HomeMy WebLinkAboutORD 2011-009 ORDINANCE NO. 2011-09
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
GRAPEVINE, TEXAS DESIGNATING A HISTORIC
LANDMARK SUBDISTICT HL10-14 IN ACCORDANCE WITH
SECTION 39 OF ORDINANCE NO. 82-73 (APPENDIX"D"OF
THE CODE OF ORDINANCES), DESIGNATING THE AREA
LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOT 5, BLOCK 109, COLLEGE
HEIGHTS ADDITION, WILLIAM DOOLEY SURVEY AND
MORE SPECIFICALLY DESCRIBED HEREIN, IN A DISTRICT
ZONED "R-7.5"SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT REGULATIONS;
PROVIDING FOR THE ADOPTION OF THE HOWARD-DUKE
HOUSE HISTORIC DISTRICT DESIGN GUIDELINES;
CORRECTING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP; PRESERVING
ALL OTHER PORTIONS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE;
PROVIDING A CLAUSE RELATING TO SEVERABILITY;
DETERMINING THAT THE PUBLIC INTERESTS, MORALS
AND GENERAL WELFARE DEMAND A ZONING CHANGE
AND AMENDMENT THEREIN MADE; PROVIDING A
PENALTY OF FINE NOT TO EXCEED THE SUM OF TWO
THOUSAND DOLLARS ($2,000.00) FOR EACH OFFENSE,
AND A SEPARATE OFFENSE SHALL BE DEEMED
COMMITTED EACH DAY DURING OR ON WHICH AN
OFFENSE OCCURS OR CONTINUES; DECLARING AN
EMERGENCY AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE
WHEREAS, an application was made by the Grapevine Historic Preservation
Commission requesting a historic landmark subdistrict designation by making application
for same with the Planning & Zoning Commission of the City of Grapevine, Texas as
required by State statutes and the zoning ordinances of the City of Grapevine, Texas and
all the legal requirements, conditions and prerequisites having been complied with, the
case having come before the City Council of the City of Grapevine, Texas after all legal
notices, requirements, conditions and prerequisites having been complied with; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Grapevine, Texas at a public hearing
called by the City Council did consider the following factors in making a determination as to
whether this requested historic landmark subdistrict designation should be granted or
denied; safety of the motoring public and the pedestrians using the facilities in the area
immediately surrounding the site; safety from fire hazards and measures for fire control,
protection of adjacent property from flood or water damages, noise producing elements
and glare of the vehicular and stationary lights and effect of such lights on established
character of the neighborhood, location, lighting and types of signs and relation of signs to
traffic control and adjacent property, street size and adequacy of width for traffic
reasonably expected to be generated by the proposed use around the site and in the
immediate neighborhood, adequacy of parking as determined by requirements of this
ordinance for off-street parking facilities, location of ingress and egress points for parking
and off-street locating spaces, and protection of public health by surfacing on all parking
areas to control dust, effect on the promotion of health and the general welfare, effect on
light and air, the effect on the transportation, water sewerage, schools, parks and other
facilities; and
WHEREAS, all of the requirements of Section 39 of Appendix "D" of the Code of
Ordinances have been satisfied by the submission of evidence at a public hearing; and
WHEREAS, the City Council further considered, among other things,the character
of the existing zoning district and its peculiar suitability for particular uses and with the view
to conserve the value of buildings and encourage the most appropriate use of land
throughout this city;
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Grapevine, Texas does find that there is
a public necessity for the granting of this historic landmark subdistrict, that the public
demands it, that the public interest clearly requires the amendment, that the zoning
changes do not unreasonably invade the rights of those who bought or improved property
with reference to the classification which existed at the time their original investment was
made; and does find that the historic landmark subdistrict designation lessens the
congestion in the streets, helps secure safety from fire, panic and other dangers; promotes
health and the general welfare; provides adequate light and air; prevents the overcrowding
of land; avoids undue concentration of population; facilitates the adequate provisions of
transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks and other public requirements; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Grapevine, Texas has determined that
there is a necessity and need for this historic landmark subdistrict designation and has also
found and determined that there has been a change in the conditions of the property
surrounding and in close proximity to the property requested for a change since this
property was originally classified; and, therefore, feels that historic landmark subdistrict
designation for the particular piece of property is needed, is called for, and is in the best
interest of the public at large, the citizens of the City of Grapevine, Texas and helps
promote the general health, safety, and welfare of this community.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
GRAPEVINE, TEXAS:
Section 1. That the City does hereby designate a historic landmark subdistrict
(HL10-14) in accordance with Section 39 of Ordinance No. 82-73, being the
Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the City of Grapevine,Texas same being also known
as Appendix "D" of the City Code of Grapevine, Texas, in a district zoned "R-7.5" Single
Family District Regulations within the following described property: 617 East Worth Street
and legally described as Lot 5, Block 109, College Heights Addition, and in addition
thereto, the adoption of the Design Guidelines as conditions, regulations and safeguards in
connection with the said historic landmark subdistrict, a copy of said criteria being attached
hereto and labeled Exhibit "A".
