HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/20/2004, PH 1 - CONSIDERATION OF CULTURAL HERITAGE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION OF 774 CAUDILL STREET TO THE CITY'S LIS council. M�umDw
EA Agenda Repont �'wm
C I T Y O F SAN LU I S O B 1 S P 0
FROM: John Mandeville, Community Development Director
Prepared By: Buzz Kalkowski, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF CULTURAL HERITAGE COMMITTEE
RECOMMENDATION OF 774 CAUDILL STREET TO THE CITY'S
LIST OF CONTRIBUTING HISTORIC PROPERTIES AND APPEAL
BY PROPERTY OWNER OF THE DETERMINATION OF
HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE (ARCMI 143-03).
CAO RECOMMENDATION:
1. Deny the appeal and uphold the Cultural Heritage Committee's determination of 774 Caudill
Street historic significance.
2. As recommended by the Cultural Heritage Committee (CHC), add the residence .at 774
Caudill Street to the Listing of Contributing Properties.
DISCUSSION:
Introduction
On October 7, 2003, the applicant submitted a request to remove any historical significance
designation associated with the residence, and to demolish the structure to increase the
marketability of the property. The request does not include any development plans.
The CHC held a hearing on December 8,.2003, and made the determination that the residence
has historical significance and should be added to the Listing of Contributing Properties (Hearing
minutes: Attachment No. 9). Four findings were made to support the recommendation: 1) the
house is associated with the "Little Italy" neighborhood; 2) it is more than 50 years old; 3) it
contributes to the historical and architectural character of the "Little Italy" neighborhood; and, 4)
is part of the 1891 Imperial Addition(Streets named for the reigning monarchs of the time).
On December 15, 2003, the applicant filed an appeal of the CHC recommendation disagreeing
with the determination of the dwelling's historical significance, stating that the neighborhood is
now"commercialized" and the building's condition limits rehabilitation (Attachment No. 10).
Site Data
Property Owner: Lillian Colombo
Trustee acting on behalf of the owner: Loretta Colombo-Bruno
Zoning: Manufacturing
General Plan Designation: Service & Manufacturing
Council Agenda Report—Colombo Appeal of CHC's determination (ARC MI 143-03)
Page 2
Site Area: 15,980 square feet
Site Description: The level site is developed with a house and a detached garage. Surrounding
land uses include two residences, a car dealership, a car repair shop, a landscape maintenance
operation, a meat packing/processing operation and a vacant office.
Background
In June 2000, the Cultural Heritage Committee identified "threatened and endangered buildings"
that appeared eligible for historic listing and were subject to use changes, neglect, or other
factors that could lead to demolition(Attachment No. 14). These properties were to be reviewed
for historic significance with any application for development or demolition. 774 Caudill is one
of the properties identified in that survey. A 1992 Historical Resource Survey II by Margaret
Lovell, Historical Researcher, proposed the creation of the Little Italy Historic District
(Attachment No. 8), and identified the house at 774 Caudill as a "Recommended Contributing
Property" associated with the proposed Little Italy Historic District. The "Little Italy" area was
home to Italian-American working class families, beginning around 1910, with most homes built
during the 1920s. Many of the men residing in this area were railroad workers. Although the
CHC has discussed the creation of a Little Italy historic district, it postponed further action until
a more detailed, current historic inventory of the area could be done..
Basis For the Appeal
As explained in the attached letter(Attachment No. 15), the appellant wants to remove the house
to better market the property and objects to it having a historic listing.. Two building condition
reports were submitted by the appellant(Available in the Council Reading File No. 1 and No. 2),
and note that.the building is in fair-to-poor condition. The appellant is concerned that having a
historical determination would hamper efforts to sell and redevelop the property with Services
and Manufacturing uses consistent with the area's zoning. As yet, there are no specific
redevelopment plans. At its December 8, 2003 meeting, the CHC determined the property has
historical significance, meets City criteria for Contributing Property status and recommended
listing, in part, to ensure that adaptive reuse of the house could be considered with
redevelopment.
What is a Contributing Property?
Buildings can be classified as either "contributing or "non-contributing" properties. A
"Contributing" property is defined in the Historic Preservation Program Guidelines as a building
"built before 1941 that has retained its original architectural style and viewed in the context of its
surroundings, and contributes to the historical character of the area (City Council Resolution No.
6424 (1988 Series)). While most contributing properties are located within historic districts, the
CHC and the City Council have determined that they may be located anywhere in the City if they
meet the above criteria. An example is the Van Gordon Residence at 1408 Johnson Avenue,just
outside the Old Town Historic District. The Van Gordon Residence was added to the Listing of
Contributing Properties in August 1997.
Cd-planIBKICHCICHC143-03ColombolCC143-03CouncilRepoq
Council Agenda Report—Colombo Appeal of CHC's determination (ARC MI 143-03)
Page 3
Effects of Historic Listing
Once a building is added to the Listing of Contributing Properties,physical changes or changes in
use are possible, provided that such changes promote the structure's original architectural style
and character. Significant exterior architectural changes are referred to the Cultural Heritage
Committee to determine whether the changes are consistent with City standards and to meet
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requirements. If listed as a Contributing
Property, the property is deemed historically significant pursuant to the CEQA. Demolition,
reconstruction, or relocation of historically significant structures may be considered a significant
adverse environmental impact. Significant adverse impacts can be avoided if the Secretary of
the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving,
Rehabilitating, Restoring, and Reconstructing Historic Buildings or the Secretary of the
Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings
(1995, Weeks and Grimmer) are followed.
Contributing properties are not eligible for the Mills Act Program. As. designated historic
resources, however, they may be eligible for other preservation incentives including flexible
zoning and building standards, tax credits, and historic rehabilitation loan programs.
Historic Data
Historic Resource Inventory sheets, dated 1989 and 1991, are located in the Council Reading
File (No. 3 and No. 4). The house is described as a wood frame, single story, "Bungalow" having
a hip/pyramid shape roof, with a bay window, and with two small shed-roof additions to both the
front and rear(See Attachments No. 3 and No. 4).
In a January 8, 2004 phone conversation, Delphine Silva said that her father built the house at
774 Caudill in 1908, the year her parents, Mr. and Mrs. Alexander Mainini, were married, and
the year before her older sister, Mrs. James Quaglino (Quaglino Roofing) was bom. Mr. and
Mrs. Alexander Mainini also owned the house at 796 Caudill (The house next to the Colombo
House, at the comer of Caudill and Victoria). Mr. Mainini worked for the railroad both as a
section hand and later in the roundhouse. The Mainini Family moved from the house in 1914
when Mr. Mainini quit working for the railroad to begin farming on a ranch northwest of the
City, in the Chorro Area.
