HomeMy WebLinkAboutPH-2 - ARCH-2213-2015 (San Luis Square)Meeting Date: November 13, 2017
Item Number: 3 2
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT
SUBJECT: Continued architectural review of a new mixed-use project that includes three, four-story
structures with a request for a maximum height of 59.5 feet. The project includes 19,792 square feet of
commercial space, 62 residential units, 36 hotel rooms, and a two-level underground parking garage with
136 parking spaces, as well as a request for a new driveway approach to the parking garage along on
Nipomo Street. The project is categorically exempt from environmental review.
PROJECT ADDRESS: 570, 578 & 590 Marsh & BY: Rachel Cohen, Associate Planner
581 Higuera Streets Phone Number: (805) 781-7574
e-mail: rcohen@slocity.org
FILE NUMBER: ARCH-2213-2015 FROM: Doug Davidson, Deputy Director
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the Draft Resolution based on findings, and subject to conditions
(Attachment 1).
SITE DATA
Applicant John Belsher, The Obispo Company
Submittal Date October 21, 2015
Complete Date April 20, 2017
Zoning Downtown Commercial (C-D)
General Plan General Retail
Site Area 0.98 Acres (42,610 square feet)
(4 parcels)
Environmental
Status
Consistent with CEQA Section
15168(C)4, Article 12 Section
15183(a) and Categorically Exempt
from environmental review under
15332 (In-Fill Development Projects).
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 project proposes 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.
1.0 COMMISSION’S PURVIEW
The ARC’s role is to review the project in terms of its consistency with the Community Design
Guidelines and applicable City policies and standards.
ARC3 - 1
ARCH-2213-2015
570, 578 & 590 Marsh & 581 Higuera Street
Page 2
2.0 BACKGROUND
December 1, 2014: The Architectural Review Commission (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 (see Figure 1 below, 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 Cultural Heritage Committee (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). Review by the
CHC was not required for the site since it is not within a historic district and is not located on a historic
site. The Community Development Director determined that the ARC would benefit from a common
discussion with the CHC to gather insights at the conceptual stage of the project prior to the formal
submittal and review of the application because of the adjacency of the project to the Master List Historic
Jack House. The CHC and the ARC provided a list of directional items that were to be considered and
included in the final project plan submittal (Attachment 3, Directional Items Letter and Attachment 5,
CHC/ARC Meeting Minutes – July 13, 2015). As a part of that direction, the ARC directed staff to return
to the CHC to review the revised project.
May 22, 2017: A revised project was reviewed by the CHC that included changes and additional
information based on the direction provided during the conceptual review. A Historic Resources
Evaluation prepared by LSA Consultants evaluated the house located at 570 Marsh Street. LSA
concluded that the building did not qualify as a historic resource because of a lack of significant
association with a historical context. The CHC supported this determination and made the
recommendation the that the house did not qualify as a cultural resource.
The CHC discussed the shading study (Directional Item #3) and Directional Item #2 regarding evaluation
of potential effects on cultural resources (Attachment 3, Directional Items Letter and Attachment 5,
CHC/ARC Meeting Minutes – July 13, 2015). The CHC provided input that since the proposed project’s
scale and massing could impact the Jack House Gardens, a categorical exemption from environmental
review should not be used and an Initial Study should be prepared pursuant to CEQA.
The Director of Community Development is charged with determining whether and what level of
environmental review is appropriate and directing the preparation of the appropriate environmental
document or application of the appropriate categorical exemption. The Director considered the CHC’s
discussion and recommendation and determined that the concerns regarding potential adverse impacts
provided by the CHC did not support a conclusion that the project falls within an exception to a
categorical exemption from environmental review. An in-depth discussion and analysis is provided in
Attachment 10. The Community Development Director also directed that City staff verify the shade
analysis by running their own analysis.
ARC3 - 2
ARCH-2213-2015
570, 578 & 590 Marsh & 581 Higuera Street
Page 3
3.0 PROJECT INFORMATION
3.1 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 their location along Marsh, Nipomo and Higuera Streets. Table 1 provides site
information and surrounding uses.
Figure 1: Locations of the four parcels that make up the project site.
Table 1: Site information and setting
3.2 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
Zoning C-D (Downtown Commercial)
Site Size 0.98 acres (42,610 square feet)
Present Use & Development 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 Bank (#4).
Topography Flat
Access Nipomo
Surrounding Use/Zoning North: C-D (Sandy’s Liquor and the Creamery)
South: C-D-MU (Marsh Street Commons Mixed Use)
East: C-D (Historic Jack House)
West: C-D (McCarthy’s)
1
2
3
4
Jack House
The Creamery
ARC3 - 3
ARCH-2213-2015
570, 578 & 590 Marsh & 581 Higuera Street
Page 4
architecture. The new buildings will include the following elements (see Attachment 4, 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.
3.3 Project Statistics
Item Proposed 1 Standard 2
Setback
Front Yard 0 feet 0 feet
Other Yard (max height 35 feet) 0 feet 0 feet
Max. Height of Structure(s) 59.5 feet 60 feet3
Max. Building Coverage (footprint) 68% 75%
Density Units (DU) 34.52 DU 35.27 DU
Parking Spaces
Vehicle 136 117
Bicycle 37 18
Notes:
1. Applicant’s project plans submitted
2. Zoning Regulations
3. The ARC may approve building height up to 60 feet (MC 17.42.020.C(2)).
4.0 PROJECT ANALYSIS
The City has various policies and guidelines that govern the development of projects within the
Downtown. The General Plan and the Zoning Regulations include development standards for buildings
taller than 50 feet within the Downtown Core1. In addition to these standards, the Community Design
Guidelines (CDG) provide specific design and architectural features that are to be included in Downtown
development. The ARC also provided specific direction to the applicant in regards to design and site
1 General Plan, Land Use Element Policy 4.20 (see Attachment 8, LUE Policy 4.20).
Zoning Regulations Chapter 17.42 Downtown Commercial Section 17.42.020.C: Additional building height up to 75 feet
may be approved as provided under 17.42.020.C.1 and C.2 and C.3 below .
Figure 2: Front façade elevations of the three proposed structures
ARC3 - 4
ARCH-2213-2015
570, 578 & 590 Marsh & 581 Higuera Street
Page 5
planning (Attachment 3, Directional Items Letter & Attachment 5, CHC/ARC Meeting Minutes – July
13, 2015). The following is an evaluation of the proposed project in light of the City’s policies and code
as well as ARC’s direction.
4.1 General Plan Policy Analysis
The City’s General Plan provides several policies regarding downtown development. The following
provides a discussion and analysis of the proposed project in regard to these policies.
4.1.1 Downtown Design
The LUE provides specific design guidelines for new buildings within the Downtown Core. Policy 4.20
and its subsequent sub-policies detail specific guidelines for construction and uses of the new
development (see Attachment 8, LUE Policy 4.20). The proposed project is designed to be consistent
with these policies and includes elements such as continuous street level stores and restaurants, upper
level residential dwellings, similar storefront widths to existing buildings in the Downtown, and includes
design details such as transom windows, bulkheads, large display windows, awnings, landscaping and
patios which can be appreciated by people on the sidewalks. Policy 4.20.4 of the LUE states, in part, that
tall buildings (50-75 feet) shall be designed to achieve multiple policy objectives, including design
amenities, housing and retail land uses. The project includes public/private viewing decks as part of
581 Higuera Street,2 is designed to meet LEED silver energy standards, provides the maximum number
of residential units allowed for the site, includes a public/private plaza (like Court Street) that connects
Higuera to Marsh Street (like the Downtown Center paseo), and is consistent with the proposed
Downtown Concept Plan.
4.1.2 Downtown Residential
LUE Policy 4.2. states that the Downtown is not only a commercial district, but also a neighborhood. Its
residential uses contribute to the character of the area, allow a 24-hour presence which enhances
security and help the balance between jobs and housing in the community. As such, the LUE encourages
the development within the downtown to include a variety of uses, including residential,3 and be
designed for the enjoyment of those that live within Downtown.4 The Housing Element (HE) Policy 5.3.
2 LUE Policy 4.2.4(A) and LUE Policy 4.17. New Buildings and Views: Downtown development nearby publicly -owned
gathering places shall respect views of the hills. In other locations Downtown, views will be provided parallel to the street
right-of-way, at intersections where building separation naturally makes more views available, and at upper -level viewing
decks.
3 LUE Policy 4.2.1. Existing and New Dwellings: The City shall use the following when evaluating development in the
Downtown area: A) Existing residential uses within and around the commercial core should be protected, and new ones
should be developed; B) Dwellings should be provided for a variety of households; C) Dwellings should be interspersed with
commercial uses; D) All new, large commercial projects should include residential uses; E) Commercial core properties may
serve as receiver sites for transfer of development credits, thereby having higher residential densities than otherwise allow ed
(see Policies 6.4.5 and 6.4.6).
HE Policy 6.10. To help meet the Quantified Objectives, the City will support residential infill development and promote
higher residential density where appropriate.
4 HE Policy 7.2. Higher density housing should maintain high quality standards for unit design, privacy, secu rity, on-site
amenities, and public and private open space. Such standards should be flexible enough to allow innovative design solutions
in special circumstances, e.g. in developing mixed -use developments or in housing in the Downtown Core.
ARC3 - 5
ARCH-2213-2015
570, 578 & 590 Marsh & 581 Higuera Street
Page 6
states, encourage the development of housing above ground-level retail stores and offices to provide
housing opportunities close to activity centers and to use land efficiently. HE Policy 6.2 specifically
requires that new commercial developments in the Downtown Core shall include housing5.
4.2 Major City Goal
Housing was determined to be one of the most important, highest priority goals for the City to accomplish
over 2017-19 financial year. The goal states: Implement the Housing Element, facilitating workforce,
affordable, supportive and transitional housing options, including support for needed infrastructure
within the City’s fair share.
4.3 Zoning Regulations
4.3.1 Performance Standards
The Zoning regulations state that additional building height up to 75 feet may be approved as provided
under Section 17.42.020.C.1 and C.2 and C.3. The applicant has provided the following information
consistent with the listed performance standards:
a. The project includes housing at a minimum residential density unit value of 36 units per acre and
the average floor area of dwellings within the project is approximately 576 square feet.
b. The project site is flat and the maximum height of the project from average natural grade is 59.5
feet.
c. The applicant has provided documentation that the project is designed to achieve at least a Silver
rating on the LEED-CS or NC checklist (or equivalent measure) (Attachment 7, SLO Green Build
Multi-Family GreenPoint Checklist).
d. The parking for the project is subterranean and the driveway to the parking area only uses
approximately 18 feet of the storefront level (approximately 2% of the building façade).
e. The project is conditioned to merge all the lots prior to Building permit approval (Condition #13)
and therefore will conform to the minimum size and dimension requirements provided in the
Subdivision Regulations.
4.3.2 Policy Objectives
The Architectural Review Commission (ARC) may approve building height up to 60 feet if the ARC
determines that the project includes at least two policy objectives. The Zoning regulations state that the
intent of the Policy Objectives is to insure that buildings taller than 50 feet proposed in the C-D zone
include features that meet the specific policy objectives outlined for tall buildings in the City’s General
Plan and that regardless of the number of objectives proposed, the decision making body must determine
that the overall project is consistent with the General Plan, including goals and policies for view
preservation, historical resource preservation, solar access and architectural character. 6 The project
implements four features from three of the eight policy objectives outlined in the Zoning Regulations.
Below is a list those policy objectives included in the project and a description of the specific project
features.
5 HE Policy 6.2. New commercial developments in the Downtown Core (C-D Zone) shall include housing, unless the City
makes one of the following findings: A) Housing is likely to jeopardize the health, safety or welfare of residents or employe es;
or B) The property’s shape, size, topography or other physical factor makes construction of new dwellings infeasible.
6 Zoning Regulations Chapter 17.42 Section 17.42.020.C(2).
ARC3 - 6
ARCH-2213-2015
570, 578 & 590 Marsh & 581 Higuera Street
Page 7
Property Development Standards (Section 17.42.020.C(2))
Policy Objectives Features Outlined in the
Policy Features Included in the Proposed Project
Affordable and Workforce
Housing
The project includes residential
density greater than or equal to
36 units per acre and the
average floor area of units is
1,000 square feet or less.
The project includes residential density that
is based on 36 units per acre and the average
floor area of units is 576 square feet. The
project site is less than an acre and has a
maximum density of 35.27.
Pedestrian Amenities
The project provides a major
pedestrian connection between
Higuera Street and the
Creekwalk, Monterey Street
and the Creekwalk, Higuera
Street and Marsh Street, or at
another acceptable mid-block
location.
San Luis Square provides a major pedestrian
connection (paseo) between Marsh and
Higuera Streets (see Attachment 4, Project
Plans, Sheet A31 – A33). The Paseo includes
benches, bicycle parking, landscaping,
decorative lighting, outdoor eating areas and
interactive signage. The project is
conditioned to return to the ARC with a sign
program for the entire project (Condition
#10).
Pedestrian Amenities
The project incorporates a
significant public plaza, where
the public art requirement is
met by providing the art on-site
(no in-lieu fee option).
As part of the pedestrian connection between
Higuera and Marsh Streets, the project
includes a central plaza and public art (see
Attachment 4, Project Plans, Sheet A30-
A33). The project is conditioned to install
public art as part of their project in place of
the in-lieu fee option (Condition #11).
View Access and
Preservation
The project provides a public
viewing deck or decks, or
similar feature, to provide
significant free public access to
views of surrounding natural
features such as, but not limited
to, Cerro San Luis.
The rooftop deck located on the top floor of
581 Higuera is accessible and open to the
public with views of Cerro San Luis and the
surrounding landscape.
4.3.3 Vehicle Access
In order to maintain pedestrian orientation and the continuity of sidewalks within the C-D Zone, any
new driveway approach shall be approved by the ARC.7 The ARC must make at least one of the
following findings:
1. The proposed driveway approach will not harm the general health, safety and welfare of people
living or working in the vicinity of the project site because the number of vehicles expected to
7 Zoning Regulations Chapter 17.42 Section 17.42.020.G.Vehicle Access: Although residential uses are encouraged in the
C-D Zone, it is not the intent of the City to ensure that parking is provided on-site for residential uses. Therefore, there is no
guarantee of parking availability, either on-site or off-site, for downtown residential projects. On-site parking may be
considered inappropriate at certain downtown locations where the pedestrian experience would be harmed by vehicle ingress
and egress across the sidewalk. In order to maintain pedestrian orientation and the continuity of sidewalks within the C-D
Zone, an Administrative Use Permit must be approved to permit the installation of new driveway approaches proposed after
the effective date of this ordinance. When new driveway approaches are proposed in conjunction with an application for
Architectural Review, a separate Planning Application shall not be required.
ARC3 - 7
ARCH-2213-2015
570, 578 & 590 Marsh & 581 Higuera Street
Page 8
use the driveway is limited (less than 10 spaces) and there are no other alternatives, such as
service alleys, to provide vehicle access to the site.
2. The proposed driveway approach is located along a non-arterial street and will not significantly
alter the character of the street or pedestrian circulation in the area in consideration of the
characteristics of pedestrian flow to and from the project site and surrounding uses.
3. The proposed driveway approach is a shared facility and provides efficient access to more than
a single project in a way that eliminates the need for additional driveways.
4. The proposed driveway approach provides access to public parking.
The project is proposing to install one driveway approach along Nipomo Street to lead to the
underground parking that serves the three buildings on the site (see Attachment 4, Project Plans, Sheet
A5.1). Nipomo Street is not an arterial street and the driveway will not significantly alter pedestrian flow
to and from the project because the project includes various pedestrian paths and paseos for pedestrians
to use to bypass the driveway and access the site. Additionally, the project is reducing the overall number
of driveways that currently access the site by eliminating four driveways out of the existing five.
Transportation staff and the Transportation Study by Central Coast Transportation Consulting have
evaluated the location of the driveway and support its location (Attachment 6, Traffic Study, pg 1). As
designed, the project complies with findings #2 and #3 above.
4.4 Community Design Guidelines
Project plans were reviewed in terms of their consistency with the City’s General Plan, Zoning
Regulations and the Community Design Guidelines (CDG) for Downtown (Chapter 4). San Luis Square
is designed to echo and complement some of the traditional architectural elements within the Downtown,
while also being contemporary in style.
4.4.1 Street Orientation8
The CDG state that buildings within the Downtown should be located at t he back of sidewalk. The
project is designed where each building is located at the back of sidewalk. Additionally, the public
sidewalks link up to the internal paseos and plazas within the project site (Attachment 4, Project Plans,
Sheet A5.1).
4.4.2 Height and Scale9
The surrounding development pattern varies in scale and height. Along Marsh, Nipomo and Higuera
Streets the neighborhood contains single story, two-story and three-story structures. The applicant is
proposing three structures that each exceed 50 feet in height. The structures located at 570 and 590 Marsh
Street are 54.5 feet tall (Attachment 4, Project Plans, Sheets A18-A19 & A23-A24) and the structure at
581 Higuera has a maximum height of 59.5 feet as measured at the internal part of the site (Attachment
4, Project Plans, Sheets A11-A13). 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
8 CDG: Chapter 4: Downtown Design Guidelines, Section 4.2.A
9 CDG: Chapter 4: Downtown Design Guidelines, Section 4.2.B
ARC3 - 8
ARCH-2213-2015
570, 578 & 590 Marsh & 581 Higuera Street
Page 9
street façade that is consistent with the historic pattern of development, maintaining the general
similarity of building heights at the sidewalk edge.10
As designed, the project is consistent with this design guideline. The project provides 62 upper-floor
residential units and 36 hotel units above approximately 20,000 square feet of retail and commercial
space at the street level. 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.11 570
Marsh is designed to step back from the Jack House property in order to provide an appropriate visual
transition from a significantly shorter adjacent structure12 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.13 Additionally, each of the structures include
varying wall planes, articulation on all four sides, and uses various materials and colors to break up the
massing and scale of the structures.
4.4.3 Façade Design14
The CDG discusses that new structures should provide storefront windows, doors, entries, transoms,
awnings, cornice treatments and other architectural features that complement existing structures. Each
of the buildings within the project include transoms, and recessed storefront entries that are framed by
awnings. The buildings include concrete bulkheads and detailed cornicing or lintels that complement the
unique architectural style of each of the buildings (Attachment 4, Project Plans, Sheets A14, A15, A20,
A25, & A26).
4.4.4 Materials and Architectural Details
The CDG outlines a series of characteristics that define downtown materials and architecture details.
The CDG also notes that materials should complement those on significant adjacent buildings. The
applicant received direction from the CHC and ARC at the conceptual review to use monumental
materials and remove wood from the façade of any of the buildings. The project proposes to use materials
that complement the surrounding Downtown architecture including brick, Shildan terracotta cladding,
glass, metal paneling, smooth finish stucco, and corten steel.15 The architectural design incorporates
appropriate articulation including recessed entries and balconies and maintains typical downtown
storefront rhythm and bulkheads16, sets back the fourth floors so that the upper building walls are not
visible to pedestrians on the sidewalk along the building’s frontage.17 and includes colors that
complement the surrounding neighborhood.
10 CDG: Chapter 4: Downtown Design Guidelines, Section 4.2.B. Height and scale
11 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.
12 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.
13 CDG: Chapter 4: Downtown Design Guidelines, Section 4.2.B.4
14 Community Design Guidelines Chapter 4, Section 4.2 C
15 CDG: Chapter 4: Downtown Design Guidelines, Section 4.2.D Material and architectural details (pages 48 -51).
16 CDG: Chapter 4: Downtown Design Guidelines, Section 4.2.C Façade Design (pages 46-47).
17 CDG: Chapter 4: Downtown Design Guidelines, Section 4.2.B. Height, scale (pages 41-45).
ARC3 - 9
ARCH-2213-2015
570, 578 & 590 Marsh & 581 Higuera Street
Page 10
5.0 DIRECTIONAL ITEMS
As part of the July 2015 joint conceptual review, the ARC provided a list of items for the applicant to
include in the final submittal as well as specific design related direction (Attachment 3, Directional Items
Letter 7-17-2015). The applicant has provided all the requested information and most of the items are
summarized below with the location of where the information can be found within the attachments.
Direction Attachment
Provide plans that include the whole project at each site level (better
shows features such as the bridges that connect 570 and 590 Marsh). 4. Project Plans, Sheets A5.1-A5.4
Provide a massing model of the project within its wider context in the
downtown area (not just with adjacent properties). Available online
Provide a solar study for both the summer and the winter solstice. 4. Project Plans, Sheets A38-A41
Consider supplying parking on-site for residential units. 4. Project Plans, Sheets A6-A7
Provide more information on the plaza and paseos (width, use, etc.) and
consider expanding the space or notching out areas that are wider to
allow more sunlight within these areas and not create non-active alleys.
4. Project Plans, Sheets A31-A33
Consider providing a public roof viewing area that is not connected to a
business.
4. Project Plans, Sheet A5.4 (Deck in
581 Higuera)
Provide various views from the Jack House property (and even from
inside the Jack House) and how the project will impact those views. 4. Project Plans, Sheets A36-A37
Simplify window design and reconsider window sizing on 590 Marsh
and 581 Higuera (vertical windows are preferred).
4. Project Plans, Sheets A11-A13 &
A23-A24
Provide detailed information on the window glazing throughout the
project.
4. Project Plans, Sheets A15-A16,
A20-A21, A25-A27
Provide upper story setbacks and pay particular attention to building
height along the property line shared with the Jack House. 4. Project Plans, Sheets A35
Incorporate additional articulation on upper floor wall planes and step
back upper floor(s) of 581 Higuera. Four floors may be acceptable for
this project, but not all in the same plane.
4. Project Plans, Sheets A13
Supply an affordable housing plan in accordance with the City’s
Housing Element and as part of the justification for the proposed
building height.
9. Affordable Housing In-lieu Fee
Analysis18
6.0 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The project is categorically exempt from environmental review under Class 32, 15332 (In -Fill
Development Projects) 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 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 infill property
and is served by required utilities and public services.
As a separate and independent basis to conclude that the project does not require further environmental
review under CEQA, the City concludes based on analysis provided in the supporting record that the
project is consistent with CEQA Section 15168(C)4 and Article 12 Section 15183(a) because the City
18 The project could build 2 affordable units as part of the project or pay the in-lieu fee. The applicant is proposing to pay
the in-lieu fee of approximately $650,000, which will support the construction of approximately 26 affordable units.
ARC3 - 10
ARCH-2213-2015
570, 578 & 590 Marsh & 581 Higuera Street
Page 11
has provided a written analysis that evaluates the site and the activity to determine whether the
environmental effects of the operation were covered in the Land Use and Circulation Element (LUCE)
Final EIR (Attachment 10, CEQA Analysis) and the project is consistent with the development density
established by existing zoning and general plan policies in the LUCE Final EIR.
Based on analysis reflected in the project review record and review of prior City actions, including, but
not limited to, the approval of the Land Use and Circulation Update, the Historic Preservation Ordinance
and Guidelines, prior zoning code updates, and the downtown height regulations, as set forth in Chapter
17.42 of the City’s Municipal Code, as well as review and approval of the Downtown Concept Plan, the
City finds that the project is consistent with development previously analyzed and contemplated for the
project site and is consistent with the type and level of development previously approved for this site.
The project is consistent with all development standards applicable to the site, the project does not cause
any substantial adverse changes to the significance of the historical resource located on the adjacent Jack
House property, and the project does not present any other unusual circumstances that may have a
significant environmental impact that could support an exception to the categorical exemption relied
upon or otherwise require further environmental review.
7.0 ALTERNATIVES
1. Continue the project with direction to the applicant and staff on pertinent issues.
2. Deny the project based on findings of inconsistency with the Community Design Guidelines or
applicable City policies and standards.
8.0 ATTACHMENTS
1. Draft Resolution
2. Vicinity Map
3. Directional Items Letter 7-17-2015
4. Project Plans
5. CHC/ARC Meeting Minutes – July 13, 2015
6. Traffic Study
7. SLO Green Building Checklist
8. Land Use Element Policy 4.20
9. Affordable Housing In-lieu Fee Analysis
10. CEQA Analysis
ARC3 - 11
ATTACHMENT 1
RESOLUTION NO. ARC- -17
A RESOLUTION OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW
COMMISSION APPROVING A NEW MIXED-USE PROJECT WITH THREE, FOUR-
STORY STRUCTURES THAT INCLUDE 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
MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF 59.5 FEET AND A NEW DRIVEWAY APPROACH ALONG
ON NIPOMO STREET, WITH A CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION FROM
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW, AS REPRESENTED IN THE STAFF REPORT AND
ATTACHMENTS DATED NOVEMBER 6, 2017
570, 578 & 590 MARSH STREET & 581 HIGUERA STREET (ARCH-2213-2015)
WHEREAS, the Architectural Review Commission 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 December 1, 2014, pursuant to a proceeding instituted under ARCH-0300-
2014, PB Companies, applicant; and
WHEREAS, the Cultural Heritage Committee and the Architectural Review Commission
of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted a joint public hearing 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-0609-2014, PB Companies, applicant; and
WHEREAS, the Cultural Heritage Committee 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 May 22, 2017, pursuant to a proceeding instituted under ARCH-2213-2015, The Obispo
Company, applicant; and
WHEREAS, the Architectural Review Commission 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 6, 2017, pursuant to a proceeding instituted under ARCH-2213-
2015, The Obispo Company, applicant; and
WHEREAS, the Architectural Review Commission 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 Architectural Review Commission of the
City of San Luis Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. Findings. The Architectural Review Commission hereby grants final
approval to the project (ARCH-2213-2015), based on the following findings:
1. That the project will not be detrimental to the health, safety, and welfare of persons living or
ARC3 - 12
Resolution No. ARC- -17 ATTACHMENT 1
ARCH 2213-2015 (570, 578 & 590 Marsh & 581 Higuera Street)
Page 2
working at the site or in the vicinity because the project respects site constraints and is
compatible with the scale and character of the neighborhood.
2. The proposed project is consistent with Land Use Element Policy 4.20 (4.20.1 - 4.20.6)
because the project provides continuous street level stores and restaurants, upper level
residential dwellings, similar storefront widths to existing buildings in the Downtown, and
includes design details such as transom windows, bulkheads, large display windows,
awnings, landscaping and patios which can be appreciated by people on the sidewalks,
includes public/private viewing decks as part of 581 Higuera Street, is designed to meet
LEED silver energy standards, provides the maximum number of residential units allowed
for the site, and includes a public/private plaza that connects Higuera to Marsh Street.
3. The proposed project is consistent with Housing Element Policies 5.3 and 6.2 because the
project provides a mixed-use development that includes housing above ground-level retail
stores and restaurants within the Downtown Core.
4. The proposed project is consistent with Zoning Regulations Chapter 17.42 Sections 17.42.020
and 17.42.020.C(2) because it meets all the property development standards and implements
at least two policy objectives for buildings in the Downtown over 50 feet in height
5. The project is consistent with the City’s Community Design Guidelines because the proposed
project incorporates similar materials and architectural features to the surrounding
neighborhood and provides a complementary color scheme.
6. The proposed new driveway will not harm the pedestrian experience within the Downtown
Core because the proposed driveway approach is located along a non-arterial street and will
not significantly alter the character of the street or pedestrian circulation in the area in
consideration of the characteristics of pedestrian flow to and from the project site and
surrounding uses and the proposed driveway approach is a shared facility and provides
efficient access to more than a single project in a way that eliminates the need for additional
driveways (M.C. Section 17.42.020.G.Vehicle Access).
7. 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, is not associated
with any significant historical person groups or events in the City's history and 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.
SECTION 2. Environmental Review.
1. The project is categorically exempt from environmental review under Class 32, 15332 (In-
Fill Development Projects) because the project is consistent with General Plan policies for
ARC3 - 13
Resolution No. ARC- -17 ATTACHMENT 1
ARCH 2213-2015 (570, 578 & 590 Marsh & 581 Higuera Street)
Page 3
the land use designation and is consistent with the applicable zoning designation and
regulations. The project site occurs on 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 infill property and is served by required utilities
and public services.
2. As a separate and independent basis to conclude that the project does not require further
environmental review under CEQA, the City concludes based on analysis provided in the
supporting record that the project is consistent with CEQA Section 15168(C)4 and Article 12
Section 15183(a) because the City has provided a written analysis that evaluates the site and
the activity to determine whether the environmental effects of the operation were covered in
the Land Use and Circulation Element (LUCE) Final EIR and the project is consistent with
the development density established by existing zoning and general plan policies in the LUCE
Final EIR.
3. Based on analysis reflected in the project review record and review of prior City actions,
including, but not limited to, the approval of the Land Use and Circulation Update, the
Historic Preservation Ordinance and Guidelines, prior zoning code updates, and the
downtown height regulations, as set forth in Chapter 17.42 of the City’s Municipal Code, as
well as review and approval of the Downtown Concept Plan, the City finds that the project is
consistent with development previously analyzed and contemplated for the project site and is
consistent with the type and level of development previously approved for this site. The
project is consistent with all development standards applicable to the site, the project does not
cause any substantial adverse changes to the significance of the historical resource located on
the adjacent Jack House property, and the project does not present any other unusual
circumstances that may have a significant environmental impact that could support an
exception to the categorical exemption relied upon or otherwise require further environmental
review.
SECTION 3. Action. The Architectural Review Commission (ARC) hereby grants final
approval to the project with incorporation of the following conditions:
Planning Division – Community Development Department
1. The applicant shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City and/or its agents, officers
and employees from any claim, action or proceeding against the City and/or its agents,
officers or employees to attack, set aside, void or annul, the approval by the City of thi s
project, and all actions relating thereto, including but not limited to environmental review
(“Indemnified Claims”). The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any Indemnified
Claim upon being presented with the Indemnified Claim and the City shall fully cooperate in
the defense against an Indemnified Claim.
2. Final project design and construction drawings submitted for a building permit shall be in
substantial compliance with the project plans approved by the ARC. A separate, full-size
sheet shall be included in working drawings submitted for a building permit that lists all
conditions and code requirements of project approval listed as sheet number 2. Reference
ARC3 - 14
Resolution No. ARC- -17 ATTACHMENT 1
ARCH 2213-2015 (570, 578 & 590 Marsh & 581 Higuera Street)
Page 4
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.
3. Plans submitted for a building permit shall call out the colors and materials of all proposed
building surfaces and other improvements. Colors and materials shall be consistent with the
color and material board submitted with Architectural Review application.
4. The locations of all exterior lighting, including lighting on the structure, bollard style
landscaping or path lighting, shall be included in plans submitted for a building permit. All
wall-mounted lighting fixtures shall be clearly called out on building elevations included as
part of working drawings. All wall-mounted lighting shall complement building architecture.
The lighting schedule for the building shall include a graphic representation of the proposed
lighting fixtures and cut-sheets on the submitted building plans. The selected fixture(s) shall
be shielded to ensure that light is directed downward consistent with the requirements of the
City’s Night Sky Preservation standards contained in Chapter 17.23 of the Zoning
Regulations.
5. Mechanical and electrical equipment shall be located internally to the building. With submittal
of working drawings, the applicant shall include sectional views of the building, which clearly
show the sizes of any proposed condensers and other mechanical equipment. If any
condensers or other mechanical equipment is to be placed on the roof, plans submitted for a
building permit shall confirm that parapets and other roof features will provide adequate
screening. A line-of-sight diagram may be required to confirm that proposed screening will
be adequate. This condition applies to both initial project construction and later building
modifications and improvements.
6. A final landscaping plan, including irrigation details and plans, shall be submitted to the
Community Development Department along with working drawings. The legend for the
landscaping plan shall include the sizes and species of all groundcovers, shrubs, and trees with
corresponding symbols for each plant material showing their specific locations on plans.
7. The location of any required backflow preventer and double-check assembly shall be shown
on all site plans submitted for a building permit, including the landscaping plan. Construction
plans shall also include a scaled diagram of the equipment proposed. Where possible, as
determined by the Utilities Director, equipment shall be located inside the building within 20
feet of the front property line. Where this is not possible, as determined by the Utilities
Director, the backflow preventer and double-check assembly shall be located in the street yard
and screened using a combination of paint color, landscaping and, if deemed appropriate by
the Community Development Director, a low wall. The size and configuration of such
equipment shall be subject to review and approval by the Utilities and Community
Development Directors.
ARC3 - 15
Resolution No. ARC- -17 ATTACHMENT 1
ARCH 2213-2015 (570, 578 & 590 Marsh & 581 Higuera Street)
Page 5
8. Plans submitted for a building permit shall include all details, cut sheets, dimensions, and
specifications to ensure all materials, windows, and architectural details are of high quality
and suitable for a Downtown development project.
9. Plans submitted for a building permit shall include window details indicating the type of
materials for the window frames and mullions, their dimensions, and colors. Plans shall
include the materials and dimensions of all lintels, sills, surrounds recesses and other related
window features.
10. The project shall submit a separate application for a sign program for the site. The sign
program shall include information on the sizes, locations, colors, materials, types, and
illumination of all signage. Project signs shall be designed to be compatible with the
architecture of proposed buildings and complement the site’s setting.
11. The project shall install public art as part of the project in place of the in-lieu fee option. The
public art application shall be submitted to the Community Development Director. Approval
of public art shall be obtained prior to the issuance of a building permit.
12. The proposed project is permitted to unbundle parking for tenants of the project (commercial
and residential), however, they shall not sell parking (required or otherwise) to off-site users
unless a Use Permit is approved per Chapter 17.16.060.F (Off-site Parking) of the Municipal
Code. Unbundled parking is when the cost of parking is levied separately from the rent of
residential and commercial tenants.
Building Division – Community Development Department
13. All existing underlying property lines shall be merged through the voluntary merger process
or may be included within a lot line adjustment or subdivision process. The lines shall be
adjusted or merged prior to any construction permits unless otherwise approved for deferral
by the Community Development Director.
14. A roof plan shall be submitted as part of the construction documents submitted for building
permit application as none were incorporated in the entitlement set.
Engineering Division – Public Works/Community Development Department
15. Projects involving the construction of new structures requires that complete frontage
improvements be installed or that existing improvements be upgraded per city standard MC
12.16.050.
16. The building plan submittal shall show all new frontage along Marsh, Nipomo, and Higuera
to be in accordance with City Engineering Standards for the Mission Sidewalk District of
downtown.
ARC3 - 16
Resolution No. ARC- -17 ATTACHMENT 1
ARCH 2213-2015 (570, 578 & 590 Marsh & 581 Higuera Street)
Page 6
17. The building plan submittal shall show and note any sections of damaged or displaced curb,
gutter & sidewalk or driveway approach to be repaired or replaced to the satisfaction of the
Public Works Department.
18. The building plan submittal shall include the dimensions and bearings for all property lines
for reference. Any known property corner monuments shall be shown and noted on the plans
for reference. Include the monument at the corner of Marsh and Nipomo. Monuments shall
be preserved or re-established in accordance with current statutes.
19. The required public improvements may be included in the building permit plan submittal but
will ultimately need to stand alone as a separate miscellaneous public improvement plan per
City Engineering Standards with the standard signature cover sheet. Improvements located
within the public right-of-way will require a separate encroachment permit and associated
inspection fees. A separate plan review fee payable to the Public Works Department will be
required for the Public Works Department review of the public improvements associated with
the project. Said review fee shall be in accordance with the improvement plan review fee
resolution in effect at the time of the plan submittal. Record drawings will be required at the
completion of construction.
20. The building plan submittal or public improvement plans submittal shall include a complete
design prepared by a licensed Civil Engineer. The plan shall include all existing and proposed
improvements. The design shall show how drainage is being directed around the bulb out and
able to maintain minimum flows in the street gutter without the need for a sidewalk
underdrain. Drainage calculations may be required to confirm curb capacities and to evaluate
any spread into the adjoining travel lanes. If gravity flows are not possible or are undesirable,
the final design for either a sidewalk underdrain or additional catch basins shall be approved
by the City Engineer. The bulb out shall be designed to the satisfaction of the Public Works
Department. The transition from the widened sidewalk area back to the existing curb shall
include a minimum inside radius and minimum outside radius per City Engineering Standards.
A surface drainage strategy should be pursued for all areas of proposed sidewalk
widening/bulb-outs.
21. The project shall install two pedestrian level streetlights along the Nipomo frontage per City
Engineering Standards in accordance with the City approved layout plan. The streetlight
conduit shall be extended to the northerly limits of the project or PGE secondary point of
connection, whichever is closer to the proposed third future light along the Nipomo frontage
of 599 Higuera.
22. The applicant should consider providing secondary conduit to the proposed and/or existing
street trees for future tree lighting. If tree lighting is proposed, the system components shall
be installed in accordance with current City and Downtown Association (DA) guidelines and
standards and shall be approved to the satisfaction of the City and the DA.
23. The improvement plan submittal shall show the existing and proposed street parking, signage,
striping, and parking meter abandonments/relocations per city engineering standards. The
developer/contractor shall be responsible for all improvements including parking meter fees
ARC3 - 17
Resolution No. ARC- -17 ATTACHMENT 1
ARCH 2213-2015 (570, 578 & 590 Marsh & 581 Higuera Street)
Page 7
during construction. The demolition plan shall include a complete site inventory including
all existing signage, parking meters, and furniture in the public right-of-way.
