Planning Commission - public_hearing

So I'm gonna have you. Welcome. Welcome to our meeting everybody today. The items are gonna be called in the order on the docket. If you want a copy of the docket, copies are over there as well as copies of all the items that we're going

to be considering. If you're

an applicant here today, please take the time to read through the staff report for your item because we may ask you questions. The way we will proceed today is each act that will come up. We don't really have a podium or a lectern, but we can use Stand on the x and you can use the audio visual part to rest your elbow or foot materials. The way we will proceed is we will have an opportunity to present your matters then the board may ask some questions. There will be a public hearing portion, a republican way in then the board will deliberate and then take one of a number of actions.

The board can vote to approve to issue a certificate of appropriateness or deny. The board can take no action. And if no action is taken in forty five days, then it's an automatic approval, which practically means if they take no action, they would have to the board would have to take take action in the very next meeting. The board can continue a matter until the next meeting on its own or at the request of an applicant, the board can defer an application. A tie vote is a no vote.

So you need a majority, a simple majority of the board members. We don't have any matters tonight that are anything but decisions. All decisions of the board can be appealed to city council, and there's a window of time there. I don't know what it is, but I'm sure mister Conklin can tell you, is it thirty days to appeal?

Yeah. No. No. I'm sorry.

You have fourteen days from you have to submit your appeal fourteen days from the hearing date.

So if you don't like

what we said, you can appeal to the city council and they can take action. Okay. With all of that said, Mr. Coffey, what is our first item on today's business?

All

right. Thank you, Mr. Scott. And I would remind all of our board members, please speak up. We're doing our best with our acoustics in here, and so just speak loudly. First item on on the docket tonight is the minutes.

Alright. Same member of the board have any suggested modifications to the minutes from the May six, twenty twenty six BAR meeting. Do any members of the public wish to suggest any modifications to those minutes? Seeing none, can I have a motion on the minutes? So moved. Second?

Second.

All those in favor of adopting the minutes, say

aye. Aye.

Any opposed? The minutes are adopted. Next, have the consent calendar.

Yes. Next, we have the consent calendar. And just a reminder to anyone here who was planning on speaking tonight, please fill out a public speaker form, which is back on my table right over there, and hand it to my colleague. So if you're speaking, please do so. Alright. We have three items. We can send calendars tonight. First is item number three, BAR2026Dash00108, Old District. Request for signage at 506 King Street. Parcel address 520 King Street.

Applicant to this program, At second is item number four, BAR2026Dash00119District, request for alterations at 320 North Alfred Street. Applicant is Alan Moore, represented by Sean D Williams agent. And final item on the consent calendar tonight is number 5, AAR2026Dash00126ColumbusRoadDistrict. Request for alterations in 719 Prince Street. Applicants are William Ryan.

Do any members of the Board wish to remove any of the items from the consent calendar? No. Does any member of the public wish to remove any of the items in the consent calendar to make comment or seek public discussion of those items? Seeing none, can I

have a motion on the

consent calendar? So moved.

Sorry, I'm sorry, was that Mr. Stember?

Moved. Mr. Spencer, do we have a second?

Yes, I second.

All those who in favor of adopting the consent calendar, aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay. The consent calendar is adopted. If your item was item three, four, or five, you have been issued a certificate of appropriateness. Next, we have some unfinished business.

Yes. We have an we have one item under unfinished business tonight, and that the applicant for the item has requested for the deferral. Just so you understand what this is. This is the you may recall 60123 was conversion commercial to residential, and one of the aspects of that was the staining of the brick, and and the board had asked to see some samples of that stain. The applicant is still working through some samples to get some color that they think looks right at the opacity level, and so they will be coming back to us once they find something that they're

happy with. So so we do have

this item on number 6, B B A R 22025 Dash 00549, Old Historic District, request for for operations at 601 Whit Street. Applicant is six zero one Whit Street LLC, represented by Nassby Lee, I think. And they requested to defer. Can I

get a motion on their request to defer? So moved. Second?

Second.

Okay. All those in favor of approving the deferral of docket item number six, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Alright. Item six is deferred for the next meeting or to a future meeting. Future meeting. Yep. Thanks. Okay. On to new business. Alright.

Thank you. Several items of new business tonight. First item is number seven, BAR2020 I'm sorry. 2026Dash00134ParkerGray. Request for new construction in at 08:06 North Columbus Street. The applicant is 7328 and eight zero six Development LLC represented by Kenneth Wyatt, attorney.

In the members of the board, Patrick Bloomfield, we'll give you

the most development. Step on the next five. Oh, so

The x is for our little audio. So you're on TV, and you can hear young. You're online. So thank you.

So, yeah, let's I'll get to the finished samples in a second. I wanna come and give an overarching summary of what we changed. You know, the combination of the board, we simulated the upper window pattern and fenestration for the bay. So because it's become one large bay, we feel this is more appropriate, also a good suggestion. We have pulled in the right side of the bay to break up the long wall on the right side.

I think that's added a little bit more detail. We've extended the belt line around the side, which also, I think, breaks it up, and then we've added some decorative historic stars to the right side. And that's, you know, that that's a we can install those or not. Really it's really a thought on from the board on that and see what they think. For the finished materials, our intention is to use one of these three colors, probably leaning more towards the center or maybe a beige color. Of the three samples on top. For the cast stone. Right? Right. That cast stone will be belt lines, sills, corners above.

Right? And then the brick is a wire cut arctic white and with with an arctic white mortar. So that'll kinda blend in, and it'll show see more of the natural face of the brick. It's a lot sharper edges when it's wire cut. So and it's kinda got this forget the terminology for it, but it's got some aggregate that gives it a little bit more definition of just flat brick.

We also plan to use revealed Hardie panel for the rear of the building I'm sorry, for the the the 4th Floor to give it a little bit more variety at the top. So these can be installed both horizontally and vertically, and then they have a a rabbit or a dado to run down and have a reveal that breaks at every every point. Then we have a textured hearty lap siding, which would go on the backside, again, light color to kinda complement the brick, and that's pretty much it. And we have an example of the black metal used to wrap. We'd use a thick gauge to avoid oil getting on on the mullions that that sit in between the windows and then flashing that wraps around the the upper radius of the windows.