Mrs. Silva said that originally the house had a front porch with gingerbread trim. A 1956
building permit for the 774 Caudill Street address (Christian Street at the time) was issued to an
Angelo Colombo. It is believed that the front porch was rebuilt and enclosed with a large picture
window at that time.
In a phone conversation on January 8, 2004, Mary Cattaneo, who resides at 756 Woodbridge, (A
listed Contributing Property — see Previous Council Action below) one block north of the
Colombo House, said that her parents, Mr. Angelo and Mrs. Luigia Piantanida, lived at 774
Caudill when they first married. They moved to 774 Caudill when the Mainini Family moved
from it to the ranch. The Piantanida Family rented 774 Caudill from Alex Mainini for one year.
Cd-plan/BKICHCICHC 143-03Colombo/CC 143-03CoundlReport
/-3
Council Agenda Report—Colombo Appeal of CHC's determination (ARC MI 143-03)
Page 4
Near the end of the year, Mr. Mainini decided to sell the house and Mr. Piantanida could not
afford the asking price of$250 for the home. Mr. Piantanida worked for the railroad as a section
hand foreman.
John Bruno, Lillian Colombo's son-in-law, provided the following information. Angelo
Colombo is the late husband of Lillian Colombo. Angelo Colombo's occupation was a cement
finisher/plasterer. It is believed the Colombo Family purchased the house in the 1930's from a
family who lived in San Francisco. The name of the selling family is unknown.
A brief department library search of 744 Caudill Street property owners and the Colombo Family
did not uncover any historically significant people or important events associated with the
structure or property. Time did not allow for research on the Mainini and Paintanida Families.
Eligibility of 774 Caudill Street for Historic Nomination
The Cultural Heritage Committee determined that the building's historical significance was
based on its age, its representation of a working class, Italian neighborhood, and its association
with the Imperial Addition, a residential subdivision from the late 1800s. The 774 Caudill Street
dwelling is an example of the small, square-like, pyramid roof, once-common, working class
residence. The structure has retained much of its original architectural character and footprint
This is evident by comparing the building footprints on the 1926 Sanborn Map (Attachment No.
5) and the most recent footprint map (Attachment No. 6). The 1956 rebuilding and enclosure of
the front porch with its large picture window is the only significant architectural/structural
change(Attachment No. 4).
Previous Council Action
In October 2001, the Council added three other properties in the Little Italy neighborhood to the
Contributing Properties List: 750, 756 and 762 Woodbridge Street. These properties were
considered significant due to their historic association with early Italian-American families in
San Luis Obispo, due to their contribution to the historic character of the neighborhood that was
once predominantly residential, and due to their age and architectural character.
Significant Impacts
If 774 Caudill is upheld to be historically significant, demolition or relocation of the house may
result in significant, adverse environmental impact under the California Environmental Quality
Act, most likely requiring preparation of an Environmental Impact Report(EIR).
If the property is not held to be historically significant, the house could be removed after meeting
permit requirements. The applicant would be issued a demolition permit 1) upon request and
presenting evidence that for a period of not less than 90 days from the date of permit application,
the building was advertised in a local newspaper on at least three separate occasions not less than
15 days apart, the house's availability for relocation, and 2) upon submitting photo
documentation of the structure.
Cd-planIMICHCICHC 143-03Co1ombo/GC 143-03CoundlReport
Council Agenda Report—Colombo Appeal of CHC's determination(ARC MI 143-03)
Page 5
ALTERNATIVES
1. Do not adopt a resolution designating the property as historic and grant the appeal.
This allows the property owner to demolish the residence, subject to the requirements of the
Demolition and-Building Relocation Code. In addition, this action would allow removal or
relocation of the house and redevelopment without further review by the CHC.
2. Continue the item for additional information or study, and specify the additional information
or analysis needed.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Vicinity Map
2. Aerial Photo of area
3. Front photographs of residence
4. Photographs of sides and rear of residence
5. 1926 Sanborn Map
6. Most recent building foot print map
7. Composite of the 1926 & "most recent footprint" maps
8. Map of proposed "Little Italy/Railroad Historic District"
9. CHC draft minutes
10. Draft resolution denying the appeal and adding 774 Caudill to Listing of Contributing
Properties
11. Draft resolution granting the appeal
12. Appeal
13. Excerpt, Historical Preservation Program Guidelines (Appendix C) Historical Designation
Criteria
14. Tentative List of Threatened Sites and Buildings
15. Letter from Loretta Colombo-Bruno
Council Reading File:
I. Structure condition report by Eric Coulton
2. Structure condition report by John Bruno Historic
3. Resources Inventory Surveys— 1989 and 1991
4. Excerpt, Demolition and Building Relocation Code 2001
5. Historic Resource Survey II Completion Report, Margaret Lovell, January 1992
Cd-pianlBKICHCICHC 143-03Colombo/CC 143-03CounalReport
s. fill
C.
gill
N Niliii�'unn�uui �
filli
Y11111VICINITY MAP ARCMI 143-03 ,
��N� N� �►►�� wr� '
INllllluul 11 nn�d � ;;,.
1
.IRV
:r �
F J
n
1
f
r I,.,. *t4 f •�y l � �.•h•J
.1
1
� ���� , •�J vi � J 14 •
h .
7. . N•
4
4*4
Y h
I !
—•��• � �''1� __ .� � _. far
4 '•�
� y
,.
.-. .
' � -
_...
• =��
P �
,_ - - ��
_� �' � s
r •a. - i
-�
'�+ Y
� ��..
��
•
. s �
t ire - ��L ^ i .
� '
1 �Y^� -
� ��� �
.>
T 4
„�may'►.
r' I
T�
4 �
2
• �rRj
pp
1
i
el4'
yy
if
+ IC -
Attachment 4
O
144D `may_ • ""TT -��r s'? .-,�? L �t .. _.���
•4 �. L..1 JSJ ��{ _..� { T
s+ ♦ �
�< G
1 1
:z"
:» {
J 1pIS '
J � I
Attachm.nnt 4
O
� f
r
i.
