All right, this meeting will come to order.

We will proceed tonight with applications and other agenda items in the order indicated on the docket.

Limited copies of tonight's agenda and each staff report are available or should be available in the hall on a first come first served basis.

If you are an applicant, please be sure to read the staff report for your case.

For each application, we will proceed in the following order of business.

The applicant or applicant's representative may be present for the proposal or be available for any questions from the board.

This is not required.

The board encourages applicants to be thorough but concise.

The board will have an opportunity to speak on each application.

Members of the public interested in speaking on a docket item should fill out speaker forms in advance and give them to any staff member.

So if you want to speak, Susan over here can take your speaker form.

Members of the public will have three minutes to speak, and those representing community organizations will have five minutes.

After the public comment is complete, the applicant may respond to any of the public comments.

Following this, the board will close public discussion and begin deliberation.

During deliberation, board members may ask questions of the applicant.

After deliberation, the board will take uh may take the following options for uh actions for each application.

One, the board may vote on a motion to issue, continually issue or deny a certificate of appropriation.

Two, upon request by an applicant, uh vote on a motion to defer taking action.

Three, vote to continue the case to the next available public hearing, or four, proceed to the next docket item without any action.

If the board takes no action at the next regularly scheduled meeting, the certificate appropriateness is automatically issued.

And that's because of a rule that if the board takes no action within 45 days, uh it is deemed approved.

I do want to make a couple of points on voting.

Uh motions pass on this board by a simple majority.

A tie vote results in no action being taken, which I just mentioned earlier.

If the board votes to deny an application, a similar application will not be considered for a period of one year following the denial.

The board occasionally takes up matters other than applications for a certificate of appropriateness.

The public will have an opportunity to comment on those matters.

Any appeals of a board decision to the city council must be made within 14 days of the board's decision and in conformance with zoning ordinance section 10-107.

That's the old and historic architectural district, 10-207, Parker Gray, or 10-309 pertaining to 100-year-old buildings.

And with that said, Mr.

Conkey, what is first?

First item on the docket this evening is the uh vote on the on the approval for the minutes.

Does any member of the board have a comment or wish to make edits to the uh minutes from the December 3rd meeting?

Does any member of the public wish to oh sorry, Miss Del Nino?

Go ahead.

Oh, okay.

Your microphone is on.

Oh uh well, does any member of the public wish to make a comment or amend any of the public meetings?

Seeing none, now it is time for motion.

I move to approve the minutes.

I second.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

The minutes are adopted.

Moving on to the consent calendar.

Yes, sir.

Okay, we have a number of items on the consent calendar this evening.

I'll read them all in.

Uh first is item number three, BAR 2025-00490, old and historic district.

Request for alterations at 311 North Alfred Street.

The applicant is Alan Cathy Cox.

Mr.

Conky, is this the one that we have a speaker form on?

We do have a speaker form on this one.

Okay, so um just preliminarily, I think we should plan to remove that from the consent calendar.

Understood.

Uh we'll go through the rest of these for quick first.

Um item number four is BAR 2025-00494.

Old historic district request for alterations at 1022 King Street.

Applicant is Church's Incorporated.

BR 2025-00505.

Old historic district, request for signage and alterations at 400 King Street.

The applicant is Econo signal incorporated, Laura Mercier.

Request for alterations at 1118 Print Street.

Applicant is Kenneth B.

Crutchfield.

Item number seven, B AR 2025-00507.

Old historic district, request for alterations at 119 Wolf Street.

The applicant is Ann Altazer, represented by Derek Binstead Architect.

And finally, item number eight, B AR 2025-00511.

Old historic district request for signage at 1101 King Street.

The applicant to City House Old Town LSC, represented by Patience Schaefer.

All right.

Well, uh, as we have a public speaker on consent calendar item number three, that's 311 North Alfred Street.

I would request that we remove that from the consent calendar.

Does any member of the board wish to remove any of the other remaining items from the consent calendar?

Does any member of the public wish to remove any other remaining items from the consent calendar?

All right.

I so move.

Well I'll second that.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

All right.

So if your application is number four, five, six, seven, or eight, it has been approved.

All right.

Um is the applicant for number three eleven North Alfred Street here.

Are you prepared to um go forward now or would you like us to move it to the end of the meeting?

Mr.

Chair, members of the board, I have no presentation.

It seems straightforward, and I agree with everything in the staff report.

Okay, great.

Mr.

Conkey, do we need to read this in again?

Yes, we should.

Um, and actually, I wanted to um before we read this in, I did I do want to say something before we get into the body of the um of the hearing tonight.

Um, I wanted to highlight uh for everyone that the final docket item on the on a docket tonight, which is item number 18, which is a um concept review for 806 North Columbus Street.

That project is that has been is being deferred uh to a hearing in January at the request of the applicant.

I know that there have been some at some interested parties, so if you're here for that hearing, that docket item tonight.

I just wanted to give you a heads up early so you're not waiting around until the end of the hearing.

Um we'll not be we will not be discussing that docket item tonight.

That being said, thank you for letting us know.

If you're here to listen or contribute to the discussion about 806 North Columbus, uh that's gonna be deferred to it.

Will it be the next meeting?

No, we're looking at the second meeting in January.

Second meeting in January, which probably be toward the end of January.

The 21st of January.

Yes.

Uh, okay, with that said, um, would you like to proceed in our item number three now?

Absolutely.

Uh item number three, B A R 2025-00490, Old Historic District, request for alterations at 311 North Alfred Street.

The applicant is Alan Kathy Cox.

Great.

Um, given that it was uh member of the public who requested to speak on this, I would propose we hear from that member first so we can understand the issue and then we can discuss.

Where should I uh uh you can head up to the um lectern right here and just turn on the microphone, and if you can, please give us your name and an address for the record.

Okay, can you hear me?

Okay, very good.

Um my name is Brad Fleetwood.

Uh my wife and I reside at 312 North Columbus Street, Alexandria.

Uh, our townhouse is uh uh you know directly behind the house at 311 North Alfred Street.

Um I'm here uh in no different way than I would have been here had this been done properly with pre-notice uh made to the uh uh to the bar before the uh work was completed.

Um I was surprised at this.

Um, and um I'm sort of surprised, and perhaps it's based on my misunderstanding as the whole why it was already agreed to to be a consent issue.

