HomeMy Public PortalAbout08-01-2018 Minutes HDC RegularPage 1 of 10
Minutes
Historic District Commission Meeting
7 p.m. Aug. 1, 2018
Whitted Human Services Center, 300 W. Tryon St.
Present: Chair Reid Highley, Max Dowdle, Joe Griffin, Jill Heilman, and Virginia Smith
Absent: Candice Cobb, Laura Simmons
Staff: Planner Justin Snyder
Guests: David Cates, Tym Cleve, Lisa Ellis, Lea Frederick, Kay Johnson, Reed Johnson, and Henry Ray,
Item 1: Call to order, roll call, and confirmation of quorum
Chair Reid Highley called the meeting to order at 7 p.m. Planner Justin Snyder called the roll and confirmed the
presence of a quorum.
Item 2: Reading of the commission’s mission statement
Highley read the commission’s mission statement.
Item 3: Adjustments to the agenda
Highley suggested adding a conversation about the outdoor dining barriers being installed downtown. Snyder
suggested adding that discussion to Item 8. Commission Member Jill Heilman requested that under Item 8 she be
able to share her observations from the joint public hearing regarding the former Colonial Inn property.
Item 4: Minutes review and approval
A. Minutes from the regular meeting June 6, 2018.
Motion: Heilman moved to approve the minutes as presented. Commission Member Joe Griffin seconded.
Vote: 5-0
Changes: None
B. Minutes from the special meeting July 9, 2018.
Motion: Commission Member Max Dowdle moved to approve the minutes as presented. Heilman seconded.
Vote: 5-0
Changes: None
Item 5: Election of officers
A. Election of vice chair
Motion: Dowdle moved to elect Heilman as vice chair. Commission Member Virginia Smith seconded.
Vote: 5-0
Item 6: Old business
None
Item 7: New business
A. Certificate of Appropriateness Application: 211 E. Corbin St. — Applicants are Claude and Johanna Wilson
requesting to construct a façade-length front porch, to replace Masonite siding with Hardie, to construct a
Page 2 of 10
rear screened porch, to remove and replace several rear windows, and to remove and replace several existing
mature shrubs (Orange County PIN 9874-19-7062).
Motion: Griffin moved to open the public hearing. Heilman seconded.
Vote: 5-0
Highley asked whether there were any conflicts of interest on the commission regarding this application. There
were none.
David Cates, representing the applicant, was sworn in.
Snyder read the staff report into the record.
Cates added that this is a non-contributing house and is one of the only examples of a saltbox in the
neighborhood. He said the porch would help visually reduce the front façade to a human scale, make the front
more inviting, and bring the mass and scale of the house more in congruence with the lot. He noted that the lot
was recently reduced in size with the subdivision of the rear yard. Cates reviewed the history of the saltbox
architectural style, explaining that the saltbox started as something smaller and then became a garrison house. He
shared an example. Eventually the house style became a saltbox, which evolved into a New England colonial
farmhouse. Cates said the porch is a natural evolution of a saltbox-style house built in the South.
Cates said the applicants are proposing that a screened porch replace the rear patio. He noted Landscape
Architect Casey Collins had created the landscape plan. He read a short narrative written by Collins, who was not
able to attend the meeting.
Highley asked whether there was anyone in the audience to speak for or against the application. There was no
one.
Regarding the landscaping, a commission member expressed interest in the applicant screening the western side
of the driveway and parking pad or the western side of the property. Cates noted the driveway and parking pad
are existing, so he does not think that the applicant is required to meet the landscaping requirement for new
parking pads.
Regarding the screened porch proposed for the rear elevation, Cates said the lattice beneath it would be painted.
Regarding the proposed additional double-hung windows, Cates did not believe there was room to add shutters.
Regarding the proposed elongated horizontal window over the shower, Highley asked Cates to speak about it
because the commission has denied that window style in the past as the horizontal proportion seems out of
keeping with the other windows. Cates said that is why he has proposed muntins over this type of window.
