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.

Uh item number three is BAR 2026-0010, Old and Historic District.

Request for alterations at 714 Wolf Street.

The applicant is Robert and Elaine Flanagan, represented by Tobin Tracy, architect.

All right.

Does any member of the public uh does any member of the board wish to remove this item from the consent calendar?

Does any member of the public wish to remove this item from the consent calendar?

All right.

Then all those in favor of adopting the consent.

Yeah.

All those in favor, um, give me wait.

I need a motion.

Who wants to make a motion on the consent calendar?

Thank you.

Uh do we have a second?

Second.

You got that?

All those in favor of adopting the consent calendar say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Okay.

Nay.

Yeah.

We have one nay.

Yep.

Um, the content consent calendar is adopted.

Next, we have unfinished items and previously deferred.

Yes, sir.

We have one item tonight under uh previously deferred.

Uh, this is item number four and five.

I guess that's two items.

Uh BAR 2026-00071, old and historic district.

Request for partial demolition.

Encapsulation at 732 North Washington Street.

The applicant is 732 and 806 development LLC, represented by Kenneth Wire attorney.

And BAR 2026-00055, Old Historic District.

Request for alterations and an addition at 732 North Washington Street.

Applicant is 732 and 806 development LLC, represented by Kenneth Wire, attorney.

All right.

Thank you very much.

In place of uh Mr.

Mr.

Kenwire tonight.

If you don't mind, can you pull up the final submission package?

And we can just scroll through.

Or is this part of the staff report?

I just want to make sure this is the whole thing.

This should be these it's all it's on one package altogether.

This is your submission package.

Okay, great.

So right there blow that up a little bit.

Great.

So first off, I I'd like to thank uh the board uh further suggestions.

I think all of them added quite a bit of value to the aesthetics of the project, and and um I think you know we're we're ending up with a much better building now.

So uh would you mind zooming in on that?

I just want to get a high level um uh thing on changes.

Is there any way to blow that up even for controlling the battery?

Got it, okay.

Okay, just to give a just to give a quick summary starting from the bottom.

Um the board suggested that we turn uh the muttons to be vertical vertically aligned.

Uh we thought that was a good suggestion.

We've gone ahead and adopted that.

Um the turnbuckles um we agree after further review, it was more of a distraction than anything.

So we went ahead and removed those.

Uh we found that with the shallow depth of the cantilever, we were able to figure out a way to support that without the turnbuckles.

Um Mr.

Spencer uh advocated for um uh more curvature in in the balconies.

Uh he thought I would soften the edges, and I we we agree and we we decided to incorporate that into the design.

At the same time, um uh you know, given the configuration and the layouts of the building, uh we found that that you know reducing the the front balconies to Juliet's was appropriate.

And um and if if you acknowledge that there's also uh a project next door across from Madison, 808 North Washington had a similar approach.

We think this is very important to in in convergence of office buildings and it's also just uh just a market demand to have outdoor space on a multifamily level.

Um another suggestion that was made by the board uh was to heavy up the transition that that occurs between the manters on the fifth floor outdoor balconies.

Um again, we think this is helpful and is kind of given a little bit meatier, hardier approach and connects the two uh sides of the mansard appropriately, both on North Washington and Madison.

Um and we also align the dormers.

Um I think that was just an oversight on our part, but again, we agree with the suggestion and have have gone ahead and move forward um with a change.

So if you don't mind if um if you can just start skipping through the slides, I'd like to see the the west elevation, rear elevation.

There's one more comment I want to make sure that that I've pointed out.

I'm trying to be as brief as possible given the lack of the agenda.

Next slide.

I'll just keep going and I'll I'll I'll have you stop when I hit the correct elevation.

One more.

There we go.

Uh so you'll see um, and this is kind of bothered me initially too as well.

Uh we we've added the keystones in the soldier courses um above the windows.

I will say in exploring the existing brick sizes, they're an unusual brick size that are not made uh today.

Um so we would we wanted to get some advice from the board on on potentially how you would approach um uh you know adding some of the the soldier courses above the windows because there's a good chance that we will not be able to match the brick exactly.

And so I don't think paint is the appropriate uh uh path for that, but maybe there's a slightly darker color brick, and that's been represented um on the front of the front rendering.

Sure.

Um I wasn't here for the first presentation, but um had you discussed the possibility of using a precast material here or are you only considering brick or similar masonry?

I think I think the precast in that color would be very heavy.

Yeah.

Um and would look off.

In like a red color, you mean or like a um a gray stone color.

Potentially.

Um I'm thinking more of like a solid through color above the above the the windows.

Um I think we'll have enough brick that will cut out when we make these windows opening wider, we'll be able to preserve that brick.

So each window opening gets about 16 inches wider on either side.

So we're hopeful that we'll be able to utilize some of that.

But on the soldier course, um the bricks get longer because they're on a diagonal.

Yeah.

So it would be hard to replicate that to some degree.

And I just want to know, you know, if if this if this issue comes up down the road, maybe it's something we can have a conversation with staff on on the best way to resolve it.

I'm not ruling out that we can't use an existing brick and figure it out.

Um but it's it's just it's an odd shape brick that was produced back in the 50s and it's not not a common size anymore.

Okay, well uh we'll get everybody's comments and see where we landed, but thank you for flagging that.

Yep.

And um so I short and sweet, you know, we I I presented kind of the full package on the last run, and I just wanted to make sure I called out all the major changes that really were the result of great suggestions by the board.

Thank you.

Um before we move to public comment, do any of the board members have initial questions?

You can also ask questions during deliberations.

Okay.

Are there any members of the public who wish to speak on this application?

Seeing none, we'll close the public comment period.

Okay, and we can pivot to deliberations.

So the floor is open to any of uh the board members who'd like to offer their opinions.

On this elevation that you're showing, are the keystones in there, bricks over the brick over the small windows.

Are those original or are those new too?

They're new.

I I mean you might want to consider not providing them at that minor little window.

Yeah, I that's a yeah, I agree.

We we could maybe just do a a straight soldier there or get rid of it altogether.

I mean you can almost uh I would almost advocate for nothing.

Um I'll let other board members see how they feel, but I would almost advocate for it just treating it like a almost like a bathroom window or something.

It's just that's what it is.

So we're open to that second.

It's a little too much decoration at that little window.

Who would like to speak or offer opinions?

Um including the Washington Street standards in our packet.

That was very nice.

You know, it's hard for us to remember what they say.

I appreciate that.

And um I think this design has been pretty responsive to our comments.

Um I think a lot of the materials you're suggesting I think are really gonna look nice, uh, especially the steel windows, you know, on the ground floor and um you know, a lot of the the aluminum cornice.

Um I I was a little concerned about the uh mansard angle uh because right now uh you know the massing, it really reads as a fifth floor.

And if it were a real mansard roof, that would help recede, you know, the massing.

I don't know.

Um it was very hard for me to read the little FAR tabulation because it wasn't in a a typical um planning and zoning sheet that's easier to read.

It's hard.

I don't know.

Are you planning on um a zoning special exception on this?

No, so the existing so when when you add the amount of bathrooms that get added um to a commercial building when it converts the residential often takes away more um FAR from the calculation.

So the existing FAR was a 2-4 with the full flip-four roof, accounting for even the the further recess of the mansard, right?

Okay.

Um and we end up at a 238 from a FAR.

So we're not exceeding that.

Okay.

I I know that that's um you know not our in our purview, but I thought it was 1.5 if it's residential.

If you have the residential component 1.5 for the FAR.

No, we're we're at a 2.5.

It was converted under SUP to a CRMUS.

Okay, so it did go through the SUP process for that.

Correct.

Okay.

Um but I think that with the additional 10% on the mansard slope, that's going to make the dormers really read more like dormers and reduce the massing of it looking like a five-story building instead of a four-story with you know a mansard roof.

I think that it's important to bring that back, especially given if if you don't mind going to BAR number nine, the existing um slope of the roof.

Um referring to the Washington Street standard?

Um no, I'm I'm just looking at the existing elevation.

Page nine.

Yeah, page nine.

Yeah.

Oh, uh uh, eight, eight is fine.

We got some photos.

Here we go.

How about the photos?

All right.

There you go.

So it really reads like a four-story building.

I think it doesn't need to be, of course, that sloped back, but I think that additional ten degrees makes it a typical mansard uh slope.

And it'll help with your dormers.

So that is it.

Would you mind if I shared with you the two um precedent buildings that are on North Washington?

Sure.

It's in the package.

Um can you go to I think I believe it's a it's either a couple pages before this or a couple pages after?

Uh one more slide.

So this is located at 900 North Washington.

So about two blocks to the north.

You see that the the pitch of the mansard and the projection of the dormers were virtually matching this on this building.

Uh we went back, we stood in front of the building, we looked at it, uh, we we we felt that the pitch of the roof was very similar.

Um if you go to the page right before this.

Again, this is a more modern interpretation, but again, the pitch is also just as steep, and the dormer projections are also virtually the same.

So we've we felt I did look at that.

And these are three-story buildings, and they're much um they're they're much more delicately treated, especially with the elevation with uh the way it goes ins and outs.

So if you don't mind showing the other mansard roof that's on King Street that's in the packet.

Yeah, so there you're seeing um a much taller building, and here the mansard roof is reading more like a mansard.

It's really helping reduce that whole floor.

Look at 100 South Royal, 320 King Street.

Those are much closer to the building that we're looking at tonight.

Uh I appreciate the suggestion.

And we can always look at it further.

Okay, thank you.

Can I just point out since we have this on, you've got um for 320 King Street in this image, you do have that um pre-cast material instead of a soldier course.

I'm not suggesting you would have to do that, but it is something that you could consider as an alternative if you don't think you have enough materials.

Sure.

Yes, since she's on the mansard roof.

Um can you go to one of the renderings that shows the mansard roof?

And I just had a question about that one.

Elevation is fine.

I guess why did the mystery the material, the mansard roof stop at the at the balconies?

Because that that just feels strange that it stops there.

I would think the mansard material would carry across that.

We were trying to tie in the ornate details of the balconies with the outdoor area on the fifth floor.

So that was what our goal was.

We felt it was a little too heavy to expand, do like a parapet wall, uh which would be on a slope and kind of feel like a pocket cut opening into a into a roof.

But that's what it looks like, a pocket cut opening to the roof, even in your renderings.

That's why I asked for the columns.

And I think the the columns that were shown are just kind of not haphazardly placed, but they're not really designed columns.

They're just somebody pulled a rectangle down and said, there's a column there.

I think if they had been designed columns, they would have been tasteful, but with or without the columns, I think the material the mansard needs to carry across to make it feel more uniform.

Because it doesn't feel like a a true mansard.

It feels like just bits and pieces of a mansard.

Well, we tried to pull the windows back off the corners, we reduced the dormers, we align them.

We felt that was enough of a change on on the mansard roof to bring out that design a little bit further.

I'd like to say I really do like the rail across the it's not very tall, it's only 18 inches.

I'm not talking about from the bottom.

I'm talking about the top material.

Oh.

Yeah, we can put we can put sleep there.

Can I ask a question?

Are you I I see that the height of your building is uh 53 and some inches.

Is that as tall as you can go under the zoning ordinance?

This was uh a map amendment.

Yeah.

A text uh is a map or a text amendment, but it was done during the SUP process.

So I'm just asking like if you could bring the mansard roof, make it a like slightly taller to show the pitch of it and really make the the dormers uh really read more as dormers.

We are fairly restricted on given that the height is already taller than the North Washington standard of 53.

We we really have very limited flexibility.

Okay.

Um we did tighten the windows, though.

So that was another suggestion.

You weren't seeing this kind of it's a little bit more pronounced line across the top of the dormer than was there before.

So we could shorten the windows about six inches to accommodate that.

So I just want to make sure I'm tracking this conversation so for the cutout in the center for the for the patio there on the fourth floor, uh the fifth floor, you would suggest instead of metal on the top that it just be continued.

Um slate.

The mansard's slope slate would continue across.

And you want to we'd follow the slope too.

Yeah.

So it looks like a complete mansard.

We'd be okay with that.

Yeah.

Are there other thoughts on that issue?

I just want to.

Um I think I think that's a a good point.

And then if the um the internal walls are turning back in, should the mansard also have that slope?

Right now it's just a vertical um side walls of the inset.

So you're asking should the material of the mansard turn back and let the back wall itself be.

Yeah, like okay, if so it was gonna if it's reading like a bay, like two bays, you know, the outside slope of the mansard is here, but the inside slope is not.

Ah, you're saying slope the inside.

That's it.

That is another approach if you want it to be two bays.

That you start sloping.

Synthetically, it may be possible.

We do have door entrances coming on that are not quite visible there.

So I saw that.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Looks like you might have a little wall space or something.

It's a good suggestion.

I don't know w how would you feel about something like that?

I mean, I I do like that the outside corners of the mansard are sloping as from the building shell, right?

And so I I worry that if we put them on the inside, you're almost creating two separate mansards and they would read like two separate buildings.

It would almost be in contrast to one building.

Yeah.

That's why I was trying to say that.

I'm a good I think slope to the top and adding slate there is fine.

We're we'd be open to that.

I was gonna say I would be it might be interesting to take the slate back, though on the sides, even if they are perfectly straight.

So it looks like it's going back on the uh it's something you could study.

Not saying that maybe like 18 inches or something.

I know you can't take it all the way back, but uh the architect and me wants it to go all the way back.

Probably should, right?

Because it's yeah.

Well, if you'd allow me to study that with Bill, I'd be we'd be happy to explore that.

No, I just I wasn't one thing I was gonna ask you.

That should be very low thing.

Okay, I'll let you guys talk.

Um do we have any other comments uh on this one?

I just wanted to say that I um in regard to what we're specifically talking about right now.

I really liked Mr.

Spencer's suggestion that the if I understood it correctly, that the ends of the on the fourth level.

I'm sorry, fifth level, um that there be columns rather than just a long rectangular space on the ends of what look to me like folding glass doors.

Um because I think visually it would help bring the eye up.

So I would suggest I would agree with Mr.

Spencer that columns would be nice there.

Otherwise, I might as well go ahead and make my comments.

I think you've really listened to our board and uh in what we suggested a month ago, and um can't tell you how much we appreciate that.

Thank you very much.

I think the building is better for it.

Um those are all my comments at the moment.

Thank you.

What I asked for is for cows.

Um I'll go ahead and uh give my so I don't have to be like necessarily additional comments, but I do agree with the um with the bathroom windows, not necessarily they don't need to have the top uh top.

And I do I agree with uh Ms.

Del Nino about the the Mansard group.

I think the angle needs to be more to kind of show um that is a mansard group.

So I think that that makes a big difference also because of the height of it, because it's it's uh it's such a tall building, it helps to reduce um that effect.

And um and for the balconies, as we talked about, I also agree with just just sloping the top part of it and have the same material the slate.

Um thank you for the changes you have made.

It it does look much better.

Thank you.

Thank you for the suggestions.

I have I have a comment as well.

Um briefly, I think this design is really a handsome response and it's going to improve this building immensely.

I can't wait to see it on Washington Street.

Um and I really appreciate the consideration you gave to all the comments.

I think your changes are thoughtful.

I really like the the evolution of the balconies, the shape and the um the weight at the bottom, which I I do think um could be echoed in the soldier where you have the soldier cores with cast material.

I think that would be an appropriate substitute if you do so need that.

Um if we could go to the detail of the actual balcony railings.

It's towards the end of the presentation.

I just had one comment on that.

So and maybe we could zoom in on the decorative railing.

Yeah.

So this is a small thing, but I do think it's gonna be really noticeable on the building.

Um I find the detail of that very gothic in nature, and I think it could be simplified um potentially to just the ring band railing that you see.

Just I think a simpler, cleaner design might be more appropriate to the building.

But I appreciate that you wanted to add some detail.

I'm just not sure that's the right detail.

Understood.

Thank you.

That's all I have one more comment.

Can you go to page 35, please?

Yes.

Right there.

So at the balcony carve out again next to the bay window on the right hand side.

There needs to be a little more material there.

Right now you have looks like a slither of of material there.

And it doesn't look like I agree with you.

I I noticed that earlier today.

So I agree with you.

So we we can we can extend that maybe 12 inches or so.

Yeah, maybe a little bit more.

Maybe it lines up with the window frame or something because it just I think 12 inches might look a little danky.

It needs to be enough meat there to make it look like it's really carving out.

Yep.

In that case, should it be on both sides to be, or or you can maybe again adjust the windows just so that it's in the center.

Centered up.

Yeah, that's another.

Yeah.

If you're gonna do that, yeah, could you could the windows slide a little bit so that if you add some more material to the right that the whole thing is centered up?

Is there a space to do that?

Let's start with that.

Um if that's I'm not sure if that's a bedroom.

Are you saying shorten it to two windows?

No, no.

So on the carve out, if you add the material on the right side next to the bay.

Can you move the windows within the carve out center them up in that space?

Yeah, we can shorten that.

Absolutely.

Thank you.

And I do like the current balconies.

Yeah, I don't want to be all negative.

They won't be difficult.

I mean, they'll be difficult to make, but it'll come out in the railing, you mean?

No, the current balconies and stuff.

They were square initially.

They're really nice.

Okay.

They were square initially.

So we're kind of all over the place here.

Does anyone else have a comment on the decorative railing?

We did we did have a comment on the the style of it, and I just wonder if anyone else wanted to weigh in on that.

I agree with your comment.

Okay.

Yeah, I I do too.

I think that's a good comment.

I like what's there.

Uh and be I would be open to exploring other possibilities.

Are there any more comments from anyone on this?

So the only thing that seems really substantive right now is whether uh oh, first of all, did you read the staff report?

Did you see there was a recommendation in there?

Um ensuring that the material on the sides of the dormers um and the dormer window surrounds would be metal similar in color to the metal.

Okay.

Um just sort of to blend in with the synthetic slate.

Yes.

Okay.

Um the issue of the roof pitch.

Do you have any like how are you responding to this suggestion that it be a slightly steeper grade?

Um do you have flexibility there?

Uh I would prefer to keep it in in my opinion.

Um again, you have to understand where we're coming from here.

So on the existing design, it was such a such a shallow pitch that we're trying to achieve the opposite of that, right?

Yeah.

Um so we felt that there was enough precedent on North Washington to achieve that.

Whether the whether the building's four or five stories, I still think it.

Um we we we you know we bought this building under the assumption that it was going to be a five-story building, and we're not going any higher than it was.

So we don't really control those factors.

Uh so I I'm not an architect.

I'm wondering from our architects, it if are there architectural details that could be incorporated that that would be different from changing the pitch of the roof, such as making the dormers a little bit lower, or I don't know, doing anything to distinguish the dormers from the roof.

I I don't have any suggestions.

I just wonder if anyone else does.

What is the pitch on the dormers?

I don't have I don't honestly don't have the degree.

I meant to write it down before I came in here, but I do not have it.

Because it looks like when you look at this building right now, it looks like a four-story building, and then this one looks like a five-story building.

So we really like to if you can bring some more like a you're not asking for too much slope like the one that is existing, but some slope just to give that a feel of this is actually a uh mass or there may be room for a very light adjustment.

Okay.

Yeah, I was thinking just ten percent, eight to ten percent.

Let me examine it with my architects and if you don't mind uh if we could I'll ask you know Bill's thought and we can work through it with the staff.

Yeah.

Mr.

Conkies had something you could work through.

Um I've been given some pretty clear directions, so I'm happy to work with them.

Okay.

Um my only concern is we had talked about this last time and it was a problem.

So I have a feeling unless we ask them to please to if you can give me a clear direction to say you would like it at no less than something if you if if you would like to be that specific, I'm absolutely happy to to work with them to work with the applicant to to figure out how to actually achieve that.

Happy to do so.

But if you'd like to be very specific about that, that is that just gives me more guidance.

Well, while everyone is thinking I'll offer some comments.

Um I live very close to here and I think you've done a great job.

I think it's a really nice design.

I wasn't here for the first meeting, so I didn't offer any comments.

Um but I I think it's gonna be a huge improvement to the block and to North Washington Street, which everybody cares a lot about.

So I just want to thank you for the careful and thoughtful design here.

I know we're talking about some little details, but um I don't have any large comments.

I will say I agree with uh Mr.

Spencer that the small bathroom windows on the west elevation probably don't need any kind of decoration on the top.

I think it's fine if they read just as small windows.

Um and it's getting pretty crowded over there by the other one.

So that might also might allow you to save on some brick material.

Sure.

Um Teresa.

If the uh I guess my concern about sloping it too much is the headroom on the inside, I know that's not in our purview, but they still have to be functional.

But is there an opportunity for the uh forgive my architectural terms at this point?

The uh corners to be maybe more decorative, so the eye stops.

Would that help?

Um one thing I wanted to point out before the issue response.

They the the dormer windows are pretty large.

Yeah.

So I think as far as the height, you know, maybe some you know I don't think it affects too much.

At least 50 percent of it, right?

Like it looks like 50 percent or so or more.

The window height is yeah, that the dormers is fine.

I'm saying beyond the dormers is what I'm saying that because the dormers are so large, 50 percent of the interior have enough roof headroom, at least if we do just eight to ten percent.

It's um do we have a section in the the back end?

We don't, so that's what that's gonna be that's why I I'm I'm kind of concerned about saying it has to be at a certain percentage because we don't have any idea what that would actually do.

Yeah, and we also don't I mean we could eyeball what five um percent is, but I wouldn't hesitate to give you a minimum pitch change because we don't have that sort of sensitivity analysis with us.

Uh I will say I've noticed you've beeped up beefed up the cornice molding from the last time.

Could you beef it up a little more?

I'm gonna ask why I was asking Teresa, would that help?

Yeah.

Or more decorative or something.

Yeah, I'm thinking it's the massing really that's there.

And it looks like you have 10 feet floor to floor.

So, you know, bringing that in 10 degrees, I'm not too sure how that's gonna really negatively impact the interior.

Well, there's a there's a structural component to it as well, if you don't mind.

So I'm sure.

Right now with the existing pitch, it's just just at an angle where we don't have to do these like freestanding beams and then have columns drop to the middle of the floor floor plate, which would really influence the layouts quite a bit.

So we're trying to balance that out.

Um so we can use the existing CMU all within the brick to support it, you know, kind of a cantilever for a column to come down tighter to the wall.

Otherwise you start losing you have to start furring out walls, you really start losing quite a bit of livable square footage if you have to pitch it even further.

So it's a consideration we're balancing.

I I think we're open to it.

I think I'm reluctant to ag to to agree to a comment within the approval right now without having my architect do a study of what that entails.

Um so I think if you can just give Bill some direction on what you think is appropriate.

I think he he's very well suited in and making the right decision that would that would uh align with your interest.

Okay.

What is it going to look like?

Is it going to be the improvement that we're looking for?

We won't know that if we don't see it again.

So I guess we'd be putting that in your court, Bill, right?

Uh I mean it's gonna look like would you have to do that?

It would be up to you.

I mean it would be up to the board to uh how you would put make the condition if you would the if you were to state the condition to be a minimum number, then we would need to achieve that number.

Um uh otherwise it's you could word it in such a way that it's uh I don't know, it would be an improvement to the slip it back um so that it effectively does whatever you're trying to achieve.

It depends on how you word the motion, I guess, is my long way of answering a short question.

Yeah, that's true.

You can't do it.

Yeah, I mean five to ten percent probably isn't gonna affect livable square footage, but it probably would affect your um structural component for your fifth floor, right?

That's probably the main consideration for you there.

Yeah.

Okay.

Um I'm gonna go over what I've got in terms of notes right now, in case anyone's thinking about a motion or just to make sure that I've captured everything that I think we've talked about.

The first would be the fifth floor cutouts would be would have slate material at the top instead of metal.

Number two would be work on staff on designing a few columns to sort of break up just the open expanse on the balcony, make it look a little more residential, a little less corporate.

Um the third would be the authorization if needed to replace your soldier course with something like a precast material or using working with staff on that.

Um that would be a permission.

The fourth um the the fourth would be working with staff on um using a less gothic element in the decorative railing.

The fifth would be uh on the north elevation on the right side to add some more material between the dormer and the cutout.

And then uh and then the the sixth one would be uh essentially working with staff to um increase the pitch of the roof ever so slightly to uh make the dormers pop out a little bit more.

Um so I think we would all I don't want to speak for everyone, but even a small change could be beneficial.

Um at a six A?

Yeah, yeah.

Which was at that that dormer that we're seeing on the screen on the right hand side is that he was going to re center recender the windows within the bay once he adds the additional material to the side.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Okay.

Uh can I uh make one suggestion maybe to give it a little bit more depth on the dorm?

Um what if we extended the roof line of the of the top of the dormer a little bit to project it a little bit more so it adds a little bit more contrast to the slope?

The height?

No, the depth.

Like more.

Maybe a little bit more balconies?

Or the dorm to the dormant.

The dormer.

The roof on the dormer.

Yeah.

Adding like a more substantial cornice piece at the top.

Maybe or make it deeper.

Yeah.

Okay.

I think if you could slim down the slim it down, it might be better.

Right.

I was gonna say, is it possible to shorten the dormers a little bit?

Um we may be able to adjust the pitch down a little bit, but we're kind of we're we're pushing up against the it's hard to tell here, but that that parapet wall sticks about 18 inches above the floor.

So we're getting we're we're pushing those windows pretty tight if we go any further.

We've already s shortened it six inches to accommodate having more of a heavier line right across the top.

Yeah.

So I'd be reluctant to do that if we can avoid it.

I also want to add a eight.

Okay.

I'm gonna make sure you make the motion.

Which we which we discussed during when I was talking was the he was he was you said that they would explore turning the mansard material back on the vertical wall.

You mean within the cutouts?

So that it's what what is it programmed to be right now?

Brick or some kind of glass.

So whatever we didn't have glass would be a metal panel, most likely.

Yeah.

That the matches the dormers.

So it would just go back on that vertical.

So on the interior return of the cutout, like maybe put some slate in there or the synthetic slate.

I think we can take it maybe to the doorway opening.

To the doorway open.

It would return a little bit, and then it would be glass.

So I think that would accomplish the same thing.

Okay.

So I think we're certainly open it up.

Um I know that you're familiar with the building on the north side of uh Madison Street.

You've got the um the old historic home that's been relocated to the corner and then the building on Columbus Street, and then the other building that's programmed to go in there on Washington Street.

Just can you refresh my memory?

How tall is that building?

Do you know?

Fifty feet.

It's fifty feet.

So it's a little bit shorter than this building.

Correct.

Okay.

Just by a few inches.

Um this building's fifty-three.

Yeah.

By three feet.

Oh.

By three feet, yeah.

And then the row house sits below the the 50-foot structure pretty substantially.

So in terms of looking at it as a block.

It'll feel the same appropriately.

Be a little bit taller.

I just wanted to say I I commend you on the beautiful renderings that you have uh provided.

And I think it's um the window, the the window, the keystone and the window header, that's brick right now, as it's shown is really beautiful.

So if you can keep it and you re reuse the brick, that would be of course like preference.

Desirable, yes, absolutely.

That's our preference.

All right.

Um, and I have a question um Mr.

Scott, on your number five um condition.

Uh is that I uh were you saying work with the staff to reduce the mansard slope?

Is that what you meant?

I think that was my number six, but yes.

Uh it would yeah, but just be work with staff to reduce it.

I uh I would uh it's up to the board, obviously.

I'm one person on the board, but my thought is it I don't know that we're well situated to suggest a particular pitch change because we just don't have that information before us.

I don't know.

I uh 10% over 10 feet is gonna be a foot, right?

In so that's that's really not gonna change livable space that much, but it could change the structure to some extent.

Yeah, because you if you can imagine there's a there's a steel beam at the top.

Yeah.

Right that needs to run across.

So the further you peel that in, the deeper the wall gets.

It will impact space if it comes back above.

Five percent over ten feet is like um half a foot, right?

That's kind of six inches.

Kind of what I'm thinking.

Um that might be doable.

I mean, six inches will provide a greater reveal there at the top of your dormer.

Right.

It will be visibly noticeable.

It's just gonna it's gonna pad out the corner.

Yeah.

It'll just make them okay.

So maybe maybe that fifth condition is to work with staff to get somewhere in the neighborhood of a five percent increase in the pitch.

That's minimum five percent if more possible.

Okay.

Okay.

All right.

Um I'm gonna read these again because I've had to renumber them.

And I wrote one down twice.

So here we are.

Number one is uh fifth floor cutout roof would be slate.

Number two would be work with staff on designing some columns to break up the open um patio cutouts on the fifth floor.

Number three would be a permission to eliminate the um soldier course on the bathroom windows.

And then I guess number four would be use precast in lieu of soldier core, just a permission, not a requirement in case you you're having issues with the brick.

Then number five would be work with the staff on uh decorative railing, right?

Just to make it more consistent with the style of the house.

I I do want to note though, we have encouraged more decorative railings, especially on King Street at times.

And so I think what I'm hearing from my colleague on the board is that for this particular building, the style of this particular building, um, a gothic style railing may be not appropriate.

Okay.

Um I just want to make sure we distinguish it.

Um, so that would be five would be work with the staff on decoring, six would be on the north elevation on the right side by the dormer, just increase the amount of material, and also sort of re-center the windows within that bay.

That's six number seven is um minimum five percent increase in grade on roof.

Slope.

Uh slope.

Slope is the same thing as grade, but I'll say it's fine.

And then well uh Ms.

Miller, I think you had something else for me that I haven't said.

Did I forget something?

Work with staff to reduce the mansard slope.

That I just said that.

Okay, at least five degrees.

That's number seven.

Umbody have anything else.

I had one edgy.

Which was returning the slate material inside the bump outs.

Not bump outs, but inside the cutouts.

To the door, right?

Yes.

Slate on return to door.

All right.

Um can I ask you one question?

Yes, sir.

Condition two was the columns, right?

Yeah.

See, this is this the intention of the alternative design was to show how awkward it feels to me personally.

Um we can certainly explore it, but I I don't I really do not want to obstruct the views that we're creating there.

I agree that is pretty awkward.

I think the idea would be to make it more decorative so that it wasn't so awkward, but I don't know.

Right.

The idea was that they would be not black spots that come down like that.

I guess in my in my idea, they were going to be kind of decorative white columns that kind of blend in with the all your rendering show that recesses white, so it kind of blends in with that, and it's not sitting at the front face of the edge of the mantra.

It could be set back a little bit so it's actually looks like a supporting something in the mantra sticking out past it a little bit.

So I think it's just a design thing, because this doesn't feel like these columns were designed.

They were just kind of pulled and said here's a rectangular mass, and there they are.

I I do to your point think that without having some kind of a column there, you you almost do read it like it's two different roofs.

Um I think it will happen understanding your your comment about the views, uh, but I do think it will make the whole roof seem a little bit more like a single plane.

Um it reads more residential with those columns.

I I also think um people would look right through the columns and look at the view of the river there.

I don't think they would notice the columns at all from the inside.

Uh okay, are there would anyone else like to add anything to this um motion?

And we're gonna add staff recommendations.

Staff recommendations, yes.

Okay, have you been hearing what I've been saying?

I put it all down.

Okay.

Yep, I'm I have written it all down.

I'm good.

So if we have a motion and a second for the and staff recommendations, yeah.

I mean, so uh we have a do we have a motion first?

That is the motion.

From chair.

From the chair.

Am I allowed to make a motion?

Yes.

Okay.

Unless anyone else wants to.

I've just been taking notes.

I second that motion.

Okay.

And I assume we need a roll call on this.

Uh yes, we do, since there's a demolition.

All right.

Well, let's call the roll.

Okay.

Uh Ms.

Robinson?

Aye.

Mr.

Spencer?

Aye.

Ms.

Andian?

Aye.

Ms.

Miller.

Aye.

Ms.

Don't you?

Aye.

And Mr.

Scott.

I congratulations.

Thank you.

All right.

What is next?

Okay, we have a we have a light docket tonight.

So we only have one more one more item tonight.

Item number six and seven under new business uh BAR 2026-00088 Old Historic District.

Request for alterations and addition at 229 South Pitt Street.

Applicant is Chris and Courtney Cox, represented by Susie O'Brien Architect.

And BAR 2026-00092 Old Historic District.

Request for partial demolition encapsulation at 229 South Pitt Street.

Applicant is Chris and Courtney Cox, represented by Susie O'Brien architect.

Hi.

Hi.

Hi, I'm Susie O'Brien from Thompson and Cook Architects.

I'm representing Chris and Courtney Cox.

They hired us to design a small mudroom entry on the side of their home on South Pitt Street.

And to uh sort of give them a little bit more space at the entry on the side so that they have more of a mud room.

And then to also bring more light into the existing uh dining area at the back of their house by rebuilding the bay window that's currently there and uh just creating more uh taller windows and uh bring more light in through those.

And I'm available for questions.

Thank you.

Yes.

Um I I will point out to my colleagues on the board.

If you look at page three of the staff report, this is almost not visible from the public right away.

So um it's quite concealed.

Um with that, does anyone have any initial questions for the applicant before we open it for public comment?

Um I had a question.

Um were you planning on gutters and downs votes?

Um yes.

Uh I'm not sure if we're showing it or not, but um the idea would be we try to keep uh copper gutters, either half routes or K-style gutters um in keeping with the architecture that's there.

But yes.

Do we have any public speakers on this application?

All right, we'll close the public comment period.

And if anyone would like to offer comments or make a motion, the the floor is open.

Make a motion to approve per staff recommendations.

Second.

I'm sorry, I was Ms.

Miller was a second?

Thank you.

Have you reviewed the general notes on the application?

Yes.

Okay, everything's fine.

I think so.

Okay, great.

Uh it's roll call.

Uh yes, it is.

It's also also has demolition.

Call a roll.

All right, Ms.

Robinson.

Aye.

Mr.

Spencer.

Aye.

Ms.

Andian.

Aye.

Ms.

Miller?

Aye.

Ms.

Doninha?

Aye.

And Mr.

Scott.

Aye.

Congratulations.

Thank you.

Okay.

Uh I think that's it for business today.

That is all we have for tonight.

Um couple notes about the next hearing.

Uh it will be back at the at Charles Houston.

Um as everyone here knows, we are continuing to fine-tune our Charles Houston setup.

Uh I think the last hearing went much better in terms of ability to hear, ability to communicate with the public.

Um we're continuing continuing down that road.

Um I will say that the first um hearing that we had there, the recording was almost impossible to to to um make out, unfortunately.

Um the second one was much better.

We're still working towards it, so just you know.

Any any suggestions, anything you guys have had come up with as you're as we're continuing to work through this, let me know, and we'll continue to improve it.

I will just go ahead.

Um, instead of um students do it.

I have a high vote for everyone.

It's um because of the uh elementary school.

So because of the structure, the way that they because because um the parks and record department is is a is a sister department to us and schools are very separate, are very separate.

It would be very difficult to use a school facility because of after hours access, all these other things.

It's much easier for us to work with a sister department than it is with something while schools are all under the city government, they are they do function sort of separately, and we've because we looked at um, I think um it was an early suggestion about using the um the uh um the school board chambers and we had the same problem.

It's just it's difficult to um to in we end up having to reserve it, we then end up having to spend money on it, it's difficult, so we just it's easier for us in terms of logistics to work with uh rec centers.

Is the pool part of the rec center department?

Yeah, uh which pool.

So when the pool is rebuilt, maybe we can have our meetings at the pool.

There you go.

We can have the meetings in the pool if if in July.

Okay.

So I have a question, I'm sure you have looked at it, but um is there any space in the space that you have been moved to?

No.

In fact, that's actually causing us some problems.

Um we're trying to uh set up our design guidelines committee.

And we're trying now, we're looking for spaces because uh we get we we don't have any access, any after hours access to our current office.

We can't have any act any after hours after hours access.

So that's so we're trying to find space for our design guidelines.

You can't go to the building after hours?

No, because it because it would have to be open to the public.

And the uh the elevators are locked after hours, and so we'd have to find some way to uh provide them, keep them open.

It would be difficult.

Um we're trying to we're struggling with that.

So again, we keep coming back to rec centers.

They're they're open all hours.

I do just want to point out to my colleagues.

I've looked at the preliminary docket.

It's a pretty big docket for next week.

Um, including some townhouses on North Columbus Street that uh may be controversial.

And so I would just ask everyone if you have time to review um the docket and the docket items before the meeting um because I think you will we will all be overwhelmed if it's a case of first impression when we're when we're looking at the materials for next week.

So not that you aren't doing it, um, but in two weeks.

Sorry, next time.

Uh yeah, it'll just be that's a good opportunity to practice reading and visiting the sites in advance, which I know we're all doing anyway.

Okay, with all of that, I will adjourn the meeting and uh we'll see you in a couple weeks.

Have a good evening.

Part of the city hall renovation is the renovation of Market Square, which holds the old town farmers market.

The 100 block of North Royal Street from