Architectural Review Board

*noted attachments will be added after approval of the draft by the ARB Minutes Architectural Review Board May 13, 2024 Council Chambers You may view and listen to the Architectural Review Board meeting in its entirety here. The time of each presentation is in brackets below [00:00:00]. Members Present Members Absent Staff Adriana Moss (Chair) Kelly Penick Kate Schwartz Helen P. Ross (Vice Chair) Ellie Dauernheim Laura Galke Caroline Hieber James Jarrell IV D.D. Lecky Karen Irvin Chair Moss called the Architectural Review Board meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. OPENING REMARKS Chair Moss determined that a quorum of 6 members was present, and asked if public notice requirements had been met. Ms. Schwartz confirmed that they had. APPROVAL OF AGENDA [00:02:35] Ms. Galke made a motion to approve the agenda. Ms. Irvin seconded and the motion carried 6-0. ANNOUCEMENTS & REPORTS [00:02:52] Chair Moss announced that May was National Preservation Month and provided a brief presentation on opportunities to support preservation efforts. APPROVAL OF MINUTES [00:06:34] Ms. Lecky motioned to approve the minutes from the March 11, 2024 meeting as written. Vice Chair Ross seconded and the motion carried 6-0. Ms. Galke motioned to approve the minutes from the March 25, 2024 meeting as written. Ms. Irvin seconded and the motion carried 6-0. DISCLOSURE OF EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS None. DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST None. CONSENT AGENDA [00:09:07] A. COA2404-0045 – 700 Princess Anne Street – Sign Installation B. COA2404-0052 – 1200 Princess Anne Street– Sign Installation C. COA2404-0053 – 826 Caroline Street– Sign Installation D. COA 2405-0054 – 317 William Street – Sign Installation There were no public comments on the consent agenda. Ms. Lecky motioned to approve the consent agenda as submitted. Ms. Galke seconded and the motion passed 6-0. PUBLIC HEARING [00:10:55] Continued Applications A. COA 2401-0035 – 823 Caroline Street – James McGhee requests approval of the site planning, scale, and massing of a new four-story, mixed-use building on this vacant lot. James McGhee, project architect, was present and discussed ongoing modifications and changes made to the drawings. He provided the Board a 3D model of the building. Danae Pecker, Historic Fredericksburg Foundation Inc. (HFFI), spoke against the application and commented on square footage, height, and view from Sophia Street. Ms. Irvin thanked the applicant for their efforts. She stated that she believed it complied with the guidelines. She asked a clarifying question about the parapet wall and if the doors curved with the wall. Mr. McGhee clarified that they did. Mr. Jarrell asked a question about the fenestration patterns and clarified the variations between floors. Ms. Lecky thanked the applicant and said she appreciated the resolution to the floor setbacks. She stated that the view from Sophia street made the building seem more appropriate. She asked a clarifying question about the patio doors in the curved wall. She stated that she would be prepared to approve site planning, scale, and massing and further discuss fenestration with the next application. Mr. McGhee commented on the view from Sophia Street and stated that the mass was 2 feet below the yellow building. He also stated that the rear of the building was articulated and visually appropriate. Ms. Galke thanked the applicant for the materials and stated that they were sensitive and clever. She stated that the proposal was good, sensitive to the neighborhood, and complies with the guidelines. She supported the staff recommendations. Vice Chair Ross thanked the applicant. She made comparisons with the south elevation of the hotel on Caroline Street. She stated that the model helped with articulating the slanted or sloping roofs. She stated that it would be a welcome addition to the downtown. Chair Moss thanked the applicant for working with the Board and their creativity. She stated there was no precedent for a curved top floor but it is minimally visible from the surrounding streets. She said that the scale, massing, and height meets guidelines and she was prepared to support the application. Ms. Galke moved to approve site planning, scale, and massing in accordance with revised drawings submitted on May 3, 2024 and the 3D model presented during the meeting. Ms. Lecky seconded and the motion carried 6-0. B. COA 2403-0043 – 1501 Caroline Street – Sean Kline requests to construct a two-story addition attached to the rear elevation of this single-family residence. The addition will expand the existing rear addition. 2 Evan Lawson was present to represent the application. He stated that the color matching for materials would be done in the field to keep consistent colors throughout and that the old colors will be replaced to match. David Primmer, 1509 Caroline Street, commented on Section 9 of the Design Guidelines about additions being subordinate and inconspicuous. He stated that the neighbors had privacy concerns and requested that the roof deck be removed from the plan. Danae Peckler (HFFI) commented on the visuals and added square footage. She also commented on the flat top roof deck and spiral staircase lacking precedence, and thought it should be less visually prominent. Ms. Irvin thanked the applicant for their thoroughness and said she appreciated the clarity of the contrasting views. She said she was comfortable with the size and thought it was subordinate and lower than the existing addition and complies with the guidelines. Ms. Lecky thanked the applicant for their thoroughness and square footage calculations. She stated that she did not think the roof deck was in violation of the guidelines and that she was prepared to approve the application. Ms. Galke thanked the applicant for the perspectives and details, and thanked the citizens for their comments. She stated that she visited the site and the proposal takes advantage of site setting and elevation. She said the addition was smaller in size and lower in elevation, and sympathized with the roof deck stating the impact could be reduced. She said it does not violate the guidelines and she was prepared to support the