Historic Preservation Commission Meeting
Video Transcript
Duration: 70 minutes
Speakers: 11
Oh,
oh, no. We'd be
not. Let's
see what I
can find. Play next. Play
next, please. Oh, that's good.
I got a shirt in my bag. No. It's in here. I'll just leave this up.
It's a case. Is downtown.
Yeah.
Yeah. Yeah. It did a little bit. That would give me an excuse to get a new one.
Thank you. Trustee. Alright.
Okay. Sorry about that.
Today is 09/10/2015,
and this is the Roswell Historical Preservation
Commission.
I want to read to you a little bit about the commission, the district, and what we do here this evening. The current Roswell Historical Preservation Commission was established in 1988 with the mission to protect and preserve the historical and archaeological resources within the boundaries of the district.
The commission is composed of dedicated volunteers who are appointed by the mayor and city council to carry out the design review process and other tasks as outlined in section 13 of the Unified Development Code. My name is Philip Mansell. I am the Historic Preservation Commission Chair.
The HPC commission members are vice chair Mark DiNolo,
Ron Jackson,
Wassey Lively,
Gertesh Narang, Mary Nichols, and Michael Sutton. Also present is Judy Muir, who is the ex officio member and is president of the Roswell Historical Society.
Tonight, we have with us from the City of Roswell's planning and zoning staff, Shay Dixon.
The process will begin with staff presenting the application. This presentation will be include applicable codes and guidelines and staff recommendations based on our UDC and design guidelines,
as well as the secretary of interior
standards for rehabilitation of historic properties and our historic district master plan.
Commission members may then ask questions to city staff regarding the application. Next, the applicant will present the project and commission members may ask questions and or clarifications in regard to the application.
Commission members may then ask questions to city staff regarding the application.
Then we will take public comments which are limited to three minutes per speaker and we need them to remain on topic.
The applicant may have rebuttal to public comment. If so desired, the commission will have further discussion if needed,
then we will call for a motion which will require a second to that motion, then a vote. Another motion may be offered. At that time, anyone aggrieved by a decision of the HPC has the right to appeal to mayor and city council.
Such an appeal must be filed with the planning and zoning director within thirty days of the decision.
Thank you, and let's get started.
Before we get started, I'd like to take a moment of silence for, Preston Font, the firefighter who was killed yesterday, and Charlie Kirk.
Okay.
We will go to,
partial demolition,
HPC 202527791076
Canton Street, certificate of appropriateness for partial demolition
for the restoration of an existing historic structure.
Previously divert. So we'll call Shay up to the sand.
Before we have a discussion with the chief building official.
Now starting off with 1076 Canton Street, Ball House Founders Hall.
This is a deferred application
from the last meeting.
Previously, this was a previously, this was an application to demolish the entire building and rebuild with the surviving historic struct or materials.
This new application or it's actually the same application. This revised plan for the same application
is only a partial demolition in order to actually restore the building using as as much
demolition in order to actually restore
the building using as as much of the historic structure that is there as possible.
Now going to the time line, most of this presentation will be basically just a repeat of of last meetings. Nothing much has changed about the base background of the facts.
Still application was still received back in June, past staff reviews in July.
It was first reviewed last month, August 13 meeting of HPC,
and these revised plans are now being reviewed,
today, September 10. In y'all's staff report as well as presentation,
any changes made,
from staff's perspective because of the revised plans are labeled in red for your convenience, and these staff reports are also available for the public online.
Once again, here's the the existing front facade of 1076 Canton Street as it exists today.
And the existing building with the non historic side and rear addition, which are off to the right.
This part of the application only focuses on the historic portion. This is the front part of the building. The rear part of the building was already approved for changes
as part of the other application that was filed for 1076 Canton Street and was voted on at our previous meeting.
Moving on here, here are here's Founders Hall in the twenty tens,
still with its gardens out in the front end as well. Again, a front facade photo from just a few weeks ago.
Here's the existing rear facade. Again, this part of the building is completely,
been approved for changes
based upon the previous approvals. This is not included in this packet.
But what is included in this packet is this part of the building here, the existing south facade, which also includes the non historic front porch, which has already been improved for demolition,
as well as some of the historic cornice returns as part of the architectural features of this particular building.
The interiors we've already discussed has already mainly been stripped down. HPC doesn't have any jurisdiction over the interior renovations,
just the just the exterior, but it gives you a little bit of a perspective of what's been going on at this,
at this particular location.
As we've previously discussed, the architecture is of a Greek revival style. It's It's an I house, form of house, which is relatively rare for Roswell's historic district as well as just Southern historic areas in general. He's more common towards the Midwest.
It follows fairly closely
to the Greek revival style as well as has many of the elements that are described in both the UDC design guidelines
as well as the architectural guide used most commonly by myself. It's the field house to American field guide to American houses.
Rectangular
shape plan, two stories, symmetrical.
It's clapboard,
has a full height, full height front porch, though, as we discussed, the non historic front porch.
It is a gabled roof in the front and hipped in the non historic portion.
Double hung sash, six over six windows,
classical columns, transom and sidelights are very classical for this type of this type of Greek revival home, and this home does have them, and the emphasis on the cornice lines.
It vaguely roughly follows the I House form. The front historic portion does still follow the definition of an I House, which is one room deep, two rooms wide, and two stories high. However, the non the non historic additions in the rear,
kind of all sort of this form to a certain extent.
We've already gone over the history. Major events
building was originally built in 1870,
was owned by the same family, the Ball family, for over seventy years. That's why it was originally called Ball
House. Became known as Founders Hall after renovation in the nineties to become more of a special event space.
And now today,
the proposal to be more of a a club hotel type of style.
Here is the previously approved demo plan from the previous approval in 2021,
just removing the front porch and rear porch, the non historic front and rear porch.
And this was the previously proposed demo plan, which took down took down the entire building to rebuild with the same materials.
Here are revised
elevations.
