Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout10-29-2018 Minutes HDC Special MeetingPage 1 of 8 Minutes Historic District Commission 6 p.m. Oct. 29, 2018 Board Meeting Room, 105 E. Corbin St. Present: Chair Reid Highley, Candice Cobb, Max Dowdle, Joe Griffin, Jill Heilman, Laura Simmons and Virginia Smith Staff: Town Attorney Bob Hornik, Public Information Specialist Cheryl Sadgrove and Planner Justin Snyder Guests: Frankie Bird, Lyell Cash, Justin Fejfar, Maria Flanagan, Jean Massé, Tom Roberts 1.Call to order, roll call, and confirmation of quorum Chair Reid Highley called the meeting to order at 6:03 p.m. Planner Justin Snyder called the roll and confirmed the presence of a quorum. 2.Commission’s mission statement Highley read the commission’s mission statement. 3.Agenda changes The agenda stood as presented. 4.Minutes review and approval There was none. 5.Old business There was none. 6.New business A.Certificate of Appropriateness Application: 153 W. King St. — Applicant Allied Dev Corp LLC requests approval to install a loading zone in the right of way; demolish and rebuild an existing roof and floor of the dining room; demolish and rebuild an existing kitchen roof; demolish an existing rear brick fireplace and patio and repurpose the wood beams and bricks; restore the existing Colonial Inn building by repairing and repainting the existing siding, doors, windows, and trim; construct a new two-story guest wing building and courtyard; add exterior pedestrian-scale lighting, wood fencing, plantings, and hardscapes; and improve existing on-site handicap accessibility. (PIN: 9864-98-9916). Motion: Member Laura Simmons moved to open the public hearing. Member Jill Heilman seconded. Vote: 7-0 Highley asked the commission whether anyone had any conflicts of interest regarding this application. There was none. Snyder entered the staff report into the record and summarized the report for the audience. Snyder noted the Board of Commissioners has not yet approved the front sidewalk, loading zone and on-street parking spaces. He Page 2 of 8 noted the current front porch railings do not meet code and asked the commission to consider giving the applicant some latitude to seek approval for changes to the railing as a Minor Work approved by staff. He noted the applicant is proposing no fenestration on the rear of the guest wing, as requested by West Margaret Lane neighbors who were concerned about privacy. He also noted that indoor public restrooms had been added to the original plan to remove the need for portable toilets for special events. Snyder said that the site plan is substantially in keeping with the guidelines overall. He also noted that the question of the placement of a fire hydrant had been resolved. Snyder said the Board of Commissioners would be further discussing the sidewalk in front of the inn. He asked the commission to consider allowing staff to work with the applicant on the sidewalk. He said sidewalk accessibility that meets Americans with Disabilities Act standards is a concern. The public space manager believes the lower sidewalk needs to be improved as it is a goal in the town’s connectivity plan. He suggested that the Duke stones in the current lower sidewalk could be used elsewhere on site. The goal is to maintain the character of the historic building’s front while allowing people to walk freely on the lower sidewalk. Justin Fejfar was sworn in. Fejfar said Snyder’s recap was accurate and he was available to answer questions. Highley asked whether anyone in the audience wished to speak. Maria Flanagan was sworn in. Flanagan said overall she is excited about the project and Fejfar has been approachable. She requested that no windows be placed on the back of the guest wing. She asked what is happening at the back drive. Snyder indicated a brick pathway with mulch on either side on the site plan with a fence all the way across the drive. She asked where recycling would be. Fejfar said the recycling rollout carts were moved away from the back corner in the plan. Snyder indicated on the site plan that the recycling area was moved to the east side of the property with carts to be walked to West King Street. The fence along the back will include a gate to give firetruck access if needed. Flanagan added that she thinks the loading zone should be located in front of this property. Tom Roberts was sworn in. Roberts said the applicant has done a remarkable job with the design and a nice job addressing the concerns of the property owners adjacent to the rear of the property. He said it sounds like the applicant is considering a loading zone in front of the inn. Fejfar said the location of the loading zone is somewhat unresolved. Roberts said his concern is that the loading zone not creep into the residential neighborhood more than it needs to. He said the mass and scale concern him, but he is not an architect, so he will leave it at that. Jean Massé was sworn in. She said the changes Fejfar has made address many of her concerns. She does not want any functional fenestration on the back of the guest wing. She likes the back with no fenestration as shown in the plans. Lyell Cash was sworn in. Cash said there is no pathway on the side that borders his property. Fejfar said there is 2.5 feet of Colonial Inn property from the chimney, and Colonial Inn employees will only use it to pull rollout carts through to the street. Cash said OK. Highley suggested the commission start with the applicant’s narrative packet, then move to the overview of the site, then talk about materials, and