The Sierra Madre City Planning Commission on Aug. 7 approved a Certificate of Appropriateness (CA25‑02) allowing demolition of a nonoriginal detached two‑car garage at the Twycross House, 123 South Baldwin Avenue, and construction of a new garage reoriented behind the house, with conditions including salvage of feasible historic materials, a differentiated stone base course and limits on fence height.

Senior Planner Wolf told the commission that staff evaluated the proposal under the Secretary of the Interior Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and recommended approval with conditions. “In the evaluation for appropriateness, we’ll look at the Secretary of the Interior Standards,” Wolf said during his presentation.

The decision matters because the property is a designated historic landmark and the project will alter a visible accessory structure and the driveway configuration. Commission approval lets the applicant proceed with demolition and reconstruction subject to the conditions the commission adopted.

Staff described the existing garage as a later addition that now straddles two parcels; Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps indicate the original property had a single‑car parking structure. The new garage will be moved behind the house, reoriented to face north and built to modern interior clearances (minimum 20 by 20 feet). Setbacks for the replacement garage are shown in the staff report as 9 feet 9 inches (side) and 18 feet 4 inches (rear). Roof material will be asphalt shingle to match the house; siding is proposed as a mix of cementitious panels and hardy shingles with a stacked river rock base. An arborist report identified a protected oak tree near the proposed garage site with an estimated trunk diameter of 15 inches and canopy diameter of about 12 feet; staff said that canopy does not extend into the new garage footprint and that a larger dead tree next to it is not identified as protected and may be removed.

On environmental review, Wolf said staff found the project categorically exempt under CEQA classes the report cites for small additions, new accessory construction and for rehabilitation of historic resources consistent with the Secretary of the Interior Standards (staff referenced three categorical exemptions in the staff report).

Three conditions highlighted in the staff presentation were incorporated into the approval: salvage and reuse of historic materials to the extent feasible (condition 2.4.1); a requirement that the proposed base course stone use a stack pattern differentiated from the main house (condition 2.4.02); and limits on fence height—42 inches for any fence placed in the front and 6 feet elsewhere—enforced through condition 2.4.3. Wolf explained that the salvage requirement is “to the extent feasible” and that the historian recommended salvaging any reusable materials, while acknowledging much of the existing garage material is deteriorated.

Commission discussion focused on two secondary elements: the proposed permeable interlocking pavers with chipped infill for the driveway, and a proposed dog‑eared cedar perimeter fence. Several commissioners said they supported approving the permeable pavers for stormwater/percolation performance; others expressed hesitation about approving a specific fence design without seeing a placement plan. Staff said the commission may approve the fence material without approving a fence location, which would allow the applicant to use the approved material later so long as height limits are respected, or the commission could require the applicant to return with a fence location for review.

No members of the public spoke on the item. Commissioners reported prior site visits. After deliberation the commission moved to approve the Certificate of Appropriateness as amended from the dais; the motion carried unanimously among commissioners present and staff was directed to finalize the resolution of approval.

The approval is to be issued pursuant to the Planning Commission resolution noted in the staff report. The applicant and architect were present to answer questions at the podium and confirmed they expect to salvage a limited number of fixtures and to recycle or reuse other materials where feasible.

Next steps: staff will finalize and issue the Certificate of Appropriateness consistent with the conditions of approval and the applicant may proceed to building‑permit review subject to standard permit processes and any additional code requirements.