HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-22-2017 CHC Agenda Packet
City of San Luis Obispo, Council Agenda, City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis
Obispo
Agenda
Cultural Heritage Committee
Monday, May 22, 2017
5:30 p.m. REGULAR MEETING Council Hearing Room
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA
CALL TO ORDER: Chair Papp
ROLL CALL: Committee Members Thom Brajkovich, Damon Haydu, Sandy Baer, Craig
Kincaid, Glen Matteson, Vice-Chair Shannon Larrabee, and Chair James Papp
ACCEPTANCE OF AGENDA: Committee or staff may modify the order of items.
CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES
Minutes of the Regular Cultural Heritage Committee meeting of March 27, 2017.
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.
1. 546 Higuera Street. ARCH-0339-2017: Review of the repositioning and rehabilitation,
including an addition to the rear of the Master List Norcross House; and review of a proposed
construction of a two-story structure behind the Norcross House, with a categorical exemption
from environmental review; C-R zone; Higuera Commons, LLC, applicant. (Kyle Bell)
2. 570, 578, 590 Marsh Street & 581 Higuera Street. ARCH-2213-2015: Determination of
historic significance and review of responses to previous Cultural Heritage Committee
feedback on a project adjacent to the Historic Jack House for a new mixed-use project that
San Luis Obispo – Cultural Heritage Committee Agenda of May 22, 2017 Page 2
includes three four-story structures, with 19,792 square feet of commercial space, 62
residential units, 36 hotel rooms, and a two-level underground parking garage with 136 parking
spaces, with a categorical exemption from environmental review; C-D zone; The Obispo
Company, applicant. (Rachel Cohen)
COMMENT AND DISCUSSION
1. Agenda Forecast & Staff Updates
ADJOURNMENT
The next Regular Cultural Heritage Committee meeting is scheduled for Monday, June 26,
2017 at 5:30 p.m., in the Council Hearing Room, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California.
The City of San Luis Obispo wishes to make all of its public meetings accessible to the
public. Upon request, this agenda will be made available in appropriate alternative formats to
persons with disabilities. Any person with a disability who requires a modification or
accommodation in order to participate in a meeting should direct such requests to the City Clerk’s
Office at (805) 781-7100 at least 48 hours before the meeting, if possible. Telecommunications
Device for the Deaf (805)781-7107.
Minutes - DRAFT
CULTURAL HERITAGE COMMITTEE
Monday, March 27, 2017
Regular Meeting of the Cultural Heritage Committee
CALL TO ORDER
A Regular Meeting of the Cultural Heritage Committee was called to order on Monday,
March 27, 2017 at 5:30 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, James Papp, Vice Chair Thom
Brajkovich, and Chair Jaime Hill.
Absent: Committee Members Shannon Larrabee and Leah Walthert
Staff: Senior Planner Brian Leveille, Associate Planner Rebecca Gershow, and Recording
Secretary Monique Lomeli.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
ACTION: MOTION BY COMMITTEE MEMBER KINCAID, SECOND BY COMMITTEE
MEMBER BAER, CARRIED BY CONSENSUS 5-0 to approve the minutes of the Cultural
Heritage Committee meeting of February 27, 2017 as amended:
Page 2, “Committee Member Papp on the reconfiguration of the stage area and provided
historical information on the area, stated he admires the outreach efforts extended to the
community; commented on the historical importance of the area and asked that its rich history be
incorporated into the plans for signage, sculpture, and other placemaking efforts.”
Page 3, Last paragraph of Item 2: “Committee Member Papp requested staff consider reducing
the Mills Act application fees. Senior Planner Leveille stated that such consideration is
underway.”
Page 4: “Chair Hill requested staff provide information on the height of building height
particularly from Church Street.”
Committee Member Papp commented on the design and stated…and the design guidelines for
the district cannot be elegantly applied to this building.”
DRAFT Minutes – Cultural Heritage Committee Meeting of March 27, 2017 Page 2
Page 5: “Chair Hill provided information regarding the potential uses of the space and invited
Buzz Kalkowski to provide input on behalf of Friends of La Loma.”
PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA
None.
--End of Public Comment--
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. Downtown Concept Plan. GENP-1622-2015: Conceptual review and discussion of
the Downtown Concept Plan; discussion of this item is not subject to CEQA; multiple
zones; City of San Luis Obispo, applicant.
Senior Planner Brian Leveille acknowledged the receipt and distribution of
correspondence from Kenneth Schwartz.
Associate Planner Rebecca Gershow presented an in-depth staff report with use of a
PowerPoint presentation and responded to Committee inquiries.
Public Comments:
None.
--End of Public Comment--
COMMENTS AND DISCUSSION
Senior Planner Leveille provided an agenda forecast and information regarding eligibility for
Historic Preservation grants. Committee Member Papp provided an update on the status of the
Certified Local Government grant application which will be submitted to the State Historic
Preservation Office.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 6:40 p.m. The next Regular meeting of the Cultural Heritage
Committee is scheduled for Monday, April 24, 2017 at 5:30 p.m., in the Council Hearing Room,
990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California.
APPROVED BY THE CULTURAL HERITAGE COMMITTEE: XX/XX/2017
CULTURAL HERITAGE COMMITTEE AGENDA REPORT
SUBJECT: Review of the proposed repositioning, and rehabilitation, including an addition to the
rear of the Master List historic Norcross House; and review of a proposed construction of a two -
story structure behind the Norcross House.
PROJECT ADDRESS: 546 Higuera Street BY: Kyle Bell, Associate Planner
Phone Number: (805) 781-7524
E-mail: kbell@slocity.org
FILE NUMBER: ARCH-0339-2017 FROM: Brian Leveille, Senior Planner
1.0 RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the Draft Resolution (Attachment 1) which recommends the
Community Development Director find the project consistent with Historic Preservation Guidelines
and Secretary of Interior Standards, based on findings, and subject to conditions.
SITE DATA
Applicant John Belsher
Representative Thom Brajkovich, Paragon Design
Historic Status Master List
Complete Date Pending
Zoning Commercial Retail (C-R) zone
General Plan General Retail
Site Area ~2.07 acres
Environmental Status Categorically Exempt from
environmental review under Section
15331 of the CEQA Guidelines
(Historical Resource Restoration/
Rehabilitation)
2.0 SUMMARY
The proposed project includes the rehabilitation and repositioning of a Master List Historic
Resource (Norcross House) and construction of a two-story detached residence. On November 18,
2014, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 10579 (2014 Series) adding the David Norcross
residence at 546 Higuera Street to the Master List of Historic Resources. The property was found to
qualify for listing under three of the significance criteria including architectural style, his toric
significance and integrity, as the structure maintains its original location, style, and character
defining features. (Attachment 5, City Council Resolution).
The proposed project has been previously reviewed by the CHC, this report and the attached
exhibits address the applicant’s responses to the prior comments made by the CHC conceptual
review held on April 27, 2015 (Attachment 6, Previous CHC Report).
Meeting Date: May 22, 2017
Item Number: 1
CHC1 - 1
ARCH-0339-2017
546 Higuera Street (Norcross House)
Page 2
3.0 PROJECT INFORMATION
Site Information/Setting
The subject property is 2.07 acres in size (90,169 sq. ft.) and is located at 546 Higuera Street mid-
block along Higuera Street between Nipomo and Carmel Streets, within the Commercial Retail (C-
R) zone. The property abuts the San Luis Creek toward the rear of the property. The 1.44 acre site
was previously utilized as a residential trailer park, all trailers have been removed for the
resurfacing of the property, subject to the review by the California Department of Housing and
Community Development.
The existing residence is no longer in habitable
condition, and over the years the property has suffered
from a lack of maintenance. Failing foundation
supports have caused the floors to be uneven, and the
structure suffers from damaged exterior and interior
details. A complete rehabilitation or partial
reconstruction of the residence is necessary to allow it
to be safely occupied.
Project Description
A summary of the significant project features is included below (Attachment 3, Project Plans):
1. Historic Preservation: See Attachment 2, Historic Preservation Report;
Demolition: Remove non-historic additions to the rear of the structure
Reposition: The historic structure will be repositioned 15-feet closer to Higuera Street
Rehabilitation: Rehabilitating the residence to its appearance during its period of
significance from 1886-1890, includes;
o Repair/replace the deteriorated foundation and materials
o Reconstruction of the front porch to include balcony, as was in 1904
o Replacing 2nd story window with new double doors to access balcony
2. Architectural Design: The project has been designed similar to the Eastlake Gothic Revival
architectural style (Attachment 4, City Council Report), without replicating or detracting
from character defining features of the original structure, designs include;
A two-story addition to the Norcross House to restore the use of the structure to a single-
family residence.
New detached two-story unit to the rear of the Norcross House with covered tandem
parking on the ground floor.
4.0 PROJECT ANALYSIS
Historic Preservation Guidelines & Secretary of Interior Standards (SOI)
The Historic Preservation Guidelines provide criteria to evaluate alterations to historic resources to
be designed a compatible with nearby historic resources, and for consistency with applicable design
and preservation policies and standards. The most appropriate treatment standard to consider is
characterized as “rehabilitation” under the SOI Standards since the project proposes a continuation
Figure 1: Norcross House (Photo 2014)
CHC1 - 2
ARCH-0339-2017
546 Higuera Street (Norcross House)
Page 3
of a compatible use for the property, proposes restoration of key elements of the building’s exterior
to approximate its appearance during the historic era, and proposes new additions to the building.
SOI Rehabilitation Standard #9: New additions, alterations, or related new construction will not
destroy historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property. The
new work shall 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.
SOI Rehabilitation Standard #10: New additions and adjacent or related new construction will be
undertaken in such a manner that, if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the
historic property and its environment would be unimpaired.
The SOI Standards for Historic Rehabilitation recommends constructing new additions so that there
is the least possible loss of historic materials and so that character-defining features are not
obscured, damaged, or destroyed. The revisions to the design of the project are consistent with the
Historic Preservation Guidelines and SOI Standards since architectural character of the existing
residence is retained1, and new construction is consistent with the existing character including site
design, roofing style, siding materials, finish, and scale2. The construction of the additional two
story unit is compatible with the scale, size, massing and architectural features of the property3.
Previous Conceptual CHC Review
After the CHC conceptual review on April 27, 2015 the applicant worked with staff to revise the
project to address directional items identified by the previous CHC report (Attachment 6). The
applicant has made the following changes to the project in response to the directional items:
Directional Item #1: Explore design alternatives to reduce the massing and height of the project by
reducing height of the new construction where it meets the historic structure so that the additions
are subordinate to the historic resource and do not detract from the architectural integrity of the
structure. Additions should be more proportional and step down from the height of the original
structure and/or step in from the edges of the building, effectively emphasizing the historic
residence in relation to the additions. The proposed additions should be designed so that there is
the least possible loss of historic materials and the character-defining features are not obscured.
Due to the small footprint of the historic structure, reduction in total floor area may be required in
addition to architectural design modifications.
1 Secretary of Interior Standards. Additions/Alterations. Some exterior and interior alterations to a historic building are
generally needed to assure its continued use, but it is most important that such alteration do not radically change,
obscure, or destroy character defining spaces, materials, features, or finishes.
2 Historic Preservation Guidelines. Additions 3.4.1(d). Additions to listed historic structures should maintain the
structure’s original architectural integrity and closely match the building’s original architecture, or match additions
that have achieved historic significance in their own right, in terms of scale, form, massing, rhythm, fenestration,
materials, color and architectural details.
3 Historic Preservation Guidelines. New Accessory Structures 3.4.1(c). New accessory structures should complement
the primary structure’s historic character through compatibility with its form, massing, color, and materials .
CHC1 - 3
ARCH-0339-2017
546 Higuera Street (Norcross House)
Page 4
Staff Evaluation: The project has been reduced in height and stepped back approximately 3-feet on
along the east and west elevations where it meets the historic structure so that the additions are
visually subordinate and do not detract from the architectural integrity of the original structure, as
seen from Higuera Street. Visibility of the historic structure is enhanced by repositioning the
structure closer to the street, further emphasizing the integrity of the historic structure at this
location without obscuring any of the character-defining features.
Directional Item #2: To reduce massing of the addition, consider a separate structure and/or
remove vehicle parking from the addition or consider providing parking in a separate parking
structure; or leave parking uncovered on the site.
Staff Evaluation: The applicant has revised the project design to provide the parking and additional
unit in a separate structure, effectively reducing the overall scale and mass of the project so that the
additional structure does not detract from the architectural integrity of the historic structure as a
single-family residence (Figure 2 & 3). Covered parking is provided for both units on the ground
floor of the additional structure.
Directional Item #3: The proposed addition should include some differentiation from the historic
building by including one or more of the following measures:
1) Include a visual break or border between the addition and historic building.
2) Incorporate architectural details which are more simplified from the historic building.
3) Include slight variation in exterior details (siding dimensions, trim, etc.) while
emphasizing complementary design between the addition and historic structure.
Figure 3: Revised East Elevation
Figure 2: Previous East Elevation
CHC1 - 4
ARCH-0339-2017
546 Higuera Street (Norcross House)
Page 5
Staff Evaluation: The architectural details and materials of the addition to the historic structure have
been simplified when compared to the historic structure including, dormers, exterior wood-lap
siding to closely match existing, a lower roof pitch, simplified detailing of the eaves and dormers,
and non-decorative wood framed double-hung windows and doors. The addition does not introduce
any conflicting elements and has been designed to be architecturally compatible with the original
architectural character of the building.
Directional Item #4: Plans submitted to include details regarding rehabilitation of historic
structure. Clearly define portions/aspects of structure to be preserved/restored versus
reconstructed. Include details regarding deconstruction of structure, repositioning, foundation,
materials to be used for reconstruction, and documentation to support features to be recreated.
Identify methods of restoration for features to be retained.
Response: The applicant has provided a historic preservation report (Attachment 2) that outlines the
methods of restoration and preservation of the historic resource4. Staff has evaluated the report and
recommends Conditions 2 through 5 to ensure that character defining features are preserved and
methods of rehabilitation and repositioning of the structure are clearly identified and consistent with
the Secretary of Interior’s Standards for Treatment of Historic Properties, to the satisfaction of the
Chief Building Official and Community Development Director.
5.0 CONCLUSION
The project is consistent with the Secretary of Interior Standards for Rehabilitation because the
proposed addition will not detract or destroy any historic character defining features of the existing
residence and is designed so that the essential form and integrity of the historic property is
preserved. The rehabilitation of the Norcross House will preserve the original residential use and
provide for the long-term preservation of a currently dilapidated and vacant structure t hat is
threatened. The removal of non-historic additions and repositioning of the structure toward Higuera
Street will enhance the historic character of the property and add to the importance of the building
as part of San Luis Obispo, as seen from the public right-of-way.
6.0 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The project is exempt from environmental review under Class 31 (Section 15331) Historical
Resource Restoration/Rehabilitation of the CEQA Guidelines because the project consists of
rehabilitation and restoration of a historical resource in a manner consistent with the Secretary of
the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties. The project is also identified as an
in-fill development project (Section 15332) that is consistent with the applicable general plan
designation and all applicable general plan policies as well as with applicable zoning designation
and regulations. The project will not result in significant impacts on historic resources, traffic,
noise, air quality or water quality.
4 Secretary of Interior Standards for Rehabilitation #6. Deteriorated historic features will be repaired rather than
replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature will
match the old in design, color, texture, and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features will be
substantiated by documentary and physical evidence.
CHC1 - 5
ARCH-0339-2017
546 Higuera Street (Norcross House)
Page 6
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
1. Recommend that the Community Development Director find the project inconsistent with
the City’s Historic Preservation Program Guidelines and/or Secretary of Interior Standards.
2. Continue the item with specific direction for additional discussion or research.
8.0 ATTACHMENTS
1. Draft Resolution
2. Historic Preservation Report
3. Reduced scale Project Plans
4. City Council Report – November 18, 2014
5. City Council Resolution No. 10579 (2014 Series)
6. Previous CHC Report – April 27, 2015
7. CHC Meeting Minutes – April 27, 2015
Included in Commission member portfolio: Project plans
Available at CHC hearing: color/materials board
CHC1 - 6
RESOLUTION NO. CHC-XXXX-17
A RESOLUTION OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO CULTURAL HERITAGE COMMITTEE
RECOMMENDING THAT THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR FIND
THE REPOSITIONING, RESTORATION AND REHABILITATION OF THE MASTER
LIST HISTORIC STRUCTURE KNOWN AS NORCROSS HOUSE, INCLUDING THE
CONSTRUCTION OF AN ADDITIONAL TWO STORY UNIT CONSISTENT WITH
THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION ORDINANCE
546 HIGUERA STREET (ARCH-0339-2017)
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a public
hearing in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, on
November 18, 2014, pursuant to a proceeding instituted under HIST-0155-2014, John Belsher,
applicant; and approved adding the David Norcross Residence to the Master List of Historic
Resources and adopted the City Council Resolution No. 10579 (2014 Series); and
WHEREAS, the Cultural Heritage Committee of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted
a public hearing in the Council Hearing Room of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo,
California, on April 27, 2015, pursuant to conceptual review proceeding instituted under ARCH-
0982-2015; and
WHEREAS, the Cultural Heritage Committee of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted
a public hearing in the Council Hearing Room of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo,
California, on May 22, 2017, pursuant to a proceeding instituted under ARCH-0339-2017, John
Belsher, applicant; and
WHEREAS, the Cultural Heritage Committee of the City of San Luis Obispo has duly
considered all evidence, including the testimony of the applicant, interested parties, and
evaluation and recommendations by staff, presented at said hearing.
WHEREAS, notices of said public hearing were made at the time and in the manner
required by law; and
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. The project is consistent with the City’s Historic Preservation Guidelines since the
architectural character of the existing residence is retained, and new construction is
consistent with the existing character including site design, roofing style, siding materials,
finish, and scale. The proposed project does not impact the scale or historical character of
the existing residence.
Attachment 1
CHC1 - 7
Resolution No. ARC-XXXX-17
ARCH-0339-2017 (546 Higuera Street)
Page 2
2. The project is consistent with the Secretary of Interior Standards for Rehabilitation because
the proposed addition will not detract or destroy any historic character defining features of
the existing residence and is designed so that the essential form and integrity of the historic
property is preserved.
3. The construction of the additional two story unit is consistent with Secretary of Interior
Standards for new construction on historic properties since the new construction is
compatible with the scale, size, massing and architectural features of the property and with
development in the vicinity.
4. The project is consistent with the General Plan policies for compatible development (LUE
2.3.9), and housing conservation (HE 3.5) since the project retains the scale and character of
the existing residence and maintains the existing residential use.
SECTION 2. Environmental Review. The project is exempt from environmental review
under Class 31 (Section 15331) Historical Resource Restoration/Rehabilitation of the CEQA
Guidelines because the project consists of rehabilitation and restoration of a historical resource in
a manner consistent with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic
Properties. The project is also identified as an in-fill development project (Section 15332) that is
consistent with the applicable general plan designation and all applicable general plan policies as
well as with applicable zoning designation and regulations. The project will not result in
significant impacts on historic resources, traffic, noise, air quality or water quality.
SECTION 3. Action. The Cultural Heritage Committee does hereby recommend that the
Community Development Director find the project consistent with the Historic Preservation
Ordinance, based on the above findings, and subject to the following conditions:
1. Final project design and construction drawings submitted for a building permit shall be in
substantial compliance with the project plans approved by the CHC. A separate, full-size
sheet shall be included in working drawings submitted for a building permit that lists all
conditions of project listed as sheet number 2. Reference shall be made in the margin of
listed items as to where in plans requirements are addressed. Any change to approved
design, colors, materials, landscaping, or other conditions of approval must be approved by
the Director or Architectural Review Commission, as deemed appropriate.
2. Plans submitted for a building permit shall clearly detail all proposed modifications to the
existing historic structure and include details, notes, and callouts in order to demonstrate
consistency with Secretary of Interior Standards and to ensure follow through of required
treatments during construction phases. The detailing of the modifications shall be consistent
with the submitted Historic Preservation Plan, prepared by Thomas G. Brajkovich.
3. All historic materials, including decorative brackets, porch supports, and any other original
materials that can be reused, shall be integrated into the rebuilt porch in its original
configuration.
Attachment 1
CHC1 - 8
Resolution No. ARC-XXXX-17
ARCH-0339-2017 (546 Higuera Street)
Page 3
4. Plans submitted for a building permit shall include details and the procedure for removal of
the additions in compliance with Secretary of the Interior Standards for rehabilitation to
avoid damaging the original building walls. Any non-repairable or missing material shall be
replaced to match in-kind and in-alignment with the original construction.
5. Plans submitted for construction permits shall include the method and details to accomplish
the lifting of the structure, demolition of existing non-historic additions, and construction of
the addition to the historic residence. All required information shall be provided to
guarantee preservation of the historic residence and all character defining features to the
satisfaction of the Chief Building Official and Community Development Director. A
security bond shall be submitted to complete necessary reconstruction work in the event the
project is not fully completed or the historic residence incurs structural damage or character
defining details are compromised.
On motion by Commissioner , seconded by Commissioner , and on the following roll call
vote:
AYES:
NOES:
REFRAIN:
ABSENT:
The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 22nd day of May, 2017.
_____________________________
Brian Leveille, Secretary
Cultural Heritage Committee
Attachment 1
CHC1 - 9
Attachment 2
CHC1 - 10
Attachment 2
CHC1 - 11
Attachment 2
CHC1 - 12
Attachment 2
CHC1 - 13
Attachment 2
CHC1 - 14
Attachment 2
CHC1 - 15
Attachment 2
CHC1 - 16
Attachment 2
CHC1 - 17
Attachment 2
CHC1 - 18
Attachment 2
CHC1 - 19
Attachment 2
CHC1 - 20
Attachment 2
CHC1 - 21
Al
l
d
e
s
i
g
n
s
a
n
d
o
t
h
e
r
i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
o
n
t
h
e
s
e
d
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
a
r
e
f
o
r
u
s
e
o
n
th
i
s
s
p
e
c
i
f
i
c
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
a
n
d
s
h
a
l
l
n
o
t
b
e
u
s
e
d
o
t
h
e
r
w
i
s
e
w
i
t
h
o
u
t
t
h
e
ex
p
r
e
s
s
e
d
w
r
i
t
t
e
n
p
e
r
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
A
r
c
h
i
t
e
c
t
.
Wr
i
t
t
e
n
d
i
m
e
n
s
i
o
n
s
o
n
t
h
e
s
e
d
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
s
h
a
l
l
t
a
k
e
p
r
e
c
e
d
e
n
c
e
o
v
e
r
sc
a
l
e
d
d
i
m
e
n
s
i
o
n
s
.
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
o
r
s
s
h
a
l
l
v
e
r
i
f
y
a
n
d
b
e
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
l
e
f
o
r
a
l
l
dim
e
n
s
i
o
n
s
a
n
d
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
o
n
t
h
i
s
j
o
b
a
n
d
t
h
i
s
o
f
f
i
c
e
s
h
a
l
l
b
e
n
o
t
i
f
i
e
d
in
w
r
i
t
i
n
g
o
f
a
n
y
v
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
s
f
r
o
m
t
h
e
d
i
m
e
n
s
i
o
n
s
o
r
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
s
h
o
w
n
in
t
h
e
s
e
d
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
.
OF
SH
E
E
T
S
DA
T
E
JO
B
N
O
.
SH
E
E
T
SC
A
L
E
CH
E
C
K
E
D
DR
A
W
N
N
O
R
C
R
O
S
S
H
O
U
S
E
5
4
6
H
I
G
U
E
R
A
S
T
.
C
L
I
E
N
T
:
J
O
H
N
B
E
L
S
H
E
R
S
A
N
L
U
I
S
O
B
I
S
P
O
,
C
A
9
3
4
0
1
NO
R
C
R
O
S
S
H
O
U
S
E
54
6
H
I
G
U
E
R
A
S
T
,
S
A
N
L
U
I
S
O
B
I
S
P
O
,
C
A
9
3
4
0
1
VI
C
I
N
I
T
Y
M
A
P
PR
O
J
E
C
T
D
A
T
A
SC
O
P
E
O
F
W
O
R
K
DI
R
E
C
T
O
R
Y
SH
E
E
T
I
N
D
E
X
OW
N
E
R
S
:
JO
H
N
B
E
L
S
H
E
R
34
8
0
S
.
H
I
G
U
E
R
A
S
T
.
S
U
I
T
E
1
3
0
SA
N
L
U
I
S
O
B
I
S
P
O
,
C
A
9
3
4
0
1
PH
:
(
8
0
5
)
5
4
0
-
3
3
3
0
AR
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
:
TH
O
M
A
S
B
R
A
J
K
O
V
I
C
H
(
C
1
5
6
1
2
)
PA
R
A
G
O
N
D
E
S
I
G
N
S
10
0
9
M
O
R
R
O
S
T
,
S
U
I
T
E
2
0
3
SA
N
L
U
I
S
O
B
I
S
P
O
,
C
A
9
3
4
0
1
PH
:
(
8
0
5
)
5
4
1
-
9
4
8
6
/
F
A
X
:
(
8
0
5
)
5
4
1
-
5
7
0
5
pr
o
j
e
c
t
i
n
f
o
@
p
a
r
a
g
o
n
a
r
c
h
i
t
e
c
t
s
.
c
o
m
ST
R
U
C
T
U
R
A
L
E
N
G
I
N
E
E
R
:
CI
V
I
L
E
N
G
I
N
E
E
R
:
TI
M
C
R
A
W
F
O
R
D
/
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
E
N
G
I
N
E
E
R
PB
C
O
M
P
A
N
I
E
S
34
8
0
S
.
H
I
G
U
E
R
A
S
T
.
S
U
I
T
E
1
3
0
SA
N
L
U
I
S
O
B
I
S
P
O
,
C
A
9
3
4
0
1
PH
:
(
8
0
5
)
5
4
0
-
3
3
3
0
in
f
o
@
p
b
c
o
m
p
a
n
i
e
s
.
c
o
SO
I
L
S
R
E
P
O
R
T
:
EN
E
R
G
Y
C
A
L
C
S
:
TI
T
L
E
S
H
E
E
T
&
N
O
T
E
S
:
T-
1
.
0
:
T
I
T
L
E
S
H
E
E
T
T-
1
.
1
:
G
E
N
E
R
A
L
N
O
T
E
S
CI
V
I
L
:
C-
1
:
T
I
T
L
E
S
H
E
E
T
C-
2
:
S
I
T
E
&
D
R
A
I
N
A
G
E
P
L
A
N
C-
3
:
S
I
T
E
&
D
R
A
I
N
A
G
E
P
L
A
N
C-
4
:
E
R
O
S
I
O
N
C
O
N
T
R
O
L
P
L
A
N
C-
5
:
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
P
L
A
N
C-
6
:
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
D
E
T
A
I
L
S
AR
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
U
R
A
L
A-
S
I
T
E
:
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
U
R
A
L
S
I
T
E
P
L
A
N
A-
1
.
0
:
A
S
-
B
U
I
L
T
D
R
A
W
I
N
G
S
&
M
A
T
E
R
I
A
L
S
S
A
L
V
A
G
E
&
R
E
-
U
S
E
A-
1
.
1
:
P
R
O
P
O
S
E
D
F
I
R
S
T
F
L
O
O
R
P
L
A
N
S
A-
1
.
2
:
P
R
O
P
O
S
E
D
S
E
C
O
N
D
F
L
O
O
R
P
L
A
N
S
A-
1
.
3
:
P
R
O
P
O
S
E
D
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
F
R
O
N
T
R
E
S
I
D
E
N
C
E
A-
1
.
4
:
P
R
O
P
O
S
E
D
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
R
E
A
R
R
E
S
I
D
E
N
C
E
A-
5
.
0
:
S
E
C
T
I
O
N
S
A
N
D
R
O
O
F
P
L
A
N
LA
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
L-
1
:
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
P
L
A
N
SI
T
E
I
N
F
O
:
AD
D
R
E
S
S
:
5
4
6
H
I
G
U
E
R
A
S
T
,
S
A
N
L
U
I
S
O
B
I
S
P
O
,
C
A
9
3
4
0
1
AP
N
#
:
0
0
2
-
4
0
2
-
0
3
0
LE
G
A
L
I
N
F
O
:
L
O
T
6
1
,
B
L
O
C
K
4
0
2
,
P
A
R
C
E
L
M
A
P
;
P
.
M
.
B
K
.
6
9
P
G
.
8
0
-
8
2
.
M
C
D
O
U
G
A
L
L
T
R
A
C
T
R
.
M
.
B
K
A
,
P
G
.
1
6
8
.
OC
C
U
P
A
N
C
Y
:
R
-
3
ZO
N
I
N
G
:
C
-
R
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
T
Y
P
E
:
V
-
B
#
O
F
S
T
O
R
I
E
S
:
2
RE
L
O
C
A
T
I
O
N
,
A
N
D
A
D
D
I
T
I
O
N
T
O
,
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
3
6
'
-
6
"
X
1
6
'
-
0
"
H
I
S
T
O
R
I
C
A
L
"
R
E
D
H
O
U
S
E
"
.
T
W
O
SE
P
A
R
A
T
E
R
E
S
I
D
E
N
C
E
S
W
I
L
L
B
E
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
E
D
.
SI
T
E
A
R
E
A
S
:
SI
T
E
A
R
E
A
:
2
.
0
7
A
C
R
E
S
=
9
0
,
1
6
9
.
2
S
Q
F
T
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
A
R
E
A
:
(
1
4
6
2
.
8
3
S
Q
F
T
(
1
S
T
F
L
O
O
R
)
+
1
1
4
0
.
6
1
S
Q
F
T
(
2
N
D
F
L
O
O
R
)
)
=
26
0
3
.
4
4
S
Q
F
T
AR
E
A
O
F
D
E
M
O
L
I
T
I
O
N
:
1
6
0
7
.
3
S
Q
F
T
AR
E
A
O
F
H
I
S
T
O
R
I
C
A
L
H
O
U
S
E
T
O
R
E
M
A
I
N
&
B
E
R
E
-
L
O
C
A
T
E
D
:
9
9
6
.
1
4
S
Q
F
T
AD
D
E
D
C
O
N
D
I
T
I
O
N
E
D
S
Q
U
A
R
E
F
O
O
T
A
G
E
:
2
1
1
3
.
1
1
S
Q
F
T
TO
T
A
L
C
O
N
D
I
T
I
O
N
E
D
S
Q
U
A
R
E
F
O
O
T
A
G
E
:
3
1
0
9
.
2
5
S
Q
F
T
UN
C
O
N
D
I
T
I
O
N
E
D
S
Q
U
A
R
E
F
O
O
T
A
G
E
:
GA
R
A
G
E
:
1
1
1
9
.
4
6
S
Q
F
T
CO
V
E
R
E
D
P
O
R
C
H
E
S
:
1
3
0
S
Q
F
T
FO
O
T
P
R
I
N
T
A
R
E
A
:
1
3
2
5
.
0
3
S
Q
F
T
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
C
O
V
E
R
A
G
E
:
2
%
(
1
3
2
5
.
0
3
S
Q
F
T
/
9
0
,
1
6
9
.
2
S
Q
F
T
)
VI
E
W
F
R
O
M
H
I
G
U
E
R
A
S
T
.
HI
S
T
O
R
I
C
A
L
P
H
O
T
O
C
I
R
C
A
1
9
0
4
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
3
C
H
C
1
-
2
2
HI
G
U
E
R
A
S
T
R
E
E
T
25
'
-
5
"
(N
)
D
R
I
V
E
W
A
Y
25
'
-
0
"
M
I
N
.
W
I
D
E
30
'
-
6
"
3
2
'
-
6
"
1
7
'
-
2
"
1
6
'
-
4
"
7
7
'
-
0
"
SI
D
E
W
A
L
K
&
C
U
R
B
RE
M
O
V
E
(
2
)
T
R
E
E
S
NE
W
P
A
L
M
T
O
RE
P
L
A
C
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
3
'
-
0
"
3
'
-
6
3
8
"
RE
-
L
O
C
A
T
E
D
(
E
)
H
I
S
T
O
R
I
C
A
L
"
R
E
D
H
O
U
S
E
"
(N
)
P
R
O
P
O
S
E
D
A
D
D
I
T
I
O
N
8
'
-
4
"
5
'
-
0
"
7'
-
0
"
1
1
'
-
0
"
6
'
-
8
"
4
'
-
4
"
18
'
-
1
1
1 2 "
11
'
-
6
1 2 "
6'
-
0
"
5'
-
7
"
6'
-
0
"
H
T
.
W
O
O
D
F
E
N
C
E
6'-
0
"
H
T
.
W
O
O
D
G
A
T
E
3'
-
0
"
H
T
.
P
I
C
K
E
T
F
E
N
C
E
3'
-
0
"
H
T
.
P
I
C
K
E
T
F
E
N
C
E
3'-
0
"
H
T
.
P
I
C
K
E
T
G
A
T
E
3'
-
0
"
H
T
.
P
I
C
K
E
T
FE
N
C
E
&
G
A
T
E
Al
l
d
e
s
i
g
n
s
a
n
d
o
t
h
e
r
i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
o
n
t
h
e
s
e
d
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
a
r
e
f
o
r
u
s
e
o
n
th
i
s
s
p
e
c
i
f
i
c
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
a
n
d
s
h
a
l
l
n
o
t
b
e
u
s
e
d
o
t
h
e
r
w
i
s
e
w
i
t
h
o
u
t
t
h
e
ex
p
r
e
s
s
e
d
w
r
i
t
t
e
n
p
e
r
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
A
r
c
h
i
t
e
c
t
.
Wr
i
t
t
e
n
d
i
m
e
n
s
i
o
n
s
o
n
t
h
e
s
e
d
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
s
h
a
l
l
t
a
k
e
p
r
e
c
e
d
e
n
c
e
o
v
e
r
sc
a
l
e
d
d
i
m
e
n
s
i
o
n
s
.
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
o
r
s
s
h
a
l
l
v
e
r
i
f
y
a
n
d
b
e
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
l
e
f
o
r
a
l
l
dim
e
n
s
i
o
n
s
a
n
d
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
o
n
t
h
i
s
j
o
b
a
n
d
t
h
i
s
o
f
f
i
c
e
s
h
a
l
l
b
e
n
o
t
i
f
i
e
d
in
w
r
i
t
i
n
g
o
f
a
n
y
v
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
s
f
r
o
m
t
h
e
d
i
m
e
n
s
i
o
n
s
o
r
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
s
h
o
w
n
in
t
h
e
s
e
d
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
.
OF
SH
E
E
T
S
DA
T
E
JO
B
N
O
.
SH
E
E
T
SC
A
L
E
CH
E
C
K
E
D
DR
A
W
N
N
O
R
C
R
O
S
S
H
O
U
S
E
5
4
6
H
I
G
U
E
R
A
S
T
.
C
L
I
E
N
T
:
J
O
H
N
B
E
L
S
H
E
R
S
A
N
L
U
I
S
O
B
I
S
P
O
,
C
A
9
3
4
0
1
AR
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
U
R
A
L
S
I
T
E
P
L
A
N
SC
A
L
E
:
3
16
"
=
1
'
-
0
"
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
3
C
H
C
1
-
2
3
CL
A
W
F
O
O
T
TU
B
8'-
0
"
C
E
I
L
I
N
G
H
E
I
G
H
T
8'-
0
"
C
E
I
L
I
N
G
H
E
I
G
H
T
10
'
-
0
"
C
E
I
L
I
N
G
H
E
I
G
H
T
14
'
-
2
"
14
'
-
4
"
28
'
-
6
"
1
2
'
-
6
"
1
6
'
-
4
"
1
0
'
-
2
"
3
9
'
-
0
"
2'
-
7
"
2'
-
7
"
2'
-
7
"
30
'
-
6
"
1
6
'
-
4
"
1
6
'
-
4
"
6
'
-
4
"
6
'
-
2
"
1
0
'
-
2
"
(E
)
D
E
C
K
W
/
N
O
A
C
C
E
S
S
FR
O
N
T
P
O
R
C
H
10
'
x
1
2
'
S
H
E
D
O
F
F
O
F
K
I
T
C
H
E
N
12
'
-
0
"
2'
-
2
"
2
2
'
-
2
"
1
9
'
-
6
"
6'
-
2
"
9
'
-
6
"
1
0
'
-
0
"
6'
-
4
"
5
'
-
8
"
10
'
-
2
"
27
'
-
2
"
30
'
-
6
"
1
6
'
-
4
"
1'
-
0
"
1
5
'
-
8
"
7
'
-
0
"
2
2
'
-
2
"
5'
-
0
"
PO
R
C
H
MA
T
E
R
I
A
L
S
MA
T
E
R
I
A
L
S
S
A
L
V
A
G
E
L
I
S
T
KE
Y
Q'T
Y
S
I
Z
E
2
4 0 3 0
DO
U
B
L
E
H
U
N
G
W
I
N
D
O
W
S
w
/
W
E
I
G
H
T
S
DE
S
C
R
I
P
T
I
O
N
12
V
A
R
I
E
S
WO
O
D
M
A
N
T
E
L
15
0 1 6
TO
P
O
F
W
I
N
D
O
W
G
R
I
D
+/
-
2
7
3
SQ
F
T
T
.
&
G
.
D
O
U
G
L
A
S
F
I
R
F
L
O
O
R
I
N
G
1
X
4
PO
R
C
H
B
O
A
R
D
S
50
%
O
F
(E
)
DU
T
C
H
L
A
P
W
O
O
D
S
I
D
I
N
G
1
X
6
+/
-
4
0
0
SQ
F
T
50
%
O
F
(E
)
1
X
1
0
1
X
8
DU
T
C
H
L
A
P
W
O
O
D
S
I
D
I
N
G
1
8"
X
3
6
"
NE
W
E
L
L
P
O
S
T
1
3 X
5
CA
S
T
I
R
O
N
C
L
A
W
F
O
O
T
T
U
B
?
2
X
4
FR
A
M
I
N
G
M
E
M
B
E
R
S
(
I
N
S
P
E
C
T
&
S
A
L
V
A
G
E
A
C
C
O
R
D
I
N
G
L
Y
)
10
0
%
VA
R
Y
I
N
G
OR
N
A
M
E
N
T
A
L
F
A
S
C
I
A
80
%
1
X
CR
O
W
N
M
O
L
D
I
N
G
50
%
1
X
FA
S
C
I
A
50
%
1
X
6
DO
O
R
&
W
I
N
D
O
W
C
A
S
I
N
G
MA
T
E
R
I
A
L
S
MA
T
E
R
I
A
L
S
R
E
U
S
E
L
I
S
T
KE
Y
Q'T
Y
S
I
Z
E
2
4 0 3 0
DE
S
C
R
I
P
T
I
O
N
WO
O
D
M
A
N
T
E
L
-
C
A
N
B
E
R
E
U
S
E
D
A
R
O
U
N
D
(
N
)
G
A
S
F
I
R
E
P
L
A
C
E
I
N
S
E
R
T
+/
-
2
7
3
SQ
F
T
T
.
&
G
.
D
O
U
G
L
A
S
F
I
R
F
L
O
O
R
I
N
G
-
R
E
U
S
E
F
O
R
N
E
W
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
A
L
O
N
G
W
I
T
H
N
E
W
M
A
T
E
R
I
A
L
S
1
X
4
P
O
R
C
H
B
O
A
R
D
S
-
R
E
U
S
E
F
O
R
N
E
W
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
A
L
O
N
G
W
I
T
H
N
E
W
M
A
T
E
R
I
A
L
S
50
%
O
F
(E
)
DU
T
C
H
L
A
P
W
O
O
D
S
I
D
I
N
G
-
R
E
U
S
E
T
O
S
I
D
E
N
E
W
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
A
L
O
N
G
W
I
T
H
(
N
)
D
U
T
C
H
L
A
P
S
I
D
I
N
G
1
X
6
+/
-
4
0
0
SQ
F
T
50
%
O
F
(E
)
1
X
1
0
1
X
8
1
8"
X
3
6
"
NE
W
E
L
L
P
O
S
T
-
R
E
U
S
E
A
T
B
A
S
E
O
F
(
N
)
S
T
A
I
R
.
/
A
D
D
B
A
S
E
T
O
M
E
E
T
C
O
D
E
H
E
I
G
H
T
R
E
Q
U
I
R
E
M
E
N
T
S
1
3
X
5
CA
S
T
I
R
O
N
C
L
A
W
F
O
O
T
T
U
B
-
R
E
S
T
O
R
E
&
U
S
E
I
N
(
N
)
M
A
S
T
E
R
B
A
T
H
?
2
X
4
FR
A
M
I
N
G
M
E
M
B
E
R
S
-
R
E
U
S
E
I
N
N
E
W
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
W
H
E
R
E
A
P
P
L
I
C
A
B
L
E
10
0
%
VA
R
Y
I
N
G
OR
N
A
M
E
N
T
A
L
F
A
S
C
I
A
-
R
E
U
S
E
A
T
M
A
I
N
1
6
:
1
2
G
A
B
L
E
S
80
%
1
X
CR
O
W
N
M
O
L
D
I
N
G
-
R
E
U
S
E
A
T
F
A
S
C
I
A
A
L
O
N
G
W
I
T
H
(
N
)
M
A
T
E
R
I
A
L
S
T
O
M
A
T
C
H
(
E
)
C
R
O
W
N
50
%
1
X
FA
S
C
I
A
-
R
E
U
S
E
F
O
R
N
E
W
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
A
L
O
N
G
W
I
T
H
N
E
W
M
A
T
E
R
I
A
L
S
50
%
1 X
6
DO
O
R
&
W
I
N
D
O
W
C
A
S
I
N
G
-
R
E
U
S
E
F
O
R
N
E
W
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
A
L
O
N
G
W
I
T
H
N
E
W
M
A
T
E
R
I
A
L
S
DU
T
C
H
L
A
P
W
O
O
D
S
I
D
I
N
G
-
R
E
U
S
E
T
O
S
I
D
E
N
E
W
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
A
L
O
N
G
W
I
T
H
(
N
)
D
U
T
C
H
L
A
P
S
I
D
I
N
G
Al
l
d
e
s
i
g
n
s
a
n
d
o
t
h
e
r
i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
o
n
t
h
e
s
e
d
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
a
r
e
f
o
r
u
s
e
o
n
th
i
s
s
p
e
c
i
f
i
c
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
a
n
d
s
h
a
l
l
n
o
t
b
e
u
s
e
d
o
t
h
e
r
w
i
s
e
w
i
t
h
o
u
t
t
h
e
ex
p
r
e
s
s
e
d
w
r
i
t
t
e
n
p
e
r
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
A
r
c
h
i
t
e
c
t
.
Wr
i
t
t
e
n
d
i
m
e
n
s
i
o
n
s
o
n
t
h
e
s
e
d
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
s
h
a
l
l
t
a
k
e
p
r
e
c
e
d
e
n
c
e
o
v
e
r
sc
a
l
e
d
d
i
m
e
n
s
i
o
n
s
.
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
o
r
s
s
h
a
l
l
v
e
r
i
f
y
a
n
d
b
e
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
l
e
f
o
r
a
l
l
dim
e
n
s
i
o
n
s
a
n
d
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
o
n
t
h
i
s
j
o
b
a
n
d
t
h
i
s
o
f
f
i
c
e
s
h
a
l
l
b
e
n
o
t
i
f
i
e
d
in
w
r
i
t
i
n
g
o
f
a
n
y
v
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
s
f
r
o
m
t
h
e
d
i
m
e
n
s
i
o
n
s
o
r
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
s
h
o
w
n
in
t
h
e
s
e
d
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
.
OF
SH
E
E
T
S
DA
T
E
JO
B
N
O
.
SH
E
E
T
SC
A
L
E
CH
E
C
K
E
D
DR
A
W
N
N
O
R
C
R
O
S
S
H
O
U
S
E
5
4
6
H
I
G
U
E
R
A
S
T
.
C
L
I
E
N
T
:
J
O
H
N
B
E
L
S
H
E
R
S
A
N
L
U
I
S
O
B
I
S
P
O
,
C
A
9
3
4
0
1
F
I
R
S
T
F
L
O
O
R
P
L
A
N
SC
A
L
E
:
3
16
"
=
1
'
-
0
"
S
E
C
O
N
D
F
L
O
O
R
P
L
A
N
SC
A
L
E
:
3
16
"
=
1
'
-
0
"
AS
-
B
U
I
L
T
S
.
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
&
M
A
T
.
R
E
-
U
S
E
SC
A
L
E
:
3
16
"
=
1
'
-
0
"
AS
-
B
U
I
L
T
E
.
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
&
M
A
T
.
R
E
-
U
S
E
SC
A
L
E
:
3
16
"
=
1
'
-
0
"
MA
T
E
R
I
A
L
S
S
A
L
V
A
G
E
&
R
E
-
U
S
E
L
E
G
E
N
D
SC
A
L
E
:
N
.
T
.
S
.
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
3
C
H
C
1
-
2
4
DI
N
I
N
G
R
O
O
M
GA
S
F
I
R
E
P
L
A
C
E
KI
T
C
H
E
N
I
S
L
A
N
D
w
/
B
A
R
S
E
A
T
I
N
G
BA
T
H
R
O
O
M
CO
N
V
E
C
T
I
O
N
OV
E
N
MI
C
R
O
W
A
V
E
PA
N
T
R
Y
CA
B
I
N
E
T
PO
R
C
H
FA
M
I
L
Y
R
O
O
M
PA
R
L
O
U
R
20 RISES of 7"
19 RUNS of 11"
RE
L
O
C
A
T
E
D
"
R
E
D
HO
U
S
E
"
D
E
S
I
G
N
A
T
E
D
BY
W
A
L
L
H
A
T
C
H
1
'
-
6
"
CO
V
E
R
E
D
UP
1
C
A
R
G
A
R
A
G
E
2
C
A
R
G
A
R
A
G
E
CA
R
R
I
A
G
E
S
T
Y
L
E
OV
E
R
H
E
A
D
D
O
O
R
8'
-
0
"
x
7
'
-
0
"
3
6
'
-
6
"
32
'
-
6
"
32
'
-
6
"
3
C
A
R
C
O
V
E
R
E
D
CA
R
P
O
R
T
11
'
-
4
"
21
'
-
2
"
2
0
'
-
1
0
"
1
5
'
-
8
"
8'
-
0
"
8'
-
0
"
8'
-
0
"
D.
W
.
WA
S
H
E
R
/
D
R
Y
E
R
1'
-
6
"
11
'
-
0
"
8'
-
0
"
3'
-
0
"
1'
-
9
"
2'
-
6
"
2'
-
6
"
1'
-
9
"
18 RISES of 6 34"
17 RUNS of 11"UP
17
'
-
2
"
16
'
-
4
"
6'
-
0
"
33
'
-
6
"
8'
-
2
"
8'
-
2
"
4'
-
8
"
3'
-
1
1
"
4'
-
8
"
A
A-
1
.