CU r -
a �
i of
r -
Co
O
i
r p d
Ll
µ
s r ,
Attachment 4
f
Mi .
x:, t
Ir
.q
r
k w.
k
Q e• t•'
41. .t;. ` j If 4.
J,
f_f' • �f
. ,
L
Imo ;
°l
It
;' EI F
t4 L
i I
000,
Attachment 5
fki
O - --
O 9 4
\J✓� Q y c
® ° O
ED
P
P v"
A
0 �
� tqZ� Sr�NBo�N t`n1�1�
®= NO LoN 6eL sW�is.T
C�N
A..00\ Attachment 6
` r g 1 i
0 I V i �+
♦ r�
q5 ,h�a III( ' ♦♦i
'I LL"'S� ♦
i
�1 1 �
ra ♦
♦ w
P C
i
J���''�t�� � =gyp �� '9 S2, •9
ry 4° sj
I'1v��TL LP
�
wo OBRI s
R
97
sJ(L 8
+,
rRp 1�.�ry �Pe a or R
uobsi°
x
y L
2P14
coo
O O < O O ah
CAUOIL
/J-15
= D�nn.0Lt5H6D CO>`(T"R.Lj�!UTfN4 PROFIEQTI
w
C f
Attachment 7
JY4� ` o n `\ , • • � �
U
D � 7 • •
z
���� � m J 97`4 i • !
dor
c � -
Q .40
.
9 '
od%jhs Jig t6 �t L7R
SZ �
K 4N 'h % 8
b GL y�'•841� � ���� 1 Y/
G
o
ve O rho
IL
� Sth
a
WO OBR1'O
87 2 w Si P91 ' Si
QO N mac•` p\� D \ \ \\ A
❑ ARC Ta 0
T
9
'LI` yIZI. M
Avoor
0 X0 u n �;
• GoE i 't
CUOIL� " jos ,ae 61
s
ep ( Tc or- sRaLl�p fj r�n�-r J-15 -R
Attachment 8
JEN/YMER ST.
w I ;
QSi �fi St. i c RACHEL
e
_.J
F s
J \ /
_D Ej 11Are
Q J u
5 O m�
- ���• y —sail T.43ii ;'i
� 1
p al 01 I
o v'1
x x - f •{
A I •i
I "
•
\ st. ry ✓ 1
�' 1•'� 1 '!Jf / NIL CAVD11jr
� ID/ '� ✓
v a v v �� t~•
W � C \
i
G N ' ♦ i LAa'zErtf *tea Ola. �rc\�4. 4:
SCALE
1 STONERIDGE DR
1:A610 CK'I d�
BLUEROCT. \"
�}O
LITTLE ITALY/RAILROAD DISTRICT
����������IIIIIIIllll�,f����lllllll city of *=ReO61Mended as, Historic Resource property
M US �B�S�O = Recommended Contributing property
® = Recommended District boundary
o80 Palm Street/Post Office Box 8100•SanLuis Obispo,CA 83403.8100
72-M
Attachment 9
Draft
MINUTES - --- -_
SAN LUIS OBISPO CULTURAL HERITAGE COMMITTEE
Special Meeting of Monday,December 8,2003
The meeting convened at 5:30 p.m. in the Council Hearing Room, San Luis Obispo City Hall,
990 Palm Street.
ROLL CALL: Present: Chairperson Paula Juelke Carr, Barbara Breska, Chuck Crotser, Bob
Schrage, and Frank Scotti.
Absent: Committee members Tom Wheeler and Sandy Baer.
MINUTES: On a motion by Committee Member Scotti, seconded by Committee member
Crotser,the minutes of the October 27, 2003 regular meeting were approved as submitted, 5-0.
PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS:.
1. 774 Caudill Street. ARCMI 143-03. Determination of historic significance for a
potentially historic house in the "Little Italy" area, M zone; Loretta Colombo-Bruno,
applicant.
Buzz Kalkowski presented the staff report and showed slides of the house proposed. for
demolition. -John Bruno, representing the applicant, explained the background on their request.
They were asking for a determination of no historic significance to allow the demolition to
proceed and to enable the property owner's family to sell the property.
In response to a question from Committee member Schrage, Jeff Hook noted this item was
before the Committee because the house was on the CRC's list of"Threatened and Endangered
Buildings" and had been identified as being potentially historic in the City's Historical Resources
Survey Report. II (Lovell, 1992). Consequently, City procedures and the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) require a determination of historic significance before a
demolition can be approved. He provided additional background on the"Little Italy" district and
noted in keeping with usual CHC procedures, staff was not making a specific recommendation
on the request.
John Bruno, architect, the applicant's husband and son-in-law of the property owner, provided
background information. He noted the 92-year old property owner was born and raised in San
Luis Obispo and lived in the house until 1993, but that she can no.longer live independently and
needs specialized care. She has no money, and the sale of this property is needed to pay for her
care. Their efforts to lease or sell the property have been hindered by the possibility that the old
house is historically significant, so they would like to demolish the house and sell the property as
vacant. The house is dilapidated and would have to be totally rehabilitated to bring it up to code,
and potential buyers are not interested in the house. He felt the house had no historic or
architectural significance and that the Little Italy neighborhood was too far committed to
commercial uses to be viewed as a residential area. He felt the house was an eyesore.
Attachment 9
CHC Minutes, Special Meeting of December 8, 2003
Page 2
In response to a question, Jeff Hook noted that recent Zoning Regulation changes allow
residential uses in the M zone and can accommodate mixed residential and commercial uses, so
that this property could have single or multi-family units. He added that this area has historically
had a mix of residential and commercial and light industrial uses. Mr. Hook explained that if the
CHC found the house to be historically or architecturally significant and supported historic
listing, its recommendation would go to the City Council for final action. If the Council agrees
and adds the property to the Master or Contributing Historic Property lists, demolition would
require architectural review, taking into account the house's condition and the design of the
proposed replacement building. If the CHC determines the property is not historically
significant, photo-documentation of the house would be required, along with a 90-day waiting
period during which the house must be advertised as being available for relocation.
Chairperson Carr opened the public hearing.
John Van Wyk, Valley Mazda, 2436 Broad Street, spoke in support of the applicant's request.
He said he was an interested party in that he would like to purchase the property. He suggested it
was late to try to save the historic houses that might have once been there. There is a lot of
traffic, and most of the area consists of commercial uses. It's past the point of being able to
restore the historic significance of the house and the area.
Hearing no further public comment, Chairperson Can:closed the public hearing.
