Historic Preservation Board

MEMBERS Brad Miller, Chair Historic Preservation Board Valerie Paquin-Gould, Vice Chair Hilary Bassett Wednesday, May 20, 2026 at 5:00 PM William DeSerres Michael Hutchins Room 24 (Basement Level of City Hall) Kristina Sottery and Zoom Rob Whitten HYBRID PARTICIPATION: 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: You are invited to a Zoom webinar! When: May 20, 2026 05:00 PM Eastern Time (US and Canada) Topic: Historic Preservation Public Hearing 5-20-2026 Join from PC, Mac, iPad, or Android: https://portlandmaine-gov.zoom.us/j/83176870234 Phone one-tap: +13052241968,,83176870234# US +13092053325,,83176870234# US Join via audio: +1 305 224 1968 US +1 309 205 3325 US +1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago) +1 646 931 3860 US +1 929 205 6099 US (New York) +1 301 715 8592 US (Washington DC) +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 Page 1 +1 253 205 0468 US +1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma) +1 346 248 7799 US (Houston) +1 360 209 5623 US Webinar ID: 831 7687 0234 International numbers available: https://portlandmaine-gov.zoom.us/u/ktdeHCyMQ PUBLIC COMMENT INFORMATION: 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 APRIL 15, 2026 i. Public Hearings Review of & Recommendation to Maine Historic Preservation Commission regarding National Register Nomination for 0 Fessenden Avenue (Little Diamond Island Casino). DeSerres, Hutchins, Miller, and Paquin-Gould present. Bassett, Sottery, and Whitten absent. Review of Alterations; 279 Congress Street. DeSerres, Hutchins, Miller, and Paquin-Gould present. Bassett, Sottery, and Whitten absent. Workshops Review of New Construction; 30 Atlantic Street. DeSerres, Hutchins, and Miller present. Bassett, Paquin-Gould, Sottery, and Whitten absent. 3. REPORTS OF DECISIONS AT THE MEETING HELD ON APRIL 15, 2026 i. Review of & Recommendation to Maine Historic Preservation Commission regarding National Register Nomination for 0 Fessenden Avenue (Little Diamond Island Casino). The Board voted 4 in favor, none opposed to recommend that the Maine Historic Preservation Commission support the nomination. Review of Alterations; 279 Congress Street; St. Paul’s Parish Church, Applicant. Plan Number: HP-00061-2026. The Board voted 4 in favor, none opposed to table consideration of the application. 4. COMMUNICATION AND REPORTS 5. PUBLIC HEARING 2 Page 2  i. Review of Alterations; 28 Waterville Street; Eliza Huber-Weiss, Applicant. Plan Number: HP- 00080-2026. ii. Review of New Construction; 30 Atlantic Street; Brooke Chornyak and Dylan Jones, Applicants. Plan Number: HP-00068-2026. 6. WORKSHOP i. None 7. CONSENT AGENDA 3 Page 3 STAFF MEMORANDUM HISTORIC PRESERVATION PROGRAM PLANNING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT TO: Chair Miller and Members of the Historic Preservation Board FROM: Evan R. Schueckler, Historic Preservation Program Manager DATE: May 15, 2026 RE: 28 Waterville –PUBLIC HEARING – Alterations PROJECT ID: HP-00080-2026 MEETING: May 20, 2026 Owner: Eliza Huber-Weiss Architect: Chelsea Lipham, Chelsea Lipham Architecture | Design A sign announcing the Historic Preservation Board’s meeting on May 20, 2025 was posted at the property on May 10, 2026, and 63 notices were sent to neighboring property owners within 100 feet of the subject property. _________________________________________ PROJECT SCOPE Enclose existing, non-historic side porch to create new mudroom. Dimensions: Overall Height: ~9’-4” Footprint: ~5’ x 12’-6” Material Specifications: Foundation Existing Siding Wood clapboard with 4” reveal Trim Wood Roofing Existing Windows Unspecified Doors Unspecified _________________________________________ 1 Page 4 SUMMARY OF HISTORIC CONTEXT Figure 1: Map of Portland’s Historic Designations showing location of 28 Waterville Street. 28 Waterville is an individually designated Landmark in close proximity to the Munjoy Hill and Portland Company Historic Districts. Constructed in 1859 the modest house is one of the earlier surviving structures in Portland’s East End, having survived the Great Fire of 1866 and multiple phases of subsequent development. The building is a simple one-and-a-half story cape structure which features a decorative Greek-revival entry surround and gable returns. The building historically featured corner boards and wooden clapboard siding, but sometime after 1924, the house was resided with asbestos cladding. In 1977 a covered porch was added to the north side of the house, and in 1991 a deck and sliding glass door were added to the south side of the house. All windows and doors were also replaced sometime before designation of the structure as a Landmark in 2021. Figure 2: 1886 Sanborn Map showing the footprint of 28 Waterville Street. 2 Page 5  Figure 3: 1924 Tax Photo of 28 Waterville Street. Figure 4: 1954 Sanborn Map showing the footprint of 28 Waterville Street. Additional information on the Munjoy Hill Historic District can be found on the city website: https://www.portlandmaine.gov/1548/Historic-Designations _________________________________________ 3 Page 6 STAFF COMMENTS The applicant is proposing to enclose an existing non-historic porch which was added to the house in 1977. The massing of the side porch is an existing condition which the applicant is seeking to work within, utilizing the foundation, posts, and roof. To enclose the porch, the applicant is proposing to fill in the spaces between the posts with simple clapboard-clad walls. The new enclosed porch will feature a simple single-lite door facing Waterville Street and a single-lite casement window on the side. These simple contemporary openings will help to show that the enclosed porch/mudroom is not an original or historic feature of the house, while the use of horizontal clapboard siding will help to establish some compatibility with the historic house. Overall, the impact on the existing structure will be minimal and require little, to no alteration of the historic structure beyond the non-historic porch. _________________________________________ MOTION FOR CONSIDERATION I move to [APPROVE / CONDITIONALLY APPROVE] application HP-00080-2026 for alterations at 28 Waterville Street 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 MAY 20, 2026] that the project MEETS subsection 16.6.3 standards for review of alterations to contributing properties; [WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:] 1) [CONDITIONS] _________________________________________ ATTACHMENTS 1. Project Description 2. Drawings 3. HP-00080-2026 Draft Findings of Fact, May 15, 2026 4. 1977 and 1991 Permits for 28 Waterville 4 Page 7 Historic Preservation Board City of Portland, Maine th 389 Congress Street, 4 Floor Portland ME 04101 Subject: 28 Waterville St April 27, 2026 To the Board of Historic Preservation: On behalf of the owner of 28 Waterville St, I am submitting this letter to detail the proposed project at the property. The proposal would convert an existing covered deck into an enclosed mudroom. There is no change to the building footprint or roof area. The new enclosure will follow the existing deck and utilize the existing deck roof. The entry wall will be inset 5-6” in order to keep the existing electrical meter located as it is now. The existing house is clad in asbestos shingles, but was historically clad in clapboards. The new walls will be clad in 4” clapboard, painted to match the existing house. Windows and window trim will match the existing house. Please reach out with any questions. Sincerely, Chelsea Lipham Maine Licensed Architect Chelsea Lipham Architecture and Design LLC 741 Stevens Ave, Portland ME 04103 Page 8  28 WATERVILLE 28 Waterville St LOT 017 E034 ZONE RN-4 HISTORIC BUILDING W DESIGNATION AT ER VI SCOPE OF WORK: LL E ENCLOSE EXISTING ST ENTRY PORCH. NO CHANGE TO BUILDING FOOTPRINT SCALE: 1" = 30'-0" AREA OF WORK ISSUE (ENCLOSE EXISTING 28 WATERVILLE ISSUE PORCH, NO CHANGE TO LOT 017 E034 EXISTING FOOTPRINT) 4/27/26 TITLE PLOT PLAN S ST SHEET ADAM 1 PLOT PLAN 1" = 30'-0" A-0 Page 9  28 Waterville St SCALE: ISSUE ISSUE 4/27/26 TITLE PHOTOS SHEET A-02 Page 10  1 A-3 A A-2 NEW BATHROOM W2 WINDOW EXISTING ROOF POSTS NEW 2X4 INFILL WALLS 2' - 0" 28 Waterville St INFILL WINDOW CUBBIES / STORAGE EXSITING DOOR 6' - 7" B 11' - 9" A-2 