Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Historic Preservation Addition topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Historic commission approves addition at 3462 Mary Louise Drive with conditions

3439993 · May 21, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Historic Design and Review Commission approved a certificate of appropriateness for an addition and small mechanical room at 3462 Mary Louise Drive, requiring the applicant to match existing window types, reuse removed materials, install a tile roof and add distinguishing stone-band detailing.

The Historic Design and Review Commission voted Wednesday to approve a certificate of appropriateness for an addition and a 33-square-foot mechanical room at 3462 Mary Louise Drive, provided the applicant meets several staff and commission stipulations.

The commission’s approval covers three requests from applicant Ramon Torres and designer Daniel Phelan: constructing a historic-compatibility structure atop an existing addition, enclosing an opening on the eastern façade of that addition, and adding the 33-square-foot mechanical room at the southwest corner of the structure. The commission’s motion incorporated staff stipulations and additional conditions requested by the neighborhood association and commissioners.

The Monticello Park Neighborhood Association, through a voicemail from president Bianca Maldonado, had urged staff recommendations and requested conditions including matching the new fixed glass windows on the west elevation to the home’s existing 1-over-1 wood windows, reusing any removed windows in the addition, reincorporating removed stone on the front elevation, and installing a tile roof rather than composition shingles. During the hearing, Torres and designer Daniel Phelan said they agreed with those requests and said they would revise their details to show a tile roof and match existing window profiles where new windows are required.

Commissioners discussed several design details before the vote. The applicant presented two roof options in the renderings — a gable roof matching the historic portion and a hipped roof for the addition — and said he preferred the hipped roof because it differentiates the addition from the original house. Commissioners also sought a modest architectural detail to distinguish the new stone band from the original stone band (for example a different profile, size, or chamfer), a request the applicant accepted and agreed to show in a wall section detail. The commission clarified that final materials and details must be submitted to staff for review before a certificate of appropriateness is issued.

Commissioners moved to approve items 1–3 with all staff stipulations and added stipulations that the second-floor west elevation fixed glass window match the home’s existing 1-over-1 windows, removed windows be reused in the new addition, removed stone be reincorporated on the front elevation, the addition use a tile roof per the approved hip roof drawing, and the applicant provide the distinguishing stone-band detail in the wall section. The motion passed by roll call vote.

The commission spokesperson noted that a certificate of appropriateness does not replace required building permits; permits must be obtained before work begins. Staff will prepare the commission action letter and the certificate; the applicant was told submission of revised drawings for staff review is required prior to issuance.