Architectural Board of Review

Architectural Board of Review Minutes Monday, August 5, 2024 8 A.M. Via Conference - Zoom Members Present: Sandra Madison, Chair Hans Walter, Vice Chair James Neville, Member Kevin Kennedy, Alternate Member Vince Leskosky, Alternate Member Others Present: Daniel Feinstein, Senior Planner Kelly Beck, Planning Specialist The meeting was called to order by Daniel Feinstein, Senior Planner at 8:00 a.m. * * * * Approval of Minutes from the July 1, 2024 meeting. Approved. * * * * Approval of Minutes from the July 15, 2024 meeting. Approved. * * * * ABR24-000052 – 14201 Southington Road – Preliminary Review: Ludlow School Renovation. Mr. Feinstein summarized the meeting notes from the July 15, 2024 meeting. He listed the comments from that continued review. Aaron Rodebaugh, GPD Group, showed the updated plans. The entry windows have been altered to better coordinate with the building. Window details are shown specifically within the large window facing Ludlow Road addressing the street. The design ties into the proportion of the classroom windows and has mullion types like the gymnasium windows. The entry changed the head height to align with the stone banding course. That line turns the corner to be the head of the stone work over the entry. They raised the head of the flanking windows with stone below each window. The window pane proportion is equal with the classroom windows. The other items include centering the equipment screening on the roof of the gym, and opening up the view of the ramp replacing some of the wall, with an open guardrail as required. One area to explore is the seating/planter area of the stairs, where they are trying to work brick into the area. The district does not want the overall stair width reduced. There are no changes to the second entry. Mr. Feinstein said the Board of Zoning Appeals will review variances at their August 6, 2024 meeting. They will provide comments to the Architectural Board regarding the pick-up and drop-of procedure. The most relevant change to the plans is the drive aisle widths have been reduced to allow the walkway to be widened to 12 feet wide. Mr. Kennedy said he appreciates the finessing of the details. This is getting closer but he has several questions. What happens at the pilaster at the corners? The rendering appears to have a stone outer corner and brick at the inner corners. This is odd to have the materials change. Tamisha Lawson, GPD Group, said this is a program error with the rendering software. It is all brick. Mr. Kennedy asked about the cornice turning the corner. He asked about an overflow drain from the roof. Where will that be positioned? The ramp has less issues with visibility due to the lower walls. A planter could be raised in order to allow art at the steps. He would like to see how the joints work out at the entry trim. A different canopy needs to be proposed. The doors could be recessed to provide an amount of cover at the entry instead of the tacked on canopy. Mr. Leskosky agreed the idea for a recessed entry door is a great idea instead of the canopy. Mr. Neville agreed and asked if there is room to accomplish a recessed door. Mr. Rodebaugh said it could be recessed about 2 feet. He agrees as the canopy looks blocky now. Mr. Kennedy said the point is not to be completely dry, but to provide some protection and depth to the entry. Mr. Walter said where the ramp meets the building seems awkward. He asked about the top rail. Mr. Rodebaugh said they showed a color railing last meeting. This was meant for levity and brightness on the outside of the building. Mr. Walter said make it intentional as a piece of art. He likes the extended sidewalk width. It looks like brick above the canopy. This is not a scenario he would like to see. He is pleased with the design direction of the plans in general. Mr. Leskosky said the guardrail at the top should either be integrated into the railing or make it entirely different. Mr. Neville said the support posts for the railing should have more regular spacing do coordinate with the architecture. There was a general discussion regarding the ramp detailing. Architectural Board of Review 08/5/2024 Page 2 of 7 Mr. Leskosky said there could be brick incorporated into the risers of the seating area. Mr. Neville asked about the large window facing Ludlow Road. Is there a double hung window within the fixed surrounding window? Mr. Rodebaugh said the gymnasium windows are a similar design, but the double hung windows are not operable. Mr. Neville said he does not like the differing proportions of the windows. A double hung window design as depicted is not appropriate. Mr. Rodebaugh said the gymnasium now does not have matching windows to the rest of the building. This looked ok with the previous building details as it is a separate area. When the entry addition is in place this brings the details closer together and they have to balance those differences. Mr. Leskosky said that planters, unless substantial, are difficult to maintain. If the brick could happen at the seating steps, that would help. He said the general box of the addition is better with some additional detailing and coordination. The stairs, ramp and landing still need more work. Mr. Neville said the bricks are dimensioned at 13 ½ inches. The collar joint needs adjustment. He asked if the treads on the steps have been adjusted to be deeper. Mr. Rodebaugh indicated they would study the steps further. Continued with the following comments: 1) square off and redesign the ramp wall to an even height with the railing behind it; 2) extend the plantings in front of the ramp wall; 3) study the mechanical roof screen with a line-of-sight study and design material to lessen the height and lower the visual massing; 4) study and resolve the window design and muntin proportions throughout the new windows and determine the final proposed widow material; 4) resolve the entry step detailing including a deeper tread depth; 5) remove the canopy and instead recess the front entry doors to create an overhang; and 7) provide details of the stone detailing around the front entry. Submit revised plans for