2275 Amherst Street

15 Pages·2014·1.22 MB·English

Historic Resources Board

Staff Report
‘August 20,2014

To: Wistar Resources Beard

From: Christy Fong Department: Planning and
Planner Community Environment

Subject: 2275 Amherst Street [14PLN.00148)- Request by Margaret Wimmer, an

behalf of Ken Deleon, for Historia Resources Board review and
recommendation regarding proposed alterations and additions to a
residance, inially constructed in 1893, that Is listed on the City’s Hstorle
Inventory in Category 2 and located in the College Terrace neighbachood,
Zoning District: 1. The project applicallen Includes a request for a Home
Improvement Exception for the height of a new gable,

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Historic Resources Board (HRB} review the project with respect to
the Suerelary of Inleriar’s Standards for Rebabililaion (the SISR Slandards) and recommend that
the Director of Planning and Community Environment. conditionally approve the project as
compliant with the Standards based on the following findings (alsa nated in Allachment A and
subject to conditions of approval as doseribed in Attachment B.

Findings for Compliance with SiSR

‘L. The proposed renovation and relrabiltation complies with the Secretary af the Interior's,

Standards for Rehabilitation Standards. The project would substantially preserve the
character defining features af the building as well as retaining the original historic use,

2. The new one-story addition replacing the non-historic service parch isi compliance with
the Standards for compatibility, as the proposal retains design characteristics of farm,
materials and detaling consistent with the main residence, to the extent possible given
‘thatthe addition s cantemporary structure

3. The new dormer complles with the Standards tor compatibility as i contributes to the
defining character of the building with consistent features and finishes.

4. The new stairway from the existing porch and the proposed basement comply ith the
Standards with respect to compatibiity sing matching materials, color and visual
‘qualities, while making possible an effclent, contemporary use
BACKGROUND,
Historle Resourees Inventory

The approximately 3,700 square-foot house with a detached garage at 2275 Amherst Street is
situated an a 15,563 square feat Int within the College Terrace neighborhood. In 1994, the
house was invidually designated asa signficant buildlng, Catogory 2 of the Historic Inventary.
‘A Category 2 building is described in the Palo Alto Municipal Cade as a ‘Major building’, which
means ‘any building or group af buildings of major regional Importanco, merltarlous works of
the best architects of na outstanding example of an architectural style or the styllatle
development of architecture in the state or region, A majar building may have some exterior
‘modileation, but the original characteris eatalned.*

Architectural Style
The Historle Resources Inventory Form (Attachment C) describes the house at 2275 Amherst
Street as an excellent example of the Queen Anne style, possessing high artistic values.

Important defining features ofthis Queen Anne resource include:

‘steep pliched maln roof farm, adarned with a square shaped comer turret that Is
crowned with a steep pyramid roof

Major gables facing three sides of building with highly refined use of materials and
detailing highlighted by layered and shaped end rafters, gabled brackets, a fan of Lurned
spindles, scalloped shmigles and decorative windows with wide trim;

The gables faring Amherst Street and the rear yard are the crowning feature of vertu
bay windows with shaped corner brackets supporting the upper level and belt-course
immediately above the lower bay;

A wrap-around entry porch with a secondary gable and lathe turned columns, banisters,
and decorative ball and dewel spandrels overhead along the parch beams;

A scalloped shingle hel-course between the frst and second floor, which visually
regulates ihe scale af the home:

Very tall dauble hung wood windows with narrow sash materials and wide trl;
Horizontal wood siding, with deeper drop siding below the first loar level wator-table
trim board

Modest boxed in soffit painted to match teim;

Numerous éesorative highlights, such a5 acorn pendants, concave medallions, fanike
carvings, and various shaped brackels at the parch, bullding bays, gable corners, and
gable apexes; anc

Simple rear (2st) elevation asthe only elevation treated in 3 more functional manner,

Historle Significance

The property at 2275 Amherst Strect was builtin 1293, two years after the opening of Stanford
University, This architecturally significant building was originally situated an a comer lot facing
what was California Avenue when that street ran fram El Caming Real to Amherst Street, Irs,
possible hat the house was originaly built as 2 “core-on” or madel home by the developer
‘wha hoped to fll College Terrace subdivision with “handsome residences” for faculty members
and fraternities, The first owner af 2275 Amherst was Walter Miler, «Professor of Latin and an
‘original member of Stanford's Faculy.

