Board continues review of venting, masonry and stucco changes at 509 East Main; staff recommended partial disapproval

The Board of Architecture Review continued consideration of several modifications at 509 East Main Street after staff recommended disapproval of two elements and requested further coordination among departments.

Staff found the replacement of a proposed louver wall with a masonry wall acceptable, but disapproved: (1) an extended kitchen exhaust duct run that had been added on site at the request of a building inspector; and (2) the application of a synthetic exterior insulation and finish system (EIFS) over a concrete‑block wall rather than traditional stucco. Staff concluded the extended ductwork was highly visible and inconsistent with guidelines calling for mechanical equipment to be located and screened so as to minimize visibility. Staff also advised that EIFS (brand names discussed during the hearing) is an imitation material disfavored in historic districts.

Applicant representatives said the larger duct extension was installed after a mechanical inspector raised a fire‑and‑clearance concern late in construction and that building inspection had approved the modification and issued final sign‑off; the applicant asked the board to allow the ductwork to remain while staff and mechanical inspection seek a less obtrusive alternative. The applicant also said the masonry wall had been installed and that bamboo plants had been purchased for screening; the owner said the bamboo would be noninvasive and that specifications could be provided.

Neighbors raised concerns about noise, visible ductwork near a public deck area and changed landscaping; one neighbor submitted written objections. Staff and the applicant agreed to an on‑site meeting with mechanical inspection and preservation staff to seek alternative venting or screening solutions. Because work had been performed ahead of return to historic review, staff recommended continuing the item to allow the interdepartmental meeting and for the applicant to submit documentation about plant material and wall foundation depth.

The board continued the hearing to May 21 and instructed staff and the applicant to pursue a field meeting to evaluate alternative exhaust configurations, possible screening and whether the ductwork can be shortened or painted and to provide documentation about the proposed non‑invasive bamboo and any root barrier specifications.

Next steps: applicant to provide a proof‑of‑purchase / plant specification sheet for the bamboo, provide documentation about the masonry wall footer depth and participate in an on‑site coordination meeting with preservation and building inspection staff prior to May 21.