application. Vice Chair Ross said that the design was well-rounded and that she agreed with the other Board members. She said that it seemed subservient to the historic house and sloping of the site. She asked a question about the existing vegetation and tree impact. Mr. Lawson stated that most of the trees will remain and just be trimmed if needed, as they wanted to protect the original addition. Vice Chair Ross recognized the concerns with privacy and suggested the applicants use a more opaque railing. Mr. Lawson stated that they could come up with different versions of fencing. Vice Chair Ross voiced her general support of the application. Chair Moss discussed the possibility of exploring different railing types and asked the Board if they would like to continue discussing it or allow staff to approve. Vice Chair Ross stated that staff approval would be fine. Chair Moss echoed her colleague’s comments on the sensitivity of the historic core and addition and the utilizing of the terrain. She recognized concerns about the rooftop deck but it was not prominently visible from the public right-of-way nor was it a feature that stood out. She voiced her support for the application. Ms. Galke moved to approve the application in accordance with the revised documentation provided on May 3 on the conditions that the simulated divided light windows and doors include spacer bars between the glass panes, that the owner coordinate with City staff on the location of proposed gutters and downspouts, and coordinate with City staff to ensure that the proposed railing for the rooftop deck is traditionally designed and opaque as outlined and detailed in the Historic District Guidelines. Ms. Lecky seconded and the motion carried 6-0. 3 New Applications C. COA2404-0046 – 1311 Princess Anne Street – James McGhee requests approval to construct a new two-story addition attached to the rear of this single-family residence and to remove the covering over the basement entry on the façade. James McGhee was present and discussed the poor condition of the house and repairs to be made. Danae Peckler (HFFI) thanked the applicant for their proposed repair and looked forward to seeing the modest and appropriately scaled improvements that are in keeping with local guidelines. David Primmer, 1509 Caroline Street, stated that the neighbors were appreciative of the repairs. Ms. Irvin asked if the applicant was proposing to demolish the entire rear addition. Mr. McGhee clarified that they were because it was falling apart. Ms. Irvin stated that she would like to make sure that the Board clarifies the demolition in any motion they make and that building codes would probably require demolition. Ms. Lecky asked if there was history on the addition. Ms. Schwartz said that it did not appear on Sanborn Maps or in building permit records. Ms. Lecky asked if the two window openings on the rear of the house would be closed with an addition. Mr. McGhee stated that the openings would become door openings. Ms. Lecky asked what the applicant would do to deter water from the exterior door opening to the basement with a temporary solution such as a covering or tarp. Mr. McGhee stated that there was no temporary plan and that the door was already damaged by water. Ms. Lecky stated that she was prepared to support the application. Ms. Galke said that she appreciated the application and rehabilitation. She said that it was minimally visible from the public right of way and she supported the staff recommendations. She also echoed Ms. Lecky’s concerns about the basement door covering. Vice Chair Ross asked if the porch was originally comprised of 3-bays. Mr. McGhee stated that it was not. Vice Chair Ross discussed the porches on the other houses being full façade. Mr. McGhee said they were going to keep the door for egress. Vice Chair Ross stated that she looked forward to seeing the changes. Chair Moss thanked the applicant for the application and rehabilitation. She said that she had similar concerns about the basement entry. She asked about existing square footage versus proposed square footage. Mr. McGhee stated that they were about the same footprint with the addition to the second story as well. Chair Moss clarified that the windows would be 1-over-1 double-hung sash windows. Ms. Lecky motioned to approve the construction of a new two-story addition attached to the rear of this single-family residence, and to remove the covering over the basement entryway, as well as the demolition of a small existing non-historic addition on the condition that the balustrade on the north end of the porch is restored to match the remaining two sides. Vice Chair Ross seconded the motion and it passed 6-0. GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT Danae Peckler (HFFI) commented on the Historic District Guidelines being cross-referenced and potential changes that could be made to clarify applicable guidelines. 4 13 May 2024 To: Kate S. Schwartz ksschwartz@fredericksburgva.gov cc: Planning@fredericksburgva.gov The Historic Fredericksburg Foundation has reviewed the upcoming agenda and related COA documents for the May 13, 2024, meeting of the Architectural Review Board and submits the following comments on select projects. Public Hearing: 10.A.i COA 2401-0035 (previously COA 2401-0024)—823 Caroline Street HFFI made public comments on this application at the handful of regular and supplementary meetings where this project has been discussed at length, many such comments will be repeated again as further adjustments to this design are needed to bring it in better compliance with several important district guidelines. The current COA does not include the total square footage for the proposed four-story building, but figures noted for the first, second, and third floor totally more than 7,700 SF. While we don’t have figures to quantify the fourth floor, it is reasonable to assume that it contains around 9,700 SF and will be the largest building on the east side of the block. Specifically focusing on the height, scale, and massing, the building continues to rise far above neighboring historic resources, particularly at the east or rear elevation. Its form is complex, making it standout even further from adjoining older buildings. Guideline 9.B. states