Historic Landmarks Commission Packets

HISTORIC LANDMARKS COMMISSION MAY 11, 2017 THE REGULAR MEETING WILL BE HELD AT 9:00 A.M. IN CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS CITY HALL BUILDING NOTE: IF YOU CANNOT ATTEND THIS MEETING, PLEASE CALL THE DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING BY 12:00 NOON, WEDNESDAY, MAY 10, 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, May 11, 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-2017-00012, submitted by Conley Hall, agent for Thomas Dana, property owner, for the repainting of the existing siding, eaves, soffit and foundation, installation of a front stoop railing and handrails, installation of a side stoop railing and handrails and replacement of a front door with side lights at 310 Bank Street, Zoning Map 34G19, Block A, Parcel 30. 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. Old Business 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. VI. Staff Reports A. Enforcement Update B. Administrative Approvals VII. Adjournment  MINUTES HISTORIC LANDMARKS COMMISSION April 13, 2017 9:00 A.M. The regular meeting of the Historic Landmarks Commission was held on Thursday, April 13, 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 MEMBERS ABSENT: 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. 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. The first item of business was introduced by the Chairman, followed by a staff report by Amy Thurston, Planner I. Ms. Thurston stated that the subject property, 128 Pinner Street, is located within the Original Suffolk Historic District. 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. Ms. Thurston described the context of the surrounding properties, which include examples of Second Empire, American Renaissance and Vernacular architecture, many of which have full-width one-story porches and standing steam metal roofs. Ms. Thurston stated that on April 13, 2015, a Certificate of Appropriateness (HC2015-00006) was approved for exterior repairs, replacement, and renovations to the existing main structure and addition. According to the property owner and agent, the only actions completed under the 2015 COA were repairs to the masonry chimney and replacement of the concrete steps on the front porch with wooden steps. The remainder of the work did not commence within the 6-month time period, thus it has expired. Ms. Thurston stated that the original addition on the 2 right side and rear of the home was demolished by the previous contractor around November 2015 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. Following approval of this Certificate in July 2016, the applicant applied for building permits from the City of Suffolk Community Development Division and was made aware of the requirement to obtain a new COA. The applicant now proposes to construct the new addition to be the same size and in the same location as the original addition for the purpose of a kitchen and laundry room. Materials are listed in the staff report. The proposed changes to the main dwelling include replacement of the existing seam metal roof with a new standing seam metal roofing in Pearl Gray, replacement of deteriorated sections of the existing wood siding and fascia in-kind, reinstallation of two preexisting wooden windows on the rear of the main dwelling and repainting of the entire dwelling with Roycroft Suede (SW 2842) or equivalent from the approved Sherwin Williams Arts and Crafts Exterior Paint Palette with all trim and doors in white. Ms. Thurston provided images of the existing condition of the structure showing the areas on the right side and rear where the addition was removed. The images show the poor condition of the metal standing seam roofing and the obvious gaps in the wood siding. The contractor, Mr. Scheil, submitted the required contractor’s statement to support the replacement of these 3 materials. Ms. Thurston stated that staff has reviewed the application with the Historic District Design Guidelines and found that all of the proposed changes to the main dwelling are in-kind and appropriate for the period, design, and architectural character of the building. 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. 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. 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 the Guidelines. Based on the above findings of fact, staff recommends approval of HC2017-05 with the conditions noted. The public hearing was opened and speaking in favor of the application was Lee Cross, property owner. Mr. Cross stated that this is a state and federal tax credit project and that there are saved original windows. Mr. Cross stated that it was not a conscious decision to tear down the structure and knew that he had to come get permits. Mr. Lee noted that a change will be needed in regard to the foundation on the addition which will use stucco instead of tin, as required by DHR. 4 Also, speaking in favor of the application was Scott Scheil, contractor. Mr. Scheil stated that an Englert standing seam metal roof would be used instead of the proposed Union roof but that it would still meet District requirements. There being no more speakers in favor or opposition, the public hearing was closed. After clarification of the changes as requested by the applicant, Commissioner Boyette made a motion to approve the application with the changes specified, seconded by Commissioner King and approved by a recorded vote of 8-0. 