city of manassas, virginia architectural review board ... · april 09, 2019 page | 1 city of...

Archi tectura l Review BoardArchi tectura l Review Board MeetingApri l 09, 2019Page | 1

City of Manassas, VirginiaArchitectural Review Board Meeting

AGENDA

Architectural Review Board Meeting9027 Center Street

Manassas, VA 20110Second Floor Conference Room

Tuesday, April 09, 2019

Work Session - 6:30 p.m.

Call to Order and Pledge of Allegiance - 7:00 p.m.

Roll Call

1. Approval of the Meeting Minutes

1.1 February 12, 2019 Draft Meeting MinutesFebruary 12, 2019 Draft Meeting Minutes

2. New Business

2.1 ARB-2019-00129403 Grant AveRana QuraStaff Report and Attachments

2.2 ARB-2019-00139406 Battle St.Chris SellersStaff Report and Attachments

2.3 ARB-2019-00149501 Grant AvenueLillian P. RuckerStaff Report and Attachments

1

https://legistarweb-production.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/attachment/pdf/336665/2.12.19_Draft.pdf

https://legistarweb-production.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/attachment/pdf/337266/final_combined_report_v2.pdf

https://legistarweb-production.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/attachment/pdf/337267/Full_Report_v2.pdf

https://legistarweb-production.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/attachment/pdf/337268/Staff_Report3.pdf

Archi tectura l Review BoardArchi tectura l Review Board MeetingApri l 09, 2019Page | 2

3. Old Business

4. Other Business

4.1 Old Town Update

Adjournment

2

DRAFT

MINUTES REGULAR MEETING CITY OF MANASSAS

ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD

February 12, 2019 – 7:30 P.M. Members Present: Jan Alten, Chairperson

Myra Buchanan Brent Peter Rosen Marci Settle

Members Absent: Robert Carter, Vice-Chairperson

Nancy Hersch Ingram Staff Present: Elizabeth Via-Gossman, Director of Community Development

Dorothy Baker, Planner Donna J. Bellows, Boards and Commissions Clerk PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL AND DETERMINATION OF A QUORUM Clerk called the roll, and a quorum was determined. APPROVAL OF MINUTES – January 8, 2019 Ms. Settle motioned to approve the minutes as submitted. Mr. Rosen seconded the motion. The MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY BY VOICE VOTE. OLD BUSINESS ARB #2016-33 (Amendment) 9206 Main Street Robert and Victorine Latimer Ms. Via-Gossman stated that in 2016, the applicant proposed to install Kyocera Solar KU-265 solar panels on three different south facing gable roof exposures of the home (towards Portner Avenue). The ARB approved the installation of the panels on the two rear additions to the home and the flat roof of the existing carport but not the gable roof of the main house. Since this

3

DRAFT Architectural Review Board Minutes – February 12, 2019

Page 2 of 4

proposal was approved by the ARB, Staff has had the opportunity to reconsider the installation of solar panels. The technology has evolved and Staff has provided updated recommendations based on the guidelines permitting the reconsideration of this request. The Staff notes that the previously approved panels have been installed flat to the roof. The Staff feels strongly that green technology, including the installation of solar panels, should be encouraged in the City of Manassas, and the City’s Utilities Department has a net metering policy that allows individual customers to install solar at their home or facility and net the output against their usage. This policy allows for month to month credits if a customer produces more than they use in some months but less in others. In November, the Utilities Department reported at least four residential customers in the City who have rooftop installations and are taking advantage of the net metering policy. On September 11, 2018, the ARB heard a similar case for a house at 9514 Main Street and noted that the City’s Historic District Handbook design guidelines for solar panels (page 40) were written in 1990 and that solar technology had changed significantly over the last 25+ years. Therefore, the Staff analysis for that case in 2018 relied on more recent guidelines from the Secretary of the Interior and industry standards. As per the discussion in the 2018 case, there are currently three types of installation methods. These include 1) flush mounting the solar panels on the roof, 2) installing actual solar shingles on the roof in place of more traditional materials such as asphalt or 3) installing free standing mounted panels. Of these three methods, the first, flush mounting, has the least impact to a historic structure. In this method of installation, panels are installed flush to the roof with little impact to the profile of the roof, with the panel itself being only a couple inches thick. Panel installation also does not require any permanent modification to the roof and can be easily removed. These two factors greatly diminish the profile/visual impact of roof mounted solar panels on historic structures. The second method, installing solar shingles, is a modern option for new construction in a Historic Overlay District, as they involve the replacement of roof shingles and have no visual profile. This would not be appropriate on a historic structure; however, as it would permanently modify the historic materials. The third, free standing mounted panels, would likewise not be appropriate in the Historic Overlay District, as they can have a large profile and would be difficult to locate without being visible from the public street. With the above considerations, Staff recommends the Board consider the following two standards from the Secretary of Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation to evaluate the appropriateness of solar panel installation:

• Standard Two: The historic character of a property shall be retained and preserved. The removal of the historic material or alteration of features and spaces that characterize a property shall be avoided.