Another type of window might be uncomfortable for a bathroom, Cates said. He also noted that it is on a rear
elevation. Heilman said that she had trouble with it because that window is different from the others and, at the
moment, the rear elevation is very visible to the street. Smith shared that in her house an interior window was
added for privacy and to protect the exterior window from the shower. She noted that this house is from 1982,
and therefore, the transom-style window is OK. Highley said he thinks the proposed horizontal window over the
shower is OK because it is on a screened rear elevation of a newer house in the district.
Regarding the front porch, Highley said this is tricky because there are guidelines that argue strongly against this
type of addition. Smith suggested some changes that Cates was OK with making and that are reflected in the
conditions. Smith said she believes the porch would help this house and be an improvement. Griffin agreed.
Page 3 of 10
Heilman said saltboxes do not typically have porches. She understands that this is not an historic house. Highley
said he also struggled with it because the guidelines are firmly worded regarding additions to front elevations. He
said, however, this house is different in that it was built in Hillsborough in 1982, but the proportions are a little bit
off, a little bit awkward. He thinks Cates’s argument that the porch brings it down to a human scale is a good one.
Also, it is a typical New England-style house in North Carolina. If this style had been brought to the South, it
probably would have a front porch. Highley said this is a very specific instance and, in this particular instance, it
would be appropriate to add the front porch. Highley then echoed Smith’s comments on the arches on the front
porch overhead beams being made flat instead of curved.
Smith asked if the window in the laundry space could be centered on the wall. Cates said yes.
Motion: Smith moved to close the public hearing. Griffin seconded.
Vote: 5-0
Motion: Highley moved to find as fact that the Claude and Johanna Wilson application is in keeping with the
overall character of the Historic District and complies with all relevant standards of evaluation based
on the commission’s discussion of the application and the standards of evaluation in Section 3.12.3 of
the Unified Development Ordinance because the plans are consistent with the Historic District Design
Guidelines: Additions to Existing Buildings, Paint and Exterior Color; Windows and Doors; Site Features
and Plantings; Porches, Entrances, and Balconies; Decks; Exterior Walls; Roofs; Utilities and Energy
Retrofit. Griffin seconded.
Vote: 5-0
Motion: Highley moved to approve the application with conditions. Griffin seconded.
Vote: 5-0
Conditions: The arches proposed on the front porch overhead beams shall be made flat instead of curved, the
beadboard siding proposed on the sides of the front porch shall match the lap siding on the rest of the
house, and the laundry window shall be centered on the west façade.
B. Certificate of Appropriateness Application: 144 E. Tryon St. — Applicant is East Tryon Properties, LLC,
requesting to stain and repair existing brick walls, to remove and replace existing balconies and stairs with
new flat-roofed metal balconies and stairs, to change exterior light fixtures, to construct an entry concrete
sidewalk, to build a detached four-car garage, to enlarge and replace front windows and to change existing
entry doors to frosted glass doors (Orange County PIN 9874-16-1753).
Motion: Heilman moved to open the public hearing. Dowdle seconded.
Vote: 5-0
Highley said he had a conflict of interest regarding this application.
Motion: Heilman moved to recuse Highley for this item. Dowdle seconded.
Vote: 4-0
Heilman assumed the role of chair for this item.
Lisa Ellis, one of two owners of the property, was sworn in.
Snyder read the staff report into the record.
Page 4 of 10
Highley, representing the applicant, introduced the project team. He said Sam Coleman and Ellis co-own the
apartment building. They contacted David Cates to do the design work for the building renovation and indicated a
preference to take the building in a more modern direction. Cates asked Highley to work as a consultant on the
schematics design. Casey Collins was brought in as a consultant on the landscaping aspects of the process. Highley
said he would talk about the building and Cates would talk about the landscaping.
Highley said he would dispute that this is a mid-century modern building. He said this is a stylistically non-
committal building. It has a gable roof, but the overall style is not traditional — no moldings, no elaborate trim
around the window and door openings. The style is modern in that it is spare, but the style is not mid-century
modern like the Piedmont Electric building across the street that is easily identifiable with horizontal overhangs
and horizontal proportioned windows. As a designer, Highley said, this building felt like a blank slate. It could
become very traditional or could become more modern, and the team chose the more modern approach.