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. The next item of business was introduced by the Chairman, followed by report by Amy Thurston, Planner I. Ms. Thurston stated the subject property is located within the Original Suffolk Historic District between Pinner and Grace Streets and is zoned RM, Residential Medium. Ms. Thurston stated that Pearl Street consists entirely of contributing two-story residential homes that were constructed between the late nineteenth century and early twentieth century, most of which have Vernacular architecture. 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 includes a hipped roof with lower cross gable, 5 Vernacular porch with Ionic columns, and a Palladian motif window on the front gable. Ms. Thurston stated that an after-the-fact Certificate of Appropriateness, HC2017-04AD, was approved on March 1 of this year for the purpose of replacing the existing asphalt shingle roof with GAF Timberline Architectural Roof Shingles in Williamsburg Slate. The current application is also an after-the-fact request. Prior to submission of this application the following work had commenced: • Replacement of front porch ceiling • Removal of existing front porch railings and preexisting handrails, replaced with modern wooden railings and handrails consisting of square balusters • Partial installation of a new side porch handrail • Repointing of masonry steps on side porch Ms. Thurston stated the applicant proposes to repair or replace elements of the front and side porches and to repaint the exterior trim and decorative elements. Ms. Thurston stated that Carl Guinsler of GF Remodeling submitted a letter in support of this application, noting that an inspection of the property on September 22, 2016 revealed that the front porch was deteriorated and unsafe. 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 damage and weathering takes place. Ms. Thurston reviewed the application, which includes replacement of front porch ceiling boards, sanding and repair of the existing front porch floor and repainting it in-kind, replacement of the preexisting porch railing and handrails, installation of a new handrail on the side porch, repointing the side porch brick steps, and repainting 6 several decorative elements including the front porch columns, trim, and cornice as well as the lattice and crawl space door on the right side of the home. Ms. Thurston reported that the preexisting front porch railings featured wooden turned spindles and the handrail was metal. Ms. Thurston provided an image from the Department of Historic Resources archive that was taken circa 1986 and shows the preexisting front porch metal handrail and the original railing on the right side of the porch that consists of wooden turned spindles. Ms. Thurston provided new images showing the newly installed railings and handrails that are modern wooden deck railings with square balusters. The applicant also proposes to add circular post caps and to add one side porch handrail to match the newly installed front porch handrails using modern square balusters and a circular post cap. The side porch is visible from the right-of-way. Ms. Thurston explained that although the replacement materials for the section of water damaged tongue and groove ceiling boards on the front porch 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. 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. In regard to the repointing of the existing masonry steps on the side porch, the applicant also indicated that they will match the new mortar in texture, color, strength and appearance with the existing 7 mortar, as recommended by the 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, the guidelines state that “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. Ms. Thurston stated that the guidelines emphasize the importance of residential porches to the overall historic character of a building. The modern square balusters of the proposed railings do not complement the style and historical integrity of the dwelling, thus staff recommends that historically appropriate wooden turned spindle be used on the front porch railings to closely match the original spindles. Ms. Thurston stated that 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. The newly installed 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. 8 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 throughout the Historic District for trim and decorative elements, and it is consistent with the current colors used on the dwelling. 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, 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. Based on the above findings-of-fact, staff recommends denial of the following actions requested by Certificate of Appropriateness, HC-2017-00006: 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. 