Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Historic Preservation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Cambridge Historic Preservation Commission approves four property applications, adds emergency re‑roofing review
Summary
At its Jan. 21 meeting the Cambridge Historic Preservation Commission approved four property applications — including an emergency in‑kind partial re‑roof at 309 Choptank Avenue — and attached conditions to several approvals related to preservation guidelines.
The Cambridge Historic Preservation Commission on Jan. 21 approved four applications for alterations to locally designated properties, including an emergency in‑kind partial re‑roofing review for 309 Choptank Avenue.
Commissioners approved a reconstruction of a shed at 310 Belvedere Avenue with conditions intended to retain historic fabric. Commissioner Janice Olshesky, the vice chair, moved to approve the application "as conditioned," specifying that "the birdhouse located above the existing garage door will be salvaged and placed above the new garage door," that the existing "Hollywood" driveway be restored to its original condition, and that an adjacent 4‑by‑8 storage building, if salvaged, be painted and re‑roofed to match the new garage. That motion passed unanimously, 6–0.
The commission approved a partial re‑roofing at 204 Oakley Street with drainage modifications required for the porch eaves. Olshesky moved the conditioned approval requiring the north and south eave gutters be pitched toward the rear of the porch and for downspouts to be relocated to the rearmost corners; the motion passed 5–1.
At 1 West End Avenue the commission approved a revised deck sited on the rearmost noncontributing addition and found the proposed 4‑foot black aluminum “Charleston” fence by Patriot Aluminum Company appropriate. That motion passed 5–0 with one abstention.
Staff introduced an emergency review for an in‑kind partial re‑roofing at 309 Choptank Avenue; the applicant did not attend. Commissioners discussed the value of offering emergency action in such cases, and Olshesky moved to approve the application as submitted. The motion passed unanimously, 6–0.
Commissioners cited the commission’s written guidance when making approvals. The minutes list specific guideline citations for each approval, including the Cambridge Historic District Design Guidelines (2018) and the Unified Development Code. The approvals include detailed, itemized conditions the commission said support preservation of character‑defining features.
The commission recorded no public comments on these items and relied on staff presentations and applicant responses where present. No other formal actions were taken on the applications.
