HomeMy Public PortalAbout2004.02.18 BAR Meeting MinutesMINUTES BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW FEBRUARY 18, 2004
The Board of Architectural Review met in regular session on February 18, 2004 at 7:30
p.m. in the Council Chambers at the Town Hall located at 25 West Market Street,
Leesburg, Virginia. Members present were Vice -Mayor Mervin Jackson, Bobbi Elliott,
Richard Forbes, Teresa Minchew, and William Sutton. Staff was represented by Kristie
Lalire.
APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FROM THE JANUARY 21,2004 MEETING.
Mr. Sutton made a motion to approve the minutes as submitted.
Ms. Minchew seconded.
BOARD ACTION: Approved, vote 4-0-1.
CONSIDERATION OF THE CONSENT CALENDAR
Bar Case 03-129 Request for approval of alterations to the building and property located
at 301 North King Street. Bar Case 04-07 Request for approval of alterations to the
residence located at 11 Royal Street SE. Bar Case 04-12 Request for approval of a
projecting sign for Dunlap and Grubb Attorneys located at 199 Liberty Street SW. Bar
Case 04-13 Request for approval of a projecting sign for Check -It Paint Ball located at
212A Loudoun Street SE. Bar Case 04-15 Request for approval of a directory sign for
the offices at 120 East Market Street. Bar Case 04-16 Request for approval of a free-
standing sign and a directory sign for Burnett and Williams located at 105 Loudoun
Street SE. Bar Case 04-19 Request for approval of a sign for the Princeton Companies
located at 201 Loudoun Street SW. Bar Case 04-20 Request for approval of two signs for
the Feathered Nest located at 1 Cornwall Street NW. Bar Case 03-137 Request for
approval of a wall sign and refacing an existing monument sign located at 316 East
Market Street. Bar Case 04-10 Request for approval of a monument sign for Toyota
Dealership located at 3 Cardinal Park Drive SE.
Ms. Minchew moved that the above cases be approved subject to the clarifications and
conditions identified by staff.
Ms. Elliott seconded.
BOARD ACTION: 4-0-1.
Bar Case 04.14: Request for approval of alterations, including a commercial handicap
ramp on the rear elevation of the building and a stoop for the front of the outbuilding for
the property located at 109 South King Street.
Mr. Forbes stated it his understanding that there has been no new information or
drawings. He asked for a motion to defer this item.
'MINUTES BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW FEBRUARY 18, 2004
Ms. Latham the applicant came forward.
Ms. Latham stated she received a letter that stating she has approval of the stoop located
at 2 Royal St SW.
Mr. Forbes asked what about the ramp at 109 S. King Street.
Ms. Latham stated she gave Ms. Lalire a letter and gave her the dimensions of the ramp.
She stated they only slightly lowered the existing ramp for safety reasons.
Mr. Forbes asked if she submitted drawings by the deadline?
Ms. Latham stated no she gave Ms, Lalire the dimensions. She stated she submitted the
drawings the first time but it was not acceptable. She stated she does not know who she
can get to do these drawings. She stated it would be nice if the B.A.R. would tell her
where she could find someone to do the drawings. She stated she does not have a
draftsman on staff.
Mr. Forbes stated you do not need to have a draftsman on staff. He stated all over town
there are plenty of drafts people who work on an hourly basis.
Ms. Latham asked why do we need drawings even though it was replaced the same has
the existing ramp except it was just lowered for safety reasons. She stated it meets code.
Mr. Forbes stated we need the drawings for approval purposes; it needs to be a legal
document.
Ms. Minchew asked if the ramp has already been replaced.
Ms. Latham stated yes.
Mr. Forbes stated the B.A.R. can not approve something after the fact because it has been
done.
Mr. Forbes asked if it was replaced as exactly as it was before?
Ms, Latham stated they lowered it.
Mr. Forbes stated then it is not exactly the same.
Ms. Minchew stated we can not rely on everybody to it properly without approval.
