Historic Review Board

TOWN OF FORT MILL HISTORIC REVIEW BOARD April 16th, 2019 112 Confederate Street 4:30 PM AGENDA CALL TO ORDER APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. HRB Meeting: March 12, 2019 [Pages 3-8] NEW BUSINESS 1. Request for Certificate of Appropriateness [Pages 9-19 ] Applicant Name: Courtney Thompson Owner Name: Old Centre Theater LLC Property Address: 100 Main Street Purpose: Request to add roof/cover over existing deck as well as a wall sign on the front façade Zoning: LC / Historic INFORMATION / DISCUSSION 1. Continued discussion of the potential for administrative reviews of painting proposals based on a selected color palette for the Town of Fort Mill Historic District. The paint palette from the City of Richmond, VA has been included. [Pages 20-39] 2. SC Historic Preservation Conference 2019 [Pages 40-41] 1 ADJOURN The following press was notified of the meeting by email or fax in accordance of the Freedom of Information Act: The Herald; CN2; WRHI; Fort Mill Times and WBTV. The agenda was also posted at the entrance to Town Hall the required length of time and on the Town website. The Town of Fort Mill is committed to assuring accessibility with reasonable accommodation, of Town services and facilities for all individuals, in compliance with federal law. Please contact the Town Manager’s Office at 803-547-2116 if you need assistance. 2  MINUTES TOWN OF FORT MILL HISTORIC REVIEW BOARD March 12th, 2019 Council Chambers – 112 Confederate Street 4:30 PM Present: Chairman Louis Roman, Carolyn Blair, David Booth, LeAnne Burnett Morse, Chip Heemsoth, Melissa White, Planning Director Penelope Karagounis, Senior Planner Alex Moore Guests: Kyle Hobbs, Trevor Threet, Dan Dodd CALL TO ORDER Chairman Roman called the meeting to order at 4:30 PM. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Chip Heemsoth made a motion to approve the minutes from the February 12th, 2019, meeting as presented. Ms. LeAnne Burnett Morse seconded the motion. The minutes were then approved with a vote of 6-0. OLD BUSINESS 1. Request for Certificate of Appropriateness – 135 Confederate Street Senior Planner Moore introduced the request, the purpose of which was for the review of an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) for a driveway and associated ADA parking space at 135 Confederate Street. This COA request was submitted to revise what was approved by the HRB at the 2-12-19 HRB meeting. Moore noted that SCDOT would not permit an ADA space designed to permit a vehicle to back-out into the Confederate Street right-of-way, which was what the previous approval allowed. Moore presented a revised illustrative drawing to the HRB showing a configuration submitted by the applicant. This schematic had been revised by the applicant’s design professional subsequent to the HRB packet being delivered via email the previous week. While still designed to meet SCDOT requirements, the revised proposal also preserved a tree on the site. Moore stated that there were no other changes proposed to the site plan or the building at 135 Confederate Street. 3  Dan Dodd, representing the applicant, was on hand to answer questions from HRB members. Mr. Heemsoth asked Mr. Dodd if the driveway was remaining in the same location. Mr. Dodd stated that this was correct. Chairman Roman asked Mr. Dodd if SCDOT had any other stipulations regarding the site plan. Mr. Dodd stated that they did not have any other required changes to the plan and noted that SCDOT presented him with this solution to the mandate that there be no vehicular backing into the right-of-way. Dodd noted that if HRB would approve this iteration as presented then SCDOT would be satisfied. Chairman Roman asked if there was any other discussion. There being none, he entertained a motion on the COA application as presented. Ms. Blair made a motion to approve the COA application as presented. Mr. Heemsoth seconded the motion. Then, by a vote of 6-0, the HRB approved the COA request. NEW BUSINESS 1. Request for a Certificate of Appropriateness – 106 Confederate Street Senior Planner Moore introduced the request, the purpose of which was for the review of an application for a COA for a projecting sign at 106 Confederate Street. The COA request was submitted by Kyle M. Hobbs of the Hobbs Threet, LLP Law Firm. Mr. Hobbs was at the meeting along with his associate, Trevor Threet. Senior Planner Moore reviewed the schematic drawing as submitted and noted that the proposed sign met the criteria as stipulated within the Historic District Guidelines and the Zoning Ordinance respectively. The sign was proposed to be placed above the awning and over the door facing Confederate Street. Ms. White had a question about the materials and color of the sign. Mr. Hobbs affirmed that the sign would be black wrought-iron, that the sign face would be black and white with recessed lettering, and that the sign would be two-sided. Ms. Burnett Morse stated that the projecting sign was certainly needed at this location so that the law firm would have needed visibility. Mr. Hobbs agreed that this sign was very much needed so that clients could better locate their office. There being no other comments concerning the projecting sign, Chairman Roman entertained a motion from the board. Ms. Burnett Morse made a motion to approve the COA application for the projecting sign as presented. Ms. Blair seconded the motion. The HRB then voted 6-0 to approve the request. 