• Standard Nine: New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. New work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity pf the property and its environment.

4


Page 3 of 4

In this case, the applicant is asking that the ARB revisit the proposal to flush mount solar panels on the pitched roof of the structure facing Portner Avenue. As noted earlier, this structure has been substantially modified and this portion of the home appears to be a later addition which changed the orientation of the original home from Main Street to Portner Avenue. Staff supports the reconsideration of this request. Applicant, Victorine Latimer, noted the importance of the elevation in the performance of the solar panel system, providing a 40% increase. ARB Discussion

• Original Structure fronts on Main Street. • Panels will cover most, but not all of roof. • Structural impacts of the panel weight, if any modifications to roof, they would be

internal to attic. Chair Alten motioned to approve ARB #2016-33 (Amendment) as recommended by staff. Ms. Brent seconded the motion. Roll Call

The MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. OTHER BUSINESS Adoption of Rules of Procedure Chair Alten motioned to approve the adoption of the Architectural Review Board Rules of Procedure. Ms. Brent seconded the motion. The MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY BY VOICE VOTE. Ms. Via-Gossman reviewed the amended Boards and Commissions policy. Old Town Updates

• None

Chair Alten Y Ms. Brent Y Mr. Rosen Y Ms. Settle Y

5


Page 4 of 4

ADJOURNMENT Chair Alten moved to adjourn the meeting. Mr. Rosen seconded the motion. The MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY TO ADJOURN THE MEETING. The meeting ended at 8:01 p.m. __________________________________ ___________________ Jan Alten, Chairperson Date

6

ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD No. 2019-0012

Applicant(s): Rana Qura Site Owner(s): Rana Qura Site Address: 9403 Grant Ave. Tax Map No.: 101-01-00-367 Site Location: East side of Grant Ave. between Lee St. and Church St. Current Zoning: B-3, City Center Commercial Parcel Size: 0.06 Acres Age of Structure: 68 Years Type of Structure: Commercial Summary of Request: Replace awning fabric; repaint front doors with new color; replace

exterior wall sconces: Date Accepted for Review: March 22, 2019 Date of ARB Meeting: April 9, 2019

7

2 of 4

STAFF REPORT

ARB Case: 2019-0012 Applicant: Rana Quara Address: 9403 Grant Ave REQUEST The applicant is requesting approval for the replacement of the existing awnings with a different color, painting the front doors with a different color, and replacing the exterior wall sconces. PROPERTY INFORMATION Location – East side of Grant Ave between Lee St. and Church St. Historical Significance – This two-story, three-bay commercial building is masonry construction of 6 course American-bond brick. It is covered with a flat roof with metal coping. Fenestration consists of 8/8 double-hung windows with rowlocks sills on the side elevation, 1- light fixed metal windows with yellow rowlock sills, two flush side entries with a yellow brick door surround, and a stone surround for four grouped windows on the second-story façade. This is a noncontributing structure in the Historic Overlay District. Surrounding Properties – The surrounding properties are B-3 zoning properties that are both noncontributing structures and contributing structures. The properties at 9251 Lee Street, and 9402 Grant Ave across the street are contributing. APPLICANT’S PROPOSAL The owner of the property would like to update the exterior of the building, including the awning fabric, doors, and sconces. Currently, the building has red awnings that are faded, dark red doors, and gold lighting sconces. The proposed new color for the awnings is dark blue called Mediterranean Blue Tweed (ordering code 4653/6053). The proposed new color for the door is a dark blue called Naval (SW 6244). The proposed new sconces are black and motion activated (model number 41682). A fabric sample and paint chip will be provided at the meeting.

