HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/18/2001, PH 1 - APPEAL OF THE CULTURAL HERITAGE COMMITTEE'S (CHC) DETERMINATION THAT THE STRUCTURE AT 756 PALM STR r i
L9Acouncil °�
acEnba Report pmNm�vw Z
-
C I T Y OF SAN LUI S O B I S P O
FROM: John Mandeville, Community Development Direc
Prepared By: John Shoals, Associate Planne
SUBJECT: APPEAL OF THE CULTURAL HERITAGE COMMITTEE'S (CHC)
DETERMINATION THAT THE STRUCTURE AT 756 PALM STREET
IS HISTORICALLY AND ARCHITECTURALLY SIGNIFICANT:
BRIAN CAMPBELL, APPELLANT; RALPH PETERS, APPLICANT,
ARC 164-00
CAO RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a resolution denying the appeal and concurring with the CHC findings
DISCUSSION
Situation
Mr. Ralph Peters would like to improve his property at 756 Palm Street (Attachment 1). His
plans are to relocate the residence at 756 Palm Street, demolish the residence at 754 Palm Street
and to construct two new residences on the property (see Attachment 2). The site is listed as a
"contributing property" in the City's Historical Preservation Program Guidelines and is located
in the Downtown Historic District. As such, the Cultural Heritage Committee (CHC) and the
Architectural Review Commission (ARC) must approve the subject project. In May 2001, the
proposed project was referred to the CHC for a determination on compliance with the City's
principles of historical preservation and the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Preservation
and Rehabilitation of Historic Structures. On May 29, 2001, the CHC determined that the
structure located at 756 Palm Street is historically and architecturally significant, and that the
applicant's replacement project is not architecturally compatible with the surrounding area. The
CHC determined that the house at the rear of the lot (754 Palm) was not historically significant.
The CHC's decision means that the proposed project will have a significant adverse impact on a
historic resource that is not mitigated and requires the preparation of an Environmental Impact
Report (EIR) before a final decision can be made on the development application. On June 8,
2001, Brian Campbell filed an appeal of the CHC's decision on behalf Ralph Peters. The
appellant does not agree with the CHC's determination and is appealing that action to the City
Council.
l�
Council Agenda Report_ ..,o Palm Street
Appeal of CHC action
Page 2
Cultural Heritage Committee Action
On May 29, 2001, the CHC made two specific determinations on the property and the proposed
development project. The CHC determined that the structure located at 756 Palm Street is
historically and architecturally significant because it represents, in its scale, massing and site
integrity, an early American Era "Folk Victorian" structure characteristic of homes built on the
fringes of Mission and Presidio properties in Mission communities. The CHC also determined
that the proposed development project is not architecturally compatible with the surrounding area
because it is not in keeping with the scale or massing of structures typically built in the late 19`x'
century on the fringes of Mission or Presidio structures. This determination is necessary due to
the property's location within a historical district. Attachment 3 is a copy of the CHC follow-up
letter and Attachment 4 the action update from the May 291" meeting.
Appellant's Position
The appellant is asking the Council to find that the 756 Palm Street structure does not meet the
level of significance which warrants environmental review and that moving this structure to an
appropriate site will not degrade the quality of the environment. Attachment 6 is a copy of the
appellant's statement. The appellant position is discussed in the following paragraphs.
According to the appellant, the structure at 756 Palm Street is not a historic resource as defined
by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) because it does not meet any of the criteria
for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources. As such, the structure is not
eligible as a Master List structure.
The appellant does not believe that the structure is a significant contributing structure to the
Downtown Historic District. He believes that the structure has the scale and massing of a Folk
Victorian structure and is more accurately described as a Railroad era house. According to the
appellant, there are many examples of this style of house in the Old Town Historic District and at
various other locations throughout the City.
The appellant does not agree with the CHC's conclusion that the structure has retained its site
integrity. He argues that the structure has not retained its site integrity because various upgrades
over the years have drastically changed the structure's original character and historic integrity.
Attachment 6 is a set of photographs showing the former condition of the structure.
Finally, the appellant maintains that the proposed replacement structure is compatible with the
Mission neighborhood and the Downtown Historic District. He contends that a two-story
rectangular building comprised of plaster walls and tile roof is compatible with the
Spanish/Mission era-Monterey style of several buildings in the immediate area.
1�2
Council Agenda Report .,o Palm Street
Appeal of CHC action
Page 3
Evaluation
Historical Significance Determination
The appellant contends that the structure at 756 Palm Street is not a historic resource as defined
by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)because it does not meet any of the criteria
for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources. While the structure may not be
eligible for State List of Historical Resources, the CEQA Guidelines give the City the authority
to determine the historical significance of a resource. Section 15064.5(a)(2) states:
A resource included in a local register of Historical resources, as defined in
section 5020.1(k) of the Public Resources Code or identified as significant in an
Historical resource survey meeting the requirements of section 5024.10 of the
Public Resources Code, shall be presumed to be historically or culturally
significant. Public agencies must treat any such resource as significant unless the
preponderance of evidence demonstrates that it is not historically or culturally
significant.
The City's Historical Preservation Program Guidelines list the site as a "contributing property"
making it a historical resource in the City of San Luis Obispo. The CHC considered the City's
Historical Preservation Program Guidelines, the Phase I and II Historical and Subsurface
Archeological Investigations prepared by Cultural Resources Management Services (CRMS) and
the CEQA guidelines in making a determination on historical significance. The CHC's
determination means that the proposed relocation of the historic resource at 756 Palm Street, as
proposed by the project, would constitute a substantial adverse change to the resource and require
the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report. No other aspects of the project would
trigger the need to prepare an EIR. It should be noted that the applicant does have the option of
redesigning the project to comply with the City's Historic Preservation Program Guidelines and
the Secretary of Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation, which are recognized methods of
mitigating the impacts of changing historic resources. This would eliminate the need for an EIR.
The Council needs to decide if the appellant has provided substantial evidence to demonstrate
that the 756 Palm Street structure is not historically or culturally significant.
Contribution to Historic District
The appellant does not believe that the residence is a significant contributing structure to the
Downtown Historic District. He believes that the structure has the scale and massing of a Folk
Victorian structure and is more accurately described as a Railroad era house.
Cultural Resources Management Services (CRMS) prepared a Phase I Cultural Resources
Inventory in August 2000 and a Phase II Historical and Subsurface Archeological Investigation
in May 2001. The Phase II Investigation found that the building fagade remains as pictured in
1- 3
Council Agenda Report o Palm Street
Appeal of CHC action
Page 4
early photographs, and that the building interior had undergone substantial renovation over the
years. The CRMS investigation concludes that the CEQA Guideline may apply to the structure
because it embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type and period of time, noting that the
building fagade with porch evokes an earlier and simpler time in the history of San Luis Obispo.
The investigation also states that small vernacular houses of this type were and are found tucked
behind the Mission San Luis de Tolosa. Based on this information, the Cultural Heritage
Committee determined that the small residential structure significantly contributes to the Historic
District and that its removal would significantly impact the area.
The Council needs to decide if the appellant has provided substantial evidence to demonstrate
that the house at 756 Palm Street is not a significant contributing structure to the Downtown
Historic District.
Loss of Historic Integrity
The appellant believes that the structure has not retained its significance because various
upgrades over the years have drastically changed the structure's original character and historic
integrity. While the CHC acknowledged that the property owner/applicant has done a lot to
improve and upgrade the house, committee members felt that the house had retained its original
architectural style, form and location.
Compatibility with the Downtown Historic District
The appellant maintains that the proposed replacement structure is compatible with the
Downtown Historic District and adequately mitigates the potential impact: The structure is a
two-story rectangular shaped building with plaster walls and tile roofing consistent with the
Mission and other structures in the immediate area.
According to the CEQA Guidelines, the City has the authority to identify potentially feasible
measures to mitigate significant adverse changes in the significance of an historical resource.
The CHC determined that the proposed development project is not architecturally compatible
with the surrounding area because it is not in keeping with the scale or massing of structures
typically built in the late 19" century on the fringes of Mission or Presidio structures. The
CRC's direction to the applicant was to revise the project to comply with the City's Historical
Preservation Program Guidelines and the Secretary of Interior's Standards for Rehabilitating
Historic Resources. The CHC felt that the applicant could retain, upgrade and add onto the
existing house at 756 Palm Street and put a majority of the new construction at the rear of the site
where it would be less visible from the street. The CHC felt potential impacts could be mitigated
with project redesign.
FISCAL IMPACT
No significant fiscal impact is anticipated as a result of action taken on this appeal.
Council Agenda Report o Palm Street
Appeal of CHC action
Page 5
ALTERNATIVES
1. Adopt a resolution upholding the appeal and finding that there is substantial
evidence in the record that demonstrates that the structure at 756 Palm Street is not
historically or culturally significant.
If the structure is not a historic resource, there is no environmental impact
associated with moving, salvage and/or demolition. Staff would, however,
recommend that the Council authorize its removal from the list of"Contributing
Properties" in the Historical Preservation Program Guidelines. The applicant
would still be required to comply with the City's Demolition and Building
Relocation Code (DBRC). The DBRC requires the owner/applicant to advertise
the structure as available for moving or salvage for a period of 90 days prior to
issuance of a demolition permit, and to provide photo documentation of the
building. The replacement structure will still require architectural review.
2. Continue the item for additional information or study, and specify the additional
information or analysis needed. There is no mandated deadline for action on this item.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 1: Vicinity map
Attachment 2: Reduced-scale Project Plans
Attachment 3: CHC Follow-up Letter dated June 8,2001
Attachment 4: CHC action update from the May 29`h meeting
Attachment 5: CHC staff report dated May 29, 2001
Attachment 6: Appellant's statement
Attachment 7: Excerpts from the CEQA Guidelines
Attachment 8: Excerpts from the California Public Resources Code
Attachment 9: Draft Resolution"A"- denying the appeal
Attachment 10: Draft Resolution `B"-upholding the appeal
JShoals/CC/CHC 164-00
1-s
IF / PF-H
756 Palin
\ . ARC 164-00
4\3'H \ 7 .
Mission Preparatoryj Mission San Luis \ s
High School i de Tolosa H
2H \ y \ }
756 Palm St.
N ARC 164=00
A0 100 2D0 300 Feet
Attachment 2
Ij-
---rq 7-1,
04�
If JR 2 1 -1 P� r
-- ----------- j
nio
--- -------
Ur 14- 1 -,
V
Mq R11 R
------------
ro
'T T 777
T-- W t z
W ri
F-9 I a
z
X 0
lit
;p
t
gR
FPO-IE,:T ALIIIPE:: -HEET TITLE CAMPWJ.L DESIGN h CONTMUMON
SITE PLAN
RALM PCMRS
Attachment
I. L a tti'
m � jl ill-
I
WI
T.
�
Till).
' •a
La � r _
s r
_ -11 17
=
4.
6 } 1
m S e 611 LJ
m V ° W
C1ti
ti l
4_l' r
1
I t-
I
— •r F I
-- I , iiti rl Irl I
jf3 FPD.iECT ADDF'E-- -HEET TITLE �' I�I'I' � yv CAMPBELL DESIGN k CONSTRUCTION
9 ! RALPH POUtS GARAGE I BASEMENT PLAN a"S' fwa euaanata m stmxr
l p,,,t mauuaaaamaa�maaaamaaer =s Aao ws�a Picw�..0 I�—!C
-ca •. -�.�,rm..r,_, GUEST NOOSE ELEVATIONS V
7 .,,. a.:r•. • ]'sir
L---
Attachment 2
i
I �
i
V' ' L�
pin
z
4
9
4,
i 4 ffffff�
I /
'A f
FF ' ~
LMA-1 I, ilk
! jg PPO IEiT .ALIT E:. :HEET TITLE i -A FJ CAMPBELL DESIGN x CONSTRUCnON
> I RALPHS i PETMAIN FLOOR PLAN ;_•:; m�v�„;
mrrem.aamaonew FRONT ELEVATION
Attachment 2
TI
Ln Ir
L o �
: F:� _ II - � .mi IP I I �� ❑ :
T
r `Y IT,
.
PH
I f � Ili
I
ii - --
L
f 6 '�
tl 91 _
9 7 a
T2
� ll— I
ITlll—
It-
® iED
[x
F z; III-- k--4
IST- Y'
—I
�� II
118
Il�-
-I
r i
I �
IS PFOJE-T ADDFE!_ =HEFT TITLE I' Imo' I �. a �F pHEII,DESIGN B OONSIMUCITON
" RALPH PETUM 2nd FLOOR PLAN 'a !MaeNCIIMM sce
im
(� mw�immaea�amrwu� EAST ELEVATION �'-? rxo.�i.. �Uw.�.«u
1 mm _
,��rF,'rIIi-WI
--
_IIF�J
AfaChment 2
�TILJI�.II-L�
2111
I�-,LWT',
LTJ—'rt{ .. i.
ll�m��
-
I
U T�tI
'
I-111 7
pI T q?
IF
ITT-if I
i_I .LI
W-IL
—Il Lil B
IK
III mW01f .
Vii.ITT-p
lI T
rmTr l _
V'Iji�I TibMp
` IIDm
l-101m ,
P=
�m-
`i"m
m- @
Z - -
:
m�ME
gf-
� m ®
e R I ® r ZI �
p i•W�-IIT I-IF, � O -III I I I�
I I
® I [IEEEI 'I
p + 1
9 E
m � T II � T� I ' I
3 ;TIS ITI n .
co ;- Til- t- - T• l-Q�
Ll�i� �i
m 1 m rI' ION
W
ILLI I � I-
- fi -
`Ib IIF Tpli- I
JT=11F 7 IH I
h L-
`t
i
! jg F•P❑.'ECT ADDF,E:: :HEET TITLE i'L'I�' I>:r�. GA a*-DESIGN h CONSTRUCTION
S > RALPH PETERS WEST 8 NOKM ELEVATION-Olt, v ma a«wonu,o mvxr /
®�aaaamaaa�®r�o�
736 Palm - aw�oeero.u.am / /
-`rvl Pad �Ir.n Pfl CSdY11A IY iIMI.YtI
Aftachment 2
F-
IF
W
J
Ll
CIE-
LI
ly
Z 0 1 I�� r l l r`� f ` I f �l �tl.
L
Li
Al
E=3_A
4
Z
If i
�mj ,
I hL
P'FO--E--T -Llr,FE:: �-T=111-E CAMPBEI.L DESIGN &CONSMUCnON
P.4.F" PETOM
EXISTING SITE PLAN
-- Attachment 3
���IIIIIIIIIIIIhIII���;������ �IIIIIIIIIIII�
city of sAn x15 OB1Spo
990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249
June 8, 2001
Ralph Peters
30 Evans Rd.
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
SUBJECT: ARC 164-00, 756 Palm Street
Demolition, remodel and construction of new dwelling at the rear of a
contributing historic property in the Downtown Historic District
Ralph Peters, applicant.
Dear Mr. Peters:
The Cultural Heritage Committee, at its.meeting of May 29, 2001, determined that 1) the
structure located at 756 Palm Street slated to be demolished or relocated is historically
and architecturally significant because it represents, in its scale, massing and site
integrity, an early American Era "Folk Victorian" structure characteristic of homes built
on the fringes of Mission and Presidio properties in Mission communities; and 2) the
Committee further determined that the proposed development project is not
architecturally compatible with the surrounding area because it is not in keeping with the
scale or massing of structures typically built in the late 19th century on the fringes of
Mission or Presidio structures. The CHC's decision means that your project, as
designed, may have a significant adverse impact on this historic resource and will
require the preparation of an environmental impact report (EIR) to discuss the potential
impact and feasible means of avoiding of reducing it.
There are three possible options available to you. You could pursue the project, as
designed, which will require an EIR. You could redesign the project to comply with the
City's Historic Preservation Program Guidelines and the Secretary of Interior's
Standards for Rehabilitation, which would eliminate the need for an EIR. The CHC and
the Architectural Review Commission would review the redesigned project and make a
final decision. Finally, you could appeal the CHC's decision to the City Council within
10 days of the action. The Council would then make a decision on historical
significance, which would be used to determine the appropriate level of environmental
review for the project.
V� The City of San Luis Obispo is committed to include the disabled in all of its services.programs and activities.
Telecommunications Device for the Deaf(805)781-7410. /—/�
Attachment 3
If you have questions, please contact John Shoals at (805) 781-7166.
Sincerel ,
John Mandeville
Community Development Director
cc: Brian Campbell
1075 San Andriano Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93405
Address File
t-1 4
i
Attachment 4
MEETING UPDATE
Regular Meeting of the San Luis Obispo Cultural Heritage Committee
Planning Conference Room
990 Palm Street,, San Luis Obispo
May 29, 2001 Tuesday 5:30 p.m.
Call Members to Order: Chairperson Bob Schrage, Vice- Chairperson Bob Pavlik,
Paula Carr, Steve McMasters, Tom Wheeler, Matt Whittlesey, and Margot McDonald.
Committee members McMasters and Wheeler were absent.
Staff: Jeff Hook, Associate Planner.
Elect Chairperson and Vice Chairperson. On a motion by Committee member Carr,
seconded by Committee member McDonald, the Committee voted 5-0 to re-elect Bob
Schrage as Chairperson and Bob Pavlik as Vice-Chairperson.
Public Comments: There were no public comments.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Regular meetings of February 27, March 26, and April 23,
2001, and special meeting of May 2, 2001. On a motion by Committee member Carr,
seconded by Committee member McDonald, the Committee voted 5-0 to approve the
minutes as amended at the meeting.
PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS:
1. 1408 Johnson Avenue. Review historic significance of accessory buildings for the
historic Ira Van Gordon Residence, Evelyn Talmage, applicant
Jeff Hook introduced the item, explaining that the applicant wanted CHC clarification of
two issues: 1) whether two detached apartments on the site were historically
significant, and 2) possible effects of locating a temporary carport adjacent to the main
house at 1408 Johnson Avenue on the property's historic significance. He then
summarized the historic information that staff had found on the buildings.
Committee member Pavlik felt that based on the CHC's original action nominating the
Van Gordon residence, all the buildings on the :site were included in the historic
designation. He likes the fact that the proposed pole and plastic fabric canopy carport
would be temporary and easily removable, though not necessarily architecturally
compatible with the historic buildings.
Committee member Carr agreed with the above.
Committee member McDonald noted she wasn't on the Committee when the main
house was nominated as a contributing historic property, but she agreed the accessory
buildings could also be considered historic. She felt more historic documentation was
needed to finally resolve the matter. /—/ ,S
CHC Meeting Update, May 29, 2001 Attachment 4
Page 2
Committee member Whittlesey questioned if this is a temporary structure, had plans
been done for a permanent, long-term replacement carport.
Robert Mule, 1314 Pismo Street, spoke in support of Ms. Talmadge's request.
Evelyn Talmadge explained her request and noted that a carport was needed to protect
one of her tenants' cars from weathering and bird droppings. She said a permanent
carport would block access for regular tree maintenance on her property, which may
then require the trees' removal. She hoped to avoid a permanent structure for this
reason, and also because of cost and architectural compatibility concerns.
Committee member Carr noted this property has been maintained in exemplary
condition and in part, it was due to these efforts that the property was nominated to the
Contributing Properties List even though it was outside a historic district.
Chairperson Schrage closed the public hearing.
Committee member Pavlik moved that the Committee confirm that the buildings located
at 1311 Pismo Street and 1412 Johnson Avenue contribute to the property's historic
significance based on the available historic documentation, the properties' age and
architectural style. Committee member Carr seconded the motion, which carried on a
5-0 vote.
On a motion by Committee member Pavlik, seconded by Committee member Carr, the
Committee voted 5-0 to determine that the proposed temporary carport as described in
the applicant's letter would not adversely affect the historic resource because it is a
small-scale, reversible and non-permanent structure.
2. ARC 164-00, 756 Palm Street: Demolish, remodel and construct new dwelling on
a contributing historic property in the Downtown Historic District. Ralph Peters,
applicant.
Jeff Hook presented the staff report, noting this was a continued item from the
Committee's November 2000 meeting. Brian Campbell, architect and Ralph Peters
explained their proposal and stated the house located at 756 Palm Street was beyond
its useful life and should have been demolished years ago. They originally were not
aware the house was historic because they had an early version of the City Historic
Preservation Program Guidelines that did not include this property in the historic
property list. Mr. Campbell said they planned to move the house to a site on Evans
Road, just south of the City limits. He did not believe the house's relocation would be a
significant loss since there are better examples of historic "Railroad Vernacular"houses
nearby, such as the historic Manderscheid House."
Ralph Peters explained his ideas for redevelopment of the property and why he chose
to do this project. He emphasized he wanted to live Downtown with the front of his
house near the street. He felt that preservation of the house placed a tremendous
burden and constraint on a property that was only 30 feet wide. /
CHC Meeting Update, May 29, 2001 Attachment 4
Page 3
Committee member Carr explained her belief that the house at 756 Palm Street is
historically significant because it is an example of the small, neighborhood housing built
around California Missions in the 1800s, and few of these remain today. The proposed
project would change the scale and established building pattern of the neighborhood
and detract from the Downtown Historic District. She noted that loss of the old house
would adversely affect adjacent Master List historic buildings, including the Mission and
the Manderscheid House by changing their environmental context.
Committee member McDonald felt the house contributed to the Downtown Historic
District's distinctive scale and architectural massing at the street level. She did not
agree with the applicant that the house was a `tear down" or no longer historically
significant, since it retains most of its important original architectural features.
Committee member Pavlik noted that under adopted city standards, demolition is the
"least favored option"when historic properties are redeveloped.
Committee member Whittlesey was most concerned about the architectural
compatibility of the proposed structures with the prevailing character of the
neighborhood and the Downtown Historic District in which it was located.
Pat and Grace Dempsey, citizens, said they understood 100 year old houses were
difficult to maintain. They agreed that the house at 756 Palm was historic but could
also understand the owner's desires. Grace felt that if the house was in good enough
shape to be moved and reused on Evans Road, it could also be rehabilitated and made
usable in its existing location.
The public hearing was closed.
Chairperson Schrage explained that the City follows the Secretary of the Interior's
Standards for Historic Preservation, which describe how historic properties can be
modified to serve contemporary uses while still preserving their historic qualities. He
said many communities were experiencing the loss of small-scale older houses and the
development of large "Monster Houses" on small lots. He explained the CHC is
charged with preserving the City's "sense of place" by preserving the scale and
character of historic buildings and neighborhoods.