Um, but nevertheless, I am here.

Um I'm also not aware that all of our neighbors were informed about this.

I do know that my next door neighbor Melissa Newman, who lives at 310 North Columbus Street, never received any notification of this hearing.

Um, the after-the-fact approval is something that, for example, when we look at our patio or our back windows, both upstairs and downstairs, and also certainly visible from the public uh alley, which is traversed by a great many people.

Uh the uh mini split is you know right there uh and running and all of that stuff.

Uh previously it wasn't.

In fact, myself, visitors, my wife would comment about how what a cute little building it is because it has a little couple on top.

Um, and uh I don't, you know, know I guess that's the image that he's provided to you, but previous to that, that was just a yellow siding.

Uh the thing I'm I'm having installed mini splits at a couple of houses in the past, the placement of the condenser could easily have been put on the uh uh uh I guess it would be the west side or the south side as opposed to the east side.

Um I'm fully uncertain as to why that wasn't done, except perhaps he felt it would be noxious to his own property as opposed to others.

Um, and with regard to the failure to get prior notice on this, um I have had to come to bar before to get prior notice.

People who live in the historic district are well aware of their requirements and responsibilities.

And with regard to Mr.

Cox, who my understanding is has had some affiliation with the bar or staff in the past, maybe the great long pass, but regardless, uh he is certainly well aware of this because he has actually reported a number of our uh adjacent neighbors for violations on installations and come some cases emergency installations where there was damage being done to the property, and uh work had to be ceased, and I I know they were quite upset.

So I disagree with this approval strongly.

Um, it's a matter of course, you come to bar before you have something done.

With regard to the emergency nature of this, it certainly could have been put, something certainly could have been put on the same pad, the existing pad as before.

Uh if it was that urgent, that would have been easy.

And secondly, there was clearly an alternative, a very easy alternative.

If any of you have ever installed mini splits before, the consent condenser could have played been placed on the uh the west side or it could have been placed on the south side facing his own house.

Uh instead, now it's faced in full public view.

It's not attractive.

And uh I I wish he had come for prior approval and let the board hear from me before.

Chair, we've hit our time limit.

I'm sorry, that's beeping is not working.

Okay.

Uh thank you.

Uh Mr.

Cox, I'd be happy to give you an opportunity to respond if you'd like.

But as always, if you could give us your name and an address for the record, it would be helpful.

Thank you, Chairman Scott.

My name is Al Cox.

I live at 311 North Alfred Street.

Um the mechanical unit that is in this photograph with the X on it, is in a sidewalk that is three feet wide.

The property line runs adjacent to that sidewalk.

There was no way to take our trash out without stepping on the neighbor's property.

We have a new neighbor on that north side who has sent a letter from his lawyer telling us not to do that anymore.

So this needed to be relocated.

While we, and I called staff and talked to them about that, and said that we were looking at 21st century technology instead of 20th century technology for the heat pump replacement.

The reason it's at this end of the garage is because that's where the panel box, that's where the meter, and that's where the disconnect is for the old unit.

So that's why we placed it there.

Um there is, as is in the application, a very similar unit, slightly larger at 308 Columbus Street across the alley.

Um, and so based on that, and the board's approval of that on the historic building across the alley.

We didn't believe that there would be a problem here.

In the time that we were trying to find a unit, the unit that was in there that's 25 years old failed, and we had a freeze coming with like a week later.

So we had to replace the unit.

It was not operational.

So we were able to scramble around and find a replacement unit.

Um, I'm not aware of turning in my neighbors for violations.

Um I'm not sure what he's referencing.

Um, but you know, there you have it.

It was an emergency replacement.

We used to do that frequently for air conditioners in July and August.

Uh, work with staff if it was something that was in a location or process that had been frequently done before, um, you could come to the board for an after-the-fact, which is what I'm doing.

Thank you.

Uh thank you, Mr.

Cox.

Uh Mr.

Conky have a couple of questions.

Um, just to address the public speaker's concern.

Uh, was this understanding this is an after-the-fact application?

Was this notified part of the public notice for the hearing today?

Yes, it was go ahead.

As far as as far as uh we're concerned, it was public properly noted notice.

Um, we got we followed all the rules for noticing in terms of what the staff does, and then we we verified that it was uh the proper as best we can, proper notifications were mailed out, just like we do for every every every application.

Okay, and um I get uh I I will just note for the public um and for the applicant that after the fact approvals or applications are given the same level of review as an in-advance application, which is to say we don't hold an applicant to a higher or different standard.

It is the same standard.

Uh, with that being said, I'd be happy to open it up to comments or questions from my colleagues on the board.

Uh Mr.

Cox, I have a question for you.

Uh I don't am I clear through the mask?

Yes, ma'am, I can understand.

Thank you.

I I realize that it would be a huge imposition to move the unit, but was any consideration giving given to mounting it basically up on the wall above where the old unit was?

Uh yes, ma'am.

While it's I understand it's not within the board's purview, the interior layout of the apartment over the garage didn't allow for that.

However, putting it over the window allows it to blow into the one room apartment.

It's an efficiency apartment up there.

Um there are other features, closets and things in the way that wouldn't have permitted it.

And on the north side, it's too close to the property line to put a condensing unit anyway by zoning ordinance.

Thank you.

Are there any other comments?

Well, I'll make a comment.

I appreciate your application.

Um thank you, sir, for coming and commenting.

I do think that had this been placed uh on the north elevation, it would essentially be the same thing.

It's just a visible condenser on a different elevation.

So in terms of like um affecting the historical uh view of the building, it is the same condenser no matter where it goes.

So I think that to my eye, it seems appropriate it's on the alley end of an alley.

And that's the business end of a bit of a building on the alley.

So that said, does anyone oh go ahead?

Yeah, would you consider uh putting some sort of casing just kind of around it just to try to disguise it a little bit?

Um Susan, can you please put up the slide that shows the existing unit in place?

No, that's the before.

Yeah.

There's an after that was in the staff report.

Yes.

Ums Pratt, you can see that this is pretty small.

It is 10 times quieter than the unit that was there before.

That like I said, is uh 25-year-old technology that was for the unit sitting on the ground.

Um it has to have the breathing space.

It has to sit away from the wall, the eight or nine inches to breathe on that side.