CITY OF MANASSAS Department of Community Development

Elizabeth S. Via-Gossman, AICP, Director Phone: 703-257-8223 Fax: 703-257-5117

8

3 of 4

STAFF ANALYSIS The current awnings are a red color that are faded. The proposed awnings are a dark blue color, which matches the proposed color for the doors. The awnings are a standard slanted fabric shape. This shape and the location of the awnings are not changing. The proposed color change follows the guidelines on page 88 and 89 of the Historic District Handbook:

• Guideline #5: “The choice of colors should be coordinated as part of an overall color scheme for the building.”

• Guideline # 7: “Avoid using overly bright awning colors or complex patterns that are not carefully coordinated with the building and storefront. Fabric type, no bright colors or patterns.”

Currently, there are two doors on the face of the building that are a red color. The proposed doors will be painted a dark blue color that matches the proposed dark blue paint for the awnings. Overall, this color scheme compliments the red brick of the building. The proposed color change follows the guidelines on page 80 of the Historic District Handbook:

• Guideline #1:” Colors should blend and complement the overall color schemes that exist on the same street.”

Currently, there are two gold sconces next to each door on the face of the building. The proposed sconces are black. The proportion and style are similar to what is already there. The location is not changing.

9

4 of 4

Review Criteria Pursuant to Section 130-406 (a), the ARB shall consider the following criteria in determining whether or not to issue a Certificate of Appropriateness for construction or alterations:

STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends APPROVAL of the proposed designs including the change in colors for the awnings and doors, as well as the new sconces as submitted.

CRITERIA APPLICATION

Activity Proposed:

Replacing the existing awnings with a different color, painting the front doors with a different color, and replacing the exterior wall sconces.

(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 HOD.

The proposed awning material and paint color are compatible with the site and the HOD.

(2) The harmony of the proposed change in terms of overall proportion and the size and placement of elements such as entrances, windows, awnings, exterior stairs, and signs.

The proposed designs do not change the harmony of the proportions of the building.

(3) The effect of the proposed change on the historic district neighborhood, setting, or streetscape.

The proposed designs have little to no effect on the HOD.

(4) Whether the proposed method of construction, renovation, or restoration would have an adverse impact on the historic or architectural character of the structure or site, or on adjacent buildings or structures.

The prosed designs have no adverse impacts on the HOD.

(5) The Secretary of the Interior Standards for Historic Preservation, as may be relevant.

N/A

(6) Any applicable provisions of the adopted design guidelines.

The proposed designs are in line with the design guidelines.

10

March 22, 2019

Re: 9403 Grant Avenue - Exterior Updates

Requested by: Rana Qura, Owner [email protected] 703-508-8805

Requested Changes:

1. Awning color - changed from maroon to navy • Sunbrella "Mediterranean Blue Tweed” • The awning framework will remain the same • Fabric will have a straight edge instead of current scalloped edge; Proposed rendering

attached. • Installed by Montgomery Shade & Awning in Warrenton, VA

2. Front exterior doors - both doors re-painted navy to match the awning • Sherwin Williams "Naval - SW6244

3. Replace wall sconces

4. Install kick plates on both exterior doors

12

mailto:[email protected]

Current Façade at 9403 Grant Avenue

13

Awning Rendering & Example of Door Color

Awning Estimate

14

Exterior Light Fixtures

3/24/19, 10*29 PMAllen + roth Midnight Valley 11.25-in H Black Motion Activated LED Outdoor Wall Light at Lowes.com

Page 1 of 4https://www.lowes.com/pd/allen-roth-Midnight-Valley-11-25-in-H-Black-Motion-Activated-LED-Outdoor-Wall-Light/1000689792

Prices, promotions, styles, and availability may vary.Our local stores do not honor online pricing. Pricesand availability of products and services are subjectto change without notice. Errors will be correctedwhere discovered, and Lowe's reserves the right torevoke any stated offer and to correct any errors,inaccuracies or omissions including after an orderhas been submitted.

Item # 1085705 Model #41682

allen + roth Midnight Valley 11.25-in H Black Motion Activated LEDOutdoor Wall Light

8 Ratings

5.0 Average

100%Recommend

this product

�Community

Q&AView Now

�FREE Store

Pickup� 3 available today

at N. ManassasLowe's!

�Shipping &

Delivery� Available!

