Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Addition 628 Nw 16 topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission continues review of large addition proposal at 628 NW 16th after design and massing concerns
Summary
A proposed side addition and related exterior renovations at 628 NW 16th Street were continued to May 7. Commissioners and staff said the addition, as drawn, risked overwhelming the historic house and asked the applicant to revise massing, roof form and materiality to make the addition visibly subordinate to the original structure.
The Historic Preservation Commission continued consideration of an extensive renovation and addition proposed for 628 NW 16th Street, citing concerns that the planned side addition would visually compete with the historic house.
Applicant Bridall Portree and homeowners Forrest and Ashley Wilson presented plans that included a roughly 500-square-foot side addition (first-floor bedroom for aging-in-place), removal of some pavers, new lighting fixtures, selective demolition of an existing side addition, and facade treatments including brick veneer and paint removal. Staff recommended continuing most of the work so the design team could revise the addition’s massing, roof form and material palette; staff noted the project should remain visually subordinate to the historic primary structure and that additions normally are located at rear elevations where possible.
Commissioners said the current proposals risked making the addition appear as an independent structure rather than a secondary attachment. Concerns focused on the addition’s width relative to the house, a large gable/roof area that increased perceived mass, and the planned use of heavier materials such as brick veneer that might dominate the composition. Commissioners suggested several possible approaches to make the addition subordinate: reduce width or height, alter roof pitch, simplify roof lines, match siding and window proportions to the existing house, or reduce the amount of brick and use siding that reads as secondary.
Because the proposed work touches many elements of the property and because the addition’s scale and placement are central to those questions, the commission continued the entire application to allow the applicant to return with a single refined plan. The applicant was advised to submit revised materials quickly if they hoped to be heard at the next meeting. The commission indicated it could be open to a side addition if the design clearly established the new work as secondary and compatible with the original house.
The item was continued to the May 7 meeting with a request for a single consolidated design package rather than multiple alternate options.