ORD. NO. 2011-09 2
Section 2. That City Manager is hereby directed to correct the official zoning map
of the City of Grapevine, Texas to reflect the "H" zoning designation.
Section 3. That in all other respects, the use of the tract or tracts of land herein
above described shall be subject to all the applicable regulations contained in said City of
Grapevine zoning ordinances and all other applicable and pertinent ordinances of the City
of Grapevine, Texas.
Section 4. That the zoning regulations and districts as herein established have
been made in accordance with the comprehensive plan for the purpose of promoting
health, safety, morals and the general welfare of the community. They have been
designed with respect to both present conditions and the conditions reasonably anticipated
to exist in the foreseeable future, to lessen congestion in the streets;to secure safety from
fire, panic, flood and other dangers; provide adequate light and air; to prevent
overcrowding of land, to avoid undue concentration of population; facilitate the adequate
provisions of transportation,water, sewerage, drainage and surface water, parks and other
public requirements, and to make adequate provisions for the normal business,commercial
needs and development of the community. They have been made with reasonable
consideration, among other things, of the character of the district, and its peculiar suitability
for the particular uses and with a view of conserving the value of buildings and encouraging
the most appropriate use of land throughout the community.
Section 5. That this ordinance shall be cumulative of all other ordinances of the
City of Grapevine, Texas affecting zoning and shall not repeal any of the provisions of said
ordinances except in those instances where provisions of those ordinances are in direct
conflict with the provisions of this ordinance.
Section 6. That the terms and provisions of this ordinance shall be deemed to be
severable and that if the validity of the zoning affecting any portion of the tract or tracts of
land described herein shall be declared to be invalid, the same shall not affect the validity
of the zoning of the balance of the tract or tracts of land described herein.
Section 7. That any person violating any of the provisions of this ordinance shall
be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be fined in a sum
not to exceed two thousand dollars ($2,000.00) and a separate offense shall be deemed
committed upon each day during or on which a violation occurs or continues.
Section 8. That the fact that the present ordinances and regulations of the City of
Grapevine, Texas, are inadequate to properly safeguard the health, safety, morals, peace
and general welfare of the inhabitants of the City of Grapevine, Texas, creates an
emergency for the immediate preservation of the public business, property, health, safety
and general welfare of the public which requires that this ordinance shall become effective
from and after the date of its final passage, and it is accordingly so ordained.
ORD. NO. 2011-09 3
PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
GRAPEVINE, TEXAS on this the 15th day of February 2011.
APPROVED:
William D. Tate
Mayor
ATTEST:
67.;;tAd Atv
Linda Huff
City Secretary
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
John F. Boyle, .
City Attorney
ORD. NO. 2011-09 4
EXH1311"—_,
To ,ORD• ax)//-
Page of —Lg.....