4 INFORMATION / DISCUSSION 1. Continued discussion of the potential for administrative reviews of painting proposals based on a selected color palette for the Town of Fort Mill Historic District Senior Planner Moore introduced the discussion. He noted that he had included the City of Richmond’s historic district color palette as a resource to draw upon in formulating the prescribed colors to be included within Fort Mill’s approved paint colors. Ms. Burnett Morse asked the HRB members if they had looked at the Richmond information and stated it would, in her opinion, be an easy adaption to the Town of Fort Mill. She also noted that the Richmond color guidelines provided for the appropriate treatment of façade elements such as trim and lintels. Senior Planner Moore noted that the administrative color palette would be for previously painted commercial buildings only. Masonry buildings that have not been painted should remain unpainted. Mr. Booth asked if the different types of architecture would be defined vis-à-vis the color palette or would there simply be an overall color palette for body, trim, etc. Chairman Roman responded that this could be done but that it did not have to be this way. He then noted that communities that have color palettes typically do match colors to architectural types. This allows a profile to be created for each structure type and lends consistency to the process. Ms. Blair asked if commercial buildings that have been painted an inappropriate color in relation to architectural type would be allowed to use the same color, or if the applicant would have to choose a color from the approved palette. She also noted that she liked the Richmond color palette. Senior Planner Moore noted that it was his understanding that the HRB would allow an applicant to use the same color, regardless of its hue. Ms. Blair stated that this was also her understanding, but that there was a discussion about this as to whether this is what the HRB wanted to move forward with. Mr. Booth stated that the HRB might create a date by which all commercial painting proposals within the historic district would have to conform to the newly adopted paint palette. Chairman Roman stated that the HRB should gain a consensus on this issue. Ms. Burnett Morse asked how long a color review requirement had existed, and how long had the historic district regulations been in place. 5 Mr. Heemsoth responded that, while the issue of the adoption of a commercial district color palette had just recently been undertaken, he believed the historic district had been in place twelve to thirteen years. Additionally, he noted that in some instances business and property owners had not come before the HRB to request approval on painting their commercial buildings. But, when such an individual or group did come before the HRB, they would bring one or more potential colors for review. Mr. Heemsoth then added that it was his opinion that if a color palette was to be adopted, then the applicant should conform to that palette, regardless of what the color was before. Ms. Burnett Morse expressed her agreement with this view and stated that any projects that had been approved prior to approval of a color palette but had not yet moved forward should be allowed to continue with what was approved. Chairman Roman also agreed with this sentiment and suggested that a maintenance timeline might be adopted for requiring applicants to adhere to the new palette. As an example, he used a ten-year timeframe, meaning that a business or property owner could re-paint to an existing color, regardless of hue, with no staff or HRB review and approval. If the ten-year timeframe elapsed, then the applicant would have to either conform to the adopted color palette or receive HRB approval to use a color not within the approved palette. Mr. Booth noted that this made sense but that conversely, a property might never be updated to an approved palette color if the structure was painted every nine-years. Ms. Burnette Morse then stated that the HRB might adopt a date, based on a somewhat recent HRB approval, after which all commercial painting proposals would have to adhere to the new color palette. She used the Olive’s Mud Puddle approval of July 10th, 2018 as this possible date as this was the last commercial painting proposal to come before the HRB. Ms. Blair then noted, after whatever date is adopted, an applicant could still go “off-palette,” but such a proposal would have to come before HRB. Chairman Roman asked if there was now a consensus from the HRB on this issue of adopting such a date. Senior Planner Moore then asked for clarification on which palette colors were being adopted. Ms. Burnette Morse, Ms. Blair, and Chairman Roman stated that they wanted to adopt the Richmond color palette. Senior Planner Moore noted that the Town of Fort Mill’s historical building stock was not as varied as what the City of Richmond contains. Mr. Booth then noted that if, for example, someone wished to do a redevelopment project within the historic district, then there would be ample architectural style-based colors to choose from. 6  There was then a brief discussion on the treatment of any structure in the district which might be destroyed by fire or otherwise. Senior Planner Moore noted that if the property was on the National Register of Historic Places that such rebuilding must also be coordinated with the South Carolina Historic Preservation Office. For such buildings not on the National Register, but within the Historic District, board members stated that rebuilding did not have to coordinate with the state historic preservation office, but only with the local HRB. Senior Planner Moore then clarified if the HRB wished to adopt the entirety of the Richmond color palette and