HUNTSVILLE HISTORICAL PRESERVATION COMMISSION



HUNTSVILLE HISTORICAL PRESERVATION COMMISSIONMINUTESAugust 8, 2016The Huntsville Historic Preservation Commission met in the Conference Room on the 1st Floor of the Public Service Building located at 320 Fountain Circle on August 8, 2016. The members present were:Mr. Jan WilliamsMs. Drenda KingMr. Mark RussellMr. David ElyMr. Mike HolbrookMr. Peter LoweMr. Randy CunninghamAlso present at the meeting was Ms. Jessica White, Historic Preservation Consultant and Sharon Mize, Recording Secretary. The meeting was called to order at 4:30 p.m. by Mr. David Ely, Chairman. He read the preamble and introduced the Commission members. 503 Adams Avenue – Mr. Frank Nola for Mrs. Laura InnesMr. Nola said Mrs. Innes family has lived in this house over the last 80 years. They would like to paint the house white using the Benjamin Moore No. 963, which is a warm white. Mr. Russell made the motion to approve painting the house white and Ms. King seconded the motion. The Commission voted unanimously to approve the motion.1008 Clinton Avenue – Mr. Mark Brubaker and Mr. Robert PotterThis request is to demolish a rear screen porch and erect a new addition, construct a new rear dormer addition and add a galvanized standing seam roof. Mr. Brubaker said they revised their previous plans by keeping the proposed rear dormer at the same height as the existing roof height. Lot coverage and setbacks are not an issue for this project. Mr. Holbrook recommended the roof be galvalume instead of the sample which was submitted which was a painted silver metal.On the east side of the house they will add a door and move a window. On the addition they will be using windows which are insulated, simulated true divided light with wood outside. Mr. Brubaker said they will remove the shutters off of the front windows. Mr. Holbrook said this application is a great improvement from the last application. Mr. Russell made the motion to approve the application to allow the removal of the screen porch and erect an addition in its place, construct a rear dormer addition and add a standing seam galvalume roof and paint the house. Mr. Holbrook seconded the motion. Mr. Brubaker asked if he could change the fence color to a stained gray color. Mr. Russell amended his motion to allow the fence be stained a gray color. Mr. Holbrook seconded the amended motion. The Commission voted unanimously to approve the motion.508 Eustis Avenue – Mr. Ned Jones for Kory & Julie McMurrayMr. Jones came before the Commission requesting to remove the side shed and rear patio, remove side steps and door and install a window in its place, replace front concrete steps with brick steps, remove portions of the rear stonewall and erect a new addition with a standing seam metal roof, construct a screen porch, erect an attached garage and paint the house. Mr. Jones said the proposed additions will be located at the back of the house to be respectful of the primary elevation. He said this house is not visible from the street because it is located behind 512 Eustis Avenue. Mr. Jones said he is trying to leave all or most of the driveway space. Mr. Ely asked what will happen to the stonewall which has been there for a long time. Mr. Jones said he will peel back part of it and make the wall of the back of the house part of the wall. He wants to move the stairwell in the rear yard over a few feet and reuse as much of the stones as he can. The stonewall was erected in 1955. The materials will match the existing materials on the house including the brick and wood siding. They will use some of the siding removed to patch in where they will be putting in a window. The new siding will be hardiboard siding. The paint colors for the house will be Sherwin Williams Anew Gray for the siding, Alabaster for the trim and Iron Ore for the shutters.The concrete steps on the front porch are out of code and are separating from the front of the house and they are requesting to rebuild them to meet code and add a simple metal handrail. The roof on the addition will be a bronze standing seam metal roof and will not be visible except for the backyard. Mr. Lowe made the motion to approve removing the side shed, removing the side steps and door and install a new window, replace front steps with brick steps, remove a portion of the stonewall as necessary for construction of a rear addition, paint the house, add a new screen porch, erect a new garage, and make an addition to the rear of the house. Ms. King seconded the motion and the Commission voted unanimously to approve the application.315 Franklin Street – Mr. Bill Boehme for NQB8, LLCMr. Boehme came before the Commission requesting the addition of windows and doors to the front and side of the building. On the front of the building they would like to install a storefront, two doors and a balcony. On the side they would like to also add a balcony. They would like to make a second story rear addition to the