If you don't mind, if you could if you could go through the slide, but I'm just gonna point out a couple of

things on the self elevations. Can everyone see this okay? Anyone see the samples okay?

Not really.

They're sliding.

Can I put stand

up? Okay.

Yeah. Everyone can stand up if you wanna see the sample. I'll show I'll show it to Standing is allowed. You could go over. Thank you.

Up there.

So you'll see this is the side elevation of the north. You'll see we've added brick to the to the exposed walls in the street. I I know that was very important to the board. Above the house, we'll probably use a thin, you know, a one inch thick brick just to avoid any kind of load bearing issues, but it'll match the front. So they'll have that visual appearance of it. We hope that, you know, our neighbors appreciate the the extra cost that goes into this, but we think it'll be a good value to the project. So we're we're happy to move forward with it. And next slide, please.

These kind

of call out the revisions. So you'll see we've had a lot of we've had some big big changes occurred the biggest changes occurred between the first concept review submission and the second concept review where we adjusted scale and mass. Again, these what we're seeing here in the middle section is kind of the the the light change to kind of fine tune the exterior in front. So you'll see on the right that long red dot in the center on the left. That's where we pulled back the bay to give a little bit more definition on that elevation.

And then you'll see it the red boxes that outline the windows, you'll see that's been expanded to one window. We've gotten rid of the kind of wider center fixed stash there that wasn't matching the windows above. So next slide. This is just a picture of of it on the street. It's very difficult to pull all these together and make everything to scale, but, you know, we are we feel feel good about where we're at in the neighborhood. This is more an accurate representation here on the lower elevation of of where we stand with in regards to the neighborhood scale. Next slide. Can I before you there's

a question on this? Can you go back to the streetscape, Brendan? Just to be clear, because I know it's gonna come up. How tall is the main mass of the building?

It is 32 and a half feet to to the roof deck. Yep. And then it's about a three and a half foot parapet wall.

Okay. So about 35 feet. And then how tall is the total building?

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

And that's within the zoning or 45 is the height. So you're below zoning. Right.

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

Okay. Did you do any studies to see, like, just because, obviously, this perspective is not a human perspective. Can you see the upper floors from across the street? Do you know?

Directly across? No. But, you know, it's possible that you will see them on an angle.

On an angle. Okay. Thank you. I think miss Miller question on that too.

Yes. How far is the setback between the 3rd And 4th Floors?

Approximately four feet.

Okay. Thank you.

And are those observation decks?

Or They they will the intention is for them to to be connected. So you'll be able to walk from the front back to the rear roof deck on the outside.

For the end units? Yes. And the one in the middle The one in

the middle is yes. The capsid ish. Correct. Okay. Thank you. No problem. Next slide. Just wanna take you to some of the the angle shots. Yeah. Keep going.

So this is a good this is a good representation of all the different finish colors. We're kinda playing around with the exact color for for the cast stone, whether to go darker in in in virtue of the white. I think the mock up will kind of really pin that down. And so, you know, we'll work with Bill to to make sure that fits fits the desired word. And then you'll you'll see that that we have our our various details that are shown on this material board.

Next slide. The intention is to use a Pella lifestyle brand, which is an aluminum clad window with external grills, external and internal grills, and spacers in between to give you that simulated light separated light feeling. So we're pretty pretty happy with this window style. Next slide.

So we make that slow. So so we're gonna take the image takes a little work.

Yeah. All these data centers take that are

What do wanna go for pass this one?

Yeah. I just wanna I wanna see the color rendering. Same angle, though. I think it's in the. That's a bit right here.

So I wanna correct something here on that rendering on the right. It doesn't represent the jog that occurs at the fourth level and the way it's pulled back. Mhmm. It's more representative here on the left side.

How far in does it go? Four feet.

No. It's 11.

Oh, 11 from the front.

Oh, from the front?

Back from the front. Yes. Four.

One to one. It's more than one to one.

Okay. Great.

The intention is you're looking at it from a sideline view. You shouldn't see it.

Okay. Great. So, Margaret, that it's 11 feet back from the carpet wall. I might even be farther than that. I have to go up.

It might be closer to 13, actually. Okay. But we're

We're on

the second. Okay. Okay.

Yeah. So the floor is on either side. Right? That's just to kind of break up the mass of the wall. Right? But, yeah, that's that's our presentation. We hope you see that we've taken comments and and really tried to address them to the best of our ability.

Happy to hear your feedback. Thank you. Does anyone have initial questions? We may have public comment on this. Do have any speaker forms on this? We have one assigned time. Okay. So I'd like to open it up to the public right now unless anyone has any quick questions.

Of course, you

can ask all the questions you want during the iteration. Okay. So let's open it up to the public. Who's our speaker? Okay. The speaker I have for this item is Kate Zurnis. Great. Now are you recommending yourself or okay. You have to stand on the blue x, and I got three minutes, and you just have to start with your name and then address for the record.

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

So Okay. When the when the clock changes.

And maybe we're sound.

We'll get there.

Hello again. My name is Kate Zurns. I am resident at 814 North Columbus Street, which is next to the development. Can you please pull up slide six for me? While he's pulling that up, I'll go ahead and speak.

So first of all, this is just boiled down to its essentials. Three, four story townhomes squashed between two historic two story townhomes, half the height with no breathing space on either side. That there is nothing from Buzz Bakery to Old Town that is that same situation. The new build on the same street was held to a standard of step down. There's three stories next to two stories and four stories next to three stories.

This is a complete anomaly and also goes against precedent for new build. Not opposed to the concept of a new build. BIA did it beautifully on this exact block. This is not harmonious. This is why the bar exists to in other areas where there isn't regulation to prevent something like this. The bar is here to prevent something like this. This is still completely out of harmony. Also, I think one of the main points is the bar respectfully requested height lowering twice. The first time they lowered it by only three feet. The second time, they disregarded that request by the bar completely.

