Historic Preservation Board — Portland, ME
Date: 2026-06-03
Time: 17:00

MEMBERS
Historic Preservation Board Brad Miller, Chair
 Valerie Paquin-Gould, Vice Chair
Wednesday, June 3, 2026 at 5:00 PM Hilary Bassett
Room 24 (Basement Level of City Hall) William DeSerres
and Zoom Michael Hutchins
 Kristina Sottery
 Rob Whitten



The Historic Preservation Board invites the public to attend the meeting in person or Zoom pursuant to the
Remote Meeting Policy adopted by the Historic Preservation Board. Prior to the meeting, please check the
Agenda Center https://portlandme.portal.civicclerk.com to view memos and reports which will be posted by the
end of the day on the Friday before the Historic Preservation Board meeting. Please note that the placement of
each item on the agenda is subject to change. Please check the Agenda Center prior to the meeting for the item
start time.

REMOTE PARTICIPATION
Allow your computer to install the free Zoom app to get the best meeting experience. If you are not able to
attend either in person or via Zoom, a recording will be available in the Agenda Center following the
meeting. For more information on how to use zoom, please go here:
https://content.civicplus.com/api/assets/18148b5d-f26e-472f-8d2c-245db97e5c27

Please click the link below to join the webinar. Join from PC, Mac, iPad, or Android. https://portlandmaine-
gov.zoom.us/j/83008840022

Phone one-tap: +16469313860,,83008840022# US +19292056099,,83008840022# US (New York)

Join via audio:
+1 646 931 3860 US
+1 929 205 6099 US (New York)
+1 301 715 8592 US (Washington DC)
+1 305 224 1968 US
+1 309 205 3325 US
+1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago)
+1 346 248 7799 US (Houston)
+1 360 209 5623 US
+1 386 347 5053 US
+1 507 473 4847 US
+1 564 217 2000 US
+1 669 444 9171 US
+1 669 900 6833 US (San Jose)
+1 689 278 1000 US
+1 719 359 4580 US
+1 253 205 0468 US
+1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma)
Webinar ID: 830 0884 0022
International numbers available: https://portlandmaine-gov.zoom.us/u/kbE13uOnpi

PUBLIC COMMENT INFORMATION:
 1
To submit written public comment on an agenda item, email hp@portlandmaine.gov. Submissions must be
received by 12:00 pm the day before the Historic Preservation Board meeting to guarantee their inclusion in
the agenda packet. All submissions must include the commenter's name and legal address. To help ensure your
comment is submitted for the correct item, please include the name of the agenda item (see below).




AGENDA:

1. ROLL CALL AND DECLARATION OF QUORUM
2. REPORT OF ATTENDANCE AT THE MEETING HELD ON MAY 20, 2026
 i. Review of Alterations; 28 Waterville Street; Eliza Huber-Weiss, Applicant. Plan
 Number: HP-00080-2026. Bassett, DeSerres, Hutchins, Miller, Paquin-Gould, Sottery and
 Whitten present.

 ii. Review of New Construction; 30 Atlantic Street; Brooke Chornyak and Dylan Jones,
 Applicants. Plan Number: HP-00068-2026. Bassett, DeSerres, Hutchins, Miller, Paquin-
 Gould, Sottery and Whitten present.

3. REPORTS OF DECISIONS AT THE MEETING HELD ON MAY 20, 2026
 i. Review of Alterations; 28 Waterville Street; Eliza-Huber-Weiss, Applicant. Plan
 Number: HP-00080-2026. The Board voted unanimously to approve the project.

 ii. Review of New Construction; 30 Atlantic Street; Brooke Chornyak and Dylan Jones,
 Applicants. Plan Number: HP-00068-2026. The Board voted 6 in favor and Miller opposed
 to approve the project.

4. COMMUNICATION AND REPORTS
 i. None

5. PUBLIC HEARING
 i. Review of New Construction; 8 Garrison Street Extension; Debra and James Robbins,
 Applicant. Plan Number: HP-00082-2026.

