Historic District Commission Staff Report November 4 th & 18 th, 2015

Similar documents
Historic District Commission

Historic District Commission Staff Report September 7 th 2016

Historic District Commission

Historic District Commission

Historic District Commission Staff Report March 2 nd, 2016

Historic District Commission Staff Report May 3 rd, 2017

Historic District Commission Staff Report February 1 st, 2017

Resolution : Exhibit A. Downtown District Design Guidelines March 2003

13. New Construction. Context & Character

B L A C K D I A M O N D D E S I G N G U I D E L I N E S for Multi-family Development

Chapel Hill Historic District Commission MILES RESIDENCE. Request for a Certificate of Appropriateness 240 Glandon Drive PIN

Site Planning. 1.0 Site Context. 2.0 Pedestrian Circulation Systems. Pag e 2-23

Request Alternative Compliance to the prescribed criteria of the Oceanfront Resort District Form-Based Code. Staff Planner Kristine Gay

MIDTOWN MIXED-USE VILLAGE. TECHNICAL DATA SHEET COMPONENT C-1 FOR PUBLIC HEARING - PETITION NUMBER Project No RZ1.1. Issued.

Morgan s Subdivision Historic District Character-defining Features

Baker Historic District

4.0 Design Guidelines For The Village Centre. South fields Community Architectural Design Guidelines Town of Caledon

Walnut Creek Transit Village Design Guidelines. Part Three III - 25

Analysis of Environs of 1000 New York Street, German Methodist Episcopal Church

SECTION TWO: Overall Design Guidelines

FLORIN ROAD CORRIDOR Site Plan and Design Review Guidelines Checklist

6. BUILDINGS AND SPACES OF HUMAN SCALE

MEMORANDUM. This memo deals with proposed amendments to previously issued Development Permit No for Park Royal North.

WINDSOR GLEN DESIGN GUIDELINES

CITY OF TORRANCE HISTORIC PRESERVATION ORDINANCE AND TORRANCE TRACT HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN. City Council Tuesday, December 5, 2017 PAGE & TURNBULL

Parking Garage Site Selection Committee Final Report October 15, 2012

Housing and Coach House Guidelines - Ladner

R STREET CORRIDOR NEIGHBORHOOD Site Plan and Design Review Supplemental Guidelines Checklist

REPORT TO THE HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION

SMALL LOT DESIGN STANDARDS. An Illustrated Working Draft for Test Implementation

Eastcreek Farm. Planned Development Standards September, 2014

The petition proposes the development of five townhomes on a vacant parcel between Charlotte Latin School and Providence Presbyterian Church.

SEAPINES STATION DESIGN GUIDELINES CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH MARCH 2017

Design Guidelines for Residential Subdivisions

Ottawa Historic Resources Inventory: Commercial Historic District Building Information. Significance and Potential Eligibility

The broad range of permitted and special uses allowed in the district remain, but some descriptions have been clarified.

CITY OF MERCER ISLAND DESIGN COMMISSION STAFF REPORT

City of Bellingham. Multifamily Residential Design Handbook

Cha p t e r 2: Ge n e r a l De s i g n Gu i d e l i n e s

Incentive Zoning Regulations Florida Municipal City of Orlando

Urban Design Brief Woodland Cemetery Funeral Home 493 Springbank Drive

ST. ANDREWS HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOOD OVERLAY DESIGN STANDARDS

The Village. Chapter 3. Mixed Use Development Plan SPECIFIC PLAN

5.1 Site Plan Guidelines

Chapter II: Building Placement, Massing and Access

GUIDELINES REPLACEMENT HOUSING GUIDELINES LOCATION INTRODUCTION URBAN DESIGN GUIDELINES

B. Blocks, Buildings and Street Networks

Case 21081: Quinpool Road Plan Amendment and Development Agreement Application: Mixed-Use Building Proposal

Residential Design Standards Stakeholders Meeting

The Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission Prince George's County Planning Department Development Review Division

Chapter 5: Mixed Use Neighborhood Character District

14.0 BUILT FORM DESIGN CRITERIA

ZBA-BPDA Design Review

Table of Contents. Elm Avenue Improvement Plan City of Waco, Texas. Introduction 1. Existing Context 1 Figure 1 2.

Tazewell Pike. Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District Design Guidelines

Urban Design Guidelines Townhouse and Apartment Built Form

Othello Neighborhood Design Guidelines

Glossary. Block Face The row of front façades, facing the street, for the length of. Addition New construction attached to an existing structure.

Zoning Technical Review Presented by Camiros. November 10, 2015

CENTERS AND CORRIDORS

INSTITUTIONAL USE DESIGN COMPATIBILITY TECHNIQUES

Rezoning Petition Post-Hearing Staff Analysis July 31, 2018

WATERFRONT DISTRICT DESIGN STANDARDS

North Downtown Specific Plan MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT: PREDEVELOPMENT PLAN REVIEW OF PROJECT LOCATED AT 2632 EAST WASHINGTON BOULEVARD ('ST. LUKE MEDICAL CENTER')

Required yards shall be horizontally unobstructed except as follows:

MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL DESIGN PRINCIPLES Site Plan and Design Review Principles Checklist

BULLETIN #1 Summerfield/Riverwalk Fencing Criteria

Eastcreek Farm. Planned Development Standards July, 2015

City of Vaughan Urban Design Guidelines for Infill Development in Established Low-Rise Residential Neighbourhoods

Residential Design Guidelines

Planning Board Hearing October 20th, 2016

Clairtrell Area Context Plan

4780 Eglinton Avenue West - Zoning By-law Amendment and Draft Plan of Subdivision Applications - Preliminary Report

DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM

The NWX Colonial Revival Style

Residential Commons at Barry s Corner. Boston civic design commission February 5, 2013

The Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission Prince George s County Planning Department Development Review Division

ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN REVIEW ORDINANCE DESIGN GUIDELINES DECEMBER 2000 PREPARED FOR THE MEREDITH PLANNING BOARD BY CHRISTOPHER P. WILLIAMS, ARCHITECTS

Request Change in Nonconformity. Staff Recommendation Approval. Staff Planner Jonathan Sanders

Guidelines. Building 1. Zoning Provision Building height limit shall be 11m to the mid point of the roof. 2. Building setbacks see Sample Plan.

DESIGN PROFESSIONALS DEEP DIVE THURSDAY, MAY 25, 2017

Draft Cary Community Plan Review Part 3: Shop, Engage, Serve, Special Area Plans, Other Updates. October 27, 2015 Police Department Training Room

PROPOSED WATERFRONT DISTRICT DESIGN STANDARDS

1. Context for Design

Wide asphalt driveway abutting school property. garage built with incompatible materials, too close to park. incompatible fencing materials

8 October 14, 2015 Public Hearing

NEW HOMES IN ANCASTER S MATURE NEIGHBOURHOODS WHAT WE HAVE HEARD

September 30, 2014 Ms. Lorraine Weiss Department of Community Development City of San Mateo 330 West 20th Avenue San Mateo, CA

II. SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL

Winston Road Neighbourhood Town of Grimsby. Urban Design Manual. February 2016

REPORT TO: Council FOR: Regular Meeting. PRESENTED: April 1, 2008 FILE: , Byl 1932 & 1936

7437, 7439 and 7441 Kingston Road - Zoning By-law Amendment and Site Plan Control Applications - Preliminary Report

NWI Wetland Public Waters Inventory Low Density Residential Medium Density Residential. High Density Residential. Public or Institutional

PLANNING COMMISSION. Agenda Item # 3

Architectural Review Board Report

STAFF BRIEF. Project: 2016-COA-356 Meeting: September 8, th Street Oxford Hotel

Urban Planning and Land Use

EXISTING TOWNHOUSE. What s working & What s not?

Rezoning Petition Pre-Hearing Staff Analysis October 15, 2018

Transcription:

Historic District Commission Staff Report November 4 th & 18 th, 2015 Page 1 of 36 8. 54/58 Ceres Street (Minor HVAC units (roof-mounted)) 9. 67-77 State Street (Minor Revise windows and doors) 10. 143 Daniel Street (Minor Revise windows and doors) ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS / OLD BUSINESS: Approval of Minutes (10-7-15, 10-14-15) Administrative Approvals: 1. 195 Hanover Street HVAC Screen 2. 11 Pickering Street - Gutter 3. 401 State Street Transformer Requests for Rehearing: 1. 18 Manning Street Half Screens OLD BUSINESS: A. 103/5 High Street (Minor Front Elevation Changes) NEW BUSINESS / CONSENT AGENDA: 1. 111 New Castle Ave. (Minor Use of Azek Trim) 2. 30 Maplewood Ave. (Minor Fencing) 3. 233 Vaughan Street (Minor Sign) PUBLIC HEARINGS: 4. 24 Market Street (Minor Windows) 5. 640 Middle Street (Minor Windows and doors) 6. 765 Middle Street (Minor - Fencing) 7. 102 State Street (Minor Rear Addition) WORK SESSIONS/ PUBLIC HEARINGS: 11. 420 Pleasant Street (Minor chimney, steps and windows) 12. 55 Hanover Street (Minor Windows) WORK SESSIONS: A. 0 Marcy Street (Moderate Stage modifications) B. 127-137 High Street (Moderate New buildings in rear) C. 28 Dennett Street (Minor replace roof, windows, doors..) D. 112 State Street (Minor Siding and Windows) DISCUSSION: Design Guidelines Comments HDC Work Plan for 2016

Page 2 of 36 3 WS-C WS-B 12 2 WS-D 5 6 8 OB-A 4 10 9 7 WS-A 13 11 1 HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MEETING DATES: November 4 th and 18 th APPLICATIONS: 18

Historic District Commission Project Address: 101-105 HIGH STREET Permit Requested: CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL Meeting Type: PUBLIC HEARING #A A. Property Information - General: Existing Conditions: Zoning District: CD4-L2 Land Use: Two-Family Land Area: 3,920 SF +/- Estimated Age of Structure: 1835 Building Style: Federal Greek Revival Number of Stories: 2.5 Historical Significance: Contributing Public View of Proposed Work: View from High Street Unique Features: Highest Point in Downtown Portsmouth Neighborhood Association: North End B. Proposed Work: To modify the front façade to add a commercial storefront. C. Other Permits Required: Board of Adjustment D. Lot Location: Planning Board City Council Terminal Vista Gateway Mid-Block Intersection / Corner Lot Rear Lot E. Existing Building to be Altered/ Demolished / Constructed: Principal Accessory Demolition F. Sensitivity of Context: Highly Sensitive Sensitive Low Sensitivity Back-of-House G. Design Approach (for Major Projects): Literal Replication (i.e. 6-16 Congress, Jardinière Building, 10 Pleasant Street) Invention within a Style (i.e., Porter Street Townhouses, 100 Market Street) Abstract Reference (i.e. Portwalk, 51 Islington, 55 Congress Street) Intentional Opposition (i.e. McIntyre Building, Citizen s Bank, Coldwell Banker) H. Project Type: Consent Agenda (i.e. very small alterations, additions or expansions) Minor Project (i.e. small alterations, additions or expansions) Moderate Project (i.e. significant additions, alterations or expansions) Major Project (i.e. very large alternations, additions or expansions) Page 3 of 36 I. Neighborhood Context: The new building is located along High Street. It is surrounded with many new and proposed infill buildings ranging from 2.5 to 5 stories in height. The neighborhood is predominantly made up of a wide range of 2.5-5 story wood- and brick-sided structures on lots with little to no setback from the sidewalk. Note that this property recently rezoned to CD4-L2 which would allow for retail and restaurant uses on the ground floor. J. Staff Comments and/ or Suggestions for Consideration: At the October 14 th work Session the HDC continued the public hearing to November 4 th in order to receive additional details on the door surround and windows. Otherwise, the project was generally supported as presented. K. Aerial Image, Street View and Zoning Map: Zoning Map Aerial and Street View Image HISTORIC SURVEY RATING C

STAFF HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MEMBERS CONTEXT BUILDING DESIGN & MATERIALS SITE DESIGN 103-105 HIGH STREET PUBLIC HEARING #A (MINOR PROJECT) INFO/ EVALUATION CRITERIA SUBJECT PROPERTY NEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXT Project Information Existing Building Proposed Building (+/-) Abutting Structures Surrounding Structures No. GENERAL BUILDING INFORMATION (ESTIMATED FROM THE TAX MAPS & ASSESSOR S INFO) 1 Gross Floor Area (SF) 2 Floor Area Ratio (GFA/ Lot Area) 3 Building Height / Street-Width (ROW) Ratio 4 Building Height Zoning (Feet) 5 Building Height Street Wall / Cornice (Feet) 6 Number of Stories 7 Building Coverage (% Building on the Lot) MINOR PROJECT -ADD A COMMERCIAL STOREFRONT TO THE GROUND-FLOOR FACADE ONLY - PROJECT REVIEW ELEMENT APPLICANT S COMMENTS HDC SUGGESTIONS APPROPRIATENESS 8 Scale (i.e. height, volume, coverage ) Appropriate Inappropriate 9 Placement (i.e. setbacks, alignment ) Appropriate Inappropriate 10 Massing (i.e. modules, banding, stepbacks ) Appropriate Inappropriate 11 Architectural Style (i.e. traditional modern) Appropriate Inappropriate 12 Roofs Appropriate Inappropriate 13 Style and Slope Appropriate Inappropriate 14 Roof Projections (i.e. chimneys, vents, dormers ) Appropriate Inappropriate 15 Roof Materials Appropriate Inappropriate 16 Cornice Line Appropriate Inappropriate 17 Eaves, Gutters and Downspouts Appropriate Inappropriate 18 Walls Appropriate Inappropriate 19 Number and Material Appropriate Inappropriate 20 Projections (i.e. bays, balconies ) Appropriate Inappropriate 21 Doors and windows Appropriate Inappropriate 22 Window Openings and Proportions Appropriate Inappropriate 23 Window Casing/ Trim Appropriate Inappropriate 24 Window Shutters / Hardware Appropriate Inappropriate 25 Storm Windows / Screens Appropriate Inappropriate 26 Doors Appropriate Inappropriate 27 Porches and Balconies Appropriate Inappropriate 28 Projections (i.e. porch, portico, canopy ) Appropriate Inappropriate 29 Landings/ Steps / Stoop / Railings Appropriate Inappropriate 30 Lighting (i.e. wall, post ) Appropriate Inappropriate 31 Signs (i.e. projecting, wall ) Appropriate Inappropriate 32 Mechanicals (i.e. HVAC, generators) Appropriate Inappropriate 33 Decks Appropriate Inappropriate 34 Garages / Barns / Sheds (i.e. doors, placement ) Appropriate Inappropriate 35 Fence / Walls / Screenwalls (i.e. materials, type ) Appropriate Inappropriate 36 Grading (i.e. ground floor height, street edge ) Appropriate Inappropriate 37 Landscaping (i.e. gardens, planters, street trees ) Appropriate Inappropriate 38 Driveways (i.e. location, material, screening ) Appropriate Inappropriate 39 Parking (i.e. location, access, visibility ) Appropriate Inappropriate 40 Accessory Buildings (i.e. sheds, greenhouses ) Appropriate Inappropriate PROPERTY EVALUATION FORM PORTSMOUTH HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION PROPERTY:101-105 HIGH STREET Case No.:A Date: 11-4-15 Page 4 of 36 Decision: Approved Approved with Stipulations Denied Continued Postponed Withdrawn INSERT PHOTO HERE H. Purpose and Intent: 1. Preserve the integrity of the District: Yes No 4. Maintain the special character of the District: Yes No 2. Assessment of the Historical Significance: Yes No 5. Complement and enhance the architectural and historic character: Yes No 3. Conservation and enhancement of property values: Yes No 6. Promote the education, pleasure and welfare of the District to the city residents and visitors: Yes No I. Review Criteria / Findings of Fact: 1. Consistent with special and defining character of surrounding properties: Yes No 3. Relation to historic and architectural value of existing structure: Yes No 2. Compatibility of design with surrounding properties: Yes No 4. Compatibility of innovative technologies with surrounding properties: Yes No

