Oxford Historic Preservation Commission

COA application: 348

Applicant: Bradley Beard

Address: 907 Lincoln Avenue

COA Request: Approval of new construction

COA History: 4/2014 - Case #268 – A&B Demo/Landscape plan - Approved w/condition to return with home plans – Expired 6/2015 – Case #331 – Approval of plans for new construction – Approved HP Ordinance

Reference: Sec. 54-26. (1-3)

Design Guidelines

Reference: Section 6: New Construction Section 10: Exterior Building Materials

Previous consultant Comments: Property is non-contributing element per Historic Survey.

A2H, PLLC Comments:

1. General: a. In general, the design adjustments make the home appear less closely tied to exact

replication of historic detailing, which is an improvement over the original design.

2. In reference to the previously approved application, the following modifications are being proposed:

i. Architectural composition shingles have been replaced with metal standing seam roof on the main house and garage.

1. The use of standing seam metal panel for roofing has already been introduced in this area, so this material will not be out of place with what is seen on neighboring structures. Therefore, this seems like an appropriate substitution.

ii. The roof pitches have been changed, and the gable returns have been removed. 1. The change in roof pitch helps to improve the building’s overall

proportions.

iii. Window glazing patterns have changed on the east and west ells. 1. While the 2/2/2 glazing pattern on these windows is a good departure

from false historic detailing, the proportions of this arrangement seem out of place with the rest of the design. The arrangement shown in the original application, simulating 4/4 hung sash results in a much better relationship with the rest of the design.

iv. The garage/studio is a complete redesign. 1. The overall approach to the redesigned garage/studio is an improvement

over the original design. Relocating the stair accessing the second floor studio will improve this structure’s appearance when viewed from the street. The use of masonry cladding however, makes what should be a secondary structure compete for attention with the main house. The applicant might consider adapting the same design to reflect the same construction type as the primary residence. In addition, the windows on the gable ends of the garage should be reduced in scale to relive the tension created where the window opening nearly touches the ridge of the roof.

v. One window has been added to the west elevation, and the fenestration pattern of the east elevation has been altered.

1. The West Elevation window added to the second floor improves the composition.

2. With the exception of the glazing patterns discussed above, the changes to the east elevation result in a design that is no less appropriate for this district than the one originally submitted and approved.

32

' -8

" B

UIL

DIN

G H

EIG

HT

I

C

2627

E

TAT

S

Tupelo, MS

FO SSIM

T

REGIS

Michael Grey Jones

ARERED

IPPI

SS

T

H

I TEC

CHECKED:

DRAWN:

NUMBER:

DATE:

NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION

REVISION

A6 Project

Number

Beard

Resid

ence

Oxfo

rd, M

s

1/4" = 1'-0"1

Front Elevation

1/4" = 1'-0"2

Rear Elevation

8

12

8

12

6

12

I

C

2627

E

TAT

S

Tupelo, MS

FO SSIM

T

REGIS

Michael Grey Jones

ARERED

IPPI

SS

T

H

I TEC

CHECKED:

DRAWN:

NUMBER:

DATE:

NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION

REVISION

A7 Project

Number

Beard

Resid

ence

Oxfo

rd, M

s

1/4" = 1'-0"1

Right Elevation

I

C

2627

E

TAT

S

Tupelo, MS

FO SSIM

T

REGIS

Michael Grey Jones

ARERED

IPPI

SS

T

H

I TEC

CHECKED:

DRAWN:

NUMBER:

DATE:

REVISION

A8 Project

Number

Beard

Resid

ence

Oxfo

rd, M

sS

D

1/4" = 1'-0"1

Left Elevation

UP

DN

Foundation-3' - 0"

Attic Floor8' - 0"

Ro

of H

eig

ht

22

' - 1

3/3

2"

11

' - 0

"

5' -

7"

Foundation-3' - 0"

Attic Floor8' - 0"

11

' - 0

"

Ro

of H

eig

ht

22

' - 1

3/3

2"

Foundation-3' - 0"

Attic Floor8' - 0"

11

' - 0

"

Ro

of H

eig

ht

22

' - 1

3/3

2"

Foundation-3' - 0"

Attic Floor8' - 0"

Ro

of H

eig

ht

22

' - 1

3/3

2"

11

' - 0

"

A94

A9

3

A9 5

21' - 0"

1' - 9"

7' -

0"

8' -

0"

8' - 0"1' - 6"

7' -

0 1

/32

"8

' - 0

"

1' - 9" 8' - 0"

4' -

0"

A9

2

A94

A9

3

A9 5

19' - 7"

3' - 6" 3' - 6"

6' - 3" 8' - 5 1/4"

6' -

6 1

/32

"9

' - 0

"

6' -

6"

9' -

0"

21' - 0"

I

C

2627

E

TAT

S

Tupelo, MS

FO SSIM

T

REGIS

Michael Grey Jones

ARERED

IPPI

SS

T

H

I TEC

CHECKED:

DRAWN:

NUMBER:

DATE:

REVISION

A9 Project

Number

Beard

Resid

ence

Oxfo

rd, M

sS

D

1/4" = 1'-0"2

Garage Front 1/4" = 1'-0"

3Garage Rear

1/4" = 1'-0"4

Garage Right 1/4" = 1'-0"

5Garage Left

1/4" = 1'-0"1

Garage Floor Plan

1/4" = 1'-0"6

Attic Floor Plan

Oxford Historic Preservation Commission

COA application: 331

Applicant: Bradley Beard

Address: 907 Lincoln Avenue

COA Request: Approval of new construction

COA History: 4/2014 - Case #268 – A&B Demo/Landscape plan - approved w/condition to return with home plans

Previous consultant Comments: Property is non-contributing element per Historic Survey.

A) Review of the following required by Historic Preservation Ordinance: Sec. 54-26. Criteria for issuance of certificates of appropriateness. (4) e. 1. The resource is not individually, architecturally,

culturally, and/or historically significant. Resource is not significant individually, architecturally, culturally or historically.

2. The resource does not contribute to the architectural character of the district.

Removal of resource is not likely to have a negative impact on surrounding architectural character of district.

3. The removal of the resource will not negatively impact neighboring property values.

Property value impact requires discussion by commission. 4. The resource is not difficult or impossible to reproduce because of its texture, design, material, detail, or unique character.

Resource is not difficult to replicate. 5. The removal of the resource will not impact the structural integrity or character of the surrounding structures.

Removal of resource will not impact structural integrity or character of surroundings.

6. The removal of the resource does not alter or diminish the statement of significance for the establishment of the preservation district where the property is located.

Statement of significance impact requires discussion by commission. B) Proposed landscape plan appears to omit existing trees and perimeter landscape elements. Clarify intent for substantial existing trees along curb. Existing landscape elements, especially trees, should be preserved to the greatest extent possible.

List of Materials:

1. Brick and concrete board exterior

2. Standing Seam metal roof and architectural shingles

3. No rot windows,

4. Solid wood doors.

5. Permacast load bearing columns

6. 2x6 exterior walls

7. Copper gas lanterns

8. Operational no rot or wood shutters

9. Concrete driveway