GRAPEVINE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
HISTORIC LANDMARK DESIGNATION FORM
1. Name
Historic Howard-Duke House
And/or common
I2. Location
Address 617 E.Worth Street land survey Ester Moore
Location/neighborhood College Heights block/lot Block 109 Lot 5 tract size acres
I3. Current zoning
R7.5
I 4. Classification
Category Ownership Status Present Use
district public X occupied _agriculture _museum
X building(s) X private _unoccupied commercial park
_structure work in progress _education X residence
_site Accessible _entertainment _religious
X yes:restricted government scientific
yes:unrestr. industrial —transportation
_no —military _other
I 5. Ownership
Current owner: Laurie Verver phone:
Address: 617 E. Worth Street
city: Grapevine state:Texas zip: 76051-3649
I 6. Form Preparation
Name&title Susan Kline, consultant organization: Grapevine Township Revitalization Project
Contact: David Klempin phone: 817/410-3197
I 7. Representation on Existing Surveys
_Tarrant County Historic Resources _National Register of Historic Places
Recorded Texas Historic Landmark
_other —Texas Archaeological Landmark
for office use only
8. Date Rec'd: Survey Verified: Yes No
9. Field Chk date: By:
10. Nomination
Archaeological Structure —District
Site Structure&Site
y",3,'"21R TO o,2o• 9-0/1-09
PACIG 01- of _{5......_
I11. Historic Ownership
original owner N. A. Cummings
significant later owner(s)W. L. Ratliff,W. M. Howard, S. R. and Nellie Duke
I12. Construction Dates
original c. 1918
alterations/additions unknown
I 13. Architect
original construction unknown
alterations/additions unknown
14. Site Features
natural
urban design neighborhood platted c. 1912
I 15. Physical Description
Condition Check One: Check One:
excellent deteriorated unaltered Original site
good ruins X altered Moved (date:_)
X fair unexposed
Describe present and original(if known)physical appearance;include style(s) of architecture,
current condition and relationship to surrounding fabric(structures, objects, etc.). Elaborate on
pertinent materials used and style(s) of architectural detailing, embellishments and site details.
14),,r•J:rylVe ' ,y'r I--- `i. ''t ill YpIP-r; 7::-.---—
` P
a
`;-*.
t, ,__ 11.
4
. ' si �''�'�y , ! :,,'� � t 3 ,sl 'um Y ar,4-
r � -
The Howard-Duke House, named for long tenured owners, is a 1-story wood-framed pyramidal
style house located on the north side of Worth Street in the College Heights Addition to
Grapevine. The steeply pitched hipped roof is covered with composition shingles and has boxed
eaves. The entrance is slightly off-center and is flanked by paired 1/1 wood windows. A shed
- u�-�� x�u«� ��
�n���� . �=�l�. T0 =^-~^ ��c �-^^' _~
��
�a��
" ��� ~�~~_=�� _,
roof is located above the entrance and a portion of the left(west)set of windows. Simple posts
support this roof. The exterior of the house is sheathed with asbestos shingle siding.
Tax records suggest that the house originally had an integral porch at the west end of the front
elevation. If that was the case,that porch has been enclosed,meaning that the shed roof over
the entrance likely is not original to the house. A shed-roofed wood carport has been added along
the west elevation with an addition to the house behind it. A concrete driveway runs from the
street to the carport.
Tax records indicate that a detached garage was added to the property in 1938. This garage has
been removed.
V 16. Significance
Statement of historical and cultural significance. Include: cultural influences, ape events and
important personages, influences on neighborhood, on the city, etc.
Official records offer conflicting dates of construction for the house at 617 E.Worth Street, Records of
the Tarrant County Tax Assessor indicate that the house was constructed in 1912 and that a garage
on the property was constructed in 1938.Considering the sale price of the lot in 1912,this date
appears to be too early.The style of the house and the increase in property value suggest that the
house may have been constructed c. 1918.
The Tarrant Appraisal District indicates that the house was constructed in 1940. This date is lik |y
too late(the tax record was likely created in the late 1930s and as stated above,this information
indicates that the house was constructed prior to that time).
In 1907, D.E.Austin purchased 33.88 acres of the Ester Moore Survey from E.J.and Joie Lipscomb.
This land became the basis for the College Heights Addition to Grapevine. Lots from this addition
were being sold as early as 1912. That year,John B.Wood bought numerous lots in the addition,
including Lot 5 of Block 109. On August 5, 1912, he sold that lot to John S. Estill for$100. That
same day, Estill and his wife,Ada, sold the lot to C. R. Blevins for$400. In 1913, Blevins sold Lot 5
and the adjacent Lot 6 to L. H. Cook for$550. In 1917, Cook and his wife, Eva, sold both lots to J. H.
Withrow for$635. Withrow sold both lots to N.A. Cummings in 1918 for$1,300. Considering that the
price nearly doubled in a year's time,there is a probability that a house was constructed on Lot 5 in
that time period. On August 28, 1919,Cummings and his wife, Maude,sold both lots to W. L. Ratliff
for$1,340. The following February, Ratliff and his wife, Maria, sold Lot 5 to W. M. Howard for$850.
The property remained in the Howard family until it was sold to S. R.and Nellie Duke in 1934. This
was the year that Mr. Duke(1888- 1960)retired from Willhoite's Garage. He then operated the Old
Folks Trading Post on Main Street. He served as constable from 1944 to 1948. His wife, Katie(d.