I ask that you adhere to your request that were respectfully rendered and disregarded. On this, I would also very much question whether or not this is to scale, and some of the numbers that are being thrown out, I would double check against the actual rent rate. But this is where the sideline would be if you're comparing the two story to the four story. They are small two story houses as well. So I appreciate your time. Thank you again. It's good to see you all.

Thank you. Are there any other public speakers on this docket item? Okay. So we'll close the public portion of the hearing. Mr. Weier, if you'd like to come back. Does anyone have questions for our applicant? Oh, mister Bloomfield. Sorry. Okay. Kenneth Wyre is the other person. I

have one question. So have you seen the staff recommendation about the building

I've recently read it.

Did you have any thoughts

about I think we're two and a half feet below what the zoning requires, and I think Allows. Allows. Correct. And I think that we've done a good job at pulling back the 4th Floor to not have such a heavy shadow line on our neighbors. I do wanna correct the record is that, you know, our neighbor to the north is substantially smaller than the block, which makes it look irregular.

But the real block mass is about thirty thirty three feet 31 to 33 feet, and that's where we're delivering our roof deck to. They just have mansards that sit above their roofline. So that's the same standard we were held to at the Whitley. We're 34 feet across the street. That's exactly what we're doing here. So that's the big the big building on 805 across the street. So I I feel like we've met the standard, and we hope that the design will be appreciated.

Well, I I appreciate your design, and I'm understanding the comments from the public. I really appreciate the input. We're in a typical situation here where there's not much we can do about the zoning entitlement. If the zoning board, in my personal view, says this is within the city's zoning guidance for this block, I appreciate the fact that you lowered in three feeds at the request of the board. I'm in I'm just for your application, but I have two comments.

I wasn't here for the concept review. So this is a matter of first impression for me. But but my suggestion would be in this particular location, I think it would be appropriate to have brick on all of the facades of the building. I think you have Harvey on the back. I think it would be more appropriate to have brick there. And secondly, if you look at the surrendering, you're you're molding at the top, the cornice molding. At the very top of the building, it's quite substantial. And then at the top of your window bay bump outs, it's smaller. I would suggest, and

of

course, I'm open to other member input that you reverse the the dimensionality so that the top of the window base is more substantial and that more communicates it sort of lowers the vertical mass of the building and then you take that top one and you get a little bit smaller, almost just flipping those two. It's not that Those would be my two

Other members of the board?

I have a question on color. Are they is it are all three going to be the same color?

Correct.

Have you considered ABA or BAA?

We think over I I believe the design standard is a 100 feet, Bill. Is is that to to provide variation in

the in the color on the Washington Street standards?

This is on Washington Street, so it doesn't fall.

Right. So I I just think over a 50 foot span, 52 foot span, that it would be breaking it up a little too much. If it was a 100 80 to a 100 feet, I could I see introducing that. We have a similar project on 04/15. We've added a lot of variety to that. I think it looks better with just a simpler tighter mass in the middle and two eighteens on the side.

Gotcha.

It looks more one unit. Looks like three townhouses connected on a block of much smaller townhouses on this side of the street for me. So that's why I suggested it to you. Give it some individuality rather than

That's all.

On that note on the color, there there are a few buildings with newer builds in the neighborhood that have very light colored brick, and we've seen within just a few years that we're seeing a lot of, like, staining of that light colored brick. I think it looks nice. I guess I would just ask I don't know if there are materials in the border or in in any kind of trim that caused that kind of fading or bleeding of colors or just needs to be maintained and kept. I don't know what the issue is, but I would just ask that you look into that to make sure you're using materials that aren't gonna leach color, and then you have stained white brick, which obviously isn't how you want your brain to build it. Sure.

Yeah. Absolutely.

I appreciate the detail on this building and the changes you made. I also was not a member of the VA on the other council review, so I didn't have the advantage of seeing that. I do have some concerns about the height of the building, and I think we need to be respectful of that staff recommendation. And I don't know, as a point of deliberation, if we, as a board, wanna create an upper limit for the height. My biggest issue with the massing of the building is I feel like the parapet, although you're calling out the height of the building at thirty two nine for the top of the bay, the parapet to the top is 35, almost 36 feet.

And I think this block face is a it's a very quintessential Parker Gray block. I mean, it's got a lot of historic buildings, and I I just think for the height, we need to be respectful of the buildings that surround it. I feel like the block based elevation that's shown is just the on BAR 9, that's just shown as lots of buildings is a little bit deceiving because most of these buildings have articulation on the front that creates a parapet. And so when you take the top of the parapet, the overall, you know, upper height of your building, it looks a lot more massive than the buildings that are on the bed. So I would like to propose that the top of the parapet wall is no higher than 32 feet, which makes it as high as the peaks of the reef line for the rest of the block.

I'd like to see it shorter.

The parapet well, the parapet is serving a a code purpose for fall prevention. So we wouldn't be able to adjust the floor heights up under the roof. So how would you would you add a rail to

the top? How would you meet the standard for it?

Is there no option to reduce the overall height of the building?

No. I mean, we're we're at a normal we're at a market ceiling height of ten, nine, and nine. That's pretty standard at any EYA or any townhouse project throughout the city. We're not trying to stretch it any further than we should. This is pretty standard.

You actually have nine feet on the 1st Floor. I think you brought it down according to the

I think it The

the clear height the clear height is 10 on first.

The BA one, number five. Could you pull that up for me? But the maybe the upper two floors could be eight feet.

I mean, that's where the master suite would go. It it would be a challenge for us. On the 3rd Floor? The 4th Floor could potentially go to eight feet.

Let's see.

Like Fourth

But Do see that

during this one here? It's like the elevation. That's right.

Which page is this is page 21 with North B.

And you do have steps up to the front?

