Howard County Historic Preservation Commission will meet Oct. 4.
Here is the agenda provided by the Commission:
The October meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission will be held at 3430 Court House Drive, Ellicott City, MD 21043. All cases are public meetings where any member of the public may offer testimony. Certain cases, such as requests for Certificates of Approval, are contested cases subject to the County Administrative Procedure Act. Information about participating in Commission cases is available at the Commission’s website, www.howardcountymd.gov/Departments/Planning-andZoning/Boards-and-Commissions/Historic-Preservation-Commission. Additional information may be obtained from the Department of Planning and Zoning by calling 410-313-2350. Requests for accommodations should be made at least three working days in advance of the meeting.
This Agenda identifies the work proposed and includes comments and recommendations from DPZ Staff. The recommendations included here do not constitute a decision of the Commission.
PLANS FOR APPROVAL
Consent Agenda
1. MA-17-53c – 8020 Main Street, Ellicott City
2. MA-18-28c – 3877 College Avenue, Ellicott City
Regular Agenda
3. HPC-18-48 - 3877 College Avenue, Ellicott City
4. HPC-18-49 - 3530 Sylvan Lane, Ellicott City
5. HPC-18-50 - 8396 Park Drive, Ellicott City
6. MA-18-22c and 18-26c – 8396 Park Drive, Ellicott City
7. HPC-18-51 – 3749 Church Road, Ellicott City
8. HPC-18-52 – 8167 Main Street, Ellicott City
CONSENT AGENDA
MA-17-53c – 8020 Main Street, Ellicott City
Final tax credit approval. Applicant: Mark Bean
Background & Scope of Work: This property is located in the Ellicott City Historic District, and dates circa the 1920s/1930s after the Patapsco Hotel collapsed and this row of buildings was constructed. The Applicant was pre-approved for tax credits on November 21, 2017 through the Minor Alterations process for the replacement of the flat roof. The Applicant has submitted documentation that $25,347.00 was spent on eligible, pre-approved work. The Applicant seeks $6,336.75 in final tax credits.
Staff Comments: The work complies with that pre-approved and the invoice and other documentation total the requested amount.
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval as submitted for $6,336.75 in final tax credits.
MA-18-28c – 3877 College Avenue, Ellicott City
Final tax credit approval. Applicant: Michael Smith
Background & Scope of Work: This property is located in the Ellicott City Historic District, and according to SDAT, dates to 1937. The Applicant was pre-approved for tax credits on July 30, 2018 through the Minor Alterations process for the repair and replacement of the roof. The Applicant has submitted documentation that $33,757.00 was spent on eligible, pre-approved work. The Applicant seeks $8,439.25 in final tax credits.
Staff Comments: The work complies with that pre-approved and the invoice and cancelled total the requested amount.
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval as submitted for $8,439.25 in final tax credits.
REGULAR AGENDA
HPC-18-48 - 3877 College Avenue, Ellicott City
Tax Credit Pre-Approval for Exterior Repairs. Applicant: Michael Smith
Background & Scope of Work: This property is located in the Ellicott City Historic District. According to SDAT, the building dates to 1937. The Applicant seeks tax credit pre-approval for the following work:
1) Replace rusted, loose metal railings located adjacent to the front door of the house.
2) There are two railings at the rear stair, a handrail down the steps to the basement and a safety rail that runs along the top of the stairs wall.
a. Replace safety rail with newly fabricated metal railings painted in glossy black rust resistant paint.
b. Replace basement wood railing with a metal railing.
3) Remove rotted roof over rear stair and replace framing and shingle in Certainteed asphalt shingle in the same style as the rear dormer roof.
4) Replace cracked footing under railing at rear stair with new concrete cap topped with bluestone.
Staff Comments: The railings were removed from the front stoop, but the in-kind replacement of Item 1, the railings located adjacent to the front of the house, is considered Routine Maintenance per Chapter 5, which states, “repair or replacement of roofs, gutters, siding, external doors and windows, trim, lights and other appurtenant fixtures using the same materials and design.” From the photographs provided, the railings were wrought iron, so any replacement would need to be fabricated to match the design and material of the existing. The replacement would comply with Section 20.112 of the Code as a replacement of a feature on the historic structure. Repairing rather than replacing the railings would better comply with the Guidelines and also qualify for tax credits.
