|
Cultural
Heritage Committee Action Update
November 26 ,2007 Monday
5:30p.m.
ROLL CALL:
Committee Members, Chuck Crotser, Lynne Landwehr, John Fowler, Dean
Miller, Elise Wheeler, Vice Chair Robert Pavlik and Chairperson
Barbara Breska. All members were present.
STAFF:
Kevin Waldron, Planning Intern, Phil Dunsmore, Associate Planner,
Pam Ricci and Jeff Hook, Senior Planners, and Kim Murry, Deputy
Director of Long-Range Planning.
PUBLIC COMMENT:
Paula Carr, 615 Lawrence Drive, expressed concerns about the
dilapidated condition of the historic Milestone Motel Inn at 2223
Monterey Street. She noted much of the original hotel had been
demolished and that what remained was in poor condition due to
exposure to the elements. She added that the historic Old Gas Works
building at 280 Pismo Street was tagged with graffiti and was for
sale. She was concerned about damage and possible loss of both
historic structures. David Brodie, 873 Chorro Street, recommended
that the CHC broaden its analysis to include adaptive reuse, and to
identify opportunities where this technique might be more
appropriate than demolition of an historic resource.
MINUTES:
Minutes of October 22, 2007 regular meeting.
The
minutes of the October 22, 2007 regular meeting was approved on a
7:0 vote.
Chairperson Breska recused herself due to a potential conflict of
interest and left the hearing room. Vice-Chair Pavlik assume the
role of meeting chairperson.
PUBLIC
HEARING ITEMS:
1.
1333 Mill Street.
CHC MA 143-07; Request to change the property’s historic
designation from “Contributing” to “Master List” and request for a
Mills Act Historic Preservation Contract; R-2-H zone; Pierre & Terri
Rademaker, applicants. (Brian Leveille)
Jeff HookH presented the staff
report and described the request. He noted that staff felt this was
a prominent and attractive Contributing historic property in the
Mill Street Historic District, but that without further information,
it was not clear how the property met eligibility criteria for
nomination to the Master List of Historic Resources. Pierre
Rademaker, property owner and applicant explained that since
purchasing the property several years ago, he has been
“unremodeling” the house to remove architecturally incompatible work
done in the 1950s and 1960s and return to what is believed to be its
original architectural character. He acknowledged that, as stated
in the staff report, there are no photographs or plans to document
the house’s original appearance. He briefly discussed the history of
the house’s designer, Theodore Maino, and its builder, William J.
Smith, and noted both were locally important. He described one of
the house’s early residents, Warren Burch, appointed City Engineer
for the City of San Luis Obispo in 1915 and who later served as
County Engineer and Deputy County Surveyor.
Vice-Chair Pavlik opened the public hearing. There was no public
comment, and he closed the public hearing.
Committee member Crotser felt the house was a pretty strong
candidate for the Master List in Eligibility Categories II (items 1
and 2) and V (item 2). Committee member Landwehr agreed, adding
that she would like the applicant to prepare a brief letter
detailing how the property met these eligibility criteria.
Committee member Wheeler also agreed the property met eligibility
criteria if it is looked at “holistically.” Committee member Fowler
felt more information was needed before he could be comfortable
supporting reclassification to the Master List. Committee member
Miller gave a brief background on the Maino Family and on William
Smith. He felt the applicant presented a strong case for
reclassification and for inclusion in the Mills Act Program.
Committee member Pavlik agreed that the property was a good
candidate for the Master List, but felt the property’s association
with the “History – Persons” criterion was weak.
After a brief discussion, on a motion by Committee member Crotser,
seconded by Committee member Miller, the Committee continued the
item to a date uncertain with direction to the applicant to return
with detailed information on how the property meets Eligibility
Category V, Items 2 and 3, and to provide documentation on the
garage and the house’s interior. The motion carried, 6-0-1
(Chairperson Breska absent).
Chairperson Breska returned to the meeting.
2.
1010 Broad Street.
ARC 111-02; Review the proposed demolition of the Art Center
building and reconstruction of a larger facility in the Downtown
Historic District; PF-H zone; San Luis Obispo Art Center,
applicant. (Phil Dunsmore)
Phil DunsmoreH presented the
staff report and stated that based on the proposed architectural
design, the project was not consistent with cultural heritage
policies in the General Plan Conservation and Open Space Element and
with the Historical Preservation Program Guidelines for new
development in a historic district. Art Center Chairperson Karen
Kyle and Board Member Bruce Fraser presented slides showing
renderings of the proposed building and described the history and
purpose of the project.
