Historic Preservation Commission Meeting Minutes 10N. Public Square January 16, 2024 5:30P.M. . Open Meeting Called to order by Vice Chairman Brad Galland at 5:30 PM. Present: Brad Galland, Larry Gregory, Becky Carr, David Elder, Lisa Ellis, and Vandi White Staff Present: David Hardegree, Zack Arnold, Ashley Peters, and Keith Lovell Absent: Greg Frisbee 1.A Approval of Minutes Vice Chairman Galland called for ai motion to approve the minutes oft the last meeting. Board Member Becky Carr made ai motion to approve the meeting minutes from December 19, 2023. Board Member David Elder scconded thc motion. Thc motion carricd unanimously. Vote: 6-0 Certificate ofl Preservation: 2. COP24-01.6S. Wall St Applicant: Justin Earl (The Jerks, LLC) David Hardegree, Planning and Development Assistant Director, stated per the original application COP24-01, applicant proposes multiple front façade modifications for new building. The building is under new ownership (applicant). The current tenant, Lulabelle's Closet, will remain on the 1st floor. The 2nd floor is vacant. The applicant wishes to make cosmetic modifications to the front façade. The stucco elements oft the façade arej painted. Some brick areas are not painted. Project Tasks: 1. Replace the full lite front door with a fiberglass, pre- hung commercial style door. 2. Replacc fabric awning with samc. 3. Paint the exterior as needed. Vice Chairman Galland opened the floor for discussion. Justin Earl, 306 N Gilmer, came forward to state that the door that is located at the property alrcady is an old residential door that is swollen and nceds to bc replaccd. Thc awning at thc properly is old und would like lo repluce the uwning us well us puint the trim und new door bluck. Board Member Larry Gregory asked about the door being replaced and ifit needed to have ADA requirements listed. Keith Lovell, City Attorney, stated that it would be up to the building Vice Chairman Galland asked regarding the painting of the exterior. Mr. Hardegree stated that this case is only looking at the trim and door to match the awning. Mr. Earl stated that he inspectors to set that requirement. eventually might look at removing the stucco or repainting it at a later date. Vice Chairman Galland closed the discussion and asked for a motion to be made. Board Member Gregory made ai motion to approve the application as submitted. Board Member Carr seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. Vote: 6-0. 3. COP24-02. 8S Wall St. Applicant: Justin Earl (The Jerk LLC) Mr. Hardegree stated per the original application COP24-02 applicant proposes multiple front façade modifications for new business. The structure was constructed c.1920. The building is under new ownership (applicant). The applicant wishes to make extensive modifications to the front façade. The 1st & 2nd floors are vacant. Interior demo has begun. Modifications are planned for the rear of the building per the submitted plans, but they were not identified in the HPC application. Exterior modifications to the rear of the building will also The applicant intends to create a front façade, specifically, the 1st floor store entrance, with a character and style found oni many buildings ini the early 20th century. No documentation can be found that the proposed modifications were found on the original building. No other buildings in the immediate area- Wall St, Public Sq and W. Main St, were found to contain all the elements shown in the plans. There are buildings in the DBD with isolated architectural details, sO the proposed changes are in the spirit of a restoration project even though this is not technically a "Restoration" or Reconstruction" project as defined by the Secretary oft the Interior. Staff does not support the removal of paint from the brick on the 2nd story. More information is needed ont thei typec ofpaint, the numberoflayers ofpaint and the condition ofthe brick underneath Lead paint will need to be remediated ifit can be removed. Chemical removal may be the best option but could be cost prohibitive. More information and a plan is needed based on a test area. Iti is likely that multiple paint layers could be removed, but not 100% oft the paint can or should require review by the HPC. the paint. be removed if damage to the brick is the result. The remaining three sides of the building are stucco. The stucco likely was used to enforce or replace the failing brick exterior. Removing the stucco on1 the remaining walls to expose the brick isi not recommended. This task is not identified in the application. Project Tasks (AIl tasks are for front ofl building only): 1. Remove stone veneer. 2. Remove (1) half-lite door. 3. Remove (2) large glass panes. 