CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW Regular Meeting September 15, 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 (Note: Any consent agenda item may be pulled and moved to the regular agenda if a BAR member wishes to discuss it, or if any member of the public is present to comment on it. Pulled applications will be discussed at the beginning of the meeting.) 1. Certificate of Appropriateness Application BAR 20-09-01 418 E. Jefferson Street, TMP 530040000 Downtown ADC District Owner: 418 E Jefferson Street, LLC Applicant: William Adams, Train Architects Renaissance School--replace five windows 2. Certificate of Appropriateness Application BAR 20-09-02 534 Park Street, TMP 30126000 North Downtown ADC District Owner/Applicant: Seth Liskey Fence at side/rear yard 3. Submission for BAR Record BAR 18-07-04 0 East Water Street, TMP 570157800 IPP Owner: Choco-Cruz, LLC Applicant: Ashley Davies Interpretive signage for coal tower BAR Packet Guide (9 Sept 2020) 1 C. Deferred Items 4. Certificate of Appropriateness Application BAR 17-11-02 167 Chancellor Street, TMP 090126000 The Corner ADC District Owner: Alpha Omicron of Chi Psi Corp. Applicant: Kevin Schafer, Design Develop, LLC Exterior alterations and addition D. New Items 5. Certificate of Appropriateness Application BAR 20-09-03 1112 Park Street, TMP 470050000 IPP Owner: Margaret Sherman Todd Applicant Paul Josey, Wolf Josey Landscape Architects Driveway 6. Certificate of Appropriateness Application BAR 20-09-04 128 Chancellor Street, TMP 090105000 The Corner ADC District Owner: University Christian Ministries Applicant: Tom Keogh, Train Architects Rear addition 7. Certificate of Appropriateness Application BAR 20-09-05 1619 University Avenue, TMP 090102000 The Corner ADC District Owner: Sovran Bank Applicant: Brian Quinn, Milrose Consultants Bank of America exterior lighting BAR Packet Guide (9 Sept 2020) 2 E. Preliminary Discussions 9. 217 5th Street SW – Restore 1865 house, raze outbuildings. IPP (Fifeville) Mitch Willey 10. 605 Preston Place – New apartment building. IPP and Rugby Road/University Circle/Venable Neighborhood ADC District Kevin Riddle, Mitchell Matthews Architects and Planners 11. 106 Oakhurst Circle – Renovate existing residence, construct addition. Oakhurst-Gildersleeve ADC District Patrick Farley, Patrick Farley Architect D. Other Business 10. Staff questions/discussion Review of multi-step approval process (if time allows) E. Adjournment BAR Packet Guide (9 Sept 2020) 3 Certificate of Appropriateness Application BAR 20-09-01 418 E. Jefferson Street, TMP 530040000 Downtown ADC District Owner: 418 E Jefferson Street, LLC Applicant: William Adams, Train Architects Renaissance School--replace five windows Application Components (linked):  Staff Report  Historic Survey  Application CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW STAFF REPORT September 15, 2020 Certificate of Appropriateness Application BAR 20-09-01 418 East Jefferson Street, TMP 530040000 Owner: 418 E Jefferson Street, LLC Applicant: William Adams, Train Architects Renaissance School - replace five windows Background Year Built: 1826 (Remodeled 1921) District: North Downtown ADC District Status: Contributing The building is Colonial Revival, brick (Flemish bond), has two stories with a gable roof, and is organized into five bays with a one bay addition. Its entrance is in the projecting and pedimented center bay with a wood frontispiece and a quasi-Palladian window at the second story. The frontispiece has a segmental broken pediment over the entrance. The building has a 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 nearly all that remain from the original storerooms. Prior BAR Reviews (See appendix for all reviews) July 21, 2020 – BAR approved CoA for rehabilitation of windows on historic (north) volume of building facing Court Square, and replacement of windows on secondary elevations. Application  Submittal: Application with Train Architects drawings, Additional Window Revisions, dated 24 August 2020: Sheets 8, 9 and 10. 418 E. Jefferson Street (8 Sept 2020) 1 Request CoA for the replacement of five windows on the east elevation of the c1950s building fronting on 5th Street NE. Discussion and Recommendations Staff recommends approval. 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 replacements 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. 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. 418 E. Jefferson Street (8 Sept 2020) 2 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. […] Appendix: February 16, 1999 – BAR approved construction of a rooftop addition to a portion of the structure. 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 (8 Sept 2020) 3 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 ._. -- - ~ - ~--~- 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 RS would like to also replace these SASH - MISSING MUNTINS windows using the detail below. 06. DAMAGE FROM PREVIOUS APPLICATION OF SEALANTS Additional Revisions-24 August 2020 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 Additional Window Revisions-24 August 2020 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 Additional Window Revisions-24 August 2020 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 Additional Window Revisions-24 August 2020 Certificate of Appropriateness Application BAR 20-09-02 534 Park Street, TMP 30126000 North Downtown ADC District Owner/Applicant: Seth Liskey Fence at side/rear yard Application Components (linked):  Staff Report  Historic Survey  Application CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW STAFF REPORT September 15, 2020 Certificate of Appropriateness Application BAR 20-09-02 534 Park Street, Tax Parcel 530126000 Owner/ Applicant: Seth Liskey Fence at side/rear yard Background Year Built: 1911 District: North Downtown ADC District Status: Contributing 534 Park Street is a 1911 Victorian vernacular home designed by Eugene Bradbury. (Historic survey attached.) Prior BAR Reviews October 19, 1993 - BAR approved CoA on for renovations and additions to the main residence December 21, 2004 - BAR approved CoA for redesigned garden in front of the residence. March 18, 2008 - BAR accepted applicant’s request for deferral (window replacement). April 15, 2008 – BAR approved CoA to replace thirty windows. Application  Submittal: Application with photos of site, aerial image showing location of fence, proposed fence cut sheet. 534 Park Street (8 Sept 2020) 1 CoA request to install aluminum picket fencing at the side and rear yard. Fence height to be 36” Along Farish Street and at returns on either side (approx. 12-ft lengths). Fence height to be 48” along the rear [extending from the 12-ft section at 36” height]. Fencing to be 5/8” square pickets with spear finial and 1” square rails. Simple finial. End posts to be 2” square with flat caps. Gate to be flat with pickets and rail to match fence. Color to be black. Discussion and Recommendations Staff recommends approval as submitted. The rear yard is elevated with an approximately 18” high concrete wall. The proposed 36” tall fence results in a height that exceeds the recommended guidelines—fence should not exceed 4-ft in height from the sidewalk; however, until a few years ago, there was a 33” tall wood fence here (see photos) with posts approximately 48” in height. The proposed metal fence is of a similar height and less visible than the wood fence. Fencing is not prevalent along this segment of Park Street, and there is no typical fence type for it is existing. The BAR approved similar fencing for 632 Park Street (February 2018). 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 fence satisfies the BAR’s criteria and is compatible with this property and other properties in the North Downtown ADC District, and that the BAR approves the application as submitted. 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; 534 Park Street (8 Sept 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 Guidelines for Site Design and Elements 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. 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. 534 Park Street (8 Sept 2020) 3 534 Park Street—side and rear fence—25 August 2020 2012 Google Streetview (From Farish) 2020 Google Streetview 534 Park Street—side and rear fence—25 August 2020 2020 Google Streetview (Proposed new fence) 48” Face of garage 36” 36” 36” 33” +/- 24” +/- 36” +/- 45” +/- 12” +/- Farish 36” tall Park Street 48” tall Farish 36” tall Park Street 48” tall Submission for BAR Record BAR 18-07-04 0 East Water Street, TMP 570157800 IPP Owner: Choco-Cruz, LLC Applicant: Ashley Davies Interpretive signage for coal tower Application Components (linked): • Staff Report • Application City of Charlottesville Board of Architectural Review Staff Report September 15, 2020 Certificate of Appropriateness Application BAR 18-07-04 0 East Water Street / Tax Parcel 570157800 Owner: Alan Taylor Applicant: Ashley Davies Pocket Park at Coal Tower – interpretative signage Background Year Built: 1942 Designation: Individually Protected Property (IPP). Designed and constructed by the Ogle Construction Company, Coal Tower originally functioned as a storage tower for coal and sand with a mechanism that loaded the materials onto steam locomotives. Decommissioned in 1986, it is one of seven of its kind remaining in Virginia. Prior BAR Actions (Prior to Sept. 2018 see appendix) September 18, 2018 – BAR approved the proposed park design at the Coal Tower, with the following conditions:  Final light fixtures selected will be submitted for the BAR review;  Lamping not to exceed 3000 color rendering index (CRI);  Interpretative signage and/or displays submitted for BAR review. August 18, 2020 – Exterior light fixture submitted for BAR record. Application  Applicant’s submittal: Mock-up and draft text for plaque/marker. Submittal of information requested by the BAR as condition of approval for the September 2018 CoA for the planned pocket park. 0 East Water Street, Coal Tower (September 10, 2020) 1 Discussion and recommendation Staff finds the mock-up marker to be compatible with the guidelines. Staff has not evaluated the proposed text; however, the cited work is by Thomas W. Dixon, Jr., a well-known author and historian of railroad history. Staff recommends only that the text be modified to be consistent with the contemporary style guides. Specifically:  C&O should have spaces, C & O.  8 should be spelled out, eight.  In the second paragraph, delete the second reference to the tower’s 300-ton capacity.  In the second paragraph, delete the word today.  In the last sentence, delete the second comma. The Charlottesville Coal Tower The Charlottesville Coal Tower is one of seven remaining of its kind in Virginia. The job of the coaling tower was to fuel steam-powered locomotives. 1948 was the last year of all-steam operations on the Chesapeake & Ohio Railway (C&O), and steam operations fully ceased in 1956. The cylindrical coaling tower is an ideal vessel for strength and a logical design for placement of heavy loads of coal in the towers above the track. The 300-ton capacity was the most common on the C&O and appeared in at least 8 locations. In the last decade of the C&O’s full steam operations, there were 99 designated fueling locations. In 1942, the Ogle Construction Company, one of three major builders of coaling stations, built the 91-foot-tall concrete coaling tower in Charlottesville, capable of holding 300 tons of coal. Decommissioned in 1986, the Charlottesville Coal Tower still stands between East Market Street and the CSX railroad tracks today. Like most coaling stations, it was retired in place, due to its large dimensions and solid construction. 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 narrative marker, as submitted, satisfy the conditions of the CoA approved on September 18, 2018. 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. 0 East Water Street, Coal Tower (September 10, 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 4) Federal Regulations (36 C.F.R. §67.7(b)), as may be relevant; 5) The effect of the proposed change on the historic district neighborhood; 6) The impact of the proposed change on other protected features on the property, such as gardens, landscaping, fences, walls and walks; 7) Whether the proposed method of construction, renovation or restoration could have an adverse impact on the structure or site, or adjacent buildings or structures; 8) When reviewing any proposed sign as part of an application under consideration, the standards set forth within Article IX, sections 34-1020 et seq shall be applied; and 9) Any applicable provisions of the City’s Design Guidelines. Pertinent Guidelines for Public Design and Improvements I. Public Signs 1) Maintain the coordinated design for a citywide gateway, directional, and informational public sign system. 2) Add a distinctive street sign system for historic districts. 3) Continue to install plaques or signs commemorating significant events, buildings, and individuals in the districts. 4) Avoid placing sign posts in locations where they can interfere with the opening of vehicle doors. 5) Preserve existing historic plaques located in the district. 6) New plaques should be discreetly located and should not obscure architectural elements. Appendix Prior BAR Review September 19, 2017 – BAR approved proposed landscaping plan in concept , requesting that submittal of specific details such as plants species, location, lighting, and signage (if included) to come back to the BAR. July 17, 2018 - Re: proposed maintenance and rehabilitation of the Coal Tower, BAR accepted applicant’s request for deferral. July 25, 2018: Re: proposed maintenance and rehabilitation of the Coal Tower, with BAR consent, staff approved applicant’ request to complete certain mauntenance items at the Coal Tower. (See page 25 of applicant’s July 31, 2018 submittal.) August 21, 2018: BAR approved the Pocket Park design and proposed maintenance and rehabilitation of the Coal Tower with the following additions:  The lower platform [outside of the door at top of tower] to be retained if possible 0 East Water Street, Coal Tower (September 10, 2020) 3  Consent to replace windows if repair is not feasible  Simplify the design of the park  Explore different grasses to use in the strip between the sidewalk and Bocce court  Provide a lighting plan for under the tower.  Interpretive signs will come back to the BAR for review  Changes to the site plan will be turned into staff and put on the consent agenda for approval. 0 East Water Street, Coal Tower (September 10, 2020) 4 In September 2018, the BAR approved a CoA for a park at the C&O Coal Tower along East Water Street. The motion conditioned that interpretative signage would be submitted for the BAR record. Certificate of Appropriateness Application BAR 18-07-04 0 East Water Street Tax Parcel 570157800 Alan Taylor, Owner/ Ashley Davies, Applicant Maintenance and Rehabilitation Motion: Schwarz moved 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 park design at the Coal Tower satisfies the BAR’s criteria and is compatible with this Individually Protected Property, and that the BAR approves the application with the following conditions: • Final light fixtures selected will be submitted for the BAR review; • Lamping not to exceed 3000 color rendering index (CRI); • Interpretative signage and/or displays will be submitted for BAR review. Earnst seconded. Approved 7-0. 'fhe Charlottesville Coal Tower The Charlottesville Coal Tower is one of seven remaining of its kind in Virginia. The job of the coaling tower was to fuel steam-powered locomotives. 1948 was the last year of all-steam operations on the Chesapeake & Ohio Railway (C&O), and steam operations fully ceased in 19%. Th.: cylindrical coaling tower is an ideal vessel for strength and a logical design for placement of heavy loads of coal in the towers above the track. The 300-ton capanty was the most common on the C&O and appeared m at least 8 locations. In the last decade of the C&O's full steam operations, there were 99 designated fueling locations. In 1942, the Ogle Construction Company, one of three ma,1or builders of coaling stations, built the 91-foot-tall rnnnete coaling tower in Charlottesville, capable of holding 300 tons of coal. Decommissioned in 1986, the Charlottesville Coal Tower still stands between East Market Street and the CSX railroad tracks today. Like most coaling stations, it was retired in place, due to its large dimensions and solid construction. Source: Chesapeake & Ohio Coaling Stations, By Thomas W Dixon, Jr. -------------22"------------,I The Charlottesville Coal Tower The Charlottesville Coal Tower is one of seven remaining of its kind in Vlrglnia. The job of the coaling tower was to fuel steam-powered locomotives. 1948 was the last year of al-steam operations on the Chesapeake & Ohio Railway (C&O), and steam operations fully ceased in 1956. The cylindrical coaling tower is an ideal vessel for strength and a logical design for placement of heavy loads of coal in the towers above the track. The 300-ton capacity was the most 30 " common on the C&O and appeared in at least 8 locations. In the last decade of the C&O's ful steam operations, there were 99 designated fueling locations. In 1942, the Ogle Construction Company, one of three major builders of coaling stations, built the 91-foot-tall concrete coaling tower in Charlottesville, capable of holding 300 tons of coal. Decommissioned in 1986, the Charlottesville Coal Tower still stands between East Market Street and the CSX railroad tracks today. Like most coaling stations, it was retired in place, due to its large dimensions and solid construction. Source: Chesapeake & Ohio Coalins Stations, By Thomas W. Dixon, Jr. Plaque and location Not to Scale For Discussion Only Plaque and location Not to Scale For Discussion Only Certificate of Appropriateness Application BAR 17-11-02 167 Chancellor Street, TMP 090126000 The Corner ADC District Owner: Alpha Omicron of Chi Psi Corp. Applicant: Kevin Schafer, Design Develop, LLC Exterior alterations and addition Application Components (linked):  Staff Report  Historic Survey  Application City of Charlottesville Board of Architectural Review Staff Report September 15, 2020 Certificate of Appropriateness BAR 17-11-02 167 Chancellor Street, TMP 090126000 The Corner ADC District Owner: Alpha Omicron of Chi Psi Corp. Applicant: Kevin Schafer, Design Develop, LLC Exterior alterations and addition Background Year Built: 1915 District: The Corner ADC Status: Contributing This large, five-bay, two-and-a-half‐story dwelling shows elements of the Colonial Revival style; details include: brick stretcher bond, hip roof with one hip roof dormer, two‐bay front porch with piers and full entablature, and entrance with three-lite transom and sidelights. Prior BAR Reviews (See appendix for all reviews.) August 18, 2020 – BAR accepted applicant’s request for deferral. Application  Applicant submittal: o Design Develop drawings Chi Psi Lodge at 167 Chancellor Street, dated 25 August 2020: Cover through sheet 15. o Design Develop email and addendum drawings, 8 September 2020: sheets A1 (Elevation Behind [west] Portico) and A2 (Rake Trim). CoA request for a proposed addition and alterations, including site work and landscaping, to an existing fraternity house. 167 Chancellor Street (9 Sept 2020) 1 Modifications per August 18, 2020 BAR discussion: Masonry  Soldier course brick water table  All new 2F windows lowered to reveal full brick mould trim  Decorative brick header at all 1F windows Roof  Copper J-trim at rake shingles  Copper flashing at ridge and valleys West Elevation (facing Madison Lane)  Black rail at side stairs to "disappear"  Enlarged wood front door to match window header height [west entry]  Portico trims to better agree with Madison Lane precedents North Porch  Upper: Revised rail profile and post/column alignment  Lower: Revised treatment of porch base o Faceted brick columns o Framed horizontal lattice o Brick sill below (For complete list of building materials, see August 18, 2020 BAR staff report.) Discussion Staff recommends BAR discuss and clarify the roof flashing details. Otherwise, staff recommends approval of the CoA. Suggested Motions Approval: Having considered the standards set forth within the City Code, including City Design Guidelines for Site Design and Elements, New Construction and Additions, and Rehabilitation, 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 Corner 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 Site Design and Elements, New Construction and Additions, and Rehabilitation, 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 Corner 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: 167 Chancellor Street (9 Sept 2020) 2 (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. 