Committee member Schrage commented it was important to get "living history" from the
house's owner and to get historic photo-documentation. On one hand, we do have a building that
has some value because it was occupied by an early Italian-American family, but the
neighborhood is not too good—there are very few houses left. We did save some historic houses
on Woodbridge Street, nearby. The possibility of future rezoning may encourage housing, but at
the present time the house's condition doesn't merit preserving. On the surface it looks OK, but
it was not a well built building and would take a lot to rehabilitate.
Committee member Breska noted three factors that shaped her views on the request: 1) the front
porch addition had modified the original house design, 2) the house has been allowed to
deteriorate and materials, such as the siding, have not been protected, and 3) the house's setting,
or neighborhood, has been altered to the point that there no longer appears to be a residential
neighborhood. She stated there appeared to be no alternative but to support Action Alternative 2,
that the house is no longer Historically significant due to building changes that have affected its
historic integrity.
Committee member Crotser noted this was a difficult case and that the area was now a "mixed
bag", but that it was likely to undergo future changes back to a more residential character. The
site is big enough to accommodate a mixed-use or residential development, and the property
could be sold while preserving the old house at least until a new development project is
proposed. The City would have the option of allowing demolition later, with the possibility the
house could be rehabilitated or integrated with a new development.
j-IZ
Attachment 9
CHC Minutes, Special Meeting of December 8, 2003
Page 3
Committee member Scotti stated it was never too late to consider the option of historic
preservation. The CHC's responsibility is to consider a property's historical or architectural
significance or potential significance compared with its current condition, not whether it is too
late or not too late to preserve. He was leaning toward finding that the house is not a historic
resource given its poor condition. Although potentially restorable, he felt it would be cost
prohibitive.
Chairperson Carr noted the CHC's charge was to determine whether the property met adopted
criteria for historical designation, and to look beyond the exterior appearance of a building. A
building's historic significance may transcend mere architectural appearances or condition. If
this property was the only remaining example of the Little Italy neighborhood she would be more
concerned, but there are other potentially significant residences across the street that appear more
secure. She believed the building's integrity and setting had been adversely affected, and that
Action Alternative 2 may be appropriate.
Committee member Crotser stated, as someone who had done rehabilitation projects under
similar circumstances, the appropriate action may be to support Contributing Property listing
until such time as anew development plan can be reviewed before demolition is considered.
Mr. Hook explained provisions in the City's Historic Preservation Program Guidelines regarding
historic designation. He noted that for Contributing Property status, the building must be at least
50 years old and must contribute to the historic character of the neighborhood, and these criteria
leave discretion to the CHC and Council as to how much architectural character has been
retained. He added that Contributing Properties vary considerably in how much of the original
building exterior has been retained— some almost entirely original, others, for example, with 2-
story additions. He also noted the owners have some options to demolition, including marketing
the property with the house remaining, with the possibility of demolition in the future when the
City approves a replacement project, or the possibility of splitting the lot into two lots and
retaining the house on one of the lots and selling the vacant lot. In answer to Committee member
Crotser, he added that under the proposed Draft Housing Element, greater flexibility in lot sizes
may be possible to preserve housing on smaller than the minimum lot size. Under current rules,
such an exception would require approval of a variance to lot size.
Chairperson Carr asked staff it there were possible financial incentives or fee waivers to assist
I
he applicant if he chose to request a lot split. Mr. Hook noted that while there is no specific
incentives or waivers available, Council has the authority to waive fees. He commented,
however, that would be unusual. If the property were historically listed as a Master List
property, the Mill Act Program may provide a financial incentive for rehabilitation.
Committee member Scotti had difficulty finding the house contributed to historic character of the
neighborhood, given the changes to its setting. If the definition of the neighborhood were
expanded to include houses on the other side of Broad Street, than the house could be considered
as contributing.
/- 13
Attachment 9
CHC Minutes, Special Meeting of December 8,2003
Page 4
Committee members discussed possible bases for historical significance and ways to preserve the
house while allowing the applicant to still achieve their objectives.
Committee member Crotser commented there was an opportunity here for the owner and City to
accomplish short- and long-term goals if there were flekibility on lot size. He moved that the
CHC recommend the City Council add the house at 774 Caudill to the Contributing Properties
List, with the following findings:
1. The house is associated with the "Little Italy" neighborhood, a working class
neighborhood of the late 19th and early 20th century, occupied mostly by Italian-
American families, many of whom were railroad workers.
2. The house is at least 50 years old and meets criteria in the Historic Preservation Program
Guidelines for designation as a Contributing Historic Property.
3. The house contributes to the historic and architectural character of the "Little Italy"
neighborhood, as described in the Historical Resources Survey II Completion Report
(Lovell, 1992).
4. The property is part of the Imperial Addition, a residential subdivision recorded and filed
in 1891, with streets named for reigning monarchs.
Chairperson Can- seconded the motion, adding that this house raises important issues about the
character and future of the Little Italy area. Committee members discussed the motion in detail
and reviewed a map prepared by Margaret Lovell .that showed the Little Italy neighborhood
including properties located on both sides of Broad Street. Committee member Crotser felt that
there was enough of the original Little Italy neighborhood left to build on what's there and
preserve and enhance its character.
The motion carred, 4-1, with Commissioner Breska voting no.
Chairperson Carr and Committee member Crotser volunteered to attend the Council meeting
where the CHC's recommendation would be considered. There was also support for City fee
waivers or other incentives, where possible, to help the applicants preserve the house.
Chairperson Carr opened the public hearing again to hear additional public comment.
Pete Colombo, son of the property owner, provided additional background on the request. He
noted that the City had allowed other houses owned by Italian-American families to be removed,.
and these were more historically significant. He questioned why this house would be designated
historic when other nearby houses in better condition had been removed in recent years, and felt
it unfair the City would not allow the owner to remove, the house to enable the property's sale
and help pay for the property owner's health care.
Craig Colombo said he lived in the house and that it was not conducive to residential use due to
noise and traffic. He said the property is not in a residential zone — it's a commercial zone, and
Attachment 9
CHC Minutes, Special Meeting of December 8, 2003
Page 5
believed no one would buy the property if the house had to remain. It would be very expensive
to preserve and rehabilitate the house.
Hearing no additional comments, Chairperson Carr closed the public hearing and proceeded to
consider agenda item 2.