associated details, such as architectural type. Ms. Blair stated that there could be a statement in the adoptive language indicating that not all the architectural styles are applicable in Fort Mill but that the information could be kept for reference if someone did wish to construct a respective style not of the existing historic stock. Ms. Burnett Morse also noted that some of the information from Richmond would need to be taken out before adoption. Chairman Roman indicated that this color palette would be an important component of historical redevelopment moving forward as much more growth was anticipated due to the community’s location in the Charlotte region. Ms. Burnett Morse then had some thoughts on the concept of painting masonry work within the historic district of Fort Mill. She agreed with the appropriateness of not allowing brick to be painted in the downtown area. However, she’d noted her belief that painting brick residences in the historic district should not be prohibited. Chairman Roman noted that, while the historic design guidelines indicate that it is not appropriate for masonry to be painted, an applicant could come before the HRB and request to paint a brick structure. Ms. Burnett Morse stated that the current language of the design guidelines stated that brick indeed cannot be painted. It was the board’s feeling that an individual should be allowed to paint brick upon approval by the HRB of such a project. Senior Planner Moore noted that staff would look at an edit of this and bring it back to HRB along with the paint palette draft. Chairman Roman then reminded the board of the upcoming South Carolina Historic Preservation Conference in Columbia on Friday April 26th. Senior Planner Moore noted that the Town could pay for any HRB member who wished to attend this conference. 7 Senior Planner Moore then introduced Penelope Karagounis, new Town of Fort Mill Planning Director, to the HRB. Ms. Karagounis spoke briefly about her background and noted that she looked forward to working with all the HRB members. There being no other business, the meeting adjourned at 5:08 PM. Alex J. Moore, AICP Senior Planner March 28th, 2019 8 9 10  H ISTORI C R EVI EW B OARD APPLICANT Courtney Thompson Southern Sugar 100 Main Street Tax Map # 020-06-08-010 Zoning District: Local Commercial/Historic District Zoning Case: 2019-0171 REQUEST The Town has received an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) from Ms. Courtney Thompson of Southern Sugar to include a vertical wall sign which is proposed to be placed on the front façade of 100 Main Street, along with a black aluminum roof/cover to be placed over the deck at her business. SITE DESCRIPTION AND GENERAL CONSTRUCTION PLAN Southern Sugar is an existing business located at 100 Main Street within the Center Theatre building. This is in the Town of Fort Mill Historic District. This building is not listed on the National Register of Historic Places. Please note the attached schematics illustrating the design and location of the proposed vertical wall sign as well as the proposed aluminum roof. HISTORIC DISTRICT DESIGN GUIDELINES REVIEW This review will be presented in two parts. First will be the proposed vertical wall sign. Second will be the proposed aluminum roof. I. COA REQUEST FOR A VERTICAL WALL SIGN A. Zoning Requirements The applicant notes within the COA application that she believes the existing theatre marquee at 100 Main Street has been detrimental to her business from a wayfinding perspective. Thus, Ms. Thompson has proposed a vertical wall sign as illustrated below: 11 Per the Town of Fort Mill Zoning Ordinance, wall signs are attached to the wall of a building and project out from such walls no more than 14-inches. The area of a wall sign includes that area within a continuous line enclosing all letters and graphic symbols of the sign. No wall sign shall exceed an area equal to 15 percent of the area of the wall to which it is affixed. A wall-sign cannot exceed an area greater than 150 square feet. The applicant has estimated that this signage will consist of approximately 36 square feet. Additionally, based on Staff estimates, this proposed signage does not exceed 15 percent of the front façade. Thus, the proposed wall signage as designed, meets Town of Fort Mill Zoning requirements. B. Historic District Design Guidelines The Town’s historic district design guidelines establish parameters for new and modified signage. When planning signage for a building the following concepts should be considered: • Establish objectives for signage • Limit impacts on character-defining features • Find original sign locations on a building • Ensure sign compatibility with a building and site • Consider impacts on the block • Create graphic interest 12 With the proposed signage as presented, the applicant is attempting to gain better visibility for the business. The existing, historical “Center Theatre” sign dominates the front façade of this building. However, the new signage as designed, works against the attributes of the façade by adding a vertical feature which is not compatible with the horizontal pattern of the building. Thus, there is a good possibility of a negative visual impact within this block in that the signage would not be at the same height and façade location as that of adjacent businesses. Planning Staff recommends that the applicant design a sign such as the one located on the southwest façade of the building and resubmit to the HRB for review (See below). Such a sign could be placed on the front façade and allow the proposal to overcome the deficiencies as enumerated above. 