Alexandria BAR Public Hearing Summary - May 21, 2026 (Note: Agenda/ Minutes show May 20, 2026)

So I'm gonna have it.

Welcome to our meeting, everybody today.

Um the items are going to be called in the order on the doc group.

If you want a copy of the docket, um copies are over there as well as copies of all the uh items that we're gonna need to consider it.

If you're an applicant here today, please take the time to read through the staff report for your item because we may ask you questions.

Uh the way we will proceed today is uh each applicant will come up.

We don't really have a podium or electurn, but we can use something stand on the X and you can use maybe audio visual cart to rest your elbow or put materials.

The way we will proceed is um you will have an opportunity to present your matters, then the board may ask some questions.

There will be a public hearing portion, uh, with publican way in, then the board will deliberate and then take one of the number of actions the board can vote to approve to issue a certificate of appropriateness or deny.

The board can take no action, and if no action is taken in 45 days, then it's an automatic approval, which practically means if they take no action, they would have to the board would have to take action in the very next meeting.

The board can um continue a matter until the next meeting of its own, or at the request of an applicant, the board can defer an application.

Um a tie vote is a no vote.

Uh so you need a majority, a simple majority of the board members.

Um we don't have any matters tonight that are anything but decisions.

All decisions of the board can be appealed to city council, and um there's a uh window of time there.

I don't know what it is, but I'm sure Mr.

Con tell you is it 30 days to appeal?

Yeah, oh no, yeah, I'm sorry, yeah.

14 days from you have to uh you have to submit your appeal 14 days from the hearing date.

So if you don't like what we said, you can appeal to the city council and they can take action.

Um okay, with all that said, Mr.

Conkey, what is our first item on today's business?

All right, uh, thank you, Mr.

Scott.

Um, and I will remind all of our court members please speak up.

We're doing our best with our acoustics in here, and so just speak loudly.

Uh first item on the docket tonight is the minutes.

All right, um, does any member of the board have any suggested modifications to the minutes from the May 6th, 2026 BAR meeting?

Do any members of the public wish to uh suggest any modifications to those minutes?

Seeing none, um can I have a motion on the minutes?

So moved.

Second, all those in favor of adopting the minutes say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

The minutes are adopted.

Next we have the consent calendar.

Yes, next we have the consent calendar.

Uh, and just a reminder to uh anyone here who is planning on speaking uh tonight, please fill out a uh public speaker form, which is back on our table right over there, and hand it to my colleague.

So if you're speaking, please do so.

All right, we have three items in the consent calendar tonight.

First is item number three, the R 2026-00108, hold historic district.

Request for signage at 506 King Street, parcel address 520 King Street applicant to this program.

Seconds item number four, B AR 2026-00119, whole historic district request for alterations at 320 North Cowford Street.

Applicant is Alan Moore, represented by Sean D.

Williams agent.

And final item on the consent calendar tonight is number five, B AR 2026-00126, the old distorted district request for alterations at 719 Prince Street applicants of William Ryan.

Do any members of the board wish to remove any of the items from the consent calendar?

Does any member of the public wish to remove any of the items in the consent calendar to make comment or see public discussion of those items?

Seeing none, can I have a motion on the consent calendar?

So move.

Sorry, Council Representative Mr.

Summer.

Mr.

Spencer, do we have a second?

Yeah, a second.

Uh all those who uh in favor of adopting the approving the consent calendar say aye.

I any opposed.

Okay, the consent calendar is adopted.

If your item was item three, four or five, you have been issued a certificate of appropriateness.

Uh next we have some unfinished business.

Yes, we have an we have one item under unfinished business tonight, and that um the applicant for the item has requested the deferral.

Um, just so you understand what this is.

This is the you may recall uh 601 from commercial to residential.

Um, and one of the aspects of that was the staining of the brick, and then the board had asked to see some samples of that stain.

Um the applicant is still working through some samples to get the color that they looks right and the opacity level.

And so um they will be coming back to us once they find something that they're happy with.

So um, so we do have this item item number six.

Uh B AR 22025-00549, hold historic district request for alterations 601 with street.

Applicant 601 with street LLC represented by Matthew Lever.

And they requested the world.

Can I get a motion on uh their request to defer?

So move.

Second.

Second.

Okay.

All those in favor of approving the deferral of docket item number six say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

All right, item six is deferred to the next meeting or to a future b.

Future meeting.

Yeah.

Okay, on to new business.

All right, thank you.

Um several items on the new business tonight.

First item is number seven.

B AR 2020.

I'm sorry, 2026.

Uh dash 00134, Parker Gray.

Request for nuclear structure at 806 North of Columbus Street.

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

Evening uh numbers of board.

Patrick, we'll feel the rooms development.

Oh the X is for our little audio examples.

So you're on TV and you can hear online.

So thank you.

Um, so yeah, let's I'll get to the finished samples in a second.

I want to kind of give an overarching summary of what we change.

Um we simulated the upper window pattern and finestration for the bay.

So because it's become one large bay, we feel this more appropriate.

Also a good suggestion.

Um we have pulled in the right side of the bay uh to break up the long wall on the right side.

I think that's added a little bit more detail.

We've extended the belt lines around the side, uh, which also I think breaks it up, and then we've added some decorative historic stars uh to the right side.

And that's you know, that at the we can install those or not, really.

It's really a thought on uh from the board on that and see what they think.

Um for the finished materials.

Uh, our intention is to use one of these three colors, probably leaning more towards the center, um, or maybe a beige color of the three samples on top for the castone, right?

Great.

Uh that castone will be belt line sills, corners above, right?

And then the brick is a wire cut um Arctic white and with uh with an Arctic white mortar.

So that'll kind of blend in and it'll show see more of the natural face of the brick.

Um it's a lot sharper edges when it's wire cut.

So and it's kind of got this um forget the terminology for it, but it's got some aggregate that uh gives it a little bit more definition, just the flat brick.

Uh we also plan to use um uh uh revealed uh hardy panel for um the rear of the building.

I'm sorry, for the the fourth floor um to give it a little bit more variety at the top.