3' - 0 1/2" 1' - 6" 2 Window Schedule A-3 Type Mark Width Height Comments Count SCALE: W1 1' - 9" 3' - 0" 1 1/2" = 1'-0" W2 1' - 10" 3' - 6" 1 DN W1 ISSUE ISSUE NOTE: 3' - 2" 1. NEW WINDOWS TO MATCH EXISTING HOUSE WINDOWS IN STYLE AND COLOR D1 4/27/26 2. EXTERIOR TRIM AT WINDOWS TO MATCH EXISTING HOUSE EQ EQ LINE OF Door & Frame Schedule ROOF ABOVE TITLE LOCATION DOOR OPENING PANEL 4' - 6 1/2" EXISTING POST PLANS - MARK OPERATION WIDTH HEIGHT MATL THICK COMMENTS MUDROOM INSET WALL TO CLEAR D1 Single - Hinged 2' - 8" 6' - 8" WD 1 3/4" EXISTING METER EXISTING SHEET EXISTING ELEC METER STONE A-1 C RETAINING LEVEL 1 PROPOSED A-2 WALL BELOW 1 1/2" = 1'-0" Page 11  28 Waterville St EXISITNG ASBESTOS SHINGLE SIDING 1 TO REMAIN (8" 1 A-3 EXPOSURE, TYP) A-3 EXISTING ROOF TO REMAIN NEW ENTRY DOOR EXISTING PORCH NEW FASCIA ROOF NEW 4" CLAPBOARD SIDING (PAINTED SCALE: W1 W2 TO MATCH 1/4" = 1'-0" EXISTING HOUSE) ISSUE ISSUE 4/27/26 EXISTING DECK POSTS TO TITLE EXISTING STONE ENCLOSE REMAIN RETAING WALL AT PORCH GRADE TO REMAIN EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS SHEET C NORTH (STREET SIDE) ELEVATION 1/4" = 1'-0" B WEST ELEVATION 1/4" = 1'-0" A SOUTH ELEVATION 1/4" = 1'-0" A-2 Page 12 EXISTING ROOF 5" +/- 1 X TRIM EXISTING RAFTER CLAPBOARD SIDING NEW WALL RAKE DETAIL SECTION 28 Waterville St 3 1 1/2" = 1'-0" EXISTING ROOF STRUCTURE 1 A-3 EXISTING ROOF 3 STRUCTURE A-3 EXISTING FASCIA EXPOSED RAFTER TAILS SCALE: FULL HEIGHT CUBBY As indicated NEW INFILL WALL, ENTRY STEP ALIGNED WITH POSTS ISSUE ISSUE SLOPED EXTENDED 4/27/26 NEW PLY FLOOR EXTERIOR SILL SHEATHING AND FINISH FLOOR 7" EXISTING DECK FRAMING WATERPROOF AT NEW TITLE WALL, ALLOW DRAINAGE BETWEEN RETAINING WALL SECTIONS AND NEW WALL FINISH EXISTING STONE RETAINING WALL SHEET 2 CROSS SECTION 3/8" = 1'-0" 1 SECTION 3/8" = 1'-0" A-3 Page 13 CITY OF PORTLAND HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD NOTICE OF DECISION PROPERTY OWNER: Eliza Huber-Weiss (“Applicant”) PROPERTY LOCATION: 28 Waterville Street (“Property”) PROJECT ID: HP-00080-2026 HISTORIC DESIGNATION(S): 28 Waterville Street ___________________________________ FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. On April 28, 2026, the Applicant applied for approval of alterations 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) 1 Page 14  4. On May 20, 2026 the Board held a Public Hearing to review the application for alterations at the property under HP-00080-2026. 5. Based on the written materials, oral testimony, staff memoranda, and public comment received during the public hearing held on May 20, 2026, the Board finds as follows: Subsection 16.6.3 - Standards for review of alterations to contributing properties: Standard A. Compatible use When the use of a property is being changed, every reasonable effort shall be made to minimize the alteration of the character-defining features of the building, structure, object, or site. Standard Met? Staff Comments The applicant provided plans and a project description to demonstrate that the structure is intended to retain its residential use. Additionally, the Board notes that the proposed alterations will be limited to the area of the non-historic YES porch. The Board further finds that the work will therefore minimize alterations to the character-defining features of the building. Thus, the Board finds this standard has been met. Standard B. Retain historic features The distinguishing original qualities or character of the building, structure, object, or site shall be retained and preserved. The removal or alteration of any historic material or distinctive architectural features should be avoided when possible. Standard Met? Staff Comments The applicant provided plans to demonstrate the scope of work will be limited to enclosing an existing non-historic porch. The Board finds that this work will YES not require removal or alteration of any historic material or distinctive features. Thus, the Board finds this standard has been met. Standard C. Historical accuracy The building, structure, object, or site shall be recognized as a product of its own time, place, and use. Alterations that have no historical basis or create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or elements from other properties, shall not be undertaken. Standard Met? Staff Comments The applicant provided plans to demonstrate the scope of work includes enclosure of the existing non-historic porch with simple clapboard siding, single lite vertical windows, and a full-lite door. The Board finds that the YES proposed alterations do not create a false sense of historical development since they do not involve the addition of conjectural features. Thus, the Board finds this standard has been met. 2 Page 15 Standard D. Acquired significance Changes which may have taken place in the course of time are evidence of the history and development of the building, structure, object, or site. Changes that have acquired significance in their own right shall be retained and preserved. Standard Met? Staff Comments Historic Preservation staff provided historic documents to demonstrate that the existing porch was added in 1977. The Board finds that the porch was added less than 50 years prior to the designation of the Landmark, and is YES therefore not considered to be a historic alteration to the building. Thus, the Board finds that no changes which have acquired significance are to be removed or altered and this standard has been met. Standard E. Distinctive features Distinctive features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of skilled craftsmanship which characterize the building, structure, object, or site shall be retained and preserved. Standard Met? Staff Comments The applicant provided plans to demonstrate that the scope of work will be limited to enclosing an existing non-historic porch. The Board finds that this YES work will not require removal of any distinctive features. Thus, the Board finds this standard has been met. Standard F. Repair rather than replace Deteriorated historic features shall be repaired rather than replaced wherever feasible. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature should match the feature being replaced in composition, design, texture, and other visual qualities and, where possible, materials. Repair or replacement of missing historic features should be based on accurate duplications of features, substantiated by documentary, physical, or pictorial evidence. Standard Met? Staff Comments The Board finds this standard is not applicable to the proposed scope because NOT the applicant provided plans demonstrating that no replacement of historic APPLICALE material is proposed. Standard G. Surface cleaning The surface cleaning of the building, structure, or object, if appropriate, shall be undertaken with the gentlest means possible. Chemical or physical treatments, such as sandblasting, that cause damage to historic materials shall not be undertaken. Standard Met? Staff Comments NOT The Board finds this standard is not applicable to the proposed scope because APPLICALE the applicant provided plans demonstrating that no surface cleaning is planned. 