Well, so that's the that's trying to line up with the face of the block. Well, every townhouse on that block is elevated to step two two trends. If we sink it flat, one, it creates an aesthetic issue. I think it doesn't look right, but it's really an attempt to to match the the the floors of the of everything on that block.

I noticed in the the structure across the street, and it was just to make everything level. There's a variety of steep heights that's not already been sunken in further.

That has to do with the grade change. So we're not necessarily moving the building. We're just letting the grade to follow, and then we're digging down to get to that that area away.

So Couldn't you do the same here? Dig down and get the building down?

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

I mean, it can be done. It's normally, these these seem to have a wind and stream to some degree.

Oh, I think as Michelle mentioned Mikayla mentioned, excuse me, right across the street are sunken entrances, kind of like an English basement, really, where you step down into it. So I was thinking if if the problem is that you wanna go up that high, perhaps you could bring it down some.

So in order for the building across the street to work, we had to get five it's like financially work. Okay? We had to get five floors and 50 feet. So had we had the option financially to shave off the top floor to build the project and then make it, you know, a profitable venture for investors, whoever else, We could have gone four stories and raised the building three feet out of the ground. But we didn't have that luxury, so we work with the existing grades, and we figured out a way to enter the building without having to step up. And so some of that is working with the natural grade. So you'll see on the north side of the Whitley project, you have more steps going down because the grade's naturally higher. There's not much we can do about the sidewalk grade, so we have

to work with that within our design. Because our we're in theory flat. The grade moves up and down. Right?

Mhmm.

So I I don't think for these towns would look appropriate. It'd feel like you're entering more of, a retail space. That's why we're trying to elevate a little bit out of ground to match the street.

Mhmm. Thank you. It looks like your your master bedroom is actually on the 2nd Floor. So I was talking about, you know, reducing the 3rd Floor ceiling height from nine to eight.

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

That's Oh, it it's I'm

sorry.

My dorm says nine feet ceiling height.

It does say nine. So

Oh, well, then it's even

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

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

So

I have a question for you, Hold on. Sorry. Michela, were you suggesting the overall height of the building including the fourth story? The

I don't know if she would be fourth story simply because it's set back far enough, and I think it's very similar to what's been constructed across the back of the Snowden Hollowell Valley. It's very similar to that. I don't think that's gonna be perceived with mass from the street. It's just that the parapet wall is massive. Like, it's a mess. And then I'm not suggesting that, you know, you remove it for code purposes because I think the building looks good. I just think the building is too tall. So And it compares to the rest of the block fix.

Yeah. I I will just weigh in and say, I think the height is fine. I totally respect your comments. I think you do see varying heights on city blocks all over the city, and just around the corner on Montgomery Street, you have a lot of brand new town homes that are essentially the same dimensions and cities there, three stories with a four story addition. So I it's a new building on a block of houses that are of various sizes and ages.

There's a brand new very large apartment building across the street. So I don't know from my perspective, the applicant has already brought the height down three feet in response to our requests, and I do think that a step or two up into a front door is appropriate. I think that flat front door entrance could cause our problems for for someone who owns Water infiltration. Yeah. So totally respecting the comments of my colleagues.

I would I would be inclined to support the height overall. I think you probably could bring it down one foot. I think you can probably bring it down. You could do, you know, nine, eight and a half, eight and a half, and bring it down from, you know, what is this gonna forty two six to forty one six or 41 feet. That probably wouldn't cause too much of a problem.

Nine foot is a is a kind of a a breaking point. And We'll figure out mark. Just mark it. Yeah. I mean, for salability. So I would really, really rather prefer to stick with nine nine and nine. As you as you heard earlier, I thought it was 10.

What about the parapet wall? I mean, it's brick here. Is there an alternative to to Yeah. Like You could do a a a handrail. Handrail.

You can do handrail, which will make it feel lighter, but I do I do like the difference between the top of the bay and

the parapet. I wouldn't

be opposed to doing something like that. I just don't think it matches the aesthetic of the building.

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

Move it back. If you've got 11 feet

The parapet wall.

Could the parapet wall step back? So it doesn't it's it's really to me to my eye, even looking, you know, at the side elevations, it's it it reads as the base of the building. It's not set back very far from the base. Could the could the parapet not be set back?

I mean, we could knock it down 18 inches and then do a decorative guardrail, but It'll feel lighter, but it's still gonna end up with the same light.

What kind of decorative guardrail?

Like I mean,

we should do glass. I mean, a metal simple simple metal. I I want everyone else to be here. I don't want people to want.

Would glass be appropriate for those?

Well okay.

We also see it's up in in roof detects. We often see glass or horizontal cable rails.

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

And and if you step back from the edge, you can see a glass. So

It it also shields some of the 4th Floor. That's also one of the reasons there. So that that's what that's what causes the sight line going. So that's that's the, you know, unintended purpose there, the fiber storage.

I think one thought too would be to have the base be two stories and have them end at two story so that the 3rd Floor would be just more of a a flat facade. And that would be more in keeping with the the buildings on the street that are a lot of them are two stories.

Would you mind if I showed you a slide? Yeah. Sure. Can you go to the elevation?

I don't remember the exact page number.

If you could zoom out for a second. But it would be the front elevation that shows the street massing all the way across.

That should follow-up. It's on

page 25 of it. Oh, 25 of it again.

Right here. Do you see one of our first comments that we addressed was to try to align with the scale of the block, not just the neighbor to the north. Right? So those bays were dropped from concept one to concept two to align with that roofline all the way across. But, visually, that's how it's gonna feel.

It seems that the both the townhouses too, the more the MSL would almost align with the second top of the 2nd Floor if you had a two story bay. Right, your your three story bay is significantly higher than, let's say, all the windows along Yeah. On the street.

You mean then the townhouse is to the right of starting at 814?

Yeah. If you look at 814, those windows stop at your two story bay and also 802, yeah, two story bay with kind of a line with, you know, the bottom of the roofline, if they don't do it. I think that would that would help, you know, break up the mass. I I agree that it it does seem large and massive and more we can do to get it to fit a little meter into that elevation.