Chairperson Breska opened the public hearing. Pierre Rademaker, and
Joe Kourakis, 1577 Tanglewood, supported the proposed design. Dan
Krieger, historian and former CHC member, also supported the project
design. Hearing no further comment, Chairperson Breska closed the
public hearing.
Committee member Miller said the proposed building’s massing, per
se, didn’t bother him, but that he did not support the overall
design. He felt a contemporary design that was more compatible with
the historic setting was possible for the Art Center. Committee
member Crotser felt architectural contrast can strengthen historic
building character and that the juxtaposition of contemporary and
historic buildings can be effective. He gave examples of such
contrasts in Washington, D.C. He felt a high quality building was
essential at this location, and that architectural details will
“make or break” the building. Overall, he supported the design
approach, but expressed concern about the curtain wall and the
storefront on the back and wanted more details on the details.
Committee member Landwehr was concerned with the proposed building’s
height, mass and scale compared with the historic Carnegie Library
across the street. Committee member Wheeler agreed with Committee
member Crotser and liked the project. Committee member Pavlik liked
the building design and materials, but felt the design was not
consistent with City policies on projects in historic districts. He
also liked the Old Mission, Carnegie Library and San Luis Obispo
Creek and felt the initial placement of a building at this creekside
location was a mistake. He noted that citizens are concerned about
the changing character of Downtown, and questioned whether there was
another, better Downtown location for the Art Center which would
meet multiple City objectives. It would allow the site to go back
to a more natural condition as an homage to the Creek and resolve
the historic compatibility issue. Chairperson Breska said the City
has policies on new development in historic districts and questioned
the point of designating historic districts if we were not going to
follow the policies. She felt the glass in the project helped to
mitigate the massing and historic compatibility problems and liked
the project but felt “torn” in terms of historic compatibility.
Committee members Pavlik and Miller felt that redesign of the
building was needed to better reflect the site’s historic context,
but weren’t looking for a faux mission or fake historic building.
Committee member Landwehr felt that the Art Center location was good
for visitors and enhanced the Downtown with a variety of experiences
within walking distance. She expressed concern about not being able
to see the proposed building in context with the existing historic
buildings and wanted to see graphics with views from different
vantage points (for example, from Chorro Street, looking across the
Mission and Plaza areas toward the Carnegie Library and proposed Art
Center building. She was concerned with the precedent that might be
set approving such a contemporary architectural design in an
historic district.
On a motion by Committee member Pavlik, seconded by Committee member
Crotser, the Committee determined that revised project drawings will
be required to make a recommendation to the Architectural Review
Commission, and that the project design should: 1) include specific
changes to more closely address issues raised in the staff report
relating to General Plan and Historic Preservation Program
Guidelines compliance, 2) better reflect the project’s setting and
place in City history, and 3) include graphics showing the
integration of the project with its neighborhood. The motion
carried, 7-0.
3.
785 High Street and 2015 Santa Barbara Avenue.
ARC 100-07; Review a mixed-use project with eight residential units
and ground floor commercial space in the Railroad Historic
District; C-S-H zone; Sally Quaglino, applicant.
(Tyler Corey)
Kevin WaldronH presented the
staff report and gave a brief slide presentation. The applicant’s
representative, Scott Lathrop, responded to the staff report and
agreed to the staff report’s recommended conditions calling for true
divided-lite windows, vertical alignment of windows and columns, and
smooth-textured exterior plaster. Chairperson Breska asked if the
small house at 783 High Street proposed for demolition could be
relocated and photo-documented. Mr. Waldron noted that the City’s
Demolition and Building Relocation Regulations require that
buildings like this one, that were not historically designated but
over 50 years old must be advertised three times over a 90-day
period as being available for relocation, and must be
photo-documented inside and out. In response from Committee member
Wheeler, Jeff Hook noted that staff had researched the property’s
history based on the information available in the CHC library and
did not find information indicating the property was historically
significant. A listing of the property’s owners, or “chain of
title”, is one piece of information that was not available but that
is often included in historic research. He added that based on age
and its architectural design, the CHC could consider nominating the
property as Contributing in the Railroad Historic District.
Committee member Wheeler would like to see a chain of title
prepared and was concerned the historic research seemed “light” for
this property. Committee member Crotser felt the house may have
been overlooked in the 1983 citywide historic survey. Chairperson
Breska observed that the house had structural issues and that the
front porch and house were leaning.
Chairperson Breska opened the public hearing. There was no public
comment, and she closed the public hearing.