24. The contractor shall provide a construction staging plan and schedule for review and approval
by the City prior to encroachment permit issuance. The developer/contractor shall provide
construction notification, project description, phasing and timing, and contact information to
the Downtown Association and affected businesses to the satisfaction of the City.
25. A “sidewalk dining” permit and/or a “tables and chairs” permit shall be required for any
dining in the public right-of-way. The necessary permits shall be completed to the satisfaction
of the Community Development Director.
26. The building plan submittal shall show an 8’ clear pedestrian path of travel void of all
sidewalk obstructions along all street frontages in order to meet pedestrian level of service
thresholds required for this area.
27. Any existing driveway approach that is not required for the new underground parking shall
be abandoned. The existing driveway approach used for the new underground parking shall
be upgraded per City and ADA Standards. The current City and ADA standard requires a 4’
sidewalk extension behind the ramp.
28. Development of the driveway and parking areas shall comply with the Parking and Driveway
Standards for dimension, maneuverability, materials, signing, and striping. The building plan
submittal shall show all parking spaces that are adjacent to a post, column, or wall sh all be
one additional foot in width per City Engineering Standard 2220.
29. Provisions for trash, recycle, and green waste containment, screening, and collection shall be
approved to the satisfaction of the City and San Luis Obispo Garbage Company. The
respective refuse storage area and on-site conveyance shall consider convenience, aesthetics,
safety, and functionality. Ownership boundaries and/or easements shall be considered in the
final design. The building plan submittal shall show the proposed trash en closure to comply
with Engineering Standard 1010.B for drainage and water quality standards.
30. The building plan submittal shall include a complete site utility plan. All existing and
proposed utilities along with utility company meters shall be shown. Existing underground
dry utilities and services shall be shown along with any proposed alterations or upgrades. All
work in the public right-of-way shall be shown or noted.
31. The applicant shall provide a copy of the Preliminary PGE design sketch to the engineer of
record and City of San Luis Obispo for review and approval prior to final design. The final
PGE handout package shall be reviewed by the engineer of record for consistency with the
design and shall be approved by the City of San Luis Obispo.
32. The building plan submittal shall include a final grading plan and drainage report for this
project. The drainage report shall consider any historic offsite drainage tributary to this
property that may need to be conveyed along with the improved on-site drainage. This
ARC3 - 18
Resolution No. ARC- -17 ATTACHMENT 1
ARCH 2213-2015 (570, 578 & 590 Marsh & 581 Higuera Street)
Page 8
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.
33. The project is located within a designated flood zone 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 Floodplain Management Regulations per Municipal Code Chapter
17.84.
34. This property is located in an AO (2’ depth) Flood Zone; the water surface or base flood
elevation (BFE) of a 100-year storm is 2’ above adjacent grade. The structure and building
service equipment must be raised or floodproofed to an elevation that is at least one foot above
the BFE or 3’ above the highest adjacent grade. Additional freeboard to 2’ above the BFE
may result in additional structure protection and savings on flood insurance and is strongly
encouraged.
35. The building plan submittal shall show the below grade parking structure to be dry
floodproofed per City and FEMA standards. The elevator designs and construction shall
comply with the most current FEMA Technical Bulletin.
36. The building plan submittal shall show compliance with the Post Construction Stormwater
Requirements as promulgated by the Regional Water Quality Control Board for redeveloped
sites. Include a complete Post Construction Stormwater Control Plan Template as available
on the City’s Website.
37. An operations and maintenance manual will be required for the post-construction stormwater
improvements. The manual shall be provided at the time of building permit application and
shall be accepted by the City prior to building permit issuance. A private stormwater
conveyance agreement will be required and shall be recorded prior to final inspection
approvals. If a direct connection to the public storm drain is proposed, an annual and recurring
inspection fee will be required in accordance with the storm drain connection fee schedule in
effect at the time of the permit approvals/connection.
38. The building plan submittal shall show all existing and proposed trees with a trunk diameter
of 3” or greater. Offsite trees along the adjoining property lines with canopies and/or root
systems that extend onto the property shall be shown or referenced. The plans shall note the
disposition of all trees. Include the diameter and species of all trees. Tree canopies should
generally be shown to scale for reference. The plan shall show all existing and proposed street
trees.
39. The building plan submittal shall show all proposed new street trees to be 24” box minimum.
Tree wells, grates and guards shall be in accordance with City Engineering Standards. Tree
species and planting requirements shall be per City Engineering Standards.
ARC3 - 19
Resolution No. ARC- -17 ATTACHMENT 1
ARCH 2213-2015 (570, 578 & 590 Marsh & 581 Higuera Street)
Page 9
40. The City Arborist supports the proposed tree removals with compensatory tree plantings.
Compensatory trees shall be provided at a 1 to 1 ratio. Compensatory trees (24” box) may be
planted on-site, in the public sidewalk, or at specific empty tree wells within the Downtown
area. Alternate planting locations outside of the Downtown shall be approved to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer and City Arborist.
41. Tree protection measures for the existing neighboring Walnut, Redwoods, and Ficus street
trees shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Arborist. Tree protection measures
shall comply with City’s Engineering Standard Specifications. The existing neighboring
Walnut tree canopy shall be pruned to match the amount of root pruning required for the
project. The City Arborist shall review and approve the proposed tree protection measures
prior to commencing with any demolition, grading, or construction. The City Arborist shall
approve any safety pruning, the cutting of substantial roots, or grading within the dripline of
trees on the property or on adjacent properties. A city-approved arborist shall complete safety
pruning. Any required tree protection measures shall be shown or noted on the building plans.
Transportation Division - Public Works Department
42. The building plan submittal shall show details of any gating facilities for the parking structure
access control. All clearances for the gating mechanicals shall be accommodated with
minimum ramp width maintained for vehicle access.
43. The building plan submittal shall show all parking spaces comply with City Engineering
Standards 2230, 2240 and 2250.
44. Parking for employees and residents shall be marked as such. The sentence in the “Basis of
Design for the Parking Structure Component”, submitted 2/6/17, “During the day when
residents leave the facility to travel to work, that space is available to staff looking for
parking” shall be deleted.
45. Building submittal shall show proposed signage for parking areas.
Utilities Department
46. The project will be required to provide a plan for the disposal, storage, and collection of solid
waste material for both the residential and commercial components of the project. The
development of the plan shall be coordinated with San Luis Garbage Company. The plan must
be submitted for approval by the City's Utilities Services Manager and the Community
Development Director.
47. In order to be reused, any existing sewer laterals proposed to serve the project must pass a
video inspection, including repair or replacement, as part of the project. The CCTV inspection
shall be submitted during the Building Permit Review Process for review and approval by the
Utilities Department prior to issuance of a Building Permit. Existing laterals that are not
proposed to be reused shall be abandoned at the City main consistent with City standards.
ARC3 - 20
Resolution No. ARC- -17 ATTACHMENT 1
ARCH 2213-2015 (570, 578 & 590 Marsh & 581 Higuera Street)
Page 10
48. A new sewer lateral is proposed to serve the project. Any existing sewer lateral tied in along
the Higuera, Nipomo, or Marsh Street project frontage must be abandoned at the main
consistent with City standards as part of the project. Any sewer lateral that crosses one
proposed parcel for the benefit of another shall provide evidence that a private utility easement
appropriate for those facilities has been recorded prior to final Building Permit.
49. The property is served by a series of existing water meters. The project’s Building Permit
submittal shall clearly show the disposition of all existing water meters. For the proposed
project, commercial and residential uses shall be metered separately. All residential units are
to be individually metered. Privately owned sub-meters may be provided for residential
condominiums upon approval of the Utilities Director or her/his designee. The CCR’s for the
property/homeowner association shall require that the sub-meters be read by the association
(or a contracted service) and each condominium billed according to water use. Per Chapter
13.4.120 of the City’s Municipal Code, separate parcels will be supplied through individual
water service connections and private service lines shall not cross parcel boundaries unless
authorized by the Utilities Department.
50. During the declared drought emergency, the project’s estimated total wate r use (ETWU) to
support new landscaping shall not exceed 50 percent of maximum applied water allowance
(MAWA). Information shall be submitted during the Building Permit Review Process for
review and approval by the Utilities Department prior to issuance of a Building Permit to
support required water demand of the project’s proposed landscaping.
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 6th day of November 2017.
_____________________________
Doug Davidson, Secretary
Architectural Review Commission
ARC3 - 21
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
MARSHHIGUERAVICINITY MAP ARCH-2213-2015
570, 578 & 590 Marsh Street and 581 Higuera Street ¯
ATTACHMENT 2
ARC3 - 22
July 17, 2015 (Sent via Email)
PB Companies
3480 South Higuera Street, Suite 130
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Subject: ARCH-0609-2014 (570, 578 & 590 Marsh & 581 Higuera Streets): 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.
Dear Lady and Gentlemen:
On July 13, 2015, the CHC and the ARC met to review the new mixed-use project located at
570, 578 & 590 Marsh & 581 Higuera Streets. The CHC and the ARC have provided a list of
directional items below that are to be included in the final plan submittal.
The CHC provided the following direction:
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 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.
ATTACHMENT 3
ARC3 - 23
ARCH-0609-2014 – CHC/ARC Directional Items
July 17, 2015
Page 2
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.
The ARC provided the following direction:
1. Orient all of the plan sheets the same way and include a North arrow.
2. Provide plans that include the whole project at each site level (better shows features such
as the bridges that connect 570 and 590 Marsh).
3. Note elevations with directional titles (i.e. north, south, east, and west) with composite
elevations showing relation to other project buildings (581 west and 570 west, for
example).
4. Provide a massing model of the project within its wider context in the downtown area
(not just with adjacent properties).
5. Provide a solar study for both the summer and the winter solstice.
6. Provide appropriate/equivalent sized affordable housing units.
7. Consider supplying parking on-site for residential units.
8. Include high quality (monumental materials) such as stone as part of the project (do not
use wood).
9. Provide more information on the plaza and paseos (width, use, etc.) and consider
expanding the space or notching out areas that are wider to allow more sunlight within
these areas and not create non-active alleys.
10. Consider providing a public roof viewing area that is not connected to a business.
11. Provide various views from the Jack House property (and even from inside the Jack
House) and how the project will impact those views.
12. Simplify window design and reconsider window sizing on 590 Marsh and 581 Higuera
(vertical windows are preferred).
13. Provide detailed information on the window glazing throughout the project.
ATTACHMENT 3
ARC3 - 24
ARCH-0609-2014 – CHC/ARC Directional Items
July 17, 2015
Page 3
14. Consider using less glass and curtain-wall glass in the project (e.g. in the circulation
towers) and integrate materials that are already being used on the building in place of the
glass.
15. Provide upper story setbacks and pay particular attention to building height along the
property line shared with the Jack House.
16. Consider keeping 570 Marsh to three stories in deference to the Jack House and
eliminating unit #21 from 581 Higuera in deference to the Jack House.
17. Incorporate additional articulation on upper floor wall planes and step back upper floor(s)
of 581 Higuera. Four floors may be acceptable for this project, but not all in the same
plane.
18. Supply an affordable housing plan in accordance with the City’s Housing Element and as
part of the justification for the proposed building height.
Directional items from the staff report:
1. The final ARC submittal shall include all the necessary required information for the additional
height as stipulated in Section 17.42.020.3 of the Zoning Regulations.
2. 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. Signage design may be tailored for individual buildings, but site directional
signs and tenant directory signs should have a coordinated design.
3. Include detailed information on pedestrian pathways, wall and site lighting, location of
backflow prevention devices, and screening of mechanical equipment.
4. 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.
5. Provide a feasibility study for the subterranean parking garage.
If you have any questions regarding this letter, please contact me at (805) 781-7574.
Sincerely,
Rachel Cohen
Associate Planner
Community Development Department
919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-2710
rcohen@slocity.org
ATTACHMENT 3
ARC3 - 25
DATE: MAY 13, 2016#1014071March 24, 2017T1Sheet Index T1 TITLE SHEET / MARSH PERSPECTIVET2 CODE ANALYSIS- OCCUPANT LOADSA1 570 MARSH RENDERINGSA2 590 MARSH RENDERINGA3 581 HIGUERA RENDERINGSA4 PEDESTRIAN PASEO RENDERINGSA5.1 OVERALL SITE PLAN - LEVEL 1A5.2 OVERALL SITE PLAN - LEVEL 2A5.3 OVERALL SITE PLAN - LEVEL 3A5.4 OVERALL SITE PLAN - LEVEL 4A6 LEVEL -1 PARKING PLANA7 LEVEL -2 PARKING PLANC1 CIVIL GRADING & DRAINAGE PLANC2 CIVIL UTILITY PLANC3 CIVIL FRONTAGE IMPROVEMENT PLAN C4 CIVIL FRONTAGE IMPROVEMENT PLANC5 CIVIL GRADING & DRAINAGE PLANC6 TOPOGRAPHIC MAPA8 581 ELEVATIONSA9 581 ELEVATIONSA10 581 ELEVATIONSA11 581 DESIGN DETAIL SHEETA12 581 DESIGN DETAIL SHEETA13 581 COLOR AND MATERIALSA14 570 ELEVATIONSA15 570 ELEVATIONSA16 570 DESIGN DETAIL SHEETA17 570 COLOR AND MATERIALSA18 590 ELEVATIONSA19 590 ELEVATIONSA20 590 DESIGN DETAIL SHEETA21 590 DESIGN DETAIL SHEETA22 590 COLOR AND MATERIALSL1 LANDSCAPE PLANL2 CONCEPTUAL PLANTING PLANL3 TREE PLANL4 LANDSCAPE COLOR AND MATERIALSL5 LANDSCAPE COLOR AND MATERIALSA23 CONCEPT SITE LIGHTINGA24 SIGNAGEA25 PEDESTRIAN PASEO COMPARITIVE EXHIBITSA26 PEDESTRIAN PASEO COMPARITIVE EXHIBITS A27 ENTRIES AND PLAZA PLANA28 BICYCLE CIRCULATION PLANA29 OVERALL SITE SECTIONA30 JACK HOUSE RENDERINGSA31 JACK HOUSE RENDERINGSA32 SHADE STUDY - VERNAL EQUINOX A33 SHADE STUDY - SUMMER SOLSTICE A34 SHADE STUDY - AUTUMNAL EQUINOX A35 SHADE STUDY - WINTER SOLSTICE A36 CONTEXT PERSPECTIVES - HIGUERA STREETA37 CONTEXT PERSPECTIVES - MARSH STREETA38 CONTEXT PERSPECTIVES - NIPOMO STREETA39 UNIT DISTRIBUTIONA40 UNIT DISTRIBUTIONA41 UNIT DISTRIBUTIONProject Directory570 MarshThe Five 90581 HigueraProject Info:Project StatementVicinity MapOWNER: Marsh Nipomo Mixed Use, LP3480 S. Higuera Street, Suite 130San Luis Obispo, Ca. 93401ARCHITECTS: RRM Design Group3765 S.Higuera Street, Suite 102San Luis Obispo, Ca. 93401Contact: Pat BlotePhone: (805) 543-1794Email: plblote@rrmdesign.comIsaman Design, Inc.1027 Marsh Street, Suite 200San Luis Obispo, Ca. 93401Contact: Bill IsamanPhone: (805) 544-5672Ten Over Studio539 Marsh Street San Luis Obispo, Ca. 93401Contact: Jim DuffyPhone: (805) 541-1010PROJECT ADDRESS: 570 / 590 Marsh St. & 581 Higuera San Luis Obispo, Ca. 93401*APN NUMBERS: 003 - 511 - 013 003 - 511 - 023 003 - 511 - 024 003 - 511 - 025 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.COMMERCIAL PARKING REQUIRED : C-D Zone, Chapter 17.16, Section H (TABLE 6):RETAIL: 1 per 500 sf GFA = (1220+1695+1859) SF/500 = 10 SPACESGROCERIES: 1 per 500 sf GFA = (5297) SF/500 = 11 SPACESRESTAURANT: 1 per 350 sf (Per Municipal Code 17.16.060 H.2) (4436+2185+3100) SF/350 = 28 SPACESLOUNGE: 1 per 350 sf (Per Municipal Code 17.16.060 H.2) 880 SF/350 = 3 SPACESCOMMUNAL KITCHEN: 1 per 500 sf (Per Municipal Code 17.16.060 H.4) 880 SF/500 = 2 SPACES TOTAL COMMERCIAL REQUIRED: 54 SPACESRESIDENTIAL PARKING REQUIRED : C-D Zone, Chapter 17.16, Section H (TABLE 6):MIXED USE / MULTIFAMILY : STUDIOS : 40 UNITS x .5 per unit = 20 SPACES1 BEDROOM : 22 UNITS x .75per unit =16.5 SPACESADDITIONAL GUEST SPACES REQUIRED : 1 space for every 10 units : 62 units /10 = 6.2 SPACESTOTAL RESIDENTIAL PARKING REQUIRED: 43 SPACESHOTEL PARKING REQUIRED : C-D Zone, Chapter 17.16, Section H (TABLE 6): HOTEL ROOMS: 36 UNITS x .5 per room = 18 SPACESEMPLOYEES: =2 SPACESTOTAL HOTEL PARKING REQUIRED: 20 SPACESTOTAL PROJECT PARKING REQUIRED: 54+43+20 = 117 SPACES ON-SITE PARKING PROVIDED: = 136 SPACES EXCESS / (SHORT) = ( +19 SPACES )BICYCLE PARKING REQUIRED : C-D ZONE, Chapter 17.16, Section H (TABLE 6):# OF BICYCLE SPACES AS A % OF REQ’D AUTO SPACES: 15% : 167*.15 = 25 BICYCLE SPACES Minimum short-term bicycle spaces: 50% : 25 *.50 =13 bike short term spacesMinimum long-term bicycle spaces: 50% : 25 *.40 =10 bike long term spacesBicycle Parking Provided: 25 short term bike spaces 12 long term spacesTOTAL BICYCLE PARKING PROVDED: 37 BICYCLE SPACES EXCESS / (SHORT) = +12 SPACESMOTORCYCLE PARKING REQUIRED : C-D ZONE, Chapter 17.16, Section G:# OF MOTORCYCLE SPACES AS A % OF REQ’D AUTO SPACES: 5% : 167*.05 = 9 MOTORCYCLE SPACES(1 MOTORCYCLE PER 20 REQUIRED PARKING SPACES) TOTAL MOTORCYCLE PARKING PROVDED: 9 MOTORCYCLE SPACES EXCESS / (SHORT) = 0 SPACESProject StatsZoning: C-D (Downtown Commercial)Current Use: CommercialS.F. of Commercial Space: +/- 24,800 S.F.Parcel B: 003 - 511 - 013 : 21,344 SF = .49 AC*Parcel C: 003 - 511 - 023 : 4,005 SF = .0919 AC*Parcel D: 003 - 511 - 024 : 4,525 SF = .1039 AC*Parcel E: 003 - 511 - 025 : 12,736 SF = .2939 AC*Total SF of Parcels B-E: 42,610 SF = 0.9797 AC*Allowed Density: 36 D.U. / Acre0.9797 Acre (36 D.U.) = 35.27 D.U.*PROPOSED MULTIFAMILY UNITS: STUDIOS < 450SF: 40 UNITS x .50 DU = 20 DU1 BEDROOM: 22 UNITS x .66 DU = 14.52 DUTOTAL UNITS: 62 UNITS = 34.52 DUProject Density = 34.52*All 1 BEDROOM UNITS WILL BE REDUCED TO 1,000 SF OR LESS PER SAN LUIS OBISPO MUNICIPAL CODE 17.100.150 IN FUTURE DESIGN DEVELOPMENTParking Requirements(see General Plan sec. 3.1.6 Building Intensity )Allowed F.A.R. is 3.75 In downtown area.Project SIte Area: 42,610 S.F. (0.9797 Acres)Proposed Number of Stories = 4 StoriesProposed Building Heights: 54’-6” to 59’-6”570 Marsh Total Proposed Floor Area = 22,871 S.F.590 Marsh Total Proposed Floor Area = 40,383 S.F581 Higuera Total Proposed Floor Area = 47,616 S.FTOTAL PROJECT FLOOR AREA = 110,870 S.F110,870 SF TOTAL FLOOR AREA / 42,610 SF PROJECT SITE AREA = 2.60 F.A.RF.A.R CalcsPublic Art:The applicant has allocated space within the project for public art, and intends to continue with the formal public art process.*ALL 1 BEDROOM UNITS WILL BE REDUCED TO 1,000 SF OR LESS, AND ALL STUDIOS WILL BE REDUCED TO 450 SF OR LESS PER SAN LUIS OBISPO MUNICIPAL CODE 17.100.150 IN FUTURE DESIGN DEVELOPMENTThe 570T1 TITLE SHEETT2 PRELIMINARY CODE ANALYSIS A1 570 MARSH RENDERINGSA2 590 MARSH RENDERINGA3 581 HIGUERA RENDERINGS A4 PEDESTRIAN PASEO RENDERINGSA5.1 OVERALL SITE PLAN - LEVEL 1 A5.2 OVERALL SITE PLAN - LEVEL 2 A5.3 OVERALL SITE PLAN - LEVEL 3 A5.4 OVERALL SITE PLAN - LEVEL 4A6 PARKING PLAN - LEVEL 1A7 PARKING PLAN - LEVEL 2A8 ALTERNATIVE PARKING PLAN - LEVEL 1A9 ALTERNATIVE PARKING PLAN - LEVEL 2C1 CIVIL GRADING & DRAINAGE PLAN C2 CIVIL UTILITY PLANC3 CIVIL FRONTAGE IMPROVEMENT PLAN C4 CIVIL FRONTAGE IMPROVEMENT PLAN C5 CIVIL GRADING & DRAINAGE PLANC6 TOPOGRAPHIC MAPA10 581 VICINICTY MAPA11 581 ELEVATIONSA12 581 ELEVATIONSA13 581 ELEVATIONSA14 581 DESIGN DETAIL SHEETA15 581 DESIGN DETAIL SHEETA16 581 COLOR AND MATERIALSA17 570 VICINITY MAPA18 570 ELEVATIONSA19 570 ELEVATIONSA20 570 DESIGN DETAIL SHEETA21 570 COLOR AND MATERIALSA22 590 VICINITY MAPA23 590 ELEVATIONSA24 590 ELEVATIONSA25 590 DESIGN DETAIL SHEETA26 590 DESIGN DETAIL SHEETA27 590 COLOR AND MATERIALS L1 LANDSCAPE PLANL2 CONCEPTUAL PLANTING PLANL3 TREE PLANL4 LANDSCAPE COLOR AND MATERIALSL5 LANDSCAPE COLOR AND MATERIALS L6 GREEN BUILDING FEATURESA28 CONCEPT SITE LIGHTINGA29 SIGNAGEA30 PUBLIC ARTA31 PEDESTRIAN PASEO COMPARITIVE EXHIBITS A32 PEDESTRIAN PASEO COMPARITIVE EXHIBITS A33 ENTRIES AND PLAZA PLANA34 BICYCLE CIRCULATION PLANA35 OVERALL SITE SECTIONA36 JACK HOUSE RENDERINGSA37 JACK HOUSE RENDERINGSA38 SHADE STUDY - VERNAL EQUINOX A39 SHADE STUDY - SUMMER SOLSTICE A40 SHADE STUDY - AUTUMNAL EQUINOX A41 SHADE STUDY - WINTER SOLSTICE A42 SHADE STUDY COMPLIANCEA43 CONTEXT PERSPECTIVES - HIGUERA STREET A44 CONTEXT PERSPECTIVES - MARSH STREET A45 CONTEXT PERSPECTIVES - NIPOMO STREETSheet IndexProject StatementSan 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 4ARC3 - 26
DATE: MAY 13, 2016#1014071March 24, 2017T2Preliminary Code Analysis570 MARSH - ALLOWABLE AREA CALCULATIONSConstruction TypeType V-AAllowables per StoryOccupancy MAllowable Area per floor 42,000 SFAllowable Stories 4Allowable Height 70'Occupancy R-2Allowable Area per floor 36,000 SFAllowable Stories 4Allowable Height 60'Actual AreasGround Floor RetailM6,290 SFSecond Floor ResidentialR-26,290 SFThird Floor ResidentialR-26,290 SFFourth Floor ResidentialR-24,073 SFTotal Building Area 22,943 SFTotal Allowable Building AreaRatios of actuals/allowables0.61590 MARSH - ALLOWABLE AREA CALCULATIONSConstruction TypeType V-AAllowables per StoryOccupancy A-2Allowable Area per floor 34,500 SFAllowable Stories 2Allowable Height 50'Occupancy R-2Allowable Area per floor 36,000 SFAllowable Stories 4Allowable Height 60'Actual AreasGround Floor RestaurantA-28,800 SFSecond Floor ResidentialR-29,135 SFThird Floor ResidentialR-29,671 SFFourth Floor ResidentialR-27,374 SFTotal Building Area 34,980 SFTotal Allowable Building AreaRatios of actuals/allowables0.98581 HIGUERA - ALLOWABLE AREA CALCULATIONSConstruction TypeType V-AAllowables per StoryOccupancy A-2Allowable Area per floor 34,500 SFAllowable Stories 2Allowable Height 50'Occupancy MAllowable Area per floor 42,000 SFAllowable Stories 3Allowable Height 75'Occupancy R-1Allowable Area per floor 36,000 SFAllowable Stories 3Allowable Height 50'Occupancy R-2Allowable Area per floor 36,000 SFAllowable Stories 4Allowable Height 60'Actual AreasGround Floor RestaurantA-23,863 SFGround Floor RetailM8,130 SFGround Floor HotelR-12,625 SFSecond Floor HotelR-114,590 SFThird Floor HotelR-114,590 SFFourth Floor ResidentialR-210,463 SFTotal Building Area 54,261 SFTotal Allowable Building AreaRatios of actuals/allowables1.48GARAGE- ALLOWABLE AREA CALCULATIONSConstruction TypeType I-AOccupancy S-2Allowable Area per floorUnlimited SFAllowable StoriesUnlimitedAllowable HeightUnlimitedActual AreasParking Basement 1S-2 B134,743 SFParking Basement 2S-2 B234,743 SFTotal Building Area69,486 SFTotal Allowable Building AreaN/ACODE ANALYSISCode InterpretationOccupancyA-2, M, R-1, R-2, S-2309.1Construction TypeV-A, I-AT-503Automatic Fire SprinklersYesATTACHMENT 4ARC3 - 27
A1March 24, 2017570 Marsh RenderingsView of the 570 building from Marsh StreetView of the 570 building from Marsh StreetATTACHMENT 4ARC3 - 28
A2March 24, 2017590 Marsh RenderingView of the 590 building from the corner of Marsh and Nipomo StreetATTACHMENT 4ARC3 - 29
View of the 581 building from Higuera StreetView of the 581 building from the corner of Nipomo and Higuera StreetA3March 24, 2017581 Higuera RenderingsATTACHMENT 4ARC3 - 30
A4March 24, 2017Pedestrian Paseo RenderingsATTACHMENT 4ARC3 - 31
March 24, 2017San Luis Obispo, Ca.A5.1581 HIGUERAGROCERYRESTAURANTATTACHMENT 4ARC3 - 32
SCALE: 1/16”=1’-0”0816 32 64NORTHNOTE: VERTICAL STANDPIPE FOR FIREFIGHTING PURPOSES SHALL BE PROVIDED WITHIN EACH STAIRWELLBuilding Rm # SF Unit Type201 675 1 bdrm202 664 1 bdrm203 436 studio204 450 studio205 806 1 bdrm206 1099 1 bdrm201 450 studio202 450 studio203 450 studio204 1000 1 bdrm205 450 studio206 920 1 bdrm207 450 studio208 450 studio209 450 studio210 450 studio211 750 1 bdrm212 395 studioBuilding Rm # SF Unit Type201 435 Suite202 435 Suite203 435 Suite204 435 Suite205 638 Suite206 621 Suite207 621 Suite208 638 Suite209 435 Suite210 435 Suite211 435 Suite212 435 Suite213 420 Suite214 420 Suite215 638 Suite216 630 Suite217 630 Suite218 638 Suite570590581Level 2 Hotel Unit MixLevel 2 Residential Unit Mix186 SF675 SF1099 SF64 SF664 SF436 SF450 SF806 SF505 SF141 SF119 SF173 SF 230 SF104 SFMarch 24, 2017DATE: MARCH 3, 2016#1014071San Luis Obispo, Ca.A5.2ATTACHMENT 4ARC3 - 33
NOTE: VERTICAL STANDPIPE FOR FIREFIGHTING PURPOSES SHALL BE PROVIDED WITHIN EACH STAIRWELLBuilding Rm # SF Unit Type301 692 1 bdrm302 650 1 bdrm303 430 studio304 450 studio305 651 1 bdrm306 894 1 bdrm301 450 studio302 450 studio303 450 studio304 1000 1 bdrm305 450 studio306 920 1 bdrm307 450 studio308 450 studio309 450 studio310 450 studio311 750 1 bdrm312 930 1 bdrmBuilding Rm # SF Unit Type301 435 Suite302 435 Suite303 435 Suite304 435 Suite305 638 Suite306 621 Suite307 621 Suite308 638 Suite309 435 Suite310 435 Suite311 435 Suite312 435 Suite313 420 Suite314 420 Suite315 638 Suite316 630 Suite317 630 Suite318 638 SuiteLevel 3 Hotel Unit Mix581570590Level 3 Residential Unit Mix104 SF692 SF650 SF430 SF450 SF851 SF894 SF546 SF147 SF104 SF186 SF95 SF 397 SF119 SF93 SFMarch 24, 2017A5.3ATTACHMENT 4ARC3 - 34
SCALE: 1/16”=1’-0”0816 32 64NORTHNOTE: VERTICAL STANDPIPE FOR FIREFIGHTING PURPOSES SHALL BE PROVIDED WITHIN EACH STAIRWELLBuilding Rm # SF Unit Type401 450 studio402 708 1 bdrm403 740 1 bdrm404 450 studio401 450 studio402 450 studio403 450 studio404 800 1 bdrm405 450 studio406 450 studio407 450 studio408 450 studio409 450 studio410 700 1 bdrm411 380 studio401 435 studio402 435 studio403 435 studio404 435 studio405 952 1 bdrm406 952 1 bdrm407 435 studio408 435 studio409 435 studio410 435 studio312 740 1 bdrm581Level 4 Residential Unit Mix570590450 SF708 SF122 SF83 SF126 SF740 SF450 SF420 SF79 SF278 SF186 SFMarch 24, 2017A5.4Overall Site Plan - Level 4ATTACHMENT 4ARC3 - 35
UPMN242526F181716151422GHOPDE23IJKL121311' - 0"28' - 7"25' - 8"24' - 0"26' - 3"18' - 6"E22' - 7"29' - 9"29' - 9"29' - 9"29' - 9"18' - 6"29' - 9"29' - 9"29' - 9"29' - 9"38' - 6"EcccccccLOBBYABOVEcTOTAL PARKING67 SPACES18' - 5"23' - 6"18' - 5"23' - 6"18' - 5"16' - 0"28' - 4"16' - 0"23' - 6"16' - 0"2' - 5"18' - 5"24' - 3"18' - 5"18' - 5"SLOPEDOWNSLOPE DOWNFROM STREETEXISTING FICUSEXISTING FICUSELECTRIC VEHICLECHARGING STATIONSA6March 24, 2017Parking Plan - Level 1Note: Below Grade parking structure shall be dry ÁRRGSURRIHGSHUFLW\·V)(0$VWDQGDUGV6HHGHWDLOproposed in Summary letter to ARCSCALE: 1/16”=1’-0”0816 32 64NORTHParking Plan - Level 1Retain both Ficus Trees on Marsh StreetTotal Level 1 Parking Spaces - 67Total Level 1 Motorcycle Parking - 6 ATTACHMENT 4ARC3 - 36
ELECTRIC VEHICLECHARGING STATIONSA7March 24, 2017Parking Plan - Level 2SCALE: 1/16”=1’-0”0816 32 64NORTHNote: Below Grade parking structure shall be dry ÁRRGSURRIHGSHUFLW\·V)(0$VWDQGDUGV6HHGHWDLOproposed in Summary letter to ARCParking Plan - Level 2Retain both Ficus Trees on Marsh StreetTotal Level 2 Parking Spaces - 69Total Level 2 Motorcycle Parking - 3ATTACHMENT 4ARC3 - 37
Note: Below Grade parking structure shall be dry ÁRRGSURRIHGSHUFLW\·V)(0$VWDQGDUGV6HHGHWDLOproposed in Summary letter to ARCELECTRIC VEHICLECHARGING STATIONSA8March 24, 2017Alternative Parking Plan - Level 1Remove both Ficus Trees on Marsh StreetTotal Level 1 Spaces - 77Total Level 1 Motorcycle Parking - 6 Alternative Parking Plan - Level 1ATTACHMENT 4ARC3 - 38
Note: Below Grade parking structure shall be dry ÁRRGSURRIHGSHUFLW\·V)(0$VWDQGDUGV6HHGHWDLOproposed in Summary letter to ARCELECTRIC VEHICLECHARGING STATIONSAlternative Parking Plan - Level 2A9March 24, 2017Alternative Parking Plan - Level 2Remove both Ficus Trees on Marsh StreetTotal Level 2 Spaces - 76Total Level 2 Motorcycle Parking - 3ATTACHMENT 4ARC3 - 39
SDSDSDXXXXSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSD(186)(186)(188)(189)(189)XXX188.68FS1.6%EXIST TREE TO REMAINEXIST TREE TO REMAIN1FLOOD GATENTS020 20 40HORIZONTAL SCALE: FEETNC1March 24, 2017Civil Grading and DrainageCivil Grading and Drainage PlanATTACHMENT 4ARC3 - 40
SSSSDSDSDETXXXXTSSSSSSSSDSSSSSSSSSSSSSGGGGGGGGWWWWWWWWWWWWWWEEEEEEEEEEESDSDSDSDSDTTTTTTTVTVTVTVTVTVSDWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWSSSSSSGGGGGGGWWWSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDSDWWWWWWWWTTTTTTTTGTTTETVEEEEEEETTTTTTTTVTVTVTVTVTVGGGGGTEETVEEEETTEGWWWWW(186)(186)(188)(189)(189)XXXELECTRICAL NOTES:ALL EXISTING AND PROPOSED UTILITIES SHALL BE UNDERGROUNDEDSD1SD2SD2SS1W1SS1W1SD3SD3W1STORM DRAIN CONSTRUCTION NOTES:SANITARY SEWER CONSTRUCTION NOTES:WATER CONSTRUCTION NOTES:2" DOMESTIC METER AND 2" FIRE SUPPLYSS2SS2SD3C2March 24, 2017Civil Utility PlanCivil Utility PlanATTACHMENT 4ARC3 - 41
SDSD(188)(189)20'END OF (E) MISSIONSTYLE SIDEWALK(E) NO PARKINGSIGN TO REMAIN(E) PARKING METERTO REMAIN(E) TRAFFIC SIGNALTO REMAIN(E) SIGNAL BOXTO REMAIN4563'3'(189.99 FL)2.0%TYP2.0%TYP6(187.45 FL)1422R12'46(188)(189)(E) DRIVEWAYTO BE REMOVEDEND OF (E) MISSIONSTYLE SIDEWALK(E) NO PARKINGSIGN TO REMAIN(E) PARKING METERTO REMAIN(E) WATER METERTO BE REMOVED(E) STREET TREETO BE REMOVED(E) WATER VALVETO REMAIN(E) TRAFFIC SIGNALTO REMAIN(E) SIGNAL BOXTO REMAIN(E) MISSION STYLECURB RETURN TOBE REMOVED010 10 20HORIZONTAL SCALE: FEETNSITE CONSTRUCTION NOTES:PROPOSED 6" CURB AND 18" GUTTERPROPOSED MISSION STYLE SIDEWALKPROPOSED DRIVEWAYPROPOSED SIDEWALK UNDERDRAINPROPOSED CATCH BASINPROPOSED STREET TREE AND GRATE2PROPOSED FRONTAGE IMPROVEMENTS - NIPOMO STREET1EXISTING PARKING CONDITIONS - NIPOMO STREET010 10 20HORIZONTAL SCALE: FEETNC3March 24, 2017Civil Frontage ImprovementsCivil Frontage ImprovementsATTACHMENT 4ARC3 - 42
MARSH STREETMARSH STREETC4March 24, 2017Civil Frontage ImprovementsCivil Frontage ImprovementsATTACHMENT 4ARC3 - 43
SDSDSD (186)(186)(E) TRAFFIC SIGNALTO REMAIN(E) SIGNAL BOXTO REMAIN(E) PARKINGTO REMAIN24'35' LOADING ZONE(1.63%)(E) PARKING METERTO REMAIN(E) PARKING METERTO REMAIN(E) PARKING METERTO REMAIN(E) PG&E BOXESTO REMAIN(E) PARKING METERTO REMAIN(E) STREET LIGHTTO REMAIN(E) PG&E BOXESTO REMAINR12'22266664112%TYP2%TYP10'17'R20'R20'
R10'R10'R20'(E) STREET TREETO REMAIN010 10 20HORIZONTAL SCALE: FEETN2PROPOSED FRONTAGE IMPROVEMENTS - HIGUERA STREET(186)(186)(E) TRAFFIC SIGNALTO REMAIN(E) SIGNAL BOXTO REMAIN(E) MISSION STYLECURB RETURN TOBE REMOVED(E) PARKING METERTO BE REMOVED(E) PARKING METERTO BE REMOVED(E) PARKING METERTO BE REMOVED(E) WATER METERTO BE REMOVED(E) DRIVEWAYTO BE REMOVED(E) PARKINGTO BE REMOVED(E) DRIVEWAYTO BE REMOVED1EXISTING PARKING CONDITIONS - NIPOMO STREET010 10 20HORIZONTAL SCALE: FEETNSITE CONSTRUCTION NOTES:PROPOSED 6" CURB AND 18" GUTTERPROPOSED MISSION STYLE SIDEWALKPROPOSED DRIVEWAYPROPOSED SIDEWALK UNDERDRAINPROPOSED CATCH BASINPROPOSED STREET TREE AND GRATEMARSH STREETMARSH STREETC5March 24, 2017Civil Grading and DrainageCivil Grading and Drainage PlanATTACHMENT 4ARC3 - 44
C6March 24, 2017Topographic MapATTACHMENT 4ARC3 - 45
A10March 24, 2017ATTACHMENT 4ARC3 - 46
East ElevationSan 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.A11March 24, 201757’ - 0” TOPOF ROOF59’ - 6” TOPOF ROOF47’ - 6” TOPOF ROOF44’ -0” F.F.32’ - 0” F.F.20’ - 0” F.F.14’ - 0” BOTOF CANOPY64’ - 0” TOPOF ROOF66’ - 0” TOPSTAIRS581 Elevations581 ElevationsEast ElevationAs seen from Marsh Street West ElevationAs seen from Higuera Street081/8" = 1'-0"SCALE:42116081/8" = 1'-0"SCALE:42116ATTACHMENT 4ARC3 - 47
SCALE: 1/8”=1’-0”0 4 81632San 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” TOPOF ROOF57’ - 0” TOPOF ROOF44’ -0” F.F.32’ - 0” F.F.20’ - 0” F.F.14’ - 0” BOTOF CANOPY59’ - 6” TOPOF ROOF66’ - 0” TOPOF STAIRS47’ - 6” TOPOF ROOFA12March 24, 2017581 Elevations581 ElevationsNorth Elevation As seen from Nipomo Street081/8" = 1'-0"SCALE:42116ATTACHMENT 4ARC3 - 48
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” TOPOF ROOF66’ - 0” TOPOF STAIRS47’ - 6” TOPOF ROOF64’ - 0” TOPOF ROOF57’ - 0” TOPOF ROOF44’ -0” F.F.32’ - 0” F.F.20’ - 0” F.F.14’ - 0” BOTOF CANOPYA13March 24, 2017581 Elevations581 ElevationsSouth ElevationAs seen from the Jack House081/8" = 1'-0"SCALE:42116ATTACHMENT 4ARC3 - 49