The chimneys are gonna stay in place as they are just being repointed.
The siding is the main thing that's going to be taken off, and our applicants have
on multiple occasions, notified us that the siding is at least partially structural or at least believed to be partially structural, which is one of the primary reasons this is still considered a partial demolition even though they're putting the siding back onto the building afterwards,
after sheathing is installed. Because it's structurally
structural, we wanna make sure we're following
the, the demolition procedures that we've started to develop here at the city as closely as possible.
Recommendation recommended conditions from staff changed a little bit because of the change in plans.
Now we're recommending that the applicants must submit a detailed engineering report to the chief building official, planning and zoning director, and the historic district planner confirming that the building can withstand the scope of this work,
that the building must be inspected by the chief building official to demonstrate that the historic portion of the building can withstand the restoration
that will include the removal and replacement of materials.
The applicant must adhere to any and offshoring and phasing requirements issued by the chief building official,
that any original historic materials, which is anything that is could reasonably have been on the building prior to 1975,
that are not rotten, broken, or otherwise beyond repair are to be placed back on the structure in their original location,
and that the applicants must provide a written inventory to the planning and zoning director of those materials that were, in fact, saved and reused.
These recommendations
come because the partial demolition of the rest of the restoration for the historic structure represents a a bit of a best case scenario for the preservation of this structure.
Applicants and their engineer have have well notified us of the difficulties with this building,
of the cost of restoring this building,
and the fact that it would likely be difficult to continue
being an occupied used building if kept in its current state. Of course, that being said, this building is a reconstruction era Greek revival I house. That's not something that's very common in the historic district. Just the plain fact that it's over a 150 years old is worthy of pause to make sure sure we're doing everything as best as we can. And this represents one of the best possible scenarios we think for keeping that building and keeping its historic nature.
In saying that the restoration process will result in the preservation of the historic character of the structure, avoiding the loss of its contributing components
represented by the structure and maximizing the reuse of the historic materials.
And as we've
mentioned previously, in order for the site to be adequately used and therefore successfully contribute to the historic district, partial demolition and restoration
Thank you, Shay.
Will the applicant like to come forward?
Alex Paul Alex Paulson with Randall Paulson Architects.
I really don't have much to say, but to thank Shay and Jeannie for working with us to get us where we are today. We listen to you guys, and we listen to the people that came to express concern,
and we're here
to keep the building and bring it back to its charm.
Thank you, mister Paulson. I I am personally very impressed with, what you guys came back with. I I feel like
obviously, it's a very delicate situation, and I feel like you guys have done a great job of compromising with
the the city's interest,
and your own as well.
Somebody questions? Yeah. This is Mary Nichols. I agree with Philip.
And one thing I would like to see if we can change
is,
instead of calling it partial demolition,
can we call it deconstruction? Or I I think
demolition is going to be a negative, and we don't need that.
I understand.
We have a bit of a process discussion later on this evening
where I think we can it'll maybe bring some more insight.
The City has worked hard after
the loss at 30 Goulding
to work with the Planning and Zoning and Chief Building Official and Building Regulations Division
to make sure our processes
preserve
those
structures that we want preserved.
So
the use of that terminology is intentional
because what it triggers.
So I do understand. I hear you and I think we could talk more about it later.
For this matter,
keeping it as a demolition
and just revising the current application
also was important
to move forward
quickly and not have to stop the process and start a new one.
Thank you, Jeanne. Ron.
This is Ron Jackson.
I like this.
This is really a good solution, I think.
The nomenclature
of,
demolition versus
reconstruction or whatever, we can work that out. But when we look at 30 Goulding,
I've had people come to me and say, well, you know, this is gonna start a trend.
We don't like our building. We wanna redo it, so we'll neglect it and let it fall in like they did at 30 Goulding.
The person that got the citation
on 30 Goulding was not 30 Goulding. It was next door. Miss Smith got the citation,
which that's a discussion for another day.
I like the idea of let's
save what we can,
try to renovate it, make it structurally sound so that when Ms. Lively and I go in there for events, we don't worry about falling in.
We worry about it now when we look at those pictures
and we think back on the times we were there. So I think it's really important. We don't want to have Kansas Street full of houses that fall in so we can reconstruct them at a cheaper rate.
So
I like it. I think
the the most we can if we can save as much as possible, I like that.
So let's do that.
Judy.
I also wanna thank you. State your name.
Oh, I'm Judy Meer, Roswell Historical Society.
I wanna thank you very much, all of you that have anything to do with this, for coming back with this partial demolition
and,
restoration
because we don't have many of those style houses, only a few.
Rebuilding
it like it looked
is not in a historic property.
And I think with Roswell being known for its historic character and the historic homes, I think it's extremely important that it does remain. So thank you all very much. And I agree with everyone else because probably
some of us will be going there for one reason or another. And, obviously, we wanna walk through it and don't feel the floors
giving. So, good luck with that, and thank you very much.
Yep.
Mark DiNolo, I'll concur with what everybody said. I know we
we had quite a conversation last meeting, and I appreciate you going back and taking a look at it and just having, you know, the sensitivity to to do what you can to preserve the building. So thank you.
Alright. Anybody from the public?
Okay.
Do I have a motion?
Oh, actually, before, question for you.
If the building inspector goes in and determines that it can't be,
restored and has to be demolished,
do we need to have something
in our motion about that, or
is that, like, automatically
that's just
I believe with the shoring and phasing plan language that it would be automatic if it was determined. I just wanna make sure we have our basis confidence. I feel like you're
definitely protected in the language that you Alright. Cool. Alright.
I make a motion. This is Ron Jackson. I make a motion in the matter
of HPC
2025.
I think that's yeah, that's 25.
27791076
Canton Street, certificate of appropriateness.
I move that this
motion as written be approved.
Do I have a second?
Mark DiNolo. I'll second that motion.
All in favor?
Passes unanimously.
Thank you very much. Thank you very much, mister Paulson. Good luck. Alright. Thank you.
