CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW Regular Meeting July 21, 2020 – 5:30 p.m. Remote meeting via Zoom Packet Guide This is not the agenda. Please click each agenda item below to link directly to the corresponding staff report and application. B. Consent Agenda 1. Submit for BAR record: Front railing at 430 N. 1st Street (BAR 18-07-02) 2. Certificate of Appropriateness Application BAR 20-07-01 119 W. Main Street (Bizou) Tax Parcel: 330260000 Owner: Walters Building, LLC Applicant: Tim Burgess Fence at rear of building 3. Certificate of Appropriateness Application BAR 20-07-02 105 E. Main Street (101-111 E. Main Street) Tax Parcel: 330248000 Owner: First and Main Charlottesville LLC Applicant: Christie Haskin/Woodard Properties Install door at window opening 4. Certificate of Appropriateness Application BAR 20-07-03 120 Oakhurst Circle Tax Parcel: 110025000 Owner: Tenth and Main, LLC Applicant: Bill Chapman New driveway and parking C. New Items 5. Certificate of Appropriateness Application BAR 20-07-05 320 W. Main Street Tax Parcel: 290018000 Owner: 320 West Main LLC Applicant: Robert Nichols/Formwork Design Exterior alterations and signage BAR Agenda July 21, 2020 1 6. Certificate of Appropriateness Application 20-07-04 518 17th Street NW Tax Parcel: 050066000 Owner: Charlottesville VA House Corp – Alpha Phi Applicant: George Stone Replace slate roof 7. Certificate of Appropriateness Application 20-07-06 411 1st Street N Tax Parcel: 330107000 Owner: Andrea and Reidar Stiernstrand Applicant: Julie Kline Dixon/Rosney Co. Architects New door at window opening 8. Certificate of Appropriateness Application 20-07-07 422 1st Street N Tax Parcel: 330100000 Owner: NONCE, LLC Applicant: Julie Kline Dixon/Rosney Co. Architects Addition to residence 9. Certificate of Appropriateness Application 20-07-08 418 E. Jefferson Street (Renaissance School) Tax Parcel: 530040000 Owner: 18 East Jefferson Street, LLC Applicant: Bill Adams/Train Architects Window repairs and replacements 10. Certificate of Appropriateness Application 20-07-10 506 Park Street Tax Parcel: 530123000 Owner: Presbyterian Church Ch’ville Trust Applicant: Karim Habbab/BRW Architects Addition to Fellowship Hall BAR Agenda July 21, 2020 2 Submission for BAR record: Front railing at 430 N. 1st Street (BAR 18-07-02) On July 17, 2018, the BAR approved the following CoA application. Certificate of Appropriateness Application BAR 18-07-02 430 North 1st Street; Tax Parcel 330088100 George and Austine Howard, Owner/ Scott Weiss, Applicant Addition and Modifications Motion: Schwarz moved having considered the standards set forth within the City Code, including City Design Guidelines for New Construction and for Rehabilitations, I move to find that the proposed new additions and modifications to the original house satisfy 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 modifications: • Proposed railing detail must be submitted to staff to be circulated to the BAR for approval. • Photos showing proposed brick next to existing brick to be submitted to staff to be circulated to the BAR for approval. • Color choices to be submitted to for administrative approval. • The BAR does not approve the request to paint the existing exterior brick. Lohendro seconded. Approved (7-0). Certificate of Appropriateness Application BAR 20-07-02 105 E. Main Street (101-111 E. Main Street) Tax Parcel: 330248000 Owner: First and Main Charlottesville LLC Applicant: Christie Haskin/Woodard Properties Install door at window opening Contents (Click to link directly to PDF page) • Staff Report • Staff Photos • Historic Survey • Application Link back to Packet Guide. City of Charlottesville Board of Architectural Review Staff Report July 21, 2020 Certificate of Appropriateness BAR 20-07-02 105 E. Main Street Tax Parcel: 330248000 Owner: First and Main Charlottesville LLC Applicant: Christie Haskin/Woodard Properties Install door at window opening Background Year Built: 1916 District: Downtown ADC District Status: Contributing 101 and 105 East Main Street are two abutting commercial buildings on Charlottesville’s Downtown Mall, both constructed in 1916. The two three-story buildings are clad in pressed brick, and each has two bays of paired sash windows on the upper floors. The east building (105 East Main Street) is crowned with a marble tablet, inscribed “Allegree-Flannagan Building, 1916.” Prior BAR Review There have been previous requests to demolish these buildings in 1988 (Jefferson National Bank), 1997 (Wachovia Bank), and 2000 (D&R Development Company). March 2000 – D&R Development Company submitted an application to demolish four buildings. BAR voted 7-2 to deny application. D&R filed an appeal to City Council but did not pursue it. June 2000 – The BAR deferred four separate requests for demolition, and requested that the City hire an impartial engineering firm to evaluate the feasibility of using the properties. August 2000 – The BAR denied the four requests for demolition based on the engineer’s report. September 18, 2000 – BAR denial appealed to City Council. Council voted to deny the request to demolish except for: (a) 107 E. Main Street; (b) the two-story structure attached to and located 105 E. Main (July 16, 2020) 1 behind 105 E. Main Street; and (c) all of the building at 111 E Main Street except for its E. Main Street façade. This demolition permit has expired. Application  Submittal: Woodard Properties summary dated June 26, 2020: Photo illustration at rear window, location map with building photos, and illustration of proposed new door and side lite (three pages). Request to remove the existing window and metal grate and install into the opening a new entry door with side lite. Recommendations and Discussion This opening is at the rear elevation of the building and will accommodate use of the interior space. Staff recommends approval of this CoA with the following conditions:  Retain and store the existing window and metal grate, should the opening be later restored.  The existing masonry opening—width, height and arch--is not altered other than below the existing window.  Provide cut sheets of the proposed door, side lite, frame, and hardware. Suggested Motion Approval: Having considered the standards set forth within the City Code, including City Design Guidelines for Rehabilitation, I move to find that the proposed window removal and new door installation satisfies the BAR’s criteria and is compatible with this property and other properties in the Downtown ADC District, and that the BAR approves the application as submitted with the following conditions:  Applicant to retain and store the existing window and metal grate, should the opening be later restored.  The existing masonry opening—width, height and arch--is not altered other than below the existing window.  Provide to staff for the BAR archives cut sheets on the proposed door, side lite, frame, and hardware. Denial: Having considered the standards set forth within the City Code, including City Design Guidelines for Rehabilitation, I move to find that the proposed r window removal and new door installation does not satisfy the BAR’s criteria and is compatible with this property and other properties in the Downtown ADC District, and that for the following reasons the BAR denies the application as submitted for the following reasons:… Criteria, Standards, and Guidelines Review Criteria Generally Sec. 34-284(b) of the City Code states that, in considering a particular application the BAR shall approve the application unless it finds: (1) That the proposal does not meet specific standards set forth within this division or applicable provisions of the Design Guidelines established by the board pursuant to Sec.34-288(6); and (2) The proposal is incompatible with the historic, cultural or architectural character of the district in which the property is located or the protected property that is the subject of the application. 105 E. Main (July 16, 2020) 2 Pertinent Standards for Review of Construction and Alterations include: (1) Whether the material, texture, color, height, scale, mass and placement of the proposed addition, modification or construction are visually and architecturally compatible with the site and the applicable design control district; (2) The harmony of the proposed change in terms of overall proportion and the size and placement of entrances, windows, awnings, exterior stairs and signs; (3) The Secretary of the Interior Standards for Rehabilitation set forth within the Code of Federal Regulations (36 C.F.R. §67.7(b)), as may be relevant; (4) The effect of the proposed change on the historic district neighborhood; (5) The impact of the proposed change on other protected features on the property, such as gardens, landscaping, fences, walls and walks; (6) Whether the proposed method of construction, renovation or restoration could have an adverse impact on the structure or site, or adjacent buildings or structures; (7) Any applicable provisions of the City’s Design Guidelines. Pertinent Guidelines for Rehabilitations C. WINDOWS 1) Prior to any repair or replacement of windows, a survey of existing window conditions is recommended. Note number of windows, whether each window is original or replaced, the material, type, hardware and finish, the condition of the frame, sash, sill, putty, and panes. 2) Retain original windows when possible. 3) Uncover and repair covered up windows and reinstall windows where they have been blocked in. 4) If the window is no longer needed, the glass should be retained and the back side frosted, screened, or shuttered so that it appears from the outside to be in use. 5) Repair original windows by patching, splicing, consolidating or otherwise reinforcing. Wood that appears to be in bad condition because of peeling paint or separated joints often can be repaired. 6) Replace historic components of a window that are beyond repair with matching components. 7) Replace entire windows only when they are missing or beyond repair. 8) If a window on the primary façade of a building must be replaced and an existing window of the same style, material, and size is identified on a secondary elevation, place the historic window in the window opening on the primary façade. 9) Reconstruction should be based on physical evidence or old photographs. 10) Avoid changing the number, location, size, or glazing pattern of windows by cutting new openings, blocking in windows, or installing replacement sash that does not fit the window opening. 11) Do not use inappropriate materials or finishes that radically change the sash, depth of reveal, muntin configuration, reflective quality or color of the glazing, or appearance of the frame. 12) Use replacement windows with true divided lights or interior and exterior fixed muntins with internal spacers to replace historic or original examples. 13) If windows warrant replacement, appropriate material for new windows depends upon the context of the building within a historic district, and the age and design of the building. Sustainable materials such as wood, aluminum-clad wood, solid fiberglass, and metal windows are preferred. Vinyl windows are discouraged. 14) False muntins and internal removable grilles do not present an historic appearance and should not be used. 15) Do not use tinted or mirrored glass on major facades of the building. Translucent or low (e) glass may be strategies to keep heat gain down. 105 E. Main (July 16, 2020) 3 16) Storm windows should match the size and shape of the existing windows and the original sash configuration. Special shapes, such as arched top storms, are available. 17) Storm windows should not damage or obscure the windows and frames. 18) Avoid aluminum-colored storm sash. It can be painted an appropriate color if it is first primed with a zinc chromate primer. 19) The addition of shutters may be appropriate if not previously installed but if compatible with the style of the building or neighborhood. 20) In general, shutters should be wood (rather than metal or vinyl) and should be mounted on hinges. In some circumstances, appropriately dimensioned, painted, composite material shutters may be used. 21) The size of the shutters should result in their covering the window opening when closed. 22) Avoid shutters on composite or bay windows. 23) If using awnings, ensure that they align with the opening being covered. 24) Use awning colors that are compatible with the colors of the building. L. Rear of Buildings The area behind commercial buildings is often forgotten and neglected. This area may be a utilitarian space for deliveries and storage of discarded goods. However, in some cases the rear of the building may provide the opportunity for a secondary entrance, particularly if oriented to a public alley. The appearance of the back area then becomes important to the commercial district and to the individual business. Customers may be provided with direct access from any parking area behind the building. In these cases, the back entrance becomes a secondary entrance to the store and is the first contact the customer makes with the business. 1) Meet all handicapped accessibility requirements. 2) Consolidate and screen mechanical and utility equipment in one location when possible. 3) Consider adding planters or a small planting area to enhance and highlight the rear entrance, and create an adequate maintenance schedule for them. 4) Retain any historic door or select a new door that maintains the character of the building and creates an inviting entrance. 5) Note building and ADA codes when and if changing dimensions or design of entrance. 6) Windows define the character and scale of the original façade and should not be altered. 7) If it is necessary to replace a window, follow the guidelines for windows earlier in this chapter. 8) If installation of storm windows is necessary, follow the guidelines for windows earlier in this chapter. 9) Remove any blocked-in windows and restore windows and frames if missing. 10) Security grates should be unobtrusive and compatible with the building. 11) Avoid chain-link fencing. 12) If the rear window openings need to be covered on the interior for merchandise display or other business requirements, consider building an interior screen, and maintain the character of the original window’s appearance from the exterior. 13) Ensure that the design of the lighting relates to the historic character of the building. 14) Consider installing signs and awnings that are appropriate for the scale and style of the building. 15) Design and select systems and hardware to minimize impact on the historic fabric of the building. 16) Ensure that any fire escapes meet safety regulations and that no site elements inhibit proper egress. 17) Ensure that any rear porches are well maintained; and if used as upper floor entrance(s), are well lit and meet building codes while retaining their historic character. 105 E. Main (July 16, 2020) 4 105 East Main Street Staff Photos Figure 1: View from East Market Street to lot behind 105 East Main Street. Figure 2: Oblique view towards rear of 105 East Main Street and window proposed for door conversion. L==r= d _ LANDMARK SURVEY IDENTIFICATION BASE DATA Street Address: 105 & 107 West Main Street Historic Name: Letterman Building Map and Parcel: 33-256, 33-257 Date/Period: 1899, 1911 Census Track & Block: 1-312 Style: Victorian Present Owner: Pappas Y Makris/Rausch-Stine Real Height to Cornice: Address: 107 W. Market St. Estate Height in Stories: 3 Present Use: Bar and Retail Store Present Zoning: M-I Original Owner: Letterman Company Land Area (sq. ft.): 6045 Original Use: Department Store Assessed Value (land + imp.): 105,100 ARCHITECTURAL DESCRIPTION The Letterman Company building is of no identifiable style, but rather a good example of late Victorian eclecticism. Above the periodically altered ground-floor display windows of the two businesses; in the separate halves, the bui Iding presents a four-bay, two-storey facade: two arched central bays are flanked by projecting pavi II ions. Construct-ion is of grey, pressed brick (painted red on the No. 107 side). Three projecting courses alternating with two inset create the appearance of rusticated banding across the facade. In the flanking pavil lions, a single, one+over+one+ light sash window with rectangular transom I ight is located at the second floor, and a square single-pane half-window lights a low third-storey. Both second and third floor windows are covered with large, rusticated brick jack arches above granite lintels. Central bays are formed by a large, shallow bay window which reaches to the third floor and which thenrcont lnues above the third floor level as a semi-circular thermal 'tlindow. A brick surround borders the window, inset below an.arch of molded brick supported on pilasters. Pilasters are of rusticated brick with a short fluted section capped by a pseudo-classical capital at the top. A heavy, ornate, classical style cornice with shapped modillions crowns the facade on a parapet wall. A shed roof of standing-seam· tin drains gently to the First Street side. With the exception of the rebuilt corner section (about 25 feet square) the building extends back along First Street as a two storey structure. Before alterations in 1911, the Letterman building extended a full six bays - four central arches flanked by the corner pavillions.- HISTORICAL DESCRIPTION When the Letterman Company formed in January 1899, S. Letterman sold tOe the company the lot he owned on the north- west corner of Main and First Streets (City DB 9-222). Simultaneously, the Letterman Co. deeded the property in trust to John M. White as security for a total of $25,000 in bonds (DB 9-224,,06 9-232) probably at least partially a construction loan. Tax records of 1900 note a "building added". The building sold in May 1911 at auction for debts due under the above deeds of trust, and Isaac Hutzler was high bidder (DB 22-269). Hutzler made substantial changes, removing two of the four central, arcaded bays and moving the eastern (corner) pavil Iion over in their place. The corner lot (#101,27' 10" width) was then sold to the Jefferson,·.National Bank (DB 22-311), who built a new facade but left the rear intact. The remainder of the Letterman Bui Iding was divided: i.n two and sold separately in 1913 and 1914 to W. T. Walp (#105, DB 25-367) and to T.C. Conlon (#107, DB 26-432). Walp operated a department store at #105 until 1926, when he rented, and eventually sold in 1945 (DB 122-402) .to William Pappas, who opened the "New York Billiar.dParlor" now more commonly known as''The 6rass Rail". Gus Pappas n9w owns and operates his father's business at #105, whi le the most recent tenant of #107 is "Joe The Motorists Fri·end". GRAPHICS CONDITIONS SOURCES Fa i r City Reco rds LANDMARK CO.MMISSION -DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT, SEPTEMBER,1974 ·"~:;'~;;?~~fY;:{~:~:?':':~:?~:?471;¥r1q:'~[~~~~?;~I _ .. : -:..~'.:.:'.' :::,-.. :".'_. "', '".": /::;;.~" '~-,,;;'.:-:': ... f}/c1~a.-- U~- P£rl; ~ C t. Cl/l/o ITa-, .,r, !Ze ;:-, r$ t /-:::-c ItJ •. r: - JtpOD Board of Architectural Review (BAR) Certificate of Appropriateness Please Return To: City of Charlottesville Department of Neighborhood Development Services P.O. Box 911, City Hall Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 Telephone (434) 970-3130 Please submit ten (10) hard copies and one (1) digital copy of application form and all attachments. Please include application fee as follows: New construction project $375; Demolition of a contributing structure $375; Appeal of BAR decision $125; Additions and other projects requiring BAR approval $125; Administrative approval $100. Make checks payable to the City of Charlottesville. The BAR meets the third Tuesday of the month. Deadline for submittals is Tuesday 3 weeks prior to next BAR meeting by 3:30 p.m. First and Main Charlottesville LLC Owner Name___________________________________ Christie Haskin, Woodard Properties Applicant Name______________________________________ 330248000 105 East Main Street; Rear window to egress door Parcel Number__________________________ Project Name/Description______________________________________ 105 East Main Street, Charlottesville, VA 22902 Project Property Address____________________________________________________________________________ Signature of Applicant Applicant Information I hereby attest that the information I have provided is, to the 105 East Main Street, Charlottesville, VA 22902 Address:______________________________________ best of my knowledge, correct. _____________________________________________ christie@woodardproperties.com Email:________________________________________ SCHaskin 6/2/2020 __________________________________________ N/A Phone: (W) _________________ 757-647-3303 (C) _______________ Signature Date Christie Haskin 6/2/2020 __________________________________________ Property Owner Information (if not applicant) Print Name Date First and Main Charlottesville LLC Address:______________________________________ Property Owner Permission (if not applicant) 224 14th Street, Charlottesville, VA 22903 _____________________________________________ I have read this application and hereby give my consent to anthony@woodardproperties.com Email:________________________________________ its submission. 434-971-8860 Phone: (W) _________________ 434-989-6739 (C) _______________ 6/2/2020 _ __________________________________________ Signature Date Do you intend to apply for Federal or State Tax Credits No Anthony Woodard 6/2/2020 _________________________________________ for this project? _______________________ Print Name Date Description of Proposed Work (attach separate narrative if necessary):__________________________________ Replacing an existing window in the rear of the building with a door for egress. ______________________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________________ List All Attachments (see reverse side for submittal requirements): Image of the existing conditions and an elevation of the intended door system ______________________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________ For Office Use Only Approved/Disapproved by: ______________________ Received by: ___________________________ Date: _______________________________________ Fee paid: ___________Cash/Ck. # _________ Conditions of approval: _________________________ Date Received: _________________________ ____________________________________________ Revised 2016 ____________________________________________ HISTORIC DISTRICT ORDINANCE: You can review the Historical Preservation and Architectural Design Control Overlay Districts regulations in the City of Charlottesville Zoning Ordinance starting with Section 34-271 online at www.charlottesville.org or at Municode.com for the City of Charlottesville. DESIGN REVIEW GUIDELINES: Please refer to the current ADC Districts Design Guidelines online at www.charlottesville.org. SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: The following information and exhibits shall be submitted along with each application for Certificate of Appropriateness, per Sec. 34-282 (d) in the City of Charlottesville Zoning Ordinance: (1) Detailed and clear depictions of any proposed changes in the exterior features of the subject property; (2) Photographs of the subject property and photographs of the buildings on contiguous properties; (3) One set of samples to show the nature, texture and color of materials proposed; (4) The history of an existing building or structure, if requested; (5) For new construction and projects proposing expansion of the footprint of an existing building: a three- dimensional model (in physical or digital form); (6) In the case of a demolition request where structural integrity is at issue, the applicant shall provide a structural evaluation and cost estimates for rehabilitation, prepared by a professional engineer, unless waived by the BAR. APPEALS: Following a denial the applicant, the director of neighborhood development services, or any aggrieved person may appeal the decision to the city council, by filing a written notice of appeal within ten (10) working days of the date of the decision. Per Sec. 34-286. - City council appeals, an applicant shall set forth, in writing, the grounds for an appeal, including the procedure(s) or standard(s) alleged to have been violated or misapplied by the BAR, and/or any additional information, factors or opinions he or she deems relevant to the application. 105 E Main Street 6/26/2020 Our Intent: To install a door into an existing window opening. *Door specification 3rd page* Current New For illustration only. See page 3 for door detail. 105 E Main Street B C A Project location and views View A View B View C 105 E Main Street White Single Panel Steel Construction Security Glass Certificate of Appropriateness Application BAR 20-07-01 119 W. Main Street (Bizou) Tax Parcel: 330260000 Owner: Walters Building, LLC Applicant: Tim Burgess Fence at rear of building Contents (Click to link directly to PDF page) • Staff Report • Staff Photos • Historic Survey • Application Link Back to Packet Guide City of Charlottesville Board of Architectural Review Staff Report July 21, 2020 Certificate of Appropriateness Application BAR 20-07-01 119 West Main Street Tax Parcel 330261000 Walters Building, LLC, Owner; Tim Burgess and Vincent Derquenne, Applicants Wood fence at rear of building Background Year Built: 1898 (117-121 West Main) District: Downtown ADC Status: Contributing The Walters Building accommodated numerous tenants in the early twentieth century, including a furniture store, a hardware store, and a china store. Later in the century, the building housed a Piggly-Wiggly grocery store. The pressed-brick building has storefronts on both its south and west elevations, standing three stories tall at the front and dropping to two stories in the rear. Traces of old signs painted on the south façade are still visible. (Historic survey attached.) Prior BAR Actions None. Application  Submittal: Plan view and elevation sketches, photographs of proposed fence design and stain color, and gate hardware. Request for CoA to install sections of wood fencing at the rear of the building. Discussion Staff recommends approval as a Consent Agenda item with the condition that the fence height does not exceed 6’-0”. 119 West Main Street (July 16, 2020) 1 Suggested Motions Approval: Having considered the standards set forth within the City Code, including City Design Guidelines for Rehabilitations, I move to find that the proposed fencing satisfies the BAR’s criteria and is compatible with this property and other properties in the Downtown ADC District, and that the BAR approves the application as submitted with the following conditions:  Fence height will not exceed 6’- 0”.  Fence will be either painted or have an opaque stain—color to be submitted to staff prior to application. Denial: Having considered the standards set forth within the City Code, including City Design Guidelines for Rehabilitations, I move to find that the proposed fencing does not satisfy the BAR’s criteria and is not compatible with this property and other properties in the Downtown ADC, and that for the following reasons the BAR denies the application as submitted: Criteria, Standards, and Guidelines Review Criteria Generally Sec. 34-284(b) of the City Code states that, in considering a particular application the BAR shall approve the application unless it finds: (1) That the proposal does not meet specific standards set forth within this division or applicable provisions of the Design Guidelines established by the board pursuant to Sec.34-288(6); and (2) The proposal is incompatible with the historic, cultural or architectural character of the district in which the property is located or the protected property that is the subject of the application. Pertinent Standards for Review of Construction and Alterations include: (1) Whether the material, texture, color, height, scale, mass and placement of the proposed addition, modification or construction are visually and architecturally compatible with the site and the applicable design control district; (2) The harmony of the proposed change in terms of overall proportion and the size and placement of entrances, windows, awnings, exterior stairs and signs; (3) The Secretary of the Interior Standards for Rehabilitation set forth within the Code of Federal Regulations (36 C.F.R. §67.7(b)), as may be relevant; (4) The effect of the proposed change on the historic district neighborhood; (5) The impact of the proposed change on other protected features on the property, such as gardens, landscaping, fences, walls and walks; (6) Whether the proposed method of construction, renovation or restoration could have an adverse impact on the structure or site, or adjacent buildings or structures; (7) Any applicable provisions of the City’s Design Guidelines. Pertinent Design Review Guidelines for Site Design C. Walls and Fences 1) Maintain existing materials such as stone walls, hedges, wooden picket fences, and wrought- iron fences. 2) When a portion of a fence needs replacing, salvage original parts for a prominent location. 3) Match old fencing in material, height, and detail. 4) If it is not possible to match old fencing, use a simplified design of similar materials and height. 5) For new fences, use materials that relate to materials in the neighborhood. 6) Take design cues from nearby historic fences and walls. 7) Chain-link fencing, split rail fences, and vinyl plastic fences should not be used. 119 West Main Street (July 16, 2020) 2 8) Traditional concrete block walls may be appropriate. 9) Modular block wall systems or modular concrete block retaining walls are strongly discouraged but may be appropriate in areas not visible from the public right-of-way. 10) If street-front fences or walls are necessary or desirable, they should not exceed four (4) feet in height from the sidewalk or public right-of-way and should use traditional materials and design. 11) Residential privacy fences may be appropriate in side or rear yards where not visible from the primary street. 12) Fences should not exceed six (6) feet in height in the side and rear yards. 13) Fence structures should face the inside of the fenced property. 14) Relate commercial privacy fences to the materials of the building. If the commercial property adjoins a residential neighborhood, use a brick or painted wood fence or heavily planted screen as a buffer. 15) Avoid the installation of new fences or walls if possible in areas where there are no are no fences or walls and yards are open. 16) Retaining walls should respect the scale, materials and context of the site and adjacent properties. 17) Respect the existing conditions of the majority of the lots on the street in planning new construction or a rehabilitation of an existing site. Pertinent Design Review Guidelines for Rehabilitation: L. Rear of Buildings 1) Meet all handicapped accessibility requirements. 2) Consolidate and screen mechanical and utility equipment in one location when possible. 3) Consider adding planters or a small planting area to enhance and highlight the rear entrance, and create an adequate maintenance schedule for them. 4) Retain any historic door or select a new door that maintains the character of the building and creates an inviting entrance. 