Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Historic Preservation Addition topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Leesburg BAR defers review of 227 South Street SE addition after design questions
Summary
The Leesburg Board of Architectural Review deferred action on a proposed 850-square-foot rear addition at 227 South Street SE, asking the applicant for perspective drawings and revisions to reduce visible massing and clarify materials.
The Leesburg Board of Architectural Review on Feb. 3 deferred action on an application to add about 850 square feet to the rear of the historic house at 227 South Street SE, and asked the applicant to provide perspective drawings and studies showing lowered roof and floor options.
Board members said the revised design addresses several earlier staff concerns — including converting an outdoor chimney box to a real chimney and adding a hyphen between the historic main block and the new mass — but they remained focused on the overall height and visible massing of the addition from the public right of way.
Staff presentation said the existing building dates to circa 1888 and is listed as a two‑story structure though it reads as a one‑and‑a‑half story on the interior. The revised submission changes a previous gable roof to a hipped roof on the addition and adds a small hyphen to separate the new mass from the historic block; staff and multiple board members said those changes reduce perceived height but increase visible roof area.
Michael Wijdoughen, MW Architects, the architect on record, told the board the team is studying lowering the first floor by about 1 foot and dropping the roof another foot — a roughly 2‑foot overall reduction — and will present perspectives showing both the current and lowered options.
Board members asked for perspective drawings showing pedestrian line‑of‑sight from the sidewalk and across the street, and suggested studying alternatives such as a metal roof with a lower pitch to reduce ridge height. Several members said the hipped roof is a trade‑off — it conceals some wall massing but produces a large, unarticulated roof plane — and that a return to a gable could be acceptable if the lowered profile renders the addition less visible.
Members also discussed fenestration. Staff said the addition’s limited side windows are similar to the existing historic house, but encouraged the board to weigh in; several members said they were comfortable with the proposed window arrangement. The board asked the applicant to reintroduce a horizontal trim band and to study trim and shutter details so the addition reads as distinct from, but compatible with, the historic fabric.
The public hearing for the item had been closed at a prior meeting; no new public testimony was taken. The board voted to defer TLH PBR2024‑0058 to the Feb. 18 business meeting to allow the applicant time to provide revised drawings, perspective studies and material clarifications.
The board and staff noted schedule constraints: the applicant agreed to deliver revised drawings by the Monday before the Feb. 18 meeting to allow packet review. The applicant also agreed to investigate the cost implications of a metal roof versus shingles and to provide alternatives in the next submission.
With additional perspectives and the lowered option illustrated, several board members indicated they could support the project at the next hearing; the board did not take a final approval vote during the Feb. 3 meeting.
