Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Staff Report 5.B 01/07/2008
CITY OF PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA AGENDA BILL Agenda Title: Discussion and Possible Action Regarding an Appeal by Brian and Stephanie Breen of a Decision of the Historic and Cultural Preservation Committee to Deny the proposed 1,241 square foot addition to the existing 817 square foot residence located at 500 Howard Street within the Oakhill -Brewster Historic District, APN 006-142-014. Project File No. 07 -APL -0579 -CR. 5 January 7, 200 Meeting Date: January 7, 2008 Meeting Time: ❑ 3:00 PM M 7:00 PM Category: ❑ Presentation ❑ Consent Calendar M Public Hearing ❑ Unfinished Business © New Business Department: Community Development Cost of Proposal: N/A Amount Budgeted: N/A Director: Mike Moor C Director �\ Contact Person: Tiffany Robbe, Senior Planner TS Phone Number: 778-4301 Account Number: N/A Name of Fund: N/A Attachments to Agenda Packet Item: 1. Draft Resolution Upholding the Decision of the Historic and Cultural Preservation Committee 2. Location Map 3. Appeal Letter, date stamped November 16, 2007 4. Public Comment: One new letter date stamped December 17, 2007 and copies of the 11 letters submitted to H - SPARC. 5. Historic and Cultural Preservation Committee Staff Report with attachment (excluding plans) 6. Plans date stamped November 16, 2007 Summary Statement: The Breens, at 500 Howard Street, have appealed the Historic and Cultural Preservation Committee's denial of their residential addition, as proposed. The Committee was unable to make the findings required to approve the project as they found it inconsistent with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring & Reconstructing Historic Buildings ("Secretary of the hiterior's Standards") and the Oaldrill-Brewster Historic District Preservation Guidelines & Standards ("Oakhill -Brewster Guidelines"), and therefore inconsistent with the General Plan, the Zoning designation, and ineligible for a CEQA exemption. The Committee felt that the addition could be redesigned to conform with the Standards and Guidelines and could then return to the Committee for approval. Recommended Citv Council Action/Suggested Motion: Staff recommends that the City Council uphold the Historic and Cultural Preservation Committee's decision to deny the addition as proposed. ReviewedVV� ?Admin. Sv .Dir: Reviewed by City Attorney: Approved 6gvity Manager: l �-� Date: �'lIU I Date: �� Date: Rev. # 1 I Date Last Revised: December 29, 2007 1 File: S:\CC-City Council\500 Howard Bill & Rept J1 CITY OF PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA JANUARY 7, 2008 AGENDA REPORT FOR THE APPEAL BY BRIAN AND STEPHANIE BREEN OF A DECISION BY THE HISTORIC AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION COMMITTEE TO DENY THE PROPOSED 1,241 SQUARE FOOT ADDITION TO THE EXISTING 817 SQUARE FOOT RESIDENCE LOCATED AT 500 HOWARD STREET WITHIN THE OAKHILL-BREWSTER HISTORIC DISTRICT 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The Breens, at 500 Howard Street, have appealed the Historic and Cultural Preservation Committee's denial of their residential addition, as proposed. The Committee was unable to make the findings required to approve the project as they found it inconsistent with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring & Reconstructing Historic Buildings ("Secretary of the Interior's Standards") and the Oakhill -Brewster Historic District Preservation Guidelines & Standards ("Oakhill -Brewster Guidelines"), and therefore inconsistent with the General Plan, the Zoning designation, and ineligible for a CEQA exemption. The Committee felt that the addition could be redesigned to conforni with the Standards and Guidelines and could then return to the Committee for approval. 2. BACKGROUND: PROTECT DESCRIPTION On April 3, 2007, an application was submitted by Brent Russell on behalf of property owners Brian and Stephanie Breen for Historic and Cultural Preservation Committee (H - SPARC) review and approval of a 1,241 square foot addition to the existing 817 square foot residence located at 500 Howard Street in the Oakhill -Brewster Historic District. The project would add 801 square feet at the main floor level and 440 square feet at the daylight basement level. The addition would be constructed by extending the existing pre -1906 house to the rear of the property and adding a cross -lipped wing extending north toward Galland Street, and would be visible from all elevations. The roof over the existing portion of the house would be raised in order to incorporate the existing bath under the shed addition (which dates to 1910). The height of the roof's peals would increase by two feet, though the impact would be greater due to the daylight basement proposed to be constructed where the house slopes down to Galland Street; the height measurement would increase from 19.7 feet to 23.3 feet (as measured from average grade to peals of roof). See Plans, Attachment 6. A historic resource evaluation and an evaluation of the addition was prepared by Vicki Beard of Tom Origer & Associates and submitted as part of the application materials (see Attachments 5 C). 1 HISTORIC AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION COMMITTEE REVIEW On November 8, 2007, the Historic and Cultural Preservation Committee held a public hearing on the proposed addition. After reviewing the project and hearing public testimony, a number of the Committee members stated that while they believed an addition could be designed so as to be consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Oakhill -Brewster Guidelines, modifications to the proposed projects were necessary before the consistency finding could be made. The Chair asked the property owners if they wanted to request a continuance to allow time to make the modifications discussed by the Committee. The property owners declined and requested a decision on the project as proposed. A vote to approve the addition as proposed failed two votes to three. The Historic and Cultural Preservation Committee meeting can be viewed on the City's website at httD://DetalLtina.Qranicus.com/ViewPLiblisher.Dlll)?viewid=4. The following is a summary of the Historic and Cultural Preservation Committee's discussion. The Committee as a whole was disappointed that the project was unchanged from the one the Committee reviewed and offered their comments on at Preliminary Review on June 28, 2007 (these comments are summarized on page 4 item 2 and the hearing itself can be reviewed at: httu://netalania.--ranicus.corn/ViewPublisher.nhu?view id=4). The majority of the Committee ruled that: • The Historic Evaluation is inadequate; specifically they pointed out that the reviewer's determination that the project is consistent with the Secretary of the hrterior's Standards is undermined by her statement that the project is not consistent with Standard 10 (see more about Standard 10 below). • The addition, as proposed, is inconsistent with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards. They found the project to be inconsistent with Standard 9, which requires that new additions not destroy character defining features of the property and that new work be compatible with existing massing, size, scale, and architectural features and protect the historic integrity of the property. The historic evaluation found "simplicity of form" to be a character defining feature and the Committee felt that the addition as proposed would destroy this characteristic and be incompatible with the historic massing and scale. They concurred with the historic evaluator's finding that the project is not consistent with Standard 10, which requires that new additions be undertaken in such a manner that the existing structure remains intact. The Committee felt that the addition engulfed the cottage's form and that the modifications, such as the new roof form that encompasses both the historic and the proposed square footage and the cutting of openings for new windows and removing existing ones, resulted in the existing stricture not remaining unimpaired as required by Standard 10. • The addition, as proposed, would result in the house no longer qualifying as a contributor to the Oakhill Brewster Historic District, resulting in a significant, and unmitigatable, impact. • The addition, as proposed, is inconsistent with the Oakhill -Brewster Guidelines, particularly with regard to the requirement that new work on existing buildings be 2 consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and with regard to Guideline 3d which relates to roofline arrangement. • An addition could be designed so as to be consistent with the Secretary of the hrterior's Standards and the Oakhill -Brewster Guidelines (as well as with the Zoning Ordinance, and the General Plan, and so as to eliminate the substantial adverse change in the significance of a historic resource, and thereby qualify for a CEQA exemption), allowing approval of a redesigned addition by the Committee. Following is a synopsis of the modifications which the Committee felt would assist the architect in redesigning the project to be consistent with the Secretary's Standards and Oakhill -Brewster Guidelines: • Reduce/eliminate the modifications to the front elevation. Maintain the use of a shed roof over the existing bathroom, malting the wider/higher/more massive roof needed to encompass the front bath unnecessary and thereby better preserving the front facade and massing. Maintain the existing window configuration at the existing bathroom. • Reduce/eliminate the modifications to the Kent Street elevation. Do not change the window opening locations, just the window inserts. Inset and/or consider a shed roof for any rear addition. • Simplify the roof plan. Preserve the existing hipped roof structure with shed roof bathroom. • Design an addition that abuts rather than engulfs the existing house. • Reduce the massing of the proposed house overall by increasing use of the downslope area, by way of increased excavation at the rear. GROUNDS FOR APPEAL On November 16, 2007, within the 14 day appeal period, the City Clerk's office received an appeal from Brent Russell on behalf of Brian and Stephanie Breen appealing the decision of the Historic and Cultural Preservation Committee to the City Council, (see Attachment 3). The following are the grounds sited for the appeal to the City Council: 1. The site has many challenges, particularly having three street frontages and a front setback greater than required. 2. At the Preliminary H -SPARC hearing, the general feedback received was that the Committee "understood the concerns of one member", but "would be supportive pending the submittal of a historian's report and formal submittal before them". 3. The neighbors are supportive. 4. The Breens expected to be able to add on to the house and raise their family there. STAFF RESPONSE TO GROUNDS FOR THE APPEAL 1. There are difficulties inherent in this parcel, which represent design challenges. However, the findings that the project is consistent with the Secretary of the 3 t'— Interior's Standards, Oalchill-Brewster Guidelines, Zoning District, and General Plan and exempt from further CEQA review still have to be made by the Committee. The majority of the Committee did not feel that they could make these required findings based on the current house design. The Cormuittee felt that the problem was not so much that the addition could be seen from three streets (or other siting constraints) as that the addition, as proposed, overwhelms/engulfs the existing structure. They felt that an addition could and should be designed consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Oakhill -Brewster Guidelines. 2. Reviewing the Preliminary H -SPARC minutes, staff does not believe that the Committee asserts they "would be supportive pending the submittal of a historian's report and formal submittal before them". Rather they indicate: • That the Cominittee's primary concern is that the addition not overpower the existing pyramidal cottage and the need for the addition to be subordinate to the existing house. • The Committee advise the architect to consider maintaining window opening locations (Kent side) and modifying the roof massing to more closely match the existing. • That the Committee appreciates: o That wood double -hung windows are proposed to replace vinyl windows, o That desired new square footage would be gained by adding a daylight basement where the property slopes to Galland Street, and o That the existing landscaping is proposed to be preserved. It is important to remember that the nature of a Preliminary Review is for the applicant to receive preliminary design feedback from the Committee, that no historic evaluation is included, and that no decision is made or implied. 3. The Committee understood that the neighbors supported the project as proposed; however they also understood that this fact would not relieve the Committee of its duty to find that the project is consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards, the Oakhill -Brewster Guidelines, the General Plan, and the Zoning Ordinance and eligible for a CEQA exemption. 4. The Committee denied the addition as proposed after first asking the applicants if they would like a continuance in order to modify the proposed addition to address the Committee's concerns and establish consistency with the Secretary of Interior's Standards, as required. If the applicants had been willing to make modifications such that the Committee was able to make the required consistency findings, the project would not have been denied. If the applicants now make such modifications, they will be able to add on to their house. Please note: If the Council can not make the required findings that the project is consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and the Oakhill -Brewster Guidelines, they may not approve the project (as, pursuant to Zoning Ordinance section 17-508, a showing of hardship unrelated to personal, family, or financial difficulties was neither attempted nor demonstrated). Additionally, if the project is not consistent with the General Plan policy to preserve Petaluma's architectural 4 heritage, then the General Plan consistency finding can not be made. Likewise if the project is not consistent with the Secretary's Standards and Oakhill -Brewster Guidelines, then the project is not consistent with the Historic District Overlay Zoning District, and the Zoning Ordinance finding can not be made. Furthermore, while the original Committee staff report relied on a CEQA exemption contained in Section 15301(e)(2) of the CEQA Guidelines for additions to existing structures of 10,000 square feet or less, Public Resources Code section 20184(e) and CEQA Guidelines section 15300.2(1) provide that no exemption can be used if the project will cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource. Therefore, if the extent and nature of the proposed changes means that the project is not consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Oakhill - Brewster Guidelines and/or that the property would no longer be considered a contributor to the Oakhill Brewster Historic District, the result is a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource, and the CEQA exemption finding can not be made. PUBLIC NOTICE AND COMMENT Notice of the appeal was published in the Argus Courier on December 19, 2007. Notice of the appeal was sent to all property owners, occupants within 500 feet of the project site, and the Historic and Cultural Preservation Committee on December 18, 2007. To date, the Planning Division has received one letter in opposition to the granting of the appeal. This letter is from one of the Historic and Cultural Review Committee (H - SPARC) members. It articulates at least one Committee members thought process regarding the decision and encourages the Council to adhere to the City's own and the nationally accepted preservation standards and to ensure that historic districts are protected (see Attachment 4). Prior to or at the Historic and Cultural Preservation Committee hearing, eleven letters supporting the project were submitted; these are also included (see Attachment 4). 