PLAS
Another early owner was Michael Carney, a former mayor of Mayfield

the condition of the building detesiarated in the 19306, when it served as a boarding house, but
retabilitation began after World War Il duringthe ownershla under the Wilard R, Kautman,
family, and continues under the present owners. Cambridge Avenue, shich the house was buitt
‘to face, was closed at the upper end during the 1930s,

From 1976 to 2012, the owners refurbished and, vhere necessary, restored both the exterior
and interior of the building. ttincluded the rehabiltatian of arginal windows and moldings;
silding packet doors and the stalrcase co-exist with Plrell flooring. A eraclous, wraparound parch
overlooks the park-like garden replete with century oaks, fruit trees and a small pond. Thue
structure Is an excellent cxample of Is style and possesses high artiste and histone values, and Is
reoognized as a major building of regional importance anid classified as Category 2 the City's,
Histari¢ Inventary.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

The projects outlined in the applean’s project desriptlon letter to the Historle Resources
Board, dated Api 20, 2014 Usttachment O}, and ilustrated inthe Project Plan set (Attachment
gi

Alterations/Additions related to the exterior building volume include the following

‘+ Removing the existing services porch and stair facing the driveway:

‘+ Removing tha chimney thal projects from the hip roa on the side af the house facing the
driveway:

‘© Extending the rear/service sidewall of the house (westside) at the first and basement
levels 6 feet towards the driveway for the entire width af that facade;

‘+ Adding balcony above the extension (off the back of the master bedroom). The guard
wall al the balcony isan extension of the scalloped shingle bell-course tuppad with an
‘open railing of wood spindles. The design ofthe splnles will match the existing ones at
the frant porch;

‘= Addinga large gabled darmer centered on the existing hip roof plane as seen on the west
levation. The design and detailing of Lhe gable is shown to match the exlsting gables I
appearance, albeit a smaller form;

4+ Providing new windows and doors on the west side elevation at all levele while keeping
‘wo existing windows [one relocated] on the upper floar at the bedroom, New window
‘materials, design, and detailing are shawn an the plans to closely match existing
windows. The upper loor glazed door is more contemporary, but is matching the
window in width and trim detaling, and is aligned with windows below. The lower
service door has a glazed upper portion and panets belovy

‘© Adding new windows and doors leading out ta the patlo off the basement and a new pair
of windows at the kitchen as seen on the north elevation. The windows will match
existing windows, while the doors are mare contemporary deuble/French patia doors;

‘+ Adding an exterior stair leading from the wraparound porch ta the new lower patla nf
the hasement as seen on Lhe north efevatlon, The stal railing Is detalled to match the
existing wraparound porch;

Heenan Pagel
Adding two small skylights high on the hip roof plane facing the homne’s yard area as seen
‘nthe west clevation. Those skylights are nal visible from the street; and
+ Adding building lighting (wall seances),

DISCUSSION
‘Summary of the City’s Review Process

Pala Alto’s Histark Preservation Ordinance in Section 16.49.0S0(a) requires thal the HRB review
all applications involving historic single-family ‘significant buildings’ ;Category-1 and 2]. tn 1987,
subsequent to the Lity Caunei’s adaption of the Historic Preservation Ordingace, the Council
approved the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabiltation as the HRB's standard af

In addition to the HRB review, the project at 2275 Amherst Street is subject to discretionary
review of a Home linprovernent Exernption (HIE request for a height exemption ta allow the
proposed gable dormer of 38 fect 3 Inches in height Lo exceed the maximum allowable helght by
eight (81 feet, when the existing building is 40 fect in height. The provisions of the California
Envrranmental Quality Act {CECA require a discretionary historic project to comply with the
Secretary's Standards for Rehabilitation betoro a bulldlng permit can be Issucd. The HRB dows
nat specifically review and recommend! on the request for an HIF, but to determine whether the
proposed project that Incorporates an HIE eonforms to the Secretary's Standards for
Rehabilitation,

Staff's Comment on the Project Description
The praposal seeks to rake additions and alterations to the rear portion of the house, which
now faces the driveway sida, create a usable basement, rearganize firsl and second floor
layouts, and expand the attic. The majority of exterior changes will be visible from the west
(Omterler left) and narth (rear) evaluations of the house,

The historle chavacter of the new and ald frantages will be preserved. Most of the historic
materials on these sides, Ike wall cladding, trim and windows, will not be affacted by this
Proposal. On the west evaluation {interior left). the side wall of the house at the first and
basemont levels will be extended six fest towards the driveway fur the entire width af that
facade, to replace an existing non-historic service porch. The addition will feature materials and
datailing matching those an the esteriar of this Queen Anne house. The proposal will Improve
the false senso of historleal development by replacing the conjecturat features with a mare
compatible structure, The dimension and placement of new windows are consistent with the
exlsting windows. On the second level, a new balcany will be created as the result of the Inwer
floor addition. The balcony will be built in a continuation of existing scalloped belt course
between the fist and secand floor. The guardrail wll he silar to the existing rails at the porch,
in design and style. A new gable dormer with two 2 6" x 3° 2° casement glass windows Is
Proposed. The height of this gable will be 38 fest Jinches above grade,

slightly higher then the existing side gables (approximately 35 feet) to offer a greater interior
tabng helghl. The detailing of the propased gable wil be similar to the erisling gables with the
exception that the window wall be slighty larger in size,