On a motion by Committee member Carr, seconded by Committee member
Pavlik, the Committee voted 5-0 to: 1) adopt action alternative 1 in the staff report
and determine that the structure located at 756 Palm Street slated to be
demolished or relocated is historically and architecturally significant because it
represents in its scale, massing and site integrity of an early American Era "Folk
Victorian" structure characteristic of homes built on the fringes of Mission and
Presidio properties in Mission communities; and 2) that the Commission further
determines that the proposed project is not architecturally compatible with the
surrounding area because is not in keeping with the scale or massing of
structures typically built in the late 19th century on the fringes of Mission or
Presidio structures. r
CHC Meeting Update, May 29,2001 Attachment 4
Page 4
Committee Member Pavlik suggested an amendment to the motion to address the
demolition of the structure as it relates to the environmental review process. He
suggested the wording that `the property is historically significant and that its removal
would constitute a significant adverse environmental impact." Committee member
agreed to amend her motion to include the above. Committee member Pavlik
seconded the motion. The motion carried, 5-0.
Discussion followed regarding community objectives for historic preservation and the
applicant's concerns with the Committee's action
3. ARC 40-01: 1400 Osos Street. Review Master Plan for Mitchell Park, in the
Downtown Historic District. City Parks and Recreation Department, Applicant.
Jeff Hook presented the staff report and noted that Parks and Recreation staff person
Kathy Mills was present to provide background on this item.
Kathy Mills explained that the Master Plan was developed several years ago at the
Council's request and was intended to guide future park improvements. Its purpose is
to make Mitchell Park more usable, safe and attractive. She noted the Parks and
Recreation Commission (PRC) had approved the Master Plan.
Taylor Bateman, 1045 Islay Street, questioned the need to change the Park's design.
Kathy Mills explained that the Commission wanted to make the Park more
neighborhood oriented by discouraging "shortcuts" through the Park and installing new
walkways, landscaping, gazebos and a low railing around the Park.
Committee member Carr questioned who Mitchell -- the Park's namesake -- was. She
was also curious to learn more about the Park's history and development, and didn't
understand why the existing park layout was a problem. She liked the fact that the
Park's walkway layout allows shortcuts and is very open for safety. She felt the new
design was very modern in its curved walkway design and asymmetrical layout and
preferred a more formal, traditional layout with a bandstand in the middle, similar to the
park in Downtown Templeton, California.
Joyce Romero, 1245 Buchon Street liked the park layout. She had a small child and
was concerned about safety and security because strangers often camped in the Park.
She supports keeping the Park visually open.
Grace Dempsey, citizen, said that if the diagonal walkways were taken out, people
would simply make paths in the grass because that is how they want to use the space.
She is concerned about litter, increased landscaping which could reduce the Park's
openness, vandalism and safety. She felt the Park is decent now and there are other
City spending priorities. She also felt the Park's Downtown location requires that
address different circulation needs than a suburban park. She felt the existing "criss-
cross-walkway layout works well.
Committee member Pavlik liked the planned tot lot improvements. �—J
Attachment 5
MEMORANDUM
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
TO: Cultural Heritage Committee
VIA: John Mandeville, Community Development Director?,
FROM: John Shoals, Associate Planner
MEETING DATE: May 29, 2001
SUBJECT: Item #2: Demolition and relocation of existing structures, construction of new
residential buildings on a contributing historic property in the Downtown
Historic District; 754 and 756 Palm Street, ARC and ER164-00
BACKGROUND
Situation
The Community Development Department has received an application for architectural review
of a residential project at the subject address. The property owner/applicant, Ralph Peters, is
proposing to relocate the residence at 756 Palm Street, demolish the residence at 754 Palm Street
and construct two residential structures.
The plans have been forwarded to the Cultural Heritage Committee (CHC) because the site is
listed as a "contributing" property in the Downtown Historic Preservation District, and the
project involves removal and demolition of potential historic resources. The CHC is being
asked evaluate the project and forward a recommendation to the Architectural Review
Commission (ARC). The ARC will take final action on the demolition and the new buildings
proposed for the property.
Site and Setting
The rectangular-shaped site consists of approximately 4,500 square feet and is developed with
two houses, a driveway, parking and ornamental landscaping. The site is located in the
Downtown Historic District, which is one of the oldest parts of the city.. A recently completed
cultural resources inventory shows the property to be adjacent to or within the recorded
boundaries of a large historical and archeological site that comprises the Mission complex and
contains Mission-area materials. Other historical resources in the immediate area include: the
Mission de Tolosa (the Mission), Ah Louis store and the old "Chinatown" district. A complete
discussion of the site's historical background is contained in the cultural resources inventory
prepared by Cultural Resources Management Services (CRMS) in May 2001 (Attachment 3).
756 Palm Street
ARC 164-00 (Peters) AttaChment 5
Page 2
Existing Buildings
According to the CRMS historical investigation, the fagade and porch evokes an earlier and
simpler time in the history of San Luis Obispo. Small venacular houses of this type were and are
found tucked behind the Mission San Luis de Tolosa. These houses replaced the adobes and
provided housing and workshops of the mission. A few remaining examples of this type of
housing can still be found behind the mission.
The fagade of the building remains much as pictured in early photographs, although the interior
has undergone substantial renovation under the current ownership. The current ownership has
also done some basic repairs to the porch, siding and roofing.
New Building Description
The property owner/applicant is proposing to construct two new residential structures on the
property. The first residence, closest to the street, would be a two-level structure with a
basement. The second residence, at the rear of the site, would be a three-level structure with
parking underneath. The architectural style proposed for the buildings can be described as
"Spanish eclectic," incorporating many features from Spanish Colonial Revival, Mediterranean
and California Mission styles. Full-scale plans are contained in the CHC packet and are
available for review at the Community Development Department at 990 Palm Street.
Demolition Regulations
The Demolition and Building Relocation Code (SLOMC Section 110) requires that requests to
demolish designated historic buildings be referred to the CHC for a determination of historical,
architectural or aesthetic significance. If the CHC determines such property to be significant, the
ARC in the context of the proposed development then considers the demolition request.
According to City Regulations, a building permit shall not be issued unless the ARC determines
the following:
1. For demolition of a structure, the proposed replacement structure is as, or more,
compatible with the neighboring development than the existing structure, consistent with
ARC guidelines; and either the condition of the structure poses a threat to the health,
safety or welfare of the community residents or people living or working on or near the
site, or the applicant has submitted written documentation that it is financially infeasible
to rehabilitate the structure or preserve the historic nature of the site.
The applicant believes that the proposed replacement structures are compatible with the
neighboring development and will preserve the historic nature of the site. CHC should
review the new buildings and provide input on whether the proposed structures meet the
above criterion.
2. For relocation or moving of a structure, the structure to be moved will be compatible
with the new site and other buildings in the neighborhood.
756 Palm Street ,
ARC 164-00 (Peters) Attachment 5
Page 3
The applicant wants to relocate the front structure, and the project plans note that every
effort will be made to have this structure moved to another lot. However, the applicant
has not identified a specific location for evaluation. According the project architect, they
have received some interest in the house, but staff is not aware of any definite plans. The
CHC should ask the applicant to clarify his intentions for moving this structure. Based
on his response, the CHC will need to decide if the proposed location meets the above
criterion and forward a recommendation to the ARC.
Because the applicant has not identified a specific location, there is a concern that he may
not find a suitable location, and will want to demolish this historic resource. In staff's
opinion, demolition of the house at 756 Palm Street would be contrary to the City's goals
and policies on preserving historic resources. The City's General Plan and Historical
Preservation Program Guidelines promote the preservation of historic and architecturally
important buildings and site. The historic guidelines state: "The demolition of a Historic
Resource is the least favored option and should be done only when (1) the condition of
the building poses a threat to the health, safety or welfare of community residents or
people living or working near the site, or (2) the project sponsor demonstrates that it is
financially infeasible to rehabilitate the structure or preserve the historic nature of the
site. " It has long been a City practice to work with property owners to explore
alternatives to demolition, such as rehabilitation and reuse of the building, use of
alternative building code's provisions to make rehabilitation more feasible, or possible
relocation of the structure to a more suitable site. The CHC should discuss the positive
and negative impacts of this potential situation and forward a recommendation to the
ARC.
City Policies on New Construction in Historical Districts.
The City's Historical Preservation Guidelines include the following guidance for the review of
new buildings in historical preservation districts:
"New primary structures within Historical Preservation Districts should further
promote the historic character of those areas. Careful attention to building form, bulk,
scale, siting and site landscaping is encouraged. All new buildings need not be
designed in the same style of surrounding structures. However, elements of these styles
and building forms should be included in the new structure and it should complement
the architectural character of the area. "
The CHC should discuss if the proposed project promotes the historic character of the
"Downtown Historic Preservation" district.
Environmental Review
The proposed project is subject to the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA) because
it involves changes to a locally historic property. Pursuant to CEQA, Planning staff will be
prepare an initial environmental study to determine what level of environmental review is
756 Palm Street - Attachment 5
ARC 164-00 (Peters)
Page 4
required to comply with CEQA guidelines. The CRC's input on the proposed project will be
used to make a final determination on environmental review.
Action Alternatives.
The CHC may take any of the following actions:
Demolition
1. Determine that the structures to be demolished or moved (under the City's demolition
regulations, the relocation of historically/culturally significant structures is treated like
demolition)are historically or architecturally significant,based on the following findings: (list
findings for Contributing or Master List historic designation,e.g. age, condition,architectural
style,environmental context). The ARC must make the special findings listed in the demolition
regulations prior issuance of any building permit.
2. Determine that the structures to be demolished or remodeled are not historically or
architecturally significant, based on findings, in which case the normal procedures for
demolishing structures older than 50 years apply:(list findings for non-significance).
New Buildings
3. Determine that the proposed new buildings (as designed) are architecturally compatible with
the surrounding area;
4. Determine that the proposed new buildings are architecturally compatible with the setting
provided that the following design changes are incorporated: (CHC to indicate desired
design changes;
5. Determine that the proposed new buildings are not architecturally compatible with the
surrounding area, based on the following findings: (State reasons why the project is not
architecturally compatible with the historic character of the setting)
Continuance
6. Continue the item to a date certain for additional discussion or historical research.
Attachments:
Attachment 1-Photographs of the site and surrounding uses
Attachment l-Cri}It� nn
l Resource vena by Cultural Resources Management Services
Full-scale plans were distributed to the Cultural Heritage Committee and are available for review
at the Community Development Department at 990 Palm Street.
!Shoals/ChUARCI64-00(Peters)
l-�a
is y,.4• f"v"• ,:�''G x. 'i..: Y a7+` e°i,v" °pmig ,{. r r ' ,,-.t•Y.,
{�I• r_- � � � ��.� � <i CA�.�,"'"L "�+(��',}i ait may° r> � 1��`,- d' J i.t y•'�' ._ n a s�i
,�x,A. ° -w ""s'ms„, ' 9�' et e'F�� .�ss,T ��>�.Mk r y'•+�^t�t � ,� ,�^ i��t_(
fA '•T•. �_y t La. r 3f �` 'V 1t�: g. i t° �T+ r b
M13 a '1'd R4 A 1• Y f °.4, + i 1
1.-
Air
�o•�'r1�1``w``+at dcr.§ ��q'p4r . '��' ' f .[ti : i¢9 '� C•r�°:' �,R.t'! �twr�
,�. �"" -- ,-,;z• '� 0.,a ?.*i '
°��tl�° {F •,ati'� »�� :{�. r ».a�: a� +.-,e.,,..�. e".`1 tet'
� 4
�2„ap,,, �,.�,..•'F�»"' -+'moi .° � � }( .•R..,�
� ' .4° •..�.acvd 7°:.d�'t�fit._ � +n � �+w. k ;5� ss
.r ° h1L'. tA+uv r�'�{o .c... ..fix ♦ + yry�"���Wy..c��>< ° . i � t
rYSi}'. 'Ja+q.. t :y. 1""1Y4 A :'3y° E'� ♦, 1 1 R + i '
•,r`r• Y' > ..,w � \R '�-..,o-l-�„�y'�. +y�`�`,^•+ M-�, �,�/r:�{� .d .^fob M Ljy yam. •:r
Wb � F �$J,1•'.tiL �Vp M4 ,�� �j y�Q �p�RMy'.9 �,u
� F� Y ! �ji'p I' * ����Y'�9s°v� �.pYi::,����`°'` 'L+...•,Y�,.,
wR, „fid,'" a.,- DRi °� ••� ,rt YiP,q,��•1 �i f^ 'rr,�•�?5w° c r:�t ' ii.4 w `P� � °'y
_.,,�..• rr.• &.i+:y.�ti�'�t � Mr+�4 r•' ��5�'i �aaRYxs,yw' yF�,,y �'^' .,K����y �"`.+"
•+'i3e�^�,'�1iNp'y^,�"`' `�,�''S5..F�,f'•w ! a
�, t.»•.�•G�`,y4,�xt.~�,.�t„�' +�{����..�µK. .tLif•'�1'�'�v it" +{�R4-'vG"R
v.�l( 'J}�`:C•nliJ�.� }X+!!`�i'* i'P�P{"`sem�'S���a} 1+^L�#� �1i s.{...a .1.t,.G�. + 1��Ji5Q:liXtWYt'.'l��i_Fti.L�'
,y t
IY
t � �. T'. tel t'L�•t.^,rw't;'i'°':r;.•
p l
4 i ti ` i r 'k{5( • 'G 'q L tx 9`i
',• Ott r� -tip � � � � � _-,�. A
, { 4r >{ rr t `�'�„'�� kS � t L . � '�-':,+r 1 .L w•, u �+�i_4
Y F ► i 1 tJt
.. r y� ' S ' �_t�' x.{^' k��r '�� J�'`f�dc�; •qb f �, � X` "x' � a�l.F.
s� yid ay
eta'�.a-y""r�''�^."g1^� x`x., ". � aww. �'M"'•'9 � �.'.
.t'"»ur 1'w r'1 � a� 4[.a."{,@ ,. •�' F eJ �S�ti$r+,.�h?tLSiSt'•.�.'i�} �s" _, .
. �.. �` X s?f P+� qxi yx £vt _ f�c �. r4�•evl f�,'v,E :. .+ 'i�' 'r �..
� .;"r �r.., d x� s� n. r ✓ f "LT'�'f{�#r4-.i rc". f.,, � '"t'...
- - -_ .. � ysy^�ra asYf� ��P�*tw �}*�+"�ri� ,•.,f"'�f .�aS^ci�� S�rl$�{��
' rt�..tTlllYVfv]F'.^_'._'G.�•.3's LNy�496.'.� yj�"T x��.;` � • _ ).�.
`.�++c-1re+^.�.! •��"n� i"J;moi'-�„M1 r!«.0 ^'y- i
a7l
r.t...-Y, ,^' ,r- .:fin:-� .y„�w'."1 wa S ".�,Mr' eu` +UA s r r W`y � •` "+;.
:N ��j`ji.•+""/��'i- '^"'"a't =1 t t`a wv § �'f sx S, 1#f. 9 •T ':(•� 'r ' '1
_y.�S�---'^' S r >��+' �'�i•,+���`�`°�a>31 - '' �. �' r r,Fc l� t�..�f f�4j r v?ty. -., 'I a,
xx �ppp
'.O`1;r3"e•�- '� � �. � �., _�s �k t ,', �v„-' i �k rtl �. � f .{ { e *a t 1,�
,�,5 r ik� Y GSS4 ! � S +�61 .t♦s ... { 1 4 QQ4
' liwi
x 8
r ..ci •ZS .U- f g a.F 9.•.r i s
IT
` r 3.r :.a,�, t .,v�,►t 'nd1� ` i `1 'e'` t`"q��'F` �y d
M
t + f
`�/ r
0dr .J r fx r `-.a�,y2 J+ !..? �_T G 9•,y ,�..jr-'t^
• ..•.•' 1`3 icy a } a' v" 7/' P.R"�g y �.* (t(�t
rY�,1I J.. ,sem
'�y,��•'e..+"•.-.-!� i M ^dam "'.1. '_:..roY.w..,,,.rt+'"- - �..• —.r....:��� � � 2„ a�t%'yig!vi_+„xP i
�1lltry 14
• �` � �vtGYYi/4�C i •fit � _ .Y^•
13
i
1
t' v•�w �'ri"Ir • i
� ..,_ �. � % 1 ;' a •• —p} ..
).'/I I. AjNil �j'•',y'i}�wx M1.,.yp^ I III
x:^.:'`11�- _ t Y • .•s Fyr�'ry',. ci t'a It.. ^
r as ! e a \ d�•� i.
\i
1 Sb Yy
tee, •�`•;�:..A rt s'r„A,""_.+.�aTT.• � � �.. • «:hr
Attachment 5
Historical and
Subsurface Archaeological Investigations at
754 and 756 Palm Street,
San Luis Obispo, California,
Being a Part of CA-SLO-64/11
Prepared for
Brian Campbell
Campbell Construction
1075 San Adrian Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93405
Prepared by
Nancy Farrell
and
Betsy Bertrando
Cultural Resource Management Services
813 Paso Robles Street
Paso Robles, California 93446
May 7,2001.
CRMS
y� ® CWS ftjW 1,16.3&3-V
cutnuu,aEtan¢wn.¢�mn�nms /
v
Attachment 5
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION .......................................................................:...................... 1
NATURAL HISTORY OF THE PROJECT AREA ......................................... 1
CULTURALBACKGROUND .......................................................................... 5
RESEARCHMETHODS :.................................................................................. 7
ArchivalResearch ..............................................................I...:................. 7
FieldMethods ........................................................................................ 7
SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA ...:::......................................................:................ 8
RESULTS OF THE INVESTIGATIONS ......................................................... 9
HistoricalResearch ................................................................................. 9
756 Palm Street ............................................................................. 10
754 Palm Street- Construction Description 12
752 Pahn Street 12
Subsurface Archaeological Investigations ..........................:................... 14
Trench1 ...........:............................................................................. 14
Trench2 ...........:........................................................................... 14
Trench3 ..................................................................:.................... 16
RockAlignment ........................................................................ 16
Trench4 ......................•..............................................:................: 16
Rock Wall Foundation ................................................................ 17
Rock"Pile" .................................................................................. 17
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................. 17
754 Palm Street Building ....................:................................................... 17
756 Palm Street Building .......:................................................................ 18
Archaeological Resources ....................................................................... 18
Attachment 5
FIGURES
Figure1: Location Map ...............:.............................................................. 2
Figure 2: Vicinity Map, USGS 7.5' San Luis Obispo Quadrangle 3
Figure 3: Current Configuration, 756 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo ....... 4
Figure 4: Floor Plan: 756 Palm Street ........................................................ 11
Figure 5: Floor Plan: 754 Palm Street ...............................................:......... 13
Figure 6: Project Area Showing Backhoe Trenches,Probes, and Features 15
EXHIBITS
Exhibit A: Historical Information and Documents
Exhibit B: Unit and Feature Profiles
Exhibit C: Primary General Catalog
�a
1
Attachment 5
INTRODUCTION
This report describes the results of historical archival research and subsurface
archaeological investigations at a residential lot [APN 002-413-018] on Palm Street in the City
of San Luis Obispo, California The study area is located in the oldest part of the City of San
Obispo, across the street from the Mission San Luis Obispo de Tolosa(Figure 1, Figure 2). A
substantial addition to one existing residence(756 Palm Street),removal of another residence
(754 Palm Street), and construction of a new residence, at the rear of the parcel, are proposed
(Figure 3).
In accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
and the City of San Luis Obispo, a cultural resources inventory report was submitted to the City
(Farrell and Bertrando 2000). The inventory report was reviewed by the Cultural Heritage
Committee (Mandeville 2000). The Committee requested additional information, including 1)
additional historic documentation, and 2) the results of subsurface archaeological testing.in order
to assess the depth and integrity of the archaeological deposit oil the property that would be
impacted by the proposed construction activities.
NATURAL HISTORY OF THE PROJECT AREA
The City of San Luis Obispo lies within a biologically diverse region surrounded by
mountains, rolling hills, and broad valleys. The oldest parts of the city are located on the flood
plain of San Luis Creek and its two major tributaries, Brizzolara Creek and Stenner Creek. The
soils underlying the city are primarily recent(Holocene) alluvial deposits of gravel, sand,clay, and
silt derived from the surrounding uplands composed primarily of the Franciscan formation. The
project location soil is classified as part of the Los Osos-Diablo complex, and is high in clay
content (USDA 1984: 59). A variety of minerals and rock types occurring in this melange were
utilized by Native Americans as raw materials for tools and ornaments, especially: chert,
sandstone, basalt, shale and serpentine.
A series of distinctive Oligocene/Early Miocene volcanic plugs,known as the Morros,
dominate the landscape from Morro Bay southwest through the city, to Edna Valley(Chipping
1987). The dacite (known locally as "granite") that composes these plugs was used to fashion a
variety of grinding tools by the original inhabitants of the region(Roper et.al. 1996). Historically,
it has been used throughout the City as a building material.
The native vegetation communities in the surrounding region comprise a mosaic of
grassland, oak woodland, chaparral, and riparian habitats. Native annual and perennial grasses,
herbaceous plants, shrubs, and trees provided important food resources prehistorically, including
acorns, bulbs, berries, greens, and a wide variety of edible seeds. Many plants were also used for,
medicine, shelter, clothing, containers, and tools.
-1-
�a9
Attachment 5
a
OEa
¢
y A� Fb.im T"1 r 9
rf: 'QkWd Hvt pp Cpul
Me\
iR.WW
�i REGP�e '
Od
Maw
//j waoe�n ab IB Cft
SM 1 e k ObkPO oe�ar
1
KamN/��
' V vC
a seed .& `°°°`.°'o
am r wemLui. bkp*Ge� d 9p Bop -
/� I! srr,:oeppana
Cm sm
1� I
j
56 P
I2 f i �atNa Y. y CC
Nm \V\ 1
omw
S4 V1YGT..n0 9
1 r �
I so,
A.i 1
727 / sm r k.a+mrC^af
j IBdoda WLdhm WYm aNtle
1 &Jmd,.nn P. M�Inc
F .. �O.A�
r� sr<smaomlla rRv
` saNesd.e.f �prR.soa�
qq�q-' as h3.d ��^.
rtra
xy. ��� t_ or Oi1Yls
94CQ pcp aYird.. A '
ap^�
s and o
. Lips rsn
SYi,•B� "am Irb OEbNr Sb.
r�a1°r�ia.� Yale.
aa:�,® grapey �
„m q A e �F
Bavur rRmr�e mm—ee��'..`ss
Cp r��tla µ f1wa Mme'
aees 4bsr
Lepep Cp,fbam rpVeflOw
a RM
� 9np
WYaI /YN Pa �af�
y efa 9pslrY OtlyO
g� I�t Karew / Oveedec �Pl impar[ .
d �„Q so u:x..srT4op.erao...e caco.em e�.rTws
J roma, aE,avrr..c
a \\
Figure 1: Location Map
-2-
360 ------
•
3
M �mi
i Well N�\� MXIMOrouri
4
302, Wf
IM 2 it
it
diol wer.
