[0:05] We have a full document tonight. So please try to be concise and to the point if you are speaking. And if you wish to speak on any of the cases, please make sure to pull out speakers and give it to the staff. So first order of the business. We have the consideration of the meeting minutes from July.

[0:25] I'd like to see, does any of the members of the board

[0:29] wish to suggest operations to the meetings?

[0:32] To the meetings?

[0:34] No, do any members of the public

[0:37] have any comments on the meeting?

[0:41] No, can I get a motion on a minute?

[0:44] So moved.

[0:45] Any opposed?

[0:48] I like it.

[0:51] Any opposed?

[0:56] All right, can we be adopted all in favor?

[1:00] Hi.

[1:02] All opposed.

[1:04] All right.

[1:05] Without the minute next item on the calendar is the consent calendar?

[1:12] Yes.

[1:13] Thank you.

[1:14] The point is better than one point on a couple of things to remember.

[1:17] First of all, welcome after our August recess.

[1:20] Nice to be able again, but we'll have nice and August.

[1:23] We'll see a couple of new things tonight, we're trying to stop out and fail miserably,

[1:27] because now we have to look at the data, but I'll try to, I'll always look in the, in the

[1:31] movie, try to improve things. So we'll see a couple things. First, the data, of course,

[1:36] have a new template. We're trying out the different template, try to, push some of the more important

[1:41] information early in the document, making it easier to find kind of a little more graphic, you know,

[1:46] that sort of thing. So we'll do that for a couple of, a couple of hearings, give us feedback,

[1:50] In fact, things in the line, things in development,

[1:52] questions.

[1:53] We did as we go for this one thing.

[1:56] The second thing is we're going to try out,

[1:58] try out something new out,

[1:59] where Snap will do a brief,

[2:01] very, very, really.

[2:02] Like I've been promised a brief,

[2:03] uh,

[2:04] skip it out to each case.

[2:05] So we'll just basically say,

[2:06] okay,

[2:07] you're, you're up salient points in this case.

[2:09] Here are things that are,

[2:10] uh,

[2:11] to look at and Snap is recommending this.

[2:15] And the recommendation and,

[2:17] and conditions will be found here.

[2:18] That's about it.

[2:20] We're just trying to focus the conversation so the dollar one was really the important point for this project.

[2:27] So, that being said, that's our new stuff.

[2:29] Now we move on to our documents.

[2:32] This idea is that we have the number of items on the consent calendar.

[2:36] It would be the minimum.

[2:39] First item at number three, the R2026-00244.

[2:45] all district districts request for operation that needs zero six sound fairfax

[2:50] speed. Now in the solar energy world represent our way to the end of the day.

[2:55] Item number four, the R is going to be six dashed of the area zero two five four

[2:59] for request for all reasons and to work five to eight to reach South Pitch Street.

[3:04] Applicant is very well-appropriated, representative by Gretchen Dreadel.

[3:09] Item number five is the R 20 for six dashed of the area zero two means six

[3:15] at 724 south of the street, applicant is Richard and Sean

[3:19] Kathbarts.

[3:21] At number 6 is DBR 2026, that 0.298.

[3:26] Holders for district, request for operations and signs in 8207

[3:29] illustrations.

[3:30] Applicant is Portland, Alexandria, but they're like MZ permits.

[3:34] And finally out of the 7 is the R2026, that 0.304.

[3:39] Holders for district request for operations with 719

[3:42] I'm going to put street, yeah, we're going to win.

[3:45] Thank you.

[3:46] Thank you.

[3:47] Do any members of the board wish to remove any of these items from the gallery?

[3:54] Yes.

[3:55] I'd like to remove item number six for 8020 South Carolina Street.

[4:00] And I would like to remove number five.

[4:04] So that's 20 more sounds.

[4:07] Do any members of the public wish to remove any items from the convention?

[4:14] So let's look for the remainder of the organs on the back of the head.

[4:21] Any other motion at the second and then just a voice.

[4:27] I want to make some motion for applying the remainder of the organs on the concept calendar.

[4:33] Excuse us.

[4:34] We can't really hear it. It's very muffle time here.

[4:39] All right, we'll speak up.

[4:41] Is there a microphone?

[4:43] I'm going to have a mic because we will do a little bit better.

[4:45] Very poor.

[4:49] I'm sorry. I think I...

[4:51] We'll try to speak a little louder.

[4:52] I hope that's your direction.

[4:54] Yes.

[4:55] We will work our best to speak louder so everyone can hear us.

[5:00] And also on the second two,

[5:07] okay. Right, aye. Aye. So moving on to number five, it's been removal from the consent calendar, AR-

[5:15] 26th at its users are 286, all district districts of operation is 724. These crews, the sound easily bad. What just happened? So literally, what just happened? Okay, we've

[5:30] I'm sorry, this is as best we can do. We do not have so which items are still left. I'm in three, four and seven. I've been approved. So if you've been on item three, four and seven, you believe you items have been approved.

[5:43] 5 and 6 are being considered every day.

[5:50] Okay, again, number five is next in line, number five.

[5:55] 74 south of the street.

[5:58] The applicant needs the courts.

[6:05] Yes, before you start for minutes.

[6:06] I'm going to make sure this.

[6:07] All right.

[6:08] So the applicants are Richard and Sean Katkart.

[6:11] You guys can't remain standing on time.

[6:13] The proposed scope of work is to replace three iron columns on the 18-foot wide front porch

[6:19] with three six-by-eight painted cedar wood columns. On page two of the report,

[6:27] you'll see the site context is that this is third in line on a row of seven homes. I'll set that

[6:34] from the street to allow a curb cushion larger front yard. Page three of the report shows the

[6:40] look of the wooden columns. And page three also draws attention to the design standards

[6:47] for porches that include that porches should be a program that store full style of the structures

[6:52] and porches should be made of materials which are sympathetic to the building materials

[6:56] generally found in the store district. Page four of the report has the engagement staff

[7:01] right. Page two. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Paisis. Thank you, your name and address for

[7:07] Yes, all right. I'm Sean Calf-Card and our address is 724 south-way street. Thank you. So I

[7:16] I pulled this out just I have a comment on the size of the column because it seems very large for

[7:25] the for the basically room that is for the porch and the room that is holding. So my recommendation is to

[7:32] So kind of look at the side of it to regain a seat.

[7:37] Similar to what your neighbors have, that you actually have pointed out.

[7:41] Well, if you're looking at a rendering,

[7:44] it is out of proportion.

[7:46] We are doing a inch with the columns.

[7:50] It's about the same size as what the.

[7:53] We could go around.

[7:57] We decided not to rock, but we decided to remove the iron post

[8:01] and put new working posts in, and then we're doing detailed holidays on the top and the bottom.

[8:07] Yeah, I appreciate it. It's making me improve my, why not just maybe, maybe I can make a comment,

[8:14] because I'm not there to see it in the rendering industry to be. So maybe I can just

[8:19] recommend to work with the staff to make sure that the size is similar to what the, you know,

[8:24] the neighbouring house as well. Yeah, it is, you know, and if you perspective, this is eight inches.

[8:29] It's like, so it's just public and it's 18,000 wide porch.

[8:34] So if I could show you any sort of visual idea of the proportions of it,

[8:42] because I agree through the random AI rendering is a little bit too beefy.

[8:46] So to clarify, I'm looking at the picture that shows your facade with 726 Southleaf and 728 Southwood.

[8:55] So the size and measure of the size of those columns and yours has been keeping with that size. Yes.

[9:02] Thank you.

[9:05] Thank you.

[9:06] Make a motion to approve that they work with staff to confirm that the column size is pertinent size for the height of the porch.

[9:26] second. All those in favor say aye.

[9:34] Which they have members of the work.

[9:42] Thank you. Thank you so much.

[9:45] Thank you.

[9:45] All right. Moving to the next item.

[9:49] and number six? Yes, yes, and number six. This is B-A-R-2026.

[9:56] this.

[9:57] So, here we go.

[9:58] Two, nine, eight,

[9:59] let's go.

[10:00] District, request for operations, signage, at 820, self-promised, creative, applicant, agenda, resident, resident, resident, resident, resident, resident, resident, resident, resident, resident, resident, resident.

[10:10] All right, so the post-copal work is to install an individual letter,

[10:15] hand-mounted, halo-obuminum sign above the building entrance, which is the West

[10:20] elevation. On page two of the report, you will see the site context for this

[10:28] project is a residential building that encompasses the entire block of 800 South

[10:33] Columbus. And on page three of the report shows the placement and visual

[10:39] parents of the proposed signage.

[10:42] Page 3 also draws attention to the design standards for signage that includes that styles

[10:47] and materials are sympathetic to the age and architectural style of the building.

[10:51] They do not attract from the architectural character of the source structures and the included

[10:57] lettering is appropriately scaled to the size of the sign.

[11:01] Page 3 of the report has the staff recommendation.

[11:05] Thank you.

[11:06] Can you please state your name and address for the record?

[11:09] My name is John Martell, I'm one, two, six, one, eight,

[11:13] matched things way in Bristol, Virginia.

[11:16] And I am representing Corbyn and M. G. Burnett,

[11:20] so I'm the contractor.

[11:22] Thank you.

[11:23] Would you like to make your presentation

[11:24] or just answer it to question?

[11:26] Answer to question.

[11:27] I thought I was only consent calendar.

[11:30] So do you have any speakers or do you have three speakers?

[11:35] First is taught how to

[11:44] do it in my short list.

[11:47] Absolutely.

[11:48] And I just thought of the 15 self-pollumnest rate.

[11:52] It's right across the street from the local.

[11:55] So staff clearly noted in their recommended approval,

[11:59] the application that was consistent with recent,

[12:01] a little limited signs through by the board.

[12:04] However, they get in slight specific examples.

[12:07] And it was possible to determine the approvals represented.

[12:10] similar signs and similar residential neighborhoods.

[12:15] In the absence of that clarity by staff, I took the time to review the B.A.R.'s published

[12:19] meeting in January with the B.A.S. Act 12 months in order to answer the questions.

[12:25] So, when reviewing that with these 20 B.A.R hearings, I was able to clearly view that there

[12:29] were four proposals that came before the B.A.R., seeking approval for internally and no

[12:33] main signs.

[12:35] There were several dead links in the published genders, and there were a couple that I was

[12:39] not able to determine if they were a lit sign or not.

[12:44] However, what was clear in reviewing that is that all four requests related to properties

[12:49] on or around King Street within the King Street urban retail zone and none of the proposal requests

[12:56] came from properties in a residential only area.

[12:59] So to be specific, the four proposals came from the 400 King Street, which is where the

[13:09] self-verb X, one from 100 more pit on the poor of king and pit.

[13:15] Interestingly, the approval recommendations

[13:16] talked about staff with regard to that application

[13:19] from the backlit sign of 100 more pit.

[13:22] Staff found that the proposed backlit sign was appropriate

[13:27] as it was located on a non-street facing elevation

[13:32] and was not adjacent to any residential problems.

[13:38] But by publishing this, staff's own recommendation and that 100 North Pitt Street proposal set for both a clear and objective writ of criteria that should strongly be considered by the BAR and all future requests for internally eliminate signs, since by its own words, staff is using consistency with previous approvals as the standard of you all future applications.

[14:02] In this specific case, they're recommended approval of the 820 self-pulomous stands

[14:08] equivalent prevention of any previously stated criteria, as 820 self-pulomous to street

[14:15] proposed sign would be located on both a street-facing elevation and will be adjacent to residential

[14:21] projects.

[14:22] As a result, we believe the Board should consider viewing this application as inconsistent

[14:28] to with previous more briefings.

[14:30] I know I may have to admit it,

[14:32] so I'd really thank you for your time

[14:33] and have answered questions you may have in the comments.

[14:36] Thank you.

[14:38] Our next speaker is Janice Kruppiak.

[14:41] We'll be, sorry, thank you.

[14:43] Thank you.

[14:44] Good evening, Chair, my chair, members of the board

[14:47] and staff, I'm sure there's some busy people.

[14:49] Thanks for the opportunity to speak this evening.

[14:51] My name is Janice Kruppiak,

[14:52] and I too met a gate between South Columbia Street,

[14:55] directly across from the end of the way

[14:56] of age 20 South Columbia Street.

[14:58] I hope that all of you were able to.

[15:00] Review the materials I sent to staff last week, receiving a petition, objecting to the signage as proposed. I sent an updated version this morning with a quick turnaround. I was able to get 37 signatures of which only two are residents versus property owners, and you include all of the owners of properties in the required notification zone. I respectfully request that the bar deny the signage request as proposed, a hallowed illuminated sign is not typical in the old and historic district, computing along King Street, one of our busiest commercial corridors in the city.

[15:29] The city's own sign ordinance discourages this type of signage and imposes limits on nighttime

[15:34] illumination in residential zones. The entryway is in fact in a residential zone and across

[15:39] the street from eight homes, all of which have a bedroom located in the front of the house,

[15:43] facing South Columbus Street. Four have kitchens and dining areas that face South Columbus Street,

[15:47] and up to four two homes have direct view of the entryway from this portion of their homes.

[15:52] When the trees are bare, which is not in this picture, you will have full view and will now be

[15:57] blocked by flowers of poor leaves.