3. ALTERNATIVES: a. Uphold Historic and Cultural Preservation Committee's decision to deny the addition as proposed. Rely on the City's Historic and Cultural Preservation Committee for detenninations of a project's consistency with historic standards. (The applicant may then modify their proposal to address the inconsistency issues and resubmit to H - SPARC.) b. Find that the proposed project is consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards, including Standards 9 and 10, and with the Oakhill -Brewster Guidelines, Find that the historic evaluation is adequate including its response to Standard 10, Find that the project is eligible for a CEQA exemption, Grant the appeal, and Approve the addition as proposed. Note: If this alternative is chosen, Council should consider those conditions drafted for the HCPC consideration (see Attachment 5 B). 5 4. FINANCIAL IMPACTS: This is an appeal of a private development project subject to any applicable City Special Development Fees. The appeal is subject to the cost recovery fee system. The appellant is required to pay the $170 appeal fee established by City Council. The project applicant is required to pay all costs with processing the appeal that exceed the $170 appeal fee. To date the City has collected $170.00. Approximately 45 hours of total staff time at a cost of $1,879 has been expended to date. The City Attorney's hours have not yet been received. 5. CONCLUSION: The Historic and Cultural Preservation Committee did not approve the addition as proposed because they were unable to make the findings required to approve the project: firstly that the project is consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Oakhill -Brewster Historic District Guidelines, and subsequently that the project is consistent with the General Plan and the Zoning designation and eligible for a CEQA exemption. The Committee did feel that an addition could be designed to conform with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Oakhill -Brewster Guidelines, thereby allowing approval. As such, staff recommends that the City Council uphold the decision of the Historic and Cultural Preservation Committee, deny the appeal, and direct the appellant to modify the project such that it is consistent with the requirements of the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Oakhill -Brewster Guidelines (and thus the General Plan, Zoning Ordinance), and eligible for a CEQA exemption, and resubmit to the Historic and Cultural Preservation Committee. 6. OUTCOMES OR PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENTS THAT WILL IDENTIFY SUCCESS OR COMPLETION: Not Applicable 7. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a Resolution to uphold the Historic and Cultural Preservation Committee's decision that the project, as proposed, is not consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Oakhill -Brewster Guidelines, is therefore not consistent with the General Plan or the Zoning designation or eligible for a CEQA exemption, and deny the appeal (see Attachment 1). I- 10 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF PETALUMA UPHOLDING THE DECISION OF THE HISTORIC AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION COMMITTEE, DENYING APPLICANT'S APPEAL AND DENYING THE BREEN ADDITION AS PROPOSED AT 500 HOWARD STREET, APN 006142-014 WHEREAS, on November 8, 2007, the Historic and Cultural Preservation Committee of the City of Petaluma held a public hearing to consider the Breens' application for a proposed 1,241 square foot addition to the existing 817 square foot residence at 500 Howard Street, APN 006-142-014, in the Oalchill-Brewster Historic District; and WHEREAS, after considering the public testimony and application materials, the Historic and Cultural Preservation Committee was unable to make the findings required to approve the project as they found it inconsistent with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring & Reconstructing Historic Buildings ("Secretary of the Interior's Standards") and the Oak -hill - Brewster Historic District Preservation Guidelines & Standards ("Oakhill -Brewster Guidelines"), and therefore inconsistent with the General Plan, the Zoning Ordinance, and ineligible for a CEQA exemption; and WHEREAS, the applicant choose not to request the item be continued to allow time to modify the project to address these inconsistencies, but rather requested a decision on the project, as proposed; WHEREAS the Historic and Cultural Preservation Committee, not being able to make the required findings, denied the project; and WHEREAS, on November 16, 2007, the City Clerk received a letter appealing the Historic and Cultural Preservation Conunittee's decision on behalf of the Breens; and WHEREAS, the Petaluma City Council held a noticed public hearing on January 7, 2008; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council, based on the evidence and testimony presented for the record at the public hearing, hereby upholds the decision of the Historic and Cultural Preservation Committee, denies the appeal, and denies the application for the Breen Addition at 500 Howard Street, as proposed, based on the following findings: Findings The Historic Evaluation is inadequate; for example, the statement therein that the project is consistent with the Secretary of the hrterior's Standards is undermined by the statement that the project is not consistent with Standard 10. 2. The addition, as proposed, is inconsistent with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards. Firstly, the project is inconsistent with Standard 9, which requires that new additions not destroy character defining features of the property and that new work be compatible with existing massing, size, scale, and architectural features and protect the historic integrity of the property. For example, "simplicity of form" is a character defining feature and the addition as proposed would destroy this characteristic and be incompatible with the historic massing and scale. Secondly, the project is inconsistent with Standard 10, which requires that new additions be undertaken in such a manner that the existing structure remains intact. Instead, the addition, as proposed, would engulf the cottage's form. The modifications, such as the new roof form that encompasses both the historic and the proposed square footage and the cutting of openings for new windows and the removing of existing ones, result in the existing structure not remaining unimpaired as required by Standard 10. 3. The addition, as proposed, is inconsistent with the Oakhill -Brewster Guidelines, particularly with regard to the requirement that new work on existing buildings be consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and with Oakhill -Brewster Guideline 3d regarding roofiine arrangement. 4. The extent and nature of the proposed changes means that the project is inconsistent with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and with the Oakhill -Brewster Guidelines and that the property would no longer be considered a contributor to the Oaldiill Brewster Historic District; thus, these changes would cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource, making the project ineligible for an exemption from CEQA, pursuant to 14 California Code of Regulations sections 15301(e) and 15300.2(f) and Public Resources Code section 20184 (e). 5. Because the project is inconsistent with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and with the Oakhill -Brewster Guidelines, it is inconsistent with Objective j of the General Plan which requires preservation of Petalurma's architectural heritage. 6. Because the project is inconsistent with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and with the Oakhill -Brewster Guidelines, it is inconsistent with the Historic District Overlay Zoning designation and the Zoning Ordinance. 0 Pam Torliatt, Mayor Karen Nau, Vice Mayor Mike O'Brien, Councilman David Rabbit, Councilman Mike Barris, Councilman Samantha Freitas, Councilwoman Teresa Barrett, Councilwoman City of Petaluma 11 English Street Petaluma, CA 94952 ATT,40HMENT 3 November 15, 2007 NOV `§' 9 Dear Mayor & Councilmembers, v � ?$1�������lg + � •- ., fy On behalf of Brian and Stephanie Breen, I am appealing the decision by the City Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee (SPARC) to deny approval of the proposed addition at 500 Howard Street. This decision was made on November 8, 2007. The vote was 2 ayes, 3 nays. The owners and I are requesting that you overturn this denial and approve the addition as proposed. The existing house is an 817 square foot, two bedroom, one bath house that was originally constructed by connecting two chicken coops together. The house has belonged to members of Mrs. Breen's family since about 1910 (see historian's report). The owners are proposing to add 801 square feet at the main level of the house and a 440 square foot livable basement. The final result will be a 4 bedroom, 3 bath house of 2,058 s.f, to accommodate this family of 2 adults, one child, and one on the way. The project presented many challenges, most particularly that of having 3 street frontages. Significant effort was made to retain the dominant front portion of the house intact while accommodating the space needs for a growing family at the rear and left side of the house. Although the existing house sits beyond the front setback line, the clients and I endeavored to meet the current setbacks as listed in the current zoning code for the new construction. The original design proposal submitted in January did not include the basement, but during the staff review period the owners determined that an additional bedroom would be necessary to accommodate their family. I suggested that to make the house larger physically would probably be frowned upon by the city staff and SPARC. This precluded adding a second story or increasing the main floor of the house. Since the lot slopes downward towards Galland Street, I suggested that the additional space be accommodated in a basement. The siding, windows, detailing, roofing, and roof slope were all designed to complement the existing building. During the design process we made several changes recommended by the original historian including to the roof and window placement. I have been working with the Breen's on this project since the early summer of 2006. We first submitted plans for review by SPARC in late January of 2007. We subsequently addressed items requested by the planning staff during Spring of 2007. As part of the submittal process, the clients were required to submit an independent report provided by a professional historian. The historian's initial support and enthusiasm for the project design later became significantly less 202 Webster Street • Petaluma, CA 99952 - 707.769.0535 1 • l positive. During the late winter of 2007 we discovered that the historian was doing contract work for an individual with a background in historical preservation that had joined SPARC during early 2007. It soon became evident that there was a potential conflict of interest and on the suggestion of the historian, the Breen's chose to look for a new historian. Unfortunately, two local historians contacted refused to do work here in Petaluma due to previous negative experiences in working with SPARC and City Staff. During the process of addressing staff comments, a new historian was brought on board in late spring of 2007 and as an extra measure of guidance I recommended that the Breen's submit their project for preliminary SPARC to get some feedback on the proposed project. During this preliminary SPARC meeting in June of 2007, with the exception of one SPARC member, the general feedback received by us was that although the other members understood the concerns of the one SPARC member (who objected the design) they were generally favorable and would be supportive pending the submittal of a historians report and formal submittal before them at a subsequent meeting. One of the members also requested photos of surrounding homes to assess the addition in relationship to surrounding homes. These pictures were submitted to the City staff as requested as part of the formal SPARC submittal. A historians report was submitted as part of the formal SPARC submittal that included three requested changes to the plan that were included as part of the conditions of approval. These included a trim board to differentiate between existing and new wall on the South side of the building, siding of slightly different spacing on the new addition and substitution of the pair of French doors for a single door on the East side of the house. Despite the considerable effort and time expended to meet the requirements for SPARC and follow the current process diligently, we were denied approval at the SPARC meeting on a 2-3 vote. Considerable effort was made by the Breen's to inform their neighbors of the proposed project and they voluntarily put up story poles so that the neighbors could see the extent of the proposed project. At least 5 neighbors showed up at the meeting to show support, as well as letters from 11 additional neighbors. The process has proved to be very frustrating and disheartening to the owners. Mrs. Breen is a fourth generation Petaluman and has worked at Petaluma Valley Hospital for the past 6 years as a registered nurse. Mr. Breen works as a financial advisor in downtown Petaluma and is actively involved in one of the local Rotary Clubs and the Petaluma Chamber of Commerce. The Breen's purchased this home never thinking they would not be able to expand their home size when they decided to expand as a family. They very much desire to raise a fifth generation in this home. They have formed strong attachments to both their neighborhood and the warm and