1949),worked at Dozier's Laundromat. (Young,p. 183). A. B.Allen purchased the property in 1945.
The property had two other owners before being purchased by the current owner in 2009.
The numerous sales of the property between 1912 and 1917 are suggestive of the speculative nature
of real estate development in Grapevine prior to World War II.
The pyramidal style house was a common vernacular style typically constructed between 1905 and
1930.This style get its name from its distinctive pyramidal(equilateral hipped)roof.Although the
construction of these roofs was more complex than a gabled roof,the framing required fewer long-
spanning rafters which made the houses less expensive to build.According to Virginia and Lee
McAlester's A Field Guide to American Houses"Such roofs appeared on modest folk houses earlier
in the post-railroad era than did the side-gabled forms. In the south,one-story pyramidal houses
became a popular replacement for the less s ' us hall-and-parlor house during the early decades
of the 30^'century.°(K8cAlesber, p.1OD). Modest folk hous oh as this one helped meet
Grapevine's housing needs in the early decades of the 20th century.
[ 17. Bibliography k
McAlester,Virginia and Lee. A Field Guide to American Houses. New York:Alfred A. Knopf, 1995
EX-11BIT 19. To 0,e0. czo//-ô9
(Twelfth printing). - Page `1 of
Tarrant County Clerk's Office, Deed Records, Multiple volumes.
Tarrant County Tax Assessor's Office. Tax History Card for Block 109, Lot 5,College Heights
Addition to Grapevine.
Young, Charles, ed. Grapevine Area History. Dallas, Texas: Taylor Publishing Company, 1991.
18. Attachments
District or Site map Additional descriptive material
X Site Plan Footnotes
X Photos (historic ¤t) Other( )
E ,.B',i A io ORD. aor/- o9
Page _5 of _L
I Designation Merit
X A. Character, interest or value as part of the development, heritage or cultural
characteristics of the City of Grapevine, State of Texas of the United States.
B. Location as the site of a significant historical event.
C. Identification with a person or persons who significantly contributed to the culture and
development of the city.
X D. Exemplification of the cultural, economic, social or historical heritage of the city.
E. Portrayal of the environment of a group of people in an era of history characterized by a
distinctive architectural style.
X F. Embodiment of distinguishing characteristics of an architectural type or specimen.
G. Identification as the work of an architect or master builder whose individual work has
influenced the development of the city.
H. Embodiment of elements of architectural design,detail, materials or craftsmanship which
represent a significant architectural innovation.
_I. Relationship to other distinctive buildings, sites or areas which are eligible for
preservation according to a plan based on historic, cultural or architectural motif.
J. Unique location of singular physical characteristics representing an established and
familiar visual feature of a neighborhood, community or the city.
K. Archaeological value in that it has produced or can be expected to produce data
affecting theories of historic or prehistoric value.
L. Value as an aspect of community sentiment or public pride.
IRecommendation
The Grapevine Township Revitalization Program requests the Grapevine Historic Preservation Commission to deem
this nominated landmark meritorious of designation as outlined in Chapter 39,City of Grapevine Comprehensive
Zoning Ordinance.
Further,the Grapevine Historic Preservation Commission endorses the Design Guidelines,policy
recommendations and landmark boundary as presented by the City of Grapevine Development Services
Department.
Burl Gilliam,Chair David Klempin
Grapevine Historic Preservation Commission Historic Preservation Officer
Scott Williams,Director
Development Services/Building Official
E iBI __A._ TO 04b ao!/-09
Page to of _a_
Design Guidelines
Howard -Duke House
617 East Worth Street
• Grapevine,Texas
Grapevine Township Revitalization Project, Inc.
City of Grapevine
200 S. Main
Grapevine, Texas 76051
August 25, 2001
E\ 11.":1 A . TO O'€0- aou- o9
Page . '7 of .....d........._
Table of Contents
PREFACE
SITE
• Setbacks
• Driveways, Parking Lots
• Service and Mechanical Areas
• Fences
II. BUILDING FABRIC
• Preservation
• Exterior Finishes
• Windows
III. EMBELLISHMENTS
• Awnings-Canopies
• Exterior Lighting
•
IV. NEW BUILDING CONSTRUCTION
• Infill
• Additions to Historic Buildings
Page 2
EXHIBIT__.. TO 01.0
•
ao j1-oq
. Preface Page of . / ......�...
vxt t.(,, ;�it
•ti..),„..; ,,T. ,, ....fat.. ., _, Ai_ .s, :,,rbIly ,1, , ,;:e (7...,. __...