A14March 24, 2017581 Design Detail SheetsBrick Lintel at Windows and OpeningsSteel and Perforated Metal CanopiesArcade Dining AreaConcrete BulkheadPaseo Dining AreaSteel Rod and Plate Tie-backsCustom Perforated and Flat Metal Wall SconceWrought Iron Blade SignRecessed Accent Course for Horizontal Banding on Brick ColumnsWrought Iron BalconiesAluminum French Doors Dark BronzeWrought Iron BracketDark Bronze Aluminum Windows at TransomMetal Canopies at Storefront OpeningsDark Bronze AluminumAccordion Doors Cut-out Address Lettersin Metal Wall Panel at Residential EntryATTACHMENT 4ARC3 - 50
A15March 24, 2017581Design Detail SheetsPanelto reduce glareATTACHMENT 4ARC3 - 51
A16March 24, 2017581 Color and MaterialsBrickRobinson’s “English Pub”Corten Steel Panel Metal Wall and Roof Panels Dark BronzeCustom MetalWall SconceATTACHMENT 4ARC3 - 52
A17March 24, 2017ATTACHMENT 4ARC3 - 53
SCALE: 1/8”=1’-0”SCALE: 1/8”=1’-0”0 4 816320 4 8163217’-6” F.F.29’-6” F.F.42’-0” F.F.54’-6” TOP OF ROOF 17’-6” F.F.29’-6” F.F.42’-0” F.F.54’-6” TOP OF ROOF 63’-6” TOPOF ROOF63’-6” TOP OF ROOF 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.A18March 24, 2017East ElevationAs seen from Marsh StreetNorth Elevation As seen from Nipomo Street570 Elevations570 ElevationsATTACHMENT 4ARC3 - 54
17’-6” F.F.29’-6” F.F.42’-0” F.F.54’-6” TOP OF ROOF 63’-6” TOP OF ROOF 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.A19March 24, 2017West Elevation As seen from Higuera StreetSouth Elevation As seen from the Jack HouseSCALE: 1/8”=1’-0”SCALE: 1/8”=1’-0”0 4 816320 4 81632570 Elevations570 Elevations17’-6” F.F.29’-6” F.F.42’-0” F.F.54’-6” TOP OF ROOF 63’-6” TOP OF ROOF ATTACHMENT 4ARC3 - 55
A20March 24, 2017570 Design Detail SheetATTACHMENT 4ARC3 - 56
A21March 24, 2017570 Color and MaterialsATTACHMENT 4ARC3 - 57
A22March 24, 2017ATTACHMENT 4ARC3 - 58
0 8' 16' 24'0 8' 16' 24'A23March 24, 201717'-6" F.F.19'-6" F.F.42'-0" F.F.54'-6" TOPOF ROOF17'-6" F.F.19'-6" F.F.42'-0" F.F.54'-6" TOPOF ROOF590 Elevations590 ElevationsSouth ElevationAs seen from The Jack HouseEast ElevationAs seen from Marsh StreetATTACHMENT 4ARC3 - 59
0 8' 16' 24'0 8' 16' 24'A24March 24, 201717'-6" F.F.19'-6" F.F.42'-0" F.F.54'-6" TOPOF ROOF17'-6" F.F.19'-6" F.F.42'-0" F.F.54'-6" TOPOF ROOF590 Elevations590 ElevationsWest Elevation As seen from Higuera StreetNorth ElevationAs seen from Nipomo StreetATTACHMENT 4ARC3 - 60
A25March 24, 2017590 Design Detail SheetATTACHMENT 4ARC3 - 61
A26March 24, 2017590 Design Detail SheetATTACHMENT 4ARC3 - 62
A27March 24, 2017590 Color and MaterialsATTACHMENT 4ARC3 - 63
L1March 24, 2017Landscape PlanNORTHATTACHMENT 4ARC3 - 64
L2March 24, 2017Conceptual Planting Planeptual Planting PlanATTACHMENT 4ARC3 - 65
Tree PlanTREE INVENTORY570 Marsh Street / 590 Marsh Street / 581 HigueraSTATUS#1 - Ficus (22.25") To remain #2 - Ficus (36.75") To remain #3 - Redwood (20.50") To remain #4 - Redwood (22.75") To remain #5 - Redwood (22.50") To remain #6 - Redwood (24.75") To remain #7 - Redwood (24.50") To remain #8 - Redwood (20.75") To remain #9 - Redwood (20.50") To remain#10 - Paper Bark Melaleuca (10") To be removed#11 - Paper Bark Melaleuca (9") To be removed#12 - Paper Bark Melaleuca (13") To be removed#13 - Paper Bark Melaleuca (8.50") To be removed#14 - Paper Bark Melaleuca (10") To be removed#15 - Paper Bark Melaleuca (4.25") To be removed#16 - Osage (29") To be removed#17 - Pittosporum (6") To be removed#18 - Pittosporum (5") To be removed#19 - Pittosporum (4") To be removed#20 - Pittosporum (4") To be removed#21 - Pittosporum (5.50") To be removed#22 - Pittosporum (5") To be removed#23 - Ash (10.50 & 11.00") To be removed#24 - Ash (15.50") To be removed#25 - Jacaranda (11.75") To be removed#26 - Black Walnut (25") Toremain#27 - Paper Bark Melaleuca (11.00") To be removed#28 - Bradford Pear (5.50") To be removed#29 - Bradford Pear (5.50") To be removed#30 - Washington Palm (22.75") To be removed#31 - Mexican Sand Palm (21.75") To be removed#32 - Ficus (5.50") To be removed#33 - Brisbane Box Eucalyptus 11.25") To remain#34 - Brisbane Box Eucalyptus (11.25") To remain#35 - Mexican Sand Palm (18.00") To be removed#36 - Mexican Sand Palm (20.00") To be removed#37 - Paper Bark Melaleuca (12.00") To be removed#38 - Lagerstroemia (2.00") To be removedL3March 24, 2017ATTACHMENT 4ARC3 - 66
L4March 24, 2017Landscape Color and MaterialsATTACHMENT 4ARC3 - 67
L5March 24, 2017Landscape Color and MaterialsATTACHMENT 4ARC3 - 68
L6March 24, 2017Green Building FeaturesATTACHMENT 4ARC3 - 69
ATTACHMENT 4ARC3 - 70
ATTACHMENT 4ARC3 - 71
A28March 24, 2017Conceptual Site LightingATTACHMENT 4ARC3 - 72
A29March 24, 2017SignageATTACHMENT 4ARC3 - 73
Public ArtA30March 24, 2017ATTACHMENT 4ARC3 - 74
A31March 24, 2017Pedestrian Paseo Comparative Exhibit Page 1 of 2ATTACHMENT 4ARC3 - 75
A32March 24, 2017Pedestrian Paseo Comparative Exhibit Page 2 of 2ATTACHMENT 4ARC3 - 76
A33March 24, 2017Entries and Plaza PlanNORTHATTACHMENT 4ARC3 - 77
A34March 24, 2017Bicycle Circulation PlanATTACHMENT 4ARC3 - 78
A35March 24, 2017Overall Site SectionsATTACHMENT 4ARC3 - 79
A36March 24, 2017Jack House RenderingsATTACHMENT 4ARC3 - 80
A37March 24, 2017Jack House RenderingsATTACHMENT 4ARC3 - 81
A38March 24, 2017Shade Studies - Vernal Equinox March 20thATTACHMENT 4ARC3 - 82
805.541.1010539 Marsh StreetSan Luis Obispo, CAinfo@tenoverstudio.comtenoverstudio.comSAN LUIS SQUARE - SHADE STUDYSAN LUIS OBISPO, CADATE: 07/07/2017SPRING (VERNAL) EQUINOX - MARCH 20TH12:00 PM2:00 PM1:00 PM3:00 PM590590590590570570570570581581581581ATTACHMENT 4ARC3 - 83
A39March 24, 2017Shade Studies - Summer Solstice June 21stATTACHMENT 4ARC3 - 84
805.541.1010539 Marsh StreetSan Luis Obispo, CAinfo@tenoverstudio.comtenoverstudio.comSAN LUIS SQUARE - SHADE STUDYSAN LUIS OBISPO, CADATE: 07/07/2017SUMMER SOLSTICE - JUNE 20TH12:00 PM2:00 PM1:00 PM3:00 PM590590590590570570570570581581581581ATTACHMENT 4ARC3 - 85
A40March 24, 2017Shade Studies - Autumnal Equinox September 22ndATTACHMENT 4ARC3 - 86
805.541.1010539 Marsh StreetSan Luis Obispo, CAinfo@tenoverstudio.comtenoverstudio.comSAN LUIS SQUARE - SHADE STUDYSAN LUIS OBISPO, CADATE: 07/07/2017AUTUMNAL EQUINOX - SEPTEMBER 22ND12:00 PM2:00 PM1:00 PM3:00 PM590590590590570570570570581581581581ATTACHMENT 4ARC3 - 87
A41March 24, 2017Shade Studies - Winter Solstice - December 21stATTACHMENT 4ARC3 - 88
805.541.1010539 Marsh StreetSan Luis Obispo, CAinfo@tenoverstudio.comtenoverstudio.comSAN LUIS SQUARE - SHADE STUDYSAN LUIS OBISPO, CADATE: 07/07/2017WINTER SOLSTICE - DECEMBER 21ST12:00 PM2:00 PM1:00 PM590590590570570570581581581ATTACHMENT 4ARC3 - 89
A42March 24, 2017ATTACHMENT 4ARC3 - 90
A43March 24, 2017Context Perspectives - Higuera StreetATTACHMENT 4ARC3 - 91
A44March 24, 2017Context Perspectives - Marsh StreetATTACHMENT 4ARC3 - 92
A45March 24, 2017Context Perspectives - Nipomo StreetATTACHMENT 4ARC3 - 93
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 5
ARC3 - 94
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 5
ARC3 - 95
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 5
ARC3 - 96
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 5
ARC3 - 97
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 5
ARC3 - 98
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 5
ARC3 - 99
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 5
ARC3 - 100
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 5
ARC3 - 101
(805) 316-0101
895 Napa Avenue Suite A-6, Morro Bay, CA 93442
MEMORANDUM
Date: May 25, 2017
To: Bryan Wheeler, City of San Luis Obispo
From: Joe Fernandez and Liam Campbell, CCTC
Subject: San Luis Square Mixed Use Transportation Impact Review
In January 2016 CCTC prepared a Transportation Impact Study (2016 TIS) evaluating the San Luis Square (590
Marsh Street) project. The project description has been revised, prompting the need to revisit the 2016 TIS’
analysis and conclusions. This memorandum summarizes the changes resulting from the new project
description. In summary, the revised project description would not change the findings and recommendations
described in the 2016 TIS. Details are provided below.
LAND USES
The currently proposed project
includes apartment units and hotel
rooms, along with commercial and
restaurant space, served by a
subterranean parking lot. These land
uses differ from those analyzed in the
2016 TIS. Table 1 compares the land
uses in the prior project description to
the currently proposed project
description.
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
The prior TIS used traffic counts collected in 2014 to evaluate the transportation impacts of the proposed
project. These 2014 values were reviewed and compared to counts conducted in 2016 by the City of San Luis
Obispo. Volume changes for the study intersections are shown in Table 2. Changes to the baseline traffic counts
have been under 10% for all intersections in the past two years, so the level of service (LOS) of the study
intersections should not be affected.
ATTACHMENT 6
ARC3 - 102
2 San Luis Square Revised PD Evaluation
Central Coast Transportation Consulting May 25, 2017
PROJECT TRIP GENERATION
Table 3 summarizes the impacts of the updated project compared to the previously analyzed land uses. The
Institute of Transportation Engineers’ (ITE) Trip Generation Manual was used to produce this trip generation
estimate. Pass-by rates and urban infill reductions were applied according to the ITE Trip Generation Handbook,
consistent with the 2016 TIS.
The project trip generation estimate shows 1,667 new daily trips, 139 new midday peak hour trips, and 143 new
PM peak hour trips added to adjacent streets. Compared to the previously approved land uses, this results in
an increase of 383 daily trips, 36 midday peak hour trips, and 32 PM peak hour trips.
The prior TIS calculated vehicle, bicycle, transit, and pedestrian LOS values for the project. These results were
reviewed and key locations with the lowest reported service levels were tested to determine if the additional
project trips would worsen LOS to an unacceptable level and result in impacts beyond those identified in the
2016 TIS. The additional project trips generated by the revised project description would not result in changes
to LOS at any studied locations. The findings of the 2016 TIS would therefore apply to the revised project.
SITE CIRCULATION
The 2016 TIS’ circulation recommendations also apply to the revised project description. No further
recommendations are noted.
CONCLUSION
The proposed changes to the project would not change the findings of the 2016 TIS prepared for the project.
No further recommendations are noted.
ATTACHMENT 6
ARC3 - 103
San Luis Square Mixed Use Project
Transportation Impact Study
Central Coast Transportation Consulting
895 Napa Avenue, Suite A-6
Morro Bay, CA 93442
(805) 316-0101
January 2016
Prepared For: City of San Luis Obispo
ATTACHMENT 6
ARC3 - 104
Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2016
1San Luis Square
Transportation Impact Study
Executive Summary
This study evaluates the potential transportation impacts of the San Luis Square project located in the
City of San Luis Obispo. The project consists of the redevelopment of most of a city block (570 Marsh
Street, 590 Marsh Street, 581 Higuera Street) with 49 residential units and 22,866 square feet of mixed
commercial uses served by a subterranean parking lot.
The project’s downtown location, mix of uses, density, and proximity to transit all support trip-making
via walking, biking, and transit. These factors reduce the number of vehicle trips generated by the
project when compared to similar projects located in suburban or rural locations. After adjusting to
reflect these characteristics, the project trip generation estimate shows 1,284 new daily trips, 103 new
AM peak hour trips, and 111 new PM peak hour trips added to adjacent streets.
All of the study intersections and segments operate acceptably for pedestrians, bicycles, transit, and
autos. The addition of project trips has an insignificant effect on vehicle queues at the study
intersections.
Under Cumulative and Cumulative Plus Project conditions the Higuera Street/Marsh Street is forecast
to experience long queues on the westbound approach (Higuera Street approach leaving downtown).
All other study intersections operate acceptably.
All study intersections have lower collision rates than the state average except for the Nipomo
Street/Monterey Street intersection. Continued monitoring of collisions at this location is
recommended to determine if there is a persistent issue. This intersection is not noted as having a high
collision rate in any of the City’s recent Traffic Safety Reports.
As proposed, vehicle access into and out of the parking structure would be provided via a driveway on
Nipomo Street, with one lane for ingress and one lane for egress. This configuration is adequate for a
structure of this size. The forecast queues spilling back from the signals on Higuera and Marsh Streets
would not spill back and block the project driveway.
The parking structure aisles below the 570 Marsh building are offset from the parking aisles below the
581 Higuera building. This offset will require drivers to ‘jog’ to the left while circulating through the
structure, and appears to cause a narrow point in the circulating aisle. Guide striping should be provided
at the ‘jog’ to clearly delineate vehicle paths of travel, and circulation reviewed using vehicle turning
templates (AutoTURN or similar).
The control type at the parking structure entrance has not been defined. If access gates are provided,
they should be located such that entering vehicles stopped to swipe cards or pull tickets do not block
sidewalks.
The applicant should design the parking structure exit to ensure that exiting vehicles have at least 10
feet clear sight triangle to the sidewalk on both sides of the exit, unobstructed by building corners,
columns, or any other visual impediments. This distance is measured from 8 feet behind the stop bar
and two feet to the right of the centerline where a driver would be located in a stopped vehicle.
The project driveway shall be evaluated once every six months after they open for use until one year
after full project occupancy. If vehicle-pedestrian conflicts are identified during an evaluation, the
applicant shall install visual and audible signals at the identified driveways that are triggered by exiting
vehicles so that pedestrians are notified before they enter the driveway area or provide other suitable
mitigation as approved by the Director of Public Works.
ATTACHMENT 6
ARC3 - 105
Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2016
2 San Luis Square
Transportation Impact Study
Contents
Executive Summary .................................................................. 1
Contents ...................................................................................... 2
Introduction ............................................................................... 3
Analysis Methods....................................................................... 6
Existing Conditions ................................................................... 8
Existing Plus Project Conditions .......................................... 19
Cumulative Conditions ........................................................... 34
References ................................................................................. 45
Figure 1: Project and Study Locations .............................................................................................................. 4
Figure 2: Project Site Plan ................................................................................................................................... 5
Figure 3: Existing Peak Hour Volumes and Lane Configurations .............................................................18
Figure 4: Project Trip Distribution ..................................................................................................................23
Figure 5: Project Trip Assignment ...................................................................................................................24
Figure 6: Existing Plus Project Volumes ........................................................................................................25
Figure 7: Cumulative Volumes .........................................................................................................................36
Figure 8: Cumulative Plus Project Volumes ..................................................................................................37
Appendix A: Traffic Counts
Appendix B: Intersection LOS Calculation Sheets
Appendix C: Segment LOS Calculation Sheets
Appendix D: Trip Generation Calculations
Appendix E: Collision Information
ATTACHMENT 6
ARC3 - 106
Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2016
3 San Luis Square
Transportation Impact Study
Introduction
This study evaluates the potential transportation impacts of the San Luis Square project located in the
City of San Luis Obispo. The project consists of the redevelopment of most of a city block (570 Marsh
Street, 590 Marsh Street, 581 Higuera Street) with 49 residential units and 22,866 square feet of mixed
commercial uses served by a subterranean parking lot.
The project’s location and study intersections are shown on Figure 1, while Figure 2 the project’s site
plan. Study intersections were identified in consultation with City staff. The following intersections
were analyzed during the weekday midday (11 AM-1 PM) and evening (4-6 PM) time periods:
1. Nipomo Street/Monterey Street
2. Nipomo Street/Higuera Street
3. Broad Street/Higuera Street
4. Higuera Street/Marsh Street
5. Nipomo Street/Marsh Street
6. Broad Street/Marsh Street
7. Nipomo Street/Pacific Street
8. Broad Street/Pacific Street
Vehicular, pedestrian, and bicycle levels of service are reported for each study intersection consistent
with the City’s Multimodal Transportation Impact Guidelines. The study segments were identified in
consultation with City staff consistent with City policies. Seven roadway segments were analyzed for
bicycle, pedestrian, transit, and auto level of service:
1. Higuera Street - Broad Street to Nipomo Street
2. Higuera Street - Nipomo Street to 500 feet SW of intersection
3. Marsh Street - Broad Street to Nipomo Street
4. Marsh Street - Nipomo Street to Beach Street
5. Nipomo Street - Monterey Street to Higuera Street
6. Nipomo Street - Higuera Street to Marsh Street
7. Nipomo Street - Marsh Street to Pacific Street
The study locations were evaluated under these scenarios:
1. Existing Conditions reflects 2014/2015 traffic counts and the existing transportation network.
2. Existing Plus Project adds Project generated traffic to Existing Conditions volumes.
3. Cumulative Conditions represents future traffic conditions reflective of the buildout of land
uses in the area, not including the proposed Project.
4. Cumulative Plus Project represents future traffic conditions reflective of the buildout of land
uses in the area, including the proposed Project.
Each scenario is described in more detail in the appropriate chapter.
ATTACHMENT 6
ARC3 - 107
ATTACHMENT 6
ARC3 - 108
San Luis Square
Figure 2: Project Site Plan
L1
DATE: MAY 19, 2015
#1014071
570 / 590 Marsh St.
581 Higuera St.
San Luis Obispo, Ca.
SCALE: 1” = 15’Landscape Plan
North
ATTACHMENT 6
ARC3 - 109
Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2016
6 San Luis Square
Transportation Impact Study
Analysis Methods
The analysis approach was developed based on the City of San Luis Obispo’s standards and policies.
Facilities operated by the City of San Luis Obispo were evaluated using thresholds identified in the
2014 Circulation Element. Table 2 of the Circulation Element specifies that level of service (LOS) D
or better operations shall be maintained for bicycle and transit modes in the study area, and LOS E or
better operations shall be maintained for vehicles in the downtown area. The minimum LOS standard
is LOS C for pedestrians. The Circulation Element establishes priorities of each mode as presented in
Table 1. Project impacts are considered significant if the project degrades a higher priority mode.
Intersection Analysis
The level of service thresholds for intersections and the pedestrian, bicycle, and transit modes based
on the 2010 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) are presented in Table 2.
The study intersections were analyzed with the Synchro 9 software package applying the 2010 HCM
methods. Where 2010 HCM methods do not allow analysis of a specific lane or signal phasing
configuration, the 2000 HCM methods were applied.
Segment Analysis
The study roadway segments were evaluated for pedestrians and bicycles using the LOS+ software
which applies the 2010 HCM methods. Auto segment LOS was evaluated using generalized daily
capacities developed by the Florida Department of Transportation adjustments based on 2010 HCM
methods. The thresholds for each study segment is shown in Table 3. Local roadways have a flat 5,000
ADT threshold.
Priority
Residential Corridors &
Neighborhoods
Commercial Corridors &
Areas
Regional Arterial and
Highway Corridors
1 Pedestrians Vehicles Vehicles
2 Bicycles Bicycles Transit
3 Vehicle Transit Bicycles
4 Transit Pedestrians Pedestrians
Table 1: Modal Priorities for Level of Service1
1. Source: Table 3 City of San Luis Obispo TIS Guidelines
Control Delay
(seconds/vehicle)
Level of
Service
Control Delay
(seconds/vehicle)
Level of
Service
Control Delay
(seconds/vehicle)
Level of
Service LOS Score
Level of
Service
≤ 10 A ≤ 10 A ≤ 5 A ≤ 2.00 A
> 10 - 20 B > 10 - 15 B > 5 - 10 B > 2.00-2.75 B
> 20 - 35 C > 15 - 25 C > 10 - 20 C > 2.75-3.50 C
> 35 - 55 D > 25 - 35 D > 20 - 30 D > 3.50-4.25 D
> 55 - 80 E > 35 - 50 E > 30 - 45 E > 4.25-5.00 E
> 80 F > 50 F > 45 F > 5.00 F
Table 2: Intersection Level of Service Thresholds
1. Source: Exhibit 18-4 of the 2010 Highway Capacity Manual.
2. Source: Exhibits 19-1 and 20-2 of the 2010 Highway Capacity Manual.
4. Source: Exhibit 16-5 and 16-6 of the 2010 Highway Capacity Manual, assuming 60 ft2/p for pedestrian mode.
Signalized Intersections1
Stop Sign Controlled
Intersections2
Pedestrian, Bicycle, and
Transit Modes4
Two-Way Stop Sign
Controlled3
3. Source: Exhibits 19-2 of the 2010 Highway Capacity Manual.
ATTACHMENT 6
ARC3 - 110
Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2016
7 San Luis Square
Transportation Impact Study
Thresholds of Significance
Significant impacts to transportation facilities are identified under the following circumstances:
Signalized intersections:
Project traffic causes an intersection operating at LOS A, B, C, or D to degrade to LOS E or
F for bicycles or causes an intersection operating at LOS A, B, or C to degrade to LOS D, E,
or F for pedestrians; or
Project traffic degrades bicycle or pedestrian LOS at an intersection currently operating at an
unacceptable level (LOS E or F for bicycles, LOS D, E, or F for pedestrians); or
Project traffic causes an intersection operating at LOS A, B, C, D, or E to degrade to LOS F
for autos or project traffic increases auto volume-to-capacity ratio by 0.01 or more at an
intersection currently operating at LOS F; or
Project causes or exacerbates 95th percentile turning movement queues exceeding available
turn pocket capacity.
Unsignalized intersections:
Project traffic causes an intersection operating at LOS A, B, C, or D to degrade to
unacceptable traffic conditions of LOS E or F; and V/C ratio is increased by .01 or more and
signal warrants are met; or
Project causes or exacerbates 95th percentile turning movement queues exceeding available
turn pocket capacity.
Segments:
Project traffic causes a segment operating at LOS A, B, C, or D to degrade to LOS E or F
for bicycles or causes an intersection operating at LOS A, B, or C to degrade to LOS D, E,
or F for pedestrians.
The City’s Multimodal Transportation Impact Study Guidelines allow discretion when identifying
impacts to non-auto modes based on whether the impacts are contextually significant.
Segment Classification1 Lanes A2 B2 C D E
Higuera Street - Broad Street
to Nipomo Street Class II Arterial 3 - 3,420 21,660 26,277 27,588
Higuera Street - Nipomo
Street to 500' SW of Class II Arterial 2 - 2,331 15,372 19,278 20,286
Marsh Segments Class II Arterial 3 - 2,700 17,100 20,745 21,780
Nipomo Segments Class II Arterial 3 - - 11,025 15,225 16,065
1. Source: Figure 4.4-1 San Luis Obispo Roadway Classification Map, City of San Luis Obispo (2014)
Source: City of San Luis Obispo Circulation Element (2014) Table 4.4-7 with adjustments from FDOT Quality/Level
of Service Handbook Tables (2013) based on facility type, lane geometry, and directional attributes.
2. LOS A on all segments and LOS B on Nipomo are not possible due to formula characteristics.
Table 3: Segment ADT Thresholds
ATTACHMENT 6
ARC3 - 111
Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2016
8 San Luis Square
Transportation Impact Study
Existing Conditions
This section describes the existing transportation system and current operating conditions in the study
area.
EXISTING ROADWAY NETWORK
Higuera Street is a one-way three-lane arterial with a speed limit of 30 mph in the study area. Higuera
Street traverses the downtown core in a southwest direction serving major commercial and residential
areas.
Marsh Street is a one-way three-lane arterial with a speed limit of 30 mph in the study area. Marsh Street
parallels Higuera Street and serves the commercial, and residential areas within the downtown core in
a northeast direction.
Nipomo Street is a north-south, two-way local road with one lane in each direction and a speed limit of
25 mph in the study area. Nipomo Street operates perpendicular to Higuera and Marsh Streets. The
road mainly serves as a connection between the residential areas and the downtown core.
Broad Street is a north-south, two-way arterial with one lane in each direction and a speed limit of 25
mph in the study area. Broad Street operates parallel to Nipomo Street. The roadway serves the retail,
commercial, and residential areas within the downtown core.
Pacific Street is an east-west, two-way local collector with one lane in each direction and a speed limit of
25 mph in the study area. Pacific Street runs parallel to Higuera and Marsh Street, serving the residential
areas downtown core.
Monterey Street is an east-west, two-way local collector with one lane in each direction and a speed limit
of 25 mph in the study area. Monterey Street serves the retail and commercial areas within the
downtown core, providing access to two of the three downtown parking structures.
EXISTING PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE FACILITIES
Pedestrian facilities include sidewalks, crosswalks, and pedestrian signals at signalized intersections. All
study streets have paved sidewalks on both sides of the street for segments within the study area. All
study intersections provide striped crosswalks and pedestrian countdown heads except as noted below.
The stop-sign controlled intersections of Nipomo Street/Pacific Street and Nipomo
Street/Monterey Street have no striped crosswalks.
The Marsh Street/Nipomo Street intersection has countdown pedestrian signal heads, but no
striped crosswalks.
The Marsh Street/Broad Street intersection has paved pedestrian crossings, but no pedestrian
signal heads.
Bicycle facilities in the study area consist of on-street striped bike lanes (Class II), and on-street shared
bike lanes (Class III). Some Class III bike routes are designated as Bicycle Boulevards, which often
parallel arterial streets and are designed to minimize vehicle traffic levels and speeds. The following
bicycle facilities are provided in the study area:
Class II bike lanes are provided along Higuera Street west of Nipomo Street, along the extent
of Marsh Street, and on the segment of Chorro Street between Mill Street and Lincoln Street.
ATTACHMENT 6
ARC3 - 112
Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2016
9 San Luis Square
Transportation Impact Study
Class III bike routes are provided on Higuera Street east of Nipomo Street and on Chorro,
Broad, and Nipomo Streets. A bicycle boulevard is provided on Morro Street from Marsh
Street to Upham Street.
EXISTING TRANSIT SERVICE
The San Luis Obispo Regional Transit Authority (RTA) and the City of San Luis Obispo Transit
Division (SLO Transit) provide fixed route transit service to the study area. RTA Route 10 and SLO
Transit Routes 1 and 2 serve the study area.
RTA Route 10 serves Nipomo Street within the study area, providing service from San Luis Obispo to
Santa Maria. Along Nipomo Street, Route 10 only stops at Higuera Street. Weekday service has one
hour headways, Saturday service has near 3 hour headways, and Sunday service has near 4 hour
headways.
SLO Transit Route 1 runs south from Monterey Street to Broad Street within the study area. Nearest
stops include Nipomo Street at Nipomo Street and Higuera, and Marsh Street at Marsh Street and
Broad Street. Route 1 runs only on weekdays with hourly headways.
SLO Transit Route 2 provides service from downtown San Luis Obispo to Suburban Road, with stops
along Nipomo Street at Higuera Street, and along Marsh Street at Archer Street, Pismo Street, and
Broad Street. Route 2 provides service with 40 minute-headways, as well as hour headways in the
weekday evenings from Labor Day to mid-June.
EXISTING TRANSPORTATION CONDITIONS
This section is divided into the following subsections: 1) automobile operations, 2) pedestrian and
bicycle operations, and 3) transit operations.
1. Automobile Mode
Traffic counts for weekday Midday and PM peak hour conditions were collected at the study
intersections in 2014 and 2015. Traffic count sheets are provided in Appendix A.
Figure 3 shows the existing peak hour traffic volumes and lane configurations. Table 4 presents the
LOS for the study intersections, with detailed calculation sheets included in Appendix B.
ATTACHMENT 6
ARC3 - 113
Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2016
10 San Luis Square
Transportation Impact Study
The study intersections operate at an acceptable service level for automobiles.
Table 5 shows the existing roadway segment levels of service.
Intersection Peak Hour V/C1 Delay2 LOS
MID 0.10 1.8 (10.7)A (B)
PM 0.09 1.2 (10.7)A (B)
MID 0.41 10.9 B
PM 0.37 15.7 B
MID 0.41 14.6 B
PM 0.43 14.8 B
MID 0.69 18.5 B
PM 0.65 17.6 B
MID 0.37 10.8 B
PM 0.38 11.4 B
MID 0.45 18.8 B
PM 0.41 18.1 B
MID 0.18 8.0 A
PM 0.17 8.1 A
MID 0.54 9.1 A
PM 0.59 9.3 A
Note: Unacceptable operations shown in bold text.
2. HCM 2010 average control delay in seconds per vehicle.
3. For side-street-stop controlled intersections the worst approach's delay is
reported in parentheses next to the overall intersection delay.
1. Volume to capacity ratio reported for worst movement.
3. Broad Street/
Higuera Street
1. Nipomo Street/
Monterey Street3
2. Nipomo Street/
Higuera Street
4. Higuera Street/
Marsh Street
6. Broad Street/
Marsh Street
5. Nipomo Street/
Marsh Street
8. Broad Street/
Pacific Street
Table 4: Existing Intersection Auto Levels of Service
7. Nipomo Street/
Pacific Street3
Segment Classification1 Lanes
Existing
ADT
Existing
LOS
Higuera Street - Broad Street
to Nipomo Street Class II Arterial 3 7,769 C
Higuera Street - Nipomo
Street to 500' SW of Class II Arterial 2 9,097 C
Marsh Street - Broad Street to
Nipomo Street Class II Arterial 3 10,339 C
Marsh Street - Nipomo Street
to Beach Street Class II Arterial 3 10,339 C
Nipomo Street - Monterey
Street to Higuera Street Local 2 4,515 N/A
Nipomo Street - Higuera
Street to Marsh Street Class II Arterial 2 3,988 C
Nipomo Street - Marsh Street
to Pacific Street Local 2 2,400 N/A
Table 5: Existing Auto Segment Analysis
1. Source: Figure 4.4-1 San Luis Obispo Roadway Classification Map, City of San Luis Obispo
(2014) & FDOT Quality/Level of Service Handbook Tables (2013)
ATTACHMENT 6
ARC3 - 114
Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2016
11 San Luis Square
Transportation Impact Study
The study segments operate acceptably at LOS C or better for automobiles.
Table 6 presents the key existing queues for the study intersections.
The 95th percentile queues exceed storage at three intersections in the downtown core. The queue
spillback is less than one vehicle length. Given the short block lengths, slow vehicle speeds, and urban
nature of downtown occasional queue spillback is expected by drivers during peak periods and does
not result in a breakdown in flow.
Intersection
MID 10
PM 10
MID 64
PM 63
MID 99
PM 92
MID 147
PM 160
MID 209
PM 236
MID 9
PM 11
MID 42
PM 32
MID 41
PM 24
MID 75
PM 52
MID 103
PM 127
MID 77
PM 94
MID 21
PM 32
MID 89
PM 87
2. 'Trap' denotes design where the through lane terminates in a turn lane.
Bold indicates queue length longer than storage length
Peak Hour
Storage
Length2Movement
95th Percentile
Queues (ft)1
1. Queue length that would not be exceeded 95 percent of the time. Queues are reported
only for turning movements where queues exceed storage capacity.
NBR 90
SBT
EBT
150
360
5. Nipomo Street/
Marsh Street SBL 40
SBL 45
8. Broad Street/
Pacific Street
6. Broad Street/
Marsh Street
Table 6: Existing Queues
WBL Trap
WBT 420
NBL 250
2. Nipomo Street/
Higuera Street
NBT 150
3. Broad Street/
Higuera Street
4. Higuera Street/
Marsh Street
NBL 50
EBR 50
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.
NBT 360
WBT 360
ATTACHMENT 6
ARC3 - 115
Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2016
12 San Luis Square
Transportation Impact Study
2. Pedestrian, Bicycle, Transit Modes
Tables 7 and 8 show the pedestrian and bicycle intersection operations under existing conditions for
the study intersections. The study intersections operate at an acceptable service level for both
pedestrians and bicyclists.
