Cliff McCormick.

Also let's use your mics as we go around because we're live streaming this morning.

Cliff McCormick.

Present.

Piper Stro Matt.

Brandon Peng and Eben.

Present.

Todd Morgan.

Present.

John Cavit.

Present.

Cassie Courtney.

Present.

Nate Then Bird.

Present.

Matt McDonald.

Present.

Skip Pond.

Present.

All right.

Can you do our swearing in for us, please?

Sure.

If you plan to speak, will you please stand and raise your right hand?

Do you sound like swear from the testimony you're giving today?

With the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

So help you guide.

Thank you.

Sorry.

All right.

Our rules of procedure for the meeting today.

The order of business for hearing certificate of appropriateness cases will be as follows.

Each case will have a staff presentation, followed by an applicant presentation of no more than 10 minutes.

After which we'll have comments by others for or against the project for five minutes total.

The applicant will have an opportunity for rebuttal if necessary of no more than five minutes, after which the commission members will discuss the case and make a motion.

A certificate of appropriateness will be issued within a week of this hearing.

If you defer your case or if you have conditional items to bring back before the commission, you must contact staff and ask to be added to the agenda for the next meeting.

You will not automatically be added to the agenda.

If you plan to speak, you must be sworn in and please sign in at the podium when you come up.

If you would like to defer your case to be heard at a later date, a deferral must be requested prior to the statement of the case's motion.

If you leave the meeting, please wait until you exit the wooden doors to speak or use your cell phone.

All construction work must meet the certificate of appropriateness and design guidelines as approved by the Chattanooga Historic Zoning Commission or staff.

If plans change, a new application will be required.

If work is not started within six months of the issue date, a new COA will need to be issued.

As COA is not a building permit or a land disturbing permit, please contact the land disturbing office or the building permit office prior to starting the project.

The COA must be posted in visible location or on file on the property until the project is completed.

Applicants are respectfully requested to ensure that they have submitted the required application and supporting documents prior to this meeting and to adhere to the time limits as previously explained.

Board members are requested to limit questions and comments on the case to only those within the purview of the board.

Code setback variants and zoning issues are not within the purview of the commission and will have to be addressed by the applicant with the appropriate personnel within the city.

Reminder this meeting is being recorded and live streamed today.

Next we need to approve the minutes from last month's meeting.

If everyone's had a chance to review those, I'll take a motion to approve them.

I'll make a motion to approve minutes as written.

All right, do we have a second?

Second.

All in favor.

All right.

The minute the minutes are approved.

Uh we'll move into I guess staff reviews, Cassie.

Old business.

Okay, thanks.

Yeah.

I'll uh pull up the staff reviews.

We have one old business case where we're using the old guidelines.

So I have that language in the slides, and then there's a copy on each side of the dais in case you guys need to flip through it.

And then we have one new business case using our new guidelines, and then um at the end of the meeting, we'll do officer elections.

Um so here are the staff reviews that were conducted um from the last time that we met.

And then our first old business case.

This is HZ2617 at 4401 St.

Elmo Avenue in the St.

Elmo neighborhood.

It is a historic structure, circa 1900.

This is the proposed project is an addition.

This is a revision from what you previously saw, and you can see the sandborn maps there from 1917, 1930, and 1955.

Uh historic zoning history, some from 2025 for a correction notice for an outbuilding conversion, and then back in 2018 for an exterior rehabilitation of the carriage house.

So here's the map of the property and then the property within the St.

Almo Historic District Overlay.

Here are property photos.

Neighboring property photos.

And then the application information.

So this is the March 2026 submission.

I'm gonna roll through those and then you'll see the revision.

Okay, and this is the updated July 2026 submission.

You can see that site plan there.

And the elevation, the east and north elevation.

West elevation, south elevation.

And then a rendering provided by the applicant.

And then the material list is the same as you saw back in March.

So asphalt roof.

Smooth Hardy Lap to match existing.

New parking pad and apron.

That's not that was approved previously, so we're not looking at that.

The walkway and the ramp, pressure treated wood to match recently installed railing.

Uh windows, all new windows to will be wood, which will match the size and style of existing windows on the house.

And for the staff report, this is section 6.1 and additions in the St.

Elmo design guidelines.

So item A should be located at the rear of buildings, not on the front or readily visible areas of the sides.

The proposed addition is located at the rear, but it will be visible from West 44th Street.

Item B should be secondary, smaller and simpler than the original building in scale design and placement.

We'll have the applicant confirm the square footage for us.

Item C should be of a compatible design in keeping with the original building's design, roof shape materials, color, and location of window, door and cornice heights.