caring neighbors around them. We ask that you will see fit to correct this adverse decision in a way that demonstrates the City's commitment to support young families in a community that increasing is unaffordable for people in the current generation. Sincerely�� �� Brent I. Russell, Ar Encl. cc. Brian & Stephanie Breen 202 Webster Street • Petaluma, CA 94952 • 707.769.0535 iar, ATTACHMENT 4 December 12, 2007 Pamela Torliatt, Mayor Karen Nau, Vice Mayor Teresa Barrett Samantha Freitas Mike Harris Mike O'Brien David Rabbit Dear Mayor and Council Members As one of two historical representatives on the city's Historical and Cultural Preservation Committee (Historic Sparc), I, as an individual, respectively request that you uphold the decision the committee made November 8, 2007 when the Breen Addition at 500 Howard Street was reviewed. Background: On June 28, 2007, the project came before the committee for preliminary review. Issues discussed were the negative effects on the small existing historic cottage by removing so much of the existing house and altering its basic design so dramatically. The new construction overpowers and engulfs the historic by obscuring the cottage's basic form and massing, by removing extensive exterior wall sections, by creating a complex hipped roof, and cutting openings for new windows and removing existing ones. The addition or additions need to be secondary to the cottage, and need to respect the essential volume and massing. Adding living space to an existing 800 square foot cottage is extremely challenging, and requires an alternative approach to the one presented where 150% is added. In reality, the proposed project results in a new building, new design, and primarily new materials. This was discussed at the preliminary meeting and the applicants were advised by this committee member that the design of the addition did not adhere to the Oak Hill Brewster Guidelines or the Secretary of the Interior's Standards (required too for CEQA exemption). Additions are acceptable in historic districts, but those additions must adhere to certain requirements to insure that the historical integrity of both the house and the district are retained. Nevertheless, the aDDlicants came to the committee in November for full review with the exact same desien thev Dresented at the Dreliminary meetine. Oak Hill Brewster: The neighborhood is notable for its diversity of historic styles, dates of construction, building sizes, extent of ornamentation, and irregularity of the sites. Whether large or small, each contributor plays an important role in defining and retaining the authentic character within the boundaries of the district that was established by the city in 1990. 500 Howard Street "...is representative of an early twentieth century working-class home in the vernacular or Builder style, notable for its simplicity of form. minimal decoration, and functional spatial arrangement." This quote is from the report prepared by the applicant's consultant and expands on how this property contributes to the neighborhood as an authentic cottage. RECEIVE® DEC 17 2007 1 15 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Standards for Review: Staff did not recommend the project, but came to the committee to ask for guidance. The applicant's consultant (an archeological firm) indicated in the report that the project in fact did not follow the historic guideline (#10) that deals specifically with new additions. (see page 7) Secretary of the Interior's Guideline #10: New additions shall be undertaken so that if removed in the future, the essential form and intem-ity of the historic property would be unimpaired. This project does not differentiate the addition from the existing house in a way that is required by the standards. The other guideline that deals with additions is #9: "shall not destrov historic materials (note plans where entire exterior walls, roof sections, and window openings are removed) historic features, (note the loss of the historic hipped roof, the loss of the simple square massing, size, etc.) and spatial relationships (refer to the pedestrian view with the story poles that show only the new walls, not the proposed taller complex roof). Too much of the existing is demolished in this proposed project. The consultant's recommendations regarding French doors, siding, and a vertical wall board do not create a compliant project.—these are minor issues when compared to the major issues discussed above. Conclusion: Historic Sparc rarely denies an application. Typically, there are compromises and adjustments on the design to make it compliant with the guidelines and district requirements. The report by the applicant's consultant is inconsistent in its own findings, and as noted above, indicates that a major guideline for new additions is not met. If Historic Sparc is not supported, it sets a negative precedent for other projects requiring historical review. This sends the message that Petaluma does not uphold its own standard for review and ignores accented preservation guidelines insuring that historic nrooerties and districts are ultimatelv protected. Sincerely, 1410(4w� %" Marianne Hurley, Historic Sparc committee member RECEIVED DEC 17 2007 W COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT To Whom It May Concern: ���s��!'G�2. . � at �- are-- for the acceptance of the "Breen Addition' at Soo Howard St. We feel that the addition would be positive to the neighborhood and its surroundings. Due to conflicting schedules, we will not be able to attend the Historic SPARC meeting on Thursday, November 8", although this letter is in lieu of us being there to support the Breen family Sincerely, tZG GWaVcj> NO'q 8, 2001 To Whom It May Concern: S� S�� We, G�J ` at are for the acceptance of the "Breen Addition" at Soo Howard St. We feel that the addition would be positive to the neighborhood and its surroundings. Due to conflicting schedules, we will not be able to attend the Historic SPARC meeting on Thursday, November 8"', although this letter is in lieu of us being there to support the Breen family. Sincerely, RECEIVE® NOV 0'12007 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT I� To Whom It May Concern: We, �1 I.avy tel/ at are for the acceptance of the "Breen Addition' at Soo Howard St. We feel that the addition would be positive to the neighborhood and its surroundings. Due to conflicting schedules, we will not be able to attend the Historic SPARC meeting on Thursday, November 8"', although this letter is in lieu of us being there to support the Breen family Sincerely, RECEIVED NOV 0 7 2007 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 11- To Whom It May Concern: We, 1 A JL. -t Nb�, c 5/5- floc m>n S i 2 e--IFI- at are for the acceptance of the "Breen Addition" at Soo Howard St. We feel that the addition would be positive to the neighborhood and its surroundings. Due to conflicting schedules, we will not be able to attend the Historic SPARC meeting on Thursday, November 8"i, although this letter is in lieu of us being there to support the Breen family. Sincere RECEIVED NOV 012007 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 14 To Whom It May Concern: We, �B(..t✓6 a IA) d v�--at 5� 4 -7 ✓d St are for the acceptance of the "Breen Addition' at Soo Howard St. We feel that the addition Would be positive to the neighborhood and its surroundings. Due to conflicting schedules, we will not be able to attend the Historic SPARC meeting on Thursday, November 8", although this letter is in lieu of us being there to support the Breen family Sincerely, 4-. OJL RECEIVE® NOV 072007 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT II To Whom It May Concern: are for the acceptance of the "Breen Addition" at Soo Howard St. We feel that the addition would be positive to the neighborhood and its surroundings. Due to conflicting schedules, we will not be able to attend the Historic SPARC meeting on Thursday, November 8"', although this letter is in lieu of us being there to support the Breen family. Sincerely, 'l/V� RECEIVED MV 072007 COMMUNffY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT O�D To Whom It May Concern: We, `�' V i� at A are for the acceptance of the "Breen Addition" at Soo Howard St. We feel that the addition would be positive to the neighborhood and its surroundings. Due to conflicting schedules, we will not be able to attend the Historic SPARC meeting on Thursday, November 8"', although this letter is in lieu of us being there to support the Breen family Sincerely, RECEIVED NOV 072007 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMEENT 0`I To Whom It May Concern: We, Dak'.2t %o(cl+l.a /tom c,,.,/ Ueo,u,, Oa,,go�— at C r? jc ztii St are for the acceptance of the "Breen Addition" at Soo Howard St. We feel that the addition would be positive to the neighborhood and its surroundings. Due to conflicting schedules, we will not be able to attend the Historic SPARC meeting on Thursday, November 8", although this letter is in lieu of us being there to support the Breen family. Sincerely, — RECEIVED NOV 012007 COMMUNITY DEVEW9MEKT, DEPARTMENT A To Whom It May Concern: r� We, �/ C1�✓ at ,I S ", ,uz.-- are for the acceptance of the "Breen Addition" at Soo Howard St. We feel that the addition would be positive to the neighborhood and its surroundings. Due to conflicting schedules, we will not be able to attend the Historic SPARC meeting on Thursday, November 8"', although this letter is in lieu of us being there to support the Breen family. Sincerely, DECEIVED Nov 0 7 2007 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 22 00 To Whom It May Concern: We, \_l�nn� k� mj \sysvbyi [)iaAJ14a-at 52.0 )CAA4- 54-rU47-- are for the acceptance of the "Breen Addition" at Soo Howard St. We feel that the addition would be positive to the neighborhood and its surroundings. Due to conflicting schedules, we will not be able to attend the Historic SPARC meeting on Thursday, November 8", although this letter is in lieu of us being there to support the Breen family. Sincerely, RECEIVED NOV 0'12007 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT A4— Elizabeth Howland 521 Walnut Street Petaluma, CA 94952 Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee enq Historic and Cultural Preservation Committee City of Petaluma Petaluma, CA 94952 Re: Breen Addition Dear Committee Members, I am writing to encourage you to accept the plan for the Breen addition, as unfortunately, I am not able to attend the meeting on Novembet 8. I live up the street from the Breens, on the corner of Walnut and Galland streets in a home that is over 120 years old. During the 25 plus years I have lived in my home, I have always admired and appreciated the care that Petaluma takes with plans for remodeling in this historic neighborhood. I also walk by the Breen's home at least once a day and have reviewed the scale of the addition, thanks to the outline they have constructed. I am urging you to accept the plans for the addition based on three factors that are very important to me: 1. Ever since the Breens moved into their home, they have continuously improved both the condition of the house and the lot. 2. 1 believe that the proposed addition will sit nicely on the lot and be a welcome enhancement to our neighborhood. 3. Most importantly, I strongly believe that we must support and encourage young families to remain in our neighborhood. They should have the ability to renovate their homes in such a way that makes room for their expanding families. I think this is critical to the health of our community. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. Regards, Elizabeth Howland cc. Mr. and Mrs. Breen RECEIVE® NOV 0 7 2007 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT ATTACHMENT 5 CITY OF PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA MEMORANDUM CoauiiunityDevelopment Department, Planning Division, 11 English Street, Petaluma, CA 94952 (707) 778-4301 Fax (707) 778-4498 E-mail. planning&i petaluma.ca.us DATE: November 8, 2007 AGENDA ITEM NO. I TO: Historic and Cultural Preservation Committee FROM: Tiffany Robbe, Senior Planner SUBJECT: Request for approval of an addition at 500 Howard Street, APN 006-142-014, within the Oakhill -Brewster Historic District (File 07 -SPC -0025 -CR) P"Kel M Sym- a1O .WK63 1 Staff requests that the Historic and Cultural Preservation Committee review the site and architectural plans for the proposed 1,241 square foot addition to the existing 817 square foot residence located at 500 Howard Street within the Oakhill -Brewster Historic District. Should the Committee find that the project addresses their earlier concerns and is consistent with the General Plan, CEQA, District Guidelines, and Secretary's Standards, staff has included draft findings and conditions of approval (see Attachments A and B). PROJECT DESCRIPTION Brent Russell on behalf of property owners Brian and Stephanie Breen, have submitted an application for Historic and Cultural Preservation Committee review and approval of a 1,241 square foot addition to the existing 817 square foot residence located at 500 Howard Street in the Oakhill -Brewster Historic District. The project would add 801 square feet at the main floor level and 440 square feet at the daylight basement level. The addition would be constructed by extending the existing pre -1906 house to the rear of the property and adding a cross -hipped wing extending north toward Galland Street, and would be visible from all elevations. The roof over the existing portion of the house would be raised in order to incorporate the existing bath under the shed addition (which dates to 1910). The height of the roof's peak would increase by two feet, though the impact would be greater due to the daylight basement proposed to be constructed where the house slopes down to Galland Street; the height measurement would increase from 19.7 feet to 23.3 feet (as measured from average grade to peak of roof). See Plans, Attachment G & H. A historic resource evaluation and an evaluation of the addition was prepared by Vicici Beard of Tom Origer & Associates and submitted as part of the application materials' (see Attachments C & D). 