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. 167 Chancellor Street (9 Sept 2020) 3 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 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. … H. Utilities and Other Site Appurtenances 1. Plan the location of overhead wires, utility poles and meters, electrical panels, antennae, trash containers, and exterior mechanical units where they are least likely to detract from the character of the site. 2. Screen utilities and other site elements with fences, walls, or plantings. 3. Encourage the installation of utility services underground. … Pertinent Guidelines for New Construction and Additions G. Roof (New) 1) Roof Forms and Pitches a. The roof design of new downtown or West Main Street commercial infill buildings generally should be flat or sloped behind a parapet wall. b. Neighborhood transitional buildings should use roof forms that relate to the neighboring residential forms instead of the flat or sloping commercial form. c. Institutional buildings that are freestanding may have a gable or hipped roof with variations. d. Large-scale, multi-lot buildings should have a varied roof line to break up the mass of the design using gable and/or hipped forms. e. Shallow pitched roofs and flat roofs may be appropriate in historic residential areas on a contemporary designed building. f. Do not use mansard-type roofs on commercial buildings; they were not used historically in Charlottesville’s downtown area, nor are they appropriate on West Main Street. 2) Roof Materials: Common roof materials in the historic districts include metal, slate, and composition shingles. a. For new construction in the historic districts, use traditional roofing materials such as standing-seam metal or slate. b. In some cases, shingles that mimic the appearance of slate may be acceptable. c. Pre-painted standing-seam metal roof material is permitted, but commercial-looking ridge caps or ridge vents are not appropriate on residential structures. d. Avoid using thick wood cedar shakes if using wood shingles; instead, use more historically appropriate wood shingles that are thinner and have a smoother finish. e. If using composition asphalt shingles, do not use light colors. Consider using neutral- colored or darker, plain or textured-type shingles. 167 Chancellor Street (9 Sept 2020) 4 f. The width of the pan and the seam height on a standing-seam metal roof should be consistent with the size of pan and seam height usually found on a building of a similar period. I. Windows and Doors (New) 1) The rhythm, patterns, and ratio of solids (walls) and voids (windows and doors) of new buildings should relate to and be compatible with adjacent historic facades. a. The majority of existing buildings in Charlottesville’s historic districts have a higher proportion of wall area than void area except at the storefront level. b. In the West Main Street corridor in particular, new buildings should reinforce this traditional proportion. 2) The size and proportion, or the ratio of width to height, of window and door openings on new buildings’ primary facades should be similar and compatible with those on surrounding historic facades. a. The proportions of the upper floor windows of most of Charlottesville’s historic buildings are more vertical than horizontal. b. Glass storefronts would generally have more horizontal proportions than upper floor openings. 3) Traditionally designed openings generally are recessed on masonry buildings and have a raised surround on frame buildings. New construction should follow these methods in the historic districts as opposed to designing openings that are flush with the rest of the wall. 4) Many entrances of Charlottesville’s historic buildings have special features such as transoms, sidelights, and decorative elements framing the openings. Consideration should be given to incorporating such elements in new construction. 5) Darkly tinted mirrored glass is not an appropriate material for windows in new buildings within the historic districts. 6) If small-paned windows are used, they should have true divided lights or simulated divided lights with permanently affixed interior and exterior muntin bars and integral spacer bars between the panes of glass. 7) Avoid designing false windows in new construction. 8) Appropriate material for new windows depends upon the context of the building within a historic district, and the design of the proposed building. Sustainable materials such as wood, aluminum- clad wood, solid fiberglass, and metal windows are preferred for new construction. Vinyl windows are discouraged. 9) Glass shall be clear. Opaque spandrel glass or translucent glass may be approved by the BAR for specific applications. J. Porches (New) 1. Porches and other semi-public spaces are important in establishing layers or zones of intermediate spaces within the streetscape. L. Foundation and Cornice (New) 1) Distinguish the foundation from the rest of the structure through the use of different materials, patterns, or textures. 2) Respect the height, contrast of materials, and textures of foundations on surrounding historic buildings. 3) If used, cornices should be in proportion to the rest of the building. 167 Chancellor Street (9 Sept 2020) 5 4) Wood or metal cornices are preferred. The use of fypon may be appropriate where the location is not immediately adjacent to pedestrians. M. Materials and Textures (New) 1) The selection of materials and textures for a new building should be compatible with and complementary to neighboring buildings. 2) In order to strengthen the traditional image of the residential areas of the historic districts, brick, stucco, and wood siding are the most appropriate materials for new buildings. 3) In commercial/office areas, brick is generally the most appropriate material for new structures. “Thin set” brick is not permitted. Stone is more commonly used for site walls than buildings. 4) Large-scale, multi-lot buildings, whose primary facades have been divided into different bays and planes to relate to existing neighboring buildings, can have varied materials, shades, and textures. 5) Synthetic siding and trim, including, vinyl and aluminum, are not historic cladding materials in the historic districts, and their use should be avoided. 6) Cementitious siding, such as HardiPlank boards and panels, are appropriate. 7) Concrete or metal panels may be appropriate. 8) Metal storefronts in clear or bronze are appropriate. 9) The use of Exterior Insulation and Finish Systems (EIFS) is discouraged but may be approved on items such as gables where it cannot be seen or damaged. It requires careful design of the location of control joints. 10) The use of fiberglass-reinforced plastic is discouraged. If used, it must be painted. 11) All exterior trim woodwork, decking and flooring must be painted, or may be stained solid if not visible from public right-of-way. N. Paint (New) 1) The selection and use of colors for a new building should be coordinated and compatible with adjacent buildings, not intrusive. 2) In Charlottesville’s historic districts, various traditional shaded of brick red, white, yellow, tan, green, or gray are appropriate. For more information on colors traditionally used on historic structures and the placement of color on a building, see Chapter 4: Rehabilitation. 3) Do not paint unpainted masonry surfaces. 4) It is proper to paint individual details different colors. 5) More lively color schemes may be appropriate in certain sub-areas dependent on the context of the sub-areas and the design of the building. O. Details and Decoration (New) 1) Building detail and ornamentation should be consistent with and related to the architecture of the surrounding context and district. 2) The mass of larger buildings may be reduced using articulated design details. 3) Pedestrian scale may be reinforced with details. P. Additions (New) 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. 167 Chancellor Street (9 Sept 2020) 6 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 Rehabilitation B. Facades and Storefronts (Rehab) 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. 167 Chancellor Street (9 Sept 2020) 7 C. Windows (Rehab) 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. 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 (Rehab) 167 Chancellor Street (9 Sept 2020) 8 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. 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 (Rehab) 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. 167 Chancellor Street (9 Sept 2020) 9 F. Foundation (Rehab) 1) Retain any decorative vents that are original to the building. 2) Offset infill between brick piers either with concrete block or solid masonry to ensure that a primary reading of a brick foundation is retained. 3) When repointing or rebuilding deteriorated porch piers, match original materials as closely as possible. 4) Where masonry has deteriorated, take steps as outlined in the masonry section of these guidelines. G. Roof (Rehab) 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. H. Masonry (Rehab) 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. I. Wood (Rehab) 1) Repair rotted or missing sections rather than replace the entire element. a. Use epoxies to patch, piece, or consolidate parts. b. Match existing materials and details. 2) Replace wood elements only when they are rotted beyond repair. a. Match the original in material and design by substituting materials that convey the same visual appearance or by using surviving material. 167 Chancellor Street (9 Sept 2020) 10 b. Base the design of reconstructed elements on pictorial or physical evidence from the actual building rather than from similar buildings in the area. c. Complement the existing details, size, scale, and material. 3) Do not substitute vinyl for wood railing and trim. Some composites, including fiberglass reinforced composite, may be found acceptable as a substitute material for a specific application, but must be painted. J. Synthetic Siding (Rehab) 1) Avoid applying synthetic siding. In addition to changing the appearance of a historic building, synthetic siding can make maintenance more difficult because it covers up potential problems that can become more serious. And synthetic siding, once it dents or fades, needs painting just as frequently as wood. 2) Remove synthetic siding and restore original building material, if possible. K. Paint (Rehab) 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. Appendix Prior BAR Reviews November 2017 - Preliminary discussion. BAR was supportive of something happening here, but not the submitted version. The changes to Chancellor Street side were more problematic: the big dormer is not appropriate; maintain the wrap-around porch, maybe come out only as far as first column. Maintain integrity on Chancellor Street side. Madison Lane side could be more contemporary and differentiated from historic fabric; invading setback on that side OK; maybe one-story full width porch instead of 2- story portico; play off the two volumes; porch can create own axis, not necessarily symmetrical; take cues from Greek revival – not-so-grand two-story porch. New addition could be more contemporary. http://weblink.charlottesville.org/public/0/edoc/739824/2017- 11_167%20Chancellor%20Street_BAR.pdf April 2018 – BAR approved the application for general massing, concept and composition with details and the SUP recommendation to come back for BAR review. http://weblink.charlottesville.org/public/0/edoc/754415/2018- 04_167%20Chancellor%20Street_BAR.pdf October 2019 – BAR recommended approval of Special Use Permit for setback variances; that based on the general design and building footprint as submitted the proposed Special Use Permit for 167 Chancellor Street will not have an adverse impact on the Corner ADC District, with the understanding that the final design and details will require future BAR review and approval and that the BAR extends the Certificate of Appropriateness from April 2018. http://weblink.charlottesville.org/public/0/edoc/791772/2019- 10_167%20Chancellor%20Street_BAR.pdf 167 Chancellor Street (9 Sept 2020) 11 CHARLOTTESVILLE CoA APPLICATION THE CHI PSI LODGE 167 CHANCELLOR STREET CHARLOTTESVILLE , VA PRESENTED BY ALPHA OMICRON OF CHI PSI CORPORATION IN ASSOCIATION WITH AUGUST 25TH, 2020 1 | COVER 3 | TABLE OF CONTENTS 4 -5 | SUMMARY OF REVISIONS 6 -7| REVISED WINDOW DETAILS 8-9 | REVISED PORTICO DETAILS 10-11 |REVISED SIDE PORCH DETAILS 12-13 | REVISED ROOF DETAILS 14-15 | PROPOSED ELEVATIONS COPPER FLASHING AT RIDGE AND VALLEYS ALL NEW 2F WINDOWS LOWERED TO REVEAL FULL BRICK MOULD TRIM COPPER J-TRIM AT RAKE SHINGLES DECORATIVE BRICK HEADER AT ALL 1F WINDOWS PORTICO TRIMS TO BETTER AGREE REVISED RAIL PROFILE WITH MADISON LANE PRECEDENTS AND POST / COLUMN ALIGNMENT REVISED TREATMENT OF PORCH BASE - FACETED BRICK COLUMNS - FRAMED HORIZTONAL LATTICE - BRICK SILL BELOW ENLARGED WOOD FRONT DOOR TO MATCH WINDOW HEADER HEIGHT BLACK RAIL AT SIDE STAIRS TO "DISAPPEAR" SOLDIER COURSE BRICK WATER TABLE 4 167 CHANCELLOR ST DESIGN DEVELOP, LLC CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA SUMMARY OF REVISIONS AUGUST 25TH, 2020 REVISED TREATMENT OF PORCH BASE - FACETED BRICK COLUMNS - FRAMED HORIZTONAL LATTICE - BRICK SILL BELOW ENLARGED WOOD FRONT DOOR TO MATCH WINDOW HEADER HEIGHT BLACK RAIL AT SIDE STAIRS TO "DISAPPEAR" SOLDIER COURSE BRICK WATER TABLE EXISTING DOOR, FRAME AND LIGHTS TO BE REPLACED/REFURBISHED AS NECESSARY TO MATCH ORIGINAL CONDITIONS SOLDIER COURSE BRICK WATER TABLE BOXWOOD SHRUBS TO BE PLANTED TO CONCEAL HVAC UNITS 5 167 CHANCELLOR ST DESIGN DEVELOP, LLC CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA SUMMARY OF REVISIONS AUGUST 25TH, 2020 WINDOWS LOWERED TO REVEAL FULL BRICK MOULD TRIM DECORATIVE BRICK HEADER CONTEXTUAL PRECEDENTS WINDOWS LOWERED TO REVEAL FULL BRICK MOULD TRIM BRICK WATER TABLE ADDITION 6 REVISED WINDOW DETAILS COV DA VINCI BELLAFORTE 11" BATT (R-40) OWENS CORNING ECOTOUCH SYNTHETIC SLATE SHINGLES 11" BATT (R-40) OWENS CORNING ECOTOUCH PINK FIBERGLASS INSULATION PINK FIBERGLASS INSULATION ROOFING UNDERLAY 5/8" ZIP ROOF SHEATHING PRE-ENGINEERED ROOF TRUSS 5" OGEE EXTRUDED GUTTER 5/4" FASCIA NT3 SMOOTH HARDIE TRIM BOARD 1/4" HARDIE VENTED SMOOTH SOFFIT PANEL 2 X 6 SUBFACIA (CONT.) 1/4" HARDIE VENTED SMOOTH SOFFIT PANEL 4" PVC BED MOULD EXTERIOR TRIM 2 X 6 DOUBLE 11" BATT (R-40) OWENS CORNING ECOTOUCH TOP PLATE 4" PVC BED MOULD EXTERIOR TRIM 5/4 X 12 COMPOSITE FRIEZE BOARD PINK FIBERGLASS INSULATION CONTACT: BO 1/2" ZIP SHEATHING 2 X 4 NAILERS 4" PVC BED MOULD EXTERIOR TRIM (P):434-806 2 X 4 NAILERS (CONT.) (E):bob@designdev 5/4 X 12 COMPOSITE FRIEZE BOARD 1/2" ZIP SHEATHING HEADER PER 5/4" X 12" COMPOSITE FRIEZE BOARD FLEXIBLE SELF-ADHERING FLASHING TAPE 95% PRICIN EIFS EXTERIOR SYSTEM STRUCTURAL OVERLAPS NAILING FLANGE -ADHESIVE/BONDING AGENT BIDDIN FLEXIBLE SELF-ADHERING FLASHING TAPE OVERLAPS NAILING FLANGE -RIGID INSULATION 5/8" GYPSUM BOARD 5/4 NT3 SMOOTH HARDIE TRIM BOARD -WIRE REINFORCING MESH CONTRA 5/4" NT3 SMOOTH HARDIE TRIM BOARD -BASE AND ELASTOMERIC COLOR DOCUM CORNER BEAD AT BACKER ROD AND SEALANT PER MANUFACTURER'S "WILLIAMSBURG" FACTORY APPLIED 3 1/2" -FINISH COATS GYPSUM RETURN NOT FO INSTALLATION INSTRUCTIONS ALUMINUM BRICK MOULD TRIM CONSTRU "WILLIAMSBURG" FACTORY APPLIED 3 1/2" J BEAD AT GYPSUM ALUMINUM BRICK MOULD TRIM September TERMINATION LINE OF BRICK JAMB BEYOND 4 STUCCO EAVE AND WINDOW HEADER 6 TYPICAL EAVE AT STUCCO WALLS A3.0 3"=1' A3.0 3"=1' 1 TYPICAL EAVE AND SECOND FLOOR WINDOW HEADER AT MASONRY WALLS 1/2" ZIP EXTERIOR SHEATHING A3.0 3"=1' FLOOR SHEATHING PER STRUCTURAL LSL RIM BOARD CAVITY INSULATION (5 1/2" ROCKWOOL) PER MANUF. SPEC. THE LODGE AT CHI PSI TJI FLOOR SYSTEM PER STRUCTURAL SOLDIER COURSE 5/4 X 4 OAK SILL; WATER TABLE LINE OF BRICK JAMB BEYOND LINE OF STUCCO JAMB BEYOND STAIN TO MATCH FLOOR PRECAST CONCRETE SILL 3" 2" NAILING FLANGE WEEP HOLES ABOVE GRADE 8 A3.0 5/8" GYPSUM CEILING FINISH GRADE (SEE CIVIL) PRECAST CONCRETE SILL NAILING FLANGE 5 1/4" CONT. METAL FLASHING (TUCK INTO MORTAR JOINT) 7 CONTINUOUS METAL FLASHING 7 PRECAST CONCRETE SILL AT MASONRY WALLS A3.0 WITH END DAM A3.0 3"=1' 2" X 1 1/2" STEEL ANGLE BRICK LEDGE CMU EIFS EXTERIOR SYSTEM CONTINUOUS METAL FLASHING 1/2" ZIP SHEATHING DRAINAGE MAT WITH END DAM COMPOSITE WATERPROOFING 5 1/2" ROCKWOOL INSULATION (TYP.) MEMBRANCE (HENRY'S BLUESKIN 1" VENTED AIR GAP (TYP.) WP 200) ADHERED TO CLEAN F/ BLOCK 2 1/2" WITH COLVENT-BASED ADHESIVE 2" BRICK VENEER SYSTEM (STA-PUT 2001M) 2 1/2" 5 WINDOW SILL AT SECOND FLOOR STUCCO WALL 8 PRECAST CONCRETE SILL AT STUCCO WALL 11 TYPICAL FOUNDATION WALL 2 TYPICAL WINDOW SILL AT MASONRY WALLS A3.0 3"=1' A3.0 3"=1' A3.0 1"=1' A3.0 3"=1' CMU FOUNDATION PER STRUCTUAL SOLDIER HEADER COURSE 1/2" X 2" WOOD DAM 5/8" IMPACT RESISTANT GYPSUM 5/8" GYPSUM WALL SHEATHING WOOD SILL BELOW FLEXIBLE SELF-ADHERING FLASHING 1/2" X 2" WOOD DAM PTD 2 X 4 TAPE OVERLAPS METAL FLASHING FLAT FRAMED DRAWN BY: SG WOOD SILL BELOW CHECKED BY: KS @ 16" O.C. 1 1/2" RIGID WINDOW PER A4.0 - INSTALLED PER INSULATION WEEPHOLES MANUFACTURER'S INSTALLATION INSTRUCTIONS 3/8" BOND BREAK CONTINUOUS METAL FLASHING CONC. SLAB PER STRUCTURAL STEEL LINTEL PER STRUCTURAL WINDOW PER A4.0 - INSTALLED PER "WILLIAMSBURG" FACTORY APPLIED 3 1/2" "WILLIAMSBURG" FACTORY APPLIED 3 1/2" MANUFACTURER'S INSTALLATION ALUMINUM BRICK MOULD TRIM ALUMINUM BRICK MOULD TRIM INSTUCTIONS PRECAST SILL BEYOND 6 MIL. POLY VAPOR BARRIER DETAIL SEC FINISH WRAPS BRICK VENEER STONE SLAB BASE (4" MIN.) PRECAST SILL BELOW ISSUE DAT 10 TYPICAL MASONRY WINDOW JAMB 7 A3 June 30, 20 3 TYPICAL FIRST FLOOR WINDOW HEADER 9 TYPICAL STUCCO WINDOW JAMB A3.0 3"=1' FOOTING PER STRUCTURAL A3.0 3"=1' A3.0 3"=1' STONE SURROUND AT FOOTING 4" SLOTTED DRAIN PIPE SHEET #19 O DECORATIVE TRIMS PORTICO TRIMS TO BETTER AGREE WITH MADISON LANE PRECEDENTS BLACK RAIL TO "DISAPPEAR" CONTEXTUAL PRECEDENTS WINDOWS LOWERED TO REVEAL FULL BRICK MOLD TRIM ENHANCED DECORATIVE TRIM AT EAVE COPPER FLASHING IN LIEU OF SLATE CAPS PORTICO TRIMS TO BETTER AGREE WITH MADISON LANE PRECEDENTS DECORATIVE BRICK HEADER ENLARGED FRONT DOOR TO MATCH WINDOW HEADER HEIGHT SOLDIER COURSE BRICK RISER 8 BLACK RAIL TO "DISAPPEAR" SOLDIER COURSE BRICK WATER TABLE REVISED FRONT PORTICO DETAILS COV COPPER J-TRIM CONCEALS SHINGLE EDGE AT GABLE 1 X 8" NT3 SMOOTH HARDIE TRIM BOARD ON EAVE 4" PVC BED MOULD EXTERIOR TRIM 1 X 6" NT3 SMOOTH HARDIE TRIM BOARD CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA 418 EAST MAIN STREET SEE WINDOW SCHEDULE FOR EXTERIOR DOORS AND WINDOWS PITCHED PLYWOOD AND COPPER FLASHING 8" CROWN MOULD EXTERIOR TRIM CONTACT: BOB PINEO 8" PVC BED MOULD EXTERIOR TRIM (P):434-806-8365 (E):bob@designdevelopllc.com 4/4" NT3 SMOOTH HARDIE TRIM BOARD 95% PRICING AND 5" X 2" PVC NOSE MOULD EXTERIOR TRIM BIDDING COFFERED SOFFIT TRIM AT BEAM CONTRACT 5/8" DENGLASS SHEATHING, PAINTED DOCUMENTS; NOT FOR 4" PVC BED MOULD EXTERIOR TRIM CONSTRUCTION September 3, 2020 P2 HANDRAIL PROFILE WITH PLAIN SUBRAIL THE LODGE AT CHI PSI PVC RAILING CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA 22903 ASSEMBLY WITH ALUMINUM INSERTS 167 CHANCELLOR STREET SLOPED-TOP BOTTOM RAIL IPE WOOD DECK TILES 24" X 48" 2 X PTD SLEEPERS 2 X PTD NAILER AND 4/4" NT3 SMOOTH HARDIE TRIM BOARD TAPERED RIGID INSULATION WITH EPDM ROOFING 2 X PTD BLOCKING @ 16" O.C. 3/4" PTD PLYWOOD SHEATHING 2 X PTD DECK JOISTS PER STRUCTURAL 4/4" NT3 SMOOTH HARDIE TRIM BOARD PORCH BEAM PER STRUCTURAL 5/8" DENGLASS SHEATHING, PAINTED 20" DIAMETER X 20' TALL ROUND TAPERED FIBERGLASS REINFORCED POLYMER WITH MARBLE DUST LOAD BEARING COLUMN WITH TUSCAN CAPITAL AND TUSCAN BASE IN SMOOTH FINISH CONCRETE PORCH SLAB, BROOM FINISH DRAWN BY: SG CHECKED BY: KS 1 1/2" PRECAST TREADS C.I.P. CONCRETE PER STRUCTURAL BRICK FACED RISER PORCH DETAILS ISSUE DATE: June 30, 2020 A3.1 REVISED FRONT PORTICO DETAILS 1 MADISON LANE PORCH ELEVATION A3.1 3/4"=1' MADISON LANE PORCH SECTION 3/4"=1' 2 A3.1 9 SHEET #20 OF 20 CONTEXTUAL PRECEDENTS RAILING SET BACK TO ACT AS A SECONDARY ELEMENT HEAVY ELEMENT TO READ AS ROOF SINGLE STORY COLUMNS SCALED TO HEIGHT RAILING CENTERED TO COLUMNS TRIM BOARD TO RESEMBLE PORTICO PORCH FACETED COLUMNS 10 COV CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA 418 EAST MAIN STREET CONTACT: BOB PINEO (P):434-806-8365 (E):bob@designdevelopllc.com 95% PRICING AND BIDDING P2 HANDRAIL PROFILE WITH PLAIN SUBRAIL CONTRACT DOCUMENTS; NOT FOR PVC RAILING CONSTRUCTION ASSEMBLY WITH ALUMINUM INSERTS September 3, 2020 IPE WOOD DECK TILES 24" X 48" SLOPED-TOP BOTTOM RAIL TAPERED RIGID INSULATION WITH EPDM ROOFING COPPER DRIP EDGE AT EPDM 3/4" PTD PLYWOOD SHEATHING 4" PVC CROWN MOULDING 1 X 8 NT3 SMOOTH HARDIE TRIM BOARD 4" PVC CROWN MOULDING 1 1/2" X 1 1/2" PVC SQUARE COVE MOULDING 1X NT3 SMOOTH HARDIE TRIM BOARD THE LODGE AT CHI PSI WRAPS PORCH BEAM CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA 22903 5/8" DENGLASS SHEATHING, PAINTED 167 CHANCELLOR STREET 12" DIAMETER X 9' TALL ROUND TAPERED FIBERGLASS REINFORCED POLYMER WITH MARBLE DUST COLUMN WRAP WITH TUSCAN CAPITAL AND TUSCAN BASE IN SMOOTH FINISH 5/4 NT3 SMOOTH HARDIE TRIM BOARD 2 X PT DECK JOISTS 1" X 1" PVC SQUARE COVE MOULDING BRICK FACED CMU PIER BEYOND HORIZONTAL LATTICE DRAWN BY: SG 2 X 4 PTD NAILER CHECKED BY: KS 1X BLOCKING, PAINTED ROWLOCK SILL BRICK FACE ON CMU PORCH DETAILS ISSUE DATE: June 30, 2020 A3.1 11 MADISON LANE PORCH SECTION 2 1 MADISON LANE PORCH ELEVATION REVISED SIDE PORCH DETAILS A3.1 1/2"=1' 3/4"=1' A3.1 SHEET #21 OF 20 VER SHEET 1 A2.1 NEW SYNTHETIC SLATE ROOFING. SEE A2.0 FOR SPECIFICATION. 