So these can be installed both horizontally and vertically, and then they have a rabbit or data with a run down and have a reveal that breaks every every plane.

Um we have a textured hardy lap siding, um, which would go on the back side again, a light clear to kind of complement the brick.

Um and that's pretty much it.

And we have uh an example of the black mic just to wrap, we'd use a thick gauge to avoid oil canning on the mull ends that sit in between the windows and flashing the wraps around the the upper radius of the windows.

Um if you don't mind if you could if you could go through the slides, but I'm just gonna point out a couple of things on the sound elevations.

Anyone see this okay?

Uh not really.

Yeah, everyone can stand up if you want to see the sample.

I'll show it.

Standing is a lot.

You keep going all water.

Okay, thank you.

So you'll see this is a side elevation of the north.

Um, you see, we've added brick to the to the exposed walls from the street.

I know that was very important to the board.

Um above the house, we'll probably use a thin, you know, a one-inch thick brick just to avoid any kind of load bearing issues, but it'll match the front.

So it'll have that visual appearance of it.

Um we hope that you know our neighbors appreciate the extra cost that goes into this.

Um, but we think it'll be a value to the project.

So we're happy to move forward with it.

And next slide, please.

These kind of call out um the revisions.

So you'll see we've had a lot of we've had some big big changes occurred.

The biggest changes occurred between the first concept review submission and the second concept review where we adjusted scale and mass.

Um again, these what we're seeing here in the middle section is kind of the the light change to kind of fine-tune the exterior of the front.

So you'll see on the right that long red dot in the center on the left.

Um, that's where we pulled back the bay to give it a little bit more definition on that elevation.

And then you'll see it, the red boxes that outline the windows.

You'll see that's been expanded to one window.

We've got rid of the kind of wider center fixed sash there that wasn't matching the windows above.

So next slide.

This is just a picture of it on the street.

It's very difficult to pull all these together and make everything to scale, but you know, we are we feel feel good about where we're at in the neighborhood.

This is more an accurate representation here on the lower elevation of where we stand with in regards to the neighborhood scale.

Next slide.

Can I before you just ask a question on this?

Can you go back to the street state brand?

Just to be clear, because I know it's gonna come up.

How tall is the main mass of the building?

It is 32 and a half feet to the roof deck.

Yep.

Um and then it's about a three and a half foot parapet wall.

Okay, so about 35 feet.

And then how tall is the total building?

Uh the total building, I think is 42 and a half right there.

And that's within the zoning or 45 is the height.

So you're below zoning.

Right.

We were at we were at 44 and a half, and we dropped two and a half feet as part of the concept concept too.

Okay.

Did you do any studies to see uh like just because obviously this perspective is not a human perspective?

Can you see the upper floors from across the street?

Do you know directly across?

No.

Um, but you know, it's possible that you will see them on an angle.

On an angle, yeah.

Thank you.

I think um we're still going to push on that too.

Yes.

Um, how far is the setback between the third and fourth floors?

Approximately four feet.

Okay, thank you.

And are those observation decks or the intention is for them to be connected.

So you'll be able to walk from the front back to the the rear roof deck on the outside.

For the end units, yes, and then one in the middle with the one in the middle is yes, encapsulated.

Okay, thank you.

Uh problem.

Uh next slide.

Just want to take you to some of the angle shots.

Um, keep going.

So this is a good um, this is a good representation of all the different finish colors.

Um, we're kind of playing around with the exact color for for the cast on whether to go darker and in virtue of the white.

I think the mock-up will kind of really pin that down.

Um, and so you know, we'll work with builds to make sure that fits fits the desire of the board.

Um, and then you'll you'll see that um that we have our our various details that are shown on this material board.

Next slide.

Uh the intention is to use uh a Pella Lifestyle brand, which is an aluminum clad window with um external grills, external and internal grills, and spacers in between to give you that simulated light, uh separated light feeling.

Um so we're pretty pretty happy with this window style.

Next slide.

So it's a running tape, but the image takes a little more.

What you want to go to next pass this point?

Yeah, I just want to I want to see the colored render.

Same angle those.

I think so.

Next slide.

So I want to correct something here on that rendering on the right, doesn't represent the jog that occurs at the fourth level and the weather's pulled back.

It's more representative here on the left side.

How far in does it go?

Four feet.

No, it's 11.

Oh, 11 from the front.

Oh, from the front.

Oh, from the front.

Yes, one to one.

It's more than one to one.

Okay, great.

The intention is you're looking at it from a sight line view, you shouldn't see it.

Okay, great.

So mark it back.

It's 11 feet back on the parapet wall.

I have to jump side.

You might be closer to 13, actually.

Okay.

Um with the bigger.

Okay.

Yeah, so the four is on either side, right?

That's just to kind of break up the mass of the wall.

Right.

Um, but yeah, that's that's our presentation.

Uh, we hope you see that we've taken comments and and really tried to address them to the best of our ability.

Um happy to hear your feedback.

Thank you.

Um, does anyone have initial questions?

We may have public comment on this.

Do we have any speaker forms on this?

We have one sign up.

Okay, so uh I'd like to open it up to the public right now, unless anyone has any quick questions, or so you can ask all the questions you want during the orderation.

Okay, so let's open it up to the public.

Who's our speaker?

Okay, the speaker I have um for this item is eight series.

Great.

Now, are you representing yourself or you have to stand on the blue X and uh you have three minutes and just have to start with your name and then address for the record or is yours?

Um I'm gonna run the speaker uh the clock from my watch and my phone here.

So okay, when the when the clock things maybe a weird sound, we'll get there.

Hello again.

Um my name is Kate Zarns.

I am resident at 814 North Columbus Street, which is next to the development.

Can you please pull up side fixed screening?

Um while you're pulling that up.

I'll go ahead and see.

So, first of all, this is just boil down to its essentials.

Three four-story town homes squashed between two historic two-story town homes, half the height, with no breathing space on either side.

That there is nothing from Buzz Bakery to old town, that is that same situation.

The new build on the same street was held to a standard of step down.

So there's three stories next to two stories and four stories next to three stories.

