The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutNotice PLANNER 10/27/2008 . . r AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE RECEIVED STATE OF OREGON) )ss. County of Lane ) OCT 2 72008 By:1@t~ 1 ~ I, Karen LaFleur, being first duly sworn, do hereby depose and say as follows:. 1. I state that I am a Program Technician for the Planning Division of the Development Services Department, City of Springfield, Oregon. . 2. I state that in my capacity as, Program Tech'1.ician, I prepared and caused to b~ ~ mailed copies of DRCZcoE)-oOOG Z-- . (' ?, j)e~ - ~ Au 'rfr.7 ~ (See attachment "A") on 0 200 addressed to (see a~'Vt Clu_uK-i.___ Attachment B"), by causing said letters to be placed in a U.S. mail box with postage fully prepaid thereon. ~M U{ . C!tJ-~~ KAR N LaFLEUR STATE OF OREGON, County of Lane O(f:8~ 21 . 2008. Personally appeared the above named Karen LaFleur, Program Technician, who acknowledged the foregoing instrument to be their voluntary act.. Before me: . OFFICIAL SEAL . . DEYElTE KEI.I. Y '-. i NOTARY PUBLIC. OREGON COMMISSION NO. 420351 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES AUG. 15, 2011 ~~#t; My Commission Expires: o/Isftt t1 i . . TYPE I mSTORICAL REVIEW, STAFF REPORT & DECISION Project Name: Ebbert Memorial Church Gate Enclosure Historical Commission Meeting: 08/12/08 Project Proposal: Gated Stairwell Case Number: DRC2008-00062 Project Location: 532 "c" Street Assessor's Map: 17-03-35-24/11100 Zoning: LDR Application Submitted Date: 08/29/08 Decision Issued Date: 10/27/08 Appeal Deadline Date: In accordance with SDC 5.1-125 the Director's decision is the [mal decision of the City. Associated Applications: None APPLICANT'S DEVELOPMENT REVIEW TEAM Applicant: Andrew Epperson .5749 Thurston Road Springfield, OR 97478 Owner: Ebbert Memorial United Methodist Church 532 "C" Street Springfield, OR 97477 CITY OF SPRINGFIELD'S DEVELOPMENT REVIEW TEAM POSITION REVIEW OF NAME PHONE Proiect Manager Planning Tara Jones 736-1003 Community Services Manager Building Dave Puent 726-3668 PROPOSAL The applicant proposes to enclose the basement access stairwell on the east side of the Ebbert Memorial Church. The present stairwell has become an attractive place for homeless people to sleep and carry on illegal activities. The existing cream colored wrought iron fencing would be replaced with black wrought iron bars. One wall of bars would face 6th Street. Another wall of bars with a bi-fold gate would face south. The entire space would be enclosed from the cement walkway to the shed roof. The gate will have a crash bar on the inside to ensure egress from the building in case of emergency. DRC2008-00062 Type I Historical Review Page I of4 . . r BACKGROUND/SITE INFORMATION The Ebbert Memorial United Methodist Church was built in 1916. It is the oldest standing church structure in Springfield and the only example of Romanesque style architecture in the city. The church is classified as of Secondary Significance (Contributing) on the National Register of Historic Places. There have been alterations made over the years including the addition of a classroom/office building attached to the rear of the church and the addition of an ADA accessible ramp to the southwest entrance of the building in 1977. Staff could fmd no reference regarding the addition of the existing cream colored scrolled wrought iron fencing in the stairwell, but it does not appear to be original to the design of the building. The update survey conducted in 2003 describes the church as being of good integrity and condition. REVIEW PROCESS In accordance with SDC 3.3-915 B and C, the Springfield Historical Commission reviews and makes recommendations to staff on Type I decisions. The Springfield Historical Commission reviewed this proposal at their August 12, 2008 meeting. They recommended that the proposal be approved subject to the removal of the scroll work from the proposed design. They also recommended that the metal work be painted black. The proposal as submitted in application DRC2008-00062 incorporates both of these changes. DECISION This Type I Historical Review is approved as of the date of this letter, subject to the conditions described herein. CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL (SDC Section 3.3-945 Major and Minor Alteration Standards) 1. Any proposed use shall minimize exterior alteration of the Historic Landmark Site or Structnre and its environment; uses that require substantial exterior alteration shall not be permitted. Finding I: Only a portion of the proposed enclosure will be visible from the street. Finding 2: The Historical Commission found that black iron bars would be less visible than the current cream colored scroll work. Finding 3: The Historical Commission found that straight iron vertical bars would be more consistent with the church's historical context. Finding 4: This project is a minimal exterior alteration to the church. Condition 1: The enclosure shall be installed using vertical black iron bars without scroll work. Conclusion: As conditioned herein, this proposal satisfies Criterion 1. 