I I personally would rather not, but if we if that's what I attempt to get an approval today, we would consider the two story bed.

So let's stop there. Just keep clear. So I understand your proposal. It would be to bring the point small bit down to this level. Mhmm. And then this 3rd Floor would be essentially flat. Mhmm.

Okay. We probably bring it down to you see the sill height Yeah. Of the window Mhmm. On the 3rd Floor? We want it to come up a little bit above the window Yeah. Fan out for it to look appropriate.

Yeah.

Of

course. He wants it to look squab.

Or maybe the center base stays at three. That's why

I was thinking that too. That's possible. You mean for the center gate?

Yes. For the center bay, maybe that. And that way

What about the inverse of that?

No. I I think that that bookends should be lower.

My my right flank hasn't said a dominant thing. So do we have any input for mister Spencer or mister Adams?

I think the comments everybody's made about heights, you can think about, I think, which one has some validity for neighborhood, but I also understand the market conditions and the but I do think that eight six could work in some time, maybe on the 3rd Floor and Top Floor maybe bring that down. At least some version of reducing the mass would be nice. That idea of the cord is changing. Possibly, that could reduce the volume feeling. Like, more on the setting, I the the trim and the precast the precast of the brick, they're pretty much the same color.

We would try to have a a light contrast too.

I think the contrast would help, essentially, the architecture, and they break it up into smaller pieces. Mhmm. So it's funny to think that these big, you know, stars on the north facade or skylights.

Correct.

And, technically, if they were real, they would be running through a very sort of wall. Right? Right now, it's just kind of random. I like the idea that maybe you can do a lot of sun and breaking. It would have been Sure. In the time.

And

I think putting break in the back

of the house would be good. Thank you. Mister Spencer? I don't really have much to add. Kinda agree with the chair. I really don't have a problem with the hike, but considering you know, that consider what the other board members have said, I wouldn't really agree to assume. I understand the market forces, and I I need to be mindful of staff with that.

They're a bit likewise.

Lowered it, I mean, lowered it some. The problem is you get the 18 inches pipe within you get if you need a railing line, which doesn't always look so great either. Yeah. So that's my issue. And that that that that I'd rather just see a bridge caricature come across and it's clean and it's done as opposed to

a railing that I can't figure out how the

how the rhythm really work with this. It doesn't seem to be a natural breaking here to actually add rhythms and some great tiers to kinda break it down. It's just kind of a I think it would make it feel even stranger, and and what I do I don't like the the flat elevation, which I know I don't wanna see, but the top, I the I personally think the vertical side is too long for this house or the style of this house, but I won't see it, so I don't I'm not gonna function on that one. And in the color, we need to reevaluate the color selection because it looks very it looks very bland, and all the render isn't just kind it's washed out. Everything's white or all white.

It just there's no so there's a character in the brickwork because it's not being accentuated by enough contrast to any of the materials selection. Mhmm. So that's all I have.

I'm gonna make another comment. I was asking questions before, but I wanna tell you what I think. We, as the board, we are seeing more and more. Maybe every other meeting. There's an infill in a block that it and the houses are much smaller.

We didn't see that as much in the past, but it seems that the program is really being developed, and many of those houses are smaller than some of the townhouses that we saw in other historic townhouses and other quadrants of old town. So, contextually, I first of all, I wanna tell you that I think you've done a very nice building, and it looks good. Contextually, for me, it does not work in this block. And it's it's a conundrum for me because we are seeing more and more of these, and I suspect we're going

to see more and more

of these. And I would say this building in a different block where there is more variety in the height of the buildings would be more appropriate. So that's what I'm struggling with at the moment.

Well, I I want I do wanna point out that the James Millander building behind us is four stores. Mhmm. And it's it towers over us. It's not it's, like, a true 50 foot 45 foot building.

Mhmm.

Right? And then that surrounds really the backside of us, and then it continues all the way down Montgomery. There's all they're all four stories with a pullback on the Top Floor.

I know. For me, I'm just thinking about the block, as Mikaela mentioned. And two two weeks ago, we had another oh, I think it was maybe the 1,100 or 1,300 block of Prince Street, all two story houses, and then an a submission, very nicely done, just like your building, to go up two more feet. And that was a concern for me. And do understand that this is surrounded by bigger buildings. James Bland had an exception on the height, don't they? Because it's affordable housing. Am I correct?

No. They they they're within the height the the the height height.

Alright. So thank you for your response. We have to take a moment.

Yeah. I think I think part of the frustration of the board here is really not your fault. It's nobody's fault. It's that the city has owned this neighborhood at a certain height, and there is a sense that maybe it's taller than the neighbors or the board would prefer, but but it is also what the zoning is. And so, you know, we're not the zoning board. Yeah. I did just in the interest of trying to move things forward, you have a it's page 29 of your presentation. I don't know if it's on here. I wanted to just in response to mister Spencer's comment. I wanted to okay. Yeah.

Right here. If you see the the rendering on

the left here, I don't know if it's an accident or not, but above the the the arch soldier force above the windows on the left Mhmm. Is of a contrasting brick. I I think maybe that sort of detailed contrast is something that mister Spencer was talking about. Is that something you could maybe do for all of your soldier courses just to create a little bit of visual interest in the

That that's not a hill I'm gonna die on. I think it's fine. A good suggestion. I I would I would wouldn't mind introducing contrast. And and it's been regards to the siding. I'm not, you know, I'm not gonna fight the the horizontal siding as well. It doesn't doesn't bother me whether it's horizontal or vertical.

Did you have a comment on what kind of siding was for? You said that vertical is not appropriate. I mean, it's appropriate. I think it

I mean, this is kind of a traditional ish kind of building, and then there you got this modern top. There's no there's no trim details around the window or on the door opening. It's just kind of decided to flex up to you. I don't know if it was left off in the rendering. It just doesn't seem like it was finished game design. And then I I would almost is that, like, that little window at the top. It almost wants to go I mean, it it it it comes down or it goes up. It's like that little bit of siding that's in between the top of the clear win clear story window and it.

You mean the transom above the Yeah.

Right. That little trip near, like, six or eight inches. I mean, the rendering rendering and the the elevation showed that as being vertical side stuff in that little piece, which is either you grow the window or or reduce the the transit window. Yeah. I mean, I'm open to that. I just it just there's not enough detailing on that that floor floor. Just looks like someone just kinda get the minimum they needed to do up there so we have an elevation.

In in some ways, it's a little bit intentionally, but we're trying to make it visually go away. It's setback, but if it's setback,

so no one's gonna see it anyway. Right.

But I'm certainly open to to tweaking that and making

it more work involved with that. They hope to tie it to the house overall. Sure.

Okay. I'm I'm prepared to offer some conditions for a motion, and we'll just see how it goes. Unless any other board members would like to make comments, I don't wanna cut anybody off. So just give me one second to get my thoughts together. Okay.

I would I would make a motion to approve with staff recommendations and following conditions. One, the that you introduce a contrasting decorative brick element in, for example, the soldered courses above the windows and even maybe that side detail you have on the north elevation just to provide some visual interest along the lines of what mister Spencer noted. Two would be on 4th Floor that you use horizontal siding and introduce decorative trim finish details just so that it's not so austere. The third would be to address the transom window that that small amount of difference between the top of the transom and then your corners molding. Maybe either just have like a slightly taller French door with no transom or I don't know.

Just add, you know, maybe an extra six inches there or take the window all the way out. So just work with staff to address mister Spencer's concern.

That would

be the condition. Four would be, okay, on the north and south of the three to bring down the bay to the second Story for those two like we talked about, leaving the one in the middle at three floors or actually giving me giving you the option to to do the 2nd Floor or the 3rd Floor. I I would leave that to your discretion as you We may. We have to model I will leave that at your discretion. But to bring those side ones down to the 2nd Floor and then to make the cordless molding at the top of the vertical bay elements more substantial and then the quartz molding at the top of the aparacet wall to be less substantial just to sort of emphasize the lower scale of the building.

And then six would be to use brick on on all facades of the building on the first three levels with understanding you've got your hardy on the floor. Does anyone wanna first of all, mister Farkin, did you get those? Yeah. Okay. Would anyone wanna add anything else on this on on this motion? We can always have other motions if this one doesn't pass. Okay. So I will make the motion to approve with those six conditions and stat regulations.

I'll second that.

Do we need to do

a roll call vote, mister Pompey?

We do not. There's no demolition to called.

Great. All those in favor of the motion, aye. Aye.

Aye.

Four ayes and two names. Six. One two. Congratulations. Thank you. Bye bye.

And I'm just just to clarify, miss miss Roxanne.

Miss Mela. And miss Mela.

Okay. Thank you. What's next on the documents, mister Ponti?

One or something?

Okay.

Number eight and nine.

Next item, doctor's name, number 89. This is VA 2026Dash00106. District request for re reapproval of expired alteration and addition plans at 333 Green Street, the application call of a Sullivan. And BDR 2026Dash00107, Multisore District. Request for approval of expired partial demolition encapsulation plans at 333 Green Street. The applicant is Paul O'Sullivan.

Okay. Mister O'Sullivan, can you just are you the Paul O'Sullivan?

I am Paul Sullivan. And your address is? 333 Green Street.

Okay. Before I turn it over to you because we saw you a year ago, have you made any changes to these designs since the board approved this a year ago? Minimum. Minimal. And they Do you wanna just go through that

with us?

Sure. On page four, actually, of the the presentation.

Mhmm.

Engineer citing, it has so one of the that's an email.

Awesome. Just gone.

That's okay.

If you

can if

you can jump to the elevations. The the engineered siding actually from the brick has been pulled in. Do have a picture with us? We we need to talk from here.

It'll work on here. Alright. Thanks.

So the the engineered siding has been pulled in and said two and three quarters originally had one inch. This is gonna be

a game of inches, by the way.

Okay. Overheading has been pulled in eleven and three quarters. We reduced the size of the HVAC rooftop unit as well as put a roof rooftop unit screen on it. I showed some snow guards, which are also shown in the products at the the back end. And the only other thing that I realized that's not in there is the existing chimney right now has three brick high. It extends beyond the main chimney by about, I think, three quarters to an inch. So what we did was we had to continue we flattened that out as we brought it up, but then we repeated that as we went to the new chimney.

Okay. That's it. Those are pretty minor details. Correct. Just for the public's information, we have reviewed this house three or four times. It was disapproved and then approved. And we currently have a suggestion before the city council to allow homeowners have three years from the time a certificate of appropriateness is issued. There is a quirk in the city ordinance that allows developers who have to get a special use permit to have three years, but we unfortunately hold homeowners to this one year standard, which in my view is not fair to them. And so, mister Cockney, this is coming before this council soon. Right?

We are trying to get yes. It's it's within a package of zoning orbits amendments that we have addressed with the board. We've talked talking through all these things. It is supposed to go soon. We are still just waiting for approval to get it through.

Okay. So we're gonna try to address this problem in the future, understanding there are a lot of reasons why people can't start the project within a year. With all of that said, are there any public speakers on this particular docket item? No. Okay. Then we'll post public hearing, and then I just wanna open it up. Since we've already talked to you so many times, I just wanna open it up to my colleagues on the board, see if anyone has some comments or questions. And and just for clarification too.

The under the reason for the the delay was small man taco has screwed over with the tariffs, so price of things have skyrocketed.

Understood. Okay. There's no questions. Do we wanna do a motion? Wait. No. I don't. Yes, miss Noah.

I mean, I've been paying as much attention as I should have. This has been more than a year.

Right? That's where we have

to reapprove it. It's been a year. Yes.

Okay. Right. Okay. I think you were extremely lucky to get it the last time, and here we go again.

Would anyone like to make a motion on this application?