5:12 5:12 CONTA (P):4 (E):bob@d 95% P B CO MATCH EXISTING DO N 8:12 CON Sep NEW RIDGE. SEE STRUCTURAL. EXISTING HIP RIDGE. RIDGE CAP PER MANUF. INSTALLATION INSTRUCTIONS. EXTEND NEW ROOF AS SHOWN AND TIE INTO EXISTING ROOF . 8:12 2 A2.0 2 4:12 A2.1 8:12 8:12 EXISTING DORMER TO REMAIN. PROTECT AS NEEDED DURING 5" OGEE ALUMINUM EXTRUDED CONSTUCTION AND PREP FOR NEW ROOF TIES INTO GUTTER, WHITE (TYP.) NEW ROOF. EXISTING RIDGE 8:12 8:12 8:12 RAINWATER LEADER (TYP. 1 OF 5) EXISTING OVERHANG TO 12" TYPICAL OVERHANG (TO MATCH EXISTING) REMAIN DRAWN BY: CHECKED B 12 NEW METAL ROOF ON EXISTING FRONT PORCH NOTES: RO EXISTING DORMER TO REMAIN. PROTECT AS NEEDED DURING CONSTUCTION AND PREP FOR NEW ROOF. 1. INSTALL NEW SYNTHETIC SLATE PER MANUFACTURER INSTALLATION IS INSTRUCTIONS, INCLUDING RECOMMENDED EAVE FLASHING DETAILS, Ju RIDGE CAP DETAILS, AND VALLEY FLASHING DETAILS. 1 1 ROOF PLAN 2. REMOVE ALL EXISTING GUTTER A REPLACE WITH NEW SPECIFIED GUTTER. A2.0 A1.3 3/8"=1' 3. INSPECT AND EVALUATE ALL EXISTING WOOD FASCIA. REPAIR VALLEY METAL BROKEN VALLEY METAL FROM 24" STOCK (OPT. A OR B) CUT OFF TOP SELF-ADHERED CORNER OF MEMBRANE REQ'D SLATE CLOSEST IN ALL VALLEYS TO CENTER OF VALLEY @ 45° WHERE POSSIBLE ANGLE USE WIDER SLATES ADJACENT TO VALLEY FASTEN 5" MIN. FROM CENTER WHERE POSSIBLE 1" MIN. 1" MIN. RIDGE VENT DETAIL (COPPER) 10 1/2" 10" OPT. A - SINGLE DIVERTER OPT. B - TWIN DIVERTER VALLEY METAL VALLEY METAL DAVINCI SLATE - MULTI-WIDTH OPEN VALLEY INSTALLATION SCALE: N.T.S. 1-800-328-4624 www.davinciroofscapes.com VALLEY FLASHING DETAIL (COPPER) HIP DETAIL (BELLAFORTE SLATE) 13 ROOF RIDGE HEIGHT 580'-0" ROOF RIDGE HEIGHT C CLEAN, SCRAPE, FILL, CAULK, PRIME AND REPAINT ALL EXISTING FASCIA, FRIEZE, AND EAVE TRIM 4 A3.0 569'-9" C CLEAN, SCRAPE, FILL, CAULK, EAVE PRIME AND REPAINT ALL ALL HARDIE TRIM AT EAVES, EXISTING FASCIA, FRIEZE, AND EAVE TRIM 4 PORCH RAILINGS, COLUMNS, A3.0 AND PEDIMENT TO BE PAINTED IN BENJAMIN MOORE 569'-9" "CHANTILLY LACE" EAVE ALL HARDIE TRIM AT EAVES, PORCH RAILINGS, COLUMNS, AND PEDIMENT TO BE PAINTED 5 IN BENJAMIN MOORE CONTACT: BOB P 560'-1"' A3.0 "CHANTILLY LACE" (P):434-806-83 UPPER LEVEL (E):bob@designdevelo FINISHED FLOOR 5 95% PRICING CONTACT: BOB P 560'-1"' A3.0 A BIDDING (P):434-806-83 UPPER LEVEL (E):bob@designdevelo FINISHED FLOOR CONTRAC DOCUMEN 95% PRICING NOT FOR A BIDDING CONSTRUCT 549'-3" CONTRAC September 3, 2 MAIN LEVEL DOCUMEN FINSHED FLOOR NOT FOR CONSTRUCT CLEAN, SCRAPE, FILL, CAULK, B 549'-3" CLEAN, SCRAPE, FILL, CAULK, September 3, 2 PRIME AND REPAINT ALL MAIN LEVEL PRIME AND REPAINT ALL EXISTING MECHANICAL UNITS EXISTING WINDOWS NEW METAL ROOF FINSHED FLOOR RAILING, COLUMNS, AND PORCH TRIM GAS METER ON EXISTING PORCH CLEAN, SCRAPE, FILL, CAULK, B CLEAN, SCRAPE, FILL, CAULK, 539'-8" PRIME AND REPAINT ALL CHI PSI PRIME AND REPAINT ALL EXISTING MECHANICAL UNITS BASEMENT SLAB EXISTING WINDOWS NEW METAL ROOF RAILING, COLUMNS, AND PORCH TRIM GAS METER 1 ELEVATION ON EXISTING PORCH A2.0 1/4"=1' STREET STREET 539'-8" ATPSI BASEMENT SLAB 580'-0" ROOF RIDGE HEIGHT 1 ELEVATION A2.0 1/4"=1' 167 CHANCELLOR AT CHI NEW SYNTHETIC SLATE SHINGLES THE LODGE 580'-0" ROOF RIDGE HEIGHT 167 CHANCELLOR NEW SYNTHETIC SLATE SHINGLES 1X12 COMPOSITE FRIEZE BOARD THE LODGE 569'-9" EAVE 1X12 COMPOSITE FRIEZE BOARD 569'-9" EAVE 560'-1"' UPPER LEVEL FINISHED FLOOR 560'-1"' DRAWN BY: SG UPPER LEVEL CHECKED BY: KS FINISHED FLOOR DRAWN BY: SG CHECKED BY: KS 549'-3" MAIN LEVEL FINSHED FLOOR 549'-3" RAIN WATER LEADER MAIN LEVEL ELEVATIONS (TYP. 1 OF 5) FINSHED FLOOR A GLEN-GERY EXTRUDED FACEBRICK VENEER IN "ABERDEEN" STYLE WITH ISSUE DATE: ARGOS "BEIGE" GROUT June 30, 2020 A2. B EIFS BUILDING CLADDING SYSTEM, 539'-8" RAIN WATER LEADER 14 SMOOTH FINISH, PAINTED IN BENJAMIN ELEVATIONS BASEMENT SLAB (TYP. 1 OF 5) MOORE "HALO" 2 ELEVATION A GLEN-GERY EXTRUDED FACEBRICK ELEVATIONS C VENEER DAVINCIINBELLAFORTE "ABERDEEN"SYNTHETIC STYLE WITHSLATE A2.0 1/4"=1' ARGOS SHINGLES "BEIGE" GROUT IN "SLATE GREY" ISSUE DATE: June 30, 2020 A2. B SHEET #16 OF EIFS BUILDING CLADDING SYSTEM, 539'-8" SMOOTH FINISH, PAINTED IN BENJAMIN BASEMENT SLAB MOORE "HALO" 2 ELEVATION C DAVINCI BELLAFORTE SYNTHETIC SLATE ROOF RIDGE HEIGHT 1 A3.1 A3.1 580'-0" ROOF RIDGE HEIGHT 1 2 A3.0 1 A3.1 A3.1 569'-9" EAVE 1 A3.0 569'-9" EAVE CONTACT: BOB P 560'-1"' (P):434-806-83 UPPER LEVEL 3 (E):bob@designdevelo FINISHED FLOOR A3.0 95% PRICING BIDDING CONTACT: BOB P 560'-1"' CONTRAC (P):434-806-83 UPPER LEVEL 3 FINISHED FLOOR DOCUMEN (E):bob@designdevelo A3.0 NOT FOR CONSTRUCT 2 95% PRICING 549'-3" A3.0 BIDDING September 3, 2 MAIN LEVEL FINSHED FLOOR CONTRAC 20" FIBERGLASS COLUMNS; SEE A3.1 FOR COLUMNS, DOCUMEN RAILINGS, AND PEDIMENT SPECIFICATIONS NOT FOR CONSTRUCT 2 549'-3" A3.0 September 3, 2 MAIN LEVEL FINSHED FLOOR 539'-8" 20" FIBERGLASS COLUMNS; SEE A3.1 FOR COLUMNS, PSICHI PSI BASEMENT SLAB RAILINGS, AND PEDIMENT SPECIFICATIONS 1 ELEVATION A2.1 1/4"=1' STREET 580'-0" ROOF RIDGE HEIGHT 539'-8" AT CHI AT 167 CHANCELLOR BASEMENT SLAB 1 ELEVATION A2.1 1/4"=1' THE LODGE STREET 580'-0" 6 ROOF RIDGE HEIGHT A3.0 167 CHANCELLOR 569'-9" EAVE THE LODGE 6 A3.0 569'-9" EAVE 560'-1"' UPPER LEVEL FINISHED FLOOR DRAWN BY: SG CHECKED BY: KS 560'-1"' UPPER LEVEL FINISHED FLOOR 549'-3" DRAWN BY: SG MAIN LEVEL CHECKED BY: KS FINSHED FLOOR MAXIM LIGHTING ARTISAN 1-LIGHT ELECTRIC METER OUTDOOR WALL MOUNT 549'-3" A GLEN-GERY EXTRUDED FACEBRICK MAIN LEVEL VENEER IN "ABERDEEN" STYLE WITH ISSUE DATE: FINSHED FLOOR ARGOS "BEIGE" GROUT June 30, 2020 MAXIM LIGHTING ARTISAN 1-LIGHT ELECTRIC METER B EIFS BUILDING CLADDING SYSTEM, 539'-8" OUTDOOR WALL MOUNT 15 BASEMENT SLAB SMOOTH FINISH, PAINTED IN BENJAMIN MOORE "HALO" 2 ELEVATION C ELEVATIONS DAVINCI BELLAFORTE SYNTHETIC SLATE A2.1 1/4"=1' SHINGLES IN "SLATE GREY" A GLEN-GERY EXTRUDED FACEBRICK SHEET #17 OF VENEER IN "ABERDEEN" STYLE WITH ISSUE DATE: ARGOS "BEIGE" GROUT June 30, 2020 B EIFS BUILDING CLADDING SYSTEM, 539'-8" BASEMENT SLAB SMOOTH FINISH, PAINTED IN BENJAMIN Certificate of Appropriateness Application BAR 20-09-03 1112 Park Street, TMP 470050000 IPP Owner: Margaret Sherman Todd Applicant Paul Josey, Wolf Josey Landscape Architects Driveway Application Components (linked):  Staff Report  Historic Survey  Application CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW STAFF REPORT September 15, 2020 Certificate of Appropriateness Application BAR 20-09-03 1112 Park Street, Tax Parcel 470050000 Individually Protected Property Margaret Sherman Todd, Owner Paul Josey, Wolf Josey Landscape Architects, Applicant Driveway alterations Background Year Built: 1884 District: IPP Status: N/A Historically known as the Finch-McGee Cottage, when constructed it marked the northern extent of residential development along Park Street. The two-story wood house is organized into three bays, with the northernmost bay projecting forward. The building incorporates in a picturesque arrangement a range of features from various styles popular during the period. Its character- defining features include the steeply pitched gables, first-floor bay window, veranda supported by Tuscan columns, and a roof balustrade crowning the veranda. Prior BAR Reviews No previous BAR reviews. Application  Submittal: Application with Wolf Josey Landscape Architects drawings, Todd + Mohr Residence - 1112 Park Street, dated August 18, 2020: Sheets 1 through Request CoA to construct a new driveway, with associated landscape alterations. Existing gravel drive is at the north the property line. New driveway and entrance will shift south, off the 1112 Park Street (9 Sept 2020) 1 property line. The existing turn around at the house will remain. New to be paved with a crushed stone, ending at a concrete threshold at the road. Work will require the removal of a 24” white oak and a 6” crab apple. The oak will be replaced. New landscaping will also include native shrubs and groundcovers, and at the north parcel line a 4-ft tall wood picket fence, painted dark gray. Discussion and Recommendations Staff recommends approval; however, the following clarifications and conditions should be discussed:  All work within the public right of way must be coordinated with/approved by the City of Charlottesville.  Tree protection and/or actions to mitigate damage to the roots within the dripline for the following: At 1112 Park Street, the 21" red oak, the 20" tulip poplar and the 12" tulip poplar; at 1122 Park Street, the 30" tulip poplar. 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 driveway and associated landscaping satisfies the BAR’s criteria and is compatible with this IPP, 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 Design and Elements, I move to find that the proposed driveway and associated landscaping do not satisfy the BAR’s criteria and are not compatible with this IPP, 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; 1112 Park Street (9 Sept 2020) 2 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. 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. 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. 1112 Park Street (9 Sept 2020) 3 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. E. Walkways and Driveways Providing circulation and parking for the automobile on private sites can be a challenging task, particularly on smaller lots and on streets that do not accommodate parking. The use of appropriate paving materials in conjunction with strategically placed plantings can help reinforce the character of each district while reducing the visual impact of 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. 1112 Park Street (9 Sept 2020) 4 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. Margaret Sherman Todd Owner Name___________________________________ Paul Josey, ASLA Applicant Name______________________________________ 1112 PARK ST -DRIVEWAY MODIFICATION Project Name/Description______________________________________ TMP 47-50 / PARCEL A Parcel Number__________________________ 1112 PARK STREET, CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA 22901 Project Property Address____________________________________________________________________________ Signature of Applicant Applicant Information I hereby attest that the information I have provided is, to the 310 Second St. SE, Suite F Address:______________________________________ best of my knowledge, correct. Charlottesville, VA 22902 _____________________________________________ pjosey@wolfjosey.com Email:________________________________________ 8/24/20 __________________________________________ 434-466-7472 Phone: (W) _________________ 434-270-3208 (C) _______________ Signature Date Paul P. Josey 8/24/20 __________________________________________ Property Owner Information (if not applicant) Print Name Date 1112 Park Street Address:______________________________________ Property Owner Permission (if not applicant) Charlottesville, VA 22901 _____________________________________________ I have read this application and hereby give my consent to stodd@tmdarch.com Email:________________________________________ its submission. 434-971-4631 Phone: (W) _________________ (C) _______________ _ __________________________________________ Signature Date Do you intend to apply for Federal or State Tax Credits Margaret Sherman Todd 8/24/20 _________________________________________ NO for this project? _______________________ Print Name Date NEW ENTRY & RE-ALIGNMENT OF Description of Proposed Work (attach separate narrative if necessary):__________________________________ EXISTING DRIVEWAY - SEE ATTACHED LANDSCAPE PLANS BY WOLF-JOSEY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS ______________________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________________ List All Attachments (see reverse side for submittal requirements): LANDSCAPE PLANS BY WOLF-JOSEY- 8/18/20; EXHIBIT A & EXHIBIT B ______________________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________ 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. NORTH AV E . 11 12 PA RK ST . PA RK ST. D AV IS A VE HW Y 25 0 AERIAL VIEW Todd + Mohr Residence - 1112 Park Street August 18, 2020 1112 Pa r k St re e t - City Asse ssor view 1112 Pa r k S t re e t - S t re e t v iew, e n t r y d r ive fro m We st H is tor y a nd De scrip t i o n o f E x i sti n g S i te Th e h o use at 1112 Park Stre e t is a n ind iv id ua lly p ro te c te d pro pe r t y i n t h e A rch i te c t u ral D e s i g n C o n t ro l Distric t alo ng Park S t reet . It i s a two s tor y hou se b u ilt in the Victori an s t yl e i n 18 7 0 . T h e e xi s t i n g dri ve i s a g rave l dri ve th at ru ns alo ng t he p rope r ty l i ne . It i s a b utte d by the ne ig hb ors wo o d s h e d an d a s m al l wo o d an d w i re fe n c e , bo t h in po o r c o nditio n. P r o posed La nd sca p e P l a n : E nt r y D r ive : The e ntr y d r ive se q u e nce will b e u pdate d i n t h i s ve r y m o de s t re n ovat i o n o f 1112 Park S treet. T h e drive lo cat io n i s s hi f te d a few fe e t sou th so tha t it is n o l o n g e r c o n t i g u o u s w i t h t h e n e i g h bo ri n g pro pe r t y. Bo th sides o f th e en t r y dr ive wi l l be wi l l b e p la nte d with na tive shru bs an d g ro u n dc ove rs , an d a 4 ’ wo o d pi cke t fe n c e , painted dark gray, w ill mar k the prope r ty line . D u e to its close p roxi m i t y to t h e e xi s t i n g dri ve , a 2 4 ” w h i te o ak an d a 6” c rab apple are p rop osed to be re move d . T he se re m ova ls will o pe n u p vi ews to t h e h o u s e f ro m t h e s t re e t , an d t h e wh ite o ak will be re p la c ed i n ki nd. Ve hic u lar circula tion : Th e main dri veway i s shown with a sm a ll a d justm e n t to i t s l o c at i o n to g ai n s o m e di s tan c e f ro m t h e n e i gh bo ring pro per ty. I t will be pave d wi th a cru she d stone , e nd ing in a c o n c re te t h re s h o l d at t h e ro ad. T h e e xi s t i n g t u rn aro und in th e driveway w ill rema i n. F r ont Lawn: N at ive shrubs and grou nd cove rs will a lig n b oth s i de s o f t h e e n t r y dri ve . T h e s e pl an te d bo rde rs w i l l stabiliz e th e slo pe a nd define the e ntr y s e q u e nce . T he front la wn is n e arl y c o m pl e te l y s h ade d by a h al f do z e n s pe c i m e n c ano py trees. T h e 2 4 ” oak propos e d for re m ova l is not a sp e cim e n t re e du e to i t s n arrow c row n t h at i s a re s u l t o f c o m p eting fo r ligh t and re sourc es from wi th the nota b le 42” D B H white o ak n e arby. M ater ials: Th e propose d dri ve will b e crushe d stone to m a tch e xi s t i n g , w i t h a c o n c re te t h re s h o l d o f f o f Park S t reet. View o f Wo o d S he d o n n e ig hb o r in g ( n o n IPP) View o f e n t r y d r ive a n d e x i s t i n g fe n c e f ro m e a s t p ro p e r t y DESCRIPTION OF EXISTING CONDITIONS AND PROPOSED Todd + Mohr Residence - 1112 Park Street August 18, 2020 TO BE REMOVED TO BE REMOVED 1112 Pa r k St re e t - S tre e t view, e ntr y drive from West 1112 Pa r k S t re e t - S t re e t v iew, e n t r y d r ive fro m We st TO BE REMOVED View of 42 ” w h i te oak and compe ting 2 4 ” wh ite oak to be removed View o f 2 4 ” w hite o a k to b e re m ove d B ra n che s o f 2 4 ” D B H w hite o a k in tel/data lines (power across street) EXISTING CONDITIONS Todd + Mohr Residence - 1112 Park Street August 18, 2020 110 5 Park St re e t ( I P P, ne arby ) - Stre e t view 1109 Park St ree t ( n e ig hb o r ) - S t re e t v iew 112 2 Pa r k S t re e t ( n e ig hb o r ) - S t re et v i ew 110 8 Park St re e t ( I P P, ne ighbor) - Stre e t view 1115 Park St reet ( n e ig hb o r ) - S t re e t v iew 112 2 Pa r k S t re e t - Cit y Asse sso r v iew ADJACENT PROPERTIES Todd + Mohr Residence - 1112 Park Street August 18, 2020 current access to remove current access to parking eliminated fence parking eliminated prOP PR opER erTY ty LIN linEe 21" RED OAK 30 " TULIP POPLAR LIMIT OF WORK 20" + 12" TULIP POPLAR PROPERTY LINE lim it of wo rk remove existing drive 10" AM. ELM material and subbase reuse existing drive ma terial as proposed subbase for new driveway RK wOo r k oFf W ITt O N remove 24” remove 6” mi lLiIM existing drive edge 6" DOGWOOD white oak 12" RED MAPLE crab apple R new drive edge 18" AM. HOLLY regraded slope PARK P A R KSST T. p ro p e E S RTY LIN N r ty li n e PROPE 24" BUCKEYE C 42" WHITE OAK P KEY Existing driveway aggregate to be removed Existing driveway aggregate to remain P Revised grade D C D E C 495 490 EXISTING CONDITIONS D S Todd + Mohr Residence - 1112 Park Street 0 4 8 16 D August 18, 2020 1 DEMOLITION AND TREE PROTECTION PLAN L n e i g hb or i n g wood p i l e pr op er ty lin e 4 ’ DARK GR AY WOOD n a ti ve fe rn s a n d P ICKE T FE NCE g rou n d cove rs hy dran ge a lim it of wo rk arbo re sce n s CRU SHE D CO NC R ET E STONE DRIV E A P RON n a ti ve p a chys a n d ra g rou n d cove r on s l op e k wor t of limi w hi te oa k PA R K S T. p ro p e r ty li n e OVERALL LANDSCAPE PLAN Todd + Mohr Residence - 1112 Park Street August 18, 2020 PROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINE 5'-0" 5'-0" 5'-0" 5'-0" 112" 1" SPACE 112" 1" SPACE 4'-0" 4'-0" VEHICULAR V CONCRETE PAVING C CLEAR MIN 2" POST BEHIND CLEAR MIN 2" POST BEHIND SCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0" Na rrow p i cke t fe n c e FENCE PRECEDENT - 4’ Picket Fence Todd + Mohr Residence - 1112 Park Street August 18, 2020 Fence Elevation C Fence Elevation June 2020 w o l f j o s e y . c o m H yd ra n g e a arbo re s ce ns ‘ H aas H alo’ | H a as Halo hydran gea Pachysan dra p ro cu m b e n s | Alle g he ny sp u rg e Qu e rcu s a lb a | W hite o a k H e u ch era vi l l o s a ‘ A utumn B ride ’ | Alum root At hyrium filix-fem in a | L a d y fe rn An e m o n e ca n a d e n sis | Wind f l owe r ENTRY DRIVE PLANTING - Habit Todd + Mohr Residence - 1112 Park Street August 18, 2020 DERELICT VAN UNDER TARP (30 YRS +) COVERED FIREWOOD PILE (30 YRS+) Legend Parcels NO RTH Addresses AVE City Limits HEDGEROW IN R.O.W. BLOCKS LINE OF SIGHT TO NORTH OF DRIVEWAY ENTRANCE DRI VEW AY ENT SEE SURVEY RAN FOR DETAILS CE 111 2P ARK T PARK S EXHIBIT A MAP 4/20/20 1112 PARK STREET CHARLOTTESVILLE GIS MAP 4/3/2020 DISCLAIMER:The City makes no warranties, expressed or implied, concerning the accuracy, completeness or suitability of this data, and it should not be construed or used as a legal description. The information displayed is a compilation of information obtained from various sources, and the City is not responsible for it's accuracy or how current it may be. Every reasonable effort is made to ensure the accuracy and completeness of the data. Pursuant to Section 54.1-402 of the Code of Virginia, any determination of topography or contours, or any depiction of physical improvements, property lines or boundaries is for general information only and shall not be used for the design, modification or construction of improvements to real property or for flood plain determination. H yd ra n g e a arbo re s ce ns ‘ H aas H alo’ | H a as Halo hydran gea H e u ch era vi l l o s a ‘ A utumn B ride ’ | Alum root At hyrium filix-fem in a | L a d y fe rn ENTRY DRIVE PLANTING - Composition Todd + Mohr Residence - 1112 Park Street August 18, 2020 PARTIAL PARKING SPACE / OWNERS CAR ACCESS TO SIDE PARKING SPACE BY PROJECTS INTO 1112 DRIVEWAY WHEN PARKED PERMISSION FROM OWNERS OF 1112 PARK ST HEDGEROW (NO DEEDED ACCESS ACROSS 1112 DRIVEWAY) TO BE WITHDRAWN FENCE TO BE REMOVED FROM 1112 PARK PROPERTY WOODPILE LIC PUB . W R.O. EXISTING 1112 PARK DRIVEWAY EXHIBIT B SURVEY 4/20/20 Certificate of Appropriateness Application BAR 20-09-04 128 Chancellor Street, TMP 090105000 The Corner ADC District Owner: University Christian Ministries Applicant: Tom Keogh, Train Architects Rear addition Application Components (linked): • Staff Report • Historic Survey • Application • Supplemental Submittal City of Charlottesville Board of Architectural Review Staff Report August 18, 2020 Certificate of Appropriateness BAR 20-09-04 128 Chancellor Street, TMP 090105000 The Corner ADC District Owner: University Christian Ministries Applicant: Tom Keough, Train Architects Rear addition Year Built: c1926 District: The Corner ADC Status: Contributing Rectangular form, three-bay frame shingled swelling with Craftsman and Colonial Revival stylistic elements. Constructed as a dwelling, the house was occupied until 1969 when it transitions to other uses. Since the 1980s it is served as the Center for Christian Study. (Historic survey attached.) Prior BAR Actions June 2014 – Admin review of exterior deck alterations. August 18, 2020 – Preliminary discussion. Application  Submittal: William Sherman Architect, and Train Architects drawings Center for Christian Study Expansion Study, dated July 2020, REV. September 2020: Cover, sheets 1 through 15. CoA request for a proposed three-story addition of approximately 10,500 square feet (3,500 SF per floor) at the rear of the existing structure and alterations at the front entry terrace Materials and components Roofing [at addition]:  Flat roof behind parapet. 