Commission approves new single-family home at 1686 Grand amid neighbor objections

The Astoria Historic Landmarks Commission approved new construction request NC25-02, allowing a new single-family home at 1686 Grand Avenue following staff findings of compatibility and a period of public testimony that included multiple neighbors objecting to variances and material choices.

Staff told the commission the proposal is for a 2,416-square-foot home with a 1,288-square-foot unfinished walkout basement (3,704 square feet total including the basement). Staff said the design "falls between the mean and median" of adjacent house sizes, the proposed height is about 34 feet (under the 35-foot limit in the R-3 zone), and the applicants worked with city staff and the city historian to refine details for compatibility. Staff noted one variance (V25-02) had been approved for certain setback averaging; staff also said the variance appeal period had passed and that the city engineer had reviewed sightlines for traffic safety.

Applicants Katie and Finn George explained lot constraints that drove design choices including a daylight basement and front-door placement on Grand, described Gothic/Victorian inspirations, and told commissioners they had multiple pre-application and follow-up meetings with staff and the city historian. "This would be a place where a family could call home for generations to come," Katie George said, describing the care taken to match massing and details to the surrounding neighborhood.

Neighbors pressed a series of objections during public testimony: Daniel Cervantes said forward setbacks would break a long visual continuity along nearby streets and reduce his household's views; Sherry Hall called the proposed house "too close to the sidewalk" and said moving the home forward would alter the corner's historic character; Jeffrey Bale and other longtime residents questioned whether modern composite siding and a recessed slider window could preserve the feel of century-old homes; and Carl Johnson raised concerns about tour buses and potential traffic conflicts. Chris Botero, a neighbor with experience working on historic homes, recommended using natural siding products rather than composite materials and questioned the inclusion of a slider where historical precedents exist.

Staff and the applicant responded: staff explained how the setback averaging is calculated using adjacent properties and reiterated that the variance appeal period had closed; the applicant said the front-porch variance affects only a small porch projection and that the front door itself is set back, and noted that the city engineer judged sightlines acceptable.

After deliberation commissioners indicated support for the staff findings. Commissioner Michelle Defenbaugh, who joined by Zoom after a brief recess, said she believed the project met the commission's criteria and praised the applicants' work with the historian. A commissioner moved to adopt the staff findings and approve NC25-02; the motion was seconded and the commission approved the request by voice vote. The chair reviewed appeal rights and permit timelines for the public.

Two commissioners had recused themselves earlier in the hearing because of proximity to the site. The approval is conditioned as outlined in the staff report; the commission record notes the variance for setbacks was handled through the planning variance process and that appeal opportunities for that variance have passed.