This is a complete anomaly, and also goes against precedent for new build.

Um, not opposed to the concept of a new build, UIA did it beautifully on this exact block.

Um this is not harmonious.

This is why the bar exists to in other areas where there isn't regulation to prevent something like this.

The bar is here to prevent something like this.

It's so completely out of harmony.

Um also I think one of the main points is the bar respectfully requested height lowering twice.

The first time they lowered it by only three feet, the second time they disregarded that request by the bar completely.

Um I asked that you adhere to your request that we're respectfully rendered and disregarded.

Um I would also very much question whether or not this is to scale and some of the numbers that are being thrown out.

I would double check against the actual rendering.

But this is where the sideline would be.

If you're pairing the two stories to four stories, they are small two-story houses as well.

So I appreciate your time.

Thank you again.

It's good to see you all.

Thank you.

Are there any other public speakers on this docket item?

Okay, so we'll close the public portion of the hearing.

Mr.

Wire, if you'd like to come back.

Um does any member have questions uh for our applicant?

Oh, Mr.

Bloomfield, sorry.

Okay.

And wire is the other person.

Um have you uh seen the staff recommendation above the building.

I briefly read it.

Yeah, um, did you have any thoughts?

I mean, I think we're two and a half feet below what the zoning requires.

Um, and I think allows allows.

Um, and I think that we've done a good job at pulling back the fourth floor um to not have such a heavy shadow line on our neighbors.

I do want to correct the record, is that um you know our neighbor to the north is substantially smaller than the block, which makes it look irregular.

Um but the real block mass is about 30 33 feet, 31 to 33 feet, and that's where we're delivering our roof deck to.

They just have mansarts that sit above the roof line.

So that's the same standard we were held to at the Whitley.

We're 34 feet across the street.

That's exactly what we're doing here.

Um, so that's the big the big building on 805 across the street.

So I feel like we've met the standard, and we hope that the design will be appreciated.

Well, I I appreciate your design and um understanding the comments to the public.

I really appreciate the input.

Um, we're in a typical situation here where there's not much we can do about the zoning entitlement.

Um if the zoning board in my personal view uh says this is within the city's zoning guidance for this block.

I appreciate the fact that you lower to three feet at the request of the board.

Um I'm trying to support your application, but I have two comments.

Uh I wasn't here for the concept review.

So this is a matter of first impression for me.

But but my suggestion would be in this particular location.

I think it would be appropriate to have brick on all of the um facades of the building.

I think you have hardy on the back.

I think it would be more appropriate to have brick there.

And secondly, if you look at this rendering, your um your molding at the top, the cornice molding, at the very top of the building, it's quite substantial.

And then at the top of your window bay bump outs, it's smaller.

I would suggest, um, and of course I'm open to other member input that you reverse the dimensionality so that the top of the window base is more substantial and that more communicates.

Uh uh, it sort of lowers the vertical mass of the building, and then you you take that top one and you make it a little bit smaller, almost just flipping those two.

Yeah, it's not about it.

Yeah, those would be my two.

Other members of the work?

I have a question on color.

Are they is it are all three going to be the same color?

Uh correct.

Have you considered ABA or BA?

We think over, I believe the design standard is a hundred feet bill.

Is that to provide variation in the in the color on the Washington Street standards?

Well, this is not a washable street, so it doesn't fly.

Right.

So I just think over a 50-foot span, 52-foot span, that um it would be breaking it up a little too much if it was 100, 80 to 100 feet.

I could I see introducing that.

We have a similar project on 415.

We've added a lot of variety to that.

I think it looks better um with just a simpler, tighter mass in the middle and two eighteens on the side.

Okay.

Uh it looks more one unit, looks like three townhouses connected on a block of much smaller townhouses on this side of the street for me.

So that's why I suggested it to you.

Give it some individuality rather than okay.

That's all.

On that note on color, there are there are a few buildings with newer builds in the neighborhood that have very light colorable brick.

And I mean we've seen within just a few years that we're seeing a lot of like staining of that light-colored brick.

Uh I think it looks nice.

I guess I would just ask.

I don't know if there are materials in a border or in any kind of trim that would cause that kind of fading or bleeding of color.

It just needs to be maintained and kept full.

I don't know what the issue is, but um, I would just ask that you look into that to make sure you're using materials that aren't very leech color, and then you have stained white brick, which um obviously isn't how you want your brain to build it.

Sure.

Absolutely.

Uh I appreciate the detail on this building.

The changes you made.

I also was not a member of the BAR on the Hydro Concept review, so I didn't have the advantage of uh seeing that.

I do have some concerns about the height of the building, and I think we need to be respectful of that staff recommendation.

And I don't know as a point of deliberation if we as a board want to create an upper limit for the height.

Um, my biggest issue with the massing of the building is I feel like the parapet, although you're calling out the height of the building at 329 for the top of the bay, the parapet to the top is 35, almost 36 feet.

Um, and I think this block base is a it's a very quintessential Parker Gray block.

I mean, it's got a lot of historic buildings, and I just think for the height, we need to be respectful of the buildings that surround it.

I feel like the block base elevation that's shown is just the on BAR9.

Um, it's just shown as blocks of buildings is a little bit deceiving because most of these buildings have articulation on the front that creates a parapet.

And so when you take the top of the parapet of the overall kind of upper height of your building, it looks a lot more massive than the buildings that are on the so I would like to propose that the top of the parapet wall is no higher than 32 feet, which makes it as high as the peaks of the reef line for the rest of the block.

I'd like to see it shorter.

The parapet, well, the parapet is serving a um uh a code purpose for fall prevention.

So um we wouldn't be able to adjust the floor heights under the roof.

So how would you would you add a rail to the top?

How would you meet the standard for is there no option to reduce the overall height of the building?

No, I mean we're we're at a normal, we're at a market ceiling height of 10, 9 and 9.

That's pretty standard in any EYA or any townhouse project throughout the city.

We're not trying to stretch it any further than we should.

This is pretty standard.

You actually have nine feet on the first floor.

I think you brought it down according to the I think it's clear height, the clear height is 10 on first.

Um the BA numbered five.

But the maybe the upper two floors could be eight feet.

I mean, that's where the master suite would go.

On the third floor?

The fourth floor could potentially go to a four-foot ceiling.

Fourth floor.

But you see like during this one here.

It's like the elevation.

Which page is this is uh age 21 with and you do have steps up to the front.

Well, so that's the that's trying to line up with the face of the block.

All every townhouse on that block is elevated two steps, two trends.

If we sink it flat, one it creates an aesthetic issue.

I think it doesn't look right, but it's really an attempt to match the floors of the of everything on that block.

I noticed in the news free, and this is the main everything level.

There's a variety of steep lights.

Uh some are even slightly further beloved.

That has to do with the grade change.

So we're not necessarily moving the building, we're just letting the grade follow, and then we're digging down to get to that that area way.

So couldn't you do the same here?

Dig down and get the building down.

Bill, I I don't would you would what do you think about sinking the building?

Um, I mean, it can be done.

It's normally these they seem to have a limit of to some degree.

Well, I think as Michelle mentioned, Michaela mentioned, excuse me.

Um right across the street, our sunken entrances, kind of like an English basement, really, where you step down into it.

So I was thinking if the problem is that you want to go up that high, perhaps you could bring it down some.

So, in order for the building across the street to work, we had to get five, I'm saying financially work.

Okay, we had to get five floors and 50 feet.

So had we had the option financially to shave off the top floor to build the project and make it you know uh a profitable venture for investors whoever else, um, we could have gone four stories and raised the building three feet out of the ground, but we didn't have that luxury, so we work with the existing grades and we figured out a way to enter the building without having to step up, and so some of that is working with the natural grade.

So you'll see on the north side of the Whitley project that you have more steps going down because the grade's naturally higher.

There's not much we can do about the sidewalk rate, so we have to work with that within our design because our we're the in theory flat, the grade moves up and down, right?

So I don't think for these towns would look appropriate.

It would feel like you're entering more of like a retail space.

That's why we're trying to elevate a little bit out of the ground to match the street.

It looks like your um your master bedroom is actually on the second floor.

So I was talking about you know, reducing the third floor ceiling height from nine to eight.

I just I understand.

I think it's very important that on three floors it's ten, nine, and nine.

That's oh it's I'm sorry.

My norms is nine feet ceiling height.

It does say nine.

So then it's even it's nine nine nine.

Well, then it's even more impossible to do at this point.

Should it should have been 10, but I can't take it back now.

So I have a question for you, sorry.

Michaela, were you suggesting the overall height of the building, including the fourth story?

I don't know if she would have fourth story simply because it's set back far enough, and I think it's very similar to what's been constructed across the back, the Snowden Hallwell Valley.

It's very similar to that.

I don't think that seemed to be a perceived mass from the street.

It's just the parapet wall is massive, like it's a mess.

And then I'm not suggesting that you know you remove it for code purposes because I think the building looks good.

I just think the building is too tall.

So as it compares to the rest of the block fixes.

Yeah, I I will just weigh in and say I think the height is fine.

I totally respect your comments.

You have a lot of brand new townhomes that are essentially the same dimensions as the easy three stories with a four-story addition.

So I it's a new building on a block of houses that are of various sizes and ages.

There's a brand new, very large apartment building across the street.

So I don't know from my perspective, the applicant has already brought the height down three feet uh in response to our requests.

And I do think that a step or two up into a front door is appropriate.

I think that flat front door entrance could cause a lot of problems for someone who owns.

So totally respecting the comments of my colleagues, I would I would be inclined to support the height overall.

I think you probably could bring it down one foot.

I think you probably bring down you could do you know, nine, eight and a half, eight and a half, and bring it down from you know what is this kind of 42 six to 416 or 41 feet.

I probably wouldn't cause too much of a problem.

Nine foot is a is a kind of a breaking point.

And we'll figure it out just mark it more with I mean for saleability.

Um so I would really really rather prefer to stick with nine nine and nine.

As you as you heard earlier, I thought it was 10.

What about the parapet wall?

I mean it's brick here.

Is there an alternative to uh like uh you could do a uh a hand glass handrail?

You can do hand roll, which would make it feel lighter.

Um, but I do I do like the difference between the top of the bay and the parapet.

I wouldn't be opposed to doing something like that.

I just don't think it matches the aesthetic of the building.

Yeah, well, I'm just trying to help you out here.

Um the parapet wall.

Could the parapet wall set back?

Uh doesn't it's it's really to me, to my eye, even looking you know, at the side elevations, it's it it reads as the face of the building, it's not set back very far from the face.

Could the could the parapet wall be set back?

I mean, we could knock it down 18 inches and then do a decorative guardrail above it.

It'll feel lighter, but it's still gonna end up at the same light.

What kind of decorative guard rail?

Like I mean, we should do glass.

Um simple simple metal.

I I want everyone else to contribute here.

I don't want to be on the one.

Would glass be appropriate for this?

Well, okay.

We also see uh it's up in roof text.

We often see glass or um uh horizontal cable wheels.

Just something that's minimal that's not very visible.

And if it's step back from the edge, you can see your bus looks it also shields some of the fourth floor.

That's also one of the reasons there.

So that that's what that's what caused the sight line to go away.

So that's that's the you know, unintended purpose there, but understood.

I think one thought too would be to have the bays be two stories and have them end that two-story, so that the third floor would be just more of a flat facade, and that would be more in keeping with the the buildings on the street that are a lot of them are two stories.

Would you mind if I showed you a slide?

Yeah, sure.

Um can you go to the elevation?

Remember the exact gauge number, but you could zoom out for a second, but it would be the front elevation that shows the street massing all the way across.

That two foot phase 25 over here.

Right here.

So you see one of our first comments that we addressed was to try to align with the scale of the block, not just the neighbor to the north, right?

So those bays were dropped from concept one to concept two to align with that roof line all the way across.

But visually, that's how it's gonna feel.

It seems that the both the townhouses to the north and the south would almost align with the second top of the second floor.