128 Chancellor Street (9 Sept 2020) 1 Gutters/Downspouts:  Type and locations not indicated. Cornice:  Capped parapet wall. No details provided. Siding and Trim:  Cedar shingles with 6” exposure, painted to match existing siding.  James Hardie Aspyre Reveal Panel System. Dimensions and color not provided.  Flat trim at windows, painted white, with copper drip edge. Doors and Windows:  Marvin Aluminum Clad Wood Window. Cut sheets not provided.  Storefront/curtain wall. Cut sheets not provided.  Glass specification not provided Soffit:  Material/detail beneath projecting building elements not specified. Parking garage:  Ceiling and wall materials not specified. Concrete retaining wall at rear.  Finish and color not specified. Front Terrace and Landscaping  Benches, tables, and chairs of--or similar to--Plinth style by Fine Concrete. Cut sheets not provided.  Concrete pavers with 4x4 PTP borders.  Trash enclosure container with horizontal wood panels. Similar to north stair enclosure. See photo on sheet 16.  New wood deck at south side, to match existing on north side.  Planter boxes. (No details. See rendering on sheet 16.  New sidewalk and driveway apron. Lighting  No exterior lighting shown or specified. Discussion The BAR should discuss if the submittal provides the information: a) requested during the August 18, 2020 Preliminary Discussion, and b) necessary to evaluate the project. While the submittal clearly communicates the design and composition, it is lacking many details and specifications. As such, staff believes this submittal is incomplete and recommends that BAR action be deferred until a later date. 128 Chancellor Street (9 Sept 2020) 2 Suggested Motions Approval: Having considered the standards set forth within the City Code, including City Design Guidelines for Site Design and Elements, 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 Corner 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 Site Design and Elements, 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 Corner ADC ADC district, and that for the following reasons the BAR denies the application as submitted… Deferral: I move to accept the applicant request for a deferral. Or I move to defer until the October BAR meeting any action on this application. 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 ADC District Design Guidelines Chapter II – Site Design and Elements Chapter III – New Construction and Additions 128 Chancellor Street (9 Sept 2020) 3 REV. September 2020 History area, building height, and property line The three shingled elements include the new setbacks, it was determined that a 3-story library reading room above the great hall with Description from Charlottesville Corner Survey, addition of approximately 10,500 GSF (3,500 a large-scale window to the east, the curved Charlottesville, Va. ������������������������ meeting rooms to the north, and the stair and third of the site. It was also determined that elevator tower to the south. The central large 128 Chancellor Street: Detached dwelling. a project of that size could provide the space window at the common spaces serves as a Craftsman / Colonial Revival. Ca. 1926. Frame necessary to meet the center’s current needs singular lantern to identify the institutional with wood shingles: 3 stories; hipped roof; 1 �����������������������= program of gathering, while framing the view to oversized front hipped dormer; symmetrical years. The project to design an addition at the the east from each room. The curved wall and 3-bay front; 1-bay front porch w/ paired Roman rear of the site was begun in 2019. window of the upper meeting room refers to the Doric columns and balustrade upper deck. corner turrets found in the historical Shingle One of only three shingle-clad dwellings in Style architecture that informed the original the District, this house features a 3-sided bay Description of proposed work building, while providing a sweeping view to opening onto the upper porch deck. the Southwest Mountains. The stair tower and and Design Intent elevator are meant to provide an unobtrusive A�����������������������= backdrop to the rear yard of the adjacent The addition to the existing Christian Studies property. and one parking level) was designed and Center will continue leave the residential constructed in 1996 -1998. The addition 128 Chancellor Street includes a semi-detached open exit stair along the north elevation. Frame construction with character of the institution and the original building with the Chancellor Street entrance The core of the building to which the three primary volumes attach forms a quiet unchanged. This character is central to the background, a spatial and material reveal wood shingles’����������������� identity of the institution as a “home” for between the new addition and the existing style similar to the original construction but with ����������������������=building. The material will be a rainscreen ������������������K the development of the interior as a space wall panel system, reinterpreting the paneled that is domestic in character while creating material in the connecting links of the existing Narrative the capacity to support the larger-scaled building. institutional needs. The Center of Christian Study is one of the �����������������������= leading Christian Study Centers in the Nation. ������������������������ being done in a way to precisely match the Active in the University community since the reading of the domestic to institutional scales existing architecture, so that the original 1970’�������������������= as well, with a continuity of materials and structure will appear essentially unchanged Elliewood Avenue. It purchased the house an articulation of the massing into discrete from the front and sides, including the beloved on Chancellor Street in 1976. The Center’s volumes on the new addition that echo the outdoor stair, decks and terraces. program thrived in that location and grew to the original building. The design recognizes that extent that it began design work on an addition the institutional spatial requirements demand The existing parking area will be to the original house in 1996. Construction of a shift from the residential scale, while the accommodated under the new addition. that addition, which occupies the middle third relationship to the context as viewed from of the site, was completed in 1998. below requires the articulation of appropriately scaled volumes rather than the appearance The Center continued to thrive in that “Corner” of one large mass. Each of the resulting three location and by the 2010’s they were clearly primary elements of the new addition are clad outgrowing their facility. In 2015, the Center in cedar shingles, stained to match the existing engaged William Sherman Architect with building, complemented by the white trim at the Train Architects to study their site and its windows. potential for expansion. Working with the City of Charlottesville guidelines and code requirements regarding allowable building Project Narrative Center for Christian Study Expansion Study 1 July 2020 128 Chancellor St, Char lottesville , VA 22903 William Sherman Architect | 1. 1926 WEST (CHANCELLOR ST) 2. 1996 ADDITION NORTH 3. 1996 ADDITION NORTHEAST 4. 1996 ADDITION EAST 2 3 1 6 A 4 B 5. 1996 ADDITION SOUTH 5. 1996 ADDITION EAST (ELLIEWOOD AVE) C ST 5 OR ELL VE DA ANC OO CH LOCATION IEW A. EXISTING 1926 B. EXISTING 1996 ADDITION ELL C. PROPOSED NEW ADDITION Existing Conditions Center for Christian Study Expansion Study 2 July 2020 128 Chancellor St, Char lottesville , VA 22903 William Sherman Architect | 2. NORTH WOOD DECKS 3. 1996 ADDITION - SOUTH ELEVATION - DETAIL OF WOOD PANELING 1. NORTH WALK LOOKING EAST 4. 1996 ADDITION - DETAIL OF NORTH STAIR 5. SOUTH COURTYARD AND WALKWAY Existing Conditions Center for Christian Study Expansion Study 3 July 2020 128 Chancellor St, Char lottesville , VA 22903 William Sherman Architect | 14 June 2018 Scale: 1/16" = 1'-0" NORTH 0 8' 16' 32' 64' 128' 256' Site Survey Center for Christian Study Expansion Study | Train Architects 4 July 2020 128 Chancellor St, Char lottesville , VA 22903 William Sherman Architect | Floor Plans Center for Christian Study Expansion Study 5 July 2020 128 Chancellor St, Char lottesville , VA 22903 William Sherman Architect | Floor Plans Center for Christian Study Expansion Study 6 July 2020 128 Chancellor St, Char lottesville , VA 22903 William Sherman Architect | Floor Plans Center for Christian Study Expansion Study 7 July 2020 128 Chancellor St, Char lottesville , VA 22903 William Sherman Architect | Floor Plans Center for Christian Study Expansion Study 8 July 2020 128 Chancellor St, Char lottesville , VA 22903 William Sherman Architect | Floor Plans Center for Christian Study Expansion Study 9 July 2020 128 Chancellor St, Char lottesville , VA 22903 William Sherman Architect | Floor Plans Center for Christian Study Expansion Study 10 July 2020 128 Chancellor St, Char lottesville , VA 22903 William Sherman Architect | Building Section Center for Christian Study Expansion Study 11 July 2020 REV. September 2020 128 Chancellor St, Char lottesville , VA 22903 William Sherman Architect | Southeast Isometric Northeast Isometric Isometric Views Center for Christian Study Expansion Study 12 July 2020 128 Chancellor St, Char lottesville , VA 22903 William Sherman Architect | West (Chancellor Street) Elevation South Elevation East Elevation North Elevation Exterior Elevations Center for Christian Study Expansion Study 13 July 2020 REV. September 2020 128 Chancellor St, Char lottesville , VA 22903 William Sherman Architect | Window: Marvin Aluminum Clad Wood Window Window: Marvin Aluminum Clad Wood Window Window: Marvin Aluminum Clad Wood Window Facade: Cedar Shingles; painted to match existing Facade: Cedar Shingles; painted to match existing Facade: James Hardie Aspyre Reveal Panel System; painted Window and Wall Details Center for Christian Study Expansion Study 14 September 2020 128 Chancellor St, Char lottesville , VA 22903 William Sherman Architect | CEDAR SHINGLES - JAMES HARDIE REVEAL ALUMINUM CLAD STOREFRONT / CURTAIN WALL STAINED TO MATCH EXISTING CEMENT PANEL SYSTEM WOOD WINDOW WINDOW SYSTEM NOTE: MULLION COLOR TO BE DETERMINED Materials Center for Christian Study Expansion Study 15 July 2020 128 Chancellor St, Char lottesville , VA 22903 William Sherman Architect | Existing view from Chancellor Street sidewalk Proposed view from Chancellor Street sidewalk View from Chancellor Street Center for Christian Study Expansion Study 16 July 2020 REV. September 2020 128 Chancellor St, Char lottesville , VA 22903 William Sherman Architect | Concrete Pavers Horizontal Wood Boards PLINTH Concrete Bench by FINE CONCRETE New Entry Plan Center for Christian Study Expansion Study 17 September 2020 128 Chancellor St, Char lottesville , VA 22903 William Sherman Architect | Center for Christian Study Expansion Center for Christian Study 128 Chancellor Street Charlottesville, VA 22903 September 2020 BAR Review Supplemental Submittal Center for Christian Study Expansion 128 Chancellor Street Charlottesville, VA 22903 Table of Contents: Cover Table of Contents Outline Exterior Material Specification BAR Comment Responses Supplemental Drawings Product Literature BAR Supplemental Submittal September 2020 1 Center for Christian Study Expansion 128 Chancellor Street Charlottesville, VA 22903 Outline Exterior Material Specification Roof New addition: Flat (Low-Slope); White EPDM New Bathroom addition south side: Asphalt shingles to match existing Existing flat roof: Black EPDM Cornice/Coping Metal; color to match façade color below coping Gutters/Downspouts New addition: internal drains with scuppers; no gutters and downspouts New bathroom addition south side: new gutters and downspouts to match existing Siding Cedar shingles with 6” exposure painted to match the existing cedar shingles James Hardie Aspyre Reveal Panel System; NOM 2’x8’ panels painted Benjamin Moore Light Pelham Gray; see color elevations for example Trim Flat trim; painted white Flashing Metal; white to match window frame/trim Soffits James Hardie Soffit Panel; painted to match cedar shingles Rear Retaining Wall Smooth metal formed concrete with formwork joints; natural color Guardrails Horizontal wood boards to match north stair, painted to match existing Windows Marvin aluminum clad wood windows; white cladding Window Wall Marvin structurally mulled window system-glass and panel infill (no spandrel glass); white cladding Glass Clear glass to match BAR standards Doors Marvin aluminum clad wood doors; white cladding Front Terrace Pavers Sand set Brick Pavers (formerly concrete pavers and changed to address drainage and aesthetics) BAR Supplemental Submittal September 2020 2 Center for Christian Study Expansion 128 Chancellor Street Charlottesville, VA 22903 BAR Comment Responses 1) Roofing [at addition]: See outline exterior material specification. 2) Gutters/Downspouts: See outline exterior material specification. 3) Cornice: Capped parapet wall. See outline exterior material specification and attached supplemental drawings for additional information. 4) Siding and Trim: See outline exterior material specification. 5) Doors and Windows: See outline material specification and attached product literature for additional information. a. Which openings are storefront and which are Marvin windows? All glazing in the project to be Marvin clad windows. Storefront/curtain wall windows have been replaced with Marvin’s structurally mulled window system. b. What are the lite arrangements for the windows? No muntins / divisions are being proposed for the windows; see exterior elevations for additional information. c. Colors for window and storefront components? See outline exterior material specification. 6) Soffits material: See outline exterior material specifications. 7) Parking Garage: a. Ceiling material: 5/8” exterior gyp sheathing b. Wall material: James Hardie Aspyre Reveal System to match exterior c. Lighting: Recessed fixtures to meet code minimum light levels 8) Concrete retaining wall at rear: See attached sketch with elevations (north and south ends) and outline exterior material specification. 9) Front Terrace and Landscaping: a. Benches tables and chairs? “Fine Concrete’; see attached product literature for additional information. b. Concrete pavers: Front terrace ground material has been revised to brick pavers. Pattern to be determined. BAR Supplemental Submittal September 2020 3 Center for Christian Study Expansion 128 Chancellor Street Charlottesville, VA 22903 c. Trash enclosure: Horizontal wood panels similar to north stair enclosure. See photo on sheet 16 of September BAR submittal and attached supplemental drawings for additional information. d. New wood deck: to match existing wood deck on the north side of the building. e. Planter boxes: Custom by “Fine Concrete” f. New sidewalk and driveway apron: to match existing. g. Lighting: Minimum required to illuminate egress paths – low wall mounted or bollards h. Manhole (front entry): cast iron 10) Exterior Lighting: See attached “basis of design” product literature for additional information a. Ground level exits from parking garage: recessed downlights in soffit above b. Perimeter walk around new addition: low in wall mounted lights for a walking surface c. South exit way: bollards BAR Supplemental Submittal September 2020 4 Center for Christian Study Expansion 128 Chancellor Street Charlottesville, VA 22903 Supplemental Drawings BAR Supplemental Submittal September 2020 5 Center for Christian Study Expansion 128 Chancellor Street Charlottesville, VA 22903 Wood Framed Parapet w/ Hardie Panel Facade BAR Supplemental Submittal September 2020 6 Center for Christian Study Expansion 128 Chancellor Street Charlottesville, VA 22903 Wood Framed Parapet w/ Cedar Shingle Facade BAR Supplemental Submittal September 2020 7 Center for Christian Study Expansion 128 Chancellor Street Charlottesville, VA 22903 CMU Parapet w/ Cedar Shingle Facade BAR Supplemental Submittal September 2020 8 Center for Christian Study Expansion 128 Chancellor Street Charlottesville, VA 22903 East Elevation BAR Supplemental Submittal September 2020 9 Center for Christian Study Expansion 128 Chancellor Street Charlottesville, VA 22903 4’-0” West (Front) Elevation BAR Supplemental Submittal September 2020 10 Center for Christian Study Expansion 128 Chancellor Street Charlottesville, VA 22903 Product Literature BAR Supplemental Submittal September 2020 11 CATALOG ULTIMATE M A R V I N S I G N AT U R E™ CO L L E C T I O N MARVIN ® WINDOWS Awning and Picture windows in Ebony 9 10 MARVIN SIGNATURE TM COLLEC TION MARVIN ® ULTIMATE CASEMENT Casement windows with Matte Black hardware ULTIMATE CASEMENT The Ultimate Casement window is offered in some of the largest sizes in the industry, with a secure multi- point lock, durable hardware that ensures smooth operation, and Marvin’s exclusive Wash Mode for easy cleaning–even on upper floors. With many design options, including round top shapes, the Ultimate Casement window flexes to fit your vision and can be sized to complement the most expansive views. ULTIMATE CASEMENT INTERIOR ULTIMATE CASEMENT EXTERIOR ULTIMATE CASEMENT PUSH OUT INTERIOR WITH PUSH OUT HANDLE WITH FOLDING HANDLE WITH FOLDING HANDLE Casement and Picture windows with Satin Nickel hardware 35 THIS PRODUC T IS CE CERTIFIED 36 (ULTIMATE CASEMENT NARROW FRAME - CLAD ONLY) MARVIN SIGNATURE TM COLLEC TION MARVIN ® ULTIMATE PICTURE Picture and Awning windows in White painted interior finish ULTIMATE PICTURE The Ultimate Picture window offers a classic style in a non-operable window, bringing natural light into a room or highlighting an unobstructed outdoor view. Durable and energy efficient, it can be sized to match accompanying double hung, single hung, or casement windows. An aluminum-clad exterior provides durability and flexible finish options, or an all-wood option is ideal for historic renovation projects where a wood exterior is needed to match original architectural details. DIREC T GL A ZE Direct glaze refers to a window with no sash. The glass is glazed directly into the frame and is stationary. IN-SA SH In-sash windows are non- operable, and they can match the profiles of windows with operable sashes. DIRECT GLAZE PICTURE WINDOW IN-SASH PICTURE WINDOW Casement and Direct Glaze Picture windows 54 THIS PRODUC T IS CE CERTIFIED 55 MARVIN SIGNATURE TM COLLEC TION MARVIN ® ULTIMATE BAY + BOW Bow window ULTIMATE BAY ULTIMATE BOW Ultimate Bay windows are a group of connected windows Ultimate Bow windows are a series of windows connected extending outward from a room at desired angles– to form a gentle outward curve. Typically made up of allowing light and views from multiple directions. Some four or more windows, Ultimate Bow windows can create feature a larger operating or stationary window flanked by a small nook, open up a view, bring in more light, and smaller windows. Ultimate Bay windows can create space boost visual appeal from inside and out. Bow windows are indoors for a cozy nook or window seat, or maximize a available with casement, double hung, or picture windows. scenic view to serve as a room’s focal point. INTERIOR BAY WITH ULTIMATE INTERIOR BOW WITH ULTIMATE CASEMENT AND PICTURE WINDOWS CASEMENT AND PICTURE WINDOWS Bay window 66 THIS PRODUC T IS CE CERTIFIED 67 (CLAD ONLY) MARVIN ® DOORS Multi-Slide doors in Bronze 68 69 MARVIN SIGNATURE TM COLLEC TION MARVIN ® DOOR TERMS + DEFINITIONS DOOR OPERATING STYLES 1 1. FR AME The door frame includes the head jamb across the top, side jambs and the sill at the 2 bottom. Marvin frames are built strong to stand up to heavy door usage year after year. 2. R AIL The horizontal wood members of a door are called rails, the vertical components are called stiles. The bottom rail on a French door design is about 8 inches OUTSWING DOOR INSWING DOOR SLIDING DOOR high, harmonizing with traditional design Single or double swinging doors open Single or double swinging doors open Save space with a door panel that preferences. On other doors, narrow to the exterior. to the interior. operates by sliding along a track. bottom rails match 4 ¾ inch stiles for a clean, uncluttered appearance. 