Historic Landmarks Commission Packets

HISTORIC LANDMARKS COMMISSION February 8, 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, FEBRUARY 7, 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, February 8, 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 HLC2017-030, submitted by George Haley, property owner, for exterior material alterations and additions to property located at 139 and 147 East Washington Street. The property is further identified as Zoning Map 34G18, Block A, Parcel 282*283, 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  MINUTES HISTORIC LANDMARKS COMMISSION January 11, 2018 9:00 A.M. The regular meeting of the Historic Landmarks Commission was held on Thursday, January 11, 2018, 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 Bob Goumas, Assistant Director of Planning Merritt Draper Karla Carter, Assistant City Attorney Oliver Hobbs Kevin Wyne, Principal Planner Edward King Jillian Scott-Hale, Office Assistant Vivian Turner Mary Austin Darden MEMBERS ABSENT: Randy Hicks The meeting was called to order by Vice-Chairman Hobbs. The roll was called by Mr. Goumas and the Vice-Chairman was informed that a quorum was present. The minutes of the previous meeting were approved as presented. 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. The first item of business was introduced by the Vice-Chairman, followed by report by Kevin Wyne, Principal Planner. Mr. Wyne stated the property is zoned CBD, Central Business District and serves as a single family residence. 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. 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. Mr. Wyne stated that 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 in accordance with 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. The applicant requests after-the-fact approval of the replacement 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. A condition statement was submitted by Mr. Roy C. Burden, a Class A Contractor, 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. Mr. Wyne stated that replacing windows solely because of peeling paint, broken glass, stuck sashes, and high air infiltration is not recommended, as these conditions, in themselves, are no indication that windows are beyond repair. Mr. Wyne noted the three dormer windows that had been replaced on the front elevation facing W. Washington Street and showed pictures demonstrating the character defining detail and craftsmanship of the original windows and how clearly the replacement windows lack those details. Mr. Wyne noted that on the east elevation of Pender Street façade, eleven original windows had been replaced, with only two original 12 light casement windows and one nine light casement window remaining. From Pender Street, you can also easily see the replacement dormer windows located on the rear 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. Mr. Wyne stated that the District Guidelines and the Secretary of Interior Standards offer a great deal of guidance in regards to the treatment of historic windows. Specifically, 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. In this case, the window openings on all elevations are prominent and a cohesive part of this building’s architectural style, 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. Mr. Wyne stated that in addition to the incompatibility of the proposed materials, the replacement windows lack 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 inappropriate 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. As proposed, the applicant’s request is not compatible with the District Guidelines or the Secretary of Interior Standards. However, staff believes that the criteria of the Historic District Design Guidelines can be met with the following conditions: 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. The public hearing was opened and there being no speakers in favor or in opposition, the public hearing was closed. The Commission discussed denial of the application without conditions, given that the applicant was advised of the requirements prior to window replacement, proceeded with inappropriate replacement windows without a permit, and did not attend to address this matter with the HLC. Denial without conditions would require the applicant to return the windows to the original state or apply for a new COA. Commissioner Darden noted that staff included recommendations to correct the violation, which would not require the applicant to return to the HLC for a new COA. Commissioner Draper emphasized the fact that the applicant would need to correct this violation in either case and also noted the need to retain the remaining historic material in the City. A motion was made by Commissioner Draper to deny the request without conditions. The motion was seconded by Commissioner King. After discussion of the motion, a substitute motion was made by Commissioner Darden to approve staff’s recommendation as presented. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Turner and passed by a recorded vote of 6-0. 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 216 Grace Street – Referred to court 131 Clay Street - Installing roof without COA, Notice of Violation issued 103 Linden Avenue – Installing roof without COA, Notice of Violation issued There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned.  HISTORIC LANDMARKS COMMISSION Motion: To Approve Application 1st: Darden January 11, 2018 2nd: Turner ATTENDANCE HC-2017-024 VOTE: 6-0 COMMISSIONERS YES NO PRESENT ABSENT Coley, Susan M. X X Darden Mary Austin, X X Draper, Merritt X X Hicks, Randy: Chairman X *Hobbs, Oliver, Vice X X Chairman 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: February 8, 2018 Subject: REQUEST FOR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS HLC2017-030, submitted by George Haley, property owner, for exterior material alterations and additions to property located at 139 and 147 East Washington Street. The property is further identified as Zoning Map 34G18, Block A, Parcel 282*283, 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 139 and 147 East Washington Street between Main Street and Commerce Street. This property is part of the 2002 East Washington Street Expansion of the Suffolk Historic Conservation Overlay District. According to the National Register of Historic Places Inventory, the most common building form noted in this district is brick-fronted Italianate or Vernacular style commercial structures. These commercial structures usually consist of large show windows and flat roofs, many of which have ornate parapets and central recessed entranceways. According to the National Register of Historic Places Nomination Form, the subject property was constructed circa 1950-1965 as an auto-oriented commercial building and was listed as a contributing structure in the Historic District. The building consists of a one-story Vernacular structure featuring a 5-course American Bond Brick Structural System and flat roof. The front façade originally featured an angled storefront that was characteristic of mid-century modern architecture, making it unique to the Suffolk Historic District. Since the period of significance, this property has undergone substantial renovations that removed many of the original features, thus compromising the property’s historic integrity and its contributing status to the Suffolk Historic Conversation Overlay District. HLC2017-030 February 8, 2018 Page 2 Case History The most recent Certificate of Appropriateness granted for the subject property was HC2015- 016, which was approved by the Historic Landmarks Commission on August 13, 2015. This COA allowed the original angled storefront wall located on the north (front) elevation to be rebuilt in a straight alignment, which removed the main defining feature of the building’s mid- century modern architecture. The redesigned storefront consisted of new aluminum windows with raised PVC decorative panels, as well as a brick veneer skirt. A set of double doors with raised panels and a new decorative column (to wrap the existing column) with a brick base were also approved on the north elevation; however, the double doors and redesigned column were not installed. Upon a site visit to the property, it was brought to staff’s attention that a small fence was installed on the front elevation between the column and building wall without a COA. The COA approved in 2015 also allowed the installation of one (1) matching exterior door with raised panels on the east elevation facing the parking lot and one (1) matching door on the rear elevation facing the alley. The preexisting garage door openings on the west elevation were approved to be filled in with matching brick and mortar. No new windows were approved to be installed on any elevation other than the front façade; however, several windows were installed on the east, west, and south elevations without a COA. The approved elevations from HC2015- 016 are attached to this staff report for your reference and comparison. The following COAs have also been approved for this property:  HC-2003-04 – A Certificate of Appropriateness was approved by the Historic Landmarks Commission for the demolition of a 4,398 square foot, two-story abandoned warehouse located to the rear of the subject parcel. The stated purpose of the request was to facilitate future construction or parking on the site.  HC-2003-27AD – Approved the construction of a brick retaining wall.  HC-2007-04 – A Certificate of Appropriateness was approved by the Historic Landmarks Commission for the demolition the “rear 30 feet of the existing building to make way for the Downtown Connector road consistent with the Downtown Initiatives Plan as adopted in 1998 by City Council.”  HC-2010-77AD & HC-2015-017AD – Approved like-kind repairs to the flat roof. Public Notice Public notice of this meeting was published in the newspaper and notices were mailed to adjacent property owners. Proposed Actions The applicant’s request consists of the following actions organized by building elevation. Front/north elevation facing East Washington Street: 1. Install two (2) new black metal doors with raised panels (to come into compliance with the previously approved front doors from application HLC2015-016). HLC2017-030 February 8, 2018 Page 3 East elevation facing the parking lot on the subject parcel: 1. Remove four (4) existing fixed aluminum windows on the east elevation facing the parking lot and replace them with four (4) fixed aluminum windows and raised panels that match the front elevation (in order to make both facades consistent). The panels will be painted Geddy Gray (CW-720). 2. Install four (4) fixed aluminum sixteen (16) light windows on the east elevation. 3. Install one (1) new concrete ramp and wooden handrail to be painted Bruton White (CW-710) to match the brick building walls. 4. Install one (1) additional black metal door consisting of raised panels to match the other proposed exterior doors. Condition Statement Not applicable for this application. Surrounding Characteristics As stated, the subject property is located within the East Washington Street boundary expansion. The surrounding properties consist of a combination of non-contributing and contributing commercial buildings constructed as early as 1900 and as recently as 1985. A detailed description of adjacent and nearby properties is provided below. 101 East Washington Street – Non-contributing two-story brick bank building constructed circa 1985-2000 featuring a flat roof. 122-124 East Washington Street – Contributing two-story Italianate commercial building constructed circa 1900-1914. This building features brick veneer and a shed roof. 125 East Washington Street – Contributing two-story Colonial Revival commercial building constructed circa 1923. This building features brick veneer and a shed roof. 127-131 East Washington Street – Contributing two-story Italianate commercial building constructed between 1905-1920. This structure consists of brick veneer and a shed roof. 153 East Washington Street – Contributing one-story Vernacular commercial building constructed between 1950-1960 with a brick exterior and shed roof. 155 East Washington Street – Contributing one-story Vernacular commercial building constructed between 1950-1960 with a brick veneer exterior and shed roof. Site Modifications The only site modification proposed with this application is a request to install one (1) concrete ramp along the east elevation in order to provide ADA access from the parking lot. HLC2017-030 February 8, 2018 Page 4 Applicable Regulations A. Suffolk Historic District Design Guidelines Chapter 4, Sections C and D:  Windows and door openings are a major character and style-determining feature of an historic building. These elements visually define the directional emphasis and proportions of the façade as well as the style. It is very important that the windows of an historic building be preserved where possible to maintain their size and details.  