Board of Architectural Review Meeting   8/16/2022

Good evening, everybody.

Welcome to the August 2022 Board of Architectural Review meeting.

My name is Robert Watkins.

I'm city staff.

Just a reminder to all VAR members and to Jeff, make sure to bring your microphone up to you when you speak so that the world can hear us.

We're now being streamed live, I think, on the city's streaming channels and on channel 10.

We have all of the BA members here in person who are attending but then we'll have some applicants joining us virtually as well and we'll introduce people as they come on or leave.

I don't have any other introductions except that if you're a member of the public and you're watching right now and you'd like to provide comment

At any point in the meeting, you'll need to register for the meeting through Zoom on the city calendar, and you'll need to join the Zoom webinar in order to provide comment at the appropriate place.

Thank you, Robert.

Welcome to this regular monthly meeting of the Charlottesville Board of Architectural Review.

For each item, staff will introduce the project followed by the applicant's presentation, which should not exceed 10 minutes.

I'll then ask for questions from the public followed by questions from the BAR.

After the questions are closed, we'll ask for comments from the public.

And then for each application, members of the public are allowed three minutes to ask questions and three minutes to offer comments.

Speakers that are joining us should identify themselves and provide their address.

Comments should be limited to the BAR's purview, that is regarding the exterior aspects of the project.

After the BAR's discussion and prior to taking action, the applicant will have up to three minutes to respond.

So that brings us to the first item on the agenda is matters from the public not on the agenda or for anyone who would like to speak to items on the consent agenda, which today is just a meeting of minutes from October 2021.

Do we have any members of the public?

If you would like to speak, you need to raise your hand in Zoom or

Yes, but I don't see any people joining by phone.

Also, just for formality, we're joined by two members of the public here, but they're both applicants, and I assume they don't wish to provide comment.

But for the two members who are on Zoom, if you'd like to provide comment, please raise your hand.

OK, we'll move to the consent agenda, which this meeting includes the meeting minutes from October 19, 2021.

Any opposed?

No.

So this is 350 Park Street is the primary address we're using but it's also a zero Park Street and an address there on East High Street.

This is

For the City-County Courts Expansion Project, this is at the Levy Building site.

You all have been discussing this I think since October 2020 preliminary discussion and it was the approval of the necessary demolition of the annex on the Levy Building.

and then last summer and earlier this year in February continued discussion about the new design for the building expansion and also we had a series of meetings

with the architects.

At one meeting, it was Mr. Leandro and Ms.

Lewis.

Another meeting, Mr. Zehmer was there, and in another meeting, Mr. Gastinger.

And we met at the architect's office and reviewed some of the direction they were going.

This was, I think, in the last six weeks.

And so what that's represented, those changes, slight modifications are represented in the

and the application has been submitted for this meeting.

Also earlier this evening, four o'clock, I think six of us or seven or six of the BAR members met at the Levy building to evaluate some color samples and the brick samples.

There was a

Pretty robust discussion about the color palette.

I think in general, though, we'll have to discuss the direction we're going to take on that one.

But it sounds like there are some, there's still a question to be resolved for the color of the brick, the color of the brick mortar.

and the gray that would be applied to the precast material and the metal.

I'll offer a suggested motion for that when we get to it.

Otherwise, before us tonight is the modification of the design.

Hopefully it is where you all would like it to be.

I think most of the changes are what you all talked about in the entrance.

Around the foundation, there's some detail has been added at the water table.

and the height to the building, although I think we discussed that in February, the height to the building relative to the Levy building, it's really, it's allowed the Levy building to stand alone and that was something that you all have been concerned about.

And I think, you know, we have not spent a lot of time on the courtyard.

elements, but it has come up in discussion.

I'm saying that we haven't talked about it.

It's just I think the discussion seemed to have been primarily about the building itself.

So and then just to clarify for folks at home what the goal tonight is obviously

I'd like to see approval, at least staff's recommendation.

Should there be additional information that the BAR would like to see, because Mr. LeHondro will be on the BAR only through midnight, August 31st, or at least 11.59 seconds,

would like to have the benefit of his input having been involved in this process since the beginning.

If the BAR wants some additional information and it's something we can get, we can vote, you all can vote on holding a special meeting that Wednesday evening, August 31st, and that would allow us tomorrow to get the letters and the notices out.

So that option is available to you all, but again, it's primarily

If there's information you want, I know we can get it.

Otherwise, if this is not where you want it to be, then it would be, I guess, to a future BAR meeting for further discussion.

So do you have any questions for me?

I think, and I know Eric.

All right, good evening.

My name is Steve White.

Just the people online, that will be the way they hear you.

OK, great.

I'll try to keep my mouth in the right position.

and I have with me my colleague Eric Antman from DGP, our local partner in this process.

Tonight we are happy to present to you several revisions that we've made, a lot of progress in the last several months.

I want to thank you, each of you, for your time and attention to this.

over those months to help guide some of the aesthetic direction.

And I hope that tonight you'll agree that it's come a long way.

Robert, I think we could probably fast forward to the slide that says east site building design, because I think we're all pretty familiar with the context at this point.

And you can go to the page after the narrative

So our site plan is essentially as it has been and I'll rehash a couple of key points.

The building form is driven by the organization of the courts.

There are two courts in this building and they're relatively large in size.

They're about 60 feet by 40 feet clear.

with supportive space around them for prisoner movement, for attorney-client counsel, for judges' access and sheriffs' access.

So it's a very technical layout in terms of how the building needs to be massed to function properly and safely.

So that arrangement has continued.

So we are a pretty filled out site as you can see here, but that's really what's driving this.

We are one single basement and we have a primary floor of clerks and then a secondary floor, second floor of courts.

The Levy Building which is the building in the top left corner is the historic structure which many of you know about and we were just there.

That structure will have the Commonwealth Attorney housed in it.

Our building is set back off of Park Street creating a welcoming plaza and forecourt to the main entrance.

If you go to the next slide, Robert, this is the ground floor.

So you can see on the left the court there in that elliptical form and the entry piece.

All the things that are in that purple hue are public spaces.

And everything in the white is the back of house office sort of functions for the clerks and the attorneys.

And the next slide takes you to the quartz function so you can understand again what's driving the shape of the building.

In the next slide we added a diagram for you to explain the way the building mass works.

So the quartz is the larger mass, it's the primary body.

And then we have a series of saddlebag forms that are attached to that.

The chambers to the north on High Street, the entry portico in the plaza, and then the hyphen.

And all three of those forms are lower than the main form.

and they create a variety of heights and proportions as you go around the building to help reduce the scale of the building in relation to the smaller scale buildings that are in the neighborhood.

And this is a slide we've had with the looking at the proportions of Levy as well as the original 1803 court which is across street which this will be a part of that court complex.

In the plaza, most of the work there has remained consistent.

There are a couple of changes that we'll be going over with you tonight that we want your feedback on, and I think we'll talk about those later.

Mainly the benches.

There are four benches that are between the six trees that flank the left and right as you're coming up to the building.

and we're going to talk through those.

We're also going to talk about the lighting.

That was something that was asked for us to look more into last time we met.

And those are just sections there.

So this is a new rendering depicting the new building as it rests in that plaza and some things to point out are that we've introduced the contemporary portico, the three bay portico that is reminiscent of the Greek revival but very much different from

You also see in the Levy Building entry there's an entablature portico element, sort of miniature element at the front door that's at the center bay and in the same way we have in our entrance we have a lower weather vestibule at the entrance that is a single story element as well.

The depiction of all the architecture there is contemporary in nature and we have details of those that we'll show you.

The elevation helps to see the height relationships in terms of the relationship of the entablature at Levy.

Our entablature hits at just above the architrave and kind of in the freeze band.

So the cornice lines are actually lower in the new building.

Okay, so this is a section perspective of that entry piece.

The columns are articulated in tube steel that is architecturally grade steel, so it's all the weld joints are clean and it's pre-finished with a factory finish.

There's a breeze soleil element that helps

to add some detail to the space, to the composition, but it also creates diffused light for those west facing windows that are at the second floor of the lobby.

One thing that is new here is that you can see we've added a linear light fixture.

Do you see that on the left?

It's on that single-story element, and it will throw light up onto the rooftop, underside of the rooftop, without bleeding to the night sky.

creating a look sort of similar to the image there.

And what that'll do is create a nice warm glow in the evening and create some ambient light for walking through the plaza, lighting the actual surfaces rather than through floodlight.

And then coming around to High Street, this is of course the existing condition and this is the proposed with the addition.

You can see that the hyphen is actually pushed back.

The relationship and plan for the hyphen is equal to where the current building is so that we're not

exposing historic fabric that has been eroded with the current puncture through that east-facing wall.

And then the saddlebag you see there in front of you on the left is the judge's chamber.

And that's further divided into a three-part bay and then a stair, the stairs expressed with a slight divot there on the right.

and the elevation showing the relationship to Levy.

On the Jessup House side, the Jessup House, you know, does obstruct most of that view, but you have the court function essentially behind it and the clerk's windows along that wall as well.

and then coming around to the south.

Again, these are articulated in modulated bays.

We did accentuate the pilasters by making them four inches deep rather than the two that we had previously.

and creating a little bit more shadow line.

Here we have a five bay module and then we have the stair again articulated with a slight divot or depression.

And then if you go to the next slide it's a section perspective which shows the shadow lines that you get from the articulation of the pilasters.

It's all very simple detailing but

There's corbeling in there, some banding that really breaks up the space.

We added, at the belt course at the bottom, we added rustication, which is a one inch reveal.

you know, five or so courses as you go from the belt course down to grade and that extends around the building.

And then you can see in the piano noble on the second floor that there's a clear story or a transom window and that window lets light.

If you keep looking through the section there, you can see the clear story in the courtroom and that bounces light up into the courtroom, which is a very common tool used in modern courthouse design.

and these depictions are not nearly as good as standing out in the rain with me at the Levy House.

I don't think we have too much to say there but I do appreciate the comments that we received and we would like to offer up making some new panels based on the comments that we got about the mortar color and about some of the trim color comments that we had and we would like to continue to refine that.

One thing I will point out is that the bottom left is a black and white picture, but that is the Norman brick proportion, and it's at one-third coursing, so that's the coursing that we're offering as what we believe is a very subtle shift in the normal Flemish pond that's in the plaza in the historic structures to differentiate it from its neighbors.

