Laserfiche WebLink
CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS STAFF REPORT <br />that a Staff approval for in-kind replacement would be appropriate. However, <br />upon receiving the application and visiting the site it was discovered that no <br />gutters presently existed and a small pediment which historically had diverted <br />water from the area of the,steps was now missing. This led to a search of the <br />COA files. On November 21, 1991, a certificate of appropriateness was given to <br />Mr. John Palmer for reroofing the house. What was stated on the certificate <br />was "Replace roof to resemble original" with the exception of going from <br />T -shingle -to 3 -block shingle. Apparently, when the porch roof was then <br />reconstructed, the pediment was eliminated from the project leading to the <br />present drainage onto the steps. No gutters now exist at the porch. The roof <br />edge which appears to have' re -used or reproduced historical mouldings as <br />required in the previous COA has no gutter board or easy method for installing <br />one. The documentation for the 1991 COA is fairly extensive and the Agenda for <br />the December HPC meeting implies that the issue was referred to committee. It <br />may be that the Standards and Maintenance Committee verbalized permission to <br />eliminate the pediment without recording it to the file, but not such record <br />was found. <br />The staff recommends that the Owner replace the pediment that once was over <br />the porch entry. Study of the files for COA #1991-1121 does not indicate that <br />removal of the pediment feature was approved by the commission. This pediment <br />was not only decorative but directed the rain away from the area of the porch <br />steps. If the Owner desires to install gutters, half -round type troughs would <br />be the only type applicable without alteration of roof -edge and trim <br />conditions. <br />r � <br />U <br />MKV & DBD <br />3/12/97 <br />• <br />