HomeMy WebLinkAboutYarmouth115RiverStCmts10-1-20
To: Yarmouth Historical Commission
From: Sarah Korjeff, Preservation Specialist
Date: October 1, 2020
RE: Proposal for 115 River Street, South Yarmouth
As requested, Cape Cod Commission staff has reviewed the proposal for partial
demolition of the house at 115 River Street in South Yarmouth. This property is a
contributing building within the South Yarmouth National Register Historic
District. As you are aware, the Cape Cod Commission has jurisdiction over
substantial alterations and demolitions to properties listed on the National Register of
Historic Places when they fall outside of local historic district jurisdiction. The
following comments are for the Historical Commission’s consideration as they review
this project and decide whether it constitutes a “substantial alteration” requiring
referral to the Cape Cod Commission.
The building at 115 River Street, known as the Elisha Parker House, is a Greek
Revival structure with a front-facing gable roof on its main massing and a side
ell with a side-facing gable, all built circa 1836. The building has distinctive
architectural trim around the windows of the front façade, at the entry structure, and in
the corner boards and eaves. A series of rear and dormer additions are well
documented in historic photographs and date mostly from the late 1800s and early
20th century. In addition, the roof over the front porch was extended closer to the
street in this timeframe. These changes are reflected in building footprints shown on
early maps and atlases of the area.
Staff believes the character-defining features of this building are the original building
form (both the main massing and the side ell with their different roof structures), the
configuration of doors and windows on the front façade of the building, and the
architectural trim that defines the front windows, door, corner boards and eaves of the
original structure. The original configuration of the building and its front façade
detailing are readily visible and appear mostly unaltered, with the exception of the
porch roof extension and dormer additions. While the series of additions to the rear
tell the history of the building’s evolution, they do not appear critical to maintaining
the building’s contributing status within the National Register Historic District.
The proposed work, shown in plans developed by Gordon Clark, involve demolition
of the building’s side ell and its attached rear additions, replacing them with new
construction that has a higher roofline and several rooftop elements which extend well
above the original structure’s highest point. Because the side ell is believed to be part
of the original construction and is an important part of the building’s character,
exterior changes would likely threaten the building’s National Register
status. Extending the roof height of the side ell would destroy original roof forms
and materials, and would change the relationship between the main massing and the
side ell. Changes to the rear additions, however, would be unlikely to affect the
building’s National Register status as long as the new additions were stepped back
from the corner of the historic massing and did not overwhelm the historic structure in
height or scale.
The proposed plans also involve altering the front façade of the building, removing
the original architectural detailing and changing the arrangement of
windows. Staff believes that altering these character-defining features of the
building would threaten its National Register status. It may be possible to
integrate additional windows in the front façade in some locations such as underneath
the porch structure, but that should be done without altering the original window
configuration. Enlarging existing roof dormers on the building may also be
possible as long as they do not extend over the entire length of the roof slope
and thus obscure the original roof form.
Preserving the building’s character-defining features and restricting alterations to
other parts of the structure would protect its National Register status and would
not constitute a “substantial alteration” requiring referral to the Cape Cod
Commission for review.
Please feel free to contact me if you have questions about these comments.