5) Note building and ADA codes when and if changing dimensions or design of entrance. 6) Windows define the character and scale of the original façade and should not be altered. 7) If it is necessary to replace a window, follow the guidelines for windows earlier in this chapter. 8) If installation of storm windows is necessary, follow the guidelines for windows earlier in this chapter. 9) Remove any blocked-in windows and restore windows and frames if missing. 10) Security grates should be unobtrusive and compatible with the building. 11) Avoid chain-link fencing. 12) If the rear window openings need to be covered on the interior for merchandise display or other business requirements, consider building an interior screen, and maintain the character of the original window’s appearance from the exterior. 13) Ensure that the design of the lighting relates to the historic character of the building. 14) Consider installing signs and awnings that are appropriate for the scale and style of the building. 15) Design and select systems and hardware to minimize impact on the historic fabric of the building. 16) Ensure that any fire escapes meet safety regulations and that no site elements inhibit proper egress. 17) Ensure that any rear porches are well maintained; and if used as upper floor entrance(s), are well lit and meet building codes while retaining their historic character. 119 West Main Street (July 16, 2020) 3 119 West Main Street Staff Photos Figure 1: View of lot behind 119 West Main Street. Area to be fenced-in visible through tent. Figure 2: View of lot behind 119 West Main Street. LANDMARK SURVEY Bibb/Spring 1979 IDENTIFICATION BASE DATA ;.. Street Address: 117-121 W. Main Street Historic Name: Walters Building Map and Parcel: )3-260, 261 Date/Period: 1898 Census Track & Block: 1-312 Style: Victorian Present Owner: Sophia P. Tripolas Height to Cornice: Address: 316 Parkway Height in Stories: 2 1/2 Present Use: Restaurant(#]]7) , 2 Retail Stores Present Zoning: B-4 Original Owner: John L. Walters (#119,121) Land Area (sq.ft.): 49.2' xl37' (6740 sq. ft.) Original Use: Furniture (7) Store Assessed Value (land + imp.): ARCHITECTURAL DESCRIPTION This imposing building is three bays wide and three stories tall at the front, dropping to two stories in the rear below a shed roof covered with standing-seam tin. Construction is of pressed brick laid in stretcher bond on the facade, and ordinary brick laid in 5-courseAmerican bond on the Second Street elevation. The facade has a pro- jecting central bay and slightly recessed side bays with corner piers. Traces of old signs painted on the facade are still legible: "Covington & Peyton" stretching across the entire facade between the second and third stories, and vertically between the second storey windows: "Oil Stoves", "Gas Stoves", "Toys", etc. The signs on the eastern half of the building are less legible and appear to have had other signs painted over them at some time. A brick pilaster with base and pedestal, but no capital, divides the first levelof fhe facade into eastern andwest=nhalves. Originally there were probably also pilasters at the ends. all with capitals, supporting an entablature above the storefronts, but they no longer exist. The western storefront has tile-faced walls and a recessed entrance loggia. The eastern half is divided into two small storefronts, one of which is noteworthy for its tile-faced walls and semi- dodecadonal-arched entry recess. Windows at the upper level are double-sash, l-over-l light, with bands of white concrete that stretch across the entire facade between the corner piers, serving as sills and lintels. At the second level, there are two windows in each side bay and a pair of narrower ones with a fluted pilaster between them in the center bay. Windows at the third level are shorter. There are qz oup s of three in the side ,,~"c ~n'" +-,.,n ; n +-hQ HISTORICAL DESCRIPTION center bay, all with single engaged Tuscan columns between them. A projecting parapet cornice with heavy scroll brackets is set directly above the windows of the low-ceilinged third storey. Above that, one section of the original roof balustrade remains over the first bay of the Second Street elevation. On the facade, pedestals with finials remain at the corners and on either side of a pedimented panel above the center bay giving the name of the building (with an incorrect apostrophe) in raised letters. The first bay of the Second Street elevation matches the facade, with single windOWS at the second and third levels. Of the remaining seven bays, each of the first five has a metal sash casement window at the first level. Above the first level, each of the seven bays is recessed between plain piers. Each has a single window at the second level, 2-Qver-2 light with white concrete sill and lintel extending the width of the bay. There is a recessed panel in place of a window at the third level. The parapet drops one step lower with each bay, the panel diminiShing in height correspondingly. GRAPHICS W. R. Duke, as trustee for John L. Walters, purchased this lot in 1893 (City DB 4-126). A two-story duplex brick building with parapet gables, built in the mid-1800's, was torn down and the Walters Building erected in 1898. The first level was used as a single large store in the early years: J. H. Montague & Co. (furniture), then a hardware store, then Covington & Peyton (china) in the 1920'S. After the Walters family sold it in 1923 (DB-44-152), Jefferson-Lafayette Theatres, Inc., bought it in 1927 (DB 57-317) and subdivided it into two stores. Nick Tripolas 4lldArthur G. Costan, who had operated the Monticello Lunch there since the late 1920's, bought the eastern half f~ 1940 (DB 104-314). In 1944 they bought the western half from Frank J. Edwards, who had owned it since 1927 and operated the Piggly-Wiggly Grocery Store there (DB 57-419,115-352). Additional References: City DB 39-64, 383-63, WE 19-196. CONDITIONS city Records SOURCES Good Mrs. Nick Tripolas (Sophia P. Tripolas) A. G. Costan Alexander, Recollections of Early Charlottesville Sanborn MaPs - 1896, 1907, 1920, 1969 Board of Architectural Review (BAR) Certificate of Appropriateness Please Return To: City of Charlottesville Department of Neighborhood Development Services P.O. Box 911, City Hall Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 Telephone (434) 970-3130 Please submit ten (10) hard copies and one (1) digital copy of appllcatlon fonn and all attachments. Please Include application fee as follows: New construction project $375; Oemolltlon of a contributing structure $375; Appeal of BAR decision $125; Additions and other projects requiring BAR approval $125; Administrative approval $100. Make checks payable to the City of Charlottesville. The BAR meets the third Tuesday of the month. Deadline for submittals is Tuesday 3 weeks prior to next BAR meeting by 3:30 p.m. Owner Name IIrnocl1'-:f 'f3,£gc.9 S Applicant Name P3,120 o- / Wt>:'(➔ e-, B,(J.€) U...C- Project Name/Description fu,cJ; l='.-eV\ce_ 3 3 0"2-Co Oo O Parcel Number 0 Project Property Address { I q uJ (/() aJ() 5f- c+ etc, rfc R',; v, (I e VA 2 Z°/0 Z- Signature of Applicant Applicant Information Address: I/9. W, r{)a,U"\ S 1:-- I hereby atte t that the information I have provided is, to the b o owledge, correct. Cho, c. o t\- e.s 11 , l \e \( />.. 2 -z.'1<'.> 2, Email: :tj(ho b11 c:3"'ss1i250'.lg<.l, co,,,.,,...., 6- (,- ,2..0 Phone: (W) ______ _ {C) ______ 434 lt04 0� z_.3 Property Owner Information (if not applicant) Address:� Property Owner Permission (if not applicant) I have read this application and hereby give my consent to its submission. Email:_________________ Phone: (W) ______ (C) ______ Signature Date Do you intend to apply for Federal or State Tax Credits for this project? ---'-N""'-' C�J______ Print Name Date Description of Proposed Work (attach se arate narrative if necessary): - .., , c>Y' Clot e-- • (R.,/a, r £-0'1 ce h hi de List All Attachments (see reverse side for submittal requirements): For Office Use Only Approved/Disapproved by: _________ Received by ___________ Date : ________________ Fee paid: _____Cash /Ck.# ____ Conditions of approval: ___________ Date Received. ___________ Revised 2016 New Fence and Gate New Fence and Gate 18-ft +/- New Fence and Gate 119 West Main—Rear Fence Not to scale 119 West Main—Rear Fence 119 West Main—Rear Fence 119 West Main—Rear Fence Certificate of Appropriateness Application BAR 20-07-03 120 Oakhurst Circle Tax Parcel: 110025000 Owner: Tenth and Main, LLC Applicant: Bill Chapman New driveway and parking Contents (Click to link directly to PDF page) • Staff Report • Staff Photos • Historic Survey • Application Link Back to Packet Guide City of Charlottesville Board of Architectural Review Staff Report July 21, 2020 Certificate of Appropriateness Application BAR 20-07-03 120 Oakhurst Circle Tax Parcel 110025000 Tenth and Main LLC, Owner/Bill Chapman, Applicant Background Year Built: c1950 District: Oakhurst-Gildersleeve District Status: Non-contributing (Note: It is a contributing structure to the VLR/NRHP district, but not the local ADC District.) This modest one-story, three-bay frame house was built around 1950 for Susan W. Clark. Prior BAR Reviews None Application Submittal: Site Plan, undated. Request for CoA to construct parking area at rear of parcel, to be accessed by existing driveway on neighboring parcel. New parking surface to be Turfstone pavers. (This is in lieu of the pea gravel noted on the drawing.) Access will require removal of two locust trees and slight regrading of the slope. A 6-ft high wood fence approximately 40-ft in length will be constructed on the south parcel line, screening the parking area. (New fence to match the existing at the rear parcel line. See appendix.) To further screen the parking area, three American boxwoods (Buxus Sempervirens) will be planted at the south side and a crepe myrtle (Lagerstroemia Indica) will be planted at the north side. 120 Oakhurst Circle (July 16, 2020) 1 Discussion and Recommendations 120 Oakhurst Circle is a non-contributing structure, the proposed alterations are entirely to the rear of the house, well below street level, and the ADC District does not extend beyond the rear parcel line. (The existing house is 6-ft lower than the street. The rear of the house is 16-feet lower.) (See photos in appendix.) Oakhurst Circle has an abundance of large tree. The two locust to be removed are to the rear of the house and not part of the streetscape, nor are they prominent in the overall tree canopy. The new fence will replicate the existing at the south parcel line. That fence is unfinished, vertical, 1 x 6 boards—see photo in appendix. Staff recommends approval, with any proposed conditions regarding the fencing and/or the tree selection. Suggested Motion Approval: Having considered the standards set forth within the City Code, including City Design Guidelines for Site Design and Elements, I move to find that the proposed parking area, landscaping and site work satisfy the BAR’s criteria and are compatible with this property and other properties in the Oakhurst-Gildersleeve ADC District, and that the BAR approves the application as submitted. Denial: Having considered the standards set forth within the City Code, including City Design Guidelines for Site Design and Elements, I move to find that the proposed parking area, landscaping and site work satisfy the BAR’s criteria and are not compatible with this property and other properties in the Oakhurst-Gildersleeve ADC District, and that for the following reasons the BAR denies the application as submitted. Criteria, Standards, and Guidelines Review Criteria Generally Sec. 34-284(b) of the City Code states that, In considering a particular application the BAR shall approve the application unless it finds: (1) That the proposal does not meet specific standards set forth within this division or applicable provisions of the Design Guidelines established by the board pursuant to Sec.34-288(6); and (2) The proposal is incompatible with the historic, cultural or architectural character of the district in which the property is located or the protected property that is the subject of the application. Pertinent Standards for Review of Construction and Alterations include: Whether the material, texture, color, height, scale, mass and placement of the proposed addition, modification or construction are visually and architecturally compatible with the site and the applicable design control district; (1) The harmony of the proposed change in terms of overall proportion and the size and placement of entrances, windows, awnings, exterior stairs and signs; (2) The Secretary of the Interior Standards for Rehabilitation set forth within the Code of (3) Federal Regulations (36 C.F.R. §67.7(b)), as may be relevant; (4) The effect of the proposed change on the historic district neighborhood; 120 Oakhurst Circle (July 16, 2020) 2 (5) The impact of the proposed change on other protected features on the property, such as gardens, landscaping, fences, walls and walks; (6) Whether the proposed method of construction, renovation or restoration could have an adverse impact on the structure or site, or adjacent buildings or structures; (7) Any applicable provisions of the City’s Design Guidelines. Pertinent Design Review Guidelines for Site Design and Elements B. Plantings 1. Encourage the maintenance and planting of large trees on private property along the streetfronts, which contribute to an “avenue” effect. 2. Generally, use trees and plants that are compatible with the existing plantings in the neighborhood. 3. Use trees and plants that are indigenous to the area. 4. Retain existing trees and plants that help define the character of the district, especially street trees and hedges. 5. Replace diseased or dead plants with like or similar species if appropriate. 6. When constructing new buildings, identify and take care to protect significant existing trees and other plantings. 7. Choose ground cover plantings that are compatible with adjacent sites, existing site conditions, and the character of the building. 8. Select mulching and edging materials carefully and do not use plastic edgings, lava, crushed rock, unnaturally colored mulch or other historically unsuitable materials. C. Walls and Fences 1. Maintain existing materials such as stone walls, hedges, wooden picket fences, and wrought- iron fences. 2. When a portion of a fence needs replacing, salvage original parts for a prominent location. 3. Match old fencing in material, height, and detail. 4. If it is not possible to match old fencing, use a simplified design of similar materials and height. 5. For new fences, use materials that relate to materials in the neighborhood. 6. Take design clues from nearby historic fences and walls. 7. Chain-link fencing, split rail fences, and vinyl plastic fences should not be used. 8. Traditional concrete block walls may be appropriate. 9. Modular block wall systems or modular concrete block retaining walls are strongly discouraged, but may be appropriate in areas not visible from the public right-of-way. 10. If street-front fences or walls are necessary or desirable, they should not exceed four (4) feet in height from the sidewalk or public right-of-way and should use traditional materials and design. 11. Residential privacy fences may be appropriate in side or rear yards where not visible from the primary street. 12. Fences should not exceed six (6) feet in height in the side and rear yards. 13. Fence structure should face the inside of the fenced property. 14. Relate commercial privacy fences to the materials of the building. If the commercial property adjoins a residential neighborhood, use brick or painted wood fence or heavily planted screen as a buffer. 15. Avoid the installation of new fences or walls if possible in areas where there are no are no fences or walls and yards are open. 120 Oakhurst Circle (July 16, 2020) 3 16. Retaining walls should respect the scale, materials and context of the site and adjacent properties. 17. Respect the existing conditions of the majority of the lots on the street in planning new construction or a rehabilitation of an existing site. E. Walkways and Driveways 1. Use appropriate traditional paving materials like brick, stone, and scored concrete. 2. Concrete pavers are appropriate in new construction, and may be appropriate in site renovations, depending on the context of adjacent building materials, and continuity with the surrounding site and district. 3. Gravel or stone dust may be appropriate, but must be contained. 4. Stamped concrete and stamped asphalt are not appropriate paving materials. 5. Limit asphalt use to driveways and parking areas. 6. Place driveways through the front yard only when no rear access to parking is available. 7. Do not demolish historic structures to provide areas for parking. 8. Add separate pedestrian pathways within larger parking lots, and provide crosswalks at vehicular lanes within a site. 120 Oakhurst Circle (July 16, 2020) 4 Appendix 120 Oakhurst Circle (July 16, 2020) 5 Existing fence 120 Oakhurst Circle (July 16, 2020) 6 Appendix 120 Oakhurst Circle (July 13, 2020) 5 Existing fence 120 Oakhurst Circle (July 13, 2020) 6 120 Oakhurst Circle Staff Photos Figure 1: Oblique view of 120 Oakhurst Circle, facing northeast. Figure 2: West elevation of 120 Oakhurst Circle. Figure 3: Oblique view of 120 Oakhurst Circle, facing southeast. Figure 4: View of 120 Oakhurst Circle along with entrance to parking area at neighboring Oakhurst Inn. Figure 5: View from street to rear yard of 120 Oakhurst Circle, site of proposed parking area. Parking area for Oakhurst Inn at left. Figure 6: View of 120 Oakhurst Circle, at left, in context of neighboring buildings on street. Virginia Department of Historic Resources DHR ID: 104-5092-0010 Architectural Survey Form Other DHR ID: No Data Property Information Property Names Property Evaluation Status Name Explanation Name Function/Location House, 120 Oakhurst Circle Not Evaluated Property Addresses This Property is associated with the Oakhurst/Gildersleeve Current - 120 Oakhurst Circle Neighborhood Historic District. County/Independent City(s): Charlottesville (Ind. City) Incorporated Town(s): No Data Zip Code(s): 22903 Magisterial District(s): No Data Tax Parcel(s): No Data USGS Quad(s): CHARLOTTESVILLE WEST Additional Property Information Architecture Setting: Town Acreage: No Data Site Description: Privacy fence in front; overgrown lot. Surveyor Assessment: The original owner of this ca. 1950 1-story frame cottage with Colonial Revival detailing was Susan W. Clark. It is a contributing resource to the potential Oakhurst-Gildersleeve Neighborhood Historic District Surveyor Recommendation: No Data Ownership Ownership Category Ownership Entity Private No Data Primary Resource Information Resource Category: Domestic Resource Type: Single Dwelling NR Resource Type: Building Historic District Status: Contributing Date of Construction: Ca 1950 Date Source: Local Records Historic Time Period: The New Dominion (1946 - 1991) Historic Context(s): Domestic Other ID Number: No Data Architectural Style: Colonial Revival Form: No Data Number of Stories: 1.0 Condition: Good Threats to Resource: None Known Architectural Description: This 1-story, 3-bay, frame (weatherboard), gable-roofed (asphalt shingle) vernacular dwelling features some Colonial Revival detailing including 8/8-sash windows and an exterior-end brick chimney. Constructed ca. 1950, other details include aluminum awning over the door, batten shutters, and large rear extension. Exterior Components Component Component Type Material Material Treatment Foundation Solid/Continuous Concrete Block July 14, 2020 Page: 1 of 2 Virginia Department of Historic Resources DHR ID: 104-5092-0010 Architectural Survey Form Other DHR ID: No Data Roof Gable Asphalt Shingle Structural System and Frame Wood Weatherboard Exterior Treatment Windows Sash, Double-Hung Wood 8/8 Chimneys Exterior End Brick Bond, Common Secondary Resource Information Historic District Information Historic District Name: Oakhurst/Gildersleeve Neighborhood Historic District Local Historic District Name: No Data Historic District Significance: No Data CRM Events Event Type: Survey:Phase I/Reconnaissance Project Review File Number: HD104-5092 Investigator: Kalbian, Maral Organization/Company: Unknown (DSS) Photographic Media: No Data Survey Date: 3/1/2004 Dhr Library Report Number: No Data Project Staff/Notes: Survey conducted for the city of Charlottesville in preparation of Preliminary Information Form Project Bibliographic Information: Name: Bibb, Eugenia Record Type: Personal Papers Bibliographic Notes: Bibb, Engenia, "Field Notes," April 15, 2004. 1545 Dairy Road, Charlottesville, Va. 22903 ----------------------------- Name: Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps Record Type: Map ----------------------------- Name: Chville Assessors Records Record Type: Local Records Bibliographic Notes: Web Site Bibliographic Information Bibliography: No Data Property Notes: No Data July 14, 2020 Page: 2 of 2 Board of Archi1 ec·. ural Review (BAR) Certificate of A opr opriateness Please Return To: Cit� of ( harlottesville Department of Neighbornobd Development Services P.O. Box 911, City Hall Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 Telephone (434) 970-3130 Please submit ten (10) hard copies and one (1) digital copy of application form and all attachments. Please include application fee as follows: New construction project $375; Demolition of a contributing structure $375; Appeal of BAR decision $125; Additions and other projects requiring BAR approval $125; Administrative approval $100. Make checks payable to the City of Charlottesville. The BAR meets the third Tuesday of the month. Deadline for submittals is Tuesday 3 weeks prior to next BAR meeting by 3:30 p.m. T..e..rJ, �+ +- M. 4:� ,fi I..'--<- Applicant Name � t _,.... r t.f-- + f'I.Ai' ,.1 l- L <. Owner Name - r Project Name/Description 1)12. \V€ 1,,../A'I , ) tJ.it-krf-v/lf"1parcel II PMk 1-' ,1-0 Number /IO O •"7t:---5 O O CJ Project Property Address / Z- 0 cJ 4k WV /2... > -r � /4 C l- -€ Signature of Applicant Applicant Information If" I hereby attest that the information I have provided is, to the Address: / '2-- 2- 0 f+k. · v/1.. f' 'T c... f (Le best of ��r�ect. VtCl.-e 7.,Zf trJ � ¢ E mail: 1@i// Phone: (W) tJ "'? o4-kl-t"Jl'L>7f1""N · c...o ,._ "'l. - 1j o \ (C) ______ Signature ..,:;'./4;/ Date '2- C w I L L- (./-h-- C ldAt1 .MA/ Property Owner Information (if not applicant) Print Name Date Address: ----------------- Property Owner Permission (if not applicant) I have read this application and hereby give my consent to its submission. Email: __________________ Phone: (W) _______ (C) ______ Signature Date Do you intend to apply for Federal or State Tax Credits for this project? ____.__.r/_o______ Print Nam e Date Description of PropoJ�d Work (attach separate narrative if necessary): __--.-----------,----=--=e ---­ A: l> 0 0ft - s.-,--a. ,e .£ f A-tL I- f N '; I p p ., A. I t. d O 4-1< lfvtu'.,.., e ( :4 CL e List All Attachments (see reverse side for submittal requirements): p#-d-ro;1 �rjr'rz--e-ett,rr7 /t.-}fv.l r rfA-IL/LA,fv'�. For Office Use Only Approved/Disapproved by: __________ Received by: ____________ Date: ----------------- Fee paid: _____Cash/Ck. # ____ Conditions of approval: ___________ Date Received: ___________ Revised 2016 JEFFERSON PARK AVE 100 OAKHURST CIRCLE EXISTING GRAVEL PARKING REMOVE LOCUST TREES NEW RAMP AISLE @ 18% AY W/ 4" #21A STONE OA EW KH IV UR ST DR D CIRC VE LE PA RAISE SAN. MANHOLE TO NEW GRADE G IN ST EXI NEW CREPE MYRTLE (LAGERSTROEMIA INDICA) EX. SEGMENTAL WALL PROPOSED PARKING W/ PEA GRAVEL SURFACE ON 4" #21A BASE 8.5' EX. PAVER AREA WAY WOODED SLOPE 18' 20' 5 NEW SPACES 120 OAKHURST CIRCLE 3' 8' 3' NEW 6' FENCE TO MATCH EXISTING, WITH VERTICAL PICKETS ON BOTH SIDES LENGTH: 40' EXISTING BOXWOODS 3 NEW AMERICAN BOXWOODS SITE PLAN (BUXUS SEMPERVIRENS) SCALE: 1" = 20'-0" Certificate of Appropriateness Application BAR 20-07-05 320 W. Main Street Tax Parcel: 290018000 Owner: 320 West Main LLC Applicant: Robert Nichols/Formwork Design Exterior alterations and signage Contents (Click to link directly to PDF page) • Staff Report • Staff Photos • Historic Survey • Application Link back to Packet Guide. City of Charlottesville Board of Architectural Review Staff Report July 21, 2020 Certificate of Appropriateness Application BAR 20-07-05 320 W. Main Street Tax Parcel: 290018000 Owner: 320 West Main LLC Applicant: Robert Nichols/Formwork Design Exterior alterations and signage Background Year Built: c1890-1900 District: Downtown ADC District Status: Contributing Constructed as the Sparks-Garrett House, it has been converted to commercial use. The stuccoed, framed structure is T-shaped with Victorian detailing in its wide frieze, cross-gabled roof with overhanging eaves, and now enclosed porch with turned posts and bracket detailing. (Historic survey attached.) Prior BAR Review None Application Submittal: Formwork Design, LLC drawings dated 5/15/2020: Cover and sheets 1 through 6. Enclosed front porch (west side):  Remove vertical siding, aluminum storefront, and windows at front porch enclosure (non- historic).  Remove fabric canopy. 320 West Main (July 16, 2020) 1  Between the columns install columns install Marvin triple-gang casement windows with transoms  Install new entry doors with transom aligned with adjacent windows. Front elevation:  Remove six double-hung windows (two at the first floor bay, three at second floor) and replace with Marvin double-hung windows with two-over-two lite configuration (per historic photographs). Building Exterior:  Paint wood trim: Charcoal grey.  Paint stucco: Med/dark grey.  Paint windows and doors  "Fish-scale" wood shingles at pediments to be retained. Roofing:  Existing asphalt shingle roof to remain  Existing copper half-round gutters to remain Site Work:  Remove metal railing at entry and install new.  At west side of structure, install steel swing-gate with cutout signage at top.  At the sidewalk, install a monument sign.  At entry terrace, install 18" x 42" bluestone pavers over concrete slab. Lighting: No new indicated Landscaping: No new indicated Discussion and Recommendations Removing an outdated and inappropriate enclosure of the front porch. Ideally, it would be left open, but the proposed is an improvement and does not remove or conceal historic elements. Double-hung 2/2 windows to be replaced: The existing windows do not match those visible in the 1980 photo in the submittal. New signage will require a separate signage permit. Staff recommends approval within the following conditions:  New Marvin windows [and doors] to be wood or aluminum clad. Applied muntins are acceptable and must be appropriately dimensioned. If insulated glass, there will internal space bars aligned with the applied muntins.  Any exterior lighting the lamping will have a Color Temperature not to exceed 3,000K, preferably dimmable, and will comply with the City’s “Dark Sky” ordinance. 320 West Main (July 16, 2020) 2  Applicant will provide to staff for the BAR archive cut sheets for the doors, widows, and any exterior light fixtures. Suggested Motion Approval: Having considered the standards set forth within the City Code, including City Design Guidelines for Site Work, Rehabilitations, and Signage, I move to find that the proposed alterations satisfy the BAR’s criteria and are compatible with this property and other properties in the Downtown ADC District, and that the BAR approves the application as submitted. […as submitted with the following conditions:…] Denial: Having considered the standards set forth within the City Code, including City Design Guidelines for Site Work, Rehabilitations, and Signage, I move to find that the proposed alterations do not satisfy the BAR’s criteria and are not compatible with this property and other properties in the Downtown ADC District, and that for the following reasons the BAR denies the application as submitted: Criteria, Standards, and Guidelines Review Criteria Generally Sec. 34-284(b) of the City Code states that, in considering a particular application the BAR shall approve the application unless it finds: (1) That the proposal does not meet specific standards set forth within this division or applicable provisions of the Design Guidelines established by the board pursuant to Sec.34-288(6); and (2) The proposal is incompatible with the historic, cultural or architectural character of the district in which the property is located or the protected property that is the subject of the application. Pertinent Standards for Review of Construction and Alterations include: (1) Whether the material, texture, color, height, scale, mass and placement of the proposed addition, modification or construction are visually and architecturally compatible with the site and the applicable design control district; (2) The harmony of the proposed change in terms of overall proportion and the size and placement of entrances, windows, awnings, exterior stairs and signs; (3) The Secretary of the Interior Standards for Rehabilitation set forth within the Code of Federal Regulations (36 C.F.R. §67.7(b)), as may be relevant; (4) The effect of the proposed change on the historic district neighborhood; (5) The impact of the proposed change on other protected features on the property, such as gardens, landscaping, fences, walls and walks; (6) Whether the proposed method of construction, renovation or restoration could have an adverse impact on the structure or site, or adjacent buildings or structures; (7) Any applicable provisions of the City’s Design Guidelines. Pertinent Guidelines for Site Work E. Walkways and Driveways 1) Use appropriate traditional paving materials like brick, stone, and scored concrete. 320 West Main (July 16, 2020) 3 Pertinent Guidelines for Rehabilitations B. Facades & Storefronts The following guidelines will help to determine what is worth saving and what should be rebuilt. 1) Conduct pictorial research to determine the design of the original building or early changes. 2) Conduct exploratory demolition to determine what original fabric remains and its condition. 3) Remove any inappropriate materials, signs, or canopies covering the façade. 4) Retain all elements, materials, and features that are original to the building or are contextual remodelings, and repair as necessary. 5) Restore as many original elements as possible, particularly the materials, windows, decorative details, and cornice. 6) When designing new building elements, base the design on the “Typical elements of a commercial façade and storefront” (see drawing next page). 7) Reconstruct missing or original elements, such as cornices, windows, and storefronts, if documentation is available. 8) Design new elements that respect the character, materials, and design of the building, yet are distinguished from the original building. 9) Depending on the existing building’s age, originality of the design and architectural significance, in some cases there may be an opportunity to create a more contemporary façade design when undertaking a renovation project. 