Historic Preservation Commission Meeting Signed Minutes - July 15, 2019

Home Browse Search

deterioration. Retain and maintain architectural detail of structures such as wrought iron, tile, brackets, etc., or replace when necessary with similar material in texture, size and appearance. Permitted: If vinyl or aluminum siding is the only economic solution to a deteriorating frame house, architectural detail must be visually preserved. The siding used should match the original in style, width, and lap as closely as possible. Prohibited: Do not use asbestos or asphalt siding on frame structures. Do not use artificial brick or cast stone siding on brick, masonry, stucco, or frame structures. Do not sandblast or use harsh detergents in cleaning brick, masonry or stucco. II. STRUCTURES A. ROOFS Preferred: Keep the original shape of the roof. Retain the original roofing material. A special effort should be made to do this when the roof in question is of tile, slate, or some other unique material not usually found today. Preserv e or replace all architectural features which give the roof its character, such as dormer windows, cupolas, cornices, brackets, chimneys, cres ting, weathervanes, and special eaves. Permitted: When necessary to replace roofing material, match the original as closely as possible in size, shape and texture. Prohibited: Do not add, remove, or alter features which will change its character or the architectural character of the house. C. PORCHES AND STEPS WHICH ARE READILY VISIBLE FROM THE STREET Preferred: Retain and maintain porches and steps including hand rails, balusters, columns, brackets, roof decoration, tile, and brick. If porches and / or steps are enclosed for heat conservation or other reasons, it should be done in a manner that doe s not destroy the architectural nor historical character of the home. Permitted: Replace porches and steps with materials matching the original as closely as possible. A cement porch floor is permitted for the structure on Lot 12. Prohibited: Porches and steps that are appropriate to the style of the house shall not be removed. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff divides the project into four components: 1. Staff supports the reduction in size of the porch. Staff would prefer to see either the yellow or the red brick used continuously across the entirety of the structure. 2. Staff supports the removal of the porte-cochère stairs. 3. Staff does not support the reduction in the number of columns. 4. Staff supports the use of alternative materials if they replicate the original details of the Corinthian columns and pilasters. Staff does not support a ‘regression’ in the style of the columns (i.e., the loss of the fluting on the shaft of the column, or the installation of a less ornate capital order.) Written by Adam Toering Historic Preservation Specialist Approved by Elicia Feasel Historic Preservation Administrator PETITIONER COMMENTS: Mr. John Broden explained that he is power-of-attorney for his parents who own the property and currently live in the carriage house, that he and his wife live in the main house, that some of the justifications for the proposed work is based on the cost of the overall project, and is understanding of the position s of the staff and the Commission. Ms. Jo Broden explained that this application is one of many on the house, and that many of those projects are derived from differed maintenance. Ms. Broden further explained that the yellow and red brick and use of both, and how they had hoped to conceal some of the differences between two colors with landscaping. COMMISSION DISCUSSION: Commissioner Molnar clarified his positions supporting the staff recommendations. He further revealed that he works for the Clerks Office in close cooperation with Councilwoman Broden, and that he is appreciative of the efforts of the family to attempt to tackle this project. Commissioner Hertel asked for clarification on whether this project was retroactive or not. Specialist Toering explained the expiration of the previous approval from 2018. Commissioner Hertel supported the various elements of the project but had reservations regarding the removal of two of the columns. Specialist Toering explained that the previous approval had given staff the authority to approve material changes for the pillars, as it was an exploratory deconstruction.