HomeMy WebLinkAboutDRSC 08-22-17 - approved 09-12-17Design Review Subcommittee
of the Elgin Heritage Commission
August 22, 2017
Minutes
The meeting of the Design Review Subcommittee was called to order at 6:02 p.m. in the City
Council Chambers (Located on the 2nd floor of City Hall) by Chairman Wiedmeyer.
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Bill Ristow, John Roberson, Dennis Roxworthy (6:11), Scott Savel, and John Wiedmeyer
MEMBERS ABSENT:
Lynne Diamond and Rebecca Hunter
CITY STAFF PRESENT:
Christen Sundquist, Historic Preservation; and Cindy Walden, DRSC Secretary
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
Motion made by Committee Member Ristow to approve the minutes of July 25, 2017, with an
amendments to page 9 (2x2 and 2x8); and to approve the minutes of August 8, 2017, with an
amendment to page 7 (1”overhand lip”.
The motion was seconded by Committee Member Roberson.
The motion passed for the minutes of 07/25/17 with a vote of 3-0-1 (Abstain: Savel).
The motion passed for the minutes of 08/08/17 with a vote of 4-0.
Note: Commissioner Roxworthy arrived after the minutes were voted upon.
RECOGNIZE OTHER PERSONS PRESENT:
Rose Martinez
PROPERTIES ON AGENDA FOR DISCUSSION:
Old Business
None
New Business
263 -267 Douglas Avenue - Window replacement
269 - 271 Douglas Avenue - Window replacement
21 N Channing Street - Reconstruction of rear stairs
851 N. Spring Street - Installation of privacy fence
363 Yarwood Street - Side porch rehabilitation
272-274 Division Street – Maintaining brick retaining walls
ITEMS TABLED:
None
Design Review Subcommittee – August 22, 2017
Page 2 of 13
NEW BUSINESS:
263 -267 Douglas Avenue - Window replacement
The applicant has submitted a Certificate of Appropriateness request to replace all existing
windows on the building with aluminum clad wood, double -hung, 1/1 windows.
Staff, along with Chairman Wiedmeyer and Commissioner Savel, conducted a site assessment
on July 12, 2017. At that time the condition of the windows were found to be in fair to poor
condition. All of the windows have several layers of paint and a few have missing ropes and
glass that will need to be re-glazed.
Although the windows were not beyond repair, it was determined that the repair cost s will
exceed the cost of replacement. Rather than repair, because of cost differences between repair
and replacement, the applicant has requested approval to replace all of the indicated windows,
with exception of the diamond pane fixed windows at the front porch, on the entire building.
The applicant has proposed window replacements to match existing in size and profile.
Elgin Design Guideline Manual Specifications:
Windows
A. Which are original should be preserved in their original location, size, and design
and with their original materials and numbers of panes (glass lights).
B. Which are not original should not be added to primary facades or to secondary facades
where readily visible.
C. Should be repaired rather than replaced, but if replacement is necessary, the
recommended replacement should be in-kind to match the originals in material and
design. Windows clad in aluminum or baked-on aluminum are acceptable as
replacement windows for use throughout the structure. Factors to be considered in
determining whether the severity of deterioration of windows requires replacement
shall include but not be limited to the following factors: damage, excessive weathering,
loss of soundness or integrity of the wood, deterioration due to rot or insect attack, and
cost to repair. As to the factor of the cost to repair windows, a particular window may
be permitted to be replaced rather than repaired if the estimated cost to repair the
windows is more than the estimated cost of the purchase and installation of appropriate
replacement windows.
E. Vinyl extruded windows are not permitted for use in historic districts.
F. Which are new should not have snap-on or flush muntins. True divided muntins are
preferred over these types of muntins which do not have the same appearance as
historic windows. New muntins which are an integral part of the window sash and
installed on both sides of the glass are preferable to snap-on simple grilles.
G. screens and/or storms should be wood or baked-on or anodized aluminum and fit
within the window frames.
H. that are approved for replacement may be fitted with new double-paned Low-E glass
that will improve the energy conservation on the interior. Only low-e glass that does not
contain a tint should be used.
Design Review Subcommittee – August 22, 2017
Page 3 of 13
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the Certificate of Appropriateness as submitted and with the
following conditions:
1. That all windows shall be 1/1 double-hung, aluminum clad wood and must fit original
window openings.