3 Page 16 Standard H. Archaeological resources Every reasonable effort shall be made to protect and preserve significant archaeological resources affected by or adjacent to any project. If resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures shall be undertaken. Standard Met? Staff Comments The Board finds this standard is not applicable to the proposed scope because NOT the Landmark designation materials for 28 Waterville Street do not identify APPLICALE significant archaeological resources on this site. Standard I. Differentiation and contemporary design Alterations and additions shall not destroy the character-defining features of the building, structure, object, or site. New work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the size, scale, color, material, and character of the building, structure, object, or site. Contemporary design for alterations and additions shall not be discouraged when such alterations and additions do not destroy significant materials or features that characterize the building, structure, object, or site. Standard Met? Staff Comments The applicant provided plans showing the scope of work includes enclosure of the existing non-historic porch with simple clapboard siding, single lite vertical windows, and a full-lite door. The Board finds that the proposed work will be subtly differentiated through the existing form of the porch and its use of YES single lite windows and a full-lite door which are simple modern interventions. And the Board further finds that the use of horizontal clapboard siding and vertical windows make the proposed work compatible with the historic house. Thus, the Board finds this standard has been met. Standard J. Reversibility Wherever possible, new additions or alterations to the building, structure, object, or site shall be undertaken in such a manner that, if such additions or alterations were to be removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the building, structure, object, or site would be unimpaired. Standard Met? Staff Comments The applicant provided plans to demonstrate that the work is limited to enclosure of an existing non-historic porch. The Board finds that this work will YES not require significant changes to the form or details of the existing historic house, and will therefore be readily reversible in the future. Thus, the Board finds this standard has been met. _________________________________________ 4 Page 17 DECISION By a vote of ___ to ___, the Board adopts the above findings of fact to support its [APPROVAL / CONDITIONAL APPROVAL / DENIAL] of application HP-00080-2026 from May 20, 2026. _________________________________________________ ___________________ Brad Miller, Chair Date 5 Page 18 Page 19 Page 20 Page 21 Page 22 Page 23 Page 24 Page 25 Page 26 STAFF MEMORANDUM HISTORIC PRESERVATION PROGRAM PLANNING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT TO: Chair Miller and Members of the Historic Preservation Board FROM: Evan R. Schueckler, Historic Preservation Program Manager DATE: May 15, 2026 RE: 30 Atlantic Street – PUBLIC HEARING – New Construction PROJECT ID: HP-00068-2026 MEETING: May 20, 2026 Owner: Brooke Chornyak and Dylan Jones Architect: Lauren Rosenberg, Lauren Rosenberg Architect, LLC A sign announcing the Historic Preservation Board’s meeting on May 20, 2026 was posted at the property on May 11, 2026, and 28 notices were sent to neighboring property owners within 100 feet of the subject property. _________________________________________ PROJECT SCOPE Construct new two-story gable-roofed single-family house with associated gable-roofed garage. House Dimensions: Garage Dimensions: Overall Height: ~29’ 6” Overall Height: ~14’ Footprint: ~87’ X 22’ 6” Footprint: ~13’ X 24’ Material Specifications: House Garage Foundation Concrete Concrete Siding “Masonry tile” & cedar Cedar Trim Not specified Not specified Roofing Standing seam metal Standing seam metal Windows Aluminum-clad wood Aluminum-clad wood Doors Not specified Not specified _________________________________________ 1 Page 27 SUMMARY OF HISTORIC CONTEXT Figure 1: Map of the Munjoy Hill Historic District showing location of 30 Atlantic Street with yellow star. Munjoy Hill is a dense historic neighborhood with a blend of vernacular, working-class architecture and a number of grand, high-style houses which primarily face onto the Eastern Promenade. There are also a small number of commercial and institutional buildings scattered throughout. Early in Portland’s development, Munjoy Hill was sparsely populated with only a few houses located at the western base of the hill, closer to the waterfront. Other than the area occupied by the Portland Observatory and its attendant structures (constructed in 1807), the majority of the Hill was privately maintained as open-space for the pasturing of cows. The original Tukey’s Bridge, constructed in 1796, connected the eastern end of the Portland peninsula to the mainland and prompted the laying out of Washington Avenue. Development on the hill remained slow-going early in the nineteenth century. Regardless, in 1836 the City of Portland purchased the lands along the edge of the peninsula that would eventually become the Eastern promenade in response to the increasing development. The earliest houses, of which only a few survive, were generally very modest one- to two-story wood-frame capes. 2 Page 28  Figure #: An example of an early, though somewhat altered, cape type house, which would have been common in the early- to mid-nineteenth century (7 Lafayette Street). Development picked-up pace in the mid-nineteenth century with the founding of the Atlantic and St. Lawrence Railroad in 1845 and the Portland Company in 1847. Jobs at the Portland Company in particular, at the base of Munjoy Hill and along the waterfront, created the need for working-class housing in close proximity. The undeveloped tracts on Munjoy Hill provided ample space for that growth. Homes from the mid nineteenth century were often built in the vernacular Greek Revival style, featuring highly symmetrical façades and austere classically-inspired details. Figure #: An example of a more ornate asymmetrical gable-fronted Greek Revival (8 Sherbrook Street). In the aftermath of the Great Fire of 1866, Portland found itself in dire need of additional housing and significant development occurred on Munjoy Hill. This was fueled by subdivision of the remaining large tracts of land and the arrival of horse-drawn (and later electric) streetcars, which made the easternmost ends of the peninsula easily accessible to downtown Portland. In this late- 3 Page 29 nineteenth century era, the scale of buildings increased, with many two- to three-family Italianate and Second Empire structures being built. This dense mode of development was further fueled by an influx of immigrants in the early-twentieth century. The demand for housing led to the advent of the now ubiquitous triple-deckers which dominate the easternmost ends of Munjoy Hill. These large frame structures can be found dressed in various architectural styles that were popular from the 1880s into the 1910s. Figure #: A typical street showing examples of triple-deckers and Italianate duplexes (82, 84, 86, & 88 Beckett). This same era also saw increased interest in the expansive views and beauty of the Eastern Promenade by Portland’s wealthiest residents. A number of grand single-family homes were built along the Promenade in the Italianate, Second Empire, Shingle, and Queen Anne styles. This development in the very early-twentieth century solidified the Eastern Promenade streetscape as we know it today. Figure #: An example of grant Queen Anne style house facing onto the Eastern Promenade (140 Eastern Promenade). 4 Page 30 Munjoy Hill has a long history of development and features highly varied architectural expressions across buildings. Many buildings also feature historical alterations, as past owners tried to update Capes or Greek Revival houses with Italianate or Queen Anne details, creating varied and dynamic layers of history. Regardless of this diversity, there are a handful of unifying features within the district. Construction is primarily of wood frame over brick or stone foundations, with only a handful of primarily brick structures. Structures are typically independent, but constructed densely, with tight driveways and side yards. Front yards are typically extremely shallow, with proximity to the sidewalk being prioritized even on large lots. Projecting bay windows or entry porches are often used to create additional variety along the sidewalk. Windows are predominantly vertically oriented with varied placement on front and side elevations. The immediate vicinity of the proposed development is highly eclectic, reflecting the overall diversity of the district’s architecture. There are several one-and-a-half story structures along Atlantic, with 48 Atlantic being the most architecturally spectacular of them. Two-and-a-half-story Greek revival and Italianates predominate, with a few second empire houses, triple-deckers, and larger multi-unit buildings intersperse. Figure 4: 2023 google street views showing 48 Atlantic Street (left image, left), a spectacular low-scale Italianate house next to 52 Atlantic (left image, right), a typical two-and-a-half-story Italianate house. 29 and 23 Atlantic (right image, left to right) are examples to austere two-and-a-half-story Greek revivals. 