Ben and Carrie Modlin vs. Historic Preservation Commission (COA#2019-1007A)

Home Browse Search

• Commissioner Hertel clarified that the applicant has changed materials—instead of using the LP Smartside,the applicant is going to use wood siding. Commissioner Downs-Krostenko made a motion on COA#2019-1023A be accepted with the following conditions: 1)that the south facing front facade door be allowed to be removed and filled with wood siding of the same size and reveal as the original siding, and that the wood be feathered in;2)and that the second door of the application be tabled until the next meeting;3)that the application will be waived for the continuation;4)that Commission members shall visit the site,to determine the rear additions. Seconded by Commissioner Ponder. Seven in favor,none opposed. Vote: 7—0. Motion to continue COA#2019-1023A with conditions is passed,including continued. Commissioner Hertel informed the applicant that should contact Historic Preservation Staff if they had any questions,as the Staff is very helpful and here to help. Mr.Nevarez stated that he recently bought the property,he came to staff immediately,and that he intends to convert it back to a single-family occupancy,and then put it back on the market. Commissioner Downs-Krotstenko stated that it wasn't that long ago that the house was beautiful,and that the work should be manageable to get it back to that condition. Commissioner Gelfman asked about the status of the previously approved Certificates of Appropriateness associated with this address. Specialist Toering indicated that they were issued for the previous property owner. Commissioner Hertel asked if Mr.Nevarez needed to get a new approval as the new property owner. Legal Counsel Kennedy stated that the approved Certificates of Appropriateness'stay with the property.' Commissioner Downs-Krostenko stated that approvals are only good for a year. Specialist Toering stated that the approvals were issued this summer. Mr.Nevarez stated that he would honor those previous applications and approvals. Commissioner Gelfman stated that the reason for the concern was that Commissioner Ponder was wondering about the priorities for the project. Mr.Nevarez stated that the priority was the roof and was concerned about what was previous approved for that aspect of the structure. Specialist Toering stated that the chimney had major structural issues,that former Inspector Szaday had completed a site visit, that the previous property owner had proposed taking the chimney down and rebuilding it,that the reconstructed chimney would not be a structural chimney,it would not be functional. Mr.Nevarez indicated that he would like to take the chimney down but not rebuild it. Specialist Toering stated that the chimney reconstruction was only approved because of the stated reconstruction. Mr.Nevarez stated that he understood. Commissioner Downs-Krostenko stated that he could apply to demolish the chimney in a separate document. Mr.Nevarez stated that he planned to start with the roof. Commissioner Gelfman stated that the chimney has existed and that it should remain,even if it just for looks. Commissioner Gelfman asked when the foundation will be addressed. Mr.Nevarez stated that the plan was to do the roof,siding,and then the foundation. Commissioner Gelfman asked about the main issues of the foundation. Mr.Nevarez stated that the foundation currently has an exterior access,and that the previous owners had requested permission to remove that entrance,and that was administratively approved. The foundation itself is sound. IV. PRIVILEGE OF THE FLOOR V. REGULAR BUSINESS A. APPROVAL OF MINUTES i. N/A B. STAFF REPORTS i. Administrative Approvals 1. 730 Park Avenue—Hershberger Masonry applied for and received an Administrative Approval for the reconstruction of the masonry foundation of the veranda.