Intersection Direction LOS Score1 LOS1 LOS Score1 LOS1
NB 8.2 B 10.42 C
SB 7.7 B 9.84 B
NB 2.03 B 2.04 B
SB 2.04 B 2.08 B
EB 2.12 B 2.14 B
WB 2.17 B 2.15 B
NB 1.90 A 1.93 A
SB 1.99 A 2.00 B
EB 2.16 B 2.13 B
WB 2.14 B 2.13 B
NB 2.44 B 2.43 B
SB 2.25 B 2.33 B
EB 2.51 B 2.84 C
WB 2.18 B 2.15 B
NB 1.76 A 1.77 A
SB 2.02 B 2.04 B
EB 2.24 B 2.24 B
WB 2.23 B 2.20 B
NB 2.13 B 2.12 B
SB 2.25 B 2.07 B
EB 2.29 B 2.19 B
WB 2.49 B 2.18 B
NB
SB
EB
WB
NB 2.00 B 2.04 B
SB 1.96 A 2.01 B
EB 1.79 A 1.80 A
WB 1.84 A 1.83 A
4. Higuera Street/
Marsh Street
5. Nipomo Street/
Marsh Street
Existing MID Existing PM
Table 7: Existing Intersection Pedestrian Levels of Service
3. Broad Street/
Higuera Street
6. Broad Street/
Marsh Street
1. Nipomo Street/
Monterey Street2
1.HCM 2010 pedestrian score and LOS.
2. Nipomo Street/
Higuera Street
7. Nipomo Street/
Pacific Street
2. HCM 2010 reports pedestrian LOS at two-way stop controlled intersections in delay
(seconds).
8. Broad Street/
Pacific Street
N/A
ATTACHMENT 6
ARC3 - 116
Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2016
13 San Luis Square
Transportation Impact Study
Intersection Direction LOS Score1 LOS1 LOS Score1 LOS1
NB
SB
WB
NB 2.49 B 2.48 B
SB 2.32 B 2.47 B
WB 2.88 C 2.83 C
NB 2.50 B 2.57 B
SB 2.30 B 2.29 B
WB 2.72 B 2.53 B
SB 3.70 D 2.78 C
EB 2.70 B 2.73 B
NB 2.28 B 2.33 B
SB 2.33 B 2.33 B
EB 1.54 A 1.51 A
NB 1.42 A 1.34 A
SB 2.48 B 2.54 B
EB 1.69 A 1.64 A
NB
SB
EB
WB
NB 2.53 B 2.63 B
SB 2.39 B 2.48 B
EB 2.02 B 2.08 B
WB 2.35 B 2.29 B
2. Nipomo Street/
Higuera Street
3. Broad Street/
Higuera Street
4. Higuera Street/
Marsh Street
5. Nipomo Street/
Marsh Street
6. Broad Street/
Marsh Street
2.The 2010 HCM does not establish LOS standards for bicycles at stop-controlled
intersections.
1. HCM 2010 bicycle score and LOS.
Table 8: Existing Intersection Bicycle Levels of Service
Existing MID
8. Broad Street/
Pacific Street
7. Nipomo Street/
Pacific Street2
1. Nipomo Street/
Monterey Street2
N / A
N / A
Existing PM
ATTACHMENT 6
ARC3 - 117
Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2016
14 San Luis Square
Transportation Impact Study
Table 9 presents the existing pedestrian and bicycle LOS for the study segments. All study segments
operate acceptably.
3. Transit Mode
The project is located in the downtown core and is served by multiple transit routes. The downtown
transit center is approximately ½ mile from the project site.
An acceptable transit LOS is primarily predicated on the presence of shelters and benches at bus stops,
as well as the frequency and on-time performance of each route.
Route 1 and Route 10 currently operate with a frequency of one bus per hour, while Route 2 operates
at one bus every 40 minutes. All three transit routes provide an unsheltered stop with benches within
one block of the project:
A stop at the Nipomo Street/Higuera Street intersection is served by SLO Transit’s Route 1
and Route 2.
A stop at the Marsh Street/Broad Street intersection serves Routes 1, 2, and 10.
Routes are shown in the image below.
Segment Direction LOS Score1 LOS1
LOS
Score1 LOS1
MID 1.62 A 4.16 D
PM 1.56 A 4.10 D
MID 1.90 A 3.45 C
PM 1.96 A 3.42 C
MID 1.71 A 3.47 C
PM 1.62 A 3.40 C
MID 1.64 A 3.42 C
PM 1.93 A 3.54 D
NB 1.23 A 3.36 C
SB 1.03 A 3.78 D
NB 1.16 A 2.92 C
SB 1.47 A 3.87 D
NB 1.26 A 3.43 C
SB 1.14 A 3.02 C
NB 1.48 A 3.89 D
SB 1.23 A 3.34 C
NB 1.03 A 2.55 B
SB 1.03 A 2.57 B
NB 1.11 A 3.11 C
SB 1.02 A 2.52 B
EB
WB
WB
EB
Table 9: Existing Segment Pedestrian & Bicycle Levels of Service
1. HCM 2010 pedestrian/bicycle score and LOS
MID
Peak
Hour
Higuera Street - Broad Street to
Nipomo Street
Higuera Street - Nipomo Street
to 500' SW of Intersection
Marsh Street - Beach Street to
Nipomo Street
Marsh Street -Nipomo Street
to Broad Street
Nipomo Street - Monterey
Street to Higuera Street
Nipomo Street - Higuera Street
to Marsh Street
Pedestrian Bicycle
Nipomo Street - Marsh Street
to Pacific Street
PM
MID
MID
PM
PM
ATTACHMENT 6
ARC3 - 118
Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2016
15 San Luis Square
Transportation Impact Study
The City is currently updating their Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP) in coordination with RTA. The
SRTP provides transit ridership data from 2013, summarized below.
SLO Transit’s Route 1 and Route 2 operate with acceptable loading levels, and do not exceed
the 45 passenger capacity at any time. Route 1’s maximum load occurs near 7:15 AM, with 26
passengers on a single bus. Route 2’s maximum load occurs near 2:25 PM, with 31 passengers
on a single bus.
At the Nipomo Street/Higuera Street stop, Route 1 averages 5 loading passengers, with a peak
of 10 passengers, and Route 2 has an average passenger loading of 7 passengers with a peak
of 19 passengers. Combined, there is a reported total of 16 daily boardings and alightings.
At the Marsh Street/Broad Street stop, Route 1 averages 4 boardings, with a peak of 10
passengers. Route 2 averages 8 passengers, with a peak of 23 passengers. Combined, the stop
has a reported total of 29 daily boardings and alightings.
RTA’s Route 10 occasionally has standing load trips. The average passenger load at the
Nipomo Street/Higuera Street stop is 16 passengers, with a peak of 25 passengers, and a total
of 19 daily boardings and alightings. The Marsh Street/Broad Street stop averages 14
passengers, with a peak of 23 passengers, and a reported total of 35 daily boardings and
alightings.
Image 1: Existing Transit Routes
Source: City of SLO
ATTACHMENT 6
ARC3 - 119
Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2016
16 San Luis Square
Transportation Impact Study
Table 10 presents the existing transit LOS for the study segments.
One study segment operates below the desired transit service level. The westbound segment along
Higuera Street, from Nipomo Street to 500 feet southwest of Carmel Street, operates unacceptably at
LOS E for transit services during both the Midday and PM peak hour. The only transit route on this
segment is RTA’s Route 10 with hour long headways, causing the LOS E conditions. There are multiple
stops for other routes within a block of this location, indicating that overall transit service is adequate.
All other segments operate at acceptable levels.
4. Collision Analysis
The City of San Luis Obispo maintains collision information within the study area. Collision rates were
drawn from 4 years of collision information, as well as average daily traffic entering the intersection.
These rates were compared to the state average by surrounding area, geometric layout, and control
type. The results are shown in Table 11 with detailed results in Appendix E.
Segment
Peak
Hour Direction LOS Score1 LOS1
MID
PM
MID 4.84 E
PM 4.85 E
MID 3.60 D
PM 3.51 D
MID 3.21 C
PM 3.25 C
NB
SB 3.41 C
NB
SB 3.42 C
NB
SB 1.97 A
NB
SB 1.98 A
NB
SB 2.90 C
NB
SB 2.90 C
MID
PM
MID
PM
1. HCM 2010 pedestrian/bicycle/transit score and LOS
2. LOS is not established for segments without a directional transit route.
WB
WB
EB
EB
MID
PM
Higuera Street - Broad Street to
Nipomo Street2
Higuera Street - Nipomo Street
to 500' SW of Intersection
Marsh Street - Beach Street to
Nipomo Street
Marsh Street -Nipomo Street
to Broad Street
Nipomo Street - Monterey
Street to Higuera Street2
Nipomo Street - Higuera Street
to Marsh Street2
Nipomo Street - Marsh Street
to Pacific Street2
Table 10: Existing Segment Transit Levels of Service
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
ATTACHMENT 6
ARC3 - 120
Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2016
17 San Luis Square
Transportation Impact Study
All study intersections have lower collision rates than the state average except for the Nipomo
Street/Monterey Street intersection. Of the three collisions, two involved cyclists. Two collisions
involved turning movement yielding, and one involved failure to come to a complete stop. The project
would add traffic to this intersection, but would not change the intersection geometry or other
conditions. Continued monitoring of collisions at this location is recommended to determine if there
is a persistent issue. This intersection is not noted as having a high collision rate in any of the City’s
recent Traffic Safety Reports.
Review of the City’s 2013 Traffic Safety Report indicated high pedestrian collisions at the Broad
Street/Higuera Street intersection. Complete 2014 and 2015 collision information was not yet available.
Pedestrian warning signs were installed in July of 2013 to increase pedestrian visibility.
Intersection ADT1 Collisions2
Collision
Rate
Average
Rate3
1. Nipomo Street/Monterey Street 5,144 3 0.40 0.15
2. Nipomo Street/Higuera Street 12,650 3 0.16 0.35
3. Broad Street/Higuera Street 12,783 3 0.16 0.35
4. Higuera Street/Marsh Street 23,146 4 0.12 0.35
5. Nipomo Street/Marsh Street 13,091 1 0.05 0.35
6. Broad Street/Marsh Street 17,868 2 0.08 0.35
7. Nipomo Street/Pacific Street 11,430 2 0.12 0.25
8. Broad Street/Pacific Street 12,730 1 0.05 0.35
2. Based on SWITRS data from January 1, 2010 to December 31, 2013.
Table 11: Collision Summary
1. Average daily traffic entering the intersection.
3. Average collision rate based on 2009 Collision Data on California State Highways.
Note: Bold indicates intersection collision rate higher than state average.
ATTACHMENT 6
ARC3 - 121
San Luis Square
Figure 3: Existing Peak Hour Volumes and Lane Configurations
San Luis Square
Figure 1: Project and Study Locations
True
North
Study
North
7
Legend:
- Study Intersection
- Project Site
- Traffic Signal
- Stop Sign
- MID(PM) Peak Hour
Traffic Volumes
1.
2.
3.4.5.
8.7.6.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
ATTACHMENT 6
ARC3 - 122
Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2016
19 San Luis Square
Transportation Impact Study
Existing Plus Project Conditions
This section evaluates the impacts of the proposed project on the surrounding transportation network.
PROJECT TRAFFIC ESTIMATES
The amount of project traffic affecting the study locations is estimated in three steps: trip generation,
trip distribution, and trip assignment. Trip generation refers to the total number of trips generated by
the site. Trip distribution identifies the general origins and destination of these trips, and trip
assignment specifies the routes taken to reach these origins and destinations.
Trip Generation
The project’s downtown location, mix of uses, density, and proximity to transit all support trip-making
via walking, biking, and transit. These factors reduce the number of vehicle trips generated by the
project when compared to similar projects located in suburban or rural locations.
The Institute of Transportation Engineers’ (ITE) Trip Generation Handbook (3rd Edition, 2014) provides
a procedure for estimating trips from mixed-use developments in urban infill settings. The procedure
adjusts the trip generation rates from suburban sites to account for the higher non-auto mode share
and vehicle occupancies observed at urban infill sites. Trips during the midday period were estimated
using hourly adjustment factors from surveys of similar land uses. Refer to Appendix D for detailed
trip generation calculations.
No trip credits were applied for current uses on the site to be removed. Table 12 summarizes the trip
generation estimates.
In Out Total In Out Total
Condominium/Townhouse1 49 units 231 6 8 14 14 8 22
Convenience Market2 3,744 s.f.826 37 27 64 37 39 76
Shopping Center3 11,747 s.f.330 14 11 25 14 15 29
Restaurant4 7,375 s.f.745 27 19 46 35 23 58
Total Trips 2,132 84 65 149 100 85 185
Pass-By Trips5 -848 -27 -19 -46 -39 -35 -74
1,284 58 46 103 61 50 111
Standard ITE trips reduced to reflect the urban infill nature of the site. See Appendix D for details.
Table 12: Vehicle Trip Generation
Land Use Size
Number of Trips
Daily
MIDDAY PM
3. ITE Land Use Code #820, Shopping Center. Average rate used.
4. ITE Land Use Code #932, High-Turnover (Sit-Down) Restaurant. Average rate used.
5. Pass-by trip estimates use ITE Trip Generation , 3rd Edition, 2014
Source: ITE Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition, 2012; CCTC, 2015.
Net New Trips
1. ITE Land Use Code #230, Condominium/Townhouse. Fitted curve equations used.
2. ITE Land Use Code #852, Convenience Market (Open 15-16 Hours). Average rate used.
ATTACHMENT 6
ARC3 - 123
Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2016
20 San Luis Square
Transportation Impact Study
The project trip generation estimate shows 1,284 new daily trips, 103 new AM peak hour trips, and
111 new PM peak hour trips added to adjacent streets.
Trip Distribution and Assignment
The City of San Luis Obispo developed and maintains a citywide travel demand model (TDM) for use
in forecasting travel demand. The TDM was applied to estimate the directions of approach and
departure for project trips using a select zone procedure, which tracks trips to and from a specific
Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ) in the TDM.
Note that this analysis assumes that all vehicle trips to/from the project originate from the project site.
The management of the on-site parking structure and the amount of the site’s required parking covered
by in-lieu fees is unknown at this time. If the structure is private, or a portion of the project’s parking
is to be provided in the City-operated parking structures, some of the project’s vehicle trips would
originate from a different location. This would spread the project trips and would likely result in lessor
impacts to those described herein.
Figure 4 shows the trip distribution percentages, and Figure 5 shows the project trip assignment.
Existing Plus Project volumes are shown on Figure 6.
Planned Improvements
The project would reconstruct sidewalk sections along its frontage on Higuera Street, Marsh Street,
and Nipomo Street. Parking structure access would be provide via a new driveway (at the same mid-
block location as an existing driveway) on Nipomo Street. This improvements are discussed in detail
in the Site Access and Circulation section of this report.
ATTACHMENT 6
ARC3 - 124
Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2016
21 San Luis Square
Transportation Impact Study
EXISTING PLUS PROJECT IMPACT ANALYSIS
1. Automobile Mode
Table 13 summarizes the auto operating conditions under Existing and Existing Plus Project
conditions.
All intersections operate at acceptable conditions.
Intersection
Peak
Hour V/C1
Delay2
(sec/veh)LOS3 V/C1
V/C
Delta
Delay2
(sec/veh)LOS3
MID 0.10 1.8 (10.7)A (B)0.11 0.01 1.8 (11.0)A (B)
PM 0.09 1.2 (10.7)A (B)0.09 0.00 1.2 (10.8)A (B)
MID 0.41 10.9 B 0.40 -0.01 11.3 B
PM 0.37 15.7 B 0.36 -0.01 15.6 B
MID 0.41 14.6 B 0.42 0.01 14.7 B
PM 0.43 14.8 B 0.43 0.00 14.8 B
MID 0.69 18.5 B 0.69 0.00 18.6 B
PM 0.65 17.6 B 0.66 0.01 17.7 B
MID 0.37 10.8 B 0.38 0.01 11.2 B
PM 0.38 11.4 B 0.39 0.01 11.8 B
MID 0.45 18.8 B 0.46 0.01 18.9 B
PM 0.41 18.1 B 0.42 0.01 18.3 B
MID 0.18 8.0 A 0.19 0.01 8.1 A
PM 0.17 8.1 A 0.18 0.01 8.1 A
MID 0.54 9.1 A 0.56 0.02 9.1 A
PM 0.59 9.3 A 0.61 0.02 9.3 A
1. Nipomo
Street/Monterey Street
2. Nipomo
Street/Higuera Street
3. Broad
Street/Higuera Street
8. Broad Street/Pacific
Street
4. Higuera
Street/Marsh Street
5. Nipomo
Street/Marsh Street
6. Broad Street/Marsh
Street
7. Nipomo
Street/Pacific Street
Existing
Table 13: Existing and Existing Plus Project Intersection Levels of Service
Existing + Project
1. Volume to capacity ratio reported for worst movement.
3. For side-street-stop controlled intersections the worst approach's delay is reported in parenthesis next to
the overall intersection delay. Unacceptable operations shown in bold text.
2. HCM 2010 average control delay in seconds per vehicle.
ATTACHMENT 6
ARC3 - 125
Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2016
22 San Luis Square
Transportation Impact Study
Table 14 shows the existing plus project auto segment performance.
All segments operate at acceptable conditions.
ADT LOS ADT LOS
Higuera Street - Broad Street to
Nipomo Street Class II Arterial 3 7,769 C 7,968 C
Higuera Street - Nipomo Street
to 500' SW of Intersection Class II Arterial 2 9,097 C 9,322 C
Marsh Street - Broad Street to
Nipomo Street Class II Arterial 3 10,339 C 10,641 C
Marsh Street - Nipomo Street
to Beach Street Class II Arterial 3 10,339 C 10,596 C
Nipomo Street - Monterey
Street to Higuera Street Local 2 4,515 N/A 4,624 N/A
Nipomo Street - Higuera Street
to Marsh Street Class II Arterial 2 3,988 C 4,631 C
Nipomo Street - Marsh Street
to Pacific Street Local 2 2,400 N/A 2,593 N/A
Table 14: Existing Plus Project Auto Segment Analysis
1. Source: Figure 4.4-1 San Luis Obispo Roadway Classification Map, City of San Luis Obispo (2014) &
FDOT Quality/Level of Service Handbook Tables (2013)
Existing
Existing +
Project
LanesClassification1Segment
ATTACHMENT 6
ARC3 - 126
San Luis Square
Figure 4: Project Trip Distribution
Legend:
7 - Study Intersection
- Project Site- Inbound Trip Distribution
- Outbound Trip Distribution
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
ATTACHMENT 6
ARC3 - 127
San Luis Square
Figure 5: Project Trip Assignment
San Luis Square
Figure 1: Project and Study Locations
Legend:
- Study Intersection
- Project Site
17
- MID(PM) Peak Hour
Traffic Volumes
True
North
Study
North
1.
2.
3.4.5.
8.7.6.
1
2
3
5
6
7
8
4
ATTACHMENT 6
ARC3 - 128
San Luis Square
Figure 6: Existing Plus Project Volumes
San Luis Square
Figure 1: Project and Study Locations
Legend:
- Study Intersection
- Project Site
17
- MID(PM) Peak Hour
Traffic Volumes
True
North
Study
North
1.
2.
3.4.5.
8.7.6.
1
2
3
5
6
7
8
4
ATTACHMENT 6
ARC3 - 129
Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2016
26 San Luis Square
Transportation Impact Study
Table 15 shows the 95th percentile queues for key movements at the study intersections. Detailed
queuing information is provided in Appendix B.
Intersection Existing
Existing +
Project
MID 10 12
PM 10 13
MID 64 79
PM 63 82
MID 99 101
PM 92 95
MID 147 147
PM 160 160
MID 209 209
PM 236 236
MID 9 9
PM 11 11
MID 42 60
PM 32 51
MID 41 42
PM 24 25
MID 75 76
PM 52 53
MID 103 106
PM 127 132
MID 77 78
PM 94 97
MID 21 22
PM 32 33
MID 89 95
PM 87 89
NBT 150
EBR 50
NBR 90
SBT 150
EBT 360
40SBL
Table 15: Existing Plus Project Queues
95th Percentile Queues (ft)1
WBL Trap
Storage
Length2 Peak HourMovement
WBT 420
2. Nipomo Street/
Higuera Street NBL 50
# 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.
3. Broad Street/
Higuera Street
4. Higuera Street/
Marsh Street
6. Broad Street/
Marsh Street
Bold indicates queue length longer than storage length
1. Queue length that would not be exceeded 95 percent of the time. Queues are reported only for
turning movements where queues exceed storage capacity.
2. 'Trap' denotes design where the through lane terminates in a turn lane.
5. Nipomo Street/
Marsh Street
45SBL
360
360WBT
NBT
8. Broad Street/
Pacific Street
NBL 250
ATTACHMENT 6
ARC3 - 130
Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2016
27 San Luis Square
Transportation Impact Study
Queuing issues and improvements to address them are discussed below:
Location Queuing Issue Mitigation
2. Nipomo Street/
Higuera Street
The northbound left turn lane queues
exceed storage length by 1-2 vehicles in
the midday and PM peak periods of both
existing and existing plus project
conditions.
None recommended. The
queuing issue is minor and is
not expected to significantly
affect traffic flow.
3. Broad Street/
Higuera Street
The northbound through queues exceed
storage length by about 1 vehicle in the
PM peak period of both existing and
existing plus project conditions.
None recommended. The
queuing issue is minor and is
not expected to significantly
affect traffic flow.
5. Nipomo Street/
Marsh Street
The southbound left turn lane queues
exceed storage length by about 1 vehicle in
the midday peak period for both existing
and existing plus project conditions as well
as the PM peak period for existing plus
project conditions.
None recommended. The
queuing issue is minor and is
not expected to significantly
affect traffic flow.
2. Pedestrian and Bicycle Modes
Tables 16 and 17 summarizes the bicycle and pedestrian intersection operations under Existing Plus
Project conditions. All intersections operate at or above the desired service level for pedestrians and
bicycles. Detailed LOS calculation sheets are provided in Appendix B.
ATTACHMENT 6
ARC3 - 131
Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2016
28 San Luis Square
Transportation Impact Study
Intersection Direction LOS Score1 LOS1 LOS Score1 LOS1
NB 8.10 B 8.50 B
SB 7.70 B 8.00 B
NB 10.40 C 10.80 C
SB 9.80 B 10.20 C
NB 2.03 B 2.05 B
SB 2.04 B 2.05 B
EB 2.12 B 2.13 B
WB 2.17 B 2.17 B
NB 2.04 B 2.06 B
SB 2.08 B 2.08 B
EB 2.14 B 2.15 B
WB 2.15 B 2.16 B
NB 1.90 A 1.90 A
SB 1.99 A 1.99 A
EB 2.16 B 2.16 B
WB 2.14 B 2.15 B
NB 1.93 A 1.93 A
SB 2.00 B 2.00 B
EB 2.13 B 2.13 B
WB 2.13 B 2.13 B
NB 2.44 B 2.44 B
SB 2.25 B 2.26 B
EB 2.51 B 2.52 B
WB 2.18 B 2.19 B
NB 2.43 B 2.44 B
SB 2.33 B 2.34 B
EB 2.84 C 2.85 C
WB 2.15 B 2.16 B
NB 1.76 A 1.77 A
SB 2.02 B 2.04 B
EB 2.24 B 2.25 B
WB 2.23 B 2.23 B
NB 1.77 A 1.78 A
SB 2.04 B 2.07 B
EB 2.24 B 2.25 B
WB 2.20 B 2.21 B
NB 2.13 B 2.13 B
SB 2.25 B 2.25 B
EB 2.29 B 2.30 B
WB 2.49 B 2.49 B
NB 2.12 B 2.12 B
SB 2.07 B 2.07 B
EB 2.19 B 2.20 B
WB 2.18 B 2.19 B
NB
SB
EB
WB
NB
SB
EB
WB
NB 2.00 B 2.01 B
SB 1.96 A 1.96 A
EB 1.79 A 1.80 A
WB 1.84 A 1.84 A
NB 2.04 B 2.05 B
SB 2.01 B 2.02 B
EB 1.80 A 1.81 A
WB 1.83 A 1.83 A
2. The 2010 HCM does not establish LOS standards for pedestrians for all-way stop controlled
intersections nor the stop-controlled approaches of two-way stop controlled intersections. LOS
Score here reported as delay as per 2010 HCM standards.
N/A
5. Nipomo Street/
Marsh Street
PM
MID
Existing Existing + Project
PM
8. Broad Street/
Pacific Street
MID
PM
7. Nipomo Street/
Pacific Street2
6. Broad Street/
Marsh Street
1. HCM 2010 pedestrian score and LOS.
MID
PM
MID
PM
MID
PM
MID
1. Nipomo Street/
Monterey Street2
MID
PM
2. Nipomo Street/
Higuera Street
3. Broad Street/
Higuera Street
4. Higuera Street/
Marsh Street
Table 16: Existing Intersection Pedestrian Levels of Service
Peak
Hour
MID
PM
ATTACHMENT 6
ARC3 - 132
Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2016
29 San Luis Square
Transportation Impact Study
The pedestrian and bicycle intersection service levels are acceptable with the project in place.
Intersection LOS Score1 LOS1 LOS Score1 LOS1
NB
SB
WB
NB
SB
WB
NB 2.49 B 2.54 B
SB 2.32 B 2.33 B
WB 2.88 C 2.90 C
NB 2.48 B 2.55 B
SB 2.47 B 2.48 B
WB 2.83 C 2.87 C
NB 2.50 B 2.50 B
SB 2.30 B 2.30 B
WB 2.72 B 2.73 B
NB 2.57 B 2.57 B
SB 2.29 B 2.29 B
WB 2.53 B 2.70 B
SB 3.70 D 3.72 D
EB 2.70 B 2.71 B
SB 2.78 C 2.80 C
EB 2.73 B 2.74 B
NB 2.28 B 2.30 B
SB 2.33 B 2.39 B
EB 1.54 A 1.56 A
NB 2.33 B 2.35 B
SB 2.33 B 2.40 B
EB 1.51 A 1.55 A
NB 1.42 A 1.42 A
SB 2.48 B 2.48 B
EB 1.69 A 1.70 A
NB 1.34 A 1.34 A
SB 2.54 B 2.54 B
EB 1.64 A 1.67 A
NB
SB
EB
WB
NB
SB
EB
WB
NB 2.53 B 2.55 B
SB 2.39 B 2.41 B
EB 2.02 B 2.02 B
WB 2.35 B 2.35 B
NB 2.63 B 2.65 B
SB 2.48 B 2.49 B
EB 2.08 B 2.08 B
WB 2.29 B 2.31 B
N/A
2. The 2010 HCM does not establish LOS standards for bicycles at stop-controlled intersections.
8. Broad Street/
Pacific Street
PM
MID
2. Nipomo Street/
Higuera Street
3. Broad Street/
Higuera Street
4. Higuera Street/
Marsh Street
5. Nipomo Street/
Marsh Street
1. Nipomo Street/
Monterey Street2
Existing + Project
MID
Table 17: Existing Plus Project Intersection Bicycle Levels of Service
Existing
N/A
PM
PM
Direction
PM
PM
7. Nipomo Street/
Pacific Street2
MID
PM
MID6. Broad Street/
Marsh Street
Peak
Hour
MID
MID
PM
MID
1. HCM 2010 bicycle score and LOS.
PM
MID
ATTACHMENT 6
ARC3 - 133
Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2016
30 San Luis Square
Transportation Impact Study
Pedestrian and Bicycle Segment Analysis
Table 18 summarizes the pedestrian segment analysis, with detailed results provided in Appendix C.
All roadway segments operate at or above the pedestrian threshold level under Existing Plus Project
conditions.
Table 19 summarizes the bicycle segment analysis, with detailed results provided in Appendix C. The
largest change occurs on Nipomo Street between Marsh Street and Higuera Street where the bicycle
score is degraded (but remains acceptable) due to higher vehicle volumes. All of the study segments
operate at an acceptable service level for bicycles.
LOS Score1 LOS1 LOS Score1 LOS1
MID 1.62 A 1.63 A
PM 1.56 A 1.58 A
MID 1.90 A 1.91 A
PM 1.96 A 1.97 A
MID 1.71 A 1.66 A
PM 1.62 A 1.66 A
MID 1.64 A 1.69 A
PM 1.93 A 2.05 B
NB 1.23 A 1.25 A
SB 1.03 A 1.39 A
NB 1.16 A 1.16 A
SB 1.47 A 1.48 A
NB 1.03 A 1.41 A
SB 1.03 A 1.24 A
NB 1.11 A 1.61 A
SB 1.02 A 1.37 A
NB 1.03 A 1.07 A
SB 1.03 A 1.04 A
NB 1.11 A 1.18 A
SB 1.02 A 1.03 A
WB
WB
EB
EB
MID
PM
Nipomo Street - Marsh Street
to Pacific Street
Existing + Project
Marsh Street - Beach Street to
Nipomo Street
Marsh Street - Nipomo Street
to Broad Street
Nipomo Street - Monterey
Street to Higuera Street
1. HCM 2010 pedestrian score and LOS.
Nipomo Street - Higuera Street
to Marsh Street
MID
PM
Segment
Existing
Higuera Street - Broad Street to
Nipomo Street
Direction
Higuera Street - Nipomo Street
to 500' SW of Intersection
Table 18: Existing Plus Project Segment Pedestrian Levels of Service
Peak
Hour
MID
PM
ATTACHMENT 6
ARC3 - 134
Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2016
31 San Luis Square
Transportation Impact Study
3. Transit Mode
An acceptable transit LOS is primarily predicated on the presence of shelters and benches at bus stops,
as well as the frequency and on-time performance of each route. The project proposes a transit stop
as a part of the town center component of the project in Phase 6. The precise location and amenities
for this transit stop are not available at this time.
The City is currently updating their Short Range Transit Plan in coordination with the Regional Transit
Authority. The adopted SRTP (2009) proposes the following service standards related to the location
of transit stops and service frequency:
In residential areas, 90% of the population is within ¼ mile of a bus route.
Bus stops should be spaced every 5 to 7 blocks per mile (every other block) in the downtown
core, and 4 to 5 per mile as needed on the fringe.
Transit stop spacing in the vicinity of the project conforms to these service standards.
LOS Score1 LOS1 LOS Score1 LOS1
MID 4.16 D 4.17 D
PM 4.10 D 4.12 D
MID 3.45 C 3.46 C
PM 3.42 C 3.42 C
MID 3.47 C 3.43 C
PM 3.40 C 3.43 C
MID 3.42 C 3.46 C
PM 3.54 D 3.60 D
NB 3.36 C 3.41 C
SB 3.78 D 3.79 D
NB 2.92 C 3.10 C
SB 3.87 D 3.88 D
NB 3.43 C 3.82 D
SB 3.02 C 3.38 C
NB 3.89 D 4.00 D
SB 3.34 C 3.77 D
NB 2.55 B 2.75 C
SB 2.57 B 2.60 B
NB 3.11 C 3.18 C
SB 2.52 B 2.58 B
WB
MID
Higuera Street - Broad Street to
Nipomo Street
Higuera Street - Nipomo Street
to 500' SW of Intersection
Marsh Street - Beach Street to
Nipomo Street
Marsh Street - Nipomo Street
to Broad Street
Nipomo Street - Monterey
Street to Higuera Street
WB
EB
EB
Existing Existing + Project
PM
MID
PM
Table 19: Existing Plus Project Segment Bicycle Levels of Service
Nipomo Street - Marsh Street
to Pacific Street
Nipomo Street - Higuera Street
to Marsh Street
1. HCM 2010 bicycle score and LOS.
PM
MID
DirectionSegment
Peak
Hour
ATTACHMENT 6
ARC3 - 135
Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2016
32 San Luis Square
Transportation Impact Study
One segment of Higuera Street operates unacceptably at LOS E both with and without the project.
Multiple other transit stops are located within a block of this location. The addition of the project does
not change the transit score, and is not expected to result in a noticeable degradation to transit service
along this segment.
SITE ACCESS AND ON-SITE CIRCULATION
This section discusses issues related to site access and on-site circulation. On-site circulation
deficiencies would occur if project designs fail to meet appropriate standards, fail to provide adequate
truck access, or would result in hazardous conditions.
The site plan is shown on Figure 2.
Parking Structure Access and Circulation
As proposed, vehicle access into and out of the parking structure would be provided via a driveway on
Nipomo Street, with one lane for ingress and one lane for egress. This configuration is adequate for a
structure of this size. The forecast queues spilling back from the signals on Higuera and Marsh Streets
would not spill back and block the project driveway.
The parking structure aisles below the 570 Marsh building are offset from the parking aisles below the
581 Higuera building. This offset will require drivers to ‘jog’ to the left while circulating through the
LOS Score1 LOS1 LOS Score1 LOS1
MID
PM
MID 4.84 E 4.84 E
PM 4.85 E 4.85 E
MID 3.60 D 3.59 D
PM 3.51 D 3.51 D
MID 3.21 C 3.21 C
PM 3.25 C 3.27 C
NB
SB 3.41 C 3.41 C
NB
SB 3.42 C 3.42 C
NB
SB 1.97 A 1.98 A
NB
SB 1.98 A 2.00 B
NB
SB 2.90 C 2.90 C
NB
SB 2.90 C 2.90 C
1. HCM 2010 transit score and LOS.
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Table 20: Existing Plus Project Segment Transit Levels of Service
2. LOS is not established for segments without a directional transit route.
PM
Nipomo Street - Higuera Street
to Marsh Street2
MID
PM
Nipomo Street - Monterey
Street to Higuera Street2
MID
Nipomo Street - Marsh Street
to Pacific Street2
MID
PM
Marsh Street - Beach Street to
Nipomo Street
Marsh Street -Nipomo Street
to Broad Street
Segment Direction
Existing Existing + ProjectPeak
Hour
WB
WB
EB
EB
Higuera Street - Broad Street to
Nipomo Street2
Higuera Street - Nipomo Street
to 500' SW of Intersection
ATTACHMENT 6
ARC3 - 136
Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2016
33 San Luis Square
Transportation Impact Study
structure, and appears to cause a narrow point in the circulating aisle. Guide striping should be provided
at the ‘jog’ to clearly delineate vehicle paths of travel, and circulation reviewed using vehicle turning
templates (AutoTURN or similar).
The control type at the parking structure entrance has not been defined. If access gates are provided,
they should be located such that entering vehicles stopped to swipe cards or pull tickets do not block
sidewalks.
The applicant should design the parking structure exit to ensure that exiting vehicles have at least 10
feet clear sight triangle to the sidewalk on both sides of the exit, unobstructed by building corners,
columns, or any other visual impediments. This distance is measured from 8 feet behind the stop bar
and two feet to the right of the centerline where a driver would be located in a stopped vehicle.
The project driveway shall be evaluated once every six months after they open for use until one year
after full project occupancy. If vehicle-pedestrian conflicts are identified during an evaluation, the
applicant shall install visual and audible signals at the identified driveways that are triggered by exiting
vehicles so that pedestrians are notified before they enter the driveway area or provide other suitable
mitigation as approved by the Director of Public Works.
Frontage Improvements
The project would reconstruct the sidewalks and modify driveways along its frontages on Higuera
Street, Marsh Street, and Nipomo Street as shown below.
Project
Frontage
Proposed Sidewalk
Width
On-Street Parking/Driveway
Changes
Higuera Street 19 feet Remove four parking spaces
Remove one driveway
Marsh Street 10-17 feet Remove three parking spaces
Remove three driveways
Nipomo Street 10 feet
No change- one existing driveway to
be reconstructed for parking structure
access.
The elimination of driveways will reduce the conflict points affecting pedestrians, bicycles, and vehicles.
This is consistent with the City’s Circulation Element goal 7.2.7 managing access to preserve safety
and efficiency of the transportation system.
ATTACHMENT 6
ARC3 - 137
Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2016
34 San Luis Square
Transportation Impact Study
Cumulative Conditions
Cumulative conditions represent build-out of the land uses in the region.
CUMULATIVE VOLUME FORECASTS
One roadway network change was assumed to be in place under Cumulative Conditions consistent
with the City’s Circulation Element. The Mission Plaza closure was extended to include Broad Street
between Monterey Street and Higuera Street and to include Monterey Street between Nipomo Street
and Broad Street. The City is in the process of updating the Mission Plaza Plan, which may result in a
slightly different closure than what is described above. This change would not substantially change the
findings in this section. No other roadway network changes affecting the study locations were assumed
to be in place under Cumulative conditions.
Cumulative traffic volume forecasts, shown on Figure 7, were developed using the City’s Travel
Demand Model, which includes planned network and land use changes expected upon buildout of the
City’s General Plan.
CUMULATIVE TRANSPORTATION CONDITIONS
1. Automobile Mode
Table 21 summarizes the intersection LOS for autos under Cumulative and Cumulative Plus Project
Conditions. All intersections perform at acceptable levels.
