Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Historic Preservation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Historic review board denies garage conversion exceptions at 532 Calle Corvo, approves other work
Summary
The Historic Districts Review Board denied exception requests for a garage‑to‑bedroom conversion and an altered garage opening at 532 Calle Corvo, finding the changes would impair the garage's contributing character. The board approved other work on the house provided the primary facade window remains unchanged.
The Historic Districts Review Board on Feb. 24 denied exception requests to convert a detached garage into living space and to alter a primary‑facade opening at 532 Calle Corvo, saying the changes would prevent the garage from "reading" as a contributing historic structure.
Staff preservation planner Heather summarized the application, saying the property is a contributing resource in the downtown/East Side historic district and that the proposal included a bedroom and bath addition to a detached 368‑square‑foot garage, a new yard wall and wholesale window replacements on the primary facades. "For the addition to the garage structure itself, staff does not recommend approval," Heather told the board, and staff sought more information regarding a proposed infill on a primary facade window.
Applicants and their architect argued the design would be largely hidden from public view and that the work was intended to keep the family in the neighborhood. Owner Al Salamone described the plan as "developed in such a manner so that only one tree will be required to be relocated," and architect John Padilla said the infill would be "in the exact same opening that was there" so the historic opening would still be read. Neighbors submitted letters of support and several neighbors spoke in favor of family‑oriented infill.
Opponents and some board members raised preservation and precedent concerns. Online commenter Stephanie Benonato urged the board to retain garage doors or at least doors that "read like garage doors," and several members questioned whether replacing a garage door with a large glass infill would change the building’s contributing status.
Member Bienvenu moved to deny the garage exceptions and to find that the single altered opening on the primary facade did not meet the ordinance's exception criteria; the board adopted the motion by roll call. The board clarified that if the window opening on the primary facade is maintained, the remaining proposed changes to the main house were approved. The garage changes, however, must be re‑submitted as a separate case.
The applicant may appeal the board’s decision to the City Council or revise and resubmit the garage design for future consideration.