$74.98

Aisle 2 , Bay 10

FREE PARCEL SHIPPING WITH MYLOWE'S. GET STARTED >

Opens at 6AM tomorrow!N. Manassas Lowe's �

��

ONLY AT LOWE'S

Dusk to dawn technology

Integrated LED

15

Kick Plates for Both Exterior Doors

3/24/19, 10*30 PMGatehouse 8-in W x 34-in H Oil-Rubbed Bronze Kick Plate at Lowes.com

Page 1 of 3https://www.lowes.com/pd/Gatehouse-8-in-W-x-34-in-H-Oil-Rubbed-Bronze-Kick-Plate/50041796

Prices, promotions, styles, and availability may vary.Our local stores do not honor online pricing. Pricesand availability of products and services are subjectto change without notice. Errors will be correctedwhere discovered, and Lowe's reserves the right torevoke any stated offer and to correct any errors,inaccuracies or omissions including after an orderhas been submitted.

Item # 158099 Model #32293ORDLG

Gatehouse 8-in W x 34-in H Oil-Rubbed Bronze Kick Plate

21 Ratings

4.5 Average

86%Recommend

this product

�Community

Q&AView Now

�FREE Store

Pickup� Unavailable for

Pickup at N.ManassasLowe's

�Shipping &

Delivery� Available!

$25.97

FREE PARCEL SHIPPING WITH MYLOWE'S. GET STARTED >

Opens at 6AM tomorrow!N. Manassas Lowe's

��

Anodized surface for extra durability

Fasteners with matching finish included foreasy installation

Plastic cover protects finish duringinstallation

16


Applicant(s): Chris Sellers Site Owner(s): Forrest Odendhal Site Address: 9406 Battle St. Tax Map No.: 101-01 00-386 Site Location: West side of Battle Street; ~60 feet north of Center Street Current Zoning: B-3, City Center General Commercial Parcel Size: 0.06 Acres Age of Structure: 87 years Type of Structure: Commercial Summary of Change projecting sign Request: Date Accepted for Review: March 3, 2019 Date of ARB Meeting: April 9, 2019

23

2 of 4

STAFF REPORT ARB Case: 2019-0013 Applicant: Chris Sellers Address: 9406 Battle Street

REQUEST

The applicant is proposing to change the projecting sign on the outside of the building. The building was last before the Board in June 2017 for the projecting sign (ARB 2017-35). PROPERTY INFORMATION Location – West side of Battle Street; ~60 feet north of Center Street Historical Significance – The two story, four bay Italianate-style commercial building is wood-frame construction clad with weatherboard siding that has cornerstones with square capitals. It is covered by a flat roof with a parapet that has overhanging eaves with scrolled brackets, and the recessed cant entry is covered by a back ogee cornice with scrolled brackets. Surrounding Properties – The site is surrounded by mostly contributing structures including the Hazen building at 9408 Battle Street, the Old Peoples National bank at 9110 Center Street, and Cocke's Pharmacy at 9108 Center Street. The building at 9404 Battle Street is not contributing. APPLICANT’S PROPOSAL The applicant is seeking approval for a projecting sign. The proposed projecting sign will have a color scheme of white text on a dark green background and light green highlights. The proposed material is ¾’’ thick komacel board with digital prints on both sides of the sign. The sign will be installed on an existing bracket using ¾’’ sign hangers and quick links. STAFF ANALYSIS The zoning code section for projecting signs allows signs to be up to 24 square feet (zoning code section 130-126 (3)). The proposed sign meets this requirement. The prosed sign also meets the sign guidelines in


Elizabeth S. Via-Gossman, AICP, Director

24

3 of 4

the Design Guidelines Handbook including the sign area as well as fitting into the overall character of the building and the surrounding properties. The sign is ~ 5.6 square feet and will be located above the door. Overall, the sign is consistent with the branding of the business and fits into the scheme of the Historic Overlay District. Listed on pages 82-87:

• Guideline #6: “Sign placement should be based upon visibility and compatibility with the building. Signs should not obscure openings or building details.

• Guideline #8: “Projecting signs in the downtown should be no larger than 12 square feet”, and “should match the charter of the building and of the district.”

Review Criteria Pursuant to Section 130-406 (a), the ARB shall consider the following criteria in determining whether or not to issue a Certificate of Appropriateness for construction or alterations:

STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends APPROVAL of the projecting sign as submitted.

CRITERIA APPLICATION Activity Proposed:

Projecting sign


The proposed design, scale and placement of the sign is compatible with the characteristics of the building and surrounding historic district.


The location of the sign is consistent with existing sign placement and is sensitive to elements of the building design.


The proposed sign is compatible with the streetscape and surrounding historic district.


The proposed sign is in keeping with the character of the structure and surrounding area.


N/A


The proposed sign is in keeping with the design guidelines.