2. Brick molds shall be retained. If brick molds are beyond repair, they shall be replaced to
match in kind (same material, profile, size, etc.).
3. Window glass shall not be tinted.
4. All other details match the submitted specifications.
5. That all other details meet the Design Review Subcommittee’s recommendations.
*****
Grant Born (owner) and Kevin Brown (Rep for Casco Industries) were present for tonight’s
COA discussion:
Mr. Brown explained the double hung replacement window kits are solid joints (not finger
jointed). Frame will remain, similar to a tilt-pack unit. Only the mid-section is not solid. Wood
window sills will be replaced with a 3 degree pitch to allow water/snow to run off.
Commissioners spoke of work of prior repairs and necessity to repair the multiple windows.
Brick molding is not typical. Design should be retained. Custom work would be required.
Everything (houses, windows, siding, trim, etc) is repairable, but to what extreme. Some of the
windows are clearly beyond repair. Uniformity of a structure is also important. Second floor
tenants would not be inclined to change out storm windows for screens and vice versa.
Tilt paks need to have good installation. Jambs must fit fairly snugly. Shims to perfe ct the
installation. Must measure EACH window individually for best results.
Commission indicated sills should be painted (not wrapped). Cedar is ok. Treated cedar should
be used since it is set against masonry/brick. Must use “DRY” lumber. Recommend asking the
lumber yard specifically for treated lumber (dry kilned). Pitch could be considered between
5-10 degrees for best results. Recommend building up with shims, versus cutting the angle.
Profile proposed is the “medium” (side, top, bottom and meeting rail).
Counter weights of the original windows to be removed. Area should be insulated for
maximum energy efficiency.
Motion made by Committee Member Savel to approve with staff recommendations and the
amendments: 1) five to seven (5-7) degree pitch for window sill constructed of cedar (treated
or kiln dry). Staff to review and approve one completed window (sill, window, profile, trim,
etc.), prior to all windows being installed, and 2) each window to be individually measured .
The motion was seconded by Committee Member Roberson.
The motion passed unanimously.
Design Review Subcommittee – August 22, 2017
Page 4 of 13
269 - 271 Douglas Avenue - Window replacement
The applicant has submitted a Certificate of Appropriateness request to replace all existing
windows on the building with aluminum clad wood, double-hung, 1/1 windows.
Staff, along with Chairman Wiedmeyer and Commissioner Savel, conducted a site assessment
on July 12, 2017. At that time the condition of the windows were found to be in fair to poor
condition. All of the windows have several layers of paint and a few have missing ropes and
glass that will need to be re-glazed.
Although the windows were not beyond repair, it was determined that the repair costs will
exceed the cost of replacement. Rather than repair, because of cost differences between repair
and replacement, the applicant has requested approval to replace all of the windows on the
entire building. The applicant has proposed window replacements to match existing in size and
profile.
Elgin Design Guideline Manual Specifications:
Windows
A. Which are original should be preserved in their original location, size, and design
and with their original materials and numbers of panes (glass lights).
B. Which are not original should not be added to primary facades or to seconda ry facades
where readily visible.
C. Should be repaired rather than replaced, but if replacement is necessary, the
recommended replacement should be in-kind to match the originals in material and
design. Windows clad in aluminum or baked-on aluminum are acceptable as
replacement windows for use throughout the structure. Factors to be considered in
determining whether the severity of deterioration of windows requires replacement
shall include but not be limited to the following factors: damage, excessive weathering,
loss of soundness or integrity of the wood, deterioration due to rot or insect attack, and
cost to repair. As to the factor of the cost to repair windows, a particular window may
be permitted to be replaced rather than repaired if the estimated cost to repair the
windows is more than the estimated cost of the purchase and installation of appropriate
replacement windows.
E. Vinyl extruded windows are not permitted for use in historic districts.
F. Which are new should not have snap-on or flush muntins. True divided muntins are
preferred over these types of muntins which do not have the same appearance as
historic windows. New muntins which are an integral part of the window sash and
installed on both sides of the glass are preferable to snap-on simple grilles.
G. screens and/or storms should be wood or baked-on or anodized aluminum and fit
within the window frames.
H. that are approved for replacement may be fitted with new double-paned Low-E glass
that will improve the energy conservation on the interior. Only low-e glass that does not
contain a tint should be used.