Okay. Next, we're gonna move to item number three,
Thank you, guys.
Apologies there. I had to scroll to the, to the case.
Okay. This is 52
that we request for a certificate of appropriateness
for alternative materials for a retaining wall.
Now applicants are requesting a certificate appropriateness
for an alternative style of retaining wall as well as some minor site changes. The applicants have already received,
administrative approval for a flagstone retaining wall, but have requested approval to use concrete blocks due to potential financial burden, which is a material that in the design guidelines is specifically
stated cannot be used. Therefore, it cannot be passed administratively, but can be passed by the board if so chosen.
The application was originally
re received,
07/15/2025.
The fees received until June 30.
I probably mixed up those months. I apologize. It's probably June 15 and July 30. I apologize.
Unless they paid their fees two weeks before they submit the application.
I apologize for that. Application past staff reviews August 5, and it is now being reviewed today, September 10.
Now this is
this is the previously approved development of the site. This is the site as it stands today.
52 Goulding Place. Now the retaining wall is actually on the rear of the property. It's not clearly visible from any public right of way,
and it has
pardon me. It's one of the few different retaining walls on the property due to its its unusual terrain.
But as we move on, the architecture of
of the house itself isn't particularly
standout. It's a new traditional,
Victorian home as our architectural guides would suggest.
So it's trying to find elements of Victorian style houses, but this home was built in the in the nineteen nineties. It's nothing that's actually historic in and of itself, but does in fact adhere to many of, the guidelines we'd want to see in Victorian style homes despite that effect.
And the proposed retaining wall doesn't have specific architectural style.
It does reach a maximum height of four feet six inches and is 92 feet long spreading across the property. I will get a site plan on here in one second for you as well.
History of the property. The site itself is the property itself is considered non historic.
Staff doesn't believe that
staff believes that though this was the statement, in 2003 and the 2003 historic resources survey, This is probably still accurate at the time the building isn't over 50 years old. Though it would be architecturally contributing because it hasn't reached that age minimum, it wouldn't usually be considered historic. But because it is architectural contributing,
it's not, it wouldn't be considered intrusion like some properties are.
Zoning is downtown residential
and,
history is relatively short. The road the property was built on was built circa 1857
as part of the driveway to the actual Goulding House. The time was called Colonial Place.
The property was included in an expansion of the historic district in 1988.
HPC approved a new house with, quote, unquote, traditional architecture and materials in 1995.
Some minor changes occurred in 2008 and 02/2012. It's mainly a change to the roof line and then a change to window panes on the master bathroom.
And then in February 2025, a field stone retaining wall was approved by staff.
And then in July 2025, this application is submitted.
Now these are the previously approved retaining wall materials.
The applicants were approved for either one of these stone materials. Stone and brick is the material of choice for new retaining walls in a historic district.
Stone is the one that's actually specifically mentioned in the UDC design guidelines, but by procedure, staff usually considers brick to be close enough to stone to,
be considered appropriate. But in this case, considering considering the site, considering the cost,
the applicants believe that stone was probably the best choice between those two and they were approved for either a medium stack or a meat or small stack form of field stone.
And, this is the proposed material for the retaining wall. It is a type of concrete block.
It is specifically mentioned in the UTC design guidelines to not be
a material for use in the historic district,
but the same design guidelines
grant HPC specifically,
the ability to grant exception to that.
Here's the site plan. Here again, we can see how the retaining wall is very much towards the rear of the property,
not visible from the front public right of way. The only other site plan change here is that the, some AC unit pads are being replaced, and that would be included as part of the approval for this particular
application.
Now staff recommends this for approval with conditions,
with the condition being that the retaining wall must be screened with landscaping
to minimize visibility from any budding lots and to definitely eliminate any visibility from any public right of way. Now from what we can tell, this isn't this will not be visible from any public right of way regardless of screening or not, but this condition specifically allows for,
a little bit more landscaping to make sure that it's reduced from the budding lots as well.
Staff recommends this because while the proposed retaining wall does not use approved material from the design guidelines,
the retaining wall is
minimally visible from any public right of way.
Recommended conditions assist in limiting that visibility from a budding
properties. Strict adherence to the UDC and UDC design guidelines in this case may prove financially burdensome to the applicants,
and the retaining wall being on the rear of the property is already in an area located
that is not considered highly sensitive to preservation
or architectural contribution to the district.
And that is what I have for y'all. We go back Philip Mansfield here. We go back to the picture of the house. Of course.
And we don't have another picture
of,
like, the back of the house? I we unfortunately do not have a picture of the back of the house.
I did get every angle of
I did get every angle of the front facade.
Unfortunately, I don't have them attached here, I'm afraid to say, but they are,
they are there is no way to see the retaining wall from the front part right of way. Okay.
And,
yeah. I
a very good question. I apologize for that. It's something I should have asked the applicants to to get me as a a rear photo, and I apologize for that. I will do better in the future. But That that's okay. No worries.
In this case, I do not have one. We'll work with what we got.
Do you see the gap right there between the houses on the right hand side?
Yes. So I'm assuming a road's running right in front of them. Yes. If we go to Can you see the retaining wall from that gap in between the houses? Going to the parcel map right here,
when on street view, on Google Street view, I am afraid I didn't drive that section of the street myself. But on Google Street view, you couldn't see anything of the retaining wall from that side. There is the possibility that you can see it from the road
behind it,
which is the, the townhomes.
I I'm afraid off the top of my head, I can't remember the name of those townhomes development.
Providence is Providence townhomes.
But that is all private right of way. It's not something that the city particularly looks into to for protecting the visibility from. But that is why we included the, the stipulation of landscaping to protect from abutting properties as well as from the public right of way.
Cool.
Ron.
Mister Dixon, I this is Ron Jackson.
I appreciate
you're doing something very simple, and that is getting to getting us to yes.
Here we are. Yes. Nice solution.
Put some
screening and whatnot.
