Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Certificate Of Appropriateness topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Middletown historic commission tables garage certificate for 304 Alameda, cites insufficient documentation
Summary
The Middletown City Historic Commission voted to table an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for a single-car garage at 304 Alameda, saying the application lacked sufficient documentation about materials, orientation and how the proposed structure 'matches' the existing house.
The Middletown City Historic Commission on April 17 voted to table an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to build a single-car garage at 304 Alameda after commission members said the application did not provide enough detail for a determination.
The staff report described the request as a 16-by-20-foot gable-style single-car garage matching the existing house, with a concrete footer, white wood siding and a metal roof. Staff said the property at 304 Alameda was built in 1914, sits on a roughly 0.34-acre lot, has an interior living area of 2,238 square feet, and that the applicant paid a $25 certificate-of-appropriateness fee and will need a zoning permit.
Commissioners said the submitted materials left key questions unanswered and that the application did not clearly show how the proposed garage matches the existing house. Commissioner Corey Carter said the roof forms on the submitted images and the plan drawing do not match and questioned whether the structure would sit on a concrete slab or only concrete footers. Commissioner Matthew Dixon said photographs and the plan did not make clear which materials—vertical boards, plywood or milled siding—would be used. Commissioner Andy Brickler and others also raised concern that a metal roof would be the first they had seen proposed in the historic district and wanted clarification on paint color and siding profile.
Commissioner Roger Daniel moved to table the application "until we receive further information, specifically as to how this building compares to the other buildings on the property." The motion was seconded and the commission approved it unanimously among the members recorded on the roll call: Roger Daniel, Matthew Dixon, Corey Carter and Gabriel Shalen. The commission instructed staff to notify the applicant of the commission's concerns and the next meeting date.
The commission recorded no formal public comments in support or opposition at the meeting. Staff noted the application included an appeal process and that the applicant must obtain any required zoning permit before constructing the garage.
The application will be returned to the commission for consideration at the next regularly scheduled meeting once the applicant submits the additional documentation requested by commissioners.
