Historic Landmarks Commission Packets

City of Suffolk HISTORIC LANDMARKS COMMISSION November 14, 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, November 13, 2019 (757) 514-4060 PREPARED BY THE CITY OF SUFFOLK DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIVISION OF PLANNING  AGENDA Historic Landmarks Commission Meeting Thursday, November 14, 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 HLC2019-00040, submitted by Jeffrey Townsend, property owner, for after-the-fact attached rear patio addition 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. V. Old Business 1. Request for Certificate of Appropriateness HLC2019-00038, submitted by Ben Clay, applicant and property owner, for exterior material alterations on property located at 130 Brewer Avenue. The affected area is further identified as Zoning Map 34G17, Block 2 B, Parcels 18, 19, and 20, Suffolk Voting Borough, zoned CBD, Central Business District, and HC, Historic Conservation Overlay District. VI. Staff Reports 1. Enforcement Updates a. Property Maintenance b. Zoning 2. Administrative Approvals VII. Adjournment  MINUTES HISTORIC LANDMARKS COMMISSION October 10, 2019 9:00 A.M. The regular meeting of the Historic Landmarks Commission was held on Thursday, October 10, 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 William Bissell Sean Dolan, Assistant City Attorney Susan Coley Kevin Wyne, Principal Planner Mary Austin Darden Grace Braziel, Planner I Merritt Draper Connie Blair, Planning Technician Oliver Hobbs Edward King Larry Riddick Vivian Turner The meeting was called to order 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 HLC2019-00035, submitted by William Cover, applicant and property owner, for exterior improvements at property located at 109 Bosley Avenue. The property is further identified as Zoning Map 34G16(6), Block C, Parcel 7*8*9*2A+, Suffolk Voting Borough, zoned RM, Residential Medium zoning district, and HC, Historic Conservation Overlay District. The public hearing item was introduced by Chairman Hobbs, followed by a staff report from Grace Braziel, Planner I. Ms. Braziel stated that the subject property is part of the West End District of the Suffolk Historic Conservation Overlay District and features a 2.5 story house constructed circa 1930 in the Colonial Revival style. The property fronts on Gittings Street and Bosley Avenue and includes a non- contributing detached garage in the rear yard. It previously received a Certificate of Appropriateness for exterior improvements including replacement of the concrete apron around the pool, replacement of rotten fencing, and tree removal in April 2019. The applicant is proposing to replace the existing lattice and chain link fence along the western property line with a new 6-foot-tall wooden fence, to replace the section of lattice fencing on the southern side of the property with a new black aluminum fence that will also extend around the pool, and to use the same black aluminum fence to replace the lattice fence and gate that extends across the driveway. In addition, the applicant is proposing to replace the composite shingle roof on the side porch with a new composite shingle roof which meets the requirements for in kind replacement. The applicant included removal of a large limb from a pine tree along the western property line in this request; however, this request cannot be reviewed as part of the application because the tree is located on the neighbor’s property and does not belong to the applicant. Ms. Braziel explained that the proposed location of the 6-foot fence would be in the rear yard and would not be visible from either Gittings Street or Bosley Avenue. The proposed fence also connects to an existing 6-foot wooden fence. Ms. Braziel noted that the proposed aluminum fence and driveway gate would be visible from the street, but that the Guidelines state that decorative fencing is appropriate where fences will be visible from public streets in front and side yards. The Guidelines also state that chain link fencing is prohibited, thus the proposed black aluminum fencing would be more appropriate. As such, staff recommends approval of this request with the conditions noted in the staff report. The public hearing was opened. There being no speakers in favor or in opposition of the application, the public hearing was closed. The Commission briefly discussed the proposed fencing as an enhancement to the property and the presence of similar fencing nearby. A motion was made by Commissioner Riddick to approve staff’s recommendations as presented. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Bailey and approved by a recorded vote of 9-0. REQUEST FOR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS HLC2019-00038, submitted by Ben Clay, applicant and property owner, for exterior material alterations on property located at 130 Brewer Avenue. The affected area is further identified as Zoning Map 34G17, Block 2 B, Parcels 18, 19, and 20, Suffolk Voting Borough, 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 Kevin Wyne, Principal Planner. Mr. Wyne clarified that the subject property is actually zoned RM, Residential Medium zoning district. It is located within the 2004 West End Historic District of the Suffolk Historic Conservation Overlay District. The subject property features a single family home built circa 1910-1925 in the Colonial Revival style. The house is 5 bays wide with weatherboard siding, a projecting center bay, and front porch columns that rest on concrete piers. In 2012, Certificate of Appropriateness HC-2012-48 was approved for the construction of a new garage (50’ by 20’) with James Hardie-Plank siding. Construction did not begin within the six (6) month time period; therefore, the COA expired. An identical proposal was made in 2014 and the garage construction was completed. In 2005, Certificate of Appropriateness HC-2005-90AD was received to remove and reinstall existing wood siding in order to install insulation on the first floor, replace windows with new in-kind wood windows, repair and replace wood railing and columns, and to paint the walls, shutters, and dentils. 2 The applicant is proposing to replace all existing exterior siding with Hardie plank siding in a similar color. According to a provided contractor’s statement, the overall condition of the existing siding is poor due to moisture damage or brittle and cracking wood. The amount of the siding recommended for replacement by the contractor ranges from 40% on the front façade to 76% on the rear façade. It also states that there are additions with siding that does not match the original siding on the main structure. Mr. Wyne noted that the structure in question is a large, architecturally significant home, approximately 6,000 square feet in size. There is visible evidence of moisture damage; however, there is a significant portion of siding where it appears repair is feasible. In accordance with Chapter 4, Section F.2.b of the Historic District Design Guidelines in regard to wood materials, one should “repair rotten or missing sections rather than replace the entire element” and “replace wood elements only when they are rotten beyond repair.” The applicant is proposing to replace all of the existing exterior siding with James Hardie-Plank siding, which is a fiber cement siding that is described in Chapter 4, Section H.2 of the Historic District Design Guidelines. Specifically, the Guidelines note that synthetic siding such as fiber cement “can be acceptable as a substitute for the original materials where the original siding materials have been removed, where the original siding materials have deteriorated beyond repair as determined by the Historic Landmarks Commission, or to additions to the primary historic building.” Fiber cement lapboard can be designed to replicate wood materials; however, preserving and restoring existing wood materials is the first option for historic preservation and treatment. While there are portions of siding on the structure that are repairable, the Guidelines support restoring the existing siding and replacing any missing siding or siding that is damaged beyond repair with wood that matches the existing in material and design. Due to the size and visibility of this structure, repair or replacement in kind is appropriate. Mr. Wyne explained that replacing all of the existing wood siding would have a greater visual impact because the structure is large. Wood siding of good quality evolves over time and requires maintenance that adds to historic character. Synthetic siding cannot replicate the design and natural imperfections of quality wood. There will be a noticeable impact to the street, the District, and the structure itself. As such, staff recommends denial of this request. Mr. Wyne added that staff recommends approval of the following: repair the existing siding that can be repaired; replace existing siding that cannot be repaired with wood siding that matches the existing in material, size, and exposure; and paint all siding to match existing siding. The public hearing was opened and Ben Clay, applicant and property owner, spoke in favor of the application. There being no additional speakers in favor or opposition of the application, the public hearing was closed. During his statement and subsequent discussion with the Commission, the applicant mentioned his intention to replace everything on the outside of the structure, including cornices and window trim. The Commissioners had a discussion clarifying the actual work the applicant is proposing because the application is for the replacement of the siding only. In regard to the siding itself, the Commissioners noted that the finish proposed would create a false wood grain effect whereas the original siding is smooth. They requested that the applicant repair and paint a 3 portion of the existing siding for them to view and provide a mock up panel of the proposed materials for on-site comparison. Because the applicant stated his intention to replace additional materials not included in the application, the Commission agreed that the applicant should amend his request to address the true scope of work and that the entire project should be considered at once. Following this discussion, a motion was made by Commissioner Darden to table the request for 30 days to give the applicant an opportunity to submit a more complete package. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Bailey and approved by a unanimous voice vote. OLD BUSINESS: There was no old business to discuss. STAFF REPORTS: Enforcement Update: Donald Bennett, Property Maintenance Official, reported on the following properties:  118 Wellons Street – Court case will be continued until 12-5-19  222 Clay Street – Court case was dismissed  179 E. Washington Street – Court case will be continued until 11-7-19  131 Clay Street – Still working with new property owner to submit an application for a COA  181 N. Main Street – Property was fined $150.00 for code violation  127 Clay Street – Court case will be continued until 11-7-19 Zoning Update: Matthew Levy, Zoning Inspector II, reported on the following properties:  178 E. Washington Street – Court pending 11-7-19  131 Clay Street – NOV sent; has an application in at this time  237 Pinner Street – NOV sent Administrative Approvals: Ms. Jones provided a brief report on the four administrative COAs approved since the last HLC meeting in September. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned. 4  HISTORIC LANDMARKS COMMISSION Motion: To approve with Motion: To table the staff’s recommendations request for 30 days as presented 1st: Riddick 1st: Darden October 10, 2019 2nd: Bailey 2nd: Bailey HLC2019-00035 HLC2019-00038 ATTENDANCE 9-0 9-0 COMMISSIONERS PRESENT ABSENT YES NO YES NO Bailey, George X X X Bissell, William N. X X X Coley, Susan X X X Darden, Mary Austin, Vice X X X Chairman Draper, Merritt X X X Hobbs, Oliver, Chairman X X X King, Edward L. X X X Riddick, Larry X X X Turner, Vivian X X X  CITY OF SUFFOLK 442 W. WASHINGTON STREET, P.O. BOX 1858, SUFFOLK, VIRGINIA 23439-1858 PHONE: (757) 514-4060 FAX: (757) 514-4099 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Division of Planning To: Historic Landmarks Commission From: Grace Braziel, Planner I Date: November 14, 2019 Subject: REQUEST FOR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS HLC2019- 00040, submitted by Jeffrey Townsend, property owner, for after-the-fact construction of an attached rear patio 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. STAFF REPORT Overview of the Subject Property and Surrounding Area 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 (2002) 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 feature 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 is a contributing one-story commercial building that was constructed between 1926 and 1940. This building is described as having a stretcher bond brick structural system and a flat roof with simple parapet. Case History At the September 14, 2017, meeting of the Historic Landmarks Commission, request for Certificate of Appropriateness HC-2017-014 was approved to allow for construction of a new flat roof and replacement of metal coping in-kind, repointing of brick and installation of a metal gutter, vinyl clad windows and an aluminum door on the rear of the building, as well as installation of an aluminum storefront system and architectural stone skirting on the front façade. HLC2019-00040 178 E. Washington Street November 14, 2019 Page 2 As stated on all Certificates of Appropriateness, any additional improvements shall require a COA and all required permits shall be obtained from the City of Suffolk. On October 25, 2017, the property owner informed staff that the preexisting nonconforming vinyl siding and original wooden transom windows that were hidden behind the vinyl were removed without the approval of a COA. Staff informed the owner that a new after-the-fact application would be necessary to review the proposed modifications which were not approved by HC-2017-014. At the December 14, 2017, meeting of the Historic Landmarks Commission, the property owner received a COA for the following actions: 1. After-the-fact removal of the preexisting nonconforming vinyl siding and original wooden transom windows. 2. Install replacement powder coated aluminum transom windows with obscure glass that match the original transom windows in size, layout, pattern, dimensions, muntin configuration, and profile, utilizing an appropriate beige color from one of the approved paint palettes. (The powder coating of the transom a beige color was never completed). 3. Fill in the area between the ground floor storefront windows and transom windows with painted wood trim utilizing an appropriate beige color from one of the approved paint palettes. (It appears this area was filled with metal flashing or similar material instead of approved wood). On March 15, 2018 a notice of violation was issued regarding the window signage and the wall sign that had been installed on the building. On May 17, 2018, a notice of violation was issued for the installation of a covered patio. Both of these violations stem from improvements being made without the benefit of a Certificate of Appropriateness being granted prior to the installation of the improvements. As is required, the applicant was given 90 days to file an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) for these items. As it pertains to the covered patio notice of violation, the property owner filed a COA application prior to the case being forwarded to court. At the November 08, 2018, meeting of the Historic Landmarks Commission, request for Certificate of Appropriateness HLC2019-00037 was denied. The applicants request was for an after-the-fact approval of a wall mounted sign, window signs, and the addition of a covered rear patio constructed of unpainted, treated wood. The Historic Landmarks Commission recommended that the property owner work with staff to achieve an appropriate design for the covered rear patio addition, which has resulted in the application offered for consideration. The applicant submitted and got administrative approval for HLC2019-00008 for the installation of a wooden wall mounted sign to replace the previously denied internally lit wall mounted sign. Currently there is a Certificate of Appropriateness application, HLC2019-00015, administratively under review for the window signs, staff is waiting for additional information to be provided from the applicant. HLC2019-00040 178 E. Washington Street November 14, 2019 Page 3 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 November 08, 2019. Proposed Actions The applicant’s current request consists of the following actions, after-the-fact: 1. After-the-fact construction of a 438 square foot wood covered patio on the rear of the building to be painted utilizing the color black. 2. Construct a 3 x 4 brick base around all seven of the 6 x 6 wooden posts holding up the covered rear patio. Paint the white metal gutters and downspout black to match the proposed black 6 x 6 posts. 3. Paint the 3 x 7 treated wood door that was constructed across an existing alleyway, along the northwestern property line. Surrounding Characteristics As stated, the subject property is located within the East Washington Street boundary expansion. The surrounding properties consist of contributing commercial buildings constructed in the early 1900’s. A detailed description of adjacent and nearby properties is provided below. 100 Commerce Street – One-story contributing commercial building constructed between 1926 and 1940 with a stretcher bond brick structural system and a flat roof with parapet. 174 East Washington Street– One-story contributing commercial building constructed between 1926 and 1940 with a stretcher bond brick structural system and a flat roof with parapet. 180 East Washington Street– Two-story contributing commercial building constructed between 1920 and 1925 with a stretcher bond brick structural system and a flat roof with parapet. 186 East Washington Street– Contributing two-story Colonial Revival commercial building constructed circa 1920 with a frame structural system and 7-course American Bond Brick Veneer. 173-177 East Washington Street– Contributing two-story Vernacular commercial building constructed between 1920 and 1925 with an American Bond Brick Structural System and shed roof. 179 East Washington Street– Contributing two-story commercial building constructed between 1920-1925 with a Stretcher Bond Brick Structural System and a flat roof with HLC2019-00040 178 E. Washington Street November 14, 2019 Page 4 parapet. Site Modifications As noted above, the applicant is requesting an after-the-fact approval of a covered rear wood patio. The applicant has also requested to paint a plywood door black, which was constructed without a COA permit. It is located along the western property line extending across an alleyway. Applicable Regulations A. Suffolk Historic District Design Guidelines Chapter 1, Section F, Appropriate Design of Additions and Alterations for Buildings:  Changes to historic buildings should be appropriately designed to be compatible with the architecture and overall character of the historic district. Additions and alterations to buildings require careful design in order to preserve and strengthen the character of the district. To this end, repair and maintenance activity involving exterior materials, finishes, windows, doors, awnings, signage, fencing and landscaping should be carefully planned to avoid negatively affecting the district’s overall character. Chapter 4, Section F.1.b., Guidelines for Masonry:  Masonry such as brick should be used for new construction and additions where brick is the common wall material. Chapter 4, Section F.2.b., Guidelines for Wood Materials:  Keep all surfaces primed and painted. B. Secretary of the Interior Standards: As stated in the Secretary of the Interior Standards, new additions, exterior alternations, and new construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize a 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 and its environment. Staff Analysis As mentioned above, the applicant is seeking after-the-fact approval for the installation of a 438 square foot covered patio at the rear of the building constructed of unpainted, pressure treated wood. The structure includes a flat TPO (Thermoplastic Polyolefin) membrane roof that is not visible from the public right-of-way. Additionally, the covered patio has a metal gutter and one downspout, both white in color. The rear elevation does not have any public street frontage; however, it does abut a City owned parking lot and is visible from Franklin Street, which is located approximately 80’ from where the covered patio has been constructed. HLC2019-00040 178 E. Washington Street November 14, 2019 Page 5 Chapter 1, Section F. of the Historic District Design Guidelines states that, “Additions and alterations to buildings require careful design in order to preserve and strengthen the character of the district.” Specifically, attention should be given to what types of materials are used on additions to ensure that they are compatible with the traditional materials of which historic buildings are composed. Mercantile buildings in the district primarily consist of brick structures with wood trim and metal accents. While wood is an appropriate accent, it should not be a primary building material on commercial buildings. Furthermore, wood features in the Historic District should be kept primed and painted, which the covered patio currently is not. To address this deficiency, the applicant is proposing to paint the unpainted, treated wood portions of the covered rear patio with the color black. Painting the wooden components of the covered patio black would give the appearance of metal from the street and would visually be more appropriate. The applicant is also proposing to paint the white metal gutters and downspouts black to blend in with the patio. In addition to painting the unpainted wood posts black, the applicant is proposing to brick the base of the 6 x 6 wooden posts. Chapter 4, Section F.1.b. of the Historic District Design Guidelines states that, “Masonry such as brick should be used for new construction and additions where brick is the common wall material.” The subject building has a stretcher bond brick structural system; therefore, the applicant’s proposal to brick the base of the wooden posts would be appropriate for the new addition since the primary building consists of brick. Brick bases would also provide more structural interest to the patio and would tie it visually to the structure. The combination of both the proposed painted posts, gutters, and brick base would create a visually appropriate rear patio addition that is consistent with other patios throughout the Historic District. The proposed brick base would allow for the wooden posts to be compatible with the existing commercial building. The alterations to the after-the-fact covered wooden patio as proposed would not be detrimental to the historical integrity of the primary commercial structure or to the surrounding area. The applicant is requesting in addition to the proposed patio alterations, to paint a plywood door that was constructed without a Certificate of Appropriateness. No request for the construction of the plywood door was submitted or approved. The door is attached to the neighboring building along the western property line, extending across an alleyway, connecting to an existing chain link fence. The plywood door is currently being used as a barrier, but is not an appropriate type of barrier where a fence would usually be placed. Additionally, it cannot be attached to the neighboring building. The construction of the door has not been requested or approved and is not appropriate in form or materials; therefore, staff recommends denial of the request to paint the door. Summary and Recommendations Based on the previous findings-of-fact, staff recommends approval of the following actions and conditions in regard to Certificate of Appropriateness, HLC2019-00040: 1. After-the-fact construction of a 438 square foot wood covered patio on the rear of the building. All wooden elements of the patio shall be painted utilizing the color black. HLC2019-00040 178 E. Washington Street November 14, 2019 Page 6 2. Construct a 3 x 4 brick base around all seven of the 6 x 6 wooden posts holding up the covered rear patio. The brick must be compatible in color and type with the existing brick structure. 3. Paint the white metal gutters and downspouts, on the rear patio addition, black to match the proposed black 6 x 6 posts. 