Charlotte-Mecklenburg Historic  Commission

Design Review Agenda
May 25, 2016

1.  Design Review Chair's Report -- Ken Pursley
2.  Consulting Director's Report -- Dan Morrill

a.  Hennigan Place

b.  James Blakney Farm
3.  Preservation Planner's Report -- Stewart Gray

4.  Certificates of Appropriateness

a.  Holly Bend, 3701 Neck Road, Huntersville.  The applicant is proposing rehabilitate the house.   Click here for proposed plans.
Click here to view select renderings.

Staff believes that the plan is appropriate, and that the project meets Secretary Of The Interior's Standards Numbers 9 and 10.

b.  John B. Ross Mill, 1000 NC Music Factory Boulevard, Charlotte.  The applicant is proposing to upfit the exterior of the building.
Click here for existing.   Click here for proposed plans.

c.  Highland Mill Number 3, 2901 N. Davidson Street, Charlotte.  The applicant is proposing an infill development project to the property. Click here for proposed plans.

Staff believes that the plan is appropriate, and that the project meets Secretary Of The Interior's Standards Numbers 2 and 9.

d.  Hennigan Place, 3503 Tilley Morris Road, Charlotte.  The applicant is proposing make changes to a previously approved plan.  The changes are to the roofing materials for the infill development.   Click here for plans.  Click here for proposed roofing material.

Staff believes that it would be appropriate to allow the use of some asphalt shingle roofing in the infill development.  

5.  Old Business

6.  New Business

The Secretary Of The Interior's Standards For Rehabilitation

1. A property shall be used for its historic purpose or be placed in a new use that requires minimal change to the defining characteristics of the building and its site and environment.

2. The historic character of a property shall be retained and preserved. The removal of historic materials or alteration of features and spaces that characterize a property shall be avoided.

3. Each property shall be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or architectural elements from other buildings, shall not be undertaken.

4. Most properties change over time; those changes that have acquired historic significance in their own right shall be retained and preserved.

5. Distinctive features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a historic property shall be reserved.

6. Deteriorated historic features shall be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature shall match the old in design, color, texture, and other visual qualities and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features shall be substantiated by documentary, physical, or pictorial evidence.

7. Chemical or physical treatments, such as sandblasting, that cause damage to historic materials shall not be used. The surface cleaning of structures, if appropriate, shall be undertaken using the gentlest means possible.
8. Significant archeological resources affected by a project shall be protected and preserved. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures shall be undertaken.

9. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment.

10. New additions and adjacent or related new construction shall be undertaken in such a manner that if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired.