Board of Architectural Review Meeting   11/15/2022

So I just said to them, if it's, and I said, my first guess would be yes, somebody added that, if that didn't happen, I said, but we would need something more than, Candice said she had a photograph, and then she showed me this one.

And the building's 50 years old.

And then I said, do you want to add the porch?

Fine.

I said, I think you've got it.

But I said, all this stuff

I've been wondering forever why the bricks shot and it's because somebody sandblasted.

I went through it and I was shocked how dry it was.

It was pretty dry then.

I thought the facility was going to stink.

So the questions here will be, of these things,

I did a house that, this house over on Hartman's Mill Road, I mean literally it's like, cause we did, we looked at the, oh you can't get down there.

because they had to knock the cottage down.

But you could see it in the census between 1880 and 1930.

This guy's family is just growing exponentially.

And they would just add a room, add a room, add a room, add a room.

And so it's like trying to figure out what went first, second, or third.

And at one point, they just built a roof that merged the other buildings.

And when I looked at the survey, I knew there was a senator there.

No, I'm sure that James and I were out there.

Did you have to go on a long delayed trip?

It was fantastic.

It was a pretty exciting adventure.

Have you worked?

I work at Green Country.

Did you find plates?

So, one of the views we need to get is that we have a challenge.

We've got one more person to make sure of that.

That was my messed up day.

Can I just do some housekeeping, cleaning.

We have folks who talked about the trees, if at all possible.

If you can knock it out in the key meeting, I'd like to do that.

David is, I need to.

So move it when you're chewing.

Thank you, Carl.

This is a criminal.

And so if you, so if we can do that once we get through, you know, they said maybe 10 minutes to, so have them.

That's one thing off our plate.

Anything on the agenda that you guys had any

I don't know if I got you everything.

No, no because I've been I've been dying to figure that house out and it still baffles me.

So they've been working with engineering on that whole thing.

Eric Morse has been involved.

So I'm very comfortable with that.

How are you?

Sorry, Coach.

Hey Steve, do you have, and is it Steve or Steven?

See, that's good.

Architects get a little touchy when you change it around, you know.

Forrester, a bunch of architects.

Man, that was like the hardest thing.

In the A school, I'd say, hey, Dan, it's Daniel.

I'm like, oh, man, OK, well, there you go.

Well, do you like if I call you?

I said, hey, I just get upset if you call me late for dinner.

All right, so the other

looking at myself.

Any questions on any of the other

No, in fact, that would have been, except for the demo, I would have, you know, the trees thing's a little, I don't know, we'll talk trees.

So I'm glad they took that step, but normally, if it hadn't been, you hadn't been required to review that,

I would have treated it as a site plan, so I would have just signed off and don't need to bother with that.

I was talking to Roger earlier, so we have the two preliminary discussions and really what I want to get out of the one for the hotel is what kind of details, I know what they want to do,

stuff do you all want to see so that they can have it, make it available.

They want to rebuild that portico.

Hartman's Mill House.

It's really just some, it's on that back, I don't know, I think like I said, everything except for that western addition and the decks, you know, at least dates between that 1870 and 1920.

But it's, yeah, I can't figure that house out.

Even after, you know, all that.

Well hell, we couldn't figure out that cottage.

It was the,

So, but again that one's I think

They said we know we're supposed to do a preliminary discussion.

They're checking that box.

I don't know if they have any questions, but we could certainly have any for that.

I said trees.

Hopefully we can knock that out quickly here.

And then I will say up front, I asked about a BAR dinner, as we used to do.

There's no funding for that, so I think we just should discuss that offline.

and go crash Breck's house and make him use that expensive pizza oven he has.

So the other question is, is Breck on?

And how can I determine that?

Well, I'd like to invite

Steve and Rianna to come up and talk about the trees unless you all have any.

Talking to the microphone here?

That's generally the idea.

Did you have a thumb drive?

He's got it on his machine.

Just before we start, once again, thank you so much for allowing us, Parks and Rec.

to come before you again to give you a quick PowerPoint presentation about the downtown trees.

Again, I'm Rian Anthony.

I'm the Deputy Director of Parks and Rec and this is Steve Gaines.

He is our urban forester for the city of Charlottesville and he'll be taking the lead on this presentation.

All right.