I really think it's not our job
to
create problems
and particularly an obscure
wall in the back.
And our family had a con a large concrete company in the sixties and seventies, and so I'm very fond of concrete blocks. They paid my way through college.
So
I don't consider those the old eight by eight by 16 blocks. Those are kind of decorative.
So anyway, my point is this,
that I appreciate your getting us here. You're working for a solution that we can live with,
that the the owner can live with, the neighbors can live with. Seems like a good deal, and I appreciate it.
I have a question. Is there a retaining wall there now?
Mary Nichols?
There there is. I'm gonna I can scroll back to the site plan here.
Currently, there is it says x tie. It's a railroad tie retaining wall, which actually is, the other main material that the design guidelines says not to use for new retaining walls. So this is replacing what is already a,
unpreferred material with an unpreferred material. But at least in this case, we'd have some some extra landscape screening to be included. So do their neighbors have have railroad ties or did what are the, joint the lots on either side have? Just curious.
For retaining walls, there is I believe there's one down the street that does use concrete blocks. I feel like I've seen them from, the from the providence from
because I've been over there and I have friends that live there. Absolutely. And you can see the back of these homes, and I have seen concrete blocks and they look fine. So I just that's my feedback. Yeah. There there are a few on the street. I'm afraid I can't say the addresses off the top of my head, but there are a few on the street that have concrete blocks. Those were just installed prior to 2014 when our current UDC design guidelines were put in place.
Thank you. Judy.
This is Judy Muir.
On your drawing, it looks like the railroad ties go from one
side of the lot line to the other
side?
It's And the concrete block wall is only going to be partially
in that area?
I yeah. I believe that I was saying that we have our applicant here who can answer better questions, but I believe it is a complete replacement. It's
92 feet long, I believe, and it should go from one side to the other or very close to that. Okay. Thank you.
Thank you, Shay. Would the applicant like to come up?
Thank you. Jeff Waller,
52 Goulding. My wife and I live there.
Just a couple of points.
The wall was installed in 1995.
It's dilapidated.
It's, it's putting our house at risk from sinking, so we have to replace it.
You know, the wall cannot be seen from the road. We are gonna landscape
and do some really nice things in the backyard which will further hide it. It is consistent with,
the,
Providence,
condominiums use a concrete, a modular block. The the new Goulding subdivision uses a modular block, and
the property adjacent, which is 64 Goulding, has a modular block wall, so it's consistent with everything that's there.
The wall is four and a half feet for about 20 feet, and so the majority of the wall is from, you know, two to three feet tall, so it's not a very significant wall.
The cost of the field stone wall was about 10,000 more dollars than the modular block wall and that's why we we resubmitted.
And we're told that
the modular block,
will provide better structural integrity, that there's less complexity and less chance for error than pouring concrete footers. And so those are the main reasons
that we're looking to do it. Thank you very much. Yep. Thank you, mister Waller. I have a quick question. Is this the house with the white dog?
Yeah. Unfortunately Oh, don't see it. Nope. Yeah.
Yeah. Aspen. Yeah.
Okay. That's yeah.
Funny, though.
My dogs I mean, I wouldn't and mine are gone too. So Yeah. Yeah.
Okay. Well, mister Waller, thank you very much.
Does anybody from the public
have anything
against mister Waller putting up his wall?
Okay.
Do I have a motion?
Ron.
I'll make the motion. This is Ron Jackson.
In the matter of HPC 2025,
304752
Goulding Place retaining wall replacement. I move that it be approved as recommended by the staff.
Do I have a second? I second. Mary Nichols.
All in favor?
Passes unanimously.
Good luck with your attaining law, mister Waller. And thank you for being here this evening.
Okay. We will now move on to item number four, discussion process update.
And I will call
either Shay or Jeannie up here.
Hi. I'm Jeannie Payton, the planning and zoning director.
Thank you all for being here
tonight. Welcome.
Thank you.
I'm also joined by Robert Shepherd, the chief building official, to fill in kind of some of the informational components that are part of building regulations and outside of planning and zoning's
kind of realm of of what we do.
So with 30 Goulding that happened earlier this year,
everyone knows that the structure was lost
due to a partial demolition approval
and with lack of controls in place
to ensure that the construction project moved forward
in a manner that represented
your,
your decision to save the historic part part of the structure.
Robert and I worked very closely
with,
Don,
Stevens,
the chief executive officer
or chief operating officer of the city,
and to develop a new process. It's really a reshuffling
of processes that we have, I would say.
So,
this is where I'm very sensitive. Mary, you mentioned
the calling something a partial demolition,
calling something a demolition at all and what that means for the community.
And believe me, as I presented
this idea
to the ten seventy six applicants,
it's a hard sell as well because
the community is used to reacting to a word like demolition,
but we hope to through this discussion
explain how we can make that
feel better for the community
to know that we're gonna
build their trust in that process.
So what has changed?
First, when a demolition comes forward, we're gonna take step one, which is bringing the proposal for demolition or partial demolition to the H. P. C. As a discussion item, you know, there's a time limit on any application of forty five days. So by bringing them in as a discussion item, it gets the item heard and a better understanding of what the applicant is proposing.
So if you look at UDC thirteen seven eleven,
it allows you to call on the chief building official to provide a report
on the state of repair.
When we were looking at the first demolition process
proposed at October,
it didn't really trigger this process because it was a full demo.
So some of the processes that we're gonna talk about like shoring and phasing
wouldn't have been triggered,
But we did bring them forward as this step one
in an effort to call on the chief building official so that they would have to
provide a structural engineer's report, which they did.
So that was the effort there. We kind of preempted
the spoken word of that process,
but that was that act of bringing them forward as discussion. I know the board is used to having things brought that way.
Step two is that the applicant then has to come back with a demolition
application for the H. P. C. In addition to the redevelopment.
So these are for structures
classified as historic.
So anything
historic obscured
or intrusion would not trigger this process.
