Historic District / Board of Architectural Review

Board of Architectural Review Minutes Tuesday March 3rd, 2020 Town Hall Annex Building– Training Room Members Present: Staff Present: Phil Dixon, Chairman Becca Zimmerman, Planner II David Price, Vice Chairman Jeff Bowers Rachel Burton Cecile Cothran Beth Huggins Tim Kennedy Members Absent: Items on the agenda: Old Business: 1. 206 Central Avenue 2. 133 S. Main Street New Business: 1. 304 S. Main Street 2. 213 W. Carolina Avenue Miscellaneous: N/A Chairman Dixon opened the meeting at 6:00 pm and asked for consideration of the minutes from the March 3rd, 2020 regularly scheduled meeting. Mr. Bowers moved to approve the minutes; Mr. Kennedy seconded the motion. The board unanimously approved the minutes. Old Business: 206 Central Avenue- Mr. Hill presented details that the board had requested for the construction of a new fellowship building. He also explained that he had brought the most up to date plans that have been refined from the previous plans and passed those plans out to the board members. Mr. Hill confirmed that mechanical screening would be four inches taller than mechanical equipment. Mr. Hill then detailed the gridded architectural features that will mimic the church windows on the other elevations. Some of the panels would use painted trim, and some would be spandrel glass. He explained that the board members for the church had gone back and forth on how to create this façade. Dr. Price recalled that there might be something in the BAR guidelines that prohibited the use of spandrel glass. Mr. Kennedy asked Mr. Hill to explain from an Architect’s perspective why they would want to implement these panels rather than having windows. Mr. Hill explained that the panels were intended to replicate windows closely, and only doing the painted trim without the spandrel glass has been a maintenance issue for the church. Mr. Hill and the board members further discussed the design, placement, and colors of the proposed panels, spandrel glass, and trim. Mr. Kennedy and Ms. Burton expressed that they had been under the impression that the fenestration elements shown on the plans were true windows. Mr. Hill further detailed the materials used in the design. Mr. Kennedy explained that there were discrepancies between the plans submitted and what Mr. Hill explained the intent for the design is. Mr. Hill and the board members further discussed the plans presented and what materials would be best. Mr. Hill explained that he understood the board members' concern with the some of the elevation designs and materials to be used but that it was late in the game for them to change things and have to go back before the board. Ms. Zimmerman explained that a special meeting could occur before the next meeting in the interest of time, or the board could grant approval with final details to be submitted to staff. Mr. Kennedy stated that he believed the spandrel glass was a better option than the framed painted Hardi plank. Ms. Burton explained that she thought if the applicant could provide options for the board members to review, they could vote on what they liked best at a special meeting. Ms. Cothran stated she preferred the brown-colored spandrel glass. The church board chairman and Mr. Hill stated that they preferred the grey colored sample. Mr. Hill confirmed that they would present both options in the proposed elevations for the next meeting, along with pictures of the spandrel glass from the manufacturer. Ms. Zimmerman confirmed that she would organize a special meeting. Ms. Burton motioned to approve the mechanical screening and east and street-facing elevations as presented. Mr. Bowers seconded the motion; the motion passed unanimously. 133 S. Main Street- Ms. Shows explained that she was picking up on the mural project after the staff that previously presented the mural was no longer working with the Flowertown Players. She also detailed that the mural that was painted without BAR approval was removed. Ms. Shows presented the first idea depicting the building façade over time and the second rendition of the theater with a backdrop similar to Vincent Van Gogh’s “Starry Night” painting. She asked that the board members provide feedback on the two ideas. Ms. Cothran explained that she liked the first rendering and that she would even prefer the colors to be monochromatic as they are in the sketch. Ms. Burton agreed that she liked this concept but explained that she would need to see a more exact rendering for the board to approve. Ms. Shows also presented an idea to have a vintage directional painting that would be incorporated in a final design for the board and concluded her presentation. New Business: 304 S. Main