Good evening, everyone.

I'd like to call to order the Newport Historic District Commission meeting for May twelfth, two thousand twenty-six.

I would like to ask the secretary, Miss Moran, to read the role, please.

Thank you.

I have Diana Emarillo as absent, our chair.

Kelly Moran is present.

Jim Madsen.

Here.

Frank Bala.

Here.

Ray Goddard?

Here.

Bill Finley.

Here.

Brooke Richter.

Here.

Ben Willett.

And Dan Don Chamont.

Thank you.

I would like to acknowledge that Deanna is out today.

I've been asked to uh step in as the chair, and I've asked Frank Paula to step in as the uh vice chair.

Uh we have everyone uh we have a full slate today and uh and one alternate, so we're we're good to go.

Um I would like to confirm that Brooke that you've uh wherever you are.

There you are.

Please affirm for the record that you have reviewed all material for the continued applications, have watched this uh the prior meeting uh and are prepared to be voting with the commission on these applications tonight.

That's correct.

Thank you.

I would also like to acknowledge that Kevin Chavin is our uh is attending tonight.

He's with the uh city solicitor's office.

Uh we won't have an approval of last month's meetings as uh they weren't prepared in time, so we'll take a look at those uh uh next month at next month's meeting.

And we do not have any correspondence, Jill, I believe.

I would like to note that all applications approved tonight and receive a certificate of appropriateness uh issued on the evening of May twelfth, twenty twenty six.

They will be valid for one year from the date of approval.

All applications in this meeting have a public staff report, which includes confirmed location of each property within a Newport Historic District, record as a contributing or non-contributing building, construction date of the property, and character defining features.

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

So moved.

Second.

Any opposed?

Thank you.

John Street and ten, seven cottage street.

And I think that's all of them.

Do we have any uh objectors to any of those applications here tonight?

We do not uh I would like to then make a motion that these summaries that these applicants are approved, uh, in accordance with 17.80.060.1 through a uh seven.

So moved.

All in favor?

I any opposed.

Sorry, Jim, for um for an uh I believe there was one that was a non-contributing building, so N 10.

That would be standards B1 through 2.

Okay.

I'll redo that.

We have a summary approval for 7 cottage street, which is a non-contributing structure in accordance with 17.80.060.b1 and b two.

So moved, second, all in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed?

So move.

All better.

Okay, we do have uh a few abbreviated summary applications tonight as well.

Uh summary application or excuse me, abbreviated summary application are those that just have one or two clarifying questions of the counselors.

You don't have to go through a complete presentation.

Uh if we find the answer satisfactory, then you'll be uh uh approved and good to go on.

Uh if not, we'll just put you back into the sequence.

Uh the first one we have would be for.

Uh well, excuse me, I'm sorry, we have to go to no, we'll do those first.

I'm sorry.

Uh 17 Broadway.

Do we have someone here from 17 Broadway?

Jim, sorry, just before that, um, I just want to acknowledge that.

Um action item A1 of uh one cottage street has been continued, just to put that on the record.

It's on the record.

Yes, by agreement of the app.

Yeah.

I'm sorry.

Thanks for Matt.

Okay, come on up.

Are you good, Matt?

I'm sorry.

Okay, good.

Okay.

Wait one second.

Jim, yeah, why don't you go ahead and read in too?

This is the application of the Newport Historical Society of 17 Broadway, plat 17 lot 189 contributing for permission to install signage through the contributing site.

Would you raise your right hand, please?

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

She'll help you guide.

I do.

Please state your name and spell it, please.

Rebecca Bertrand, R E B E C C A E R T R A N D.

Got it, thank you.

Uh if you we only had a uh a couple of quick questions regarding the uh the application.

Sure.

Uh so uh who had the questions?

I guess rated.

Yeah, I did.

My so my my sort of concern or comment would be that you know, given the small scale of the uh the addition that's being put on the back that the sign is too big.

I I just think it takes up pretty much the whole width of that small addition next to the door.

Um so given the scale of the addition, the scale of the sign seeming compatible to me, but that's my comment.

Well, our intention with the sign really is to is for wayfinding to encourage people to use this new uh entrance.

You know, traditionally people had entered through the front door on Broadway, and now with the ADA accessible entrance here on Stone Street, it's really um to encourage people to use this this newer cigarette.

I understand.

Um to me it's pretty self-explanatory how to get it.

So I don't I don't need uh what is the sign?

How wide is it?

Uh I think it's about seven feet wide.

I mean, uh this one is seventy-five inches, yeah.

So that just that's but I I recognize that I'm pretty much the only one on commission that has an issue with it, so you good then, Ray?

Go and take a vote.

Okay, I request a motion to approve the application of 17 Broadway, plat 17 lot 189, as presented.

So moved.

Second.

Second.

All in favor?

I need opposed?

Aye.

The favorable take it, right?

Can you tell me why you uh so just referring back to the you know the guidance on signage and scale?

Okay.

Okay.

The uh application passes.

Thank you.

Our next abbreviated summary approval would be for 14 Leroy Avenue.

Right, Chair, if you could please read it.

This is the application of Newport Architecture LLC of 14 Leeroy Avenue Platte 36 lot 145, non-contributing for permission to enclose a small section of the rear porch with a stucco wall matching the surrounding wall and adding a small window matching the existing windows.

Thank you, and thanks for coming in.

I'd like to get you uh sworn in.

If you could raise your right hand, do you swear to speak the truth and nothing but the truth?

So healthy guy?

I do.

State your name and Mohammed Farzan F A R Z.

We got that.

Okay.

So I think Frank, you had a question?

I did.

Um the window I understand is uh Anderson Fiber X exterior window, which is not in uh the guidance uh windows that we would normally approve for use.

Um I understand that they it matches the existing windows, but would you be willing to uh use us uh acceptable manufacturer to match the windows that are already there with an acceptable different manufacturer?

Sure, that's a good point.

Um the real the point being that actually we have used um that particular window in the historic district with approval of the commission, of course.

Yes, but in particular case it's you're correct that it's not exactly the same as the previous windows, but the building is not contributing, and the previous windows have not performed very well.

This window is actually outperforms that and it looks the same because they all paint great, and when they're painted, they look exactly the same with the texture.

That's why we're actually preferring that to the ones that are after 20 years are showing sort of rot and damage.

So that's the golden effect.

As they start decaying, we may be in front of you again for replacement.

So the uh guidance that I'm referring to is the guidance that we passed, I believe, last year, uh, which was after the uh original application.

So the existing windows that are in the existing house no longer comply with the guidance that we put forth.

Um it's the uh exterior cladding of uh fiberx, which is the material that is of question.

It's a composite material, it's a superior.

Yes, it's not um your the type of window that was not approvable.

So it has been we have used them, as I said.

We have been using it on other projects as well in the historic district or non-contributing new constructions, and this particularly is a new window.

It's not supposed to uh mimic exactly what was there, which is decaying.

Yes, I understand.

My point is is that if I am looking at the guidance, I would not approve this window.

So I'm asking you to use an acceptable uh manufacturer which you can work with, Jill, uh to change that window from what you've submitted.

Um they're all production windows, and there's not nothing about them that's different between different manufacturers.

Understand these uh the production windows just like the previous windows were.

It's the material in the cladding, the exterior cladding.

If you look at the guidance of the new windows that have been adopted by the historic district, those that material is not recommended for use in the historic district, whether it's non-contributing or contributing.

I'm happy to work with Julie and finding an alternative, but we do his exactly the same shape and condition.

That was my only comment.

Thank you.

Okay, thank you.

anybody else?

Okay.

I request a motion to improve the application of 14 Leroy Street.

So moved.

Is there a condition being put on it or based off of Frank's I wasn't done?

Okay.

I make a motion to approve 14 Leroy Avenue, plat 36, lot 145, with the condition that the uh cut sheet for the window be presented and uh approved by the preservation planner in advance.

So moved.

We have second second all in favor.

Opposed.

Thank you.

You're good.

We also have an abbreviated summary for six sunshine court.

Vice Chair, would you please read the application?

I will.

This is the application of Patricia Leach of Six Sunshine Court, flat 12 lot 020-4.

Contributing for permission to add a fixed window to the wall where no window currently exists.

Okay.

I welcome.

Raise your right hand, please.

Do you swear to say the whole truth and nothing but the truth?

So help you God.

Please state your name.

Patricia Light.

Thank you.

Uh it's probably similar to the last one.

I think Frank, you had a similar same question.

I did.

Uh we didn't see any uh material on the window that you're proposing to use, and I'd like to just make sure that you pass that by the planner for approval before you cut a hole in the building.

I appreciate that.

Um so I was hoping to put in a window similar to this picture shown and find a salvaged window that's old wood and fix it up and put it in.

