AGENDA CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW Regular Meeting February 21, 2018 – 5:30 p.m. City Council Chambers - City Hall BAR Members Present: Melanie Miller, chair; Tim Mohr, co-chair; Carl Schwarz; Breck Gastinger; and Emma Earnst BAR Members Absent: Corey Clayborne, Stephen Balut, and Justin Sarafin Staff Present: Jeff Werner; Camie Mess; and Carolyn McCray Call to Order: Chair – Melanie Miller calls meeting to order at 5:30 5:30 A. Matters from the public not on the agenda (please limit to 3 minutes) They were no matters from the public. B. Consent Agenda (Note: Any consent agenda item may be pulled and moved to the regular agenda if a BAR member wishes to discuss it, or if any member of the public is present to comment on it. Pulled applications will be discussed at the beginning of the meeting.) 1. Gastinger moved to approve the January 17, 2018 minutes. Schwarz seconded. Approved (5-0). 2. Certificate of Appropriateness BAR 18-02-05 501 West Main Street Tax Parcel 320175000, 320176000, 320177000 Quirk Hotel, Owner/ Jennifer D. Mullen, Esq., Applicant Additional demolitions This item was pulled from the consent agenda. Questions from the Public: No questions from the public. Questions from the Board: No questions from the board. Comments from the Public: 1. Ms. Hill: Talked about the memories she had about the doctor’s office which was also Dr. Coulter’s home. She told an anecdote about her father, during 1910, there was a whooping cough epidemic and her mother told her to go and get the doctor, she ran and ran, to get the doctor, ran Monticello Avenue to West Main Street to tell the doctor she was needed by the time they hitched up the horse and got to the house, the baby had died. When she pass by there the addition makes her remember that it was a doctor’s office and home in the same building. It bothers her that this might demolish that portion of the building. Miller: Told Ms. Hill the applicant has changed their mind and they are not going to remove the doctor’s office. 2. Jennifer Mullen, architect, she is here on behalf of the applicant and removed the request to demolish the doctor’s office, and invited her to come see the doctor’s office where he made the two room addition using brick from an Old Catholic church. 3. Jean Hyatt: Preservation Piedmont, our local historic preservation organization. Our group has worked with the City of Charlottesville for many years in an effort to preserve Main Street’s historic streetscape. Today we ask that you deny the request by the developers of the Quirk Hotel to demolish the two historic additions to the circa 1893 Wheeler-Dyer House at 501 West Main Street. The one story brick wing of the Wheeler-Dyer House was used as a doctor’s office and built between 1902 and 1920. These two century old additions are integrally connected with the story of this building and should not be removed. The house next door at 503 West Main, the Paxton Place house, ca 1820, is one of only two of the oldest remaining buildings on West Main from the ante-bellum period. The Paxton Place house was a residence for a time and also served as a funeral home and later was identified as a lodge hall. The other oldest building, just a few doors down, is the John W. Pitts House, also ca. 1820, which became the Inge Grocery Store, an integral part of African American history in Charlottesville. The Quirk Hotel developers have chosen to construct their next hotel right in the middle of our city’s very important historic district & adjacent to historically African American residences, businesses, and a school and with that decision, they also have accepted the responsibility of being good stewards of our historic buildings by following guidelines to rehabilitate and preserve them. By saving both of the Wheeler-Dyer House historic additions, the two houses will stand out as significant intact buildings and not seem to be absorbed into the hotel structure simply as facades. The developers are fortunate to have been able to acquire the next door property where the Atlantic Futons business was located as this gives them much more land to work with and should mean that they are able to preserve all of the two historic buildings. A house identical to the Wheel-Dyer house existed on this property (421 West Main) until it was destroyed by fire, maybe 40 years ago. Additionally, we are concerned about the side of the Quirk Hotel that will face onto the very narrow and quiet Commerce Street and how the hotel’s structure will respect the historically African American Jefferson School’s main entrance as well as the residential neighborhood of Star Hill. Comments from the Board: Mohr: This it is an historical addition but he thought there was a much later one that was demolished. However, right now both of the additions that she just expressed concern for are staying intact. Gastinger: Was glad to see the applicant consider the removals of these properties and it re-enforces that the Quirk project will be a good steward of these properties and is going to be a good example of appropriate preservation and development on the Main Street corridor. Schwarz moved: Having considered the standards set forth within the City Code, including City Design Guidelines for New Construction and Additions and for Demolition, I move to find that the partial demolition and proposed massing changes satisfy the BAR’s criteria and are compatible with these properties and other properties in the Downtown ADC district, and that the BAR approves the application as submitted, seconded by Earnst, Approved (5-0). C. Deferred Items 5:40 3. Certificate of Appropriateness BAR 18-01-04 632 Park Street Tax Parcel 520114000 Kaitlyn Marie Henry, Owner/ Rick Uhler, Uhler and Company, Applicant Front yard landscaping; repave driveway, new fence and retaining wall Staff report presented by Camie Mess. Applicant: Eugene Young, Waters Street Studio, assisting Chris Henry with the landscaping architectural and planning work, spoke. Questions from the Public: No questions from the public Questions from the Board: Schwarz: There is a 4ft evergreen shrub; is there a species in mind? Young: A boxwood in front, the three dogwoods right above it, the other planting along the foundation of the house will be hydrangeas, and we are still in discussion to what will be along the southern portion. He said there are already arborvitae in the back yard, a redbud and a tulip poplar canopy tree. Schwarz: Does it stop growing at 4ft or is it trimmed at 4 feet? Young: It probably grows up to 5 or 6 feet. Schwarz: I want to confirm it won’t be 8 or 10 feet. Mohr: Isn’t the biggest issue the driveway and the poplar tree? Young: Yes, both of those; currently it has already been cut Mohr: Is that going to threaten that tree? Young: It has already been cut. Rick Uhler: There are 4 or more houses on Park Street that have turn-arounds Miller: They are circular drives which is a little different Young: Given the nature of the increased traffic on this road, you can’t put a turn-around in that back yard and they don’t want to back out into Park Street. The traffic is a different condition then it was 15 years ago. Comments from the Public: No comments from the public. Comments from the Board: Gastinger: Major concern with the turnaround and it is not so much the pavement. He fears it is going to become a parking space, seeing cars parked in the front yard on Park Street is a precedent and there are several circle drives but the cars are removed from the street or parked right on the street. If there was a way to make it work where it doesn’t turn into a parking space, he feels like he could support this. In our guidelines there is a strong recommendation to account for planting out the canopy scale to that of the street. The dogwoods are going to be a little bit small while the plan could pass as is, it would be good to consider a larger tree along the southern edge. Schwarz: Looked at the driveway, less than ideal situations, in areas where it is visible, as much as there is a way to make as a turnaround but not a parking space, strongly encouraging a shade tree. Miller: Said the BAR would need a full plan that specified all of the plantings. Young: Asked is it the BARs place to tell the applicants what they want to plant? Schwarz: Told Mr. Young to read the guidelines. He said there are some areas where it is visible from Park Street. The turn-around doesn’t bother him if there was a way to make it convenient as a turn- around, but not as a parking space. Mohr: Said he agrees with Carl, maybe the turn-around is just enough to get the tail end of the car in and spin it around; he wants the retaining wall to be only on one side, and not so pronounced. He said looking at the larger scale of the street the tulip poplar is not going to be there forever so planning ahead for that makes a lot of sense. He said having a big shade tree near the house is part of the character of these houses. Miller: Said the other thing on the application is the vinyl fence, and now that has changed to wood and she suggests a darker color, with the idea that makes the fence harder to see. Gastinger moved: Having considered the standards set forth within the City Code, including City Design Guidelines for Site Design and Elements, and for rehabilitation I move to find that