C. HDC2006-00369
Applicant: Chestnut Lodge Properties, Inc.
Address: 500 W. Montgomery Avenue
Request: Rehabilitation of and rear addition to Little Lodge
Cindy Kebba presented the staff report. The Little Lodge, and the front almost eight acres of the Chestnut Lodge property, is in the West Montgomery Avenue Historic District and the Little Lodge is a contributing resource. It is situated between the Stable and the Ice House, both of which will be accessory structures to the Little Lodge on Lot 1 of the new Chestnut Lodge development and are subjects of the next two applications on tonight’s agenda. This application is for rehabilitation of and a rear one-story addition to the Little Lodge.
The house was owned by Dr. Dexter Bullard, who was Chestnut Lodge Hospital’s second generation owner and the hospital’s primary psychiatrist, and his wife Anne. It was built c. 1929. The exterior materials and appearance are largely intact. The rehabilitation of the Little Lodge and a rear addition were reviewed at an HDC courtesy review on July 20, 2006.
Ms. Kebba noted that HDC courtesy review comments on the rehabilitation were focused on the east porch. The porch is not currently screened and probably was not originally, but did have screening at one time and the applicant intends to put the screening back in. The HDC felt that enlarging the door opening from the living room to the porch and replacing the single door that’s there with a double French door would be an approvable alteration as this is a secondary façade that will be somewhat hidden from view by the screened porch and that extra light that would be provided by a larger door would be beneficial because the screening on the porch will diminish sunlight available to this room. The HDC was also in favor of changing the access from the porch to the south side or rear yard, and commented that the metal railing on top of the porch should be replaced with the same material but at a height to meet code (36 inches) rather than the pvc material that was proposed by the applicant.
Ms. Kebba referred to the list of proposed repairs and replacements in-kind that are listed in the staff report. The roof is simulated slate and will be entirely replaced with a similar material. The metal roof over the east porch will be replaced with a new flat seam metal roof. The front and rear second story dormer window sashes will all be replaced with matching wood sashes, but the wood frames will be retained. Other than these and the first floor door to the east porch, no other doors or windows will need replacement. Window and wall air conditioning units, the handicapped ramp in front, and metal fire escape stairs will be removed. The smooth stucco will be repaired where needed and painted.
Staff finds that the proposed rehabilitation meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation #6, the City’s Technical Guides for Exterior Alterations, and the Chestnut Lodge Design Guidelines.
The proposed one-story rear addition at the SW corner has a low gable roof and does not have a significant impact on the second story dormers which are a defining architectural feature of the house. The addition is fairly small, 462 square feet, not including the covered porch that is part of the addition. It is in appropriate scale to the main house. It will be inset from the west plane of the house by about 8 inches. The materials, including Hardiplank siding with 5-inch exposure, aluminum–clad, double-hung windows with simulated divided lights, synthetic trim, and standing seam metal roof, will differentiate it from the materials used on the original house.
Staff stated that the proposed addition meets the City’s Technical Guide for Exterior Alterations #4 (new additions), Secretary of the Interior Standards #9 and #10 and the Chestnut Lodge Design Guidelines.
Soo Lee-Cho, attorney for the applicant, said that her applicant had been before the HDC twice for courtesy reviews and they now felt very comfortable that they had enough guidance from the HDC to present final plans for rehabilitation of and a rear addition to the Little Lodge. She noted that the detailed application for the Chestnut Lodge development was scheduled to be before the Planning Commission on October 25.
The HDC agreed that the courtesy reviews had been helpful and recognized that HDC comments and recommendations had been taken into consideration in the final plans by the applicant.
MOTION: Commissioner Moloney moved approval; Commissioner Powell seconded.
VOTE: 3-0
D. HDC2006-00370
Applicant: Chestnut Lodge Properties, Inc.
Address: 500 W. Montgomery Avenue
Request: New Construction – Stable
Cindy Kebba presented the staff report and said that the Stable is a relatively large rectangular building at the far west border of the Chestnut Lodge property and is part of the W. Montgomery Avenue Historic District.
The existing vernacular wood-frame stable is approximately 3,100 square feet and has a first and second floor. It is one of the earliest extant buildings on the Chestnut Lodge property and was built c. 1887 at about the same time the hotel (Lodge) was built. It is a contributing resource to the hotel and hospital periods of significance and it has had many uses throughout its history. As a result it has been physically altered to accommodate new uses.
Ms. Kebba said that the Stable is in deteriorated condition and does not have salvagable materials as has been discussed at prior courtesy reviews. The rear wall is bowed from distress in the foundation. The applicant requests that it be demolished and all new materials be used in construction of a new building. The location and orientation and the basic footprint, form, scale and massing of the new building will be that of the pre-1959 stable.