5 Page 31  Figure 5: 2023 google street views showing 28 Atlantic Street (left), an example of high-style triple decker, and 55 Atlantic, an early fully brick three-story apartment built. Additional information on the Munjoy Hill Historic District can be found on the city website: https://www.portlandmaine.gov/1548/Historic-Designations _________________________________________ PREVIOUS REVIEW BY HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD April 15, 2026, Workshop: Figure 6: Rendered view looking south from the April 15 workshop. During the workshop Board members expressed generally favorable views of the proposed design stating the form, scale, placement, and fenestration of the proposed new construction were all 6 Page 32 very compatible with the Munjoy Hill Historic District. Board members did express an openness with some mild reservation regarding the proposed tile shingle cladding system. Board members requested additional information and views of the material to better understand its character. The Board’s most significant concern was with the proposed primary entrance placement and configuration. Board members noted that while side entrances are common throughout the Munjoy Hill Historic District, they are usually placed fairly close to the street and are quite prominent either through robust trim details or porches that project to or very close to the street. Board members noted that some of the proposed site features, including a solid fence between the house and garage, further reduced visibility and prominence of the significantly set back front door. Members recommended exploring ways of making the entrance more visually prominent. _________________________________________ STAFF COMMENTS Since the workshop, the applicant has made some changes to the proposed site features in an effort to emphasize the building’s entrance. The applicant is now proposing a lower, 4’ tall, fence and gate between the house and garage. Additionally, they have added a walkway separate from the driveway that provides a pedestrian approach to the gate and door beyond. In response to questions about the cladding material, the applicant has provided additional images of the proposed tile shingle product on several completed projects. _________________________________________ MOTION FOR CONSIDERATION I move to [APPROVE / CONDITIONALLY APPROVE / DENY] application HP-00068-2026 for new construction at 30 Atlantic Street 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 amended during the meeting on May 20, 2026 that the project [MEETS / FAILS TO MEET] subsection 16.6.4 standards for review of additions and new construction [WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:] 1) [CONDITIONS] _________________________________________ ATTACHMENTS 1. Project Description 2. Drawings 3. HP-00068-2026 Draft Findings of Fact, May 15, 2026 7 Page 33  Re: Project description for Historic Preservation Application Submission / V2 APR IL 2 7, 202 6 Dear City of Portland Planning and Urban Development Department, The property of 30 Atlantic Street is currently a .12 acre vacant parcel on Munjoy Hill. The proposed project includes three separate structures: a main house (2983 square feet) , detached 1-car garage, and detached sauna pavilion. From the street, the house (the principle structure) is justified on the left side of the property, measuring 18’ wide and extending to the rear setback. The house has a strong connection to the street and ensures continuity in the neighborhood. The house has a 9:12 standing seam gable roof. The facades are a combination of masonry tile and vertical cedar boards. The masonry tile is a timeless natural material that has a 100-year warranty and resembles traditional cedar shingles. The vertical boards connect a grouping of windows on the first and second levels, and will be stained to match the masonry tiles. The staircase on the left-side of the building protrudes out to allow for daylight to be brought into the staircase while maintaining privacy from the adjacent neighbor, and adding architectural interest from the street. The entry shares a similar language, yet by maximizing glazing: this emphasizes the entry, allows light into the house, provides a visual continuity between the front and back yard, and is highly visible from the street. A flat roof extends over the entry and garage roof, providing a covered “connection” between the house and the garage. From the street, the garage is justified on the right side of the property and is 13’ wide and set back 14’-6” from the house. The garage also has a 9:12 standing seam gable roof. The garage facade will be vertical cedar boards, aligning with the tonality of the main house masonry tile. A sauna pavilion anchors the far right rear of the property, forming a courtyard within the three buildings. The pavilion will also be clad with natural vertical cedar boarding and will be seasonally used. The structure is intended to “float” over the property and fully engage with the designed landscape. L A U R E N R O S E N B E R G A R C H I T E C T L L C L R A R C . C O M Page 34  I appreciate the feedback that was provided during the April 15th workshop. We have considered the comments and have taken multiple measures to alter the approach to provide more of a connection to the street. The initial design included a taller gate that APR IL 2 7, 202 6 acted as a continuation of the front garage facade. We have eliminated this connection, understanding it felt like a wall, and pushed the gate towards the back of the property and lowered it to ~4’, aligning with the masonry wall tile. We also incorporated the house number and mailbox onto the entrance gate to ensure that one knows this is clearly the entrance — it’s the entrance to the property that anyone could feel comfortable approaching, with high visibility to the entry door (which stands 10’ tall) and to the backyard (with an additional sight line through the house to the backyard) . The original design had a walkway that only connected the driveway to the entrance gate. We have altered this to provide a direct connection to the sidewalk, making it very clear that anyone on the sidewalk can enter the property. These shifts work together to create an entry that is closer to the street, more inviting, and fully engaged with the neighborhood. Thank you, Lauren Rosenberg L A U R E N R O S E N B E R G A R C H I T E C T L L C L R A R C . C O M Page 35  3 0 AT L A N T I C S T R E E T H I S TO R I C P R E S E R VAT I O N A P P L I C AT I O N 04.27.2026 OWNER Brooke Chornyak and Dylan Jones ARCHITECT LR/ARC LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT Matthew Cunningham Landscape Design CIVIL ENGINEER Acorn Engineering, Inc. STRUCTURAL ENGINEER Albert Putnam Associates LR/ARC Page 36  SITE CONTEXT A T L A N T IC E D S A T N R E E E M T O R P N R E T S A E 3 0 AT L A N T I C S T R E E T H I S TO R I C P R E S E R VAT I O N A P P L I C AT I O N | 0 4 . 2 7 . 2 0 2 6 LR/ARC Page 37  STREETSCAPE 3 0 AT L A N T I C S T R E E T H I S TO R I C P R E S E R VAT I O N A P P L I C AT I O N | 0 4 . 2 7 . 2 0 2 6 LR/ARC Page 38  STREETSCAPE DIAGRAM WIDTH AND HEIGHT PROPORTIONAL TO S T R E E T S C A P E S TA C K E D B AY T W O - S TO RY E N T RY B U M P - O U T GABLE ROOF GABLE ROOF WINDOWS COVERED ENTRY SIDE ENTRANCE A L L U S I O N TO S TA C K E D B AY W I N D O W S RECESSED GARAGE C L E A R V I E W TO T H E F R O N T D O O R VISUAL PRIVACY ( H I G H W I N D O W S I L L / LO W E N T RY G AT E ) 3 0 AT L A N T I C S T R E E T H I S TO R I C P R E S E R VAT I O N A P P L I C AT I O N | 0 4 . 2 7 . 2 0 2 6 LR/ARC Page 39  FIGURE GROUND DIAGRAM PRECEDENT BUILDINGS A # 5 6 AT L A N T I C S T R E E T B # 3 7 AT L A N T I C S T R E E T C # 2 7 M U N J OY S T R E E T D # 5 1 WAT E R V I L L E S T R E E T E # 3 4 AT L A N T I C S T R E E T F # 6 6 AT L A N T I C S T R E E T G # 7 AT L A N T I C S T R E E T CONSISTENT SETBACK FROM STREET MASSING AND BUILDING WIDTH CONSISTENT ALONG STREET 3 0 AT L A N T I C S T R E E T H I S TO R I C P R E S E R VAT I O N A P P L I C AT I O N | 0 4 . 2 7 . 2 0 2 6 LR/ARC Page 40  PRECEDENT IMAGES A # 5 6 AT L A N T I C S T R E E T GABLE ROOF S U B O R D I N AT E S I D E E N T R A N C E B # 3 7 AT L A N T I C S T R E E T GABLE ROOF SIDE ENTRANCE SET BACK FROM THE STREET 3 0 AT L A N T I C S T R E E T H I S TO R I C P R E S E R VAT I O N A P P L I C AT I O N | 0 4 . 