IN
=* ,_" `, .../.....,„,,,. , .. _,. ,,, ,,,
\ 4r,
r.
.-:.-17-'0 E -
e
r ,- !
"pli -,..4. F li
:''''' .rw. 1f:'1P'
1 .,
ll`
617 East Worth Street
The Howard-Duke House, named for long tenured owners, is a 1-story wood-framed
pyramidal style house located on the north side of Worth Street in the College Heights
Addition to Grapevine. The steeply pitched hipped roof is covered with composition shingles
and has boxed eaves. The entrance is slightly off-center and is flanked by paired 1/1 wood
windows. A shed roof is located above the entrance and a portion of the left(west)set of
windows. Simple posts support this roof. The exterior of the house is sheathed with asbestos
shingle siding.
Tax records suggest that the house originally had an integral porch at the west end of the
front elevation. If that was the case, that porch has been enclosed, meaning that the shed
roof over the entrance likely is not original to the house.A shed-roofed wood carport has been
added along the west elevation with an addition to the house behind it. A concrete driveway
runs from the street to the carport.
Tax records indicate that a detached garage was added to the property in 1938. This garage
has been removed.
Official records offer conflicting dates of construction for the house at 617 E. Worth Street,
Records of the Tarrant County Tax Assessor indicate that the house was constructed in 1912 and
that a garage on the property was constructed in 1938. Considering the sale price of the lot in
1912, this date appears to be too early. The style of the house and the increase in property value
suggest that the house may have been constructed c. 1918.
The Tarrant Appraisal District indicates that the house was constructed in 1940. This date is likely
too late (the tax record was likely created in the late 1930s and as stated above, this information
indicates that the house was constructed prior to that time).
Page 3
�
*:;:,:',717 \ o
pap [t --��--^
In 1907, D.E.Austin purchased 33.88 acres of the Ester Moore Survey from E. J. and Joie
Lipscomb. This land became the basis for the College Heights Addition to Grapevine. Lots from
this addition were being sold as early as 1912. That year,John B.Wood bought numerous lots in
the addition, including Lot 5 of Block 109. On August 5, 1912, he sold that lot to John S. Estill for
$100. That same day, Estill and his wife, Ada, sold the lot to C. R. Blevins for$400. In 1913.
Blevins sold Lot 5 and the adjacent Lot 6 to L. H. Cook for$550. In 1917, Cook and his wife, Eva,
sold both lots to J. H.Withrow for$635. Withrow sold both lots to N.A. Cummings in 1918 for
$1.300. Considering that the price nearly doubled in a year's time, there is a probability that a
house was constructed on Lot 5 in that time period. On August 28, 1919, Cummings and his wife,
yNaude, sold both lots to W. L. Ratliff for$1,340. The following February, Ratliff and his wife,
Maria, sold Lot 5 to W. M. Howard for$850. The property remained in the Howard family until it
was sold to S. R. and Nellie Duke in 1934. This was the year that Mr. Duke(1888- 1960)retired
from VViUhoite'm Garage. He then operated the Old Folks Trading Post on Main Street. He served
as constob|e from 1944 to 1948. His wife, Katie(d. 1949),worked at Dozier's Laundromat.
(Young, p. 183). A. B.Allen purchased the property in 1945. The property had two other owners
before being purchased by the current owner in 2009.
The numerous sales of the property between 1912 and 1917 are suggestive of the speculative
nature of real estate development in Grapevine prior to World War II.
The pyramidal style house was a common vernacular style typically constructed between 1905
and 1930. This style get its name from its distinctive pyramidal (equilateral hipped)roof.Although
the construction of these roofs was more complex than a gabled roof, the framing required fewer
long-spanning rafters which made the houses less expensive to build.According to Virginia and
Lee K8o/gmmter'm,4Field Guide to American Houses"Such roofs appeared on modest folk houses
earlier in the post-railroad era than did the side-gabled forms. In the south, one-story pyramidal
houses beca r replacement for the less spacious hall-and-parlor house during the
early decades mf the 20"'m»ntury.^ (K8cAlemhmr^ p.10Q). Modest folk h es such as this one
helped meet Grapevine's housing needs in the early decades of the 20th century.