Um we are doing Pella windows in the rest of the house that have all been approved.

You know, I could go that direction if you wanted me to, but I'd rather um do an antique looking.

That's great.

Okay.

Have you um found any windows to go in there?

I started looking, but there's so many different sizes that I wanted to see if there were any stipulations before.

I don't want to do it too big.

I just want to add a little front, a little light to our front hall and some charm, because I think that would be kind of charming.

Okay.

Yeah, I I actually have one, right?

And so does my neighbor have one.

So I'm a I'm just um pop up.

Oh, you are?

Yeah, so I'll give it to you if you want it.

Yeah.

It would look beautiful there.

Right.

You actually have one?

Yeah, I think it might only be a two over two, but uh my neighbor might have a three over three somewhere.

Yeah, that'd be great.

I'd love to talk about that.

Okay.

This has no condition on approval.

No conditions.

On my basement.

Well, well, should we have some kind of discussion about the size of this window?

I mean, if she finds a beautiful uh stained, you're not planning on using stained glass.

No, I don't want to use stain, and it's also a pretty small space.

So, my ceiling kind of hit like I can't go too big.

Yeah, we should have to be approved by the preservation planner.

Okay, so we can put that on jail.

Okay, works for me.

Is that okay?

Okay, I request a motion to approve the application of six sunshine court, plat 12 lot 020-4.

Contributing uh with a condition that the window replacement is passed by the preservation planner in advance.

Do I have a motion?

So moved.

Second, second, all in favor?

I think you would you mind me connecting with you.

No, not at all.

There's should I just ask them for your email or something?

I'll knock on your door.

I'll bring it over.

Yeah.

Okay.

Thank you.

Well, we're about it all the time.

Just as a side note, when we're approving, I think we should be stating the standards on the staff report.

Yes.

Just uh moving forward.

Okay, but you had those, right?

17.80.6081 through 7.

Thank you.

Good quote.

All right.

Is that the last abbreviated?

I believe so.

Okay.

All right.

We'll circle back up to uh one continuing application, which is for 719 Bellevue Avenue.

Uh I will be recusing myself.

Okay.

This is the tech note.

This is the application part two of Inching.

Family Limited Partnership of 719 Bellevue Avenue Plot 38 lot 020, contributing for permission to enclose a large three-story deck and construct a 165 square foot deck.

Counselor.

Good evening, Mr.

Chairman, members of the commission, Jay Russell Jackson, Miller Scott Holbrook, and Jackson on behalf of the applicant.

You're familiar with this project.

We've been in front of you, at least for one full hearing.

And I know during the travel of this case, some of you had the opportunity to go out and do a site visit as part of a design review.

It became evident that the design that was proposed at the time didn't appear as though it was going to carry the day with most commissioners.

And there were concerns also, you know, some conflicting concerns about the fact that there's um sort of for better phrase, inappropriate three levels of decks that were built many, many years ago.

And although I think the sentiment was it'd be nice to see something done which was appropriate, what we had before you last month wasn't gonna get approval.

So we went back to the drawing board, and part of that process was um the design that's before you this evening.

So the architectural design was brought in-house by uh Kirby Perkins.

Um Helen Johnson is sort of spearheaded um trying to come up with a vision for this edition, which was more consistent with some of the comments that were provided throughout the process by commission members, both um at the design review as well as during hearing.

Um so the architects at uh Hull Cove, which is sort of the in-house architectural firm for Kirby Perkins came up with the designs that are before you this evening.

Um I know Helen spent a lot of time working with Jill since last month to try to um achieve through the design uh some of the concerns uh and comments that were presented um last month by the commission.

So that's where we are now, and we're hoping you'll take a fresh look at what's been proposed.

Helen Johnson is here to do a presentation of the changes and um uh the elements uh regarding this new design, and if you have any sort of technical um building code or contractor related questions, we also have Bill Murphy here from Kirby Perkins as well.

Got it.

Thanks, Council.

Helen, raise your right hand.

Uh do you uh uh do you speak the truth and nothing but the truth?

So help you guys.

I do.

State your name and spell it, please.

Ellen Johnson, H-E-L-E-N-J-O-H-N-S-O-N.

Yep, we got it.

All right, thank you.

You want to walk us through it, please?

Absolutely.

Thank you.

Alright, so after reviewing the previously proposed designs, watching the recording of last month's meeting and several design reviews with the preservation planner, a new architect was brought on to create a design that meets both the clients' wishes as well as Newport's standards for treatment of historic properties.

This new design incorporates details from the original historic structure as well as the previously approved 2022 edition.

We believe this proposed design meets the following standards.

Bear with me as I go through them.

Standard one, retain historic character, the proposed design does not remove or alter features or spaces that characterize the contributing structure.

We are in agreement with the staff report that the existing edition does not represent architectural quality or reflect the original details of the early 20th century building inchequency.

Standard two, avoid conjecture.

The proposed design does not create a false sense of historical development.

It references details from the 2022 edition and incorporates single-pane windows to delineate the proposed edition from the contributing portion of this structure.

We use the belt course and spindle design details from Inchiquin to pay homage to character defining features without creating a false sense of historical development.

Standard three, maintain significant alterations.

We do not believe that the alterations being made to the existing rear edition change any features that have acquired historic significance in their own right.

The staff report references the footprint of the rear edition feeding to circa 1903.

However, as also noted in the staff report, there have been significant alterations to this early 20th century edition since its construction and existing cladding windows as well as interior framing and finishes are indicative of these changes.

Most importantly, the portion of the edition that will be most impacted by this proposed design, the existing decks, do not hold any significant historic value.

Standard four, preserve character-defining features and workmanship.

We are in agreement with the staff report, which states the existing decks are not a character-defining feature and are inconsistent with the architectural quality of inchquin.

The current deck design does not have any distinctive features, finishes, construction techniques, or examples of craftsmanship that deserve preserving.

And finally, standard seven, minimize harm from alterations.

Instead of introducing yet another architectural language to the edition, we have referenced the paneling from the previously approved 2022 edition, thus simplifying the facades of the existing editions elevations.

Using inspiration from existing trim profiles, spindle details, and a monochromatic paint scheme, the proposed design seamlessly blends with the existing edition while clearly reading as new construction.

The proposed design allows the entire edition to read as subservient to the beautiful historic house it is attached to and will therefore be less expensive than the current behemoth edition of shingle and Victorian spindles.

And one thing to note, we did alter slightly the windows on the first floor, or I'm sorry, the doors.

We just brought them up a little bit to be aligned with that um French door.

So I have printouts of that if you'd like to take a look.

Questions?

Questions.

So I'll pass up the slight modification.

Thank you.

So if you have any questions, yeah, we gotta take that into access.

Okay.

So we have to make a motion to accept.

These drawings as exhibit A.

So moved.

Second.

Second.

Approved.

Hi.

Everybody.

All approved?

Yeah.

Okay.

Got it.

Um, speak.

Do you want to go?

Yep.

Okay.

Um, I think uh I uh reviewed this application.

Uh I'm not in favor of this application.

Um I wasn't at the last meeting.

Um I think the uh enclosing and putting a roof over non-conforming texts is going to set a standard of uh potential other applications for us to, if we approve this, to have a hard time not approving anywhere else.

Uh as I said in my last in the last meeting, uh the existing decks are non-conforming in size and and given the new zoning uh administration uh regulations uh and then uh adding walls, windows, and a roof to them is simply you know turning it into an addition.

Uh I think the massing of this addition has is uh there were several comments made during site uh visits about the massing of this addition.

I think the this adds to the massing, which I don't think is a favorable uh response to the historic building that this is attached to.

So I cannot uh approve this.

Any other questions or comments?

Uh I I would say that I I can go with Commissioner Bala on that same like I I could not approve it based on what I'm looking at.

Um, if anyone seven, I have to say I'm on the other side on this one.

Um I was at the site visit and um went through it at that at that time very carefully, and um I think you've addressed all the points that needed to be addressed.

Uh uh and you've um taken all the things that were mentioned at that time, and I think addressed uh certainly in a way that um I can support so okay.

I concur, I support this application.

I think you've really done a beautiful job of of taking something um that was very challenging and making it um much more appropriate to the land itself and certainly the um the main structure of the house.

So I do support this application.

I guess the comment that thank you very much, bro.

Uh the comment that I would make is that when I first looked at it, you know, you look at as a historic building because it's it's you know very historic for the city of of Newport, uh and it's a beautiful structure, but then you look at this building and I kind of look at it's almost like an apartment building next to a historic building, it really is.

So if in my own mind, if I separate those two and say we're really not doing anything to that historic structure whatsoever with this move, right?

