| Home > Government > Boards and Commissions > Historic District Commission > 2003 > Minutes > June 19 |  |
Submitted:
July 17, 2003
Approved: July 17, 2003
CITY
OF ROCKVILLE
HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION
MINUTES
Thursday,
June 19, 2003
Meeting No. 06-2003
The City
of Rockville Historic District Commission convened in regular session in the
Mayor and Council Chambers, Rockville City Hall, 111 Maryland Avenue, at 7:13
PM.
PRESENT
Anita Neal Powell, Chairperson
Jeff Broadhurst, Chair pro tem
Andrea Hartranft
Craig Moloney
Beth Rodgers
HDC Staff present: Bob Spalding, Chief of Planning; Judy Christensen,
Cindy Kebba, Anne Brockett and Robin Ziek, Preservation Planners.
MINUTES:
I. Meeting
No. 05-2003, May 15, 2003
Commissioner
Hartranft corrected her comments on page 5 regarding skylights in the Buckingham
Design Guidelines.
MOTION:
Commissioner Broadhurst moved to approve the minutes as corrected. Commissioner
Hartranft seconded the motion.
VOTE: 3-0-2 (Abstained: Neal Powell and Rodgers)
The Chair
welcomed Con Hitchcock, a resident of King Farm, who introduced himself as an
applicant for the HDC vacancy. He spoke briefly about his legal background dealing
with preservation law and involvement in historic preservation in Washington
DC. He is a 10-year member of the Committee of 100 on the Federal City.
II. APPLICATIONS FOR CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL
A. HDC03-0249
Applicant: Daniel Maddox
Address: 217 W. Montgomery
Request: Replace garage
Planner Cindy
Kebba presented a visual overview of the site, the existing house and garage,
and the work proposed. The existing garage is a concrete block structure built
in the late 1940s, and the new garage will be sited in its place to preserve
the traditional view from the street. The site is complicated in that an old
summer kitchen called “The Annex” is extant but not part of the main
structure so must be counted toward the maximum 900 square feet of accessory
buildings permitted on the site. Mr. and Mrs. Maddox have applied for a variance
to permit construction of an 890 square foot garage in place of the existing
garage. The Commission reviewed the plans at its May 15 meeting as a courtesy
review and stated that it would support the variance, as a property owner in
a historic district should not be required to give up original outbuildings
that contribute to the history of the site to have modern conveniences. She
noted that a small shed currently used for storage would be removed when the
garage was complete and was not calculated as part of the total accessory square
footage.
Planner Kebba noted that diagonal siding would be installed in the front attic
story of the garage to match the original house front. Andersen windows, 6/6,
are specified and the garage doors will not be as shown on the plan, but will
be a roll-up carriage house style. The exterior siding is German-style Hardiplank,
either smooth or wood-grained finish. She noted that a further revision added
two windows symmetrically placed on the west side and one window on the east
will be centered between the door and the corner to add additional light and
relieve the façade. Staff recommended approval with conditions that only
1/3 of the attic floor could be floored for storage and all applicable building
permits must be obtained.
In response to questions from Commissioner Broadhurst, applicant Daniel Maddox
said the roof pitch was 12/12 and the diagonal boards would be mitred at the
apex. He stated that this diagonal pattern matches the original gable siding
of the house and he has discovered evidence of the diagonal siding treatment
on the interior of his attic. He said 6/6 windows rather than 2/2 as on the
houses’ front facade were selected to match the rear house windows. He
agreed that the window in the garage attic story should be reduced in size and
the attic trim board and king post details reworked to better match the front
of the house.
Commissioner Moloney inquired about trim material and sizes. Mr. Maddox said
he preferred to use all Hardiplank and would match trim widths to the house.
He noted that the proposed Andersen windows were true divided lights, not removable
grilles, and determined that the sash material was paintable fibrex.
Evelyn Maddox, 217 West Montgomery, asked if they would need to return for approval
of the modifications that were verbally presented at the meeting. The Commission
said those changes would be incorporated into the motion so a return was required
only if the materials or design further changed.
MOTION: Commissioner Moloney moved to approve application HDC03-0249 for a new detached garage at 217 West Montgomery Avenue as amended by the applicant:
Commissioner
Rodgers seconded the motion.
VOTE: 5-0
B. HDC03-0251
Applicant: Cameron Moffett
Address: 701 Grandin Avenue
Request: Replace porch supports (retroactive); install fence; install cementitious siding & decorative shingles; replace gable window; install porch railing
Planner Anne
Brockett presented a visual overview of the site and the existing house, which
was recently designated. She detailed the changes done to date and what is proposed.
Ms. Brockett noted that three plain fiberglass Tuscan columns, which are more
compatible with the style, have replaced the former cast metal porch supports.
The applicants wish to replace the existing asbestos shingles with fiber cement
siding and decorative fishscale shingles in the attic gables. Rather than a
1/1 sash window in the front attic gable, the applicant is proposing a 2 foot
square window turned on the diagonal. Ms. Brockett presented a photograph of
the house recently found in the Peerless Rockville collection that showed the
house with a small elongated diamond-shaped window surrounded by diamond shaped
shingles in the attic gable.
Ms. Brockett stated that the picket fence at the front and rear of the yard
met the HDC design guidelines and were approved by staff. The side yards are
proposed to be fenced with a 6-foot board on board stockade fence similar to
a deteriorated one in place on the east side. This fence and the west side chain
link fence will eventually be replaced.
Cameron Moffet, owner of 701 Grandin, said he had not seen the historic photo
before and would like to reproduce the diamond window and shingle design if
possible. In response to questions from the Commission he said he was undecided
about his choice of using smooth or wood grained siding over the existing siding
and that the original wood siding that he had seen was fire damaged and deteriorated.
He said he would drill holes to mount the new siding.
Commissioner Broadhurst said he found the three-bay porch odd as the center
column was placed in front of a window. He said four columns would be closer
to the original design. He asked the owner if another column could be added
and said that reproducing the original attic design would be a wonderful touch.
He noted that wood is generally preferred on original buildings but the owner
may replace the current cementitious shingle siding without a permit as ordinary
maintenance, and the clapboard pattern would be more appropriate to the house.
Planner Robin Ziek suggested that smooth siding be utilized, as the wood grained
clapboard siding would not have been original to the house.
Commissioner Moloney asked if the window and door trims would be lost in the
additional layer of siding. Mr. Moffett said that they had been extended out
previous to their purchase in anticipation of adding siding. He asked that the
additional column not be required. He asked if a porch rail was required by
code. Mr. Moloney said only if the porch was 30 inches or more from the grade,
and since the porch is not that high, a decorative porch railing of any height
may be installed.
Commissioner Hartranft asked if the diamond pattern shingle was available in
cement siding. Planner Robin Ziek stated that it was not but that the diamond
shape could easily be cut on site using wood shingles.
Commissioner Rodgers clarified the fence placement and that the diamond design
would be used in all attic gables.
MOTION: Commissioner Hartranft moved to approve application HDC03-0251 for exterior siding, columns, gable windows and fencing at 701 Grandin Avenue with the following conditions:
Commissioner
Broadhurst seconded the motion.
In discussion, condition number one was modified to be a recommendation, not a condition. Commissioner Broadhurst said the porch rail installation should not be required until the HDC could review the design and placement. Commissioner Hartranft accepted both amendments. Commissioner Moloney added smooth cement siding to the conditions, which was also accepted.
VOTE: 5-0
III. BUCKINGHAM
ARCHITECTURAL GUIDELINES REVIEW
The applicant,
John Clark of Elm Street Development, was present. Commissioner Broadhurst complimented
Mr. Clark on the revised guidelines, saying that they were much improved in
organization and
scope.
Commissioner Hartranft stated concern with the size and placement of attached
garages. She would like to see more guidance on massing, proportion, and placement
of garages. Mr. Clark stated that his concern with limiting garage design and
placement in the guidelines was due to the PRU guidelines, which give the total
buildable square footage of each lot. He does not want the garages to encroach
on that area.
Commissioner Broadhurst noted that requiring skylights on the rear side could
be problematic if the house has a front-facing gable. He suggested placing them
so that they avoid being seen from the public side.
Commissioner Rodgers commented on retaining walls and asked to see a final schedule
of landscape materials as a courtesy. The “reviewing committee” was
clarified as the HOA, the HDC, or both as applicable. Several minor details
were added: painted metal was added to #12 as a gutter material, fences were
limited to a maximum height of 36” in the front of houses in #15, “interlocking”
was added to clarify pre-cast Keystone blocks in #16, and should be limited
to secondary views only, and a typographical error was noted in the second item
of #20. A copy of the HDC memo to the Planning Commission is attached.