It I k
PP
IL
Teal 7, 7(-
t
ybr
MMO
✓
.40
rE i",
v
W-0 It J
v-
at
i rrospecE x.
DU
of
'Ov.Th.- N9 1___
-1-. IL
sc'm
Sim
It
'P rk
cv
........... LLS(0? k*
Figure 2: Vicinity Map, USGS 7.5'San Luis Obispo CA Quadrangle
1_31
n
Attachment 5
.a 1W.BC.CCH -
0 o C
n°O
o Se2 Z
� i dB o8
I
I
II _ W 3
�9
-
J�
9$
W sz
a I
U O
I �
c 3 c
E o
O I SK Q " 4
dl i Lf] W
I � f ; � •�I I � al
113
t° z
Y
i
;S;
I ! W ' 1 ee
I - >
W I :I II Y II Io z I
-R$ < I O
I
•:a Y
W .3 I ` 11 N PSS < I --
�I
( I W
y� N
b • 9 I H
-- .cc3.ou.ec.c
Figure 3: Current Configuration, 756 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA
-4-
l-3�
Attachment 5
Since the founding of the Mission San Luis Obispo de Tolosa,the native vegetation of
project area and immediate vicinity has been replaced primarily by European cultivars and other
"Mediterranean climate" plants . The vegetation on the project parcel presently consists of two
large trees (Washington Palm and Brazilian Pepper)that were probably planted in the 1920s,
ornamental shrubs, and the remnants of lawn grasses. Vestiges of the native vegetation are present
in vacant lots around the neighborhood.
CULTURAL BACKGROUND
Archaeological evidence indicates that coastal San Luis Obispo County has been occupied
for at least 9,000 - 10,000 years, as indicated by radiocarbon dates from excavations conducted at
Diablo Canyon(Greenwood 1972) and Edna Valley(Fitzgerald et.al. 1998). At the time of
European contact, the San Luis Obispo region was occupied by speakers of Obispeiio, a dialect of
the Chumash language. The Chumash inhabited coastal and inland regions between Malibu and the
vicinity of San Simeon(Kroeber 1925; Gibson 1982);the Obispefio were the northernmost of this
group, occupying the area from Nipomo north.
Ethnographic evidence shows that the Northern Chumash(such as San Luis Obispo)
differed somewhat in social structure and customs from the Southern Chumash(such as in Santa
Barbara), approximating more closely the practices of their Salinan neighbors to the north. The
Southern Chumash were noted for large community organizations with dense populations and
elaborate social and political structures. In contrast, the Northern Chumash and Salinan
communities were characterized as consisting of small and widely scattered populations that did
not exhibit the same intensity of structuring of social and political organization seen in the more
southerly groups.
Early historic observations reported that the local inhabitants of San Luis Obispo and the
surrounding area maintained a generalized hunting, gathering, and fishing economy, shared in
common with most areas of California at the time of Spanish contact(for reviews, see Brown
1967; Geiger and Meighan 1976; King 1991). Stone, bone,wood, plant fibers,and shell provided
the materials for the production of tools, containers, clothing, and houses. Plant foods such as
seeds, nuts, berries, bulbs, seaweed and a variety of leafy greens were important in the diet.
Acorns in particular provided a nutritious, stable and storable source of protein and carbohydrates.
Nuts and seeds were processed with a set of groundstone tools commonly found in the material
culture assemblages of Californian groups. Procurement of terrestrial animals and birds was
accomplished with a variety of techniques, including the bow and arrow, traps, and snares. Fish,
shellfish, and marine mammals,taken from estuaries, rocky shores, and nearshore areas,were
common food sources on the coast and to some extent inland.
There are few historic accounts of the Obispefio Chumash, as compared to the information
available for the Chumash living on the Santa Barbara coast. European contact in the San Luis
Obispo region probably began with the visit of Pedro de Unamuno to Morro Bay in 1587,
although some scholars have questioned this, based on the ambiguity of Unamano's descriptions
-5-
/-33
Attachment 5
(Mathes 1968). A visit by in 1595 by Sebastian Rodriguez Cermefio is better documented
(Wagner 1924). The earliest well-documented descriptions come from accounts by members of
Gaspar de Portola's land expeditions of 1769 and 1770 (Squibb 1984). No large villages,such as
those seen along the Santa Barbara channel, were reported by early travelers. Greenwood(1978:
52 1) suggests that the area may have once been populous, but was already declining by the time
the Europeans arrived. This suggestion has yet to be demonstrated archaeologically.
Los Osos, originally La Canada de Los Osos (the Bears), was named by the men of de
Portola's expedition, which passed through that location on September 7, 1769 (Squibb 1984). Lt.
Pedro Fages and his soldiers returned to the valley 1772 for the"Great Grizzly Bear Hunt", which
provided badly needed food for the settlers at the newly founded Monterey Presidio (Sullivan
1995: 1). The success of the grizzly bear expedition led to the first Spanish settlement in the
region, beginning with the founding of Mission San Luis Obispo de Tolosa in 1772(Hall-Patton
1994: 83). As elsewhere, induction into the missions had a devastating effect on the local
inhabitants, requiring them to live and work at the mission and abandon their former lifeways. As
early as 1803, the Mission's agricultural commune system had absorbed the local inhabitants of
Morro Bay and their neighbors on the coast from Cayucos to Pismo Beach and inland beyond. By
the time the missions were secularized in 1834, the Chumash population had been decimated by
disease and the disintegration of their social structure.
The time of greatest growth and prosperity for the Mission San Luis Obispo was between
1790 and 1810 (Kocher 1972). Annual reports filed by the Mission Fathers give some information
on the growth and construction of the mission complex. Unfortunately, reports are missing for the
first twenty-five years. As a self sustained community, the mission complex developed the land
well beyond the quadrangle that exists today. Nearby were reservoirs, tanning vats, mills,and
adobe housing and storage buildings and work shops. Areas surrounded by rock walls contained
vegetables, orchards and vineyards with grain fields and livestock nearby.
The mass of Indians were lodged in rows of small houses of one story,
situated near the north, east and west sides of the main building. They were built
of adobe -a large sun-dried brick-as were likewise the main mission buildings,
except the north and west walls, which were of stone. The roofs were covered with
tiles, and the walls whitewashed. (Angel 1883).
By 1830,the results of an earthquake left much of the mission in ruins. This was
compounded by the weakening condition of the Native work force as well,the result of illness and
deaths among the neophytes. In Fr. Gil's annual reports for this period much is said of the
difficulty in repairing the buildings with a weakened and declining work force. In August of 1834,
Governor Figueroa and his government adopted the Secularization Act, essentially amounting to
the confiscation of mission lands in California In 1835,the Mission properties were inventoried
and valued at$6,858.00 (Engelliardt 1963).
-6-
/3z/
Attachment 5
Eugene Duflot de Mofras, visiting San Luis Obispo in 1841,observed that there were
barely one hundred Indians remaining and the remaining Franciscan was living"in abject poverty."
Mofras goes on to say, "The venerable Father distributes what little is sent to him among the few
Indian children who still live with their families in the ruins near the Mission" (Wilbur 1937).
The area between Stenner and Garden Creeks, Palm Street and Santa Rosa Street, was an
early part of the development of the City of San Luis Obispo. The land behind the Mission was
configured into irregular shaped lots and was settled mostly by settlers from Mexico and remnants
of the local Indian population. The settlers had either been part of the mission-system or had
arrived with the influx of people from Sonora, Mexico during the gold rush. It wasn't until 1872
that the land these families had occupied for many years was petitioned for,and granted by, the
City of San Luis Obispo. Fences that had been erected between the old property lines had to be
readjusted during the incorporation of the town to allow for the plotting of blocks and street
alignments(E. Bertrando and B. Bertrando 1998).
The group of mostly adobe buildings located in back of the Mission became known as El
Barrio del Tigre. An Edward Vischer sketch completed during the 1860s illustrates the look of
the project area at that time (Nicholson 1972). Eventually, the adobes were replaced with
wooden frame houses.. In the post-World War B era, the area has continued as a residential
neighborhood, with many of the frame houses slowly being replaced by newer homes and
apartment buildings.
RESEARCH METHODS
Archival Research
Primary archival research was conducted for the Phase I Inventory of the parcel(Farrell
and Bertrando 2000). Supplemental research for this phase of the investigation was concentrated
on finding additional information regarding the structures on the lot and obtaining the Chain of
Title.
Heid Methods
Archaeological field investigations took place on January 16-19, 2001. A series of four
mechanically excavated trenches were strategically placed in an effort to: a) locate subsurface
intact features such as privy pits,trash pits, fences, wall foundations, evidence of the 1895 barn
fire, and b) to assess the presence of any prehistoric deposits.
During the initial surface inspection of the property(Farrell and Bertrando 2000) fragments
of Mission Period roof tiles(tejas) and floor tiles(ladrillos), Pismo clam fragments, saw-cut
mammal bone, common red brick, and white ironstone dishware fragments were found across the
parcel. Since there seemed to be no concentrations of cultural materials, two backhoe trenches
-7-
1-3S-
i
Attachment 5
were dug in the yard between 756 and 754 Palm Street and two in the backyard between 754 Palm
Street and the northern property line, in order to investigate all parts of the lot that are currently
accessible.
The trenches were excavated in 20 cm levels by a backhoe with a 24" bucket. Mr. Brian
Campbell,the project architect, provided the backhoe services. In order to gain a sense of the
range of cultural materials present, a sample of sixteen shovelfuls was taken from each level and
dry-screened through 1/4 mesh. Trenches were excavated down to a very wet clay layer the
water table at this location lies at about one meter. Soil profiles were drawn of three of the
trenches, the fourth was abandoned due to the presence of live electrical wires. Fieldwork was
conducted by Nancy Farrell,Ron Rose and Shannon Mahoney. Mrs. Sarah Krolak represented the
Native American community.
Subsequent to the archaeological field work, an inspection of the small residence at 754
Palm Street was undertaken by Betsy Bertrando. Her description of the building may be found in a
following section.
SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA
Section 15064.5 (a) of the CEQA Guidelines,defines a resource as"historically
significant" if the resource"meets the criteria for listing on the California Register of Historical
Resources, (Pub. Res. Code §5024.1, Title 14 CCR Section 4852) including the following:
(A) Is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of
California' history and cultural heritage;
(B) Is associated with the lives of persons important in our past,
(C) Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type,period, region,or method of
construction, or represent the work of an important creative individual, or possess high
artistic values;or
(D) Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory of history."
Cultural resources that meet one or more of these criteria are defined as"historical resources"
under CEQA.
Under Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines, the following questions are posed in
order to determine the impact of a project on cultural resources [historical resources]:
Would the project:
a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined
in Section 15064.5?
b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource
pursuant to Section 15064?
c. Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries?
-g-
1-3L
Attachment 5
In addition, the City of San Luis Obispo has produced The Historical Preservation
Guidelines which were adopted by City Council, (resolution No. 6158) in 1987. This document
also contains a list of-Contributing Properties within Historical Preservation Districts". The
City's historic resource criteria for evaluating buildings was also used in the preparation of this
document (City of San Luis Obispo 1987).
The cultural resource impacts discussed in this report were evaluated using both these
criteria The results are detailed below in the Conclusions and Recommendations section.
RESULTS OF THE INVESTIGATIONS
Historical Research
Records for the area surrounding the Mission, which was settled during the Mission Period,
are almost nonexistent prior to 1850. The first name associated with the 756 Palm Street property
appears on a request for land presented in 1870 that was issued in 1872. The sketch map that
accompanied the request for 0.43 acres illustrates a house on the corner, a fence line and the name
Loreta Garcia. It is possible that she was from the same family as the Garcia's who owned the
large two-story adobe adjacent to the Mission and the former Mission cemetery location on
Chorro Street. That building served as a restaurant and hotel.
The adjoining lot,Number 3 (currently 770 to 776 Palm Street), was petitioned for in 1860
by Antonio Paredes. Within the document is found the following;
"lueda concedida al Sr. Antonio Paredes un solar para casa de diez seis
varas de frente y veinte de fondo, en la espalda de la cocina y tapia de Dona
Francisca Garcia. Se midis en cuatro de Noviembre de 1847.
There are interesting clues within the document. Paredes represents that he erected a
house on the property that he occupied for many years. He therefore requests"All that piece or
parcel of land, fronting on Palm Street, and bounded on one side by the wall of the kitchen erected
by Dona Francisca Garcia, or formerly owned by her......." The reference suggests that Dona
Francisca Garcia preceded Loreta Garcia on the project parcel(Bertrando 1996). Francisca could
also be the same Francisca that was married to one of the sons of Inocente Garcia by his fast wife
whose name was Juan Bautista Inocente Garcia was interviewed just before he died in 1878 by
Thomas Savage for H. H. Bancroft (Bonilla 1974).
In 1850, the census for San Luis Obispo has an entry for Francisca Garcia, who was born in
California, and was 52 years old at the time(Bowman 1972). The 1860 census lists two names for
the Garcia property. Loretta(sic) Garcia is a fifty year old"washerwoman" living with Lucia
Garcia who is a thirty year old"tailoress". Both give their country of origin as Mexico. We do
not know the exact relationship between the Garcia women whose names appear on the two
documents.
-9-
I
- Attachment 5
The 700 block of Palm Street has been occupied since the early Mission Period when the
County was under the control of Spain. First,as housing for the Native Americans and later
followed by the Mexican population that settled there. It is during the American Period, after
1849, that the two houses currently on the project area were built. The house that faces Palm
Street(756) was built before the twentieth century and the small house in back (754) between
1903 and 1926.
756 Palm Street
The Garcia parcel was split in August 8, 1888 creating the current Lot 21 (the project
parcel), which was transferred to Ygnacio Madril. An 1891 Sanborn Fire Insurance Map shows
the house at 756 Palm already constructed;there is also a small "shed" slightly apart from the
house at the rear. It is reasonable to assume that the house was built by Madril between 1888 and
1891. On February 14, 1895 title was transferred from the Madrils to Ferdinando Chiesa. A floor
plan of the house, as currently configured, is included as Figure 4.
This outside "shed" seen in the 1891 map is still present in an 1893 photo, along wither
larger bam structure on the property to the north. One wall of the barn falls along the adjoining
property(756) line. In the northern corner of the project parcel there is a small shed or bam
shown on the 1903 Sanborn Map that later becomes the garage. In this area today are the remains
of a concrete pad (see Figure 6) but there are no tell-tale bolt holes or other evidence of
construction over the concrete. The 1903 Sanbom map shows the original Garcia property divided
into four different lots. The first three lots run north-south on the property parallel to one another.
The fourth"runs east-west behind Lots 21, and 22 with the large bam structure continuing along
the property line to the northeast. There is a large house on each of the first two lots facing Palm
Street, with the smaller Madril house in place. The parcel at 756 Palm shows the same detached
"shed" directly to the rear of the house abutting the property line, its location shown further east
than on the previous map.
A beautiful photo facing north taken sometime between 1903 and 1926 not only shows the
grape arbor at the Mission but also illustrates the property at 756 Palm All the structures depicted
are unchanged from the 1903 Sanbom Fire Insurance Map. In 1927 the title of the property was
transferred for Lots 21 and 22 from Ferdinando Chiesa to Margarita Chiesa This is reflected in
the 1926 Sanborn map,where there is no longer a division line between the two properties. It
shows, on Lot 21, a garage in the northeast comer and a new, smaller house in the center of the
property facing west(754 Palm). A small addition to the back of the 756 Pahn is shown as being
joined to the house,but offset to the east and abutting the property line.
In July 1953 the title was transferred yet again to Rose Serpa for Lots 21 and 22. Under
the permit history filed at the City of San Luis Obispo, it states that in 1955 a permit was garnered
to demolish an outside bathroom. Was this the attached "shed"? At any rate, the shed behind 756
Palm no longer exists. A 1957 map of the property shows that no changes had been made in the
property since the 1926 map.
-10-
Attachment 5
I
I /
I /
I � 1
.9—.Z
I
v \
N
O W
II � I
�
J UO
LQ
O
O
Mui
O , IY
I
i Z d
N I m I
+ + L cc ' 0
+ + � I p m m
z I I
E
I N O
1
of CD 4
ZZ
I
L - - - - -
_ - -�- - I
1 � I
p
u � I
p
u
N
� I uj 1 I r
C
T
OM
J
OI I �jl IY O
i I r
N I 3 pl la I Q
I y
m V.
I I
NI I
I
I I
J glosop!g .OL JO 26p3
N I
Y
Attachment 5
Records from 1950 show that the resident at 756 Palm Street was Barney Minetti(was he
a renter?). The current owner is Ralph Peters. Both houses have been unoccupied for a number
of years.
754 Palm Street - Construction Descrfntion
The small 18 ft x 24 ft one bedroom house at 754 Palm Street (Figure 5) is estimated to
have been built circa 1920. It is covered with various kinds of siding. The front and one side have
21/2"clapboard, the rear is 6 "shiplap and the remaining side is 8" board and batten. Wood
shingles are used as siding under the gable roof on the side with the clapboard.
The single wall construction is with 1" x 12" redwood with a type of fiber board/cardboard
used as wall board lining the interior. This construction forces the window casements to extend
into the rooms. The flooring throughout the house is linoleum. The current owner tiled the
kitchen. The contained space for the refrigerator and the closet are also later additions. The
bathroom toilet is a recent replacement.
There are three doors within the house. The closet door and the door between the living
room and bedroom are both.30" wide and 78" high with five recessed panels on each. The
bathroom door also has five panels but it is T wide and 71 ''/s"high. The entrance door is 32" wide
and has two panels below six panes of glass.
Five windows are 2'x T double sash with two more smaller windows of a different type
that are recent additions in the kitchen and bath. The porch,which extends on to the adjacent
property, has new rails and slats. The two posts, however, appear to be original- Some of the
fascia has been replaced and the wainscoting in the board and batten style along the foundation is
also a recent addition. There is a low board retaining wall, put in by the current owner,along two
sides to control drainage and keep the dirt off the sides of the house.
Foundation posts sit on redwood siding that is in a degraded condition;some of the posts
have been replaced. The house is estimated to have been constructed in the early 1920s,perhaps
as living quarters for Chiesa's hired help.
.752 Palm Street
The Chiesa residence on Lot 22 is certainly the building with the greatest potential for
significance. From its construction in 1895 until 1953 it was the Chiesa family home. Chiesa was
greatly involved in the development and early growth of the City of San Luis Obispo. A
compilation of information on the Chiesa family may be found in Exhibit A.
-12-
Attachment 5
1
I '
:
I
i i 1
I
° I i
3
i > I
1 i
I `
� I
I c I
' � I
a [d — — — -- - - - - - - - -
1 ,
o m
I
I
I
I I a I I
I I I
I �
1
ai I II z
= I
i
I I + + I !i e�
E Q � a
o
Q m
I I w o I m m
0
I I
J
= I 1
I
3
1 I
1 I E
1 iy
N / I
I I Ie
o I a
U L
I I i 8
W i
H v,
i I p
I I i m
I
v I I i
I J i
n I I I
� I
� I a
a o .
1 1 2
I
I
I 1 j
Attachment 5
Subsurface Archaeological Investigations
Detailed laboratory analysis of the artifacts and ecofacts recovered is currently underway.
Preliminary examination of the materials recovered shows similarity to the types of items found in
recent archaeological excavation and monitoring investigations in the central parts of San Luis
Obispo (Bertrando and Bertrando 1997, 1998; Conway 1996;Nettles 1999; Singer 2000; Singer
and Atwood 1990;). Profile drawings for the test trenches and the primary catalog of artifacts
recovered are included as Exhibit B and Exhibit C.
Trench I
Excavation of Trench 1 began on January 16, 2001 (Figure 6). The trench was located so
as to be as close as possible to the building at 754 Palm,and yet avoid the underground electrical
conduit to that house. At about 50 cm below the surface,the primary electric conduit servicing
754 Palm Street was encountered, running diagonally running across the center of the trench. The
location of the conduit had been erroneously thought to be farther to the east. The trench was
discontinued at 50 cm below surface, since substantial subsurface disturbance had resulted as a
result of trenching for the conduit in the 1970s.
Trench 2
Trench 2 was placed between the two houses,oriented in an east-west direction(Figure 6).
The dark brown silty clay contained: small marine shell fragments; saw-cut mammal bone; metal
items, including bolts, screws, wire and square-cut nails;bottle glass, white"ironware" and
patterned ceramic fragments. Also noted throughout were small flecks of charcoal or carbon.
The most common artifact recovered from this trench was fragmentary roof tiles, tejas,
which probably date to the Mission era. There was a long history of the re-use of roof tiles from
the Mission around the neighborhood This trench contained the largest amount of these tiles found
during the testing. A concentration of tejas fragments is apparent in the sidewall profile at about
65 cm. (see Exhibit B). At 65-80 cm below surface there was also a slightly higher density of
shell. The species represent major food species: Pismo clam(Tivela stultorum), mussel(Mytilus
californianus?), Little-neck clam(Protothaca stamina),black turban(Tegula funebralis), and
abalone(Haliotis spp.)
As the trench neared one meter in depth, the matrix became almost pure clay. In the last
level excavated (80-100 cm),the amount of cultural materials-recovered decreased dramatically,
but roof tiles,white earthenware, large mammal bone, and sparse marine shell were still found.
-14-
tor
10' S I d e w a I k : 14
F I'
Attachment 5
o�m C
ON
ro>m
oNn N �p2: /V• ��� ; I I
5 i
a• � `" is t' � " I
a
II
nom
G W y n o
u _ °-
z
°s li I ♦
X
i 8 ��' /o• '� IL
OIL
3 IIS to tl �I I g -
�
I '
I I
' � it •� � ��. I % o
i R
1453•38.00'E 30'
1 ♦ ♦
cR
b P p
Attachment 5
Trench 3
Trench 3 was placed where the new construction is planned and where the deepest grading
will take place (Figure 6). The top strata was a light brown, obviously imported, "road base" of
gravel and recent historic materials(wire nails,porcelain,etc.). Beneath that was a stratum of
dense roots from the Washington Palm and the Brazilian Pepper trees. Cultural materials
recovered were similar in content to those found in the other trenches, (primarily marine shell,
saw-cut mammal bone, tejas, and metal, glass and ceramic fragments), but in considerably lesser
quantities. The shell species represented were also less diverse than in Trenches 2 and 4: Pismo
clam and mussel, with very small amounts of little neck clam, black abalone and black turban.
