Editor,
I was saddened by the negative vote of the Historical District Commission’s October 6 meeting regarding completed renovations on 22 Pine Street. Its front porch had been hit by a city truck and required the renovation.
Approved in July, the HDC noted a 1 ft. difference and brought it back to the board. While surrounding neighbors spoke in favor, a few HDC board members and two citizens suggested the result was a “travesty.” Why?
Although the HDC had already approved removing the front entrance to the porch, much time was spent on this. “Unwelcoming,” said one citizen. “Not the right rock!” said another.
The one-foot error was readily admitted by the contractor. Since I am familiar with Pine Street, I wondered what the fuss was about. The finished limestone porch skirt is now directly in line with the skirts on nearby houses. Much better.
Thank goodness the front steps are gone. The old front steps had had to be repeatedly replaced because of water damage. The original side entrance is much safer. Council members seemed to be more interested in not allowing any variance, despite support of the professional city staff. I wondered if commission members had even driven by the house.
If there were no other variances on Pine Street or adjacent streets, I might at least say that the HDC was consistent, though wrong. But there are many variances.
Two doors down from 22 Pine is a porch with modern wood porch posts. A modern home is being built on Spring Street. There are several houses with only side entrances on their front porches. There are several styles and materials of porch skirts.
House colors are often chosen with no apparent interest in Victorian colors. Pine Street itself is difficult to maneuver and hardly original in its layout due to storm drainage mitigation.
I believe in historic preservation. However, I urge everyone to listen to the segment of that meeting and then drive by beautiful 22 Pine St. I think you’ll agree that the HDC made a mistake.
Susan Osborne