9 The public hearing was opened and speaking in favor of the application was Kimberly Brock, property owner. Ms. Brock stated that she went online and got the information from the Suffolk Historic website to find the materials that would be allowed. Ms. Brock stated that she was trying to match the same materials from what was previously there and that the insurance company required the changes. There being no more speakers in favor or in opposition, the public hearing was closed. The Commission discussed the height and thinness of both the newly installed railings and the preexisting railings as inappropriate in appearance. They also noted the need to allow for safety measures which might include less conspicuous metal railings behind a lower, thicker railing more appropriate to the style of the house. Commissioner King made a motion to table the application to allow the applicant to return with a more appropriate style, seconded by Commissioner Hobbs and approved by a recorded vote of 8-0. New Business: Enforcement Update Donald Bennett, (Planning & Community Development) reported on the following properties: 223 Bank Street – Court case continued, possible foreclosure 119 Pinner Street – Court case continued until May 4, 2017 201 N Main Street – Case dismissed, property owner complied 118 Pinner Street – Property maintenance violation, case continued until June 1, 2017 10 New Business: Zoning Update Frederick Sample, (Planning & Community Development) reported on the following properties: 181 N. Main Street – Case dismissed, new notice of violation issued 216 Bank Street – Case being sent to court 222 Pinner Street – Re-inspection, case being sent to court 302 Bank Street – Fined $200.00 310 Bank Street – Application submitted 216 Pearl Street – Stop work order issued, application submitted 433 N. Main Street – COA approved administratively 447 West Washington Street – Notice of Violation sent There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:55 a.m. 11  HISTORIC LANDMARKS COMMISSION Motion: Motion: To Approve To Table Application & return Application with the changes with a more appropriate style specified 1st : Kings 1st : Boyette April 13, 2017 2nd: Hobbs 2nd: King ATTENDANCE HC-2017-00005 HC-2017-00006 VOTE: 8 - 0 VOTE: 8 – 0 COMMISSIONERS PRESENT ABSENT YES NO YES NO Boyette, Walter, Vice-Chairman X X X Coley, Susan M. X X X Austin Darden, Mary X X X Draper, Merritt X Faircloth, John X X X Hicks, Randy, Chairman X X X Hobbs, Oliver X X X King, Edward L. X X X Turner, Vivian X 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: Kevin M. Wyne, AICP, Principal Planner Date: May 11, 2017 Subject: REQUEST FOR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS HC-2017- 00012, submitted by Conley Hall, agent for Thomas Dana, property owner, for the repainting of the existing siding, eaves, soffit and foundation, installation of a front stoop railing and handrails, installation of a side stoop railing and handrails and replacement of a front door with side lights at 310 Bank Street, Zoning Map 34G19, Block A, Parcel 30. 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. The Vernacular structure is located on Bank Street in an area developed around 1870, named “New Town.” The oldest residential structures in "New Town” are situated along Bank Street, Franklin Street and the southern extent of Pinner Street. The most interesting aspect of this development is the mix between modest vernacular buildings with more impressive “stylistic” buildings. On Bank Street, the modest dwellings at 212, 222-224, 309, 309, 310, 311 and 318 are smaller because they are older, generally all having been built in the mid-1880s. The large structures such as numbers 133 and 210 are examples of simple design with Italianate elements but are more substantial in size. Bank Street is made completely unique in the District by having a concentration of Second Empire-style buildings. There are four in all, including the Holland House, located at 216 Bank Street, which is the only individual property in the District listed on the National Register. This rather exceptional house has patterned slate work, dormer windows with surrounds, roof curbing and an elaborate porch. HC-2017-00012 May 11, 2017 Page 2 On Bank Street there are several examples of simple houses incorporating the Queen Anne style, including the subject property. The focal detail on all four is the attic window. In most examples there is a Palladian motif or pointed-arch window. There are a variety of materials including scalloped shingles, simple shakes, and modern asbestos weatherboard used throughout these examples. According to the National Register of Historic Places Nomination Form, the subject property is noted as a detached two-story Vernacular home constructed circa 1890. It is a wood framed, 3- bay (asymmetrical) building with a gable roof, brackets in cornice, pent roofs at gable ends and a Palladian window in the front gable. Case History An after-the-fact Certificate of Appropriateness application was submitted on March 17, 2017 for the subject property in response to a notice of violation, issued by the City on February 14, 2017, for exterior work being conducted in the HC-Historic Conservation Overlay District, without benefit of the required Certificate of Appropriateness. The submitted application covers the scope of work that has been conducted without the required Certificate of Appropriateness. In July 2001, the property received an administrative Certificate of Appropriateness (HC2001- 29) related to the painting of the structure. 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 commencement of work, the asbestos shingle siding was painted beige, eaves and soffit were painted cream, the front door and sidelights were painted cream, and the trim and corner boards were painted white. The front stoop had metal railings and both the front and side porches were free of handrails. Additionally, the front door was wooden with six panels flanked on each side by three lite sidelights. The applicant has installed a new door, new modern railings along the edge of the stoop landing and new modern handrails along the side of the front steps. The railings are wood and have been painted white. The balusters are thicker than the metal ones observed on the nomination photo in taken in 1986. Additionally, the vertical rails extend below, one of two horizontal cross rails on the landing portion. The cross rails on both the handrail and landing portion are quite thick and easily discernible from the street. HC-2017-00012 May 11, 2017 Page 3 The applicant’s entire request consists of the following items: 1. Paint the siding on all sides using Downing Sand (SW 2822) or equivalent from the approved Sherwin Williams Victorian Exterior Paint Palette. 2. Paint the eaves and soffit Chateau Brown (SW 7510) or equivalent from the approved Sherwin Williams Victorian Exterior Paint Palette. 3. Paint the foundation Roycroft Pewter (SW 2848) or equivalent from the approved Sherwin Williams Arts and Crafts Exterior Paint Palette. 4. Paint trim, to include window trim and corner boards, white. 5. Replace wood, six panel, cream door, with a white, two panel steel door with glazing. 6. Replace sidelights to match new door, to be painted white. 7. Install new wooden front step handrails to consist of square balusters, to be painted white. 8. Install new stoop landing railing to consist of square balusters, to be painted white. Surrounding Characteristics A detailed description of adjacent and nearby properties is provided below. 302 Bank Street - Located adjacent and to the right of the subject property, at the corner of Bank and Pinner Streets; a two story, three bay, Second Empire home with a Vernacular porch constructed circa 1890. 318 Bank Street – Located adjacent and to the left of the subject property, at the corner of Bank and Holladay Streets; a two story, three bay Colonial Revival with a Colonial Revival porch constructed circa 1900. 301 Bank Street – A brick, three story, 14 bay American Renaissance structure with four, three story porches constructed circa 1930. 309 and 309 1/2 Bank Street – A vernacular duplex, consisting of two stories and three bays, constructed circa 1880. 311 Bank Street – A two story, five bay vernacular house constructed circa 1880 with a Vernacular porch with exposed rafter ends. Site Modifications The applicant does not propose any site modifications as part of this application. HC-2017-00012 May 11, 2017 Page 4 Applicable Regulations A. Suffolk Historic District Design Guidelines 1. Chapter 4, Section D, Doors: Like windows, door openings are a major character and style-determining feature of an historic building. Taken together, these elements usually act in unison to visually define the directional emphasis and proportions of the façade as well as the style. It is very important that the doors of an historic building be preserved, where possible, to maintain their size and details. 2. Chapter 4, Section D.1, Background: Doors help to define a building’s particular style and serve to allow access to the interior of a building. When in association with porches and entrances, they may be decorated and ceremonial. Doors on secondary facades tend to be simpler and more utilitarian. A variety of doors can be found in the Suffolk Historic Conservation Overlay District. Many of the doors are wood with different types of panels. While the six-panel door is common, other types include doors with tall, narrow, arched panels or recessed carved panels or doors with rectangular or oval glass panes. Flush doors are also found in the district. This design is more recent, and generally does not have an historic appearance. In addition to the style or door, decorated entrances also include features such as pilasters, pediments, leaded glass transoms, sidelights, and fanlights. 3. 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. 4. Chapter 4, Section I.2, Guidelines for Painting: American Foursquare, Hipped, and Frame Vernacular: These buildings are generally very simple designs with plain detailing. One color should be used for the trim and a contrasting color for the wall. 5. 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. 6. Chapter 5, Section J.2, Guidelines for Residential Porches:  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. HC-2017-00012 May 11, 2017 Page 5  Avoid: adding “Colonial” decorative elements, such as broken pediments, columns, and pilasters, installing decorative iron supports, and replacing wood steps with concrete steps. 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 are strongly discouraged. Staff Analysis The applicant has painted the siding on all sides of the house using Downing Sand (SW 2822) or equivalent from the approved Sherwin Williams Victorian Exterior Paint Palette. The previous color of the structure was equivalent to Craftsman Brown (SW 2835) from the approved Sherwin Williams Arts and Crafts Exterior Paint Palette. As the new color is found in one of the district’s approved exterior paint palettes, staff finds the painting of the siding in Downing Sand (SW 2822) or equivalent, consistent with the District Guidelines. Additionally, the applicant has painted the eaves and soffit on the house Chateau Brown (SW 7510) or equivalent from the approved Sherwin Williams Victorian Exterior Paint Palette. Previously, these elements were white and contrasted well against the brown of the home’s siding. With the home being painted the lighter, Downing Sand color, the contrast is even more prevalent and the colors complement each other well. The applicant has also painted the foundation Roycroft Pewter (SW 2848) or equivalent from the approved Sherwin Williams Arts and Craft Exterior Paint Palette. The color contrasts well with the lighter Downing Sand of the house and serves as an improvement over the unpainted cinder block that existed previously. Lastly, white paint has been used for the remainder of the trim and while the contrast is not as prevalent with the siding consisting of the Downing Sand paint as it previously was when the building was brown, a contrast is still apparent and white is an appropriate color throughout the district. As a part of the application, the applicant has replaced an existing metal stoop railing with a wooden railing of similar height and thicker balusters as well as installing wooden handrails, to match the stoop railings, on each side of the steps. Both features are painted white, which will match the window trim and corner boards. The 1986 Historic District Survey Form notes that, at the time, the structure had a modern porch with steel railings. No evidence of original railings is available. The District Guidelines provide limited direction on the installation of modern, recommended safety features such as porch hand railings and stoop railings. Due to the baluster and railing width of the newly installed elements, they are far more prominent than the simple porch columns and roof, and are the dominant feature on the front elevation of the house. The installed rail balusters are modern and of a style prevalent during and after the 1980’s. The HC-2017-00012 May 11, 2017 Page 6 balusters have pointed ends that extend below the bottom cross rail and are prominent from street view. Front entryways are prominent and important features on structures and modern features, should they be deemed necessary, should be deemphasized so they do not detract from the historical elements that collaborate to form the historical character of a structure. The installation of stoop railings and handrails is a significant addition, and as such, should be done with care as to not disrupt or detract from other elements that make a historic structure unique. The newly installed stoop railing and handrails radically change the entryway in a manner that disrupts its historic character and methods should be explored to construct these improvements by using designs that soften their appearance. It is recommended that the newly installed wooden handrails and stoop railing be replaced with metal handrails and a metal stoop railing similar to those seen on the structure in its 1986 Historic District Survey photo. In addition to the front stoop changes outlined above, the applicant has made similar additions to a side stoop. The side stoop is located on the west facing elevation of the rear addition and is not visible from the public right-of-way. The changes include the installation of handrails on the stoop steps and a railing on the landing. With this alteration not being visible from public view, staff is of the opinion that these improvements do not radically change this side entryway in a manner that disrupts the historic character of the structure. Lastly, the applicant has replaced an existing six panel wooden door with three lite side lights on each side, with a two panel, six lite craftsman style steel door, flanked on each side by five lite sidelights. It is common for Vernacular structures throughout the district to incorporate design elements found on more prominent structures. In Suffolk, this was most common with Vernacular construction utilizing simple detail found on more prominent Victorian structures. There are three (3) examples of Vernacular buildings in the district that borrow elements made popular during the American Arts and Crafts (Craftsman) movement which occurred from 1905- 1940. The homes at 217 N. Saratoga Street and 119 and 121 Pinner Street are simple Vernaculars that incorporate a bungalow style porch, which is Craftsman inspired. The homes on Pinner Street are located a block to the south of the home in question. While Craftsman style homes were not the most common style found in the Original Suffolk Historic District, there are 11 bungalows and 3 American Foursquares that incorporate appropriate Craftsman style design elements. As such, a Vernacular building borrowing design elements from other types of architecturally significant structures found within Suffolk is not uncommon. Craftsman style doors of the proposed type are prevalent throughout the district and not exclusively