13 II. COA REQUEST FOR A BLACK ALUMINUM ROOF/COVER TO BE PLACED OVER EXISTING DECK The applicant has also applied for a COA to place a roof over the existing deck at 100 Main Street. This is proposed to be an aluminum roof. The application notes that horizontal bars will line the perimeter which will hold outdoor drapes between vertical posts. These drapes are proposed to be black and white striped. Below are pictures of the proposed roof over the existing deck at 100 Main Street: 14 15 Additionally, the applicant has provided a schematic drawing of the dimensions of the deck on-which the roof will be placed: 16 The below picture will be helpful for a historical perspective on this building from the perspective of the proposed roof. As can be seen, there was once a building attached the Center Theatre. The above picture indicates that the existing deck has a very similar footprint to this former building. Furthermore, the proposed roof addition appears to be substantially similar to the location of the roof or parapet height of the former building at this location. A. Zoning Requirements The zoning designation for this property is LC, Local Commercial. There are no setback requirements within the LC Zoning District. B. Historic District Design Guidelines The historic district design guidelines note within Chapter 3 and Chapter 4 that an addition to an existing commercial building should be compatible in scale, materials, and character with the main building. The height, mass, and form of the addition should be compatible with the historic context. Additions should be designed to be compatible within the historic context in terms of color, materials, and finish. The roof form should be compatible within the context of other structures. 17  The applicant’s proposal meets the criteria above as noted in the design guidelines. The scale and character of the roof will be compatible with the existing deck. The height, mass, and form certainly fit into the historic context as illustrated within the bygone photo on the previous page. The materials, finish, and color appear to provide appropriate integration into the downtown context. Bailey Bill Review The property, York County Tax Map # 020-06-08-010, is subject to a pending request to receive a special tax assessment for rehabilitated historic properties (Bailey Bill). The property has been approved for Preliminary Certification but has not yet received Final Certification approval. Any substantive changes made to the property during rehabilitation (prior to Final Certification approval), such as those proposed with this request, shall be reviewed and approved based upon the standards for rehabilitation outlined in Chapter 2, Article IV, Division 3, Section 2-202. Any changes not meeting those standards may disqualify the property from eligibility during the Final Certification process. Should the proposed improvements be scheduled for construction after the property has received Final Certification approval, the proposed improvements would still need to be reviewed based upon the standards for rehabilitation outlined in Chapter 2, Article IV, Division 3, Section 2- 202. The Historic Review Board shall make a determination as to whether the proposed improvements are consistent with the standards for rehabilitation. If determined to be consistent, the proposed improvements may be constructed without affecting the special tax assessment on the property. If the proposed improvements are determined to be inconsistent, their construction would disqualify the property from its eligibility for the special tax assessment. (a) Standards for rehabilitation. To be eligible for the special tax assessment, historic rehabilitations must be conducted according to the following standards: (1) The historic character of a property shall be retained and preserved. The removal of historic materials or alterations or of features and spaces that characterize each property shall be avoided. (2) Each property shall be recognized as a physical record of its time, place and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development shall not be undertaken. (3) Most properties change over time. Those changes that have acquired historic significance in their own right shall be retained and preserved. (4) Distinctive features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property should be preserved. (5) Deteriorated historic features shall be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement or of a distinctive feature, the new should match the old in design, color, texture, and other visual qualities and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features shall be substantiated by documentary, physical or pictorial evidence. 18 (6) Chemical or physical treatments, such as sandblasting, that cause damage to historic materials shall not be used. The surface cleaning of structures, if appropriate, shall be undertaken using the most gentle means possible. (7) New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the historic property and its environment. (8) New additions and adjacent new construction shall be undertaken in such a manner that, if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired. Staff Recommendation In summary of these requests, Planning Staff recommends that the HRB advise the applicant to re-design the proposed wall sign for resubmittal and review. Conversely, Planning Staff recommends Approval for a Certificate of Appropriateness for the proposed black aluminum roof/cover to be placed over the deck at 100 Main Street. Should the Board wish to approve the request for a Certificate of Appropriateness, staff would request that the approval motion include a condition to allow staff the ability to approve minor modifications to the plan so as to accommodate the comments and concerns of the various plan reviewers for the Town of Fort Mill. Additionally, staff would also request that any motion by the Board include language to note whether the proposed improvements were consistent with the Bailey Bill standards for rehabilitation. 