B.6 - LHD-2020-0012 - 703 Oakland Ave — original pdf

Backup

B.6 - 1 HISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION APRIL 27, 2020 APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS LHD-2020-0012 703 OAKLAND AVENUE SMOOT/TERRACE PARK HISTORIC DISTRICT PROPOSAL Replace siding and windows, change the roof material, widen the front stoop, infill a second-story rear sleeping porch, demolish a rear garage, and add a below-grade basement. Many parts of this project were completed prior to historic review, due to an error by Development Services Department staff during intake. The applicant has followed all City instructions, consulted with the OWANA Zoning Committee, and referred to the Smoot/Terrace Park Historic District Design Standards in planning the project. ARCHITECTURE Two-story, rectangular-plan house with a side-gabled roof, wood cladding, 1:1 and 6:6 wood- sash windows, and a hip-roofed entry portico with two wood doors. PROJECT SPECIFICATIONS The proposed project has five parts: 1) Replace wood lap siding with wood teardrop siding; 2) Replace some windows with 1:1 wood-sash windows. The central four windows on the front elevation, as well as four windows on the rear wall, have been replaced. Other windows have been repaired; 3) Install a standing-seam metal roof in place of the shingled roof; 4) Reconstruct the front stoop to be wider and deeper; remove the low wing walls. The stone from the existing steps will be reused as much as possible to surface the new stoop; 5) Infill a second-story rear sleeping porch with wood siding; 6) Demolish a rear open one-story garage; and 7) Add a below-grade basement, raising the house by 1’. STANDARDS FOR REVIEW The property is contributing to the Smoot/Terrace Park Historic District. The following requirements from the historic district design standards apply to the proposed project: Front Exterior Walls 1. Retain and repair the historic exterior materials on front walls, side walls within 15 feet of the front, unless HPO staff and/or the HLC agree that repair is not possible due to deterioration beyond repair. The historic siding and trim have been replaced. The applicant has provided an inspector’s report that notes: o Significant and detrimental water damage at wall assemblies; o End-of-life conditions for siding, including wood rot, deterioration, water damage, loose boards, and damaged boards; and o Bowed or leaning walls at east and west walls. 2. If replacement of the historic exterior wall materials is necessary, choose a material similar in dimensions, profile, reveal, and texture to the historic material, and install  B.6 - 2 the new materials so that they do not damage adjacent historic fabric and so that they maintain the planar relationships and joint patterns that existed historically relative to window frames, door frames, and other exterior features. The wood shiplap siding has been replaced with wood teardrop siding. This does not match in dimensions and profile, but it is the same material and texture. The teardrop siding does match that of two very similar houses to the east; it is different from the identical house immediately to the west. The replacement trim has the same dimensions as the historic trim. The project largely does not meet this standard. Doors and Door Openings No changes are proposed to the doors on the front wall or side walls within 15’ of the front. Windows and Window Openings 1. Avoid alterations that enlarge or relocate window openings, or add new window or skylight openings, on front walls, side walls within 15 feet of the front, or roofs within 15 feet of the front. No window openings have been enlarged on the primary façade or secondary elevations. The project meets this standard. 2. Retain and repair all components of existing historic windows unless HPO staff and/or the HLC agree that the individual component is deteriorated beyond repair. The applicant has provided an inspector’s report that notes water penetration issues, air infiltration issues, deteriorated glazing, cracked panes and damaged/missing counter balance springs, and impeded egress. The report concludes that the windows are in “very poor condition.” 3. If replacement of historic windows is necessary, use windows that are the same size and match the dimensions, profile, and configuration of historic windows. The replacement windows are 1:1 windows that match the dimensions and profile, but not the 6:6 configuration of the historic windows. The project does not meet this standard. 4. Substitute materials are appropriate if they maintain the profile and finish appearance of the historic window. Extruded aluminum and aluminum-clad wood are acceptable substitutes for wood; vinyl is not an acceptable substitute material. The replacement windows have clad-wood sashes. The project meets this standard. 5. If replacement windows are required, install the new windows so that they maintain the same planar relationships and joint patterns as existed historically relative to window frames, exterior wall planes, and other exterior features. The replacement windows maintain the historic relationships and patterns. The project meets this standard. Porches 1. Retain and repair the historic front porch materials and features unless HPO staff and/or the HLC agree that they are deteriorated beyond repair. The applicant has provided an inspector’s report that notes cracking, loose stones, out- of-level appearance, and inadequate riser and tread dimensions on the front stoop. The applicant proposes to rebuild the steps to be wider and deeper to comply with code, reusing as many stones as possible if they are flat. The project meets this standard.  B.6 - 3 2. If replacing deteriorated historic porch materials or features, use materials that are the same size and match the dimensions, profile, texture, and configuration of existing historic features. The project will use the historic stones as much as possible and similar stones where it is not possible. The project meets this standard. Roofs and Roof Features Recommendation: a. If replacing roof materials and features that are deteriorated beyond repair, first consider using the original material, then the use of a product that matches the dimensions, profile, appearance, and configuration of the historic material; metal roofs are also acceptable. The project proposes to use a metal roof, which meets this advisory recommendation. Additions to Contributing Buildings 1. New additions should be compatible with the historic building by reflecting the scale, massing, and/or materials of the historic building, but differentiated enough so that they are not confused as historic or original to the building. The same cladding has been used to infill the sleeping porch, which is compatible but not differentiated. The project somewhat meets this standard. 3. Design new additions that are subordinate to and do not overpower the historic building. The infill is subordinate to the historic building and meets this standard. 4. Construct additions that avoid the removal or obstruction of any historic exterior features on the front of the building or the sides within 15 feet of the front. The infill is located on a rear corner that is minimally visible from the street, and meets this standard. 6. A new basement addition may extend to the front of the house. The basement addition extends to the front of the house, as allowed. The project meets this standard. 5. Design basement additions so that they do not raise the floor level of the house, or so that the new floor level of the house is not higher than either the average of the contributing houses on the same block face, or the average of the adjacent houses if contributing. The addition raises the floor level of the house by one foot. The resulting height is lower than the average grade-to-floor height of both 617 and 701 Oakland Avenue. The project generally meets the applicable standards. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS The committee noted that the replacement siding does not match the historic siding, but is typical of the neighborhood; and that replacement windows would have ideally matched the lite pattern of the historic windows. Committee members preferred to keep the shingle roof but acknowledged that the design standards allow a metal replacement roof. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Approve the plans. Though the project does not meet all applicable standards, the applicant has done everything requested of her. The delayed historic review occurred as a result of City error, and staff does not believe the applicant should be penalized by being required to  purchase new siding and windows that comply with the standards. The replacement siding and windows do not match what was on the building historically, but they are in keeping with the character of similar adjacent buildings and the historic district as a whole. B.6 - 4  LOCATION MAP B.6 - 5  PROPERTY INFORMATION Photos B.6 - 6 Primary (east) façade and south elevation of 703 Oakland Avenue. Source: Google Street View, February 2019.