The Historic Architectural and Preservation Board voted Oct. 9 to approve an application to add a second story to an existing garage at 625 West Venice Avenue (PLAR25‑00086), subject to a revision that the decorative eyebrow roof be raised to the parapet roof line and carried across the front elevation.

Nicole Tremblay, senior planner with the City of Venice, said the 1926 single‑family house is within the historic district and that the garage — built, according to property‑appraiser records, in 1976 — was designed to match the house. The applicant proposed a second story with an exterior spiral staircase, stucco finish, aluminum railings and a barrel‑style eyebrow roof intended to fit local VHP design guidance.

Historical resources manager Harry Klinkhammer told the board that because the garage postdates the original house, a future local‑register nomination would likely cover the house rather than the garage. He also noted the Secretary of the Interior’s guidelines encourage new additions to be distinguishable from original fabric so that they can be reversed in the future if needed.

Contractor Chris Alexakis of CSA Construction, who said he performed prior revisions on the property, described the addition as a stand‑alone structure from a construction standpoint and said the new second floor would be attached only by stucco and lath. “The only thing that will be attaching it would be stucco and lath,” Alexakis said.

Board members recommended minor design refinements before final building permits: raising the eyebrow roof so it reads as a continuous, capped element across the frontage; possibly increasing window height to bring more light while maintaining historic window ratios; and moving one decorative light fixture slightly away from the garage door for better proportion. The board agreed those changes could be handled administratively by staff if they are minor, rather than requiring another full hearing.

A motion to approve the application as presented with the eyebrow modification carried unanimously in a roll call vote: Mr. Barrick, Mr. Green, Ms. Trammell, Mr. Watkins, Mr. Steckety and Chair Beebe all voted yes. The board closed the public hearing and congratulated the applicant on a revision the board described as a significant improvement over the earlier submittal.