Everett Historical Commission

DRAFT Everett Historical Commission Minutes July 28, 2015 Members Present Members Absent Visitors City Staff Bobby Olsen Dale Good Judy Tuohy, City Council Dave Koenig Bill Vincent Neil Anderson Dave Ramstad Jan Meston Jack O’Donnell Luis Sialer Ross Johnson Arnold Morrison Walter Diaz Allan Giffen Mark Soine Nicolas Eckert Niels Tygesen Steve Fox Glenn Hunter Paul Popelka Laura Cameron-Behee Allan White Jim Staniford Bobby Olsen: Welcome to the Historical Commission meeting. Our first item is approval of the minutes for the May meeting. Approval of Minutes Several Commissioners noted corrections. Jack O’Donnell moved to approve the minutes as corrected. Allan White seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. Citizen Comments Dave Ramstad: In the Seattle Times yesterday there was an article about the Panama Hotel in the International District downtown. It has been listed as a National Treasure, a new designation since 2011. Seattle’s first Japanese architect designed the hotel. The National Trust has created the designation “National Treasure” to highlight the significance of historic resources which probably already have historic register status but are threatened now. They are eager to get word out on this. This may be another tool for local communities to push back against random development. We have some national treasures here. Longfellow School has national significance due to the education of Senator Henry M. Jackson, a world figure. Everett High School also has that distinction. We have the Equator, the ruin of the vessel that Robert Louis Stevenson sailed the South Pacific in. We have the red bricks at the west foot of Hewitt Avenue as a national treasure because the Everett Massacre is nationally known and is in every labor history of the United State. We should look into this at future meetings of the Commission and consider what assets we have that have this significance. Commission Comments Mark Soine: The contractor on the North Everett sewer project put in large stretches of sidewalk which have no small squares. Ross, I think when I made this comment the last time, you commented that there was an ordinance that says that lamp black is supposed to be included in the concrete. There is no lamp black in the new sidewalks, they are bright white. Either construction management fell down or Public Works again doesn’t care about the appearance of historic Everett. They did the plans and oversaw the construction. They don’t care. We need to continue to point that out. Also, the sidewalks that go from the street to the homeowners’ sidewalks are varied in width. They replaced all those. Some are 18 inches wide and some are 3 feet wide. Allan White: Mine matches the width of my walkway. Laura Cameron-Behee: They have taken a lot of street trees down on Grand. Will they talking to the homeowners about replacing those? It would be nice to see them put back. Allan White: I got a letter that said to call a certain number if you want your tree replaced. Jack O’Donnell: I agree about the sidewalks having the traditional three-block square pattern and about trees being replaced. Maybe we can put the National Treasure item on a future agenda and have a brainstorming session about candidates in Everett. Jack O’Donnell: I have some photos this evening of 2410 Everett Avenue. The owners have removed the asphalt siding to reveal the original wood siding. This is a success story – the original windows are intact except upstairs. This was done right. On a bad note, 2102 Colby is being ruined. The little railing is gone. The design work above the window is gone. Windows are being replaced. We have lost part of our streetscape. You can compare it to the twin house next door. They have destroyed the texture of this house. Public Hearing on Proposed Demolition and New House at 2802 Victor Place Bobby Olsen: We will now open a public hearing regarding an application to demolish a contributing structure in the Riverside Historic Overlay Zone and build a new single-family residence in its place. It is important that the Historical Commission’s consideration of this matter not only be fair in fact, but also fair in appearance. Does any Commissioner know of any real or potential conflict or concern which should cause that member to avoid participation in this hearing? (No Commissioners replied.) Does any member of the public have any objection to any Commissioner’s participation in this matter before us? If so, now is the time to come forward and state your objection. (No one replied.) The Commission will consider whether to recommend approval of the proposed project. The purpose of this hearing is:  To provide factual information about the proposed project to the general public and to the Historical Commission.  To provide a fair, open and orderly forum for public comment and questions.  