Historic Review Board

HISTORIC REVIEW BOARD July 13th, 2021 4:30 PM Live Viewing Online: Request Access by emailing before 4:00pm on Tuesday, July 13th, 2021, to Penelope G. Karagounis, Planning Director at pkaragounis@fortmillsc.gov Public Access by Phone: Dial (toll free) 1-877-309-2073 and use access code 527-612-845 AGENDA CALL TO ORDER APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. HRB Meeting: May 11th, 2021 [Pages 2-4] NEW BUSINESS 1. Request for Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) [Pages 5-21] Applicant Name: Lynn Blackwell Interior Design Owner Name: Lynn Blackwell Property Address: 223 Main Street Purpose: COA request for the replacement of awning fabric/design, new window signage, and change of existing projecting sign. Property information: Town of Fort Mill Historic Preservation District LC, Local Commercial Zoning District ADJOURN The following press was notified of the meeting by email or fax in accordance with 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. 1  MINUTES TOWN OF FORT MILL HISTORIC REVIEW BOARD May 11th, 2021 Virtual Meeting 4:30 PM Present: Chairman Louis Roman, David Booth, Megan Brinton, Scott Couchenour, Elizabeth Leventis, Samantha Nifong, Jessica Scarlett, Planning Director Penelope Karagounis, Senior Planner Alex Moore Guests: Les Spencer CALL TO ORDER Chairman Louis Roman called the meeting to order at 4:30 PM. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Chairman Louis Roman entertained a motion to approve the minutes. Mr. Couchenour made a motion to approve the minutes from the April 13th, 2021, meeting as presented. Samantha Nifong seconded the motion to approve the minutes. The minutes were then approved by a vote of 7-0. OLD BUSINESS Chairman Louis Roman opened the meeting by noting the contents of the agenda and the associated packet of information. OLD BUSINESS ITEM The old business included an agenda item from the April 13th, 2021, meeting which was deferred. This included the request for a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) for the replacement of windows at St. John’s United Methodist Church. At the April 13th meeting, the historic review board (HRB) deferred a decision on the proposal for replacement windows at St. John’s UMC until they received additional product information. Senior Planner Moore gave an overview of the supplementary information provided by St. John’s UMC in relation to the windows. This included a spreadsheet with prices for Pella and Andersen series brands along with a brief description of each type. Moore also noted that the applicant had received a verbal estimate from an Andersen window representative on the cost of repairing the windows. 2 Moore then asked the representative from St. John’s UMC, Les Spencer, if he had anything to add to this information. Mr. Spencer added that it was the church sanctuary building which is the most significant architectural portion of the property. His point in mentioning this was that the windows under consideration within the educational building were of less historical importance than the stained-glass windows within the sanctuary section of the church. Moreover, he added that the proposed Pella replacement windows were very much in character with the building forms within which they would be located in. Megan Brinton then asked if any of the replacement windows would be part of the sanctuary building, or were they all to be within the educational building? Mr. Spencer stated that all the windows would be located within the educational building. Chairman Roman asked if there were any further comments or questions. Jessica Scarlett asked if the general state of the windows indicated that they all needed to be replaced at this time, or conversely was it ever considered to only replace the Mr. Spencer indicated that he personally had not performed a window-by-window inspection, but that he had probably looked at the worst cases. From this he had deduced that if all such windows had deteriorated in such a manner, then it made more sense to go ahead and replace all of the windows at once rather than replace them incrementally. Mr. Spencer then added that some of the windows in question have already been replaced at some point. He based this finding on the fact that these windows did not possess uniform counterbalance systems. Chairman Roman then asked if there were any other questions on the information as presented. Ms. Brinton asked about the information pertaining to the window representative regarding the cost of window repair rather than window replacement. Specifically, Ms. Brinton’s question was if Mr. Spencer had gotten this from the window representative or from the company that could perform the restoration? Mr. Spencer stated that he received this information from the window representative. Ms. Brinton indicated that her concern with this is that she felt the window representative was simply trying to sell the church new, replacement windows rather than providing them with actual information on a viable refurbishment professional. There being no other questions or comments, Chairman Roman entertained a motion. Scott Couchenour made a motion that the HRB approve the Pella 250 replacement windows. Samantha Nifong seconded this motion. Scott Couchenour then asked Chairman Roman for the opportunity to discuss. He then stated that he liked the fact that all the windows would be replaced at one time and that the storm windows would be permanently removed. Thus, he believed that this would provide a cohesive look to the educational section of the church. 