Historic Landmarks Commission Packets

HISTORIC LANDMARKS COMMISSION JANUARY 8, 2015 THE REGULAR MEETING WILL BE HELD AT 9:00 A.M. IN CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS SUFFOLK CITY HALL NOTE: IF YOU CANNOT ATTEND THIS MEETING, PLEASE CALL THE DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING BY 12:00 NOON, WEDNESDAY, January 7, 2015 514-4060 RANDY HICKS CHAIRMAN PREPARED BY THE CITY OF SUFFOLK DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIVISION OF PLANNING  AGENDA Historic Landmarks Commission Meeting Thursday, January 8, 2015 9:00 a.m. I. Call to Order: Chairman II. Roll Call III. Approval of the Minutes of December 11, 2014. IV. Election of Vice-Chairman V. New Business A. REQUEST FOR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS HC-2014-46, submitted by Norbert and Garon Trojanowski, applicant and property owner, for the after-the-fact change in materials for the repair or replacement of an existing metal shingle roof and associated exterior renovations of an existing structure located at 106 Brewer Avenue. The property is further identified as Zoning Map 34G17 Block (2) B Parcel(s) 6, Suffolk Voting Borough, and is zoned RM (Residential Medium District), and HC (Historic Conservation Overlay District). VI. Staff Reports A. Enforcement Update B. Administrative Approvals VII. Adjournment  MINUTES HISTORIC LANDMARKS COMMISSION December 11, 2014 9:00 A.M. The regular meeting of the Historic Landmarks Commission was held on Thursday, December 11, 2014, 9:00 a.m., in the Council Chambers of the City Hall, 442 W. Washington Street, Suffolk, Virginia, with the following persons present: MEMBERS PRESENT: STAFF: Susan Coley Robert Goumas, Assistant Director of Planning John Faircloth Karla Williams, Associate City Attorney Randy Hicks, Chairman Shanda Davenport, Current Planning Manager Edward King Thomas Jordan, Planner II Geraldine Outterbridge Jillian Scott, Office Assistant II Merritt Draper MEMBERS ABSENT: Walter Boyette Amy Stone The meeting was called to order by Chairman Hicks. The roll was called by Mr. Goumas and the Chairman was informed that a quorum was present. The minutes of the previous meeting were approved as presented. The Chairman noted the time limits for public hearings are ten (10) minutes for proponents, fifteen (15) minutes for opponents, and five (5) minutes for rebuttal. NEW BUSINESS REQUEST FOR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS HC-2014-45, submitted by Gerry Jones, Director of Capital Programs and Buildings, agent for, City of Suffolk, Virginia, applicant and property owner, for the demolition of three existing residential structures located at 407 W. Washington Street, 409 W. Washington Street, and 413 W. Washington Street; and further identified as Zoning Map 34G17 Block (A) Parcel 189, 34G17 Block (A) Parcel 190, and 34G17 Block (A) Parcel 191, respectively, Suffolk Voting Borough, and is zoned CBD (Central Business District), and HC (Historic Conservation Overlay District). The first item of business was introduced by the Chairman, followed by a staff report by Shanda Davenport, Current Planning Manager. Ms. Davenport stated that the request is for the demolition of three adjacent residential structures in order to allow the construction of a new municipal library and its associated features. All of the structures are deemed contributing to the district. The property is part of the 2004 West End District Expansion and is located along the W. Washington Street Entry Corridor. All three structures are sited close to the street, unlike other residential structures along the corridor. The properties are collectively bounded by Lee Street on the east and a commercial parking lot to the west. Historic buildings are irreplaceable community assets, and with each succeeding demolition or removal, the integrity and character of the district is further eroded. Consequently, the decision to demolish or remove historic structures must be carefully considered and all alternatives explored. Ms. Davenport provided a synopsis of the three addresses to be considered: 407 W. Washington Street – This dwelling is a two-story, three-bay, frame, side-gable dwelling with some Late Greek Revival style elements and dates from 1900. There is a two- 2 story ell off the rear of the main block as well as a one-story, gabled roof addition off the rear ell. The house retains its original weatherboard siding and six-over-six double-hung sash windows. The side-hall plan of the house is indicated by the location of the entry door, with transom and sidelight, in the left bay. There is an attached one-story, hipped-roof porch which is supported by chamfered posts and simple balustrade. 