Historic Landmarks Commission Packets

HISTORIC LANDMARKS COMMISSION APRIL 13, 2017 THE REGULAR MEETING WILL BE HELD AT 9:00 A.M. IN CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS CITY HALL BUILDING THE DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING BY 12:00 NOON, WEDNESDAY, APRIL 12, 2017 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, April 13, 2017 9:00 a.m. I. Call to Order: Chairman II. Roll Call III. Approval of the Minutes IV. New Business 1. REQUEST FOR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS HC-2017-00005, submitted by Scott Scheil, agent, on behalf of Lee Cross, property owner, for the construction of a new addition, replacement of the existing standing seam metal roof on the main dwelling, repair and replacement of wood siding, and repainting at the property located at 128 Pinner Street, Zoning Map 34G18, Block A, Parcel 187. The affected area is further identified as being located in the Suffolk Voting Borough, zoned RM, Residential Medium District and HC, Historic Conservation Overlay District. 2. REQUEST FOR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS HC-2017-00006, submitted by Kimberly Brock, property owner, for the repair of the existing front porch decking and ceiling, replacement of porch railings, repair to masonry steps, and repainting at 216 Pearl Street, Zoning Map 34G18, Block A, Parcel 166. The affected area is further identified as being located in the Suffolk Voting Borough, zoned RM, Residential Medium District and HC, Historic Conservation Overlay District. V. Staff Reports A. Enforcement Update B. Administrative Approvals VI. Adjournment 2  MINUTES HISTORIC LANDMARKS COMMISSION February 9, 2017 9:00 A.M. The regular meeting of the Historic Landmarks Commission was held on Thursday, February 9, 2017, 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: Randy Hicks David Hainley, Director of Planning & Com. Dev. Susan Coley Bob Goumas, Assistant Director of Planning John Faircloth Claire Jones, Comprehensive Planning Manager Oliver Hobbs Karla Carter, Associate City Attorney Walter Boyette Kevin Wyne, Principal Planner Edward King Amy Thurston, Planner I Vivian Turner Jillian Scott-Hale, Office Assistant Mary Austin Darden Merritt Draper The meeting was called to order by Chairman Hicks. The roll was called by Ms. Jones and the Chairman was informed that a quorum was present. The minutes of the previous meeting were approved as presented. 3 REQUEST FOR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS HC-2016-24, submitted by Scott Alperin of Suffolk Tower Holdings, LLC, property owner, for the replacement of 17 wood windows with vinyl clad windows and the restoration of 11 Palladian windows at 181 N. Main Street, Zoning Map 34G18, Block (A), Parcel 324. The affected area is further identified as being located in the Suffolk Voting Borough, 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 Kevin Wyne, Principal Planner. Mr. Wyne stated that the property is located at the intersection of North Main and Market Streets in the Original Suffolk District (1987) of the City’s Historic Conservation Overlay District. The building currently serves as a mixed use structure, with commercial uses on the first and second floors and apartment dwellings on the upper six (6) floors of the eight story building. The applicant is seeking an after-the-fact approval to replace 10 wooden double-hung sash windows and approval to replace an additional 7 wooden double-hung sash windows on the second floor of the building known as the Suffolk Tower. The applicant states that the original windows are beyond repair and proposes to replace them with six-over-one, double- hung, Pinnacle vinyl clad windows. Only windows on the second story are slated for replacement as a part of this application as outlined in the staff report. Additionally, as a part of this application, the 11 Palladian windows located on the second floor are proposed for restoration, by scraping the old paint and repainting with a like color. Mr. Wyne stated that the matter came to the City’s attention in April 2016 when it was reported that window replacement was taking place at 181 N. Main Street without the required Certificate of Appropriateness. Windows not specified in this application remain under enforcement action and are being addressed through the courts. The subject property features a contributing structure built in 1924. The eight (8) story, four (4) bay building was built in the American Renaissance style and incorporates classical motifs throughout the façade, including jack arches with keystones and a full classical entablature below the parapet 4 roof. Mr. Wyne pointed out original to the building noting the detail, particularly the sashes and muntin depth. These windows show a lack of maintenance and it is not clear if the wood is compromised or if the windows just need to be scraped and repainted. Mr. Wyne stated that on the first floor, the windows are wood, six over one double hung sash windows flanked by side-lights. These windows have been restored and the contrast between these restored windows and the windows above have been replaced with new vinyl windows is evident. Mr. Wyne stated that the six sash windows on N. Saratoga Street on the rear elevation are included with this application. Three windows have been replaced and three are original. The two smaller windows on each side of the fire escape are not slated for replacement as a part of this application. This elevation at the south rear parking lot is the least visible from the right of way and contains sash windows and a French door. One of the 10 second story windows that have already been replaced is located on this side. Mr. Wyne stated that the Historic District Guidelines emphasizes that windows should be retained and restored whenever feasible. The provided contractor’s statement notes that some windows are in poor/bad condition and states that missing panes and deteriorated wood surrounding the window, particularly on the exterior was observed. The contractor recommends replacement of the windows; however, the provided statement does not provide an individual analysis of each of the 17 windows which is necessary to determine the feasibility of restoration vs. replacement. Additionally, while the wood surrounding the window is noted, there is no mention of the structural integrity of wood windows themselves. Mr. Wyne stated that the existing wood windows are true divided light windows, with muntins exposed on the exterior and possess a noticeable muntin depth, thickness and exterior exposure that are easily evident from street level. The applicant does not indicate whether the replacement vinyl clad windows would utilize applied grids or muntins. The replacement windows that have already been installed are simulated divided light 5 vinyl windows with interior grids that have no exterior exposure. The material and the profile of these windows impact their visual appearance as they lack the character defining quality and depth of the original wood windows from the adjacent streets. Mr. Wyne stated that Suffolk Tower is a prominent structure within the district at a highly visible location. Windows are important character defining features and should be treated with care and properly maintained and the second story replacement windows that have already been installed are not appropriate on this building. The material and the profile of these windows impact their visual appearance as they lack the character defining quality and depth provided by the wood of the original windows from the adjacent streets. Material choice is important to maintain cohesion on all façades. The wood windows on the first and second floors create a unified face and maintain consistency with the building’s classical details, which are highly visible from the immediately adjacent streets. Mr. Wyne stated staff is recommending approval with conditions, specifically: • Restoration of the second story Palladian windows by scraping the existing paint and repainting the windows using SW 9110 Malabar. • Repair and retention of wood sash windows on the second story where feasible. A signed statement with exhibits, from a licensed general contractor stating the condition of each original window, the ability to be repaired, need for replacement, and proposed corrective measures shall be provided. • Replacement of irreparable wood sash windows and previously installed vinyl windows on the second story with double-hung, six over-one wooden windows compatible in design, profile and configuration with the windows original to the structure. • Painting of all windows with SW 2822 Downing Sand or equivalent from the approved Sherwin Williams Victorian Color Palette. 6 The public hearing was opened and speaking in favor of the application was Whitney Saunders, representative for the applicant. Mr. Saunders stated that there have already been over 100 original windows replaced in the building and done prior to the current owner purchasing the property. Mr. Saunders stated as a result, the building has inconsistency with the windows in place. Mr. Saunders stated that the ultimate goal is to get an economically feasible consistency for the building. Also, speaking in favor of the application was Michael Queen, contractor. Mr. Queens stated the sashes are rotten and that the windows will not go up or down and the wood is falling apart and are just beyond repair. Mr. Queen stated that it would be very expensive to replace the windows as proposed. There being no more speakers in favor or opposition, the public hearing was closed. The HLC discussed the importance of the subject property and its prominence within the District, particularly with respect to the lower two floors. They further noted that vinyl windows are not appropriate under the Guidelines and have not been approved in the District in the past. Commissioner Hobbs made a motion to approve staff’s recommendation and the motion was seconded by Commissioner Faircloth and approved by a recorded vote of 9-0. 7 New Business: Enforcement Update Donald Bennett, (Planning & Community Development) reported on the following properties: 118 Pinner Street – Ongoing work, case continued until April 6, 2017 201 N. Main Street – Court case continued until March 2, 2017 139 N. Main Street – Case dismissed, property owner complied New Business: Zoning Update Frederick Sample, (Planning & Community Development) reported on the following properties: 181 N. Main Street – Property in litigation, case continued until March 2, 2017 216 Bank Street – Case being sent to court 222 Pinner Street – Notice of Violation 302 Bank Street – Case being sent to court There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:38 a.m. 8  HISTORIC LANDMARKS COMMISSION Motion: To Approve Staff’s Recommendation 1st: Hobbs February 9, 2017 2nd: Faircloth ATTENDANCE HC-2016-00024 VOTE: 9-0 COMMISSIONERS PRESENT ABSENT YES NO Boyette, Walter, Vice-Chairman X X Coley, Susan M. X X Darden, Mary Austin X X Draper, Merritt X X Faircloth, John X X Hicks, Randy, Chairman X X Hobbs, Oliver X X King, Edward L. X X Turner, Vivian X X  CITY OF SUFFOLK 442 W. WASHINGTON STREET, 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: Amy Thurston, Planner I Date: April 13, 2017 Subject: REQUEST FOR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS HC-2017- 00005, submitted by Scott Scheil, agent, on behalf of Lee Cross, property owner, for the construction of a new addition, replacement of the existing standing seam metal roof on the main dwelling, repair and replacement of wood siding, and repainting at the property located at 128 Pinner Street, Zoning Map 34G18, Block A, Parcel 187. The affected area is further identified as being located in the Suffolk Voting Borough, zoned RM, Residential Medium District and HC, Historic Conservation Overlay District. STAFF REPORT Overview of the Subject Property and Surrounding Area The subject property is located within the Original Suffolk Historic District, which was created in 1987. According to the National Register of Historic Places, most of the houses on Pinner Street were estimated to be constructed between 1870 and 1885, thus they are contributing to the Historic District. The properties located in close proximity to the subject property consist of Second Empire, American Renaissance and Vernacular architecture, many with full-width one- story porches, and gable roofs. The predominant roofing material is standing seam metal. Based on the National Register of Historic Places Nomination Form, the subject property is noted as a simple Vernacular building constructed circa 1870 with two (2) bays, a standing seam metal gable roof, and weatherboard siding. Additional details include a Vernacular porch with Tuscan columns, cornice brackets and returns. It is estimated that the preexisting addition on the right side and rear of the home was constructed in the early 1900s; therefore, the preexisting addition was contributing to the Historic District. Case History On April 13, 2015, a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) was approved for exterior repairs, replacement, and renovations to the existing main structure and addition. The approved HC-2017-00005 April 13, 2017 Page 2 conditions are listed below. According to the property owner and agent, items #3 and #9 were the only actions completed under the 2015 COA. 1. The existing metal roof shall be repaired in a workmanship manner with in-kind materials. If the existing metal roof is unable to be repaired, the applicant must submit a complete condition statement with photo documentation per the Suffolk Historic District Guidelines for review and approval by the Secretary of the Historic Landmarks Commission. If authorized, the replacement roof will be the A1301 series metal roof system by Englert Incorporated in a slate gray color. 2. The existing asphalt shingle roof on the rear 1-story addition will be replaced with an architectural grade dimensional asphalt shingle from the GAF Timberline Series or equivalent. 3. Masonry repairs to the chimney should be performed in conformance with the guidance provided National Park Service (NPS) Preservation Brief No. 2. 4. The existing house, trim, roof and doors will be painted with in-kind paint colors. Porch and stair trim shall be painted white for consistency with the existing dwelling’s trim color. 5. Wood weatherboard siding where deteriorated shall be replaced in-kind with regard to dimension, composition, and profile of original materials and painted to match the primary exterior wall color of the dwelling. 6. The existing plywood wall covering shall be removed wood batten board siding shall be replaced in-kind with regard to dimension and composition of original materials and painted to match the primary exterior wall color of the dwelling. 7. Windows repairs should be performed in conformance with the guidance provided National Park Service (NPS) Preservation Brief No. 9. If any of the existing windows on the side or rear are unable to be repaired, the applicant must submit a complete condition statement with photo documentation per the Suffolk Historic District Guidelines for review and approval by the Secretary of the Historic Landmarks Commission. If authorized, the replacement window(s) shall be wood, metal clad, or vinyl clad and shall match the original in appearance, detail, material, profile, and overall size as closely as possible and be 6/6, 4/4 or 2/2 (determined by the design of the original window being removed) divided light or simulated divided lite with a raised exterior grid fabricated by the manufacture. 8. The first-story side window opening proposed to be closed shall be retained with the back side frosted, screened, covered with safety glass or with dark painted plywood on the inside in order to appear in use. 9. The existing concrete steps shall be removed and replaced with steps constructed of wood. HC-2017-00005 April 13, 2017 Page 3 10. No further exterior improvements shall be permitted without the issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness. 11. All required permits shall be obtained from the Community Development Division. The original addition on the right side and rear of the home was demolished (due to structural damage) around November 2015 by the previous contractor without a Certificate of Appropriateness. In April 2016, a Historic Preservation Certification Application was submitted to the Department of Historic Resources for exterior and interior changes, including rebuilding the first story addition that was demolished. This Certificate was approved in July 2016. Following this approval, the applicant applied for building permits from the City of Suffolk Community Development Division and at that time was made aware of the requirement to obtain a new COA. Public Notice Public notice of this meeting was published in the newspaper and notices were mailed to adjacent property owners. Proposed Actions This is partially an after-the-fact request for a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) because the applicant proposes to rebuild the original addition that was demolished without approval from the Historic Landmarks Commission. In addition, the applicant proposes changes to the main dwelling, which have not commenced, including: replacement of deteriorated sections of the existing wood siding and one (1) section of wood fascia, reinstallation of two (2) preexisting wooden windows, replacement of the existing standing seam metal roof, and repainting of exterior building walls and trim. The applicant’s request consists of the following items: 1. Construct a new addition (which is the same size and in the same location as the original addition that was demolished) for a kitchen and laundry room. The proposed building materials are as follows: Foundation: Simulated brick tin with cinder block piers behind (proposed to match the existing foundation of the main dwelling). Siding: Batten board siding to be painted the same color as the main dwelling. Windows: Reinstall five (5) one (1) over one (1) wood windows from the original addition. Roofing: GAF Timberline HD architectural roof shingles in charcoal grey. Side and back doors: Metal 6-panel doors to be painted white. Side porch: Reconstruct to include one column and brick pier (to match the original side porch) and utilize the preexisting brick steps. 2. Replace the existing standing seam metal roof on the main dwelling with Union Advantage-Lok standing seam metal roofing in Pearl Gray (to include concealed fasteners). HC-2017-00005 April 13, 2017 Page 4 3. Replace deteriorated sections of the existing wood siding and one (1) section of deteriorated wood fascia in-kind, as shown in the applicant’s photos. 4. Reinstall two (2) preexisting wooden windows on the rear of the main dwelling which match the other existing windows (double-hung, six (6) over six (6) windows). 5. Repaint the entire exterior of the main dwelling and new addition with Roycroft Suede (SW 2842) or equivalent from the approved Sherwin Williams Arts and Crafts Exterior Paint Palette. Repaint all trim and doors white. Condition Statement Scott Scheil of Seaboard Enterprises submitted a condition statement and pictures of the existing siding and roof conditions to support this application. Mr. Scheil’s letter stated that the preexisting addition was removed by a previous contractor. His intention is to rebuild the structure in the exact way it was originally built and retain the property’s historic value. Surrounding Characteristics A description of adjacent and nearby structures is provided below based on the National Register of Historic Places Inventory. 301-307 Bank Street- Located adjacent and to the left of the subject property, fronting on Bank Street; a three-story brick American Renaissance apartment building constructed circa 1930. The property features three-story porches with two-story tall Tuscan columns, turned balusters on first level, and full classical entablature with modillions in the cornice. It is the only example of this type of building in the District. 223 Bank Street- Second Empire detached house constructed circa 1880 featuring a wood frame, weatherboard siding, three (3) bays, concave mansard roof (slate), Vernacular porch with turned balusters and Tuscan columns, detailed cornice brackets and a period iron fence. 125 Pinner Street- Detached Vernacular house constructed circa 1880 featuring a wood frame, weatherboard siding, two (2) bays, gable roof with standing seam metal, and a Vernacular porch with Tuscan columns, cornice brackets and returns. 121 Pinner Street- Detached Vernacular house constructed circa 1890 featuring a wood frame, weatherboard siding, three (3) bays, gable roof with standing seam metal, Bungalow-style porch with square tapered columns set on brick piers with stone caps, simple cornice and returns, and 6 over 6 windows. 119 Pinner Street- Detached Vernacular house constructed circa 1890 featuring a wood frame, aluminum siding, three (3) bays, gable roof with standing seam metal, and a Bungalow-style porch with square tapered columns set on brick piers with stone caps. HC-2017-00005 April 13, 2017 Page 5 Site Modifications As mentioned, the applicant requests to construct a new addition on the side and rear of the home which would utilize the same building footprint as the original addition that was removed in 2015. A site plan and elevation drawings for the proposed addition are attached and a list of proposed building materials can be found in the Proposed Actions section of this report. Applicable Regulations A. Suffolk Historic District Design Guidelines 1. Chapter 1, Section F, Goals within the Historic Conservation Overlay District, Appropriate Design of Additions and Alterations for Buildings: Changes to historic buildings should be appropriately designed to be compatible with the architecture and overall character of the district. Additions and alterations to buildings require careful design in order to preserve and strengthen the character of the district. To this end, repair and maintenance activity involving exterior materials, finishes, windows, doors, awnings, signage, fencing and landscaping should be carefully planned to avoid negatively affecting the district’s overall character. 2. Chapter 4, Section C.3., Guidelines for Window Preservation: Preserve and maintain original windows by patching, splicing, consolidating or otherwise reinforcing the wooden members. Uncover and repair covered-up windows and reinstall windows where they have been blocked in. Replace windows only when they are missing or beyond repair. Reconstruction should be based on physical evidence or old photographs, when available. Replacement windows should be designated to match the original in appearance, detail, material, profile, and overall size as closely as possible. 3. Chapter 4, Section D.2, Guidelines for Doors:  Maintain Historic Door Arrangements: Avoid changing the number, location, or size of doors by enlarging or reducing the original door opening or installing replacement doors that do not fit the original openings.  Use Compatible Door Styles: When replacing doors, use door styles that relate to those found in the district. 4. Chapter 4, Section E, Decorative Features: Decorative features such as columns, cornices, window trim, and details provide much of the stylistic character of historic buildings. These elements usually work together to form a particular historic style. Preservation of decorative features is critical to preserving the character and appearance of an historic building. 5. Chapter 4, Section F.2.b. Guidelines for Wood Materials:  Repair rotten or missing sections rather than replace the entire element. Use epoxies to patch, piece, or consolidate parts. Match existing materials and details.  Replace wood elements only when they are rotten beyond repair. Match the original in material and design or use substitute materials that convey the same visual appearance. HC-2017-00005 April 13, 2017 Page 6  Base the design of reconstructed elements on pictorial or physical evidence from the actual building rather than from similar buildings in the area. 6. Chapter 5, Section G.2, Form of Additions: An addition to an historic house should be designed so that its form is based on the form of the original house, with emphasis placed on ensuring that the original form is not overwhelmed by the addition. 7. Chapter 5, Section H.2, Rehabilitation Guidelines: Repoint or rebuild deteriorated brick porch foundations matching materials as closely as possible. Where the masonry has deteriorated, refer to the masonry section of this Guideline for guidance. 8. Chapter 5, Section H.3, Additions Guidelines: When designing an addition to an historic house, match the original foundation using a traditional foundation treatment based on the historic treatments on the existing building. Also, respect the foundation's height, contrast of materials, and textures of foundations on surrounding historic buildings. 9. Chapter 5, Section I.7, Roofing Materials for Replacement Roofs: Traditional roofing material such as standing seam metal are preferred over asphalt shingles but are not required. 10. Chapter 5, Section J.2, Guidelines for Residential Porches:  Repair damaged elements, matching the detail of the existing original material.  Do not strip entrances and porches of historic material and details.  Do not remove or radically change entrances and porches which serve to define the building’s overall historic character.  Replace an entire porch only if it is too deteriorated to repair or is completely missing. The new porch should match the original as closely as possible.  Maintain and rehabilitate original porch flooring. If replacement is required, match the existing flooring material or a synthetic substitute, method of application, and color (paint or stain). 