Architectural Review Board

Architectural Review Board City of Petersburg, Virginia Minutes of the Regular Meeting March 11, 2020, 6:00 p.m. Council Chambers, City Hall 135 N. Union Street, Petersburg VA 23803 Members Present: Chair, Joe Battiston Vice-Chair, Dino Lunsford Celeste Wynn Mitchell Pradia Terry Ammons Larry Murphy Members Absent: Lisa Jordan Staff: Secretary to the ARB, Kate Sangregorio 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, 2020, 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 Minutes from October 2019 were presented. Mr. Ammons had a correction in the spelling of “John Baird House.” Mr. Murphy motioned to approve the minutes with this correction, with a second from Ms. Jordan. The motion passed unanimously. 4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Ms. Wynn motioned to approve the agenda as presented, with a second by Mr. Pradia. 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. Arthur Capuano, 1931 Matoax Ave. Petersburg, came forward. Mr. Capuano expressed his concerns with the problem of treasure hunters and vandalizations. Mr. Battiston said the police should be called for those situations. Mr. Capuano said it was  an immediate issue, there should be a reverence for a historic area, and it should be made a bigger crime. Mr. Battiston said the ARB had no control over that issue, it would be something for the police or City Council. With there being no further comments, Chair Battiston closed the Public Information Period. 6. REQUEST(S) FOR CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS a. 213 Grove Avenue Applicant present, Kenneth Branford. Staff recommended approval, but requested regular maintenance on the fence. Mr. Branford stated that the church would maintain the fence, it was specifically needed in the rear for safety because there is a ravine behind the lot; people cut through the lot to fish and park too close to the edge. Mr. Branford said there was once a no-trespassing sign up, but it was stolen years ago. The lot is private property, but it is open and hard to keep people out of. RM Branford said he has spoken to the neighbors, and they can use it for parking if there is an event. Mr. Ammons asked to confirm that the post and chains against the street would not be connected to the fence in the rear, that was correct. Mr. Battiston asked if wheel stops would be added, Mr. Branford said they once had wheel stops, but they fell into the ravine. Mr. Battiston asked the height of the fence, Mr. Branford said 3 or 4 feet. Mr. Ammons commented that the style was welded wire rather than chicken wire, and welded wire was used at Studio Ammons on Market Street, although it was black. Mr. Ammons explained that the block wire fence disappears into the foliage and hides rust and stains. Mr. Battiston asked if Mr. Branford would consider using black for the fence, Mr. Branford said he would consider it, and there would be bushes and plants to beatify it. Mr. Ammons commented that neither the fence or bushes would stop cars and suggested using railroad ties that are pegged down. Ms. Wynn asked about the shrubs, Mr. Branford said maybe just two feet high, Ms. Wynn commented that it would add a buffer. Mr. Battiston opened the floor for public comment. Louis Malon from the Historic Petersburg Foundation came forward. HPF owns the neighboring property of Peter Jones Trading Post, and Mr. Malon said after hearing the explanation he does not object to the proposal but suggested considering fencing the rest of the lot. There was no further public comment. Mr. Ammons motioned to approve the application as presented, with the recommendation to use black wire. The motion was seconded by Mr. Pradia and passed unanimously. b. 277 Grove Avenue Applicant present, Nicolas Yoss with Johanne Yoss. Staff recommended denial for the proposed door, and deferral for the proposed windows based on lack of information. Ms. Yoss explained that they found a different door which was more similar to the original. Ms. Yoss explained that the windows had rot, some were painted shut or had no opening mechanism, and the storm windows were bad too. Mr. Ammons commented that the ARB should not allow replacements if the original windows are OK. Mr. Lunsford added that repairs of windows are often less expensive than full replacements. Mr. Ammons mentioned that storm windows can be added to increase energy efficacy. Mr. Ammons asked the difference between the proposed doors was one was wood the other fiberglass. Mr. Battiston echoed the suggestion to attempt repair over replacement. Ms. Yoss noted that some storm windows were missing, Mr. Ammons was fine with installing new storms, and added that he hoped as many windows as possible were repaired as possible. Mr. Battiston added that windows from less visible elevations could be moved to the front if they are the same size, and that the ARB had no purview over things that are not visible from public right of way. Ms. Yoss said all the windows were different sizes. Ms. Yoss asked if they had to keep the existing storm door, they did not. No public comment. Mr. Ammons motioned to approve the new wooden door as presented, and to have a contractor assess the condition of the windows to determine if they can be repaired; staff can determine if they need reviewed or not. The motion was seconded by Mr. Murphy. The motion passed unanimously. c. 224-226 Mercer