933 Verret St.

Staff Recommendations: 

Constructed between 1908-1937, 933 Verret Street is a contributing frame single shotgun residential building with reserved detailing. On March 11, 2023, a Stop Work order was placed at the building for working without an HDLC Certificate of Appropriateness (CofA). The completed work includes the removal of existing windows and installation of inappropriate vinyl windows, the removal of existing barrel style ridge tiles, the removal of gutters and downspouts, the removal of existing wood siding and replacement with inappropriate wood-grained Hardie Plank, the removal of wood trim and installation of inappropriate Hardie Plank trim, the removal of brackets, the removal of exterior lighting, removal of metal handrail, change in plane of existing exterior walls, and the removal of the front door transom bar. The applicant has agreed to reinstall the metal handrail, exterior lighting, and gutters and downspouts, but is seeking retention of the other outstanding items. 

HDLC violations at the property date back to a 2016 Demolition by Neglect (DbyN) case. Later that year, the case was brought to adjudication where it was fined $1,575 (currently unpaid). In January 2023 a permit case was created for a non-structural renovation permit. HDLC Staff contacted the applicant to notify them that the scope of work needed to be expanded to include all DbyN conditions and that the fine needed to be paid prior to the issuance of the permit. Staff did not receive a response regarding this request. 

Although the building has a limited number of windows (4), and the removed windows did not appear to be original, the currently installed windows are inappropriate flush-mounted vinyl windows that do not match the dimensions or muntin patterns of the existing windows. In addition, the street facing window at the front façade must be wood per the HDLC guidelines. Staff recommends denial of the inappropriate vinyl windows at the left-side elevation. A vinyl, aluminum clad, or wood clad window that can be recess-mounted into the plane of the wall could be approved at that location. Staff recommends that retention of the front façade window be denied and that a true wood window be installed to match the existing window muntin pattern. 

At newly installed windows as well as cornerboards, fascia, front façade door, and porch soffit, existing wood trim was removed and replaced with inappropriate Hardie Plank trim. The HDLC only allows for the installation of Hardie Plank trim at these locations at new construction buildings. Staff recommends denial of Hardie trim installation, and that wood trim be reinstalled at the building. 

In addition to the Hardie Plank trim, wood-grained Hardie Plank siding was installed at every elevation. Wood-grained Hardie Plank siding is not allowed as a cladding material in full control districts. In some instances, the Hardie boards can be flipped and reinstalled if a smooth finish is on the interior. If possible, Staff recommends reinstalling the Hardie Plank siding with the smooth finish at the exterior. If this solution is not possible, Staff recommends retention of the wood-grained siding at the left and right elevations with the proviso that the siding be painted to obscure the graining. Staff recommends denial of wood-grained Hardie siding at the front façade and that wood or smooth finish Hardie siding be reinstalled at that location. 

It is unclear what work took place that resulted in a change in the plane of the existing exterior walls at the side elevations. Before and after photographs show a 3-4" shift inward of the existing exterior walls where the walls meet the sill (see comparison below). Where the exterior weatherboard cladding used to continue down the wall, a stepped in condition exists currently. Based on the amount of barge board stacked throughout the site, it can only be surmised that new exterior walls were built on the interior face of the existing barge board walls and then existing barge board walls were removed, altering the plane of the wall. However, no evidence through interior photographs or architectural drawings are available  to corroborate this notion. Staff leaves retention of this wall condition at the discretion of the NO Commission. 

Several smaller items including the removal of existing ridge tiles, removal of brackets, and removal of a transom bar were also cited in the violation. Staff recommends that salvaged or new barrel-style ridge tiles be reinstalled at the roof ridge to match the previous condition. Staff also recommends that three (3) scrolled brackets to match the existing in detail, material, and dimension be reinstalled at the front façade overhang. Lastly, Staff recommends that the inappropriately-sized transom bar at the front facade door/transom be removed, and a transom bar matching the existing in detail, material, and dimension be reinstalled.