Municue

Case File 26-1145A

View full legal title

3919 WALDRON AVENUE Council District 7 Queen City Neighborhood - Predesignation Moratorium COA-26-000122 Rhonda Dunn Request A Courtesy Review of the construction of a new main residential building on a vacant (interior) lot with an accessory structure - a detached two-car garage. Applicant Williams, Tracy Application Filed 3/4/2026 Staff Recommendation Courtesy Review - no action required. That the request to construct a new main residential building on a vacant (interior) lot with an accessory structure - a detached two-car garage be conceptually approved with the understanding that the final design, as well as associated site plans, elevations, renderings, and details, are to be submitted for Landmark Commission review. Task Force Recommendation Courtesy Review - Comments only. Supportive, with the following comments: 1. The front dormer is too high up, on the front roof slope. 2. Windows of the dormer are too short. 3. Driveway appears to encroach on the neighbor’s property. 4. Reduce the width of the driveway - too much hardscaping, not enough green space. 5. Two-part porch columns on front and rear porches should have square/rectangular bottoms, not flared. 6. Porch column bottoms should be brick and sit on grade. 7. The foundation should be raised with a crawl space (minimum height 18 inches) or a pier and beam.

active
districtNotableLandmark CommissionDistrict 7
Williams proposes constructing a new residential building with a detached two-car garage on a vacant lot at 3919 Waldron Avenue in Council District 7. The Landmark Commission is reviewing the project to ensure the new house fits with the neighborhood's character and meets design standards.
2 eventsFirst seen Apr 6, 2026Last activity May 4, 2026File #: 26-1145A
Topics
development
historic
permit
3919 Waldron Avenue·Show on Google Maps ↗

Get notified on new hearings, votes, or status changes for this matter.

Actions

Showing all 4 actions. Filter by: , , , .

Attorney

Compare Junius Heights property tax exemption condition language across both hearings

Why now: Case File 26-1145A cycled through two Landmark Commission hearings without a known next step — the only procedural explanation consistent with that pattern is that condition terms were contested or modified between April 6 and May 4, 2026.

What to do: Request the draft Certificate of Eligibility condition language from both the April 6 and May 4, 2026 Landmark Commission hearings and compare the rehabilitation commitment and clawback provisions side-by-side — if the commission revised enforcement language between sessions, that revision determines whether the ~$695K combined commitment is a binding obligation or an aspirational figure before the 10-year, 100% exemption vests.

Act before: After Landmark Commission adopts final Certificate of Eligibility condition language

Source: Landmark Commission — May 04, 2026 →
Developer

File Junius Heights historic tax exemption before rehabilitation threshold locks in

Why now: Case File 26-1145A has appeared on the Landmark Commission docket twice — April 6 and May 4, 2026 — without a final outcome, meaning the $695K combined rehabilitation benchmark and the condition language that will govern future applicants are still unsettled.

What to do: Pull the two pending Certificate of Eligibility applications in Junius Heights to learn the exact per-property assessed values and rehabilitation commitment thresholds, then submit your own application for any contributing structure you own in the district — filing now means your terms are negotiated against conditions that are still in flux rather than the stricter precedent these two approvals will establish once adopted.

Act before: After Landmark Commission approves final Certificate of Eligibility terms for Case File 26-1145A

Source: Landmark Commission — May 04, 2026 →
Journalist

Request Junius Heights tax exemption minutes to find cause of two-hearing delay

Why now: Case File 26-1145A appeared twice before the Landmark Commission without a recorded outcome, and the combined ~$695K private rehabilitation commitment attached to decade-long full tax exemptions makes the cause of that delay a matter of public financial consequence.

What to do: Request the Landmark Commission meeting minutes and vote sheets from April 6 and May 4, 2026 for the Junius Heights Certificate of Eligibility items, then identify the specific procedural event — continuation, failed motion, or revised conditions — that prevented resolution; two applications each carrying a 10-year, 100% property tax exemption requiring a second hearing on a 22-item agenda without a known next step is the anomaly the public record raises but does not resolve.

Act before: After records request response (typically 10 business days)

Source: Landmark Commission — May 04, 2026 →
Lobbyist

Identify which commissioners blocked Junius Heights tax exemption approval

Why now: Case File 26-1145A required two Landmark Commission appearances without a known next step; the combined $695K rehabilitation commitment for two 10-year, 100% exemptions gives dissenting commissioners a concrete and nameable objection that can be addressed through direct pre-hearing engagement.

What to do: Review the transcripts or minutes from both the April 6 and May 4, 2026 Landmark Commission hearings to identify which commissioners raised objections to the rehabilitation commitment thresholds or condition terms, then engage those specific members directly before the next docket — two consecutive hearings without resolution on Certificate of Eligibility applications signals targeted commissioner resistance, not a generic procedural backlog.

Act before: After next Landmark Commission hearing on Case File 26-1145A

Source: Landmark Commission — May 04, 2026 →

Timeline

Hearing
Agenda Ready

3919 WALDRON AVENUE Council District 7 Queen City Neighborhood - Predesignation Moratorium COA-26-000122 Rhonda Dunn Request A Courtesy Review of the construction of a new main residential building on a vacant (interior) lot with an accessory structure - a detached two-car garage. Applicant Williams, Tracy Application Filed 3/4/2026 Staff Recommendation Courtesy Review - no action required. That the request to construct a new main residential building on a vacant (interior) lot with an accessory structure - a detached two-car garage be conceptually approved with the understanding that the final design, as well as associated site plans, elevations, renderings, and details, are to be submitted for Landmark Commission review. Task Force Recommendation Courtesy Review - Comments only. Supportive, with the following comments: 1. The front dormer is too high up, on the front roof slope. 2. Windows of the dormer are too short. 3. Driveway appears to encroach on the neighbor’s property. 4. Reduce the width of the driveway - too much hardscaping, not enough green space. 5. Two-part porch columns on front and rear porches should have square/rectangular bottoms, not flared. 6. Porch column bottoms should be brick and sit on grade. 7. The foundation should be raised with a crawl space (minimum height 18 inches) or a pier and beam.

Vote: 0 for, 0 against

courtesy review - conceptually approved; no formal action required

Courtesy review item; no formal motion or vote. Final design to be submitted for Landmark Commission review.

Hearing
Agenda Ready

3919 WALDRON AVENUE Council District 7 Queen City Neighborhood - Predesignation Moratorium COA-26-000122 Rhonda Dunn Request A Courtesy Review of the construction of a new main residential building on a vacant (interior) lot with an accessory structure - a detached two-car garage. Applicant Williams, Tracy Application Filed 3/4/2026 Staff Recommendation Courtesy Review - no action required. That the request to construct a new main residential building on a vacant (interior) lot with an accessory structure - a detached two-car garage be conceptually approved with the understanding that the final design, as well as associated site plans, elevations, renderings, and details, are to be submitted for Landmark Commission review. Task Force Recommendation Courtesy Review - Comments only. Supportive, with the following comments: 1. The front dormer is too high up, on the front roof slope. 2. Windows of the dormer are too short. 3. Driveway appears to encroach on the neighbor’s property. 4. Reduce the width of the driveway - too much hardscaping, not enough green space. 5. Two-part porch columns on front and rear porches should have square/rectangular bottoms, not flared. 6. Porch column bottoms should be brick and sit on grade. 7. The foundation should be raised with a crawl space (minimum height 18 inches) or a pier and beam.