Excavation continued to a depth of 80 cm. Near the floor of this trench at about 70 cm, a large
stone(18 cm long) was encountered. Because it was anomalous in the surrounding matrix,the
possibility that this might be part of a buried rock feature was investigated
Rock Alignment
After discovery of the large rock in Trench 3, another trench was opened perpendicular to
Trench 3 (Probe Trench#2 on Figure 6) in order to establish the suspected presence of a buried
linear rock feature. The trench was excavated parallel to where it was assumed that the rock
feature would be located if it was indeed a foundation. Once it was excavated to the desired depth,
we probed at an angle at the base of the trench and located a linear formation of rocks parallel to
the trench. The feature lies about 75 cm below the present surface. Based on our probes,
performed diagonally, the feature is approximately 33 cn-L wide and extends for about 70 cm. Soil
from this trench was not screened,,although each bucket-full was given a cursory examination. No
significant artifacts were recovered from this trench, nor was evidence of a distinct cultural
deposit, such as a trash pit, seen in the trench profile. This alignment probably represents some
type of foundation for an outbuilding, although further exploratory excavations would be required
to fiilly demonstrate that this is the case.
Trench 4
Trench 4 was excavated adjacent to the north wall of the rear house, oriented in a north-
south direction. The surface soil was a mulch layer that had been laid down within the last two
years by Mr. Campbell. At a depth of 25-30 cm below surface a small lens of charcoal was seen in
the in the west wall. This proved to consist primarily of charred wood(cut lumber), but upon
closer examination a burned leather shoe heel was also discovered. This charcoal lens appears to
be a small, discrete trash burning deposit dating from the mid to late 20'century. The profile of
this trench is shown in Exhibit B.
The array of ecofactual and artifactual materials found in this trench is similar to those
found in Trench 2. Fewer tejas were recovered than from Trench 2, but still totaled 2,493 g from
four levels. The marine shell assemblage is similar to that of Trench 2. However, the 60-80 cm
-16-
Attachment 5
level also included small amounts of barnacle, oyster (Ostrea lurida)and Olivella(Olivella
biplicata).
The trench was discontinued at 80 cm. The clay soil was saturated due to the proximity of
the water table, and nearly impossible to screen. A pocket of dark black clay soil was seen in the
north corner at the bottom of the west wall of the trench. The dark color was probably due to
carbon staining, although no distinct fragments of charcoal could be seen in the matrix. A soil
sample was taken from this lens, but further analysis has not yet been performed. The only
evidence of cultural material seen in this lens was a small piece of burned (mammal?) bone.
Rock Wall Foundation
While clearing soil and debris along the eastern boundary of the property,Brian Campbell
uncovered an alignment of rocks. This feature was further exposed and was determined to be a
segment of a rock wall foundation approximately three meters long. Probing by trowel; shovel,
and finally backhoe (Figure 6,Probe Trench#1) along the same axis failed to identify any further
remnants. The southern portion of a wall on this,property line was removed for construction of a
new concrete block retaining wall about six or seven years ago (Brian Campbell,personal
communication). At that time, the rocks were removed and placedina pile along the northern
boundary of the property.
Rock "Pile"
A short probe trench was placed between the palm tree and the Brazilian Pepper tree. At
that location an abrupt change in elevation indicated that there might be a buried cultural feature,
such as a wall segment. The trench was placed perpendicular to the berm, with the hope that this
would expose an intact cross-section. On close examination, this feature proved to be more of a
rock pile, rather than a rock wall. River cobbles, four kinds of common red brick, and dressed
granite stones are present, with no apparent order. All the stones and bricks are now covered by
soil and plant detritus and held together in place by tree roots. Based on the apparent age of the
trees, this rock pile may date to the 1930s, and,may have functioned as a crude retaining wall.
This feature appears as"rocks"on Figure 5.
CONCLUSIONS/RECOMMENDATIONS
754 Palm Street:
This building does not appear to meet any of the criteria under Section 15064.5 (a) of the
CEQA Guidelines that would qualify it as"historically significant". It is also not listed in the City
of San Luis Obispo Historical Preservation Guidelines as a contributing property within an historic
district. No further action regarding the structure is recommended prior to the proposed removal.
-17-
Attachment 5
756 Palm Street:
This project was originally submitted to the City of San Luis Obispo in 2000 as a
proposed addition to an existing historical structure. In March 2001,the client withdrew the
proposal for the addition and is at this time requesting removal of the c. 1890 building.
The facade of this building remains much as pictured in early photographs,although the
interior has undergone substantial renovation under the current ownership. This small house is on
the City's list of contributing properties within an historic district. CEQA Guidelines may also
apply under the underlined portions of criterion c):
Embodied the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or
method of construction, or represent the work of an important creative individual,
or possess high artistic values;
Guidelines for the Historical Preservation Program for the City of San Luis Obispo contain
a section on demolishing historic buildings. The following paragraph is from that document:
The demolition of a Historical Resource is the least favored option and
should be done only when(1) the condition of the building poses a threat to the
health, safety or welfare of community residents or people living or working on or
near the site, or(2) the project sponsor demonstrates that it is financially infeasible
to rehabilitate the structure or preserve the historic nature of the site.
The City"promotes the long-term maintenance and restoration of the designated Historical
Resources and buildings in historic Districts....and would like to work with property owners to
explore alternatives to demolition..."
There is no doubt that the facade with porch evokes an earlier and simpler time in the
history of San Luis Obispo. Small vernacular houses of this type were and are found tucked
behind the Mission San Luis de Tolosa. They replaced the adobes that previously provided the
housing and workshops of the mission. Often they were built and occupied by a Spanish speaking
ethnic population interested in maintaining a close relationship to their church, sometimes for their
own protection. The Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps did not fully cover the area until into the
1900s, although old records have shown it was the earliest area in the City of San Luis Obispo to
remaining be inhabited. A few examples of this type of housing can still be found behind the
mission.
Archaeological Resources
Three rock"features" were identified, only one of which may be positively identified at
this time as p=osefully constructed. The rock wall segment along the east edge of the property
appears to date to the Mission Period, and may be the foundation for a boundary wall of that
-18-
I-J14
J
Attachment 5
period. Discussion of the structure of these walls is contained in a report on the Mission Orchard
wall found at 626 Broad Street (Hoover 1991;Bertrando 1998). At that location, historical
research, the distribution of artifacts, and the presence of adobe"melt" in the soil context
confirmed the identity of a rock feature as a Mission Period garden wall. At the Palm Street
location, none of that evidence is present. A number of tejas fragments and a square nail were
found nearby, but so was red brick fragments and a variety of relatively"modern", that is post-
WWII, material remains. Thus, at this point we can only say that the style of construction is very
similar to that of other walls dating to the Mission Period. This feature by itself does not meet the
criteria for a"significant"historic resource, since it is but a small fragment, and better examples of
the genre exist nearby. However, it should be preserved in place,if possible, as part of the story of
this little piece of San Luis Obispo history.
The integrity of the archaeological deposit on this property varies with location, but
historic and possibly prehistoric cultural materials appear to be present throughout. Additional
features may be present. If the construction proceeds as planned, the following actions are
recommended for mitigation of potential impacts to the archaeological resources:
1) Archaeological monitoring during removal of the concrete pad in the northern portion of
the property near the palm tree(see Figure 5).
2) Archaeological monitoring during demolition of the house at 754 Palm Street, if such is
approved.
3) Excavation of an exploratory backhoe trench across the"footprint" of the(754) building.
This is the most likely area in which to find an intact feature such as a privy, if such still
exists, on the property. If a feature is located by means of the exploratory trench,the
feature area should be excavated as part of a 1 x I meter(minimum) controlled excavation
unit.
4) Architectural documentation of the house at 756 Palm Street. The level of documentation
that.should be undertaken is dependent on the ultimate disposition of the building.
5) Archaeological monitoring during removal of the house at 756 Palm Street, if such removal
is approved.
6) Excavation of exploratory backhoe trench across the"footprint"of the(754) building.
This is the area where we would expect to find the best evidence of Mission-era residential
artifacts. If features, including but not limited to floors, hearths,areas of roof tile
deposition, are located by means of the exploratory trench, the immediate area should be
excavated as part of a 1 x 1 meter(minimum) controlled excavation unit.
-19-
l-�7
Attachment 5
7) Excavation of a 1 x 1 meter controlled excavation unit adjacent to the location of Trench 2.
The layer of marine shell food debris and concentration of tejas suggest a"living surface
that should be further investigated.
8) Grading and trenching for the project should be carefully monitored by an archaeologist. If
features (trash pit, privy, hearth), or substantial concentrations of cultural materials are
found during the construction excavation,the archaeologist will evaluate the significance of
the materials and follow the procedures outlined in Section 4.60 of the City of San Luis
Obispo ARPG.
_20_
Attachment 5
ADDENDUM
To the Report: Historical and Subsurface Archaeological Investigations at 754 and 756 Palm
Street. San Luis Obispo, California.Being a Part of CA-SLO-64/H dated May 7, 2001.
See CONCLUSIONS/RECOMMENDATIONS,Page 18
756 Palm Street- Section amended as follows:
This property was originally submitted to the City of San Luis Obispo in 2000 for a
proposed addition to an existing historical structure. After the first of the year,the client
withdrew the original proposal and is at this time requesting the removal of the c. 1890 house.
The facade of this building remains much as pictured in early photographs, although
some of the porch structure has been replaced by the current owner in an effort to improve the
appearance of the building_ The interior has undergone substantial renovation. This small house .
is on the City's list of contributing properties within the Downtown Historic District as is the
adjacent Chiesa House at 748 Palm Street. The house at 756 Palm Street does not compare in
historical significance to the Mandershied House at the corner of Palm and Broad Streets. The
Mandershied House is on the City of San Luis Obispo's Master List of Historic Properties as
being potentially eligible for the National Register.
CEQA Guidelines may apply under the underlined portions of criterion c):
Embodied the distinctive characteristics of a b=. pgriodregion, or
method of construction, or represent the work of an important creative individual,
or possess high artistic values;
There is no doubt that the facade with porch evokes an earlier and simpler time in the
history of San Luis Obispo. Small vernacular houses of this type were and are found tucked
behind the Mission San Luis de Tolosa. They replaced the adobes that previously formed the
housing and workshops of the Mission. Often they were built and occupied by a Spanish
speaking ethnic population interested in maintaining a close relationship to their church,
sometimes for their own protection. The Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps did not fully cover the
area until into the 1900s, although old records have shown it was the earliest area in the City of
San Luis Obispo to be inhabited. A few remaining examples of this type of housing can still be
found behind the mission.
Attachment 5
' 1
Phase .I Cultural Resources Inventory at
754 and 756 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California
Prepared for
Brian Campbell
Campbell Construction
1075 San Adrian Street
San Luis.Obispo,CA 93405
Prepared by
Nancy Farrell
and
Belly Bertrando
Cultural Resource Management Services
813 Paso Robles Street
Paso Robles,California 93446
CRM5- August 19, 2000
00000
Attachment 5
INTRODUCTION
This report describes a Phase 1 cultural resource investigation of a residential lot
[APN 002-413-018]on Palm Street in the City of San Luis Obispo,California. The study
area is located in the oldest part of the City of San Obispo, across the street from the
Mission San Luis Obispo de Tolosa (Figure,Figure 2). Substantial renovation and
additions to one existing residence (756 Palm Street) and removal of another residence
(754 Palm Street), are projects planned for the property (Figure 3). In accordance with
the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA) and the City of
San Luis Obispo, an archaeological literature and records search,historic archives
search and field inventory of the proposed project area was conducted. The purpose of
the investigation was to identify and evaluate any prehistoric or historic archaeological
remains, or historic structures, that would be impacted by the proposed construction
activities.
NATURAL HISTORY OF THE PROJECT AREA
The City of San Luis Obispo lies within a biologically diverse region and is
surrounded by mountains, rolling hills, and broad valleys. The dominant geologic The
oldest parts of the city are located on the flood plain of San Luis Creek and its two
major tributaries,Brizzolara Creek and Stenner Creek. The soils underlying the city are
primarily recent(Holocene) alluvial deposits of gravel, sand,clay, and silt derived
from the surrounding uplands composed primarily of the Franciscan formation. A
variety of minerals and rock types occurring in this melange were utilized by Native
Americans as raw materials for tools and ornaments, especially: chert, sandstone,
basalt, shale and serpentine.
A series of distinctive Oligocene/Early Miocene volcanic plugs, known as the
Morros, dominate the landscape from Morro Bay southwest, through the city, to Edna
Valley (Chipping 1987). The dacite that composes these plugs was used to fashion a
variety of grinding tools by the original inhabitants of the region(Roper et.al..1996).
Historically, it has been used throughout the City as a building material.
The native vegetation communities in the surrounding region comprise a mosaic
of grassland, oak woodland,chaparral, and riparian habitats. Native annual and
perennial grasses, herbaceous plants, shrubs, and trees provided important.food
resources prehistorically, including acorns, bulbs,berries, greens, and a wide variety of
edible seeds. Many plants were also used for, medicine, shelter,clothing,containers,
and tools.
The immediate vicinity of the project area has been subject to a good deal of
-1-
S�
Attachment 5
Poodro
v `
Go.\ o.asm
!� � SSa/deFsj
Jen O�x
_ \\ zz
11 Cwo
icanok UPo
Cwan. \eZae R..v e" y .
Rod
J m Cwwkv
old}�bSod
per. 5L dlbwad
LUM Cocoa
till scram ` 114,
i
2�I. Ye pbe
/ Hyll� L�d000shdftr:��e. \ `z
Gdwa moo,
701 I sudsoo roa rwnm
SWam Fppl y(
Owtd Jxt SMKn IIN Uuh[
T7—
/EdnT �gn�6e/�w�Y sm al ow eew.�ili�wlu
Sn ! fFtm�\ BmiJer Cd \
\` Widodow ledhet lb YmM6p�9R+
but 6Jt�d7_�F �gtemw6c�� �lNlk
Frog
iBoi�Inp�oremMMm f
eoon Mfoh / �_ y�S a Retl9Roun
air -CAOMrL Ph.& efos OWNIP T Uw /
S F faeb 6 Carol
Iap Onp9 ea/Sen
y�eBeo Nart lm OMept/�'"+�e
tanelas F�Yeea� � �fAEers \ F�Web Y'
\
Toad,jdtC-
Q
_ \\�dy J /Rudsoe K
/
tod� /Bryrd. � A�-- ��w.cuYrme\
Fidow=��
l, QtwdSce,c010.rod
R
Stec WOCONN, r.r a . ddsS ,
w.Sod,
Ika�oue rrarbp Race
lue a�urn 'tceetn++r ` 9eednl�m vti .
` y Stn LAINNttnY peuMp�mrt Cspmelm
T
y\/\ \• @sakwaF
ice. n \ NMS, \`
21
Figure 1: Location Map
-2-
r-sa
360 .\_ �-�, /,r0 •. .el'+� ./,, „ / C. !`�I
Co/l at _\-v\��j_ `3,F.t I <.r z,e-``-�-4tt4��S`!✓`
1 n � 11`
:•tr•Oo / �•'
a \ I _.-�I ', -� •rod r .�` n �-� a+ x � .' ,
-`� � ;_r.a r 'n C` .. � ��✓r I�(11� (Nll� \ I. 1 rl� i111 �-li
{1111'/JV> ••\ 111 i ` Cr` ri i, I 1))� �..
'Br I ♦� � e I '�a__e- .+%�'/ i `I. j1` l �\ $Tf 1?tJ•l\\ ,' I 1 (Jr ' , !,! ..I��l/i\��
RM'
7� i 333'V , t• �, r r I ! `1� 00.�✓ [_-
1!\� Well p `Ap\� Rrxlro Grout .">— 1 s, ``\1•-,
J07 p lM ,TIU I" r C m
,I• ,;rfl �); P:.' ' r •It p �' \ 1 1 \ ` �. j 11 I .r1 OrOU7(
)1i iiu! n
-�`' 6 9 CAI IF ItNIA i�1 r,ll IP �n
Ld1 _m 2 � �� ""�li� � •� , ti'I•r1'1L
iOR,pwei , at � \ } 'I1 �'x '/ 6�=n 1\ ./'-\•�
_ � �Y �\� r �a p\•�1 \r�� /. , U� � /:_, nii "rl - \r llr 1 t`\ � \,•
ISY'1�
O o-�
• .2.i
278 "--•o .'Teat - t \ ,'•e.� U,k; •r:' t I \l-_- 1 1 , , "i
Proset k r ��I 1
J � hl 1 -Tw. I` �I (�11 i_-�� '-•.I �` .c t_ 1 L� ��rl � / �. _ �•' na.-i
\ My1A100' '� Op in �J lY\ \ 'L. Yhc•oca S� I \ rr_�_ - ^ \
�/ `J9
c trtKnt
L_y �'- `U (`'`• yTs'a.�.. TREO C � 3T� A -� � 'l r� j �. t �.4Cw�•
tAMO OR' '•\ ��� � - 1.-.. O \ - 2 I. r I j0�ytllt L.
" ' \ •' � ,�. $ rra 9T8� :�k ���� _�L `+ ' I In � .tom`.
,N.
l. ✓hi-
,• f w • ter" B 'a n'1a Ros A M' �rrfP41 - �. -S 1 1
„� 1 _� �es,
N,
V
•; 1t
Wafer
c > ,
y <
1 1JJ
T>
Rad
N", '$ hot : 4 ��, M �. y• - �..
rN"'l\
VV
, •_ �d \ ICtM 25:
7P�J2 11 U1S rS O`,p.0
\IlZ7
••-�N,,1. / I I �1 II f : - y S i1/ � I 1'. � I \ . ♦ P•
\ W'"-� J. ��' laer ` • `T•. :n Lmal.,til�t.4 I / / b
1 1 7
%`\1
-Hos 4. ( 1.
I q .Iyac use 23 : 46 P .�
r - �lV� bort • I\ °o ,NT r
2 '11
�� u•A i I gr ae 5r,�,. •sl.\r_bp \ l ✓.A1
< � •� ` 1 I :,hi'II /I .M�•i•• \1� • .� `r 1 GOO r P, '1
`\` �laitund i %/'r�P 4rle is rw r '\ ��\. `WW1 t ..%% d. � \ ! •�
WIN "L
)+ , /�� - w lorne \ � !•` la, �7?'� .•'r •.r.`�w T l• SIJ1 t�• 1
1soy17Har - -09
`,.: 11
``56,9
�;: , i M1Md Irv.. •\.• :ch 1 -41
Zv .!•>•• )..e,
'fJ /
OP'0 �. .�;.��� II�yAIr�'�rY���- 1 Ild �Il: �� ... +•S� -� ' /�-�-�'3•�J 4`/�t�ni\` /�!
p�.� v .ii a � / � so,�rN ' ■q:- I bF
Figure 2: Vicinity Map, USGS 7.5' San Luis Obispo CA Quadrangle
-3-
—s3
Attachment 5
ht U d
e� N
CQ Y
E y 0 tv
N
d lin PI
o rant
_J m O N
fn m 4J
1 O � o u
y M m
QQ
,(A y, � C m'n
a O
_ E'n e Jm
C3 �c%;0
(�
to
V)
i l s
Z _
zell ,.
Figure 3: Project Plans,756 Palm Street,San Luis Obispo
-4-
1-S�
Attachment 5
disturbance. The vegetation on the project parcel consists primarily of remnants of
ornamental plantings and lawn. Vestiges of native vegetation are present in vacant lots
in the area.
CULTURAL BACKGROUND
Archaeological evidence indicates that coastal San Luis Obispo County has been
occupied for at least 9,000-10,000 years, as indicated by radiocarbon dates from
excavations conducted at Diablo Canyon (Greenwood 1972) and Edna Valley
(Fitzgerald eta1.1998). At the time of European contact,the San Luis Obispo region
was occupied by speakers of Obispeno, a dialect of the Chumash language. The
Chumash inhabited coastal and inland regions between Malibu and the vicinity of San
Simeon (Kroeber 1925;Gibson 1982b); the Obispeno were the northernmost of this
group, occupying the area from Nipomo north.
Ethnographic evidence shows that the Northern Chumash (such as San luis
Obispo) differed somewhat in social structure and customs from the Southern
Chumash (such as in Santa Barbara),approximating more closely the practices of their
Salinan neighbors to the north. The Southern Chumash were noted for large
community organizations with dense populations and elaborate social and political
structures. In contrast, the Northern Chumash and Salinan communities were
characterized as consisting of small and widely scattered populations that did not
exhibit the same intensity of structuring of social and political organization as seen in
the more southerly groups.
Early historic observations reported that the local inhabitants of San Luis Obispo
and the surrounding area maintained a generalized hunting, gathering, and fishing
economy,shared in common with most areas of California at the time of Spanish
contact(for reviews,see Brown 1967; Geiger and Meighan 1976, King 1991; Wagner
1924). Stone,bone, wood, plant fibers; and shell provided the materials for the
production of tools, containers,clothing, and houses. Plant foods such as seeds, nuts,
berries, bulbs, seaweed and a variety of leafy greens were important in the diet
Acorns in particular provided a nutritious, stable and storable source of protein and
carbohydrates. Nuts and seeds were processed with a set of groundstone tools
commonly found in the material culture assemblages of Californian groups.
Procurement of terrestrial animals and birds was accomplished with a variety of
techniques, including the bow and arrow, traps, and snares. Fish, shellfish, and marine
mammals, taken from estuaries,rocky shores, and nearshore areas, were common food
sources on the coast and to some extent inland.
-5-
^S.S
Attachment 5
There are few historic accounts of the Obispeno Chumash,as compared to the
information available for the Chumash living on the Santa Barbara coast European
contact in the San Luis Obispo region began with the visit of Pedro de Unamuno to
Morro Bay in 1587. Los Osos, originally La Canada de Los Osos, was named by the
men of Gaspar de Portola's land expedition, which passed through the area on
September 7, 1769 (Squibb 1984). Lt. Pedro Fages and his soldiers returned to the
valley 1772 for the"Great Grizzly Bear Hunt" which proved badly needed food for the
settlers at the newly founded Monterey Presidio (Sullivan 1995:1). No large villages,
such as those seen along the Santa Barbara channel, were reported by early travelers.