MOTION:
Commissioner Rodgers moved to recommend the Buckingham Architectural Design
Guidelines with corrections and additions as stated to the Planning Commission.
Commissioner Broadhurst seconded the motion.
VOTE: 5-0
IV. COURTESY
REVIEWS
A. Chestnut
Lodge – Associated Properties. Initial review of concept plans for residential
development.
Attorney Jody Kline of Miller, Miller and Canby introduced Kate Kuranda of R.Christopher
Goodwin & Associates as the Historic Preservation Consultant, and Morty
Levine, President of Associated Companies, the contract purchaser. He said Ms.
Kuranda would present an existing conditions survey, a maximum potential site
plan and overlay the historic resources to identify conflicts.
Ms. Kuranda began with an overview of seven buildings selected as having historic
significance, noting that the historic resources are a high priority for the
developer and will serve as a “frontispiece.” The lodge building is
the classic “white elephant” that will not disappear and must be made
an asset. She stated that the buildings had been examined by a structural engineer
and ranged in condition from “long term deferred maintenance” to “abandoned
and derelict.” In some cases the buildings are designed for hospital or
medical use and would be extremely difficult to reuse as residential properties.
The costs for renovation were not to beautify or fit out but to remove health
and safety issues such as asbestos, lead paint and mold, which has become a
great concern.
Costs for hazardous materials remediation and building rehabilitation: The Hotel/
Lodge was estimated at $3 to 4 million with no buildout for reuse. Frieda’s
Cottage would cost $300,000 with all new services. The Upper Cottage would cost
$400,000. It was built about 1942 on the site of the earlier laundry. There
is no interior evidence that the laundry is incorporated into the present building.
It has single rooms with extremely low ceiling heights that may not pass code.
The Icehouse was an original hotel accessory building but was severely deteriorated
as of 1996. The developer may consider moving or reconstructing the Icehouse
in the vicinity of the barn.
Costs for rehab for the Little Lodge would be in the upper $400,000s. This building
was constructed by the Bullards as a personal residence in 1939. It is tied
into the hospital heat or air conditioning with no separate utilities and the
slate roof is failing.
The former Stable retains its original massing, but was converted to small office
and dormitory use.
Rose Hill Barn- In poor condition.
Ms. Kuranda presented the proposed maximum build out plan noting that it retained
as many mature trees as possible and utilities and roads were snaked around
specimen trees. It shows retention of the main hospital building, Frieda’s
Cottage, and Rose Hill Barn. The icehouse is proposed to be reconstructed near
the Rose Hill Barn in an agricultural setting. Ms. Kuranda stated that the Upper
Cottage is in the proposed roadway, has limited reuse, and is less important
in the hierarchy of historic resources and is not proposed to be retained. The
Stable has been substantially modified and is also proposed to be demolished.
Commissioner Hartranft pointed out that the two houses on the east side of the
main building appeared to be too close in proximity. She said the history and
significance of the building should be respected by not having new construction
immediately abutting it. Commissioner Rodgers mentioned the cafeteria building
designed by Chloethiel Woodward Smith as a modernist building by a noted architect
that should be preserved. Ms. Kuranda said that the developer’s discussion
had been limited to designated buildings only and the cafeteria has not been
designated.
Commissioner Moloney said that the development seemed very inward-focused with
the main drive as the only access. He asked if a build out of Thomas Street
had been considered and if the Stable could be an accessory building for a residence.
He was generally not opposed to moving the Icehouse, and would like to see the
Little Lodge/Bullard House rehabbed as a residence.
In addressing Thomas Street, Ms. Kuranda said the developers understood from
the Mayor and Council that the front portion of the site should remain as is.
She noted that staff had already identified the two houses on the east side
of the main building as a potential issue and the lots were being arranged on
the west side to accommodate them. She stated that they could consider orienting
some house toward Thomas Street. The Stable retains little integrity as a stable
except in its massing and would essentially have to be rebuilt, which would
be very expensive. The aim is to put the most money into the most important
structures with maximum impact.
Commissioner Rodgers asked how preservation would be a frontispiece for the
development and how the history would be preserved and promoted. Ms. Kuranda
said that they have not yet looked at interpreting and conveying the site’s
history but said that an outreach package could be developed. She mentioned
publications and tours as well as open houses and said they were open to ideas.
She emphasized that the developers do not have a use for the main building identified,
but it can be a major amenity or a major detraction. The current plans are to
remove inappropriate additions and the air conditioning tower and to stabilize
it until a use is found.
