Citizen Portal
Sign In

Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows

Historic Landmark Commission approves rear-only addition at 4771 Cumberland Circle; side foyer denied

5549216 · August 7, 2025

Loading...

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 El Paso Historic Landmark Commission approved a certificate of appropriateness for a rear bathroom addition at 4771 Cumberland Circle while denying the proposed side foyer/addition. Commissioners said the rear addition met guidelines; the side addition remained too visible from the street.

The El Paso Historic Landmark Commission on Aug. 7 approved a certificate of appropriateness for a rear addition at 4771 Cumberland Circle but voted to exclude a smaller side foyer addition that applicants had proposed.

The commission approved the rear washroom addition after staff recommended relocating new work to the rear, using different cladding to clearly differentiate new work from historic fabric, and adjusting details such as windows, doors and railings to avoid a false sense of history. The motion approved “the addition at the back without the addition at the side of the property.” The vote was taken by voice and the motion carried.

Staff told commissioners the property is in the Austin Terrace historic district, is zoned R-4-H and dates to 1937; it is a contributing property. Staff said the newly submitted drawings (filed the same day) reduced the side addition’s size from approximately 7-by-15 feet to about 6-by-6.5 feet and shifted some functions to the rear. Staff recommended approval with modifications, citing Chapter 20.2 (certificates of appropriateness), El Paso design guidelines for historic districts, and the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation.

Jorge Limon, the homeowners’ representative, described the revised scheme as splitting the prior proposal into two smaller elements and said the homeowner currently uses the secondary side entrance as a primary access. Limon asked whether preparing a rendering would be worth pursuing to win approval for any portion of the side addition.

Owner Patricia Beltran, who addressed the commission during the hearing, said safety and accessibility motivated the application. Beltran said the house dates to 1937 and has narrow landings and stairs; she described prior falls and said she sought an addition to accommodate a ramp, a landing and a downstairs bathroom to reduce trips on the stairs. Commissioners and staff confirmed ADA accommodations can be considered; staff referenced the International Residential Code and ANSI A117.1 as design references, and said that many small accessibility alterations (landings, stairs, railings) can be approved administratively if they are not full enclosed additions.

Commissioners said their central concern remained street visibility and preservation of character-defining features. Several commissioners reiterated that new additions should be located on non–character-defining elevations and be minimally visible from the public right of way. Staff said that, if the side addition is withdrawn now, the applicant may reapply for that element later without waiting a year; had the commission denied the design, the applicant would otherwise have to wait a year to refile unless the application is withdrawn and resubmitted.

The commission’s approval was limited to the rear bathroom/addition; commissioners directed that exterior cladding be a different material from the historic stone, and that details be designed so the new work reads as differentiated from the original structure. No vote roll call or individual vote tallies were recorded in the meeting transcript.

The homeowner and representative said they would provide any additional materials requested by staff and that the representative could appear virtually at the next hearing if needed.