6. WORKSHOP




 2

MEMBERS
Historic Preservation Board Brad Miller, Chair
 Valerie Paquin-Gould, Vice Chair
Wednesday, June 3, 2026 at 5:00 PM Hilary Bassett
Room 24 (Basement Level of City Hall) William DeSerres
and Zoom Michael Hutchins
 Kristina Sottery
 Rob Whitten



The Historic Preservation Board invites the public to attend the meeting in person or Zoom pursuant to the
Remote Meeting Policy adopted by the Historic Preservation Board. Prior to the meeting, please check the
Agenda Center https://portlandme.portal.civicclerk.com to view memos and reports which will be posted by the
end of the day on the Friday before the Historic Preservation Board meeting. Please note that the placement of
each item on the agenda is subject to change. Please check the Agenda Center prior to the meeting for the item
start time.

REMOTE PARTICIPATION
Allow your computer to install the free Zoom app to get the best meeting experience. If you are not able to
attend either in person or via Zoom, a recording will be available in the Agenda Center following the
meeting. For more information on how to use zoom, please go here:
https://content.civicplus.com/api/assets/18148b5d-f26e-472f-8d2c-245db97e5c27

Please click the link below to join the webinar. Join from PC, Mac, iPad, or Android. https://portlandmaine-
gov.zoom.us/j/83008840022

Phone one-tap: +16469313860,,83008840022# US +19292056099,,83008840022# US (New York)

Join via audio:
+1 646 931 3860 US
+1 929 205 6099 US (New York)
+1 301 715 8592 US (Washington DC)
+1 305 224 1968 US
+1 309 205 3325 US
+1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago)
+1 346 248 7799 US (Houston)
+1 360 209 5623 US
+1 386 347 5053 US
+1 507 473 4847 US
+1 564 217 2000 US
+1 669 444 9171 US
+1 669 900 6833 US (San Jose)
+1 689 278 1000 US
+1 719 359 4580 US
+1 253 205 0468 US
+1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma)
Webinar ID: 830 0884 0022
International numbers available: https://portlandmaine-gov.zoom.us/u/kbE13uOnpi

PUBLIC COMMENT INFORMATION:
 1

 Page 1
To submit written public comment on an agenda item, email hp@portlandmaine.gov. Submissions must be
received by 12:00 pm the day before the Historic Preservation Board meeting to guarantee their inclusion in
the agenda packet. All submissions must include the commenter's name and legal address. To help ensure your
comment is submitted for the correct item, please include the name of the agenda item (see below).




AGENDA:

1. ROLL CALL AND DECLARATION OF QUORUM
2. REPORT OF ATTENDANCE AT THE MEETING HELD ON MAY 20, 2026
 i. Review of Alterations; 28 Waterville Street; Eliza Huber-Weiss, Applicant. Plan
 Number: HP-00080-2026. Bassett, DeSerres, Hutchins, Miller, Paquin-Gould, Sottery and
 Whitten present.

 ii. Review of New Construction; 30 Atlantic Street; Brooke Chornyak and Dylan Jones,
 Applicants. Plan Number: HP-00068-2026. Bassett, DeSerres, Hutchins, Miller, Paquin-
 Gould, Sottery and Whitten present.

3. REPORTS OF DECISIONS AT THE MEETING HELD ON MAY 20, 2026
 i. Review of Alterations; 28 Waterville Street; Eliza-Huber-Weiss, Applicant. Plan
 Number: HP-00080-2026. The Board voted unanimously to approve the project.

 ii. Review of New Construction; 30 Atlantic Street; Brooke Chornyak and Dylan Jones,
 Applicants. Plan Number: HP-00068-2026. The Board voted 6 in favor and Miller opposed
 to approve the project.

4. COMMUNICATION AND REPORTS
 i. None

5. PUBLIC HEARING
 i. Review of New Construction; 8 Garrison Street Extension; Debra and James Robbins,
 Applicant. Plan Number: HP-00082-2026.

6. WORKSHOP




 2

 Page 2
STAFF MEMORANDUM
HISTORIC PRESERVATION PROGRAM
PLANNING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

TO: Chair Miller and Members of the Historic Preservation Board
FROM: Rob Wiener, Associate Preservation Planner
DATE: May 29, 2026
RE: 8 Garrison Street Extension – PUBLIC HEARING – New Construction of ADU
PROJECT ID: HP-00082-2026
MEETING: June 3, 2026

Owner: Debra & James Robbins
Designer & Contractor: Donald Hawkes

A sign announcing the Historic Preservation Board’s meeting on June 3, 2026 was posted at the
property on May 22, 2026, and 28 notices were sent to neighboring property owners within 100
feet of the subject property.

_________________________________________
PROJECT SCOPE
Construct a freestanding accessory dwelling unit in the side yard of 8 Garrison Street Extension.

Dimensions:
Overall Height: Approximately 19’
Footprint: 20’ x 34’ (680 Square Feet)

Material Specifications:
 Foundation Poured concrete, with crawl space for mechanicals
 Siding Painted or solid stained wood clapboard, 4” exposure
 Trim Painted wood; painted 2” thick PVC window sills
 Roofing Asphalt architectural shingles; 8/12 pitch
 Windows Marvin Elevate (fiberglass exterior,) double-hung, awning, and casement
 Doors Main Entrance: Wood, raised panels; Rear

______________________________________
SUMMARY OF HISTORIC CONTEXT

Stroudwater Village is unique among Portland’s historic districts, having retained evidence of its
early history as a rural settlement founded to fit the geography and make use of local
resources. The District is significant as an early village which still conveys a coherent sense of a
place, as well as its distinctive history. The fact that Stroudwater is now part of the City of
Portland, where comparable eighteenth and early nineteenth century settlement has been


 1

 Page 3
considerably obliterated by fires and later development, makes this historic district especially
important to the city. Moreover, Stroudwater is a good example of the planning of a New
England village, not according to rigid plans and typical central commons, but in terms of the
natural topography that both respected the landscape and exploited it for economic advantage.
For instance, the streets on which the historic structures now stand follow the high ground and
were originally the roads used to haul masts to the Fore River.

The village occupies the western bank of the tidal Fore River where it is joined by the
Stroudwater River. The historic district contains about thirty residences, dating from the
Colonial, Federal, and Greek Revival periods and standing on the gentle hills that slope down to
the Fore River. In addition, the district includes the village burying ground, sites associated with
collecting and exporting of masts, mills, tanneries, and shipyards which supported the
inhabitants, and the section of the Cumberland and Oxford Canal which runs along the eastern
bank of the Fore River opposite the village.

The district contains many outstanding examples of Georgian/Colonial, Federal, and Greek
revival architecture, but also contains a number of other more modest houses in these same
styles and more vernacular forms such as simple capes and center hall colonials

William Waterhouse, the original owner of 8 Garrison Street Extension, was a shipwright who
built the early Federal Style residence in 1795. Some of the houses in the immediate context
are of a comparable age and style, while others exhibit later styles, including Greek Revival and
Victorian designs. Changes over time have altered all the houses to varying degrees. The
William Waterhouse dwelling retains its simple rectangular form and layout, but among other
modifications, it acquired an Italianate door hood and 2/2 sashes that replaced the original 9/6
windows.




Figure 1: Map of Stroudwater Historic District showing location of 8 Garrison Street Extension


 2

 Page 4
Figure 2: William Waterhouse house Figure 3: Existing house on right, ADU site in front

 According to the applicants, the western section of the lot where the new construction is
 proposed once contained a one-story house owned by a son of Mr. Waterhouse. The 1914
 Richard’s Atlas of Portland showed a different configuration of lots, with the side yard then
 belonging to the property at the corner (1193 Westbrook Street,) and small stable or barn in
 the vicinity of the proposed building site.




 -
 G
 o
 o
 g
 l
 e
 Figure 4: Satellite view of 8 Garrison Street Extension, with approximate location of new ADU




 3

 Page 5
Figure 5: 1914 Richard’s Atlas of Portland Plate 10, property and construction area highlighted

As can be seen from aerial views, density in the Stroudwater District varies; large lots and areas
of open land are interspersed with smaller house separations and clusters of dwellings and
outbuildings. Cases of new construction in subdivided large lots have occurred numerous times
in the last 50 years, as evidenced by more modern house styles. House sizes also vary in the
neighborhood, in terms of footprint sizes and heights. Traditional window openings are
typically vertical in their orientations, but houses that have overall proportions tending toward
horizontality tend to be more common in Stroudwater than in more dense urban
neighborhoods on the Peninsula.