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the Certificate of Appropriateness as submitted and with the
following conditions:
Design Review Subcommittee – August 22, 2017
Page 5 of 13
1. That all windows shall be 1/1 double-hung, aluminum clad wood and must fit original
window openings.
2. Brick molds shall be retained. If beyond repair, the new brick molds shall match the
original in kind (same size, profile, material, etc.).
3. Window glass shall not be tinted.
4. All other details match the submitted specifications.
5. That all other details meet the Design Review Subcommittee’s recommendations.
*****
Grant Born (owner) and Kevin Brown (Rep for Casco Industries) were present for tonight’s
COA discussion:
Same type of windows for installation as 263-267 Douglas project, with the exception of the 3rd
floor windows facing the street. The two middle windows have an arched panel about the
double hung windows.
Commission indicated the arched upper could be constructed of wood or a PVC panel due to its
placement.
The six bay windows will have the picture window and upper fixed window will be taken out
and re installed. Double hung windows will be installed on each side of the bay windows (same
design as existing) to allow for ventilation.
Windows under the porch would be casement style, which must match as closely to existing
design and detailing.
Motion made by Committee Member Roberson to approve with staff recommendations and
the amendment: arched panel above the 3rd floor windows would be allowed as a PVC panel.
The motion was seconded by Committee Member Roxworthy.
The motion passed unanimously.
21 N Channing Street - Reconstruction of rear stairs
The applicant has submitted a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) to reconstruct the
property’s rear porch. The COA application has been filed as a corrective action to the following
violations:
1. Rear porch reconstruction without a COA or building permit.
The applicant noted that the rear porch was in disrepair and needed to be fixed quickly. Staff
noted to the applicant that any work completed on the exterior of a property within the historic
districts needs prior approval before work is started.
The rear of the building is visible from Mary Place as is the rear stairs. Staff provided a
rendering of an appropriate design for the rear stairs that borrows elements from the front
porch to the homeowner. The homeowner stated that they will closely match the design in the
rendering by borrowing elements from the front porch.
Design Review Subcommittee – August 22, 2017
Page 6 of 13
To note, the front porch balustrade, stairs and newel posts at the front porch were
reconstructed in 2009.
Elgin Design Guideline Manual Specifications:
Porches
A. Should be maintained in their original design with original materials and detailing
B. Should be repaired or replaced to match the original in design, materials, scale and
placement
C. Should be screened only if the structural framework for the screen panels is minimal
and the open appearance of the porch is maintained. Screen panels should be
placed behind the original features such as columns or railings and should not hide
decorative details or result in the removal of original porch materials.
D. Should have steps of the same material as the porch floor (e.g. porches with wood
floors should also have steps made of wood, not concrete or brick)
E. Should have poured concrete steps if the porch, patio or terrace floor is made of
concrete (see section on Porch Steps).
F. Should have wood tongue and groove flooring running perpendicular to the façade,
if the porch floor is made of wood.
G. Should have trellises made of wood, if trellises are appropriate.
H. Should be filled in as traditional for the type and style of the house or with
decorative wood framed skirting, vertical slats, or lattice panels, if open areas in the
foundation exist.
I. Should not be removed if original to the dwelling
J. Should not be enclosed with wood, glass, or other materials which would alter the
porch’s open appearance.
Porch Columns and Railing
A. Should be preserved and maintained. Where repair is required, use materials to
match the original in dimensions and detailing.
B. Should be rebuilt in historic designs if the original columns and railings have been
removed or replaced
C. Should have new balusters for the railing, if required. Porch balusters (also called
spindles) should be appropriate for the building’s style and period. The height of the
railing should be in line with the window sill level, if present, and no greater than 30
inches in height.
Porch Staircases and Steps
A. Should be retained in their original location and configuration , if original to the
property. Wood and concrete steps should be repaired with materials to match the
original.
B. Should be replaced with wood rather than brick or concrete, if the porch floor is
made of wood.
C. Should have their tread constructed in either 5/4x12 or 2x12 lumber. The ends of
the treads should be bull-nosed and overhang the riser by no less than 1 inch.
D. Should have newel posts and balusters, treads and risers, to match original porch
construction.
Design Review Subcommittee – August 22, 2017
Page 7 of 13
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the Certificate of Appropriateness as submitted and with the
following conditions:
Rear Porch
1. All rear porch elements to match design details found at the front porch including
design and size of newel posts, handrails, and balustrade.