Step three is once they receive your approval. Yes.
So
step one, they come they bring it before us. So they have to wait till the next meeting
to so that's another thirty days before they can submit.
So we have met with a few Robert and I have met with a few applicants, Shay included,
where we
make them aware of this process.
So we allow them to come to you before they're ready to make application.
They can save some time
while they're still prepping their construction documents that are required for the HPC demolition.
So we're not costing them any more time than to what's needed
to give this board a heads up.
So once the applicant receives an approval for a demolition or a partial demolition, it's really the partial demolition
that triggers the next process.
They must apply for a demolition permit with building regulations. So tonight, ten seventy six got your approval.
They'll now have to apply for a demolition permit through building regulations to do the work approved. Did did they have to do that previously?
If they were going to do a full demo, they would have.
And really, yes. I mean any of the demolition of the porch and the rear building
would have triggered that.
So this is a point
and it goes to Mary's point as well that we've thought through.
If
building regulations
calls it a demolition
and requires a demolition permit,
that is the gray area where we're going to call it that too.
We might not be
100%
because this could also be
a building
that is in a fragile state and they want to replace the windows.
That could end up being called a partial demolition.
It's going to endanger the integrity of the structure,
and we want it to trigger this process. So, again, we're trying to build a process
that builds the trust from the community that we are trying to preserve. Yes, Ron.
I appreciate your sensitivity
Yeah. To the community and their perception. Because as you know, there are a lot of folks in this town right now. They're a little worked up over things that are happening,
whether it be
down on Bullock Avenue or whatever. But the point being,
we need to be sensitive. We got people freaking out here, and we hear we're gonna tear down Founders Hall or demolition.
I I like softening the words, little euphemism here and there. But on the other hand,
if there is an industry standard
and that includes or the nomenclature
includes
demolition and it means a certain thing. I'm not a builder. I'm not a structural guy.
If it means something to structural guy,
then I can I can absorb that?
And I think we need to be aware that there may be industry terms that we need
to be aware of. On the other hand, we are dealing with the community here that,
they're a little worked over things. So we need to be careful. And if we have to slip in a euphemism,
then let's do that. But
I I I like this.
I
if nothing else, I like the fact that you're aware of the fact that people hear the word demolition and go nuts.
So we have
to
smooth off the edges a little bit. And I think you saw that and our sensitivity
to that tonight in their application where we called it a partial demolition for
restoration.
You know, we don't wanna lose the trust of our applicants either, but we wanna trigger this process. So,
I recently read last week, I suppose, we the city
deconstructed a a historic home.
They called it deconstructing,
but they're taking the whole thing down. They're demolishing it and
saving all of the saving all the pieces because they're gonna rebuild it or use them for something else. So
the
city
could deconstruct I mean, I just it just seems that
deconstruction is such a softer demolition just
I mean, even if they're doing a partial demolition, it's a demolition permit. So I I make a commitment as long as, you know, I have a say in it. We can add those descriptor words that it's a partial demolition
for
deconstruction
and preservation
of the components
of.
I think that building was maybe being done by the Georgia Trust.
So I'm not sure because we didn't I didn't have any, you know,
conversations about that, but I was aware of that structure.
So, yeah, we can continue to talk about this, but I think you'll see in the next slide and as I we explain Robert's
process, you know, the the idea is
if
if someone pulls a records
request and building regulations requires a demo permit but we haven't called it that,
we haven't triggered the process. So that's where our our minds are on this.
So step three, continue.
When the demolition
permit comes in as was recommended in the conditions.
Robert is gonna require that it has a phased demolition plan
to maintain the structural integrity.
Make sure if you use 30 Goulding as an example,
they would have had to present a phased plan
to say we're going to take down this part, not we're gonna gut the entire interior
and foundation of the structure
and to assuring plan, a plan that Robert's team can review
and ensure that the structural integrity remains
again,
did not happen in that previous case.
Do Do you wanna explain the next few points?
Robert Shepherd, chief billing official.
The next next
parts of the slide deal with actually what it says
mitigation. In other words, their their intended function is to mitigate certain hazards. That could be fire, That could be fire, egress, whatever you're looking to do, structural integrity.
But what it's not meant to do is is to kinda to prevent people from doing things. So even if you're dealing with the structures of the historic nature, it may not meet the current building code. That doesn't mean we have to make it. We can account for certain things and mitigate things in different ways.
And so what this
the part of the slides, the existing buildings or structures determined to be of historic nature undergoing alteration or required to be evaluated by a Georgia licensed design professional, that's part of what we're incorporating.
That we want the structure to be looked at before anything starts.
We want a complete evaluation
of what they're going to do.
Can the structure withstand
what they're proposing to do?
Are they gonna get to a certain point and the structure's been so damaged that
they start demolishing and then the whole thing
we know the story.
The intent is to preserve the historic features and maintain the historic nature of the building or structure where compliance would otherwise require changes or reconfiguration of the building or structure. That's what that deals with.
Just
different ways that we can accomplish this to save these structures and make sure that they're they stay in the community.
And we're vigilant of what
we have to do to to make them useful in working with the contractors and the public.
So that's
that's the the next part.
Another another component that Robert's team has committed to is,
at the Goulding property,
there was there was no process in place to ensure that that pre meeting took place.
And with these plans
meeting,
Robert has committed
to having meetings with inspections
set up
to ensure that it doesn't count on the applicant to call in. And I'll let him talk more about that.
After 30 guling,
we sat down, Jeanne and I,
we're kind of collaborating on writing some standards and protocols, SOPs as you will, as to what we would do in the future
and dealing with historic structures and and working with
and helping to assist in getting them to where they need to be both in the contractor side,
the applicant side, the owner side, and our side.
We're dealing with different situations.
Otherwise, we have different skill levels and contractors, different skill levels and
what's expected by
a property owner and stuff. So we're we're balancing different things.
We came up with the protocols
that we're talking about now with the phase demolition and the shoring plan.
And And I don't know of any other jurisdiction that has
these specific requirements in place. I've never seen them. And I'm
kind of reluctant to say it, but I think I will that
implementing what we're putting in place to protect our historic structures, we're we're probably gonna be above and beyond what the jurisdictions around us do to preserve these structures.
And that's kind of the intent.
It's not to make it so difficult
or so hard that we can do things with these structures, but let's just make sure we're doing enough
to preserve them
and helping applicants. That's the most important part. It's the way I train my staff.
Help people. That includes contractors,
applicants, property owners. Let's help. Let's come up with something together that works, that we can create, adopt,
and we can follow.
I train my plan reviewers, train my inspectors,
train my customer service staff
to recognize when these comes in. It's not a large number. I think it was four or five years. Yeah. Four or five years. It's not so much that it's gonna consume so much resources,
but frankly, it's worth it. So
hope that
helps.
Any yeah.
Ron. Yeah. I wanted to,
travel back to Doc's Cafe.
Okay. The newspaper said you're gonna take it apart piece by piece. It also says
you're you doing three d drawings, doing CAD photographs
and taking regular photographs.
And so it'll be back.
Somebody that
was in there way back when would be able to look at it and say, this looks like it originally looked.
That's about right.
Yeah. We we were
were you in part of the Doc's Cafe
deconstruction?
Yeah.
So I don't know if it's a parks and rec project, but it's not something that reached us there in community development.
Well, it says that,
it's in the,
Oxbow area. Mhmm. It's very sensitive.
And I'm not talking about the building.
I'm talking about what it represents. And it's it's sensitive to a lot of people, including me,
because,
things weren't so good back then. And that's where folks went when they wanted a cup of coffee and they couldn't go to,
up here.
So I really appreciate the fact. I don't know any any other alternative than to take it apart and I think that's a little different.
I know when I've alluded to Colonial Williamsburg, they have
reconstruction,
they have,
a number of terms, they have reconstruction restoration
and they're scrupulous.
They may have rules as good as yours
up there. Nothing happens
that doesn't get blessed and isn't
pretty perfect.
So I like the idea that docs is gonna be preserved
whether we take it apart, they put it back together, whatever. I just like to one day be able to see it back together.
One other go ahead. I I have a question. Okay.
Okay. So
at our last hearing,
for the demolisher
of, the Founders Hall,
basically, it it was up to us to decide if it needs to be restored or if it needs to be demolished.
And if we had voted on it being restored,
then,
you would go out and evaluate if the structure could handle the restoration.
So
so basically,
I I guess I I feel like that
that's a little bit of a missing step there where if
if it can't be repaired, I I feel like we should know that answer
before.
So that is step one. Okay. So that is step one. But my question is, like, is that,
are we correcting that? So we I know we don't have a lot of demos and I I Yeah.
But I I just you you know, because we're not,
contractors or anything. We're complete laypeople in that regard.
And so, you know
yeah. No. It's definitely recognizing the subtleties that are in the code. And thirteen seven eleven a gives the board
that trigger power to call someone like rob to call the chief building official Robert into the process.
So at that point when we bring these things forward
for that discussion item, staff will begin
to offer you up
prompts.
Should we,
our professional opinion be
that something like that is needed.
When ten seventy six came in,
that's in the we we immediately jumped to that step.
The discussion was almost secondary.
So
sometimes
we wanna bring it for you bring it to you in the discussion, which is what we did to Mary's point. You don't wanna delay someone too
long,
But that is what's happening in thirteen seven eleven A.
And as we see more of them, our process can improve.
You as a board can decide how you want to exercise that. If it means two discussions,
we just don't want them to turn in an application
where the clock starts Right. Until you're comfortable with what you need to see. Awesome.
Thank you, g.
What?
Oh,
Robert's gonna talk about some terminology.
Yeah. Demolition is a is a it's a pretty hard word.
I'll do my best here.
There are a lot of terms that we're used to, like,
just saying somebody's building a house, they're gonna install the drywall. Everybody knows what that means. They're gonna put the board inside. If you open a building code, that term doesn't exist anywhere.
Doesn't exist. How many of you heard the term for electrical? The sub panel in my house.
That term does not exist anywhere in the building codes.
We try to use specific terms because we can match them to what the code is telling us and where the code is guiding us. It uses these terms and it offers definitions for these terms or helps us understand
where myself and contractors are speaking the same language. And my background is construction for over thirty years.
I didn't come to this side until 02/2017,
But these terms, they have to have an equal meaning. So if we use somebody, if we use a term,
and the term isn't something that somebody's
we're in the industry used to hearing, then it can sometimes create confusion because we we create
regional dialects. And one and one of that is is is a,
a hurricane clip.
Nobody makes a hurricane clip. It it it's it's just a a general term used for a mechanical fastener.
Doesn't exist.
Nobody has the nobody has the rights to that. It's not called a hurricane clip. It's it's got an actual model name and everything to it. So
with terms,
and and I understand where you're going with the with the different terminology, but we use these terms
because they're they're defined by the building code and they give us guidance as to what we need to do, what we need to see, where we need to follow.
Examples, property lines, things like that. Those are all defined terms. Demolition is is one of those.
But I understand where you're coming from. That makes sense.
Thank you, Rob.
So so here are some recaps and I can share the slide presentation with you all. So you have these kind of pointed items to to look at later on. I also printed off the demo section so you can kind of of absorb it later on.
But the demolition and historic district is governed by U. D. C. 13711
and it has mirroring
criteria
in the design guidelines
5.52
And this is a list of those criteria. They're what you saw for this case last month.
They're what you're going to see for any case that is termed
as a demo or partial demo. And again,
this can range from
a window coming out that's large enough to make a structure unstable
to
a full demolition.
Some other guidelines that give additional standards are
5.53,
minimizing damage to historic structures when demolishing a non historic addition.