Greenwood (1978: 521) suggests that the area may have once been populous, but was
already declining by the time the Europeans arrived. This suggestion has yet to be
demonstrated archaeologically.
The success of the grizzly.bear expedition.led to the first Spanish settlement in
the region, beginning with the founding of Mission San Luis Obispo de Tolosa in 1772
(Hall-Patton 1994: 83). As elsewhere, induction into the missions had a devastating
effect on the local inhabitants, requiring them to live and work at the mission and
abandon their former lifeways. As early as 1803, the Mission's agricultural commune
system had absorbed the local inhabitants of Morro Bay and their neighbors on the
coast from Cayucos to Pismo Beach and inland beyond. By the time the missions were
secularized in 1834, the Chumash population had been decimated by disease and
disintegration of their social structure..
The time of greatest growth and prosperity for the Mission San Luis Obispo was
between 1790 and 1810 (Kocher 1972). Annual reports filed by the Mission Fathers give
some information on the growth and construction of the mission complex.
Unfortunately, reports are missing for the first twenty-five years. As a self sustained
community, the mission.complex developed the land well beyond the quadrangle that
exists today. Nearby were reservoirs, tanning vats,mills, and adobe housing and
storage buildings and workshops. Areas surrounded by rock walls contained
vegetables, orchards and vineyards with grain fields and livestock nearby.
The mass of Indians were lodged in rows of small houses of one story,
situated near the north, east and west sides of the main building. They were built
of adobe-a large sun-dried brick-as were likewise the main mission buildings,
except the north and west walls, which were of stone. The roofs were covered with
tiles, and the walls whitewashed. (Angel 1883).
By 1830, the results of an earthquake left much of the mission in ruins. This was
compounded by the weakening condition of the Native work force as well, the result of
illness and deaths among the neophytes. In Fr. Gil's annual reports for this period
-6-
i \
Attachment 5
much is said of the difficulty in repairing the buildings with a weakened and declining
work force. In August of 1834, Governor Figueroa and his government adopted the
Secularization Act, essentially amounting to the confiscation of mission lands in
California. In 1835, the Mission properties were inventoried and valued at$6,858.00
(Engelhardt 1963).
Eugene Duflot de Mofras, visiting San Luis Obispo in 1841, observed that there
were barely one hundred Indians remaining and the remaining Franciscan was living
"in abject poverty." Mofras goes on to say, "The venerable Father distributes what little
is sent to him among the few Indian children who still live with their families in the
ruins near the Mission' (Wilbur 1937).
The land between Stenner and Garden Creeks, Palm Street and Santa Rosa Street
was an early part of the development of the City of San Luis Obispo. Broad Street
provided access to the Edna Valley. The land behind the Mission was configured into
irregular shaped lots and was settled by mostly settlers from Mexico and remnants of
the Indian population. The settlers had either been part of the mission system or had
arrived with the influx of people from Sonora, Mexico for the gold rush. It wasn't until
1872 that the land these families had occupied for many years was petitioned for and
granted by the City of San Luis Obispo. Fences that had been erected between the old
property lines had to be readjusted during the incorporation of the town to allow for
the plotting of blocks and street alignments (E. Bertrando and B. Bertrando 1998).
The group of mostly adobe buildings located in back of the Mission became
known as El Barrio del Tigre. An Edward Vischer sketch completed during the 1860s
illustrates the look of the project area at that time (Nicholson 1972). Eventually, the
adobes were replaced with wooden frame houses. The area has continued as a
residential area until the present.
METHODS
A search of maps and records was undertaken at the Central Coastal Information
Center, UCSB, which provides archaeological site data for San Luis Obispo County
under agreement with the California Office of Historic Preservation.
Additional archival research was conducted at the City of San Luis Obispo Planning
Department, the San Luis Obispo County Historical Society archives, and at the library
of Bertrando & Bertrando Research Consultants.
Fieldwork was conducted by Nancy Farrell and Betsy Bertrando on July 28,
2000. About one-half of the soil surface of the property was obscured by buildings,
vegetation, or building debris. The remainder of the parcel was closely examined, as
were the exteriors of the two extant buildings.
=7-
Dy
Attachment 5
PREVIOUS CULTURAL RESOURCE INVESTIGATIONS IN THE AREA
Forty cultural resource investigations have been completed within one mile of
the project area. Most of these have been Phase I surface surveys, some are historical
architectural studies, and some were archaeological monitoring of construction projects.
A total of twelve archaeological sites are recorded within the same diameter. Few
controlled archaeological investigations have been conducted in the area; the two major
excavations have been at site SLO-1419H, east of our project area on Palm Street, in the
heart of the old "Chinatown' district(Conway 1995;Parker, pers.comm, 2000). Other
important historical sites have been found during monitoring of construction for civic
infrastructure: roads, sewer systems, bridges, etc. The areas around the Mission and
along San Luis Obispo Creek appear to be especially sensitive. (Bertrando 1994a, 1994b,
1995; Singer et.a1., 1990, 1993; Price 1999).
The entire parcel was found to he adjacent to, or within, the recorded boundaries
of a large historical archaeological site,CA-SLO-64. The boundaries of this site have
never been well defined, since the site comprises the Mission complex and Mission-era
associated materials. Site SLO-64 H was recorded in 1950 by Arnold Pilling. He
included the mission grounds in the original record. On subsequent visits, he made
surface collections on several of the surrounding lots. In 1952, he collected historic
materials, "including milk glass" on"the surface of a vacant lot on the north or
northeast corner of Palm and Broad streets" (Pilling 1952). Several small archaeological
and historical archival studies have investigated various parts of the site (Brock,J and
R. Wall, 1986;Sawyer, 1986; Conway, 1996; Bertrando and Bertrando, 1998b, 1999;
Bertrando etal. 1908; Parker, 1999). It is unlikely that the actual"boundaries of the site
will ever be determined, due to the sparse records from the early mission period and
the urban nature of the neighborhood.
RESULTS OF THE INVESTIGATIONS
Archival Research
Records for the area surrounding the Mission, which was settled during the
Mission Period, do not exist prior to 1850. The first name associated with the 756 Palm
Street property appears on a request for land presented in 1870 that was issued in 1872.
The sketch map that accompanied the request for 0.43 acres illustrates a house on the
corner, a fence line and the name, Loreta Garcia. It is possible that she was from the
same family as the Garcia's who owned the large two-story adobe adjacent to the
Mission between the former Mission cemetery location on Chorro Street. That building
served as a restaurant and hotel.
The adjoining lot, Number 3 (currently 770 to 776 Palm Street),was petitioned
-8-
Attachment 5
for in 1860 by Antonio Paredes. Within the document is found the following;
"Iueda concedida al Sr. Antonio Paredes un solar para Casa de diez seis
varas de frente y veinte de fondo, en la espalda de la cocina y tapia de Dona
Francisca Garcia. Se midis en cuatro de Noviembre de 1847."
There are interesting clues within the document, Paredes represents that he
erected a house on the property that he occupied for many years. He therefore requests
"All that piece or parcel of land, fronting on Palm Street, and bounded on one side by
the wall of the kitchen erected by Dona Francisca Garcia, or formerly owned by
her......." The reference suggests that Dona Francisca Garcia preceded Loreta Garcia on
the project parcel (Bertrando 1996). Francisca could also be the same Francisca that was
married to one of the sons of Inocente Garcia by his first wife whose name was Juan
Bautista. Inocente Garcia was interviewed just before he died in 1878 by Thomas
Savage for H. H. Bancroft(Bonilla 1974).
In 1850, the census for San Luis Obispo has an entry for Francisca Garcia, who
was born in California,and was 52 years old at the time (Bowman 1972).The 1860
census lists two names for the Garcia property. Loretta (sic) Garcia is a fifty year old
"washerwoman" living with Lucia Garcia who is a thirty year old "tailorese. Both
give their country of origin as Mexico. We do not know the exact relationship between
the Garcia women whose names appear on the two documents.
The 700 block of Palm Street has been occupied since the early Mission Period
when the County was under the control of Spain. First, as housing for the Native
Americans and later followed by the Mexican population that settled there. It is during
the American Period, after 1849, that the current two houses in the project area were
built The larger house that faces Palm Street(756) was built before the twentieth
century and the small house in back (754) between 1903 and 1926.
There is an error in the City of San Luis Obispo Planning Department file on 756
Palm Street Contained in this file is a note with the information that is-included on an
original building permit archived at Cal Poly. It states that in 1908 a building permit
was made out to M.S. Fredericks for a residence 28 ft x 42 ft to be built by J. Maino &
Sons. This note should be applied to 770 Palm Street file as it does not apply to 756
Palm Street. The building permit does not correspond to the information that is
recorded on the Sanborn Fire Insurance Map for the property on 756 Palm Street The
configuration shown on the 1903 Sanborn Fire Insurance Map for the parcel illustrates
the house currently facing the street at 756 Palm Street which predates the 1908
building permit information. The small house in back (754) does not appear on the
Insurance Map until after 1903 and before 1926. It is also smaller than 28 ft x 42 ft. and
is constructed of different siding material on each exterior wall of the house. As the
result of the information being in the wrong folder, the error is repeated in the Land Use
Information document under Historic/Archaeological Information (HRS fact 1908-M.
-9-
i-s9
- Attachment 5
Fredericks) for the year the house at 756 Palm Street was constructed. A City Directory
listing for 770 Palm Street in 1928 gives the resident as Marie Frederick which is
probably accurate and explains the difference between the Planning Department file
and the Sanborn Map. The house built for Frederick is illustrated as being 28 ft x 42 ft
and was built after 1903 to replace an earlier house on the property at 770 Palm Street,
not 756 Palm Street.
On the north corner of the project parcel there is a small shed or barn shown on
the 1903 Sanborn Map that later becomes the garage_ Coverage for the parcel does not
exist on the Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps prior to 1903. It is not unusual for there to be
no coverage in areas that are old, rundown,residential only, and/or ethnic (no English
speakers) as a fire insurance company would be unlikely to have business in those
areas. Records show the resident at 756 Palm Street in 1950 was Barney Minetti. The
current owner is Ralph Peters but both houses are currently unoccupied.
Field Inspection
We were accompanied during the surface inspection by Brian Campbell, the
project architect, who provided information on the history of the parcel during the last
decade. About six-seven years ago, a retaining wall and walkway was constructed
along the east side of the property. Part of a stone wall that may date to the mission
period was uncovered during that work. Material that had been excavated from the
east side of the front house (756) during this work was piled at the rear of the parcel;
in this pile was found: fragments of Mission-period roof tiles (ladrillos), Pismo clam
fragments, saw-cut mammal bone, and common brick. Between the buildings at 756
and 754, fragments of mission-period tile, Pismo clam, and white ironstone were found
on the surface. Portions of what appears to be a stone wall along the rear of the
property were examined. Mr. Campbell thinks that the stones were deposited there
during the construction of the eastern retaining wall, but this needs to be verified.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The property is a portion of site SLO-64, the "Mission site'. This poorly defined
site includes the current Mission grounds and the area immediately surrounding it.
There is a high probability that the proposed construction activities will expose
additional historic archaeological materials and possibly features related to the period
of early Mission occupation. Features such as privies (outhouse), dating to the late 19'h
century are also most likely present. Privies are an important source of information for
documenting and interpreting the material culture of a community (Wheeler 2000).
With the exception of such features that were excavated during the Palm Street Parking
Garage project, few of these types of features have been investigated in this county.
We recommend the following actions for Phase II investigations:
-10-
Attachment 5
1) The residence at 754 Palm Street is scheduled for removal under the current
plan. Examples of early 20'century vernacular architecture such as this are rapidly
disappearing from San Luis Obispo County. This building should be documented as
an example of that style and period. The documentation should include: drawing of a
basic floor plan; description of building materials and architectural details such as
windows; and black/white photography of the exterior and interior.
2) After removal of the building, and prior to any grading or other disturbance, the
exposed soil surface should be inspected by an archaeologist.
3) Subsurface examination of the rock wall at the back of the property should be
completed in order to ascertain whether this wall is part of a mission period
construction.
4) Initial grading for the project should be carefully monitored by an archaeologist.
If substantial materials or features are found during the excavation, the archaeologist
can evaluate the possible significance of the materials and formulate a plan to minimize
impacts to the resource (if this is feasible) or provide for data recovery.
-11-
1 �6l
i
i
Attachment 5
REFERENCES CITED
Bibliography
Angel, Myron
180 Facsimile Reprint History of San Luis Obispo County, California. Valley Publishers,
1979, CA.
Bertrando, Betsy
1996 Petitions for Land in the City of San Luis Obispo. Annotated index prepared for the
City of San Luis Obispo.
Bertrando, Ethan
1994a Cultural Resource Monitoring of the Nipomo Street Bridge Replacement, San Luis
Obispo, CA. Prepared for the City of San Luis Obispo Public Works Department..
Bertrando & Bertrando Research Consultants.
1994b Cultural Resource Investigation of the Proposed Santa Rosa Street Bridge Replacement,
San Luis Obispo, CA. Prepared for the City of San Luis Obispo Public Works
Department. Bertrando & Bertrando Research Consultants.
1995 Results of the Cultural Resource Monitoring of the Elks Lane Bridge
Replacement Project. Letter report prepared for the City of San Luis Obispo
Public Works Department. Bertrando & Bertrando Research Consultants.
Bertrando, Ethan and Betsy Bertrando
1997 Cultural Resource Investigation and Inventory of 626 Broad Street, APN 002-292-020
The Mission Orchard. Report prepared for Devin Gallagher. Bertrando &
Bertrando Research Consultants.
1998a Cultural Resource Investigation for the Proposed Utilihj Trenching at the 800 and 600
Blocks of Walnut and Morro Streets in the City of San Luis Obispo, CA. Report
prepared for the Public Works Department,City of San Luis Obispo. Bertrando
& Bertrando Research Consultants.
1998b Cultural Resource Investigation of the Soda Water works and Tullman Residence
Complex. Prepared for Mary Mitchell-Leitcher. Bertrando & Bertrando
Research Consultants.
Bertrando,Ethan, Betsy Bertrando, and Luther Bertrando
1998 Cultural Resource Significance Evaluation of CA-SLO-64/H, The Mission Orchard
Wall. Prepared for Devin Gallagher. Bertrando & Bertrando Research
Consultants.
-12-
1-6a
i
Attachment 5
Bonilla, Antonio Isaac
1974 Garcia Hechos and Other Garcia Papers. Unpublished manuscript that includes
Hechos Historicos de California from the Bancroft Library, University of California,
Berkeley.
Bowman, Alan P.
1972 Index to the 1850 Census of the State of California. Genealogical Publishing Co., Inc.
Baltimore, Maryland.
Conway, Thor
1996 Phase 1 Archaeological Survey of 770 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California. Report
prepared for Ray & Kathleen Ball,San Luis Obispo.
Engelhardt, O.F.M.,Fr. Zephyrin
1963 Mission of San Luis Obispo in the Valley of the Bears. W. T. Genns,Santa Barbara.
Fitzgerald, Richard T. and Terry L.Jones
1998 Interpretive Synthesis of Subsurface Archaeological Investigations for the
Coastal Branch Phase II Project Appendix G in Archaeological Data Recovery at
CA-SLO-1797, the Cross Creek Site, San Luis Obispo County, California, Coastal
Branch, Phase II Project. Submitted to California Department of Water Resources.
Garcia and Associates,San Anselmo.
Gibson, Robert O.
1982 Ethnogeography of the Salinan People:A Systems Approach. Master's Thesis,
California State University, Hayward.
Greenwood, R.S.
1972 9000 Years of Prehistory at Diablo Canyon, San Luis Obispo County, California. San
Luis Obispo County Archaeological Society Occasional Paper 2, San Luis Obispo.
1978 Obispeno and Purismeno Chumash. In Handbook of North American Indians, Vol.
8, California.Smithsonian Institution,Washington, DC.
Hall-Patton, Mark
1994 Memories of the Land:Place-names of San Luis Obispo County. EZ Nature
Books, San Luis Obispo.
Hickman,James C. ed.
1993 The Jepson Manual:Higher Plants of California. University of California
Press. Berkeley.
-13-
i
-- Attachment 5
Hoover, Robert L.
1991 Notes on the Garden Wall Footings Mission San Luis Obispo de Tolosa, Broad
Street and Highway 101,San Luis Obispo,California. Unpublished manuscript.
Kocher, Paul H.
1972 Mission San Luis de Tolosa 1772-1972. Blake Printing & Publishing, Inc.,San Luis
Obispo.
Nicholson, Loren
1972 Mission San Luis Obispo Bicentennial 1772-1972. La Vista Volume 2, Number 4,
San Luis Obispo County Historical Society.
Parker,John
1999 Cultural Resources Evaluation of the Vernon Parcel, 782 Broad Street, San Luis Obispo,
APN 002-302-009.
Polk, R. L. &Company
1928 San Luis Obispo City Directory. Published by R.L. Polk &Co.,Los Angeles, CA.
1950 San Luis Obispo City Directory. Published by R.L. Polk &Co.,Los Angeles, CA.
Price, Barry
1999 Preliminary Report of Archaeological Monitoring for the Creek Walk Construction Area.
Letter Report prepared for the city of San Luis Obispo Public Works
Department. Applied Earthworks, Fresno.
Roper, C. Kristina, Ethan Bertrando, Michael Imwalle, Doug Harro, Rebecca McKin,
Betsy Bertrando,Carol Denardo and Barr Price
1996 Archaeological Evaluation of Resources along Segment 2 of the Chorro Valley
Transmission Line. Prepared for the department of General Services, San Luis
Obispo and the Environmental Resources Branch, U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, Los Angeles District
Singer, Clay,John Atwood and Jay Frierman
1993 It Came from Beneath the Streets:An Archaeological Report on the City of San Luis
Obispo Wastewater Treatment System. Prepared for the City of San Luis Obispo
Wastewater Division. Singer& Associates, Inc., Cambria.
Singer, Clay,John Atwood,Jay Frierman, and Alex Kirkish
1990 Along the Banks of San Luis Creek:Refuse Management in Late 19Qe Century San Luis
Obispo, California. Prepared for the City of San Luis Obispo Engineering
Department. Singer& Associates, Inc., Cambria.
-14-
L)
Attachment 5
Squibb, Paul
1984 Captain Portola in San Luis Obispo County in 1769. Tabula Rasa Press, Morro Bay,
California.
Wheeler, Kathleen
2000 View from the Outhouse:What we can learn from the Excavation of Privies.
Historical Archaeology Volume 34 (1): 1-19.
Wilbur, Marguerite Eyer
1937 Duflot de Mofras' Travels on the Pacific Coast. The Fine Arts Press,Santa Ana,CA.
Historical Maps Consulted
1870 Petition for Land, Deed issued to Loreta Garcia Feb. 9, 1872
1874 County of San Luis Obispo, surveyed by R.R. Harris
c.1875 Sketch Map of two blocks on Palm Street
1903 Sanborn Fire Insurance Map
1926 Sanborn Fire Insurance Map
Other Records and Documents
1860 United States Government Census
2000 Land use information prepared by the City of San Luis Obispo
-15-
1�S
Attachment 5
Exhibits
1'ti. _•" Ep 1L ::tw �4 1-�'r< � '�- - 7!- r5r� _�e c :<'� 1.�``ytt ` . .
r�, v. •}• `r5 wi �i 1 i�6 ��� 'ik ^ ill ° � �'LL r� `
ik
<1 Ell
n r ✓K ,
)`•� (1 ;Y� r I. La r }.g,,Jr �1 � .:x \ ` r ` ,YI
�, '• • i + {� r• ,n 1 \'ate S � s �, „v .
04
d,r. C. 1I r h � 4 Mi.'L. 7, t-``� �A t � ♦, tc �4 v y $����f:i
�� a Y' � `ay ✓ I v x .r • moi. S l Yid :�p :,�
t'. .. Shy - a( } J:"T J n '}� `y��'-.y� �I •♦♦•
A .,f .d.� �6 j�1 �A iA.,, S}• Yy.•. tt
ny -•,�. � e rpt �M ��.
`` w
' T +' ` ' +�� ♦ �4 �„F •♦ ,1A` �4 �`f h 4.. jf' ) yr
IM l4
.. � cam. ,J �y 5,. � f 11.•.� ' � �t
10
� �} � _ _ +fit � �t.�... .- :. Y�'1•'Ar � tYy• A � ) ,1~ :�
r'1, � r, ,r��H.� i��fi". t r •� .t $ Y.. P n ��r.. �� y -F�
s' 4j" N
•�N ?� ryv ry'. v� t+ yj '�+ 1 E.� ” ` ' /y-. Y�', C; ;r \. ^^•�,ti�YYY
i igfyr" 4� •4� y � � '.
,!,.:._ �� L S RiC f)t� - 1 sIyeS'1 r �-� �L Y�})�� ♦��'
} WM yl vt c 7r i 11 .it' h `l4,0
-vj+ A!pL�rth$ I�� Kv • v.P � .. iA T 1 �Sirr .rI o'?: *� -. d.t.
��'rA•
�1.�(�'MY\ 4 y 1 :'+� 1h 3 t �Y(�' �.♦ � � ``�F lITLYN �A\ • �\{{�. J
%i�, w r�i' .'' '/- ix 't'_'. � ��A li' r I'� ` � � r't � r� .o-•�S-��y�. ,.
c.m 411P 2; t K�::Fy+' ryi Txy &1♦' '•
AT."
1 _ !_ +�F aTr+• ..f. `A r
.A`Y4" w !�i �"sTK li Yttt�r�+.- t•` R��i f t'R,, �� ` � '
e'
•r j��y '4(i3MI .�
S 1.{Z r. rte, p r,y, .:F `_ .y pY,::K• + 'y _ "d
rLv +�T
t .��5 AYc d. _it t t� . .!_•"'k�'r'S % 'r`"M. 1 "�W1,
�7 I •n " f a ! h � _(( y� +IL Y'(�{ � R fi " i� +ir.; ,.�?r\�""" 'r.:
b.yt _ w,
<\ }' l� Fr Y _F ,,, � vS ;.iiE�j�� � "tJ ` 1� Q rt ti .„ r L �.�� •F�
y(nnr.�/* L t 1 ` r A r Xw �..7-�.i4i P.1�� _IQJal N' � p� .ti ! Ye r•(,y�n���Th• v�S +
).•�f n iy�.' ♦ I r Sa.. 1 .-- •� L x� l Li"v t•� � g �rA U7 R•+i'' ^. uY� _r.