2. The handrail shall have a 2x4 top rail with chamfered edges, ¾” cove installed on either
side of spindle. Spindles to be 2x2 with v-bead, placed 4” on center. That the bottom rail
is a 2x4 with chamfered edges.
3. That the newel posts are installed at the bottom of the stairs and shall be 6x6 and to
match existing in style (pyramidal – hipped cap) and proportion. The newel post shall
have a 1x top wrap with a chamfered bottom edge (6 inches in height) and a 1x bottom
wrap with a chamfered top edge (6 inches in height).
4. That the stair treads shall 5/4” x 12 (recommended) or 2x12 and bull -nosed on 3 sides
and overhang the risers a minimum of 1”. Pressure treated wood or composite material
is acceptable. When using pressure treated wood for the stair treads, paint every side
with porch/deck enamel to deter any future cupping of the board. Use 3 -4 deck screws
(ceramic coated preferable) to adhere board to framing.
5. Skirting shall match the skirting found adjacent to the stairs that shows a simplistic fleur
de lis with circle cut pattern. This cut pattern skirting shall be installed behind the stair
stringer and bottom rimboard. The bottom rimboard shall be the same size as what is
found adjacent to the stairs.
6. That all other details match the attached rendering.
7. All rear porch details shall be primed and painted.
*****
Aurora Reyna (owner) was present for tonight’s COA discussion:
This type of exterior work requires a building permit anywhere within the city limits. If a permit
has been requested prior to construction, the porch requirements would have been provided
by city staff, along with requirements for historic district details.
No corner board required against the house. Existing porch skirting pattern should be
replicated and installed.
Motion made by Committee Member Roxworthy to approve with staff recommendations and
the following amendment: treads to be 5/4 x 12 (drawing was incorrectly noted).
The motion was seconded by Committee Member Roberson.
The motion passed unanimously.
851 N. Spring Street - Installation of privacy fence
The property owner has submitted a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) to install a 4’-0”
privacy fence, dog-eared along the southern portion of their property.
Design Review Subcommittee – August 22, 2017
Page 8 of 13
The applicant noted that approximately 1’-0” of their fence extends past the lot line connecting
to the neighbor’s fence. This 1’-0” section is proposed to be removed leaving their rear yard not
completely enclosed.
They would like to enclose their property from their existing picket fence to the rear lot line
along the southern boundary in anticipation of the removal of the portion of their fence that
extends past the lot line. They noted that they have dogs and would like the fence enclosed to
ensure that the dogs do not leave the property when they let them out.
Staff indicated to the applicant that double fencing is not allowed in the historic districts. To
note, the proposed fence height will be no greater than the existing neighbor’s fence height.
Elgin Design Guideline Manual Specifications:
Fences
A. Should be proportionate to the house and the design should be compatible with the
character of the building and district.
B. Should be painted white or a trim color related to the house, never left to weather or
given a stain finish.
C. Of cat iron or other material of original design should be preserved.
D. Of cast iron may be added to buildings constructed in the late 19 th and early 20th
century. Cast iron fences are generally not appropriate for dwellings built after 1920.
E. If placed along common property lines should not be placed against another fence -
double line fencing is not permitted.
F. Should have posts that are set a minimum of 30 inches below grade and no more than
eight feet apart.
G. If wood, be of cedar, redwood or pressure treated pine, cypress or other rot resistant
wood.
H. That has a decorative gate or arbors must be submitted with a drawing complete with
dimensions.
Fences in Rear Yard
I. Built for privacy should not extend beyond the rear yard beginning at the back corner of
the house.
J. Built for privacy should have a minimum of gate post, corner post, and end posts which
are five to ten inches wide and taller than the pickets.
K. Can be constructed in the same low fence design found in the front yard.
L. Of wood boards or planks for privacy should be located in rear y ards and be no taller
than six feet. Boards should be no more than six inches wide.
M. Privacy fences of flat boards with flat tops in a single row are most appropriate for the
historic districts. Vertical boards topped with lattice or picket are also appropriate as
privacy fences.