the proposed landscaping, new fences, walkways, and driveway cut satisfies the BAR’s criteria and guidelines and is compatible with this property and other properties in the North Downtown ADC district, and that the BAR approves the application as submitted with the following clarifications to be submitted and circulated for administrative approval: • An updated plan of the turn-around with dimensions to be clarified and explained so this is clearly a turn around and will not accommodate/be used as a parking space • Soften the edges of the turn around • Updated location of the stone retaining wall (F) on landscaping plan • A larger specimen street or canopy tree be included in the front yard, with the species and location to be determined by the owner • Provide a plant species key to the landscaping plan This is a provisional approval pending the updated plan submittal. Mohr seconded. Approved (5-0). D. New Items 6:00 4. Certificate of Appropriateness BAR 18-02-01 104 West High Street Tax Parcel 330185000 John Conover and Virginia Daugherty, Owner and Applicant Adding height to upstairs front porch railing Staff report presented by Camie Mess. Applicant: John Conover/Virginia Daugherty: the reason is it is very dangerous, and she has grandchildren and she is scared to let them out of the porch. Questions from the Public: No questions from the public. Questions from the Board: Schwarz: Will the corner post is quite a bit higher than the top rail; will the new board fit in with the current corner post? Ms. Daugherty: It will come right up to the underside of the corner post. Mohr: Is there any reason the top railing is thicker? Ms. Daugherty: That is what the carpenter said to use because of the space between the two boards. Mohr: They are almost as thick as the post. Schwarz: I am going to trust the carpenter on that one. Mohr: The maximum space is 4 inches, but it looks like 6 inches. He said to it make skinny as you can and paint the railing a darker color. Comments from the Public: No comments from the public. Comments by the Board: No comments from the board. Mohr moved: Having considered the standards set forth within the City Code, including City Design Guidelines for Rehabilitation, I move to find that the proposed addition to the railing in concept satisfies the BAR’s criteria and guidelines and is compatible with this property and other properties in the North Downtown ADC district, and that the BAR approves the application with the modification that the top rail be reduced to 4” so there is a roughly a 4” air space—not to exceed maximum allowed by code--between the two and paint the top rail (new rail) the same accent color as the current top rail. Gastinger seconded. Approved (5-0). 6:20 5. Certificate of Appropriateness BAR 18-02-03 540 Park Street Tax Parcel 520183000 Lynn and Tobias Dengel, Owner/ Keith Scott and Julie Dixon, Applicant New roof and gutters Discussion and Recommendations Staff report presented by Camie Mess Keith Scott: (did not speak in mic) Questions from the Public: No questions from the public. Questions from the Board No questions from the board. Comments from the Public: No comments from the public. Comments by the Board: Schwarz: Don’t do Philadelphia gutters if you can help it. Mohr: Philadelphia gutters are a tough one because now you can put ice and water shield on them so it doesn’t actually damage the house. It is a question of longevity; how long do they last. The half rounds are good if you have a lot of trees. Miller: The BAR has approved them many times Gastinger: The BAR has approved them, but it is a pretty defining characteristic of the house, it would be a shame to see that change. One of the strengths of how the house has been painted and the way it currently sits the downspouts have been painted so they don’t visually break of the façade as a copper downspout might. Mohr: you can do the copper downspout and paint it. Mr. Scott: said he didn’t want to paint the copper. He doesn’t disagree that there is certain complicity and beauty and his recommendation is don’t do the roof. Earnst: Said she supports the idea of not doing copper because it will stand out more and change the appearance of the half round gutters. Miller: Said since there is a lot of water coming off of that roof, she would consider exploring a one inch bigger downspout. Schwarz: The BAR has seen some pretty nice houses with Philadelphia gutters and has allowed them to be removed. Schwarz moved: Having considered the standards set forth within the City Code, including City Design Guidelines for Rehabilitation, I move to find that the proposed new copper roof and copper gutter system satisfies the BAR’s criteria and guidelines and is compatible with this property and other properties in the North Downtown ADC district, and that the BAR approves the application with the following modification that you find a way to paint the downspouts to minimize visibility and, as much as possible, locate downspouts to minimize visibility, especially at prominent corners Earnst seconded. Approved (5- 0). 