2 7 . 2 0 2 6 LR/ARC Page 41  PRECEDENT IMAGES C # 2 7 M U N J OY S T R E E T GABLE ROOF T W O - S TO RY B U M P - O U T AT E N T RY S U B O R D I N AT E S I D E E N T R A N C E B E H I N D G AT E MAIN ENTRY HIDDEN FROM STREETVIEW D # 5 1 W AT E R V I L L E S T R E E T VARIOUS WINDOW SIZES ON FRONT FACADE S U B O R D I N AT E S I D E E N T R A N C E 3 0 AT L A N T I C S T R E E T H I S TO R I C P R E S E R VAT I O N A P P L I C AT I O N | 0 4 . 2 7 . 2 0 2 6 LR/ARC Page 42  PRECEDENT IMAGES E # 3 4 AT L A N T I C S T R E E T GABLE ROOF SIDE ENTRANCE SET BACK FROM THE STREET HISTORIC PRECEDENTS * C U R R E N T LY D E M O L I S H E D / M A J O R LY R E N O V A T E D B U I L D I N G S F # 6 6 AT L A N T I C S T R E E T G # 7 AT L A N T I C S T R E E T GABLE ROOF GABLE ROOF SIDE ENTRANCE SET BACK FROM S T R E E T, B E H I N D G AT E T W O - S TO RY E N T RY BUMP-OUT ON SIDE OF BUILDING 3 0 AT L A N T I C S T R E E T H I S TO R I C P R E S E R VAT I O N A P P L I C AT I O N | 0 4 . 2 7 . 2 0 2 6 LR/ARC Page 43  8 Chornyak-Jones 11 G Residence SITE PLAN 30-32 Atlantic Street Portland, Maine G 118 G General Notes: 1. Existing conditions and topographic data are 118 from a site plan of land dated 17 July 2025; G prepared by Owen Haskell, Inc., 390 US-Route NEIGHBOR Chornyak-Jones 1, Unit 10, Falmouth, ME 04105 - Tel: (207) 774.0424 Residence G 2. Existing conditions supplemented from data PROPERTY LINE collected by: Matthew Cunningham Landscape G G G G 30-32 Design LLC, G Atlantic Street G411 Main G Street, Stoneham, MA G G 118 G Portland, Maine G G 02108 / 366 Fore Street, Portland, ME 04101 G FENCE - Tel: (617) 905.2246 LOW RETAINING WALL 3. True and current conditions may differ from 120 General Notes: those indicated on the plan. Contractor shall G GRAVEL STORAGE verify true conditions in the field prior to SPACE 1. Existing conditions and topographic data are construction and notify landscape designer of BUILDING SETBACK 118 from a site plan of land dated 17 July 2025; significant discrepancies. prepared by Owen Haskell, Inc., 390 US-Route G NEIGHBOR 1, Unit 10, Falmouth, ME 04105 - Tel: (207) 4. Contractor shall verify location of any existing 774.0424 utilities and services and provide protection SOAKE POOL PROPERTY LINE during construction. Contractor shall directly 2. Existing conditions supplemented from data MECHANICAL 119 coordinate with DIG Safe. Utilities damaged G G G G G G G G G G collected by: Matthew Cunningham Landscape during construction shall be repaired at SOAKE FENCE Design LLC, 411 Main Street, Stoneham, MA LOW RETAINING WALL contractor's expense. 118 POOL 02108 / 366 Fore Street, Portland, ME 04101 LF-1 - Tel: (617) 905.2246 7 ATLANTIC STREET 9 11 5. Contractor shall contact and inform client and G 11 120 STONE PATIO 5'-0" GRAVEL STORAGE landscape esigner to any unforeseen conditions 3. True and current conditions may differ from LF-1 SPACE 3'-6" 3'-0" RE-ALIGNED which may affect the intended design as set forth those indicated on the plan. Contractor shall GARAGE in the drawings. ENTRY DRIVE verify true conditions in the field prior to BUILDING SETBACK G construction and notifyENTRY landscape designer of SAUNA 6. LOW NATIVE Contractor shall secure any necessary significant discrepancies. 3'-0" permitsPLANTING required for the work from any state or local agencies, departments, utility companies or 4. Contractor shall verify location of any existing other authorities having jurisdiction and affected G SOAKE POOL utilities and services and provide protection 119 MECHANICAL by the work. PROPERTY LINE during construction. Contractor shall directly G G G G G coordinate with DIG Safe. Utilities damaged SOAKE G G G G 7. All work shall be in in accordance with the 6'-0" 4'-0" 118 during construction shall be repaired at LF-1 G POOL FENCE Maine State Building Code. LF-1 LOW RETAINING WALL contractor's expense. LF-1 7 ATLANTIC STREET 9 11 ENTRY shall 8. Contractor PATH LIGHTING leave site clean and orderly 11 STONE PATIO 2'-6" 5. Contractor shall contact and inform client and 120 during all phases of the construction process. 5'-0" landscape designer to any unforeseen conditions G LF-1 Remove from the site all excess materials, soils, 10'-0" GRAVEL STORAGE RE-ALIGNED 6'-0" SPACE 3'-6" GARAGE 3'-0" ENTRY DRIVE which may affect the intended design as set forth ENTRY debris, WALK Store and equipment. WITHmaterials only in an STONE WALK in the drawings. BUILDING SETBACK approved location.STEPS GRANITE SAUNA 6. Contractor shall secure any necessary G 9. Do not scale drawings. 3'-0" LF-1 permits required for the work from any state or FENCE local agencies, departments, utility companies or BUILDING SETBACK 10. All angles ORNAMENTAL are assumed to be 90 degrees authorities having ENTRY jurisdictionPLANTER K PROPERTY LINE SOAKE POOL other and affected BUILDING SETBAC unless otherwise stated. WITH work.PERENIALS AND ANNUALS 119 MECHANICAL STONE WALK by the G PROPERTY LINE 10'-0" 118 SOAKE 7. All work shall be in in accordance with the 1'-0" 6'-0" 4'-0" POOL STEP LF-1 STEP Maine State Building Code. LF-1 7 G ATLANTIC STREET 9 11 8. Contractor shall leave site clean and orderly 11 STONE PATIO 2'-6" 1'-0" during all phases of the construction process. 5'-0" 3'-0" Remove from the site all excess materials, soils, 6'-0" LF-1 GARAGE 10'-0" RE-ALIGNED 3'-0" ENTRY DRIVE debris, and equipment. Store materials only in an G STONE WALK SAUNA 11 approved location. RESIDENCE 6 9. Do not scale drawings. 6'-9" G BUILDING SETBACK 10. All angles are assumed to be 90 degrees K 7'-6" 3'-0" 117 PROPERTY LINE 8 unless otherwise stated. RE-BULT RETAINING WALL BUILDING SETBAC 11 STONE WALK 10'-0" 3'-0" G 118 1'-0" STEP LF-1 STEP 2'-6" 1'-0" G 5'-0" 3'-0" 3'-0" STONE WALK 11 G 6'-9" RESIDENCE 6 BUILDING SETBACK 7'-6" 3'-0" DR K G PROPERTY LINE D 117 BUILDING SETBAC 8 STONE WALK 11 STEP STEP 3'-0" G 2'-6" W W BRICKS REMOVED 116 G 117 BUILDING SETBACK 11 RESIDENCE 165 G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G 117 G G G G G 8 G DR 11 D PROPERTY LINE G W W BRICKS REMOVED 116 G 2'-2" BUILDING SETBACK 411 Main Street, Stoneham, MA 02180 366 Fore Street, Portland, ME 04101 11 G 7 617.905.2246 p | 617.321.4014 f 5'-0" GRAVEL ACCESS PINE DUFF PATH 5 REVISIONS: DR D G G G G AREA G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G #: DATE: DESCRIPTION: G PROPERTY LINE W W G BRICKS REMOVED 116 C H R NYA K- J O NE S 2'-2" BUILDING SETBACK 411 Main Street, Stoneham, MA 02180 366 Fore Street, Portland, ME 04101 30 Atlantic St. Portland, Maine 7 11 617.905.2246 p | 617.321.4014 f LANDSCAPE MASTERPLAN 5'-0" GRAVEL ACCESS PINE DUFF PATH 5 SCALE: 1/4"=1'-0" REVISIONS: DATE: 06 April 2026 G G G G AREA G G G G G G G G G G G 27 APRIL 2026 #: DATE: G G G G G G G DESCRIPTION: NEIGHBOR SCALE: 1/4"=1'-0" 0' 4' 8' 16' PROPERTY LINE SHEET TITLE: 0' 3 04' AT L A N8'T I C S T12' REET 20' H I S TO R I C P R E S E R VAT I O N A P P L I C AT I O N | 0 4 . 2 7 . 2 0 2 6 LR/ARC Page 44 Landscape Site Plan  FIRST FLOOR PLANS G A R A G E S A U N A ( F F E : 12 0 ' - 6 " ) E N T R Y ( F F E : 12 0 ' - 0 " ) H A L L SITTING R O O M B E D R O O M 1 M U D R O O M L A U N D R Y S C U L L E R Y K IT C HE N DR B A T H 1 D W W ST A IR 3 0 AT L A N T I C S T R E E T H I S TO R I C P R E S E R VAT I O N A P P L I C AT I O N | 0 4 . 2 7 . 2 0 2 6 LR/ARC Page 45  SECOND FLOOR PLAN H A L L H A L L P R IMA R Y B E D R O O M B E D R O O M 2 P R I M A R Y W C C L O S E T B A T H 2 P R I M A R Y B A T H R O M ST A IR 3 0 AT L A N T I C S T R E E T H I S TO R I C P R E S E R VAT I O N A P P L I C AT I O N | 0 4 . 2 7 . 