A site visit to the property on September 24, 2018 revealed that Item 2.A, the safety railing above the basement steps, and Item 4, the replacement footing and new bluestone cap, have already been replaced. The new railing is aluminum and is of a different, more ornate style. The original railing appears to have been wrought iron. This item is no longer eligible for tax credits because the work has already been done and it is not an in-kind replacement. The railing now needs retroactive approval.
As seen in Figure 6 below, the safety railing leading down the basement steps has already been removed and a replacement has not been installed. To evaluate the proposed railing, Staff needs more information on what the proposed railing would look like and what the material would be. However, this also does not appear to be a historic building component and the Commission should determine if tax credits apply.
Item 3, the replacement of the roof over the rear stair, was applied for and approved in MA-18-28c, which is also before the Commission for final tax credit approval. This work has been completed.
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends tax credit pre-approval for Item 1. Staff recommends denial of tax credit pre-approval for Item 2.a, 3 and Item 4. Staff recommends the Commission determine if Item 2.b qualifies for tax credits under Section 20.112 of the County Code.
HPC-18-49 - 3530 Sylvan Lane, Ellicott City
Certificate of Approval for Exterior Repairs. Applicant: Matthew Krist
Background & Scope of Work: This property is located in the Ellicott City Historic District. According to SDAT, the building dates to 1956. The Upper Church Road/Sylvan Lane area was incorporated into the historic district in 1990. The Applicant was approved through case HPC-18-01 to construct an addition on the ranch style house and side the addition in vinyl, to match the existing siding.
The Applicant now seeks approval to change the siding on the entire house to cedar shake siding and replace the white 6:6 vinyl windows with black 1:1 wood windows. The middle window on the front façade currently consists of one large picture window flanked by two 4:4 windows. The proposed alteration would change the 4:4 windows to 1:1 windows.
The front door currently appears to be an oak wood door or a fiberglass door designed to resemble natural oak. This door is proposed to be changed to a full light door in the color black, but the material is unknown.
On the left side of the house is currently a set of sliding doors, which are proposed to be changed to the same proposed full light door in black.
While the change to a wood siding over a vinyl siding is preferable in material choice, the addition of cedar does not make the ranch house more compatible with the historic structures in the vicinity and district as a whole. There is no comparable building type in the historic district, and the use of a wood or composite lap siding would be more compatible.
Staff has requested additional information on the material for the current door and proposed door and whether windows on other elevations of the house are also being changed. This information has not yet been provided.
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends the following:
1) The existing 4:4 and 6:6 window patterns be retained, but otherwise approval of black wood windows.
2) Approval of changing the sliding glass door to a full light black wood door.
3) Approval of changing the existing front door to a full light black wood door.
4) That the Applicant identify another siding option for consideration.
HPC-18-50 - 8396 Park Drive, Ellicott City
Certificate of Approval for Exterior Alterations Applicant: Tarpley Long
Background & Scope of Work: This property is located in the Ellicott City Historic District. According to SDAT the building dates to 1899 (this date corresponds with the division of land from the Linwood estate, however, this building most likely dates circa 1920/1930).
The Applicant was pre-approved in case MA-18-22 on July 3 for the painting of the house and all colors submitted within that application were approved. The Applicant later changed her mind on the colors and submitted a new application that was processed as MA-18-26 and was partially approved on July 16. This application was only partially approved due to an objection on the proposed color of the front door, Almalfi Coast, a bright blue.
The Applicant now seeks retroactive approval for the painting of the front door, in the color Benjamin Moore Notting Hill blue. The Notting Hill color is a lighter blue that is more appropriate for a historic structure in this region. The color on the door appears slightly brighter and lighter than the paint swatch.
Staff Comments: While the color on the door lacks the gray tones from the paint chip, the color complies with Chapter 6.N recommendations, “in general, use calm or subdued colors, reserving bright colors for small, important details such as doors or trim.” The door is not highly visible due to the siting of the house and location of the door above the retaining wall, behind the fence and underneath the overhang.