And this is just simply a study of how windows intersect with belt coursing and it was based on a discussion we had had at one of our individual meetings earlier this summer.

So I would like to spend a little bit of time on this slide.

This is the top left is a stone top bench that we think is the right bench for this.

We're proposing a linear in-grade light fixture that would go between the metal

Blade stanchions that would support the concrete top bench or stone top bench, rather.

And it would create enough ambient light sort of thrown out into the plaza so that that would essentially be our egress lighting, if you will, to get to the public way.

So avoiding basically street lamps for that space.

We also have lit bollards, which are on the upper right, and those occur as a safety measure as well as for lighting.

We have confirmed that the honey locust is acceptable to the county and the city's list of acceptable tree species and believe it's a good selection because its foliage is thinner and easier to see through and it's not as heavy.

which will help you to see the building since the building is a good 60 feet back from the street.

And then the final slide is simply a treatment of brick walls and some bluestone treatments of other site walls.

Our entry feature wall that's part of that curved ellipse is in the bluestone color and has the signage for the city and the county.

No, I think that's great.

We're joined by some folks here in person and as well as some folks online through Zoom.

We'll start in person if anybody wishes to provide or has any questions from the public, you can come forward to the podium.

If not, to our three people who are joined online on Zoom, raise your hand please if you'd like to ask questions.

I have a few.

Thanks for the walk around today.

I appreciate seeing the brick in person.

That's a big help.

Just going through your presentation, I'll go from the back up, or some of the final points.

The benches that you're proposing, I'm sorry if I missed it, but did you clarify what the legs are going to be underneath?

Is it a metal spin?

And this is a catalog bench, so we're not creating a custom bench.

Hello.

Yeah, yes, it is a metal bench.

I'm sorry, metal fin.

I have the website open.

I'm trying to confirm which type of metal.

I don't know that it's stainless steel.

You would see the, do you see where, the one that says in-grade uplighting under bench?

So we don't have a picture of that light with that bench, but it would be a light, a linear light that would be between the blades in a length that's some distance less than the blade separation.

And then there would be another one next to that.

Yes, I think the lights are three feet long and the fins are four feet long and they are stainless steel.

Yeah, we went through a pretty exhaustive exercise about finding a light.

We initially wanted to find a light that was under the bench.

And to find one that wasn't, you know, through the roof astronomically expensive, the concerns that we did have of the ones we did find was that they would get either vandalized or tampered with and they would easily fall.

We weren't satisfied with the connections to the bench.

It wasn't really integrated, I would say.

So, we actually went in a full circle.

We started with in-grade and we had concerns about the in-grade, but we never found one in the bench under the seat that was, you know, we have to remember this is outdoors and it's in a public space, so, you know, someone fiddling with it is to be expected, so that's how we ended up back with the in-grade.

Yep.

And then I just have two other questions.

I just noticed on your notes that the steel posts, you called them out as galvanized, but also painted.

I think galvanized has been kind of a rougher finish, and then a paint on top of that.

We're trying to get the best, most long-lasting, yet cost-effective solution for the county.

So we've used this before.

I do agree that it's not as absolutely crisp as, say, a stainless steel.

but it is a very acceptable, I wouldn't call it rough.

It's dipped in the galvanized system and then it's high performance coating that's painted on top of that.

Yep.

Thank you.

Oh how high are they?

I would guess that they're around the 36 to 42 inch range.

I mean, the site perspective looks like they're about 36.

And the bluestone wall in the site perspective, it looks like that wall, although it's kind of shaded, you can't tell, but it looks like it's almost like parched concrete or I don't know, something else.

I thought that was intended to be a seating area.

Yes.

Right.

Yes.

That's correct.

There would be a low seat wall, no specific bench top or attached bench to it.

That's all I have.

OK.

Thank you, Ms.

The feet on the stone benches

Yes, sir.

So all the brick pavers, there'll be a concrete base that'll be poured, and then it'll be anchored to that.

And then the bricks will be laid around and cut to fit.

Is that your understanding, Drew?

That is correct.

That's how we will detail it.

And we will work with the manufacturer, make sure that happens.

I had a follow-up question regarding that lighting.

Some manufacturers offer a glare reduction lens or a low glare lens.

I'm not sure if that's available with this manufacturer, but I would certainly recommend it if it is possible rather than a clear lens.

But the cutoff is also a good detail to keep an eye on.

Thank you for that.

I had a question about the planting area on East High Street that's labeled as planting bioretention area.

Robert, do you have the ability to pull that up?

Yeah, I'm pulling it up now.

Yeah, so I don't have the silver drawings in front of me.

As far as it needing to be bioretention, that is correct.

and also the area in the sort of the nook to just to the south of that, which is labeled as planting area, also needs to be a bioretention area.

I don't believe we have a cross section, but they are bound by short curb walls to contain

the runoff, and then they are essentially typical bioretention facilities with a mix of bioretention soil and then planting that will reach 70 plus percent coverage within less than two years.

OK.

Thank you.

Then one small detail question about the facade as it relates to colors and some of the conversation we had previously on.

I don't have a page number for your presentation separate from our packet, but it's the section perspective of the east site, typical bay.

On our packet it's page 81.

In that image, it looks like there are a couple of different tones of gray that are happening with the window trim.

Is that the intention?

Yeah, that's a fair question.

This is in-house rendering from a Revit model.

and the Revit model, we assign a material.

So the top is the GFRC, the panel, the lintel panel on the first floor window is aluminum, the cast stone is cast stone, and each of those reflects light differently.

And the accuracy of the Revit model

Between the first and the second floor, it is intentional.

If the east-west, maybe Robert, if you can flip through, I don't remember, there could be a mistake in there.

Yeah, that's a mistake.

So that evolved and that's an error.

So the intent is what you see in this drawing.

That's fine, I just wanted to know what the intention was.

And then lastly, related to some of the brick discussion, we didn't speak specifically to the color of the brick in the horizontal plane, but I'd love to hear more about what you guys are thinking as it would relate to the building color.

And then several of the drawings, such as the site, the plaza enlargement site plan,

Robert, yeah, I think it's at the beginning of the deck.

There's that site plan, that one, right.

And Drew, you didn't have the benefit of walking the site with the board, but we had sample panels of the vertical building brick, but we did not have panels for the horizontal material.

Right, yeah.

The intention is to try to match the Park Street brick as close as possible, but also to understand that once that building brick was selected and finalized, that we would have to confirm that that's complimentary, the Park Street brick, that is.

So that brick hasn't been fully selected, but that is the design intention to match the Park Street brick.

As far as color change within the ellipse there, there is a pattern change.

I believe that's what is

Can you zoom in very close on the ellipse?

So it was running bond within the rest of the larger field.

The line drawings in the drawing set are better depictions than this color drawing.

So does it?

OK.

Did you hear that, Robert?

If you go to that one.

Is it in that?

That's OK.

That was helpful.

The Park Street brick has gray bricks in it, in the field.

to have a variegated stippled sort of... And then also still have the elliptical design with the spokes of the wheels, so to speak.

Yeah, I think we should drill down on that.

Perhaps when you're in the lips, maybe that speckle does not occur as sort of almost like a rug that's on top of the Park Street pattern.

Other questions from the board?

One more question.

The note that on the overall site plan had repair, repointing and repairs to the front steps of the Levy building.

Yes.

There's... Do you want me to speak for you?

I can speak.

There's roof replacement.

There is brick repointing and repair.

Just one other follow-up then with that I found that brick repointing can be a pretty fussy

Sure, I'm Eric Antman, architect in Charlottesville.

That's a great question, David.

The restorations, well, first of all, we have a general contractor on board who's a construction manager who will be having all the subs pricing the work later on.

However, Worcester Eisenbrandt is the restoration subcontractor that's already been brought on as sort of a secondary general contractor, if you will.

And I actually worked with them on the historic Madison County Courthouse.

So I can attest to the fact that the Masons that will be doing the work are qualified

It's a qualified restoration company, but you're absolutely right with the color selection of mortar.

We actually have a blend of, that's a kind word, an admixture of various generations of lime mortar and Portland cement mortar and the strategy is not to cut everything out and try to repoint the entire building.

Any other questions from the board?

To members of the public who are here in person, if you'd like to provide comment, now is an appropriate time.

If not, then we have two members of the public attending online.

If you'd like to provide comment, please raise your hand.

OK.

Comments from the board.

And maybe while we're gathering our thoughts for comments from the board, I just note that there were a number of meetings that have happened since the last public presentation.

So keep that in mind if there was direction that you felt like was given or received.

And then related to

The brick color and brick mortar and metal color, I'd like us to try to see what we can agree upon in terms of an approach to give them good direction moving forward.

Fairly simple, send it to the two chairs first and then we can... Okay, I'll take a look, but let's go, any comments?

When we met earlier today, I think we were focused on the facade color and the trim and

and basically of the new quartz building and in its environment.

And the kind of surprise for me was the question about what this plaza is going to look like and what those bricks are going to look like and whether they really, we would want them to look like the street which has the sort of variegated, that's a good word or whatever, you know, checkered, I would call it, pattern of contrasting colors and whether that would work with the very articulated oval shape

with the trim and bluestone or whatever it is.

I'm hesitating.

I was ready to sort of maybe support either camp, depending on how people were feeling about the brick color hues programming, but now I'm further confused because I'm realizing there's going to be an expanse, a huge expanse of brick right in front of this brick building.

and I would want them to not be fighting each other or at least be complementary or whatever the pattern is or whatever.

And I'm not sure that we have quite enough in front of us just on the plaza itself.

It looks like it's just, it looks like it's just Bond.

Is that correct?

But we're not sure what the colors are at this point.

Is that it?

Well, because of the complex form, there are actually a couple of different patterns that are in there.

Remind me, Drew, what the pattern was.

It's running.

And then it looked like

Perhaps the sidewalk was a herringbone, which I think it might currently be, or it might have been redone.

But you showed that in a herringbone.

OK, thank you.

Just to overall kind of respond to the strategy for what's historic and what's not historic, the whole sort of flat work of paving in Court Square is non-historic and modern.

So the team with Drew's help and Roadside Harwell, the landscape architect, earlier

looked at should we do a new design for the plaza that's unique and different, sort of as the facade of the building is, or should we make the plaza tie into the rest of Court Square?