To identify issues to be considered as part of the decision. Applicant’s Proposal Luis Sialer: I am the designer for this project. I am very excited to work with the Historical Commission. When I started working with the owner, we were excited to work on a house in a historic neighborhood. I like this lot because it is a corner lot. The idea is to construct a new house on this lot. 2 The existing garage is blocking the view up the street along Victor Place. Our idea is to move that garage. The existing house is in really bad condition. Demolishing this house and building a new house is good for the neighborhood. It will add value to the neighborhood. The existing garage is about six inches from the property line. We are proposing a setback of 20 feet. The proposed garage off Cedar will also be set back 20 feet. We have tried to follow the guidelines for this historic overlay. (Photographs were shown of the condition of the existing house.) This house has been sitting vacant for a number of years. A new house will also meet the new energy codes. The inside of the existing house has been destroyed. The site plan shows the garage access moving to Cedar Street for a two-car garage. We would like to keep the same general location for the front porch as on the existing house. These are the floor plans for the basement, main floor and upstairs. Staff Report Jan Meston: In their meeting packets, the Historical Commission received copies of the house elevations and floor plans and a draft Staff Report. We conducted a SEPA review of this proposal concurrently with the public notice for this hearing, and the final Mitigated Determination of Non- Significance was issued yesterday. The Commission has a copy of that decision this evening. That decision has several conditions on it and “Information for the Developer” for this project. The Historical Commission received a final Staff Report this evening, which includes conditions in response to comments received from the public. Staff has worked with Luis Sialer and Walter Diaz since early this year when they first came in expressing interest in demolishing this house and building a new house. We have gone through several iterations of design, and the applicant has been responsive to the Historical Overlay guidelines and standards and our requests for design changes based on those guidelines and standards. This map shows the lot we are talking about on the corner of Victor Place and Cedar. It is a “small lot”, meaning that it is under 5,000 square feet. The lot is 3,761 square feet. That put extra Zoning Code restrictions on the development that can occur there, specifically a restriction on the ratio of the floor area of the house to the area of the lot. The maximum ratio of floor area to lot area is 50%. The areas of the house included in that calculation are the first and second floors. We received five public comments on this proposal. The Commission received those comments prior to the hearing this evening. The final Staff Report summarizes the staff’s analysis of how the proposed design of the house meets the Riverside Historic Overlay Zone design guidelines and standards. The standards require that when there is a proposed demolition of a contributing structure in the overlay zone, that proposal must come to the Commission for review and consideration of the proposed design. The Historical Commission will make a recommendation to the Planning Director on the project. The staff analysis is that this project meets the overlay guidelines and standards in every way except there is a request for a deviation from the front setback. The proposed design meets the standards by 3 having a visible and covered entry way, having a 5-foot side setback from the interior lot line and a 20- foot setback from the sidewalk along Cedar Street. The rear setback meets the required 20 feet to the house. The proposed house is two-story; the Riverside overlay has a mixture of 1, 1.5 and 2-story houses. The majority of the houses along the south side of Victor are 1.5 stories. The height of the proposed house is approximately 22 feet; the height limit is 28 feet. There are a number of features that help to mitigate the fact that the proposed house is two-story and most houses are 1.5 stories. These are the dormers, the roof brackets and fascia boards, the variety in the siding, the extra roof after the first story, and a setback in the second story on the west end of the house, and the front porch. The roof pitch is 6:12, the minimum required. The windows are vertical windows which are either casement or single-hung. There is a consistent window design around the house. The siding matches what is called out as appropriate in the guidelines. That brings us to the deviation being requested in the front setback. The standards call for the front setback to match that of the adjacent property. That property sits back 23 feet 3 inches. The proposal for this new house is a front setback of 20 feet. The request is for a 3 foot 3 inch reduction in the front setback. Mark Soine: Is that just the front porch, or is that the entire house? Jan Meston: It is the entire house. The porch is allowed to project 6 feet into the front setback. Mark Soine: How deep is the front porch? Jan Meston: It’s about four feet. Mark Soine: So the adjacent house is at 23 feet, and the Zoning Code in areas outside the historic overlay would otherwise require 20 feet, is that it? Jan Meston: Yes. But it is a different standard in the overlay to help new construction blend in. Mark Soine: What’s the setback of the current house? Jan Meston: It’s about even with the adjacent house. On requests for deviations, there