Thank you everybody again.

Thank you for the opportunity to be here to talk with you.

I know everybody's busy.

Anyway, so my name is Steve Gaines.

I'm an urban forester through Parks and Rec.

Thank you for taking the time to educate yourself about this, even though I'm sure you're all well educated about what we're here for.

So I just want to say up front, you know, we all know what this project is, and that's focusing on tree removals.

We understand that it's a very sensitive

subject.

But Parks and Rec does not, we don't want to remove any of these trees.

Our main business is to care for the trees and to support urban canopy and the services that these trees provide.

But we are also obligated to protect the public and the property.

So that's really why we're acting now.

As we move forward this evening, please help, you know, hold questions until the end and we'll get through what we can.

We should have time for questions and comments.

Next slide, please.

So just a quick hit list of where this discussion is going.

We are planning for the long-term management of the mall trees.

That is definitely forefront in our minds.

We're going to talk a little bit about why we're removing the trees that we're targeting and where they are located and what the city's going to do to mitigate the disturbance to the mall going forward.

Next slide please.

All right, so long-term planning for the mall.

We are in the process of securing yearly funding for the management on the mall with the trees.

This should give us funding for inspections, pruning, or anything else maintenance related for the trees going forward.

There is a current RFP request for proposal that has recently been submitted to the city.

It's in procurement right now.

The finished product is going to be pretty much a comprehensive plan of management practices and timelines for all of our mall activities.

We are going to put this out to bid internationally.

We expect to get a good response.

We're going to have a good mix of

Arborists, urban planners, landscape architects, hopefully a firm that's going to encompass all of that.

And there will be a committee that's appointed that's going to go through all of the bids and select what plan we're going to go with and what company.

Next slide please.

Okay, the RFP will specifically address how we will be removing the trees in the future, how they will be replaced, and maintenance plans and timeframes.

At this time, we do not know what we are going to replace the trees with that we remove, and we don't know what species they're going to be, is going to be the replacements, and we don't know in what manner the trees are going to be removed in the future.

We're going to go block by block,

or just continue to peck away at the very obvious trees that are declining and replace them as they decline.

That's all going to be addressed in the RFP.

Next slide, please.

Okay, our main objective here is safety, making the pedestrian mall safe for pedestrians and to protect the property and of course the historic features.

Again, we don't want to remove the trees, but we feel that they are necessary.

Next slide.

Okay, I mentioned earlier that this is, as we've been looking at these trees for a long time, and my predecessor certainly have, it was not just city staff that looked at these trees.

These trees were also looked at by Bartlett tree experts, Big O Tree and Lawn Service, Tree Matrix, and Virginia Cooperative Extension.

When we were walking them all, we all got zeroed in on the same trees.

It was not just, I picked these out.

It was very well thought out.

So basically, as an arborist, when I'm assessing a tree, we use scary words like risk and hazard and we evaluate the tree itself in addition to the surrounding environment.

As it says here, a tree is considered hazardous when it appears to be likely to fail and to cause an unacceptable degree of injury.

We've got a risk, combination of likelihood and potential consequences and hazard, how likely it is for a branch or a lead to break and fall and causing them an unacceptable degree of injury.

As you can see in this picture, if you look at it, there's leaves, obviously the tree's fallen over and it's been rotten, but there probably wasn't a whole lot that was showing what was going on on the inside of the tree.

It's very difficult to tell.

It's hard to tell these things going on, so arborists look for signs and symptoms that kind of tell the story of what's going on on the interior of the tree.

In the case of the trees out here on the mall, there are a lot of signs and a lot of symptoms.

It's very obvious that these trees are declining.

At the same time, for us, it's environment, environment, environment.

So we've got a lot of very valuable property.

We've got pedestrians.

The only way to make sure there's zero risk with the trees is to not have a tree there.

We all enjoy the benefits.

We need to have trees in our mall.

So we need to make them safe.

So again, for example, a tree that's dying on the side of a field somewhere, it's not necessarily a risk.

It's not a hazard.

If it's a playground or a park, yeah, it's a serious liability and it needs to be addressed, which is exactly what we have here.

Environmental factors and risk include exposure, how often there's a target underneath it.

In the case of the mall,

On a good day in June or July, you might have 5,000, 6,000 people on the mall.

