the and the point at our to begin the Wednesday July 3rd for the architecture review meeting for the the meeting on June 20th, 2024. Are there any corrections or modifications to the minutes as submitted or members? Are there any members of the public that would like to modify or make corrections to the minutes as submitted? Seeing none may have a motion, please. I imagine you'll approve the sorry. Please. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Thank you. Mr. Kulky. Thank you, sir. We have two items in the consent count of this evening. First is at number three. B-A-R-2024-00214. Oldness Park District request for alterations at 435 South Lee Street. Applicant is David Albright and Ulrich Weinrich. The second is I'm before the R2024 0226 district request for alterations at 929 South St. Asaf street applicant is hairy as well incorporated. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. and may I have a motion, please, to approve the modified consent calendar. I'm motion to approve the modified consent calendar with item number three being approved. Is there a second? I second that. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed, say nay. Sorry, that was Theresa for the. Yes. I. Any opposed say nay sorry that was Theresa for the yes. All those in favor me any opposed a nay eyes have it. Mr. Conkey will move on to new business with item number four. Thank you sir sorry the voices all sound very similar we all have the same tone today. Yes. You especially, Mr. At number four, BAR 2024-00226, Oldenstort District Request for Alterations, at 929 South St. Ace of Street, applicant is Harry Braswell, Incorporated. Is there anything or are there representatives here to speak on behalf of this project? the project. We have a meeting. Is there a representative here to speak on behalf of this project? I have nothing to say unless there is anything for you guys to say. Could you state your name and address for the record please? The question brown. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I I would like to speak on this case. Welcome. I trust Harry, President, I know it does great work. I just had a question on why the application was incomplete. Staff says that why couldn't there be, they asked for window and door details, and they said some photos of some neighborhood doors that they think it'll be like, but it's not that hard to have a detail. So I don't know why that wasn't part of the application. It's in the checklist for a complete application. And also, just with the style proposed, I know often in Yates Gardens, there are fixed windows on the first floor for bay windows, I think that's the second floor. There are fixed windows on the first floor for bay windows, but in this case, they're changing it from a fixed to a vertical case meant double opening, which seems odd with the double sashes above. And they show us examples, other windows in the neighborhood that are double hung like the second floor windows in this house. But there's double-hungle, second floor, and vertical open sash on the first floor, and then we don't have the details of the door. And it's not even specified that would be wood, which is generally a consideration within your guidelines in the board. And staffed in condition it. It explains in the staff report it would have to meet the policies, but they don't have a condition. But it doesn't seem like it would be that hard to have the actual detailed specs of the . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . recommendation is with condition that applicant clarifies the window and door replacement material when submitting the building permit. I mean, it's, we always try to get all that information ahead of time. Sometimes for various reasons, we don't get it in time to get it into the report. In which case, we just make a condition that it comply with our guidelines. So it is periodically, the period that does happen just for various reasons when we can't get the information in time. Mr. Malone, as you're having more comments? No, thank you. Thank you. Is there any other speakers from his home? With that, we will close the public hearing on this and move on to board deliberation. Who would like to begin? I have some questions. Okay. public hearing on this and move on to board deliberation who would like to begin. So the door that you're considering it's it does say that a lit door divided lit door are you thinking of something basically similar to what you're showing or it's similar to that. And then the windows understand why Mr. Madone, it does show a double opening. We are considering that one point, but we're just going to go with a single sash. OK, that's it. That's it. The door, yeah, I think it should be divided like it's shown here. It could be also from just the writing it could change to one of these modern doors. For example, but I think what's shown is appropriate for the area. We wanted to match the window that's right next to it. And if the board would like to make that a condition, it's just to be super clear. So we know exactly what we're looking for under the, when we get the permit drawings, that would be a good idea. Miss Dalyne, you have any comments? No. Miss Delinio, do you have any comments? No. Sandy, would you like to make a motion? Sure. A motion to approve with staff's recommendation and with the condition that the door would be the same or similar as it's shown in the documents. Can you just clarify specifically like what page and what is generally super clear as to what? The example of the door that's shown on page 19 with six or more lip lights. Thank you. Yep. Thank you. I just want to be clear. Thank you. Yep, I just want to be clear. Thank you. Is there a second? A second, Dan. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed, say nay. Hives, have it. Congratulations. Thank you. Thank you. All right, Mr. Colkey. Let's next under new business. Thank you, sir. With that, we'll move on to new business. First item tonight under new business is at under 5. BER 2024-00199, Olden the Stork District. Request for alterations is 205 North Pit Street. Applicant is Sean Tyree. Is the applicant or the representative here to speak on the applicant's project. Good evening. Hello, just date your name and address for the record police or Sean Tyree. Addresses 205 North bit. Welcome. Would you like to make a presentation or just answer questions? It's my understanding that you you had the document that I'd written prior to the proceedings so I'm really at the mercy of the of the B.I.R. on your guidance of whatever that is. I don't know if I like the at the mercy but okay. This is not a courtroom sir but yeah we will proceed. Is there are there any members of the board that has questions with this applicant? Mr. Adams, I'm just curious who brought these windows to you. The contractor was he aware of the