are three criteria that the Historical Commission should consider in deciding whether to recommend approval of a deviation. The criteria are: a. The unique characteristics of the property and/or surroundings and how they will be protected and/or enhanced by the deviation; b. The positive characteristics of the proposed development and whether such characteristics could be provided by compliance with the standards and guidelines; and c. Whether the proposed design mitigates the impacts that could be caused by deviation from the standards. The staff concluded that the proposed design meets the criteria above as follows:  This is a small lot (3,761 SF) and there’s a house to the south facing Cedar Street between 2802 Victor and the alley, so the lot at 2802 Victor does not have access to an alley. The 4  proposed deviation allows more space between the house facing Cedar Street and the proposed new house by meeting the rear setback of 20 feet.  The proposed plan moves access to the garage from Victor Place, the primary streetscape, to Cedar, and moves the garage back 20 feet from the sidewalk. This will enhance the Victor Place streetscape and keep both the Victor and Cedar sidewalks clear for pedestrians.  The existing garage, which is in the front yard and has no setback from the sidewalk, will be removed in the proposed plan, so the proposed deviation is a substantial improvement in the front setback.  The building design overall enhances the corner lot and addresses both streetscapes by providing interesting design detail including dormers, modulation of the front façade, trim that accents the architecture, and variation in siding materials, Allan White: Do you have a picture of the garage and the streetscape? The garage does stick out. Jim Staniford: Does the design meet the setback requirements on the east, south and west sides of the house? They’re really only asking for an additional 3 feet 3 inches on the north side. Jan Meston: Yes. Then the front porch may project into the front setback a maximum of six feet. Jim Staniford: I went out to the house, and if you look down the street, everybody’s front set back is a little different. There is at least 3 feet 3 inches difference between the setbacks on a number of houses on both sides of the street. Jan Meston: Deviations are granted based on superior design as opposed to a hardship. The staff conclusion was that this is a superior design because it moves the garage access to Cedar and the house design enhances the corner because of the detailing on the house on both the Victor and Cedar sides. There is a lot of modulation in the house design. Arnold Morrison: Did you have a survey done, Mr. Sialer? Luis Sialer: Yes. Arnold Morrison: And these lot lines were taken from that survey? Luis Sialer: Yes. Jan Meston: The staff report finding is that the proposed design does satisfy the criteria for a deviation from the front setback and the proposal meets the standards and guidelines otherwise. Our recommendation is that the Historical Commission recommends that the Planning Director approve the project as proposed. Bobby Olsen: Are there any comment from the public? Nick Eckert: I have lived on Victor Place for about 19 years. I was in the existing home when I first moved there. There has been no doubt among the neighbors for some years that this would be a teardown house. The chimney is coming away from the home. There has probably been water leaking into the house for 10+ years. 5 I have some concerns about the project. The structure to me seems to be out of scale with the rest of the homes in the neighborhood. But I do notice that there is the vertical orientation to the windows, the brackets, the siding materials, and the bellyband trim are very nice features. I am concerned about the deviation in the front setback, but was glad to see that it is only about a three-foot distance. I’d like to offer an idea to the designer. The front porch on the existing home is larger than what he is proposing. The one proposed is really only big enough to get out of the rain and open the front door. I would suggest extending the front porch to the corner of the house, in front of the den of the home, and maybe even bring it forward an additional foot. Then you could still walk up to the doorway but also sit on the porch like many of us do. I am concerned about there being a two-car garage. There aren’t many homes in the Riverside neighborhood or on our block that have a two-car garage. I do understand they don’t have access to the alley and they are a smaller lot, but a detached single-car garage is more typical of the neighborhood. But I do understand their wanting to get value. You could also allow a deviation for the rear of the home so it could be placed further back rather than a deviation for the front. That might allow the porch to be a little bigger and neighborhood friendly. Even though on the elevations they show a tree on the front corner, I expect that the existing tree will have to go away. The root structure is extensive. I would like to see a landscaping plan for the property. That block of Victor Place is a fairly well cared for street. Most of the people who live there have spent quite a bit of money on their landscaping and caring for their homes. The