And that's extreme.

So all of these considerations are kind of in my mind when I'm looking at these.

And there are actually equations that quantitatively quantify the level of risk.

But here, the ones that we are targeting, it's really a no-brainer, particularly considering what the risks and the targets are.

Next slide.

OK, I think everybody got a handout of this.

So the tree locations, as you can tell, it's kind of centered around the fountain part of the mall in the middle.

It's not like we are removing all the trees at the front or the bottom of the mall.

They're kind of spread out.

So there's 72 trees that make up the mall.

63 of them are oaks.

Nine of them are maples.

We're proposing to remove five oaks, three maples, and one tree of heaven, which no one really wants anyway.

So it's pretty spread out.

Next slide, please.

All right, so I know we're all kind of anxious to see which trees are going to be getting targeted here.

But just kind of nailing home here, before we get too much into considering which trees are going to be removed, I want to talk a little bit about urban tree stressors.

As we all know, trees are dynamic organisms.

They grow, they mature, they die, just like us.

And when they're getting older, they require more maintenance.

But these trees, they have tolerated a lot.

First off, they have very little room for root development.

Considering the mass of these tree support, it's really pretty incredible that they're still standing upright.

Considering the very small area they have for root development.

On top of that, they have direct heat from the sun, and then they have reflected heat coming up from the impervious pavement.

They have extremes of drought and excess moisture.

And, of course, they have the tree grates that we all love so much.

Of course, litter and people pouring things in there, I mean, it's just not a very conducive environment for trees.

And so all things considered, we are extremely fortunate that they've lasted this long.

Alpern put this design together and the trees were planted in 1976.

Trees were about six inches in caliper when they were planted, so they're about maybe a little over 50 years old, 55 years old, somewhere in there.

They've put up with a lot.

Willow Oaks were an incredibly good choice for this scenario, and they've done well.

I think they've exceeded any of our expectations.

They just need some help at this point.

So, moving on.

Next slide, please.

So first tree needs to be removed.

I didn't list all 11 in here.

I do have pictures of them in the slide.

I just kind of hit the highlights right here.

This one that needs to be removed is right near the fountain, right behind the fountain in the heating and dining area.

It's about a 22-inch Willow Oak.

So you can see it's got a very suspicious wound.

It's probably about head height, maybe about five feet.

It was wounded by something.

If you look at all of the, well not all of them, but several trees along the mall, they all have a wound like this at about the same height.

It's rather suspicious.

But this one in particular, for its location and its degree of lean, is particularly hazardous.

If you're up close looking at it, you will see that it's got a lot of carpenter ant activity.

Carpenter ants pretty much nest in decay.

So that tells me right there there's a significant amount of decay inside that tree.

If you were to take a sharp object like a knife or a long pen, you can actually poke that and go in several inches into the interior of the tree.

It needs to go, given the level of people around it in the businesses.

Next slide, please.

This is another willow oak, about the same size, maybe a little bit smaller.

Same story, it's got a lot of carpentry activity.

I would say the degree of decay in this probably exceeds the last one.

It's probably got a bit more of a lean.

Both of these trees where that main decay spot is where the

The weight shifts in the top.

It starts leaning.

That's a very significant point to have a weakness.

The idea that it might fail is elevated just for the location of that particular wound.

And that wound's about the same height as the other one, about head height, which tells me it's probably some sort of human alteration that's causing the wounds.

could be any number of things.

But anyway, it's a significant risk.

It's got a lot of dead limbs.

And a lot of those limbs at the site of the pruning cuts where they've removed branches are oozing, which is also not a good sign.

It's just stressed out.

Next slide, please.

And also we have some trees that it's also a little bit more difficult to tell what's going on, but they've been pruned extensively.

You've pretty much got a stick with a little bit of green on it.

And we've really got to ask ourselves, if you look at all the number of fruiting bodies from fungus that's on there and

and all the other hazards associated with it.

Is it worthwhile to keep this tree there and accept the level of risk or remove it and plant something that's going to provide more shade and more service for people on the mall?

Also, this particular tree, which is right across from Rockfish Brewing Company, if you look on the bottom along the base, you'll see a big fruiting body conch.

It's a Ganoderma fungus.

It's only going to be there unless there's significant decay in the trunk.