3. SILL Our door sills are made of Ultrex®, pultruded 4 fiberglass based materials that are virtually impervious to time, weather, and pressure. Ultrex door sills provide excellent performance in hot or cold climates, plus durability over the long haul by being resistant to warping, denting, and fading. 4. PANEL S In a door, the panel is the main section, BI- FOLD DOOR LIF T AND SLIDE DOOR MULTI-SLIDE DOOR operating or stationary, that is installed This door folds to the side and can For openings as large as 48 feet Another option to blend interior into the frame. Marvin doors come in include up to sixteen panels. wide and 12 feet high, substantial and outdoor living with a modular many sizes, some of the industry’s largest, door panels fully open into pocket frame system. but all share the tight tolerances for fit and or stacked configurations. quality finishes. 3 MAKE EVERY ENTRANCE GRAND Marvin doors are designed to maximize the potential of any opening, view, and living space. 70 71 MARVIN SIGNATURE TM COLLEC TION MARVIN ® INTERIOR FINISH OPTIONS PINE WOOD SPECIES STAIN + PAINT Offering a rich, warm look, many custom options, When compared to painting or staining on the job site, and design versatility, wood is a premium choice. factory-stained finishes offer consistent quality and Wood can be used on both the interior and exterior performance resulting from our expertise with wood as of a window or door. As a lower maintenance option, a material and years of perfecting our staining process. wood can also be used on only the interior with an Painting on the job site or scheduling off-site finishing is extruded aluminum cladding exterior. Marvin offers an extra step that takes time and coordination. Choose our VER TIC AL GR AIN DOUGL A S FIR both options, leading the industry in sourcing, painted interior finish option on any Marvin windows and processing, and utilizing high quality wood. doors with a wood or clad exterior for a factory-painted option that arrives ready to install. DOUGL A S FIR CLE AR WHE AT CHERRY HONE Y HA ZELNUT WHITE OAK LE ATHER C ABERNET MAHOGANY ESPRESSO DESIGNER BL ACK MAPLE Custom option WHITE PRIMED WHITE BL ACK WALNUT Custom option Wood Bi-Fold door in Mahogany * Stain colors shown on Pine. To see more about finishes visit Marvin.com. 88 89 MARVIN SIGNATURE TM COLLEC TION MARVIN ® EXTERIOR FINISH OPTIONS STONE WHITE COCONUT CRE AM SIERR A WHITE C A SHMERE EXTRUDED ALUMINUM PEBBLE GR AY Extruded aluminum is an extremely tough cladding that protects wood windows, mimics the profiles of wood, and provides superior HAMPTON SAGE durability. It is the most commonly ordered Marvin material. C ADET GR AY Select a color from our palette of 19 durable extruded aluminum colors, including a spectrum of rich hues and three pearlescent finishes. If CL AY you have more specialized needs, we can also work with you to create a custom color. C A SC ADE BLUE Ultimate Double Hung G2 window in Ebony SUEDE WOOD SPECIES Ultimate Double Hung G2 window in Suede Wood is a premium material for windows and GUNMETAL doors, offering classic aesthetic appeal, many options for customization, and design versatility. WINEBERRY We treat exposed millwork with a water repellent wood preservative to help it last longer. Choose from one of the four options below. Each is BRONZE ready to be finished to match your project’s exacting requirements. BAHAMA BROWN PINE E VERGREEN EBONY VER TIC AL GR AIN DOUGL A S FIR BRIGHT SILVER (PE ARLESCENT) MAHOGANY COPPER (PE ARLESCENT) WESTERN RED CEDAR LIBER T Y BRONZE (PE ARLESCENT) Exterior trim package only CUSTOM COLOR: ANY COLOR YOU WANT 90 91 9/9/2020 PLINTH — FineConcrete ABOUT UHPC + WORKS STUDIO SHOP + FURNISHINGS + PRODUCTS CONTACT US PLINTH While presenting a monolithic appearance and substantial mass, PLINTH benches are elevated above the ground with a shallow 2” reveal. the benches are cast hollow with a 1” thickness for ease of install and shipping. Available in 2’ and 8’ lengths for flexibility of grouping. Optional hardwood seats and backs are inset into the concrete base. All assembly hardware included. www.fineconcrete.com/plinth 1/2 9/9/2020 PLINTH — FineConcrete www.fineconcrete.com/plinth 2/2 LED recessed ceiling luminaires - Vortex optics - Symmetric wide Application Type: Linear LED recessed ceiling luminaires with symmetric wide light distribution. The patent pending ‘vortex reflector’ rotates a parabolic BEGA Product: reflector around the vertical axis to for a complex vortex shape. The vortex Project: balances maximum efficiency with optimal glare control while eliminating shadows and artifacts in a uniquely rectangular shape. Modified: Materials Luminaire housing and trim constructed of die-cast marine grade, copper free (≤ 0.3% copper content) A360.0 aluminum alloy Clear safety glass Reflector surface made of pure anodized aluminum Silicone applied robotically to casting, plasma treated for increased adhesion High temperature silicone gasket Mechanically captive stainless steel fasteners Stainless steel screw clamps NRTL listed to North American Standards, suitable for wet locations Protection class IP 65 Weight: 14.1 lbs Electrical Operating voltage 120-277V AC Minimum start temperature -20° C LED module wattage 48.0 W System wattage 55.0 W Controllability 0-10V dimming down to 0.1% Color rendering index Ra > 80 Luminaire lumens 5,880 lumens (3000K) Lifetime at Ta = 15° C 369,000 h (L70) Lifetime at Ta = 35° C 111,000 h (L70) LED color temperature 4000K - Product number + K4 3500K - Product number + K35 3000K - Product number + K3 2700K - Product number + K27 BEGA can supply you with suitable LED replacement modules for up to 20 years after the purchase of LED luminaires - see website for details Finish All BEGA standard finishes are matte, textured polyester powder coat with minimum 3 mil thickness. Available colors Black (BLK) White (WHT) RAL: Bronze (BRZ) Silver (SLV) CUS : B A C Recessed ceiling luminaires · Vortex optic · Symmetric wide LED β A    B C 24 305 48.0 W 52° 60 3⁄ 8   3 3 1⁄ 2 β = Beam angle BEGA 1000 BEGA Way, Carpinteria, CA 93013 ( 805 ) 684-0533 info@bega-us.com Due to the dynamic nature of lighting products and the associated technologies, luminaire data on this sheet is subject to change at the discretion of BEGA North America. For the most current technical data, please refer to bega-us . com © copyright BEGA 2018 Updated 02/14/19 LED recessed ceiling downlights - narrow beam Application Type: LED recessed ceiling luminaire with narrow beam light distribution designed for downlighting atriums, canopies, passages and other interior and BEGA Product: exterior locations. Project: Materials Luminaire housing and faceplate constructed of die-cast marine Modified: grade, copper free (≤ 0.3% copper content) A360.0 aluminum alloy Clear safety glass Silicone optical collimating lens Reflector surface made of pure anodized aluminum High temperature silicone gasket Stainless steel screw clamps Galvanized steep rough in ceiling pan with through wiring box NRTL listed to North American Standards, suitable for wet locations Protection class IP65 Weight: 2.2 lbs Electrical Operating voltage 120-277V AC Minimum start temperature -20° C LED module wattage 8.3 W System wattage 9.7 W Controlability 0-10V dimming down to 0.1% Color rendering index Ra > 80 Luminaire lumens 1,194 lumens (3000K) Lifetime at Ta=15°C > 500,000 h (L70) Lifetime at Ta=45°C 270,000 h (L70) LED color temperature 4000K - Product number + K4 3500K - Product number + K35 3000K - Product number + K3 2700K - Product number + K27 BEGA can supply you with suitable LED replacement modules for up to 20 years after the purchase of LED luminaires - see website for details Finish All BEGA standard finishes are matte, textured polyester powder coat with minimum 3 mil thickness. Available colors Black (BLK) White (WHT) RAL: Bronze (BRZ) Silver (SLV) CUS : C B A LED recessed ceiling downlights · narrow beam LED β A B C 24 817 8.3 W 21 ° 5 5⁄ 8 5 18 β = Beam angle BEGA 1000 BEGA Way, Carpinteria, CA 93013 ( 805 ) 684-0533 info@bega-us.com Due to the dynamic nature of lighting products and the associated technologies, luminaire data on this sheet is subject to change at the discretion of BEGA North America. For the most current technical data, please refer to bega-us . com © copyright BEGA 2018 Updated 01/25/18 LED recessed wall luminaires - asymmetrical Application Type: LED recessed wall luminaire with asymmetrical light distribution for the illumination of ground surfaces, building entrances, stairs and footpaths. BEGA Product: Materials Project: Luminaire housing constructed of die-cast aluminum marine grade, copper free (≤ 0.3% copper content) A360.0 aluminum alloy Modified: Clear safety glass Silicone applied robotically to casting, plasma treated for increased adhesion High temperature silicone gasket Mechanically captive stainless steel fasteners Stainless steel screw clamps Composite installation housing NRTL listed to North American Standards, suitable for wet locations Protection class IP65 Weight: 2.1 lbs Electrical Operating voltage 120-277V AC Minimum start temperature -40° C LED module wattage 8.4 W System wattage 11.0 W Controlability 0-10V, TRIAC, and ELV dimmable Color rendering index Ra > 80 Luminaire lumens 480 lumens (3000K) LED service life (L70) 60,000 hours LED color temperature 4000K - Product number + K4 3500K - Product number + K35 3000K - Product number + K3 2700K - Product number + K27 Amber - Product number + AMB Wildlife friendly amber LED - Optional Luminaire is optionally available with a narrow bandwidth, amber LED source (585-600nm) approved by the FWC. This light output is suggested for use within close proximity to sea turtle nesting and hatching habitats. Electrical and control information may vary from standard luminaire. LED module wattage 8.7 W (Amber) Fully enclosed luminaire with System wattage 10.7 (Amber) installation housing ensures Luminaire lumens 111 lumens (Amber) seamless integration and weathertight operation. BEGA can supply you with suitable LED replacement modules for up to 20 years after the purchase of LED luminaires - see website for details Finish All BEGA standard finishes are matte, textured polyester powder coat with minimum 3 mil thickness. Available colors Black (BLK) White (WHT) RAL: Bronze (BRZ) Silver (SLV) CUS : BB A CC LED recessed wall luminaires · asymmetrical LED A B C 33 055 8.4 W 12 1⁄ 2 2 3⁄ 4 5 BEGA 1000 BEGA Way, Carpinteria, CA 93013 ( 805 ) 684-0533 info@bega-us.com Due to the dynamic nature of lighting products and the associated technologies, luminaire data on this sheet is subject to change at the discretion of BEGA North America. For the most current technical data, please refer to bega-us . com © copyright BEGA 2019 Updated 08/26/19 38.18 · Technical amendments reserved ! 84 107 Bollard IP 65 Project · Reference number Date 360 260 105 Montageplatte Mounting plate Contre-plaque 3 x 120° 3x 1200 12 0° Ø 70 Ø 140 Ø 100 Product data sheet Product description Application Inrush current Luminaire made of aluminium alloy, Shielded LED bollard with asymmetrical light Inrush current: 12 A / 24.2 µs aluminium and stainless steel distribution for the illumination of squares, Maximum number of luminaires of this Safety glass access roads and entry areas. type per miniature circuit breaker: Silicone gasket The luminaire housing is adjustable, allowing B 10 A: 50 luminaires Reflector made of pure anodised aluminium the light distribution to be adapted to the B 16 A: 50 luminaires Swivel range 90° requirements of the installation site. C 10 A: 50 luminaires Luminaire with mounting plate for bolting onto a C 16 A: 50 luminaires Lamp foundation or an anchorage unit Module connected wattage 19.4 W Light technique Mounting plate with two pitch circles: Luminaire connected wattage 22.2 W Luminaire data for the light planning program ø 70 mm, 3 elongated holes 7 mm wide Rated temperature ta = 25 °C DIALux for outdoor lighting, street lighting and ø 100 mm, 3 elongated holes 9 mm wide Ambient temperature ta max = 50 °C indoor lighting as well as luminaire data in Luminaire can be aligned on the mounting plate EULUMDAT- and IES-format you will find on the around 360° 84 107 K4 BEGA web page www.bega.com. Mounting bracket with connection box for Module designation LED-0872/940 through-wiring of up to 5 × 2,5@ Article No. 84 107 Colour temperature 4000 K LED power supply unit LED colour temperature optionally 4000 K Colour rendering index CRI > 90 220-240 V x 0/50-60 Hz or 3000 K Module luminous flux 3310 lm DC 176-276 V 4000 K – Article number + K4 Luminaire luminous flux 2661 lm DALI controllable 3000 K – Article number + K3 Luminaire luminous efficiency 119,9 lm / W A basic isolation exists between power cable Colour graphite or silver and control line graphite – article number 84 107 K3 BEGA Thermal Control® silver – article number + A Module designation LED-0872/930 Temporary thermal regulation to protect Colour temperature 3000 K Accessory temperature-sensitive components without Colour rendering index CRI > 90 70 895 Anchorage unit switching off the luminaire Module luminous flux 3130 lm with mounting flange made of hot-dip Safety class I Luminaire luminous flux 2516 lm galvanised steel. Total length 400 mm. Protection class IP 65 Luminaire luminous efficiency 113,3 lm / W 3 stainless steel fixing screws M8. Dust-tight and protection against water jets Impact strength IK08 Service life · Ambient temperature Pitch circle ø 100 mm. Protection against mechanical Rated temperature ta = 25 °C See the separate instructions for use. impacts < 5 joule LED psu: > 50,000 h c – Conformity mark LED module: > 200,000 h (L 80 B 50) Weight: 7.0 kg 100,000 h (L 90 B 50) Ambient temperature ta max = 50 °C (100 %) LED psu: 50,000 h LED module: 91,000 h (L 80 B 50) 100,000 h (L 70 B 50) Light distribution 84 107 LED 4 2 0 25 5 2 1 0,5 0,2 lx 2 4 m 0 2 4 6 8 BEGA Gantenbrink-Leuchten KG · Postfach 31 60 · 58689 Menden · info@bega.com · www.bega.com Certificate of Appropriateness Application BAR 20-09-05 1619 University Avenue, TMP 090102000 The Corner ADC District Owner: Sovran Bank Applicant: Brian Quinn, Milrose Consultants Bank of America exterior lighting Application Components (linked):  Staff Report  Historic Survey  Application CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW STAFF REPORT September 15, 2020 Certificate of Appropriateness Application BAR 20-09-05 1619 University Avenue, TMP 090102000 The Corner ADC District Owner: Sovran Bank Applicant: Brian Quinn, Milrose Consultants Bank of America exterior lighting Background Year Built: 1959 District: The Corner ADC District Status: Contributing This one-story Classical Revival brick commercial building was built as a bank branch in 1959. It is characterized by a projecting half-octagon porch, fixed 35-light windows, and a hipped roof. Prior BAR Reviews May 2013 – BAR accepted applicant’s request for deferral. Revised plan should further develop the drawing submitted at meeting; brick walls at consistent horizontal level; lose the picket railing; look at framing concrete travel ways with brick, and coordinate with stone tread steps/brick risers; straighten path; clean up landscaping under tree; keep upper diagonal path on east side; use red brick [Old Virginia] pavers instead of dark brick, and consider polymeric sand. July 2013 – BAR approved with conditions that the handrail design will match existing; eliminate two stairs in the center front; carry the bluestone cap detail across so it breaks the upper level from lower level; carry City sidewalk brick color to wall*; clean up geometry east side so there is a memory of an arc. Resubmit digitally to staff to be circulated to BAR for approval; *include two photoshop versions of brick color [dark City sidewalk brick and red brick to match existing] so final decision can be made. 1619 University Avenue (9 Sept 2020) 1 Application  Submittal: Little Diversified Architectural Consulting, Bank of America, University, ELP Renovation, dated 24 August 2020: CoA application, two letters, Sheets A00.00, A03.01, E00.01, E01.01, E02.01, E031.01, E04.01, and S01.01. Request CoA for the replacement of exterior lighting. Discussion and Recommendations BAR may want to establish conditions for the proposed tree and vegetation trimming, including a requirement that any work within the public right of way be coordinated with the City. Application indicates the light fixtures will have lamping with a Color Temperature (CT) that does not exceed 3,000K; however, the fixture cut sheets indicate that none of the fixtures are available with 3,000K lamping. (See attached.) 1619 University Ave Cree Lighting # CT per spec UAB1 ARE-EDG-4M-DA-04-E-UL-BZ-525-30K 40K UAN1 ARE-EDG-5M-DA-06-E-UL-BZ-525-30K 40K UAW1 ARE-EDG-4MB-DA-04-E-UL-BZ-700-30K 40K UAX1 ARE-EDG-4MB-DA-06-E-UL-BZ-700-30K 40K UBO1 CPY250-A-DM-F-20W-UL-WH-30K 40K USA1 and USA2 SEC-EDG-2S-WM-02-E-UL-BZ-350-30K 40K USB1 SEC-EDG-2S-WM-02-E-UL-BZ-525-30K 40K With presentation prior to the BAR meeting of up-to-date catalog specs/cut sheets for each fixture indicating that the lamping meets the BAR’s criteria (a Color Temperature not to exceed 3,000K), staff will recommend approval. In the absence of that information, staff recommends that this request be deferred. 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 lighting satisfies the BAR’s criteria and is compatible with this property and other properties in the Corner 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 Site Design and Elements, I move to find that the proposed lighting does not satisfy the BAR’s criteria and is not compatible with this property and other properties in the Corner ADC District, and for the following reasons the BAR denies the application as submitted. Criteria, Standards, and Guidelines Review Criteria Generally 1619 University Avenue (9 Sept 2020) 2 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 D. Lighting Charlottesville’s residential areas have few examples of private site lighting. Most houses, including those used for commercial purposes, have attractive, often historically styled fixtures located on the house at various entry points. In the commercial areas, there is a wide variety of site lighting including large utilitarian lighting, floodlights and lights mounted on buildings. Charlottesville has a “Dark Sky” ordinance that requires full cutoff for lamps that emit 3,000 or more lumens. Within an ADC District, the BAR can impose limitations on lighting levels relative to the surrounding context. 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. 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. 1619 University Avenue (9 Sept 2020) 3 Bank of America—University Ave Fixture Type UBO Bank of America—University Ave Fixture Types USA and USB SEC-EDG-2S-WM-02-E-UL-BZ-350-30K SEC-EDG-2S-WM-02-E-UL-BZ-525-30K Bank of America—University Ave Fixture Type UAB1, UAN1,UAW1, and UAX1 ARE-EDG-4M-DA-04-E-UL-BZ-525-30K ARE-EDG-5M-DA-06-E-UL-BZ-525-30K ARE-EDG-4MB-DA-04-E-UL-BZ-700-30K ARE-EDG-4MB-DA-06-E-UL-BZ-700-30K Bank of America University ELP Renovation University Facility Partner CBRE - (MD) 1619 University Avenue Charlottesville, VA ELP Renovation 3401 Columbia Pike, Ste 301 SERIAL NUMBER: NRSP VERSION: Arlington, VA 22204 BULLETIN: 703.302.2526 BULLETIN: XX/DDXX LITTLE PROJECT #: 223.13649.00 Architect 1619 University Avenue LITTLE 4245 Fairfax Drive, Suite 650 Arlington, VA 22203 PROJECT INFORMATION SCOPE OF WORK Charlottesville, VA 703.908.4535 This drawing and the design shown are the property Electrical of Little Diversified Architectural Consulting. The reproduction, copying or other use of this drawing LOCATION MAP without their written consent is prohibited and any infringement will be subject to legal action. LITTLE Little 2020 4245 Fairfax Drive, Suite 650 Arlington, VA 22203 571.257.4063 Issue Date & Issue Description By Check Structural LITTLE 4245 Fairfax Drive, Suite 650 Arlington, VA 22203 703.908.4505 DRAWING INDEX ARCHITECTURAL ELECTRICAL STRUCTURAL VICINITY MAP GRAPHIC SYMBOLS Seal/Signature Digitally signed by Ryan M McGrath DN: CN=Ryan M McGrath, OU=A01410C00000170CAD0890A0000D357, O=Unaffiliated, C=US Project Name Date: 2020.08.24 12:19:16-04'00' PROTOTYPE LAYOUT CAD File Name Description Scale A00.00 LS1 Bank of America TR1 University ELP Renovation 1619 University Avenue LS1 Charlottesville, VA TR4 TR4 SERIAL NUMBER: NRSP VERSION: UNK BULLETIN: UNK ATM1 ASSOCIATE ENTRY TR2 This drawing and the design shown are the property of Little Diversified Architectural Consulting. The reproduction, copying or other use of this drawing without their written consent is prohibited and any infringement will be subject to legal action. Little 2020 ATM2 Issue Date & Issue Description By Check 1 TR1 ATM3 AHD TR3 LS1 Seal/Signature TR1 Digitally signed by Ryan M McGrath DN: CN=Ryan M McGrath, OU=A01410C00000170CAD0890A0000D357, Project Name O=Unaffiliated, C=US Date: 2020.08.24 12:19:44-04'00' KEY NOTES SHEET NOTES PROTOTYPE LAYOUT LANDSCAPE SCHEDULE CM = CRAPE MYRTLE UNK = UNKNOWN CAD File Name SYMBOL QTY NOTES LANDSCAPING PLAN TRIM TREE UP TO 15' AND AWAY FROM LIGHT FIXTURE TO ENSURE THAT IT DOES NOT Description TR1 3 INTERFERE WITH INTENDED ILLUMINATION TR2 1 TRIM TREE UP TO 10' AND THIN OUT TREE CANOPY Scale NOT TO SCALE TRIM TREE UP TO 11' AND AWAY FROM LIGHT FIXTURE TO ENSURE THAT IT DOES NOT TR3 1 INTERFERE WITH INTENDED ILLUMINATION A03.01 TR4 2 REMOVE TREE 1 LS1 - TRIM LANDSCAPING DOWN TO 36" LANDSCAPING PLAN SCALE: N.T.S. Bank of America University ELP Renovation 1619 University Avenue Charlottesville, VA SERIAL NUMBER: GENERAL DEMOLITION NOTES: NRSP VERSION: Y3 UNIVERSITY AVENUE A. SEE SHEET E00.01 FOR PROJECT DETAILS AND SPECIFICATIONS. ALL NOTES ON SHEET E00.01 BULLETIN: SHALL APPLY TO THIS DRAWING. B. SEE SHEET E03.01 FOR RISER DIAGRAM, PANEL AND FIXTURE SCHEDULES. Y3 CH C. SEE GMR DRAWINGS FOR FINAL LIGHTING FIXTURE LAYOUT, DETAILS, AND NOTES. AN D. UNLESS SPECIFICALLY INDICATED OTHERWISE, ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT, LIGHTING FIXTURES, DEVICES, FEEDERS, AND BRANCH CIRCUIT WIRING INDICATED FOR REMOVAL SHALL BE REMOVED C ELL IN THEIR ENTIREITY BACK TO THE SOURCE OR TO THE NEXT ACTIVE FIXTURE TO REMAIN. Y4 E. ELECTRICAL DRAWINGS ARE DIAGRAMMATIC AND SHOW INTENT OF DEMOLITION WORK TO BE O DONE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE ALL MATERIALS, EQUIPMENT, AND LABOR REQUIRED RS 3 4 4 FOR A COMPLETE WORKING INSTALLATION. R1 TR Y4 F. ITEMS OUTSIDE THE SCOPE OF WORK ARE EXISTING TO REMAIN AND SHALL REMAIN ACTIVE EE THROUGHOUT THE CONSTRUCTION PROCESS. CONTRACTOR SHALL ENSURE THE CONTINUITY OF POWER TO ALL EXISTING ITEMS TO REMAIN AND RESTORE DISRUPTED CIRCUITS AS REQUIRED. T UNK UBO1 Y5 UBO1 1 UNK G. POWER SHUTDOWNS SHALL BE COORDINATED AND COMPLETED AT TIMES OUTSIDE OF NORMAL 3 WORKING HOURS AS APPROVED BY THE OWNER. PROVIDE A MINIMUM OF SEVEN DAYS ADVANCED R1 1 R3 R1 3 NOTICE PRIOR TO ANY SHUTDOWN. UBO1 This drawing and the design shown are the property H. ALL EXTERIOR LIGHTING FIXTURES ARE TO BE AUTOMATICALLY CONTROLLED BY EXISTING of Little Diversified Architectural Consulting. The 3 LIGHTING CONTROLS EQUIPMENT LOCATED WITHIN THE MAIN EQUIPMENT ROOM. CONTRACTOR reproduction, copying or other use of this drawing without their written consent is prohibited and any ATM1 SHALL RETAIN EXISTING LIGHTING CONTROLS AND PROVIDE ADDITIONAL COMPONENTS, WIRING, AND CONTROL DEVICES AS REQUIRED FOR A COMPLETE SYSTEM. SEE NOTES ON SHEET E00.01 infringement will be subject to legal action. ASSOCIATE ENTRY AND GMR DWGS FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. Little 2020 I. EXISTING LIGHT FIXTURES TYPE "Y" ARE EXISTING TO REMAIN. NOTES: 1. TYPICAL - EXISTING CANOPY MOUNTED LIGHT FIXTURE(S) TO BE REMOVED AND REPLACED. REMOVE FIXTURE / SUPPORTS, AND RETAIN EXISTING BRANCH CIRCUIT / CONTROLS FOR Y2 RECONNECTION UNDER NEW WORK. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE PATCHING, PAINTING, AND ATM2 R1 3 R1 WEATHERPROOFING AS REQUIRED. Issue Date & Issue Description By Check BANK OF AMERICA 4 2. TYPICAL - EXISTING BUILDING MOUNTED LIGHT FIXTURE(S) TO BE REMOVED AND REPLACED. REMOVE FIXTURE, SUPPORTS, AND RETAIN EXISTING BRANCH CIRCUIT FOR RECONNECTION UNDER NEW WORK. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE PATCHING, PAINTING, AND WEATHERPROOFING USA1 2 / FIREPROOFING AS REQUIRED. 3. TYPICAL - EXISTING LIGHT FIXTURE(S) TO BE REMOVED. REMOVE FIXTURE, SUPPORTS, WIRING, AND CONDUIT BACK TO SOURCE OR TO NEXT ACTIVE FIXTURE TO REMAIN. ANY CIRCUITS MADE 3 R1 SPARE BY DEMOLITION WORK SHALL BE TURNED TO 'OFF' POSITION AND UPDATED ON PANEL SCHEDULE. GC SHALL PROVIDE PATCHING, PAINTING, AND WEATHERPROOFING / FIREPROOFING AS REQUIRED. 4. CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE AND VERIFY REMOVAL / TRIMMING OF TREES / BUSHES WITH GMR DRAWINGS AND THE OWNER PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. 4 ATM3 AHD R1 3 3 R1 1 UBO1 R3 R2 USB1 3 R1 2 3 4 4 4 Seal/Signature Y1 1 ELECTRICAL SITE PLAN - DEMOLITION E01.01 1" = 10'-0" Project Name PROTOTYPE LAYOUT CAD File Name Description Scale E01.01 Bank of America University ELP Renovation 1619 University Avenue Charlottesville, VA SERIAL NUMBER: GENERAL NOTES: NRSP VERSION: Y3 UNIVERSITY AVENUE A. SEE SHEET E00.01 FOR PROJECT DETAILS, SCHEDULES AND SPECIFICATIONS. ALL NOTES ON BULLETIN: SHEET E00.01 SHALL APPLY TO THIS DRAWING. B. SEE SHEET E03.01 FOR RISER DIAGRAM & PANEL SCHEDULES. Y3 CH C. SEE LIGHTING FIXTURE SCHEDULE FOR FIXTURE MOUNTING HEIGHTS ON E03.01. AN D. ELECTRICAL PLANS ARE DIAGRAMMATIC. DO NOT SCALE DRAWINGS EXCEPT WHERE DIMENSIONS ARE SHOWN. C ELL E. ALL WORK SHALL BE DONE AT SUCH TIMES AND IN SUCH A MANNER AS WILL LEAST INTERFERE Y4 WITH THE MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION OF ALL RELATED OR AFFECTED SYSTEMS. O RS F. ALL POWER OUTAGES SHALL BE COORDINATED WITH OWNER. TR G. THE ACTUAL NUMBER OF WIRES ARE NOT INDICATED FOR ALL CIRCUITS, ONLY THOSE WHERE Y4 EE CLARIFICATION IS NECESSARY. E.C. SHALL PROVIDE ALL WIRES NECESSARY FOR THE PROPER FUNCTION OF THE SYSTEM. T UNK UBO1 Y5 UBO1 4 UNK H. ALL EMPTY CONDUIT RUNS SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH PULL STRINGS. 4 F. ALL EXTERIOR LIGHTING FIXTURES ARE TO BE AUTOMATICALLY CONTROLLED BY EXISTING UBO1 LIGHTING CONTROLS EQUIPMENT LOCATED WITHIN THE MAIN EQUIPMENT ROOM. CONTRACTOR This drawing and the design shown are the property SHALL RETAIN EXISTING LIGHTING CONTROLS AND PROVIDE ADDITIONAL COMPONENTS, WIRING, of Little Diversified Architectural Consulting. The AND CONTROL DEVICES AS REQUIRED FOR A COMPLETE SYSTEM. SEE NOTES ON SHEET E00.01 reproduction, copying or other use of this drawing AND GMR DRAWINGS FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. without their written consent is prohibited and any infringement will be subject to legal action. G. ALL EXTERIOR LIGHTING CIRCUITS / FIXTURES SHALL OPERATE SIMULTANEOUSLY AND SHALL BE Little 2020 AUTOMATICALLY POWERED 'ON' FROM DUSK UNTIL DAWN, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. NOTES: USA2 1. EXTEND EXISTING EXTERIOR BRANCH CIRCUIT SERVING NEAREST LIGHT FIXTURES TO NEW 1 2 Y2 BUILDING MOUNTED LIGHTING FIXTURES AS NECESSARY [2#10, 1#10G IN 3/4"C]. CONTRACTOR SHALL BALANCE THE LOADS WHERE MORE THAN ONE EXISTING CIRCUIT IS AVAILABLE THE Issue Date & Issue Description By Check BANK OF AMERICA CONTRACTOR SHALL CONCEAL ALL BRANCH CIRCUIT WIRING WHERE POSSIBLE. EXPOSED USA2 CONDUIT AT BUILDING EXTERIOR SHALL ONLY BE USED WHERE ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY. IF EXPOSED CONDUIT IS DEEMED NECESSARY, CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE LOCATION / USE USA2 WITH OWNER. ENSURE EXTERIOR BRANCH LIGHTING CIRCUIT IS AUTOMATICALLY CONTROLLED USA1 3 AND POWERED 'ON' FROM DUSK-UNTIL-DAWN, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 2. PROVIDE AND INSTALL NEW WALL MOUNTED FIXTURE(S) AT BUILDING EXTERIOR AT MOUNTING HEIGHT AS SCHEDULED ON SHEET E03.01. COORDINATE FINAL LOCATION WITH EXISTING CONDITIONS AND PROVIDE MOUNTING HARDWARE AS WELL AS ANY CUTTING, PATCHING, PAINTING, AND FIREPROOFING / WATERPROOFING AS REQUIRED. 3. TYPICAL - PROVIDE AND INSTALL NEW WALL MOUNTED FIXTURE(S) AT BUILDING EXTERIOR. MATCH 7 EXISTING MOUNTING HEIGHT AND CONNECT LIGHT FIXTURES TO EXISTING CIRCUITING, WITH EXISTING CONTROL TO REMAIN, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. COORDINATE INSTALLATION W/ A-13,15 5 6 EXISTING STRUCTURE / CONDITIONS AND PROVIDE MOUNTING KIT & HARDWARE AS WELL AS ADDITIONAL CUTTING, PATCHING, PAINTING, AND FIREPROOFING / WATERPROOFING AS REQUIRED. A-12 4. PROVIDE AND INSTALL NEW FIXTURES AT EXISTING CANOPY AND CONNECT TO EXISTING LIGHTING 1 2 4 UBO1 CIRCUIT. COORDINATE INSTALLATION W/ EXISTING STRUCTURE / CONDITIONS AND PROVIDE MOUNTING KIT & HARDWARE AS WELL AS ADDITIONAL CUTTING, PATCHING, PAINTING, AND UAB1 USB1 UAW1 (NEW POLE) FIREPROOFING / WATERPROOFING AS REQUIRED. CONNECT LIGHT FIXTURES TO EXISTING CIRCUITING, WITH EXISTING CONTROL TO REMAIN, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 3 5. PROVIDE NEW POLE, CONCRETE POLE BASE (W/ #6G COPPER GROUND TO GROUND ROD), AND A-13,15 POLE MOUNTED FIXTURE(S) AS SCHEDULED. SEE LIGHTING FIXTURE SCHEDULE ON E03.01 AND POLE BASE DETAIL ON STRUCTURAL SHEET S0.01 FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. 6. EXTEND 240V-20A BRANCH LIGHTING CIRCUIT TO NEW POLE MOUNTED FIXTURES AS NECESSARY FROM INDICATED LIGHTING CIRCUIT [2#8, 1#10G IN 1-1/2"C]. COORDINATE FINAL ROUTING WITH EXISTING CONDITIONS AND TRENCH THE PATH WITH THE LEAST AMOUNT OF DISTURBANCE TO EXISTING DRIVEWAYS AND SIDEWALKS. COORDINATE ALL WORK WITH OWNER AS REQUIRED. 5 6 UAN1(NEW POLE) 7. LOCATION OF EXISTING ELECTRICAL SOURCE PANELS, IN ELECTRICAL ROOM IN BACK-OF-HOUSE SPACE, FOR EXTERIOR LIGHTING CIRCUITS TO BE EXTENDED AS NEEDED. EXISTING TIMECLOCK AND CONTACTORS CONTROLLING ALL EXTERIOR LIGHTING CIRCUITS SHALL REMAIN IN PLACE AND 5 6 UAN1(NEW POLE) BE RE-UTILIZED. SITE LIGHTING DESIGN STATEMENT THE INDICATED BUILDING-MOUNTED AND POLE-MOUNTED LIGHTING DESIGN, INCLUDING FIXTURE SELECTIONS, INSTALLATION LOCATIONS AND SUPPORTING PHOTOMETRIC CALCULATIONS, HAS BEEN PERFORMED BY THE OWNER'S CONSULTANT (GMR). THE 5 6 BUILDING-MOUNTED AND POLE-MOUNTED FIXTURES, INCLUDING FIXTURE SUPPORTS, POLE BASES AND ALL INDICATED CIRCUITING, ARE INCLUDED IN THE CONTRACT AND SHALL BE PROVIDED AND INSTALLED BY THE CONTRACTOR, ACCORDING TO THE POLE AND FIXTURE MANUFACTURER'S INSTRUCTIONS. Seal/Signature UAX1 (NEW POLE) Y1 1 ELECTRICAL SITE PLAN - NEW WORK E02.01 1" = 10'-0" Project Name PROTOTYPE LAYOUT CAD File Name Description Scale E02.01 Bank of America University LIGHTING FIXTURE SCHEDULE SYMBOL LABEL WATTAGE PER FIXTURE FIXTURE ARRANGEMENT FIXTURE TYPE / MOUNTING / MANUFACTURER ** CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY MOUNTING ACCESSORIES BEFORE ORDERING** BUG RATING MOUNTING HEIGHT MOUNTING ACCESSORIES NOTES ELP Renovation UAB1 70 SINGLE (AB) ARE-EDG-4M-DA-04-E-UL-BZ-525-30K / WALL MOUNT / CREE B2-U0-G2 10' - 6'' AFG WM-DA-BZ ADD NEW FIXTURE 1619 University Avenue Charlottesville, VA UAN1(NEW POLE) 101 SINGLE (AN) ARE-EDG-5M-DA-06-E-UL-BZ-525-30K / POLE MOUNT / CREE B4-U0-G3 15' AFG - ADD NEW FIXTURE UAW1 (NEW POLE) 93 SINGLE (AW) ARE-EDG-4MB-DA-04-E-UL-BZ-700-30K / POLE MOUNT / CREE B1-U0-G2 15' AFG - ADD NEW POLE AND FIXTURE UAX1 (NEW POLE) SINGLE (AX) ARE-EDG-4MB-DA-06-E-UL-BZ-700-30K / POLE MOUNT / CREE 15' AFG SERIAL NUMBER: 134 B1-U0-G2 - ADD NEW POLE AND FIXTURE NRSP VERSION: UBO1 20 SINGLE (BO) CPY250-A-DM-F-20W-UL-WH-30K / CANOPY MOUNT / CREE B1-U0-G1 MATCH EXISTING XA-BXCC9001 REPLACE EXISTING FIXTURE BULLETIN: USA1 25 SINGLE (SA) SEC-EDG-2S-WM-02-E-UL-BZ-350-30K / WALL MOUNT / CREE B1-U0-G1 MATCH EXISTING - REPLACE EXISTING FIXTURE USA2 25 SINGLE (SA) SEC-EDG-2S-WM-02-E-UL-BZ-350-30K / WALL MOUNT / CREE B1-U0-G1 8' - 6'' AFG - ADD NEW FIXTURE USB1 37 SINGLE (SB) SEC-EDG-2S-WM-02-E-UL-BZ-525-30K / WALL MOUNT / CREE B1-U0-G1 MATCH EXISTING - REPLACE EXISTING FIXTURE R1 - SINGLE EXISTING FLOOD FIXTURE - - - REMOVE AND PATCH R2 - SINGLE EXISTING CANOPY FIXTURE - - - REMOVE AND PATCH R3 - SINGLE EXISTING WALL MOUNT FIXTURE - - - REMOVE AND PATCH Y1 - DOUBLE (2@180°) EXISTING POLE FIXTURE - - - OUT OF SCOPE Y2 - SINGLE EXISTING POLE FIXTURE - - - OUT OF SCOPE Y3 - SINGLE EXISTING DECORATIVE POLE FIXTURE - - - OUT OF SCOPE Y4 - - This drawing and the design shown are the property SINGLE EXISTING FLOOD FIXTURE - - OUT OF SCOPE of Little Diversified Architectural Consulting. The reproduction, copying or other use of this drawing Y5 - SINGLE EXISTING CANOPY FIXTURE - - - OUT OF SCOPE without their written consent is prohibited and any infringement will be subject to legal action. SEE E00.01 FOR ADDITIONAL FIXTURE NOTES. Little 2020 Issue Date & Issue Description By Check BANK OF AMERICA ELECTRICAL ROOM EX. EX. PNL-A PNL-B 3 4 4 120/240V 120/240V 3PH-4W 3PH-4W 225A 225A 2 GRADE 1 GENERAL NOTES: A. ALL PANEL BOARDS AND FEEDERS ARE EXISTING TO REMAIN. B. EC SHALL VERIFY EXISTING CONDITIONS, EXISTING RISER DIAGRAM, EQUIPMENT RATINGS, AND FEEDER SIZES PRIOR TO START OF CONSTRUCTION AND NOTIFY ENGINEER OF ANY DISCREPANCIES. RISER NOTES: 1 EXISTING 120/240V-3P ELECTRICAL SERVICE FROM POWER COMPANY. 4 REFER TO PANEL SCHEDULE FOR DETAILS. 2 EXISTING C.T.'s ENCLOSURE. 3 EXISTING C.T. ELECTRICAL METER Seal/Signature Project Name PROTOTYPE LAYOUT CAD File Name Description Scale E03.01 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Bank of America UNIVERSITY AVENUE GENERAL NOTES: University ELP Renovation A. SEE SHEET E00.01 FOR PROJECT DETAILS, 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Y3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 SCHEDULES AND SPECIFICATIONS. ALL NOTES ON SHEET E00.01 SHALL APPLY TO THIS DRAWING. Y3 B. SEE LIGHTING FIXTURE SCHEDULE FOR CH FIXTURE MOUNTING HEIGHTS ON E03.01. 1619 University Avenue 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 AN C. ELECTRICAL PLANS ARE DIAGRAMMATIC. Charlottesville, VA PROPERTY LINE CE DO NOT SCALE DRAWINGS EXCEPT WHERE DIMENSIONS ARE SHOWN. LLO Y4 D. FOOT-CANDLES (+0.0) ON SITE PLAN ARE 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.7 1.1 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 SERIAL NUMBER: RS MEASURED AT GRADE. NRSP VERSION: TR Y4 BULLETIN: EE T 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 1.5 7.2 Y5 UBO1 UBO1 9.6 3.2 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 UBO1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.3 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.6 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.4 0.6 5.2 0.5 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 USA2 0.0 0.1 0.8 1.3 15.2 4.3 0.6 0.3 Y2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 This drawing and the design shown are the property BANK OF AMERICA USA2 of Little Diversified Architectural Consulting. The reproduction, copying or other use of this drawing USA2 without their written consent is prohibited and any infringement will be subject to legal action. 0.1 1.3 2.5 USA1 6.0 1.2 0.6 0.1 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 Little 2020 0.1 0.1 1.1 1.9 0.0 4.0 2.1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 Issue Date & Issue Description By Check 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.5 1.0 0.0 4.0 1.5 1.6 0.8 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 PR UBO1 OP UAB1 USB1 UAW1 (NEW POLE) ER 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.6 0.8 2.9 6.2 8.5 8.0 7.3 15.1 10.3 5.6 4.3 3.1 1.7 0.7 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 TY LIN E 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.4 0.7 2.5 5.4 5.8 6.9 4.9 5.7 5.1 4.2 3.9 3.4 2.6 1.3 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 UAN1(NEW POLE) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.7 1.6 2.4 3.3 0.5 UAN1(NEW 0.0 POLE) 3.1 2.4 0.3 0.2 3.0 2.2 1.2 0.6 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.5 0.9 1.4 1.1 3.3 1.8 3.8 3.3 2.4 1.9 2.4 1.5 0.9 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.3 1.3 2.4 3.7 2.7 3.2 2.7 2.4 2.1 1.5 0.9 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 PR OP 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.4 1.0 3.1 3.7 3.2 2.7 2.2 1.8 1.4 1.0 0.6 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 ER TY LIN 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 1.1 3.1 3.5 2.6 1.8 1.5 1.0 0.6 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 E 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 (NEW 1.2 UAX1 POLE) 3.0 3.1 2.3 1.6 0.9 0.5 Y1 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 2.0 2.8 2.4 1.3 0.7 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 1.4 2.1 1.1 0.6 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Seal/Signature 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.7 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Project Name 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 PROTOTYPE LAYOUT 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 CAD File Name Description 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Scale 1 PHOTOMETRIC PLAN E04.01 1" = 10'-0" E04.01 Bank of America University ELP Renovation 1619 University Avenue Charlottesville, VA 22903 SERIAL NUMBER: NRSP VERSION: BULLETIN: 4245 North Fairfax Drive Suite 650 Arlington, VA 22203 T: 703.908.4501 F: 703.908.4502 www.littleonline.com This drawing and the design shown are the property of Little Diversified Architectural Consulting. The reproduction, copying or other use of this drawing without their written consent is prohibited and any infringement will be subject to legal action. © Little 2020 Issue Date & Issue Description By Check 01 02/17/2020 OWNER'S REVIEW SUBMISSION 02 03/27/2020 CL CREE P25R LIGHT POLE PERMIT SUBMISSION (5"Øx11GA") 15' - 0" MAX FIXTURE MOUNTING HEIGHT ABOVE FINISHED GRADE PROVIDE GROUNDING LUG w/ 6 GA MIN GROUNDING W IRE, COORD w/ ELEC INSTALL ANCHOR RODS AS SPECIFIED BASE PL AND ANCHOR BY LIGHT POLE MFR RODS DESIGN BY POLE MFR 6" MIN 45° CHAMFER ALL AROUND 3' - 0" ABOVE FINISH GRADE AT "AG2" IN PARKING LOT 3" 3" 6" ABOVE FINISH GRADE OTHERWISE GENERAL NOTES: 1. LIGHT POLE FOUNDATION IS DESIGNED IN ACCORDANCE W ITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE 2015 INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE AS AMENDED BY THE LOCAL JURISDICTION. 2. SEE SITE PLAN FOR LIGHT POLE LOCATIONS. 3. DESIGN LOADS: SNOW LOAD Pg 30 PSF ls 1.0 W IND LOAD V 115 MPH EXPOSURE C FINISHED lw 1.0 GRADE, SEE LIGHT FIXTURE PROJECTED W IND AREA 1.68 SF CIVIL LIGHT POLE BASE SHEAR .35 K SEISMIC LOAD OCCUPANCY GROUP II le 1.0 Ss 0.208 w/ ELEC REQUIREMENTS S1 0.069 2' - 0" MIN, CONFIRM SITE CLASS D (DEFAULT) 4000 PSI CONC Sds 0.222 Sd1 0.110 SEISMIC DESIGN CATEGORY B STRUCTURAL SYSTEM INVERTED PENDULUM BASE SHEAR LIGHT POLE 0.2 K (8) #5 V EQ SPACED 4. SOIL BEARING CAPACITY ARE BASED ON THE PRESUMPTIVE LOAD-BEARING VALUES PROVIDED IN TABLE 1806.2 IN THE IBC AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT TIME OF CONSTRUCTION BY A GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER LICENSED IN THE PROJECT STATE. IF MINIMUM 4' - 6" MIN BELOW GRADE BEARING CAPACITY IS FOUND TO BE LESS THAN 1,500 PSF FOR GRAVITY AND 100 PSF/FT FOR LATERAL, THE STRUCTURAL ENGINEER SHALL BE NOTIFIED AND LIGHT POLE FOUNDATION DESIGN W ILL BE REVISED IF NECESSARY. 5. ALL CONCRETE W ORK SHALL CONFORM TO ACI 318-14. 6. CONCRETE SHALL HAVE THE FOLLOW ING PROPERTIES: ELEC CONDUIT 1. CONCRETE CATEGORY : F2 (ACI 318-14) COORD w/ ELEC 2. 28 DAY COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH F'c = 4,000 PSI AT 28 DAYS 3. NORMAL W EIGHT (145 PCF) 4. MAXIMUM W /C RATIO = 0.40 5. MAXIMUM AGGREGATE SIZE - 3/4" 6. ENTRAINED AIR = 6% ± 1% 7. SLUMP = 4" ± 1" 8. NO CALCIUM CHLORIDE SHALL BE ALLOW ED #3 x 1' - 6" OD CIRCULAR 7. SUBMIT CONCRETE MIX TO EOR FOR REVIEW PRIOR TO POURING. TIES w/ STD HK EA END 8. REINFORCING BARS SHALL CONFORM TO ASTM A615 GRADE 60. AT 10" OC MAX Seal/Signature PROVIDE GROUNDING W IRE CLR 3" COORD w/ ELEC 2' - 0" Ø ANCHOR ROD PATTERN, SEE LIGHT POLE MFR Project Name 03/27/2020 P N LA (8) #5 VERT, EQ BANK OF AMERICA - University ELP SPACED 223-13649-00 6" M I PROTOTYPE LAYOUT 3" CLR #3 x 1' - 6" OD CIRCULAR ALL SIDES CAD File Name TIES w/ STD HK EA END AT 10" OC MAX Description GENERAL NOTES AND LIGHT POLE FOUNDATION DETAIL Scale NOTES: 1. SEE ELECTRICAL FOR LIGHT POLE LOCATIONS. 1 LIGHT POLE FOUNDATION DETAIL S01.01 1" = 1'-0" S01.01 Preliminary Discussion 217 5th Street SW – Restore 1865 house, raze outbuildings. IPP (Fifeville) Mitch Willey Submittal Components (linked): • Staff Report City of Charlottesville Board of Architectural Review Staff Memo September 15, 2020 Preliminary Discussion Barksdale-Coles House 217 5th Street SW, TMP 290066000 Individually Protected Property Applicant: Mitch Willey Rehabilitation/Restoration of historic house; raze outbuildings and construct new. Background Year Built: c1854-1865 – Primary structure District: IPP Status: Contributing The Barksdale-Coles-Hailstock house is a two-story, three-bay, stuccoed vernacular dwelling with a gabled roof and ornate bargeboard [also called a vergeboard]. Behind the house are three single- story structures—a garage and two dwellings, all believed to have been constructed in the 1940s or 1950s. The entire parcel is an IPP. The original house and the two small dwellings are contributing; the garage is not. Prior BAR Reviews None Application No submittal. See photos, maps, and historic surveys. Preliminary discussion regarding 217 5th Street SW.  