We're not right.

We're we're bolting something onto this apartment building, it happens to be next to a historic home.

Correct, right?

And then when I looked at the, you know, and I can't stand the three floors of decks either, and I don't think taking them out's gonna be an option for your owner, right?

So then you kind of look at it, okay.

If the decks weren't there, you know, and you look at it through the same ones that okay, it's an apartment building next to you know uh a historic building, would we allow that or would zoning allow it wouldn't be us at that point?

So, you know, I would almost I would be approving this based on it looks better than the decks, but it's still just a building next to a historic building, the way I view it.

I don't think it's doing anything to the historic structure.

It does certainly to the scale and massing coming around the corner, but the way it sits back and there's high hedges and it's you know it's it's been pretty well.

We do address that on the second page.

Um, I know in the staff report there was a photo of what you can see from the street, right?

Um that is taken from a Google Earth bar where it's a 10 foot pole uh with a camera on top.

So we went across the street and uh had one of our carpenters take a photo of the exact same view, and also if you turn the page on what we just handed out, there's a very small arrow pointing to the um decks that you can see.

It's minimal uh in the view shed that you got the same picture.

That's my bicycle.

Right.

So yeah, yeah, you can't see it really.

And we do believe that absolutely it's going to blend.

Uh what I stated in my um review of the standards, I do stand by.

I do not believe that this causes any harm um to the historic structure.

Okay.

Uh do we have any other questions, comments?

No, I'm I'm inclined to approve also for the reasons that have been stated.

And I think the job of kind of inspiring from the Northwest Corner edition, I think really improves this from the last uh things that we saw.

We worked very hard with Jill to work through these designs and listen to what the commission said in the last meeting, and we were on site looking at what we could do to make this as minimally obtrusive as possible.

Okay, you ready to go for a vote?

Are you good with that?

Yes, sir.

Any other questions, comments?

All good.

Okay.

I request a motion to approve the application of what's the app 719 Bellevue Avenue, plat 38, lot zero to zero, as presented.

Citing standards, Newport Standards 17.80.060, 1 through 7.

So moved.

All in favor?

Opposed?

Aye.

I would say A1, A4, and A7.

I would say A1 and A7.

Okay.

It's approved.

Thank you.

Just a little.

It's a little cat.

Uh this is the application of the city of Newport of 365.

Parentheses zero.

Fame street, flat 24 lot 001.

Contributing for permission to remove existing glass wall and vestibule to replace it with a new glass wall and create new vestibule by infilling arches with storefront glass.

Brick floor will be removed and relayed to create a level floor within the vestibule, as well as an ADA compliant ramp with handrails.

Replace existing exterior signage on the north, east, and south sides of the building with new signs.

Three new temporary banners are proposed to be installed on the east side facing Fame Street.

Thank you.

Okay.

Can you uh raise your right hand, please, and state your name?

Uh Thad Samasco.

Okay.

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

So help you God.

Yes.

And can you spell your last name, please?

Yes, it's S-I-E-M-A-S-K-O.

Okay.

Would you like to start?

Sure.

Go ahead, please.

So, yeah, my name is Thad Samasko of an architect.

Um, and I'm working with the Museum of Newport History.

I have uh the executive director Becca Burtrend behind me, and Larissa uh is from H2.

She's the museum interior designer doing the exhibit work, and I'm working on this exterior change.

Um it's pretty straightforward.

We for functional reasons, mostly the AD access, but also the ability to use that sort of darker interior space, that darker cave kind of space, just pull the glazing out, gives the uh museum some functional ability to grab some groups before they go in.

Uh it gives us a vestibule for energy conservation purposes by pulling it out, and it gives us that accessibility off the side to come in.

We took the approach of taking what was done prior to infill those openings and continue that same system forward, uh carrying that banner that band line across and holding the glazing back so that the prominent super thick brick arches really stand out, and this is just more of a light infill.

Um, we we're not um everything we're doing is of course reversible.

Uh it's clearly not part of the original fabric, which is which we think makes sense.

Um and it's really um a way to get usable space for the museum uh as they as they grow, a little more, a little more exhibit space, a lot more functionality at that entranceway, and probably the major thing is the accessibility.

Thank you.

Counselors, do we have any questions, comments?

Um I think the intent of this application is terrific, and uh congratulations on uh you know making the space better and more uh usable in today's standards.

The problem I have with it is the infill of the existing arches with storefront materials and recognizing that the storefront on the other pieces of the building.

Uh, but this is a very predominant uh side of the building.

It's very visible, and I think in the building's use is uh kind of I'm high uh holding it as a higher category because it's a historical used building.

In looking at the um historic uh pictures that were sent with this, there were uh infills in the um arches originally.

They seem to be like maybe French doors with partial glass, the panel.

And I would like to see you go back to the drawing board and come with an application that gives a little more character to it, opposed to putting in the storefront.

I think uh for the you know the visual impact of this building, uh it's present uh in the town, it's occupant.

Uh I think we can do better.

Thank you.

Any other comments?

Yeah, I'd like to build on that because um as I see this building, it's a historic gem, right?

Um I believe the architect with Peter Harrison, and he's also the architect for Trinity Church in the Redwood Library, and this is probably one of his best pieces of work.

Uh, and I I agree with uh Commissioner Bell that we can probably do that, although I recognize what you're doing here is sort of replicating what's already been done on the north and south side, and and you want to do it also on the west side, but there's also something about the fact that it's an open air arcade that's sort of evocative of what its original purpose was, right?

As a market, and closing it in with glass, it and it's an extremely prominent location, right?

You just have determination of Broadway, you know, Washington Square, everybody stops and sees that building, right?

And right now it still has a little bit of that original sort of feel to it.

Uh, and I am afraid that by bringing these windows forward like that, you take that all away.

Not and I'm recognizing the fact that it has been done many times over the years, it's gone through a lot of different iterations.

So uh I feel like uh to me that front elevation should be left alone because it it it it destroys the historic character of the building by infilling those arches.

Um so the Newport Historical Society.

Actually, did we swear in before we did?

Yes.

Okay, you're good.

So I just wanted to add that the Newport Historical Society is the tenant of the city of Newport.

Um we have a 30-year lease on the building, and the purpose of this building is uh to be the Museum of Newport history.

Um, and currently there already is a layer of glass um that's within uh the the lower section, and there already is this glass vestibule.

And so all we're asking to do is to create this this vacuum seal, which it desperately needs for for wind um and to keep snow out and just push that out another uh uh a bit farther um so that we create uh a vapor barrier um and to correct uh what has happened and um over time over 30 years um from the last time there was a major restoration of the building and and level set the bricks.

Um so it's not that we're making any kind of real major change.

We're just trying to improve what has happened over the past 30 years and really keep the the beauty of the architecture of the building by only using glass.

You know, I would argue that it in is keeping the the nature of the architecture by having the glass maintained and and not adding not using any kind of conjecture by adding architectural elements that weren't there before.

Um there was a lot that changed in the building over time.

We have countless historic photographs of the building.

Um and so we're we're trying to keep it the most pure uh by just having glass uh because originally there wasn't any glass.

Yeah, sure.

I have to be sworn in.

Yes, you do.

Um right hand, please.

I'm sorry.

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

So I help you guys.

We do, yes.

Okay.

And state your name and spell it, please.

My name is Larissa Halgren, L-A-R-I-S-S-A-Hall Great as H-A-L-L-G-R-E-N.

And um I'm the owner of H2 Design.

We're the museum creation design firm.

So I'm creative director of this project.

And from my perspective, this vestibule creation is just absolutely essential to the success of the project.

And the reason being is the ADA access.

This will allow front door ADA access, which is not there at this point in time.

And for museums to be successful, accredited museums around the country know that we need to be incredibly welcoming from the get-go to bring people in and not to um only allow accessibility in the back door.

That's not that's not really the way we want to go.

So this gives us that opportunity, and I would echo um Becca's comments where we elected to use materials like glass, not to be disrespectful of the good points you make.

You make really good points about the storefront nature that this building has had at moments in time, but really to not compete with the materials that are present in the building and allow there to be uh really a celebration of what's going on on the inside and a little hint, not an overwhelming hint, something like there is now, just a bit of glass would be there to allow you to see what's going on in terms of the museum and be feel invited and welcomed inside.

Um so I just wanted to give you that perspective as well as you're thinking about this.

I would be inclined to agree with that.

I think if you did close it up like it is in that last older picture, uh that may provide some conjecture that that's the way it was.

There always was doors there, or it probably wasn't.

They weren't just open arches, and I think the full glass plane pane represents that in my you are I guess I'd say when I went and looked at the building, I'm struck by as you look at the photos, the arches are the prominent thing.