10) Avoid using materials that are incompatible with the building or within the specific districts, including textured wood siding, vinyl or aluminum siding, and pressure-treated wood, 11) Avoid introducing inappropriate architectural elements where they never previously existed. C. Windows 1) Prior to any repair or replacement of windows, a survey of existing window conditions is recommended. Note number of windows, whether each window is original or replaced, the material, type, hardware and finish, the condition of the frame, sash, sill, putty, and panes. 2) Retain original windows when possible. 3) Uncover and repair covered up windows and reinstall windows where they have been blocked in. 4) If the window is no longer needed, the glass should be retained and the back side frosted, screened, or shuttered so that it appears from the outside to be in use. 5) Repair original windows by patching, splicing, consolidating or otherwise reinforcing. Wood that appears to be in bad condition because of peeling paint or separated joints often can be repaired. 6) Replace historic components of a window that are beyond repair with matching components. 7) Replace entire windows only when they are missing or beyond repair. 8) If a window on the primary façade of a building must be replaced and an existing window of the same style, material, and size is identified on a secondary elevation, place the historic window in the window opening on the primary façade. 9) Reconstruction should be based on physical evidence or old photographs. 10) Avoid changing the number, location, size, or glazing pattern of windows by cutting new openings, blocking in windows, or installing replacement sash that does not fit the window opening. 11) Do not use inappropriate materials or finishes that radically change the sash, depth of reveal, muntin configuration, reflective quality or color of the glazing, or appearance of the frame. 320 West Main (July 16, 2020) 4 12) Use replacement windows with true divided lights or interior and exterior fixed muntins with internal spacers to replace historic or original examples. 13) If windows warrant replacement, appropriate material for new windows depends upon the context of the building within a historic district, and the age and design of the building. Sustainable materials such as wood, aluminum-clad wood, solid fiberglass, and metal windows are preferred. Vinyl windows are discouraged. 14) False muntins and internal removable grilles do not present an historic appearance and should not be used. 15) Do not use tinted or mirrored glass on major facades of the building. Translucent or low (e) glass may be strategies to keep heat gain down. 16) Storm windows should match the size and shape of the existing windows and the original sash configuration. Special shapes, such as arched top storms, are available. 17) Storm windows should not damage or obscure the windows and frames. 18) Avoid aluminum-colored storm sash. It can be painted an appropriate color if it is first primed with a zinc chromate primer. 19) The addition of shutters may be appropriate if not previously installed but if compatible with the style of the building or neighborhood. 20) In general, shutters should be wood (rather than metal or vinyl) and should be mounted on hinges. In some circumstances, appropriately dimensioned, painted, composite material shutters may be used. 21) The size of the shutters should result in their covering the window opening when closed. 22) Avoid shutters on composite or bay windows. 23) If using awnings, ensure that they align with the opening being covered. 24) Use awning colors that are compatible with the colors of the building. D. Entrances, Porches, and Doors 1) The original details and shape of porches should be retained including the outline, roof height, and roof pitch. 2) Inspect masonry, wood, and metal or porches and entrances for signs of rust, peeling paint, wood deterioration, open joints around frames, deteriorating putty, inadequate caulking, and improper drainage, and correct any of these conditions. 3) Repair damaged elements, matching the detail of the existing original fabric. 4) Replace an entire porch only if it is too deteriorated to repair or is completely missing, and design to match the original as closely as possible. 5) Do not strip entrances and porches of historic material and details. 6) Give more importance to front or side porches than to utilitarian back porches. 7) Do not remove or radically change entrances and porches important in defining the building’s overall historic character. 8) Avoid adding decorative elements incompatible with the existing structure. 9) In general, avoid adding a new entrance to the primary facade, or facades visible from the street. 10) Do not enclose porches on primary elevations and avoid enclosing porches on secondary elevations in a manner that radically changes the historic appearance. 11) Provide needed barrier-free access in ways that least alter the features of the building. a. For residential buildings, try to use ramps that are removable or portable rather than permanent. b. On nonresidential buildings, comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act while minimizing the visual impact of ramps that affect the appearance of a building. 320 West Main (July 16, 2020) 5 12) The original size and shape of door openings should be maintained. 13) Original door openings should not be filled in. 14) When possible, reuse hardware and locks that are original or important to the historical evolution of the building. 15) Avoid substituting the original doors with stock size doors that do not fit the opening properly or are not compatible with the style of the building. 16) Retain transom windows and sidelights. 17) When installing storm or screen doors, ensure that they relate to the character of the existing door. a. They should be a simple design where lock rails and stiles are similar in placement and size. b. Avoid using aluminum colored storm doors. c. If the existing storm door is aluminum, consider painting it to match the existing door. d. Use a zinc chromate primer before painting to ensure adhesion. K. Paint 1) Do not remove paint on wood trim or architectural details. 2) Do not paint unpainted masonry. 3) Choose colors that blend with and complement the overall color schemes on the street. Do not use bright and obtrusive colors. 4) The number of colors should be limited. Doors and shutters can be painted a different color than the walls and trim. 5) Use appropriate paint placement to enhance the inherent design of the building. Pertinent Guidelines for Signs A. Signs 1) Types of Signs and Typical Locations 2) Placement a. Place signs so that they do not obstruct architectural elements and details that define the design of the building. 320 West Main (July 16, 2020) 6 b. Projecting signs for commercial buildings are limited to one per storefront. They should be no lower than 7 feet from the sidewalk, and no more than 3 feet from the surface of the building. They should not be placed above the second story sill line. For residential buildings, small projecting signs attached to the wall at the first floor or porch column are appropriate. c. Window signs should be approximately 5.5 feet above the sidewalk at the center point for good pedestrian visibility. Optional locations could include 18 inches from the top or bottom of the display window glass. Window signs are also appropriate on the glazing of doors. d. Flat wall signs for commercial buildings can be located above the storefront, within the frieze of the cornice, on covered transoms, or on the pier that frames the display windows or generally on flat, unadorned surfaces of the façade or in areas clearly designed as sign locations. Flat wall signs for residential buildings can be appropriate if attached to the wall at the first floor or between porch columns. e. Awning and canopy signs should be placed on the valance area only. The minimum spacing between the edge of the letter and the top and bottom of the valance should be 1.5 inches. f. Freestanding signs, in general, are not an appropriate sign type in commercial areas of Downtown and the West Main Street corridor except for use in the front yard of a residence that has been converted to commercial or office use on a site where the building is set back deeply on the lot. In this case, freestanding signs should be no higher than 12 feet. 3) Respect the signs of adjacent businesses. 4) Number of permanent signs a. The number of signs used should be limited to encourage compatibility with the building and discourage visual clutter. b. In commercial areas, signs should be limited to two total, which can be different types. c. A buildings should have only one wall sign per street frontage. d. In addition to the existing permitted signs, each business in a building with rear entrances may have one small flat mounted sign not to exceed 6 square feet. 5) Size a. All the signs on a commercial building should not exceed 50 square feet. b. Average height of letters and symbols should be no more than 12 inches on wall signs, 9 inches on awning and canopy signs, and 6 inches on window signs. c. Projecting signs should be a maximum of 10 square feet per face. d. Window signs should obscure no more than 20 percent of the window glass. e. Flat wall signs should not exceed 18 inches in height and should not extend more than 6 inches from the surface of the building. 6) Design a. Signs should be designed and executed by sign professionals who are skilled at lettering and surface preparation. 7) Shape a. Shape of signs for commercial buildings should conform to the area where the sign is to be located. b. Likewise, a sign can take on the shape of the product of service provided, such as a shoe for a shoe store. 8) Materials 320 West Main (July 16, 2020) 7 a. Use traditional sign materials, such as wood, glass, gold leaf, raised metal or painted wood letters, and painted wood letters on wood, metal, or glass. b. Newer products, such as painted MDO may also be used. c. Do not use shiny plastic products. d. Window signs should be painted or have decal flat letters and should not be three- dimensional. 9) Color a. Use colors that complement the materials and color of the building, including accent and trim colors. b. A maximum of three colors are recommended, although more colors can be appropriate. 10) Illumination a. Generally, signs should be indirectly lit with a shielded incandescent light source. b. Internally lit translucent signs are not permitted. 11) Buildings with Multiple Tenants a. A comprehensive sign plan should be submitted for multi-tenant buildings. b. Upper-floor tenants should be represented at each primary entrance by a flat, wall- mounted directory sign. 12) Other Signs a. Banners should be temporary and wall murals should be carefully reviewed for compatibility with district character. 13) Neon Signs a. Neon signs are often associated with early- to mid- twentieth century commercial design and are currently prohibited within the historic districts unless mounted inside windows. 14) Halo-lit signs with opaque letters may be appropriate. 15) Sign Maintenance a. Signs that are not properly maintained should be removed. b. Signs of a business no longer occupying a building or storefront should be removed unless it is historically significant. 320 West Main (July 16, 2020) 8 320 West Main Street Staff Photos Figure 1: Oblique view of 320 West Main Street, facing southwest. Figure 2: North elevation of 320 West Main Street. Figure 3: Oblique view of 320 West Main Street, facing southeast. [~---- ---- .. 3 LANDMARK SURVEY Bibb/Winter 1979 IDENTIFICATION BASE DATA Street Address; 320 ",est xa Ln Street Historic Name: Spar~<:s-Gar::ett rIouse ~1ap and Parcel: 29-18 Date/Period: 1899 Census Track & Block: 1-301 Style: Vi=torian Vernac~ar Present Owner: Ferdinand and Judith A. Bazin Height to Cornice: Address: 320 W. Main Street Height in Stories: 2 Present Use: Restaurant and Residence Present Zoning: 8-4 Original Owner: Dr. B. H. Sparks Land Area (sq. ft.): 44' x 185' ave. (8140 sq. ft.) Original Use: Residence and /'!edicalOffice Assessed Value (land + imp. ): ARCHITECTURAL DESCRIPTION This 2-storey I 3-bay, stuccoed house set on a 10\1/ bz i.ck foundation 1 c: in t~e ~-shape popular in che late 19tH cen- tury, with projecting side bays front and rear. The T-shaped ~edium-pitched gable roof is covered with greenish composition shingles. It has a boxed cornice with returns and a wide cornice board. The gable ends are covered with wooden shinqles above the cornice, and each contains an attic window. The house is pa.irrcedwh i.t.ewith royal blue trim. A one-storey veranda covers the western two bays of ~~e facade. It has a low-?itc~ed hip roof cove~ed with the same greenish composition shingles and a boxed cornice. It has ceen enclosed with vertical '.o•oden s i d.inq , leaving the spool frieze and turned posts and balustrade undisturbed on the outside. There is now a multi-light stationary-sash. window in each porch bay. The original entrance in ~~e central bay of the facade is now an interior door. Nindows are double-sash, 2-over-2 light, with architrave trim. There i.s a one-storey semi-octagona" bay window in the eastern !Jay of the facade. Its low-pitched hip roof is an extension of the veranda's roof. A door in one plane of ~'1ebay window originally' gave acces s to the doctor's office from the veranda. The ',,,{ndows match ~'1eothers in tr.ehouse. The one-storey rear wing covering the two western bays is probably original. Its roof and windows match those in ~'1e rest of the house. Side and back perches around it have been enclosed. The central chimney has been removed; a smaller one at the rear of ~'1ewing remains. A single-flight open staircase wi~, simple turned balustrade rises from the central hall. Doors and w i ndowa ;a~re svr:mne+- -i ••••r! l' To "'!'!-'Pt '-:er1 ;-..•... ..;""'I HISTORICAL DESCRIPTION wi~'1 corner blocks. The parlor mantel has 'I'uscancolumns reaching to the top of a'mirror over-mantel. To accom- modate a child's room in the attic, a section of the floor has been lowered and a stair and two skylights added. For nearly half of its 80 years, this house has served as a doctor's resicence and office. Dr. B. E. S9arks bought the lot in 1899 and built the house the sw~ year (City DB 10-115). George~. Harris bought it from Dr. Sparks in 1908 (DB 19-462) and sold it in 1919 to Susie J. Nebb (~lrs.James J. ;'ebb) who owned it until 1945 (DB 34-104, 120-483). Dr. M. T. Garrett purchased it in 1947 (DB 132-35) and for 29 years lived and had his cffice there. The present owners bought the house from Dr. Garrett's estate in 1977 (DB 388-313). They live on the second level and have remodeled ~~e first level for use as a restaurant. Additional Deed References: City DB 17-465, 18-85; IVB 20-554. GRAPHICS CONDITIONS City Records SOURCES l1rs. Ferdinand Bazin Good Mrs. M. T. Garrett Sanborn Maps - 1907, 1920, 1969 LANOMARK CO.MMISSION 'OEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT, AUGUST,1974 . Progress Photo. by Jim Carpenter JUDITH AND FERDINAND BAZIN STAND IN FRONT OF LOCATION OF LE SNAIL The Restaurant Featuring European Cuisine Will Be Located on West Main Street . .' \ ',' , \ ( Something Old, Some,thlng New , ' . . . . · ' By CINDY KELLEY' by the Bazins has been the The Bazins consider them. , of The Progress Staff 'iL' changes they have had to make selves "pioneers of West Main The snail, according to Web- in order to follow the hand. Street." ster, is a slow-moving, worm-j: ..icapped code. "We had to raise There is a city plan in the like mollusk with a protective: the floor, which created quite a making for the upgrading of the shell. . hardship," said Mrs. Bazin. Starr Hill neighborhood, where · This definition, however, is The Bazins are seeking to ac- Le Snail will be located, not indicative of the service compIish a warm and comfort- The area has gained quite a Judith and .Ferdinand Bazin able atmosphere exemplifying disreputable I reputation over plan to offer customers of Le European culture. Parts of the the years, but the Bazins are Snail. interior of the future restaurant quite confident their business · Le Snail, a new restaurant -are being built with pieces from: won't be affected. In fact they 'planned for Charlottesville, is the castle ory Nydrie Farm in. appear quite thrilled by the fact going to offer a European at~ Keene. , . .:. ", they are indeed "pioneers" of mosphere WIth a Continental. Th '11b th f the faceIift planned for the menu. The menu will be pre- ~re WI t e ree rooms fJor neighborhood. . dominantly French, but~willr'-du~e.- y Cd us °bme'!:~~m-Jw:Q..,,~c-A-common questio~' asked oC" '\ f t G an and Ita i mmz an ,a ar.. , ,,\ , , ,I) so ,ea ure. erm . -:;( _,i Tht back 'dining' room will:( the" Bazins concerns parking , • i uan. I dishes, as well as dally spe- ' h ave a more fit' orma a mos- space , ,where by they quickly cIa s. . . ' .phere than the one planned for .point out that the City Market head Austrian-born chef at theBazin has Head Boars been . th e fron.t Th e b ar WI'11 sea t 18 parking lot " just across the S t Cl b h h' f d h people the total seating capaci- street, has 180 spaces for autos, por s u: were. IS 00 as ty will' be 70. The equipment for the kit, already gamed quite a repu· , . . . 'chen area is all second-hand. tation, for four-and~a'half Lunch prices will range, from The cou Ie found this a nec.' years. His cont~act WIth the $2,50 to $5, and dinners wllIav-essary W~y to go because of the sports club ends I~ February ~f ,erage about S? to $6: ,'difficultv in obtainins il hank 1979. and t.hp nnerunc of I ,p Snail R"f"rn ."tt,ntT nr.nnn Dnn," ' of Assistant City Attorney Paul reahsnc study." said Bazm. He ;'i.rs. Bazin IS a g;'doudle 01 C. Garrett. worked with seating capacity to Barnard College and a former The Bazins moved into the see how many people would systems analyst for IBM. Bazin upper floor of the building a have to be fed per day, then began as an apprentice chef at little over a year ago. The lower took apart the concept to see if the age of 14 and has been cre- level is in the process of being it was workable and came up ating his masterpieces since transformed into Le Snail. with a "conservative figure of that time. One of the most difficult and 60 per day" in order to break Le Snail will be located at 320 costly alterations encountered. even. W. Main St. -�i Board of Architectural Review (BAR) Conservation District - Certificate of Appropriateness Please Return To: City of Charlottesville 11• Department of Neighborhood Development Services < , ttt � P.O. Box 911, City Hall � I �' ••• �(c Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 GINJA-'\: Telephone (434) 970-3130 Please submit ten (10) hard copies and one (1) digital copy of application form and all attachments. Please include application fee as follows: New construction project $375; Demolition of a contributing structure $375; Appeal of BAR decision $125; Additions and other projects requiring BAR approval $125; Administrative approval $100. Make checks payable to the City of Charlottesville. The BAR meets the third Tuesday of the month. Deadline for submittals is Tuesday 3 weeks prior to next BAR meeting by 3:30 p.m. 3::::;.tX�;:..;::;....._i,:.:;... Project Name/Description....::=. D ��µ,4L,""-"'-J-4-__,,_...L.-I-.L.l■."""'--1--- Parcel Number 2q O O I '8 0 0 0 Project Address/Location 3J O � e, s. f fY\c,t I() 5{ee_ t C ha Vlo +/r-,s e Vfi: l/� / / ,2 2 j O 3 Owner Name 3 d. 0 {J)es+ vYltll � LL C Applicant Name__ . ______________ Applicant Information 3J D {A)--e,,S:,. t (fla vr) /...L-(._ Signature of Applicant c/o cf-Aw fovd l--+ 111d evvY\.M1. v\ � . Oln I hereby attest that the information I have provided is, to the Address: ?::::'5 o 3 Bvu YlSLP I c.-f,c t2 � o�my �pk'edge, correct. C\¥\1':lo�u, \.\..C VA • - 4/?!sp-o 3-c.4· i5\tl; 2--z..qa3 Emaii: r ;J..wtv¼Wl I\ @ '.¢'�\ ( , C.O-l'Yl �� Signatur� Date ' Phone: 0N) _______ (H) ______ '-0'2- '8tf I - S563 CA fttv'/; v c/ II,nttf§vfYlcvn rt ��=� Y /zr-/20 I Print Name Date Property Owner Information (if not applicant) Property Owner Permission (if not applicant) Address:.________________ I have read this application and hereby give my consent to Email:._________________ Phone: 0N) _______ (H) ______ �c� 1/z,e /� Signature Date r:; cl JI,f'lJbi/ rVL/U4 C {).-ftvv If' Print Name ,A fI2, � Date I 20 Description of Proposed Work (attach separate narrative if necessary): _______________ List All Attachments (see reverse side for submittal requirements): For Office Use Only Approved/Disapproved by: __________ Received by: ____________ Date: _________________ Fee paid: _____Cash/Ck.# ____ Conditions of approval: ___________ Date Received: ___________ Revised April 2017 CONSERVATION DISTRICT ORDINANCE: You can review the Historic Conservation Overlay Districts regulations in the City of Charlottesville Zoning Ordinance starting with Section 34-335 online at www.charlottesville.org or at Municode.com for the City of Charlottesville. DESIGN GUIDELINES: Please refer to the current Historic Conservation Districts Design Guidelines online at www.charlottesville.org. SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: Per Sec 34-345, the applicant shall submit sufficient information to make a determination whether further review and a certificate of appropriateness is required. If the director determines that review and approval by the BAR is required, then the applicant shall submit a complete application that includes the following information: (1) A written description of proposed exterior changes; (2) A general sketch plan of the property including: the location of existing structures; property and setback lines; and any proposed new construction, additions or deletions, parking areas, and fences; (3) The total gross floor area of the existing building and of any proposed additions; (4) Elevation drawings depicting existing conditions and proposed exterior changes; (5) Photographs of the subject property in context of the buildings on contiguous properties; (6) In the case of a demolition request where structural integrity is at issue, the applicant shall provide a structural evaluation and cost estimates for rehabilitation, prepared by a professional engineer. The director may waive the requirement for a structural evaluation and cost estimates in the case of an emergency, or if the building is the primary residence of the applicant. 320 WEST MAIN STREET CHARLOTTESVILLE BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS SUBMITTED MAY 15, 2020 © 2020 FORMWORK DESIGN LLC 320 West Main Street is a contributing structure within the West Main Street Historic District, which is listed in the National Register of Historic Places. The following excerpt is from the nomination of the West Main Street Historic District for The house at at 320 West Main Street dates from the 1890s and has listing in the NRHP: been converted for commercial use. 320 West Main Street is historically known as the Sparks-Garrett House and was constructed ca. 1900. The The house at at 320 West Main Street dates from the 1890s and has been converted for stuccoed frame dwelling is T-shaped with Victorian detailing in its wide commercial use. 320 West Main Street is historically known as the Sparks-Garrett House frieze, cross-gabled roof with overhanging eaves, and now enclosed porch and was constructed ca. 1900. The stuccoed frame dwelling is T-shaped with Victorian with turned posts and bracket detailing. detailing in its wide frieze, cross-gabled roof with overhanging eaves, and now enclosed porch with turned posts and bracket detailing. 310 West Main Street, neighboring the subject property to the east, currently serves as the The following excerpt is from the nomination of the West Main Street Historic District for Greyhound bus station. The two-story building, ca. 1964, is in the "moderne" style. listing in the NRHP: 324 West Main Street, ca. 1925, neighboring the subject property to the west, is a former auto dealiership and currently houses infrastructure facilities for Comcast. The building is one of several 20th century, vernacular, auto-related commercial enterprises withing the disrict. 310 320 324 BUS STATION SUBJECT BUILDING COMCAST 320 WEST MAIN HISTORIC STATUS 1 FORMWORK DESIGN OFFICE, llc © 2020 CHARLOTTESVILLE BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW SUBMISSION 5/15/20 01 VERTICAL CHANNEL WOOD SIDING TO BE DELETED 06 02 EXISTING WINDOWS @ "PORCH" TO BE DELETED 07 03 EXISTING DOUBLE-HUNG WINDOWS TO BE DELETED, REPLACED W/ NEW IN EXISTING OPENINGS 03 04 ALUMINUM STOREFRONT ENTRY TO BE DELETED 05 05 FABRIC CANOPY TO BE DELETED 04 02 03 06 "FISH-SCALE" WOOD SHINGLES TO BE MAINTAINED 02 03 01 07 EXISTING COPPER HALF-ROUND GUTTERS TO BE 01 MAINTAINED 03 05 02 05 04 02 01 03 04 01 320 WEST MAIN EXISTING CONDITIONS / DEMOLITION NOTES 2 FORMWORK DESIGN OFFICE, llc © 2020 CHARLOTTESVILLE BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW SUBMISSION 5/15/20 06 07 04 02 c. 1980 03 01 NEW MARVIN DOUBLE-HUNG WINDOWS @ ALL EXISTING DOUBLE-HUNG LOCATIONS. PHOTOGRAPHIC RECORDS INDICATE THE ORIGINAL SASH CONFIGURATION WAS 01 TWO-OVER-TWO 02 EXISTING EXTERIOR WOOD TRIM TO BE PAINTED CHARCOAL GREY 03 EXISTING STUCCO EXTERIOR FINISH TO BE PAINTED MED/DARK GREY 08 05 04 EXISTING BROWN ASPHALT SHINGLE ROOF IS IN CONDION AND IS SCHEDULED TO REMAIN 10 09 05 NEW MARVIN TRIPLE-GANG CASEMENT WINDOWS W/ TRANSOM 06 "FISH-SCALE" WOOD SHINGLES (NOT SHOWN) TO BE MAINTAINED 11 07 EXISTING COPPER HALF-ROUND GUTTERS (NOT SHOWN) TO BE MAINTAINED 08 NEW WOOD ENTRY DOORS WITH TRANSOM TO MATCH ADJACENT WINDOW ASSEMBLIES 09 STEEL SWING-GATE WITH CUTOUT SIGNAGE AT TOP. 10 NEW MONUMENT SIGN 11 PAINTED STEEL HANDRAIL 320 WEST MAIN GENERAL VIEW 3 FORMWORK DESIGN OFFICE, llc © 2020 CHARLOTTESVILLE BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW SUBMISSION 5/15/20 320 WEST MAIN CLOSE VIEW 4 FORMWORK DESIGN OFFICE, llc © 2020 CHARLOTTESVILLE BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW SUBMISSION 5/15/20 SWING GATE TO PARKING AT REAR FUTURE PAVERS EXISTING BRICK WALL 32O WEST MAIN APPROX. 48" HIGH VEHICLE TRAFFIC VEHICLE TRAFFIC COMCAST DATA CENTER GREYHOUND BUS TALL GRASSES / PERENNIALS STATION EXISTING TREE 18" x 42" BLUESTONE PAVING STONES OVER CONC. SLAB SUBSTRATE (2) 5-1/2" RISERS SIDEWALK MONUMENT SIGN CITY EXISTING TREE WEST MAIN STREET 320 WEST MAIN SITE PLAN 5 FORMWORK DESIGN OFFICE, llc © 2020 CHARLOTTESVILLE BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW SUBMISSION 5/15/20 8'-5" GARRETT CUT-OUT LETTERING 2'-4" STEEL GATE PANEL 320 WEST MAIN PAINTED DIMENSIONAL LETTERING COFFEE BOOKS TENANT SIGNAGE AS NEEDED 7'-8" 2"X2" STEEL TUBE / PAINT OFFICE TO MATCH WOOD TRIM ON BUILDING OFFICE +/- 5'-6" MONUMENT SIGN AT SIDEWALK SWING GATE AT REAR PARKING ENTRY 320 WEST MAIN SIGNAGE ELEVATIONS 6 FORMWORK DESIGN OFFICE, llc © 2020 CHARLOTTESVILLE BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW SUBMISSION 5/15/20 Certificate of Appropriateness Application BAR 20-07-04 518 17th Street NW Tax Parcel: 050066000 Owner: Charlottesville VA House Corp – Alpha Phi Applicant: George Stone Replace slate roof Contents (Click to link directly to PDF page) • Staff Report • Staff Photos • Historic Survey • Application Link back to Packet Guide. City of Charlottesville Board of Architectural Review Staff Report July 21, 2020 Certificate of Appropriateness Application BAR 20-07-04 518 17th Street NW Tax Parcel 050066000 Zeta Iota Deuteron, HCB, Owner/ George Stone, Applicant Roof replacement Background Year Built: 1900 District: Rugby Road- University Circle-Venable Neighborhood ADC District Status: Contributing This rambling Victorian house was constructed for Randolph M. Balthis in 1899 and remained a single-family dwelling until at least the 1970s. The two-story house has weatherboard cladding, a steep hipped roof, and a wraparound verandah. (Historic survey attached.) Prior BAR Actions: November 15, 2011 – Preliminary discussion re: proposed addition. December 20, 2011 – BAR approved two-story frame addition. BAR found that the proposed handicapped ramp does not threaten the historic significance of the building. June 21, 2016 – BAR approved proposed fence. November 20, 2018 – CoA request to replace the entry door deferred by applicant. Application Application Submittal: Narrative and photographs of the proposed (Eco-slate) imitation slate shingles. Request CoA for removal of existing slate roof and replacement with imitation slate shingles, matching the shingles used on south addition approved by the BAR in December 2011. Flashing to be copper, with valley exposure to match existing. (Ledge flashing at the gables to remain.) Ridge and hip caps to be bent shingles. Internal gutters will be abandoned, replaced with eave- 518 17th Street NW (July 13, 2020) 1 mounted, 6” half-round gutters and 4” round downspouts. (Gutters will be attached to the roof sheathing; the existing cornice profile will remain.) New gutters and downspouts to be aluminum, painted white. No work proposed for the porch roof or on southern addition. Discussion and Recommendations Shingles: Per the Design Guidelies, artificial slate is an acceptable substitute when replacement is needed. Apploicant has expressed that repeated efforts have been made to repair leaks, however priblems persist. In lieu of continuing the ineffectibe spot repairs, the roofer recommended replacement of the entire roof. With replacement, the use of simulated slate is less expensive than new slate. Gutters and Downspouts: The BAR has approved CoA requests to remove internal gutters and replace with eave-mounted. Applicant proposes painted aluminium (white), matchinh the current downpouts and reducing the visibility of the new gutters. Staff recommends approval of the CoA, with the following conditions: (See the attached images.)  Match the existing dimensions of the exposed valley flashing.  Ridge and hip cap profile to match or be similar to the existing profiled, metal cap.  Install new downspouts at same locations as the existing. Suggested Motion Approval: Having considered the standards set forth within the City Code, including City Design Guidelines for Rehabilitation, I move to find that the proposed roof replacement satisfies the BAR’s criteria and is compatible with this property and other properties in the Rugby Road- University Circle-Venable Neighborhood ADC District, and that the BAR approves the application as submitted. […as submitted with the following modifications…] Denial: Having considered the standards set forth within the City Code, including City Design Guidelines for Rehabilitation, I move to find that the proposed roof replacement does not satisfy the BAR’s criteria and is not compatible with this property and other properties in the Rugby Road-University Circle-Venable Neighborhood ADC District, and that for the following reasons the BAR denies the application as submitted: Criteria, Standards, and Guidelines Review Criteria Generally Sec. 34-284(b) of the City Code states that, in considering a particular application the BAR shall approve the application unless it finds: (1) That the proposal does not meet specific standards set forth within this division or applicable provisions of the Design Guidelines established by the board pursuant to Sec. 34-288(6); and (2) The proposal is incompatible with the historic, cultural or architectural character of the district in which the property is located or the protected property that is the subject of the application. Pertinent Standards for Review of Construction and Alterations include: 518 17th Street NW (July 13, 2020) 2 (1) Whether the material, texture, color, height, scale, mass and placement of the proposed addition, modification or construction are visually and architecturally compatible with the site and the applicable design control district; (2) The harmony of the proposed change in terms of overall proportion and the size and placement of entrances, windows, awnings, exterior stairs and signs; (3) The Secretary of the Interior Standards for Rehabilitation set forth within the Code of Federal Regulations (36 C.F.R. §67.7(b)), as may be relevant; (4) The effect of the proposed change on the historic district neighborhood; (5) The impact of the proposed change on other protected features on the property, such as gardens, landscaping, fences, walls and walks; (6) Whether the proposed method of construction, renovation or restoration could have an adverse impact on the structure or site, or adjacent buildings or structures; (7) Any applicable provisions of the City’s Design Guidelines. Pertinent Standards for Review of Rehabilitation include: G. Roof 1) When replacing a standing seam metal roof, the width of the pan and the seam height should be consistent with the original. Ideally, the seams would be hand crimped. 2) If pre-painted standing seam metal roof material is permitted, commercial-looking ridge caps or ridge vents are not appropriate on residential structures. 3) Original roof pitch and configuration should be maintained. 4) The original size and shape of dormers should be maintained. 5) Dormers should not be introduced on visible elevations where none existed originally. 6) Retain elements, such as chimneys, skylights, and light wells that contribute to the style and character of the building. 7) When replacing a roof, match original materials as closely as possible. a. Avoid, for example, replacing a standing-seam metal roof with asphalt shingles, as this would dramatically alter the building’s appearance. b. Artificial slate is an acceptable substitute when replacement is needed. c. Do not change the appearance or material of parapet coping. 8) Place solar collectors and antennae on non-character defining roofs or roofs of non-historic adjacent buildings. 9) Do not add new elements, such as vents, skylights, or additional stories that would be visible on the primary elevations of the building. 518 17th Street NW (July 13, 2020) 3 518 17th Street NW Staff Photos Figure 1: Oblique view of 518 17th Street NW, facing southwest. Figure 2: Oblique view of 518 17th Street NW, facing southeast. Figure 3: Oblique view of 518 17th Street NW, facing southeast. Figure 4: West elevation of 518 17th Street NW. Figure 5: View of 518 17th Street NW, at right, in context of neighboring buildings on street. Figure 6: View of 518 17th Street NW, at left, in context of neighboring buildings on street. Board of Architectural Review (BAR) Certificate of Appropriateness Please Return To: City of Charlottesville Department of Neighborhood Development Services P.O. Box 911, City Hall Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 Telephone (434) 970-3130 Please submit ten (10) hard copies and one (1) digital copy of application form and all attachments. Please include application fee as follows: New construction project $375; Demolition of a contributing structure $375; Appeal of BAR decision $125; Additions and other projects requiring BAR approval $125; Administrative approval $100. Make checks payable to the City of Charlottesville. The BAR meets the third Tuesday of the month. Deadline for submittals is Tuesday 3 weeks prior to next BAR meeting by 3:30 p.m. Owner NameZE"f':R '1"0-rA DEufE<4)N Ht g Applicant Name G. W., QLPHfl TJ�� R..oR.1 '['11 W AR.L01TE$\lILLE \[fl 2,'Z.903 Signature of Applicant Applicant Information I hereby attest that the information I have provided is, to the d Dafe 1 ,g� :::&;� s�i1/2_020 Property Owner Information (if not applicant) Print Name Address: ________________ Property Owner Permission (if not applicant) I have read this application and hereby give my consent to Email:_________________ its submission. Phone: (W) _______ (C) ______ Signature Date Do you intend to apply for Federal or State Tax Credits .._N O ------ for this project? __ ,_=- Print Name Date For Office Use Only Approved/Disapproved by: __________ Received by: ____________ Date: ----------------- Fee paid: _____Cash/Ck.# ____ Conditions of approval: ___________ Date Received: ___________ Revised 2016 518 17th Street NW 518 17th Street NW 518 17th Street NW 518 17th Street NW (images from Google Maps, dated July 2019) Note cap and valley flashing. Similar profile (on-line image) Proposed ridge and hip cap 120 Oakhurst 518 17th Street NW (images from Google Maps, dated July 2019) Internal gutters, painted downspouts 518 17th Street NW (images from Google Maps, dated July 2019) Slate Roof framing Valley flashing Width of exposed flashing ROOF DRAINAGE HALF ROUND HANGERS GEM CIRCLE W/ SPRING CLIP, NUT & BOLT MATERIALS: WIDTHS: NOTES: Aluminum - Painted, Aluminum - Mill Finish, 5", 6" * Accessory item is not formed from FreedomGray® coil or sheet Copper, Copper - *FreedomGray®, product. It is formed from copper product plated with Tin Steel - Galvanized, Zinc coating to provide similar color and properties. Steel - Painted Galvanized FreedomGray® is registered trademark of Revere Copper Products, Inc. #10 COMBINATION CIRCLE & SHANK W/ SPRING CLIP HALF ROUND HANGERS MATERIALS: WIDTHS: Aluminum - Painted, Copper, 5", 6" Steel - Galvanized, Steel - Painted Galvanized FACE MOUNT HANGER W/ CROSSBAR & SPRING CLIP MATERIALS: SIZES: WIDTHS: NOTES: Aluminum - Painted, Copper, 3/16" x 1" Bar 7", 8" Steel - Galvanized and Steel - Steel - Galvanized, Steel - Painted Galvanized 1/16" x 1" Crossbar Painted Galvanized items require a 2 week lead time. HIDDEN HANGER FOR REVERSE BEAD GUTTER ONLY MATERIALS: WIDTH: Aluminum - Painted, Copper, 6" Steel - Stainless RIVAL STRAP HANGER MATERIALS: WIDTH: Aluminum - Painted, Aluminum - Mill Finish, 5", 6" Copper, Steel - Galvanized BERGERBP.COM | 800.523.8852 • 215.355.1200 • FAX: 215.355.7738 33 ROOF DRAINAGE SHANKS #1 SHANK PLATE FOR MATERIALS: NOTES: FASCIA Aluminum - Painted, Aluminum - Mill Finish, *Accessory item is not formed from Copper, Copper - *FreedomGray®, FreedomGray® coil or sheet product. Steel - Galvanized It is formed from copper product plat- ed with Tin Zinc coating to provide similar color and properties. Free- domGray® is registered trademark of Revere Copper Products, Inc. #6 SHANK FOR OGEE OR MATERIALS: CROWN MOLDING Copper, Steel - Galvanized, Steel - Painted Galvanized SHANKS #8 SHANK FOR CORNICE MATERIALS: Iron - Malleable #10 SHANK FOR FASCIA MATERIALS: Copper, Steel - Galvanized, Steel - Painted Galvanized #11 SHANK FOR NAILING MATERIALS: TO EXPOSED RAFTER Aluminum - Painted, Copper, Steel - Galvanized #12 SHANK FOR NAILING MATERIALS: NOTES: TO SHEETING - 1/3 PITCH Aluminum - Painted, Aluminum - Mill Finish, *Accessory item is not formed from Copper, Copper - *FreedomGray®, FreedomGray® coil or sheet product. Steel - Galvanized, Steel - Painted Galvanized It is formed from copper product plated with Tin Zinc coating to provide similar color and properties. FreedomGray® is registered trademark of Revere Copper Products, Inc. #25 SHANK FOR NAILING MATERIALS: TO SHEETING - 1/2 PITCH Copper, Steel - Galvanized 38 BERGERBP.COM | 800.523.8852 • 215.355.1200 • FAX: 215.355.7738 Certificate of Appropriateness Application BAR 20-07-06 411 1st Street N Tax Parcel: 330107000 Owner: Andrea and Reidar Stiernstrand Applicant: Julie Kline Dixon/Rosney Co. Architects New door at window opening Contents (Click to link directly to PDF page) • Staff Report • Staff Photos • Historic Survey • Application Link back to Packet Guide. City of Charlottesville Board of Architectural Review Staff Report July 21, 2020 Certificate of Appropriateness Application BAR 20-07-06 411 1st Street N Tax Parcel: 330107000 Owner: Andrea and Reidar Stiernstrand Applicant: Julie Kline Dixon/Rosney Co. Architects Relocate door to window opening Background Year Built: 1882-1889 District: North Downtown ADC District Status: Contributing The George-Makris House was likely built as a rental property sometime between 1882 and 1889. Compared with neighboring houses of similar scale on the block, the subject building has fewer architectural embellishments. The two-story, three-bay brick house is situated on a high basement and is fronted by a wood porch with Victorian trim. (Historic survey attached.) September 18, 2001 – BAR approved CoA to extend an existing addition to the rear. April 16, 2002 – BAR approved CoA to replace the single windows in the side elevations of the original structure with double windows. November 17, 2009 – BAR approved CoA to add a frame, 2-story rear addition for a sunroom and loggia on the first floor and a bath and screen porch on the second floor. Wood, double-hung windows, operable shutters, painted dark green/black, at existing rear windows. Copper roof and gutters to match existing; Hardie-siding; azek trim; stucco base; all siding/trim painted white. 411 N. 1st Street (July 16, 2020) 1 Application  Submittal: Rosney Co. Architects submittal dated 26 May 2020: Narrative (two pages); drawings EC1.0, A1.0, A2.0, A3.0, A3.1 (5/6/2020), and A3.2 (6/29/2020). Request CoA for removal of existing basement window and installation of entry door.  Relocate existing window to center door opening. Infill with new brick below.  Relocate existing door to south window opening.  From driveway to door, construct stone steps/landing and new stone retaining wall.  Reconstruct wood porch stairs to accommodate new access to basement entry.  Install new light fixture. Note: While the drawings indicate swapping the existing window with the existing door, the applicant would prefer to leave the door in place and install a new door in the window opening. Discussion and Recommendations This opening is at the primary and is being modified to accommodate accessibility for an elderly relative. If the applicant preference is approved, staff recommends the following conditions:  [Staff concurs with the applicant’s preference.] Remove only the proposed window and install a new door in the opening. Leave in place the existing door at the center, below the front porch.  Retain and store the existing window, should the opening be later restored.  The existing masonry opening is not altered other than below the existing window.  For the exterior light fixture, the lamping will have a Color Temperature not to exceed 3,000K, preferably dimmable, and will comply with the City’s “Dark Sky” ordinance.  Applicant will provide to staff for the BAR archive cut sheets for the doors, widows, and any exterior light fixtures. Suggested Motion Approval: Having considered the standards set forth within the City Code, including City Design Guidelines for Rehabilitation, I move to find that the proposed alterations satisfy the BAR’s criteria and are compatible with this property and other properties in the North Downtown ADC ADC District, and that the BAR approves the application as submitted. […as submitted with the following conditions: …] Denial: Having considered the standards set forth within the City Code, including City Design Guidelines for Rehabilitation, I move to find that the proposed alterations do not satisfy the BAR’s criteria and are compatible with this property and other properties in the North Downtown ADC District, and that the BAR denies the application as submitted for the following reasons: Criteria, Standards, and Guidelines Review Criteria Generally Sec. 34-284(b) of the City Code states that, in considering a particular application the BAR shall approve the application unless it finds: (1) That the proposal does not meet specific standards set forth within this division or applicable provisions of the Design Guidelines established by the board pursuant to Sec. 34-288(6); and 411 N. 1st Street (July 16, 2020) 2 (2) The proposal is incompatible with the historic, cultural or architectural character of the district in which the property is located or the protected property that is the subject of the application. Pertinent Standards for Review of Construction and Alterations include: (1) Whether the material, texture, color, height, scale, mass and placement of the proposed addition, modification or construction are visually and architecturally compatible with the site and the applicable design control district; (2) The harmony of the proposed change in terms of overall proportion and the size and placement of entrances, windows, awnings, exterior stairs and signs; (3) The Secretary of the Interior Standards for Rehabilitation set forth within the Code of Federal Regulations (36 C.F.R. §67.7(b)), as may be relevant; (4) The effect of the proposed change on the historic district neighborhood; (5) The impact of the proposed change on other protected features on the property, such as gardens, landscaping, fences, walls and walks; (6) Whether the proposed method of construction, renovation or restoration could have an adverse impact on the structure or site, or adjacent buildings or structures; (7) Any applicable provisions of the City’s Design Guidelines. Pertinent Design Review Guidelines for Rehabilitations Pertinent Guidelines for Rehabilitations C. Windows 1) Prior to any repair or replacement of windows, a survey of existing window conditions is recommended. Note number of windows, whether each window is original or replaced, the material, type, hardware and finish, the condition of the frame, sash, sill, putty, and panes. 2) Retain original windows when possible. 3) Uncover and repair covered up windows and reinstall windows where they have been blocked in. 4) If the window is no longer needed, the glass should be retained and the back side frosted, screened, or shuttered so that it appears from the outside to be in use. 5) Repair original windows by patching, splicing, consolidating or otherwise reinforcing. Wood that appears to be in bad condition because of peeling paint or separated joints often can be repaired. 6) Replace historic components of a window that are beyond repair with matching components. 7) Replace entire windows only when they are missing or beyond repair. 8) If a window on the primary façade of a building must be replaced and an existing window of the same style, material, and size is identified on a secondary elevation, place the historic window in the window opening on the primary façade. 9) Reconstruction should be based on physical evidence or old photographs. 10) Avoid changing the number, location, size, or glazing pattern of windows by cutting new openings, blocking in windows, or installing replacement sash that does not fit the window opening. 11) Do not use inappropriate materials or finishes that radically change the sash, depth of reveal, muntin configuration, reflective quality or color of the glazing, or appearance of the frame. 12) Use replacement windows with true divided lights or interior and exterior fixed muntins with internal spacers to replace historic or original examples. 13) If windows warrant replacement, appropriate material for new windows depends upon the context of the building within a historic district, and the age and design of the building. 411 N. 1st Street (July 16, 2020) 3 Sustainable materials such as wood, aluminum-clad wood, solid fiberglass, and metal windows are preferred. Vinyl windows are discouraged. 14) False muntins and internal removable grilles do not present an historic appearance and should not be used. 15) Do not use tinted or mirrored glass on major facades of the building. Translucent or low (e) glass may be strategies to keep heat gain down. 16) Storm windows should match the size and shape of the existing windows and the original sash configuration. Special shapes, such as arched top storms, are available. 17) Storm windows should not damage or obscure the windows and frames. 18) Avoid aluminum-colored storm sash. It can be painted an appropriate color if it is first primed with a zinc chromate primer. 19) The addition of shutters may be appropriate if not previously installed but if compatible with the style of the building or neighborhood. 20) In general, shutters should be wood (rather than metal or vinyl) and should be mounted on hinges. In some circumstances, appropriately dimensioned, painted, composite material shutters may be used. 21) The size of the shutters should result in their covering the window opening when closed. 22) Avoid shutters on composite or bay windows. 23) If using awnings, ensure that they align with the opening being covered. 24) Use awning colors that are compatible with the colors of the building. D. Entrances, Porches, and Doors 1) The original details and shape of porches should be retained including the outline, roof height, and roof pitch. 2) Inspect masonry, wood, and metal or porches and entrances for signs of rust, peeling paint, wood deterioration, open joints around frames, deteriorating putty, inadequate caulking, and improper drainage, and correct any of these conditions. 3) Repair damaged elements, matching the detail of the existing original fabric. 4) Replace an entire porch only if it is too deteriorated to repair or is completely missing, and design to match the original as closely as possible. 5) Do not strip entrances and porches of historic material and details. 6) Give more importance to front or side porches than to utilitarian back porches. 7) Do not remove or radically change entrances and porches important in defining the building’s overall historic character. 8) Avoid adding decorative elements incompatible with the existing structure. 9) In general, avoid adding a new entrance to the primary facade, or facades visible from the street. 10) Do not enclose porches on primary elevations and avoid enclosing porches on secondary elevations in a manner that radically changes the historic appearance. 11) Provide needed barrier-free access in ways that least alter the features of the building. a. For residential buildings, try to use ramps that are removable or portable rather than permanent. b. On nonresidential buildings, comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act while minimizing the visual impact of ramps that affect the appearance of a building. 12) The original size and shape of door openings should be maintained. 13) Original door openings should not be filled in. 14) When possible, reuse hardware and locks that are original or important to the historical evolution of the building. 411 N. 1st Street (July 16, 2020) 4 15) Avoid substituting the original doors with stock size doors that do not fit the opening properly or are not compatible with the style of the building. 16) Retain transom windows and sidelights. 17) When installing storm or screen doors, ensure that they relate to the character of the existing door. a. They should be a simple design where lock rails and stiles are similar in placement and size. b. Avoid using aluminum colored storm doors. c. If the existing storm door is aluminum, consider painting it to match the existing door. d. Use a zinc chromate primer before painting to ensure adhesion. H. Masonry 1) Retain masonry features, such as walls, brackets, railings, cornices, window surrounds, pediments, steps, and columns that are important in defining the overall character of the building. 2) When repairing or replacing a masonry feature, respect the size, texture, color, and pattern of masonry units, as well as mortar joint size and tooling. 3) When repointing masonry, duplicate mortar strength, composition, color, and texture. a. Do not repoint with mortar that is stronger than the original mortar and the brick itself. b. Do not repoint with a synthetic caulking compound. 4) Repoint to match original joints and retain the original joint width. 5) Do not paint unpainted masonry. 411 N. 1st Street (July 16, 2020) 5 411 North 1st Street Staff Photos Figure 1: Oblique view of 411 North 1st Street, facing southwest. Figure 2: East elevation of 411 North 1st Street. Figure 3: Oblique view of 411 North 1st Street, facing northwest. Figure 4: Focus view of entry porch and location of proposed exterior door. Figure 5: Focus view of entry porch and location of proposed exterior door. Figure 6: Focus view of entry porch and existing door below porch. Figure 7: View south on North First Street, with 411 North 1st Street at right. Board of Architectural Review (BAR) Certificate of Appropriateness Please Ret u rn To: City of Charlottesville Department of Neighb orhood Development Servi ces P.O. Box 911, City Hall Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 Telephone (434) 970-3130 five (5) Please submit ten t18t hard copies and one (1) digital copy of application form and all attachments. Please include application fee as follows: New construction project $375; Demolition of a contributing structure $375; Appeal of BAR decision $125; Additions and other projects requiring BAR approval $125; Administrative approval $100. Ma�e checks payable to the City of Charlottesville. The BAR meets the third Tuesday of the month. Deadline for submittals is Tuesday 3weeks prior to next BAR meeting by 3:30 p.m. Owner Name Andre a & Re id a r S iem t s trand Applicant Name Julie Kline Di xo n Pro ject Name /Description _E_x_t e_n_o· _l r _a _e_t r _ti_a o_ n ____ s ______ Par cel Number ___3_ 3 _oi_o_7oo_____ o _ t S_tr_ee_t_ ________ _____________ ___ 41_1 _N__o rth_l_s _ Project Property Address__ Signature of Applicant Applicant lnfonnation ( I hereby attest that the information I have provided is, to the Address: [QO". i�r AM:fl:::ll:e:r ST o ledge, correct. best of my knw t\.+ ,\(l...vO 11}..":> v I \. t..C I/A ?--i,� :>\ Sign� Date ProP9rty Owner lnfonnation (if not applicant) Print Name Date Address: 4:I\ iJ. ls, 5'( Prope¢f Owner Pennission (if not applicant) I have read this application and hereby give my consent to e 0 Email: IV\ C. \0., ad Y(.d Al\.l WM A,t its& � Phone: (W) _ ______ (t) _____ _ 5 1...u/z. o °I 11· t? 'b. ":?oi5 ftature l.,e ' Do you intend to apply for Federal or State Tax Credits for this project? ___N:...:_o______ !:'lclv..(' � Sh-c.,.,r1StiZ41tJL s-Ju /zlJ Print Name Date ' Description of Proposed Work (attach separate narrative if necessary): ______________ List All Attachments (see reverse side for submittal requirements): OG'll'wltJb !:>(:1: For Office Use Only Approved/Disapprove d by: _________ Received by: ___________ Date: ________________ Fee paid: _____Cash/Ck.# ____ Conditions of approval: __________ Date Received: __ ________ Revised 2016 Date: 26 May 2020 To: City of Charlottesville From: The Rosney Co Architects Re: 411 North 1st Street Re: Narrative Description of Proposed Alteration to 411 North 1st Street: The Stiernstrands need to create a more gentle entry into their basement to accommodate an aging in place relative who will be staying with them indefinitely. Currently, the door to the basement enters below the front porch. It is cramped by the porch overhead, has a steep drop from the earth level below the porch into the house, 609 East Market Street, Suite 206 Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 and is cramped by the bottom of the stair directly inside. There are two masonry openings for windows on the left and right of the door, not covered by the porch, and of the exact same width as the door itself. Given that the existing masonry opening on the south side of the east façade is much simpler to access, we propose re-purposing that existing masonry opening which currently holds the window into a door. This allows adequate head height, and easy transition from the proposed new landing to the interior and amply space inside for maneuvering. If it’s preferable, we would happily re- use the existing door from below the porch in the new opening, although our instinct is to leave that door in place and to label and store the existing window and brick that must be removed on site. Julie Dixon The Rosney Co Architects 609 East Market Street, Suite 206 Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 609 East Market Street, Suite 206 Charlottesville, Va. 22902 T: 434.391.4947 11'-1 3/4" 10'-1/2" 7'-8 3/4" CONSULTANTS: CIVIL ENGINEER: 6'-8" HVAC 8'-6 1/2" 5'-4 3/4" bath 7'-6" 8' 14'-7 1/4" 7'-6 1/4" playroom 12'-3" 7'-5" 8'-5 1/2" 7'-6 1/2" Stiernstrand Residence 5'-2" 18'-7 1/2" Charlottesville, Virginia 22911 8" 411 1st Street NW, 6'-11 3/4" 13'-1/2" bedroom 15'-7 1/2" 17'-9" 14'-8" 7'-4" 7'-3/4" 6'-10 5/8" 15'-5" 12'-4 3/4" 3'-8 1/2" STEP DOWN 7.5" EDITIONS/REVS 5/6/2020 6'-11 3/4" 3'-11 1/4" Basement Plan 5/6/2020 10'-11 1/4" 17'-4" 10'-11 3/8" EC1.0 3:55 PM:5/6/2020 609 East Market Street, Suite 206 Charlottesville, Va. 22902 T: 434.391.4947 CONSULTANTS: CIVIL ENGINEER: SECOND FLOOR SECOND FLOOR 10'-6" 10'-6" FIRST FLOOR FIRST FLOOR 8'-1 1/2" 8'-1 1/2" TEN 7 1/4" RISERS W/ 10" TREAD BASEMENT BASEMENT 7 1/2" Stiernstrand Residence Front Elevation Rear Elevation 1 2 SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0" SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0" Charlottesville, Virginia 22911 411 1st Street NW, SECOND FLOOR SECOND FLOOR 10'-6" 10'-6" FIRST FLOOR FIRST FLOOR 8'-1 1/2" 8'-1 1/2" EDITIONS/REVS BASEMENT BASEMENT BASEMENT 5/6/2020 Exterior Elevations Side Elevation Side Elevation 3 4 SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0" SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0" 5/6/2020 A2.0 3:03 PM:5/6/2020 609 East Market Street, Suite 206 Charlottesville, Va. 22902 T: 434.391.4947 11'-1 3/4" 10'-1/2" storage CONSULTANTS: CIVIL ENGINEER: 3'-3" kitchenette 5'-11 1/4" mech. 7'-6 1/4" 5'-8" 14'-7 1/4" 1'-6 1/2" storage bath exercise 10'-10 1/4" 4' laundry 6'-6 1/2" Stiernstrand Residence D 8'-2 1/2" W 11'-7" 6' 2'-1" cl Charlottesville, Virginia 22911 411 1st Street NW, lockers 6'-11 3/4" 13'-1/2" 15'-7 1/2" 17'-9" 14'-8" 15'-5" REUSE EXISTING WINDOW WITHIN EXSTG mudroom bedroom MASONRY OPENING. INFILL WITH NEW BRICK BELOW 12'-4 3/4" REUSE EXISTING DOOR FROM STAIR HALL WITHIN EXSTING MASONRY OPENING STONE LANDING AND STAIR TO BASEMENT LEVEL WITH (3) RISERS @ 6.75" EA. 3'-6" 10" 10" 5' down EDITIONS/REVS 4'-6 3/4" DRAIN 5/6/2020 under porch storage NEW STONE RETAINING WALL BETWEEN STAIR AND NEW BASEMENT ENTRY 6'-11 3/4" 4'-5 1/4" Basement NEW WOOD STAIR ALIGNED WITH Option 1 COLUMNS ABOVE 5/6/2020 10'-11 1/4" 17'-4" 10'-11 3/8" Basement 1 A1.0 SCALE: 3/8" = 1'-0" 4:40 PM:5/6/2020 609 East Market Street, Suite 206 Charlottesville, Va. 22902 T: 434.391.4947 CONSULTANTS: CIVIL ENGINEER: SECOND FLOOR SECOND FLOOR Stiernstrand Residence 10'-6" 10'-6" Charlottesville, Virginia 22911 RE-USE EXISTING WINDOW FROM ADJACENT ROOM HERE FIRST FLOOR 411 1st Street NW, FIRST FLOOR RE-USE EXISTING DOOR FROM STAIR HALL HERE 8'-1 1/2" NEW DRAIN @ LANDING 8'-1 1/2" THERMAL CUT 2" THICK BLUESTONE TREADS TO MATCH REAR EXISTING BASEMENT FLOOR HEIGHT 1'-8 1/4" BASEMENT BASEMENT 7 1/2" 3" Existing Entry 1 Proposed Porch Section 1 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" A3.0 EDITIONS/REVS 5/6/2020 Front Porch Section 5/6/2020 A3.0 3:07 PM:5/6/2020 609 East Market Street, Suite 206 Charlottesville, Va. 22902 T: 434.391.4947 CONSULTANTS: CIVIL ENGINEER: SECOND FLOOR SECOND FLOOR Stiernstrand Residence 10'-6" Charlottesville, Virginia 22911 RE-USE EXISTING WINDOW FROM ADJACENT ROOM HERE FIRST FLOOR FIRST FLOOR 411 1st Street NW, RE-USE EXISTING DOOR FROM STAIR HALL HERE NEW STAIR 8'-1 1/2" NEW DRAIN @ LANDING LOCATION THERMAL CUT 2" THICK BLUESTONE TREADS TO MATCH REAR EXISTING BASEMENT FLOOR HEIGHT BASEMENT BASEMENT 1'-8 1/4" 3" 4'-6 3/4" EDITIONS/REVS 5/6/2020 Front Porch Section 5/6/2020 A3.1 3:08 PM:5/6/2020 609 East Market Street, Suite 206 Charlottesville, Va. 22902 T: 434.391.4947 CONSULTANTS: CIVIL ENGINEER: 2'-10" 6'-11 3/4" 13'-1/2" REMOVE DOOR AND INFILL WALL FIRST FLOOR PORCH 8" 1' bedroom 15'-7 1/2" 7'-3/4" 6'-10 5/8" 6'-11 3/4" 8'-1 1/2" 6'-3 3/4" REMOVE DOOR AND INFILL WALL 7'-3/4" NEW OPENING 3' Stiernstrand Residence 10 1/2" Charlottesville, Virginia 22911 411 1st Street NW, 3'-7" SLAB STEP DOWN 7.5" 7 1/2" BASEMENT RE-USE EXISTING WINDOW FROM ADJACENT ROOM HERE 6'-11 3/4" 17'-4" Front Porch Section Basement Plan 1 2 SCALE: 1" = 1'-0" SCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0" EDITIONS/REVS 6/29/2020 Front Porch Section 6/29/2020 A3.2 9:21 AM:6/29/2020 Certificate of Appropriateness Application BAR 20-07-07 422 1st Street N Tax Parcel: 330100000 Owner: NONCE, LLC Applicant: Julie Kline Dixon/Rosney Co. Architects Addition to residence Contents (Click to link directly to PDF page) • Staff Report • Staff Photos • Historic Survey • Application Link back to Packet Guide. CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW STAFF REPORT July 21, 2020 Certificate of Appropriateness Application BAR 20-07-07 422 1st Street N Tax Parcel: 330100000 Owner: NONCE, LLC Applicant: Julie Kline Dixon/Rosney Co. Architects Addition to residence Background Year Built: c1870 - 1885 District: North Downtown ADC District Status: Contributing The Watson-Bosserman House is a three-bay, two-story frame house built in 1870. It’s representative of similar vernacular houses built in Charlottesville in the decades following the Civil War. (Historic survey attached.) Prior BAR Reviews None Application  Submittal: Rosney Co. Architects narrative, photos, drawings sheets, dated 25 June 2020: Sheets EC1.0, EC1.1, EC2.0, EC2.1, A1.0, A2.0, A3.0 and Perspective. Request CoA for alterations to the rear of the house. 1st Floor, South Elevation:  Remove the wood deck, metal rail and spiral stair to the lower garden.  Remove the east and south facing sunroom façade and roof.  Reconstruct the sunroom walls to accommodate new windows and new roof.  Below the sunroom, construct brick piers and install two new windows. Existing door to remain. 422 1st Street North (July 16, 2020) 1 1st Floor, East Elevation:  Remove the wood deck.  Construct a rear porch on painted brick piers. Decking to be ipe,  Sunroom roof to extend over the new porch and wrap the rear addition. Roof will be supported 10” square posts. Trim details to match the house.  Remove south window on the rear wing and install entry door.  On the north side of the porch, install an entry door into the house and construct stairs from the yard. Steps to be ipe.  Porch and stair rails: Railing 3-1/4" rounded, pickets 1" x 3/4" square edge. Second Story Addition:  Construct a second story above the existing rear wing of the house.  Roofline and eave will be below that on the front section of the house.  Trim and details to match front section of the house.  Existing chimney to be extended and shifted to accommodate new window. General:  Trim details to match the existing on the house.  Siding repairs/new to match existing.  Windows to be Marvin or similar, solid wood, double-hung sash. Selections have not been made, but applicant will accept a condition that lite configuration will conform with that shown on the elevations and for insulated glass that applied muntins are acceptable provided there is an internal spacer bar.  Roof to be standing-seam metal.  