The El Paso Historic Landmark Commission on Dec. 4 approved a certificate of appropriateness for a rear-yard addition and deck at 2801 Silver Avenue in the Manhattan Heights Historic District, subject to modifications to clarify window details and to ensure the addition is distinguished from the historic building.

Staff presentation noted the corner lot’s visibility makes secondary facades as important as primary ones and said additions in historic districts should be compatible but "a product of their own time and not attempt to replicate the historic fabric." The property is zoned R-3-H, built in 1950, and is listed as a contributing structure.

Why it matters: Commissioners said the city’s design guidelines and the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards require new work to be differentiated so historic materials can be uncovered or restored in the future. Staff recommended approval with modifications including submission of window drawings and a redesign that makes the new work subtly different from the original.

Homeowner Luis Tarango, who identified himself during the meeting, told commissioners he is proposing modern window replacements to improve heating and cooling and said, "It will be the same, the same type of windows ... we'll try and match as closely as possible to the original as it is." Staff, however, said the plans included a note to replace all windows but did not include a window schedule or supporting documentation and therefore asked that window drawings be submitted as a condition of approval.

Commissioners asked whether the historic brick and other character-defining features would remain; the applicant said existing materials would not be demolished. After an internal discussion a commissioner moved to accept staff’s recommendation. The commission voted to approve the certificate of appropriateness with the staff-specified modifications. Staff clarified that if replacement windows maintain the same profile and operation, staff could approve them administratively without returning the item to the commission.

The commission did not set an additional timeline for filing plans beyond the standard permit and review process. The decision is a recommendation-based permit action handled by the Historic Landmark Commission; further permit or administrative reviews may be required before construction begins.