HomeMy Public PortalAbout2014 02 19 BAR Meeting MinutesLEESBURG BOARD OFARCHITECTURAL REVIEW
BUSINESS MEETING MINUTES
Wednesday, 19 February, 2014
Town Hall, 25 West Market Street
Council Chamber
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Edward Kiley, Vice Chairman Paul Reimers, Parliamentarian
Dale Goodson, Richard Koochagian, Teresa Minchew, Dieter Meyer and
Planning Commission Representative Milton Herd
MEMBERS ABSENT: Mark Malloy and Council Representative Tom Dunn
STAFF: Deputy Town Attorney Barbara Notar, Zoning Administrator & Acting
Preservation Planner Christopher Murphy, and Planning & Zoning
Assistant Deborah Parry
Call to Order and Roll Call
Chairman Kiley called the meeting to order at 6:59 pm, noted attendance and determined that a quorum
was present.
Adoption of the Meeting Agenda
Mr. Kiley noted there are no minutes for approval; therefore, that item should be stricken from the
agenda.
On a motion by Mr. Meyer, seconded by Ms. Minchew, the amended meeting agenda was adopted by a
6 -0 -1 (Malloy absent) vote.
BAR Member Disclosures
Chairman Kiley disclosed that his wife has done extensive business with Mr. Carroll, the owner /applicant
for TLHP- 2013 -0178 and TLHP- 2013 -0129, through her catering and special event planning business.
He added that Mr. Carroll's parents are his neighbors; however, he does not feel that either of these
matters will impact his ability to reach a decision for the cases before the Board.
Ms. Notar clarified that the business dealings Chairman Kiley's wife has had with Mr. Carroll has not
exceeded $10,000 per year.
Public Comment and Presentations
None
Consent Agenda
There was no consent agenda.
Petitioners
There were no petitioners.
Public Hearings on New Cases in the H -1 Overlay District
a. TLHP- 2013 -0178, 2C Loudoun Street (R -6 /1-1-1 Overlay District). Applicant: Mike Carroll,
Leesburg Beer Company. Project: Installation of sign at rear entrance (facing Pearson's Walk)
Chairman Kiley opened the public hearing at 7:01 pm.
Mr. Murphy outlined the proposal to install two 10 square foot signs on the mansard roof above the
entrance to the restaurant off the Pearson's Walk entry with one facing the Town garage and the
other is facing Pearson's Walk. He stated the Zoning Ordinance allows two signs per business;
however, Leesburg Beer Company currently has two signs in the front and one sign in the rear, which
BOARD OFARCHITECTURAL REVIEW
BUSINESS MEETING MINUTES
19 February, 2014
Page 2 of 4
was supposed to be removed as a condition of approval for the window sign on the front fagade. He
stated the Historic District Guidelines allow the Board to increase or decrease the number of signs
allowed per businesses as appropriate. Further, he stated staff finds that the proposal for roof signs
is not appropriate nor in keeping with the historic character of the district and recommends that two
window signs be approved for the rear entrance with details to be approved by staff and with the
reiterated condition that the existing rear porch sign be removed.
Mr. Goodson clarified staff finds the signs as submitted to be approvable as window signs.
Mr. Meyer stated the false mansard roof in this case reads more like a wall and asked if there was
language in the Zoning Ordinance or Design Guidelines that speaks as to how this would be read as
a roof verses a canted wall.
Mr. Murphy stated the Design Guidelines include illustrations of roof types and staff's interpretation
from reading the guidelines is that this is a mansard roof. He stated the Zoning Ordinance does
permit signs to be mounted on mansard roofs; however, it is staff's opinion from reviewing the Design
Guidelines that roof signs are not appropriate in the Old and Historic District. Further, he the Board
has discretion as to whether it is more appropriate to consider this a mansard roof or canted wall.
Vice Chairman Reimers verified this entrance addition to the structure is not a contributing resource.
Further, he concurred with Mr. Meyer's statement that the false mansard roof reads as a canted wall.
The applicant's representative, Dave Payne of Signs by Dave, was present.
Ms. Minchew asked if Mr. Payne would be amenable to staff's proposal.
Mr. Payne stated he could compromise on a window sign for the Pearson's Walk fagade; however,
the sign proposed for the Town garage fagade should be elevated given a window sign would be
hidden by the parked cars in that area.
Ms. Minchew verified staff would find a wall sign on the fagade facing the garage to be appropriate if
the Board were to find that the stated mansard roof is truly a canted wall.
Mr. Goodson asked if the sign would be mounted flat or lifted off the wall on a bracket.
Mr. Payne stated he would like the sign on the Pearson's Walk side to be flat with the roof; however,
he could support either a flat or bracket mounted sign at a 90 degree angle on the other fagade.
Ms. Minchew stated she could support the application as proposed given this is not a true mansard
roof and there would be no negative impact on the historic district by virtue of its positioning.