The HDC discussed the Stable at courtesy reviews on June 15 and on July 20, 2006. Ms. Kebba stated that the architect, Mary Oehrlein, was present at these meetings to provide information on what her firm has discovered regarding the physical evolution and current condition of the building. She said that there were three distinct periods of construction with changes to window and door openings. The building was significantly altered c. 1959. The shed portion was probably open originally. They have exposed the underlying sheathing that was covered by asbestos siding in conducting their research on the building, and there is a variety of German drop siding, diagonal tongue and groove, plywood and fiberboard infill. The main roof is asphalt and the shed roof is metal.
There was a silo at the southeast corner when the building was used as a dairy, where those double doors are now and the shed addition was about 12 ½ feet shorter than it is now. The only access to the second floor now is via these stairs and south side door.
Ms. Kebba noted that the HDC was concerned about producing a replica of the stable that might be mistakenly interpreted to be one of the historic structures. At that time the applicant was proposing German siding and wood windows and trying to put back at least what they knew was once there in terms of materials. The HDC asked them to come back with a solution to this problem and at the July 20 courtesy review they again presented much the same massing, size and form of the Stable but proposed modern materials; the same materials that will be used on the Little Lodge addition and on the new residential construction at the rear of the site outside of the historic district. This includes smooth grain Hardiplank siding, aluminum-clad double-hung windows with simulated divided lights and synthetic trim. The roof would be standing seam metal on both the main roof and the shed. The garage doors are carriage style but operate as overhead doors. The HDC had favorable comments on this concept at the courtesy review.
Ms. Kebba said that the first floor will consist of three garage bays. The slope of the shed roof will be reduced and the height increased to accommodate the garage entrances. The shed addition is reduced in length, as it was when the silo was present. The second floor will have a central bath and open rooms on either side that could be used as a studio or other uses. Entrances will be provided on the north side both first floor and second floor but there will be no entrance at the south elevation.
Staff recommends approval of this application for new construction. The character-defining features which still exist with the existing stable are its location, siting and spatial relationship to the Lodge and its general size, scale and form. The applicant proposes to use these features in a new building to evoke the essence of the Stable on its original site but to clearly identify it as new construction and to provide it with a viable use as an accessory building to the Little Lodge.
Ms. Kebba concluded that this application meets the City of Rockville Technical Guides for Exterior alteration #5 (new construction), Chestnut Lodge Design Guidelines, and Secretary of the Interior Standards for Rehabilitation #9 and #10.
Commissioner Moloney asked about the roof material and the exterior lighting fixtures. Martin Howell, Oehrlein Associates, said that it would be a contemporary standing seam metal roof, probably pre-finished. He also made a correction, noting that the three carriage lamps at the entrances would be 14 ½ inches tall and 7 inches in diameter, smaller than the dimensions that were shown on the cut sheet that was provided to the commissioners.
MOTION: Commissioner Powell moved approval; Commissioner Moloney seconded.
VOTE: 3-0
E. HDC2006-00371
Applicant: Chestnut Lodge Properties, Inc.
Address: 500 W. Montgomery Avenue
Request: Rehabilitation of Ice House
Planner Kebba presented the staff report and identified the ice house on the site map, noting that it is located immediately east of the Little Lodge.
Ms. Kebba explained that the applicant proposes to dismantle the Ice House and rebuild it in its existing location with the same orientation and re-using much of the existing materials. This is a rehabilitation. Like the Stable, it has successfully been adapted to new uses over time. It served as the hospital music room after its use as an Ice House became obsolete during the hotel period.
Rehabilitation of the Ice House was approved in concept as HDC2005-00036 in 2005 with conditions as are addressed in the current staff report. One of these conditions was Planning Commission approval of Detailed Application, PRU2006-0022A. Ms. Kebba explained that this application is scheduled to go to the Planning Commission on Oct. 25. The other conditions had to do with retaining its location and orientation, which the applicant is doing, vs. moving the Ice House to another location on the property, and documentation which has been completed by the applicant.
The design, scale, proportion, siting, orientation, and materials will be unchanged except the applicant proposes a stone veneer foundation to match the west elevation of the Lodge foundation.
The building is small, only 369 square feet. The north side double doors will be removed and stored so that they can be replicated. They provide entrance to the basement level. Immediately inside the doors are concrete steps leading to the basement. There is no landing at the top or bottom. This situation does not meet current code.
The east side has an entrance to the main level. It is a very narrow wood door. It will be retained and re-used but the glazing and trim will be replaced and the transom above will be replaced to match. There are no openings on the west side.
The cedar shake roof is badly deteriorated and will be entirely replaced in-kind. The applicant believes that approximately 70% of the siding (combination of novelty and German siding) can be re-used. There is some interior matching siding that they may be able to use to supplement the salvagable exterior siding.