19  Richmond, VA Paint Staff representatives of the Commission of Architectural Review (CAR) are authorized to assist Old and Historic District property owners in paint color selection and, where appropriate, grant administrative approval for paint color proposals. If you are considering an exterior color change, please call Commission staff at (804) 646-6335. The chart of paint colors found below represents a palette of paint colors appropriate for use on historic properties. It has been developed to guide property owners and Commission staff in color selection. Not all paint chart colors are appropriate for every historic building. Property owners are strongly encouraged to contact CAR staff in advance of any proposed painting or repainting to ensure that appropriate colors are selected. Colors not found on the palette must be reviewed by staff on a case-by-case basis. If staff members consider a property owner’s preferred colors to be inappropriate, they will forward the proposal to the CAR for full review, noting that administrative approval was not granted. The color palette is based on Sherwin Williams-brand colors. The Commission does not promote a specific brand of paint, and uses these color codes for reference only. Any paint brand with a comparable paint color may be used. Frame Structures 1) High quality paint should be used following directions for preparation and application. A paint professional should be consulted before beginning your project. 2) It is important that color selections blend with and complement the overall color schemes on the street. 3) Fluorescent and obtrusive colors are not appropriate as these were not traditionally used on local historic structures. (The high Victorian “painted ladies” of San Francisco and other western cities represent a phenomenon never adopted in Richmond.) 4) Number and variety of colors should be limited. With the notable exception of the Queen Anne style, traditional paint schemes do not use more than two or three colors. 5) Individual details in cornices and columns should not be emphasized with additional color. 6) The handrails of wooden porch railings are often painted a dark color while the pickets are painted white or off-white. 7) Doors and shutters can be painted a different color than the walls and trim. 8) Enamel “high gloss” paint should be used only on doors. 9) Treating exterior wood elements with clear finishes is not advisable unless the element was historically stained or varnished. 10) Stains are a modern method of protecting and/or coloring wood, and are usually not appropriate for use on historic building exteriors. An exception to this guidance is the use of opaque stains on pressure-treated wood elements (for example, at new fire stairs, or at rear or side porches). 11) Building materials installed as a result of additions and alterations should be painted to match or complement a building’s existing colors. Richmond CAR Guidelines Proposed update to paint colors 27 October 2016 Page 1 20 Historic Masonry 1) Do not paint historic brick or stone masonry that has not previously been painted. Painting previously unpainted masonry is historically inaccurate and is not permitted. Property owners who wish to remove paint from masonry should work with a qualified contractor knowledgeable in the use of non-abrasive cleaners. 2) Review is required if you wish to change the color of painted brick. If you wish to paint previously painted brick the same color, no review by staff or the CAR is necessary. 3) Colors associated with the colors of natural brick are strongly encouraged and are preferable to less appropriate colors (white, green, blue, etc.). Commission staff must approve any new paint colors before work can begin. Colors appearing on computer screens or printed on standard printers may distort the values of colors. It is best to refer to the color swatches available at any home improvement store. Information on the color’s name, and number can be found on the following page. The Commission does not endorse specific paint brands. Sherwin Williams paint names and codes are provided for reference only. Richmond CAR Guidelines Proposed update to paint colors 27 October 2016 Page 2 21 Exterior Paint Color Selection Chart The paint chart below is provided with the goal of streamlining paint discussions between property owners, architects / contractors, and City of Richmond staff. The colors are arranged by location on the building, with a full list (name, number, and example) provided at the end of this section. The following color selections generally correspond to the recommendations by the City of Richmond’s Commission of Architectural Review (CAR). This document is intended to be a guide and, as such, can be expanded or contracted as CAR staff and commissioners find appropriate. Colors are for previously painted surfaces only. Existing unpainted brick and stone must remain unpainted per the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation. Exterior paint sheens should be semi-gloss. Element Color Notes Wood-frame Buildings (including Stucco-clad buildings) 18C, Georgian, Federal, and Greek Revival styles Body