Lighting fixtures have not been selected, but applicant will accept a condition that the lamping be dimmable and have a Color Temperature that does not exceed 3,000K. Discussion and Recommendations Staff is unable to determine if the rear addition is that seen in the 1896 and 1920 Sanborn Maps, or some part of it. Applicants stated that the sunroom is not. (Note: Sanborn Maps are unreliable for building dimensions.) BAR should discuss the relocated chimney. No details are provided on the materiality. 422 1st Street North (July 16, 2020) 2 Should the BAR move to approve, staff recommends the following conditions:  New windows and doors to be wood or aluminum clad. Applied muntins are acceptable and must be appropriately dimensioned. If insulated glass, there will internal space bars aligned with the applied muntins.  Any exterior lighting the lamping will have a Color Temperature not to exceed 3,000K, preferably dimmable, and will comply with the City’s “Dark Sky” ordinance.  Applicant will provide to staff for the BAR archive cut sheets for the doors, widows, and any exterior light fixtures. Suggested Motions Approval: Having considered the standards set forth within the City Code, including City Design Guidelines for New Construction and for Rehabilitations, I move to find that the proposed alterations and addition satisfy 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.. [.. as submitted with the following modifications…] Denial: Having considered the standards set forth within the City Code, including City Design Guidelines for New Construction and for Rehabilitations, I move to find that the alterations and addition do not satisfy the BAR’s criteria and are not compatible with this property and other properties in the North Downtown ADC district, and that for the following reasons the BAR denies the application as submitted.. Criteria, Standards, and Guidelines Review Criteria Generally Sec. 34-284(b) of the City Code states that, in considering a particular application the BAR shall approve the application unless it finds: (1) That the proposal does not meet specific standards set forth within this division or applicable provisions of the Design Guidelines established by the board pursuant to Sec. 34-288(6); and (2) The proposal is incompatible with the historic, cultural or architectural character of the district in which the property is located or the protected property that is the subject of the application. Pertinent Standards for Review of Construction and Alterations include: (1) Whether the material, texture, color, height, scale, mass and placement of the proposed addition, modification or construction are visually and architecturally compatible with the site and the applicable design control district; (2) The harmony of the proposed change in terms of overall proportion and the size and placement of entrances, windows, awnings, exterior stairs and signs; (3) The Secretary of the Interior Standards for Rehabilitation set forth within the Code of Federal Regulations (36 C.F.R. §67.7(b)), as may be relevant; (4) The effect of the proposed change on the historic district neighborhood; (5) The impact of the proposed change on other protected features on the property, such as gardens, landscaping, fences, walls and walks; (6) Whether the proposed method of construction, renovation or restoration could have an adverse impact on the structure or site, or adjacent buildings or structures; (7) Any applicable provisions of the City’s Design Guidelines. 422 1st Street North (July 16, 2020) 3 Pertinent Guidelines for New Construction and Additions P. Additions Many of the smaller commercial and other business buildings may be enlarged as development pressure increases in downtown Charlottesville and along West Main Street. These existing structures may be increased in size by constructing new additions on the rear or side or in some cases by carefully adding on extra levels above the current roof. The design of new additions on all elevations that are prominently visible should follow the guidelines for new construction as described earlier in this section. Several other considerations that are specific to new additions in the historic districts are listed below: 1) Function and Size a. Attempt to accommodate needed functions within the existing structure without building an addition. b. Limit the size of the addition so that it does not visually overpower the existing building. 2) Location a. Attempt to locate the addition on rear or side elevations that are not visible from the street. b. If additional floors are constructed on top of a building, set the addition back from the main façade so that its visual impact is minimized. c. If the addition is located on a primary elevation facing the street or if a rear addition faces a street, parking area, or an important pedestrian route, the façade of the addition should be treated under the new construction guidelines. 3) Design a. New additions should not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. b. The new work should be differentiated from the old and should be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment. 4) Replication of Style a. A new addition should not be an exact copy of the design of the existing historic building. The design of new additions can be compatible with and respectful of existing buildings without being a mimicry of their original design. b. If the new addition appears to be part of the existing building, the integrity of the original historic design is compromised and the viewer is confused over what is historic and what is new. 5) Materials and Features a. Use materials, windows, doors, architectural detailing, roofs, and colors that are compatible with historic buildings in the district. 6) Attachment to Existing Building a. Wherever possible, new additions or alterations to existing buildings should be done in such a manner that, if such additions or alterations were to be removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the buildings would be unimpaired. b. The new design should not use the same wall plane, roof line, or cornice line of the existing structure. Pertinent Guidelines for Rehabilitations C. Windows 1) Prior to any repair or replacement of windows, a survey of existing window conditions is recommended. Note number of windows, whether each window is original or replaced, the material, type, hardware and finish, the condition of the frame, sash, sill, putty, and panes. 422 1st Street North (July 16, 2020) 4 2) Retain original windows when possible. 3) Uncover and repair covered up windows and reinstall windows where they have been blocked in. 4) If the window is no longer needed, the glass should be retained and the back side frosted, screened, or shuttered so that it appears from the outside to be in use. 5) Repair original windows by patching, splicing, consolidating or otherwise reinforcing. Wood that appears to be in bad condition because of peeling paint or separated joints often can be repaired. 6) Replace historic components of a window that are beyond repair with matching components. 7) Replace entire windows only when they are missing or beyond repair. 8) If a window on the primary façade of a building must be replaced and an existing window of the same style, material, and size is identified on a secondary elevation, place the historic window in the window opening on the primary façade. 9) Reconstruction should be based on physical evidence or old photographs. 10) Avoid changing the number, location, size, or glazing pattern of windows by cutting new openings, blocking in windows, or installing replacement sash that does not fit the window opening. 11) Do not use inappropriate materials or finishes that radically change the sash, depth of reveal, muntin configuration, reflective quality or color of the glazing, or appearance of the frame. 12) Use replacement windows with true divided lights or interior and exterior fixed muntins with internal spacers to replace historic or original examples. 13) If windows warrant replacement, appropriate material for new windows depends upon the context of the building within a historic district, and the age and design of the building. Sustainable materials such as wood, aluminum-clad wood, solid fiberglass, and metal windows are preferred. Vinyl windows are discouraged. 14) False muntins and internal removable grilles do not present an historic appearance and should not be used. 15) Do not use tinted or mirrored glass on major facades of the building. Translucent or low (e) glass may be strategies to keep heat gain down. 16) Storm windows should match the size and shape of the existing windows and the original sash configuration. Special shapes, such as arched top storms, are available. 17) Storm windows should not damage or obscure the windows and frames. 18) Avoid aluminum-colored storm sash. It can be painted an appropriate color if it is first primed with a zinc chromate primer. 19) The addition of shutters may be appropriate if not previously installed but if compatible with the style of the building or neighborhood. 20) In general, shutters should be wood (rather than metal or vinyl) and should be mounted on hinges. In some circumstances, appropriately dimensioned, painted, composite material shutters may be used. 21) The size of the shutters should result in their covering the window opening when closed. 22) Avoid shutters on composite or bay windows. 23) If using awnings, ensure that they align with the opening being covered. 24) Use awning colors that are compatible with the colors of the building. D. Entrances, Porches, and Doors 1) The original details and shape of porches should be retained including the outline, roof height, and roof pitch. 422 1st Street North (July 16, 2020) 5 2) Inspect masonry, wood, and metal or porches and entrances for signs of rust, peeling paint, wood deterioration, open joints around frames, deteriorating putty, inadequate caulking, and improper drainage, and correct any of these conditions. 3) Repair damaged elements, matching the detail of the existing original fabric. 4) Replace an entire porch only if it is too deteriorated to repair or is completely missing, and design to match the original as closely as possible. 5) Do not strip entrances and porches of historic material and details. 6) Give more importance to front or side porches than to utilitarian back porches. 7) Do not remove or radically change entrances and porches important in defining the building’s overall historic character. 8) Avoid adding decorative elements incompatible with the existing structure. 9) In general, avoid adding a new entrance to the primary facade, or facades visible from the street. 10) Do not enclose porches on primary elevations and avoid enclosing porches on secondary elevations in a manner that radically changes the historic appearance. 11) Provide needed barrier-free access in ways that least alter the features of the building. a. For residential buildings, try to use ramps that are removable or portable rather than permanent. b. On nonresidential buildings, comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act while minimizing the visual impact of ramps that affect the appearance of a building. 12) The original size and shape of door openings should be maintained. 13) Original door openings should not be filled in. 14) When possible, reuse hardware and locks that are original or important to the historical evolution of the building. 15) Avoid substituting the original doors with stock size doors that do not fit the opening properly or are not compatible with the style of the building. 16) Retain transom windows and sidelights. 17) When installing storm or screen doors, ensure that they relate to the character of the existing door. a. They should be a simple design where lock rails and stiles are similar in placement and size. b. Avoid using aluminum colored storm doors. c. If the existing storm door is aluminum, consider painting it to match the existing door. d. Use a zinc chromate primer before painting to ensure adhesion. E. Cornice 1) Keep the cornice well sealed and anchored, and maintain the gutter system and flashing. 2) Repair rather than replace the cornice. 3) Do not remove elements of the original composition, such as brackets or blocks, without replacing them with new ones of a like design. 4) Match materials, decorative details, and profiles of the existing original cornice design when making repairs. 5) Do not replace an original cornice with a new one that conveys a different period, style, or theme from that of the building. 6) If the cornice is missing, the replacement should be based on physical or documented evidence, or barring that, be compatible with the original building. 7) Do not wrap or cover a cornice with vinyl or aluminum; these substitute materials may cover up original details and also may hide underlying moisture problems. 422 1st Street North (July 16, 2020) 6 422 North 1st Street Staff Photos Figure 1: Oblique view of 422 North 1st Street, facing northeast. Figure 2: West elevation of 422 North 1st Street. Figure 3: Oblique view of 422 North 1st Street, facing southeast. Figure 4: View north on North First Street, with 422 North 1st Street at right. Board of Architectural Review (BAR) Certificate of Appropriateness Please Return To: City of Charlottesville Department of Neighborhood Development Services P.O. Box 911, City Hall Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 Telephone (434) 970-3130 Please submit ten (10) hard copies and one (1) digital copy of application form and all attachments. Please include application fee as follows: New construction project $375; Demolition of a contributing structure $375; Appeal of BAR decision $125; Additions and other projects requiring BAR approval $125; Administrative approval $100. Make checks payable to the City of Charlottesville. The BAR meets the third Tuesday of the month. Deadline for submittals is Tuesday 3 weeks prior to next BAR meeting by 3:30 p.m. Owner Name Nonce, LLC Applicant Name Julie Dixon The Rosney Co Architects Project Name/Description Addition / Renovation to existing residence__ Parcel Number__________ Project Property Address 422 1st Street North Charlottesville, VA 22901 Signature of Applicant Applicant Information I hereby attest that the information I have provided is, to the Address: 609 East Market Street Suite 206 best of my knowledge, correct. rDtpn, Charlottesville VA 22902Email:juliekdixon@hotmail.com 25 June 2020 Phone: (C) 4343914947 Signature Date Julie Dixon________ _25 June 2020 Property Owner Information (if not applicant) Print Name Date Address: 422 1st Street North Charlottesville VA Property Owner Permission (if not applicant) 22902 Email:_________ I have re this application ar hereby give my consent to Phone: (W)_(C) t./_ft/. �t:/(). J/1:,/, its sub �/ Do you intend to apply for Federal or State Tax Credits � «50«#, �� �i�nature , / ,.,/ Date for this project? _no_ ttar/411 L . � 25 June 2020 Print Name�� ��� l.Ll- Date Description of Proposed Work (attach separate narrative if necessary):'---------------- ___see attached________________________________ List All Attachments (see reverse side for submittal requirements): Drawings and Description or y: ________ Received by: ____________ Fee paid: _____Cash/Ck.# _ _ _ Conditions of approval: ----------- Date Received: ___ ________ Revised 2016 HISTORIC DISTRICT ORDINANCE: You can review the Historical Preservation and Architectural Design Control Overlay Districts regulations in the City of Charlottesville Zoning Ordinance starting with Section 34-271 online at www.charlottesville.org or at Municode.com for the City of Charlottesville. DESIGN REVIEW GUIDELINES: Please refer to the current ADC Districts Design Guidelines online at www.charlottesville.org. SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: The following information and exhibits shall be submitted along with each application for Certificate of Appropriateness, per Sec. 34-282 (d) in the City of Charlottesville Zoning Ordinance: (1) Detailed and clear depictions of any proposed changes in the exterior features of the subject property; (2) Photographs of the subject property and photographs of the buildings on contiguous properties; (3) One set of samples to show the nature, texture and color of materials proposed; (4) The history of an existing building or structure, if requested; (5) For new construction and projects proposing expansion of the footprint of an existing building: a three­ dimensional model (in physical or digital form); (6) In the case of a demolition request where structural integrity is at issue, the applicant shall provide a structural evaluation and cost estimates for rehabilitation, prepared by a professional engineer, unless waived by the BAR APPEALS: Following a denial the applicant, the director of neighborhood development services, or any aggrieved person may appeal the decision to the city council, by filing a written notice of appeal within ten (10) working days of the date of the decision. Per Sec. 34-286. - City council appeals, an applicant shall set forth, in writing, the grounds for an appeal, including the procedure(s) or standard(s) alleged to have been violated or misapplied by the BAR, and/or any additional information, factors or opinions he or she deems relevant to the application. � 4-��L �4-k ��CL-. LLc_ hi), es!>� tc,'nvc .n�f- Re: Narrative Description of Proposed Additions and Alterations to 422 North 1st Street: The owners of 422 North 1st Street propose a multi-part project that will improve the overall aesthetics and create much needed additional living space. First, we propose removal of the existing rear wood deck, metal rail and spiral stair to the lower garden. They are deteriorated visually and not in keeping with the house aesthetically. We also propose removal of the existing east and south facing sunroom façade and roof (structure and material) which we’d like to replace with new double hung windows and architectural detailing that gives the space the look of an enclosed sunroom. The windows will be solid wood by Marvin or similar and the roof a standing seam metal. On the rear of the house, we propose the addition of a covered porch with painted brick piers instead of the existing wood, ipe decking, solid wood wrapped 10” posts, traditional trim details matching those elsewhere in the house, solid wood siding to match existing, a standing seam metal roof, and a new stair on the north side. The proposed new roof structure will wrap both the sunroom and porch under one wrap- around hip structure. We would also like to add brick piers on the basement level below the new sunroom façade to create a more pleasing architectural rhythm. Last, we propose the addition of a new second story above the existing rear wing of the house. Pending structural approval, we propose the addition of a bedroom and closet over the existing rear wing. We hold the roof and eave below the existing and use windows and details that are consistent with the front bay of the house. Julie Dixon The Rosney Co Architects 609 East Market Street, Suite 206 Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 609 East Market Street, Suite 206 Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 108 5th Street SE, Suite 308 Charlottesville, Va. 22902 T: 434.242.9678 F: 540.301.0466 CONSULTANTS: CIVIL ENGINEER: STRUCTURAL ENGINEER: MEP: GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER: 39'-3" 28" TERRACE 15'-11 1/2" 20'-10 3/4" 3.5" built-in hutch 13'-4 1/4" KITCHEN 32" radius CH 9'-10" 1.5" 14'-3" 3.5" 19'-7 1/4" First Street Residence SUNROOM 16'-11 1/2" CH 8'-10 1/4" CH 7'-9 1/2" REF DW Charlottesville, Virginia 3'-11 3/4" 3'-8 1/2" 13'-4 1/4" 4'-10 1/2" PWD. CH 9'-11" CH 8'-11" D W WH CH 6'-6" CH 6'-11 1/2" 7'-10" 6'-1" CL. 15'-11 1/4" 15'-5 1/4" 15'-7 1/4" BASEMENT CH 8'-2 1/4" CL. FRONT ENTRANCE MECH. CH 9'-10 3/4" 14'-6 3/4" CH CL. 7'-3 1/2" EDITIONS/REVS FLOOR PLANS 6/25/2020 EC1.0 12:13 PM:6/25/2020 108 5th Street SE, Suite 308 Charlottesville, Va. 22902 T: 434.242.9678 F: 540.301.0466 CONSULTANTS: CIVIL ENGINEER: STRUCTURAL ENGINEER: MEP: GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER: First Street Residence Charlottesville, Virginia LANDING CH: 12'4" BEDROOM MASTER CH: 8'10" BEDROOM CH: 8'10" HALL BATHROOM CH: 8'11.5" CH: 8'10" EDITIONS/REVS ATTIC ACCESS Second Floor Plan 6/25/2020 EC1.1 12:13 PM:6/25/2020 108 5th Street SE, Suite 308 Charlottesville, Va. 22902 T: 434.242.9678 F: 540.301.0466 CONSULTANTS: CIVIL ENGINEER: STRUCTURAL ENGINEER: MEP: GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER: First Street Residence Charlottesville, Virginia EDITIONS/REVS EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 6/25/2020 EC2.0 12:13 PM:6/25/2020 108 5th Street SE, Suite 308 Charlottesville, Va. 22902 T: 434.242.9678 F: 540.301.0466 CONSULTANTS: CIVIL ENGINEER: STRUCTURAL ENGINEER: MEP: GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER: First Street Residence Charlottesville, Virginia EDITIONS/REVS EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 6/25/2020 EC2.1 12:13 PM:6/25/2020 108 5th Street SE, Suite 308 Charlottesville, Va. 22902 T: 434.242.9678 F: 540.301.0466 CONSULTANTS: CIVIL ENGINEER: STRUCTURAL ENGINEER: MEP: GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER: First Street Residence 6'-1 1/4" 8'-9" 8'-9" 7'-3/4" 6'-10 13/16" NEW DOOR IN EXISTING Charlottesville, Virginia WINDOW OPENING PORCH 1'-11" 3'-2" 3'-2" 3'-2" 2'-5 1/2" 2'-4" 3'-6" built-in hutch 17'-5 1/4" 13'-5" 3'-2 1/2" KITCHEN CH 9'-10" 4'-3 1/4" 13'-6" 14'-6" 14'-3" down 6'-3" OFFICE SUNROOM 1/2" REF DW 3/4" 4'-0" RELOCATE EXISTING WINDOW 3'-2 2'-11" FROM KITCHEN HERE 5'-0" clear 4'-9 CLOSET 5'-11" PWD. CL CH 8'-11" 6'-7" BATH 4'-1/2" 2'-0" INDICATES NEW 3'-10" WALL, TYP. 2'-4 1/2" 12'-11" LANDING 12'-11" 6'-7/8" CH: 12'4" INDICATES EXISTING WALL, TYP. 10'-2" EDITIONS/REVS BEDROOM BEDROOM CH: 8'10" CH: 8'10" FRONT ENTRANCE NEW SUN PORCH HALL CH 9'-10 3/4" WINDOWS ALIGNED BATHROOM CH: 8'11.5" WITH NEW C.O. CH: 8'10" 7'-8 1/4" 7'-4 1/4" Plans ATTIC ACCESS 6/25/2020 Second Floor Plan SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0" 1 Ground Floor Plan SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0" 2 A1.0 12:13 PM:6/25/2020 108 5th Street SE, Suite 308 Charlottesville, Va. 22902 T: 434.242.9678 F: 540.301.0466 12 2 CONSULTANTS: CIVIL ENGINEER: STRUCTURAL ENGINEER: 11 1/4" MEP: GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER: Eave Detail First Street Residence 1 SCALE: 1" = 1'-0" East Elevation Porch Section 2 3 SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0" SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0" Charlottesville, Virginia EDITIONS/REVS Exteriors 6/25/2020 South Elevation North Elevation A2.0 4 5 SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0" SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0" 12:13 PM:6/25/2020 108 5th Street SE, Suite 308 Charlottesville, Va. 22902 T: 434.242.9678 F: 540.301.0466 CONSULTANTS: CIVIL ENGINEER: 12 STRUCTURAL ENGINEER: 6 MEP: GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER: to stair hall to closet 12 2 First Street Residence Charlottesville, Virginia to living room EXISTING FLOOR STRUCTURE EXISTING WALLS EDITIONS/REVS EXISTING FOUNDATION Building Section 6/25/2020 Sunroom and Office Section Facing West 1 A3.0 SCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0" 12:13 PM:6/25/2020 First Street Residence 108 5th Street SE, Suite 308 Charlottesville, Va. 22902 6/25/2020 T: 434.242.9678 Perspective EDITIONS/REVS Charlottesville, Virginia F: 540.301.0466 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER: MEP: STRUCTURAL ENGINEER: CIVIL ENGINEER: CONSULTANTS: 12:13 PM:6/25/2020 Certificate of Appropriateness Application BAR 20-07-08 418 E. Jefferson Street (Renaissance School) Tax Parcel: 530040000 Owner: 18 East Jefferson Street, LLC Applicant: Bill Adams/Train Architects Window repairs and replacements Contents (Click to link directly to PDF page) • Staff Report • Staff Photos • Historic Survey • Application • Additional information from applicant Link back to Packet Guide. CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW STAFF REPORT July 21, 2020 Certificate of Appropriateness Application BAR 20-07-08 418 East Jefferson Street Tax Map 530040000 418 E Jefferson Street, LLC, Owner/ Bill Adams, Applicant Repair/replace windows Background Year Built: 1826 (Remodeled 1921) District: North Downtown ADC District Status: Contributing The building is Colonial Revival, brick (Flemish bond), two stories with a gable roof, five bays with a one bay addition. Entrance in center bay within a two-story projecting, pedimented pavilion with wooden facing and a quasi-Palladian window at the second story. Segmental broken pediment over entrance. Mousetooth cornice. Brick gable ends extend above roof line. Two, tall exterior end chimneys forms curtain above roof line. The building was extensively remodeled in 1921. The interior was gutted and converted into a central hall, double pile office complex. The eastern wall (located along 5th Street NE) with its chimneys and curtain and the second floor double sash windows are about all that remain from the original storerooms. Prior BAR Reviews February 16, 1999 – BAR approved construction of a rooftop addition to a portion of the structure. July 17, 2007 – BAR approved removal of the entry door from the frame at the 5 th Street NE entrance and installation of copper coping and copper downspout. (See details in appendix.) July 19, 2011 – BAR approved replacement of 15 windows. (See details in appendix.) 418 E. Jefferson Street (July 16, 2020) 1 Application Submittal: Train Architects drawings, dated June 23, 2020, sheets 1 through 13; photos of replacement sash kit and color sample. Request CoA for the replacement and/or repair of select windows. Applicant requests approval of either one or some combination of three options. Work includes removal of an entry door (on 5th Street), infilling the masonry, and installing a new window. Windows to be replaced and/or repaired. All are double hung windows.  North elevation: eight individual 6/6, two sets of twin 6/6, one set of triple windows, 2/2 + 6/6 + 2/2.  East elevation: All are individual windows. o Original, brick section: four 6/6, two 8/8, two 1/1. o Painted brick addition: four 6/6, two 1/1.  West elevation: two individual 6/6, two individual 8/8, four individual 1/1, two sets of twin 1/1, one set of triple 1/1. Proposed options:  Option 1: (Preferred) Replace all windows noted with Marvin Ultimate Double Hung (clad) insert G-2 windows. The exterior trim will be retained and painted to match the Marvin window color.  Option 2: Replace windows noted on the east and west elevations only with Marvin Ultimate Double Hung insert G-2 windows. Rehabilitate and/or replace sash, cords, etc. on the north (Court Square) elevation, which is the primary elevation. (The west elevation faces the alley. The east elevation faces 5th Street NE.)  Option 3. Combination of selective rehabilitation, including sash repair and replacement. Discussion and Recommendations Last fall, staff visited the site with the contractor and inspected the windows. Staff concurs that there is substantial and significant deterioration at many of the existing window, particularly those in the original portion of the. Of the few existing sash [at other elevations] that might match those in the primary elevation, they also warrant significant repair, if not replacement. Submittal summarizes the proposed work at each window and provides details showing how the replacements will fit into the existing frames and compare dimensionally to the existing sash. The BAR should determine if the windows warrant replacement or repair/rehabilitation. If replacement is approved, the BAR should review and approve the color, lite configuration and muntins widths, stile and rail dimensions, and installation details relative to retaining and/or replicating the existing sills and trim. Suggested Motion Approval: Having considered the standards set forth within the City Code, including City Design Guidelines for Rehabilitation, I move to find that the proposed window repairs and replacements satisfy 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. 418 E. Jefferson Street (July 16, 2020) 2 […as submitted with the following conditions:] Denial: Having considered the standards set forth within the City Code, including City Design Guidelines for Rehabilitation, I move to find that the proposed window repairs and replacements do not satisfy the BAR’s criteria and are not compatible with this property and other properties in the North Downtown ADC District, and that for the following reasons the BAR denies the application as submitted: Criteria, Standards, and Guidelines Review Criteria Generally Sec. 34-284(b) of the City Code states that, in considering a particular application the BAR shall approve the application unless it finds: 1) That the proposal does not meet specific standards set forth within this division or applicable provisions of the Design Guidelines established by the board pursuant to Sec. 34-288(6); and 2) The proposal is incompatible with the historic, cultural or architectural character of the district in which the property is located or the protected property that is the subject of the application. Pertinent Standards for Review of Construction and Alterations include: 1) Whether the material, texture, color, height, scale, mass and placement of the proposed addition, modification or construction are visually and architecturally compatible with the site and the applicable design control district; 2) The harmony of the proposed change in terms of overall proportion and the size and placement of entrances, windows, awnings, exterior stairs and signs; 3) The Secretary of the Interior Standards for Rehabilitation set forth within the Code of Federal Regulations (36 C.F.R. §67.7(b)), as may be relevant; 4) The effect of the proposed change on the historic district neighborhood; 5) The impact of the proposed change on other protected features on the property, such as gardens, landscaping, fences, walls and walks; 6) Whether the proposed method of construction, renovation or restoration could have an adverse impact on the structure or site, or adjacent buildings or structures; 7) Any applicable provisions of the City’s Design Guidelines. Pertinent Guidelines for Rehabilitations C. Windows 1) Prior to any repair or replacement of windows, a survey of existing window conditions is recommended. Note number of windows, whether each window is original or replaced, the material, type, hardware and finish, the condition of the frame, sash, sill, putty, and panes. 2) Retain original windows when possible. 3) Uncover and repair covered up windows and reinstall windows where they have been blocked in. 4) If the window is no longer needed, the glass should be retained and the back side frosted, screened, or shuttered so that it appears from the outside to be in use. 5) Repair original windows by patching, splicing, consolidating or otherwise reinforcing. Wood that appears to be in bad condition because of peeling paint or separated joints often can be repaired. 6) Replace historic components of a window that are beyond repair with matching components. 418 E. Jefferson Street (July 16, 2020) 3 7) Replace entire windows only when they are missing or beyond repair. 