Commission approves extensive remodel at 443 East College with conditions to preserve front features

The Murphish Borough Historic Zoning Commission on April 15 approved a multi-item remodel plan for 443 East College Street, a 2,975-square-foot, one-and-a-half-story vernacular Craftsman fourplex that staff previously identified as a contributing structure in the historic district (construction date cited in the application as approximately 1925, with some earlier sources listing 1910).

Amelia, planning staff, summarized the applicant’s proposal and the staff concerns: applicant Brad Chambers proposed extensive exterior work including full siding replacement, window and door changes, removal of a metal exterior stair, replacement of porch columns and porch floor, brick skirting around the porch, replacement of chimneys, reroofing with architectural shingles and standing-seam metal on the porch, and a possible enlargement of a rear shed dormer. Staff told commissioners some requested changes did not meet the historic guidelines and that the commission would consider grouped votes on distinct elements.

Discussion focused on retaining character-defining features at the primary façade and porch. Commissioners emphasized keeping the front-facing window material and scale, the spacing and profile of the porch columns, the wraparound porch footprint and the stained-glass element. Commissioners voiced concern that incremental changes (wider siding reveals, vinyl windows, unfluted columns) could cumulatively make the house ineligible as a contributing structure.

The commission adopted a multi-part motion that approved the remodel with conditions. Key items approved or clarified in the motion included:

- Siding: Replacement permitted but must retain the existing 5-inch reveal (applicant had proposed LP SmartSide with a 7-inch reveal). - Windows: Side and rear windows may be replaced with vinyl; the two front windows under the porch and the shed dormer windows must be wood and remain 1-over-1 sash. - Porch: The left (wraparound) portion of the porch is to remain; porch floor to be wood (not poured concrete); porch ceiling to be tongue-and-groove beadboard; brick skirt/piers to be retained or rebuilt on proper footings and visually accented so the piers remain prominent; columns to be like-for-like (square and fluted) and may be repaired or replaced with matching profiles for maintenance. - Stained glass and front entry: The existing stained-glass window and a single front door with a flat transom were directed to remain; the commission allowed administrative staff authority to approve a ‘‘like’’ replacement for the front door that meets current code (tempered glass) if the original cannot be repaired. - Roof and gutters: The main house roof will use architectural asphalt shingles; the porch and dormer may have standing-seam metal; traditional rectangular downspouts and prefinished aluminum gutters were approved as proposed.

The motion, as read into the record and accepted by the commission, also allowed the applicant to remove non-original side doors and to cover or fill-in certain non-original openings where noted in the application. Commissioners required that front-facing details (reveal, column profiles and stained glass) be preserved to maintain the property’s contributing status.

The main grouped motion passed on a unanimous roll call: Miss Anderson — yes; Mister Becker — yes; Mister Jakes — yes; Mister Panassi — yes; Mister Prince — yes; Mister Thompson — yes; Vice Chair Belcher — yes; Chair Davis — yes.

Subsequent votes and administrative directions on connected items:

- Rear shed dormer: Commission allowed the rear shed dormer to be widened provided it remain at least 3 feet from each side edge; porch/dormer roof materials permitted as above. (Unanimous vote.) - Chimneys: Because the existing masonry chimneys are structurally compromised, the commission required the applicant to reestablish the visual presence of the chimneys on the roofline. The commission approved reconstructing chimney forms using lightweight (framed or veneer) construction that matches the existing dimensions and appearance and complies with building-code requirements. Staff or code review required before final construction. (Unanimous vote.) - Front steps and cheek walls: The commission approved replacing the front steps and cheek walls in brick to match approved porch skirting; the motion preserved the existing width and suggested matching caps. (Unanimous vote.) - Porch lighting: The commission approved the proposed porch lighting on the condition that hanging fixtures leave at least 8 feet of clearance from the porch floor to the bottom of the fixture; if final fixture lengths would not meet that clearance the applicant must adjust fixtures or seek administrative review. (Unanimous vote.) - Front door replacement: Commissioners directed that if the existing door cannot be repaired, the applicant may replace it with a ‘‘like’’ door (similar glass-to-panel proportions, single door with flat transom) that meets code; staff was granted administrative authority to approve the replacement under those parameters to avoid an extra hearing if the door is replaced for structural or code reasons. (Unanimous vote.)

During the hearing staff and commissioners noted the property had previously been converted to four units and that local CCO (City Core Overlay) rules and nonconforming-use protections may apply if the building were demolished and rebuilt; commissioners discussed economic-hardship and demolition standards but took no demolition action. Matthew Blomley (planning staff) clarified that CCO rules provide some protections for legally established nonconforming uses but that full research would be required if demolition and rebuild were proposed.

The commission closed the item after enumerating the administrative follow-ups: staff review of the front-door replacement (if needed), code review for chimney reconstruction options, and administrative sign-off on the porch mock-ups and lighting as required.

Ending: The commission approved the remodel with conditions intended to preserve the property’s front-facing historic character while allowing practical repairs and limited modernization of non-primary elevations.