Ms. Lalire stated the ramp is illegal and that one of the issues. She stated there were
never any permits issued for the ramp.
2
(MINUTES BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW FEBRUARY 18, 2004
Ms. Lalire stated that is why Zoning went ahead and stated that you need to go through
the process.
There was a brief discussion about the responsibility of the illegal ramp.
Ms. Lalire explained to Ms. Latham what she needs to do to get her application approved.
Mr. Forbes stated he wants to defer this application until the Board receives new
drawings.
Mr. Sutton moved to defer Case Bar• 04-14 to the March 15, 2004 meeting.
Ms. Elliott seconded.
BOARD ACTION: Deferred, vote 4-0-1
Bar Case 04-18: Request for approval of a commercial ramp on the rear elevation of the
building located at 105 South King Street.
Mr. Toby Gomez was representing the applicant. He carne forward to address the Board,
Mr. Gomez stated Mr. Saunier and his father built the ramp.
Mr. Forbes stated the ramp does not meet B.A.R. criteria and it does not meet building
code standards.
Mr. Gomez stated he knows the slope is extreme but it is not for public use.
Mr. Forbes stated there are other issues.
Mr. Gomez explained to the Board what Mr. Saunier planned on doing with the ramp.
Ms. Lalire stated Mr. Saunier needs to submit another drawing showing the correct slant
of the ramp that meets the correct building code regulations and the design of the ramp
drawn to scale on plans with elevations. She stated she spoke building department it does
not make a difference whether the ramp is for private or public use it must meet the state
building code.
There was a brief discussion regarding what details are needed for the drawings.
Mr. Gomez stated he understands, and asked for the application to be deferred to the
April meeting.
Mr. Forbes asked for a motion to defer.
Ms. Minchew moved to defer Case Bar 04-18 to the April 19, 2004 meeting.
3
MINUTES BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL, REVIEW FEBRUARY 18, 2004
Mr. Sutton Seconded.
BOARD ACTION: Deferred, vote 4-0-1.
Case Bar 04-01 Request for approval of a wall sign for Spring Essence located at 5A
Fort Evans Road.
Mr. Forbes asked for a motion to defer.
Ms. Minchew moved to defer Case Bar 04-01 to the March 15, 2004 meeting.
Mr. Sutton seconded.
Board Action: Deferred, vote 4-0-1
Bar Case 04-11: Request for approval of an addition to Holy Trinity Lutheran Church
located at 605 West Market Street,
Mr. Robert Stouffer , Joe Walker and Mr. Matthew Fine came forward to address the
Board.
Mr. Stouffer stated they were getting their permit drawings together. He stated they
would like to come back at the next meeting for a final. He stated they would like to
question and talk to the Board about some of the issues raised. He started they are not
ready to make a smooth presentation this evening.
Mr. Stouffer passed around an 8 x 11 drawing of the site to show where the parking is.
He stated the lighting, plant materials are being changed at this time.
Mr. Joe Walker the construction manager stated when they submitted the information to
the Board they had just stated getting their comments back from the Town's engineers.
He stated he was wondering how they can satisfy everyone's criteria.
Ms. Lalire stated she knows that they are reviewing it in Current Planning. She stated
they will defer it the BAR. She stated is decide on a light fixture design and submit to the
BAR, She stated the light fixtures have to be a maximum of 20 feet high. She stated the
BAR looks at the landscaping. She stated the BAR frequently relies on the Arborist. She
stated the BAR can look at the architecture and look at the lighting latter.
There was a brief discussion about the lighting.
Mr. Stouffer went over the staff recommendations. He stated the size of the new parking
lot is based on the size of the sanctuary. He stated it is a 13,000 square foot addition.
Ms, Minchew asked for an overview of the project.
4
MINUTES BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW FEBRUARY 18, 2004
Mr. Stouffer gave an overview of the project.
Mr. Forbes stated
Mr. Forbes stated the Board is not asking for the addition to be exactly the same as the
existing building. He stated they need to be compatible not the same.
Mr. Forbes stated he does not want the mechanical screen to be the focal point.