Tae ta Page
The changes to the north [rear evaluation are mostly not visible from the public way. It Includes
a new 200 square feet recessed patio, two new skylights in the attic and a walk-out basement
with accoss from 2 new stalrway. An existing window will be replaced as 3 result of interior
change at the ground level. While the changes are proposed to improve the canternporary
functionally, the new works are differentiated fromm the old and are compatible with the overall
historic character in toms of massing, size, scale and architecturat features,

‘the proposal will offer protection far the two sireul trees by the driveway and the erdinance-
size onk tree that straddles the property line between 2275 and 2203 Amherst Street, The oak
‘tree is 57 inches in diameter and trimming is not permitted for canstructlon. The applicant has
provided an arborist tepart far all peatected trees. Staff has reviewed the arborist report and
supports the proposed project with regard to the required tree protection,

FINDINGS BASED ON THE SECRETARY OF INTERIOR’S STANDARDS
‘As deseribod In Attachment A, the projactis rated as compliant with rast standards, and where
it's marginally compliant, conditions can be used to bring the project to mitigate thy impacts
Since the maturial and color buard has wot been reviewed 95 part ofthe Secretary's Standards,
25.9 cancion of approval, stalf recommends that 8 subcommittee of the HRB to revlew the
proposed materials far averall consistency with the character defining busing Features

ATTACHMENTS

‘A. Project's Consistency with the Secretary of the Interiors Standards for Rehabilitation of
Historie Structures

Conditions of Approval

Historic Inventory Farm for 2275 Araharst Street

*Projeet Description Letter submitted by the Applicant, dated April 20, 2044.

Project Plans dated July 25, 2014 {HRB members anly). Plans are also avallable an the

city's website at

hito://wwsccitvofpaleatte.cve/civican/filebank/biobdload. aspx?

2200

+ Submitted ly applicant and reviewed by HRB members only
COURTESY COPIES:

Margaret Wimmer
en DeLeon

PREPARED BY: teat Tong
Chrisiy’reng,

Planner

Tees
Attachment A,

Project's Consistency with the Secretary ofthe Interior's Standard for Rehabilitation of Historte Structures

Rehabilitation is defined (by the Secretary) as “the process af returning o property tow stote of utility, through
repair or alteration, which makes possible on efficient contemparory use while preserving those portions and!
features of the property which are significant to ts histarc, erchitectoral, and euiturat volves.” As stated In the
dlefinition, the treatrnent “rehabilitation” assumes at least some repair or alteration ofthe historic bullding
will be needed in order ta arovide far an efficient contemporary use; however, these repairs and aMterations
‘must not damage or destroy materials, features or finishes thal ara important in defining thu building's
historic character,

‘There are 10 standards for compliance. Each standard is listed bolaw with evaluation determinations and
commentary. The praposed project is rated relative to each standard as “compliant {ite or no impact om the
resource), “marginally compliant” (the resouree Is impacted and mazlieations recommended, but the level af
impacts not sufficient to warrant re-evaluation, ancl “not compliant (the resouree would be negatively
impacted by the proposed design as well sits eligibility for listing as an historic resource}. Overall compliance
with S15. fs notnecessarly a dizect sum of the level ot camplance foreach standard; however, that
information is weighed relative tothe overall impact ofthe project on both the design and historical
signfieance ofthe resource. Overall eompllanice is covered in the Review Summary parographis)

Secretary of the Interlor Standards far Rehabilitation

S:1._Apraperty shat be used for its historic porpose or he placed in a new use that requires minima change
to the defining eharacteristes of the building anu its site ong environment.

Evaluation Commentary: lhe property shal retain ts historic purpose as a single-family esidence. The
project, therefore, is compliant with Standard 1,

5-2. The historic character of « property shol be retained and preserved. The removal of historic maoterials
‘r olteration of features and spoces the character of the property should be avoided.