The code tasks us with carefully removing non historic additions features to avoid damage, historic building and wall features,
repair historic building walls that are exposed
when non historic additions or features are removed. These are sections of the code that Robert and I relied heavily on when working through the process after the Goulding
incident.
The UDC guidelines
demolition by neglect standard. We've used this with a few,
people who showed up on our doorstep.
Buildings that should not be allowed to deteriorate by failure
to provide proper maintenance.
Ordinary maintenance such as painting will not be evaluated by the H. P. C. However, if they fail to maintain a property and create a condition of neglect,
the city can take steps.
So this is a term that early on in Robert and I, when we started here about a year ago, that we've had to use with people to say, you just can't let your historic structure
fade away so that then it's eligible for demo. We've heard that out of a few people.
So let me let me see if I get this. This is Ron again. Let me share I heard you and I think you were very clear. I just wanna make sure Sure. That
if in the case of, say, 30 Goulding,
some guys said, you know, it's a whole lot easier for us to let it fall in than to do
anything. So let's ignore it.
We have something in the UDC that could slap
them. Well, it's tricky with that particular case where this can apply very clearly
is for a structure with an owner that is just failing to maintain the structure.
I think we have an example across the street with a historic gas station.
It is,
classified as historic.
Therefore,
as with any property in any part of the city, a property has to have property maintenance.
A structure like
that came across Robert's desk last year because it had a failing
retaining wall. And so the applicant
is not interested
in
being the person who renovates that building,
but it's not for him to decide what happens.
It's not for him to neglect until your decision
is made clear.
So we do have provisions that are provided to us. And I think this even comes down from the secretary of state.
I'm sorry. Secretary of interior. Wrong secretary.
To to establish
that
demolition
neglect terminology
so that we can identify when that has happened. And there's also provisions in the demolition section of 13
of the UDC that allow
the board to make a decision of what to do, what steps to take.
The final
section for review
are the relocation
of building standard. This would,
come into play with Doc's Cafe. Historic buildings within the district should not be moved from one site to another
except were threatened
with demolition or loss of integrity.
So that just gives you some guidelines when considering
move,
proposals.
Judy. Yes.
Judy Muir.
In the past, there were several buildings that I observed
that had been neglected and
I tried to get a demolition by by neglect.
That would have to go before a judge
at least back then for anything to happen.
And it never nothing ever happened.
So
what would be the procedure
to actually
code enforcement
case. And then code enforcement can issue citations,
when someone is not in adherence to the code and then it goes to court.
So then it we we provide all this evidence in that situation.
We can't guarantee the outcome
at that point,
but we can guarantee that we will call it what it is
if we've seen neglect.
Is there any kind
of fine associated with it or anything that would
prod someone into activity?
Definitely not through the UDC, the sections that the planning and zoning,
administrate.
And this is something we really investigated
with the 30 Goulding property.
And Robert's code, and I'll let him speak to it more,
actually prohibits him from being punitive.
So there are steps we can take to kind
of let the state boards know that
a contractor has not acted correctly, but there's nothing we can do
punitively.
So the property owner can be
receive a citation or something, but that doesn't necessarily
make him do
what he needs to do to
citation issued by code enforcement and Robert can speak more because he has some powers that I'm not even aware of,
there's a court process. Mhmm.
Shepherd.
It is
part of the
the protocols that we were writing for this,
was also gonna include as we do with dirty cooling
of inspections not being called in at the right time. You know, I'm backing up a little bit here and I apologize, but, one of the things we wanna write into the ordinance is that there would now be a fine for that. There would be a fine if somebody missed an inspection like,
we were issuing a permit and they didn't because it it rolls over into other permits too, not just historic district. People just don't call in inspections, and we don't hear from them again, and then years later. So,
but, yes, that there's that.
We are
I am
researching,
what I can do. I'm meeting with legal, determining what my avenues are
to address some of these issues because, I mean, it's not just historic. I mean, we have dilapidated structures. We have we have a lot of things going on. And so,
we're we're kinda setting up those protocols now in the early stages of determining what we can do, where we can go.
I don't wanna see the address. Recently, we had an issue in the historic district with someone doing something that wasn't
approved, and I did take him to court.
And,
and he has
they have since then come into compliance and are are really working. So it it has an effect when when you walk into the courtroom and even though you don't get a fine or you don't get to get just to be there and just
be in that moment, it means something. So,
we're we're working on those steps to put that structure in place to hopefully help.
Robert Phillip Mansell.
So I I've done
battle a couple times with the Oak City of Oakland Historical
Preservation
Commission.
And,
and they are they come after you with the fines.
I do appreciate this. I think that this is good to help motivate
our people
to act accordingly.
Would we be if it does go to court, are we gonna be called in as witnesses
or
would the staff handle that?
I believe The only reason why I ask is because the the Oakland City HPC guy was there that all my court hearings with them. So I haven't seen that happen in my time here. I'm not saying it could never happen,
but I think staff would represent
any kind of communication that happened between HPC.
Robert goes to court on a weekly basis, monthly basis.
Code enforcement goes more often than him. I'm invited maybe once every three months. So I I have acted in that way on behalf of planning and zoning, and I think that would Okay. Cool.
This is Mary Nichols. I have a question. Next next door to 1076
is a home. It's not I don't know that it's historic, but it's in the historic district.
It is falling it's beginning to fall apart. It's
what do we do about that?
Yeah. So if you see something,
yeah, you can report it And that's the first step.
You know, the squeaky wheel gets the grease. We can't see everything that's happening. And I know sometimes you say, well, it's right next door,
but it's maybe not our focus.
Where if a call comes in, a complaint is launched, if it's through code enforcement, you know, they have an entire online system,
then the process triggers. Yes, Ron. The,
comment was made about a structure. I didn't hear the address.
I'm sorry? Missus Nichols mentioned a structure that's misbehaving.
I didn't hear where it is.
She she's It's next door to 1070. It's it's
can I say the name? It's called Beebe's.
