B.2 - 2210 Windsor Road - Staff Report — original pdf

Backup

H ISTORIC LANDMARK COMMISSION APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS B.2 - 1 JU LY 27, 2020 C14H-2008-0016 D A VIS-SIBLEY HOUSE 2210 WINDSOR ROAD PR OPOSAL Construct additions and a carport to the rear of the house; restore damaged and deteriorated architectural features, replace non-historic metal windows with wood windows, install new windows, modify the garage door opening. PR OJECT SPECIFICATIONS The applicant proposes a myriad of restoration projects as well as modifications to the existing building, the construction of two additions to the back side of the house, and the construction of a carport on the back of the house. More specifically, the applicant proposes to: A. Additions 1. Construct a one-story addition on the back of the house that will enclose an existing small outdoor loggia; the loggia will remain visible from the exterior through a large multi-lite steel and glass window adjacent to the loggia, and a larger steel and glass entry at the far end of the addition. The addition will be clad in stucco to match the house. 2. Construct a new carport in the back yard of the property. The proposed carport will be 24 square feet and will feature open ogee arches all around. 3. Construct a one-story addition on the north side of the house. The addition will be clad in stucco to match the house. B. Restorations and reconstruction 1. Remove the existing clay roof tiles to install new roof insulation and a membrane; re-roof the house using existing Ludowici tiles and replace broken tiles with new Ludowici tiles to match. 2. Repair rotting wood windows and restore broken hardware to make windows operable. 3. Replace non-historic aluminum and steel windows with custom wood windows to match the original window design. 4. Restore second-story wood windows on the west wall. 5. Repair wood shutters to operating condition. 6. Repair and paint stucco (white). 7. Remove French doors and restore the patio at the guest quarters. C. Modifications 1. Reconstruct west exterior stair and knee wall. 2. Remove a mechanical tower on the north wall and construct a lower enclosure for mechanical equipment. 3. Add copper gutters and downspouts. 4. Install a new wood-clad garage door to provide a single-bay, double-wide garage 5. Install new wood windows in the ca. 1975 addition. opening. STA NDARDS FOR REVIEW B.2 - 2 The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation are used to evaluate projects on historic landmarks. The following standards apply to the proposed project: 1) A property will be used as it was historically or be given a new use that requires minimal change to its distinctive materials, features, spaces, and spatial relationships. Evaluation: The proposed project does not affect this building’s identification as a residence. 2) The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The removal of distinctive materials or alteration of features, spaces, and spatial relationships that characterize a property will be avoided. Evaluation: The applicant proposes to enclose an exterior loggia, but is constructing the enclosure to provide visibility of the loggia from the outside. 3) Each property will be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or elements from other historic properties, will not be undertaken. Evaluation: The proposed carport and rear additions take their cues from the distinctive architecture of the house but do not mimic it to present a false sense of historical architectural development. 4) Changes to a property that have acquired historic significance in their own right will be retained and preserved. Evaluation: The ca. 1975 addition will be retained; the windows and door will be modified but the form and design of the addition will remain. 5) Distinctive materials, features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property will be preserved. Evaluation: This application appears to be very sensitive to the architectural distinction of this house. 6) Deteriorated historic features will be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature will match the old in design, color, texture, and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features will be substantiated by documentary and physical evidence. Evaluation: The applicant proposes several restoration projects as p art of this proposal. 7) Chemical or physical treatments, if appropriate, will be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. Treatments that cause damage to historic materials will not be used. Evaluation: N/A 8) Archeological resources will be protecte: N/Ad and preserved in place. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures will be undertaken. Evaluation: N/A 9) New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction will not destroy historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property. The new work will be differentiated from the old and will be compatible with the historic materials, features, size, scale and proportion, and massing to protect the integrity of the property and its environment. Evaluation: The proposed addition will enclose a now-exterior loggia, but is designed to allow visibility of the loggia from the outside. The proposed carport has been scaled down in its monumentality since the COA Committee’s review of this project. B.2 - 3 10) New additions and adjacent or related construction will be undertaken in such a manner that, if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired. Evaluation: The addition will be built around an existing exterior feature of the house; the carport could be removed without any effect to the historic house. The project meets the applicable standards. C OMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS The Committee stated concerns that the feel of the open spaces was being lost, the glass and steel end unit of the proposed addition was not appropriate, and that the carport had too large of a presence on the back side of the house (which is visible from an adjacent street). The Committee recommended providing additional drawings and perspectives and modifications to the carport that would reduce its physical presence. STA FF RECOMMENDATION Approve as proposed. The applicant made significant changes to the design of the carport, in accordance with the concerns and recommendations of the Committee: the design now uses large ogee arches that open up the structure and allow for greater visibility of the back of the house from the adjacent street, and is lower and with a hipped roof to reduce its presence on the site. B.2 - 4