Page 4
TO OR.O. 0201/-09
PQg3 / 0 of
SITE
Retain the historic relationships between buildings, landscaping features and open space. Avoid
rearranging the site by moving or removing buildings and site features, such as walks, drives and
fences,that help define the residence's historic value.
SETBACKS
Building setbacks should be consistent with adjacent buildings or with the style of the building.
Setbacks are an important ingredient in creating an attractive streetscape. Buildings should be
set back to a line that is consistent with their neighbors and land use. For example, a residential
setback should retain the setback of adjacent and nearby structures,with landscaping along the
street right-of-way.
Residential buildings with a commercial use in residential areas should be set back in a manner
consistent with setbacks of neighboring or similar residential structures.
Maintain building orientation pattern,with the front facade facing the street. Maintain spacing
patterns between buildings.
DRIVEWAYS,PARKING LOTS AND VACANT SITES
Driveways should be located perpendicular to the street; no circular drives shall be allowed (unless
proven with historic documentation) in front or corner side yard, so that the character of the
landscaped yard can be reinforced.
New parking lots for commercial uses should not be located adjacent to sidewalks in the district.
Off-street parking lots should not be allowed to interrupt the continuity of landscaped front or corner
side yards. This is important to both the preservation of historic character,and to the strengthening of
the residential district.
Screen existing parking lots from streets and pedestrian areas in the Historic District. Existing parking
lots located adjacent to streets and sidewalks may be screened to the height of car hoods. This will
provide a certain level of continuity of the building facade line;it will screen unsightly views;and it will
provide a level of security by allowing views to and from the sidewalk.
FENCES
Historically, fences around historic houses defined yards and the boundary around property and
gardens. Wood picket fences,wood rail fences and barbed wire or decorative wire fences were the
common fence types in Grapevine. Traditionally, picket fences surrounded the front of the house
while rail and wire fences surrounded the agricultural portions of the property. Maintain historic
fences.
New fences. Simple wood picket fences,wood and wire and wrought iron fences are appropriate.
Avoid chain-link fences, privacy fences and concrete block fences for the street sides of property.
Wood privacy fences may be allowed when installed in the rear yard and behind the front facade of a
property. Utilitarian/privacy fences should not be installed in front of a historic building or beyond the
Page 5
��;77Ti"*. ^4 . -�� .04D. '2o�~[)�
' .
Pap 1/��
. of
line of the front façade of a historic building.
Replacing fences. If replacement is required due to deterioration, remove only those portions of
historic fences that are damaged beyond repair and replace in-kind,matching the original in material,
design and placement. If replacement is necessary for non-historic fences, or new fences are
proposed,locate and design the fence in such a way that will compliment the historic boundary of the
property without concealing the historic character of the property.
SERVICE AND MECHANICAL AREAS
Service and mechanical areas and equipment should be screened from the street and other
pedestrian areas.
All garbage and equipment storage areas should be screened from the street. -- —
Mechanical equipment including satellite dishes,shall not be located in front or corner side yards or
should be set back from the edges of roofs,and screened so that they are not visible to pedestrians
and do not detract from the historic character of buildings.
BUILDING FABRIC
PRESERVATION
Preserve, obabi|izm, and restore original building honn,ornament and materials.
Any missing or severely deteriorated elements may be replaced with replicas of the original. Ensure
that roof,window,porch and cornice treatments are preserved,or when preservation is not possible
duplicate the original building element.
When nmhmbi|ibmtin0, remove non-historic alterations.
Often, nmodernN renovations conceal the original facade details. If not,the original style may be
recreated through the use of historic photographs.
Where replication of original ehermentmimncdpomaib|m,anewdmmign#onoish»ntwiththaorigina|mhyle
of the building may be used.
Reconstruction of building elements should reflect the oiow, oca|m, material and level of detail of
the original design.
Preserve older renovations that have achieved historic significance. Older structures or additions
may have, at some time, been renovated with such care and skill that the renovation itself is
worthy of preservation. Usually, such renovations may date from before 1940.
EXTERIOR FINISHES
Original wood finishes should be maintained and painted or, when necessary, replaced in kind.
Modem synthetic siding materials such as vinyl or metal bear little resemblance to historic siding
materials. The application of such modern synthetic materials often involves the removal of original
decorative elements such as cornicm, corner boards, buackebm, window and door trim, etc. New
synthetic siding shall not be installed; removal of existing such materials is not required,but strongly
Page 6
Pag3 / of _Xi._
encouraged, to restore historic patina, finish and appearance.
