January 2018 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Date: December 7, 2017 Application Number: 2017-1204A • Property Location: 50106 Bittersweet Trail Architectural Style/Date/Architect or Builder: L-Plan/Italianate/1877/William C. Kownover Farm Property Owner: David A. Visser Landmark or District Designation: Local Landmark, Ordinance No. 117-76, amended 11-1987 Rating: Outstanding DESCRIPTION OF STRUCTURE/ SITE: The Kownover farmhouse is a 2 '/z story brick house with asphalt shingle roof and stone foundation. 2/2 wood windows with segmental arches, with keystones, brick heads, and stone sills, and two bay windows on the front. A portico with flat roof supported by square wood columns covers the front entrance. The property has a summer kitchen of brick to match the house, and a large gable -roof barn. ALTERATIONS: Original bay windows roofs have been replaced with higher pitch and wood shakes. Aluminum storm windows have been added. There is a small addition to the rear of the house. Between May 2012 and December 2014, the front portico was removed without a COA. The barn was taken down in 2014 without a COA. Green space at site of former barn has been developed with a stone wall built of original barn foundation stones. COA 2017-0403A approved installation of egress window on north side of house and landscaping to screen window and adjacent A/C unit, creation of dumpster pad along south side of drive adjacent to road, to be enclosed with fence, gates, and evergreens, and extension of gravel driveway. COA 2017- 0501 approved installation of 6'H dog-ear wood stockade panels along north property line. Appropriate shade tolerant plants and/or junipers to be installed as necessary. APPLICATION ITEMS: "Barn demolition. Barn was demolished in 2014 without COA and documentation of the need. Also done without permit. Property sold to Vissers in 2015. Seeking retroactive COA for building that no longer exists so that permit can be issued, and to settle the unresolved issues." See attached. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED PROJECT: Background: This application is a continued effort by the owner to obtain a retroactive COA on the barn that was demolished by the previous owner. At the April 2017 meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission, COA 2017-0403A was amended to strike the barn demolition due to lack of information on the condition of the barn and the COA was continued as amended with • conditions including, HPC petitions for leniency for the current owner on barn demolition and seek the previous owner make restitution. Although staff has petitioned the Building Department for leniency for the current owner and that the responsibility for the violations be directed at the owner responsible for the barn removal, it is their policy not to pursue any other owner than the current for violations. Condition of barn: What is known about the condition of the barn has been gathered from two sources, Mr. Sokol, previous owner of the property and responsible for the demolition of the barn and the site visit report made by Steve Szaday, preservation specialist. In summary, Mr. Sokol details the neglected condition of the property upon taking ownership. Specifically, holes in the 4+ layers of roof, rotten wood, animal infestation, missing and weakened fieldstone foundation, beam on top foundation rotten from animals, insects, and water, and a bat infestation. Quotes for some of these repairs began at $110,000 plus materials. See attached. According to the preservation specialist, the building lacked a foundation which contributed to its collapse. PRESERVATION SPECIALIST REPORT: See attached 2014, 2015 documents STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES: Group B A. Maintenance The maintenance of any historical structure or site shall in no way involve any direct physical change except for the general cleaning and upkeep of the landmark. The Commission shall encourage the proper maintenance of all structure or sites. B. Treatment Treatment shall be defined as any change of surface materials that will not alter the style or original form. Such improvements include re -roofing, glazing, or landscaping lawns and may involve a change that can potentially enhance or detract from the character of the landmark. A treatment change of any surface whether on the landmark or in its environment may require a Certificate of Appropriateness if it significantly alters the appearance of the landmark. Although these kinds of changes may not require a Building Permit, a Certificate of Appropriateness may be necessary. The commission should review the proposed treatment for character and style consistency with the original surfaces. C. Renovation and Additions Renovation is the modification of a structure, which does not alter the general massing while an addition, is a change in mass. A modification, which involves the removal of a part of the landmark, should be considered under demolition (see demolition). • Additions to landmarks should not detract from the original form and unity of the landmark and should not cover singular examples of architectural detail. Additions to landmarks should be added in a manner that does not disrupt the visible unity of 51