Mr. Forbes asked Mr. Stouffer what made him pick the type of tower he is proposing.
Mr. Stouffer stated because of the shape of the church.
Mr. Forbes stated the addition needs to have some reference to the original structure. He
stated things like the window massing and the materials of the windows should pay some
sort of homage to the original structure.
Mr. Stouffer asked if he should use brick mold for the windows.
Mr. Forbes stated yes.
There was a brief discussion regarding the windows.
Mr. Forbes stated the windows can be S -D -L on both sides.
Ms. Minchew stated she agrees with using the brick molding.
Mr. Walker and stated they plan on using stained glass in the large window behind the
alter.
Mr. Stouffer passed around a detail drawing to each of the Board members to show what
they are proposing.
Mr. Stouffer showed the Board the brick details.
There was more of a discussion regarding the windows.
Ms. Minchew asked if there were enough issues to set up a work session to discuss the
details.
Mr. Stouffer stated he would rather defer this and come back to the next meeting.
Mr. Forbes stated the soldier course draws his eye to them rather then the windows.
5
MINUTES BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW FEBRUARY 18, 2004
Ms. Lalire stated part of the problem is that it looks more contemporary and it is not
consistent with the Romanesque tower. She stated the windows are not typical traditional.
windows of Leesburg.
Mr. Stouffer asked about having a work session.
Ms. Lalire stated you cannot vote at a work session.
Ms. Minchew stated there is not enough time between now and the next meeting to have
a work session.
Mr. Forbes stated there would not be enough time to translate the information from a
work session and make new drawings for the next meeting.
Mr. Walker stated he would like to discuss this at the March meeting.
Ms. Lalire stated the alternative is to email the changes to her and then she could email
the Board so they can all look at it, then they will be ready to discuss it at the March
meeting.
Mr. Forbes asked for a motion to defer this to the March 15, 2004 meeting.
Ms. Minchew moved to defer Case Bar 04-11 to the March 15, 2004 meeting.
Ms. Elliott seconded.
Board Action: Deferred, vote 4-0-1
Bar Case 04-17 Request for approval of signs for Red Apple Buffet located at 962
Edwards Ferry Rd.
Mr. Man Yuen Cheung came forward to address the Board.
Ms. Lalire stated she had a discussion with the applicant. She stated it was discussed that
the sign can not exceed 2 feet in height. She stated the sign couldn't be higher than the
parapet; the sign needs to rest very comfortably on the parapet. She stated there are only
2 elevations that will have signs. She stated the north elevation facing the Walmart and
the elevation facing the parking lot. She stated Zoning has already informed the applicant
that they will have to eliminate the "All You Can Eat" on the awning.
Mr. Forbes asked for a new drawing.
Mr. Cheung gave the Board the new drawing.
There was a brief discussion regarding the signs.
6
MINUTES BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW FEBRUARY 18, 200
Richard Forbes, r hairman
Ms. Lalire stated the text on the awing will be painted out. She stated the parapet sign
will be 2 feet high by 25 feet long with one sign on the west elevation and one sign the
north elevation.
Mr. Cheung stated he will get a new drawing on the north elevation.
Mr. Forbes asked for a motion.
Ms. Minchew moved that Case Bar 04-17 be approved with the changes as discussed
tonight with the text on the awning to be painted over so that awning will be one uniform
color; the parapet signs will be a maximum of 2 feet tall by 25 feet long with one on the
west and one on the north side; the final sign on the north side will be subject to
administrative approval pending submission of a scaled drawing; no signs shall be
erected until the awnings are painted and all non -conforming signs are removed.
OTHER BUSINESS
There was a brief discussion regarding the new Town Hall addition.
Mr. Sutton made a motion to give authority to staff to administratively approve relocating
the sign for the Black Shutter Antiques.
Ms. Elliott seconded.
Board Action: Approved, vote 4-0-1
Meeting Adjourned 9:15 p.m.
Anne M. Eaton, Recording Secretary
7