Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Demolition 5th Ave topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Design review panel signals support for demolition of altered, flood‑prone 5th Avenue buildings
Summary
DRC members told the applicants they are inclined to recommend demolition of two heavily altered, frequently flooded buildings on 5th Avenue North, and urged careful design of any replacement so it reads as multiple storefronts and respects the downtown corridor.
The Design Review Committee, meeting in March 2026, told developers they are likely to recommend demolition of two heavily altered, flood‑prone commercial buildings at 234 and 242 5th Avenue North and urged that any replacement be designed to preserve a human‑scale Main Street rhythm.
Greg Gamble, representing the Butler family, said the two one‑storey properties had been repeatedly flooded and were costly to rehabilitate. He presented appraisals, interior and exterior photos, and a massing study that showed a new, flood‑compliant building with parking below a raised first floor that would bring the finished floor at least one foot above the 100‑year flood elevation.
Staff told the committee that both sites fall inside the Downtown Franklin Historic District and that demolition is “highly discouraged” unless one of the commission’s criteria is met: loss of historic integrity, proven structural instability, or an unreasonable economic hardship. The application argues the buildings are non‑contributing, were heavily altered, and would trigger costly flood‑proofing and code upgrades if rehabilitated.
Several commissioners said the buildings have lost their architectural integrity and noted repeated flood events on the site. Commissioner Brian said the combined circumstances — altered facades, structural compromise and flood risk — satisfied multiple demolition criteria. “These buildings are muddled at best,” the applicant’s architectural reviewer added, saying substantial work would be needed to restore original forms.
Committee members who supported demolition urged the applicant to design a replacement that reads as multiple storefronts rather than one monolithic block, recommended punched window openings and stepped facades to match downtown scale, and asked that the team study materials and fenestration that help the new building relate to the historic district. The panel also recommended planning for parking under the raised first floor and returning with more detailed elevations and streetscape studies at the voting meeting.
The DRC did not take a formal vote at the March meeting; members directed staff to include the committee’s feedback in the DRC recap packet and instructed the applicant to prepare the engineering, flood modeling and refined design details for the next review.