Um the fan is so quiet that's standing underneath it, you can't tell that it's running.

No, I'm I'm just thinking about it.

I don't think there's any way to get around the fact it is kind of ugly, that even if there was some sort of say lattice casing that could help just distract visually from it, that I know I know it would not completely satisfy the neighbors, but maybe it would could be done relatively inexpensively and make it not quite so obvious, I guess.

It has been our experience in the past, and particularly where you have rooftop mechanical equipment screening, that the screening is worse than seeing the unit.

Um lattice has been in the past prohibited by the board for screening mechanical units.

So I'm not quite sure what kind of probiscus you could add off of the east wall of the building that would be smaller or less offensive than a simple mechanical unit that is um on everyone's house in Old Town.

Thank you.

Excuse me for a second.

As the public Sir, I'm sorry, you've you've already had three minutes to the first time.

You don't know the point that was made.

Each member of the public has three minutes, and you've spoken for three minutes, so you can sit down or you can leave, but you don't get to speak anymore on this matter.

Okay, okay, thank you.

Go ahead, Miss Del Nino.

Um, I just wanted to clarify that this is this is not the historic structure, is that correct?

1977.

Right.

It's concrete block in stucco.

Yeah, uh, I would not have proposed this on the historic structure, although again, the one across the alley is 20 years uh younger than our structure.

It's where the old courthouse sat on Columbus Street, so it's probably 1910-ish across the alley.

And y'all approved it there.

Would anyone wish to make a motion on this one?

I'll make a motion that we approve it.

It's not ideal, but it's uh is what it is.

And the back of the house, it's an alley.

And I would motion that we approve it.

Is there a second on that motion?

I second that.

Mr.

Conkey, do we need a roll call on this one?

Uh no, sir.

There's no demo no demolition.

All right.

All those in favor of the motion say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Congratulations.

Your motion is approved.

All right.

Mr.

Conkey, I think we are at items nine and ten.

Is that right?

Yes, that's right.

That is true.

Um we're gonna jump ahead.

And I did I did also want to mention one other thing.

I understand that we are having some difficulty with our speakers in the back.

So um, if you're having trouble hearing anything up here, please.

There's lots of room up front, so please make your way to the front.

Um the as most of you know the building's gonna go undergo a very dramatic renovation here soon, so uh we're struggling with our technology.

So if you can't hear, come on up.

All right, it's I feel like a preacher at church.

I know come to the front.

There's plenty of seats.

Yes, get here.

Yes.

All right, nine and ten.

Building needs to be renovated.

Um, item number nine and ten.

BR 2025-00484, old historic district request for alterations, and in addition at 814 Print Street.

The applicant is 814 Prince LLC, represented by William Cromley Architect, and BAR 2025-00485.

Old Historic District, request for partial demolition, encapsulation at 814 Prince Street.

The applicant is 814 Prince LLC, represented by William Cromley Architect.

Hi, good evening.

So don't have a lot to say.

I'm happy to entertain board questions.

Mr.

Cromley could be able to do that.

Sorry, William Cromley.

Yeah, thank you.

426 North Columbus Street, Alexandria, representing um uh 8 14 uh Lee Street.

I'm sorry, Prince Street, um LLC.

Um the only thing I wanted to add was there are two mislabels.

Um we don't use AZEC for trim, that's a PVC product that we do we don't we don't use.

We prefer to use Borel, which is uh uh also a synthetic product, but mostly made out of recycled fly ash.

Um and then the siding, it's a synthetic siding.

We don't propose to use synthetic siding, we propose to use uh wood siding, mostly because it has a fatter profile than synthetic siding.

We didn't think synthetic siding or hardy board or any other um composite siding was appropriate for this project.

Did you have any other presentation you wanted to make or no okay?

Um do any members of the board have any questions for this applicant before we deliberate are there any public speakers on this last call for the public?

All right, we'll close the public portion of this um docket item.

Um would any board members like to offer deliberative comments.

Uh I'm familiar with the house, and I think this is a lovely solution.

I'm I think it's uh perfect.

Thank you.

Are you comfortable with the staff recommendations?

Yes.

And also, would you be comfortable with additional conditions that would just um reflect the statements that you just made?

Yes.

Since you made them verbally and they're not in the application.

Absolutely.

Okay.

Um, I you know, I also think it's attractive from the alley.

My initial concern was that the addition seemed to be um taller and um more massive than the original house.

Um so it looks like and that's generally I I believe that we usually don't have additions that are taller than the original house.

So um maybe you can talk to that a little bit.

Sure.

So obviously the board's purview is what's visible from the public way, and so we made very uh um took great care in making sure that that extra height was not um seen, which is what you see in the in the um in the elevations and in our site diagram.

I did want to point out though, because recently um approved by the board was something very similar that was much higher than what we're proposing.

And I'll I don't know, staff if this staff, but I'm sure they were involved in it, it was 209 wolf, and I just have it on my phone, but I can pass my phone around to see, and it's it's uh much much higher, and that was recently approved.

I don't know if it was in the last year, but it was something that was approved recently.

And the the logic uh by staff was the same that it couldn't be seen from the public way, and therefore it was not not under the board's purview per se.

I appreciate that sentiment because clearly massing is one of the most important things that the board does.

Um, even more important in my opinion than than architectural details.

But in this case, again, we took great care.

The scale in the back actually is is quite good because most the majority of the block is of the same scale or higher.

Uh so it's the front that we concentrated on and made sure that we tweaked it so that you could not see it from the sidewalk.

You do see it obliquely from the alley, but again, it's 30 feet back, so the scale isn't overwhelming the historic structure.

Right.

You see the alley elevation from the back.

I I mean I'm sorry, I meant the horse alley from the front.

Oh, and down the narrow right there.

Yeah.

So it doesn't appear taller.

Sorry.

It doesn't appear taller because it's that much further back.

Yes, and that's an accurate 3D uh representation of someone standing on the opposite sidewalk, which would be the the highest view of it, a six foot tall or five and a half foot.

I'm sorry, six foot tall person standing with their back to the property across the street.

So we took it the farthest because the farthest would be the most accurate, the closer up, obviously, they would it would appear smaller.

So thank you.

Sure.

Do we have any other comments?

Or would someone like to make a motion?

I I'll make the motion, but I you have to tell me the product that you're using.

