Historic Landmarks Commission Packets

HISTORIC LANDMARKS COMMISSION JANUARY 11, 2018 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, JANUARY 10, 2018 514-4060 RANDY HICKS CHAIRMAN PREPARED BY THE CITY OF SUFFOLK DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIVISION OF PLANNING  AGENDA Historic Landmarks Commission Meeting Thursday, January 11, 2018 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 HLC2017-024, submitted by Roy Burden, agent for Greenhouse Properties, property owner, for after-the-fact replacement of 29 wooden windows with vinyl windows at 500 W. Washington Street, Zoning Map 34G17, Block A, Parcel 7. 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. V. Staff Reports A. Enforcement Update B. Administrative Approvals VI. Adjournment 2  MINUTES HISTORIC LANDMARKS COMMISSION December 14, 2017 9:00 A.M. The regular meeting of the Historic Landmarks Commission was held on Thursday, December 14, 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: Susan Coley Claire Jones, Comprehensive Planning Manager Merritt Draper Karla Carter, Deputy City Attorney Randy Hicks Amy Thurston, Planner I Oliver Hobbs Kevin Wyne, Principal Planner Edward King Jillian Scott-Hale, Office Assistant Vivian Turner Mary Austin Darden 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 HLC2017-021, submitted by Jeffrey Townsend, property owner, for exterior material alterations at property located at 178 East Washington Street. The property is further identified as Zoning Map 34G18, Block (6), Parcel 5, 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 report by Amy Thurston, Planner I. Ms. Thurston stated the subject property is located on East Washington Street between Commerce Street and Franklin Street, thus it is part of the East Washington Street Historic District. The property is zoned CBD, Central Business District, which allows a variety of retail, service, office and residential uses. According to the National Register of Historic Places Nomination Form, the subject property is a contributing one-story commercial building that was constructed between 1926 and 1940. In the past, the front façade of the building was inappropriately modified to conceal the original wooden transom windows with vinyl siding. Ms. Thurston stated that, at the September 14, 2017, meeting of the Historic Landmarks Commission, request for Certificate of Appropriateness HC-2017- 014 was approved to allow several exterior changes to the property which did not include modifications to the nonconforming vinyl siding on the front of the structure. Ms. Thurston noted that the approved actions from the September COA included installation of an aluminum storefront system and architectural stone skirting on the front façade among other items. The Historic District Design Guidelines and the Secretary of the Interior Standards state that windows should only be replaced when they are missing or beyond repair. Reconstruction 4 should be based on available physical evidence or old photographs, and replacement windows should match the original in appearance, detail, material, profile, and overall size as closely as possible. Replacement of wood elements should match the original in material and design or use substitute materials that convey the same visual appearance. In accordance with Section F of the Guidelines, materials other than historic materials which may replicate the qualities of the original may be acceptable as substitutes if the Historic Landmarks Commission determines that the substitute material will produce the overall character, appearance, and performance. The applicant proposes to replace the original wooden transom windows with silver aluminum transom windows to match the design provided by Suffolk Glass and Aluminum. The proposed design is based on physical and pictorial evidence; it consists of utilizing the original window opening, layout, pattern, profile, and muntin configuration. Since the preexisting window frames had simple lines as opposed to intricate trim used on other structures in the district, staff feels that the frames can be replicated using aluminum if painted with an appropriate color to produce the same finish, profile, and overall appearance as the original wooden transom windows. Ms. Thurston reported that the area between the ground floor storefront windows and the transom windows is currently devoid of any exterior siding material. There is no record of what material previously existed in this location; however, wood would likely have been the material used at the time the building was constructed. The applicant proposes to fill in this area using beige aluminum trim coil. Other similar commercial storefronts in the Historic 5 District that have a distinct separation between the storefront windows and transom windows utilize wood trim in this area of their facades. Aluminum trim coil does not produce a similar profile, appearance, nor evoke the same character that wood trim produces; thus, it does not comply with Section F.2.b. of the Design Guidelines. Additionally, the use of aluminum trim coil in place of wood trim would not be in-keeping with surrounding properties; therefore, painted wood trim is recommended to be utilized. Based on the previous findings-of-fact, staff recommends approval of the following actions requested by Certificate of Appropriateness, HLC2017-021, with the conditions noted in the staff report. The public hearing was opened and there being no speakers in favor or in opposition, the public hearing was closed. The Commission discussed the painted finish proposed, and Chairman Hicks noted that a powder coat finish would be needed to produce the desired look of painted wood. After discussion by the Commission, a motion was made by Commissioner King to approve staff’s recommendation with the requirement that a powder coat finish be used. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Draper and passed by a recorded vote of 7-0. 6 REQUEST FOR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS HLC2017-022, submitted by Missi Cohn, agent for ForKids, property owner, for exterior material and color alterations, landscaping, and fencing on property located at 119 W. Constance Road, Zoning Map 34G11, Block (1), Parcel R*2A. 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 next item of business was introduced by the Chairman, followed by a staff report by Kevin Wyne, Principal Planner. Mr. Wyne stated that the subject property is a non- contributing constructed in 1996 and is located in the North Main Street Entry Corridor, which is significant as the place where the City was founded and contains prominent and early buildings. The most prominent buildings in the vicinity are the old Nansemond County Courthouse at 524 North Main Street and the adjacent Riddick’s Folly at 510 North Main Street. The subject property is zoned CBD, Central Business District and the building is currently vacant; however, it has most recently served as a restaurant and a video store. Mr. Wyne stated that the proposed north and east elevations include a number of prominent alterations, including the replacement of the existing signage with two (2) new halo lit wall signs that will be a maximum of 42 square feet in size, removal of four of the existing seven columns at the front entrance, replacement of the existing storefront with a new aluminum storefront finished in bronze, and a new cloth shade sail over that patio. Mr. Wyne provided an example of the proposed signage, which will be placed over the main entrance on both the east and north facades. The signs will be indirectly lit using halo lighting. He noted that staff believes that the removal of the unneeded columns will not be a detriment to the building or 7 the district. Additionally, staff finds that the other alterations align with the Historic District Design Guidelines. Mr. Wyne stated that on the west elevation (Church Street) a new aluminum window and door combination will be installed along with two additional fixed pane windows, all of which will work to help break up this currently blank façade. Additionally on this façade, landscape improvements are proposed that will include the construction of a 48” tall, black, aluminum fence and the construction of a play area between the west elevation and Church Street. The 48” fence will wrap around the building and extend from the existing patio area on the north elevation around to the west elevation. The fence will enclose an approximate area of 100’ x 30’, which will be utilized as a play area. Presently, this area consists of grass and other vegetation. The newly created play area will bring the use to the street edge, which is preferred within urban environments and in this case, would be appropriate. On the south elevation, one (1) of the utility doors will be replaced with a glass door, and a fixed pane window will be installed with a blue awning being placed above the two doors. Aside from two (2) utility doors, this elevation does not contain any window or door openings. The installation of window and door openings on this elevation will offer some welcomed fenestration. Mr. Wyne stated that after evaluation, staff recommends approval of the following actions requested by Certificate of Appropriateness, HLC-2017-022, with the conditions noted in staff’s report. 8 The public hearing was opened and there being no speakers in favor or opposition, the public hearing was closed. The Commission discussed the size of the proposed signs in relation to the existing signs. Mr. Wyne noted that they are comparable in size. Following the discussion, a motion was made by Commissioner King to approve staff’s recommendation as presented. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Turner and passed by a recorded vote of 7-0. New Business: Enforcement Update Donald Bennett, (Planning & Community Development) reported on the following properties: 223 Bank Street – Secured property, foreclosed and property sold 221 Bank Street – Court case continued until January 3, 2018 118 Pinner Street – Reissued Notice of Violation 209 Pearl Street – Granted extension until January 3, 2018 121 Pinner Street – Court case continued until February 1, 2018 New Business: Zoning Update Ricky Sample, (Planning & Community Development) reported on the following properties: 222 Pinner Street – Notice of Violation issued, property owner submitted COA 500 West Washington Street – Notice of Violation, property owner submitted COA 412 N. Main Street – Establish church without Certificate of Appropriateness 131 Clay Street - Installing roof without COA, Notice of Violation issued 9 Chairman Hicks noted that Vice-Chairman Boyette had stepped down from the Commission and asked for new nominations to fill the position of Vice-Chairman. Commission King nominated Commissioner Hobbs; seconded by Commissioner Turner. There being no additional nominations, Chairman Hicks called for a roll call vote. Commissioner Hobbs was elected by a vote of 6-0, with Mr. Hobbs abstaining. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned. 10  HISTORIC LANDMARKS COMMISSION Motion: Motion: To Approve To Approve Application Application 1st: Hobbs 1st: King December 14, 2017 2nd: King 2nd: Turner ATTENDANCE HC-2017-021 HLC-2017-022 VOTE: 7-0 VOTE: 7-0 COMMISSIONERS YES NO YES NO PRESENT ABSENT Coley, Susan M. X X X Darden Mary Austin, X X X Draper, Merritt X X X Hicks, Randy: Chairman X X X *Hobbs, Oliver, Vice X X X Chairman King, Edward L. X X X Turner, Vivian X X X *Voted Vice – Chairman at Meeting  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: January 11, 2017 Subject: REQUEST FOR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS HLC2017-024, submitted by Roy Burden, agent for Greenhouse Properties, property owner, for after-the-fact replacement of 29 windows at 500 W. Washington Street, Zoning Map 34G17, Block A, Parcel 7. 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. STAFF REPORT Overview of the Subject Property and Surrounding Area The subject property is located at 500 West Washington Street within the West End District (2004) of the Suffolk Historic Conservation Overlay District. According to the National Register of Historic Places Inventory Nomination Form for the West End District, the district area sits approximately four blocks west of the original Suffolk Historic District. The West End neighborhood is roughly bounded by the CSX Railroad to the north, the Norfolk Southern Railroad to the south, Linden Avenue, Wellons Street and Pender Street to the east, and Brewer Street and Causey Avenue on the west. The majority of the buildings in this neighborhood date from the last decade of the 19th century through the first four decades of the 20th century, and display the fashionable architectural styles of the period in which they were constructed. There are a few examples dating from the third quarter of the 19th century that proceed the area's major period of development. The dominant forms and styles found in the district include Italianate, Queen Anne, Colonial Revival, Classical Revival, Tudor Revival, Bungalow/Craftsman, and American foursquare. The subject property features a contributing structure built between 1910 and 1925. The one-and- a half (1.5) story Craftsman bungalow features a complex roofline with clipped gables and hipped dormers, exposed rafter tails, and a wraparound porch with tapered square columns and decorative corbels. The structure is built on a stretcher bond solid brick foundation extending to brick segmental arches that form the porch surround. Although the wood weatherboard siding is now covered with aluminum siding, the house retains most of its original architectural features. HLC2017-024 January 11, 2017 Page 2 Multiple light double-hung sash and casement windows are a hallmark of the American Craftsman style and were used throughout this structure. Prior to their removal, the house had a combination of 12 over 12 (12/12), 10 over 10 (10/10), and 6 over 6 (6/6) double-hung sash windows, which are unique for using divided lights in the lower sash. In addition, there were several 9 and 12 light wooden casement windows in the side dormers and on the basement level. Of these windows, twenty-nine (29) have been replaced with 1 over 1 double-hung sash vinyl windows. Case History The property owner submitted an application for an administrative Certificate of Appropriateness on October 16, 2017, for the replacement of an existing asphalt shingle roof with architectural shingles and the repainting of the structure white. The requested COA was approved on October 18, 2017. After thorough consultation with staff at the time of application, the owner was advised that any changes to the windows would require additional review and approval. On November 2, 2017, a zoning inspector noticed that exterior changes had been made to the windows at 500 West Washington Street without a Certificate of Appropriateness, as required by Section 31-302 (a) (1) of the Unified Development Ordinance. A Notice of Violation was mailed the same day to the property owner. The owner returned to the Planning Division office on November 14, 2017, to submit an after-the-fact COA application. 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. The applicant’s request consists of the following items: 1. Replace twenty-nine (29) full divided light, double-hung sash and casement wood windows with one over one (1/1), double-hung sash vinyl windows. Condition Statement Mr. Roy C. Burden, a Class A Contractor (#2701034727), submitted a condition statement in support of this application. The letter states that many of the old windows were inoperable and had missing or broken glazing; however, the statement did not document the condition of each window, ability to be repaired, or need for replacement as required by the standards of the Historic District Design Guidelines. Mr. Burden did note his suggestion that the existing windows be replaced with more energy efficient vinyl windows. A limited number of pictures of the original windows were provided by the applicant; however, the location of the windows pictured was not noted and assessment of their condition was not HLC2017-024 January 11, 2017 Page 3 included. Surrounding Characteristics The area around the property contains a strong collection of contributing structures from the late 19th and early 20th centuries. The houses in the 500 block of West Washington Street include good examples of the Queen Anne, Italianate, and Colonial Revival styles, most of which retain their original windows and metal roofs. A detailed description of adjacent and nearby properties is provided below. 