4. Remove metal awning. 5. Remove paint from painted brick. 6. Replace 2nd floor 2/2 SH windows with new windows. Vice Chairman Galland opened the floor for discussion. 7. Reconfigure 1st floor store front per submitted plans and project scope description. Mr. Earl is proposing to put the building back to an old Victorian style. With the demolition that is taking place on the interior it seems there is new brick on the building. With this renovation there will be an additional door added to allow access to the upstairs apartments plus a replacement ofthe door that is present. Aftera discussion with al local window company the owner was told that he could get vinyl windows that look like old wood windows to help cut down Board Member Carr asked about the rear façade that was discussed and wanted to see ifthat would be another phase to the project ori ifadditional items needed to be added to the project list for this meeting. Mr. Hardegree stated that the back area will come back for review with the back Vice Chairman Galland asked regarding what is under the veneer oft the building. Mr. Earl stated that he had found cinder block. Mr. Galland asked regarding the paint removal of the building. Mr. Earl stated that hej plans on trying to remove some ofthe paint with a chemical solution. Ifit Board Member Vandi White asked if the brick would be covered by wood, then new columns Board Member Ellis asked ift the building colors would complement the building next door. Mr. Earl stated that with painting the other buildings trim and door will help bring the colors together Board Member Gregory asked about windows being added to the top area and if the ceiling was being removed did the contractor find tin pieces. Mr. Earl stated that no lin was found when the replacement costs in the future. windows for approval. looks like the brick is breaking or being damaged, he plans on repainting. would be added. Mr. Earl stated that it would. as best as possible. ceiling was demoed. He also addressed the new windows that will be installed above the large Vice Chairman Galland asked the staff members from planning if they could be present when they try to test the paint removal on the brick to provide photos and provide an update on the removal to the board. Mr. Hardegree stated that he would not mind having someone from the window in the front. office take photos and provide an update to the Board. Vice Chairman Galland closed the discussion and asked for a motion. Board Member White made a motion to approve the entire project list on the front ofbuilding only as submitted. Board Member Elder seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. Vote: 6-0. COP24-23 530 W: Main St. is being moved to the bottom oft the agenda. 4. - COP24-04. 120 S. Gilmer St Applicant: Hudson & Co, JB Hudson Mr. Hardegree stated per the original application COP24-04, the applicant wants to constructa History of the Property: Conflicting information exists in the Historic District records. District records at the time ofd district adoption (2004) show this property addressed as 120 S. Tennessee St. and identified it as "Contributing."I No records were found for 120 Gilmer St. or S. Gilmer St. Current tax records do not show a 120 S. Tennessee St. address but do show a 120 Gilmer St. address for this property. Tax records show the parent property/ building was constructed C. 1945. There is no GHRS for the parent property/ building under either address. new building for retail. Previous COPs: COP23-14. Multiple Exterior modifications. Approved 4-18-23. windows, awnings. Approved 2-12-13 and 3-19-23 (revision). COP13-01 (Including 117 S. Tennessee St): Commercial renovations for restaurant incl. doors, Analysis of the COP: The parent building is historic, contributing. See architectural plans. The proposed 900sfbuilding is conceived as a spec building currently. The use ofbrick, metal, wood and glass materials and parapet walls are appropriate for the district. The character and style reflected int the building elevations are like other buildings ini the DBD. Will this building be painted white to match the other buildings? The proposed structure and location seem appropriate for the DBD. Project Tasks: 1.New Construction of Spec Building A. Construct 900sfbuilding. B. Patio area to have brick garden walls. C.Building walls to brick. D. Flat roofwith parapet wall to hide mechanical equipment. E. Wood & Glass storefront to front Gilmer St. F.S Steel frame windows facing Tennessee St. G.Steel frame doors on north and south elevations Vice Chairman Galland opened the floor to discussion. JB: Hudson, 122 Arrowhead Dr., wanted to create a building that has character and looks like it belongs as part oft the city. Vice Chairman Galland closed the discussion and asked for a motion. Carr scconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. Vote:6-0. Board Member Elder made al motion lo approve the applicalion as submilled. Board Member 5. COP24-05. 