11. Chapter 8, Section D.1, Demolition: To the extent economically feasible, recover/recycle the structure's architectural elements, such as doors, windows, columns, lights. B. Secretary of the Interior Standards The Secretary of the Interior Standards, which are included in Appendix A of the Historic Guidelines, encourage the repair and preservation of existing historic materials and character defining elements. Where replacement is determined to be necessary, the new feature shall match the old in design, color, texture, and other visual qualities and, where possible, materials. The design of replacement features shall also be substantiated by documentary, physical, or pictorial evidence. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or architectural elements from other buildings, is strongly discouraged. HC-2017-00005 April 13, 2017 Page 7 Staff Analysis All of the proposed changes to the main dwelling, including roof replacement, replacement of deteriorated wood siding and one section of fascia, reinstallation of two (2) preexisting windows, and repainting are in-kind and appropriate for the period, design, and architectural character of the building. The proposed roof material, Union Advantage-Lok standing seam metal roofing in Pearl Gray, is consistent with Chapter 5, Section I.7 of the Historic District Design Guidelines which states: “traditional roof material such as standing seam metal is preferred.” In addition, the proposed roof will be the same color as the existing roof and it will consist of concealed fasteners. Secondly, the proposed siding replacement of deteriorated wood only and one section of deteriorated fascia complies with the Guidelines for Wood Materials listed in Chapter 4, Section F.2. Thirdly, the proposed reinstallation of two (2) preexisting, double-hung, six over six wooden windows is consistent with Chapter 4, Section C.3, Guidelines for Window Preservation. Overall, the aforementioned changes are necessary in order to preserve the integrity of the historic structure and allow for continued use of the building. Additionally, the proposed changes will revitalize the structure and enhance this area of the Historic District, all of which are specific goals stated in Chapter 1 of the Guidelines. The design of proposed one-story addition on the side/rear of the dwelling is consistent with Historic District Design Guidelines and the Secretary of the Interior Standards. As stated in the Standards: “Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature (in this case the entire addition), the new features shall match the old in design, color, texture, and other visual qualities and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features shall be substantiated by documentary, physical, or pictorial evidence.” The applicant has made an effort to match the new addition as closely as possible to the design, appearance, materials, and character of the original addition as evidenced by photographs. The reconstructed addition would utilize the same building footprint as the original addition; thus the proposed shape and proportions are appropriate, as outlined in Chapter 7, Section D. The applicant also plans to use the same foundation material from the main dwelling (simulated brick tin) on the addition in order to maintain consistency, which is recommended by Chapter 5, Section H.3 of the Guidelines. The proposed siding, roofing material, windows, and side porch elements will be the same materials that were used on the original addition. Although the proposed side and rear doors are different from those used on the original addition, they are an appropriate type of door used in the Historic District as stated in Chapter 4, Section D.1. In regard to the design of the reconstructed side porch, the proposed column, brick pier, and existing brick steps are consistent with Chapter 5, Section J.2, which states: “Replace an entire porch only if it is too deteriorated to repair or is completely missing. The new porch should match the original as closely as possible.” Lastly, the materials and design of the reconstructed side porch will blend cohesively with the Vernacular style of the building. HC-2017-00005 April 13, 2017 Page 8 Summary and Recommendations Based on the above findings-of-fact, staff recommends approval of HC-2017-05 with the conditions noted below: 1. Construct a new addition (which is the same size and in the same location as the original addition that was demolished) for a kitchen and laundry room consistent with the applicant’s elevation drawings. The addition shall utilize the following materials: Foundation: Simulated brick tin with cinder block piers behind to match the existing foundation of the main dwelling. Siding: Batten board siding to be painted the same color as the main dwelling. Windows: Reinstall five (5) one (1) over one (1) wood windows from the original addition. Roofing: GAF Timberline HD architectural roof shingles in charcoal grey. Side and back doors: Metal 6-panel doors to be painted white. Side porch: Reconstruct to include one column and brick pier to match the original side porch, utilize the preexisting brick steps. 2. Replace the existing standing seam metal roof on the main dwelling with Union Advantage-Lok standing seam metal roofing in Pearl Gray (to include concealed fasteners). 3. Replace deteriorated sections of the existing wood siding and one (1) section of deteriorated wood fascia (on the right side of the dwelling) in-kind, as shown in the applicant’s photos. 4. Reinstall two (2) preexisting wooden windows on the rear of the main dwelling to match the existing windows (double-hung, six (6) over six (6) windows). 5. Repaint the entire exterior of the main dwelling and new addition with Roycroft Suede (SW 2842) or equivalent from the approved Sherwin Williams Arts and Crafts Exterior Paint Palette. Repaint all trim and doors white. 6. Any additional improvements shall require a Certificate of Appropriateness. 