Highley said the brick façade is failing. He can’t find ties holding it to the face of the building. The brick has to
come off, he said. Instead of replacing the brick veneer with new brick veneer, the design team decided to look at
the surrounding context and go with a light-colored lap fiber cement siding to share context with surrounding
houses. The apartments are extremely dark inside because the windows are small and shaded. The team wanted
to make the apartments nicer for those who live in them. Highley said the team is proposing using taller windows
and he thinks the proportions would work better on this façade. He thinks vertically-oriented windows help
achieve that and look friendlier to the street. Also, the existing porch is a motel-like configuration. The porch is
only 4 feet wide, and people don’t use it because it is not very wide. The team saw an opportunity to provide an
amenity and to draw the residents out to engage with the community. The new front porches would be 8 feet
deep. The access would only be from the back, with the large staircase in the front removed. Because the parking
is in the back, residents would access their units from the back. The front porches would be replicated on the back
side with staircase access similar to what is already in place. There are no changes to the windows on the sides or
rear of the building.
Highley said the proposed garage would be behind the building and could be visible from East Tryon Street when
traveling west.
Cates read Collins’s landscape narrative into the record.
Heilman asked if anyone else wished to speak.
Bryan Stuart was sworn in. He said he lives across the street and had a question. He missed the name of the three
trees proposed to be planted along the front. Cates and Snyder answered male gingkoes. Heilman expressed
concern that male gingkoes can sometimes switch to become female gingkoes.
No one else wished to speak.
Regarding the landscaping proposal and dumpster screening, there were no board comments or questions other
than Heilman’s concern about the gingkoes.
Regarding the proposed garage, Smith said the garage windows would be more in keeping with the windows on
the front of the structure if they did not have divided lites. Highley submitted a new garage door proposal, which
the commission reviewed. The garage would be light gray to match the lap siding proposed for the front of the
house. Smith read the guidelines section on garage doors being compatible to the windows and doors on the
primary building. Smith thinks one long panel on the garage would be more compatible. Cates was not sure there
was such a garage door available because the selection of doors without texture is very small. Heilman suggested
a Masonite door with a more simplistic design. It was agreed to have the applicant present a garage door design
Page 5 of 10
to Snyder for review. Highley answered that the dumpster screening would not be painted but rather would be
allowed to weather to make it not a focal point.
Highley asked to speak before the commission discussed the proposed changes to the building. Highley said that
although the design of the building is noncommittal, the design team had decided to push it into a modern
direction. He feels it is appropriate given that the building is nondescript as is. He thinks if it were a pure
traditional building or pure modern building, the design team would want to work within that vein. He said, as an
architect, it would be an opportunity lost if the needed repairs were made and the building were only renovated
the way it is. He feels that it is an opportunity to have the building be a better contributor to the streetscape.
Griffin said the proposed lap siding would help it blend in better with the houses on the street. Snyder said the
argument this commission has made is that if the building was historically painted, it could be painted and that if
it had not been painted, it could not be painted. Snyder said painting the brick would be in opposition to the
guidelines. Heilman said the proposal is to stain the brick. Snyder said the only time the commission has allowed
brick to be stained or painted is on new construction, which this is not. Cates said the house on West Margaret
Lane was approved to have the brick painted. He added that there have been other examples of allowing brick
houses to be painted when the brick is splattered with paint already. Highley clarified that the brick on the sides
and rear elevation of this building would not be replaced. The corners need to be repaired.
Heilman said she is grateful that the owners are financially able to repair the building and she thinks replacing the
front façade with lap siding would be appropriate to help it better connect with the street. Smith referred to
masonry guideline No. 5. Smith suspects the guidelines about bricks were written to take care of historic brick
structures like the Berry Brick House or the chimneys at Twin Chimneys. She is not sure the guidelines regarding
the painting of brick were intended to apply for this more modern building. Smith thinks it’s a good idea to
replace the front façade with lap siding and to stain the three brick sides.
