Historic Preservation Commission approves four Blue Crab Street COAs with material and tree conditions

The Historic Preservation Commission on March 4 approved certificates of appropriateness for four single-family homes at 2, 4, 6 and 8 Blue Crab Street in the Tabby Roads development, adopting staff-recommended conditions on porch details, material determinations and tree mitigation.

Staff told the commission the projects had been returned after being tabled on Jan. 7 and that the applicant had addressed many prior comments, but that the commission still needed to make specific determinations on several materials and confirm site-specific conditions. The staff presentation noted required corrections and approvals on porch heights, shutter hardware, garage-door overlays and trim materials and flagged tree-mitigation obligations under the town’s UDO.

William Court, the applicant’s representative from Court Atkins Group, said the porches were intentionally set at a 30-inch height "so per the IRC we would not need a railing," and offered to adjust individual details if the commission preferred. "We have intentionally tried to set these right at 30, which would mean that per the IRC we would not need a railing," he said.

Commissioners discussed multiple architectural details, including whether porch handrails should be a welded aluminum product rather than the fabricated fitting shown in the initial cut sheet; whether gable louvers should read as operable vents instead of siding; and bracket and ceiling details at trellis and porch bays (commissioners asked that flat ceilings be removed so the ceiling follows the roof slope). Staff recommended, and commissioners adopted, determinations that Boral trim is acceptable, that composite overlay on garage doors is appropriate, and that powder-coated aluminum handrails are acceptable if furnished as welded aluminum rather than the submitted fitting.

Tree mitigation was a recurring topic. Staff and commissioners noted that if trees required by the UDO cannot be planted on site, the applicant may be required to pay a fee in lieu. The commission also asked the applicant to consider larger-caliber replacement trees where possible and to coordinate final mitigation placement with staff so it does not conflict with permeable pavers and rain gardens.

Motions to approve each Blue Crab application carried. For 2 Blue Crab the commission approved staff conditions (including shutter-dog style, louver detailing, ceiling and bracket edits, and the material determinations) and then amended the motion to clarify that the commission would not require a continuous picket railing across the first-floor front porch. Similar motions for 4, 6 and 8 Blue Crab incorporated matched conditions for rail patterns, bracket/beam details, tree mitigation and the same set of material approvals; each motion passed by voice vote.

The approvals are conditioned on the documented edits and final coordination with town staff for tree mitigation and the detailed material submittals. The commission’s actions leave the UDO administrator authority to require fee-in-lieu if on-site mitigation cannot be accommodated.