Use Compatible Door Styles: When replacing doors, use door styles that relate to those found in the district. Chapter 6, Section C.2 Guidelines for Mercantile Buildings:  Preserve and rehabilitate historic mercantile display windows at the street level to not only restore the building's original appearance, but also to encourage street-level retail uses and foster a pedestrian-friendly environment. Chapter 6, Section F:  To achieve ADA compliance for many older historic buildings which were not built with at-grade entrances the addition of access ramps and lifts is a necessity. If designed carefully and sensitively, access ramps and lifts can usually be added to historic buildings without substantially altering their historical appearance. The building code controls the design of ramped access. o Ramps which rise over 6 inches are required to have a slope no greater than 1:12. Handrails are required on each side and a landing is required on each end and at changes in direction of the ramp. o Ramps which rise less than 15 inches in height are required to have handrails without guardrails. Landings are required at each end and at changes in direction of the ramp. Ramps should be hidden with landscaping or a low screen wall or fence. Rails may be simple wrought iron to minimize their appearance or hidden with a wall or fence. o Ramps which rise more than 15 inches in height above the ground, are required to have guardrail pickets or slats which will prevent people from falling through the rail. Ramps should be hidden with landscaping or a low screen wall or fence. Chapter 7, Sections A and F:  New infill construction in the Historic Conservation Overlay District should contribute to and emphasize the characteristics that define the district's uniqueness. To this end, new construction should complement and not distract from the district's historic character and features.  Windows- The rhythm and spacing of windows across the façade of new buildings should be based on typical historic spacing and sizes. With this in mind, mercantile storefronts often have more horizontal elements and a higher ratio of window-to-wall than the upper stories of the same building. Furthermore, windows, cornices, water tables, storefront windows, sign friezes, and other horizontal design elements should relate to the height of similar adjacent elements. HLC2017-030 February 8, 2018 Page 5 B. Secretary of the Interior Standards The Secretary of the Interior Standards, which are included in Appendix A of the Historic Guidelines, state the following as it pertains to new alterations to historic properties: New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property. Staff Analysis As previously stated, the subject property has been substantially altered such that many of the original mid-century modern features have been removed and the building is no longer contributing to the Historic District. As recommended in the Historic District Design Guidelines, exterior alterations to non-contributing buildings should be designed to complement and not detract from historic properties in the district. Therefore, new alterations should take their design cues from surrounding structures and utilize consistent materials, where appropriate, without artificially mimicking historic elements. The newly proposed windows and doors should relate to other window and door styles found in the district. Metal raised panel doors are appropriate for the north (front) elevation of this building as it no longer contains mid-century modern architecture and the storefront windows now consist of a more traditional design. The proposed doors are the same as the previously approved doors from HC2015-016, which were not installed. Currently, the boarded up front doors are not in compliance with the previously approved elevations and they detract from the building’s appearance. In the approved elevations from HC2015-016, an existing column on the right side of the storefront was required to be refaced with a new brick base and decorative column. This work was not completed; hence, it is recommended that this work be included as part of the new COA. Upon a site visit to the property, it was brought to staff’s attention that a small fence was installed on the front elevation between the column and building wall without approval. This fence detracts from the storefront appearance and is uncharacteristic of the Historic District; therefore, it should be removed. Solid metal security doors are currently in place on the east and south elevations, which are not in compliance with the approved elevations from HC2015-016. The exterior door on the west elevation is currently boarded up; therefore, it also does not comply with the previous elevations. The three (3) aforementioned doors should be replaced with decorative raised panel doors in order to comply with the previously approved elevations, as well as to create consistency throughout the facades, and improve the overall aesthetic of the building. In regard to the proposed windows on the east elevation, since matching storefront windows and raised panels were previously approved on the front elevation, the proposed fixed windows consisting of black frames and raised panels would create consistency on the building. In addition, new windows would provide improved visibility between the public right of way and the commercial use. The second window style proposed consists of a fixed, divided-light, aluminum window consisting of sixteen (16) lights. This window style is similar to the