And the architects responded pretty well to our comments from the last time this was presented to the BAR, especially in terms of breaking up the massing both vertically and horizontally, giving some stratification.

I think we all thought it looked like a big block, and you all have done a nice job to kind of help cut that up and add some shadow lines.

And I appreciate that.

So thank you.

I agree.

I think that the further articulation of some of the detail, giving a little bit more relief to some of the facade, I think not only makes for a more interest in the building, but also I think brings out some of the careful proportioned studies that were happening in those elevations.

Sorry, I didn't have my microphone on.

I unfortunately didn't get to meet.

I was out last month.

So I'm seeing this after an iteration.

And so I'm still back in early spring.

So for me, I think the real plus is what my colleagues have mentioned.

further articulation, the more variety of materiality.

I'd also say that I think you did a good job in paying deference to the Levy building, you know, in both of those perspectives.

You really kind of, you get a building that

as the word we've been using out there complements the surroundings very well.

So both with the cornice line and the rhythm of the windows and the bays, I feel like there's a general consistency that kind of flows between the two, but separates the new from the old.

I'll just say in general we've come a long way on this building and really appreciate the applicants and obviously the county as the project manager allowing the project architects to make those changes.

We had seen some facades specifically on the east and west side, losing my slide, north and south.

There were big expanses of wall without any apertures and you've added those, thank you very much.

So I don't have to look at a plain brick wall with no windows across the street from my office.

they're just the front entrance has undergone a lot of different iterations but it's really really quite attractive and it'll be a very significant public building it really is I mean from the first view that we saw the first rendering this is really very attractive you know I'm ready like I think a lot of us are the majority of us are to support approving this I think we're kind of stuck on

the brick and trim tones after this afternoon not for lack of options that have been given us I just think we are not at a consensus point right now if I can summarize the

you know state of things so and I'm looking at this motion that was suggested and I don't think I feel comfortable saying all these words nor do I think that I agree with all of them.

I appreciate staff putting it in front of us, but I think that's why I'm staring blankly.

Just as clearly as my head's been for about two weeks, so I'm glad that it actually came out the way I was hoping it did.

Maybe a suggestion, just ignore this motion for a moment.

and the last two sentences are really where sort of what is it that we want to express and so again forget about how you word it right now and sort of those blanks and I'll read it so that everyone can know how unusual it is but essentially I

It's the same motion for approval with the addition of including, you know, applications submitted including this brick size and the coursing.

I thought it was important that we clarify that.

We can certainly refer to something specific if need be.

However, with the understanding that the color palette is omitted,

specifically the brick color, the mortar color, and the gray for the precast stone and metal elements and will be submitted for approval as a separate COA.

Additionally, the intent is that the approved color palette will result in the brick and mortar appearing less, I said pink, salmon, then the samples presented at the site tonight and more or less blank if

some suggestion language, and that the gray will be similar to, and I simple numbered them, or lettered them A, B, or C as presented, and more or less fill in the blanks of what you'd like that gray to be.

So, and then the last piece I had is, finally the BAR and the applicant have discussed the need for an expedient decision.

and are committed to finalizing the color palette no later than pick a BAR meeting date.

So, as I said, my suggestion would be to kind of pick up on the, where I said the intent is that the approved color palette will result in the brick and mortar appearing what?

And that the gray will be similar to, not similar to one of the three samples.

Well, I guess I am interested in the language.

My suggestion is, again, given that this is a city-county project, we're all in this together, so to speak.

It's a little bit different than, I think, a private applicant, but I think I agree with you.

and we could certainly just simply you know do the okay omit the color palette and even in the motion refer to tonight's discussion so but in some way that we are all able to look at each other and say yes we agreed to do this and this is what we expressed

You all, again, some of you may say, I want to see more brick colors, I don't know what I want it to be.

I understand that, I'm just trying to nudge in a direction, but I'm not saying you have to go there.

But I think that you could make a motion

that omits the color palette, be specific about what that color palette is, at least frame the intent of resolving it soon.

So I think at the heart of it from my perspective is that in the documentation there were some attractive examples of precedent buildings that had one color approach.

There were some renderings of the structure that had an attractive color approach and then the samples were not

they were somewhere in between and it wasn't unclear which way the building would be going or what we'd be really receiving.

I think that our purview as the BAR, we do need to keep that in mind.

I think that the project is within our guidelines in the way that it's been presented, in the way that changes have been made.

However, we know how critical some of those last color decisions can be, especially in the kind of context that we're working in.

There's a lot of different contexts.

It's really hard to choose exactly how.

I have a hard time being specific in the writing, a little less this, a little more that.

I just say from my own personal view that I didn't see the BRIC samples being complementary to what's there.

That's a personal preference.

I guess to your point of how we move this forward,

I for one would be more than willing to come back and look at other samples that you bring, have a broader discussion.

I think at the end of the day that's probably what this is about is to get a number of different people looking at it and generating a few more viewpoints as we

Mr. Chair I had a question for the applicants because we were looking we're looking as part of our motion the suggested motion to

require or strongly suggest that you come back and that we vote on the final brick color scheme, brick trim color scheme.

It's been suggested that maybe we should hopefully have that done by October or November.

Does that sound realistic for your engagement and your time?

Well, I don't know if this is out of bounds or not, but what's in my mind is if we could, you know, tonight get to a sort of conditional approval that the design intent is there,

if we can get a Mason hired on board we can have I personally think we can have panels that are bigger and that are actually built on the ground that are right next to the building that are much more substantive and we can

If there was no BAR oversight, we would be doing that anyway, and we would be testing these mortars with bigger... It's really tough to be looking at a small

Small little 1x2 panel with wood trim around it.

And the same goes for the, we'll have real samples of cast stone with the color and real samples of the GFRC with color.

I think we're going to

Well, we're slated to go to bid early next year.

And the construction period is two years.

Well, that's another take on it.

It's just that I think we'll be making a decision based on what I can get from suppliers who don't have the project yet, and it's going to be small pieces.

That's my concern, is that we won't have really as much information.

And I'll also kind of address the elephant in the room because I can see Mr. Warner making some faces.

We're told not to approve anything conditionally, so the suggestion has been made that we could approve a certificate of appropriateness, exempt out the color scheme, and then require that you come back and get a separate certificate of appropriateness for that before you move forward.

So I think a piece of this and you know it you're right and I've worked on projects where we've done the sample panel and the architects like oh my god what was I thinking so the reality is is that they'll be making some adjustments decisions as well.

So that's why I'm kind of having been through this and other iterations I'm comfortable with knowing that we're going to look at something but I would very much prefer that

some direction be given.

And like I said, what I heard tonight was there was some question about contrasting with the Levy building.

There were comments about it being, the color being a little too pink, a little too salmon color.

So it would be, the more we can narrow this down and provide direction and not just say, gosh, I'll know it when I see it.

I don't wanna go that, I do not recommend going that far.

If I could just respond to Ms.

Lewis, what you just said, two separate C of A's, certificates of appropriateness is exactly what project development needs because the second C of A is not a cost issue.

We're picking colors and joint patterns.

and that's exactly the approval that the county and the city need so that project development can move to construction documents and we can stay on schedule and coming back for a material palette approval later is fine whether that happens this fall because it's better for you or next summer because it's better for the contractor is not the main point.

I would like to at least say, because I won't be here, and whatever bit of guidance I can offer the group.

To my mind, a brick color that is less orange, that is not orange, but within the range of the reds that is surrounding this project.

Even if it's a lighter red, that's fine, but light to dark red, but not the pink, not the orange, and a lighter mortar color, buff color or something.

Those would be my personal recommendations.

I don't know how the rest of the board feels, but I just wanted to offer that in case it would be helpful.

Could you, could we pull up one of the renderings and comment on the, have you specifically, Mr. Lehendro, comment on the sort of salmon and lighter, like that color palette or the perspective cutaways actually show it better.

I think this is the salmon orange scheme because that's what my eye sees there, that's more to orange and salmon.

You're saying move away from that and more towards the red.

Yeah, I think that I support that.

I also support more of a tanner buff mortar joint as opposed to the pink that we saw in the samples.

I think that that kind of gets to y'all's goal of being homogenous a little bit with the other court buildings.

But in using the Norman brick as a much bigger scale to our traditional Virginia brick,

You know, that's going to help set it apart.

So I think Eric's kind of got to the point that we can approve materiality here in brick and cast stone and steel and aluminum.

It's just the color palette that we want to see come before us again.

I mean, I don't know how complicated it has to be given this discussion.

but suggested motion approval having considered the standards set forth in the city code including the city design guidelines for public design improvements.

Well, it's exactly as you read it except for the fact that they must submit a subsequent COA agreement or approval in which the board has to approve

for the design.

So all the other board people will say, well, maybe we want orange bricks after all.

But to Ms.

And Mr. Warner suggested that we specifically include that in the motion.

Right.

My only real reason I'm just hesitating in my brain is to make sure

One of the goals was to be very specific about the color palette, what it is.

The blue stone and the what?

Yeah.

I use the word trim.

I don't know if that's architecturally appropriate.

And if I heard correctly, I did not hear a time frame on the color palette.

And I'm fine with that.

All right, well.

All right.

I will call a roll call vote.

Mr. Zehmer.

Aye.

Ms.

Lewis.

Aye.

Mr. Lehendro.

Aye.

And Mr. Bailey.

Aye.

And I vote aye as well.

Passes.

Thank you.

It does feel like this is probably the first start to finish project that I've been involved in as the staff.

I've also been involved in the whole, as most of you know, the court's discussion for almost two decades in my other position.

And so getting the city and county to come together and work on this is a culmination of a lot of things.

But I particularly like that, I think it was three, four years ago when

and I cannot remember his name.

The gentleman from the county came in, we talked about ideas for this and so it was sort of, it still seemed like years off.

It is neat to bring something to fruition and I thank you all.

We're not done yet, I know, believe me, I know, I know, we've got ways to go.

Next thing up is the fountains, but I just wanted to say, I apologize, I've had a rather

difficult past four weeks.

It's sort of like that country western joke, if you play the song backwards, a girl friend comes home, his truck doesn't wreck, and his dog doesn't die.

My wife came home from a trip, brought COVID.

