Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout2003.01.22 BAR Meeting MinutesMINUTES BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW JANUARY 22, 2003 The Leesburg Board of Architectural Review met in regular session on January 22, 2003 at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers at the Town Hall located at 25 West Market Street, Leesburg, Virginia. Members present were Kelly Burk, Richard Forbes, Bill Sutton Mervin Jackson and Cliff Vaughn. Approval of the Minutes for the December 16, 2002 meeting. Mr. Forbes asked for a motion to approve the minutes. SCANNED JUN 0 6 2011 LASERFICHE Mr. Sutton moved that the minutes from the December 16, 2003 meeting be approve as submitted. Mr. Vaughn seconded. Board Action: Approved, vote 4-0. Approval of the Consent Calendar Case Bar 03-01: Request for approval of a wall sign for Metro Home and Garden located at 106 Harrison Street SE. Case Bar 03-02: Request for approval of alterations to the residence located at 233 Cornwall Street Case Bar 03-03: Request for approval of alterations to the building of Hunt Country Furniture located at 1 Loudoun Street SW. Case Bar 03.04: Request for approval of a sign for Main Street Title & Escrow located at 217 South King Street. Case Bar 03-06: Request for approval of alterations to the Academy Building and the 1959 courts building located at 18 East Market Street. Case Bar 03-08: Request for approval of demolition of the building located at 203 Loudoun Street SE. Case Bar 03-12: Request for approval of a sign for Prosperity Title located at 703-J East Market Street in the Prosperity Shopping Center. Case Bar 01-121: Request for approval of a sign for Kelly Insurance located at 26 North King Street. Mr. Forbes asked for a motion to defer. Mr. Sutton moved that Case Bar 01-121 be deferred to the February 19, 2003 meeting. Mr. Vaughn seconded. Board Action: Deferred, Vote 4-0 Case Bar 03-07 Request for approval of the Landscape Master Plan for the Loudoun County Courthouse lawn located at 18 East Market Street. Mr. Jim Raugh of Loudoun County and Mr. Thomas McGilloway of Mahan Rykiel Associates Incorporated gave a brief presentation on the Landscape Master Plan for the Loudoun County Courthouse lawn. They showed the three concept overlays. 1 MINUTES BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW JANUARY 22, 2003 Mr. Forbes asked for a motion Ms. Kelly Burk moved that Case Bar 03-07 title option 13 be approved. Mr. Sutton Seconded. Board Action: Approved, vote 4-0 Case Bar 03-08: Request for approval of demolition of the building located at 203 Loudoun Street S.E. Case Bar 03-09: Request for approval of demolition of the building located at 205 Loudoun Street S.E. Case Bar 03-10: Request for approval of demolition of the building located at 106 Han.ison Street SE. Case Bar 03-11: Request for approval of demolition of the building located at 206 Royal Street S.E. Ms. Lalire stated the applicant is requesting demolition for buildings on four separate properties. She stated the applicants are proposing a development that would compose of all four of these properties. She stated staff was asking for more information from the applicant. She stated the Zoning Ordinance requires post -demolition plans. Mr. James Turner came forward and stated that submitting a site plan for the proposed development of the four properties would be cost prohibitive especially if he was denied the demolition permits to demolish the buildings. He stated he did submit some additional information. He stated he would come back. He stated he has been working with Mr. Rocky LaRock of Ballianger & LaRock. He showed a model to the Board of the proposed building structure. Mr. Forbes stated the main thing with demolition is any historic structure that you plan on tearing down should be replaced with something greater or of a higher quality of architecture to benefit the community. He stated also if what you are tearing down is worth saving or not, that is the criteria of what you have to meet. Mr. Turner stated he would come back to the next meeting with more information. Mr. LaRock of Ballanger and LaRock Architects stated what they want to do is integrate with the houses are like on Loudoun Street. He stated they would try and make it look like some of the buildings on King and Market Streets. Mr. Vaughn asked Mr. Turner and Mr. LaRock if they were aware that there was a petition for the house on Royal Street. 2 MINUTES BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW JANUARY 22, 2003 Mr. Turner stated he did not. Mr. Jackson offered a copy of the petition to Mr. Turner. Ms. Lalire stated what they would like to see for the next meeting in addition to the drawings is the criteria for the reasons for demolition of the four buildings. She stated the staff has not had the opportunity to provide an analysis with the respect for historic preservation. There was a brief discussion regarding the use of the proposed structure and the parking. Mr. Turner stated there is the issue of having to go through a rezoning of the property located at 206 Royal Street SE. Mr. LaRock stated the public has not seen what they are proposing. He gave a brief presentation on what they are proposing. He stated they did not want to use the house on Royal Street as residential anymore. He explained what they would like to do with the floor plan and briefly the parking. He stated they would like to make the exit come out on Loudoun Street. There was a brief discussion about the upper level of the proposed building to be of mixed use to include residential. Mr. Forbes asked if anyone from the public would like to come forward and speak? Ms. Linda Ifert of 205 Royal Street S.E. came forward and stated she would like to meet with Mr. Turner. She stated herself and many residents who are homeowners on Royal Street are very concerned with the demolition of the buildings. She stated in particular the house at 206 Royal Street SE. She stated other residents are with her tonight who signed