Additional information on the Stroudwater Historic District can be found on the city website:
https://www.portlandmaine.gov/1548/Historic-Designations

_________________________________________
STAFF COMMENTS

Historic Preservation staff met with owner Jim Robbins and builder Don Hawkes in early April to
discuss preliminary plans and the review process. Mr. Hawkes has produced revised, more
detailed plans in response to staff comments.

Staff was comfortable bringing this application to the Board for a public hearing as a simple,
small, traditional design with elements that respond to the context. According to the submitted
site plan, the Robbins lot has 100 feet of frontage on Garrison Street Extension, providing


 4

 Page 6
ample width for the small home to fit comfortably in the side yard. A twenty-foot-wide gable
end faces the quiet dead-end street, with large 2/2 double-hung windows, a moderately
pitched roof, and traditional short cornice returns at the corners.

Side entrances like the one proposed on the east side facing the owners’ home are not
predominant in Stroudwater but there are a number of examples, particularly those associated
with Greek Revival homes on narrower lots. In 2024 the Board approved a new house at 1164
Westbrook Street (now completed,) with the main entrance on the side and no door in the
street-facing gable end. Such a design was not without precedents in Stroudwater, with some
examples at 1235, 1246, and 1266 Westbrook Street.




Figures 6 & 7: 1235 (with modern side ell and garage) and 1246 Westbrook Street, early houses with side
entrances




Figure 8: 1266 Westbrook Street Figure 9: Recent Construction at 1164 Westbrook

__________________________________________




 5

 Page 7
MOTION FOR CONSIDERATION

I move to [APPROVE / CONDITIONALLY APPROVE] application HP-00082-2026 for new
construction at 8 Garrison Street Extension on the basis of submitted documentation, plans,
and specifications; information provided in the staff memo; and the attached findings by the
Historic Preservation Board [AS WRITTEN / AS AMENDED DURING THE MEETING ON June 3,
2026] that the project MEETS subsection 16.6.4 standards for review of additions and new
construction [WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:]
 1) [CONDITIONS]

_________________________________________
ATTACHMENTS
 1. Cover Letter and Project Description
 2. Plans and Elevations
 3. Wall Section and Details
 4. Materials and Windows
 5. Applicant Photos
 6. Draft Findings of Fact




 6

 Page 8
 HAWKES CONSTRUCTION LLC



May 4,2026
City of Portland
Planning and Urban Development Department

Historic Preservation Board and Staff:

RE: Application for ADU construction at 8 Garrison Street Extension, Stroudwater Historic
District.

  In 1783, William Waterhouse, a shipwright, purchased a small lot of land located at the
easterly end of the Town Landing which was located on the southerly side of Mill Creek where
the creek joins the Fore River.
  Upon his purchase at Stroudwater, William Waterhouse erected a two-story dwelling, out
buildings and boat shop. In 1795 he conveyed the premises to his son Robert, excepting the
westerly end of the lot, which he conveyed to his son Joseph Hatch Waterhouse, who built
upon it a one-story house. (Leonard Bond Chapman, the Deering Maine News Aug. 20-22, 1903)

 This same property, now owned by James and Debra Robbins, is the site of a proposed
Accessory Dwelling unit on the westerly lot formerly occupied by Joseph Waterhouse, the
house having been moved to a site on Westbrook Street years ago. The intended use of the
ADU is a home for the Robbins’ disabled adult daughter.

  The structure, as proposed, is a detached single-story detached dwelling of 680 s/ft. The
design is traditional to conform with the architectural form and details of the existing home and
historic neighborhood. Exterior details include double-hung windows, painted Pine window
casing, corner boards, clapboards, soffit and fascia. Roof framing is pitched 8/12 with
architectural asphalt shingles. Entry is a traditional raised panel door with sidelights.
  After consultation with the City Arborist, care has been taken with setbacks and siting to
minimize potential damage to an abutting 30” diameter Norway Maple. A crawl-space concrete
foundation is planned for mechanical space. Single car off street parking is designed for a wider
street opening due to the narrow street access and turning radius.

