Architectural Review Board

Architectural Review Board City of Petersburg, Virginia Minutes of the Regular Meeting February 8, 2023 6:00 p.m. Multipurpose Room, Petersburg Public Library 201 W. Washington Street, Petersburg VA 23803 Members Present: Vice-Chair, Joe Battiston Terry Ammons Bill Hartsock Louis Malon Celeste Wynn Members Absent: Chair, Larry Murphy Dino Lunsford Staff: Secretary to the ARB, Kate Sangregorio 1. CALL TO ORDER Vice-Chair Joe Battiston called to order a regular meeting of the City of Petersburg Architectural Review Board on Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 6:00 p.m. in the Multipurpose Room of the Petersburg Public Library, 201 W. Washington Street, Petersburg, Virginia 23803. 2. THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. REVIEW OF MINUTES Minutes from the January 11, 2023, regular meeting were presented. Mr. Battiston noted that there was an error for item 6a, that Mr. Battiston did not open the public information, Mr. Murphy did. Mr. Ammons motioned to approve the minutes with that amendment, with a second from Mr. Malon. The motion passed unanimously. 4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Ms. Wynn motioned to approve the agenda as presented, with a second by Mr. Malon. The motion passed unanimously. This approved item 6a in the consent agenda. 5. PUBLIC INFORMATION PERIOD Vice-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, Vice-Chair Battiston closed the Public Information Period. 1 6. REQUEST(S) FOR CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS 6b. 307 Webster Street Applicant present, Jose Velasquez. Staff recommended approval. Mr. Malon wondered if the rear windows could be made more uniform in location, Mr. Ammons noted the room layout probably wouldn’t allow that. There was no public comment. Mr. Ammons motioned to approve the application as submitted based on the Design Guidelines Chapter 7. The motion was seconded by Mr. Hartsock and passed unanimously. 6c. 1138 West High Street Applicants present, Mirek Wapniarz and David Budych. Staff recommended approval. Mr. Budych explained that they have owned the house for 5 years and were renovating it historically with no vinyl. They had found some of the columns and moldings from the porch and rebuilt the missing ones. They asked that staff provide any photos that might show railings on the porch, otherwise they may use square pickets. Mr. Hartsock asked if it would be a single family. Mr. Budych said that they had purchased it as a duplex and intended to renovate it as such, however since it had been vacant more than two years, the Zoning Ordinance required it to be used as single family based on the size of the lot. Mr. Ammons asked that a recommendation be made to the city that the house should be allowed to remain a duplex as it is important to the history and use of West High Street. Mr. Battiston suggested the applicants talk to their City Council member. Mr. Ammons noted that the house should still read as a double house since that was its historic use. Mr. Ammons said that if the request does go to City Council, an ARB representative should attend. Mr. Battiston opened the floor for anyone to speak for or against the application. Tom Moore came forward. Mr. Moore asked if a historic building was only partially there or gone, if it could be rebuilt. Staff explained that any new construction projects have to meet current regulations. Kenneth Lewis came forward. Mr. Lewis said that if the house was a duplex it should stay a duplex. 2  Michelle Murrills came forward. Ms. Murrills agreed that the house should remain a duplex. With there being no further public comments, Mr. Battiston closed the public comment period. Mr. Ammons motioned to approve the application as submitted with the addition of proposed railings and a notation that the ARB supported the house remaining a duplex. Ms. Wynn seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. 6d. 25 Early Street Applicant not present. Mr. Malon motioned to move the application to the end of the agenda with a second from Mr. Ammons. The motion passed unanimously. 6e. 108 S. South Street Applicant present, Saul Pardo. Mr. Pardo explained that the contractor said the metal roof was destroyed and it was making the bad condition of the house worse, and he did not know the house was historic. Staff noted that the windows had already been replaced with the wrong size vinyl windows. Mr. Battiston said the metal roof should have remained, and noted that the ARB allows newer steel metal roofs with a seam height of one inch or less. Mr. Ammons noted that it would be a field formed roof, not a snap together. Mr. Battiston said the vinyl windows could say since they were replaced before this owner, and asked what the brick piers on the porch were covered with- it was wood. Mr. Malon noticed the door didn’t have a transom anymore; it should be put back if feasible. Mr. Battiston said the sidelights would have to be replaced if a transom was added. Mr. Pardo said the door and windows were covered by plywood so they couldn’t be matched. Mr. Ammons thought the porch railings, columns and windows were ok, but the door and roof were an issue. The asbestos siding to hardiplank was good. Mr. Ammons said that it was important to keep the scale as part of the street fabric- Mr. Pardo understood. There was no public comment. Ms. Wynn motioned to approve the changes, with the exception that the door should be returned to its original configuration with a transom, and that the asphalt roof be replaced with a metal roof. The motion was seconded by Mr. Malon and passed unanimously. 