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends retroactive approval as submitted.
MA-18-22c and 18-26c – 8396 Park Drive, Ellicott City
Final tax credit claim. Applicant: Tarpley Long
Background & Scope of Work: This property is located in the Ellicott City Historic District. According to SDAT the building dates to 1899 (this date corresponds with the division of land from the Linwood estate, however, this building most likely dates circa 1920/1930). The Applicant was pre-approved in case MA-18-22 for the painting of the house (all colors submitted within that application were approved) and the repointing of the chimney and front steps. The Applicant later changed her mind on the colors and submitted a new application that was processed as MA-18-26. This application was only partially approved, due to an objection on the color of the front door.
The Applicant seeks final tax credit approval for the exterior painting, chimney repointing and the front steps repointing and has submitted documentation that $8,1035 was spent on work.
Staff Comments: The invoice for the painting includes entrance doors. However, in this case the panting of the entrance door was approved to be a different color, the color used was objected to. This item should be removed from the invoice and the total cost adjust to reflect the removal of the door. Regarding the repointing, the work complies with that pre-approved and the invoice and other documentation totals the requested amount.
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends the final tax credit request for the painting be continued until a revised invoice total is submitted that removes the cost of the front door from the scope of work. Staff recommends final tax credit approval of the repointing, which cost $3,300.00 for a tax credit of $825.00.
HPC-18-51 - 3749 Church Road, Ellicott City
Certificate of Approval for Exterior Alterations Applicant: Kimberly Kepnes
Background & Scope of Work: This property is located in the Ellicott City Historic District. According to SDAT the building dates to 1830. The Applicant seeks approval for the following exterior alterations:
1) Construct a new pathway from the driveway to the home. The pathway will follow the natural hillside contour, will be 4 feet wide, and will be paved using semi-impervious asphalt millings surface. The pathway will start at the top of the driveway and continue to the bottom of the hillside, at the base of the existing brick sidewalk. The path will help accommodate accessibility limitations.
2) Modify existing driveway EP Henry block retaining wall to connect the existing driveway to the proposed pathway.
3) Remove and replace approximately 97 feet of broken and displaced sidewalks. The Applicant seeks tax credits and/or Façade Improvement Grants, if eligible.
Staff Comments: The application contains two sketches showing the proposed work and photographs of the general area where the proposed pathway will be installed.
Pathway
The application mentions that a hillside driveway was previously approved for the property. This driveway was approved in 2014 (HPC-14-40) and was going to be paved in crushed bluestone with a cobblestone border. The driveway not constructed, and the approval has since expired.
There are a few different existing access options to the house, such as a staircase off of the driveway that leads down to the house. If the goal of the pathway is to accommodate accessibility limitations, it does not appear that it would be ADA compliant in both slope and material. The pathway will curve to follow the contour of the hillside, which complies with Chapter 9.A recommendations, “minimize grading by siting new structure and other improvements to make use of the land’s natural contours.” The proposed material is a dark gray course crushed stone. There are a variety of hardscaping materials on site, such as brick pavers, granite cobblestones, and an EP Henry retaining wall and steps with slate tops. While this material would introduce another hardscaping element, the dark color of the crushed stone will be compatible with the other materials. An alternative could also be to simply use mulch for the pathway, to match the other landscape beds on the property. Due to the steep slope of the hillside, any loose rock could wash away in a rainstorm. The proposed crushed stone, or brown mulch, would comply with Chapter 9.D recommendations, “construct new site feature using materials compatible with the setting and with nearby historic structures, particularly for features visible from a public way.”
Street Sidewalk
The removal and replacement of the sidewalk along the street, if done in-kind to match the existing, does not require HPC approval. While not specifically mentioned in the application as part of the scope of work, the replacement of any curbing would only be in-kind if existing concrete curbing is replaced. The photos provided by the Applicant show that granite curbing and concrete curbing exist at this location. Any granite curbing should either be retained or reset, but should not be removed. The replacement of the sidewalk is not eligible for tax credits, as it does not meet the criteria listed in Section 20.112 of the County Code, nor is it eligible for Façade Improvement Grants. If the Applicant proposes to reset the granite curbing, that work could be eligible for tax credits, if the Commission determines it is a historic landscape feature. If the Applicant includes the resetting of granite curbing within their scope of work, a site plan showing the location and length of granite curbing should be provided. The Applicant should contact the Department of Public Works for approval before starting the work.