Intersection
Peak
Hour V/C1
Delay2
(sec/veh)LOS3 V/C1
V/C
Delta
Delay2
(sec/veh)LOS3
MID 0.16 0 (0)A (A)0.16 0.00 0 (13.7)A (B)
PM 0.23 0 (0)A (A)0.23 0.00 0 (14.0)A (B)
MID 0.55 13.0 B 0.54 -0.01 12.8 B
PM 0.48 16.7 B 0.47 -0.01 16.4 B
MID 0.58 2.1 A 0.59 0.01 2.1 A
PM 0.52 3.4 A 0.53 0.01 3.3 A
MID 0.90 24.7 C 0.91 0.01 25.1 C
PM 0.91 28.7 C 0.91 0.00 19.5 B
MID 0.43 11.6 B 0.44 0.01 12.1 B
PM 0.58 13.5 B 0.59 0.01 14.0 B
MID 0.51 19.9 B 0.52 0.01 20.1 C
PM 0.62 21.6 C 0.63 0.01 21.9 C
MID 0.18 8.2 A 0.20 0.02 8.3 A
PM 0.20 8.5 A 0.21 0.01 8.6 A
MID 0.62 9.5 A 0.63 0.01 9.5 A
PM 0.74 9.9 A 0.75 0.01 9.9 A
2. HCM 2010 average control delay in seconds per vehicle.
1. Nipomo
Street/Monterey Street
Table 21: Cumulative Plus Project Intersection Auto Levels of Service
1. Volume to capacity ratio reported for worst movement.
8. Broad Street/Pacific
Street
4. Higuera
Street/Marsh Street
5. Nipomo
Street/Marsh Street
3. Broad
Street/Higuera Street
6. Broad Street/Marsh
Street
7. Nipomo
Street/Pacific Street
Cumulative + Project
2. Nipomo
Street/Higuera Street
Cumulative
3. For side-street-stop controlled intersections the worst approach's delay is reported in parenthesis next to
the overall intersection delay. Unacceptable operations shown in bold text.
ATTACHMENT 6
ARC3 - 138
Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2016
35 San Luis Square
Transportation Impact Study
Table 22 summarizes segment performance in the study area. Unacceptable operations are noted on
Nipomo Street from Monterey Street to Higuera Street. The segment is currently classified as Local,
and thus has a 5,000 ADT threshold. Both the cumulative and cumulative plus project conditions are
forecast to exceed the threshold by more than 2,000 vehicles. This is due to land use growth and the
extension of Mission Plaza, which would add traffic to Nipomo Street.
Intersection operations, which typically constrain roadway capacity, are acceptable, so no operational
degradations are expected. Reclassification to a commercial collector may be appropriate upon the
Mission Plaza expansion.
ADT LOS ADT LOS
Higuera Street - Broad Street to
Nipomo Street Class II Arterial 3 9,859 C 10,058 C
Higuera Street - Nipomo Street
to 500' SW of Intersection Class II Arterial 2 10,334 C 10,559 C
Marsh Street - Broad Street to
Nipomo Street Class II Arterial 3 16,225 C 16,527 C
Marsh Street - Nipomo Street
to Beach Street Class II Arterial 3 14,923 C 15,180 C
Nipomo Street - Monterey
Street to Higuera Street Local 2 7,056 N/A 7,165 N/A
Nipomo Street - Higuera Street
to Marsh Street Class II Arterial 2 5,317 C 5,960 C
Nipomo Street - Marsh Street
to Pacific Street Local 2 3,107 N/A 3,300 N/A
1. Source: Figure 4.4-1 San Luis Obispo Roadway Classification Map, City of San Luis Obispo (2014) &
FDOT Quality/Level of Service Handbook Tables (2013)
Table 22: Cumulative Plus Project Auto Segment Analysis
Segment Classification1 Lanes
Cumulative
Cumulative +
Project
ATTACHMENT 6
ARC3 - 139
San Luis Square
Figure 7: Cumulative Volumes
San Luis Square
Figure 1: Project and Study Locations
Legend:
- Study Intersection
- Project Site
17
- MID(PM) Peak Hour
Traffic Volumes
True
North
Study
North
1.
2.
3.4.5.
8.7.6.
1
2
3
5
6
7
8
4
ATTACHMENT 6
ARC3 - 140
San Luis Square
Figure 8: Cumulative Plus Project Volumes
San Luis Square
Figure 1: Project and Study Locations
Legend:
- Study Intersection
- Project Site
17
- MID(PM) Peak Hour
Traffic Volumes
True
North
Study
North
1.
2.
3.4.5.
8.7.6.
1
2
3
5
6
7
8
4
ATTACHMENT 6
ARC3 - 141
Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2016
38 San Luis Square
Transportation Impact Study
Table 23 summarizes the peak hour queues under Cumulative conditions.
Intersection Cumulative
Cumulative +
Project
MID m10 m13
PM m16 m26
MID 68 81
PM m37 m55
MID 150 154
PM 130 132
MID 135 136
PM 161 161
MID 174 174
PM 184 184
MID 156 164
PM 558 579
MID #796 #803
PM #648 #657
MID 48 64
PM 52 73
MID m45 m45
PM m42 m42
MID 97 98
PM 77 77
MID 146 153
PM 190 196
MID 145 149
PM 150 152
MID 24 25
PM 41 43
MID 97 100
PM #132 #149
SBT
NBR
WBL Trap
NBL 50
3. Broad Street/
Higuera Street
WBT 420
NBT 150
#: 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer.
Bold indicates queue length longer than storage length
8. Broad Street/
Pacific Street
NBT 360
SBT 150
EBT 360
WBT 360
Table 23: Cumulative Plus Project Queues
Movement
Storage
Length2
Peak
Hour
95th Percentile Queues (ft)1
250
+1000
m: Volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal.
1. Queue length that would not be exceeded 95 percent of the time. Queues are reported only
2. 'Trap' denotes design where the through lane terminates in a turn lane.
4. Higuera Street/
Marsh Street
NBL 250
5. Nipomo
Street/ Marsh SBL 40
6. Broad Street/
Marsh Street
SBL 45
NBR 90
2. Nipomo
Street/ Higuera
Street
ATTACHMENT 6
ARC3 - 142
Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2016
39 San Luis Square
Transportation Impact Study
Queuing issues and improvements to address them are dicussed below:
2. Pedestrian and Bicycle Modes
Tables 24 and 25 summarize the bicycle and pedestrian intersection operations under Cumulative
conditions. No bicycle intersection deficiences are noted. The pedestrian LOS at Nipomo Street
/Monterey Street is LOS D/E both with and without the project. A controlled crossing with an
acceptable service level is provided less than 400 feet away at Nipomo Street/Higuera Street. No
improvements are recommended.
Detailed LOS calculation sheets are provided in Appendix B.
Location Queuing Issue Mitigation
2. Nipomo Street/
Higuera Street
The northbound left turn lane queues
exceed storage length by 1-2 vehicles
in the midday and PM peak periods of
both existing and existing plus project
conditions.
None recommended. The
queuing issue is minor and is
not expected to significantly
affect traffic flow.
3. Broad Street/
Higuera Street
The northbound through queues
exceed storage length by about 1
vehicle in the PM peak period of both
existing and existing plus project
conditions.
None recommended. The
queuing issue is minor and is
not expected to significantly
affect traffic flow.
4. Higuera Street/
Marsh Street
The southbound through volumes
exceed capacity, so queues may be
longer than reported. Queues would
be accommodated on S Higuera Street
without spilling back to the next
upstream intersection at Nipomo
Street.
None recommended. A
second southbound through
lane would eliminate this issue
but would require widening S
Higuera Street to provide a
second receiving lane.
5. Nipomo Street/
Marsh Street
The southbound left turn lane queues
exceed storage length by about 1
vehicle in the midday peak period for
both existing and existing plus project
conditions as well as the PM peak
period for existing plus project
conditions.
None recommended. The
queuing issue is minor and is
not expected to significantly
affect traffic flow.
ATTACHMENT 6
ARC3 - 143
Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2016
40 San Luis Square
Transportation Impact Study
Intersection Direction LOS LOS1 LOS LOS1
NB 24.40 D 25.10 D
SB 22.80 D 23.50 D
NB 32.40 E 33.40 E
SB 30.20 E 31.10 E
NB 2.06 B 2.07 B
SB 2.11 B 2.11 B
EB 2.29 B 2.29 B
WB 2.24 B 2.25 B
NB 2.06 B 2.08 B
SB 2.15 B 2.16 B
EB 2.21 B 2.21 B
WB 2.21 B 2.21 B
NB 1.94 A 1.94 A
SB 1.92 A 1.92 A
EB 2.23 B 2.24 B
WB 2.23 B 2.24 B
NB 2.01 B 2.01 B
SB 1.92 A 1.92 A
EB 2.19 B 2.19 B
WB 2.19 B 2.20 B
NB 2.59 B 2.59 B
SB 2.42 B 2.43 B
EB 2.50 B 2.50 B
WB 2.25 B 2.26 B
NB 2.67 B 2.68 B
SB 2.38 B 2.40 B
EB 2.72 B 2.73 B
WB 2.38 B 2.40 B
NB 1.79 A 1.79 A
SB 2.05 B 2.07 B
EB 2.29 B 2.30 B
WB 2.27 B 2.27 B
NB 1.80 A 1.81 A
SB 2.10 B 2.12 B
EB 2.40 B 2.40 B
WB 2.35 B 2.36 B
NB 2.17 B 2.17 B
SB 2.28 B 2.28 B
EB 2.32 B 2.33 B
WB 2.53 B 2.54 B
NB 2.17 B 2.18 B
SB 2.13 B 2.13 B
EB 2.34 B 2.34 B
WB 2.34 B 2.35 B
NB
SB
EB
WB
NB
SB
EB
WB
NB 2.09 B 2.09 B
SB 2.04 B 2.04 B
EB 1.79 A 1.79 A
WB 1.83 A 1.83 A
NB 2.21 B 2.22 B
SB 2.10 B 2.10 B
EB 1.80 A 1.81 A
WB 1.85 A 1.85 A
MID
6. Broad Street/
Marsh Street
MID
PM
3. Broad Street/
Higuera Street
MID
PM
4. Higuera Street/
Marsh Street
MID
PM
5. Nipomo Street/
Marsh Street
MID
PM
1. HCM 2010 pedestrian score and LOS.
Table 24: Cumulative Plus Project Intersection Pedestrian Levels of Service
Cumulative Cumulative + ProjectPeak
Hour
8. Broad Street/
Pacific Street
MID
PM
1. Nipomo Street/
Monterey Street2
MID
2. The 2010 HCM does not establish LOS standards for pedestrians for all-way stop controlled
intersections nor the stop-controlled approaches of two-way stop controlled intersections. LOS Score
here reported as delay as per 2010 HCM standards.
N/A
PM
PM
2. Nipomo Street/
Higuera Street
7. Nipomo Street/
Pacific Street2
MID
PM
ATTACHMENT 6
ARC3 - 144
Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2016
41 San Luis Square
Transportation Impact Study
Intersection LOS LOS1 LOS LOS1
NB
SB
WB
NB
SB
WB
NB 2.55 B 2.60 B
SB 2.63 B 2.63 B
WB 3.07 C 3.09 C
NB 2.58 B 2.64 B
SB 2.64 B 2.65 B
WB 3.00 C 3.01 C
NB 2.46 B 2.46 B
SB 2.14 B 2.14 B
WB 2.91 C 2.92 C
NB 2.59 B 2.59 B
SB 2.14 B 2.14 B
WB 2.83 C 2.84 C
SB 4.26 E 4.28 E
EB 2.67 B 2.69 B
SB 2.97 C 2.98 C
EB 2.51 B 2.51 B
NB 2.32 B 2.35 B
SB 2.43 B 2.49 B
EB 1.62 A 1.63 A
NB 2.38 B 2.40 B
SB 2.48 B 2.56 B
EB 1.80 A 1.82 A
NB 1.48 A 1.48 A
SB 2.69 B 2.69 B
EB 1.75 A 1.76 A
NB 1.40 A 1.40 A
SB 2.87 C 2.87 C
EB 1.90 A 1.91 A
NB
SB
EB
WB
NB
SB
EB
WB
NB 2.64 B 2.65 B
SB 2.65 B 2.66 B
EB 2.02 B 2.02 B
WB 2.30 B 2.30 B
NB 2.91 C 2.92 C
SB 2.77 C 2.79 C
EB 2.08 B 2.08 B
WB 2.29 B 2.30 B
6. Broad Street/
Marsh Street
MID
PM
7. Nipomo Street/
Pacific Street2
MID
PM
8. Broad Street/
Pacific Street
Table 25: Cumulative Plus Project Intersection Bicycle Levels of Service
Peak
Hour Direction
Cumulative Cumulative + Project
1. Nipomo Street/
Monterey Street2
MID
PM
2. Nipomo Street/
Higuera Street
MID
PM
3. Broad Street/
Higuera Street
MID
PM
4. Higuera Street/
Marsh Street
MID
PM
5. Nipomo Street/
Marsh Street
MID
PM
N/A
N/A
MID
PM
1. HCM 2010 bicycle score and LOS.
2. The 2010 HCM does not establish LOS standards for bicycles at stop-controlled intersections.
ATTACHMENT 6
ARC3 - 145
Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2016
42 San Luis Square
Transportation Impact Study
Pedestrian and Bicycle Segment Analysis
Table 26 summarizes the pedestrian segment analysis. All of the study segments operate at an
acceptable service level for pedestrians.
Table 27 summarizes the bicycle segment analysis. The segment of Higuera Street from Broad Street
to Nipomo Street operates at LOS E for bicycles during the midday peak hour. The addition of project
traffic increases the bicycle score by 0.01 along this segment, which is a contextually insignificant
change. No changes are recommended.
LOS Score LOS LOS Score LOS
MID 1.79 A 1.80 A
PM 1.69 A 1.70 A
MID 2.25 B 2.95 C
PM 2.07 B 2.78 C
MID 1.73 A 1.74 A
PM 1.74 A 1.92 A
MID 1.77 A 1.98 A
PM 2.20 B 2.66 B
NB 1.41 A 1.42 A
SB 1.64 A 1.65 A
NB 1.61 A 1.62 A
SB 1.54 A 1.55 A
NB 1.44 A 1.56 A
SB 1.33 A 1.40 A
NB 1.71 A 1.85 A
SB 1.34 A 1.43 A
NB 1.07 A 1.11 A
SB 1.14 A 1.14 A
NB 1.19 A 1.24 A
SB 1.12 A 1.13 A
WB
WB
EB
EB
PM
Table 26: Cumulative Plus Project Segment Pedestrian Levels of Service
Direction
PM
MID
PM
Higuera Street - Broad Street to
Nipomo Street
Higuera Street - Nipomo Street
to 500' SW of Intersection
Marsh Street - Beach Street to
Nipomo Street
Marsh Street - Nipomo Street
to Broad Street
Nipomo Street - Monterey
Street to Higuera Street
Nipomo Street - Marsh Street
to Pacific Street
Cumulative
Nipomo Street - Higuera Street
to Marsh Street
MID
MID
Peak
HourSegment
1. HCM 2010 pedestrian score and LOS.
Cumulative + Project
ATTACHMENT 6
ARC3 - 146
Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2016
43 San Luis Square
Transportation Impact Study
3. Transit Mode
Under Cumulative conditions transit services were assumed to remain the same within the study area.
An acceptable transit LOS is primarily predicated on the presence of shelters and benches at bus stops,
as well as the frequency and on-time performance of each route. The project is within a one block
radius of stops for both SLO Transit and RTA. Future transit service expansions would improve transit
LOS compared with the results reported in Table 28.
LOS Score LOS LOS Score LOS
MID 4.30 E 4.31 E
PM 4.22 D 4.23 D
MID 3.61 D 2.73 B
PM 3.54 D 2.66 B
MID 3.48 C 3.49 C
PM 3.49 C 3.60 D
MID 3.51 D 3.78 D
PM 3.67 D 4.09 D
NB 3.82 D 3.83 D
SB 4.02 D 4.03 D
NB 4.00 D 4.01 D
SB 3.94 D 3.95 D
NB 3.84 D 4.01 D
SB 3.72 D 3.81 D
NB 4.07 D 4.21 D
SB 3.74 D 3.84 D
NB 2.76 C 2.93 C
SB 3.02 C 3.05 C
NB 3.22 C 3.37 C
SB 2.96 C 3.01 C
WB
Cumulative
1. HCM 2010 bicycle score and LOS.
Direction
MID
Marsh Street - Nipomo Street
to Broad Street
Nipomo Street - Monterey
Street to Higuera Street
Nipomo Street - Marsh Street
to Pacific Street
Nipomo Street - Higuera Street
to Marsh Street
MID
Cumulative + Project
Table 27: Cumulative Plus Project Segment Bicycle Levels of Service
Marsh Street - Beach Street to
Nipomo Street
PM
Segment
Peak
Hour
WB
EB
EB
PM
Higuera Street - Broad Street to
Nipomo Street
Higuera Street - Nipomo Street
to 500' SW of Intersection
MID
PM
ATTACHMENT 6
ARC3 - 147
Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2016
44 San Luis Square
Transportation Impact Study
Table 28 summarizes the transit segment analysis.
The segment of Higuera Street from Nipomo Street to 500 feet southwest of the intersection operates
at LOS E for transit both with and without the project. The addition of project traffic increases the
transit score by 0.11. This is due to the removal of parking along the project frontage and its effect on
the pedestrian experience to the nearby bus stops. However, the parking removal is accompanied by a
wider sidewalk along the project frontage. The increase in transit score is not likely to be noticeable to
transit riders, and is therefore contextually insignificant.
LOS Score LOS LOS Score LOS
MID
PM
MID 4.89 E 5.00 E
PM 4.86 E 4.97 E
MID 3.60 D 3.60 D
PM 3.53 D 3.55 D
MID 3.22 C 3.26 C
PM 3.29 C 3.36 C
NB
SB 3.45 C 3.45 C
NB
SB 3.43 C 3.43 C
NB
SB 2.00 A 2.01 B
NB
SB 2.00 B 2.01 B
NB
SB 2.92 C 2.92 C
NB
SB 2.91 C 2.92 C
1. HCM 2010 bicycle score and LOS.
N/A
N/A
N / A
N / A
N / A
N / A
Cumulative + Project
2. LOS is not established for segments without a directional transit route.
MID
PM
Nipomo Street - Higuera Street
to Marsh Street2
MID
PM
Nipomo Street - Monterey
Street to Higuera Street2
Nipomo Street - Marsh Street
to Pacific Street2
MID
PM
Marsh Street - Beach Street to
Nipomo Street
Marsh Street -Nipomo Street
to Broad Street
Table 28: Cumulative Plus Project Segment Transit of Service
Segment Direction
Cumulative Peak
Hour
WB
WB
EB
EB
N / A N / A
Higuera Street - Broad Street to
Nipomo Street2
Higuera Street - Nipomo Street
to 500' SW of Intersection
ATTACHMENT 6
ARC3 - 148
Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2016
45 San Luis Square
Transportation Impact Study
References
City of San Luis Obispo. 2014. Circulation Element of the General Plan.
______. 2014. Bicycle Transportation Plan.
______. 2013. Annual Traffic Safety Report.
______. 2015. Multimodal Transportation Impact Guidelines.
Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). January 2015. ITE Journal: Serving Society’s Vision.
Hourly Variation in Trip Generation for Office and Residential Land Uses.
______. 2014. Trip Generation Handbook.
______. 2012. Trip Generation, 9th Edition.
San Luis Obispo Council of Governments. 2014. Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable
Communities Strategy.
Transportation Research Board. 2010. Highway Capacity Manual.
ATTACHMENT 6
ARC3 - 149
ATTACHMENT 7
ARC3 - 150
ATTACHMENT 7
ARC3 - 151
ATTACHMENT 7ARC3 - 152
ATTACHMENT 7ARC3 - 153
ATTACHMENT 7ARC3 - 154
ATTACHMENT 7ARC3 - 155
ATTACHMENT 7ARC3 - 156
ATTACHMENT 7ARC3 - 157
ATTACHMENT 7ARC3 - 158
ATTACHMENT 7ARC3 - 159
ATTACHMENT 7ARC3 - 160
ATTACHMENT 7ARC3 - 161
ATTACHMENT 7ARC3 - 162
Land Use Element
4.20. Design Principles
The following principles should guide construction and changes of use within the commercial core.
4.20.1. Street Level Activities
The street level should be occupied by stores, restaurants, and other uses benefiting from
and contributing to pedestrian traffic, such as offices with frequent client visits. Stores and
restaurants may occupy upper levels. Offices not having frequent client visits should be
located above street level.
4.20.2. Upper Floor Dwellings
Existing residential uses shall be preserved and new ones encouraged above the street level.
This new housing will include a range of options and affordability levels.
4.20.3. Continuous Storefront
There should be a continuous storefront along sidewalks, at the back of the sidewalk,
except for the Courthouse and City Hall blocks, plazas, recessed building entries, and
sidewalk cafes.
4.20.4. Building Height
New buildings shall fit within the context and scale of existing development, shall respect
views from, or sunlight to, publicly-owned gathering places such as Mission Plaza, and
should be stepped back above the second or third level to maintain a street façade that is
consistent with the historic pattern of development. Generally, new buildings should not
exceed 50 feet in height. Tall buildings (50-75 feet) shall be designed to achieve multiple
policy objectives, including design amenities, housing and retail land uses, such as:
A. Publicly accessible, open viewing spaces at the upper levels
B. Housing affordability in excess of the Inclusionary Housing Requirement
C. Energy efficiency beyond State mandated requirements
D. Adaptive reuse of a historical resource in a manner consistent with the Secretary of
the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation
E. High residential density (e.g. above 24 units per acre) achieved by a concentration
of smaller dwelling units
F. Street level features such as a public plaza, public seating and/or public art
G. Provide midblock or other significant pedestrian connections
H. Increased retail floor area, including multi-story retail
I. Directly implements specific and identifiable City objectives, as set forth in the
General Plan, the Conceptual Plan for the City’s Center, the Downtown Strategic
Plan and other key policy documents
J. Receiving Transfer of Development Credits for open space protection or historic
preservation
K. Proximity of housing to convenient transit connections
ATTACHMENT 8
ARC3 - 163
4.20.5. Building Width
New buildings should maintain the historic pattern of storefront widths.
4.20.6. Sidewalk Appeal
Street facades, particularly at the street level, should include windows, signs, and
architectural details which can be appreciated by people on the sidewalks.
ATTACHMENT 8
ARC3 - 164
Page 1
Affordable Housing In-Lieu Fee Requirement
The Inclusionary Housing Requirement from the City of San Luis Obipso’s General Plan Housing
Element allows Developers to pay a fee to the City instead of constructing affordable dwellings,
which is outlined in section 17.91 of the General Plan Housing Element.
The dollar amount owed is calculated using Table 2 and 2A of the General Plan Housing Element,
shown below and on Page 2:
ATTACHMENT 9
ARC3 - 165
Page 2
San Luis Square is a mixed-use project located within the City limits. Based on this, and following
the guidelines outlined in Section 17.91.050 of the Zoning Code and the tables above, the
affordable housing fee for San Luis Square is calculated based on the commercial space and the
subterranean parking garage costs as follows:
Building Category Estimated Cost
Hotel $6,300,000.00
Commercial $2,700,000.00
Parking Structure $4,000,000.00
TOTAL: $13,000,000.00
x.05 $650,000.00
Total Affordable Housing In-Lieu Fee Owed: $650,000.00
ATTACHMENT 9
ARC3 - 166
Expanded Environmental Analysis of San Luis Square
Project Description
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.
Background
The Architectural Review Commission (ARC) conceptually reviewed a part of the project located
at 581 Higuera Street on December 1, 2014. On July 13, 2015 the Cultural Heritage Committee
(CHC) and the ARC held a joint conceptual review of the mixed-use project that included the
structure located at 581 Higuera. Review by the CHC was not required for the site since it is not
within a historic district and is not located on a historic site. The Community Development Director
determined that the ARC would benefit from a common discussion with the CHC to gather insights
at the conceptual stage of the project prior to the formal submittal and review of the application
because of the adjacency of the project to the Master List Historic Jack House. In this case, the
project was referred to the CHC by the Director following the joint meeting with the ARC based
on the ARC’s request that the CHC review its nine directional items and the fact that this
development is located adjacent to one of the City’s most significant historic resources. The
purpose of the CHC review in this case was to solicit input from the CHC to better inform the
analysis of the project by staff in order to move the project forward for consideration by the
decision making body, the ARC.
On May 22, 2017, the CHC reviewed responses to previous directional items from the July 13th,
2016 meeting and resolved those items with the exception of a discussion about the shading study.
The CHC ultimately decided to continue the item and requested the applicant prepare a new solar
shading study with a different methodology from the computer modeling that was provided.
In addition to discussing the nine directional items, the CHC suggested that the project’s scale and
massing could impact the Jack House Gardens. As a result, the CHC recommended that a
categorical exemption from environmental review should not be used and an Initial Study should
be prepared pursuant to CEQA. The Committee’s recommended that the categorical exemption
should be reevaluated was based on the CHC’s assessment that that the project, as proposed, has
the potential to cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of the adjacent Jack House
Property. The CHC’s recommendation focused on three aspects of it’s the Jack House’s integrity
that the CHC felt could be affected by the project: setting, feeling and association as discussed in
the National Register Bulletin.1
The Director of Community Development is charged with determining whether and what level of
environmental review is appropriate and directing the preparation of the appropriate environmental
document or application of the appropriate categorical exemption. The Director considered the
1 https://www.nps.gov/nr/publications/bulletins/nrb15/
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 146
CHC’s discussion and recommendation and determined that the concerns regarding potential
adverse impacts provided by the CHC did not support a conclusion that the project falls within an
exception to a categorical exemption from environmental review. After significant further analysis
in the context of the CHC’s input, the Director concluded that the CHC’s general discussion about
possible impacts to integrity of the Jack House related to the scale and massing of the San Luis
Square project do not amount to substantial evidence since there is no evidence supporting a
conclusion that the adjacent project, which is not within a historic district and is not itself historic,
would not affect the features of the Jack House property that were the basis for its historic listings
and convey its significance.
The Jack House property is listed on the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion B –
association with persons significant to our past. The Department of Interior National Register
Bulletin on the evaluation of integrity focuses on understanding a property’s physical features and
how they relate to its significance. According to the bulletin, a historic property should possess
several, and usually most, of the seven historic aspects. There is no requirement that all sev en
aspects of integrity must be satisfied or that the immediate environment around a historic property
are to remain unaltered. In order to retain sufficient integrity to maintain listed status, those
physical aspects which convey significance must be retained and the property retain the identity
for which it is significant. A basic test of integrity discussed in the bulletin for properties significant
for their association with persons or events (Criteria A & B- events & persons) is whether a historic
contemporary would recognize the property as it exists today. The Department of Interior bulletin
on Integrity also discusses that when a property is significant under Criterion C (architecture &
design), retention of design, workmanship, and materials is more important than the other aspects.
These aspects would be clearly unaffected by the San Luis Square project. The location and setting
are noted as important where the design is a reflection of their immediate environment (such as
designed landscapes and bridges). This is also not applicable to the Jack House or its gardens
which are already in an urbanized environment. An analysis is provided below outlining the
Director’s analysis and conclusions regarding the applicability of relevant CEQA exemptions and
the lack of evidence supporting any argument that an exception to an applicable CEQA exemption
is supported in this instance.
CEQA Findings of Exemption
The California Secretary of the Resources Agency has authority to adopt by regulation a list of
classes of projects that under normal circumstances will have no significant effect on the
environment and would thus be exempt from CEQA. Pub Res C §21084. These categorical
exemptions are listed in 14 Cal Code Regs §§15300-15333.
Some exemptions are relied on more often than others. One of the more commonly used categorical
exemptions Class 32 (Infill Development Projects). 14 Cal Code Regs §§ 15332, is applicable to
this project.
15332 In-Fill Development Projects:
Class 32 consists of project characterized as in-fill development meeting the conditions described
in this section:
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 147
a) The project is consistent with the applicable general plan designation and all applicable
general plan policies as well as with applicable zoning designation and regulations.
b) The proposed development occurs within city limits on a project site of no more than five
acres substantially surrounded by urban uses.
c) The project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species.
d) Approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise,
air quality, or water quality.
e) The site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services.
The provisions of 14 Cal Code Regs §15300.2 contain certain exceptions that preclude application
of the categorical exemptions. The categorical exemptions do not apply in a specified set of
circumstances, including “projects that cause substantial adverse changes in the significance of
designated historical resources.” In accordance with 14 Cal Code Regs § 15064.5, a “substantial
adverse change” means the “physical demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration of the
resource or its immediate surroundings such that the significance of an historical resource would
be materially impaired.” Under this standard, to be “materially impaired” means that the project
“demolishes or materially alters in an adverse manner those physical characteristics of an (sic)
historical resource that convey its historical significance and that justify its inclusion in, or
eligibility for, inclusion in the California Register of Historical Resources” or “demolishes or
materially alters in an adverse manner those physical characteristics that account for its inclusion
in a local register of historical resources.” This exception to the categorical exemption was the
focus of the CHC’s discussion and recommendation and is the focus of this further analysis.
In addition to the above categorical exemption for infill projects, the following CEQA provisions
also support the conclusion that further environmental review is not supported under the
circumstances for this project.
Section 15183.(a) of the CEQA Guidelines, governing “Special Situations” mandates that projects
which are consistent with the development density established by existing zoning, community
plan, or general plan policies for which an EIR was certified shall not require additional
environmental review, except as might be necessary to examine whether there are project-specific
significant effects which are peculiar to the project or its site. This streamlines the review of such
projects and reduces the need to prepare repetitive environmental studies.
The Guidelines governing subsequent actions consistent with a prior EIR, include section
15168.(C)4, which provides: “Where the subsequent activities involve site specific operations, the
agency should use a written checklist or similar device to document the evaluation of the site and
the activity to determine whether the environmental effects of the operation were covered in the
program EIR.” The analysis below reflects staff’s utilization of the CEQA checklist to demonstrate
the basis for staff’s conclusion that there are no project specific significant effects that require
additional review or suggest the streamlining provisions, and/or the categorical exemption should
not apply. The project is consistent with development consistently anticipated, studied and, in fact,
previously approved, at this site and with prior City actions to adopt the LUCE Update, the City’s
Historic Preservation Ordinance and Historic Preservation Program Guidelines and/or the
Downtown height regulations, included as part of Chapter 17.42 of the Municipal Code.
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 148
Staff Analysis
The proposed project has been analyzed pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) and found to be exempt from further environmental review, consistent with CEQA
Sections 15168(C)4, 15183.(a), categorical exemption 15332 (In-Fill Development Projects), and
the 2014 Land Use and Circulation Element (LUCE) Update Final EIR (FEIR).
Staff has conducted a thorough review of the project and any impacts that it might have on the
subject site, adjacent parcels and the surrounding neighborhood. The LUCE FEIR considered and
anticipated the construction of multi-story buildings within the Downtown. As proposed, the
project would not have an impact on Agricultural Resources, Air Quality, Biological Resources,
Geology/Soils, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Hydrology/Water
Quality, Land Use/Planning, Mineral Resources, Noise, Population/Housing, Public Services,
Recreation, and Utilities/Service Systems. Additional information regarding Aesthetics, Cultural
Resources and Transportation/Traffic is provided below.
Aesthetics – The proposed project is in the urbanized Downtown Core of the City on a level site.
The site is surrounded by Downtown Commercial development to the north, south, east and west.
The proposed project occupies four lots that make up the majority of the northwest intersection of
Nipomo and Marsh Street. The site is located to the east of the Master List Historic Jack House, a
historic resource and public park. None of the structures on the site are considered historic as is
further discussed in the Cultural Resources Section. According to the Circulation Element and the
Conservation/Open Space Element, the site is not located within a designated scenic vista.
Land Use Element Policy 4.17 states that “New Buildings and Views: Downtown development
nearby publicly-owned gathering places shall respect views of the hills. In other locations
Downtown, views will be provided parallel to the street right-of-way, at intersections where
building separation naturally makes more views available, and at upper-level viewing decks.” The
project maintains views along street corridors and allows the use of roof deck to the public, which
provides views of Cerro San Luis from the Downtown. The project is located to the east of the
Master List Historic Jack House and would not block views from the park/garden towards Cerro
San Luis to the northwest.
Located approximately 0.28 miles to the east, Highway 1/101 is the closest scenic highway to the
project site. The project site is not visible from the highway or on/off ramps.
The existing site contains four structures: a vacant commercial building that used to be a Foster
Freeze fast food restaurant, two houses that have been converted into office spaces (one of which
is vacant) and a vacant bank building. The proposed project would demolish these existing
structures and construct three, 60-foot tall mixed-use structures with two levels of subterranean
parking. The plans also include landscaping and street furniture within the outdoor paseos and
walkways. The site is surrounded by structures of varying heights. As noted above, the project is
located adjacent to the Master List Historic Jack House. The Jack House property includes a garden
that is directly adjacent to the proposed project site. 50-70 foot tall redwoods and an accessory
structure would partially screen views toward the proposed site.
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 149
The applicant’s renderings, included in their application, show that the tops of the structures would
be seen from the garden. Although they can be seen, they are consistent with the development
standards outlined in the Zoning Regulations Chapter 17.42 for buildings over 60 feet in height.
The project includes design elements such as upper level setbacks, vining plants that grow on the
building, inclusion of seven new street trees, other landscape features, and architecture styles that
complement other structures in the Downtown. With these design and landscape features, the
project would comply with City General Plan policies aimed at preserving scenic views and the
character of prominent visual features within the City, as well as the City’s Community Design
Guidelines which are intended to ensure that future development is consistent with the City’s
expectations relating to the quality and character of site and building design. The project will
require a final determination of project consistency with the Community Design Guidelines by the
ARC.
A shade analysis was conducted for the project site (Attachment 1) that includes images of the
shading caused by the project through each of the seasonal equinoxes. Because of the orientation
of the site, the proposed project would cast a slight shadow on the edge of the Jack House gardens
from 8:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. As the day continues the shadows shift north to Higuera Street and
then east onto Nipomo Street.
Non-reflective surface finishes would be used on exterior walls and reasonably-sized windows are
proposed to ensure that substantial light or glare would not be generated from the project. As
discussed above, the project was designed to be consistent with the Community Design Guidelines,
and the design, materials, colors, signage, landscaping, and lighting for the project must be
reviewed and approved by the ARC. The project would not substantially degrade the existing
visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings. Based on the above analysis, staff
concludes that there is no substantial evidence supporting an argument that the project may have
aesthetic impacts that “…cause substantial adverse changes in the significance” of the Jack House
as a historical resource.”
Cultural Resources – The proposed project is not located on a site that includes any historical
resources or located within or adjacent to an identified historic district. LSA Associates, Inc.
conducted a records search with the Central Coast Information Center (CCIC), literature search,
and archival research for historic resources within and adjacent to the project site. LSA's records,
literature, and archival search, identified one building within the project site, a single-story 1,052-
square foot wood-frame residence at 570 Marsh Street, that was constructed in approximately
1920. That building was evaluated further to determine whether it is historical resource as defined
by CEQA (Section 15064.5[a]), which could be substantially adversely impacted by the project.
Upon thorough evaluation, LSA determined that the structure did not qualify as a historical
resource (Attachment 2). The Cultural Heritage Committee in May 2017 reviewed this evaluation
and concurred with the LSA evaluation.
LSA’s evaluation of the project site (Attachment 2 and 3) identified two historical resources near
the proposed project, the Robert Jack House (Jack House), located to the west of the project site
at 536 Marsh Street and the Kaetzel House located across Marsh Street south of the project site.
The Jack House is a two-story Italianate residence constructed in 1882 comprising a detached wash
house, a former carriage house, and gardens. The Jack House is listed in the National Register and
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 150
in the City of San Luis Obispo's Master List of Historic Resources. The Kaetzel House is a two -
story Carpenter Gothic residence constructed in 1882; the Kaetzel House is listed in the City of
San Luis Obispo's Master List of Historic Resources.
The Jack House was listed on the National Register and California Register of Historic places in
1992. In the nomination form for the Jack House for inclusion on the National Register of Historic
Places prepared by the City's Cultural Heritage Committee (CHC) and accepted by the California
Office of Historic Preservation, it states that “The Jack Residence is significant under [National
Register] Criterion B in the area of commerce and development for the association with Robert
Jack, a central figure in the San Luis Obispo area during the years 1870-1894 promoting the
expansion of the railroad through the central coast.” The nomination form goes on to say that “It
is very likely the Jack House is significant under Criterion C in the area of architecture as a good
example of Italianate design retaining a high level of integrity. This is not, however, supported in
the nomination.” The nomination form further states that the original wash house is a contributing
building, but that the original carriage house, utility room, gazebo and picket fence are
noncontributing structures. The gardens are discussed as being a part of the Jack House property,
but are not identified in the documentation as having historic significance.
Prior to 1926, portions of the Jack House property facing Higuera Street were subdivided and sold.
These parcels were shown as vacant on Sanborn Maps published in 1926, but have subsequently
been developed with commercial uses. Over the years the lots surrounding the Jack House property
have been developed with various commercial and residential structures. The site of the Jack
Residence and accessory buildings have maintained all elements that contribute to its historical
value, even with the parceling off of the original site itself and with the changing development
around the site.