I think b e b e. Okay. And I
understand there's some
but anyway It's next door to 1076.
Is that I don't understand. On
on Googling?
On No. On Kansas Street. Street? Okay. I got it.
So Robert and I didn't coordinate this effort, but I believe the person Robert had in court was because my husband and I went to have ice cream.
And when we went to have ice cream, we noticed a violation,
and I let him know the next morning. So
see something, say something, and we can act.
Process. And
some of the structure has to be set in place.
Address some of these things that may not have previously been there or may not been addressed in in the way that we would like to have seen it.
Get that in place and get everybody working in the same direction
to understand how we're how we catalog that information, how
where we issue fines, where we give people an opportunity to comply. So we don't actually get to enforcement
until someone doesn't want to comply.
What we hope
is that we get there, we tell them what we're looking for, and they're all on board and we're all working together. And that's what we hope happens. So
kinda getting all that stuff in place now.
Oh, I hope I've given you some extra information. I know you guys get a lot of questions from the community and
myself, Shane, Robert, we're all sensitive to that.
So
we can continue to have this discussion.
If any of you want to have refresher or an update
or, any kind of further conversation,
please just let us know and we'll add discussion items.
Jeanne, I'm,
very impressed with,
pulling the team together,
addressing some of the issues that we have procedurally.
It's it's very refreshing to see after,
you know, four years of being up here. So thank you for
that. Well, I appreciate that. I do need to call out Robert because so much of this
was just subtle things that we needed to do. Really nothing changed for us and Robert's making the real changes
to his processes. And so it's exciting to see that too, too, that we could work together on that. Thanks, Ryan. Something that happened in the historic district. So
anybody from the public?
Mayor Wood, come on up, sir. Thank you, sir. Thank you for
Well, thank you for your service.
I apologize for getting here late.
I thought it was a normal time of seven, and I'm I apologize if I missed something and if my
presentation
goes in the areas where I shouldn't have been because you've already covered
it. First, I wanna give you my background in,
a little background in
historic preservation.
I and my father and my brother restored the Perry Place,
restored the Fowler House.
I restored two
Mill Village houses in Mill Village.
And when I say I did it, I was the guy driving the nails and and pulling the boards and,
so I knew it from the ground up.
First point I would like to make, I think we can all agree that this is a historic house. There's no question about that.
It's a high profile historic house.
I think it's one of three
two story houses. I happen I'm fortunate to have gotten inherited one from my father, but it's a very high profile house and it's very important
to this community
and your decision will have far reaching effects.
The second thing, I think we've got a clear case of failure to maintain.
That I've been in that house. I wasn't there when miss Ball lived there, but I've been there after Zach restored it and many times and had a few drinks over there. And,
I didn't see that the house was falling down when I walked in it.
I do wanna make it clear that I'm only talking about the historic structure.
All the rest of that crap is crap.
I think it's a great thing for it to be gone. I think it's a great thing for this property to be developed.
But if we come to the historic house,
there was discussion up there. How do we enforce
the penalty for allowing it to fall apart? Well, I think you've got a great example here.
You can either reward the people who allowed this thing to fall apart by letting them tear it down.
Or you can say to the citizens of Roswell, you may let your house fall down. It's just gonna cost you more down the road when you have to fix it back up. And that's the penalty you the only real penalty you have today, and I hope you use that penalty.
And I think it can be
restored. It's not gonna be as cheap as rebuilding it. But you know,
you know what the difference between a diamond
and a cubic zirconium is, folks?
Well, one's real.
This is a real house. It has real value. If they just build a new one just exactly like it, it's gonna be a cubic zirconium. And it's not gonna have any real value to this community. This house has value. It's gonna set an example, and I think the example should be, if you're gonna let that place deteriorate, we're not gonna reward you with a demolition permit. And I think it can be restored. I haven't been in it,
but
my experience in old houses,
the
t the the rot begins
in the floor joist.
That's where the water is, the moisture.
So in the in the First Floor, I've never found one in good shape. But as you go up the building, it gets stronger.
The studs
in the wall,
you can sister those up with new studs
and solve the problem with not having strong studs. You don't have to pull them out. You just sister them up with another set of studs. And as you get to the Second Floor, they get even stronger. And I'll bet you that ceiling in the First Floor is just as solid as it can be,
cause it was not down near the dirt and the moisture.
You get to the attic, it's gonna be sound.
You get to the fireplace. I had heard last time they said it's falling down.
Houses burned down
and the fireplace stands.
This fireplace should never be torn down. So I hope that,
we can work with the with the owner and say, let's try to take that part of this old building that's
restorable and restore it. Let's not replace
a historic home with a cubic zirconium which has no value.
Thank you, mayor Wood. You'd be happy to hear that we, approved them for a restoration
earlier this evening.
So I apologize
for boring. No. No. Not at all, sir. It's always a joy to hear you speak.
Yeah. I think we came to a point in our last meeting where,
the the idea of demolishing the place was was halted
and they rethought the approach. And, you know, I think they have a much better plan tonight with what you just described, with the with the new approach.
They're gonna have to come with a phase demolition plan,
not to overuse that word, and a shoring plan. So we'll be able to see what what happens here.
Ron, you should keep me up with what's going on and I'm missing the button. I just sent you No, sir. I part for taking after time. I just sent you a text message to the subject.
I enjoy hearing you speak, so thank you for coming this evening.
Okay. Let's move on to item number five, the minutes
of 08/13/2025
HPC.
I've got it that the meeting adjourned at 08:45
and present was Mary Nichols, Ron Jackson,
Mark Gianolo, Mary Nichols, and myself.
Do I have a motion?
I move to approve Mary Nichols. I move to approve the minutes. Do I have a second?
I'll second to approve the minutes.
Name from August 13.
Mark Danilo.
All in favor?
Alright. Passes unanimously.
This adjourns the September 10 HPC meeting. Thank you all for attending.
Oh,
hi. Well