The applicant is proposing matching roof lines, siding and window styles.

Item E should appear distinguishable from the historic building, not an exact copy of it.

The applicant showing vertical trim board to delineate the addition.

Item F should be built in a manner that avoids extensive removal or loss of historic materials and which does not damage or destroy the main architectural features of the building.

Applicant notes that at least two windows are to be replaced and saved on site.

We'll have them confirm.

Item G should should keep the exterior walls of the original building alone and use existing door and window openings for connecting the addition.

So we can have the applicant talk more about that.

And then item I additions should be made to the rear, not sides of the house.

The addition is at the side and rear.

And so we'll have the applicant's presentation.

If you could just state your name and address for the record, please.

Well, it is dry stack cinder blocks foundation.

And so I basically went back to the homeowner and said, you don't want us to do an addition on this.

And so we decided to pause and say, well, now it appears we need to tear off the addition.

Well, now what do you want?

And so to answer square footage, the addition that would be removed, or the part that's affected by the inadequate foundation would be about a thousand square feet, two stories, and then we would be going back with 1300 square feet.

So it's not a substantial increase in square footage.

Um applicant notes at least two windows to be replaced and saved on site.

Uh that is correct.

One of the windows we'll be using as a basically an opening from the main house into the addition.

Um other what other questions do you have?

Are there any other things that come to mind?

I think that's what all I had.

Um in the staff report for now.

So we can move to public comment.

Do we have any community comments or comments by other persons?

Okay.

Uh we can move to commission discussion.

Okay, do we have any questions or comments for the applicant?

I think if we could look at, and I don't know if it's that's the best view.

Are you saying on the right-hand side?

Everything from a certain point back is gonna be all brand new.

Yes.

So where is that point?

From this line back is all from here back is not original to the house, as far as we can tell, and that's where the uh faux foundation starts.

Is that the whole house from left to right?

In other words, it was some point you won't be able to see anything but error from that line you just showed me.

Yes, back.

Okay.

So we would be removing, we were just expanding the second floor originally.

What was approved was widening that second floor.

Um, and then we realized, and again, like in this under this, there's about a six-inch crawl space under, I mean, so it it looks like somebody built a first floor porch, and then they went above it with another low.

I mean, so we determine we just have to tear the whole thing off and then rebuild it.

Yeah, that's a good view.

But all of the wood, you know, all of the wood is new wood.

It's you can tell it's definitely not original to the house, none of the windows match, that kind of thing.

So it's so not really any changes to their the original plan.

It's just a no more to get done.

Right.

Yeah, no, it's great that they're they're doing that.

I mean, it's a huge expense to preserve that home.

Um, the right way.

So it was not a fun conversation to say uh by the way.

Well, I'm glad we found out before we started and not after we started.

So okay.

Any other questions or comments?

Nathan.

Yeah, I'm just wondering if if we're talking about tearing down this back half of the house and rebuilding it, if we want to talk about the skylights, which I know there are existing skylights.

We don't have to, but it looks like they're going back in.

Yeah, we would we would like to put them back in.

And given the existing president, I'm fine with it.

I just know skylights have been uh controversial in the past.

Go back to that plan.

What the plan on that side.

Yeah, those are not highly visible with that low slope roof.

I I don't have an issue with them, and they're there already.

Anyone else have anything?

I would like to make a motion.

Uh just one other thing to make sure.

So looking at this right hand side again, the upper wall, upper story wall is not in the same line as a lower story wall.

It sets back some six or eight, ten feet, it looks like.

Is that stay is that going back in the same place it it currently exists?

No, it would be it would be expanding toward toward the viewer.

Okay, so there's gonna be more room on the upper floor than there is on the upper floor.

It's a very narrow, like a 12 foot wide upper floor right now, and they're wanting to expand that.

Yeah, that's a good okay.

So the so the wall now on the left side, the the existing wall is not as far over to the left on the upper floor.

Correct.

Okay, I see.

Yeah, I think I mean it seems like suddenly a big deal, and I guess it is that you know, but if you're saying if you're telling us that a lot of this is not obviously historic, I mean it actually looks like on the sandboard map, it looks like it was there in 1917, but maybe it was maybe that was a porch at one point.

Oh, it was, it was 1917.

Looks like it shows a porch.

Um cobble of porches.

Okay, I don't I see what you're saying.

Do we have any demarcation between the what is old and what is new?

Usually we we like to have a uh uh a line.

Yes, sir.