building. The building’s fa?ade was removed without a COA and a Stop Work Order was placed on the job. The proposed windows are aluminum clad windows. Mr. Boehme said they would like to take the building back to its original style of 1925. The brick pilaster is still there in between the two units and the ones on the side as well. The interior has already been demolished and revealing the interior prior to the renovations of 1965. Mr. Ely said there was not a balcony on the front or side of the building when it was built. Mr. Boehme said there was not, but the owner would like to add a balcony if at all possible. Mr. Ely said there is also Fresnel glass as a transom on the left and the beam is not exposed. The drawings show an exposed beam and that is not like the original. Mr. Boehme said the original storefront had a door in the middle on the right side but the owners want to move the door more towards the end. It has to be recessed because the street does slope and they have to push the door back in order to get some steps to it. On the left side they want to make the entrance the main entrance for the tenants upstairs as well as downstairs. Mr. Ely said there are a lot of differences from the original building and what has been drawn. Mr. Lowe said the drawings make the front of the building look busy. Mr. Ely said he did not think they brought enough detailed information to make a full application. Mr. Holbrook said he applauded their efforts for trying to take the building back to the original style. However, they are taking the “Disney” approach to creating a fa?ade. One of the things the guidelines prohibit is additional architectural elements which did not exist originally. The Commission is struggling with the balconies and other elements which did not exist on the original structure. The Commission’s biggest struggle is they had a contributing structure and now it will never be a contributing structure again. Slow changes over time, whittles away the districts.Mr. Kirk Brannon, one of the owners of the building, said they asked specifically if the building was in the historic district and he was told it was not and believed they could proceed with the renovations without coming before the Commission. The original architect they hired for this project also showed removing the marble from the building and did not realize it was in the historic district. Mr. Boehme said the contractors did have a permit but it was for interior demolition work only. It was just one of those things that fell through the cracks and was not intentional. Mr. Brannon said this clearly was a mistake and they are very sad it has happened. It was a mistake of ignorance and not one of defiance. He said history wise, they are so excited about coming downtown. Mr. Will Brannon said when they were considering purchasing this property they wanted to create a gateway into the square from Franklin Street. They did some research and found the historical photographs and their desire is to take it back close to the original and pay reverence to the history of the building. At the same time, they want to change to meet the needs of the City of Huntsville. They want to leave the meeting with the Commission’s input and feedback on how to proceed. Mr. Lowe said the remodel was done in 1965. Ms. White said according to the National Register the original building was built in 1925. Mr. Ely said it is a shame the front of the building came off; not every building is the right building for every tenant. Just to make changes to fit the tenant does not fit historic preservation. Also, it is a shame that they have now missed the tax credits they could have taken advantage of during this process. Mr. Ely said there is work which needs to be done on the drawings to get the building back to where it needs to be.Mr. Lowe said another idea is to leave the marble that Harvie Jones designed and maybe stucco it and that would save some of it. He said he did not like the balconies across the front because it looked so busy. He thought cast iron would look better on the front instead of the brick. On the side it is not nearly as busy and he thought it would be an improvement to drop the railing on the top. He said the marble was unattractive and he is glad they took it off. He said when they finish the project it will be an asset to downtown. Mr. Heath Rayburn of Fite Building Company said he wanted it to be known that the full responsibility was on Fite Building Company. It was a huge mistake and it won’t happen again. He said they did not want the owner to be penalized for their mistake. Mr. Ronnie Mayes, the Field Supervisor for Fite Building Company, said the mistake is really on him. He said he got excited and misunderstood and said he did not want the owners to be penalized for his mistake. He said Fite Building Company does a lot of work in Huntsville and would like to continue to do work here. Mr. Rayburn said he would like to move