,.
ra1.'I r �N *•f y,,;�. r �" ,P:�. n � � ^. ��t,� t,r`lSM'dl, ,�.� f r'�� ' t"�'\`xf
�t S'8�-�.t ��t,��� '% 'R r •.�� 'f 'r � t 1 4 � rr�„ .t�r ♦ `�?af k.; � t0� +.rY.yT (♦ r t -�s -�
M"�.9f ,'• 1 t". .yi�-:'. _ v )}+ r �- .: � 49� t. t I• �, y k�i.ux•.i c I,f, TC'
�' ♦s�� TPti ,..i��t }-Vit "jExhibit A
i ±iSi�fy'1�'� •'1I�1 Y {.
In rAB - 1. 1
-t C•1 +8y A 1.} 1893,
\ fi. )4A F i G♦ S
t r
property sh1 outline
''.i..: ` r.. •.- :- i.WO ;; - , ,;1_., :v a - .1 , ',fid LtT :�. '•A•
Attachment 5
.r,
Fence
�}
u 0 . 11T'
use
:.7Ti',Z".�ti!G'::rn"9F.•:t:.poor:y:m-,Fa+n T<'•71•. .bc+_.�.r �o:r'
Petition for Grant-Loreta Garcia - presented May 16, 1870-Deed issued Feb. 9, 1872
Petition for Grant-Loreta Garcia-presented May 16, 1870 -deed opened Feb. 9, 1872
settled in 1869, states she owns no other lot in town, house on property
Exhibit B
City of San Luis Obispo Petition for Land Record
Petition for Grant,Project Area Shown In Cross-Hatch
j-6 �'
Attachment
i8
� A
i
t7
L Of'
t'g0 `
Lr
S C�,�,
i C7llr
.-T ct T
I.
Petition for Grant -Antonio Paredes -presented Oct, 1870-
-� settled 1869, signed by Simmler for(Antonio Baderas)
Exhibit C
City of San Luis Obispo Petition for Land Record
Petition for Grant,Project Area Shown In Cross-Hatch
♦C
•. ' Al_
04
37
04
.. ¢AMOR
J.CO'
Y�t DO ; E
� ,;.
ilcc p' �/ R/ l -r Q ;`' f11M r!� rte• 'j }'7"�
'' i ,'��`� O l i �N7 1'I i./• ' �, •t f.. +a ^- +�. t t otl!. A +• > O, S._• \� '
vro. aAsTA
MAAI 11 LA f1A�T IV�►R: Al. ;64t C •610A
{ 1 LrPI 1�,� 5"P' 'i � ^• .i'rdtL.i f...y.e. 5'
�t�0.�. ..� a T � r��l ., �I ',� + r. ra. ;, L: +'K�� .' O� r4`'6�+ ,�-ti�` rr,( 4.•. ;f
'~
a i ! ' rC i y'} y,F. ,t'� Cly, \Ilj•s hV '� ya �} •1��. ! +�.
'A'1 t '.•tt L i¢•,,.>i- <{ `9a Nf } `<lt'.t+Naj Y _`fr"i-.M'•^4>, s {4.,' `
` Mia^'�^ o , hr ; * -.•
.�, - r••." a. 4 �'�rt ,ter +r � :;�
IV
S COORS
Y .r.� 1 F7i•-,b."}} ,. u` r.,
..' ~ .F :� _, V��� d. . Q1.` ��< fit ' '; „y.r �. ',t.'�• .1:-/?'^^�-'
{y 1�. , >.. �: sem' x r f '� / 1�;l��•i� �si •( e '�'r ~ 7
11111 ql� '� � ` y, � .: �• f'a � * rf � •7 �J�� i{=.h .` �^tom° , (�t
I" j/ �, N4j ' r ' M: u C'. �: 7 . 95+r S�,'\'R12i•1 { r-
11 p 1•. i a. � .
1 l^„ ,mow . .3,. �,•{:S.1L r- •, r w jy i V{�—. !t �O F-+�!t
;> _r tiff -1'..:r t: ' (t, '}au it.ti i�.,u a. '..]N'RY}'�{i lz rY ~� iyfl,.t, �A d� ��{ CM� r=•. � ;�"�J ��
mal
(} . . '' � {f a It rf=. k r ,Yt� '�}�i'I i� i r ?,14�i�'?•('� 'nr ��i' f"+< '�,r
I, � y -/'r ^'S R r< � �� � 3 � "ft�t � >4�. •� �5 :il`� .i�l,� Q � *��i{r� •F•�ar}t^ 1
M =c
�//��Q)
(f!' '.�Y•. .� M-T �jl�:zg ,y, � b>r �*,a f� t•7_ ,•' 7� `' /��/ , tr . ..}}4.
.• `` •e-`j/ •i �t Jill +1 a ' d i, -\ y� z. :.v ' ri
• s' Jif � `(I �e � _ ~ .rt ? � +1 \T +..,F Jt: . ,^x. 1 � a r< ` a1 �Yh� f •
•A H \ 1f , - i :^> '. }, 11�+ i;li�'i ! .f �' , {�. ( -� •1 a yjp ik'v�'�Yu
Exhibit D
1874 R R Harris SLO County Map
Project Area Shown In Cross-Hatch (Block 12)
1-7D
e n t
Q
n
v c S
9 y
♦ S E
i
y rJ
5 •� � fps
/
B.
v L e�•
o L�i�b
yR
` o
0
01
*
v ♦\ P�
1 N
z t 3 � ♦ ) d
R SO
0
fn ♦ \/
i
/
\ +P
o �
0 Irk. at
Rau
of
.♦ 0
•N
o h
0
S O v
Exhibit E
1903 Sanborn Fire Map
Project Area Indicated By Arrow n
Attachment 5
0 0
z
is11
A
2
A 1.1
D_^ Q
A
S
ICE D
A C OLD MCSLo,�J PHROEf/r9c
A
A
916E
p $ �
D
� S
rUSsia,V Sf1,v�vJS OBidPv
-LL U2+E laAal1 R.P.CauRfy D
D i ADOgE "i'�.n<
".
M/DS.ON AYrfs>i D.
BH✓B✓Ef✓gy �
✓q" ADOgE Aug<w.
AD... 4;g11A6E
1 p —L
acv"
Exhibit F
1926 Sanborn Fire Map
Project Area Indicated By Arrow
/ rr��
/- / 2
t - •' ; rW`• - Attachment 5
u Ave, = j -
oA
n a v: A r
to
1 / X
F • I
x i
qO// .ru Iso
no ^ 7
7477
799 1 1 1
9 I I 1
1 I 1
I i
1 1
1 Ire•
(i z)
�e ..1.
, xr 0g ,
i /
4 I:
I / I 7-44Jr
■ � '��y..D�. _ _._. I IJ-- .:sur,,.
1 7.72 ^" 275 776 .. . 778
Ydr`1 1
1
tcc
O Sct.ale
eo 'of Feec O ,
�1 ,o m :o w ° 50 _ loo so '
Exhibit G
1957 Sanborn Fire Map
Project Area Indicated By Arrow
Attachment 5
Record Search
`7 Attachment 5
California
Department of Anthropology
OfT,I{�Of7f�151{��Of"n1 University of California, Santa Barbara
rchaeological ^_ Uu LJ U U tJC�tls U U SAN LUIS OBISPO AND Santa Barbara,CA 93106-3210
Inventory SANTA BARBARA COUNTIES (845)893-2474
July 31, 2000
Ron Rose
Cultural Resource Management Services
813 Paso Robles Street
Paso Robles, CA 93446
Dear Mr. Rose,
Enclosed are the results of the record search you requested for the Campbell
Property project. Our records were consulted for all known archaeological sites,
historic properties, and previous cultural resource studies within the radius you
provided.
In this search, twelve archaeological sites and forty previous cultural resource
studies were found.
According to our records the project area has only been partially surveyed. A
cultural resource survey of the project area is recommended. The survey should
be completed before any construction or development begins.
Please contact me if you have any questions about this search, or if you require
copies of any site records or survey reports.
Sincerely
Kevin C. Scott
Interim Assistant Coordinator
t Data R Time Rxrived
_ J
Attachment 6
APPEAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL
In accordance with the appeals procedure as specified in Title 1, Chapter 1.20 of the
San Luis Obispo Municipal Code (attached), the undersigned hereby appeals the
decision of
C�I�J�at NPcIT4�P �� Wlvri ��e. P.
rendered on aoo 1 , which consisted of the
following (i.e., explain whaT t you re appealing and the grounds for submitting the appeal.
Use /additional sheets as needed.) r F�jMc _
17�s4Ci C, S��wkt �t cg % �t o � � (o A
ke
��o-,ea( n�i�re l 0Q V.,ems. i 5 eon ev«.
�UCCouwd%L== Q
The undersigned discussed the decision being appealed with:
on Ma�j 310 0 1 ¢ �3jf.-X- Zc{o i
Name/Department (Date)
The appellant agrees to appear and/or send a representative to appear on his/her
behalf.
(Signature of p ant) ; f
G /5 w ?O arc, � (a ,e3l
Namerhtle Mailing Address and Zip Code
f.� Sy3 � �
Home Phone Work Phone
Representative: nJc ` l 4 be OAU, -5141 `f a 11
.4•-..�4....�p�f.�� / Ow ti2.l��fPSEW�D�� cerci a /Ct�(1 a r.�.a C�`�ZQ�'
Name/Title3 Mailing Address and Zip Code
This item is hereby calendared for
C: City Attorney RECEIVED
City Administrative Officer
Department'Head JUN 0 fi 2001
City Clerk.(original) SLO CITY CLERK
� G W�IiSPinun.(
;john 6p"d15 /
(3/01)
JUN 20 2001 13: 20 CAMPBELL DESIGN a Lu(r5 I Ku auQDY i 4c i o r
- Attachment 6
CAMPBELL DESIGN & CONSTRUCTION
1075 San Adrlano.Scrnac
San Luis Obispo.CA 93445
Phone:SOS•S41-4213
Fa=805.541-4213
June 20,2001
RECEIVED
Mayor and City Council
990 Palm Street JUN 2 2001
San Luis Obispo,CA 93401 SLO CITY COUNCIL
SUBJECT: ARC 16400, 756 Palm Street
Background Information for appeal to the Mayor and City Council
Dear Mayor and City Council:
We are appealing the May 29,2001 Cultural Heritage Committee's action that
determined the 756 Palm Street structure as historically and architecturally significant,
and that the proposed project is not architecturally compatible with the Mission
neighborhood.
The 756 Palm Street structure does not meet any of the criteria for listing on the
California Register of Historical Resources,which makes it ineligible as a Master List
structure. This structure is not a Historic Resource as defined by CEQA_
756 Palm is not significant to its Historic District as a contributing structure. 756 Palm
has the scale and massing of a Falk.Victorian structure, and is moreaccurately described
as a Railroad Era house.There are many examples of this style in the Old Town Historic
District in neighborhoods and on lots more suitable in scale.
It is inaccurate to say that this structure has retained.its site integrity. Because of the
original inferior construction,upgrades throughout the years have drastically changed the
original character and historic integrity.
The proposed project is compatible with the Mission neighborhood and the Downtown
Historic District. A two-story rectangular mass comprised of plaster walls and tile roof is
in perfect harmony with the Spanish/Mission Era-Monterey style. It is also compatible
with more recent(1900— 1940's) structures within a block of 756 Palm Street.
l - 7�
JUN 20 2001 13: 24 CRMNbtLL Ut51UN LUlIbIKU OUJU-tI-rGa� p.. o
Attachment 6
The proposed project does not require a change of zoning and falls well within the
development standards of density,height, or site coverage.
We ask the Council to find that the 756 Palm Street structure does not meet the level of
significance which warrants Environmental Review,and that moving this structure to an
appropriate site will not degrade the quality of the environment. We also ask for the
Council to find that the style,mass,and material make-up of the proposed project is
appropriate for the Mission Neighborhood and the Downtown Historic District.
Re
sp
ectfu
lly,
Brian Campbell, Applicant's Agent
/-7r
a.._
•lam• _.
r" -
�
` � .t `` t.J.C.• �*+i�.•�_..-..
--......w.. '- iii
r
1 � f
4 pr was
We
mc
1 , � j L i • a r4 'r v �.LL,
�,n.7 b'•LS. ave 1. e.' .)t.O,
a �y��a Yi I fL.. t o •r� .y
r, y:
yy°° �" wyl�irt7•� < 'r 1 � ♦ � -r . 1n si.7 `�rr
z �
Ilk
rl w
• 1•
"1.
t � _
i
t t
a
a
T
•�' �,. .. � ¢�� qty 5�� � 'y
4
r ti .•
A c+
.. +: a
•' tie
+
�u
A'
1
® r
• 1 r -
i
V)
LU
LU cn
IQ
y V
O_
w
tn
k
LLJ—
W
W h4 cc
i C`E
v! cc Q W1� W m C•7
O
m
� o
LU
h
4.03
h
Z3
to x 1 W O M
O 'LL
O
J o e Y 1 j J j o 4
2 V u i , c c m m -2
4,3
7 C7 P Or c� r
s
m o ' $ a d .• N
4
o O �
y O Q r
, `y
t �I,
r3 ILI
C _
m u c i m u Q \'J `..
10
4W
Q a y Q}• ��
Y. o m u 3 ° S W �.
gO \l
ct o t a j r j
x , p
" e° 3 O •° t o cc
cup
= Q
cj C
W -- W M Q 2
ti q VC3
to
q t►
The California Environmental 4 Aty Act
CEQA ' Attachment 7
Title 14. California Code of Regulations
Chapter 3.Guidelines for Implementation of the
California Environmental Quality Act
Article 5. Preliminary Review of Projects and
Conduct of Initial Study
Sections 15060 to 15065
(Note:Newly revised language is underlined-deleted language is stricken through. The numbered
sections have been adopted by the.Secretary of Resources as part of the California Code of
Regulations. The discussions after each section are provided by the Governor's Office of Planning and
Research;they are not in the California Code of Regulations.)
060. Preliminary Review
(a)A le agency is allowed 30 days to review for completeness applications for permits or other
entitlemen or use. While conducting this review for completeness,the agency should be alert r
environments issues that might require preparation of an EIR or that may require additional
explanation by applicant.Accepting an application as complete does not limit the autho ' of the
lead agency to req ' e the applicant to submit additional information needed for environm tal
evaluation of the pro ct. Requiring such additional information after the application is mplete does
not change the status o e application.
(b)Except as provided in Se ion 15111,the lead agency shall begin the formal a tronmental
evaluation of the project after cepting an application as complete and determ' ng that the project is,
subject to CEQA.
(c)Once an application is deemed co lete,a lead agency must first det ine whether an activity is
subject to CEQA before conducting an r 'tial study. An activity isnot Ject to CEQA if:
(1)The activity does not involve the exercis f discretionary pow s by a public agency;
(2)The activity will not result in a direct or reaso bly forese le indirect physical change in the
environment;or
(3)The activity is not a project as defined in Section 1 8.
(d)If the lead agency can determine that an EIR wi a cle y required for a project,the agency may
skip further initial review of the project and begin ork direc on the EIR process described in
Article 9,commencing with Section 15080. In absence of - initial study,the lead agency shall still
focus the EIR on the.significant effects of the ro'ect and indicate riefly its reasons for determining
that other effects would not be significant o otentially significant.
Authority: Sections 21083 and 21087, blit Resources Code; Referent • Sections 21080(b),21080.2
and 21160,Public Resources Code.
Note: Authority cited: Sections 83 and 21087, Public Resources Code; Re ence:.Section 65944,
Government Code; Section 21 0.2, Public Resources Code:
Discussion: This section scribes the actions required of the Lead Agency when it r eives an
application for a projec is section is necessary in order to save time that could othe ise be spent if
the agency ignored a tronmental issues for the first 30 days of reviewing the application.The section
is also necessary fo flowing the efficiencies that result from moving directly to the prepar 'on of an
EIR where the ao cy can see that one will clearly be required.This avoids the time involve the
separate step o reparing an Initial Study where the Lead Agency believes it will perform the k of
identifying a ecu as significant or non-significant while it does simultaneous work preparing the R.
This sec ' n also introduces the term "preliminary review"to apply to this early review of an
applic ion for completeness and for a possible exemption from CEQA.This term is needed to provide
a shorthand way to referring to these early steps and to distinguish them from the more formal Initial
Study process that follows preliminary review.
43
that the project is causing,and governs—'•hin the area of the project. Further,only those crandards
whi ave been adopted 6y a public i !y after a public review process are applicab!
Subsection rovides guidance for determining at an early stage whether a project will make a
considerable con "bution to a significant cumulative effect. When the project does not make a Attachment 7
considerable contrib ' n to a potentially significant cumulative effect,or if any contribution is
rendered less than cumu ' ely considerable through mitigation,no analysis is required beyond that
necessary to determine that th ntribution is not considerable and a negative declaration or mitigated
negative declaration is required. the contribution is determined to be considerable,an EIR must
be prepared in order to further an
mulative effect.
Subsection(i)also provides that where the increme impacts of a project are so small as to be de
minimus,no EIR is required. De minimus means that the ironmental conditions would essentially
be the same with or without the project.
Pursuant to section 15063,this initial determination of whether the projec ds a considerable
contribution does not require the extent of analysis that would be required of a ussion of
cumulative impacts in an EIR.
15064.5. Determining the Significance of Impacts to Archeological
and Historical Resources
(a)For purposes of this section,the term "historical resources"shall include the following:
(1)A resource listed in,or determined to be eligible by the State Historical Resources Commission,for
listing in the California Register of Historical Resources(Pub. Res.Code SS5024.1,Title 14 CCR,
Section 4850 et seq.).
(2)A resource included in a local register of historical resources,as defined in section 5020.1(k)of the
Public Resources Code or identified as significant in an historical resource survey meeting the
requirements section 5024.1(g)of the Public Resources Code,shall be presumed to be historically or
culturally significant. Public agencies must treat any such resource as significant unless the
preponderance of evidence demonstrates that it is not historically or culturally significant.
(3)Any object,building,structure,site,area,place,record, or manuscript 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 may be
considered to be an historical resource,provided the lead agency's determination is supported by
substantial evidence in light of the whole record. 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(Pub.Res.Code SS5024.1,Title 14 CCR, Section 4852) including the
following:
(A)Is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of
California's history and cultural heritage;
(B)Is associated with the lives of persons important in our past;
(C)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
(D)Has yielded,or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.
(4)The fact that a resource is not listed in,or determined to be eligible for listing in the California
Register of Historical Resources,not included in a local register of historical resources(pursuant to
section 5020.1(k)of the Public Resources Code),or identified in an historical resources survey
(meeting the criteria in section 5024.1(g)of the Public Resources Code)does not preclude a lead
agency from determining that the resource may be an historical resource as defined in Public
Resources Code sections 5020.10)or 5024.1.
(b)A project with an effect that may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an
historical resource is a project that may have a significant effect on the environment.
(1)Substantial adverse change in the significance of an historical resource means 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.
(2)The significance of an historical resource is materially impaired when a project:
(A)Demolishes or materially alters in an adverse manner those physical characteristics of an 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
(B)Demolishes or materially alters in an adverse manner those physical characteristics that account for
its inclusion in a local register of histor' -',resources pursuant to section 5020.1(k)of thez, ublic
Resources Code or its identification in istorical resources survey meeting the requu ats of
section 5024.1(g)of the Public Resources Code,unless the public agency reviewing the': cts of the
project establishes by a preponderance of evidence that the resource is not historically or culturally Attachment
significant;or 7
(C)Demolishes or materially alters in an adverse manner those physical characteristics of a historical
resource that convey its historical significance and that justify its eligibility for inclusion in the
California Register of Historical Resources as determined by a lead agency for purposes of CEQA.
(3)Generally,a project that follows the Secretaryof.the Interior's Standards for the.Treatment.of
Historic-Properties with Guidelines for Preserving,Rehabilitating, Restoring,and Reconstructing
Historic Buildings or_the_.Se_cretary_of the Interior's Standards_for Rehabilitation_and.Guide_lines for
Rehabilitating.Historic Buildings_(]995), Weeks-and-Grimmer,shall be considered as mitigated to a
level of less than a significant impact on the historical resource.
(4)A lead agency shall identify potentially feasible measures to mitigate significant adverse changes in
the significance of an historical resource.The lead agency shall ensure that any adopted measures to
mitigate or avoid significant adverse changes are fully enforceable through permit conditions,
agreements,or other measures.
(5)When a project will affect state-owned historical resources,as described in Public Resources Code
Section 5024,and the lead agency is a state agency,the lead agency shall consult with the.State
Historic Preservation Officer as provided in Public Resources Code Section 5024.5. Consultation
should be coordinated in a timely fashion with the preparation of environmental documents.
(c)CEQA applies to effects on archaeological sites.
(1)When a project will impact an archaeological site,a lead agency shall first determine whether the
site is an historical resource,as defined in subsection(a).
(2)If a lead agency determines that the archaeological site is an historical resource, it shall refer to the
provisions of Section 21084.1 of the Public Resources Code,and this section,Section 15126.4 of the
Guidelines,and the limits contained in Section 21083.2 of the Public Resources Code do not apply.
(3)If an archaeological site does not meet the criteria defined in subsection(a),but does meet the
definition of a unique archeological resource in Section 21083.2 of the Public Resources Code,the site
shall be treated in accordance with the provisions of section 21083.2.The time and cost limitations
described in Public Resources Code Section 21083.2(c-f)do not apply to surveys and site evaluation
activities intended to determine whether the project location contains unique archaeological resources.
(4)If an archaeological resource is neither a unique archaeological nor an historical resource,the
effects of the project on those resources shall not be considered a significant effect on the environment.
It shall be sufficient that both the resource and the effect on it are noted in the Initial Study or EIR, if
one is prepared to address impacts on other resources,but they need not be considered further in the
CEQA process.
(d)When an initial study identifies the existence of,or the probable likelihood,of Native American
human remains within the project,a lead agency shall work with the appropriate native americans as
identified by the Native American Heritage Commission as provided in Public Resources Code
SS5097.98.The applicant may develop an agreement for treating or disposing of,with appropriate
dignity,the human remains and any items associated with Native American burials with the
appropriate Native Americans-as identified by the Native American Heritage Commission. Action
implementing such an agreement is exempt from:
(1)The general prohibition on disinterring,disturbing,or removing human remains from any location
other than a dedicated cemetery(Health and Safery Code Section 7050.5).
