July 2003 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

application. The existing 8' by 12' kitchen will be transformed into a mudroom. The existing kitchen window will be removed and replaced with a Marvin door. The dining room window and much of the surrounding brickwork will be removed for the creation of a ten -foot archway between the kitchen and the dining room. The current landscaping and garden will have to be removed for the construction of the proposed addition. A mature tree in front of the side wing may have to be removed (not specified) and no plan for new landscaping was included with the application. Because the Historic Preservation Commission does not have jurisdiction over the interior spaces of a home, staff can offer no opinion upon the renovation of the existing kitchen and its change into a mudroom. But, staff notes that because their will be no door providing direct access to the kitchen from the outdoors, the formal dining room will essentially become a traffic path wedged between the exterior doors, the mudroom and the kitchen. Staff makes note the original designer's well-planned location of the current kitchen relative to the driveway for easy access into the home through the side door. Although this addition brings concern to staff because of its large size and ungainly proportion compared to the rest of the house, the changes that will occur to the home's interior character and use (though HPC has no jurisdiction here), and the permanence of the new structure, staff finds few reasons to deny recommendation of approval. The addition will be located at the rear of the home and will not affect the home's street appearance. The contractor has found brick that matches the original brick of the house and will include exterior details somewhat compatible with the Colonial Revival style. (ie. flat -roofed porch -like addition with classical pilasters.) Yet, the addition does not seem to recognize the character defining elements of the home such as the half - gabled sun porch and entrance with boxed returns. Acknowledgement and usage of these elements in prior design stages would have strengthened the application for appropriateness as well as the addition's design suitability with the current structure. Staff still finds the transition from the house to the addition as well as the removal of much of the brick veneer with its simple coursework details for a 10' wide arched doorway ungainly and poorly conceived. The Secretary of the Interior Preservation Standards for treatment and rehabilitation of historic structures calls for the "retention of the existing building's form, features, and detailing."' The Standards also state that "the historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The replacement of intact or repairable historic materials or alterations of features, spaces, and spatial relationships that characterize a property will be avoided." Z Staff would like to note the increasing trend of alterations and additions on houses in the East Wayne Street district that do greatly change the historic form of these buildings. The Herly addition adds to square footage of the footprint by almost 25%, removes about 20% of the original brick veneer from view and 40% of this amount will be demolished for the construction of the kitchen entryway. The surface area of the walls of the addition will increase the surface area of the house by a little under 30% with a structural system and materials not in keeping with the historic materials of the house—that is wood frame on brick veneer platform. Staff would like to call attention to the overuse of false historical features that are present on the exterior of this addition: Marvin windows, the pilasters, and paneling covering the wood frame, and the even the flat -roof. From a preservationist standpoint, these should be avoided to retain historic authenticity of the existing structure. Instead, the owner and the contractor would do well to include elements from the existing building in future plans and projects. Plans should include massings that are in correct proportion and scale with the existing building. The proposed addition is currentiv two times the size of the gabled sun porch and three times the size of the current kitchen. An addition in keeping with the size of these rooms would be lesser damaging to the historic character of the residence. 19 Z 18.