The first order of business will be to consider the minutes from the March 5th meeting. Does any member of the board wish to make any modifications to the minutes from the March 5th meeting? Yes, I would like to amend the minutes. In our last meeting, there was a mention of color. I guess I don't have the BAR number in front of me for the docket item that was deferred. We spoke about color and I mentioned the white vertical high lastures were accentuating the building's height. I think mr. Scott also mentioned color that I did see a little more discussion in the minutes about what was said Yes, I believe that was the case on Abingdon 12.01 East Abingdon. Yes, okay. Thank you Yes Miss homin just that count as a motion. Do we need to get a second. Okay, so we're going to have a second. Okay, so we're going to have a second. Okay, so we're going to have a second. Okay, so we're going to have a second. Okay, so we're going to have a second. Okay, so we're going to have a second. All right. All right. All those opposed? We've adopted that. I do any members have any other modifications to the minutes that they would like to suggest? Would any member of the public like to make any modifications to the minutes or suggestions? All right. Hearing none. All those in favor of adopting the minutes as modified by Ms. Delinio's motion say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? All right, the minutes are adopted. Next, Ms. Helman, we have the consent calendar. Yes, this is item number BAR 2025-00020 in the Old and Historic District. A request for signage at 10 Duke Street. The applicant is Noa Landini represented by patients, Schaefer. Would any member of the board like to remove this item from the consent calendar? Would any member of the public wish to remove this item from the consent calendar? We have two speakers for the case. We have to. There are two speakers here who'd like to speak on. All right. Well, that sounds like we should deliberate on this issue then. So, all right. I think we should remove this from the consent calendar and consider it a new item. I think we could probably proceed with this rather than putting it at the end. Is that okay? Yes, I think that should be fine. All right, great. So, would you like to read this one in? Or did you read it in? Yes, I did. That's okay. Let's begin. Is the applicant here? Okay, great. If you could please just state your name and address of record, please. Hi, my name is Patience Schaefer. I'm with Art Displaco. I'm representing No Landini. Addresses 401, Hampton Park Boulevard, Capitol Heights, Maryland 20743. Thank you. Now, would you like to give a presentation on your application or just answer the board's questions? I'm here to answer any questions. Terrific. Does any member of the board have questions for this applicant? All right. I understand we have some public speakers. Speakers, you can go over to this microphone over here. That way, if the applicant needs to respond to anything, We don't have to. First is Maurice and Donna DeGroff. I'm going to speak on behalf of Maurice. Perfect. Sorry, if you could please state your name and address for the recording. My name is Donna, D-O-N-A-A, D-G-E-G-R-O-F-F, and I live in Robinson Landing. The address is 12, Iron Mill Way, and we are directly across from the new constructed Cooper's Mill restaurant bar, whatever you want to call it. And I'm here because we are trying to understand as a community exactly what our opposition to what they're attempting to do is this humongous sign that they want to put on at the corner of Duke and strand. And it's really going to impact the quality of our life within our community. I mean, we've made a lot of concessions to address the, you know, the Alexandria restaurant group with, you know, the restaurants that are in that community. And now we have, we originally, when we bought into that community, we were told that that historic building was never going to be a commercial building. So we're here to object to the sign, the huge sign that they want to put on the corner. It says that it's non-illuminated, but right now, even on the front of the building, they I have a marquee that says open, open, open, and it just goes on, and they're serving alcohol. The other thing that they've done, that we weren't aware of until we went to our home owners meeting today, was that they also put speakers on the outside. So when they hold events or whatever, it's going to impact the lives of those of us who live within that townhouse community at Robinson Landing. So that's what we're rejecting to. We think that sign should not be that huge. And I'll just point out for those in the audience that the sign is the photo on the right, right, Marina circling it now with her thing. That shows the proposed sign. Right. Can you speak into the microphone? We do. We just have to record everything. Thank you. If you look at the different restaurant establishments that are around that area, none of them have signs like that on the side of their building. None of them do. And it's definitely a bar and they serve pizzas and whatever it is that they're doing in there. And on the second floor, they're going to be holding events. So that sign obviously is going to be an eyesore in my opinion. The other thing that they haven't done is there's no landscaping. There's nothing that really enhances our community. But it's a big object that we have right now and we brought it up at our homeowners meeting today is the height of that sign. And then on the front of the building, they have a marquee that just keeps saying open open open So it's just an eye sore. That's all I have to say Thank you. Are there any other speakers on this application? Yes, Norman leader Hi, good evening. My name is Norman leader and I live at 14 Duke Street right next door to this building. A couple of issues I want to need clarity on. In the document here, it says this will be on the east side of the building, the east facing side. But