409 W. Washington Street – This vernacular-style dwelling is a two-story, three-bay, frame, side-gable dwelling was constructed around 1890. There is a two-story shed roof addition off the rear. The house retains its original weatherboard siding, six-over-six, four-over-four and two-over-two double-hung sash windows. There is an attached two-story, shed-roof porch which is supported by Doric columns. 413 W. Washington Street – This Italianate-style dwelling is a two-story, three-bay, frame, side-gable dwelling was constructed around 1880 and was last used as a two-unit apartment house. There are multiple additions off the rear of the house including a two-story shed roof addition, a two-story gable roofed ell and a one-story side-gable section. The house retains its original weatherboard siding, six-over-six, four-over-four and two-over-two double-hung sash windows, and decorative brackets. There is an attached two-story, shed roof porch which is supported by Doric columns on the first level and square replacement posts on the second level. The original porch balustrade remains on the first level; the balustrade on the second level has been replaced. Ms. Davenport stated that the demolition of structures within the Suffolk Historic Conservation Overlay District is discussed in Section 31-413(l), of the UDO which speaks to structures designated as having substantial public interest. The specific guidance for determining whether or not to approve the demolition of a structure within the historic 3 district is found in Chapter 8, Section C, Guidelines for the Consideration of Demolishing or Moving Buildings of the Suffolk Historic District Design Guidelines. Ms. Davenport examined several questions in regard to the requested demolition: Are the structures Architecturally Significant? Yes, each structure is contributing to the period of significance of the District and the three building are some of the few remaining side-hall plan homes in the district, particularly along the main entry corridors. The buildings are not however unique nor constructed of rare or uncommon materials. Is the structure of historical significance? No, these structures and site are not known to have any historical significance nor any association with any event or person of historical significance. Is relocation a practical alternative? No, the applicant has offered the structures at a nominal cost to any parties interested in purchasing the properties to relocate and rehabilitate. No offers have been presented. Furthermore, the structural assessment provides an overview of each structure, indicating that all three structures are in need of significant structural repairs and each would require reconstruction of major structural systems. While all of the structures appear to be currently stable; relocation would be complicated by the structural condition of the structures. Ms. Davenport stated that the applicant has provided a structural analysis of the properties as well as a narrative addressing the criteria contained in the Historic District Guidelines. Staff concurs with the analysis provided by the applicant. The applicant has indicated that the demolition of the structures is needed to allow the construction of a new municipal library 4 and its associated site features. This site is supportive of the City’s goal of a vibrant revitalized Downtown. The success of the City’s efforts will have a direct positive impact on the Historic District. Demolition of a structure may be justified when the proposed new development with which it will be replaced is of greater significance to the preservation of the district than retention of the existing structure. The loss of the structures will have an effect on the historic character of the district; however the new development will be compatible, appropriate and beneficial to the district. The applicant has offered the properties for sale to a buyer who could relocate the structures. No offers of purchase have been received. While these structures are within both the local Historic Overlay District and the National Register District, the urban fabric of W. Washington Street as it proceeds west was not deemed cohesive enough to justify its inclusion in the National Register District. The continued expansion of the municipal core, initiated by the construction of the new City Hall, will be a healthy catalyst for renovation and rehabilitation efforts throughout the district. The overriding public interest will best be served by the creation of a strong contextually appropriate municipal core as opposed to the interest that is served by the retention of the structures at 407, 409, and 413 W. Washington Street. While the properties are identified as landmarks, they are not associated with any specific event or person. The retention of the three individual structures would be a deterrent to a major improvement program that will be of substantial benefit to the district and the public. Therefore, staff recommended that the demolition of 407, 409, and 413 W. Washington Street be permitted. 5 The public hearing was opened. Speaking in favor of the request was Gerry Jones, Director of Capital Programs & Buildings. Mr. Jones stated that the ultimate purpose of the project was for municipal function for the location of the central library. Mr. Jones stated that back in March, the city advertised the properties for sale to the general public, and only received one inquiry but no offers on the properties. Mr. Jones stated that the properties are in poor structural condition and of no use to the city and public safety could become an issue. Mr. Jones stated that the engineering firm for the project was in attendance and he would answer any questions the Commission may have. There being no more speakers in favor or in opposition, the public hearing was closed. After discussion by the Commission, a motion approving the noted actions was made by Commissioner Faircloth. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Outterbridge and approved by a recorded vote of 6-0. New Business: Enforcement Update Donald Bennett, (Planning & Community Development) gave an update on the enforcement actions taken by Community Development for the following properties: 212 ½ Pearl Street – case continued until January 8, 2015 128 Pinner Street - property fined $1,400.00 209 Pinner Street – resent out notice to property owner 6 Chairman Hicks stated that the election of the new vice-chairman should take place at next month’s meeting. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:16 a.m. 7  HISTORIC LANDMARKS COMMISSION Motion: Faircloth 2nd: Outterbridge TO: Approve Application December 11, 2014 ATTENDANCE HC-2014-45 VOTE: 6-0 COMMISSIONERS PRESENT ABSENT YES NO Boyette, Walter X Coley, Susan M. X X Draper, Merritt X X Stone, Amy X Faircloth, John X X King, Edward L. X X Outterbridge, Geraldine X X Hicks, Randy, X X Chairman THIS PAGE WAS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK THIS PAGE WAS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK  CITY OF SUFFOLK 442 W. WASHINGTON ST., P.O. BOX 1858, SUFFOLK, VIRGINIA 23439-1858 PHONE: (757) 514-4060 FAX: (757) 514-4099 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Division of Planning To: Historic Landmarks Commission From: Thomas Jordan, AICP, Planner II Date: January 8, 2015 Subject: REQUEST FOR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS HC-2014-46, submitted by Norbert and Garon Trojanowski, applicant and property owner, for the after-the-fact change in materials for replacement of an existing metal shingle roof and associated exterior renovations of an existing structure located at 106 Brewer Avenue. The property is further identified as Zoning Map 34G17 Block (2) B Parcel(s) 6, Suffolk Voting Borough, and is zoned RM (Residential Medium District), and HC (Historic Conservation Overlay District). STAFF REPORT Overview of the Subject Property and Surrounding Area The structure located at 106 Brewer Avenue is a single-family home. It is a two and a half-story frame dwelling estimated to be constructed between 1895 – 1910. The contributing dwelling was constructed in the Queen Anne architectural style. Notable features of the main dwelling as described in the Department of Historic Resources (DHR) reconnaissance survey include: an off- center entrance with a three-light