'The file includes a draft historical evaluation prepared by Diana Painter; this evaluation was not finalized before the change of consultants and for this reason is not included as an attachment. Page 1 0�0 SETTING The subject parcel fronts Howard Street and is bounded by Kent Street to its south and Galland to its northwest. This location with frontage on three streets makes the parcel and addition more visible than with a typical mid -block lot situation. The parcel is across the street and just north of Oakhill Park. The property is within the Oakhill -Brewster Historic District; an area developed primarily with historic single-family residences (see Attachment F for Location Map). The site contains an 817 square foot, two-bedroom, one -bath, one-story single-family residence constructed in the first years of the twentieth century and a detached garage constructed in 1949. A prominent feature is the large street trees in the landscape median; no modification is proposed to these or the front yard landscaping generally. BACKGROUND On June 28, 2007, the project received a preliminary review by the Historic and Cultural Preservation Committee (see www.citvofbetaluma.net => City Clerk => Minutes of Meetings for streaming video). The Committee's primary concern was that the addition not overpower the existing pyramidal cottage and the need for the addition to be subordinate to the existing house. The committee also advised that the architect consider maintaining window opening locations (Kent side) and modifying the roof massing to more closely match the existing. The Committee appreciated that the vinyl windows were proposed to be replaced with wood double -hung, that needed additional square footage was being gained by adding a daylight basement where the property slopes to Galland Street, and that the existing landscaping was proposed to be preserved. Staff is not aware of any modifications made responding to the Committee's concerns. The project and first draft of the evaluation were routed to Heritages Homes of Petaluma (IIID. At that time they choose not to comment as a committee. Since that time, as requested by Heritage Homes, staff no longer routes applications to HH that will ultimately be reviewed by H - SPARC. STAFF ANALYSIS GENERALPLAN The General Plan land use designation of the subject property is Urban Standard (2.1 to 5.0 units to the acre). The Urban Standard land use designation is intended for single-family residential uses. The existing use of the property as a single-family residence is consistent with this land use designation. In order to approve the project, the Committee must be able to find that the proposed project is consistent with the following General Plan Community Character objectives: Objective is Upgrade the quality of residential development throughout the City. Objective j: Preserve Petaluma's architectural heritage. Objective k: Retain the unique qualities and architectural flavor of downtown and Westside residential areas. Page 2 a_l ZONING The subject property is zoned R-1:6,500, One -Family Residential Zoning with a 6,500 square foot minimum parcel size. The Oakbill-Brewster Historic District overlays the R1:6,500 zoning of the site. Therefore, the project is subject to the requirements of the R1:6,500 zoning district and the Oakbill-Brewster Historic District Guidelines and Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings. The required building setbacks and height limit in the R-1:6,500 district are: 1) 25 feet from the front/Howard Street property line 2) 20 feet from the rear property line 3) 15 feet from both the Kent and Galland street sides and 4) a maximum height for each elevation of 25 feet, measured from average finish grade to the midpoint of the roof. While the existing residence extends into the front setback (one corner measures 10 feet to the front property line), the proposed additions and modifications comply with all setback requirements and with the height limit. OAKHI .T-BREWSTER HISTORIC DISTRICT GUIDELINES & SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR'S STANDARDS A historic resource evaluation of the addition was prepared by Vicki Beard of Tom Origer & Associates (see Attachments C & D). It found that: • The rectangular -plan house with a hipped -roof was built in the very early years of the twentieth century - by 1906 - to provide worker housing close to town. The shed -roof addition, which included the bathroom, was added by 1910. Between 1910 and 1923, the porch was reoriented and a front -facing room was added; with these modifications the house acquired a slight hint of formal architectural style with a porch column and one Window suggestive of the Craftsman style. All of these modifications are themselves old enough to be considered part of the property's historical fabric. • The house is a contributor to the Oakhill -Brewster Historic District as a representative of a very early twentieth century working-class home in the "vernacular" style (also called `Builder Style"), of which character defining features are: simplicity of form, minimal decoration, and an emphasis of functional spatial arrangement. • The house has been in the Leal/Silva family since 1910 (the current owners are descendents); for most of those years as a rental property. Because the house is designated as a contributor to Petaluma's Oakhill -Brewster Historic District, Vicki Beard's evaluation reviewed the proposed addition for consistency with the District Guidelines and with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring, and Reconstruction Historic Buildings. The evaluation had the following points regarding the arrangement of the proposed addition: Italicized text is from staff. • The proposed addition creates a complex series of broken facades where now the facade is very simple; however, the new addition will be set back from Howard Street about 40 feet, and because of the lot configuration it will not be overly apparent from that viewpoint. Page 3 1�-X • Front: A short, front -facing window in the shed -roofed addition will be removed. This was not part of the original house. • Galland side: Changes to the Galland Street fagade will be more noticeable; the new addition will project toward Galland Street 22 feet beyond the existing fagade and will include a daylight basement. The existing garage will partly shield the addition from Galland. • Kent side: The Kent Street fagade will be extended 11 feet toward the rear of the lot (east), and the extension will include an additional pair of double -hung windows that will match (pursuant to their recommendation, see below) the paired windows on the west side of this elevation (where there is a nonconforming replacement at present). A shorter window has been proposed to replace the existing, single window. The proposed changes will not detract from this elevation's simplicity, and the new window and window arrangement are in keeping with the period in which this house was constructed. • Rear: The rear of the house (east elevation) will change significantly from 24 feet to just over 50 feet in length, and three pairs of double -hung windows will be added where there is now only one single window on that fagade. The windows will match those on the front of the house, and will be spaced an appropriate distance apart. An out -of -character French door has also been proposed on the north end of rear fagade, which should be replaced with a single door. • Roof. At present, the house has a simple, moderately pitched, hipped roof over the main part of the house with a shed roof over the addition on the north side. The existing roof over the Howard Street entry will be maintained and will abut a taller, hipped roof built to encompass the existing shed -roof addition. The proposed addition will have a similar arrangement with a lower roof intersecting a taller roof; however this roofline will be oriented 90 degrees from the original rooftine creating a cross -hipped wing. The new roof slope will approximate the existing slope. Changes to the roof line will be most noticeable from Galland Street. Nearby houses are an eclectic collection of roof types with some being very complex. Hipped, truncated hipped, gable -on -hip, cross -hipped and cross -gabled, and cross -gabled with towers were all noted along this part of Howard Street. Proposed changes to the roofline at 500 Howard Street will not be out of scale with the rooflines found in the immediate neighborhood. The evaluation found the planned addition to be generally compatible with the existing residence as well as with nearby district houses. The evaluation included the following comments: • No character -defining materials or features will be removed. • New wood sash windows will replace the existing windows which are mostly vinyl sashes. • While the planned changes will enlarge the house considerably, the building will retain an overall simplicity of form and materials that will continue to reflect the twentieth century vernacular building. The planned expansion is designed to allow the existing fagade on Howard Street to visually dominate the addition by placing the new construction clearly back from the original fagade. These changes will not preclude the house from continuing as a contributor to the Oakhill -Brewster District. ' • The proposed addition (adding 801 square feet at the existing level and 440 square feet at the daylight basement level to the existing 817 square foot home) increases the footprint of the building by 57 percent (when calculated considering the existing deck and stairs; Page 4 I—I 87% when calculated on existing to proposed square footage) while increasing the square footage by 150% (figures corrected from the evaluation). This is in keeping with the Secretary's standard because: o The addition is set toward the rear of the original house, o The second story is created by using sub -space rather than building a second story, and o The additional height required by this plan is setback from the original wall plane so that the original house is not overwhelmed by the addition. This plan makes the addition as inconspicuous as possible, while providing adequate family living space. • With the addition, the house will be well within the size and scale of other historical buildings in the neighborhood. • The new addition is consistent with each of the Secretary of the Interior's Standards (with the incorporation of the recommendations below), expect for Standard 10 which addresses maintaining the essential form and integrity of a building. This standard is not met because portions of the exterior wall will be removed. The proposed plan requires removal of about 38 percent of the exterior walls, including: the entire east elevation and 16 feet of the north elevation. In discussing this issue, the National Park Service makes the following point in Preservation Brief 14: "Generally speaking, preservation of historic buildings is enhanced by avoiding all but minor changes to primary or "public" elevations" (Weeks 1986). The east elevation (the bulk of the removal) is not visible from the street. The north elevation, from which 16 feet of the exterior wall will be removed, is visible from Galland Street and includes a Craftsman -like window. In our opinion, removal of the window will not detract from this otherwise unadorned building, and loss of 16 feet of the north wall, is not overly conspicuous. The west and south walls will remain in place. The evaluation noted three items which are not consistent with the district guidelines. • It finds that the rear elevation French door is not in character with the original house and recommends that it be replaced with a standard single door. • It finds that the east pair of windows on the Kent Street elevation is shorter than those on the west side of the same elevation and recommends that they be lengthen to match. • It finds that: o The new addition should be clad in wood siding that is wider than the siding on the original house to create a visual distinction and, o On the Kent Street elevation, where the existing house and addition meet, a vertical board separating the new and old construction, maybe appropriate. Staff has included these recommendations as draft conditions of approval (See Attachment B, Conditions 4-6). DEMOLITION Since the house was constructed before 1945, the extent of its proposed demolition was evaluated to determine whether the building is subject to additional' review under the City's demolition policy (Resolution 2005-198 would apply if more than 50% of the exterior walls of the existing house are proposed to be removed). The architect prepared Sheet 5 to demonstrate Page 5 110 the extent of the exterior wall removal and calculated the extent of that removal at 37.6% (see Attachment G/H). Therefore, this project is not subject to the additional review/findings specified by the City's demolition policy. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The project is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15301, Class l(e)(2), of the CEQA Guidelines, which allows additions to existing buildings. A historic resource evaluation was prepared for the project which indicates that the project is consistent with the Secretary of Interior's Standards and the Oakhill -Brewster Historic District Guidelines. Therefore, no further environmental review is required. PUBLIC NOTICE On October 24, 2007, a notice of public hearing was published in the Argus Courier and sent to property owners and occupants within 500 feet of the subject property. At the writing of this staff report, no comments related to this project have been received. DECISION TIMELINE This application was received by the Community Development Department on January 22, 2007. The application was complete on October 24, 2007. Pursuant to the terms of the Permit Streamlining Act, a decision must be made within 60 days of the project being deemed complete. SPARC must render a decision on the project no later than December 23, 2006. The next regularly scheduled SPARC hearing is December 13, 2007. The applicant may request a one- time extension if additional time is needed to revise the project. ATTACHMENTS A. Draft Historic and Cultural Preservation Committee Findings B. Draft Historic and Cultural Preservation Committee Conditions of Approval C. Historic Resource Evaluation dated October 16, 2007 D. Primary Record date stamped August 15, 2007 E. French door and window cut sheet date stamped August 15, 2007 F. Photographs submitted by applicant, including neighboring properties and subject house G. Reduced Size Plans date stamped October 4, 2007 (Committee Members Only) H. Full Size Plans date stamped October 4, 2007 (Committee Members Only) S:\Sparc\Reports\500Howard.doc Page 6 '31 1 1 ATTACHMENT A 2 3 DRAFT HISTORIC & CULTURAL PRESERVATION COMMITTEE 4 FINDINGS 5 Breen Addition 6 500 Howard Street, Oakhill -Brewster Historic District 7 APN 006-142-014 8 File 07 -SPC -0025 -CR 9 November 8, 2007 10 1. The Historic and Cultural Preservation Committee, authorizes a 1,241 square foot 11 addition to the existing 817 square foot residence located at 500 Howard Street in the 12 Oakhill -Brewster Historic District. The project would add 801 square feet at the main 13 floor level and 440 square feet at the daylight basement level. The height measurement 14 would increase from 19.7 feet to 23.3 feet, as measured from average grade to peak of 15 roof. 16 17 2. The proposed project, as conditioned, is consistent with the intent of the General Plan and 18 policies to preserve Petaluma's architectural heritage; retain the unique qualities of West 19 side residential areas; and to upgrade the quality of residential development throughout 20 the City. The project is consistent with the Urban Standard General Plan land use 21 designation which contemplates single-family residential uses. 22 23 3. The project, as conditioned, is consistent with the uses allowed in the One -Family 24 Residence (R-1:6,500) zoning district and the applicable development standards. The 25 non -conforming front yard setback is an existing condition and will not be made more 26 non -conforming as a result of this project. The project will result in a parking 27 configuration that is consistent with current parking requirement for a single-family 28 residence. 