| Home > Government > Boards and Commissions > Historic District Commission > 1999 > Minutes > June 29 |  |
Submitted: 7/20/1999
Approved:
CITY
OF ROCKVILLE
HISTORIC
DISTRICT COMMISSION
MINUTES
Tuesday, June 29, 1999
Meeting No. 7-99
The City of Rockville Historic District Commission
convened at 7: 13 p.m. at Rockville City Hall.
PRESENT
Craig Moloney, Chairman
Bruce Noble Dean Brenneman
Anita Neal Powell
Staff: Kathleen Mitchell, Directory, Department of Planning and Community Services Christensen, Preservation Planner
I.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
No additions or corrections were offered to the minutes of June 15, 1999.
Commissioner Brenneman moved, seconded by Commissioner Noble, to approve the minutes of the Historic District Commission meeting of June 15, 1999 as submitted.
VOTE: 3-0-1 (Abstained: Neal Powell)
1. HDC99-0148 - Applicant: Hassan Akhlaghi
(Continued from meeting of June 15)
9819 Dockside Terrace, Montgomery Village
Construction of new house at 6 Thomas Street
Action: Approve or Deny
Staff stated that the public hearing on HDC99-0148 was continued from the June 15 meeting. Commissioner Anita Neal Powell was not present at the public hearing held June 15 and therefore will abstain from voting on this issue.
Chairman Moloney stated that the applicant was returning for a review of changes to reduce the appearance and mass of the house and to offer more information on details and materials.
Applicant Hassan Ahklaghi said he addressed three major issues. First, regarding the massiveness and bulk of the house, he stated that the roof pitch on the east portion of the house was changed from 12/12 to 9/12 and the end gable was changed to a hip roof. Second, the garage was altered to remove the rear projection but he did not remove the garage roof overhang and projection. He noted that he would install additional trees and landscape material to help screen the garage doors from West Montgomery and Thomas Street. Third: the rear elevation now has shutters and a gable roof to break up the façade. On materials, he said the siding material was changed from vinyl siding to a Hardy Board (cementious) clapboard siding with wood trim, vinyl fishscale shingles, Certainteed Architectural shingles in Graystone color for the main roof and standing seam metal roof on porches and other roofs, red brick for the basement and chimney, wrought iron railing in front and painted wood lattice underskirting and a painted wood railing in the rear. The garage doors are roll up wood panel garage doors and the shutters are vinyl. The proposed colors are a light gray McCormick paint color #106 (Incense) with white trim.
Commissioner Noble clarified that the main roof height did not change, just the pitch and truss system. The roof height of the east section was lowered.
Commissioner Brenneman clarified that only dead or dying evergreen trees in the front yard would be removed and the mature hollies and evergreen would remain and that the garage projection was not removed because the applicant believed it would be unattractive to remove it. Commissioner Brenneman noted that small details and materials remained to be defined.
The following citizens commented on the revised plan.
Jim Vitol, 11 Wall Street, stated that he was delivering comments on behalf of Mrs. Hoopes at 400 West Montgomery Avenue, who was unable to be present. He said Mrs. Hoopes expressed two major concerns: the size and mass of the house on the lot and the incompatibility of the basement integral garage with the neighborhood character. She did not favor approval of application.
Speaking for himself, Mr. Vitol asked what address the building would have and if that would influence the placement and setback requirements of the rear yard. Staff said the site specialist in the Planning Department assigns new addresses and as this building will front on West Montgomery Avenue it will probably be 404 or 406. Commissioner Brenneman clarified that the homeowner has the option of selecting a street in such cases as a corner lot has two "fronts". This does not affect the setbacks.
Mr. Vitol said the design problem stemmed from the 1993 lot subdivision that created a lot which was different in orientation from the existing lots. Therefore this house must have its bulk facing the street rather than extending to the rear. He concurred that the major concern other than the bulk of the house was the garage, which was not typical of the area and will be prominently displayed to West Montgomery Avenue and Thomas Street. He suggested de-emphasizing the garage.
Alex Daskalakis, 8 Thomas, an abutting neighbor, also voiced concern with the garage design as being too prominent. He preferred wood to the vinyl shutters that will face his house.
Andrew Sellman, 411 West Montgomery, also expressed concern on the size of the house compared to the lot size saying it will not blend in with the streetscape. He suggested a deeper setback or reduced exposure of the basement to reduce the height and mass. He mentioned that no storm drains are on Thomas and rainwater may flow into the basement garage. He noted that the 35-foot driveway would accommodate four cars and suggested the garage be eliminated as most people use garages for storage rather than automobiles.
Jim Vitol concurred, saying that the garage appeared to be driving the house design rather than functioning as an accessory.
Commissioner Brenneman said that public works requires the driveway ramp to be designed to eliminate storm water flow from the street by bringing it to the normal curb height. Mr. Ahklaghi said the drop from street to garage doors is about four feet now and the garage would not be accessible if the basement exposure was reduced. He said the family intended to use the garage for automobiles, not storage.
Ali Honarkar, 216 West Montgomery, stated that this is a modern house and automobiles are part of modern life. He noted that if HDC limited design only to what was built previously, all new structures would be alike. He noted that having automobiles parked on the driveway pad or paving the rear yard as a driveway to a detached garage added more asphalt and made the site less attractive.