121 Etowah Dr. vinyl siding tol house over existing siding. Applicant: James Green Mr. Hardegree stated per the original application COP24-05, the applicant is wanting to add History of the Property- GHRS shows 1905-1914. Tax records show the house was built in 1905. COP22-20. Replace (16) wood, DH windows with vinyl. Approved. 12-20-22 Analysis of the COP: The house is historic, contributing. Type: Gabled-wing Cottage. Style: Due to issues with the existing wood siding, replacement costs of wood siding, and air drafts throughout the house, the applicant proposes to add vinyl siding and vinyl coverings to all sides ofthe house. Vinyl coverings will bej placed over all eaves, moldings, and trim. The applicant states in the application that al house two doors down has vinyl siding. HPC records indicate that wood siding was replaced at 127 Etowah Dr in 2009. Normally, failing wood siding is replaced, calked, and painted. Refer to Sec. 9.25-54, Part 1,, The HPC could grant a variance to the design standards if an undue hardship is determined per Folk Victorian Sections A (Wood) and F (Exterior Walls). Sec. 9.25-34 (k): Project Description: 1.Add vinyl siding to the house over existing wood siding. All sides. 2. Add vinyl covering to all eaves, moldings, and trim. 3. Replace damaged or missing wood sheathing where needed. Vice Chairman Galland opened the floor to discussion. Mr. Hardegree called ini the applicant James Green. Mr. Green stated that he painted his house less than four years ago and the siding that is on the house will not allow the paint to stick which is due to the age oft the home. He is asking for approval to wrap thel house which will help the draft that is occurring within the home then add vinyl siding that is the same width. Vice Chairman Galland stated the discussion with Mr. Green stating that the board has to keep the historic home that are contributing within the guidelines that are set for the historic district. Mr. Green stated that he is wanting to keep the house and keep it in good condition, and this was the most cost-effective way that will allow the house to look the same as it is now but upkept and asked Mr. Hardegree what the appeal process would be ifit gets denied during this meeting. Mr. Hardegree stated that ift the request gets denied it will be moved before City Council. Board Member White stated that the vinyl is not within the guidelines and is willing to offer some painters names/ numbers of contractors who work with historic homes. Board Member Ellis asked ift research had been completed regarding ift the vinyl would have a negative effect on the home. Found information stating that vinyl siding could allow for poor circulation and break down ofthe wood underneath the house and could potentially causea termite issue. Mr. Green stated that the product that was found allows for proper ventilation. He believes that by paying the large expense upfront to get the house wrapped and the vinyl added it will be cheaper than having to repaint the home every 3-4 years. The owner cannot afford to continue to: repaint every 3-4 years and that this is the best solution he found will fix the issues of the cold air entering the home through the home and the paint will remain on the home and Vinyl siding is not allowed within the guidelines. siding will look just like it does now. Vice Chairman Galland closed public hearing. Board Member Gregory made a motion to deny the application due to district guidelines under Section 9.25-54 Part1A (12,3,7,8, and 10) and F (2,4,8, and 9). Board Member White seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. Vote: 6-0 6. COP24-06 219 West. Ave. Applicant: Jacqueline Black et al Mr. Hardegree stated per the original application COP24-06, the applicant is wanting to convert History of the Property- Bartow County Tax assessor's records show house was built in 1918. building in driveway to a garage. Modify existing fence at driveway. GHRS shows 1880-1920. No COPS on file. Analysis of the COP: The house type is Central Hallway. The house style is undetermined. The applicant has the property under contract for purchase. The HPC: review oft the garage The applicant proposes converting the large room located in the driveway into a garage. No documentation was found ofthis space ever being a garage. The major work entails