So that that will be the line, and that'll be the corner of that bump out, and so we'll I think it'll be demarked very well on both sides in that yeah, same same on that side.

There'll be a vertical board trim board right there.

Okay.

In my opinion, this works for the old guidelines as well as the new guidelines.

Commissioner are there any conditions we would like to add?

We're ready to make a motion.

Okay.

I make a motion to approve case number HZ-2617 at 4401 St.

Elmo Avenue as submitted pursuant to the Chattanooga City Code Chapter 10 Article 2, Section 10-15E, and pursuant to the Chattanooga Historic Guidelines.

The approval is subject to no conditions.

Second, second amount.

Nathan, all in favor.

Motion carries.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay, great.

We'll move to our next new business case.

So this is HZ2670 at 4617 Florida Avenue in the St.

Elmo neighborhood, it is a historic structure, circa 1925.

Um, description of the proposed project.

It's an addition.

I did have to issue a stop work order.

Um the applicant um began work without their building permit or certificate of appropriateness.

And you can see 1917 Sanborn, the building's not there, but it is there in 1930.

And we don't have any historic zoning history for the property.

So here's an aerial of the property and then the property within the San Elma Historic District Overlay.

And then property photos.

And this uh street view, you can see before the addition on the left.

So that old carport was removed.

And then neighboring property photos.

There's a site plan showing that that um carport was removed and that they added uh 10 by 14 addition.

Another site plan provided by the applicant there.

So you can see that addition on the back left corner, uh, again where that car port was previously.

Then existing elevation front and side drawing here from the applicant showing the dimensions of the um addition.

Some more pictures of that addition and then the showing the foundation height.

Uh this is a video.

I'm happy to pull it up of kind of some of the work being done on site if we need to take a look at that, and then a receipt of materials.

And then some more um application information talking about house wrap and windows, the gable in the roof, uh ensure windows are level and square, install soft and fascia, um support structure, the understructure area, and then it's install exterior siding or approved exterior finish system.

We'll have the applicant confirm, but I think they were requesting vinyl siding.

So here is the staff report.

So this is um the requirement from the matrix and the new guidelines.

So additions that are more than 150 square feet that are visible or inconsistent with scale, massing height, and rhythms need to come before the commission.

And again, this was a stop work order, so we've got it in front of you.

So chapter 11 additions, new construction and demolition, locating additions at the rear side elevations.

Uh, this is the appropriate section.

Sorry.

Locating additions at the rear or side in a manner that is clearly subordinate to the primary structure.

Yes, constructing additions that can be removed in the future without permanently damaging the historic building.

Uh, yes, constructing an addition that's smaller than the existing building or in a similar scale that is not prominently visible from the public right-of-way.

The addition is smaller again, it's 10 by 14, but it's visible from West 47th Street.

Uh constructing an addition with similar form and massing to the existing building and adjacent sites.

Yes, constructing an addition at the rear of the building or side elevation as far back on the site as possible.

Yes, and maintaining the primary facade or principal elevation of a building towards the street elevation.

Uh, yes, on Florida Avenue.

That elevation has is untouched.

And then using altern alternate materials on additions as long as the material is a lesser material than the original construction.

So this is more applicable if we're talking about kind of a stucco or brick home and doing a wood clabbered addition.

Uh we'll have the applicant confirm materials for the siding, roofing, foundation, and windows, and then uh some notes from the inappropriate section, designing additions with materials not used on the property or similar buildings in the district.

Again, we'll have the applicant confirm the materials for siding, roofing, foundation, and windows, and then using contrasting materials for the addition when compatible materials are available.

Oh, so we'll have uh the applicant's presentation.

If you could just state your name and address for the record, please.

Um, six seventeen law and uh I'm out of my depth.

I just want y'all to know I'm here to represent my mother-in-law and the uh contractor.

Um he sent some things for me to say.

I really don't know what to say.

I just we want to comply with whatever you guys um asked us to do to preserve the historical uh area.

Um that's pretty much all I got to say.

I'm here because he couldn't be here.

Sure.

Um I think I had talked with Calvin, the contractor.

I think he noted that he wants to fill in the foundation with concrete block.

And then we had talked about vinyl siding.

Did you have any more information on the materials?

Uh he he's he's gonna go with whatever materials that you guys suggest.

Um he's want to get it done and do it right.

Okay, so sure.

Yeah, thank you.

Yeah, I don't know.

I'm scared, right?

I'm out of my depth.

This ain't what I do.

So well, thank you.

Do we have any community comments or comments by other persons?

Okay, we can move to commission discussion.

Does anyone have any initial comments or questions?