front door is more elaborate than most of the doorways on Victor Place, and it also has side lights on it. You won’t see sidelights on any of the adjacent homes. Having a full-light front door is typical for our neighborhood. It’s what I have in my home and it is the original door. Maybe removing the sidelights would soften the appearance. It also appears that brick is being proposed for the pillar supports, correct? Luis Sialer: Yes, it will be plywood with brick veneer. Nick Eckert: I don’t think any of the adjacent properties have brick on supporting columns or in most of the homes. There might be some brick on the homes across the street. I am glad to see the existing garage go; it has been a rat haven for many years. I would like to see the existing curb cut removed and a continuous curb put in its place. I appreciate your listening to my comments. Mark Soine: You mentioned expanding the front porch and increasing its depth. How does that match up with your objection about encroaching into the front setback? Nick Eckert: As an adjacent property owner, the flyer I received doesn’t talk about setbacks. Looking at the picture of the structure, I saw a fairly large home and felt that the setback would be much closer than it actually will be. Three feet off is not that bad. I was thinking about making the porch larger along Victor, so that would not affect the setback. Mark Soine: You are not talking about increasing the depth from the four feet proposed, just widening it? 6 Nick Eckert: I think increasing the depth to five feet would be okay. That is like my porch and that is usable space so you can put chairs out there. That wouldn’t change the setback because the setback rules are based on the body of the house, not the porch. Mark Soine: But if you make it half the width of the house, it increases the perception of mass if nothing else. Nick Eckert: Yes. Maybe it they could expand partially the other way. It looks like that could interfere with the stairway windows. If the porch roof went in front of the front windows, it would match the style of the home next to it and several other homes on Victor Place. Mark Soine: What would you envision being included in a landscaping plan? Nick Eckert: Just some trees and vegetation. Glenn Hunter: These are beautiful pictures. But I question how much taller this house is compared to the adjacent houses. It almost looks out of scale. I know the elevation on the property is above the sidewalk. The house style reminds me a little of a Craftsman style. I can’t see what kind of pillars are holding up the porch. I would suggest they be square to go with the Craftsman style. I believe on the plans there is a gas fireplace bump out. Could that at least have a faux chimney on the outside to blend in with the neighborhood? Thank you. Mark Soine: Would you want a faux chimney out of brick? Many new ones are clad in siding. Glenn Hunter: I would like the look of brick. Jim Staniford moved to close the public hearing. Mark Soine seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. Jim Staniford: The tree in the corner of the property has gotten so big it has probably contributed to the foundation being broken. Will that tree be taken down? If so, I would like to see other trees put on the property to compensate. Luis Sialer: Yes, the tree roots have broken the foundation. We will provide a landscaping plan with trees. Jim Staniford: I think that the 3-foot-3-inch deviation in the front setback will not disrupt the neighborhood. Setting the whole house back would make the garage too close to the rear property line. The way the house sits on the lot is well balanced as proposed. Working to help the chimney blend in and making the front porch wider would not be bad things. The little things help the house blend into the neighborhood. Mark Soine: I am curious about the dormers on the south side of the house. They are two different sizes. One extends down on the roofline about 2 or 3 feet. Jan Meston: That may be in part to keep the ration of floor area ratio to lot size at 50% or less Allan White: Is there street parking on Victor or Cedar? 7 Jan Meston: Yes. Allan White: And is there enough room in the driveway to park a car? Jan Meston: And still clear the sidewalk? Yes – 20 feet. Jim Staniford: Are we deciding on the demo of the existing structure? Jan Meston: You are making a recommendation to the Planning Director on approving the proposal, which includes demolition of the existing structure and design of the new house. The design of the new house includes a request for a deviation from the front setback standard. Jack O’Donnell: I’d like to hear more about the existing house. We haven’t heard anything about it. We saw some ugly pictures, but that is all. Luis Sialer: The condition of the house is very bad. No one can live there now. It would cost a lot of money to fix. The foundation is broken; there is a lot of leaking. Bobby Olsen: Is the existing house two stories? Luis Sialer: It is one story. Jim Staniford: Is there an existing basement? Luis Sialer: No basement, just a huge crawl space six feet tall. Allan White: One of the letters referred to issues of rodent population in the current house. Could that be addressed before demolition so it doesn’t adversely