original windows on the west elevation; thus, it is appropriate, provided that the windows utilize exterior HLC2017-030 February 8, 2018 Page 6 muntins. The neighboring property located at 75 Commerce Street also utilizes similar fixed, divided-light, aluminum windows. As noted in the Historic District Design Guidelines, new windows should relate to historic rhythm and spacing. While the subject building was originally constructed as a service station, it has since been converted into office space; thus, it is fitting to consider allowing additional windows to support the reuse of the property. Furthermore, the neighboring historic building to the right has a similar ratio of windows to wall. Lastly, in regard to the proposed ADA ramps on the east elevation, ramps are permitted in the Historic District provided that they are installed at an appropriate location to lessen the visual impact on the public right of way and avoid interference with significant architectural features, as discussed in Chapter 6 of the Design Guidelines. Both of the proposed ramps are situated far back from East Washington Street, adjacent to the parking lot, where they are not highly visible or impactful to the building’s architecture. Please be advised that the proposed ramps must comply with the Uniform Statewide Building Code. Summary and Recommendations Based on the previous findings-of-fact, staff recommends approval of the following actions requested by Certificate of Appropriateness, HLC2017-030, with the conditions noted below: Front/north elevation facing East Washington Street: 1. Install two (2) new black metal doors with raised panels, consistent with the submitted elevations. East elevation facing the parking lot on the subject parcel: 1. Remove four (4) existing fixed aluminum windows on the east elevation facing the parking lot and replace them with four (4) fixed aluminum windows and raised panels that match the front elevation. The panels shall be painted Geddy Gray (CW-720 or equivalent) in order to match the panels on the north elevation. 2. Install four (4) fixed aluminum sixteen (16) light windows with exterior muntins in accordance with the submitted elevations. 3. Install one (1) new concrete ramp and traditional wooden handrail, consistent with the submitted elevations. The handrail shall be painted Bruton White (CW-710 or equivalent) to match the brick building walls. The ramp must comply with the Uniform Statewide Building Code. 4. Install one (1) additional black metal door consisting of raised panels to match the other proposed exterior doors. In addition, staff recommends approval of the following actions with conditions. Front/north elevation facing East Washington Street: 1. Reface the existing column on the right with a new brick base to be painted Bruton White (CW-710 or equivalent) and decorative column to be painted Geddy Gray (CW-720 or equivalent), substantially in accordance with the submitted elevations and existing paint colors. HLC2017-030 February 8, 2018 Page 7 2. Remove the wood fence located between the column and building face. East elevation facing the parking lot on the subject parcel: 1. Retain three (3) existing aluminum fixed windows with black frames on the east elevation; however, exterior muntins must be installed to create sixteen (16) divided lights in accordance with the submitted elevations or they shall be replaced accordingly. 2. Retain the existing concrete ramp on the east elevation. Remove the wooden handrail and replace it with a more traditional wooden handrail, consistent with the submitted elevations. The handrail shall be painted Bruton White (CW-710 or equivalent) to match the brick building walls. Compliance with the Uniform Statewide Building Code must be verified. 3. Replace one (1) existing solid grey metal door with a black metal door consisting of raised panels (to come into compliance with the door style approved from application HLC2015-016). Rear/south elevation facing the alley: 1. Retain one fixed (1) aluminum window with black frame and add exterior muntins to create sixteen (16) divided lights, or replace accordingly, to be consistent with the submitted elevations. 2. Replace the existing solid grey metal door with a black metal door consisting of raised panels to match the other exterior doors that are proposed. West elevation: 1. Retain one (1) existing fixed aluminum window (towards the rear) with black frame and add exterior muntins to create sixteen (16) divided lights, or replace accordingly, to be consistent with the submitted elevations. 2. Replace the existing side door with a black metal door consisting of raised panels (to come into compliance with the door style approved from application HLC2015- 016). Attachments cc: George Haley, property owner HLC2017-030  ZONING / LAND USE MAP HLC2017-030 ST CAR E RCE OL I C OM M RO NA L IN RD AR D NM CA AI N ST CBD ST K LIN FRA N E WAS H I N GT O N ST 34G18(A)*282*283 T CE S M ER ST AIN C OM SM AVE HALL s FRRD T AN S MOR AR S G T CE D FAIR G RO U NDS LAN E HLC2017-030, 139 and 147 East Washington Street Existing conditions of the subject property looking at the north (front) elevation: 1 HLC2017-030, 139 and 147 East Washington Street Existing east elevation: 2 HLC2017-030, 139 and 147 East Washington Street Existing east elevation: Location of proposed ramp and handrail, new windows, and replacement door on east elevation: 3 HLC2017-030, 139 and 147 East Washington Street Existing windows, ramp, and handrail on east elevation installed without a COA. (The door shown is not in compliance with previous COA): Existing south/rear elevation (Door not in compliance with previous COA, window installed w/o COA): 4 HLC2017-030, 139 and 147 East Washington Street Existing west elevation: West elevation (The door is not in compliance with the previous COA. Preexisting windows not under review): 5 HLC2017-030, 139 and 147 East Washington Street Property prior to renovations in 2015: 6 Proposed Elevations for HLC2017-030 Previously Approved Elevations from HC2015-016 Zoning Case Activity Report February 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 Referred 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)