The south façade features a window which will be re-used ad a shed roof over a vent that will be re-used.
A chart summarizing materials that will be re-used vs. replaced in-kind is provided in the staff report.
The basement will be filled. The rehabilitated Ice House will be built on a 4-inch concrete slab. This will not affect its appearance from the exterior and interior access will be available from the wider north doors as well as the narrow east door.
Staff concluded that the proposed rehabilitation meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation, the City’s Technical Guidelines, and the Chestnut Lodge Design Guidelines and suggested the condition that the foundation of the main block be parged concrete blocks as is currently there rather than stone veneer as proposed by the applicant because there is not sufficient evidence that the foundation was ever stone.
Soo Lee-Cho stated that staff’s recommendation, with the condition for the foundation material, is acceptable to the applicant.
Commissioner Moloney said that he does not disagree with filling in the basement, but he prefers cladding the new foundation with stone veneer. He suggested that the interior space be finished with insulation and HVAC.
Martin Howell said the existing foundation is clay tile which was not original. He proposed stone to match the stone foundation of the Lodge building and because ice houses usually had a masonry foundation. He thinks the ice house was probably moved and built on a new foundation at some point.
MOTION: Commissioner Moloney moved approval with the stone veneer foundation for the main block and a brick foundation for the north extension as was proposed by the applicant; Commissioner Powell seconded.
VOTE: 3-0
Discussion of the site plan for Lot 1:
The applicant requested feedback from the HDC on the hardscape and landscape features for Lot 1, including trees, shrubs, walkways, driveways, parking areas, the utility enclosure and patio behind the Little Lodge, lighting and the two stone pillars that indicate entry into the non-historic portion of the site.
Staff agreed with the City Forester that the solid line of evergreens along the historic district boundary line at the south property line of Little Lodge should be less dense, include native plantings, and some deciduous trees. Staff asked if the large proposed shade tree in rear yard of Little Lodge, roughly where a white oak will be removed may be too close to the house. Staff commented that the parking pad in front (east of) the Stable is larger than necessary as it is wider than the width of the Stable (20 ft. 2”).
Soo Lee-Cho said that the landscaping buffer along the boundary line resulted from comments received from the Mayor and Council during the exploratory phase of the application. She said the applicant is not opposed to changing this buffer but they would have to research what was included in the exploratory plan approval. She introduced Molly Graves, landscape architect with Lewis Scully Gionet.
Ms. Graves addressed staff’s concerns and said that the latest version of their plans do show more variety in the buffer. She said she thought the buffer was provided to shield the view of the new construction from the historic district. Commissioner Moloney said that a hedge or continuous barrier may not be what is best and more visual interest may be created with more variety and more groupings and less of an unnatural barricade. Ms. Graves agreed to work with that idea.
Ms. Graves described the stone pillars on each side of Bullard Circle at the entrance to the non-historic area would be 6 feet tall and 4 feet square, made of Stoneyhurst stone, with a pre-cast cap and a small pre-cast panel with the Chestnut Lodge logo. They will match the pillars at the main entrance at Laird Street and W. Montgomery Avenue. She said that there will also be smaller pillars at the base of the driveway leading to the Stable which would also incorporate the mailbox for the Little Lodge. These pillars at the driveway would be smaller; 4 feet in height and 2 feet square.
Ms. Graves said that she was not concerned that the replacement tree behind the Little Lodge would be too close to the house. She estimates that it will be about 15 feet from the house and felt that was adequate.
Ms. Graves said that the asphalt parking pad in front of the stable is shown as about 25 feet wide and is needed to provide turn-around area and visitor parking. She agreed that the paved area could probably be reduced somewhat. There is no curb around it.
Ms. Graves described the three types of walkways on Lot 1 (bluestone pavers, concrete “brick” pavers and stonedust) that will be provided on Lot 1 and the patio. The patio will be bluestone pavers on stone dust and stepping stones will be bluestone pavers. Commissioner Moloney noted that bluestone pavers were shown leading to a closed railing at the Stable and this needed to be corrected. The stone dust path connects the Little Lodge to the Ice House and out to Bullard Circle. The applicant chose stone dust for this path to minimize it and to deter the general public from using it. It is compacted on a stone base with filter fabric on top and the stone dust on top of that. Commissioner Moloney asked if edging would be provided to keep the stone dust in place. Ms. Graves was not sure at this point but thought that might be a good idea. Commissioner Moloney thought that the stone dust might be too subtle and not enough of a deterrent to keeping the public off. He thought a small gate might be appropriate. The utility enclosure is a four-foot tall wood fence. Commissioner Moloney asked that the HDC be provided more detail on this.
The applicant will return to the HDC for approvals on these items.