Historic District Commission Project Address: 111 NEW CASTLE AVE. Permit Requested: CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL Meeting Type: PUBLIC HEARING #1 Existing Conditions: Zoning District: GRB Land Use: Single- Family Land Area: 8,571 SF +/- Estimated Age of Structure: c.1850 Building Style: Greek Revival Historical Significance: Contributing Public View of Proposed Work: View from New Castle Ave. Unique Features: NA Neighborhood Association: South End B. Proposed Work: To use Azek trim and replace 2 basement windows. C. Other Permits Required: Board of Adjustment D. Lot Location: Planning Board City Council Terminal Vista Gateway Mid-Block Intersection / Corner Lot Rear Lot E. Existing Building to be Altered/ Demolished: Principal Accessory Demolition F. Sensitivity of Context: Highly Sensitive Sensitive Low Sensitivity Back-of-House G. Design Approach (for Major Projects): Literal Replication (i.e. 6-16 Congress, Jardinière Building, 10 Pleasant Street) Invention within a Style (i.e., Porter Street Townhouses, 100 Market Street) Abstract Reference (i.e. Portwalk, 51 Islington, 55 Congress Street) Intentional Opposition (i.e. McIntyre Building, Citizen s Bank, Coldwell Banker) H. Project Type: Consent Agenda (i.e. very small alterations, additions or expansions) Minor Project (i.e. small alterations, additions or expansions) Moderate Project (i.e. significant additions, alterations or expansions) Major Project (i.e. very large alternations, additions or expansions) Page 5 of 36 I. Neighborhood Context: The building is located along New Castle Ave. It is surrounded with many wood 2.5-story historic structures with shallow setbacks and small side or rear garden areas. J. Staff Comments and/ or Suggestions for Consideration: The Application is proposing to: Obtain approval for the use of azek material which replaced the wood trim and to replace the two basement windows. Note that the work for this project has already been completed; this is an enforcement application. K. Aerial Image, Street View and Zoning Map: Zoning Map Aerial and Street View Image HISTORIC SURVEY RATING C

STAFF HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MEMBERS CONTEXT BUILDING DESIGN & MATERIALS SITE DESIGN No. 111 NEW CASTLE AVE. PUBLIC HEARING #1 (CONSENT AGENDA - MINOR) INFO/ EVALUATION CRITERIA SUBJECT PROPERTY NEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXT Project Information Existing Building Proposed Building (+/-) Abutting Structures Surrounding Structures GENERAL BUILDING INFORMATION (ESTIMATED FROM THE TAX MAPS & ASSESSOR S INFO) 1 Gross Floor Area (SF) 2 Floor Area Ratio (GFA/ Lot Area) 3 Building Height / Street-Width Ratio 4 Building Height Zoning (Feet) MINOR PROJECT 5 Building Height Street Wall / Cornice (Feet) 6 Number of Stories USE AZEK TRIM AND REPLACE TWO BASEMENT WINDOWS ONLY 7 Building Coverage (% Building on the Lot) PROJECT REVIEW ELEMENT APPLICANT S COMMENTS HDC SUGGESTIONS APPROPRIATENESS 8 Scale (i.e. height, volume, coverage ) Appropriate Inappropriate 9 Placement (i.e. setbacks, alignment ) Appropriate Inappropriate 10 Massing (i.e. modules, banding, stepbacks ) Appropriate Inappropriate 11 Architectural Style (i.e. traditional modern) Appropriate Inappropriate 12 Roofs Appropriate Inappropriate 13 Style and Slope Appropriate Inappropriate 14 Roof Projections (i.e. chimneys, vents, dormers ) Appropriate Inappropriate 15 Roof Materials Appropriate Inappropriate 16 Cornice Line Appropriate Inappropriate 17 Eaves, Gutters and Downspouts Appropriate Inappropriate 18 Walls Appropriate Inappropriate 19 Siding / Material Appropriate Inappropriate 20 Projections (i.e. bays, balconies ) Appropriate Inappropriate 21 Doors and Windows Appropriate Inappropriate 22 Window Openings and Proportions Appropriate Inappropriate 23 Window Casing/ Trim Appropriate Inappropriate 24 Window Shutters / Hardware Appropriate Inappropriate 25 Awnings Appropriate Inappropriate 26 Doors Appropriate Inappropriate 27 Porches and Balconies Appropriate Inappropriate 28 Projections (i.e. porch, portico, canopy ) Appropriate Inappropriate 29 Landings/ Steps / Stoop / Railings Appropriate Inappropriate 30 Lighting (i.e. wall, post ) Appropriate Inappropriate 31 Signs (i.e. projecting, wall ) Appropriate Inappropriate 32 Mechanicals (i.e. HVAC, generators) Appropriate Inappropriate 33 Decks Appropriate Inappropriate 34 Garages/ Barns / Sheds (i.e. doors, placement ) Appropriate Inappropriate 35 Fence / Walls (i.e. materials, type ) Appropriate Inappropriate 36 Grading (i.e. ground floor height, street edge ) Appropriate Inappropriate 37 Landscaping (i.e. gardens, planters, street trees ) Appropriate Inappropriate 38 Driveways (i.e. location, material, screening ) Appropriate Inappropriate 39 Parking (i.e. location, access, visibility ) Appropriate Inappropriate 40 Accessory Buildings (i.e. sheds, greenhouses ) Appropriate Inappropriate PROPERTY EVALUATION FORM PORTSMOUTH HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION PROPERTY:111 NEW CASTLE AVE. Case No.:1 Date: 11-4-15 Page 6 of 36 Decision: Approved Approved with Stipulations Denied Continued Postponed Withdrawn INSERT PHOTO HERE H. Purpose and Intent: 1. Preserve the integrity of the District: Yes No 4. Maintain the special character of the District: Yes No 2. Assessment of the Historical Significance: Yes No 5. Complement and enhance the architectural and historic character: Yes No 3. Conservation and enhancement of property values: Yes No 6. Promote the education, pleasure and welfare of the District to the city residents and visitors: Yes No I. Review Criteria / Findings of Fact: 1. Consistent with special and defining character of surrounding properties: Yes No 3. Relation to historic and architectural value of existing structure: Yes No 2. Compatibility of design with surrounding properties: Yes No 4. Compatibility of innovative technologies with surrounding properties: Yes No

Historic District Commission Project Address: 30 MAPLEWOOD AVE. Permit Requested: CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL Meeting Type: PUBLIC HEARING #2 A. Property Information - General: Existing Conditions: Zoning District: CD4 Land Use: Mixed-Use Land Area: 56,675 SF +/- Estimated Age of Structure: c.1970 Building Style: Modern/ Rehabilitated Number of Stories: 3 Historical Significance: NA Public View of Proposed Work: View from Maplewood Ave., Bridge & Hanover Streets Unique Features: NA Neighborhood Association: Downtown B. Proposed Work: To revise the patio area and fencing. C. Other Permits Required: Board of Adjustment D. Lot Location: Planning Board City Council Terminal Vista Gateway Mid-Block Intersection / Corner Lot Rear Lot E. Existing Building to be Altered/ Demolished: Principal Accessory Demolition F. Sensitivity of Context: Highly Sensitive Sensitive Low Sensitivity Back-of-House G. Design Approach (for Major Projects): Literal Replication (i.e. 6-16 Congress, Jardinière Building, 10 Pleasant Street) Invention within a Style (i.e., Porter Street Townhouses, 100 Market Street) Abstract Reference (i.e. Portwalk, 51 Islington, 55 Congress Street) Intentional Opposition (i.e. McIntyre Building, Citizen s Bank, Coldwell Banker) H. Project Type: Consent Agenda (i.e. very small alterations, additions or expansions) Minor Project (i.e. small alterations, additions or expansions) Moderate Project (i.e. significant additions, alterations or expansions) Major Project (i.e. very large alternations, additions or expansions) Page 7 of 36 L. Neighborhood Context: The building is located along Maplewood Ave. and Bridge Street. It is surrounded with many wood 2.5 wood frame structures to the north and 4-5 story mixed-use masonry buildings to the south. M. Staff Comments and/ or Suggestions for Consideration: The Application is proposing to: Obtain approval for modifying the patio area and fencing along the Maplewood Ave. and Bridge Street facades. L. Aerial Image, Street View and Zoning Map: Zoning Map Aerial and Street View Image HISTORIC SURVEY RATING NC

STAFF HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MEMBERS CONTEXT BUILDING DESIGN & MATERIALS SITE DESIGN 30 MAPLEWOOD AVE. PUBLIC HEARING #2 (CONSENT AGENDA - MINOR PROJECT) INFO/ EVALUATION CRITERIA SUBJECT PROPERTY NEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXT Project Information Existing Building Proposed Building (+/-) Abutting Structures Surrounding Structures No. GENERAL BUILDING INFORMATION (ESTIMATED FROM THE TAX MAPS & ASSESSOR S INFO) 1 Gross Floor Area (SF) 2 Floor Area Ratio (GFA/ Lot Area) 3 Building Height / Street-Width Ratio 4 Building Height Zoning (Feet) 5 Building Height Street Wall / Cornice (Feet) MINOR PROJECT 6 Number of Stories 7 Building Coverage (% Building on the Lot) MODIFY PATIO AND FENCE ONLY PROJECT REVIEW ELEMENT APPLICANT S COMMENTS HDC SUGGESTIONS APPROPRIATENESS 8 Scale (i.e. height, volume, coverage ) Appropriate Inappropriate 9 Placement (i.e. setbacks, alignment ) Appropriate Inappropriate 10 Massing (i.e. modules, banding, stepbacks ) Appropriate Inappropriate 11 Architectural Style (i.e. traditional modern) Appropriate Inappropriate 12 Roofs Appropriate Inappropriate 13 Style and Slope Appropriate Inappropriate 14 Roof Projections (i.e. chimneys, vents, dormers ) Appropriate Inappropriate 15 Roof Materials Appropriate Inappropriate 16 Cornice Line Appropriate Inappropriate 17 Eaves, Gutters and Downspouts Appropriate Inappropriate 18 Walls Appropriate Inappropriate 19 Number and Material Appropriate Inappropriate 20 Projections (i.e. bays, balconies ) Appropriate Inappropriate 21 Doors and windows Appropriate Inappropriate 22 Window Openings and Proportions Appropriate Inappropriate 23 Window Casing/ Trim Appropriate Inappropriate 24 Window Shutters / Hardware Appropriate Inappropriate 25 Awnings Appropriate Inappropriate 26 Doors Appropriate Inappropriate 27 Porches and Balconies Appropriate Inappropriate 28 Projections (i.e. porch, portico, canopy ) Appropriate Inappropriate 29 Landings/ Steps / Stoop / Railings Appropriate Inappropriate 30 Lighting (i.e. wall, post ) Appropriate Inappropriate 31 Signs (i.e. projecting, wall ) Appropriate Inappropriate 32 Mechanicals (i.e. HVAC, generators) Appropriate Inappropriate 33 Decks Appropriate Inappropriate 34 Garages / Barns / Sheds (i.e. doors, placement ) Appropriate Inappropriate 35 Fence / Walls (i.e. materials, type ) Appropriate Inappropriate 36 Grading (i.e. ground floor height, street edge ) Appropriate Inappropriate 37 Landscaping (i.e. gardens, planters, street trees ) Appropriate Inappropriate 38 Driveways (i.e. location, material, screening ) Appropriate Inappropriate 39 Parking (i.e. location, access, visibility ) Appropriate Inappropriate 40 Accessory Buildings (i.e. sheds, greenhouses ) Appropriate Inappropriate PROPERTY EVALUATION FORM PORTSMOUTH HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION PROPERTY:30 MAPLEWOOD AVE. Case No.: 2 Date: 11-4-15 Page 8 of 36 Decision: Approved Approved with Stipulations Denied Continued Postponed Withdrawn INSERT PHOTO HERE H. Purpose and Intent: 1. Preserve the integrity of the District: Yes No 4. Maintain the special character of the District: Yes No 2. Assessment of the Historical Significance: Yes No 5. Complement and enhance the architectural and historic character: Yes No 3. Conservation and enhancement of property values: Yes No 6. Promote the education, pleasure and welfare of the District to the city residents and visitors: Yes No I. Review Criteria / Findings of Fact: 1. Consistent with special and defining character of surrounding properties: Yes No 3. Relation to historic and architectural value of existing structure: Yes No 2. Compatibility of design with surrounding properties: Yes No 4. Compatibility of innovative technologies with surrounding properties: Yes No