[15:59] The entryway of the building has included my materials

[16:01] is currently fully accumulated during fall overnight hours.

[16:05] The existing signage when the building was known

[16:07] as the playboard was blocked that way

[16:08] and it's certainly appropriate

[16:09] to have a character in the streetscape.

[16:11] I submitted additional documentation

[16:13] that includes photos of South,

[16:14] the South Washington side of the block,

[16:16] photos of blue days, hardware,

[16:18] friend use, staff side, the Navy's to swerve,

[16:20] none of which have illuminated signs.

[16:22] They have lights that face down over this signage,

[16:25] but they do not project outward.

[16:26] Even the sign that we're Jones, which is on the self-belumbest side, is not illuminated.

[16:31] Again, thanks for the opportunity to speak to you this evening.

[16:34] Newer's residents in the neighborhood are opposed to proposed signage as submitted to you.

[16:39] It appears that the concern here is not with reasonable identification of the property,

[16:43] but with the unnecessary introduction of additional nighttime lighting into the

[16:47] historical residential streetscape.

[16:49] The proposed halo illuminated corporate signage would increase light pollution and

[16:52] to track from the atmosphere,

[16:54] but they 100 block of the South Pole and Michigan,

[16:55] which is located in the boundaries

[16:57] of the boldness of our district.

[16:58] There are many sign options available.

[17:01] For granted, she's not outweighed

[17:03] the preservation standards and residential character

[17:05] that you all have been entrusted to on our behalf.

[17:08] Thank you.

[17:09] And I'm also gonna share in the sign

[17:10] that my neighbor met May and she's gay

[17:12] and she had the better of that faces

[17:14] the front of the building.

[17:15] Thank you.

[17:16] Thank you.

[17:17] Nice to meet you.

[17:18] Nice speaker and Nancy Ellen McCarthy.

[17:23] And I'll be really quick, but thank you for the seed making opportunities because I actually

[17:27] moved to 803 degrees in spring.

[17:31] So I'm on the board of green stuff on this, so I can see the product in the proper use.

[17:35] The ability to sell the stuff logically.

[17:37] I think the addition of this cable that will give me the sign, really changes the collection

[17:42] not only of a residential neighborhood, but old town advocacy as a whole.

[17:47] And I would like to pose as like a hypothetical, they say as lawyers, they say not to use

[17:53] hypotheticals.

[17:54] But just to imagine across the street from my house, the building is allowed to put a

[17:59] bad, good, halo that's fine on the side.

[18:02] What is to stop the home owners and the town owners to put a halo in the numbers on their

[18:08] homes?

[18:09] I'm just using that as a hypothetical, a hypothetical to show how it can change as a reflection

[18:14] of a recipient to be working. I encourage you to vote against this

[18:18] missing request. Thank you. Thank you. Any other questions? All right, we'll

[18:25] combine the questions and the deliberation for the members to any one

[18:30] coach. Does anyone remember who'd like to go first? I really appreciate the

[18:36] organized community for some knowledge and the solidarity that you have in

[18:41] your opposition. Thank you for coming out tonight and for all of your

[18:44] petitions and your letter. I will say a completely agreed. This is a

[18:48] residential street unlike King Street and I think it's a bad

[18:53] precedent for signage on more residential streets. So I support

[19:00] your sentiments. And I guess I would just ask

[19:03] Portland, is there an alternative signage proposition that you would consider?

[19:08] That's not a halo lit.

[19:11] Reef is three dimensional letters, not eliminated.

[19:15] I mean, I don't understand the residents concerned.

[19:21] But we're talking about a halo lit letter,

[19:24] which this face is solid.

[19:26] It's just a light that shines around the letter.

[19:29] It doesn't shine out.

[19:30] It will not shine on anybody's property.

[19:32] We are not in any bonus room.

[19:34] Let her find it.

[19:35] Okay, so.

[19:36] But that seems to be a big concern of all these people to come up and

[19:41] scope it somehow this is going to affect. They won't even get the

[19:45] front of the building is set. I don't know 40, 50 feet from the road so it's not

[19:56] if it's not just 10-15 feet.

[20:00] So, I mean, that's fine. If Courtland would prefer to have a lighted sign, we will accept a non-aluminated

[20:12] three-dimensional letter sign, but somebody mentioned Gu's neck lighting, with any type of

[20:19] lighting to be acceptable to people here and to the board, whereas the sign just have to be

[20:24] not eliminated three dimensional letters.

[20:30] I would think for if you need to add lighting,

[20:34] like a stance, or if I saw that,

[20:36] you actually have some ground lighting already there,

[20:40] so you might not have enough lighting,

[20:42] but that would be fine.

[20:43] Not just eliminated sign.

[20:45] Okay, so not an internally eliminated sign.

[20:48] External illumination would be okay,

[20:51] or are we gonna have a problem with that too?

[20:54] I think you should.

[20:55] I mean, that's much better.

[20:56] It's really better.

[20:58] Because I can see the public.

[20:59] I think this next round.

[21:01] Because that lighting could be

[21:02] excluded administratively.

[21:03] So that's up in the board should be very.

[21:05] Yes.

[21:07] As long as it.

[21:09] It aligns with the other lighting.

[21:13] At the end of this.

[21:15] Yeah.

[21:16] Actually.

[21:18] Okay.

[21:18] But also want to make sure that.

[21:20] Would you all be opposed to.

[21:22] I didn't hear what she said.

[21:24] and other businesses in the neighborhood

[21:26] that employees rented above.

[21:28] So here's the thing I want.

[21:29] You would be okay to that if we did that.

[21:31] And we know to see the proposal.

[21:32] I'd like to see the proposal.

[21:34] I don't know how to write.

[21:35] We're going to make it.

[21:36] There are small reading blanks

[21:37] along the street from Portland.

[21:39] Very bright, street blanks that they did all.

[21:42] And they have a logging area that looks like a hospital.

[21:46] It's so bright.

[21:47] It's like 24 hours a day.

[21:49] So really bothering, I think if there's

[21:52] going to be something added to the bill. I personally like to see

[21:56] specifically what it is. That's fine. I just want to make sure not

[22:02] going back and forth with multiple. So what's the reason you want to ask?

[22:07] It seems there is enough lighting there. Is that something

[22:10] that's for better? What's that? I feel there would be better visibility.

[22:14] They feel that this entrance is set back from the road.

[22:18] I'll be honest with you. I've only been there in the daytime so I don't know

[22:21] the lighting in the evening, but they just feel that because of the trees and and so forth,

[22:27] which I never not bloom on your own, but that it would just be better visibility and the halo,

[22:34] like halo illuminated letters are a classic look on the building. So I hope now that you know the

[22:40] stats of the neighbors, the community to consider not coming to any lighting. If you really feel that

[22:48] and you need to ask to make me more of a good start to move.

[22:51] All right, I'm going to talk to you.

[22:53] The board will make a condition in compliance

[22:55] with the tradable to private.

[22:58] Thank you.

[22:59] Yes, I do want to speak up.

[23:01] I appreciate the neighbors, am I a lot of them?

[23:04] I appreciate the neighbors speaking

[23:06] and in such a unified fashion.

[23:10] And I, too, think that what is there now

[23:12] is appropriate enough in terms of lighting.

[23:16] It's actually very canceled signage that you have up there right now, so I'm an

[23:21] infringement with no lighting and could I just remain the same with it next

[23:29] possibly added?

[23:33] Absolutely, absolutely.

[23:33] Absolutely. Well, adding just next to the change to what's near now, so.

[23:37] Great.

[23:41] I think a resident wants to speak.

[23:43] We have, we have, we have, we are done with the parliamentary meeting. I'm sorry, I'm exposed.

[23:49] So, thank you. I would just encourage you. I mean, this is clearly a hot button issue.

[23:55] I would encourage all students, you guys want to think about that. I would just say that.

[24:00] What you're going to do with the proposed, let me speak to them. I see what they want to do.

[24:03] And then we'll come back and then we'll do it to you guys and hopefully be administrative.

[24:11] So, the board was worried that it would like to set up deferrals. I mean, we don't come back to the board.

[24:17] If the board would like to say a condition of approval is that it may get compliance with the administrative guidelines,

[24:23] so we can work with the applicant to do something.

[24:27] We have the board as a solution in front of the member.

[24:30] The front of the meeting, the act on, it can be either approved and I set up deferrals.

[24:35] And again, you can accept, with the conditions, the conditions could be that it complies with the administrative government and then move on.

[24:42] Mr. Conkey, did we deny it tonight?

[24:46] Yes.

[24:46] Could they come back with a non-lighted, financial quest for an administrative?

[24:50] No, that would be one minute.

[24:52] Okay.

[24:52] And another question is, can they speak with each other?

[25:00] And come back to us. Wasn't it in a few minutes, as we move along. Now, we have to come back for another

[25:07] another hearing. We can, we can, we can't, we can't, we can't be so business tonight. We have a long dog.

[25:20] Okay, with a deferral,

[25:21] I don't want you to deny and we can't make a change for a year, but that's what I heard you correctly. If you defer, they don't come back.

[25:28] You can come back another year and it's probably in a moment.

[25:31] That's fine.

[25:31] I don't problem with that.

[25:32] Did I hear you correctly?

[25:34] Did you deny my application?

[25:35] I can't do anything for a year.

[25:37] Okay.

[25:38] So you please defer.

[25:39] I have the occasion.

[25:40] But yeah, I'm getting ahead with the president.

[25:41] The girl.

[25:43] Right.

[25:43] Yeah.

[25:44] Question.

[25:45] Can they just verb?

[25:46] I also deny the name of my name.

[25:49] So we don't have to do this there.

[25:50] Guys.

[25:51] Any more.

[25:52] No.

[25:53] All right.

[25:56] We're going to make a motion to accept the deferral.

[26:03] All the data.

[26:05] I haven't finished second.

[26:07] Sorry.

[26:08] All right.

[26:08] Sorry.

[26:10] All right.

[26:12] All right.

[26:13] All right.

[26:14] Thank you.

[26:15] All the data.

[26:16] All right.

[26:16] Thank you.

[26:17] Well, that's it.

[26:18] Thank you.

[26:19] Sorry.

[26:21] Thank you.

[26:22] Congratulations.

[26:23] Congratulations, next item.

[26:24] Okay.

[26:25] Okay.

[26:25] And then it's the night is under a much of a finishes,

[26:27] and the physical lifting is in first.

[26:30] This is at a level three, and the AR20,

[26:33] One, but it fits that, 0, 0, 2, 2, 3,

[26:36] oldest record is for cut walked operations in the position.

[26:39] I'm for, 1, 1-4-3-2.

[26:41] First I'm going to invest in, 1-2-2,

[26:42] which features to have it,

[26:44] that we've found as a receiver,

[26:45] as it is by John Lyon and Jamie as it is.

[26:48] All right.

[26:49] And the proposed double board is to pull this.

[26:51] to demolish approximately 480 square feet of the Masonry Wall area with a 24-somewhere

[26:57] feet maze.

[26:58] I removed the existing railing and the carts from the south end of the existing porch,

[27:03] as well as the constructed two-story addition of the southeast corner of the property and

[27:08] lead place to the existing single door on the side porch and in-kind, and adds side

[27:13] lights and a transit.

[27:14] On page two of the report, and I should probably get to the actual report by apologies, on page

[27:22] two of the reports.

[27:23] You'll see the site context is free standing brink home with private alley to the south to propose

[27:30] addition and alterations will be visible from the right way.

[27:34] Page three of the reports shows the proposed new addition photos on pages eight through

[27:41] I'm sorry, 18 through 26 show the existing conditions and page three also draws attention to the design standards that include that it should be compatible with the store building and surroundings clearly distinguishable from the existing structure and utilize building materials to balance around the historic history.

[28:00] page 4 of your report has the HP staff

[28:03] recommendation.

[28:06] Thank you.

[28:08] Can you please state your name and address

[28:10] for the request?

[28:11] Yes, it's John.

[28:12] Why I'm.

[28:14] Although 20 Sunrise Valley sweet 100

[28:18] arrested for tune yet architect

[28:20] representing the others.

[28:22] Thank you.

[28:22] Would you like to make a presentation or

[28:24] answer to questions?

[28:25] I don't feel that I need to

[28:27] to present the body of the work further than what staff has recommended for approval.

[28:33] We appreciate that.

[28:35] We would like to try to address the issue of the door on the porch, the leads to the

[28:42] porch and the expansion of that opening.

[28:46] That's something that is important to the opening of the view from the interior space to the

[28:56] court guard and the guard and the pool and it is also something that tucked into the

[29:05] porch is not so visible. We feel from the right away. So we like to try and convince the

[29:13] board to accept that as a part of the design. Appetite answering questions regarding that issue.

[29:22] Thank you. Do any members of the board have questions for the applicant?

[29:30] We move on to opening it to public. Do any members of the public have questions or would you

[29:37] just be?

[29:40] No? All right, go open it to delegation for the board members. I have a question. I'd

[29:46] like to see. Can we show the existing door versus the one that's proposed? So this is the existing door

[29:53] there on the bottom right or left, and take the post.