Restore/rehabilitate the original, c1860s house. Landscape the front yard and replace the crumbling concrete walkway with a more authentic treatment. The landscaping would be simple but would create a much more welcoming façade and street presence. Replace the existing fencing with something more attractive but simple. 217 5th St SW Prelim Disc – 9 Sept 2020 1  Demolish the three outbuildings and construct new, two story structures that are roughly equivalent to the existing footprints, with similar setbacks and locations.  Also behind the original house, construct two small residential buildings with a footprint of approximately 768 square feet each, a small lap pool and surrounding garden area Discussion Primary question from the applicant is whether or not the BAR would consider a request to raze the three, nod-twentieth century outbuildings as part of a project that redevelops the site and restores/rehabilitates the c1860s dwelling. This is a preliminary discussion, no BAR action is required; however, by consensus, the BAR may express an opinion about the project as presented. (For example, the BAR might express consensus support for elements of the project, such as its scale and massing.) Such comments will not constitute a formal motion and the result will have no legal bearing, nor will it represent an incremental decision on the required CoA. There are two key objectives of a preliminary discussion: Introduce the project to the BAR; and allow the applicant and the BAR to establish what is necessary for a successful final submittal. That is, a final submittal that is complete and provides the information necessary for the BAR to evaluate the project using the ADC District Design Guidelines and related review criteria. In response to any questions from the applicant and/or for any recommendations to the applicant, the BAR should rely on the germane sections of the ADC District Design Guidelines and related review criteria. Demolition: For demolition, the review criteria is found in Sec. 34-278. - Standards for considering demolitions. New Construction: While elements of other chapters may be relevant, staff recommends that the BAR refer to the criteria in Chapter II--Site Design and Elements and Chapter III--New Construction and Additions. 217 5th St SW: History (Draft) John T. Barksdale bought property in 1854 (Alb Co DB 53, Pg 478). The house was built in 1865— or at least between 1854 and 1865. (From the historic survey, based on tax records.) The house is on the Virginia Landmarks Register (VLR) and National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) as a contributing structure to the Fifeville and Tonsler Neighborhoods Historic District. We cannot know if Barksdale (1813-1879) ever lived in the house; in fact, it is doubtful he did. In the 1850, 1860 and 1870 censuses, he is white, lives in Albemarle, and reports a high level of wealth. He is buried in the family cemetery on Adventure Farm, near the Charlottesville Airport. 1860 US Census: John L. Coles, Black, a carpenter, born in 1837, living with his wife (Priscilla), infant son (Charley), and a 12-year-old boy (John Cogbell. Priscilla’s maiden name is Anna Priscilla Cogbill, also Coghill.). That he was included in the 1860 Census indicates he and his family were Free Blacks. 217 5th St SW Prelim Disc – 9 Sept 2020 2 1867: Barksdale sold the property to John L. Coles (1837-1905). Coles is known as a builder, so it is reasonable to believe that he constructed the house. 1870 US Census: John Coles, Priscilla, live here with five children. 1880 US Census: John Coles, Priscilla, live with nine children. 1900 US Census: John Coles, Priscilla and two daughters (Lizzie and Eva) lives at 217 5th Street, SW, which he owns “free” with no mortgage. Priscilla is listed as having had 11 children, with nine still living. In 1905, John Coles dies and is buried at Daughter of Zion Cemetery. 1928: RH (Richard Henry) Hailstock purchases the property. 1930 US Census: RH Hailstock is Black, born c1892, lives in the house with his wife, a son and daughter, and three men listed as “Roomer[s].” His occupation is a shoemaker who owns his own store. Per the 1931 City Directory, he owns Midway Shoe Store at 299 West Main. In the 1936 City Directory, the store is not listed and RH is listed as Rev[erend] Richard Hailstock. 1840 US Census: Hailstock listed is a government-employed Play Ground Director, and resides in the house with his wife and two sons. Note on the construction dates for the two c1940s/1950s dwellngs: The 1958 Sanborn Map (below) indicates on one parcel the original house and, behind it, a garage and a small dwelling (217-1/2). Just south, on a separate parcel is a single-story dwelling (213-1/2), which is now within the modern parcel boundary. The 1940 Census lists no boarders residing at 217 and no listing for 217-1/2 or 213-1/2, suggesting the two small dwellings did not exist until after 1940. 1983: Property is sold by RH Hailstock’s daughter-in-law, Catherin Hailstock. 217 5th St SW Prelim Disc – 9 Sept 2020 3 Suggested Motions For a preliminary discussion, the BAR cannot take action on a formal motion. 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 ADC District and IPP Ordinance Sec. 34-278. - Standards for considering demolitions. The following factors shall be considered in determining whether or not to permit the moving, removing, encapsulation or demolition, in whole or in part, of a contributing structure or protected property: (a) The historic, architectural or cultural significance, if any, of the specific structure or property, including, without limitation: (1) The age of the structure or property; (2) Whether it has been designated a National Historic Landmark, listed on the National Register of Historic Places, or listed on the Virginia Landmarks Register; (3) Whether, and to what extent, the building or structure is associated with an historic person, architect or master craftsman, or with an historic event; (4) Whether the building or structure, or any of its features, represent an infrequent or the first or last remaining example within the city of a particular architectural style or feature; (5) Whether the building or structure is of such old or distinctive design, texture or material that it could not be reproduced, or could be reproduced only with great difficulty; and 217 5th St SW Prelim Disc – 9 Sept 2020 4 (6) The degree to which distinguishing characteristics, qualities, features or materials remain; (b) Whether, and to what extent, a contributing structure is linked, historically or aesthetically, to other buildings or structures within an existing major design control district, or is one (1) of a group of properties within such a district whose concentration or continuity possesses greater significance than many of its component buildings and structures. (c) The overall condition and structural integrity of the building or structure, as indicated by studies prepared by a qualified professional engineer and provided by the applicant or other information provided to the board; (d) Whether, and to what extent, the applicant proposes means, methods or plans for moving, removing or demolishing the structure or property that preserves portions, features or materials that are significant to the property's historic, architectural or cultural value; and (e) Any applicable provisions of the city's design guidelines (see section 34-288(6). (9-15-03(3)) Pertinent ADC District and IPP Design Guidelines Chapter II – Site Design and Elements Chapter III – New Construction and Additions Checklist from section 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 217 5th St SW Prelim Disc – 9 Sept 2020 5 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. Chapter 7 – Demolition and Moving 217 5th St SW Prelim Disc – 9 Sept 2020 6 From National Register nomination for Fifeville HD c1984 July 2020 July 2020 City survey—1984 Dwelling c1940s/50s Approximate parcel boundary Garage c1940s/50s Dwelling c1940s/50s Barksdale-Coles House c1854-1865 217 5th Street SW — Looking northwest Approximate parcel boundary Dwelling c1940s/50s Dwelling c1940s/50s Garage c1940s/50s Barksdale-Coles House c1854-1865 217 5th Street SW — Looking southwest Dwelling c1940s/50s Barksdale-Coles House c1854-1865 Dwelling c1940s/50s Garage c1940s/50s Approximate parcel boundary 217 5th Street SW — Looking southeast Sanborn Map 1907 Sanborn Map 1920 Sanborn Map c 1958 Base map is 1929. Inserted “patch” indicates improvements built AFTER 1929. Sanborn Map c 1968 Preliminary Discussion 605 Preston Place – New apartment building. IPP and Rugby Road/University Circle/Venable Neighborhood ADC District Kevin Riddle, Mitchell Matthews Architects and Planners Submittal Components (linked):  Staff Report  Submittal City of Charlottesville Board of Architectural Review Staff Memo September 15, 2020 Preliminary Discussion on Requested Certificate of Appropriateness 605 Preston Place Tax Parcel 050111000 Owner: Neighborhood Investment – PC, LP Applicant: Kevin Riddle, Mitchel Matthews Architects Background Year Built: 1857 District: Rugby Road-University Circle-Venable Neighborhood ADC Status: Individually Protected Property Also known as Wyndhurst, 605 Preston Place was the manor house of the 100-acre farm that is now the Preston Heights section of the city. It is a typical 2-story, 3-bay, double-pile white weatherboard-clad house with Greek Revival details. Prior BAR Reviews (See appendix) Application  Submittal: Mitchel Matthews Architects drawings and photographs for 605 Preston Place, Preliminary BAR Review, dated September 2020: Cover; SK-44; Survey of Existing Conditions; Plan; View West; View SW; View SE; SK-115; SK-116; SK-111; and SK 109. Proposed construction of apartment building, including parking, landscaping and site improvements. Discussion This is a preliminary discussion, no BAR action is required; however, by consensus, the BAR may express an opinion about the project as presented. (For example, the BAR might express consensus support for elements of the project, such as its scale and massing.) Such comments 605 Preston Place Prelim Discussion 9 Sept 2020 1 will not constitute a formal motion and the result will have no legal bearing, nor will it represent an incremental decision on the required CoA. There are two key objectives of a preliminary discussion: Introduce the project to the BAR; and allow the applicant and the BAR to establish what is necessary for a successful final submittal. That is, a final submittal that is complete and provides the information necessary for the BAR to evaluate the project using the ADC District Design Guidelines and related review criteria. In response to any questions from the applicant and/or for any recommendations to the applicant, the BAR should rely on the germane sections of the ADC District Design Guidelines and related review criteria. While elements of other chapters may be relevant, staff recommends that the BAR refer to the criteria in Chapter II--Site Design and Elements and Chapter III--New Construction and Additions. Of particular assistance, as a checklist for the preliminary discussion, are the criteria for Additions in Chapter III: 1) Function and Size 2) Location 3) Design 4) Replication of Style 5) Materials and Features 6) Attachment to Existing Building Suggested Motions For a preliminary discussion, the BAR cannot take action on a formal motion. Criteria, Standards, and Guidelines Relevant Code provision for Preliminary Discussion Sec. 34-282. - Application procedures. (c) A pre-application conference with the entire BAR is mandatory for the following activities proposed within a major design control district: (4) Development having a projected construction cost of three hundred fifty thousand dollars ($350,000.00) or more; 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; 605 Preston Place Prelim Discussion 9 Sept 2020 2 (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 ADC District Design Guidelines Chapter II – Site Design and Elements Chapter III – New Construction and Additions Checklist from section 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. 605 Preston Place Prelim Discussion 9 Sept 2020 3 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. Appendix Prior BAR Reviews August 14, 2017 – BAR approved moving [to 506-512 Preston Place] the house, porch, chimneys, and east side additions located at 605 Preston Avenue and demolition of the rear additions. October 17, 2017 – BAR moved to find that the proposed renovations satisfy the BAR’s criteria and guidelines and are compatible with this property and other properties in the Rugby Road- University Circle-Venable ADC district, and that the BAR approves the application as submitted. The BAR would encourage zoning to look into the 50 foot setback, because the BAR believes it would be a more successful design with a back porch. June 18, 2019 – Request to construct a 25-space parking lot in the rear yard of the historic structure. The BAR moved to accept the applicant’s request for deferral (9-0). October 15, 2019 – BAR denied CoA request to construct parking lot in the rear yard of the historic structure. (December 2019 – Council denied applicant appeal.) http://weblink.charlottesville.org/public/0/edoc/791778/2019- 10_605%20Preston%20Place_BAR.pdf 605 Preston Place Prelim Discussion 9 Sept 2020 4 605 PRESTON PLACE C H A R L O T T E S V I L L E , V A PRELIMINARY BAR REVIEW M I T C H E L L M AT T H E W S A R C H I T E C T S S e pte m be r, 2020 RE IN SS OG FT PR A DR Location 605 Preston Place Area 0.396 acres (17,250 SF) Zone R-3H R-1UH Residential Units up to 21 DUA (by right) Parking Two bedroom apt. or smaller: AD 1 space RO Three or Four bedroom apt.: 2 spaces L Y P GB Height 45 feet (max) N R-3H R-3H TO RU ES R-3H Setbacks 25 feet (average of neighbor- R (front) ing properties) P PL 0.396 acres Setbacks 1 ft per 2 ft height (10’ min) N (side) TO ES Setbacks na (double frontage lot - no PR (rear) rear yard) GR AD E Y AV AV E LL NW BE CA R-3H ST th 17 605 PRESTON PL M I T C H E L L / M AT T H E W S Charlot t e s v i lle VA ZONING SUMMARY Architects & Planners SK-44 09.04.2020 All grades, counts and quantities are approximate and will change as design proceeds. 434.979.7550 © 2020 605 PRESTON PL M I T C H E L L / M AT T H E W S Charlot t e s v i lle VA SURVEY EXISTING CONDITIONS Architects & Planners 09.04.2020 All grades, counts and quantities are approximate and will change as design proceeds. 434.979.7550 © 2020 605 PRESTON PL M I T C H E L L / M AT T H E W S Charlot t e s v i lle VA VIEW WEST EXISTING CONDITIONS Architects & Planners 09.04.2020 All grades, counts and quantities are approximate and will change as design proceeds. 434.979.7550 © 2020 605 PRESTON PL M I T C H E L L / M AT T H E W S Charlot t e s v i lle VA VIEW SW EXISTING CONDITIONS Architects & Planners 09.04.2020 All grades, counts and quantities are approximate and will change as design proceeds. 434.979.7550 © 2020 605 PRESTON PL M I T C H E L L / M AT T H E W S Charlot t e s v i lle VA VIEW SE EXISTING CONDITIONS Architects & Planners 09.04.2020 All grades, counts and quantities are approximate and will change as design proceeds. 434.979.7550 © 2020 access The introduction of an alley at the south of the site serves multiple purposes: • At a utility level, it accesses required parking spaces. • Because it carries only occasional vehicular traffic, the connection it creates across the circle can be shared with pedestrians, cyclists and wheelchair users. • With a one-way path of travel that imitates Preston Place’s, it requires drivers to enter at the west end and exit at the east end-- reducing the frequency of vehicular travel around the entire circle. • It revives and strengthens the perception of Wyndhurst’s original frontage. The early twentieth construction of the Preston Court Apartments (1601 Grady Ave.) stranded the house to some extent, blocking its original face on Grady Avenue. With this development, an impression was created that the house is turned sideways to its new address on Preston Place. Building the new alley—combined with a thoughtful hardscape of steps and seating connecting the front porch to the alley—has the potential to restore a public face to the historic house. Instead of looking at the back of an apartment building, it acquires a new street with which to engage. Yet simultaneously it retains its unique—and interesting—position relative to Preston Place. In other words, the story of the neighborhood’s history that Wyndhurst’s funky orientation tells is not erased or disguised. Rather, the original front yard is reconsidered within its current confines. In this alternative, instead of a grassy, nondescript lawn lacking public access, the house gains a new thoroughfare and purposeful design. Neighbors and passersby have renewed access to the house, encouraged to see it from a new perspective. plantings Reasonable efforts will be made to preserve the two extraordinary Cedar trees at the southwest right-of-way adjacent to Preston Place. Landscape design is still underway, but it will include new plantings near both street frontages and around the historic house, buffering and enhancing paths of travel. architecture In this proposal we embrace distinction between old and new. Wyndhurst is singular. So, too, are the Preston Court Apartments. The proposed building, while located in close proximity to these historic structures, is not an addition to either of them. We intend for it to read as the independent building it is. We intend for these three buildings of different eras and sensibilities-- Wynhurst of the 1850’s, the Preston Court Apartments of the 1920’s and the proposed building of the 2020’s-- to coexist together in a new precinct created by the alley connection. Just as many houses in the surrounding circle-- dating from different time periods, reflecting different design traditions-- have contributed to an evolving architectural assemblage, so we expect the proposed building and landscaping to add to the neighborhood. Instead of deferring to certain forms, facades and palettes, we propose that the broader essential strengths of the nearby architecture—such as robust materials, distinctive entries, prominent exterior porches and balconies—are the things worth including in the new building. The exemplary architectural characteristics of surrounding buildings-- rather than their particular details-- influence the concept proposed here. parking Proposed parking does not occupy front yards. Most spaces are relegated to the site interior and are not highly visible from Preston Place. 605 PRESTON PL M I T C H E L L / M AT T H E W S Charlot t e s v i lle VA DESIGN INTENT Architects & Planners SK-115 09.04.2020 All grades, counts and quantities are approximate and will change as design proceeds. 434.979.7550 © 2020 605 PRESTON PL M I T C H E L L / M AT T H E W S Charlot t e s v i lle VA EXAMPLES BUILDINGS OF DIFFERENT ERAS COEXISTING Architects & Planners SK-116 09.04.2020 All grades, counts and quantities are approximate and will change as design proceeds. 434.979.7550 © 2020 Location 605 Preston Place Area 0.396 acres (17,250 SF) Zone R-3H CONCEPT DATA Residential Units 8 apartments 13 15 STORIES Proposed 6 (four-bedroom) +586 +587 +588 +589 2 FLOORS 2+inBASEMENT Wyndhurst 12 side yard 14 4 in proposed building UNITS 1 (three-bedroom) 6 - 4 BEDROOM 1 (two-bedroom) yard 1 - 3 BEDROOM 586 587 E 588 10' x 10'-6" 10' x 10'-6" 10' x 10'-6" L AC 1 - 2 BEDROOM front PRESTON PLACE Parking 15 spaces proposed 1,150 sq ft apt B N P cl PROPOSED BUILDING patio WYNDHURST BEDS 15 spaces required p F 29 BEDS STO 590 FF mech w/d cl 596.6 598.4 FF 40 sq ft w/d 10' x 10'-4" Height 34 feet (approximate) PARKING PRE apt A 828 sq ft 15 SPACES REQUIRED 8'-11" x 10'-4" storage? Setbacks 25 feet (average of neighbor- 593 sprinkler? recy. tr (front) ing properties) bikes? 