Laserfiche WebLink
with the standards above. Several minor changes have been <br />introduced in the new plans: (a) the scale and proportion of the <br />addition changes in relation to the rear facade in that it is <br />larger (10' X 12' vs. 5' X 8'); (b) the proposed east window <br />opening in the existing extension is relatively small as compared <br />to the corresponding replacement sash, which is in scale with the <br />existing windows on the rest of the house; (c) the proposed entry <br />door will be 2" wider than the existing, but will replicate in <br />form and material the existing; (d) the orientation of the entry <br />stoop is different from the existing. <br />The staff asserts that the change cited in (a) does not <br />compromise the historic or architectural integrity of the <br />building. The addition will be offset from the east corner of <br />the rear facade by at least 6", thus keeping the cornerboard <br />detail and profile. Similarly, the changes cited in (b) and (c) <br />are of no detriment. The commission may want to consider the <br />change cited in (d); the reorientation and/or proposed materials <br />may detract from the existing facade. <br />Furthermore, the commission should require that the existing <br />molded entablature in the roof/wall junction be replicated in the <br />new addition. <br />-- James V. Pastor <br />Staff, Historic Preservation <br />