29 30 4. The proposed project, as conditioned, is consistent with the Oakbill-Brewster Historic 31 District Guidelines and the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation and 32 Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings. 33 34 5. The proposed project, as conditioned, will not constitute a nuisance or be detrimental to 35 the public welfare of the community in that it will be operated in conformance with the 36 standards specified in the Uniform Building Code, the Petaluma Zoning Ordinance and 37 the 1987 City of Petaluma General Plan. (Except as Modified by the Conditions for 38 Noise). 39 40 6. The project is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act 41 (CEQA) pursuant to Section 25301, Class 1(e)(2), Existing Facilities, which allows 42 additions to existing buildings. A historic resource evaluation of the project was prepared 43 by Vicki Beard of Tom Origer & Associates. The HRE indicates that the project is 44 consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and the Oakhill -Brewster Hsitoric 45 District Guidelines. Pape 7 �ir%. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 7. The proposed structure and site plan, as conditioned, conforms to the requirements of Site Plan and Architecture Review Standards for Review of Applications 26-406 (A) of the Zoning Ordinance as: a. Quality materials are used appropriately in harmony and proportion to the existing residence and surrounding structures, b. The architectural style is appropriate and is compatible with the existing residence and other structures in the immediate neighborhood, c. The siting of the structure is comparable to the siting of other structures in the immediate neighborhood, and d. The bulk, height, and color of the structure is comparable to the bulk, height, and color of other structures in the immediate neighborhood. Page 8 1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 ATTACHMENT B DRAFT HISTORIC & CULTURAL PRESERVATION COMMITTEE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Breen Addition 500 Howard Street, Oakhill -Brewster Historic District APN 006-142-014 File 07 -SPC -0025 -CR November 8, 2007 1. Approval is granted for a 1,241 square foot addition to the existing 817 square foot residence located at 500 Howard Street in the Oakhill -Brewster Historic District. The project would add 801 square feet at the main floor level and 440 square feet at the daylight basement level. The height measurement would increase from 19.7 feet to 23.3 feet, as measured from average grade to peak of roof. 2. The plans submitted for building permit review shall be in substantial conformance with those plans on file in the Planning Division and date stamped October 4, 2007, except as modified by the following conditions. 3. Prior to the issuance of any development permit, the applicant shall revise the site plan or other first sheet of the office and job site copies of the Building Permit plans to list these Conditions of Approval as notes. 4. Prior to building permit approval, the plans shall be modified such that the rear elevation French door is replaced with a standard single door, subject to the review and approval of staff. 5. Prior to building permit approval, the plans shall be modified such that the east pair of windows on the Kent Street elevation are lengthen to match those on the west side of the same elevation, subject to the review and approval of staff.. 6. Prior to building permit approval, the plans shall be modified such that the horizontal siding boards on the new construction are wider than the siding on the original house. On the Kent Street elevation, where the existing house and addition meet, a vertical board shall separate the new and old construction. These details shall be subject to the review and approval of staff. 7. All windows and doors shall be un -clad wood. 8. The site shall be kept clear at all times of all garbage and debris. No outdoor storage shall be permitted. 9. All construction activities shall be limited to 8:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. Monday through Friday. Construction activities that generate little or no noise (plumbing, painting, Page 9 3�1- electrical, etc.) are permitted on Saturdays from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Construction shall be prohibited on Sundays and all holidays recognized by the City of Petaluma. 10. The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City or any of its boards, commissions, agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City, its boards, commissions, agents, officers, or employees to attack, set aside, void, or annul any of the approvals of the project, when such claim or action is brought within the time period provided for in applicable State and/or local statutes. The City shall promptly notify the applicants/developers of any such claim, action, or proceeding. The City shall coordinate in the defense. Nothing contained in this condition shall prohibit the City from participating in a defense of any claim, action, or proceeding and if the City chooses to do so appellant shall reimburse City for attorneys' fees by the City. From the City Engineer (Craie SDauldine) 17 11. Remove and replace any broken and displaced sidewalk, curb, and gutter along the 18 three street frontages. 19 20 12. Construct pedestrian ramps at the corner of Howard and Kent and the corner of 21 Howard and Galland. 22 23 13. The surface runoff from the new addition and impervious surfaces shall be directed to 24 the public street. New surface runoff from the subject property shall not adversely 25 affect adjacent properties. 26 27 Standard Historic and Cultural Preservation Committee Conditions 28 14. In the event that archaeological remains are encountered during grading, work shall be 29 halted temporarily and a qualified archaeologist shall be consulted for evaluation of 30 the artifacts and to recommend future action. The local Native American community 31 shall also be notified and consulted in the event any archaeological remains are 32 uncovered. 33 15. The colors and exterior materials of construction of the new building/addition and the 34 existing building shall match. 35 16. External downspouts shall be painted to match background building colors. Scuppers 36 without drainage pipes may not be installed because of probable staining of walls 37 (overflow scuppers are excepted). 38 17. All exterior light fixtures shall be shown on plans subject to staff review and 39 approval. All lights attached to buildings shall provide a soft "wash" of light against 40 the wall. All lights shall conform to City Performance Standards (e.g., no direct glare, 41 no poles in excess of 20 feet height, etc.) and shall compliment building architecture. 42 18. Prior to building permit approval, temporary protective fencing shall be erected 5' 43 outside the drip line of all trees to be preserved/protected and all trees (on neighboring 44 property) in proximity to construction activities. The fencing shall be a minimum of Page 10 7j", 1 5' in height and shall be secured with in -ground posts subject to staff inspection prior 2 to grading permit issuance and any grading/construction activity. Proof of fencing 3 installation shall be provided in the form of photographs prior to issuance of the 4 building permit. Page 11 14P Tom Origer & Associates Archaeology / Historical Research October 16, 2007 Brian and Stephanie Breen 500 Howard Street Petaluma California 94952 Dear Mr. and Mrs. Breen: Attachment C We have completed our historical/azchitectural evaluation of the house at 500 Howard Street in Petaluma. The Primary Record and attached forms present the results of our evaluation, detailing ownership and other associations with the house and property from about 1894 to the present. As an individual property, the house at 500 Howard Street does not meet the California Register eligibility criteria; however, it is part of the Oakhill -Brewster Historic District, which would likely be eligible for inclusion on the California Register if it was fully documented. Because the house is a contributor to the historic district, any alterations must be made in accordance with the preservation guidelines set for the district. The following sections assess the planned addition based on the Oakhill -Brewster Historic District Preservation Guidelines & Standards and The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring & Reconstructing Historic Buildings with emphasis on the section "New Additions to Historic Buildings." Oakhill -Brewster Historic District Preservation Guidelines & Standards This house has been designated as a contributor to Petaluma's Oakhill -Brewster Historic District.This district has not been fully documented and nominated for inclusion on the California Register; however, it is likely that it would be eligible if documentation were completed. In 1991, the City of Petaluma adopted guidelines for preserving the character of the Oakhill -Brewster Historic District. Paramount in the district . guidelines is the need to preserve "the existing harmony of proportions and materials" (City of Petaluma 1991:5). In addition, there is concern about maintaining the architectural characteristics of the various buildings so that, for example, a simple Greek Revival home does not end up adomed with Stick Victorian detailing. To that end, the City established "Standards for Review" (adapted from the Secretary of the Interior's Standards the Treatment of Historic Properties). Both the City and Secretary.of the Interior's standards are published by the City of Petaluma (1991) in Oakhill -Brewster Historic District Preservation Guidelines & Standards The district is defined as a concentration of residential buildings reflecting the architecture of every decade from the 1850s to the 1980s (Lauder 1991:1). As such, the contributors to the district must be residential buildings (i.e., single or multiple family dwellings) and must reflect the architectural development of the City of Petaluma in the roughly 140 years represented. The house at 500 Howard Street is best characterized as a "vernacular" building. Vernacular, as used here, refers to buildings that reflect the common building of an area at a particular time (Carter and Cromley 2005:8). Character defining attributes of vernacular residential buildings in the Petaluma area at P.O. Box 1531, Rohnert Park, California 94927 ♦ Phone (707) 584-8200 Fax (707) 584-8300 3� Brian and Stephanie Breen Page 2 October 16, 2007 the beginning of the twentieth century are simplicity of form, minimal decoration, and an emphasis on functional spatial arrangement. These are the attributes that make the house a contributor to the Oakhill - Brewster District as a representative of early twentieth century building. The house at 500 Howard Street is a frame structure built on a rectangular plan. The previous additions generally continue to reflect the simplicity of Petaluma's early twentieth century vernacular form. However, a slight hint of formal architectural style is provided with a porch column and one window suggestive of the Craftsman style. Those elements were likely added between 1910 and 1923 when an addition was made to the Howard Street fagade and the house was reoriented to face Howard Street rather than Kent Street. We have reviewed the plans for changes to the house at 500 Howard Street. In summary, the proposed plan increases the available living space from 730 square feet to 2,058 square feet by constructing an addition along the eastern and northern elevations (1618 square feet) and creating a lower living area on the current basement level (440 square feet). The proposed addition increases the footprint of the building by 55 percent while nearly tripling the current living space. The roof line will change with a series of hipped additions, and a two -foot increase in elevation will occur for part of the new roof. In effect, roof changes will create the look of a cross -hipped wing extending north toward Galland Street While the planned changes will enlarge the house considerably, the building will retain an overall simplicity of form and materials that will continue to reflect the twentieth century vernacular building. The planned expansion is designed to allow the existing fagade on Howard Street to visually dominate the addition by placing the new construction clearly back from the original fagade. These changes will not preclude the house from continuing as a contributor the Oakhill -Brewster District. Below, we have addressed key points of the Oakbill-Brewster Historic District architectural standards with respect to the proposed addition. STYLE The existing building is a modest, vernacular house, originally constructed in the first years of the twentieth century. Minor Craftsman style embellishments, consisting of a single porch column and a side window were added, probably circa 1910 and 1923, when additions to the original structure were made (Sanborn Map and Publishing Company 1910 and 1923). While the mass of the house will change greatly, the planned addition matches the simplicity of the original building, and adds no architectural detailing that is counter to the vernacular form of the house. The addition is setback from Howard Street so that the front fagade retains a modest appearance. 