Historic Resources Board approves two small additions at Helen Leslie House, allows second‑story ADU with conditions

The Carmel-by-the-Sea Historic Resources Board on May 14 approved two modest additions to the Helen Leslie House and voted to allow a proposed second‑story accessory dwelling unit (ADU) at the rear of the property with conditions on materials and detailing.

Staff opened the public hearing by describing the property — built in 1963 and listed in the city’s inventory of historic resources on 11/06/2025 — and recommended that the 30‑square‑foot garage addition and the 95‑square‑foot rear addition, plus related fenestration and site work, be found consistent with the Secretary of the Interior’s standards. Staff further recommended the board find the proposed second‑story addition inconsistent, saying it would remove much of a character‑defining Mansard roof and would “permanently impair” the essential form and integrity of the house.

Mary Anne Shikatans, the project architect, told the board the intensive survey supports the home’s significance under criterion 3 (architecture) and that only two of seven character‑defining elements would be affected: a portion of the Mansard roof and one side chimney. "Importantly, neither of those two elements are really visible from public view," Shikatans said, adding that the design locates most new massing at the rear and keeps the public facade intact. She asked the board to find the project consistent with the rehabilitation guidelines.

Historic preservation consultant Kent Simi also spoke in support, saying the design "gives more space to the owners without visually damaging the building envelope" and that he had "no concerns about it." Board members acknowledged the project’s rear setback and limited public visibility but debated whether adding a full second story is appropriate for a small, post‑war house that the staff noted is a rare local example of Hollywood Regency styling.

After discussion the board moved to approve the 30‑square‑foot and 95‑square‑foot additions as consistent with the standards, with direction that siding and roofline details be refined so the additions are clearly differentiated but compatible with the historic fabric. The board also approved allowing the second‑story ADU as proposed, with the owners given the option to use a smaller siding profile or a larger siding offset so the new work reads as differentiated; the board accepted staff’s explanation about the chimney removal as proposed. The motion was seconded and passed by recorded affirmative votes.

The vote cleared the design review for those elements; staff will prepare an updated resolution reflecting the board’s edits and will circulate it for signature, and no additional board hearing was required for adoption. The board did not adopt staff’s recommendation that the second story be found inconsistent; instead it granted approval with the stated conditions.

The board’s action included these clarifying details recorded in the hearing: the lot is approximately 4,000 square feet; the two small additions are 30 sq ft and 95 sq ft; the property’s period of significance was listed as 1963; and the main preservation concern is the extent of Mansard roof removed by the proposed second story. The board asked staff and the applicants to provide specific siding details and to show how the proposed roofline and siding would be distinguished from the original materials.

The Historic Resources Board will file the amended resolution and notify the applicant of the conditions; no appeal or further scheduling was announced during the meeting.