2. 1746 Chorro Street. ARCMI 141-03. Remodel c e at the historic Aston House
to convert to an office/bedroom, R-2 z njamin and Susan Holty, applicants. (To be
continued to a date uncertai
On a unanimous e,the Committee continued the item to a date uncertain.
3. 1167 Marsh Street. ARCMI 150-03. Add exterior.stairs and Landings, replace roof at
the historic Graves House, O zone;Bob and Zoey Schrage, applicants.
Buzz Kalkowski presented the staff report. Bob Schrage, plicant, described the project.
Steven Chandler, applicant's contractor, explained desi d construction details and materials.
There was no other public comment, and Chairpers arr closed the public hearing.
Committee members generally supporte a proposed stairs and landing, and.re-roofing. Ona
motion by Committee member Crots , seconded by Committee member Breska, the Committee
determined the proposed project as consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards For
the Treatment of Historic operties, and referred the item to the Community Development
Director with a recomm ation to approve the project with the following condition:
Roofing shall b ray "Slateline" shingles to match existing roof as closely as possible.
4. 871 Islay Street. ARCMI 163-03. Request to demolish non-historic house, eplace with
1-bedroom house and 2-bedroom house. R-2-H zone; Mike McNamara; icant.
Buzz Kalkowski presented the staff report. Ernie Kim, archite , described the project and
explained that the old house on the property had not been li in for many years and was in a
severely dilapidated condition. He described the chan that had been made to the house, and
noted that the new housing planned was design o reflect the architectural character of the
historic neighborhood.
Committee members did not fe the house contributed to the historic character of the
neighborhood due to its arch' aural changes from the original, its limited visibility from the
street, and the lack of his cal association with persons, groups or events in the City's history.
On a motion by Co ittee member Schrage, seconded by Committee member Crotser, the
Committee vote -0 to determine the property at 871 Islay Street had no historical or
architectural s' nificance.
i
Attachment 10
RESOLUTION NO. (2004 SERIES)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
ADDING 744 CAUDILL STREET TO THE
LISTING OF CONTRIBUTING PROPERTIES AND DENYING THE APPEAL OF THE
CHC DETERMINATION OF 174 CAUDILL STREET HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE
WHEREAS, on December 8, 2003 the Cultural Heritage Committee held a public hearing
to consider recommending to the City Council the addition of 774 Caudill Street to the Contributing
List of Historic Resources due to its historical and/or architectural significance to the community,
and
WHEREAS, on December 15, 2003; the applicant filed an appeal of the Cultural Heritage
Committee's determination of historical significance, disagreeing with the historic value of the
structure, stating that the neighborhood is now "commercialized" and that the building's
condition limits rehabilitation; and
WHEREAS, this City Council conducted a public hearing on January 20, 2004 and has
considered testimony of the appellant, interested parties, the records of the Cultural Heritage
Committee hearing and recommendation,and the evaluation and"recommendation of.staff;
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. Fes. The residence located at 774 Caudill Street meets the Historic
Resource Criteria For Building Evaluation and Recommendations as listed in the Historic
Preservation Program Guidelines, Category VIII, History - Context category, based on the
following findings:
1. The residence is associated with the "Little Italy" neighborhood because it is
identified as being potentially historic in the City's Historical Resources
Survey Report II (Lovell, 1992), and all identified residents of the property
are of Italian decent;
2. The residence is more than 50 years old;
3. The residence contributes to the historical and architectural character of the
"Little Italy" neighborhood because it is identified as being potentially
historic in the City's Historical Resources Survey Report II (Lovell, 1992),
and it is representative of early Twentieth Century working class homes,
typical of early Italian railroad workers' residences;
/-I(P
Attachment 10
Resolution No. (2004 Series)
Page 2
4. The residence is part of the 1891 Imperial Addition, which was first
developed as a residential development and the original street names were
named for the reigning monarchs of the time.
SECTION 2. Addition to Contributing Properties List. The residence located at 774
Caudill Street, and more specifically described in the attached Exhibit A, is hereby added to the
Contributing Properties List of Historic Resources, based on historic documentation on file in the
Community Development Department.
SECTION 3. Publish Revised Contributing List. The Community Development Director
is hereby directed to amend the Contributing List to include the property listed above, and to
publish a revised Master List for public distribution.
SECTION 4. Recording of Historic Properties. The City Clerk is hereby directed to record
the properties'historic designation with the County Recorder,pursuant to State Law..
SECTION 5. Appeal Denied. The Council upholds the Cultural Heritage Committee
determination of the 774 Caudill Street historical significance.
On motion of , seconded by and
on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted this 20th day of January 2004.
Mayor David F. Romero
ATTEST:
Lee Price,C.M.C.
City Clerk
Attachment 10
Resolution No. (2004 Series)
Page 3
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Jonathan owell, ity omey
O,Qachment f 6
Resolution No. (2004 Series)
Page 4
EXHIBIT A
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF LISTED HISTORIC PROPERTY
Following is the legal description of the property added to the City of San Luis Obispo's Listing of
Contributing Properties,by City Council Resolution No. (2004 Series):
774 Caudill Street.
City of San Luis Obispo, Imperial Addition, (Assessor's Parcel Number (APN#) 004-921-
013). Owner: Lillian Colombo.
Cd-plan/BKICHC143-031Reso143-03CobmboContributing
1
I
Attachment 11
RESOLUTION NO. (2004 Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
GRANTING THE APPEAL OF
THE CULTURAL HERITAGE COMMITTEE DETERMINATION OF 774 CAUDILL
HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE
WHEREAS, on December 8, 2003 the Cultural Heritage Committee held a public hearing
to consider recommending to the City Council the addition of 774 Caudill.Street to the Contributing
List of Historic Resources due to its historical and/or architectural significance to the community;
and
WHEREAS, on December 15, 2003, the applicant filed an appeal of the Cultural Heritage
Committee's determination of historical significance, disagreeing with the historic value of the
structure, stating that the neighborhood is now "commercialized" and that the building's
condition limits rehabilitation; and
WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing on January 20, 2004 and has
considered testimony of interested parties, the records of the Planning Commission hearing and
action, and the evaluation and recommendation of staff, and
BE IT RESOLVED,by the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows:
SECTION 1. Findings. That this Council, after consideration of the 774 Caudill Street
property, finds that it does not meet the Historic Resource Criteria For Building Evaluation and
Recommendations as listed in the Historic Preservation Program Guidelines, Criteria for Building
Evaluations,based on the following findings:
1. Though the residence is associated with the early "Little Italy" neighborhood, the
character of the neighborhood east of Broad Street has changed over the years, is
mostly commercialized, is zoned Manufacturing; and shows little resemblance to the
earlier Little Italy community;
2. The residence is not compatible with most neighboring structures, which are
predominately commercial structures and uses;
3. The property is not associated with any significant historical person or event.
SECTION 2. Granting the appeal. The appeal of the Cultural Heritage Committee
determination of 774 Caudill historical significance is hereby approved.
i
- Attac�rment 1:1
Resolution No. (2004 Series)
Page 2
On motion of , seconded by , and on
the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:.
the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 20th day of January, 2004.