Thank you for your consideration of our proposal and we look forward to working with you.

Sincerely,

Don Hawkes

cc. James Robbins, Debra Robbins




Hawkes Construction LLC 1181 Westbrook Street Phone: 207-383-5408
 Donald Hawkes Portland, ME 04102 email: hawkesdonald@gmail.com

 Page 9
Page 10
Page 11
Page 12
Page 13
Page 14
Page 15
Page 16
 HAWKES CONSTRUCTION LLC



Robbins ADU Exterior Materials specifications:

Foundation at grade: Poured in place concrete.

Windows: Marvin Elevate- exterior Ultrex fiberglass, interior painted wood as drawn:
 A= ELDH 3468 Double-hung (see East and North elev.)
 B= ELAWN 2927 Bedroom Awning (see West elev.)
 C= ELAWN 2939 Bath and Kitchen Awning (see West elev.)
 D= ELCAP 2547 Living room Casement (see South elev.)

Doors: Entry and patio doors as drawn:
 E= Marvin Elevate ELSPD 6070 OX Kitchen Sliding Door (see South Elev.)
 F= Simpson F-77130 3-0 x 6-8 6-panel w/(2) F77705 1-2 x 6-8 sidelights (East elev.)

Wood exterior trim: Lifestyle painted Pine pre-primed.

PVC exterior trim: Windowsills shall be 2” Azek Historic sill

Wood siding: Pre-primed ½” x 6” Pine or Cedar clapboards 4” TTW

Roofing/waterproofing:
 White galv. steel drip edge at eaves and rakes,
 White painted aluminum drip cap at windows and doors.
 White painted aluminum soffit vent
 White painted wall vent caps at Kitchen and Bath
 CertainTeed Moire Black Asphalt Shingles

Stairs:
 Pressure-treated framing with Azek (PVC) trim and Timber tech composite decking (grey)

Hardscape:
 Gravel driveway and path.




Hawkes Construction LLC 1181 Westbrook Street Phone: 207-383-5408
 Donald Hawkes Portland, ME 04102 email: hawkesdonald@gmail.com

 Page 17
Page 18
Page 19
Page 20
Page 21
Page 22
Page 23
Page 24
Page 25
Page 26
Page 27
Page 28
Page 29
Page 30
Page 31
Page 32
CITY OF PORTLAND
HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD
NOTICE OF DECISION

PROPERTY OWNER: Debra and James Robbins (“Applicant”)
PROPERTY LOCATION: 8 Garrison Street Extension (“Property”)
PROJECT ID: HP-00082-2026
HISTORIC DESIGNATION(S): Stroudwater Historic District

___________________________________
FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

 1. On May 7, 2026, the Applicant applied for approval of new construction at the Property.

 2. Pursuant to subsection 16.5.2 of the City of Portland Land Use Code (“Land Use Code”),
 the application required review and approval by the Historic Preservation Board
 (“Board”) against the standards for review of subsection 16.6 (“Standards”).

 3. Subsection 16.6.2 of the Land Use Code incorporates by reference the Historic
 Resources Design Manual, which provides additional guidance to this Board. Specifically,
 when discerning the “compatibility” and “differentiation” of the proposed project, the
 Design Manual provides the following guidance:

 “Two core concepts in reviewing alterations to historic properties and additions or
 new construction within historic contexts are those of compatibility and
 differentiation. Compatibility refers to establishing visual relationships with the
 patterns or characteristics that define a given context. New work does not need to
 follow the patterns of the context in every way; however, they should relate to a
 number of the key character-defining features of the context. Differentiation refers
 to the ability of new work to be visually understood as a construction of its own time,
 distinct from the historic properties. This inherently requires some degree of
 departure from the patterns of the context.

 These two concepts are at times in tension, but when they are successfully balanced,
 they uphold the goals of reinforcing what defines historically-designated places while
 ensuring authenticity and allowing the passage of time to remain legible in the built
 environment. There are numerous approaches that designers can take in striking this
 balance, and their successful application can be found across a variety of projects.”
 (Page 2.12)

 4. On June 3, 2026 the Board held a Public Hearing to review the application for new



 1

 Page 33
 construction at the property under HP-00082-2026.