Historic District Commission Project Evaluation Form: 233 VAUGHAN STREET Permit Requested: CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL Meeting Type: PUBLIC HEARING #3 Page 9 of 36 I. Neighborhood Context: The lot is located in the heart of the Northern-Tier and is surrounded by a wide variety of vacant lots and non-contributing structures. The project was previously approved by the HDC as well as the Planning Board under Site Plan Review. J. Staff Comments and/ or Suggestions for Consideration: The applicant is seeking to install a free-standing sign that will include space for three tenants. The total sign area is 15 SF and it s proposed to be 8 feet tall. It is located along the Vaughan Street elevation. A. Property Information - General: Existing Conditions: Zoning District: Central Business District A (CBA) Land Use: Vacant Land Area: 20,100 SF +/- Estimated Age of Structure: Vacant Building Style: Modern Number of Stories: 4 Historical Significance: Non-Contributing Public View of Proposed Work: View from Vaughan and Green Streets Unique Features: NA Neighborhood Association: North End Residents B. Proposed Work: To install a free-standing sign. C. Other Permits Required: Board of Adjustment Planning Board City Council D. Lot Location: Terminal Vista Gateway Mid-Block Intersection / Corner Lot Rear Lot E. Existing Building to be Altered/ Demolished: Principal Accessory Demolition F. Sensitivity of Context: Highly Sensitive Sensitive Low Sensitivity Back-of-House G. Design Approach (for Major Projects): Literal Replication (i.e. 6-16 Congress, Jardinière Building, 10 Pleasant Street) Invention within a Style (i.e., Porter Street Townhouses, 100 Market Street) Abstract Reference (i.e. Portwalk, 51 Islington, 55 Congress Street) Intentional Opposition (i.e. McIntyre Building, Citizen s Bank, Coldwell Banker) H. Project Type: Consent Agenda (i.e. very small alterations, additions or expansions) Minor Project (i.e. small alterations, additions or expansions) Moderate Project (i.e. significant additions, alterations or expansions) Major Project (i.e. very large alternations, additions or expansions) Zoning Map K. Aerial Image, Street View and Zoning Map: Aerial and Streetview Images HISTORIC SURVEY RATING NA

STAFF HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MEMBERS CONTEXT BUILDING DESIGN & MATERIALS SITE DESIGN 233 VAUGHAN STREET PUBLIC HEARING #3 (CONSENT AGENDA - MINOR PROJECT) INFO/ EVALUATION CRITERIA SUBJECT PROPERTY NEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXT Project Information Existing Building Proposed Building (+/-) Abutting Structures Surrounding Structures No. GENERAL BUILDING INFORMATION (ESTIMATED FROM THE TAX MAPS & ASSESSOR S INFO) 1 Gross Floor Area (SF) 2 Floor Area Ratio (GFA/ Lot Area) 3 Building Height / Street-Width Ratio 4 Building Height Zoning (Feet) MINOR PROJECT 5 Building Height Street Wall / Cornice (Feet) 6 Number of Stories INSTALL A FREE-STANDING SIGN ONLY 7 Building Coverage (% Building on the Lot) PROJECT REVIEW ELEMENT HDC COMMENTS HDC SUGGESTIONS APPROPRIATENESS 8 Scale (i.e. height, volume, coverage ) Appropriate Inappropriate 9 Placement (i.e. setbacks, alignment ) Appropriate Inappropriate 10 Massing (i.e. modules, banding, stepbacks ) Appropriate Inappropriate 11 Architectural Style (i.e. traditional modern) Appropriate Inappropriate 12 Roofs Appropriate Inappropriate 13 Style and Slope Appropriate Inappropriate 14 Roof Projections (i.e. chimneys, vents, dormers ) Appropriate Inappropriate 15 Roof Materials Appropriate Inappropriate 16 Cornice Line Appropriate Inappropriate 17 Eaves, Gutters and Downspouts Appropriate Inappropriate 18 Walls Appropriate Inappropriate 19 Siding / Material Appropriate Inappropriate 20 Projections (i.e. bays, balconies ) Appropriate Inappropriate 21 Doors and Windows Appropriate Inappropriate 22 Window Openings and Proportions Appropriate Inappropriate 23 Window Casing/ Trim Appropriate Inappropriate 24 Window Shutters / Hardware Appropriate Inappropriate 25 Awnings Appropriate Inappropriate 26 Doors Appropriate Inappropriate 27 Porches and Balconies Appropriate Inappropriate 28 Projections (i.e. porch, portico, canopy ) Appropriate Inappropriate 29 Landings/ Steps / Stoop / Railings Appropriate Inappropriate 30 Lighting (i.e. wall, post ) Appropriate Inappropriate 31 Signs (i.e. projecting, wall ) Appropriate Inappropriate 32 Mechanicals (i.e. HVAC, generators) Appropriate Inappropriate 33 Decks Appropriate Inappropriate 34 Garages/ Barns / Sheds (i.e. doors, placement ) Appropriate Inappropriate 35 Fence / Walls (i.e. materials, type ) Appropriate Inappropriate 36 Grading (i.e. ground floor height, street edge ) Appropriate Inappropriate 37 Landscaping (i.e. gardens, planters, street trees ) Appropriate Inappropriate 38 Driveways (i.e. location, material, screening ) Appropriate Inappropriate 39 Parking (i.e. location, access, visibility ) Appropriate Inappropriate 40 Accessory Buildings (i.e. sheds, greenhouses ) Appropriate Inappropriate PROPERTY EVALUATION FORM PORTSMOUTH HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION PROPERTY:233 VAUGHAN STREET Case No.: 3 Date: 11-4-15 Page 10 of 36 Decision: Approved Approved with Stipulations Denied Continued Postponed Withdrawn INSERT PHOTO HERE H. Purpose and Intent: 1. Preserve the integrity of the District: Yes No 4. Maintain the special character of the District: Yes No 2. Assessment of the Historical Significance: Yes No 5. Complement and enhance the architectural and historic character: Yes No 3. Conservation and enhancement of property values: Yes No 6. Promote the education, pleasure and welfare of the District to the city residents and visitors: Yes No I. Review Criteria / Findings of Fact: 1. Consistent with special and defining character of surrounding properties: Yes No 3. Relation to historic and architectural value of existing structure: Yes No 2. Compatibility of design with surrounding properties: Yes No 4. Compatibility of innovative technologies with surrounding properties: Yes No

Historic District Commission Project Address: 24 MARKET STREET Permit Requested: CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL Meeting Type: PUBLIC HEARING #4 Page 11 of 36 I. Neighborhood Context: The building is located along Market Street. It is surrounded with many brick 3-4 story structures with no setbacks from the sidewalk. J. Staff Comments and/ or Suggestions for Consideration: The Application is proposing to: Remove and replace 10 windows with Marvin, 2/2 double-hung, SDL windows. The application does not make clear whether the windows are clad so this will need to be clarified at the meeting. A. Property Information - General: Existing Conditions: Zoning District: CD5 Land Use: Mixed-Use Land Area: 3,866 SF +/- Estimated Age of Structure: c.1803 Building Style: Federal Historical Significance: Contributing Public View of Proposed Work: View from Ladd Street Unique Features: Located along Service Alley Neighborhood Association: Downtown B. Proposed Work: To remove and replace 10 windows. C. Other Permits Required: Board of Adjustment D. Lot Location: Planning Board City Council Terminal Vista Gateway Mid-Block Intersection / Corner Lot Rear Lot E. Existing Building to be Altered/ Demolished: Principal Accessory Demolition F. Sensitivity of Context: Highly Sensitive Sensitive Low Sensitivity Back-of-House G. Design Approach (for Major Projects): Literal Replication (i.e. 6-16 Congress, Jardinière Building, 10 Pleasant Street) Invention within a Style (i.e., Porter Street Townhouses, 100 Market Street) Abstract Reference (i.e. Portwalk, 51 Islington, 55 Congress Street) Intentional Opposition (i.e. McIntyre Building, Citizen s Bank, Coldwell Banker) H. Project Type: Consent Agenda (i.e. very small alterations, additions or expansions) Minor Project (i.e. small alterations, additions or expansions) Moderate Project (i.e. significant additions, alterations or expansions) Major Project (i.e. very large alternations, additions or expansions) K. Aerial Image, Street View and Zoning Map: Zoning Map Aerial and Street View Image HISTORIC SURVEY RATING C

STAFF HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MEMBERS CONTEXT BUILDING DESIGN & MATERIALS SITE DESIGN No. 24 MARKET STREET PUBLIC HEARING #4 (MINOR PROJECT) INFO/ EVALUATION CRITERIA SUBJECT PROPERTY NEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXT Project Information Existing Building Proposed Building (+/-) Abutting Structures Surrounding Structures GENERAL BUILDING INFORMATION (ESTIMATED FROM THE TAX MAPS & ASSESSOR S INFO) 1 Gross Floor Area (SF) 2 Floor Area Ratio (GFA/ Lot Area) 3 Building Height / Street-Width Ratio 4 Building Height Zoning (Feet) MINOR PROJECT 5 Building Height Street Wall / Cornice (Feet) 6 Number of Stories REPLACE 10 WINDOWS ONLY 7 Building Coverage (% Building on the Lot) PROJECT REVIEW ELEMENT APPLICANT S COMMENTS HDC SUGGESTIONS APPROPRIATENESS 8 Scale (i.e. height, volume, coverage ) Appropriate Inappropriate 9 Placement (i.e. setbacks, alignment ) Appropriate Inappropriate 10 Massing (i.e. modules, banding, stepbacks ) Appropriate Inappropriate 11 Architectural Style (i.e. traditional modern) Appropriate Inappropriate 12 Roofs Appropriate Inappropriate 13 Style and Slope Appropriate Inappropriate 14 Roof Projections (i.e. chimneys, vents, dormers ) Appropriate Inappropriate 15 Roof Materials Appropriate Inappropriate 16 Cornice Line Appropriate Inappropriate 17 Eaves, Gutters and Downspouts Appropriate Inappropriate 18 Walls Appropriate Inappropriate 19 Siding / Material Appropriate Inappropriate 20 Projections (i.e. bays, balconies ) Appropriate Inappropriate 21 Doors and Windows Appropriate Inappropriate 22 Window Openings and Proportions Appropriate Inappropriate 23 Window Casing/ Trim Appropriate Inappropriate 24 Window Shutters / Hardware Appropriate Inappropriate 25 Awnings Appropriate Inappropriate 26 Doors Appropriate Inappropriate 27 Porches and Balconies Appropriate Inappropriate 28 Projections (i.e. porch, portico, canopy ) Appropriate Inappropriate 29 Landings/ Steps / Stoop / Railings Appropriate Inappropriate 30 Lighting (i.e. wall, post ) Appropriate Inappropriate 31 Signs (i.e. projecting, wall ) Appropriate Inappropriate 32 Mechanicals (i.e. HVAC, generators) Appropriate Inappropriate 33 Decks Appropriate Inappropriate 34 Garages/ Barns / Sheds (i.e. doors, placement ) Appropriate Inappropriate 35 Fence / Walls (i.e. materials, type ) Appropriate Inappropriate 36 Grading (i.e. ground floor height, street edge ) Appropriate Inappropriate 37 Landscaping (i.e. gardens, planters, street trees ) Appropriate Inappropriate 38 Driveways (i.e. location, material, screening ) Appropriate Inappropriate 39 Parking (i.e. location, access, visibility ) Appropriate Inappropriate 40 Accessory Buildings (i.e. sheds, greenhouses ) Appropriate Inappropriate PROPERTY EVALUATION FORM PORTSMOUTH HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION PROPERTY:24 MARKET STREET Case No.:4 Date: 11-4-15 Page 12 of 36 Decision: Approved Approved with Stipulations Denied Continued Postponed Withdrawn INSERT PHOTO HERE H. Purpose and Intent: 1. Preserve the integrity of the District: Yes No 4. Maintain the special character of the District: Yes No 2. Assessment of the Historical Significance: Yes No 5. Complement and enhance the architectural and historic character: Yes No 3. Conservation and enhancement of property values: Yes No 6. Promote the education, pleasure and welfare of the District to the city residents and visitors: Yes No I. Review Criteria / Findings of Fact: 1. Consistent with special and defining character of surrounding properties: Yes No 3. Relation to historic and architectural value of existing structure: Yes No 2. Compatibility of design with surrounding properties: Yes No 4. Compatibility of innovative technologies with surrounding properties: Yes No

Historic District Commission Project Address: 640 MIDDLE STREET Permit Requested: CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL Meeting Type: PUBLIC HEARING #5 A. Property Information - General: Existing Conditions: Zoning District: GRA Land Use: Single-Family Land Area: 15,068 SF +/- Estimated Age of Structure: NA Building Style: Colonial Revival Number of Stories: 2.5 Historical Significance: Contributing (likely) Public View of Proposed Work: View from Middle Street Unique Features: Former parsonage for Middle Street Baptist Church Neighborhood Association: Cass B. Proposed Work: To replace windows and doors and make misc. alterations. C. Other Permits Required: Board of Adjustment D. Lot Location: Planning Board City Council Terminal Vista Gateway Mid-Block Intersection / Corner Lot Rear Lot E. Existing Building to be Altered/ Demolished / Constructed: Principal Accessory Demolition F. Sensitivity of Context: Highly Sensitive Sensitive Low Sensitivity Back-of-House G. Design Approach (for Major Projects): Literal Replication (i.e. 6-16 Congress, Jardinière Building, 10 Pleasant Street) Invention within a Style (i.e., Porter Street Townhouses, 100 Market Street) Abstract Reference (i.e. Portwalk, 51 Islington, 55 Congress Street) Intentional Opposition (i.e. McIntyre Building, Citizen s Bank, Coldwell Banker) H. Project Type: Consent Agenda (i.e. very small alterations, additions or expansions) Minor Project (i.e. small alterations, additions or expansions) Moderate Project (i.e. significant additions, alterations or expansions) Major Project (i.e. very large alternations, additions or expansions) Page 13 of 36 K. Neighborhood Context: The building is located along Middle Street. It is surrounded with many contributing structures ranging from 2.5 to 3 stories in height. The neighborhood is predominantly made up of a wide range of 2.5-5 story woodand brick-sided structures on lots with significant setbacks from the sidewalk. L. Staff Comments and/ or Suggestions for Consideration: At the October 7 th Public Hearing, the HDC denied the applicant s request to removed and replace the windows as well as remove the bottom half of the chimney. As a response, the applicant has revised the application to restore the windows and add wood storm windows as well as retain the chimney and relocate the door s and windows along the rear porch area. Note that new and updated plans will be provided at the meeting to reflect the restoration plans for the windows. M. Aerial Image, Street View and Zoning Map: Zoning Map Aerial and Street View Image HISTORIC SURVEY RATING C

