2008-08-18 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

14 WHEREAS , this Council has given due consideration to the standards for the issuance of a certificate of appropriateness for new construction as set forth in City Code section 34-276, including the applicable provisions of the City’s design guidelines, and finds that the proposed design, as illustrated in the property owner’s submittal entitled “City Council Certificates of Appropriateness 08/18/08” is architecturally compatible with the buildings and structures within the surrounding historic district. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council for the City of Charlottesville that a certificate of appropriateness is hereby approved, subject to the following conditions: (1) The design of the building will be substantially as shown on the property owner’s submittal entitled “City Council Certificates of Appropriateness 08/18/08”, which incorporate the following specific changes from the design as originally approved by the BAR: (2) The design of the building will be approximately 1,300 square feet smaller than the design approved by the BAR on March 18, 2008, with the house width (parallel to the street) reduced by approximately 8 feet and the length reduced by approximately 12 feet (at the second and third levels), resulting in a side yard setback from the property line of 11 feet adjacent to the townhouses, and 19 feet from the north property line, adjacent to the existing shed, with the roof canopy over the mudroom projecting by two feet; (3) The addition of a porch at the garden apartment, with removal of the left flanking stone wall; (4) The reintroduction of outriggers at the roof eaves and louvers at windows; (5) The use of wood clad or fiber cement planking in lieu of metal at the front bay; and a pergola at the entrance and porch; (6) The removal of the gate to the off street parking area and the addition of terracing of the stone walls and gardens at the rear of the parking drive; and, (7) The removal of one off-street parking space and one parking space in the garage. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the BAR, as noted in their March 18, 2008 decision, shall retain jurisdiction to review and approve additional design details, as described in a letter dated April 9, 2008 from the City’s Preservation and Design Planner to the architect for the property owner, to the extent that they remain relevant. The BAR may also, in their discretion, review any new design details as shown in the property owner’s most recent submittal that have not been previously reviewed by the BAR or approved pursuant to this Resolution. Mr. Huja made a motion to approve a small task force to report back in 90 days or so. Mr. Norris said we may not need a committee. He suggested that Ms. Suokko and staff work together, and then if a committee is recommended, that can be done at a later time. Ms. Edwards recommended that the redevelopment of the CRHA sites be included. REPORT : JEFFERSON SCHOOL Mr. Martin Burks, a Managing Partner for Jefferson School, said the Partners were formed to continue the work of the task force and to explore the financial feasibility of renovating Jefferson School. He said Bushman-Dreyfus Architects have been selected. He said there is a desire by the Cultural Heritage Committee to have more space free, but they have been told if they want more space they will have to pay for it.