Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Additions And Compatibility topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission tables application to build a side addition at 4771 Cumberland Circle; staff asked to explore rear options and renderings
Summary
An application to construct an addition on a secondary side façade at 4771 Cumberland Circle was tabled. Staff recommended the addition be relocated to the rear or, if retained on the side, be differentiated in materials and details; commissioners requested renderings and further exploration of rear alternatives including ramp options.
The Historic Landmark Commission voted to table a proposal to construct a side addition at 4771 Cumberland Circle, a 1937 contributing property in a residential historic zone, and asked the applicant to explore locating the laundry-room addition at the rear and to provide renderings or drawings showing alternative designs that clearly differentiate any new work from the original building.
Staff told commissioners the application proposes an addition on a character-defining elevation that closely copies the existing façade materials and details, which the guidelines discourage. The staff recommendation called for relocating the addition to the rear façade or, if retained on the side, for changing the cladding and altering window and door details so the new construction does not create a false historical appearance.
Designer Jorge Limon attended and said the addition is planned as a laundry-room and accessibility improvement; the applicant prefers a side location because rerouting a gas line and site constraints make a rear location expensive and awkward. Limon described the addition as "butting up new studs against the existing wall with a new foundation tied into the existing foundation" and said the addition would extend about seven feet from the existing wall.
Commissioners and staff suggested alternative approaches — a differentiated exterior texture or a covered breezeway, and several commissioners pressed for renderings to illustrate the trade-offs. One commissioner said the addition "is just so visible" from the street and asked the applicant to return with alternate schemes that might include ramping or a rear connection.
The commission voted to table the application and asked the applicant to return in two weeks (applicant noted a deadline window to August 10) with renderings or revised plans showing either a rear location or a clearly differentiated side addition and proposed details for a ramp or covered connection.