On a motion by Committee member Crotser, seconded by Committee
member Wheeler, the Committee
found that the buildings to be demolished do not meet
eligibility standards for historic listing, and recommends the ARC
approve the proposed demolitions and project, subject to the
following findings and recommended conditions.
Findings:
1.
As conditioned, the proposed colors, materials and
architectural details of the building are consistent with the
architectural guidelines contained within the Railroad District
Plan.
2.
The project is consistent with the City’s Historic
Preservation Program Guidelines because the architectural style of
the building has similar details to the Southern Pacific Railroad
Depot and supports the historic character of the Railroad District.
3.
The proposed buildings to be demolished do not meet
eligibility standards for historic listing.
4.
The proposed mix of residential and commercial uses
is consistent with land use patterns discussed in the Railroad
District Plan that promote developments that allow people to live
near work places and services.
Recommended Conditions:
1.
The siding proposed on the building shall be smooth
cement plaster, consistent with Sheet DP3 of project plans.
2.
The pillars between the first and second levels on
the east building elevation (Santa Barbara Avenue facing) shall be
aligned, as feasible, subject to the approval of the Community
Development Director.
3.
The proposed windows on the 2nd level that show
divided lights shall be “true” divided light windows, subject to the
approval of the Community Development Director.
4.
The Applicant shall provide a chain of title property
owner listing as part of photo-documentation for 783 High Street, to
the approval of the Community Development Director.
The motion carried, 7-0.
Committee member Fowler recused himself due to a
potential conflict of interest and left the meeting.
4.
840, 842, 844 & 848 Monterey Street and 984 & 986 Chorro Street.
ARC 69-05; Review building condition reports and structural analyses
for the Blackstone Hotel and Sauer Bakery buildings related to the
proposed Chinatown mixed-use development project in the Downtown
Historic District; C-D-H zone; SLO Chinatown, LLC, applicant.
(Pam Ricci)
Pam RicciH presented the staff
report and provided copies of correspondence from four members of
the public: Richard Schmidt (supports retention of the two
structures); Bob Vessely (Indicates adaptive re-use hasn’t been
adequately explored); Jim Lopes (general comments about the lack of
Chinese motif in the development and concern about display of
artifacts discovered during construction); and Betsy Bertrando
(indicates a detailed evaluation of feasibility had not been done
and that economics of restoration alone shouldn’t prevail as a
reason to demolish the buildings). Architect Mark Rawson gave a
slide presentation showing the condition of the Blackstone Hotel
building and the historic Sauer Bakery building. He noted that both
buildings had been modified over time and appeared to have
significant structural damage due to weathering and deferred
maintenance. Laura Luker, architect and Barry Price, archaeologist,
were also present, representing the applicant.
Chairperson Breska opened the public hearing. Dan Krieger, 662
Islay Street, historian and former CHC member urged the Committee to
preserve the historic building facades of the Blackstone Hotel
building and historic Sauer Bakery building as a “gift to the
street.” He briefly described the historic role of the Sauer Bakery
and felt the memories and historic roles of the buildings must be
commemorated at all costs. Alex Gough, 964 Chorro Street, showed
photos of the two buildings as they looked in the early 20th
century, as the “Quintana Block” building at the corner of Monterey
and Chorro, and the original Sauer Bakery building. He noted he was
in favor of the project but felt that to make this the best project
possible, these two buildings must be preserved since the grounds to
demolish them were not justifiable. David Brodie read a statement
by Professor Randall Cruikshanks recommending the buildings be
preserved and adaptively reused, and Mr. Brodie added his own
statement about the importance of preserving the buildings as a
critical part of Downtown’s urban character and sense of place. He
added that the CHC needs to lend its support and guidance to
developers to help preserve historic buildings. Mr. Brodie also
spoke on behalf of Joe Kourakis who felt the buildings should be
saved and adaptively reused. Boz Schrage,1167 Marsh Street, owner
of an historic residence and former CHC member, urged the CHC to be
very deliberate and base its decisions on historic significance and
not on economic feasibility. He indicated that the vitality of
Downtown and its sense of historic character are interrelated and
asked the Committee to preserve Downtown’s historic character.