[30:03] You may have gone the wrong way. Have I gone the wrong way? Sure. Okay. You are getting to sit now. Sorry. Yeah. So maybe one of the better ones is the page 17, although if you keep going, there'll be a 2D hard line. Yeah. The next page will be the. So here is the red door on the right is the door in question. And then. I should, I'm sorry. But I should clarify that the door does have an existing.

[30:30] So what's being proposed is an expansion horizontally, not in high.

[30:38] You

[30:42] can see the door actually, I think, 19 to 16.

[30:48] Yeah, you can see in the upper left-hand corner, the door, and partially in both of those images.

[30:56] And then the lower left-hand corner is the proposed, if it's possible to zoom in.

[31:01] And you can see that it's the existing door that size of the door is proposed to remain

[31:07] the same.

[31:08] What we're proposing to do is to add a slide right there again.

[31:12] Thanks.

[31:13] Add a slide right to the door and extend the transient across the wire.

[31:20] That's to help open the view up from the interior to the quote.

[31:25] I

[31:33] agree with staff recommendation, but if you want to bring more like me and our documentary

[31:37] to put a silo that transforms them out the same one, the same, like mountains as the rest of them.

[31:45] That's something that I think the owners should be adding millions to that

[31:51] blazing. If that would be subject to, if that would be an important condition for improvements,

[31:56] I'm sure. All the other other members to speak.

[32:03] I've been to the site and revealed the plan.

[32:06] I commend you on the plan. I think it's a really engaging addition that is largely particularly the store is I don't think it's visible from the public right away.

[32:18] So I don't have a problem with the store.

[32:24] I don't know.

[32:26] I'm going to echo the same comments as my family.

[32:28] I don't think the store is very visible. So I don't really have an issue with the store.

[32:31] I agree

[32:35] with my colleague and mine and in the way that you noticed that door elsewhere.

[32:41] Well, again, the idea is that the door would remain.

[32:44] We're not changing the size of the door.

[32:46] It's simply adding a sidelight to the door, which would mean that the transom is enlarged to go above that wire.

[32:54] But we certainly could add millions to those openings to being keeping with proportions of existing conditions.

[33:02] Thank you. So I'll make a motion if everyone agrees to

[33:07] to accept the such a set design with the condition of adding

[33:13] lines in my feed similar to the floor and the rest of that

[33:16] the openings for that.

[33:18] Based on the basic outings.

[33:22] I'm not sure about that because there's a bunch of different

[33:26] voting patterns already on the ceiling. Which

[33:29] motions are you lining up to? With the door you know there's the one

[33:32] that's right next to it. It's a one-ball assembly,

[33:37] sit-door, and a transform and a side-up. So that's with all my children.

[33:42] That's what I'm talking about.

[33:44] Sure, that's a deal breaker. It's not a deal breaker for me.

[33:48] That's what you guys want to follow, that's why.

[33:53] Thank you. All right.

[33:55] All the information about the services of the lower-level system.

[33:59] Hello.

[34:01] Hi.

[34:01] How does it work?

[34:02] Hi.

[34:03] It's special.

[34:04] Hi.

[34:05] Let's go.

[34:05] Hi.

[34:06] Hi.

[34:09] Thank you.

[34:10] Congratulations.

[34:12] Next item.

[34:18] Okay.

[34:18] I'll do this number 8.

[34:21] I'm going to do this.

[34:22] Right.

[34:23] First of which, you have a number 10.

[34:26] 10.

[34:26] It's apartment grade 2026.

[34:28] that 001664, the bus operations in addition to 1010

[34:34] Mordell-Streaters were able to send Simpson from

[34:37] Senate on the Intervented Forward problem.

[34:40] And VR to be 26, and that should be

[34:42] there at once, except for direct use.

[34:44] So that's for the President of the State of

[34:46] 1010 Mordell-Streaters was able to give the

[34:48] Susanne Simpson's representative by

[34:50] Peter Van Bauer.

[34:51] All right.

[34:53] To post go to work is to demolish the existing

[34:55] rear addition and a portion of the South wall

[34:58] as well as construction and everything.

[35:00] Number three, story, and case two of the report shows the site context, which states that the proposed edition will be located on the south side of the existing structure and will be wider and taller than the existing structure. The addition will be visible from the sidewalk on the north side or no go. However, much of the elevation will be shielded from view by the existing building. The alley behind the property is public. Many of the nearby buildings in this block also have modern edition before.

[35:29] other modifications. Page 5 of the report shows the placement of the new addition and there are

[35:42] warm lands on pages 15 for 18 with elevations on pages 19 for funding and the renderings are on 24

[35:49] to 25. Page 3 draws attention to the design standards that include that additions should respect the

[35:56] heritage of the historic buildings, in which they are attached.

[35:59] Editions should remain subordinate to the historic structures.

[36:03] Editions should serve as a compatible background element,

[36:07] or echo the design features on the primary structure,

[36:10] and that new word should be compatible with Stinkwitch-Blood.

[36:16] And the H-6 of the board has the H-2P staff prioritization.

[36:21] H-6. Yes.

[36:26] Right. Thank you.

[36:27] So, should you please state your name and address for the record?

[36:30] Peter Vanderboh, 800, 4th Street, unit 52, Washington, D.C.

[36:36] Thank you.

[36:36] Would you like to give a presentation or just answer the question?

[36:40] I would like to give a presentation and let me tell you the dates of those.

[36:43] Hi.

[36:44] Have I?

[36:45] Thank you.

[36:47] Do any members of the public wish to speak on this application?

[36:56] Do any members of the board have any questions for the applicant?

[37:04] It's not the move on to that is ready to present it.

[37:18] Any other comments from the board members?

[37:26] Yes, I'd like to make a motion to approve that presentation.

[37:33] Okay.

[37:33] Oh, second, second.

[37:36] Uh, all in Gator,

[37:39] this is our privacy club.

[37:46] No.

[37:51] And I'm special.

[37:53] Hi.

[37:54] Hi.

[37:55] Hi.

[37:58] What's matter?

[38:06] Okay, next item on the agenda tonight is

[38:09] 9.12.

[38:11] The AR 2026 that 0.0238.

[38:15] All in the store district requested to offer you the 121.

[38:18] Fairfax Street.

[38:19] The applicant is going to need a little part of the story,

[38:21] but presented by Patrick.

[38:26] Let's see.

[38:28] All right.

[38:28] I'll just.

[38:29] Yes.

[38:30] And here's the put there in here.

[38:31] One second.

[38:32] So just.

[38:33] them. Yes.

[38:40] We have five. Five. All right. Um, a little bit back around here. Um, the

[38:53] proposed couple of work is for places existing wood shingle groove with a standing seam that

[38:57] root on page two of the report. You'll see that despite context for this page is a free standing

[39:03] house. That's it's been put back on the lot that spans to north of the

[39:08] street. Page three shows the proposed group and that is for the

[39:15] existing room with a sort of photograph. Page four draws attention to the

[39:20] design standards that state and the original grouping material is missing and

[39:24] cannot be determined. Roofing appropriate to the architectural style of the

[39:28] period of the building should be used, page 4 of the support has the age-based

[39:33] path recommendation. And with that, we have a presentation. And then it was loaded.

[39:45] Oh, please, I'm sorry. It went rogue on me.

[39:49] Okay, but you're doing that. I can just introduce myself. Good evening, Madam Chair, members

[39:55] of the AR, my name is Justin Billson, I'm the executive director of the OVA Parks.

[40:00] Thank you for address purposes. In this case, 5400 dots for your vaccination. I also have a couple of addresses and Alexandria as well. So, it is great to be here, great to, to provide a brief presentation on our proposal and we are excited about the opportunity to continue to invest in this historic property. We have half of the people in this room work for the Nova Park team and I just want the most to add up. So, you have a number of people here who can answer questions.

[40:29] for you. You need to be in charge of that, including our preservation architect,

[40:34] Mr. Marshall, Brian Nolan, from our planning team. Also from our planning team.

[40:39] In fact, he was our historic site manager at Carly House, Nusdomed House,

[40:43] our one-of-hour Park Superintendant, and Anne Fondre.

[40:47] So we, this year marks a half a century that we have had this property open to the public,

[40:54] interpreting the history in this property, and continuing to invest in it. In the past

[40:59] couple of years we have invested about a million and a half dollars and we are prepared to do a similar

[41:04] number of the next two years as originally we continue to invest in this court and historic

[41:09] property both for Alexandria and our region. Very quickly the as Saf mentioned the proposal is to

[41:19] replace the existing roof on this facility with a new roof that is designed to resemble

[41:29] historic metal roof that is on this property for a significant portion of its history.

[41:36] We are excited to have the support of the staff, and we appreciate their support in their

[41:41] collaboration as we work through this project over the last several months.

[41:47] This is the condition of the existing roof.

[41:50] Unfortunately, this was a roof that was installed 20 years ago, and one of the reasons that

[41:54] that we are proposing to now replace it with a metal roof

[42:00] is a desire to not have to go and do significant work

[42:04] on this property frequently.

[42:06] It is a very historic building

[42:07] and we would like the to not have to do

[42:10] the level of disruption that is required

[42:13] in order to replace a roof and disrupt the building.

[42:16] And so we believe that by returning to the historic metal

[42:22] the seed and the standing seed roof that we are proposing here that we will be able to avoid

[42:27] disruption, frequent disruptions on this property. We are proposing to do use a freedom grade

[42:33] as detailed in your staff report and here's some examples, not in the city here, but here's some

[42:40] examples of that move in action and how it would look. We drew, as I said earlier, inspiration from

[42:48] the history of just building the history of other buildings in the old and historic district.

[42:52] In the case, we have two pictures here that kind of show you at various points over the

[43:01] Carla House's history, the non combustible metal roof on this property.

[43:08] That's two examples of that. We've also drew inspiration from the city's

[43:14] presentation of other properties that are in the city's inventory, including the Murray

[43:18] Dick Fawson House, a property where the city recently installed a replacement of the

[43:26] metal on that facility.

[43:29] So we, and obviously we believe over time this roofing will age appropriately and consistent

[43:37] with again the previous existence of a metal roof on this building.

[43:44] Finally, in addition to the staff's support, which we greatly appreciate, we have also consulted

[43:51] the Virginia Department of Historic Resources, which holds the preservation easement on this

[43:54] property, and they have noted in your staff report provided support and affirmation that

[44:01] this is consistent with the Department of Interior standards for rehabilitation.

[44:05] So with that, as I said, we have a significant number of people here to answer any questions

[44:09] that you might have. And we hope that you will be supportive of the

[44:14] significant appropriateness application for our lives. So thank you. Thank you.

[44:18] Thank you. I believe members of the board have questions or we can read on

[44:23] the deliberations.

[44:26] No, right? Do we have any more mixed figures for this?

[44:29] We certainly do. We start with Bob, Ryan, the second.

[44:38] This is Bob, Ryan, they're good.

[44:39] Can you please just say your address as well to 11 camera street and I speak book as a neighbor and there's the impression of the historical sanitary proposition.

[44:51] If I'm not loud enough, I'm gonna tell me.

[44:55] I've never since that gone to my pulmonaryologist.

[44:58] Please focus on breathe.

[45:03] I don't think that two wrongs make a right. And I'm hoping that I'm today preaching to the choir. I think that the fact that there was a metal roof on at some point in this lifetime is really irrelevant, but you're supposed to have the property.

[45:30] And the road and everything about it exists, like it should have existed in 1752 when it was established.

[45:37] And I have a report which I think you have seen by Willie Graham, a curator of architecture retired from colonial Williamsburg.

[45:45] And he made some point that you can think and use the correct way, which would see it.

[45:50] And it was the correct thickness and applied properly.

[45:53] It can last every bit as long as about a roof.

[45:56] You can debate with him, but he's really an expert on this subject.

[46:01] And it would argue that the proof originally had to be void.

[46:05] The one thing we know is it wouldn't be valid.

[46:08] That was more Victorian-era wood.

[46:11] And wood is what would have been done.

[46:13] It would either have wood, that's your slate.

[46:16] Certainly wouldn't be that.

[46:17] It's not an Irish cottage.

[46:19] Slate, we would have known that it would have been preserved.

[46:21] So obviously I think it's it's wood and like for the grams that are in history for it the appropriate question is what roof covering best serves the nationally significant 18th century house interpretive to the 1750s and standing within one of the country's most important historic districts.

[46:45] And I think that's what you all have to focus on.

[46:50] This is a tremendous property.

[46:54] It's probably the most important property in the old historic district or the city of

[46:59] Alexandria.

[47:00] And it had a wood roof.

[47:02] And if you look at it, it's a four-sided roof, it's stunning.

[47:05] And it's next to City Hall.

[47:08] It's the building where General Braddock planned the French meeting to work with other colonies.

[47:14] It's much more than Washington was commissioned into the British Army and across the street

[47:20] of Market Square, it's more Washington and Drill the troops for the French and Indian

[47:25] Wolves.

[47:26] So I'm just saying that it's iconic, it should stay as it is, it should be wooded.

[47:31] And the fact that they're going to have to repair it again maybe in 20 years and maybe

[47:37] in 30 years.

[47:38] They do it rather than they want.

[47:39] I don't think it's a factor that should be considered by the board.

[47:47] Thank you. Any questions?

[47:51] Any questions?

[47:53] Thank you.

[47:54] Our next speaker is Gail Rockrock.

[48:07] Today, thank you all and members.

[48:09] My name is Gail Rockrock.

[48:11] I have two other bad things to read.

[48:14] About two weeks ago,

[48:15] I was looking on North Lee Street and I noticed a B.A.R. posting for application at the

[48:22] Car Loud House and being on some time volunteer gardener there, I thought, oh, well, they're

[48:28] going to do something with basically time, and I'm sure it'll be for staff to administer

[48:34] the pool.

[48:35] But by the way, I looked at the docket and it was for a change in character of the group.

[48:44] So this is not appropriate. It's our landmark time, George, and museum property. And I think

[48:55] now this mission is to preserve our natural and cultural heritage of this really surprised

[49:01] their point for mental growth. So turning to the staff report, this certificate of

[49:10] of public standards that should have been found are the 105A2A over the overall architectural

[49:17] design, modern style, and structure, and B, architecture, details, including the original

[49:27] material methods of construction.

[49:29] And we know both from the late Brandon and from our talks that the original material for

[49:36] this group was wood.

[49:38] And for the record, just to adhere to the city's preservation ordinance, the B.A.R. is instructed

[49:45] to abide as standards for a certificate of appropriate snot, consistency with the Tucson guidelines,

[49:52] which was stated in the salary push.

[49:55] So for this case, we were fortunate to have several extra experts laying in.

[50:00] In the documentation, Martha Raymond National Park Service, retiree, with 42-year preservation, pointed out that the application should be the secretary standards for restoration. Restoration is the treatment that should be followed where the express goal is for the building to appear in its most significant time and in history. That period is a chunk of us tenure. And now Cox, former city historic preservation.

[50:29] architecture, AIA, and Meredith points out that metal roofs were not available until

[50:34] the 19th century, and we're not coming here even till after the Civil War.

[50:40] And Bob Langan has spoken about Louis Graham's point, and I think we need to address that

[50:49] because the good news with the proper wood and the materials well-lasted 15 years, he

[50:57] and that experience at the Young Museumsburg.

[51:00] Finally, maybe in some of the application

[51:03] wasn't for replacement in time,

[51:06] because now Nova Parks has the information

[51:10] and advice to do this properly by putting it on with rules.

[51:17] And it's my belief that Nova could apply the grants

[51:21] from H.A.M. from the Alexandria Association,

[51:24] and some moves like friends and friends that might do some fundraising, get help from this being a program with the correct moves.

[51:34] Thank you.

[51:37] Our next speaker is Alden's builder.

[51:43] You guys can be on the blue.

[51:47] Yeah.

[51:57] I'm going to echo a lot. My name is Alden Philbrook. I live at 133 North Fairfax Street,

[52:02] which I happen to be the only residential neighbor of the Carlo House that look out every

[52:08] day from the bank of Alexandria. And I love Buddhist organizations and feel everybody should

[52:16] be great stewards of the city and the oldest or district.

[52:20] Carl has had just to be probably the most prominent building

[52:23] in the city for ample reasons.

[52:26] The age course, the builder and the founder,

[52:29] Carlisle family put it there at the founding of the city.

[52:33] The history that occurred in there that my colleagues

[52:36] stepped through, but also it's open to the public

[52:40] in a location that's very accessible.

[52:42] So they get to come through, see what Alexander

[52:44] Andrew was all about first hand that go up into the rooms and the staff shows and where

[52:49] the final family lived. And it's interpreted to 1753. A lot of other things happened

[52:55] in the building, but the building was built in 1753. I'm very concerned with the, with

[53:04] two things and I hope that one other thing, the willy-thrame report, you read thoroughly

[53:09] because it's a very fortunate of us to have access to Willie. He's done work at the bank of Alexandria,

[53:16] but also throughout the mid-Atlantic.

[53:20] Concerned that the ordinance says that if you can't find

[53:27] evidence of what the roof was, then you have to go back and use material that's appropriate for the

[53:33] style and for the period. And the examples that you saw on the slide are our styles and periods,

[53:42] but they're not of Carlaw House. Metal roofs were not available back in 1753, although there was

[53:49] one in 1880, which is true. That's the first standborne map that shows evidence, but that map,

[53:58] That was 130 years after the House was born, so, or put together, so the House was historic

[54:04] at that point.

[54:05] And a stone, George, had either slate or wood for the size of the house that wouldn't

[54:11] have been fetched because of the investment in the house, and slate was not available this

[54:16] far south at in 1700s.

[54:18] So it pretty much was wood.

[54:20] The Wheeling Grand Report put its hands on a bold shingle that was found in the house

[54:27] with 18th century nail holes.

[54:31] So there's some circumstantial evidence of wood.

[54:35] But in buried in his report is the fact

[54:38] that if the wood material is correct, a white cedar,

[54:42] if it's the right thickness,

[54:43] and it's installed correctly with underlayers of breathing,

[54:47] it will last 30, 40, 50 years or more.

[54:51] So it's not a reason to put wood on metal on a rig.

[55:00] In this case. So, I want to appeal to to everybody here that a wood roof is appropriate. That's the most important house in Alexandria and it should be interpreted as it was when it was been. Thank you. Thank you.

[55:19] Yes, we have two more. William Dickinson.

[55:30] Good.

[55:30] Hi, I'm Bill Dickinson.

[55:32] I live here in Alexandria for almost 50 years.

[55:36] I live at 21, 21, Jameson Avenue.

[55:41] I looked served on the part of the board for about 12 years, representing Alexandria.

[55:46] So obviously I have a great interest in for us.

[55:50] And so at over the years.

[55:53] I'm agnostic on this issue, but I thought I had some information that might be useful to you.

[55:59] All in is quite correct. There was a report, a very extensive report in 1980 that looked

[56:06] at the renovation of the house, which took about six years. It took a huge amount of money.

[56:13] It cost at that time two and a half million dollars for the renovation. Put that into

[56:19] a day's dollars as about 14 million dollars.

[56:22] They went through extensive work, detailed work.

[56:27] No question about it.

[56:29] The roof was worth serious.

[56:32] But it interesting, I mean, the roof worked,

[56:34] and it's funny, very little mention of the roof.

[56:37] What mattered was the hall.

[56:40] It was where the grand con was assembled.

[56:44] It also really put the emphasis in report

[56:47] that the restoration had two purposes. One is to tell the history of the house, and curiously,

[56:55] they never mentioned the history after the Grand Congress, and never talked about the Civil War.

[57:02] But then he out, that's the way it was. And the second thing is to show the best

[57:09] restoration methods possible. And that's shown in one of the rooms, the interpretive room, which

[57:16] the 18th century construction techniques

[57:21] along with the restoration.

[57:25] Yes, in 2006, the roof was falling apart.

[57:31] I was on the board, it was a devil to get money to work.

[57:37] We got a save America's treasures granted

[57:41] from the National Projects, thank you to Jim Moran.

[57:47] And then we had an issue.

[57:49] If we put on city groups, Fire Marshall did not want

[57:54] the Wooden Wooden Wooden in the city for obvious reasons.

[57:59] But here we start with we want authenticity.

[58:03] So we went with the idea of a single,

[58:07] all, Cedar Schindel, that was traded with fire retardant and painted with them.

[58:15] Now, we were told it would probably last 20, 30 years, but it didn't, or it may be pretty

[58:20] close, but you can see where it is, it's not in good shape.

[58:26] My concern is that that building be protected and preserving.

[58:32] And so you'll have a balancing issue to just run out to do it.

[58:37] As far as the secretaries of guidelines, I'm a layman looking at them near the experts to look at them.

[58:45] But I did read them and they said, you know, if you want to put elected items in there, plum and things like that, that's okay.

[58:55] And also get it comprised of code.

[59:00] So, there you go.

[59:01] Thank you so much.

[59:02] So, what's up to you, old?

[59:05] Our last speaker is Yvonne Cali.

[59:13] This was.

[59:15] Good evening. My name is Ivonne Wake-Calihan.

[59:18] I'm president of the Italian Civic Association.

[59:20] I appreciate your extended offer for five minutes,

[59:23] which I will not take quite there.

[59:24] I don't think.

[59:25] Let me start off with what was on the Mount Vernon website.

[59:30] Wood was the overwhelming church choice for Virginia groups in Washington

[59:35] days, saves Karab. Washington purchased hundreds of thousands of shingles for

[59:40] Mount Vernon during his lifetime. Most of them split from cypress trees cut down

[59:45] in the dismal swamp of southern Virginia. So we start with the premise that this

[59:51] would have been wood. There could have been slaying in those days even

[59:56] probably not. My understanding is that swaying sometimes

[1:00:17] So, what you're being asked to do is kind of overlook the issue of the period of significance

[1:00:23] in this case. There's one area, the time that Scarlett also was built. That is not the case

[1:00:30] with the Meridic Fosset House. It was a deliberate choice to show that that was a living,

[1:00:36] breathing occupied house for hundreds of years. Now, it was also not mentioned. Was that the

[1:00:43] front on Prince Street? We know to be wood. So, even the significant part of the Meridic Fosset House

[1:00:51] exemplifies what was put on there before, and we have a longer period of significance

[1:00:56] because of its continued occupancy.

[1:01:00] I would also suggest that my friend Joseph and I should probably take a little trip around to it.

[1:01:06] Because if I understand it correctly, gas is now being replaced in its wooden shingles.

[1:01:12] and the HAF building on the Wolf Street also recently replaced its roof with shingles, presumably

[1:01:21] with consultation and approval of staff, just like they wanted that to go down.

[1:01:28] Now, I think that the fire issue is there's a crime out there's a fire station two blocks away from the car last.

[1:01:39] Shingles can be made flame retardant.

[1:01:43] Shingles can also be covered to put metal under the groove to make it a little bit safer.

[1:01:50] Shingles can also be treated so that they last.

[1:01:55] In fact, I'm sorry you may have heard Christine Roberts has had a medical emergency in her family.

[1:02:00] It's not able to be here, but she has located single companies where they have a 50-year warranty.

[1:02:08] I would suggest that the notion that there was a movie film tier is, okay, what are we

[1:02:15] going to do?

[1:02:16] We would agree that maybe Tara should be maintained because it was a movie, but that's

[1:02:20] about it yet.

[1:02:21] If we jumped into the 21st century and said, oh, we could have met it because there was

[1:02:26] a movie film here.

[1:02:27] We have forgotten everything we were ever supposed to learn about historic preservation.

[1:02:32] So, I would urge you to let's just keep on working and see what we can do to achieve this.

[1:02:39] The hidden elephant here is cost.

[1:02:42] You're not to consider that.

[1:02:44] Thank you very much.

[1:02:45] Thank you.

[1:02:46] Thank you.

[1:02:46] That's the answer.

[1:02:48] Thank you.

[1:02:49] We'll move to the regulations on the members.

[1:02:52] Anyone would like to vote for us?

[1:03:05] If I can and first of all, I think the comments from from the speakers of many of you were good partners and volunteers in Carlisle House and shared a lot of this facility.

[1:03:18] My friend, Yvonne and I, we, I would be happy to go on a tour with you, but I can save you some time and provide a little bit of a visual tour of a number of properties in the old historic district with similar

[1:03:36] their roofs from a similar time approved by the B.A.R., furthermore, I think it's important

[1:03:42] to note that we interpret multiple periods of significance at Carlisle House.

[1:03:51] I think the suggestion that there is only one period of historic significance that we

[1:03:56] interpret at Carlisle House is not accurate.

[1:03:58] And I would quote, and I think we've talked a little bit about the Maria Cpaset House

[1:04:03] and Al Cox commissioned a report for OHA back in 2023, and I quote from that report

[1:04:14] for a practical and economic reasons medical roofing has been installed on a majority structure

[1:04:19] for approximately 100 years, the same amount of time that which shingles were used here.

[1:04:23] So the appearance of a standing seam metal roof has also acquired historic importance

[1:04:28] and its own right as a character-defining feature of the dwelling should be reinstalled

[1:04:32] and matched the material and appearance of original as closely as possible.

[1:04:37] And so I think it's important to note, again, for a significant portion of the history

[1:04:41] of Carlisle House, we have had a roof much akin to what we are proposing to install.

[1:04:48] And I'm happy to answer any additional questions for the board.

[1:04:53] Thank you.

[1:05:05] Thank you to all and to the party. Thank you, Mr. Wilson, and even staff for your recommendations. I have been on a close read about this. I wondered why slate wasn't being proposed. And I understand that that would have been an option. That way back on.

[1:05:30] I was involved in the transaction on the 100 block of print street that as late as its

[1:05:37] roof and it was built in the 1780s.

[1:05:43] So I do know it's an option and the story is that it came in as balanced as I believe

[1:05:48] one of you mentioned in a ship and that ship owner put the slate on the roof and it's still

[1:05:55] there, believe it or not.

[1:05:56] So I guess those things happen.

[1:05:59] I take it at your word that the research had been done and that this was very likely it

[1:06:05] would move from the get go.

[1:06:10] I am of the month disposition that this is a wonderful opportunity for you all to restore

[1:06:17] it to its original brand or this is this house, this one is really in rarefied air in

[1:06:23] Virginia and throughout our country with its history. So many people attend the whole town

[1:06:30] speaking of the parlour house. So I think while you know it may be difficult for you all to swallow,

[1:06:38] I think the appropriate thing to do is put the wood roof on this house and that is how I will vote.