STAFF HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MEMBERS CONTEXT BUILDING DESIGN & MATERIALS SITE DESIGN 640 MIDDLE STREET PUBLIC HEARING #5 (MINOR PROJECT) INFO/ EVALUATION CRITERIA SUBJECT PROPERTY NEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXT Project Information Existing Building Proposed Building (+/-) Abutting Structures Surrounding Structures No. GENERAL BUILDING INFORMATION (ESTIMATED FROM THE TAX MAPS & ASSESSOR S INFO) 1 Gross Floor Area (SF) 2 Floor Area Ratio (GFA/ Lot Area) 3 Building Height / Street-Width (ROW) Ratio 4 Building Height Zoning (Feet) 5 Building Height Street Wall / Cornice (Feet) 6 Number of Stories 7 Building Coverage (% Building on the Lot) MINOR PROJECT - RESTORE WINDOWS, ADD WOOD STORMS, ADD WINOWS & DOORS ONLY - PROJECT REVIEW ELEMENT APPLICANT S COMMENTS HDC SUGGESTIONS APPROPRIATENESS 8 Scale (i.e. height, volume, coverage ) Appropriate Inappropriate 9 Placement (i.e. setbacks, alignment ) Appropriate Inappropriate 10 Massing (i.e. modules, banding, stepbacks ) Appropriate Inappropriate 11 Architectural Style (i.e. traditional modern) Appropriate Inappropriate 12 Roofs Appropriate Inappropriate 13 Style and Slope Appropriate Inappropriate 14 Roof Projections (i.e. chimneys, vents, dormers ) Appropriate Inappropriate 15 Roof Materials Appropriate Inappropriate 16 Cornice Line Appropriate Inappropriate 17 Eaves, Gutters and Downspouts Appropriate Inappropriate 18 Walls Appropriate Inappropriate 19 Number and Material Appropriate Inappropriate 20 Projections (i.e. bays, balconies ) Appropriate Inappropriate 21 Doors and windows Appropriate Inappropriate 22 Window Openings and Proportions Appropriate Inappropriate 23 Window Casing/ Trim Appropriate Inappropriate 24 Window Shutters / Hardware Appropriate Inappropriate 25 Storm Windows / Screens Appropriate Inappropriate 26 Doors Appropriate Inappropriate 27 Porches and Balconies Appropriate Inappropriate 28 Projections (i.e. porch, portico, canopy ) Appropriate Inappropriate 29 Landings/ Steps / Stoop / Railings Appropriate Inappropriate 30 Lighting (i.e. wall, post ) Appropriate Inappropriate 31 Signs (i.e. projecting, wall ) Appropriate Inappropriate 32 Mechanicals (i.e. HVAC, generators) Appropriate Inappropriate 33 Decks Appropriate Inappropriate 34 Garages / Barns / Sheds (i.e. doors, placement ) Appropriate Inappropriate 35 Fence / Walls / Screenwalls (i.e. materials, type ) Appropriate Inappropriate 36 Grading (i.e. ground floor height, street edge ) Appropriate Inappropriate 37 Landscaping (i.e. gardens, planters, street trees ) Appropriate Inappropriate 38 Driveways (i.e. location, material, screening ) Appropriate Inappropriate 39 Parking (i.e. location, access, visibility ) Appropriate Inappropriate 40 Accessory Buildings (i.e. sheds, greenhouses ) Appropriate Inappropriate PROPERTY EVALUATION FORM PORTSMOUTH HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION PROPERTY:640 MIDDLE STREET Case No.: 5 Date: 11-4-15 Page 14 of 36 Decision: Approved Approved with Stipulations Denied Continued Postponed Withdrawn INSERT PHOTO HERE H. Purpose and Intent: 1. Preserve the integrity of the District: Yes No 4. Maintain the special character of the District: Yes No 2. Assessment of the Historical Significance: Yes No 5. Complement and enhance the architectural and historic character: Yes No 3. Conservation and enhancement of property values: Yes No 6. Promote the education, pleasure and welfare of the District to the city residents and visitors: Yes No I. Review Criteria / Findings of Fact: 1. Consistent with special and defining character of surrounding properties: Yes No 3. Relation to historic and architectural value of existing structure: Yes No 2. Compatibility of design with surrounding properties: Yes No 4. Compatibility of innovative technologies with surrounding properties: Yes No

Page 15 of 36 Historic District Commission Project Address: 765 MIDDLE STREET Permit Requested: CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL Meeting Type: PUBLIC HEARING #6 A. Property Information - General: Existing Conditions: Zoning District: GRA Land Use: Single family Residential Land Area: 8,080 SF +/- Estimated Age of Structure: NA Building Style: NA Number of Stories: 2 Historical Significance: NA (Likely Contributing) Public View of Proposed Work: View from Middle Street Unique Features: NA Neighborhood Association: Wibird B. Proposed Work: Install an 8 foot fence along Middle & 42 inch fence on Lincoln Street. C. Other Permits Required: Board of Adjustment D. Lot Location: Planning Board City Council Terminal Vista Gateway Mid-Block Intersection / Corner Lot Rear Lot E. Existing Building to be Altered/ Demolished: Principal Accessory Significant Demolition F. Sensitivity of Context: Highly Sensitive Sensitive Low Sensitivity Back-of-House G. Design Approach (for Major Projects): Literal Replication (i.e. 6-16 Congress, Jardinière Building, 10 Pleasant Street) Invention within a Style (i.e., Porter Street Townhouses, 100 Market Street) Abstract Reference (i.e. Portwalk, 51 Islington, 55 Congress Street) Intentional Opposition (i.e. McIntyre Building, Citizen s Bank, Coldwell Banker) H. Project Type: Consent Agenda (i.e. very small alterations, additions or expansions) Minor Project (i.e. small alterations, additions or expansions) Moderate Project (i.e. significant additions, alterations or expansions) Major Project (i.e. very large alternations, additions or expansions) I. Neighborhood Context: This lot and structure is located along Middle Street and is surrounded with many focal and contributing structures. The neighborhood is predominantly 2.5-3 story wooden structures with small side or rear yards and shallow setbacks from the street edge. J. Staff Comments and Suggestions for Consideration: This applicant is proposing to: Install an eight (8) foot board and baluster privacy fence along Middle Street with a transition to a 42 inch baluster picket fence along Lincoln Street. K. Aerial Image, Street View and Zoning Map: Aerial and Street View Image Zoning Map HISTORIC SURVEY RATING -

STAFF HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MEMBERS CONTEXT BUILDING DESIGN & MATERIALS SITE DESIGN 765 MIDDLE STREET PUBLIC HEARING #6 (MINOR) INFO/ EVALUATION CRITERIA SUBJECT PROPERTY NEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXT Project Information Existing Proposed Abutting Structures Surrounding Structures Building Building (+/-) GENERAL BUILDING INFORMATION (ESTIMATED FROM THE TAX MAPS & ASSESSOR S INFO) 1 Gross Floor Area (SF) 2 Floor Area Ratio (GFA/ Lot Area) 3 Building Height / Street-Width Ratio 4 Building Height Zoning (Feet) MINOR PROJECT 5 Building Height Street Wall / Cornice (Feet) 6 Number of Stories - INSTALL FENCING ONLY - 7 Building Coverage (% Building on the Lot) PROJECT REVIEW ELEMENT APPLICANT S COMMENTS HDC SUGGESTIONS APPROPRIATENESS 8 Scale (i.e. height, volume, coverage ) Appropriate Inappropriate 9 Placement (i.e. setbacks, alignment ) Appropriate Inappropriate 10 Massing (i.e. modules, banding, stepbacks ) Appropriate Inappropriate 11 Architectural Style (i.e. traditional modern) Appropriate Inappropriate 12 Roofs Appropriate Inappropriate 13 Style and Slope Appropriate Inappropriate 14 Roof Projections (i.e. chimneys, vents, dormers ) Appropriate Inappropriate 15 Roof Materials Appropriate Inappropriate 16 Cornice Line Appropriate Inappropriate 17 Eaves, Gutters and Downspouts Appropriate Inappropriate 18 Walls Appropriate Inappropriate 19 Siding / Material Appropriate Inappropriate 20 Projections (i.e. bays, balconies ) Appropriate Inappropriate 21 Doors and Windows Appropriate Inappropriate 22 Window Openings and Proportions Appropriate Inappropriate 23 Window Casing/ Trim Appropriate Inappropriate 24 Window Shutters / Hardware Appropriate Inappropriate 25 Awnings Appropriate Inappropriate 26 Doors Appropriate Inappropriate 27 Porches and Balconies Appropriate Inappropriate 28 Projections (i.e. porch, portico, canopy ) Appropriate Inappropriate 29 Landings/ Steps / Stoop / Railings Appropriate Inappropriate 30 Lighting (i.e. wall, post ) Appropriate Inappropriate 31 Signs (i.e. projecting, wall ) Appropriate Inappropriate 32 Mechanicals (i.e. HVAC, generators) Appropriate Inappropriate 33 Decks Appropriate Inappropriate 34 Garages/ Barns / Sheds (i.e. doors, placement ) Appropriate Inappropriate 35 Fence / Walls (i.e. materials, type ) Appropriate Inappropriate 36 Grading (i.e. ground floor height, street edge ) Appropriate Inappropriate 37 Landscaping (i.e. gardens, planters, street trees ) Appropriate Inappropriate 38 Driveways (i.e. location, material, screening ) Appropriate Inappropriate 39 Parking (i.e. location, access, visibility ) Appropriate Inappropriate 40 Accessory Buildings (i.e. sheds, greenhouses ) Appropriate Inappropriate PROPERTY EVALUATION FORM PORTSMOUTH HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION PROPERTY:765 MIDDLE STREET Case No.: 6 Date: 11-4-15 Page 16 of 36 Decision: Approved Approved with Stipulations Denied Continued Postponed Withdrawn INSERT PHOTO HERE H. Purpose and Intent: 1. Preserve the integrity of the District: Yes No 4. Maintain the special character of the District: Yes No 2. Assessment of the Historical Significance: Yes No 5. Complement and enhance the architectural and historic character: Yes No 3. Conservation and enhancement of property values: Yes No 6. Promote the education, pleasure and welfare of the District to the city residents and visitors: Yes No I. Review Criteria / Findings of Fact: 1. Consistent with special and defining character of surrounding properties: Yes No 3. Relation to historic and architectural value of existing structure: Yes No 2. Compatibility of design with surrounding properties: Yes No 4. Compatibility of innovative technologies with surrounding properties: Yes No

Historic District Commission Page 17 of 36 Project Address: 102 STATE STREET Permit Requested: CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL Meeting Type: PUBLIC HEARING #7 A. Property Information - General: Existing Conditions: Zoning District: CD4 Land Use: Commercial Land Area: 2,235 SF +/- Estimated Age of Structure: c.1815 Building Style: Federal Cape Number of Stories: 1.5 Historical Significance: Contributing Public View of Proposed Work: View from State Street Unique Features: Wood-frame structure Neighborhood Association: Downtown B. Proposed Work: To add a rear addition for a residential use. C. Other Permits Required: Board of Adjustment D. Lot Location: Planning Board City Council Terminal Vista Gateway Mid-Block Intersection / Corner Lot Rear Lot E. Existing Building to be Altered/ Demolished: Principal Accessory Demolition F. Sensitivity of Context: Highly Sensitive Sensitive Low Sensitivity Back-of-House G. Design Approach (for Major Projects): Literal Replication (i.e. 6-16 Congress, Jardinière Building, 10 Pleasant Street) Invention within a Style (i.e., Porter Street Townhouses, 100 Market Street) Abstract Reference (i.e. Portwalk, 51 Islington, 55 Congress Street) Intentional Opposition (i.e. McIntyre Building, Citizen s Bank, Coldwell Banker) H. Project Type: Consent Agenda (i.e. very small alterations, additions or expansions) Minor Project (i.e. small alterations, additions or expansions) Moderate Project (i.e. significant additions, alterations or expansions) Major Project (i.e. very large alternations, additions or expansions) I. Neighborhood Context: The building is located along State Street. It is surrounded with many brick 3 story historic structures with no front yard setbacks with gardens and lawns within the rear yards. J. Staff Comments and/ or Suggestions for Consideration: The applicant is proposing to: Add a rear addition to the historic structure for a residential use. Note that revised plans have been submitted to reflect the comments from the HDC at the Work Session. K. Aerial Image, Street View and Zoning Map: Zoning Map Aerial and Street View Image HISTORIC SURVEY RATING C

STAFF HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MEMBERS CONTEXT BUILDING DESIGN & MATERIALS SITE DESIGN 102 STATE STREET PUBLIC HEARING #7 (MINOR) INFO/ EVALUATION CRITERIA SUBJECT PROPERTY NEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXT Project Information Existing Proposed Abutting Structures Surrounding Structures Building Building (+/-) GENERAL BUILDING INFORMATION (ESTIMATED FROM THE TAX MAPS & ASSESSOR S INFO) 1 Gross Floor Area (SF) 2 Floor Area Ratio (GFA/ Lot Area) 3 Building Height / Street-Width Ratio 4 Building Height Zoning (Feet) MINOR PROJECT 5 Building Height Street Wall / Cornice (Feet) 6 Number of Stories ADD REAR ADDITION AND SHED DORMER ONLY 7 Building Coverage (% Building on the Lot) PROJECT REVIEW ELEMENT APPLICANT S COMMENTS HDC SUGGESTIONS APPROPRIATENESS 8 Scale (i.e. height, volume, coverage ) Appropriate Inappropriate 9 Placement (i.e. setbacks, alignment ) Appropriate Inappropriate 10 Massing (i.e. modules, banding, stepbacks ) Appropriate Inappropriate 11 Architectural Style (i.e. traditional modern) Appropriate Inappropriate 12 Roofs Appropriate Inappropriate 13 Style and Slope Appropriate Inappropriate 14 Roof Projections (i.e. chimneys, vents, dormers ) Appropriate Inappropriate 15 Roof Materials Appropriate Inappropriate 16 Cornice Line Appropriate Inappropriate 17 Eaves, Gutters and Downspouts Appropriate Inappropriate 18 Walls Appropriate Inappropriate 19 Siding / Material Appropriate Inappropriate 20 Projections (i.e. bays, balconies ) Appropriate Inappropriate 21 Doors and Windows Appropriate Inappropriate 22 Window Openings and Proportions Appropriate Inappropriate 23 Window Casing/ Trim Appropriate Inappropriate 24 Window Shutters / Hardware Appropriate Inappropriate 25 Awnings Appropriate Inappropriate 26 Doors Appropriate Inappropriate 27 Porches and Balconies Appropriate Inappropriate 28 Projections (i.e. porch, portico, canopy ) Appropriate Inappropriate 29 Landings/ Steps / Stoop / Railings Appropriate Inappropriate 30 Lighting (i.e. wall, post ) Appropriate Inappropriate 31 Signs (i.e. projecting, wall ) Appropriate Inappropriate 32 Mechanicals (i.e. HVAC, generators) Appropriate Inappropriate 33 Decks Appropriate Inappropriate 34 Garages/ Barns / Sheds (i.e. doors, placement ) Appropriate Inappropriate 35 Fence / Walls (i.e. materials, type ) Appropriate Inappropriate 36 Grading (i.e. ground floor height, street edge ) Appropriate Inappropriate 37 Landscaping (i.e. gardens, planters, street trees ) Appropriate Inappropriate 38 Driveways (i.e. location, material, screening ) Appropriate Inappropriate 39 Parking (i.e. location, access, visibility ) Appropriate Inappropriate 40 Accessory Buildings (i.e. sheds, greenhouses ) Appropriate Inappropriate PROPERTY EVALUATION FORM PORTSMOUTH HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION PROPERTY:102 STATE STREET Case No.:7 Date: 11-4-15 Page 18 of 36 Decision: Approved Approved with Stipulations Denied Continued Postponed Withdrawn INSERT PHOTO HERE H. Purpose and Intent: 1. Preserve the integrity of the District: Yes No 4. Maintain the special character of the District: Yes No 2. Assessment of the Historical Significance: Yes No 5. Complement and enhance the architectural and historic character: Yes No 3. Conservation and enhancement of property values: Yes No 6. Promote the education, pleasure and welfare of the District to the city residents and visitors: Yes No I. Review Criteria / Findings of Fact: 1. Consistent with special and defining character of surrounding properties: Yes No 3. Relation to historic and architectural value of existing structure: Yes No 2. Compatibility of design with surrounding properties: Yes No 4. Compatibility of innovative technologies with surrounding properties: Yes No

