Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout02-02-2022 Minutes HDC Regular Meeting 101 E. Orange St., PO Box 429, Hillsborough, NC 27278 919-732-1270 | www.hillsboroughnc.gov | @HillsboroughGov HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MINUTES | 1 of 6 Minutes HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION Remote regular meeting 6:30 p.m. Feb. 2, 2022 Virtual meeting via YouTube Live Town of Hillsborough YouTube channel Present: Chair William Spoon, Vice Chair Max Dowdle, Eric Altman, Elizabeth Dicker, Will Senner and Virginia Smith Absent: Megan Kimball Staff: Town Planner Tyler Sliger 1. Call to order, roll call and confirmation of quorum Chair William Spoon called the meeting to order at 6:31 p.m. Spoon called the roll and confirmed the presence of a quorum. 2. Commission’s mission statement Spoon read the statement. 3. Agenda changes Spoon and Town Planner Tyler Sliger said Item 5C would not be discussed tonight. Sliger confirmed the meeting agenda listed the wrong address for Item 5B. The correct address for Item 5B is 206 W. Orange St. 4. Minutes review and approval Minutes from regular meeting on Jan. 5, 2022. Spoon asked if any commission members had any corrections to the minutes. Member Will Senner noted two clarifications. First, he referred the commission members to Page 5 of the minutes regarding 310 N. Cameron St. and to his comment agreeing that lowering the addition’s roofline 6 inches would help decrease the massing. Senner clarified his comments were not in response to the impact of the addition’s interior construction. He noted interior construction is not within the commission’s purview. Second, Senner referred the commission members to the application for a 7-foot privacy fence at 314 W. Margaret Lane. Senner clarified the fence’s location in the rear of the property contributed to his decision to vote in favor of allowing the fence. Member Eric Altman agreed, noting the fence would not compromise any views from the street. Sliger agreed to make the requested changes. Motion: Spoon moved approval of the Jan. 5, 2022, minutes with two changes. Altman seconded. Spoon called the roll for voting. HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MINUTES | 2 of 6 Vote: 6-0. Ayes: Members Altman, Elizabeth Dicker, Max Dowdle, Senner, Virginia Smith and Spoon. Nays: None. 5. New business A. Certificate of Appropriateness Application: 323 W. Queen St. — Applicant Kristine Wescott is requesting to replace and expand the existing rear deck, stairs, railing and partial wooden roof, and to extend the existing roofline to the rear to cover the screened porch. The second portion of the proposal is to add additions to the garage’s north, south and east elevations. (PIN 9864-87-2415) 
 Spoon declared the public hearing open. He introduced Item 5A. Sliger, applicant Kristine Wescott and property owner David Neal were sworn in. Spoon asked if any commissioners had conflicts of interest regarding this application. None was raised. Sliger summarized the staff report. He said the one-story, three-bay, side-gabled, Craftsman-style house was built one room deep with a one-room-deep gabled rear ell and a shed-roofed porch along its left (east) side. The house has German-profile weatherboards. The replacement two-lite-over-four-panel front door is centered on the façade and sheltered by a front-gabled porch. The front-gabled porch is supported by tapered wood posts on brick piers with a matchstick railing between the piers and wood shingles in the gable. In 2005, the house was considerably enlarged by extending the rear ell to a full-width gable that is three bays deep over a raised basement due to the slope of the lot. Modern three-over-one Craftsman-style windows were installed throughout. Square columns on an unpainted wood deck support a small gabled entrance on the rear elevation. Tax records date the house to 1947, but the house appears on the 1943 Sanborn map. Sliger said the applicant is requesting to replace and expand the existing rear deck, stairs, railing and partial wooden roof, and to extend the existing roofline to the rear to cover the screened porch. She also is requesting to add additions to the garage on the north, south and east elevations. Sliger referred the commission members to the application materials in the agenda packet, including a project narrative, existing and proposed elevations and a materials list. He said the
