Board of Historic & Architectural Review

The Smithfield Board of Historic and Architectural Review held its regular meeting on Tuesday, October 19th, 2021, at the Smithfield Center. The meeting was called to order at 6:30 p.m. Members present: Trey Gwaltney – Chairman Russell Hill Gary Hess Justin Hornback Judith Lally Laura Brown Members absent: Julia Hillegass Staff present: William H. Riddick, III – Town Attorney Tammie Clary – Community Development & Planning Director Amy Novak – Director of Parks & Recreation Press: None Citizens: 3 Chairman Gwaltney welcomed everyone to the meeting. Community Development & Planning Director’s Report: Tammie Clary reported that Summit Design & Engineering Services, PLLC, the Town consultants for the 2020/2021 Comprehensive Plan update, have developed a website to assist in providing transparency in the comprehensive planning process. The website is accessible via the following link: https://smithfieldvacomprehensiveplan.com/. A draft existing condition report and a draft summary report of the recent citizen survey are accessible via the link. Finally, our consultants have also posted a draft Vision, Goals, Objectives and Strategies for feedback. Mrs. Clary stated that Ms. Brines asked that 330 Main Street to be pulled from the agenda. Town staff is awaiting confirmation on the style of the gutters and downspouts. Upcoming Meetings and Activities: Monday, October 25th, 3:00 PM – Town Council Committee Meetings Tuesday, October 26th, 3:00 PM – Town Council Committee Meetings Monday, November 1st, 6:30PM – Town Council Meeting Wednesday, November 3rd, 5:30 PM – Planning Commission Working Session Tuesday, November 9th, 6:30 PM – Planning Commission Meeting Tuesday, November 16th, 6:30 PM – Board of Historic & Architectural Review Meeting Tuesday, November 16th, 7:30 PM – BZA Meeting Public Comments: There were no public comments. Board Member Comments: There were no Board member comments. Accessory Structure (Signs) – 301 Jericho Road – Landmark – Town of Smithfield Parks, Amy Novak, applicant: Board of Historic and Architectural Review October 19th, 2021 Tammy Clary reported that the applicant was seeking approval to erect three new three foot by three-foot double hanging street signs on eight-foot post. The post will be painted black, and the signs will have a variety of black background with gold lettering and gold background with black lettering. The first sign will inform guests that a particular entrance is for service personnel only. The other two signs will welcome and direct event guests to the event parking located on the Manor House and Grounds. The applicant, Amy Novak was available for questions from the Board. She stated that currently they are using sandwich boards which doesn’t fit the look of the historic Manor House. She stated that the road sign that says Church Street and Jericho is very attractive and fits the period the house was built. Mr. Hess made a motion to approve the application as presented and Mrs. Lally seconded. With no further discussion, Chairman Gwaltney called for the vote. On call for the vote, six members were present. Mr. Hess voted aye, Mr. Hill voted aye, Mr. Hornback voted aye, Mrs. Lally voted aye, Mrs. Brown voted aye, and Chairman Gwaltney voted aye. There were no votes against the motion. The motion passed. Pain/Color Change (Front Door and Shutters) – 318 Main Street – Contributing – Minette Brooks, applicant: Tammie Clary reported that the applicant was seeking approval to paint the front door and shutters in a navy-blue color known as “Honorable Blue” from Sherwin Williams. The applicant, Karen Collier, of 318 Main Street was available for questions from the Board. She stated that the darker blue in the sample is closer to the actual color. Chairman Gwaltney asked what color the iron railings on the porch would be. Ms. Collier stated that the iron railings on the porch would stay black. Mr. Hornback made a motion to approve the application as presented and Mr. Hill seconded. With no further discussion, Chairman Gwaltney called for the vote. On call for the vote, six members were present. Mr. Hess voted aye, Mr. Hill voted aye, Mr. Hornback voted aye, Mrs. Lally voted aye, Mrs. Brown voted aye, and Chairman Gwaltney voted aye. There were no votes against the motion. The motion passed. Windows (after-the-fact) – 360-368 Main Street – Contributing – Yusuf Atay, applicant: Tammie Clary reported that the applicant was seeking after-the-fact approval for the installation of one-over-one vinyl windows. She stated that included in the staff report is the email from the applicant indicating that he was under the assumption he could replace with the same material with the windows that were there. Town staff is unable to verify if vinyl windows were previously present on that property which is why town staff brought this application for your review. The applicant did not attend the meeting. Mr. Hornback asked how many windows were replaced. Tammie Clary stated that she doesn’t know the exact number of windows that were replaced but not all of them were replaced. Mr. Hess asked are the windows that were not replaced vinyl windows. Tammie Clary stated no they are not. 2 Board of Historic and Architectural Review October 19th, 2021 Mr. Hornback stated that they are storm windows over wood. Mr. Hill stated that they are probably wood windows because he would have left wood windows and taken the vinyl windows out. Mr. Hess stated that the board can’t proceed without more information. He suggested that the town inspect the windows that were replaced and the ones that were not replaced so the board can frame the questions appropriately. Mrs. Lally stated that the building has different types of windows. She asked are there plans to make the windows more consistent because it would look better than the different types of current windows. Chairman Gwaltney stated that we don’t know how many have been replaced. Mr. Hornback asked the board if they would submit a list of questions to Mrs. Clary and she could reach out to the applicant for answers. Mr. Hess made a motion to table the application to allow the applicant the opportunity to answer questions from the Board. Mr. Hill seconded. With no further discussion, Chairman Gwaltney called for the vote. On call for the vote, six members were present. Mr. Hess voted aye, Mr. Hill voted aye, Mr. Hornback voted aye, Mrs. Lally voted aye, Mrs. Brown voted aye, and Chairman Gwaltney voted aye. There were no votes against the motion. The motion passed. Accessory Structure (Roof Addition) – 415 south Church Street – Contributing – Randy Pack, applicant: Tammy Clary reported that the applicant was seeking approval for a one hundred foot, three inches wide by twenty-three foot, seven and three-quarter inch long roof extension to convert the uncovered deck to a covered deck at the rear of Smithfield Station. The roof extension on the back of the building would replace the temporary tents that were put up during the COVID-19 pandemic. Additionally, the proposed addition would include asphalt shingles or rubber membrane to match the existing shingles or rubber membrane on the building. The existing gutters and downspouts would be removed to allow the new rafters to be bolted to the existing rafters. The proposed overhand would match the slope of the existing roof. The applicant, Randy Pack, of 415 South Church Street was available for questions from the Board. Chairman Gwaltney asked would the roof be covered with asphalt shingles or rubber membrane to join to something else. Mr. Pack stated that the existing roof is rubber membrane so we will extend the rubber membrane. Mr. Hess asked if he was planning on enclosing the deck. Mr. Pack stated that we will put heaters, fans, and lighting under the roof. He stated that people prefer to eat outside because of the pandemic. Mr. Hill made a motion to approve the application as presented and Mr. Hess seconded. With no further discussion, Chairman Gwaltney called for the vote. On call for the vote, six members were present. Mr. Hess voted aye, Mr. Hill voted aye, Mr. Hornback voted aye, Mrs. Lally voted aye, Mrs. Brown voted aye, and Chairman Gwaltney voted aye. There were no votes against the motion. The motion passed. 3 Board of Historic and Architectural Review October 19th, 2021 New Single Family Dwelling Construction – Lot 182-A Riverview Avenue – Non- Contributing – Mesa Construction, applicant. Tammy Clary reported that the applicant wishes to construct a new single-family dwelling on the property. The house will be covered by “Pewter Gray” Timberline HD shingles and will feature a split-faced block foundation in a natural color. All trim will be PVC or equivalent, white in color. The siding will be “Blue Spruce” Everlast Advance Composite siding. The front and side windows are double hung new construction vinyl clad windows, six over six, with grids between the glass. The small dormers and side windows are four grid fixed, while the larger dormer is horizontal six by six grid pattern. The rear windows are full view casement new construction vinyl windows with no grills. The front door will be wood and fiberglass and stained brown. The front porch, second floor porch, and rear porch will feature white vinyl square picket railings. The second-floor door and rear door will be painted white. The new single-family dwelling will feature a white side load garage door with four arched windows over top. There will also be a second twenty-foot by thirty-six-foot detached garage that will be twenty-one feet in height and will feature a white sixteen-foot by ten-foot garage door, which will match the garage door on the primary structure. The roof will match the primary structure with the Timberline HD shingles in “Pewter Gray” and “Blue Spruce” Everlast composite siding, with white trim. There will be an entry door on the left side that will be painted white to match the trim. There will be two windows on the right side that will match the front and side windows of the primary structure, with six over six grids between the glass. Additionally, the applicants are seeking approval for the installation of a white six-foot vinyl fence located along the right rear side of the parcel. The fence will be used to separate their property from the adjoining park which has a lot of foot traffic. The applicants are seeking approval for vinyl material due to maintenance reasons. Town staff recommend the fence be wooden and painted white or stained. The fence cannot be erected until after the zoning permit for the new single-family dwelling has been issued. The applicant, Marvin Smith, of 19351 Battery Park Road was available for questions from the Board. He stated that we would like to do a privacy style six-foot fence to separate the park from the house. The fence will not be seen from Riverview. A vinyl fence is less maintenance. The Everlast siding is a composite siding probably three sixteens by five sixteens thick. There is a lifetime warranty on the color fade. The Everlast siding the color is all the way through the product. Chairman Gwaltney stated that he would like to separate the items for discussion purposes. The first discussion is on the house and garage. Mr. Hill asked if he would be using vinyl or composite rails on the front porch. Mr. Smith stated that he would like to use the vinyl rails but is not opposed to using composite railings. Mr. Hill asked if the trim around the windows will have one by fours around the windows on the house and garage. Mr. Smith stated that the Everlast product has a Jay channel type product that is about two and half inches wide. The composite Jay channel is about two and half inches wide accompany with the white double hung sash and the trim around the window will have the bigger look. The window on the elevation is nine over nine but it is going to be six over six. The small dormers at 4 Board of Historic and Architectural Review October 19th, 2021 top, sliding window, big dormer, and the other two windows are kind of irrelevant to the look of the house. Mr. Hornback asked if the composite siding would be a board and batten style. Mr. Smith stated that he would like to use seven-inch lap style. It has a wood definition in the texture. Chairman Gwaltney asked what it is the siding made of. Mr. Smith stated the composite is made of vinyl, cement, and epoxy. Tammy Clary stated for clarification the window trim is a Jay channel composite which is two and half inches with corners six and half inches. Mr. Smith stated that the window trim will be two and half inches with corners six inches. Chairman Gwaltney stated that next discussion is on the fence. Mr. Smith stated that the fence will be at the back left property line. It will come up to the first turn at the property line and attached to the rear of the house. It will provide privacy. Chairman Gwaltney stated that the fence starts from whatever the final point is on the illustration and comes up to the first angle then stops. Mr. Smith stated that Canada Surveying is working on a plat. They would like to put the fence up before construction starts to help maintain the silk fence in the back. They would like to put the fence up to be able to get a vehicle to the back edge to drop off the fence and dig the poles. He stated that once the house is built the fence will be attached from the first corner on the left property line to the back of the house. Chairman Gwaltney stated that the goal is to keep people from cutting through from the street to the park. Mr. Smith stated that the main purpose of the fence on the left-hand side is privacy from the park. Mrs. Brown asked what will prevent people from walking around the far edge of the fence. Mr. Smith stated that the far edge is a cliff at the back of the property. Mrs. Brown stated that she would be concern about people trying to sneak around the fence and using it a place to hide. Chairman Gwaltney asked how far from the property line are the benches. Mr. Smith stated that they are about ten or fifteen feet. Mrs. Brown asked would the fence impact the view of the river. Mr. Smith stated that no you would not see the river. Mrs. Brown stated that it would take something away from the town by preventing people being able to see the river at Riverview Park. Ms. Kimberly Lowry stated that she is not opposed to doing a six-foot fence on most of the property and a four-foot fence in the back. Chairman Gwaltney asked would you consider a split-rail fence. He stated that building a house between the street and the park it would do a fair amount of discouraging people cutting through. Ms. Lowry stated that she could not install a split-rail fence because of her dog. Mr. Smith stated that he would do a four-foot fence at the back edge. Mr. Hornback stated that it would make since to have a fence for liability purposes. 5