[1:06:46] Thank you. Thank you.

[1:06:50] Thank you. Thank you. Thank you for your stewardship of this property.

[1:06:53] and appreciate everything you're saying. I do think that Mr. Graham presents a compelling case

[1:06:59] for the wood shingle as well as techniques that could be considered employing them that might make

[1:07:05] the roof less longer. And as you know, it's not our job to assess costs or maintenance in our deliberations,

[1:07:13] but rather what is appropriate to the age and the significance of the building. Given this is a museum

[1:07:19] that's largely interpreted from the 1750s and given the fact that we are in Virginia and

[1:07:27] potentially the school standard of historic homes, including Mount Vernon,

[1:07:32] Sticky Miles down the road, I think if we want to be taken seriously as a historic

[1:07:37] destination in Virginia, we need to take the roof for the car while on how seriously and

[1:07:43] and to the right thing for the roof.

[1:07:46] So I too would prefer to see what she both replaced

[1:07:51] and properly done.

[1:07:53] And that's all better.

[1:07:54] Thank you.

[1:07:55] Assistant.

[1:07:56] Thank you everyone for your speaking on this item

[1:08:01] and I really appreciate the work that has been done

[1:08:04] and the information has been lied to us for this.

[1:08:08] Typically I am not one for saying that something,

[1:08:11] I mean, Alexandria, that should be a sealed box, sealed museum box, and nothing should ever change.

[1:08:18] But on this particular aisle, I tend to lean with my colleagues that a wood group would be appropriate.

[1:08:25] But maybe there are more modern installation methods that could help it last longer, which may be more expensive upfront today, but actually wouldn't save you money in the long run.

[1:08:39] that you should explore as far as construction techniques

[1:08:42] to actually make that work last longer.

[1:08:45] Thank you.

[1:08:46] And I echo the opinions on the rest of the members,

[1:08:51] what we've needed, but it's very important building.

[1:08:55] He's going to, and I believe it's,

[1:08:59] it's worth, we don't master the cost,

[1:09:02] but it's worth spending a little bit more

[1:09:04] and keeping tune to the history of the building.

[1:09:07] So I believe in replacing the big wood, but it wouldn't call it that I'm done properly, so it's just.

[1:09:17] I would like to thank you.

[1:09:20] Thank

[1:09:26] you very much.

[1:09:41] Yeah, I think hearing a unanimous from the board. I don't think there's any merit in requesting a deferral. I think we'll make a decision about whether it's even a film.

[1:09:52] All right, I'll make a motion. I'll motion to approve with the condition of using appropriate wood to keep this.

[1:10:00] It's probably a period of 1750 to with all the line to means that there's a need to make sure that it's and say it's as it can be. Exactly. Madam Chair, can I can I clarify into the motion. So our, our request is to replace the room with a, a, a, a, bouncy groove, which was recommended by staff. I think what I'm hearing is not.

[1:10:29] not a denial hearing an approval of a request that we're not making so I want to be clear

[1:10:37] on what the what the motion is that it's been asked to hear.

[1:10:41] Not a denial of changing the rules to the material.

[1:10:45] So a request to just replace the roof in light because an administrative request is not

[1:10:51] the request that we have to take before the work today.

[1:10:53] We just want to start.

[1:10:54] Okay.

[1:10:56] That's the problem.

[1:10:57] But I'll make a motion to deny this application.

[1:11:02] Second.

[1:11:09] This is not required.

[1:11:11] Thank you.

[1:11:13] This is not required.

[1:11:14] We'll go home.

[1:11:15] We can do a little bit.

[1:11:16] See you.

[1:11:19] I.

[1:11:20] I.

[1:11:23] Thank you.

[1:11:26] Thank you.

[1:11:27] We'll take a five minute break.

[1:11:29] And back at eight point.

[1:11:37] Thank you.

[1:11:41] Thank you.

[1:11:44] Yeah,

[1:11:46] thank you.

[1:11:48] Nice and warm,

[1:11:49] thank you.

[1:11:51] Very well.

[1:11:51] Thank you.

[1:11:52] I'm going to love you so much.

[1:12:05] Thank you.

[1:15:00] aye, aye, nay, abstain, quorum, agenda item, ordinance, resolution, city council, public hearing, minutes, adjourned.

[1:19:54] I'm sorry, I'm sorry.

[1:20:34] Okay,

[1:20:39] thank you.

[1:20:43] Sorry. My voice seems to be on my way.

[1:20:47] All right, I'm ready for 13. Tonight is BR 2026.

[1:20:53] There are two separate points.

[1:20:54] in terms of district type.

[1:20:56] Question of operations that three, three, five,

[1:20:58] and one of the oil streams,

[1:20:59] applicants to fall into the enemy.

[1:21:04] Yes, two of them, two good privacy streams

[1:21:07] on the second floor, rear, north, east elevation deck.

[1:21:11] On page two of the report,

[1:21:13] you can see the site context is in quarter unit

[1:21:17] with residential, a buddy goes to the south

[1:21:20] and the east of the subject site.

[1:21:22] So from both privacy panels,

[1:21:23] we'll be visible for Princess Street and North Royal Street.

[1:21:26] Page 3 of the report shows the placement of the post screens and there's more photos on pages 13 and 14 including photos from the mountain itself.

[1:21:37] Page 3 also draws attention to the design standards that include that the design should not hide obscure obscure or cause removal of the historic architectural elements.

[1:21:48] It should be made of materials, which are sympathetic to the building material generally found in the historic district.

[1:21:55] And it should generally be painted the predominant color in the building, more than color of the trim.

[1:22:01] Page four of the report as the age piece staff recommendation.

[1:22:06] Thank you.

[1:22:07] Do you need to state your name on it?

[1:22:09] Oh, let's do it.

[1:22:11] My wife and I are going to pop the 35 North Warriors.

[1:22:15] Thank you.

[1:22:16] Would you like to make a presentation or just answer a question?

[1:22:20] Yeah.

[1:22:21] You do want a presentation.

[1:22:23] I sent in the other day when I saw the staff recommendation.

[1:22:28] Three additional photos.

[1:22:30] Did you see?

[1:22:31] The other you want to make a gallery group?

[1:22:33] It's the same as it.

[1:22:35] I kind of apologize.

[1:22:36] Reversed on the original.

[1:22:37] Yeah.

[1:22:38] Sorry.

[1:22:39] Whatever.

[1:22:39] I don't think.

[1:22:40] I think it made sense.

[1:22:41] So.

[1:22:43] The first photo is the photo of the hero of our house.

[1:22:50] And I just wanted to indicate that the architecture between the two homes there, very, very similar, is almost identical.

[1:22:58] The second photo is our neighbor, adjacent neighbor, who also has a privacy screen already.

[1:23:09] in on her, her porch on her deck.

[1:23:12] And then the third photo is a picture

[1:23:15] of what we view from our deck,

[1:23:19] which is a property that's on Princess Street.

[1:23:23] The orientation is there,

[1:23:24] that we see the side of the house all the way down

[1:23:27] to where they're going, where they're there is.

[1:23:31] And the view from, from those windows,

[1:23:36] actually look on to our deck and write into our master bedroom. And we have a four-glass panel

[1:23:43] door on the deck itself. So that's what the original request was. And so my response was

[1:23:54] really to the staff concerns. The first one was that the proposal was incompatible with

[1:24:00] that the architectural character of the building.

[1:24:04] And then the second one is that the building is located

[1:24:08] at a gateway to the historic district,

[1:24:11] which I never knew was really at a station.

[1:24:14] And so I'm not really sure what exactly that meant.

[1:24:17] But in this photograph, you can see

[1:24:21] that the townhouse immediately next door,

[1:24:24] which has the same architectural design burglar

[1:24:27] has an existing privacy screening incorporated into it,

[1:24:30] into a deck and purchase structure.

[1:24:33] And I understand that that screening

[1:24:35] was a food pilot board at the time

[1:24:37] of its original development.

[1:24:40] This is particularly relevant

[1:24:43] because the proposed screening on my property

[1:24:45] could serve essentially the same architectural

[1:24:47] and privacy function.

[1:24:49] The existing neighboring example demonstrates

[1:24:53] that the privacy screening can be incorporated

[1:24:55] into the structures while remaining compatible.

[1:25:00] The architecture of the overall development. And so, you know, we, we're concerned about the fact that, you know, we want to implement or integrate into the existing architecture of the building. And, and we definitely feel like there was a need for privacy. So we requested a proposal for us.

[1:25:27] Do any members of the board have questions for the opening?

[1:25:31] Thank you.

[1:25:32] What are we going to do with all this?

[1:25:36] Sure.

[1:25:37] Can we have the public speaker?

[1:25:39] We'll leave you in a minute.

[1:25:41] A whole map.

[1:25:42] Please.

[1:25:44] Okay.

[1:25:44] Yes.

[1:25:44] Just me.

[1:25:46] Members of the board.

[1:25:47] Stephen Flinsky.

[1:25:48] One of four north west stream.

[1:25:51] I haven't met Mr.

[1:25:53] Leslie before, but I did want to say this is a project that my office did about 10 years ago.

[1:25:59] There is nothing.

[1:26:00] the historic visible from this MAC deck, I see what Mr. Lesley doing on that and I respect

[1:26:07] that this is something that we would have done had the money been there earlier on in

[1:26:12] another and then perform the project to develop this.

[1:26:16] There's nothing sacred about this, I think you should allow this, no offense of all very

[1:26:24] proud of these buildings.

[1:26:25] I'd like that they're the gateway to the historic district because there's little historic

[1:26:29] work side across the street saying this is the historic district and there's a lot of

[1:26:33] information online where you see that picture and you see these four houses that were

[1:26:37] developed there kind of applying their district, you know, we're not, I think it was a successful

[1:26:42] project, but we expected it to adapt every time like this. So it's loved to see this.

[1:26:48] Thank you. Thank you.

[1:26:51] Any other members of the public? We wish to speak on this. No,

[1:26:56] We'll open to the deliberation of the board members.

[1:27:00] Anyone would like to go first?

[1:27:03] I'll go first.

[1:27:06] I agree with Mr. Kalinsky.

[1:27:08] I think that screening on this property seems appropriate.

[1:27:12] I don't have an issue with the screening.

[1:27:14] I do have some concerns about the design of the screen.

[1:27:17] And I wonder if the applicants might consider doing something that's more similar to the next door neighbors that's more of a lattice design as opposed to the heavy slats.

[1:27:25] I feel like the slats are, they feel chunky and create a lot of extra lines that don't

[1:27:32] agree with the other lines, whereas the lattice might just be more compatible also with

[1:27:36] big risk.

[1:27:37] For example, if I'm in the business, go ahead and look at it for the five of a second.

[1:27:42] Thank you.

[1:27:45] Well, with that said, if you're totally fine with that, I'm totally fine with improving that.

[1:27:50] Thank you.

[1:27:52] Thank you.

[1:27:52] Okay, so here you want to make something?

[1:27:57] An information that we approve the certificate with the stipulation that the lattice is designed

[1:28:05] to appear the same as the next year or the next, last.

[1:28:13] Second.

[1:28:16] So this is not overall, right?

[1:28:19] It's not that much of a problem with the paper.

[1:28:21] All in favor?

[1:28:21] Hi. Hi. Hi. Any opposed? No. Thank you.

[1:28:26] Thank you.

[1:28:30] Thanks.

[1:28:33] Item number 14.

[1:28:36] Yes. Yes.

[1:28:37] Item 14 tonight is AR 2026.

[1:28:40] or dash zero zero to eight five will distort history

[1:28:44] for the first demolition encapsulation

[1:28:46] at 213 South Fairfax Bridge.

[1:28:48] Black and Lincoln's John and C2.

[1:28:50] Tomio, who was sent by John's old co-ordinator.

[1:28:53] It's a big time.

[1:28:53] So the focus to abolish 220th where B of the West

[1:28:58] are rear base-ring wall and removal

[1:29:01] of the existing porch screening and frame and gar rails.

[1:29:04] This project is demolition only.

[1:29:06] On page 2 of the report, you'll see the site context for this project is standalone brick home with the private alley to the south pages 11 to 16 of the report shows the brewers section to be encapsulated page 3 of the report walks you through the demolition

[1:29:25] in the right area, the report has the HP staff recommendation.

[1:29:31] Yes, I think it's a say your name and answer is what I'm talking about.

[1:29:36] John, hold back.

[1:29:39] This is what we're doing today.

[1:29:43] I haven't answered questions, but I think it's been straightforwardly.

[1:29:48] You know, for yourself.

[1:29:49] The next question to do.

[1:29:51] Any questions from the board members?

[1:29:54] It will be have any members of the public who would like to speak on it.

[1:30:00] Okay, you open to the integration, or are you going to make a motion? I'll make a motion. I can motion for approval. I'm sorry, I'm like, yes, I'd like the motion for approval with that recommendations. Thank you. I'm assuming that both. This is a roll call. Do you need a second? Second,

[1:30:24] aye. Special. Aye. Thank you. Thank you. Congratulations. Thank you.