Just a quick question.

The existing siding is wood siding or does it have vinyl siding on it now?

I can't I think it's aluminum siding.

Is that do you know, sir, what the white siding is on the house?

I think it was aluminum.

Okay.

I think so as well.

But I I did hear him um talk to my um mother-in-law about the type of siding that you guys suggested.

So that's they're working on that.

Okay.

And can't are the wind looks like those windows are not original Cassie.

Yeah that's correct.

Okay.

And again that addition is right here.

Could you stop at that view right there?

Yes.

So first I will say I think the addition makes sense and I don't have where I think it is and I I meant to drive by I did not have a chance I don't think there's anything in this edition the size the shape the location that we would object to but looking at the drawing that was submitted I'm confused maybe the sizes are off because from right there just thinking about how wide this house probably is based on you know it's probably a you know how wide the lots are it looks like the addition is filling in where the carport is the the carport's gone and now there's an addition there.

Correct.

But if I look at this the existing elevation the drawing that shows the dimensions it's showing it being 20 feet wide um and it's showing a left and a right side to it but I don't know how there can be a left and a right side if it's just filling in that if it's just filling in where there used to be a carport.

Like I can't I can't square what the drawing what these photographs are if I can see the drawing I maybe I can explain.

Yeah because I'm just I should have gone by there but I'm confused.

Yeah so that one yeah so that one 19 foot eight is the width of that addition but that would mean but I know the addition is more narrow than the main part of the back of the house.

Correct.

But there's no way that house is 60 feet wide or 50 feet wide okay I don't think and then I've got a left and a right side but I don't I don't understand where especially on the the left hand side of the page I don't know where that I can't figure where that picture is taken from yeah something something the right side I can tell and it looks like based if I didn't see that left hand side I'd say well the addition is filling in where the carport used to be right which seems fine but then I have a right side that shows it sticking out from the house and I don't know where that's taken from yeah I can't I can't square that either I'm looking at it so these are the pictures from when I issued the stop work order I see like that left side inside my house I'll be honest that left side elevation looks like AI to me.

It looks like it was full it almost appears it is an element from like a material it's kind of back out another picture from this side I think in some way we need to just act like that's not there or exclude it from this presentation.

Yeah there should only be two elevations right it's built into the corner of the home so the one that says left side elevation is not an actual photo and then the front and right side elevation that's depicted that's are the actual photos and it aligns with the what is there whatever it is 10 foot by 14 foot I think we would ignore the dimensions too because I think maybe those dimensions aren't accurate the width anyway I don't think I don't think they are they there it shows 10 by 400 40 foot yeah 10 by 14 in which case it's not even 1450 square feet.

And the right side elevation has a window label it's five by five that's a good point if it's less than 10 by 14 that's less than 150 square feet so that's that still fall under a full addition application.

So for future reference, though, if it were if it were not a stop work, you could have approved this.

Yes, as long as it okay.

Yep.

Okay.

My my only comments would be I I think the I think the siding probably needs to be hardy, in my opinion.

Um I I'd like to see those column piers tucked under the way they are now is odd, and I'm not sure how that's gonna hold up over time.

Um and then the windows.

Do we do we know what kind of windows those are?

Are they vinyl?

Uh I don't know.

I don't know.

I have limited uh, you know, I don't want to gotcha.

I I would say the one windows need to be clad with uh with the grid to match the rest of the house.

Any other comments, commission?

Could I go ahead?

The exterior, I'm trying to remember in the new guidelines where that would even be.

I'm just wondering if if there's any possibility of approving aluminum in kind.

I'm wondering if we could say because uh looking at the pictures that I except for the one that I think maybe AI looking at the pictures, this edition's fine.

I don't think we have any trouble with it.

I wonder if we can just uh make a motion to approve it, but then say materials will be staff reviewed.

So you know they can so we so we're not selecting a material here today that someone may want a different material that would also be good, also be acceptable.

I'd rather just say, you know, what the siding, um, that sort of thing, staff could review that.

So are we good with aluminum or hardy?

I would not want to approve vinyl.

What does this new guideline say about vinyl?

The old one kind of allowed it, kind of allowed it.

I'm not seeing anything that addresses it.

11.6 does there at the bottom.

Talks about vinyl.

I didn't like it.

And then if we're just looking at exterior woodwork, page 6.12 has the appropriate and inappropriate for repairing.

And we may have more in that chapter about vinyl.

Yeah, so they're on the bottom of 11.6 if vinyl is under an inappropriate material.

We have any other questions or comments.

Or would someone like to make a motion?