Chief of Planning Bob Spalding reviewed the Master Plan Recommendations for
the property and said it probably would be developed through the Planned Residential
Unit (PRU) process. As a PRU, the Mayor and Council would set the zone requirements
for the property as was done for the Buckingham property. This project is different
in that it starts with both National Register and locally designated historic
resources on it and the HDC is a key player from the beginning.
Mr. Morty
Levine, President of Associated Companies said that the company has done many
developments which included historic components, such as Waters Landing in Germantown,
and saw Chestnut Lodge as a unique opportunity. He said it would only be successful
if all parties worked hand in hand. Commissioner Rodgers reiterated that the
Cafeteria building is important to the history of Chestnut Lodge and the Commission
wants to work with them to preserve it and other buildings. Mr. Levine responded
that although he does not expect to make money on the renovated historic buildings,
he does not want to lose money on them or have them become a liability. He is
working with Peerless Rockville, staff, and other groups to find acceptable
answers.
Suzanne Fisher, President of Peerless Rockville, said that Peerless has been
working with the applicants and are in favor of moving the Icehouse. She said
Peerless still hopes the Little Lodge/Bullard House can be preserved and resold,
as it is a residence and has beautiful interior details and considerable period
charm. Commissioner Moloney asked if Peerless had an opinion on the loss of
the stable. Ms. Fisher said if funds were limited for preservation, the Little
Lodge/Bullard House should have priority over the stable. She said it would
be very saleable if restored.
The HDC thanked Mr. Levine and his consultants for working with the HDC and
being forthright with their goals. Chairperson Neal Powell said they looked
forward to a productive partnership. Mr. Levine said they would be seeing a
lot of each other in future months as plans progressed.
B. 22 West
Jefferson Street – The Magruder Companies. Review of revised plans.
Daniel Ball,
representing the Magruder Companies, presented the revised plans for 22 West
Jefferson. He noted that the Mayor and Council had placed a moratorium on commercial
projects abutting residential parcels 11 months ago and subsequently adopted
new standards for the zone that limited the building height. He said that the
building project was planned at 53,000 square feet for the site with 5,600 square
feet in the historic district. The existing three-story office building would
be gutted on the interior as it has become functionally obsolete and brought
up to code. The exterior will be renovated and repaired with a 2-story wing
added on the east side and a 3-1/2 story addition on the rear. A four-story
underground garage will also be added. The roof of the underground garage will
be landscaped and a rear entry plaza with accessible ramps will enter into a
new elevator tower and lobby located at the connection of the existing building
and the rear addition.
In detail, there will be a broken wall plane between the existing building and
the new 2-story side addition that will reflect the original design details.
The rear addition is brick and precast stone with pilasters breaking up the
façade. A building longer than 100 feet must be broken every 50 feet
according to the new development standards.
In general, the HDC was supportive of the current design. The HDC had concerns
with the continuous roofline and the placement of pilasters, windows and dormers.
They also thought that some of the breaks were arbitrary, and wanted a more
cohesive design. There was discussion of how the windows and dormers did and
did not line up. The new design should not look like townhouses, but an extension
of the Georgian revival style and massing. Commissioner Broadhurst suggested
that if breaks are necessary per the development standards, having a symmetrical
central block with wings would be more reflective of Georgian architecture.
Commissioner Hartranft was concerned about window placement and crowns and felt
the windows were too crowded. Commissioner Moloney asked about the landscaping
on the east side of the addition. Mr. Ball noted 15’ on that side of the
property above the parking garage would be used for a lawn area. No large plantings
would be possible due to the underground garage. There is also an antiquated
storm drain that will be revamped.
Mr. Ball indicated they were looking at synthetic slate for the roof. Commissioner
Moloney asked him to bring samples. The final approval will be on the July 17th
Meeting agenda.
C. 115
Park Avenue – Spates Bungalow. Review of revised plans for parking lot
and modifications for reuse
Barbara Sears
and Erin Girard of Linowes and Blocher appeared on behalf of the property owners,
Casey Management. Ms. Sears and Ms. Girard presented the site plans included
in the Use Permit application for the office building, and noted that it had
not changed substantially since the HDC had endorsed it at the courtesy review
of January 2003. Several revisions are in process concerning the sidewalk along
Fleet Street, the handicapped access ramp on the north side of the house that
wraps around to the front, the location of the stormwater management pond, and
the size of the parking lot.