If you had a two-story bay, right?

Your your three-story bay is significantly higher than let's say all the windows along the street elevation.

You mean then the townhouses to the right of uh starting at 814?

Yeah, if you look at 814, those windows can stop at your two-story bay, and also 802, yeah, two story bay with kind of a line with you know, the bottom of the roof line to I think that would that would help you know break up the mass.

I I personally would rather not but if we if that's what it took to get an approval today we would consider the two story bag so it's something that's just so I understand your proposal it would be to bring the course molding down to this level and then this third floor would see essentially flush okay we probably bring it down to you see the sail height yeah of the window on the third floor we want it to come up a little bit above the window fan out for it to look appropriate yeah of course otherwise it could look squawked or maybe the center base stays at three it's too too long that's I was thinking then to that's possible you mean for the center unit.

Yeah for the center being maybe that and that way could help we what about the inverse of the no I I think that the book ends should be lowered.

My right flank hasn't said a dominant frame so do we have any input for Mr Spencer or Adams I think the comments everybody's made about heights you could think about I think this one has some the limit for neighborhood but I also understand the orbit conditions and the um I do think I think six could work at some time and I'm not the foot of the third floor and top floor maybe bring that down some version of reducing the mass would be nice uh the idea the cord is changing uh possibly that could reduce the volume feeling um more on the settings I think the um the trim and the precast is a precast of the brick the pretty same color we would try to have a light contrast to it I think uh the contrast would help uh essentially the architecture and they need to break it up into smaller pieces um I don't even think that these the you know stars on the north facade or skyrods correct and technically if they were real they would be running through uh wall right now just kind of random I like the idea but maybe you can do a little summing where you wouldn't well maybe had they been sure in the time and um I think putting brake on the back of the house would be really houses I do Mr.

Spencer I don't really have much to add I would chair I really don't have a problem with the height but I consider we want to consider what some of the board members look that would be just soon I understand the market forces and I try and read the nine for the same house I get that height wise lowering I mean lowered it's on the problem is you get the two inch height but then you get a railing line which doesn't always look so great either that's my issue with that that that pose then I'd rather just see a brick character come across and it's clean and it's done as opposed to a railing that I can't figure out how the rhythm to really work with this because it doesn't seem to be a natural break in here to actually add railings and some brick here to kind of break down it's just kind of a I think it would make it feel even stranger and and then I do I don't like the the flat elevation which I know I won't see but the top I think the I personally think the vertical side is draw for this house or the style of this house but I won't see it so I don't I'm not gonna function on that one and it's reemaling color selection because it looks a very it's very bland and all the windows and just kind of it's washed out everything's white or off white which is there's no there's character in the brick work is it's not being accentuated by enough contrast in their material selection so that's all I have I want to make another comment I was asking questions before but I want to tell you what I think um we are at the board we are seeing more and more um maybe every other meeting there is an infill in a block that it then the houses are much smaller we didn't see the

Um that's all I have.

Um I want to make another comment.

I was asking questions before, but I want to tell you what I think.

Um we are at the board, we are seeing more and more.

Um, maybe every other meeting, there is an infill in a block that it and the houses are much smaller.

We didn't see that as much in the past, but it seems that the program it's really being developed, and many of those houses are smaller than some of the townhouses that we saw in other historic townhouses and other quadrants of um old town.

So contextually, I first of all I want to tell you that I think you've done a very nice building.

It looks good.

Um contextually for me, it does not work in this block.

And it's um well, it's a conundrum for me because we are seeing more and more of these, and I suspect we're going to see more and more of these.

And I would say this building in a different block where there is more variety in the height of the buildings would be more appropriate.

So last we're struggling with at the moment.

Well, I wouldn't I do want to point out that the James Blanche development behind us is four stories.

And it's it towers over us.

It's not it's a like a true 50-foot, 45-foot building.

Right.

And then that surrounds really the back side of us, and then it continues all the way down Montgomery.

There's all they're all four stories with a pullback on the top floor.

I know for me, I'm just thinking about the block, as Michaela mentioned.

And two weeks ago, we had another.

Oh, I think it was maybe the 1100 or 1300 block of Prince Street, all two-story houses, and then an submission.

Very nicely done, just like your building to go up two more feet.

And that was concerned for me.

Um, and I do understand that this is surrounded by bigger buildings.

Uh James Bland had an exception on the height, don't they?

Because it's affordable housing, my correct.

No, they mean they they're within the height.

Um the the tight I can okay.

All right.

So thank you for your response.

We have to make a high moment.

Yeah, I think I think part of the frustration of the board here is really not your fault.

It's nobody's fault.

It's that the city has zoned this neighborhood at a certain height, and there is a sense that maybe it's taller than the neighbors or the board would prefer, but but it is also what the zoning is.

Um, we're not the zoning board, you know.

Um, I did just in the interest of trying to move things forward.

You have uh it's page 29 in your presentation.

I don't know if it's on here.

I wanted just in response to Mr.

Spencer's comment.

Um, I wanted to, okay.

Yeah, right here.

If you see the the rendering on the left here, I don't know if it's an accident or not, but above the the the arch soldier course above the windows on the left is of a contrasting brick.

Um I think maybe that sort of detailed contrast is something that Mr.

Spencer was talking about.

Is that something you could maybe do for all of your soldier courses just to create a little bit of visual interest in it?

Yeah, that's not a hill I'm gonna die on.

I think it's fine.

Um a good suggestion.

Yeah, I would I would wouldn't mind introducing contrast.

And in regards to the siding, I'm not, you know, I'm not gonna fight the horizontal siding as well.

It doesn't bother me whether it's horizontal or vertical.

Did you have a comment on what kind of siding was for you said that vertical is not appropriate?

I think it's appropriate.

I think I mean this is kind of a traditional ish kind of building, and then there you've got this modern top, and there's no there's no trim details around the window or on the door opening, it's just kind of the side and just butts up to I don't know if it was left off in the rendering, it just doesn't seem like it's finished being designed.

And then I'm I would almost it's that like that little window at the top.

It almost wants to go.

I mean, either comes down or it goes up.