Evaluation Commentary: The modifications to the design da not remove historle features af the
property and attempt to retain ax much of the historic materials and character of the residence as
possible, Existing windaws are relocated, where passlble, such as on the driviway side elevation at the
master bedraam. The project, therefore, is compliant with Standard 2,

5-3 Each property shall be recognized as « physical record af ts time, place, andl use, Changes that create @
False sense of bistorical development, suck as adding conjectural features or architectural elements from other
baiting, shall not be undertaken,

Evaluation Commentary: The changes to the design use the matching materials and detaling as those
‘an the exterior ofthis Queen Anne house, but are likely macle af modern materials and manufacturing
processes. Such modern manufacturing af windows and siding ete. have slight cferences in
appearance from their historic predecessors, While this shauld be documented, it can tkely represent
2 physical record of contemporary construction of an Nistor style. Nat used are conjectural features
‘or architectural elements salvaged from other buildings that would confuse historic materials, The

sprolect, therefore, ls compliant with Standard 3 eubject to additional informati
Attachment A
5-4» Most properties change aver time; those changes that have acquired bistaric significance in their own
Fight fof! he retoined and preserved.

Evaluation Commentary: The resource does not have additions ar alterations other than the detached
{garago, and the detachod garage isnot viewed as having acquited historic significance. No work is
being propased to the garage and its noe-issue, The project, therefore, is compliant with Standard
4

55 Distinctive features. inshes, ond construction techniques or exemales of craftsmenshi that
characterize 0 property shall re preserved.

Evaluation Commuantary: Almost all of the ariginal home's fealures, finishes, and exising construction
is boing maintained. The prolect, therefore, is compliant with Stanciard 5.

58 Detertorated historic feouures shall be repoled rather than replaced. Where the severty of the
Geterioratian requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature shall match the ald in design, cofor,
texture, ond other visual qualities and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features shall be
substontioted by documentary, physical, or pictorial evidence.

Evaluation Commentary: The histone FeaLures of the casldence are In good repair and require nothing
‘more than ongoing maintenance and painting, The project, therefore, is compliant with Standard 5,

$8 Significont archeologleal resources affected by a project shal be prot
resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures shall be undertken.

ted ond preserved. jf such

Evaluation Commentary: There are no known archeological finds at this location. The prolect,
therefore, is compliant with Standard 8,

5-9 New additions, exterior alterations, ar related new construction sia! not destroy the histone moterials
that characterize the property. The new work sal! be diferentioted from the ott and shall be compatible with
the massing size, scale ond architectural features to protect the historic integrity ofthe property and its
environment.

Evaluation Commentary: The addition has been dane in such a way that the west sd of the house,
which was originally the moro functional and loss adorned side ofthe hause, retains ts historic
character and purpose by keeping function and facade composition similar to the original resource,
These attributes differentiate this side of the house frum the olher sides ofthe house, which are more
ornate and whimsical note: the hustarle inventory referred to the public sce ofthe house as a “fantasy
‘or gables"), This is important to maintaining the overall integrity ofthe resource and ils histary, while
allowing rehabilitation af Une house for modern living, This can be seen in the massing and scale of the
‘expanded floor area that replaces the service parch and the use of matching materials ané detailing for
wall surfaces and windows with minimal use of ornamentation,

‘The addition ta the ranflina on the west sida Is an attic dormer. Ths element's size and placement are
Compatible with this side of the house a5 & maintains this side's rnaf as an hip fern more sa thanon
other sides of the house. On those sides, the gables are large and project out fram the hip roof ina
mannes that strongly interruat the otherwise harizantal line of rave to call great attention to
themselves. Dormers are comman secondary roof forms on Queen Anne homes. This one is
Attachment A
compatible with the home’s massing and uses éetaling and materials sinllarto tha home's other
gables to retaining unity Inthe home's roof,

‘While the westside aditions are generally compatible with the existing house, and the detalls and
materials are mostly matching, there area aspeels of the design (hat will differentiate old from new in
‘a way thal make the addition recognizable as such, One is the extruded feel to the extension aff the
first floor and the wlde dack on the upper Naor. Others are the glazed danr to the upper deck off the
master bedroom, the inclusion of basement windows, and solld character of the massing. (ke it does
not look related ta a porch projection} The form hardly scems likely characterstes ofthe period af the
home's original construction where a service porch would be a more clearly additive elernent, and if
deck were used It would be less than litely to be lang and narrow with this lype oF period of house.
Cintry to the raised main level near the ground fie. like a spit level) as proposed alsa scems atypical of
the resource's period. For these reasons the addilion has dilferentiaing features coupled with strong
compatioity af materials and detailing

(Other changes to the house to accommodate the basemont are falrly modest and mostly not visible
from the public way. they de not change the character af the house, nor undermine its historie
integrity. Likewise, intcior layout changes Improve funetionalty without enmprornising the use or
overall integrity of the huilding. For these and other rensons nated inthis analysis the proposal is
viewed as hoth compatible with and differantisted fram the resaurce, The projec, therefore, is
compliant with Standard 9,

S10 New additions and adjacent or related now construction shal be undertaken in such a mariner that
removed ia the future, the essentil form aad incegrity of the historic eroperty ond Ws environment would be
unimpaired.

