BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEWAGENDA

August 20, 2015 - 4:00 PMCouncil Chambers - Rouss City Hall

1. POINTS OF ORDERA. RolICallB. Approval of Minutes — August 6, 2015

2. CONSENT AGENDA

3. NEW BUSINESS

BAR-15-466 Request of Roger U. Delauter Jr. for a Certificate of Appropriateness to add a windowto the south side and remove deck and stairs from the rear side and replace with new deck at 126North Washington Street.

4. OLD BUSINESS

5. OTHER DISCUSSION

6. ADJOURN

***APpLICANT OR REPRESENTATIVE MUST BE PRESENT AT THE MEETING***

BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEWMINUTES

The Board of Architectural Review held its regularly scheduled meeting on Thursday, August 6, 2015, at4:00p.m. in Council Chambers, Rouss City Hall, 15 North Cameron Street, Winchester, Virginia.

POINTS OF ORDER:

PRESENT: Chairman Rockwood, Vice Chairman Bandyke, Ms. Jackson, Mr. Serafin, Mr. Walker,Ms. Elgin, Ms. Schroth

ABSENT: NoneSTAFF: Josh Crump, Erick Moore, Aaron Grisdale, Carolyn BarrettVISITORS: Sam Long, John Chesson, Alexander Kilimnik

APPROVAL OF MINUTES:

Chairman Rockwood called for corrections or additions to the minutes of July 16, 2015. Vice ChairmanBandyke moved to approve the minutes. Mr. Serafin seconded the motion. Voice vote was taken andthe motion passed 5-0-1. (Jackson)

Ms. Elgin arrived at 4:03pm.

CONSENT AGENDA:

Vice Chairman Ban dyke made a motion to move BAR-15-428 to the Consent Agenda. Ms. Jacksonseconded the motion. Voice vote was taken the motion passed 7-0.

BAR 15-428 Request of Medallion Holdings LLC for a Certificate of Appropriateness to remove the sideporch at 10-12 E. Clifford Street.

On a vote of 7-0, the Board approved a Certificate of Appropriateness for BAR-15-428 with the caveatthat any replacements must come before the Board for approval prior to construction.

NEW BUSINESS:

BAR 15-429 Request of Monmouth Street Properties LLC for a Certificate of Appropriateness for exteriorchanges to siding and windows/doors at 116 West Monmouth Street.

Mr. Long stated that instead of Hardiplank siding as submitted, he would like to go back to wood siding.He would also like to replace a window with French doors.

Vice Chairman Bandyke asked if German siding was underneath the asphalt siding and was that why hewas changing it? Mr. Long said it was not. He believed the addition was put on in the 1950’s based onthe material and he wanted to keep the same shadow lines by using 34” pine lap siding.

Chairman Rockwood asked where the French doors were going to go. Mr. Long said the doorway wasnot visible from the street. Chairman Rockwood commented that the Board would not normallyapprove a steel door if it was visible from the street.

1

Mr. Walker made a motion to grant a Certificate of Appropriateness to BAR 15-429 for replacement ofthe exterior siding with wood siding to match the existing siding and replacement of the door andwindow that is not in the public view as submitted. Vice Chairman Bandyke seconded the motion. Voicevote was taken and the motion passed 7-0.

BAR-15-434 Request of John P. Chesson for a Certificate of Appropriateness to install a Japanese stylecharred oak plank fence at 101 34 West Cork Street.

Mr. Chesson explained that he wanted to install a Japanese fence for privacy. He had started to put up ascreen until it became apparent something more private was needed. He also talked about the designand measurements. Vice Chairman Bandyke asked about the height of the fence at the steps. Mr.Chesson said it was five feet and the fence in the back is eight feet. He was trying to do minimumfencing but realized it was causing more issues.

The board members asked about the gap in the fence boards and if the boards would be louvered. Mr.Chesson said it would be horizontal boards. Mr. Chesson said he had previous approval in 2013 (BAR13-499) for a shed and 8 foot fence in the backyard. The board members asked questions about wherethe new fence was going to go. Mr. Chesson outlined his property lines.

Vice Chairman Bandyke asked about the graphic of charred wood ranges that the clerk had included inthe packet. Mr. Chesson said he was leaning towards the darker colors. Chairman Rockwood noted thatthere was no specific color selected or a specific gate design. He was trying to understand exactly whatwas being asked for in the proposal. He preferred getting the specifics straightened out at this timerather than the applicant having to return. Mr. Chesson said horizontal boards at the gate, charredwood, same materials, same orientation of five feet tall. Mr. Serafin asked if the posts were paintedsteel. Mr. Chesson said they were powder-coated black.