[1:30:34] I am connected with.

[1:30:36] President, I am on 13th at 16th,

[1:30:39] the year of on 226th,

[1:30:41] and messenger,

[1:30:42] two 8 main lines of district federal operations and fishing at 8117 Columbus,

[1:30:49] the African,

[1:30:49] Jackson.

[1:30:50] Joan Barton, representative by the

[1:30:52] Dianne Grieb, architect and

[1:30:53] D-A-R-2-M-E-T-N-E-S-X.

[1:30:55] Here is your two-night flat,

[1:30:57] which is for the history.

[1:30:59] Professor Hoffman,

[1:31:00] I'm listening to the cancellation

[1:31:01] and 8-1-1 in the south of the

[1:31:03] England streets.

[1:31:04] Yeah, that is Joan Barton, representative by

[1:31:06] Dan Green.

[1:31:08] Hi, good evening.

[1:31:09] I'm Diana Grieb.

[1:31:10] It's just one quick of a minute here.

[1:31:13] So you're clearly fine.

[1:31:14] And the proposal for work is to demolish 100 square feet of a group area on the Front East

[1:31:19] Elevation Group.

[1:31:20] And then to construct your normal windows on the Front East Elevation, on page 2 of

[1:31:25] the report, you'll see that the site contacts for this project is part of a row of eight town

[1:31:30] homes with a public alley to the west and subject site.

[1:31:34] To propose normal owners, we'll be visible from South Columbus Street and Jefferson on page

[1:31:39] page 4, I'm painting 4, shows the placement of the dormers, and then we draw attention

[1:31:49] to the design standards that say the style and scale of the dormers should be appropriate

[1:31:54] to the architectural style.

[1:31:56] Dormers should not be too taller than the existing bridge line of the roof.

[1:31:59] Dormers sashes should be compatible with the other sashes and the trim on the structure.

[1:32:04] New dormers should be centered on or between the existing windows.

[1:32:08] and then lastly, dormer sidewalls may be covered

[1:32:12] to match the existing roof material,

[1:32:14] but as it looks later, I'm out.

[1:32:16] And then page five has the staff recommendation.

[1:32:21] Hi, good evening, Diane Grieba,

[1:32:23] and I'm at 33-03 on-day landing.

[1:32:27] And the client would greatly appreciate

[1:32:31] she has a large space up there in the attic

[1:32:33] and wants to utilize it and have egress as well.

[1:32:37] So this would be a perfect fit sort of mirroring some of the architectural dormers on the street there and we'll follow the staff recommendations.

[1:32:51] Thank you.

[1:32:53] Do any more members have questions from the applicant?

[1:32:58] Any public members who would like to speak?

[1:33:01] No, right. We'll open for deliberation. I need four members. Do you have any comments or want to make a motion to approve or a stat recommendation?

[1:33:14] discussion.

[1:33:15] Thank you.

[1:33:16] Good to meet you.

[1:33:22] The next

[1:33:27] VP is of all my

[1:33:48] book.

[1:33:48] Um, obviously they're attached to each other and the same architect same design.

[1:33:52] All those things that would suggest for the sake of, uh,

[1:33:55] Reming that the board, uh,

[1:33:58] Discussing them together,

[1:33:58] and then we will need to do a separate vote for each one,

[1:34:01] uh, if the board is okay with them.

[1:34:03] Yes.

[1:34:04] Yes.

[1:34:04] Okay.

[1:34:05] So let me read them all in.

[1:34:07] There's a bunch of words.

[1:34:09] The air on 20.6.

[1:34:11] That's zero zero.

[1:34:12] 293 will disturb district.

[1:34:43] of Washington Street.

[1:34:44] Applicant is 500 feet of Washington on the scene.

[1:34:47] Representative Westy, we're going to sit here.

[1:34:48] I expect.

[1:34:49] And finally, in March 28th, we are on the move from 6th dash.

[1:34:52] The here is here in 2-9-1.

[1:34:53] What is the current picture of the project?

[1:34:55] What is the resolution?

[1:34:55] The capital is 25 feet.

[1:34:56] We're going to Washington Street.

[1:34:57] Applicant is 500 feet of Washington on the scene.

[1:35:01] And I should have been asked if they are not going to be able to accelerate these all of these together. I'm sure. Thank you. So the proposal for work is to demolish portions of the rear of the structure and the roof of the building for the construction of a new and different. It's also to construct an addition on the third floor to the existing building and the three for addition to the rear of the existing building on the H2 of the report.

[1:35:29] you'll see the site context for this project is a former

[1:35:33] corner parcel, notes of the duplex originally in 1926.

[1:35:37] All three sides of the building are visible from the public

[1:35:40] right away.

[1:35:41] Pages before and before I show some renderings.

[1:35:48] And then page 6 also draws attention to the design standards

[1:35:54] from both O'Han and Washington Street,

[1:35:57] their two separate standards. Together, I'll just read some of them that say,

[1:36:02] addition should remain subordinate to the historic structure. New work should be compatible,

[1:36:08] but distinguishable. Material should be complement, the primary building. In general,

[1:36:14] the group board should reflect the group board to express along the block face. And lastly,

[1:36:19] the design of the addition of the and to the existing building shall be complementary to the

[1:36:25] the sort of buildings found on Washington Street.

[1:36:28] Hey, should I have another forum has

[1:36:29] in the staff recommendation.

[1:36:32] Thank you.

[1:36:34] Would you like to introduce?

[1:36:36] Sure, real quick.

[1:36:36] Stephen Plansky, one or four more of the West Street.

[1:36:41] I just like hearing Bill say,

[1:36:42] my name being eight or 10, I'm saying.

[1:36:46] Actually, the whole reason why I'd be here.

[1:36:48] Just, just, we're, my clients are taking the building

[1:36:52] and it's currently used as commercial offices.

[1:36:56] And I'm going to try to convert back

[1:36:57] to the two original residences that it was.

[1:37:00] And in doing so, we're keeping everything,

[1:37:03] as carefully as possible,

[1:37:05] the long Washington Street,

[1:37:06] to respect the Washington Street design guidelines.

[1:37:08] And we did everything for the deferential

[1:37:11] to the original building and the Washington Street

[1:37:13] in our design.

[1:37:15] It steps down in the back.

[1:37:17] You can see it.

[1:37:19] I think the report, the staff report, very nicely presented all that and my confidence

[1:37:27] to whoever came up with a new staff report format because it really is an improvement.

[1:37:33] All staff reports you find, but this really helps you look at six.

[1:37:38] So I'm here to answer any questions.

[1:37:41] Thank you. Do any member or member questions for the end again?

[1:37:49] Any public members who would like to speak on this application?

[1:37:57] We'll close the public portion and open to deliberation.

[1:38:04] Ms. Grant, we'd like to.

[1:38:08] I think this is a nicely expressed building. I've been curious to know which we're going

[1:38:14] to do since we approved the demolition of the garage behind. So I'd like to see this come

[1:38:19] to light. And I think the the terracing and the stepping down and the variation of materials

[1:38:26] is very attractive. I have one concern and it's the chimneys. My first concern about the chimneys

[1:38:34] was that they're not in the same spot, but I recognize after driving by that they're not in

[1:38:39] the same spot in the original building, which is a little weird, but it is, it is an asymmetrical front.

[1:38:45] But clearly, and I assume this is because of the cold, the chimneys had to be raised,

[1:38:52] and they feel very prominent to me now as these sort of silos that have met, because previously

[1:38:58] they were connected to the building, and now they're just sort of shooting up in the air without

[1:39:02] kind of any connection to the actual building and I don't have that answer but I would love to see

[1:39:10] a different solution. The different solutions to remove the chimney sets the only way to do it

[1:39:16] and still have functioning. And is that because you want them to be wood-burning?

[1:39:22] Does it have to be invented that way if it's a gas? It really comes down to, comes down to the

[1:39:30] manufacture specifications, and if it's an open gas thing, it needs full chilly and full

[1:39:40] clearance to feed above anything within 10 feet, but if it's a sealant, then if you can

[1:39:47] give it a bit, you can do different things. I could bring an event out to side, but I think that

[1:39:54] would be significantly worse than raising these chillies up the three or four feet that they're

[1:39:59] You're going to be able to do it.

[1:40:01] I mean, I like the prominence of a chimney, so I'm not at odds with it,

[1:40:10] but there is no good, easy solution to just a lot of them. Thank you. Thank you.

[1:40:23] I agree with the chimney solution, but I also understand the concern, I guess, typically

[1:40:31] in Alexandria, we do have a mystery of having nicely designed chimney, and maybe there's

[1:40:35] a little more design aesthetic applied to the chimney, and there'd be some nice brick

[1:40:39] work for some decorative brick elements that make it feel like it's a statement, and not

[1:40:46] just a functional chimney stack on the sides as a possible option.

[1:40:52] We could embellish the top of the building where we weren't going to do anything below.

[1:40:57] Yeah, I mean, typically when I think of the nice relic them,

[1:41:01] shillings, they were like near the top or maybe a few feet down that they're actually...

[1:41:06] Oh, we'd be glad to consider, you know, with staff approval and kind of a more articulated top

[1:41:15] That's a chimney. Yeah, I hope that's really helped me become more of what I

[1:41:20] What we come to love about some of the Alexander chimney. They are actually state new pieces of the house

[1:41:26] Other than I think the design is a good. I was in a great design. I really appreciate the way it steps back

[1:41:32] And then steps down as it goes further to the rear and not doesn't really impose itself on washed

[1:41:45] Okay, I think you've done a wonderful job and I'm very excited to see that this has been converted back to residences.

[1:41:54] And I've been asking myself why we don't see more of this in the city about Alexandria because we have vacant commercial spaces.

[1:42:05] And we have a national need for more housing and so rather than building new housing,

[1:42:11] a lot of care and on Sandra, it would be great to see more of this happening.

[1:42:16] Conversions from empty office or less than full office residential.

[1:42:22] So I like that. All right, that's totally off the point.

[1:42:24] But I'm pleased with the nature of the project.

[1:42:29] But from picture page 5 and your 4 to me, it looks like the chin needs are the same height.

[1:42:40] It's important. It's not the height. Yeah.

[1:42:44] The heights do match the location on the side of the patient.

[1:42:47] Or they're not going to raise it the height of the chin.

[1:42:50] But those are being raised.

[1:42:52] They're currently the same height and they will be raised.

[1:42:54] Same height, but just on the other side.

[1:42:56] Once farther back on the elevation.

[1:42:58] I see. Was that your friend's turn? My concern was the height. Is that the only change you're

[1:43:04] making for the Chinese? Is that the only change you're making for the Chinese? Just the height?

[1:43:09] Yes. Oh yeah, that's your concern for both chimneys.

[1:43:13] Yeah, I got it. They're not placed symmetrically on the side of the building.

[1:43:17] Right. But that's just the fact of the chimneys as they exist today. But since they've been raised

[1:43:23] to clear the top roof line, they're really standing out to me.

[1:43:29] All right.

[1:43:33] This also reminds me of a building in the 200 block of South Fairfax Street.

[1:43:37] They have a thing that we just approved before you, the propobios.

[1:43:41] So this is right next door to them.

[1:43:44] And it's two.

[1:43:45] And the sister has this.

[1:43:46] Maybe it'll be next door to them.

[1:43:48] Sister reminds me of very much of that.

[1:43:50] And that for my ramblings, I would like to work with us.

[1:43:57] Thank you. I think it's a great design.

[1:44:00] And the stepping back, I appreciate that.

[1:44:04] And the change in material.

[1:44:07] I really do appreciate that you are keeping the original chimney.

[1:44:11] It's really important to the history of the building and wood burning, especially.

[1:44:16] I think it's great.

[1:44:18] I agree that maybe it would be a little bit more ornate.

[1:44:23] Pretty well, it would be nice, but I don't know.

[1:44:25] That's all good.

[1:44:26] Love, we love that.

[1:44:28] I'll continue to dig in.

[1:44:29] It's my client.

[1:44:33] So.

[1:44:35] Should we make anything?

[1:44:37] I'll make a motion here.

[1:44:39] Make a motion to approve what they can do both the one time.

[1:44:42] Let's talk here.

[1:44:43] So let's make that.

[1:44:44] I do need two separate votes. So let's call this one for 17 and a team.

[1:44:49] Make a motion to approve 17 and 18 for staff recommendations.

[1:44:54] You want to include the voting workers stat on the

[1:45:11] I was looking at one one was for demolition of everything.

[1:45:19] Yes, I see. Well, now that I read, I'm not reading the words that are on the page.

[1:45:26] Yes, I make a mention for the first staff recommendations and that they work with staff to enhance the chimney brick work.

[1:45:35] Thank you.

[1:45:37] Second.

[1:45:40] Yes.

[1:45:41] Yes.

[1:45:42] And this is

[1:45:47] Hi.

[1:45:49] Hi.

[1:45:50] Hi.

[1:45:52] That's 1718.

[1:45:53] That's 500.

[1:45:55] 1920.

[1:45:56] Make a motion to approve first that recommendations and that the

[1:46:00] architect works with staff to enhance the upper part of the chimney brick work.

[1:46:07] Same motion.