Allan Cooper, 756 Broad Street, noted that he had restored a house
in worse condition than shown in the slides of the historic
buildings, and on a very limited budget. He felt the lifecycle
costs of preservation vs. demolition were not being considered. He
emphasized that historic preservation is a “Green Building” strategy
in that it saves energy and materials and reduces pollution and
waste. Pete Evans questioned the accuracy of the applicant’s
reports, and noted that although he didn’t support the Chinatown
Project, he wanted to see the historic buildings preserved either
way. He agreed with Allan Cooper. He felt the City was becoming
“Wal-Mart style” and was losing its unique character. Elizabeth
Abrahams, 335 San Miguel, said that although the CHC had asked for a
detailed rehabilitation study at its last meeting, she saw no
evidence that that study had been provided. She asked why the City
appeared to be rushing to take an action. Bruno Giberti, 3981
Hollyhock, architectural historian and former CHC member, observed
that the two buildings’ historical significance was not under
debate. The main question was whether it was structurally or
financially feasible to rehabilitate them. However the questions of
structural or economic feasibility had not been adequately addressed
by the applicant. No pro forma was provided to allow a rational
evaluation. He felt the City needs to “raise the bar” on
documentation required to evaluate demolition vs. adaptive reuse.
He added that he supports the Chinatown project, but felt it should
build on the Downtown’s “torn historic fabric.” These buildings are
part of the City’s urban character. Christopher Yip, architectural
historian with expertise in Chinese-American history, said that
based on the pictures and reports provided by the applicant, one
must assume that the historic buildings are restorable. Their size
and scale represent the historic development and urban fabric of
Downtown. Joe Abrahams, 335 San Miguel, felt that preserving
cultural integrity is critical to maintaining Downtown’s economic
integrity. These two buildings can serve as anchors for the
revitalization of Downtown’s character. Bob Vessely, 743 Pacific
Street, noted that the “detailed feasibility analysis” requested by
the Committee had not been provided. He added that past structural
reports on the buildings had determined they were feasible to
rehabilitate. He noted that some of the holes in floors and walls
shown in the slides of the Blackstone Hotel were ones he had made to
do a previous structural evaluation. Paula Carr noted that the
Copelands had purchased these properties knowing they were
un-reinforced masonry buildings and subject to seismic retrofit
requirements. She felt one of the her biggest regrets as a former
CHC member is allowing the demolition of the historic Loobliner
Building and urged the Committee not to repeat that mistake. She
felt the buildings could be preserved. She also noted that the
applicant could take advantage of the Historic Building Code to
address some of the concerns being expressed with adaptive reuse of
the buildings.
Hearing no further comment, Chairperson Breska closed the public
meeting
Committee member Landwehr said she was convinced the buildings could
and should be saved. We should not repeat the Loobliner Building
mistake. Committee member Wheeler agreed with Committee member
Landwehr and added that the information provided was not adequate to
determine rehabilitation feasibility. Committee member Pavlik felt
these structures possessed historic significance and that based on
the Secretary of the Interior Standards, these buildings should be
adaptively reused. This is what the City’s General Plan calls for.
Committee member Miller can’t support the findings in the staff
report to allow building demolition. He felt the Committee’s charge
was to preserve historically significant buildings, and that it’s
not a question of cost, but rather a question of value. Committee
member Crotser appreciated the public comments and noted that he had
a dilemma in determining how much historic fabric was left in these
buildings to enable adaptive reuse. He felt more thorough analysis
of the feasibility to rehabilitate these buildings was needed before
the CHC took action. He felt the Blackstone Hotel building might
need “reconstruction” to preserve it. Chairperson Breska felt the
CHC did not get sufficient information to complete its review of the
demolition request of these two buildings.
Committee member Pavlik explained that as part of his motion, he
anticipated that the applicant would do a detailed structural and
economic feasibility analysis and that the CHC would eventually see
the results. Consequently, he did not feel it was necessary to
continue the project for more information.
On a motion by Committee member Pavlik, seconded by Committee member
Wheeler, the Committee supported the preservation and rehabilitation
of the Blackstone Hotel building and the historic Sauer Bakery
building, their adaptive reuse and incorporation into the Chinatown
Project. The motion carried, 5-1 (Crotser), with Committee member
Fowler absent.
Committee member Fowler returned to the meeting.
COMMUNICATIONS:
A.
Agenda
Forecast – Staff
Staff gave a brief agenda forecast for the December 17, 2007 CHC
meeting. Staff asked the Committee to consider several possible
dates for a CHC retreat early next year. Committee members felt
February 11th or March 10th, 2008 would be
suitable dates.
Due to the lateness of the hour, the Committee decided to continue
the remaining agenda items to the December 17th meeting.
B.
Historic Survey Status
C.
Committee
ADJOURNMENT The
CHC adjourned the meeting at 10:00 pm. |