Sure.

It's a it's a it's a product called Borel.

Boral Moral.

B O R A L.

Yeah.

And it's made from fly ash, which is a a coal um uh residue, and it's 75% recycled content.

And we use it in lieu of PVC for a lot of reasons, environmental, but also it doesn't move as much.

And is PVC, Mr.

Conkey's PVC against the rules?

Generally, yeah, we discourage PVC for lots of reasons.

As Mr.

Cromley knows it's it's first off not particularly environmentally sound, but um we don't care about that.

I understand from a building standpoint, it's also not very stable.

It uh it it moves quite a lot and it cracks and it breaks and lets water in, so we don't like it, especially if you're paying.

I do personally care about the environment, but this board just doesn't that's why I I followed up with my with my architect architect geeky reasons.

Yeah.

Okay, well then I would uh move to approve this application with the staff recommendations and the additional conditions that the trim be made of the boral product and that any siding visible from the public right away is made of wood, and um that's it.

Do we have a second?

Second.

Do we need a roll call on this?

Yes, we do.

It has demolition.

Okay.

One second.

Sorry, I'm writing writing too many things at the same time.

Uh Ms.

Pratt.

I vote to approve.

Ms.

Donino.

Hi.

Mr.

Adams.

Aye.

Mr.

Scott.

Aye.

Congratulations.

Thank you very much.

Okay, Mr.

Conkey, 11 and 12.

Yep.

All right.

11 and 12 tonight.

Uh BAR 2025-0050, old historic district.

Request for alterations and an addition at 821 South Lee Street.

The applicant is Alex and Sydney McCormick, represented by Patrick Camus architect.

And BAR 2025-00499, old and historic district.

Sorry.

Uh request for partial demolition and encapsulation at 821 South Lee Street.

The applicant is Alex and Sydney McCormick, represented by Patrick Camus.

Did you just oh you did nine and you did 11 and 12 together?

Yeah.

Because okay.

Yep.

Got it.

This applicant.

11 and 12.

This is the same project.

This is the demo and the new.

Okay, got it.

Sorry.

Yep.

Um, okay.

If you would like to say your name and address for the record, we'll go forward.

My hi uh members of the board.

So Patrick Kamus is Gamus, uh 225 North Pitch Street, representing the owner's addicts in Sydney McCormick.

Um I've read the stuff for poll.

Uh looks good to me.

I'll be happy to answer any questions.

Does anyone have any questions before we open it up for public comment?

Ms.

Hellman, do we have any public comments on this application?

Okay, well, get your speaker forms in.

And we're items.

Oh, that's all right.

Okay.

Yeah.

And then if you have you filled out a speaker form yet?

Uh you can grab are they still in the lobby, perhaps?

Or Ms.

Hellman might have Ms.

Roberts has a yelling, I'm sorry.

Has a speaker form for another uh case.

Could I just add these item numbers to that speaker form?

I think that's fine, Mr.

Conkey.

We just had another person.

So uh okay, go ahead, Miss Roberts, while we have our next person filling the format.

Hi, my name's Christine Roberts.

I represent Historic Alexandria Foundation, uh, which is located at 228 North Lee Street.

Um we uh feel that this edition will be an improvement over the current situation for this building, and um wholeheartedly in support of it.

Thank you.

We love when you come out and support projects.

Okay, our next speaker.

Um you can come forward and um you can finish the form after you're done talking, as long as you promise to turn it in.

I promise.

Okay, so if you will just give us your name and an address for the record, and then you have three minutes unless you're representing an organization that you have five.

I am not.

Um my name is Taroma Alleygood, and I am at 822 South Fairfax, so the property immediately behind the property in question.

Um I just looked at the plans tonight because two of my next door neighbors um asked me to come and speak.

Um is a beautiful plan.

I would want to live in that home myself.

Um we are very concerned with the scale um in relation to the Gates Garden neighborhood, which um is our architecturally significant.

It was designed very carefully by um car uh by um no, I'm sorry, by Moss, Louis R.

Moss.

Um, and so on the block, the scale of the expansion to the back is much larger than really any other home on the block traditionally.

Um the letters of support were by 809 and 819 uh Lee Street, which are the only two other homes to expand to the rear that we are aware of, um, just based on satellite images and our own experience with the 819 expansion.

Um and those expansions have been smaller in scale.

Um, so non-architect or an urban planner haven't done this before, but I had a couple of factual questions related to the staff report, which was really well put together, but as well as we wanted to express our concerns.

My neighbors are elderly, they couldn't be here tonight, but just um the scale and how far back the structure um is, as well as how it's not so visually in keeping with all of the brick two to three-level townhomes above grade in the entire Eight's garden development.

And I have a nice Alexandria Times out of the attic article on how carefully this was architected and designed, all of these townhomes for small families coming from uh DC to escape the hustle and bustle of the city.

And so, you know, one of the reasons we bought our place and we had three small children, we get it, is because it's one of the only neighborhoods in uh uh old town that has yards.

Um when the 819 extension went in, uh we've it does look to us from the front, it's beautiful from the side it's beautiful.

From those of us who see and experience it to the rear, it's not great.

Umise increased, privacy is reduced, it's just kind of much larger than any other home on the block, the entire block.

Um, and this um addition looks to be even larger of footprint.

Um so I don't know how this goes, but I'm happy to answer.

So you have you have three minutes, and you can just ask your questions and get them on the record, and then we'll give the applicant an opportunity to respond.

Okay, um, I see that the plans uh have reduced the open space to the bare minimum.

Unfortunately, you're at time.

I will I took some of your time because I told you what to do.

Oh ask it real fast.

Yeah, I would um question the public or the easement for the public sidewalk um in front of the home specifically, and then just again, um I the satellite image provided in the staff assessment does not include uh the addition to the neighboring property 819, but um if one would overlay this addition on that satellite image, one could see that it's very much reduced.

Uh it's uh much larger of a footprint um than any of the other homes on the block.

And so my neighbors and I have some concerns.

Okay.

Thank you.

Um, and then just get that speaker form in whenever you're done.

Okay, Mr.

Camus, you may respond if you'd like.

Um I respect that comment.

Uh is something that I told with.

Um, but I like to think that with the book end at 819, um, this is still smaller in scale.

It steps down uh systematically.