So it's a hazard.

Next slide, please.

And of course, we have a tree of heaven.

This is right near the whiskey jar.

It's not only propagating in all of our beds, but it's also probably seeding the part of lower Preston Street.

It might be.

Anyway, mature female Ailanthus tree, we don't want it.

We're going to remove it.

Next slide.

Okay, so there's a couple more trees if you guys want to look.

There are pictures at the end of this if we want to really get into it, but the safety protocols and mitigations.

We're planning to do this in February, probably hopefully another bleak drizzly day where there's not going to be a scene that's going to be able to direct people in and out of

Shops and stores for store owners and pedestrians.

It's going to be tree crews, it's going to be staff available.

We'll follow existing OSHA regulations and probably a lot more to make sure that everybody's safe and there will be a lot of attention on this in regards to safety.

And we're going to keep people informed and give people notice of when we intend to do the work.

At this time, I'm thinking January or February.

But we'll see.

And I think that's about it.

Next slide.

I don't know if anyone can hear me.

Probably, I mean the way the trees, you know, they coat it, how they deal with a wound, some of them have been more successful at containing the

It's completely out of our purview.

I'm just curious.

I'm just wondering, would patio heaters do that?

Yeah.

There's all kinds of things, but that would be my guess.

Interesting.

Clarification question on that?

Yes, sir.

No, no, no, they do not all have that wound and not all the trees that we are planning to remove have that wound.

I don't think I said that, but if I did, I apologize.

Let me clarify.

So we have, we all know there's some issues with the maltrees in general and that's where that larger sort of plan is underway to have that discussion.

What you have here are, I cross out the tree of heaven, is a determination by

essentially city manager's office, you know, these are trees that are present a risk.

And so what I wanted to make sure is that, you know, they were able to do what they needed and the BAR understood that.

But this is not, we're not getting into discussion now about the rest of the trees.

Did I understand that you said you weren't sure what you were going to replace the trees with?

What species?

That's correct.

Willow oaks need more sunlight than they have.

It's already quite shaded.

They're shade intolerant, so they're going to need more sunlight.

So if we wanted to plant something like that, we'd have to look at removing, I call them kind of islands of trees.

something that's going to have enough light to be able to grow like that.

There's plenty of other shade tolerant species that are not going to be able to grow as fast.

So it's a large conversation as far as what's going to be replaced, what the replacement species is going to be.

And do we replace it with the same species?

Do we have a number of different species?

Because if you think about how something, my big fear here is like an ambrosia beetle is going to get in here.

Ambrosia beetles are attracted pretty much to wood boring insect, it's a family of them really, but it's attracted to declining trees, stressed out trees.

All these trees are under an incredible amount of stress.

You get one of those little buggers in there, they're all going to go.

So really the only defense against that is a diverse species composition.

That is correct.

And there's been a number of, you know, thoughts on what to do with the wood.

I would think, certainly with that, just to eliminate the safety hazard, cut it low and cover the stump up, we might do something.

I think we should get creative and invite the community to participate, but maybe some sort of a wood carving, something.

I mean, with the wood itself generated from the trees that are going to be cut, we could do some on-site milling, we could make benches, we could do a log

I think something that we can recycle some of the energy and maybe even some of the funds if we have some sort of an auction back in the mall projects.

But either way, something that the community is going to be able to get involved with.

I don't know.

I mean, I would think, I don't know, maybe hip height, maybe.

A lot of it depends on how decayed it is, too.

I don't think these trees, I would assign this a moderate risk.

They're not gonna fall down tomorrow.

Honestly, if you walk the mall, it's much scarier just looking up at the amount of dead wood in the trees than these particular trees that I've selected.

But the trees that I did select have a much higher risk for something big failing and falling.

Can I add just a couple things?

Yes sir.

Thank you.

Thank you.

And thanks to the city and for doing this study.

I think it's important that you've identified these hazards.

They are, they have been.

I think even though many people do not necessarily recognize, I think all the trees are doing just great.

But I agree with the selections that you've made and have made a good case for it.

So I support this, the action.

I guess the thing that I would just note in terms of moving forward, you mentioned the couple of priorities for Parks and Recreation, one being safety.

That's agreed.

Protecting historic resources, that's agreed.