It knocked me on my

back and I've been in a fog ever since and our dog did die and it was heartbreaking and that's all right he was 16 he was ready to go but it was and it's just been a you know and as some of you know Robert will be leaving us to wrap up grad school

and his goal is to be in Chicago next year.

I'll say some things at the end, more specifically to that, but it's been a, he came over to my house last week and he's like, I really haven't known how to, because I know you've been having a rough time.

So, but I, yeah, so.

I just apologize again because I said the COVID brain has been really an odd sensation and I hope I'm coherent.

And if I'm not, Robert, just take over and turn my microphone off.

So the next one, you know, more fun with local government.

This is a request from the city of Charlottesville to install metal grates at the three small fountains located on the downtown mall.

And this is one of those interesting stories where I didn't know that there were three fountains.

I knew there was the big one.

I think I knew the one at the nook.

And I didn't know where the other two even were because the way the mall has sort of evolved.

But these are the three fountains.

Small fountains that are stone on top of a stone pedestal.

I don't know if they've been on for some time.

And the situation we have is that because of issues related to pedestrian safety, ADA accessibility concerns, a decision was made to install grates.

at these three fountains.

So this does not include the large fountain at Central Place.

I think discussions will come up later about that.

The request came in to install metal grading to be installed on a metal bracket that would be bolted to the inside of the fountain pool.

My suggestion was that we consider something that is where the grate is set in and it would be two pieces.

The grate is set in and can be lifted and removed.

That it's not permanently anchored into the stone.

There's no boring drilling, things like that.

That's a possibility.

Just to explain that drawing that you see there, actually just kind of roughly sketched off of the Halpern drawings.

There's actually that lower set of

I think there's something actually on the top of the blocks.

But either way, that's what the general construction of these are.

So, Robert, scroll down a little bit.

And so you can see there just my suggestion to Parks and Rec.

Obviously, we have to determine that it could be done, but the idea being that a flange is on the edge of the metal and then it sets down in.

We're not, again, making holes in the mall.

I had also said to all of you,

If you had another idea, I try to do a little bit of research.

It's actually very difficult to Google water fountains.

So I don't know.

The only other idea I came up with is maybe we fill them with gravel.

That's probably not practical or realistic.

So that's what we have.

This is a must-do situation, at least as far as the decision from the city goes, that something must be done.

And so I'm presenting it to you as

If there's concerns about it, that at least we move forward with something temporarily.

And we'll also, we can discuss it tonight.

There's a lot going on at the mall.

You guys know I've been involved, Robert and I have been involved with the

the work on the historic survey.

In fact, we'll be moving forward.

We signed the paperwork the other day, moving forward on the formal National Register nomination of the mall as a designed landscape.

And with that, and

My boss James Freese is here and Rhianna Anthony is here with Parks and Rec.

There really is a lot of attention within City Hall to what's going on in the mall and how do we approach some of the things that need to be addressed.

And there's a lot of them.

and the BR will be involved in those discussions.

So this is one of the things that we have to tackle and there are several other things coming that we want to tackle.

All right.

Good evening, Mr. Chair, members of the board.

My name is James Freese, Director of Neighborhood Development Services.

I appreciate the time this evening.

Thank you for giving me an opportunity to speak.

As Jeff alluded to, and as the city manager announced actually at the first city council meeting of August,

City Manager Rogers announced that he is forming a downtown committee to look at all of the various issues that we're addressing right now with the mall.

So it's my hope that

with the work of this committee, which we are just starting to put together kind of a work program and kind of a process for how that's going to go forward, but that the work of this committee will help us move away from kind of piecemealing our approach to the various issues as they come up.

We bring them before you.

We bring them before

various boards, committees, and decision makers, that we can move more towards a proactive stance and a coordinated stance, something that looks more like a management plan for the future and less like reacting to issues.

And of course, my expectation is that the BAR will be engaged in that process as we move forward.

So we're still very much in the early stages.

We are in fact meeting next week to start to put more meat on the bones of this, but that committee is being put together and I look forward to talking to you guys further about that.

Really sharing this tonight just to give you guys some context as you guys go into this conversation about a specific issue.

As Jeff mentioned, we

This was seen as something that needs to be done, that it can't really be put off any longer.

It's been identified by both our ADA coordinator and the city's risk management office as an issue that needs to be addressed.

But we are aiming to be more comprehensive in the future.

So happy to answer any questions at this time.

Not that I have a whole lot of answers at this point.

We'll start with questions in the public.

I see somebody here has raised their hand.

My name is Linda Abbey.

I just have a question as to whether the grates should be removed, removable because of the leaves and the debris that falls so that they can be cleaned.

Great.

Hey, Rian.

Sure.

I'm Rian Anthony, deputy director of Parks and Rec.

Thank you so much for the opportunity, chair and the board.

I'm actually very happy to be here to discuss the greats and the more.

As James mentioned that it was instructed that we close the fountains, which I saw at the moment, and due to that it's because of an ADA issue and risk management issue.

There has been a few complaints through the NDS department to Parks and Rec over the past

about people tripping and falling with intact fountain.

So that was brought to our attention as well.

We looked at different

methods of meeting the ADA standards.

And there was a lot of ideas within our team, the city team, coming up with different ideas.

And we found that this will be one of the most recommended recommendations with the grades.

And again, it will have to be removed because if you look at the motors, the motors sits either in a beneath the fountain or on the side of the fountain, so we need access to get in.

So it will be removed when we do our maintenance and for leaves and to do cleanup.

So that is a must part of our maintenance plan.

Mr. Chair, just for the sake of members who are online, I'll give them the chance to ask questions as well.

We have one attendee online.

If you'd like to ask a question, please raise your hand.

We had two comments that were submitted by email.

Great.

It might be helpful.

I just want to make sure they had been.

Okay, thank you.

You mentioned maintenance.

At the moment, we haven't started our fountains up because it was shut down just before we start up with our fountain.

So everything is working.

But unfortunately, we do not want to switch it on because it is enclosed by barricades.

So at any given time, we can get the fountains to work.

But it is functional.

And again, it is tested since it's chemicals.

So we have staff that check the chemicals, especially on the big fountain, making sure that they are maintained and cleaned on a daily basis.

On a daily basis.

That's correct.

Yes.

It doesn't seem that time.

I know, because I know previously before COVID, we had a few gentlemen that actually put soap in it.

So almost every day, you'd see bubbles coming out of the big fountain.

And again, it is a public space.

Roughly around about 2,000 to 5,000 people hop by.

And again, with the guidelines of the downtown mall, our staff comes in roughly about 5 o'clock.

You mentioned that this directive was given from some concern from either the ADA coordinator or the risk assessment.

Do you know which provisions of the ADA they were concerned with, specifically what their fear is?

Okay.

I'm not a professional.

That's an ADA specialty.

So I don't know the code off the top of my head.

But basically, if you look at the fountain, the fountain is supposed to be interactive.

for everyone.

But if you are in a wheelchair, there is a threshold.

If you're in a wheelchair, you can't get to the fountain and play.

And that's the ADA standard that says if it's for everybody to have the same access, we need to give everybody the same access.

And that is why when you go with a wheelchair,

The first step is to get approval from the bar.

If we get the approval from that, then I can get specific drawings to get engineered according with the grades, and then the barricades will be removed.

Maybe I should be more specific.

Currently, the three fountains would not be considered accessible because of the barricades that are erected by the restaurant owners, so close that they do not provide accessible passage to and from the fountains.

Good question, so just to articulate back to you, it's about the cafe space, so we, the cafe space, okay.

So I cannot answer that question because that is not, whoops.

That's not within my preview, that belongs to zoning in NDS.

We don't set the standards as parks and rec to say where the cafe space is, but I'll definitely talk to our zoning.

to see about those cafe spaces.

Because I know there's one fountain that is, two fountains that is in a cafe space.

So when you were talking about accessibility, you're really talking about the fountain at Central Place.

No.

Correct?

I'm talking about the three, because all three has, if you don't mind, if you can bring up the drawing, if you don't mind.

Yeah.

Well, at Central Place there is sort of a lip around them, so a person in a wheelchair or even a walker can't get quite up to the edge of the water.

That's correct.

But also at Central Place there are posts with chains to keep anyone from getting close to the fountain.

That's correct.

And the most important, sorry.

If I can turn that into a question since we're in the question phase.

We looked at chains.

We looked at a barricade, like a clear glass barricade, totally round.

talking to NDS and the intent was when the fountains, and again I can only go with what I read and also from staff's recommendation was they wanted the water fountains to be part of play, interactive.

And that's why we thought if we can put the change then it's not interactive with the guests.

So if I could to make sure I'm understanding the concern it's on one hand the drop that creates a tripping hazard or a fall hazard and the secondly the accessibility of getting to the touching the water fountain itself

There are two of the three fountains that have a lower cover over the second part of the basin, and I believe there's one that's more like this section.

I'll just ask it.

So the time frame right now, I'm hoping that the city gets approval from the bar.

Once I get that, I can then start getting RFQ out for someone to design these patterns.

And from there, we'll be able to put the grades on.

Has there been some kind of a recommendation?

or is there a mandate or is there direction for where the grate needs to be placed?

Is the idea that it has to be flush or can it be at a certain point down from the lip?

I guess the reason why I ask that is because there are stairs everywhere.

You can't avoid a stair.

And that looks like, I haven't measured it, I don't know what the actual depth is, but that looks like a, with the lower well filled in, it looks like really what we're dealing with there is one, maybe an eight inch step or a little bit higher.

But for a wheelchair, half inch is the highest it can go.

Yeah, I guess that's my question.

Are we looking at a half inch or flush with the main?

Well, I think the flush.

Just to also comment, great question.

And that is why I worked with the staff, Jeff, and one of his recommendations was option two.

As you can see, there's a small lip.

So long that lip meets ADA requirement, we'll be able to also come up with that certain design.

OK.

Do we have any comments from the board?

Or I'm sorry, any comments from the public, either in person or online?

Do you wish to provide comment again for members of the public here?

And then online, we have one attendee.

If you wish to provide comment, raise your hand.

OK, we did receive this email from Blair Williamson.

Dear BAR, thank you for your service to our community.

I understand the city is planning to modify the three existing stone fountains on the downtown mall with galvanized ADA compatible grading.

Presumably this is to mitigate the risk of a person falling into the fountain.