4
2
'
-
3
"
2
6
'
-
0
"
2
'
-
3
"
3
0
'
-
6
"
6
'
-
9
"
8
'
-
6
"
8
'
-
6
"
6
'
-
9
"
17
'
-
2
"
16
'
-
4
"
33
'
-
6
"
8'
-
2
"
8'
-
2
"
2'
-
6
"
6'
-
1
0
"
4'
-
6
"
3'
-
4
"
2
7
'
-
6
"
7
'
-
1
"
2
0
'
-
5
"
4
'
-
6
"
5
'
-
0
"
1
'
-
1
0
"
3'
-
7
"
6'
-
0
"
6'
-
1
"
6
'
-
8
1
4
"
3
'
-
5
1
2
"
8'
-
7
3 4 "
1'
-
4
"
3
'
-
4
"
2'
-
2
"
3
'
-
2
"
1'
-
4
"
2
'
-
2
"
2
'
-
6
"
6
'
-
4
"
5'
-
0
"
6
'
-
0
"
2
'
-
6
"
4
'
-
8
"
3'
-
6
"
1'
-
2
"
1
2
'
-
1
0
"
7'
-
0
"
3'
-
4
"
4'
-
4
"
5
'
-
6
"
2
'
-
2
"
3
'
-
8
"
3'
-
0
"
2
'
-
6
"
3
'
-
0
"
6'
-
0
"
5'
-
4
"
3
'
-
2
"
1
4
'
-
6
"
6
'
-
4
"
1'
-
9
"
29
'
-
0
"
1'
-
9
"
3
'
-
3
"
A
A-
1
.
4
3'
-
1
1
"
8
'
-
1
1
3
4
"
6
'
-
1
"
7 1 4 "
6
'
-
1
"
CA
R
R
I
A
G
E
S
T
Y
L
E
OV
E
R
H
E
A
D
D
O
O
R
8'
-
0
"
x
7
'
-
0
"
CA
R
R
I
A
G
E
S
T
Y
L
E
OV
E
R
H
E
A
D
D
O
O
R
8'
-
0
"
x
7
'
-
0
"
Pr
o
p
e
r
t
y
L
i
n
e
Pr
o
p
e
r
t
y
L
i
n
e
All
d
e
s
i
g
n
s
a
n
d
o
t
h
e
r
i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
o
n
t
h
e
s
e
d
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
a
r
e
f
o
r
u
s
e
o
n
th
i
s
s
p
e
c
i
f
i
c
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
a
n
d
s
h
a
l
l
n
o
t
b
e
u
s
e
d
o
t
h
e
r
w
i
s
e
w
i
t
h
o
u
t
t
h
e
ex
p
r
e
s
s
e
d
w
r
i
t
t
e
n
p
e
r
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
A
r
c
h
i
t
e
c
t
.
Wr
i
t
t
e
n
d
i
m
e
n
s
i
o
n
s
o
n
t
h
e
s
e
d
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
s
h
a
l
l
t
a
k
e
p
r
e
c
e
d
e
n
c
e
o
v
e
r
sc
a
l
e
d
d
i
m
e
n
s
i
o
n
s
.
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
o
r
s
s
h
a
l
l
v
e
r
i
f
y
a
n
d
b
e
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
l
e
f
o
r
a
l
l
di
m
e
n
s
i
o
n
s
a
n
d
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
o
n
t
h
i
s
j
o
b
a
n
d
t
h
i
s
o
f
f
i
c
e
s
h
a
l
l
b
e
n
o
t
i
f
i
e
d
in
w
r
i
t
i
n
g
o
f
a
n
y
v
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
s
f
r
o
m
t
h
e
d
i
m
e
n
s
i
o
n
s
o
r
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
s
h
o
w
n
in
t
h
e
s
e
d
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
.
OF
SH
E
E
T
S
DA
T
E
JO
B
N
O
.
SH
E
E
T
SC
A
L
E
CH
E
C
K
E
D
DR
A
W
N
N
O
R
C
R
O
S
S
H
O
U
S
E
5
4
6
H
I
G
U
E
R
A
S
T
.
C
L
I
E
N
T
:
J
O
H
N
B
E
L
S
H
E
R
S
A
N
L
U
I
S
O
B
I
S
P
O
,
C
A
9
3
4
0
1
FI
R
S
T
F
L
O
O
R
SC
A
L
E
:
1 4 "
=
1
'
-
0
"
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
3
C
H
C
1
-
2
5
BE
D
R
O
O
M
1
BE
D
R
O
O
M
2
MA
S
T
E
R
BE
D
R
O
O
M
20 RISES of 7"
19 RUNS of 11"
DE
C
K
TUB/SHOWER
DE
S
K
MA
S
T
E
R
CL
O
S
E
T
MA
S
T
E
R
BA
T
H
R
O
O
M
FO
Y
E
R
A
A-
1
.
4
17
'
-
2
"
16
'
-
4
"
1
'
-
6
"
17
'
-
2
"
16
'
-
4
"
6'
-
0
"
1
'
-
3
"
2
8
'
-
0
"
1
'
-
3
"
3
0
'
-
6
"
1
4
'
-
0
"
1
4
'
-
0
"
6
'
-
1
0
"
BE
D
R
O
O
M
1
DE
C
K
BE
D
R
O
O
M
2
BE
D
R
O
O
M
3
BA
T
H
R
O
O
M
TU
B
/
S
H
O
W
E
R
LI
V
I
N
G
R
O
O
M
A
A-
1
.
4
DE
C
K
1
2
'
-
5
"
5
'
-
8
"
1
2
'
-
5
"
3
0
'
-
6
"
11
'
-
0
"
2
'
-
0
"
2
'
-
6
"
9'
-
6
"
13
'
-
6
"
9'
-
6
"
7'
-
6
"
GA
S
F
I
R
E
P
L
A
C
E
BA
T
H
R
O
O
M
DE
S
K
LI
N
E
N
32
'
-
6
"
10
'
-
0
"
11
'
-
6
"
KI
T
C
H
E
N
ST
A
C
K
E
D
WA
S
H
E
R
/
D
R
Y
E
R
LI
N
E
N
16 RISES of 6 34"
15 RUNS of 11"UP
33
'
-
6
"
1
'
-
6
"
2
7
'
-
6
"
9
'
-
1
0
"
7
'
-
6
"
1
0
'
-
2
"
7
'
-
1
"
2
'
-
9
"
2
'
-
0
1
2
"
3
'
-
5
"
2
'
-
0
1
2
"
5
'
-
1
"
5
'
-
1
"
8'
-
2
"
8'
-
2
"
4'
-
0
"
8'
-
8
"
4'
-
6
"
2'
-
0
"
33
'
-
6
"
8'
-
2
"
8'
-
2
"
4'
-
0
"
8'
-
1
1
"
4'
-
3
"
13
'
-
2
"
2'
-
2
"
6
'
-
4
"
2'
-
6
"
16
'
-
0
"
5'
-
6
"
6
'
-
1
0
"
8'
-
5
"
3
'
-
6
"
12
'
-
3
"
6
'
-
4
"
2'
-
6
"
2'
-
2
"
3'
-
0
"
8'
-
7
1 8 "
16
'
-
8
"
3'
-
4
"
2'
-
0
"
3
'
-
6
"
6
'
-
5
7
8
"
2
'
-
6
"
2
'
-
0
1
8
"
3
'
-
5
"
2
'
-
6
"
3
'
-
5
"
7'
-
6
"
15
'
-
8
"
5
'
-
0
"
3
'
-
4
"
5'
-
6
"
4'
-
0
"
6'
-
9
"
6'
-
9
"
3'
-
9
"
5'
-
9
"
5
'
-
6
"
6
'
-
1
1
"
2
'
-
1
0
"
2
'
-
1
0
"
7
'
-
2
1
2
"
5
'
-
2
1
2
"
32
'
-
6
"
5'
-
6
"
5'
-
6
"
3'
-
7
7 8 "
2'
-
7
7 8 "
3'
-
8
1 4 "
5'
-
9
"
5'
-
9
"
11
'
-
0
"
5
'
-
2
1
2
"
6
'
-
6
1
2
"
4'
-
4
"
5
'
-
1
"
1
0
'
-
9
"
2
'
-
1
1
"
5
'
-
0
"
3'
-
3
"
3'
-
6
"
3'
-
3
"
2
'
-
2
"
2
'
-
6
"
2
'
-
1
"
2
'
-
6
"
2
'
-
6
"
3'
-
6
"
3
'
-
9
"
3'
-
7
"
4
'
-
1
"
4'
-
6
"
3
'
-
0
"
2'
-
6
"
8
'
-
0
"
2
'
-
3
"
8
'
-
0
"
2'
-
5
3 8 "
5
'
-
0
"
2'
-
7
"
2'
-
7
1 2 "
3'
-
1
"
2'
-
9
"
2
'
-
2
"
7'
-
6
"
2
'
-
2
"
1
1
'
-
1
1
"
1
1
'
-
1
1
"
4
'
-
4
"
11
"
2'
-
4
"
4
'
-
9
"
2'
-
0
"
2
'
-
3
"
8'
-
2
"
1'
-
0
"
2'
-
6
"
SH
O
W
E
R
Pr
o
p
e
r
t
y
L
i
n
e
Pr
o
p
e
r
t
y
L
i
n
e
All
d
e
s
i
g
n
s
a
n
d
o
t
h
e
r
i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
o
n
t
h
e
s
e
d
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
a
r
e
f
o
r
u
s
e
o
n
th
i
s
s
p
e
c
i
f
i
c
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
a
n
d
s
h
a
l
l
n
o
t
b
e
u
s
e
d
o
t
h
e
r
w
i
s
e
w
i
t
h
o
u
t
t
h
e
ex
p
r
e
s
s
e
d
w
r
i
t
t
e
n
p
e
r
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
A
r
c
h
i
t
e
c
t
.
Wr
i
t
t
e
n
d
i
m
e
n
s
i
o
n
s
o
n
t
h
e
s
e
d
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
s
h
a
l
l
t
a
k
e
p
r
e
c
e
d
e
n
c
e
o
v
e
r
sc
a
l
e
d
d
i
m
e
n
s
i
o
n
s
.
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
o
r
s
s
h
a
l
l
v
e
r
i
f
y
a
n
d
b
e
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
l
e
f
o
r
a
l
l
di
m
e
n
s
i
o
n
s
a
n
d
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
o
n
t
h
i
s
j
o
b
a
n
d
t
h
i
s
o
f
f
i
c
e
s
h
a
l
l
b
e
n
o
t
i
f
i
e
d
in
w
r
i
t
i
n
g
o
f
a
n
y
v
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
s
f
r
o
m
t
h
e
d
i
m
e
n
s
i
o
n
s
o
r
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
s
h
o
w
n
in
t
h
e
s
e
d
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
.
OF
SH
E
E
T
S
DA
T
E
JO
B
N
O
.
SH
E
E
T
SC
A
L
E
CH
E
C
K
E
D
DR
A
W
N
N
O
R
C
R
O
S
S
H
O
U
S
E
5
4
6
H
I
G
U
E
R
A
S
T
.
C
L
I
E
N
T
:
J
O
H
N
B
E
L
S
H
E
R
S
A
N
L
U
I
S
O
B
I
S
P
O
,
C
A
9
3
4
0
1
SE
C
O
N
D
F
L
O
O
R
SC
A
L
E
:
1 4 "
=
1
'
-
0
"
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
3
C
H
C
1
-
2
6
1
4
0'
-
0
"
(
E
)
H
O
U
S
E
1
S
T
F
L
O
O
R
11
'
-
0
"
P
L
A
T
E
H
E
I
G
H
T
17
'
-
6
"
P
L
A
T
E
H
E
I
G
H
T
11
'
-
8
"
(
E
)
H
O
U
S
E
2
N
D
F
L
O
O
R
8'
-
0
"
H
E
A
D
E
R
H
E
I
G
H
T
19
'
-
8
"
H
E
A
D
E
R
H
E
I
G
H
T
(
o
r
8
'
-
0
"
f
r
o
m
2
n
d
f
l
o
o
r
)
MA
X
H
E
I
G
H
T
(
V
e
r
i
f
y
)
RE
S
T
O
R
A
T
I
O
N
N
O
T
E
S
1.
R
E
P
A
I
R
A
N
D
R
E
T
A
I
N
F
A
S
C
I
A
D
E
T
A
I
L
.
2.
M
A
I
N
T
A
I
N
(
E
)
L
A
P
S
I
D
I
N
G
RE
P
A
I
R
A
S
N
E
E
D
E
D
.
3.
N
E
W
W
I
N
D
O
W
S
T
O
M
A
T
C
H
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
.
(E
)
J
A
M
B
&
C
A
S
I
N
G
D
E
T
A
I
L
S
OF
O
R
I
N
G
I
N
A
L
H
O
U
S
E
T
O
B
E
R
E
S
T
O
R
E
D
.
4.
A
D
D
F
R
E
N
C
H
D
O
O
R
S
&
L
O
U
V
E
R
E
D
SH
U
T
T
E
R
S
T
O
M
A
T
C
H
O
R
I
G
I
N
A
L
H
O
U
S
E
.
RE
M
O
V
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
W
I
N
D
O
W
.
5.
M
A
I
N
T
A
I
N
E
X
I
S
I
T
N
G
H
E
I
G
H
T
O
F
OR
I
G
I
N
A
L
R
A
I
L
I
N
G
(
3
2
"
)
PE
R
P
L
A
N
N
I
N
G
A
N
D
H
I
S
T
O
R
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
S
.
5
12
0'
-
0
"
(
E
)
H
O
U
S
E
1
S
T
F
L
O
O
R
11
'
-
0
"
P
L
A
T
E
H
E
I
G
H
T
17
'
-
6
"
P
L
A
T
E
H
E
I
G
H
T
11
'
-
8
"
(
E
)
H
O
U
S
E
2
N
D
F
L
O
O
R
8'
-
0
"
H
E
A
D
E
R
H
E
I
G
H
T
19
'
-
8
"
H
E
A
D
E
R
H
E
I
G
H
T
(
o
r
8
'
-
0
"
f
r
o
m
2
n
d
f
l
o
o
r
)
MA
X
H
E
I
G
H
T
(
V
e
r
i
f
y
)
0'
-
0
"
(
E
)
H
O
U
S
E
1
S
T
F
L
O
O
R
11
'
-
0
"
P
L
A
T
E
H
E
I
G
H
T
17
'
-
6
"
P
L
A
T
E
H
E
I
G
H
T
11
'
-
8
"
(
E
)
HO
U
S
E
2
N
D
F
L
O
O
R
8'
-
0
"
H
E
A
D
E
R
H
E
I
G
H
T
19
'
-
8
"
H
E
A
D
E
R
H
E
I
G
H
T
(
o
r
8
'
-
0
"
f
r
o
m
2
n
d
f
l
o
o
r
)
MA
X
H
E
I
G
H
T
(
V
e
r
i
f
y
)
CO
M
P
.
R
O
O
F
I
N
G
O
V
E
R
3
0
#
FE
L
T
T
O
M
A
T
C
H
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
MA
T
C
H
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
D
O
O
R
&
WI
N
D
O
W
T
R
I
M
(
T
Y
P
.
)
1
x
8
H
O
R
I
Z
O
N
T
A
L
W
O
O
D
SI
D
I
N
G
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
N
E
W
/
RE
M
O
D
E
L
E
D
16
12
12
12
1
3
3
5
CO
M
P
.
R
O
O
F
I
N
G
O
V
E
R
3
0
#
FE
L
T
T
O
M
A
T
C
H
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
MA
T
C
H
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
D
O
O
R
&
WI
N
D
O
W
T
R
I
M
(
T
Y
P
.
)
1
x
8
H
O
R
I
Z
O
N
T
A
L
W
O
O
D
SI
D
I
N
G
12
12
16
12
0'
-
0
"
(
E
)
H
O
U
S
E
1
S
T
F
L
O
O
R
11
'
-
0
"
P
L
A
T
E
H
E
I
G
H
T
17
'
-
6
"
P
L
A
T
E
H
E
I
G
H
T
11
'
-
8
"
(
E
)
H
O
U
S
E
2
N
D
F
L
O
O
R
8'
-
0
"
H
E
A
D
E
R
H
E
I
G
H
T
19
'
-
8
"
H
E
A
D
E
R
H
E
I
G
H
T
(
o
r
8
'
-
0
"
f
r
o
m
2
n
d
f
l
o
o
r
)
MA
X
H
E
I
G
H
T
(
V
e
r
i
f
y
)
26
'
-
0
"
R
O
O
F
H
E
I
G
H
T
Al
l
d
e
s
i
g
n
s
a
n
d
o
t
h
e
r
i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
o
n
t
h
e
s
e
d
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
a
r
e
f
o
r
u
s
e
o
n
th
i
s
s
p
e
c
i
f
i
c
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
a
n
d
s
h
a
l
l
n
o
t
b
e
u
s
e
d
o
t
h
e
r
w
i
s
e
w
i
t
h
o
u
t
t
h
e
ex
p
r
e
s
s
e
d
w
r
i
t
t
e
n
p
e
r
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
A
r
c
h
i
t
e
c
t
.
Wr
i
t
t
e
n
d
i
m
e
n
s
i
o
n
s
o
n
t
h
e
s
e
d
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
s
h
a
l
l
t
a
k
e
p
r
e
c
e
d
e
n
c
e
o
v
e
r
sc
a
l
e
d
d
i
m
e
n
s
i
o
n
s
.
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
o
r
s
s
h
a
l
l
v
e
r
i
f
y
a
n
d
b
e
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
l
e
f
o
r
a
l
l
dim
e
n
s
i
o
n
s
a
n
d
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
o
n
t
h
i
s
j
o
b
a
n
d
t
h
i
s
o
f
f
i
c
e
s
h
a
l
l
b
e
n
o
t
i
f
i
e
d
in
w
r
i
t
i
n
g
o
f
a
n
y
v
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
s
f
r
o
m
t
h
e
d
i
m
e
n
s
i
o
n
s
o
r
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
s
h
o
w
n
in
t
h
e
s
e
d
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
.
OF
SH
E
E
T
S
DA
T
E
JO
B
N
O
.
SH
E
E
T
SC
A
L
E
CH
E
C
K
E
D
DR
A
W
N
N
O
R
C
R
O
S
S
H
O
U
S
E
5
4
6
H
I
G
U
E
R
A
S
T
.
C
L
I
E
N
T
:
J
O
H
N
B
E
L
S
H
E
R
S
A
N
L
U
I
S
O
B
I
S
P
O
,
C
A
9
3
4
0
1
NO
R
T
H
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
SO
U
T
H
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
WE
S
T
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
EA
S
T
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
SC
A
L
E
:
1 4 "
=
1
'
-
0
"
SC
A
L
E
:
1 4 "
=
1
'
-
0
"
SC
A
L
E
:
1 4 "
=
1
'
-
0
"
SC
A
L
E
:
1 4 "
=
1
'
-
0
"
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
3
C
H
C
1
-
2
7
9'
-
O
"
P
L
A
T
E
H
E
I
G
H
T
(
f
r
o
m
g
a
r
a
g
e
f
l
o
o
r
)
10
'
-
O
"
F
L
O
O
R
H
E
I
G
H
T
(
f
r
o
m
g
a
r
a
g
e
f
l
o
o
r
)
18
'
-
0
"
P
L
A
T
E
H
E
I
G
H
T
(
f
r
o
m
g
a
r
a
g
e
f
l
o
o
r
)
-
0
'
-
3
"
T
.
O
.
S
.
RE
S
T
O
R
A
T
I
O
N
N
O
T
E
S
1.
R
E
P
A
I
R
A
N
D
R
E
T
A
I
N
F
A
S
C
I
A
D
E
T
A
I
L
.
2.
M
A
I
N
T
A
I
N
(
E
)
L
A
P
S
I
D
I
N
G
RE
P
A
I
R
A
S
N
E
E
D
E
D
.
3.
N
E
W
W
I
N
D
O
W
S
T
O
M
A
T
C
H
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
.
(E
)
J
A
M
B
&
C
A
S
I
N
G
D
E
T
A
I
L
S
OF
O
R
I
N
G
I
N
A
L
H
O
U
S
E
T
O
B
E
R
E
S
T
O
R
E
D
.
4.
A
D
D
F
R
E
N
C
H
D
O
O
R
S
&
L
O
U
V
E
R
E
D
SH
U
T
T
E
R
S
T
O
M
A
T
C
H
O
R
I
G
I
N
A
L
H
O
U
S
E
.
RE
M
O
V
E
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
W
I
N
D
O
W
.
5.
M
A
I
N
T
A
I
N
E
X
I
S
I
T
N
G
H
E
I
G
H
T
O
F
OR
I
G
I
N
A
L
R
A
I
L
I
N
G
(
3
2
"
)
PE
R
P
L
A
N
N
I
N
G
A
N
D
H
I
S
T
O
R
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
S
.
12
12
9'
-
O
"
P
L
A
T
E
H
E
I
G
H
T
(
f
r
o
m
g
a
r
a
g
e
f
l
o
o
r
)
10
'
-
O
"
F
L
O
O
R
H
E
I
G
H
T
(
f
r
o
m
g
a
r
a
g
e
f
l
o
o
r
)
18
'
-
0
"
P
L
A
T
E
H
E
I
G
H
T
(
f
r
o
m
g
a
r
a
g
e
f
l
o
o
r
)
-
0
'
-
3
"
T
.
O
.
S
.
9'
-
O
"
P
L
A
T
E
H
E
I
G
H
T
(
f
r
o
m
g
a
r
a
g
e
f
l
o
o
r
)
10
'
-
O
"
F
L
O
O
R
H
E
I
G
H
T
(
f
r
o
m
g
a
r
a
g
e
f
l
o
o
r
)
18
'
-
0
"
P
L
A
T
E
H
E
I
G
H
T
(
f
r
o
m
g
a
r
a
g
e
f
l
o
o
r
)
-
0
'
-
3
"
T
.
O
.
S
.
12
12
NO
T
E
:
M
I
N
I
M
U
M
C
L
A
S
S
C
RO
O
F
I
N
G
M
A
T
E
R
I
A
L
I
S
RE
Q
U
I
R
E
D
P
E
R
S
E
C
T
I
O
N
R9
0
2
.
1
.
3
O
F
T
H
E
2
0
1
3
C
R
C
.
CO
M
P
.
R
O
O
F
I
N
G
O
V
E
R
3
0
#
FE
L
T
T
O
M
A
T
C
H
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
1
x
8
H
O
R
I
Z
O
N
T
A
L
W
O
O
D
SI
D
I
N
G
MA
T
C
H
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
D
O
O
R
&
WI
N
D
O
W
T
R
I
M
(
T
Y
P
.
)
1
x
8
H
O
R
I
Z
O
N
T
A
L
W
O
O
D
SI
D
I
N
G
CO
M
P
.
R
O
O
F
I
N
G
O
V
E
R
3
0
#
FE
L
T
T
O
M
A
T
C
H
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
MA
T
C
H
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
D
O
O
R
&
WI
N
D
O
W
T
R
I
M
(
T
Y
P
.
)
9'
-
O
"
P
L
A
T
E
H
E
I
G
H
T
(
f
r
o
m
g
a
r
a
g
e
f
l
o
o
r
)
10
'
-
O
"
F
L
O
O
R
H
E
I
G
H
T
(
f
r
o
m
g
a
r
a
g
e
f
l
o
o
r
)
18
'
-
0
"
P
L
A
T
E
H
E
I
G
H
T
(
f
r
o
m
g
a
r
a
g
e
f
l
o
o
r
)
-
0
'
-
3
"
T
.
O
.
S
.
Al
l
d
e
s
i
g
n
s
a
n
d
o
t
h
e
r
i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
o
n
t
h
e
s
e
d
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
a
r
e
f
o
r
u
s
e
o
n
th
i
s
s
p
e
c
i
f
i
c
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
a
n
d
s
h
a
l
l
n
o
t
b
e
u
s
e
d
o
t
h
e
r
w
i
s
e
w
i
t
h
o
u
t
t
h
e
ex
p
r
e
s
s
e
d
w
r
i
t
t
e
n
p
e
r
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
A
r
c
h
i
t
e
c
t
.
Wr
i
t
t
e
n
d
i
m
e
n
s
i
o
n
s
o
n
t
h
e
s
e
d
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
s
h
a
l
l
t
a
k
e
p
r
e
c
e
d
e
n
c
e
o
v
e
r
sc
a
l
e
d
d
i
m
e
n
s
i
o
n
s
.
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
o
r
s
s
h
a
l
l
v
e
r
i
f
y
a
n
d
b
e
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
l
e
f
o
r
a
l
l
dim
e
n
s
i
o
n
s
a
n
d
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
o
n
t
h
i
s
j
o
b
a
n
d
t
h
i
s
o
f
f
i
c
e
s
h
a
l
l
b
e
n
o
t
i
f
i
e
d
in
w
r
i
t
i
n
g
o
f
a
n
y
v
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
s
f
r
o
m
t
h
e
d
i
m
e
n
s
i
o
n
s
o
r
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
s
h
o
w
n
in
t
h
e
s
e
d
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
.
OF
SH
E
E
T
S
DA
T
E
JO
B
N
O
.
SH
E
E
T
SC
A
L
E
CH
E
C
K
E
D
DR
A
W
N
N
O
R
C
R
O
S
S
H
O
U
S
E
5
4
6
H
I
G
U
E
R
A
S
T
.
C
L
I
E
N
T
:
J
O
H
N
B
E
L
S
H
E
R
S
A
N
L
U
I
S
O
B
I
S
P
O
,
C
A
9
3
4
0
1
NO
R
T
H
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
SO
U
T
H
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
SC
A
L
E
:
1 4 "
=
1
'
-
0
"
WE
S
T
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
EA
S
T
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
SC
A
L
E
:
1 4 "
=
1
'
-
0
"
SC
A
L
E
:
1 4 "
=
1
'
-
0
"
SC
A
L
E
:
1 4 "
=
1
'
-
0
"
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
3
C
H
C
1
-
2
8
9'
-
O
"
P
L
A
T
E
H
E
I
G
H
T
(
f
r
o
m
g
a
r
a
g
e
f
l
o
o
r
)
10
'
-
O
"
F
L
O
O
R
H
E
I
G
H
T
(
f
r
o
m
g
a
r
a
g
e
f
l
o
o
r
)
18
'
-
0
"
P
L
A
T
E
H
E
I
G
H
T
(
f
r
o
m
g
a
r
a
g
e
f
l
o
o
r
)
-
0
-
3
"
T
.
O
.
S
.
0'
-
0
"
(
E
)
H
O
U
S
E
1
S
T
F
L
O
O
R
11
'
-
0
"
P
L
A
T
E
H
E
I
G
H
T
18
'
-
2
"
P
L
A
T
E
H
E
I
G
H
T
11
'
-
8
"
(
E
)
H
O
U
S
E
2
N
D
F
L
O
O
R
8'
-
0
"
H
E
A
D
E
R
H
E
I
G
H
T
19
'
-
8
"
H
E
A
D
E
R
H
E
I
G
H
T
(
o
r
8
'
-
0
"
f
r
o
m
2
n
d
f
l
o
o
r
)
MA
X
H
E
I
G
H
T
(
V
e
r
i
f
y
)
(E
)
1
6
:
1
2
R
O
O
F
R
A
F
T
E
R
S
T
O
BE
R
E
P
L
A
C
E
D
A
S
N
E
E
D
E
D
(N
)
5
:
1
2
T
R
U
S
S
GA
B
L
E
R
O
O
F
(N
)
1
1
7
8 "
T
J
I
F
L
O
O
R
JO
I
S
T
S
@
1
6
"
O
.
C
.
(N
)
P
E
R
I
M
E
T
E
R
F
O
U
N
D
A
T
I
O
N
2
x
8
@
1
6
"
O
.
C
.
w
/
3
4 "
PL
Y
W
O
O
D
S
U
B
-
F
L
O
O
R
TE
M
P
O
R
A
R
Y
F
L
O
O
R
I
N
G
2
x
8
@
1
6
"
O
.
C
.
w
/
3
4 "
PL
Y
W
O
O
D
S
U
B
-
F
L
O
O
R
TE
M
P
O
R
A
R
Y
F
L
O
O
R
I
N
G
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
S
T
R
U
C
T
U
R
E
T
O
R
E
M
A
I
N
1
'
-
6
"
1
1
'
-
7
"
2
'
-
8
"
8
7
8
"
1
'
-
4
3
4
"
(N
)
1
2
:
1
2
TR
U
S
S
G
A
B
L
E
RO
O
F
1
6
:
1
2
1
6
:
1
2
5
:
1
2
5
:
1
2
16
:
1
2
16
:
1
2
3
:
1
2
3
:
1
2
5
:
1
2
5
:
1
2
16
:
1
2
16
:
1
2
16
:
1
2
16
:
1
2
16
:
1
2
16
:
1
2
16
:
1
2
16
:
1
2
12
:
1
2
12
:
1
2
1
2
:
1
2
1
2
:
1
2
16
:
1
2
16
:
1
2
Al
l
d
e
s
i
g
n
s
a
n
d
o
t
h
e
r
i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
o
n
t
h
e
s
e
d
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
a
r
e
f
o
r
u
s
e
o
n
th
i
s
s
p
e
c
i
f
i
c
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
a
n
d
s
h
a
l
l
n
o
t
b
e
u
s
e
d
o
t
h
e
r
w
i
s
e
w
i
t
h
o
u
t
t
h
e
ex
p
r
e
s
s
e
d
w
r
i
t
t
e
n
p
e
r
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
A
r
c
h
i
t
e
c
t
.
Wr
i
t
t
e
n
d
i
m
e
n
s
i
o
n
s
o
n
t
h
e
s
e
d
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
s
h
a
l
l
t
a
k
e
p
r
e
c
e
d
e
n
c
e
o
v
e
r
sc
a
l
e
d
d
i
m
e
n
s
i
o
n
s
.
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
o
r
s
s
h
a
l
l
v
e
r
i
f
y
a
n
d
b
e
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
l
e
f
o
r
a
l
l
dim
e
n
s
i
o
n
s
a
n
d
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
o
n
t
h
i
s
j
o
b
a
n
d
t
h
i
s
o
f
f
i
c
e
s
h
a
l
l
b
e
n
o
t
i
f
i
e
d
in
w
r
i
t
i
n
g
o
f
a
n
y
v
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
s
f
r
o
m
t
h
e
d
i
m
e
n
s
i
o
n
s
o
r
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
s
h
o
w
n
in
t
h
e
s
e
d
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
.
OF
SH
E
E
T
S
DA
T
E
JO
B
N
O
.
SH
E
E
T
SC
A
L
E
CH
E
C
K
E
D
DR
A
W
N
N
O
R
C
R
O
S
S
H
O
U
S
E
5
4
6
H
I
G
U
E
R
A
S
T
.
C
L
I
E
N
T
:
J
O
H
N
B
E
L
S
H
E
R
S
A
N
L
U
I
S
O
B
I
S
P
O
,
C
A
9
3
4
0
1
RO
O
F
P
L
A
N
SC
A
L
E
:
1 4 "
=
1
'
-
0
"
SE
C
T
I
O
N
A
SC
A
L
E
:
1 4 "
=
1
'
-
0
"
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
3
C
H
C
1
-
2
9
All
d
e
s
i
g
n
s
a
n
d
o
t
h
e
r
i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
o
n
t
h
e
s
e
d
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
a
r
e
f
o
r
u
s
e
o
n
th
i
s
s
p
e
c
i
f
i
c
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
a
n
d
s
h
a
l
l
n
o
t
b
e
u
s
e
d
o
t
h
e
r
w
i
s
e
w
i
t
h
o
u
t
t
h
e
ex
p
r
e
s
s
e
d
w
r
i
t
t
e
n
p
e
r
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
A
r
c
h
i
t
e
c
t
.
Wri
t
t
e
n
d
i
m
e
n
s
i
o
n
s
o
n
t
h
e
s
e
d
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
s
h
a
l
l
t
a
k
e
p
r
e
c
e
d
e
n
c
e
o
v
e
r
sc
a
l
e
d
d
i
m
e
n
s
i
o
n
s
.
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
o
r
s
s
h
a
l
l
v
e
r
i
f
y
a
n
d
b
e
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
l
e
f
o
r
a
l
l
dim
e
n
s
i
o
n
s
a
n
d
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
o
n
t
h
i
s
j
o
b
a
n
d
t
h
i
s
o
f
f
i
c
e
s
h
a
l
l
b
e
n
o
t
i
f
i
e
d
in
w
r
i
t
i
n
g
o
f
a
n
y
v
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
s
f
r
o
m
t
h
e
d
i
m
e
n
s
i
o
n
s
o
r
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
s
h
o
w
n
in
t
h
e
s
e
d
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
.
OF
SH
E
E
T
S
DA
T
E
JO
B
N
O
.
SH
E
E
T
SC
A
L
E
CH
E
C
K
E
D
DR
A
W
N
N
O
R
C
R
O
S
S
H
O
U
S
E
C
L
I
E
N
T
:
J
O
H
N
B
E
L
S
H
E
R
5
4
6
H
I
G
U
E
R
A
S
T
.
S
A
N
L
U
I
S
O
B
I
S
P
O
,
C
A
9
3
4
0
1
NO
R
C
R
O
S
S
H
O
U
S
E
RE
S
T
O
R
A
T
I
O
N
&
A
D
D
I
T
I
O
N
54
6
H
I
G
U
E
R
A
S
T
.
SA
N
L
U
I
S
O
B
I
S
P
O
,
C
A
L
I
F
O
R
N
I
A
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
3
C
H
C
1
-
3
0
HI
G
U
E
R
A
S
T
R
E
E
T
(N
)
D
R
I
V
E
W
A
Y
25
'
-
0
"
M
I
N
.
W
I
D
E
SI
D
E
W
A
L
K
&
C
U
R
B
RE
M
O
V
E
(
2
)
T
R
E
E
S
(N
)
P
A
L
M
RE
-
L
O
C
A
T
E
D
(
E
)
H
I
S
T
O
R
I
C
A
L
"
R
E
D
H
O
U
S
E
"
(N
)
P
R
O
P
O
S
E
D
A
D
D
I
T
I
O
N
1
2
34
53647
3
2
89
(E
)
P
O
R
C
H
2
2
5'
-
0
'
10
10
10
10
(N
)
L
A
N
D
I
N
G
(N
)
S
T
A
I
R
S
25
'
-
0
"
SE
E
D
E
T
.
#
2
SE
E
D
E
T
.
#
1
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
T
R
E
E
(
T
W
O
I
N
F
R
O
N
T
T
O
B
E
R
E
M
O
V
E
D
)
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
S
T
R
E
E
T
T
R
E
E
PA
L
M
T
R
E
E
GR
O
U
N
D
S
H
R
U
B
PL
A
N
T
GR
O
U
N
D
C
O
V
E
R
1.
(
N
)
6
'
H
T
.
F
E
N
C
E
2.
(
N
)
3
'
H
T
.
P
I
C
K
E
T
F
E
N
C
E
3.
(
N
)
G
A
T
E
4.
(
N
)
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
W
A
L
K
5.
(
N
)
F
L
A
G
S
T
O
N
E
P
A
V
E
R
S
6.
(
N
)
U
T
I
L
I
T
Y
S
E
R
V
I
C
E
7.
(
N
)
T
R
A
S
H
L
O
C
A
T
I
O
N
8.
(
N
)
B
R
I
C
K
P
L
A
N
T
E
R
9.
(
N
)
P
A
V
E
R
S
10
.
(
N
)
C
O
N
C
.
P
I
L
A
S
T
E
R
S
w
/
P
L
A
S
T
E
R
2
X
6
R
E
D
W
O
O
D
C
A
P
2
X
2
R
E
D
W
O
O
D
P
I
C
K
E
T
S
4
.
5
"
O
.
C
.
1
X
1
R
E
D
W
O
O
D
N
A
I
L
E
R
S
2
X
4
R
E
D
W
O
O
D
R
A
I
L
w
/
T
A
P
E
R
E
D
E
D
G
E
1
X
6
T
&
G
R
E
D
W
O
O
D
F
E
N
C
E
B
O
A
R
D
S
2
X
4
R
E
D
W
O
O
D
R
A
I
L
w
/
T
A
P
E
R
E
D
E
D
G
E
1
X
8
R
E
D
W
O
O
D
K
I
C
K
B
O
A
R
D
4 X
4
R
E
D
W
O
O
D
F
E
N
C
E
P
O
S
T
6
'
-
0
"
O
.
C
.
(
T
Y
P
.
)
12
"
X
1
8
"
P
O
S
T
H
O
L
E
F
I
L
L
E
D
w
/
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
6'-
0
"
O
.
C
.
3"
S
P
A
C
I
N
G
6
'
(
T
Y
P
.
)
1
'
-
3
"
12
"
1
8
"
2
1 2 "
P
I
C
K
E
T
S
2"
S
P
A
C
I
N
G
3
'
-
6
"
(
T
Y
P
.
)
4
X
4
R
E
D
W
O
O
D
F
E
N
C
E
P
O
S
T
6
'
-
0
"
O
.
C
.
(
T
Y
P
.
)
12
"
X
1
8
"
P
O
S
T
H
O
L
E
F
I
L
L
E
D
w
/
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
1
X
3
R
E
D
W
O
O
D
P
I
C
K
E
T
2 X
4
R
E
D
W
O
O
D
F
E
N
C
E
R
A
I
L
CO
P
P
E
R
4
X
4
P
O
S
T
C
A
P
2 X
4
R
E
D
W
O
O
D
F
E
N
C
E
R
A
I
L
2'
-
6
"
2'-
6
"
Al
l
d
e
s
i
g
n
s
a
n
d
o
t
h
e
r
i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
o
n
t
h
e
s
e
d
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
a
r
e
f
o
r
u
s
e
o
n
th
i
s
s
p
e
c
i
f
i
c
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
a
n
d
s
h
a
l
l
n
o
t
b
e
u
s
e
d
o
t
h
e
r
w
i
s
e
w
i
t
h
o
u
t
t
h
e
ex
p
r
e
s
s
e
d
w
r
i
t
t
e
n
p
e
r
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
A
r
c
h
i
t
e
c
t
.
Wr
i
t
t
e
n
d
i
m
e
n
s
i
o
n
s
o
n
t
h
e
s
e
d
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
s
h
a
l
l
t
a
k
e
p
r
e
c
e
d
e
n
c
e
o
v
e
r
sc
a
l
e
d
d
i
m
e
n
s
i
o
n
s
.
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
o
r
s
s
h
a
l
l
v
e
r
i
f
y
a
n
d
b
e
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
l
e
f
o
r
a
l
l
dim
e
n
s
i
o
n
s
a
n
d
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
o
n
t
h
i
s
j
o
b
a
n
d
t
h
i
s
o
f
f
i
c
e
s
h
a
l
l
b
e
n
o
t
i
f
i
e
d
in
w
r
i
t
i
n
g
o
f
a
n
y
v
a
r
i
a
t
i
o
n
s
f
r
o
m
t
h
e
d
i
m
e
n
s
i
o
n
s
o
r
c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
s
h
o
w
n
in
t
h
e
s
e
d
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
.
OF
SH
E
E
T
S
DA
T
E
JO
B
N
O
.
SH
E
E
T
SC
A
L
E
CH
E
C
K
E
D
DR
A
W
N
N
O
R
C
R
O
S
S
H
O
U
S
E
5
4
6
H
I
G
U
E
R
A
S
T
.
C
L
I
E
N
T
:
J
O
H
N
B
E
L
S
H
E
R
S
A
N
L
U
I
S
O
B
I
S
P
O
,
C
A
9
3
4
0
1
LA
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
P
L
A
N
T
I
N
G
P
L
A
N
SC
A
L
E
:
3
16
"
=
1
'
-
0
"
PL
A
N
T
L
E
G
E
N
D
PL
A
N
K
E
Y
N
O
T
E
S
6'
W
O
O
D
F
E
N
C
E
SC
A
L
E
:
3 8 "
=
1
'
-
0
"
1
42
"
P
I
C
K
E
T
F
E
N
C
E
2
SC
A
L
E
:
3 8 "
=
1
'
-
0
"
A
t
t
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
3
C
H
C
1
-
3
1
City of San Luis Obispo, Council Agenda Report, Meeting Date, Item Number
FROM: Derek Johnson, Community Development Director
Prepared By: Phil Dunsmore, Senior Planner
SUBJECT: HISTORIC EVALUATION OF A RESIDENCE CONSTRUCTED IN 1874
PROPOSED FOR DEMOLITION (CITY FILE NO. HIST-0155-2014).
RECOMMENDATION
As recommended by the Cultural Heritage Committee (CHC), adopt a resolution (Attachment 7)
adding 546 Higuera Street to the Master List of Historic Resources.
BACKGROUND
Advisory Body Recommendation
The applicant is contemplating the redevelopment of the property and the removal of the existing
residence to allow the redevelopment of the existing trailer park with the development of a new
modular home project. Staff required a historic evaluation due to the age of the structure and
subsequnetly referred the historic evaluation to the Cultural Heritage Committee (CHC) on
September 22, 2014 (Attachment 6) to determine whether the property is eligible for placement
on the City’s list of Historic Resources.
At the hearing, the CHC recommended the City Council add the property to the City’s list of
contributing historic resources and asked staff to perform additional research to determine
whether the property may be eligible for the Master List of Historic Resources. Since no
demolition application or development application has been submitted at this time, the
demolition request is not currently a part of the Council’s action.
DISCUSSION
Historic Resource Evaluation
Historic Preservation is an important goal of the City’s General Plan, as described in
Conservation and Open Space Element policies 3.3.1 - 3.3.5 and Land Use Element policy 4.12.
Although the City strives to preserve and identify its unique history, in some instances, a
building or resource may have been inadvertently left out of previous surveys. In these cases, the
property may be reviewed to ascertain whether it should be added to the City’s Historic
Resources Inventory. The City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance (MC 14.01) guides the
evaluation and listing process.
The City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance (MC 14.01.060) outlines the process for determining
the significance of a historic resource. The project applicant (John Belsher) hired LSA associates
to prepare an eligibility evaluation for the residence in July, 2014 (Attachment 3). The LSA
report concluded the property was not eligible for inclusion on the City’s Master List of Historic
November 18, 2014
2014
Attachment 4
CHC1 - 32
546 Higuera Historic Listing Page 2
Resources under the City’s criteria in Section 14.01.070 of the Municipal Code. Following the
CHC review and recommendation on August 25, 2014, Betsy Bertrando, a consultant on the
City’s list of qualified historical consultants, donated her services to research information for the
property (Attachment 4). Bertrando’s research found that the residence was constructed earlier
than originally estimated by LSA and found that the residence is associated with persons who
made significant contributions to local events. Bertrando’s research leads staff to determine that
the residence is eligible for the Master List based on Architectural and Historical significance.
Consistency with applicable listing criteria is briefly detailed below.
1. Architectural Criteria (Style, Design, and/or Architect)
When this property was originally surveyed by the City in 1983 as part of the Citywide
historic resource survey, the design, condition and style were carefully analyzed as noted in
this excerpt from the City file. Today, the façade remains unchanged from t he 1983 survey
and the structure remains an excellent example of Gothic Revival Architecture:
“Examples of Eastlake-Gothic Revival architecture are rare in in San Luis Obispo.
This style of architecture is known for its elaborate use of façade decorations; and
this building is a fine model of this style. That the façade of this building is in such
fine condition is an added bonus. By comparing the present structure with a 1904
photo it is obvious that the façade is virtually unchanged. The combination of the
rare nature of this style of architecture, the fine original condition of the façade,
and the age of the building add together to form one of the more important
architectural resources of San Luis Obispo.”
It is not known why the residence was not previously added to the City’s historic resource
inventory, since the original survey clearly found this residence to be architecturally
significant. The residence qualifies for listing based on architectural significance.
2. Historic Criteria (Person, Event, and/or Context)
David C. Norcross was the original resident in the house, beginning in 1874. Mr Norcross
was the Sheriff in San Luis Obispo from 1871 through 1877. He was also instrumental in
bringing the first narrow gauge railroad to the County as president of a company known as
the San Luis Obispo Railroad which was later sold to Port Harford and became part of the
Pacific Coast Railroad. David Norcross lived in the residence until his death in 1889. Later,
the residence was the home of Dr. James Sinclair from 1889 until approximately 1907. Dr.
Sinclair was the lead surgeon of the San Luis Obispo County Hospital from 1896 to 1902.
Both Mr. Norcross and Dr. James Sinclair are considered significant persons to the
community in accordance with MC 14.01.070 B 1.
3. Integrity: Whether a structure occupies its original site, the degree it has maintained
enough of its historic character to be recognizable, and the degree to which it has retained
its original design and workmanship.
Attachment 4
CHC1 - 33
546 Higuera Historic Listing Page 3
546 Higuera is one of few residences from the mid to late 1800’s that is still on its original
foundation, in its original location, and still maintains its original façade. The wood
detailing, exterior siding and some
of the windows are original or were
updated in a very early time. The
interior floors and walls are
original. Small additions have been
added to the rear of structure over
time. The surrounding trailer park
detracts from the context of the
property. However, the property can
be clearly recognized as the Gothic
Revival residence that was
constructed in 1874. Therefore, it
has maintained its integrity in a
manner sufficient to convey its
significance.
Property Condition
Unfortunately, the property is no
longer in habitable condition. A variety
of tenants have occupied the structure
over the years, and the property has
suffered from a lack of maintenance.
Failing foundation supports have caused
the floors to be uneven, and the property
suffers from damaged exterior and
interior details. A complete restoration
or partial reconstruction of the residence
would be necessary to allow it to be
safely occupied (see Attachment 5).
However, the condition of a property
does not affect the historic significance
unless the condition impacts the
integrity and its ability to convey
significance. (MC 14.01.070)
Development Project
The applicant has discussed with staff the intent to demolish the residence to make room for the
future development of a modular residential project that will take the place of the existing trailer
park. At this time, the applicant has not submitted plans for the new development and staff has
not seen plans for this proposal. Since the development is proposed as a “modular project”
similar to a mobile home park, much of the permitting would be handled by the State with the
City only responsible for reviewing zoning consistency and compliance with Chapter 5.45 of the
Figure 1: 1904 Photo of 546 Higuera Street
Figure 2: 2014 Photo of 546 Higuera Street
Attachment 4
CHC1 - 34
546 Higuera Historic Listing Page 4
Municipal Code dealing with mobile home park conversion requirements. Project entitlement is
not a part of the historic resource determination for this property at this time. However, the
resource determination may have an impact on the project entitlement and process.
Demolition of Historic Resources
If the Council determines that the residence does not qualify for listing in accordance with the
City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance, the demolition of the structure may be handled through a
building permit without further discretionary review. If the Council concurs with the CHC and
determines the house is eligible for either the Contributing or Master List of historic resources,
proposed demolition of the structure would need to be evaluated consistent with MC 14.01.100.
Under this section of the Historic Preservation Ordinance, the Council must make specific
findings to allow demolition, which include:
1. The property is a hazard to public health or safety, and repair or stabilization is not
structurally feasible.