transom, an exterior end chimney which pierces the roof of a cut-away bay window on the second story, two bays on the second story which are inset, and a paladian window on the front gable ends. The property was included in the district as part of the 2004 West End District boundary expansion. Case History HC2013-018AD - Replacement of porch deck and structural support with like material. HC2014-033 - Replacement of existing metal shingle primary roof and asphalt shingle porch roof, installation of screen door and exterior window screens, and repaint existing dwelling. HC-2014-46 January 8, 2015 Page 2 of 4 On November 13, 2014 the applicant received authorization from the Historic Landmarks Commission (HLC) for the replacement of an existing metal Victorian shingle roof on the main dwelling and asphalt shingled roof on the porch with a standing seam metal roof. The applicant’s proposal requested utilization of an exposed fastener metal panel roof system. However, the Historic Landmark Commission modified the request and authorized the installation of a standing seam metal roof with concealed fasteners. Standing seam metal was identified as a more appropriate and durable material for a wood frame dwelling in addition to being in greater conformance with the character of the historic district. Subsequent to the issuance of the noted Certificate of Appropriateness by the Commission, the applicant proceeded to install an asphalt shingle roof on the subject property. This was performed without the benefit of a Certificate of Appropriateness. In addition to replacing the roof, a site inspection has further identified two (2) interior brick chimneys have been removed as part of the roof replacement. The prior and existing conditions of the single-family dwelling can be seen in the attached exhibits. Proposed Action The applicant is requesting approval for the after-the-fact replacement of a metal Victorian shingle roof on the main dwelling and asphalt shingled roof on the porch. The replacement roof material is a dimensional asphalt shingle. The applicant also removed an interior brick chimney as part of the roof replacement. As part of the overall application request the applicant is requesting administrative approval to install a new wood privacy fence in the side and rear yards. The proposed fence will utilize a stockade style picket in a 6’ height and be required to be painted. Public Notice Public notice of this meeting was published in the newspaper and notices were mailed to adjacent property owners. Applicable Regulations and Analysis A. Unified Development Ordinance 1. Section 31-413(f)(1), Certificate of Appropriateness: Where exterior appearance of any structure as viewed from any street or public way is involved, the Zoning Administrator shall issue no permit for erection, alteration, or improvement unless and until a Certificate of Appropriateness has been issued. 2. Section 31-413(g)(2), General Considerations A. The compatibility with the design, development standards and criteria as included in the City’s adopted Historic District Design Guidelines. C. The historical or architectural value and significance of the building, HC-2014-46 January 8, 2015 Page 3 of 4 structure or appurtenant element and its relationship to the historic or architectural value of the area in which it is proposed to be located. E. The compatibility of planned improvements and renovations with the architectural and historic quality, character, and scale of the historic buildings in the City of Suffolk. 3. Section 31-413(g)(7), Approval of Major Action by the HLC: (v) Any alteration to exterior materials or color of materials B. Suffolk Historic District Design Guidelines 1. Chapter 1, Section E, Categories of Significance with the Historic Conservation Overlay District, Contributing Structures: Historic or non-historic structures contribute to the overall historic character of the historic district through the compatibility of their design, character, scale, material, and detailing. They are not, however, significant enough to be designated as landmarks. 2. Chapter 1, Section F, Goals with the Historic Conservation Overlay District: • Continued use of historic buildings • Appropriate design of additions and alterations for buildings 3. Chapter 2, Section E, Certificate of Appropriateness: A Certificate of Appropriateness is similar to a building permit in that it is required whenever the exterior appearance of any structure in the Historic Conversation Overlay District, as viewed from any street or public way, is erected, altered, or improved. 