I have seen the details submitted for this modification and I would ask that you require the city to hire one of many landscape architects who have offices within a stone's throw of any of these fountains to help with the detail and make this modification more intentional and respects Halprin's design aesthetic.

There are other materials that would be more compatible with the fountain, such as Corten steel.

The galvanized steel will certainly look like an afterthought.

I'm sure there's a way for a city to hire one of the local landscape architects without an RFP process, as this is such a small but important project.

I would also venture that the new solution would encourage people to walk across the grate, potentially grabbing a heel and causing a fall.

The original design makes it very clear that you are not supposed to walk through the fountain.

You might also consider changing the perimeter stone coping to a highly textured stone to serve as a warning to keep the blind from falling in, similar to a concept of warning strips in a crosswalk.

I don't pretend to know the best solution to provide ADA compliance, but I know there is a better design decision to be made.

Lastly, the orange plastic jersey barriers have been up for months and I have just as past week seen the notice of BAR application.

We should encourage the city to be thoughtful with their closures as we have missed at least half of the season with these fountains and the mall retailers and restaurants are working hard to bring life back to the mall.

Thanks in advance for your consideration.

Blair Williamson.

Secondly, we have a comment from Gina Wood.

I'm the owner of the Nook restaurant and owner managing partner of the Nook building, which owns the Nook building at 415 East Main Street.

My husband and I would like to register for in-person public hearing concerning the fountains.

On the downtown mall, one of which is directly in front of the Nook.

Just to give you a heads up, I bought the Nook with several partners back in 2006 and bought out my partner several years ago.

During the time I've owned the Nook, the fountain in front of my building has been a source of great distress and frustration.

The fountain water has functioned only half the time and that is a generous estimate.

I have asked repeatedly over the years for it to be repaired or removed.

Neither has happened.

It is a constant source of garbage, natural debris and human waste.

I have to pay my staff every morning to clean out the dry fountain well.

One day, about a week or so ago, I literally picked out 52 cigarette butts along with to-go containers, plastic water bottles, and paper trash.

During the times it has functioned with water, we arrived early in the morning to find naked people taking a bath, urinating and defecating in there as well.

Putting some kind of grate over the fountains will only make it more difficult or impossible for us to clean up the mess.

I look forward to meeting on Tuesday.

Thank you.

Gina Wood.

I think that's comment from the public if we have any comments from the board.

I'm waiting for the design opportunity.

Robert, would you put it on page 89?

I think it needs to be a temporary solution, just like James said.

We need to buy time to consider the whole mall and all the issues and design solutions that are complementary and respectful of how it works designed.

So this is just a temporary solution.

I'm wondering why, instead of Jeff's great solution about a collar, but to avoid that, why we can't do an angled frame all around it and put legs on it at the corners or even other places and that just be sitting in there?

so that we're not even bolting something to the sides and it's completely removable.

That's an option.

We did it at the pavilion.

I think that's not a bad idea.

Thank you.

I agree.

I agree.

I think if we can figure out a way to make it temporary so that it gets incorporated, like Jody said, into a bigger scheme makes sense.

I think in terms of materiality, we would want to be careful to make sure it wasn't something that could potentially rust and stain the stone within the fountain so that when we come up with a better solution, we don't have staining.

I also, I guess the open grate, you know, one person from the public brought up the idea of somebody's heel slipping down in there and whatnot.

So my thought there also just goes to, like, how does that impact the actual fall of the water?

Does that then end up making it splash way further out into the surrounding paving, onto cafe, you know, people sitting there eating?

It's a water feature.

It's a water feature that captured the water per its original design.

Well, it would be easy to take one out and, I mean, just make one and test it.

Well, not surprisingly, I have a lot of thoughts about this.

And I'm a landscape architect, dealing with these kinds of issues all the time, our public realm.

And I am really skeptical about the claim that this is an ADA issue.

For one, and I went back through all of ADA last night, just to even double check myself,

And there's really nothing in ADA that I could point to that this would be in violation of.

There's very clear visual difference between before the drop.

There's textural difference.

If you went to the Virginia Building Code, even that drop is allowable by Virginia Building Code.

I think that if the city were really concerned about accessibility they would not have allowed the barriers related to the restaurants to be placed where they are because they are what are actually constricting the space and creating accessibility challenges.

So I don't buy that this is about accessibility at all.

That's my reading as a professional, not as an ADA professional, as a landscape architect.

But I think the bigger picture here is that there's a fundamental misunderstanding of the fountains.

There were several fountains that were shown in our packet.

I'm not sure who selected those.

But they were water that, sorry Jeff, I'm gonna rail on those images.

But those fountains are fundamentally different.

Those are fountains that are projecting water up into the air that are on a flat surface that are designed to be run through.

These are not that kind of fountain.

This is a fountain that has several parts.

It has a lifted up volume of stone, a really massive piece of stone that's hovering above the ground.

The water doesn't shoot out of it.

It spills out over the edges and then is given a texture by the shape of the stone and it falls.

into a basin.

The basin is actually part of that design feature.

Seeing the water land in the basin is the way that it was designed, and I feel that it's designed to be sat next to for people to even encourage people to put their feet into.

So the idea that we're making it more accessible by essentially chopping the fountain in half is also, I think, just a misreading of the original Halprin design intent.

And this is something we've got to get right.

I know we want it, I'm not saying we don't want it to be safe.

We want it to be safe, but this is a defining character, a character-defining feature of a really important American landscape that happens to be one of our most important in our city.

It's one that the process of which made a pretty bold statement about public space and that public space belongs to everyone and over the years that commitment to the public has been whittled away.

The promise that was made between the city and its citizens with the construction of the downtown mall has been compromised.

And the fact that the fountains have not even been on I feel is a failure of the city to live up to that promise that was made by the construction of the mall.

This doesn't solve any of that, doesn't speak to that really important fundamental foundational design dialogue that the Mall had with its citizens.

I think it's one that's based on fear of litigation.

and doesn't really respond to the design intention.

I just note that in both ADA and the Virginia Building Code, there are notes about historic preservation and there are notes about alterations to facilities that are eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places, which we've just found out is the case.

This is an important Halpern landscape.

We shouldn't change it lightly.

And we need to think about this, as James said earlier, in a holistic way that really protects that relationship between the city and its citizens that is manifest in the downtown mall.

I'll get off my soapbox.

I feel strongly against this as it's been proposed.

I know that everyone has come to it with best intentions to try to protect the public.

If I could just add, and just for clarification, the mall is on the National Register.

It is already listed.

The current effort is in order to get, Robert you said it much better than I did, but it's identified as part of the downtown historic district and we're taking that a step further and more than just the acknowledgement of the Halperin design, but a detailed

Now it's a contributing member to a historic district, you're trying to get individual recognition for the design.

And looking at that picture there, Brecht, your point is well taken.

When you're putting up barriers that close to the fountain, you're requiring people to really

Go scoop by it and take a chance of falling in or stepping into that hole.

You're right.

The problem that the city has created by leasing these spaces for restaurants and then requiring barriers to put up, I'm blaming it on the city.

I don't mean to do that.

On the flip side, the mall for a couple of decades was Tumbleweeds.

And by turning into, I know this doesn't sound great, basically an area of a gigantic, lovely, wonderful food court has attracted a lot of people downtown and revitalized it.

So there's going to always be that tension.

Well, I don't know how wonderful it is when I walk down the mall up and down, I try to find a place to sit.

And I can't find a place to sit because all the chairs are all chained up.

I think I would a little bit dissent in that the mushroom and the square smaller fountains, I can see how a visually impaired person might have a little bit more treachery with them than with the central place one, which I think was

I would say that if a visually impaired person

came down the mall and the fountains were on, they would know the fountain was in front of them because they could hear the sound of water.

And they might even feel the feeling of water on your body, which you do if you get near a fountain, and especially those small ones.

You can see how when it was working, it was splashing.

You could walk by it and you would get wet, and that's pleasant on a warm day.

With regard to Central Place, I completely agree with Brecht.

There is a lip there and it's intended to give access to it.

I'm shocked that I've seen

I feel like I just saw this fountain in use a couple of weeks ago, but I'm now realizing that if there are bollards and chains around it, that it's been a long time.

But I remember when people would put their feet in it on a hot day.

And perhaps if we return the use of these fountains to a public purpose,

You won't have litter.

You won't be tempted to throw or defecate in it.

And maybe people will guard them better, because they're just not empty vessels that are waiting to be bathed in or whatever.

Yeah.

And if they're maintained every day, as you've said, Mr. Anthony.

So thank you for giving us that vision that these would be well taken care of again.

I'm of a divide of mind about the greats that might work on the smaller ones only because I know that the way, and the other condition that's been cited is the cafes and sort of when you go, when you're trying to cross the mall between these two cafes with their divisions set up

You go very close to these fountains and if someone were visually impaired or just rushing, I could see that it would be a little bit more of a hazard.

We don't have enough space opened up between them and maybe zoning, as you said, or whoever manages cafes in the mall can next season give a little bit more space around them and give them a little bit more respect, which they deserve.

Yeah, I also want to commend Breck's comments.

It really articulates the frustrations that I was feeling with the proposal, not feeling like it really was a problem in and of the design.

There were, as we've talked about, newer exterior forces turning it into a problem.

So I was reluctantly trying to figure out the best way around it.

But I think the most important question right now is,

is maybe a deeper thinking into whether this needs to be done.

And then I also wanted to thank both the letters, both the emails that came from the public.

I thought they were both really well written and different ends of the spectrum, but I think really well thought out points of view.

If I could add, so a couple things just for you all to keep in mind.

One, I will say I've talked to not a lot of people but several people about these and I'm alarmed by how many have suggested the city just removed them.

because the cafe spaces are more important.

And I think the fact that I as a city resident for the last 26 years and walked on the mall for that long and work on the mall, didn't realize we're three fountains is, you know, means we're not telling the story very well.

That's again, hopefully what we can achieve with some of this, what we're looking at relative to the Halpern design specifically.

I think it's understood that the mall has been altered.

Maybe death by a thousand cuts just aren't having been paying attention.

But I think on the bright side is that because I've been involved in these discussions internally, I know that attention to the mall and an understanding of the mall is something the city wants to do.