Commissioner Brenneman said that the problem was not the garage itself but the typical subdivision look of the doors and the prominent location. He suggested recessing the doors from the plane of the wall to put them in shadow which would mitigate their impact and use a garage door design that was more in keeping with the house style such as a carriage house style door. He stated that such doors are available as a roll up door. Mr. Ahklaghi stated that if this would help resolve the concerns of the HDC and neighbors that he would recess the doors and change the style.
Sandra Deighton, 402 West Montgomery Avenue, reiterated her previous testimony that the proposed house is too large for the lot and said she believed it will be an eyesore.
Chairman Moloney closed the record on HDC99-0148. He concurred that the site is a prominent location at a major gateway to the historic district but disputed the characterization of the proposed house as an eyesore. He found it well detailed and well thought out. He pointed out that the applicant has done a great deal to mitigate concerns about the mass and appearance by reducing the roof pitch and changing its design, changing the siding materials and adding details and landscape screening which adds to the expense. He would support the recessed garage door and favored a carriage house style of door rather than the typical subdivision one proposed.
Commissioner Noble concurred with the Chair, saying that he saw no advantage to a detached garage on this site.
Commissioner Brenneman stated that many minor details remained to be specified and must be approved either by staff or brought back to the HDC. He noted that approval of this plan would allow the applicant to begin the building permit process review while addressing these details. He listed them as gutters and downspouts, specific brick color, garage door design and material, type, material and profile of front railing, submission of a detailed landscape plan, approval of the City Forester to remove trees, and selection of wood or fiberglass shutters. Other necessary details included manufacturer, materials and design of the front door and windows, dimensions and profile of wood trim and crown molding, and attic ridge venting or other venting plan for the attic. He mentioned that these choices would have to be made by the applicant before the house was completed and could be submitted as an amendment to the approved plan. He also noted that Mr. Akhlaghi had agreed to recess the garage doors from two to four feet to reduce their prominence.
Commissioner Brenneman moved, seconded by Commissioner Noble, to approve HDC99-0148 for a new house at 6 Thomas Street with the following conditions:
1. The applicant is to submit details and information previously cited by Commissioner Brenneman and incorporated by him by reference into this motion as an amendment to the approved plan.
2. The garage doors are to be recessed from two to four feet back from the plane of the garage wall and the style of doors changed from a standard roll-up panel garage door to a carriage house style.
Discussion: Commissioner Noble said the house is not an eyesore and complimented the applicants on their attention to detail and responsiveness to the concerns of the HDC and their neighbors. He noted that the applicant had voluntarily complied with neighborhood setbacks and other conditions. He said he continued to be somewhat concerned about the size of the house but felt the HDC and the applicant had worked to make it suitable for this site. He said he understood that the HDC could not deny new construction on a legal lot because they preferred it to remain vacant.
Commissioner Brenneman said that in some situations, an HDC may deny. He pointed to Kensington where large houses are centered on multi-lot sites and a builder wished to sandwich a house on either side of the existing historic home. The County HPC denied this application because it was in conflict with the character and rhythm of the streetscape and historic district and was upheld by the courts. He said he briefly considered such a denial on this site but examined the site and the evidence and information presented by staff and applicant and determined that the proposed structure was not in conflict with the character and rhythm of the West Montgomery Avenue Historic District and the West Montgomery Avenue streetscape. He noted that many concerns and observations were expressed but none of the concerns were shown to impact neighbors or deny them enjoyment and use of their own property.
VOTE: 3-0-1 (Abstained: Neal Powell)
V. OLD BUSINESS
Commissioner Neal Powell distributed the LPHS/ City of Rockville History Day program and several tasks were assigned. Eileen McGuckian from Peerless Rockville volunteered hand fans and offered use of photographs from Peerless' files for the black history tours. Peerless will offer Courthouse and downtown tours and both groups will refer visitors to the other Rockville History Day sites and activities. It was agreed that a joint Rockville effort would be made for next year's History Day.
VIII.
COMMISSION/ STAFF UPDATES
Kathy Mitchell, Director of Planning and Community Development, discussed the process and procedures of historic designation with the HDC, especially in regards to Rose Hill and the recent removal of the allee of trees recommended by the HDC several years ago as part of the proposed Rose Hill historic district. After some research and discussion, it was determined that the Commission recommended to designate the final main street right of way to have an opportunity to review the design and materials of the road that constitutes the traditional historic viewscape to the Rose Hill House. At the time of the recommendation, it was understood that not all and perhaps none of the existing trees could remain. The HDC's desire for further review and input of this viewscape was not clearly understood and omitted from the process. Ms. Mitchell stated that the Mayor and Council had approved proceeding with the Rose Hill, Wootton's Mill and Hurley Carter historic designations but not Chestnut Lodge. After some discussion of procedures, it was concluded that staff should proceed with these applications for Map Amendments for historic districts.
IX.
ADJOURN
The City of Rockville Historic District Commission meeting of June 29, 1999 was adjourned at 10:32 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
Judy Christensen
HDC Staff Liaison