applicable Design Standards are Porches, Entrances and Balconies; Roofs; Outbuildings and Garages; Decks; Windows; and Doors. When asked, Wescott and Neal said they had no information to add and were happy to answer questions. Spoon noted most of requested changes would occur behind the property. Spoon asked for the commissioners’ questions, comments or concerns. Sliger displayed the application. When asked, Sliger said he received some phone calls about the application. He said none of the callers opposed the application. Senner noted the proposed additions to the garage shed would come very close to an existing cedar tree. He asked Wescott’s thoughts about protecting the tree during construction. Wescott confirmed the construction would come up to the tree’s drip line. She said that if care is taken she believes the tree could be maintained. When asked, she said the tree’s trunk is between 10 and 12 inches in diameter. HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MINUTES | 3 of 6 Spoon and Senner discussed addition a condition that the cedar tree be protected during construction. Spoon described tree protection fencing. Spoon said Sliger could provide Wescott with tree protection fencing resources. Wescott agreed to the condition. The commission members discussed the project’s exterior lighting. When asked, Wescott confirmed she plans to install recessed downlighting beneath the new extended roofs of the addition and the shed. Wescott confirmed the fixtures would not be visible. She said she had not indicated lighting next to the entry doors but noted such lighting is fairly standard. Spoon explained the Historic District Design Standards prohibit indiscriminate exterior lighting and recommend lighting that is downward, recessed and human scale, of the type Wescott is proposing. Sliger and Spoon said Wescott should submit an exterior lighting plan to staff, which could be approved as a minor work. Wescott agreed. When asked, Wescott confirmed the previously discussed cedar tree is the only tree that could be impacted by construction. Regarding the three-dimensional drawings on Page 29 of the agenda packet, Senner expressed concern that the back porch’s stairs would be visible from the street. He said he interpreted the standards as intending to keep back porches and stairs hidden from street view. Sliger said the stairs are not incongruent as presented but would be more congruent if they were tucked further away. Wescott explained the three-dimensional rendering’s perspective is very tall and is misleading. She said the rendering’s perspective had to be from a taller viewpoint to show the stairs because the lot’s slope obscures the stairs. Neal and Wescott clarified that the proposed stairs would have almost the same location and configuration as the old stairs, with the new stairs slightly farther from the street. Senner agreed the stairs would be minimally visible from the street and would meet the standards’ intent, given that the rendering’s perspective is misleading and the stairs’ location would be consistent with the current stairs. When asked, Wescott clarified there is an existing gravel path at the bottom of the stairs. She said the path’s location would not change. She said Neal might refresh the path by adding new gravel. Spoon confirmed adding new gravel would be acceptable, noting the applicants should check with Sliger if they change the path’s materials. Dicker noted the project’s materials list shows aluminum-framed or wood-framed windows for the garage shed. She noted the standards indicate window materials should match any existing windows. When asked, Wescott said the existing window is wood. The commission members discussed whether the new window also should be wood. Wescott asked whether the wood window could be aluminum-clad. Neal clarified the garage currently has one low-quality aluminum window. Neal said his goal is to install high-efficiency, high-quality windows that aesthetically match the house, as opposed to the existing low-quality window. Wescott added another project goal is to have the garage be well-insulated and tending toward net-zero, sustainable construction, with high quality, energy efficient materials. Wescott said she has not found any high-efficiency windows that are entirely wood, but she has found aluminum-clad wood windows. Neal confirmed he wants the garage windows to aesthetically match the house’s windows. Wescott and Neal said they could continue researching window materials if necessary. Smith said aluminum-clad wood windows would be compatible with the standards, referencing the Compatibility Matrix. Dicker suggested adding a condition that the windows be either wood or aluminum-clad. The commission members agreed. There were no other questions or concerns. Spoon declared this portion of the public hearing closed. There were no other deliberations. HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MINUTES | 4 of 6 Motion: Spoon moved to find as fact that the Wescott/Neal 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 Standards: Porches, Entrances and Balconies; Roofs; Outbuildings and Garages; Decks; Windows; and Doors. Senner seconded. Spoon called the roll for voting. Vote: 6-0. Ayes: Members Altman, Dicker, Dowdle, Senner, Smith and Spoon. Nays: None. Motion: Spoon moved to approve the application with conditions. Dicker seconded. Spoon called the roll for voting. Vote: 6-0. Ayes: Members Altman, Dicker, Dowdle, Senner, Smith and Spoon. Nays: None. Conditions: Applicants shall submit an exterior lighting plan to staff if proposing exterior lighting. Applicants shall install tree fencing around the cedar tree in the front of the property before construction begins. Garage shed windows shall be wood or aluminum-clad windows. B. Certificate of Appropriateness Application: 206 