Loading...
HPB 10262016-Regular Meeting HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD AGENDA City of Campbell, 70 North First Street, Campbell, California Regular Meeting of the Historic Preservation Board Wednesday, October 26, 2016, 4:00 p.m. City Council Chambers, 70 N. First Street, Campbell CALL TO ORDER Chair Blake ROLL CALL MINUTES 1. Approval of Minutes for Meeting of September 28, 2016 (Attached) ORAL COMMUNICATIONS This is the point on the agenda where members of the public may address the Board on items of concern to the Community that are not listed on the agenda. STUDY SESSION 1. ‘Lost Gatos’: Q&A with Mr. Feinberg who is the primary creator of the ‘Lost Gatos’ Historic Preservation Tour app, using ‘mytours.com' PUBLIC HEARING 1. 235 S. First Street: Hattie DePuy House – The applicant has applied for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to construct a 448 square foot addition to the existing 456 square foot home. The project also includes construction of a new 293 square foot detached garage for a total floor area of 1,197 square feet. The owner is also proposing to replace one of the windows in the front of the home with a window from the rear of the home that will be removed to accommodate the new addition. Staff Planner: Cindy McCormick (Staff Report attached). 2. 226 Alice Avenue: Alice Hyde House – The property owner has applied for a Mills Act Contract. The application includes a Schedule and Plan for Maintenance and Treatment of the Historic Property and photos of the property. Staff Planner: Cindy McCormick (Staff Report attached). NEW BUSINESS None OLD BUSINESS 1. Historic Preservation Ordinance (Chapter 21.33): Continue discussion regarding update of the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance. Pursuant to the CLG Agreement, OHP must have the opportunity to review and comment on ordinance changes prior to adoption. Changes that do not meet the CLG requirements could affect certification status. Continue discussion to a study session on Wednesday, Nov. 9th from 4:00pm to 5:30pm (or another date as needed to accommodate a quorum). 2. Brochure: Board Members Moore and Walter will provide an update on the brochure. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS (no discussion) 1. CLG Report (November 2016) 2. 80 S. Second Street (November 2016) 3. Cambrian and Kennedy Tract area (TBD) 4. HPB Member requests for future agenda items HPB MEMBER / STAFF ANNOUNCEMENTS / COMMUNICATIONS 1. Training 2. 209 Railway 3. General Plan Update 4. Farmer’s Market Table Reservations ADJOURNMENT Adjourn to the next regular meeting to be held on November 16, 2016, at 4:00 p.m., City Council Chambers, 70 North First Street, Campbell, California. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, listening assistance devices are available for meetings held in the Council Chambers. If you require accommodation to participate in the meeting, please contact Corinne Shin at the Community Development Department, at corinnes@cityofcampbell.com or (408) 866-2140. HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD REGULAR MEETING MINUTES 4:00 p.m. - Wednesday City Council Chambers September 28, 2016 CALL TO ORDER Vice Chair Blake called the Historic Preservation Board Regular Meeting of Wednesday, September 28, 2016, to order at 4:06 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, located at 70 North First Street, Campbell, California, and the following proceedings were had to wit. ROLL CALL Board Members Present: Susan Blake, Vice Chair Todd Walter (arrived 4:20pm) Dawn Anderson Laura Taylor Moore Board Members Absent: None Staff Members Present: Cindy McCormick, Senior Planner APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Board Member Anderson made a motion to approve the Regular Meeting Minutes of August 24, 2016. Board Member Moore seconded. Motion Passed 3-0 NON-AGENDIZED ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None Historic Preservation Board - Meeting Minutes September 28, 2016 Page 2 of 4 PUBLIC HEARING 1. 235 Sharp Avenue - Heritage Tree Application for Haas avocado tree. Staff member Naz Pouya gave a brief summary of the report, stating that staff could not make the findings for approval of the heritage tree application because it has significant lean and is therefore not an outstanding species and fruit trees are not protected by the Municipal Code. Board Member Anderson asked if an Arborist Report had been prepared, if the tree was bearing fruit, and if the canopy was encroaching on the neighbor’s property. Ms. Pouya stated that an arborist report had not been prepared, that yes the tree was bearing fruit, and yes the canopy was encroaching on the neighbor’s property. Staff member Cindy McCormick pointed out that an Arborist Report is not required; however Ms. Pouya is a landscape architect and capable of making her assessment. Vice Chair Blake pointed out that fruit/nut trees are excluded from tree protection; that the tree’s health is compromised; and that avocado trees usually have a life expectancy of 45 to 50 years. She agreed with staff’s recommendation to deny the application. She would like to commend the owner for caring for the tree and recommended that the owner consider consulting with an Arborist to help ensure the tree remains healthy. Board Member Moore made a motion to deny the heritage tree application. Board Member Anderson seconded. Motion Passed 3-0 NEW BUSINESS 1. 51 Alice (Informational only). Staff member McCormick advised the HPB that a building permit application was submitted to repair the existing foundation of the home, remove and reinstall the brick wainscot; repair the dry rot; and apply paint where needed to match the home. The applicant explained that a portion of the existing foundation was not attached which caused leaking and dry rot. He also explained that the contractor cannot repair the foundation without removing and replacing the wainscoting. Board Member Anderson asked for more information and also asked if the foundation will be completely replaced. She also asked what wood had been used for the framing and what the exterior siding consisted of. The applicant indicated that the waterproofing was inadequate, that it has been leaking for decades, and that the wood behind the brick is rotted. He indicated that the existing foundation will be attached and that no other work is proposed. He also indicated that it is hard to tell what the framing was made of due to the rot, however the joists are fir. He indicated that the siding includes horizontal siding and shingles. Vice Chair Blake pointed out that