Original asbestos siding should be maintained and painted, or when necessary, replaced with
synthetic siding to match the existing asbestos siding. The removal of asbestos siding over existing
wood siding is not required,but strongly encouraged,to restore historic patina,finish and appearance.
Original masonry surfaces should be maintained and not be painted,unless severe deterioration of
the brick or stone can be shown to require painting. If the color or texture of replacement brick or
stone cannot be matched with existing, painting may be an appropriate treatment.
Paint colors should be complimentary to each other and the overall character of the house. When
possible,research the original paint color and finishes of the building's historic period;the right colors
respect the historic building.
The Historic Preservation Commission shall adopt, as necessary, a paint palette(s)appropriate to
the district's character,which may be proposed and approved through the Minor Exterior
Alteration application process. Any colors proposed outside the adopted palette may be reviewed
by the Commission in the regular Certificate of Appropriateness process.
WINDOWS
Original window framing and lites (panes of glass)configurations should be preserved and
maintained or replaced in kind.
When replacement is necessary,do so within existing historic opening. Replacement of non-original
windows should consider the use of historically appropriate wood windows. Use same sash size to
avoid filling in or enlarging the original opening. Clear or very slightly tinted window glass may be
used. No reflective or heavily tinted glass shall be used.
Should the owner wish to install security bars, they should be installed on the interior of windows
and doors.
Storm windows. The use of interior storm windows is encouraged. Storm windows are available
which can be installed on the interior of windows. This helps to preserve the exterior historic
character of the building.
Should storm windows need to be installed on the exterior of the historic windows, storm windows
constructed of wood and configured to match the historic sashes(i.e. one over one sashes)are
recommended.
If metal storm windows are installed, paint to blend with surrounding elements.
EMBELLISHMENTS
AWNINGS-CANOPIES
New awnings and canopies should not be installed above windows or doors.
Page 7
. ..v ! To ORO. aotj-09
pao
EXTERIOR LIGHTING /3 of
Lighting is an important element in residential areas. Fixtures should be consistent with the
historic character of the house.
Appropriate incandescent light fixtures to the style of the district should be used.
Avoid exposed lighting of any kind unless part of a historic fixture.
NEW BUILDING CONSTRUCTION
INFILL
The Secretary of the Interior's guidelines for new buildings in historic districts encourage similarity
of form and materials, but not actual replication. New construction proposals and the
rehabilitation of non-historic buildings will be reviewed based on these Criteria. Judgement will be
based on the compatibility of the design within the context of the property's adjacent and nearby
historic buildings.
The design of new buildings should have key elements of the building's historic period of significance
including massing, scale,fenestration and materials.
Infill buildings should not be absolute reproductions, and appear as clearly contemporary. Only
when a previously demolished historic Grapevine building can be accurately replicated may a
reproduction be considered.
Infill buildings between historic buildings should be similar in setback, roof form, cornice line and
materials,to one of the adjacent buildings. Relate height of new building to the heights of adjacent
structures. Avoid new buildings that tower over existing ones.
Horizontal wood siding (either novelty, tongue and groove, shiplap or equivalent) and brick are
appropriate exterior building finishes for the historic house. Fake brick or stone or gravel aggregate
materials shall never be used.
ADDITIONS TO HISTORIC BUILDINGS
Additions to historic buildings should replicate the style of the main building if possible; otherwise
they should adhere to the general style with simplified details.
As a minimum, new additions should reflect the massing, roof shape, bay spacing, cornice lines
and building materials of the primary structure.
All new wood or metal materials should have a painted finish except on some 20th century buildings
where the use of unpainted aluminum or steel was part of the original design and should be
maintained.
A new addition should, if at all possible, be located at the rear of the historic building. If this is not
possible, the addition may be added to the side if it is recessed at least 18 inches from the historic
building facade or a connection is used to separate old from new.
New vertical additions should be set back from primary facades so as not to be readily apparent
Page 8
1 oRo. ao(r-o9
Pap L
from the facing street.
When reproducing elements that were originally part of a historic building they should be replicated
when evidence of the actual detail has been documented by photographs, drawings, or remaining
physical evidence. If no evidence exists, elements typical of the architectural style may be used.
Historic photographs can provide information on the original elements of the building.
Page 9