2. DESIGN The proposed addition introduces no design features on publicly viewed elevations that are inconsis- tent with the existing house. The French door on the east elevation replaces a simple doorway on the north elevation. This type of door is not consistent with the era or simple form of the house; however, it is on the east elevation and is not visible to the public. An inconsistency noted on the planned south elevation is the use of shorter, more horizontally configured windows where original fenestration is taller, vertically configured windows. The single sash near the center of the wall will light a new bathroom and this is an appropriate use of the shorter window, and one employed on neighboring district homes. The paired sashes on the east side of the 3 Brian and Stephanie Breen Page 3 October 16, 2007 wall are also shorter. These should more appropriately match the longer windows used on the west side of the same wall. 3. ARRANGEMENT This section of the Oakhill -Brewster standards and guidelines speaks to the relationship of a property with respect to "immediately adjacent" buildings and the "immediate neighborhood." Because of the configuration of the parcel and the way in which the historic district was drawn, the house at 500 Howard Street has no immediately adjacent buildings that are part of the district, so properties across Galland, Howard, and Kent streets were considered in the following discussions. a. Setback New construction places the house no closer than existing setbacks on Howard and Kent streets. Currently, there is a 10 -foot setback from the sidewalk on Howard Street and 15 feet on the Kent Street side. On the Galland Street side, the nearest new construction will be 17 feet from the sidewalk. Houses along Howard Street are similarly situated on their parcels with the exception of the house at 507 Howard Street, which is an anomaly in this area. It sits on a larger parcel, setback from Howard Street about 50 feet. b. Side yards The addition will extend the house north toward Galland Street (about 24 feet) and east toward an adjacent parcel (about 11 feet), truncating the yards in those directions. A distance of 11 feet will be maintained between the house and the existing garage, and 20 feet from the parcel boundary on the east side. Again, this is consistent with properties along this portion of Howard Street except at 507 Howard Street. c. Height A two -foot increase in elevation is necessary for part of the roof; however, it .will not be out of scale with nearby district homes. The house across Kent Street is a two story building that sits on an elevated parcel. The house across Galland Street has about the same roof height as the current house at 500 Howard Street, and the houses across Howard Street are taller. The proposed two - foot increase to the roof height stays within the 20 percent average height of neighboring homes. In addition, the proposed new construction would create a situation where height is added through construction of basement living space. This space will be visible particularly on Galland Street and to a lesser extent on Howard Street. The planned change incorporates materials (e.g., window and siding styles) consistent with the original vernacular structure and this addition will not detract from the simple visual presentation of the building. d. Roofline At present, the house has a simple, moderately pitched, hipped roof over the main part of the house with a shed roof over the addition on the north side. The existing roof over the Howard Street entry will be maintained and will abut a taller, hipped roof built to encompass the existing shed -roof addition. The proposed addition will have a similar arrangement with a lower roof intersecting a taller roof; however this roofline will be oriented 90 degrees from the original roofline creating a cross -hipped wing. The new roof slope will approximate the existing slope. Changes to the roof line will be most noticeable from Galland Street. 31 Brian and Stephanie Breen Page 4 October 16, 2007 Nearby houses are an eclectic collection of roof types with some being very complex. Hipped, truncated hipped, gable -on -hip; cross -hipped and cross -gabled, and cross -gabled with towers were all noted along this part of Howard Street. Proposed changes to the roofline at 500 Howard Street will not be out of scale with the rooflines found in the immediate neighborhood. e. Facade The proposed addition creates a complex series of broken facades where now the fagade is very simple; however, the new addition will be set back from Howard Street about 40 feet, and because of the lot configuration it will not be overly apparent from that viewpoint. A short, front - facing window in the shed -roofed addition will be removed. This was not part of the original house. Changes to the Galland Street fagade will be more noticeable, although the existing garage partly will shield the addition from that aspect. The new addition will project toward Galland Street, 22 feet beyond the existing fagade, and will present upper and lower stories. The parcel is lower on the east and north sides, and the house has a partial basement. The lower story will be created by excavating beneath the existing basement. Again, because of the parcel configuration, changes to this far; ade will not be overly apparent. The Kent Street fagade will be extended 11 feet toward the rear of the house (east), and the extension will include an additional pair of double -hung window that will match the paired windows on the west side of this elevation (where there is a nonconforming replacement at present). A shorter window has been proposed to replace the existing, single window. The proposed changes will not detract from this elevation's simplicity, and the new window and window arrangement are in keeping with the period in which this house was constructed. The rear of the house (east elevation) will change significantly from 24. feet to just over 50 feet in length, and three pairs of double -hung windows will be added where there is now only one, single window on that fagade. The windows will match those on the front of the house, and will be spaced an appropriate distance apart A French door has also been proposed on the north end of rear fagade. This door is out of character with this house. With respect to house fagades in the vicinity, changes to this house will not be out of proportion with nearby district homes, many of which are considerably larger and more architecturally complex. 4. TEXTURE AND MATERIALS Roofing, siding, and trim will match or approximate that of the original house. New windows will have wood sashes rather than the existing vinyl sashes. 5. COLOR The district guidelines do not specify colors; rather, they state that "the color scheme should be harmonious with surrounding structures and consistent with the architectural time of the building." The property owners plan to retain the existing color scheme of yellow with off-white trim. Brian and Stephanie Breen Page 5 October 16, 2007 The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring & Reconstructing Historic Buildings The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring & Reconstructing Historic Buildings (hereafter, Standards and Guidelines) have been adopted by many local agencies, including the City of Petaluma, for use in determining the proper treatment for buildings that the agencies consider historically significant. The Standards focus on maintaining historical integrity by reusing materials, when possible, or materials in- kind, when reuse is not possible; using existing space rather than build additional space, when feasible; and being mindful of the overall historic character of a structure in terms of material, size, space, and setting. The Standards (addressed below) "are to be applied to specific rehabilitation projects in a reasonable manner, taking into consideration economic and technical feasibility." 1. A property shall be used for its historic purpose or be placed in a new use that requires minimal change to the defining characteristics of the building and its site and environment. The house at 500 Howard will continue to be a residence. 2. The historic character of a property shall be retained and preserved. The removal of historic materials or alteration of features and spaces that characterize a property shall be avoided. No character -defining materials or features will be removed (see item 9). Historically, this has been a small house, although it was been expanded twice since it was first built, demonstrating the old adage that change is inevitable. Between 1906 and 1910, the living space was expanded by one-third, and between 1910 and 1923 another 20o of floor space was added. Although, the proposed addition will increase the size of the house by about 55%, it is our opinion that this is in keeping with the property's history and historic character. No important landscape features will be removed or displaced by the proposed project. A minor change in circulation routes on the parcel will be created by moving the secondary entry, on the north of the house, to the east elevation. The existing garage will not be removed, and adequate distance is retained between the new addition and the garage. 3. Each property shall be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or architectural elements from other buildings, shall not be undertaken. The planned addition includes French doors on the east elevation. This type of door would not have been used on the original house. A standard, single door is more appropriate. Also, the horizontal windows proposed for the south elevation are not typical on a house of this vintage. It Brian and Stephanie Breen Page 6 October 16, 2007 4. Most properties change over time; those changes that have acquired historic significance in their own right shall be retained and preserved. A Craftsman -style window will be removed from the north elevation. The window does not add to the significance of the house and is not significant in and of itself. Removal of the window will enhance the overall vernacular form of the house. Distinctive features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property shall be preserved. Rehabilitation of this house will not result in the loss of any distinctive features, finishes, construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship. 6. Deteriorated historic features shall be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature shall match the old in design, color, texture, and other visual qualities and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features shall be substantiated by documentary, physical, or pictorial evidence. No historic features will be repaired or replaced. 7. Chemical or physical treatments, such as sandblasting, that cause damage to historic materials shall not be used. The surface cleaning of structures, if appropriate, shall be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. No damaging chemical or physical surface treatments will be used. 8. Significant archeological resources affected by a project shall be protected and preserved. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures shall be undertaken. There are no known archaeological resources on the property. 9. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment. This standard is multifaceted and begins with the retention of character -defining historic materials. The proposed plan requires removal of about 38 percent of the exterior walls, including the entire east elevation and 16 feet of the north elevation. In discussing this issue the National Park Service makes the following point in Preservation Brief 14: "Generally speaking, preservation of historic buildings is enhanced by avoiding all but minor changes to primary or "public" elevations" (Weeks 1986). The east elevation (the bulk of the removal) is not visible from the street. The north elevation, from which 16 feet of the exterior wall will be removed, is visible from Galland Street and includes a Craftsman -like window. In our opinion, removal of the window will not detract from this otherwise unadorned building, and loss of 16 feet of the north wall, is not overly conspicuous. The west and south walls will remain in place. IN Brian and Stephanie Breen Page 7 October 16, 2007 Another facet of this standard is differentiation of old from new. The proposed addition is setback 16 feet from the present fagade on Howard Street, and is oriented 90 degrees from the original house. The setback and orientation of the new addition creates distinction between old and new. In addition, the new addition will be clad in wood siding that is wider than the siding on the original house to create a visual distinction. Where the two different widths of siding interface (on the Kent Street fagade) a vertical board could be used, as is often seen on historical buildings where additions have been made. Finally, the proposed plan increases the living space from 730 square feet to 2,058 square feet by constructing a 1618 -square -foot addition along the eastern and northern elevations and creating a lower living area on the current basement level (440 square feet). The proposed addition increases the footprint of the building by 55 percent while nearly tripling the current living space. This is in keeping with the standard because the addition is set toward the rear of the original house, the second story is created by using sub -space rather than building a second story, and the additional height required by this plan is setback from the original wall plane so that the original house is not overwhelmed by the addition. This plan makes the addition as inconspicuous as possible, while providing adequate family living space. 10. New additions and adjacent or related new construction shall be undertaken in such a manner that if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired. This standard is not met by the planned addition because about 38% of the exterior wall will be removed, and the addition will be an integral part of the house. To facilitate application of the Secretary's Standards, Guidelines were also provided. Below is a discussion of the Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings, as they apply to the rehabilitation of the house at 500 Howard Street, with emphasis on the section that concerns additions to historic buildings. We recognize that they are somewhat repetitive but feel that they deserve consideration. The Guidelines recommend using existing, non -character -defining spaces rather than installing a new addition. This is not feasible for the house at 500 Howard Street. The basement area (about 350sq. ft.), which will be converted to living space as part of this project, is the only existing non -character -defining space into which the living space can be extended. That does not allow adequate space, leaving an addition the only way to gain additional living space. The Guidelines recommend consideration of the attached exterior addition both in terms of the new use and the appearance of other buildings in the historic district or neighborhood. With the planned addition, the house will be well within the size and scale of other historical buildings in the neighborhood. The Guidelines recommend designing additional stories that are set back from the wall plane and are as inconspicuous as possible when viewed from the street. The planned addition follows this guideline. The additional story is carved from the existing basement space rather than extending the building upward so no appreciable height is added to the facade. The Guidelines recommend retaining the historic relationship between buildings and the landscape. No important landscape features will be removed or displaced by the proposed project, and circulation routes Brian and Stephanie Breen Page 8 October 16, 2007 will not be disrupted except that the secondary entry, on the north of the house, will be moved to the east elevation. The existing garage will not be removed, and adequate distance is retained between the new addition and the garage. Conclusion Review of proposed changes to the house at 500 Howard Street, which is a contributor to a locally recognized