Evaluatian Commentary: It would be possible to remove the audition atthe frst floor and restore a
smaller service porch as well as remove the dormer atthe roof iTsomeone wanted ta restore the
character of the original service side of the house as these are discrete additions to the existing
structure. te would be comawhatdiffieult and unlikely that this would be done, but its possible. The

pioiect, therefore, is compliant with Standard 40,
Review Summary

‘The project is rated as compllant with all 10 Standards. Compliance with Lhe Secratary ofthe Interior's
Standards for Rehabilitation is not necessarily cqual to the relative campllance with each of the
mndlvdual standards, hut rather the project's averall impact on the existing and future integrity ofthe
historic resource. In this instance the averall lmpact ofthe project maintains the resaurce’s integrity
‘while allowing far cehabilitation,
attachment 8

ATTACHMENT 8: CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
2275 Amborst Strat / File No, 1APLN-00183
Historie Resources Board
‘August 20, 204

Planning DWvsion,

L

2

3

4

10,

uu,

‘The project shall be constructed In substantial conformance wth the approved plans
received July 25, 2014, except as modified ta incorporate these Canditions of Approval,
The Director of Planning's project approval letter, Including the approved Conditions,
shall be printed on one of the initial sheets of the Building Permit Plan Set

The applicant shall review color and materials with HRB subcommittee that would be
more compatible with the existing hous.

The applicant shall review the landscape plan with Cty staff or HRB subcommittee fat
the IIRB's discretion) with the intent to retain significant existing landscaping featurus
con the site

‘The ten Sectctary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation shall be printed on one
‘of the intial sheets of the Bulldlag Permit Plan St,

The current editian ofthe California Historical Building Code shall be applied to al
eligible aspects of the historic rehabilitation of the extevior ofthe house when needed
ta preserve character defining features,

No demolition or permanent removal of significant historic Fabre that isnot included in
the project approval shall be carried out in any amount for any reason except with
written permission by the Department of Plannlag and Community Environment.
Unauthorized demolition may result in significant delay of the projert inckiding return
to the Historle Resources Board

Any revisions to approved materials and color: tor the exterior af the house proposed
during the project construction phase shal be submitted for review by City stall or HRB
subcommittee (at the HRB's dlcretlon) depending on the scope of the proposed

‘Any new exterior lighting added to the project during the construction phase shall be
reviewed by City staff or HRB subcomimiltey [at the HRB's discretion) with respect to the
style, materials, and colar of the fixtures, and the light bulb types, Light bulb glare that
‘could impact neighboring properties sal be avoided.

Priar to Issuance of the building permil City staff shall review the Building Permit Plan
Set (final full construction plans) for consistency with the Director of Planning’ project
approval based on the recammendatians of the Histarlc Rasaurces Board,

A Planning Division Final inspection willbe required to determine substantial
‘compliance with the approved plans.
_ATTACHME

PORALEe aha DE ETAT Fone _
H va
HISTORIC AESQURCESANVENTORY #|¢-———
vy |
sitesi Gabe :
1 conaeenice ETS brat Biregb
ve Imig 80 fr ye Ca
4, Pomen owner, if krowre_ Joe] & Dorethy Kaplan pctiewse:_ Same.
en mm ooo sabie Cpa El

Ppa Us fostdence crajoel us _RFetCe

6 ef sare le rat lye

veo ee rsiutie and drt any mir testo tot art

usea fe jn agchizectural style, thts two-story house exhtbits 9 rectangular
Sore St an angle of one corner, and 35 an important exanpte of the Gvean Anne
style

‘The spool work me the porch and paired portholes in the man gable Tend & sense
S)Sthedinorate! decorative setaTivg.” The interesttag maseig of foms and fine
Ornomental cevail rendar the house architecturally significant.

3. Lassa eh van fea onal an
uno een, wed pone orn

or appror ae

Ir hek 8
a teaten [i] eco C]” sie C]
at vorrted [7], Haase 1]

arent? CT # Unatenae Of

1 suru: fhe roe thw om iene (RES OT)
sn Oemtant LL 6. Sexiness“)
savy butran Laan)
e corm L! ¢ taut (2)
er IL

12 Team se
Porta BRT any dtr
© Zang [-] a Prt Works, Tj
Sveawes CD home pp

ei nin eies sna 14 Datel ot ent pesnpahte: SEK