forward in the right direction.Mr. Brannon said the building next door has the balconies and they want it to match the same style. He said they also purchased the parking lot across the street and they would like to have bands and other activities downtown on the weekends. Part of the reason for the balconies is for a “ring side” seat for such activities. Mr. Ely said that is putting elements on the building which were not there originally. Mr. Holbrook said downtown development is not the goal of the Commission; our goal is historic preservation, though they can be compatible. Mr. Brannon requested the Commission to give them guidance to go in the right direction so they can move forward with the project. Mr. Holbrook said he wanted to clarify their intent with the brick. Mr. Boehme said they want to try and bring back the brick capital on top of the building. Mr. Holbrook said it appears the corbeling is gone. Mr. Boehme said it is probably behind the capitol. Mrs. Margaret Watson said she is thrilled to see the building go back toward the original style. She used to live right down the street when she was growing up. She said the 1965 renovation was unattractive. Mr. Lowe asked if the stucco would be an option where they could keep the pilasters and the limestone. Mr. Ely said the stucco would not look like marble. Mr. Ely said he thought it would look better if they went back with the 1925 version of the building but it needs to have details more in tune with the original structure. The balcony on the front will not look right. The balconies on the side would be more acceptable. Mr. Lowe said the fence on the addition rooftop needs to be dropped back or made lower. Mr. Will Brannon said it is there to protect people while they are on the roof garden. Mr. Boehme said it probably won’t be very visible because it will be set back a few feet from the edge of the roof. The original side elevation had several windows which were removed when the 1965 alteration was done. They would like to put the windows back in place with the same configuration as the original windows to put natural light back in the building. The chimneys were also removed at the same time. The brick has been damaged on the building and they will need to use a tumbled brick or a wood mold brick. The brick presented is not the right brick for this project. Mr. Ely said it will almost take a rebuild and it will not be easy. Mr. Ely said what is important is they come back with glass banding with a beam above; add similar lights and window elements; a glass store front, add steps on the south side; and the beam is not exposed. There does not need to be a balcony on the front. They can add a balcony on the small. They need to come back before the Commission with good detailed drawings. Mr. Brennan asked if they could proceed with work on the interior and Mr. Cunningham said they could on interior only. No motion was made so the application was denied.Old Business:Mr. Williams made the motion to approve the minutes from the July 11th meeting and Ms. King seconded the motion. The Commission voted unanimously to approve the minutes.Mr. Ely said he, Ms. King and Ms. White attended the NAPC in Mobile and had a great time and listened to some good talks. Ms. King said she was impressed with the expertise and the historians. She learned more about what the Commission should be looking for, including landscaping: what is contributing and non-contributing in landscaping. She was able to network with other commission members. She said there are some issues which need to be ironed out concerning solar energy. Ms. White said she heard some good information on repairing and maintaining versus replacing. She said she would like into getting some grant funding to get some speakers to come in and do some workshops to demonstrate on how to repair and maintain siding and windows. People can come and pay for the workshop and learn how to do their repairs. She said she was interested on how to move forward with preservation as newer buildings are starting to age in and how does the Commission look at the modern movement. Huntsville has a lot of modern movement buildings. Also, she would like to set up incentives locally for preservation. We have lost the state tax credit. There are communities across the country that is using funding at the local level as an incentive to get people to restore and reinvest in their communities. All of these things will require Commission collaboration to make them happen. Mr. Holbrook said it would be nice if our City Council and the downtown development had a common goal because they are mutually exclusive at this point. He said, in his opinion, the greatest threat to our historic fabric is our downtown commercial buildings. Mr. Ely said he agreed. The meeting was adjourned at 5:55 p.m.Respectfully submitted,Dennis MadsenManager of Urban and Long Range Planning ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download