Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Site Improvement Fence Patio topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission requests revised drawings for fence and rooftop patio proposals at 28–32 Bottles Avenue
Summary
Commissioners conducted a conceptual review of two linked applications at 28–32 Bottles Avenue — a fence and retaining wall alteration and a rooftop patio — and asked the applicant to provide scaled sections, gate‑operation details, sight‑line studies and material specifications before the commission will act.
The Historic Preservation Commission held a conceptual review on June 20 of two related applications for 28–32 Bottles Avenue: (1) installation of a 36‑inch metal fence atop the existing retaining wall (plus replacement of the retaining wall) along three townhomes, and (2) a proposed rooftop patio and associated roof alterations on the Third Floor.
Staff noted the retaining wall is likely a historic feature documented in the file as in place since at least 1889 and recommended continuing the fence application so the applicant can provide additional documentation and revised drawings. Rick Carapa, the property representative, told commissioners he wants a small courtyard and to deter thefts of items he placed on the sidewalk and that he had sketches and product data available for staff review. "I wanna make, like, a little courtyard," Carapa said, explaining the motivation for the fence.
Commissioners asked for a scaled section that shows how the proposed fence ties to the existing dry‑stack stone and how gates would operate with the site steps; they also raised the "intimidation" effect of tall, continuous fencing at the sidewalk edge and encouraged the applicant to set the fence back where possible, lower heights, or adjust gate placement. For the rooftop patio application the commission requested a full sight‑line study (three‑dimensional model or photos), sections showing support and how rainwater and flashing will be handled, and clearer drawings correcting chimney and parapet proportions.
Staff said applicants should supply material specifications (stone type, fence details, retaining wall dimensions), revised drawings that clarify where additions are reversible, and options that reduce visual bulk. The commission did not act on either application and advised the applicant to return with revised materials for a future business meeting.