7. All required permits shall be obtained from the City of Suffolk. Attachments cc: Lee Cross, property owner Scott Scheil, agent HC2017-05  HC2017-05 ZONING/ LAND USE MAP AY LA D H OL RM BAN K 34G18(A)*187 ER PINN M-2 CBD s N&W FRRD WA S HIN GT ON HC-2017-00005, 128 Pinner Street Current conditions: 1 HC-2017-00005, 128 Pinner Street 2 HC-2017-00005, 128 Pinner Street 3 HC-2017-00005, 128 Pinner Street Preexisting addition that was demolished: 4 HC-2017-00005, 128 Pinner Street 5 HC-2017-00005, 128 Pinner Street 6 HC-2017-00005, 128 Pinner Street Proposed addition: 7 HC-2017-00005, 128 Pinner Street 8 HC-2017-00005, 128 Pinner Street Streetscape Images: 9  CITY OF SUFFOLK 442 W. WASHINGTON STREET, 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: Amy Thurston, Planner I Date: April 13, 2017 Subject: REQUEST FOR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS HC-2017- 00006, submitted by Kimberly Brock, property owner, for the repair of the existing front porch decking and ceiling, replacement of porch railings, repair to masonry steps, and repainting at 216 Pearl Street, Zoning Map 34G18, Block A, Parcel 166. The affected area is further identified as being located in the Suffolk Voting Borough, zoned RM, Residential Medium District and HC, Historic Conservation Overlay District. STAFF REPORT Overview of the Subject Property and Surrounding Area The subject property is located within the Original Suffolk Historic District, which was created in 1987. Pearl Street consists entirely of contributing two-story residential homes with Vernacular architecture that were constructed between the late nineteenth century and early twentieth century. The overall appearance of Pearl Street is unchanged from the period of significance; therefore, this area of the Historic District has a strong cohesive historic impression. According to the National Register of Historic Places Nomination Form, the subject property is noted as a detached two-story Queen Anne home constructed circa 1910. It is described as having a wood frame, aluminum siding, three (3) bays (asymmetrical), hipped roof with lower cross gable, Vernacular porch with Ionic columns, Palladian motif window on the front gable and two (2) over two (2) windows. Case History An after-the-fact Certificate of Appropriateness, HC2017-00004AD, was approved on March 1, 2017 for the subject property for the purpose of replacing the existing asphalt shingle roof with GAF Timberline Architectural Roof Shingles in Williamsburg Slate. HC-2017-00006 April 13, 2017 Page 2 Public Notice Public notice of this meeting was published in the newspaper and notices were mailed to adjacent property owners. Proposed Actions This is a request for an after-the-fact Certificate of Appropriateness. Prior to submission of this application, a section of the front porch tongue and groove ceiling boards was replaced (only on the left side of the porch) and the preexisting original wooden front porch railings, which featured turned balusters were replaced with new modern wooden deck railings consisting of square balusters. In addition, the preexisting metal handrails that were not original to the structure were removed from the front porch and replaced with modern wooden deck handrails consisting of square balusters (to match the new railings). Work had also begun on one (1) new handrail for the side porch, which is proposed to match the newly installed front porch handrails. A small section of masonry steps on the right side of the home were repointed prior to this application; additional repointing is proposed. The applicant’s request consists of the following items: 1. Replace a section of the deteriorated front porch tongue and groove ceiling boards with tongue and groove ceiling boards (left side only), to be painted white. 2. Repair front porch decking and repaint in-kind using Downing Slate (SW 2819) or equivalent from the approved Sherwin Williams Victorian Exterior Paint Palette. 3. Install new modern wooden front porch deck railings and handrails to consist of square balusters and circular post caps, to be painted white. 4. Install one (1) new modern wooden side porch handrail to consist of square balusters and a circular post cap (to match the new handrails on the front porch), to be painted white. 5. Repoint masonry joints on the steps located on the right side of the home using the concave or rodded style. Match the mortar in color, texture, and strength with the existing mortar. 6. Repaint the exterior trim and decorative elements (columns, frieze, cornice, lattice, and crawl space door on the right side of the home) white. Condition Statement Carl Guinsler of GF Remodeling submitted a letter (dated March 5, 2017) in support of this application. The letter stated that an inspection of the property on September 22, 2016, revealed that the front porch was deteriorated and unsafe. In particular, the railings and handrails were decomposed, a small section of ceiling boards on the left side of the porch were water-damaged, and decking boards needed to be repaired and repainted. In addition, the letter noted that sections of masonry joints (on the steps located on the right side of the home) were crumbling on the edges. Mr. Guinsler recommended repairs and replacement be made where needed before further HC-2017-00006 April 13, 2017 Page 3 damage and weathering takes place. Surrounding Characteristics A detailed description of adjacent and nearby properties is provided below. 217 Pinner Street - Located adjacent and to the right of the subject property, fronting on Pinner Street; a Vernacular house constructed circa 1930 with a Vernacular porch, fluted Doric columns, and full classical entablature. 214 Pearl Street - Located adjacent and to the left of the subject property; a Queen Anne house constructed circa 1910 consisting of a Vernacular porch which curves from the front to ride side and features Ionic columns and pediments. 212 Pearl Street - Two (2) houses to the left of the subject property; a Vernacular duplex constructed circa 1890 with a Vernacular porch, turned supports and Italianate brackets in the cornice. 210 Pearl Street - Three (3) houses to the left of the subject property; a Vernacular house constructed circa 1885 with a Vernacular porch, chamfered supports, and brackets. 223 Pearl Street - Vernacular house constructed circa 1890 with a Vernacular porch, Italianate cornice brackets, chamfered supports, and jigsaw balusters. 219 Pearl Street - Vernacular house constructed circa 1890 with a Vernacular porch, Tuscan columns, and pediments. 217 Pearl Street - Vernacular house constructed circa 1885 with a Vernacular porch, Tuscan columns, and Italianate cornice brackets. 213 Pearl Street - Vernacular house constructed circa 1890 with a Vernacular porch, Tuscan columns, and Italianate cornice brackets. 211 Pearl Street - Vernacular house constructed circa 1890 with a Vernacular porch with pediment and square columns. 