2. The distinguishing original qualities of the Historic Landmark Site or Structure and its environment shall not be substantially altered. The removal or alteration of any historic material or distinctive architectural featnres is prohibited unless an immediate hazard to public safety exists. Finding 5: The existing scroll work appears to be from the 1970's and its removal is not considered a reduction of the distinguishing original qualities of the church. Conclusion: As submitted, this proposal satisfies Criterion 2. 3. All Historic Landmark Sites or Strnctures are recognized as prodncts of their own time. Alterations. which have no historic basis and which seek to create an earlier appearance are prohibited. DRC2008-00062 Type I Historical Review Page 2 of 4 . . .1 Finding 6: The proposed alteration is minim~l. The design is not based on earlier historical appearances. Conclusion: As submitted, this proposal satisfies Criterion 3. - 'I 4. Changes that have taken place in the course of time are evidence of the history and development of a Historic-Landmark Site or structure and its environment. Where changes have acquired significance in their own right, this significance shall be recognized. Finding 7: The existing wrought rron scroll~d fencing is an insignificant change to the development of the church. Conclusion: As submitted, this proposal sati~fies Criterion 4. 5. Distinctive stylistic features and exaD,1ples of local or period craftsmanship which characterize a Historic Landmark Site or Structure shall be retained. Finding 8: No distinctive stylistic features are being proposed for removal. , Conclusion: As submitted, this proposal satisfies Criterion 5. 6. Deteriorated architectural features shall be repaired rather than replaced. In the event replacement cannot be avoided, the new material shall match the material being replaced in composition, design, color, textnre and visual qualities. Repair or replacement of missing architectural features is based on accurate duplicate features, substantiated by historic, physical or pictorial evidence rather than on conjectural design, or the availability of different architectural. elements from other buildings or structures. Finding 9: No architectural features are proposed for replacement. Conclusion: As submitted, this proposal satisfies Criterion 6 7. New design for undeveloped Historic Landmark Sites in the Washburne Historic Landmark District and for alterations and additions to existing Historic Landmark Sites and Structures are permitted when they complement significant historic, architectural or cnltural features and the design is compatible with the size, scale, color, material and character of the property, neighborhood or environment. Finding 10: This project was designed to be of insignificant visual impact on the church. Conclusion: As submitted, this proposal satisfies Criterion 7. 8. New additions or alterations to Historic Landmark Structures shall not impair the esseutial form and integrity or the structure. Finding II: This project was designed to b~ of insignificant visual impact on the church. Conclusion: As submitted, this proposal satisfies Criterion 8. CONDITION OFAPPROV AL: Condition 1: The enclosure shall be installed using vertical black iron bars without scroll work. DRC2008-00062 Type I Historical Review Page 3 of4 . . \ WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE . The applicant shall obtain a Building Permit within 90 days of this approval. 'Ibe Building Permit should include a floor plan of the downstairs space served by the exit being enclosed, The design of the egress gate must be drawn by' a licensed architect or engineer. The gate needs to be able to be opened without special tools or knowledge. · Upon completion of the gate enclosure, the applicant must submit a set of front and side elevation photographs to the City. If this is a hardship to the applicant, call Tara Jones at 736-1003 and she will photograph the house for City archives. If you have any questions please contact Tara Jones at (54!) 736-1003 or by emai! at tioneslalci.soringfield.or. us. PREPARED BY: Tara Jones Planner I DRC2008-00062 Type I Historical Review Page 4 of 4 __ ~ . _____h__ __ _. . ------------------------ -~--- " ~D~ ~i:J:/I.'[tj;1I:1(it'.]:I:[ti. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES toY PLANNING DEPARTMENT 225 FIFTH STREET SPRINGFIELD, OR 97477 . Andrew Epperson 5749 Thurston Road Springfield, OR 97478 se",NG"'CD~ . ~"j;J:III'{~;//~I/'J!Jf.']:/~~ DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ~ PLANNING DEPARTMENT 225 FIFTH STREET SPRINGFIELD, OR 97477 Ebbert Memorial United Methodist Church 532 "c" Street Springfield, OR 97477 ',; ... ..CJd'.. ..... ....... . . -. . . . ... ,. ..idJLc1;'v~:ue>C -,:-. . ,IL..'... U