8) If a window on the primary façade of a building must be replaced and an existing window of the same style, material, and size is identified on a secondary elevation, place the historic window in the window opening on the primary façade. 9) Reconstruction should be based on physical evidence or old photographs. 10) Avoid changing the number, location, size, or glazing pattern of windows by cutting new openings, blocking in windows, or installing replacement sash that does not fit the window opening. 11) Do not use inappropriate materials or finishes that radically change the sash, depth of reveal, muntin configuration, reflective quality or color of the glazing, or appearance of the frame. 12) Use replacement windows with true divided lights or interior and exterior fixed muntins with internal spacers to replace historic or original examples. 13) If windows warrant replacement, appropriate material for new windows depends upon the context of the building within a historic district, and the age and design of the building. Sustainable materials such as wood, aluminum-clad wood, solid fiberglass, and metal windows are preferred. Vinyl windows are discouraged. 14) False muntins and internal removable grilles do not present an historic appearance and should not be used. 15) Do not use tinted or mirrored glass on major facades of the building. Translucent or low (e) glass may be strategies to keep heat gain down. […] Appendix: July 2007 request: Remove the entry door from the frame at the 5th Street NE entrance of the Renaissance School with the condition that the interior entry door aligns with the existing exterior door opening with staff approval needed for the vestibule flooring material. BAR approved copper coping and copper downspout with the condition that the applicant verify with the planning department that the new rooftop unit does not require additional screening. July 2011 request: Replace 15 windows with Pella Architect Series double-hung, white 1/1 aluminum clad wood replacement windows. The window openings will stay the same size.  Eight windows are located on the west elevation facing a parking lot (6 metal; 2 -1/1);  Three metal windows face north toward the access driveway from Jefferson Street;  Four paired 1/1 windows face south toward a light well. Some of the windows being replaced are newer, 1/1 windows and some are older, metal casement windows, possibly from the 1921 remodeling. New windows to be installed in front of the metal frames. June 2018 - Staff administratively approved replacement of the front door with a new, matching door. New door was slightly thicker to accommodate security glass. Existing door was not historic. 418 E. Jefferson Street (July 16, 2020) 4 Undated photo taken prior to the 1920s renovations. 418 E. Jefferson Street (July 16, 2020) 5 418 East Jefferson Street Staff Photos Figure 1: Oblique view of 418 East Jefferson Street, facing southeast Figure 2: North elevation of 418 East Jefferson Street. Figure 3: Oblique view of 418 East Jefferson Street with neighboring buildings beyond, facing southwest. Figure 4: Oblique view of 418 East Jefferson Street, facing southwest. Figure 5: Oblique view of Renaissance School annex buildings along 5th Street NE, facing southwest. Figure 6: Oblique view of Renaissance School annex buildings along 5th Street NE, facing northwest. LAND ARK SURVEY IDENTIFICATION BASE DATA Street Address: 418 East.Jefferson Street Historic Name: Kelly-Bragg Storehouse Map and Parcel: 53-40 Date/Peri ad: 1826 Census Track & Block: 1-111 Style: Colonial Revival Present Owner: Court Square Building, Incorporated Height to Cornice: 26.62 c/o William Perkins, Jr. Height in Stories: Address: court Square Building, City 2 Present Use: Offices Present Zoning: B-3 Original Owner: John Kelly Land Area (sq. ft.): 51 x _100 Original Use: Storehouse Assessed Value (land + imp.): 12,430 + 38,490 = 50,920 ARCHITECTURAL DESCRIPTION Once a simple but handsome merchantile duplex, the building was extensively remodeled in 1921 when Court Square Building, Incorporated secured ~~e property. The interior was completely gutted and converted L~to a central hall double pile office comp l ex , The elaborate entrance with its br oken segmental pediment, -. tripartite window, and central gable is in ~~e Colonial Revival tradition. The eastern wall with its chimneys and curtain and the second floor double sash windows are about all that remain from the original storerooms. HISTORICAL DESCRIPTION According to James Alexander, "these stores were erected in 1826 by John Kelly, and their first occupant was Colonel Watson (J. Richard)." Mr. Watson's building on the corner of Court Fifth and East High Streets was in the Kelly family for over fifty years. When John Kelly died in 1830, the property passed to his wife and then his daughter Eliza Bragg whose first husband was John C. Ragland. In 1881 the deed passed from ~trs. Bragg's estate to W. R. Burnley (ACDB 79-1). The Court Square Building Incorporated purchased the property in 1921 (DB 38-21) and converted it into offices. The building served as a dry goods: store, and in more recent memory, a confectioners, a grocery, and a liquor store. GRAPHICS /1'--. ~_ /;. '. CONDITIONS SOURCES Mr. George Gilmer Average County/City Records Alexander, Recollections, p. 35. LANDMARK CO,MMISSION·OEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY OEVELOPMENT ._. -- - ~ - ~--~- Board of Architectural Review (BAR) Certificate of Appropriateness Please Return To: City of Charlottesville Department of Neighborhood Development Services P.O. Box 911, City Hall Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 Telephone (434) 970-3130 Please submit ten (10) hard copies and one (1) digital copy of application form and all attachments. Please include application fee as follows: New construction project $375; Demolition of a contributing structure $375; Appeal of BAR decision $125; Additions and other projects requiring BAR approval $125; Administrative approval $100. Make checks payable to the City of Charlottesville. The BAR meets the third Tuesday of the month . Deadline for submittals is Tuesday 3 weeks prior to next BAR meeting by 3:30 p.m. Owner Name_______________ lohnson, Head of School, RS . . R enaissance School Window Improvements 53 4 ProJect Name/D escnpt1on _________________ Parce IN um b er__________ _ oo oooo Project Property Address 418 East Jefferson Street, Charlottesville, VA 22902 Signature of Applicant Applicant Information l hereby attest that the information I have provided is, to the I Ad ams, Train Address: 8"11 • Areh"t I ect S 61? East Jefferso� Stree_t, Charlottesville, VA Email: wadams�trainarch1tects.com 22902 best !-1� f m knowle � � orr eg t � 23 . II me ?Q?Q Phone: (W) 434�93.2965 (C) 434.981.4640 Signature bate )r the Renaissance School, Sara Johnson, Head of School William Adams 23 June 2020 Property Owner Information (if not applicant) Print Name Date 418 East Jefferson Street.tr LLC c/o Renaissance School Address: 418 East Je11erson Street Property Owner Permission (if not applicant) Charlottesville, VA 22902 I have read this application and hereby give my consent to its submission. ��o��:st�R 434lf-J�52 a nc a (E)b aI erg 23 June 2020 Signature Date Do you intend to apply for Federal or State Tax Credits Sara Johnson □ for this project? -�a�n-'-t -k_n_o�w�----- 23 June 2020 Print Name Date Description of Proposed Work (attach separate narrative if necessary): .,,....,..,....,...,... Improvements to windows; see attached presentation including n ...,... arrat1 v - e- .----------- List All Attachments (see reverse side for submittal requirements): See attacbed presentation incl11ding narrative, drawings and pbatagrapbs, 13 pages total For Office Use Only Approved/Disapproved by: _________ Received by: Q S .knn10 Date: _________________ Fee paid: \2_5c.µ Cash/Ck.# \6\\C) Conditions of approval: ___________ Date Received: LQ(Z..� \ 1-CW Revised 2016 Renaissance School Window Improvements Renaissance School 41 8 E Jefferson St Charlottesville, VA 22902 BAR Submission 23 June 2020 Train Architects 6 1 2 East Jeffer son St reet Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 ph 434.293.2965 fax 295.5122 History would go a long way toward rectifying this defect, without the expense and architectural consequences of Maintain elements and features original to the Description from Charlottesville and Albemarle County a separate dedicated fresh air system. The window units building. Courthouse Historic District, Charlottesville, Va. Pg. 16 on the West elevation get a lot of sun, and decent low Existing casings and interior trims would be maintained. (per Charlottesville City web site). E glass would greatly help with the cooling loads and New window profiles compare favorably with historic energy efficiency. Likewise, the windows on the North profiles. Proportions and site lines would be minimally 418 (East Jefferson): brick (Flemish bond); 2 stories; leak a lot of air, so that those spaces are not comfortable affected. gable roof ; 5 bays, 1 bay addition. Colonial Revival in the winter. 1826. Remodeled 1921. Entrance in center bay: 2-1tory Remove inappropriate materials. projecting, pedimented pavilion with wooden facing Windows to be replaced are noted in the photos. Plexiglass on the exterior of the windows will be painted white, quasi-Palladian window on 2nd story. removed. Interior storm windows that create a ‘double Segmental broken pediment over entrance. 6/6 sash mirror’ effect will be removed. Heavy silicone sealant except 1/1 in three west bays 1st story. Mousetooth around the sashes will be removed. All of these window Description of Proposed Work treatments have served to trap moisture and hasten cornice. Brick gable ends extend above roof line. Brickwork between 2 tall, exterior end chimneys forms decay in the sashes and sills. There are 3 approaches to consider. curtain above roof line. N. R. Restore as many of the original elements as 1. Replace all windows noted to be replaced with possible. 217 (Fifth Street Northeast): brick (stretcher bond); 2 Marvin Ultimate Double Hung (clad) insert G-2 and 3 stories; flat roof; 7 bays. Commercial Vernacular. Exterior casings and interior casings will be preserved windows. Trim would be repainted in a color to and restored. The main entry will be cleaned up and 1931+. Entrance in 5th bay from left. 4 bays original, match the standard Marvin window color that is (2 stories), 3 bays added (3 stories). 1/1 sash with flat restored (no change in side lites/transom/door in the very close to the existing windows (see sample). 418 East Jefferson Street arches. lower area). This is the approach preferred by the Renaissance School as they consider appearance, function, Design new elements that respect the character, The building was remodeled in 2007 with an addition on energy and air quality issues for their school; they the rear upper floor and extensive interior renovations. material and design of the building, yet are are also comfortable with the appearance, as the distinguishable from the original. There appear to have been other renovations over time site lines maintained by the new windows compare and selective replacement of windows and sashes. New Windows will retain the proportions of the existing very favorably with the existing window site lines, and have general appearance of the existing, but be and the existing interior and exterior trim would be made of modern, lower maintenance materials. maintained. Also note that complete rehabilitation of Narrative the windows to include new sash, removal of trim to allow re-installation of sash cords and sash weights The Renaissance School, a coeducational private high is more expensive than the installation of the Marvin school dedicated to the Arts, seeks to improve the windows. windows at the School’s building at 418 East Jefferson 2. Replace windows noted to be replaced on the Street. Existing windows are in need of repair and East and West Elevations with Marvin Ultimate replacement and/or rehabilitation; there are air and Double Hung insert G-2 windows. Rehabilitate and/ water infiltration issues; sashes are no longer operable, or replace sash, cords, etc. on the North (Court sash cords are missing, sashes and other window parts Square) Elevation. The West Elevation is not have rot; many sashes are no longer original. Windows primary. The East Elevation is not as important as appear to have been sealed in the 2007 renovation, the Formal elevation to the North. contributing to many of the rot and performance issues. 3. Pursue a combination of selective rehabilitation, Plexiglass has been applied to windows on the West replacement, re-painting and repair as a lower cost elevation to help with water and air infiltration. Interior option. storm windows have been applied to many of the North facing (Court Square) windows. General Design Guidelines Enhanced thermal properties, operability and better glass quality would allow the existing the mechanical Sustainability. system to function better- newer insert units would take Replacement windows will be far more energy efficient advantage of advances in window technology, offering and provide enhanced comfort and better air quality to far superior U values, low E glazing and very low air the occupants than selective replacement/rehabilitation. infiltration/exfiltration. One issue is that the mechanical Replacement sashes are likely to be as leaky as original system in the front part of the building does not have a sashes in a few years and do not offer the same thermal dedicated fresh air intake system. Operable windows properties. Project Narrative Renaissance School Window Improvements 02 23 June 2020 418 E Jeffer son St, Char lottesville , VA 22902 EJ EFF ER T SO KS NS T PA R NE ST CO 4 TH UR TS Q NE ST 5 TH NORTH (E JEFFERSON ST) - SHEET 05 LOCATION WEST (REAR) - SHEET 13 WEST (ALLEY) - SHEET 13 WEST (NOTCH) - SHEET 13 EAST (5TH ST NE) - SHEET 08 Project Location & Views Renaissance School Window Improvements 03 23 June 2020 418 E Jeffer son St, Char lottesville , VA 22902 PLEXIGLASS OVER EXISTING WINDOW DUE TO WATER AND AIR INFILTRATION ISSUES SASH WARPED AND LOOSE IN FRAME ROTTING SASH DAMAGED EXTERIOR CRACKED TRIM OR SILL GLASS DAMAGE FROM PREVIOUS APPLICATION OF SEALANT Typical Window Damage Renaissance School Window Improvements 04 23 June 2020 418 E Jeffer son St, Char lottesville , VA 22902 EXISTING CONDITION NOTES OAWD WOOD WINDOWS FROM 1920’S OAWD OBWD WOOD WINDOWS FROM 1930’S OBHM HOLLOW METAL WINDOWS FROM 1930’S (DETAIL SIM. TO OBWD) 01. SASH WARPED AND LOOSE IN FRAME 02. ROTTING SASH (WOOD ROT) 03. PLEXIGLASS OVER EXISTING WINDOW DUE TO WATER AND AIR INFILTRATION ISSUES 04. INTERIOR STORM WINDOW 05. DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE ORIGINAL SASH - MISSING MUNTINS 06. DAMAGE FROM PREVIOUS APPLICATION OF SEALANTS 01 01 01 07. DAMAGED EXTERIOR TRIM OR SILL 08. CRACKED GLASS 04 04 04 04 04 NEW WORK NOTES 04 04 04 04 WINDOW “A” - EITHER (SEE NARRATIVE) A-R EXISTING TO BE REHABILITATED OR REPLACED - SEE DETAIL 01, SHEET 07. 07 07 A-M NEW MARVIN ULTIMATE DOUBLE HUNG 02 INSERT G-2 - SEE DETAIL 02, SHEET 07. REPAIR & REPAINT EXISTING TRIM 01 WINDOW “B” - EITHER (SEE NARRATIVE) 06 B-R EXISTING TO BE REHABILITATED OR 01 REPLACED - SEE DETAIL 01, SHEET 10. B-M NEW MARVIN ULTIMATE DOUBLE HUNG 01 INSERT G-2 - SEE DETAIL 02, SHEET 10. 06 REPAIR & REPAINT EXISTING TRIM 08 NEW WINDOW “B” AT EXISTING DOOR REMOVE EXISTING DOOR AND FRAME, FILL IN MASONRY AROUND NEW WINDOW TO MATCH EXISTING OPENING HEIGHT AND WIDTH. 02 02 LEGEND 01 WINDOWS TO BE REPLACED / RESTORED North (E Jefferson St) Renaissance School Window Improvements 05 23 June 2020 418 E Jeffer son St, Char lottesville , VA 22902 OAWD WOOD WINDOWS FROM 1920’S A-R EXISTING TO BE REHABILITATED OR REPLACED A-M NEW MARVIN ULTIMATE DOUBLE HUNG INSERT G-2 OAWD 01. A-R ELEVATION 3/4” = 1’-0” 02. A-M ELEVATION 3/4” = 1’-0” Window “A” Elevations Renaissance School Window Improvements 06 23 June 2020 418 E Jeffer son St, Char lottesville , VA 22902 OAWD WOOD WINDOWS FROM 1920’S A-R EXISTING TO BE REHABILITATED OR REPLACED A-M NEW MARVIN ULTIMATE DOUBLE HUNG INSERT G-2 OAWD 01. A-R DETAIL 3” = 1’-0” 02. A-M DETAIL 3” = 1’-0” Window “A” Details Renaissance School Window Improvements 07 23 June 2020 418 E Jeffer son St, Char lottesville , VA 22902 EXISTING CONDITION NOTES OAWD WOOD WINDOWS FROM 1920’S OBWD OBHM OAWD OBWD WOOD WINDOWS FROM 1930’S OBHM HOLLOW METAL WINDOWS FROM 1930’S (DETAIL SIM. TO OBWD) 01. SASH WARPED AND LOOSE IN FRAME 02. ROTTING SASH (WOOD ROT) 03. PLEXIGLASS OVER EXISTING WINDOW DUE TO WATER AND AIR INFILTRATION ISSUES 04. INTERIOR STORM WINDOW 05. DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE ORIGINAL SASH - MISSING MUNTINS 06. DAMAGE FROM PREVIOUS APPLICATION OF SEALANTS 04 07. DAMAGED EXTERIOR TRIM OR SILL 04 08. CRACKED GLASS 04 NEW WORK NOTES WINDOW “A” - EITHER (SEE NARRATIVE) 04 A-R EXISTING TO BE REHABILITATED OR 04 REPLACED - SEE DETAIL 01, SHEET 07. 02 04 04 01 A-M NEW MARVIN ULTIMATE DOUBLE HUNG 04 02 04 INSERT G-2 - SEE DETAIL 02, SHEET 07. 04 04 04 REPAIR & REPAINT EXISTING TRIM 04 04 04 04 05 WINDOW “B” - EITHER (SEE NARRATIVE) B-R EXISTING TO BE REHABILITATED OR 08 REPLACED - SEE DETAIL 01, SHEET 10. 01 B-M NEW MARVIN ULTIMATE DOUBLE HUNG 09 04 01 01 04 08 04 08 INSERT G-2 - SEE DETAIL 02, SHEET 10. 11 12 02 02 02 02 REPAIR & REPAINT EXISTING TRIM 06 06 NEW WINDOW “B” AT EXISTING DOOR 02 07 04 04 REMOVE EXISTING DOOR AND FRAME, FILL IN MASONRY AROUND NEW WINDOW TO MATCH EXISTING OPENING HEIGHT AND WIDTH. 04 04 LEGEND WINDOWS TO BE REPLACED / RESTORED East (5th St NE) Renaissance School Window Improvements 08 23 June 2020 418 E Jeffer son St, Char lottesville , VA 22902 OBWD WOOD WINDOWS FROM 1930’S B-R EXISTING TO BE REHABILITATED OR REPLACED B-M NEW MARVIN ULTIMATE DOUBLE HUNG INSERT G-2 OBWD 01. B-R ELEVATION 3/4” = 1’-0” 02. B-M ELEVATION 3/4” = 1’-0” Window “B” Elevations Renaissance School Window Improvements 09 23 June 2020 418 E Jeffer son St, Char lottesville , VA 22902 OBWD WOOD WINDOWS FROM 1930’S B-R EXISTING TO BE REHABILITATED OR REPLACED B-M NEW MARVIN ULTIMATE DOUBLE HUNG INSERT G-2 OBWD 01. B-R DETAIL 3” = 1’-0” 02. B-M DETAIL 3” = 1’-0” Window “B” Details Renaissance School Window Improvements 10 23 June 2020 418 E Jeffer son St, Char lottesville , VA 22902 STAIR HANDRAIL BEHIND DOOR DOOR NOT OPERABLE ROTTING WOOD EXISTING DOOR 01. EXISTING DOOR ELEVATION 3/4” = 1’-0” 02. PROPOSED WINDOW “B” & BRICKWORK 3/4” = 1’-0” Window “B” at Existing Door Renaissance School Window Improvements 11 23 June 2020 418 E Jeffer son St, Char lottesville , VA 22902 OBHM HOLLOW METAL WINDOWS FROM 1930’S (DETAIL SIM. TO OBWD) EXISTING DOOR & OBHM 01. OBHM ELEVATION 3/4” = 1’-0” OBHM Renaissance School Window Improvements 12 23 June 2020 418 E Jeffer son St, Char lottesville , VA 22902 EXISTING CONDITION NOTES OAWD WOOD WINDOWS FROM 1920’S OBWD WOOD WINDOWS FROM 1930’S OBHM HOLLOW METAL WINDOWS FROM 1930’S OAWD (DETAIL SIM. TO OBWD) 01. SASH WARPED AND LOOSE IN FRAME 02. ROTTING SASH (WOOD ROT) 03. PLEXIGLASS OVER EXISTING WINDOW DUE TO WATER AND AIR INFILTRATION ISSUES 04. INTERIOR STORM WINDOW 05. DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE ORIGINAL SASH - MISSING 01 MUNTINS 06. DAMAGE FROM PREVIOUS APPLICATION OF SEALANTS 07. DAMAGED EXTERIOR TRIM OR SILL 08. CRACKED GLASS 04 04 01 NEW WORK NOTES 02 04 08 WINDOW “A” - EITHER (SEE NARRATIVE) 04 02 A-R EXISTING TO BE REHABILITATED OR REPLACED - 04 SEE DETAIL 01, SHEET 07. A-M NEW MARVIN ULTIMATE DOUBLE HUNG INSERT G-2 - 02 SEE DETAIL 02, SHEET 07. 02 REPAIR & REPAINT EXISTING TRIM 03 02 WINDOW “B” - EITHER (SEE NARRATIVE) 04 B-R EXISTING TO BE REHABILITATED OR REPLACED - 05 02 05 SEE DETAIL 01, SHEET 10. 05 05 B-M NEW MARVIN ULTIMATE DOUBLE HUNG INSERT G-2 - SEE DETAIL 02, SHEET 10. REPAIR & REPAINT EXISTING TRIM NEW WINDOW “B” AT EXISTING DOOR 02 02 REMOVE EXISTING DOOR AND FRAME, FILL IN MASONRY 04 04 AROUND NEW WINDOW TO MATCH EXISTING OPENING HEIGHT AND WIDTH. 03 02 02 LEGEND 04 04 WINDOWS TO BE REPLACED / RESTORED OBWD West Renaissance School Window Improvements 13 23 June 2020 418 E Jeffer son St, Char lottesville , VA 22902 418 East Jefferson Street—BAR 20-07-08 Sash replacement sample 418 East Jefferson Street—BAR 20-07-08 Paint sample July 16, 2020 418 East Jefferson Street Additional information from applicant Re: exterior trim or sills, in general, anything that is rotten will be replaced, preferably with whole pieces (of the same species as the existing) and not ‘dutchman’ or other similar repairs that leave horizontal joints. There are just a few of these vertical grain pieces that are candidates for replacement, but most are sound and can be reconditioned in place with good paint preparation. It’s preferable, where possible, to leave the older trim material in place. The older material is decent stuff. I just went over and tried to stick a knife in the areas you have highlighted on the first floor NE window. That material is still solid. The horizontal rail of the sash in the photo is rotten and the knife went right in. On the N. elevation, there are a couple of spots on the 2 nd floor at the base of the vertical trim that look questionable. These are hard to get to right now (interior storm window, window fixed, need a ladder), these will have to be examined more carefully when the job gets underway (Alexander Nicholson is the contractor). In most areas, it is the sashes that are either rotten, warped, dried-out or falling apart. The existing frames (including the boxes for sash weights), sills and exterior trim are mostly in OK shape. Again, if material is rotten, or split/broken, it will be replaced. Where the option is to replace an existing sash with a new facsimile, then more parts have to come apart in order to install, including sash weights, etc. The downsides to this approach are: 1. It’s the unravelling sweater--the more you take apart, the more gets damaged, etc. and has to be replaced (and then there are more issues about how it goes back together). 2. Our experience with these kind of exact sash replacements is that the new wood will shrink/move, even if very carefully milled of top grade material and installed with great care. The net result is loose windows and a return of the air infiltration problems that the replacement was supposed to solve. 3. Expense. It’s very labor intensive, and good material is expensive. Certificate of Appropriateness Application BAR 20-07-10 506 Park Street Tax Parcel: 530123000 Owner: Presbyterian Church Ch’ville Trust, Applicant: Karim Habbab/BRW Architects Addition to Fellowship Hall Contents (Click to link directly to PDF page) • Staff Report • Staff Photos • Historic Survey • Application Link back to Packet Guide. City of Charlottesville Board of Architectural Review STAFF REPORT July 21, 2020 Certificate of Appropriateness Application BAR 20-07-10 506 Park Street Tax Parcel 530123000 Presbyterian Church Ch’ville Trust, Owner/Isaac Miller, Applicant Addition Background Year Built: 1954 (Fellowship Hall 8 th Street constructed in 1986) District: North Downtown ADC District Status: Contributing First Presbyterian Church is designed in the Colonial Revival style and based on James Gibbs’ 1722 Saint Martin-in-the-Fields in London. (Historic Survey attached.) Prior BAR Actions March 19, 2019 – BAR approved new entrance and ADA ramp at the east elevation (7th Street NE) of the Fellowship Hall. June 2019 – BAR approved modifications to ADA entrance at 7th Street. Application Submittal: BRW Architects drawings First Presbyterian Church Renovation and Addition, dated July 21, 2020, pages 1 through 41. Request for CoA for alteration and new construction at the First Presbyterian Church. Construction of a three-story addition to the Fellowship Hall, including a new exterior terrace and modifications to the existing driveway. Renovations at the west elevation of the Gathering Hall: Remove four arched windows to accommodate French doors; alterations and new landscaping at the front terrace. Alterations to the Gathering Hall courtyard terrace. 506 Park Street (July 16, 2020 1 Materials  Brick to be Keuka Type 2 Mudbox smooth from Watsontown Brick. (New brick and mortar to match existing. Sample provided.)  Doors and windows to match proportion, color and lite configuration of existing. Glass shall be clear. Windows to be aluminum clad wood. (Sample provided.)  Trim to match existing and painted to match.  Hipped roof to be slate, with snow guards, similar to existing.  Internal gutters with scuppers and downspouts to match existing.  Wall sconces (at new French doors) to match existing  New metal railings, painted black.  Lighting: (See page 39 of submittal) o Lamping will be dimmable and not exceed a Color temperature of 3,000k. o Uplights will be at a maximum of less than 3000 lumens. o Fixtures that emit 3000 lumens or more shall be full cut off. Landscaping  Entry Terrace at Addition o Concrete terrace with brick accent band o Sod area enclosed by brick pavers o (Near sanctuary) Concrete steps with brick cheek walls with wall-mounted lights. o (Near 7th Street) Concrete sidewalk and stairs with wall and stair-mounted lights. o Stake-mounted path lights  Gathering Terrace at Gathering Hall o Bluestone pavers o Stake-mounted path lights o Up-lighting beneath trees.  Courtyard Terrace at Gathering Hall o Artificial turf area enclosed by concrete sidewalk  Trees and Shrubs o Lomndon Planetree, Platanus x acerifolia ‘Blood Good’ o Red Maple, Acer rubrum ‘Red Sunset’ o Dogwood, Cornus florida o Serviceberry, Amelanchier x grandiflora ‘Autumn Brilliance’ o Magnolia, Magnolia virginiana o Eastern redbud, Cercis canadensis o Holly, Ilex verticillata o Hydrangea, Hydrangea quercifolia o Virginia sweetspire, Itea virginica ‘Henry’s Garnet’ o Boxwood, Buxus ‘Green Gem’  Low plantings o Autumn fern, Dryopteris erythrosora polystichum acrostichoides o Geranium, Geranium macrorrhizum o Coral bells, Heuchera villosa ‘Autumn Bride’ o Liriope, Liriope spicata galanthus nivalis, o Liriope, Liriope spicata Scilla Siberica o Liriope, Liriope spicata o Liriope, Liriope muscari ‘Big Blue’ 506 Park Street (July 16, 2020 2 o Viburnum, Viburnum carlesii Discussion Addition  Function, Size, Location: Addition is necessary to accommodate an expansion of church activities and space needs. It is located to the rear of the property and behind the 1950s sanctuary and Gathering Hall. In size and scale it is subordinate to the sanctuary and does not overwhelm the adjacent halls.  Design, Replication of Style, Materials and Features: The addition is intended to respect, but not mimic the design and materiality of the sanctuary and halls. Design elements distinguish the old from the new.  Attachment to Existing Building: The addition is linked to the sanctuary and Fellowship Hall by hyphens that will distinguish the old from the new. Gathering Hall Terrace and Doors  BAR should discuss the removal of existing windows to accommodate the new doors.  Removal of the 24” diameter tree. (See photos on sheet 6 of the submittal.) This is a significant, mature tree. BAR should discuss its removal and, if approved, require that it be replaced with a suitable large canopy tree (per the City’s Tree List) and at a location within the SW corner of the site. Courtyard Terrace at Gathering Hall  The use of artificial turf is unprecedented within an ADC District, however this courtyard is enclosed by surrounding structures and will not be visible from any public right of way. Lighting  Conform with design guidelines and BAR standards. Landscaping  Proposed trees and shrubs are consistent with the City’s Master Tree List.  Paving materials conform with design guidelines. Suggested Motions Approval: Having considered the standards set forth within the City Code, including City Design Guidelines for New Construction and Additions, Site Design and Elements, and I move to find that the proposed addition, alterations, and landscaping satisfy 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. […as submitted with following conditions:…) Denial: Having considered the standards set forth within the City Code, including City Design Guidelines for New Construction and Additions, and Site Design and Elements, I move to find that the proposed addition, alterations, and do not satisfy the BAR’s criteria and are not compatible with this property and other properties in the North Downtown ADC District, and that the BAR denies the application as submitted. 506 Park Street (July 16, 2020 3 Criteria, Standards, and Guidelines Review Criteria Generally Sec. 34-284(b) of the City Code states that, in considering a particular application the BAR shall approve the application unless it finds: (1) That the proposal does not meet specific standards set forth within this division or applicable provisions of the Design Guidelines established by the board pursuant to Sec.34-288(6); and (2) The proposal is incompatible with the historic, cultural or architectural character of the district in which the property is located or the protected property that is the subject of the application. Pertinent Standards for Review of Construction and Alterations include: (1) Whether the material, texture, color, height, scale, mass and placement of the proposed addition, modification or construction are visually and architecturally compatible with the site and the applicable design control district; (2) The harmony of the proposed change in terms of overall proportion and the size and placement of entrances, windows, awnings, exterior stairs and signs; (3) The Secretary of the Interior Standards for Rehabilitation set forth within the Code of Federal Regulations (36 C.F.R. §67.7(b)), as may be relevant; (4) The effect of the proposed change on the historic district neighborhood; (5) The impact of the proposed change on other protected features on the property, such as gardens, landscaping, fences, walls and walks; (6) Whether the proposed method of construction, renovation or restoration could have an adverse impact on the structure or site, or adjacent buildings or structures; (7) Any applicable provisions of the City’s Design Guidelines. Pertinent Guidelines for Site Design and Elements B. Plantings 1) Encourage the maintenance and planting of large trees on private property along the streetfronts, which contribute to the “avenue” effect. 2) Generally, use trees and plants that are compatible with the existing plantings in the neighborhood. 3) Use trees and plants that are indigenous to the area. 4) Retain existing trees and plants that help define the character of the district, especially street trees and hedges. 5) Replace diseased or dead plants with like or similar species if appropriate. 6) When constructing new buildings, identify and take care to protect significant existing trees and other plantings. 7) Choose ground cover plantings that are compatible with adjacent sites, existing site conditions, and the character of the building. 8) Select mulching and edging materials carefully and do not use plastic edgings, lava, crushed rock, unnaturally colored mulch or other historically unsuitable materials. D. Lighting 1) In residential areas, use fixtures that are understated and compatible with the residential quality of the surrounding area and the building while providing subdued illumination. 