affect the neighborhood? Jan Meston: On the information attached to the SEPA decision, any and all rodent infestation is required to be exterminated prior to demolition. Nick Eckert: It appears that the original house does still have its original windows, but it has been re- sided at some point. It looks like there has been extensive water leakage getting behind the replacement siding. The amount of work required to fix up this house would be extensive. The condition of the foundation is typical of the condition of a lot of homes in this neighborhood; it is post on pier and the piers are big boulders under the house. The large trees to the east of the house are on the neighbor’s property. I have been inside the house several times. It is just terrible inside. The owner was a school teacher for 40 years, but the house was not maintained. Steve Fox: To me this looks like a beautiful suburban house. I’m not sure it’s quite ready for this neighborhood yet. I think it needs a little more work. Its massing seems out of scale. On this block the houses are all 1-1/2-story houses with gables on the front. Even the houses that are 2-story have tables on the front. This house is so wide and tall, it’s basically a rectangular presence on the front. I wonder if there is something that can be done to mitigate that imposing presence relative to the other houses in the neighborhood. It’s a shame to lose the old house, but I understand that it’s in pretty bad shape. But 8 this house is so different than what’s there. The comments that Nick and Glenn made are right on. It’s a little out of scale, and that is bothering me. Laura Cameron-Behee: A lot of houses have a wrap-around porch. Would that help since this is on a corner? The west side of the house is visible from the street. And maybe you could somehow tie in the fireplace to make it look more built into the home. Bobby Olsen: I agree with Steve’s comments. This looks like a suburban house, and maybe part of it is the materiality. Having the stone on the porch supports is suburban. Arnold Morrison: Can we look at Google Earth so we can look down the street? Steve Fox: I don’t think the design mitigates the deviation in the front setback. The massing combined with the reduced setback isn’t mitigated. Mark Soine: If you are concerned about the massing, then you would never be able to do a two-story house in this neighborhood because a two-story house by its very nature will over shadow any of the existing houses that are 1.5 story houses. Whatever is in that ½ story has probably been bootlegged in at some point rather than built into the eaves. They are all basically one-story houses. My view is that we need to recognize that neighborhoods are changing, and we will see two-story houses. You are not going to improve the neighborhood by building another 1,000-square-foot home. If we call this house too massive, then the neighborhood is probably going to decline rather than improve over time. We are keeping the characteristics of the historic neighborhood by the materials, roof pitch, etc. It’s not like they are putting in a mid-century house. They are trying to conform to the guidelines. That’s my perspective on the massing. I don’t disagree that it will appear somewhat out of character. But the homes at the end of 19th Street are all two-story houses, and if you go three blocks west on 19th, they are all essentially one-story houses. Arnold Morrison: This is a problem we have to face and have to address. We see it in a very physical form, the change from one-story to two-story. You made a very good point on that. Steve Fox: Can you go one block west on Google? Mark Soine: That house has brick porch supports. Bobby Olsen: The three-foot setback doesn’t bother me. It doesn’t seem like a huge deviation from the neighboring lot, and it seems to be a great solution to the garage location. I would be in favor of the deviation. Jack O’Donnell: The reason I left the Historical Commission earlier was this type of thing, when a contributing home in an overlay district was being destroyed. That is what we are doing. If I vote yes on this, I compromise myself in every way. That is why we have these overlay districts, to save what is there because it is special. Even though that little garage is an anomaly, I think it is a character defining thing on that street. I hope the applicant will save the little tiny building in the back; it’s made out of bead board and is charming. All that said, I think this design is very attractive. My first thought was that the massing was way out of place, but this is a nice house and will do justice to the neighborhood. I think brick is okay to use on the porch, but I hope it is standard sized brick with standards sized measurements that would have been in old houses. If it has to be veneer, it still needs to be standard sized bricks. I agree with a brick chimney, 9 but where it comes out on the house a brick chimney will not work. That’s not where a chimney would have gone in an old house. I agree that the existing curb cut should be eliminated. I prefer the asymmetrical features over symmetrical. I think if you play with the porch you need to be careful because that roofline over the porch makes it look like a deck that has been attached to the front