Architectural Review Board

Architectural Review Board City of Petersburg, Virginia Minutes of the Regular Meeting March 11, 2015 6:00 p.m. Council Chambers, City Hall 135 N. Union Street, Petersburg VA 23803 Members Present: Chair, Joe Battiston Vice-Chair, Isaac Ward Celeste Wynn Theresa Booty Mitchell Pradia Members Absent: Gibson Worsham Staff: Secretary to the ARB, Kathleen Morgan 1. CALL TO ORDER Chair Joe Battiston called to order a regular meeting of the City of Petersburg Architectural Review Board on Wednesday, March 11, 2015 at 6:00 p.m. at Council Chambers, City Hall, 135 N. Union Street, Petersburg, Virginia 23803. 2. THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. REVIEW OF MINUTES Mr. Pradia moved to dispense of the minutes, followed by a second from Vice-Chair Ward. The motion passed unanimously. 4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Mr. Pradia made a motion to approve the agenda, and in approving the agenda also approved the consent agenda items (102-104 W. Old Street, 1 Centre Hill Court), followed by a second from Ms. Wynn. The motion passed unanimously. 5. PUBLIC INFORMATION PERIOD Chair Battiston opened the Public Information Period to anyone who wished to speak on any subject not on the agenda. With there being no comments, Chair Battiston closed the Public Information Period. 6. REQUEST(S) FOR CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS Consent Agenda: a. 102-104 W. Old Street: Approved b. 1 Centre Hill Court: Approved Regular Agenda: c. 533 High Street: The applicant, Bruce Donald, was present. Staff recommended approval of the proposed application. The applicant stated the shutters would be wood shutters, as well as the windows. There was no public comment. Ms. Wynn moved to approve the application as submitted, followed by a second from Ms. Wynn. The motion passed unanimously. d. 239 High Street: The applicant, Lisa Vaughan Jordan, was present. Staff recommended approval of the proposed application. The applicant stated that the roof will only need repairing, not replacing any sections of the roof. There was no public comment. Ms. Wynn moved to approve the application as submitted, followed by a second from Ms. Booty. The motion passed unanimously. e. 21 N. Sycamore Street: The applicant, Christine Lynch, was present. Staff recommended approval of the proposed application. The applicant explained that the storefront on the north side of the building had been altered in the 20th century, and the alteration has forced them to make the windows smaller than on the Sycamore Street side. The muntins are at a height that is equal to the windows on the Sycamore Street side. There was no public comment. Mr. Ward moved to approve the application as submitted, noting the 2/20/2015 elevation with one bay on the north side is withdrawn from the submission, followed by a second from Mr. Pradia. The motion passed unanimously. f. 12 Centre Hill Court: The applicants, Jim and Sarah Read, were present. Staff recommended approval of the proposed application. The applicant stated the previous fence was in poor condition, and the current fence follows the same footprint of the previous fence. The applicant stated she would present a stain or paint color to staff for approval. There was no public comment. Mr. Ward moved to approve the application as submitted, followed by a second from Ms. Wynn. The motion passed unanimously.  g. 14 Centre Hill Court: The applicant, Dennis McLane of Elwood Yates Contracting, was present. Staff recommended approval with the conditions the dormer is rebuilt, the half round gutter is painted to match the trim, and tongue and groove is used under the soffit instead of plywood. The applicant stated the dormer would be rebuilt. Mr. Pradia stated that since the entire roof is gone, the new construction guidelines could be applied. Mr. Ward concurred, stating that since the owner did not remove the roof, this could be considered new construction. Ms. Booty asked if any repointing needed to be done; the applicant stated that the appropriate lime based mortar would be used if repointing is necessary, color to match what is existing. Mr. Ward moved to approve the application per the staff recommendation, with the conditions that the applicant show staff a sample of the shingle for final approval as well as the dormer drawing, and to include mortar repair and repointing, followed by a second from Mr. Pradia. The motion passed unanimously. 7. OLD BUSINESS 8. NEW BUSINESS 9. WORK SESSION Staff stated that a discussion on murals did take place at 5:00 p.m., prior to the meeting. Staff stated that a draft would be ready for a vote at the next meeting. 10. ADJOURNMENT Mr. Ward moved to adjourn the meeting, followed by a second from Ms. Wynn. The motion passed unanimously. The meeting adjourned at approximately 7:01 p.m.