Historic Landmarks Commission Packets

City of Suffolk HISTORIC LANDMARKS COMMISSION May 9, 2019 THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE HISTORIC LANDMARKS COMMISSION WILL BE HELD AT 9:00 A.M. IN CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS CITY HALL BUILDING Note: If You Cannot Attend This Meeting, Please Notify the Planning Division by 12:00 Noon, Wednesday, May 8, 2019 (757) 514-4060 PREPARED BY THE CITY OF SUFFOLK DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIVISION OF PLANNING  AGENDA Historic Landmarks Commission Meeting Thursday, May 9, 2019 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 HLC2019-00014, submitted by Michael Beale, applicant, on behalf of N & N Land Company, LLC, property owner, for exterior material alterations and fencing on property located at 239 West Washington Street. The property is further identified as Zoning Map 34G17, Block A, Parcels 160 and 161*162, Suffolk Voting Borough, zoned CBD, Central Business District, and HC, Historic Conservation Overlay District. 2. National Register of Historic Places Nomination, DHR No. 133-0101, Samuel Eley House, 4801 Pruden Boulevard V. Old Business VI. Staff Reports 1. Enforcement Updates a. Property Maintenance b. Zoning 2. Administrative Approvals VII. Adjournment  MINUTES HISTORIC LANDMARKS COMMISSION February 14, 2019 9:00 A.M. The regular meeting of the Historic Landmarks Commission was held on Thursday, February 14, 2019 at 9:00 a.m., in the Council Chambers of Suffolk City Hall, 442 W. Washington Street, Suffolk, Virginia, with the following persons present: MEMBERS PRESENT: STAFF: George Bailey Claire Jones, Secretary Susan Coley Karla Carter, Assistant City Attorney Mary Austin Darden Kevin Wyne, Principal Planner Merritt Draper Grace Heagy, Planner I Oliver Hobbs Connie Blair, Planning Technician Edward King Larry Riddick Vivian Turner The meeting was called to order by Chairman Hobbs. The newest commission member, George Bailey, was introduced by Chairman Hobbs. The roll was called by Ms. Jones and the Chairman was informed that a quorum was present. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: The minutes of the previous meeting were approved as presented. NEW BUSINESS: Request for Certificate of Appropriateness HLC2019-00001, submitted by Gerry L. Jones, applicant, on behalf of the City of Suffolk, property owner, for demolition of a commercial building and associated site improvements on property located at 108 Commerce Street. The property is further identified as Zoning Map 34G18, Block A, Parcels 239, 240, 241*241A, 242, and 243, zoned CBD, Central Business District and HC, Historic Conservation Overlay District. The public hearing item was introduced by Chairman Hobbs, followed by a staff report from Grace Heagy, Planner I. Ms. Heagy stated that the application is a request to demolish a single story non- contributing commercial building and to provide site improvements to the neighboring parking lot. The subject property includes five (5) tax parcels located along Commerce Street, making it a part of the East Washington Street Historic District (2002) of the Suffolk Historic Conservation Overlay District (1987). The building proposed for demolition is vacant, and formerly served as the Office of Real Estate Assessor for the City of Suffolk, which was relocated to the Suffolk City Hall in 2014. Ms. Heagy stated that 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. The subject property features a non-contributing commercial structure built around 1960. Ms. Heagy noted at the time of nomination, it would not have been contributing based on age, but it would be considered contributing based on age today. The nomination form notes that the non-contributing structures in the area lack stylistic characteristics, as is the case with the subject building. This building consists of a solid poured concrete foundation and has a wood frame structural system with stucco and a side gable asphalt shingle roof. It has been determined that the structure does not contribute to the architectural character or integrity of the district. Ms. Heagy stated that the property in question is located on the back side of a strip of contributing commercial buildings along East Washington Street, which are a cohesive group of similar size and scale that present a unified block face. The later Assessor’s building is not compatible due to its proximity to the rear of these buildings, which impedes access, and to its gable roof, which makes it appear out of scale with its neighbors. Ms. Heagy explained that the subject structure is largely surrounded by parking lots that can be accessed from either Commerce Street or Franklin Street. To the east are contributing residential properties facing the lot along Franklin Street that are located within the original Suffolk District. They are Italianate-style houses that were constructed in the late 1800’s. Ms. Heagy stated that the applicant is proposing to demolish the existing building located at 108 Commerce Street and to expand the existing parking lot in the entire area of demolition to accommodate additional parking spaces. The applicant is also proposing site improvements to the existing parking lot, which include reconfiguring of parking spaces, providing new landscaping, and installing six (6) new light fixtures. The proposed demolition and site improvements will increase the total number of parking spaces by 17. The new light fixtures are a black, colonial style light that will improve the overall environment in the area. The additional lighting proposed is compatible with existing fixtures in the District and are the same style used at City Hall. Ms. Heagy explained that the Courthouse parking area is listed as a short-term redevelopment opportunity in the Suffolk Downtown Master Plan as the Festival and Market Square entertainment concept. This concept looks at utilizing the courthouse parking lot as an event space and explores offering infrastructure such as a market shed, stage, plaza, bathrooms and storage. The courthouse parking area could experience a loss of 40 spaces. As compensation, the project includes a recommendation to demolish the former Real Estate Assessor’s building to help regain any lost spaces. In conclusion, Ms. Heagy stated that Chapter 8, Section C, of the Historic District Guidelines outlines the criteria when determining the appropriateness of demolishing or removing buildings. Staff analyzed each of the Guidelines and found that, due to the prior use of the building relocating to another place and because the structure itself is not architecturally or historically significant, its demolition would have 2 little to no impact on the character of the District. In addition, the proposed enhancements to the surrounding parking lot will provide additional lighting and landscaping that is compatible with existing fixtures in the District and will improve the overall environment in the area. As such, staff recommends approval based on the findings-of-fact and the conditions noted in the staff report. The public hearing was opened and Mr. Gerry L. Jones, applicant, spoke in favor of the application, noting long-standing issues with flooding, mold and mildew, and potential public safety issues with vacant buildings. There being no other speakers, the public hearing was closed. The Commission discussed the condition of the building and the need for better maintenance of buildings in the District. They also discussed the proposed improvements to the parking lot and the potential benefits to the surrounding area. A motion was made by Commissioner Riddick to approve staff’s recommendation as presented. The motion was seconded by Commissioner King and approved by a recorded vote of 8-0. OLD BUSINESS: There was no old business to discuss. STAFF REPORTS: Zoning Update: Matthew Levy, Zoning Inspector I, reported on the following properties: • 131 Clay Street – Found guilty, fined • 178 E. Washington Street – Covered patio, no COA, court pending • 178 E. Washington Street – Signs, found guilty, fined in court 2/7/19 • 216 Grace Street – New NOV issued Enforcement Update: Donald Bennett, Property Maintenance Official, reported on the following properties: • 120 W. Finney Avenue – Reinspection scheduled on 2/15/19 • 122 W. Washington Street – Scheduled for court on 3/7/19 • 118 Pinner Street – Fined $1,350.00 on 1/3/19 • 342 N. Main Street – Court case scheduled to be heard on 3/7/19 • 131 Clay Street – Scheduled for court 4/4/19 3 Administrative Approvals: Ms. Jones provided a brief report on eight administrative COAs approved since the last HLC meeting in November and noted that copies of each were provided in the meeting packet. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned. 4  HISTORIC LANDMARKS COMMISSION Motion: Motion: To approve with staff recommendations as presented 1st: 1st: Riddick 2nd: February 14, 2019 2nd: King HLC2019-01 ATTENDANCE VOTE: 8-0 COMMISSIONERS PRESENT ABSENT YES NO YES NO Bailey, George X X Coley, Susan X X Darden, Mary Austin, Vice X X Chairman Draper, Merritt X X Hobbs, Oliver, Chairman X X King, Edward L. X X Riddick, Larry X X Turner, Vivian X X  CITY OF SUFFOLK 442 W. WASHINGTON ST., P.O. BOX 1858, SUFFOLK, VIRGINIA 23439-1858 PHONE: (757) 514-4060 FAX: (757) 514-4099 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Division of Planning To: Historic Landmarks Commission From: Kevin M. Wyne, AICP, Principal Planner Date: May 9, 2019 Subject: REQUEST FOR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS HLC2019- 00014, submitted by Michael Beale, applicant, on behalf of N & N Land Company, LLC, property owner, for exterior material alterations and fencing on property located at 239 West Washington Street. The property is further identified as Zoning Map 34G17, Block A, Parcels 160 and 161*162, 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 239 West Washington Street, which is part of the 2002 District Expansion of the Original Suffolk District. The most common building form noted in this second boundary expansion is the brick-fronted commercial structure. These buildings are categorized as commercial in style or vernacular. Examples can be seen in one to three story versions, with three to five bays on the facade, and are capped with a flat roof behind an ornate parapet. Buildings often feature large show windows and an entry on or off center. Other common features include oriel windows, brickwork paneling, and brick friezes and cornices either corbeled or in geometric patterns. Horizontal elements framed by vertical components, such as rowlock sills and stringcourses abutting multi-story pilasters, were often favored in this type of vernacular commercial building form. According to the National Register of Historic Places, the subject property was constructed between 1910 and 1925 and represents one of the brick-fronted commercial buildings described above. The building features painted brick, a single storefront with a recessed entryway and a stepped parapet roofline. An open air patio area is located to the west of the structure on a separate parcel. The subject property also includes an eight foot wide alley deeded for access to the surrounding properties in 1890. The current owner of these properties has provided written HLC2019-00014 May 9, 2019 Page 2 permission to use this alley. Case History The subject property received a Certificate of Appropriateness in 2015 for the installation of a sign, construction of a shelter for barbecue smokers, and the painting of the patio fence white. These improvements were related to the establishment of the restaurant that most recently occupied the building. Prior to that, in 2006, a Certificate of Appropriateness was granted for the installation of a sign and the painting of previously painted brick. These improvements were also related to the opening of a restaurant in the building. Public Notice This request has been duly advertised in accordance with the public notice requirements set forth in Section 15.2-2204 of the Code of Virginia, as amended, and with the applicable provisions of the Unified Development Ordinance. A notice, containing a copy of the staff report, was also provided to the applicant on May 3, 2019. Proposed Actions The applicant’s request includes the following actions: 1. Install one (1) 42” wide aluminum storefront (bronze) door, with glass panels on each side on the west elevation to replace an existing, non-contributing double door made of plywood. 2. Install one (1) 36” wide aluminum storefront (bronze) door, with window panels on the west elevation of the building to replace an existing window that has been boarded with plywood. The window will include seven (7) panes, including a pane over the installed door. All trim will be aluminum with a bronze finish. 3. Replace an existing wood picket fence and wood paneled fence with a 4’ tall aluminum, wrought iron style fence finished in black. 4. Install a window on the east elevation of the building to replace an existing window that has been boarded with plywood. The window will include eight (8) panes. All trim will be aluminum with a bronze finish. Condition Statement The applicant did provide pictures and a statement for the east side window that is proposed to be reopened, as the window underneath remains. The statement indicates that most of this window’s frame is missing. The current windows have many missing and/or broken panes, and moisture damage to the frames, casing, and muntins. Pictures provided by the applicant show windows with little to no salvageable metal left, meaning that sanding and restoring the existing window is not feasible. HLC2019-00014 May 9, 2019 Page 3 Surrounding Characteristics A detailed description of adjacent and nearby properties is provided below. 219-225 West Washington Street – Non-contributing one-story structure, which was built between 1960 and 1975. This vernacular commercial building features a concrete structural system with brick veneer and a flat roof with a parapet. 248 West Washington Street – A contributing commercial building constructed circa 1920. The original storefront windows and entry door have been replaced but decorative brick corbelling remains on the façade. 251-253 West Washington Street – A contributing one-story, two-bay commercial building constructed circa 1920. The structure has a stepped parapet roofline topped by a brick header course. 258-262 West Washington Street – A contributing two-story 1920’s commercial style building with tiled storefronts on the first floor and replacement windows on the second floor. Site Modifications As noted above, a portion of this application includes the replacement of an existing, modern residential style wooden fence, with a 4’ tall aluminum fence with a black finish. The current fence is divided into two (2) sections, and is located between the structure subject to this request and the building located at 251-253 West Washington Street. The front section of fence consists of a wood picket fence, and is approximately 3 ½ in height. The back section of fence is a standard privacy fence consisting of vertical wood panels, and stands approximately 6’ tall. Applicable Regulations A. Suffolk Historic District Design Guidelines Chapter 4, Section C.3 Guidelines for Window Preservation:  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 HLC2019-00014 May 9, 2019 Page 4 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. Chapter 4, Section D. Doors:  Door openings are a major character and style-determining feature of an historic building.  Many of the doors are wood with different types of panels.  Avoid changing the number, location, or size of doors by enlarging or reducing the original door opening or installing replacement doors that do not fit the original openings. HLC2019-00014 May 9, 2019 Page 5  Base reconstruction on physical evidence from the original door or on old photographs if they are available and use appropriate materials, finishes, and details. 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. D.2. Guidelines for Doors  Maintenance and Repairs: Maintain and repair doors by patching, splicing, consolidating or otherwise reinforcing the original material. Wood that appears to be rotted because of peeling paint and separated joints may in fact be sound enough to repair. Reuse serviceable door hardware and locks.  Restore Doors: Uncover and repair covered-up doors. If the door is no longer needed it should be fixed in place. Where applicable, the back side of any glass in the door will be frosted, screened, painted black, or shuttered so that it appears from the outside to be used.  Maintain Historic Door Arrangements: Avoid changing the number, location, or size of doors by enlarging or reducing the original door opening or installing replacement doors that do not fit the original openings.  Preserve Original Doors: Only replace doors when they are missing or beyond repair. Base reconstruction on physical evidence from the original door or on old photographs if they are available and use appropriate materials, finishes, and details. Avoid substituting stock, mass-produced doors from building supply firms for original historic doors.  Storm Door Guideline: If purchasing a storm door, look for one that is mostly glass so that it does not cover up the historic door. Paint aluminum storm doors to match other doors or trim.  Use Compatible Door Styles: When replacing doors, use door styles that relate to those found in the district. Chapter 6, C.2 Guidelines for Mercantile Buildings:  Preserve and rehabilitate original window/door openings, window sashes, window/door muntin patterns and window/door trim to maintain and strengthen not HLC2019-00014 May 9, 2019 Page 6 only the building's historic character but also that of the surrounding area as well. B. Secretary of the Interior Standards As recommended by the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation, the historic character of a property shall be retained and preserved. Each property shall be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or architectural elements from other buildings, shall not be undertaken. Replacement of historic or missing features shall be substantiated by documentary, physical, or pictorial evidence. Staff Analysis The western elevation of the subject property features several windows that are boarded up and painted red. The applicant proposes to reopen the window aligning with the existing privacy fence and reconfigure it to include a single leaf metal and glass door. The remainder of the existing window would be reopened and a new aluminum, divided lite window would be installed consisting of seven (7) lites. Also on the western façade of the building, the applicant is proposing to remove an existing, non-contributing double door made of plywood. The double door would be replaced with a single aluminum framed storefront door flanked by storefront glass panes on each size. The opening will maintain its current size, and aside from being slightly wider, the door will match the other storefront door proposed for installation on this elevation. The two new doors are proposed to allow access to the outdoor patio and are set back from the street behind fencing. Aluminum doors are commonly used on other commercial storefronts in the Historic District. Also, as these are new doors, they should not artificially mimic historic doors that may be found on contributing structures throughout the District. The newly installed patio access door will mostly utilize an existing window opening, thus the creation of new opened area on the building will be minimized. Because these doors are proposed to replace an existing window and non-contributing doors, reuse of the existing materials could not achieve the same access and preserve original material. On the eastern elevation, the applicant proposes to replace an existing window with a new aluminum paneled window (bronze finish). Presently, this window is boarded up with painted plywood. The window is proposed to match the one on the western elevation and consist of eight (8) panes. This elevation includes three windows of the same type, all currently obscured by boards and painted the same color as the building. Because of the alignment of the street and the adjacent parking lot, this façade appears to be more visually prominent than the western. In addition, in the event that the remaining windows can be repaired, all windows on this façade should match. While the proposed window on the western façade would be visible from the public right-of- way, it is located on a secondary elevation with a less prominent façade than the front of the building and the eastern façade. As such, this window would not be a primary focal point of the structure and will be minimally visible from the eastbound approach on West Washington Street, primarily due to the close proximity of a neighboring structure. It is important to note that the HLC2019-00014 May 9, 2019 Page 7 proposed window will match the style and color of the storefront door and windows on the front of the structure. Additionally, the proposed window, while not an exact replica, would provide a configuration that attempts to pay homage to the original window. The contractor has provided evidence detailing the condition of the windows which show windows in a state of disrepair. The current windows have many missing and/or broken panes, and moisture damage to the frames, casing, and muntins. The pictures provided show windows with little to no salvageable steel left, meaning that sanding and restoring the existing windows is not feasible. In conversations with the applicant, opportunities to restore the existing windows have been explored; however, due to previous repair work, and the methods available to restore the windows, restorative work would result in more damage to what is left of the original materials. Although the replacement west façade window is not identical to the existing window it is replacing, the Historic Landmarks Committee has approved similar projects in the past. Examples can be found at 75 Commerce Street (HC-2009-51) and 326-340 East Washington Street (HC-2007-56). Both commercial buildings have been rehabbed and feature aluminum framed, paneled windows that replaced original windows. These replacements, while not replications of the previous windows, preserved the size of the original opening and offered a window style that honored the character of the previous window. These projects offer guidance and examples of when these materials and window styles can be installed in a fashion where they are compatible and complimentary of existing original window styles on a building and other commercial structures throughout the District. With the applicant proposing to replace the existing window with not only a new window, but also a door, the proposal would not allow for the preservation of this window. In the case of the east façade where additional original windows remain, any replacement window should match the profile and configuration of the existing windows. Such replacement windows are still produced and are made in appropriate configurations and materials. The final component of this requests includes the proposed replacement of two sections of wooden, residential style fence with an aluminum style fence designed to mimic wrought iron. The Design Guidelines do not establish recommendations for the placement of fencing on commercial properties; however, this type of fencing is of a style that is more appropriate for a commercial site within the District. The current wood fencing is more appropriate for a residential property, and thus its replacement with a wrought iron style aluminum fence would result in an improvement to the existing condtion. The fence will meet height requirements and will allow for a more attractive and functional patio area for the proposed business. Overall, all of the western façade improvements and fencing replacement would result in an improved condition over the current state of these features on the structure and the property. In regard to the western façade window, the opening itself will be preserved, and while the proposed window will differ in style from the historic windows, the proposed window will make an effort to honor the original windows in their design. The need to replace the window stems from the applicant’s effort to improve access to the structure. This is also the case for the replacement of the existing double doors on this façade. The existing window is covered by painted plywood and the removal of this cover and the installation of a new window, that would HLC2019-00014 May 9, 2019 Page 8 be compatible with surrounding buildings and similar projects in the District, is encouaraged. In regard to the eastern façade, original windows remain on this façade, albeit covered by plywood, which are not slated for improvement as a part of this request. Any changes proposed for the eastern façade windows, such as the change proposed by the applicant, should take into account the additional original windows. The new window as proposed, would replace a 16 lite window with an 8 lite window. Additionally, the design would differ from the existing window and the other existing windows on this façade that may be uncovered in the future. This façade is also more visually prominent than the western façade due to street alignment and an adjacent parking lot. Furthermore, unlike the western façade proposal, the change in window configuration does not stem from the creation of a new access point. As such, care should be taken to ensure any replacement windows are compatible with the existing windows on this façade. The in-kind replacement of this window is supported by the Guidelines and recommended by staff. Summary and Recommendations Based on the previous findings-of-fact, staff recommends approval of the following actions requested by Certificates of Appropriateness, HLC2019-00014, with the conditions noted below: 1. Install one (1) 42” wide aluminum storefront (bronze) door, with glass panels on each side on the west elevation to replace an existing, non-contributing double door made of plywood. 2. Install one (1) 36” wide aluminum storefront (bronze) door, with window panels on the west elevation of the building to replace an existing window that has been boarded with plywood. The window will include seven (7) panes, including a pane over the installed door. All trim will be aluminum with a bronze finish. 3. Replace an existing wood picket fence and wood paneled fence with a 4’ tall aluminum, wrought iron style fence finished in black. 4. Install a window on the east elevation of the building to replace an existing window that has been boarded with plywood. The window shall be aluminum or similar material and include 16 panes matching the existing window in profile and configuration. 5. Any additional improvements shall require a Certificate of Appropriateness. 6. All required building and zoning permits shall be obtained from the City of Suffolk. Attachments HLC2019-00014  ZONING / LAND USE MAP HLC2019-00014 NORTH ST MAR K ET S T T C LA YS PINE ST CHESTNUT ST AS T AT OG W WASHING AR TON ST NS LE E S T 34G17(A)*160 T SOUTH S T AS AT OG AR SS s JAC KS ON ST S ST R LE RD NA LI CHA O C AR CHE RD RRY ST NA LI RO CA User Name: bsmith Date: 4/17/2019 HLC2019-00014 239 W. Washington Street Subject Property Subject Property HLC2019-00014 239 W. Washington Street HLC2019-00014 239 W. Washington Street HLC2019-00014 239 W. Washington Street HLC2019-00014 239 W. Washington Street Western Window Current Condition HLC2019-00014 239 W. Washington Street HLC2019-00014 239 W. Washington Street Door Style Example HLC2019-00014 239 W. Washington Street HLC2019-00014 239 W. Washington Street HLC2019-00014 239 W. Washington Street Eastern Window Current Condition HLC2019-00014 239 W. Washington Street Kevin M Wyne From: Ralph Nahra <tower112llc@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2019 1:33 PM To: ralphnahra; Kevin M Wyne Subject: Re: 239 W. Washington Street Dear Mr. Wyne, In response to your email of April 17, 2019, please be advised that Mr. Beale has N&N Land Co. permission to reconstruct the fence on this portion of the property that is designated as a private right of way. Thank you! Ralph Nahra On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 1:19 PM ralphnahra <ralphnahra@cox.net> wrote: Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone -------- Original message -------- From: Kevin M Wyne <kwyne@suffolkva.us> Date: 4/17/19 12:06 PM (GMT-05:00) To: ralphnahra@cox.net Subject: 239 W. Washington Street Good Afternoon Mr. Nahra, We are reviewing a certificate of appropriateness application for 239 W. Washington Street, submitted by Mr. Michael Beale. A part of the application includes the replacement of a 4’ fence in the patio area. A portion of this area has been deeded right-of-way between the two adjacent properties (239 and 245 W. Washington Street), which are both owned by your company, N & N Land Company, LLC. As a formality, we will need in writing from you, as a representative of N & N Land Company, LLC, a letter or email granting Mr. Beale permission to reconstruct the fence on this portion of the property that is designated as a private right-of-way. If you have any questions, please let me know. Thank you, 1  CITY OF SUFFOLK 442 WEST 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 MEMORANDUM TO: Historic Landmarks Commission FROM: Claire Jones, Secretary RE: National Register Nomination – Samuel Eley House, DHR No. 133-0101 DATE: May 9, 2019 Attached for your review and comment, please find a copy of the National Register of Historic Places nomination for the Samuel Eley House, which is located at 4801 Pruden Boulevard in the City of Suffolk. The subject property contains a house and several accessory structures that have been surveyed by a qualified historic preservation firm and determined to be locally significant in the area of architecture. The nomination to recommend listing the property on the National Register and the Virginia Landmarks Register is scheduled to be presented to Virginia’s State Review Board and Historic Resources Board on June 20, 2019. Because Suffolk is a Certified Local Government, the Historic Landmarks Commission is entitled to a sixty-day comment period to review the proposed nomination of this property and provide any comments to the Virginia Department of Historic Resources prior to its presentation to the state review boards. The nomination being offered for consideration was initiated as mitigation for the visual impact stemming from construction of a cell tower, which was located in close proximity to the property in 2014. The City retained the services of Commonwealth Preservation Group to prepare this nomination on behalf of the property owner who supports this action. Staff has also reviewed the nomination and supports the listing of this property on National Register of Historic Places. Should the Historic Landmarks Commission wish to offer formal support for this nomination, it may wish to do so in the form of a motion to recommend it for approval to the state review boards. This action would then be relayed to the state prior to the scheduled meeting date. Should you have any questions pertaining to this nomination, please do not hesitate to contact me. Zoning Case Activity Report May 2019 PROPERTY OWNER(S) LOCATION VIOLATION(S) JUDGEMENT INSPECTOR Window signs and window tint, Court Jeffrey Townsend 178 E. Washington St Matt no COA 6/6/2019 Court Jeffrey Townsend 178 E. Washington St Covered patio without COA Matt pending Shore Breeze, LLC Summons c/o LaShawn 216 Grace St Exceeding Scope of COA Matt pending Howard