Brian Daley used to refer to it as this is a critical piece of city infrastructure and we need to treat it that way and then I just kind of I've been running with that since he said it and I think I don't think I know I've seen with the folks above me a commitment to that.

and this is a city owned space and that's what I've also had to tell people is that is not your space, the city owns that and leases it and I think that maybe the public doesn't realize that it's their space so I think in the discussions that are we hope planned and will come to fruition

you know an evaluation of that space and I'm not for eliminating the cafe spaces.

I know that there are golden egg laying goose in a lot of ways but I do think that there are opportunities to have discussions about these spaces that have been sort of

like these put in position where we have to do something like that.

So just if I can offer that perspective from what I've been hearing from others, what I know internally, I'm optimistic about them all and I look forward to that larger discussion.

I know you all will be involved in it because I think

I think the BAR is sort of the one group that has its finger on the pulse of all things and hopefully you'll be able to help us when we move forward with this.

So is there a consensus that I really

Considering this has come from the staff, and I know Chuck put some time into it, I don't feel like a deferral, a vote to deny, rather, is appropriate.

Rather simply defer this?

Well, we can't defer it.

I don't know how well I expressed it, but I think if you all defer it, and you can.

Some very, very clear direction needs to be sent in what you're thinking.

It cannot just be, go try again.

If there's something specific you want to see.

I mean, we review what's put before us.

I understand.

And the other option is that you all can vote to deny it.

It appeals to counsel.

Now, in some ways, that's not bad.

I mean, that's how the process works.

If you all feel strong, and it does put that decision in front of counsel.

Just puts me in a weird position of having to say to defend the VAR's position.

But I think maybe if that were

if that were understood that you all are... So I think that, I don't know, I would just like to ask staff, and I think I'll be very candid, I'm really enthused at the working relationship that I'm seeing that did not used to exist within city hall about the mall.

and I want to grab hold of that and not let go.

So anything I could do to sort of keep that some momentum behind that and that was my recommendation for a grate that doesn't make a hole in the wall.

Well, thank you.

Thanks for saying that.

And I agree.

And so for Ryan and James, please don't take my lack of enthusiasm for this particular solution to mean more than what it is.

We really need to be good partners for this space and for all of the downtown mall gives to our city.

So we do need to forge a better relationship.

There are some big long term

We look forward to having that.

We want to be partners in that and to that extent I would urge

Most definitely, totally understand.

Needle, that there was a strong preference, I think, in the staff report that these be temporary and that they only may be reevaluated for a year.

I would support installing the grades, as Mr. Leandro suggested, on the lower tier of the two smaller fountains.

for a period of no longer than a year only because of the access when people cut through, and I'd still like to see them be opened, but I can see that design solution working there.

It also may address, and it's outside of our design guidelines, but it also may address

with trash and, you know, I'm not saying it would resolve everything, but it may, with them sort of, these fountains being abused, for lack of a better word.

Yeah, okay, good, thank you.

You're welcome to make that motion.

I will not support it.

I will note that

We're living with a lot of temporary solutions that are already on the mall that were supposed to be temporary and that's part of, well I wouldn't support it anyway but I'm hesitant to I guess I was hoping that moving forward with these grates would at least remove the orange barriers that surround these two smaller

I would suggest or I would prefer, I would really like to hear more about the reason why these are necessary.

And I don't think that's an unusual question to ask.

I take fault for that.

I did have a conversation with our ADA coordinator.

I also know the city's risk manager had looked at this and the question was, should they be here to speak?

And I said that in my discussions, my understanding, the decision by the city to do this has been made and that it's, you know, that explaining

ADA requirements, and we all know that it's the complications of that.

So I said that I just felt like that wasn't where we needed to be discussing this.

A decision was made.

City Manager's Office wants this done, and based on the recommendations of those two staff.

Well, if they want it to be done then they should just do it.

We should deny it and then it goes to the City Council and they can do it.

I agree that our considerations are the historic bones of them all.

Are they going to be violated if we go along in this process?

I can interrupt two things.

One, for a denial, I do want to state why these, you know, reference what in the guidelines is doing that, although I realize it's an unusual appeal situation.

Second would be

Assuming this does get appealed to city council, would the recommendation of the consideration of a temporary rating versus permanent?

I believe I just tried that.

It's in the guidelines, pertinent design review guidelines for public design and improvements, section B, plazas, parks, and open spaces, item one.

Can I add another friendly amendment that the proposed design is inconsistent with the original Halprin design intent for the fountains because they obscure the visual and sound of the basin.

They could create additional splash that hasn't been considered.

Yeah.

All right.

So may I clarify, when we vote aye, we mean we're denying it.

That is correct.

Okay, thank you.

Mr. Timmerman.

Aye.

Mr. Zehmer.

Aye.

Ms.

Lewis.

Aye.

I vote aye.

Aye.

Mr. Alejandro.

The motion passes.

Thank you.

Thank you guys.

Thank you.

Your Honor, we'll talk tomorrow.

We'll get it all squared away.

Thank you all, appreciate your patience on that.

How are we doing?

All right, we're up to 800 East Market Street?

Yes.

I think we can keep going.

This is a, as I mentioned in the preliminary meeting, it's a COA request, although the applicant, the city of Charlottesville is not asking for an action tonight from the BAR, but consideration of some alternatives and ideas that I'll let them present.

This is the Key Recreation Center.

The Herman Key Recreation Center formerly had been the National Guard Armory, constructed in 1937 and in the 1970s it was relocated down Avon Street and in fact the original Armory

was built where the police station is currently and this building was constructed to replace it.

It has been converted or was converted to a recreation center.

by the city.

And following his death in 2004, it was renamed for Herman Key Jr.

And I'm going to let Miss Lewis speak to the importance of that name in a second.

And so what it has on it now, the existing roof is slate.

We're fairly confident it's local, probably Buckingham slate.

It appears to be original to the building.

The discussion is about replacing that.

And also there's two flat roofs in the front and the rear that just replacing the membrane, but they're not of any issue.

So that's what the applicant will be talking about.

And Ms.

Well I knew him from serving on the Planning Commission and he actually served for 10 years and he was a disability advocate during that time but he had, the reason why the rec center was named after him is that he was the ringleader of the wheelchair basketball teams and in fact people that were not disabled would play in the wheelchair basketball teams because they were such

A great camaraderie among the teams and a great kind of competition.

People would put their butts in a wheelchair who didn't have to be in a wheelchair like Herman did.

He grew up in Flavana.

The key family in Flavana is really well known.

He played football in high school.

I don't know exactly what caused him to not be able to walk again, but he

spent his life in a wheelchair and he was just a really pleasant guy and kind of beloved among the community.

I think the piece that we could both add to that is that we're a little surprised that that explanation wasn't on the city's webpage.

It would be great if I emailed you if a plaque could be created and put on the outside of the building celebrating him.

I wrote to Mr. Warner earlier today that I'm the only one in the room who remembers Herman, which is kind of mind blowing for me because he was on the Planning Commission for a long time and was a public figure.

He worked for, oh gosh, anyway.

a disability advocacy group and I'm forgetting what the name of it is but it was a local group and that's what he did professionally.

But we want to remember people like him in Charlottesville.

It isn't named after a national figure.

This is someone who lived and breathed and made a difference certainly in our public decisions because he called us out when we were about to make bad decisions about things like ADA or about accessibility of anyone who has a disability.

So he just championed that.

was relentless in reminding us of it at moments when we as public officials were going to do really stupid things and not thinking about how a lot of other people may be impacted by that.

So maybe a way of recognizing him would be great.

Thank you, board.

Cheri, that was interesting.

I had not heard that before, so thank you.

Staff, thank you.

I'm here to talk about the key ref roof replacement.

It's not an exciting project.

It may not even require

D.A.R.

approval, but it might.

We're looking at different options.

It's a strange market out there.

It's a strange market for slate in this community.

We're working with our architect, Grimmond Parker, whose roof assessment in 2018 identified that this roof is going to need some serious more than maintenance.

It's either going to need to be replaced or

We just wanted to bring the conversation to folks now.

to talk about materials and to talk about what may or may not work.

I've brought our architect Jim with us and he's going to speak more articulately than I can about that.

He understands the local market for slate and he understands, of course, roof design.

So with that, I'd just like to start a conversation about what

could be or what can't be and just let the conversation evolve from there and kind of give us some guidance hopefully.

Thank you, Scott.

I know a lot of you.

A few of you may not know me.

I practiced here in the city for a long time.

In fact, one of my early projects was to do a rendering for the first cafe on the downtown mall.

and I still have the rendering.

No, we didn't.

But I can tell you that my roommate, Charlie Kramer, and I got up in the middle of the night and we drove to this end of the mall.

I wanted to be able to say I was the last person to drive a car down Main Street and I can't remember whether it was 2 a.m.

or 3 a.m.

but it was early in the morning and we explained to the workmen what we wanted to do and they were on board so we drove through and put barrier behind my piece of junk car and I drove the old beater all the way to the other end of, there of course was no hotel, there was a field at that end of the mall

Mr. Boyd was the last person to drive a car down Main Street.

But we're here to talk about the roof on the Key Rec Center.

I've had a practice here for many years, practice at Hayward Boyd, and about ten years ago I merged my practice into Grimm and Parker.

If you were to ask people what Grimm and Parker does, roofing is not the first thing that people would talk about.

They would talk about libraries or schools, police stations, campus buildings, which is most of their work.

We do have one group that does nothing but roof replacements.

We do a lot of this for the University of Virginia, the city, the county, community college system, and we've dealt with a lot of slate in the last seven or eight years.

Mem Jim, Thornton Hall, McKim.

What's happening at the Key Rec Center is no different than what happened to all those buildings at UVA.

Usually slate in the 1930s was put on with probably galvanized nails but certainly steel nails and over time they rust out.

Slate itself is fine and sometimes you'll see a piece and it's just kind of like

turned halfway and that's where a nail is rusted through.

Sometimes when both nails give out, that piece of slate will come crashing down.

And in the case of the Key Rec Center where we have pedestrians on both sides, particularly the side there approaching City Hall Annex, you have people parking right where the slate falls down.

And it's a problem.

So I know there have been renovations to the building, one in the late 70s that when it was converted to a rec center.

I don't believe any work was done on the roof at that time.

Then later there was a window replacement.

and then after that we did a replacement repair with the city and then subsequently did another repair project.

So you certainly can take pieces out and lift it up and put another piece of slate in and fasten it.

The problem is when people walk on the slate they break more slate.

So this becomes a battle that you know

After a while, the recommendation is, hey, this looks like a big problem.

We think you need to take all the slate off and put new slate on.

And that's where we are.

We think it's time that this building had a complete removal and the slate replaced.

There may be

We don't know exactly what's going on with the substrate.

This particular substrate is a wood-wool slab tectum, I believe.

I don't know if it's the type of the metal edges or not.

But when the light is just right, you can see a little bit of sagging in there.

So we're concerned about that.

At MemGem, when we took that roof off, we found rotten places.

So we actually put a nailable insulation underneath to help span that.

And we may want to do something like that here.

but that's not the problem that we're facing.

The problem is you can't necessarily get Slate.

Now the quarry, Buckingham Slate has gone through several owner changes in the last 15 to 20 years.

30 years ago you could reliably get Slate, orders came on time and there was no question of supply.

In its current ownership, you might get Slate, you might not get Slate because they're only producing Slate in very small quantities.

UVA's been fortunate to get Slate in the last year, but they're not filling all the orders.

So I did call the quarry and I got something less than, oh yeah, we can do that type answer.

So we're concerned about that.

So if it needs repairing,

and we aren't sure we can get Slate, the question that the city wants to pose to you is would it be appropriate, would it be reasonable to discuss some other roofing material such as some type of standing seam metal or

Do you feel that this is so important that we find a way to get the slate and we do a removal and replacement?

When the slate comes off, even when workmen are trying to be very careful,

they do break slick.

And even if you're trying to salvage it, I don't know the exact percentage, but probably more than half, but probably less than three-fourths is what you could expect to salvage.

So there's 8,000 square feet involved here.

Traditionally that's not a big order, but right now it's a big order.

So not as bad as EPDM, there's a 12 month wait on that right now.

That's just what we're dealing with.

So we're here to provide you with information.

Great.

I'd be astounded if we have any questions from the public.

Are there any questions from the public?

For members of the public who are here in person, it doesn't look like we have any questions, and then we don't have any attendees online anymore.

Thank you.

We outlasted them again.

It's very reliable.

We sometimes just get photographs, and sometimes we actually have the drone use photometry to give us actual measure drawings on the roof.

So you can use a drone to tell the condition of the nails and whether or not this is a

It can be due to weather.

We did the last repair and we did field observations during that period so we got a good look at the nails then.

It seems to be consistently steel nails and they're rusting in two so they don't all fail at the same time.

So I was just curious, and I was the project manager for the M-GEM roof replacement, so I enjoyed working with y'all.

Thank you.

Okay.

But I also spoke with two different roofing companies to see if...

some of them have products stored away somewhere that they don't tell everyone.

And I think there's a Vermont slate company that actually owns a quarry in Arvonia, so you might try talking to them too.

Just ideas.

And what's wrong with the ridge cap or the ridge detail that it needs to be changed?

Well, there are two ways, as you know, to cap groups.

One's with the metal cap and the other is one piece of slate overlapping the other.

And I can't recall whether the Key Rec Center has the metal cap or whether it's overlapping.

But either way, if it's

Lewis, or not there, that's a problem.

The only image I've seen is this of the entire roof.

Typically Mike Thomas would be here in my place.

He is our roofing specialist, but Mike has COVID, so he's not out tonight.

Yeah.

That was mentioned as a problem, the Ridge and also the, um,

the valley flashing and apparently not enough distance in between the roof and the side of material, covering material.

The timeline you all are discussing is about a couple of years, though, right?

You're going to have some thoughts on our part.

but then in another year you'll have the budget assigned.

Next year, okay.

So one could hope that the supply issues might go away in that time period.

So going back around on availability, we all love Buckingham Slate.

You mentioned Vermont Slate.

The products that come from Vermont we find to be more brittle and I wouldn't recommend that the city go down that avenue.

We generally don't recommend the faux slates.

We experienced them cupping and fading.

I think for maybe if this were a residence and it was a smaller installation, that might be fine.

But I don't think that's a good solution for this.

I guess you could always put composition shingles on it, but that somehow feels degrading.

I think a pre-painted metal with a standing seam might be an appropriate roof, but that might not be acceptable to the BAR.

I don't think that

Of course, turn-coated steel's not available anymore, so that's not an option, a traditional fuel painted roof.

We could always get the freedom gray, but I'm afraid that would be budget challenged.

So that's a copper with a turn coating on it.

Well, we're kind of rolling into comments, and I'll invite, if any public out there wants to comment, just hold your hand up.

Just for some context, our guidelines for roof

Repair like this, a roof replacement is found in chapter 3, G, number 7, which is pretty clear.

It says when replacing a roof, match original materials as closely as possible.

and it specifically calls out an example of, well in this case, replacing a standing seam metal roof with asphalt shingles but saying avoiding that because that dramatically alters the building's appearance.

It does suggest that artificial slate is an acceptable substitute when replacement is needed and we have approved that.

In some cases it has been largely residential.

To my mind, it's only been residential projects where that's been approved.

So you talk about salvaging Slate.

Well, you're involved with those projects.

What is the university?

I mean, I know we've been fanatical in all of our jobs at UVA about salvaging all we can.

And we don't get it all.

I know that.

I'm thinking 60% to 70% would be good.

Sure.

And I just kind of, I'm curious, because one of the solutions that's proposed is to salvage slate, but then use faux slate to supplement, and I just think that sounds odd.

That was me, just throwing out the permutation.

Although the Buckingham products tend to not fade as much as others, there is some discernible difference.

You either have to blend them fairly well or separate them, because you can, most people would notice that.

Which you can see in that photograph, I think, on the page.

They're going to get new roofs anytime soon?

I'll just start.

I'm biased towards it and not offended by EcoStar or artificial slate.

I have it on my home.

I installed it 17 years ago.

I would agree that

that it does slightly, I'm not sure I would use cup, but I don't think that it retains its shape perfectly.

But you'd have to look really close to see that.

And I have a one story home.

And most of the homes that it's used on are two stories because the further it is away, the less you're able to detect it.

But most people that see my home and I don't have a huge setback

from the street or anything really do think it's late to this day.

And they really haven't discolored.

And I've had no problems with any of it sliding, moving, rearranging, anything like that.

So I would note, I don't really love the idea of mixing and matching doing one side with

EcoStar artificial and one with the other.

But I would note that if you look at the orientation of the rec center, one is definitely a southern exposure.

that must get a whole lot more, you know, I would imagine it's, I mean, we don't have any data in front of us about what the shape of this roof is in.

You said you sent a drone up, we've got one picture, it was four years ago.

So we really don't have any kind of forensic data about how many tiles are missing, slipped, you know, what the condition is.

That's why we're all a little bit like,

We know it's necessary.

We just don't know how to quantify what the problem is.

And certainly if it were a small repair problem, I think a lot of this board would, according to our guidelines, use the same material.

But if it's a really vast issue,

We just don't have information, I feel like, in front of us to make a good decision, but I would say that I'm not against EcoStar.

This is quite a tall building.

I doubt anybody.

I don't know where in the city you could see it, actually, except maybe if you were up on the SNL building.

But honestly, there are not even any current structures that look down on it.

I don't think you can see it from any side.

No, you can see it from the ground.

It's a fairly steep slope.

Anyway, well, I would be in favor of it if we knew that it was kind of, you know, I'm reluctant to give up the slate, but 8,000 square feet is just a maintenance monster, you know, for this city.

And I'd frankly rather use our tax dollars elsewhere.

You know, if Slate is

is difficult to get.

We know it's expensive to get.

And is that the best use of our tax dollars right now at a time when, you know, we could be opening up fountains on the downtown mall and putting money to schools and, you know, we have a big rearrangement of the local school system.

There are just a lot of projects and I'm sure I'm singing to the choir right here.

Too, yeah, too.

Yeah, too artificial.

I don't know.

I know that the price of regular slate has doubled in the last year.

and if you can get it.

I haven't asked.

Well, I might put it to the board this way.

So I think our guidelines are pretty clear.

Slate or stick with it or if the synthetic slate might be appropriate if

if we understand the details correctly in the product.

Thank you.

Is it actively leaking?

It's a shame Rihanna left it.

I don't know that it has active leaks.

Probably not, but we've got to think a little bit about where the dew point is with that tectum roof, tectum deck.

And before changing the assembly, I think we need to do a little calculation on that.

Because I don't want to trap moisture in the tectum.

What did you do at Men's Gym?

Did you put a... It wasn't APDM.

It was probably like a frog scanner.

And then had nailable... Ice and water shield.

Deck.

Yeah.

We also don't know what we have above the deck of whether we have something recent to nail into.

It would be interesting to know the price difference too.

Keeping the slate, there's a sustainable side of that.

Keeping 50% of that roof, that's a good thing.

And so I'd be interested in understanding what the price difference is between half the roof being a real slate versus the whole roof being the artificial.

and then a better understanding I guess of where the artificial is in its lifespan these days.

Can you count on 50 years?

Can you count on 70 years?

Is that what you need?

I think so.

I think this is a preliminary discussion, so no action will be taken.

Thank you for just being very forthright, because that really tells us a lot, gives us great direction as to where we need to go from here.

Do we need a five minute bio break?

The old female.

I took my break.

OK.

It's going to raise the king.

We're going to figure that out.

Yes.

And I honestly, I hope this is an easy one under the circumstances.

You jinxed it.

Let's see.

So this is a demolition request for 210 West Market Street.

This is the, currently at the site is a former gas station built in 1935, was renovated sometime in the mid 1960s.

The angled corner there was added and it originally had, it was sheathed in metal panels, gas station panels, so what you see now is just kind of the

Parging that was underneath over the cinder blocks.

It is a contributing structure.

However, all structures in the downtown ADC district were designated as contributing and the distinction is that

being a contributing structure, then it requires the BAR review for any demolition.

Of course, anything that's constructed on the site is reviewed by the BAR, but only contributing structures is the demolition reviewed.

As I noted, that west wing there, which you see on the left of the photo, was constructed, I'm sorry, the west wing, which is on the right, to the right, that's the sort of gas station there.

You can see some of the, at least one of the bays is still there.

Built in around 1935 at the best I could determine from, actually from the city directory.

As early as 1886 and until the early 1930s, there was a series of small dwellings here and really an interesting group of individuals.