Historic District Commission Project Evaluation Form: 54 CERES STREET Permit Requested: CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL Meeting Type: PUBLIC HEARING #8 Page 19 of 36 I. Neighborhood Context: This contributing structure is located along South Street and is surrounded with many other wood, 2.5 story contributing structures. J. Staff Comments and Suggestions for Consideration: The applicant proposes to install two wall-mounted heat pumps units on the shed roof on the rear wall of the building. A. Property Information - General: Existing Conditions: Zoning District: CD4 Land Use: Mixed-Use Land Area: 3,760 SF +/- Estimated Age of Structure: c.1955 Building Style: Colonial Number of Stories: 2.5 Historical Significance: Unknown Public View of Proposed Work: View from Ceres Street Unique Features: NA Neighborhood Association: Downtown B. Proposed Work: To install cedar fencing. C. Other Permits Required: Board of Adjustment D. Lot Location: Planning Board City Council Terminal Vista Gateway Mid-Block Intersection / Corner Lot Rear Lot E. Existing Building to be Altered/ Demolished: Principal Accessory Significant Demolition F. Sensitivity of Context: Highly Sensitive Sensitive Low Sensitivity Back-of-House G. Design Approach (for Major Projects): Literal Replication (i.e. 6-16 Congress, Jardinière Building, 10 Pleasant Street) Invention within a Style (i.e., Porter Street Townhouses, 100 Market Street) Abstract Reference (i.e. Portwalk, 51 Islington, 55 Congress Street) Intentional Opposition (i.e. McIntyre Building, Citizen s Bank, Coldwell Banker) H. Project Type: Consent Agenda (i.e. very small alterations, additions or expansions) Minor Project (i.e. small alterations, additions or expansions) Moderate Project (i.e. significant additions, alterations or expansions) Major Project (i.e. very large alternations, additions or expansions) K. Aerial Image, Street View and Zoning Map: Zoning Map Aerial and Street View Image HISTORIC SURVEY RATING -

STAFF HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MEMBERS CONTEXT BUILDING DESIGN & MATERIALS SITE DESIGN No. 54 CERES STREET PUBLIC HEARING #8 (MINOR PROJECT) INFO/ EVALUATION CRITERIA SUBJECT PROPERTY NEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXT Project Information Existing Building Proposed Building (+/-) Abutting Structures Surrounding Structures GENERAL BUILDING INFORMATION (ESTIMATED FROM THE TAX MAPS & ASSESSOR S INFO) 1 Gross Floor Area (SF) 2 Floor Area Ratio (GFA/ Lot Area) 3 Building Height / Street-Width Ratio 4 Building Height Zoning (Feet) MINOR PROJECT 5 Building Height Street Wall / Cornice (Feet) 6 Number of Stories INSTALL WALL-MOUNTED MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT ONLY 7 Building Coverage (% Building on the Lot) - PROJECT REVIEW ELEMENT HDC COMMENTS HDC SUGGESTIONS APPROPRIATENESS 8 Scale (i.e. height, volume, coverage ) Appropriate Inappropriate 9 Placement (i.e. setbacks, alignment ) Appropriate Inappropriate 10 Massing (i.e. modules, banding, stepbacks ) Appropriate Inappropriate 11 Architectural Style (i.e. traditional modern) Appropriate Inappropriate 12 Roofs Appropriate Inappropriate 13 Style and Slope Appropriate Inappropriate 14 Roof Projections (i.e. chimneys, vents, dormers ) Appropriate Inappropriate 15 Roof Materials Appropriate Inappropriate 16 Cornice Line Appropriate Inappropriate 17 Eaves, Gutters and Downspouts Appropriate Inappropriate 18 Walls Appropriate Inappropriate 19 Siding / Material Appropriate Inappropriate 20 Projections (i.e. bays, balconies ) Appropriate Inappropriate 21 Doors and windows Appropriate Inappropriate 22 Window Openings and Proportions Appropriate Inappropriate 23 Window Casing/ Trim Appropriate Inappropriate 24 Window Shutters / Hardware Appropriate Inappropriate 25 Awnings Appropriate Inappropriate 26 Doors Appropriate Inappropriate 27 Porches and Balconies Appropriate Inappropriate 28 Projections (i.e. porch, portico, canopy ) Appropriate Inappropriate 29 Landings/ Steps / Stoop / Railings Appropriate Inappropriate 30 Lighting (i.e. wall, post ) Appropriate Inappropriate 31 Signs (i.e. projecting, wall ) Appropriate Inappropriate 32 Mechanicals (i.e. HVAC, generators) Appropriate Inappropriate 33 Decks Appropriate Inappropriate 34 Garages (i.e. doors, placement ) Appropriate Inappropriate 35 Fence / Walls (i.e. materials, type ) Appropriate Inappropriate 36 Grading (i.e. ground floor height, street edge ) Appropriate Inappropriate 37 Landscaping (i.e. gardens, planters, street trees ) Appropriate Inappropriate 38 Driveways (i.e. location, material, screening ) Appropriate Inappropriate 39 Parking (i.e. location, access, visibility ) Appropriate Inappropriate 40 Accessory Buildings (i.e. sheds, greenhouses ) Appropriate Inappropriate PROPERTY EVALUATION FORM PORTSMOUTH HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION PROPERTY:54 CERES STREET Case No.:8 Date: 11-4-15 Page 20 of 36 Decision: Approved Approved with Stipulations Denied Continued Postponed Withdrawn INSERT PHOTO HERE H. Purpose and Intent: 1. Preserve the integrity of the District: Yes No 4. Maintain the special character of the District: Yes No 2. Assessment of the Historical Significance: Yes No 5. Complement and enhance the architectural and historic character: Yes No 3. Conservation and enhancement of property values: Yes No 6. Promote the education, pleasure and welfare of the District to the city residents and visitors: Yes No I. Review Criteria / Findings of Fact: 1. Consistent with special and defining character of surrounding properties: Yes No 3. Relation to historic and architectural value of existing structure: Yes No 2. Compatibility of design with surrounding properties: Yes No 4. Compatibility of innovative technologies with surrounding properties: Yes No

Historic District Commission Project Address: 67-77 STATE STREET Permit Requested: CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL Meeting Type: PUBLIC HEARING #9 A. Property Information - General: Existing Conditions: Zoning District: CD5 Land Use: Mixed-Use Land Area: 15,680 SF +/- Estimated Age of Structure: c.1916 Building Style: Colonial Revival Historical Significance: Contributing (former Army/ Navy building) Public View of Proposed Work: View from Market Street Unique Features: NA Neighborhood Association: Downtown B. Proposed Work: To modify the window manufacturer. C. Other Permits Required: Board of Adjustment D. Lot Location: Planning Board City Council Terminal Vista Gateway Mid-Block Intersection / Corner Lot Rear Lot E. Existing Building to be Altered/ Demolished: Principal Accessory Demolition F. Sensitivity of Context: Highly Sensitive Sensitive Low Sensitivity Back-of-House G. Design Approach (for Major Projects): Literal Replication (i.e. 6-16 Congress, Jardinière Building, 10 Pleasant Street) Invention within a Style (i.e., Porter Street Townhouses, 100 Market Street) Abstract Reference (i.e. Portwalk, 51 Islington, 55 Congress Street) Intentional Opposition (i.e. McIntyre Building, Citizen s Bank, Coldwell Banker) H. Project Type: Consent Agenda (i.e. very small alterations, additions or expansions) Minor Project (i.e. small alterations, additions or expansions) Moderate Project (i.e. significant additions, alterations or expansions) Major Project (i.e. very large alternations, additions or expansions) Page 21 of 36 L. Neighborhood Context: The building is located along State Street and the Wright Ave parking lot. It is surrounded with many brick and wood-sided 2.5 & 3.5 story mixed-use structures with no setbacks. M. Staff Comments and/ or Suggestions for Consideration: The Applicant is proposing to: Revise the previously approved plans to revise the details of the copper bay and copper downspouts, remove one penthouse window, add a shadow box window detail, revise the railing material and dormer windows, and add roof clip at all the dormers. N. Aerial Image, Street View and Zoning Map: Zoning Map Aerial and Street View Image HISTORIC SURVEY RATING -

STAFF HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MEMBERS CONTEXT BUILDING DESIGN & MATERIALS SITE DESIGN No. 66-67 STATE STREET PUBLIC HEARING #9 (CONSENT AGENDA) INFO/ EVALUATION CRITERIA SUBJECT PROPERTY NEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXT Project Information Existing Building Proposed Building (+/-) Abutting Structures Surrounding Structures GENERAL BUILDING INFORMATION (ESTIMATED FROM THE TAX MAPS & ASSESSOR S INFO) 1 2 Gross Floor Area (SF) Floor Area Ratio (GFA/ Lot Area) 3 Building Height / Street-Width Ratio 4 Building Height Zoning (Feet) 5 Building Height Street Wall / Cornice (Feet) 6 Number of Stories 7 Building Coverage (% Building on the Lot) PROJECT REVIEW ELEMENT APPLICANT S COMMENTS HDC SUGGESTIONS APPROPRIATENESS MINOR PROJECT REVISIONS TO PENTHOUSE, WINDOWS, DORMERS AND OTHER MISC. ONLY 8 Scale (i.e. height, volume, coverage ) Appropriate Inappropriate 9 Placement (i.e. setbacks, alignment ) Appropriate Inappropriate 10 Massing (i.e. modules, banding, stepbacks ) Appropriate Inappropriate 11 Architectural Style (i.e. traditional modern) Appropriate Inappropriate 12 Roofs Appropriate Inappropriate 13 Style and Slope Appropriate Inappropriate 14 Roof Projections (i.e. chimneys, vents, dormers ) Appropriate Inappropriate 15 Roof Materials Appropriate Inappropriate 16 Cornice Line Appropriate Inappropriate 17 Eaves, Gutters and Downspouts Appropriate Inappropriate 18 Walls Appropriate Inappropriate 19 Siding / Material Appropriate Inappropriate 20 Projections (i.e. bays, balconies ) Appropriate Inappropriate 21 Doors and Windows Appropriate Inappropriate 22 Window Openings and Proportions Appropriate Inappropriate 23 Window Casing/ Trim Appropriate Inappropriate 24 Window Shutters / Hardware Appropriate Inappropriate 25 Awnings Appropriate Inappropriate 26 Doors Appropriate Inappropriate 27 Porches and Balconies Appropriate Inappropriate 28 Projections (i.e. porch, portico, canopy ) Appropriate Inappropriate 29 Landings/ Steps / Stoop / Railings Appropriate Inappropriate 30 Lighting (i.e. wall, post ) Appropriate Inappropriate 31 Signs (i.e. projecting, wall ) Appropriate Inappropriate 32 Mechanicals (i.e. HVAC, generators) Appropriate Inappropriate 33 Decks Appropriate Inappropriate 34 Garages/ Barns / Sheds (i.e. doors, placement ) Appropriate Inappropriate 35 Fence / Walls (i.e. materials, type ) Appropriate Inappropriate 36 Grading (i.e. ground floor height, street edge ) Appropriate Inappropriate 37 Landscaping (i.e. gardens, planters, street trees ) Appropriate Inappropriate 38 Driveways (i.e. location, material, screening ) Appropriate Inappropriate 39 Parking (i.e. location, access, visibility ) Appropriate Inappropriate 40 Accessory Buildings (i.e. sheds, greenhouses ) Appropriate Inappropriate PROPERTY EVALUATION FORM PORTSMOUTH HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION PROPERTY:67-77 STATE STREET Case No.:9 Date: 11-4-15 Page 22 of 36 Decision: Approved Approved with Stipulations Denied Continued Postponed Withdrawn INSERT PHOTO HERE H. Purpose and Intent: 1. Preserve the integrity of the District: Yes No 4. Maintain the special character of the District: Yes No 2. Assessment of the Historical Significance: Yes No 5. Complement and enhance the architectural and historic character: Yes No 3. Conservation and enhancement of property values: Yes No 6. Promote the education, pleasure and welfare of the District to the city residents and visitors: Yes No I. Review Criteria / Findings of Fact: 1. Consistent with special and defining character of surrounding properties: Yes No 3. Relation to historic and architectural value of existing structure: Yes No 2. Compatibility of design with surrounding properties: Yes No 4. Compatibility of innovative technologies with surrounding properties: Yes No