6:40 6. Preliminary Discussion BAR 18-02-06 213 2nd Street SW Tax Parcel 280076000 Two Chefs LLC, Owner/ Bang Restaurant Tim Burgess, Applicant Outdoor Pergola for back patio - thespacedowntown@ gmail.com Tim Burgess: Said he brought in eleven set of plans. Mr. Burgess asked for a deferral Schwarz accepted the applicants request for deferral. Mohr seconded. Approved (5-0). Information to be provided by applicant: • Elevations and sections of proposed pergola • On renderings, show proposed benches. • Sample of wood finish. • Information on any proposed lighting. • Information on any proposed landscaping. 7:00 7. Certificate of Appropriateness BAR 18-02-02 516 Ridge Street Tax Parcel 290273000 Claire and Charles McKinley, Owner and Applicant Renovating front façade, fence, porch and walkway. Adding main floor deck Staff report presented by Jeff Werner, noted the applicant has done due diligent research on this property. Questions from the Public: No questions from the Public. Questions from the Board: Schwartz: On your front door, you are adding a wood façade over the brick, is that wood going to have finish on it or a coating? Ms. McKinley: We are envisioning satin shiny not barn looking protective finish. Gastinger: Are you going to raise the height of the brick wall? Mr. McKinley: It is the same on both sides of the free standing wall. Comments from the Public: No comments from the public. Comments by the Board: Schwarz: The changes are appropriate; the BAR needs to have cut sheets and product data sheets for the replacement windows and the doors. The upstairs window will not need to be replaced and the synthetic wood grain is a little over the top Mohr: The trim is like a mossy green, a Charleston green, iron post, a corner looks more scales and stick on the front. Gastinger: These are straight forward. The modification to the brick wall in the front is a little conceptual but the BAR will need to be able to see what the specific design is. Miller: Thank you for a very thorough application. Schwarz moved: Having considered the standards set forth within the City Code, including City Design Guidelines for Rehabilitations, for Site Design and Elements, and for New Construction and Alterations, I move to find that the proposed exterior repairs and renovations satisfy the BAR’s criteria and guidelines and are compatible with this property and other properties in the Ridge Street ADC district, and that the BAR approves the application with the following modifications to come back and be circulated for approval: • Cut sheets for the new door • Cut sheets for the windows (basement and upper levels) • Simpler garage door (no faux wood grain on doors) • Details for the front wall Mohr seconded. Approved (5-0) 7:20 8. Certificate of Appropriateness BAR 18-02-07 407 2nd Street NE Tax Parcel 330092000 Charles Lunsford II, Owner/ Kristin Cory, Applicant Rear porch infill and landscape replacement Staff report presented by Jeff Werner Questions from the Public: No questions from the Public. Questions from the Board: Gastinger: The magnolias to the left of the house, are they staying or going? He said the English ivy is very overgrown which is causing issues with the brick. A larger circle is that the shrubbery replaces magnolia, make sure it is an appropriately scaled shrubbery. Comments from the Public: No comments from the public. Comments from the Board: Miller: The addition is appropriate if meets zoning regulations, what about extended a hood over the landing. Schwarz moved: Having considered the standards set forth within the City Code, including City Design Guidelines for Rehabilitation, for Site Design and Elements, and for New Construction and Additions I move to find that the proposed changes satisfies the BAR’s criteria and is compatible with this property and other properties in the North Downtown ADC district, and that the BAR approves the application as submitted with cut sheets for the door and windows to come back and be circulated for approval. Earnst seconded. Approved (5-0). 7:40 9. Certificate of Appropriateness BAR 18-02-04 405 Altamont Circle Tax Parcel 330113000 Miles Hingeley, Owner/ Simons Young + Associates, Applicant Rear addition and roof extension Staff report presented by Jeff Werner Read a letter from a neighborhood for approval, the star magnolia, keep and preserve. Questions from the Public : No questions from the public. Questions from the Board: Gastinger: Are you planning on changing the landscape? Miller: She doesn’t see how we can approve the PVC version, the aluminum clad is in the guidelines. She said the siding she is not particular in favor of. She said it feels very much on trend which is great for today, but in 50 years it probably won’t be the case. Mr. Young: They are open to painting it. We do feel that that would be a nice look, Mohr: We would like to see a site plan. Comments from the Public: No comments from the public. Comments by the Board Mohr: Makes sense to him to clean up the roof line, since the addition faces the alley, he has reservation about the vinyl windows. Miller: [read the guidelines] Frosting the back side of the bathroom goes under the counter and it doesn’t matter. An architecturally controlled district is 360 degrees; design overall, the floating idea, in a place that is not visible. She is not in favor of the siding. Mohr: Look at houses on Park Street bay windows that were the trend, that defines, mid 2010, we can’t avoid that because it really bothers him. Gastinger: Finds it attractive. Wood is going to be used on residences for a while still it is a coarse and quite different. He thinks it is an attractive addition and nice rehabilitation of a project. He agrees with Melanie’s’ suggestions about the windows, especially for the upstairs bathroom. It is a nice project. Schwarz: He agrees with Gastinger on the windows and we have made exceptions on the windows; we did on Park Street where we allowed a window to be in-filled. Miller: Why doesn’t the kitchen work, she has one in her kitchen. You can open the windows and clean out with the dust buster. Mohr: The bathroom is a no brainer; just fill in the bottom half. Ernest: Asked are those two windows original and the smaller two replacements? Mohr: Said he would like to see some site plan information, otherwise he is okay with it. The BAR would like to know about the exterior lighting, services outside, and a landscape plan. Gastinger: It would be good to document it before contractors show up; because we have just has another issue with another house where they proceeded with all of the interior work and didn’t realize that they needed a plan for removing all vegetation. Miller: The landscape architect had no idea what was there before. Mohr: Would we give them an approval with the request to bring a landscaping plan back for approval? Miller: The BAR will need cut sheets for the replacement windows, the doors and exterior lighting. Also, any material specifics will need to come back to the BAR for approval. Mohr moved: Having considered the standards set forth within the City Code, including City Design Guidelines for New Construction and Additions, and for Rehabilitation, I move to find that the new addition satisfies the BAR’s criteria and are compatible with this property and other properties in the North Downtown ADC district, and that the BAR approves the application as submitted with the following provisos to come back and be circulated for approval: • At south elevation, when installing the proposed windows you maintain existing opening, using a panel or other treatment to infill below new windows. Consider retaining the existing 2nd floor window and re-glaze lower sash or apply filter as appropriate to screen visibility into interior bathroom. Consider storing removed windows, to allow later reinstallation. • Provide cut sheets for doors and windows. BAR expressed preference for metal doors and windows versus PVC. • Submit a site plan with lighting, paving materials, and proposed landscaping, specifically delineation for protection during construction of the star magnolia near the NE corner of the house. • Provide plan of existing landscaping. • Provide details/drawings on new rear porch and stair railing. • If concrete masonry units (CMU) used for wall supporting the new rear porch, apply parging. Schwarz seconded. Approved (4-1; with Miller opposed) E. Other Business 10. PLACE report Mohr was not at the last PLACE meeting, but there has been ongoing discussion about the comprehensive plan. I would encourage the BAR to look at that. PLACE has opened discussions with the Downtown business association to discuss lighting on the downtown mall [specifics on this can be heard on the archived BAR video.] Also, and this is not really PLACE, but the discussion about city government. 11. Set next guidelines work session date: Hoping for Wednesday March 14, 2018 (daytime) 12:00 – 2:00pm F. Adjournment 8:40pm