111 Henley Place – A modern, non-contributing government building that serves as the City’s Police Administration Building. 105 St. James Avenue (501 West Washington Street) – A contributing church, built in the Colonial Revival style. The building is constructed of brick in a Flemish Bond pattern and has a combination of 16 light octagonal wooden windows, 16/16 double-hung wooden windows and fixed 16 light wooden windows. The structure was constructed in 1938 and has a gable roof with wood shingles. 457 W. Washington Street – A contributing 2 ½ story Queen Anne home constructed circa 1890. The home has a wraparound porch with Tuscan columns and wood 1/1 and 2/2 double-hung sash windows. 504 W. Washington Street – A contributing Greek Revival house constructed circa 1830 by Thomas Jefferson Kilby and extensively remodeled circa 1930-40. The house features a two (2) story, three (3) bay portico, stucco siding, and wood 12/12, 8/8, and 12/8 double-hung sash windows. 509 W. Washington Street – A Colonial Revival commercial structure constructed between 1915 and 1930 with a two (2) story, one (1) bay porch with wood ionic columns. Site Modifications The applicant does not propose any site modifications as part of this application. Applicable Regulations A. Suffolk Historic District Design Guidelines Chapter 4, Section C, of the Guidelines addresses the treatment of historic window openings. It states that windows are a major character and style-determining feature of historic buildings and notes the importance of preserving them wherever possible. Windows help to define a building’s particular style since they are one of the most visual aspects of a building. Specific items germane to this application are listed below: Chapter 4, Section C.3. Guidelines for Window Preservation: HLC2017-024 January 11, 2017 Page 4  Maintain Original Windows: Maintain original windows by patching, splicing, consolidating or otherwise reinforcing the wooden members. Wood that appears to be in bad condition because of peeling paint or separated joints often can be repaired. Uncover and repair covered-up windows and reinstall windows where they have been blocked in. If repair of an original window is necessary, repair only the deteriorated element to match the original in size, composition, material, dimension, and detail by patching, splicing, consolidating, or otherwise reinforcing the deteriorated section. The removal of historic materials shall be avoided.  Avoid Replacing Original Windows: 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. Do not use inappropriate materials or finishes that radically change the sash, depth of reveal, muntin configuration, the reflective quality or color of the glazing, or the appearance of the frame.  Maintain the Original Window Patterns: Do not change the number, location, size, or glazing pattern of windows by cutting new openings, blocking in windows, or installing replacement sash that do not fit the window opening.  Improve Thermal Qualities: Improve thermal efficiency with weather stripping, storm windows (preferably interior), caulking, interior shades, and if appropriate for the building, shutters (blinds) and awnings. Install interior storm windows with airtight gaskets, ventilating holes, and/or removable clips to insure proper maintenance and to avoid condensation damage to windows. Install exterior storm windows that do not damage or obscure the windows and frames. The storm windows divisions should match those of the original window. Avoid unpainted aluminum storm sashes. This type of window can be painted an appropriate color if it is first primed with a zinc chromate primer. Avoid replacing a multi-paned sash with new thermal sash utilizing false snap-in muntins. Do not replace windows or transoms with fixed thermal glazing. Do not use tinted glass on major facades of the building.  New Window Materials: New windows may be constructed of painted wood, metal clad or vinyl clad. Unfinished or anodized aluminum is not permitted. When evaluating the acceptability of replacement windows, the following criteria shall be used: o Kind and texture of materials; o Architectural and historical compatibility; o Comparison to original window profile; o Level of significance of original windows to the architectural style of the building; and o Material performance and durability.  Conditions Statement: A signed statement, with exhibits, from a licensed general contractor stating the condition of the existing windows, 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. HLC2017-024 January 11, 2017 Page 5 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. Specific guidance with regard to the preservation of historic windows is provided below.  Windows - Identify, Retain and Preserve – Recommended: o Identifying, retaining, and preserving windows and their functional and decorative features that are important in defining the overall historic character of the building. Such features can include frames, sash, muntins, glazing, sills, heads, hoodmolds, paneled or decorated jambs and moldings, and interior and exterior shutters and blinds.  Windows - Identify, Retain and Preserve – Not Recommended: o Removing or radically changing windows which are important in defining the historic character of the building so that, as a result, the character is diminished. o Changing the historic appearance of windows through the use of inappropriate designs, materials, finishes, or colors which noticeably change the sash, depth of reveal, and muntin configuration; the reflectivity and color of the glazing; or the appearance of the frame. o Obscuring historic window trim with metal or other material. o Stripping windows of historic material such as wood, cast iron, and bronze. o Replacing windows solely because of peeling paint, broken glass, stuck sash, and high air infiltration. These conditions, in themselves, are no indication that windows are beyond repair.  Windows – Replace – Recommended: o Replacing in kind an entire window that is too deteriorated to repair using the same sash and pane configuration and other design details. If using the same kind of material is not technically or economically feasible when replacing windows deteriorated beyond repair, then a compatible substitute material may be considered.  Windows – Replace – Not Recommended: o Removing a character-defining window that is unrepairable and blocking it in; or replacing it with a new window that does not convey the same visual appearance. Staff Analysis As required under Chapter 4 of the Historic District Guidelines, original windows are to be replaced only when they are missing or beyond repair. Additionally, the Secretary of Interior’s Standards recommend identifying, retaining, and preserving windows that are important in HLC2017-024 January 11, 2017 Page 6 defining the overall historic character of the building, and replacing with like materials when necessary. The contractor’s statement provided by the applicant indicates that many of the original windows in this structure had broken glass panes and peeling paint or were inoperable. Although the contractor recommends replacement, there is no documentation that all of the windows are beyond repair. Peeling paint, broken glass, stuck sashes, and air infiltration are common in historic windows that have not been properly maintained, but these conditions are often able to be corrected and are no indication in themselves that windows are beyond repair. Windows that can be repaired should be retained and restored in compliance with the Guidelines. As noted, the applicant is requesting after-the-fact approval for the replacement of 29 windows that were a combination of double-hung sash and casement, full divided light, wood windows. The largest windows were 12/12 double-hung sash windows, many of which were located on the south (front) and east sides of the house facing West Washington and Pender Streets. The remainder of the windows included three 10/10 sash windows in the front dormer, smaller 6/6 sash windows on the sides and rear of the structure, 12 light casement windows on the basement level, and smaller 9 light casements strategically placed where the wall height did not allow for larger windows. All of these windows were original to the structure and typified the American Craftsman style through the use of natural material and multiple lights in the upper sashes and casement windows. The use of multiple lights in the lower sashes was not as common, making this house a unique example of the Craftsman style in Suffolk. Of the 29 windows the applicant has replaced, three (3) were located on the front (south) elevation facing West Washington Street and eleven (11) were located on the east elevation facing Pender Street. Two original sash windows remain on the front façade and three casement windows remain on the east façade. The remaining fifteen (15) windows that have been replaced are on the north and west elevations, with the majority having been located on the west elevation facing the structure at 504 West Washington Street. The corner location of the structure and placement of the house on the lot make all sides of this structure visible from public rights-of- way, although some views are currently obscured by vegetation. Removal of the existing vegetation, which would be permitted by the Guidelines, would lead to high visibility of the windows on all façades. When a window is documented to be beyond repair, reconstruction should be based on physical evidence and replacement windows should match the original in appearance, detail, material, profile, and overall size as closely as possible. The Guidelines specify that inappropriate materials or finishes that radically change the sash, depth of reveal, muntin configuration, the reflective quality or color of the glazing, or the appearance of the frame shall not be used. When new windows are