And um I think that even though the the comment about the large footprint on on a satellite view, that would make sense, but I think that it's layered and mashed well enough for it not to be as imposing as people describe it.

I have a question for you.

On the on the staff report uh on page six of the staff report, it it appears that there's a photograph of your subject property with an adjoining house right next door.

Correct.

Uh is is the addition gonna be further out than that adjoining house um yes.

Um yes.

The one most of it being the one-story porch component.

Yeah, uh, it is 13 feet from the end of that um neighbor's second floor mass.

Of the second floor mass.

Yes, yeah, not the bay window, which you can see in that photograph there.

Now, is this um does this comply with Alexandria zoning ordinances?

It would not come here without that.

Right.

Uh and I I don't know, I have no knowledge of an easement.

We don't really review easements, but was this a sidewalk easement or something?

Well, I believe that there's a there's some description about rights to parking because the the front drive is part of the personal property of the of all all of Yates Gardens houses.

Um but I conferred first thing with zoning about what element of that is allowed to be used as open space.

So even though uh it looks reduced in the rear, the compound open space meets all the requirements.

Because of the ownership of the parking, correct.

Okay, understood.

Okay.

Would anyone else like to offer comments or questions to the applicants?

Um make one comment.

I think because the furthest backed extension is an open porch, although not on the neighbor's side, it has to be solid by code.

But I think that openness does speak for it being not a solid mass from the other two sides.

And I do like the way that it steps down from the tallest original part of the house.

I think that's been well done, and the detailing is lovely.

Um I'm sure often we do review other additions to these houses along the way, and um almost all of them uh many of them have additions already and probably will have in the future, and I think this sets a high bar for stylistically for what can be done.

So I would pretend to uh support this application.

Um would any other members like to comment?

You don't have to, but you're invited to.

I I agree with um Mr.

Adams.

I think it's really gonna look better than what it currently does, and it's not just the I understand it's just the two-story edition.

It's not gonna be any taller than what's already there, and I I think the massing is appropriate.

So I I really think this is a positive um improvement.

Uh Mr.

Camus, I am not an architect, so I may not be fully understanding the plans, but it it appears that the profile from the side of the addition basically follows the shape that it is now.

It's just out further.

And I was are you referring to the uh south elevation?

The the the right hand drawing in that in that uh in the sheet.

I was on um let's see, I think it would be it's page 17 of the staff report where it shows the north and the proposed north and south elevations, and then just kind of comparing it to the photograph of the existing back, it just look from what I could tell, it seems to follow the same profile.

Yes, uh I think it's it's with the the 819 property to the north, it has uh uh a similar profile, yes.

Okay, thank you for your application.

I uh concur with my colleagues' comments.

I will just for the record and for our public speaker, um, just frame the discussion a little bit because if we can go to page four of the staff report, so the board has to review only what's visible from the public right away, and this subject property is only visible through the backyard from Fairfax Street.

So this is the view that the board has to make its decision on.

Unless Mr.

Conki, is there another view where this would be visible from the public because there's no public alley behind this board?

Right.

Now this is gonna be it's gonna be what you're seeing here, which is kind of through some Yeah.

And so uh, you know, I although I do appreciate your comments just from a historical preservation um perspective, it it is really not gonna be very differently visible than it is now.

And given that you already have a lot of variation with additions over the years in the back, and then it conforms to all zoning requirements.

I would also be inclined to support the application.

Um there are a few recommendations from the staff, Mr.

Camus.

Have you taken a look at those?

Yes, I have an opponent with any of them.

Okay.

Yeah.

All right.

Um, is anyone else have comments or a motion of any kind?

Motion we approve this application.

With staff recommendations.

With staff recommendations.

I second that.

All right, Mr.

Conkey, we have a motion.

Okay.

Um sorry, Mr.

Neo, was it we was that second?

Okay, thank you.

Okay.

Um Ms.

Pratt.

I.

Aye.

Mr.

Adams.

Hi.

Mr.

Scott.

I congratulations.

Thank you.

Okay.

Okay, what's next?

13 and 14.

Yep.

And Mr.

Camus, don't go too far.

Okay.

Uh 13 and 14.

B AR 2025-00502, old historic district.

Request for alterations and an addition at 107 North Fairfax Street.

Pat and Carrie, I'm sorry, the applicant.

It's Pat and Carrie Adams represented by Patrick Camus Architect.

And BAR 2025-00501, Old Historic District.

Request for partial demolition and encapsulation at 107 North Fairfax Street.

The applicant is Pat and Carrie Adams represented by Patrick Camus Architect.

Members of the board, good evening again.

Patrick Camus, Studio Camus, representing the Adams family here.

No relation to the one on the board.

I will make a quick presentation here, given that there's a higher profile visibility here for King Street and the and the scale of this building.

The building is suffering a little from delayed maintenance.

And the 1967 addition at the rear has sort of filtered through the whole the building.

So the third floor addition is set back five foot six from the existing parapet wall, which you can see in that photograph.

And that big uh continues the line for the whole addition to this to this building.

Um the exterior changes I've suggested are just there to clean up some of the mixed languages.

Uh I feel like the changes in windows, um the lintels, and the uh star ties um just give it a cleaner sense of um of stature um this is a large building, but uh I feel like the addition is modest enough not to take away from from the storyline of this of this great property.

Um I think it's fitting for and subtly enough for what is visible from King Street.

I'll be happy to answer any questions from that.

Do any members of the board have uh preliminary questions before we open it up to public comment?

Are there any public speakers on this application?

Uh yes, Christine Roberts is speaking for Historic Alexandria Foundation.

Okay.

Hi there again, Christine Roberts, Historic Alexandria Foundation.

And I'm glad that this visual is up, because uh I'd like to know exactly on here what we would be able to see from King Street.

And usually in the staff report, it there's a red box that shows what you're able to see, but in the staff report on page I think three, it's not clear where this building and the addition ends up in this very very visible and central part of historic Alexandria.

In fact, that's the visitor center.

That's where we're asking people to come and evaluate um the historic uh uh treasures that we have to offer.

So getting a clear idea of of what's visible from this spot would be super helpful to us.

For instance, is is the spiral staircase gonna be visible from King Street right here, or from which is uh public, it's a public building and the the area in the um the garden there is a publicly accessible garden that's owned by the city, so and frequented by uh visitors to Alexandria.

