Historic Preservation Commission Agenda and Packet 2020 12 21

Home Browse Search

ANALYSIS: The overall project includes demolition around the original home and a two story building addition above a portion of and attached to the structure. There is an existing detached accessory structure would remain at the rear of the lot. The preservation, rehabilitation, and restoration work on the front fagade includes the following and is supported by the Historic Structure Assessment: • Siding repair • Foundation/crawlspace • Roof repairs • Window replacement • Siding replacement (as necessary) • Siding restoration • Porch restoration As previously mentioned, the proposed addition to the home would likely not meet the standard for an alteration certificate because the majority of the overall historic form would be lost, the form and materials of the home addition are not adequate distinguished from the historic home, and the new portions of the home do not adequately differentiate the new from the old. The addition is placed on top of and surrounding the historic home resulting in a non -compatible massing, size and scale that visually overwhelms the historic home. However, the preservation of the front fagade with the preservation bonus does provide meaningful preservation of the scale and massing and historic character at the front of the home. While not a full landmark designation, this tool for conservation is supported by the Preservation Master Plan, which states "If a building is not eligible for landmarking, HPF grants may be offered in exchange for conservation easements." The other benefit of the conservation easement is to formalize the preservation promoted under the Old Town Overlay zone district standard for facade preservation. While the ordinance requires initial preservation of the fagade to obtain the preservation bonus, there is not ongoing assurance the front fagade would not be altered. This could include changes in materials or form or even complete removal and replacement of the front facade. An additional consideration is whether using a conservation easement as a preservation tool will create a significant disincentive for landmark designation. Some property owners who do not want the alteration certificate requirement placed on the property may be inclined to opt for a conservation easement in lieu of landmark designation. Landmark designation provides a higher level of assurance that preservation of the historic building take place and building additions meet historic preservation principles. Because a landmark will still receive a larger lot coverage and floor area bonus and more grant funding available, the intent is that there is still significant incentive to landmark a property. This is also a reason to consider increasing the grant amount available for residential landmark designation from $40,000 to $55,000 as provided tine redline to the funding resolution. 14