I think really the third, which should make the same list, even though you've implicitly stated it, is that we need to evolve the mall tree planting into a long-term, sustainable, maintainable system, living system.

And the RFP, that's certainly the one step towards it, but I think all of this conversation

demonstrates that we're five, ten years behind on this.

We need to move quickly.

This is going to be increasingly an issue and I don't want to wait until the next eight trees need to go before we have a much better plan for what's going in its place.

I will note that I do believe that the species selection, especially the willow oaks, is a really critical, important part of the design, the historic design.

I think it's been borne out that the maples were especially poor selection and it performed poorly.

But so I think there's definitely

So again the reason why we are not just jumping into planting and replacing is because we have the RFP coming and within the RFP scope we are also asking them to look at a species combination and they will give us that recommendation so that we don't have to do the work twice.

So we're waiting for that RFP to come in

There's a larger discussion that we're building towards.

I know it's completely off topic, but is the city doing anything to communicate with the businesses on the mall about not harming the trees?

So that is a very good question, and at the same time a very complex question.

The downtown mall is a complex community.

And yeah, the reason why the trees are being stressed, because normally if you take a tree or even a human being living in a normal habitat, we will live longer.

But if we are put into a stressful situation, which they are, meaning cafe space, there are heaters in the summer, I mean in the winter, there are lights hanging from the tree, there are nails.

So again, as James mentioned here a couple of months ago, the city, led by the city manager, is forming a downtown mall committee.

I think one of the bar members will also be invited to that.

He's to look at this complex situation as a whole and address all these things so that

Sorry, I interceded.

Are you all amenable to that?

All right.

So gentlemen, thank you.

We'll be in touch.

Steve, good to meet you finally.

And thank you for that sign at the park or whoever got it up there at the cemetery.

That's what we needed.

Thank you very much.

And it's Mr. Schwartz, if you would like.

I did.

Well, you know,

Robert did leave.

You got the links back there, so that's fantastic.

Molly is a very fast learner.

Robert came in and walked her through his special recipe, so she did great.

I don't know who has the computer screen right now, Patrick?

I don't need to be a large head.

If you could make him a little square.

Ah, there we go.

I've got it, yes.

All right, everyone.

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

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

The chair will then ask for questions from the public, followed by questions from the BAR.

After questions are closed, the chair will ask for comments from the public.

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

Speakers shall identify themselves and provide their address.

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

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

So the first item on our agenda is matters from the public not on the agenda.

Also, if you wish to speak to anything that's on the consent agenda, now would be the time to do so.

The items on the consent agenda are zero pressed in place, 480 Rugby Road, and 402 Park Street.

Is there anybody in the public who would like to speak to matters not on our action agenda?

All right.

Next is our consent agenda.

Second?

Seconded.

All right.

Aye.

Aye.

I abstain.

I abstain.

All right.

Forgot about that.

So our first item tonight is a deferred item.

All right, while we're waiting for, we can do it this way.

Okay, better at this.

All right, here we go.

So, first off, this is a continued discussion of 0 Third Street Northeast.

It's within the North Downtown ADC District.

It's a vacant parcel and been working with the applicant on the construction of a new residence on the site.

You've had a

A couple of

and this is working towards preparing what they hope is a final submittal for you all to review.

So while it's just going to be a discussion, we still, because of it being a deferred matter, at the end of the discussion, Candy, I will encourage her to request

additional deferral, you all can vote to accept that request.

So, I won't, I think you all are relatively familiar with this one, and as I said, this is, Candace has a list of questions, but I also think there, you know, this is an opportunity if there are

questions.

You all have details you want to see, things that need to be clarified that you would want to see in a final submittal.

This is an opportunity to express that as well.

Thank you very much.

Good evening.

Can the people in the back hear Ms.

How about that?

Is that better?

Sorry.

How about now?

All right, I'll be closer.

I actually have just two or three questions for you.

The first is the style and form of the front porch, which has gone through a couple different variations than you all.

And we agreed that we like this entrance at the semi-lower level through a brick foundation, corbelled foundation.

and upper porch not accessible by stairs that's actually at the main first floor living level.

So there's three porches that we're going to talk to you about.

I'm also going to ask you about paint colors and I have paint chips that I'm going to pass out to you because the scans of colored renderings never appear the way they are.