The Land Use Element (LUE) was updated in 2014 and anticipated new development within the
downtown. The FEIR evaluated the existing and proposed policies, including those for downtown
development such as Policy 4.20.4. which states “New buildings shall fit within the context and
scale of existing development, shall respect views from, or sunlight to, publicly-owned gathering
places such as Mission Plaza, and should be stepped back above the second or third level to
maintain a street façade that is consistent with the historic pattern of development. Generally, new
buildings should not exceed 50 feet in height. Tall buildings (50-75 feet) shall be designed to
achieve multiple policy objectives, including design amenities, housing and retail land uses.” The
proposed project is not requesting any special considerations, is consistent with the LUE policy
and complies with all of the applicable Downtown development standards prescribed in Zoning
Regulations Chapter 17.42. While the step back provisions above speak to street facades, the
project specifically incorporates step backs into the building façade facing the Jack House
property.
The LUE refers to a Conceptual Physical Plan for the Cit y’s Center, an advisory document, which
guides City review of development in the Downtown. In December 2015, staff, volunteers, and a
consultant team began working on the update of the Plan. The objective of the Plan is to provide a
road map for future public projects and guidance for private development in the downtown and
surrounding areas. Input on the plan was provided from the public and City advisory bodies. In
September 2017, the City Council reviewed and approved the revised Downtown Concept Plan.
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 151
The proposed project is located in block 28 of the plan. Block 28 is described as including “three
four-story commercial mixed-use buildings with lower level retail and upper level residential
fronting Higuera, Nipomo, and Marsh Streets. A paseo travels through the center of the block
between the buildings and behind the Jack House Gardens; it is envisioned to connect to the
gardens and a mid-block paseo aligned with Beach Street and connecting to Block 27. The Jack
House Gardens are envisioned to be used more as a public park as the surrounding area
redevelops.” The proposed project is consistent with the description in the Downtown Concept
Plan.
The LUCE FEIR noted that development allowed by the LUCE update could cause substantial
adverse change in the significance of historic resources within the City and required an update to
Policies 3.3.2 and 3.3.5 of the Conservation and Open Space Element. Policy 3.3.2 states
“Historically or architecturally significant buildings shall not be demolished or substantially
changed in outward appearance, unless doing so is necessary to remove a threat to health and
safety and other means to eliminate or reduce the threat to acceptable levels are infeasible.” The
proposed project would not demolish or alter any historic resources. Policy 3.3.5 states, “In
evaluating new public or private development, the City shall identify and protect neighborhoods
or districts having historic character due to the collective effect of the Contributing or Master List
Historic properties.” The proposed project is not located within a historic district nor a
neighborhood that has been identified by the City as having historic character.
In 2008, a four-story mixed-use project was reviewed and approved for the corner property located
at 590 Marsh Street. The project was considered categorically exempt from CEQA based on
Section 15332 In-Fill Development Projects. This was a completely different project and not
located directly adjacent to the Jack House. However, the prior project approval obviously reflects
prior City consideration of the specific operation of a four-story development on this specific site,
a focused public consideration of the development potential for the subject site, and a conclusion
that such a project was appropriate to the site and compatible with the surrounding context,
including the Jack House.
Shortly after the prior project approval on the site, in 2010, the City adopted the Historic
Preservation Ordinance and the Historic Preservation Program Guidelines (HPPG). The HPPG
provides guidelines to preserve and protect historic resources. Included in the Guidelines is a map
of all the historic districts within the City. Each district is unique and the HPPG states that new
development is to be compatible with the district it is in (Section 3.2.1). As noted above, the
proposed project is not located within a historic district. The HPPG also provides guidance for
historic resources outside of historic districts (Section 3.3.1). The project is consistent with this
section because no historic resources are located on the project site.
The Historic Preservation Ordinance provides standards to identify, protect, enhance and preserve
historic resources within the City. The Ordinance includes all the requirements for evaluation and
level of review for potentially historic and listed historic resources, as well as the establishment
and amendments to historic districts. As discussed in the previous paragraph the project site is not
in a historic district and does not contain any historic resources.
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 152
LSA’s records, literature, and archival search found that several cultural resource inventories and
field surveys have been conducted throughout the project site (Bente and Hilderman-Smith 1980;
Singer et al. 1993; Bertrando and Bertrando 2003). During each study, no potential paleontological
or archaeological resources were observed. Most of the project site is paved or developed, and
ground exposure is limited to previously landscaped areas. Therefore, the potential for
archaeological resources to exist on the site is limited.
The proposed project would not involve the physical demolition, destruction, relocation, or
alteration of a historical resource. A shade study was prepared for the project and submitted with
application materials that demonstrates that the project would not shade the Jack House Property.
The Jack House has been included as a listed state and/or local historic resource since 1992, and
continuously throughout several City planning and zoning code updates, including the downtown
height ordinance and the historic preservation ordinance processes. At no point during any of
those significant public processes and related environmental review efforts prior to the submission
of the current application did the City determine that any rezoning, height limitation or limitation
of any other generally applicable downtown development standard was necessary or appropriate
on this site to protect or enhance the Jack House property. Based on the substantial record of
focused City consideration of development standards in the downtown, and the current project’s
conformance to adopted standards, staff concludes the proposed project would not adversely
materially impair the physical characteristics of the Jack Residence or wash house that convey
their association with Robert Jack, a central figure in the San Luis Obispo area and would not
substantially adversely change the historical significance of the resource, either as to its historical
association to the Jack family or its architectural features that justify its inclusion in, or eligibility
for, the California Register of Historical Resources and the City's Master List of Historic
Resources..
Transportation / Traffic – In January 2016, Central Coast Transportation Consulting (CCTC)
prepared a Transportation Impact Study (TIS) evaluating the proposed project. CCTC provided a
revised analysis of the TIS when the project description changed to include more hotel u nits and
less residential units. CCTC found that the revised project description would not change the
findings and recommendations described in the 2016 TIS (Attachment 4).
In accordance with the City General Plan Circulation Element Section 6.1.2 Multimodal Level of
Service (LOS) Objectives, Service Standards, and Significance Criteria, acceptable vehicle traffic
operating conditions are LOS E in the Downtown and LOS D outside of the Downtown. Level of
Service (LOS) is a qualitative measure of the effect of a number of factors, including speed and
travel time, traffic interruptions, freedom to maneuver, driving comfort and convenience. LOS are
designated A through F from best to worst, which cover the entire range of traffic operations that
might occur. LOS A represents essentially free‐flow conditions, and LOS F indicates substantial
congestion and delay. The City of San Luis Obispo considers roadways operating at LOS D or
better to be acceptable, excepting segments downtown where LOS is allowed to drop to E.
The project’s downtown location, mix of uses, density, and proximity to transit, all support trip-
making via walking, biking, and transit. These factors reduce the number of vehicle trips generated
by the project when compared to similar projects located in suburban or rural locations. After
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 153
adjusting to reflect these characteristics, the project trip generation estimate shows 1,284 new daily
trips, 103 new AM peak hour trips, and 111 new PM peak hour trips added to adjacent streets. The
TIS determined that traffic at all the study intersections and segments would operate acceptably
for pedestrians, bicycles, transit, and autos and that the additional project trips would have an
insignificant effect on vehicle queues at the nearby intersections.
In addition, the Traffic Impact Study concludes that the entrance and exit to the underground
parking garage would not result in adverse impacts to queuing of vehicles on Nipomo and at study
intersections. The current project design proposal includes the recommendations outlined in the
TIS such as adequate sight distances maintained at the entrance/exit of the parking garage and
modifications to the the interior design of the parking garage and gate control structure.
The project is not located in the vicinity of the San Luis Obispo County Airport and would not
result in any changes to air traffic patterns.
The proposed project would not modify existing intersections or roadways. The project driveways
would be consistent with City code requirements for ingress/egress to safely and adequately serve
the project. Because the project is a similar use to those in the immediate vicinity, the project
would not introduce any incompatible uses.
The project has been reviewed by the City Fire Marshal to ensure adequate emergency access has
been provided. As proposed, the project would not alter the existing travel flow of vehicles,
bicyclists, or pedestrians or substantially increase traffic on local streets in a way that would
negatively affect emergency access. Therefore, the proposed project would not have a negative
effect on emergency access.
The project is consistent with policies supporting alternative transportation due to the site’s
location within an urbanized area, and its proximity to shopping, parks and services. The site is
located approximately 1/3 a mile from the San Luis Obispo Regional Transit Authority (RTA) and
the City of San Luis Obispo Transit Division (SLO Transit) transportation centers.
The project would not substantially impact the existing transportation and traffic conditions at the
site or the surrounding area.
Attachments:
1. Shade Analysis
2. Historic Resource Evaluation of 570 Marsh Street by LSA
3. Evaluation of the San Luis Square Project by LSA
4. Memo and Executive Summary of the San Luis Square Mixed-Use Transportation Impact
Study by Central Coast Transportation Consulting
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 154
A38March 24, 2017Shade Studies - Vernal Equinox March 20thATTACHMENT 1ATTACHMENT 10ARC1 - 155
805.541.1010539 Marsh StreetSan Luis Obispo, CAinfo@tenoverstudio.comtenoverstudio.comSAN LUIS SQUARE - SHADE STUDYSAN LUIS OBISPO, CADATE: 07/07/2017SPRING (VERNAL) EQUINOX - MARCH 20TH12:00 PM2:00 PM1:00 PM3:00 PM590590590590570570570570581581581581ATTACHMENT 1ATTACHMENT 10ARC1 - 156
A39March 24, 2017Shade Studies - Summer Solstice June 21stATTACHMENT 1ATTACHMENT 10ARC1 - 157
805.541.1010539 Marsh StreetSan Luis Obispo, CAinfo@tenoverstudio.comtenoverstudio.comSAN LUIS SQUARE - SHADE STUDYSAN LUIS OBISPO, CADATE: 07/07/2017SUMMER SOLSTICE - JUNE 20TH12:00 PM2:00 PM1:00 PM3:00 PM590590590590570570570570581581581581ATTACHMENT 1ATTACHMENT 10ARC1 - 158
A40March 24, 2017Shade Studies - Autumnal Equinox September 22ndATTACHMENT 1ATTACHMENT 10ARC1 - 159
805.541.1010539 Marsh StreetSan Luis Obispo, CAinfo@tenoverstudio.comtenoverstudio.comSAN LUIS SQUARE - SHADE STUDYSAN LUIS OBISPO, CADATE: 07/07/2017AUTUMNAL EQUINOX - SEPTEMBER 22ND12:00 PM2:00 PM1:00 PM3:00 PM590590590590570570570570581581581581ATTACHMENT 1ATTACHMENT 10ARC1 - 160
A41March 24, 2017Shade Studies - Winter Solstice - December 21stATTACHMENT 1ATTACHMENT 10ARC1 - 161
805.541.1010539 Marsh StreetSan Luis Obispo, CAinfo@tenoverstudio.comtenoverstudio.comSAN LUIS SQUARE - SHADE STUDYSAN LUIS OBISPO, CADATE: 07/07/2017WINTER SOLSTICE - DECEMBER 21ST12:00 PM2:00 PM1:00 PM590590590570570570581581581ATTACHMENT 1ATTACHMENT 10ARC1 - 162
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 2
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 163
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 2
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 164
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 2
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 165
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 2
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 166
Perimeter Rd
Fredericks St
H igueraStSan Luis DrBishop StA
u
g
u
s
t
a
S
t
Lawrence DrMeadow StMargarita A
v
e
Sandercock St
Branch StB uchonS tAtasc
a
d
er
o
St Vi
c
t
o
r
i
a
A
v
e
Mcmillan AveGrandAveSanta Barbara StCaudill St
£¤101
ST1
ST1
C
h
orro
St
SHigueraStSanL
u
i
sDrC
alifornia
Blv
d
MontereyStOrcutt RdMadonnaRdMarshStChorro StWFoothillBlvdE F o o t h i l l B l v d
Lincoln StHigueraStB
r
o
a
d
S
tElks LnL
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 StPrincetonPl
L o o m isS tMill St
Slack St
Ro
c
k
v
i
ew
P
l
El
M
e
r
c
a
d
o
Palm
St
P hillipsL nVerdeDr
P ism oS tRafaelWayUpha
m St
High St
A
v
a
l
o
n
S
t Gr
o
v
e
S
t
Mccollum St
PacificS tHillStCerro CtElm CtBeebeeStD
e
e
r
R
d
T
o
r
o
S
tTahoe RdMissio
n
Ln
F e l
M a r Dr
Warren
Way Cuesta DrDaly Dr
Campus
Way
Ni
p
o
mo
St
P
e
p
p
e
r
S
t
Hu
a
s
n
a
D
r
Felt o n
Way
IslayS tCerro
Romauldo Ave
B
e
a
c
h
S
t Ga
r
d
e
n
S
tMo
r
r
o
St
Ca
rm
e
l
S
tVista DeLa CuestaE llaS tMurray St
Rougeot Pl
F
i
x
li
n
i
St
Woodbridge St
S e r r an o Dr
C e rr o
R o m a u l d o
F
l
o
r
a
S
tJaycee DrSan
Jose
Ct
LeffS tPalomarAveLincoln StCapitoli
o
W
a
y
San
Carlos
DrCorralitos AveLaurel LnB
alb
o
a
S
t
Prado RdHermosa
Way Santa Lucia DrLa Canada DrLo
m
a
Bo
n
i
t
a
D
r
Del Nort
e
W
a
y
D anaS tPache
co
Wa
y
S
i
e
r
r
a
W
a
y
Laguna LakePark andNatural Reserve
San LuisObispo HighSchoolBrizziolariCreek
PerfumoCreekOl
dGar
denCr
eekStennerCreekSanLuisObispoCreekLagunaLake
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 2
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 167
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 2
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 168
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 2
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 169
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 2
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 170
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 2
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 171
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 2
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 172
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 2
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 173
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 2
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 174
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 2
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 175
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 2
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 176
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 2
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 177
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 2
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 178
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 2
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 179
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 2
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 180
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 2
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 181
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 2
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 182
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 2
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 183
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 2
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 184
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 2
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 185
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 2
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 186
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 Chapek 5
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 2
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 187
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 2
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 188
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 2
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 189
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 2
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 190
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 2
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 191
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 2
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 192
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 2
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 193
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 2
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 194
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 2
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 195
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 2
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 196
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 2
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 197
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 2
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 198
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 2
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 199
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 2
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 200
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 2
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 201
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 2
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 202
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 2
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 203
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 2
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 204
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 2
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 205
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 2
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 206
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 2
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 207
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 2
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 208
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 2
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 209
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 2
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 210
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 2
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 211
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 2
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 212
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 2
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 213
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 2
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 214
July 2017
EVALUATION OF THE
SAN LUIS SQUARE PROJECT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Submitted to:
Jenny Emrick
Senior Project Manager
The Obispo Company
3480 South Higuera Street, Suite 130
San Luis Obispo, California 93401
Prepared by:
Kimberly Butt, M.S., AIA
Interactive Resources
117 Park Place
Point Richmond, California 94801
510.236.7435
Michael Hibma, M.A., RPH #603
LSA
157 Park Place
Point Richmond, California 94801
510.236.6810
LSA Project No. PBC1503
ATTACHMENT 3
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 215
EVALUATION
J ULY 2017
SAN LUIS SQUARE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P:\PBC1503_San_Luis_Square\Report\July_2017\Late_July\LSA_San_Luis_Square_Study_July_2017.docx (08/23/17) i
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
LSA and Interactive Resources, Inc. (IR) prepared this Evaluation of the San Luis Square Project
(project) in San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California. The evaluation utilized information
drawn from previous historical resource documentation, City of San Luis Obispo (City) planning
documents, and conceptual design drawings provided by The Obispo Company. To augment the
existing documentation, IR completed a pedestrian field review of the project site and properties
within 500 feet to identify existing conditions within the project site and its vicinity.
The existing documentation and field review identified one built environment cultural resource 50
years of age or older within the project site: a single-story building, built in 1920, located at 570
Marsh Street (Assessor’s Parcel Number [APN] 003-511-023). LSA prepared a Historical Resource
Evaluation (HRE) of this property for inclusion in the California Register of Historical Resources
(California Register) and the City’s Master List of Historic Resources (Master List). The HRE
concluded that the building does not appear eligible for inclusion in the California Register or in the
Master List and is not a historical resource for the purposes of the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) (Hibma and Long 2015). During the May 22, 2017 meeting of the City’s Cultural Heritage
Committee (CHC), the CHC reviewed the HRE and concurred with LSA’s conclusions. Another built
environment cultural resource 50 years of age or older is located west of and adjacent to, the
project site and consists of a two-story Italianate Jack House residence and single-story detached
\Wash House, built in 1882, located at 536 Marsh Street (APN 003-511-022). These buildings,
collectively known as the Robert Jack House (Jack House property), are listed in the National
Register of Historic Places (National Register), the California Register, and the City’s Master List, and
are a historical resource for the purposes of CEQA.
The project site is not within the boundaries of a designated or candidate historic district nor does it
contain a historic site. However, due to the proposed project’s location adjacent to the National
Register-listed Jack House property, the CHC and the City’s Architectural Review Commission (ARC)
on July 13, 2015 prepared a joint conceptual design review of the project. The review directed the
applicant to “evaluate potential impacts to cultural resources, including the potential effects to the
historical significance of the Master List Jack House property.” Based on field observations, research,
and review of the proposed plans, LSA and IR concluded that no historical resources within 500 feet
of the project site would sustain a substantial adverse change as a result of the project. Accordingly,
the focus of this study is the Jack House property. The project proposes the construction of three
new buildings on a site northeast of, and adjacent to, the Jack House property.
This study assessed the potential impact of the proposed construction on the character-defining
features of the Jack House property that conveys its significance under National Register Criterion B.
To do this, LSA and IR applied the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic
Properties (Secretary’s Standards). LSA and IR conclude that the current design of the proposed
project is in compliance with the Secretary’s Standards. Therefore, the project would not result in a
substantial adverse change in the significance of or cause a material impairment or an indirect
impact to the Jack House property as defined at CEQA Guidelines 15064.5(b)(1)(2)(3).
ATTACHMENT 3
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 216
EVALUATION
J ULY 2017
SAN LUIS SQUARE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P:\PBC1503_San_Luis_Square\Report\July_2017\Late_July\LSA_San_Luis_Square_Study_July_2017.docx (08/23/17) ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................. I
1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Project Setting and Description ........................................................................................... 1
1.1.1 Project Setting ....................................................................................................................... 1
1.1.2 Project Description ................................................................................................................ 5
2.0 METHODS ........................................................................................................... 6
2.1 Literature Review ................................................................................................................. 6
2.2 Field Survey .......................................................................................................................... 6
3.0 HISTORIC STATUS SUMMARY .............................................................................. 7
3.1 Previous Evaluations ............................................................................................................ 7
4.0 RESOURCES DESCRIPTION AND ARCHITECTURAL CONTEXT .................................. 9
4.1 Resource Description ........................................................................................................... 9
4.2 Architectural Context ......................................................................................................... 10
4.3 Integrity Assessment .......................................................................................................... 10
4.3.1 Character-Defining Features ................................................................................................ 11
4.3.2 Assessment .......................................................................................................................... 12
4.3.3 Conclusion ........................................................................................................................... 14
5.0 PROJECT SPECIFIC IMPACTS ............................................................................... 15
5.1 Impact Threshold ............................................................................................................... 15
5.1.1 Secretary’s Standards .......................................................................................................... 15
5.2 Secretary’s Standards Compliance Assessment ................................................................. 18
5.2.1 Rehabilitation Standards 1-8 ............................................................................................... 19
5.2.2 Rehabilitation Standard 9 .................................................................................................... 19
5.2.3 Rehabilitation Standard 10 .................................................................................................. 25
5.2.4 Conclusion ........................................................................................................................... 25
6.0 CONCLUSION ..................................................................................................... 27
7.0 PREPARERS’ QUALIFICATIONS ........................................................................... 29
8.0 REFERENCES CONSULTED .................................................................................. 30
FIGURES AND TABLES
FIGURES
Figure 1: Project Site and Vicinity ........................................................................................................... 2
Figure 2: Project Site .............................................................................................................................. 3
Figure 3: Historical Resources Locations ................................................................................................ 4
ATTACHMENT 3
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 217
EVALUATION
J ULY 2017
SAN LUIS SQUARE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P:\PBC1503_San_Luis_Square\Report\July_2017\Late_July\LSA_San_Luis_Square_Study_July_2017.docx (08/23/17) iii
TABLE
Table A: Secretary’s Standards for Rehabilitation – Jack House Property ........................................... 18
APPENDICES
A: Robert Jack House – Current Conditions
B: Jack House National Register of Historic Places Nomination Form
C: San Luis Square – Conceptual Site Plan and Perspective Views (June 8, 2016)
D: San Luis Square – Shade Study
ATTACHMENT 3
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 218
EVALUATION
J ULY 2017
SAN LUIS SQUARE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P:\PBC1503_San_Luis_Square\Report\July_2017\Late_July\LSA_San_Luis_Square_Study_July_2017.docx (08/23/17) 1
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This study was prepared by LSA and Interactive Resources, Inc. (IR), at the request of The Obispo
Company (formerly PB Companies, LLC) (client) for the San Luis Square Project (project), San Luis
Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California. This study was conducted in a two-step process. The first
step analyzed the scope, nature, and design of the proposed project for compatibility with the
character-defining features of the adjacent Jack House property, which is listed in the National
Register, the California Register, and the City’s Master List.1 The second step assessed whether the
proposed project would cause a “substantial adverse change” in the significance of the Jack House
property using the criteria described in CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(b).
Per direction from the San Luis Obispo Architectural Review Commission and Cultural Heritage
Committee, the client was required to “evaluate potential impacts to cultural resources, including
the potential impacts to the historical significance of the Master List Jack House property” (Rachel
Cohen pers. comm. PB Companies, 17 July 2015). IR reviewed built environment cultural resources
within a 500-foot radius of the project site to identify the baseline conditions for the analysis. The
proposed project site does not contain any listed historical resources, lies outside the boundaries of
any designated or candidate historic district(s), and, other than the Jack House property, is not
adjacent to other individually listed historical resources. Accordingly, the focus of this study is the
Jack House property.
1.1 PROJECT SETTING AND DESCRIPTION
1.1.1 Project Setting
The L-shaped, 0.978-acre project site, comprising APNs 003-511-023, -024, -025, and -013, covers a
portion of a city block bounded by Higuera Street to the northwest, Nipomo Street to the northeast,
Marsh Road to the southeast, and Carmel Street to the southwest, on the western edge of
downtown San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California (Figures 1 and 2). The project site
currently contains the following: a single-story vernacular house built in 1920 at 570 Marsh Street; a
beauty salon built in 1950 at 578 Marsh Street; a fast-food restaurant built circa 1950 at 590 Marsh
Street; and a two-story bank building constructed in 1997 at 581 Higuera Street. As previously
mentioned, the site is not located within a designated or candidate historic district, but is near the
Downtown Historic District, located approximately 60 feet north across Higuera Street; and the Old
Town Historic District, located one block southeast approximately 350 feet. Additionally, the project
site is northeast of, and adjacent to, the historic Jack House property, and two other Master List
resources are within 500 feet of the project site: the Kaetzel House, built in 1882 at 547 Marsh
Street, and the Parsons House, built in 1919 at 1204 Nipomo Street (Figure 3).
1 This property is referred to in the City of San Luis Obispo Citywide Historic Context as the “Robert Jack House”
Historic Resources Group, 2013:145, 165.
ATTACHMENT 3
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 219
Perimeter Rd
Fredericks St
H igueraStSan Luis DrBishop StA
u
g
u
s
t
a
S
t
Lawrence DrMeadow StMargarita A
v
e
Sandercock St
Branch St
B uchonS tAtasc
a
d
er
o
St Vi
c
t
o
r
i
a
A
v
e
Mcmillan AveGrandAveSanta Barbara StCaudill St
£¤101
ST1
ST1
C
h
orro
St
SHigueraStSanL
u
i
sDrC
alifornia
Blv
d
MontereyStOrcutt RdMadonnaRdMarshStChorro StWFoothillBlvdE F o o t h i l l B l v d
Lincoln StHigueraStB
r
o
a
d
S
tElks LnL
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 StPrincetonPl
L o o m is S tMill St
Slack St
Ro
c
k
v
i
ew
P
l
El
M
e
r
c
a
d
o
Palm
St
P hillipsL nVerdeDr
P ism oS tRafaelWayUpha
m
St
High St
A
v
a
l
o
n
S
t Gr
o
v
e
S
t
Mccollum St
PacificS tHillStCerro CtElm CtBeebeeStD
e
e
r
R
d
T
o
r
o
S
tTahoe RdMissio
n
Ln
F e l
M a r Dr
Warren
Way Cuesta DrDaly Dr
Campus
Way
N
i
p
o
mo
St Pe
p
p
e
r
S
t
Hu
a
s
n
a
D
r
F elto n
Way
IslayS tCerro
Romauldo Ave
Be
a
c
h
S
t Ga
r
d
e
n
S
tMo
r
r
o
St
Ca
rm
e
l
S
tVista DeLa CuestaEllaS tMurray St
Rougeot Pl
F
i
x
li
n
i
St
Woodbridge St
S e r r a no Dr
C e r r o
R o m a u l d o
F
l
o
r
a
S
tJaycee DrSan
Jose
Ct
LeffS tPalomarAveLincoln StCapitoli
o
W
a
y
San
Carlos
DrCorralitos AveLaurel LnB
alb
o
a
S
t
Prado RdHermosa
Way Santa Lucia DrLa Canada DrLo
m
a
Bo
n
i
t
a
D
r
Del Nort
e
W
a
y
D anaS tPache
co
Wa
y
S
i
e
r
r
a
W
a
y
Laguna LakePark andNatural Reserve
San LuisObispo HighSchoolBrizziolariCreek
PerfumoCreekOl
dGar
denCr
eekStennerCreekSanLuisObispoCreekLagunaLake
SOURCE: ESRI StreetMap North America (2012).
FIGURE 1
San Luis Square Project San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California
Project Site and Vicinity
0 1000 2000
FEET
I:\PBC1503\GIS\Maps\Cultural\Figure 1_Project Site and Vicinity.mxd (10/15/2015)
Project Site
AtascaderoAtascadero
TempletonTempleton
PismoPismoBeachBeach
GroverGroverBeachBeach NipomoNipomo
MorroMorroBayBay
£¤101
ST1
San LuisSan LuisObispoObispo
San LuisSan Luis
ObispoObispo
CountyCounty
Pacific
Ocean
Project Site
ATTACHMENT 3
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 220
SOURCE: USGS 7.5-minute Topo Quad - San Luis Obispo, Calif. (1994).
I:\PBC1503\GIS\Maps\Cultural\Figure 2_Project Site.mxd (10/15/2015)
FIGURE 2
San Luis Square Project
San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California
Project Site
0 1000 2000
FEET
Project Site
ATTACHMENT 3
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 221
Project Site
Golden State Creamery
APN 002-402-045
570 Higuera Street
Jack House and Gardens
APN 003-511-022
536 Marsh Street
Kaetzel House
APN 003-514-015
547 Marsh Street
Parsons House
APN 003-521-001
1204 Nipomo Street
Downtown Historic District
Old Town Historic District
Marsh Street
Higuera
Street
Pacific StreetN
i
p
om
o
S
t
r
e
e
t Br
o
a
d
S
t
r
e
e
t
B
e
a
c
h
S
t
r
e
e
t
Dana
Street
SOURCE: City of San Luis Obispo (2015); Esri World Imagery Basemap (2010).
I:\PBC1503\GIS\Maps\Cultural\Figure 3_Historical Resources Locations.mxd (10/22/2015)
FIGURE 3
San Luis Square Project
San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California
Historical Resources Locations
075150
FEET
ATTACHMENT 3
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 222
EVALUATION
J ULY 2017
SAN LUIS SQUARE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P:\PBC1503_San_Luis_Square\Report\July_2017\Late_July\LSA_San_Luis_Square_Study_July_2017.docx (08/23/17) 5
1.1.2 Project Description
The project, known as “San Luis Square,” would combine APNs 003-511-023, -024, -025, and -013,
demolish the buildings currently occupying these parcels, and construct three four-story buildings,
approximately 54 to 60 feet tall, with two levels of subterranean parking. The project would contain
approximately 24,900 square feet of commercial retail space, 34 hotel rooms, and 64 residential
units consisting of a mix of studios, single bedroom, and two bedroom residential spaces.
As currently designed, the proposed new buildings would consist of the following:
• A 22,871 square-foot, four-story, mixed-use building located at 570 Marsh Street;
• A 40,383 square-foot, four-story, mixed-use building located at 590 Marsh Street; and
• A 52,961 square-foot, four-story, mixed-use building located at 581 Higuera Street.
The project would also include mid-block pedestrian crossings and 15,940 square feet of public
areas consisting of pedestrian pathways, benches, bicycle parking, landscaping, decorative lighting,
outdoor eating areas, interactive signage, and public art.
ATTACHMENT 3
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 223
EVALUATION
J ULY 2017
SAN LUIS SQUARE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P:\PBC1503_San_Luis_Square\Report\July_2017\Late_July\LSA_San_Luis_Square_Study_July_2017.docx (08/23/17) 6
2.0 METHODS
2.1 LITERATURE REVIEW
LSA and IR reviewed previous research, maps, government records, internet sources, and other
background information to characterize and understand the architectural context of the project site
and its vicinity. For the impacts analysis portion of the study, LSA and IR examined the following
documents and analyses:
• National Register of Historic Places, Robert Jack Residence, San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo
County, California, National Register #19920413 (Pinard 1991) (Appendix B);
• City of San Luis Obispo Citywide Historic Context Statement (Historic Resources Group 2013);
• Historic Preservation Program Guidelines (City of San Luis Obispo 2010a);
• Historic Preservation Ordinance (City of San Luis Obispo 2010b);
• City of San Luis Obispo Architectural Review Commission and Cultural Heritage Committee (13
July 2015 joint meeting minutes) (City of San Luis Obispo Architectural Review Commission
2015);
• San Luis Square - Conceptual Site Plan and Perspective Views (June 8, 2016)
(The Obispo Company 2016) (Appendix C); and
• San Luis Square - Shade Study (Ten Over Architects (2015) (Appendix D).
Please see Section 9.0, References Consulted, for a complete list of the materials reviewed.
2.2 FIELD SURVEY
On September 16, 2015, IR architectural historian and preservation architect Kimberly Butt, M.S.,
AIA, conducted a pedestrian review of the Jack House property, its setting, the project site, and the
surrounding blocks within a 500-foot radius. The field observations were documented through notes
and photographs. Please see Appendix A for a description of current conditions within the Jack
House property.
ATTACHMENT 3
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 224
EVALUATION
J ULY 2017
SAN LUIS SQUARE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P:\PBC1503_San_Luis_Square\Report\July_2017\Late_July\LSA_San_Luis_Square_Study_July_2017.docx (08/23/17) 7
3.0 HISTORIC STATUS SUMMARY
This section identifies the historical status of the Jack House property with respect to previous
evaluations and historical designations under national, State, and local preservation registration
programs. The proposed project site itself does not contain any built environment architectural
resources eligible for historical designation.
3.1 PREVIOUS EVALUATIONS
The proposed project site includes four existing buildings that are to be demolished. The building at
570 Marsh Street was evaluated by LSA and appears not eligible for listing as a historic resource in
any national, State, or local registers (Hibma and Long 2015).2 According to information made
available to LSA and Interactive Resources, no other eligibility evaluations have been prepared for
built environment architectural resources within the project site.
One historical resource at 536 Marsh Street, the Jack House property, is southwest of, and adjacent
to, the project site. In 1991, the Jack House property was nominated for inclusion in the National
Register (Pinard 1991). The nomination documentation identified four buildings and one structure
on the property contained within APN 003-511-022 (Appendix B). The entire parcel is the historical
resource boundary described in the official National Register nomination form; however, only two
buildings within the property were found eligible as contributing elements: a two-story Italianate
Jack House residence and a detached, single-story Wash House. No other built environment or
landscaping elements within the property were identified in the National Register nomination
documentation as contributing elements, either due to lack of integrity or having been constructed
outside of the Jack House property’s period of significance of 1882-1894. In 1992, the Jack House
property was formally listed in the National Register at the local level of significance for its
association with Robert Jack, a prominent banker, land developer, and rancher in San Luis Obispo
(Criterion B). The nomination states that the property may also be eligible at the local level of
significance as a representative example of Italianate architecture in San Luis Obispo (Criterion C).
However, the nomination documentation does not fully address the possible architectural
association of the Jack House property (Pinard 1991:10) (Appendix B). However, the City has
recognized the Italianate architectural qualities of the two-story Jack House residence.3 The
landscaped gardens were also identified and described in the nomination, although for reasons not
explained in the National Register nomination documentation, they were not included as
contributing elements of the Jack House property (Pinard 1991:5).
2 During the May 22, 2017, meeting of the City’s Cultural Heritage Committee (CHC), the CHC reviewed the
HRE and concurred with LSA’s conclusion regarding the building’s status.
3 The two-story Jack House residence is depicted as a representative example of Italianate architectural style
in the City of San Luis Obispo Citywide Historic Context Statement San Luis Obispo. Historic Resources
Group, 2013:145, 165.
ATTACHMENT 3
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 225
EVALUATION
J ULY 2017
SAN LUIS SQUARE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P:\PBC1503_San_Luis_Square\Report\July_2017\Late_July\LSA_San_Luis_Square_Study_July_2017.docx (08/23/17) 8
Due to its National Register listing, the Jack House property was automatically listed in the California
Register as well, and included in the City’s Master List. Due to its inclusion in these registers, the Jack
House property qualifies as a “historical resource” under CEQA (California Public Resources Code
Section 21084.1), as well as Section 14.01.020 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code. Other nearby
properties that qualify as “historical resources” under CEQA and the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code
include portions of the Downtown Historic District, located approximately 60 feet north across
Higuera Street from the project site; the project site itself contains no district contributors and the
Old Town Historic District is located one block southeast approximately 350 feet from the project
site; and two Master List residential properties are south and east of the project site: the Kaetzel
House (547 Marsh Street) and the Parsons House (1204 Nipomo Street).
ATTACHMENT 3
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 226
EVALUATION
J ULY 2017
SAN LUIS SQUARE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P:\PBC1503_San_Luis_Square\Report\July_2017\Late_July\LSA_San_Luis_Square_Study_July_2017.docx (08/23/17) 9
4.0 RESOURCES DESCRIPTION AND ARCHITECTURAL CONTEXT
Background research and a field survey of the project site and vicinity identified one built
environment cultural resource over 50 years old at 536 Marsh Street (APN 003-511-022) adjacent to
the project site (Appendix A). This resource, locally known as the Jack House property, consists of:
• A two-story wood-frame Italianate-styled Jack House residence built in 1882 (contributing
building);
• A single-story detached Wash House that was relocated in 1980 (contributing building);
• A single-story carriage house with an attached modern pavilion structure (non-contributing
building);
• A single-story utility building built in 1980 (non-contributing building);
• A gazebo built in 1980 (non-contributing building);
• Landscaped gardens (non-contributing feature); and
• The Kaetzel Monument (non-contributing object).
The following sections identify and describe the context and character-defining features of the Jack
House property. These features convey the significant aspects of the resource and justify their
eligibility as contributors to the property.
4.1 RESOURCE DESCRIPTION
The Jack House property consists of the entire 0.85-acre mid-block parcel fronting Marsh Street. The
site is essentially flat and features two contributing buildings (the two-story Italianate Jack House
residence and the detached, single-story Wash House), three non-contributing buildings (the
carriage house, utility building, and gazebo), and the non-contributing landscaped gardens and
Kaetzel Monument. The two-story Italianate Jack House residence stands in the southwest section
of the lot, approximately 45 feet from the street curb, with the detached, single-story Wash House
directly behind and the single-story utility building behind and to the northeast. The carriage house
is located near the lot’s northern corner, and the gazebo stands near the eastern corner, close to
Marsh Street. A decomposed granite driveway runs parallel to the northwestern and southwestern
property lines and is accessed via a gate on Marsh Street. The majority of the property is covered
with lawn, with areas of ornamental planting, numerous mature trees, concrete pathways, and
flagstone paving. A picket fence, constructed in 1980 to replicate the original, stands along the
Marsh Street property line (Pinard 1991:5). No vegetation or related landscaping features were
identified in the National Register nomination as contributing elements to the Jack House property;
however, the large amount of open space and gardens on the parcel adds to the understanding of
the importance of Robert Jack within the community during its period of significance of 1882-1894.
ATTACHMENT 3
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 227
EVALUATION
J ULY 2017
SAN LUIS SQUARE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P:\PBC1503_San_Luis_Square\Report\July_2017\Late_July\LSA_San_Luis_Square_Study_July_2017.docx (08/23/17) 10
The two-story, wood framed, Italianate-styled single-family residence rests on a raised concrete
perimeter foundation. The building is essentially rectangular in plan and features redwood shiplap
siding; an asymmetrical hipped roof with a decorative balustrade and overhanging eaves with
decorative brackets and frieze; two brick chimneys; tall, double-hung wood-sash windows with flat,
corniced window hoods; decorative cornice eaves with dentils and decorative brackets; a full-width
front porch supported by square wood posts; and single-story bay windows on the east- and west-
facing façades.