Heilman asked the design team to talk more about staining the bricks. Cates said painting brick requires repainting
every three to five years. Stain gets absorbed in the brick and helps protect it from the elements while still
allowing it to breathe. When brick is painted, it does not allow the release of moisture, which then causes the
paint to bubble and peel. The stain would be light gray. Highley said he does not have professional experience
with staining brick and noted that he would be interested to see how it looked on Charles Woods’s house on
Thomas Ruffin Street, a new house for which the commission approved staining the brick.
Regarding the proposals for the balconies and stairways, Highley said the intention for flat roofs on the porches
was to make the porches as transparent as possible, so the proposal is for thin planes for the porch floors and
roofs so that they are nothing more than they need to be. The roof would be a white plastic membrane that
would not be seen. The top railings would be steel tubes, and the rails below would be cable.
Snyder noted that mailboxes and the address numbers are exempt from the guidelines. The lights would be LED
lights, simple in design. The hardware would be black or dark metal levers. The sidewalks would be brushed
concrete. There would be three staircases on the back of the building. Heilman acknowledged the staff report
included architectural metal. Highley said the front and rear porches do not have much life left to them and need
to be taken away or replaced. He showed a photo of the damaged staircase. Heilman checked that the proposed
new metal railing for the staircases in the back would be vertical pickets similar to what is there now. Highley
confirmed this.
Motion: Griffin moved to close the public hearing. Dowdle seconded.
Vote: 4-0
Page 6 of 10
Motion: Heilman moved to find as fact that the East Tryon Properties application is in keeping with the overall
character of the Historic District and complies with all relevant standards of evaluation based on the
commission’s discussion of the application and the standards of evaluation in Section 3.12.3 of the
Unified Development Ordinance because the plans are consistent with the Historic District Design
Guidelines: Paint and Exterior Color; Porches, Entrances, and Balconies; Fences and Walls; Site
Features and Plantings; Accessibility and Life Safety Considerations; Roofs; Windows and Doors;
Masonry; Exterior Walls; New Construction of Outbuildings and Garages; Walkways, Driveways, and
Off-Street Parking; Exterior Lighting; Architectural Metals. Griffin seconded.
Vote: 4-0
Motion: Heilman moved to approve the application with conditions. Griffin seconded.
Vote: 4-0
Conditions: The garage door design and documentation on the appropriateness of using gingko trees for this site
shall be submitted to staff for review and approval.
C. Certificate of Appropriateness Application: 423 N. Cameron St. — Applicant is Lea Frederick on behalf of
Martin and Christina Usiak requesting to construct an in-ground pool with a bluestone patio, walkway, and
deck, and to add landscaping and a white wood 6-foot-tall privacy fence in the rear yard (Orange County PIN
9874-18-2753).
Motion: Smith moved to open the public hearing. Griffin seconded.
Vote: 5-0
Highley asked whether there were any conflicts of interest regarding this application. There were none.
Lea Frederick was sworn in.
Snyder read the staff report into the record.
Highley asked whether there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against the application.
There was no one.
Snyder noted the applicant had provided three stone samples and wanted to know which the commission
preferred. Frederick confirmed the samples are natural stone and not artificial. Highley said all three were
appropriate. Smith said the pool meets the guidelines in that it is not visible from the street and does not
compromise the character of the house or street.
Frederick asked would it be possible to approve concrete around the pool with a stone coping if the stone is cost
prohibitive. Highley checked with Snyder that small concrete patios can be approved by Minor Works in the rear
of the house. Snyder confirmed that small concrete patios fall under Minor Works, and this one is slightly larger
than what he can approve in that way. Highley said given that there is provision in the guidelines for the applicant
to go through the process in an easier way, he would prefer it to be stone but is fine with it being concrete. Other
commission members agreed. Smith said the gates need to be straight at the top and have black metal hardware
like the photo. Frederick explained that to meet code for pools, the gates must spring shut.