25

This Page Intentionally Left Blank

36


Applicant(s): Lillian P. Rucker Site Owner(s): Lillian P. Rucker Site Address: 9501 Grant Avenue Tax Map No.: 100-01-00-171 Site Location: Southeast corner of the intersection of Grant Avenue and Prince

William Street Current Zoning: R-2S, Low Density Single Family Residential Parcel Size: 0.22 Acres Age of Structure: 104 Years Type of Structure: Residential Summary of Replace Windows Request: Date Accepted for Review: March 28, 2019 Date of ARB Meeting: April 9, 2019

37

2 of 4

STAFF REPORT

ARB Case: 2019-0014 Applicant: Lillian P. Rucker Address: 9501 Grant Avenue REQUEST The applicant is requesting approval for the replacement of the previously installed double hung metal windows with the double hung vinyl windows. PROPERTY INFORMATION Location – Southeast corner of the intersection of Grant Avenue and Prince William Street. Historical Significance –Set on a poured concrete foundation, this two-story, two-bay single dwelling is constructed of wood-frame construction clad in aluminum siding and corner boards. It is covered by a front gable roof sheathed in asphalt shingles. The roof has overhanding eaves and a plain frieze board. The one-story, one-bay porch has a metal awning, metal railing, and posts. Fenestration consists of 1/1 double hung metal windows. Typical of vernacular dwellings constructed in the early decades of the twentieth century, the structure lacks ostentatious architectural ornamentation like many homes constructed during this time. It is representative of the period and is ranked contributing. Surrounding Properties – Structures in the immediate vicinity are rank as noncontributing, including: 9503 and 9507 Grant Ave to the south, 9517 and 9519 Grant Ave to the east, The Courts at Historic Manassas to the west (across Grant Ave), and the Water Tower to the north (across Price William St). APPLICANT’S PROPOSAL The owner of the property is requesting the installation of white double hung vinyl windows. The original windows were removed prior to the 1993 historic survey of the structure. The structure currently contains metal replacement windows. The applicant is proposing to match the 1/1 design of the existing windows. The new windows are of the same size as the originals and would be located in the same location. The applicant is maintaining the trim around the windows. In total the applicant has proposed 11 windows for replacement. The 3 existing white vinyl windows located on the rear of the structure are proposed to remain.


Elizabeth S. Via-Gossman, AICP, Director Phone: 703-257-8223 Fax: 703-257-5117

38

3 of 4

STAFF ANALYSIS The building is not new construction, so applicable design guidelines are from the Historic District Handbook, pages 55-63 and the supplemental Historic District Window Guidelines (attached). The guidelines indicate that original windows should be repaired and should be replaced when they are missing or beyond repair. The current windows on the structure are not original, but are replacements that appear to have been installed prior to the survey of the structure. The proposed window uses a 1/1 design to match the existing 1/1 windows. While staff cannot verify the design of the original windows, a 1/1 design is appropriate to the local historic district for a vernacular style home during the period of construction. The applicant’s proposal to maintain the existing size and location of the windows is in keeping with recommendations for windows. In regards to materials, the proposed vinyl window would not be appropriate as a replacement for original wood windows, nor would it be appropriate for a restoration of the structure. However, the original wood windows have previously been removed. As the house sits today, it has seen significant alterations to the existing structure’s materials over the years. In addition to the prior replacement of the windows, the roof and siding are not original. In addition, the front porch is not original. In consideration of the condition of the existing structure, and the fact that the proposal replaces existing replacement windows, staff supports the proposal to install new replacement vinyl windows which maintains the design, location, and size of the existing windows. Review Criteria Pursuant to Section 130-406 (a), the ARB shall consider the following criteria in determining whether or not to issue a Certificate of Appropriateness for construction or alterations:

39

4 of 4

STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends APPROVAL of the proposed vinyl windows as submitted. The structure currently contains replacement windows. In addition, the structure has several exterior alterations which have impacted the historical integrity of the structure.

CRITERIA APPLICATION Activity Proposed:

Installation of new windows


The new window material and design are compatible with the site, which contains existing replacement windows.


The proposed window replacements do not change the proportion, placement, or size of the element.


The proposed change of the windows would have an not have adverse impact on the historical district neighborhood.


The change in the design and materials of the windows would not have an adverse impact on the historical or architectural character of the building.


N/A


The proposed windows are in keeping with the adopted design guidelines.

40

This Page Intentionally Left Blank

50

city of manassas, virginia architectural review board ... · april 09, 2019 page | 1 city of...

Documents