[1:46:08] I'm sorry I could not have seen.

[1:46:16] I'm sorry.

[1:46:17] Sorry.

[1:46:19] Please.

[1:46:31] Thank you.

[1:46:35] Thank you.

[1:46:35] Congratulations.

[1:46:36] Thank you all.

[1:46:37] Thank you.

[1:46:39] I'll say it any more time.

[1:46:41] There's one.

[1:46:47] We're getting it.

[1:46:48] Okay.

[1:46:48] All right.

[1:46:49] Item item is.

[1:46:50] I don't know which one to you.

[1:46:54] This is.

[1:46:55] It's.

[1:46:56] It's.

[1:46:57] It's.

[1:46:58] It's.

[1:46:59] It's.

[1:47:04] It's.

[1:47:10] It's.

[1:47:11] to install, read, bail,

[1:47:13] alternative wall signs on the West,

[1:47:15] North and South elevations.

[1:47:17] On page two of the report,

[1:47:19] you'll see the site contacts for this project.

[1:47:21] It's a seven-story office building

[1:47:23] surrounded by commercial and residential buildings.

[1:47:26] The proposed signs will be visible

[1:47:28] from North Washington Street,

[1:47:29] First Street, Montgomery Street,

[1:47:31] and North St. Assof Street.

[1:47:34] Page three of the report shows the placement

[1:47:36] of the proposed signs here.

[1:47:39] page 3 also draws attention to the design standards, which include.

[1:47:44] Signed lettering should be appropriately scaled to the side of the sign and optimized for pedestrian viewing.

[1:47:50] Signed should be attached to the manner that causes the least damage to the billed immaterial.

[1:47:54] The board discourages internally illuminated the illicit backlit and neon style sign,

[1:48:00] and where signs have lighted, the illumination should be adjustable with the final level determined in the field by staff.

[1:48:06] and the color of the light should be warmer rather than white or slash

[1:48:10] cooler. Page 4 of the report has the H&E staff recommendation.

[1:48:15] Thank you. May you please say your name and address again.

[1:48:20] John Montelbus, Virginia representing the Eleanor Lieutenant and everybody else

[1:48:28] associated with the sign. Would you like to thank you for the presentation or just

[1:48:32] Yes. Well, I mean, again, so this is a little bit different than the last time you saw me.

[1:48:38] This is a commercial, and this is on North Washington Street. This is a commercial building.

[1:48:44] I do understand that there are some residences around, but this building towers, this is kind

[1:48:51] of the tallest building in the area. So when you come down, you know, from National Airport,

[1:48:57] this is, you start to get into town, this is one of the first buildings that you see on your left.

[1:49:01] So we agree with everything in the staff record except one thing.

[1:49:09] And you're probably going to be guessing that the 3,000 Kelvin elimination, you know, that is really not appropriate for this type of sign.

[1:49:24] That's really, it's a yellow. It's not white.

[1:49:28] I understand that the LED calvans run from 3,000 to 7,500 and if you get to 7,000 to 7,500,

[1:49:36] they are bright, stark white, but I don't think it's appropriate that, you know,

[1:49:41] when you look at the information on LEDs and calvans, it's 3,300 to 3,500.

[1:49:47] They talk about that being indoor type of soft lighting for offices for smaller areas.

[1:49:54] So I'm hoping that you guys will consider allowing

[1:50:00] Something a little bit more that's white. I mean, my client has a, you know, their colors are red, right, and blue. They don't want to sign this red yellow and blue.

[1:50:11] So. And. I mean, questions from this. As I'm board members. I have a question. I just want to clarify, this is currently an illuminated and in there. Yes, there are. Yes, there are. We're replacing that location. Or the exact same location. Almost.

[1:50:31] most. There are on the front where you see Alpha and photo one above there, there's something

[1:50:38] says five star. They are like the owners of the building. That goes away and a new Alpha

[1:50:44] sign goes. You're adding a sign around, I think it's photo three of the south elevation.

[1:50:51] That's a brand new sign. There's no sign there on that elevation right now. But that elevation

[1:50:56] faces the river and when flames come in I think they want that kind of look

[1:51:02] if that's people going to look over and they're going to see the after sign

[1:51:05] why I don't know but I think that they know they want their name for that the

[1:51:11] point number one if you said that it's going to move on there it is to

[1:51:15] bummer there's already a sign right now this is after there's two signs on that

[1:51:19] elevation right now above it in that river where the cursor is says five star

[1:51:26] They're all illuminated.

[1:51:28] They're all illuminated.

[1:51:29] They're all illuminated.

[1:51:30] Whether they're working right now, I don't know.

[1:51:32] But they're all illuminated.

[1:51:33] And that's not pretty.

[1:51:34] Okay.

[1:51:35] So, the new ones will.

[1:51:39] Yes, but they are all supposedly.

[1:51:42] I mean, if you go up there, you can see the one.

[1:51:44] Just want them to be illuminated.

[1:51:47] I hate.

[1:51:48] Not them to be.

[1:51:48] Halo illuminated.

[1:51:50] Which.

[1:51:50] is appropriate and not frontlit, and so it's still the soft office type of look versus

[1:51:58] a retail, you know, that start retail look that you get.

[1:52:02] They are eliminated now, or they're supposed to be eliminated now, so at one point they

[1:52:06] were approved to be eliminated.

[1:52:09] So we'd like that, but we'd like you to consider instead of that 3,000 Kelvin restriction

[1:52:15] to let us do something that's 5,000 kelvin is considered white, considered daylight white.

[1:52:25] And we would like something that's white. So when you look at it in the evening,

[1:52:31] there's a white halo around it and not a yellow of brownish or dull.

[1:52:35] Thank you. But we don't want to know.

[1:52:38] But this is really, I mean, this is not, I mean, I understand that it's technically old.

[1:52:42] but I mean, again, this is the seven-story office building.

[1:52:48] And if you're gonna put it on this building,

[1:52:51] a brick office building,

[1:52:52] I mean, you've got to allow,

[1:52:55] I hope that you consider allowing the tenants

[1:52:57] to have an appropriate sign.

[1:53:00] The tenants are the owners.

[1:53:02] Well, the owner, yes, the owner,

[1:53:04] and the tenant is after the tenant.

[1:53:06] Oh, is it?

[1:53:07] So I have a question for Mr. Colton.

[1:53:08] Yes.

[1:53:09] Yes, so

[1:53:13] when we just need, this is just me talking off my head, when we do our guidelines,

[1:53:20] I think most of the time when I think of our guidelines, I'm typically not, not depending

[1:53:27] your stance, just to put that out from.

[1:53:31] I typically think of walking down to the street and seeing small residential, not residential,

[1:53:37] but smaller buildings kind of with street levels.

[1:53:40] three-level where you typically would want something that's kind of a soft glove, right?

[1:53:46] I mean, that's kind of how I think of our signings.

[1:53:48] Yeah, I mean, the vast majority of the signs that we see.

[1:53:51] Right. Warsies on the status quo is administratively vast majority of our string-level

[1:53:55] reticents. Right.

[1:53:57] And the college temperature that we control as a representation has been based on that as the

[1:54:04] type of services, I guess, then yes, that is the vast majority of them.

[1:54:14] thing that I have my concern is that we go pull more with this light fixture

[1:54:22] that it would be too strong even though it's seven stories up.

[1:54:28] So I had nothing to really judge this offer. I might have re-reviewed that that 3000

[1:54:34] calories might be too low, but I'm not sure if going five plus is the light actually either.

[1:54:41] Is the halo light and temperature adjustable when it's installed or do you install it at a particular temperature?

[1:54:51] It can be adjusted.

[1:54:54] It can be you can get them to read there or they're adjusted adjustable.

[1:55:00] We can do that. But usually you determine how bright you want it, and that's what you get for your LEDs, because they make 3,000, 3,500, 4,000, 5,000, 6,500, 7,500. So, when there's no restrictions, we're always going to put in 7,000 or 7,500, because people want, wow, you know, they look at it as my sign is bright and everything. But trying to be sensitive to your guys, local governments, we thought

[1:55:29] But, I mean, 5,000, like I said, it's considered daylight and is, I think, a fair compromise

[1:55:38] between a really stark, bright 7,000, you know, K versus a very yellow E3,000, 3500K.

[1:55:48] So we just want it to be white versus, you know, yellow.

[1:55:53] And I looked up and it was light LED light expert dot com and they talked about the different

[1:56:04] kelvins and you know 3000 K produces a warm calm inviting light that is greater general

[1:56:10] indoor lighting.

[1:56:11] You know, 4,660,500 is Chris pure white light 5000 which is really what we're asking is

[1:56:21] daylight and white use for outdoor lighting.

[1:56:23] that's what it says in there. Can't you go in 45. Chris what do I know and I'm saying it's still

[1:56:30] I still much higher up on the buildings so it's not like and one of one of them on the north side is

[1:56:36] directly facing residential buildings but this is the north side is that it's the first three

[1:56:48] The apartment building, the one that's like the apartment building or whatever, but it will be higher than the apartment building.

[1:56:55] So it's Halo eliminated. So it's not as if it's going to be shooting any time to clear into anybody's windows or anybody's.

[1:57:03] and you know, right now, we're finding its way.

[1:57:07] I'm sure, but again, being halo eliminated.

[1:57:10] Yeah, I understand what you're saying, versus,

[1:57:13] you know, if it was frontlit sign,

[1:57:16] where it was a letter that would be much more starting

[1:57:19] than as the same question,

[1:57:20] can't you order it with a range?

[1:57:22] I agree that 33,000 houses probably too low

[1:57:26] for this application.

[1:57:28] I'm not gonna say that that's not true.

[1:57:30] maybe even 35,000, I could give a little $1,000 or $1,000 to $6,000.

[1:57:37] I would even say $6,000, but you get it with a range.

[1:57:40] I think we're happy with $5,000.

[1:57:42] I'm happy to work $5,000, Kelvin, LAD modules, I could have been in there,

[1:57:47] and again, it would not be something that range between $4,000 and $5.

[1:57:52] I mean, she said they're adjusted, so can they adjust between those two ranges?

[1:58:00] I'm not sure how I'm going to be honest with you, I'm not an expert, I just install.

[1:58:05] So I do know that you can put them on like a dimmer and that type of stuff.

[1:58:11] So we could, I mean, we could look into what I said when I, like, don't let it be, I don't

[1:58:16] want to see anybody up with Jordan, but I would like to see is that if we improve something

[1:58:22] and start to go out and look at it and give the final

[1:58:27] approval and a lot of it.

[1:58:28] Stop what have to do with me.

[1:58:30] Yeah, so because you want to be a specific,

[1:58:33] you want to be a part of that and you need me.

[1:58:35] So it's going to be static ourselves.

[1:58:39] So you would be willing to approve something.

[1:58:42] So basically, if I got it done, we were able to dim this.

[1:58:46] It would be something that would be then else.

[1:58:51] I could probably, I mean, I just need to figure out before I say, oh, yeah, I don't want

[1:58:54] to agree to something and then they tell me you can't do that.

[1:58:58] You want to defer?

[1:59:00] I really don't want to do it, I mean, I like your proposal and I don't see a problem

[1:59:05] with that.

[1:59:06] I just, somehow I need to protect myself because we do, we're going to give you the range.

[1:59:12] So, do you mind if I say something?

[1:59:14] Sure.

[1:59:14] Okay.

[1:59:17] I have some concerns about it. I first want to understand the, did you say the five-star

[1:59:23] light sign is coming off the building? Correct, yes. That's an improvement. Thank you.

[1:59:29] Okay. This is a gateway into a hotel. Correct. We talked about gateway being 335 South Royal,

[1:59:38] sorry, I think it's North Royal Street earlier this evening. Oh, we're going to surprise,

[1:59:42] I was fried out in childhood to gateway, but anyway, this is truly gateway and that Alexander

[1:59:47] you're coming from the airport down to Parkway and that Christophe star has driven me crazy

[1:59:55] for 40 years.

[1:59:56] So I'm really glad it's coming down, but I am.

[2:00:00] I think it's concerned about the lighting of it. When I go up and down to the street, now this is outside of the historic district, but the Motley pool and another business called five guys, they've got big illuminated signs, and they definitely, I can't tell you if it's Saltalo or what the coven are on their signs, but it really stands out. And so, and that's allowed in other parts of the city of Alexandria.

[2:00:29] I'm not so much an old dad, so I'm hesitant here to go with what you're asking for because I think this is an opportunity to die down.

[2:00:41] What would have been less than attractive for a very long time?

[2:00:49] But I believe that if you dial down the kelvins and make it try to make it a yellow light that's not going to look as nice as if it was a softer white light around the letters.

[2:01:00] Well, then that's another comment that you made, and I do want to talk with you about it.

[2:01:04] I'm not trying to say, you know, my words a lot, but we have a CVS sign on King Street that

[2:01:11] is as we talked about smaller commercial and diminutive prepared to this, but that CVS sign

[2:01:18] is supposed to be below, so that's how it goes, right?

[2:01:22] Oh, I don't even think I think that there was supposed to be a lot to say.

[2:01:25] Well, I don't know, but it is supposed to be.

[2:01:27] And you went around and around on that and sitting in, you know, it's supposed to, you're supposed to go to check it if there's any questions about it and whether it's been installed or what will be approved.