Vice Chairman Bandyke asked how the wood charring was done. Mr. Chesson described severalmethods and finishes. Mr. Walker said he was more comfortable with the more charred pieces becausethey look more uniform. Other colors end up too different. The board members asked if the woodwould have some kind of finish on it. Mr. Chesson said no, depending on the method used, it would notneed it.

Mr. Walker made a motion to grant a Certificate of Appropriateness to BAR-15-434 with the followingconditions:

• The wood should be the darker end of the charred spectrum.• The fence supports shall be black powder-coated iron.• Plan A option is approved as submitted.• If alternate to gate design is selected, applicant is to bring it before the Board for approval.

Vice Chairman Ban dyke seconded the motion. Voice vote was taken and the motion passed 7-0.

2

OLD BUSINESS:

BAR 15-334 Request of Alexander Kilimnik for a Certificate of Appropriateness to repair the roof andgutters at 107 E. Cecil Street.

Mr. Kilimnik explained that after speaking to Mr. Crump, he decided it would be better to break hisrenovation project up into smaller segments. For this submission, he would like to discuss the shingles,gutter and fascia under the gutter. The fascia is potentially going to be thicker to allow for a soffitgroove on the back side. He wanted to know if it was something that could be allowed for. The pictureof his neighbor’s house shows what he would like to do.

Vice Chairman Bandyke asked if he was proposing to add a soffit on his house. Mr. Kilimnik said thehouse currently does not have one. Vice Chairman Bandyke explained the overhang shown on theneighbor’s house. More shingles would have to be added. Mr. Kilimnik said the overhang alreadycomes over too far. Vice Chairman Bandyke asked if it would go all the way around the house and Mr.Kilimnik said yes. The board members discussed the fascia board and drip edge to clarify what wasplanned. Mr. Kilimnik asked if it would be all right to seal the fascia with aluminum when finished buthe would use paint instead if required. Vice Chairman Bandyke said he wished to go on record and sayhe did not think it was needed and putting vinyl or aluminum fascia wrap should not be approved. Mr.Kilimnik said the original fascia had to come off because it was rotten and water was leaking into thehouse.

Mr. Kilimnik said he would be putting the same style and material gutters back on the house. They maybe a little wider than the original. Vice Chairman Bandyke asked if he was doing a downspout where theexisting one is and if he would put another one on. The board members noted it would be a good ideato add another downspout to better handle the water.

Chairman Rockwood noted that there were many items on the application. Mr. Crump said that afterdiscussion with Mr. Kilimnik, it was decided to submit improvement items in phases.

Mr. Serafin made a motion to grant a Certificate of Appropriateness for BAR-15-334 in regard to thesubmitted roof

•Fascia is to be built of wood and painted no aluminum or vinyl covering.• Gutters and downspouts to match existing but slightly larger.• This approval does not include windows or deck.

Mr. Walker seconded the motion. Voice vote was taken and the motion passed 7-0.

DISCUSSION:

Mr. Grisdale spoke about BAR-15-437 for an exterior color change at the Just Like Grandma’s Restaurantlocated at 46 East Piccadilly Street. It was submitted as an administrative approval but he wanted theopinion of the Board on the color choice.

The board members discussed the building panel material and what would have to be done to it tomake the paint adhere to it. They also discussed the choice of color and the characteristics of thebuilding. Vice Chairman Bandyke asked if the panels were in poor condition. Mr. Grisdale said no, the

3

owner is looking for ways to draw more attention to his business. He is also working on sign optionswith staff. The Board suggested lettering on the exterior rather than the signage currently all over thefront window. Mr. Grisdale said he would contact the applicant and work on it more administratively. Ifthere was anything else he was not sure about, he would bring it back before the Board.

Mr. Crump stated that Mr. Simpson of 210 South Washington Street has appealed to City Council abouthis window replacement case BAR-15-336. The case will be on the August 25, 2015 City Council worksession and the September 8, 2015 meeting. He is still going to replace the front windows but isappealing the decision on the side windows.

ADiOURN:

With no further business before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 4:54pm.