And our point, we had two points of departure.

One was to do what was suggested, which is filling it in with something, you know, wooden and more historic and more in that direction, or do this idea, which is almost making it invisible.

Uh and and when you look at the photos, you really see you very rarely almost see the glass in them.

You really just see these big big arches and the shadows they create.

So we purposely set the glass back.

We purposely kept it as thin as we could so that this does feel like you can see the art really properly the arches and not and even the the choice of the darker storefront frame, which was done before, was also because it just recedes.

And you really are seeing the the form of the building with this very light thin fill.

I'm afraid if we went to the wooden, you know, I say wooden, but a more traditional fill-in approach, as some of those photos showed, it would it would feel it would it would not feel like it would it was part it would feel more like it was part of the original building, which I know we're not trying which we know we're not trying to do.

Um so that that's why we took this point of departure versus the the more I'll call it the more historic route, if you will.

Right.

I I would argue that there should be no infill, right?

Because as it stands now, that has it like I said earlier, was is evocative of its original sort of condition, and that, you know, although you may say that when you put glass on that street facing facade that you won't notice it, that's certainly not the case.

You're gonna glass is highly reflective and there's gonna be lights bouncing off at night, and it it it changes its character considerably in my opinion.

I also would say that uh there certainly is a way that you can use ADA access within the given space, leaving the space open without having to enclose it, right?

So that's how I look at it.

I mean, it is an architectural job.

And I really do think the city really should pay attention to what they're doing before they close it in.

I think it was a mistake in in my opinion, to have closed in the arcade along the north and south app.

Um, but it that is done at this point, right?

Uh I I don't see where carrying on a mistake makes it any better.

I would tend to agree a little bit.

Go ahead.

Just a clarification uh question.

There's glass now, right?

On the inside, and there's a brick um kind of walkway.

So you'll be taking that glass out, you'll be extending the brick to the to the windows that you wish to put in, correct?

Yes.

Is that right?

The f the flooring now is is lowered up and it would be raising that brick up to up to threshold level and then coming down by way of grab to the sidewalk.

Okay, so there are arches inside as well that you will be opening up.

I don't think so.

No.

Am I wrong?

No, I think it's it's gonna be a glass box, right?

On the front.

No, the the existing arches across the front will be infilled with the glazing, and a perpendicular glass wall be added to create a vestibule.

Right, okay.

It needs a vestibule because of uh to create some kind of finance seal.

If there's no vestibule at all, then the first floor will have museum objects on it.

That wasn't the case in the past.

If you might if you've been in the space, there was a museum shop on the first floor where uh eliminating that top permanent interpretive experience.

If you've been in the brick market, you know there's no elevator in there.

So that's really limitating limiting for um a visitor experience.

So we're trying to have it so that people of all abilities can see uh a museum experience on the first floor and on the second floor.

Um so now we'll have a bigger interpretive experience on the first and second floor.

Um, and I I should add also that all of these restorations to the building um are being paid for by the historical society, not by the city.

Um, so we're raising the funds for all these um alterations for release.

Okay, so it's not going to be a store on the first floor any longer, and you are putting an elevator in as well.

We can't no, not.

So for people coming on their wheelchairs and crutches, they can only go on the first floor.

So we're only a little bit ADA approved.

Yeah, there is a tiny vestibule now on the first floor that penetrates uh into the space where the cursor is.

Right.

And it changes up a little bit of the footprint on that first floor now, which again was only a store.

So by removing that vestibule, we get more putting it or an accession experience, an accessible exhibition experience, but there wasn't an accessible exhibition experience all the paths with entirely on the second floor.

And the museum will extend from the first to second floor, and and one of the primary motivators was again in the axis, but the second one is the guy and someone footprint or exhibition experience, which gets back to the painting, it's also more opportunity to tell the story to break the street.

Um, and it's it's fairly considerable, frankly, like what we're able to gain.

And much more lengthening start to all the bits of any other comments regarding the entrance and door.

Uh so you're saying that you cannot make this ADA compliant without extending into the front arches.

Why I'm just trying to understand why it's not possible to make it ADA compliant at the moment since it's nearly flat.

You can add the ramp and not the vestibule.

And leave the and leave it open as it is now.

Right, and the ramp would be it could be in the same position as shown, just to not have the the vestibu the the entrance wall or in show the openings.

So this there's more to it than the accessibility that just happens to be, you know, one of the major components of the project.

Right.

The uh the other is as was mentioned to gauge space inside the second set of doors for the museum exhibition, but also to have an area outside within that vestibule where they can do you know, they can do some small exhibits and all and sort of generate some interest of folks who come in to come into the museum and enjoy it.

Isn't there a way to create a vestibule and I re recognize the airlock considerations that you're speaking of?

But it seems to me that you've got an awfully large vestibule just to create an airlock.

And is it isn't there a way that we could get a you know a ramp in there, which I think you've already shown with a much smaller uh if you want to call it vestibule airlock so that you can come in and approach it with a small little airlock in front without closing in the whole arcade.

Well the the accessibility guidelines are making these vestibules something like seven by twelve.

So yes, you could have a second perpendicular wall on the other side of the of the double door and leave that have that alcove left open.

Um I'm not sure what that what that gains you well it leaves it leaves the arcade open, which is which I think is an important element of the historic fabric of the that part of Newport.

It would leave sorry, we leave the ends of the arcade open, but the middle would still need to be filled.

No, what I'm saying is that I believe that the space within the floor plan to get the airlock and the ADA without enclosing the whole arcade.

If you look at this here now, what's in this fix?

Um from the from the from the word um and from the N of new to the left is space you would not need for a vestibule from the or from the letter N to the to the right, you would need to create a a vestibule with a proper clearance.

And you have their airlock in your vestibule.

Yep.

I'm just fundamentally opposed to the concept of closing in the arcade.

I think that does a lot of damage to the historic character of the building.

So I would never be in support of that in any iteration.

I would also agree.

I I understand where you're coming from, especially with the product that you chose.

I think if we're going to enclose it, that's probably the best option, especially to create sort of a disappearing to to emulate that those openings.

But um I think Mr.

Goddard makes a very fair point that it's I'm concerned about damage to the building, first off, that these are pretty permanent and are not going to last probably more than a few decades um before they need to be either replaced or taken out taken out, and then we're, you know, reconsidering what's going to be put there again.

Um I also think if you're considering flow of of foot traffic, that being able to walk underneath that building on the sidewalks is part of the experience of the history of that building and that that location.

So with some more consideration, I'm I I would agree that I'm not sure in closing this section is really going to do the building any justice, but I could be open to something within that space without closing the arches that would achieve your goal.

I um I support this application.

I think that the um the window is a um is consistent with um other aspects and uh alterations to the building.

Um I believe that cultural institutions like museums, they they need to grow and they develop, and as much as our job is to, you know, retain historic character, um, I also want to support institutions in having additional space and additional offerings, so I support this application.

Um I would agree, however, I think you're uh there's some um fallacy to what the drawing showed.

The you've made reference to in closing the arches with all glass, it appears that they are glass storefront with a metal panel below them.

Yeah, uh, which is not all glass.

Um, and the your ramp uh on the plan, I would just suggest that you'd look at ADA clearances at the top of the ramp and at the door.

Uh it seems very pinched.

Uh as I've said previously, though, I would not be uh supporting this application.

If if I may, um it's spandrel glass that's filling in the bottom, so the word glass is appropriate.

Uh and we we live and die by the ADA, and this this meets the ADA standards.

Well, it meets the ADA standards for a ramp.

Right, and access to the building, but it doesn't make it a compliant AD building.

Understood.

Right, because you're not gonna have an elevator, so you're just kind of you're really doing this to get more space on the first floor, right?

I mean, that's the gist of it.

You just want to be more space, right?

That's on the first floor.

It's been vandalized and has exits across all of the blocks.

And the um bricks will have to be replaced no matter what, because they're feeding them.

Right, that's repair work.

It's quite dark and um in a bit unwell for me, as it is now.

The way to last, but the glass that's there is a bit, it's kind of a funny thing that's up to this if we go so that kind of bounces the light back instead of letting you see the illumination inside.

So we we want more space.

We want to be more lucky.

We love it to allow me now under the door, and you get to have that accessibility on the front door on the first floor.

So I guess it's a number of issues which we're up, but more space is certainly in the middle of it.

There's a big story to tell.

So um, mainly it's the expression.

I'm trying to get everybody in the hands that can tell that full and complete story, and um may sound like it's not a lot to have the best there or not, but it's low and things with the management pretty significantly, but this really changes a dynamic experience with with imagined the first floor.

It's pretty good now.

Can I ask you what the rationale is behind having the spandle glass?

Sorry, right.

What's the rationale from the span for the spandrel glass?

Just New England winter wear and tear.

It's more more durable, less having to less having to wash and clean it continually.

To me, I mean, it just it just adds to to the I'll use the word because it's gonna sound overly dramatic, but it adds to the insult to putting the glass in it in the first place.

Spandral glass.

I mean, this is one of the most historic buildings, maybe in in the on the whole east coast of the United States, right?

And so I just don't think the right proper level of consideration is being given to this.

I just don't.

I I I would have the same feeling if you were playing around with the Redwood Library or Tranly Church or the Colony House or saying, Well, yeah, we're gonna put spandral glass in the trainer church.

I mean, I just couldn't support it.

I don't know why we would anybody on the commission would support that, be honest with you.

I mean, Peter Harrison's one of the more famous American architects in our history.

Right.

I mean, this is one of his preeminent work.

And with thick and spandled glass.

Something that in a couple years is gonna look dated and in my opinion, silly.

Can you tell me a little bit about this?

Glass.

I'm not sure I'm familiar with that.

So it's it's opaque glass.

It's it's something that you can't see through it.

Okay.

I've just never heard that word used before.

Yeah, so you'll see like it's a fairly common.

There you go.

Yeah.

Tinted glass.

Well, it's not even completely opaque.

Okay.

Yeah, it's completely opaque.

And uh it's a storefront, it's a modern storefront application on one of the most historic buildings in Newport.

I just don't see it.

Perhaps a site visit would be beneficial for some commissioners to kind of get yeah, a feel for the inside of the space and the exterior view.

We'd be happy to show you space, and so you can see the damages that have taken place to the building over time.

You can see the wear and tear that has taken place to the vestibule that's in there now, and you can see the heaving of the bricks, the vandalism that's happened to um to the windows, and also understand what our exhibit design is and really the service that the historical society is is doing for the city of Newport, re restoring this building.

Um and and the effort that we're putting in um to this work because we're we're raising two and a half million dollars um throughout this whole exhibition um redesign process um that we'll see over 35,000 visitors a year.

Um so it's a conscientious effort uh that that we're trying to put in place.

I recognize that and I'm highly sensitive to it.

I and I I believe Peter Harrison is an incredible architect.

No, no, I I I and I believe you're trying to do the right thing.

I just uh am in disagreement with the the approach that we're taking here.

Yeah.

Um and I well, no, I think we're we'll all have the same goal.

We're just like kind of coming out of it from different directions, right?

Our role is to protect the building right and preserve the building.

And when you start adding modern glass to it, that's doesn't align with preservation.

So we kind of look at it from that perspective as well.

Um but we'll be able to put that to to a vote if you'd like to do that.

We also have any other questions on the front elevation and the front door.

We do have a signage to talk about as well.

No, there's signage to discuss.

Yeah, there's some signage on the side that we need to talk about that, isn't there?

On the front the banners, the banners, right?

Yeah, the banners.

Those are for the front, right?

Okay, those go in the front then.

I can just say that these are temporary banners which were intended for our opening.

Okay, so that people understand.

I I can't tell you the number of times people say to me where is the museum of Newport history?

And so this really is for our for our opening to lasting year.

Well, they all know.

Yeah.

That'll do it.

Right.

So would it be permanent signing that you're proposing?

Or is permanent signage if you flip to the next page?

They're already that that signage is to be the exact same footprint of the signage that already is there.

Okay.

To replace it.

It's wood, it's it's broken.

If you're on the south side of the building, you can see that the wood sign that's there is completely uh split in half.

And has been broken for three years.

Okay, so that's replacement and kind.

Right, okay.

Yeah.

And the banners are temporary.

The banners are temporary.

Right, okay.

But it does say it's made of uh resin, so it's not a wooden sign anymore.

No, it's not going to be a wooden sign.

The the wood signs um they really rot, particularly the ones on the south side.

But Larissa, if you want to talk about the material.

It's sphenolic resin, um, and that's really a standard that's revised by the National Park Service and the state of Rhode Island and one state agencies for exterior signage.

It has a variable thicknesses, and it will look just likely with the sign in terms of parents, will replicate the design so it's it's it's the same book kind of the same photography and so on.

Um, and it has a technically a 30-year lifespan, even the manufacturer warranty if you're 20 years, so that it's a it's really a little bit of a that's a really good thing.

You don't want to be replacing it, you can have one.

Is there one going on the south side or just on the north side as pictured here?

So they're for yeah, it's for the south side and the north side.

So there are two one on each side of the building.

There currently is one on the south side and the north side.

Okay.

Could I ask what your schedule is, what your anticipated opening is?

We're intending to open on December 31st, 2026.

Um I might suggest that if you wish to take this application to a vote, that we split the application to the signage and the banners.

I would I would I would love to, yeah, because I'm using signage and banners and promotional materials to advertise and and to the great.

Okay.

I'm trying to pull up our sign.

Yeah, I couldn't find it either.

Okay.

So in the effort of time, did anyone go through this before that I did not?

I is resin something that we would support.

It doesn't specifically say, but it says signs should be of architectural quality and material that's consistent with the building building materials so there is an argument in support of um resin wood uh wood there is an argument against resin I should put it like that I would say I would support using the resin phenolic resin it's a durable material it's gonna be 10 12 feet off of the ground you'll never know the difference and I I feel like uh you know if we were to force them to make it out of wood for what purpose does that serve I don't see it you know uh I don't phenolic resin sounds like plastic is actually not it's a different type of material is it flat or are the letters like the existing sign going to be carved into it same thing carved in right they can be carved in they also could be just printed and can be flat and look exactly the same.

Overall because they have such a long lifespan I think that those the speeds this material choice represent that's damage to the building and using work because you will have to replace it to sign it over a period of time and each time you enter that in order that's an issue.

I just want to make sure that we're properly following our guidance and holding the same standard that we are to everyone else in the historic districts so um I don't know if up if it were up to me I would probably continue everything but the large banners if everyone is on the same page with those even but I feel like I I feel like we just need a little bit more time on this and seeing the property uh at a site visit would be very helpful for me personally.

Yeah I'm inclined to do that as well because you probably have to order the banners and all that kind of stuff right so uh we can go ahead and split the vote we'll vote on the on the banners themselves and then we'll continue the balance uh and schedule a site visit between now and the meeting in June you're voting on the banners or you're voting on the signs were you're voting on signs banners we're gonna put the sign into the continued pile right I I would like to see that personally I think it needs a little bit more assessment.

Right that's my opinion.

Okay.

All right.

So with that I would like to split the application so I request a motion to split the application of it zero or three sixty five same street uh lot 24 lot zero zero one contributing structure will be uh splitting the application between the banners uh mounted uh temporarily as from the rest of the project which is the front elevation vestibule and wooden sign uh on the side uh do I have a motion to split the application so moved second second all in favor opposed now I'd like to uh request a motion to continue the application for 365 fame street plat 24 lot zero zero one uh for the front elevation and wooden sign to be continued to the next meeting in June.

So moved second all in favor I takes it and I would like to then uh make a motion to approve the portion of the application regarding the uh banners you know hanging from the building in a temporary basis as presented could we just add temporary banners they're not permanent I think I didn't say that.

Okay.

I think you did, yeah.

I did say ten.

Thank you.

Okay.

Okay.

So moved.

Second.

All in favor uh okay thank you and we'll schedule a site visit in the coming uh week, whatever works for you guys.

Okay.

Thank you.

Thank you.

This is the application of Sean Burns of six Catman Place, plat 12, lot two, seven, one non contributing for permission to add covered wood framed porch.

Front porch on facade.

And replace existing landing and stair on side elevation at exterior swing door to the rear north elevation and a landing and a stair at the proposed rear exterior door.

Alter of instrument on the facade.

Okay.

Thank you, Vice Chair.

Uh we'll go ahead and get you sworn in.

Uh raise your right hand.

Okay.

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

So help you God.

I do.

I'll be good.

I do.

Okay.

Why don't you each say your name and spell it, please?

John Burns.

S H-A-W-N-B-U-R-N S.

We got that.

Name's Kevin Connery, K-V-A-N, C-O-N-N-D-R-Y.

Okay.

Gotcha.

GS construction industry.

Gotcha.

Thank you.

And uh who's gonna present then today?

Go ahead.

Oh.

I'm gonna say just two words and hand over to Kevin real quick.

I live next door.

I have an interest in making the house next door to me look really nice.

Okay.

It'll look nice for me, my neighbors.

I get it.

My uh future long-term residents.

On some work on the inside, doing a lot of work on the outside to try to tidy it up.

So what you've just heard is part of me cleaning up this house that's put together in 1970 and hasn't been touched since my late uh neighbor passed.

So I picked it up.

Oh, I see so you're not related to the property at all.

I own the property.

Oh, you own the property.

When my neighbor passed, I bought it.

Oh, okay.

Now I got you.

Okay.

I want to tune it up.

Okay.

So you're in the ones that are right of it to the east of it.

Is that the building?

I live at four Castman Place.

Okay.

Yeah.

Properties.

The problem we're discussing is six Castman.

Right.

Gotcha.

Okay.

Kevin, could you help me out?

Yeah, sure.

So I'm sure you guys are all familiar with the drawings.

Um the project has three key um elements to it.

The main one is obviously the new covered front porch that we're gonna um propose, which is you know, consistent in scale and detail with you know, some of the other houses in the neighborhood.

We cited some photos of other properties, um, without you know, going too much into the historic details, because as mentioned in the application, this is non-contributing, and we wanted to avoid conjecture.

We're not trying to make this look like an historic house with this porch, simply just trying to you know provide a space that the homeowner wants um to go to the outdoors.

The other um two key elements are we're gonna rebuild the wood frame stairs and landing that go directly into the kitchen that's on the east side, and then we're proposing added exterior door on the rear elevation.

Um that's uh yeah, so that's the death yep, all right.

So we can talk about that.

So on the left you can see the proposed stair and landing.

Which is gonna go directly in the kitchen.

That's actually already there.

We're just basically rebuilding it to make something that's actually poke compliant.

It's I mean it's completely falling apart, it's unsafe.

And then uh third aspect of the design process or the design is to add a landing and exterior stair that goes directly to the outside um in a very property.

So, okay.

I mean it's basically the you guys questions.

I do, right?

Uh did you read the staff comments?

Okay, so uh one of the questions was the uh front porch.

Uh the side porches have railings.

Front porch does not.

Uh could you elaborate on that?

I mean, it was it's really just to make the space look a little bit more open.

Um we're envisioning you know somebody sitting on this front porch.

We didn't run it a you know, views, I guess.

Technically, they're really not required.

Um we have existing grade to the stair, the current stair landing is around 24 inches.

We're not gonna change that.

So we're gonna build this at the same height as the concrete stair.

Um, so we know we're good with that.

Technically, they're not required.

It's kind of just something that we're adding for safety, really.

Um the railings.

I mean, if maybe they I guess it could come off, but I when I look at that, I'm counting thir I mean you're you know over 30 inches to the it's a technical detail I suppose in the end but you count one, two, three, four, five, right?

That's 35 inches.

Yeah.

Yeah the anything over 30 you need to I mean the right we kept the risers pretty low.

I mean they're just under six technically so yeah well I mean I mean that's definitely something we could look at a little bit more closely um we're not trying to alter the grade at all you know um if need be I mean like I said this was just us being out there doing site work.

We took measurements from the top of the existing concrete landing and then we just went off of that so you may find yourself needing railings through building code if you do um you can uh work with Jill I guess since you have railings on other the other comment was uh on your materials uh your specifying composite materials that's correct um I think we all understand why but we tend to shy away from that uh in in historic districts would you be willing to change your materials to more compatible acceptable wood materials and I think that's really a question for Sean and maybe for us to discuss I mean we to be honest with you we really hadn't had that discussion because being a non contributing structure I thought that kind of cleared us from having to use traditional you know materials for like that you would see in the historic houses in the neighborhood.

You know what I mean it's that was kind of my line of thinking on you're still a historic district however.

Right.

So and and that's just something that I'm still trying to what that line is it seems like it's a case by case um you know basis however at for Catsman where the Sean's current house is um they did use man-made composite materials so that was kind of like our baseline for you know presenting it maybe I understand your point yeah um I I would make that a condition of my approval that you upgrade your materials and you submit it to the planner and if there's any questions you could come back.

I think the other uh point and the recommendations was just the size of the porch uh in the front um you know I don't think this building uh I don't think the porch uh reads um unfavorable to this building I mean the building I think it's like you're saying making the neighborhood kind of so I don't have a uh a particular issue with the scale of porch how how deep is the front porch as compared to the rest of the structure it seemed from the drawing it it seemed quite deep off the top of my head it's roughly around eight feet I would say finished.

Well it's not that it's the same size or depth porch as the other house beside me.

Eight captain points I'm thinking of it's the same size as that.

Exactly the same that's worth eight feet can't be all right and I'll go with it.

I have some technical questions sure uh so I'm seeing on I think this particular drawing or uh the footprints it appears that the front porch is centered on the house.

Maybe not so much in this one but the previous that looks like it's centered on the house, and in the renderings and the the front plans, it's offset.

So I would like clarification on that.

So see how that's a little offset.

That's a um that's a mistake.

In all honesty, which is uh if you go to the floor plan, so sorry about that.

That is correct, and you can see the distance right there, it's almost double the distance on the western side.

So yeah, that site plan needs to be corrected.

Okay.

My apologies.

No worries, and then the do you know the pitch of the front roof section on the porch?

Those are gonna be asphalt shingles up top.

Yes, to match.

And the pitch that you have isn't is not gonna be an issue with having asphalt shingles there.

It's three and twelve, so I mean we'll just ice and water, borderline.

Okay, um, um a little struggling with the asymmetry of this porch.

Um the pit, just I think a lot of aspects of it, and I think that this building will benefit from having some kind of uh porch or any kind of architectural detail on the front, but I'm I'm not sure this is it, in my opinion.

Um I feel like there could be something that's a little bit more like compatible with what I don't know, maybe compatible is not the word um that contributes to the building somewhat rather than just kind of throwing an overhang on it and putting a front deck.

I'm just not sure that it does any justice to that little building, aside from putting a porch on.

Um, so I'm I'm struggling to support this just in like architectural quality standards.

Well, I mean we did look at a few options where we tried to basically extend that existing roof and kind of turn it, make it look as though it were really part of the house, but it was kind of a challenge because in order to do that, we would need to extend the Eve on the eastern side, and then we run into issues with clearance with the door and the headroom and all that.

And you know, it's kind of funny because when this project came to us, I was like, oh, you know, this is gonna be easy, right?

It's like just nothing but I mean, we probably went through I don't know, maybe 15 different options, and then we dwindle it down to three, and yeah, it will it's it's a little bit of a challenge, but I mean in the end we feel like you know, we're providing our client with what they envision for the space, while at the same time, you know, adding basically to the overall architectural quality of the house.

I mean, just creating another element, another dimension to it, which in my opinion makes it more interesting.

I mean, I understand the asymmetry the asymmetry, however, the problem is we can't move that front door.

That's the issue because the entire interior has been completely renovated.

Sean did a really beautiful job, and that front door, um, in order to move that, we basically have to move uh a load bearing wall, um, which is if you look at the rendering between the door and the window on the right, and basically rip up all the finishes on the inside of the house.

It would be yeah, I don't think you should do that.

Yeah.

I'm just wondering, you know, do you have to do you have to um move the door just to say widen the stairs so that it encompasses the door and keeps that central if that's the goal of your stairs to be centered on the building, or or uh walking straight up into the door, but maybe I don't know.

I I I would just like personally to see a revision of this because I think that there could be something else done so that even just down to the little vent in the um in the attic, it your roof line is going to be offset from it, but only just ever so slightly where it looks like a mistake.

So that's my take on it.

I think Sue would like to add to not be smaller.

Go ahead, go ahead.

But your right hand.

Do you swear to tell truth or all truth and nothing but the truth?

I do.

State your name, please, Sue.

Sue Horwitz, a series, H-O-R-W-I-T-Z, and how much APS construction.

I think what I wanted to explain, we tried many, many different versions, going the full length of the building, going wrapping around the corner, and what was happening is we were either getting out posts really like five feet apart, which looked crazy, looked like a forest, or they were uneven, which looked wrong.

Or if we could get them even, the front door was half hidden by a toast.

We really did try a lot of different options.

And we thought to simplify it, and from the street, you're really not gonna see that it's offset from the street.

You'll see it from further away.

Absolutely.

But as you're walking past, you're gonna see the porch.

You're not gonna see the offset.

And to us to have the front door and the window offset would look worse.

That it was we really did try.

We tried different options with the condoms and the posts, sorry.

And this we thought was the simplest and the least compromise.

That was our thought doing the posts.

No, I get what you're saying with the post.

I think the question is uh there's two questions.

I think uh we're requesting a little more detail in the front porch, something that maybe the posts are different than square, maybe there's a header before you know, something a little more, which would give a little character to to your porch.

You know, the offset, I think I think the with the detailing of this porch, you would probably be able to carry off the offset.

Like you said, you've worked very hard, there's existing features.

Um, you know, I I just think it's kinda quirky like the rest of the house.

I mean, it's kind of there, but I think you need to bring some element to the porch.

I I would concur.

I think that the the offset doesn't bother me because I agree.

I'm sorry, I forgot your name.

Ellie, yeah.

Kevin and Sue, sorry.

Uh I agree with you.

I think that the only way you'll ever perceive that slight offset would be from a distance looking straight on.

I think from most angles and most perceptions, you won't see that.

So I'm not really bothered by it.

Um, but I do think it does need a little more detail.

I totally agree.

I mean, it's one of the simplest structures that's come in front of us in a long time.

And anything you can do to make it less simple, simple, right?

You know, it actually looks like my shed in the backyard.

Because it was but uh so yes, if anything to do, give it a little more character, and I'd be in support of the application.

If I can just add one thing, I mean we we have shown like a post detail, we haven't gone into actually moldings and details, but if you look, there is a top post, there is a base, right?

Would we happen to elaborate on it?

Yeah, that would be helpful.

And yeah, maybe cut like a building section through that.

Because I see the problem is I see it in my head.

Yeah, what I mean.

I and you're looking at that, you're not seeing what I'm seeing.

So it is there, it's just not maybe well, I guess.

No, I would agree, and I would would suggest and putting a second window on the front makes all it's almost looks like they forgot it, right?

The first time.

Right.

They just didn't put it in.

Uh but my suggestion would be to, you know, because I don't think you have enough to get a full approval tonight, but if we can continue in, you can add a few more features if you would to it and try to, does it work to center or not center?

Is there ways to maybe draw your eye differently?

Uh and there's there's ways to do that.

So that would be my suggestion if you would like to do that.

Just bring it back next month or something.

The board's opinion on it being offset, we understand the details.

Can we get um just the board's opinion if you say again to accept the fact that it's offset?

Yeah, I think we would.

Absolutely.

I think it's yeah, we're not gonna ask you to move the door, right?

Or the house, or the house.

Right.

Well, we would, but the material.

We have to find a really old one to put there.

Right.

Yeah, and your material come back with your materials.

Yeah, and we we can't make you do it, right?

As a non-contributing structure within a uh historic district.

However, it's certainly our preference, and uh your neighbors will be happier.

But uh so that would be uh our recommendation to uh go ahead and continue this to next uh uh to next month's hearing.

So um okay I request a motion to continue the application for six Castman Street.

Sir Pl it's uh catchman place.

Sorry, I'm sorry.

So lost my drawing.

Hold on.

What's it?

Flat 12 lot 271.

Uh I'd like to make a motion to continue that to the next meeting in June 9th.

So move.

Second, second.

All in favor.

Opposed.

Thank you.

All right, thank you.

Okay.

We're still good to go.

Yep.

Okay.

Good.

Uh we'll move on to N8.

Slash chair, please.

This is the application of Cindy Widga of 33K Street, flat 22, lot 009 contributing for permission to demolish a 16 foot by 14 foot sunroom extension.

Alter alignment of seven existing historic windows, add three windows to the original rear L, remove two non-historic windows, three exterior doors, and one French door.

Construct wood trellis pergola system on the self-elevation of the L.

Remove exterior stair, install three condensers on a concrete pad with vegetative screening, remove above ground bulkhead with flush steel bulkhead, install new hardwood decking at front of the main house, restore chimneys, repair and restore all exterior trim wood uh trim work and windows.

Okay, thank you.

Uh let's get started, Spencer.

Hi.

Uh, go ahead and get you sworn in.

Raise your right hand.

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

So help you guide.

State your name and spell it, please.

Cindy Whitga, C-I-N-D-Y, and Whitka W I D G A.

Thank you.

Spencer.

And I'm Spencer McComb, architect for the project.

Yeah.

Okay.

Gonna walk through it.

Um so Cindy is the new owner of 33K.

Uh we're really excited to show you this project, and uh I've gotten to do a lot of projects in Newport, but this one is sort of that quintessential historic district house that you want to kind of save and get right.

So we're excited to present it to you and be part of this uh be part of Cindy's restoration of this house.

Um that's great.

I can speak for Cindy and she can speak for herself.

But uh, you know, she came to us very interested in restoring this home to its full grandeur.

It's been owned for 70 plus years by the same families, uh woman who who lived there.

And um, so it has some deferred maintenance over the years that it's sort of kind of crept up, namely a lot of ivy that's taken over almost half the facade at this point.

So we're gonna see how much damage that's done, but the goal is to pull all that back, restore all the woodwork.

We did initially talk about possibly using you know new windows as you know, most homeowners come saying, I want this thing tight as a tight as a drum, but we've since come off of that and really realize the uh importance of the existing windows to be fully restored and the use of storms to try to get the you know the air ceiling.

So we're committed to using all of the windows that are on the house and and really going the full restoration process to bring those back to you know what they what they could and and should be.

Uh we are moving uh well, we'll say the goal of the the the project or the design uh work was to take that central main house and really just bring it fully back to what it was.

This house has been four possibly more uh uh residential units so a single family house that's been sort of divvied up over the years and to do that stairs and decks and doors were added really ad hoc um across there I'm actually pretty close with uh a couple who actually own the inn next door and lived on this second floor and they were there when the rear stair was being built so that they could live in there and had to cut through their neighbor's uh unit for a little while until those stairs were finished in the early 2000s so not even that that long ago um the main house is just a a project of restoration so not a lot to really talk about there other than anything that's chipping or rotted will be replaced and and painted all wood products uh to match existing if there's any replacement of any trim that's kind of reached the end of its life uh and so we've we've taken off the rear stairs and balconies again that were added about about 20 years ago um there's and then the L is really where we're spending most of our design time we do have some pictures in your packet um that we've collected from the previous owner and some other photos that we've been able to gain that do show the rear L.

It does show that the the rear L had a variety of different window types and window configurations over the years which you can see in the in the two pictures that are here they're family photos but you do see the rear behind them with barn doors and almost what looks like a barn ramp going into the back of the house.

Since then I think we've got it dated to around the 70s 1975 there was what we're calling a screen it was a screened in porch at one point then it was enclosed and you see that sort of tacked on to the end the the foundation's completely different the sandborne maps kind of show that that was clearly something that was added much later.

We'd like to remove that a lot of this is about editing sort of sins of the past here and trying to just pull it back to something that you know Cindy can look at we can look at as a community and say okay this house is like back to what it needs to be.

But to be specific about the rear L, I think the the major moves that we're taking besides the demolition of of these kind of random windows and additions is to try to make sense of the rear windows in the L, which I think at some point we're probably aligned as as we're trying to do we don't have documentation of that except for what's behind the pictures in the historic the folks in the historic picture but there were clearly hoods over the over the windows similar to what's uh on the main house those have sometimes been removed from some windows so we'd like to bring those back obviously those show in some of the photos and they're clearly on some of the windows on that rear L.

The comparison elevation that Jill's got up there kind of tries to make sense of this so it's easy to understand at a glance.

We've got the before and afters here elevationally and we've tried to color code things so it was easy to see and of course you can glance down and see how things have changed essentially aligning windows uh there's almost a transom window or a small window.

It's a funny one that has a larger lower sash than upper sash um and so it's like a double hung that isn't quite double uh and uh you know unique to the house but uh you know it's a nice nice window we're gonna keep them um we are uh on the on the flip side going to use one new window which kind of works out because we didn't have another one to fill in its place but what it does allow us is to get egress out of a bedroom which it didn't have before and you can imagine with that style window which only goes up a few inches from an egress standpoint so it kind of worked out that we had enough windows to sort of make this facade make sense as well as use the one new window in an area where we were getting egress now this is a window that is on the back of the L.

It's up against the property line a lot more not seen from a distance as much as maybe the interior side of that L which has a little bit more of the uh alignment and wouldn't have that one new window that we're we're adding to this mix.

Let's see up sort of painting with a broad brush but I can you know get into uh some specifics if we want to talk about additional things we've got some small decks that are added in areas where a door is needed that's on the end of the L.

We know that at one point was a large barn door with that sloping uh ramp that we see in the picture but we it's it's not a barn we're not gonna try to make it a barn here so uh that n gable we did try to you know design that facade so it made sense things were aligned and sort of had the fit and finish of the rest of the uh the L as it turns around which has the large double hungs on the first floor and then this smaller petite three three quarter gable I'm not sure what to call it uh window or three quarter double hung above and that will kind of carry around the whole thing.