2) Choose light levels that provide for adequate safety yet do not overly emphasize the site or building. Often, existing porch lights are sufficient. 506 Park Street (July 16, 2020 4 3) In commercial areas, avoid lights that create a glare. High intensity commercial lighting fixtures must provide full cutoff. 4) Do not use numerous “crime” lights or bright floodlights to illuminate a building or site when surrounding lighting is subdued. 5) In the downtown and along West Main Street, consider special lighting of key landmarks and facades to provide a focal point in evening hours. 6) Encourage merchants to leave their display window lights on in the evening to provide extra illumination at the sidewalk level. 7) Consider motion-activated lighting for security. E. Walkways & Driveways 1) Use appropriate traditional paving materials like brick, stone, and scored concrete. 2) Concrete pavers are appropriate in new construction, and may be appropriate in site renovations, depending on the context of adjacent building materials, and continuity with the surrounding site and district. 3) Gravel or stone dust may be appropriate, but must be contained. 4) Stamped concrete and stamped asphalt are not appropriate paving materials. 5) Limit asphalt use to driveways and parking areas. 6) Place driveways through the front yard only when no rear access to parking is available. 7) Do not demolish historic structures to provide areas for parking. 8) Add separate pedestrian pathways within larger parking lots, and provide crosswalks at vehicular lanes within a site. Pertinent Guidelines on New Construction and Additions P. Additions 1) Function and Size a. Attempt to accommodate needed functions within the existing structure without building an addition. b. Limit the size of the addition so that it does not visually overpower the existing building. 2) Location a. Attempt to locate the addition on rear or side elevations that are not visible from the street. b. If additional floors are constructed on top of a building, set the addition back from the main façade so that its visual impact is minimized. c. If the addition is located on a primary elevation facing the street or if a rear addition faces a street, parking area, or an important pedestrian route, the façade of the addition should be treated under the new construction guidelines. 3) Design a. New additions should not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. b. The new work should be differentiated from the old and should be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment. 4) Replication of Style a. A new addition should not be an exact copy of the design of the existing historic building. The design of new additions can be compatible with and respectful of existing buildings without being a mimicry of their original design. 506 Park Street (July 16, 2020 5 b. If the new addition appears to be part of the existing building, the integrity of the original historic design is compromised and the viewer is confused over what is historic and what is new. 5) Materials and Features a. Use materials, windows, doors, architectural detailing, roofs, and colors that are compatible with historic buildings in the district. 6) Attachment to Existing Building a. Wherever possible, new additions or alterations to existing buildings should be done in such a manner that, if such additions or alterations were to be removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the buildings would be unimpaired. b. The new design should not use the same wall plane, roof line, or cornice line of the existing structure. Pertinent Guidelines on Rehabilitation C. Windows 1) Prior to any repair or replacement of windows, a survey of existing window conditions is recommended. Note number of windows, whether each window is original or replaced, the material, type, hardware and finish, the condition of the frame, sash, sill, putty, and panes. 2) Retain original windows when possible. 3) Uncover and repair covered up windows and reinstall windows where they have been blocked in. 4) If the window is no longer needed, the glass should be retained and the back side frosted, screened, or shuttered so that it appears from the outside to be in use. 5) Repair original windows by patching, splicing, consolidating or otherwise reinforcing. Wood that appears to be in bad condition because of peeling paint or separated joints often can be repaired. 6) Replace historic components of a window that are beyond repair with matching components. 7) Replace entire windows only when they are missing or beyond repair. 8) If a window on the primary façade of a building must be replaced and an existing window of the same style, material, and size is identified on a secondary elevation, place the historic window in the window opening on the primary façade. 9) Reconstruction should be based on physical evidence or old photographs. 10) Avoid changing the number, location, size, or glazing pattern of windows by cutting new openings, blocking in windows, or installing replacement sash that does not fit the window opening. 11) Do not use inappropriate materials or finishes that radically change the sash, depth of reveal, muntin configuration, reflective quality or color of the glazing, or appearance of the frame. 12) Use replacement windows with true divided lights or interior and exterior fixed muntins with internal spacers to replace historic or original examples. 13) If windows warrant replacement, appropriate material for new windows depends upon the context of the building within a historic district, and the age and design of the building. Sustainable materials such as wood, aluminum-clad wood, solid fiberglass, and metal windows are preferred. Vinyl windows are discouraged. 14) False muntins and internal removable grilles do not present an historic appearance and should not be used. 15) Do not use tinted or mirrored glass on major facades of the building. Translucent or low (e) glass may be strategies to keep heat gain down. 506 Park Street (July 16, 2020 6 16) Storm windows should match the size and shape of the existing windows and the original sash configuration. Special shapes, such as arched top storms, are available. 17) Storm windows should not damage or obscure the windows and frames. 18) Avoid aluminum-colored storm sash. It can be painted an appropriate color if it is first primed with a zinc chromate primer. 19) The addition of shutters may be appropriate if not previously installed but if compatible with the style of the building or neighborhood. 20) In general, shutters should be wood (rather than metal or vinyl) and should be mounted on hinges. In some circumstances, appropriately dimensioned, painted, composite material shutters may be used. 21) The size of the shutters should result in their covering the window opening when closed. 22) Avoid shutters on composite or bay windows. 23) If using awnings, ensure that they align with the opening being covered. 24) Use awning colors that are compatible with the colors of the building. D. Entrances, Porches, and Doors 1) The original details and shape of porches should be retained including the outline, roof height, and roof pitch. 2) Inspect masonry, wood, and metal or porches and entrances for signs of rust, peeling paint, wood deterioration, open joints around frames, deteriorating putty, inadequate caulking, and improper drainage, and correct any of these conditions. 3) Repair damaged elements, matching the detail of the existing original fabric. 4) Replace an entire porch only if it is too deteriorated to repair or is completely missing, and design to match the original as closely as possible. 5) Do not strip entrances and porches of historic material and details. 6) Give more importance to front or side porches than to utilitarian back porches. 7) Do not remove or radically change entrances and porches important in defining the building’s overall historic character. 8) Avoid adding decorative elements incompatible with the existing structure. 9) In general, avoid adding a new entrance to the primary facade, or facades visible from the street. 10) Do not enclose porches on primary elevations and avoid enclosing porches on secondary elevations in a manner that radically changes the historic appearance. 11) Provide needed barrier-free access in ways that least alter the features of the building. a. For residential buildings, try to use ramps that are removable or portable rather than permanent. b. On nonresidential buildings, comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act while minimizing the visual impact of ramps that affect the appearance of a building. 12) The original size and shape of door openings should be maintained. 13) Original door openings should not be filled in. 14) When possible, reuse hardware and locks that are original or important to the historical evolution of the building. 15) Avoid substituting the original doors with stock size doors that do not fit the opening properly or are not compatible with the style of the building. 16) Retain transom windows and sidelights. 17) When installing storm or screen doors, ensure that they relate to the character of the existing door. 506 Park Street (July 16, 2020 7 a. They should be a simple design where lock rails and stiles are similar in placement and size. b. Avoid using aluminum colored storm doors. c. If the existing storm door is aluminum, consider painting it to match the existing door. d. Use a zinc chromate primer before painting to ensure adhesion. 506 Park Street (July 16, 2020 8 506 Park Street Staff Photos Figure 1: West elevation of 506 Park Street. Figure 2: Oblique view of 506 Park Street, facing southeast . Figure 3:North elevation of 506 Park Street. Figure 4: Oblique view of 506 Park Street, facing northeast. Figure 5: Oblique view of 506 Park Street and fellowship hall wing, facing northeast. Figure 6:View of subject property looking north up Park Street. Board of Architectural Review (BAR) Certificate of Appropriateness Please Return To: City of Charlottesville Department of Neighborhood Development Services P.O. Box 911, City Hall Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 Telephone (434) 970-3130 Please submit ten (10) hard copies and one (1) digital copy of application form and all attachments. Please include application fee as follows: New construction project $375; Demolition of a contributing structure $375; Appeal of BAR decision $125; Additions and other projects requiring BAR approval $125; Administrative approval $100. Make checks payable to the City of Charlottesville. The BAR meets the third Tuesday of the month. Deadline for submittals is Tuesday 3 weeks prior to next BAR meeting by 3:30 p.m. Isaac Miller Presbyterian Church Charlottesville Trust Applicant Name______________________________________ Owner Name___________________________________ First Presbyterian Church Addition & Renovation 530123000 Project Name/Description______________________________________ Parcel Number__________________________ 506 Park Street, Charlottesville, VA 22902 Project Property Address____________________________________________________________________________ Signature of Applicant Applicant Information 112 4th St. NE, Charlottesville , VA 22902 I hereby attest that the information I have provided is, to the Address:______________________________________ best of my knowledge, correct. _____________________________________________ imiller@brw-architects.com Email:________________________________________ 6/30/2020 __________________________________________ 434-971-7160 Phone: (W) _________________ (C) _______________ Signature Date Isaac Miller 6/30/2020 __________________________________________ Property Owner Information (if not applicant) Print Name Date 506 Park St. Charlottesville, VA, 22902 Address:______________________________________ Property Owner Permission (if not applicant) _____________________________________________ I have read this application and hereby give my consent to forbes@vmdo.com Email:________________________________________ its submission. 434-296-7131 Phone: (W) _________________ (C) _______________ _ __________________________________________ Signature Date Do you intend to apply for Federal or State Tax Credits DavidScott Terry Forney Forbes 6/30/2020 6/30/2020 _________________________________________ No for this project? _______________________ Print Name Date Description of Proposed Work (attach separate narrative if necessary):__________________________________ New Addition and sitework to existing church at Northeast corner. Minor adjustment to ______________________________________________________________________________________________ facade facing park street at administration wing, with sitework. ______________________________________________________________________________________________ List All Attachments (see reverse side for submittal requirements): 40 __ page booklet containing required drawings and images ____________________________________________________________________________________________ Proposed brick sample and window corner sample (window sample finish does not match specified finish, refer to booklet) ______________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________ For Office Use Only Approved/Disapproved by: ______________________ Received by: ___________________________ Date: _______________________________________ Fee paid: ___________Cash/Ck. # _________ Conditions of approval: _________________________ Date Received: _________________________ ____________________________________________ Revised 2016 ____________________________________________ HISTORIC DISTRICT ORDINANCE: You can review the Historical Preservation and Architectural Design Control Overlay Districts regulations in the City of Charlottesville Zoning Ordinance starting with Section 34-271 online at www.charlottesville.org or at Municode.com for the City of Charlottesville. DESIGN REVIEW GUIDELINES: Please refer to the current ADC Districts Design Guidelines online at www.charlottesville.org. SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS: The following information and exhibits shall be submitted along with each application for Certificate of Appropriateness, per Sec. 34-282 (d) in the City of Charlottesville Zoning Ordinance: (1) Detailed and clear depictions of any proposed changes in the exterior features of the subject property; (2) Photographs of the subject property and photographs of the buildings on contiguous properties; (3) One set of samples to show the nature, texture and color of materials proposed; (4) The history of an existing building or structure, if requested; (5) For new construction and projects proposing expansion of the footprint of an existing building: a three- dimensional model (in physical or digital form); (6) In the case of a demolition request where structural integrity is at issue, the applicant shall provide a structural evaluation and cost estimates for rehabilitation, prepared by a professional engineer, unless waived by the BAR. APPEALS: Following a denial the applicant, the director of neighborhood development services, or any aggrieved person may appeal the decision to the city council, by filing a written notice of appeal within ten (10) working days of the date of the decision. Per Sec. 34-286. - City council appeals, an applicant shall set forth, in writing, the grounds for an appeal, including the procedure(s) or standard(s) alleged to have been violated or misapplied by the BAR, and/or any additional information, factors or opinions he or she deems relevant to the application. project: First Presbyterian Church 500 Park St Charlottesville, Va 22902 for: Owner job number: 18013 drawing: EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS revisions: C:\Revit_Local\18013_FPC_Phase1_khabbab.rvt FIRST FLOOR BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW 495' - 0 1/32" drawn by: checked by: Author Checker copyright: © 2018 brwarchitects, P.C. FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH GROUND FLOOR 483' - 9 19/32" T.O. Footing 483' - 0 19/32" RENOVATION + ADDITION B.O. Footing 482' - 0 19/32" 2/12/2019 5:03:47 PM 1 A300.1 1 JULY 21 2020 PHASE 1 - 7TH STREET ELEVATION approval seal 1/4" = 1'-0" A200.1 date sheet 2/4/19 A200.1 Author PROGRESS SET First Presbyterian Church - 506 Park St, ADC GUIDELINES NEW CONSTRUCTION & ADDITIONS: Charlottesville, VA 22902 A. INTRODUCTION Sustainability: the new construction will meet or exceed all sustainability requirements. The facade will be brick, a durable material, that fits within the context of the original structure. The original structure PROJECT DESCRIPTION will be predominately preserved in the construction of the new addition, a recessed hyphen on either The new work will consist of: side of the new proposed addition will differentiate the new addition from the existing original church 1. A new three story addition at structure that was construction in 1954 as well as the more recent addition constructed in 1986. In the North Eastern corner of the addition to the hyphen, the roof form, and window layout will distinguish the new addition from the complex existing structure while maintaining the character of the existing historic structure as well as being 2. A new exterior terrace next to that compatible with it. New structure elements will be at the interface between the new construction and addition as well as adjustments to the existing structure to maintain the integrity of the historic structure. the driveway in that area. 3. Renovation facing Park Street B. SETBACK consisting of: The new addition is placed at the corner of the existing church complex and will, with exception of the • Changing the existing windows to hyphen, maintain the setbacks of the existing structures to reinforce the character of the church and the operable french doors. compatibility between the new addition and the existing structure. • Site and landscape work to create a new terrace adjacent to the C. SPACING french doors. The spacing of the new addition utilizes the existing rhythm established by the existing structure. MATERIALS D. MASSING & FOOTPRINT • The railing will be metal painted The massing and footprint of the new addition sets itself as secondary to the existing historic chapel black. and sanctuary structure. The addition achieves this through various methods including a hipped roof, • The new brick will be Keuka Type 2 in contrast to the existing historic gable roof, to minimize the prominence of its facade in relation to the Mudbox smooth from Watsontown historic chapel and sanctuary, as well as a ‘flat’ roof at the hyphens to clearly distinguish the existing Brick. New brick and mortar to footprint from the new addition. The use of hyphens as well as step-backs at the hyphens reduce the match existing. implied footprint of the addition in relation to the adjacent historic church structure. Topographical • New glass in doors and windows changes on the site also help reduce the scale of the addition in relation to the existing sanctuary. at the entry shall adhere to BAR guidelines. Glass shall be clear E. HEIGHT & WIDTH and will match existing windows The height and width of the proposed addition fits in the existing context of the church’s height and in proportion, color, and number width. The addition, being at the corner of the existing complex, lends itself to a cornerstone proportion of lites. Windows will be aluminum that is more square in nature, with the hyphens on either side of the brick used to bridge the gap to clad wood,to match look of existing the existing structures. The use of trim work and various design elements break down the scale of the windows. Color of cladding to be building to a reinforce a human experience while maintaining the monumental scale of the existing similar to existing windows. church experience. • New trim work shall be painted off- white, similar to existing trim. F. SCALE • Refer to Landscape plan for Use of a brick water-table, covered entries with canopies, cornice that relate to the existing church, sitework materials. trim work, and facade design elements help connect the proposed addition to the existing church, • New hipped roof to be slate with distinguishing the addition while maintaining the same language of the existing in regard to the snowguards, similar to existing. monumental scale of the church. This is also accomplished by a new entry terrace that sits in the • Copper downspouts to match foreground of the addition facing North. The entry terrace helps define the monumental scale of the existing. proposed addition without overshadowing the existing historic church. PROJECT DESCRIPTION First Presbyterian Church Board of Architectural Review July 21, 2020 2 proposed design fits into its context and respects the height and texture of the 4. REPLICATION OF STYLE G. ROOF adjacent structure. The use of those elements sets up the three-part composition a. The new addition is designed to be compatible with the existing church without The proposed addition utilizes a slate hipped roof at the corner structure befitting of foundation, middle and cornice, while navigating its relationship within the being a mimicry of the existing design. the existing church design and its location within the existing church. They hyphens existing structures. b. Through distinct design features and new hyphens that bookend the addition, utilize a low slope roof, not visible from the ground, to break up the mass of the there is a clear distinction of the boundaries of the new addition. design and distinguish the new addition from the existing church. The addition roof M. MATERIALS & TEXTURES also contains a metal paneling bump-out that matches the color of the slate roof The primary materials used in the proposed addition are brick and hardie panel 5. MATERIALS AND FEATURES at the rear towards the inner church courtyard that houses the elevator shaft, this and trim siding, in accordance with the B.A.R guidelines and the context of the a. The materials, bricks, windows, details, and roof are designed to be compatible bump-out is designed to not be visible from the ground. existing structure. with the existing structure by using materials that are established in the existing church structure. H. ORIENTATION N. PAINT As an addition to an existing structure, the new facade carries the same language Where design features are painted, such as trim work, paint will be selected to be 6. ATTACHMENT TO EXISTING BUILDING across from the adjacent facades. similar to the existing off-white precedent. a. The new structure is designed to minimally impact the existing historic church and maintain the essential form and integrity of the original design. I. WINDOWS & DOORS O. DETAILS & DECORATION b. Through setbacks at the new hyphens and the brick corner piece, the wall The ratio of solid (wall) to void (windows and doors) in the new addition relate to Details on the facade are implemented in relation to the existing standards of the plane and the roof form of the new addition vary from the existing church. the adjacent existing historic structure except at the recessed hyphen where the historic church, to break down mass of the structure. New design elements are opening are recessed and form a break in the language of the facade as a tool also used to distinguish the new addition from the existing structure. to distinguish the new addition from the existing church. The size and proportion of width to height of the windows and doors are compatible with the surrounding P. ADDITIONS existing structure. The use of jack arches and a stone sill in the new addition 1. FUNCTION & SIZE relates to the existing window design elements. The new proposed octagonal a. The addition offers a much needed expansion to the existing facilities at the ADC GUIDELINES SITE DESIGN & ELEMENTS: windows at the third story of the addition relate to the same materiality as the church as well as incorporates an elevator to establish accessibility to all floors of The architectural improvements proposed for the addition to First Presbyterian existing church while distinguishing the design from the existing architecture. the church. will be supported with two major landscape improvements. The addition of The new entries at the hyphens feature side-lites and transoms and trim work to b. The new addition was designed in congruence with the existing historic the exterior terrace to the west lawn of the church facing Park Street will allow frame the openings. New windows shall be aluminum clad wood, with simulated building while maintaining the hierarchy of the existing building. for a direct connection between a new internal gathering hall and the exterior divided lights and clear glass that adheres to B.A.R guidelines. landscape. The series of double hung windows below the arched windows will 2. LOCATION be replace by French doors. The terrace and new landscape planting is intended J. PORCHES a. The addition is located at the rear corner of the complex, at a point farthest to provide the congregation an informal gathering place before and after services Canopies at both proposed entrances at the addition demarcate the entryways, away from Park St., Maple St., and 7th St. at the end of 7th St. on a dead end and special events. The new bluestone terrace add a significant amenity to this establishing them as distinct zones on the building facade to guide the visitors into road. side of the building and enliven the Park Street landscape by opening up the life the space. The size of each canopy is also reflective of the size of each entry and b. The addition is set away from the Sanctuary facade facing Park St. and activities of the church to the main civic streetscape. its relationship to the rest of the existing structure. c. The B.A.R new construction guidelines have been utilized in the design of the proposed addition. The second major landscape improvement will be the new entrance terrace at the K. STREET-LEVEL DESIGN north east corner of the building at the point that seventh street terminates into the Through a series of trim work, detailing and design elements such as recesses and 3. DESIGN church parking lot. This new entry terrace will provide accessible access to the setbacks, various ‘bays’ in the new design are articulated, providing a dynamic a. The new addition is sensitive to the existing historic church and its character and building, a landscaped forecourt, and a limited vehicular connection between the facade with visual interest to the pedestrians and users. works. upper and lower parking areas. The limited vehicular access will be controlled by b. The new addition uses the design language presented in the existing structure bollards prohibiting the connection when the church needs to control the vehicular L. FOUNDATION & CORNICE and builds upon it to differentiate the old from the new while maintaining the traffic on the site. The landscape terrace, steps, accessible ramp, and planting will A brick water-table, with a bull nose brick course, that steps out from the plane overall historic integrity of the property and its environment. provide both a safe connection between the building and the parking as well as of the wall above, sets up the relationship between the foundation and the rest an informal garden like gathering area. Landscape planting will be guided by of the building. Using the same language that exists in the adjacent existing native species and lighting will be provided with discreet low bollards, wall and structure, and through the use of trim work, cornice lines, and a brick band, the step lighting. PROJECT DESCRIPTION First Presbyterian Church Board of Architectural Review July 21, 2020 3 Site Renovation & Sitework Addition & Sitework Court Square Park Downtown Mall SITE CONTEXT First Presbyterian Church Board of Architectural Review July 21, 2020 4 NEW COURTYARD 1954 SANCTUARY 1954 1954 CHURCH CHURCH 1986 ADDITION NEW PROPOSED SITEWORK + EXTERIOR ADDITION DRIVEWAY TERRACE EXISTING PROPOSED SCOPE OF WORK First Presbyterian Church Board of Architectural Review July 21, 2020 5 PARK STREET EXISTING PHOTOS - PARK STREET First Presbyterian Church Board of Architectural Review July 21, 2020 6 EXISTING PHOTOS - PARK STREET First Presbyterian Church Board of Architectural Review July 21, 2020 7 7TH STREET EXISTING PHOTOS - 7TH STREET First Presbyterian Church Board of Architectural Review July 21, 2020 8 7TH STREET EXISTING PHOTOS - 7TH STREET First Presbyterian Church Board of Architectural Review July 21, 2020 9 EXISTING PHOTOS - 7TH STREET First Presbyterian Church Board of Architectural Review July 21, 2020 10 EXISTING PHOTOS - 7TH STREET First Presbyterian Church Board of Architectural Review July 21, 2020 11 RENDERED LANDSCAPE IS REPRESENTATIONAL. REFER TO PLANTING PLAN FOR ACCURATE DEPICTION OF LANDSCAPE AND SPECIES 3D PERSPECTIVE First Presbyterian Church Board of Architectural Review July 21, 2020 12 RENDERED LANDSCAPE IS REPRESENTATIONAL. REFER TO PLANTING PLAN FOR ACCURATE DEPICTION OF LANDSCAPE AND SPECIES 3D PERSPECTIVE First Presbyterian Church Board of Architectural Review July 21, 2020 13 3D PERSPECTIVE - 7TH STREET - ADDITION First Presbyterian Church Board of Architectural Review July 21, 2020 14 3D PERSPECTIVE - 7TH STREET - ADDITION First Presbyterian Church Board of Architectural Review July 21, 2020 15 3D PERSPECTIVE - ADDITION First Presbyterian Church Board of Architectural Review July 21, 2020 16 RENDERED LANDSCAPE IS REPRESENTATIONAL. REFER TO PLANTING PLAN FOR ACCURATE DEPICTION OF LANDSCAPE AND SPECIES 3D PERSPECTIVE - ADDITION First Presbyterian Church Board of Architectural Review July 21, 2020 17 RENDERED LANDSCAPE IS REPRESENTATIONAL. REFER TO PLANTING PLAN FOR ACCURATEDEPICTION OF LANDSCAPE AND SPECIES 3D PERSPECTIVE - ADDITION First Presbyterian Church Board of Architectural Review July 21, 2020 18 RENDERED LANDSCAPE IS REPRESENTATIONAL. REFER TO PLANTING PLAN FOR ACCURATE DEPICTION OF LANDSCAPE AND SPECIES 3D PERSPECTIVE - ADDITION First Presbyterian Church Board of Architectural Review July 21, 2020 19 RENDERED LANDSCAPE IS REPRESENTATIONAL. REFER TO PLANTING PLAN FOR ACCURATE DEPICTION OF LANDSCAPE AND SPECIES 3D PERSPECTIVE - ADDITION First Presbyterian Church Board of Architectural Review July 21, 2020 20 RENDERED LANDSCAPE IS REPRESENTATIONAL. REFER TO PLANTING PLAN FOR ACCURATE DEPICTION OF LANDSCAPE AND SPECIES 3D PERSPECTIVE - ADDITION First Presbyterian Church Board of Architectural Review July 21, 2020 21 NEW SITEWORK, REFER TO LANDSCAPE PLAN CHANGE EXISTING WINDOWS TO FRENCH DOORS DN SCALE 1/8”:1’ RENOVATION: ENLARGED PLAN - GATHERING HALL (PARK STREET) First Presbyterian Church Board of Architectural Review July 21, 2020 22 Churc 500 Par Charlot for: Owne job num drawing EXTER revisions PARK STREET LEVEL 495' - 0 1/32" SCALE 1/16”:1’ 1 PHASE 2 - PARK STREET ELEVATION - WEST A2.1 1/8" = 1'-0" C:\Revit_Local\18013_FPC_Phase2_khabbab.rvt drawn b ISM copyrig T.O. PLATE 516' - 3 9/16" UPPER LEVEL - ADDITION 507' - 1 21/32" 6/30/2020 12:36:53 AM PARK STREET LEVEL 495' - 0 1/32" approva 5' - 3" PARK STREET LEVEL 7TH STREET 495' - 0 1/32" LEVEL 483' - 9 19/32" NEW EXTERIOR SCONCE TO MATCH EXISTING SEE LANDSCAPE LIGHTING PLAN date EXISTING NEW SCALE 1/8”:1’ 2 PHASE 2 - 7TH STREET ELEVATION - EAST 6' - 0" 5/5/ PHAS A2.1 1/8" = 1'-0" PROTECT EXISTING BRICK, REPLACE DOUBLE HUNG WINDOW WITH FRENCH DOORS (THESE 4 BAYS) PRESERVE EXISTING BRICK ARCHES AND KEYSTONE RENOVATION: ELEVATION - PARK STREET 75% IN PRICIN ISM WINDOWS, DOWNSPOUTS DURING INSTALL OF NEW FRENCH DOORS First Presbyterian Church Board of Architectural Review 1 GATHERTING TERRACE - ENLARGED July 21, 2020 A2.6 1/4" = 1'-0" 23 bbab.rvt 306A 306 HIGH SCHOOL WD 6' - 8" 5' - 0" G MTL CLOSERS 306B 306 HIGH SCHOOL WD 6' - 8" 5' - 0" G MTL CLOSERS drawing: 307 310 NORTH STAIR FR WD 6' - 8" 3' - 0" F MTL FLIP TO LEFT SWING DOOR SCHEDULES revisions: STUCCO, PAINTED, EXISTING TO REMAIN 3 PANEL TO MATCH STEEL FRAME, POWER COAT TO EXISTING WINDOW PHOTOS OF PROFILE FOR REFERENCE EXISTING? MATCH DOORS. PROFILE TO MATCH EXISTING. FIXED STEEL TRANSOM ABOVE, POWDER COAT TO MATCH DOORS. 