Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Local Historic Administration topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Architectural Review Commission approves rear‑addition at 505 E. Hughes Street with detailed staff conditions
Summary
The ARC granted a Certificate of Appropriateness for a rear bathroom addition at 505 East Hughes Street in Tampa Heights, approving the design subject to detailed drawings and material clarifications to ensure the new work is visually subordinate and compatible with the historic house.
The Tampa Architectural Review Commission on June 2 approved a rear addition at 505 East Hughes Street in the Tampa Heights Historic District, granting a Certificate of Appropriateness with multiple conditions intended to preserve the historic character and ensure clear differentiation between original fabric and new construction.
Donovan Dean, the property owner and applicant, presented a proposal to add an approximately 11‑ to 12‑foot rear extension primarily to provide a second bathroom and a small rear porch. “My name is Donovan Dean. I am the owner of the home at 505 East Hughes Street,” Dean said while showing site plans, elevations and wall sections, and he told the commission the goal was to “match the existing” lap siding and roof form.
Historic‑preservation staff recommended approval but noted missing details. “Staff found this application to be consistent with conditions with the Tampa Heights design guidelines,” Elaine Lund said, while listing Secretary of the Interior guidance and conditions the applicant needed to meet. Commissioners emphasized the need for clear documentation of the joint between old and new construction and for the addition to read as subordinate to the historic house.
Commission discussion focused on several technical items staff had asked to be resolved before final approval: reducing the width of the addition slightly so it is visually subordinate, modifying the roof so it does not appear as a direct continuation of the main roof, providing elevation drawings for the missing side, specifying porch flooring and ceiling materials, providing detailed foundation and lattice pier drawings, and showing how a closed window would be infilled so it appears consistent with historic siding. The applicant agreed to add a vertical trim board at the transition between old and new and to match wood siding and exposed rafter tails.
The commission voted to grant the Certificate of Appropriateness with conditions that require the applicant to provide final details for: the corner column at the rear patio, window‑infilling details to match existing conditions, foundation pilaster and lattice detailing and materials, roofing and rafter‑tail details, porch materials and floor framing, lighting cut sheets for any new visible fixtures, and other items required by staff prior to permit. The motion specified that staff would work with the applicant to finish the technical drawings so the project could be administratively approved without the applicant returning to the ARC for another hearing.
Outcome: Certificate of Appropriateness granted; motion passed by voice vote. The approval directs staff to confirm finishes and construction details and to ensure the addition is differentiated from the historic house while matching its scale and materials.
Why it matters: The project is a typical small addition in a local historic district. The commission’s conditions reflect common preservation practice — allow compatible additions but require new work to be clearly subordinate and documented so later reviewers and future owners can distinguish historic fabric from new construction.