3 Chairman Roman noted that this was a sensible comment and asked if there was any other discussion before the vote was taken. There being none, Chairman Roman asked for a roll-call vote. Planning Director Karagounis then noted that there was a motion to approve from Scot Couchenour and a second from Samantha Nifong. She then undertook a roll-call vote: Elizabeth Leventis: Aye Scott Couchenour: Aye Jessica Scarlett: Aye Samantha Nifong: Aye David Booth: Aye Megan Brinton: Nay. Chairman Louis Roman: Abstain Planning Director Karagounis then stated that since Chairman Roman abstained, she would need to email him a form to complete. Thus, the application for the certificate of appropriateness (COA) for the Pella 250 series replacement windows at St. John’s UMC as presented was approved by a vote of 5 to 1. Additionally, with her vote of “Nay,” Ms. Brinton had asked for an opportunity to discuss her reasoning. Thus, Planning Director Karagounis gave her the floor to do this. Ms. Brinton stated that she did like the idea that all of the windows within the educational building would be replaced at the same time, that the number of window openings would remain the same, that the size of the windows would not be changing, and that the general design was remaining the same. However, Ms. Brinton indicated that she was a bit concerned that more information was not known about the age of the building and that the town’s historic district design guidelines clearly indicate that vinyl windows are not appropriate. She stated that in some cases that the use of vinyl windows may be necessary, but without exhausting all other options, the historic district guidelines need to be adhered to. Chairman Roman thanked Ms. Brinton for her comments. There being no other business, the meeting adjourned at 4:52 PM. Respectfully submitted, Alex J. Moore, AICP Senior Planner June 10th, 2021 4 5 6  HISTORIC REVIEW BOARD A P P LI C A N T Lynn Blackwell Interior Design Subject Property: 223 Main Street Tax Map # 020-02-01-023 Zoning District: Local Commercial/Historic Preservation District Zoning Case: 2021-0271 REQUEST The Town of Fort Mill Planning Department has received an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) from Lynn Blackwell Interior Design requesting to replace awning fabric, add window signage, and to change the color and text of an existing projecting sign at 223 Main Street. S I T E D E S C R I P TI O N A N D G E N E R A L C O N S T R U C T I O N P L A N This property is located within the Historic Preservation District and is also listed on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). The general construction plan is attached which includes the front and rear elevations at 223 Main Street. The location of the proposed improvements as described in the request are then numbered, in red, on these elevations as noted below. 2. Bracket sign - Front Elevation – The proposed change includes color and text only. 4. Awning – Front and Rear Elevations – The proposed change is for fabric only – Seaside 320556. 5. Front Door color and signage – Front Elevation – The proposed color is Oxford Blue #031d4e. 6. Display Window Signage – Front Elevation 7. Display Window Signage – Front Elevation 9. Window Signage – Rear Elevation Following the elevation drawings, singular illustrations of each proposed improvement(s) are provided. These illustrations include the corresponding red number(s) which then indicates its location(s) on the elevation drawings. 7  HISTORIC DISTRICT DESIGN GUIDELINES REVIEW There are three principal portions of this review which include the projecting sign, the replacement of the awning fabric, and the proposed window/door signage. 1) Projecting Sign (A) Examples of this type of sign within the Town of Fort Mill Historic District are shown below along with bulleted, design descriptions. This is taken from page 107 of the Town of Fort Mill, SC Historic District Design Guidelines. This section illustrates the preferred methods for design and placement of projecting signs. (B) In addition to the design guidelines, there are also zoning/building code requirements for projecting signs. Projecting signs are permitted within the zoning district which encompasses Main Street (LC, Local Commercial District).  Such signs must not exceed 12-square feet in area.  A projecting sign must not extend more than 3-feet from the façade to which it is attached.  No more than one projecting sign can be permitted for any place of business.  The lowest portion of the projecting sign must be at least 8-feet above the sidewalk. 8 2) Awnings The manner in which awnings are to be designed in Fort Mill are illustrated below. This is taken from page 115 of the Town of Fort Mill, SC Historic District Design Guidelines. 9 3) Window/Door Signage (A) Signage which is to be placed onto windows are to be designed to the below standards which are taken from page 106 of the Town of Fort Mill, SC Historic District Design Guidelines. (B) Within the Town Zoning Ordinance, there is a definition for a window sign which states it is a sign located near, or attached to, the interior of a window that is observable from the exterior of the building. Beyond this definition there are no parameters for window signs found within the Town of Fort Mill Zoning Ordinance. 10  STAFF FINDINGS Projecting Sign  The submitted drawing indicates that the proposed projecting sign is 11.97 square feet. This meets the requirement of not being more than 12 square feet in area.  This projecting sign appears to meet the locational requirements of the design guidelines as well as the mandate that it be placed at least eight feet above the sidewalk. Awnings  The proposed awnings appear to principally meet the historic district design guidelines except that they are not solid in color. Window/Door Signage  The proposed window and door signage are somewhat problematic as designed. It seems the amount of glass to be covered could be minimized via the removal of the gray background for the window and door signage, respectively. The text to be placed on the windows and door could then be designed as a dark blue rather than white to allow for better visibility. STAFF RECOMMENDATION So that the amount of window covered may be minimized in accordance with the historic district design standards, Planning Staff recommends that this COA application be approved as submitted with the condition that the proposed window/door signage be text only with no gray background. 11 12 13 14 15 16 2 17 5 18 6&7 19 4 20 9 21