reserved to the district’s collection of Bungalows and American Foursquares. Specifically, Vernacular structures at 211 and 215 Grace Street, a block south of the subject parcel, utilize Craftsman style doors in the form proposed by the applicant. Additionally, a collection of Queen Anne homes on Clay Street have attractive front doors in the Craftsman style proposed by 310 Bank Street. The proposed steel material is not the same as the original wooden door; however, this is not apparently visible from the right-of-way as the newly installed door profiles like the historic examples in the district cited above. As such is the case, the Vernacular structure at 310 Bank HC-2017-00012 May 11, 2017 Page 7 Street utilizing a Craftsman style door with accompanying sidelights, does not substantially alter its original architectural character. Original openings were utilized and not enlarged, as the new features are the same size as the old ones. Furthermore, it incorporates a practice that was not unheard of during the time period it was constructed with Vernacular structures borrowing design elements from more prominent architectural styles. Chapter 4, Section D.2 of the District Guidelines recommend that “When replacing doors, use door styles that relate to those found in the district.” With Craftsman style doors of the proposed type being prevalent throughout the district on a variety of architectural styles, including Vernacular like the subject parcel, the utilization of one is this case would be appropriate. Summary and Recommendations Based on the above findings-of-fact, staff recommends approval of the following completed actions requested by Certificate of Appropriateness, HC-2017-00012, with the conditions noted below: 1. Paint the siding on all sides using Downing Sand (SW 2822) or equivalent from the approved Sherwin Williams Victorian Exterior Paint Palette. 2. Paint the eaves and soffit Chateau Brown (SW 7510) or equivalent from the approved Sherwin Williams Victorian Exterior Paint Palette. 3. Paint the foundation Roycroft Pewter (SW 2848) or equivalent from the approved Sherwin Williams Arts and Crafts Exterior Paint Palette. 4. Paint trim, to include window trim and corner boards white. 5. Replace wood, six panel, white door, with a white, two panel steel door with glazing. 6. Replace sidelights to match new door, to be painted white. 7. Remove the newly installed wooden front entryway stoop landing railing and step handrails and install new metal front entryway step handrails and stoop landing railing, similar in design to the style observed in the 1986 survey photo, painted a dark color to minimize visual impact to the structure. 8. Install new wooden side entryway handrails and stoop landing railing to consist of square balusters, to be painted white. 9. Any additional improvements shall require a Certificate of Appropriateness. 10. All required permits shall be obtained from the City of Suffolk. Attachments HC-2017-00012 May 11, 2017 Page 8 cc: Conley Hall, agent for the property owner HC2017-12  ZONING / LAND USE MAP HC2017-12 ACE GR PEA R L LAD AY RM H OL CBD M-2 R PINN E KL I N 34G19(A)*30 FRA N BAN K M-2 CBD s N&W RT Y LIB WA E S HIN FRRD GT ON CBD HALL 310 Bank Street- HC2017-00012 310 Bank Street - 1986  310 Bank Street- HC2017-00012 BEFORE AFTER  310 Bank Street- HC2017-00012 310 Bank Street 310 Bank Street 310 Bank Street- HC2017-00012 310 Bank Street- HC2017-00012 310 Bank Street- HC2017-00012 Side Stoop Railings  310 Bank Street- HC2017-00012 Door Examples 211 Grace Street 215 ½ Grace Street  CITY OF SUFFOLK 442 W. WASHINGTON STREET, POST OFFICE BOX 1858, SUFFOLK, VIRGINIA 23439-1858 PHONE: (757) 514-4060 FAX: (757) 514-4099 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Division of Planning MEMORANDUM TO: Historic Landmarks Commission FROM: Amy Thurston, Planner I RE: 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. DATE: May 4, 2017 The Historic Landmarks Commission, at its meeting of April 13, 2017, tabled consideration of Certificate of Appropriateness application, HC2017-00006, to allow the applicant time to submit a revised proposal. Planning Division staff has met with the applicant to discuss appropriate railing and handrail options for this property. A revised proposal was submitted by the applicant on May 4, 2017. An addendum will be distributed to the Historic Landmarks Commission before the scheduled meeting on May 11, 2017. Zoning Case Activity Report May 2017 PROPERTY OWNER(S) LOCATION VIOLATION(S) JUDGEMENT INSPECTOR Zoning - replacement Suffolk Tower Holdings LLC 181 N Main St New NOV issued Ricky windows, no COA Zoning - exterior work without Raven P. Coston 222 Pinner St Court - 6/1/2017 Ricky COA Zoning - Missing features, no Nansemond Wharf Southside Properties 216 Bank St Continued 6/1/2017 Ricky COA Zoning - Replacing porch Lakeisha Bradley 302 Bank St Court - 6/1/2017 Ricky decking, no COA Zoning - exterior work without Thomas W Dana 310 Bank St HLC Ricky COA Zoning - exterior work without Kimberly Brock 216 Pearl St HLC Ricky COA Zoning - site work without Allyn W & Kristen K Brown 231 Pinner St App under review Ricky COA Zoning - expired COA, no New application The First Lady/ Walter Boyette 447 W Washington St work performed to correct Ricky under review violation