The single-story wood-framed detached Wash House rests on an undetermined type of foundation.
The building is rectangular in plan and features redwood shiplap siding. It is covered with a hipped
roof with overhanging eaves. The main entrance to the building consists of a modern replacement
arched doorway. Secondary entrances consist of a nine-over-two wood paneled door and a four
panel wood door.
4.2 ARCHITECTURAL CONTEXT
The Jack House property is located at the western end of the City’s historic downtown core. The Jack
House property and surrounding parcels were developed in the mid- to late 1880s with single-family
residential properties (Sanborn-Perris Map Co., Ltd. 1886). By the mid-1920s, the City’s downtown
core expanded and Higuera and Marsh streets northeast of Nipomo Street became increasingly
commercial, as did the parcels adjacent to, and northeast of, the Jack House property (Sanborn-
Perris Map Co., Ltd. 1926). The 1950 Sanborn Fire Insurance Company map depicts parcels directly
behind the Jack House property redeveloped as commercial properties, while much of the area
south of Marsh Street remained primarily residential (Sanborn-Perris Map Co., Ltd. 1950).
Today, the area surrounding the Jack House property is developed in primarily one- and two-story
commercial buildings, some of which were originally residences later converted to commercial uses,
such as 570 Marsh Street (Hibma and Long 2015). Many of the buildings on the block containing the
project site and the Jack House property were constructed less than 50 years ago. The parcel
adjacent to, and southwest of, the Jack House property contains a two-story commercial building
constructed circa 1980 that was designed in a derivative of the Italianate style, perhaps in sympathy
to the Italianate architecture of the two-story residence on the Jack House property. The project site
is located northeast of the Jack House property, with commercial buildings facing Higuera Street
located on parcels northwest of and behind the Jack House property. Mature street trees and wide
concrete sidewalks line Marsh, Nipomo, and Higuera streets.
4.3 INTEGRITY ASSESSMENT
In order to determine if the proposed project would materially alter in an adverse manner the
physical characteristics of a historical resource that convey its historical significance and that justify
its inclusion in the National and California registers, the historic integrity and character-defining
features (or the physical characteristics of a historical resource that convey its significance) of the
historical resource must be established. In general, for consideration for inclusion in the National
Register or California Register a property must retain the essential physical features that enable it to
convey its historic identity. These essential physical features are those features that define both why
a property is significant and when it was significant (National Park Service (NPS) 1997).
ATTACHMENT 3
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 228
EVALUATION
J ULY 2017
SAN LUIS SQUARE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P:\PBC1503_San_Luis_Square\Report\July_2017\Late_July\LSA_San_Luis_Square_Study_July_2017.docx (08/23/17) 11
However, as properties change over time, it is not a requirement that a property must retain all its
historic physical features or characteristics to convey its historical significance (NPS 1997:44). While
a property’s significance relates to its role within a specific historic context, its integrity refers to “a
property’s physical features and how they relate to its significance” (NPS 1997:44).
To determine if a property retains the physical characteristics corresponding to its historic context,
the National Register has identified seven aspects of integrity. These are:
Location is the place where the historic property was constructed or the place where the historic
event occurred...
Design is the combination of elements that create the form, plan, space, structure, and style of a
property...
Setting is the physical environment of a historic property...
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...
Feeling is a property’s expression of the aesthetic or historic sense of a particular period of time...
Association is the direct link between an important historic event or person and a historic property.
4.3.1 Character-Defining Features
The property’s physical features that contribute to its historical significance under Criterion B for
association with Robert Jack, a person significant in San Luis Obispo’s past, are listed and described
in a National Register Registration Form prepared for the property (Pinard 1991). The character-
defining features for the Jack House property are listed below.
Character-Defining Features of Setting:
• Semi-urban contextual setting of primarily low-rise buildings;
• Large parcel with a low percentage of the area covered by buildings;
• Jack House gardens established by Nellie Jack;
• Palm trees near Marsh Street;
• Driveway location; and
• Flagstones on the northeast side.
Character-Defining Features of the Jack House Residence:
• Two-story volume;
• Italianate style;
ATTACHMENT 3
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 229
EVALUATION
J ULY 2017
SAN LUIS SQUARE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P:\PBC1503_San_Luis_Square\Report\July_2017\Late_July\LSA_San_Luis_Square_Study_July_2017.docx (08/23/17) 12
• Wood frame structure;
• Rectangular plan;
• Redwood shiplap siding;
• Asymmetrical hipped roof;
• Decorative balustrades;
• Overhanging eaves with decorative brackets and frieze;
• Two brick chimneys;
• Tall, double-hung wood-sash windows;
• Flat, corniced window hoods;
• Decorative cornice eaves with dentils and decorative brackets;
• Full-width front porch supported by square wood posts; and
• Two single-story bay windows.
Character-Defining Features of the Wash House:
• Single-story volume;
• Wood frame structure;
• Rectangular plan;
• Redwood shiplap siding; and
• Hipped roof with overhanging eaves.
The condition of these physical features was verified via subsequent site visits and conditions
assessments undertaken by the report authors.
4.3.2 Assessment
In order to be listed on the National Register a resource need only meet one area of significance,
regardless if the resource may be significant in multiple areas. Because the nomination focused only
on Criterion B (association with persons significant to our past) then specific aspects of integrity that
relate most specifically to Criterion B are given greater consideration. These aspects of integrity are
location, setting, materials, feeling, and association (NPS 1997:48). However, the two-story Jack
House residence is considered significant for its associations with the Italianate architectural style.
Integrity of design and workmanship are less critical than in situations where the property is listed
under Criterion C, for example. The integrity requirement for properties that are significant under
Criterion B is if the property retains the essential physical features that made up its character or
appearance during the period of its association with the person(s) significant in our past (NPS
1997:14, 46).
A basic integrity test for Criterion B is whether a “historical contemporary would recognize the
property as it exists today” (NPS 1997:48). This inherently subjective exercise requires the observer
to imagine past conditions, feelings, and lifeways to meaningfully interpret the significance of the
historic property and to perceive its “recognizability” as Robert Jack or a historical contemporary
might. However, because feeling and association depend on individual perceptions, their retention
alone is never sufficient to support eligibility of a property for the National Register (NPS 1997:45).
ATTACHMENT 3
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 230
EVALUATION
J ULY 2017
SAN LUIS SQUARE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P:\PBC1503_San_Luis_Square\Report\July_2017\Late_July\LSA_San_Luis_Square_Study_July_2017.docx (08/23/17) 13
The following assessment focuses on those specific aspects of integrity integral to conveying the
significance of a historic property eligible under Criterion B:
Location
The Jack House has not been moved and retains integrity of location.
Setting
Integrity of setting is the physical environment of a historical resource. Setting refers to the
character of the place in which the property played its historic role, how the property is situated and
its relationship to surrounding features and open space. The immediate setting of the Jack House
property includes the physical features and their relationships within the parcel boundaries. The
existing relationship between the property’s buildings, the gardens, the palm trees, and the fence
along Marsh Avenue reflect the same basic conditions that existed on the site during the period of
significance, 1882-1894, except that the Jack House property was larger and extended to Higuera
Street, encompassing a total of 1.55 acres.
Before 1926, the rear half of the property facing Higuera Street was sold for development. Sanborn
Insurance Company maps illustrate that the rear half of the property remained undeveloped during
the period of significance. As stated in the National Register Nomination, “the [current] site of the
Jack Residence and accessory buildings contain all elements that contribute to its historical value.
There are no related elements of historical value visible on parcels facing Higuera Street that were
previously owned by the Jack family” (Pinard 1991:12). Because the features that directly contribute
to the resource’s historic value all remain located on the developed portion of the original property
and were not removed from the property, the overall immediate integrity of setting remains intact.
Setting also includes the examination of the relationship between the property and its surroundings
outside of the parcel boundaries (NPS 1997:45). Much of the contextual setting has been altered
since the Jack House property’s period of significance of 1882-1894, when the primary land use
pattern consisted of a one-and two-story single-family residential development interspersed with
open space. Several of the original single-family homes in the area remain, but have been converted
to commercial uses. Also, the area surrounding the property has over time become denser with new
construction, including several low-rise commercial structures on nearby and adjacent properties
such as the two-story Coast National Bank building built circa 2000 at 500 Marsh Street (APN 003-
511-038) approximately 50 feet west of the Jack House. However, the new structures do not appear
to have significantly diminished the integrity of the contextual setting due to the generally low
heights and open space surrounding the Jack House buildings. Overall, the property retains
sufficient integrity of both its immediate setting and contextual setting to reflect the general
physical conditions of the property during its period of significance, even though with the contextual
setting integrity has been slightly diminished due to growth of the surrounding area.
ATTACHMENT 3
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 231
EVALUATION
J ULY 2017
SAN LUIS SQUARE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P:\PBC1503_San_Luis_Square\Report\July_2017\Late_July\LSA_San_Luis_Square_Study_July_2017.docx (08/23/17) 14
Materials
Integrity of materials refers to the specific physical elements that were combined to form the
historic resource. The Jack House property retains a significant amount of original material ranging
from the physical exterior elements of the two-story Italianate Jack House residence and the
detached single-story Wash House to plants and trees in the gardens. The property clearly retains its
integrity of materials.
Feeling
Integrity of feeling is a property’s expression of the aesthetic or historic sense of a particular period
of time. The Jack House property in its current condition clearly maintains a sense of upper-class
residential life in the late-19th century with its well-maintained buildings and spacious gardens. Over
the last 123 years, commercial and residential development in the western area of San Luis Obispo
has sharpened the contrast between the low-density land use patterns of the late-19th century, as
expressed by the Jack House property; with the higher-density land use patterns of the mid-to-late
20th century. As the surrounding parcels built out, an obvious contrasting feeling of relative
openness of the two-story Italianate Jack House residence and surrounding grounds formed. This
quality enables visitors to experience an enhanced sense of historical feeling of being in a relative
open parcel in an urban setting. The property retains its integrity of feeling.
Association
Finally, under Criterion B integrity of association is the direct link between a historic person and a
historical resource. A property must be sufficiently intact to convey the relationship between the
person and the property to an observer. The Jack House property remains remarkably intact with
numerous features illustrating the resource’s historic association to the locally prominent and
wealthy Robert Jack, such as the grand two-story Italianate Jack House residence standing within a
large parcel and surrounded by landscaped gardens and small outbuildings which contrasts with the
incremental development of the surrounding area over the last 123 years. The property retains its
integrity of association.
4.3.3 Conclusion
Overall, the Jack House property retains a high degree of historic integrity and clearly conveys its
significance for its associations with Robert Jack and its historic design. Sufficient integrity remains in
order to justify its continued inclusion in national, State, and local registers.
ATTACHMENT 3
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 232
EVALUATION
J ULY 2017
SAN LUIS SQUARE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P:\PBC1503_San_Luis_Square\Report\July_2017\Late_July\LSA_San_Luis_Square_Study_July_2017.docx (08/23/17) 15
5.0 PROJECT SPECIFIC IMPACTS
This section assesses the potential for the proposed development to result in a significant impact to
the Jack House property pursuant to CEQA.
5.1 IMPACT THRESHOLD
According to Section 15064.5(b) of the CEQA Guidelines, a proposed project with “an effect that may
cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource is a project that may
have a significant effect on the environment.” Examples of substantial adverse change are listed at
Section 15064.5(b)(1) and include “physical demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration of the
resource or its immediate surroundings such that the significance of a historical resource would be
materially impaired.”
With respect to mitigating such impacts, Section 15064.5(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines states:
Generally, a project that follows the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of
Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring, and Reconstructing
Historic Buildings or the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines
for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings (Secretary’s Standards), shall be considered as mitigated to a
level of less than a significant impact on the historical resource.
Therefore, a project’s impact on a historical resource can be considered less than significant if the
project is in accordance with the Secretary’s Standards (see discussion at Section 5.1.1 below). The
Jack House property (consisting of the two-story Italianate Jack House residence and the detached,
single-story Wash House) is a historical resource under CEQA. Therefore a compliance assessment of
the proposed project with the Secretary’s Standards is used below as a tool for determining
potential significant effects of the proposed project on the significance of the Jack House. An
assessment using the Secretary’s Standards directly informs a determination as to whether the
proposed project would cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of the historical
resource by materially altering in an adverse manner those physical characteristics that convey its
historical significance and that justify its inclusion in the National and California registers (CCR
Section 15064.5(b)(3)).
5.1.1 Secretary’s Standards
The Secretary’s Standards provide guidance for historic preservation and are used by Federal
agencies and local governments to evaluate proposed rehabilitation, restoration, preservation, and
reconstruction work on or near historical properties (including historical resources, as defined by
CEQA); they are applied to a wide variety of resource types, including buildings, sites, structures,
objects, and districts. As described above, the Secretary’s Standards are not prescriptive in nature,
but they offer a practical means for assessing and describing the potential impacts to historical
resources. The measure of a potential impact from new construction may be gauged by the degree
to which a proposed project conforms to their guidance.
ATTACHMENT 3
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 233
EVALUATION
J ULY 2017
SAN LUIS SQUARE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P:\PBC1503_San_Luis_Square\Report\July_2017\Late_July\LSA_San_Luis_Square_Study_July_2017.docx (08/23/17) 16
The Secretary’s Standards comprise four sets of standards to guide the treatment of historic
properties: Preservation, Rehabilitation, Restoration, and Reconstruction (Weeks and Grimmer
1995:2). Those four distinct treatments are defined as follows:
Preservation: The Standards for Preservation “. . . require retention of the greatest amount of
historic fabric, along with the building’s historic form, features, and detailing as they have
evolved over time.”
Rehabilitation: The Standards for Rehabilitation “. . . acknowledge the need to alter or add to a
historic building to meet continuing new uses while retaining the building’s historic
character.”
Restoration: The Standards for Restoration “. . . allow for the depiction of a building at a
particular time in its history by preserving materials from the period of significance and
removing materials from other periods.”
Reconstruction: The Standards for Reconstruction “. . . establish a limited framework for re-
creating a vanished or non-surviving building with new materials, primarily for interpretive
purposes.”
Typically, one set of standards is chosen for a project based on the project scope. For the purposes
of this study, there is no work proposed that would physically alter any portions or features of the
Jack House property; however, there is the potential that the project would alter the contextual
setting of that resource. A resource should sufficiently retain integrity of setting in order to convey
its significance. As part of the evaluation of integrity of setting, NPS guidance states that “physical
features and their relationships should be examined not only within the exact boundaries of the
property, but also between the property and its surroundings [emphasis in original]” (NPS 1997:45).
As examined above in Section 4.3 the Jack House property retains sufficient integrity of both its
immediate setting (within the parcel boundaries) and its contextual setting (between the property
and its surroundings) to convey its significance under Criterion B. Several character-defining features
that contribute to the historic significance of the property include the semi-urban setting of its
primarily low-rise buildings, the large, relatively open parcel with few buildings, and the gardens.
In terms of the Secretary’s Standards, only one treatment standard, Rehabilitation, addresses
potential impacts to the setting by adjacent new construction; therefore, the degree to which the
project conforms to the Standards for Rehabilitation will serve as the basis for evaluating its
potential impacts to the Jack House property and its integrity of setting. As stated:
New construction should be appropriately scaled and located far enough away from the
historic building to maintain its character and that of the site and setting. In urban or other
built-up areas, new construction that appears as infill within the existing pattern of
development can also preserve the historic character of the building, its site, and setting
(NPS 2017:26).
ATTACHMENT 3
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 234
EVALUATION
J ULY 2017
SAN LUIS SQUARE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P:\PBC1503_San_Luis_Square\Report\July_2017\Late_July\LSA_San_Luis_Square_Study_July_2017.docx (08/23/17) 17
Of the ten Standards for Rehabilitation issued, only two, Standards 9 and 10, directly address new,
adjacent construction and are applicable to this study. Rehabilitation Standards 9 and 10 are quoted
below.
Standard 9: New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy
historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old
and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the
historic integrity of the property and its environment.
Standard 10: New additions and adjacent or related new construction shall 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.
As specified in Rehabilitation Standard 9, the new work shall protect the historic integrity of a
historical resource. As previously discussed in Section 4.3.1, the NPS defines integrity as “the ability
of a property to convey its significance” (NPS 1997:44). The seven aspects of integrity are: location,
design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association. Under Criterion B (the criterion
under which the Jack House property is listed on the National Register), a property must retain the
physical features that made up its character or appearance during the period of its association with
the important person, in this case, Robert Jack. Ideally, the property should retain some features of
all seven aspects of integrity; however, under Criterion B the most relevant aspects include location,
setting, materials, feeling, and association (NPS 1997:48).
The NPS Technical Preservation Services Branch issued New Construction within the Boundaries of
Historic Properties, which provides supplemental practical guidance, based on the Secretary’s
Standards, for incorporating new construction within historic contexts (NPS 2015). The core tenet of
the guidance is that “new construction needs to be built in a manner that protects the integrity of
the historic building(s) and the property’s setting.” While the proposed project would not cross the
boundaries of the Jack House property, elements of the guidance are applicable for the assessment
of project-related indirect impacts (i.e., visual impacts) to the Jack House property. The contextual
setting of a historical resource can extend beyond its specific or legal boundaries to include aspects
of the surrounding area that help modern visitors understand the historical resource in its historical
context. These aspects can include, but are not limited to: massing, spacing, density, materials,
street setbacks, and curtilage.
The NPS guidance provides the following instructive concepts:
1. Related new construction – including buildings, driveways, parking lots, landscape
improvements and other new features – must not alter the historic character of a property. A
property’s historic function must be evident even if there is a change of use.
2. The location of new construction should be considered carefully in order to follow the setbacks
of historic buildings and to avoid blocking their primary façades. New construction should be
placed away from or at the side or rear of historic buildings and must avoid obscuring,
damaging, or destroying character-defining features of these buildings or the site.
ATTACHMENT 3
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 235
EVALUATION
J ULY 2017
SAN LUIS SQUARE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P:\PBC1503_San_Luis_Square\Report\July_2017\Late_July\LSA_San_Luis_Square_Study_July_2017.docx (08/23/17) 18
3. Protecting the historic setting and context of a property, including the degree of open space and
building density, must always be considered when planning new construction on an historic site.
This entails identifying the formal or informal arrangements of buildings on the site, and
whether they have a distinctive urban, suburban, or rural character. For example, a historic
building traditionally surrounded by open space must not be crowded with dense development.
4. In properties with multiple historic buildings, the historic relationship between buildings must
also be protected. Contributing buildings must not be isolated from one another by the insertion
of new construction.
5. As with new additions, the massing, size, scale, and architectural features of new construction
on the site of a historic building must be compatible with those of the historic building. When
visible and in close proximity to historic buildings, the new construction must be subordinate to
these buildings. New construction should also be distinct from the old and must not attempt to
replicate historic buildings elsewhere on site and to avoid creating a false sense of historic
development.
6. The limitations on the size, scale, and design of new construction may be less critical the farther
it is located from historic buildings.
7. As with additions, maximizing the advantage of existing site conditions, such as wooded areas or
drops in grade, that limit visibility is highly recommended.
8. Historic landscapes and significant viewsheds must be preserved. Also, significant archeological
resources should be taken into account when evaluating the placement of new construction,
and, as appropriate, mitigation measures should be implemented if the archeological resources
will be disturbed (NPS 2015).
5.2 SECRETARY’S STANDARDS COMPLIANCE ASSESSMENT
The following presents the results of a Rehabilitation Standards-based assessment of the proposed
project in relation to the Jack House property. Although no project-related activities will occur
within the Jack House property boundary, the following assessment matrix presents the standards
analysis for the Jack House property from project implementation (NPS 2015).
Table A: Secretary’s Standards for Rehabilitation – Jack House Property
Rehabilitation Standard Compliant Not
Compliant
Not
Applicable
Standard 1: A property would be used as it was historically or be given a
new use that requires minimal change to its distinctive materials, features,
spaces and spatial relationships.
X
Standard 2: The historic character of a property would be retained and
preserved. The removal of distinctive materials or alteration of features,
spaces, and spatial relationships that characterize the property would be
avoided.
X
ATTACHMENT 3
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 236
EVALUATION
J ULY 2017
SAN LUIS SQUARE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P:\PBC1503_San_Luis_Square\Report\July_2017\Late_July\LSA_San_Luis_Square_Study_July_2017.docx (08/23/17) 19
Rehabilitation Standard Compliant Not
Compliant
Not
Applicable
Standard 3: Each property would be recognized as a physical record of its
time, place, and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical
development, such as adding conjectural features or elements from other
historical properties, would not be undertaken.
X
Standard 4: Changes to a property that have acquired significance in their
own right would be retained and preserved. X
Standard 5: Distinctive materials, features, finishes and construction
techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property would
be preserved.
X
Standard 6: Deteriorated historic features would be repaired rather than
replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a
distinctive feature, the new feature would match the old in design, color,
texture, and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features
would be substantiated by documentary and physical evidence.
X
Standard 7: Chemical or physical treatments, if appropriate, would be
undertaken using the gentlest means possible. Treatments that cause
damage to historic materials would not be used.
X
Standard 8: Archaeological resources would be protected and preserved in
place. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures would be
undertaken.
X
Standard 9: New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction
would not destroy historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that
characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old
and would be compatible with the historic materials, features, size, scale,
proportion, and massing to protect the integrity of the property and
environment.
X
Standard 10: New additions and adjacent or related new construction would
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.
X
5.2.1 Rehabilitation Standards 1-8
There is no work proposed within the boundaries of the Jack House property. Therefore, Standards
1 through 8 are not applicable.
5.2.2 Rehabilitation Standard 9
New additions, exterior 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, proportion, and massing to protect the
integrity of the property and environment.
ATTACHMENT 3
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 237
EVALUATION
J ULY 2017
SAN LUIS SQUARE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P:\PBC1503_San_Luis_Square\Report\July_2017\Late_July\LSA_San_Luis_Square_Study_July_2017.docx (08/23/17) 20
The intent of Rehabilitation Standard 9 is to avoid or limit potential actions that would diminish the
integrity of a historical resource as the result of new construction. As previously mentioned, the
most relevant aspects of integrity for properties listed on the National Register under Criterion B
(association with persons significant to our past) are location, setting, materials, feeling, and
association (NPS 1997:48). Integrity of design and workmanship are less critical. As stated above in
Section 4.3.2, the basic integrity test for properties that are significant under Criterion B is whether
a historical contemporary would recognize the property as it exists today (NPS 1997:48). The
following section analyzes the key aspects of integrity for the Jack House and provides
determinations regarding impact(s) of the proposed project.
Integrity of location is the place where the historical resource was constructed or the place where
the historic event occurred. The two-story Italianate Jack House residence and the detached, single-
story Wash House would remain in their historical locations, and the proposed project would not
alter integrity of location.
Integrity of setting is the physical environment of a historical resource. Setting refers to the
character of the place in which the property played its historic role and its relationship to
surrounding features and open space. The immediate setting of the Jack House property includes
the physical features and their relationships within the parcel boundaries. As proposed, the project
would not result in new construction or project-related activity within the boundaries of the Jack
House property, and therefore the project would not alter the historic property’s integrity of setting.
The contextual setting includes the property’s surroundings outside of the parcel boundaries and
the property’s relationship to the surrounding context. Much of the surrounding area has been
altered in the 123 years following the end of the Jack House property’s period of significance (1882-
1894), when the primary land use pattern was one- and two-story single-family residential
development interspersed with open space. While the proposed project cannot restore these lost
aspects of the surrounding area’s integrity of setting, the design would not contribute in a
detrimental way to the pattern of subsequent diminishment of the contextual integrity over the last
120-plus years. The incremental expansion of the city to include these once semi-rural areas is a
result of changing land use patterns, population growth, and economic prosperity of the community
since the mid-1890s. A recent example of this is the two-story Coast National Bank building
constructed circa 2000 at 500 Marsh Street (approximately 50 feet from the two-story Italianate
Jack House residence), the two-story bank building constructed in 1997 at 581 Higuera Street
(within the project site), a three-to-four story multi-unit assisted-living facility (a.k.a., The Manse on
Marsh) constructed circa 2000 at 475 Marsh Street, and several two-story commercial buildings
constructed 2014 at 505-575 Marsh Street.
The proposed buildings are significantly larger in size, scale, and massing than the buildings on the
Jack House property. At four stories in height, the proposed buildings would be twice the overall
height as the two-story Italianate Jack House residence. The massing and density of the three
proposed buildings on the project site would also be clearly modern in design expressed in a
different massing arrangement than the Jack House property, where the buildings have smaller
footprints and are surrounded by open space. The density and urban character of the proposed
development is in keeping with historical land use development patterns adjacent to and in the
ATTACHMENT 3
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 238
EVALUATION
J ULY 2017
SAN LUIS SQUARE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P:\PBC1503_San_Luis_Square\Report\July_2017\Late_July\LSA_San_Luis_Square_Study_July_2017.docx (08/23/17) 21
vicinity of the Jack House property. The proposed project would construct three buildings with
larger footprints and relatively little open space between them and would create a denser, more
urban contextual setting than the earlier, rural-era feeling and land use pattern from the Jack
House’s period of significance. Two of the three proposed buildings, 570 Marsh Street and 581
Higuera Street, would be located along the eastern boundary line of APN 003-551-022, which
contains the Jack House property (Appendix C: Sheets A10-A21).
To maintain its contextual integrity, which is an important component of its collective historical
setting, the Jack House property would retain sufficient open space to retain its function as an
important component of its collective historical setting. To this end, a minimum buffer of 135-feet
would lay between the east-facing façade of the two-story Italianate Jack House residence and the
west-facing façades of the proposed buildings at 570 Marsh and 581 Higuera. The proposed project
would install “Green Building” features such as rooftop gardens, a physical mesh for vegetative
screening to soften the southwest corner of 581 Higuera Street that faces into the Jack House
property, among other measures (Appendix C: Sheet L6). In addition, the top (fourth) floor of the
proposed building at 570 Marsh Street, the proposed building nearest the two-story Italianate Jack
House residence, would be stepped back to enhance visual separation thereby maintaining the Jack
House property’s integrity of setting. For these reasons, the proposed project would not significantly
alter integrity of setting.
Integrity of materials reflects the physical elements that were assembled, combined, or deposited
during a particular period of time in a particular pattern or configuration. Integrity of materials
assesses whether sufficient authenticity of a historical resource remains. The project will not alter
the materials that make up the two-story Italianate Jack House residence or the detached single-
story Wash House. The façades of the proposed buildings, particularly 570 Marsh Street and 581
Higuera Street, will incorporate a materiality that is harmonious but does not outright replicate late-
19th century building materials such as horizontal wood siding.
The proposed buildings would be clearly modern in design and easily differentiated from the
adjacent Jack House property by modern observers. The proposed materials vary for each of the
building designs. The proposed building at 570 Marsh Street includes brick as the predominant
material, in addition to concrete, glass, aluminum storefronts and windows, steel canopies and
trellis, and metal panel wall cladding (Appendix C: Sheets A17-A21). The proposed building at 581
Higuera Street also would predominantly feature brick, in addition to concrete, glass and aluminum
storefronts, anodized aluminum windows, a glazed curtain wall, metal wall and roof panels, stucco,
and weathering, or corten steel (Appendix C: Sheets A14-A16).4 The proposed building at 590 Marsh
Street would feature the most modern materials of the project, including terracotta cladding,
4 Weathering steel, known commonly by its proprietary name Corten or Cor-Ten is a group of steel alloys
which do not require painting and present a rust-like appearance.
ATTACHMENT 3
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 239
EVALUATION
J ULY 2017
SAN LUIS SQUARE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P:\PBC1503_San_Luis_Square\Report\July_2017\Late_July\LSA_San_Luis_Square_Study_July_2017.docx (08/23/17) 22
concrete, terracotta sunscreens, painted steel, stucco and glass, and aluminum-framed storefronts
and windows (Appendix C: Sheet A2; A25-A27).
Shiplap redwood siding is the primary siding material found on the two-story Italianate Jack House
residence and detached single-story Wash House on the Jack House property. While not part of the
Jack House property, brick is a common material found on older and historic buildings within several
blocks surrounding the project site and is a compatible choice in the proposed design. Other
material selections such as premanufactured lintels and cornices and painted stucco, a traditional
building material common to the San Luis Obispo region, would also be compatible with the
adjacent historic resource. Aspects of the proposed design such as glass and metal storefronts,
metal awnings and pergola, terracotta panels and sunscreens, metal cladding, and weathering steel
are clearly modern in nature and are most appropriately used on façades not facing the Jack House
property or minimally on façades fronting the historical resource. As designed, the proposed project
would use materials in a manner that would be compatible with the Jack House property and for
these reasons; the proposed project would not significantly alter integrity of materials.
Integrity of feeling is a property’s expression of the aesthetic or historic sense of a particular period
of time. The Jack House property should continue to convey a sense of upper-class residential life in
the late-19th century. The proposed project design will neither replicate a late-19th century built
environment, nor introduce obvious modern materials or discordant features on façades that face
the Jack House property that would diminish integrity of feeling. Furthermore, the project will
incorporate landscape features and vegetative screening elements to further reduce or diminish
impacts to integrity of feeling.
As stated above in Section 4.3.2, commercial and residential development in the western area of
San Luis Obispo over the last 123 years has sharpened the contrast between the low-density land
use patterns of the late-19th century, as expressed by the Jack House property; with the higher-
density land use patterns of the mid-to-late 20th century. As the surrounding parcels built out, an
obvious contrasting feeling of relative openness of the two-story Italianate Jack House residence
and surrounding grounds formed. This quality enables visitors to experience an enhanced sense of
historical feeling of being in a relative open parcel in an urban setting. For these reasons, the
proposed project would not significantly alter integrity of feeling.
Finally, integrity of association is the direct link between a historic person and a historical resource.
A property must be sufficiently intact to convey the relationship between the person and the
property to an observer. The following physical features of the property are identified as
contributory in the National Register nomination (1) the two-story Italianate Jack House residence,
and (2) the detached, single-story Wash House, would remain intact and in their original locations.
However it is important to note that although the associated landscaped grounds on the 0.85-acre
parcel were identified and described in the National Register nomination, they were not identified
as contributing (Pinard 1991:5). This may be either due to lack of integrity or much of the current
configuration of the grounds reflect alterations completed outside of the Jack House property’s
period of significance of 1882-1894.
ATTACHMENT 3
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 240
EVALUATION
J ULY 2017
SAN LUIS SQUARE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P:\PBC1503_San_Luis_Square\Report\July_2017\Late_July\LSA_San_Luis_Square_Study_July_2017.docx (08/23/17) 23
As described above at section 4.3.2, assessing association is an inherently subjective exercise that
requires the observer to imagine past conditions, feelings, and lifeways to meaningfully interpret
the significance of the historic property and to perceive its “recognizability” as Robert Jack or a
historical contemporary might. If Robert Jack were to reappear, the scope of change would be
bewildering to him, but he would clearly recognize the two-story Italianate residence as his home,
the Wash House and, perhaps to a lesser degree, the associated grounds. For these reasons, the
proposed project would not significantly alter integrity of association.
5.2.2.1 New Construction within the Boundaries of Historic Properties
The following are applicable considerations provided in the document entitled New Construction
within the Boundaries of Historic Properties (NPS 2015). Although new construction would not occur
within the boundaries of a historic property (i.e. the Jack House property), the selected aspects are
useful in assessing the project’s compliance with Rehabilitation Standard 9.
Of the eight total aspects, the following are applicable to this analysis:
2. The location of new construction should be considered carefully in order to follow the setbacks of
historic buildings and to avoid blocking their primary elevations. New construction should be
placed away from or at the side or rear of historic buildings and must avoid obscuring,
damaging, or destroying character-defining features of these buildings or the site.
The proposed buildings do not correspond with the deep street setback of the Jack House. Proposed
setbacks conform to commercial buildings located farther north and east. They would maintain
similar setbacks to the building at 570 Marsh Street currently on the project site. The new
construction would be approximately 200 feet east of the two-story Italianate Jack House residence
and not block or obscure any views of or from any of the façades; the historic buildings would
remain clearly visible from Marsh Street and within the property. The proposed project would not
block or partially obstruct views towards Cerro San Luis Obispo or Bishop Peak from the second floor
windows of the two-story Italianate Jack House residence. The location of Cerro San Luis Obispo and
Bishop Peak are due northwest and oriented behind the Jack House property. No proposed
construction will cross this sight line. Ground level views of Cerro San Luis Obispo and Bishop Peak
from the Jack House Grounds are currently obscured by foliage and modern development. Views of
the Jack House Grounds – maintained by the City of San Luis Obispo Department of Parks and
Recreation – from the two-story Italianate Jack House residence will not be obscured by new
construction.
3. Protecting the historic setting and context of a property, including the degree of open space and
building density, must always be considered when planning new construction on an historic site.
This entails identifying the formal or informal arrangements of buildings on the site, and whether
they have a distinctive urban, suburban, or rural character. For example, a historic building
traditionally surrounded by open space must not be crowded with dense development.
The proposed project would result in a denser built environment adjacent to the Jack House
property. However, much of the setting has been altered since the Jack House property’s period of
significance of 1882-1894, when the primary land use pattern consisted of a one-and two-story
ATTACHMENT 3
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 241
EVALUATION
J ULY 2017
SAN LUIS SQUARE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P:\PBC1503_San_Luis_Square\Report\July_2017\Late_July\LSA_San_Luis_Square_Study_July_2017.docx (08/23/17) 24
single-family residential development interspersed with open space. Although several of the original
single-family homes in the area remain, several have been converted to commercial uses. Also, the
area surrounding the property has over the last 123 years become denser with new construction,
including several low-rise commercial structures on nearby and adjacent properties. As described
above in this section, new construction would not cross the Jack House property boundary; and the
design incorporates façade setbacks, compatible materiality and massing, along with landscape
elements and vegetative screening to reduce indirect impacts on the historic setting of the property
as defined above.
4. In properties with multiple historic buildings, the historic relationship between buildings must
also be protected. Contributing buildings must not be isolated from one another by the insertion
of new construction.
The existing inter-relationship between the buildings on the Jack House property would not be
altered by the proposed construction.
6. The limitations on the size, scale, and design of new construction may be less critical the farther
it is located from historic buildings.
The two-story Italianate Jack House residence would be approximately 135 feet from the proposed
building at 570 Marsh Street.
The two-story Italianate Jack House residence would be approximately 200 feet from the proposed
building at 590 Marsh Street (a.k.a. the Five 90 Building).
The two-story Italianate Jack House residence would be approximately 150 feet from the proposed
building at 581 Higuera Street.
Both the proposed buildings at 570 Marsh Street and 581 Higuera Street would maintain an
appropriate massing transition zone that would minimize size and scale limitations in consideration
of the two-story Italianate Jack House residence, since they are farther away from the historic
buildings than the proposed building at 590 Marsh Street and the eastern half of the proposed
building at 581 Higuera Street. Therefore, the design, size, and scale of 570 Marsh Street and 581
Higuera Street would not result in an indirect impact to the architectural qualities of the two-story
Italianate Jack House residence.
8. Historic landscapes and significant viewsheds must be preserved. Also, significant archeological
resources should be taken into account when evaluating the placement of new construction and,
as appropriate, mitigation measures should be implemented if the archeological resources will
be disturbed.
While none of the landscape elements or viewsheds were formally identified or alluded to as
contributing elements in the National Register nomination of the Jack House property, several
existing trees and ornamental garden areas date to the 1882-1894 period of significance (Pinard
1991:5; Appendix A). As proposed, the project would not impact the Jack House’s landscape.
ATTACHMENT 3
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 242
EVALUATION
J ULY 2017
SAN LUIS SQUARE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P:\PBC1503_San_Luis_Square\Report\July_2017\Late_July\LSA_San_Luis_Square_Study_July_2017.docx (08/23/17) 25
Several significant viewsheds from both inside the two-story Italianate Jack House residence and
from the exterior grounds were identified during a September 16, 2015 site visit. The assessment of
potential effects to the viewsheds was conducted through reviewing photo simulations studies
prepared by the project design team (Ten Over Studio 2015b). A significant view identified from the
Jack House property is north toward Cerro San Luis (a.k.a. “San Luis Mountain” or “Mission
Mountain”). This view would not be altered by the proposed project. Views east toward the
proposed project site from the two-story Italianate Jack House residence house and gardens are
generally obscured by a screen of existing mature redwood trees along the northeastern parcel
boundary. From the inside, the primary views are of the gardens themselves. From a bedroom on
the southeastern portion of the second floor, the hills to the east can be seen, and from the
northeastern bedroom, views of nearby buildings are visible. As currently proposed, the project
would not block or obscure any historically significant views from inside the two-story Italianate Jack
House residence. The most significant direct views toward the Jack House property are from the
southeast side of Marsh Street, and they would not be altered by the proposed project. Oblique
views of the residence from Marsh Street northeast of the property would also not be impacted,
and no prominent or important views of the Jack House property currently exist from within or
along the perimeter of the proposed project site.