209 Pearl Street - Vernacular house constructed circa 1890 with a rectangular transom and sidelights, cornice returns, and a metal door hood. Site Modifications The applicant does not propose any site modifications as part of this application. HC-2017-00006 April 13, 2017 Page 4 Applicable Regulations A. Suffolk Historic District Design Guidelines 1. Chapter 4, Section E, Decorative Features: Decorative features such as columns, cornices, window trim, and details provide much of the stylistic character of historic buildings. These elements usually work together to form a particular historic style. Preservation of decorative features is critical to preserving the character and appearance of an historic building. 2. Chapter 5, Section J, Residential Porches and Entrances: Entrances and porches are often the primary focal points of an historic building. In addition to being functional and ceremonial, elements for all buildings, their decoration and articulation, help define the style of the structure. For residential buildings, porches have traditionally served as a social gathering point as well as a transition area between the exterior and interior. The retention of porches is critical to maintaining the integrity of the historic dwelling’s original design. 3. Chapter 5, Section J.2, Guidelines for Residential Porches:  Inspect masonry, wood, and metal of porches and entrances for signs of rust, peeling paint, wood or mortar deterioration, and improper drainage. Correct any of these conditions. Repair damaged elements, matching the detail of the existing original material.  Do not strip entrances and porches of historic material and details.  Do not remove or radically change entrances and porches which serve to define the building’s overall historic character.  Avoid: adding “Colonial” decorative elements, such as broken pediments, columns, and pilasters, installing decorative iron supports, and replacing wood steps with concrete steps.  Maintain and rehabilitate original porch flooring where original materials have not deteriorated substantially. If replacement is required, match the existing flooring material or a synthetic substitute, method of application, and color (paint or stain).  A signed statement, with exhibits, from a licensed structural engineer or general contractor stating the condition of the existing porch, ability to be repaired, need for replacement, proposed corrective measures, and options to replacement is required as supporting documentation for any application for a Certificate of Appropriateness. B. Secretary of the Interior Standards The Secretary of the Interior Standards, which are included in Appendix A of the Historic Guidelines, encourage the repair and preservation of existing historic materials and character defining elements. Where replacement is determined to be necessary, the new feature shall match the old in design, color, texture, and other visual qualities and, where possible, materials. The design of replacement features shall also be substantiated by documentary, physical, or pictorial evidence. Changes that create a false sense of historical development is strongly discouraged. HC-2017-00006 April 13, 2017 Page 5 Staff Analysis The applicant proposes to replace one (1) section of water damaged tongue and groove ceiling boards on the front porch (on the left side only) with similar tongue and groove ceiling boards. Although the proposed replacement materials do not match the exact profile of the original tongue and groove ceiling boards, the materials proposed are generally consistent with the original materials in appearance and will not detract from the historical integrity of the structure, which is consistent with Chapter 4, Section F.2.b., Guidelines for Wood Materials. The proposed repairs (sanding, patching and painting) to the front porch deck boards are also consistent with the Guidelines for Wood Materials because this will allow the existing deck boards to be rehabilitated and preserved. The applicant has proposed to repoint the existing masonry steps on the side porch using the concave or rodded style (which is formed using a curved steel jointing tool to recess the mortar between the bricks to create clean lines). The applicant also indicated that they will match the new mortar in texture, color, strength and appearance with the existing mortar, as recommended by Chapter 4, Section F.1.b Guidelines for Masonry. These repairs are necessary in order to repair the disintegrated mortar and cracks in the mortar joints, and to prevent the bricks from becoming loose. In regard to the proposed replacement of the original front porch railings, Chapter 4, Section B.1, of the Historic Guidelines states: “Original materials should, to the maximum extent possible, be maintained and preserved in place. When alterations are required, the original materials should remain unaltered to the greatest extent possible. When exterior materials must be replaced, due to deterioration or alterations, the physical dimensions, styles, and other qualities of the original materials should, to the maximum extent possible, be replicated to match the original as closely as possible.” The proposed modern wooden deck railings consisting of square balusters are significantly different from the style, appearance, details and character of the original railings; therefore, they are not appropriate for this building. Chapter 5, Section J, Residential Porches and Entrances emphasizes the importance of residential porches to the overall historic character of a building: “Porches are often the primary focal points of an historic building. In addition to being functional and ceremonial, elements for all buildings, their decoration and articulation, help define the style of the structure. The retention of porches is critical to maintaining the integrity of the historic dwelling’s original design.” The modern square balusters of the proposed railings do not compliment the Vernacular style and historical integrity of the dwelling, thus staff recommends that historically appropriate wooden turned balusters be used on the front porch railings to closely match the original spindles. The preexisting metal handrails used on the front porch were not original to the structure; they also did not follow the unique curvature of the original concrete steps. As a result, front porch handrails are not appropriate for the architectural style of the subject building as they would radically change the appearance. Similarly, since the side porch did not originally include handrails, the proposed side porch handrail is also not appropriate for this building. Lastly, the proposed work includes repainting exterior trim and decorative elements (columns, frieze, cornice, lattice, and crawl space door) white. White is an appropriate color used HC-2017-00006 April 13, 2017 Page 6 throughout the Historic District for trim and decorative elements, and it is consistent with the current colors used on the dwelling. Summary and Recommendations Based on the above findings-of-fact, staff recommends approval of the following actions requested by Certificate of Appropriateness, HC-2017-00006, with the conditions noted below: 1. Replace one (1) section of deteriorated front porch tongue and groove ceiling boards with tongue and groove ceiling boards (left side only), to be painted white. 