the petition and will come forward to speak. She read the following Significance Statement from the Department of Historic Resource Reconnaissance Survey Form: Royal Street is one of the original streets in Leesburg, VA, first laid out in1759. Within the survey area, Royal Street contains a wide variety of mostly Vernacular residence Royal Street has retained much of its historic character. This house at 206 Royal Street S. E. first appears on the 1930 and 1937 Sanborn maps and probably dates from the 1920's. Set on a double lot, this small --scale Vernacular house contributes to the architectural character of Royal Street. She stated she became a first time homeowner eight years ago when she bought her home across the street form 206 Royal Street. She loves her home and her neighborhood. She stated her house and 206 Royal Street are the gateway to the residential section of Royal Street S.E. She stated she wants to preserve the historical fabric that is there. She stated residents that border commercial and residential properties have rights and should have some protection. She stated what she has seen that is proposed is not acceptable to her and the residents on the street. She stated a parking lot with streetlights and seeing the 3 MINUTES BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW JANUARY 22, 2003 back of a three story office complex is not what she calls preserving the character and fabric of that neighborhood. She stated that is the reason for the petition. She stated she would like to meet with the applicant. Ms. Maggie LaBillois of 211 Royal Street S.E. came forward and stated as neighbors of the home located at 206 Royal Street her husband and her believe that tearing this home down will destroy the historic character of Royal Street. She stated Leesburg is a wonderful historic and small town. She stated please do not permit the demolition of this home. Mr. Brian Fillman of 223 Royal street S. E. carne forward and stated he has concerns about the traffic access to Royal Street form Harrison Street and than on to Loudoun Street. He stated he would like the neighborhood to remain residential. Mr. Todd Watts of 201 South Street SE came forward and stated his biggest concern is what the building is being used for. He stated he would like to see something interesting go into the first floor of the proposed office building besides office. Ms. Lyle Werner stated as president of the Historic District Residential Association came forward and stated the committee would like to see something of mixed use go into the proposed office building. She stated the house to be demolished at 206 Royal Street SE would require a rezoning. She stated that process should come first. She stated have a concern about protecting the Old and Historic District. Mr. Jackson stated he suggested in light of the petition Mr. LaRock and Mr. Turner should sit down and meet with the residences to address the issues. Mr. Forbes stated he has concerns with how the backside of the building would look. Mr. Forbes asked for a motion. Mr. Sutton moved that Case Bar 03-08, 03-09, 03-10 and 03-11 be deferred to the February 19, 2003 meeting as stated in the following staff recommendation: Deferral of the application is recommended pending submission of architectural elevations depicting the scale, massing, proportion and height as well as design of the proposed project that would replace the demolished structures so that the BAR may consider as provided under the zoning ordinance the relationship of the proposed development with the character of adjacent historic buildings and the surrounding historic district. Ms. Lalire stated to include in the motion to show reason for demolition. Mr. Vaughn seconded the motion. Board Action: Deferred, vote 4-0. 4 MINUTES BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW JANUARY 22, 2003 Case Bar 02-72 Request for approval of construction and site plan for Leesburg Auto Body located at 8 Cardinal Park Drive. Mr. Forbes asked for a motion to defer. Mr. Sutton moved that Case Bar 02-72 be deferred to the February 19, 2003 meeting. Mr. Vaughn seconded. Board Action: Deferred, vote 4-0. Case Bar 02-120 Request for approval of modifications to a previously approved application for construction of an office building located at 307 East Market Street. Ms.Lalire stated the applicant would like to make changes to the application. She stated they added a cupola and a gable over the entrance and details on the other elevations. Mr. Michael Alan Finn the applicant was present. He stated the cupola will be at the center of the building and will be 15 feet high from the existing ridge of the roof. He stated the roof is cooper and the windows will remain the same. He stated regarding the gable there will be a balcony below the gable. He stated the other change will effect the area in front of the building. He stated the grade on the Market Street side of the building was actually a tad higher than the finished floor. He stated there is a craw space under the first floor. He stated the craw space must be vented. So they have turned the louver vent to brake up the lower portion of the vent. Mr. Finn stated he agreed to staff recommendations regarding the windows. Mr. Forbes stated simulated- divided- light or true- divided- light windows are the only options for the windows. Mr. Forbes asked what size was the brick mold. Mr. Finn stated he did not have that information yet. There was a brief discussion regarding the windows and the brick mold. Mr. Finn stated he will use the Hardy Plank siding. Mr. Forbes asked Mr. Finn if he could use aluminum dad windows. Mr. Finn agreed. Mr. Forbes stated the cupola was about 20 to 25 percent to big. Mr. Finn stated the mechanical units would be partially camouflaged. 