5.2.3 Rehabilitation Standard 10
New additions and adjacent or related new construction would 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.
If the proposed new buildings were to be removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of
the Jack House property would remain unimpaired. As designed, the proposed development would
be in compliance with Rehabilitation Standard 10.
5.2.4 Conclusion
It is beneficial that new construction would be, at a minimum, approximately 135-150 feet away
from the project-facing façade of the two-story Italianate Jack House residence.5 The significant
amount of open space contributes to this historic property’s significance by functioning as part of its
setting, which is an integral part of the property’s eligibility. This open space also creates a transition
zone that lessens the impact of the size, scale, and massing of the proposed project to the two-story
Italianate Jack House residence.
5 The approximate distances between the two-story Jack House residence and the proposed building at 570
Marsh Street and 581 Higuera would be 135 feet and 150 feet, respectively. The approximate distance
between the Jack House residence and proposed building at 590 Marsh Street would be 200 feet.
ATTACHMENT 3
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 243
EVALUATION
J ULY 2017
SAN LUIS SQUARE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P:\PBC1503_San_Luis_Square\Report\July_2017\Late_July\LSA_San_Luis_Square_Study_July_2017.docx (08/23/17) 26
In addition to the distance and design features already mentioned, existing vegetative screening
provided by several semi-mature redwood trees along the northeastern Jack House property
boundary serves to further diminish the impact on setting and feeling of the proposed fourth story
of 570 Marsh Street. A tree inventory report prepared by Arbor First identified seven Coast
Redwood (Sequoia sempervirens) trees along the northeastern Jack House property boundary.
These trees vary in height, but are currently generally above 60 feet, higher than the proposed
construction. The report recommended an optimum tree preservation zone that ranged from 15.38
feet to 18.56 feet, depending on the respective trunk sizes of the seven trees (Arbor First 2015a:3).
Moreover, the project would install additional “Green Building” features such as rooftop gardens, a
physical mesh for vegetative screening to soften the southwest corner of 581 Higuera Street that
faces into the Jack House property, among other methods (Appendix C: Sheet L6).
The proposed construction would (1) step back the third and fourth floors of 570 Higuera Street
away from the Jack House property boundary, and (2) incorporate compatible architectural details
in the design. The proposed construction of 581 Higuera Street would install vegetative screening
and utilize historically compatible materials in the proposed design. Therefore, for the reasons
stated above the current design of the proposed project complies with the Secretary’s Standards.
Therefore, the proposed project would not result in substantial adverse change in the significance of
the Jack House property as defined at CEQA Guidelines 15064.5(b)(1)(2)(3).
ATTACHMENT 3
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 244
EVALUATION
J ULY 2017
SAN LUIS SQUARE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P:\PBC1503_San_Luis_Square\Report\July_2017\Late_July\LSA_San_Luis_Square_Study_July_2017.docx (08/23/17) 27
6.0 CONCLUSION
The Jack House property is a former residence on a 0.85-acre parcel located at 536 Marsh Street in
the City of San Luis Obispo (APN 0003-511-022). The Jack House property consists of two
contributing elements: a two-story Italianate-styled Jack House residence and a detached, single-
story Wash House, both built in 1882. The property also contains five non-contributing elements
that include a utility building, gazebo, carriage house, the Kaetzel Monument, and landscaped
gardens. The Jack House property is listed in the National Register, the California Register, and the
City’s Master List, and is, therefore, a “historical resource” under CEQA, as well as under Section
14.01.020 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code.
The proposed project would redevelop several parcels to the northeast of and adjacent to the Jack
House property with three, four-story mixed-use buildings. No new construction would occur within
the historic property boundary of the Jack House property, and no historical resources are located
within the project site. The current project design includes the following measures to reduce or
diminish impacts to the National Register-listed two-story Italianate Jack House residence and a
detached single-story Wash House to a less-than significant level:
570 Marsh Street
• The design of the proposed building at 570 Marsh Street includes visual transitions from the
historic property by stepping back the third and fourth stories, lessening the impact in the
significant change in mass and scale from the historic property to the proposed development.
• The existing redwood trees along the eastern parcel boundary of the Jack House property also
lessen impacts and should be protected during construction to ensure they remain as a visual
screen between the historical resource and new construction. These trees vary in height, but are
currently generally above 60 feet, approximately 20 feet higher than the proposed construction
at 570 Marsh Street.
• he proposed building at 570 Marsh Street includes brick as the predominant material, in
addition to concrete, glass, aluminum storefronts and windows, steel canopies and trellis, and
metal panel wall cladding (Appendix C: Sheets A17-A21). The proposed building at 581 Higuera
Street also would predominantly feature brick, in addition to concrete, glass and aluminum
storefronts, anodized aluminum windows, a glazed curtain wall, metal wall and roof panels,
stucco, and weathering, or corten steel (Appendix C: Sheets A14-A16).
• A proposed 6-foot high wooden fence along the western façade of the proposed building at 570
Marsh Street would screen bicycle parking from the Jack House property.
ATTACHMENT 3
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 245
EVALUATION
J ULY 2017
SAN LUIS SQUARE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P:\PBC1503_San_Luis_Square\Report\July_2017\Late_July\LSA_San_Luis_Square_Study_July_2017.docx (08/23/17) 28
581 Higuera Street
• The design of the proposed building at 581 Marsh Street includes visual transitions from the
historic property by stepping back the fourth floor, lessening the impact in the significant
change in mass and scale from the historic property to the proposed development.
• The design of the proposed building at 581 Higuera Street includes “Green Building” features
such as rooftop gardens, a physical mesh for vegetative screening to soften the southwest
corner of 581 Higuera Street that faces into the Jack House property.
• The proposed building at 581 Higuera Street also would predominantly feature brick, in addition
to concrete, glass and aluminum storefronts, anodized aluminum windows, a glazed curtain
wall, metal wall and roof panels, stucco, and weathering, or corten steel (Appendix C: Sheets
A14-A16).
590 Marsh Street
• The proposed building at 590 Marsh Street, the furthest away from the Jack House property and
screened by the proposed building at 570 Marsh Street would feature the most modern
materials of the project, including terracotta cladding, concrete, terracotta sunscreens, painted
steel, stucco and glass, and aluminum-framed storefronts and windows (Appendix C: Sheet A2;
A25-A27).
The façades of the proposed buildings, particularly 570 Marsh Street and 581 Higuera Street that
will face the Jack House property, incorporate a materiality that is harmonious but does not outright
replicate late-19th century building materials such as horizontal wood siding as found on the two-
story Italianate Jack House residence. The proposed buildings would be clearly modern in design and
easily differentiated from the adjacent Jack House property by modern observers and not introduce
a visually jarring or discordant visual element in the environment. The proposed materials vary for
each of the building designs. For these reasons, the overall design complies with the Secretary’s
Standards. Therefore, the project would not result in a substantial adverse change in the significance
of the National Register-listed Jack House property and would avoid creating a significant impact to
a historical resource under CEQA.
ATTACHMENT 3
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 246
EVALUATION
J ULY 2017
SAN LUIS SQUARE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P:\PBC1503_San_Luis_Square\Report\July_2017\Late_July\LSA_San_Luis_Square_Study_July_2017.docx (08/23/17) 29
7.0 PREPARERS’ QUALIFICATIONS
Michael Hibma, Architectural Historian/Senior Cultural Resources Manager. Mr. Hibma has a B.A.
in History from Humboldt State University, an M.A. in History from Sacramento State University, and
a Certificate in Land Use and Environmental Planning from U.C. Davis Extension. Mr. Hibma meets
the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards in Architectural History and
History (36 CFR Part 61) and is certified by the Register of Professional Historians (#603). He has
more than 10 years of experience in historical research, built environment analysis, and
architectural history. Mr. Hibma undertakes historical research that includes map and photographic
image analysis, secondary literature reviews, and archival reviews at various state and local
repositories. He has extensive experience addressing the requirements of Section 106 of the
National Historic Preservation Act and CEQA. Mr. Hibma has conducted architectural field studies
and prepared historical context overviews for projects in counties throughout northern and central
California.
Kimberly Butt, Preservation Architect. Ms. Butt has more than 15 years of experience in historic
architecture and architectural history. Ms. Butt is licensed to practice architecture in California
(California License #C30301) and meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications
Standards for Architectural History and Historic Architecture (36 CFR Part 61). Ms. Butt is
experienced in applying the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic
Properties. A selection of Ms. Butt’s experience in impacts analysis includes the Suisun-Fairfield Train
Depot Renovation, Crockett Veteran’s Memorial Hall Rehabilitation, Ferry Point Conceptual Design
Study, the Palace of Fine Arts Roof Rehabilitation and Conditions Evaluations, the Murphy’s
Windmill Restoration, the Emporium Dome and Façade Rehabilitation, 50 UN Plaza Program
Development Study, Menlo Park Fire Station No. 6 Reconstruction Project, City of Novato
Administrative Office Historic Resource Technical Study, and numerous Section 106 consultations at
the San Francisco Veterans Association Medical Center.
ATTACHMENT 3
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 247
EVALUATION
J ULY 2017
SAN LUIS SQUARE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P:\PBC1503_San_Luis_Square\Report\July_2017\Late_July\LSA_San_Luis_Square_Study_July_2017.docx (08/23/17) 30
8.0 REFERENCES CONSULTED
Association of Environmental Professionals (AEP)
2015 2015 California Environmental Quality Act - Statute and Guidelines. AEP, Palm Desert,
California.
California Office of Historic Preservation
2003 California Historic Resource Status Codes. Electronic document,
http://ohp.parks.ca.gov/pages/1069/files/chrstatus%20codes.pdf, accessed June 23, 2015.
2011 California Office of Historic Preservation Technical Assistance Series #6 - California Register
and National Register: A Comparison (for purposes of determining eligibility for the
California Register). Electronic document,
http://ohp.parks.ca.gov/pages/1069/files/technical%20assistance%20bulletin%206%202011
%20update.pdf, accessed September 24, 2015.
City of San Luis Obispo
2010a Historic Preservation Program Guidelines. City of San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo,
California. Electronic document, http://www.slocity.org/home/showdocument?id=4144,
accessed September 24, 2015.
2010b Historic Preservation Ordinance. City of San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo, California.
Electronic Document, http://www.slocity.org/home/showdocument?id=4142, accessed
September 24, 2015.
City of San Luis Obispo Architectural Review Commission
2015 Meeting minutes – 13 July 2015. Architectural Review Commission and Cultural Heritage
Committee joint meeting. San Luis Obispo, California. Electronic document,
http://opengov.slocity.org/weblink8/1/doc/49731/Page1.aspx, accessed October 1, 2015.
City of San Luis Obispo Cultural Heritage Committee
1991 National Register of Historic Places, Robert Jack residence, San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo
County, California (NRHP Program Reference #92000312), San Luis Obispo Cultural Heritage
Committee, San Luis Obispo, California. Electronic document,
http://focus.nps.gov/pdfhost/docs/NRHP/Text/92000312.pdf, accessed October 1, 2015.
Cohen, Rachel
2015 Letter to PB Companies, LLC, sent via email, 17 July 2015.
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.
Historic Resources Group
2013 City of San Luis Obispo Citywide Historic Context Statement. Historic Resources Group,
Pasadena, California. Electronic document,
ATTACHMENT 3
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 248
EVALUATION
J ULY 2017
SAN LUIS SQUARE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P:\PBC1503_San_Luis_Square\Report\July_2017\Late_July\LSA_San_Luis_Square_Study_July_2017.docx (08/23/17) 31
http://ohp.parks.ca.gov/pages/1054/files/SLO%20Final%20Historic%20Context%20Stateme
nt_1.21.2014.pdf, accessed September 24, 2015.
McAlester, Virginia Savage
2013 A Field Guide to American Houses: the Definitive Guide to Identifying and Understanding
America’s Domestic Architecture. Alfred A. Knopf, New York.
National Park Service (NPS)
1997 National Register Bulletin 15: How to Apply the National Register Criteria of Evaluation U.S.
Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C.
2015 New Construction within the Boundaries of Historic Properties. Electronic document online,
http://www.nps.gov/tps/standards/applying-rehabilitation/successful-rehab/new-
construction.htm, accessed September 28, 2015.
2017 The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with
Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, restoring, and Reconstructing Historic Buildings.
Electronic document online, https://www.nps.gov/tps/standards/treatment-guidelines-
2017.pdf, accessed various.
Obispo Company
2016 San Luis Square - Conceptual Site Plan and Perspective Views. June 8, 2016.
Pinard, Leo W., II
1991 National Register of Historic Places, Robert Jack Residence, San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo
County, California, National Register #19920413. SLO Heritage Committee, San Luis Obispo.
Sanborn-Perris Map Co., Ltd.
1886 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.
1950 San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California. Sheet 4. Sanborn Map and Publishing
Company, Pelham, New York.
Ten Over Studio
2015a San Luis Square – Shade Study. Ten Over Studio, San Luis Obispo, California.
2015b San Luis Square – Jack House Perspectives. Ten Over Studio, San Luis Obispo, California.
Weeks, Kay D. and Anne E. Grimmer
1995 The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with
Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, and Restoring & Reconstructing Historic Buildings.
U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Cultural Heritage Stewardship and
Partnerships, Heritage Preservation Services, Washington D.C.
ATTACHMENT 3
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 249
EVALUATION
J ULY 2017
SAN LUIS SQUARE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P:\PBC1503_San_Luis_Square\Report\July_2017\Late_July\LSA_San_Luis_Square_Study_July_2017.docx (08/23/17)
APPENDIX A
ROBERT JACK HOUSE – CURRENT CONDITIONS
ATTACHMENT 3
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 250
Image 2: Contextual view of the Jack House & Gardens south of and across Marsh Street from project
site. View northwest. 9/17/15.
Image 1: Contextual view of Jack House & Gardens west of and across Marsh Street towards project
site. View northeast. 9/17/15.
Robert Jack House - Current Conditions
Project Impacts Analysis
San Luis Square
San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California
P:\PBC1503\g\Cultural\Robert Jack House - Current Conditions.cdr (10/23/2015)
ATTACHMENT 3
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 251
Image 4: Jack House, south-facing façade and east-facing façade. View northwest. 9/17/15.
Image 3: Jack House, south-facing façade and portion of adjacent landscaped areas. View north across
Marsh Street. 9/17/15.
Robert Jack House - Current Conditions
Project Impacts Analysis
San Luis Square
San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California
P:\PBC1503\g\Cultural\Robert Jack House - Current Conditions.cdr (10/23/2015)
ATTACHMENT 3
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 252
Image 6: Jack House main residence rear, north-facing façade (right) wash house west-facing façade
(left). View to the southeast. 9/17/15.
Image 5: Jack House & Garden gazebo and eastern area. View east with proposed project site beyond
screen of redwood trees. 9/17/15.
Robert Jack House - Current Conditions
Project Impacts Analysis
San Luis Square
San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California
P:\PBC1503\g\Cultural\Robert Jack House - Current Conditions.cdr (10/23/2015)
ATTACHMENT 3
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 253
Image 8: Northeast end of the Jack House Gardens. West-facing façade of the Carriage House in the
background. View east. 9/17/15.
Image 7: Wash house south-facing facade (left), utility building west-facing façade (right). View
north. 9/17/15.
Robert Jack House - Current Conditions
Project Impacts Analysis
San Luis Square
San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California
P:\PBC1503\g\Cultural\Robert Jack House - Current Conditions.cdr (10/23/2015)
ATTACHMENT 3
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 254
Image 9: Kaetzel Monument at the eastern portion of the Jack House Gardens. 9/17/15.
Robert Jack House - Current Conditions
Project Impacts Analysis
San Luis Square
San Luis Obispo, San Luis Obispo County, California
P:\PBC1503\g\Cultural\Robert Jack House - Current Conditions.cdr (10/23/2015)
ATTACHMENT 3
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 255
EVALUATION
J ULY 2017
SAN LUIS SQUARE
SAN LUIS OBISPO, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
P:\PBC1503_San_Luis_Square\Report\July_2017\Late_July\LSA_San_Luis_Square_Study_July_2017.docx (08/23/17)
APPENDIX B
JACK HOUSE NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES NOMINATION FORM
ATTACHMENT 3
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 256
NFS Form 10-900
(Rev. 8-86)
United States Department of the Interior
National Park Service
NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES
REGISTRATION FORM
OMB No. 1024--00 18
1. Name of Property
historic name: Jack, Robert, Residence
other name/site number: Jack House
2 . Location
street & number: 536 Marsh Street
not for publication: NA
city/town: San Luis Obispo vicinity: NA
state: CA county: San Luis Obispo code: 079 zip code: 93401
3. Classification
Ownership of Property: Public - Local
Category of Property: Building
Number of Resources within Property:
Contributing Noncontributing
_2_ _2_ buildings
____ ____ sites
____ _1_ structures
_______ _____ objects
_2_ _3_ Total
Number of contributing resources previously listed in the National
Register: _0_
Name of related multiple property listing: NA
ATTACHMENT 3
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 257
USDI/NPS NRHP Registration Form Robert Jack Residence Page 2
4. State/Federal Agency Certification
As the designated authority under the National Historic Preservation Act
of 1986, as amended, I hereby certify that this x nomination ___
request for determination of eligibility meets the documentation
standards for registering properties in the National Register of
Historic Places and meets the procedural and professional requirements
set forth in 36 CFR Part 60. In my opinion, the property X meets
___ does not meet the National Register Criteria. __ See continuation
sheet.
Signature of certifying offifeLal
California Office of Historic Preservation
State or Federal agency and bureau
In my opinion, the property _____ meets ___ does not meet the National
Register criteria. __ See continuation sheet.
Signature of commenting or other official Date
State or Federal agency and bureau
5. National Park Service Certification
I, hereby certify that this property is:
'S entered in the National Register /
__ See continuation sheet.
___ determined eligible for the
National Register
__ See continuation sheet.
___ determined not eligible for the
National Register
___ removed from the National Register
___ other (explain): ______________
Signature of Keeper Date
of Action
6. Function or Use
Historic: Domestic Sub: Single Dwelling
Current : Recreation and Culture Sub: Museum
*
ATTACHMENT 3
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 258
USDI/NPS NRHP Registration Form Robert Jack Residence Page 3
7. Description
Architectural Classification:•
Late Victorian: Italianate
Other Description: NA
Materials: foundation: concrete roof: cedar shingles
walls: wood other:
Describe present and historic physical appearance. _X_ See continuation
sheet.
8. Statement of Significance
Certifying official has considered the significance of this property in
relation to other properties: at- +ho ir>rai
Applicable National Register Criteria: B
Criteria Considerations (Exceptions) : NA
Areas of Significance: Commerce
Development
Period(s) of Significance: 1882-1894
Significant Dates: NA
Significant Person(s): Jack, Robert Edgar
Cultural Affiliation: NA
Architect/Builder: Evans, William
State significance of property, and justify criteria, criteria
considerations, and areas and periods of significance noted above
X See continuation sheet.
ATTACHMENT 3
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 259
USDI/NPS NRHP Registration Form Jack House Page 4 a
11. Form Prepared By
Name/Title: Leo W. Pinard, II, Member
Organization: SLO Cultural Heritage Committee Date: August 28, 1991
Street & Number: 714 Buchon Street Telephone: (805) 544-4566
City or Town: San Luis Obispo State: CA ZIP: 93401
Kovi.sor.l by OI1P 1/21/92
ATTACHMENT 3
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 260
NFS Form 10-900-a OMB Approval No. 1024-0018
(86-86)
United States Department of the Interior
National Park Service
NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES *
CONTINUATION SHEET
Section number 7 Robert Jack Residence Page 5
The Robert Jack Residence is a two story wood frame Italianate
residence completed in 1882. The exterior is distinguished by a low
pitched asymmetrical roof surmounted by a roof balustrade; widely over-
hanging eaves supported by decorative brackets; tall, narrow windows
with flat and corniced window heads; two single story bays; and a shal-
low, full width, single story porch with a balustrade over the slightly
projecting entry way. In 1970 an elevator shaft was added to the side
elevation. A partial single story addition was added to the rear of the
house, soon after 1882. The original interior is little changed. Also
located on the property are the original wash house, moved, but little
changed and counted as a contributing building; the original carriage
house, altered and considered noncontributing; a utility room and
gazebo, both built in 1980 and considered a noncontributing building and
noncontributing structure respectively. A picket fence, replicating the
original, is a 1980 addition and is not being counted.
In 1875, Robert Jack bought the property and began construction
of the house about five years later. The original size of the property
was 225 feet x 300 feet (1.55 acres) and extended between Marsh and
Higuera Streets with frontage on both streets. The portion of the
property that faced Higuera Street (0.71 acres) was sold for development
prior to 1926.
When construction of the house was completed in 1882, the
residence's style and proportions reflected the importance of the Jack
family. The house is a two story wood frame building sitting on a
raised concrete foundation. The overall shape is rectangular with eight
major rooms located off a central hallway on both floors. The stairs
and railing in the hallway are original, and the first thing seen as you
enter the front door. All ceilings in the house are 12 feet high. The
height of the ceiling in the stairwell is over 24 feet. The plaster
cornice work and medallions on the ceilings demonstrate a construction
skill almost non-existent today.
The front parlor is on the left and contains a fireplace with its
original Italian marble mantel. The first room on the right is the
library. The kitchen is at the back of the hallway on the right and has
its original wainscot and pantry. The dining room is across the hallway
from the kitchen. It is unique because it has a square cut oak floor,
as it was also sometimes used for dancing. The tub in the upstairs bath
is original as are the sinks in the bedrooms. There is one fireplace in
ATTACHMENT 3
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 261
NFS Form 10-900-a OMB Approval No. 1024-0018
(86-86)
United States Department of the Interior
National Park Service
NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES *
CONTINUATION SHEET
Section number 7 Robert Jack Residence Page 6
the northwest bedroom. It has a cast iron mantle and firebox. All the
walls, ceilings and doors on the interior are original, except for some
plaster repair and new wallpaper done after the city acquired the house
in 1974.
The exterior of the house is much the same as when R.E. Jack
lived there. A full porch extends across the front of the house with a
balustrade over the centered entrance section. The tall, thin windows
are double hung and evenly spaced with a cornice head. The hip roof has
a balustrade and a decorative vent; The eaves are decorated with paired
brackets, medallion blocks and a decorative frieze. The single story
bay windows are found on each side of the house. The exterior sheathing
is shiplap redwood, typical of the era.
The only change made to the house is the addition of an elevator
in 1970. The elevator provided alternative access to the second story
for aging Jack family residents. Structures added to the property in
1980 are the utility room that contains restrooms, a kitchen and a small
meeting room to serve various functions held on the grounds, and a
gazebo. The present picket fence that extends along the property's
Marsh Street frontage was constructed by the 4-H Club in 1989 and is a
replica of the original fence, copied from photographs.
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 driveway and
the surrounding grounds are covered with many mature trees planted by
Nellie Jack, who was particularly fond of trees and exotic plants.
The gravel driveway enters the property from Marsh Street and
continues straight back to the rear of the lot where it makes a 90 de-
gree turn to the right, past the wash house and continues to the
carriage house. The carriage house is approximately 18 x 28 feet and
still retains its original wood floor. The building originally had a
cedar shingle roof and the siding was vertical redwood board and batten.
The roof is now covered in asphalt and asphalt has been added to the
north and east elevations. The south elevation is now covered with
plywood and battens. The west elevation is also new. The carriage
house is considered a noncontributing building because of the number of
changes to the exterior.
The combined wood shed and wash house are approximately 14 x 20
feet. The single story wood frame building was moved in 1979 10 feet to
the west, to accommodate the new utility building. A door has been
added to the arched wood shed entrance for security.
ATTACHMENT 3
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 262
NFS Form 10-900-a OMB Approval No. 1024-0018
(86-86)
United States Department of the Interior
National Park Service
NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES *
CONTINUATION SHEET
Section number 7 Robert Jack Residence Page 7
The concrete walkways were all installed as part of a master
landscape plan commissioned after the city acquired the property in
1974. The flagstones near the bench, on the northeast side, are
original. When the heirs of Robert and Nellie Jack deeded the house and
gardens to the city in 1974, much of the original furnishings, bric-a-
brac, kitchen and dining dishes and utensils, library and personal
papers that document the Jack family's involvement in San Luis Obispo
County were included as part of the gift.
Twelve hundred items of furniture, art works, and bric-a-brac
seen in the house today were purchased or acquired by members of the
Jack family. The majority of the larger pieces of furniture, silver and
art were the original property of the Nellie and Robert Jack. Other
pieces were brought to the "Town House" from the Jack Ranch, located
east of Cholame.
The library contains over 2,000 volumes collected by the Jack
family, ranging from the Odes of Keats to a history of the French
Monarchy, from the entertaining novel to the depth of the law. A 2,000
volume library in a private house was considered large and demonstrates
that Nellie Hollister Jack was an avid reader, as well as a collector of
writings.
ATTACHMENT 3
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 263
NFS Form 10-900-a OMB Approval No. 1024-0018
(86-86)
United States Department of the Interior
National Park Service
NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES •
CONTINUATION SHEET
Section number 8 Robert Jack Residence Page 8
The Jack Residence is significant under Criterion B in the area
of commerce and development for the association with Robert Jack who
lived in the house from 1882 until his death in 1916. Jack was a
central figure in the San Luis Obispo area during the years 1870S-1894
promoting the expansion of the railroad through the central coast. As a
banker and land speculator, Jack was also a major benefactor of the
growth and development spurred by the railroad.
The house was built by Robert Edgar Jack, a prominent banker and
land developer and wool grower in Central California. The last two
decades of the 19th century were a time of economic expansion caused by
the coming of the railroad. Jack was a major force in this economic
development as he was a central figure in organizing San Luis Obispo to
promote the expansion of the railroad through the central coast. His
original business was wool growing but in the early 1870s he moved into
the City of San Luis Obispo and started banking. This led to other
business ventures such as hotels and public transport. R.E. Jack died
in 1916.
The house was continuously occupied by the family until 1974 when
Howard, the youngest son, died and the house was deeded to the city.
Robert Edgar Jack was born near the Kennebec River in Bowdoinham,
Maine on September 4, 1841. He attended Maine Wesleyan Seminary at
Kents Hill, Kennebec County and graduated in 1860. At the age of 21, he
went to New York City and took a job in shipping in the Commission House
of William J. Dewey & Company.
During the Civil War, Jack was a member of the New York militia
at the time of Lee's raid on the Suquehanna. He was a volunteer in the
56th New York Infantry and took part in the Battle of Gettysburg.
After the Civil War Jack came to California and joined with W.W.
Hollister in sheep raising on the Cholame Rancho, which they purchased
together. Originally 28,000 acres, the ranch was later increased to
58,000 acres. When Hollister died, Jack purchased the entire ranch and
operated it as a sheep and cattle range. These operations ranged along
the central coast from the Tehachapi's north to Monterey County, and
made Jack the largest wool grower in central California.
R.E. Jack married Nellie Lucy Hollister on November 20, 1870 in
San Francisco. She was the daughter of Joseph Hubbard and Ellen
ATTACHMENT 3
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 264
NFS Form 10-900-a OMB Approval No. 1024-0018
(86-86)
United States Department of the Interior
National Park Service
NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES *
CONTINUATION SHEET
Section number 8 Robert Jack Residence Page 9
Hoilister, holders of several large ranches, including El Chorro and San
Lusito. The Jacks had five children: Ella, Gertrude, Ethel, Robert
Edgar, Jr., and Howard Vail. Mrs. Jack and her sisters, Ida and Mamie,
had been sent to school in the east. She collected the fine library
still in the house. She was fluent in both French and Spanish, and in-
terested in anything to do with learning. She like to garden and was
especially interested in trees. She gave trees to others in the county
to plant around their houses. Both she and her husband were active in
St. Stephen's Episcopal Church and many of the church garden parties
were held in the Jack garden.
The drought of the 1860s had encouraged diversification, but the
transportation of agricultural products out of the county was difficult
without a railroad. In 1873, the Southern Pacific line extended south
to Soledad and everyone expected it to go through the county in a few
years. R.E. Jack anticipated the changes the railroad would bring by
establishing himself as a banker and real estate speculator in the
1870s. He was the cashier of the First National Bank, which was later
the Bank of San Luis Obispo. He was a principal in the banks of Paso
Robles, Santa Maris and Lompoc. According to Myron Angel, he was the
second largest land holder in the county, with 30,000 acres in 1883.
the largest land holder in the county was P.W. Murphy of Santa Margarita
with 60,000 acres.
By 1886 the rails had reached Templeton and local business elite
in San Luis Obispo were concerned that it continue through their town.
To accomplish this, the Board of Trade (Chamber of Commerce) was estab-
lished with E.W. Steele as president and R.E. Jack as treasurer. He was
already the treasurer of the West Coast Land Company, which was selling
land adjacent to the railroad in Templeton. Jack was also the secretary
and co-treasurer of the California Southern Hotel Company which built
the Ramona Hotel in anticipation of the coming of the railroad. To get
hotel guests from the narrow gauge Pacific Railroad, Jack bought the
City's horse drawn rail trolley.
In 1887, the Southern Pacific asked R.E. Jack, Isaac Goldtree,
and J.P.Andrews to procure the right of way for the railroad throughout
the city. Prominent citizens were enlisted for this job, since the
railroad expected the landowners along the proposed route to give up
their land for the "good of all" citizens in the community.
This pattern of land sales and hotel building continued south to
Los Olivos and Lompoc. However, before the land boom was over, Jack was
a millionaire. The San Francisco Examiner listed him as the richest
taxpayer in the count in 1890. Jack's involvement in promoting the
ATTACHMENT 3
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 265
NPS Form 10-900-a OMB Approval No. 1024-0018
(86-86)
United States Department of the Interior
National Park Service
NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES *
CONTINUATION SHEET
Section number 8 Robert Jack Residence Page 10
railroad ended in 1894 with the completion of the coastal line.
However, Jack continued his involvement in banking and commerce, and
development activities as the rail line was extended south. As an ex-
ample, in 1895 when the railroad reached Oceano, Jack built a spur line
to the beach and arranged for the construction of a Victorian style
pavilion to accommodate conferences, dances, and recreational ac-
tivities.
Jack was the Chairman of the City Trustees (1890-1893), the
governing body of San Luis Obispo before the turn of the century. He
represented the city in conferences with Charles Crocker and C.P.
Huntington of the Southern Pacific Railroad Company, during the years
when the city sought a coastal line. Fraternally, Jack was a Knight
Templar Mason. He was a leader in the Republican party and served on
both county and state central committees. He was a delegate to the na-
tional Republican Convention in Minneapolis, which nominated Benjamin
Harrison for President.
It is very likely the Jack House is significant under Criterion C in the
area of architecture as a good example of Italianate design retaining a
high level of integrity. This is not, however, supported in the nomina-
tion.
ATTACHMENT 3
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 266
JACK HOUSE GARDENS £
CAMERA LOCATIONS AND VIEWING DIRECTIONS
'- -r, ' - '
X MARSH STREET SCALE: 1" = 27'ATTACHMENT 3ATTACHMENT 10ARC1 - 267
(805) 316-0101
895 Napa Avenue Suite A-6, Morro Bay, CA 93442
MEMORANDUM
Date: May 25, 2017
To: Bryan Wheeler, City of San Luis Obispo
From: Joe Fernandez and Liam Campbell, CCTC
Subject: San Luis Square Mixed Use Transportation Impact Review
In January 2016 CCTC prepared a Transportation Impact Study (2016 TIS) evaluating the San Luis Square (590
Marsh Street) project. The project description has been revised, prompting the need to revisit the 2016 TIS’
analysis and conclusions. This memorandum summarizes the changes resulting from the new project
description. In summary, the revised project description would not change the findings and recommendations
described in the 2016 TIS. Details are provided below.
LAND USES
The currently proposed project
includes apartment units and hotel
rooms, along with commercial and
restaurant space, served by a
subterranean parking lot. These land
uses differ from those analyzed in the
2016 TIS. Table 1 compares the land
uses in the prior project description to
the currently proposed project
description.
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
The prior TIS used traffic counts collected in 2014 to evaluate the transportation impacts of the proposed
project. These 2014 values were reviewed and compared to counts conducted in 2016 by the City of San Luis
Obispo. Volume changes for the study intersections are shown in Table 2. Changes to the baseline traffic counts
have been under 10% for all intersections in the past two years, so the level of service (LOS) of the study
intersections should not be affected.
ATTACHMENT 4
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 268
2 San Luis Square Revised PD Evaluation
Central Coast Transportation Consulting May 25, 2017
PROJECT TRIP GENERATION
Table 3 summarizes the impacts of the updated project compared to the previously analyzed land uses. The
Institute of Transportation Engineers’ (ITE) Trip Generation Manual was used to produce this trip generation
estimate. Pass-by rates and urban infill reductions were applied according to the ITE Trip Generation Handbook,
consistent with the 2016 TIS.
The project trip generation estimate shows 1,667 new daily trips, 139 new midday peak hour trips, and 143 new
PM peak hour trips added to adjacent streets. Compared to the previously approved land uses, this results in
an increase of 383 daily trips, 36 midday peak hour trips, and 32 PM peak hour trips.
The prior TIS calculated vehicle, bicycle, transit, and pedestrian LOS values for the project. These results were
reviewed and key locations with the lowest reported service levels were tested to determine if the additional
project trips would worsen LOS to an unacceptable level and result in impacts beyond those identified in the
2016 TIS. The additional project trips generated by the revised project description would not result in changes
to LOS at any studied locations. The findings of the 2016 TIS would therefore apply to the revised project.
SITE CIRCULATION
The 2016 TIS’ circulation recommendations also apply to the revised project description. No further
recommendations are noted.
CONCLUSION
The proposed changes to the project would not change the findings of the 2016 TIS prepared for the project.
No further recommendations are noted.
ATTACHMENT 4
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 269
San Luis Square Mixed Use Project
Transportation Impact Study
Central Coast Transportation Consulting
895 Napa Avenue, Suite A-6
Morro Bay, CA 93442
(805) 316-0101
January 2016
Prepared For: City of San Luis Obispo
ATTACHMENT 4
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 270
Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2016
1San Luis Square
Transportation Impact Study
Executive Summary
This study evaluates the potential transportation impacts of the San Luis Square project located in the
City of San Luis Obispo. The project consists of the redevelopment of most of a city block (570 Marsh
Street, 590 Marsh Street, 581 Higuera Street) with 49 residential units and 22,866 square feet of mixed
commercial uses served by a subterranean parking lot.
The project’s downtown location, mix of uses, density, and proximity to transit all support trip-making
via walking, biking, and transit. These factors reduce the number of vehicle trips generated by the
project when compared to similar projects located in suburban or rural locations. After adjusting to
reflect these characteristics, the project trip generation estimate shows 1,284 new daily trips, 103 new
AM peak hour trips, and 111 new PM peak hour trips added to adjacent streets.
All of the study intersections and segments operate acceptably for pedestrians, bicycles, transit, and
autos. The addition of project trips has an insignificant effect on vehicle queues at the study
intersections.
Under Cumulative and Cumulative Plus Project conditions the Higuera Street/Marsh Street is forecast
to experience long queues on the westbound approach (Higuera Street approach leaving downtown).
All other study intersections operate acceptably.
All study intersections have lower collision rates than the state average except for the Nipomo
Street/Monterey Street intersection. Continued monitoring of collisions at this location is
recommended to determine if there is a persistent issue. This intersection is not noted as having a high
collision rate in any of the City’s recent Traffic Safety Reports.
As proposed, vehicle access into and out of the parking structure would be provided via a driveway on
Nipomo Street, with one lane for ingress and one lane for egress. This configuration is adequate for a
structure of this size. The forecast queues spilling back from the signals on Higuera and Marsh Streets
would not spill back and block the project driveway.
The parking structure aisles below the 570 Marsh building are offset from the parking aisles below the
581 Higuera building. This offset will require drivers to ‘jog’ to the left while circulating through the
structure, and appears to cause a narrow point in the circulating aisle. Guide striping should be provided
at the ‘jog’ to clearly delineate vehicle paths of travel, and circulation reviewed using vehicle turning
templates (AutoTURN or similar).
The control type at the parking structure entrance has not been defined. If access gates are provided,
they should be located such that entering vehicles stopped to swipe cards or pull tickets do not block
sidewalks.
The applicant should design the parking structure exit to ensure that exiting vehicles have at least 10
feet clear sight triangle to the sidewalk on both sides of the exit, unobstructed by building corners,
columns, or any other visual impediments. This distance is measured from 8 feet behind the stop bar
and two feet to the right of the centerline where a driver would be located in a stopped vehicle.
The project driveway shall be evaluated once every six months after they open for use until one year
after full project occupancy. If vehicle-pedestrian conflicts are identified during an evaluation, the
applicant shall install visual and audible signals at the identified driveways that are triggered by exiting
vehicles so that pedestrians are notified before they enter the driveway area or provide other suitable
mitigation as approved by the Director of Public Works.
ATTACHMENT 4
ATTACHMENT 10
ARC1 - 271