Historic District Commission Project Address: 143 DANIEL STREET Permit Requested: CERTIFCATE OF APPROVAL Meeting Type: PUBLIC HEARING #10 A. Property Information - General: Existing Conditions: Zoning District: CD5 Land Use: Mixed-Use Land Area: 15,742 SF +/- Estimated Age of Structure: c.1910 Building Style: Colonial Revival Number of Stories: 3 Historical Significance: C Public View of Proposed Work: View from Daniel and Chapel Street. Unique Features: Gateway to Downtown Neighborhood Association: Downtown B. Proposed Work: To revise previous approved plan with 14 design changes. C. Other Permits Required: Board of Adjustment D. Lot Location: Planning Board City Council Terminal Vista Gateway Mid-Block Intersection / Corner Lot Rear Lot E. Existing Building to be Altered/ Demolished / Constructed: Principal Accessory Demolition F. Sensitivity of Context: Highly Sensitive Sensitive Low Sensitivity Back-of-House G. Design Approach (for Major Projects): Literal Replication (i.e. 6-16 Congress, Jardinière Building, 10 Pleasant Street) Invention within a Style (i.e., Porter Street Townhouses, 100 Market Street) Abstract Reference (i.e. Portwalk, 51 Islington, 55 Congress Street) Intentional Opposition (i.e. McIntyre Building, Citizen s Bank, Coldwell Banker) H. Project Type: Consent Agenda (i.e. very small alterations, additions or expansions) Minor Project (i.e. small alterations, additions or expansions) Moderate Project (i.e. significant additions, alterations or expansions) Major Project (i.e. very large alternations, additions or expansions) Page 23 of 36 M. Neighborhood Context: The new building is located along Maplewood Ave., Russell and Deer Streets. It is surrounded with many new and proposed infill buildings ranging from 2.5 to 5 stories in height. The neighborhood is predominantly made up of newer, 4-5 story brick structures on large lots and little to no setback from the sidewalk. N. Staff Comments and/ or Suggestions for Consideration: The Applicant is proposing to: Revise the downspouts, add snow guards, copper flashing, side windows and doors in the balconies, and revise the raised plaza design and the entry porch rails. N. Aerial Image, Street View and Zoning Map: Zoning Map Aerial and Street View Image HISTORIC SURVEY RATING C

STAFF HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MEMBERS CONTEXT BUILDING DESIGN & MATERIALS SITE DESIGN 143 DANIEL STREET PUBLIC HEARING #10 (MINOR PROJECT) INFO/ EVALUATION CRITERIA SUBJECT PROPERTY NEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXT Project Information Existing Building Proposed Building (+/-) Abutting Structures Surrounding Structures No. GENERAL BUILDING INFORMATION (ESTIMATED FROM THE TAX MAPS & ASSESSOR S INFO) 1 Gross Floor Area (SF) 2 Floor Area Ratio (GFA/ Lot Area) 3 Building Height / Street-Width (ROW) Ratio 4 Building Height Zoning (Feet) 5 Building Height Street Wall / Cornice (Feet) 6 Number of Stories 7 Building Coverage (% Building on the Lot) MAJOR PROJECT - REVISIONS FOR DOWNSPOUTS, BALCONIES, PATIO AND ROOF ONLY - PROJECT REVIEW ELEMENT APPLICANT S COMMENTS HDC SUGGESTIONS APPROPRIATENESS 8 Scale (i.e. height, volume, coverage ) Appropriate Inappropriate 9 Placement (i.e. setbacks, alignment ) Appropriate Inappropriate 10 Massing (i.e. modules, banding, stepbacks ) Appropriate Inappropriate 11 Architectural Style (i.e. traditional modern) Appropriate Inappropriate 12 Roofs Appropriate Inappropriate 13 Style and Slope Appropriate Inappropriate 14 Roof Projections (i.e. chimneys, vents, dormers ) Appropriate Inappropriate 15 Roof Materials Appropriate Inappropriate 16 Cornice Line Appropriate Inappropriate 17 Eaves, Gutters and Downspouts Appropriate Inappropriate 18 Walls Appropriate Inappropriate 19 Number and Material Appropriate Inappropriate 20 Projections (i.e. bays, balconies ) Appropriate Inappropriate 21 Doors and windows Appropriate Inappropriate 22 Window Openings and Proportions Appropriate Inappropriate 23 Window Casing/ Trim Appropriate Inappropriate 24 Window Shutters / Hardware Appropriate Inappropriate 25 Storm Windows / Screens Appropriate Inappropriate 26 Doors Appropriate Inappropriate 27 Porches and Balconies Appropriate Inappropriate 28 Projections (i.e. porch, portico, canopy ) Appropriate Inappropriate 29 Landings/ Steps / Stoop / Railings Appropriate Inappropriate 30 Lighting (i.e. wall, post ) Appropriate Inappropriate 31 Signs (i.e. projecting, wall ) Appropriate Inappropriate 32 Mechanicals (i.e. HVAC, generators) Appropriate Inappropriate 33 Decks Appropriate Inappropriate 34 Garages / Barns / Sheds (i.e. doors, placement ) Appropriate Inappropriate 35 Fence / Walls / Screenwalls (i.e. materials, type ) Appropriate Inappropriate 36 Grading (i.e. ground floor height, street edge ) Appropriate Inappropriate 37 Landscaping (i.e. gardens, planters, street trees ) Appropriate Inappropriate 38 Driveways (i.e. location, material, screening ) Appropriate Inappropriate 39 Parking (i.e. location, access, visibility ) Appropriate Inappropriate 40 Accessory Buildings (i.e. sheds, greenhouses ) Appropriate Inappropriate PROPERTY EVALUATION FORM PORTSMOUTH HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION PROPERTY:143 DANIEL STREET Case No.: 10 Date: 11-4-15 Page 24 of 36 Decision: Approved Approved with Stipulations Denied Continued Postponed Withdrawn INSERT PHOTO HERE H. Purpose and Intent: 1. Preserve the integrity of the District: Yes No 4. Maintain the special character of the District: Yes No 2. Assessment of the Historical Significance: Yes No 5. Complement and enhance the architectural and historic character: Yes No 3. Conservation and enhancement of property values: Yes No 6. Promote the education, pleasure and welfare of the District to the city residents and visitors: Yes No I. Review Criteria / Findings of Fact: 1. Consistent with special and defining character of surrounding properties: Yes No 3. Relation to historic and architectural value of existing structure: Yes No 2. Compatibility of design with surrounding properties: Yes No 4. Compatibility of innovative technologies with surrounding properties: Yes No

Historic District Commission Project Address: 420 PLEASANT STREET Permit Requested: CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL Meeting Type: PUBLIC HEARING #11 A. Property Information - General: Existing Conditions: Zoning District: General Residential B (GRB) Land Use: Multi-Family (5 units) Land Area: 4,334 SF +/- Estimated Age of Structure: c.1820 Building Style: Federal Historical Significance: Contributing Public View of Proposed Work: View from Pleasant and Franklin Streets Unique Features: NA Neighborhood Association: South End B. Proposed Work: To remove and replace chimney and make emergency repairs. C. Other Permits Required: Board of Adjustment D. Lot Location: Planning Board City Council Terminal Vista Gateway Mid-Block Intersection / Corner Lot Rear Lot E. Existing Building to be Altered/ Demolished: Principal Accessory Significant Demolition F. Sensitivity of Context: Highly Sensitive Sensitive Low Sensitivity Back-of-House G. Design Approach (for Major Projects): Literal Replication (i.e. 6-16 Congress, Jardinière Building, 10 Pleasant Street) Invention within a Style (i.e., Porter Street Townhouses, 100 Market Street) Abstract Reference (i.e. Portwalk, 51 Islington, 55 Congress Street) Intentional Opposition (i.e. McIntyre Building, Citizen s Bank, Coldwell Banker) H. Project Type: Consent Agenda (i.e. very small alterations, additions or expansions) Minor Project (i.e. small alterations, additions or expansions) Moderate Project (i.e. significant additions, alterations or expansions) Major Project (i.e. very large alternations, additions or expansions) Page 25 of 36 I. Neighborhood Context: This structure is located along Pleasant Street and is surrounded with many contributing structures. The neighborhood is predominantly 2.5-3 story wooden residential structures with small lots and narrow setbacks from the street. J. Staff Comments and Suggestions for Consideration: The Applicant is proposing to: Remove the chimney below the roofline (and later replace it), make foundation repairs, replace front steps and landing and replace three rear windows for egress per the Inspection Department. See structural assessment report from Summit Engineering. Note that the final plans are still in progress given the inspection report and updated plans will be presented, if need be, at the meeting. Also note that the applicant may request a work session in order to discuss the changes and the details of the chimney replacement. K. Aerial Images and Maps: Aerial and Streetview Image Zoning Map HISTORIC SURVEY RATING C

STAFF HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MEMBERS CONTEXT BUILDING DESIGN & MATERIALS SITE DESIGN No. 420 PLEASANT STREET PUBLIC HEARING #11 (MINOR PROJECT) INFO/ EVALUATION CRITERIA SUBJECT PROPERTY NEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXT Project Information Existing Building Proposed Building (+/-) Abutting Str. Surrounding Structures GENERAL BUILDING INFORMATION (ESTIMATED FROM THE TAX MAPS & ASSESSOR S INFO) Note the data below may not fully represent revised building 1 Gross Floor Area (SF) 2 Floor Area Ratio (GFA/ Lot Area) 3 Building Height / Street-Width Ratio 4 Building Height Zoning (Feet) 5 Building Height Street Wall / Cornice (Feet) 6 Number of Stories 7 Building Coverage (% Building on the Lot) MINOR PROJECT REPLACE 3 WINDOWS & MAKE REPAIRS TO CHIMNEY, FOUNDATION, AND FRONT STEPS ONLY PROJECT REVIEW ELEMENT APPLICANT S COMMENTS HDC SUGGESTIONS APPROPRIATENESS 8 Scale (i.e. height, volume, coverage ) Appropriate Inappropriate 9 Placement (i.e. setbacks, alignment ) Appropriate Inappropriate 10 Massing (i.e. modules, banding, stepbacks ) Appropriate Inappropriate 11 Architectural Style (i.e. traditional modern) Appropriate Inappropriate 12 Roofs Appropriate Inappropriate 13 Style and Slope Appropriate Inappropriate 14 Roof Projections (i.e. chimneys, vents, dormers ) Appropriate Inappropriate 15 Roof Materials Appropriate Inappropriate 16 Cornice Line Appropriate Inappropriate 17 Eaves, Gutters and Downspouts Appropriate Inappropriate 18 Walls Appropriate Inappropriate 19 Number and Material Appropriate Inappropriate 20 Projections (i.e. bays, balconies ) Appropriate Inappropriate 21 Doors and windows Appropriate Inappropriate 22 Window Openings and Proportions Appropriate Inappropriate 23 Window Casing/ Trim Appropriate Inappropriate 24 Window Shutters / Hardware Appropriate Inappropriate 25 Awnings Appropriate Inappropriate 26 Doors Appropriate Inappropriate 27 Porches and Balconies Appropriate Inappropriate 28 Projections (i.e. porch, portico, canopy ) Appropriate Inappropriate 29 Landings/ Steps / Stoop / Railings Appropriate Inappropriate 30 Lighting (i.e. wall, post ) Appropriate Inappropriate 31 Signs (i.e. projecting, wall ) Appropriate Inappropriate 32 Mechanicals (i.e. HVAC, generators) Appropriate Inappropriate 33 Decks Appropriate Inappropriate 34 Garages/ Barns/ Sheds (i.e. doors, placement ) Appropriate Inappropriate 35 Fence / Walls (i.e. materials, type ) Appropriate Inappropriate 36 Grading (i.e. ground floor height, street edge ) Appropriate Inappropriate 37 Landscaping (i.e. gardens, planters, street trees ) Appropriate Inappropriate 38 Driveways (i.e. location, material, screening ) Appropriate Inappropriate 39 Parking (i.e. location, access, visibility ) Appropriate Inappropriate 40 Accessory Buildings (i.e. sheds, greenhouses ) Appropriate Inappropriate PROPERTY EVALUATION FORM PORTSMOUTH HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION PROPERTY:420 PLEASANT STREET Case No:11 Date:11-11-15 Page 26 of 36 Decision: Approved Approved with Stipulations Denied Continued Postponed Withdrawn INSERT PHOTO HERE H. Purpose and Intent: 1. Preserve the integrity of the District: Yes No 4. Maintain the special character of the District: Yes No 2. Assessment of the Historical Significance: Yes No 5. Complement and enhance the architectural and historic character: Yes No 3. Conservation and enhancement of property values: Yes No 6. Promote the education, pleasure and welfare of the District to the city residents and visitors: Yes No I. Review Criteria / Findings of Fact: 1. Consistent with special and defining character of surrounding properties: Yes No 3. Relation to historic and architectural value of existing structure: Yes No 2. Compatibility of design with surrounding properties: Yes No 4. Compatibility of innovative technologies with surrounding properties: Yes No

Historic District Commission Project Address: 55 HANOVER STREET Permit Requested: CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL Meeting Type: PUBLIC HEARING #12 A. Property Information - General: Existing Conditions: Zoning District: CD4-L2 Land Use: Mixed-Use Land Area: 3,920 SF +/- Estimated Age of Structure: 1835 Building Style: Federal Revival Number of Stories: 4 Historical Significance: New Construction Public View of Proposed Work: View from Hanover Street Unique Features: Infill Building Neighborhood Association: North End B. Proposed Work: To replace the storefront window. C. Other Permits Required: Board of Adjustment D. Lot Location: Planning Board City Council Terminal Vista Gateway Mid-Block Intersection / Corner Lot Rear Lot E. Existing Building to be Altered/ Demolished / Constructed: Principal Accessory Demolition F. Sensitivity of Context: Highly Sensitive Sensitive Low Sensitivity Back-of-House G. Design Approach (for Major Projects): Literal Replication (i.e. 6-16 Congress, Jardinière Building, 10 Pleasant Street) Invention within a Style (i.e., Porter Street Townhouses, 100 Market Street) Abstract Reference (i.e. Portwalk, 51 Islington, 55 Congress Street) Intentional Opposition (i.e. McIntyre Building, Citizen s Bank, Coldwell Banker) H. Project Type: Consent Agenda (i.e. very small alterations, additions or expansions) Minor Project (i.e. small alterations, additions or expansions) Moderate Project (i.e. significant additions, alterations or expansions) Major Project (i.e. very large alternations, additions or expansions) Page 27 of 36 O. Neighborhood Context: The building is located along Hanover Street. It is surrounded with many new and proposed infill buildings ranging from 2.5 to 5 stories in height. The neighborhood is predominantly made up of a wide range of 2.5-5 story wood- and brick-sided structures on lots with little to no setback from the sidewalk. Note that this property recently rezoned to CD4-L2 which would allow for retail and restaurant uses on the ground floor. P. Staff Comments and/ or Suggestions for Consideration: The Applicant is proposing to: Remove and Replace the storefront window with an Anderson Eagle window sash with simulated divide lights to match the existing. Note the 7/8 ths muntin grill will be located on the interior and exterior side of the window and include a space bar. O. Aerial Image, Street View and Zoning Map: Zoning Map Aerial and Street View Image HISTORIC SURVEY RATING -