white, Spanish brown, yellow ochre, stone, buff, light grey, green- grey, medium blue, Trim green, light yellow, white, straw, cream, black, dark brown, dark grey, dark green, dark brown Wood-frame Buildings (including Stucco-clad buildings) Italianate, Second Empire, and Queen Anne styles Body Deep blue, medium grey, dark ochre, tan, slate, Trim Golden yellow, dark grey, green-black, tan, deep red, olive green Wood-frame Buildings (including Stucco-clad buildings) Arts and Crafts style Body Off-white, light yellow, light blue, medium blue, light olive, light grey Trim White, off-white, light yellow, light grey, deep red, deep green Richmond CAR Guidelines Proposed update to paint colors 27 October 2016 Page 3 22 Element Color Notes Wood-frame Buildings (including Stucco-clad buildings) Colonial Revival style Body White, beige, pale green, medium grey, medium blue Trim Green, white, yellow Masonry Buildings (previously painted only) All styles Body Color - Reds, browns, yellow- Previously-painted brick only. Match original brick Brick clay color when possible. Body Color - Browns Previously-painted stone only. Match original stone Stone color when possible. Wood Trim See style chart for appropriate trim color Lintels Natural stone or brick Previously-painted stone only. Match original stone colors, as body colors lintel color. above. Previously-painted brick lintels are to be painted the body brick color. Headers Natural stone or brick Previously-painted stone only. Match original stone colors, as body colors color. above. Previously-painted brick lintels are to be painted the body brick color. Unless the lintel is stone, do not pick out the lintel in a contracting color. Colors appropriate for all buildings Window Whites, Blacks, May match trim color or may be contrasting. Sashes Neutrals Sills Neutrals Painted stone only. Match original stone color. Shutters Blacks, Greens Doors Blacks, Browns, Painted wood only. Stained wood doors must remain Greens, Reds, Yellows, stained and may not be painted. Neutrals Porch Blues Ceilings Porch Floors Neutrals Use non-slip texture for foot traffic. Metal Blacks, Greens May also be used for wood top hand rail. Elements Metal Roofs Blacks, Greens, Reds May also match an existing gray, but not “silver” paint. Wood Fences Whites, Dark Browns, Whites and opaque neutral stains. Gray Richmond CAR Guidelines Proposed update to paint colors 27 October 2016 Page 4 23 18th Century, Georgian, Federal, and Greek Revival Styles Wood-frame Buildings (including Stucco-clad Buildings) Body Color SW 0046 SW 0050 SW 0053 SW 2829 SW 2833 SW 7008 SW 6385 SW 2829 SW 0050 SW 0078 SW 2834 SW 2865 SW 6128 SW 6394 SW 2807 SW 2808 SW 2838 SW 2856 SW 6069 SW 6146 SW 7020 Wood Trim SW 0046 SW 0050 SW 0053 SW 2829 SW 2833 SW 7008 SW 6385 SW 2829 SW 0050 SW 0023 SW 0024 SW 0037 SW 0038 SW 0049 SW 0054 SW 2805 SW 2821 SW 2844 SW 2845 Masonry Buildings Body Color – Brick (previously painted only) – Reds and Yellow-Clay – all styles SW 0006 SW 0008 SW 0072 SW 2903 SW 2839 SW 0078 SW 2805 SW 2822 SW 2834 Body Color – Stone (previously painted only) – Browns and Grays – all styles SW 2807 SW 2808 SW 2838 SW 2856 SW 6006 SW 6069 SW 6146 SW 2821 SW 2844 Masonry Lintels (previously painted only) - Neutrals SW 0023 SW 0049 SW 0054 SW 0055 SW 0077 SW 2821 SW 2844 SW 2845 SW 2850 SW 6199 Richmond CAR Guidelines Proposed update to paint colors 27 October 2016 Page 5 24 Masonry Sills (previously painted only) – Neutrals SW 0023 SW 0049 SW 0054 SW 0055 SW 0077 SW 2821 SW 2844 SW 2845 SW 2850 SW 6199 Wood-frame and Masonry Buildings Window Sashes – Whites, Blacks, Neutrals SW 0046 SW 0050 SW 0053 SW 2829 SW 2833 SW 7008 SW 0023 SW 0024 SW 0037 SW 0038 SW 0049 SW 0054 SW 2805 SW 2821 SW 2844 SW 2845 SW 6258 SW 6990 SW 7020 SW 7069 Shutters – Blacks, Greens SW 6258 SW 6990 SW 7020 SW 7069 SW 0014 SW 2809 SW 2816 SW 2846 SW 2847 SW 6207 Doors – Blacks, Browns, Greens, Reds, Yellows, Neutrals SW 6258 SW 6990 SW 7020 SW 7069 SW 2807 SW 2808 SW 2838 SW 2856 SW 6006 SW 6069 SW 6146 SW 0014 SW 2809 SW 2816 SW 2846 SW 2847 SW 6207 SW 0006 SW 0008 SW 0072 SW 2903 SW 2839 Richmond CAR Guidelines Proposed update to paint colors 27 October 2016 Page 6 25 SW 0078 SW 2834 SW 2865 SW 6128 SW 6394 Porch Ceilings - Blues SW 0052 SW 0059 SW 0068 SW 6477 SW 6478 Porch Floors – Neutrals SW 0023 SW 0024 SW 0037 SW 0038 SW 0049 SW 0054 SW 2805 SW 2821 SW 2844 SW 2845 Metal Elements – Blacks, Greens SW 6258 SW 6990 SW 7020 SW 7069 Metal Roofs – Blacks, Greens, Reds SW 6258 SW 6990 SW 7020 SW 7069 SW 0014 SW 2809 SW 2816 SW 2846 SW 2847 SW 6207 SW 0006 SW 0008 SW 0072 SW 2903 SW 2839 Wood Fences – Whites and opaque neutral stains SW 0046 SW 0050 SW 0053 SW 2829 SW 2833 SW 7008 SW 2807 SW 2808 SW 2838 SW 2856 SW 6006 SW 6069 SW 6146 SW 0023 SW 0024 SW 0037 SW 0038 SW 0049 SW 0054 SW 2805 SW 2821 SW 2844 SW 2845 Richmond CAR Guidelines Proposed update to paint colors 27 October 2016 Page 7 26 Italianate, Second Empire, and Queen Anne Styles Wood-frame Buildings (including Stucco-clad Buildings) Body Color SW 2807 SW 2808 SW 2838 SW 2856 SW 6006 SW 6069 SW 6146 SW 0014 SW 2809 SW 2816 SW 2846 SW 2847 SW 6207 SW 0006 SW 0008 SW 0072 SW 2903 SW 2839 SW 6244 SW 9178 SW 9179 Wood Trim SW 0046 SW 0050 SW 0053 SW 2829 SW 2833 SW 7008 SW 0023 SW 0024 SW 0037 SW 0038 SW 0049 SW 0054 SW 2805 SW 2821 SW 2844 SW 2845 SW 0078 SW 2834 SW 2865 SW 6128 SW 6394 SW 0014 SW 2809 SW 2816 SW 2846 SW 2847 SW 6207 SW 0006 SW 0008 SW 0072 SW 2903 SW 2839 Masonry Buildings Body Color – Brick (previously painted only) – Reds and Yellow-Clay – all styles Richmond CAR Guidelines Proposed update to paint