Mayor David F. Romero
ATTEST:
Lee Price C.M.C.
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ity A --o Lowell
Cd-pLmMKICHC/CHC 143-031Reso143-03ColomboUpholdAppeal
Filing Fee: $100
r Attachment 1Z
` �5�
city J Or -REFER TO sEcnoN 4 -- — --- -
san Luis OBISPO
APPEAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL
SECTION I. APPELLANT INFORMATION 634 MiRwcoD AvG
f 012r,-17-AGni Qt eQ -a? Ltit) sp-n1 TOSCc� X15125
Name Mailing Address and Zip Code
Apb Z�o2- c!5'47
Phone Fax
t- " S" 1631 FAi9 VW M e?" JoG- 65[25
Representative's Name Mailing Address and Zip Code
411-11 26q-- a s4:1
Title Phone Fax
SECTION 2. SUBJECT OF APPEAL
1. In accordance with the procedures set forth in Title 1, Chapter 1.20 of the San Luis Obispo
Municipal Code (copy attached), I hereby appeal the decision of the:
,,5VL-(2AL 0 lAiG G�ttt—Lj
(Name of Officer, Committee or Commission decision being appealed)
2. The date the decision being appealed was rendered: Q�� � 20b 2
3. The application or project was entitled: :274 4-"AUQI LL- n (1,
1�SSD M— tJ�,E
4. 1 discussed the matter with the following City staff member.
U J?--a -1" K n I.A J I on
(Staff Members Name and Department) (Date)
5. Has t(iimatter been the subject of a previous appeal? .If so,when was it heard and by whom:
}� I
SECTION 3. REASON FOR APPEAL
Explain specifically what actions you are appealing and why you believe the Council should consider your
appeal. Include what evidence you have that supports your appeal. You may attach additional pages, if
necessary. This form continues on the other side.
Page 1 of
/-Z Z-
Attachmprit 1?_--
Reason for Appeal continued
Ol'Z1�1 n'T" 4-E2gE!== -rT4A i 714a L2561 alfa NAL APY
5161JI EC,6t1l PU6 i E9;GAL VA14UE ALD MIR
lyol� �oM�,rt 2C.�>4t.tzr✓D '2 71AB R)NT 744A[ -ME gt5M - QJ
C�e M S ? (1 I l i S 8922. A1J 0 IM L.-T'S G U90FAII e, 8 I) 1DA1
W665,63L]5 A W - erV&.JQLt 6 AL ��At3L.LI T�c��.5 . � CITY
G Zt1 --i2 A tZ (4iS_Ff2 tG VAUS O P (7 LbhAC t✓-?CIS
SEGb71��. ' PELLM' ry
'Y
r � i. f r._ _ a + r h
-' �; PCe�aa�Lii` aGisoua46:004�`C , acjptionHn local gouemrrfcttrandtip:
1 itl ag afiltfiflim Gzew rrieiat.< o �ils��"tltre�fo, s l>oosis assoi ate v¢itf°.�jty . M
? ;o �Co istd rati�a ftan�ap r in o��pz if obi�1*� eals pedaining to a� �
A-a-ul p'p'iir o` orrpYo�ect; s'flgj "t$� li W6 �b,-vnh`id'h>mus�accomj�agy�thye; T
pedi fdrm _t t.
Your ngfat^t2�exerclse`an ap peal trne's inrtfh certain respoilslF�iilties If you#Ile an
'64-p lease.l roc a :d sit 6e he cd a tip`r b5` 1aY�frQrn fifer g this>forrn Abu�vlllb
u�otl'fi`ed��in r en-g-ijf�fFi04AO at j
nil; pdtbeEore fhe( ur�cll ow�oryour+ ;.
,n esel a e i1,110111111'e�ukllic he rang,=anc�F#o he paepai!kto rnak'e ypur 5 ,
��a� ° rotacftestitu3o7s?lfiraid� t,<'
_. +, r ,•`Tf x' `' C"Sr:• s .. . n d' aL. -.s 4 ,.re•. ,E y 'Q , r
-• -'Ti„ ♦ .,,t� '. ;} +.r, r_p� rY',,: �...... y 'Y°.a'. 3 ,it a . i t'. �� ♦ i.�
-4x roA rad] ce xtay b v `e'7i do � aln>ar�1`tlrfgsuaUairoumstances: lf,yptlffeel pu
' Ab ,mo fEaeGler ;VCe�a`se bea
.34601';
�p� alifry es�ftl)ihi`alylsre�cei�fiodaffe7�ffi'aeppeal:is nopcedto,tfiepub�lc;#F�e`r
t� rik
eU.0240 < tlbtnTttiragequest&i oncey� o e scret�oca o t�d"Oly, ounc ' <
.y�." �� A.,n+�•`R'� ... ,,yr,+.�.r x.�("S,�5"��^d`��>"-r r'•.{,!� 'f. {Fa`.t'F+�;"....`r',.. * a t,.s.> .. r-.
i�'a oda iP�arrohdmyb`t�[ialfl
�e Gi�yr�oufi�Cil
�tiili", �Fj Y4t r1s� � T. " � � .z i'r •'4 ti ��" � i ,.'r # rs lk
V ..T'. !..'-8 yya,t,-�w- �.-r•Z Sst rr. ^2 - -' . yrs
Jg eAp iia
,#} y t r (3do)'
ms s:r �% w—fi• �. -' aThe a"6ove•Jn8mediappe ,y7•p
l.zce o. o steer e�Co . 15.ee ecis(ons �l Itanf,hasalrteafd , aid
he3C O toy` .p a1 spa oCJy oYficlal>or Cou cl6advisory t3oc]y. r
This item is hereby calendared for
c: City Attorney
City Administrative Officer
Department Head
Advisory Body Chairperson
City Clerk(original) Page 2 of 3
8w
,t
_•��+.7� F.-_arll�l� _-Ulli ilii: II
. Y-'� n.. -i I I �•1 •til
I'
T 38: 3EKXST03ELXCJL3L
3P3Et3E:S3E: xozq
FaOGR M
GUX 3LXlq3E:S
I � IIS 1� i i�'�Il�.��;��� I � lI � (�Il,��f - �•
4w `( �1
�1
M
J of
oBispo
d
Attachment13
City of San Luis Obispo Cultural Heritage committee
DELINEATION OF HISTORIC RESOURCE CRITERIA
FOR BUILDING EVALUATION AND RECOMD'IENDATIONS
ARCHITECTURAL CRITERIA
I. $S3LF
Describes form of building such as size,structural shape and details within
that form (i.e., arrangement of windows and doors, ornamentation, etc.)