Motion: Smith moved to find as fact that the Lea Frederick application on behalf of Martin and Christina Usiak
is in keeping with the overall character of the Historic District and complies with all relevant standards
of evaluation based on the commission’s discussion of the application and the standards of evaluation
in Section 3.12.3 of the Unified Development Ordinance because the plans are consistent with the
Historic District Design Guidelines: Fences and Walls; Site Features and Plantings; Walkways,
Driveways, and Off-Street Parking; Decks; Utilities and Energy Retrofit.
Page 7 of 10
Motion: Heilman moved to close the public hearing. Griffin seconded.
Vote: 5-0
Conditions: The top of the gates need to be straight without an arch.
D. Certificate of Appropriateness Application: 437 Dimmocks Mill Road — Applicant is The Expedition School on
behalf of Eno River Mill, LLC, requesting to construct a wood beadboard-sided, pressure-treated wood shed
with metal roll-up doors to be attached to the rear of the existing building on an existing concrete platform
(Orange County PIN 9864-64-6207).
Motion: Heilman moved to open the public hearing. Smith seconded.
Vote: 5-0
Highley asked whether there were any conflicts of interest regarding this application. There were none.
Tym Cleve, physical education teacher at The Expedition School, was sworn in.
Snyder read the staff report into the record.
Highley asked whether anyone in the audience wished to speak for or against this application. No one did.
Heilman noted the proposal was to not attach the shed to the existing concrete pad and asked whether that
would be safe. Cleve said he was certain it was safe. He added that the door would be built into the shed and
would provide extra weight and stability to the shed.
Heilman said that generally she does not find this type of door appropriate for sheds in the district but given that
there is already one on this property and that this property has an industrial history, it could be approved for this
shed.
Motion: Dowdle moved to close the public hearing. Griffin seconded.
Vote: 5-0
Motion: Dowdle moved to find as fact that The Expedition School application is in keeping with the overall
character of the Historic District and complies with all relevant standards of evaluation based on the
commission’s discussion of the application and the standards of evaluation in Section 3.12.3 of the
Unified Development Ordinance because the plans are consistent with the Historic District Design
Guidelines: New Construction of Outbuildings and Garages, Windows and Doors, Paint and Exterior
Color, Roofs. Heilman seconded.
Vote: 5-0
Motion: Dowdle moved to approve the application as submitted. Heilman seconded.
Vote: 5-0
E. Certificate of Appropriateness after-the-fact application: 421 W. Corbin St. — Applicant is Frances Ray
requesting to remove the exterior siding and additions from an existing encroaching, non-conforming,
dilapidated mobile home and to allow it to be removed from the property (Orange County PIN 9864-78-2842).
Motion: Heilman moved to open the public hearing. Dowdle seconded.
Vote: 5-0
Highley asked whether anyone had a conflict of interest regarding this application. No one did.
Page 8 of 10
Henry Ray was sworn in, representing the applicant.
Snyder summarized his staff report for the record.
Highley asked whether there was anyone to speak for or against the application. There was no one.
The commission had no questions.
Motion: Heilman moved to close the public hearing. Smith seconded.
Vote: 5-0
Motion: Heilman moved to find as fact that the Frances Ray application is in keeping with the overall character
of the Historic District and complies with all relevant standards of evaluation based on the
commission’s discussion of the application and the standards of evaluation in Section 3.12.3 of the
Unified Development Ordinance because the plans are consistent with the Historic District Design
Guidelines: Demolition of Existing Buildings. Dowdle seconded.
Vote: 5-0
Conditions: None
F. Review: 324 W. Tryon St. — Property owners are Kay and Reed Johnson seeking approval of their proposed
landscaping plan to satisfy a previous Certificate of Appropriateness condition of approval (Orange County PIN
9864-87-1005). Note: This is not a public hearing item.
Reed Johnson was sworn in. Johnson said the proposed landscaping plan is necessary to stabilize the stairs next to
the front porch. The proposal is that the boulders that were brought to the site would be moved and a natural
stone wall would be built. He shared photographs of similar walls in the district.