Staff Recommendation:
Staff cannot recommend approval as double fencing does not meet the Historic District
Guidelines. However, should the Design Review Subcommittee approve the proposed as the
height of the proposed fence will align with the height of their existing fence as well as the
neighbor’s, staff would then recommend the following:
Design Review Subcommittee – August 22, 2017
Page 9 of 13
1. The fence shall be no higher than 4’-0” at the rear yard.
2. The fence shall be painted to match the color of the existing picket fence (forest green).
*****
Cindy Kurdrat (owner) was present for tonight’s COA discussion:
Owner prefers to put in a 6’ high fence; willing to install fence with the existing height. Has lived
in this home for 38 years. Currently having issues with neighbor regarding fence line, trees and
dogs. Property owner wants to enclose her rear yard for privacy and safety for her and her pet.
House is setback about 45 feet from the Spring Street. North side fence is untreated/natural.
East side fence is from the former Sherman Hospital visitor/staff parking lot.
Motion made by Committee Member Ristow to approve with staff recommendations and the
following amendments: 1) fence to be installed to remain unpainted, to weather naturally, and
2) staff to provide final fence approval, after homeowner confirms property line and other
possible legal ownership of land.
The motion was seconded by Committee Member Savel.
The motion passed unanimously.
363 Yarwood Street - Side porch rehabilitation
The applicant has submitted a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) to restore the side porch at
the east elevation.
The applicant noted that the side porch is in disrepair as the pitch of the porch is too steep, and
the stairs and handrail at the stairs are deteriorated. They are proposing to correct the pitch of
the porch and install new skirting, new stairs and stair handrails to match the style of the side
porch. The applicant noted that they will not be removing or replacing the columns, balustrade
or decking.
Elgin Design Guideline Manual Specifications:
Porches
A. Should be maintained in their original design with original materials and detailing
B. Should be repaired or replaced to match the original in design, materials, scale and
placement
C. Should be screened only if the structural framework for the screen panels is minimal
and the open appearance of the porch is maintained. Screen panels should be
placed behind the original features such as columns or railings and should not hide
decorative details or result in the removal of original porch materials.
D. Should have steps of the same material as the porch floor (e.g. porches with wood
floors should also have steps made of wood, not concrete or brick)
E. Should have poured concrete steps if the porch, patio or terrace floor is made of
concrete (see section on Porch Steps).
F. Should have wood tongue and groove flooring running perpendicular to the façade,
if the porch floor is made of wood.
Design Review Subcommittee – August 22, 2017
Page 10 of 13
G. Should have trellises made of wood, if trellises are appropriate.
H. Should be filled in as traditional for the type and style of the house or with
decorative wood framed skirting, vertical slats, or lattice panels, if open areas in the
foundation exist.
I. Should not be removed if original to the dwelling
J. Should not be enclosed with wood, glass, or other materials which would alter the
porch’s open appearance.
Porch Columns and Railing
A. Should be preserved and maintained. Where repair is required, use materials to
match the original in dimensions and detailing.
B. Should be rebuilt in historic designs if the original columns and railings have been
removed or replaced
C. Should have new balusters for the railing, if required. Porch balusters (also called
spindles) should be appropriate for the building’s style and period. The height of the
railing should be in line with the window sill level, if present, and no greater than 30
inches in height.
Porch Staircases and Steps
A. Should be retained in their original location and configuration, if original to the
property. Wood and concrete steps should be repaired with materials to match the
original.
B. Should be replaced with wood rather than brick or concrete, if the porch floor is
made of wood.
C. Should have their tread constructed in either 5/4x12 or 2x12 lumber. The ends of
the treads should be bull-nosed and overhang the riser by no less than 1 inch.
D. Should have newel posts and balusters, treads and risers, to match original porch
construction.
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the Certificate of Appropriateness as submitted and with the
following conditions:
Side Porch
1. The handrail at the stairs shall align with the balustrade and shall have a 2x4 top rail
with chamfered edges, ¾” cove installed on either side of spindle. Spindles to be 2x2,
placed no more than2.5” apart. That the bottom rail is a 2x4 with chamfered edges.
2. That the newel post are installed at the bottom of the stairs and shall be 6x6 with
pummeled top edges topped with a ball cap.
3. That the stair treads shall 5/4” x 12 (recommended) or 2x12 and bull -nosed on 3 sides
and overhang the risers a minimum of 1”. Pressure treated wood or composite material
is acceptable. When using pressure treated wood for the stair treads, paint every side
with porch/deck enamel to deter any future cupping of the board. Use 3 -4 deck screws
(ceramic coated preferable) to adhere board to framing.
4. Skirting shall be 1x4 vertical slats spaced 1” apart with a top rimboard of 1x6 or 1x8 with
a bottom rimboard of 1x4 and a 1x8 cornerboards.
