Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Routine Approvals topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
BAR approves a slate of residential repairs and paired porch work; two grouped Princess Street items pass
Summary
The board approved a set of largely routine items: porch restorations and partial demolitions at 1612–1614 Princess Street, a post‑fire encapsulation at 216 South Fairfax, and an accessibility‑oriented addition at 51 Fourth South Pitt, and approved a homeowner addition at 426 South Lee with minor conditions.
The Alexandria Board of Architectural Review approved several routine and grouped applications on its agenda.
Princess Street (1612 & 1614): Karen Conkey presented paired applications for 1612 and 1614 Princess Street aimed at restoring porch forms and correcting earlier changes; no public speakers registered and the board approved items 10–13 per staff recommendations in two roll‑call votes.
216 South Fairfax Street: Karen Conkey said the house suffered a 2023 fire; the owners seek to encapsulate a rear wall and remove a modern sunroom not visible from the public way. The board noted earlier approvals had expired because of a zoning delay; after confirming the work is not visible from the public right‑of‑way the board approved the staff recommendations.
51 Fourth South Pitt & 514 South Pitt: Architect Steven Kalinski described an interior reconfiguration and a linked addition designed to allow the long‑term owner to age in place; the board approved the proposal with staff recommendations.
426 South Lee Street: Agent Trent Sorensen described an 8‑foot rear extension to enlarge two second‑floor bedrooms. Board questions focused on roof height versus the neighboring building and on door/window alignment; the applicant said the increased height was to meet energy‑code insulation requirements and agreed to refine elevations. The board approved the application with staff recommendations.
Awning at 411 Cameron (consent): The board removed item 3 from the consent calendar for brief discussion; the applicant explained the awning is needed to protect a soon‑to‑open restaurant entrance from dripping condensate overflow from upper‑floor window air conditioners. Board members asked about signage, height and permanence; applicant and staff agreed to add conditions addressing placement and signage so the awning does not obscure historic keystone detailing. The item was approved.
The approvals were largely routine but reflect the board’s continuing attention to historic details and context when permitting rooftop changes, porch restorations and facade work.