Could it just say with that um make a motion we that we're making a motion to approve uh, but that uh material selections are to be staff uh staff reviewed?

Um and then as far uh skip as far as the those columns.

I I see in that middle picture there's I see some flashing in there to shed water.

I don't know that I would I share your concern, but I don't know at this point that I would want to ask someone to move a column.

You know, I think it's on the rear.

I think it's okay.

Any other comments we're ready to go?

Are you okay with the foundation materials?

It being filled in with concrete block.

I believe that was the plan.

I think we typically say it needs to be did we say stucco on it or again, it needs something, you know.

It's that can't just be a bare block, and I would say the choice of material could that be staff reviewed as well.

That's fine.

Usually put a code over it.

I mentioned this on the last case uh about a a line of demarcation between the old and the new.

It it uh would would be good to have a vertical board separating what is old and what is new.

Yeah, put a trium in there where you can see something where that old siding will have something to stop against.

And I should note also I think it's allowed to be open, it's allowed to not be enclosed having having peers like this, right?

Yeah, and there are like appropriate screening if we can do one.

Yeah, I can coordinate with the applicant on the materials, yeah.

Matt, unless they reside the whole house, I mean they would they would have to put in a piece of double J.

Like I think the most thing that makes most sense is just continuing with aluminum siding and put a piece of aluminum double J in there any other comments.

I make a motion to approve case number HZ26 70 4617 Florida Avenue submitted pursuant to Chattanooga City Code Chapter 10, Article 2, Section 1015E, and pursuant to Chattanooga Historic Guidelines approval is subject to the following conditions.

Add vertical trend between old and new work, exterior materials, including screening under addition or to be staff reviewed.

Do we have a second?

Second second by Matt.

All in favor?

All right.

Aye.

Any opposed?

All right.

Motion carries.

Thank you.

Thank you, guys.

Yeah, I have a wonderful day.

All right.

That was our last case for today.

And forgive me, I don't have a slide saying this, but we need to hold our um elections.

So I'll defer to city attorney for that.

All right.

We will need to um elect chair and vice chair.

Um, so we'll start with the chair position.

Uh does anyone want to volunteer or nominate a board member to be or one or more uh board members to to possibly be the uh chair for the forthcoming year?

If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Yeah, okay.

If you're amenable to being I will stay in this role again, nominates get pawned.

All right.

Any other nominations?

All right, we will close nominations for chair.

Um all in favor of Chip Pond as chair for the next year.

Say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Congratulations, uh, Mr.

Ponds, Chair Pond.

Thank you.

Uh and for vice chair.

Um, that's the same process.

Anyone can volunteer or nominate uh any member of the board.

We do need someone to be nominated.

I will nominate that, Cliff.

Continue.

All right.

Uh I forgot I was.

So you amenable to that?

Uh yes.

Okay.

Uh, any other nominations?

We will close nominations.

All in favor of Cliff McCormick as vice chair for the upcoming year.

Say aye.

I need opposed.

Congratulations, Mr.

McCormick.

That concludes our officer elections.

Thank you.

Um, don't really have any staff updates for you all.

I believe um tomorrow we're expecting to get the application for Lupton City to become a local historic districts, which means you will potentially be reviewing that in August.

Uh it could be September, but just make you aware of that.

Um, but otherwise, we will see you all next month.

I think we may do our ethics training as long as our agenda's not too long, but we'll keep you guys posted.

All right.

Anything else, or do we have a motion to adjourn?

Um yes, sir.

I was telling you assumption stand up to attend this meeting.

Uh I have a couple of questions about some land I purchased.

And I wanted to build on and I wanted to bring I guess before the board and get their approval because I was concerned about what might happen later on.

I signed up for the to be here today.

Okay.

And do you have um an address for the properties that you're yes, it's uh 3540?

Okay.

So that's not within one of our local historic districts.

This is the historic zoning commission, so we only review cases that are in one of our four historic districts.

Um pre-submittal meeting?

We have those on Thursdays.

Okay.

Let me get you to the right.

We'll get you to the right place.

Okay.

Sorry about that.

Before we adjourn, can we recognize Python as being here so that uh she gets credit for being here?

Yes.

All right.

We'll take a motion to adjourn.

Matt, we have a second.

Second by Nathan, all in favor.

Thank you all.

This was an unit of the short month.

I didn't believe this.

So I guess uh inside and look at it closely.

So it's like we could just look at it.

Or just that increase what you want to do.

So September 500.

Okay, it's been looking forward to all of planning commission meetings.

That's true, but that is gonna be uncomfortable.