5. That all other details match the attached rendering.
All rear porch details shall be primed and painted.
Design Review Subcommittee – August 22, 2017
Page 11 of 13
*****
Dan Gongora (owner) was present for tonight’s COA discussion:
The staggered skirting looks appropriate, due to grade change.
Building codes will need to be followed for pier (probably a 12”), rise and runs. Concrete slab
may need to be removed to meet building requirements.
Remove “doorway” appearance (at top of stairs). However, existing brackets should remain.
Motion made by Committee Member Roxworthy to approve with staff recommendations and
the following amendments: 1) doorway “frame” to be removed, and 2) rise and run of stairs
must be identical and comply with building codes.
The motion was seconded by Committee Member Roberson.
The motion passed unanimously.
272-274 Division Street – Maintaining brick retaining walls
The applicant has submitted a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) to maintain the
reconstructed retaining walls along Division Street. The COA application has been filed as a
corrective action to the following violations:
1. Installation of new retaining walls without a COA or building permit.
The applicant is requesting to retain the reconstructed retaining walls at the south end of the
property along Division Street. The owner noted that the previous concrete curb had major
spalls, cracks and was beyond repair. The previous concrete wall was a curb with a gently
sloped landscaped area. What was installed was a 2’-4” high brick retaining wall that aligns with
the concrete knee walls.
The owner also stated that bricks were used for the planters as they were borrowing the same
design/material that was approved found at the base of the statues on the west elevation.
Elgin Design Guideline Manual Specifications:
Retaining walls:
A. should be preserved and maintained, if original to the dwelling (or built before 1945).
B. should be of poured concrete (not concrete blocks) or in stone designs such as cut stone,
random rubble, coursed rubble, or cobblestones. Retaining walls of brick are less
appropriate but may be constructed. If constructed of artificial or cultured stone, textures,
colors and random designs should replicate natural stone. If located in front yards, the walls
should be constructed using up to two courses and an additional cap course, not to exceed
twenty inches in height.
C. should not be removed or replaced with new materials, if built before 1945.
D. should not be built on the fronts of dwellings, if constructed of timbers or railroad ties.
Design Review Subcommittee – August 22, 2017
Page 12 of 13
Staff Recommendation:
Staff cannot recommend approval as the material and height does not meet the Historic Distri ct
Guidelines as new material shall match that of the existing and the height shall not exceed 20
inches.
However, although retaining walls of brick are less appropriate, the material does match that of
the approved cladding found at the statues on the west elevation. If the Design Review
Subcommittee approves the proposed as submitted, Staff would then recommend the
following.
1. The retaining wall installed at the west side of the two stairs (smaller sidewalk that leads
to the statues on the west elevation) shall be removed and new poured concrete curb
installed in the same profile as what was existing.
2. The other concrete curbs on the property in front of the home shall be retained or if
beyond repair, shall be replaced to match the existing in kind (same ma terial - concrete,
size - 11 inches high and 6 inches thick, shape – curved top edge).
*****
Willis Weiler and Martha Martinez (representatives of St. Joseph Church) were present for
tonight’s COA discussion:
Mr. Weiler indicated a parishioner donated the material and labor to construct the retaining
wall/planters. Concern for safety due to the grade change was stated as the reason for newly
constructed walls/planters were installed.
Staff reminded commissioner and attendees that building code requires architectural/engineer
stamped plans if a retaining wall is greater than 24” from grade.
Staff also reminded the representatives that all exterior work within the historic districts
requires a COA (Certificate of Appropriateness) prior to any work being performed.
Commission reviews materials and other exterior requests.
Several commissioners noted they recall haven spoken to the property owner and/or
representatives on previous projects which were also done without permit and/or COA. All
properties within historic districts must work within the requirements of Design Review
Guideline Manual.
Material use is inappropriate. Had the property owner came to the commission to construct
planters, and staircase, the commissioners agreed they would have been inclined to approve
such a request with appropriate materials. The material used is for newer developments and is
not appropriate in historic district. The “stone” design is inappropriate. The smooth concrete
returns abutted by brick is not an appropriate design for historic property.
Appropriate style designs would be poured, smooth concrete or limestone block (rough edges)
to match the existing principal structure; with a smooth cap.
Statue stonework on the west side of the church is constructed of different material and