Last week, the two additions to the house, which can be seen in the picture above, were removed. The first to go was the addition with the shed roof that appears at the left, which was very likely not original to the house. The second to go was the one at the right in the picture above, around the bay on the house's south facade.
What was removed can be seen in this picture of the house, taken last April.
It seemed possible that the enclosed porch might have morphed from the ornate open porch that appears in this 1853 image of the house.
For this reason, the Historic Preservation Commission should have weighed in on the appropriateness of its removal and advised about the possible salvage of anything original that might have remained. When I asked code enforcement officer Craig Haigh about the demolition, which was done while a stop-work order was still in the place, and shared with him reports that work was going on inside the house as well (remember that A. J. Davis woodwork), I received the following information in an email:
They have been granted a permit to get the building ready for a CofA app[lication]. The rear part of the building which was the add on and had partially collapsed.
I did approve their permit to get the building cleaned up so they can determine what needs to be fixed and how they are going to fix it based on the requirements of the building and the city code, which does include the HPC. The owner of the property is well aware of what the requirements are what they can and cannot do.COPYRIGHT 2019 CAROLE OSTERINK
Fully aware and cognizant of the requirements. Just unheeding. As usual.
ReplyDelete