Some of the households were a couple of people at times.

up to eight, nine, ten people living in a house.

This was a black area and the, for instance, the Martins, Henderson and Ida Martin lived there from looks like late 1800s all the way up until after 1930.

So that's what was there before.

The, you know, noted in here, the 36th city directory lists this as a service station owned by Thomas Miller.

By 1951, it was Sam's Golf Service Station.

And by the 1970s, if not prior, the structure was occupied by Brown's Lock and Safe and they continued to

to operate out of there.

In reviewing the guidelines for demolitions, I could just very quickly go through those.

One of the questions is the age of the structure of the property.

As I noted, the west portion of the building was constructed around 1935.

The East Wing, constructed around 1965.

Whether or not it has been designated on the National Register.

It is listed on the National Register inventory.

This is one of the really old surveys.

from the city, I think late 70s, early 80s.

And so I'm not always clear, something might be on the inventory, but it's not clear if it was identified as contributing.

But my assumption is that it is, but I'm not so sure.

Whether to what extent the building structure is associated with a historic person, architect, master craftsman, historic event, no known associations.

Whether the building or structure or any features represent an infrequent or first or last remaining example within the city, they're not applicable.

There's no such features or materials with this building.

Whether the building or structure is such of such old or distinctive design, texture, material, etc.

that could not be reproduced,

There's nothing about the building that is remarkable in the sense of craftsmanship or materials that could be easily duplicated.

A cinder block building in Charlottesville is not unusual.

And number six, to the degree to which distinguishing characteristics, qualities, features, and materials will remain, the building will be removed in its entirety.

and one of the questions is whether and what extent the contributing structure is linked historically or aesthetically to other buildings or structures within the design control district or is it one of a group of properties with is there a concentration of buildings here and

As I said, the 1935 gas station corresponds to really kind of an interesting boom in automobile dealerships and gas stations throughout the city.

Actually, I think I was talking to Robert about it was kind of surprising the number of considering we didn't have that many cars, it seemed like gas stations were going in all over town.

I don't know.

It's a history.

I probably need to sit down with Richard Guy Wilson and explore.

But we had a lot of these constructed between 1920, 1950s.

However, unlike West Main Street and Preston Avenue, this building here is not associated with a cluster of similar buildings.

and I note on the staff report there's the remaining auto-related buildings from this period.

We do have several in the city.

I think the overall condition of the building and structure, that's not in question.

The demolition is requested in order to facilitate redevelopment of the site.

And now I noted earlier, I don't know what the plan is for this, and the building may well remain in use until that time.

But the request is for just the demolition, it's not a function of safety of the building.

And then whether and to what extent the applicant proposed means, methods, plans for removing, removing, et cetera, et cetera.

The building, again, its proposal is to raise the entire structure so no elements, features, or materials will be retained.

The one thing I did note in the staff report, and right there, Robert, that's the south wall.

It was a little unusual to see that local stone as the foundation wall.

It doesn't correspond to a previous building on the site, but my gut tells me it was probably on the site.

So I think, you know, simply as a possibly a recommendation for whatever gets built there.

We do have that example down there on Preston and up Marcus Street.

There's some low walls that use a similar stone.

Possibly that's a recommendation to be incorporated into whatever new goes there.

And I had a couple of recommendations in

This is the recommended motion.

Yeah, so in the approval when you all reviewed 218 West Market, that demolition, there were some conditions that you applied.

I've sort of offered something similar in two options here.

One, you know, the staff approval, well, the BAR, in the previous one, the condition of approval was that the applicant, as always, provide a BAR documentation of the existing building.

And I note here, in addition to the photos provided, documentation include dimension floor plans and elevations.

And we have some very good examples of a simple documentation that's been done that we've used.

and you've also, for 218 West Market, you required that the demolition was contingent upon an approved building permit for the construction of the new building.

So it was anchoring sort of the, I think the concern was just don't want an empty lot, don't want to drop a building and have it

This site is somewhat different.

This is a small building, and again, I don't know the circumstances with the businesses that is using it, but I thought maybe another way to do it is that if it was to be demolished without something new approved there,

that at least the treatment of the site would come to the BAR for approval, so just not a gravel lot.

or a place where they stockpile filter.

So I suggest that the BR consider ether now as either a condition or a recommendation that the redevelopment of the site incorporate the stone elements that reflect the stone foundation wall at the south elevation.

So those are my suggestions.

I'll take that as a compliment.

Thanks, everyone.

I'll be brief.

The application, Jeff reviewed the points that we made in the application that the building

seems to meet all of the acceptable criteria for demolition.

It is within an historic district in and of itself.

The structure doesn't appear to have any historical significance or architectural significance.

It's been changed quite a bit over time.

I'd like to, and I'm happy to talk further about that, but I think that the guidelines for considered demolition, we meet all of the acceptable guidelines for that.

I would like to talk a bit about why we are asking for this now, what the immediate plans are for the property, because I'm sure that's a big question right now.

The applicant for the demolition permit is Heirloom Development.

Heirloom is the developer that owns the adjacent site at 218 West Market with the artful lodger on it and is looking at the possibility of including this property as part of a development on 218.

The current owner

signed the application, there is an agreement to move forward with sale of the property under a number of conditions.

One of them is if the building can be demolished so that it could be developed for greater density, more retail on the site, as is what the city of Charlottesville says it wants in its downtown core.

This was a similar situation at 218 West Market with the Artful Lodger.

Heirloom Development did not own it at the time, but it was one of the conditions for moving forward with the sale of the property.

So in this instance, this is just one of those moves.

I would offer that

we would be more than willing to make a condition for the demolition the same as was done at 218, which is an approved building permit must be in hand before the building could be demolished.

We don't

We don't have any intention of taking this down if a sale is made.

I don't know that the current owner has any intentions for the building, but certainly if this is the case, we wouldn't take the building down until we were ready to move forward with a construction project.

I would say it's probably served the city pretty well in the instance of that condition, in the instance of 218 West Market.

Nobody has any intention of taking that down at this point.

in the throes of trying to figure out the design.

And so it's not as though that developer has gone away.

With COVID and with costs ever increasing for construction, we're really trying to wrap our head around what the project would be at 218 West Market.

And this property being available is something we would like to consider as part of that development.

I don't need to remind you, but for the public, it's important to understand that anything that gets built here would have to be approved by the BAR.

We don't have anything to propose at this time, but the guarantees in all of this are that the BAR would have to approve anything that gets built on this site and or the adjacent site.

Before anything gets torn down, we would need an approved site plan and building permit.

That's the overview of the project.

I would like to ask, if possible, that if approval is given, that it be given for the longest timeframe possible, which I believe is 18 months.

This is a long-term project.

As you know, we had to return for approval to demolish

in the future, the Artful Lodger project, because this is taking time to consider, but also because the process with the city, in order for the certificate of appropriateness for the demolition of the Artful Lodger to be effective, we needed an approved preliminary site plan.

And one was submitted to the city

was really a placeholder.

And the length of time for processing by the city these days is extremely protracted and long.

And so if we could get the 18 months, whatever the maximum allowable is, it would be appreciated.

We'll just not have to return to you quite so quickly.

I think that's all that I have to say.

Great.

Thank you, Jeff.

My name again is Linda Abbey and I know you Jeff.

I have questions about Market Street and the effect that these buildings both at 218 Market and this one would have on Market Street because it's so narrow and these buildings would rise up nine stories and I think that the sidewalks are narrow, the streets narrow, and the noise would be incredible when the emergency vehicles go through or the boom

cars go through.

I'm really worried about the light and the shadow.

I'm talking about the sunlight and the shadow in all the area around these buildings.

These buildings are going to be massive and they're also the gateway from the west to the mall.

And we've got already a massive building at the code building and a massive building at the Omni and this is going to be a third massive building and it won't go away for at least 50 years.

and I'm also worried about the effect of apartment units.

There's 136 proposed for Market Street, the arfelager site with 56 parking places.

I'm worried about the traffic and the parking.

And the affordable housing issue, which everybody talks about.

is non-existent here.

Eight units in 136 doesn't work.

The intersection at the corner of Market Street, High Street and Old Preston Avenue is going to be horrendous.

and the entrance from the mall to the west, as I said before, is going to be blocked by three huge buildings.

I think that before you approve the demolition that a good, a really good solution for these problems needs to be presented and otherwise I think that it's going to be a huge mistake for the city to build it.

That's all.

Thank you for those comments.

Any other comments from the public or questions from the public?

Okay, questions from the board.

Comments from the public.

Comments from the board.

I'll just respond a little bit in my comment to some of the concerns raised that when the board previously, and Jeff mentioned this too, when the board previously reviewed the demolition request for the Artful Lodger project, it was left to be contingent on approval of the building design.

I just comment that I think this application does satisfy all of the criteria for demolition.

I wouldn't say that I don't have a twinge of regret seeing another little blast in the past building like the Watchmakers building on Water Street gone from the landscape.

as representative of another era of downtown.

Well, I would just note that because one of our criteria when considering demolition requests, and I had it circled here, chapter 7B, demolition of historic structures, number two is the public necessity of the proposed demolition.

And I do believe that this meets the criteria

but because of this specific notation and also Mr. Dreyfus's suggestion, I do think that it is in the city's interest and our interest to include that contingency for an approved building permit just as we did for the Artful Lodger.

Having considered the standards set forth within the city code, including the ADC district design guidelines, I move to find that the proposed demolition of 210 West Market Street satisfies the BAR's criterion guidelines and is compatible with this property and other properties in the downtown ADC district, and that the BAR approves the application as submitted with the express condition that the demolition permit not be issued without a building permit being

Condition one.

Go up about eight lines.

Oh, got it.

OK.

And it's not loading, I know.

I think I've got it.

Hold on.

For some reason, it's just not loading.

Somebody's hogging up the data in this room.

OK, I'll borrow.

Jody's streaming a movie over here.

Seemers.

James is watching himself dance.

Got more vacant.

and the documentation of the existing building.

In addition to the photos provided, we'd like to see dimension floor plans and elevations if they exist, similar to documentation provided for 1532 Virginia Avenue, January 2019.

All right, I'll call the vote.

Mr. Timmerman?

Aye.

Ms.

Lewis?

Aye.

Mr. Leandro?

Aye.

Mr. Bailey?

Aye.

And I'll vote aye as well.

Motion passes.