Milwaukee preservation commission approves front-porch reconstruction, places two roof cases on file and ratifies staff certificates

The Historic Preservation Commission on May 5 approved a certificate of appropriateness for a full-width front porch at 850 North 20th Street in the Concordia Historic District and took three procedural actions: it placed two roof cases on file as no longer necessary and ratified staff-approved certificates for multiple properties.

The commission’s approval clears the owner’s plan to reconstruct a full-width wood porch believed to be historically appropriate for the house and to replace concrete front steps with wood steps and handrails. Commissioners also voted to place two pending roof applications (files 241,957 and 241,958) on file after staff reported the applications were no longer necessary, and they ratified staff approvals for a set of staff-issued certificates of appropriateness (items 4 through 18 on the agenda).

Staff presentation and approval details A preservation staff member told the commission that photographic evidence and prior surveys showed the house once had a full-width front porch and that the applicant proposes to reconstruct a porch consistent with that earlier condition. The staff description noted reuse of turned wood posts, tongue-and-groove decking, 2-by-2 wood balusters, 4-by-4 posts with decorative caps, molded top and bottom rails, and 1-by-2 porch skirting. Staff recommended approval.

The owner identified himself at the meeting as Michael Kohanski and confirmed he had retained a master carpenter to do the work; Kohanski said he had not personally done the carpentry. Alderman Robert Bauman, chair of the commission, moved approval; Commissioner Nicholas Hans Robinson seconded. The motion passed on an affirmative voice vote.

Procedural votes For two separately noticed roof matters — file 241,957 (4444 North 20th Street, Garden Homes District) and file 241,958 (4370 North 20th Street, Garden Homes District) — staff reported the items were “no longer necessary” and commissioners voted to place both files on file.

The commission also voted to ratify staff-approved certificates of appropriateness for items listed as 4 through 18 on the agenda. A staff member presented the list and commissioners moved and seconded the ratification; the motion passed on an affirmative voice vote.

What the votes mean The porch approval authorizes the applicant to proceed with the porch reconstruction as drawn and described in the staff presentation; any permit requirements remain separate and are handled by city permitting staff. Placing the two roof files “on file” removed them from the commission’s active agenda because staff indicated the cases were resolved or no longer required review. Ratification of staff approvals confirms the commission’s oversight of routine staff-issued certificates.

Actions recorded at the meeting (see below) list the agenda file numbers, who moved and seconded each motion as reflected in the transcript, and the recorded outcomes.

No legal authorities (ordinances or statutes) were cited on the record during the discussion of these items; staff framed the porch application in terms of historical documentation and typical certificate-of-appropriateness review standards.

Votes at a glance - File 241943 — Certificate of appropriateness for porch reconstruction at 850 North 20th Street (Concordia Historic District): Motion to approve moved by Alderman Robert Bauman, seconded by Commissioner Nicholas Hans Robinson; outcome: approved (affirmative voice vote). - Files 241,957 and 241,958 — Noncompliant roof installations (addresses stated on agenda): Motion to place both files on file as no longer necessary; outcome: placed on file (affirmative voice vote). - Items 4–18 — Staff-approved certificates of appropriateness: Motion to ratify staff approvals; outcome: ratified (affirmative voice vote).

Next steps and implementation The owner may proceed with permit applications and construction consistent with the approved plans; staff and building-permitting authorities will handle permit-level review. The commission did not attach additional conditions on the record beyond the design details presented by staff.