It's like that little bit of siding that's in between the top of the clear wind clear story window and the transom above the right screen.

That rural trim there is like six or eight inches.

I mean the rendering rendering and the elevation showed that as being vertical siding stuff in that little piece, which is either you grow the window or or reduce the the transit.

Yeah, I mean I'm open to that.

I just it just there's not enough detailing on that four floor, just looks like someone just kind of gives the middle they need to do over there so we have an elevation.

In some ways it's a little bit intentionally.

We're trying to make it visually go away.

Right.

So I'm certainly open to tweaking that and make it a bit more.

I'll show you all sure.

Okay.

Okay.

I'm I'm prepared to offer some conditions for a motion and we'll just see how it goes.

Uh unless any other board members would like to make a comment because I don't want to cut anybody off.

Um so uh just give me one second to get my thoughts together.

Okay.

So I wouldn't I would make a motion to approve with staff recommendations and following conditions.

One be that you um introduce a contrasting decorative brick element uh in, for example, the soldier courses above the windows, and even maybe that side detail you have on the north elevation.

Um just to provide some visual interest along the lines of what Mr.

Spencer noted.

Um two would be on the fourth floor that you use horizontal siding and introduce decorative trim finish details, just so that it's not so austere.

Uh the third would be to address the transom window, uh that that small amount of difference between the top of the transom and then your your forness molding.

So maybe either just have like a slightly taller French door with no transom, or I don't know, just add you know, maybe an extra six inches there, or take the window all the way up.

So just we'll work with staff to address Mr.

Spencer's concern.

That would be the condition.

Four would be okay on uh the north and south of the three to bring down the um the bay to the second story for those two, like we talked about, um, leaving the one in the middle at three floors, or actually giving me giving you the option to do the second floor or the third floor.

I I would leave that to your discretion as you may, yeah.

We have to model I would leave that at your discretion.

Um, but to bring those side ones down to the second floor and then to make the cornice molding at the top of the vertical bay elements more substantial, uh, and then the course molding at the top of the uh parapet wall to be less substantial, just to sort of emphasize the lower scale of the building, and then um six would be to use brick on on all facades of the building um on the first three levels with understanding you've got your hearting on the fourth level.

Does anyone want to do first of all, Mr.

Clark?

Did you get those?

Yeah, okay.

Would anyone want to add anything else on this?

On this motion, we can always have other motions if this one doesn't pass.

Okay, so I will make the motion to approve with those six conditions and stack recommendations.

I'll second that.

Do we need to do a roll call vote, Mr.

Company?

Uh we do not.

There's no double issues involved.

Great.

All those in favor of the motion say aye.

Okay, four eyes and two names.

Congratulations.

Thank you.

Okay.

And I'm just saying just a clear fire as Ms.

Roxon.

And Miss Milk.

Okay, thank you.

Uh, what's next on the document, Mr.

Conte?

Okay, uh number eight and nine.

Number eight and nine.

This is the 2026-00106.

District request for reapproval of expired alteration addition plans at 333 Green Street.

Paul or Sullivan.

And BR 2026-00107 for district question for reapproval expired partial demolition encapsulation plans.

I have three three three green screen.

The applicant is called some.

Okay.

Um, Mr.

Osulman, can you just are you the Paul Solomon?

I am Paul Sol.

And your address is 333 Green Street.

Okay, before I turn it over to you, because we saw you a year ago.

Have you made any changes to these designs since the board approved this a year ago?

Minimum.

Minimal.

And maybe you want to just go through that with us.

Sure.

On uh page four, actually.

Uh the presentation.

Uh engineer siding has so one of the that's an email.

Um just gone.

That's okay.

We can share.

If you can jump to the uh elevations, the the engineered siding actually from the brick has been pulled in.

Um do you have a page remember that it's we can just talk from it here.

It'll work okay.

Uh all right, I so the engineer studying then pulled in uh instead two and three quarters originally.

We had one inch.

This is gonna be a game of inches, by the way.

Okay.

Um pulled in 11 and three quarters.

We uh reduced the size of the HBAC rooftop unit as well as put um a root when uh rooftop unit screen on it.

I showed some snow guards, which are also shown in the um products at the back end.

And the only other thing that I realize that's not in there is um the existing chimney right now has uh three three brick high.

It extends beyond the main chimney by about I think three quarters to an inch.

So what we did was we actually continue, we we flattened that out as we brought it up, but then we repeated that as we went to the uh new chimney.

Okay, that's it.

Those are pretty minor details.

Correct.

Um just for the public's information.

Um we have reviewed this house three or four times.

Um it was disapproved and then approved.

Um, and we currently have a suggestion before the city council to allow homeowners to have three years from the time um a certificate of appropriateness is issued.

There is a quirk in the city ordinance that allows developers who have to get a special use permit to have three years, but we unfortunately hold homeowners to this one year standard, which in my view is not fair to them.

Um, and so Mr.

Conkey, this is coming before this council soon, right?

Um, we are trying to get yes, it's it's within a package of zoning ordinance um amendments that we've addressed with with the board.

We've talked you through all these things.

Um, it is supposed to go soon.

We are still just waiting for um approval to get it through.

Okay, so we're gonna try to address this problem in the future.

Understanding there are a lot of reasons why people can't start the project within year.

Um, with all that said, are there any public speakers on this um particular document item?

No, okay, then we'll close the public hearing, and then I just want to open it up since we've already talked to you so many times.

I just want to open it up to my colleagues on the board, see if anyone has some comments or questions.

And and just for clarification too, the under the reason for the the delay was um small man taco uh has screwed over with the uh tariff.

So price of things have skyrocketed.

Understood.

Okay, there's no questions.

Do we want to do a motion?

Wait, no, I don't yes, Miss Miller.

I mean, I've been paying as much attention as I should have.

This has been more than a year, right?

That's where we have to reapproval.

It's been a year.

Yes, okay.

Right.

Okay.

I think you were extremely lucky to get it the last time.

Um here we go again.

Would anyone like to make a motion on this application?

Yeah, I I think you really work with us over the different design.

