Loading...
2016-04-14 Historic Preservation Commission MinutesCITY OF EDMONDS HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION Summary Minutes of Regular Meeting April 14, 2016 CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL Chair Scott called the meeting of the Edmonds Historic Preservation Commission to order at 5:37 p.m. in the 3rd Floor Conference Room of City Hall, 121 — 5d' Avenue North. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT Emily Scott, Chair Larry Vogel, Vice Chair (arrived at 5:35 p.m.) Sandra Allbery Chris Deiner-Karr Tim Raetzloff Steve Waite Dave Teitzel, City Council Member COMMISSIONERS ABSENT Eric Livingston AGENDA ADDITIONS/CHANGES STAFF PRESENT Kemen Lien, Senior Planner Diane Cunningham, Administrative Assistant OTHERS PRESENT David Peterson Margaret Peterson The agenda was modified to place the Action Item (820 Maple Street) first on the agenda. ACTION ITEMS Certificate of Appropriateness or Removal from Historic Register for Dr. Palmer House at 820 Maple Street Mr. Lien advised that 820 Maple Street was placed on the Edmonds Register of Historic Places in 2010, and is one of the few properties the BOLA Report listed as qualifying for the National Register. The current owners have applied for a building permit for a garage addition, a porch addition, and replacement of four windows on the third floor. David and Margaret Peterson provided an overview of the proposed changes to both the inside and outside of the structure. Mr. Peterson explained that, in addition to replacing four windows on the third floor, they are proposing to remove the asbestos siding to reveal the home's original wood siding. The proposed garage will have a similar architectural detail as the home. Mr. Lien reminded the Board that the proposed modifications will require a Certificate of Appropriateness from the Commission. He referred to the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation of Historic Structures. He summarized that both the garage and porch additions appear to be consistent with the standards, but he has concerns about the windows. He specifically pointed out that: Windows comprise a considerable amount of the historic fabric and wall plain, and thus, deserve special consideration in a rehabilitation project. The windows were identified in the BOLA Report as part of the defining historic character of the house. The standards do not allow property owners to remove or radically alter the windows, which are important in defining the historic character of the building, in such a way that diminishes the character. That is the big question the Commission must answer. The applicant is proposing to change both the size of the window openings and the style of the windows. Based on precedence set by the Schumacher Building, the Commission could approve the Certificate of Appropriateness as long as the size of the openings is not changed. The standards also recommend against adding false historic character to the building. In addition to changing the size and style of the window, the applicant is proposing to add a design element to the top of the windows. Mr. Lien advised that small additions that do not change the defining character of the building can be allowed. The porch addition will be located at the back corner of the building under the existing eaves, and the shed type roof will differentiate the addition from the sweeping eaves. The Commissioners all voiced support for the applicant's proposal to remove the asbestos siding and restore the original siding and shingles that lie underneath. They also voiced general support for the proposed changes to the south side of the structure (porch and garage), which will not be visible from the street. However, Commissioner Waite voiced concern that the proposed garage design is too much like the historic structure. He explained that the design is supposed to be influenced by the historic structure, but not replicated. Regarding the windows, the Commission discussed the following: Are the Secretary of the Interior's Standards recommendations or mandates? Some Commissioners felt that if the structure was being considered for the State or National Registers, the criteria should be interpreted strictly. However, there is more flexibility for local registers. On the other hand, Commissioner Waite pointed out that the Department of the Interior's Standards are clear and have been in place for a number of years. Disregarding the standards could raise questions about the credibility of the Edmonds Register of Historic Places. While he applauded the Petersons for restoring the original siding, which is an important characteristic of the building, he questioned if that should warrant the Commission's decision to disregard the criteria relative to windows. It was discussed that, although the proposed window alterations are inconsistent with some of the criteria, they would not prevent a future owner from changing the size and style back to the original design at some point in the future. Some felt that the proposed change would