So what we're hoping to do is just take the L, which I don't feel like is as important or as specific as maybe the main house but um give it a life that it needed sort of aligned things so that when you're in the room there's these are these are this is a large room internally so you'll see both windows across from each other so internally they were symmetrical and it just kind of it kind of all clicked and made sense instead of having what before was a bit of a scattered mix of doors windows that were shifted over nothing was aligning a few things were aligning which was even maybe more chaotic but uh I think the way we've had it is something that we can all look positively on and that I can get behind and again it's the L so this this probably existed at my first glance when Cindy sent me a picture before I had gone there it seemed like that L probably wasn't original but so we're looking around in the basement and looking at the foundation and how it was I think the L was really close if not built with the house because the foundation just turns the corner it's wide open the structure doesn't change and so you know upon further investigation you know taking down the L became not an option because obviously we wanted to preserve the original bones of the house and so we've kind of fallen in love with it at this point and we like it on it are going to use it instead of just having the sort of four square that was was there originally this is a house that's similar to other houses up down K.

There's almost sister houses as they work their way along all of them are a little different some have cupolas on them.

This one has some reminiscent uh framing of a cupola on the top of this house but at this point we're not suggesting we're gonna put that back on but just want to give you a little flavor for the street I've worked on a lot of the houses along K and uh just really excited when uh when Cindy came to us to get into this project and be able to present it to you as you know maybe a great example of what the HDC can do uh you know for the community and how how Cindy can be a good steward of this this property.

I'll I'll give Cindy if you want to add anything to that.

I um I did meet with the owner, her family has owned it for the past 100 years.

I'm only the third owner now of the house, and she was super open.

What can I share with you?

And we talked about when was this, and she didn't know a lot of it, but she did know that back stairway and stairs that led when they broke it into for apartments.

She said, My parents, we we didn't go through the HDC, and the carpenter was told, we're only gonna get in trouble if the neighbors tell on us that try to make it look exactly like the front with the I don't know, architect speech, but the rails and the ballasters and everything, and they did a pretty good job.

Um, but we won't tell anyone.

And then she did say it was when she was in her early adulthood at late 70s, 80s when that sun porch was sort of added on.

So and I went to the historical society, is at the building, and a gentleman helped me and he looked everywhere.

They had no old pictures, very little text on the house.

That a lot of text on the other four properties that are very similar by the same architect, but I've looked high and low.

I've asked her for pictures, she shared a couple, but just not a lot of historical pictures.

No, I appreciate that.

Any comments, currently?

No.

I think that you've done a fabulous job.

You know, and I I would concur.

I came around that corner along the drive and I looked at that L and said, Well, it I thought that was what was being torn down.

And then I looked closer and said, No, that's been here a long time, right?

Because you can see the stone foundation in that.

So um in my view, it does make a lot of sense to remove that structure off the back.

I think everything you're doing to clean it up the L portion, you know.

I think it's it's it's a lot of work, and I think it's all done in you know, in in good taste and from a restoration perspective, you know, and I think it uh I'm good with it.

So if anybody else has any questions, agreed.

Oh my question what are you gonna do that big wrought iron fence in the front yard?

You're gonna redo that.

The name of someone who I'm gonna see if we can restore it because I think it's gorgeous, but it's yeah.

It's heavy, it's a project.

Okay, so with that, uh, I request a motion to approve the application of 33K Street, flat 22, lot zero zero nine, as presented in reference to 17.80.060 A1 through 7.

So moved.

Second, second, all in favor?

Any opposed?

No.

Thank you.

You're good.

Thank you very much.

Yeah, appreciate it.

Yep.

Not a fun starts.

Um, this is the application of Heather.

I'm not even going to try to say your last name.

22nd Street, flat 16, lot 197, contributing for permission to replace existing wood shingle roof with asphalt shickles.

All right.

Uh would like to get you sworn in first.

Raise your right hand, please.

Okay.

Do you swear to tell the whole truth?

Nothing but the truth, so help you God.

I do.

Please state your name and spell it, please.

Ted Croy.

C-R-O-Y.

Okay.

And how are you related to the project?

I worked on the building over the years on the 1990s.

I worked for her mother and father.

I restored the building to where it's at now.

Okay.

Um, uh, you listed uh on the application.

I'm not sure if it's a representative.

I could look right now.

Just procedurally, we if somebody other than the owner is uh presenting, we need a uh affidavit.

She's not here all the time, so she doesn't qualify to stand here.

Well, she owns a house, makes her qualified.

Oh, she owns the house, yes.

Yeah, yeah, she's qualified.

Yeah, I don't have um anything on here um stating that there is an authorized representative, and I also don't have an email from her, I believe from today.

Um so I'm not sure that we can hear the application.

Um, you have anything from Heather?

I have the application.

Right.

Yeah.

I don't think I can we hear the matter without being it being presented, because I think for a number of people attorney here, we just had one question about it.

Well, basically, like we we just don't have an authorized.

Okay, I'm comfortable with that.

If the change okay, sure.

Yeah, if you want to go ahead and present what you'd like to do, we can certainly have discussion.

Sure.

Um, she needs a new roof.

Her she has a wooden roof.

That one is decayed.

It's uh there, and she wants to replace it with an asphalt roof.

Most of the roofs in the area near her are asphalt roofs.

Uh there is one wood uh couple houses down.

In fact, a brand new house going on going in the neighborhood that does not have a wood roof either.

Um her mother and father endured a fire that was caused by the neighbors.

The neighbor's house caught on fire, and then because they had a wood, that has caught fire.

So she's got this deep fear in her about fire.

That's what it's basically comes down to.

She so asphalt burns too.

I mean, the whole house is still made of wood, so I'm afraid the roof may not make a bunch of.

She might put a slate roof up there.

Well, I'm not sure if sleep would be appropriate for a house of that air era.

I don't know.

Maybe the maybe Jill can speak to that, but not.

It's I think a colonial era house like that would have had cedar shingles.

I think the majority of the comments on this application have been that we would not support a roof in change of materials.

Uh it's a um contributing building.

Um, so we would hold our standards for the same kind of roof to be used as feedback.

Okay.

Well, how about that?

So you can come back uh to the commission with uh authorization to present it for the owner if if you so choose, or you can work with the planner on specifics.

But um we'll uh no I don't I don't I think if you look at the staff report, I don't know if you had a chance to do that, but it it does detail out the reasons why, right?

That it's got a wooden uh shingle roof today, then you know, you can replace it in kind, which would be another wood roof, right?

So uh the new homes there they fall under a different standard than old historic homes, so they may in fact have a asphalt roof.

There were others that had potentially slate roofs that kind of went rogue and replaced them, and they probably shouldn't have, but uh nonetheless, it's it's a shingled roof and uh excuse me, it's a wooden roof and it would have to remain so.

I certainly uh understand her concerns about fire hazard.

I live in the same neighborhood.

I think we all have share the same fear because the houses are so close together that they're all just you know Kindle boxes, and you know, and she actually had a major fire just down the street from her in January, right?

So uh so it happens, you're absolutely right, and uh it's really unfortunate, but you know I don't know that that's gonna solve it.

So uh if you come back with a you know something from her saying that you can present her, then present it then that that'd be fantastic, or if you have alternatives to look at you can talk to the preservation planner and she'd certainly be able to uh to help you out okay but just trying to be practical about it I think that we could say that um were the application to be revised for an in-kind replacement of a wood shingled roof right um as approved by the city planner that then this application would be approved then you don't need to come back yeah so typically even for you know in-kind replacements for roofs I handle that at the administrative level anyways um so if you were willing to or if Heather was willing to um switch to a wood shingle roof then we could not have um a hearing but the current roof is in need up replacement correct is that the issue yeah yeah that would be you know our advice and if if she's you know fine with the replacement with a wood roof they do put treatments on them and you can do the studies and and look at you know how susceptible they are to uh you know a burning ember right versus you know other types of material it's actually pretty you know fire retardant so as long as you keep up with so is I'm just curious is there an option to use a synthetic roof that looks like wood no I haven't seen any of those um I don't I don't even know if something like that really exists.

No there are sort of like deposit kind of like cement type materials um we haven't seen any proposals here um but typically even for a slate roof we would require a replacement in kind so typically wood shingle would be appropriate.

So would that be a continuation or well it's not a hearing and she has yeah so we would continue this matter um and then if you you know other chooses to come back with something different um or you know I I'll reach out to her and uh mention that I can approve a wood shingle roof um administratively then that's the way we'll go but okay if she wants to come back and um then if she wants to come back for an asphalt roof then it would likely be a denial so okay all right so let's uh request a motion to continue the application for 22nd Street Platte 16 lot 197 to the next schedule meeting in June to have a motion so moved second all in favor I oppose thank you okay thank you okay do we have any other any other items for the agenda today I don't think so make a motion to close the meeting of May 12th 2026.

So moved second all in favor.

Jim wanted to strike the gavel no we we know how to run a meeting aro