Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Historic Survey topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Consultant outlines Bothell historic built-environment survey plans and data gaps
Summary
Willamette Cultural Resources Associates briefed the board on a planned intensive-level update to Bothell’s historic built-environment inventory, noting many existing records are more than 10 years old, several properties are misidentified in the state repository, and the update will include stronger coverage of pre-contact Indigenous history.
Adam Alsobrook, senior architectural historian with Willamette Cultural Resources Associates, briefed the Landmark Preservation Board on Sept. 10 about an upcoming update to Bothell’s historic built-environment (HBE) survey and inventory.
Alsobrook told the board that Bothell’s inventory dates to an intensive survey in 1988 with partial updates in 1992, 1995 and 2002; later efforts included a 2011 tax-assessor data project and a 2019 downtown landmark feasibility study. "There are some known issues with the current Bothell inventory as it is housed on WISRD," Alsobrook said, referring to the state database, and he said some demolished properties still appear as standing and some documentation is out of date.
Alsobrook said the Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (DAHP) requires reevaluation of recordations older than 10 years. He explained the typical scope and methodology for an intensive-level survey—fieldwork, interior and exterior documentation, archival research, and preparation of historic-context statements—and said the forthcoming request for proposals will likely set the survey date threshold at 40–45 years (properties constructed in about 1981–1986 and earlier would be evaluated if a 2026 survey is executed).
The RFP will set the level of survey, professional qualifications, goals and deliverables, Alsobrook said. He described WISRD iconography that marks properties as not eligible, eligible, unevaluated or demolished and recommended updating the city’s context statements and inventory forms. Alsobrook also said the update will include a more robust section on pre-European-contact history and that tribal consultation and additional stakeholder identification will occur during the project.
Alsobrook outlined next steps: issue the RFP, conduct fieldwork and research (which sometimes blend), provide periodic updates to the Landmark Preservation Board and public, circulate a draft survey report for comment (including DAHP review), and submit final survey documentation and forms to the city and DAHP.
Board members asked whether stakeholders would be identified before the project and whether tribal partners and the Burke Museum would be included; Alsobrook said stakeholders are typically identified at project start and that additional stakeholders are often added during the work.
Alsobrook closed by noting the update will produce contemporary inventory forms and clarified that the city is 1 of 2 Washington cities that have a regulatory inventory as a certified local government.