And then last question is just a question on the form of what could have been a gate, excuse me, a fence near the

Beyond the front face of the building, but it's actually some gates to Close off the courtyard Court parking court, I guess you might want to call it So the first question is on the porches.

There's three porches that the owner has We are presenting for the owner the first is a very streamlined thin roofed

structure that has solid panels below that would be in one of the darker pink colors that you will see.

So those circles and ovals are just etches in a solid panel on the upper porch.

And again, the brick opening into the door that's recessed back at the face of the building.

Yeah, I think just the front is fine.

is a little bit more deeper, more expressive.

Actually, this is the same one, so we need to go to the next one.

Sorry.

A deeper entablature.

The owner can see doing this with a style of house.

He'd still prefer the solid panels on the railings, but he is open to metal railings if that is deemed more desirable by the board.

and I'm skipping over the side elevations because they're sort of self-explanatory and then the third option

is a hip truth that, again, has the same choice of metal railings or solid metal panels.

Again, the owner would prefer the solid panels for the porch for privacy and for the coloration when you see that color.

So the first question for the board is, you can talk about it when you get to discussion, the three roof forms.

And then the next question is going to be on the paint colors.

and we can go to

The siding color is a light gray, I mean a medium gray that has some blue cast to it.

The lighter color called half sea fog would be the corner boards and cornice color.

and the darker green would be for front door or garage doors or possibly a black because the windows and doors will be at this point are planned as ebony from Marvin Elevate windows which are is a black tone.

So those are colors for you to consider.

and then the last, actually there's two more, if you go to the very last drawing that was submitted, this one, all of our entry gates had lined up with the front of the house which is at the

requisite setback from zoning.

But we actually think those gates are best pulled back towards the back of the front portion of the building.

And in this case, it coincidentally aligns with the downhill neighbor's porch so that there's no projection of that retaining wall in front of their house.

There'd be gates that would swing out and a human door that would swing in, but they would look pretty much like a solid panel fence, if you can go back to the elevation.

Thank you very much.

So they would appear to be just solid doors, but they will have recessed flat panels, much like the garage doors that are spec'd beyond.

OK?

Are there any questions from the public?

And bear in mind we'll have comments in a couple of minutes.

Yes, please.

Sarah Johnson, 500 Park Plaza.

My question is not germane to the exact details of that presentation.

We've lowered the overall house form by two feet.

We've lowered the ground floor one foot, so everything related to the downhill's neighbors one foot lower, all the floors lowered.

The second floor ceiling line came down and cornice was adjusted so that it's a full two feet shorter than it was before.

Any other questions from the public?

And if you're online, please raise your hand or press star 9.

OK.

Questions from the board.

Breck, do you want to go first?

Sure.

Could you clarify how tall the panels gate to the parking court?

Yes, please.

That's fine.

And I guess my only other question is, you described the solid panels on the porches as etched solid panel.

Like a composite panel, MDF, and it'll have a recessed groove describing that oval shape, but not penetrating all the way through to the back.

So it's just really going to be seen in relief.

Just in case.

Board here shows black, but your rendering was sort of a bronze.

The windows are planned to be black.

The bronze was showing up in the gutters.

Much prefer that.

Other questions?

Yeah, sorry.

You've got possibly doors with the dark green and then doors and windows with the ebony.

I believe what we had originally had was that the fence or the gate would be a dark green perimeter with a siding color inner panel, but we can make them all dark green if you want it to be more monochromatic.

We want to tie them into the house color if we can.

Alright, are there any comments from the public?

Hi there.

My name is Roxanne White.

My husband David and I live at 505 Park Plaza.

We are named the downhill neighbors.

So I've got three points I'd like to make tonight.

The first one is I want to kind of revisit the bar's decision that allows the driveway in the front of the property.

We understand that the bar has to adhere to your guidelines, that even though we feel the size of the house, the height is still larger than the rest of the neighborhood, that you have guidelines that 200% that allows the building to be built the way it is.

So we accept that that approval is based on these guidelines.

What we don't understand, and that is why there's a very explicit bar guideline that states that a front driveway should not be allowed if there's parking available in the rear, and that this guideline is not being followed.

Even though parking is available on the rear of this property, the bar has been silent about allowing a front driveway plus two garages.

