Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Building Code And Design topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
BAR approves rooftop stair amendment at 212 South King Street after required drawings and materials sent to staff
Summary
Leesburg BAR approved an amendment to a previously approved addition at 212 South King Street to add a code-required rooftop stair; approval carried conditions that the penthouse east elevation materials and full dimensional drawings be submitted to staff and that final details be administratively reviewed.
The Leesburg Board of Architectural Review on June 18 approved revised elevations for a rooftop stair/penthouse at 212 South King Street, an amendment that the town and the applicant said was required to satisfy building-code egress for an upper-level condominium unit.
Staff told the board the stair is required by Loudoun County building-review as a second means of egress for a fourth-floor penthouse unit; staff recommended the board discuss siting and exterior design so the addition is as compatible as possible with the building’s historic form. “We understand the need for the rooftop access; it’s acknowledged by staff as being required by the building code,” the preservation manager said.
Applicant Kevin Ash said the county review required a second means of egress for the uppermost condominium unit because of travel distance, and that the proposed stair location parallels the west wall to make the stair a second legal egress. He told the board the design team used a low-profile roof angle and standing-seam metal cladding to reduce visibility from King Street.
Board members discussed alternatives—moving the stair along a different wall, integrating the stair as a design feature, or making it visually distinct—and ultimately approved the amendment with conditions that the penthouse east elevation materials be provided to staff for review and that a detailed drawing showing height, width, depth and cross section of the stair enclosure be submitted. The motion was made by JP Andrews and seconded by Don Schurman; the vote was 6-0-1 (Rick Brown recused), per the record.
Why it matters: the vertical access amendment is a code-driven change to a previously approved project. The board sought to balance the applicant’s code obligation with visual compatibility for adjacent historic properties.
What’s next: applicant will submit the east-elevation finish schedule and full dimensional drawings for staff review; staff will confirm the materials and the final appearance prior to permit issuance.
