Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Demolition Historic topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
DDRC denies demolition request for 2332 Stark Street duplex, urges Bailey bill rehabilitation
Summary
The commission denied an owner’s request to demolish a contributing duplex in the Old Shandon Lower Waverly protection area, citing the building’s historic significance and recommending Bailey bill tax-abatement rehabilitation instead.
The Design and Development Review Commission denied a request to issue a certificate of design approval for demolition of a duplex at 2332 Stark Street, finding the building contributes to the character of the Old Shandon Lower Waverly protection area and that the owner had not provided sufficient documentation to justify demolition under the district guidelines and city ordinance.
City staff described the one-story, wood-frame duplex (built circa 1940) as a contributing structure in the protection area and said most original features — including exposed rafter tails and original wood siding beneath Masonite — remain. Staff recommended denial under the Old Shandon Lower Waverly guidelines (section 4) and UDO section 17-2.5(c), and suggested the property would be a strong candidate for the Bailey bill rehabilitation program.
Staff reported the property value at $91,600 and said that, under the Bailey bill program, the investment threshold would be $18,320. The applicant submitted a renovation estimate of $116,500 and two new-construction bids of about $221,000 and $231,000. Staff noted that the renovation estimate and other materials were not produced by specialists experienced in historic rehabilitation and that a detailed engineer or architect report was not provided, information that the UDO allows the commission to require.
Staff also noted code constraints if the lot were redeveloped: the house sits very close to the lot lines (approximately 4.4–4.5 feet on one side and less than 2 feet on the other), while current code calls for 5-foot setbacks; rebuilding a duplex in the same form would likely require fire-rated materials on side walls, increasing cost and complicating replication of the historic form.
Owner and licensed contractor Frank Mitchell told the commission the property is "not an historical architectural or landmark or unique unique building" and argued that noncompliance with current zoning and the cost of matching materials made demolition and new construction preferable. He said his proposal would replace the duplex with an 18-foot-wide single-family house and add a driveway for off-street parking.
Commissioners discussed rehabilitation feasibility versus replacement and the practical risks of leaving a burned and vacant building in place. Staff said the house suffered a fire in January 2025 but had not been declared a public-safety hazard and that renovation would need to commence before a one-year vacancy threshold lapses to avoid additional compliance steps.
After deliberation the commission voted to deny the demolition request, citing the Old Shandon Lower Waverly protection area guidelines and city ordinance sections referenced in staff’s report. Commissioners recorded unanimous votes in favor of denial. Staff recommended the owner pursue Bailey bill certification to offset rehabilitation costs; commissioners noted that rehabilitation would preserve an example of mid-20th-century workers’ housing that contributes to the district’s historical pattern.