589 592 tr 63 sq ft tr tr 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Setbacks tr tr 1 ft per 2 ft height (10’ min) HC (side) edge of building above side yard Setbacks na (double frontage lot - no utility pole to be relocated (2) transformers (rear) rear yard) to be relocated ONE WAY ONE WAY ONE WAY ONE WAY 20' 20' +587 +588 +589 +590 +591 JOINT ACCESS EASEMENT JOINT ACCESS EASEMENT 9 10 11 c c c - 111 S K SITE PLAN 605 PRESTON PL & BASEMENT SITE MITCHELL / M AT T H PLAN EWS Charlot t e s v i lle VA SITE PLAN CONCEPT Architects & Planners SK-111 SCALE: 1" = 20' 0 10' 20' 40' All grades, counts and quantities are approximate and will change as design proceeds. MIT CHELL / MATTHEWS 434.979.7550 © 2020 © 2020 09.04.2020 ARCHITECTS & PLA NNERS FORMATION IS APPROXIMATE AND SUBJECT TO CHA NGE CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA 434-979-7550 605 PRESTON PL M I T C H E L L / M AT T H E W S Charlot t e s v i lle VA SITE PLAN SE CORNER Architects & Planners SK-109 09.04.2020 All grades, counts and quantities are approximate and will change as design proceeds. 434.979.7550 © 2020 Preliminary Discussion 106 Oakhurst Circle – Renovate existing residence, construct addition. Oakhurst-Gildersleeve ADC District Patrick Farley, Patrick Farley Architect Submittal Components (linked):  Staff Report  Submittal City of Charlottesville Board of Architectural Review Staff Memo September 15, 2020 Preliminary Discussion on Requested Certificate of Appropriateness 106 Oakhurst Circle, Tax Map Parcel 110005000 Oakhurst-Gildersleeve ADC District Owner: 106 Oakhurst Circle LLC Applicant: Patrick Farley Alterations and site work Background Year Built: 1922 District: The Corner ADC Status: Contributing Designed as a combination of Colonial Revival and Craftsman styles, this two-story dwelling has a gabled roof, stucco siding, overhanging eaves with exposed rafter ends, a pent roof between the first and second floor, an interior stuccoed chimney, a concrete stoop, and a central door sheltered by a gabled hood supported by brackets. Triple eight-by-eight casement windows are found on the first floor, while eight-over-eight-sash double-hung windows are used on the second floor and flank a central triple eight-by-eight casement bay window. French doors on the east side lead out to a patio. The house also includes a rear deck and a projecting rectangular one-story bay window supported by wooden brackets on the west end. (From the National Register nomination for the Oakhurst-Gildersleeve Neighborhood Historic District.) Prior BAR Reviews None Application  Submittal: Patrick Farley Architect submittal dated 14 August 2020: Narrative, photos, site plan, schematic plan, and renderings (15 pages). 106 Oakhurst Prelim Discussion – 9 Sept 2020 1 Preliminary discussion to review proposed alter the house into a two-family attached (duplex) dwelling. Site work to include a new driveway, which will require removal of the south porch and replacement with a shallower version. Remove and replace the existing rear deck (not original) and construct a new exterior space accessible to both dwelling units. Discussion This is a preliminary discussion, no BAR action is required; however, by consensus, the BAR may express an opinion about the project or elements of the project. Such comments will not constitute a formal motion and will have no legal bearing, nor will it represent an incremental decision on the required CoA. There are two key objectives of a preliminary discussion: Introduce the project to the BAR; and allow the applicant and the BAR to establish what is necessary for a successful final submittal. That is, a final submittal that is complete and provides the information necessary for the BAR to evaluate the project using the ADC District Design Guidelines and related review criteria. In response to questions from the applicant and/or for recommendations to the applicant, the BAR should rely on the germane sections of the ADC District Design Guidelines and related review criteria. While elements of other chapters may be relevant, staff recommends that the BAR refer to the criteria in Chapter II--Site Design and Elements, Chapter III--New Construction and Additions, and The BAR should also consider the building elements and details necessary to evaluate the project. Renderings and schematics communicates mass, scale, design and composition; however a complete application should include details and specific information about the projects materials and components. For example:  Measured drawings: Elevations, wall details, etc.  Roofing: Flat, hipped, etc. Metal, slate, asphalt. Flashing details.  Gutters/downspouts: Types, color, locations, etc.  Foundation.  Walls: Masonry, siding, stucco, etc.  Soffit, cornice, siding, and trim.  Color palette.  Doors and windows: Type, lite arrangement, glass spec, trim details, etc.  Porches and decks: Materials, railing and stair design, etc.  Landscaping/hardscaping: Grading, trees, low plants, paving materials, etc.  Lighting. Fixture cut sheets, lamping, etc. Suggested Motions For a preliminary discussion, the BAR cannot take action on a formal motion. Criteria, Standards, and Guidelines Relevant Code provision for Preliminary Discussion Sec. 34-282. - Application procedures. 106 Oakhurst Prelim Discussion – 9 Sept 2020 2 (c) A pre-application conference with the entire BAR is mandatory for the following activities proposed within a major design control district: … (4) Development having a projected construction cost of three hundred fifty thousand dollars ($350,000.00) or more; 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 ADC District Design Guidelines Chapter II – Site Design and Elements Chapter III – New Construction and Additions Checklist from section 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 106 Oakhurst Prelim Discussion – 9 Sept 2020 3 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. Chapter 4 – Rehabilitation 106 Oakhurst Prelim Discussion – 9 Sept 2020 4 106 Oakhurst Circle - Schematic DRAFT 14 August 2020 PROJECT NARRATIVE Vitals: The subject property was developed as a single family home in 1922. Arts & Crafts in character, its primary materials comprise stucco cladding, painted wood trim, shingle roof (in need of replacement) and a combination of single-glazed wood window types (casement & double-hung). The original porch to the south appears to have been covered as there is evidence of an attached second story porch structure; however, there are no available records describing the architecture. The current zoning is R2U, which would allow either single or two-family use. The property has been used as a student rental home since at least 1996 and contains 3 bedrooms & 2.5 baths. Current off-street parking is capable of accommodating 2 cars, stacked. Proposed Improvements We propose to re-develop the property as a two-family attached (duplex) dwelling, with a “front” and a “rear” unit, in concert with off-street parking that could accommodate 5 to 6 average-sized vehicles. Central to our site strategy is the installation of a new driveway connecting from the existing driveway, so as to avoid alteration and impact to the public right-of-way. This will entail removal of the south porch and replacement with a shallower version. With the overarching goal of bringing a 20th Century home into the 21st, the existing dwelling will be fully renovated inside and out, along the lines of a “deep energy retrofit”; the defining elements of which have yet to be fully determined, but could potentially follow “Passivhaus” protocols. We also intend to remove and replace the existing rear deck (not original) with a new common exterior space that is accessible to both dwelling units. In concert with a re-imagining of the front yard and vehicular access, a ramped walk will be integrated for accessibility to one of the two dwellings. The architecture The existing dwelling is proposed to undergo minimal architectural change. As the existing shingle roof areas have reached the end of their useful life, we propose to replace all with a standing seam metal system, which is partly driven by the aforementioned energy efficiency agenda, as well as reducing the maintenance cycle. And, as noted previously, the south porch is proposed to be replaced; aside from the driveway accommodation, we seek a more intimate exterior space at the main level in concert with a second floor balcony and roof canopy supported by wood brackets in keeping with the existing character. The addition (unit #2) is proposed to contain the “DNA” of the original home, while evincing a quiet modernity that reflects its sense of connection with a restored landscape. The materials palette will comprise synthetic stucco and aluminum-clad windows of a contemporary, low-profile. The dark blue-black finish of the existing accent trim will weave thru all trim, as well as the base of the new building. The roofing will be standing seam for uniformity throughout. Site ecology The existing landscape is defined by numerous mature White Oaks. However, the areas not currently in mowed lawn are primarily a mix of a few ornamentals (front yard) and a sloped rear yard slowly being overtaken by invasive non-native plants (English Ivy being dominant). Our site design entails removal of at least one large oak in the rear yard to facilitate off-street parking; however, we propose to atone for that loss partly by fully restoring the ecosystem to a native landscape, modeling an oak forest habitat. Ground covers and shrub layers will support the first trophic level of the food web, while new understory and additional canopy trees will increase overall breeding and nesting structure. The landscape goal is the site-at- large comprising three native garden spaces supporting the overarching agenda of biodiversity - - the entry yard, the central “tree court” and a restored rear yard of intense plantings, inclusive of a forest rain garden. Extending to the boundaries, the plan includes additional vegetated buffers via new shrubs and trees, as well as a “living fence” along the south boundary (108 Oakhurst). Related to this and our underlying stewardship goals, we are planning to remove the south porch in a “surgical” manner by saw-cutting the concrete top into masonry units that will then be re-purposed into the retaining wall required to resolved the grading at the new driveway. This will mitigate both the solid waste stream and the noise impact to those neighbors during the demolition phase. EXISTING DWELLING Introduction and Purpose Charlottesville’s Board of Architectural Review (BAR) staff prepared this guide to establish a standard review process for large developments in the City’s historic districts. This guide will inform applicants of the meetings, materials, and expectations necessary for a successful application. While most project can be reviewed, even approved, in a single BAR meeting, large-scale projects can require multiple BAR meetings for the board to provide critical design direction and to allow ample time for review and discussion of the complex applications. In the past, the BAR has granted multiple Certificates of Appropriateness (CoA) to individual projects. These “partial CoAs” would encompass discrete parts of a project (massing, fenestration, landscaping, etc. ). However, only a final CoA, granted when the BAR was satisfied with the disparate applications, allowed the issuuance of a building permit. The Charlottesville City Code (Code) makes no provisions for “partial CoAs” and the BAR must modify its approach to reviewing large-scale projects. . The City Attorney’s Office has instructed the BAR to grant a single CoA for each proposed large-scale project. The BAR staff drafted a revised process--described in the following guide-to accommodate the multiple meetings that may be necessary to for conferring the CoA for such projects. This single CoA shall be understood as representing satisfactory review of the elements required to apply for a Building Permit. It is also understood that some elements may be reviewed later under a separate CoA request. (For example, landscaping and signage.) These situations should be discussed and resolved early in the review process. Overview The BAR will review large-scale projects in three stages:  Preliminary Discussion, (pre-application conference per Sec. 34-282.b and c)  Preliminary Reviews  Final CoA Application. The BAR will make its decision on the requested CoA after this final stage, when a formal application is submitted. During the Preliminary Review stage, the BAR may take a vote to express a consensus opinion about the project, as presented. However, this vote will not be on a formal motion and the result will have no legal bearing, nor will it represent a decision on the required CoA. During the Preliminary Discussion phase)…. During the Preliminary Review stage, an applicant may present their project as many times as necessary. Generally, the BAR and n staff intend this Preliminary Review stage to encompass the bulk of deliberations. Once a formal application is submitted for a CoA, the BAR expects to be sufficiently familiar with the project. I: Preliminary Discussion The Code (Sec 34-282) requires a pre-application conference, or Preliminary Discussion, for developments having a projected construction cost of $350,000 or more. This informal consultation introduces the project to the BAR, and allows applicants and the BAR to discuss project goals and establish a review schedule for successful final submittal and approval of a CoA. Preliminary discussions will occur at the end of regular BAR meetings, generally held on the third Tuesday of each month. The following list outlines requirements and expectations for a Preliminary Discussion:  Applicant will notify BAR staff to request a Preliminary Discussion by 5:00 PM on the first Friday of a month. Staff has the discretion, in consultation with the BAR chair, to move a Preliminary Discussion to the following month, should the upcoming meeting’s agenda warrant it. .  Applicant will submit a digital copy of the proposed project to BAR staff by 5:00 PM on the second Thursday of a month. This digital copy will be circulated to BAR members and posted for public accessibility on the City’ website.  If the applicant revises this submittal after the second Thursday deadline, they must bring paper copies to circulate at the BAR meeting. However, the BAR will review such late revisions at their discretion. ( Applicant will also provide for staff a digital copy of the revisions.)  Staff will not prepare staff report for a Preliminary Discussion.  There will be no fee or formal application form required for a Preliminary Discussion.  The item will be noted on the BAR meeting agenda, however, there will be no formal public notification as is required for a formal CoA application (see Sec. 34-284). II: Preliminary Review The Preliminary Review stage will encompass most discussions and review of proposed large developments. Applicants can utilize as many Preliminary Review meetings with the BAR as necessary; the BAR encourages each applicant to break the review up as best suits the individual project. For example:  Height, Massing and Scale  Building Footprint and Orientation  Fenestration  Roof Form  Primary Exterior Materials  Landscaping  Lighting During this stage, the applicant must indicate any elements that may be submitted later for review under a separate CoA request--landscaping, signage, etc. In consultation with City staff, the BAR will determine if, and for what elements, this will be allowed. At the end of a Preliminary Review meeting, the BAR may take a non-binding vote to express support, opposition, or even questions and concerns regarding the project’s progress. These will not represent approval or even endorsement of the CoA, but will represent the BAR’s opinion on the project, relative to preparing the project for formal submittal. While such votes carry no legal bearing, BAR members are expected to express their opinions—both individually and collectively--in good faith as a project advances through the Preliminary Review stage. In the event of changes to the BAR membership, new members will be expected to respect the positions collectively stated by the prior BAR. Requirements and expectations for a Preliminary Review:  Applicant will submit a Preliminary Review application form [TBD] (found on the City website), 10 paper copies of the materials for review as well as a digital copy to Neighborhood Development Services, three weeks prior to the day of the meeting, by 3:30 PM. The digital copy will be posted on the City’s website.  Though not legally mandated, staff guarantees that the Preliminary Review will occur at a BAR meeting within 60 days of the submission deadline.  If the applicant revises the submitted materials after the deadline, they will submit paper copies and a digital copy of the revisions to staff by 5:00 PM a week prior to the day of the meeting. Revisions submitted after this date (including at the meeting) will be considered at the discretion of the BAR. will  Staff will not prepare a staff report for the Preliminary Review, but will prepare a summary of the materials submitted and offer initial, brief comments, as needed.  There will be no fee required for a Preliminary Review.  The item will be noted on the BAR meeting agenda, however, there will be no formal public notification as is required for a formal CoA application (see Sec. 34-284). Staff will provide public notice by emailing the appropriate neighborhood association, as recognized by the City, and by posting a sign at the site. III: Final CoA Application Once an applicant has received sufficient feedback through the Preliminary Review process, they may submit a final application for a CoA. This final review will synthesize feedback and determinations from the Preliminary Review meetings. At the end of deliberations, the BAR will vote whether to approve a CoA. This CoA will represent the BAR’s definitive support of the project. Requirements and expectations for a Final Review will follow the provisions of Sec. 34-282 and Sec. 34-284.  Applicant will submit a CoA application form (found on the City website), 10 paper copies of the application, and a digital copy to Neighborhood Development Servicesthree weeks prior to the day of the meeting, by 3:30 PM. The digital copy will be posted on the City’s website.  Review of a Final CoA Application will occur within 60 days of submission.  If the applicant later revises the materials submitted, they must submit paper copies and a digital copy of the revisions to staff by 5:00 PM a week prior to the day of the meeting.  Staff will prepare a staff report, with specific feedback and references to the Design Guidelines. This staff report will be circulated to BAR members, the applicant, and will be posted on the City website.  The review of a Final CoA Application has applicable fees, as clarified in the application form. Staff will provide public notice through letters mailed to adjacent property owners and a sign posted at the site. The review will also be listed on the monthly meeting agenda, available on the City website. All actions of the BAR shall comply with Sec. 34-285. - Approval or denial of applications by BAR and Sec. 34-288. - Responsibilities of BAR. Appeals of BAR actions shall comply with Sec. 34-286. - City council appeals. Summary The following list highlights key differences between the existing review process and the new steps:  The BAR will now only grant one CoA for each project. This single CoA shall be understood as representing satisfactory review of the elements required to apply for a Building Permit.  It is also understood that some elements may be reviewed later under a separate CoA request. These matters will be resolved during the Preliminary Review process.  Earlier votes during the Preliminary Review stage have no legal bearing and will not function as CoAs.  Preliminary Reviews will have no submission fees.  Staff will not prepare staff reports for Preliminary Reviews, but will complete an inventory form explaining the contents of each submission.  Staff will not mail letters to adjacent property owners to announce Preliminary Reviews. Staff will contact the applicable neighborhood association and will post signs at the site. Staff will continue to mail letters to adjacent property owners to announce final reviews for CoAs.  Minor revisions to the approved CoA will be treated as ….. (should there be a fee and separate application? Or, as has been the done, is it reviewed with no fee required?) In the event of the CoA review running concurrent with a Special Use Permit request…. Note: For a CoA to be granted, the Charlottesville City Code only requires a Preliminary Discussion and a formal application. Preliminary Reviews are not mandated. An applicant may, after the required Preliminary Discussion, submit an application for a final CoA. The BAR must take action within 60 days of the submittal deadline. However, to provide the time to fully vet and review a complex project—and to work towards a more complete final submittal that--–the BAR and staff encourage applicants to utilize the Preliminary Review stage as an efficient and productive step in the CoA approval process..