2 0 2 6 LR/ARC Page 46  914 .4 7 5.6061 | L a ur en@L Ra r c .c om P AV I L I O N E L E V AT I O N S SB SA SB SA S2 S1 S2 S1 laur en r osenber g architect llc 2 2 C U S H M A N S T R EET , 2 A P O R T L A N D , M A I N E 0 4 10 2 914 .4 7 5.6061 | L a ur en@L Ra r c .c om SB SA SB SA S2 S1 S2 S1 E V A T ION 1 N O R T H E L E V A T ION 2 W E S T E L E V A T ION 2 W E S T E L E V A T ION 1' - 0 " S C A L E : 1/ 4 " = 1' - 0 " S C A L E : 1/ 4 " = 1' - 0 " S C A L E : 1/ 4 " = 1' - 0 " 30 A T L A NT IC S T R E E T 30 A T L A NT IC S T R E E T E V A T ION 1' - 0 " 1 N O R T H E L E V A T ION S C A L E : 1/ 4 " = 1' - 0 " 2 W E S T E L E V A T ION S C A L E : 1/ 4 " = 1' - 0 " 2 W E S T E L E V A T ION S C A L E : 1/ 4 " = 1' - 0 " A T LA NT IC N O R T H E L E V AT I O N W E S T E L E V AT I O N P O R T L A N D , M A I N E 0 4 10 1 P O R T L A N D , M A I N E 0 4 10 1 A T LA NT IC SA SB SA SB S1 S2 S1 S2 SA SB SA SB S1 S2 S1 S2 E V A T ION 3 S O U T H E L E V A T ION 4 E A S T E L E V A T ION 4 E A S T E L E V A T ION 1' - 0 " S C A L E : 1/ 4 " = 1' - 0 " S C A L E : 1/ 4 " = 1' - 0 " S C A L E : 1/ 4 " = 1' - 0 " S O U T H E L E V AT I O N E A S T E L E V AT I O N PAVILION ELEVATIONS SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" DATE: 3/ 17/ 26 E V A T ION S O U T H E L E V A T ION E A S T E L E V A T ION E A S T E L E V A T ION 1' - 0 " 3 S C A L E : 1/ 4 " = 1' - 0 " 4 S C A L E : 1/ 4 " = 1' - 0 " 4 S C A L E : 1/ 4 " = 1' - 0 " A-204 PAVILION ELEVATIONS SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" DATE: 3/ 17/ 26 3 0 AT L A N T I C S T R E E T H I S TO R I C P R E S E R VAT I O N A P P L I C AT I O N | 0 4 . 2 7 . 2 0 2 6 LR/ARC Page 47 A-204  G A R A G E E L E V AT I O N S laur en r osenber g architect llc 2 2 C U S H M A N S T R EET , 2 A P O R T L A N D , M A I N E 0 4 10 2 914 .4 7 5.6061 | L a ur en@L Ra r c .c om GB GB GA GA G2 G2 G1 G1 laur en r osenber g architect llc 2 2 C U S H M A N S T R EET , 2 A P O R T L A N D , M A I N E 0 4 10 2 12 12 12 12 GB GA G2 G1 914 .4 7 5.6061 | L a ur en@L Ra r c .c om GB 9 9 GA 9 9 G2 G1 12 12 12 12 9 9 9 9 116 116 116 116 1 N O R T H E L E V A T ION N O R T H E L E V A T ION 2 W E S T E L E V A T ION W E S T E L E V A T ION 1 2 S C A L E : 1/ 4 " = 1' - 0 " S C A L E : 1/ 4 " = 1' - 0 " S C A L E : 1/ 4 " = 1' - 0 " S C A L E : 1/ 4 " = 1' - 0 " 3 0 A T L A N T I C S3T0R E AT E LT A N T I C S T R E E T A T L A N T IA CT L A N T I C N O R T H E L E V A T ION 1 N O R T H E L E V AT I O N N O R T H E L E V A T ION W E S T E L E V A T2 I WOEN W E S T E L E V A T ION S T E L E V A T ION 1 2 S C A L E : 1/ 4 " = 1' - 0 " S C A L E : 1/ 4 " = 1' - 0 " S C A L E : 1/ 4 " = 1' - 0 " S C A L E : 1/ 4 " = 1' - 0 " P O R T L A N D , M AP IO NRE T0L4A10 N D1 , M A I N E 0 4 10 1 GA GA GB GB G1 G1 G2 G2 12 12 12 12 GA 9 9 GA GB 9 9 GB G1 G1 G2 G2 12 12 12 12 9 9 9 9 D04 D04 S O U T H E L E V AT I O N E A S T E L E V AT I O N 3 S O U T H E L E V A T ION S O U T H E L E V A T ION 4 E A S T E L E V A T I OD04 N E A S T E L E V A T I OD04 N 3 4 S C A L E : 1/ 4 " = 1' - 0 " S C A L E : 1/ 4 " = 1' - 0 " S C A L E : 1/ 4 " = 1' - 0 " S C A L E : 1/ 4 " = 1' - 0 " GA RA GE S O U T H E L E V A T ION S O U T H E L E V A T ION E A S T E L E V A T ION E A S T E L E V A T ION ELEVATIONS 3 3 4 4 S C A L E : 1/ 4 " = 1' - 0 " S C A L E : 1/ 4 " = 1' - 0 " S C A L E : 1/ 4 " = 1' - 0 " S C A L E : 1/ 4 " = 1' - 0 " SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" DATE: 4/27/26 3 0 AT L A N T I C S T R E E T H I S TO R I C P R E S E R VAT I O N A P P L I C AT I O N | 0 4 . 2 7 . 2 0 2 6 LR/ARC Page 48 GA RAA-203 GE ELEVATIONS  H O U S E E L E V AT I O N S 35'-0" M A X B U I L D I N G H E I G H T 35'-0" M A X B U I L D I N G H E I G H T D C B A A B C D T.O. R I D G E T.O. R I D G E E L E V . = 2 8 ' - 3 1/ 4 " E L E V . = 2 8 ' - 3 1/ 4 " 12 12 12 12 9 9 9 9 laur en r osenber g architect llc 2 2 C U S H M A N S T R EET , 2 A P O R T L A N D , M A I N E 0 4 10 2 914 .4 7 5.6061 | L a ur en@L Ra r c .c om T.O. P L A T E ( S E C O N D F L O O R ) T.O. P L A T E ( S E C O N D F L O O R ) E L E V . = 2 0 ' - 10 " E L E V . = 2 0 ' - 10 " 208 207 215 214 T.O. S U B F L O O R ( S E C O N D F L O O R ) T.O. S U B F L O O R ( S E C O N D F L O O R ) E L E V . = 11' - 4 3 / 4 " E L E V . = 11' - 4 3 / 4 " 107 106 114 113 T.O. S U B F L O O R ( F IR S T F L O O R ) T.O. S U B F L O O R ( F IR S T F L O O R ) E L E V .= 0'-0" E L E V .= 0'-0" S I T E E L E V . = 119 ' - 0 1/ 4 " S I T E E L E V . = 119 ' - 0 1/ 4 " 30 A T L A NT IC S T R E E T A T LA NT IC 1 N O R T H E L E V A T ION 1 S O U T H E L E V A T ION S C A L E : 1/ 4 " = 1' - 0 " S C A L E : 1/ 4 " = 1' - 0 " N O R T H E L E V AT I O N S O U T H E L E V AT I O N P O R T L A N D , M A I N E 0 4 10 1 35'-0" M A X B U I L D I N G H E I G H T 5.0 4.0 3.0 1.0 2.0 2.0 1.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 T.O. R I D G E E L E V . = 2 8 ' - 3 1/ 4 " 3 0 AT L A N T I C S T R E E T H I S TO R I C P R E S E R VAT I O N A P P L I C AT I O N | 0 4 . 2 7 . 2 0 2 6 LR/ARC Page 49 T.O. P L A T E ( S E C O N D F L O O R ) E L E V . = 2 0 ' - 10 "  30 ATLAN 35'-0" M A X B U I L D I N G H E I G H T A B C D A T L P OR T L A ND, T.O. R I D G E H O U S E E L E V AT I O N S 35'-0" M A X B U I L D I N G H E I G H T 12 12 E L E V .= 28'-0" 9 9 6.0 5.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 laur en r osenber g archite 2 2 C U S H M A N S T R EET PO R T L A ND, MA INE 0 T.O. R I D G E E L E V . = 2 8 ' - 3 1/ 4 " 914 .4 7 5.6061 | L a ur en@L Ra r T.O. P L A T E ( S E C O N D F L O O R ) EL EV .= 20'-6 3/4" T.O. P L A T E ( S E C O N D F L O O R ) E L E V . = 2 0 ' - 10 " 215 214 206 T.O. S U B F L O O R ( S E C O N D F L O O R ) 205 204 E L E V . = 11' - 4 3 / 4 " 217 216 215 202 T.O. S U B F L O O R ( S E C O N D F L O O R ) E L E V . = 11' - 4 3 / 4 " 114 113 105 104 103 T.O. S U B F L O O R ( F IR S T F L O O R ) E L E V .= 0'-0" 115 114 30 A T L A NT IC S T R E E T D02 102 A T LA NT IC T.O. S U B F L O O R ( F IR S T F L O O R ) 1 S O U T H E L E V A T ION E L E V .= 0'-0" MA IN HOUSE S I T E E L E V . = 119 ' - 0 1/ 4 " S C A L E : 1/ 4 " = 1' - 0 " ELEVATIONS SCALE: 3/8" = 1'-0" DATE: 4/27/26 W E S T E L E V A T ION P O R T L A N D , M A I N E 0 4 10 1 2 W E S T E L E V AT I O N S C A L E : 1/ 4 " = 1' - 0 " A-201 35'-0" M A X B U I L D I N G H E I G H T 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 T.O. R I D G E E L E V .= 28'-0" T.O. P L A T E ( S E C O N D F L O O R ) EL EV .= 20'-6 3/4" 213 210 T.O. S U B F L O O R ( S E C O N D F L O O R ) E L E V . = 11' - 4 3 / 4 " 112 110 109 108 T.O. S U B F L O O R ( F IR S T F L O O R ) E L E V .= 0'-0" MA IN HOUSE ELEVATIONS SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" DATE: 3/ 17/ 26 2 E A S T E L E V AT I O N E A S T E L E V A T ION S C A L E : 1/ 4 " = 1' - 0 " 3 0 AT L A N T I C S T R E E T H I S TO R I C P R E S E R VAT I O N A P P L I C AT I O N | 0 4 . 2 7 . 2 0 2 6 LR/ARC A-20 Page 50  RENDERINGS VIEW FROM STREET V I E W F R O M C O U R T YA R D 3 0 AT L A N T I C S T R E E T H I S TO R I C P R E S E R VAT I O N A P P L I C AT I O N | 0 4 . 2 7 . 2 0 2 6 LR/ARC Page 51  SKETCH RENDERINGS 3 0 AT L A N T I C S T R E E T H I S TO R I C P R E S E R VAT I O N A P P L I C AT I O N | 0 4 . 2 7 . 2 0 2 6 LR/ARC Page 52  P R O P O S E D M AT E R I A L S MASONRY TILE | GLEN-GERY SK1N VERTICAL CEDAR BOARDING S TA N D I N G S E A M M E TA L R O O F - G A LV A L U M E 3 0 AT L A N T I C S T R E E T H I S TO R I C P R E S E R VAT I O N A P P L I C AT I O N | 0 4 . 2 7 . 2 0 2 6 LR/ARC Page 53  MASONRY TILE | PRECEDENT IMAGES 3 0 AT L A N T I C S T R E E T H I S TO R I C P R E S E R VAT I O N A P P L I C AT I O N | 0 4 . 2 7 . 2 0 2 6 LR/ARC Page 54  PROPOSED DOOR/WINDOW M A R V I N U LT I M A T E MARVIN MODERN casement/fixed multislide door 3 0 AT L A N T I C S T R E E T H I S TO R I C P R E S E R VAT I O N A P P L I C AT I O N | 0 4 . 2 7 . 2 0 2 6 LR/ARC Page 55  2 8 2 6 NOTE: SEE ST R UC T UR A L METAL SILL PAN W IT H 2 2 2 2 2 2 F OR HE A DE R SIZING BA C K DA M. DO NOT SET IN SE A L A NT 2 8 2 6 EX T ENT OF BOA R DING WMETAL R A P GRSILL A C EPAN ICEWAIT NDH 2 2 2 NOT E: SEE ST R UC T UR A L 2 2 2 WATERBA C K LDA SHIE D M. ONT DO NOT SILL AY P R O P O S E D B U I L D I N G D E TA I L S F OR HE A DE R SIZING SET IN SE A L A NT EX T ENT OF TR IM N ALL EX T ENT OF BOA R DING EX T ENT OF F L OOR ING W R A P GR A C E ICE A ND 2x SILL, P IT CHED TO AY NOT E: SEE ST R UC T UR A L WATER SHIE L D ONT O SILL DR A IN N ALL F OR HE A DE R SIZING EX T ENT OF TR IM SEA L F L A SHING TO SHE A T HING W IT H ST R IP OF V P 10 0 EX T ENT OF F L OOR ING T .O. S U B F L O O R A T F IR S T F L O O R SE L F -A DHE R E D ME MB R A NE 2x SILL, P IT E CHED L E VTO .