that the form of the new building “should relate to the existing streetscape. If most building forms are simple, then the form of a new building should respect that characteristic.” Like members of the ARB, HFFI repeatedly requested views of the proposed project from Sophia Street. While an isometric of the southeast corner was produced, it wasn’t quite what we were looking for—the view from Sophia’s sidewalk. Thus, I took the liberty of placing Mr. McGhee’s sketch in situ but couldn’t quite get the scale to line up with neighboring buildings see Figure 1). I did err on the side of caution and actually made the sketch drawing smaller than its neighbors’ rooflines on either side. But this image further conveys the complexity of this design and the ways in which it stands apart from its surroundings is more clear. While Mr. McGhee’s creative approach to meet his client’s programmatic demands is admirable; the height, massing, and scale this design continues to go beyond design guideline’s guard rails. 10.A.ii. COA 2403-0043 – 1501 Caroline Street HFFI appreciates the visual clarity provided by the models in this application and its sensitive approach to adding onto the historic resource at 1501 Caroline Street. It is clear that the proposed addition will add 1,229 SF to the existing building. Overall, the proposed design of the two-story addition is generally in keeping with district guidelines; however, the flat rooftop decks and spiral staircase providing access from the lower to upper deck do not have precedent in surrounding historic resources or the neighborhood, at large. The lower deck appears more hidden from view along Hawke Street, but the upper section is most visually prominent. HFFI recommends that this space be modified to better suit its context. 10.B.i. COA 2404-0051– 1311 Princess Anne Street HFFI would like to thank the applicant and their team for the proposed repair work and look forward to seeing these modest and contextually scaled improvements that are in keeping with local guidelines come to fruition. 11. General Public Comment HFFI Preservationist, Danae Peckler, noted that there is an abundance of guidelines in our district handbook, some of which overlap on specific features and materials, and can be easily confused. To be clear, Chapter 3 relates to “Existing Buildings” and existing materials that applies to things like roofs, dormers, chimneys, and gutters. Chapter 5 is entitled “Site Elements” where guidance for “decks” (5.D) appears along with fences and walls, lighting, outbuildings and accessory structures, site appurtenances, and parking. The first page of this chapter also contains italic text to detail its applicability and use (see page 64) that reads: “This section provides guidance for site elements and all structures that may be an accessory to the primary residence or commercial buildings on a site. These minor elements, when taken together, can have a substantial impact on the overall character of a property and the district. These site features define the relationship between a building and the street or its neighbors and may be considered an important part of any project.” For further clarification, Staff generally includes the applicable guidelines for each type of project in the COA. It is my understanding that the only guidance that applies to something like an addition would be the “Additions” guidelines in Chapter 9. Therein guideline number 5 states: “To avoid compromising the integrity of historic buildings, additions should not be made to look older than they are. New construction should be differentiated from the old while still being compatible with the massing, scale, and architectural features of the original building. Replicas only confuse the importance of the original architecture.” But please correct me if I am wrong in thinking that it is only the specific guidelines for each project type that are applicable in their review. Thank you. Figure 1: Applicant’s southeast perspective of proposed infill at 823 Caroline over current Google Streetview image looking west from Sophia Street. Perspective image could not be scaled to match neighboring existing resources; inserted image was slightly undersized (rooflines in drawing fall below existing) to avoid overestimating the size of this new construction. TO: Kate Schwartz, Historic Resources Planner FROM: Karen and David C. Primmer, 1509 Caroline Street DATE: May 10, 2024 RE: Exterior Altera�ons at 1501 Caroline Street Ms. Schwartz: As neighbors, we are responding to plans submited for the two-story addi�on to the Wellford House at 1501 Caroline Street. The plans were submited at the April 8, 2024 ARB mee�ng. The Fredericksburg ARB, APPLICABLE HISTORIC DISTRICT DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES, Sec�on 9. L/Addi�ons reads: 1. Additions should be subordinate in size to the primary building and as inconspicuous as possible. 2. Additions should not visually overpower the existing structure. Below is a perspec�ve viewing from Pit Street (south facing) of the proposed addi�on from the ARB memorandum dated April 3, 2024. The original Wellford home is the construc�on with the black shuters. The rest of the rendering would be new addi�ons to the original home. As homeowners in the Historic District we realize that adding addi�ons to an exis�ng building is a huge challenge. However, the scale and size of this addi�on seems to dwarf the original house, is not inconspicuous and does seem to visually overpower the original Wellford home. Below is a rendering of the north side of the proposed addi�on (adjoining our property) and also visible to our Caroline Street neighbors. This rendering details the two-storied roo�op deck and balcony that will intrude directly on the privacy of our back deck, sunroom and master suite. Again, we recognize the challenges to addi�ons in the Historic District. However, looking at the proposed deck’s appropriateness to the neighborhood’s historic character and the privacy of our home and the Caroline and Pit Street neighbors, we ask the ARB to remove this roo�op deck from the submited plans. Thank you for considering our concerns. Please disseminate this email to the members of the ARB. We request that it be read into the record at the mee�ng.