4. Chapter 5, Section I.1, Roofs - Design: Roof designs vary considerably within the Historic Conservation Overlay District and are one of the key character defining elements of the style of the house. The type of roof covering is also important in defining the character, formality, stature, and texture of the house and the street. Consequently, historic roofing materials should be preserved and maintained. 5. Chapter 5, Section I.4, Preserve Historic Roof Materials: When replacing a roof, original materials should be matched as closely as possible in order to avoid altering the building’s appearance. 6. Chapter 5, Section I.9, Roof – Condition Statement: A signed statement, with exhibits, from a licensed general contractor stating the condition of the existing roof, ability to be repaired, need for replacement, proposed corrective measures, and options to replacement is required as supporting documentation. Staff Analysis The guidelines identify that roof designs vary considerably within the Historic Conservation Overlay District and are one of the key character defining elements of the style of the house. Furthermore, roofs are important in defining the character, formality, stature, and texture of the house and the street. HC-2014-46 January 8, 2015 Page 4 of 4 While the guidelines provide clear guidance regarding matching original materials as closely as possible when replacing a roof it does not provide guidance regarding the style of roof replacement. The style of the roof can be as important or even more significant in defining the character of the house. The previous Victorian shingle roof on the dwelling resulted in a simulated fishscale appearance on the roof. The applicant is requesting approval for the after-the-fact replacement of a metal Victorian shingle roof on the main dwelling and asphalt shingled roof on the porch. As part of the original application the applicant submitted a condition statement from the contractor which stated the original roof had reached the end of its useful lifespan and is suffered from continual leaks resulting in structural and interior damage to the home. Given the age and condition of the existing roof its replacement was found to be appropriate at the November public hearing. The original proposal for the installation of an exposed fastener metal replacement was modified by the Historic Landmarks Commission to authorize a standing seam metal roof. The standing seam metal roof was identified as a more appropriate and durable material for a wood frame dwelling in addition to being in greater conformance with the character of the historic district. Subsequent to this action, the applicant proceeded with the installation of an asphalt shingled roof and the removal of two (2) interior brick chimneys. The shingles utilized by the applicant are from the GAF Materials Corporation’s Timberline Roof Shingles series. Dimension shingles such as these have been utilized throughout the historic district for roof replacements. Asphalt shingles are the predominate roof covering found along Brewer Avenue. The Suffolk Historic District Design Guidelines recommend that historic roof elements such as chimneys and roof ornamentation that contribute to the style and character of the building shall be retained. Since the chimneys were internal to the structure, the visual impacts of removing the structures are minimal. While two of the three brick chimneys were removed the prominent exterior end chimney was not impacted by construction. No documentation was submitted supporting the need to remove the two (2) interior brick chimneys. However, internal chimneys are common routes for water to seep into structures which can contribute to the degradation of the overall structural integrity of the building. Summary and Recommendations It is staff’s position the criteria of Chapter 5, Section I, Roofs, of the Historic District Design Guidelines have been generally satisfied. Based on the above findings-of-fact, staff recommends the following actions with regard to the requests outlined in HC2014-46: 1. The after-the-fact replacement of the metal shingle roof and asphalt shingle porch roof with a dimensional asphalt shingle from GAF Materials Corporation’s Timberline Shingle series and the removal of two (2) interior brick chimneys. 