guidelines for the cities? I clear that. I don't think he was aware of the guidelines. I asked him specifically. I said, do I need to get a building permit or anything like that? And I said, no, it's a standard modification to a home of standard maintenance. And it's not materially changing the look of the home. So he didn't think I had to. Obviously, I was also ignorant to it. So it's probably my fault. I don't have a good excuse for how it happened. Thank you. Anyone else? Any members of the public has questions with this application? Seeing none of them will be close to public hearing and move on to board deliberation. I'll start with Ms. Downing-no. I walk to work, I go by the house all the time and notice the other townhouses do have simulated divided light windows. I guess that's part of a question to you. Did you notice that your windows were going to be substantially different than your neighbors? No. And in fact, the dividers I didn't realize candidly would be inside the window. Obviously, I know it now. I've never bought windows for a home before. So it was not a detail that I was really considering. I was my primary focus was completely on the efficiency of the windows, hopefully making my house more efficient and more quiet, because I do get a lot of, I airline the way it's just like everybody else does so that was my focus Mr. Adams Miss Zendia I don't have any comments. Zendia. I'm sorry. I don't have any questions. It's basically the applicant didn't apply for certificate of app preparedness and it doesn't comply with the guidelines. basically the applicant didn't apply for certificate of appropriate, appropriateness. And it doesn't comply with the guidelines. So I don't know, should I agree with this staff recommendation, basically, but I don't have any other additional comments? I guess one thought I had looking at it is whether additional buttons could be placed on the glass. Is that something? So I've researched it. They can. But I didn't know if that was an option or not. Okay. Mr. Adams or is Miller? Which one of you would like to go next? Just to just to clarify. I'm justene knows the question. This is something we've done before, where we've had sandwiched funds installed. And we've worked with applicants to get new ones installed on the inside NASA. So that is something we have done before. That would settle the month question. Is Miller? If that's not that would settle the one question. Okay. Is Miller? I didn't realize that could be done. I think that's. It makes perfect sense. So I think it's a good solution for us to give some consideration to. Mr. Adams. If that's been done and approved by staff, it does seem like a reasonable way to get around and get something done that looks right for the public. Be clear that there's two issues here with the windows. The first is that they are vinyl windows and the second is the mutton. So that would address the mutton question. And we have done that successfully in the past and staff would be comfortable doing that. So that just to be clear that addresses the second part of the issue. Thank you. I'll hear what others say. Okay. Yes, we'll start this over again. Ms. Douninho, how do you feel about the vinyl windows? Well, I guess our concern with the vinyl windows is, it's discoloration over time. So I don't know if these, I noticed these particular vinyl windows are a higher quality than a lot of the other vinyl windows we see. And if the manufacturer could speak to, you know, the discoloration of the vinyl. Yeah. As you know, I spent a ton of money on these windows. I have no desire to see me discolored either. If that were the case, I would replace them of my own accord before anyone was directing me to do it. I don't want my house to look out of order. Again, I think you have the specifications. They're some of the most expensive windows that you can buy. I wish I had frankly bought cheaper windows and not had this happen. But yeah, I'm happy, you know, if it comes to that or we need to have the manufacturer come in, I'm happy to support that. And they've said that they'd be happy to come in and speak to any of it. The other thing that a lot of times we look closely at is that, you know, the Miter joint at, you know, we're at the jams and the head meat. And I noticed that you know, some of of your neighbors houses have similar details so I was I was okay with the installation of these final windows. Okay. They're all here by the way. Oh the neighbors. Yeah. Okay. So, you know, I am thinking, you know, if they are a higher quality, the installation is good, they're not going to be yellow and you can get, you know, an applied exterior button, I would be in favor of allowing these to remain. I mean, I'm taking guidance from the VAR, so whatever you tell me to do, that's what I'm going to do. All right. Me, I guess I'm the only one who hasn't spoken. I'll give everyone else a chance to speak as well. I like the solution of the new buttons, but I am concerned about the slope we're on by approving vinyl windows. The support has historically not approved vinyl windows, and we start now that we'll be setting a different precedence for this board. So just my thought, there are other board members who may feel differently. And so I will go on to Ms. Zandion. and so I will go on to Miss Zandion. The thoughts on the vinyl windows. You have the same thoughts as you just mentioned. I don't want this to become a president because historically we have just always, and it's in the guidelines to not have any vinyl. And usually everyone refers to previous, you know, presidents. So I'm inclined to not accept the vinyl. I'm fortunate. Could I speak to that? You know. Give me your chance to speak out to everyone else to spoke. Is Miller? Got it. I'm not comfortable approving the vinyl windows because of the precedence that it sets. We do have standards that we go by and we use for all homeowners and we have many times said no to a vinyl windows. I certainly have been consistent with it and it does set a precedent that and I don't want to go to that tonight. So I did have another question for you when you do speak. I'll wait for that, okay? Mr. Adams. Question. There are other windows replaced on the house. Is that correct? Not just the facade that we see. That's right. These are the only ones in the public. You should, or maybe on the side. Yeah, all three elevations are of this. Or of this. Yes. I'd raise the question. Could we do the applied buttons on the south and west side, but on the east side correct the vinyl to change it to guideline appropriate. Just do the facade on the pit street. It's a... I do. Is this a public alleyway, Mr. Kunky? Yes, it is. Okay. If you wanted to address the question about the vinyl one still? Yeah, so the only approval is there's five Rex windows, there's five glass windows, there's aluminum windows. Five Rex windows are over 60% vinyl. It's an extruded window that is made from polycarbonate that would matter as added to. And Anderson does this specifically to skirt issues just like the one we're talking about. Aluminum and fiberglass windows are covered in vinyl to get paint to it here to them. So any modern window, if it's not made some, a specialized window like what's made in a lot of the very older homes in Alexandria, they have vinyl on them. Mr. Conkey, would you like to speak to that? No, you're not a window manufacturer. I'm not a window manufacturer. I'll put that up. I mean, the board has looked at windows many times in detail. We've sat here and looked at the five-erks windows and looked at the five-axis windows. I think that there's certainly, the applicant makes a good point, certainly that there are some aspects of it that are vinyl. The board has found that to be different than a completely vinyl window. And so I think that's where our guidelines lay, is that while there are some aspects to it, they are different enough that the board has accepted them and like I said we've the board has been through this quite in depth and correct me if I'm wrong we have approved and denied fiber X windows on certain projects I'm sorry we have approved we have approved and denied fiber X windows on certain projects that is true yes yes case by case this is a later building so that could be that could be done this building because it's a later building Right, but these are not 5x these are these are vinyl sure vinyl correct correct, but this is a later building So there's more flexibility little bit of the only thing that the the standard say on a later building is no vinyl windows That's that's really it's it's the exact what it says in the guidelines All right. So here we are with someone with a proposal that they would like to submit. I have one other question for the applicant. Sure. You mentioned your neighbors are here. Are we going to hear from any of them? I mean, they've been supportive. In fact, most of them didn't even know I had my windows replaced. But I welcome, I mean, if you would like to ask them. I think they would have this but I think they could fill out the speakers for them, correct, Mr. Colkey? Yes, we'll need if the speaker forms fill out. And of course, it's up to the board whether you'd like to hear additional public speakers at this time and on. It's at your discretion. Um, at least I feel I know where I am on this issue. So I don't need to hear more thought, but if other board members would like to hear more public input. Okay. Okay. So may I have a motion from someone please? Um, well, I did have one other thought, is it would it be worth it for us to actually look at a section of this window and maybe understand whether the vinyl that concerns us is. I would think if we're going to accept this window, we'd have to re-look at our guidelines because our guidelines specifically say no vinyl. So for me, I don't feel like I need to see a section of it, but other members may feel differently and want to maybe ask for a deferral to get more information. to get more information. And Ms. Delany, you seem to like more information. Is Miller? Yes. I would support that if we could get some more information and you would consider a deferral, which means we will go through this again. Yeah, that's fine. So you're requesting a deferral? Yeah, if you need more information, I'm happy to provide it. Okay. And can you provide pictures of all sides of the building as well once when you come back? Absolutely. Thank you. Mr. Comkin, did you have something you want to add to this? No, I'm just going to suggest if there's any specific information that you'd like, I want to be clear again that make sure we give you everything you need. So I think you're, sounds like you're looking for a physical sample of the, like a corner of the window, like we typically see, is that what you're looking for? I think that would be good. Get a physical sample of the corner and we can look at it along with the fiber X and just kind of compare. Sure. I'd happy to get one of these if you'd like to consider it. Yes sir. Could we also have an address where you could show us where these not as if it applied on top of the sandwich box? Yes I can think of one specifically right now I'll talk my head that I'm drawing a blank on the address but I can see I can see it in my house I can see it in my house right now. So I can give you the address. It's that one to be clear that one is woodwindows, but they were ordered incorrectly. It's a case that I'm thinking of, where the woodwindows were ordering incorrectly with sandwiched buttons, and we went in to work with them. They got new stick on buttons. I hate to say it that way. But basically, stick-on buttons on the inside and outside to replicate the stick-on buttons on that one is her what? We're not just to come buttons on that particular window. Are they wood? Or are they? No wood as well. It's wood window. When you order this sample, can you order it with the stick-on buttons on it. We can ask. We can try. Yes. Because I am interested to see how this would look in a vinyl application versus a wet. That's why I pointed out that I'm only aware of this happening on a wood window. So that's why I wanted to point out that the example would be wood, so it'd be slightly different. Just keep that in mind. All right. May I have a motion to accept the deferral? So moved. Is there a second? Second. All those in favor say aye. Aye. May I oppose a nay, nay. Congratulations. We'll see you when you get the sample in. Thank you. Mr. Conkey, what's next? There we go. Next item on our docket tonight is item number six. This is BAR 2024-00218. Olden the historic district request for alterations at 309 Duke Street. The applicant is Chris Clark. Welcome. I'm the owner's rep, Joel Dalyan from Market Tech Screw Practice. Yeah, I trust. 1-1-1, Belprey Way. Are you here to make a presentation or you just want to answer questions? Yes, answer questions. OK. And remember, the board has questions with this applicant. Is Miller? No questions at that time. I have no other questions. Are there any public speakers through this application, Ms. Hillen? Yes, we have Gail Rothrock. Good evening. Welcome. Thank you. Good evening, Mr. Chairman, members of the board, Gail Rothraught for the record, 209 Duke Street for Historic Alexandria Foundation. So, I'm very glad to see that someone is taking on this house because it's been sitting there for a while with this big pile of bricks out front. But it is a historic house and it's lost its historic fabric and it seems to me the fabric that's out front, the bricks, should be replaced. This is not new construction. This should be replacement and kind, which I think we would all do with our own houses. So I see no reason why the brick can't be used but put over the framing and just put it back the way it was. It should be a wonderful house. It's been neglected and I would be excited to see it restored. So thank you and I hope you'll consider those comments. Before you walk away, I just wanted to clear you're asking to reuse the existing brick exactly Thank you. Thank you It's Helmine who's next Next is Ann male I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Thank you. Thank you. Good evening. I reside at 307 Duke Street next to the House under petition. Excuse me. Really quickly. Could you state your name and address? I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm at 307 Duke Street. the use of this inappropriate concrete board siding on an 1880s house in the heart of the historic district. I have resided 307 Duke for more than 20 years. I chose to live here because of my respect and appreciation for the preservation of the historic houses in this district. And over the past 20 years, I have invested deeply in my personal time as well as my money. I have complied with BAR requirements, whether they're visible from the street or not. I have over the last 20 years endured the view of this deteriorating house until it's collapse. And now I'm faced with a permanent view in the future of concrete board siding on a historic home. I find this deeply disturbing. I've invested myself my time and my money in community activities for the preservation of this historic district. And I really feel very, very strongly that the original materials should be replaced or something similar to that, not concrete board siding. There's no place for that type of material in the historic district where they're visible from the street or not. So and I ask that you consider the impact of this inappropriate material on my ability to enjoy my home as well as the president that I feel could be set that could undermine the work that you have done to maintain the historic integrity of this irreplaceable neighborhood. Thank you. Mr. Conkey, how much of this is going to be visible from the street? The rear-el, I mean you can see it in some of these photographs. A portion of the rear-el is visible from the from the public right away. It's, you know, you can see, this is the L steps back. You can see that in the plan here. And in the photo on the right is a photo of it. The blue is the tarp covering the yellow right now. So that's how much of the side elevation you can see. Sorry dinner up. And this original real real real was brick. That's correct. That's the brick that collapsed. Brick, a collapse. Correct. Here we go. Yes. And I think that's it for that I have for you guys. Thank you. Is down in yellow? No, nope. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. And I think that's it for that I have for you guys. Thank you. Is down. No. I'm sorry. We have another public speaker. I'm speaking. Sorry. Welcome. Good. Mr. Chairman. Members of the board. I agree with Ms.'m sorry. Good. Good. Good. Good. Good. Good. Good. Good. Good. Good. Good. Good. Good. Good. comments. In addition, I think this isn't even before you correctly with the way it's presented because there's basically an approval here implied, well, it overtly, to prove demolition of this entire wall of this L. So we realize this is, I mean, it could just be, you know, what they say, like, like, got got action or I forget what that's called, but, or it they say like, like God Action or I forget what that's called, but or it could be neglect, which I admit I've neglected my brick walls and have cracks and need to get them repointed sooner than later. But in any case, if the wall's going to, if the brick's going to be down and remain down, the board needs to approve and after the fact demolition permit. That's not requested tonight. That should be required. In addition, I think that's inappropriate. As you know, you require a demolition permit to remove 25 square feet of historic material and surface. This is somewhere on the order of 500 or 600 square feet or something. And it's inappropriate, and I would not recommend that you not do that. As was stated, it could be, oh, sorry, I passed around a picture. That's at the corner of Prince Street and South Alfred Street, the 200 block south. That wall that you can see in the middle, you can see the mortars, the is a different color, the, because it just collapsed into the street, similar to this, and it's owned by the seaport properties, it owns lots of properties around town. They sent a mason out and he rebuilt it in about three days, and it looks great. And he reused the bricks over there, and he repositioned all the original wood windows and even could save the original, or all the original wood windows and even could say it saved the original, or not the original, the storm windows that had been applied to the exterior and the door and the door frame just reconstructed it all and put it back up just like they did originally in a few days and they could do that here and I realize there may not be enough salvage material but as was suggested you could either rebuild it out of block with a brick face or frame with a brick face and reuse as many of the bricks that are still available and get bricks that match if you don't have enough. And that would be appropriate. And the hardy planks are inappropriate. This is not a new addition or something that's built after 1931 or now contemporary. It's the existing structure from between 1877 and 1885. With still the other three walls intact, it's just this one wall. So it should be reconstructed appropriately using the appropriate material and methods to extend possible. Thank you. Thank you. Are there any other public speakers Ms. Helden? That we will close the public hearing. And I guess, sir, do you have any comments in regards to what you've heard so far? From our point of view, it's, the visibility is extremely limited if at all, it's the visibility. It's extremely limited, if at all, especially during the summer when the trees are there. It's pretty much entirely not visible from a public way. That's done really thing. You know, I don't think they have sides to that. Okay. Mr. Conkey, correct me if I'm wrong. We don't consider agitation as part of blocking the view shed. That's correct. Okay. And additionally, we also don't consider what someone else can see from their home as part of our review process, correct? That's correct. Thank you. Next, we'll move on to, we'll close the public hearing and move on to board deliberation. That's correct. That's correct. Okay. Thank you. Thanks. We'll move on to, we'll close the public hearing and move on to board deliberation. Starwood, Mr. Adams. The two subjects here, I think the concept, the demolition by neglect is something that we should think about because I think there been other houses that became neglected and during the city stepped in I think it did some maintenance and then there was something to do with their taxes I don't know the details but it is a bad precedent to think that people could just let a house fall down because it hadn't had maintained. The other thing I think, Mr. Rock, Mayell, and Mr. Mullen, are right, this is a historic house, and it should be replaced in kind. I live in a house where I did a, took down a 1950s edition that was already using used brick and reused it. I reused it a third time over wood frame construction. And the maintenance is last. I mean, I don't have to paint it, even those signatures maybe isn't, but I think it's a valuable commodity. You have the bricks there and they can be supplemented with others. They're not enough. And come back with another design shows us the elevation how that would turn out. Thank you. I just want to clarify one thing real quick. The current owner who's applying for the work tonight is not the owner who owns a property when it collapsed. Just to be clear in terms of when we're talking about demolition of neglect, I just want to make sure that the board understands that this is a subsequent owner after the collapse of the wall. Ms. Del Nino. I agree with Mr. Malone that you know neglecting the building until it falls down and then building it back with something else is something that we don't want to promote. It also happens with the last wood window application that we have. If you neglect your house to the point and then say that you can't maintain it or put it back, that really changes the composition of our historic district. And I think that because the brick fell down, you know, it's lime mortar. So the mortar is almost like sand and I'm thinking it's going to be relatively easy to reuse these bricks. And the ones if you don't have enough, you can get some that match and I think given its location in the historic district, it would be important, you know, to have its location in the historic district, it would be important to have it made in the real built back. Agreed. Miss Andy Yon. So this is a historic house from 1880s. And I believe that the person basically who purchased a house in historic Old Town, historic house should value and respect that aspect of it and try similar to the neighbors who have been taking care of their buildings this should be taken care of and I don't believe that this should be considered as a new construction. This is a addition or replacement of a wall to the historic house. And the existing bricks should be used to build this house. And I think that the basically doors and windows also should go with the historic guidelines. And I believe that you are already using wood doors and windows. So those are appropriate. I agree that those are appropriate. Not any kind of doors and windows, but the wall, I believe that should be reconstructed with existing building, existing bricks of old historic bricks that it had. And I agree with other board members comments. Thank you. Ms. Miller? I thank you for your being here, your presentation. I agree with our speakers tonight and my fellow board members that the, that we should use, reuse the existing bricks and that the, should you need more, you'll need to secure them. And I'd be happy to make a motion if we need it. Well, I would like to speak less. Oh certainly. And then you can make your motion. I do have one quick question. The existing brick is not a painting brick, right, Mr. Cumpy? No sir, it is not painted. Okay. So I agree with everyone that said those far, but I have one small change that I think would be critical, where you run out. I would recommend that we use the existing brick to the extent possible, and where you run out of brick. We have a hard joint line there, so we can denote where the original brick stopped and where the new brick kicks in so there's maybe a hard line there as opposed to a two thing in new brick into old brick. Um, kind of the same way we treat windows just because this is a historic brick that we're talking about and I would like maybe we offset the new brick or the old brick out or in so that you can tell where from a historic perspective where the new brick was put in but that's just my personal thought. If the world wants to move forward with that we just have other suggestions as something to do with that as we could ask that that joint be located close to the front of the property as possible. The rear portion of the L is the most visible as you get closer. So it may be worthwhile to, if that joint exists to locate it towards the front. Or closer to the front of the house. So it's close to the part of the wall that room. It may not be visible. It may not be visible, but you could tell where it was at. Or on the bottom maybe like a water table. I was thinking of a vertical control joint in the back. I was thinking of it as a vertical joint as well, but Mrs. Andy, I honestly think of it as a horizontal joint. But maybe we can suggest the architect to bring some suggestions once they come back. Well, in that case are you asking would they accept a deferral? Sorry. Yes, this question. I want to add a quick clarification of why we chose to go back with a Fibre-Saman board versus the brick baneer. Going to a modern cavity wall, we'd lose some valuable square inches as far as the overall width to make our floor plans work. So that was a critical thought going to a wood frame with a Fibersman baneer in a modern cavity wall. You will lose some square inches versus what's there, which is a double thick, double width brick. That's all that's there right now. Going to a modern construction, you will lose some inches, and it would impede on the owners' proposed floor plans. Thank you. Would you like a deferral? Or do you want us to proceed? If this gets denied, you can't come back for a year. It seems like most of the board members now are looking to ask you to use the existing brick. I understand you're concerned about your floor plan, but you would have to modify your floor plan. Is there any way any of the suggestions that you had given that could be implemented today as far as part of the moving forward? Or? Well, I'm... The board could, and if the board feels conditioned, it feels comfortable with us, of course. The board could condition that the wallbeat could be used, be rebuilt with existing brick instead of deferring. If the, and then allows to have to work with the applicant to make that happen, if the board is comfortable with that, of course, if you would like to see it yourselves, then deferral is more appropriate. And just a clarification on the wall construction, we're not saying it needs to be a complete masonry wall. It could be a wood stud with a masonry veneer with this existing brick masonry veneer, correct? Yeah. Correct. Mrs. Vandian. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I didn't mean to interrupt. I think it was just a question of that control joint. Yeah. Miss Sandion, you had other thoughts? No, same thing, yes. Miss Dunno said that only the facade that we see behind it, you can use the, you know, a modern like a stock wall with the spacing, water proofing and all that and also I agree with Miss Akonke that we can approve it with the condition of them working with with the staff to for the Joint Are you turning that into a motion? I'm motion to approve the condition of the applicant working with staff on the joint lines of well first I should say to use the existing brick to rebuild the wall with the suggested wood window and doors and also to work with the staff on where that joint, if you don't have enough brick, which if it was double with you might have enough bricks, but if you don't have enough brick to build the wall where that joint would be to meet the new brick. Okay. Were there any other conditions in the staff report you need to make sure it's in the motion. The other conditions here related to archaeology. So I was awarded that adopts the staff recommendations associated with archaeology. Then that we will be fine. Sandy, on is that acceptable? In your motion. Exactly. Agreed to staff recommendations for archaeology. I agree with the staff recommendation on archaeology. Okay. Is there a second? Second. Okay. I'm trying to see is there any demo with this because it's already demolished? I don't know. Just demolish itself. Okay. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. You oppose say nay. Aye is happy. Congratulations sir. So I work with staff. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. He opposed say nay. Eyes having. Congratulations, sir. So I work with staff. We'll be calling Mr. Conkey on the 4th of July. Call him. He will answer your call. OK. Definitely. Sure. Read it. So many. OK, Mr. Conkey, what's next? OK. the . Okay. Next item on our document is number seven and eight. This is BAR 2024-0022 Oldenstort District. Question four addition and alterations at seven two nine south pit street. Applicant is Ashley Bohn and number BAR. Sorry. BAR number 2024-00234. Question four. Question four. I'm actually a person who is a person who is a person who is a person who is a person who is a person who is a person who is a person who is a person who is a person who is a person who is a person who is a person who is a person who is a person who is a person who is a person who is a person who is a person who is a person who is a person who is a person who is a person who is a person who is a person who is Are you here to give a presentation or you just want to answer questions? I do have a comment on one of the staff recommendations. If that's okay. The second item which refers to the type of shingles that should be used. Our plan was to use our to install a metal roof in the addition. Mr. Colkey, were you aware of this? Drawing shows a shingle roof. if a metal roof is going to be at an only addition, then that would be perfectly acceptable to staff. OK. Yeah. OK. All right. Any other questions, sir? Do you have any other issues with any other staff recommendations? No. OK. All right. That we will go to ask any board members if they have questions for this applicant. I have one question. Is the HVAC that's installed on the wall? Is that visible from any public views or? Maybe. I mean, if from the alley behind the house, there's probably an angle you could see it from. It's kind of nestled back in a, there's a sort of side alley on our property and it's back in there. It's a little bit sort of back, right? Yes, yes. Is there a reason why I'm just wondering that if you bring it to the, it's shown on the left side. If you bring it more to the right side, would it cover it a little bit more from the alley? Or is there a reason why it's there? Oh, so the right side of one wall? Yeah, right side. Like it's to the lower, like bottom left of the window. If you move it to the lower right of the window. There's a small shed in that area, but there probably... It probably would be possible to move it to the right somewhat. I don't know that we could go all the way over to that window, because that window actually bumps out a little bit. So you could move it a few feet, probably, maybe two, three, four feet. That's. I, yeah. I actually like that it's lining up with the edge of the window. So I don't know if moving it to the right with the window any benefit. It's essentially directly above where the existing the compressor for the main house is. Okay. Thank you. I think that was that was all my question. Good. Mr. Raddles. It's a public alley behind this house right. What is the next building over just how to cure us? It has a big roof on the other side of the alley apartment buildings. Okay. Thank you One of the things that are the traditional guidelines in Old Town for the B.A. R. was that any addition or change should add to our house should reflect some consciousness of the existing house when it was built to its gardens house. And in this case, I know sometimes we've done contemporary additions, but it seems like the window elevations, especially the west elevation, it doesn't, both of them really, has nothing to do with the existing French stores in the, I guess it's a kitchen below. And the other, they have no relevance to the language of window design placement. And maybe it's too much windows, I think, even facing north. It just seems not well composed to my eye. In terms of the amount of window, what we're, I mean, it're certainly not, you know, stuck on this particular design of window, which I think one of the staff recommendations sort of covers. And so something that is closer to the, you know, design of the French doors on the existing extension would probably be fine with us. Any other members have questions for us? Let's see, is the question segment of where we are just to be? Yes. Speak clear. I guess I was wondering why you hadn't tied this the roof of the addition into the existing roof. Like, it is, I find it's very incongruous that, you know, it's got this poke, pokes up. But I mean, it would be, it would have water splashing up and snow drift. You know, those are kind of maintenance things, but aesthetically, I think it's in Congress with the existing design. And especially if you're going to have a metal roof, it would be nice to just kind of tie in that way you just have one downspout. Right now, you're going to have maybe three downspouts just on this little addition here. I don't think we'll be adding any downspouts because the existing addition already has its own downspouts. I think they'll all tie together as far as I understand. As far as, you know, I mean, in terms of the profile, the roof, well, maybe that's not what you're asking, but, you know, the addition, we're kind of matching what's already there. Ms. Dunning, are you referring to the sections A and B, where the roof kind of steps down? I mean, I mean, I'm not sure if you're referring to the section A and B. I mean, I'm not sure if you're referring to the section A and B. I mean, I'm not sure if you're referring to the section A and B. I mean, I mean, we're kind of matching what's already there. Ms. Dunning, are you referring to the sections A and B where the roof kind of steps down and underneath the... Yes, and also the proposed side elevation, you know, that if you were going to align the, you know, the bottom of the existing roof with the bottom of your new roof and tie the roof in, I think that would be much more sensitive addition. It's not that I want to tell you how to design it. I'm just trying to, you know, I'm just trying to think that that led to be carried down to meet the existing Yeah, I think that's the issue. I think that is does steps down. That's weird. Are you talking about that something like the gap between the two rooms? Yeah, I'm looking at a 210. I don't think that's quite just a red paper. It's like this one here. I think that's good. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, you can kind of see that elevation proposed side elevation up there. Yeah. OK. I don't know what the alternative is, I guess. I mean, what would we do differently? Well, you know, you could align your roof the bottom of your new roof with the bottom of the existing match the pitch and just tie it into your existing roof. The bottom of the new roof with the bottom of the existing match, the pitch, and just tie it into your existing roof. The bottom of the new roof. I mean, that's what I would do. So what were the roof of the extension you're saying, so that the bottom, so that they match? Well, we wanted more height, I guess, as the reason we chose this. As my thought is, even if you did want more height, it should die into the other roof, though. Yeah. I think it's one of those that's my thought, is even if you did want more height, it should die into the other roof, though. Yeah. Even if it doesn't align with the bottom of the old roof, you could maybe if you took it from where your lower roof is, not your new lower roof is, and it became a gable of sorts, and it tied in there. Or even if it was just a slope roof, a giant... Yeah, a slope roof that just came across, and you could tie it into the other roof and let it die into the other roof beyond, as opposed to what you kind of have right now, which is a gap between the two roofs that's shown in the... Can you slide the image up in the ceiling? A gap between the two roofs, I think, and this... I mean, I don't think that's shown in the, can you slide the image up and say, oh man, the gap between the two roofs, I think in this, I mean, I don't think that's gonna be visible for us, but I'm concerned you're gonna have waterproofing problems. And because you have one roof that's sloping towards another roof, even though you're making a little small gutter in there, would be just imagine that, I don't know if this section is in the right direction, either that roof line that's shown there is a low slope roof going up to hit the other roof or if it's half of a gable that I see going back horizontally perfect to die into the other roof. If that makes sense. Probably not. I think I, I mean, it's describing it very well. It's easier to understand this or describe it. Looking at the two elevations on this page, if you go up the proposed back elevation and proposed side elevation, I think you can see the relationship of the two roofs are the best, just because the sections are difficult to understand exactly where they are. So these I think are more helpful. You're saying the top. Sorry, you're saying the top of the new roof would extend to hit the old existing roof on the right side. If you can show it with your cursor like that and then continue going to the left, continue going to hit that. Right now you have a cable, right? So since he has a cable facing the back, the cable would, in theory, continue to die and to continue to die into the other roof. If I understand these elevations correctly, right? And if I understand, Ms. Delinio's first comment was why the new addition has two different, like in this right side, the proposed side elevation, why does it have two different elevations? Is that what the difference is? I think the gate was cut back where the larger windows are if I understand this correctly. Well, it's not on the same cup thing. I got it. Okay. Yeah. I assume. Are you okay, Miss Miller? Or are you lost? I need some kind of a sketch or... A little bit better clarification. I say horizontal element of the roof on the side going to be all one line. That's what you're exposing. Yeah, so if that's the game here, so we're saying one option is to do that Let's tell you know and I were also looking at the same Situation is happening between the additions roof and your neighbor. There's another Small space in there that's just gonna accumulate water. There'll be water problems now and so forth. It just seems like the roof design in this addition is flawed. Well, the gap there I know is, I don't, we can't attach it to his wall as far as I understood. I mean, that's how it was explained to me. So that's why that gap was there. But maybe that's not correct, but that was my understanding. Can we ask you, we're still in the question phase, right? We're not actually in the deliberation phase. So we've kind of jumped ahead. So let me back us up a little bit and ask, are there any members of the public, Miss Hellman, that like speech application? Okay, now we'll move on to more deliberation. So I'm going to ask really quickly, sir. Is it possible that we could, you could ask for a deferral next time, have your architect come? Sure that way. Yeah, I think that's probably a good idea. I would help There's a lot of architects on this board. So I mean That's saying that we speak a separate language, but we we kind of all talk the same But yeah, I'm wood. I a treading water here, barely. So that would be fine. Mr. Comby, I just to be clear, I think I understand direction of the board is going with these comments. Would you like staff to work with the applicant and the applicants architect to continue to develop this before we come back to you? Because I do think I understand your comments. Yeah. That would be great. Thank you. I have one more. Yeah, yes. Well, he's asking for deferral. Right. Speaking to that, detail 1A500. It says 501, but it's actually on sheet 500. You need a flashing. If you bring them it's in. Page here. 8. It's 22 of the PDF. Thank you. Thank you. Another. That's no way I can read this. I think it's. Oh yes, that one to the left. The one you need a flashing between the sighting and the existing break otherwise water will go into your wall, existing brick and it will destroy your wall. And that's not mentioned, I suppose. It's something that probably the pyramid office might pick up, but just as a suggestion, there should be a flashing there. OK. All right. All right. There's been a request there. Okay. All right. All right. There's been a request for deferral. Is there a motion to accept the deferral? Yes, a motion to accept your deferral request. Is there a second? Second. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed say nay. Aye, have it. We look forward to seeing you again Thank you. Thank you mr. Conkey. What's next? Thank you sure One more item under new business tonight We have one more item under new business tonight. Item number nine and ten, BAR 2024-00224 Parker Gray. Wasteful alterations at 400 North Fayette Street, applicant is properties reimagined to LLC, and BAR 2024-00225 Parker Gray. Wasteful partial demolition and encapsulation at 400 North Fayette Street, applicant as properties reimagined LLC. Welcome. Hey, thank you for having me. My name is Richard Ingovo. The address is 400 North Fayette. I am here representing properties reimagined on the general contractor for the project. Okay. You have a presentation or would you like to answer questions? Could I make a quick statement? I guess. So I have a lot of experience in remodeling houses, as well as investing, specifically investing in Alexandria. I have never done a historical project before and unfortunately I was under the misguidance that this property was not in the historical district and obviously found that out after so that might explain some of what's going on here but anyway so the purpose, though, of our refurbishment of this property is absolutely to stay within the board's guidelines. We're not looking to do anything crazy, anything fancy, anything outside of historical norms. Okay. Yep. Thank you. Fancy's nice. Nothing against fancy. Okay. There are any members of the Board of the Asked Questions for this applicant? Downing your lights on. Questions or? No, I don't have any questions. Thank you. All right. Seeing none. Oh, Ms. Miller is turning her light on. I just want to clarify that there's no change to the front facade. That's correct. No change. All right. Thank you. Thank you. Yes. Actually, one clarification on that. I'm hoping that was in our documents. Our initial intention was to paint the brick that's a no-no. I'm judging by that expression, so we will not be doing it. Okay. I guess that's cleared up. You can power wash it or just... We will absolutely power wash it. Any other questions? This... Zandion? It says that you're in closing two windows. And turning, converting a window into a door, where are those windows? Those are on the rear elevation on the main floor. There's a width within the porch area, correct? Correct. So those are inside the existing porch? On the back. On the back, but they are currently basically interior to the house. Oh. They're inside that room on the back. I see. Oh. Is there any inside that room on the back? I see. Oh, I see. These two. Thank you. And I do have another question for you also. What is the roof material you're proposing for the overhang over the front door? for the overhang over the front door. It looks to me like there's an awning of some nature. In the existing left side elevation on page 22. So on the existing, so the current, it has an enclosed porch on the back. Right, but on the front, I'm still back on the front side when I ask if there was any changes up aside. So that small roof on the front. Is that, is that, that's existing, I assume, the awning that looks like an awning on the front? Can you go to the the existing elevation page or is that the existing? Yeah, that's existing then Yeah, again, we're not changing anything Frontics elevation it's already there you can see it let's review there is so there's currently a metal Oning above the front door I think miss I don't know what's going on. We're going to try it. But there's an existing metal awning above the front door. And that's what you're seeing on the elevation. I don't know whether there's a desire to change that or not. But that's what you're seeing on the elevation. I was wondering whether this would be an appropriate time to address it, but I don't know what it is. You can see it here in a second. OK. It's a metal red. I was wondering whether this would be an appropriate time to address it, but I don't know what it is. You can see it here in a second. Okay. It's a metal red awning. I see. I think it's a, oh, never mind, nothing, okay? Is there going to be any changes to that awning? We don't have any plan outside of, you know, cleaning it up. We're completely open to the board's recommendation on what to do with that. I see there's other houses that don't have it. Something prettier. So we're absolutely. We can do something fancy there if that works. Would you be willing to work with our board? I mean, I'm sorry with our staff to dress up the front. Absolutely. Make it something prettier possibly. Absolutely. Okay. More than happy to. I'm not touching it. Unless you all have some suggestions. Good point. No, I defer to Mr. Conkey's good judgment. Yes, sir. We've worked with many of these houses, so my deas on what an, what an, what a good doorhood looks like. Is, yeah. All right. With that, are there any other questions from the board members? Is how many are there any public speakers on this application? No, sir. Saying none, we will go to board deliberation. And I'll start with Ms. Andion. Yeah, we're deliberating. So you just give your thoughts on the project. And if're just going to be able to get the information from the staff. Yeah, we're deliberating. So you just give your thoughts on the project. And if you're going to, if you feel you can support or not support. Sure. I'm very happy to see that you're this is getting renovated and hopefully will look nicer than it is right now, both in the back and the front. So I support the staff recommendation, but the conditions they have. Thank you. Yes, Miller? I think I already talked with you about most of my thoughts. And I would support you working with staff to improve on the awning and maybe even that glass door, the exterior door. Okay. I think that could be improved. Sure. Otherwise, I'm disposed to approve your application. Thank you. Mr. Adams. This is a corner lot. It's a prime spot as this neighborhood. It's improved. And in some ways, I'm wondering, first of all, why you're taking off some enclosed space if you're a developer. Is that a basement under it? Or under it? It does, and it's on brick piers, and it is in horrible condition. It's actually pulling away from the house. So that was our recommendation was it would be. The proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. The proceedings. the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings, the proceedings.