Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Historic Preservation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Church explores 350‑seat sanctuary behind historic Corn House; DRC urges smaller footprint or partially buried design
Summary
Cornerstone Church’s design team presented multiple options to add a sanctuary behind the contributing 1897 Corn House at 132 3rd Avenue South. Staff and commissioners said the proposed addition exceeds recommended footprint and lot‑coverage thresholds and suggested partially below‑grade solutions and simplified detailing to keep new mass subordinate to the historic house.
A design team for Cornerstone Church asked Franklin’s Design Review Committee for early feedback on proposals to add a 350‑seat sanctuary attached to the rear of the historic Corn House at 132 3rd Avenue South.
The house is a contributing resource in the Downtown Franklin National Register Historic District (circa 1897). The applicants showed multiple schemes — a one‑story addition, a partly buried option with an entry vestibule and below‑grade sanctuary, and a two‑story option — and asked whether the DRC could support the program and siting in this urban context.
Planner staff advised that the proposed addition currently exceeds the DRC’s guideline thresholds: the design presented equaled about 102% of the historic footprint for additions and proposed about 38% lot coverage, above the typical 35% recommendation. Staff also noted some stylistic discord in the early sketches (Gothic‑style arches reading differently from the house’s Italianate character) and asked the team to provide additional documentation on the age of existing additions so the commission could determine which parts count as historic.
Commissioners encouraged creative strategies to reduce visible mass and maintain the house’s primacy. Multiple members suggested placing most of the program below grade so the addition reads as subordinate from public vantage points, reducing visible ridge and eave heights, simplifying Gothic motifs, and improving landscaping and courtyard design to screen the new work. The DRC also recommended keeping the new design compatible with the house’s materials and to explore a restrained carriage‑house or service‑building aesthetic so the addition reads as ancillary rather than dominant.
Applicant representatives said they were open to alternatives, including partial burial and a glass connector or breezeway to the neighboring church property, and asked for guidance on whether the DRC would accept a two‑story plan if massing and detail were carefully controlled.
Next steps: the applicant will study a lower‑profile or partially below‑grade design, provide clearer massing studies and material choices, document the age of existing additions, and return to DRC for further input before a formal application to the Historic Zoning Commission.