then talk about each elevation. Narrative: Highley said regarding asbestos and lead paint, the applicant has to do what he has to do. He asked Fejfar to speak about the proposed demolition. Fejfar said the roof of the old dining room is almost on the floor. Essentially, the plan is to rebuild it back. The old kitchen wing on the east side will be demolished, and a portion will be built back in a smaller footprint, smaller in length and similar in width. Page 3 of 8 Regarding the new roofline, Fejfar said the roof over the existing dining room will be a low -sloped roof, sloping to the back but with a higher volume. The roof over the kitchen used to be gabled, but it doesn’t make sense to drain rainwater back toward the historic structure, so the plan is for a mono roof. Fejfar said the rooflines on the new guest wing are all gabled roofs with dormers. The design is for gables in the back as a design element and larger gables in the front to frame out the courtyard area. There would be a low-sloped roof over the porch that mimics the old structure. Highley asked if Fejfar is reasonably confident that the mechanical units would not be visible from the street. Fejfar confirmed that. Highley checked that the new dining room roof has been lowered from the previous proposal. Fejfar said yes. Highley appreciated the lower height to keep it from being visible from West King Street and to bring it below the eaves of the two wings. Regarding the exterior wall construction, there was no discussion. Regarding windows and doors, Fejfar said his group spent a lot of time looking at windows earlier in the day and determined hey would be much better off replacing the windows because a lot of work would need to go into rebuilding the existing windows. It would be more economical and energy efficient to replace them. Highley asked Fejfar whether his team had considered just replacing the sashes. Fejfar said that does not make sense because the sashes are hidden. Member Virginia Smith said you would lose the wavy glass in the old windows; the guests would love the wavy glass. Snyder said it would be impossible to find replacement windows. Snyder asked Fejfar whether his team had talked with anyone from Double Hung LLC in Greensboro. Fejfar said no. Snyder said he could provide the name of another company as well. It was noted Double Hung had renovated the windows in the Payntor Law Firm building that were almost falling into the street. Snyder said for a project of this size, it might be more economical to repair the windows than to try to replace them. Fejfar said he would like the flexibility to replace windows. Heilman said the commission would need to see what the applicant would be offering to replace the windows with. Snyder reminded Fejfar he could install interior storm windows as a placeholder while the windows are being restored. Highley said the first guideline under the Windows and Doors section of the Hillsborough Historic District Design Guidelines state that property owners should maintain windows and doors that contribute to the overall character of the district, and these very much do that. The windows are one of the signature aspects of this building. Smith agreed. Highley said the commission would push for restoring the windows. Highley said if a window is completely structurally unsound and not able to be repaired, the commission would understand. Highley suggested the applicant should contact the window restoration companies mentioned this evening and take inventory of each window to determine which ones can be salvaged. Heilman suggested the commission could be emailed that inventory. Snyder said David Hoggard, who owns Double Hung, makes comprehensive reports on the status of windows. Snyder said a report from Hoggard would be expert testimony. Smith told Fejfar that Tom Roberts has a lot of windows in his basement that might match those in the Colonial Inn. Fejfar said a lot of the windows could be restored. He then asked: If the sash has to be replaced, is there any difference between replacing the sash and replacing the entire windows? Heilman said yes, it’s the glazing. Fejfar asked: If the glazing is broken, should it be replaced with standard clear glass? Several board members said it is common to have some wavy old-glass panes and some newer panes in restored windows. Highley said he thinks Fejfar will be surprised how renovating the windows comes out cost-wise. Smith asked for more information about the door on the east elevation. Fejfar said it is a steel utility door that is not very visible because it is set back so far from the face of the building. Regarding paint, the proposal is for the old and new buildings to be painted white with a contrasting trim color. The building color would be French Linen, a grayed white. The eaves and corner boards would also be French Linen. Smith asked if the ceiling of the porches would be blue. Fejfar said he had not considered that. The commission recommended he consider painting the porch ceiling “haint blue.” Regarding exterior lighting, the fixtures would be copper. Simmons asked if Fejfar had considered gas lanterns. Highley said gas lanterns probably would not provide sufficient light. Page 4 of 8 Regarding signage, Fejfar said the new sign would be a replica of the old one with the correct date. Overview of the Site: Regarding plantings, Smith noted that the landscaping plan included replacing black walnut trees with dogwoods which do not grow as tall as what they are replacing. Fejfar said the intention is to not have any