(2)The requirements of CEQA and the Coastal Act.
(e)In the event of the accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains in any location other
than a dedicated cemetery,the following steps should be taken:
(1)There shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably
suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until:
(A)The coroner of the county in which the remains are discovered must be contacted to determine that
no investigation of the cause of death is required,and
(B)If the coroner determines the remains to be Native American:
1.The coroner shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission within 24 hours.
2.The Native American Heritage Commission shall identify the person or persons it believes to be the
most likely descended from the deceased native american.
3. The most likely descendent may mal-- recommendations to the landowner or the persortresponsible
for the excavation work,for means of ing or disposing of,with appropriate dignit) human
remains and any associated grave g000b as provided in Public Resources Code Section-_.7.98,or
(2)Where the following conditions occur,the landowner or his authorized representative shall rebury Attachment 7
the Native American human remains and associated grave goods with appropriate dignity on the
property in a location not subject to further subsurface disturbance.
(A)The Native American Heritage Commission is unable to identify a most likely descendent or the
most likely descendent failed to make a recommendation within 24 hours after being notified by the
commission.
(B)The descendant identified fails to make a recommendation;or
(C)The landowner or his authorized representative rejects the recommendation of the descendant,and
the mediation by the Native American Heritage Commission fails to provide measures-acceptable to
the landowner.
(f)As part of the objectives,criteria,and procedures required by Section 21082 of the Public
Resources Code,a lead agency should make provisions for historical or unique archaeological
resources accidentally discovered during construction.These provisions should include an immediate
evaluation of the find by a qualified archaeologist. If the find is determined to be an historical or
unique archaeological resource,contingency funding and a time allotment sufficient to allow for
implementation of avoidance measures or appropriate mitigation should be available. Work could
continue on other parts of the building site while historical or unique archaeological resource
mitigation takes place.
Note: Authority: Sections 21083 and 21087, Public Resources Code. Reference: Sections 21083.2,
21084,and 21084.1,Public Resources Code;Citizens for Responsible Development in West Hollywood
v. City of West Hollywood(1995)39 Cal.AppAth 490.
Discussion: This section establishes rules for the analysis of historical resources, including
archaeological resources,in order to determine whether a project may have a substantial adverse effect
on the significance of the resource.This incorporates provisions previously contained in Appendix K
of the Guidelines. Subsection(a)relies upon the holding in League for Protection of Oakland's
Architectural and Historic Resources v.City of Oakland(1997)52 Cal.AppAth 896 to describe the
relative significance of resources which are listed in the California Register of Historical Resources,
listed in a local register or survey or eligible for listing,or that may be considered locally significant
despite not being listed or eligible for listing. Subsection(b)describes those actions which have
substantial adverse effects. Subsection(c)describes the relationship between historical resources and
archaeological resources,as well as limits on the cost of mitigating impacts on unique archaeological
resources. Subsections(d)and(e)discuss the protocol to be followed if Native American or other
human remains are discovered.
'A JBsof Significance.--
(a)Each public ncy is encouraged to develop and publish thresholds o ignificance that the agency
uses in the determin ' n of the significance of environmental effects. reshold of significance is an
identifiable quantitative, alitative or performance level of a particu environmental effect,
non-compliance with which ans the effect will normally be dete ined to be significant by the
agency and compliance with w means the effect normally w' be determined to be less than
significant.
(b)Thresholds of significance to be adopte or general a as part of the lead agency's environmental
review process must be adopted by ordinance, oluti ,rule,or regulation,and developed through a
public review process and be supported by substa - evidence.
Note: Authority: Sections 21083 and 21087, lic Reso ces Code. Reference: Sections 21082 and
21083, Public Resources Code.
Discussion:This section encourages encies to develop,publish, 'd use thresholds of significance
as a means of standardizing enviro ental assessments.Thresholds m constitute standards for
determining significance pursu to subsection(i)of section 15064.Not at if an agency decides to
adopt thresholds it must do s y ordinance,resolution,regulation or rule at a conclusion of a public
review process.
15065. Mand ory Findings of Significance
A lead agen shall find that a project may have a significant effect on the environment and the by
require IR to be prepared for the project where any of the following conditions occur:
(a)The project has the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment,substantially
reduce the habitat of a fish and wildlife species,cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below 1_4M
i
CEGA and Histori�r40.9 tlmnt 8
Appendix 1
Excerpts from Public Resources Code
Excerpts from Public Resources Code (3) The resource is evaluated and determined by the
Section 5020.1: office[of Historic Preservation]to have a signifi-
cance rating of Category 1 to 5 on DPR Form 523.
(h) "Historic district"means a definable unified geo-
graphic entity that possesses a significant concen- (4) If the survey is five or more years old at the time
tration, linkage, or continuity of sites,.buildings, of its nomination for inclusion in the California
structures,or objects united historically oraestheti- Registry,the survey is updated to identify histori-
cally by plan or physical development. cal resources which have become eligible or ineli-
gible due to changed circumstances or further
(i) Historical landmark"means any historical resource documentation and those which have been demol-
which is registered as a state historical landmark ished or altered in a manner that substantially di-
pursuant to Section 5021. minishes the significance of the resource.
(j) "Historical resource" includes, but is not limited Public Resources Code Section 21098.1:
to,any object,building,structure,site,area,place,
record, or manuscript which is historically or A project that may cause a substantial adverse
archaeologically significant,or is significant in the change in the significance of an historical resource is
architectural,engineering,scientific,economic ag- a project that may have a significant effect on the en-
ricultural, educational, social, political, military, vironment. For purposes of this section,an historical
or cultural annals of California. resource is a resource listed in, or determined to be
eligible for listing in; the California Register of His-
(k) "Local register of historic resources"means a list torical Resources.. Historical resources included in a
of properties officially designated or recognized local register of historical resources,as defined in Bub-
as historically significant by a local government section(k)of Section 5020.1,are presumed to be his-
pursuant to a local ordinance or resolution. torically or culturally significant for purposes of this
section,unless the preponderance of the evidence dem-
(q) "Substantial adverse change" means demolition, onstrates that the resource isnot historically or cultur-
destruction,relocation, or alteration such that the ally significant. The fact that a resource is not listed
significance of an historical resource would be in,or determined to be eligible for listing in,the Cali-
impaired. fornia Register of Historical Resources, not included
in a local register of historical resources,or not deemed
Subdivision (g) of Public Resources Code significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision
Section 5024.1: (g)of Section 5024.1 shall not preclude a lead agency
from determining whether the resource may be an his-
(g) A resource identified as significant in an histori- torical resource for purposes of this section.
cal resource survey may be listed in the California
Register if the survey meets all of the following
criteria:
(1) The survey has been or will be included in the State
Historic Resources Inventory.
(2) The survey and the survey documentation were
prepared in accordance with office procedures and
requirements.
Governor's Office of Planning and Research 9
1-67
Attachment 9
Draft Resolution "A"
RESOLUTION NO. (2001 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
DENYING AN APPEAL OF THE CULTURAL HERITAGE COMMITTEE'S
ACTION,THEREBY FINDING PROPERTY AT 756 PALM STREET TO BE A
HISTORIC RESOURCE CONSISTENT WITH THE CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT CRITERIA
(ARC 164-00)
WHEREAS, on May 29, 2001, the Cultural Heritage Committee conducted a public
hearing and, based on the documentation and public testimony presented, found the property at
756 Palm Street to be historically and architecturally significant and recommended that the City
Council add the property to the list of contributing historical properties; and
WHEREAS, Brian Campbell filed an appeal of the Cultural Heritage Committee's action
on behalf of the property owner,Ralph Peters, on June 8, 2001; and
WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing on September 18, 2001, and
has considered testimony of the appellant, interested parties, the records of the Cultural Heritage
Committee hearings and action, and the evaluation and recommendation of staff; and
BE IT RESOLVED,by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. Findings. That this Council, after consideration of the Cultural Heritage
Committee's recommendations, the appellants' statement, staff recommendations and reports
thereof, makes the following findings regarding the property's historic significance pursuant to
the historic resource criteria outlined in the City's Historical Preservation Program Guidelines:
1. The structure located at 756 Palm Street slated to be demolished or relocated is
historically and architecturally significant because it represents, in its scale, massing
and site integrity, an early American Era "Folk Victorian" structure characteristic of
Resolution No. (2001 Series) Attach
756 Palm Street ment 9
Page 2
homes built on the fringes of Mission and Presidio properties in Mission
communities; and
2. The proposed development project is not architecturally compatible with the
surrounding area because it is not in keeping with the scale or massing of
structures typically built in the late 19' century on the fringes of Mission or
Presidio structures.
SECTION 2. Appeal Denied. The appeal of the Cultural Heritage Committee's action is
hereby denied.
On motion of , seconded by
and on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this_day of , 200.1.
Mayor Allen Settle
ATTEST:
Lee Price, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
r .
6ityttorney Jeffrey G. Jorgensen
« „ Attachment 10
Draft Resolution B
RESOLUTION NO. (2001 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
UPHOLDING AN APPEAL OF THE CULTURAL HERITAGE COMMITTEE'S
ACTION,THEREBY FINDING PROPERTY AT 756 PALM STREET IS NOT
HISTORICAL AND ARCHITECTURALLY SIGNIFICANT
(ARC 164-00)
WHEREAS, on May 29, 2001, the Cultural Heritage Committee conducted a public
hearing and, based on the documentation and public testimony presented, found the property at
756 Palm Street to be historically and architecturally significant and recommended that the City
Council add the property to the list of contributing historical properties; and
WHEREAS, Brian Campbell filed an appeal of.the Cultural Heritage Committee's action
on behalf of the property owner, Ralph Peters, on June 8, 2001; and
WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing on September 18, 2001, and
has considered testimony of the appellant, interested parties, the records of the Cultural Heritage
Committee hearings and action, and the evaluation and recommendation of staff; and
BE IT RESOLVED,by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. Findings. That this Council, after consideration of the Cultural Heritage
Committee's recommendations, the appellants' statement, staff recommendations and reports
thereof, makes the following findings regarding the property's historic significance pursuant to
the historic resource criteria outlined in the City's Historical Preservation Program Guidelines:
1. There is substantial evidence that the structure located at 756 Palm Street slated to be
demolished or relocated is not historically and architecturally significant, and moving
this structure to an appropriate site will not degrade the environment.
Resolution No. (2001 Series) Attachment 10
756 Palm Street
Page 2
2. The proposed development project is architecturally compatible with the surrounding
area.
Council to specify findings
SECTION 2. Appeal Upheld. The appeal of the Cultural Heritage Committee's action is
hereby upheld, and the project is referred to the Architectural Review Commission for
processing.
On motion of , seconded by
and on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this—day of , 2001.
Mayor Allen Settle
ATTEST:
Lee Price, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Attorney Jeffrey G. Jorgensen
JShoals/CHC/reso756Palm(uphold)
Date R Time Rxeived
APPEAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL
In accordance with the appeals procedure as specified in Title 1, Chapter 1.20 of the
San Luis Obispo Municipal Code (attached), the undersigned'hereby appeals the.
decision of /► II /�
rendered on a7 o2c'/ aqoo r , which consisted of the
following ,(i.e., explain why a�re appealing and the grounds for submitting the appeal.
Use additional sheets as(rneeded.)
a die
The undersigned discussed the decision being appealed with:
on 6Ia y Zoo �•�^� U' 2ao i
Name/Department (Date)
The appellant agrees to appear and/or send a representative to appear on his/her
behalf.
(y�(Signature of. p ant)
Namerhtle Mailing Address and Zip Code
Home Phone Work Phone
Representative: �Jc �Qe (I (�,�-rte 5yl `fa13
'6ct(l /O w h2! PrpSE i / D c�4 k �t d f 4 a_ . si"Cu�
Name/Title -5 7�(/_V213 Mailing Address and Zip Code
This item is hereby calendared for
c: City Attorney RECEIVED
City Administrative Officer
Department Head JUN 0 8 2001
City Clerk.(original)
SLO CITY CLERK
John l'�artite ✓►tl�
- d O hn 6K441 5
(3/01)
Chapter 1.20
APPEALS PROCEDURE
Sections:
1.20.010 Title.
1.20.020 Right to appeal.
1.20.030 Time within which to file an appeal.
1.20.040 Hearing-Notice.
1.20.050 Hearing-Appellant to show cause-Council's determination final.
1.20.010 Title.
This chapter shall be known as the"Appeals Procedure"for the city.(Prior code§'1400)
1.20.020 Right to appeal.
A. Except where an appeals procedure is otherwise specifically set forth in this code, any person
objecting to the approval, denial, suspension or revocation of a license, permit or entitlement of any
nature, the determination or issuance of which is under any of the provisions bf this code, or to any
administrative decision made by any city official; if the approval, denial, suspension or revocation of
such license, permit or entitlement or the determination of such administrative decision involves the
exercise of administrative discretion or personal judgment exercised under any of the provisions of this
code, may appeal in writing to the council by filing with the city clerk a written notice of such appeal,
stating the,specific grounds for the appeal.
B. No appeal may be taken to any such administrative decision made by a city official under the
provisions of this chapter unless such decision to appeal has been first taken up with the department head
concerned, and where an appeals board is empowered to consider interpretation and enforcement
questions,unless such decision to appeal has been considered by such appeals board.
C. No right of appeal to the council from any administrative decision made by a city official under
any of the provisions of this code shall exist when such decision is ministerial and thus does not involve
the exercise of administrative discretion or personal judgment exercised under any of the provisions of
this code,whether the administrative decision involves the approval,denial,suspension or revocation of
a license, permit, entitlement or any other administrative decision. (Ord. 1044 § 1, 1985: prior code §
1401)
1.20.030 Time within which to file an appeal.
The appellant shall file a notice of appeal with the city clerk within ten calendar days afte the date
upon which the administrative decision appealed from is made. ]n the event the last day of the filing
period falls on a nonbusiness day, the appeal period shall be extended to include the next business day,
and this rule shall apply whenever an appeal procedure is specifically set forth elsewhere in this code.
(Prior code§ 1402)
1.20.040 Hearing-Notice.
Upon receipt of the filing of the notice of appeal in its proper form, the city clerk shall place the
matter on the council agenda.Except in cases of emergency,when the council may.detertitine the matter
immediately,or where state law prescribes a different appeal process, the clerk shall set the muter for
hearing at the next reasonably available council meeting, but in no event later than forty-five calendar
days after the date of the filing of such notice of appeal with the city clerk. The city clerk shall cause
written notice.of.such hearing to be given to the applicant not less than five business days prior to such
hearing, unless such notice is waived in writing by the applicant. (Ord. 1252 § 1, 1994: prior code §
1403)
1.20.050 Hearing-Appellant to show cause-Council's determination final.
Atsuchhearing the appellant shall show cause on the grounds specified in the notice of appeal why
the action appealed from should not be approved. The council may continue the hearing from time to
time,and its findings on the appeal shall be final and conclusive in the matter.(Prior code§ 1404)
CAMPBELL DESIGN & CONSTRUCTION
1075 San Adriano Street
San Luis Obispo,CA 93405
Phone:805-541-4213
Fax:805-541-4213
June 20, 2001
Mayor and City Council
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
SUBJECT: ARC 164-00, 756 Palm Street
Background Information for appeal to the Mayor and City Council
Dear Mayor and City Council:
We are appealing the May 29, 2001 Cultural Heritage Committee's action that
determined the 756 Palm Street structure as historically and architecturally significant,
and that the proposed project is not architecturally compatible with the Mission
neighborhood.
The 756 Palm Street structure does not meet any of the criteria for listing on the
California Register of Historical Resources,which makes it ineligible as a Master List
structure. This structure is not a Historic Resource as defined by CEQA.
756 Palm is not significant to its Historic District as a contributing structure. 756 Palm
has the scale and massing of a Folk Victorian structure, and is more accurately described
as a Railroad Era house. There are many examples of this style in the Old Town Historic
District in neighborhoods and on lots more suitable in scale.
It is inaccurate to say that this structure has retained its site integrity. Because of the
original inferior construction, upgrades throughout the years have drastically changed the
original character and historic integrity.
The proposed project is compatible with the Mission neighborhood and the Downtown
Historic District. A two-story rectangular mass comprised of plaster walls and tile roof is
in perfect harmony with the Spanish/Mission Era-Monterey style. It is also compatible
with more recent (1900— 1940's) structures within a block of 756 Palm Street. RECEIVED
LJUN2 5 2001
ITY CLERK
The proposed project does not require a change of zoning and falls well within the
development standards of density, height, and site coverage.
We ask the Council to find that the 756 Palm Street structure does not meet the level of
significance which warrants Environmental Review, and that moving this structure to an
appropriate site will not degrade the quality of the environment. We also ask for the
Council to find that the style,mass, and material make-up of the proposed project is
appropriate for the Mission Neighborhood and the Downtown Historic District.
Respectfully,
6aOt.-
Brian Campbell, Applicant's Agent
From: Lee Price
To: Stendahl, Sherry
Date: 6/25/01 4:54PM
Subject: Re: Fwd: Peters Appeal-ARC 164-00
Read my correspondence with Jeff first...............We're checking, but I'm almost certain that we have, in
the past, noticed it as a public hearing,then included a recommendation to continue it to a date certain to
keep the paper trail clean. I'll get back to you, but.that's what I think we should plan for. We can include
in the notice/letter that the item will be continued...seems like extra work I know but that way we can never
be blamed for not having the hearing within the forty five days.
From: Jeff Jorgensen
To: Price, Lee
Date: 6/25/01 2:07PM
Subject: Re: Fwd: Peters Appeal-ARC 164-00
You might check how we have done it in the past, but I think it has to be scheduled as a hearing item...
>>> Lee Price 06/25/01 01:57PM >>>
Thanks, can we do it on consent?or do we have to notice it as a PH then continue it?
>>>Jeff Jorgensen 06/25/01 01:40PM >>>
You need to take it to the Council within the ordinance time period and recommend a continuance , if that
is what staff feels is appropriate to do.
>>> Lee Price 06/25/01 12:10PM>>>
We received by fax a letter from the appellant asking that his appeal (currently set for 7/17) be heard on
9/18 instead due to "scheduling conflicts". Do we still need to take it to council on 7/17 with a
recommendation to continue it to 9/18 at the appellant's request? or can we just go ahead and move it?
Seems to me that in the past you've recommended that we have the council grant the request to continue
to keep the paper trail clean? Please advise.
i
CAMPBELL DESIGN & CONSTRUCTION
1075 San Adriano Street
San Luis Obispo,CA 93405
Phone:805-S41.4213
Fax:805-541-4213
June 22, 2001
Ms. Lee Price
City Clerk, City of San Luis Obispo
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
SUBJECT: ARC 164-00, 756 Palm Street
Dear Ms. Price:
The 756 Palm Street Project is currently scheduled for the July 17, 2001 City Council
meeting. Due to scheduling conflicts we respectively request to be placed on the
September 18, 2001 City Council agenda.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Brian Campbell, Applicant's Agent
cc: John Mandeville
John Shoals
RECEIVED
JUN 2 2001
SLO CITY COUNCIL
�LINCIL ❑ FIN DDRR MF"ING AGENDA
9ACA AO C3 _FIRE CHIEF DA t ITEM#P
PCRNEY El PW DIR
LERK/ORIG ❑ POLICE CHF
September 10, 2001 ❑ DEPT HEADS ❑ REC DIR
®' ,4L5 ❑ UTIL DIR
El HR DIR
TO: Mayor Allen K. Settle
Council Members: John Ewan; Jan Howell Marc; Christine Mulholland; Ken
Schwartz
FROM: Ralph A. Peters ���✓�,, ,��r��/'�
SUBJECT: ARC 164-00, 756 Pa/1_m Street
Response to the CHC's decision of May 29, 2001 and statement of project's
objectives
My proposed project is to remove 2 old small houses and to replace them with 2 new
residences, one of which will be owner-occupied. The site is in the Downtown Historic
District around the Mission.
On May 29, 2001 the Cultural Heritage Committee (CHC) decided that this project may
have a significant adverse effect on a historic resource, and that removing it constitutes a
significant adverse environmental impact. The reason the CHC gave for its action was that
this small house represents, in its character, structures typically built on the fringes of
mission and presidio properties in mission communities.
I now ask the City Council to make its own decisions pertaining to historic significance,
and the appropriate level of review. The Council has broader perspectives and is better
equipped to deal with matters containing complex concerns, overlapping guidelines and
competing goals.
The site in question is a narrow, non-conforming, 30-foot, R-4 zoned lot across from the
gardens of the Mission. On it sit 2 little houses the City listed as structures contributing to
the Downtown Historic District. The CHC's decision applied to the non-conforming front
structure, 756 Palm Street, a 600 square-foot house.
This house was built about 1890 with pre-cut lumber routinely shipped here during the
expansion of the city, at the time of the coming of the railroad. Many houses of similar
form, method of construction, and materials are concentrated in and scattered about the
city and county. The proper name for these structures is Folk Victorian. They are
commonly called railroad-era houses.
Folk Victorian houses are found in cities with and without a Mission, and are located close
to and far from missions. To determine whether or not this folk house and the Mission are
casually or significantly related in their histories, the CHC required a professional
RECEIVED
SEP 1 0 2001
SLO CITY COUNCIL
2
archaeological and historical investigation. The study found no significant archaeological
or historical physical link between my house and the SLO Mission.
In assessing the issue of historical significance during the Spanish and Mexican eras of the
Mission, it is important for the Council to note the CHC's decision ignored the empirical
results of the archaeological and historical investigations of the site performed by N.
Farrell and B. Bertrando. These investigators found no significant archaeological and
historical resources on the site. Also, they found no significant empirical evidence or data
that physically links the present residential structures on the site with any residential
structures of the Spanish and Mexican eras. These aspects of the professional studies make
the CHC's decision appear strained and exaggerated.
In assessing the issue of the historic significance of my house in the American era of the
Mission, it is important for the Council to note that the house was not designed,
constructed, or crafted by a prominent person. My folk house is small and basic, with
plain trim and modest adornments giving it an unpretentious look and a local appeal. It
was built about 1890 by Y. Madril. In 1895 title was transferred to F. Chiesa, owner of a
downtown restaurant. From 1895 to 1994 it was used mostly as a rental. In 1972, a
County Residential Building Record, attached to the County's Assessor's Record, states
that the remaining life of the house is 1 year. (The accompanying photocopies show its
poor condition in 1994 and its present appearance). Since 1994 it has remained
unoccupied and has been improved with structural and surface repairs, and cosmetic
remodeling. Here are only 4 examples of that work: the original front porch was totally
replaced because it was dilapidated to the point of being dangerous; the original windows
were replaced by modern double-pane windows which are totally different in style and
mode of operation; the original foundation was changed; and brick banding was added at
the base of the house as a facade to hide the wood posts that support and connect the
structure to the ground. The recent work, and that of others prior to my ownership,
undermined its authenticity, integrity, and early look.