not irreparably change the structure and character of the building. The Petersons pointed out that the larger windows are needed to improve the lighting for the living space and to take advantage of the fabulous views. Commissioner Waite explained that the idea of reversibility is generally related to repair, and it is not likely that the original window style and size will be replaced at a future time. He suggested that a skylight could be an alternative to provide additional light. The Commissioners agreed that the structure is very important to the Edmonds Register and it is currently eligible to be included on the National Register, as well. Chair Scott suggested that the Commission consider whether or not the building would have still been added to the Register if the window modifications had occurred prior to listing it on the Register. It was discussed that retaining the structure on the Register would allow the Commission to work with the property owners to maintain the integrity of the building going forward. Commissioner Raetzloff said he believes the Commission would have approved the structure for the Register if the windows had already been changed, but he is still hesitant to support the application as proposed. Some Commissioners felt the preponderance of historic characteristics and attributes for keeping the structure on the Register far outweigh the windows. Commissioner Deiner-Karr said she does not believe that changing just four windows would have a significant impact on the historic integrity of the building, particularly in light of the applicant's proposal to restore the original siding. Commissioner Waite commented that although the window alterations may not be noticeable to those walking by, the Commission's responsibility is to maintain the historic integrity of structures. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes April 14, 2016 Page 2 • The Commissioners referred to their earlier action relative to the Schumacher Building. It was pointed out that the current proposal is different in that it would replace iconic windows and the Schumacher Building windows were not original. It was also pointed out that the window openings on the Schumacher Building were not altered. • There was concern expressed that the proposed window design provides too much detail that does not match the windows below. If the details were eliminated, the windows would look more authentic. • The Commission discussed that fire safety requirements may need to be addressed if the upper story is used as bedroom space. It was noted that the windows would need to open, and they can be no higher than 48 inches from the floor. • Chair Scott pointed out that if the applicant replaces the four windows on the upper story as proposed, it is likely the home would no longer be eligible for the State and National Registers. It was explained that because the City is a Certified Local Government, it must follow the State's standards, which are based on the Department of the Interior's Standards. Again, it was suggested that the Department of the Interior's Standards could be interpreted to be recommendations and not mandates. VICE CHAIR VOGEL MOVED THAT THE COMMISSION ISSUE A CERTICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR REMOVAL OF THE ASBESTOS SIDING TO REVEAL AND RESTORE THE ORIGINAL FIR SIDING AND CEDAR SHINGLES. COMMISSIONER ALLBERY SECONDED THE MOTION, WHICH CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. VICE CHAIR VOGEL MOVED THAT THE COMMISSION ISSUE A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR THE PORCH ADDITION. COMMISSIONER ALLBERY SECONDED THE MOTION. Commissioner Waite pointed out that no design has been proposed for the porch addition. Mr. Lien said the porch will have a shed roof, which is different than the existing roof. The porch will be located under the eaves, and will not alter any of the significant features of the home. VICE CHAIR VOGEL MOVED TO AMEND HIS MOTION TO CLARIFY THAT THE PORCH ADDITION WOULD BE LOCATED ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE STRUCTURE AND THE DESIGN WOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH STAFF'S DESCRIPTION. COMMISSIONER DEINER-KARR SECONDED THE AMENDMENT. THE MOTION TO AMEND WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED. THE MAIN MOTION, AS AMENDED, WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED. VICE CHAIR VOGEL MOVED THAT THE COMMISSION ISSUE A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR THE GARAGE ADDITION AS DESCRIBED IN THE DRAWINGS. COMMISSIONER WAITE SECONDED THE MOTION, WHICH CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Commissioner Deiner-Karr pointed out that the applicant has not finalized the window design. She suggested that the Commission could approve the window modifications based on specific recommendations. For example, the upper windows could be redesigned to remove the embellishments and reflect the design of the existing first and second floor windows. VICE CHAIR VOGEL MOVED THAT THE COMMISSION ISSUE A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR THE PROPOSED MODIFICATIONS TO THE THIRD FLOOR WINDOWS, WITH THE PROVISO THAT EVERY EFFORT BE MADE FOR THE WINDOWS TO REFLECT THE DESIGN AND CHARACTER OF THE EXISTING WINDOWS ON THE FIRST AND SECOND FLOORS. COMMISSIONER DEINER-KARR SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION FAILED 4-2, WITH COMMISSIONERS VOGEL AND DEINER- KARR VOTING IN FAVOR AND COMMISSIONERS RAETZLOFF, ALLBERY, SCOTT AND WAITE VOTING IN OPPOSITION. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes April 14, 2016 Page 3 Mr. Lien agreed to notify the Peterson's of the Commission's decision and offer direction for how they can modify the proposed window alterations or request that the property be taken off the Register. After speaking with the Petersons, Mr. Lien would send an update to the Commissioners. Commissioner Raetzloff inquired if allowances could be made to accommodate the changing uses of a structure. Mr. Lien answered affirmatively and reviewed the Department of the Interior's Standards that apply to "Alterations and Additions for the New Use." The installation of additional windows on rear or other non -character -defining elevations would be allowed if required by the new use. While the design should be compatible with the overall design of the building, it should not duplicate the fenestration, pattern, detail or character of the defining elevation. READING/APPROVAL OF MINUTES COMMISSIONER RAETZLOFF MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 11, 2016 AS SUBMITTED. COMMISSIONER DEINER-KARR SECONDED THE MOTION, WHICH CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. REOUESTS FROM THE AUDIENCE There were no audience comments. NEW BUSINESS Discussion and Recommendation on New HPC Schedule Ms. Cunningham suggested that this item be postponed until the Commission's May meeting. She explained that because the City must pay overtime for a staff person to monitor the door during Commission meetings, the City Council has proposed that the Commission change its meeting location and/or time. Staff is still working out the details and will report back to the Commission. Vice Chair Vogel voiced opposition to changing the meeting date to the third Thursday of each month, since that is the day the Arts Commission conducts the monthly Art Walk, which is a major event in Edmonds. Discussion on 2017 Calendar This item was postponed to the next meeting. Preservationist Update Chair Scott reported that Commissioner Raetzloff wrote some great copy that features the First Baptist Church, and she is working to get some different photographs. Civic Playteld Council Member Teitzel reported that the City recently purchased the Civic Playfield and the master plan process will start soon. There has been a lot of discussion about potentially demolishing the grandstands, which are not currently listed on the Register. Chair Scott clarified that the grandstands have been infested with worms, and restoration may no longer be possible. The Commission agreed to recommend that a structural assessment of the structure be done before a final decision is made. Property at 232 Sunset Avenue Commissioner Allbery reported that the home at 232 Sunset Avenue has been sold. She agreed to contact the new owner to discuss adding the property to the Register. Changes to the Library Commissioners Waite and Allbery agreed to review the assessment of repairs and alterations that need to be done at the Library facility. The consultant who completed the assessment is interested in ensuring that the modifications are done in a way that preserves the historic quality and character of the building. Because the City owns the building, the Commission agreed that the City has a responsibility to take care of many of the items. Commissioner Waite suggested that the Commission should advise the City relative to the proposed changes to make sure the work is done correctly. The Commission concurred and agreed to review the list in more detail at their next meeting. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes April 14, 2016 Page 4 Geo Caching Program Commissioner Deiner-Karr said she has collected all of the information needed to create a geo-caching program for 2017. The Commission agreed to discuss the concept again in June, and Commissioner Deiner-Karr agreed to send a rough draft of her plan to Chair Scott prior to the next meeting. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION CHAIR COMMENTS Chair Scott suggested that the Commission continue to explore avenues for establishing a historic district so the Commission can have some oversight on changes that are made to historic structures. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSIONER COMMENTS Commissioner Raetzloff suggested that when reporting back to the Petersons, Mr. Lien should make them aware that although the Certificate of Appropriateness was voted down, not all of the votes were in strong opposition. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 7:10 p.m. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes April 14, 2016 Page 5