2. No further exterior improvements permitted without the issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness. 3. All required permits shall be obtained from the Community Development Division.  Suffolk R D VE Historic & Cultural VIEW W ILLE A E W VI R E R Overlay District & IV D E R IV DE R ER DUMV IV ER ME DR A E MO N National Register AKE ANS FORT Historic Districts ST L N PIT R AVE ER RD AD ST HC46-14 ST VI TAN CE CH DR E W ONS LA E C BU TLE JONES SI D KET £ ¤ KE T RIV N BRO 58 S E W EST AV E TLE ERN AV N D E LA CHUR GH LEGEND FO HI ST R ER N MA Suffolk Historic & Cultural Conservation Overlay HI EST RD N IN CR LL CH S E P ES NATIONAL REGISTER HISTORIC DISTRICTS W CO NSTAN CE IN S Original Suffolk District (1987) RD T North Main Street Extension District (1998) T East Washington Street District (2002) PR EN TIS ST West End District (2004) West End District Expansion (2004) THIRD AV E Suffolk District Expansion (2004) KET TL SEC ON T Cedar Hill Cemetery (2006) D AVE CEN E E E S TRA RD E R AV L AV R ST CHEST NUT ST PIN E FIRST E AV E E AV NORT H ST Disclaimer. THE CITY OF SUFFOLK MAKES NO WARRANTY, REPRESENTATION, PITC H OR GUARANTEE OF ANY KIND REGARDING EITHER ANY MAPS OR OTHER INFORMATION PENDE PROVIDED HEREIN OR THE SOURCES OF SUCH MAPS OR OTHER INFORMATION. THE BREW T CITY OF SUFFOLK SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIMS ALL REPRESENTATIONS OR WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES ST Y S OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. T Y S MOO R The City of Suffolk assumes no liability either for any errors, omissions, or inaccuracies in the information provided regardless of the cause of such DA or for any decision made, action taken, or action not taken by the user in W NER reliance upon any maps or information provided herein. W ASH CL A IN GTO Parcel and Zoning information has been developed to provide a graphic LLA N ST D representation of the Real Estate Property Tax Maps. The boundaries of any parcel may have been adjusted to provide a more visually pleasing presentation. GITTI PIN R User should refer to instrument of transfer (deed or plat) for legal boundary NGS S location and perimeter or area measurements. T BAN HO Aerial Photography captured March 1999. A limited area of the City was reflown K E K S in March of 2001. The most up-to-date photography available was used to capture planimetric information. EN AV T R A RD AV E AD ST LEE ST P E ¹ EY AV ARY LIND JAMES D E W R ST AS E S BRO HI E Y AV BO SL M ILIT H VE NG LL A A SA INT TO EC HA N WILSO N N ST ST LI BE CAUS ST T O R S ST A EN ST ST C 1:12,000 IN LOD AD T R NT Y AM S DA S S 1 inch = 1,000 feet MA RY A CUL T G COU O A T CE TO S FAC R ON AVE A MAS S City of Suffolk Department of S Planning & Community Development Updated : 11/3/2014 34G16(4)*51A*51C EXHIBIT B 34G16(4 HC46-14 ZONING / LAND USE MAP )*50 34 G 17 (2)A 34G17(2)B*16*17+ 34 34G17(2)B*16*17+ 34G 34G17(1)* *16 G17 17(1 (1)* )*4499 48 34G17(2)A*15 34G17(4)*3 R A VE 34G16(4)*43 34G16(4)*43 34G17(2)A*14+ 34G16(5 BREWE ) *1 34G17(2)A*13+ 34G16(5 34G17(2)B*12*13+ ST O-I ) *2 34G17(2)A*12*40A PENDE 34G17(2)B*10*11 R 34G17(3A)*A RM 34G17(2)A*11+ BZA6-05 11/8/2005 34G16(4 )*22 34G17(3A)*B 34G16( 34G17(2)A*9*10*20 34G17(2)B*9 4)*21 34G17(2)B*8 34G17(3A)*C 34G17(A)* 34G17(2)A*8 34G17(3)* 34G17(2)B*7 34G17(3) 8 BZA7-96 34G16( F 34G17(2)A*7*9*20B 3/12/1996 *G 34G17(A A) * 7 )*5 34G17(2)B*6 BZA20-84 34G17(2)A*6 12/11/1984 RZ9-13 SV2-13 34G17(A 11/20/2013 34G17(2)B*5 11/20/2013 34G17(2)A*5 )*6 34G17(A 34G16(A)*8 34G17(2)B*4 ) *9 34G17(2)A*4 34G16(A 34G17(2 34G17(3)* 34G17(2 34G17(3 C R A VE ST ) *1 0 ) A* 1 * 2 34G17(A ) * B +E ) A* 2 A* 3 PENDE R 34G17(A) BREWE ) *7 34G17(3) 34G17(2)B*1 *A *1 0 W W AS H IN G T O N ST 34G16(A N A VE 34G17(A 34G17(A E )*11 AMES A V CBD ) *2 6 8 34G17(A)*24 ) *2 6 7 s 4 L IN D E 34G17(A 34G17(A 34 G 17 ( 5 34G17(A )*2 43 )*266 )*242 SAINT J ) *B C11-07 RM 9/19/2007 1 inch = 100 feet Aerial Imagery Sources: VGIN/VITA VMBP 2013 Orthophotography and/or ESRI http://goto.arcgisonline.com/maps/World_Imagery Date: 11/3/2014 HC46-14 HC46-14 THIS PAGE WAS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK