Okay, good evening.

I mean to call uh the Newport Historic District Commission meeting for Tuesday, February tenth, two thousand and twenty-six to order and ask our secretary to call the roll.

Thank you, Madam Chair, Deanna Amarillo here.

Rose Oh.

Kelly Moran, I'm here.

Jim Madsen.

Here.

Frank Bala.

Here.

Ray Goddard.

Here.

Bill Finley is absent and we knew of his absence.

And Brooke Richter.

Here.

I confirm that we have a quorum for this evening's meeting.

Just like to acknowledge that we have uh Kevin Gavin here from our city solicitor's office supporting the HDC.

We begin with minutes of our Tuesday, January thirteenth, two thousand and twenty-six meeting.

These have been provided to the commission for review.

Uh commissioners, are there any additions or corrections to those meeting minutes?

No.

Okay, with that I will request a motion to accept the minutes for Tuesday, January thirteenth, two thousand and twenty-six as presented.

So moved.

Second.

All those in favor.

Aye.

Aye.

All those opposed.

All applications approved and certificates of appropriateness issued this evening Tuesday, February tenth, two thousand and twenty-six are valid for one year from the date of approval.

All of the applications in this meeting have a published staff report, which includes the confirmed location of each property within a Newport Historic District.

As we begin the meeting this evening, I request a motion to accept all staff findings of fact as our findings of fact.

So moved.

Those are C three, six Greeno Place, C four, ninety-seven Harrison Ave, UN PL, C five, thirty Poplar Street, and C six seventy-three Catherine Street.

So those five applications, if anyone was here this evening from the public, just want to make sure that you realize those will not be heard this evening.

Also in the pre-meeting this evening identified a couple of applications to be considered for summary approval.

These are viewed by our members as complete with no questions and acceptance of the staff findings of fact and recommendation for approval.

So the first of those this evening is N two.

Um, the application of 32 Clark Street, plat 24, lot 085.

Um, is there any public comment on this application?

And with that, I'll request a motion to approve the application of 32 Clark Street Platte 24 lot 085 as presented, citing Newport Standards 17 TAC 80 060, a one four, five, and seven.

So moved.

Second.

All those in favor.

Aye.

All those opposed.

The next application for summary this evening is N6, 146 Brenton Road, Plat 43, Lot 064.

Do we have anyone here for public comment on this application this evening?

Uh so with that, I'm going to request a motion to approve the application of 146 Brenton Road, Plat 43 Lot 064.

Um, citing Newport Standards 17 tag 80 060 B1 and 2 with a comment um that there was a um secondary plan that was submitted that referenced um a curved garage opening.

We just want to make sure that that's maintained.

So again, citing Newport standards 17 TAC 80 060 B1 and 2.

So moved.

Second.

All those in favor.

Aye, all those opposed.

Uh we had no applications this evening for abbreviated summaries.

So I will ask um Mr.

Madsen, who's filling in this evening as our vice chair to read our first agenda item.

We start with the would be action items.

Yep.

Okay, our first action item is the application of Cynthia Barton of 61 to 53 K Street, plat 22 lot 003.

It's a contributing structure.

They would like to extend the certificate of appropriateness for permission to construct a two-story addition to on the south and east elevation with corner board to distinguish new addition.

Council.

Good evening, madam chair, members of the commission, Jay Russell, Jackson, Miller, Scott, Holbrook, and Jackson on behalf of the applicant.

Um, as you may recall, this project was before you on a couple of occasions.

The first one was in relation to um the phase of the project that were before you this evening, and that has to do with an addition on the rear of the main building to house um a staircase.

We got your approval for a certificate of appropriateness to build that addition on the rear.

And then a number of months later, we came back and secured your approval for the reconstruction of a carriage house right next to the main residence.

We then needed to go to zoning.

And between the two visits here and the uh permitting path through zoning.

Um by the time I reached out again to Jill to extend the uh approvals.

We realized I realized that the first one had already expired.

So that's why we're here before you this evening.

I can tell you that there's no change in the plans by virtue of going through the zoning process.

So um the addition on the rear that you all approved is uh hasn't changed, and that's what we're looking for an extension on.

Okay.

Commissioners, any questions for council?

No.

Okay.

So with that, I'm gonna request a motion to um extend the certificate of appropriateness for 61 and 63 K Street, plat 22 lot 003.

So moved.

All those in favor.

Aye, all those opposed.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Yep.

Okay, A2 is the application of 105 Broadway, plat 21, lot 196 for architectural review and recommendation.

Good evening, madam chair, members of the commission, K Russell Jackson, Miller Scott, Holbrook, and Jackson on behalf of the applicant.

Um this project um is located on Broadway 105 Broadway, and it is in the general business zone.

It is not in the historic district.

Uh the uses taking place here are a retail stall and um 11 vacation guest facility units with a total of 20 bedrooms, is my recollection.

Um, there is a provision in the code, the development standards relative to vacation guest facility units, which calls for the design to be presented to the historic district commission for review and comment as part of the overall development plan review.

This project's gone through development plan review and received preliminary plan uh approval, although ultimately ultimately it will require final plan approval from the director of planning.

Um so at the last TRC meeting, uh it was noted that this still needed to be before you so that comments could be received and um changes if appropriate uh from our perspective could be incorporated into the design that's uh that's before you this evening.

I can tell you just a little history and and I'm sure Jill can fill in um as well from her perspective.

But we went in front of the TRC a number of months ago first on a conceptual review and had a completely different design for the building, which was um a shingle building, and it was sort of uh consistent with the vacation guest facility unit you see on Broadway, excuse me, on Memorial Boulevard that just opened within the last year or so.

Um after we presented that on a conceptual basis, we got fair amount of feedback at that conceptual meeting, and it was uh indicated that maybe a different design would be more appropriate for Broadway.

So uh the building was completely redesigned.

Um, and when we came back for um our first um TRC meeting on the actual application, this essentially is the design that we had.

And then by the second TRC meeting, there were additional uh modifications to this design.

So this is the product of receiving some feedback from the city, and there's a certain evolution to what you see before you this evening.

But again, um happy to take any comments um uh that we can sort of look at and incorporate, hopefully, before we submit for final plan approval.

Okay.

I'm just gonna ask our preservation planner to set a little bit of context for the commission in terms of the purview of commentary this evening.

Sure.

Um, so the provision that Russ is speaking of is 17 tech 100 tech 360.

So it says during the course of the development plan review for vacation guest facility shall be presented to the historic district commission for recommendations on compatibility with the surrounding area.

So basically, what the HCS to do tonight is to make recommendations on design based on the compatibility with the surrounding Broadway Historic Area.

Um I did review this at every level at the technical review committee from the preliminary plan, which I rest is correct, was critical of.

And um I worked with Chris Fagan to kind of shape the design for something that would be maybe more appropriate for Broadway in the scale that we intend to see.

Um we have no purview overuse over zoning or anything like that.

We are just to give our recommendations and the recommendations will go to the director of planning um for final review.

Okay.

All right.

So with that, I will open it up to feedback from the commission.

So do we have any just just straight up 2D elevations at all, or is everything 3D?

Can I have like a street view elevation?

Okay, we can start with that.

Street view.

What are you asking for, Ray?

From the view from the street to mention, right?

That's it right there.

Okay.

Justice review as it is now.

So my my first impression, just seeing it for the first time, would be that this looks almost institutional, like like a uh like a school almost, maybe too much glass.

There's no obvious entry to it.

Um things like that.

Uh in something that would be bring it to a more residential scale, I suppose.

Uh would be helpful.

Um I don't see the I mean when I'm looking at the elevation, I don't even know how you get into the building.

First floor retail.

The first round level is uh along the Broadway streetscape is retail.

So um there's obviously an entry to the retail next to the retail.

Um there are there's the garage opening, and there's also uh doors which lead to the vacation guest facility on the second, third, and fourth floor.

So I would say some some distinguishing feature on the building itself.

The separate sort of yeah, there's I think there's um I don't know if the renderings that are that in the in the sort of deck that we have here, but there is signage that is going to be associated next to the front door.

I think um through the process with the technical review committee.

There was a desire, at least I sense Jill, you can correct me if I'm wrong to keep the sort of signage as as sort of subdued and minimal as possible.

Yeah, that's right.

Um we had desired to have a sort of mixed use.

So the first floor originally was just all entrance to the parking, which is going to be housed in the first level, partially in this front portion and then partially in the rear um of the lot.

So this design kind of attempted to minimize the vehicular entrance um the north bay.

Attempted to uh minimize the entrance to the hotel.

Well, what why would you minimize the entrance to the hotel?

Minimize the vehicular entrance.

Oh, the vehicular entrance, yeah.

Yeah.

And was it confirmed in TRC that the garage entrance needs to be on Broadway?

Yes.

Yes, unfortunately.

The only other street it's got access to is Kileroy Court, and there is a certain elevation in Kilroy is a very narrow street.

Yeah, okay.

And really what we're doing is re we're essentially repurposing the existing curb cut because what's there right now is it's a commercial parking lot.

Okay.

Mr.

Madsen.

Uh Council, do you do you know how tall it is as compared to the buildings across the street?

Uh I I don't I don't know what the the exact height of the buildings directly across the street, but this project was intentionally you know that the height limit is 45 feet.

And so this entire project was designed intentionally to meet all the dimensional requirements of the zoning code.

So it's it's right at the it's probably right at or just below the 45 foot mark.

Um it meets all the setbacks, lot coverage, it provides for all the parking on site.

So you know, I I guess when I look at it, you know, I would say it looks a little bit you know, too uh you know to raise point a little box, a little square and institutional.

And I was wondering if you look at a lot of the buildings on that street, if you cross the street at the uh shop over there and the junk store next to it, they've all got kind of interesting roof lines, right?

Some have quite a few of them have corbels along the top, some have different kinds of gables.

So there's a lot of you know, artistic elements, I think, along the the roof line that I'm sorry about that, that uh that aren't evident here that may make it fit a little bit more into the uh into the district than what it or what it does.

Um yeah, and is that is there a roof deck or is there something on the roof?

I couldn't quite tell.

There is a balcony uh facing Broadway.

And there used to be one on the on the west-southwest side facing Kilroy Court, but that was removed by comments at the last TRC meeting.

So, yes, there is uh that's the one spot where there's some outdoor space.

Yeah, I mean, that was the only thing that that would concern me if you if you go down like lower things, sometimes see people hanging off there and all you know, that kind of thing.

If on Broadway, um certainly a different vibe, but you whether that fits or not, I guess you'd have to determine that.

Um on the windows, as large and kind of squared as they are, if they were arched, possibly rather than just boxed, right?

Might soften it, you know, a bit too, as well as the ones along the bottom, the entry doors, you know, might soften the whole view of it, because you know, I think it does look quite a bit actually, it looks a lot like the hospital upstreet, right?

So it's uh you know, but I think it's you know, you know, something needs to go in that space, and it's it seems though it fits and uh, but if it could be softened a little bit, kind of rounded, maybe add the corbels to it.

Um you know, it does block if you're coming from the north, yeah.

You you have the church next to it, you know, with the architectural elements of that that'll be blocked, but I think anything gonna do that.

So uh that's just my thoughts on it.

If you want to give to Chris or have him call me, that's fine.

Okay.

Other questions, comments, Ms.

Moran.

Um yeah, institutional is a word, um, metropolitan, maybe there's something very cold and simple about it.

And I hear Newport be described as quaint all the time.

And this is like the opposite of what I think of when I hear the word quaint.

Uh, it's very large.

Um, so when I think about large buildings on Broadway, the school, City Hall, maybe one oh eight Broadway, I think it is.

Um, so when I think about large buildings on Broadway, the school, City Hall, maybe one oh eight Broadway, I think it is, and then everything else is kind of like smaller mixed-use wood frame buildings, and um and then the churches, like I think of I know that this is really early on, but down the line, you know, what is it?

What is Broadway going to turn into?

I think in New York City where the churches become dwarfed in these little uh like canyons almost, and I just I think that that could be like the future of Broadway if we start seeing buildings come in like this with the height and the mass of it.

And I recognize that real estate is most valuable when you put as many units in it as possible and you maximize what's on the lot, but then you get this box and you get these vertical walls, and when I think of Newport and and the historic nature of it and the quaintness, I think of roof lines.

I think of uh, you know, architectural details, and I just I don't think that this really reflects Newport at all, even though Broadway is not considered to be a historic neighborhood.

I just I just don't really see it um quite yet.

So I don't know if I really have anything else to add aside from that, but I just doesn't really fit in my opinion.

Um all right, so I have if you could speak to the materials.

So clearly the upper levels are brick.

Um what is the that first floor that's on the street?

Is that it looks like in some of the elevations almost like a cinder.

Yeah, it's I want to say the intention is stonework, stone veneer.

Oh god.

Is that Jill?

Am I remembering that correctly?

Chris had a conflict this evening.

Chris was going to be here and he notified me that he had an unavoidable conflict at a different municipal board that he couldn't get out of.

I don't have a list of materials.

I know that it was some sort of wasn't a natural material, some sort of composite board, perhaps, especially for the upper levels.

Um, I'm hoping that lower level would not be just raw cinder block, it would certainly have to be some sort of stone veneer.

Um the upper portions are brick veneer.

Um and the window specs were not provided.

Okay.

I would um echo other commissioners in terms of the feeling of it, particularly when you look at these drawings and elevations.

It feels very industrial to me, almost like it's been an adaptive reuse of a factory or an old mill.

Um, so while it looks like new construction, it definitely the characteristic of it.

Um Broadway obviously is a mix of you know architectural styles.

Um, there isn't necessarily anything that would have indicated that this had been an industrial area within the city.

Um I do think it should be differentiated from other buildings on Broadway, which I I like the idea of brick pulling from other references that you have in some of the other landscapes.

Um, but adding some architectural features that whether it be making it a little bit warmer but less industrial overall, particularly given that elevation off of the ground and what clearly reads as something, you know, that there's this in industrial entrance you're going into a parking facility.

Um, but just generally that's the first thing that comes to mind when I see this is adaptive reuse of which it's not, but it looks very industrial and like an old factory that had been rehabbed.

Um the other thing I'm not seeing, Clause not in this plan, I don't expect to see him, but would I the mechanical equipment?

I suspect would probably on the roof that would have something of an impact on how it would appear, I think.

You know, so I just don't know enough about the building that seeing it for the first time.

So and I would agree with Mr.

Madsen about that third floor balcony, um, particularly on the street facing Broadway, that would be concerning as well.

I don't know if that's something that's public access to everybody that's using the building or if it's a suite to a specific unit.

Okay.

Yeah, that was one of the reasons that the there was a balcony facing Kilburn, which was accessible to all the guests.

That was one of the reasons it was removed.

Okay.

TRC.

Okay.

Um, any other questions that we can answer for you specifically or uh feedback is helpful.

Jill, anything else you'd like us to opine on?

I think that so you know, during the technical review committee process, we were presented with an initial proposal that was quite tall and did not have any stepbacks.

So one of my recommendations was that the third floor or fourth floor, the fourth floor would be kind of set back to kind of take some of the massing off that.

I think that's effective resulted in the step back there.

Um I did mention one of my comments that didn't get didn't make the final cut was that along Broadway, it's very typical to have kind of the angle bay with the recessed entrance.

And I thought that that was something that could be implemented in this building to kind of make it a little softer off of the edge of the street and the sidewalk.

Um, I think that would lend to bringing more um visibility to the retail aspect of that ground floor.

I mean, I agree with the others by having I think signage, which if this were in a historic district, we would have purview over signage.

I think keeping it fairly minimal is will be beneficial, but that would might be a nice way to communicate to you know everything else that's happening on Broadway that there is a retail aspect to this building.

Um otherwise it does just look like a continuation of whatever the structure is, or that that had been not that use originally.

So initially, what was on this parcel before was that kind of like really cool 70s, like mid-century modern um gas station, which I would have loved an homage to, but um, in terms of design and what the developers and architect was comfortable with, we went with something a little more industrial to again set it apart.

There's a lot of flat roofs in this portion of uh Broadway, although it would be nice to see some kind of wood materials.

Um this is what was landed on.

So I think all of your comments are um are spot on.

And Rust, do you are you clear?

I have a list going for I'm sorry, what's that?

I are you clear on what the the commission is kind of recommending.

Yeah, I think so.

I've taken notes and and based on our discussion earlier, my understanding is you're gonna put some together some type of correspondence, sort of summarizing the comments for those to uh Trish Reynolds, right?

Yes, correct.

Perfect.

Okay.

Anyone else?

Any comments, recommendations?

Okay.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay, now we'll start the new applications.

First one is the application of Rhode Island property wire LLC for 27 more.

C2.

Oh, sorry about that.

Uh yeah, C2.

I missed that one.

Uh, this is the application of John D.

Picote Jr.

of 11 Brunton Road, plat 41, lot 416.

It's a non-contributing uh new construction for permission to construct a new home at former site of the underwood school.

Okay, welcome back.

I'm gonna get everybody sworn in.

We can do everybody together, but then I'll have you state your names individually.

Uh, do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?

So help you God.

Okay, and then just go down and we'll get you on the record.

Donovan Brundage.

Jessica Carpechuk.

Can you spell your list name?

Okay, A R P E I C H I K.

Well, okay, welcome back.

Thank you.

Good to see you guys again.

Um we taken all your comments and big changes to the design.

Very helpful.

But that's going to pop up at the five.

So after reanalyzing the neighborhood, seeing the surrounding properties and their scale design, we decided to go with the Dutch colonial or an enlarged Dutch colonial.

Um, so kind of speaking to the neighborhood, not really having those full two-story buildings, really bringing down the scale or at least the feeling of the scale of the building by not having these full massive walls going all the way up, integrating spaces in the roof line, and even more so trying to hide even more of the massing through larger dormers on the back side of the house.

So while street facing it appears even smaller in scale, especially on that top level.

Um so keeping with a generally traditional design, um, contemporary in the way that you can see more spaces fitted in through dormers and just overall size and layout, um, but still trying to respect what's surrounding in the area.

Okay.

So just for um the record, we did hold another design review committee um after.

So there's two that were held for this project.

Um so the plans that we see here um were reviewed um and thoroughly in that second design review.

So just so that the other commissioners are aware, we had had that and provided feedback to the applicant.

So with the new submittal, we also did receive an updated staff report um providing commentary from our preservation planner.

So I will open it up for questions and comments from the commission.

Mr.

Madsen.

Sure.

Uh thank you, Chair.

Uh I would say that is it's a great change from what we saw, you know, a month ago, right?

And I know there's been a couple of DRC meetings.

Unfortunately, I wasn't able to make either of those, and I was probably one of the more vocal, you know, from last one, particularly around the the front uh garage doors.

Uh you know, I think you know, the collaborative efforts that you've put together with uh with the uh uh commission as well as the uh preservation planner is well done.

I mean, you really came back with a design that I think is gonna fit there.

The scale of it seems, although square footage may not be that much less, but it it just appears as though it fits more into the lot into the area.

I like the garage doors on the side.

Um I don't know where you're gonna put the golf cart, but it's uh there's no golf course there anyway.

But it's uh no, I think it's great.

I'm I'm going to win it.

Okay.

Great job, everybody.

Any other questions, comments?

Um other than just well, I was in the review committee, so you know my comments.

So I think it's a uh wonderful transition from the original to this, and uh um just as the chair would say, I think it's uh it's a good opportunity to um show the the value of that process.

Yeah, I would echo that.

I think this is an exceptional example of collaboration when we work together with the applicants when you look at the original plans that were submitted, the feedback that was provided, really looking at the lot and the sighting, obviously looking, you know, having to contend with some heavy wetlands.

Um the design that came back that we see before us this evening really is demonstrative um demonstrating the compatibility with the neighborhood and this the process here we see it helped us much better than well that makes us very happy to hear.

So any other questions or comments from the commission?

No.

All right.

So with that, I'm going to request a motion to approve the application of 11 Brenton Road, plat 41 lot 416 as presented this evening, citing Newport Standard 17 TAC 80 060, C One through 3.

So moved.

Second.

All those in favor.

Aye.

All those opposed.

Okay, congratulations.

Thank you guys for all your time.

Thank you.

Are we ready?

Yeah.

Okay.

All right.

Uh, next application is that of RI properties wire LLC of 27 through 31 and a half.

Franklin Street, plat 27, lot 72, contributing structure for permission to add new rear shed dormer, replace existing doghouse style bulkhead with a new bulkhead, construct a faux chimney to replace the brick chimney and replace the front door with a larger door, rearrange the filtration of uh and install a 20-inch high by 27 inch wide sign and install HVAC equipment and replace windows that are deemed irreparable from the window report.

Okay, welcome.

I'm gonna get both of you sworn in this evening.

Uh, do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God.

And if you could both state your name for the record, Shane Cooper.

Right, it's all our question.

Okay.

Okay.

If you could walk us through um the different details of the project.

I'm just gonna go down the list of the approvals we're seeking.

Sure.

Uh the first one's a new rear dormer on the south side, which is the rear of the building to provide required headroom for the third floor.

Number two is to replace the existing bulkhead with a new bulkhead that allows for a new safer stair that will replace the existing steep unsafe stair.

Maybe I don't need to repeat it.

I think if there's any additional details as you go through each one of those that you want to share.

No, there is already a bulkhead.

It would just be an extension of that bulkhead by about three feet.

Right now, go downstairs about that ball feet.

So it's an essentially a useless ball pit uh right now.

Um so that's just one of the important things to note on that.

Um important to note uh on the dormer for the third floor, it was noted we saw it in the south where it said now uh to think about creating a third floor living space.

It is already a third floor living space that um so it would just be created more usable space because right now it's you walk into there and then the hallway butt to use it.

It is classified as living space and was a unit.

Yeah, um considering that's on the rear building.

Uh if you're standing, obviously you can't see it from the front, but if you're standing on the um east side, you can't see it at all.

There's no way unless you walk down the driveway.

And from the western side, it's it's essentially the same thing unless you were to like kind of puck back, it's really gonna be unnoticable from really any angle, um, except possibly from uh memorial.

You might be able to see it in one narrow gap between uh the post office and um so it's still back approximately three feet, so I think it'd be really difficult to see it from that angle.

But I think you're more likely to see it from the angle from a moor across the parking lot.

Yeah, exactly.

From the back of the other side.

How far is it off the ridge line?

I believe um sit it down.

Whoa.

Yeah, it's about a foot down.

And the total width of the dormer though is it by around 30 feet.

I guess let's open it up.

We'll kind of step through each of the phases.

So any other questions or comments on the dormer from the commission.

I do, Mr.

Bella.

Um, yeah, I just think the dormer is a little bit much for this building.

Uh it is a contributing building, which is been modified, and and here we are today, but it is contributing.

Um I just think the the size of the dormer is excessive for this elevation, the mass of the dormer, and I understand what it's doing, but um uh I'm not in favor of it.

Okay.

I will jump in and echo um Mr.

Bell's comments about the dormer, the overall size, um, particularly that it's one long shed dormer.

Um, you know, if you were to take cues from the front of the building, there's two smaller dormers, but the overall size and looking at the street view that we just saw previously, I do think that this is gonna be considerably visible um coming up Franklin Street, potentially also from the rear of the building.

So I would not be in favor of one continuous dormer as presented.

What do we have for dimensions uh for height at the knee of that dormer?

So the the I guess it would be the north basement wall.

What would be the height of that wall?

Interior wall.

On the inside, right there.

Oh yeah, it's about seven feet.

I tend to think it's a much a little bit much too uh in terms of the massing of it and the scale of it.

Uh I feel like you can get the space that you need up there without such a large continuous dormer, such as you show here.

Can you also comment on the chimney?

So there is an existing chimney on the building.

Um the positioning of the dormer intersects that just a little bit.

And so the proposal to recreate the chimney that's there existing, you're taking out the obviously programming on the interior is driving this.

Yes.

Okay.

It's not used for it's already been removed, correct?

It fell actually dirty down the wish.

And you have the old bricks that you're gonna cut those and make a veneer out of them.

Would you be open to squeeze in the sides in more Mr.

Ball?

My thought is that the dormer is whether it's this big or smaller, is uh adding a story to something that wasn't there.

It was a roof line, as it's been said, the other side has two dainty little gable dormers, which still respect that there was a roof there.

I think what um this proposal is doing is uh making it seem like it's a whole piece of the building that just wasn't there.

I understand somebody's carved out a unit up there, but um, you know, I I just don't see the appropriateness of the dormer.

Um smaller gable dormers may be more in keeping.

Uh however, they may not meet the programming that's required for the space.

So um I think that's the uh the quandrum we're having.

I guess I'll agree with the rest of the commission.

Uh I struggle with dormers on historic buildings to begin with, and this is definitely a large dormer, uh especially for a building that's defined by having a I believe a gable roof pierced by smaller dormers like such.

So I really struggle with kind of eliminating that architectural feature of the building, both on the front and the back, even though it is kind of hard to see.

But uh I find that the roof line on this particular building is is one of the one of the character defining features.

And it it's a relatively large attic, if you will, compared to a lot of the other buildings around here that do have living space up on the third floor.

So for me, I I cannot support a dormer of this nature and of this scale to the building.

Would consider us to do and that we could then try and alter our architectural plan to accommodate and you know the roof line, you know, the character of the building.

I mean we definitely want to retain the value new port history.

I mean, we we've done you know several renovations and work hand in hand with you guys in the past on other projects that are being held by us.

We're not just selling these things off.

Um, you know, and we want to do that, but we'd also like to make this useful space.

It is legal usable space now, but it's not functional.

And this dormer is critical, especially at least at entry way points to the unit, the functional.

Um without that, I mean it's like you come in there now and it's it's a legal unit.

I don't even know how, but you do one of these to get into the unit.

Um, but the city granted its legal use years ago and it's there now, and we'd like to tell us safe.

And right now it's like borderline, should it even be there?

Uh and by making these modifications we'll find a at least its ability to be a safe structure for the unit.

Um one of the things you may want to play with uh is that there are there's a language of these two gable dormers on the front side.

Um you may want to mimic that on the back side, and I understand you're trying to get a wide dormer.

Often what's done is there's a space in between gable dormers that is set back and becomes a shed dormer connecting the two proud gable dormers, and it may give you some since it's on the back of the house and it's less obtrusive.

You may be able to play with the geometry and not bring I think the thing we're reacting to is this dormer is thrust right to the almost the the north use I mean bringing it out and then kind of building it.

The two gable dormers and then have the yeah the shed set back in the windows get tall uh shorter because of the roof is maintained, but it does give it hints to the language that's there.

It may meet your programming, right?

Yeah, hopefully can give us a little extra space.

We need to get a proper kitchen and bathroom, and then at the same point, open that area where you come up in the unit.

For me, that would show that you've given some sensitivity to the comments, and I think yeah, I could probably without seeing it, I could probably be convinced of it.

I think we could work on something about that enough.

Um I I think but I mean ultimately it's gonna be about the scale and it's gonna be about the size.

And the sort of tactic that comes commissioner Frank was speaking about it's not just a matter of putting a little gable at the end of each one at the end of the existing dorma that you have now and then pushing that wall back a foot.

That won't not for me anyway.

I think it needs to be a substantially smaller dormer, right?

And it needs the recess.

If you're gonna do that, if you're gonna pursue that, which I'm not a big fan of, if you're gonna pursue that, I think it needs to go back substantially, you know, from the facade of the dormers themselves.

The shed would be have to go considerably far back and not like a little six-inch reveal with the gable on each end.

Um that would be my commentary on that.

Okay.

Uh I just wanna I'm looking at the pictures of the third floor apartment.

Um, it's 900 square feet, reasonably large, I would say for like a third floor apartment.

Um I understand you want to add more square footage, but when we're taking away architectural details of a building, character defining features of an arch of this building that is right downtown, directly in the center of our historic district, very much visible.

I personally wouldn't be a fan of any additional dormers.

Um unless there's something that I just can't see it personally.

I know that there's one there.

Perhaps I could get behind sort of mimicking that and bring in a secondary one on the back so you have more light and and another window.

But as far as adding one of these big, you know, modern shed dormers to the to the third floor.

I just I can't support it personally.

I just think that it's taking away from the you know the silhouette of this building um from a couple of different angles.

And again, just kind of a character defining shape that this building holds.

Um, just one comment to that uh regarding the that is like if you put a laser at the floor.

Sure, I understand you know, so let's call it 700 or so real, you know, the guidelines.

What is it?

Uh I forget what the mathematic equation that's used.

Yeah, it doesn't even count, so it's probably more like 400 square feet, 450.

It's not big.

Well, that's that is I think a little bit of putting right.

So that's saturation.

It's you'd have to be well, there's two sides, and then the way it comes in and got the stairwell in the middle, it's huge.

Um, so I mean, you could run the map on that.

But there's a full staircase, it's not like you're bumping your head when you walk up the stairs.

It's when you come into the unit becomes the issue.

Um yeah, okay.

I understand what you're dealing with, but I I struggle with this, especially when it when we're talking about changing a historic building that's right in the center of town.

So I understand that, and and that's why it's it is a big ask.

But we're you know, praying for you know some approval for this, just it is on the rear side, it is hard to see it.

You you would have to be looking for it, and it will be a even though it will be a character changing effect on the building, it'll greatly improve its use um at least.

Um hard to see, so I'm just hoping that we can get some weak.

All right, so I think you've gotten um some good feedback on the dormer.

Um any questions or comments on the bulkhead.

Is that is that a fire regress, or is that just uh making the space access?

Yeah.

Yeah.

No, I don't really have any issues with the dorm.

I mean with the uh bulkhead at all.

Yeah, fine.

Okay.

Um next, the the chimney replacing the chimney.

I think some of that may depend on where obviously we want to put it back in the original location.

I'm not sure if that changes within the detailing of the dormers.

Um I think the commission would generally be in favor of reconstructing, given that it's fallen down at this point using original materials.

Uh let's move to the front elevation and the front door, um, which is also to be there's a fairly significant change here on the fenestration.

It is the front door is not an original front door, and the window report should have had it in it, but didn't include it.

Um it appeared when he was there, and we have to tables to come back to that.

We can, but it appeared that it had been a larger front door at one time and closed in.

Um so we have to have them come back out to give a new report on that.

We can have that done.

You said it's not original, what was original, you know?

Um we don't know what the original was, but the front door is clearly not original.

It's you know, sometime in the 80s, he said.

Uh and then the lights had been modified.

So um think there were any lights, were there?

Yeah, maybe at one point there wasn't.

Uh, but I know we had seen some old pictures of it.

Right.

Um, but uh just going off of what uh heritage restoration um uh Bob said the front door was not original, and I believe that the lights had been modified or changed throughout time.

Do we have an um historical society report on the property?

Yes.

Unfortunately, you can't really see the front door very well.

Too bad.

Did Rob do report on the windows that are in that front door?

He did.

He did a report on all of the uh windows, but not the front door.

Okay, not the ones that are in the I was expecting the nine right they weren't there because they look like single pane glass windows with true mullions.

So and how much are we looking to increase the width of the door?

Three inches, or is it four from 32 to 36?

So the surround is staying the same.

So just what I see in the shade of the area.

You you you're your intention is to replace the door and the side lights.

Correct.

And we would use the highlight material there.

And you're sort of just duplicating what you have there, just enlarging it a little.

I'm okay with it.

Yeah, that doesn't bother me so much either.

Wood door, right?

Correct.

Uh just to share feedback from the um staff notes that the proposal to remove the front door, widen the entrance and replace with a larger door in the same style does not meet our standard for retaining historic character as the alteration removes historic materials and alters features that characterize the structure.

Are you uh driven by building and life safety codes here for replacing this door?

For that purpose.

It would seem like uh 36-inch door is code opposed to a 32-inch door.

Yeah.

So I I think that's the thriving force here.

Okay.

Can I just make a question or um maybe someone in the room can answer that?

Uh can you go back to that previous picture, Jill?

The sill of the door, I don't know what you call that.

It's sort of wider than the door itself.

And I'm just wondering if that is any indication of potentially a larger door that had been there.

Generally, I'm not a fan of changing the fenestration and larging doors and windows, but uh, and since we don't have something to prove what was there previously, I guess I'm just trying to sort of triangulate myself into is this something that could have been an indication of a larger door?

Maybe not at all.

I mean, the those little pieces are called a horn.

And they they are larger than typical in that in that look there.

So you may be onto something.

It may it may have been the original threshold was you know under a bigger door.

And the transom above the door, you said that was not included in the was that in the window report?

No, I missed it.

The transom above.

What's the plan with the transom window?

Is that I would like to leave that.

Okay.

It's beautiful.

It looks like a single-pane glazed uh yes window.

And so when you're revised window door report, it will indicate that that door is from the 80s or the 90s or certainly not original to the house.

Well, I mean, the house is 200.

I mean, I'll have them put it in the report for you.

Well, I mean, knowing the age of the door would be helpful before.

I mean, you can look at the door and you can decide this is not this is something modern.

Well, what would make you make that determination?

Just the the way the door's made.

It doesn't, it's not a quality door.

You know, it's not like it was done.

I mean, we've seen plenty of well-made doors that were done back in the day that stood the test of time.

This is not one of those.

So, Brian, when do you think the door was made?

When do you think the door was made?

I have no idea.

Are there any interior photos?

Looking at the door.

Do you have anything like that?

Or I mean, when I when we don't have any indication of things, we may I like to like open it up from the inside and see what is the framing tell us.

We might have something.

Can uh we have the can look for them right now and then uh we want to go back to it.

Are you doing any work to that interior hallway where you may be removing trim or not at this point?

Okay.

Uh I mean eventually there'll be like this was very uh basic on the inside.

It was you know, clearly at one point was made is a four-family for very uh modest living and so it's a very stock trim.

Putting very nice high-end trim inside and things like that later on.

Okay.

I don't know where the rest of the commission stands, but if we're kind of hung up on that, I mean my question would be what it what is the what is the house tell us from the inside, if anything, what is the framing look like?

Yeah.

Um, and that's where I like I said, if you'd like I could get a revised report and have that done.

That'd be helpful.

You know, or I can get better pictures of the door, and if you saw the door, you'd be like, yeah, this is not that would be helpful.

Photos of the inside.

Uh no.

I mean, those could come off in two minutes where um and so what's currently there is 32, 33.

It's a 32.

And you go into 36.

If you wanted, we can compromise it at 34, but you know, at that point, you might as well just make its code.

Well, I I guess my question is if we're asking for an updated window survey with the door in the transom, I think we need to wait to get more feedback.

Yeah, because my feeling is I can't make an educated decision on that unless I know.

Like it would be a shame if the door was a hundred and fifty years old and we threw it out.

You know, um we may have some pictures for you in a moment.

Okay, more information is helpful.

Yeah, I think coming from heritage would be appreciated by the commission.

Um, all right.

So let's we'll come back to the door.

Um so next we have on the rear, um, updating the fenestration, which is also tied into some windows.

Um, I think as you saw, obviously in the staff comments, the fact that this property has original windows is that are in actually um restorable condition is remarkable.

So that you know, the commission is definitely gonna be in favor of restoring wherever possible.

There's a couple that are noted.

Um, but let's talk about the rear, the south elevation and what you're looking to do with the fenestration.

Well, the three windows on the bump out uh on the back, um which are noted there, they said that they should be replaced.

So we'd like if we're able to replace them.

Um they're pretty in really rough shape.

Uh the window above it is also in rough shape uh and was noted to be replaced, I believe.

And then the window that is grayed out to the left of the man door, um, is in bad shape in um instead of replacing it, we're uh requesting that we're able to eliminate that window altogether, uh, which would allow that area there to become a bedroom.

Um next to that installed a new window and ES size window.

Um we'd obviously use architectural series wooden windows for that.

That the same size as the one adjacent to it.

Um looks a little large.

So yes, same size, yes.

The windows on this bump out you're gonna redo.

Is that right?

The post it does the one above it is also um just beyond saving.

The good news is the rest of the windows are south, uh, and as noted uh in the heritage restoration report.

Uh the ones on the front side, facing the the street side on the third floor are original, so there's still a note.

There's some really cool windows that stay.

They'll need to be you know repaired and stripped of all the bad things on them and recoded with more modern materials that the uh the lead commission doesn't like anymore beyond that.

Okay, so commissioners um on the south elevation.

Any questions or comments about what's being proposed about not only removing but updating those windows.

I think we need some more photos.

I do see a lot of the comments here that were made on the window um report, but either they didn't load for me or I just feel like and they're also very small thumbnails that I can't really see what's going on.

But I know several of the windows in question on the back are noted as poor, but replacement or reconstruction.

I have seen some very poor windows be reconstructed successfully.

Uh so I guess my position is where on the spectrum are they?

So the issue was that the that bump out had a water intrusion and water which is coming in the body, and um the end obviously in the course of the renovations that we solve, but um that's why when I just spoke about where he's like these are the ones, fortunately.

Um we would love to store it on the beautiful windows.

Um yeah, they look like they're really large, like floor to ceiling windows.

So and then I mean it's gonna be probably more expensive to honestly replace them than it would have been to repair them.

So uh, but just under the condition they're at, they would be all new anyway.

These are all this Swiss P.

Yeah, I I can tell that they've already been kind of frankens a little just from reading these.

I I recognize that uh you can push the glass and it's all dyspong.

You can push the glass and it's all just spongy.

So that window on the second floor, because I'm just looking at the 2.8 is an original.

That's the one that's and the condition of that one per the window report.

This is one that should be able to be restored.

And that one could then officially be moved to the location where we're putting the new window if it was okay with that.

We'd be fine with that.

That makes sense.

So on that second story and the first one where you're looking to take those windows out.

Um I see infill.

Can we ghost frame those?

So these little awning frame windows are from the 1800s for the report, right?

Oh, which ones?

So this on the back, there are several, actually on the back and the side, there's kind of a mix of sizes.

There's a small window in between the two on the first floor, and then there's this like awning window that you're proposing to replace with an a full-size window, I think.

Yeah.

So we're changing a lot of the verifration, and that is a concern of mine, especially when you have some of these like unique changes that were made over time that have kind of um acquired some historical significance, I feel, especially with them being late 1800s.

So I kind of struggle with those changes.

Uh it's just a sound like an 1850.

It doesn't look right.

I mean, I know it's a little fun, it's a little funky, but I actually think it would look side by side on the first floor um and eliminating the smaller of the windows.

I don't think you're wrong necessarily, but we're not here necessarily to make things look better.

We're here to uh preserve the history and also the history acquired over time with some of the changes that were made.

At least we'd be moving that window from the one on the second floor down to there, so we'd retain the history in itself.

And we are spending the egress with that spot.

On the first floor?

I just find that there's some uniqueness in these windows.

You you actually have a bit of a mix on the back with those smaller windows.

So it's unique in its own way.

And that's where I'm having some some trouble with taking those out and getting rid of them entirely, especially with their age.

If they were, you know, vinyl windows put in in the 80s, maybe it'd be it would be a little bit different, but I do feel that they are the little window there is one that's in the port to be the placed anyway.

Um which one on the on the left?

Small one on the right to the left of the door.

The awning window, right?

Six.

Because it's in two poor condition.

Oh no, that's one six per the one six.

It says good function, good, no damage, good function.

It looks like uh the two awning windows on the house.

I think they're only two.

They do report as as good and functional.

One, I've got two on the east side.

No, on the east side, one on the south side.

Three, the one above it.

I don't have the actual printout of the window component.

We are getting we are looking for an updated window report.

Is that right?

Yeah, I think if we're gonna include that to have the front door and the transom, we will have that.

I'd personally like some more photos or even uh site visit.

I respect the um the window inventory and everything here, but also because this building is I don't want to like go walking in the back and and you know it's easy to see stuff from the front side on the street, but that would be a little bit more helpful to me.

I just don't know that I can really make a decision on this because uh I'm leaning to no, in my opinion.

I mean, I think just the two windows that we're talking about on the rear, one six and one seven, the window evaluation, neither one of those is recommended for replacement or reconstruction.

Obviously, they need some updating, but to take both of those out, change one with a the double hung becomes considerably larger for egress purposes of the first floor bedroom.

Um just it would be nice to at least make life safety codes.

Um there's a way to at least do that, and if we were to uh window with the leave the window and light it up on the back side so it looks like a window do that.

So your programming currently, it looks like this is a kitchen.

So I mean, you're speaking about a bathroom, it sounds like or a bedroom.

It sounds like you're doing interior reprogramming that creates that need for the egress.

So for the commission, which we don't have purview in terms of what's going on in the inside, our priority is on what's happening to the outside.

Um but I agree with our preservation planner that it significantly changes the rear fenestration.

What would be appropriate that we could do because it is what you know that under that location.

Is this city requiring an egress window there?

Uh an ingress window.

If the bedroom is moved there, but I mean, I think given the condition of the windows, it's not lending to the idea of completely ripping out windows, putting different size windows there, ghosting other windows.

There, the the report, which we rely heavily on, is telling us that those windows uh that are from 1850 are in decent enough condition that they should be able to be maintained and updated to stay in those positions.

And that's what I'm saying.

If we it's possible to take the we're going to remove a window or um do anything, we could reuse a window and put it in that location uh to retain the um original windows.

Certainly we don't want anything good to be thrown up to the trash.

I think what I'm saying is that it's not about moving a historic window into another location.

It is changing that rear fenestration.

If you go back to the photo, those two windows, the small little hopper window, and then the the double hung is a much smaller window, then to take that window that's on the second story and now move it downstairs.

I mean, I appreciate moving windows, and when we have pockets and other buildings where it makes sense to they can be swapped without changing the actual dimensions of the windows, but that's a very large change.

Is there any recommendation that you could make that would be acceptable?

Restore possibly moving the hopper window up or um so at least windows stay in the same position, or I think we're just struggling with eliminating historic material, historic just stories of of its evolution that we're eliminating from this building.

We we probably know that that awning window there or that hopper window is maybe not original.

There may have been a uh one of these same this commonly sized window right below it.

It seems symmetrical in such a way, but there is something about how this building has evolved to have these certain features, and very early on.

Again, it wasn't just over the last not even century at this point.

I mean, we're would it be possible to propose a site visit so you could see it?

Because where this is located on the south side cannot be seen from any location, unless you are there, it's 27 franklines on the front, and there is another god-awfully ugly two or three family built directly behind the net spot we were building.

And there's all of about 15 feet between our building and that building's a very tight spot.

And I can promise you when you go in there, you would go into that space, you would not take anything windows.

Your eyes are drawn without a two-family or I see it, yeah.

This is so minor when we're on we're talking about it, but mean a lot to us for the ability to make our layout changes on the interior of the space.

I promise you you'd agree with me when you got there.

Like, yeah, I see what you're saying.

This is so minor.

And if a little site visit was warranted, I'd be happy to take you guys through.

Chen if I may say something um so I think that what I'm hearing is there there's some friction between the core tenants of the historic district commission and the applicant so for some context when you own a a property in the historic district as you know you have a couple that you must be a steward to that house so this house is 246 years old those original windows have been there for 246 years.

Whatever period of time that you're planning on making changes you know owning this property you're making changes for that short period of time of your ownership.

So the historic district commission is an advocate for the historic resource and I think that's where they're coming from the windows from 1850 you know we're talking about 176 years that they've been there.

So effectively this has existed in its manner for 176 years something we can't even really fathom you know more than our lifetimes and so I think that you know it it's close to the conception of the the country right so I think that that history is embedded within this property and the hesitation to make changes although it might seem oh we're just gonna move a window here or there actually tells a much deeper story so um think about the short period of time that you are going to own the building what is you know is it worth it and I and I uh totally respect the the uh opinion of course that that's why we're all here everybody that's in this room you know behind me and before me is asking to make a modification to a structure that was built long ago and would be here much longer than all of us got willing uh in so I'm just another person asking for uh a change to a historic building for it uh in you know I I do believe that these changes are minor and reasonable um you know especially with the windows the dormer I get that's a it's a discussion we're probably gonna have to have carry on with uh to find something that kind of works for all of us uh but uh you know the windows the door even you know the front door that's the discussion I think that once you see the report you'll see what I'm talking about we'll go dissect that for you uh but the rear windows would be um I just I think as long as we're retaining and using the materials really appreciate and pray that you guys could see the the need or use in that so let's go through the other details um we have signage HVAC um do we have details on those that we can bring up do we have details on those no no yes I don't have the HVAC in the plans currently um the H back would go on the um western side towards the rear um as out of sight as possible um yeah right there behind that right in that area doesn't the building next to it already have yeah and the building right behind it have their units in the same spot uh right behind us and when you say HVAC are we talking about a split or split unit condenser yeah okay so there's gonna be lines running up the building yeah lines running up the building to get into the property the interior we would not have a line on the outside how many condensing units um there may be as many as two but they'd be stacked you know they're like the the new LGBT systems are stacked uh don't uh like cycles two and one basically so it would be on this side of the building not on the rear because this is where it's quite visible if you're standing on Franklin Street more visible there but there's no space in the rear to the part we're making it so tight against the other building there um not a good spot for it or you'd be blocking those windows that that we're already talking about.

Um I mean, typically we would see that on an elevation with some sort of screening.

Yeah, screening out but I think for context in terms of placement and location.

It's tough.

That's real tough.

There's no room on the back side next to the bay window, is there?

Um the back side of the bay window over there, like in the around the corner there.

Really not in the room there.

You're blocking the windows that you're trying.

I see.

It's very, very tight.

Uh it's amazing.

I don't even, I still wonder how the approval to build the building right behind us with the budget.

Um before us.

That's tough placement.

With screening, I believe that you know, and I'm open to putting it wherever the committee would like, but I do believe that's the best spot with spring.

Is that something that we can um just knowing that it looks like we're probably gonna split and come back for some other details that you could add to the elevation with scaling and showing what the screening looks like for the HVAC?

What type of fence would the committee like?

I mean, something in keeping with the character, you might find other examples within the the district, some sort of lattice or fencing to cover it.

Um I think the preservation planner could also give you some insight into what that would be.

That's a cost minor thing, so I'm just open to doing what you guys would prefer.

Um difference to me in terms of material.

Okay, and then so we don't have any details on the signage.

Uh the signage, uh you guys may be familiar, it's the exact same sign that we have on our other uh two um places it's already gone before you guys uh at uh 199 Spring Street and 41 Pellin Street, Royce.

This will be um part of that uh that group.

Okay, we don't but Jill, we don't have that material in our packet.

Okay, so I think we're gonna need to see we don't have any context within this application of what that looks like.

It's a 27 by 30 inch.

I mean, I can show you pictures of it.

I would recommend so I basically I'm just kind of doing a summary of where we are.

So it sounds like we have consensus on moving ahead with the bulkhead and the faux chimney.

Um, but the rear dormer, the front door, the rear fenestration, the HVAC and the windows, and I would say also the signage.

We need to split the application.

We could get you approval on the first two, but have you come back to the other details if that works for you?

I I would really appreciate it if we could put the vote on the ace HVAC, and I'm willing to do the screening or whatever the committee would like, but because the design is so specific, the house needs heat right now, and it doesn't currently have it.

Uh so I mean that could cause things to get worse than honestly.

So really like to get things heated again um and get that part moving.

Technically, the HVAC doesn't require full commission review.

If you submit a mechanical permit, then I can review it at the permit level.

Doesn't require a certificate of appropriate list appropriateness unless it is uh mounted on a roof.

So you can just do that through a simple mechanical permit.

Oh, yeah.

Okay.

Then but what should the committee weigh in on where they'd like it to go and the type of screening around it?

As long as it meets zoning, and I will review the appropriateness of the location and the screening.

Okay.

Okay, so we could put that in with the the bulkhead in the chimney.

Sure.

If we were to and then conditionally, you can review that.

Okay, so to the commission, does that sound like a path forward?

Yes, sorry.

Okay.

All right.

So with that, I'm first going to request a motion to split the application of 40, excuse me, 27 to 31 and a half Franklin Street, um, into the first part, which will include the bulkhead, faux chimney and HVAC.

The second part will include the addition of a rear dormer, um, expanding the front door and elevation, the rear fenestration, signage, and windows.

So moved.

All those in favor of the splitting of the application.

Aye, aye.

All those opposed.

And so then I will request a motion to approve the first part of the application for 27 and 31 and a half Franklin Street, plat 27, lot 072, which includes an update of the bulkhead uh replacement of a chimney using the existing bricks that had um were on the original chimney and HVAC with the condition that screening be reviewed with the preservation planner.

Citing Newport Standard 17 TAC 8006014 5 and 7.

So moved.

Second.

All those in favor.

Aye.

All those opposed.

And then I will request a motion to continue the second half of the application for 27 through 31 and a half Franklin Street to our next regularly scheduled meeting on Tuesday, March 10th, 2026, which will also include an updated window evaluation for the front door and transom.

So moved.

Second.

All those in favor.

Aye.

All those opposed.

Okay.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thanks, guys.

I think since 1930.

So that's what I'm saying.

Okay.

Okay.

Four.

Three.

Three or four.

Oh.

And three.

This is the application for Mary D.

Desprez of 160 Webster Street, plat 36, lot 003, non-contributing for permit permission to replace existing garage door with new carriage style garage doors.

Okay.

And before we get you sworn in, I'll just state on the record that Commissioner Goddard has recused from this application.

Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?

So help you, God.

I do.

And your name for the record.

Spencer McComb architect.

Okay.

Um we were in front of you a few months ago for this, uh, some minor tweaks to the front elevation.

Uh we weren't dealing with the large 16-foot aluminum garage door that sort of dominates the elevation.

Um we weren't proposing to do anything with it, but as the homeowners been here and been doing the renovations.

Um just grew to dislike the prominence of it.

So you know, there's a couple of things that we could do here uh for it, but uh we chose a door that I've used successfully throughout the district.

Uh this thimble door.

We find that uh when we use a natural material for the garage door, they get beat up very fast.

Um just doesn't last um as long.

So then we're back into the synthetic world.

Um this uh particular door manufacturer that I've used a lot, uh both in the district and out, I think is uh is a great strong door.

It's laid up, it's not pressed or anything, so it's got a strong shadow line to it.

And uh, but as I was sitting here waiting to be heard, looking at that door on that house, I kind of thought, although it's you know historic and meets the meets the like the historic aspect of a carriage door.

I'm not sure it fits with the door with the house.

Um and so my suggestion would be to not have the divided lights that we show on this because I don't think they are reminiscent of the rest of the style, and just leave those as full lights there.

So still have the group board, still have the definition that breaks up that elevation a little bit, but just remove those divided lights that happen there.

And I'm typically on a historic district, we're talking about divided lights and want them, but in this case, I just don't think um given given a month to think about it and sitting here looking at it.

It's a better use of this door.

Um, I think it's an upgrade from the pressed aluminum uh 16-foot door, and uh so I I would like to amend the application with that aviat to just have those be four individual lights up there instead of the divided component of it, which I think would kind of square a little better with the rest of the uh fenestration on the house.

Okay.

I will start us off.

That was um, I think for myself, material was fine as proposed.

I do think that it's compatible.

Um it was about the styling of the doors.

I I agree for a 1970s and putting a carriage door with those divided lights didn't seem like it went with the rest of the house.

So I would be in favor of supporting with that amendment to um removing that divided light.

Um I would agree.

Uh that was my comment also.

I thought the carriage doors, although we've seen them, we like them didn't really fit.

So uh good call.

I agree.

Okay.

Yeah.

That doesn't look good.

Okay.

So with that, um, I'm gonna request a motion to approve the application of one sixty Webster Street, plat 36, lot zero zero three.

Um, with the note that the application was amended um of the style of the garage door to remove the divided lights.

We'll have four open lights at the top, citing Newport Standard 17 tact 80 tact 060 be one and two.

So moved.

Second.

All those in favor.

All those opposed.

Thank you.

Okay, thank you.

Okay, right now we're gonna just get right back.

Can I get through without a break?

Um we could we want to go to um looking for breakfast?

Or we could go to N5.

He was also recusing himself on N5.

Oh, where's Frank on now?

Commissioner would like to take a short recess.

A five minutes.

Okay, we'll do a five minute recess.

Sorry, we'll get ourselves all together here.

We go.

But it's still fine.

I'll survive.

I didn't even know it's fine.

It's fine, but it's supposed to be next one.

Oh well, is it close?

No, I did not actually have like that.

I think it can't be as well.

It's like indicated as exciting as a vacation.

But yeah, that's a lot of light work for it.

Yeah, there's a no.

Oh, that's what I mean.

I like it.

No, I'm good.

I just decided last night after I took down a whole like sleeve of cookies that I was gonna forego sweeps for the foreseeable.

I think I said for the year.

But dry January, no film, no benefit for the month.

Okay, no idea.

You know, sometimes you can take it to the park off.

But I did find the ice cream cake in the freezer.

There's half a bit.

Yeah, yeah.

I've been a little bit more curious than ice cream cake.

Oh, there's a tall kind of thing.

I'm sure I could sign the lots of those.

There are these ginger snacks that I explained for remote and blue.

Yeah, I've the entire bag of like 31.

Really?

No, they and I even brought my decent to the fence.

They run, yeah, just randomly.

Machine set.

Or to get them.

Okay, good line.

I was up there today.

There you go.

Then you eat ball.

Then you eat three banks.

Don't stop one.

Good thanks.

All right, we go.

Yeah.

Ray.

Ray.

Mr.

Goddard.

Mr.

Goddard.

Commissioner Goddard.

Please join us.

You're needed on the the day.

We're so close to the end.

And four.

Yes.

This is the application of Rainbow Chard LLC of 16 Clark Street, plat 24, lot 49, contributing for permission to replace 30-inch height railings and balustards with 42-inch height, code compliance, similar railings and balusters.

Replace posts to accommodate additional height for installation.

Replaced aged decking, replace lattice panels, and replace with raised pi panels.

Okay, and before we have our applicant um be sworn in, just for the record, uh Commissioner Bala has recused himself from this application for 16 Clark Street.

So Mr.

I will get you sworn in.

Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?

So help you, God.

I do.

And if you could state your name for the record, please.

Duncan Macumber.

Okay.

Okay, we'll have you talk us through the application.

If we could have you walk us through the application.

So this is a historical inn that was purchased by my clients uh approximately five or six years ago.

Uh we remodeled the inside um and uh made the rooms uh bigger and modernized them and but kept with the in with the character.

Um these are the same owners that own both of the Stone Acre restaurants and they have gone to great lengths to uh um give the place a lot of character while maintaining the historical aspect.

Uh the deck uh is in disrepair, the poster disrepair, the rail inter disrepair.

Obviously, the lattice on the front uh was something that was uh replaced many years ago.

It's a very cheap um uh lattice.

So trying to do is to um replace them with uh something in kind.

Um I called the building inspector and said um we want to replace the rails.

They are presently 30 inches high.

I asked him, uh, do we need to replace them with uh uh code compliant commercial railings?

And he said, yes, you you need to replace them with 42 inch railings.

That's what I was told by the building inspector.

And so I uh went out and uh um obviously the posts as they stand because they're square on the bottom and then turned up, they will only accept 30 inch railings.

So that's why we have to replace the posts in order to accept the rail stock that holds the spindles into the side so that they're secure.

Uh there is a history of uh people falling off that deck prior to these donors.

Um to the height 30, you know, normal railings are 36, and then of course they were raised to 42 inches.

Um the decking, as you can see, the decking is in great disrepair.

And uh they were hoping to uh replace that as well.

I have the uh the posts and the spindle on the balustrades are um ones that I um spec'd out are uh turned wooden posts, they're similar to the ones that uh were there.

Can you ask a question?

We see the decks and the railings a lot in the historic district, right?

We know they don't mean code.

Why are there some instances where the code comes up and others where we don't have any issue with that?

Yeah, I was gonna ask about grandfathering.

Yeah, so you can ask for a variance to the building code um based on historic precedence and its location in the historic district.

Um I'm willing to speak to the the building inspector to see if that's something that can be arranged.

Um if you're interested.

Um there have been instances in which people will um attach a like a top or bottom rail to elevate without altering the existing height um of the ballusters.

So I would recommend that an alternative be sought out or explored.

Or what type of railing, additional railing you could attach to that post there.

I mean, we could probably um retrofit something in there, but I'm not sure.

Um we're happy to do that.

The the uh clients are very concerned about the uh health and well-being of their of their clients that come and enjoy uh port and all the bars and restaurants that are down the street.

Um so that would be fine.

I don't know.

So you were talking about basically raising a railing up higher six inches, trying to attach it, which to me looks like would be somewhere in the bottom of that turn post.

So I'm not really sure that would be a good look.

Um but yeah, I'm happy to get the variance, but we're very concerned concerned about the fact that there is a history of people falling off.

Right.

Um it's up to you.

I can see to the building official to see if it's necessary.

Um so it depends if you would like to explore that option or if the commission is comfortable with the proposed changes um to the balustrade, then that's a different story.

So well, I I I personally think going from 30 to 42 is a a dramatic change to the look of the front of that building.

Yeah, and so I I would encourage your client to pursue something other than a complete wholesale change.

So if there is a variance that you can pursue to get that, uh I would do that.

I think that what uh the planner was speaking about is you could take the existing balustrade assembly and lift it uh maybe because that right now is like from the bottom rail to the top of the deck, it might be I don't know, two or three inches, maybe I can't really tell.

From the bottom rail to the deck, yeah, it's about it's about three inches.

Yeah, right.

So if you know, like for example, you could run perhaps a um a small base to it, then have a four-inch gap, which is a code, and then keep the same balustrade.

I know where it attaches to the columns, it will not be ideal, but I do believe those are original columns, right?

So if they are original columns, I think we'd want to see those saved, and if there's some sort of modification that can be made at the end of the rail system to marry it up to the column.

I think we'd that's that's what I would be leaning towards.

I just take a 42-inch, and I know what I understand what the code is looking for.

Uh but I think it's to the detriment of I think your client as well.

I mean, 42 inches is excessive.

I mean, I understand what code asked for, but uh I mean people aren't falling off of 36 inch or 36-inch railings.

I think well, if you want to just do three, yeah.

I'm I'm fine with that.

I'm going on the priority.

I mean, if I if I were you, building inspector and told them what we were doing and asked him what he went, and he said, Yeah, you definitely need to put 42 inches there.

I said, Okay.

Yeah, no, I understand.

Yeah.

Um I I would have replaced them just in kind, but uh that's what I would do too.

Well, I don't know if you if you uh I don't know if you can you can't.

I mean, if they're if they're salvageable, yes.

I don't know what all the materials on all of that are you know they're in rough shape and they're trying to do obviously that's the front.

Yeah, people check in or walk up to it.

Yeah, right now it's very unattractive, and it's typically 600 bucks a night.

Yeah, right now it's very unattractive and it's typically you know, six hundred bucks a night, and so they're yeah, no, I agree, and I but I also think that you know when it when it comes to the issue of it uh it being uh appealing from the street, you know, uh having a street appeal that the your client would like.

I think 42 actually you'd go in the other direction.

Oh, absolutely.

You know, so I I have no problem.

I got this I said to me, I could if we go 36, I would still have to replace the posts.

Right.

Um, why would you have to replace the post?

Because of the see where the 30 inch, see where the 30-inch top rail looks into the post.

Yeah, right there.

There is maybe an inch left between no good, but it it could be some way the final piece here could be some kind of scribe piece that would go up and vary into that profile.

But you can slide that up.

I think you could do that without replacing the post.

Okay.

That's something I would consider.

Okay.

Well, I'll I'll I'll talk to my craftsman and see if we can come up with something that doesn't uh I'm leaning more toward I really think you should consider the variance and and keep it as is because we're there are some modifications that you're going to have to make.

Then we're modifying what is still very much an original and intact porch.

The proportions to lift it on a on a porch like that.

Now you're kind of closing in that that porch.

I just I just think that it's gonna start to change the proportions on the building and complicate things even more.

I'm I'm not objecting to it whatsoever.

As I said, I I made the call before I proposed the uh to do the work on the building, like all the building inspector, and this is what he mandated.

And I said, fine.

You didn't say anything to me about variance or anything like that.

So happy to go that avenue and replace it in in time.

And see why or preserve what you have.

What's that?

Or preserve what you have?

Do you you feel that you need to replace it?

Or uh, you know, because we we are here to repair before replace.

Um I'm I I'm uh you know, I'm gonna have to that I didn't consider that because I was under the impression that we were going to replace it.

So there didn't seem to be a lot of rot talking in the uh in the balustrades themselves.

Yeah, they're they're the posts and the balustrates are are yes, there are a lot of them that are are rotten and for me to try to replace them.

I mean, if we're happy, I can get I can get the balustrades that I spec'd out before, I can get them in shorter lengths.

And and I can duplicate that railing.

Right.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Right.

However, we do like to see that what's existing is repaired before we placed for a number of reasons.

Um I don't know the condition of it.

It looks in the photos to not be so poor.

Yeah, you know, we're talking about replacing old growth wood with something more modern that is more susceptible to rot.

Let me take let me reassess it.

What there being I think that would be appreciated.

Okay, so then let's talk about the decking material.

Yep.

So uh obviously the deck is in disrepair.

Um needs to be replaced.

Um the problem is underneath it's it's exposed.

We've actually painted that deck uh in the four years of painted twice.

And uh wearing away, maybe it's wearing away and get disrepair.

So the deck is beyond that decking is definitely beyond repair.

It looks like it, yeah.

I'll go the decking that I proposed was a decking that I researched that's accepted by many different uh historical commissions, and uh it is a composite, but uh if that's unacceptable to this historic commission, then the problem of course is that the decking is up off the ground by five feet.

There's a whole lot of moisture that gets in underneath it.

The type of wood that they make for decking nowadays is you know, not your type of same as the decking that you used to get many years ago.

It's much softer.

Um, but um that would be decking it that basically the material that can repair a lot of historic commissions use that, but um you guys feel like it's unacceptable, and we'll go back to the wood decking, and unfortunately it just doesn't last that long in that present location.

Yeah, typically you know, in the historic districts, we don't go with uh you know composites.

It does look like a decent one.

I don't know that we've seen it here before.

Um but you know, maybe uh mahogany or something like that, you know, would last a little bit longer.

Okay, you know, versus you know, something you're painting.

Yeah, especially a front-facing porch.

Um there's times and scenarios on the rear properties we might have approved an alternative material, but this is a very prominent.

Would you guys be okay if we put mahogany decking in there if I just left we left it natural?

Yep.

Yeah, done.

Okay.

Okay.

Sounds great.

Um and then let's move down below to the paneling.

So here um you're proposing to you replace those lattice panels with raised panels, and I think we had some photos.

Well, I tap some photos of some raised panels, but you see that quite a bit around, you know, there's actually right next door.

Uh we would leave the uh um brick piers exposed.

I saw there was a note in that.

Say that again, Duncan.

I'm sorry.

There was a note in the uh the brick pierced.

Yeah, about the brick piers, and we would leave them exposed.

Okay, yeah, that's what I was gonna suggest.

If you just budget your paneling into those, and they stay right in the middle.

I think you're you're a golden there.

Yeah.

That's the way I was looking at it.

Do we have any historical photos of the building?

Uh yes.

Oh, how did I miss that?

Oh, with the step again.

That's the same outs.

So much lower.

Well, in my opinion, is anything's better than lattice, so yeah.

Panel is fine with me.

Yeah, don't put the fence back.

Yeah.

Come on.

Can we trade on?

Yeah, exactly.

And the the panels are also gonna be painted wood.

Yes.

Okay.

Yeah, there you go.

Are you thinking flat panels or or a groove tongue and groove type uh look?

Um, I was just gonna do flat panel, but uh the tongue and groove would probably look nice as well.

I was just you know trying to keep it simple.

Uh yeah, you know, I'm I'm opening it.

I'll I'm open any record.

The only the only reason I would suggest tongue and groove is because it's a relatively large panel thing.

And I feel more large panels tend to distort a little bit and they tend to start to look a little bit wonky.

And if you can put a you know, shadow lines in there that would help to sort of take your eye off of that.

I would say that's a good call, right?

Uh yeah.

I'm good with that.

And the panel that sort of overhangs the house where the stairs are.

Are you intending on keeping that?

And is there a reason why it's there?

Where are we talking?

Uh you can't really see it in that photo.

Uh that the one on the right.

Maybe it was there for a handrail.

It's just kind of like oddly protruding from the from the side.

And I'm just trying to envision how that's going.

You know, what you're gonna put a panel there.

Now I I understand that that could have been there for a long time and acquired some historical significance, but I'm just trying to like understand the plan there.

And if you're just gonna put a panel and it's gonna stay the same.

You know, obviously uh we've got a client that's running the business there and keeping me on a budget, so um you know it's it's it's a part of it.

Uh yeah, I'm agree with you 100% on what we're looking at it now.

It's like um, but you know, maybe with the paneling on there, uh you know, could it be removed?

It could probably be removed and then just have the railings come down on each side with a noodle post there.

Right.

Uh we are um we are going to get rid of those railings.

The rod on it.

All right, yeah.

Okay.

Do we have a replacement product in mind?

I don't have one yet.

Okay.

I'm I'm also noticing that little lamp there.

I don't know.

I'm assuming it it illuminates and you have some electrical now within that lock.

So I don't know how reasonable it is to remove it.

We could the wires money underneath it against all those whatsoever.

We'll we'll we'll come up with a uh uh something.

Obviously, you're on a street there.

We want the light.

Well, now it starts to make me wonder how long that that that's been there.

It doesn't appear that it's in the old photos, so maybe it's not a historic I was pretty cheap.

Right.

Yeah, and I actually, quite frankly, uh you're just looking at it, focused on it right there.

I see no saving braces for that wall and corner whatsoever.

And I think everybody would agree that that could go away.

Um it would probably uh just go straight down from the last post.

Yeah, yeah.

But then, of course, what I would have to do is finish the stairs.

I would have to try to find a new old uh that would obviously be comparable to the original deck posts.

Sorry to complicate everything because now I'm thinking we might want to see what that's gonna look like.

Uh and the handrails, like kind of that whole stair.

Can you Jill go back to the house next door that had the paneling?

Just squeeze over there.

Not putting one of those in the boat, we'll do the turnboat.

Also, you're gonna have to think about how the railings are going to interface with this because it looks like so.

There's maybe a little more work in terms of railing.

Um I think the building code does require some balusters in there.

Um, double check on that.

Yeah, I mean, I do I could go either way in terms of keeping or removing that last section, but I do think removing it's gonna create some challenges for the applicant, right?

I mean, I would I would venture to say that for everybody's sake, would they be happier just leaving it and filling it in with the paneling?

I mean, I would be in that case, that's fine.

Take out the light.

I mean, I think we're making great if we're gonna pursue a variance on the railing and have all wood decking.

I think that we could go with moving that or keeping that.

So just to summarize what we talked about relative to how the application was presented, um, looking into a variance on the railing height to maintain the existing 30-inch height.

Um ballusters to be restored where possible, otherwise matched mahogany decking, and the we will keep the brick um piers and add a tongue and groove wood paneling.

If that summarizes it, okay.

Have I covered it for everybody?

I think so.

All right, so with that, I'm going to request a motion to approve the application of 16 Clark Street, lot 24 lot 049, as presented, um, with the condition um that application the applicant will pursue a variance on the railing height at 30 inches.

Um, original ballusters and posts to be restored, uh decking to be replaced with mahogany, and we will be adding a tongue and groove, uh wood paneling, brick um peers to remain, citing Newport Standard 17 TAC 80 TAC 060, a one, two, three, four, five, and seven.

So moved.

Second, all those in favor.

Aye, all those opposed.

Okay.

Thank you.

Okay.

We get oh, there's my friend's coming back.

Okay, and with that, we will move to application and five.

I'll ask our vice chair to read the application, which is a long one.

This is the application of Jacqueline Ivory.

Eleven Gurney Court, plat 12, lot 20 contributing for permission to replace trim and siding in kind.

Remove all existing vinyl replacement windows and place with new marvin ultimate wood windows with simulated divided lights.

Remove existing front door and replace with new double door.

Remove door on the south elevation and replace with new double door.

Remove existing deck boards on south elevation and replace with new wood decking, demolish the existing bulkhead and replace with glass bulkhead door.

Addition of a new stone chimney on the north elevation of the shed for proposed outdoor cooking unit.

Remove existing shed door and replace with new Dutch door.

Add skylight on the north elevation of the main house and west elevation of the garage.

Replace all skylights in kind.

Add new HVAC on west elevation of the main house, remove existing vinyl glass patio door and replace with new wood French door.

Existing siding at garage to be removed and replaced with shingles.

Remove existing garage doors and replace with new doors and windows.

Okay, and I'll just state for the record that Commissioner Goddard has recused himself from this application.

We have Mr.

McComb is back.

Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?

So help you, God.

And if you could state your name for the record, please.

Okay, welcome.

Okay.

So the majority of the work on the uh contributing house.

Um there is uh shed and a garage that are not contributing, which we're doing some work too, and there's some landscape features that are also part of this.

But um I'm gonna focus most of what we talk about to the contributing house, and if there's anything else, other ones happy to mention those.

Uh the majority of the work stems from Anderson replacement windows and doors that are throughout the home.

Uh those are the replacement kind that sit inside the existing frame of the window.

So we're proposing actual windows, uh, which would be removing the old frame and the replacement window and replacing with a Marvin ultimate wood uh window.

And that's basically wholesale around the house.

Um even the front door was a vinyl Anderson window.

And so um I think the biggest proposal change is that double uh window in the front, which uh in reading the staff report, we you know had a conversation about that um and agree and looked around at some of the other double doors in the point, and uh the the difference it's a it's a the existing windows a full light patio door essentially.

Um and so we were kind of doubling that to get more light, but in looking at it and sort of thinking about other buildings in the dis in this in the point area, actually.

The double doors that were used were typically a divided light window with a panel below, similar to that style window door they have there.

We have some pictures of ones around the area, but we have a door picked out that is like that in the packet.

So we're proposing of using that door instead of this double patio door for that front door.

Um and so uh we think that just a little bit more harmonious with it, it still gives uh still gives the uh the extra light, which the owner's looking for into internal to the house.

Um we go to the next sheet as a single door, not as a double.

As a single door, though, not as a double, or we'd like to talk about it with you.

Okay, that that style door, but in a double scenario, which is pretty consistently used around the point as a double door.

Um we'd like to talk about it.

Okay, and then I'd like um the owner to kind of give a general sense of her reason for doing this and kind of how long she's lived there, just kind of um let her speak a little bit about the foot.

She said sure.

Thank you.

Um, my uh my husband and I purchased the house in 2000.

Um, so we've gone on 26 years.

Um, it has been a huge this little house, has been a huge part of our family story.

My daughter um uh was 10 months old when we bought it, and she got married last month here at Newport.

So Newport is ordinarily.

Um the city itself.

I mean, I've been we've we've been coming here since I was a kid, so we are very familiar with town.

We are also very familiar with the preservation of the city.

Um, when we purchased this house, the point was certainly not in the current condition.

That this end of the point was a little was a little rough.

Um, it's been remarkable the transformation and the restoration that's happened.

Um we bought this house.

There was a uh from the the previous owners, the they owned Cozy Cab Company.

Um so they service the cabs on that property.

Um and he did the restoration um, I believe in the mid-90s because somebody wrote in the concrete basement foundation 1997, which we're pretty sure that's when everything was re redone.

Um and the addition on the west side of the property was put on.

So it's a primary bedroom uh and a bathroom and a closet.

Um but every single window and every door was replaced by Anderson vinyl replacement um windows.

Um I I believe the siding was also put on in the 90s and it's um cedar shingle.

Um and so the house was a rental for the military for a number of years.

Um and we would get to enjoy it in the summertime and then hand it off to another wonderful military family, and now we get to use it as often as we like.

We live in the Berkshires.

Um, but we love it, and it's important to us and we wanna work really hard with uh your cooperation to help restore um what it might have been.

I have no idea what it looked like.

We never I don't believe there's any pictures of it uh prior to certainly us owning it.

I don't think prior to Miller owning it.

Um but it lacks some charm.

We'd like to put some charm back into it and be as um accurate as we can be and honor the neighborhood um and our street.

So it's a it's a lovely uh part of the of point.

And we we we're a little hidden gem on Gurney Court.

Nobody really even knows that it's there.

Um but we'd we just like to put some of the historic charm back into what we think was taken out at some point.

So uh the trim aspect to it is because we're replacing the windows, we have to re-trim them, and so on cedar.

Uh we have with windows.

So I think it's uh it's gonna give the house an upgrade from what I think was a lot of that texture missing with the vinyl replacement series that was in there.

And um you'd like to discuss the double door, we're um as we talked earlier.

We want to be respectful of everything about this house, and and so we just wanna have that conversation with you guys.

Um and if there's any questions on the non-contributing section and some of some of the landscape feature stuff and the makeover we're doing at the taxi cab barn.

Um questions and comments.

Mr.

Madsen, please.

Uh no, I think it's you know, a very interesting project, and you know, I live in the point as well.

And in fact, I knew about the building because the person that uh owned it when it was a cozy cab, he still lives in the point on Elm Street.

Yeah, it was right behind me.

Yeah, yeah, I think he does.

Yeah, because he told me it was a cab company there and he worked there, and his his mother was she just passed away that lived on the corner there.

Elsie, you probably know her.

I did not.

The little old lady, she was a hunter.

Anyway, so that's what it was, right?

It was it was a a taxi cab place right there.

So uh I guess it I think you've done a good job in terms of the design.

Spencer's bringing it all to all together, and it really does need to be uh revitalized or uh restored because it is an interesting street, and you're gonna get a lot more uh views, probably, because you're gonna have construction going on in the warehouse and then the other folks across the street, they want to right next to you want to do a big addition as well.

So it's traffic's gonna be a problem or parking, you know, over the construction period.

But uh the only thing when you come around the corner, I guess with a double door.

Uh it it just is it would be evident to me that it wasn't a double door, that it would a single door seems to fit there with the spacing between the two windows on the uh either side of it.

Um, I'm not totally against it, but it's the only thing I would see that's um would be a uh an issue.

And then I was kind of concerned what what's the second chimney?

Is there a new chimney going in as well?

I thought there was only one.

Yeah, there's a proposal for uh uh fireplace for that fire.

Okay, because that uh I didn't see that in the right-up in the rear room.

Okay.

So you see it.

I don't think you're we see it, but in in street elevation, see it.

Right.

That's gonna be relatively similar to the one that's existing.

Okay, nothing fancy to top or anything like that, or just kind of borrowed the existing same line.

So that was actually a comment that I had.

If there is a way to differentiate that new chimney, so that it doesn't give a false sense of there having been another chimney on the building.

It could be also exactly just some point of reference that creates a differentiation.

But that's the only comments I had.

Okay.

Mr.

Bell.

Um are those doors recessed on or are they on the same plane?

I couldn't tell.

They're not resets.

They're not resets.

Okay.

There's a house on chair that has double doors.

Um and I've always my husband and I have always admired that.

We do struggle with light in the house, oddly the way the sound has that's the first door is fairly dark.

So we thought this was a kind of creative way mirroring what other houses in the point have to add additional light to uh space.

Um since we're talking about the double door, I I agree with Mr.

Madsen that it does feel very appropriate to have this single door.

I don't know if adding side lights so that you're maintaining the single door, but maybe having an opportunity to bring additional light in without having two doors is something to consider.

Um I mean it's interesting, it's not an old farmhouse, but that porch and the single door to me reads a little bit like a very simple modest entry and creating just having the double definitely changes that character, but that's just an idea to put out there.

So a single door in the center with two side lights, yeah.

That same portion with the panel, I think would net the same amount of glass between them.

Yeah, I mean it's it's it was a thought primarily because there are so many charging houses in the point on third and on cherry that do have those doors.

Um but it you know it's not on the main addition for what this restoration is, then I'll yeah we'll go with your idea.

Other feedback I would I would agree, I think a single door is a little bit more appropriate.

The double French doors make it feel like it's the rear of the house, like I'm looking into your backyard, and you may use it for that, and just because of the way the lot is out of the room.

I'm sure it's right.

And I I get that part just for to the usability of the flow outside, but at the end of the day, it is still the front of the house.

And so I do think that keeping a single door there is critical.

Um the side lights.

I suppose I could support.

Um and you you didn't look to procure a historical report, did you, or see if they had any historical photos of this building on file somewhere?

No, there's nothing original or historical about this little house and things uh probably shape or not exorbitant saved it, actually.

I think it's probably going in that direction, but not a okay.