colors 27 October 2016 Page 8 27 SW 0006 SW 0008 SW 0072 SW 2903 SW 2839 SW 0078 SW 2805 SW 2822 SW 2834 Body Color – Stone (previously painted only) – Browns and Grays – all styles SW 2807 SW 2808 SW 2838 SW 2856 SW 6006 SW 6069 SW 6146 SW 2821 SW 2844 Masonry Lintels (previously painted only) - Neutrals SW 0023 SW 0049 SW 0054 SW 0055 SW 0077 SW 2821 SW 2844 SW 2845 SW 2850 SW 6199 Masonry Sills (previously painted only) – Neutrals SW 0023 SW 0049 SW 0054 SW 0055 SW 0077 SW 2821 SW 2844 SW 2845 SW 2850 SW 6199 Wood-frame and Masonry Buildings Window Sashes – Whites, Blacks, Neutrals SW 0046 SW 0050 SW 0053 SW 2829 SW 2833 SW 7008 SW 0023 SW 0024 SW 0037 SW 0038 SW 0049 SW 0054 SW 2805 SW 2821 SW 2844 SW 2845 SW 6258 SW 6990 SW 7020 SW 7069 Shutters – Blacks, Greens SW 6258 SW 6990 SW 7020 SW 7069 SW 0014 SW 2809 SW 2816 SW 2846 SW 2847 SW 6207 Richmond CAR Guidelines Proposed update to paint colors 27 October 2016 Page 9 28 Doors – Blacks, Browns, Greens, Reds, Yellows, Neutrals SW 6258 SW 6990 SW 7020 SW 7069 SW 2807 SW 2808 SW 2838 SW 2856 SW 6006 SW 6069 SW 6146 SW 0014 SW 2809 SW 2816 SW 2846 SW 2847 SW 6207 SW 0006 SW 0008 SW 0072 SW 2903 SW 2839 SW 0078 SW 2834 SW 2865 SW 6128 SW 6394 Porch Ceilings - Blues SW 0052 SW 0059 SW 0068 SW 6477 SW 6478 Porch Floors – Neutrals SW 0023 SW 0024 SW 0037 SW 0038 SW 0049 SW 0054 SW 2805 SW 2821 SW 2844 SW 2845 Metal Elements – Blacks, Greens SW 6258 SW 6990 SW 7020 SW 7069 Metal Roofs – Blacks, Greens, Reds SW 6258 SW 6990 SW 7020 SW 7069 SW 0014 SW 2809 SW 2816 SW 2846 SW 2847 SW 6207 Richmond CAR Guidelines Proposed update to paint colors 27 October 2016 Page 10 29 SW 0006 SW 0008 SW 0072 SW 2903 SW 2839 Wood Fences – Whites and opaque neutral stains SW 0046 SW 0050 SW 0053 SW 2829 SW 2833 SW 7008 SW 2807 SW 2808 SW 2838 SW 2856 SW 6006 SW 6069 SW 6146 SW 0023 SW 0024 SW 0037 SW 0038 SW 0049 SW 0054 SW 2805 SW 2821 SW 2844 SW 2845 Richmond CAR Guidelines Proposed update to paint colors 27 October 2016 Page 11 30 Arts and Crafts Style Wood-frame Buildings (including Stucco-clad Buildings) Body Color SW 0046 SW 0050 SW 0053 SW 2829 SW 2833 SW 7008 SW 0078 SW 2834 SW 2865 SW 6128 SW 6394 SW 0014 SW 2816 SW 2846 SW 6207 SW 2861 SW 0023 SW 0024 SW 0037 SW 0038 SW 0049 SW 0054 SW 2805 SW 2821 SW 2844 SW 2845 Wood Trim SW 0046 SW 0050 SW 0053 SW 2829 SW 2833 SW 7008 SW 0023 SW 0024 SW 0037 SW 0038 SW 0049 SW 0054 SW 2805 SW 2821 SW 2844 SW 2845 SW 0078 SW 2834 SW 2865 SW 6128 SW 6394 Masonry Buildings Body Color – Brick (previously painted only) – Reds and Yellow-Clay – all styles SW 0006 SW 0008 SW 0072 SW 2903 SW 2839 SW 0078 SW 2805 SW 2822 SW 2834 Body Color – Stone (previously painted only) – Browns and Grays – all styles Richmond CAR Guidelines Proposed update to paint colors 27 October 2016 Page 12 31 SW 2807 SW 2808 SW 2838 SW 2856 SW 6006 SW 6069 SW 6146 SW 2821 SW 2844 Masonry Lintels (previously painted only) - Neutrals SW 0023 SW 0049 SW 0054 SW 0055 SW 0077 SW 2821 SW 2844 SW 2845 SW 2850 SW 6199 Masonry Sills (previously painted only) – Neutrals SW 0023 SW 0049 SW 0054 SW 0055 SW 0077 SW 2821 SW 2844 SW 2845 SW 2850 SW 6199 Wood-frame and Masonry Buildings Window Sashes – Whites, Blacks, Neutrals SW 0046 SW 0050 SW 0053 SW 2829 SW 2833 SW 7008 SW 0023 SW 0024 SW 0037 SW 0038 SW 0049 SW 0054 SW 2805 SW 2821 SW 2844 SW 2845 SW 6258 SW 6990 SW 7020 SW 7069 Shutters – Blacks, Greens SW 6258 SW 6990 SW 7020 SW 7069 SW 0014 SW 2809 SW 2816 SW 2846 SW 2847 SW 6207 Doors – Blacks, Browns, Greens, Reds, Yellows, Neutrals SW 6258 SW 6990 SW 7020 SW 7069 SW 2807 SW 2808 SW 2838 SW 2856 SW 6006 SW 6069 SW 6146 Richmond CAR Guidelines Proposed update to paint colors 27 October 2016 Page 13 32 SW 0014 SW 2809 SW 2816 SW 2846 SW 2847 SW 6207 SW 0006 SW 0008 SW 0072 SW 2903 SW 2839 SW 0078 SW 2834 SW 2865 SW 6128 SW 6394 Porch Ceilings - Blues SW 0052 SW 0059 SW 0068 SW 6477 SW 6478 Porch Floors – Neutrals SW 0023 SW 0024 SW 0037 SW 0038 SW 0049 SW 0054 SW 2805 SW 2821 SW 2844 SW 2845 Metal Elements – Blacks, Greens SW 6258 SW 6990 SW 7020 SW 7069 Metal Roofs – Blacks, Greens, Reds SW 6258 SW 6990 SW 7020 SW 7069 SW 0014 SW 2809 SW 2816 SW 2846 SW 2847 SW 6207 SW 0006 SW 0008 SW 0072 SW 2903 SW 2839 Wood Fences – Whites and opaque neutral stains SW 0046 SW 0050 SW 0053 SW 2829 SW 2833 SW 7008 Richmond CAR Guidelines Proposed update to paint colors 27 October 2016 Page 14 33 SW 2807 SW 2808 SW 2838 SW 2856 SW 6006 SW 6069 SW 6146 SW 0023 SW 0024 SW 0037 SW 0038 SW 0049 SW 0054 SW 2805 SW 2821 SW 2844 SW 2845 Richmond CAR Guidelines Proposed update to paint colors 27 October 2016 Page 15 34 Colonial Revival Style Wood-frame Buildings (including Stucco-clad Buildings) Body Color SW 6385 SW 2829 SW 0050 SW 0030 SW 0044 SW 0078 SW 2831 SW 2834 SW 2865 SW 2819 SW 2849 SW 2863 SW 0066 SW 2815 Wood Trim SW 0046 SW 0050 SW 0053 SW 2829 SW 2833 SW 7008 SW 6385 SW 2829 SW 0050 SW 0023 SW 0024 SW 0049 SW 0054 SW 0055 SW 0077 SW 2821 SW 2822 SW 2844 SW 2845 SW 0078 SW 2834 SW 2865 SW 6128 SW 6394 Masonry Buildings Body Color – Brick (previously painted only) – Reds and Yellow-Clay – all styles SW 0006 SW 0008 SW 0072 SW 2903 SW 2839 SW 0078 SW 2805 SW 2822 SW 2834 Richmond CAR Guidelines Proposed update to paint colors 27 October 2016 Page 16 35 Body Color – Stone (previously painted only) – Browns and Grays – all styles SW 2807 SW 2808 SW 2838 SW 2856 SW 6006 SW 6069 SW 6146 SW 2821 SW 2844 Masonry Lintels (previously painted only) - Neutrals SW 0023 SW 0049 SW 0054 SW 0055 SW 0077 SW 2821 SW 2844 SW 2845 SW 2850 SW 6199 Masonry Sills (previously painted only) – Neutrals SW 0023 SW 0049 SW 0054 SW 0055 SW 0077 SW 2821 SW 