Commission approves partial door infill plan, continues fence plan for Lavera Boulevard house

The Historic and Design Review Commission on July 2 acted on Case 2025-153293 for a house on LaVera Boulevard, approving staff recommendations on side-door treatment, accepting the applicant’s withdrawal of a metal roof request, and continuing the proposed front-yard fence until the applicant submits a fence/site plan.

Staff presented three requested actions by the applicant: 1) infill two existing side doors with stone to match the historic cladding, 2) replace a standing-seam metal roof, and 3) install a 4-foot black metal front-yard fence with driveway gate. The applicant withdrew the standing-seam roof request and proposed to reinstall composition shingles in-kind. Staff recommended retaining the farthest side door and infilling the middle door; replacing the farthest door with a window could also be appropriate if it met the city’s window standards.

The applicant (speaking remotely) said the stone on parts of the façade had cracked and that the team removed and will reset salvage stone in the same pattern. "Most of the stones were cracked, so we are removing them to put it back the same way that it was previously... we're using the same exact stones that we have," the applicant said. The applicant asked the commission to allow both door openings to be infilled because, he said, the openings no longer serve access functions.

Staff and commissioners referenced historic documentation to guide the decision. Staff said the property first appears on the 1951 Sanborn map and that a prior COA had authorized repointing and resetting of fallen stone. The commission expressed reluctance to remove original exterior fabric without strong evidence that openings are not original. Commissioners suggested alternatives, including sealing or fixing doors closed on the exterior while preserving them as historic features, or replacing a door with a French door with glass lights if additional light into the space were desired.

The formal motions were: to adopt staff recommendations for the side-door treatment (middle door may be infilled; farthest door to be preserved or replaced with a window only on return with window details), to acknowledge the withdrawal of the standing-seam roof request, and to continue consideration of the fence/gates until the applicant submits the fence plan. The motion carried on roll call.

The applicant told commissioners he will provide a fence drawing and further details; staff and commissioners set a 90-day window for the applicant to supply additional materials. The commission’s action leaves in place the existing COA-related requirement that stone repair use matching materials and repointing, and it requires the applicant to return with detailed drawings for any window replacement or fence installation before a COA will be issued.