historic district, found that the planned addition is generally compatible with the existing residence as well as nearby district houses. The original house is a vernacular building that has no true architectural style. The proposed addition increases the living area of the house without straying from its vernacular roots. The proportions of the design are in keeping with nearby homes and do not detract from the district's historic fabric. These changes will not adversely affect the building's status as a district contributor. In our review, we rioted an item that is not consistent with the district guidelines. The French door proposed for the east side of the house is not in character with original house. The central and eastern- most windows planned for the south elevation (facing Kent Street) are short, horizontally configured windows inconsistent existing windows and those planned on other elevations. The middle window is for a bathroom where a shorter window is appropriate and can be found in other nearby district homes. However, we recommend that the plans for the east set- of windows be changed to match the dimensions used on the west side of the south wall. With regard to the Secretary of the Interior's Standards, the new addition is consistent with eight of the ten standards. Standard 3 speaks to the introduction of historically inaccurate elements, and in our opinion the use of the French door on the east elevation and the horizontal windows on the south elevation are not appropriate for this house. Standard 10 addresses maintaining the essential form and integrity of a building. This standard is not met because portions of the exterior wall will be removed. Please contact me if you have any questions or need additional information. Sincerely, Vicki Beard Senior Associate IMI Brian and Stephanie Breen Page 9 October 16, 2007 References Carter, T. and E. Collins Cromley 2005 Invitation to Vernacular Architecture. University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville Lauder, J. 1991 Oakhill -Brewster Historic District. Preservation Guidelines & Standards. City of Petaluma. Sanborn Map and Publishing Company 1906 Petaluma, California. Sanbom Map and Publishing Company, New York. 1910 Petaluma, California. Sanborn Map and Publishing Company, New York. 1923 Petaluma, California. Sanborn Map and Publishing Company, New York. Weeks, K. 1986 New Exterior Additions to Historic Buildings Preservation Concerns. Preservation Briefs 14, Technical Preservation Services, National Park Service, Washington, D.C. 0 I"1 •' t'1 Primary # P- ERI # Attachment D Trinomial: Other Listings: NRNP/CRHR Status Code: Review Code: Reviewer: Date: Resource Name or #: 500 Howard Street Page 1 of 12 Pl. Other Identifier: P2. Location: Unrestricted a. County: Sonoma EG' 5I V E b. USGS 7.5' Quad: Petaluma. Date: 1981 T 5 N/R 7 W; SW 1/4 of NE 1/4 of Sec. 32; MDBM J iJ c. Address: 500 Howard Street City: Petaluma Zip: 94952 d. UTM: Zone: 10 529540 mE 4232060 mN e. Other Locational Information: P3a. Description: The house at 500 Howard Street is a modest, one-story, frame building constructed in the early 20th century. The house is rectangular in shape with a small, comer porch (Figure 1). The roof is hipped with a moderately steep pitch. Eaves are close raked and boxed. The house is clad with medium -width, drop siding. Roofing material is composition shingles. In general, windows are one -over -one, double -hung sashes set singularly and in pairs. Window and door surrounds are simple and unembellished Most windows appear to be in the original piercing but have been replaced with vinyl sashes. Exceptions are a window on the east elevation that has a narrow band of multiple panes over a wide, single -paned, wood sash in the Craftsman style, and a more horizontally configured pair of double -hung sashes on the south elevation. The front entry faces Howard Street and is offset to the south comer of the house. Wooden steps lead to the porch, which is beneath the principal roof and is partially enclosed by a low wall (Figure 2). A single Tuscan column is used for support at the open corner. The upper part of the paneled front door is glazed. To the north of the inset porch is a set of double -hung windows. (Continued on page 2) P3b. Resource Attributes: HP2 P4. Resources Present: Buildings P5. Photograph or Drawing: See also page 3 P5b. Figure 1. North and west elevations from Howard Street. rll. ReportCitation: P6. Date Constructed/Age and Sources: Before 1906 -Sanborn maps 1910 -Assessor's records P7. Owner and Address: Brian & Stephanie Breen 500 Howard Street Petaluma, CA 94952 P8. Recorded by: V. Beard Tom Origer & Associates P.O. Box 1531 Robnert Park, CA 94927 P9. Date Recorded: August 2007 P10. Type of Survey: Property Specific P12. Attachments: Building, Structure, and Object Record; Continuation Sheets; Location Map. 014 CONTINUATION SHEET Page 2 of 12 Recorded by: V. Beard Pia. Description: (Continued from page 1) Primary #: P- IM #: Trinomial: Resource Name or #: 500 Howard Street Date: August 2007 The north elevation has a shed -roofed addition and porch (Figure 3). This porch has simple board balustrades, and wood posts support a small shed roof Flanking the doorway are two double -hung windows. The window farther east of the doorway is wider than others and, as mentioned above, has a row of four panes above a single pane similar to Craftsman windows. Originally, the house was oriented toward Kent Street and was reoriented to Howard Street at some point between 1910 and 1923. The south elevation (facing Kent Street) has a one -over -one, double -hung window toward the rear of the house, and a pair of double -hung windows closer to the front ofthe house figure 4). This set of -windows is shorter and more horizontally configured than those found elsewhere and is not original. Northeast of the house is a garage with two bays. Vertical boards with battens were used for three of the walls of this shed - roofed building. The elevation facing Galland Street has horizontal siding at the top with a central post creating separate openings. The large garage doors are made of vertically placed boards (Figure 5). The County Assessor's records indicate that in 1949 a barn and shed were demolished and the existing garage built with old lumber, presumably taken from the two demolished structures. III PSQ A QP: r t,r X4, BUILDING, STRUCTURE, AND OBJECT RECORD Page 4 of 12 Bl. Historic Name: None Primary # P- HRI # NRNP/CRHR Status Code: Resource Name or #: 500 Howard Street B2. Common Name: None B3. Original Use: Residence B4. Present Use: Residence B5. Architectural Style: Vernacular with minor Craftsman embellishments 136. Construction History: County assessor's records provide an approximate construction date of 1910; however, the house appears on the 1906 Sanborn insurance map. By 1910, a room had been added to the north elevation. The 1923 Sanborn map shows that a room and comer porch had been added to the west elevation, which then became the front of the house. B7. Moved? Unknown Date: Unknown B8. Related Features: Original Location: Unknown B9a. Architect: Unknown B9b. Builder: Unknown B10. Significance: Theme: Residential Architecture Area: Petaluma Period of Significance: 1850 to 1930 Property Type: House Applicable Criteria: None Context Statement Residential architecture in the City ofPetaluma varies greatly in both style and scale, as evidenced by the many well-preserved examples in and around the city. In 1978, an inventory of important buildings (both residential and commercial) in Petaluma was compiled by architect Dan Peterson. Peterson identified several districts within the city that possessed historical and architectural integrity, and provided a brief context for each district. Later, the City of Petaluma established the Oakhill -Brewster Historic District roughly based on Peterson's Oak Hill Park and Brewster Residential Area districts. The house at 500 Howard Street lies within the Oakhill -Brewster historic District. Both Peterson and the City of Petaluma highlight the diversity of architecture found within this area, and in describing the historic district the City writes, "Taken as awhole, the neighborhood forms anearly continuous fabric of a century of vintage architecture, representing most major residential styles from the 1850's through the 1980's" (City of Petaluma 1990:1). (Continued on page 4) B11. Additional Resource Attributes: -- -- WEST O . ----------- -4 i 1t B12. References: I_ `I See Continuation Sheet page 10 � I= .KK\ a FI i T 3 J6e j '� +.•®p � B13. Remarks: '" • " " 0A4LA1V0 ^ N e T B14. Evaluator. V. Beard s ° z • i I© Date of Evaluation: August 2007 All O e 4 North z �F \\ KENT IM CONTINUATION SHEET Page 5 of 12 Recorded by: V. Beard B10. Significance: (Continued from page 4) Primary 4: BRI R: Trinomial: Resource Name or 9: 500 Howard Street Date: August 2007 Notably, the City ofPetaluma possesses a number of high -style residences, including many Romantic and Victorian era forms such as Greek and Gothic Revival, RaHanate, Stick, and especially Queen Anne. These homes were built during Petaluma's ascendancy as a market town, atime when goods into and out of the region were necessarily shipped from her docks. With the advent of the railroad, Petaluma commanded the transfer of goods north of San Francisco, and the town's economy was favored by her hold on transportation. Petaluma!s leading citizens spared no expense in showing their individual and civic pride through elaborate architecture. At Petaluma's periphery, the first homes were farmhouses, widely spaced, with plenty of surrounding land used for various agricultural pursuits. These outlying farms and ranches drove Petaluma's economy, making it possible for those in town to maintain their gentrified lives. By the end of the 19th century however, Petaluma's burgeoning commercial enterprises, especially those related to the poultry and dairy industries, created new employment needs and opportunities, and the need also arose for more worker housing close to town. Over time, smaller lots were carved out of the larger farm lots at the edge of town. The Cherry Hill Addition, created by subdividing Lot 550, is an example of the type of development that resulted in the spread of Petaluma's urban limits (Figures 6 and 7). Figure 6. 1877 view of the northwestern edge of the City of Petaluma showing farm Lot 550 belonging to Mrs. L.T. Holmes (Thompson 1877). f67' ,fpf r'r• rcr The houses built on these newly created parcels were modest, one and one -and -a -half story homes. Contrary to the majestic homes found near the city's core, these homes favored function over style. The architectural atmosphere ofthe time was one of simplification rather than elaboration, and new homes emphasized efficiency, iuformality, and neatness. The resulting homes reflect the principles of"structural simplicity, balanced proportions, and minimal decoration" (Clark 1986:132). Ornate house styles of the preceding Victorian era were considered European imitations, and America and its architects were seeking their own identity. The Craftsman and Prairie styles grew out ofthis movement, as did a more generic group of homes that borrowed minimally from specific styles. r 60 CONTINUATION SHEET Page 6 of 12 Recorded by: V. Beard B10. Significance: (Continued from page 5) Primary #: HRI #: Trinomial: Resource Name or #: 500 Howard Street Date: August 2007 Architectural historians Massey and Maxwell (1996:211) offer the term -Builder Style" to describe these working-class homes of the late -19th and early -20th centuries, homes that were'9ong on function, and short on stylistic effects and architectural grandeur." These homes were widespread throughout the United States, chiefly because they were promoted by pattern book designers, constructed in great numbers by early developers, and were readily available through mail-order catalogs after about 1908. Property Types Properties reflective of Residential Architecture for the years 1850 to 1930 include single-family homes and associated outbuildings, boarding houses (often large, subdivided homes), hotels, and apartment buildings. Property History In 1894, William Hill filed a subdivision map forthe Cherry Hill Addition to Petaluma dividing Lot 550 of the original Petaluma plat (Sonoma County Recorder's Office [SCRO] 1894). This addition included lands bound by West, Walnut, and Howard streets in the northwestern part of the City. The house at 500 Howard Street occupies the western part ofLots 8 and 9, Block3 of the Cherry Bill Addition. Initially, Lots 8 and 9 were purchased, along with several other lots on Block 3, by A R Isaacson in April of 1903 (SCRO 1903a). Isaacson held the property for only two months before selling the westerly 65 feet ofLots 8 and 9 to Mamie A Connolly and Lot 7 and the eastern parts of Lots 8 and 9 to B.F. Gober in June of 1903. The parcel upon which the house at 500 Howard Street rests coincides with the property purchased by Connolly, who held the property for seven years. During Minnie Connolly's period of residence, the house faced Kent Street with the address of 466 Kent Street Later (by 1910), the house number was changed to 628 Kent Street (Sanborn Map and Publishing Company 1906, 1910). Mamie Connolly was the widow ofBernard Connolly, proprietor of Connolly Soda Works in Petaluma (Thompson 1877; US Bureau of Census [USBC] 1880, 1900). At the time of the 1900 census, Minnie Connolly and three children in their teens were living in a rented house on Howard Street, near the center of town (USBC 1900). After leaving Petaluma, the family relocated to San Francisco, selling the Kent Street property to Frank A. Leal (SCRO 1910; USBC 1910). Leal and his wife, Beatrice, acquired the eastern portion of Lots 8 and 9 and Lot 7 in 1909 from the estate ofKatie Silva, and with his 1910 purchase, the Leal's owned all of the Lots 7, 8, and 9. Prior to obtaining the Petaluma property, Frank and Beatrice Leal were living in Vallejo, where Frank Leal drove a water wagon (USBC 1910). Four children were enumerated in the Leal household in 1910: two young daughters (Frances and Marriane), and two older children (Amoae and Harry Silva) from Beatrice's first marriage. Both Beatrice and Frank Leal immigrated to the United States from Portugal in the late 1870s. Frank Leal did not pursue an agricultural position; as many Portuguese immigrants did. Rather, he worked as a wagon driver throughout his adult life. Upon moving to Petaluma, Frank and Beatrice Leal lived fust on Vallejo Street (c.19071 and then in the house at 622 Kent Street, just east of the Connolly house (Arthur 1907; Sanborn Map and Publishing Company 1910; USBC 1920). The Leal's never lived in the house at 628 Kent Street (now 500 Howard Street). Beatrice kept house while Frank worked as a teamster for the City (Polk Directory Company 1939). In 1920, 16 year-old Frances is listed as an egg candler in the census. The 1930 census shows that the older Leal's were still at 622 Kent Street (next door to the house at 500 Howard Street) and that a grandson was living with them (USBC 1930). By 1939, Beatrice Leal is shown in the city directory as awidow residing at 625 Galland Street (Polk Directory Company 1939). That address coincides with a cabin elsewhere on the Leal property (see Figures 8 through 10). The cabin had been used as a rental unit in previous years (USBC 1930). The house at 500 Howard was also used as a rental. The 1920 census listed William and Iva Katen as renters at 500 Howard Street. No tenants were enumerated at either 628 Kent or 500 Howard streets during the 1910 and 1930 census: however, the 1939 city directory shows that the house at 500 Howard Street and the former Leal residence at 622 Kent Street were both occupied, presumably by renters (Polk Directory Company 1939). After her death, Beatrice's son, Harry Silva, kept the property, and it has been passed down or purchased by members of the Silva family since that time. For many years it was used as rental property. 