2844 SW 2845 SW 2850 SW 6199 Wood-frame and Masonry Buildings Window Sashes – Whites, Blacks, Neutrals SW 0046 SW 0050 SW 0053 SW 2829 SW 2833 SW 7008 SW 0023 SW 0024 SW 0037 SW 0038 SW 0049 SW 0054 SW 2805 SW 2821 SW 2844 SW 2845 SW 6258 SW 6990 SW 7020 SW 7069 Shutters – Blacks, Greens SW 6258 SW 6990 SW 7020 SW 7069 SW 0014 SW 2809 SW 2816 SW 2846 SW 2847 SW 6207 Doors – Blacks, Browns, Greens, Reds, Yellows, Neutrals SW 6258 SW 6990 SW 7020 SW 7069 Richmond CAR Guidelines Proposed update to paint colors 27 October 2016 Page 17 36 SW 2807 SW 2808 SW 2838 SW 2856 SW 6006 SW 6069 SW 6146 SW 0014 SW 2809 SW 2816 SW 2846 SW 2847 SW 6207 SW 0006 SW 0008 SW 0072 SW 2903 SW 2839 SW 0078 SW 2834 SW 2865 SW 6128 SW 6394 Porch Ceilings - Blues SW 0052 SW 0059 SW 0068 SW 6477 SW 6478 Porch Floors – Neutrals SW 0023 SW 0024 SW 0037 SW 0038 SW 0049 SW 0054 SW 2805 SW 2821 SW 2844 SW 2845 Metal Elements – Blacks, Greens SW 6258 SW 6990 SW 7020 SW 7069 Metal Roofs – Blacks, Greens, Reds SW 6258 SW 6990 SW 7020 SW 7069 SW 0014 SW 2809 SW 2816 SW 2846 SW 2847 SW 6207 SW 0006 SW 0008 SW 0072 SW 2903 SW 2839 Richmond CAR Guidelines Proposed update to paint colors 27 October 2016 Page 18 37 Wood Fences – Whites and opaque neutral stains SW 0046 SW 0050 SW 0053 SW 2829 SW 2833 SW 7008 SW 2807 SW 2808 SW 2838 SW 2856 SW 6006 SW 6069 SW 6146 SW 0023 SW 0024 SW 0037 SW 0038 SW 0049 SW 0054 SW 2805 SW 2821 SW 2844 SW 2845 Richmond CAR Guidelines Proposed update to paint colors 27 October 2016 Page 19 38 List of All Colors: Whites Blues White Hyacinth SW 0046 Pearl Gray SW 0052 Classic Light Buff SW 0050 Frostwork SW 0059 Porcelain SW 0053 Copen Blue SW 0068 Classical White SW 2829 Naval SW 6244 Roycroft Vellum SW 2833 Tidewater SW 6477 Alabaster SW 7008 Watery SW 6478 In the Navy SW 9178 Blacks Anchors Aweigh SW 9179 Tricorn Black SW 6258 Caviar SW 6990 Neutrals Black Fox SW 7020 Pewter Tankard SW 0023 Iron Ore SW 7069 Curio Gray SW 0024 Morris Room Grey SW 0037 Browns Library Pewter SW 0038 Rookwood Med Brown SW 2807 Silver Gray SW 0049 Rookwood Dark Brown SW 2808 Twilight Gray SW 0054 Polished Mahogany SW 2838 Light French Gray SW 0055 Fairfax Brown SW 2856 Classic French Gray SW 0077 Black Bean SW 6006 Renwick Beige SW 2805 French Roast SW 6069 Downing Stone SW 2821 Umber SW 6146 Downing Sand SW 2822 Roycroft Mist Gray SW 2844 Greens Bunglehouse Gray SW 2845 Sheraton Sage SW 0014 Chelsea Gray SW 2850 Rookwood Shutter Grn SW 2809 Sawdust SW 6158 Rookwood Dark Green SW 2816 Rare Fray SW 6199 Roycroft Bronze Green SW 2846 Accessible Beige SW 7036 Roycroft Bottle Green SW 2847 Retreat SW 6207 Reds Toile Red SW 0006 Cajun Red SW 0008 Deep Maroon SW 0072 Rookwood Terra Cotta SW 2903 Roycroft Copper Red SW 2839 Yellows Sunbeam Yellow SW 0078 Birdseye Maple SW 2834 Classical Yellow SW 2865 Blonde SW 6128 Sequin SW 6394 Richmond CAR Guidelines Proposed update to paint colors 27 October 2016 Page 20 39 Subscribe Past Issues Trans View this email in your browser 2019 SC Historic Preservation Conference Friday, April 26. Registration is open, Early-bird rate ends April 18. Register now at: https://scarchivesandhistoryfoundation.org/2019/01/14/sc-historic- preservation-conference-2019/ Just a few of the informative sessions at this fast-paced conference on South Carolina history, historic properties, and preservation... Traditional Building Arts & Future Artisans * The American College of the Building Arts, housed in the recently rehabbed historic Charleston Trolley Barn, is the nation’s only college offering a four year degree in traditional building arts - architectural carpentry, architectural stone, classical architecture, forged architectural ironwork, masonry, plasterwork, and Restoration of Piedmont Slave timber framing. Leigh Handal, Chief Structures * Advancement Officer, will share how the College Learn about Historic Brattonsville‘s fosters exceptional craftsmanship and recent restoration of two original slave 40 encourages the preservation, enrichment, and buildings to their 1850s appearance. understanding of architectural heritage. Joseph C. Mester, Property / Farm Manager, and Sara Johnson, Digital Documentation of Historic Structures* Preservation / Restoration Specialist, Getting accurate drawings of existing structures can be a difficult, time consuming, and expensive will describe how they addressed task, but new technologies are revolutionizing the deterioration and reversed damage process. Bennett Preservation Engineering staff from past interventions, while keeping will show how to create very high resolution as much historic fabric as possible. photographs, compare traditional techniques with Learn about mortar cleaning and laser scanning, and demonstrate how to rapidly repointing, traditional limewash, and produce plans, sections, and elevations with cedar shake roofing. laser scanning. Exhibit Planning for Historic Buildings Explore how to use historic buildings as Thanks to our sponsors: interpretive spaces through the process to The Sherbert Group, Preservation South develop an exhibit plan for the Garvin Garvey Carolina, and Historic Columbia. House in Bluffton. Erin Schumacher with the Town of Bluffton and Rachel Bragg of HW Exhibits will discuss the challenges of working within historic buildings and share the lessons they learned completing the exhibit plan for the CONFERENCE LOCATION: house. SC Archives & History Center 8301 Parklane Road Columbia, SC 29223 Copyright © 2019 South Carolina Archives & History Foundation, All rights reserved. Want to change how you receive these emails? You can update your preferences or unsubscribe from this list. 41