STAFF HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MEMBERS CONTEXT BUILDING DESIGN & MATERIALS SITE DESIGN 55 HANOVER STREET PUBLIC HEARING #12 (MINOR PROJECT) INFO/ EVALUATION CRITERIA SUBJECT PROPERTY NEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXT Project Information Existing Building Proposed Building (+/-) Abutting Structures Surrounding Structures No. GENERAL BUILDING INFORMATION (ESTIMATED FROM THE TAX MAPS & ASSESSOR S INFO) 1 Gross Floor Area (SF) 2 Floor Area Ratio (GFA/ Lot Area) 3 Building Height / Street-Width (ROW) Ratio MINOR PROJECT 4 Building Height Zoning (Feet) 5 Building Height Street Wall / Cornice (Feet) - REMOVE AND REPLACE THE STOREFRONT WINDOW ONLY - 6 Number of Stories 7 Building Coverage (% Building on the Lot) PROJECT REVIEW ELEMENT APPLICANT S COMMENTS HDC SUGGESTIONS APPROPRIATENESS 8 Scale (i.e. height, volume, coverage ) Appropriate Inappropriate 9 Placement (i.e. setbacks, alignment ) Appropriate Inappropriate 10 Massing (i.e. modules, banding, stepbacks ) Appropriate Inappropriate 11 Architectural Style (i.e. traditional modern) Appropriate Inappropriate 12 Roofs Appropriate Inappropriate 13 Style and Slope Appropriate Inappropriate 14 Roof Projections (i.e. chimneys, vents, dormers ) Appropriate Inappropriate 15 Roof Materials Appropriate Inappropriate 16 Cornice Line Appropriate Inappropriate 17 Eaves, Gutters and Downspouts Appropriate Inappropriate 18 Walls Appropriate Inappropriate 19 Number and Material Appropriate Inappropriate 20 Projections (i.e. bays, balconies ) Appropriate Inappropriate 21 Doors and windows Appropriate Inappropriate 22 Window Openings and Proportions Appropriate Inappropriate 23 Window Casing/ Trim Appropriate Inappropriate 24 Window Shutters / Hardware Appropriate Inappropriate 25 Storm Windows / Screens Appropriate Inappropriate 26 Doors Appropriate Inappropriate 27 Porches and Balconies Appropriate Inappropriate 28 Projections (i.e. porch, portico, canopy ) Appropriate Inappropriate 29 Landings/ Steps / Stoop / Railings Appropriate Inappropriate 30 Lighting (i.e. wall, post ) Appropriate Inappropriate 31 Signs (i.e. projecting, wall ) Appropriate Inappropriate 32 Mechanicals (i.e. HVAC, generators) Appropriate Inappropriate 33 Decks Appropriate Inappropriate 34 Garages / Barns / Sheds (i.e. doors, placement ) Appropriate Inappropriate 35 Fence / Walls / Screenwalls (i.e. materials, type ) Appropriate Inappropriate 36 Grading (i.e. ground floor height, street edge ) Appropriate Inappropriate 37 Landscaping (i.e. gardens, planters, street trees ) Appropriate Inappropriate 38 Driveways (i.e. location, material, screening ) Appropriate Inappropriate 39 Parking (i.e. location, access, visibility ) Appropriate Inappropriate 40 Accessory Buildings (i.e. sheds, greenhouses ) Appropriate Inappropriate PROPERTY EVALUATION FORM PORTSMOUTH HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION PROPERTY:55 HANOVER STREET Case No.:12 Date:11-18-15 Page 28 of 36 Decision: Approved Approved with Stipulations Denied Continued Postponed Withdrawn INSERT PHOTO HERE H. Purpose and Intent: 1. Preserve the integrity of the District: Yes No 4. Maintain the special character of the District: Yes No 2. Assessment of the Historical Significance: Yes No 5. Complement and enhance the architectural and historic character: Yes No 3. Conservation and enhancement of property values: Yes No 6. Promote the education, pleasure and welfare of the District to the city residents and visitors: Yes No I. Review Criteria / Findings of Fact: 1. Consistent with special and defining character of surrounding properties: Yes No 3. Relation to historic and architectural value of existing structure: Yes No 2. Compatibility of design with surrounding properties: Yes No 4. Compatibility of innovative technologies with surrounding properties: Yes No

Historic District Commission Project Evaluation Form: 0 MARCY STREET / PRESCOTT PARK Permit Requested: CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL Meeting Type: WORK SESSION # A A. Property Information - General: Zoning District: Municipal (M) Land Use: Public Park Land Area: 153,485 +/- SF Estimated Age of Structure: NA Building Style: Modern Stage Number of Stories: NA Historical Significance: NA Public View of Proposed Work: Limited view from Marcy Street Unique Features: Public Park with Historical Significance Neighborhood Association: South End B. Proposed Work: Remove and replace the stage and control booth. Page 29 of 36 J. Neighborhood Context: The stage structure is located along Marcy Street is surrounded by a wide variety of contributing structures and open spaces that are primarily residential structures situated on small lots with shallow setbacks from the street edge. Importantly, the proposes staged area is located where the temporary stage has been located and the project has been designed in an effort to improve the layout of the stage facility, meet existing program needs and also to reduce and mitigate any adverse off-site externalities like noise or visual impacts. J. Staff Comments and/ or Suggestions for Consideration: The applicant proposes to: Demolish the existing stage and control booth and construct a new stage and control booth in a new location. A canopy will be added to the stage. K. Aerial Image, Street view and Zoning Map: C. Other Permits Required: Board of Adjustment Planning Board City Council D. Lot Location: Terminal Vista Gateway Mid-Block Intersection / Corner Lot Rear Lot E. Existing Building to be Altered/ Demolished: Principal Accessory Demolition F. Sensitivity of Context: Highly Sensitive Sensitive Low Sensitivity Back-of-House G. Design Approach (for Major Projects): Literal Replication (i.e. 6-16 Congress, Jardinière Building, 10 Pleasant Street) Invention within a Style (i.e., Porter Street Townhouses, 100 Market Street) Abstract Reference (i.e. Portwalk, 51 Islington, 55 Congress Street) Intentional Opposition (i.e. McIntyre Building, Citizen s Bank, Coldwell Banker) H. Project Type: Consent Agenda (i.e. very small alterations, additions or expansions) Minor Project (i.e. small alterations, additions or expansions) Moderate Project (i.e. significant additions, alterations or expansions) Major Project (i.e. very large alternations, additions or expansions) Zoning Map Aerial and Street View Images HISTORIC SURVEY RATING -

STAFF HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MEMBERS CONTEXT BUILDING DESIGN & MATERIALS No. 0 MARCY STREET / PRESCOTT PARK WORK SESSION #A (MODERATE PROJECT) INFO/ EVALUATION CRITERIA SUBJECT PROPERTY NEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXT Project Information Existing Building Proposed Building (+/-) Abutting Structures Surrounding Structures GENERAL BUILDING INFORMATION (ESTIMATED FROM THE TAX MAPS & ASSESSOR S INFO) 1 Gross Floor Area (SF) 2 Floor Area Ratio (GFA/ Lot Area) 3 Building Height / Street-Width Ratio 4 Building Height Zoning (Feet) MODERATE PROJECT 5 Building Height Street Wall / Cornice (Feet) 6 Number of Stories REMOVE AND REPLACE STAGE AND CONTROL BOOTH ONLY 7 Building Coverage (% Building on the Lot) PROJECT REVIEW ELEMENT HDC COMMENTS HDC SUGGESTIONS APPROPRIATENESS PROPERTY EVALUATION FORM PORTSMOUTH HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION PROPERTY:0 MARCY STREET Case No.: A Date: 11-18-15 8 Scale (i.e. height, volume, coverage ) Appropriate Inappropriate 9 Placement (i.e. setbacks, alignment ) Appropriate Inappropriate 10 Massing (i.e. modules, banding, stepbacks ) Appropriate Inappropriate 11 Architectural Style (i.e. traditional modern) Appropriate Inappropriate 12 Roofs Appropriate Inappropriate 13 Style and Slope Appropriate Inappropriate 14 Roof Projections (i.e. chimneys, vents, dormers ) Appropriate Inappropriate 15 Roof Materials Appropriate Inappropriate 16 Cornice Line Appropriate Inappropriate 17 Eaves, Gutters and Downspouts Appropriate Inappropriate 18 Walls Appropriate Inappropriate 19 Siding / Material Appropriate Inappropriate 20 Projections (i.e. bays, balconies ) Appropriate Inappropriate 21 Doors and Windows Appropriate Inappropriate 22 Window Openings and Proportions Appropriate Inappropriate 23 Window Casing/ Trim Appropriate Inappropriate 24 Window Shutters / Hardware Appropriate Inappropriate 25 Awnings Appropriate Inappropriate 26 Doors Appropriate Inappropriate 27 Porches and Balconies Appropriate Inappropriate 28 Projections (i.e. porch, portico, canopy ) Appropriate Inappropriate 29 Landings/ Steps / Stoop / Railings Appropriate Inappropriate 30 Lighting (i.e. wall, post ) Appropriate Inappropriate 31 Signs (i.e. projecting, wall ) Appropriate Inappropriate 32 Mechanicals (i.e. HVAC, generators) Appropriate Inappropriate 33 Decks Appropriate Inappropriate 34 Garages/ Barns / Sheds (i.e. doors, placement ) Appropriate Inappropriate INSERT 35 Fence / Walls (i.e. materials, type ) Appropriate Inappropriate 36 Grading (i.e. ground floor height, street edge ) Appropriate Inappropriate PHOTO 37 Landscaping (i.e. gardens, planters, street trees ) Appropriate Inappropriate 38 Driveways (i.e. location, material, screening ) Appropriate Inappropriate HERE 39 Parking (i.e. location, access, visibility ) Appropriate Inappropriate 40 Accessory Buildings (i.e. sheds, greenhouses ) Appropriate Inappropriate H. Purpose and Intent: 1. Preserve the integrity of the District: Yes No 4. Maintain the special character of the District: Yes No 2. Assessment of the Historical Significance: Yes No 5. Complement and enhance the architectural and historic character: Yes No 3. Conservation and enhancement of property values: Yes No 6. Promote the education, pleasure and welfare of the District to the city residents and visitors: Yes No SITE DESIGN I. Review Criteria / Findings of Fact: 1. Consistent with special and defining character of surrounding properties: Yes No 3. Relation to historic and architectural value of existing structure: Yes No 2. Compatibility of design with surrounding properties: Yes No 4. Compatibility of innovative technologies with surrounding properties: Yes No Page 30 of 36 Decision: Approved Approved with Stipulations Denied Continued Postponed Withdrawn

Historic District Commission Project Address: 127-137 HIGH STREET Permit Requested: CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL Meeting Type: WORK SESSION #B A. Property Information - General: Existing Conditions: Zoning District: CD4-L1 Land Use: Multifamily Land Area: 3,920 SF +/- Estimated Age of Structure: c.1820 & c.1860 Building Style: Federal Number of Stories: 2.5 Historical Significance: Contributing Public View of Proposed Work: View from High Street Unique Features: Abuts The Hill Neighborhood Association: Downtown B. Proposed Work: To add buildings on the rear and make misc. renovations. C. Other Permits Required: Board of Adjustment D. Lot Location: Planning Board City Council Terminal Vista Gateway Mid-Block Intersection / Corner Lot Rear Lot E. Existing Building to be Altered/ Demolished: Principal Accessory Demolition F. Sensitivity of Context: Highly Sensitive Sensitive Low Sensitivity Back-of-House G. Design Approach (for Major Projects): Literal Replication (i.e. 6-16 Congress, Jardinière Building, 10 Pleasant Street) Invention within a Style (i.e., Porter Street Townhouses, 100 Market Street) Abstract Reference (i.e. Portwalk, 51 Islington, 55 Congress Street) Intentional Opposition (i.e. McIntyre Building, Citizen s Bank, Coldwell Banker) H. Project Type: Consent Agenda (i.e. very small alterations, additions or expansions) Minor Project (i.e. small alterations, additions or expansions) Moderate Project (i.e. significant additions, alterations or expansions) Major Project (i.e. very large alternations, additions or expansions) L. Neighborhood Context: The building is located along State Street. It is surrounded with many brick 3 story historic structures with no front yard setbacks with gardens and lawns within the rear yards. M. Staff Comments and/ or Suggestions for Consideration: The applicant is proposing to: Add two new structures to the rear of the existing structures. Renovate the two existing historic structures. Resurface the gravel driveway as brick. Provide 1.5 parking spaces per unit. N. Aerial Image, Street View and Zoning Map: Zoning Map Aerial and Street View Image HISTORIC SURVEY RATING C Page 31 of 36