[2:01:42] But that's my question.

[2:01:45] Is it the same?

[2:01:46] Is it the light, is the face light up to the letters lighter?

[2:01:49] It is halo.

[2:01:51] What I'm looking for is it's white, it's not yellow and not I can't speak for them but I

[2:02:00] would say that they did not use 30 times.

[2:02:04] I don't think that you just, I mean you can't change it is what it is, 3500, 3500, 3000

[2:02:10] kelvin's, it's yellow, I mean I wish they have a chart that kind of shows you, you know,

[2:02:19] gives you little light bulbs and tells you what it is. And you can see you know it goes up from

[2:02:23] from yellow and then a little bit plus yellow and then just a hint of yellow and then yeah yeah

[2:02:28] so so there you go. I mean you're seeing stuff like that so that's why I can't tell you what they

[2:02:33] put in there and there's something I can't speak to to what we want to do but we want to do some

[2:02:38] of it in the middle which is not which is the first where it's primarily white versus having a yellow

[2:02:46] I don't think that's, I mean, again, this is also, you know, you're speaking of signs,

[2:02:52] which I agree with you, James, that on King Street, the pedestrian level, that's a little

[2:02:58] bit different.

[2:02:59] But this is an office building these signs, as you can see, are six, seven stories up

[2:03:04] in the air.

[2:03:05] You're very eye catching coming down the board, but I will say that.

[2:03:08] Are you planning to, in this picture that I'm at, which may not be adequate, the letters

[2:03:14] There's more of a darker blue to make.

[2:03:17] Where is the light going to be?

[2:03:19] It's going to be dwelling behind the blue.

[2:03:21] Yes.

[2:03:23] Okay.

[2:03:29] It was just a minute.

[2:03:31] Yes.

[2:03:34] We have.

[2:03:36] Sorry.

[2:03:38] Well, I'm hoping to hold you up.

[2:03:45] So again, that's done with probably light.

[2:03:48] it was higher than 5,000. That's pretty good. So what in please say to work with the staff to

[2:03:58] something between 45, like we usually don't have this, but I think it's higher and it's

[2:04:04] a bit commercial, more of a partial zone, maybe something between 3,000 to 45,000. Yeah, 3,000 to 4,000

[2:04:14] like me good. Four thousand is still going to be yellow. Forty-five hundred still has a hint of yellow.

[2:04:22] I really wish you would let us try five thousand with you know I guess the caveat that I mean

[2:04:29] I'm pretty sure you guys don't have a problem with it but I would certainly if you could put in

[2:04:34] there that you know you have I don't know how you work it I mean say you know whatever you said

[2:04:39] see the yes, you know the same type of wording or something along those lines, maybe we're

[2:05:00] In the investigation on the site, the determine the level is correct. And if the applicant goes back and finds out they cannot be justice, then the applicant could return to the board to modify the approval. So at that point, basically, if you say, you can go back and find out that a candidate can't even go back to the board. That's fine. I went back and looked at the candidate, I'd like to modify the approval. And then that's fine. I'm pretty sure it can be dimmed. I don't want to say honorable.

[2:05:29] percent of positive, but certainly we would be able to do that, but it could certainly do

[2:05:36] something like that, and we would, yeah, you know, I think that's the reason we've gone for months.

[2:05:43] What do you think particularly the completion of it can 3,000, 4,000 or 5,000 or 5,000 for

[2:06:08] I'm on by during the day.

[2:06:11] Any day you walk.

[2:06:13] So yeah, that's fine.

[2:06:14] We'd be happy to do that.

[2:06:15] I mean,

[2:06:16] the time we get to install an appointment,

[2:06:18] then a winner.

[2:06:19] So it'll be dark at six.

[2:06:20] Something.

[2:06:22] Okay.

[2:06:23] Oh.

[2:06:24] Are you?

[2:06:24] We need to check.

[2:06:30] Well,

[2:06:35] for the applicant to work with the staff on a nimble payload sign if in 3000 to 5000 K and

[2:06:45] for staff to check the application installation to verify if it needs to be for what level it needs

[2:06:51] to begin.

[2:06:52] We will do it.

[2:06:55] We have a second.

[2:06:59] Second?

[2:07:02] Second, me.

[2:07:03] I didn't mean it.

[2:07:03] Yeah, I didn't mean it.

[2:07:04] Notice, there's a second.

[2:07:05] I didn't mean it.

[2:07:06] I'm not even-

[2:07:06] Again, here.

[2:07:08] It's no need to question.

[2:07:08] And then we're getting about, like, not anything.

[2:07:10] Ah, is there a second?

[2:07:10] Maybe.

[2:07:11] I wasn't, I didn't mean it.

[2:07:13] We were all second.

[2:07:14] I didn't mean it.

[2:07:15] Wait, are you, are you, are you, just second yourself?

[2:07:17] No, you know I didn't make the motion.

[2:07:18] I just, you know I didn't make the motion.

[2:07:21] Okay, let's do it.

[2:07:28] Hi.

[2:07:29] Hi.

[2:07:30] Hi.

[2:07:31] Hi.

[2:07:33] Hi.

[2:07:35] Sorry.

[2:07:39] I'm looking at five for a long time.

[2:07:41] Hi, and this may, you're going to be very happy when it's done.

[2:07:44] I'm sorry.

[2:07:45] This will be an improvement to have the haveler in the regional.

[2:07:49] and all the innovation. Yes, all the essence. And also thank you. You were on the first

[2:07:53] pace and one of the last. Yes, thank you. Thank you very much.

[2:07:57] Thank you very much. Thank you very much.

[2:08:01] Thanks. I appreciate it. Thank you all. All right, so what do I want to say? I mean,

[2:08:08] it's very several points where this gets installed. So, do you have any contact to guys?

[2:08:13] No, no, no, no. Okay, sounds good. I thank you all.

[2:08:16] So, it takes some time to see if the generation, or the university will see the veterinarian

[2:08:27] around the corner.

[2:08:28] Right.

[2:08:29] So, I know we have the same approval methods.

[2:08:33] I guess my question is, what's stopping them from which I think might have happened.

[2:08:39] Meanwhile, we look at it, it looks great, proven, proven.

[2:08:42] Well, you walk away, think that I'll be back up.

[2:08:46] I mean, I think I have to, but I think that, I mean,

[2:08:48] we'll do it, I mean, since you have the board has asked me

[2:08:50] to check on it, I will go back and check the approval

[2:08:53] of the members of that and see if it was personally

[2:08:55] available, and check to see where we are in that.

[2:08:57] I think that we will contact them.

[2:08:58] I think we'll be able to say on the free demo board

[2:09:01] and make sure that's not like, but I understand what they

[2:09:03] cranked the back up as we walk.

[2:09:04] I mean, that's, that's probably where it's cost-of-visioning.

[2:09:22] We have two and together to consider it's also our last, so BAR 2026, there's a 306, which

[2:09:33] which is the FICE for Partial Demolition and Account

[2:09:36] Obsolation at one of the weekly mainstream,

[2:09:39] as well as the VAR 2026-307,

[2:09:43] which is the poll-teration at the same address.

[2:09:47] The applicant is Keith Lawson Moore,

[2:09:50] representative of the Biocare and Compea Art Protect.

[2:09:54] The proposed goal before it was to demolish 76 square feet

[2:09:57] of existing slave roofing, both on the floor.

[2:10:00] Ms. Faw, assembly, basic, and answer, as well as to add a Ruth Tarris new steering closure and a shed

[2:10:07] normer to the sound-facing bandsaw group. On page 2 of the report, you'll see that the site context

[2:10:14] of this project is part of a group of 7-tash talent-up homes, 103, the second building in

[2:10:21] from North New Union Street, the alley behind the homeless private page 4 of the host project

[2:10:29] or I'm sorry, page 4 of the report shows those for you,

[2:10:32] the dormer and green terrace.

[2:10:34] Page 5, get there, there we are.

[2:10:39] Draw the attention, the design standards that you have to do.

[2:10:42] The style and scale of the dormers should be appropriately

[2:10:45] our potential style.

[2:10:47] New dormers should be centered on or between

[2:10:50] the existing windows below.

[2:10:52] New dormers should match existing dormers

[2:10:55] and style and proportion.

[2:10:56] and composite deposit sightings such as five of cement can be used on all sides

[2:11:02] provided that it is on the smooth finish and it is manageable.

[2:11:05] 75 of the report has a HB staff recommendation.

[2:11:10] Thank you.

[2:11:12] Thank you.

[2:11:12] So, we will see you in the next slide.

[2:11:16] Hello.

[2:11:17] My name is Karen Conkey.

[2:11:19] I'm a 4-7 South Leastread.

[2:11:20] I'm here representing Wayne Lawson Moore.

[2:11:24] He gives his huge apologies. He had a business meeting that came up or dinner that came up this evening. So he could not join us. So he had spots sitting by myself.

[2:11:34] Lawson bought this home earlier this spring. In the staff report, there's a picture of one of five Queen, which is a project that I did, I guess about three or four years ago.

[2:11:43] When he fell in love with their roof deck and said, hey, can you do me a roof deck just like that one? I said, let me see what I can do.

[2:11:50] So he's proposing the cable railing around the perimeter in the stair tower or stair

[2:11:56] closure that's similar to what we did in the next door at the neighbors so that's how we

[2:12:00] knew we can do it.

[2:12:02] And it's all outdoor kitchen.

[2:12:04] And with that, I'll answer any questions.

[2:12:06] And maybe we'll do the staff work.

[2:12:07] And love the staff work too, by the way.

[2:12:10] We do too.

[2:12:12] Thank you.

[2:12:13] Any questions from the board members?

[2:12:15] Any questions from the public?

[2:12:22] So we'll do a demonstration any any comment?

[2:12:30] Is this the hospital work time anymore?

[2:12:34] It is. I did the day window in the shed door on the back.

[2:12:37] I guess in 2016.

[2:12:39] Yeah, and we talked a lot about the window proportions to one another.

[2:12:43] right? It's possible for different. I've worked on Austin's door. Okay. How's the leader's side,

[2:12:50] too? So, okay. Yeah, no. Absolutely naming cocky. Yeah, really. All right. That's

[2:13:00] the only question. You are, I think, a dormer. So the dormer on the front elevation is what we're adding.

[2:13:07] So, currently it's just a faux-man sorry group with no dormer and so he's adding his 3-go menus up at the top.

[2:13:15] It's because if you go up in that third floor it's like, it's right, it's sloping, so he's trying to get that.

[2:13:21] He's got the square footage, but you can't really talk about it in a minute.

[2:13:25] And it makes sense if I just was wondering that on the roof of this, are you using this lace that you're taking out to the floor?

[2:13:32] No, it's a metal, it's a fancy metal roof, a little slow metal.

[2:13:36] So, yeah, the slate would require a sweep or slope on the dorm room, so we're keeping

[2:13:44] the slate around the dorm room, but the actual roof of the dorm room is metal.

[2:13:49] It's a little flat.

[2:13:51] Yeah, it's very flat.

[2:13:53] And it's the same slope as the dorm room on the back side that we did in 2016.

[2:13:59] Okay.

[2:13:59] If you have any questions more, I can move on to the next one.

[2:14:07] I'll make a motion to approve for staff recommendations.

[2:14:11] Second.

[2:14:13] Thank you.

[2:14:14] Do we think it's a roll call?

[2:14:16] Yeah.

[2:14:16] I think it's a roll call.

[2:14:18] But that's to you.

[2:14:20] Make the motion.

[2:14:21] And Mr. Robinson, thank you very much.

[2:14:24] Yes.

[2:14:25] Okay.

[2:14:27] All right.

[2:14:27] All right, and roll call, it is Ms. Rahul.

[2:14:31] It's time for Mr. Spencer.

[2:14:35] Hi.

[2:14:38] And then this is Ms. Vellie.

[2:14:41] Hi.

[2:14:43] Thank you.

[2:14:44] All right.

[2:14:45] Score.

[2:14:46] Thank you very much for the long evening.

[2:14:49] Thank you.

[2:14:51] Say bye-bye.

[2:14:52] Bye-bye.

[2:14:53] Bye-bye.

[2:14:54] Thank you.

[2:14:56] Bye-bye.

[2:14:56] In this.

[2:14:56] Bye-bye.

[2:14:58] OK, I'm ready.

[2:15:00] All right. Thank you. The end of our.

[2:15:11] Again, please give us feedback on what you like and don't like about our staff board of the template and all the great things that this question we did tonight.

[2:15:35] I think that would be a little long by the end, but I think we're going to have 20 to 20

[2:15:49] Yeah, it's fun. Yeah, the goal is they are not going to be more than 90 seconds, which is also why I'm not giving you every single standard that you're putting in our stack.

[2:16:00] The stack report because the goal is you guys are reading the stack reports before tonight.

[2:16:05] So it's the intent is we are one of the few boards to not do this.

[2:16:10] So, I'm just going to try and better align the other boards and commissions as well as just to highlight the things from the stack of work.

[2:16:21] If in any way in home drive, the obsession or whatever the duty may be.

[2:16:28] All right, thank you.

[2:16:32] Thank you very much.

Board of Architectural Review

Transcript