 5. Based on the written materials, oral testimony, staff memoranda, and public comment
 received during the public hearing held on June 3, 2026, the Board finds as follows:

Subsection 16.6.4 - Standards for review of additions and new construction:

 Standard A. Scale and form
 1. Height
 The height of the addition or new construction shall be visually compatible with the
 contributing buildings, structures, objects, and sites of the historic designation when viewed
 from any street or public open space.
 Standard Met? Staff Comments
 The applicant provided plans and photos of the site and immediate context
 to demonstrate that the height of the proposed secondary structure is
 smaller than the primary building at the property. The Board further finds
 YES that house sizes vary in the surrounding historic district and examples of
 one-story and one-and-a-half-story homes exist in the district, and the
 proposed dwelling is therefore visually compatible with surrounding
 structures. Thus, the Board finds this standard has been met.
 2. Width
 The width of the addition or new construction shall be visually compatible with the
 contributing buildings, structures, objects, and sites of the historic designation when viewed
 from any street or public open space.
 Standard Met? Staff Comments
 The applicant provided plans, elevations, and photos to demonstrate that
 the width of the proposed secondary structure is appropriately recessive as
 compared with the primary structure. The Board further finds examples of
 YES
 houses with their narrow gable ends facing the street occur in the
 neighborhood, and the design is therefore visually compatible with
 surrounding structures. Thus, the Board finds this standard has been met.
 3. Proportion of principal facades
 The relationship of the width to the height of the principal facades shall be visually compatible
 with the contributing buildings, structures, objects, and sites of the historic designation when
 viewed from any street or public open space.
 Standard Met? Staff Comments
 The applicant provided plans and elevations to demonstrate that the
 proposed proportions of the project are a balance of width to height that is
 similar to the taller and wider primary residence. The Board further finds
 YES that the gable end facing the street is neutral in the relationship of total
 height to width, while the side elevation expresses greater horizontality,
 which is consistent with many houses in the neighborhood, and is therefore
 visually compatible with surrounding structures. Thus, the Board finds this



 2

 Page 34
 standard has been met.
4. Roof shape
The roof shape of the addition or new construction shall be visually compatible with the
contributing buildings, structures, objects, and sites of the historic designation when viewed
from any street or public open space.
Standard Met? Staff Comments
 The applicant provided elevations and photos to demonstrate that the
 moderately pitched gable roof is similar to the William Waterhouse house.
 YES The Board finds that the roof form of the proposed building is similar to
 many houses in the neighborhood, and is therefore visually compatible with
 surrounding structures. Thus, the Board finds this standard has been met.
5. Scale
The size and mass of the addition or new construction in relation to open spaces, windows,
doors, porches, and balconies shall be visually compatible with the contributing buildings,
structures, objects, and sites of the historic designation when viewed from any street or public
open space.
Standard Met? Staff Comments
 The applicant provided plans and photos to demonstrate that the size and
 mass of the proposed ADU are visually compatible with the width of the
 existing side yard and the relationship of nearby houses to their sites. The
 YES Board further finds the scale of the entrance porch and windows within a
 reasonable range for a small house, and the house is therefore visually
 compatible with surrounding structures. Thus, the Board finds this standard
 has been met.

Standard B. Composition of principle facades
1. Proportion of openings
The relationship of the width to height of windows and doors shall be visually compatible with
the contributing buildings, structures, objects, and sites of the historic designation.
Standard Met? Staff Comments
 The applicant provided elevations and photos to demonstrate that on the
 north and east elevations the vertical orientation of the openings is
 YES
 consistent with the prevailing pattern in the neighborhood. Thus, the Board
 finds this standard has been met.be met.