So, how much of the more modern um part of this is gonna be able to be seen?

I mean, if I can answer that.

That's our biggest concern.

I mean if I can also concern you can, but just we'll just let Ms.

Roberts finish and then you can other than that, you know, we we appreciate that it the addition is on the non-historic part of the building.

Um so we have no problem with the fact of the addition, it's just the visibility, really what we will be able to see.

Thank you.

Thank you.

All right, Mr.

Camus, the floor is yours.

Uh so quick on so I mean, everything here is going to be uh partially visible through the trees, um, but it is set back almost six feet from the existing building line.

Um but uh once again I'll make I'll make the point that I think it's the the stepping back and the messing of it that gives the the subtlety to this project.

Thank you.

Are there any more public comments?

Um no?

Okay, we'll close we will close public comment on this application, and I'd be happy to open it up for deliberative comments from my colleagues on the board.

Um well, when I first looked at usually when I look at the application, I go just straight to the plans without reading anything.

And um looking at the plans initially, I thought maybe that two-story addition, the east edition is historically original.

Um because it it was in a harmonious addition to the original structure.

And um this elevation, I think uh it I think it would benefit from being a little quieter.

It's uh right now it it seems to be drawing attention away from the historic building part of it.

Maybe, you know, it looks like we've got a a the bay edition is a cantilever with the two spiral stairs and um and then the the various different size windows and doors.

Um I don't know if there's maybe an attempt to look at that elevation and um develop it more harmoniously with the existing building and the existing addition.

I think it's true it's this is exactly where everyone is looking, you know, even if they're sitting with their gelato in this upper part here.

So um I think I think the siding is appropriate.

It should could be sided, that's fine.

I I think a shed roof is also um not a bad move, although it it seems like a pretty shallow shed roof.

I don't know what is that uh what kind of roofing is on that?

Oh uh probably probably TPO, a rubber roof.

Um, but yes, it's it was to keep the mess down while still getting the ceiling height to get out the back door.

So yeah, because uh it looked like you had eight feet there that's right in the back and then ten feet behind, so it looks like you may have a little better room.

We have a differential in in floor heights from to ceiling heights in the front and the rear, so are you forever paying the pipeline?

So I maybe there's a little study to bring it down to make the shed roof a little more um traditional slope.

Um and then maybe consider I I think it is also wise to inset it like you've done.

So I think it it really isn't gonna look exactly like this, like it's along the face.

But um maybe the taking a look at the cantilever and the spiral stairs and the various windows, I think it would benefit from a little more study.

Um Ms.

Del Nino FYI, that two-story edition on the back was built in 1967.

Exactly.

That's what I was um saying that initially you may think that it was original because it was a very harmonious addition.

And so, you know, now we're putting another edition on it it may be um a little more sensitive to look at making it a little quieter.

Thanks.

Do any other members have comments to make uh the the it's a the massing of it is really intriguing.

The uh the bay window, and it does make it an interesting piece of architecture.

I think the the catch is that it is right next to the visitor center.

And it has this pseudo colonial revival 1966, is that right?

67.

67.

The lint the uh above the windows.

The door's not very well done.

But there is a certain harmony of the old town with uh the windows, although you're changing them, I think that's because of the interior two of the two of them get a little larger.

Larger for formatting, yeah.

The two left hand ones in the 67 edition.

Yeah.

Oh okay.

So I don't know, it's sort of a question mark.

I can see the harmony of what you've done, the side is coming up to date, and it fits with the back, and it's the complexity of it, is makes it very interesting.

The uh trellis and the different layers.

I like it, but just I question whether because of the visitor center garden being right there, whether whether we're, you know, it's really the heart of all town.

It's a tricky subject.

I don't know exactly how to react.

Yeah, there's no uh so I will say I appreciate this design and I would be inclined to support it.

I would say, however, that I think, and we do sometimes approve Hardy Plank siding on additions, but in this location, given its visibility from King Street, I think that any siding you use that would be visible should probably be made of wood.

Is that something you would be comfortable with?

Totally, yes.

I have no problem with that.

Okay.

Um I'm happy to give you an opportunity to respond to Miss Del Nino's comments or Mr.

Adams's comments.

Um again, the w worthy comments.

Um I I'll say that I think that with all buildings in Old Town, um the storyline of time um changes.

Um the most successful projects are the one where those those stories are clear and delineated.

So the 1967 addition to me uh seems uh a hybrid wash to try and get it to be harmonious without being harmonious at all.

And then my attempt is to put a 2025 stamp on this building, uh, continuing that storyline.

So it's it's a slightly more streamlined um design relative to what I usually do, but I feel like um given everything that's gone on on the King Street uh and the last two blocks, I think is actually in keeping with what this city is trying to achieve.

Good question, Patrick.

The uh there's it sits back six feet from the retaining wall it uh from the parapet wall.

Which is which still exists.

Hedging or any planting that could soften the sort of for sure, yes.

There could be planting box in there for the other.

And certainly the uh I I I could um the pergolar component could be toned down.

I I'm willing to look at that.

Uh our purview, the planting material, but I was thinking of like horn beams or something that would sort of create a taller uh separation like a flying hedge on that area, something that would soften it a little bit.

And add a again, more complexity.

It is almost architectural, these trees, but just a suggestion.

It might also help if you could use potted plans or something to uh to maybe hide the spiral staircase a little bit in between the park, because it is a park.

Yep.

So um what I would like to ask you about Miss Del Nino's comment about the pitch of the roof of the uh shed dormer, I guess it is.

Um is that something you would be interested or be able to study, giving it like slightly more of a pitch there?

I don't know how much clearance you need for your own.

Well, I mean, I could certainly give it a steeper pitch, but it'll make it taller and and closer to the apex of the existing roof.

And uh to me that seems counterintuitive.

Um I'm limited in in floor to ceiling height getting out, so um I don't see very many options here to to get us where we want need to be.

Um but for me it's just keeping it as low as possible.

I'd even go with a flat roof over over more of a pitch to get to get that down in scale.

Can I ask when you it'll be painted because it's wood siding?

Uh could you do it in a dark color so that it just kind of recedes away?

That's what I had in mind for the whole edition, uh, an offset color to to the pastels that are on it now.

And the main mass of the original building and the addition would be a little bit more than a little bit.

Yes.

I do like the geometry of the windows now that I look at it.

I mean, it's a handsome composition.

The ABA and the windows above it.

It's um almost like a painting.

Simplified painting.

Do we have any more comments?

Well, I'd be happy to try to work on a motion here.

I would move to approve this application with staff recommendations, and uh uh which is as submitted, actually.

Uh, and the additional um conditions that you continue to work with the staff on the I think the pergola here and screening elements.

Screening really isn't in our the action unless it's a structure, right?

But landscape screening, other types of screening to sort of minimize the visibility of the addition um from the street, and that that it's painted at a darker color so that it will recede in the background.

And then, of course, I'm open to any fret friendly amendments to my amendment to use wood rather than hardy plank and wood siding, right?

Yes, no problem.

Okay, that that's a motion.

If there's any seconds, we could vote on it or continue deliberating.

Second that uh this does have demolition, so it is a roll-call vote.

Uh Ms.

Pratt.

Aye, Senator.

Mr.

Adams.

Uh Mr.

Scott.

Yes.

Thank you.

Congratulations.

Okay.

Thank you, everyone.

Happy holidays.

Okay, what's next?

Number 15 and 16.

Yes, item number 15 and 16.

Next next on our docker this evening.

Uh BAR 2025-00509.

Uh old and start district request for alterations and waiver of fence height requirement at 229 South Payne Street.

The applicant is Mark Boswell, represented by Christopher Lyon Architect.

Number 16 is BAR2025-Old-00508 old and historic district.

Request for partial demolition, encapsulation at 229 South Pain Street.

The applicant is Mark Boswell, represented by Christopher Lyon Architect.

All right.

Are you the applicant?

Uh my name is Chris Lyon.

I'm the architect representing the well.

If you give us an address for the record, then the floor is yours.

Sure.

Uh my office is at 2402 Mount Vernon Avenue in Alexandria.

Okay, and you can give us a presentation or just answer questions, however, you want to proceed is is absolutely fine.

Sure.

Uh so I've read the staff report and agree with the recommendations just to give a little bit of background on the project.

Uh the the gate and the fence, as you can see in the pictures, are pretty dilapidated.

So we want to just replace them in kind, knowing that they are taller than current regulations allow.

And then one of the oddities about the shed is it doesn't actually have four proper walls.

The fence is one of the walls of the shed, and the gate is the other.

So when we're removing the fence and the gate, we only have half of a structure left.

So at that point, the applicant, uh, the Boswell's decided they'd like to create a small trash area, shift the shed away from the property line, and then maintaining compliance with the city's open space regulations.

We now need to be a full eight feet away from the rear property line.

So we've essentially relocated the shed, but we want to duplicate all the materials, the standing seam metal roof, the wood painted siding, wood windows and door.

So uh, but otherwise pretty straightforward replacement of basically what is there today.

So do any board members have uh preliminary questions for the applicant?

Do we have any public speakers on this application?

All right, we'll close we will close public comment on the application.

Do any members of the board have any deliberative comments they wish to make?

This actually is a question.

Um I understood the existing gate is two parts sliding and why go to three.

So uh one of the quirks of the shed again is that you slide the gate to one side to access the yard, and then in the other, you slide it to access the shed.

So there's we're removing that reason for being, so now we can just create more of an open space uh with a triple track.

But I mean, why I guess why need why is a triple track needed as opposed to a fixed wall and just one sliding gate?

Uh just to provide some slightly better access to the backyard for the clients, that's really the only way in and out because they have the the solid brick wall along Payne Street, and then of course the fence on the property line.

So they're just looking for a little bit better access than the current gate provides.

I have a question for Mr.

Conkey.

I uh correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think the staff report says what how historical the shed is.

We see the house itself is quite historic, but the shed that's proposed to be demolished.

Um I don't believe we have a record of it being of it being built.

Um it certainly does not seem to be uh historic if it's using the the wood fence as part of one of the walls, it would date from about that time, so it's it's modern.

Okay, all right, thank you.

Sure.

Okay.

I I think that it'll be an improvement to the property.

Thank you.

Mr.

Adams, Ms.

Pratt.

Looks good to me.

I agree.

Well, let's get a motion from somebody.

I I vote to approve this application.

I second.

All right, Mr.

Conkey.

Oopsor.

Myself turned around here.

Okay, there we go.

Ms.

Pratt.

I.

Ms.

Undew?

I.

Mr.

Adams.

I.

Mr.

Scott.

I.

Thank you.

Congratulations.

Thanks so much.

All right, we have one more docket item number 17.

One more item tonight.

Uh B AR 2025-00512 Parker Gray request for alterations at 802 Pendleton Street.

The applicant is hunter right out.

You guys are very lucky.

Uh, usually when we have this many items on the docket, it is you would be here well into the night.

So I know we were like, wow, it's early.

Um hi everyone, I'm Erica Ryda.

This is my husband Hunter Rideout.

We live at 802 Pendleton Street.

Um, we moved to Alexandria over the summer.

Um, and we just love it here.

Thank you for welcoming us to this beautiful town.

Um, we were made aware that there was a report that our door um was reported as not being uh or as being faux wood instead of real wood.

Um to be honest, I don't think we had really noticed.

Um but uh given you know how cold it is right now and that we're not really in a place to replace our door at this moment.

We were hoping to get approval to keep our door as is, given that it doesn't really detract from the look of our property.

Um it's still in a historic style, and the faux wood, um I mean you can tell it's faux if you're like right up against the door, but um from the sidewalk you can't really tell.

Um, and it's you know, in a similar style to what the previous door was.

So uh yeah, that's basically the gist of it.

We were hoping to get approval to keep the door as is until a time comes that we you know might be able to replace it in the future.

Do we have any questions from the board?

Um course you can ask questions during the deliberation period too.

Do we have any public speakers on this one?

All right, we'll close public comment on this.

Um Mr.

Conkey, can you explain the recommendation here from the staff?

Or Ms.

Hellman?

Oh, yes, sir.

Um so the staff recommendation, and let me just get the wording up in front of me here, so I have it correct.

Is that approval of the of the of the certificate of appropriateness for the alterations with condition that when the door is replaced, it be replaced with wood.