Mr. Goodson concurred with the finding that this is not a true mansard and suggested a window sign
for the Pearson's Walk fagade. Further, he verified the applicant's support of this proposal.
Mr. Meyer stated he could support mounting the signs to the canted roof; however, he suggested the
signs be mounted at the vertical angle versus flat to the wall. Further, he stated a window sign on the
Pearson's Walk fagade would require that the proposed sign be significantly smaller to fit the space.
The petitioners section was opened at 7:15pm.
There were no petitioners and the public hearing was closed at 7:15pm.
Mr. Koochagian stated it is important that the motion include justification for the allowance of four
signs for this business.
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING • 25 WEST MARKET STREET • LEESBURG, VIRGINIA 20176
Telephone 703.771.2765 • Fax 703.771.2724 • www.leesburgva.gov /planning
BOARD OFARCHITECTURAL REVIEW
BUSINESS MEETING MINUTES
19 February, 2014
Page 3 of 4
Mr. Reimers stated the finding for the additional signs is that the alley is a second front fagade for this
structure which makes the additional signs appropriate.
Ms. Minchew stated the finding for two additional signs on this fagade should also include the siting of
the entrance in that the signs will not be seen from the front fagade on Loudoun Street. She stated
this is an unusual situation and the Board might not necessarily agree to allow two additional signs
under other circumstances.
There was further discussion regarding the mounting bracket for the sign, if it is to sit at an angle, and
how to minimize the impact of the visible metal bracket.
Mr. Koochagian noted the door is off center on the Pearson' Walk fagade and asked if the sign is
proposed to be centered on the shingles or over the door.
Mr. Payne stated he would likely want to center the sign on the shingles
Mr. Goodson reiterated his suggestion that the sign be centered on the glass door for the Pearson's
Walk fagade. He noted an elevated sign on this fagade would not be visible to patrons on the walk
and a window sign on the glass would better mark the entrance.
There was consensus for moving the sign on this fagade to the glass and further discussion as to
whether placement would be more appropriate on the transom above the door, on the door or
suspended above the door.
Mr. Payne asked that the Board allow flexibility for the sign on the Pearson's Walk fagade to be
placed either on the door or transom above. Further, he stated he would prefer to mount the wall sign
on the garage side flat versus mounting at an angle as discussed by the Board.
Vice Chairman Reimers moved that TLHP- 2013 -0178 and TLHP- 2013 -0179 be approved subject to
the following findings and conditions:
1. The sign facing the Town garage is approved as proposed.
2. The sign on the Pearson's walk side will be moved off the siding and sized to fit either in the
transom over the door or on the door.
3. The sign placement is appropriate in that the structure has a flat roof with canted wall versus
a true mansard roof.
Mr. Koochagian offered a friendly amendment that the sign placed on the glass transom or door will
be a decal. Further, he stated an additional finding should state that the allowance of four signs, two
in front along Loudoun Street and two in the rear for this business is appropriate in that the business
has secondary entrance in the rear.
Vice Chairman Reimers accepted Mr. Koochagian's amendments and added the condition that the
existing sign on the rear porch will be removed.
Mr. Meyer proposed a friendly amendment to add that the secondary entrance is significantly
removed from the main entrance and reads as a completely different location.
Vice Chairman Reimers accepted Mr. Meyer's amendment.
The motion was seconded by Ms. Minchew and approved by a 6 -0 -1 vote (Malloy absent).
b. TLHP- 2013 -0179, 2C Loudoun Street SW (B -1/1-11-1 Overlay District). Applicant: Mike Carroll,
Leesburg Beer Company. Project: Installation of a sign at rear entrance (facing the Town
Parking Garage)
See Discussion Above.
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING • 25 WEST MARKET STREET • LEESBURG, VIRGINIA 20176
Telephone 703.771.2765 • Fax 703.771.2724 • www.leesburgva.gov /planning
BOARD OFARCHITECTURAL REVIEW
BUSINESS MEETING MINUTES
19 February, 2014
Administrative Agenda
Administrative Approvals of COAs (For Information Only)
a. TLHP- 2014 -0002 15C Loudoun St SW — Projecting Sign
b. TLHP- 2014 -0005 338 W Market Street — Fence
c. TLHP- 2014 -0006 208 Wirt Street NW — Fence
Page 4 of 4
New Business:
a. Discussion by BAR By -Laws, Section 2.4 — Public Hearing Procedure
Chairman Kiley stated he had considered a change to the public hearing procedure; however,
he does not wish to pursue this change.
Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 7:38 pm.
NEXT REGULAR BUSINESS MEETING:
Monday, March 17, 2014 at 7pm
Town Hall, Council Chamber
Edward Kiley, Chair
Deborah E. Parry, Planning & Zoning Assistant
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING • 25 WEST MARKET STREET • LEESBURG, VIRGINIA 20176
Telephone 703.771.2765 • Fax 703.771.2724 • www.leesburgva.gov /planning