large trees growing in the back. Fejfar said they are still working on the landscaping specifics. Simmons and Smith noted that the roots of the black walnut need to be removed to make it easier for other plants to grow. Highley said it sounds a little unresolved. Simmons asked if there would be planters on the front porch. Fejfar said yes, he believes there will be. Highley asked the commission: In terms of permanent plants, do we want to see a finalized planting plan or direct Fejfar to work with staff? Heilman said she was fine with the concept of some evergreens with understory trees. Commission Member Candice Cobb said she was comfortable with Snyder determining whether the commission needed to review the final landscaping plan. Cobb likes the proposal to plant boxwoods. Fejfar said the hired landscape architect did the landscaping at The Carolina Inn. Regarding hardscaping, Fejfar showed samples of gray pavers. He said that his team had just acquired these sample pavers and intended to use pavers with a red tone instead. Smith asked if these pavers were also the material intended for the wall that would be built as seating. Fejfar said no and added that the developers have a sample of that material at the inn and decided it was too heavy to bring to the meeting. Fejfar said he can submit a sample before building the wall. Highley said it is going to be very important for the commission to see that wall material and asked for Fejfar to bring in samples in the color that he ultimately chooses. Smith asked if the commission could decide on the pavers and on wall material at a later meeting without holding up the project. Fejfar answered yes, the patio and wall would be installed at the end of the project. Snyder confirmed that the preservation tax credits are tied to the building. The board decided to talk about where hardscaping is proposed rather than the materials at this meeting. The commission reviewed the site plan. Highley said the balance of green space and hardscape seems appropriate and suits the space. Regarding the lower sidewalk in front of the building, Snyder said the Vision 2030 Plan calls for connectivity and he would like the commission to have at least a contingency plan in place addressing the scenario where the developers are required by the Town Board to improve that sidewalk to North Carolina Department of Transportation standards without having to return to the HDC for another approval, which could be severely detrimental to the project timeframe because of the structure of the tax credits and financing. NCDOT requires sidewalks to be at least 5 feet wide, and this sidewalk is in the NCDOT right of way. The developers have to meet the minimum standards for accessibility if they alter the sidewalk at all. Snyder said there also would be likely stormwater improvements that could impact the ultimate sidewalk design. Simmons asked whether the state or Fejfar would pay for sidewalk improvements. Town Attorney Bob Hornik said the answer is the town would not pay. Smith wondered if some stone left on the sidewalk meets the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Snyder replied that it did not. Simmons suggested the idea of using a brick sidewalk. Commission members agreed that a brick sidewalk would be less appropriate than concrete. Commission Member Jill Heilman said if the sidewalk needs to be widened, it would be nice if the stones could be repurposed somewhere on the site. Highley said he would be OK with a sidewalk wider than 5 feet because it would help increase pedestrian activity on that side of the street. Smith asked if trucks unloading would be blocking traffic if the loading zone were located in front of the Colonial Inn and the sidewalk were widened. Snyder answered that the Town Board and NCDOT would determine the design and location of the loading zone, but it would help if the HDC gave some parameters for the sidewalk approval. Cobb asked if a fire hydrant was being moved. Fejfar answered no. Highley said it sounded to him that there was commission consensus that the lower sidewalk can be changed to a width which meets ADA standards and can be concrete and that the stones should be repurposed on the site. Regarding fencing, there were no suggested changes. Page 5 of 8 Materials: Smith said it looks like the columns of the new building are proposed to be wrapped in a vinyl sleeve. Fejfar said the intent is for the columns to be painted wood. Fejfar said the roof material on the event space would be a low- slope standing seam roof. Highley asked if the existing 5V roof would be replaced. Fejfar said he would like to powder coat it to match the color of the standing seam roof. He added that the 5V roof is not very old. Highley said it’s a good way to match the color, and the 5V roof is a relatively new roof. Snyder asked what the texture of the powder coating would be. Fejfar said smooth. Highley asked Fejfar whether he was sure that he wouldn’t have to remove the 5V roof to repair the eaves. Smith added that Fejfar should not assume that anything under the roof was repaired before the 5V roof was installed. Highley said the bigger question is whether 5V that matches the new roof is appropriate for the building. Fejfar clarified that the 5V roof is on the original inn. Highley said he is struggling with it because a 5V roof is a more utilitarian roof that might be appropriate on the secondary building. Highley said he feels that the standing seam should be on the front building and 5V on the back. He added that there is a lot of precedent