Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Historic Preservation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Historic Resources Commission continues porch application at 617619 Dokid Avenue, requests clearer drawings and match of materials
Summary
The Historic Resources Commission continued a certificate-of-appropriateness application for a severely deteriorated porch at 617619 Dokid Avenue after commissioners and staff found the submitted drawings inconsistent and lacking key details; the applicant will submit revised, to-scale sections and confirm material and attachment details.
The Historic Resources Commission on April 17 continued consideration of Certificate of Appropriateness application for a front porch at 617619 Dokid Avenue, citing inconsistent drawings and missing construction details.
Commission staff told the panel that the revised submission addressed several earlier concerns but still contained inconsistencies. Staff said the submitted drawings removed a previously proposed metal pole, added a section view and set the railing height on the drawings to 38 inches, but recommended the plans show the same dimensions on the materials list and clarify how the new porch will be attached to the building. Staff cited city code standards for alteration in support of the recommendation.
Brent Ottson, who identified himself as production manager for River Valley Restoration and the contractor on the project, said his architecture firm had told him the revisions met the requirements communicated in prior emails. Ottson said he would return with a corrected section drawing and clarified dimensions after consulting the architect and carpenters. "I went back to the architecture firm, and they have confirmed that they definitely feel that they've met all the requirements, per the emails that we've got," Ottson said.
Commissioners and others on the dais pressed for a more explicit, to-scale section and clearer coordination between elevation views and section details. One commissioner said the section drawing did not match the elevation and left unclear how the proposed built detail would be constructed. Another commissioner noted the drawings were missing lines showing how posts and the floor tie into the existing wall and asked for a hand-drawn, to-scale section if necessary. Staff also pointed out a discrepancy in the porch flooring callout and asked that the materials list and drawing dimensions match.
The commission voted to continue the application so the applicant can supply corrected, to-scale details, consistent materials listings, and information about how the porch will be fixed to the masonry. The motion to continue carried; the commission recorded no dissent on the record.
The applicant said he would provide the requested sketches and revised technical drawings to staff and work directly with staff to meet the next filing deadline. The application will return to the commission after staff confirms the updated drawings are complete.