removing part oft the front wall and installing a carriage style, double garage door, 16ft in length and 7-8ft The existing siding is vinyl and will be replaced/ repaired where needed to make the garage door A new automatic gate is proposed in the driveway. It will be black metal with wood panels and Applicant also proposes replacing existing fence with same. It is assumed that this fence is in the The privacy fence and split rail fence along the eastern property line belongs to 215 West Ave. conversion and fence repair/ gate addition is part of the due diligence. inl height. An example isi included with the application. opening. custom built to fit the driveway. back yard. Sec. 4.16, Fences and Walls, oft the zoning ordinance. The proposals seem appropriate for the property and district. Project Tasks: 1. Convert the existing building in the driveway to a garage. A. Remove windows. B. Add carriage style, double garage door. Modify the front wall as needed. C.A Add coach lamps to either side oft the door. D. Repair/ replace vinyl siding as needed. 2. Replace existing fence along driveway/ property line. A. Add ai new automatic gate in the driveway. B. Replace the existing fence in the backyard. Vice Chairman Galland opened the floor for discussion. Tony Black, 219 W. Avenue, is in the process of purchasing the home and is wanting approval from the board to convert the apartment area to a garage with a 16ft door. The door is projected Board Member Ellis stated that the modifications look nice and had a question regarding the gate coloring on the home. Mr. Black stated that the gate will match the coloring oft the wood fence sO Board Member Carr asked the direction of the gate when it opens and where it will be in the garage area. Mr. Black stated that it will be in the back corner of the garage between the garage and the fence. After speaking with his contractor, it was decided that the fence will be opening to look like the door in the pictures, but they do not have the door in hand. itwill have more of a natural look. toward the fence. Board Member Gregory asked regarding the garage door and if the board can approve all but the garage door since the applicant has not picked out the door yet. Mr. Black added that the door in the picture is the type of door they are going after they just have not purchased it. Mr. Gregory amended his motion to have to come back for approval ofthe door to approving the line item ifit matches the pictures provided to the board. Vice Chairman Galland closed public hearing. Board Member Gregory made a motion to approve the application as submitted. Board Member Vice Chairman Galland recused himself from the meeting. Co-Vice Chairman Becky Carr took Elder seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. Vote: 6-0. over the meeting. 7. COP24-03. 530 W Main St. Applicant: Brad & Lizzi Galland Mr. Hardegree stated per the original application COP24-03, the applicant is wanting to construct a new carport to the rear ofhousel but in front yard of! Knight St. Currently, there is no covered parking for the property. The applicant is proposing a new carport structure to rear the house. Due to having multiple street frontages, a variance will also be required due to the carport is planned in the front yard abutting Knight St. Project Tasks: 1. Cedar/Timber Construction. 2. Brick or Stone water table. 3. Board and batten storage room. 4. Brick/ Stone Retaining wall. 5. Asphalt shingles roofing system. Co- Vice Chairman Carr opened the floor for discussion. A new project list was given by Mr. Hardegree as well as information about the zoning standards with this application. Mr. Galland's] property has multiple front streets and will require a variance which will require approval from zoning. The HPC: is here to approve the architectural look of Brad Galland, 530 W Main St, came forward and stated he is wanting to construct a covered carport on the back side ofl his property. He will need to add ai retaining wall due to a significant grade change. Has worked with the same contractor as his house remodel sO it will go with the Co- Vice Chairman Carr asked ift the garage will be visible from Knight St. Mr. Galland stated that it could possibly been seen during the winter months due to the trees losing leaves. the project. house. Co- Vice Chairman Carr closed public hearing. Board Member White made a motion to approve the application as submitted. Board Member Ellis seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. Vote: 4-0 II. OTHER No other business needed tol be discussed. Co- Vice Chairman Carr adjourned the meeting at 7:07 PM Date Approved: 2/20/2024 /s/ Grèg Frisbee, Chairman AP