2. Denial of the demolition will constitute an extreme economic hardship as defined in the
Historic Preservation Ordinance (MC 14.01.100 J).
The Historic Preservation Ordinance specifically notes that deterioration resulting from property
owner’s neglect or failure to maintain the property should not be justification for demolition.
Environmental Review
The listing of the property is categorically exempt from environmental review based on CEQA
Section 15307, “actions by regulatory agencies for protection of natural resources”. This section
allows for actions taken by regulatory agencies as authorized by state law or local ordinance to
View along Higuera Street toward downtown, circa
1900, showing 546 Higuera Street above
Attachment 4
CHC1 - 35
546 Higuera Historic Listing Page 5
assure the maintenance, restoration, or enhancement of a resource where the regulatory process
involves procedures for protection of the environment.
CONCURRENCES
The historic evaluation of the residence has been reviewed by the CHC. The CHC voted 5-2 to
place the property on the Contributing List of Historic Resources (Attachment 6, CHC Minutes).
The CHC also recommended the City Council consider additional research into the date of
construction and whether there are other significance issues that will elevate the property to
Master List status.
FISCAL IMPACT
Adding the property to the City’s List of Historic Resources has no bearing on City fiscal
resources. If the property is added to the Master List, the property would be eligible for
participation in the Mills Act program which would provide tax relief in exchange for a historic
preservation agreement. The tax relief would result in minor fiscal impacts to the Cit y and
County in anticipated tax revenue for the property. Approval of a Mills Act contract is a
discretionary act and not a component of this review.
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the attached resolution (Attachment 7) adding the property at 546 Higuera Street to the
Master List of Historic Resources.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Add 546 Higuera Street on the City’s list of Contributing Resources instead of the Master List
of Historic Resources, based on findings consistent with Historic Preservation Program
guidelines.
2. Determine that the property is not eligible for listing due to the altered context of the site and
potential loss of integrity to the property due to the surrounding development and changes that
have occurred to the residence over time.
3. Continue the item for additional information or discussion.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Vicinity Map
2. Copy of City survey file from 1983
3. Eligibility Evaluation prepared by LSA, July 2014
4. Supplementary information prepared by Betsy Bertrando October 2014
5. Property condition reports/photo essay
6. Draft September 22, 2014 CHC Minutes
7. Draft Resolution
t:\council agenda reports\2014\2014-11-18\review of 546 higuera st (johnson-dunsmore)\council_agenda_report 1_546 higuera st.docx
Attachment 4
CHC1 - 36
RESOLUTION NO. 10579 (2014 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS
OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, ADDING THE DAVID NORCROSS RESIDENCE
AT 546 HIGUERA STREET TO THE MASTER LIST OF HISTORIC
RESOURCES (HIS- 0155 -2014)
WHEREAS, applicant John Belsher, on September 8, 2014, submitted a historic
resources report to determine the historic listing eligibility of the residence at 546 Higuera Street;
and
WHEREAS, City staff determined that the residence reflects a significant architectural
style and was constructed in 1874 and therefore may qualify as a significant historic resource in
accordance with the City's Historic Preservation Ordinance and the California Environmental
Quality Act; and
WHEREAS, The Cultural Heritage Committee of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted
a public hearing in the Council Meeting Room of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo,
California, on June 23, 2014, for the purpose of considering adding property located at 546
Higuera Street to the Contributing or Master List of Historic Resources; and
WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing on November 18, 2014, for the
purpose of considering the property located at 546 Higuera for the Master List of Historic
Resources; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has duly considered all evidence, including the testimony
of the applicants, interested parties, the records of the Cultural Heritage Committee hearing, and
the evaluation and recommendations by staff, presented at said hearing.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis
Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. Findings. The Council makes the following findings of consistency with
Historic Preservation Program Ordinance eligibility criteria for the Contributing List of Historic
Resources:
Findings
a) The residential structure at 546 Higuera Street is eligible for the Master List of
Historic Resources because it satisfies at least one of the evaluation criteria for
historic resource listing described in the Historic Preservation Ordinance,
exhibits historic integrity, and is more than 50 years old.
b) The house satisfies evaluation criteria for historic resources listing, related to
architectural style and design (§ 14.01.070 A). It is a rare and unique example
of a late 19th Century owner -built residence that exhibits the Gothic Revival
R 10579
Attachment 5
CHC1 - 37
Resolution No. 10579 (2014 Series)
Page 2
style, which is a rare and unique style of architecture in the City. Its eclectic
detailing and craftsmanship is notably attractive and aesthetically appealing
and the street facing facade of the structure is in original condition.
c) The house exhibits historic integrity, and satisfies evaluation criteria for
historic resources listing related to historic integrity (§14.01.070 Q. The
structure occupies its original site and the extent of its original foundation. Its
historic character and appearance have been maintained, and materials and
workmanship retained.
d) The house is at least 140 years old and was constructed in 1874 as identified
on Sanborn Insurance maps /deed records. The house was published in the
1904 Fireman's Souvenir book as the residence of Dr. James Sinclair, the lead
physician at San Luis Obispo County Hospital. The house was the residence
of David Norcross, the Sheriff of San Luis Obispo and the president of the
San Luis Obispo Railroad organization, instrumental in linking the Pacific
Coast Railroad to San Luis Obispo.
SECTION 2. Environmental Determination. The City Council has determined that the
above actions are exempt under Class 6, Information Collection, Section 15306 of the CEQA
Guidelines because the resource evaluation does not result in a serious or major disturbance to an
environmental resource.
SECTION 3. Action. The Council of the City of San Luis Obispo does hereby add the
property located at 546 Higuera Street to the Master List of Historic Resources.
Upon motion of Council Member Ashbaugh, seconded by Vice Mayor Christianson, and on the
following roll call vote:
AYES: Council Members Ashbaugh, Carpenter and Smith,
Vice Mayor Christianson and Mayor Marx
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
Attachment 5
CHC1 - 38
Resolution No. 10579 (2014 Series)
Page 3
The foregoing resolution was adopted this 18th day of November 2014.
Mayor Jaolarx
ATTEST:
V At.' -, Ii
nnthcmy J. Me zt; a4
City Clerk
AS
J. h 1e Dietrick
City Attorney
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City
of San Luis Obispo, California, this Q t- day of Q 0- Jewwkx./ , 20IL-1
4 v
lAjAfrony J.
City Clerk
Attachment 5
CHC1 - 39
Meeting Date: April 27, 2015
Item Number: 1
CULTURAL HERITAGE COMMITTEE AGENDA REPORT
SUBJECT: Conceptual review of the proposed rehabilitation and repositioning of a Master List
Historic Resource (Norcross House) and review of a two-story addition for a residence and
covered vehicle parking.
PROJECT ADDRESS: 546 Higuera Street BY: Kyle Bell, Assistant Planner
FILE NUMBER: ARCH-0982-2015 FROM: Brian Leveille, Senior Planner
SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION
Continue the project to a date uncertain with direction to staff and the applicant on items to be
addressed in plans submitted for final design approval.
SITE DATA
Applicant John Belsher
Representative Thom Brajkovich, Paragon
Design
Historic Status Master List
Submittal Date February 25, 2015
Complete Date Incomplete status
Zoning C-R
General Plan General Retail
Site Area 1.44 acres
Environmental
Status
pending
SUMMARY
The applicant has submitted plans for the rehabilitation and repositioning of a Master List
Historic Resource (Norcross House) that includes addition of a two-story attached residence.
The property was added to the Master list of historic properties in 2014. On September 22, 2014
the Cultural Heritage Committee (CHC) evaluated the existing residence at 546 Higuera Street
and recommended the property for inclusion on the Master List of Historic Resources. On
November 18, 2014 the City Council adopted Resolution No. 10579 (2014 Series) adding the
David Norcross residence at 546 Higuera to the Master List of Historic Resources. The property
was found to qualify for listing under three of the significance criteria including architectural
Attachment 6
CHC1 - 40
546 Higuera Street
ARCH-0982-2015
Page 2
style, historic significance and integrity, as the structure maintains its original location, style,
and character defining features. (Attachment 5, City Council Resolution).
The project requires review by the Cultural Heritage Committee pursuant to Historic
Preservation Program Guidelines Section 3.4 (Changes to Historic Resources) because the
project proposes to reposition the historic resource 15 feet forward on the same property,
demolish previous additions made to the structure, and add a two story residence to the rear of
the newly repositioned historic resource.
PROJECT INFORMATION
Site Information/Setting
The residence is located at the front of a 1.44 acre site containing a residential trailer park within
the retail district on Higuera Street, south of Nipomo Street (Attachment 1, Vicinity Map). The
property abuts San Luis Creek at the rear and Higuera Street at the front. The residence
maintains the same form and location shown on the 1886 Sanborn Map (Attachment 3, Sanborn
Map). With the exception of non-historic additions at the rear of the structure, the building
maintains its overall integrity and effectively conveys its historic and architectural significance.
The closest historic resource to the site is the Golden State Creamery, roughly 200 feet to the
east near the corner of Higuera and Nipomo Streets (570 Higuera Street), which was built in
1910.
Historic Resource Evaluation Summary
As part of the Council consideration of the CHC’s recommendation to add the property to the
list of historic resources, Betsy Bertrando, a consultant on the City’s list of qualified historical
consultants, evaluated the property for criteria described in the City’s Historic Preservation
Ordinance (MC 14.01.060). The Bertrando Report1 found the residence to be architecturally
significant as an excellent example of Eastlake-Gothic Revival architecture. The residence has
also qualified for historical significance due to the previous residents David C. Norcross (City
Sheriff from 1871 through 1877) and Dr. James Sinclair (lead surgeon of San Luis Obispo
County Hospital from 1896 to 1902). Both Mr. Norcross and Dr. James Sinclair are considered
significant persons to the community. The property was also found to have retained its historic
integrity because the residence is still on its original foundation, in its original location, and has
maintained its integrity from the mid to late 1800’s in a manner sufficient to convey its
significance.
Property Condition
The existing residence is no longer in habitable condition, and over the years the property has
suffered from a lack of maintenance. Failing foundation supports have caused the floors to be
uneven, and the structure suffers from damaged exterior and interior details. A complete
1 Bertrando, Betsy. Bertrando Report: Historic Evaluation of the Norcross House. October 2014.
Attachment 6
CHC1 - 41
546 Higuera Street
ARCH-0982-2015
Page 3
rehabilitation or partial reconstruction of the residence is necessary to allow it to be safely
occupied (Attachment 4, Photo Summary).
Project Description
The applicant has submitted plans that include
the rehabilitation and repositioning of the
structure including addition of a two-story
residence onto the rear of the structure.
The first phase of the proposed project is to
remove the non-historic additions that have
been added to the rear of the structure. These
additions can be identified by changes of
materials and alternating ceiling heights per
room and total approximately 1,600 square
feet. All that is proposed to be retained is the
original front portion of the historic structure,
which is approximately 1,000 square feet in
size.
The second phase involves lifting the remaining structure and repositioning it 15 feet forward on
the lot, closer to the street; and rehabilitating the residence to its appearance during its period of
significance from 1886-1890. The proposed rehabilitation of the residence includes repairing the
structure’s deteriorated foundation, repairing/replacing deteriorated materials, reconstructing the
front porch to include a balcony as it did in 1904, and replacing the 2nd story window with new
double doors to access the balcony above the covered porch (Attachment 2, Project Plans).
Once the structure is repositioned on the site, phase three includes an addition of a two-story
residence to the rear of the historic structure. The proposed addition is approximately 2,100
square feet in size and includes 1,120 square feet dedicated to covered parking spaces. Phase
three would increase the residence’s overall square footage to approximately 4,200 square feet
(Attachment 2, Project Plans).
The repositioning of the historic structure is intended to make room for the future development
of a modular residential project that will take the place of the existing trailer park. At this time,
the applicant has not submitted plans for the new development of the modular residences. Future
development plans will be reviewed separately and will return to the CHC for evaluation since
the proposed development is located on the Master List Historic Property.
EVALUATION
Conceptual Review
The purpose of conceptual review is to provide the applicant with early feedback which can be
incorporated into the project prior to completing final design plans and responding to all
required submittal materials identified by staff as necessary for final review. The final
Figure 1: 2014 Photo of 546 Higuera Street
Attachment 6
CHC1 - 42
546 Higuera Street
ARCH-0982-2015
Page 4
application submittal will be reviewed again by the CHC and then considered for final approval
by the Community Development Director. The project submittal is currently in an incomplete
status. It should be noted that as a conceptual review, the CHC is providing preliminary
feedback to the applicant based on available project information and standards and guidelines
initially identified by staff. The initial CHC feedback will provide input for the applicant to
consider when completing plans for the final design review process. When the project returns to
the CHC for final review, the CHC will not be solely limited to evaluating the applicant’s
responses to the conceptual review, but rather will be reviewing the full project for consistency
with the Historic Preservation Ordinance, Program Guidelines, and the Secretary of the Interior
Standards for Treatment of Historic Resources.
The following discussion is intended to inform the CHC’s evaluation, at this conceptual stage, of
the proposed project.
Historic Preservation Guidelines
The Historic Preservation Guidelines provide criteria to evaluate alterations to historic resources
and compatibility for new development within Historic Districts.
3.4.4 Exterior building changes
Exterior changes to historically-listed building’s or resources should not introduce new or
conflicting architectural elements and should be architecturally compatible with the original
and/or prevailing architectural character of the building, its setting and architectural context.
Additions to historic buildings shall comply with the Secretary of Interior’s Standards to
complement and be consistent with the original style of the structure. Building materials used to
replace character defining features shall be consistent with the original style of the structure.
Building materials used to replicate character-defining features shall be consistent with the
original materials in terms of size, shape, quality and appearance. However, original materials
are not required.
Staff Analysis (architectural elements, exterior materials): The proposed project complements
and incorporates the existing architectural details, colors, and materials of the primary
structure’s historic character, including the exterior wood siding, detailed eaves, and matching
wood framed double-hung windows and doors. Visibility of the structure is enhanced by
repositioning the structure closer to the street, further emphasizing the integrity of the historic
structure at this location. However, the proposed mass and scale of the additions do not
complement the original structure; rather the mass and scale of the proposed additions obscure
the character defining features of the historic use of the original residence2. The proposed
additions add approximately 3,100 square-feet (including enclosed parking spaces) to the
original 1,000 square-foot residence for a total area of approximately 4,200 square-feet.
2 Historic Preservation Guidelines Section 3.4.1 (d) Additions to listed historic structures should maintain the
structures original architectural integrity and closely match the buildings original architecture…in terms of
scale, form, massing, rhythm fenestration, materials, color and architectural details.
Attachment 6
CHC1 - 43
546 Higuera Street
ARCH-0982-2015
Page 5
Secretary of Interior Standards
The most appropriate treatment standard to consider is characterized as “rehabilitation” under
the SOI Standards since the project proposes a continuation of a compatible use for the property,
proposes restoration of key elements of the building’s exterior to approximate its appearance
during the historic era, and proposes new additions to the building.
SOI Rehabilitation Standard #9: New additions, alterations, or related new construction will
not destroy historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property.
The new work shall 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.
SOI Rehabilitation Standard #10: New additions and adjacent or related new construction
will be undertaken in such a manner that, if removed in the future, the essential form and
integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired.
Staff Analysis: The Secretary of Interior Standards for Historic Rehabilitation recommends
constructing new additions so that there is the least possible loss of historic materials and so that
character-defining features are not obscured, damaged, or destroyed3. When placing a new
addition on a non-character defining elevation, the size and scale in relationship to the historic
building should be limited. The proposed project obscures the character defining features of the
historic building in proportion to the scale and mass of the proposed addition4. Although the
proposed addition has a significant setback from Higuera Street, the structure will be visually
prominent since the site is immediately adjacent to and surrounded by lower scale development
and surface parking lots. The proposed addition appears to overwhelm the scale and rhythm of
the existing residence. In order to achieve consistency with the scale, massing, and rhythm of the
prevailing architectural character and integrity of the original structure, Staff recommends
inclusion of Directional Items #1-2, below.
Secretary of Interior Standards recommend that new additions be designed in a manner that
makes clear what is historic and what is new. The Standards do not recommend duplicating the
form, material, style and detailing of the historic building so that the new work is distinguished
from the historical building. Staff recommends Directional Item #3 to provide more
differentiation between the addition and the historic portion of the building.
The CHC recommendation will provide direction to staff and the applicant on items to be
addressed in plans submitted for final design approval regarding compatibility of the proposed
project with the existing Master List resource. The Director will incorporate this
recommendation into review of the project for compliance with other site development
3 Secretary of Interior Standards Additions/Alterations Some exterior and interior alterations to a historic building
are generally needed to assure its continued use, but it is most important that such alteration do not radically
change, obscure, or destroy character defining spaces, materials, features, or finishes.
4 Secretary of Interior Standards: New Additions to Historic Buildings. It is not recommended to design and
construct new additions that result in the diminution or loss of the historic character of the resource, included its
design, materials, workmanship, location, or setting.
Attachment 6
CHC1 - 44
546 Higuera Street
ARCH-0982-2015
Page 6
requirements such as parking, setbacks, height, and building code requirements.
RECOMMENDATION
Continue the item to a date uncertain with direction to incorporate the following items into the
project:
Directional Item #1: Explore design alternatives to reduce the massing and height of the
project by reducing height of the new construction where it meets the historic structure so that
the additions are subordinate to the historic resource and do not detract from the architectural
integrity of the structure. Additions should be more proportional and step down from the height
of the original structure and/or step in from the edges of the building, effectively emphasizing
the historic residence in relation to the additions. The proposed additions should be designed so
that there is the least possible loss of historic materials and the character-defining features are
not obscured. Due to the small footprint of the historic structure, reduction in total floor area
may be required in addition to architectural design modifications.
Directional Item #2: To reduce massing of the addition, consider a separate structure and/or
remove vehicle parking from the addition or consider providing parking in a separate parking
structure; or leave parking uncovered on the site.
Directional Item #3: The proposed addition should include some differentiation from the
historic building by including one or more of the following measures:
1) Include a visual break or border between the addition and historic building.
2) Incorporate architectural details which are more simplified from the historic building.
3) Include slight variation in exterior details (siding dimensions, trim, etc.) while
emphasizing complementary design between the addition and historic structure.
Directional Item #4: Plans submitted to include details regarding rehabilitation of historic
structure. Clearly define portions/aspects of structure to be preserved/restored versus
reconstructed. Include details regarding deconstruction of structure, repositioning, foundation,
materials to be used for reconstruction, and documentation to support features to be recreated.
Identify methods of restoration for features to be retained.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Continue the item with direction to the applicant and staff on pertinent issues.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Vicinity Map
2. Project Plans
3. Sanborn map
4. Photo Summary
5. City Council Resolution
Attachment 6
CHC1 - 45
SAN LUIS OBISPO
CULTURAL HERITAGE COMMITTEE MINUTES
April 27, 2015
ROLL CALL:
Present: Committee Members Sandy Baer, Craig Kincaid, James Papp, Victoria
Wood, 1 Position Vacant, Vice-Chair Thom Brajkovich, and Chair Jaime Hill
Absent: None
Staff: Senior Planner Brian Leveille, Associate Planner Rachel Cohen, Assistant
Planner Kyle Bell, Assistant Planner Walter Oetzell, and Recording
Secretary Erica Inderlied
ACCEPTANCE OF THE AGENDA: The agenda was accepted as presented.
MINUTES: Minutes of April 13, 2015, were accepted as amended.
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS:
There were no comments from the public.
PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS:
1. 546 Higuera Street. ARCH-0982-2015; Conceptual review of the proposed
rehabilitation and repositioning of a Master List Historic Resource (Norcross
House), including addition of a two-story residence attached to the rear of the
structure; C-R zone; Higuera Commons, LLC, applicant.
Senior Planner Leveille noted the recusal of Vice-Chair Brajkovich from this item due to
a professional conflict of interest.
Kyle Bell, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report, recommending continuation to a
date uncertain with direction to staff and the applicant on items to be addressed in plans
submitted for final design approval.
Brandon Roscoe, Paragon Design, and John Belsher, applicant, gave a presentation.
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
There were no comments from the public.
COMMITTEE COMMENTS:
Committee Members Wood and Kincaid noted support for the overall design of the
project.
Committee Member Papp noted for the record that City legal counsel had determined
no conflict of interest existed with relation to his personal familiarity with John Belsher,
Attachment 7
CHC1 - 46
CHC Minutes
April 27, 2015
Page 2
applicant. Papp stated that approving removal of the existing extension and an addition
to the original structure would be premature without further information from
architectural historians, and review of the Bertrando Report which provided the basis for
the Council’s rationale to add the property to the Master List. He noted that photos from
the 1873-1876 timeframe appear to show that the extension was present on the original
building.
Committee Member Papp noted for the record that past development of Marsh and
Higuera Streets as gateways to and from the highway has had a negative impact on in
the historic character of the area.
Chair Hill and Committee Member Baer expressed disapproval for the project as
presented; noted desire to see an addition in the form of a more appropriately scaled,
detached unit instead. Committee Member Papp noted approval of the idea of multiple
structures instead of a single larger scale addition.
There were no further comments from the Committee.
On motion by Committee Member Baer, seconded by Committee Member Papp, to
continue the item to a date uncertain with direction to incorporate directional items #2
and #4 included in the staff report, with additional direction that further historical and
architectural evaluation be performed upon the portions of the home proposed for
removal.
AYES: Committee Members Baer, Hill, Kincaid, Papp, and Wood
NOES: None
RECUSED: Vice-Chair Brajkovich
ABSENT: None
The motion passed on a 5:0:1 vote.
Vice-Chair Brajkovich arrived at 6:41 p.m.
2. 1921 Santa Barbara Avenue. ARCH-0521-2014; Environmental review (Mitigated
Negative Declaration) of a new building with four live/work units and a small
commercial suite in the Railroad Historic District; C-S-H zone; Garcia Family Trust,
applicant.
Senior Planner Leveille summarized the history of the project, noting that the CHC
conducted a conceptual review of the project in December 2014, and found it to be
consistent with the Railroad District Plan in January 2015. He noted that the project was
returned to the CHC for review since the initial study found potential impacts to a
historic resource at 875 Upham; and that the CHC should focus on the adequacy of the
mitigation measure in their recommendation to the ARC.
Walter Oetzell, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report, recommending adoption of
a resolution recommending that the Architectural Review Commission approve the
Attachment 7
CHC1 - 47
CHC Minutes
April 27, 2015
Page 3
project with the incorporation of proposed mitigation measures described in the
Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the project.
George Garcia, applicant, summarized the status of the project, noting that the potential
to flip the building footprint would result in greater setback from neighboring residential
uses, and allow the large tree to remain.
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
Jason Browning, nearby property owner, SLO, distributed photographs of structures in
the neighborhood; expressed concern that the size and massing of the proposed project
will negatively impact neighboring residential uses.
John Grady, SLO, stated that the CHC has clearly noted its concern in the past about
the building’s mass, commented that General Plan policies dictate the prioritization of
protecting residential uses where they abut commercial zones.
Don Ray, nearby property owner, SLO, noted the “low profile” character of the
neighborhood; expressed concern about building incompatibility and lost viewshed.
Leslie Terry, nearby property owner, SLO, expressed concern that approval of the
proposed project will set a detrimental preced ent; opined that the proposed mitigation
measures, particularly relating to aesthetics, are insufficient.
Debbie Collins-Johnson, nearby property and business owner, SLO, commented that
the proposed building appears to be inconsistent with the Railroad District Plan.
There were no further comments from the public.
COMMITTEE COMMENTS:
Committee Member Papp expressed disapproval of the project based primarily on scale
and negative impacts to neighboring residential uses.
Vice-Chair Brajkovich noted concern about public comment relating to height of the
building. Committee Member Baer concurred.
Committee Member Wood expressed lack of approval of the proposed project based
primarily on the size of the structure which does not fit on the narrow lot.
Committee Member Kincaid concurred, commenting that bungalow-style architecture
could make the building more compatible.
Chair Hill stated that zoning design criteria are intended as maximums, not goals, and
that evaluation must be tailored to Historical Districts.
Senior Planner Leveille noted that the CHC previously found the project consistent with
the Railroad District Plan and Historic Preservation Guidelines on January 26, 2015,
Attachment 7
CHC1 - 48
CHC Minutes
April 27, 2015
Page 4
and that in order to remain consistent with the prior action, t he CHC should focus
direction based only on responding to condition #2 from the January 26, 2015 CHC
action relating to potentially significant impacts on adjacent neighboring historic
properties.
There were no further comments from the Committee.
On motion by Vice-Chair Brajkovich, seconded by Committee Member Baer, to continue
the project based on previous CHC conditions #1 & #2, to allow the applicant to return
with a redesigned project incorporating the following items:
Reduction in building scale
More cohesiveness with the historic neighborhood and Railroad District Plan.
Smoother transition between residential and commercial uses
Preservation of the tree onsite
Committee Member Wood noted for the record her observation that all Committee
members and all neighbors who have commented have expressed a desire for
reduction in building mass and scale and the project has not changed.
AYES: Committee Members Baer, Brajkovich, Hill, Kincaid, Papp, Wood
NOES: None
RECUSED: None
ABSENT: None
The motion passed on a 6:0 vote.
The Committee recessed at 7:45, and reconvened at 7:55 with all members present.
3. 570 Higuera Street. ARCH-0913-2015; Review of a remodel and rehabilitation of
the Historic Master List Golden State Creamery and a new mixed-use structure
within the Downtown Historic District; C-D zone; Creamery, LLC, applicant.
Rachel Cohen, Associate Planner, presented the staff report, recommending that the
Committee adopt a resolution recommending that the Architectural Review Commission
(ARC) approve the proposed remodel and the addition of a new mixed -use structure,
based on findings and subject to conditions.
Greg Wynn, project architect, and Damien Mavis, developer, summarized the evolution
of the project and the history of the project site, clarifying that parking requirements will
be satisfied by the payment of in-lieu fees.
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
Ursula Bishop, representing nearby Dana Street residents, SLO, spoke in support of the
project. She noted concern about potential noise impacts with the inclusion of proposed
windows added to the east side of building 2 and about limited parking.
Attachment 7
CHC1 - 49
CHC Minutes
April 27, 2015
Page 5
There were no further comments from the public.
COMMITTEE COMMENTS:
Committee Member Wood spoke in support of retaining brick walls. She noted concern
about the corrugated metal siding, the sawtooth roof design of the new structure, and
about reducing parking on site.
Committee Member Kincaid expressed support for the project, with the except ion of the
sawtooth roof design for the new structure and noted concern about reducing parking
on site.
Committee Member Papp spoke in support of the project’s historical sensitivity and
staff’s recommendation. He noted aesthetic concern of the sawtooth roof design of the
new structure with the existing architecture of the Creamery.
Vice-Chair Brajkovich spoke in support of the project and staff recommendation.
Chair Hill spoke in support for the project and commented that the sawtooth roof
formation will rarely be seen in profile due to its location. She also noted for the record
that landscaping could be used to minimize noise impacts upon the Dana Street
residences.
There were no further comments from the Committee.
On motion by Committee Member Papp, seconded by Committee Member Baer, to
adopt a resolution recommending that the Architectural Review Commission approve
the proposed remodel and the addition of a new mixed-use structure.
AYES: Committee Members Baer, Brajkovich, Hill, Kincaid, Papp
NOES: Committee Member Wood
RECUSED: None
ABSENT: None
The motion passed on a 5:1 vote.
COMMENT AND DISCUSSION:
4. Staff
a. Agenda Forecast
Senior Planner Leveille gave a forecast of upcoming agenda items.
b. Cultural Heritage Committee Bylaws Review
Attachment 7
CHC1 - 50
CHC Minutes
April 27, 2015
Page 6
Senior Planner Leveille summarized the packet materials, and the CHC
discussed their role as an advisory body and review process of recommending
projects to the ARC for final action.
There were no recommended changes from the Committee.
5. Committee
ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 9:25 p.m.
Respectfully submitted by,
Erica Inderlied
Recording Secretary
Approved by the Cultural Heritage Committee on May 26, 2015.
Laurie Thomas
Administrative Assistant III
Attachment 7
CHC1 - 51
Meeting Date: May 22, 2017
Item Number: 2
CULTURAL HERITAGE COMMITTEE AGENDA REPORT
SUBJECT: Determination of historic significance and review of responses to previous
Cultural Heritage Committee feedback on a project adjacent to the Historic Jack House for a new
mixed-use project that includes three four-story structures, with 19,792 square feet of
commercial space, 62 residential units, 36 hotel rooms, and a two-level underground parking
garage with 136 parking spaces, with a categorical exemption from environmental review.
ADDRESS: 570, 578 & 590 Marsh & BY: Rachel Cohen, Associate Planner
581 Higuera Street Phone: 781-7574
E-mail: rcohen@slocity.org
FILE NUMBER: ARCH-2213-2015 FROM: Brian Leveille, Senior Planner
1.0 RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the draft resolution that makes findings that the proposed removal of the existing structure
is consistent with the City’s Historical Preservation Ordinance and the applicant’s response to
feedback is consistent with CHC’s previous direction.
2.0 SITE DATA
Applicant John Belsher, The Obispo
Company
Submittal Date October 21, 2015
General Plan General Retail
Zoning Downtown Commercial (C-D)
Site Area 0.83 Acres (36,155 square feet
Environmental Status Categorically Exempt from
environmental review under
Section 15332 (In-Fill
Development Projects) of the
CEQA Guidelines.
3.0 SUMMARY
The applicant has submitted plans for a new mixed-use project that includes three, four-story
structures with 19,792 square feet of commercial space, 62 residential units, 36 hotel rooms, and
a two-level underground parking garage with 136 parking spaces located at 570, 578 and 590
Marsh and 581 Higuera Street. The proposed project commercial space on the first floor and a
mix of 40 studios and 22 one-bedroom residential units with 36 hotel units on the upper three
floors.
The project site is not within a historic district and is not located on a historic site, however, the
ARC2 - 1
ARCH-2213-2015 (570, 578 & 590 Marsh & 581 Higuera)
Page 2
project is adjacent to the Jack House, a Master List Historic property. The Jack House is a
significant historic resource within the City because of its architecture as well as being the home
of Robert Jack and his wife Nellie Hollister Jack. In 1992 the property was added to the City’s
Master List of Historic Resources and to the National Register of Historic Places. It was
determined that because of the significance of the structure, it was appropriate to evaluate
whether new development adjacent to the property would impact the historic property.
Additionally, the Architectural Review Commission (ARC) has requested the CHC provide
feedback on the proposed project.
4.0 COMMITTEE PURVIEW
The CHC’s role is to make a recommendation to the ARC b ased on consideration of the
applicant’s response to previous CHC feedback and make a historic significance determination
for 470 Marsh Street.
5.0 PROJECT INFORMATION
5.1 Site Information/Setting
The project site consists of four developed lots. Figure 1 shows the location of each parcel that
makes up the project site and where they reside along Marsh, Nipomo and Higuera Streets. In
total, the project site encompasses a total land area of 0.83 acres (36,155 square feet) and is
located within the Downtown Commercial (C-D) zone. The site is located adjacent to the
Historic Jack House to the southwest, north of Marsh Street Commons and west of McCarthy’s.
Sandy’s Liquor and the Creamery are located north of the project across Higuera Street.
Figure 1: Locations of the four parcels that make up the project site.
The site is relatively flat and developed with the commercial structure that housed Foster’s
Freeze (#3, above), a small commercial building (#2), a small residence used as an office (#1),
1
2
3
4
Jack House
The Creamery
ARC2 - 2
ARCH-2213-2015 (570, 578 & 590 Marsh & 581 Higuera)
Page 3
and Mission Bank (#4).
The structure located at 570 Marsh Street (#1) was built sometime around 1920 in the
architectural style of a Vernacular Folk style. Currently the structure is not listed as a historic
resource. A historic resource evaluation was conducted by LSA Associates, Inc. and is included
as Attachment 4. A detailed discussion on the property is provided in the evaluation section
below.
5.2 Previous Review
December 1, 2014: The ARC reviewed a conceptual architectural design of a new, four-story
mixed-use project with approximately 13,000 square feet of retail space and 24 residential units
located at 581 Higuera Street (Figure 1, Parcel 4). The ARC provided direction to the applicant
to consider removing the top floor of the structure and to return to the ARC with the proposal for
the entire project (all three buildings) and not submit each building as an individual project.
July 13, 2015: The CHC and the ARC held a joint conceptual review of a mixed-use project that
included three, four-story structures with approximately 21,322 square feet of retail space and 48
residential units (Attachment 5, CHC/ARC Conceptual Staff Report). The CHC and the ARC
provided a list of directional items that were to be considered and included in the final project
plan submittal.
5.3 Project Description
Named “San Luis Square,” the proposed project site includes three, four-story structures with
ground floor retail and upper floor residential and hotel uses, a public plaza and paths, a
pedestrian connection between Marsh and Higuera Streets, and an on-site, two-level
underground parking garage. The buildings are designed to include historic and classic
architectural features with contemporary architecture. The new buildings will include the
following elements (see Attachment 3, Project Plans):
1. 19,792 s.f. Commercial/Retail spaces (first floor);
2. 62 Residential units;
3. 36 hotel rooms;
4. A two-level underground parking garage with 136 spaces;
5. Outdoor seating areas, arcades, and a plaza;
6. Materials and architectural features include:
a. Glass, brick, stucco, and metal siding;
b. Metal awnings;
c. Metal balcony railings; and
d. Stone and concrete bulkheads, lintels and cornices.
6.0 EVALUATION
The proposed project is not located on a historic site or within a historic district. As noted above,
because of the historic significance of the Jack House, it was determined to be appropriate for the
CHC to evaluate whether new development adjacent to the property would impact the historic
property. The ARC will be reviewing the project’s consistency with the Community Design
Guidelines (CDG), the General Plan and Zoning Regulations.
ARC2 - 3
ARCH-2213-2015 (570, 578 & 590 Marsh & 581 Higuera)
Page 4
In the previous conceptual review, the CHC provided direction to the applicant regarding the
project’s design and massing in the context of being adjacent to the Master List Historic Jack
House (Attachment 6, CHC/ARC Meeting Minutes – July 13, 2015). The following is an
evaluation of the CHC’s direction and how the applicant has modified the project in response.
1. Submit all materials required as part of a complete application and comply with all standard
application submittal items (solar shading, dimensions, callouts, project phasing etc.) and
development standards and regulations applying to the project.
All materials were submitted by the applicant and are included as a part of the project plans
and attachments to this staff report.
2. Evaluate potential impacts to cultural resources, including the potential effects to the
historical significance of the Master List Jack House property.
470 Marsh Historic Evaluation
LSA Associates, Inc. has provided a Historical Resource Evaluation of 570 Marsh Street
(Attachment 4). The evaluation identifies the house as a Vernacular/National Folk style built
by John Chapek. John Chapek was a well-known building contractor and businessman in San
Luis Obispo. Background research by LSA found that Mr. Chapek built over 211 buildings
in San Luis Obispo between 1900 and 1930, including many of the structures found in the
Mill Street Historic District. His family residence, a Victorian-designed house at 843 Upham
Street is resource #152 on the City’s Master List of Historic Properties and a key
architectural component of the Railroad Street Historic District.
The 570 Marsh Street house was built in 1920 for Frank Mello and his wife, Catherina Mello,
upon their retirement from ranching. In 1949 the Mellos sold the house and the house has
changed hands various times and became an office in the mid-1980s. LSA provided a two-
part evaluation of the site using the California Register of Historic Resources Criteria and the
City of San Luis Obispo Historic Preservation Ordinance Criteria. Their report concluded
that the building did not qualify as a historic resource because of a lack of significant
association with a historical context. The evaluation states that although “John Chapek was
responsible for building 570 Marsh Street, he did not reside there or operate his contracting
or hardware business at that location. The building possesses the design characteristics of
Vernacular/National Folk architectural style; however, due to alterations, this building is not
a suitable, representative example of Vernacular/National Folk architecture.”
Evaluation of Potential Impacts to the Jack House
The location of the proposed development does not obstruct views of the Jack House and is
located approximately 125 feet from the Jack House structure. 570 Marsh is designed to step
back from the Jack House property and is located 16 feet from the property line (Attachment
3, Project Plans, Sheet A35). The plans include the preservation of the redwood trees and the
black walnut along the property line. The shade study shows that the new development will
not shade the gardens or any of the structures on the Jack House site (Attachment 3, Project
Plans, Sheet A41) and a site visit confirmed that the project would not block views from the
site (see Figure 2 below). The applicant is not requesting to alter any of the landscaping on
ARC2 - 4
ARCH-2213-2015 (570, 578 & 590 Marsh & 581 Higuera)
Page 5
the Jack House property and is not seeking to have access the space between the new
development and the Jack House.
3. Provide a solar/shading study for the overall project and specifically focusing on the
adjacent Jack House Gardens area during at different day times and all seasons. The Jack
House gardens and outdoor areas used for events shall not be affected by building shadows
during any times the garden areas may be in use.
On Sheets A38 – A41 of the project plans (Attachment 3) the applicant has provided a shade
analysis for each of the seasonal equinoxes. The shade studies show that the project will cast
a small amount of shade onto the Jack House property from 8:00 am to 11:00 am. The
shadow cast by the project during these hours is similar to the shade that is currently being
produced by the existing trees located on the Jack House property (see Figure 3 below).
According to the shade analysis, by 11:00 am the project will not cast any shade onto the
Jack House property during any season because the shadows cast by the proposed project
will shift to the northeast towards Nipomo Street as the sun moves across the sky from east to
west. Due to the project’s location and the rotation of the sun through the sky, it does not
appear that the new project’s shading will impact the Jack House, the Jack House Gardens
and/or events taking place within the Jack House Gardens.
Figure 2: Standing on the path in the Jack House Garden. (Right image) Looking northeast towards 570
Marsh Street; (Left image) Looking west toward Cerro San Luis.
ARC2 - 5
ARCH-2213-2015 (570, 578 & 590 Marsh & 581 Higuera)
Page 6
4. Provide a study/analysis of any potential impacts from the project and related construction
focused on the redwood trees along the Jack House property and include evaluation of the
California Black Oak (age, condition, preservation recommendations) and protection
measures if applicable.
To preserve the existing redwood trees and the black walnut (it is not a black oak as indicated
above) located on the Jack House property adjacent to the project site, the applicant removed
parking along the south and east sides of the parking garage and relocated the stem wall of
the underground parking garage to be approximately 20 feet away from the property lines .
The applicant has also updated the plans to show that the black walnut is to remain. The City
Arborist has reviewed the changes to the project and determined they are sufficient to reduce
potential impacts from construction on the adjacent trees. As a part of the ARC conditions of
approval for the project, the City Arborist is requiring that the applicant submit a detailed
arborist report with the construction plans along with detailed notes on the plans to be
reviewed and approved by the City. Additionally, safety pruning of tree branches will be
required prior to grading to allow the trees to heal before any tree roots are pruned. The
protection of the redwood trees and the walnut is required to be consistent with the City’s
engineering standards Section 77-1.03(2) that outline specific measures that must be
followed to protect the trees during all aspects of construction.
5. Show on plans the preservation of the Kaetzel monument located within the Jack House
Gardens.
Figure 3: Shade projections for the Spring Equinox from the proposed project onto the Jack House property (the
green open space on the images) during the hours of 8:00 am to 11:00 am.
ARC2 - 6
ARCH-2213-2015 (570, 578 & 590 Marsh & 581 Higuera)
Page 7
The previous conceptual plans proposed that the
new development would provide a gate and new
landscaping on the Jack House property to
connect the two properties for pedestrian use.
Committee members expressed concern that new
landscaping could impact the Kaetzel Monument
(see Figure 4). The current plans show that the
Kaetzel Monument will be preserved because
the applicant is no longer proposing any
improvements or changes to the Jack House
Gardens.
6. Include high quality, long lasting material as part of the project and replace the wood finish
at 570 Higuera to incorporate monumental materials called for in the Community Design
Guidelines for the downtown such as masonry, stone or smooth plaster exterior finishes.
The applicant has modified the design of the project to include monumental materials. In the
previously reviewed plans, the applicant proposed the use of wood as an exterior material.
The CHC communicated that wood siding was not an appropriate material to be used within
the downtown. The project includes the use of a wide range of materials including brick (of
various colors), concrete, plaster cornices, corten steel, smooth finished stucco, metal wall
panels and anodized aluminum windows and doors. All of these materials are long lasting,
durable, aesthetically complement the design of the project, and are consistent with the kind
of materials encouraged for projects located in the Downtown. Staff will present the color
and material board at the hearing for review.
7. Provide a balcony/deck design which provides residential privacy and which screens from
public view personal belongings which may be stored in these areas.
Each of the buildings’ balconies, within the project, has been redesigned to incorporate
elements that screen them from residential view. Below is a brief description of how each
building was changed.
590 Marsh: The original design proposed the use of glass panel guardrails at all balconies.
Balconies/decks have been updated to incorporate a more private guardrail design. The
proposed guardrail is a louvered screen that will obscure public/pedestrian view into the
residential decks. Partition panels between the decks provide privacy between units.
Additionally, the proposed guardrail ties into the rain screen shades located on the perimeter
of the first-floor retail storefronts. This solution promotes a more horizontal aesthetic that is
consistent with the Downtown Design Guidelines (Attachment 3, Project Plans, Sheet A26).
570 Marsh: A perforated metal mesh material was added to the balconies/decks to create
privacy and screen residents' personal belongings from public view (Attachment 3, Project
Plans, Sheet A20).
581 Higuera: The design of the decks has been revised to include perforated panels instead of
Figure 4: Rock stepping stone in the rose garden
dedicated to Margaret Kaetzel.
ARC2 - 7
ARCH-2213-2015 (570, 578 & 590 Marsh & 581 Higuera)
Page 8
open metal cable rail as originally proposed. This material allows some light to filter through
but will screen any possessions that the residences may keep on the deck, (Attachment 3,
Project Plans, Sheet A15, A16).
8. Evaluate internal site bicycle circulation as well as potential bicycle circulation in relation
to the surrounding roads and access (e.g. most cyclists will access the site from Higuera or
Nipomo Streets).
The applicant has included a bike circulation plan in the project plans (Attachment 3, Sheet
A34). The circulation plan shows that bicycles are to be routed through the site between
Marsh to Higuera Streets along the southwest property line of the project. Bicycle access is
also available along Marsh, Nipomo and Higuera Streets.
9. Provide clear setback measurements at all floor levels including dimensions to awnings or
other architectural features.
The applicant has included a series of drawings and images that show the various heights and
dimensions of each of the proposed buildings and architectural features. The overall project
has a maximum height of 57 feet. 570 Marsh, the structure closest to the Jack House
property, has a setback of 16 feet and 3 inches from the property line (which includes the
balconies) and has a maximum height of 54 feet and 6 inches.
Figure 5 below shows the East-West Cross Section of the project and a North-South Cross
Section is shown on Sheet A35 (Attachment 3, Project Plans,). Sheets A5.1 – A5.4 provide a
site plan view of each of the floors and provides the setback dimensions for each floor.
Sheets A11 – A24 provide more detailed information on each of the individual buildings and
their dimensions.
7.0 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The project is categorically exempt under Class 32, In -Fill Development Projects; Section 15332
of the CEQA Guidelines, because the project is consistent with General Plan policies for the land
use designation and is consistent with the applicable zoning designation and regulations. The
project site occurs on a property of no more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban
uses that has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species as the site is located
Figure 5: East- West Cross Section of the buildings located at 570 and 590 Marsh Street
ARC2 - 8
ARCH-2213-2015 (570, 578 & 590 Marsh & 581 Higuera)
Page 9
on an existing developed property. The project will not cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource.
8.0 RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the draft resolution that makes findings that the proposed removal of the existing structure
is consistent with the City’s Historical Preservation Ordinance and the applicant’s response to
feedback is consistent with CHC’s previous direction.
9.0 ATTACHMENTS
1. CHC Resolution (Draft)
2. Vicinity Map
3. Project Plans
4. Historical Resource Evaluation by LSA Associates, Inc.
5. CHC/ARC Conceptual Staff Report – July 13, 2015
6. CHC/ARC Meeting Minutes – July 13, 2015
ARC2 - 9
ATTACHMENT 1
RESOLUTION NO. XXXX-17
A RESOLUTION OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO CULTURAL HERITAGE COMMITTEE,
DETERMINATION AND RECOMMENDATION TO THE ARCHITECTURAL
REVIEW COMMISSION THAT THE PROPOSED REMOVAL OF EXISTING
STRUCTURES IS CONSISTENT WITH THE CITY’S HISTORICAL PRESERVATION
ORDINANCE AND THE APPLICANT’S RESPONSE TO FEEDBACK IS CONSISTENT
WITH CHC’S PREVIOUS DIRECTION
(570, 578 & 590 MARSH AND 581 HIGUERA STREETS – ARCH-2213-2015)
WHEREAS, the Cultural Heritage Committee of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a
public hearing (conceptual review) in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San
Luis Obispo, California, on July 13, 2015, pursuant to a proceeding instituted under application
#ARCH-2213-2015, The Obispo Company, applicant; and
WHEREAS, the Cultural Heritage Committee of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a
public hearing in the Council Hearing Room of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo,
California, on May 22, 2017, pursuant to a proceeding instituted under application #ARCH-2213-
2015, The Obispo Company, applicant; and
WHEREAS, notices of said public hearing 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 applicant, interested parties, and the evaluation and recommendations by staff,
presented at said hearing.
BE IT RESOLVED, by the Cultural Heritage Committee of the City of San Luis Obispo
as follows:
Section 1. Findings.
1. The character of the building located at 570 Higuera Street is not considered historically
significant as described in Section 14.01.070.A of the City’s Historic Preservation
Ordinance because the structure lacks significant historic and architectural features.
2. Consistent with Historic Preservation Ordinance Section 14.01.070.B, 570 Higuera is not
associated with any significant historical person groups or events in the City's history.
3. The existing structure no longer maintain authenticity and integrity due to alterations to the
original function and historic fabric of the building because of renovations to the building,
including additions to the front and rear façades, relocation of the main entrance,
replacement windows and entrance door, conversion to a commercial use, and paving the
side yard and backyard as parking spaces.
4. Determining the structures at the subject site are not a historic resource is consistent with
the Historic Preservation Ordinance Section 14.01.070 because the structures do not meet
the criteria for inclusion on the City’s list of historic resources.
ARC2 - 10
ATTACHMENT 1
Resolution No.XXXX-17
CHC ARCH-2213-2015 (570, 578 & 590 Marsh & 581 Higuera Streets)
Page 2
5. As proposed, the project has adequately responded to CHC’s previous direction as part of
the joint CHC/ARC conceptual review on held July 13, 2015.
Section 2. Environmental Review. The project is categorically exempt under Class 32, In-
Fill Development Projects; Section 15332 of the CEQA Guidelines, because the project is
consistent with General Plan policies for the land use designation and is consistent with the
applicable zoning designation and regulations. The project site occurs on a property of no more
than five acres substantially surrounded by urban uses that has no value as habitat for endangered,
rare or threatened species as the site is located on an existing developed property. The project will
not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource.
Section 3. Action. The Committee hereby recommends the Architectural Review
Commission determine the proposed removal of the existing structure is consistent with the City’s
Historical Preservation Ordinance and the applicant’s response to feedback is consistent with
CHC’s previous direction.
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 22nd day of May, 2017.
_____________________________
Brian Leveille, Secretary
Cultural Heritage Committee
ARC2 - 11
C-D
C-D
C-D
R-4
C-D-H
C-D
C-D
C-D-MU
C-D-H
PF-H
R-3-H
C-R
NI
P
O
M
O
MARSH
HIGUE
R
A
VICINITY MAP ARCH-2213-2015
570, 578 & 590 Marsh Street and 581 Higuera Street ¯
ATTACHMENT 2
ARC2 - 12
DA
T
E
:
M
A
Y
1
3
,
2
0
1
6
#1
0
1
4
0
7
1
Ma
r
c
h
2
4
,
2
0
1
7
T1
Sh
e
e
t
I
n
d
e
x
T1
T
I
T
L
E
S
H
E
E
T
/
M
A
R
S
H
P
E
R
S
P
E
C
T
I
V
E
T2
C
O
D
E
A
N
A
L
Y
S
I
S
-
O
C
C
U
P
A
N
T
L
O
A
D
S
A1
5
7
0
M
A
R
S
H
R
E
N
D
E
R
I
N
G
S
A2
5
9
0
M
A
R
S
H
R
E
N
D
E
R
I
N
G
A3
5
8
1
H
I
G
U
E
R
A
R
E
N
D
E
R
I
N
G
S
A4
P
E
D
E
S
T
R
I
A
N
P
A
S
E
O
R
E
N
D
E
R
I
N
G
S
A5
.
1
O
V
E
R
A
L
L
S
I
T
E
P
L
A
N
-
L
E
V
E
L
1
A5
.
2
O
V
E
R
A
L
L
S
I
T
E
P
L
A
N
-
L
E
V
E
L
2
A5
.
3
O
V
E
R
A
L
L
S
I
T
E
P
L
A
N
-
L
E
V
E
L
3
A5
.
4
O
V
E
R
A
L
L
S
I
T
E
P
L
A
N
-
L
E
V
E
L
4
A6
L
E
V
E
L
-
1
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
P
L
A
N
A7
L
E
V
E
L
-
2
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
P
L
A
N
C1
C
I
V
I
L
G
R
A
D
I
N
G
&
D
R
A
I
N
A
G
E
P
L
A
N
C2
C
I
V
I
L
U
T
I
L
I
T
Y
P
L
A
N
C3
C
I
V
I
L
F
R
O
N
T
A
G
E
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
P
L
A
N
C4
C
I
V
I
L
F
R
O
N
T
A
G
E
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
P
L
A
N
C5
C
I
V
I
L
G
R
A
D
I
N
G
&
D
R
A
I
N
A
G
E
P
L
A
N
C6
T
O
P
O
G
R
A
P
H
I
C
M
A
P
A8
5
8
1
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
A9
5
8
1
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
A1
0
5
8
1
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
A1
1
5
8
1
D
E
S
I
G
N
D
E
T
A
I
L
S
H
E
E
T
A1
2
5
8
1
D
E
S
I
G
N
D
E
T
A
I
L
S
H
E
E
T
A1
3
5
8
1
C
O
L
O
R
A
N
D
M
A
T
E
R
I
A
L
S
A1
4
5
7
0
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
A1
5
5
7
0
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
A1
6
5
7
0
D
E
S
I
G
N
D
E
T
A
I
L
S
H
E
E
T
A1
7
5
7
0
C
O
L
O
R
A
N
D
M
A
T
E
R
I
A
L
S
A1
8
5
9
0
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
A1
9
5
9
0
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
A2
0
5
9
0
D
E
S
I
G
N
D
E
T
A
I
L
S
H
E
E
T
A2
1
5
9
0
D
E
S
I
G
N
D
E
T
A
I
L
S
H
E
E
T
A2
2
5
9
0
C
O
L
O
R
A
N
D
M
A
T
E
R
I
A
L
S
L1
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
P
L
A
N
L2
C
O
N
C
E
P
T
U
A
L
P
L
A
N
T
I
N
G
P
L
A
N
L3
T
R
E
E
P
L
A
N
L4
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
C
O
L
O
R
A
N
D
M
A
T
E
R
I
A
L
S
L5
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
C
O
L
O
R
A
N
D
M
A
T
E
R
I
A
L
S
A2
3
C
O
N
C
E
P
T
S
I
T
E
L
I
G
H
T
I
N
G
A2
4
S
I
G
N
A
G
E
A2
5
P
E
D
E
S
T
R
I
A
N
P
A
S
E
O
C
O
M
P
A
R
I
T
I
V
E
E
X
H
I
B
I
T
S
A2
6
P
E
D
E
S
T
R
I
A
N
P
A
S
E
O
C
O
M
P
A
R
I
T
I
V
E
E
X
H
I
B
I
T
S
A2
7
E
N
T
R
I
E
S
A
N
D
P
L
A
Z
A
P
L
A
N
A2
8
B
I
C
Y
C
L
E
C
I
R
C
U
L
A
T
I
O
N
P
L
A
N
A2
9
O
V
E
R
A
L
L
S
I
T
E
S
E
C
T
I
O
N
A3
0
J
A
C
K
H
O
U
S
E
R
E
N
D
E
R
I
N
G
S
A3
1
J
A
C
K
H
O
U
S
E
R
E
N
D
E
R
I
N
G
S
A3
2
S
H
A
D
E
S
T
U
D
Y
-
V
E
R
N
A
L
E
Q
U
I
N
O
X
A3
3
S
H
A
D
E
S
T
U
D
Y
-
S
U
M
M
E
R
S
O
L
S
T
I
C
E
A3
4
S
H
A
D
E
S
T
U
D
Y
-
A
U
T
U
M
N
A
L
E
Q
U
I
N
O
X
A3
5
S
H
A
D
E
S
T
U
D
Y
-
W
I
N
T
E
R
S
O
L
S
T
I
C
E
A3
6
C
O
N
T
E
X
T
P
E
R
S
P
E
C
T
I
V
E
S
-
H
I
G
U
E
R
A
S
T
R
E
E
T
A3
7
C
O
N
T
E
X
T
P
E
R
S
P
E
C
T
I
V
E
S
-
M
A
R
S
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
A3
8
C
O
N
T
E
X
T
P
E
R
S
P
E
C
T
I
V
E
S
-
N
I
P
O
M
O
S
T
R
E
E
T
A3
9
U
N
I
T
D
I
S
T
R
I
B
U
T
I
O
N
A4
0
U
N
I
T
D
I
S
T
R
I
B
U
T
I
O
N
A4
1
U
N
I
T
D
I
S
T
R
I
B
U
T
I
O
N
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
D
i
r
e
c
t
o
r
y
57
0
M
a
r
s
h
The Five 90
58
1
H
i
g
u
e
r
a
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
I
n
f
o
:
Project StatementVicinity Map
OW
N
E
R
:
Ma
r
s
h
N
i
p
o
m
o
M
i
x
e
d
U
s
e
,
L
P
34
8
0
S
.
H
i
g
u
e
r
a
S
t
r
e
e
t
,
S
u
i
t
e
1
3
0
Sa
n
L
u
i
s
O
b
i
s
p
o
,
C
a
.
9
3
4
0
1
AR
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
S
:
RR
M
D
e
s
i
g
n
G
r
o
u
p
37
6
5
S
.
H
i
g
u
e
r
a
S
t
r
e
e
t
,
S
u
i
t
e
1
0
2
Sa
n
L
u
i
s
O
b
i
s
p
o
,
C
a
.
9
3
4
0
1
Co
n
t
a
c
t
:
P
a
t
B
l
o
t
e
Ph
o
n
e
:
(
8
0
5
)
5
4
3
-
1
7
9
4
Em
a
i
l
:
p
l
b
l
o
t
e
@
r
r
m
d
e
s
i
g
n
.
c
o
m
Is
a
m
a
n
D
e
s
i
g
n
,
I
n
c
.
10
2
7
M
a
r
s
h
S
t
r
e
e
t
,
S
u
i
t
e
2
0
0
Sa
n
L
u
i
s
O
b
i
s
p
o
,
C
a
.
9
3
4
0
1
Co
n
t
a
c
t
:
B
i
l
l
I
s
a
m
a
n
Ph
o
n
e
:
(
8
0
5
)
5
4
4
-
5
6
7
2
Te
n
O
v
e
r
S
t
u
d
i
o
53
9
M
a
r
s
h
S
t
r
e
e
t
Sa
n
L
u
i
s
O
b
i
s
p
o
,
C
a
.
9
3
4
0
1
Co
n
t
a
c
t
:
J
i
m
D
u
f
f
y
Ph
o
n
e
:
(
8
0
5
)
5
4
1
-
1
0
1
0
PR
O
J
E
C
T
A
D
D
R
E
S
S
:
57
0
/
5
9
0
M
a
r
s
h
S
t
.
&
5
8
1
H
i
g
u
e
r
a
Sa
n
L
u
i
s
O
b
i
s
p
o
,
C
a
.
9
3
4
0
1
*A
P
N
N
U
M
B
E
R
S
:
0
0
3
-
5
1
1
-
0
1
3
0
0
3
-
5
1
1
-
0
2
3
0
0
3
-
5
1
1
-
0
2
4
0
0
3
-
5
1
1
-
0
2
5
San Luis Square is a mixed use project that includes multi-stories of residential over commercial spaces. This project also includes a below grade parking structure that will serve the 3 proposed buildings. The residential portion of this project is conceived to serve a multi-generational occupant, and therefore a mix of unit types that will include; studio, one bedroom and two bedroom spaces.7KHSURMHFWLVORFDWHGZLWKLQDGHVLJQDWHGÁRRG]RQHDVshown on the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) for the City of San Luis Obispo. As such, any new or substantially remodeled structures shall comply with all Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) requirements and the city’s Floodplain Management Regulations per Municipal Code Chapter 17.84.The ARC submittal shall include a preliminary grading plan and drainage report for this project. The drainage report shall consider historic off site drainage tributary to this property that may need to be conveyed along with the improved on-site drainage. This development may alter and/ or increase the storm water runoff from this site or adjoining sites. The improved or altered drainage shall be directed to the street and not across adjoining property lines unless the drainage is conveyed within recorded easements or existing waterways.
CO
M
M
E
R
C
I
A
L
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
R
E
Q
U
I
R
E
D
:
C
-
D
Z
o
n
e
,
C
h
a
p
t
e
r
1
7
.
1
6
,
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
H
(
T
A
B
L
E
6
)
:
RE
T
A
I
L
:
1
p
e
r
5
0
0
s
f
G
F
A
=
(
1
2
2
0
+
1
6
9
5
+
1
8
5
9
)
S
F
/
5
0
0
=
1
0
S
P
A
C
E
S
GR
O
C
E
R
I
E
S
:
1
p
e
r
5
0
0
s
f
G
F
A
=
(
5
2
9
7
)
S
F
/
5
0
0
=
1
1
S
P
A
C
E
S
RE
S
T
A
U
R
A
N
T
:
1
p
e
r
3
5
0
s
f
(
P
e
r
M
u
n
i
c
i
p
a
l
C
o
d
e
1
7
.
1
6
.
0
6
0
H
.
2
)
(
4
4
3
6
+
2
1
8
5
+
3
1
0
0
)
S
F
/
3
5
0
=
2
8
S
P
A
C
E
S
LO
U
N
G
E
:
1
p
e
r
3
5
0
s
f
(
P
e
r
M
u
n
i
c
i
p
a
l
C
o
d
e
1
7
.
1
6
.
0
6
0
H
.
2
)
8
8
0
S
F
/
3
5
0
=
3
S
P
A
C
E
S
CO
M
M
U
N
A
L
K
I
T
C
H
E
N
:
1
p
e
r
5
0
0
s
f
(
P
e
r
M
u
n
i
c
i
p
a
l
C
o
d
e
1
7
.
1
6
.
0
6
0
H
.
4
)
8
8
0
S
F
/
5
0
0
=
2
S
P
A
C
E
S
TO
T
A
L
C
O
M
M
E
R
C
I
A
L
R
E
Q
U
I
R
E
D
:
5
4
S
P
A
C
E
S
RE
S
I
D
E
N
T
I
A
L
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
R
E
Q
U
I
R
E
D
:
C
-
D
Z
o
n
e
,
C
h
a
p
t
e
r
1
7
.
1
6
,
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
H
(
T
A
B
L
E
6
)
:
MI
X
E
D
U
S
E
/
M
U
L
T
I
F
A
M
I
L
Y
:
ST
U
D
I
O
S
:
4
0
U
N
I
T
S
x
.
5
p
e
r
u
n
i
t
=
2
0
S
P
A
C
E
S
1
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
:
2
2
U
N
I
T
S
x
.
7
5
p
e
r
u
n
i
t
=
1
6
.
5
S
P
A
C
E
S
AD
D
I
T
I
O
N
A
L
G
U
E
S
T
S
P
A
C
E
S
R
E
Q
U
I
R
E
D
:
1
s
p
a
c
e
f
o
r
e
v
e
r
y
1
0
u
n
i
t
s
:
6
2
u
n
i
t
s
/
1
0
=
6
.
2
S
P
A
C
E
S
TO
T
A
L
R
E
S
I
D
E
N
T
I
A
L
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
R
E
Q
U
I
R
E
D
:
43
S
P
A
C
E
S
HO
T
E
L
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
R
E
Q
U
I
R
E
D
:
C
-
D
Z
o
n
e
,
C
h
a
p
t
e
r
1
7
.
1
6
,
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
H
(
T
A
B
L
E
6
)
:
HO
T
E
L
R
O
O
M
S
:
3
6
U
N
I
T
S
x
.
5
p
e
r
r
o
o
m
=
1
8
S
P
A
C
E
S
EM
P
L
O
Y
E
E
S
:
=
2
S
P
A
C
E
S
TO
T
A
L
H
O
T
E
L
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
R
E
Q
U
I
R
E
D
:
20
S
P
A
C
E
S
TO
T
A
L
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
R
E
Q
U
I
R
E
D
:
5
4
+
4
3
+
2
0
=
1
1
7
S
P
A
C
E
S
ON
-
S
I
T
E
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
P
R
O
V
I
D
E
D
:
=
1
3
6
S
P
A
C
E
S
EX
C
E
S
S
/
(
S
H
O
R
T
)
=
(
+
1
9
S
P
A
C
E
S
)
BI
C
Y
C
L
E
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
R
E
Q
U
I
R
E
D
:
C
-
D
Z
O
N
E
,
C
h
a
p
t
e
r
1
7
.
1
6
,
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
H
(
T
A
B
L
E
6
)
:
#
O
F
B
I
C
Y
C
L
E
S
P
A
C
E
S
A
S
A
%
O
F
R
E
Q
’
D
A
U
T
O
S
P
A
C
E
S
:
1
5
%
:
1
6
7
*
.
1
5
=
2
5
B
I
C
Y
C
L
E
S
P
A
C
E
S
Mi
n
i
m
u
m
s
h
o
r
t
-
t
e
r
m
b
i
c
y
c
l
e
s
p
a
c
e
s
:
5
0
%
:
2
5
*
.
5
0
=
13
b
i
k
e
s
h
o
r
t
t
e
r
m
s
p
a
c
e
s
Mi
n
i
m
u
m
l
o
n
g
-
t
e
r
m
bi
c
y
c
l
e
s
p
a
c
e
s
:
5
0
%
:
2
5
*
.
4
0
=
10
b
i
k
e
l
o
n
g
t
e
r
m
s
p
a
c
e
s
Bi
c
y
c
l
e
P
a
r
k
i
n
g
P
r
o
v
i
d
e
d
:
2
5
s
h
o
r
t
t
e
r
m
b
i
k
e
s
p
a
c
e
s
1
2
l
o
n
g
t
e
r
m
s
p
a
c
e
s
TO
T
A
L
B
I
C
Y
C
L
E
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
P
R
O
V
D
E
D
:
3
7
B
I
C
Y
C
L
E
S
P
A
C
E
S
E
X
C
E
S
S
/
(
S
H
O
R
T
)
=
+
1
2
S
P
A
C
E
S
MO
T
O
R
C
Y
C
L
E
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
R
E
Q
U
I
R
E
D
:
C
-
D
Z
O
N
E
,
C
h
a
p
t
e
r
1
7
.
1
6
,
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
G
:
#
O
F
M
O
T
O
R
C
Y
C
L
E
S
P
A
C
E
S
A
S
A
%
O
F
R
E
Q
’
D
A
U
T
O
S
P
A
C
E
S
:
5
%
:
1
6
7
*
.
0
5
=
9
M
O
T
O
R
C
Y
C
L
E
S
P
A
C
E
S
(1
M
O
T
O
R
C
Y
C
L
E
P
E
R
2
0
R
E
Q
U
I
R
E
D
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
S
P
A
C
E
S
)
TO
T
A
L
M
O
T
O
R
C
Y
C
L
E
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
P
R
O
V
D
E
D
:
9
M
O
T
O
R
C
Y
C
L
E
S
P
A
C
E
S
E
X
C
E
S
S
/
(
S
H
O
R
T
)
=
0
S
P
A
C
E
S
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
S
t
a
t
s
Zo
n
i
n
g
:
C-
D
(
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
)
Cu
r
r
e
n
t
U
s
e
:
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
S.
F
.
o
f
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
S
p
a
c
e
:
+
/
-
2
4
,
8
0
0
S
.
F
.
Pa
r
c
e
l
B
:
0
0
3
-
5
1
1
-
0
1
3
:
2
1
,
3
4
4
S
F
=
.
4
9
A
C
*
Pa
r
c
e
l
C
:
0
0
3
-
5
1
1
-
0
2
3
:
4
,
0
0
5
S
F
=
.
0
9
1
9
A
C
*
Pa
r
c
e
l
D
:
0
0
3
-
5
1
1
-
0
2
4
:
4
,
5
2
5
S
F
=
.
1
0
3
9
A
C
*
Pa
r
c
e
l
E
:
0
0
3
-
5
1
1
-
0
2
5
:
1
2
,
7
3
6
S
F
=
.
2
9
3
9
A
C
*
To
t
a
l
S
F
o
f
P
a
r
c
e
l
s
B
-
E
:
4
2
,
6
1
0
S
F
=
0
.
9
7
9
7
A
C
*
Al
l
o
w
e
d
D
e
n
s
i
t
y
:
3
6
D
.
U
.
/
A
c
r
e
0.
9
7
9
7
A
c
r
e
(
3
6
D
.
U
.
)
=
35
.
2
7
D
.
U
.
*
PR
O
P
O
S
E
D
M
U
L
T
I
F
A
M
I
L
Y
U
N
I
T
S
:
ST
U
D
I
O
S
<
4
5
0
S
F
:
4
0
U
N
I
T
S
x
.
5
0
D
U
=
2
0
D
U
1
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
:
2
2
U
N
I
T
S
x
.
6
6
D
U
=
1
4
.
5
2
D
U
TO
T
A
L
U
N
I
T
S
:
6
2
U
N
I
T
S
=
3
4
.
5
2
D
U
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
D
e
n
s
i
t
y
=
3
4
.
5
2
*A
l
l
1
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
U
N
I
T
S
W
I
L
L
B
E
R
E
D
U
C
E
D
T
O
1
,
0
0
0
S
F
O
R
L
E
S
S
P
E
R
SA
N
L
U
I
S
O
B
I
S
P
O
M
U
N
I
C
I
P
A
L
C
O
D
E
1
7
.
1
0
0
.
1
5
0
I
N
F
U
T
U
R
E
D
E
S
I
G
N
DE
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
Pa
r
k
i
n
g
R
e
q
u
i
r
e
m
e
n
t
s
(s
e
e
G
e
n
e
r
a
l
P
l
a
n
s
e
c
.
3
.
1
.
6
B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
I
n
t
e
n
s
i
t
y
)
Al
l
o
w
e
d
F
.
A
.
R
.
i
s
3
.
7
5
I
n
d
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
a
r
e
a
.
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
S
I
t
e
A
r
e
a
:
4
2
,
6
1
0
S.
F
.
(
0
.
9
7
9
7
A
c
r
e
s
)
Pr
o
p
o
s
e
d
N
u
m
b
e
r
o
f
S
t
o
r
i
e
s
=
4
S
t
o
r
i
e
s
Pr
o
p
o
s
e
d
B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
:
5
4
’
-
6
”
t
o
5
9
’
-
6
”
57
0
M
a
r
s
h
T
o
t
a
l
P
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
F
l
o
o
r
A
r
e
a
=
2
2
,
8
7
1
S
.
F
.
59
0
M
a
r
s
h
T
o
t
a
l
P
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
F
l
o
o
r
A
r
e
a
=
4
0
,
3
8
3
S
.
F
58
1
H
i
g
u
e
r
a
T
o
t
a
l
P
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
F
l
o
o
r
A
r
e
a
=
4
7
,
6
1
6
S
.
F
TO
T
A
L
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
F
L
O
O
R
A
R
E
A
=
1
1
0
,
8
7
0
S
.
F
11
0
,
8
7
0
S
F
T
O
T
A
L
F
L
O
O
R
A
R
E
A
/
4
2
,
6
1
0
S
F
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
S
I
T
E
A
R
E
A
=
2
.
6
0
F
.
A
.
R
F.
A
.
R
C
a
l
c
s
Pu
b
l
i
c
A
r
t
:
Th
e
a
p
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
h
a
s
a
l
l
o
c
a
t
e
d
s
p
a
c
e
wi
t
h
i
n
t
h
e
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
f
o
r
p
u
b
l
i
c
a
r
t
,
an
d
i
n
t
e
n
d
s
t
o
c
o
n
t
i
n
u
e
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
fo
r
m
a
l
p
u
b
l
i
c
a
r
t
p
r
o
c
e
s
s
.
*A
L
L
1
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
U
N
I
T
S
W
I
L
L
B
E
R
E
D
U
C
E
D
T
O
1
,
0
0
0
S
F
O
R
LE
S
S
,
A
N
D
A
L
L
S
T
U
D
I
O
S
W
I
L
L
B
E
R
E
D
U
C
E
D
T
O
4
5
0
S
F
O
R
L
E
S
S
PE
R
S
A
N
L
U
I
S
O
B
I
S
P
O
M
U
N
I
C
I
P
A
L
C
O
D
E
1
7
.
1
0
0
.
1
5
0
I
N
F
U
T
U
R
E
DE
S
I
G
N
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
Th
e
5
7
0
T1
T
I
T
L
E
S
H
E
E
T
T2
P
R
E
L
I
M
I
N
A
R
Y
C
O
D
E
A
N
A
L
Y
S
I
S
A1
5
7
0
M
A
R
S
H
R
E
N
D
E
R
I
N
G
S
A2
5
9
0
M
A
R
S
H
R
E
N
D
E
R
I
N
G
A3
5
8
1
H
I
G
U
E
R
A
R
E
N
D
E
R
I
N
G
S
A4
P
E
D
E
S
T
R
I
A
N
P
A
S
E
O
R
E
N
D
E
R
I
N
G
S
A5
.
1
O
V
E
R
A
L
L
S
I
T
E
P
L
A
N
-
L
E
V
E
L
1
A5
.
2
O
V
E
R
A
L
L
S
I
T
E
P
L
A
N
-
L
E
V
E
L
2
A5
.
3
O
V
E
R
A
L
L
S
I
T
E
P
L
A
N
-
L
E
V
E
L
3
A5
.
4
O
V
E
R
A
L
L
S
I
T
E
P
L
A
N
-
L
E
V
E
L
4
A6
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
P
L
A
N
-
L
E
V
E
L
1
A7
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
P
L
A
N
-
L
E
V
E
L
2
A8
A
L
T
E
R
N
A
T
I
V
E
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
P
L
A
N
-
L
E
V
E
L
1
A9
A
L
T
E
R
N
A
T
I
V
E
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
P
L
A
N
-
L
E
V
E
L
2
C1
C
I
V
I
L
G
R
A
D
I
N
G
&
D
R
A
I
N
A
G
E
P
L
A
N
C2
C
I
V
I
L
U
T
I
L
I
T
Y
P
L
A
N
C3
C
I
V
I
L
F
R
O
N
T
A
G
E
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
P
L
A
N
C4
C
I
V
I
L
F
R
O
N
T
A
G
E
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
P
L
A
N
C5
C
I
V
I
L
G
R
A
D
I
N
G
&
D
R
A
I
N
A
G
E
P
L
A
N
C6
T
O
P
O
G
R
A
P
H
I
C
M
A
P
A1
0
5
8
1
V
I
C
I
N
I
C
T
Y
M
A
P
A1
1
5
8
1
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
A1
2
5
8
1
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
A1
3
5
8
1
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
A1
4
5
8
1
D
E
S
I
G
N
D
E
T
A
I
L
S
H
E
E
T
A1
5
5
8
1
D
E
S
I
G
N
D
E
T
A
I
L
S
H
E
E
T
A1
6
5
8
1
C
O
L
O
R
A
N
D
M
A
T
E
R
I
A
L
S
A1
7
5
7
0
V
I
C
I
N
I
T
Y
M
A
P
A1
8
5
7
0
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
A1
9
5
7
0
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
A2
0
5
7
0
D
E
S
I
G
N
D
E
T
A
I
L
S
H
E
E
T
A2
1
5
7
0
C
O
L
O
R
A
N
D
M
A
T
E
R
I
A
L
S
A2
2
5
9
0
V
I
C
I
N
I
T
Y
M
A
P
A2
3
5
9
0
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
A2
4
5
9
0
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
S
A2
5
5
9
0
D
E
S
I
G
N
D
E
T
A
I
L
S
H
E
E
T
A2
6
5
9
0
D
E
S
I
G
N
D
E
T
A
I
L
S
H
E
E
T
A2
7
5
9
0
C
O
L
O
R
A
N
D
M
A
T
E
R
I
A
L
S
L1
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
P
L
A
N
L2
C
O
N
C
E
P
T
U
A
L
P
L
A
N
T
I
N
G
P
L
A
N
L3
T
R
E
E
P
L
A
N
L4
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
C
O
L
O
R
A
N
D
M
A
T
E
R
I
A
L
S
L5
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
C
O
L
O
R
A
N
D
M
A
T
E
R
I
A
L
S
L6
G
R
E
E
N
B
U
I
L
D
I
N
G
F
E
A
T
U
R
E
S
A2
8
C
O
N
C
E
P
T
S
I
T
E
L
I
G
H
T
I
N
G
A2
9
S
I
G
N
A
G
E
A3
0
P
U
B
L
I
C
A
R
T
A3
1
P
E
D
E
S
T
R
I
A
N
P
A
S
E
O
C
O
M
P
A
R
I
T
I
V
E
E
X
H
I
B
I
T
S
A3
2
P
E
D
E
S
T
R
I
A
N
P
A
S
E
O
C
O
M
P
A
R
I
T
I
V
E
E
X
H
I
B
I
T
S
A3
3
E
N
T
R
I
E
S
A
N
D
P
L
A
Z
A
P
L
A
N
A3
4
B
I
C
Y
C
L
E
C
I
R
C
U
L
A
T
I
O
N
P
L
A
N
A3
5
O
V
E
R
A
L
L
S
I
T
E
S
E
C
T
I
O
N
A3
6
J
A
C
K
H
O
U
S
E
R
E
N
D
E
R
I
N
G
S
A3
7
J
A
C
K
H
O
U
S
E
R
E
N
D
E
R
I
N
G
S
A3
8
S
H
A
D
E
S
T
U
D
Y
-
V
E
R
N
A
L
E
Q
U
I
N
O
X
A3
9
S
H
A
D
E
S
T
U
D
Y
-
S
U
M
M
E
R
S
O
L
S
T
I
C
E
A4
0
S
H
A
D
E
S
T
U
D
Y
-
A
U
T
U
M
N
A
L
E
Q
U
I
N
O
X
A4
1
S
H
A
D
E
S
T
U
D
Y
-
W
I
N
T
E
R
S
O
L
S
T
I
C
E
A4
2
S
H
A
D
E
S
T
U
D
Y
C
O
M
P
L
I
A
N
C
E
A4
3
C
O
N
T
E
X
T
P
E
R
S
P
E
C
T
I
V
E
S
-
H
I
G
U
E
R
A
S
T
R
E
E
T
A4
4
C
O
N
T
E
X
T
P
E
R
S
P
E
C
T
I
V
E
S
-
M
A
R
S
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
A4
5
C
O
N
T
E
X
T
P
E
R
S
P
E
C
T
I
V
E
S
-
N
I
P
O
M
O
S
T
R
E
E
T
Sh
e
e
t
I
n
d
e
x
Project Statement San Luis Square is a mixed use development that LQFOXGHVUHVLGHQWLDODSDUWPHQWVDERYHJURXQGÁRRUcommercial and retail, as well as a 36-room hotel. The project includes a below grade parking struc-ture that will serve the three buildings.7KHSURMHFWLVORFDWHGZLWKLQDGHVLJQDWHGÁRRGzone as shown on the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) for the City of San Luis Obispo. As such, any new or substantially remodeled structures shall comply with all Federal Emergency Management Agency FEMA requirements and the city’s Flood-plain Management Regulations per Municipal Code Chapter 17.84.The ARC submittal shall include a preliminary grad-ing plan and drainage report for this project. The drainage report shall consider historic off site drain-age tributary to this property that may need to be conveyed along with the improved on-site drain-age. This development may alter and/or increase the storm water runoff from this site or adjoining sites. The improved or altered drainge shall be di-rected to the street and not across adjoining prop-erty lines unless the drainage is conveyed within recorded easements or existing waterways. ATTACHMENT 3 ARC2 - 13
DA
T
E
:
M
A
Y
1
3
,
2
0
1
6
#1
0
1
4
0
7
1
Ma
r
c
h
2
4
,
2
0
1
7
T2
Pr
e
l
i
m
i
n
a
r
y
C
o
d
e
A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
57
0
M
A
R
S
H
-
A
L
L
O
W
A
B
L
E
A
R
E
A
C
A
L
C
U
L
A
T
I
O
N
S
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
T
y
p
e
Ty
p
e
V
-
A
Al
l
o
w
a
b
l
e
s
p
e
r
S
t
o
r
y
Oc
c
u
p
a
n
c
y
M
Al
l
o
w
a
b
l
e
A
r
e
a
p
e
r
f
l
o
o
r
4
2
,
0
0
0
S
F
Al
l
o
w
a
b
l
e
S
t
o
r
i
e
s
4
Al
l
o
w
a
b
l
e
H
e
i
g
h
t
7
0
'
Oc
c
u
p
a
n
c
y
R
-
2
Al
l
o
w
a
b
l
e
A
r
e
a
p
e
r
f
l
o
o
r
3
6
,
0
0
0
S
F
Al
l
o
w
a
b
l
e
S
t
o
r
i
e
s
4
Al
l
o
w
a
b
l
e
H
e
i
g
h
t
6
0
'
Ac
t
u
a
l
A
r
e
a
s
Gr
o
u
n
d
F
l
o
o
r
R
e
t
a
i
l
M
6,
2
9
0
S
F
Se
c
o
n
d
F
l
o
o
r
R
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
R-
2
6,
2
9
0
S
F
Th
i
r
d
F
l
o
o
r
R
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
R-
2
6,
2
9
0
S
F
Fo
u
r
t
h
F
l
o
o
r
R
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
R-
2
4,
0
7
3
S
F
To
t
a
l
B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
A
r
e
a
2
2
,
9
4
3
S
F
To
t
a
l
A
l
l
o
w
a
b
l
e
B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
A
r
e
a
Ra
t
i
o
s
o
f
a
c
t
u
a
l
s
/
a
l
l
o
w
a
b
l
e
s
0.
6
1
59
0
M
A
R
S
H
-
A
L
L
O
W
A
B
L
E
A
R
E
A
C
A
L
C
U
L
A
T
I
O
N
S
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
T
y
p
e
Ty
p
e
V
-
A
Al
l
o
w
a
b
l
e
s
p
e
r
S
t
o
r
y
Oc
c
u
p
a
n
c
y
A
-
2
Al
l
o
w
a
b
l
e
A
r
e
a
p
e
r
f
l
o
o
r
3
4
,
5
0
0
S
F
Al
l
o
w
a
b
l
e
S
t
o
r
i
e
s
2
Al
l
o
w
a
b
l
e
H
e
i
g
h
t
5
0
'
Oc
c
u
p
a
n
c
y
R
-
2
Al
l
o
w
a
b
l
e
A
r
e
a
p
e
r
f
l
o
o
r
3
6
,
0
0
0
S
F
Al
l
o
w
a
b
l
e
S
t
o
r
i
e
s
4
Al
l
o
w
a
b
l
e
H
e
i
g
h
t
6
0
'
Ac
t
u
a
l
A
r
e
a
s
Gr
o
u
n
d
F
l
o
o
r
R
e
s
t
a
u
r
a
n
t
A-
2
8,
8
0
0
S
F
Se
c
o
n
d
F
l
o
o
r
R
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
R-
2
9,
1
3
5
S
F
Th
i
r
d
F
l
o
o
r
R
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
R-
2
9,
6
7
1
S
F
Fo
u
r
t
h
F
l
o
o
r
R
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
R-
2
7,
3
7
4
S
F
To
t
a
l
B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
A
r
e
a
3
4
,
9
8
0
S
F
To
t
a
l
A
l
l
o
w
a
b
l
e
B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
A
r
e
a
Ra
t
i
o
s
o
f
a
c
t
u
a
l
s
/
a
l
l
o
w
a
b
l
e
s
0.
9
8
58
1
H
I
G
U
E
R
A
-
A
L
L
O
W
A
B
L
E
A
R
E
A
C
A
L
C
U
L
A
T
I
O
N
S
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
T
y
p
e
Ty
p
e
V
-
A
Al
l
o
w
a
b
l
e
s
p
e
r
S
t
o
r
y
Oc
c
u
p
a
n
c
y
A
-
2
Al
l
o
w
a
b
l
e
A
r
e
a
p
e
r
f
l
o
o
r
3
4
,
5
0
0
S
F
Al
l
o
w
a
b
l
e
S
t
o
r
i
e
s
2
Al
l
o
w
a
b
l
e
H
e
i
g
h
t
5
0
'
Oc
c
u
p
a
n
c
y
M
Al
l
o
w
a
b
l
e
A
r
e
a
p
e
r
f
l
o
o
r
4
2
,
0
0
0
S
F
Al
l
o
w
a
b
l
e
S
t
o
r
i
e
s
3
Al
l
o
w
a
b
l
e
H
e
i
g
h
t
7
5
'
Oc
c
u
p
a
n
c
y
R
-
1
Al
l
o
w
a
b
l
e
A
r
e
a
p
e
r
f
l
o
o
r
3
6
,
0
0
0
S
F
Al
l
o
w
a
b
l
e
S
t
o
r
i
e
s
3
Al
l
o
w
a
b
l
e
H
e
i
g
h
t
5
0
'
Oc
c
u
p
a
n
c
y
R
-
2
Al
l
o
w
a
b
l
e
A
r
e
a
p
e
r
f
l
o
o
r
3
6
,
0
0
0
S
F
Al
l
o
w
a
b
l
e
S
t
o
r
i
e
s
4
Al
l
o
w
a
b
l
e
H
e
i
g
h
t
6
0
'
Ac
t
u
a
l
A
r
e
a
s
Gr
o
u
n
d
F
l
o
o
r
R
e
s
t
a
u
r
a
n
t
A-
2
3,
8
6
3
S
F
Gr
o
u
n
d
F
l
o
o
r
R
e
t
a
i
l
M
8,
1
3
0
S
F
Gr
o
u
n
d
F
l
o
o
r
H
o
t
e
l
R-
1
2,
6
2
5
S
F
Se
c
o
n
d
F
l
o
o
r
H
o
t
e
l
R-
1
14
,
5
9
0
S
F
Th
i
r
d
F
l
o
o
r
H
o
t
e
l
R-
1
14
,
5
9
0
S
F
Fo
u
r
t
h
F
l
o
o
r
R
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
R-
2
10
,
4
6
3
S
F
To
t
a
l
B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
A
r
e
a
5
4
,
2
6
1
S
F
To
t
a
l
A
l
l
o
w
a
b
l
e
B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
A
r
e
a
Ra
t
i
o
s
o
f
a
c
t
u
a
l
s
/
a
l
l
o
w
a
b
l
e
s
1.
4
8
GA
R
A
G
E
-
A
L
L
O
W
A
B
L
E
A
R
E
A
C
A
L
C
U
L
A
T
I
O
N
S
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
T
y
p
e
Type I-A
Oc
c
u
p
a
n
c
y
S
-
2
Al
l
o
w
a
b
l
e
A
r
e
a
p
e
r
f
l
o
o
r
Unlimited SF
Al
l
o
w
a
b
l
e
S
t
o
r
i
e
s
Unlimited
Al
l
o
w
a
b
l
e
H
e
i
g
h
t
Unlimited
Ac
t
u
a
l
A
r
e
a
s
Pa
r
k
i
n
g
B
a
s
e
m
e
n
t
1
S-2 B1 34,743 SF
Pa
r
k
i
n
g
B
a
s
e
m
e
n
t
2
S-2 B2 34,743 SF
To
t
a
l
B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
A
r
e
a
69,486 SF
To
t
a
l
A
l
l
o
w
a
b
l
e
B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
A
r
e
a
N/A
CO
D
E
A
N
A
L
Y
S
I
S
Co
d
e
I
n
t
e
r
p
r
e
t
a
t
i
o
n
Oc
c
u
p
a
n
c
y
A-
2
,
M
,
R
-
1
,
R
-
2
,
S
-
2
30
9
.
1
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
T
y
p
e
V-
A
,
I
-
A
T-
5
0
3
Au
t
o
m
a
t
i
c
F
i
r
e
S
p
r
i
n
k
l
e
r
s
Ye
s
ATTACHMENT 3 ARC2 - 14
A1
Ma
r
c
h
2
4
,
2
0
1
7
57
0
M
a
r
s
h
R
e
n
d
e
r
i
n
g
s
Vi
e
w
o
f
t
h
e
5
7
0
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
f
r
o
m
M
a
r
s
h
S
t
r
e
e
t
Vi
e
w
o
f
t
h
e
5
7
0
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
f
r
o
m
M
a
r
s
h
S
t
r
e
e
t
ATTACHMENT 3 ARC2 - 15
A2
Ma
r
c
h
2
4
,
2
0
1
7
59
0
M
a
r
s
h
R
e
n
d
e
r
i
n
g
Vi
e
w
o
f
t
h
e
5
9
0
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
f
r
o
m
t
h
e
c
o
r
n
e
r
o
f
M
a
r
s
h
a
n
d
N
i
p
o
m
o
S
t
r
e
e
t
ATTACHMENT 3 ARC2 - 16
Vi
e
w
o
f
t
h
e
5
8
1
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
f
r
o
m
H
i
g
u
e
r
a
S
t
r
e
e
t
Vi
e
w
o
f
t
h
e
5
8
1
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
f
r
o
m
t
h
e
c
o
r
n
e
r
o
f
N
i
p
o
m
o
a
n
d
H
i
g
u
e
r
a
S
t
r
e
e
t
A3
Ma
r
c
h
2
4
,
2
0
1
7
58
1
H
i
g
u
e
r
a
R
e
n
d
e
r
i
n
g
s
ATTACHMENT 3 ARC2 - 17
A4
Ma
r
c
h
2
4
,
2
0
1
7
Pe
d
e
s
t
r
i
a
n
P
a
s
e
o
R
e
n
d
e
r
i
n
g
s
ATTACHMENT 3 ARC2 - 18
Ma
r
c
h
2
4
,
2
0
1
7
Sa
n
L
u
i
s
O
b
i
s
p
o
,
C
a
.
A5.1
58
1
HI
G
U
E
R
A
GR
O
C
E
R
Y
RE
S
T
A
U
R
A
N
T
ATTACHMENT 3 ARC2 - 19
SCALE: 1/16”=1’-0”081 6 3 2 6 4NORTH
NO
T
E
:
V
E
R
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
N
D
P
I
P
E
F
O
R
FI
R
E
F
I
G
H
T
I
N
G
P
U
R
P
O
S
E
S
S
H
A
L
L
B
E
PR
O
V
I
D
E
D
W
I
T
H
I
N
E
A
C
H
S
T
A
I
R
W
E
L
L
Building Rm # SF Unit Type 201 675 1 bdrm 202 664 1 bdrm 203 436 studio 204 450 studio 205 806 1 bdrm 206 1099 1 bdrm 201 450 studio 202 450 studio 203 450 studio 204 1000 1 bdrm 205 450 studio 206 920 1 bdrm 207 450 studio 208 450 studio 209 450 studio 210 450 studio 211 750 1 bdrm 212 395 studio Building Rm # SF Unit Type 201 435 Suite 202 435 Suite 203 435 Suite 204 435 Suite 205 638 Suite 206 621 Suite 207 621 Suite 208 638 Suite 209 435 Suite 210 435 Suite 211 435 Suite 212 435 Suite 213 420 Suite 214 420 Suite 215 638 Suite 216 630 Suite 217 630 Suite 218 638 Suite570590581Level 2 Hotel Unit MixLevel 2 Residential Unit Mix
18
6
S
F
67
5
S
F
10
9
9
S
F
64
S
F
66
4
S
F
43
6
S
F
45
0
S
F
80
6
S
F
50
5
S
F
14
1
S
F
11
9
S
F
17
3
S
F
2
3
0
S
F
10
4
S
F
Ma
r
c
h
2
4
,
2
0
1
7
DA
T
E
:
M
A
R
C
H
3
,
2
0
1
6
#1
0
1
4
0
7
1
Sa
n
L
u
i
s
O
b
i
s
p
o
,
C
a
.
A5.2ATTACHMENT 3 ARC2 - 20
NO
T
E
:
V
E
R
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
N
D
P
I
P
E
F
O
R
FI
R
E
F
I
G
H
T
I
N
G
P
U
R
P
O
S
E
S
S
H
A
L
L
B
E
PR
O
V
I
D
E
D
W
I
T
H
I
N
E
A
C
H
S
T
A
I
R
W
E
L
L
Building Rm # SF Unit Type 301 692 1 bdrm 302 650 1 bdrm 303 430 studio 304 450 studio 305 651 1 bdrm 306 894 1 bdrm 301 450 studio 302 450 studio 303 450 studio 304 1000 1 bdrm 305 450 studio 306 920 1 bdrm 307 450 studio 308 450 studio 309 450 studio 310 450 studio 311 750 1 bdrm 312 930 1 bdrm Building Rm # SF Unit Type 301 435 Suite 302 435 Suite 303 435 Suite 304 435 Suite 305 638 Suite 306 621 Suite 307 621 Suite 308 638 Suite 309 435 Suite 310 435 Suite 311 435 Suite 312 435 Suite 313 420 Suite 314 420 Suite 315 638 Suite 316 630 Suite 317 630 Suite 318 638 SuiteLevel 3 Hotel Unit Mix 581570590Level 3 Residential Unit Mix
10
4
S
F
69
2
S
F
65
0
S
F
43
0
S
F
45
0
S
F
85
1
S
F
89
4
S
F
54
6
S
F
14
7
S
F
10
4
S
F
18
6
S
F
95
S
F
3
9
7
S
F
11
9
S
F
93
S
F
Ma
r
c
h
2
4
,
2
0
1
7
A5.3ATTACHMENT 3 ARC2 - 21
SCALE: 1/16”=1’-0”081 6 3 2 6 4NORTH
NO
T
E
:
V
E
R
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
N
D
P
I
P
E
F
O
R
FI
R
E
F
I
G
H
T
I
N
G
P
U
R
P
O
S
E
S
S
H
A
L
L
B
E
PR
O
V
I
D
E
D
W
I
T
H
I
N
E
A
C
H
S
T
A
I
R
W
E
L
L
Building Rm # SF Unit Type 401 450 studio 402 708 1 bdrm 403 740 1 bdrm 404 450 studio 401 450 studio 402 450 studio 403 450 studio 404 800 1 bdrm 405 450 studio 406 450 studio 407 450 studio 408 450 studio 409 450 studio 410 700 1 bdrm 411 380 studio 401 435 studio 402 435 studio 403 435 studio 404 435 studio 405 952 1 bdrm 406 952 1 bdrm 407 435 studio 408 435 studio 409 435 studio 410 435 studio 312 740 1 bdrm581Level 4 Residential Unit Mix 570 590
45
0
S
F
70
8
S
F
12
2
S
F
83
S
F
12
6
S
F
74
0
S
F
45
0
S
F
42
0
S
F
79
S
F
27
8
S
F
18
6
S
F
Ma
r
c
h
2
4
,
2
0
1
7
A5.4
Ov
e
r
a
l
l
S
i
t
e
P
l
a
n
-
L
e
v
e
l
4
ATTACHMENT 3 ARC2 - 22
UP
M
N242526
F
18 17 16 15 14
22
G
H
O
P
D
E
23
I
J
K
L
1213
11
'
-
0
"
28
'
-
7
"
25
'
-
8
"
24
'
-
0
"
26
'
-
3
"
18
'
-
6
"
E
22
'
-
7
"
29
'
-
9
"
29
'
-
9
"
29
'
-
9
"
29
'
-
9
"
1
8
'
-
6
"
2
9
'
-
9
"
2
9
'
-
9
"
2
9
'
-
9
"
2
9
'
-
9
"
3
8
'
-
6
"
E
c
c
cc
c
c
c
LO
B
B
Y
AB
O
V
E
c
TO
T
A
L
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
67
S
P
A
C
E
S
1
8
'
-
5
"
2
3
'
-
6
"
1
8
'
-
5
"
2
3
'
-
6
"
1
8
'
-
5
"
1
6
'
-
0
"
2
8
'
-
4
"
1
6
'
-
0
"
2
3
'
-
6
"
1
6
'
-
0
"
2
'
-
5
"
18
'
-
5
"
24
'
-
3
"
18
'
-
5
"
18
'
-
5
"
SL
O
P
E
DO
W
N
S
L
O
P
E
D
O
W
N
F
R
O
M
S
T
R
E
E
T
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
F
I
C
U
S
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
F
I
C
U
S
EL
E
C
T
R
I
C
V
E
H
I
C
L
E
CH
A
R
G
I
N
G
S
T
A
T
I
O
N
S
A6
Ma
r
c
h
2
4
,
2
0
1
7
Pa
r
k
i
n
g
P
l
a
n
-
L
e
v
e
l
1
Note: Below Grade parking structure shall be dry ÁRRGSURRIHGSHUFLW\·V)(0$VWDQGDUGV6HHGHWDLOproposed in Summary letter to ARC SCALE: 1/16”=1’-0”081 6 3 2 6 4NORTH
Pa
r
k
i
n
g
P
l
a
n
-
L
e
v
e
l
1
Re
t
a
i
n
b
o
t
h
F
i
c
u
s
T
r
e
e
s
o
n
M
a
r
s
h
S
t
r
e
e
t
Total Level 1 Parking Spaces - 67
To
t
a
l
L
e
v
e
l
1
M
o
t
o
r
c
y
c
l
e
P
a
r
k
i
n
g
-
6
ATTACHMENT 3 ARC2 - 23
EL
E
C
T
R
I
C
V
E
H
I
C
L
E
CH
A
R
G
I
N
G
S
T
A
T
I
O
N
S
A7
Ma
r
c
h
2
4
,
2
0
1
7
Pa
r
k
i
n
g
P
l
a
n
-
L
e
v
e
l
2
SCALE: 1/16”=1’-0”081 6 3 2 6 4NORTHNote: Below Grade parking structure shall be dry ÁRRGSURRIHGSHUFLW\·V)(0$VWDQGDUGV6HHGHWDLOproposed in Summary letter to ARC
Pa
r
k
i
n
g
P
l
a
n
-
L
e
v
e
l
2
Re
t
a
i
n
b
o
t
h
F
i
c
u
s
T
r
e
e
s
o
n
M
a
r
s
h
S
t
r
e
e
t
Total Level 2 Parking Spaces - 69
To
t
a
l
L
e
v
e
l
2
M
o
t
o
r
c
y
c
l
e
P
a
r
k
i
n
g
-
3
ATTACHMENT 3 ARC2 - 24
Note: Below Grade parking structure shall be dry ÁRRGSURRIHGSHUFLW\·V)(0$VWDQGDUGV6HHGHWDLOproposed in Summary letter to ARC
EL
E
C
T
R
I
C
V
E
H
I
C
L
E
CH
A
R
G
I
N
G
S
T
A
T
I
O
N
S
A8
Ma
r
c
h
2
4
,
2
0
1
7
Al
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
v
e
P
a
r
k
i
n
g
P
l
a
n
-
L
e
v
e
l
1
Re
m
o
v
e
b
o
t
h
F
i
c
u
s
T
r
e
e
s
o
n
M
a
r
s
h
S
t
r
e
e
t
Total Level 1 Spaces - 77 Total Level 1 Motorcycle Parking - 6
Al
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
v
e
P
a
r
k
i
n
g
P
l
a
n
-
L
e
v
e
l
1
ATTACHMENT 3 ARC2 - 25
Note: Below Grade parking structure shall be dry ÁRRGSURRIHGSHUFLW\·V)(0$VWDQGDUGV6HHGHWDLOproposed in Summary letter to ARC
EL
E
C
T
R
I
C
V
E
H
I
C
L
E
CH
A
R
G
I
N
G
S
T
A
T
I
O
N
S
Al
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
v
e
P
a
r
k
i
n
g
P
l
a
n
-
L
e
v
e
l
2
A9
Ma
r
c
h
2
4
,
2
0
1
7
Al
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
v
e
P
a
r
k
i
n
g
P
l
a
n
-
L
e
v
e
l
2
Re
m
o
v
e
b
o
t
h
F
i
c
u
s
T
r
e
e
s
o
n
M
a
r
s
h
S
t
r
e
e
t
Total Level 2 Spaces - 76 Total Level 2 Motorcycle Parking - 3ATTACHMENT 3 ARC2 - 26
SD
SD
SD
X
X
X
X
S
D
S
D
S
D
S
D
S
D
S
D
S D
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
(
1
8
6
)
(
1
8
6
)
(
1
8
8
)
(
1
8
9
)
(
1
8
9
)
X
X
X
18
8
.
6
8
FS
1.6%
EX
I
S
T
T
R
E
E
T
O
R
E
M
A
I
N
EX
I
S
T
T
R
E
E
T
O
R
E
M
A
I
N
1
FL
O
O
D
G
A
T
E
NTS
0
20
2
0
4
0
HO
R
I
Z
O
N
T
A
L
S
C
A
L
E
:
F
E
E
T
N
C1
Ma
r
c
h
2
4
,
2
0
1
7
Ci
v
i
l
G
r
a
d
i
n
g
a
n
d
D
r
a
i
n
a
g
e
Ci
v
i
l
G
r
a
d
i
n
g
a
n
d
D
r
a
i
n
a
g
e
P
l
a
n
ATTACHMENT 3 ARC2 - 27
S
S
S
SD
SD
SD
E
T
X
X
X
X
T
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
D
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
S
D
S
D
S
D
S
D
S
D
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
V
T
V
T
V
T
V
T
V
T
V
SD
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
S
S
S
S
S
S
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
W
W
W
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
SD
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
G
T
T
T
E TV
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
TV
T
V
T
V
T
V
T
V
TV
G
G
G
G
G
T
E
E
T
V
E
E
E
E
T
T
E
G
W
W
W
W
W
(
1
8
6
)
(
1
8
6
)
(
1
8
8
)
(
1
8
9
)
(
1
8
9
)
X
X
X
EL
E
C
T
R
I
C
A
L
N
O
T
E
S
:
AL
L
E
X
I
S
T
I
N
G
A
N
D
P
R
O
P
O
S
E
D
U
T
I
L
I
T
I
E
S
S
H
A
L
L
B
E
U
N
D
E
R
G
R
O
U
N
D
E
D
SD
1
SD
2
SD
2
SS
1
W1
SS
1
W1
SD
3
SD
3
W1
ST
O
R
M
D
R
A
I
N
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
N
O
T
E
S
:
SA
N
I
T
A
R
Y
S
E
W
E
R
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
N
O
T
E
S
:
WA
T
E
R
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
N
O
T
E
S
:
2"
D
O
M
E
S
T
I
C
M
E
T
E
R
A
N
D
2
"
F
I
R
E
S
U
P
P
L
Y
SS
2
SS
2
SD
3
C2
Ma
r
c
h
2
4
,
2
0
1
7
Civil Utility Plan
Ci
v
i
l
U
t
i
l
i
t
y
P
l
a
n
ATTACHMENT 3 ARC2 - 28
S
D
S
D
(
1
8
8
)
(
1
8
9
)
20
'
E
N
D
O
F
(
E
)
M
I
S
S
I
O
N
S
T
Y
L
E
S
I
D
E
W
A
L
K
(
E
)
N
O
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
S
I
G
N
T
O
R
E
M
A
I
N
(
E
)
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
M
E
T
E
R
T
O
R
E
M
A
I
N
(
E
)
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
S
I
G
N
A
L
T
O
R
E
M
A
I
N
(
E
)
S
I
G
N
A
L
B
O
X
T
O
R
E
M
A
I
N
4
5
6
3'
3'
(1
8
9
.
9
9
F
L
)
2
.
0
%
T
Y
P
2
.
0
%
T
Y
P
6
(1
8
7
.
4
5
F
L
)
1
4
2
2
R
1
2
'
4
6
(
1
8
8
)
(
1
8
9
)
(E
)
D
R
I
V
E
W
A
Y
TO
B
E
R
E
M
O
V
E
D
E
N
D
O
F
(
E
)
M
I
S
S
I
O
N
S
T
Y
L
E
S
I
D
E
W
A
L
K
(
E
)
N
O
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
S
I
G
N
T
O
R
E
M
A
I
N
(
E
)
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
M
E
T
E
R
T
O
R
E
M
A
I
N
(
E
)
W
A
T
E
R
M
E
T
E
R
T
O
B
E
R
E
M
O
V
E
D
(
E
)
S
T
R
E
E
T
T
R
E
E
T
O
B
E
R
E
M
O
V
E
D
(
E
)
W
A
T
E
R
V
A
L
V
E
T
O
R
E
M
A
I
N
(
E
)
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
S
I
G
N
A
L
T
O
R
E
M
A
I
N
(
E
)
S
I
G
N
A
L
B
O
X
T
O
R
E
M
A
I
N
(
E
)
M
I
S
S
I
O
N
S
T
Y
L
E
C
U
R
B
R
E
T
U
R
N
T
O
B
E
R
E
M
O
V
E
D
0
10
1
0
2
0
HO
R
I
Z
O
N
T
A
L
S
C
A
L
E
:
F
E
E
T
N
SI
T
E
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
N
O
T
E
S
:
PR
O
P
O
S
E
D
6
"
C
U
R
B
A
N
D
1
8
"
G
U
T
T
E
R
PR
O
P
O
S
E
D
M
I
S
S
I
O
N
S
T
Y
L
E
S
I
D
E
W
A
L
K
PR
O
P
O
S
E
D
D
R
I
V
E
W
A
Y
PR
O
P
O
S
E
D
S
I
D
E
W
A
L
K
U
N
D
E
R
D
R
A
I
N
PR
O
P
O
S
E
D
C
A
T
C
H
B
A
S
I
N
PR
O
P
O
S
E
D
S
T
R
E
E
T
T
R
E
E
A
N
D
G
R
A
T
E
2
PR
O
P
O
S
E
D
F
R
O
N
T
A
G
E
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
-
N
I
P
O
M
O
S
T
R
E
E
T
1
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
C
O
N
D
I
T
I
O
N
S
-
N
I
P
O
M
O
S
T
R
E
E
T
0
10
1
0
2
0
HO
R
I
Z
O
N
T
A
L
S
C
A
L
E
:
F
E
E
T
N
C3
Ma
r
c
h
2
4
,
2
0
1
7
Ci
v
i
l
F
r
o
n
t
a
g
e
I
m
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
s
Ci
v
i
l
F
r
o
n
t
a
g
e
I
m
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
s
ATTACHMENT 3 ARC2 - 29
MA
R
S
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
MA
R
S
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
C4
Ma
r
c
h
2
4
,
2
0
1
7
Ci
v
i
l
F
r
o
n
t
a
g
e
I
m
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
s
Ci
v
i
l
F
r
o
n
t
a
g
e
I
m
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
s
ATTACHMENT 3 ARC2 - 30
SDSD
SD
(
1
8
6
)
(1
8
6
)
(E
)
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
S
I
G
N
A
L
TO
R
E
M
A
I
N
(E
)
S
I
G
N
A
L
B
O
X
TO
R
E
M
A
I
N
(E
)
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
TO
R
E
M
A
I
N
24
'
35
'
L
O
A
D
I
N
G
Z
O
N
E
(1
.
6
3
%
)
(
E
)
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
M
E
T
E
R
T
O
R
E
M
A
I
N
(
E
)
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
M
E
T
E
R
T
O
R
E
M
A
I
N
(
E
)
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
M
E
T
E
R
T
O
R
E
M
A
I
N
(
E
)
P
G
&
E
B
O
X
E
S
T
O
R
E
M
A
I
N
(
E
)
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
M
E
T
E
R
T
O
R
E
M
A
I
N
(
E
)
S
T
R
E
E
T
L
I
G
H
T
T
O
R
E
M
A
I
N
(
E
)
P
G
&
E
B
O
X
E
S
T
O
R
E
M
A
I
N
R12'
2
2
2
6
6
6
6
4
1
1
2
%
T
Y
P
2
%
T
Y
P
1
0
'
1
7
'
R
2
0
'
R20'
R10'
R
1
0
'
R
2
0
'
(
E
)
S
T
R
E
E
T
T
R
E
E
T
O
R
E
M
A
I
N
0
10
1
0
2
0
HO
R
I
Z
O
N
T
A
L
S
C
A
L
E
:
F
E
E
T
N
2
PR
O
P
O
S
E
D
F
R
O
N
T
A
G
E
I
M
P
R
O
V
E
M
E
N
T
S
-
H
I
G
U
E
R
A
S
T
R
E
E
T
(
1
8
6
)
(1
8
6
)
(E
)
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
S
I
G
N
A
L
TO
R
E
M
A
I
N
(E
)
S
I
G
N
A
L
B
O
X
TO
R
E
M
A
I
N
(E
)
M
I
S
S
I
O
N
S
T
Y
L
E
CU
R
B
R
E
T
U
R
N
T
O
BE
R
E
M
O
V
E
D
(
E
)
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
M
E
T
E
R
T
O
B
E
R
E
M
O
V
E
D
(
E
)
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
M
E
T
E
R
T
O
B
E
R
E
M
O
V
E
D
(
E
)
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
M
E
T
E
R
T
O
B
E
R
E
M
O
V
E
D
(
E
)
W
A
T
E
R
M
E
T
E
R
T
O
B
E
R
E
M
O
V
E
D
(E
)
D
R
I
V
E
W
A
Y
TO
B
E
R
E
M
O
V
E
D
(E
)
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
TO
B
E
R
E
M
O
V
E
D
(E
)
D
R
I
V
E
W
A
Y
TO
B
E
R
E
M
O
V
E
D
1
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
C
O
N
D
I
T
I
O
N
S
-
N
I
P
O
M
O
S
T
R
E
E
T
0
10
1
0
2
0
HO
R
I
Z
O
N
T
A
L
S
C
A
L
E
:
F
E
E
T
N
SI
T
E
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
N
O
T
E
S
:
PR
O
P
O
S
E
D
6
"
C
U
R
B
A
N
D
1
8
"
G
U
T
T
E
R
PR
O
P
O
S
E
D
M
I
S
S
I
O
N
S
T
Y
L
E
S
I
D
E
W
A
L
K
PR
O
P
O
S
E
D
D
R
I
V
E
W
A
Y
PR
O
P
O
S
E
D
S
I
D
E
W
A
L
K
U
N
D
E
R
D
R
A
I
N
PR
O
P
O
S
E
D
C
A
T
C
H
B
A
S
I
N
PR
O
P
O
S
E
D
S
T
R
E
E
T
T
R
E
E
A
N
D
G
R
A
T
E
MA
R
S
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
MA
R
S
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
C5
Ma
r
c
h
2
4
,
2
0
1
7
Ci
v
i
l
G
r
a
d
i
n
g
a
n
d
D
r
a
i
n
a
g
e
Ci
v
i
l
G
r
a
d
i
n
g
a
n
d
D
r
a
i
n
a
g
e
P
l
a
n
ATTACHMENT 3 ARC2 - 31
C6
Ma
r
c
h
2
4
,
2
0
1
7
To
p
o
g
r
a
p
h
i
c
M
a
p
ATTACHMENT 3 ARC2 - 32
A10
Ma
r
c
h
2
4
,
2
0
1
7
ATTACHMENT 3 ARC2 - 33
Ea
s
t
E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
San Luis Obispo Zoning Regulations Section 17.16.040: Components of solar energy systems, chimneys, elevator towers, screening for mechanical equip-ment that is not integral with building parapets, vents, antennae and steeples shall extend not more than 10 feet above the maximum building height.A11
Ma
r
c
h
2
4
,
2
0
1
7
57
’
-
0
”
T
O
P
OF
R
O
O
F
59’ - 6” TOP OF ROOF 47’ - 6” TOP OF ROOF
44
’
-
0
”
F
.
F
.
3
2
’
-
0
”
F
.
F
.
20
’
-
0
”
F
.
F
.
14
’
-
0
”
B
O
T
OF
C
A
N
O
P
Y
64
’
-
0
”
T
O
P
OF
R
O
O
F
66
’
-
0
”
T
O
P
ST
A
I
R
S
581 Elevations
58
1
E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
s
Ea
s
t
E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
As
s
e
e
n
f
r
o
m
M
a
r
s
h
S
t
r
e
e
t
We
s
t
E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
As
s
e
e
n
f
r
o
m
H
i
g
u
e
r
a
S
t
r
e
e
t
0
8
1/
8
"
=
1
'
-
0
"
SC
A
L
E
:
4
2 11
6
0
8
1/
8
"
=
1
'
-
0
"
SC
A
L
E
:
4
2 11
6
ATTACHMENT 3 ARC2 - 34
SC
A
L
E
:
1
/
8
”
=
1
’
-
0
”
0
4
8
16
32
San Luis Obispo Zoning Regulations Section 17.16.040: Components of solar energy systems, chimneys, elevator towers, screening for mechanical equip-ment that is not integral with building parapets, vents, antennae and steeples shall extend not more than 10 feet above the maximum building height.64’ - 0” TOP OF ROOF 57’ - 0” TOP OF ROOF 44’ -0” F.F.32’ - 0” F.F.20’ - 0” F.F.14’ - 0” BOT OF CANOPY
59
’
-
6
”
T
O
P
OF
R
O
O
F
66
’
-
0
”
T
O
P
OF
S
T
A
I
R
S
47
’
-
6
”
T
O
P
OF
R
O
O
F
A12
Ma
r
c
h
2
4
,
2
0
1
7
581 Elevations
58
1
E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
s
No
r
t
h
E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
As
s
e
e
n
f
r
o
m
N
i
p
o
m
o
S
t
r
e
e
t
0
8
1/
8
"
=
1
'
-
0
"
SC
A
L
E
:
4
2 11
6
ATTACHMENT 3 ARC2 - 35
San Luis Obispo Zoning Regulations Section 17.16.040: Components of solar energy systems, chimneys, elevator towers, screening for mechanical equip-ment that is not integral with building parapets, vents, antennae and steeples shall extend not more than 10 feet above the maximum building height.59’ - 6” TOP OF ROOF66’ - 0” TOP OF STAIRS 47’ - 6” TOP OF ROOF
64
’
-
0
”
T
O
P
OF
R
O
O
F
57
’
-
0
”
T
O
P
OF
R
O
O
F
44
’
-
0
”
F
.
F
.
32
’
-
0
”
F
.
F
.
20
’
-
0
”
F
.
F
.
14
’
-
0
”
B
O
T
OF
C
A
N
O
P
Y
A13
Ma
r
c
h
2
4
,
2
0
1
7
58
1
E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
s
581 Elevations
So
u
t
h
E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
As
s
e
e
n
f
r
o
m
t
h
e
J
a
c
k
H
o
u
s
e
0
8
1/
8
"
=
1
'
-
0
"
SC
A
L
E
:
4
2 11
6
ATTACHMENT 3 ARC2 - 36
A14
Ma
r
c
h
2
4
,
2
0
1
7
58
1
D
e
s
i
g
n
D
e
t
a
i
l
S
h
e
e
t
s
Br
i
c
k
L
i
n
t
e
l
a
t
W
i
n
d
o
w
s
an
d
O
p
e
n
i
n
g
s
St
e
e
l
a
n
d
P
e
r
f
o
r
a
t
e
d
Me
t
a
l
C
a
n
o
p
i
e
s
Ar
c
a
d
e
D
i
n
i
n
g
A
r
e
a
Co
n
c
r
e
t
e
B
u
l
k
h
e
a
d
Pa
s
e
o
D
i
n
i
n
g
A
r
e
a
St
e
e
l
R
o
d
a
n
d
P
l
a
t
e
Ti
e
-
b
a
c
k
s
Cu
s
t
o
m
P
e
r
f
o
r
a
t
e
d
an
d
F
l
a
t
M
e
t
a
l
W
a
l
l
Sc
o
n
c
e
Wr
o
u
g
h
t
I
r
o
n
B
l
a
d
e
S
i
g
n
Re
c
e
s
s
e
d
A
c
c
e
n
t
Co
u
r
s
e
f
o
r
H
o
r
i
z
o
n
t
a
l
Ba
n
d
i
n
g
o
n
B
r
i
c
k
Co
l
u
m
n
s
Wr
o
u
g
h
t
I
r
o
n
Ba
l
c
o
n
i
e
s
Al
u
m
i
n
u
m
F
r
e
n
c
h
Do
o
r
s
Da
r
k
B
r
o
n
z
e
Wr
o
u
g
h
t
I
r
o
n
Br
a
c
k
e
t
Da
r
k
B
r
o
n
z
e
Al
u
m
i
n
u
m
W
i
n
d
o
w
s
at
T
r
a
n
s
o
m
Me
t
a
l
C
a
n
o
p
i
e
s
a
t
St
o
r
e
f
r
o
n
t
O
p
e
n
i
n
g
s
Da
r
k
B
r
o
n
z
e
A
l
u
m
i
n
u
m
Ac
c
o
r
d
i
o
n
D
o
o
r
s
Cu
t
-
o
u
t
A
d
d
r
e
s
s
L
e
t
t
e
r
s
in
M
e
t
a
l
W
a
l
l
P
a
n
e
l
a
t
Re
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
E
n
t
r
y
ATTACHMENT 3 ARC2 - 37
A15
Ma
r
c
h
2
4
,
2
0
1
7
58
1
D
e
s
i
g
n
D
e
t
a
i
l
S
h
e
e
t
s
Pa
n
e
l
to
r
e
d
u
c
e
g
l
a
r
e
ATTACHMENT 3 ARC2 - 38
A16
Ma
r
c
h
2
4
,
2
0
1
7
58
1
C
o
l
o
r
a
n
d
M
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
s
Br
i
c
k
Ro
b
i
n
s
o
n
’
s
“
E
n
g
l
i
s
h
P
u
b
”
Co
r
t
e
n
S
t
e
e
l
P
a
n
e
l
Me
t
a
l
W
a
l
l
an
d
R
o
o
f
P
a
n
e
l
s
Da
r
k
B
r
o
n
z
e
Cu
s
t
o
m
M
e
t
a
l
Wa
l
l
S
c
o
n
c
e
ATTACHMENT 3 ARC2 - 39
A17
Ma
r
c
h
2
4
,
2
0
1
7
ATTACHMENT 3 ARC2 - 40
SC
A
L
E
:
1
/
8
”
=
1
’
-
0
”
SC
A
L
E
:
1
/
8
”
=
1
’
-
0
”
0
4
8
16
32
0
4
8
16
32
17
’
-
6
”
F
.
F
.
29
’
-
6
”
F
.
F
.
42
’
-
0
”
F
.
F
.
54
’
-
6
”
T
O
P
OF
R
O
O
F
17
’
-
6
”
F
.
F
.
29
’
-
6
”
F
.
F
.
42
’
-
0
”
F
.
F
.
54
’
-
6
”
T
O
P
OF
R
O
O
F
63
’
-
6
”
T
O
P
OF
R
O
O
F
63
’
-
6
”
T
O
P
OF
R
O
O
F
Sa
n
L
u
i
s
O
b
i
s
p
o
Z
o
n
i
n
g
R
e
g
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
s
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
1
7
.
1
6
.
0
4
0
:
Co
m
p
o
n
e
n
t
s
o
f
s
o
l
a
r
e
n
e
r
g
y
s
y
s
t
e
m
s
,
c
h
i
m
n
e
y
s
,
el
e
v
a
t
o
r
t
o
w
e
r
s
,
s
c
r
e
e
n
i
n
g
f
o
r
m
e
c
h
a
n
i
c
a
l
e
q
u
i
p
-
me
n
t
t
h
a
t
i
s
n
o
t
i
n
t
e
g
r
a
l
w
i
t
h
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
p
a
r
a
p
e
t
s
,
v
e
n
t
s
,
an
t
e
n
n
a
e
a
n
d
s
t
e
e
p
l
e
s
s
h
a
l
l
e
x
t
e
n
d
n
o
t
m
o
r
e
th
a
n
1
0
f
e
e
t
a
b
o
v
e
t
h
e
m
a
x
i
m
u
m
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
h
e
i
g
h
t
.
A18
Ma
r
c
h
2
4
,
2
0
1
7
Ea
s
t
E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
As
s
e
e
n
f
r
o
m
M
a
r
s
h
S
t
r
e
e
t
No
r
t
h
E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
As
s
e
e
n
f
r
o
m
N
i
p
o
m
o
S
t
r
e
e
t
570 Elevations
57
0
E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
s
ATTACHMENT 3 ARC2 - 41
17
’
-
6
”
F
.
F
.
29
’
-
6
”
F
.
F
.
42
’
-
0
”
F
.
F
.
54
’
-
6
”
T
O
P
OF
R
O
O
F
63
’
-
6
”
T
O
P
OF
R
O
O
F
Sa
n
L
u
i
s
O
b
i
s
p
o
Z
o
n
i
n
g
R
e
g
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
s
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
1
7
.
1
6
.
0
4
0
:
Co
m
p
o
n
e
n
t
s
o
f
s
o
l
a
r
e
n
e
r
g
y
s
y
s
t
e
m
s
,
c
h
i
m
n
e
y
s
,
el
e
v
a
t
o
r
t
o
w
e
r
s
,
s
c
r
e
e
n
i
n
g
f
o
r
m
e
c
h
a
n
i
c
a
l
e
q
u
i
p
-
me
n
t
t
h
a
t
i
s
n
o
t
i
n
t
e
g
r
a
l
w
i
t
h
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
p
a
r
a
p
e
t
s
,
v
e
n
t
s
,
an
t
e
n
n
a
e
a
n
d
s
t
e
e
p
l
e
s
s
h
a
l
l
e
x
t
e
n
d
n
o
t
m
o
r
e
th
a
n
1
0
f
e
e
t
a
b
o
v
e
t
h
e
m
a
x
i
m
u
m
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
h
e
i
g
h
t
.
A19
Ma
r
c
h
2
4
,
2
0
1
7
We
s
t
E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
As
s
e
e
n
f
r
o
m
H
i
g
u
e
r
a
S
t
r
e
e
t
So
u
t
h
E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
As
s
e
e
n
f
r
o
m
t
h
e
J
a
c
k
H
o
u
s
e
SC
A
L
E
:
1
/
8
”
=
1
’
-
0
”
SC
A
L
E
:
1
/
8
”
=
1
’
-
0
”
0
4
8
16
32
0
4
8
16
32
570 Elevations
57
0
E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
s
17
’
-
6
”
F
.
F
.
29
’
-
6
”
F
.
F
.
42
’
-
0
”
F
.
F
.
54
’
-
6
”
T
O
P
OF
R
O
O
F
63
’
-
6
”
T
O
P
OF
R
O
O
F
ATTACHMENT 3 ARC2 - 42
A20
Ma
r
c
h
2
4
,
2
0
1
7
57
0
D
e
s
i
g
n
D
e
t
a
i
l
S
h
e
e
t
ATTACHMENT 3 ARC2 - 43
A21
Ma
r
c
h
2
4
,
2
0
1
7
57
0
C
o
l
o
r
a
n
d
M
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
s
ATTACHMENT 3 ARC2 - 44
A22
Ma
r
c
h
2
4
,
2
0
1
7
ATTACHMENT 3 ARC2 - 45
0
8
'
1
6
'
2
4
'
0
8
'
1
6
'
2
4
'
A23
Ma
r
c
h
2
4
,
2
0
1
7
17'-6" F.F.19'-6" F.F.42'-0" F.F.54'-6" TOP OF ROOF
17
'
-
6
"
F
.
F
.
19
'
-
6
"
F
.
F
.
42
'
-
0
"
F
.
F
.
54
'
-
6
"
T
O
P
OF
R
O
O
F
59
0
E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
s
590 Elevations
So
u
t
h
E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
As
s
e
e
n
f
r
o
m
T
h
e
J
a
c
k
H
o
u
s
e
Ea
s
t
E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
As
s
e
e
n
f
r
o
m
M
a
r
s
h
S
t
r
e
e
t
ATTACHMENT 3 ARC2 - 46
0
8
'
1
6
'
2
4
'
0
8
'
1
6
'
2
4
'
A24
Ma
r
c
h
2
4
,
2
0
1
7
17'-6" F.F.19'-6" F.F.42'-0" F.F.54'-6" TOP OF ROOF
17
'
-
6
"
F
.
F
.
19
'
-
6
"
F
.
F
.
42
'
-
0
"
F
.
F
.
54
'
-
6
"
T
O
P
OF
R
O
O
F
590 Elevations
59
0
E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
s
We
s
t
E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
As
s
e
e
n
f
r
o
m
H
i
g
u
e
r
a
S
t
r
e
e
t
No
r
t
h
E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
As
s
e
e
n
f
r
o
m
N
i
p
o
m
o
S
t
r
e
e
t
ATTACHMENT 3 ARC2 - 47
A25
Ma
r
c
h
2
4
,
2
0
1
7
59
0
D
e
s
i
g
n
D
e
t
a
i
l
S
h
e
e
t
ATTACHMENT 3 ARC2 - 48
A26
Ma
r
c
h
2
4
,
2
0
1
7
59
0
D
e
s
i
g
n
D
e
t
a
i
l
S
h
e
e
t
ATTACHMENT 3 ARC2 - 49
A27
Ma
r
c
h
2
4
,
2
0
1
7
59
0
C
o
l
o
r
a
n
d
M
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
s
ATTACHMENT 3 ARC2 - 50
L1
Ma
r
c
h
2
4
,
2
0
1
7
La
n
d
s
c
a
p
e
P
l
a
n
NORTHATTACHMENT 3 ARC2 - 51
L2
Ma
r
c
h
2
4
,
2
0
1
7
Co
n
c
e
p
t
u
a
l
P
l
a
n
t
i
n
g
P
l
a
n
ep
t
u
a
l
P
l
a
n
t
i
n
g
P
l
a
n
ATTACHMENT 3 ARC2 - 52
Tr
e
e
P
l
a
n
TREE INVENTORY
57
0
M
a
r
s
h
S
t
r
e
e
t
/
5
9
0
M
a
r
s
h
S
t
r
e
e
t
/
5
8
1
H
i
g
u
e
r
a
STATUS
#1
-
F
i
c
u
s
(
2
2
.
2
5
"
)
T
o
r
e
m
a
i
n
#
2
-
F
i
c
u
s
(
3
6
.
7
5
"
)
T
o
r
e
m
a
i
n
#
3
-
R
e
d
w
o
o
d
(
2
0
.
5
0
"
)
T
o
r
e
m
a
i
n
#
4
-
R
e
d
w
o
o
d
(
2
2
.
7
5
"
)
T
o
r
e
m
a
i
n
#
5
-
R
e
d
w
o
o
d
(
2
2
.
5
0
"
)
T
o
r
e
m
a
i
n
#
6
-
R
e
d
w
o
o
d
(
2
4
.
7
5
"
)
T
o
r
e
m
a
i
n
#
7
-
R
e
d
w
o
o
d
(
2
4
.
5
0
"
)
T
o
r
e
m
a
i
n
#
8
-
R
e
d
w
o
o
d
(
2
0
.
7
5
"
)
T
o
r
e
m
a
i
n
#
9
-
R
e
d
w
o
o
d
(
2
0
.
5
0
"
)
T
o
r
e
m
a
i
n
#1
0
-
P
a
p
e
r
B
a
r
k
M
e
l
a
l
e
u
c
a
(
1
0
"
)
T
o
b
e
r
e
m
o
v
e
d
#1
1
-
P
a
p
e
r
B
a
r
k
M
e
l
a
l
e
u
c
a
(
9
"
)
T
o
b
e
r
e
m
o
v
e
d
#1
2
-
P
a
p
e
r
B
a
r
k
M
e
l
a
l
e
u
c
a
(
1
3
"
)
T
o
b
e
r
e
m
o
v
e
d
#1
3
-
P
a
p
e
r
B
a
r
k
M
e
l
a
l
e
u
c
a
(
8
.
5
0
"
)
T
o
b
e
r
e
m
o
v
e
d
#1
4
-
P
a
p
e
r
B
a
r
k
M
e
l
a
l
e
u
c
a
(
1
0
"
)
T
o
b
e
r
e
m
o
v
e
d
#1
5
-
P
a
p
e
r
B
a
r
k
M
e
l
a
l
e
u
c
a
(
4
.
2
5
"
)
T
o
b
e
r
e
m
o
v
e
d
#1
6
-
O
s
a
g
e
(
2
9
"
)
T
o
b
e
r
e
m
o
v
e
d
#1
7
-
P
i
t
t
o
s
p
o
r
u
m
(
6
"
)
T
o
b
e
r
e
m
o
v
e
d
#1
8
-
P
i
t
t
o
s
p
o
r
u
m
(
5
"
)
T
o
b
e
r
e
m
o
v
e
d
#1
9
-
P
i
t
t
o
s
p
o
r
u
m
(
4
"
)
T
o
b
e
r
e
m
o
v
e
d
#2
0
-
P
i
t
t
o
s
p
o
r
u
m
(
4
"
)
T
o
b
e
r
e
m
o
v
e
d
#2
1
-
P
i
t
t
o
s
p
o
r
u
m
(
5
.
5
0
"
)
T
o
b
e
r
e
m
o
v
e
d
#2
2
-
P
i
t
t
o
s
p
o
r
u
m
(
5
"
)
T
o
b
e
r
e
m
o
v
e
d
#2
3
-
A
s
h
(
1
0
.
5
0
&
1
1
.
0
0
"
)
T
o
b
e
r
e
m
o
v
e
d
#2
4
-
A
s
h
(
1
5
.
5
0
"
)
T
o
b
e
r
e
m
o
v
e
d
#2
5
-
J
a
c
a
r
a
n
d
a
(
1
1
.
7
5
"
)
T
o
b
e
r
e
m
o
v
e
d
#2
6
-
B
l
a
c
k
W
a
l
n
u
t
(
2
5
"
)
T
o
r
e
m
a
i
n
#2
7
-
P
a
p
e
r
B
a
r
k
M
e
l
a
l
e
u
c
a
(
1
1
.
0
0
"
)
T
o
b
e
r
e
m
o
v
e
d
#2
8
-
B
r
a
d
f
o
r
d
P
e
a
r
(
5
.
5
0
"
)
T
o
b
e
r
e
m
o
v
e
d
#2
9
-
B
r
a
d
f
o
r
d
P
e
a
r
(
5
.
5
0
"
)
T
o
b
e
r
e
m
o
v
e
d
#3
0
-
W
a
s
h
i
n
g
t
o
n
P
a
l
m
(
2
2
.
7
5
"
)
T
o
b
e
r
e
m
o
v
e
d
#3
1
-
M
e
x
i
c
a
n
S
a
n
d
P
a
l
m
(
2
1
.
7
5
"
)
T
o
b
e
r
e
m
o
v
e
d
#3
2
-
F
i
c
u
s
(
5
.
5
0
"
)
T
o
b
e
r
e
m
oved
#3
3
-
B
r
i
s
b
a
n
e
B
o
x
E
u
c
a
l
y
p
t
u
s
1
1
.
2
5
"
)
T
o
r
e
m
a
i
n
#3
4
-
B
r
i
s
b
a
n
e
B
o
x
E
u
c
a
l
y
p
t
u
s
(
1
1
.
2
5
"
)
T
o
r
e
m
a
i
n
#3
5
-
M
e
x
i
c
a
n
S
a
n
d
P
a
l
m
(
1
8
.
0
0
"
)
T
o
b
e
r
e
m
o
v
e
d
#3
6
-
M
e
x
i
c
a
n
S
a
n
d
P
a
l
m
(
2
0
.
0
0
"
)
T
o
b
e
r
e
m
o
v
e
d
#3
7
-
P
a
p
e
r
B
a
r
k
M
e
l
a
l
e
u
c
a
(
1
2
.
0
0
"
)
T
o
b
e
r
e
m
o
v
e
d
#3
8
-
L
a
g
e
r
s
t
r
o
e
m
i
a
(
2
.
0
0
"
)
T
o
b
e
r
e
m
o
v
e
d
L3
Ma
r
c
h
2
4
,
2
0
1
7
ATTACHMENT 3 ARC2 - 53
L4
Ma
r
c
h
2
4
,
2
0
1
7
La
n
d
s
c
a
p
e
C
o
l
o
r
a
n
d
M
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
s
ATTACHMENT 3 ARC2 - 54
L5
Ma
r
c
h
2
4
,
2
0
1
7
La
n
d
s
c
a
p
e
C
o
l
o
r
a
n
d
M
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
s
ATTACHMENT 3 ARC2 - 55
L6
Ma
r
c
h
2
4
,
2
0
1
7
Gr
e
e
n
B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
F
e
a
t
u
r
e
s
ATTACHMENT 3 ARC2 - 56
A28
Ma
r
c
h
2
4
,
2
0
1
7
Co
n
c
e
p
t
u
a
l
S
i
t
e
L
i
g
h
t
i
n
g
ATTACHMENT 3 ARC2 - 57
A29
Ma
r
c
h
2
4
,
2
0
1
7
Si
g
n
a
g
e
ATTACHMENT 3 ARC2 - 58
Pu
b
l
i
c
A
r
t
A30
Ma
r
c
h
2
4
,
2
0
1
7
ATTACHMENT 3 ARC2 - 59
A31
Ma
r
c
h
2
4
,
2
0
1
7
Pe
d
e
s
t
r
i
a
n
P
a
s
e
o
C
o
m
p
a
r
a
t
i
v
e
E
x
h
i
b
i
t
P
a
g
e
1
o
f
2
ATTACHMENT 3 ARC2 - 60
A32
Ma
r
c
h
2
4
,
2
0
1
7
Pe
d
e
s
t
r
i
a
n
P
a
s
e
o
C
o
m
p
a
r
a
t
i
v
e
E
x
h
i
b
i
t
P
a
g
e
2
o
f
2
ATTACHMENT 3 ARC2 - 61
A33
Ma
r
c
h
2
4
,
2
0
1
7
En
t
r
i
e
s
a
n
d
P
l
a
z
a
P
l
a
n
NORTHATTACHMENT 3 ARC2 - 62
A34
Ma
r
c
h
2
4
,
2
0
1
7
Bi
c
y
c
l
e
C
i
r
c
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
P
l
a
n
ATTACHMENT 3 ARC2 - 63
A35
Ma
r
c
h
2
4
,
2
0
1
7
Ov
e
r
a
l
l
S
i
t
e
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
ATTACHMENT 3 ARC2 - 64
A36
Ma
r
c
h
2
4
,
2
0
1
7
Ja
c
k
H
o
u
s
e
R
e
n
d
e
r
i
n
g
s
ATTACHMENT 3 ARC2 - 65
A37
Ma
r
c
h
2
4
,
2
0
1
7
Ja
c
k
H
o
u
s
e
R
e
n
d
e
r
i
n
g
s
ATTACHMENT 3 ARC2 - 66
A38
Ma
r
c
h
2
4
,
2
0
1
7
Sh
a
d
e
S
t
u
d
i
e
s
-
V
e
r
n
a
l
E
q
u
i
n
o
x
M
a
r
c
h
2
0
t
h
ATTACHMENT 3 ARC2 - 67
A39
Ma
r
c
h
2
4
,
2
0
1
7
Sh
a
d
e
S
t
u
d
i
e
s
-
S
u
m
m
e
r
S
o
l
s
t
i
c
e
J
u
n
e
2
1
s
t
ATTACHMENT 3 ARC2 - 68
A40
Ma
r
c
h
2
4
,
2
0
1
7
Sh
a
d
e
S
t
u
d
i
e
s
-
A
u
t
u
m
n
a
l
E
q
u
i
n
o
x
S
e
p
t
e
m
b
e
r
2
2
n
d
ATTACHMENT 3 ARC2 - 69
A41
Ma
r
c
h
2
4
,
2
0
1
7
Sh
a
d
e
S
t
u
d
i
e
s
-
W
i
n
t
e
r
S
o
l
s
t
i
c
e
-
D
e
c
e
m
b
e
r
2
1
s
t
ATTACHMENT 3 ARC2 - 70
A42
Ma
r
c
h
2
4
,
2
0
1
7
ATTACHMENT 3 ARC2 - 71
A43
Ma
r
c
h
2
4
,
2
0
1
7
Co
n
t
e
x
t
P
e
r
s
p
e
c
t
i
v
e
s
-
H
i
g
u
e
r
a
S
t
r
e
e
t
ATTACHMENT 3 ARC2 - 72
A44
Ma
r
c
h
2
4
,
2
0
1
7
Co
n
t
e
x
t
P
e
r
s
p
e
c
t
i
v
e
s
-
M
a
r
s
h
S
t
r
e
e
t
ATTACHMENT 3 ARC2 - 73
A45
Ma
r
c
h
2
4
,
2
0
1
7
Co
n
t
e
x
t
P
e
r
s
p
e
c
t
i
v
e
s
-
N
i
p
o
m
o
S
t
r
e
e
t
ATTACHMENT 3 ARC2 - 74
HISTORICAL RESOURCE EVALUATION OF
570 MARSH STREET
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Prepared for:
Jennifer Emrick
PB Companies, LLC
3480 South Higuera Street, Suite 130
San Luis Obispo, California 93401
Prepared by:
Michael Hibma, M.A., RPH #603
Amber Long, M.A.
LSA Associates, Inc.
157 Park Place
Point Richmond, California 94801
(510) 236-6810
www.lsa-assoc.com
LSA Project #PBC1502
October 2015
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 75
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. HISTORICAL RESOURCE EVALAUTION OF
OCTOBER 2015 570 MARSH STREET
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 SUMMARY .................................................................................................................................... 1
2.0 REGULATORY CONTEXT .......................................................................................................... 4
2.1 CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT ........................................................... 4
2.2 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO ................................................................................................. 5
3.0 METHODS ...................................................................................................................................... 9
3.1 RECORDS SEARCH ............................................................................................................... 9
3.2 LITERATURE REVIEW ......................................................................................................... 9
3.3 ARCHIVAL RESEARCH ...................................................................................................... 10
3.4 FIELD SURVEY .................................................................................................................... 10
4.0 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION ........................................................................................................ 11
4.1 SITE AND SETTING ............................................................................................................. 11
4.2 BUILDING DESCRIPTION .................................................................................................. 11
5.0 RESEARCH AND FIELD SURVEY RESULTS ......................................................................... 12
5.1 RECORDS SEARCH ............................................................................................................. 12
5.2 LITERATURE AND MAP REVIEW .................................................................................... 13
5.2.2 Literature and Map Review ........................................................................................... 13
5.3 ARCHIVAL RESEARCH ...................................................................................................... 15
5.3.1 Online Research ............................................................................................................ 15
5.3.2 Building Permits ............................................................................................................ 16
5.3.3 City Directories ............................................................................................................. 17
5.4 FIELD SURVEY .................................................................................................................... 18
6.0 ELIGIBILITY EVALUATION ..................................................................................................... 19
6.1 HISTORIC CONTEXT .......................................................................................................... 19
6.1.1 San Luis Obispo ............................................................................................................ 19
6.1.2 Downtown Neighborhood ............................................................................................. 20
6.1.3 570 Marsh Street ........................................................................................................... 20
6.2 ARCHITECTURAL CONTEXT ............................................................................................ 21
6.2.1 Vernacular/National Folk .............................................................................................. 21
6.2.2 John Chapek .................................................................................................................. 22
6.3 APPLICATION OF SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA ................................................................ 23
6.3.1 California Register of Historical Resources Criteria ..................................................... 23
6.3.2 City of San Luis Obispo Historic Preservation Ordinance Criteria ............................... 24
6.4 INTEGRITY ASSESSMENT ................................................................................................. 28
7.0 CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................................. 30
Table 3: Resource Status Summary ......................................................................................... 30
8.0 REFERENCES CONSULTED ..................................................................................................... 31
FIGURES
Figure 1: Regional Location and Project site ......................................................................................... 2
Figure 2: Project Site .............................................................................................................................. 3
TABLES
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 76
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. HISTORICAL RESOURCE EVALAUTION OF
OCTOBER 2015 570 MARSH STREET
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
ii
Table 1: Building Permit Information .................................................................................................. 16
Table 2: City Directory Information ..................................................................................................... 17
Table 3: Resource Status Summary ...................................................................................................... 30
APPENDIX
Appendix: California Department of Parks and Recreation 523 Series Form Record
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 77
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. HISTORICAL RESOURCE EVALAUTION OF
OCTOBER 2015 570 MARSH STREET
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P:\PBC1502_570_Marsh\HRE\RTC_4.27.17\LSA_570_MARSH_STREET_HRE_(RTC_4.27.2017).doc (04/27/17) 1
1.0 SUMMARY
LSA Associates, Inc. (LSA), prepared this Historical Resource Evaluation (HRE), the building at 570
Marsh Street, San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County (Figures 1 and 2). The purpose of this HRE
is to assess whether the building at 570 Marsh Street is eligible for inclusion in California Register of
Historical Resources or qualifies as significant under the Historic Preservation Ordinance (HPO) of
the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code. To accomplish this task, LSA conducted background research,
a field survey, and resource recordation to prepare this evaluation. This document includes (1) a
description of the regulatory context for cultural resources in the project site; (2) a summary of the
methods used to conduct the analysis; (3) a description of the building at 570 Marsh Street, including
its historical context; and (4) an eligibility evaluation.
The project site is included as part of a larger project comprising several parcels (APNs 005-511-013;
-023; -024; and -025) on the western edge of downtown San Luis Obispo. Known as “San Luis
Square,” the proposed project would redevelop of a portion of the block bound by Higuera Street,
Nipomo Street, and Marsh Street. The project would combine the four parcels, demolish the buildings
they contain, and construct a mixed-use development consisting of three four-story buildings,
approximately 54 to 60 feet tall, with two levels of subterranean parking. The project would include
high-density residential, high-end commercial, pedestrian pathways, bicycle parking, 154 public
parking spaces, and mid-block pedestrian crossings. The project would contain approximately 24,900
square-feet of retail space and 15,940 square-feet of public areas that will include benches, bike
parking, landscaping, decorative lighting, outdoor eating areas, interactive signage, and a public art
sculpture. The residential portion of this project will include 60 residential units consisting of a mix of
studios, singe bedroom, and two bedroom spaces.
Based on the results of this HRE, LSA has documented that the building at 570 Marsh Street is
associated with the early 20th century development of San Luis Obispo; it was constructed by John
Chapek, a well-known local building contractor who constructed many ornate houses in San Luis
Obispo1, as a retirement residence for Frank Mello, a Morro Bay-based rancher. The building is also
associated with the Vernacular/National Folk architectural style. However, no evidence was identified
to elevate the building in associative stature; it does not possess specific, important associations with
these historic contexts and does not appear eligible for inclusion in the California Register of
Historical Resources. For the same reasons, the building is also does not appear to be a candidate for
inclusion in the City of San Luis Obispo Master List of Historic Resources. Based on the results of
this study, LSA concludes that the building at 570 Marsh Street is not a historical resource for the
purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (California Public Resources Code §21084.1).
1 According to the City’s The Chapek House, a Victorian residence built in 1921 at 843 Upham Street
(Assessor Parcel Number 003-647-001) is Resource #152 in the City's Master List of Historic
Properties (City of San Luis Obispo 2017).
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 78
Perimeter Rd
Fredericks St
H i g u e r a S t
San
L
u
i
s
D
r
Bis
h
o
p
S
t
A
u
g
u
s
t
a
S
t
Lawrence Dr
Me
a
d
o
w
S
t
Margarita A
v
e
Sandercock St
Branch St
B u c h o n S t
Atasc
a
d
e
r
o
S
t
V
i
c
t
o
r
i
a
A
v
e
M
c
m
i
l
l
a
n
A
v
e
G
r
a
n
d
A
v
e
Sa
n
t
a
B
a
r
b
a
r
a
S
t
Caudill St
£¤101
ST1
ST1
C
h
orro
St
S
H i g
u
e
r
a
S
t
S
a
n
L
u
i
s
D
r
C
alifornia
Blv
d
M o n t e r e y S t
Orcutt RdMadonnaRd
M a r s h S t
C
h
o
r
r
o
S
t
W F o o t h i l l
B l v d E F o o t h i l l B l v d
Lincoln
S
t
H i g u e r a S t
B
r
o
a
d
S
t
Elk
s
L
n
L
o
s
O
s
o
s
V
alle
y
R
d
Prad
o
R
d
S
a
n
t
a
R
o
s
a
S
t
B
r
o
a
d
S
t
T
o
r
o
S
t
O
s
o
s
S
t
J
o
h
n
s
o
n
A
v
e
South St
P
r
i
n
c
e
t
o
n
P
l
L o o m i s S t
Mill S
t
Slack St
R
o
c
k
v
i
e
w
P
l
El
M
e
r
c
a
d
o
Palm
S
t
P h i l l i p s L n
V e
r
d
e
D
r
P i s m o S t
R a f a e l
W a y
Upha
m
S
t
High St
A
v
a
l
o
n
S
t
G
r
o
v
e
S
t
Mccollum St
P a c i f i c S t
H i l l S t
Ce
r
r
o
C
t
E
l
m
C
t
B
e
e
b
e
e
S
t
D
e
e
r
R
d
T
o
r
o
S
t
T
a
h
o
e
R
d
Missio
n
Ln
F e l
M a r Dr
Warren
Way
C
u
e
s
t
a
D
r
Daly Dr
Cam
p
u
s
Way
N
i
p
o
m
o
S
t
P
e
p
p
e
r
S
t
H
u
a
s
n
a
D
r
Fel to n
Wa y
I s l a y S t
Cerro
Romauldo Ave
B
e
a
c
h
S
t
G
a
r
d
e
n
S
t
M
o
r
r
o
S
t
C
a
r
m
e
l
S
t
Vi
s
t
a
D
e
L
a
C
u
e
s
t
a
E l l a S t
Murray St
Rougeot Pl
F
i
x
li
n
i
S
t
Woodbridge St
S e r r ano Dr
C e rr o
R o m a u l d o
F
l
o
r
a
S
t
Ja
y
c
e
e
D
r
San
Jose
C
t
L e f f S t
P
a
l
o
m
a
r
A
v
e
L
i
n
c
o
l
n
S
t
Capito
l
i
o
W
a
y
San
C
a
r
l
o
s
D
r
Cor
r
a
l
i
t
o
s
A
v
e
La
u
r
e
l
L
n
B
alb
o
a
S
t
Prado Rd
Herm
o
s
a
Way
Sa
n
t
a
L
u
c
i
a
D
r
L
a
C
a
n
a
d
a
D
r
Lo
m
a
Bo
n
i
t
a
D
r
Del Nort
e
W
a
y
D a n a S t
P
a
c
h
e
c
o
W
a
y
S
i
e
r
r
a
W
a
y
Laguna LakePark andNatural Reserve
San LuisObispo HighSchool
B
r
i
z
z
i o l a r i
C
r
e
e k
P e r f u m o
C r e e k
O
l
d
G
a
r
d
e
n
C
r
e
e
k
S t e n n e r
C r e e k
S a n L u i s
O b i s p o C r e e k
LagunaLake
SOURCE: ESRI StreetMap North America (2012).
FIGURE 1
Historical Resource Evaluation of 570 Marsh StreetSan Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California
Regional Location and Project Area
0 1000 2000
FEET
I:\PBC1502\GIS\Maps\Cultural\Figure 1_Regional Location and Project Area.mxd (8/27/2015)
570 Marsh Street
SantaSantaBarbaraBarbaraCountyCounty
AtascaderoAtascadero
TempletonTempleton
PasoPasoRoblesRobles
PismoPismoBeachBeachGroverGroverBeachBeach NipomoNipomo
MorroMorroBayBay
£¤101
ST1
ST1
ST41ST46 ST46
OrcuttOrcutt
San LuisSan LuisObispoObispo
SantaSantaMariaMaria
San LuisSan LuisObispoObispoCountyCounty
Pacific
Ocean
570 Marsh Street
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 79
SOURCE: USGS 7.5-minute Topo Quad - San Luis Obispo, Calif. (1994).
\\ptr11\images\PBC1502\GIS\Maps\Cultural\Figure 2_Project Area.mxd (8/27/2015)
FIGURE 2
Historical Resource Evaluation of 570 Marsh Street San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California
Project Site
0 1000 2000
FEET
570 Marsh Street
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 80
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. HISTORICAL RESOURCE EVALAUTION OF
OCTOBER 2015 570 MARSH STREET
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P:\PBC1502_570_Marsh\HRE\RTC_4.27.17\LSA_570_MARSH_STREET_HRE_(RTC_4.27.2017).doc (04/27/17) 4
2.0 REGULATORY CONTEXT
2.1 CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
Discretionary project approvals must comply with the requirements of the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA). The term CEQA uses for significant cultural resources is “historical resource,”
which is defined as any resource that meets one or more of the following criteria:
• Listed in, or eligible for listing in, the California Register of Historical Resources;
• Listed in a local register of historical resources;
• Identified as significant in an historical resource survey meeting the requirements of section
5024.1(g) of the Public Resources Code; or
• Determined to be an historical resource by a project's lead agency.
An historical resource consists of “Any object, building, structure, site, area, place, record, or manu-
script which a lead agency determines to be historically significant or significant in the architectural,
engineering, scientific, economic, agricultural, educational, social, political, military, or cultural
annals of California . . . Generally, a resource shall be considered by the lead agency to be
‘historically significant’ if the resource meets the criteria for listing on the California Register of
Historical Resources” (CCR Title 14(3) section 15064.5(a)(3)). For a cultural resource to qualify for
listing in the California Register it must be significant under one or more of the following criteria:
Criterion 1: Is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad
patterns of California’s history and cultural heritage;
Criterion 2: Is associated with the lives of persons important in our past;
Criterion 3: Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of
construction, or represents the work of an important creative individual, or possesses
high artistic values; or
Criterion 4: Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.
In addition to being significant under one or more criteria, a resource must retain enough of its
historic character and appearance to be recognizable as an historical resource and retain integrity,
which is defined as the ability of a resource to convey the reasons for its significance (CCR Title 14
§4852(c)). Generally, a cultural resource must be 50 years old or older to qualify for the California
Register.2
National Register Bulletin 16: How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation (National
Park Service 1997:2) states that the quality of significance is present in districts, sites, buildings,
structures, and objects that possess integrity. There are seven aspects of integrity to consider when
evaluating a cultural resource: location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and
association:
2 Generally, for a cultural resource to be considered for listing in the California Register —and a historical resource for
purposes of CEQA—it must be at least 50 years old or enough time must have passed for there to be a scholarly
perspective on the resource and the reasons for its potential significance.
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 81
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. HISTORICAL RESOURCE EVALAUTION OF
OCTOBER 2015 570 MARSH STREET
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P:\PBC1502_570_Marsh\HRE\RTC_4.27.17\LSA_570_MARSH_STREET_HRE_(RTC_4.27.2017).doc (04/27/17) 5
• Location is the place where the historic property was constructed or the place where the historic
event occurred. The actual location of a historic property, complemented by its setting, is
particularly important in recapturing the sense of historic events and persons.
• Design is the combination of elements that create the form, plan, space, structure, and style of a
property. Design includes such elements as organization of space, proportion, scale, technology,
ornamentation, and materials.
• Setting is the physical environment of a historic property. Setting refers to the character of the
place in which the property played its historical role. Physical features that constitute the setting
of a historic property can be either natural or manmade, including topographic features,
vegetation, paths or fences, or relationships between buildings and other features or open space.
• Materials are the physical elements that were combined or deposited during a particular period of
time and in a particular pattern or configuration to form a historic property.
• Workmanship is the physical evidence of the crafts of a particular culture or people during any
given period in history or prehistory. It is the evidence of the artisan's labor and skill in
constructing or altering a building, structure, object, or site.
• Feeling is a property's expression of the aesthetic or historic sense of a particular period of time.
It results from the presence of physical features that, taken together, convey the property's historic
character.
• Association is the direct link between an important historic event or person and a historic
property.
“To retain historic integrity a property will always possess several, and usually most, of the aspects”
(National Park Service 1997:44).
2.2 CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
Chapter 14.01 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code contains the Historic Preservation Ordinance
(HPO). Enacted by the San Luis Obispo City Council in 2010, the HPO authorized the creation of a
Cultural Heritage Committee (CHC) to implement the ordinance, which is tasked with making
recommendations to decision-making bodies regarding:
• Development of guidelines to implement the HPO assist persons planning development projects
subject to CHC review; and for city and property-owners decisions regarding cultural resources in
the city;
• Develop and maintain the city’s master lists of Historic Resources and Contributing Historic
Resources which are those properties, area, sites, buildings, structures, or other features having
significant historical, cultural, architectural, community, scientific or aesthetic value to the
citizens of San Luis Obispo;
• Actions subject to discretionary city review and approval which may affect significant
archaeological, cultural or historic resources;
• Apply architectural, historic, and cultural preservation standards and guidelines to projects and
approvals involving historic sites, districts, and structures;
• Develop and participate in public education outreach efforts;
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 82
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. HISTORICAL RESOURCE EVALAUTION OF
OCTOBER 2015 570 MARSH STREET
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P:\PBC1502_570_Marsh\HRE\RTC_4.27.17\LSA_570_MARSH_STREET_HRE_(RTC_4.27.2017).doc (04/27/17) 6
• Provide recommendations to decision-makers regarding alterations and demolitions of listed
resources and properties within historic preservation districts;
• Provide recommendations in developing incentive programs directed at preserving and
maintaining cultural resources; and
• Assist property owners in preparing local, state, and federal historical resource nominations to
utilize preservation incentives, including Mill’s Act and federal tax incentives.
In addition to its policy development, resource management, and public outreach and documentation
assistance duties, the CHC is authorized to review, comment, and make recommendations on
applications to that may result in a change to a resource listed in the Master List of Historic Resources
or Master List of Contributing Historic Resources, or potentially affect an existing or proposed
historic district. Examples include applications to alter, demolish, or relocate listed buildings or
structures, and for new construction within historic districts. The CHC is also authorized to review
and comment on statements of historic significance and on proposed actions by public agencies that
may affect cultural resources.
The CHC also reviews and comments on applications for inclusion in the Master List of Historic
Resource or Master List of Contributing Historic Resources. Designation requests may originate from
the property owner, the CHC, the Architectural Review Commission, the Planning Commission, or
the San Luis Obispo City Council. In considering designation applications, the resource must be at
least 50 years old, exhibit a high level of historic integrity, and satisfy at least one of the following
criteria set forth by the HPO beginning at Section 14.01.070 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code:
A. Architectural Criteria: Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or
method of construction, or represents the work of a master, or possesses high artistic values.
(1) Style: Describes the form of a building, such as size, structural shape and details within
that form (e.g. arrangement of windows and doors, ornamentation, etc.). Building style will
be evaluated as a measure of:
a. The relative purity of a traditional style;
b. Rarity of existence at any time in the locale; and/or current rarity although the
structure reflects a once popular style;
c. Traditional, vernacular and/or eclectic influences that represent a particular social
milieu and period of the community; and/or the uniqueness of hybrid styles and how
these styles are put together.
(2) Design: Describes the architectural concept of a structure and the quality of artistic merit
and craftsmanship of the individual parts. Reflects how well a particular style or combination
of styles are expressed through compatibility and detailing of elements. Also, suggests degree
to which the designer (e.g., carpenter-builder) accurately interpreted and conveyed the
style(s). Building design will be evaluated as a measure of:
a. Notable attractiveness with aesthetic appeal because of its artistic merit, details and
craftsmanship (even if not necessarily unique);
b. An expression of interesting details and eclecticism among carpenter-builders,
although the craftsmanship and artistic quality may not be superior.
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 83
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. HISTORICAL RESOURCE EVALAUTION OF
OCTOBER 2015 570 MARSH STREET
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P:\PBC1502_570_Marsh\HRE\RTC_4.27.17\LSA_570_MARSH_STREET_HRE_(RTC_4.27.2017).doc (04/27/17) 7
(3) Architect: Describes the professional (an individual or firm) directly responsible for the
building design and plans of the structure. The architect will be evaluated as a reference to:
a. A notable architect (e.g., Wright, Morgan), including architects who made
significant contributions to the state or region, or an architect whose work influenced
development of the city, state or nation.
b. An architect who, in terms of craftsmanship, made significant contributions to San
Luis Obispo (e.g., Abrahams who, according to local sources, designed the house at
810 Osos Street - Frank Avila's father's home - built between 1927 – 30).
B. Historic Criteria
(1) History – Person: Associated with the lives of persons important to local, California, or
national history. Historic person will be evaluated as a measure of the degree to which a
person or group was:
a. Significant to the community as a public leader (e.g., mayor, congress member,
etc.) or for his or her fame and outstanding recognition - locally, regionally, or
nationally.
b. Significant to the community as a public servant or person who made early,
unique, or outstanding contributions to the community, important local affairs or
institutions (e.g., council members, educators, medical professionals, clergymen,
railroad officials).
(2) History – Event: Associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the
broad patterns of local or regional history or the cultural heritage of California or the United
States. Historic event will be evaluated as a measure of:
(i) A landmark, famous, or first-of-its-kind event for the city - regardless of whether
the impact of the event spread beyond the city.
(ii) A relatively unique, important or interesting contribution to the city (e.g., the Ah
Louis Store as the center for Chinese-American cultural activities in early San Luis
Obispo history).
(3) History-Context: Associated with and also a prime illustration of predominant patterns
of political, social, economic, cultural, medical, educational, governmental, military,
industrial, or religious history. Historic context will be evaluated as a measure of the degree
to which it reflects:
a. Early, first, or major patterns of local history, regardless of whether the historic
effects go beyond the city level, that are intimately connected with the building
(e.g., County Museum).
b. Secondary patterns of local history, but closely associated with the building
(e.g., Park Hotel).
C. Integrity: Authenticity of an historical resource’s physical identity evidenced by the survival of
characteristics that existed during the resource’s period of significance. Integrity will
be evaluated by a measure of:
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 84
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. HISTORICAL RESOURCE EVALAUTION OF
OCTOBER 2015 570 MARSH STREET
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P:\PBC1502_570_Marsh\HRE\RTC_4.27.17\LSA_570_MARSH_STREET_HRE_(RTC_4.27.2017).doc (04/27/17) 8
(1) Whether or not a structure occupies its original site and/or whether or not the
original foundation has been changed, if known.
(2) The degree to which the structure has maintained enough of its historic character
or appearance to be recognizable as an historic resource and to convey the reason(s)
for its significance.
(3) The degree to which the resource has retained its design, setting, materials,
workmanship, feeling and association.
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 85
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. HISTORICAL RESOURCE EVALAUTION OF
OCTOBER 2015 570 MARSH STREET
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P:\PBC1502_570_Marsh\HRE\RTC_4.27.17\LSA_570_MARSH_STREET_HRE_(RTC_4.27.2017).doc (04/27/17) 9
3.0 METHODS
LSA conducted a records search, literature review, archival research, field survey, and eligibility
evaluation to prepare this study. Each task is described below.
3.1 RECORDS SEARCH
At the request of LSA, staff at the Central Coast Information Center (CCIC) conducted a cultural
resources records search of the project site and adjacent parcels on August 31, 2015. The CCIC is an
affiliate of the State of California Office of Historic Preservation and the official state repository of
cultural resource records and reports for San Luis Obispo County. The records search was done to
identify previous cultural resources and associated documentation in and adjacent to the project site.
As part of the records search, LSA also reviewed the following federal, state, and local inventories:
• California Points of Historical Interest (California Office of Historic Preservation 1992);
• California Historical Landmarks (California Office of Historic Preservation 1996);
• Five Views: An Ethnic Historic Site Survey for California (California Office of Historic
Preservation 1988);
• Directory of Properties in the Historic Property Data File (California Office of Historic
Preservation, April 15, 2012). The directory includes the listings of the National Register of
Historic Places, National Historic Landmarks and the California Register of Historical Resources;
• City of San Luis Obispo Citywide Historic Context Statement (Historic Resources Group 2013);
• City of San Luis Obispo Master List of Historic Resources (City of San Luis Obispo 2012);
• City of San Luis Obispo Master List of Contributing Historic Resources (Historic Resources
Group 2013); and
• 75 SLO City Sites (Taylor and Lees 2010).
3.2 LITERATURE REVIEW
LSA reviewed the following publications, maps, and websites for historical information about the
project site and its vicinity:
• California Place Names (Gudde 1998);
• Historic Spots in California (Hoover et al. 1990);
• California 1850: A Snapshot in Time (Marschner 2000);
• Historical Atlas of California (Hayes 2007);
• San Luis Obispo Quadrangle, 60-minute topographic quadrangle (U.S. Geological Survey 1900);
• San Luis Obispo, Calif., 15-minute topographic quadrangle (U.S. Geological Survey 1897, 1942,
1952);
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 86
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. HISTORICAL RESOURCE EVALAUTION OF
OCTOBER 2015 570 MARSH STREET
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P:\PBC1502_570_Marsh\HRE\RTC_4.27.17\LSA_570_MARSH_STREET_HRE_(RTC_4.27.2017).doc (04/27/17) 10
• San Luis Obispo, Calif., 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle (U.S. Geological Survey 1965, 1979,
1995);
• Sanborn Fire Insurance Company Maps for San Luis Obispo (1886, 1888, 1891, 1903, 1905,
1909, 1926, 1950); and
• Calisphere at http://www.calisphere.universityofcalifornia.edu.
Please see Section 8.0 (References Consulted) for a full list of sources consulted.
3.3 ARCHIVAL RESEARCH
In September 2015, LSA conducted multiple research visits to the San Luis Obispo County Assessor
and Recorder offices, the City of San Luis Obispo Community Development Department and Public
Works Department offices, the local archives room at the History Center of San Luis Obispo County,
the University Archives and Special Collections at the Robert E. Kennedy Library at California
Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, and the San Luis Obispo Branch of the San Luis
Obispo County Library. The archival research included the examination of local histories, maps,
images, government records, newspaper s, city directories, and previous surveys for historical
information about the building at 570 Marsh Street. Information identified included former owners,
past land use activity, construction permits, building alternation dates, and the architectural context of
the neighborhood.
3.4 FIELD SURVEY
LSA cultural resource analyst Amber Long, M.A., conducted a field survey of the building at 570
Marsh Street and a cursory visual review of the surrounding neighborhood on August 27, 2015. The
exterior of the building was reviewed and photographed, as was the context of the surrounding
neighborhood.
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 87
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. HISTORICAL RESOURCE EVALAUTION OF
OCTOBER 2015 570 MARSH STREET
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P:\PBC1502_570_Marsh\HRE\RTC_4.27.17\LSA_570_MARSH_STREET_HRE_(RTC_4.27.2017).doc (04/27/17) 11
4.0 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
4.1 SITE AND SETTING
The project site is in Section 35, Township 30 South, Range 12 East, Mount Diablo Baseline and
Meridian, as depicted on the USGS San Luis Obispo, CA topographic quadrangle (USGS 1995)
(Figure 2). The building is located on APN 003-511-023, a 5,000-square-foot/0.092-acre rectangular
parcel on Block 62, located on the western fringe of San Luis Obispo’s downtown area. The project
site is bordered on the east by a single-story building built circa 1950 at 578 Marsh Street and
currently used as a beauty salon; on the north by a two-story bank building constructed in 1997 at 581
Higuera Street; on the south by Marsh Street; and on the west by the Robert Jack House (a.k.a., the
Jack House). The Jack House is a two-story Italianate residence constructed in 1882 at 536 Marsh
Street; in addition to the Italianate residence, the property also contains a detached wash house, a
former carriage house, and landscaped gardens. The property, known as the Jack House and Gardens,
is managed by the City of San Luis Obispo Department of Parks and Recreation. The Jack House is
listed in the National Register of Historic Places (National Register), the California Register of
Historical Resources (California Register), and in the City of San Luis Obispo’s Master List of
Historic Resources. The project site and adjacent areas are not located within or adjacent to an
identified historic district.
4.2 BUILDING DESCRIPTION
This building is single-story, approximately 1,000-square-foot wood-frame residence built in 1920 on
a rectangular plan. The building was constructed in a Vernacular/National Folk style and is covered
by a low-pitched, cross-gabled roof clad in composition asphalt roofing. The roof has wide, exposed
eaves with decorative knee-brackets. The walls are clad in horizontal, wood lap siding. The building
rests on combination post-and-pier and concrete perimeter foundation. No indication of a cellar or
basement was located. The main, south-facing asymmetrical façade features a projecting wing with a
full-height, three-part bay window. The main entrance is set in the inside edge of the south-facing
projecting wing and consists of a replacement, metal-skinned four-paneled door, and is accessed via a
set of brick-steps to a brick-covered front porch. The windows are a combination of the original
wood-frame double-hung sash windows on the east, south, and west-facing facades and replacement
windows on the southern, street-facing façade set within wide surrounds. The building is in an urban,
mixed commercial and residential setting on the western edge of downtown San Luis Obispo. This
building appears in fair condition. Landscaping elements include ground cover and shrubs, and
several mature redwood trees along the western parcel boundary.
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 88
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. HISTORICAL RESOURCE EVALAUTION OF
OCTOBER 2015 570 MARSH STREET
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P:\PBC1502_570_Marsh\HRE\RTC_4.27.17\LSA_570_MARSH_STREET_HRE_(RTC_4.27.2017).doc (04/27/17) 12
5.0 RESEARCH AND FIELD SURVEY RESULTS
5.1 RECORDS SEARCH
No previously recorded or listed cultural resources were identified within the project site. One
resource, P-40-040140, the Robert Jack House (a.k.a., the Jack House), is west of and adjacent to the
project site with the address of 536 Marsh Street. The Jack House is a two-story Italianate residence
constructed in 1882 and comprising a detached wash house, a former carriage house, and gardens.
The Jack House is listed in the National Register and in the City of San Luis Obispo’s Master List of
Historic Resources. Another resource, P-40-040141, located south of and across Marsh Street from
the project site, is the Kaetzel House, a two-story Carpenter Gothic residence constructed in 1882. s
The Kaetzel House is listed in the City of San Luis Obispo’s Master List of Historic Resources. Both
the Jack House and Kaetzel House qualify as “historical resources” under the California
Environmental Quality Act, as well as Section 14.01.020 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code.
The records search identified seven cultural resource surveys conducted within and adjacent to the
project site. Of these reports, only one identified the building at 570 Marsh Street. These surveys and
their findings are presented chronologically and described below.
• Bente and Hilderman-Smith (1980) conducted a study that included the entirety of the project
site. This study consisted of a literature search and field reviews for 52 potential pole locations
for an early warning system. No cultural resources in or adjacent to the project site were
identified by the study.
• City of San Luis Obispo (1983) prepared a study that included the project site. This document
included a comprehensive architectural survey and photographical inventory of the city’s pre-
World War II-era buildings. Those found significant by the City’s Cultural Heritage Committee
were included in the Master List of Historic Resources or included as contributing elements to
candidate historic districts. The building at 570 Marsh Street in the project site was not included
among those buildings deemed significant and was not listed (City of San Luis Obispo 1983).
• Brock and Wall (1986) prepared a study that included the project site. This report presented a
cultural resources assessment for proposed improvements to San Luis Obispo Creek,
approximately two blocks north of the project site. The study identified and recorded 140
historical buildings, four bridges, and a cemetery. The building at 570 Marsh Street was
identified, described, and considered as an “unknown” property which indicated that it was either
“a good example of common types, [or a] poor example of structures with other than architectural
value, [or] situations where more information needs to be obtained.” The building in the project
site at 570 Marsh Street was not specifically identified or discussed (Brock and Wall 1986:74).
• Singer, Atwood, and Frierman (1993) prepared an archaeological study of the section of Marsh
Street south of and adjacent to the project site for the City of San Luis Obispo Wastewater
Division. The study contains, archaeological monitoring results associated with an expansion of
the city’s wastewater treatment system. No cultural resources in or adjacent to the project site
were identified by the study (Singer, Atwood, and Frierman 1993).
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 89
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. HISTORICAL RESOURCE EVALAUTION OF
OCTOBER 2015 570 MARSH STREET
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P:\PBC1502_570_Marsh\HRE\RTC_4.27.17\LSA_570_MARSH_STREET_HRE_(RTC_4.27.2017).doc (04/27/17) 13
• Ethan Bertrando and Betsey Bertrando (2003) prepared a study or the City of San Luis Obispo
Public Works Department that included the project site. The report consisted of a cultural
resource inventory and field survey of eight city blocks comprising the city’s downtown core. No
cultural resources in or adjacent to the project site were identified by the study. The study
concluded that although ground exposure was limited, as most of the area is paved, archival
research indicates that “the potential for encountering cultural resources is high and earth
disturbing activities should be monitored by a qualified archaeologist.” The building at 570
Marsh Street was not expressly identified or discussed (Bertrando and Bertrando 1983:1).
• Bertrando & Bertrando Research Consultants (2004) prepared a for Michael Hodge of
Engineering Development Associates, San Luis Obispo. The report consisted of a cultural
resource inventory and evaluation of the Richardson Properties located south of and across Marsh
Street from the project site at 575 and 579 Marsh Street (APN 003-514-003) and 1213 Nipomo
Street (APN 003-514-011). No cultural resources in or adjacent to the project site were identified
by the study (Bertrando and Bertrando 2004:1).
• Bertrando & Bertrando Research Consultants (2005) prepared a supplemental study of the earlier
document referenced above. The study consisted of an evaluation of two residential properties at
577 Marsh Street and 1221 Nipomo Street. No cultural resources in or adjacent to the project site
were identified by the study (Bertrando and Bertrando 2005:1).
5.2 LITERATURE AND MAP REVIEW
LSA reviewed online materials, including scanned photographs and written materials, to obtain
information about the use and occupancy of the project site through time.
5.2.2 Literature and Map Review
Uniform residential development is depicted in and around the project site on the San Luis Obispo,
Calif., 15-minute quadrangle (USGS 1897). The parcel containing 570 Marsh Street, and most of the
north side of Marsh Street between Nipomo and Carmel streets, is developed with eight uniformly
spaced residential properties however, specific footprints of individual buildings or any associated
outbuildings are not depicted. The San Luis Obispo, Calif., 60-minute quadrangle depicts the building
at 570 Marsh Street and surrounding area in 1897. Marsh Street east of the project site is relatively
developed and is part of the emerging downtown core (USGS 1900). The properties along both sides
of Marsh Street, which includes the project site and adjacent properties, are fully developed on the
San Luis Obispo, Calif., 15-minute quadrangle (USGS 1942). Subsequent versions of the San Luis
Obispo, Calif., 7.5 and 15-minute quadrangles depict 570 Marsh Street and surrounding area in a
shaded pink color without individual building footprints depicted, indicating a high density of
development in the area (USGS 1952, 1965, 1979, 1995). The exception is the Jack House. The
footprint of the Jack House residence is depicted in a lighter shade of pink and “Jack House” label
affixed on the 1952, 1965, and 1995 San Luis Obispo, Calif., 7.5-minute quadrangles. The Jack
House footprint and label are not depicted on the 1979 7.5-minute quadrangle.
The 1886 Sanborn map of 570 Marsh Street depicts a square-shaped, single-story, wood-framed,
single-family residential building with the address of “7 Marsh.” The building is sited at the
southwestern corner of the 100-by-100-foot parcel and has a shallow street setback. The building has
a full-length front porch that faces the street, and a partial-width back porch facing a detached, single
story wood-framed building labeled “Shed.” No other buildings, structures, or objects are shown. The
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 90
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. HISTORICAL RESOURCE EVALAUTION OF
OCTOBER 2015 570 MARSH STREET
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P:\PBC1502_570_Marsh\HRE\RTC_4.27.17\LSA_570_MARSH_STREET_HRE_(RTC_4.27.2017).doc (04/27/17) 14
building is located in a lightly developed, mixed-use area with single-family dwellings on variously-
sized parcels with varied street setbacks. Many of these residential properties have associated
outbuildings, suggesting a semi-rural area of mostly small farms. The Jack House is depicted on a
parcel between Higuera and Marsh streets. The main house fronts Higuera Street and contains five
detached outbuildings. Other land uses depicted include commercial activity, including a marble
cutter at the southwestern corner of Nipomo and Higuera streets, the “San Luis Obispo Gas Works,”
and a “Brewery” located two blocks north of the project site (Sanborn-Perris Map Co., Ltd. 1886).
The 1888 Sanborn map depicts the building at 570 Marsh Street and associated built environment in a
similar configuration as shown two years earlier (Sanborn-Perris Map Co., Ltd. 1888). The 1891
Sanborn map depicts the square, 100-foot-by-100 foot parcel shown three years earlier that contains
the project site subdivided into two 100-foot-by-50-foot parcels. The building at 570 Marsh Street has
the address of “36-37 Marsh” and retains its square footprint. The detached shed also remains. The
new adjacent parcel, with an address of “34-35 Marsh,” contains a single-story, T-shaped residence
covered by a wood-shake roof. It has a full-width front porch that faces Marsh Street. A new corral
and “Buggy Shed” are depicted on the Jack House property (Sanborn-Perris Map Co., Ltd. 1891).
The 1903 Sanborn map depicts most of the built environment shown 12 years earlier. Notable
changes include the project site parcel clipped at the northwest corner to accommodate a new
landlocked parcel north of and adjacent to the project site. Within the project site, the square-shaped
detached shed along the western parcel boundary depicted earlier was demolished and replaced with a
smaller, rectangular-shaped shed located at the northwestern corner of the house. Changes nearby
include increasing residential in-fill development across Nipomo Street (Sanborn-Perris Map Co.,
Ltd. 1903).
The 1905 Sanborn map depicts the same built environment shown two years earlier in 1903 (Sanborn-
Perris Map Co., Ltd. 1905). The 1909 Sanborn map depicts the same built environment as shown four
years earlier in 1905. Discernable changes include (1) the address of the building in the project site is
shown as “570 Marsh,” (2) the “Maple Grove Creamery” is depicted at the corner of Marsh and
Nipomo streets, and (3) the corral is gone and several new outbuildings are depicted on the Jack
House property (Sanborn-Perris Map Co., Ltd. 1909).
The 1926 Sanborn map depicts the original configuration of the building currently in the project site.
The building has a square footprint with a short projecting porch and main entrance at the right side
of the south-facing façade. A short, square-shaped projecting room (perhaps a bathroom) is at the far
right side of the rear, north-facing façade. The building is covered by a shake roof and rests on an
undetermined foundation. A single-story, detached building is depicted behind the house at the
northeastern corner of the parcel and is labeled with an “A,” indicating it is an automobile garage
(Sanborn-Perris Map Co., Ltd. 1949). Other notable changes include the alteration of the building east
of and adjacent to the project site. A large addition is shown on the rear, north-facing façade. East of
this building the “Maple Grove Creamery,” depicted in 1909, was renamed the “Los Angeles
Creamery Company” and occupies a slightly larger parcel than shown 17 years earlier. Four
residential properties located north of the project site and depicted in 1909 have been demolished, and
their parcels consolidated to contain the “Swift & Company Creamery.” A “Battery Station” and
storage area is located at the southwestern corner of Higuera and Nipomo streets at the site of the
marble cutter shown in 1886. The northern half the large, through parcel containing the Jack House is
depicted subdivided into three unequal sized parcels fronting Higuera Street. The surrounding area is
shown as an increasingly dense mix of commercial and residential properties. Increasing commercial
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 91
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. HISTORICAL RESOURCE EVALAUTION OF
OCTOBER 2015 570 MARSH STREET
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P:\PBC1502_570_Marsh\HRE\RTC_4.27.17\LSA_570_MARSH_STREET_HRE_(RTC_4.27.2017).doc (04/27/17) 15
density is east of the project site and reflects the expansion of downtown San Luis Obispo (Sanborn-
Perris Map Co., Ltd.1926).
The 1950 Sanborn map depicts the residential building and surrounding parcel at 570 Marsh Street as
depicted 24 years earlier. The surrounding area is showing signs of a shift in land uses reflective of
San Luis Obispo’s growing downtown core; examples include gas stations, auto repair facilities,
storage facilities, and the footprint of the former Fosters Freeze fast-food restaurant at 598 Marsh
Street on the northwestern corner of Marsh and Nipomo streets. This building is shown sharing the
same parcel as the Swift & Company Creamery, which is relabeled but illegible (Sanborn-Perris Map
Co., Ltd. 1950).
5.3 ARCHIVAL RESEARCH
5.3.1 Online Research
A review of online archived materials, including scanned photographs and written materials, did not
specifically describe or inform the research of the building at 570 Marsh Street.
A review of San Luis Obispo historic resource inventories, government records, photographs, and
newspaper articles, indicates that 570 Marsh Street is not listed in the City of San Luis Obispo Master
List of Historic Resources or in the Master List of Contributing Historic Resources; it is also not
located within an existing or proposed historic district (San Luis Obispo 1983, 2010, 2013, 2014;
Taylor and Lees 2010). Records at the History Center of San Luis Obispo County for 570 Marsh
Street consisted of picture taken sometime between 1890-1910 of the Higuera Family with a notation
that they lived at 570 Marsh Street (History Center of San Luis Obispo County 1890-1910). No other
evidence was located to connect the Higuera Family with the project site. Regarding the house
currently in the project site, records in the Research Room at the History Center of San Luis Obispo
County included information on John Chapek, a San Luis Obispo-based building contractor who built
the house in the project site; there was also evidence that he was involved in local politics and was
part of a business partnership that ran a hardware store. Information at the History Center also
indicated that the original owner of the building in the project site was Frank Mello, son of
Portuguese immigrants and rancher based near Morro Bay. City directories on file at the History
Center and the Public Library indicated that Frank and his wife Maria moved into the house after he
retired from ranching. Records at the County Recorder’s Office included an order from the probate
court order from 1948 designating 570 Marsh as a homestead for Marie following Frank’s death in
1948. A list of subsequent owners was compiled from information from a partial set of city directories
and from chain of title research at the County Assessor’s office. Records at the San Luis Obispo
County Assessor’s Office included a copy of the Residential Building Record, that included
information regarding estimated build date, dates of alterations, several photographs of the house
from the mid-to-late 1980s, and other property-related information from assessments conducted
between 1946 and 1972 (San Luis Obispo County Assessor 1946-1972).
City Directory information from 1950 indicates that a John B. and Ann B. Masters occupied the
house. Three years later, city directories list William and Patricia McLaughlin as owners and
indicated that their business, McLaughlin Brokerage, operated out of the building, beginning an
association of commercial activity with the house at 570 Marsh Street. A deed of sale from 1956
shows that Patricia McLaughlin sold the residence to Ms. Olimpia Mainini, who in turn sold the
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 92
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. HISTORICAL RESOURCE EVALAUTION OF
OCTOBER 2015 570 MARSH STREET
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P:\PBC1502_570_Marsh\HRE\RTC_4.27.17\LSA_570_MARSH_STREET_HRE_(RTC_4.27.2017).doc (04/27/17) 16
property to H. Wayne Longaker in 1957. Mr. Longaker sold the property to Daniel and Judith Chase
in 1962. Assessor Office information indicates that 1989 the Chase Trust sold the property to Heinz
and Asa Drexler. The Drexlers sold the property to James and Joan Sargen in 1993, who in turn sold
the property in 2008 to Thomas C. Swem. In 2012 Mr. Swem sold the property to the current owners,
Carmelo and Aracely Plateroti.
Research indicated that the building at 570 Marsh Street was built by John Chapek, a San Luis
Obispo-based building contractor and businessman. John Chapek was born in Czechoslovakia on
September 2, 1872. After attending school until he was 15, he moved to Vienna to begin a three-year
apprenticeship in carpentry. He immigrated to the United States when he was 18. He worked as a
carpenter for six months in Prairie du Chien, Wisconsin, and then moved to Clayton County, Iowa,
where he worked as a carpenter for roughly two and half years when he moved to San Luis Obispo
County. He took up farming near Arroyo Grande. After six years he moved to San Luis Obispo and
resumed his trade as a full-time carpenter. In 1903, John Chapek married Mary Anderson and had
four children: Carl J., John R., Eleanor, and Frederick (Morrison and Haydon 1917:569). The Chapek
family lived at 843 Upham Street in San Luis Obispo until 1993 (Monday Club 2011).
In 1907, Mr. Chapek formed a partnership with F. H. Johnson and opened the Union Hardware
Company at 742 Higuera Street. Three years later Johnson bought out his partner, yet Chapek
retained ownership of the building. Information at the University Archives and Special Collections at
the Robert E. Kennedy Library, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, indicates
that between 1910 and 1930, Chapek applied for 211 building permits in San Luis Obispo, indicating
that he was a prolific builder. In 1917, Chapek won election to the San Luis Obispo City Council. He
was active in local social organizations such as the San Luis Obispo chapters of the Odd Fellows
Society and the Benevolent and Protective Order of Elks. On February 2, 1936, Chapek died in San
Luis Obispo (findagrave.com; ancestry.com).
5.3.2 Building Permits
A review of building permits on file at the University Archives and Special Collections at the Robert
E. Kennedy Library, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, and the City of San
Luis Obispo Community Development and Public Works Development offices identified a permit
issued on June 7, 1920, to John Chapek. The permit authorized a wood-frame residence for Frank
Mello on Block 62, which contains the project site. Listed below are the permitted events in the
history of the building:
Table 1: Building Permit Information
Date Permit Number Description/Action
March 3, 1952 BCPI 44 Enclose front porch.
April 22, 1970 BCPF 2315 Electrical repairs.
December 13, 1984 BCPF 1202 Underground electric work.
August 8, 1988 PADA 95-88 Drexler Addition (no details provided).
August 15, 1988 PARA 128-88 Drexler Addition (no details provided).
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 93
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. HISTORICAL RESOURCE EVALAUTION OF
OCTOBER 2015 570 MARSH STREET
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P:\PBC1502_570_Marsh\HRE\RTC_4.27.17\LSA_570_MARSH_STREET_HRE_(RTC_4.27.2017).doc (04/27/17) 17
September 6, 1988 BCPF 4670 Addition front room to SFR.
February 21, 1989 BCPF 5165 Electric circuit for sign.
April 25, 1989 BCPF 5346 Construct parking lot for realty office.
February 28, 2002 EF 3847 Install fire sprinkler lateral from street.
Sidewalk patch repair.
March 28, 2002 BCPF 16448 Fire sprinkler system upgrade/retrofit.
July 22, 2004 ARCMI PAD 81-
04
Request to add mixed-use addition (3-units) to an
existing office.
December 20, 2007 PHOA 0-07 Massage therapy on an outcall basis.
November 4, 2013 EF 7400 Replace sewer lateral to the main.
5.3.3 City Directories
LSA reviewed San Luis Obispo City and County directories available at the University Archives and
Special Collections at the Robert E. Kennedy Library, California Polytechnic State University, San
Luis Obispo and the History Center of San Luis Obispo County. A summary of building occupants is
listed below (only a partial listing of occupants was obtained due to data gaps resulting from an
incomplete set of directories):
Table 2: City Directory Information
Date Name Occupation Citation
1920 No name given n/a San Luis Obispo County
Directory, Pacific Telephone &
Telegraph Company.
1928 No name given n/a San Luis Obispo County
Directory, Pacific Telephone &
Telegraph Company.
1931 Frank Mello – retired
Retired San Luis Obispo City and
County Directory, A to Z
Publishers.
1932 John Chapek City Purchasing
Agent
San Luis Obispo City and
County Directory, A to Z
Publishers.
1933 No name given n/a San Luis Obispo City and
County Directory, A to Z
Publishers.
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 94
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. HISTORICAL RESOURCE EVALAUTION OF
OCTOBER 2015 570 MARSH STREET
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P:\PBC1502_570_Marsh\HRE\RTC_4.27.17\LSA_570_MARSH_STREET_HRE_(RTC_4.27.2017).doc (04/27/17) 18
1938 Frank and Mary Mello Owner San Luis Obispo City and
County Directory, General
Directories.
1939 Frank and Mary Mello Owner San Luis Obispo City and
County Directory, General
Directories.
1942 Frank V. and Maria D.
Mello
n/a Polk’s Directory for San Luis
Obispo County, California.
1946 Frank V. Mello Retired Polk’s Directory for San Luis
Obispo County, California.
1947 Frank V. Mello Retired Polk’s Directory for San Luis
Obispo County, California.
1948-1952 Anthony Duarte Resident Polk’s Directory for San Luis
Obispo County, California.
1953 William and Patricia
McLaughlin
McLaughlin
Brokerage
Polk’s Directory for San Luis
Obispo County, California.
1956 Mrs. Patricia
McLaughlin
n/a Polk’s Directory for San Luis
Obispo County, California.
5.4 FIELD SURVEY
The field survey of the project site at 570 Marsh Street identified a single-story, wood-frame
residence on a rectangular plan, built in 1920, situated at the southern end of a 5,000-square-
foot/0.092-acre rectangular parcel in an urban setting with mixed-commercial and residential uses on
the western edge of downtown San Luis Obispo. . The building was constructed in a
Vernacular/National Folk style and is covered by a low-pitched, cross-gabled roof clad in
composition asphalt roofing. The roof has wide, exposed overhanging eaves with decorative knee-
brackets. The walls are clad in horizontal wood lap siding. The building rests on a combination post-
and-pier and concrete perimeter foundation. No indication of a cellar or basement was located. The
main, south-facing, asymmetrical façade features a projecting wing with a full-height, three-part bay
window. The main entrance is set in the inside edge of the south-facing projecting wing and consists
of a replacement four-paneled metal door, and is accessed via a set of brick-steps to a brick-paved
front porch. The windows are a combination of the original wood-frame, double-hung sash windows
on the east, south, and west-facing facades and replacement windows on the southern, street-facing
façade set within wide surrounds. This building appears in fair condition. Landscaping elements
include ground cover and shrubs, and several mature redwood trees along the western parcel
boundary.
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 95
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. HISTORICAL RESOURCE EVALAUTION OF
OCTOBER 2015 570 MARSH STREET
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P:\PBC1502_570_Marsh\HRE\RTC_4.27.17\LSA_570_MARSH_STREET_HRE_(RTC_4.27.2017).doc (04/27/17) 19
6.0 ELIGIBILITY EVALUATION
This section presents the historic and architectural context of the project site and evaluates the
eligibility of the building at 570 Marsh Street under California Register and the City of San Luis
Obispo’s HPO significance criteria.
6.1 HISTORIC CONTEXT 3
This section describes the historic context of the project site, its property-specific development,
including its Vernacular/National Folk architectural characteristics.
6.1.1 San Luis Obispo 4
Recorded European activity in what would become San Luis Obispo began in September 1769, when
a military and settlement expedition headed by Captain Gaspar de Portolá left San Diego to solidify
Spain’s hold on California. Called the “Sacred Expedition,” it consisted of settlers, soldiers, and a
group of Franciscan missionaries led by Father Junípero Serra, who had been ordered to establish a
chain of missions in California. In 1772, Father Serra returned to the area and established Mission
San Luis Obispo de Tolosa, named for Saint Louis of Toulouse, a 13th century Catholic Bishop and
son of Charles II, King of Naples. The land and favorable climate surrounding the mission made it
one of the more prosperous in Alta California. At its height in the early 1810s, the mission was home
to 961 Native American converts and produced over 11,000 bushels of produce; over half was wheat
and the remaining consisted of barley, corns, bean, and peas. The mission’s herds of cattle, sheep, and
horses grazed openly over tens of thousands of acres surrounding the mission. However, within 20
years, the mission was nearly destitute (Blomquist 2003:8). By the 1860s, one traveler described the
crumbling mission and quiet town as “more South American or Spanish than any of the others we
have seen. It is a small, miserable place” (Brewer 1966:83).
Following Mexican independence from Spain in 1821, the Franciscan missions and other royal
landholdings were gradually transferred into private ownership under provisions of the Secularization
Act passed in 1833 by the Mexican government. Secularization of the missions began in 1834, which
made large tracts of former mission lands available for settlement and touched off a land rush. In
what would become San Luis Obispo County, 28 ranchos were granted between 1837 and 1845 by
Mexican Governors to secure large tracts of land in the hands of Mexican citizens and counter the
growing influence of Anglo-American settlers (Marschner 2000:4-6, 87; Robinson 1948:29-31).
In the period following the Mexican-American War and California statehood, a growing number of
Anglo-American migrants began arriving in the San Luis Obispo area, an influx also accompanied by
regional cultural and economic changes. Anglo-American culture expanded at the expense of the
3 Unless noted, this section is adapted from City of San Luis Obispo Citywide Historic Context Statement, Historic
Resources Group 2013. 4 Father Junípero Serra was beatified by Pope John Paul II on September 25, 1988, and canonized by Pope Francis on
September 23, 2015.
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 96
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. HISTORICAL RESOURCE EVALAUTION OF
OCTOBER 2015 570 MARSH STREET
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P:\PBC1502_570_Marsh\HRE\RTC_4.27.17\LSA_570_MARSH_STREET_HRE_(RTC_4.27.2017).doc (04/27/17) 20
established Hispanic culture; farmsteads slowly began to encroach on the immense Mexican ranchos,
while the cultivation of various crops replaced cattle ranching as the primary regional economic
activity (Monroy 1990:123-132). Larger tracts of land were opened for intensive agriculture,
requiring a large labor force and prompting a wave of immigration.
6.1.2 Downtown Neighborhood
The modern history of the downtown San Luis Obispo area is closely associated with the arrival of
the Southern Pacific Railroad (SPRR) in the late 1890s and the establishment of the California
Polytechnic School in 1901. The arrival of the SPRR connected distant markets with San Luis Obispo
County’s dairy and agricultural industries, as well as commercial and professional services, creating a
regional hub in San Luis Obispo for trade and tourism on the Central Coast. The economic growth
spurred the downtown area to spread.
The arrival of the California Polytechnic School (California Polytechnic State University, San Luis
Obispo) reflected the dramatic growth of the city during the early-20th century. A key event driving
this growth was the spread of the automobile, as residents traveled farther outside the city core and
needed municipal services, road improvements, and utilities.
In the downtown commercial core, most of the present built environment took shape by 1930, with
few additions during the 1940s and 1950s. Most of the early commercial establishments were small-
scale enterprises, the majority of which were food- and service-related. As the county seat of San Luis
Obispo County, the presence of county government facilities demonstrated the town’s viability and
promoted the growth of specialty and professional services, such as law firms, finance, and real
estate.
Today, San Luis Obispo has a well-defined downtown commercial core with a mix of commercial
and multi-unit residential properties. These mainly serve a growing student population alongside a
variety of smaller, specialized boutique businesses catering to tourists, civic buildings, and
entertainment venues. The city’s resistance to redevelopment pressures during the late-20th century
enabled it to retain the character of its early-20th century downtown. San Luis Obispo retains its
feeling as an intact city center retaining an architectural character and variety next to its namesake
18th century Franciscan Mission.
6.1.3 570 Marsh Street
The building at 570 Marsh Street is located on Block 62 of the City of San Luis Obispo Tract. The
project site had been occupied in the 1890s by members of the Higuera family, for which Higuera
Street is named. The Higueras owned the parcel containing the building at 570 Marsh fronting Marsh
Street along with much of the surrounding area (History Center of San Luis Obispo County 1890-
1910). It is unclear when the Higuera family sold the land containing the project site.
The building at 570 Marsh Street was built in 1920 by John Chapek for Frank Mello, a retired
rancher. Mr. Mello was born in the Azores circa 1860 to Domingo and Catherina Mello. In 1887,
Frank immigrated to the United States and became a naturalized citizen. According to U.S. Census
records, Mr. Mello worked on a ranch in the vicinity of Morro Bay in western San Luis Obispo
County. On Aug 31, 1922, Frank married Maria Francis, a fellow immigrant from the Azores, in
Alameda, California. Around this time, Mello retired from the family ranching business and moved
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 97
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. HISTORICAL RESOURCE EVALAUTION OF
OCTOBER 2015 570 MARSH STREET
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P:\PBC1502_570_Marsh\HRE\RTC_4.27.17\LSA_570_MARSH_STREET_HRE_(RTC_4.27.2017).doc (04/27/17) 21
with his wife to the house on 570 Marsh Street, where they remained until 1949 when the property
was sold for undetermined reasons.
After the Mellos left by 1949, the building at 570 Marsh Street was occupied by John and Ann
Masters, who operated a medical clinic at another location. The Masters remained at 570 Marsh until
1953, when the house was purchased by William and Patricia McLaughlin, who operated McLaughlin
Brokerage from this location. In 1962, the house was purchased by Daniel and Judith Chase until
1985, when it was purchased by Heinz and Asa Drexler purchased the house. Three years after their
purchase, the Drexlers remodeled the house with an addition to the front and rear façades. The
remodeling added a room to the front façade, relocated the main entrance to its current location at the
far right side of the west-facing façade, and created the projecting wing that encloses the bay window.
This addition was part of a conversion from a residence to a real estate office. A year later the rear
yard was removed and paved in concrete to accommodate customer parking. Since the Drexlers
converted the house to office in the mid-1980s, this building has remained in continuous commercial
use.
6.2 ARCHITECTURAL CONTEXT
Architecture in the study area follows trends elsewhere in early-20th century California. Based on a
review of the building’s visual appearance and purposes, the best applicable architectural style and
design type is Vernacular/National Folk. Each of these styles is described below.
6.2.1 Vernacular/National Folk
The Vernacular/National Folk (circa 1850 - 1930) style of architecture is partially rooted in the
Vernacular building tradition based on local materials and the Greek Revival and Italianate styles. A
useful approach to understanding what Vernacular style is, is by defining what it is not. That is,
Vernacular architecture is not overly formal or monumental in nature, but rather is represented by
relatively unadorned construction that is not designed by a professional architect. Vernacular
architecture is the commonplace or ordinary building stock that is built for meeting a practical
purpose with minimal flourish or traditional/ethnic influences (Upton and Vlach 1986:xv-xxi, 426-
432).
The historical roots of the Vernacular style in the United States dates from colonial settlement during
the 16th and 17th centuries. European immigrants, either of modest, independent means or financed by
corporate backing, brought with them a wood-based building tradition. From this combination of a
wood-based tradition, a Vernacular style developed “characterized by short-lived or temporary
dwellings focused on the family and distinct from the place of work” (Jackson 1984:85-87). Typically
associated with older, hand-built rural buildings in remote or agricultural settings, Vernacular
architecture can also include modern, pre-fabricated, general-purpose steel buildings used as shop
space, warehouses, discount-clearance centers, and many other uses (Gottfried and Jennings 2009:9-
16).
Vernacular crossed over into National Folk as mills and factories to mass-produce a standardized
design that spread across the United States via rail. This new industrial-based method of home
construction replaced older construction that employed heavy beams and hewn frames with balloon-
frame buildings, and allowed carpenters of modest skill to easily plan, build, and ornament a modern
house according to taste and budget (McAlester 2013:134-140). The standardized building forms and
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 98
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. HISTORICAL RESOURCE EVALAUTION OF
OCTOBER 2015 570 MARSH STREET
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P:\PBC1502_570_Marsh\HRE\RTC_4.27.17\LSA_570_MARSH_STREET_HRE_(RTC_4.27.2017).doc (04/27/17) 22
mass production of materials effectively enable wood-based building traditions developed in wetter
climates to supersede local building traditions in arid areas, such as San Luis Obispo County.
The National Folk style’s roots in the Greek Revival and Italianate styles, are based in their shared
Classical traditions of clean lines, aesthetically-derived rules of proportion, and a refinement of
ornamentation; it also incorporated industrial mass-production of standardization of residential
building design (Gottfried and Jennings 2009:60-61). The National Folk style evolved into six basic
forms: Gable-Front; Gable-Front-and-Wing; Hall-&-Parlor; I-House; Massed-Plan, Side-Gabled; and
Pyramidal (McAlester 2013:134). Of these forms, the building at 570 Marsh Street exhibits the
Gable-Front building form common in urban and rural areas. This relatively straightforward building
type became more popular with builders as railroad access allowed the design to spread (McAlester
2013:138-140).
Some character defining features of Vernacular/National Folk architecture include:
• Simple roofline, with a medium to low-pitch;
• Small building footprint, generally rectangular;
• Simple construction techniques and mass-produced materials; and
• Design and construction by a carpenter with no visible or discernable style.
6.2.2 John Chapek5
Background research indicated that 570 Marsh Street is associated with John Chapek, a well-known
building contractor and business owner who lived with his family at 843 Upham Street in San Luis
Obispo. John Chapek was born in Austria in 1872 and at 15 years old, he entered into a three-year
carpentry apprentice program. After finishing, John immigrated to the United States in 1890 and soon
found work Prairie du Chien, Wisconsin and later in Clayton County, Iowa. In 1893, Chapek moved
to San Luis Obispo County and ran a farm near Arroyo Grande until 1899 when he moved to the City
of San Luis Obispo and opened a carpentry business. He married in 1903 and was a partner in a
hardware business until 1910 when he sold out and “built and sold many cottages, besides doing work
for others” (Morrison and Haydon 1917:569). Chapek was also a landlord and rented many houses he
built.
John Chapek was credited with developing a section of San Luis Obispo known as Fremont Heights,
a collection of “many fine houses” built in 1900-1920 (Morrison and Haydon 1917:569).6 John
Chapek is also credited with building Miles Station Schoolhouse, the Charles Brewer Block, the
Masonic building, and the Reedy Hotel, one of the city’s first three-story buildings. Chapek was a
member of the Odd Fellows and the Elks. In 1917 John was elected to the City of San Luis Obispo
City Council and was City Purchaser in 1932.
5 Unless cited, this section is adapted from Morrison, Annie L. and John H. Haydon, History of San
Luis Obispo County and Environs, California 1917. Historic Record Company, Los Angles,
California.
6 Today Fremont Heights is known as the Mill Street Historic District, a residential neighborhood
bounded by Pepper and Toro streets on the east and west, and Peach and Palm streets on the north
and south (City of San Luis Obispo 2010:47).
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 99
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. HISTORICAL RESOURCE EVALAUTION OF
OCTOBER 2015 570 MARSH STREET
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P:\PBC1502_570_Marsh\HRE\RTC_4.27.17\LSA_570_MARSH_STREET_HRE_(RTC_4.27.2017).doc (04/27/17) 23
6.3 APPLICATION OF SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA
Due to the differences in how significance criteria are presented between the California Register and
the San Luis Obispo HPO, the section below contains a two-part presentation of the evaluation results
under their respective frameworks.
6.3.1 California Register of Historical Resources Criteria
This section applies the California Register significance criteria to the building at 570 Marsh Street.
The project site does not contain any built environment resources that were previously listed or
determined eligible for inclusion in the California Register or in a local inventory of historical
resources.
Criterion 1: Is it associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad
patterns of California’s history and cultural heritage?
Research indicates that the building at 570 Marsh Street is associated with the residential growth
of San Luis Obispo in the early 20th century, an event that made a significant contribution to the
broad patterns of the history of San Luis Obispo, an important center of economic, social, and
local government administration in the county. However, the building at 570 Marsh Street is one
of many buildings in San Luis Obispo that are associated with its residential development, and no
evidence was identified to elevate the building in associative stature; it does not possess specific,
important associations with this context that distinguish it from the many other buildings with
similar design, construction history, and use. Therefore, the building at 570 Marsh Street does not
appear significant under Criterion 1.
Criterion 2: Is it associated with the lives of persons important in our past?
Research in local history publications, newspaper collections, and previous cultural resource
surveys indicate that the building at 570 Marsh Street is associated with Azorean immigrants
Frank and Maria Mello, who were late-19th and early-20th century San Luis Obispo County-based
ranchers. Building records indicated that 570 Marsh Street was the primary residence of Frank
and his wife, Maria, following retirement from ranching in the early 1920s. Mr. Mello did not
operate his ranching business there and the Mello family left 570 Marsh Street by 1949. There is
no strong associative connection between the building at 570 Marsh Street with the Mello family
and their ranching operations in western San Luis Obispo County. Additionally, information
regarding subsequent occupants did not indicate that any rose to a level of prominence in the
history of San Luis Obispo, the State of California, or the nation. Therefore, the building at 570
Marsh Street does not appear significant under Criterion 2.
Criterion 3: Does it embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of
construction, or represent the work of an important creative individual, or possess high artistic
values?
The building at 570 Marsh Street possesses some of the general architectural characteristics of the
Vernacular/National Folk, an architectural style well represented in the existing building stock of
San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California, and nationwide. Better, more
representative examples that have equal or greater architectural expressiveness, possess higher
levels of integrity, and are currently listed in the City of San Luis Obispo Master List of Historic
Resources include:
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 100
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. HISTORICAL RESOURCE EVALAUTION OF
OCTOBER 2015 570 MARSH STREET
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P:\PBC1502_570_Marsh\HRE\RTC_4.27.17\LSA_570_MARSH_STREET_HRE_(RTC_4.27.2017).doc (04/27/17) 24
• 670 Islay Street (Fitzpatrick House, built in 1880);
• 1500 Eto Street (Foreman House, built in 1878);
• 532 Dana Street (Anderson House, built in 1898); and
• Residential properties along Murray Street between State Route 1 to Broad Street
(Historic Resources Group 2013:81-82).
Background research indicated that the building at 570 Marsh Street is associated with John
Chapek, a building contractor and business owner who lived with his family at 843 Upham Street
in San Luis Obispo. As previously mentioned above at section 6.2.2, Chapek was a prolific
builder in San Luis Obispo during the early-20th century, however he did not live at 570 Marsh, or
operate his business out of the building. He built the house for Frank Mello. The lack of a strong
associative connection of the building at 570 Marsh Street with John Chapek, his professional life
as a building contractor and business owner or his career in local politics, demonstrates that the
association of the building at 570 Marsh Street with John Chapek is peripheral in associative
stature under this criterion as Chapek “built and sold many cottages” (Morrison and Haydon
1917:569). As better, more representative examples of this style remain in San Luis Obispo with
better integrity; the building at 570 Marsh Street does not appear significant under Criterion 3.
Criterion 4: Has it yielded, or may it be likely to yield, information important to history?
This criterion is usually used to evaluate the potential of archaeological deposits to contain
information important in understanding the past lifeways of San Luis Obispo’s early historic-
period and pre-contact inhabitants. Its application to architecture is less common in eligibility
assessments due to the prevalence of multiple media that thoroughly document the form,
materials, and design of a given building type. Consequently, information about
Vernacular/National Folk design and construction techniques, as represented by 570 Marsh
Street, can be obtained from other widely available sources on this familiar architectural style.
Additionally, due to alterations, further study of this building will not result in new information
about construction techniques or the Vernacular/National Folk architectural style and design. For
these reasons, the building at 570 Marsh Street will not yield information important to the history
of the local area, California, or the nation. Therefore, the building at 570 Marsh Street does not
appear significant under Criterion 4.
6.3.2 City of San Luis Obispo Historic Preservation Ordinance Criteria
The section below provides a discussion of the building’s status under Section 14.01.070 of the HPO
outlined above.
A. Architectural Criteria: Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or
method of construction, or represents the work of a master, or possesses high artistic values.
(1) Style:
a. The relative purity of a traditional style;
While this building is associated with the Vernacular/National Folk architectural
style, subsequent alterations have diminished its ability to convey the purer form of
its architectural qualities it had at the time of construction in 1920. It is not a
prototype, or an outstanding example of Vernacular/National Folk design. Please see
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 101
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. HISTORICAL RESOURCE EVALAUTION OF
OCTOBER 2015 570 MARSH STREET
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P:\PBC1502_570_Marsh\HRE\RTC_4.27.17\LSA_570_MARSH_STREET_HRE_(RTC_4.27.2017).doc (04/27/17) 25
the California Department of Parks and Recreation 523 Series Form Record in the
Appendix for historical images of the building at 570 Marsh Street.
b. Rarity of existence at any time in the locale; and/or current rarity although the
structure reflects a once popular style;
The building at 570 Marsh Street is not a prototype or an outstanding example of
Vernacular/National Folk design. Due to significant alterations (additions to the front
and rear façades, relocation of the main entrance, replacement windows and entrance
door, conversion to a commercial property, etc.), this property is not the best
surviving example of (1) Vernacular/National Folk design as expressed in San Luis
Obispo; nor (2) a period, style, architectural movement, or construction.
c. Traditional, vernacular and/or eclectic influences that represent a particular
social milieu and period of the community; and/or the uniqueness of hybrid styles
and how these styles are put together.
The building at 570 Marsh Street retains some character-defining features of
Vernacular/National Folk design, which was an architectural style long popular in the
United States for its practicality and economic design. This style is associated with
the residential development of San Luis Obispo during the early 20th century.
However, a recent field survey of the building indicates that subsequent alterations to
the building have compromised the architectural qualities it once had; for this reason,
the building at 570 Marsh Street is no longer able to convey its significance under
this criterion.
(2) Design:
a. Notable attractiveness with aesthetic appeal because of its artistic merit, details
and craftsmanship (even if not necessarily unique);
Background archival research conducted for the building at 570 Marsh Street
indicates that has undergone alterations over the years (additions to the front and rear
façades, relocation of the main entrance, replacement windows and entrance door,
conversion to a commercial property, etc.), which have compromised several key
architectural qualities it once had and diminishing the overall quality of artistic merit
and craftsmanship. Due to alterations, the building at 570 Marsh Street is no longer
able to convey its significance under this criterion.
b. An expression of interesting details and eclecticism among carpenter-builders,
although the craftsmanship and artistic quality may not be superior.
A field survey of the building indicates that subsequent alterations to the building
have compromised the architectural qualities it once had due to alterations to the
building and surrounding parcel. Therefore, the building at 570 Marsh is no longer
able to convey its significance under this criterion.
(3) Architect:
a. A notable architect (e.g., Wright, Morgan), including architects who made
significant contributions to the state or region, or an architect whose work influenced
development of the city, state or nation.
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 102
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. HISTORICAL RESOURCE EVALAUTION OF
OCTOBER 2015 570 MARSH STREET
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P:\PBC1502_570_Marsh\HRE\RTC_4.27.17\LSA_570_MARSH_STREET_HRE_(RTC_4.27.2017).doc (04/27/17) 26
Background research indicated that 570 Marsh was not designed by a licensed or
otherwise notable architect. It was designed by John Chapek, a trained carpenter and,
as previously mentioned above at section 6.2.2, a prolific building contractor during
the early 20th century development of San Luis Obispo. However, due to subsequent
alterations, the building at 570 Marsh is no longer able to convey any significance as
a specimen of Chapek’s influence in the development of the city. Therefore, the
building at 570 Marsh Street is no longer able to convey its significance under this
criterion.
b. An architect who, in terms of craftsmanship, made significant contributions to San
Luis Obispo
Background research identified John Chapek, a San Luis Obispo-based building
contractor, as the designer/builder of the building at 570 Marsh Street. Background
research also indicated that Mr. Chapek built over 211 buildings in San Luis Obispo
between 1900 and 1930, including much of what is current the Mill Street Historic
District. His family residence, a Victorian-designed house at 843 Upham Street is
resource #152 on the City’s Master List of Historic Properties and key architectural
component of the Railroad Street Historic District (City of San Luis Obispo 2017).
Mr. Chapek was not a licensed architect, but rather a trained carpenter who
developed a robust business as a commercial building contractor in San Luis Obispo.
He was known for building many similar cottages and small residential properties in
the city. However, due to subsequent alterations, the building at 570 Marsh Street is
no longer able to convey any significance as a specimen of Chapek’s craftsmanship it
may have had under this criterion.
B. Historic Criteria
(1) History – Person:
a. Significant to the community as a public leader (e.g., mayor, congress member,
etc.) or for his or her fame and outstanding recognition - locally, regionally, or
nationally.
Background research indicated that the building at 570 Marsh Street is associated
with Frank and Maria Mello, a late-19th, early 20th century rancher who operated a
ranch near Morro Bay in western San Luis Obispo County. Mello lived with his wife
Maria in the building following his retirement. Records did not indicate that Frank or
Maria Mello were the only ranching family in San Luis Obispo or prominent in the
local Azorean-American community. Information regarding subsequent occupants
did not indicate that any rose to a level of notable prominence in the history of San
Luis Obispo, the State of California, or the nation. Therefore, the building at 570
Marsh is no longer able to convey its significance under this criterion.
b. Significant to the community as a public servant or person who made early,
unique, or outstanding contributions to the community, important local affairs or
institutions (e.g., council members, educators, medical professionals, clergymen,
railroad officials).
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 103
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. HISTORICAL RESOURCE EVALAUTION OF
OCTOBER 2015 570 MARSH STREET
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P:\PBC1502_570_Marsh\HRE\RTC_4.27.17\LSA_570_MARSH_STREET_HRE_(RTC_4.27.2017).doc (04/27/17) 27
Research in local history publications, newspaper collections, and previous cultural
resource surveys indicate that the building at 570 Marsh Street is associated with
Azorean immigrants Frank and Maria Mello, who were late-19th and early-20th
century San Luis Obispo County-based ranchers. Building records indicated that the
building at 570 Marsh Street as the primary residence of Frank and his wife, Maria,
following his retirement from ranching in the early 1920s. Mr. Mello did not operate
his ranching business there, and the Mello family left 570 Marsh Street by 1949.
There is no strong associative connection between the building at 570 Marsh Street
with the Mello family and their ranching operations in western San Luis Obispo
County. Additionally, information regarding subsequent occupants did not indicate
that any rose to a level of prominence in the history of San Luis Obispo, the State of
California, or the nation. Therefore, the building at 570 Marsh Street does not appear
significant under Criterion 2
(2) History – Event:
(i) A landmark, famous, or first-of-its-kind event for the city - regardless of whether
the impact of the event spread beyond the city.
The building at 570 Marsh Street is a single-family, Vernacular/National Folk
residential property built in 1920. This property was one of many similar properties
built during this time and is not notable as a landmark or as a “first-of its kind” in the
context of San Luis Obispo’s residential development, or for its architectural
qualities. Therefore, the building at 570 Marsh is no longer able to convey its
significance under this criterion.
(ii) A relatively unique, important or interesting contribution to the city.
Background research indicated that this building is not the only resource associated
with the early-20th century residential development of San Luis Obispo nor is it a
unique, important, or interesting example in terms of its Vernacular/National Folk
architectural qualities. An examination of previous residents indicated that the
building was once the home of Frank and Maria Mello, who moved to the house circa
1920 following Mr. Mello’s retirement from his ranching operations near Morro Bay.
The Mellos lived at 570 Marsh Street until 1949, when the property was sold.
Research did not indicate that the building was more than the residence of a retired
couple and, therefore, the level of associative statue of the building at 570 Marsh
Street under this criterion does not warrant consideration as making an interesting or
substantial contribution to the city. For these reasons, the building at 570 Marsh is no
longer able to convey its significance under this criterion.
(3) History-Context:
a. Early, first, or major patterns of local history, regardless of whether the historic
effects go beyond the city level, that are intimately connected with the building.
The building at 570 Marsh Street is not an early or first example of the early-20th
century residential development of San Luis Obispo or of Vernacular/National Folk
architecture in the city. It was one of many such properties that were built in the city
during this period. A field survey of the building identified subsequent alterations
(additions to the front and rear façades, relocation of the main entrance, replacement
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 104
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. HISTORICAL RESOURCE EVALAUTION OF
OCTOBER 2015 570 MARSH STREET
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P:\PBC1502_570_Marsh\HRE\RTC_4.27.17\LSA_570_MARSH_STREET_HRE_(RTC_4.27.2017).doc (04/27/17) 28
windows and entrance door on main, street-facing façade, conversion into a
commercial property, paving the side yard and backyard as parking space, among
others) have compromised several key architectural qualities it once had affecting the
overall quality of artistic merit and craftsmanship of the individual parts. Due to
alterations, the building at 570 Marsh Street is no longer able to convey its
significance under this criterion. For these reasons, the building at 570 Marsh is no
longer able to convey its significance under this criterion. See the attached California
Department of Parks and Recreation 523 Series Form Record in the Appendix for
historical images of the building at 570 Marsh Street.
b. Secondary patterns of local history, but closely associated with the building.
This building is associated with the secondary pattern of a post-World War II-era
shift in land use patterns near the downtown core of San Luis Obispo, namely the
conversion into a real estate office. However, research did indicate that this real
estate office was the first or only such property in San Luis Obispo. Therefore, the
building at 570 Marsh is no longer able to convey its significance under this criterion.
C. Integrity: Please see a joint California Register and City of San Luis Obispo HPO-
based integrity assessment, below.
6.4 INTEGRITY ASSESSMENT
As previously discussed, historical integrity refers to the ability of a resource to convey its significant
historical associations. Integrity is a critical component of historical resources that are listed in, or
eligible for listing in, the California Register and the San Luis Obispo Master List of Historic
Resources and/or the Master List of Contributing Historic Resources. This section discusses the
historical integrity of the building at 570 Marsh Street with respect to seven aspects: location, setting,
design, feeling, materials, workmanship, and association. Please see the California Department of
Parks and Recreation 523 Series Form Record in the Appendix for historical images of the building at
570 Marsh Street.
• The building at 570 Marsh Street has not been moved and retains integrity of location.
• The building at 570 Marsh Street does not retain integrity of setting and feeling due to the gradual
transformation of the surrounding neighborhood from the mid-20th century through today. This
change has altered the once predominantly single- and multi-family residential and light-
commercial character of the area into one more reflective of an expanding downtown business
core along a busy, one-way thoroughfare. Many older single-family homes were demolished to
accommodate commercial and residential construction along Marsh Street, and many former
residential properties were converted to commercial uses, as was 570 Marsh Street.
• The building at 570 Marsh Street does not retain sufficient integrity of workmanship, design, or
materials. This is due to alterations to the original function and historic fabric of the building as a
result of renovations to the building, including additions to the front and rear façades, relocation
of the main entrance, replacement windows and entrance door, conversion to a commercial use,
and paving the side yard and backyard as parking spaces. These alterations, taken together,
diminish the integrity of workmanship, materials, and design.
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 105
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. HISTORICAL RESOURCE EVALAUTION OF
OCTOBER 2015 570 MARSH STREET
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P:\PBC1502_570_Marsh\HRE\RTC_4.27.17\LSA_570_MARSH_STREET_HRE_(RTC_4.27.2017).doc (04/27/17) 29
• The building at 570 Marsh Street does not retain integrity of association with the early-20th
century residential development of San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California, and
nationwide. The building at 570 Marsh Street is one of many buildings in San Luis Obispo and
San Luis Obispo County that are associated with its residential development. The conversion of
the property from residential to commercial use in 1983 has diminished the building’s associative
qualities as a representative example of an early-20th century residential property in San Luis
Obispo.
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 106
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. HISTORICAL RESOURCE EVALAUTION OF
OCTOBER 2015 570 MARSH STREET
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P:\PBC1502_570_Marsh\HRE\RTC_4.27.17\LSA_570_MARSH_STREET_HRE_(RTC_4.27.2017).doc (04/27/17) 30
7.0 CONCLUSION
Background research and field survey identified one cultural resource in the project site at 570 Marsh
Street: a single-story, Vernacular/National Folk building constructed in 1920. The building was used
as a single-family residence and subsequently converted to commercial space. While the building at
570 Marsh Street is associated with the early-20th century residential development of the San Luis
Obispo, its specific association with this pattern of events is not prominent or important. The building
is associated with John Chapek, an early-20th century San Luis Obispo-based building contractor and
hardware store owner. Chapek was a prolific builder who constructed over 211 buildings between
1900 and 1930. Although records were located that indicate that Mr. Chapek was responsible for
building 570 Marsh Street, he did not reside there or operate his contracting or hardware business at
that location. The building possesses the design characteristics of Vernacular/National Folk
architectural style; however, due to alterations, this building is not a suitable, representative example
of Vernacular/National Folk architecture.
For the reasons stated above, the building at 570 Marsh Street does appear eligible for inclusion in the
California Register under any of the evaluative criteria due to a lack of significant association with a
historical context. The same reasoning supports a conclusion that the building is also not a candidate
for inclusion in the City of San Luis Obispo Master List of Historic Resources. Therefore, the
building at 570 Marsh Street is not a historical resource for the purposes of the California
Environmental Quality Act (California Public Resources Code §21084.1). This conclusion affirms the
status of the parcel at 570 Marsh Street as presented in the 2012 City of San Luis Obispo Master List
of Historic Resources and the 2013 San Luis Obispo Master List of Contributing Historic Resources,
both of which indicate that the building at 570 Marsh Street is not a recognized Historic Resource,
nor is it a contributing element to an existing or proposed Historic District (City of San Luis Obispo
2012, 2013).
Table 3: Resource Status Summary
Resource
Listed in Master List
of Historic
Resources?
Listed in Master List of
Contributing Historic
Resources?
CEQA
Historical
Resource?
570 Marsh Street No No No
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 107
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. HISTORICAL RESOURCE EVALAUTION OF
OCTOBER 2015 570 MARSH STREET
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P:\PBC1502_570_Marsh\HRE\RTC_4.27.17\LSA_570_MARSH_STREET_HRE_(RTC_4.27.2017).doc (04/27/17) 31
8.0 REFERENCES CONSULTED
A to Z Directories
1914-1933 San Luis Obispo City and County Directory. A to Z Publishers. On file at Local
History Room, San Luis Obispo County Library, San Luis Obispo, California.
Ancestry.com
1910 United States Federal Census. Electronic document, www.ancesry.com, accessed September
2015.
1920 United States Federal Census. Electronic document, www.ancestry.com, accessed September
2015.
1930 United States Federal Census. Electronic document, www.ancestry.com, accessed September
2015.
1940 United States Federal Census. Electronic document, www.ancestry.com, accessed September
2015.
Angel, Myron
1883 History of San Luis Obispo County, of Its Prominent Men and Pioneers. Thompson & West,
Oakland, California, republished 1979 Valley Publishers, Fresno, California.
Archaeological Advisory Group
1986 A Cultural Resources Assessment of Selected Study Areas within the City of San Luis Obispo.
Prepared for U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Los Angeles District, Newport Beach,
California.
Bancroft, A.L.
1871 Great List Index of Citizens in San Luis Obispo. A.L. Bancroft, San Francisco, California.
On-file at History Center of San Luis Obispo County, San Luis Obispo, California.
Bertrando & Bertrando Research Consultants.
2004 Cultural Resource Inventory of the Richardson Properties and an Historical Evaluation for a
House at 1213 Nipomo Street. Bertrando & Bertrando Associates, San Luis Obispo,
California.
2005 Addendum 1: Cultural Resources Inventory and Historic Structure Evaluation as Part of
Cultural Resources Inventory of the Richardson Properties. Bertrando & Bertrando
Associates, San Luis Obispo, California.
Bertrando, Ethan and Betsy Bertrando
2004 Cultural Resource Inventory Downtown Water and Sewer Projects. Bertrando & Bertrando
Associates, San Luis Obispo, California.
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 108
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. HISTORICAL RESOURCE EVALAUTION OF
OCTOBER 2015 570 MARSH STREET
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P:\PBC1502_570_Marsh\HRE\RTC_4.27.17\LSA_570_MARSH_STREET_HRE_(RTC_4.27.2017).doc (04/27/17) 32
Blomquist, Leonard Rudolph
2003 California in Transition: The San Luis Obispo District, 1830-1850. History Center of San
Luis Obispo County, San Luis Obispo, California.
Brechin, Gray
2006 Imperial San Francisco: Urban Power, Earthly Ruin. University of California Press,
Berkeley.
Brewer, William H.
1966 Up and Down California in 1860-1864: The Journal of William H. Brewer. Edited by Francis
P. Farquhar. University of California Press, Berkeley.
Brock, James and Richard J. Wall
1986 A Cultural Resources Assessment of Selected Project site within the City Limits of San Luis
Obispo. Prepared for U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Los Angeles District (Contract/P.O.
Number: DACW09-86-M-2100). On file at Central Coast Information Center, University of
California, Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara, California.
C. A. Singer & Associates, Inc.
1993 It Came From Beneath the Streets: An Archaeological Report on the Expansion of the City of
San Luis Obispo Wastewater Treatment System prepared for the City of San Luis Obispo
Wastewater Division. C. A. Singer & Associates, Inc., Cambria, California.
California Death Index
1905-1939 Electronic document, www.ancestry.com/, accessed September 2015.
1940-1997 Electronic document, www.ancestry.com, accessed September 2015.
California Digital Library
2012 Calisphere. The Regents of the University of California. Electronic document
<http://www.calisphere.universityofcalifornia.edu> accessed June 20, 2014.
California Directories
1939 San Luis Obispo County and City Telephone Directory. California Directories, San Francisco,
California.
California Office of Historic Preservation
1988 Five Views: An Ethnic Historic Site Survey for California. California Department of Parks
and Recreation, Sacramento.
1992 California Points of Historical Interest. California Department of Parks and Recreation,
Sacramento.
1996 California Historical Landmarks. California Department of Parks and Recreation,
Sacramento.
2001 California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and Historical Resources. California
Department of Parks and Recreation, Sacramento.
2009 California Historical Landmarks: Alameda. Electronic document
http://ohp.parks.ca.gov/?page_id=21388, accessed October 25, 2013.
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 109
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. HISTORICAL RESOURCE EVALAUTION OF
OCTOBER 2015 570 MARSH STREET
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P:\PBC1502_570_Marsh\HRE\RTC_4.27.17\LSA_570_MARSH_STREET_HRE_(RTC_4.27.2017).doc (04/27/17) 33
2012 Directory of Properties in the Historic Property Data File for Alameda County, April 15,
2012. California Department of Parks and Recreation, Sacramento.
California Register of Voters
1866-1898 Electronic document, www.ancestry.com, accessed September 2015.
City of San Luis Obispo
1874-1926 Historic/Archaeological Information for 570 Marsh Street, San Luis Obispo. On file
at the City of San Luis Obispo Community Development Department.
1952-2013 Land Use Information for 570 Marsh Street, San Luis Obispo. On file at the City of
San Luis Obispo Community Development Department.
1983 Completion Report: Historic Resources Survey, Volume 1. City of San Luis Obispo Cultural
Heritage Committee, San Luis Obispo, California. On file at the Central Coast Information
Center, University of California, Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara, California.
2010 San Luis Obispo Historic Preservation Program Guidelines. Electronic document,
http://www.slocity.org/communitydevelopment/historicpreservationord/New_Folder/Historic
Guidelines%20%284-18-11%29.pdf, accessed June 19, 2014.
2012 City of San Luis Obispo Master List of Historic Resources, updated March 2012. Electronic
document,
http://www.slocity.org/communitydevelopment/Long%20Range/SLO%20Final%20Historic
%20Context%20Statement_1.21.2014.pdf, accessed June 4, 2014.
2014 San Luis Obispo Municipal Code- Chapter 14.01. Electronic document,
http://www.codepublishing.com/ca/sanluisobispo/, accessed June 19, 2014.
2017 Historic Properties in San Luis Obispo, California. Electronic document,
http://gis.slocity.org/HistoricMapTour/index.html#, accessed various.
Deeds, J.M.
1901 San Luis Obispo City & County Directory. J.M. Deeds, Publisher, San Luis Obispo,
California.
Downing, Andrew Jackson
1850 The Architecture of Country Houses. D. Appleton & Company. Republished 1969, Dover
Publications, New York, New York.
Davis, Coin
2005 The Prefabricated Home. Reaction Books, Ltd., London, United Kingdom.
Gelernter, Mark
1999 A History of American Architecture: Buildings in Their Cultural and Technological Context.
University Press of New England, Hanover and London, United Kingdom.
General Directories
1938 San Luis Obispo County and City Telephone Directory. Local Chamber of Commerce,
California Directories, San Francisco, California.
Gottfried, Herbert and Jan Jennings
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 110
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. HISTORICAL RESOURCE EVALAUTION OF
OCTOBER 2015 570 MARSH STREET
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P:\PBC1502_570_Marsh\HRE\RTC_4.27.17\LSA_570_MARSH_STREET_HRE_(RTC_4.27.2017).doc (04/27/17) 34
2009 American Vernacular Buildings and Interiors, 1870-1960. W.W. Norton & Company, New
York, New York.
Gudde, Erwin G.
1998 California Place Names. The Origin and Etymology of Current Geographical Names. Fourth
edition revised and enlarged by William Bright. University of California Press, Berkeley.
Harris, Cyril M.
1998 American Architecture: An Illustrated Encyclopedia. W. W. Norton & Company, New York.
Harris, R.P.
1874 Map of the County of San Luis Obispo, California. Britton & Ray and Company, San
Francisco. On file at San Luis Obispo County Recorder’s Office, San Luis Obispo California.
Hayes, Derek
2007 Historical Atlas of California. University of California Press, Berkeley.
Historic Resources Group
2013 City of San Luis Obispo Citywide Historic Context Statement. Electronic document,
http://www.slocity.org/communitydevelopment/Long%20Range/San%20Luis%20Obispo%2
0Context%20Statement_9%209%202013.pdf, accessed June 20, 2014.
History Center of San Luis Obispo County
1890-1910 Photograph of Thomas and Basilia Higuera. Arelene Villa Zanchuck Collection,
Image No. 1982.013.007. On file at History Center of San Luis Obispo County, San
Luis Obispo, California.
1907 Photograph of Union Hardware and Plumbing Co. On file in the Chapek file at the Research
Room at the History Center of San Luis Obispo County, San Luis Obispo, California.
2012 Letter from Betsy Bertrando. On file in the Chapek file at the Research Room at the History
Center of San Luis Obispo County, San Luis Obispo, California.
Hoover, Mildred Brooke, Hero Eugene Rensch, Ethel Rensch, and William N. Abeloe
1990 Historic Spots in California. Fourth edition, revised by Douglas E. Kyle. Stanford University
Press, Stanford, California.
Jackson, John Brinckerhoff
1984 Discovering the Vernacular Landscape. Yale University Press, New Haven, Connecticut.
Legion Archaeological Research
1980 Diablo Canyon Power Plant Early Warning System Cultural Resources Literature Search
and Report on the Field Investigation of Selected Pole Settings prepared for Pacific Gas &
Electric Company. Legion Archaeological Research, San Rafael, California.
Los Angeles Directory Company
1914 San Luis Obispo City & County Directory. Los Angeles Directory Company, Los Angeles,
California.
McAlester, Virginia
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 111
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. HISTORICAL RESOURCE EVALAUTION OF
OCTOBER 2015 570 MARSH STREET
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P:\PBC1502_570_Marsh\HRE\RTC_4.27.17\LSA_570_MARSH_STREET_HRE_(RTC_4.27.2017).doc (04/27/17) 35
2013 A Field Guide to American Houses. Alfred A. Knopf, New York, New York.
Marschner, Janice
2000 California, 1850: A Snapshot in Time. Coleman Ranch Press, Sacramento, California.
Monroy, Douglas
1990 Thrown Among Strangers: The Making of Mexican Culture in Frontier California. University
of California Press, Berkeley.
Morrison, Annie L. Stringfellow and John H. Haydon
1917 History of San Luis Obispo County and Environs, California. Historic Record Company, Los
Angeles, California.
National Park Service
1997 How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation. U.S. Department of the Interior,
Washington, D.C.
Pacific Engineers and Surveyors Inc.
1956 Map of Survey of a Portion of Block 62. City of San Luis Obispo, California. Survey map on
file at the San Luis Obispo County Clerk Recorders Office, San Luis Obispo, California.
Pacific Telephone & Telegraph
1920-1928 San Luis Obispo County Telephone Directory. The Pacific Telephone and Telegraph
Company. On file at Local History Room, San Luis Obispo County Library, San Luis
Obispo, California.
Parsons, A. F.
1917 Map of Property of Nicholaus F. Schlicht and Ethel Easton Jack in Block 62 San Luis Obispo
Cal. Survey map on file at the San Luis Obispo County Clerk Recorders Office, San Luis
Obispo, California.
Polk’s City Directories
1942-1957 Polk’s Directory for San Luis Obispo County, California. R.L. Polk & Company, San
Francisco, California.
Robinson, W.W.
1948 Land in California. University of California Press, Berkeley, California.
San Luis Obispo County Assessor
1915-1989 Residential Building Record for 570 Marsh Street, San Luis Obispo. On file at San Luis
Obispo County Assessor, San Luis Obispo, California.
1962-2012 Assessment Ownership History for 570 Marsh Street, San Luis Obispo. On file at San
Luis Obispo County Assessor, San Luis Obispo, California.
San Luis Obispo County Clerk Recorder
1947 “Frank V. Mello: Order Setting Apart Probate Homestead and Exempt Personal Property”.
Document Number 1948-000006, Book 464, Page 228 of Official Records. On file at the San
Luis Obispo County Clerk Recorder, San Luis Obispo, California.
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 112
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. HISTORICAL RESOURCE EVALAUTION OF
OCTOBER 2015 570 MARSH STREET
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P:\PBC1502_570_Marsh\HRE\RTC_4.27.17\LSA_570_MARSH_STREET_HRE_(RTC_4.27.2017).doc (04/27/17) 36
1948-1962 Deed history in Official Records for 570 Marsh Street, San Luis Obispo. On file at
the San Luis Obispo County Clerk Recorder, San Luis Obispo, California.
San Luis Obispo County Library
Block 62, City of San Luis Obispo Plat Map. Date unknown. On file in the Local History
Room, San Luis Obispo County Library, San Luis Obispo, California.
San Luis Obispo Tribune
1903 “John Chapek Married.” San Luis Obispo Tribune, 18 September 1903. On file in the Chapek
file at the Research Room at the History Center of San Luis Obispo County, San Luis Obispo,
California.
Sanborn-Perris Map Co., Ltd.
1886 San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California. Sheet 7. Sanborn Map and Publishing
Company, Pelham, New York.
1888 San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California. Sheet 7. Sanborn Map and Publishing
Company, Pelham, New York.
1891 San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California. Sheet 10. Sanborn Map and
Publishing Company, Pelham, New York.
1903 San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California. Sheet 7. Sanborn Map and Publishing
Company, Pelham, New York.
1905 San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California. Sheet 7. Sanborn Map and Publishing
Company, Pelham, New York.
1909 San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California. Sheet 7. Sanborn Map and Publishing
Company, Pelham, New York.
1926 San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California. Sheet 4. Sanborn Map and Publishing
Company, Pelham, New York.
1949 Description and Utilization of the Sanborn Map. Pacific Division, San Francisco, California,
Sanborn Map and Publishing Company, Pelham, New York.
1950 San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California. Sheet 4. Sanborn Map and Publishing
Company, Pelham, New York.
Singer, Clay A., John E. Atwood and Jay D. Frierman
1993 It Came From Beneath the Streets: An Archaeological Report in the Expansion of the City of
San Luis Obispo Wastewater Treatment System. C.A. Singer & Associates, Inc., Cambria,
California.
Spencer, William Sturgis
1922 San Luis Obispo County Directory. Southland Publishing House, Los Angeles, California.
Taylor, Patti and Suzette Lees
2010 75 SLO City Sites: An Informative Self-Guided Architectural Tour in Historic San Luis
Obispo. Graphic Communication Institute, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis
Obispo, California.
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 113
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. HISTORICAL RESOURCE EVALAUTION OF
OCTOBER 2015 570 MARSH STREET
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P:\PBC1502_570_Marsh\HRE\RTC_4.27.17\LSA_570_MARSH_STREET_HRE_(RTC_4.27.2017).doc (04/27/17) 37
Telegraph Tribune
1991 “Parking fine, but not on her cottage.” Telegraph Tribune, 13 April 1991. On file at the City
of San Luis Obispo Community Development Department.
Tognazzini, Wilmer
1988-200 100 Years Ago. Articles from the San Luis Obispo Morning Tribune complied by Wilmer
Tognazzini. On file at the History Center of San Luis Obispo County, San Luis
Obispo, California.
Tonello, Greg
1982 The Architecture of San Luis Obispo. Architecture Department, California Polytechnic State
University, San Luis Obispo, California.
U.S. Geological Survey
1897 San Luis Obispo, Calif. 15-minute topographic quadrangle. U.S. Geological Survey,
Washington, D.C.
1900 San Luis Obispo, Calif. 60-minute topographic quadrangle. U.S. Geological Survey,
Washington, D.C.
1942 San Luis Obispo, Calif. 15-minute topographic quadrangle. U.S. Geological Survey,
Washington, D.C.
1952 San Luis Obispo, Calif. 15-minute topographic quadrangle. U.S. Geological Survey,
Washington, D.C.
1965 San Luis Obispo, Calif. 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle. U.S. Geological Survey,
Washington, D.C.
1979 San Luis Obispo, Calif. 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle. U.S. Geological Survey,
Washington, D.C.
1995 San Luis Obispo, Calif. 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle. U.S. Geological Survey,
Washington, D.C.
Upton, Dell, and John Michael Vlach
1986 Common Places: Readings in American Vernacular Architecture. University of Georgia
Press, Athens, Georgia.
Ward, Hubert C., and P. A. Forrester
1882 Map of the City of San Luis Obispo, California. On file at San Luis Obispo Recorders Office,
San Luis Obispo, California.
Young, Naomi B.
1971 The History and Development of San Luis Obispo County Hospital System. On file at the
History Center of San Luis Obispo County, San Luis Obispo, California.
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 114
LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. HISTORICAL RESOURCE EVALAUTION OF
OCTOBER 2015 570 MARSH STREET
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P:\PBC1502_570_Marsh\HRE\RTC_4.27.17\LSA_570_MARSH_STREET_HRE_(RTC_4.27.2017).doc (04/27/17) 38
APPENDIX
California Department of Parks and Recreation 523 Series Form Record
570 Marsh Street, San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 115
State of California C The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
PRIMARY RECORD Trinomial
NRHP Status Code: 6Y
Other Listings
Review Code Reviewer ____________________Date
Page 1 of 11 Resource Name: 570 Marsh Street
P1. Other Identifier: Block 62, City of San Luis Obispo Tract
P2. Location Not for Publication Unrestricted:
a. County: San Luis Obispo
b. USGS 7.5' Quad: San Luis Obispo, CA Date: 1995; T30S/R12E; NW¼ of the NW¼, Section 35; M.D.B.L.
c. Address: 570 Marsh Street City San Luis Obispo Zip 94704
d. UTM: Zone 10S; 712309mE/3906286mN
e. Other Locational Data: San Luis Obispo Township, APN 003-511-023
P3a. Description: This single-story, approximately 1,000-square-foot, wood-framed residence on a rectangular plan, built in
1920, is situated at the southern end of a 5,000 square-foot/0.092-acre parcel in an urban setting. The building was constructed in a
Vernacular/National Folk style and is covered by a low-pitched, cross-gabled roof clad in composition asphalt roofing. The roof
has wide, open, exposed overhanging eaves with decorative knew-brackets. The walls are clad in horizontal, wood lap siding. The
building rests on combination post-and-pier and concrete perimeter foundation. No indication of a cellar or basement was located.
The main, south-facing asymmetrical façade features a projecting wing with a full-height, three-part bay window. The main
entrance is set in the inside edge of the south-facing projecting wing and consists of a replacement, metal-skinned four-paneled
door, and is accessed via a set of brick-steps to a brick-covered front porch. The windows are a combination of the original wood-
frame double-hung sash windows on the east, south, and west-facing facades and replacement windows on the southern, street-
facing façade set within wide surrounds. The building is in an urban, mixed commercial and residential setting on the western edge
of downtown San Luis Obispo. This building appears in fair condition. Landscaping elements include ground cover and shrubs, and
several mature redwood trees along the western parcel boundary.
P3b. Resource Attributes: (HP2) Single-family building; (HP6) Commercial Building (1-3 stories)
P4. Resources Present: Building Structure Object Site District Element of District Other (Isolates, etc.) P5a. Photograph:
P5b. Description of Photo:
570 Marsh Street, south façade, view
north. Photo taken 8/31/15.
P6. Date Constructed/Age and
Source: Historic Built 1920; City of
San Luis Obispo Building Permit.
P7. Owner and Address:
Aracely and Carmelo Plateroti
3015 Gates Field Road
Templeton, California 93465
P8. Recorded by:
Michael Hibma, M.A., RPH
Amber Long, M.A.
LSA Associates, Inc.
157 Park Place
Point Richmond, California 94801
P9. Date recorded: September 15,
2015
P10. Survey Type: Intensive
P11. Report Citation: Hibma, Michael. 2014. Historical Resource Evaluation of 570 Marsh Street, San Luis Obispo, San Luis
Obispo County, California. LSA Associates, Inc., Point Richmond, California.
Attachments: Location Map Continuation Sheet(s) Building, Structure, and Object Record
DPR 523A (1/95)
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 116
State of California C The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
BUILDING, STRUCTURE, AND OBJECT RECORD
Page 2 of 11 NRHP Status Code: 6Y
Resource Name: 570 Marsh Street
B1. Historic Name: 7 Marsh Street
B2. Common Name: 570 Marsh Street
B3. Original Use: Single family residence
B4. Present Use: Real estate office
B5. Architectural Style: Vernacular/National Folk
B6. Construction History: A review of official building permit records on file at the University Archives and Special
Collections at the Robert E. Kennedy Library, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo and the City of
San Luis Obispo Community Development and Public Works Development offices indicates that a building permit was
issued on June 7, 1920, to John Chapek to build a wood-framed residence for Frank Mello. Subsequent alterations include
additions to the front and rear façades, relocation of the main entrance, replacement windows and entrance door on main,
street-facing façade, conversion into a commercial property, paving of side yard and backyard as parking space, among
others
B7. Moved? No
B8. Related Features: None
B9. a. Architect: None
b. Builder: John Chapek
B10. Significance: Theme: Early-20th century residential development, architecture Area: City of San Luis Obispo
Period of Significance: N/A Property Type: Commercial property Applicable Criteria: N/A
This single-story, 1,000-square-foot, former single-family residential building is situated on a 5,000-square-foot parcel in an urban
setting. Research indicates that the building at 570 Marsh Street is associated with the residential growth of San Luis Obispo in the
early-20th century, an event which that made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of the history of San Luis Obispo, and,
as the city was an important center of economic, social, and local government administration in the county center. However, the
building at 570 Marsh Street is one of many buildings in San Luis Obispo that are associated with its residential development, and
no evidence was identified to elevate the building in associative stature; it does not possess specific, important associations with
this context that distinguish it from the many other buildings with similar design, construction history, and use. Therefore, the
building at 570 Marsh Street does not appear significant under California Register Criterion 1. (See continuation sheets).
