Item # 5 - PPT 117 Claywell (Significance & Compatibility Review)

1. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Presented by:
Lety Hernandez
Director
ARB CASE NO. 878F
117 CLAYWELL
ITEM # 5
APRIL 25, 2022

2. PROPERTY
 SF-A
 Claywell
 North side, east
of Broadway
 100% demolition
and construction of
new single-family
residence with
detached garage.

3. SUMMARY
 Demolition Review
 Significance Review
 Removal or encapsulation of more than twenty-five (25) percent
of the framed structure of exterior walls facing public streets, or
a street-facing elevation if the tract of land is landlocked
 Removal/encapsulation of more than fifty (50) percent of the
framed structure of all exterior walls and/or roofs.
 Compatibility Review
 Due to the amount of total or substantial destruction of the
structure or portion thereof

4. EXISTING CONDITIONS

5. SITE & ROOF PLAN

6. FRONT ELEVATION
Main – Height: 32ft 6in
• Siding: Combination Corten Western Wave Metal Siding, Vertical Wood Siding, &
Vertical Standing Seam Metal Siding in Charcoal Color
• Roof: Standing Seam Metal, Galvalume Finish south

7. REAR ELEVATION
north

8. SIDE ELEVATION
east

9. SIDE ELEVATION
west

10. ACCESSORY ELEVATIONS
Accessory
• Height: 15ft 4in
• Siding: Vertical
Standing Seam
Metal Siding in
Charcoal Color
• Roof: Standing
Seam Metal,
Galvalume Finish

11. POLICY ANALYSIS

12. POLICY ANALYSIS
 Staff found no historical and/or architectural
significance to the existing main structure.
 The Architectural Review Board considered the request
at their April 19, 2022 meeting.
 The motion to declare the existing main structure as
not significant and recommend approval of the
demolition as requested was approved unanimously
 The motion to recommend approval of the design as
compatible was not approved with the following vote:
AYE (2), NAY (4)

13. EXISTING STREETSCAPE

14. PROPOSED STREETSCAPE & RENDERING

15. PERSPECTIVE RENDERINGS

16. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION
 Postcards - mailed to property owners within a 200-foot
radius
 Notices posted - City website and on property
 Responses received:
 Support: (0) Neutral: (0)
 Oppose: (3)