2. Repair front porch decking and repaint in-kind using Downing Slate (SW 2819) or equivalent from the approved Sherwin Williams Victorian Exterior Paint Palette. 3. Repoint masonry joints on the steps located on the right side of the home using the concave or rodded style. Match the color, texture, strength and appearance of the new mortar with the existing mortar. 4. Remove the newly installed modern front porch railings. Replace the front porch railings with wooden railings that consist of traditional, historically appropriate turned spindles which closely match the design, appearance, details, and character of the original turned spindles, to be painted white. An addendum showing the revised design must be approved by the administrator. 5. Repaint the exterior trim and decorative elements (columns, frieze, cornice, lattice, and crawl space door on the right side of the home) white. 6. Any additional improvements shall require a Certificate of Appropriateness. 7. All required permits shall be obtained from the City of Suffolk. Based on the above findings-of-fact, staff recommends denial of the following actions requested by Certificate of Appropriateness, HC-2017-00006; therefore these elements must be removed. 1. Install new handrails on the front porch (which would consist of modern square balusters and circular post caps). 2. Install one (1) new handrail on the side porch (which would consist of modern square balusters and a circular post cap). Attachments cc: Kimberly Brock, property owner HC2017-06  HC2017-06 ZONING/ LAND USE MAP HILL B-1 CBD FINN EY OAK DAL E E R AC TER ER E AC PINN GR RM 34G18(A)*166 PEA RL AY LA D HOL BAN K CBD s IN NKL FRA M-2 HC-2017-00006, 216 Pearl Street Preexisting porch railings and handrails prior to removal: 1 HC-2017-00006, 216 Pearl Street Proposed porch railings and handrails: 2 HC-2017-00006, 216 Pearl Street 3 HC-2017-00006, 216 Pearl Street Preexisting railings removed from front porch: 4 HC-2017-00006, 216 Pearl Street Proposed side porch handrail (to match new front porch handrails): 5 HC-2017-00006, 216 Pearl Street Proposed replacement of front porch ceiling tongue and groove boards (left corner only): 6 HC-2017-00006, 216 Pearl Street Proposed repairs to front porch decking: 7 HC-2017-00006, 216 Pearl Street Proposed repointing of brick steps: 8 HC-2017-00006, 216 Pearl Street Areas for repainting: 9 HC-2017-00006, 216 Pearl Street Streetscape Images: 10 HC-2017-00006, 216 Pearl Street Streetscape Images: 11 HC-2017-00006, 216 Pearl Street Streetscape Images: 12  107 Hailsham Place Grafton, VA 23692 steve@gfremodeling.com Phone (757) 879-0063 898-1147 (FAX) Class A State Contractor Number 2705-133028A Customer: Kim Brock & Aaron Bell Date: March 5, 2017 Subject Property: 216 Pearl St, Suffolk, VA 23434 To: City of Suffolk Planning and Community Development Department The front porch of the property at 216 Pearl St was inspected by Lee Bolton, HUD 203K loan inspector email bolton203k@gmail.com 622-2035 and myself and found many sections of the front porch to be deteriorated and unsafe. These sections were decomposed railings and handrails, a small section of water-damaged boards in the ceiling on the left side of the porch, sections of masonry joints that are crumbling along the edges, and the front porch areas including; trim, railings, handrails, ceiling, and floor/ decking boards that need to be repaired and repainted due to the existing paint being chipped and deteriorated. Repair and replacement required before further damage and weathering is done. Inspection date was Sep 22, 2016. Valspar, Ultra White color, storm coat exterior paint (as shown in materials section) will be used for all trim, handrails, railings, and ceiling boards to prevent any further damage to the existing and replacement wood. The same exterior paint, with the addition of Sherwin Williams' American Heritage theme color 'Downing Slate', will be used for the floor/decking boards as to match the existing color. Carl S. Guinsler  Property Maintenance Code Enforcement Update April 2017 ADDRESS CODE VIOLATION(S) STATUS 119 PINNER ST PROPERTY MAINTENANCE SCHEDULED FOR COURT ON 4/6/17 121 PINNER ST PROPERTY MAINTENANCE SCHEDULED FOR COURT ON 7/6/17 220 PINNER ST PROPERTY MAINTENANCE SCHEDULED FOR COURT ON 7/6/17 212 GRACE ST PROPERTY MAINTENANCE PASSED 215 GRACE ST PROPERTY MAINTENANCE FINED $150 ON 3/2/17 218 GRACE ST PROPERTY MAINTENANCE GRANTED EXTENSION UNTIL 4/27/17 209 PEARL ST PROPERTY MAINTENANCE GRANTED EXTENSION UNTIL 4/28/17 223 BANK ST PROPERTY MAINTENANCE SCHEDULED FOR COURT ON 4/6/17 15 KATHERINE ST PROPERTY MAINTENANCE SCHEDULED FOR COURT ON 4/6/17 201 N MAIN ST PROPERTY MAINTENANCE SCHEDULED FOR COURT ON 4/6/17 Zoning General District Court Docket March 2017 PROPERTY OWNER(s) LOCATION VIOLATION(s) JUDGEMENT INSPECTOR Zoning - replacing Court Dismissed/New Suffolk Tower Holdings LLC 181 N Main St windows, no COA NOV issued Ricky Zoning - exterior work NOV returned/ Posted without COA Raven P. Coston 222 Pinner St Ricky Zoning - Missing Nansemond Wharf Southside Continued 6/1/2017 features, no COA Properties 216 Bank St Ricky Zoning - Replacing Fined $200 porch decking, no COA Lakeisha Bradley 302 Bank St Ricky Zoning - exterior work App. submitted without COA Thomas W. Dana 310 Bank St Ricky Zoning - exterior work Stop Work Order/ App without COA submitted Kimberly Brock 216 Pearl St Ricky Zoning - exterior work COA Approved without COA Virginia G. Carrington 433 N Main St Ricky Zoning - expired COA, no work performed to NOV sent The First Lady/ Walter Boyette 447 W Washington St correct violation Ricky