Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-26-2017 CHC Correspondence - Item 1 (Papp)19 June 2017 Cultural Heritage Committee City of San Luis Obispo Dear Committee Members: With apologies for my absence on Monday, let me comment on 1160 Leff. Applicant has proposed removing the house from the Contributing List for loss of integrity because of the replacement of wood with vinyl sash windows and replacement of porch columns. 1. Marginality These minor substitutions of material and workmanship, two of the seven aspects of integrity, are marginal to the totality of the building and have not affected the other five aspects: design, location, setting, association, and feeling. Given that the building was listed based on architectural criteria, design would be of primary importance. Presuming the earlier photographs represent the original state of the building, design has not been significantly affected. With this precedent, any repair could threaten listing. 2. Reversibility The deleterious effect of the adding vinyl windows to the building is easily reversible with their return to wood. 3. Incentivization of Unpermitted Changes to Affect Listing The fact that these substitutions were unpermitted, whether or not they were carried out by the current owner, would set a precedent of incentivizing unpermitted changes to justify delisting. That said, the building had little justification to be on the contributing list. The original DPR 523 shows confusion as to whether its style is railroad vernacular or neoclassical, arguably because the building shows scarcely any architectural articulation in overall form or detail. The window frames are basic, the porch patched on rather than integral, its columns mere boards without classical reference, and the façade may be symmetrical for stylistic reasons or simply to create entrance to the center of the house. Though neoclassical is the right style, 1160 Leff does not so much “embody” neoclassicism (like, for instance, the White House) as barely reference it. Neither does it have the folk engagement with mainstream architectural style that usually characterizes listed vernacular buildings. Not every listed house needs to rise to the level of the White House, but it does need to communicate a more articulate intentionality—beyond creating four walls and roof—than 1160 Leff does. I urge the committee not to pass findings 1 and 2 that claim significant modifications have affected the building’s integrity. In findings 4 and 5, I would recommend striking the wording “no longer exhibits a high level of historic integrity.” In findings 3, 4, and 5, I would recommend substituting the wording “The structure does not satisfy the criteria” for “no longer satisfies the criteria,” to emphasize that the building has not changed significantly; rather, it did not rise to the required criteria to begin with. Yours sincerely, James Papp