HomeMy WebLinkAboutCHC-1009-16 (ARCH-2193-2015 -- 71 Palomar Avenue)RESOLUTION NO. CHC -1009-16
A RESOLUTION OF THE SAN LUIS OBISPO CULTURAL HERITAGE
COMMITTEE, RECOMMENDING THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW
COMMISSION FIND THE PROPOSED REHABILITATION, ADAPTIVE
REUSE, AND REPOSITIONING OF THE MASTER LIST SANDFORD
HOUSE PROPERTY AS PART OF A 33 -UNIT MULTI -FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL PROJECT CONSISTENT WITH THE CITY'S HISTORIC
PRESERVATION PROGRAM GUIDELINES AND SECRETARY OF THE
INTERIOR'S STANDARDS FOR THE TREATMENT OF HISTORIC
PROPERTIES (71 PALOMAR AVENUE - ARCH 2193-2015)
WHEREAS, the Cultural Heritage Committee of the City of San Luis Obispo conducted
a public hearing in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo,
California, on June 27, 2016, pursuant to a proceeding instituted under application #ARCH
2193-2015, LR Development Group, applicant; and
WHEREAS, notices of said public hearing were made at the time and in the manner
required by law; and
WHEREAS, the Cultural Heritage Committee has duly considered all evidence,
including the testimony of the applicant, interested parties, and the evaluation and
recommendations by staff, presented at said hearing.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Cultural Heritage Committee of the
City of San Luis Obispo as follows:
Section 1. Findings.
1. As conditioned, the proposed modifications to the Master List Historic Sandford House and
site which includes rehabilitation, adaptive reuse, and repositioning is consistent with the
Historic Preservation Guidelines and Secretary of Interior Standards, since character defining
features will be retained, repaired, or replaced in kind.
2. That the proposed construction of the new, 33 -unit apartment buildings is consistent with
Secretary of Interior Standards for new construction on historic properties since the new
construction is subordinate to and compatible with the scale, size, massing and architectural
features of the Master List Historic Sandford House.
3. That the proposed removal of the non -historic additions are consistent with the Secretary of
Interior Standards for Rehabilitation because they have not acquired historic significant in
their own right.
4. As conditioned, the project is consistent with Archaeological Resource Preservation Program
Guidelines since the project will be required to include an excavation monitoring and data
recovery plan to document and preserve any artifacts found during construction.
Resolution No.CHC-1009-16
ARCH 2193-2015 (71 Palomar Avenue)
Page 2
Section 2. Environmental Review.
The Cultural Heritage Committee finds that the Initial Study of Environmental Impact and
resultant Mitigated Negative Declaration and Addendum properly characterizes the project's
potentially significant impacts relative to historic/cultural resources, and that the incorporated
mitigations measures appropriately ensure that potentially significant impacts are mitigated to a
less than significant level.
Section 3. Action.
The Committee hereby recommends the Architectural Review Commission find the project
consistent with Historic Preservation Program Guidelines, and Secretary of Interior Standards,
subject to the following conditions.
rnnditinnc
1. The ARC should evaluate further reduction in scale and massing to ensure the new
development does not overwhelm the prominence of the Historic Sandford House and
give great consideration to the City Arborist's recommendations for protection of trees.
2. Plans submitted for final review shall include all details, cut sheets, dimensions, and
specifications as determined by staff to be necessary for the ARC to ensure all materials,
windows, and architectural details are of high quality and suitable for an infill project
adjacent to an architecturally significant historic structure.
3. The project shall remove the smooth panel horizontal elements around the windows on
Buildings A and B.
4. The project shall be in accordance with the mitigations measures identified in the draft
Mitigated Negative Declaration including the following:
a) Preservation of Archeological Resources. A formal monitoring plan shall be
prepared and approved by the City prior to project construction. The plan will need
to include a summary of the project and expected ground disturbances, purpose and
approach to monitoring, description of expected materials, description of significant
materials or features, protocols for stoppage of work and treatment of human
remains, staff requirements, and a data recovery plan to be implemented in case
significant deposits are exposed during construction (Mitigation Measure CR 1).
b) Removal of Non -Original Additions. Extreme care shall be taken during the removal
of the non -original additions to avoid damaging the original building walls. Any
non -repairable or missing materials revealed upon removal of the addition directly
attached to the Sandford House shall be replaced in-kind to match existing stucco.
Any historical wood -sash windows found during demolition shall be preserved for
reuse on the Sandford House where appropriate (Mitigation Measure CR 2).
c) Relocation of the Sandford House. The elevation of the existing Sandford House on
the site shall be maintained as closely as possible to the historic siting of the original
Resolution No. CHC- 1009-16
ARCH 2193-2015 (71 Palomar Avenue)
Page 3
house. The reconstructed foundation and platform porch on the house in its new
location shall retain the amount of height and exposure that the existing house
exhibits. A stair height similar to that which currently exists shall also be maintained
(Mitigation Measure CR 3).
d) Sandford House Window Replacement. Modern replacements for the first -floor
solarium windows shall minimally consist of window sash that is of the appropriate
proportion to fit into the original openings. Multi -light versions which replicate the
original multi -light windows located throughout other areas of the residence should
be used to the maximum extent feasible in the event that the original window design
for the solarium cannot be confirmed (Mitigation Measure CR 4).
e) Low Impact Cleaning and Paint Removal. Only the gentlest methods of paint
removal, and stucco cleaning or removal shall be used on or around the Sandford
House. High-pressure water blasting; sand or other hardened material blasting; or
chemical paint strippers that damage wood grain or erode metals shall not be used
unless specifically approved by the City (Mitigation Measure CR 5).
f) Massing, Location, and Architectural Features of the Proposed New Construction.
The applicant shall maintain the architectural relationship between the new
construction and historic residence and the design for the new apartment buildings
shall respect the dominance of the Sandford House on the property using scale and
massing. New construction shall not be over -detailed or designed to draw attention
away from the Sandford House (Mitigation Measure CR 6).
On motion by Committee Member Kincaid, seconded by Committee Member Papp, and on the
following roll call vote:
AYES: Committee members Kincaid, Papp, Baer and Vice -Chair Brajkovich
NOES: Committee members Larabee and Walthert
REFRAIN: None
ABSENT: Chair Hill
The foregoing resolution was passed and adopted this 27th day of June, 2016.
-jv&"X"
Brian Leve le, Secretary
Cultural Heritage Committee