Yeah, I mean it was flattened a little bit probably in the 90s, and I'm hopefully with a little bit more, you know, even just the muntains in the windows, I think will bring a little more character back to it.

So I think that that's gonna be an improvement.

So um was there the porch was probably not part of the original house that was added on in the 90s.

Decking is is um fresh-sweeted wood.

So I'm saying that on the down.

Um so uh yeah, we're doing all we can to try to put back the way up best we can.

What's currently there without charm of the house.

So let me just ask Spencer, maybe you can speak to this.

Uh right now, you know, with a single door, I don't know what the dimension would be there, 30 something inches, and then we would be doubling that more or less, even with just the side lights, or do you know kind of how because I'm kind of I'm looking at the opening itself, and it's really apparent with the white trim in that dark space that I don't know how that would look with it widened or if it would affect the curve wheel.

I mean, with the with the porch, it's always gonna be in shadow, so it's not gonna be as strong.

That's true.

It's kind of hard to see what's happening at that door.

I mean with the with the porch it's always going to be in shadow so it's not gonna be as strong that's true took it's kind of hard to see what's happening at that door but I do um I do think that you know having side but it's on a house of this size in scale would be something that would definitely happen in new board in this era.

So I don't think it's mixing some odd um I mean the more I see the the patio doors at the front I think that wasn't the right move this would this would uh be something that would fit with the house and get her some extra light in there and be appropriate.

You want to play around with a trans in on it as well but that's doesn't look like there's space ceilings.

Yeah I don't think I have enough height right and and it's gonna be right against the ceiling of the works already I think we have more height definitely get that um is there is there other questions yeah I don't want to I want to continue to get feedback on the door scenario um I think of all the options I think that with double side lights would really help with the light issue and also yeah character with the neighborhood with the I'm sorry guys I just had one question about um what's the material for the replacement garage door the garage door yeah oh it's um you have it yeah we have it's yeah it's the same garage door we talked about at the last one um it's a built up uh dimensional um door that I've used in the point a lot this being a non-contributing uh building seemed appropriate to use something that was not wood given that those doors get destroyed very quickly when clad that way so it's built up PVC you can see what it's replacing it was the big overhead garage doors yeah do we have a site plan that shows the three buildings together I was gonna ask the same question it's a bigger property I thought it was less it's an odd lot the way yeah it's shape and let's stick a shed in the middle of it yeah there's a shed right on the street yeah exactly shed right on the front front yard um commissioners any other questions on the garage or the the shed do we know the sorry I'll ask my own do we know the age of the shed I know it's not contributing but no from 1960 then we think it'd be 1980 yeah it didn't show up on the sandborne of 1950 so any time after 1950 likely okay so the proposed um outdoor grill that will be facing essentially the front porch it'll be in sort of that courtyard area okay it's a big project okay any other questions or comments I guess just one on the on the garage is that gonna be an accessory dwelling unit or anything we need to be aware of it we're turning it into um the extended band so it's not the we don't okay no kitchen facility or that change anything Jill I don't no okay we don't have any existing garage photos in the packet do we why why didn't I see those well they had a drawing yeah just the drawings existing condition pictures of the garage I don't see any there it doesn't look as good as a drawing and maybe one on the Google street here but we took some I don't know why they didn't make any back and the materials on the garage are still going to be um cedar shingle okay it just kind of starts to look like a storefront a little bit to me but it's hard sometimes to look at the the plans or the renderings they don't give you a very accurate representation of what it will look like so I guess I'm just trying to still understand what the final product is going to look like there.

It just kind of starts to look like a storefront a little bit to me, but it's hard sometimes to look at the plans or the renderings, they don't give you a very accurate representation of what it will look like.

So I guess I'm just trying to still understand what the final product is going to look like there.

When it sits way back behind kind of the other house, too.

Yeah, and that's the other thing.

I mean, we can't even see it in any of the pictures here.

So and that's not a contributing structure, correct?

Yeah, so it's a single pitch shed wedged into that back corner.

It's basically on property right on three sides.

Um, and it's one big garage door and one medium-sized garage door, and that's virtually it.

So we you know, this being their home and seemed like not really you were running a cab company if you run a camp company be the greatest.

So we just gave it a little personality having more residential view.

But that will and that, but that will still be a functioning garage.

One side will be one side equipment, one okay.

Okay.

Right with a newly married dog.

Right on the custom branch over there.

Yeah, well, it's great.

Brooke, anything?

Yeah, no, I support this application.

I I think that the um the light on the side of the door is a nice kind of compromise that will give you the light.

Um yeah, I think it's a really nice design.

I'm a little hung up on the garage, I'll be honest.

Um I know that it's really not all that visible, and it's not a contributing building, but again, something just looks like a commercial building to me.

So, and again, just having a little bit of a hard time envisioning it in its final form.

But otherwise, I the rest of the project as we've discussed, I'm very much in support of.

I mean, I I understand what you're saying because the the standing seam detailing over the window.

I it does give a little bit of a sense of a storefront, but maybe that's what it is.

It's over the window.

Normally we see an overhang over the door.

This door has a transom window.

I I'm initially just think of again a commercial space.

Um maybe I mean, if I'm the only person that has concerns over this, then maybe we don't need to get down go down that road.

But I personally would love to see a couple of small modifications, but not too.

Well if you extended the awning over the uh door too.

I was thinking over the door or over the garage, maybe more so than the window.

I mean, I would have loved to have torn it down and built something much more in accommodating to what the neighborhood is.

We do that and then we're at the stop of the bed.

Oh, yeah, you don't want to go take it out too much because we tried to come up with a with a yeah, I have a structure as it is, which it is a shape or forming.

There's not been a failing since it was built.

So we just thought maybe picking up a little shine off the front.

I mean, it's a it's it's not a great structure.

It definitely needs something.

Like an awning, like some you know, decorative corals or something.

I again just having a hard time like envisioning it and just wouldn't want it to like look kind of awkward, but what about a porch on the front there?

I don't know.

Match the main house.

I think it's just you know, maybe we were hung up Kelly's on Third Street.

There's a couple of properties that that were little stores, right?

And they look just like that, right?

Kind of thing.

So is it kind of conjecture, you know, that it's something that wasn't but yeah, I'm having a hard time putting my finger on it, but uh I think it's cool.

If I'm the only one concerned about the garage, then I don't want to hold everything up here.

Mr.

Bowl.

Maybe you could use the same context as the garage door in the opening and have it look like a garage door but function as man doors and other words, if you were to duplicate the door that you have there, and maybe it's three wide opposed to two wide, it's got glass in it.

And have it look like a garage door but function as man doors and in other words, if you were to duplicate the door that you have there, and maybe it's three wide opposed to two wide.

It's got glass in it.

One is the operable door where it would read as kind of garage front, opposed to barrage front door and a window with an awning on it.

I don't know if if that would be any better and it would serve your function.

Why not here?

But if there is conversation to be had, maybe there's uh a plan to go to look into.

If you screened it with three with greenery, we put like edges or trees of some kind to not have a B still visible from the street.

Would that be acceptable?

I mean, I'm gonna miss Chen.

Do you have any thoughts on the garage as I mean it's a non-contributing structure, and you really can't see it from the street?

You'd have to be quite close to the house.

Um, like on street view, I can't even get down that far.

I didn't know it was there until I went down there.

It is tucked back, so I'm not as concerned about the design.

Um considering it's a non-contributing structure.

Okay.

All right, totally fine.

I think there's any number of iterations we could do that from the side.

I'm not sure it's gonna be better different.

Um I want to just start recreating a symmetrical right there, or just sounds like you can leave it with it.

It should be in response like that.

I think this will give a little light to where it'll feel less central and scale and um heads program behind that wall.

I've been space.

Is that we intend to have right now it's driveway all the way up instead of garage, so there's uh crushed shell all the way to that building.

Our intention was to have grass and green organic and landscape it so if you know screening it with additional marinery is more accommodating to the done.

So it won't function as a car garage anymore.

You know, one equipment in there.

We have a little 1979 books wagon beetle that fits in there.

Um anybody wants to buy a 798.

Yeah, I would do a bunch of those.

69.

Right.

I mean, uh, we we don't have purview over landscaping, so your prerogative if you want to put plantings there.

Um but I think general consensus is that as designed is good to go.

So all right, so just I think the two things that we talked about, um amending to have a single door with side lights um in the updated profile that you showed, and then a opportunity to differentiate that new chimney on the main structure.

Sound good.

And the the door style is changing to yes, to the um that one, yep.

We'll call it the halfway.

Yep.

Perfect.

Oh, it's all light now.

Yeah.

This would be if you I think that's I mean, going back to a single door.

Um it's either single door divided light or half the one way to start with.

Is that what the I don't I think the commission I was less worried about?

It was more about saving it to one door.

Um does anybody have an opinion about the style of door?

If she wanted to have if they wanted to go back to this.

That'd be fine.

There's a lot of those around.

I just personally still see a full glass door like that as you're walking out to your patio.

I don't know.

Any front doors in Newport that are full full light doors.

So that's where I get hung up.

I don't even, yeah, I think this option with side lights would be most appropriate as a front door.

I would agree with that too.

Yep.

Okay.

So we'll draw that up and we'll send it to staff and make sure it looks what we all talk about.

You can go with that, Jill.

Yeah, okay.

All right, so we have those two conditions.

Um, so with that, I'm going to request a motion to approve the application of 11 Gurney Court Plat 12, lot zero to zero.

Um, as presented with the condition that the new chimney on the main structure um be differentiated from the original chimney, and then the front door be updated to a single half-light with side lights, citing Newport Standard 17 TAC 80 060, a one three, four, five, and seven.

So moved.

Second.

All those in favor.

Aye.

Aye.

All those opposed.

Thank you.

Thank you.

No, we didn't make that record.

All right.

So our last um agenda item this evening, new business.

Um, we do have um, it is in our ordinance to elect officials for the HDC.

Um, so for the 2026 um calendar year, I'm gonna open the floor for individual nominations for the chair, vice chair, and secretary role, um, asking us to do motions for those each individually.

Okay, I make a motion to uh nominate Diana Amarillo as chair.

Second.

So moved.

So moved.

Second.

All those in favor?

Aye.

Aye.

All those opposed.

All right.

Congratulations, madam chair.

I make a motion to nominate James Madsen as the vice chair.

So moved.

Second.

All those in favor.

Aye.

Aye.

All those opposed.

And I make a motion to nominate Kelly Moran as secretary.

So moved.

Second.

All those in favor.

Uh all those opposed.

Okay, excellent.

Congratulations.

Thank you all for your service.

We should directly and Brooke is now a full-time member.

Yay!

We are so lucky to have her.

Thank you.

As of today, though, correct?

Yes.

Okay.

I just want to make sure I adjusted all my things.

Yep.

She's a full-time member.

Yes.

And yeah, so that's great.

Now you can close out the meeting.

Appreciate you all.

Okay, so request a motion to adjourn the Tuesday, February 10th, 2026, Newport Historic District Commission meeting.

So moved.

Second.

All those in favor.

Aye.

Aye.

All those opposed.

Thank you.

Do you have to take another sand in?