So the question is, why doesn't this guideline not apply in the same way that the height and the footprint guidelines are used to drive the mass and the height decisions?

When rear alleyways and easements are used throughout the city to provide parking access, why is this option not applied to this property that actually has a rear easement already available?

And why doesn't the driveway guideline apply to this property?

It doesn't feel like it's an equitable application of the guidelines.

A second point is that we are requesting that a permanent green hedge

be planted to screen the property from our porch living spaces.

The driveway and the parking court are right on the edge of our property.

In fact, the proposed brick retaining wall, and I'm not sure what the size of that is, couldn't see that in the drawings, but that wall is right on the property line, which is less than five feet from the edge of our porch.

The owner's plan is to take down the current hedge, which will remove the only site and the sound barrier we have between our outdoor living space and their retaining wall, parking court, and garages.

So what we're asking for is that the old hedge, which is going to be replaced, that it be replaced with some type of a substantial living green hedge to provide a visible and auditory screening for us.

Our property does not have enough space to plant screening between the property line and our covered porch.

So we're asking that the owners plant the green barrier on their property.

and when we look, we based on the mass proximity of their whole structures next door with the garages, the porches, and the ADU in the back, we actually request that the owners screen these buildings with a permanent green hedge along the length of the property.

The third issue is that we just request that the bar require that the street trees be planted in front of the house as a condition of approval.

That's been discussed before, but it was not presented back in any new drawings.

That's all.

I'm Sarah Johnson, 500 Park Plaza owner.

I just wanted to associate myself with Mrs. White's comments about the driveway and the bar guideline.

on the availability of parking access in the rear.

This is the third meeting in which we've raised this issue and I think the disregard of that guideline is clear.

It was not tested, tried, examined.

It was just rejected out of hand.

The second thing I wanted to bring up was the color.

The whites also had a problem with the color that's been proposed here.

It might be medium gray, but the blue cast is very pronounced, and I think it's really going to read very blue.

In my written comments, I described the colors of the seven

residential buildings that surround the subject property and I just don't see the fit.

I don't see how they're complementary or are in sync with the current context.

I think this blue color is intrusive and I wish you would reconsider it to be more gray, less blue.

And if our public online has a comment, please raise your hand or press star nine.

Okay, no one else from the in-person audience?

My name is Mary McKinley.

I've lived for over 40 years at 510 Park Plaza, so I'm just two doors down from Sarah and diagonally across the street from Roxanne and David White.

And I just want to add my word of support to the objections that they've raised, both the

the driveway, the proposed barrier that will allow some privacy to the White's outdoor living space and I'm also concerned about the color that seems to be a more brighter blue and is

doesn't really fit in with anything else in the neighborhood.

Thank you.

All right, unless there's anyone else who wants to talk, we'll move on to comments from the board.

You can ask me.

That's fine.

That's the price for not being there in person, I guess.

OK, I'll try to speak up.

Thank you, everyone.

I have a few comments.

One is I think that the ice I do.

Driveway access on this project.

And to be clear, nothing has been approved on this project.

We have had discussions and we have hopefully guided the architect, taken our guidelines and comments from the public into consideration.

I still do feel that the access from the street is

Not in keeping with the district.

That being said, I also acknowledge that the architect is doing a number of things to try to mitigate a very unusual kind of situation.

So I continue to weigh that balance of those things for an unusual site.

With those things being said, I believe that moving the gate back from the street is a positive development.

I do not think that six foot tall gate is appropriate or even allowable in our guidelines.

I would think that this tends to fall under the

under the realm of a front yard fence.

And so I think a reasonable limitation on that height would be four feet.

And I think it still would provide the kind of screening that might be necessary.

So an opaque fence in that regard might be a good thing.

As to the three design decisions or the

The porch options, I feel that either the deeper entablature or the deeper entablature with the hipped roof are more successful.

The very first one feels a bit thin to me and as a bit of an afterthought.

And I have concerns with the etched

panel as a long-term design solution.

It feels like it's going to have significant weathering and material challenges for the kind of exposure both to light and moisture that it's going to receive.

So I'm not convinced by the strategy of having an etched solid panel in that location.

I'd also note just that the

Lower retaining wall is almost certainly going to require a guardrail given the height above existing grade.

And presumably a metal rail might be a good solution there.