B11. Additional Resource Attributes: None
B12. References:
City of San Luis Obispo
2012 City of San Luis Obispo Master List of Historic
Resources, updated March 2012. Electronic document,
ttp://www.slocity.org/communitydevelopment, accessed
June 4, 2014.
2010 City of San Luis Obispo Historic Preservation Program
Guidelines. Electronic document
http://www.slocity.org/communitydevelopment,
accessed June 4, 2014.
Hibma, Michael and Amber Long
2015 Historical Resource Evaluation of 570 Marsh Street,
San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California.
LSA Associates, Inc., Point Richmond, California.
B13. Remarks: None
B14. Evaluator: Michael Hibma, M.A., RPH #603
Amber Long, M.A.
LSA Associates, Inc.
157 Park Place,
Point Richmond, California 94801
Date of Evaluation: October 1, 2015
DPR 523B (1/95)
(This space reserved for official comments.)
570 Marsh Street
North
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 117
State of California C The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
Page 3 of 11 Resource Name: 570 Marsh Street
Recorded by: Michael Hibma and Amber Long Date: October 1, 2015
B10. (continued)
Research in local history publications, newspaper collections, and previous cultural resource surveys indicate that the building at 570 Marsh
Street is associated with Azorean immigrants Frank and Maria Mello, who were late-19th and early-20th century San Luis Obispo County-
based ranchers. Building records indicated that Frank Mello was responsible for building 570 Marsh Street as the primary residence of
himself and his wife, Maria, following his retirement from ranching in the early 1920s. Mr. Mello did not operate his ranching business
there, and the Mello family left 570 Marsh Street by 1949. There is no strong associative connection between the building at 570 Marsh
Street with the Mello family and their ranching operations in western San Luis Obispo County. Additionally, information regarding
subsequent occupants did not indicate that any rose to a level of prominence in the history of San Luis Obispo, the State of California, or the
nation. Therefore, the building at 570 Marsh Street does not appear significant under California Register Criterion 2.
The building at 570 Marsh Street possesses some of the general architectural characteristics of the Vernacular/National Folk, an architectural
style well represented in the existing building stock of San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California, and nationwide. Background
research indicated that 570 Marsh Street is associated with John Chapek, a well-known building contractor and business owner who lived
with his family at 843 Upham Street in San Luis Obispo. John Chapek was born in Austria in 1872 and at 15 years old, he entered into a
three-year carpentry apprentice program. After finishing, John immigrated to the United States in 1890 and soon found work Prairie du
Chien, Wisconsin and later in Clayton County, Iowa. In 1893, Chapek moved to San Luis Obispo County and ran a farm near Arroyo
Grande until 1899 when he moved to the City of San Luis Obispo and opened a carpentry business. He married in 1903 and was a partner in
a hardware business until 1910 when he sold out and “built and sold many cottages, besides doing work for others” (Morrison and Haydon
1917:569). Chapek was also a landlord and rented many houses he built. John Chapek was credited with developing a section of San Luis
Obispo known as Fremont Heights, a collection of “many fine houses” built in 1900-1920 (Morrison and Haydon 1917:569). John Chapek
is also credited with building Miles Station Schoolhouse, the Charles Brewer Block, the Masonic building, and the Reedy Hotel, one of the
city’s first three-story buildings. Chapek was a member of the Odd Fellows and the Elks. In 1917, John was elected to the City of San Luis
Obispo City Council and was City Purchaser in 1932. The lack of a strong associative connection of the building at 570 Marsh Street with
John Chapek, his professional life as a building contractor and business owner or his career in local politics, demonstrates that the
association of the building at 570 Marsh Street with John Chapek is peripheral in associative stature under this criterion. As better, more
representative examples of this style remain in San Luis Obispo with better integrity; the building at 570 Marsh Street does not appear
significant under California Register Criterion 3.
Criterion 4 is usually used to evaluate the potential of archaeological deposits to contain information important in understanding the past
lifeways of San Luis Obispo’s early historic-period and pre-contact inhabitants. Its application to architecture is less common in eligibility
assessments due to the prevalence of multiple media that thoroughly document the form, materials, and design of a given building type.
Consequently, information about Vernacular/National Folk design and construction techniques, as represented by 570 Marsh Street, can be
obtained from other widely available sources on this familiar architectural style. Additionally, due to alterations, further study of this
building will not result in new information about construction techniques or the Vernacular/National Folk architectural style and design. For
these reasons, the building at 570 Marsh Street will not yield information important to the history of the local area, California, or the nation.
Therefore, the building at 570 Marsh Street does not appear significant under California Register Criterion 4.
City of San Luis Obispo Historic Preservation Ordinance Criteria
The section below provides a discussion of the building’s status under Section 14.01.070 of the City of San Luis Obispo Historic
Preservation Ordinance.
A. Architectural Criteria: Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents
the work of a master, or possesses high artistic values.
(1) Style:
a. The relative purity of a traditional style;
While this building is associated with the Vernacular/National Folk architectural style, subsequent alterations have diminished its
ability to convey the purer form of its architectural qualities it had at the time of construction in 1920. It is not a prototype, or an
outstanding example of Vernacular/National Folk design. Please see the California Department of Parks and Recreation 523 Series
Form Record in the Appendix for historical images of the building at 570 Marsh Street.
b. Rarity of existence at any time in the locale; and/or current rarity although the structure reflects a once popular style;
The building at 570 Marsh Street is not a prototype or an outstanding example of Vernacular/National Folk design. Due to significant
alterations (additions to the front and rear façades, relocation of the main entrance, replacement windows and entrance door,
conversion to a commercial property, etc.), this property is not the best surviving example of (1) Vernacular/National Folk design as
expressed in San Luis Obispo; nor (2) a period, style, architectural movement, or construction.
DPR 523L (1/95)
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 118
State of California C The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
Page 4 of 11 Resource Name: 570 Marsh Street
Recorded by: Michael Hibma and Amber Long Date: October 1, 2015
B10. (continued)
c. Traditional, vernacular and/or eclectic influences that represent a particular social milieu and period of the community; and/or the
uniqueness of hybrid styles and how these styles are put together.
The building at 570 Marsh Street retains some character-defining features of Vernacular/National Folk design, which was an architectural
style long popular in the United States for its practicality and economic design. This style is associated with the residential development of
San Luis Obispo during the early-20th century. However, a recent field survey of the building indicates that subsequent alterations to the
building have compromised the architectural qualities it once had; for this reason, the building at 570 Marsh Street is no longer able to
convey its significance under this criterion.
(2) Design:
a. Notable attractiveness with aesthetic appeal because of its artistic merit, details and craftsmanship (even if not necessarily unique);
Background archival research conducted for the building at 570 Marsh Street indicates that has undergone alterations over the years
(additions to the front and rear façades, relocation of the main entrance, replacement windows and entrance door, conversion to a
commercial property, etc.), which have compromised several key architectural qualities it once had and diminishing the overall quality of
artistic merit and craftsmanship. Due to alterations, the building at 570 Marsh Street is no longer able to convey its significance under this
criterion.
b. An expression of interesting details and eclecticism among carpenter-builders, although the craftsmanship and artistic quality may
not be superior.
A field survey of the building indicates that subsequent alterations to the building have compromised the architectural qualities it once had
due to alterations to the building and surrounding parcel. Therefore, the building at 570 Marsh is no longer able to convey its significance
under this criterion.
(3) Architect:
a. A notable architect (e.g., Wright, Morgan), including architects who made significant contributions to the state or region, or an
architect whose work influenced development of the city, state or nation.
Background research indicated that 570 Marsh was not designed by a licensed or otherwise notable architect. It was designed by John
Chapek, a trained carpenter and, as previously mentioned, a prolific building contractor during the early-20th century development of San
Luis Obispo. However, due to subsequent alterations, the building at 570 Marsh Street is no longer able to convey any significance as a
specimen of Chapek’s influence in the development of the city. Therefore, the building at 570 Marsh Street is no longer able to convey its
significance under this criterion.
b. An architect who, in terms of craftsmanship, made significant contributions to San Luis Obispo.
Background research identified John Chapek, a San Luis Obispo-based building contractor, as the designer/builder of the building at 570
Marsh Street. Background research also indicated that Mr. Chapek built over 211 buildings in San Luis Obispo between 1900 and 1930,
including much of what is current the Mill Street Historic District. His family residence, a Victorian-designed house at 843 Upham Street is
resource #152 on the City’s Master List of Historic Properties and key architectural component of the Railroad Street Historic District.
Mr. Chapek was not a licensed architect, but rather a trained carpenter who developed a robust business as a commercial building contractor
in San Luis Obispo. He was known for building many similar cottages and small residential properties in the city. However, due to
subsequent alterations, the building at 570 Marsh Street is no longer able to convey any significance as a specimen of Chapek’s
craftsmanship it may have had under this criterion.
B. Historic Criteria
(1) History – Person:
a. Significant to the community as a public leader (e.g., mayor, congress member, etc.) or for his or her fame and outstanding
recognition - locally, regionally, or nationally.
Background research indicated that the building at 570 Marsh Street is associated with Frank and Maria Mello, a late-19th, early-20th
century rancher who operated a ranch near Morro Bay in western San Luis Obispo County. Mello lived with his wife Maria in the
building following his retirement. Records did not indicate that Frank or Maria Mello were the only ranching family in San Luis
Obispo or prominent in the local Azorean-American community. Information regarding subsequent occupants did not indicate that any
rose to a level of notable prominence in the history of San Luis Obispo, the State of California, or the nation. Therefore, the building at
570 Marsh Street is no longer able to convey its significance under this criterion.
DPR 523L (1/95)
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 119
State of California C The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
Page 5 of 11 Resource Name: 570 Marsh Street
Recorded by: Michael Hibma and Amber Long Date: October 1, 2015
B10. (continued)
b. Significant to the community as a public servant or person who made early, unique, or outstanding contributions to the
community, important local affairs or institutions (e.g., council members, educators, medical professionals, clergymen, railroad
officials).
Research in local history publications, newspaper collections, and previous cultural resource surveys indicate that the building at
570 Marsh Street is associated with Azorean immigrants Frank and Maria Mello, who were late-19th and early-20th century San
Luis Obispo County-based ranchers. Building records indicated that Frank Mello was responsible for building 570 Marsh Street
as the primary residence of Frank and his wife, Maria, following his retirement from ranching in the early 1920s. Mr. Mello did
not operate his ranching business there, and the Mello family left 570 Marsh Street by 1949. There is no strong associative
connection between the building at 570 Marsh Street with the Mello family and their ranching operations in western San Luis
Obispo County. Additionally, information regarding subsequent occupants did not indicate that any rose to a level of prominence
in the history of San Luis Obispo, the State of California, or the nation. Therefore, the building at 570 Marsh Street does not
appear significant under Criterion 2
(2) History – Event:
(i) A landmark, famous, or first-of-its-kind event for the city - regardless of whether the impact of the event spread beyond the
city.
The building at 570 Marsh Street is a single-family, Vernacular/National Folk residential property built in 1920. This property
was one of many similar properties built during this time and is not notable as a landmark or as a “first-of its kind” in the context
of San Luis Obispo’s residential development, or for its architectural qualities. Therefore, the building at 570 Marsh is no longer
able to convey its significance under this criterion.
(ii) A relatively unique, important or interesting contribution to the city.
Background research indicated that this building is not the only resource associated with the early-20th century residential
development of San Luis Obispo nor is it a unique, important, or interesting example in terms of its Vernacular/National Folk
architectural qualities. An examination of pervious residents indicated that the building was once the home of Frank and Maria
Mello, who moved to the house circa 1920 following Mr. Mello’s retirement from his ranching operations near Morro Bay. The
Mellos lived at 570 Marsh Street until 1949, when the property was sold. Research did not indicate that the building was more
than the residence of a retired couple and, therefore, the level of associative statue of the building at 570 Marsh Street under this
criterion does not warrant consideration as making an interesting or substantial contribution to the city. For these reasons, the
building at 570 Marsh is no longer able to convey its significance under this criterion.
(3) History-Context:
a. Early, first, or major patterns of local history, regardless of whether the historic effects go beyond the city level, that are
intimately connected with the building.
The building at 570 Marsh Street is not an early or first example of the early-20th century residential development of San Luis
Obispo or of Vernacular/National Folk architecture in the city. It was one of many such properties that were built in the city
during this period. A field survey of the building identified subsequent alterations (additions to the front and rear façades,
relocation of the main entrance, replacement windows and entrance door on main, street-facing façade, conversion into a
commercial property, paving the side yard and backyard as parking space, among others) have compromised several key
architectural qualities it once had affecting the overall quality of artistic merit and craftsmanship of the individual parts. Due to
alterations, the building at 570 Marsh Street is no longer able to convey its significance under this criterion. For these reasons,
the building at 570 Marsh is no longer able to convey its significance under this criterion. See the attached California Department
of Parks and Recreation 523 Series Form Record in the Appendix for historical images of the building at 570 Marsh Street.
b. Secondary patterns of local history, but closely associated with the building.
This building is associated with the secondary pattern of a post-World War II-era shift in land use patterns near the downtown
core of San Luis Obispo, namely the conversion into a real estate office. However, research did indicate that this real estate
office was the first or only such property in San Luis Obispo. Therefore, the building at 570 Marsh is no longer able to convey its
significance under this criterion.
DPR 523L (1/95)
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 120
State of California C The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
Page 6 of 11 Resource Name: 570 Marsh Street
Recorded by: Michael Hibma and Amber Long Date: October 1, 2015
B10. (continued)
Integrity
The building at 570 Marsh Street has not been moved and retains integrity of location.
The building at 570 Marsh Street does not retain integrity of setting and feeling due to the gradual transformation of the
surrounding neighborhood from the mid-20th century through today. This change has altered the once predominantly single- and
multi-family residential and light-commercial character of the area into one more reflective of an expanding downtown business
core along a busy, one-way thoroughfare. Many older single-family homes were demolished to accommodate commercial and
residential construction along Marsh Street, and many former residential properties were converted to commercial uses, as was
570 Marsh Street.
The building at 570 Marsh Street does not retain sufficient integrity of workmanship, design, or materials. This is due to
alterations to the original function and historic fabric of the building as a result of renovations to the building, including additions
to the front and rear façades, relocation of the main entrance, replacement windows and entrance door, conversion to a
commercial use, and paving the side yard and backyard as parking spaces. These alterations, taken together, diminish the
integrity of workmanship, materials, and design.
The building at 570 Marsh Street does not retain integrity of association with the early-20th century residential development of
San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California, and nationwide. The building at 570 Marsh Street is one of many
buildings in San Luis Obispo and San Luis Obispo County that are associated with its residential development. The conversion
of the property from residential to commercial use in 1983 has diminished the building’s associative qualities as a representative
example of an early-20th century residential property in San Luis Obispo.
Conclusion: The building at 570 Marsh Street is a single-story, Vernacular/National Folk residential building built in 1920. The
building was originally used as a single-family home and converted into a commercial property in the early 1980s. Based on
background research and field survey, the building at 570 Marsh Street does appear eligible for inclusion under any of the
criteria of the California Register. The same deficiencies support a conclusion that the building is also not a candidate for
inclusion in the City of San Luis Obispo Master List of Historic Resources. For these reasons, the building at 570 Marsh Street is
not a historical resource for the purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (CCR Title 14(3) §15064.5). This
conclusion affirms the status of the parcel at 570 Marsh Street is not a recognized Historic Resource, nor is it a contributing
element to an existing or proposed historic district.
DPR 523L (1/95)
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 121
State of California C The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
Page 7 of 11 Resource Name: 570 Marsh Street
Recorded by: Michael Hibma and Amber Long Date: October 1, 2015
P5a. Photograph (continued)
570 Marsh Street, east façade. View to the west. 8/31/15.
570 Marsh Street, north façade. View to the south. 8/31/15.
DPR 523L (1/95)
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 122
State of California C The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
Page 8 of 11 Resource Name: 570 Marsh Street
Recorded by: Michael Hibma and Amber Long Date: October 1, 2015
P5a. Photograph (Continued)
570 Marsh Street, south façade. View to the northeast. 8/31/15.
570 Marsh Street, south and east façades. View to the west. 8/31/15.
DPR 523L (1/95)
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 123
State of California C The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
Page 9 of 11 Resource Name: 570 Marsh Street
Recorded by: Michael Hibma and Amber Long Date: October 1, 2015
P5a. Photograph (Continued)
Right: 570 Marsh Street. Image taken
9/18/85. San Luis Obispo County
Assessor’s Office Property Information
File – 570 Marsh Street.
Note configuration of the south façade.
Left: 570 Marsh Street. Image taken 11/1/89. San Luis
Obispo County Assessor’s Office Property Information
File – 570 Marsh Street.
Note: building remodeled and the southern, main,
street-facing façade altered.
DPR 523L (1/95)
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 124
State of California C The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #
CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial
Page 10 of 11 Resource Name: 570 Marsh Street
Recorded by: Michael Hibma and Amber Long Date: October 1, 2015
P5a. Photograph (Continued)
570 Marsh Street, south façade. View to the north. Circa 1985.
Note previous configuration of the building’s main, street-facing façade.
Source Building Information File, on file at City of San Luis Obispo Community Development Department,
San Luis Obispo, California.
DPR 523L (1/95)
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 125
State of California C The Resources Agency Primary #
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI#
LOCATION MAP Trinomial
Page 11 of 11 Resource Name: 570 Marsh Street
Map Name: USGS 7.5-minute San Luis Obispo, CA Scale: 1:24,000 Date of Map: 1995
DPR 523J (1/95)
ATTACHMENT 4
ARC2 - 126
JOINT CULTURAL HERITAGE COMMITTEE AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION PUBLIC MEETING
SUBJECT: Conceptual architectural review of a new mixed-use project that includes three, four-story structures with approximately 21,322 square feet of retail space and 48 residential units. PROJECT ADDRESS: 570, 578 & 590 Marsh & BY: Rachel Cohen, Associate Planner 581 Higuera Street Phone Number: (805) 781-7574 e-mail: rcohen@slocity.org FILE NUMBER: (Conceptual) ARCH-0609-2014 FROM: Phil Dunsmore, Senior Planner Brian Leveille, Senior Planner
RECOMMENDATION
Continue the project to a date uncertain to the Architectural Review Commission, with direction to
staff and the applicant on items to be addressed in plans submitted for formal review.
SITE DATA
Applicant/
Representative
Randy Alonzo, PB Companies
Zoning C-D (Downtown Commercial)
General Plan General Retail
Site Area 0.83 Acres (36,155 square feet)
Environmental
Status
Final plans for the proposed project
will likely require further
environmental analysis.
SUMMARY
The applicant has submitted plans for conceptual review for the subject site located at 570, 578 and
590 Marsh and 581 Higuera Street. The proposed project includes the construction of three new,
four-story, mixed-use structures with approximately 21,322 square feet of retail space on the first
floor and a total of 48 residential units composed of studios, one-bedroom, two-bedroom, and three-
bedroom units on the upper three floors.
The project site is not within a historic district and is not located on a historic site, however, the
project is adjacent to the Jack House, a Master List Historic property. While review by the Cultural
Heritage Committee (CHC) is not mandated, the Architectural Review Commission (ARC) would
benefit from a common discussion with the CHC to gather insights at this early conceptual stage of
the project prior to the formal submittal and review of the application. The project will not return
for CHC review.
Meeting Date: July 13, 2015
Business Item Number: 1
ATTACHMENT 5
ARC2 - 127
(Conceptual) ARCH-0609-2015 (570, 578 & 590 Marsh, 581 Higuera St.)
Page 2
1.0 PURVIEW
The purpose of conceptual review before the CHC and the ARC is to offer feedback to the applicant
regarding the project design before plans are further refined for final review.
CHC: The CHC’s role is to use the Historic Preservation Program Guidelines to review and
provide feedback regarding the project’s interaction with the historic context associated with the
nearby Master List historic resource, the Jack House.
ARC: The ARC’s role is to use Community Design Guidelines (CDG), the Historic Preservation
Program Guidelines (CHC recommendation), and the General Plan to provide early design
feedback.
2.0 PROJECT INFORMATION
2.1 Site Information/Setting
The project site consists of four developed lots. Figure 1 shows the location of each parcel that
makes up the project site and where they reside along Marsh, Nipomo and Higuera Streets. In total,
the project site encompasses a total land area of 0.83 acres (36,155 square feet) and is located within
the Downtown Commercial (C-D) zone. The site is located adjacent to the Historic Jack House to
the southwest, north of Marsh Street Commons and west of McCarthy’s. Sandy’s Liquor and the
Creamery are located north of the project across Higuera Street.
Figure 1: Locations of the four parcels that make up the project site.
The site is relatively flat and developed with the commercial structure that housed Foster’s Freeze
(#3, above), a small commercial building (#2), a small residence used as an office (#1), and Mission
1
2
3
4
ATTACHMENT 5
ARC2 - 128
(Conceptual) ARCH-0609-2015 (570, 578 & 590 Marsh, 581 Higuera St.)
Page 3
Bank (#4).
The structure located at 570 Marsh Street (#1) was built sometime around 1920 in the architectural
style of a Craftsman Bungalow. Currently the structure is not listed as a historic resource. Further
research will be completed by staff prior to the final submittal to determine whether the property
meets the historic resource evaluation criteria within the Historic Preservation Ordinance. A historic
resource report may be required for definitive evaluation.
2.2 Previous Review
December 1, 2014: The ARC reviewed a conceptual architectural design of a new, four-story
mixed-use project with approximately 13,000 square feet of retail space and 24 residential units
located at 581 Higuera Street (Figure 1, Parcel 4). The ARC was supportive of the design and
provided the applicant with several directional items including reducing the height of the structure
by one floor (Attachment 2, ARC Staff Report). The currently proposed project responds to
direction provided by the ARC to include all three structures, including 581 Higuera Street, in one
review.
2.3 Project Description
Named “San Luis Square,” the proposed project site includes three, four-story structures with
ground floor retail and upper floor residential uses, a public plaza and paths, a pedestrian connection
between Marsh and Higuera Streets, and on-site two-level subterranean parking. The buildings are
designed to include historic and classic architectural features with contemporary architecture. The
new buildings will include the following elements (see project plans):
1. Commercial/Retail spaces (first floor);
2. Outdoor seating areas, arcades, and a plaza;
3. Subterranean parking;
4. Public and private roof access (decks, balconies, bridges, etc);
5. Residential units;
6. Materials and architectural features include:
a. Glass, brick, wood, stucco, and metal siding;
b. Metal awnings;
c. Metal balcony railings; and
d. Bulkheads, lintels and cornices.
2.4 Project Statistics
ITEM ORDINANCE STANDARD 1 570 & 578
MARSH STREET 2
590 MARSH
STREET2
581 HIGUERA
STREET2
Street Yard 0 feet 0 feet 0 feet 0 feet
Other Yard 0 feet 0 feet 0 feet 0 feet
Max. Height of
Structure(s)
50 feet (60 feet with ARC
approval per Section
17.42.020.C.2.)
56 feet 56 feet 59.5 feet
Building
Coverage
(footprint)
3.75 FAR (max allowed
for buildings approved
above 50 feet tall)
~2.59 FAR ~2.64 FAR ~2.70 FAR
Parking Spaces Insufficient info. provided
to determine
Total proposed number of spaces for all three
buildings = 154
Notes: 1. City Zoning Regulations
2. Applicant’s project plans
ATTACHMENT 5
ARC2 - 129
(Conceptual) ARCH-0609-2015 (570, 578 & 590 Marsh, 581 Higuera St.)
Page 4
3.0 EVALUATION/DISCUSSION
The Historic Preservation Program Guidelines (HPPG), Community Design Guidelines (CDG), the
General Plan and Zoning Regulations were utilized to review the proposed project. The CHC is
being asked to discuss and provide direction regarding the project’s design and massing in the
context of the setting for the historic Jack House located adjacent to the project site. The ARC is
being asked to provide direction to staff and the applicant on key design elements of the site,
buildings and context.
3.1 Historic Preservation
The Historic Preservation Program Guidelines provides guidelines for development adjacent to
historically designated structures and states that Listed Historic Resources located outside of
historic districts shall be subject to the same protection and regulations applicable to historic
resources within historic districts.1 The Jack House is located adjacent to the proposed project at
536 Marsh Street and is a Master List property. While no changes are proposed to the historic Jack
House property, compatibility of adjacent development is important.
3.1.1 The Jack House
The Jack House was built between 1878 and 1880 for Robert Jack and his wife Nellie Hollister
Jack. Robert Jack was a prominent land developer, banker, and rancher in Central California from
the 1870s to his death in 1916. The house is an excellent example of an Italianate residence and,
when constructed, the style and proportions reflected the importance of the Jack family. The
exterior is distinguished by a low pitched asymmetrical roof surmounted by a roof balustrade;
widely overhanging eaves supported by decorative brackets; tall, narrow windows with flat and
corniced window heads; two single story bays; and a shallow, full width, single story porch with a
balustrade over the slightly projecting entry way. Major components of the landscape, such as the
palm trees in the front of the property and the large trees in the rear, were all present at the time the
Jack family occupied the residence. The house was donated to the City as a historical monument in
1974. In 1989 the structure was designated as a historic resource. The property was added to the
City’s Master List of Historic Resources with the citywide historic resource inventory and added to
the National Register of Historic Places in 1992.
Figure 2: Jack House (left) and the proposed new buildings (right) along Marsh Street
3.1.2 Staff Analysis
The HPPG section 3.2.2 states that new development should not sharply contrast with, significantly
block public views of or visually detract from the historic architectural character of historically
designated structures located adjacent to the property to be developed. The proposed architectural
style of the project is a combination of traditional and contemporary design which includes some
1 HPPG 3.3.1 Historic Resources outside Historic Districts.
~125 feet
ATTACHMENT 5
ARC2 - 130
(Conceptual) ARCH-0609-2015 (570, 578 & 590 Marsh, 581 Higuera St.)
Page 5
variation in style
between the three
proposed structures. The
locations of the new
buildings do not appear
to obstruct views of the
Jack House and are
located over 125 feet
from the Jack House
structure. The two
buildings that are
adjacent to the Jack
house property at the
east property line along
the Jack House gardens
are at 570 Marsh Street
and 581 Higuera Street
(see project plans, sheet
L1). 570 Marsh is
located 16 feet from the property line with the third and fourth floors stepped away from the Jack
House property. The building has a total height 56 feet. 581 Marsh Street has a setback from the
eastern property line of 5 feet and a height of 59.5 feet. The plans include the preservation of the
redwood trees along the property line, which also partially screen the closest adjacent proposed
building at 570 Marsh Street. The existing carriage house, landscaping and screen fence on the Jack
House property provide screening from potential overlook from the structure at 581 Higuera Street
(see project plans, sheet L5). Because of the separation between from new development, and the
significant tree cover between the properties, the new development does not appear to detract from,
nor conflict with the historic Jack House.
CHC discussion item: The CHC should discuss and provide input to the ARC about the
compatibility of the proposed project to the Jack House.
3.2 Architectural Design
San Luis Square is designed to echo and complement some of the traditional architectural elements
within the downtown, while also being contemporary in style. The Community Design Guidelines
(CDG) states that the Goals for Design Quality and Character is to keep San Luis Obispo
architecturally distinctive; don’t let it become “anywhere USA.” Staff is supportive of this design
since it incorporates compatible materials (brick, wood, Shildan terracotta cladding, glass, metal
and plaster) and colors that complement the surrounding neighborhood. The design includes, but is
not limited to, the following areas of consistency with the Community Design Guidelines (CDG):
1. Incorporates appropriate articulation including recessed entries and balconies and maintains
typical downtown storefront rhythm and bulkheads 2;
2. Includes an appropriate range and type of materials and colors including brick, glass, metal,
and wood and incorporates the use of awnings 3; and
3. Sets back the fourth floors so that the upper building walls are not visible to pedestrians on
2 CDG: Chapter 4: Downtown Design Guidelines, Section 4.2.C Façade Design (pages 46-47). 3 CDG: Chapter 4: Downtown Design Guidelines, Section 4.2.D Material and architectural details (pages 48-51).
Figure 3: Perspective view of setbacks on the proposed structures along the
eastern property line of the Jack House
ATTACHMENT 5
ARC2 - 131
(Conceptual) ARCH-0609-2015 (570, 578 & 590 Marsh, 581 Higuera St.)
Page 6
the sidewalk along the building’s frontage.4
ARC Discussion Item:
1. Height. The applicant is proposing three structures that each exceeds 50 feet in height. The
structures located at 570 and 590 Marsh Street are 56 feet tall and the structure at 581
Higuera has a maximum height of 59.5 feet as measured at the internal part of the site (see
project plans sheets A8 and A9). The property development standards for the Downtown
Commercial (C-D) zone, per Section 17.42.020 of the Zoning Regulations, allow the ARC
to approve a building height up to 60 feet if the ARC determines that the project includes at
least two policy objectives (provided in M.C., Section 14.42.020.C.2). Directional Item #1
directs the applicant to supply all the necessary required information for the additional
height as stipulated in Section 17.42.020.3 of the Zoning Regulations. The project provides
the following two policy objectives:
a. Affordable and Workforce Housing: the project provides affordable housing, utilizes
a density bonus per the City’s Affordable Housing Incentives, and provides
residential density greater than 36 units per acre.
b. Pedestrian Amenities: the project provides a pedestrian connection between Higuera
and Marsh Streets and incorporates a public plaza and art as part of the site plan.
The CDG state that multi-story buildings are desirable [in the Downtown] because they can
provide opportunities for upper floor offices and residential units, and can increase the
numbers of potential customers for ground floor retail uses, which assists in maintaining
their viability. Multi-story buildings should be set back above the second or third level to
maintain a street façade that is consistent with the historic pattern of development,
maintaining the general similarity of building heights at the sidewalk edge.5 Each of the
proposed buildings provides upper story setbacks from the front building façades and are not
visible to pedestrians on the sidewalk along the building’s frontage.6 As described above in
section 3.1.2, the structure at 570 Marsh is designed to be setback from the Jack House
property in order to provide an appropriate visual transition from a significantly shorter
4 CDG: Chapter 4: Downtown Design Guidelines, Section 4.2.B. Height, scale (pages 41-45). 5 CDG: Chapter 4: Downtown Design Guidelines, Section 4.2.B. Height and scale 6 CDG: Chapter 4: Downtown Design Guidelines, Section 4.2.B.1.d. The project provides upper story setbacks from the
front building façade along the street consistent with LUE Policy 4.20.4. Portions of the building above 50 feet should
be set back sufficiently so that these upper building walls are not visible to pedestrians on the sidewalk along the
building’s frontage.
Figure 4: 570 & 578 Marsh Street (building shown to the left), 590 Marsh Street (middle building), and 581
Higuera Street (building shown to the right)
ATTACHMENT 5
ARC2 - 132
(Conceptual) ARCH-0609-2015 (570, 578 & 590 Marsh, 581 Higuera St.)
Page 7
adjacent structure 7 and to reduce overlook. All three structures respect the context of their
setting and provide appropriate visual transition to adjacent structures by providing
articulated roofs, reinforcing established horizontal lines of facades in adjacent buildings
and providing a distinction between the first and upper floors.8
The ARC should discuss whether the proposed height is consistent with the Community
Design Guidelines and with the goals and policies for view preservation, historic resource
preservation, solar access and architectural character described in the General Plan
(Attachment 3, Land Use Element, Chapter 4: Downtown Goals and Policies).
4.0 OTHER DEPARTMENT COMMENTS
Information needs and comments from the other departments are included as Attachment 4.
5.0 RECOMMENDATION
Continue the project to a date uncertain with the following directional items:
Planning
1. Submit a sign program that includes information on the sizes, locations, colors, materials,
and types and illumination of signage proposed for this building and the overall site. Project
signs shall be designed to be compatible with the architecture of proposed building. If a
single application for final architectural review is pursued for the larger project, then a
comprehensive sign program that includes this site plus other adjoining sites shall be
submitted. Signage design may be tailored for individual buildings, but site directional signs
and tenant directory signs should have a coordinated design.
2. Include detailed information on pedestrian pathways, wall and site lighting, location of
backflow prevention devices, and screening of mechanical equipment.
3. Provide details and locations of trash and recycling enclosures. Enclosures shall be screened
from street and off-site views and architecturally integrated with the design of the project.
4. Provide a feasibility study for the subterranean parking garage.
8.0 ATTACHMENTS
1. Vicinity Map
2. ARC Staff Report, December 1, 2014
3. Land Use Element, Chapter 4: Downtown Goals and Policies
4. Additional comments from other City Departments
Included in Commission member portfolio: project plans
7 CDG: Chapter 4: Downtown Design Guidelines, Section 4.2.B.1.b. New buildings that are significantly taller or
shorter than adjacent buildings shall provide appropriate visual transitions. 8 CDG: Chapter 4: Downtown Design Guidelines, Section 4.2.B.4
ATTACHMENT 5
ARC2 - 133
SAN LUIS OBISPO
JOINT MINUTES
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION
CULTURAL HERITAGE COMMITTEE
July 13, 2015
ROLL CALL:
Architectural Review Commission:
Present: Commissioners Patricia Andreen, Ken Curtis, Amy Nemcik, Allen Root,
Vice -Chair Suzan Ehdaie, and Chairperson Greg Wynn
Absent: Commissioner Angela Soll
Cultural Herita a Committee:
Present: Committee Members Sandy Baer, Craig Kincaid, James Papp, Chair
Jaime Hill
Absent: Vice -Chair Brajkovich
Staff: Senior Planner Phil Dunsmore, Senior Planner Brian Leveille, Associate
Planner Rachel Cohen, and Recording Secretary Erica Inderlied
ACCEPTANCE OF THE AGENDA:
The agenda was accepted as presented.
MINUTES: None.
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON - AGENDA ITEMS:
There were no comments from the public.
AGENDA ITEMS:
1. Public meeting to review the conceptual architectural design of a new mixed -use
project that includes three, four -story structures with approximately 21,322 square
feet of retail space and 48 residential units located at 570 578 590 Marsh Street
and 581 Higuera_Street (ARCH- 0609 - 2014). This is a public meeting to conduct
design review and provide direction to the applicant. No action on the project will
be taken at this meeting. This item will be scheduled for review at a future public
hearing.
ATTACHMENT 6
ARC2 - 134
ARC -CHC Joint Minutes
July 13, 2015
Page 2
Rachel Cohen, Associate Planner, presented the staff report, recommending
continuation of the project to a date uncertain before the Architectural Review
Commission, with direction to staff and the applicant on items to be addressed in plans
submitted for formal review.
In response to inquiry from Committee Member Papp, Associate Planner Cohen
clarified that the plans show the removal of the existing walnut tree at the corner of the
Jack House property and that further review and a determination by the City Arborist
regarding the health of the tree and possibility of removal would be required.
In response to inquiry from Committee Member Baer and Commissioner Curtis, Senior
Planner Dunsmore clarified that the project had been brought for review prior to
completion of a traffic study in order to vet other key issues, and that in -lieu fees are an
option under the Municipal Code since the project site is located in the Downtown
Parking District area, should an underground parking facility prove infeasible.
In response to inquiry from Committee Member Papp, Associate Planner Cohen
confirmed that the applicant did not reduce the height of the proposed building by one
story as directed by the Architectural Review Commission at a previous meeting.
Ryan Petetit, applicant representative, summarized the history of the project and its
constraints; described the vision for the site as a downtown neighborhood providing
needed housing and vitality for the area.
Erik Justesen, applicant representative, commented on the relative rarity of the
availability of enough land in the downtown area to build a project of this size; noted the
opportunity to build a project that honors the historical and contemporary contexts of the
area.
John Belsher, owner and applicant, summarized project history and public outreach;
noted the City Council's goal of creating more housing units downtown; commented on
the economic factors that drive project design elements such as building height and
pedestrian amenities. Mr. Belsher read into the record comment from neighbor Nancy
Grant in support of the project.
In response to inquiry from the Commission, Mr. Belsher clarified that engineering and
flood protection planning for the proposed parking structure was under development,
and that the walnut tree, if the City Arborist determines that it needs to be removed,
would be replaced and mitigated with additional plantings as required.
Randy Alonzo, applicant representative, made a presentation; summarized public and
advisory body feedback incorporated into the project to date; commented on the ways in
which the project aligns with the City's Downtown Conceptual Plan and Community
Design Guidelines.
ATTACHMENT 6
ARC2 - 135
ARC -CHC Joint Minutes
July 13, 2015
Page 3
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
Jennifer Isbell, SLO, spoke in support of the project as an affordable option for people
wishing to live downtown.
Penny Rappa, SLO, commented on the need for balance among uses downtown; noted
concern about the apparent informality of the Downtown Conceptual Plan and whether
the proposed project is the appropriate type of infill project for the location.
Bob Spector, neighboring property owner, thanked the project applicants for their
outreach efforts; spoke in support of the project in general; noted concern about the
proposed building height and insufficiency of economic rationale for the height.
James Lopes, Save our Downtown, SLO, commented that the historically - styled
buildings should be adjacent on Marsh Street adjacent to the Jack House rather than on
Higuera; noted concern that the proposed project materials do not honor the historical
character of the Jack House.
Pierre Rademaker, SLO, noted the project's ability to implement aspects of the
Downtown Concept Plan with midblock crossings and pedestrian amenities; noted that
early downtown neighborhoods were components of mixed uses; stated that the
combining of parcels and removal of curb cuts will create more on- street parking.
Mike Manchak, Economic Vitality Corporation President, commented on the importance
of thriving businesses and workforce housing for the health of the community.
Adam Hill, SLO, noted on State and County policies for the creation of a variety of
housing in urban centers; commented on the importance of providing workforce housing
for employees of technology- oriented companies.
Kathi Settle, Jack House Committee Member, SLO, noted concern about elements of
the proposed project including its contemporary styling, minimal setbacks, landscape
impacts, building height; opined that the project does not conform to Community Design
Guidelines protecting views.
Victoria Wood, SLO, nearby property owner, noted concern about the overall size of the
project and potential negative impacts upon historical resources; spoke in support of the
construction of underground parking to serve the project.
Jeff Eckles, Homebuilders' Association of the Central Coast, spoke in support of the
project; commented on the importance of the creation of a progressive and vibrant
downtown.
Lisen Bonnier, San Luis Obispo County Agricultural Liaison Advisory Board,
commented on the negative impacts of urban sprawl; spoke in support of the project as
an infill opportunity providing affordable housing.
ATTACHMENT 6
ARC2 - 136
ARC -CHC Joint Minutes
July 13, 2015
Page 4
Tyler Ikeda, SLO, spoke in support of the project; commented on the importance of
creating businesses that remain in the city.
Emily Sullivan, SLO, spoke in support of the project; commented on the importance of
creating a space for entrepreneurial enterprises and creating housing for business
owners.
Lauren Ferrara, SLO, commented on the progressive nature of San Luis Obispo; spoke
in support of the project.
Russell Sheppel, SLO, spoke in support of the project and its contemporary styling;
commented on the difficulty of finding housing in San Luis Obispo for people of all ages.
William Vega, SLO, spoke in support of the project; commented on the value of
attracting and retaining a variety of residents and businesses.
Brianna Ruland, SLO, spoke in support of creating density and new businesses
downtown; commented that adequate consideration appeared to have been given to the
Jack House.
Farid Shahid, SLO, spoke in support of the project based on its pedestrian and bicycle
amenities and provision of affordable housing.
Jim Duffy, project applicant, SLO, commented on the desirability of being able to locate
a business downtown; noted that the development of density in downtown areas is a
key planning principle for the protection of open spaces outside downtown areas.
Chuck Larson, SLO, spoke in support of the proposed four -story design; noted the
importance of preserving the affordability of the project by creating density.
There were no further comments from the public.
The Commission and Committee recessed at 7:54 p.m. and reconvened at 8:04 p.m.
with all members present.
COMMISSION & COMMITTEE COMMENTS:
Cultural Heritage Committee:
Committee Member Papp noted for the record his professional connections with
applicant representative John Belsher, as well as with proponents of the Jack House;
clarified that no financial conflicts exist.
Mr. Papp noted concern about the impacts of project height upon the neighboring Jack
House property and other historical resources; stated that views from the gardens are
explicitly protected by the Community Design Guidelines; noted concern about
ATTACHMENT 6
ARC2 - 137
ARC -CHC Joint Minutes
July 13, 2015
Page 5
architectural compatibility, visual height transition and the avoidance of monolithic
building faces as required by Community Design Guidelines, and the need for sufficient
environmental review.
Committee Member Baer concurred with Committee Member Papp, noting concern
about protection of the Jack House and garden, while recognizing that infill development
should be encouraged.
Committee Member Kincaid commented that the proximity of 570 Marsh Street to the
Jack House in particular was a concern, rather than the project as a whole; suggested
that 570 Marsh be designed in a more historically- sensitive style, and that the
forthcoming shade study include year -round conditions; requested that the Margaret
Kaetzel monument in the Jack House gardens receive special protection.
Chair Hill commented on the need for a view study from the vantage point of the Jack
House gardens and enclosure of upper -story decks for improved acoustics and
aesthetics; noted that proposed project setbacks are generous given the downtown
location; spoke in support of the proposed pedestrian access and amenities; suggested
that the architectural design be made simpler on the Marsh Street building, with an
emphasis on high - quality materials.
On Motion by Committee Member Papp to provide direction to the applicant that the
Jack House gardens shall be protected from shade created by the project as required
by Community Design Guideline 4.3.B.2; that surrounding sidewalks be protected from
shade created by the project as required by Community Design Guideline 4.2.B.3, that
the project height be consistent with surroundings; that the project incorporate historical
character from it surroundings; that staff conduct review for CEQA compliance in
accordance with Public Resource Code provisions relating to historical resources; that
the project be heard by the Cultural Heritage Committee again prior to it being
forwarded to the Architectural Review Commission for approval. Motion failed for lack of
a second.
On motion by Chair Hill, seconded by Committee Member Baer, to provide the following
direction to staff and the applicants:
1. Submit all materials required as part of a complete application and comply with
all standard application submittal items (solar shading, dimensions, callouts,
project phasing etc.) and development standards and regulations applying to
the project.
2. Evaluate potential impacts to cultural resources, including the potential effects
to the historical significance of the Master List Jack House property.
3. Provide a solar /shading study for the overall project and specifically focusing on
the adjacent Jack House Gardens area during at different day times and all
seasons. The Jack House gardens and outdoor areas used for events shall not
ATTACHMENT 6
ARC2 - 138
ARC -CHC Joint Minutes
July 13, 2015
Page 6
be affected by building shadows during any times the garden areas may be in
use.
4. Provide a study /analysis of any potential impacts from the project and related
construction focused on the redwood trees along the Jack House property and
include evaluation of the California Black Oak (age, condition, preservation
recommendations) and protection measures if applicable.
5. Show on plans the preservation of the Kaetzel monument located within the
Jack House Gardens.
6. Include high quality, long lasting material as part of the project and replace the
wood finish at 570 Higuera to incorporate monumental materials called for in
the Community Design Guidelines for the downtown such as masonry, stone or
smooth plaster exterior finishes.
7. Provide a balcony /deck design which provides residential privacy and which
screens from public view personal belongings which may be stored in these
areas.
8. Evaluate internal site bicycle circulation as well as potential bicycle circulation
in relation to the surrounding roads and access (e.g. most cyclists will access
the site from Higuera or Nipomo Streets).
9. Provide clear setback measurements at all floor levels including dimensions to
awnings or other architectural features.
AYES: Committee Members Baer, Hill, and Kincaid
NOES: Committee Member Papp
RECUSED: None
ABSENT: Vice -Chair Brajkovich
The motion passed on a 3:1 vote.
There were no further comments from the Committee.
On motion by Chair Wynn, seconded by Commr. Andreen, to continue the meeting past
9:00 p.m. The motion passed on a 10:0 vote.
Architectural Review Commission:
Commr. Root spoke in support of the proposed signage and outdoor seating, and
conducting a shade study; noted concern about the durability of wood siding for large
surface areas and acoustic impacts upon bedrooms facing Nipomo Street; suggested
enhanced color variety and additional articulation creating more shadow lines, the use
of smaller, more vertically- oriented windows, and the reduction of height where possible
ATTACHMENT 6
ARC2 - 139
ARC -CHC Joint Minutes
July 13, 2015
Page 7
without hindering building function; commented on the importance of encouraging
projects such as this while respecting historical resources.
Commr. Andreen spoke in support of utilizing architectural restraint in order to allow four
stories with reduced visual impact; noted concern about the lack of solar access from
the narrow interior paseo and the impact of the project upon the Jack House gardens;
suggested that the window program be generally simplified and emulate the designs
proposed for 570 Marsh Street.
Commr. Curtis spoke in support of the pedestrian paseo and plaza and the use of brick;
noted concern regarding the use of wood siding downtown and the overall height of the
project; commented that the height effects could be reduced via increased setbacks;
suggested that ground -floor building notches be added to widen and increase solar
access from the paseo and plaza, and that stone be utilized rather than wood;
requested that the project be returned to the CHC prior to being heard by the ARC. Mr.
Curtis spoke in support of utilizing vertically- oriented window designs with greater
transparency at ground level; commented that underground parking may not be
desirable in that it will increase the building's rental cost; also expressed concern
regarding the narrowness.
Commr. Nemcik spoke in support of mixed uses and high- density, affordable housing;
noted concern about the height of the Higuera Street building; commented that four
stories should be achievable within 50 feet of building height.
Vice -Chair Ehdaie spoke in support of the creation of workforce housing and the
addition of more residential units and improved bicycle amenities; noted concern
regarding overall project height; suggested the addition of landscaping and increased
setbacks to ease the transition between the Jack House property and 570 Marsh Street.
Chair Wynn spoke in support of the evaluation of a shade study including
measurements during the Jack House's busy season, a view study from the Jack House
gardens, the creation of deed - restricted or otherwise enforced onsite parking, and the
use of long- lasting materials suitable for large buildings; noted concern about extended
horizontal articulation and the narrowness of the paseo; suggested that 570 Marsh
Street be contemporarily styled and reduced to three stories, that the windows of 581
Higuera Street be designed to complement the downtown historic district; noted that a
massing model even as far as nine blocks would be useful for evaluation; inquired as to
whether the roof decks would be a public amenity around the restaurant pad.
There were no further comments from the Commission.
ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 9:30 p.m.
ATTACHMENT 6
ARC2 - 140
ARC -CHC Joint Minutes
July 13, 2015
Page 8
Respectfully submitted by,
Erica Inderlied
Recording Secretary
Approved by the Architectural Review Commission on August 3, 2015.
C(-4uXLC- J/O
Lau Ee Thomas
Administrative Assistant III
ATTACHMENT 6
ARC2 - 141