April 1998 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS STAFF REPORT ' STANDARDS The guidelines for'Local Landmarks-do not include requirements,for the ` alteration of lot areas: Though the guidelines in the county Historic °..E.. Preservation Plan for the establishment of Landmarks, give.criteria for--the"-, analysis of. significance - they do not provide specific direction on,the establishment'of boundaries.-The best- guidance.available for such a determination comes from National Register Bulletin -.16A an:excerpt of'which is attached. Most significantly,:this' criteria states-that should:... 1) " encompass ,btit not. exceed the' full - ,extent -of .,the.:significant 'resources -and,' land'making up the•property." 2)'" be large .enough to include all- historic features of the property but should-not include "buffer zones" or acreage not contributing directly to the significance of the'property." 3) not_allow "donut holes .... No area of resources within a set of boundaries may be excluded from - listing.... - Specifically., it is recommended that rural sites be based on... 1) "A - small - - parcel f drawn , to immediately, encompass the significant resources; including outbuildings and associated_setting.'.';' or , 2) "Acreage including fields, forests and open range .that was associated with the property historically and conveys the property's historic setting." RECOMMENDATION' It appears that thee'- landmark° was originally. designated ..along the - .lines of'.the second National Register guideline for rural property above and upon its- amendment was redefined along the lines of the guideline "l -for rural property:, _ Clearly the Landmark was established to reflect -the farmyard -group as opposed, to the individual =house.: .: Though. the - intervening _building;(former garden shop)' might."have been more sympathetically placed by:being setback, the streets'eape retains. the'. sense .of `the farmyard and. clearly. may be read as, an associated and-barn.-The-separation of features into separate and discreet Landmarks as.implied' request is. contrary to the •expression.of this context. -Though such alteration might'not cause"negative, affect on the resource,--it would create.the opportunity, for unsympathetic. - alterations of the • intervaning• space_, which could- des-tro' this - context. ; ._ Several Certificates . of"`appropriateness' - have been`;granted since- 1975 allowing::_, " continued reasonable' development --of, the property - - ,and- 'Staff - finds -nd- reason 'why . the'National'Registration guidelines should'not be applied- -the integrity`of this context. Staff. that -the Landmark description' remain as it is and that contiguous site = -area not be removed from the middle of the Landmark'• designation. ; DBD - .4/14/98