Street- Mr. Williford presented a proposal to do a kitchen addition, expanding the footprint at 304 S. Main Street. Mr. Kennedy asked if the existing roof was a historic roof or a replacement. Ms. Fippen confirmed it was a replacement. Mr. Williford explained that the hot water mechanical equipment would be behind the addition and not visible from the street. Ms. Burton asked about the dimensions of the new windows and questioned if they would match the existing windows. She explained that the partial left and partial front elevations showed windows that were wider than the existing windows. Mr. Williford confirmed that the windows would match and be taller than they are wide. Mr. Kennedy detailed that the windows would need to be two over two, simulated divided light. Mr. Kennedy pointed out that the plans looked like the new siding would be Hardi plank or wood and that he was fine with both. Mr. Williford expressed that he would like to go with wood siding. Ms. Cothran and Dr. Price stated that the siding should be wood, not Hardi plank. Mr. Kennedy asked if there would be open rafters like the rest of the house. Mr. Williford confirmed it would. Mr. Kennedy also pointed out that the brick detailing on the foundation shown as stepping out on the plans and would need to be revised to match the existing house. Mr. Kennedy motioned to approve the project with the conditions that the new windows be two over two simulated divided light, wood siding, the foundation detail to be corrected, and the window sill details to match the existing home. Ms. Burton seconded the motion; the motion passed unanimously. 213 W. Carolina Avenue- Ms. Elliott presented her proposal to demolish her fire-damaged home and rebuilt a similar cottage style home with a charcoal, almost black metal roof with white Hardi plank siding and four single windows on either side of the front façade. Ms. Huggins asked about the positioning of the house. Ms. Elliott and Ms. Zimmerman explained that Ms. Elliott would be going before the Board of Zoning appeals for a variance to encroach within her side setback. Dr. Price asked about the differences between the existing and the new footprint of the home. Ms. Elliot explained that the new footprint is slightly larger. Ms. Burton asked about the foundation details on the porch and side of the house being stucco. Ms. Elliott explained that was correct, and on her previous home, the front porch had a brick foundation and brick foundation piers on the rest of the house, but otherwise, the crawlspace was open. Mr. Kennedy clarified that the proposed plans showed a concrete porch. Ms. Elliott confirmed that she did not want to do a wooden porch due to upkeep issues, and confirmed she wanted a low maintenance concrete porch. Ms. Burton asked what the front steps would be constructed out of, Ms. Elliott confirmed that they would be brick. Mr. Bowers and Mr. Kennedy both confirmed that a wooden porch would be more appropriate and look better on the new home. Ms. Elliott asked if a brick porch would be acceptable. Mr. Bowers stated that brick would be better than concrete. Ms. Burton explained that Ms. Elliot could have brick piers, or what appears to be piers and lattice in the front to have the foundation appear more historically accurate and then have the concrete or stucco in the sides of the house that are not visible. Dr. Price agreed and explained that a curtain wall with false brick piers would be an easy way to achieve a historic look. Ms. Burton explained that what they were looking for was an appearance of piers on the front that would contribute positively to the cottage style of the home. Ms. Elliott confirmed that she would follow this suggestion and that the porch would be brick, and the front door would also be wood. Mr. Kennedy stated that the windows on the new home would need to have a sill on the bottom and be simulated divided light, mimicking historical details. He continued that the plans showed vinyl soffit and eaves, and they would need to be Hardi or cementitious. That the siding would need to be Hardi plank with a smooth finish, the standing seam metal roof would need to follow the BAR guidelines and have one-inch rib and sixteen-inch panel. Mr. Bowers motioned to approve the demolition of the existing home, Ms. Cothran seconded the motion, the motion passed unanimously. Mr. Kennedy motioned to approve the project with the conditions discussed to be applied, Ms. Burton seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. Miscellaneous: N/A Adjourn: Chairman Dixon adjourned the meeting at 7:44pm. Respectfully Submitted, Becca Zimmerman, Planner II Date: 4/20/2020 Approved: Philip G. Dixon PE, CFM, Chairman Or, Dr. David Price, Vice Chairman