Sumner County committee approves $2,500 for further inspection of Latimer Brown House after contractor finds mixed historic fabric

Sumner County commissionerson Monday approved up to $2,500 to fund further exploratory inspection of the Latimer Brown House, a county-owned historic property, and heard a contractor describe a mix of original log construction and later alterations that will determine how the building is restored.

The contractor, licensed preservation contractor Chris Coker, told the General Operations Committee his one-day inspection found an original log section under what he labeled the "A" area and several later additions. He described hand-hewn beams and a rock-pier foundation under one section and a poured-concrete pier system under another. "It's an absolutely beautiful house," Coker said during his presentation, describing hand-hewn rafters, 16- to 18-inch dovetail beams and an attic roof structure that appears consistent across parts of the building.

The committee was told the house shows multiple construction periods stacked together. Coker said portions he labeled B, C and D contain later floor systems and framed walls while section A appears to be the oldest log portion. He said crews found mold and wet conditions under the building and that prior work had left a mix of materials, including newer subflooring and concrete piers in some places. During the inspection teamfound newspaper insulation in a second-floor wall dated 1891 and uncovered one-inch plank floors in section B, which Coker said "could be original." He recommended removing rusted ductwork and other later material under section C to clarify whether C contains original logs as well.

A public commenter who identified himself as Jim Labber urged the commission to preserve the structure, saying, "I'm here to say thank you to everyone who's, helped get this pushed further along down the road" and that the house "can be preserved, like it should be."

Committee members and staff stressed the budget constraints and competing priorities. Committee members noted the county has limited funds for the project and that prior small appropriations had already paid for an initial inspection: commissioners were told roughly $2,000 was initially appropriated for exploration and about $500 remained. Staff also said the county currently has roughly $587,000 identified for renovating the house as part of a park centerpiece, but that any larger restoration approach would be shaped by what investigators find under the non-original finishes.

To move the work forward, the committee approved an amended motion to appropriate up to $2,500 to pay the contractor for exploratory work to reach the next decision point. Coker committed to continue the inspection, including removing ductwork and crawling under the rear section to determine the condition and extent of original fabric, and to report back with defined options within two weeks: "I will crawl underneath the house. I will I will take out all the ductwork. I will do inspections, and I will let you know what A, B, C, and D look like within a two-week period," he said.

Committee members said the next steps will include a follow-up ad hoc meeting to review Coker's findings and to decide whether to restore only sections A and B to an earlier period or to pursue a larger, higher-cost restoration that would rework C and D to match an earlier footprint. Commissioners emphasized they would balance historic-period repair goals with budget limits and the county's procurement rules.

The committee also discussed site logistics: access to the house, a potential gravel drive, and volunteer support offered by local tradespeople to reduce costs. Commissioners and staff said they will consolidate Coker's two-week report with cost options and present that information to the ad hoc committee and to budget staff for any recommended appropriation.

The commission approved the $2,500 appropriation and directed staff to add Coker's findings to the next committee packet so members can decide whether to fund a larger design or construction phase.

Ending note: The committee scheduled an ad hoc follow-up after the contractor's two-week inspection to review options and potential costs. The countyhas not yet committed to a final restoration approach and said any major work would return to the full commission for appropriation approvals.