4. No portion of the patio may be attached to the neighboring buildings. Staff recommends denial of the following actions requested by Certificate of Appropriateness, HLC2019-00040: 1. Paint the 3 x 7 treated wood door that was constructed across an existing alleyway, along the northwestern property line. Attachments cc: Jeffrey Townsend, property owner  Suffolk EL EY S T DR RIVER Historic R VI EW Conservation ST NANSEMOND AD ST MAI JO N ES MEADE E RIV E Overlay District & N BRO N ST LAKE FO RT ST PI TC W DR R AV E AL LE N VE N CE RD National Register ST TA IE Historic Districts NS BU T LE IL L E A HK CO V V ER E KI ET E RI NG AV DU MV ND T LE R D W KA SB LA GH TH OR HI Legend W ESTERN ER O AVE ST Type of Overlay CHU IN ST E S Historic Overlay District FO R E L CR E RCH ST T DISTRICT HI L S ER NN CEDAR HILL DISTRICT (2006) ST PI E EAST WASHINGTON STREET DISTRICT (2002) W CONSTA ST NCE RD AN M AH Historic Overlay NORTH MAIN STREET DISTRICT EXTENSION (1998) PRE N T IS S T VE ORIGINAL SUFFOLK DISTRICT (1987) TH I R D A VE RE A SUFFOLK DISTRICT EXPANSION (2004) E RD MOO T WEST END DISTRICT (2004) BU T E S E D ER A V R WEST END DISTRICT EXPANSION (2004) KETTL E HC2019-00040 R ST C E AD ST N CHE S TNU T S T V A BR EW ST PE N DE A PI T CH N O Y N BRO C E ST ST MA N RK ET F I T NER N ST Disclaimer. TH E CITY OF SUFFOLK MAKES NO WARR ANTY, REPR ESEN TATION, A IN Y S OR GU ARANTEE OF ANY KIN D REGARD ING EITHER ANY MAPS OR OTH ER INFORMATION PROVID ED HEREIN OR THE SOUR CES OF SUCH MAPS OR OTHER INFORMATION. THE CITY OF SU FFOLK SPEC IFICAL LY DISC LAIMS ALL REPRESENTATIONS OR WARRANTIES, PI N DA N M EXPRESS OR IMPL IED, INCLU DING, WITHOUT LIMITATION , THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERC HANTABIL ITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTIC ULAR PUR POSE. W W AS L LA RD HI NGTON GITTI The City of Suffolk assumes no liability either for an y errors, omissions, M ILI TA R Y RD NGS S ST or ina ccu racies in the information provid ed regard le ss of the cause of such T or for any de cision made, action taken , or action not taken by the user in VE HO reliance upon an y maps o r information provid ed h erein. R A VE BA N K A K S EN A Parcel a nd Zon in g information h as been developed to pro vide a g raphic JA CK S T representation of the Real Esta te Property Tax Maps. The bound aries of an y ON S P parce l may have be en a djusted to provide a more visually pleasin g presen tation. AD ST T User should refer to instrument o f transfer (dee d or plat) fo r leg al bou ndary J AM ES locatio n a nd p erime ter or area measurements. LI ND ! ( Aerial Ph otog raphy captured March 199 9. A limite d area of th e C ity was reflow n D in March of 2001. The most up-to-date pho tography available w as use d to capture R S BR O E pla nimetric informatio n. A EY AV SM IT H SA IN T ST N AVE I T MARY L ¹ LA N D LL HA RO H S CAU S AV E ST E W AS EC A WI LS O ST HI N ST NG K Y S C BE T TO OA VIRG EN N S I N IA T T A VE LO D O NS S NT CUL COU D AD T WE LL R AM T S Y S S S T A A OR G L IN O T A CT JE F R T FER M ASON A V E RO 1:12,500 A K S FA MA SO S ST N S D IS S T CA YO R ON 1 inch = 1,042 feet S M AR GRA AVE NBY A IN AS HL E Y AV E ST CED ST City of Suffolk Department of BA T T ER Y AV E Planning & Community Development Updated : 10/29/2019 User Name: bsmith Date: 10/29/2019  ZONING / LAND USE MAP HLC2019-00040 MAR K ET ST AS T AT OG AR PEA R L NS ST T AIN S NM BAN K ST 32 RCE S T R ST WW KLIN PINN COMME ASH ST E I NG TO N ST FRA N 34G18(6)*5 D Subject Property R E WAS HINGT A ON S N T LI RO AVE CA N&W T IN S S MA AVE HALL s LN NDS EN S R OU T L OD AR S FAIR T CUL G CED User Name: bsmith Date: 10/29/2019  HLC2019-00040 178 E. Washington Street Street view of the covered patio from Franklin Street. HLC2019-00040 178 E. Washington Street All unpainted wood and white downspouts are proposed to be painted black.  HLC2019-00040 178 E. Washington Street Plywood door proposed to be painted black  PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE ENFORCEMENT UPDATE NOVEMBER 2019 ADDRESS CODE VIOLATION(S) STATUS 342 N MAIN ST PROPERTY MAINTENANCE COURT CASE SCHEDULE TO BE - PEELING AND PEELING PAINT HEARD ON 12- 5-19. - DETERIORATED ROOF - DETERIORATED PORCH - DETERIORTAED EXTERIOR WALLS 129 WELLONS ST PROPERTY MAINTENANCE COURT CASE CONTIUED UNTIL - DETERIORATED SHED ROOF 12-5-19. - REMOVE MOLD/ MILDEW FROM EXTERIOR WALLS -DETERIORATED PAINT -OPEN FOUNDATION 179 E. WASHINGTON ST PROPERTY MAINTENANCE COURT CASE CONTINUES UNTIL -DETERIORATED EXTERIOR 12-5-19. WALLS. -DETERIORATED WINDOWS AND DOOR. 131 CLAY ST PROPERTY MAINTENANCE THE NEW PROPERTY OWNER IS - DETERIORATED EXTERIOR IN THE PROCESS OF WALLS SUBMITTING AN APLLICATION - DETERIORATED EXTERIOR FOR A COA. NOTE: AWAITING DOORS STRUCTURAL ENGINEER -DETERIORATED FRONT PORCH REPORT FOR THR REAR -DETERIORATED ROOF FOUNDATION. 127 BREWER AVE PROPERTY MAINTENANCE COURT CASE SCHEDULE TO BE - PROPERTY MAINTENANCE HEARD ON 12-5-19. - PEELING AND PEELING PAINT ON WOOD SURFACES - DETERIORATED ROOF AND GUTTERS - DETERIORATED PORCH - DETERIORTAED EXTERIOR WALLS -DETERIORATED RETAINING WALL AND MASONARY 127 CLAY ST PROPERTY MAINTENANCE COURT CASE CONTINUED UNTIL - PEELING AND PEELING PAINT 12-5-19. - DETERIORATED ROOF - DETERIORATED OVERHANG - DETERIORATED PORCH Zoning Case Activity Report November 2019 PROPERTY OWNER(S) LOCATION VIOLATION(S) JUDGEMENT INSPECTOR Court Jeffrey Townsend 178 E. Washington St Covered patio without COA pending, Matt Nov. 7, 2019 Doing work without an NOV sent Andres Evelio 131 Clay St Matt approved COA 7/18/2019 Jean Claude & NOV 237 Pinner St Fence without COA Matt Marie Noel pending