11 CONTINUATION SHEET Page 7 of 12 Recorded by: V. Beard B10. Significance: (Continued from page 6) Primary #: HRI 9: Trinomial: Resource Name or #: 500 Howard Street Date: August 2007 Statement of Significance This building was evaluated for inclusion on the California Register of Historical Resources (California Register). Briefly, a resource eligible for the Califomia Register is one that meets one of the following criteria (Title 14 CCR, §4852). 1. Is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns oflocal orregional history, or the cultural heritage of California or the United States. 2. Is associated with the lives of persons important to local, California, or national history. 3. Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region or method of construction, or represents the work of a master, or possesses high artistic values. 4. Has yielded, or may be Likely to yield, information important to the prehistory or history of the local area, California, or the nation. In addition to meeting one or more of the above criteria, eligibility to the California Register requires that a resource retain sufficient integrity to convey a sense ofits significance or importance. As defined by the State, "Integrity is the authenticity of an historical resource's physical identity evidenced by the survival of characteristics that existed during the resource's period of significance" (California Office ofFTistoric Preservation 2001:11). Seven elements are considered key in considering aproperty s integrity. location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association. The house at 500 Howard Street has undergone some modification over the years but generally retahis a good level ofintegrity. Major modifications (such as room additions) occurred prior to 1923 and are themselves old enoughto be considered part ofthe property's historical fabric. The following conclusions were reached regarding the property's eligibility for the California Register as an individual resource: Criterion 1. No historically important events were found to be associated with this house. Criterion 1 is not met. Criterion 2. This property is associated primarily with the Leal/Silva family (1909 to present). Neither the family nor any individuals from the family were found to be of special note to local, state, or national history. Criterion 2 is not met. Criterion 3. This property does not meet Criterion 3. No particular style, method, or type of construction is demonstrated. It is a simple, vernacular home with only the slightest architectural embellishments (column porch support and Craftsman -style window), which are later additions to the original structure. To meet Criterion 3, a property should exmp0y a particular architectural style, type ofhousing, or building method that was important in the evolution ofPetaluma's residential architecture. The house at 500 Howard Street is a vernacular structure, possibly constructed from a kit. There are many of these homes in and around Petaluma. There is nothing about this house that makes it a particularly good example of a'Builder Style" home, and it doesn't meet Criterion 3. Criterion 4. This property does not meet Criterion 4. Criterion 4 generally applies to archaeological resources that could yield important analytical data relating to prehistory or history. Eli CONTINUATION SHEET Page 8 of 12 Recorded by: V. Beard B10. Significance: (Continued from page 7) Primary k: IM ff: Trinomial: Resource Name or #: 500 Howard Street Date: August 2007 Conclusion This property does not meet the eligibility criteria for inclusion on the California Register of Historical Resources as an individual property. However, It is identified as a contributor to the locally recognized Oakhill -Brewster Historic District created by the City of Petaluma The local district is not documented as a potential California Register -eligible district. The following description of the local district comes from the Oakhill Brewster Historic District Preservation Guidelines & Standards The Oakhill/Brewster residential district, with its great diversity of architectural styles, vividly portrays the historic evolution of Petaluma homes. Encompassing one of the earliest residential portions of Petaluma, and still a dynamic and desirable neighborhood, this district gives the viewer an awareness ofthe continuity ofPetaluma's architectural heritage [City of Petaluma 1990:1]. Given this district description, the house at 500 Howard Street falls within the realm of properties that could be considered district contributors and retains sufficient integrity to represent the given period of 1850 to 1980. CONTINUATION SHEET Page 9 of 12 Recorded by: V. Beard 1 � eu iz�-a ass's Figure 8. 1906 i p v F � e ' rC rt� x .10 Figure 10.1923 a Primary #: P- HRI #: Trinomial: Resource Name or #: 500 Howard Street Date: August 2007 � 5.��s'� f7 FEr l\ G l O p „ b Figure 9. 1910 4l J 11 Evolution of the property at 544 Howard Street (shown on early 20th century Sanborn insurance maps) Figure 8. Upper left figure shows the footprint of the house in 1906. Note its orientation to Kent rather than Howard Street. Address is 466 Kent Street. Figure 9. Upper right figure is the 1910 footprint with the house still oriented to Kent Street. A room has been added to the north elevation Address is 628 Kent Street. Figure 10. Lower left figure shows the house oriented to Howard Street in 1923. The footprint matches closely its current configur- ation, with the room and comer porch additions to the west elevation Address is 500 Howard Street. CONTINUATION SHEET Page 10 of 12 Recorded by: V. Beard B12. References: Primary 0: P- HRI n: Trinomial: Resource Name or #: Date: August 2007 500 Howard Street Arthur, J. 1907 Arthur's City and Rural Directory of Petaluma, California. Petaluma Argus Courier, Petaluma California Office of historic Preservation 2001 How to Nominate a Resource to the California Register of Historical Resources. Technical Assistance Series 97. Office of Historic Preservation, Sacramento. City Directory Company 1917 Directory of Petaluma and lrcinity, 1917-18. City of Petaluma 1990 Oakhill -Brewster Historic District: Preservation Guidelines & Standards. City of Petaluma Clark, C. Jr. 1986 The American Family Home. University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill. Heig, A- 1982 History of Petaluma: A California River Town. Scottwall Associates, Petaluma Howe, J. 2002 The Houses We Live In. Thunder Bay Press, San Diego. Lancaster, C. 1995 The American Bungalow, 1880-1930. Dover Publications, New York Massey, J. and S. Maxwell 1996 House Styles in America. Dovetale Publishers, Gloucester, M McAlester, V. and L. McAlester 1991 A Field Guide to American Houses. Alfred A. Knopt; New York Pacific Telephone & Telegraph Co. 1923-1970 Sonoma, Lake, and Mendocino County Telephone Directory. Pacific Telephone & Telegraph Co., San Francisco Petaluma Argus 1914 Women's Club Directory of Petaluma Petaluma Argus. Peterson, D. 1978 Petaluma's Architectural Heritage. Architectural Preservation Associates, Santa Ross- Polk osaPolk, R- 1939 Polk's Petaluma City Directory, 1939. R.L. Polk, San Francisco. 1947 Polk's Petaluma City Directory, 1947. R.L. Polk, San Francisco. Polk-Husted Directory Company 1908 Santa Rosa and Sonoma County Directory. Polk-Husted, Oakland. 1911 Santa Rosa; Petaluma, and Sonoma County Directory, 1911. Polk-Husted, Sacramento. 66- CONTINUATION SHEET Page 11 of 12 Recorded by: V. Beard B12. References: (continued from page10) Primary #: P - BRI #.- Trinomial: :Trinomial: Resource Name or #: 500 Howard Street Date: August 2007 Praetaeilis, M., S. Stewart, A. Praetzellis, and D. Fredrickson 1989 Historic Property Survey Report, Stony Point Road Reconstruction Project, located between Petaluma and Santa Rosa, Sonoma Count), California Document 5-11709 on file at the Northwest Information Center, Sonoma State University. Reynolds, W. and T. Proctor 1898 Illustrated Atlas of Sonoma County, California Reynolds and Proctor, Santa Rosa, Sanborn Map and Publishing Company 1906 Petaluma, California. Sanborn Map and Publishing Company, New York. 1910 Petaluma, California. Sanborn Map and Publishing Company, New York. 1923 Petaluma, California. Sanborn Map and Publishing Company, New York. 1949 Petaluma, California. Sanborn Map and Publishing Company, New York Santos, R- 1995 Azoreans to California: A History of Migration and Settlement. Alley -Cass Publications, Denis, California httpJ/wwwlibrary, csustan. edu/bsantos/azoreaahtml Sonoma County Recorders Office 1894 Map of Cherry hill Addition, City of Petaluma, Sonoma County, California Map book 14, page 1). 1903a William 10 to A.R. Isaacson. Deeds 200, page 55. 1903b William ILII to A.R. Isaacson. Deeds 200, page 67. 1903c A -R. Isaacson to MA- Connolly. Deeds 206, page 439. 1903d A.R. Isaacson to B.F. Gober, Deeds 206, page 497, 1909a Jose F. Marks to F.A. Leat Deeds 259, page 439. _ 1909b Estate ofKatie Silva (formerly Perry) to F.A. Leal. Deeds 260, page 449. 1910 M.A. Connolly to F.A. Leat Deeds 263, page 196. Stratton, J. 1865 Map of the City of Petaluma Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C. Thompson, T.H. & Co. 1877 Historical Atlas Map of Sonoma County, California. TH. Thompson & Co., Oakland, California. United States Bureau of the Census 1870 Sonoma County, California Manuscript census, population schedule. 1880 Sonoma County, California. Manuscript census, population schedule. 1900 Sonoma County, California. Manuscript census, population schedule. 1910 Sonoma County, California. Manuscript census, population schedule. 1920 Sonoma County, California. Manuscript census, population schedule. 1930 Sonoma County, California. Manuscript census, population schedule. wlliams, J. 1982 And Yet They Come: Portuguese InunigrationfromdxAzorestothe UnitedStates. Center for Magtn#ionStudies,NewYork 5� Attach TILT PACO MEASUREMENT INSTRUCTIONS - Measurement Foltaw these steps to measure for aTilt Pac: Instructions L Fbrsash openingwidth, take an Inside measurement of the frame from jamb biamb. Measure sash opening depth, minimum depth allowed isU (8% See IllustrationL 2. If the window haswood blocks hodtingthe top sash in place, removethem. Lower the top sash a few inches. 3 Measure the height of the window from where thatopsash meet the head jamb to wherethe mieriorface of the bottom sash meets the all when fully closed. See Illustration 2. 4. Check the all bevel. Todeterminetheexisting bevel, raise the bottom sash and ar.usrrvTMi place a carpenter's protractor on the sill. The angle of the bevel will register. The standard Marvin sill bevel is 14°, but specials are available, See Illustration 3. ' tkad.ta-h Top9s1. t TILT PACO FULL SCREEN MEASUREMENT INSTRUCTIONS C= ft�� Marvin recommends ordering the screen after the installation of theTilt Fac. Thiswill ensure proper fit if any modifications to frame or casing reveal are made during Tilt Pae installation. Follow these simple steps to measurefor a screen: IuusrnanoN 2 1 Measure from side casingto side casing. This is the screen openingwidth. See Illustration 4. 2. Measure from the top ofcasdngtothe location onthe Awherethescreen wiprest. This is the screen opening height. See Illustration 5. Note: In deierrniningscreen opening height and width do not allow for clearance around perimeter of screen. The actual outside measurements of the screen allowing for clearancewill be calculated by Marvin. sn1ANGLE (14• sv,NOAno) Notice: Verify outside measurement of the Marvin standard clad combination as this n.LusrrumON s unit may not fit in a standard wood Double Hung frame. PLANNING DIVION Nol ioSole �59 91 152 Wood Outswing French Door Construction Details i+WJamb BSM lic-ws;Prs:iAslbi J Carl Sn�eGhas Offi — 722I — 0.5? 0.W 0521 a5t I 1 SngaGlamwlEP Q45! — 2.72} — a47� 0.43 WIN 1 I Sur0aGaaawAmVEEP 0361 — 2.761 — 0.700.38 0.431 De Ircsi so1 I rsrosvAlr a47!! — 2fl — 0.47043 0.471 048 I (flftasEli-Aa _ j038I — 2 — 0330.26 045 040. SGI �IlI mEll-Argan Ia34 — 2941 — 0.251 am 0.41 a4a Thermal and s larvahree^ m sJh eGtla da,0. Va0R5 m$YY rA!d N a=- de wdh NERC 100.97 and e a NFRCFxm&ms Argasgas's nctmsUtfxtleaAdujzfihalrega§etsp0azyh .%iGC=Slot Neat Gain Cadfelet3. VT=V-mbb UUt-Ir, ce EnerStm cods: N=Norawn, "T&J. S=.Smdm Clad Outswing French Door Construction Details tiaeEp lT�T �► i rti� -(�jjT/ i -.-=r;�zs,.c; •�.«;:.;>„ tCaiiCa3:xiF:NVdii=:. >farsc'rc"�.gr� ^I�n ") !�,F.RS'�,!.pRTA;�i; .afi' PnI;Pw Ibo-Pv ;art Noifiq fk r. kv 1GrCkar-AY 0.50 — 20� — �09TI 0.44 a4T!t 0.45 I IGB.owEll-Air aa9 — 25� — 10.271 aZ6 0.411 a40. sc i GlImVE}I-A1gaa 0.30.1 — 2781 — I027I ata 0.41{ a4a (SG� Thmmalmidsdarvdq IM-97 9esubject toupdate,NFRC eregenem kg aaa- notm4JrNortheW 111.4 Mha NFRC (mlGC--SArguigffia not ayaUA,a,a alhLa�s aiat require cap4vy hors. SHGCSoIar Neat Gain C fic�t.Vf=Vatde L'�tTmismrttanrn. Energy Slarmrks: N=Nalhem, C-CerNa, S--Sv�awn I dT.S=1k PUNNING, 191VISIO 1-1 A a t3;ri� 4 vc \ y i -tti ja i 11 iP F f7 i r !•�'=TtT"u^:•^.'�'--"__.._ f k Y� I� r �� l ynt� �i P g1.11 4 f 4 y a Z k6W nl c r , I� /T: ,r 500 HOWARD ST. AS SEEN FROM THE INTERSECTION OF HOWARD & KENT 500 HOWARD ST. AS SEEN FROM THE INTERSECTION OF HOWARD K GALLAND I r , ('`l - 1 Gfx7rryry?� � i :;III l I s 37 tAA F� 1 Gfx7rryry?� � s 37 tAA F� 1 , e I 1 y-, T t 1fi�f t � i jam., Noll r6 00, �~?r,w I Its BREEN ADDITION PLANNING 500 HOWARD ST., PETALUMA, CAG 0 ATTACEiMENT 6 ti° p Ata SITE Ptar1 V -1 --fes fie.+ KENT STREET ELEVATION REAR ELEVATION m rYw s� o rPAM e � _ 1 I � a a a c 1�GALLAN➢_S.TREET_ELEVA71L7f1 HOWARD STREET ELEVATION -flJn�v. 'eY�iR e 0 Z 0 .r f I}�Yr I�I 51 Ll _ O c I * r LOWER FLOOR PL AAt_ i 51,6' A��Sn}Y� yov I I — I` X P Sa'b' MAIN FLOOR ALAI{. " rm� .ROQE-2LML - -- - -- ------ �e r i ! 9 4✓W'Y` Ca�gyy_ µmy!/ _ . ExlS rtNG ft00F Pln•v _ tXrSi:Y 6r'f> r't.n:: �'y� RENT STREET ELEVATION uiFri] F �l�piliC�il��Il III'' iIII �� � GALLAND STREET ELEVATION x_.111 I-.Illlijl=- REAR ELEVATION HOWARD STREET ELEVATION 7T EEt �6 £NLSTINS ELEVARDNS