= 2 1' - 0 " DR A IN SEA L C OP P E R F L A SHING 3 0 A T3L0A A N TT ILC A NSTTI R C ESETTR E E T SEA L F L A SHING TO TO SHE A T HING W IT H ST R IP 2 6 1 1/ 4" NOSE STARTER SHE A T HINGTR IM W IT H ST R IP OF V P 10 T .O. S U B F L O O R A T F IR S T F L O O R OF SE0L F -A DHE R E D SE L F -A DHE R E D ME MB R A NE BL OC K ING AS R EQ 'D ME MB R A NE E L E V .= 2 1' - 0 " A T L AAT L NAT INCT I C 10 10 10 10 10 10 SEA L C OP P E R F L A SHING 2 6 3/ 16" x 3/ 16" DR IP K ERF TO SHE A T HING W IT H ST R IP 2 6 NOSE AL UMINUMTRTRIMIM AT HE A D 1 1/ 4" STARTER 1/ OF4"SEVLENT F -AILA T R DHEIONE DGA P BL OC K ING AS R EQ 'D 2 8 A ND JA MB S BL OC K ING AS R EQ 'D 2 6 ME MB R A NE 1x K IC K BOA R D 10 10 10 10 10 10 2 6 3/ 16" x 3/ 16" DR IP K ERF A L UMINUM TR IM AT HE A D 1/ 4" V ENT ILA T ION GA P BL OC K ING AS R EQ 'D 2 8 A ND JA MB S 2 6 BL OC K ING AS R EQ 'D 1x K IC K BOA R D F L A SHING, TYP. D O NOT SEA L HE R E EX T ENT OF HA R DSC A P E P O R TPLOARNTDL, AMNADI ,N M E A0I 4N E 10 1 0 4 10 1 DRYWALL R ET UR N AT C OP P E R HE A D F L A SHING, BL OC K ING AS R EQ 'D JA MBS A ND HE A D INT E R IOR BA C K E R TYP. F L A SHING, TYP. R OD A ND SE A L A NT D O NOT SEA L HE R E APPLY F L UID OV E R EX T ENT OF HA R DSC A P E INT E R IOR BA C K E R F L A NGE A ND ONT O F R A ME R OD A ND DRYWALL SEUR R ET A LNA NT AT C L OSED CELL SPRAY C OP P E R HE A D F L A SHING, F OA M INT INSUL AT HE A D A ND JA MBS JA MBS A ND HE A D E RA T IORION BAIN CKEALLR TYP. CAVITIES R OD A ND ASERAOL A UNDNT C L OSED CELL SPRAY F OA M W I ND O W S APPLY F L UID OV E R 2 4 AT INT E INSUL A T ION INRALL IOR BA C K R CAVITIES F L A NGE A ND ONT O F R A ME ARROODUNDA NDWSE AL IND OAWNTS C L OSED CELL SPRAY F OA M INSUL A T ION IN ALL AT HE A D A ND JA MBS CAVITIES A R O UND C L OSED CELL SPRAY F OA M W I ND O W S 2 4 AT INSUL A T ION IN ALL CAVITIES A R O UND W IND O W 5 TYPICAL CASEMENT HEAD DETAIL @ MASONRY TILE WALL 9 FLOOR TO CEILING W INDOW SILL A-601 SCALE: 3" = 1'-0" A-601 SCALE: 3" = 1'-0" 2 1/ 2" 2 1/ 2" TYPICAL CASEMENT HEAD DETAIL @ MASONRY TILE WALL FLOOR TO CEILING W INDOW SILL T Y PSCALE: 5 I C A3"L= 1'-0"W I N D O W H E A D D E T A I L A-601 9 A-601 SCALE: 3" = 1'-0" 16 " S T A N D I N G S E A M M E T A L R O O F DR IP E D GE ICE A ND WATER SHIE L D O/ 5/8" R OOF SHE A T HING ICE A ND WATER SHIE L D O/ 5/8" R OOF SHE A T HING 2 2 2 2 2 16 " ST A NDING SE A M METAL R OOF 16 " ST A NDING SE A M METAL R OOF 2 3/4" TYP. EX T ENT OF BOA R DING DR IP E D GE DR IP E D GE SEA L A NT A ND BA C K ER R OD 3/4" TYP. EX T ENT OF BOA R DING 2 6 5/4 W O O D SILL, HE L D T IGHT TO HA R DW A R E 2 6 SEA L A NT A ND BA C K ER R OD SEA L A NT A ND BA C K ER R OD 12 A L UMINUM SILL 5/4 W O O D SILL, HE L D 12 12 12 12 T IGHT TO HA R DW A R E S K 1N MA SONR Y TILE 1/ 2" GYP. BD., TYP. HOL D BOA R DING D O W N 1/ 4" 2 8 2 8 2 8 2 8 3/4" TYP. 12 A L UMINUM SILL 2 8 2 8 METAL HAT C HA NNE L 1/ 2" GYP. BD., TYP. HOL D BOA R DING D O W N 1/ 4" 2 8 2 8 5/4 W O O D SILL, HE L D 2 8 V P 10 0 W R A P S OV E R R.O. 2 8 T IGHT TO HA R DW 3/4" A R E TYP. 2 8 2 8 C O NT INUO US BEA D OF F R A MING AS REQ 'D. F R A MING AS REQ 'D. 5/4 W S K 1N MA SONR Y TILE SEA L A NT BE T W E E N F R A MING S K 1N MA SONR Y TILE 1/O 2"O D SILL, GYP. HE L BD., D TYP. T IGHT TO HA R DW A R E AP V 10 SHE ND 0 WRAA P S OVTYP. T HING, E R R.O. 1/ 2" GYP. BD. AT WALL 1/ 2" GYP. BD. AT WALL 2x8 S T UD W A LL 2x8 S T UD W A LL C O NT INUO US BEA D OF A ND C EIL ING, TYP. A ND C EIL ING, TYP. IC O NE P R IO R TO METAL HAT C HA NNE L SEA L A NT BE T W E E N F R A MING METAL HAT C HA NNE L INST A L L A T ION. 1/ 2" GYP. BD., TYP. A ND SHE A T HING, TYP. ( F IL L C A V I T I E S ( F IL L C A V I T I E S A ND R E M O V E E OUT . TYPICAL W IT H C C SP F ) W IT H C C SP F ) IC O NE P R IO R TO F R A MING AS REQ 'D. F R A MING AS REQ 'D. INST A L L A T ION. A ND R E M O V E W INDOW E OUT . 1/ 2" GYP. BD. AT WALL 1/ 2" GYP. BD. AT WALL DETAILS TYPICAL A ND C EIL ING, TYP. A ND C EIL ING, TYP. SCALE: 3" = 1'-0" W INDOW DATE: 4/6/26 DETAILS SCALE: 3" = 1'-0" TY 6 PTYPICAL I C A L CASEMENT WINDO WDETAIL S I L@LMASONRY D E T ATILE I L WALL 2 x 8 S T U D W A L L ( F IL L 2 x 8 S T U D W A L L ( F IL L DATE: 4/6/26 SILL 7 TYPICAL DIRECT GLAZED SILL DETAIL @ VERTICAL SIDING 10 W INDOW HEAD DETAIL @ SITTING ROOM A-601 A-601 SCALE: 3" = 1'-0" A-601 SCALE: 3" = 1'-0" A-601 SCALE: 3" = 1'-0" 6 TYPICAL CASEMENT SILL DETAIL @ MASONRY TILE WALL 7 TYPICAL DIRECT GLAZED SILL DETAIL @ VERTICAL SIDING 10 W INDOW HEAD DETAIL @ SITTING ROOM C A V IT IE S W IT H C C S P F ) C A V IT IE S W IT H C C S P F ) A-601 A-601 SCALE: 3" = 1'-0" A-601 SCALE: 3" = 1'-0" A-601 SCALE: 3" = 1'-0" A L UMINUM TR IM C L OSED CELL SPRAY F OA M INSUL A T ION IN ALL EX T ENT OF MA SONR Y TILES CAVITIES A R O UND W I ND O W S INT E R IOR BA C K E R 2 8 R OD A ND SE A L A NT 1 TYPICAL EAVE DETAIL 1 TYPICAL EAVE DETAIL 2 TYPICAL RAKE DETAIL 2 TYPICAL RAKE DETAIL A-501 SCALE: 3" = 1'-0" A-501 SCALE: 3" = 1'-0" T Y P I C A L E AV E D E TA I L A-501 SCALE: 3" = 1'-0" TYPICAL RAKE D E TA I L A-501 SCALE: 3" = 1'-0" 2 8 laur en r ose 2 2 22 C U S H M PORTLAN 2 8 914 .4 7 5.6061 6 6 3/4" BL OC K ING AS R EQ 'D EP DM R OOF ME MBR A NE O/ EP DM R OOF ME MBR A NE O/ 2 6 2 6 DRYWALL R ET UR N AT TAPERED INSUL A T ION, TAPE SEA MS. TAPERED INSUL A T ION, TAPE SEA MS. JA MBS A ND HE A D PITCH 1/ 4":1'-0" PITCH 1/ 4":1'-0" SILL BE L OW 2 6 2 6 C UR B TO RETAIN RIVER R OC K C UR B TO RETAIN RIVER R OC K T Y P I C A L W I N D O W J A M B D E TA I L 1' - 4 " 1' - 4 " F R A MING F R A MING TO TO F R A MING F R A MING TYPICAL CASEMENT HEAD DETAIL @ MASONRY TILE WALL 1 TYPICAL CASEMENT/AWNING W INDOW JAMB DETAIL 4 @ FLUSH CONDITION 8 FLOOR TO CEILING W INDOW HEAD DETAIL @ SECOND FLOOR A-601 SCALE: 3" = 1'-0" A-601 A-601 SCALE: 3" = 1'-0" SCALE: 3" = 1'-0" 3 0 AT L A N T I C S T R E E T2 8 2 8 H I S TO R I C P R E S E R VAT I O N A P P L I C AT I O N | 0 4 . 2 7 . 2 0 2 6 LR/ARC Page 56 NOTE: SEE ST R UC T UR A L F OR HE A DE R SIZING  C 12 T Y P IC A L R O O F A S S E MB L Y ( MA IN H O U S E ) BUILDING/WALL SECTION ST A NDING S E A M MET A L R O O F 9 IC E & W A T E R S HIE L D O R SIM. 5/ 8" S H E A T H I N G R OOF T R USSES 9 1/ 4 " M I N . C C S P F @ R O O F D E C K R OOF T R USSE S - SEE ST RUC T URA LS T.O. P L A T E ( UP P E R L E V E L ) E L E V . = 2 0 ' - 10 " F R A MING A S REQ'D. D C B A T.O. R I D G E E L E V .= 28'-0" 12 12 9 9 P R IMA R Y B E D R O O M E NGINE E R E D R OOF T R USSE S - SEE ST RUC T URA LS 2 x 8 S T U D W A L L ( F IL L T.O. P L A T E ( S E C O N D F L O O R ) C A V IT IE S W IT H C C P S F ) E L E V . = 2 0 ' - 10 " 12 ' - 10 1/ 2 " 9'-0" T .O . F I N. F L R . T O B . O . F I N. C L G . C L O S E T T .O . F I N. F L R . T O B . O . F I N. C L G . T.O. S U B F L O O R ( UP P E R L E V E L ) E L E V . = 11' - 4 3 / 4 " 14 " D E E P J O I S T S - S E E S T R U C T U R A L S 1' - 6 1/ 4 " T.O. P L A T E ( MA IN L E V E L ) E L E V . = 10 ' - 2 " T.O. S U B F L O O R ( S E C O N D F L O O R ) E L E V . = 11' - 4 3 / 4 " T Y P IC A L W A L L A S S E MB L Y ( MA IN H O U S E ) 14 " T J I s @ 16 " O . C . - S E E S T R U C T U R A L S 2 x 12 s @ 16 " O . C . - K IT C HE N SEE ST RUC T URA LS G L E N - G E R Y S K 1N T I L E S HA T C H A N N E L HYDROGAP 1/ 2 " S H E A T H I N G 2X8 ST UD WA L L ( CCSPF) T Y P . C E I L I N G : 1/ 2 D R Y W A L L O / 2 1/ 4 " S T R A P P I N G 1/ 2 " D R Y W A L L / W O O D B O A R D I N G - S E E F I N . S C H E D U L E S E E F INISH S C H E D U L E F O R W A L L MA T ER IA L F L USH BA SE BOA R D 9 ' - 10 1/ 2 " DA MP P R OOF ING 3/4" W O O D F L O O R I NG O / 3/4" S U B F L O O R T.O. S U B F L O O R ( MA IN L E V E L ) E L E V .= 0'-0" M U D R O O M E N T R Y 9.5" D E E P J O IS T S - S E E S T R U C T U R A L S T .O . F I N. F L R . T O B . O . F I N. C L G . GR O UND SLOPES AWAY F R O M W A L L AT 5 % CA P IL L A R Y BR E A K SEE ST R UCT UR A L S FOR CONNECTIONS 3" 8" 11" T.O. S U B F L O O R ( F IR S T F L O O R ) E L E V .= 0'-0" C R A W L S P A C E 9 . 5 " T J I s @ 16 " O . C . - S E E S T R U C T U R A L S C R A W L S P A C E 5'-5 3/ 4" SEE ST R UCT UR A L S F OR F OUNDA T ION INF OR MA T ION P OL Y ET HY L ENE V A P OR BA R R IER T UR NS UP WA LL T.O. S L A B ( C R A W L S P A C E ) T.O. F O O T I N G E L E V .= -6'-4" E L E V . = - 6 ' - 10 " 4" P E R F O R A T E D D R A IN w / 3/ 4" CLEAN C R USHE D ST ONE ALL A R O U N D W R A P P E D IN F IL T E R TYPICAL WALL SECTION F A BR IC . D R A IN T O D A Y L IGHT TYPICAL BUILDING SECTION 3 0 AT L A N T I C S T R E E T H I S TO R I C P R E S E R VAT I O N A P P L I C AT I O N | 0 4 . 