used, the Guidelines specify that they may be constructed of painted wood, metal clad or vinyl clad. In previous cases where windows were visible from the right-of-way and served as important character defining features of a structure, the Historic Landmarks Commission has required repair and retention of original windows or replacement with like materials, profiles, and configurations. The window openings on all elevations are prominent and a cohesive part of this building’s façade, thus any windows that must be replaced and are potentially visible from adjacent streets should be wood and of the same design and profile as the original windows to maintain visual consistency and the historic integrity of the Craftsman style. In addition to the incompatibility of the proposed materials, the replacement windows lack HLC2017-024 January 11, 2017 Page 7 important character defining features that are apparent when observing the original windows. Specifically, the original windows featured multiple light muntin configurations with a noticeable muntin depth, thickness and exterior exposure that are easily evident from the street. The replacement windows that have already been installed lack the material, configuration, and details of the original windows, which places them in conflict with Chapter 4. Section C.3, of the Suffolk Historic District Design Guidelines. Additionally, the Secretary of Interior’s standards do not recommend “Changing the historic appearance of windows through the use of inappropriate designs, materials, finishes, or colors which noticeably change the sash, depth of reveal, and muntin configuration; the reflectivity and color of the glazing; or the appearance of the frame.” Prior to the replacement of the original windows, no 1/1 sash or single pane casement windows existed on this structure; therefore, none of the replacement windows match the configuration of the original windows that they replaced. Photographic evidence regarding the original windows, which are prominent features throughout the structure, indicate that many could potentially be restored instead of replaced. The original windows provided the detail and craftsmanship one would expect of a contributing American Craftsman bungalow. Fine carpentry and detailing were defining features of the style and the Arts and Crafts movement that inspired it, where good design was believed to be the result of the inherent beauty of natural materials and handcrafting. As such, the treatment of character defining features, such as windows, is vital for maintaining the historic integrity of this structure. The vinyl windows that have been installed are of an inappropritate material, profile, and configuration, and are inconsistent with the standards of the Suffolk Historic District Design Guidelines or the Secretary of Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation. Summary and Recommendations After evaluation, staff believes that the criteria of the Historic District Design Guidelines can be met based on the above findings-of-fact and the conditions outlined below. Accordingly, staff recommends the following actions with regard to the request outlined in regard to HLC2017- 024: 1. Deny the after-the-fact installation of twenty-nine (29) full divided light, double-hung sash and casement wood windows with one over one (1/1), double-hung sash vinyl windows. 2. Replace all previously installed vinyl windows with wooden windows compatible in design, profile, and configuration with the windows original to the structure. Previously removed casement windows shall be replaced with new casement windows compatible in design, profile, and configuration with the windows original to the structure. 3. Retain existing original windows on the south and east façades. Repair and repaint wood white if necessary. 4. All wooden window elements shall be painted white. 5. No further exterior improvements permitted without the issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness. HLC2017-024 January 11, 2017 Page 8 6. All required permits shall be obtained from the City of Suffolk. Attachments cc: Greenhouse Properties, property owner HLC2017-024  ZONING / LAND USE MAP HC2017-024 RM BREWE PENDE R AVE R ST HENLEY P L 34G17(A)*7 CBD W WASH INGTON S T LINDE N AVE WELLO NS ST SAINT JAMES AVE s RM JACKSO N ST HLC2017-024 500 W. Washington Street Windows Before After HLC2017-024 500 W. Washington Street Windows Before After HLC2017-024 500 W. Washington Street Windows Before After HLC2017-024 500 W. Washington Street Windows House Before After HLC2017-024 Applicant Provided Photos HLC2017-024 Applicant Provided Photos Zoning Case Activity Report January 2018 PROPERTY OWNER(s) LOCATION VIOLATION(s) JUDGEMENT INSPECTOR Raven P. Coston 222 Pinner St Zoning-Changing Windows without a COA NOV/ COA Pending Matt Greenhous Properties, LLC 500 W Washington St Zoning-Changing Windows without a COA NOV/ COA Pending Matt Zoning-Established a Church no COA/ 412 N Main, LLC 412 N Main St NOV/ COA Pending Matt Permit Refered to court/ No Shore Breeze, LLC/ Lashawn Howard 216 Grace St Zoning-Exceeding Scope of COA Matt Service Gregory Mitchell 131 Clay St Zoning- Installed Roof with no COA NOV Matt Zoning- Installed Roof with no COA Megan Church Rainey 103 Linden Ave Stop Work Order/ NOV Matt (Premier Roofing)