Highley asked whether there was anyone to speak for or against the application. There was no one.
Johnson said the pavers to access the east side of the house would be made of the same stone.
Kathleen Johnson was sworn in. Addressing some confusion about plans in the agenda packet, Johnson said the
landscaping plan with a D6 circled on it is the proposed plan.
Motion: Heilman moved to approve the landscaping plan. Smith seconded.
Vote: 5-0
Conditions: None
G. Certificate of Appropriateness Application: 121 E. Tryon St. — Applicant is CH Architects on behalf of Bryan
Stuart and Kelly West, requesting to extend an existing rear porch, reconfigure the western gable roof, extend
an existing rear shed dormer, and to reconfigure a window on the western elevation (Orange County PIN
9874-17-1045).
Motion: Heilman moved to open the public hearing. Dowdle seconded.
Vote: 5-0
Highley said he would presenting this application, so he has a conflict. He asked if there were other conflicts.
There were none.
Motion: Smith moved to recuse Highley due to a conflict of interest. Dowdle seconded.
Vote: 4-0
Page 9 of 10
Heilman assumed the role of chair.
Heilman reminded Highley and Stuart that they were previously sworn in.
Snyder summarized the staff report for the record.
Highley explained the homeowners wished to add a bedroom upstairs. The intent of enlarging the rear porch is to
make it possible for two or three people to be on the porch without being in the way of someone coming up the
steps to the porch.
Highley said the removal of the aluminum siding might not happen at this time due to costs, but the homeowners
are asking for approval to remove it from the west and south elevations.
Stuart said that this proposal not only gives his family more space, but it also improves the aesthetics of the west
side of the house.
Smith said the design is so good it would look like it always was this way. Heilman said the guidelines state that
additions can be delineated but do not have to be. Highley said when the change is working within the existing
volumes of the house, it is more appropriate to look like the house has always been this way. Heilman agreed.
Motion: Dowdle moved to close the public hearing. Smith seconded.
Vote: 4-0
Motion: Dowdle moved to find as fact that the CH Architects application on behalf of Bryan Stuart and Kelly
West is in keeping with the overall character of the Historic District and complies with all relevant
standards of evaluation based on the commission’s discussion of the application and the standards of
evaluation in Section 3.12.3 of the Unified Development Ordinance because the plans are consistent
with the Historic District Design Guidelines: Paint and Exterior Color; Roofs; Porches, Entrances, and
Balconies; Wood; Windows and Doors; Exterior Walls; Additions to Existing Buildings. Smith seconded.
Vote: 4-0
Highley resumed as chair.
Item 8: Updates
A. Rules of Procedure and Minor Works revisions
Smith said that she had created a document of her comments, which weren’t necessarily objections to the
changes. She said there wasn’t time to talk about all her comments this evening. Her comments could be shared
by email.
Heilman said she appreciated Snyder’s work and needed more time to understand the Minor Works changes, but
the additional time needed wasn’t necessarily an objection to the changes.
Snyder suggested everyone email him comments on the Minor Works.
The commission then briefly discussed the new restaurant outdoor seating barriers. Highley acknowledged there
has been a lot of concern voiced about the new barriers and said because they are an important part of the
streetscape, the commission should review them.
Page 10 of 10
Snyder said one is not permanently attached to the ground and therefore the commission lost a review
opportunity. Another is too tall and therefore not compliant. A third was erected without any oversight from the
Planning Department.
Highley said he thinks there are valid concerns about how they impact the street.
Snyder said it would be helpful to have Economic Development Planner Shannan Campbell or Public Space
Manager Stephanie Trueblood discuss these barriers with the commission.
It was noted that the Planning Department shared with business owners colored photographs of several designs
of sample barriers that were not first shared with Snyder or the commission for comment.
Snyder encouraged commission members to send him their thoughts on the barriers.
Heilman gave a brief review of the public hearing comments on the former Colonial Inn property.
Item 9: Adjournment
Motion: Heilman moved to adjourn at 10:13 p.m. Dowdle seconded.
Vote: 7-0