Design Review Board
Updates for 2-C-20-DT


Level 2: Addition to an existing building/structure

Installation of a 1-story rooftop addition on the existing 1-story building. The addition will be setback approximately 14 to 19 feet from the front parapet and will have a roof height of approximately 17 feet above the top of the parapet. The roof will also be approximately 4 feet taller than the adjacent 2-story building. The design incorporates a butterfly roof design the roof angling up toward the front of the building. The roof will be supported by steel structure on the outer edge of the unenclosed deck and the underside of the roof will be finished with a composite wood plank soffit. The deck will have a steel guardrail. The enclosed portion of the building is located behind the unenclosed deck and has aluminum storefront walls with glass and composite wood plank siding between the roof and the storefront walls. The stair enclosure is on the south (left) side of the addition, adjacent to the two-story building, and this will not be covered by the butterfly roof and will have corrugated metal siding. Lighting will be installed just above the east (Central St.) storefront, below the roof, to illuminate the underside of the roof above the deck.

Site Info

This proposal is within the Southern Terminal and Warehouse (National Register) Historic District so the 'Historic Resources' section of the design guidelines are applicable. The staff recommendation is to deny this request because it does not meet the recommendations of the "Rooflines and Additions" section. In addition to the inconsistencies outlined in the staff recommendation, this section also states that one-story additions "may be possible on taller buildings" and "Rooftop additions are almost never appropriate on buildings less than four stories in height." The board has approved one-story additions on buildings less than four stories before but the additions were located further back on the roof and designed so as to be minimally visible ("inconspicuous") from the public sidewalk. Exhibit A is a visibility study for an approved one-story addition at 141 S. Gay Street which also shows an approved one-story addition at 129 S. Gay Street in the background. Both of these additions only had a small portion of the roof visible from the sidewalk on the opposite side of Gay Street, which has a much wider right-of-way in this block than Central Street at the subject property, making it harder for the Gay Street additions to meet the intent of the guidelines. Applicable guidelines: Section 1.C.1. (ROOFLINES AND ADDITIONS) Alterations of the rooflines of historic buildings are not appropriate. A one-story rooftop addition, including railings, may be possible on taller buildings if it is inconspicuous from the public right-of-way. Additions should be set back from the primary elevation of the building, and should not damage character-defining features, including parapets and side walls. These walls are often topped by coping stones offering contrasting color or texture, or contain cornices, decorative grills, chimneys, corbelled brickwork and other architectural elements. Rooftop additions are almost never appropriate on buildings less than four stories in height. GUIDELINES: 1a. Preserve or restore historic roofline features, including parapet walls and cornices. 1b. Design rooftop additions to be complementary to the historic building in terms of materials and color. 1c. Avoid construction that maintains only the historic facade. 1d. Do not alter, obscure or destroy significant features of historic resources when constructing additions. 1e. Design rooftop additions so that they are not seen from adjoining streets and sidewalks.

Staff Recommendation

DENY the 1-story addition as requested because it is not consistent with the guideline recommendation to "Design rooftop additions so that they are not seen from adjoining streets and sidewalks" (Section 1.C.1e. -- Rooflines and Additions) and the general description of this section that states "A one-story rooftop addition, including railings, may be possible... if it is inconspicuous from the public right-of-way."

Case Fileposted 3/12/2020
117 S. Central St.
Smee and Busby Architects, Scott Busby
115 S Central LLC, Leigh Burch

Actions from the meeting

- No actions at this time -