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends Approval of pathway as submitted, with the option to use brown mulch, matching the landscaping beds on the property.
HPC-18-52 – 8167 Main Street, Ellicott City
Certificate of Approval for Exterior Alterations Applicant: Doug Thomas
Background & Scope of Work: This building is located in the Ellicott City Historic District. According to SDAT the building dates to 1987. This building is not historic and was built after the original, historic building burned in 1984. The Applicant seeks approval for the following exterior alterations:
1. Construct a 16-foot-long concrete ADA handicap ramp that will run adjacent to the building in the alley and tie into the existing concrete pavement.
2. Create a new door opening at the end of the building along the alley to open up onto the new ramp. The new door will be a wood door painted colonial red to match the trim (the architectural drawings indicate a wood door, but the application indicates a steel door). The door will have a half light and be 2:2. The door will be 36 inches wide by 84 inches high.
3. Brick up an existing glass and metal door located on the alleyway side of the building and replace the opening with two windows to match the existing style of windows, consisting of a 2-Staff Comments: The application generally complies with the Guideline recommendations. The ramp will be located on the side of the building and the primary façade will not be altered. The new window will mimic the design, color and dimensions of the existing windows, which complies with Chapter 8.B recommendations, “use elements such as porch shapes, window or door openings.and other characteristics that echo historic Ellicott City buildings” and “design entrances and windows to be similar in scale and proportion to those on nearby historic building.” This proposal is not for new construction, but rather is for alterations to new construction (circa 1987) and the alterations will mimic its own building characteristics, rather than other buildings in the district.
The application states that new brick will be used to brick in the existing door opening, and that it will match the existing brick exterior wall. Since there is also a new doorway proposed to be cut into the building, that brick should be reused for filling in the other opening and will better match the building. The reuse of the existing brick would better comply with the Guidelines, “maintain or restore original brick, stone, concrete block or stucco. Make repairs with materials that match the original as closely as possible.”
The application states the new door will be steel, but the architectural drawings state that the door will be wood. Wood would be the preferred material, but since this is a minimally visible secondary entrance on a modern building, a steel door of an appropriate style could be used, as indicated by the Guidelines, “simple paneled door of wood or wood and glass are usually best, but metal doors with an appropriate style and finish can convey a similar appearance.” The style shown in the architectural drawings does not have a panel in the lower half of the door and adding one or two panels would make the door an historically appropriate style.
New gooseneck lights were shown in the architectural drawings, in place of the traditional lantern style that currently exists, but a spec sheet was not provided. The Guidelines recommend, “choose and locate lighting fixtures to be visually unobtrusive. Use dark metal or a similar material.” Staff recommends the gooseneck fixtures be a dark metal and that all existing exterior lights on the building be replaced, so that there is one consistent style. Otherwise, the existing lantern style lights should be retained for use in the alley.
The Guidelines do not specifically reference railings, but discuss the use of fencing, which is similar. The color of the proposed ADA ramp railing is not mentioned, but should be a dark metal color such as black, as indicated by Chapter 9.D of the Guidelines, “install open fencing, generally not more than five feet high, of wood or dark metal.”
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends Approval as submitted and that the Commission consider the following items:
1) The ADA ramp steel guard rail be painted black.
2) The door have one or two panels under the window, with the option to use wood or metal at this minimally-visible location.
3) The existing brick cut for the new door be reused to fill in the old doorway/area around the new window.
4) The new gooseneck light be an oil rubbed bronze or similar dark metal, or the existing lantern style lights be retained.
*Chapter and page references are from the Ellicott City or Lawyers Hill Historic District Design Guidelines.
https://www.howardcountymd.gov/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=SIdC6mn5f0M%3d&portalid=0
Alerts Sign-up