Efforts have been made to relocate the house. Advertisements were placed in The Tribune,
and owners of suitable properties in town were privately contacted. They all said that the
house was too small and the relocation costs would exceed the value of the house.
The proposed project is a gracious owner-occupied residence that is in harmony with the
neighborhood around the Mission. The design styling is a melding of the Greek Revival
and Spanish Colonial Revival, with hints of neo-classical and Churrigueresque elements
often used in the Hispanic traditions of the early Missions. The proposed project will be a
significant contribution to this neighborhood because of its construction quality, compact
urban form and visual appeal. The long narrow lot necessitates a rectilinear 2-story
structure; indoor spaces with forced viewing to the front and back vistas; appealing small
gardens; and accommodations for vehicles to be out of sight inside inconspicuous garages.
(Refer to the accompanying presentation drawings and collage of existing buildings near
the new residence). The project is designed to have an aesthetic and physical quality that
3
is in keeping with the Mission, and a compact urban form that's suited for sites at the
fringes of the downtown core.
There is a lot going on along Palm Street within 2 to 3 blocks of the proposed residence.
In this short stretch of Palm Street there is a pleasing mix of diverse structures and
activities associated with them. Here I'm referring to: the Mission; the prep school and its
modest athletic field; single family houses and apartment buildings; the Manderscheid
House; real estate and school offices; the Ah Louis store; an antique shop; the Palm
Theater; a large public parking garage; small restaurants; the library and city buildings; and
the Teass House. These quiet activities and the "just around the comer" availability of
downtown make this site ideal for this project. This is a good place for those who want to
own and live in houses that adjoin the urban structures and activities of this small city.
� P
z
/lk �
r
v j '✓ ,
/
t
r
TE
}
756 PALM STREET
Photo's Taken in 1994
I ,
y
h _
_ r
AAINs
R!
t all
. H
�Y
,.i
ad
y.
756 PALM STREET
Photo's Taken in 2001
CD
rn
n � a
o
is 1 lillilb"IZ CDr
CD
4 'MiJ
rn
i
Ili it
o
� u _ � r
CD 2
.. j/
.. � t�l !4} i ;3�WK � lA O im 335 al+ ._,R��✓ / /� {�f i
s
t r
CD
C/1
CD
H �
CA
1 `
� k.
t ,1
y� A
�y u
`� �I�!�II �'' ail f f•�
� f
( ,ti<
I �
n
,
� 1G
i
a
i
4� Pill
o
o �
rn0
x
� x
� f
z r f x
CD
cs.
r
x �
I
o
td A ter.
' 1':•. x; i, r y. �� i..�� i-ice
CD
,P'Sg 27O
y i
CD
7117 v l y _
N
i 3Az €iI�;
3 k et,
i
f
it "W� ( 3•
4_
� f � t �:e I� i e ✓., �
_,fit tt Ix.
t � k
n
1'
1 P
rp
p,
h'V
tumm
c
r� � ti i •Y iii s. ,� i c_v o
i
v b 4
I d 74x
94 � Y
kyT
hHit
�i
:4
','�� I�IIIIIIIIII� In= E;Ir����
w
��I■ �� 1Vt
-• x I_ �; I,t rl
i
lI.IH iif �y
VON
AN
;s
,6ca�
eel v1�
�n.l. t.• is ._I�..-Ham: -;I�.•/
°
w -
'
,I� Iilt,r
,
r'�.
t; F4'gy
t _ t
cic
ip
TWIN
SUED
.a .1•
Rr
.1Oa 11..11
r7f�iD 1
: :a.il9Y 1
'13n.b USI
I kiiQ v Rla�l
LPr'a:,i
c
E.Pitld Il:at.,cls f.1.:,' 1
<� � 115.$L^1P.jr! .. I �I'�Itall•Lri._IGJW- � I - -
.a
1 II I�1 s:1
ji I Y:;ar.1
I Cline
1 •.l.11 l:..:upsr
r 'll Yt SY,1
)1'Ya l
r •1.yI���� I�r,a`�u.
I 1 rl
4• _ I la)l L"
u)r
s..1
SII
�
IIS
;4, l
a
r: I �:E4s� >�•tr�.
1/ 140
{ •.
,
oat
''-a? -74■ y�: fit- ��q'�-
•�a
■Uig—=�='. ' �;��
1 Llr_Y• � ,
FF :'
t F U7 D.1
��� '�IE'rl rl.•rs :J..
�a
�L:i[T, j Ja1Ls'', 1;11 y,M11
1'.l J D 99
4 at. �JYi I i
i kt
rx �����I�1 I� •� F3 Cl. a r..
1 1'
I ?Fi
< �I4 ..:. • - y... i mar;•.I
n a�
' 4� h✓11 SI1 ;'
Iae f1� ,
Pd:ofiJAyl- i
i
....+;rp •bra`. � •. '��
...
i,got
1 41
ammommok
mommol
ME
MEMNON
ONE ON
p rON 0 0 09.
�mommom No
MOMEME09
.r�f ty1t um,mmomm ED,MEMNON MV
t cif C� A 1
+rJVii oEmommmmor'
lef x MEEmoor, C'Y: I .1
;, MMEAMENNI
k s
+d 1
,p �t I nrol
I� 11 t• 4 i t.w: Iii C;Ic-I;.»Icl .I . Fs•
i23'���
I P-
' 33
RLii1' 6. $ Ity
Cf� I&=IW'6r3 j.d ' F1:.
IL.4163'YIP Y'N wua s„
04,
,
[ r,
��TT i� Ci]+L•f
i JEI. �l �Fae!e.lE,�of r;•.i it
+�A x
'I C SIL"•;�.(;:.+J'
t
'�C 'i .c..Y .1•: u
.��:'/.✓
r . I 1 fill
•I•JIlW4nBir^TEeI
MENEM
�r,. i , -,c aesmirmrEaYz�
1r,a a:'�+r ���►'� � fl r i � i lrill:rniY�dicr'a!s
-+� t a 3 y r/t/ h� !• S � � 1 �,fl , Ml�lYrldddrfi, it
-�`.,rrr�.M4p. -r. �,✓ S R�� / �+\t°.�.y''S?� :a` \'� �r 1 1¢I til rr:C"�!r<'sYla�s►�u'cn� `',Y_.
�yhtle,i n, vtfr"r-{in It�A r' '� 6 r ✓ ��•[• \ lY\`•S/t'f fy, t. sre,aller+aamrrszr:.
�"'1r>"-'•1 a r u ?v.y.�- fim . - o���A` , • ♦ t 1 t V -a�aord.mdrm
n i ,.ir' r , •
la. ,� r\ v a . 1 t - 9 'aarruss�rrQs
7 r % i+� r �' �i. -, �a � �\ t \ . i ' .I I+safareeawaai>•F
' C\\ h \ `\�\\ \•°'1 f t { Yt�Y>nfri'ar.r.ri t
1 er,
:. -� � .� f �r r• ¢i1,`y'a'L1e� r' J `�`�.�. �-A uric+raad�aar�il, -� `
f rir�t � ,{, ' r' .dwerlmleetslrre. __
wliiitilii�l �.card
� e �rlle -'•". .
�� .rec+rea• rf Y
v r '� r+rrtw .^• Y^?.^IT"�t' r YIril6an/'9�arzrla�alrrii �
�e ��- Ai f!i .. ksv l�pa-`� 'a / �YGert'aa'�dElf4li � ••
�
'�"4( i9 J I-' w� •r� � w vera�erulrlrarn � �
=E1e....r�e".eeeMY Ih \
k` .,M`1 a 1 iJ� yyyy�a➢ 9 h" a �... y4..•�.fifis;s,..i xr.3 cu rflYccoeeaarrrf v 1 y
f� TYYjj��ll /H I✓ y4.r.. .r d�t �li.i. ��i v,l ,r �.j.
�ECf
Ail .�7 ywi. g'I®"d +r2PGuiOrdB3lri f k L�7 t�J• wt
p.. Y art- rS•: i;
��f y >« 1 ' '{t ���¢��•._ " � �rT1f1#INBrI:Y5N1 y f � t' i
k �✓tt?' Sw'-'�vny y� s'�rara dlaw°�i `kf;'Y � '
�.�r ,7•.h�. h l� I rrrs:wr.aweese�e nr t" J y,
4 l�r'�,y7 n 7 p. 55 x^,.i;L ksm'r r.rxfnrzra.rw.Brr � v
,...'�,-.!t, II , f w! ! �alaeluv,c:xrwf tfi ? �x ir•" ,� '..r
"'% •�,�Fr�f:�!�)) sv' ! ) Y r a.,, , -<w >r �q�..{rX:G �' e�� N�t�'ar�r°rlepo�rim=i �i ,��r�,�s#
.n.� �bf{'3 erf. T ?„� r kc it n�sc.E✓.7`T,t3 �w- ri�1��Ire{��6 N t .• t'
f dYi
f1
i` ':yy.7'•^ rt C [.,� 4 i y' ai. 1 �..'CE 2$W IYe�eN `/dMl 5 - 'r 1
f, S.,•, q•F {n VS 14, �♦ r r k iv � ^++ 'tmrerr.m�sacn � "rt � a { !'
��(y� a'1�e c.+,C" �ir (� � .,yyy `M:. G� Y _, x r 1.��5^ f��''j,.�l -,� rraraa�exrrddom +a rt'Y., 'r�✓
iYfrrw�.N'y�1��.1�II�'
h r 6 : PG Ly -04 a lMelY .ww M.
d.v]�+ ,rt rSw y. r�t� j ,.l 1 �. ,.J F 'nYNW'^•��t l3�i'i Y�r�.'l.wf�m� �a�r � n�,�?
-.
�Jr_
AiiJCrBY®Il9areW
t .alu: Mm > t f sl i.. -r r •N k WP+!!*=oer.�lcua
��•rJ.�i �Ittr/
F.. r r� h •LC f;y Irl 11 ff! Tt.t J, + y�_, M.Ji^' v'ij� N/ .i't' :M,•a+lO'mdWelflii! P,f =r�tr;'S YY ..
tt 'I! ✓.�wikbr�.. to t + Y r � (� �-t%7 +3��� r 4r4' t :rrrm.rYcr+l.�soc .i+ Y'
( r IEYYCYilielmN•ri" f y >�
° ` '4 g�a 3" ' I^ `+' a iena:iw.rea,arrl•: t II
r'4,�'btx 7�L>��"^xa�' � � • fl� t = `>- tC�� is prw�riRRlf! u}� �r
yy.+ 2 tN• ✓ fw,+{�']a J� 1 Y W x 1^.. r :r1rYl1 :�Br m C ,.
w.sms
.f1> f •Ni(1 ..II.. ^OYa�� � t �p� ,� r .{ \ '(' K /Miry rR IOILI�.�i
P!'/y„+t+. x�.!r T•I- (L ti Y, e' n '�, } J .as�le.Fi+a.iialri+na '
iti 4y L rt� ���N-j6. 1�, C L i �ris�'F i�s..+�K •�"'� htK/N'17rR�al�d101, 1( �
3 L Kt y�' 4. T y K •i d ; J"w' .I rr1�rIYY1�.a7�r �+ f ""
YkR� � u I, i 4„ r •w. '�S+k--3 , .",•v^^, . e:mrtcwrdwrlc Enk^!
i it ,� �"1 "," 'ICgerrwLidwf rrJ
MI�Y�
orrY! q e;
�'Jf�ii:Calm2m, k '
h t �+' t ��;� a �'+Mkl r� ly ' " - � •N gt,~'�; v. -�5 ,x ry �r s�airxsieieBw�r- �`
1 h�4 it S -rz ,J rl t m , 'C `� V Yl'! 'ig , s%3 .rdrlcdYwlfn9im fl 1 1i
4,-z
fj
m.,,,� s� erMBa�.isYvldro pC2F ,°t'�h
'✓. ar-,rk lr"{ ` v 1 J,3':. 5'i.' x '" 'W '.�r»aeBlamsr,r•ri I
i [mYi1D-y'iW upn
Iz 1�r�� `}• r r / JI J , Y r x o('F Jr r , ,� �i`` lSlr+r_�'101r.�
a 9 r�.i '� ?;� ) `�:k ",L• .. .rt 11�;,:; .! .r '�"'� .•q-r1Car,•els��>: T'�L71 �'". t.l
,{ ... 1f-' s , >w , if „ < t 4 ,?-r h �c.." Il:A•rYir'/drerl -: y i
• V� i Y y<,.. T .\fraOR1,�4':O]LwAs�'arfY/ia
( 3r � .. ee I 4 � �'a 4 F r•R 6M, .^ Y �I.t♦�eittCRYlrlrlrr� 1., trGa'. .
I! K .• { -U'r s!J< 1 a a i' F '` � ♦ 1 Y�tl Yrl^.yp.tCY^..'mif■i
-
r
I.Y"' ��J,HY J. } 4 i' ih ' %iCfrddP.rBpiv!
Ir"� .�dyd>irm "m llnm
r fHt
Y Leo®„ s M
x '1�9�K� v b� 't 4� •reodea:ilydcrn
�'YIry fi�iif��l:liO73� �t'�.r�oona�•c'.ie�il�.�►-
- I � � 1 I �•�n.vrrdee.�e1BM
,jir ` 'i^-. / - - d�53ii kfi$iri� 'remrraawrrdr.
ril rS{•,f t h�ii iiiiii�'p ramrinraa'.ar�s"
,ffl! al 3�V ,:r.a .P- _i'i �cw�aei�ioYn R
+•(�h a ' LBJi`RMI�lrrB f
v rl elewar".:.irwBrl
nril�lwdlrlw,n.z '
sm
r� .r'u ad d'�CRmYF
IY(• ri' GdeodJrrrw
Omm"In Cit=ddlAG®
�er� ,1C ,%• Ll 1��� �i=Mww� All
llP�T.
"^+�:•.wr•rnrata:n
lI:��A,�',IV� irk •"�i7 :11l/,Llr'.te IIK�^
Y'�,,, /� ,� �; alKs� 'es•�IrlprG il ,Ylm.rr:
/.Gr"JIIfF'lii
" Nil Ei0 �3' w✓ 4 aer 1rlYibieilIDAiliiG
.Yp. a ,alit
' 1 y.` ,3�,��i6,YI�' r-•+ �,^11
om "lame r
�Q`Pnig3//L'+..
� 4{ryTr �..p `i r rrv. . 1•
r ..,�y ,� r er. alYr rYecn:ei.drtl
,� spr{�r�s dle5
ie[,Yes ri�w�rr�%
P� � �,�`— 11'+t 9r �j.r rmwsrrrui_ croFec
r ilIYBY�rdi�'-]
�� b•�r ;'• � #n-!Vy ati-�''n+?'g r r. Lx�i wrdnnr+4t!!I
- �� ���'• � rt'F,�':,I-� � �.;"���"c'u�„ti'S,.': 3�r .�rlw'�e.'�i�aarir�il�i
��`1� '��"v�' �>�t^si^"s 1T; ,,} I Yi�o°r-°"w'n"rs"rs...,�or`mr. -,_•
1' i •1 e��9 G•, da ' '.�d`>e r} r,�„f,h/ s! , t�isrc rMrn• Y^.
IreRfl4.�:�� < � -'�, 7-,.>rt.?2K >si •( �`-' araia:rraa.wwi
i ,,� �O�flf `r.s�l: �L'1,,k;'';�� .'�-�' �,.• �j. �a�'�`eaLBei.:fa1e�i:` t €-
a r. rrdNSIf1eY
r �✓y� „' ` rvauerrir..lsllre.. � :
l� ■VrrB�r.:- � .- r A' �. 1 f'. eer rreelrm.ef
NMI
i•: �au�A - '�. k -.t,x'7-.'� ecYrrpua::nar: � ..
`-
I
')I}7 MA �l r - � �fIrRYL71wN0at■ rr
"■_ II
r-
r
E
to
jai
•r+. '•G}rip, n \�'. ���:�:.}\i�u 1:!. S 1,1'1 i,i Y.0 l' !p'��!!,ElE
`r •a ,,e +� " +ti�\ e •��I ,} i w�7Ywsr.SCile3llC;
' � .v 't �\\+ �\. + �. rt._ jltS t •• •• ww^.�=...,�to
`.•tt .��' '.,�+ ° '4i+\1 \ +�� t ` -' �� KyiC�uai�53IP:�
r..�l. :,.. � •.-., �• � m.'.;FilwESws^.f9E7W
•ar:�,.. - C wl4�90iQilE
�/'ii::'>� ilwiEw�uYwarA'ea
j r! I®K7::'TSlC!
3�Ysl�rY� a,
wlwus�.�
_, wYY.-s�rarww
� II !wil:"_aIMR:E
wesawEwan�YVeYe
_ �wlraotYw! w
— � Fnawleor�ar:E
(I w�e+wlow�M.eYw
�� 1 t wiYo-rc®rar
t / � \ CG9i�YtGE��i6
ew��am'iY��x
•,w�wlEalAid
wAs�AYE>w�+Ytt
�.Y� lr3�::iliAF
aa�ilwwYr.
- i .:;•1�"i-�z' i":':haw•:/ ,� ,w`'uw�w.':EwYro
t � -21 ` h;rC6w®w�Yli
� � .�,O uaf.• • i I k I',YlC".�Il�!!AP_"lIYKY
'` .IYpYeAwlwlldEEY11Yt
1 Ysaii�ll�l�:E
d3
NOW
��m II PCI�!lSr�il�YlY
sh
t. �'fAi'Jll7oM!
1 / :'�AffAi�t�l7fLi�
,, E7RlD !'AB6Z1!l�A�'E
`', a� � / ®Itstl YEIiw<+lio7wEKYNK.
':w119l1911tYYY!
'i — .aY2K/ 'lIS.+>.4w07s•1Mt•.��9'tl ,
_ F 6At1'IAd'�9EY�YID071�
- 1 Io.a Y r'.AYY•'ai..`df�i"!•nas
i 'gal ..pi:f�Y�Yr7
II "/ - i iEEBww�lE.VF7YrYiQ1
'i •'i•' / :IwmorlYar:Yc'IYIOM:
Fill` , — veses::�lYao�awe:
' ... � .��1 �aEo-�Ye�•'�w.rvr�s
rearw��:�EY?a
� ■ . j.8E:;2�.wYe E
i •' I I 1� maaluteu�B
�ortaYeu�r:aw
tf:�-�;'.;,r �' ■ 11 ;csessAaAAnr�Eat
t t!�� �� tKw»wrAY+xmr�'eeaaw
t' \i ✓ , _Ill IR+ , �.1 IEYFLdwt�T."'!^_91O
r -
--tat �F,IT�••7YIYY®Yro
u.,. �� I •. >> � 1 IY011l1w�i61E
�• a� ro'RO@iG7YI�PiYwEIK
r, V E!lii'wAw/w'JY!
rt rr w°Ji'^'CYIIlPIwA9
^� :�f •'
''�i. at. 4�M1: ;7�a�N of-••
� / t
f�
!`AEE IL'-.! kt,rr..'�C�n.r
ifYw. �7 eery
IOIGEi�: tsrc;.ct.y I�
?Gi�lE4Syif r�l I
;G6liiJiB
'IE itl�6YN1:'A
• � �AwSL^i0f61G1� �
1
10, S i d e w a l k
EL
44
d
Y
Y
.r
r .
a ,
n
� A
m
h h <
o
i
Y II c
3
g
Ih
6
0
6
m , v .,.3
o
14 v
Eli
®t.a�da91r111 � S
eirirAr:■/rw11
Qua-"'+�sua
rmmrmrsls+o•.a
rmmor.— stoma
amanr-=vrmm
a7a ppHr��1/F/
iLw_��"—'WILToi/i6M
MEN
rM/�C"'i�1ri/ r
'aaifarll�iG■�r/�'ZI � .�
wG".?rrli7i�7®
®rc�/lccRlRr�/ ,
!/mersrm�rlrl _
ra�l�srs:sN■' � -
r/is�r�mia�a■ �� a:", c
'/iG`+BIIOiiMCrl9 '
0r3/rri8i#�G
enm'or a■ ,,1
ai®1�raaa
r�/�6r10lBCiW//' w.� -
SACB+�ai1®>�al'A i
rsw�=P.9 �ri1/ J
rrrrsua//Iea�..a�a
ra�+rrinl/I�a+n r i
r�:^axlmar/Fslvc
�lppvsas�.;rs7rrarc�r i
rfS3i67CA1lRMr'&�/ i
m1A01am1rFilm JF 4 i
�/�li®1�®Py''C ■ �
1♦IrGtia■Ir"riiRllrr i %
ewsamv:+rrrRe t,, �
irirs/174191i•3�e"1,'m•'. �7a�l� �
SLAi@E!`.AJiC^�:.-;M3i�:: e1'F�r+lll ■
ansllr0�®mWwt; rFiS: df�
MvemR'1!.'=�ESSv I' Fla�IyA7 _.
IF IV<l
il�R'II7 �rs9rrR1^-w; 111�J�t�1;� (
C:'dR/?lsiW�IFAC1 J .S,.ywi
1lli'1. 9i?'a7@@37.•,Yil'; map"rawy�lcrsxrir:I s; low I+
SrR.`ic)Saf/MiirM6`Y1J.; BORT
POW
lam
EE i11l�ii1�!.rfiC'^R If wrap
�t■iiR9;=riri9447M;..
91t^':il^_IdlrlOq.SF"1�, iU.Wl
Memr�aaa■4 "r.'SO77.
D/49C-c ':S/1ri�I�A11: OWN
G■31i5�1/4iT»r/:•
JlRiSS.Sd�1lllS"`�;a<i�+
rrrrxa�arlaar;
aanma:clesl�z�:s-ev r
4are1*:�!�mnaear�:.
I>rlmra�^..1Rxa:
smar:u�ax:'11�
Im/r■�raol.�.alai.:
■rv�1111//Is�r
���•-•,r�r,areoc:
seaa■i1�e--^teae�l,
wp�olc�lirn6■Ii
■ ■ic-Sax�1
■