for 5V in the district. When asked what the difference is, Highley said the 5V roof has a shorter profile and was first used for agricultural buildings. Heilman said the standing seam roof would look much more elegant on the historic structure. Fejfar said if there is extra money in the budget, replacing the 5V roof with a standing seam roof would be one of the first things the developers would do. Highley said it would look better for the campus. Heilman said older homes have kept the standing seam. There was consensus on the commission that the developers should be required to install a standing seam roof on all the buildings. Regarding balcony flooring, Cobb said the material in the first option, Trex, is not allowed and the second option is ok. Smith recommended a Brazilian wood floor that does not have to be stained or painted. Frankie Bird was sworn in. Bird said the developers were asking for Trex to avoid the balcony and steps being hazardous when wet. Highley said in general the guidelines point away from something mimicking a natural material, which is why Trex is not allowed. Bird asked whether steel and lightweight concrete steps would meet with the commission’s approval for the stairs on the guest wing. The commission said yes. Highley noted the commission’s decision was concrete tread on the stairs and wood decking on the balcony. Elevations: Regarding the front elevation, Fejfar said the existing railings may not be tall enough on the second story and may be required on the first-floor porch where there are currently no railings. Member Laura Simmons suggested using planters instead of installing a railing on the first-floor porch. Commission members said they would like a solution other than wrought iron railing from column to column. Highley said the design guidelines state that owners should save porches that contribute to the character of the district. Highley added that part of the character is the openness of the porch. It feels like a front porch for Hillsborough, and he thinks it would be a shame to lose that. Smith said if there has to be a railing, the developers should try to copy the one upstairs. Highley said anything there would really change the relationship to the street. Heilman said she understands the potential liability of not having a railing and suggested planting shrubs in front of the porch to reduce the distance someone could fall. Fejfar said the highest point is around 30 or 31 inches, and 30 inches triggers the railing requirement for building code. Heilman asked whether that distance could be reduced by raising the new sidewalk a couple of inches. Highley said the developers could possibly create an intermediate step from the sidewalk. He reiterated that adding railings would change the character of the porch. Commission members said that if a railing was required on the first porch, wood would be the most appropriate material. Upstairs, Smith thinks a wood horizontal railing installed higher than the current railing would be more appropriate than a metal rod. Highley agreed. Highley said in order of preference, no bar is preferred on the second story; but if building code requires one, then a wood profile reviewed by Snyder would be appropriate. Smith suggested Fejfar look at the one on her porch across the street. Page 6 of 8 Regarding the fire escape on the west side, Fejfar said he is using the same staircase and changing the railings. Heilman said it appears to rub the window and wondered if it could shift slightly off the window. Fejfar said the railing would go all the way up. Regarding the south elevation, Highley appreciates the change with the center roof to keep it below the roofline of the house’s front. Fejfar asked whether the commission would agree to allow him to remove the nonfunctional door on the left side of this elevation and replace it with siding if the state preservation office doesn’t require the developers to keep the door. The commission agreed that would be appropriate. Bird said the developers would like to replace the double solid-wood front doors with something that has some glass in it. Smith said having some glass would be nice for the lobby. Heilman said the current doors are gorgeous. Highley said there are sidelights that help with light. Smith said she thinks of the front doors of a hotel being open. Simmons asked if they are original. Highley said it sounds like there is some resistance to replacing the doors. Bird said the thought was to create a more inviting doorway. Highley said it is hard to justify doing anything other than what is there. Snyder said doors, windows and trim likely date to the 1900 renovation. Regarding the east elevation, Fejfar confirmed the door would be steel and painted French Linen. Highley said a simple utilitarian door makes sense. Fejfar said it is recessed 20 feet back. Bird pointed out it serves as a commercial entrance. Commission members said it would be appropriate to either paint the door white so it blends with the siding material or French Linen like the trim. Fejfar said the front doors and guest doors would be black. Regarding the front elevation for the guest wing, Smith said she was concerned about the massing because of the length of the guest wing. Fejfar shared street-level renderings with the commission. Highley said the guest wing is shorter, sits lower on the land and is well behind the main building. Snyder said because the guest wing is farther back, it will seem smaller. Heilman said she did not have a problem with the mass or scale of this. Simmons said