So I'd like to make a motion to um approve this application.

Stable recommendations, which is beautiful.

We have a second.

Second, I'll also see if it would approve this time.

Please start.

Oh yeah.

I want to see the oh yeah.

There's no guarantee you're gonna have to read it.

It will be starting okay very soon.

So Mr.

Tonky, this is a role call, yes?

Yes, it is.

We have uh demolition for this one.

Okay, so let's call the role.

Thank you.

Ums Robinson.

Hi Mr.

Spencer.

If some of you mr.

Hi.

Thank you.

Congratulations.

All right.

What is next on the docket?

14 and 15.

No, am I skipping ahead?

Uh no, yes, you are.

Yes, I am.

It's 10 and 11.

And you have to see the I'm the exiting.

Okay.

So Mr.

Harrison, you're gonna read this one in?

Yes.

All right, hello.

Hello.

Good to see everybody.

This is such a weird setting.

But anyhow, uh, I am carrying context.

Sorry, I'm to read that first one.

Oh, sir.

Um 2026, 00116 on the historic district request for a partial demolition and the capsulation at 428 Virginia Street.

Applicant is Julia and John Acker represented by Karen Conkey architect.

And the AR 326, 00117 historic district requests for an addition of alterations at 428 Marching Street.

Applicant is Julia and John Acker represented by Karen Conkey Architects.

Thanks.

And you are Miss Conky.

I am Miss Compton.

And what's your address?

Sorry.

407 South B Street.

All right, let's go.

Great.

So my clients, uh, Julie and Jay Acker are sitting here.

Uh they purchased the home in this earlier this year to be closer to family.

Uh they are very excited about getting their renovation started.

I don't think you would be seeing them for delay over the construction.

They want to go.

Um, our application tonight proposes uh to replace all the exterior doors with doors conforming to the design guidelines.

Uh the new terrace door on the rear will be enlarged.

Um, we're adding a transom above to get some more light to the space.

Um, they want to add a bait window to the front on the first floor.

So this is the the houses.

Um there's 86 of them over with kind of there's quay, uh queen, princess, one happens to be on union facing the river.

Um, and they they have that first floor where it's a foyer and a in a garage, and so the real first floor is upstorey above.

Uh so adding that bay window.

Uh replacing the steam dormers, they have three little dormers up at the roof line um with a larger uh single shed dormer.

Um, it makes for much less awkward space on that third floor without having those little ins and outs.

Um adding a composite wood shutters at the second floor.

Um and uh they would like to add a roof terrace.

Um that's one of the main things they they approach me about, um, which they would have uh a small rear porch that then has an exterior stair that accesses the roof.

Um they've done a minimal cable railing, you know, your normal roof deck of a package verse that finishes up there.

Um we agree with the staff's findings and happy to answer any questions.

Are there any public speakers on this?

Do we have any last-minute public speakers on this?

All right, let's close the public portion of this hearing.

And I'd like to open it up for I have a question, so I'll ask the first question.

Do your rail for the roof deck.

Um, is that flush at the top of the building, or is it that?

Uh so we've got the roof coming up, and then the railing is sort of back behind that roof structure.

So it's it's bring up the oh, yeah.

There we go.

Oh we've got a slope roof, so that fo mansar roofs that all the houses have, and then my railing is kind of here, so it's sort of this condition.

Okay.

So and then your your garage door with glass elements.

Is it real glass?

Yes.

Okay, we've had some discussion about that.

Okay, good to know.

Yeah, yes.

I think we would prefer real glass.

Of course.

Um, okay.

Sure.

Sure, so we have an armor on yes, yeah.

There'll be operable shutters with the little shutter dogs and the normal stuff.

Yeah.

So the shed dormer, are these windows taller than what's currently the they're approximately the same size.

Um airing on the side that I'm sure code is gonna say that they need to be egress.

I've got them sort of sized to function as egress meadows.

Um, but they're approximately the same size.

The sill is a little different.

I think the the current sill is very close to the floor, which is a little awkward in the room.

So I think I've raised the sill to just make it more functional.

Is there a reason um why you didn't use metal roofing?

Um adjacent to the shed.

You've got metal roofing on the shed, and but we've got asphalt shambles.

I think that was just the homeowner's preference.

It has an asphalt roof now, so they were kind of feeling with what they've got.

Um, but yeah.

I can certainly think it'd be great place for rooftack.

See that the Tommy Grover is like whole part.

Yeah, so I understand this is an area where a lot of exceptions have been made in terms of the size of the um windows and show.

I would venture to say that you've done a great job of maximizing as much window as you possibly can.

I just have a bit of a concern about the solid to void ratio on this, particularly the dormer windows being almost as wide as the two bays beneath them.

It's a lot of window.

And at a minimum, I'd like to see the dormers on the top be maybe four instead of three, or just something that makes them less wide.

I could agree with that.

It's a pretty massive shed dormer on the third level.

I would say maybe bringing it in so that it so that each edge centers on the window below something like that, just making it narrower, and maybe even making the windows like a little bit.

Since it's so massive, just like it should read us the top floor, not as um.

Does that make sense?

It does.

Is that something that could be accomplished?

I think we did align the sort of the left side of the dormer with the window below it, the right side of the window.

No, I was thinking like aligning with the center of the window instead of the edge of the window.

I see just to make it less massive.

I don't know, even uh yeah, my architects probably have more thoughts.

Yeah, window, so a three-window door, which is almost aligned with an edge of the two outer windows on the side case of those.

It would find or maybe, yeah, you could adjust the scale there.

So we the dormers are actually aligned with the existing dormers.

We're just taking out the middle portion of the roofs.

The spacing in between that's what makes that's what makes it look so much more mass.

If you wanted to keep it at two dormers and change them into shed dormers, I would just concern it would be it would be looked off and small.

That's the idea.

It's to make it look small.

Small smaller than the floors below.

Yeah.

So my concern would be that kind of display that you're not.

I hate to do this, but we do need no, you are allowed to talk.

But I need you to come over here.

You're absolutely allowed to talk.

You're the applicant, and you can talk to us as much as you want.