W. Orange St. — Applicant Thomas Richardson is requesting to demolish the existing handicapped ramp and add a 240-square-foot addition to the north elevation. (PIN 9864-98-2549) Spoon introduced Item 5B. He declared the public hearing open. Spoon asked if any commissioners had conflicts of interest regarding this application. None was raised. Sliger and applicant Thomas Richardson were sworn in. Sliger summarized the staff report. He said the one-story, side-gabled Ranch house faces east and is located on a small gravel driveway that extends north from West Orange Street. It is four bays wide and double-pile with a brick veneer, plywood sheathing in the gables, two-over-two horizontal-pane wood-sash windows and several vinyl replacement windows. The two-lite-over-four-panel door is accessed by an uncovered brick stoop with a decorative metal railing. An unpainted wood deck is on the right (north) elevation. County tax records date the building to 1966. Sliger said applicant Thomas Richardson is requesting to demolish the existing handicapped-accessible ramp and add a 240-square-foot addition on the north elevation. Sliger called attention to the application materials in the agenda packet, including a project narrative, existing and proposed elevations and a materials list. He said the applicable Design Standards are Additions to Residential Buildings; Windows; and Doors. Sliger confirmed he received no communication supporting or opposing this application. When asked, Richardson said he had no information to add. Spoon confirmed no one else attending the meeting intended to speak for or against the application. Spoon asked for the commission members’ thoughts, questions or concerns. HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MINUTES | 5 of 6 Regarding the front (east) elevation, Sliger noted existing Window E matches existing Window H. When asked, Sliger confirmed the proposed Window D would match the existing Window D. Senner observed the addition would be built structurally in line with the existing house. He said he thought the applicant’s use of an alternate material for the addition would be a good way to clearly differentiate the addition from the original house and a good way to meet the standards. Smith agreed, noting that matching the original brick would have been very difficult. Regarding the right (north) elevation, Dicker noted the materials list calls for a green aluminum door. She said aluminum would not comply with the Compatibility Matrix. Richardson clarified he plans to reuse the existing side door, which was mistakenly listed as aluminum but is actually steel. Dicker said the existing steel door is acceptable. When asked, Richardson said the door probably would need to be hung in a new doorframe. Regarding the proposed siding material, Richardson confirmed he would install the Hardee plank with the smooth side facing out. He said the house’s existing Hardee plank siding also has the smooth side out. Senner noted the front (east) elevation drawing lists smooth Hardee plank as a material. When asked, Richardson said no trees would be affected by the construction, noting all of the property’s trees are in the lot’s back corner. Richardson said the addition would take the place of the existing handicapped- accessible ramp while matching the house’s rear profile. No other questions or concerns were raised. Spoon declared this portion of the public hearing closed. Motion: Senner moved to find as fact that the Richardson 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 Standards: Additions to Residential Buildings; Windows; and Doors. Spoon seconded. Spoon called the roll for voting. Vote: 6-0. Ayes: Members Altman, Dicker, Dowdle, Senner, Smith and Spoon. Nays: None. Motion: Senner moved to approve the application as submitted. Spoon seconded. Spoon called the roll for voting. Vote: 6-0. Ayes: Members Altman, Dicker, Dowdle, Senner, Smith and Spoon. Nays: None. C. Certificate of Appropriateness After-the-Fact Application: 421 W. Corbin St. — Applicant W. Corbin Street LLC is requesting to paint the exterior brick and entryway wall; replace windows, the front door and the roof; remove the chimney; and install a new HVAC unit. (PIN 9864-78-2842) 
 Item 5C was not discussed at tonight’s meeting. 6. Updates A. Staff Updates HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION MINUTES | 6 of 6 Sliger updated the members regarding a potential new commission member. He noted that tonight is Smith’s last meeting. Smith confirmed she had served six years, or two three-year terms, on the Historic District Commission. Sliger said he was working on integrating suggested updates to the Design Standards for the commission members to review. He reminded the members that he is available to research any potential changes to the standards. 7. Adjournment Motion: Spoon moved to adjourn at 7:27 p.m. Altman seconded. Spoon called the roll for voting. Vote: 6-0. Ayes: Members Altman, Dicker, Dowdle, Senner, Smith and Spoon. Nays: None. Respectfully submitted, Tyler Sliger Planner Staff support to the Historic District Commission Approved: March 2, 2022