Building style will be evaluated as.a measure of:
1. The relative purity of a traditional style (as compared to building styles
in San Luis Obispo);
2. Rarity of existence at any time in the locale; and/or current rarity
although the structure reflects a once popular style;
3. Traditional, vernacular and/or eclectic influences that represent a
particular social milieu and period of the community; and/or the uniqueness
of hybrid styles and how these styles are put together.
4. The degree to which the structure has maintained its integrity (i.e.,
assessment of alterations and structural condition, if known)..
II Desisn
Describes the architectural concept of a structure and the quality of artistic
merit and craftmanship of-the individual parts. Reflects how well a particular
style or combination of styles are expressed through compatibility and detailing
of elements. Also, suggests degree to which the architect (i.e.,
carpenter-builder) accurately interpreted and conveyed the style(s).
Building design will be evaluated as a measure of:
I. Notable attractiveness with aesthetic appeal because of its uniqueness,
artistic merit, details and craftsmanship;
2. Overall attractiveness because of craftsmanship and aesthetic value, though
not necessarily unique;
3. An expression-of-interesting details and eclecticism among
carpenter-builders, although the craftsmanship and artistic quality may not
be superior.
i
i
Attachment13
IIl. Age
Age is a measure of how relatively old a structure is in the context of the
history of San Luis Obispo, primarily Anglo-American history (circa 1850). (See
Scale of Building Age).
CRITERIA FOR BUILDING EVALUATIONS
IV. Arc itect
Describes the professional (an individual or firm) directly responsible for the
building design and plans of the structure.
The architect will be evaluated as a reference to:
1. A master architect (e-g., Wright).
L A known architect who made significant contributions to the state or region
(e.g., Julia Morgan).
3. An architect who, in terms of craftsmanship, made significant contributions
to San Luis Obispo (e.g., Abrahams who, according to local sources,
designed the house at 810 Osos - Frank Avila's father's home - built
between 1927 - 30).
4. An early architect who is otherwise of no special significance but can be
identified as a professional (e.g, pioneer architects of the region as
confirmed by AIA archival membership records of California and the Central
Coast).
V. Environmental Design Continuity
Describes the inter-relationship of structures and their relationship to a
common environment. Refers to the continuity, spatial relationship, and visual
character of a street, neighborhood, or area.
Environmental design continuity will be evaluated as a measure of the:
1. Symbolic importance of a structure to the community and the degree to which
it serves as a conspicuous and pivotal landmark (i.e., easily accessible to
the public, helps to establish a sense of time and place).
2. Compatibility of a structure with neighboring structures in its setting on
the basis of period, style (form, height, rooflines), design elements,
landscapes, and natural.features; and how these combine together to create
an integral cultural, historic, or stylistic setting.
3. Similarity to and/or compatibility of a structure with its neighboring
structures which, collectively, although of.no particular aesthetic value,
combine to form a geographically definable area with its own distinctive
character.
�;2�v
HISTORICAL CRITERIA AttachmentM
YI. History
Pam
Describes a person, group, organization, or institution that has been connected
with the structure, either intimately or secondarily, for at least two
generations (i.e., 40 years):
Historical person will be evaluated as a measure of
or group was the degree to which a person
1. Significant to the community as a public leader
etc.) or for his or her fame and outstanding recognitionay locally ressman,
regionally, or nationally.
2. Significant to the community as a public servant who has made early,
unique, or outstanding contributions to important local affairs or
institutions (i.e., councilmen, educators, medical professionals,
clergymen, railroad officials).
3. Contributions which, though minor, directly or indirectly, had a beneficial
effect on the community (i.e., firemen, law enforcement officers
workers, businessmen/shopkeepers, city employees, etc.). • postal
VII. History- XvM
Associated with a social, political, economic, governmental, educational or
other institutional event that has been important to the community.
Historical event will be evaluated as a measure of:
1. A landmark, famous, or first-of-its-kind event for the city - regardless of
whether the impact of the event spread beyond the city.
2. A relatively unique or interesting contribution to the city (i.e., the Ah
Louis Store as the center for Chinese-American cultural activities in early
San Luis Obispo history).
3. A contribution which, though minor, nonetheless was important to the
community OX, local interest.groups); or, alternatively, a unique or
interesting contribution only loosely connected with the structure, object,
site, or district..
VIII. History:CQ ext
Associated with. and also..a prime illustration of predominant patterns of
Political, social, economic, cultural, medical, educational, governmental,
military, industrial, or religious history.
Historical context will be evaluated as a measure of the degree to which it
reflects:
�7
T11.
Attachment 13
Early, first, or major patterns of local history, regardless of whether the
historical effects go beyond the city level, that are intimately connected
with the building (i.e., County Museum).
2. Secondary patterns of local history but closely associated with the
building (i.e., Park Hotel).
3. Secondary patterns of local:history but loosely associated with the
building.