she does not like the dormers and perhaps there are too many. Fejfar said the dormers are laid out to correlate with the rooms to let in natural light. Cobb said she initially shared Smith’s concerns but after seeing the renderings, she thinks the front of the guest wing is appropriate. Highley asked whether the dormers would have corner boards. Fejfar said yes. Fejfar also explained that the far left door on this elevation is a laundry door, painted to blend in with the siding or French Linen. Regarding the back elevation of the guest wing, the commission thought the articulation proposed instead of fenestration is appropriate. Highley said the cornice in the middle feels a little odd to him because cornices are typically near a roof. Highley thinks it would be appropriate to replace the cornices with a straight, flat trim board. A flat board would break down the mass of this elevation. The flat board would be painted the color of the trim. Fejfar and Bird agreed. Regarding the west side of the guest wing, Smith was a little concerned about the window design. Fejfar confirmed they are the same as on other façades. Summary: The commission and Snyder checked that key issues were covered. Highley said it sounded like there was consensus with several conditions. Motion: Heilman moved to close the public hearing. Simmons seconded. Vote: 7-0 Page 7 of 8 Motion: Highley moved to find as fact that the Allied Dev Corp 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; New Construction of Primary Buildings; Site Features and Plantings; Fences and Walls; Additions to Existing Buildings; Demolition of Existing Buildings; Exterior Lighting; Accessibility and Life Safety Considerations; Public Rights-of-Way; Walkways, Driveways, and Off-Street Parking; Windows and Doors; Wood; Masonry; Signage; Roofs; Exterior Walls; Porches, Entrances, and Balconies; and Utilities and Energy Retrofit. Simmons seconded. Vote: 7-0 Motion: Highley moved to approve the application with conditions. Simmons seconded. Vote: 7-0 Conditions: • Hardie siding must be installed smooth side out on the new building. • Existing windows on the Inn shall be repaired rather than replaced. • Paint swatches of final paint color selections must be provided to staff for approval. • The hanging sign in front of the building to be reconstructed shall have the exact same dimensions and proportions as the existing sign. • A final landscaping plan shall be provided to staff for review and final approval as a minor works prior to planting any plants on site. Plantings shall incorporate a mixture of evergreens, shrubs, and colorful, faster-growing, mid- story trees. • Samples of all hardscaping materials in the applicant’s preferred color shall be brought to the commission for review and approval prior to construction of these features. • The existing lower stone sidewalk in front of the Inn may be replaced with a concrete sidewalk at least five feet wide meeting ADA and NCDOT design standards for accessibility if required by the Town Board. Staff may approve the final design as a minor works. • The stone removed from the existing sidewalk, if reconstructed, shall be repurposed elsewhere on site. A plan showing how and where the stone will be repurposed shall be submitted to staff for review and approval as a minor works. • Wood porch columns shall not be wrapped in any sleeve material and shall be made of wood painted white to match the siding. • A “musket grey” standing seam metal roof shall be installed on all existing and proposed roof areas, including replacing the existing 5V roof. • The treads on the staircase to the upper floor of the guest wing may be concrete instead of wood. • The proposed railing on the lower front porch of the existing building is not appropriate, as it changes the character-defining feature of the historic building; however, if the applicant is required to install a railing or other barrier by the building official or the applicant’s insurance company, then the applicant shall bring a design for the proposed railing or barrier to the commission for review. • The additional metal cable railing shown for the second-floor porch on the existing building is not appropriate; however, if the applicant is required to install an additional railing by the building official or the applicant’s insurance company, then the applicant shall bring a design for the proposed railing to the commission for review. • The existing rear door on the south elevation of the west wing that is no longer functional may be removed if the state historic preservation office will allow it as part of its review for State Historic Tax Credits. The door, if removed, shall be replaced by wood siding matching the reveal and color of the other siding on the building. The light fixture associated with this door shall also be removed if the door is removed and revised elevations shall be submitted to staff should this change be approved by the State. Page 8 of 8 • The front door shall be reconstructed in the same configuration as the existing doors and shall be painted black with a matte finish. • All steel utility doors shall be painted either white to match the building or the French linen to match the color of the trim. • The center cornices shown on the south elevation of the new guest wing building shall be changed to a flat, water-table trim piece. • The balcony flooring shall be tongue-and-groove wood. Trex shall not be used. 7. Updates There was none. 8. Adjournment Motion: Simmons moved to adjourn at 8:33 p.m. Heilman seconded. Vote: 7-0