Street Applicant present, Arthur Capuano. Staff recommended approval. Mr. Capuano said the house numbers needed replaced but was not sure if he had to keep them and paint them black while painting the house white. Mr. Ammons noted that the house numbers had to meet code. Mr. Capuano brought new numbers he had gotten, the board thought they looked fine. Mr. Capuano said he wanted to rebuild the overhangs and make it look 1800s, or as close as possible, it was not made of tongue  and groove, and he doesn’t want to use plywood. Mr. Battiston asked about the roof, both the roof and overhangs have asphalt shingles. Mr. Battiston suggested the roof and overhangs should have the same color shingles. Mr. Capuano noted the algae growth on the asbestos siding and asked if he could paint it, Mr. Ammons said yes. Mr. Battiston said to be careful not to break the shingles. Mr. Capuano asked if new shingles could be used, Mr. Battison said new shingles would probably be a concrete composite, but that should be ok when they are all painted. Mr. Capuano wanted to paint everything white for simplicity, even the shutters. Mr. Murphy asked about the shutters, they are wood, probably from the 1940s. Mr. Capuano asked if he could add shutters to the first floor, the board was fine with that if they matched the second floor. Mr. Capuano brought up repointing the cinderblocks under the foundation, he said that he would prefer to just remove them since they were never mortared in, that would be acceptable. Mr. Capuano asked if he could remove the little stoops that are only made of treated wood and not attached to anything, the board said yes. Mr. Capuano commented that the area was in poor shape because of his neighbor. Mr. Ammons summarized the discussion: the overhangs would be repaired to match as best as possible, the shingles on the overhangs would match the roof, shutters could be added to the first floor windows if they matched the second floor, the wood platforms could be removed, paint could be administratively approved by staff, lose cinderblocks could be removed and potentially replaced with latus, if the door needs replaced it should be done in-kind. Mr. Capuano said he would try to do repairs and make it safer, Mr. Battiston noted they only reviewed what is visible from the street. Mr. Ammons added that the applicant could move the asbestos shingles from the back to the front, if possible, if not he could match them with new shingles. Mr. Capuano said that there was no skirting on the house, and that some of the windowsills were damaged, Mr. Ammons said he should match what’s there. Mr. Capuano thought he might try to use an epoxy. No public comment. Mr. Ammons motioned to approve the application as discussed; remove the wooden platforms, add shutters on the first floor to match the second floor, asbestos shingles could eb moved from the back to front and sides if possible and if not new shingles could be found to match the texture and shape of the originals, remove the non- attached concrete blocks, repair window sills in-kind, repair or replace front door in- kind The motion was seconded by Mr. Pradia and passed unanimously. Mr. Capuano asked about repairing the asbestos shingles, Mr. Ammons said they can be pieced together with construction adhesive and painted. There was some discussion about the roof. 7. OLD BUSINESS  a. 115 N. Sycamore Street Staff received an email that the applicant would not be present. Mr. Murphy motioned to defer the application with a second by Ms. Wynn. The motion passed unanimously. 8. NEW BUSINESS 30 E. Fillmore Staff asked if the already installed railings could be approved administratively. Mr. Battiston said they would not meet code. Mr. Ammons suggested the owner should apply for a COA normally. Mr. Lunsford added that it is no safer than what it was without railings. Mr. Pradia wondered about adding metal or wrought iron. Mr. Battiston suggested checking with Code Compliance to see if they would let it remain without pickets. Mr. Ammons noted that the railings are not compatible and don’t match. Mr. Battiston said that iron would be less obvious. A Call to Action Second Meeting Staff announced that a second Call to Action meeting would be held on April 20 at 6pm. 9. WORK SESSION 234 S. Jefferson Street A COA was issued for this property was issued in February of 2020. A concern was raised about getting approval for in-kind porch replacements. Mr. Pradia motioned to approve in-kind porch replacements on 234 S. Jefferson with a second from Ms. Wynn. The motion passed unanimously. Drainage Issue at 7 Bollingbrook St. A citizen brought up a concern about drainage near Andrade’s. There was some discussion about this. A concern was also brought up about the noise level from Andrade’s. 1101 McKenzie Street - Signage  Staff explained that the owners wanted to use a molded plastic sign for their new business, and while plastic signs are not expressly allowed in the guidelines, this was the type of sign used for the last business in the building. Mr. Battiston thought the sign would be fine, but they are very expensive so they would need more information; it should not be flat plastic painted. The board agreed it should be formally submitted for review. 10. ADJOURNMENT A motion was made by Ms. Wynn to adjourn the meeting, with a second from Mr. Pradia. The motion was passed unanimously, and the meeting was adjourned.