this home was a Sears Roebuck catalog home. She asked if the horizontal siding was shiplap. The applicant answered no. Vice Chair Blake stated she had no further concerns. <end> Historic Preservation Board - Meeting Minutes September 28, 2016 Page 3 of 4 2. Election of Chair/Vice Chair - Board Member Walter made a motion to elect Susan Blake as the Chair. Board Member Anderson seconded. Motion Passed 4-0 Board Member Walter made a motion to elect Dawn Anderson as the Vice Chair. Chair Blake seconded. Motion Passed 4-0 OLD BUSINESS 1. Historic Preservation Ordinance (Chapter 21.33): Chair Blake and Vice Chair Anderson both indicated they liked the City of Davis Ordinance language regarding Certificates of Appropriateness. Vice Chair Anderson indicated that the San Francisco ordinance has less detail than Davis and may therefore be more flexible. She also indicated that the actual Certificate from San Francisco has a lot of detail. Chair Blake indicated she preferred the stronger language and clarity from Davis. Board Members Walter and Moore agreed. Board Member Walter also stated he would like the Ordinance to be more concise and with less redundancy. 2. Brochure: The subcommittee will convene and update the HPB at the next meeting. 3. Historic Home Tour/Mobile app: Chair Blake reported that the subcommittee met with Kerry from the Museum and discussed various ideas and needs for the app. She also contacted the State Historic Office of Preservation and is waiting for a return call. Board Member Moore and Chair Blake will coordinate with each other to invite the creator of the ‘Lost Gatos’ mobile application to the next meeting. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS (No Discussion) 1. HPB Member requests for future agenda items: Vice Chair Anderson asked the HPB if they would be interested in providing an educational display along the Los Gatos Creek Trail where the Ohlone Indians were once active. Board Member Moore indicated that the Museum already offers education on the Ohlone Indians presence in Campbell. HPB MEMBER / STAFF ANNOUNCEMENTS / COMMUNICATIONS 1. Training: Board Member Walter has completed his training. 2. 227 Alice Avenue: Chair Blake indicated that the “Ralph & Maud (Husted) Hyde House” is turning 100 years old in 2017. She would like to create a commemorative display for the City Managers lobby area during National Preservation Month in May. 3. 91 S. 2nd Street: Chair Blake announced that the date for the historic tour is Wednesday, October 12th immediately following the study session. The tour will be posted on the City’s website and in the marquee in front of City Hall. Historic Preservation Board - Meeting Minutes September 28, 2016 Page 4 of 4 ADJOURNMENT Adjourned at 5:05 p.m. to a regular meeting to be held on October 26, 2016, at 4:00 p.m., City Council Chambers, 70 North First Street, Campbell, California. PREPARED BY: ______________________________________ Cindy McCormick, Senior Planner APPROVED BY: ______________________________________ Susan Blake, Chair Staff Report – Historic Preservation Board Meeting of October 26, 2016 Page 6 of 7 PLN2016-258– 235 S. 1st St Of the four treatments, only the Rehabilitation Standards provides guidance for alterations and additions to a historic resource. Under these guidelines, it is recommended that the new addition limit the loss of historic materials so that character-defining features are not obscured, damaged, or destroyed. The addition should also be designed in a manner that makes clear what is historic and what is new. In other words, the addition should not duplicate the exact form, material, style, and detailing of the historic building so that the new construction appears to be part of the historic building. Furthermore, the addition should not imitate a historic style or period of architecture. Applicant’s Approach: With regard to the Secretary of the Interior's Standards, the applicant has stated that the overall approach in the design of the project was to: 1) Preserve significant historic materials, features and form; 2) Create a cohesive design that would be compatible in form, style, character, and scale to the original home; and 3) Differentiate the new addition from the existing historic structure. As stated on pages 5 and 6 of Attachment 4, the addition was placed on the rear of the home to minimize the physical and visual impact to the building's historic form, as viewed from South First Street and the narrow alleyway. The architect also wanted to maintain the original building's design, roof shape, materials, color, and general rhythms of the existing window and door placement. To differentiate the addition from the historic portions of the home, the applicant proposes vertical trim boards between the old and new exterior stucco wall areas, a smooth stucco surface on the new addition, and a roof line transition where the addition is proposed. Furthermore, the addition was designed to be removed without significantly damaging the essential form, character, and integrity of the original structure. Staff Review: From staff’s perspective, the applicant has done an excellent job of maintaining the historic character of the home as it relates to the streetscape, thereby meeting the general purposes of the Ordinance (Criteria 1 and 3). However, staff did raise some concerns to the applicant that it may not be readily apparent to the public what is historic and what is new (Criteria 2)1. The exterior of both the historic portion of the home and the new addition would be stucco as currently proposed. While the stucco on the new addition will have a different texture than the historic portion of the home (reference pages 5 and 6 of Attachment 5), it is not apparent that the difference in texture will clearly differentiate historic from new. Furthermore, the proposed vertical trim boards and new roof line are very subtle and could be better distinguished with a more prominent architectural transition. A review of the floor plan and elevations shows the lack of clear transition between original floor plan and the addition. As shown in the image to the right, an offset in the wall plane and/or plate height of the new addition would provide a more distinctive transition. Similarly, a different exterior material (e.g., wood siding) would distinguish the historic home from the new addition. 1 Rehabilitation Standard #9 states that “new work will be differentiated from the old and will be compatible with the historic materials, features, size, scale and proportion, and massing to protect the integrity of the property and its environment.”