6f. 36 W. Fillmore Street 3 Applicant present, Steve Parson. Staff recommended denial based on the Design Guidelines Chapter 4 Section K. Mr. Parson brought a document with information about the windows that had been installed. Mr. Parson explained that when he was quoted by his roofer the quote was only based on the area and the material of the roof was not investigated, so he didn’t know part of it was slate. He said the new roof was dimensional shingles and thought the whole roof should be uniform. Mr. Battiston noted that sometimes artificial or synthetic slate is allowed, so the choices would be that or real slate. Mr. Battiston asked about the windows. Mr. Parson said the previous owners did an amateur job with three or four different styles of windows, some without glass, some rotted, and some boarded. Mr. Battsiton asked the material. Mr. Parson said there were 60 different windows, wood, aluminum, and vinyl; and now they were all vinyl. Mr. Parson said he didn’t know the building was historic, and needed to act because the police were calling and asking for the building to be secured. Mr. Parson said a lot of the windows were vinyl and some still had tags. Mr. Battiton said that integrity of the windows and roof were important. Ms. Wynn noted that if the window request had come before the ARB first and there was proof of what windows were what material, there would have been compromise, but as it were, since the ARB did not know which windows were which, it was hard to approve their replacement. Mr. Ammons thought that if this proposal was denied and appealed, City Council would likely to be approved, however, quality of materials in historic districts should not be reduced, and if the ARB doesn’t know what the quality of the windows were then there was not enough information to vote. Mr. Ammons said that 1950s brick buildings were often painted so that was less of a concern. Mr. Malon asked why the applicant wanted to paint the building, Mr. Parson said there was grout missing and the bricks didn’t match. There was no public comment. Mr. Malon motioned to deny the materials used to replace the windows and roof, and approve the proposal to paint. Mr. Hartsock seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. Mr. Malon asked if there was a list of all the windows, Mr. Parson said he would check notes, and that the two story portion of the building was pretty much all vinyl. 6g. 18 Walnut Lane Applicant present, Tom Moore. Staff recommended approval based on the Design Guidelines Chapter 7. Mr. Moore said the driveway would be installed to the side on the left, and that the house would be setback to be in line with the neighbor. Mr. Battiston said the paint color cold be administratively approved. There was no public comment. 4  Mr. Malon motioned to approve the application as submitted, with the setbacks to match the established setbacks on the street. Ms. Wynn seconded the application and it passed unanimously. 6d. 25 Early Street Applicant present, Ephriam Goodman. Staff recommended approval based on the Design Guidelines Chapter 7. Mr. Goodman said the driveway would be situated to the left like on the new construction at 217 and 215 S. Jones Street. Staff noted that there were no neighbors so the house setbacks should comply with the Zoning Ordinance. There was no public comment. Mr. Hartsock motioned to approve the application as submitted, with a second from Mr. Malon. The motion passed unanimously. 7. OLD BUSINESS 7a. Proposal to put individually listed NR Properties under ARB purview Mr. Malon said that non-congruous historic district was not good for reviewing cases as the ARB would not be able to compare a request to its neighbor. Mr. Hartsock noted the Sutherland House, a large brick house which stands out from it’s smaller frame neighbors. Mr. Malon said that context is essential for review, lack of context would lessen the ARB’s ability to follow the Design Guidelines. The board wouldn’t have the authority to go outside its jurisdiction to look at a neighborhood when that neighborhood wasn’t a part of its purview. Mr. Ammons and Mr. Battiston also expressed their opposition, but noted that if City Council issued the ordinance to establish this, they would follow it. Mr. Hartsock agreed it would be hard to put a single house in context and worried that enforcing guidelines like that would be seen more like a bias against it. Mr. Battiston opened the floor for public comment. Dr. Kenneth Lewis spoke. Dr. Lewis said that although the Peabody school had three buildings, it should be treated as a campus. Dr. Lewis explained his and his family’s history with the school, and brought old yearbooks to share with the ARB. He wanted the entire complex to be designated as historic, not just the Peabody building. Dr. Lewis had heard of a proposal to turn Peabody into apartments, and found that to be an inappropriate use for the buildings, and noted other historic black schools that had been given more appropriate educational reuses. 5  The ARB clarified that even if the ordinance in question went through, they would have no purview over use of a building, just any exterior changes. Dr. Lewis asked that if this was not something the ARB could do, that they as individuals respect and protect Peabody’s history. Julian Greene spoke. Mr. Green said he was working with the Cameron Foundation to have the whole complex listed on the National Register. He was also working with the Peabody Academic Learning and Development Center Inc. (PALDC) which was working on acquiring the property. He said that since Peabody historically had an academic use it should continue that use, and noted that PALDC wouldn’t compete with existing schools. Mr. Greene explained some history justifying Peabody as one of the oldest African American Schools. He also noted that there was some conflicting information about the ownership between the city and the school system. Staff clarified that Mr. Greene was basically asking that the whole Peabody complex be made a local historic district and under ARB purview. With there being no further public comment, Mr. Battiston closed the public comment period. Mr. Malon motioned to oppose the resolution with a second from Mr. Hartsock. The motion passed unanimously. 8. NEW BUSINESS 9. WORK SESSION Bollards: Mr. Malon asked about an upcoming City Council item on installing bollards to protect historic properties. Mr. Battiston explained that in 2008 or 2009 one of his buildings was hit by a motorist and he asked the city to install bollards; however this specific case is about the Ragland Mansion being hit by a car; the Council proposal is to have a citizen pay for the bollards but the city install them. 228 S. Jefferson Street: Ms. Wynn said that the beautiful wrought iron fence on the property was in danger of falling down. Staff would investigate the matter. 10. ADJOURNMENT A motion was made by Ms. Wynn to adjourn the meeting, with a second from Mr. Hartsock. The motion was passed unanimously and the meeting was adjourned. 6