Download as PDF

Design Review Board

Level 2: Addition to an existing building/structure

3-B-19-DT

This case has been appealed

Staff Recommendation
APPROVE Certificate 3-B-19-DT as submitted.Case File
Location
312 S Gay St
Applicant Request
This proposal is to construct an addition on the north side of the Century Building that is visually two stories in height but only one actual story. The purpose of the addition is to create an enclosed entrance and exit (lobby) from the elevator lobby that is centrally located inside the Century Building, and the second story of the Century Building that is currently being renovated. There is also an existing ground floor doorway that will have access to this new lobby that is located midway between the sidewalk and the elevator tower.

The addition will be built over the existing garage, which may need to be modified to support the structure or allow the new structure to pass through to construct its own foundation. The intent is that the existing garage will continue in operation until a new building replaces it. See sheet A4 for a conceptual future building to infill the space where the garage located.

The addition will be 12'-3" wide and 29'-8" tall. The entrance will be recessed with a storefront system made of anodized aluminum with a 'light champagne' finish. The walls of the addition will be made of smooth finished precast concrete panels, which will be the finish of the front elevation. There is a round window above the recessed entry. At the top corners of the front elevation will be bronze details with a final design that has yet to be determined. The north elevation (facing the parking garage) will have staggered metal rainscreen panels. The rainscreen will be made of smooth finished galvanized steel with 'midnight bronze' color to match the existing storefront paint color on the Century Building.
Staff Comments
The Century Building is a contributing structure within the Gay Street Commercial (National Register) Historic District so Section 1.C (Historic Resources) of the guidelines will apply to this proposal. The Century Building has received two approvals from the Downtown Design Review Board to renovate the building and construct an elevator tower and/or stair tower over the parking garage on the subject property (8-A-14-DT and 8-B-15-DT). Both of the previous approvals included a covered walkway from the sidewalk to the elevator tower, however, it has now been determined that the egress from the elevator must be through an enclosed space which is the reason for the proposed addition.

The guidelines recommend that additions should not alter, obscure or destroy significant features of historic resources, and the design should be complimentary in terms of materials and color. The guidelines also recommend that the Secretary of Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation be considered when a building listed on the National Register of Historic Places is being altered. The Standards for Rehabilitation recommends the following:
1) New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction will not destroy historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and will be compatible with the historic materials, features, size, scale and proportion, and massing to protect the integrity of the property and its environment.
2) New additions and adjacent or related new construction will be undertaken in such a manner that, if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired.

The proposal meets the general intent of the Downtown Knoxville Design Guidelines and the Standards for Rehabilitation by respecting the scale and massing of the Century Building in regard to the height of the ground floor storefront and the height of the first two stories. The addition will not remove, obscure or damage any character defining historic materials on the Century Building. The design and materials differentiate the addition from the historic Century Building. The smooth concrete façade is very different from the brick façade of the Century Building but does relate to the band of stone or concrete that separates each floor of the building. The metal siding on the side of the addition is meant to be only a temporary solution until the infill building adjacent to it is constructed in the future. The metal siding has a similar look as the façade of the building immediately north and will have a color similar to the current storefront color on the Century Building.

Applicable guidelines:

Section 1.B.3. (BUILDING MATERIALS)
New building materials should relate to the scale, durability, color, and texture of the predominate building materials in the area.
GUIDELINES:
3a. Use complimentary materials and elements, especially next to historic buildings.

Section 1.C.10. (NEW CONSTRUCTION WITHIN OR ADJACENT TO AN HISTORIC DISTRICT OR BUILDING)
Infill construction should be designed to reflect architectural and historic qualities. Designs should not duplicate current buildings. Issues of concern will be the siting, size, shape, proportion, materials, and the relationship of all of those to the prevalent character of the historic district.
GUIDELINES:
10a. Maintain the setback of adjacent historic buildings. The height of the lower stories should be similar to adjacent historic buildings. Upper floors may be 'stepped back' behind the front facade.
10b. Duplicate the horizontal floor divisions of existing buildings.
10c. Design windows to be of similar proportions to the adjacent historic building windows.
10d. Use ornamental stone, brick work, and trim appropriate to the style of the infill building.
10e. Recognize the belt courses, strong courses, cornices, and other elements of adjacent buildings.
10f. Incorporate storefronts that complement the openness, bulkheads, and transoms of historic buildings.
Applicant

McDaniel / Benefield Richters

Planning Staff
Mike Reynolds
Phone: 865-215-3827
Email: mike.reynolds@knoxplanning.org
Submit CommentsView Comments

Case History