Board of Architectural Review Public Hearing - May 6, 2026
Board of Architectural Review Public Hearing - May 6, 2026
The Board of Architectural Review (BAR) held a public hearing on May 6, 2026, at 7:02 PM in the City Council Chambers at Del Pepper Community Resource Center. Chair Scott, Vice Chair Zandian, Ms. Miller, Ms. del Ninno, Ms. Robinson, and Mr. Spencer were present; Mr. Adams was absent. The board considered three agenda items: the consent calendar, unfinished business from a previous meeting, and new business. All items were approved, with one item approved with amendments.
Consent Calendar
- Approval of Minutes: The minutes from the April 22, 2026 BAR Public Hearing were approved as submitted on a motion by Mr. Spencer, seconded by Vice Chair Zandian, with a vote of 6-0.
- BAR2026-00100 (714 Wolfe Street): Request for alterations by Robert and Elaine Flanagan, represented by Tobin Tracey. The board voted to approve the application as submitted on a motion by Ms. Robinson, seconded by Ms. Miller. The motion carried 5-1, with Mr. Spencer voting against.
Discussion Items
Unfinished Business: 732 North Washington Street (BAR2026-00055 & BAR2026-00071)
- Applicant: 732 and 806 Development LLC, represented by Kenneth Wire (attorney).
- Proposal: Partial demolition and encapsulation (BAR2026-00071) and alterations and an addition (BAR2026-00055) at 732 North Washington Street, in the Old and Historic District.
- Discussion: The applicant presented design changes responsive to previous board suggestions, including vertical alignment of muttons, removal of turnbuckles, increased curvature of balconies, and alignment of dormers. The board discussed several details:
- Roof pitch: The board requested a minimum 5% increase in the mansard roof slope to help the dormers read more distinctly and reduce the visual mass of the fifth floor. The applicant expressed concerns about structural impacts and interior headroom but agreed to study the change with staff.
- Fifth floor cutouts: The board recommended that the roof of the cutouts (patios) use slate material consistent with the mansard, and that slate be returned on the interior vertical walls up to the door openings.
- Columns: The board suggested adding decorative columns to break up the open expanse of the fifth-floor balconies, making the design appear more residential.
- Decorative railing: The board found the proposed gothic-style railing inappropriate and requested simplification to a more consistent style.
- Soldier course: The board granted permission to eliminate the soldier course above small bathroom windows and to use precast material if matching brick was unavailable.
- North elevation: The applicant was asked to add material between the dormer and the cutout on the right side and to re-center the windows within that bay.
- Staff recommendations: The board incorporated staff recommendations regarding metal surrounds on dormer windows.
- Key Outcomes: On a motion by Chair Scott, seconded by Mr. Spencer, the board voted to approve BAR2026-00055 and BAR2026-00071 as amended. The motion carried 6-0. The amendments included conditions to work with staff on the above design changes, with a minimum 5% increase in roof pitch and use of slate on the fifth-floor cutout roofs.
New Business: 229 South Pitt Street (BAR2026-00088 & BAR2026-00092)
- Applicant: Chris and Courtney Cox, represented by Suzie O’Brien (Thompson and Cook Architects).
- Proposal: Alterations and an addition (BAR2026-00088) and partial demolition and encapsulation (BAR2026-00092) at 229 South Pitt Street, in the Old and Historic District. The project includes a small mudroom entry and rebuilding of a bay window to bring more light into the dining area.
- Discussion: The applicant presented the design, noting it is almost not visible from the public right-of-way. A board member asked about gutter details; the applicant stated copper gutters would be used. No public comments were received.
- Key Outcomes: On a motion by Mr. Spencer, seconded by Ms. Miller, the board voted to approve both applications as submitted, per staff recommendations. The motion carried 6-0.
Other Business
- Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 7:57 PM.
- Administrative Approvals: The docket listed 14 administrative approvals for window, roof, shutter, fence, signage, gate, and foundation replacements. These were not discussed during the public hearing but were noted in the agenda.
- Future Meetings: The board noted that the next hearing would be held at Charles Houston Recreation Center. Chair Scott encouraged members to review the upcoming docket in advance, noting a potentially controversial item on North Columbus Street.
Meeting Transcript
This meeting is called to order. All right. We will proceed tonight with applications and other agenda items in the order in the order indicated on the docket. Limited copies of tonight's agenda and each staff report are available in the hall right outside. If you are an applicant, please make sure to review your application and the staff report before your case is called. For each applicant, we will proceed in the following order of business. The applicant or the applicant's representative may present the proposal or simply answer questions from the board. And the board encourages applicants to be thorough but concise. The public will have an opportunity to speak on each application. Members of the public will be invited in. If you do want to speak, you'll need to fill out a speaker form and bring them over here to Miss Novaez. Members of the public have three minutes to speak, and if you're representing an organization, you can speak for five minutes. After public comment is complete, the board will close the public portion of the hearing and deliberate. After deliberation, the the board can take one of several actions. The board can vote on a motion to issue, continually issue, or deny a certificate of appropriateness. The board can uh upon motion from an applicant uh defer taking action until the next meeting or a future meeting. The board can vote vote to continue the case to the next available hearing or proceed to the next docket item without taking action. If the board takes no action at the next regularly scheduled meeting, the certificate of appropriateness is automatically issued. And that's because the municipal code requires the board to take action within 45 days of the uh applicant being complete and and ready to review. So just a few comments on voting. Motions will pass by a simple majority vote. If there is a tie that results in no action, that's the same thing as not being approved. Um actually no, it just means no action. It's as though the board has taken no action. And if the board vote board votes to deny an application, a similar application won't be considered for a period of one year following the denial, and that is also in the municipal code. The board occasionally takes up matters other than applications for a certificate of appropriateness. We'll take a few of those matters up today. Um the public will have an opportunity to speak. So with all that said, um the first item on tonight's docket is the minutes from the last meeting, Mr. Conke. I don't know if you need to read those in. Nope, just uh take a vote on the minutes. Okay. Um does anyone have any proposed modifications or changes to the April 22nd BAR meeting minutes? No, do any members of the public wish to make comments on the posted minutes? No. All right. Well, then we'll take a motion on the minutes. So moved. Do we have a second? Second. All those who vote in favor of adopting the minutes from the April 22nd meeting say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? The minutes are adopted. Okay, onto the consent calendar. Yes, sir. We have one item on the consent calendar of this evening. Excuse me.
openpublica.com