Historic Preservation Board approves variance and design conditions for Washington Road home, bars glass rooftop railing

The Historic Preservation Board on March 24 approved a variance and a certificate of appropriateness for a proposed new single-family residence at 368 Washington Road after the applicant revised plans to address staff concerns.

Architect Rick Gonzalez of Reg Architects said the team removed a previously proposed tower and raised the finished floor to meet FEMA freeboard requirements, revised balcony and railing details and agreed to staff's 12 conditions. "We agree with all 12 conditions and we're willing to work with staff after this meeting to get to an agreeance with all 12," he told the board.

Anthony Mendes, the city's historic preservation planner and case manager, told the board the applicant had reduced the requested variance for cumulative side setbacks and rooted the new, smaller request in provisions that recognize narrow nonconforming lots. Mendes explained staff's analysis and recommended approval of the reduced variance and the COA conditional on meeting standards for new construction within the Prospect South and Park Historic District.

Board members pressed the applicant on details including carport clearance and visible column size, the height and parapet treatment for the rooftop railing, and the proportions of a rear balcony. One board member asked whether the railing could be set back so it would not be visible; staff and the applicant agreed to either push the railing back or change materials. The board ultimately added a modification to staff's recommended conditions explicitly prohibiting glass railings on the rooftop.

After an executive session, a board member moved to grant the variance for the proposed 4'2" intrusion into the north setback, limited to the plans presented at the March 24, 2026 meeting. The motion passed. The board then approved the COA for new construction by the same vote, with the added condition that the rooftop railing not be constructed of glass. The motions were recorded as based on the application, testimony and the staff report as competent substantial evidence.

The approvals include detailed conditions such as submitting a yard section showing fill amounts and neighbor grades prior to building permit, dimensional notes on plans reflecting the additional one-foot interior setback the applicant proposes, landscape permit submittal before building permit, and material and glazing requirements for windows and gates. The variance was explicitly limited to this project and the March 24 plans; any future expansion would require further review.

Next steps: the applicant must satisfy staff conditions and obtain required building and landscape permits; the board's approvals do not waive unrelated building-division requirements, including flood-zone compliance.