4

CERTIFICATE4f: BAR-___________

DATE SUBMITTED: ‘/IOi’i

WlnchPsterDTc%qz

zoning & in8T ( . ‘ 1

Rouss City Hall Telephone: (540) 667-181515 North Cameron Street FAX: (540) 722-3618Winchester, VA 22601 TOO: (540) 722-0782

Web: www.winchesterva.gov

APPLICATION

BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW

CERTIF!CATE OF APPROPRIATENESS

Please print or type all information: j /C..co__” c c’-L_j- L-ce

Applicant

tLL) - (acTelephone Street Address

cke\r ‘-uor c--ç-eE-mail address City / State / Zip

(2kfQ-Property Owner’s Signature Property Owner (Name as appears in Land Records)

A7_ -‘

-tlEh4ne Street Address

d I c .- . ,.,4.” U. cZ “CE-mail address City / State / Zip

PROPERTY LOCATIONCurrent Street Address(es) ‘ (, 1’J L-4 ‘, I - Use: i

Zoning: —ie I (HW) Year Constructed: I (2 Historic Plaque? Y( — N( ) Number:__‘ 1’

TYPE OF REQUEST

I. Demolition U Sign (specify type) and # xtenor Change

U New Construction U Freestanding SIding

r Addition U Wall U Roofing

Fence/Wall Projecting F/indows/Doors

CONCEPTUAL REVIEW ONLY U Other sign (specify) El Paint

U Other (specify)

***SEE REVERSE FOR MATERIALS TO INCLUDE WITH APPUCATION***

FOR OFFICE USE ONLY

U BAR Review OR U Administrative Review per Section 14-5

Hearing Date(s)

________________ ________________ ________________ ________________

CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS: U APPROVED U DISAPPROVED U TABLED U WITHDRAWN

CONDITIONS NOTED:

SIGNATURE:

__________________________________________________

DATE:

______________________________

Secretary, Board of Architectural Review(form updlec 2//14l

REQUEST FOR CHANGES TO 126 NORTH WASHINGTON STREET

This request is for changes to the south side and rear of 126 North Washington Street. The proposedchanges are the addition of a window to the south side and removing a deck and stairs from the rearand replacing with a new one.

No changes will be made to the front primary elevation. The original house was built in 1850. Sincethen several additions have been added. A two story addition has been added to the rear of the originalhouse and another two story addition has been added to that addition. The latter two story additionapparently had a sleeping porch which has since been enclosed.

The proposed new window on the south side will be between two windows of the first addition. It willbe the same material and size of the two existing windows. It is far enough down the drive between thishouse and the one to the south that it is barely visible from any public right of way.

The proposed changes to the rear involve removing an exterior stairway with two small decks andreplacing it with two new decks. New doors to access the new decks will be added. Siding that is in needof repair will be replaced.

The rear of the house, particularly the first floor, is not really visible from any public right of way. It maybe possible, once leaves are off trees, to see a small portion of the second floor from the private parkinglot to the rear.

The existing deck and stairs will not meet code. The siding is in need of repair to the point that most willneed to be removed. The windows were added when the sleeping porch was enclosed and have nohistoric value.

A similar new rear addition with comparable windows was approved recently for the house north of thisone. The intent is to not alter the original structure or primary visible elevations while making necessaryrepairs and modifications to an elevation that is barely if at all visible from a public right of way.

tan.

:inisRim’.ZEANIHSVj,ajI-ILL

:—

A

d3.4*t1,r4e

*:r-J;

3J.fl0301/iUjflNJ...e-rj

DNIIsIX3HD1Vv4o1MogMMa

—

—

-

:.

—3-

‘1’—

—__‘_‘_•‘-•w_’

1

•“a.‘.

..

—

-‘

a•*._.%

-s..%

*1sc;

I‘st.

4.’

‘at,

.s-.,•

4’...

N

-..

-.••..

RAISE FACIA TO MEET SOUTH ADDITION ROOF ANDREPLACE WITH STANDING SEAM TO MATCH EXISTING

DOORS TO DECKKOLBE & KOLBE SWINGING PATIO2 DOOR CONFIGURATIONK.-KRON FINISH PURE WHITE

REMOVE EXISTING SIDING ANREPLACE WITH HARDIPI.ANK711 EXPOSURE SMOOTHARTIC WHITE

REMOVE EXISTING ANDREPLACE WITH NEW UPPERAND LOWER DECKFRAMING PT PINEPAINTED WHITEDECKING TREX TRANSCORDGRAVEL PATHRAILING TREX TRANSCORDCLASSIC WHITE

REPAIR AND PAINT EXISTING WINDOW

ccce-a Sc E&CV4ttc1

‘a’II’

126 NORTH WASHINGTON REAR ELEVATON

-‘ -

.1

‘I.‘I

•‘

126 NORTH WASHINTON VIEW FROM REAR PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAYI

.