2" CLEAR DOUBLE GLAZED GLASS. drawn by: checked by: Author Checker copyright: © 2020 brwarchitects, P.C. 3" SIMULATED DIVIDED LITES, TYPICAL 2' - 1" ADD ALTERNATE: TRUE DIVIDED LITE. 7' - 2" LOCKABLE HARDWARE NEW STEEL FRENCH DOOR, OPENS OUTWARDS, POWDER COAT TO MATCH EXISTING. HOLD-OPEN HARDWARE AND approval seal 3/8" FLOOR MOUNTED CLOSERS 2' - 1" 2' - 1" 1 DOOR TYPE J date sheet A5.3 5/5/20 PHASE 2 A5.3 EXISTING WINDOW PHOTOS FOR REFERENCE 75% INTERIM PRICING SET RENOVATION: ELEVATION - FRENCH DOORS First Presbyterian Church Board of Architectural Review July 21, 2020 24 NEW ADDITION DN NEW SITEWORK, REFER TO LANDSCAPE PLAN DN N 7TH STREET NEW ADDITION SCALE 1/16”:1’ ENLARGED PLAN - ADDITION (7TH STREET) 1 BAR PHASE 2 - 7TH STREET LEVEL - FLOOR PLAN Copy 1 First Presbyterian Church Board of Architectural Review 1/16" = 1'-0" -BAR3 July 21, 2020 25 500 Park St Charlottesvill for: Owner job number: drawing: EXTERIOR revisions: PARK STREET LEVEL 495' - 0 1/32" 1 PHASE 2 - PARK STREET ELEVATION - WEST A2.1 1/8" = 1'-0" C:\Revit_Local\18013_FPC_Phase2_khabbab.rvt drawn by: ISM copyright: © T.O. PLATE 516' - 3 9/16" UPPER LEVEL - ADDITION 507' - 1 21/32" 6/30/2020 12:36:53 AM PARK STREET LEVEL 495' - 0 1/32" approval 7TH STREET LEVEL 483' - 9 19/32" date EXISTING NEW 2 PHASE 2 - 7TH STREET ELEVATION - EAST 5/5/20 PHASE 2 A2.1 1/8" = 1'-0" 75% INTERIM PRICING SET ISM SCALE 1/16”:1’ ELEVATION - 7TH STREET First Presbyterian Church Board of Architectural Review July 21, 2020 26 project: First Presbyte Church 500 Park St Charlottesville, Va for: Owner job number: drawing: EXTERIOR ELE revisions: C:\Revit_Local\18013_FPC_Phase2_khabbab.rvt drawn by: ISM copyright: © 2020 NEW EXISTING SCALE 1/16”:1’ 6/30/2020 12:39:08 AM 2 PHASE 2 - NORTH ELEVATION 1/8" = 1'-0" A2.2 ELEVATION - NORTH approval First Presbyterian Church Board of Architectural Review July 21, 2020 date 275/5/20 PHASE 2 75% INTERIM M project: First Presbyterian Church 500 Park St Charlottesville, Va 22902 for: Owner SLATE ROOF W/ HIDDEN GUTTERS AND SNOW GUARDS, TO MATCH EXISTING job number: T.O. PLATE 516' - 3 9/16" COMPOSITE CORNICE, PROFILE AND PAINT TO MATCH EXISTING drawing: COPPER HEADER TO MATCH EXISTING, TYPICAL ENLARGED ELEVATIONS COPPER DOWNSPOUTS TO MATCH EXISTING, TYPICAL UPPER LEVEL - ADDITION revisions: 507' - 1 21/32" 2' - 0" UPPER LEVEL COMPOSITE CORNICE W/ COPPER FLASHING , 505' - 1 21/32" PROFILE AND CORNICE PAINT TO MATCH EXISTING COPPER FLASHING FOR DOWNSPOUT PASS-THROUGH 10' - 1 3/4" WATSONTOWN 'KUEKA' BRICK STONE WINDOW SILLS TO MATCH EXISTING PARK STREET LEVEL 495' - 0 1/32" C:\Revit_Local\18013_FPC_Phase2_khabbab.rvt 11' - 2 1/2" drawn by: c ISM C BRICK copyright: © 2020 brwa BULLNOSE WATERTABLE 7TH STREET LEVEL 483' - 9 19/32" STEEL LAMB'S TONGUE RAILING, BLACK HARDIE PANEL AND TRIM SIDING KAWNEER 350 SINGLE W/ LITES, CUSTOM PT 6/30/2020 12:42:08 AM CIP RISERS W/ PRECAST CONCRETE TREADS SCALE 1/8”:1’ approval seal ENLARGED ELEVATION - ADDITION (7TH STREET) First Presbyterian Church 1 PHASE 2 - ENLARGED 7TH STREET ELEVATION - EAST Board of Architectural Review A2.4 1/4" = 1'-0" July 21,date 2020 shee 5/5/20 28 PHASE 2 A 75% INTERIM PRICING SET ISM NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION project: First Presbyterian Church EXISTING STRUCTURE TO REMAIN, PROTECT 500 Park St FLAT EPDM ROOF Charlottesville, Va 22902 METAL PANELING, COLOR TO MATCH SLATE ROOF for: Owner COMPOSITE CORNICE, SLATE ROOF W/ HIDDEN GUTTERS PAINT TO MATCH AND SNOW GUARDS, TO MATCH EXISTING EXISTING HIDDEN GUTTER COMPOSITE CORNICE, PROFILE AND PAINT TO MATCH EXISTING T.O. PLATE 516' - 3 9/16" NOT USED (OLD job number: 18013 T.O PLATE) 514' - 3 9/16" drawing: 9' - 1 7/8" ENLARGED UPPER LEVEL - ELEVATIONS ADDITION COPPER DOWNSPOUTS TO 507' - 1 21/32" MATCH EXISTING, TYPICAL UPPER LEVEL revisions: 505' - 1 21/32" 10' - 1 5/8" 30' - 6" STONE WINDOW SILLS TO MATCH EXISTING PARK STREET LEVEL BRICK BAND, TO MATCH 495' - 0 1/32" FIELD BRICK METAL CANOPY 11' - 2 1/2" BRICK BULLNOSE WATERTABLE drawn by: checked by: ISM Checker 7TH STREET LEVEL copyright: © 2020 brwarchitects, P.C. 483' - 9 19/32" RECESSED BRICK. HARDIE PANEL AND TRIM SIDING HARDIE PANEL AND TRIM SIDING KAWNEER 350 DOUBLE DOOR W/ LITES, CUSTOM PT NEW CONCRETE SIDEWLAK SCALE 1/8”:1’ ENLARGED ELEVATION - ADDITION (NORTH) approval seal First Presbyterian Church 1 PHASE 2 - ENLARGED NORTH ELEVATION Board of Architectural Review A2.5 1/4" = 1'-0" July 21, 2020 date sheet 29 5/5/20 PHASE 2 A2.5 OHU SAN SAN REVISION DESCRIPTIO O S SAN SAN SAN HU SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN DOWNSPOUTS TO S OHU REMAIN (TYP.) OHU OHU OHU U OH OHU OHU SAWCUT OHU OHU OHU OHU SAN OHU OHU OHU REMOVE LEGEND: REMOVE OHU REMOVE CONCRETE REMOVE BRICK PLANTER REMOVE STORM LINE & OH ASSOCIATED INLETS OHU REMOVE ASPHALT U OHU REMOVE BUILDING SAN X STRUCTURE AND X X REMOVE REMOVE BUILDING CONCRETE REMOVE STAIRS OHU AND HANDRAIL ASPHALT TO BE MILLED OH OHU U REMOVE/RELOCATE HVAC UNITS. OHU SAW CUT CONTRACTOR TO COORDINATE U S SAN OHU SAN DATE SAN D X REMOVE TREE WITH ARCH/MEP. OHU OHU OHU U OHU OHU OHU OHU REMAIN (TYP.) DOWNSPOUTS D UGP S SAN REMOVE SAN OHU SAN D SAN UGP O REMOVE S SAN SAN SAN HU SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN J S TO OHU OHU DE OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU SAWCUT J X OHU OHU OHU X OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU C SAN OHU C. SAWCUT UGP OHU OHU UGP UGP UGP REMOVE X RETURN TO OWNER OHU REMOVE SIGN AND SAN DOWNSPOUTS TO X REMAIN (TYP.) RETURN TO OWNER REMOVE SIGN AND POLE TO REMAIN PER CITY STD. PP-1 MIN. PAVEMENT PATCH OHU UTILITY PROVIDER RELOCATE POWER LINE AND COORDINATE WITH OHU S O HU REMOVE BRICK PLANTER REMOVE/RELOCATE HVAC UNITS. CONTRACTOR TO COORDINATE X UGP WITH ARCH/MEP. UGP REMOVE SIGN AND SAN OHU RETURN TO OWNER UG P REMOVE UGP OHU CURB UGP X REMOVE UGP DOWNSPOUTS TO X X REMOVE CURB SAN X REMAIN (TYP.) OHU X X SAWCUT X UGP UGP OHU REMOVE UGP X UGP REMOVE X X X X X SAN REMOVE REMOVE STORM LINE & 83 X ASSOCIATED INLETS NAD X HU O O OHU O DOWNSPOUTS TO X HU HU REMOVE BUILDING X X STRUCTURE AND REMAIN (TYP.) CONCRETE SCALE 1"=20' UGP REMOVE STAIRS REMOVE SIGN AND SAN HU O AND HANDRAIL RETURN TO OWNER 0 20' 40' REMOVE BRICK PLANTER REMOVE/RELOCATE HVAC UNITS. X O O HU HU OHU CONTRACTOR TO COORDINATE UGP UG UGP UGP WITH ARCH/MEP. UGP P REMOVE SIGN AND O UGP RETURN TO OWNER UG P OHU SAN HU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU REMOVE OHU OHU CURB UGP REMOVE RELOCATE POWER LINE O X HU OH REMOVE AND COORDINATE WITH UGP U UGP S UTILITY PROVIDER SAWCUT X O UGP DOWNSPOUTS TO OHU HU OH X U REMAIN (TYP.) MIN. PAVEMENT PATCH X UGP UGP SAN PER CITY STD. PP-1 OH REMOVE U POLE TO REMAIN UGP O UGP HU REMOVE X SAN X OHU X X OHU OHU OHU S REMOVE STORM LINE & 83 ASSOCIATED INLETS NAD O O X HU HU REMOVE BUILDING X X STRUCTURE AND CONCRETE 4 SCALE 1"=20' SCALE 1:40 S UGP REMOVE STAIRS REMOVE SIGN AND 0 NAD SAN AND HANDRAIL RETURN TO OWNER 0 20' 40' 83 X SCALE 1"=20' X O EXISTING SITE - DEMO O HU HU 20' REMOVE TREE REMOVE BUILDING REMOVE ASPHALT REMOVE CONCRETE SAW CUT LEGEND: ASPHALT TO BE MILLED OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU First Presbyterian Church 40' OHU Board of Architectural Review OHU OHU REMOVE RELOCATE POWER LINE O HU OH AND COORDINATE WITH July 21, 2020 U S UTILITY PROVIDER SAWCUT OHU OH U MIN. PAVEMENT PATCH OH U PER CITY STD. PP-1 30 POLE TO REMAIN FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH DATE REVISION DESCRIPTION C. KO SAN DESIG CHEC J. D J. D 45 SHE DRA 4/2 C2 1" JOB OHU SC D SA OHU O S SAN SAN SAN HU SAN ENERGY PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION FOR THE REVISION DESCRIPTI SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN SAN RELOCATION OF ALL UNDERGROUND POWER LINES AND S DOWNSPOUTS TO OHU INSTALLATION REQUIREMENTS. IT SHALL BE THE OHU OHU REMAIN (TYP.) OHU RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR TO ENSURE OHU OHU OHU POWER RELOCATION WORK DOES NOT IMPACT THE U OH OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU SAWCUT SAN PROJECT SCHEDULE. REMOVE 2. CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL AND REMOVE LANDSCAPE DRAWINGS FOR FINAL DETAILS OF ALL OHU STAIRS, HANDRAILS AND AMENITY SPACE FEATURES. 3. CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR DAMAGED AND LEGEND: REMOVE BRICK PLANTER REMOVE STORM LINE & DETERIORATING AREAS OF PAVEMENT USING BEST OH PROPOSED HARDSCAPE ASSOCIATED INLETS OHU PRACTICES, WHICH MAY INCLUDE REMOVAL AND U OHU (SEE LANDSCAPE PLAN) REPLACEMENT OF FULL PAVEMENT SECTION WHERE REMOVE BUILDING SAN NECESSARY. X STRUCTURE AND X X REMOVE 4. UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL EXISTING ROOFCONCRETE SIDEWALK LEADERS AND ONSITE PIPES SHALL REMAIN IN PLACE CONCRETE REMOVE STAIRS OHU AND HANDRAIL AND REMAIN UNALTERED. CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY ENGINEER OF RECORD IN WRITING IMMEDIATELY UPON HEAVY DUTY ASPHALT OH OHU U DISCOVERY OF ANY UTILITY LINE NOT MARKED BY MISS UTILITY. REMOVE/RELOCATE HVAC UNITS. OHU CONTRACTOR TO COORDINATE S U ASPHALT REPAIR PER CITY SAN STANDARDS DATE OHU SAN SAN D ASPHALT TO BE MILLED & OVERLAID WITH ARCH/MEP. DATE OHU OHU OHU U OHU OHU 4/28/20 OHU OHU REMAIN (TYP.) DOWNSPOUTS D UGP NOTES: S DRAWN BY SAN REMOVE SAN OHU 5 UGP SAN 1. CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE WITH DOMINION SAN O REMOVE S SAN SAN SAN J. DENKO HU SAN SAN SAN SAN ENERGY PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION FOR THE SAN SAN SAN SAN RELOCATION OF ALL UNDERGROUND POWER LINES AND S DESIGNED B TO OHU INSTALLATION REQUIREMENTS. IT SHALL BE THE OHU OHU OHU OHU RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR TO ENSURE OHU OHU OHU POWER RELOCATION WORK DOES NOT IMPACT THE J. DENKO OHU OHU X OHU OHU OHU 5.35' OHU OHU PROJECT SCHEDULE. CHECKED BY 2. CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL AND SAN OHU 5' LANDSCAPE DRAWINGS FOR FINAL DETAILS OF ALL C. KOTARSK UGP STAIRS, HANDRAILS AND AMENITY SPACE FEATURES. SAWCUT 37' 3. CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR DAMAGED AND SCALE HARDSCAPE DETERIORATING AREAS OF PAVEMENT USING BEST 1" = 20' 34.37' OHU OHU UGP UGP UGP (SEE LANDSCAPE PLANS) PRACTICES, WHICH MAY INCLUDE REMOVAL AND REPLACEMENT OF FULL PAVEMENT SECTION WHERE X RETURN TO OWNER OHU REMOVE SIGN AND NECESSARY. 4. UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL EXISTING ROOF SAN LEADERS AND ONSITE PIPES SHALL REMAIN IN PLACE X RETURN TO OWNER REMOVE SIGN AND POLE TO REMAIN AND REMAIN UNALTERED. CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY 7 ENGINEER OF RECORD IN WRITING IMMEDIATELY UPON PER CITY STD. PP-1 MIN. PAVEMENT PATCH OHU 6 DISCOVERY OF ANY UTILITY LINE NOT MARKED BY MISS UTILITY PROVIDER RELOCATE POWER LINE AND COORDINATE WITH UTILITY. OHU S O HU UGP X FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH UGP 6' R3' R5' SAN UG OHU 9' 9' P CG-2 UGP OHU 6' 6' (9) RISERS 5 R5' UGP UGP 36.95' WITH HANDRAIL 25.31' CHEEK WALL GATE REMOVE CURB SAN CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA X OHU UGP COURTYARD UGP X 6' (SEE LANDSCAPE PLANS) 5.35' (2) 6" SCH 40 PVC CONDUIT CG-2 UG RETAINING WALL OHU (SEE NOTE #1) 3.5' MAX HEIGHT P 6' 5' ADA RAMP WITH X UGP X X X X HANDRAIL 37' 26.19' RETAINING WALL HARDSCAPE SAN 34.37' 3' MAX HEIGHT (SEE LANDSCAPE PLANS) 18.99' X BUILDING ADDITION O O X HU X HU HU X 3,859 SF OHU X O 5' 5'X5' LEVEL LANDING (5) RISERS WITH HANDRAIL 7 UGP ADA RAMP WITH 6 SAN 26.37' HU O HANDRAIL PEDESTRIAN PLAZA (SEE LANDSCAPE PLANS) O O HU HU 5' STOP SIGN OHU 8.4' (MUTCD R1-1) UGP UG UGP UGP 15' UGP P 7.11' 6' R3' R5' R15' 9' UG OHU O OHU OHU UGP OHU 9'OHU OHU OHU P SAN OHU HU OHU CG-2 "DO NOT ENTER" SIGN OHU 5' (6) RISERS R15' (MUTCD R5-1) O HU UGP OH WITH HANDRAIL 1' CURB U 6' STANDARD 6' SIDEWALK (9) RISERS R5' UGP S POLE TO REMAIN TRANSITION MONOLITHIC WITH CURB UGP 36.95' WITH HANDRAIL IN PLACE CHEEK WALL OHU OH O 25.31' GATE UGP HU U PAVEMENT PATCH PER UGP COURTYARD CITY STD PP-1 UGP SAN PERMANENT OH 6' (SEE LANDSCAPEPAVEMENT PLANS) U REPAIR PER CITY STD PR-1 (2) 6" SCH 40 PVC CONDUIT CG-2 UG RETAINING WALL UGP O (SEE NOTE #1) SAN HU 3.5' MAX HEIGHT P 6' OHU ADAOHU RAMP WITH X OHU OHU X X HANDRAIL S 26.19' RETAINING WALL 3' MAX HEIGHT 83 18.99' NAD BUILDING ADDITION JOB NO. O O X HU HU 3,859 SF X 45529 X 5' SCALE 1"=20' 1"=10' 5'X5' LEVEL LANDING SHEET NO. SCALE 1:40 (5) RISERS SAN C4.0 0 NAD WITH HANDRAIL UGP 0 10' 20' 20' 40' ADA RAMP WITH 83 26.37' HANDRAIL X PEDESTRIAN PLAZA SCALE 1"=20' (SEE LANDSCAPE PLANS) O PROPOSED SITE LAYOUT O HU HU 5' 20' REMOVE TREE REMOVE BUILDING REMOVE ASPHALT REMOVE CONCRETE SAW CUT LEGEND: ASPHALT TO BE MILLED STOP SIGN 8.4' (MUTCD R1-1) 15' 7.11' OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU R15' OHU OHU First Presbyterian Church 40' OHU "DO NOT ENTER" SIGN Board of Architectural Review OHU OHU 5' (6) RISERS R15' (MUTCD R5-1) O HU OH WITH HANDRAIL 1' CURB U STANDARD SIDEWALK July 21, 2020 S POLE TO REMAIN TRANSITION MONOLITHIC WITH CURB IN PLACE OHU OH U PAVEMENT PATCH PER PERMANENT PAVEMENT OH U CITY STD PP-1 31 REPAIR PER CITY STD PR-1 FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH DATE REVISION DESCRIPTION C. KO SAN DESIG CHEC J. D J. D 45 SHE DRA 4/2 C2 1" OHU JOB SC D BRICK NOTES: THE PROPOSED BRICK, KEUKA TYPE 2 MUDBOX SMOOTH FROM WATSONTOWN BRICK, WAS CHOSEN DUE TO ITS SIMILARITY TO THE EXISTING OBSOLETE BRICK AND THE METHOD IT IS PRODUCED. MORTAR TO MATCH EXISTING AS WELL. EXISTING HISTORIC OBSOLETE BRICK. KEUKA TYPE 2 MUDBOX SMOOTH FROM WATSONTOWN BRICK. MATERIAL SAMPLE - BRICK First Presbyterian Church Board of Architectural Review July 21, 2020 32 WINDOW NOTES: THE PROPOSED WINDOW, ARCHITECT RESERVE FROM PELLA, WAS CHOSEN DUE TO ITS DESIGN FEATURES SUCH AS THROUGH- STILE CONSTRUCTION AND PUTTY PROFILE AS WELL AS SIMILARITY TO THE WINDOWS ON THE EXISTING STRUCTURE. THE WINDOW WILL BE ALUMINUM CLAD WOOD WITH A FINISH TO MATCH THE EXISTING OFF-WHITE COLOR. THE WINDOW WILL CONTAIN SIMULATED DIVIDED LIGHTS IN THE DESIGN PATTERN DEPICTED ON THE ELEVATION DRAWINGS, REFLECTIVE OF THE ORIGINAL WINDOWS ON THE HISTORIC CHURCH. WINDOW CORNER SAMPLE PROVIDED. SPECIFIC DESIGN AND FINISH NOT DEPICTED. DESIGN DEPICTED IN ELEVATIONS AND FINISH TO BE OFF-WHITE SIMILAR TO EXISTING CHURCH. EXISTING WINDOW MATERIAL SAMPLE - WINDOW First Presbyterian Church Board of Architectural Review July 21, 2020 33 EXISTING REDBUD TREE TO CC (6)AMELANCHIER X GRANDIFLORA 'AUTUMN BRILLIANCE' P F F REMAIN AND BE PROTECTED EXISTING REDBUD TREE TO TODD SHA REMAIN AND BE PROTECTED T project man GATHERING TERRACE T (74)LIRIOPE MUSCARI 'BIG BLUE' MARK LIEB (41)GERANIUM F (2)CERCIS CANADENSIS F QIYAO LI MACRORRHIZUM T project team (2)CERCIS CANADENSIS (93)LIRIOPE MUSCARI 'BIG BLUE' (8)BUXUS 'GREEN GEM' F (9)BUXUS F 'GREEN GEM' B B B B B (8)BUXUS 'GREEN GEM' (11)BUXUS 'GREEN GEM' GEM' (9)BUXUS 'GREEN(10)BUXUS 'GREEN GEM' B B B B B (99)LIRIOPE NOT FOR CONS MUSCARI 'BIG BLUE' (99)LIRIOPE NOT FOR CONST professional seal CC F F (6)AMELANCHIER X GRANDIFLORA 'AUTUMN BRILLIANCE' MUSCARI 'BIG BLUE' professional seal CC F F (6)AMELANCHIER X GRANDIFLORA 'AUTUMN BRILLIANCE' TODD SHALLENBERGER project manager TODD SHALLENBERGER T GATHERING TERRACE T CC (74)LIRIOPE MUSCARI 'BIG BLUE' MARKmanager project LIEBERTH (41)GERANIUM GATHERING TERRACE T F F QIYAO LI MACRORRHIZUM (74)LIRIOPE MUSCARI 'BIG BLUE' CONCRETE STEPS MARK LIEBERTH (41)GERANIUM project team F F QIYAO LI MACRORRHIZUM (11)HYDRANGEA QUERCIFOLIA project team (93)LIRIOPE MUSCARI ACER RUBRUM 'RED SUNSET' 'BIG BLUE' FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH (93)LIRIOPE MUSCARI F F (112)LIRIOPE SPICATA 'BIG BLUE' (11)BUXUS 'GREEN GEM' F F (10)BUXUS 'GREEN GEM' (364)LIRIOPE MUSCARI 'BIG BLUE' (11)BUXUS 'GREEN GEM' (10)BUXUS 'GREEN GEM' VINES (3)ITEA VIRGINICA 'HENRY'S GARNET' (113)LIRIOPE SPICATA (26)GERANIUM MACRORRHIZUM (3)ITEA VIRGINICA 'HENRY'S GARNET' (11)HEUCHERA VILLOSA 'AUTUMN BRIDE' (10)HYDRANGEA QUERCIFOLIA T T A A CC T COURTYARD (4)HYDRANGEA QUERCIFOLIA (173)LIRIOPE MUSCARI 'BIG BLUE' FIRST T CC A A (5)AMELANCHIER X GRANDIFLORA 'AUTUMN BRILLIANCE' CONCRETE STEPS (2)AMELANCHIER X GRANDIFLORA CHUR 'AUTUMN BRILLIANCE' STEPS A A CONCRETE QUERCIFOLIA B B B (11)HYDRANGEA (30)LIRIOPE MUSCARI 'BIG BLUE' (81)LIRIOPE SPICATA project nam ACER RUBRUM (11)HYDRANGEA 'RED SUNSET' QUERCIFOLIA FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH SCILLA SIBERICA (112)LIRIOPE ACER RUBRUM 'REDSPICATA SUNSET' FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH STONE TERRACE FIRST PRE (238)PACHYSANDRA (364)LIRIOPE (112)LIRIOPE MUSCARI 'BIG BLUE' SPICATA client TERMINALIS (97) DRYOPTERIS ERYTHROSORA (364)LIRIOPE MUSCARI 'BIG BLUE' 500 PAR waterstreet studio POLYSTICHUM ACROSTICHOIDES C CHARLO VINES (3)ITEA VIRGINICA 'HENRY'S GARNET' (21)BUXUS 'GREEN GEM' C (113)LIRIOPE SPICATA project add A MAGNOLIA VIRGINIANA B B VINES (3)ITEA VIRGINICA 'HENRY'S GARNET' PLANTING BED WITH (26)GERANIUM MACRORRHIZUM (113)LIRIOPE SPICATA 'BIG BLUE' (27)LIRIOPE MUSCARI 'BIG BLUE' (27)LIRIOPE MUSCARI'HENRY'S GARNET' LANDSCAPE ARCHITEC TS GROUNDCOVER (26)GERANIUM (11)HEUCHERA VILLOSAMACRORRHIZUM 'AUTUMN BRIDE' (3)ITEA VIRGINICA ---- SPACED 12" APART (9)ILEX VERTICILLATA PLANNERS BRICK (3)ITEA VIRGINICA QUERCIFOLIA (10)HYDRANGEA WALLS 'HENRY'S GARNET' T project num (11)HEUCHERA VILLOSA A A COURTYARD 'AUTUMN (43)GERANIUM (4)HYDRANGEA BRIDE' MACRORRHIZUM QUERCIFOLIA ENTRY TERRACE T (173)LIRIOPE MUSCARI (10)HYDRANGEA 'BIG QUERCIFOLIA T BLUE' (271)LIRIOPE SPICATA FIRST PRESBYT 75% PRIC A A T A COURTYARD (4)HYDRANGEA QUERCIFOLIA A A (19)HEUCHERA (2)AMELANCHIER X GRANDIFLORA (5)AMELANCHIER X GRANDIFLORA 'AUTUMNVILLOSA 'AUTUMN BRIDE' ADDITION BRILLIANCE' SCILLA SIBERICA (173)LIRIOPE MUSCARI 'BIG BLUE' OHU project pha (24)LIRIOPE MUSCARI 'BIG BLUE' 'AUTUMN (24)LIRIOPE MUSCARI 'BIGBRILLIANCE' BLUE' FIRST PRESBYT CHURCH A A (2)AMELANCHIER X GRANDIFLORA A A B B B (5)AMELANCHIER X GRANDIFLORA 'AUTUMN BRILLIANCE' 31" RED MAPLE CHURCHMAY 28, MUSCARI 'BIG BLUE' 'BIG BLUE' 'AUTUMN BRILLIANCE' B B (30)LIRIOPE (28)LIRIOPE (81)LIRIOPE SPICATA (378)LIRIOPE project name MUSCARI OHU A A B B B SCILLA SIBERICA issue date BLUE' (30)LIRIOPE MUSCARI 'BIG CORNUS FLORIDA (81)LIRIOPE SPICATA project name STONE TERRACE SCILLA SIBERICA FIRST PRESBYTERIAN C A OHU (238)PACHYSANDRA (21)BUXUS 'GREEN GEM' BRICK TERRACE WITH LAWN PANEL client STONE TERRACE FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CH S:\1-PROJECTS\FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH\CAD\03 SHEETS\L4.00 PLANTING PLAN.DWG TERMINALIS CC (238)PACHYSANDRA (97) DRYOPTERIS ERYTHROSORA 500 PARK ST, client (4)VIBURNUM CARLESII POLYSTICHUM ACROSTICHOIDES C OHU TERMINALIS (97) DRYOPTERIS ERYTHROSORA (21)BUXUS 'GREEN GEM' CHARLOTTESVILLE, 500 PARK ST, VA (105) DRYOPTERIS ERYTHROSORA (28)LIRIOPE MUSCARI 'BIG BLUE' CC project address A POLYSTICHUM ACROSTICHOIDES MAGNOLIA VIRGINIANA CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA, (21)BUXUS 'GREEN GEM' B B POLYSTICHUM ACROSTICHOIDES PLANTING BED WITH C OHU B B project address A (27)LIRIOPE MUSCARI MAGNOLIA 'BIG BLUE' VIRGINIANA A (27)LIRIOPE MUSCARI 'BIG BLUE' B B GROUNDCOVER (18)ITEA VIRGINICA 'HENRY'S GARNET' ---- WITH (4) VIBURNUM CARLESII SPACED BED PLANTING 12" APART (9)ILEX VERTICILLATA (27)LIRIOPE MUSCARI 'BIG BLUE' C C (27)LIRIOPE BRICK WALLSMUSCARI 'BIG BLUE' project number GROUNDCOVER OHU ---- revisions A A C C (8)VIBURNUM CARLESII (43)GERANIUM MACRORRHIZUM (9)ILEX VERTICILLATA CC SPACED 12" APART (81)LIRIOPE SPICATA ENTRY TERRACE C project number C BRICK WALLS (271)LIRIOPE SPICATA GALANTHUS NIVALIS PLATANUS X ACERIFOLIA 'BLOOD75% PRICING PACKAG A A GOOD' A (43)GERANIUM (19)HEUCHERA VILLOSA MACRORRHIZUM 'AUTUMN BRIDE' ENTRY TERRACE C C OHU SCILLA SIBERICA ADDITION (271)LIRIOPE SPICATA 'BIG BLUE' (198)LIRIOPE SPICATA OH U project phase (24)LIRIOPE MUSCARI 75% PRICING PACKAG A (132)LIRIOPE SPICATA A A (24)LIRIOPE (19)HEUCHERA MUSCARI VILLOSA 'AUTUMN'BIG BLUE' BRIDE' 31" RED MAPLE SCILLA SIBERICA ADDITION GALANTHUS NIVALIS GALANTHUS NIVALIS OHU project phase OHU SPICATA'BIG BLUE' (378)LIRIOPEMUSCARI (24)LIRIOPE waterstreetstudio MAY 28, 2020 B B AMERICAN HOLLY (24)LIRIOPE MUSCARI'BIG (28)LIRIOPEMUSCARI 'BIGBLUE' BLUE' 31" RED MAPLE OHU SCILLA SIBERICA issue date MAY 28, 2020 PLAN B B CORNUS (28)LIRIOPE MUSCARI FLORIDA 'BIG BLUE' (378)LIRIOPE SPICATA OHU SCILLA SIBERICA issue date A OH U OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU CORNUS (21)BUXUS FLORIDA 'GREEN OHU GEM' OHU OHU (20)ITEA VIRGINICA 'HENRY'S GARNET'WITH LAWN PANEL BRICK TERRACE sheet title OHU S:\1-PROJECTS\FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH\CAD\03 SHEETS\L4.00 PLANTING PLAN.DWG CC A OHU CONCRETE STEPS (5)VIBURNUM CARLESIIUBRICK TERRACE WITH LAWN PANEL L4 (21)BUXUS 'GREEN (4)VIBURNUM GEM' CARLESII waterstreetstudio OH S:\1-PROJECTS\FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH\CAD\03 SHEETS\L4.00 PLANTING PLAN.DWG CC OH U (105) DRYOPTERIS ERYTHROSORA LIGHTED HANDRAIL (150)LIRIOPE SPICATA U (28)LIRIOPE MUSCARI 'BIG BLUE' ---- PLANTING PLAN (4)VIBURNUM CARLESII POLYSTICHUM ACROSTICHOIDES GALANTHUS NIVALISO H 0 5 10 20 OHU SCALE : 1:10 (105) DRYOPTERIS ERYTHROSORA 7TH STREET NE CONCRETE WALK OHU (28)LIRIOPE MUSCARI 'BIG BLUE' B B N L4.00 OH A S POLYSTICHUM ACROSTICHOIDES (18)ITEA VIRGINICA 'HENRY'S GARNET' U (4) VIBURNUM CARLESII OHU B B C C sheet numb waterstreetstudio A OHU SCALE 1:20 revisions A A (4) VIBURNUM CARLESII C C (8)VIBURNUM (18)ITEA VIRGINICA CARLESII 'HENRY'S GARNET' CC (81)LIRIOPE SPICATA C C C C OHU revisions A A GALANTHUS NIVALIS (8)VIBURNUM CARLESII A A C C PLATANUS X ACERIFOLIA 'BLOOD GOOD' CC (81)LIRIOPE SPICATA C C OHU PLANTING PLAN feet C C NIVALIS GALANTHUS SPICATA (198)LIRIOPE SPICATA 'BLOOD GOOD' A A (132)LIRIOPE PLATANUS X ACERIFOLIA A A C C OHU GALANTHUS NIVALIS GALANTHUS NIVALIS OHU (198)LIRIOPE SPICATA (132)LIRIOPE SPICATA A A AMERICAN HOLLY GALANTHUS NIVALIS GALANTHUS NIVALIS OHU 0 First Presbyterian Church40’ PL AMERICAN HOLLY PLANTING Board of Architectural Review PLANTING PLA waterstreet studio OHU OHU OHU sheet title OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU (20)ITEA VIRGINICA 'HENRY'S GARNET' ILLUSTRATIVE PLAN FIRST PRESBYTERIAN sheet CHURCH OHU CONCRETE STEPS July 21, 2020 OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU (5)VIBURNUM CARLESII (20)ITEA VIRGINICA 'HENRY'S GARNET' title L4.00 OHU OH LIGHTED HANDRAIL CONCRETE STEPS (150)LIRIOPE (5)VIBURNUMSPICATA CARLESII SCHEMATIC DESIGN L4.00 U ---- PLANTING PLAN LOHA N D S C A P E A R C H I T E C T S GALANTHUS NIVALIS 0 5 10 20 OHU ---- SCALE : 1:10 L4.00 PLANTING PLANC I V I L E N G I N E E R S U 7TH STREET NE LIGHTED HANDRAIL CONCRETE WALK (150)LIRIOPE SPICATA 34 | 2020 08 | MAY 2 N OH GALANTHUS NIVALIS 0 5 10 20 SS OHU U OH SCALE : 1:10 7TH STREET NE CONCRETE WALK N L4.00 sheet number U waterstreet studio LANDSCAPE ARCHITEC TS PLATANUS X ACERIFOLIA ‘BLOOD GOOD’ PLANNERS waterstreet studio LANDSCAPE ARCHITEC TS PLANNERS waterstreetstudio waterstreetstudio waterstreetstudio io waterstreetstudio waterstreetstudio feet waterstreetstudio VIBURNUM 0 CARLESII 40’ waterstreet studio ILLUSTRATIVE PLAN ILLUSTRATIVE LANDSCAPE FIRST PRESBYTERIAN PLAN feet CHURCH SCHEMATIC DESIGN LANDSCAPE ARCHITEC TS feet 0 08 | MAY First Presbyterian | 202040’ Church CIVIL ENGINEERS 2 0 40’ Board of Architectural Review waterstreet studio ILLUSTRATIVE PLAN FIRST PRESBYTERIAN July 21, CHURCH 2020 udio ILLUSTRATIVE PLAN LANDSCAPE ARCHITEC TS FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH SCHEMATIC DESIGN 08 | 35 MAY | 2020 waterstreetstudio CIVIL ENGINEERS SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2 08 | MAY | 2020 ACER RUBRUM ‘RED SUNSET’ AMELANCHIER X GRANDIFLORA ‘AUTUMN BRILLIANCE’ BUXUS ‘GREEN GEM’ CERCIS CANADENSIS CORNUS FLORIDA DRYOPTERIS ERYTHROSORA POLYSTICHUM ACROSTICHOIDES GERANIUM MACRORRHIZUM HEUCHERA VILLOSA ‘AUTUMN BRIDE’ PROPOSED PLANTS First Presbyterian Church Board of Architectural Review July 21, 2020 36 HYDRANGEA QUERCIFOLIA ILEX VERTICILLATA ITEA VIRGINICA ‘HENRY’S GARNET’ LIRIOPE MUSCARI ‘BIG BLUE’ LIRIOPE SPICATA GALANTHUS NIVALIS LIRIOPE SPICATA SCILLA SIBERICA LIRIOPE SPICATA MAGNOLIA VIRGINIANA PROPOSED PLANTS First Presbyterian Church Board of Architectural Review July 21, 2020 37 5'-0" 37'-0" professiona C EXISTING CONCRETE WALK TO REMAIN GATHERING TERRACE 2" X 18" X 36" BLUESTONE PAVERS T TODD SHA EXISTING CONCRETE project ma WALK TO REMAIN F F MARK LIE CORRECTION NOTE: PROPOSED QIYAO LI B B B B B (5)STAKE MOUNTED PATH LIGHTS RECESSED WALL LIGHTING project tea 5'-5" F F BLUESTONE PAVING, SEE 03/L3.00 WILL BE SUBSTITUTED WITH UNDERMOUNTED HANDRAIL LEDNOT FOR C EXISTING PARKING LOT TO REMAIN CC F F (6)UPLIGHTS BELOW EACH TREE 5'-0" 37'-0" CONCRETE PAVEMENT, SEE 01/L3.00 LIGHTING professional seal GATHERING TERRACE 2" X 18" X 36" BLUESTONE PAVERS 6' HT. METAL SCREEN GATE T TODD SHALLENBE project manager F F BRICK CHEEKWALLS FOLLOW PROFILES OF STAIRS, SEE 05/L3.00 2" THICK BLUESTONE COPING MARK LIEBERTH CONCRETE STEPS WITH BRICK CHEEKWALLS, SEE 05/L3.00 T QIYAO LI CC project team BLUESTONE PAVING, SEE 03/L3.00 (6)RECESSED WALL MOUNTED LIGHTS IN BRICK CHEEK WALL F F EXISTING PARKING LOT TO REMAIN 9R at 6" FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH 8T@12 CONCRETE PAVEMENT, SEE 01/L3.00 SAW CUT EXISTING PAVEMENT METAL 6' HT. METAL HANDRAIL, SCREEN GATE BOTH SIDES. MATCH HANDRAIL AT FRONT OF CHURCH ON PARK STREET BRICK CHEEKWALLS FOLLOW PROFILES OF STAIRS, SEE 05/L3.00 2" THICK BLUESTONE COPING CONCRETE STEPS WITH BRICK CHEEKWALLS, SEE 05/L3.00 T NEW ASPHALT PAVING CC TS 488.0 4" PERFORATED DRAIN PIPE (6)RECESSED WALL MOUNTED LIGHTS IN BRICK CHEEK WALL T A A COURTYARD T ARTIFICIAL TURF WITH 12" OF GRAVEL IN SUBGRADE 9R at 6" A A BELOW AND PERFORATED FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH 8T@12 DRAIN PIPES SAW CUT EXISTING PAVEMENT (3)STAKE MOUNTED PATH LIGHTS FIRST A A B B B METAL HANDRAIL, BOTH SIDES. MATCH HANDRAIL 6" PERFORATED DRAIN PIPE FEE 483.51 5'-0" BS 483.34 AT FRONT483.01 OF CHURCH ON PARK STREET 483.3 CHUR project nam 12'-6" 5" CONCRETE WALK WITH 483.24 TW 484.5 483.1 SAW CUT SCORE LINES CONCRETE PAVEMENT WITH 482.93 TW 484.5 BRICK ACCENT BANDING FIRST PR NEW ASPHALT PAVING client C TS 488.0 4" PERFORATED DRAIN PIPE 8" DRAIN PIPE, BELOW 500 PAR 15'-0" waterstreet studio FOUNDATION C A T (6)STAKE MOUNTED PATH LIGHTS CHARLO B B EXISTING GENERATOR A A COURTYARD T ARTIFICIAL TURF WITH 12" OF project add 5'-0" GRAVEL IN SUBGRADE A A LANDSCAPE ARCHITEC TS BELOW AND PERFORATED POUR NEW CONCRETE CURB PLANNERS DRAIN PIPES 8" DRAIN PIPE (3)STAKE MOUNTED PATH LIGHTS FIRST----PRE A A B B B ENTRY TERRACE project num S:\1-PROJECTS\FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH\CAD\03 SHEETS\L2.01 LAYOUT, MATERIALS & GRADING PLAN ENLARGEMENTS.DWG 6" PERFORATED DRAIN PIPE 5'-0" BS 483.34 483.01 BRICK PAVING ON CHURCH A FEE 483.51 483.3 CONCRETE SLAB, ADDITION OHU project name 75% PRI 12'-6" 5" CONCRETE WALK WITH SEE 02/L3.00 483.24 5'-0" 5'-0" TW 484.519'-0" 483.1 5'-0" 31" RED MAPLE project pha SAW CUT SCORE LINES CONCRETE PAVEMENT WITH B B 482.93 TW 484.5 SOD BANDING BRICK ACCENT OHU FIRST PRESBYTE client C MAY 07 8" DRAIN PIPE, BELOW 500 PARK issue ST, date A FOUNDATION C 15'-0" OHU A (6)STAKE MOUNTED PATH LIGHTS CHARLOTTESVI B B POUR NEW CONCRETE CURB EXISTING GENERATOR CC project address 5'-0" TW 484.4 482.53 TW 484.5 OHU TW 483.12 TS 482.46 POUR NEW CONCRETE CURB 8" DRAIN PIPE ---- ENTRY TERRACE TW 483.12 OHU project number B B 6" BEEHIVE ON YARD DRAIN, S:\1-PROJECTS\FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH\CAD\03 SHEETS\L2.01 LAYOUT, MATERIALS & GRADING PLAN ENLARGEMENTS.DWG BRICK PAVING A A 482.53 CONCRETEBOTH SIDES SLAB, ADDITION C C OHU TW 483.12 C C TW 483.12 OHU SEE 02/L3.00 75% PRICING P 5'-0" 5'-0" 19'-0" 5'-0" 31" RED MAPLE CC project phase C C revisions B B SOD OHU C C OHU MAY 07, 2020 (4)STAINLESS STEEL issue date LAYO A OHU OHU BS 479.06 REMOVABLE BOLLARDS. AMERICAN HOLLY 5'-0" 12'-0" 15'-0" POUR NEW CONCRETE CURB CC USE 2 AT TOP AND 2 AT OHU waterstreetstudio OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU TW 484.4 TW 483.12 OHU 482.53 1'-4" TS 482.46 TW 484.5 (8)STAIR LIGHTS CONCRETE STEPS, SEE 04/L3.00 TW 483.12 OHU OHU BOTTOM & GR ENLA sheet title B B EXISTING CONCRETE TO REMAIN 6" BEEHIVE YARD DRAIN, A CONCRETE WALK, SEE DETAIL 01/L3.00 OH 482.53 BOTH SIDES waterstreetstudio L2 U C C O HU SAW CUT EXISTING PAVEMENT TW 483.12 TW 483.12 WALL MOUNTED OHU 7TH STREET NE C C (4)RECESSED CC ---- LAYOUT, MATERIALS & GRADING PLAN ENLARGEMENTS LIGHTS IN BRICK CHEEK WALL OH C C 0 5 10 20 revisions S U SCALE : 1:10 OHU N C C L2.01 OH U waterstreetstudio AMERICAN HOLLY 5'-0" 12'-0" 15'-0" OHU BS 479.06 (4)STAINLESS STEEL REMOVABLE BOLLARDS. LAYOUT, SCALE 1:20 sheet numb USE 2 AT TOP AND 2 AT 1'-4" (8)STAIR LIGHTS BOTTOM & GRADI OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU OHU CONCRETE STEPS, SEE 04/L3.00 LIGHTING AND MATERIAL PLAN ENLARGE feet EXISTING CONCRETE TO REMAIN sheet title CONCRETE WALK, SEE DETAIL 01/L3.00 OH 0 First Presbyterian Church40’ L2.0 U SAW CUT EXISTING PAVEMENT Board 0of Architectural Review OHU (4)RECESSED WALL MOUNTED waterstreet studio 7TH STREET NE ---- LAYOUT, MATERIALS & GRADING PLAN ENLARGEMENTS ILLUSTRATIVE PLAN FIRST PRESBYTERIAN July 21, CHURCH LIGHTS IN BRICK CHEEK WALL OH 5 10 20 S 2020 U SCALE : 1:10 N L2.01 OH LANDSCAPE ARCHITEC TS U SCHEMATICsheet DESIGN number CIVIL ENGINEERS 08 | 38 MAY | 2020 2 NEW EXTERIOR STAIRS WILL HAVE UNDER HANDRAIL LED STRIP LIGHTING THAT ADHERES TO THE B.A.R AND CITY GUIDELINES. RAILINGS TO BE PAINTED BLACK. PRECEDENT IMAGES BELOW: UPLIGHTING: SPJ18-811 COPPERMOON POLE LIGHTING TO REPLACE EXISTING CONTEMPORARY PATH LIGHT, DARK CM.720/20CG PATH LIGHT, CORDIA PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING - FORMS+SURFACES BRONZE FINISH; 2W, 8-12 V; WIDE DARK BRONZE FINISH; 18” METAL ALUMINUM, POWDER COAT FINISH DARK BRONZE ANGLE FLOOD, 2700K GROUND STAKE; 2 WATT BI-PIN LED METALLIC TEXTURE, 138” HEIGHT, 50W LED, 0-10V MR16, 60 DEG, 2700K DIMMING CAPABILITIES, 3000K *FINISH NOT DEPICTED IN IMAGE *FINISH NOT DEPICTED IN IMAGE ALL NEW LIGHTING TO ADHERE TO BAR AND CITY GUIDELINES: 1. THE LAMPING WILL BE DIMMABLE AS REQUIRED AND NOT EXCEED A COLOR TEMPERATURE OF 3,000K 2. UPLIGHTS WILL BE AT A MAXIMUM OF LESS THAN 3000 LUMENS 3. FIXTURES THAT EMIT 3000 LUMENS OR MORE SHALL BE FULL CUTOFF. PROPOSED EXTERIOR SITE LIGHTING FIXTURES First Presbyterian Church Board of Architectural Review July 21, 2020 39 PROPOSED EXTERIOR WALL LIGHTING FIXTURES AT GATHERING TERRACE First Presbyterian Church Board of Architectural Review July 21, 2020 40 -END-