1 of 2
Courtesy of Mike Gibson
Appleseed Workshops Design
Mike Gibson's new home on Sutherland Place is more contemporary in design than its neighbors. Its front will be made of cedar and the sides will be made of Hardie Board.
2 of 2
Sydney Cromwell
1403 Sutherland Place
Mike Gibson bought this property on Sutherland Place and will be tearing down the original bungalow to build a new home for his family.
Does Homewood’s charm come from residents’ creative freedom in building homes or from preserving neighborhoods with a cohesive atmosphere? There does not seem to be a simple answer.
At a July 21 meeting, Homewood’s Planning and Development Committee began discussing the possibility of a design review board, which would regulate the appearance of new homes and businesses built within the city. Based on public feedback at the meeting, there is not yet a clear consensus that such a board would either save or destroy Homewood’s residential areas.
“The opinions that we’re hearing are all over the place,” City Council President Bruce Limbaugh said.
One resident at the meeting suggested that instead of a design review board, a historical board should be created to preserve buildings of historical value. Another resident supported the board but proposed more specialized “design review districts” that would give residents more control over regulations. Two people said a design review board would make home designs more creative, while another supported landscaping and tree preservation codes.
Appleseed Workshop owner Mike Gibson was the last of the community member to speak at the meeting. His plans for his home on Sutherland Place caused the initial controversy because he would like to replace a historic bungalow with a more modern, two-story design. After strong negative reactions from neighbors at a July 10 Board of Zoning Adjustments (BZA) meeting, City Council decided to re-open the discussion of a design review board, which had first been suggested in 2009.
Gibson said he has worked with design review boards in the past and has “never had much complaint” about them. While such a board might not permit some of his more contemporary designs, Gibson stated his willingness to work with one as long as it consisted of diverse members. His larger concern was defining the role of the BZA, which does not regulate building appearances. The BZA denied him a four-inch variance on July 10, which Gibson believed was related to public backlash and will cost him an extra $10,000 in building his home.
Ward 1 Representative Britt Thames said that there are two separate issues to be considered: installing a design review board and having a clear definition of the BZA’s limits. Ward 3 Representative Walter Jones said if a board is created, its purpose will be to reduce City Council time spent on BZA and design issues, not to make Homewood neighborhoods look exactly the same.
The committee carried the discussion over to the next planning meeting. In the meantime, committee members will be studying Mountain Brook and Birmingham’s design review boards and regulations for guidance.