Staff noted that the 70-foot Park Avenue right of way had been dropped to 50
feet to preserve the porch when the property was rehabilitated and it was proposed
to drop the Fleet Street sidewalk width to four feet if the five-foot width
was not possible. A lift had been proposed by staff to gain handicapped access
to the porch, which would eliminate the stone wall railing and ramp in front
of the building and perhaps preserve a specimen tree. Ms. Sears said that cost
is a major factor and may prevent installing a lift. Commissioner Broadhurst
felt that the curved stone wall would be too large for the house. He suggested
that if the ADA ramp were to start further back in the parking lot with a switchback
there, it might be possible not to wrap around the house. This would have the
ramp entering the porch from the opposite end than what is currently proposed.
Commissioner Rodgers inquired is this would require removing a tree. Ms. Sears
noted that the City Forester had recently examined the white oak in front and
recommended further testing for hollow conditions. The tree may not be in good
enough health to be preserved.
The HDC supported the site layout and plans presented except for the handicapped
ramp and the design of the rear addition. Ms. Christensen noted that it could
not be increased in size because the parking was currently the minimum required
amount for the proposed square footage. In addition, the roof pitch, although
low in contrast to the house, would obscure the roof dormer if heightened. Commissioner
Broadhurst said that a more appropriate addition design might be the better
choice over the dormer. However, the dormer window was considered valuable to
the second story office space that has little available natural light. Commissioner
Moloney suggested using a shed roof for the addition. In addition it was noted
that code might require the stairway from the parking lot to the addition to
be covered from the weather and that this entrance would be used by office clients
and staff and would be the first impression and presentation of the businesses
within. Commissioner Hartranft suggested that a modern style addition would
also be acceptable and allow more light into the building.
Staff explained that although the site is not presently in a historic district,
it is scheduled to be designated on July 14 by the Mayor and Council. The use
permit application is pending and should be acted upon by the Planning Commission
on July 9. This review is to ensure that if approved by the Planning Commission
as part of the use permit application, the proposed site plan and addition would
meet the HDC’s architectural guidelines and standards and could be approved
by the HDC.
VII. RECOMMENDATION
FOR FY04 HDC CHAIR TO MAYOR AND COUNCIL
According
the HDC’s Rules of Procedure, the Chairperson shall be appointed at the
beginning of each fiscal year by the Mayor and Council.
Commissioner Rodgers said that Chairperson Neal Powell had served only nine
months rather than one year as cited in the ordinance and therefore the recommendation
was premature. Planner Christensen stated that the starting date of the term
was defined in the HDC Rules of Procedure that are undergoing revision and will
be presented for discussion in July. Commissioner Hartranft and others said
that a two-year period would be more appropriate as each Chairperson is replaced
just as they reach a comfort level with the position.
Chief of Planning Spalding said that one year was the approved length of term
for boards and commissions to circulate the responsibility of the Chair position
and avoid one person from dominating the body. The ordinance allows for one
year appointments by the Mayor and Council and a Chair may not succeed him or
herself. He noted that Chairperson Powell was appointed late last year due to
a busy Mayor and Council agenda, but the Mayor and Council are now current with
appointments. After some discussion, the HDC consensus was that staff should
investigate extending the term to two years and the Rules of Procedure should
modify the term starting date so as to allow the current Chairperson to serve
a full year. September was one suggested starting date. The matter will be taken
up via email and again in July.
As the time was now after 10:00 pm, Chairperson Neal Powell announced that remaining
items would be tabled to the July 17 meeting except the report from Peerless
Rockville.
VII. COMMITTEE
/ ORGANIZATION REPORTS
Peerless
Rockville – Suzanne Fisher
Ms. Fisher confirmed that the HDC would have a table in Courthouse Square Park
for the Heritage Days Tours on June 28 and would utilize Peerless Rockville
facilities to demonstrate the new Historic Rockville web site. Peerless will
be providing walking tours of St. Mary’s Cemetery and the Fitzgerald graves,
Wire Hardware, the Civil War trail, and the Red Brick Courthouse. She reported
that the Jeb Stuart return to Rockville on June 13-15 was a great event. The
Gettysburg Civil War markers should be installed and ready for the June 28 Heritage
Days tours.
VIII. ADJOURN
The HDC meeting of June 19, 2003 was adjourned at 10:22 p.m.