Historical context will also be evaluated on the basis of:
4. Whether or not a structure occupies its original site and/or whether or not
the original foundation has been changed, if known.
i
Attachment14
June 2000 EXh!bft A -- - -
Cuitura&Heritage Committee
TENTATIVE LIST OF THREATENED SITES AND BUILDINGS
No. Address Potential Estimated Threat
Resource Age
1 292 Hi era Craftsman style house 1920 Street widening_
2 296 Hi era Italianate style house 1885 Street widening
3 2005 Johnson Craftsman house 1913 Delapidated
4 2180 Johnson General Hospital 1927 Use Change
5 160 Brook St. Luke's Baptist 1920 Encroaches into
Church street; use changes
6 255 Elks Ln Sunset Drive-in 1950 Delapidated; land
use changes
7 811 El Capitan Log Cabin Theatre 1930 Develo menti
8 3615 Broad Victorian Farmhouse 1900 Development
9 3470 Broad Dutch Colonial house 1912 Development
10 842 Monterey Quintana Building/ 1880 Delapidated
Blackstone Hotel
11 4587 Broad Craftsman Bungalow 1910 Development
12 4150 Vachell Farmhouse 1910 Development
13 165 Suburban Farmhouse 1900 Development
14 12995 S. Hi uera Motor Court Apts. 1920 Development
15 2963 S. Hi uera San. Revival Offices 1920 Development
16 753 Woodbridge Railroad House 1900 Development
17 743 Caudill Railroad House 1930 Use Changes
— z> 18 774 Caudill Bungalow 1920 - _ Use Changes
19 796 Caudill Railroad House -1900 _ - - -Use Changes
20 797 Caudill Bungalow 1915 Use Chanes
21 2502 Victoria Bungalow 1920 Use Changes
22 2546 Victoria Craftsman Bungalow 1920 Use Changes
23 2653 Victoria House 1940 Use Changes-
24 2663 Victoria Cottage 1920 Use Changes
25 755 Francis House Use Chanes
26 831 Francis House 1930 Use Changes
27 835 Francis House 1930 Use Chanes
28 855 Francis House 1920 Use Changes
29 881 Francis House 1920 Use Changes
30 999 MontereX Blackstone Hotel 1880 Use Changes
Jh/Uchc:threa1ened.1s1
i
Attachment 15
LORETTA COLOMBO-BRUNO
1634 fairwood ave/san jose,ca/95125
September 8, 2003
City of San Luis Obispo
CULTURAL HERITAGE COM ITTEE .
C/O PLANNING DEPT.
W. Jeff Hook, Staff Coordinator
City Hall
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo,Ca 93401 .
SUBJECT: RESIDENCE AT 774 CAUDILL ST.
RE: PROPOSED SALE/DEMOLTTION
TO THE COMMITTEE CHAIRPERSON:
IN A RECENT CONVERSATION WITH CITY STAFF MEMBERS WITH REFERENCE TO MY
FAMILY'S PROPOSED SALE AND SUBSEQUENT DEMOLITION OF THE SUBJECT BUILDING, LW
AS ADVISED THAT THE CULTURAL HERITAGE CONMI IM HAD NAMED THIS PROPERTY
AS ONE THAT FELL INTO.THE ENVELOPE OF POSSIBLY BEING A BUILDING OF HISTORICAL
SIGNIFICANCE.
AS POWER OF ATTORNEY FOR MY 92 YEAR OLD MOTHER, THE LEGAL OWNER.OF THIS
PROPERTY THROUGH A LIVING TRUST, I AM REQUESTING A 'REVIEW' BY YOUR
COMIviI TEE TO REMOVE THIS DESIGNATION, SO I MAY COMPLETE A SALE OF THIS.
PROPERTY. THE PURPOSE OF SALE IS.TO PROVIDE THE MONEY NECESSARY TO.PAY FOR
MY MOTHER'S CARE AT A LONG TERM HEALTH CARE FACILITY, TELE COST OF WHICH
WILL EXCEED$5,000 PER MONTH.
MY AGENPT/KUSBAND, MRH JOHN BRUNO, A-LICENSED, CALIFORNIA ARCHITECT, HAS
BEEN ADVISED BY YOUR STAFF, MEMBERS TO GATHER CERTAIN INFORMATION TO
PRESENT TO YOUR comm TTEE IN SUPPORT OF MY REQUEST, SUCH AS REPORTS OF
INSPECTION OF THE BUILDING BY TWO PROFESSIONALS IN. THE CONSTRUCTION
INDUSTRY`AND TO SUBMIT PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE PROPERTY..ATTACHED FIND SUCH,
INFORMATION IN SUPPORT OF MY REQUEST.
'SHOULD ANY OF THE CITY'S STAFF HAVE ANY QUESTIONS PERTAINING TO THIS
INFORMATION, PLEASE HAVE THEM CONTACT MR. H. JOHN.BRUNO AT (408) 978-0977.•HE
WILL BE MY AGENT AT ANY MEETINGS HEAD TO REVIEW THIS REQUEST.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
SINCERELY,
TTA COLOMBO-B UNO
POWER OF ATTORNEY FOR
LILLIAN A.COLOMBO zt3 3
� -3a
�IIIIIIIII�I�����I�IIIIIIVI�IIII
EENUaison Repout
,city of san tuts osispo
RECEIVED
January 13, 2004 JAN 1 2004
To: Council Colleagues SLO CIN CLERK
From: Dave Romero, MayorG/''/
Subject: Performing Arts Center Commission meeting of January 8, 2004
The major item of business at the most recent Performing Arts Center(PAC) Commission meeting was
approval of the schematic design for the Acoustic Renovation Project. The Commission authorized .
moving forward to complete design drawings for all components of the project, as detailed in the
schematic report. They also determined that the first phase of the projected to be bid out would be the
forestage canopy (clouds) and accompanying lighting, with additional passive remedial work such as
hanging velours and sound absorbing felt included as bid alternates. An improved speaker system for
amplified performances would be part of a second phase, along with musician and choral risers and a
choral shell.
The total cost of Phase I, including the bid alternates, is estimated to be $2.8 million. The City has
already paid $200,000 toward design and construction and Cal Poly has pledged $600,000 toward the
design. The Foundation for the Performing Arts Center (FPAC) originally agreed to fundraise for an
additional $1.4 million, which should allow for completion of Phase I without the bid alternates
recommended by the acoustician. However, FPAC has now agreed to continue fundraising above that
level, with the hope that the alternates can be included, as well. Neither the City nor Cal Poly is being
asked for additional funding. Construction is expected to be conducted on Phase I in the summer of
2005, with efforts made to impact the Mozart Festival to the smallest degree possible.
COUNCIL C'DD DIR
RED FILE Er-CAOA
SIN DIR
M
NG AGENDA ,el?I ACAO FIRE CHIEF
ATTORNEY DPW DIR
DAT ` ITEM #WWRJ OCLERKIORIG ?'POLICE CHF
1�QtSvtl1 ❑ DE2T HEADS ReUEO DIR
abuaJUL TILDIR
E HR DIR
Ua on Report PAC Commission