Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Porch Cover Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board recommends BZAP hear porch-cover at 653 Eucler, with remand to ARB for final design
Summary
The ARB recommended the board of zoning and planning consider the porch-cover variance for 653 Eucler and required that final design details return to the ARB; members raised structural and foundation concerns and asked for clearer measured drawings.
The Architectural Review Board recommended that BZAP consider the variance application BZAP25-18 for a porch cover at 653 Eucler and asked that, if BZAP grants any variances, final design review and issuance of a certificate of appropriateness be remanded back to the ARB for detailed design review.
Applicant David Lipp presented hand-drawn, to-scale sketches and photos of the backyard location. Staff and board members said the new submission was a substantial improvement over the original red-line drawing but still lacked sufficient hard-line details for ARB approval. Members raised questions about how the new work would tie into the existing soffit and rafters, the foundation of brick piers on top of the patio slab, and anchorage into the house.
Neighbor Essence Lewis spoke in support of the project. Board members praised the applicant’s stewardship of the house but requested additional technical details: measured elevations showing existing conditions, sections for foundation and post footings (frost-depth considerations), structural attachment details for the ledger/soffit connection, and clarification of post base and anchor details.
On the roofing material, applicant David Lipp said he planned to use twin-wall polycarbonate panels (a Polysomething product) to let light through while providing weather protection; members said they were concerned about long-term discoloration of polycarbonate but accepted it as more viable because the proposed roof slope is shallow (applicant stated about a 7.5-degree slope) and the material would be less visible from the street. The board voted to forward the application to BZAP with a positive recommendation, subject to remand back to ARB for final design review. The motion passed by roll call vote: Miss Jones yes, Mister Hall yes, Mister Hyer yes, Chairman Scott yes. Staff and the applicant agreed the applicant would take the ARB’s requested details to BZAP and return to the ARB the following month if a variance is granted.