STAFF HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MEMBERS CONTEXT BUILDING DESIGN & MATERIALS SITE DESIGN 127-137 HIGH STREET WORK SESSION #B (MODERATE) INFO/ EVALUATION CRITERIA SUBJECT PROPERTY NEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXT Project Information Existing Proposed Abutting Structures Surrounding Structures Building Building (+/-) GENERAL BUILDING INFORMATION (ESTIMATED FROM THE TAX MAPS & ASSESSOR S INFO) 1 2 Gross Floor Area (SF) Floor Area Ratio (GFA/ Lot Area) 3 Building Height / Street-Width Ratio 4 Building Height Zoning (Feet) 5 Building Height Street Wall / Cornice (Feet) 6 Number of Stories 7 Building Coverage (% Building on the Lot) PROJECT REVIEW ELEMENT APPLICANT S COMMENTS HDC SUGGESTIONS APPROPRIATENESS MODERATE PROJECT ADD TWO NEW STRUCTURES AND RESTORE EXISTING STRUCTURES ONLY 8 Scale (i.e. height, volume, coverage ) Appropriate Inappropriate 9 Placement (i.e. setbacks, alignment ) Appropriate Inappropriate 10 Massing (i.e. modules, banding, stepbacks ) Appropriate Inappropriate 11 Architectural Style (i.e. traditional modern) Appropriate Inappropriate 12 Roofs Appropriate Inappropriate 13 Style and Slope Appropriate Inappropriate 14 Roof Projections (i.e. chimneys, vents, dormers ) Appropriate Inappropriate 15 Roof Materials Appropriate Inappropriate 16 Cornice Line Appropriate Inappropriate 17 Eaves, Gutters and Downspouts Appropriate Inappropriate 18 Walls Appropriate Inappropriate 19 Siding / Material Appropriate Inappropriate 20 Projections (i.e. bays, balconies ) Appropriate Inappropriate 21 Doors and Windows Appropriate Inappropriate 22 Window Openings and Proportions Appropriate Inappropriate 23 Window Casing/ Trim Appropriate Inappropriate 24 Window Shutters / Hardware Appropriate Inappropriate 25 Awnings Appropriate Inappropriate 26 Doors Appropriate Inappropriate 27 Porches and Balconies Appropriate Inappropriate 28 Projections (i.e. porch, portico, canopy ) Appropriate Inappropriate 29 Landings/ Steps / Stoop / Railings Appropriate Inappropriate 30 Lighting (i.e. wall, post ) Appropriate Inappropriate 31 Signs (i.e. projecting, wall ) Appropriate Inappropriate 32 Mechanicals (i.e. HVAC, generators) Appropriate Inappropriate 33 Decks Appropriate Inappropriate 34 Garages/ Barns / Sheds (i.e. doors, placement ) Appropriate Inappropriate 35 Fence / Walls (i.e. materials, type ) Appropriate Inappropriate 36 Grading (i.e. ground floor height, street edge ) Appropriate Inappropriate 37 Landscaping (i.e. gardens, planters, street trees ) Appropriate Inappropriate 38 Driveways (i.e. location, material, screening ) Appropriate Inappropriate 39 Parking (i.e. location, access, visibility ) Appropriate Inappropriate 40 Accessory Buildings (i.e. sheds, greenhouses ) Appropriate Inappropriate PROPERTY EVALUATION FORM PORTSMOUTH HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION PROPERTY:137 HIGH STREET Case No.:B Date: 11-18-15 Page 32 of 36 Decision: Approved Approved with Stipulations Denied Continued Postponed Withdrawn INSERT PHOTO HERE H. Purpose and Intent: 1. Preserve the integrity of the District: Yes No 4. Maintain the special character of the District: Yes No 2. Assessment of the Historical Significance: Yes No 5. Complement and enhance the architectural and historic character: Yes No 3. Conservation and enhancement of property values: Yes No 6. Promote the education, pleasure and welfare of the District to the city residents and visitors: Yes No I. Review Criteria / Findings of Fact: 1. Consistent with special and defining character of surrounding properties: Yes No 3. Relation to historic and architectural value of existing structure: Yes No 2. Compatibility of design with surrounding properties: Yes No 4. Compatibility of innovative technologies with surrounding properties: Yes No

Historic District Commission Project Address: 28 DENNETT STREET Permit Requested: CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL Meeting Type: WORK SESSION #C A. Property Information - General: Existing Conditions: Zoning District: GRA Land Use: Residential Land Area: 14,810 SF +/- Estimated Age of Structure: c.1810 Building Style: Federal Number of Stories: 2.5 Historical Significance: Contributing Public View of Proposed Work: View from Dennett Street Unique Features: NA Neighborhood Association: Christian Shore B. Proposed Work: To raise the roof and make misc. exterior renovations. C. Other Permits Required: Board of Adjustment D. Lot Location: Planning Board City Council Terminal Vista Gateway Mid-Block Intersection / Corner Lot Rear Lot E. Existing Building to be Altered/ Demolished: Principal Accessory Demolition F. Sensitivity of Context: Highly Sensitive Sensitive Low Sensitivity Back-of-House G. Design Approach (for Major Projects): Literal Replication (i.e. 6-16 Congress, Jardinière Building, 10 Pleasant Street) Invention within a Style (i.e., Porter Street Townhouses, 100 Market Street) Abstract Reference (i.e. Portwalk, 51 Islington, 55 Congress Street) Intentional Opposition (i.e. McIntyre Building, Citizen s Bank, Coldwell Banker) H. Project Type: Consent Agenda (i.e. very small alterations, additions or expansions) Minor Project (i.e. small alterations, additions or expansions) Moderate Project (i.e. significant additions, alterations or expansions) Major Project (i.e. very large alternations, additions or expansions) Page 33 of 36 O. Neighborhood Context: The building is located along Dennett Street. It is surrounded with many wood-sided 2.5 story historic structures with little to no front yard setbacks with gardens and lawns within the rear yards. P. Staff Comments and/ or Suggestions for Consideration: The applicant is proposing to: Made adjustments to the rear roof line and add windows to the rear of the structure. Note, the applicant will be submitting revised plans per the HDC comments at the October 14 th meeting. The plans will be available at the November 4 th meeting. Q. Aerial Image, Street View and Zoning Map: Zoning Map Aerial and Street View Image HISTORIC SURVEY RCTING C

STAFF HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MEMBERS CONTEXT BUILDING DESIGN & MATERIALS SITE DESIGN 28 DENNETT STREET WORK SESSION #C (MINOR) INFO/ EVALUATION CRITERIA SUBJECT PROPERTY NEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXT Project Information Existing Proposed Abutting Structures Surrounding Structures Building Building (+/-) GENERAL BUILDING INFORMATION (ESTIMATED FROM THE TAX MAPS & ASSESSOR S INFO) 1 2 Gross Floor Area (SF) Floor Area Ratio (GFA/ Lot Area) 3 Building Height / Street-Width Ratio 4 Building Height Zoning (Feet) 5 Building Height Street Wall / Cornice (Feet) 6 Number of Stories 7 Building Coverage (% Building on the Lot) PROJECT REVIEW ELEMENT APPLICANT S COMMENTS HDC SUGGESTIONS APPROPRIATENESS MINOR PROJECT MODIFY ROOF HEIGHT AND MAKE EXTERIOR RENOVATIONS ONLY 8 Scale (i.e. height, volume, coverage ) Appropriate Inappropriate 9 Placement (i.e. setbacks, alignment ) Appropriate Inappropriate 10 Massing (i.e. modules, banding, stepbacks ) Appropriate Inappropriate 11 Architectural Style (i.e. traditional modern) Appropriate Inappropriate 12 Roofs Appropriate Inappropriate 13 Style and Slope Appropriate Inappropriate 14 Roof Projections (i.e. chimneys, vents, dormers ) Appropriate Inappropriate 15 Roof Materials Appropriate Inappropriate 16 Cornice Line Appropriate Inappropriate 17 Eaves, Gutters and Downspouts Appropriate Inappropriate 18 Walls Appropriate Inappropriate 19 Siding / Material Appropriate Inappropriate 20 Projections (i.e. bays, balconies ) Appropriate Inappropriate 21 Doors and Windows Appropriate Inappropriate 22 Window Openings and Proportions Appropriate Inappropriate 23 Window Casing/ Trim Appropriate Inappropriate 24 Window Shutters / Hardware Appropriate Inappropriate 25 Awnings Appropriate Inappropriate 26 Doors Appropriate Inappropriate 27 Porches and Balconies Appropriate Inappropriate 28 Projections (i.e. porch, portico, canopy ) Appropriate Inappropriate 29 Landings/ Steps / Stoop / Railings Appropriate Inappropriate 30 Lighting (i.e. wall, post ) Appropriate Inappropriate 31 Signs (i.e. projecting, wall ) Appropriate Inappropriate 32 Mechanicals (i.e. HVAC, generators) Appropriate Inappropriate 33 Decks Appropriate Inappropriate 34 Garages/ Barns / Sheds (i.e. doors, placement ) Appropriate Inappropriate 35 Fence / Walls (i.e. materials, type ) Appropriate Inappropriate 36 Grading (i.e. ground floor height, street edge ) Appropriate Inappropriate 37 Landscaping (i.e. gardens, planters, street trees ) Appropriate Inappropriate 38 Driveways (i.e. location, material, screening ) Appropriate Inappropriate 39 Parking (i.e. location, access, visibility ) Appropriate Inappropriate 40 Accessory Buildings (i.e. sheds, greenhouses ) Appropriate Inappropriate PROPERTY EVALUATION FORM PORTSMOUTH HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION PROPERTY:28 DENNETTSTREET Case No.:C Date: 11-18-15 Page 34 of 36 Decision: Approved Approved with Stipulations Denied Continued Postponed Withdrawn INSERT PHOTO HERE H. Purpose and Intent: 1. Preserve the integrity of the District: Yes No 4. Maintain the special character of the District: Yes No 2. Assessment of the Historical Significance: Yes No 5. Complement and enhance the architectural and historic character: Yes No 3. Conservation and enhancement of property values: Yes No 6. Promote the education, pleasure and welfare of the District to the city residents and visitors: Yes No I. Review Criteria / Findings of Fact: 1. Consistent with special and defining character of surrounding properties: Yes No 3. Relation to historic and architectural value of existing structure: Yes No 2. Compatibility of design with surrounding properties: Yes No 4. Compatibility of innovative technologies with surrounding properties: Yes No

Historic District Commission Page 35 of 36 Project Address: 112 STATE STREET Permit Requested: CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL Meeting Type: WORK SESSION #D A. Property Information - General: Existing Conditions: Zoning District: CD4 Land Use: Mixed-Use Land Area: 3,790 SF +/- Estimated Age of Structure: c.1813-20 Building Style: Federal Number of Stories: 3 Historical Significance: Contributing Public View of Proposed Work: View from Court Street Unique Features: NA Neighborhood Association: Downtown B. Proposed Work: To replace siding and potentially, windows and trim. C. Other Permits Required: Board of Adjustment D. Lot Location: Planning Board City Council Terminal Vista Gateway Mid-Block Intersection / Corner Lot Rear Lot E. Existing Building to be Altered/ Demolished: Principal Accessory Demolition F. Sensitivity of Context: Highly Sensitive Sensitive Low Sensitivity Back-of-House G. Design Approach (for Major Projects): Literal Replication (i.e. 6-16 Congress, Jardinière Building, 10 Pleasant Street) Invention within a Style (i.e., Porter Street Townhouses, 100 Market Street) Abstract Reference (i.e. Portwalk, 51 Islington, 55 Congress Street) Intentional Opposition (i.e. McIntyre Building, Citizen s Bank, Coldwell Banker) H. Project Type: Consent Agenda (i.e. very small alterations, additions or expansions) Minor Project (i.e. small alterations, additions or expansions) Moderate Project (i.e. significant additions, alterations or expansions) Major Project (i.e. very large alternations, additions or expansions) O. Neighborhood Context: The building is located along Court Street. It is surrounded by a public park (with a privacy fence) and many wood and brick 2-3 story historic structures with no front yard setbacks with gardens and lawns within the rear yards. P. Staff Comments and/ or Suggestions for Consideration: The applicant is proposing to: Replace the vinyl siding on the second floor with hardi-plank or cedar siding. The main issue is how the overhand portions will be modified to accept the new siding. Residing of the entire addition is advised in order to have a unified, watertight, and durable surface. Q. Aerial Image, Street View and Zoning Map: Zoning Map Aerial and Street View Image HISTORIC SURVEY RATING C

STAFF HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MEMBERS CONTEXT BUILDING DESIGN & MATERIALS SITE DESIGN 112 STATE STREET WORK SESSION #D (MINOR) INFO/ EVALUATION CRITERIA SUBJECT PROPERTY NEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXT Project Information Existing Proposed Abutting Structures Surrounding Structures Building Building (+/-) GENERAL BUILDING INFORMATION (ESTIMATED FROM THE TAX MAPS & ASSESSOR S INFO) 1 Gross Floor Area (SF) 2 Floor Area Ratio (GFA/ Lot Area) 3 Building Height / Street-Width Ratio 4 Building Height Zoning (Feet) MINOR PROJECT 5 Building Height Street Wall / Cornice (Feet) 6 Number of Stories INSTALL SIDING AND TRIM ON SECOND STORY ADDITION ONLY 7 Building Coverage (% Building on the Lot) PROJECT REVIEW ELEMENT APPLICANT S COMMENTS HDC SUGGESTIONS APPROPRIATENESS 8 Scale (i.e. height, volume, coverage ) Appropriate Inappropriate 9 Placement (i.e. setbacks, alignment ) Appropriate Inappropriate 10 Massing (i.e. modules, banding, stepbacks ) Appropriate Inappropriate 11 Architectural Style (i.e. traditional modern) Appropriate Inappropriate 12 Roofs Appropriate Inappropriate 13 Style and Slope Appropriate Inappropriate 14 Roof Projections (i.e. chimneys, vents, dormers ) Appropriate Inappropriate 15 Roof Materials Appropriate Inappropriate 16 Cornice Line Appropriate Inappropriate 17 Eaves, Gutters and Downspouts Appropriate Inappropriate 18 Walls Appropriate Inappropriate 19 Siding / Material Appropriate Inappropriate 20 Projections (i.e. bays, balconies ) Appropriate Inappropriate 21 Doors and Windows Appropriate Inappropriate 22 Window Openings and Proportions Appropriate Inappropriate 23 Window Casing/ Trim Appropriate Inappropriate 24 Window Shutters / Hardware Appropriate Inappropriate 25 Awnings Appropriate Inappropriate 26 Doors Appropriate Inappropriate 27 Porches and Balconies Appropriate Inappropriate 28 Projections (i.e. porch, portico, canopy ) Appropriate Inappropriate 29 Landings/ Steps / Stoop / Railings Appropriate Inappropriate 30 Lighting (i.e. wall, post ) Appropriate Inappropriate 31 Signs (i.e. projecting, wall ) Appropriate Inappropriate 32 Mechanicals (i.e. HVAC, generators) Appropriate Inappropriate 33 Decks Appropriate Inappropriate 34 Garages/ Barns / Sheds (i.e. doors, placement ) Appropriate Inappropriate 35 Fence / Walls (i.e. materials, type ) Appropriate Inappropriate 36 Grading (i.e. ground floor height, street edge ) Appropriate Inappropriate 37 Landscaping (i.e. gardens, planters, street trees ) Appropriate Inappropriate 38 Driveways (i.e. location, material, screening ) Appropriate Inappropriate 39 Parking (i.e. location, access, visibility ) Appropriate Inappropriate 40 Accessory Buildings (i.e. sheds, greenhouses ) Appropriate Inappropriate PROPERTY EVALUATION FORM PORTSMOUTH HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION PROPERTY:112 STATE STREET Case No.:D Date: 11-18-15 Page 36 of 36 Decision: Approved Approved with Stipulations Denied Continued Postponed Withdrawn INSERT PHOTO HERE H. Purpose and Intent: 1. Preserve the integrity of the District: Yes No 4. Maintain the special character of the District: Yes No 2. Assessment of the Historical Significance: Yes No 5. Complement and enhance the architectural and historic character: Yes No 3. Conservation and enhancement of property values: Yes No 6. Promote the education, pleasure and welfare of the District to the city residents and visitors: Yes No I. Review Criteria / Findings of Fact: 1. Consistent with special and defining character of surrounding properties: Yes No 3. Relation to historic and architectural value of existing structure: Yes No 2. Compatibility of design with surrounding properties: Yes No 4. Compatibility of innovative technologies with surrounding properties: Yes No