Um this is this is a type of it's an unusual sort of recommendation, but it is something we've done in the past when we have a violation like this.

Um the board has sometimes said uh it can stay in place, but when it's replaced, let's do it right um and do it with wood at the next time.

So this that's that's what we're recommending here.

Yeah, so I I'll just say uh g given that the old and historic district is riddled with violations um put in by prior owners that uh I don't think it would be possible for us to go through and require everything to be changed right away, given that you didn't install this door.

I think the staff recommendation is appropriate.

Um, but certainly open to other members input here.

Well, we're in a little bit of a tough spot because on Fairfax Street, we recently asked somebody to replace their door.

You know, so usually the applicant reminds us of exceptions that you know that we've made and not, you know, when we've actually applied, you know, the the guidelines.

Um but you know, given in this part of town and um and what um Andy just mentioned, you know, I could support this and hope that it breaks down and you put a wood door there.

Because the other reason is it's so close to the street.

Sure.

A lot of times in Parker Grade, the buildings are a little further back and it's not quite as noticeable.

But here, you know, it is pretty noticeable.

Yeah.

Um, we're happy with the staff recommendation that like when the door is eventually replaced, it'd be wood.

I mean, we love the historic character of the neighborhood.

It's why we moved here, and we're more than happy to help uphold it.

It's just it's the middle of winter, and it's not really within our budget, is like first-time homeowners to replace the door at right at this moment.

Um, but so we'd appreciate some grace on this just to give us some more time.

And then when you do replace it, it should just be a staff approval.

That's Mr.

Conn.

Is that correct, Mr.

Connell?

Yes, it's correct.

If it was done with wood, it would be uh administrative approval.

So it would be uh short turn around a few days.

All right.

Uh do we I don't want to highlight your coughing, Mr.

Adams, but also I want to give you an opportunity to vote if we have a motion.

Do anyone does anyone uh want to make a motion on this?

I'll move to approve it with staff recommendations.

I'll second.

All right.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye, aye.

Any opposed.

Congratulations.

Thank you guys.

Happy holidays.

All right, no, I we have a couple more uh items to address here before the end of the meeting.

You do I have a couple of announcements, yeah.

Um, and as I said before, uh we are going to be hearing the 806 North Columbus Street um concept review uh in in January, so we'll look forward to that.

Um, and just for the record, uh just in case you're wondering, um, this applicant is coming to the same hearing with another another project, and just would rather go to one hearing rather than two.

That's why we're so one applicant is doing two concept reviews.

Correct.

He's a busy is it he's a busy guy.

He's a busy guy.

Strong constitution.

Um, so there are a few, a few things I want to address.

Um, first is as I think you all know, we've received an appeal for the city hall approval that will be going forward um on January 13th, uh city city council hearing.

Um just wanted to announce that.

We have also um received an appeal for the 910 King Street approval.

Um uh this is I think of the last hearing.

Um we do not have a date for that yet.

We just literally received the appeal yesterday, so we're still working through when that might be, and I will let you guys know when that occurs.

Um wanted to highlight, there's been some discussion, obviously.

Um we're gonna be moving out of this building, as we all know.

Um so the um the two hearings in January will be out at the Mark Center in the West End.

We are working through with um the park and rec department um to try to get a space.

I think we think we're we're going to be able to get a space um to have the remainder of the hearings um here in at our rec center here in Old Town.

Um so that's the that's that's our goal.

We're working through it.

I I see no reason to be um um concerned about it.

I think it's gonna happen.

Um we just need some time to get the MOU in place, work out some logistics.

So we need that basically need that month to get um set up uh uh set up in the Breck Center.

So our two meetings in January will be out of the out of the Mark Center.

So just wanted to make that announcement.

Um just briefly um wanted to point out one thing that I found I kind of noticed noted the other the other day, uh realizing this is the last hearing for the BAR uh in these chambers.

Um this BR has has met in these chambers for many, many, many, many, many years.

I know I personally have been sitting in this room pretty much once a month since I looked it up today since 2007.

Um and I know a lot of you have been have spent a lot of hours in this room.

Um I just wanted to take note.

This is our last time here, um, as the building's gonna be renovated, um, and just note the history and saw some of the really, really great work that um this board and all your predecessors are going going all the way back um have done in this room to really shape City of Alexandria.

And I think it's just I think it's worthwhile to take a moment here um and say, you know, the the board will live on and we'll be b bigger and better as the building gets renovated, but you know, that's let's note the passing of time here.

Um just wanted to wanted to say that.

Um and then finally, um, in a far less, far, far, far, far less historic.

Um uh uh loss.

Um Ms.

Hellman, this is her last hearing uh tonight as well.

Miss Hellman's retiring in a couple weeks.

I remember when she started.

I said, like I said, far less historic than this room.

Much less historic than this room.

I would argue that she has been far more influential than this room, but as uh uh not nearly as old as this room, we'll put it that way.

But I just took a wanted to take a take a moment to note Ms.

Helmans um a great loss for uh for for me and for this for the city in general.

Ums Hellman has been a great asset to the city in her in her time here, and we are very much gonna miss her.

Thank you.

That's very kind of you.

Well, thank you, Ms.

Holman, for your years of service.

Uh you've been here.

Yeah.

Round of applause for Miss Hellman.

And I'll come to future hearings and you know.

Are you gonna stay in support of everything?

Will you be residing in the city of Alexandria?

Yeah, I'm still I'll still be in Alexandria, yeah.

So you will be a member of the board then when we have a vacancy.

I hope.

Oh, yeah.

We are always interested in knowledgeable um members, and we would certainly benefit from your wisdom uh as we have for many years.

So thank you so much.

Thank you.

Well deserved, and I look forward to um working with you in a future capacity as well as having future hearings in a room that is better temperature regulated than this.

Yeah, this is this room has definitely cold right now, and sometimes it's so hot you can barely breathe.

Yeah, those of you who have been walking around City Hall the last month or two have noticed that it's it's it's it's sliding downhill.

We all dress in layers.

Um but yeah, thank you.

Um have a great everyone have a great, happy, healthy holiday.

I look forward to all of our work in the in the new year.

What is the date?

Oh, what is the date of our next meeting?

Uh January 7th.

The seventh, great.

All right, with that said, does anyone else any issues they want to bring?

And the meeting is closed.

Um, so this is like more.