Board review. * * * * Mr. Kennedy left the meeting. * * * * ABR24-000090 – 3117 Huntington Road – Façade Alteration. Mr. Feinstein explained the Board reviewed a different proposal last year. The owner is now back with a revised, simplified detail for the front façade. David Megenhardt, homeowner said the original detail was a 3 foot deep overhang that collapsed since the review. They realized a lot of light was added to the interior without the overhang. They are now proposing a wide band detail, stained the color of the front door. Architectural Board of Review 08/5/2024 Page 3 of 7 Sarah Megenhardt, homeowner, said the original detail was an overhang, not a porch. Mr. Feinstein showed a photo of the original overhanging roof design. Mr. Leskosky said he would prefer a smaller version of the original. It should look deliberate and could be 12 inches deep. Ms. Megenhardt said they have not figured out how to have something deeper, but would like to have it cover all of the area of disturbed brick. Mr. Leskosky said he would prefer a finish color like the dark brown dormer color over the front door color. An eyebrow roof design could work. Continued in order for the owner to consider a deeper maybe 12 inch eyebrow roof overhang in order to accommodate a taller trim element and hide the brick deviation behind the previous deeper roof overhang. Submit revised plans for Board review. * * * * ABR24-000085 – 14306 South Park Boulevard – Window Alteration. Zach Tame, Home Depot Representative, explained the rear entry near the kitchen interferes with the triple awning windows that are currently adjacent. They propose a cottage window instead. Approved. * * * * ABR24-000094 – 3632 Tolland Road - Addition. Josh Tooker, designer, explained they are showing two options, one without windows at the outer corner of the new addition and the second option has slider windows high on the wall. They have changed the bathroom windows to casement style windows. Mr. Leskosky said there are so many other fenestration details that he does not miss the two additional windows. There was general agreement the two windows were not needed. Approved option A plans, without windows next to the bathroom windows. * * * * Architectural Board of Review 08/5/2024 Page 4 of 7 ABR24-000075 – 17350 South Park Boulevard – Cabana. Ronald Kluchin, architect, explained the details of the cabana are the same as what was shown in their preliminary plans. The materials have been altered to mimic the white addition/overhang on the rear of the house that was constructed several years ago. Approved. * * * * ABR24-000097 – 15709 Fernway Road – New Garage. Mr. Feinstein said the applicant is before the Board of Zoning Appeals for a height and setback variance, but the plans have been revised over the weekend in order to reduce the height. The setback variance is still required. Tanya Tate, Levine Architecture, explained they are replacing the existing garage. They are working with the height limitation and matching the hardi shingle siding and painted hardi for the trim. Mr. Neville noted the service door should also be panelized. Mr. Walter said the dormer should be wider or got to the roof ridge to be better proportioned. Ms. Tate said they have that an alternative and showed the drawings for that option. The dormer roof meets the garage roof peak. Approved the revised version of the front façade that is 20 feet tall with the dormer roof meeting the ridge line, with the condition that the service entry has a panelized door. * * * * ABR24-000101 – 3608 Palmerston Road – Vinyl Siding. Herb Schoen, The Home Corporation, explained the new siding matches the color of the existing siding. The existing is 8 inches deep and the new is a 6 inch beaded board vinyl. They are not touching the front entry. Approved with the condition that the wide corner trim is maintained as white. * * * * Ms. Madison joined the meeting. * * * * ABR24-000102 – Road – 19630 Scottsdale – Vinyl Siding. Windows. Heather Davies, Davies Architecture, explained the owners started work before knowing they Architectural Board of Review 08/5/2024 Page 5 of 7 needed review. This was an open porch and now has 4 narrow casement windows. They are revising the plan to include double casement windows, with two on the rear and one on the left elevation. They will bring the new siding all the way up the porch walls. Mr. Feinstein noted the plans say wood lap siding. Is the new siding proposed as white vinyl? Ms. Davies confirmed the new siding is a double 5.5 inch vinyl siding. Approved. * * * * ABR24-000100 – 22150 South Woodland Road - Addition. Elicia Gibbon, architect, said this house backs up to the golf course and most of the renovations are at the rear of the house. This is an addition of a great room and two car garage. The existing garage will be made into living space. All of the windows will be replaced and the house will receive new siding. They have taken cues for the new addition from the existing windows. The belt course is restored in white. The front entry has been redesigned. Approved. * * * * ABR24-000103 – 3333 Elsmere Road – New Garage. Nilsa Carrero, Platinum Garages, said they propose to demolish the existing garage and erect a new 22 by 22 foot garage. The siding color will match the house, along with the black asphalt shingles. The trim is white. There are two windows and a double wide service door. Approved. * * * * ABR24-000099 – 16620 Parkland Drive – Masonry Wall. Linda or Josh Pattie, The Pattie Group, representing Kenneth and Diane Campbell, homeowners. Approved administratively. * * * * Other Business 3191 Warrington Road—Railing. A new railing, appropriate for this second floor roof on this colonial style house, needs to be designed and installed. * * * * Architectural Board of Review 08/5/2024 Page 6 of 7 There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 10:45 a.m. The next meeting will be August 19, 2024. _________________________________ _________________________________ Sandra Madison, Chair Hans Walter, Vice Chair Architectural Board of Review Architectural Board of Review Architectural Board of Review 08/5/2024 Page 7 of 7