Yeah. I I think you really worked with us about the different design. So I'd like to make a motion to approve this application with staff recommendations, which is approval.

Do you have a second? And second, and then must just say if you've approved this time. Please start. Yeah. Oh,

yeah. There's no guarantee you're gonna have

to be It it will be starting

Okay.

Very soon.

So this is probably just a roll call. Yes?

Yes. It is. We have demo with this one.

Okay. So let's call on hold.

Thank you. Miss Robinson?

Aye.

Mister Spencer? Aye.

Mister Sonia?

Aye. Mister

Adams? Aye. Miss Miller?

Nay. Mister Scott? Aye.

Thank you.

Congratulations. Alright. What is next on the docket? 14 and 15? No. Am I skipping ahead?

You're miss your work. Yes. I am. It's ten, eleven. And you have to see the docket. I will be exiting.

Okay. So, mister Harris, are you gonna read this one in?

Alright.

Hello. Hello. Good to see everybody. This is such a weird setting. But anyhow, I'm Karen Ponkey. Sorry.

I I have to read that first. Oh, sir. Okay. Items ten and eleven, BAR number 20260011 6 on Historic District. Request for partial demolition and encapsulation at 428 Virginian Street. Applicant is Julia and John Acker, represented by Karen Hockey, architect. And BAR, 132600117, Historic District. Request for an addition and alterations at 428 Virginia Street. Applicant is Julia and John Hacker, represented by Karen Conkey Architects.

Thanks.

And you are miss Conkey? I am miss Conkey. And what's your

address? Sorry.

407 South Lee Street.

Alright. Let's go.

Great. So my clients, Julie and Jay Acker, are are sitting here. They purchased the home in this earlier this year to be closer to family. They are very excited about getting their renovations started. I don't think you would be seeing them for the lay of of construction. They wanna go. Our application tonight proposes to replace all the exterior doors with doors conforming to the design guidelines. The new terrestore on the rear will be enlarged. We're adding a transom above to get some more light to the space. They wanna add a vapor door to the front on the 1st Floor.

So this is the the houses. There's 86 of them over with kind of there's quail, queen, princess, happens to be on Union facing the river. Mhmm. And they they have that 1st Floor where it's a foyer and a and a garage, and so the the Mhmm. Real 1st Floor is a story above.

So adding that day window. Replacing the steam dormers, they have three little dormers up at the roofline with a larger single shed dormer. It makes for much less awkward space on that 3rd Floor without having those little ins and outs. Adding composite with shutters at the 2nd Floor, and they would like to add roof terrace. That's one of the main things they they approached me about, which they would have small rear porch that then has an exterior stair that accesses the roof. They've done a minimal cable railing, you know, yard normal deck of package for the finishes up there. We agree with the staff's findings and happy to answer any questions.

Are there any public speakers on this? We have it.

Do we

have any last public speakers on this? Alright. Let's close the public portion of this hearing, and I'd love to open it up for I have a question, so I'll ask the first question. Do your rail for the roof jack, is that flush at the top of the building, or is it like that?

So we've got the roof coming up, and then the railing is sort of back on that roof structure. So it's it's bring up the. Yeah. There we go. Oh, we've got a slope of roof so that faux mansard roofs that all the houses have. Okay. And then my railing is kind of here, so it's sort

of this condition. Okay. Okay. And then your your garage door with glass elements Mhmm. Is it real glass? Yes. Okay. We've had some Yes. Discussion about that.

Okay. Good to know. Yeah. Think it's

I think we would prefer real glass. Of course. Okay. Right. Sure.

The shutters will be back tomorrow with you?

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

Good question. So the the shed dormer, are these windows taller than what's currently in there? They're approximately the same size.

Earing on the side that I'm sure code is gonna say that they need to be egressed, I've got them sort of sized to function as egress windows, but they're approximately the same size. The sill is a little different. I think the the current sill is very close to the floor, which is a little awkward in the room, so I think I've raised the sill to just make it more functional.

Is there a reason why you didn't use metal roofing adjacent to the shed. You've got metal roofing on the shed, but you've got asphalt shingles. I think that was just the homeowner's preference.

It has an asphalt roof now, so they were kinda feeling with what they've got. But yeah.

I can certainly think it'd be a great place for a roof deck. To the Potomac River is like that. That whole part.

Yeah. Good.

So I understand this is an area where a lot of exceptions have been made in terms of the size of the windows and. I would venture to say that you've done a great job of maximizing as much window in view as you possibly can. Right. I just have a bit of a concern about the solid to void ratio on this, particularly the the dormer windows being almost as wide as the the two bays beneath them. It's a lot of window. And at a minimum, I'd like to see the the dormers on the top be maybe four instead of three or or just something that makes them less wide. Mhmm.

I would agree with that. It's a pretty massive shed dormer

Mhmm.

On the third level. I would say maybe bringing it in so that it so that each edge centers on the window below, something like that. Just make it narrower and maybe even making the windows, like, a little bit. Since it's so massive, just like it should read as the the Top Floor, not as does that make sense?

It does.

Is that something that could be accomplished?

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

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

I see.

Just to make it less fast. I don't know. Even yeah. My architect probably have more thoughts.

Yeah. Three windows. So a three window aligned with an edge of the two outer windows on the inside case

of those.

It would be fine.

Or maybe, yeah, you could just scale there.

So we the door was actually

aligned with the existing dormers. We're just taking out the middle portion of the roofs.

The spacing in between. Yeah.

I mean, that that's what makes them. That's what makes it look so much more mass. If you wanted to keep it at two dormers and change them into shed dormers, I would like

can to be if we move

it off and small. That's the idea. It's to make it look small. Small. Smaller than the floors below. Yeah.

So it's not a concern.

I'm not as smart.

I hate to do this, but we do need no. You are allowed to talk. But I need you to come over here. You're absolutely allowed to talk. You're the applicant, and you can talk to us as much as you want.

I

I just need your name for the record. Sure. And your address is?

428 North Shore.

And then now you can say whatever you want.

Okay.

I'm not an architect, but I

do have a fairly good eye, and I feel like if you

mine, that top window would look fairly out of proportion to the rest of the of the house. Our other thing is one of the things that we wanna do on that floor is make it a big river view social room. And so cutting the windows in and blocking that view, I think, would make a very big difference on the inside, really take away what we're trying to do in that room. It's a it's sort of a social gathering with sunroom. It's actually called the sunroom on the inside. So it would be very disappointing if we had to shrink the number of men and have walls on the side.

I don't know if

that was very articulate.

It's just one option. It could be to shorten the window. We don't necessarily need to double, especially after it could be a casement. And I agree with Mikaela. Brandon, could you bring up some elevation of the other buildings to browse it? Because, yeah, that even if go back up. You can you can kinda see the window to wall ratio. Yeah. There's quite a bit of wall and then some windows. But, you know, even the building on the North where it has kind of a bigger base, it still has a fair amount of direct showing.

So that might be something to really investigate whether

John Auger 428

North Union. Yeah. Difference is that house in the North is a third smaller.

And that's why?

Less why. Sorry. So when you look at the proportionality, I mean, we're only we're not expanding the base of the dormers on width basis. We're just taking out the roof. I guess, we understand this the effect of making it.

You can stand, you can do whatever you want, but your proposal is just making it more massive. Right? So understood they extend you're changing the style of the building to make that 3rd Floor or the 4th Floor just a much more substantial element. And if you look at the the agreed smaller house to the right, you can see that dormer the edge of the dormer appears to be extended at the the center of the window. So it doesn't go all the way to the edge, and that's because typically, you would see a diminishing of, you know, on a roof on a top floor like this, you you you would have a smaller window. With Yep. Yep. It's still

Would it be be acceptable to do four? Let's see. We had five windows, I think, so reduce it to four so it does pull it to center to center.

I think I think better. Yeah. Four?

Would be better? Four might

We could use four and but center it. Mhmm. And then what about miss Delino's idea of making it a a basement window style instead

of

double hung just so you could shorten it a little bit. The basement has a crank like that. You can get them a little shorter if you get Right.

For the Egress. For the Egress. Yeah.

Would they be segmented?

We would be working with proportions to get it. I think they would be less tall is what they're proposing. Yeah. And

A little bit

would be it would be fewer windows perhaps at the

same width. Again, I have to just kinda figure out

the dimensions of it. Have to see

it. Right. Yeah. Well, if you we we can approve this with these conditions, but then we wanted to go back and, like Work with or and bring it back to us. Right.

If you

wanted to show us something else, we don't have to vote on this today Right. Or we can. I just it sounds like the act thing isn't totally there on what we're talking about, and I would get to approve something and then have you go home and be like, wait. What did what did the board approve?

I will come back in case more time. Just time. Yeah.

It's your decision. We we absolutely can vote on the certificate today. I think the board has a clear vision of what we're talking about. I just wanna make sure that we defer who we prefer. Yeah. Like, you can ask us to defer this, and you can talk to miss Congee and look at other designs before you come back. I just would hate to approve something and then have you not be comfortable with it.

Not necessarily.

You wouldn't have to come back anyway.

We could vote

on it today. Yeah. Okay. That's Yeah.

And then It's up to you.

It's really up to you, but

it doesn't get approved.

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

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

Or the deferral?

The deferral, mean?

And if you back in a month, please.

So Come back in a month.

For the deferral, can come back in next week.

Exactly. Yeah. Right. What would you recommend? We don't care.

Yeah. It's kinda up to you. The second point maybe

Yeah. Yeah. We're not done waiting again. Okay. Yeah. We have more feedback.

So Okay. Please. Yeah. Yeah.

Because you weren't totally clear, I just wanna make sure. I appreciate it. Yeah. So we'll get to that, but miss Miller has some other things to say and as do my other colleagues.

K. What is what is on is is this on the river? Is this looking in straight to the river? Bring up. I I know where it is. I've actually lived I lived at 702 South Union for quite a while. And This is North Union. Oh, I hope I'm totally confused. It's the It's on the park. I'm sorry. I was confused on that. Are there is there any precedents for any others that have been done like this? The house next door, and then there's a picture in

the stat report that shows other houses. They all have large dormers. And, again, people have there's another picture going there. We go with that one. Shoulder.

There it was.

Yeah. People batting out. Roof decks and large dormers all the way down the block.

Yeah. I brought these shoes.

Great. I heard things were smaller. Concerned for the symmetry or the

It's more just a mass, the size of the door bridge.

The lower base is just there's a little. If you look at this if you look at this image, you can see a fair amount of brick on the front facade. And, you know, that with all of the proposed fenestration, it's a little bit too much, you know, glass compared to the elevation that's developed here. Yeah. So I think Thank

you. Honestly, I would like to walk the bluff. And if if you wouldn't mind coming back, that would be helpful to me. Because when I I do walk this block, I feel that it's there are several houses that are have done a great deal to maximize the glass on their facades. And so I would like to just look contextually about how this would look compared to the other houses. That's how I feel.

Miss Salina?

I think that, you know, some additional work, you know, I could favor this application if we had all of the roof was metal just like the shed roof. I think that's gonna probably look better. And reducing the attic, the shed attic, just because I think it'll be more proportionate with the building overall. But they're they're slightly shorter windows and maybe four instead of five. You know, I think that's really.

Concur with you, Yes, sir.

Yes. Thank you. This why I called this process, so I don't know, reaction because everybody wants a review. Right. Right on the.

So I'd like to see how to get you what you want, but I think it's over reshaping right now. The with the ratio, I've worked up another property that's in a couple properties that were on the phone may have any. The code did require the ratio of glass to solid not being too great. I think this is there's just too much glass here. If the garage door is all glass

No. No. Garage door is mostly panels with glass. Oh, yeah. Yeah. That's right.

So I think the that does sound because I just somehow haven't I think the 2nd Floor or the Main Floor, maybe it's just too too it's overreaching. And