2. Rhythm of solids to voids
The relationship of solids to voids in the principal facades shall be visually compatible with the
contributing buildings, structures, objects, and sites of the historic designation.
Standard Met? Staff Comments
 The applicant provided elevations and photos to demonstrate that the
 rhythm of solid walls to window and door openings is quite regular and
 YES
 similar to other houses in the context. Additionally, the Board finds that the
 proposed building will be primarily solid, as is typical of the context. Thus,


 3

 Page 35
 the Board finds this standard has been met.
3. Rhythm of entrances, porches, and other projections or recesses
The relationship of entrances, porches, and other projections or recesses to sidewalks shall be
visually compatible with the contributing buildings, structures, objects, and sites of the historic
designation.
Standard Met? Staff Comments
 The applicant provided elevations to demonstrate that this simple
 rectangular house has a projecting entry landing and step, which is centered
 on the east façade where a very regular and symmetrical pattern of openings
 YES prevails. The Board finds that largely symmetrical side entries are common
 within the Stroudwater Historic District, as evidenced in the context analysis
 provided in the staff memo. Thus, the Board finds the design compatible
 with the surrounding built context, and this standard has been met.

4. Relationship of materials
The relationship of the color and texture of materials (other than paint color) of the principal
facades shall be visually compatible with the predominant materials used on the contributing
buildings, structures, objects, and sites of the historic designation.
Standard Met? Staff Comments
 The applicant provided a materials schedule, a project summary, and
 elevations to demonstrate that traditional materials are proposed, including
 painted wood clapboards and trim with typical exposures and proportions.
 YES
 The Board further finds the materials similar to the primary structure and
 neighboring houses, and is therefore visually compatible with surrounding
 structures. Thus, the Board finds this standard has been met.

Standard C. Relationship to street
1. Walls of continuity
Facades and site features, such as masonry walls, fences, and landscape masses, shall, when it
is a characteristic of the context, form cohesive walls of enclosure along the street to ensure
visual compatibility with the contributing buildings, structures, objects, and sites of the
historic designation.
Standard Met? Staff Comments
 The applicant provided a site plan and photos to demonstrate that the
 YES proposed construction is consistent with a pattern of a diffuse and variable
 street wall of continuity. Thus, the Board finds this standard has been met.

2. Rhythm and spacing along streets
The relationship of the addition or new construction to the open space between it and
adjacent buildings, structures, objects, or sites shall be visually compatible with the
contributing buildings, structures, objects, and sites of the historic designation.
Standard Met? Staff Comments
 YES The applicant provided a site plan and photos to demonstrate that adding a


 4

 Page 36
 secondary structure to the wide side yard will not disrupt a dominant rhythm
 of spacing on the street. Additionally, the Board notes that Stroudwater
 contains a mix of large lots and clusters of buildings and outbuildings. The
 Board further finds that with smaller, secondary structures or outbuildings
 are common in the context, and the proposed structure is therefore visually
 compatible with surrounding structures. Thus, the Board finds this standard
 has been met.
 3. Directional expression of principal facades
 The addition or new construction shall be visually compatible with the directional character of
 the contributing buildings, structures, objects, and sites of the historic designation, whether
 this be vertical character, horizontal character, or nondirectional character.
 Standard Met? Staff Comments
 The applicant provided plans, elevations, and photos to demonstrate that
 the primary façade (north) is nondirectional in character, while the long
 sides (east and west) express horizontality punctuated by vertically oriented
 openings. Additionally, the Board notes the directional character of small
 YES
 secondary structures is not as rigid in the context as it is for primary
 structures. The Board further finds the directional character is not
 significantly divergent, and is therefore visually compatible with surrounding
 structures. Thus, the Board finds this standard has been met.
 4. Streetscape, pedestrian improvements
 Streetscape and pedestrian improvements and any change in the appearance thereof located
 adjacent to any addition or new construction shall not be incongruous with the contributing
 buildings, structures, objects, and sites of the historic designation.
 Standard Met? Staff Comments
 The applicant provided a site plan and photos to demonstrate that the
 neighborhood is informal and rural in nature. Additionally, the Board notes
 that the addition of a single driveway to serve the new dwelling will not
 YES disrupt the character of the narrow gravel street. The Board further finds the
 proposed building is set back from the street, and is therefore visually
 compatible with surrounding properties. Thus, the Board finds this standard
 has been met.

_______________________________________
DECISION

By a vote of ___ to ___, the Board adopts the above findings of fact to support its
APPROVAL/CONDITIONAL APPROVAL of application HP-00082-2026 from June 3, 2026.


_________________________________________________
 ___________________
Brad Miller, Chair Date


 5

 Page 37