of the house. That’s not something these houses originally had. If you are going to build a house like this, you are going to want a two-car garage. This neighborhood is beautiful. I have trouble dealing with this kind of thing, but I think this project is okay. I agree about the deviation; it doesn’t trouble me. I’d like to see some landscaping. Jim Staniford: If this house were in the middle of the block, I would say no because of the massing. But because this house is on the corner, it is different. It will not stick out like it would if it was in the middle of the block. I think approving the reduced setback and removing the existing garage is good. Those old garages are musty and wet and often you can’t even get the door open. They serve no purpose anymore. Putting the garage on the side of the house is a benefit. You have to have a two-car garage these days. If they can make the porch a little bigger, it would be nice. I would not do the shingles on the chimney because that makes it stick out. If it had siding on it, it would blend in. A brick chimney could not be hanging in the air. I do not think brick would look right. It will vent out the side. Planting some trees would help it blend into the neighborhood. I would recommend approval of this project. Arnold Morrison: I’m in favor of the project and demolishing the building that is there. The setback deviation request is not a problem. One comment is that every house on that street has a prominent A- frame gable on the front. I would look at the entrance and make it more dominating to get an A-frame gable. Bobby Olsen: I disagree. This house is wider than it is tall. All the other houses are taller than they are wide. I think a gable in the front would not work. I think this is fine the way it is. Jan Meston: The question is whether this design meets the overlay guidelines and standards, and whether the design meet the criteria for the front setback deviation to be granted. Steve Fox: Is the railing on the back deck metal? Luis Sialer: Wood railing. Steve Fox: I think there is something in the standards requiring wood. Jim Staniford moved to approve the proposal as submitted to the Historical Commission. Bill Vincent seconded the motion. Mark Soine moved to amend the motion to include the following conditions: 1. Require the existing curb cut be removed; 2. Require replacement trees and/or a landscaping plan to be submitted; and 3. So that the applicant does not have to return to the Historical Commission for review again, authorize staff to approve plan changes to allow: 10   Expansion of the porch across the front façade and up to one foot further toward the street;  Changing the pillars from round to square;  Lap siding on the chimney as opposed to shingles;  Siding rather than brick on the porch column supports.  Sidelights on the front door to be removed and style of the door to be changed. The bulleted items above are authorized, not required. Jack O’Donnell seconded the amendment, which passed unanimously. Jack O’Donnell seconded the motion as amended, which passed unanimously. Additions to the Agenda Carnegie Building Jack O’Donnell: If you go by the Carnegie Building, one window has been replaced. Sandra Alder is working on this project with the County, which wants to replace all the windows. There are problems with the windows. Take a look at the window being proposed. They are still considering the color for the windows. I think we will want to make our voice heard on that. This is a National Register building. Try to look at the one window before the next meeting. I’d like to make a comment. Jan Meston: Dave Koenig mentioned at the last meeting that Historic Preservation will be moving to Long Range Planning as part of the reorganization following his departure. We have Niels Tygesen and Paul Popelka here this evening; they are in Long Range Planning and will be working on historic preservation. Can you guys tell the Commission a little about your backgrounds? Niels Tygesen: I’ve been with the City since 2008, in both the Planning Department and Public Works. Before that I worked for Snohomish County’s Planning Department for about a year. Before that I had recently graduated with my Master’s in Architecture. So I had some experience with historic preservation there. I worked with Jan when I first started with the City on zoning issues in the overlay zones. Paul Popelka: I am a Landscape Architect who, over my career, got more and more involved with planning. I moved to the public sector about 10 years ago; before that, I was in the private sector in my career. I have done quite a bit of work in historic preservation with historic designations, preservation, and downtown revitalization. I worked in a number of small towns throughout the state of Iowa which had an incredible stock of historic buildings, in Arizona with prehistoric and historic resources, and for several years in Charleston in the heart of the historic district. I’ve been a member of the National Trust for a long time. It’s a passion of mine. Jan Meston: I want to tell you that I will be retiring in January 2016, so we have between now and then to transition work to Niels and Paul. I know you will enjoy working with each other. The meeting was adjourned at 8:20 p.m. 11