Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Certificate Of Appropriateness topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission approves revised Hamlet House COA after architect agrees to lower rear roof 8 inches
Summary
The Oxford City Preservation Commission approved a revised Certificate of Appropriateness for the Hamlet House after the architect agreed to revert window designs, remove a shaped pool wall and lower a raised rear roofline by 8 inches to preserve the approved street appearance.
Get email alerts on the Certificate Of Appropriateness topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Oxford City Preservation Commission approved a revised Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) for the Hamlet House after the architect agreed to revert several window changes, remove a shaped pool wall and lower a rear roofline element by 8 inches so the new addition remains visually subordinate from the street.
Staff told commissioners that building plans submitted in August contained a number of unauthorized modifications from the COA granted in April, and identified three items of concern: changed window types and locations, an altered brick wall around the pool, and an apparent change in the roofline height of a rear addition. "The commission needs to determine if any of the changes that were made in the building plans have a material impact on the reasons that the COA was approved," the staff member said.
Architect JD Caldwell replied that several differences were design‑phase adjustments and mistakes on drawing sheets rather than intentional departures. Caldwell said the back roofline rose by about eight inches in the submitted construction documents and offered to "move it back down 8 inches." He also said the shaped pool wall had been removed from the project and that window styles on the back elevations were reverted to the originally approved types.
After additional clarifying questions about chimney dimensions and window placements, a motion was made to approve the COA as submitted with an added condition to reduce the new addition's height by 8 inches. The motion was seconded and the commission voice‑voted to approve the COA with that condition.
The commission asked the architect to provide any requested documentation showing original and revised dimensions as needed to verify compliance with the condition.