5 MINUTES BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW JANUARY 22, 2003 Mr. Finn showed the Board a sample of the mortar. Mr. Forbes stated it needs to be a darker brick. Mr. Forbes asked if the rake mold was a dental. Mr. Finn state dyes it is a dental. Mr. Finn stated the light fixtures will be on the building. Ms. Lalire stated Mr. Finn needs to submit an illustration of the lighting fixtures. Mr. Forbes asked for a motion. Mr. Sutton moved that Case Bar 02-120 be approved under the following conditions; the brick mortar and light fixture samples he submitted to staff; there will be no dumpster on the property; the location of the mechanical equipment to be positioned as discussed; the windows to be aluminum clad with simulated divided light and a 31/2 inch articulated casing; the cupola to be reduced by plus or minus 20 to 25 percent to be submitted to staff; the rake molding to be perpendicular to the ground; the at least one course of siding between the head of the second story windows and the cornice. Ms. Burk seconded. Board Action: Approved, vote 4-0 Case Bar 03.05 Request for approval of construction of an office building (site plan previously approved) for the vacant lot located at 517 East Market Street. Mr. James Forrester came forward and stated he read the staff recommendations and agrees to all of it. Mr. Forbes asked for a motion. There was a brief discussion on the windows. Mr. Forrester stated he would agree to whatever the board or staff request. There was a brief discussion regarding the efis texture. Mr. Forrester stated the color of the siding will be ivory. Mr. Forrester showed the Board a sample of the light fixture. Mr. Forbes asked for a motion. 6 MINUTES BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW JANUARY 22, 2003 Mr. Sutton moved that Case Bar 03-05 be approved with the following conditions; the cupola be removed; the color shall be ivory as submitted; the exterior light fixtures shall be the carriage light fixture brass finish and is to be submitted to staff along with the signs; the doors will be 6 panel metal; the efis will have the ivory finish; the windows will be aluminum clad; the gable siding to be a lighter color. Ms. Burk seconded. Board Action: Approved, vote 4-0 Case Bar 02-115 Request for approval of signs for Zeffirelli Italian Restaurant located at 5 Catoctin Circle SE. Ms. Lalire came forward and stated this has been before the board before. She stated she had not received any new information regarding the pole sign. Mr. Hussain the applicant came forward and stated he had hired a law firm to assist him. He stated he received a letter from Ms.Lalire regarding the sign ordinance. He stated he does not understand where he is standing on his case. He stated he took over the Virginia Kitchen in 2001 2002 and than changed the name to Zeffirelli's. He stated regarding the pole sign he would like to keep it. He stated taking the pole sign down and redoing the sign would cost over $5000.00 dollars. He stated he is requesting from the board to keep his pole sign. He went over the colors for the wall sign. He stated he feels putting a monument sign on Catoctin Circle would be a traffic hazard. Mr. Forbes stated when the property was vacated and than a new tenant moved than the new sign rules apply. He stated according to Zoning the property was vacated. He stated the sign is not grandfathered. Mr. Lawlor came forward and stated anytime there is a discontinuance of a use for a period 60 days or greater than the existing sign becomes obsolete. He stated the new sign comes under the requirements. He stated there was a 10 -month lapse in business license which he stated he could not confirm himself. He stated he spoke with the Loudoun County Health Department the business had been closed since August of 2002. He stated he spoke with someone in the Loudoun County Building & Development and there were permits applied for in October 2002 not all of them were issued at that time. He stated there was at least 60 days to the best of our knowledge, which brings brings in the current zoning requirements. Mr, Steve Robin of Reed Smith came forward and stated Mr.Hussian asked him to represent him. He stated his client is having difficulty with taking down the pole sign and building a monument sign. He stated he would like to discuss this with the board himself. He stated there are a variety of uses in this corridor. He stated his client is agreement with the recommendations with the wall sign. 7 MINUTES BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW JANUARY 22, 2003 Mr. Forbes stated if any individual were to come in on Catoctin Circle to open a new business and apply for a sign they would have to fall under the same criteria and purchase a new sign. Ms. Lalire stated since the determination has been made regarding a lapse in business operation. She asked Mr. Lawlor about Mr. Hussain applying for a variance before the Board of Zoning Appeals. Mr. Lawlor stated the BZA is an option. He stated the Director of Economic Development wants to set up a meeting with the Engineering Department regarding safety issues with the monument sign, He stated he would like to have more information. There was a brief discussion about the removal of the pole sign. Mr. Forbes asked if there were any other cases involving a lapse in business and the refacing of a pole sign. Mr. Lawlor stated the Shell Station located at Fairfax and South King Street, the business was discontinue after 30 days they sent out a violation letter and stated the sign had become obsolete. He stated there was a change in use therefore it worked in their favor. There was a brief discussion regarding replacing the monument sign with a pole sign. Ms. Lalire stated Mr. Hussain could submit his application for the wall sign. Mr, Forbes asked for a motion to defer. Mr. Sutton moved that Case Bar 02-115 be deferred to the February 19, 2003 meeting so future drawings can be submitted to staff.. Ms. Burk seconded. Board Action: Deferred, vote 4-0 Other Business: Ms. Lalire gave a brief presentation on the application for the Glenfiddich House located at 205 North King Street. Meeting Adjourned 10:30 p.m. Richard Forbes ' hairman VA..5:4?Ak. Anne M. Eaton, Recording Secretary 8