Historic District / Board of Architectural Review

Board of Architectural Review Minutes Tuesday November 5th, 2019 Town Hall Annex Building– Training Room Members Present: Staff Present: Phil Dixon, Chairman Becca Zimmerman, Planner II David Price, Vice Chairman Jessi Shuler, Director of Planning Tim Kennedy Jeff Bowers Rachel Burton Cecile Cothran Members Absent: Beth Huggins Items on the agenda: Old Business: 1. N/A New Business: 1.108 E. Richland Street- New construction of detached garage (GR-5) 2. 221 Sumter Avenue- Enclosure of existing carport for storage (GR-2) 3. 221 Sumter Avenue- New construction of double carport (GR-2) 4. 524 W. Carolina Avenue- Replacement of 3 existing doors and one window (GR-2) Miscellaneous: 1) UDO-Status Update Chairman Dixon opened the meeting at 6:00 PM and asked for consideration of the minutes from the October 1st, 2019 regularly scheduled meeting. Mr. Bowers moved to approve the minutes as submitted, and Mr. Kennedy seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. Old Business: Whereas there were no old business agenda items to discuss, the board addressed the first item on the agenda under new business. New Business: 108 E. Richland Street- Ms. Jacobs, the owner of the property, explained her proposal to add a two-story detached garage with a studio above, on her property. She noted that the location of the garage would be about five feet away from the primary structure; it would be the same color as the house and have details with the same trim as the house. Ms. Burton inquired as to the height of the garage. Ms. Jacobs responded that the garage would be two feet taller than the primary structure. Ms. Burton expressed her concern that she did not have a sense of scale between the house and the garage from the documents submitted. Ms. Zimmerman stated that the height of the garage would be 24.25’, and the proposed height, lot coverage, and building location would be going before the Board of Zoning Appeals for variance approval. Ms. Burton & Ms. Cothran raised their concern that the shake shingles shown on the elevation drawing presented did not tie in with primary structure, and would be more aesthetically pleasing without them. Ms. Jacobs explained the shakes would be grey, similar to the coloring on the foundation of the house. Mr. Kennedy suggested that the proposed structure match its skirt board and trim detail with the house in its entirety. Dr. Price requested a front elevation that detailed both the home and proposed garage for comparison purposes. Ms. Burton supported this request and asked that there also be an elevation showing the respective roof slopes. Mr. Bowers expressed his concern that the proposed garage would overpower the primary structure. Ms. Burton agreed and explained that the style of the home is rustic, with a mountain feel, and the proposed structure did not match this in detail. Mr. Kennedy questioned if the garage could be moved further from the primary structure. Ms. Jacobs stated that that would require moving the garage farther forward, which would push the home further into non-compliance. Dr. Price clarified that the roofs being so close would require the structures to have similar pitches. The board moved to table the agenda item until the next available meeting, which would be January. The motion passed unanimously. 221 Sumter Avenue- Ms. Cothran recused herself from participating in the review of this agenda item as she is the homeowner. Ms. Conrad presented the proposal to enclose an existing boat shed on the property to use as storage. Ms. Burton questions whether the project was an actual enclosure or a teardown and rebuild. Ms. Conrad explained that the contractor for the project would pour a slab around the existing structure and enclose with wood siding that will match the primary structure. Ms. Burton asked what material would be at the base of the structure. Ms. Conrad answered that the material would be brick, matching the principal structure. Ms. Burton raised her concern that this construction could be accomplished because of the existing posts. Chairman Dixon proposed that as long as the final result was appropriate as presented and discussed, the process of construction was not in the board’s purview. Ms. Burton asked if the shutters would be operable, and Dr. Price stated that the shutters should appear to be operable. Ms. Conard confirmed that all details if the shed would match the primary structure. With this confirmation, Ms. Burton motioned to approve the shed enclosure, Mr. Kennedy seconded the motion, the motion passed unanimously. 221 Sumter Avenue- Ms. Cothran recused herself from participating in the review of this agenda item as she is the homeowner. Ms. Conrad presented the proposal to construct a double carport with a covered walkway. She detailed for clarification purposes that there would be a brick knee wall on the sides of the structure, not the front and rear. Ms. Burton requested more information on the eyebrow roof detailing, and Ms. Conard responded, explaining that she believed it was a small roof overhang detail that the draftsperson had included. Mr. Bowers inquired about the size of the posts, and Mr. Kennedy concluded that they needed to be larger and include trim detail. Dr. Price agreed with this statement and added that the posts would look better resting on the brick. Mr. Bowers moved to approve the carport with the condition that there is more detailing, the posts would be more substantial in size and rest on or behind the brick. Dr. Price seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. 523 W. Carolina Avenue- Mr. Akinbote, the owner of the property, presented his request to replace three doors and one window with a door at his residence. He explained that the current doors and window in question are causing a pest infestation issue. He further discussed that he would like to replace a three-paneled window on his porch as the porch does not have any other access from the interior of the home. The board members discussed the options for a door that would be functional, historic in design, and the importance of the design. Dr. Price stated that a 3-panel hung window was a distinct feature to the home. Ms. Burton made the argument that though it was a distinct feature, it did not promote the livability of the house itself. She also suggested that Mr. Akinbote check into suppliers such as Berlin G. Myers, Southern Lumber, and Buck Lumber, who are all capable of designing an appropriate door for the replacement. Mr. Akinbote requested to be able to move forward with the replacement of the three doors on the rear of the home. Mr. Kennedy suggested that a wood door would be more authentic and complementary to the historic home. Mr. Akinbote showed the board members pictures of the existing doors, which are not wood and have a single glass pane. The board members discussed that a white fiberglass door with a single glass pane would be an acceptable replacement. Ms. Cothran moved to approve the door replacement, and table the window replacement until further replacement information is provided, Mr. Bowers seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. Miscellaneous: Design Guidelines- Ms. Shuler explained that the Design Guidelines needed to be updated with the newly approved Unified Development Ordinance references and that the board members would be provided these updated guidelines at the next meeting. Adjourn: Chairman Dixon adjourned the meeting at 7:15pm. Respectfully Submitted, Becca Zimmerman, Planner II Date: 12/3/19 Approved: Philip G. Dixon, Chairman Or, Dr. David Price, Vice Chairman