I I just need your name for the record because it's a municipal thing.

And your address is 428 North Street.

And that now you can say whatever you want.

Okay.

Um, I'm not an architect, um, but I do have a fairly good eye, and I feel like if you find that top window, it would look fairly out of proportion to the rest of the front of the house.

Our other thing is one of the things that we want to do on that floor is make it a big river view social room.

And so cutting the windows in and blocking that view, I think would make a very big difference on the inside.

Um, really take away what we're trying to do in that room.

It's a it's sort of a social gathering sunroom, actually call the sunroom on the inside.

So it would be very disappointing if we had to shrink the number and and have walls on the side.

I don't know if that was very articulate.

Especially at the casement.

And I agree with um Nikay.

Brandon, could you bring up some uh elevation of the other buildings surrounded?

Um, because yeah, that even if we go back up, we can you can kind of see the window to wall ratio is quite a bit of wall and then some windows, but you know, even the uh building on the north where it has kind of a bigger bays, it still has a fair amount of brick showing.

So um that might be something to really investigate, but if you want to.

John Ocker 428 North Union, yeah.

The difference is that house in the north is a third smaller.

And less wide.

Less wide, sorry.

So when you look at the proportionality, I mean, we're only we're not expanding the bays of the dormers on a width basis.

We're just taking out the roof.

I guess we understand as the effect of making it.

You can stand whatever you want.

Um, but your proposal is just making it more massive, right?

So understood they extend you're changing the style of the building to make that third floor or the fourth floor um just uh a much more substantial element.

And if you look at the the a read, smaller house to the right, you can see that dormer, the edge of the dormer appears to be extended about the the center of the window flow.

It doesn't go all the way to the edge, and that's because typically you would see a diminishing of you know, on a roof uh on a top floor like this, you you you would have a smaller window.

Um would it maybe be acceptable to do four, let's see.

We had five windows, I think, so reduce it to four so it does pull it to center to center.

I think I think better four.

We could do four and but center it and then what about Mr.

Lino's idea of making it a uh basement window style instead of a double on so you could shorten them a little bit window.

There's a post on this basement has a rank like that.

Uh you can get them a little shorter if you're for the egress for the e-grey, yeah.

But they'd be using we would be working with proportions to get it.

I think they would be less tall, is what they're proposing.

Yeah.

And a little bit would be it would be fewer windows, perhaps at the same width.

Again, I'd have to just kind of figure out the demand.

Right.

Yeah.

Well, if you look, we we can approve this with these conditions, but if we wanted to go back and like work with set or and bring it back to us, right?

If you wanted to show us something else, we don't have to vote on this today.

Right.

Or we can.

I just it sounds like the applicant isn't totally there on what we're talking about, and I would need to approve something and then have you go home and be like, wait, what did was it the board approved?

We'll come back at least more time.

Just time.

Yeah, it's your decision.

We can absolutely can vote on the certificate today.

I think the board has a clear vision of what we're talking about.

I just want to make sure that we refer to it yeah, like you can ask us to defer this and you can talk to Miss Conki and look at other designs before you come back.

I just would hate to approve something and then have you not be comfortable with it.

Not necessarily you wouldn't have to come back anyway.

We could vote on it today.

Yeah.

And then it's up to you.

It's really up to you.

But it doesn't get approved.

If it doesn't get approved, you it you can't come back for a year, but you can't appeal to the uh to the city council.

So let's do let's do the approval and then or the deferral.

And if you come back in a month, basically go back the month if the frozen go back in the next one.

Yeah, okay.

What would you recommend?

We don't care.

Yeah, it's kind of up to you.

The sticking point.

Yeah, no, we're not done with it yet.

Okay, yeah.

Um we have more feedback.

So I guess yeah, yeah, because you weren't totally clear.

I would just want to make sure.

But yeah, so we'll get to that.

But Miss Miller has some other things to say, and as do my other colleagues.

Uh okay.

Um what is on is this on the river?

Is this looking out straight to the remote?

Right.

I I know where it is.

I've actually live.

I lived at 702 South Indian for quite a while.

And um, this is north union.

Oh, I know I mean totally because it's not necessarily on the park.

It's on the park.

I'm sorry, I was confused on that.

Are there is there any precedence for any others that have been done like this?

The house next door, and then there's a picture in the staff report that shows other houses.

They all have large dormers.

So again, people have uh there's another picture going there.

We go, that one.

Shoulder.

There it was.

Yeah, people batted.

Oh decks and large dormers all the way down the block.

Yeah, for obviously.

I hear smaller concern for the symmetry.

Uh it's more just the mass, the size of a dormers.

The lower seems just looking brick out.

If you look at this, you know, if you look at this image, you can see a fair amount of brick on the front facade.

And you know, the with all of the proposed fenestration, it's a little bit too much, you know, glass compared to the elevation that's developed here.

Yeah.

So I think going from the ground in the top.

Thank you.

Um honestly, I would like to walk the bluff.

And it if you wouldn't mind coming back.

Um that would be helpful to make.

Because when I do walk this block, I feel that it's there are several houses that are done a grave deal to maximize the glass on their facades.

Um so I would like to just look contextually about how this would look compared to the other houses.

Um that's how I feel.

Um I think that um you need to some additional work.

You know, I could favor this application if we had all of the roof was metal, just like the shed roof.

Um I think that um you just some additional work you know I could favor this application if we had all of the roof was metal just like the shed group I think that's gonna I hope it will look better and um reducing the attic the shed attic just because I think it'll be more proportionate with the building overall um whether they're slightly shorter windows and maybe four instead of five you know I think that's really small I think I would be stuck in here this block almost causes uh reaction because everybody wants a great view of right on the core river so I'd like to see how to do what you want but I think it's overreaching right now the um the ratio I booked up another property that was in a couple properties that won't along with may have any the code did require the ratio of glass to solve and not be too great.

I think this is there's just too much glass here.

The garage door is all glass no garage doors mostly panels with glass up yeah so I think the that does sound somehow have a sub I think the second floor of the main floor is just too too it's overreaching and