yet the brackets on this building indicate it's protruding northeast of the building. will be on the building. So I want to know which is correct. Will it be on the east side or on the northeast corner of the building? That's my first question. The brackets, the bracket is on the east side of the building. But the sign itself will be extended out so that it's visible from strand and from Duke. So it's a 45 degree office of building? It'll sort of be, yeah, it'll sort of be at the corner as you know. Okay, because the V bracket indicates it's on the corner of the building. Right. And coming off a 45 degree angle off the building. Yeah. Which is different to what it says, saying it's on the east side of the building. So that's a discrepancy that probably should be addressed. My second point is the size of the sign is not in line with the area of Old Town. If you walk up and down 100 block, 200 block of King Street, if you walk down Strand, nobody has a sign. No restaurant has a sign this big. I have pictures to show you if you need them. Barkas has a sign that's about one little over a square yard. Chadwick doesn't have a sign. Aida doesn't have a sign. Union Pove has a sign about one square yard in size. Feed and grain doesn't have a sign except on the side of their building facing the alley. And you can go up and down King Street and see this for a fact. Now, I understand that you have guidelines for size of signs. And in the guidelines here it says seven square feet. The sign is five times that size, not two, not three, five. I think it's way too big. It's a nice looking building, it detracts in the building. It now makes a commercializes the area more than old town needs. I wish you would reconsider this sign for the size of it because other restaurants have nice, antique looking fits with the area, fits with the building because the buildings, the bricks are 200 years old. Something that fits more the motif or the look of the history. I don't think we're doing old town of favor by having such a blatant sign along with what Donna said, an open well lit, many looms open sign above the front door there on all my long well till closing obviously. This doesn't fit with our with our old town area. So I hope you consider reconsider the size of the sign and make it something more in line with the area because after the sign is approved at five times the normal guidelines size of a sign what happens when Ada wants to sign that big and what happens when the rest of the restaurants want to sign that big well the presence has been set so I hope you keep within the guidelines that is the BAR has set and keep this with a seven square foot size sign. That's all I have. Thank you. Thank you. I'd like to give the applicant an opportunity to respond to any of the public comments. Yes, I won't get too far off track, but I don't know if the public is aware that Alexandria did just approve a new updated sign code on Saturday. It does not directly affect the historic guidelines, but it does modernize the sign code to be more in line with the surrounding area and the square footage that we are proposing does conform to the new sign code, which is why we are on this meeting today. We did want to ensure that we were still well within code. The sign will not be illuminated. It is not wired. There is no method for it to be illuminated, so it will always be a non-illuminated sign. They did take that into consideration for the area. And as far as the placement of the sign, we are on a corner. I know it's a very walkable area, but the placement of the sign is to get visibility from multiple angles as people are approaching from different ways in this area. So we feel that it is appropriate for the size of the building. We are a very large event space and we do want to ensure that we have visibility and that we meet the kind of updated facade that we just poured a lot of time and effort into trying to honor the historic heritage and also modernize the area a little bit. Thank you very much. Are there any more public speakers on this application? All right. Well, you've already spoken, sir. You only get three minutes. Sorry. I don't want three minutes. You've already gone over three. I'm sorry, sir, but we did hear your response. I will say just for the record that matters, such as music coming from the venue, or the uses of the venue as a bar or restaurant, are outside of the jurisdiction of the board of architectural review. They are valid complaints that you can bring to the zoning board or to the city, but we can't consider that in our deliberations here today. So with that, I will close the public portion of this hearing and open it up to any members of our board who would like to weigh in on this. How about Mr. Lions? Would you like to start? Yeah, thank you for the speakers coming out and talking. I don't, I know the building is built on historic site, and I know that I think that did a great job of redoing it. I think for me personally, the sign is not a distraction. I think it fits nicely with the building. And I think it's kind of secluded to that corner. So I don't really know where we're seeing it from neighboring residents, but so yeah, I don't have a problem with the sign I'm gonna support it. Miss Del Nino. I think that the sign would be better suited in set south a bit. Instead of on the corner, I think that detracts from the historic building. And as Ms. Halman mentioned, the intent is that it's really visible from the strand. And so I think it would be appropriate to inset it for their south. And I think that might help with the neighbors. Proportionately, I don't have a problem with the size of the sign. If there were studies showing what's visible from further down the boat club or that kind of thing it would be good to understand. What is the size that it could be so pedestrians can see it coming from the strand? Mr. Adams. Thank you. I think it's an admiral that this building's been saved. And last week I was at a meeting of the old Tansivic Association that had to do with the pump house that would be built also in the waterfront. But it gave a larger context understanding of this area. And this restaurant is a little bit further off than the others that are more densely packed. And so forth. So it's a destination that you have to walk about how much further from the next closest restaurant or bar. Less than a quarter mile, but you know. A block or two blocks. Yeah. So I can understand why they may feel that they need you that are sign is important. So people see it. Although you have all the illumination inside the place and the other signs are, it does attract attention from a distance. And we did approve the much larger opening facing north, which does draw people to it. However, you're in a completely residential area. You're surrounded by apartments, condos, townhouses, and so forth. So I think you have to be conscious of your neighbors and the tenor of the immediate neighborhood. And some of the things as Cheris mentioned could be brought up with zoning about noise and temporary signs or that sort of thing. But I would think since it's a historic building and so much has gone into saving it, and putting it out, putting it up, replicating all the elements that you might look to some of the signs that were on the old warehouses down there. And you know, at much calmer, slightly more historic venue, they probably were painted on the brick at that point. But it might add to the allure of the place. And it's going to be a destination anyway because of the fine restaurant, the Landini family is involved, and there's no doubt it'll be a hit. So I would hope that you might re-studied in a less contemporary manner, and solve your needs, but do it in a rise to the challenge of doing something that is historic, but for all's attention. Thank you. Mr. Spencer. Yes, thank you. So I'm going to start with his regards to the size of the sign. I really don't have an issue with the size of the sign. I have more of an issue with the placement of the sign. I don't think kind of going toward Mr. Adams was saying, I don't think historically there would have been a corner sign on this building. It just seems odd and out of place. The placement of the sign based on all the work you guys have gone through to restore this building. It would be nicer to at least put the sign on a solid wall so it's not kind of hanging off the corner. I think the idea of doing a painted sign on the brick was looking at the old building where there's a big large area above the what used to be the windows that a sign probably would have went on, which would have been bigger than this sign in reality. But there's just not that, I mean, there's some headroom up there now. I just don't think a sign up there would look weird. I think that would look strange as well. I think a sign above the, the lintel on the second floor would look kind of squished in there and look a little hot. So I, I think your sign is just not on the right face of the building. I think it should be on the same face that the big opening window, a big open window is on, and not wrapping the corner. Just to clarify our usage, suggesting it be affixed to the building and not projecting as a blade sign? Yes, not a blade sign. That's all I got, okay. Ms. Vice Chair. I do agree with the other Mr. Spencer to have the sign signage on the wall. It looks more appropriate to the historic building and just it seems odd on the corner um And then if you put it on that while I think proportionally The size would be okay. It is a very large sign Think that's Thank you for my perspective, I think that's good. Thank you. For my perspective, I think I would support this application as submitted. We have approved several blade signs very recently, including at the hotel here in Annabelle Ducey's building. I think the scale of the sign is appropriate to the building. given that it is not an illuminated sign, I think it's appropriate for what is a mixed-use area not solely residential. So I would support this application as submitted. I appreciate that it's a non-illuminated sign. It looks like it's a beautiful sign on its own. I have a question for the staff. Is this having the late open sign? Does that normally have to get approved by the either staff or the board on commercial not designed the sign that usually stores put behind a window door or above their door, that's as open and anything aluminum. Like the open sign. Right. Oh, the open sign, those are temporary, right? So those don't need approval, is that correct? Yeah, I'll identify. But sometimes they're temporarily permanent. Temperarily, forever. But no, we don't. Once they put this sign on, those open signs will go away. I'm not sure if it's a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little it would probably have to come up to our board for permanent approval, but understanding that is a separate matter and not why we are here today. Okay, does any member of the board have anything else to add or would you like someone like to make a motion on this matter? All right, well, I'll make a motion. I would move to approve docket item number three with an added condition that the applicant work with the city staff to determine the most appropriate placement of the sign, whether it's a blade sign or a fix to the building and whether it protrudes to the northeast or as Miss Del Nino suggested, is a fix to the east side of the building further south so that it's only protruding from the east side of the building. So that is my motion if there are any seconds. Second. All right. There's no demolition, so this is a voice vote, right? All right, all those in favor say aye. Aye. All those opposed say nay. Congratulations. Thank you for your time. Just for clarification, you would like the sign on the east side? I think the amendment was to work with staff. Work with staff, okay. You're up because we have two sort of competing views here. Okay. And the one suggestion was that it be a blade sign facing to the east rather than the northeast and the other suggestion was that it be a fix to the building. So the motion would sort of allow whatever, working with the city staff to come with the most appropriate placement of the sign. Is that something that will work for the applicant? Okay you. Yes. Okay, great. Thank you. Thank you for your time. All right. The next item on our agenda, new business number four and five. Yes. Sorry. Mike wasn't working. Items four and five. B-A-R-2025-003-1. and historic district requests for alterations at 400 King Street and BAR 2025-004-9 old and historic district requests for partial demolition and encapsulation at 400 King Street the applicant is AB slash FH Alexandria Hotel represented by James Pandula. in here? All right. The floor is yours. Please state your name and address for the record. It's James Pandula, 1250 Connecticut Avenue, Northwest DC. And I'd be happy to walk you through it or just answer your questions. Anywhere. Please walk us through it if you'd like to. Yeah. That is, you may remember, it is the corner of 400 King Street, the old Long and Foster real estate office, and the owners would like to subdivide the space. They have two tenants lined up and replace the storefront is basically what we're doing. So the package really just addresses that. We're taking the old wooden glass door front, complying with energy codes and complying with ADA for some new entrances for the tenants. Thank you. Do any members of the board have questions for this applicant? Yes, I had a few questions. Just a plan. First of all, I think it's great that we're having ADA entrances. You know, inter-retail spaces. So, and I noticed that the ADA entrance on Royal Street, it looks like, and it may help to have the plan up, are the hand rails protruding into the sidewalk? No, actually on King Street, it's all really changing the sidewalk within an inch-so of King Street sidewalk. The one entrance on Royal Street is actually tucked back under the arcade on Royal Street, so it's all of city property for the ramp up. So the last tenant over there actually has a non-compliant entrance off of Royal Street, but there's a side entrance off the courtyard to get into the space. Okay, yeah, I was looking at that plan and noticed that the handicap and rails were ending. It seemed like they were ending in the sidewalk. If you look at the plan, they're sticking out of foot or so. It may well be to comply with the plan. Yeah, but the ramp wouldn't, the ramp itself would be in the courtyard and the arcade there. Okay. Yeah, that's, that's not it. It would be the plan. I think there's a plan in the, it's like the first page and then you need to kind of zoom in to the top of the large plan. You can kind of, I wasn't sure why the ramp wasn't as wide as the opening there There you know It looks like it's about a foot difference between the width of the ramp and the please make sure you're speaking to the microphone Thank you. I think you need to just zoom in to yeah yeah, yeah, right? I'm a food plan, yeah, just, and then scroll up a little bit. Oh North. Yeah. Get in there. I know. Okay, go right there. Yeah. Right. Yeah. So, you know, the handrail is ticking out and there's just a little sliver of space. I didn't know if it's a concept design. Maybe that's something that could be a little bit higher. I mean, I think it's going to be driven by the actual height we need to get up with in the ramp. But we didn't want to get too. We wanted to keep it independent of the pure for the arcade if that's what you mean by that little sliver of space. And I mean, the wider it gets the less access the hotel has for, I mean, that are already taking one of their gates in the back, basically, to work it around. So I would like to keep the ramp as small as it can be, to fly with ADA. And then I had a couple questions on that King Street elevation. Mm-hmm. It's on page 27 of the application. What would you like to tell, don't you? The elevations are fine. Yeah. Right. So I noticed that there's a canopy. I guess it's. It's an unusual canopy coming from the east. Is that part of this application? No, and that's actually, so both the renderings and these have been updated working with staff. So to explain the process here, there are two tenants who already have leases. They submitted renderings of what they would like for their storefronts and the building owners providing the storefronts to them. So they'll be coming back with any of the specifics about signage, street seating, the awnings, the one awning. We are just reinstalling the existing awnings on the vacant space that we're redoing there. OK, so. Say, my notice in reading through, they mentioned the paint colors and things like that. So that, that'll all be coming back as part of the Tenants packages. We're really just focusing on the storefronts itself. Okay, so, and I noticed there are a couple onnings that were missing. So they have a unique one and then other ones, all of that will just be coming back for something else. Okay. So, and these were actually pulled from the submittal just to avoid that confusion. So they still got in somehow, but that was the last comment we had from staff has to take anything out of the package that would not need to be approved in this hearing. Okay. And then I had a question too about the inset of the main entry. The elevations of the vestibule, it looks like we don't have those to look at. Like if you go to your wall section, the wall sections is novia. I think I don't have a complete package, quite visible from King Street because it's, know part of the vestibule here and it looks like we don't have that elevation. I noticed the hotel has expressed the width of the column on their you know on their vestibule in set where this one it looks like it may just be glass or it might be a good move to try to express the thickness of the wall and the width of the column there. Do you see that? Yeah, I understand what you're saying. Yes, and I think that would be, it's in the rendering actually, but the tenant wanted half glass in that. So it would be half. That's the other half of solid underneath. So. Yeah. The plan shows like the storefront coming up to like an 8 inch thickness of wall, what I'm suggesting is the next one. Trying to take a cue from the hotel. So that's actually what they're at the time of the movie. Oh. I'm going to take a cue from the hotel. So that's actually what they're at 10 or so. So if you could see the rendering, it would be solid below glass above. I'm not sure I understand what you mean, but the hotel. I think we want the King Street rendering. Yeah, no, wait, who's headed? Of the ice cream shop. Yes, cream shop. That's, yeah. Yeah, the cream, there you go. And the half glass is on the side of the vestibule as you enter. That's right. It's exactly half, though. It's more than half. Yes, it's there to glass. class. Well, maybe there's a photo of the hotel vestibule entrance. You can kind of see how it turns the corner a little bit just to indicate the one of the that we work with staff on subdividing the lights and we'd be happy to work with staff on this issue too. Okay. Thank you. Yeah. Okay. Do any other members of the board have questions for the applicants? I have a question. is a large building, it's got windows on the west side that have sort of a traditional light configuration and then you've got a restaurant with some outdoor seating that has undivided light windows. So it's going to be hard to make it totally cohesive. My question is, for the windows, if you know, on the west side of the kings, yeah, those windows, are they aluminum or are they wood? The existing or wood, the new ones would be aluminum. And the application only is to change the ones on the east side of that King Street facade, not these. That's right. It's half of the building. So the hotel would, well, I see what you're asking for. So I'm asking if you're asking for a different material on one side of the building than you're using, than exists on the other side. I think there are both on the hotel side. I think in the restaurant on the hotel, I think they have a little windows that open to their outdoor seating area. I think as you get further down towards Pitt Street, it's wood windows. I believe I really haven't. Okay. Yeah. Thank you. But they are multi-paint windows. And that's something that we're not doing on this side of the building. All right. Are there any other questions before we open it up? Do any members of the public have questions on this application, or would like to make a statement on the application? Seeing none, we will close the public portion of consideration for this docket item. Who would like to begin first with comments or deliberative input? Mr. Spencer? Thank you. So can you clarify for me once again are all the windows going to be aluminum or are windows going to be some of them going to be wood and wood and some are gonna be a little All of the ones that we're replacing will be aluminum So on the on the I'm gonna call it the retail half of the building Where we're doing this work. They'll be aluminum. We're not doing any work on the hotel side of the building and those are a mix of materials. This package is a little hard for me to kind of follow. I'm just gonna be honest. I mean, it's hard to kind of navigate my way through the package and understand exactly what's going on. It's just not, how can I help? I mean, I've figured it out. But it's just, as it's trying to tell the story, it's just not telling it in a succinct coherent manner that I can follow easily. And I know these are architectural drawings, and you know, the architecture school myself, and then we like to think the drawings speak for themselves, but they don't. It's a little more of a narrative to help kind of guide us through the package sometimes, because the change is kind of being... I understand it's at the retail level, but... it's just, I get lost in what's happening where and when it's happening. And the renderings, the renderings didn't really help clarify that much for me, so I'm at a loss really on this package. I don't really feel strongly that I think it's wrong or anything. I just, I'm having a hard time following. That's all. So, Homing, can I ask a clarifying question? So there's been some discussion about the scope of this application. I think you said the applicant stated that this really was essentially for the windows and that the details, such as the awnings, would be part of a separate application. Exactly, but that's also. We do have a conflict here because the city report includes specifically mentioning alterations, including painting the storefronts installing a new awning and replacing the fabrics of the existing awning. So Ms. Helman, I just, as Mr. Spencer said, I'm a little bit confused about the scope of what we are supposed to be considering. And I wouldn't want to inadvertently approve or deny an element that is not included in this application. Right. And that's actually what was in the packet, at least it was staff understanding, that they wanted to replace the wood and the glass storefronts with new aluminum thermal and aden ADA entrance. And we thought based on the packet that the applicant also wanted to, wanted the B.A.R. approval to paint the storefronts and put in new awnings. So, that was our understanding from the packet was that those were the changes that they were requesting. Would you like to respond or clarify for us? Yeah, again, I think that was the last comment we got from staff was to take the renderings out of the package. So this is what you're looking at was actually one of the preliminary packages that we saw. And you have more sophisticated renderings that you could show us? No, because we're not really, no, we don't actually. No, okay. We don't have anything short of the tenant renderings. Right, right. All right. Does anyone else have any deliberative comments to make on this application? Yeah, Mr. Williams. Yeah, I mean, I would, first of all, I'm not an architect, but I would agree with Mr. Spencer that I had a hard time following this and what you were really asking for. I mean, the five sentences that say what the opcaments proposal is, is I feel like I could agree with it, but at the same time, I'm not 100% comfortable with agreeing with it because I just don't think I've seen it. Who knows, maybe I have, but I just can't interpret it. I'd be happy to help if I can. So, and I'm not even sure I can necessarily form a question with the package, but, so yeah, I mean, I don't know what we do about that, but I'd just be interested in hearing what the rest of the board has to say. Okay. Um, Miss Delinino or Mr. Adams, would either of you like to offer your thoughts? Well, 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'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 We were actually handed the renderings from the tenants and we started with what they wanted as the basis for our project. So that's what we're presenting tonight. And that's where the renderings came from. So yes, I mean, I think that's how I would answer that. Is that in? Is that all you have? Mr. Adams? Actually, that was just a question. Yeah, okay. I thought you might want to say something. I mean, I'm all going to elaborate a little bit too. Because I mean mean the way the process started is we basically sent those renderings to staff. We received comments back from staff saying we reduced the size of some of the openings because one of the tenants wanted actually to take some more of the wall down if you will. So we reduce the size of that and then we also redo well reduce the size Immediately and then also left an additional punched window on the corner. So we were responding to staff comments based on the larger, you know, aluminum and glass storefront systems. So it never really came up in our working with staff to, you know, take a different direction and try and mimic what was there, but do it thermally. Thank you. So again, I really do think it's great that we're having these ADA addresses. And I understand this is a retail level. And I'm also okay with reducing the number of lights because it's retail. I think the storefront though is in Congress with the rest of the building. I'd like to see that wood and I'd like to see there's a horizontal line that's pretty consistent at the King Street and the Royal. Looks it's like 18 inches up, something. Yeah, I'd like to see that pulled across. Right. And just maybe a little more study on some of the really wider openings. Maybe that's, you know, like you've got the two openings that are next to that custom canopy, maybe that's three there instead of two, just to keep a little bit of the proportion that's introduced by the hotel. But you know, I think, you know, the hotel dining is pretty elegant and it works well for them because they do have that uninterrupted light above it. So I could certainly support that kind of treatment for the retail. I think that's exactly what staff is going to ask for too. Coming back, especially the horizontal, I think that's a reasonable item to reintroduce to the facade. Yeah, I like to be reasonable. As do we all. Thank you. Mr. Adams. Thank you. The original design was to simulate a row of Philadelphia townhouses. So I've heard from Ethan lot involved in that design. And I guess the staff report mentions that. So these gutters coming down in the every four windows is supposed to break the building up into elements unlike unlike the one block closer to the, across from city hall, it's more irregular. And this one was sort of a departure from that, and made this monolithic thing with trying to define it. So it's always been problematic that the ground floor has different modifications to it, but I guess that would happen if there were individual houses as well. It is adjacent to residential areas right behind it, so I think the impetus to do the punched windows and the 75 was the right thing to do. It is 50 years old now, so there is a certain, isn't that when we begin to say these are historic buildings? Yes national trust draw it wise yes that's the 50 years is historic. Under our guidelines it's a modern building though right? Correct it's post-1931 so it's okay so so along those lines I agree with with Miss Gellinio about the horizontal to tie that in also with the hotel side on the west. And I like the way the hotel has a smaller module of elements. And it seems there are some inconsistencies here. Sometimes there are three per bay, sometimes two, three, four. that could be be regularized, perhaps, not slavishly, but I think the fourth bay in could be and you could match the one next to it, even though there are different tenants. I guess that's true. There are different tenants or not? There would be, yes. So you're responding to a tenants design, not your own? Essentially, your business. I mean, I think that the two tenants presented very similar desires with their storefronts. And the corner one, they want to change the paint color of the, from the, yes. What our tenants does, the other one I think has been silent on it yet, but they're developing their packages. Okay. And then the corner of the building has these arch windows with it are divided into four panels and so forth. So I would have probably left more of the historic elements there of the wood. I like that. And I do think wood windows would be appropriate on this building, not alone on them. So I'd like to see some alternate studies of it maybe. I will just echo Mr. Adams, Mr. Nino, everyone's comments. So what I will suggest to you is I think you should ask us to defer your application so you can go back and tinker with this. You don't have to ask for that. You can ask for a vote today. If you do, I don't know if it's going to get approved. If it doesn't get approved, you can appeal to City Hall. And the City Council can either approve it or deny it. However, I think this is the type of matter that we do approve, pretty regularly. I think I especially want to echo it. So it is a modern building and a women windows under our guidelines are appropriate for modern building. The problem is you're only changing some of the windows and you're asking for a different light style in the windows than in other parts of the building. And I think the building really needs to be taken as a cohesive whole, not that you need to be modifying elements that are outside of your application, but I think the design for the parts that you are modifying should fit in more cohesively with the rest of the building. So certainly the staff recommendation that you modify the light pattern so that it matches the rest of the building is appropriate. I also think looking at wood windows because you have wood windows all around the rest of this building is appropriate. And then you have so many different widths to what Mr. Adams said on your application, it's not clear to me that it's necessary. And so what those are the existing openings though. So we're not changing the old things. Yeah. Yeah. So I guess you're kind of stuck with that. You may be able to come up with some design innovations to design around it So what I would suggest is that you clarify your application Make modifications based on what you've heard from the board today and then resubmit It won't have to wait a long time once you resubmit We can talk it for the next meeting So certainly don't waste your time and you have every right to ask for a vote But that would be my recommendation to you today Okay, I'm gonna get Okay I mean I Sorry, I'm gonna let Miss Andy and the vice chair have the last word because I Talked before her and I'm sorry and I will let you have the final word on this application. Okay. I Basically agree with whatever has been said By other members as well as the staff recommendation on the color and the smaller lid I do also agree with With keeping wood is sad to the wood windows go, so if you can replace with wood. I have a, so the openings are staying the same, exact sizes. Most of them, I think, for the one tenet we need to enlarge the opening for their entrance. So, yeah, I think. So I do agree with kind of looking at it to make it more coherent. I see sometimes it's too divided into sometimes in three, and that might be because it's coming from two different tenant requests, but to kind of have it a more cohesive rhythm for the whole thing that would help. I think that it should I make a motion? If you'd like to. I think it's a big deal. Well, no, so I've asked him if he wants to defer. And if you defer at your request, we can make a motion to defer. Otherwise, we can do a vote. I guess I don't understand. So just reading through, there said we were going to work with staff, which we're happy to do. What's the difference between? Well, so I'm not sure the board is going to approve this recommendation by the staff. The staff sort of said work with us. And there are so many concerns and maybe concerns is too strong. There are open questions about the scope of your application that, for example, if I were making a motion on this application, I would not concur with the staff recommendation to sort of leave it up to you guys to figure it out. I think the word would like to see this application again if you're amenable to that. Sure. Okay, so are you requesting a deferral? I guess we're requesting a deferral. Okay, would anyone like to make a motion on that? So moved. Is there a second? Second. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? All right, so we'll see you again before too long. Okay. Thank you, sir. Thank you. Okay, I think what are we up to six and seven now? Yes, sir. seven. Let's go. BAR case number two zero two five, dash zero zero zero four one, old and historic district requests for alterations at 418 North Union, and BAR 2025 dash zero zero zero four two, old and historic district requests for partial demolition and encapsulation at 418 North Union. The applicant is John C Cruden represented by Gregory Stevenson Are you the applicant? I'm the architect Gregory Stevenson or great and could you state an address for the record please 410 South maple Avenue falls truck for genuine for 224 046 Would you like to walk us through your application or just answer questions from the board? Real quickly, we're taking two windows out. We're adding a bay so that the applicant can enjoy more light and more of the park across the street. All right, does any member of the board have questions for the applicant? I have a question for you. So can we pull up page five? No, that's it. Can you zoom in a little bit? So one thing that is maddening about this is the original design of the building because the garage door is not centered on the windows. And I just have noticed that your neighbor next door has come up with a somewhat clever workaround, which is this trim that's slightly wider on one side than the other. But it kind of reads as a white block. And they have thus been able to center all three elements in the vertical. Is that something that you considered? No, we did not. I mean, we are stuck with what they did design in the 1960s. And we're trying to be both respectful but also economical at the same time. Okay. Do any of the members of the public have any comments or would like to speak on this application? All right. We'll close the public portion of the hearing on this matter. Let's get started with Mr. Adams. I think it's a reasonable change, of course, from that location. From the distance, having filmed the size of the drawing, we have it looks nice. I just hope the detailing is carefully done. Yes, that's the idea. And it's all wood. It's all wood. Okay, most likely going to be a synthetic trim. But yeah, I understand. We know it's far enough for not touching it. Right, yes, thank you. You still need to know? I think the drawings were well done and I can certainly appreciate that view of the park and the river and the neighbor has a similar bay. I think it's a good application. Mr. Lyons? Yeah, I have no issues with it and I can support the application. Mr. Spencer? Yeah, I don no issues with it. I can support the application. Mr. Spencer? Yeah, I don't know. Comments. Is Vice Chair? No comments as well. I support the application. All right. Does anyone have a motion they would like to make on this application? Motion to approve. First, I mean, the staff doesn't have any recommendations, but motion to approve. As submitted. As submitted, yes. Do we have a second? Second. All right, I think this does require a roll call vote. Yes, it does, because it has a motion. Let's do it. OK, Ms. Zondion. Hi. Mr. Adams. Hi. Ms. Doninho. Mr. Lyons. Hi. Mr. Spencer. Hi. And Mr. Scott. Yes. Congratulations. Thank you very much. Appreciate it. All right, next up, 8-9. Okay, documents number 8 and 9, BAR 2025-00044, Old and Historic District, and request for alterations at 619 South Royal. And B-A-R2025-00502, Old and Historic District, request for partial demolition and encapsulation at 619 South Royal. The applicant is Susan Alexander. All right. Are you the applicant? Yes, I'm Susan Alexander of 619 South Royal Street. Terrific. Would you like to make a presentation or answer questions from the board? No, it seems to be self-explanatory. All right. Well, does anyone from the board have any questions for this applicant? Does any member of the public wish to speak on this application? Oh, Mr. Adams, please. The arch top is something often it's more complex to build on what you're taking away, but I may be the design of it is soon as you're looking. My only comment is that the styles on the trancem above, the width of them, it'd be nice if they were aligned with the side lights below. That's often the way they were done in the past. It's just a refinement. Right. I made an arched stained glass window for the eyebrow arched one that we have. Yes. And I intend to make a new one. But I'm putting the arched one in until I build a new window and having styles interferes with how you install the stained glass panel. So I had it designed specifically to give me full design control over how I build the stained glass panel. I'm not suggesting that you add more buttons to it. I just the frame of it. the stouts. It's just a refinement as I say. Traditionally would have been the same with as the sidelines below. Right, but my plan is to line things up with how I compose the stained glass panels. So that's why the direction. Yes make the transom as minimal as possible. It would be the same minimal to speak. Well, if it matters, it's already built. So I would appreciate not having to send this back to the factory. Stare enough you. I didn't understand that I was going to need to go. This seemed like a staff approval process. And I was surprised that planning and zoning wanted me to appear and have this. Right. It's because of the amount of demolition. You've got 50-ish square feet of demolition and the zoning code for the BAR says any demolition and excess of 25 square feet has to come to the board. So that's why you're here today. Does anyone else have any comments? We've closed the public portion of the hearing on this matter just to be clear. Any other comments on this application? Just one question. To kind of get to what Mr. Adams was suggesting is it possible to make the door a little bit wider? It's 2 and 1, 8 versus 3 and 1, 8. I think is just one one inch difference between the transom and the lid on the side of the door. Is it possible to make those smaller? No, the whole unit is already manufactured. Mm-hmm. Okay. Do any other members have comments on this application? Mr. Lions? No comments. Still, you know? Mr. Spencer? No comments. OK, I will just say that this is really barely visible from the public right of way. And so although I appreciate and agree with the comments of my fellow board members, I don't think these minor refinements would be perceptible from the public right away. Just so you know, we can't consider the fact that you've already had it built. So understanding that does anyone wish to make a motion on this application? I would move to approve items 8-9 as submitted. Is there a second? I second. I believe. Yes, this is a roll call vote. Okay, let's do it. Okay, let's go. Ms. Zondian. Aye. Mr. Adams. Aye. Ms. Del Nino. Mr. Lyons. Aye. Mr. Spencer. Aye. And Mr. Scott. Aye. Congratulations. Thank you. All right. B-A-R item number 10, I think is our final new matter for today. Okay, item number 10 is B-A-R 2025. Yes, it's 0,0045. Old and historic district, a request for partial demolition at 722 South Fairfax Street. Applicant is, applicants are Stephen and Laura Swini represented by Patrick Kamus. Member Kamus. Could you state your name and address for the record? Yes, your name. My name is Patrick Kamus, the studio campus representing the Swinis. I'm happy to want for any questions on hopefully. You have to tell us your address. 225 North Pitch Street. Thank you. Do any members of the board have questions? Would anyone from the public like to speak on this application? Seeing nothing, we will close the public portion of this matter. Do any members of the board wish to weigh in on any deliberative issues on this application? Mr. Spencer, would you like to make a motion? A motion to approve per staff recommendations, which are nuns. Second. As submitted. I don't think we have any. Do we need a roll call? We do. Okay. Okay. Ms. Zondion. Hi. Mr. Adams. Hi. Ms. Del Nino. Mr. Lions. Hi. Mr. Spencer. Hi. Mr. Scott. Hi. Congratulations. Thank you, everyone. All right, Ms. Helman, do what else do we have before us? That's it. We don't have any other businesses this evening. Great. Thanks, everybody. The hearing is closed. Do we need a motion to adjourn? Then that's just me not knowing. I don't think we ever do that. OK, good. If we need one, we're wrong every single time.