2 7 . 2 0 2 6 LR/ARC Page 57 CITY OF PORTLAND HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD NOTICE OF DECISION PROPERTY OWNER: Brooke Chornyak and Dylan Jones (“Applicant”) PROPERTY LOCATION: 30 Atlantic Street (“Property”) PROJECT ID: HP-00068-2026 HISTORIC DESIGNATION(S): Munjoy Hill Historic District. ___________________________________ FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. On March 23, 2026, the Applicant applied for a 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) 1 Page 58  4. The Board held one public workshop on April 15, 2026. 5. On May 20, 2026 the Board held a Public Hearing to review the application for new construction at the property under HP-00068-2026. 6. Based on the written materials, oral testimony, staff memoranda, and public comment received during the workshop held on April 15, 2026, and the public hearing held on May 20, 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 a context analysis and drawings to demonstrate that two-story primary buildings and one-story accessory structures are typical of the Munjoy Hill Historic District and that the house is proposed to be two YES stories tall while the garage is proposed to be one story. The Board finds that these proposed heights are typical of the Munjoy Hill Historic District, and are 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 a context analysis and plans to demonstrate that the proposed structure would be about 22 feet wide, and that many neighboring buildings in the district have similar or greater widths. The Board finds that the YES proposed width of the house and that the proposed width of the garage, which is narrower than the house, fit within the ranges of widths found in the Munjoy Hill Historic District and 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 2 Page 59  The applicant provided a context analysis to demonstrate that buildings in the context are typically taller than they are wide, creating vertical proportions. Additionally, the Board notes that the applicant has provided plans showing YES that the proposed building will have a vertically proportioned façade. The Board further finds that the proposed vertically proportioned façade is typical of the Munjoy Hill Historic District, and is therefore visually compatible with surrounding structures. Thus, the Board finds this 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 a context analysis to demonstrate that many buildings in the context feature gabled roofs. Additionally, the Board notes that the applicant has provided plans showing that the proposed house and garage will YES have gabled roofs. The Board further finds that the proposed gabled roofs are typical of the Munjoy Hill Historic District, and are 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 a context analysis to demonstrate the relative scale of windows on contributing buildings. Additionally, the Board notes that the applicant has provided plans showing the scale of the openings on the proposed house and garage. The Board further finds that the relationship of the proposed openings is consistent with what is found on nearby contributing YES buildings with the windows generally having ample “breathing” room around them, with some areas of more concentrated windows such as at bay windows or the grouped corner windows on the proposed hose. Therefore, the Board finds that the propose scale of the windows and house and garage are 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 3 Page 60  The applicant provided a context analysis to demonstrate that windows in the context are predominantly vertically proportioned. Additionally, the Board notes that the applicant provided plans showing that the proposed house would have vertically proportioned openings. The Board further finds the YES proposed vertically proportioned windows are therefore visually compatible with surrounding structures. The Board also finds that the garage is proposed to have a slightly horizontally-proportioned door, as is also typical of garages in the Munjoy Hill Historic District. Thus, the Board finds this standard has been 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 a context analysis to demonstrate that buildings in the surrounding context feature primarily solid façades, with large windows regularly arranged, with some groupings of windows. Additionally, the Board notes that the applicant provided plans showing that the proposed house YES would feature a predominantly solid wall with regular window placement and a grouping of windows at the front right corner. The Board further finds that this arrangement of windows is therefore visually compatible with surrounding structures. Thus, 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 a context analysis demonstrating the character of FOR BOARD typical side entrances found in the Munjoy Hill Historic District. Additionally, DISCUSSION the Board notes that the applicant provided plans showing [BOARD FINDINGS]. The Board further finds [BOARD FINDINGS]. 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 specifications and images demonstrating the character of the proposed tile shingle cladding material. The Board finds that clapboard and shingle siding are the predominant cladding materials on non-masonry YES buildings within the Munjoy Hill Historic District. The Board further finds that the proposed tile shingle cladding has a similar scale and texture to wooden shingles, and is therefore visually compatible with surrounding structures. Thus, the Board finds this standard has been met. 4 Page 61 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 context analysis to demonstrate that buildings in the Munjoy Hill Historic District are typically located close to the street and in alignment with narrow side yards. Additionally, the Board notes the applicant has provided plans showing that the front façade of the proposed building YES would align with the front façade of its neighbors while maintaining narrow side yards. The Board further finds the proposed structure reinforces the somewhat diffuse street wall of the context, and is therefore visually compatible with surrounding structures. 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 The applicant provided a context analysis to demonstrate that properties in the Munjoy Hill Historic District are often places close together with narrow driveways separating some structures. Additionally, the Board notes that the applicant has provided plans showing that the propose structure will be placed YES close to its southern neighbor with a narrow driveway separating it from its northern neighbor. The Board further finds that this placement reinforces the tight spacing of structures within the historic district, and 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 a context analysis to demonstrate that buildings in the Munjoy Hill Historic District typically have vertical facades but are clad in siding with a horizontal expression. Additionally, the Board notes that the applicant YES provided plans showing that the proposed house will have a vertical proportion and predominantly horizontal siding. The Board further finds that this mixed vertical and horizontal expression is typical of the surrounding context, and is 5 Page 62  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 context analysis showing that open front yards, with low fences are typical of the surrounding historic district. Additionally, the Board notes that the applicant has provided plans showing that the property will have a small front yard between the garage and the street, a low fence and YES gate between the house and the garage, and a path leading to the gate and entrance beyond. The Board further finds that this arrangement of a small front yard with a path leading to the entrance is typical of the historic context, and is therefore visually compatible with surrounding structures. 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 / DENIAL] of application HP-00068-2026 from May 20, 2026. _________________________________________________ ___________________ Brad Miller, Chair Date 6 Page 63