Laserfiche WebLink
Kristine Shaw: Yes I am. <br /> Charles Ostheimer: 2711 Baker. What she is talking about, there are two <br /> condominiums on the Fulton side, my apartment house, and on Baker a double duplex <br /> and across the street there's a big house that's a rental. The yard at that house is terrible. <br /> I take care of my house, I have a beautiful place. There are nine rentals in that area, 11 <br /> homes, a parking lot and a tavern. So I do not think that area should be included in the <br /> overlay. I have been there since 1972. <br /> Larry Eastlick: 2920 Leonard Drive. I agree with him. <br /> John Meeker: 3013 Victor Place. I have lived on Victor Place since 1965. I am <br /> curious how the boundaries were selected. Whose idea is this? Who appointed them? <br /> You have eliminated all the streets from Garfield up to Baker. Many of those houses <br /> have the same character as the ones within the boundaries. It seems like the whole idea is <br /> to prevent new development. Does that mean someone can't change the door on your <br /> house if it doesn't meet your approval? My parents own a house that had a dilapidated <br /> garage. They replaced it with a garage that does not match the house. The house two <br /> doors down, the owner had a dilapidated garage and he replaced it with a pole building <br /> that looks infinitely better than the original. It seems like the whole process is going to <br /> restrict everybody and it will add to the cost. No one ever came to my door asking if I <br /> wanted this. <br /> Jan Meston: In response to the question about boundaries, the Everett zoning code <br /> gives specific criteria as to what may qualify as a historic overlay zone. One criterion is <br /> that it contains property on the Everett Register of Historic Places. At the time the <br /> neighborhood began looking in the overlay, development pressures were being felt on <br /> Baker Avenue, so their focus was on Baker and Virginia. There is an Everett Register <br /> house on Baker Ave. and also one on Virginia Ave. So that area meets the criteria. The <br /> boundaries need to be simply applied for the zone to be administered, so that in part <br /> explains why the boundaries run straight up the alleys. There is a concentration of <br /> contributing houses in this area. That is not to say there are not many other historic <br /> houses in the Riverside Neighborhood. <br /> Fred Josephson: 2711 California Street. I am opposed to this overlay because I <br /> think there are other more deserving properties all over Riverside than those in the <br /> specified boundaries. The Historical Commission in the past has surveyed and <br /> inventoried properties in the Mitchell Addition and Swalwell neighborhood. I believe <br /> there is some limitation on how many historical overlay districts the city can create. I <br /> think to create a historic overlay in an area that lacks the merit would be an injustice to <br /> the properties that do deserve protection. <br /> Georgia Pendleton: 2215 Baker Ave. I know what you mean about the development <br /> pressures as far as the church wanting to move into the community and tear out old <br /> homes. I appreciate the fact that you want to save the historical character of homes,but I <br /> disagree with certain things about how it's done. If you want to add an addition, garage <br /> or fence to your home, I disagree with someone telling me what I have to do with my <br /> own property. If you own your property, you don't want it to be destroyed; you want it to <br /> be maintained. I don't want someone to charge me a fine if I don't build a certain type of <br /> 4 <br />