And so that's something I feel like should be thought of at the same time as some of these porch details.

And the landscape plan is not

Shown here are the subject of the conversation.

I do agree with the comments from the public and previous comments from the VAR that finding some potential for larger canopy scaled trees would be both a benefit to this particular house but to the neighborhood as a whole.

My personal opinion, I actually like the, in terms of the porch, personally I like the hip roof on the porch.

I like the railing, that one basically, but that's just me.

I think the roofline matching the roofline of the house makes sense.

In terms of color, I'm curious if the actual color samples were shared with maybe the neighbors because I did read the letters that were submitted and I think

You know, they pointed out some neighboring AUDs where the blue is pretty bright.

And I'm kind of just curious if, I don't know if the applicant's willing to share this or... We're welcome to show it to them, but I have not shared it.

Okay.

I'm just curious, because this doesn't look as bright blue as, say, the rendering makes it look.

So, but I also agree and support the neighbor's assessment that kind of keeping it more on the gray side as opposed to the bright blue would be more appealing.

Let's get through some comments first and then we can come back to you.

Okay, yeah, I just had a question.

My question was, isn't the way the color reads a function of the size of the property?

I mean, we're talking about the size of the entire house, except for above the foundation.

I mean, I think there's a lot of factors.

Our guideline made reference to size, the size of the structure being a factor in determining color.

In terms of the driveway access, I mean I think it's unfortunate.

I do think that there are neighboring houses that have driveway access off the streets.

I guess it's a, does it matter which street it's off of?

I don't know.

So that's tricky.

I do appreciate the applicant lowering the overall height of the house.

I think that's something we've been trying to get through.

I'll go next since I'm sitting next to you.

And I feel obliged to go through the questions, touching other issues as well.

So with the portraits, I think I'm in agreement with everybody else.

I think two, three is probably the way to go.

The first one looks a little underdeveloped.

the deeper entablature.

I'm kind of up in the air as far as which one of the two and three is more appropriate.

So that's number one.

Number two, the colors don't offend me.

I think that I don't think they're outlandish.

I don't think that they're out of

You know, I'm out of sort of the spectrum.

But then again, I don't live on the street.

And so I don't have as a personal, I guess, attachment as some of the folks speaking tonight.

I might propose that the owner architect take some of the comments and see if you can come up.

I mean, this isn't a final.

So, you know, when I do paint colors and selections, I'm always coming up with two or three selections.

Sometimes that helps me inform the original one that I've kind of fallen in love with.

And so, you know, if there's a willingness to bring some other suggestion, another palette or an alternate or two,

I think that would help the conversation and also address hopefully address some of the clients concerns and we may find that in comparing those colors to for instance the brick which I think is really important how red the brick is may depend or may form the

the color of the blue that you choose.

That might be a really helpful conversation to have for both you and the surrounding neighbors.

The driveway, I agree with the argument that the neighbors are making about you only place the driveway in the front yard only when there's no access to the rear.

I think in this particular case, in my mind,

The argument has been that for what the owner wants to do with the multiple car garage and access, it seems like this is apparently the only place that can happen.

I do think that a six foot high gate is a little out of character with the neighborhood.

The neighborhood seems to be about transparency.

It isn't a walled, gated kind of a place.

So I think maybe there's some more thought that needs to be paid to the height than maybe even the permeance of the gate.

Maybe there's a little bit more see-through than some of the images that were shown.

I actually think that the idea that's come out of the neighborhood about having some sort of additional hedge that's somehow planted next to the brick wall is a good idea.

I haven't seen pictures of what that brick wall is.

I'm assuming it's solid, but I wonder if it has to be solid.

We've seen brick walls that aren't completely solid but provide the sort of privacy that's required.

I wonder if there's a way to

maintain some version of the hedge with the sort of permanence of a brick wall that you want, but also make that boundary in some way have a little filtering effect.

that allow light through and provide the neighbor next door with the same kind of, or the similar kind of light that comes in.

I think it's like the paint colors.

It's certainly, I think, worth the investigation for both the owner's side and the neighbor's side.

Thank you.

I agree with a lot of what has been said, especially regarding the porch detailing.

I think the heavier entablature and the low hip roof are more in keeping with the detailing that you would see in this neighborhood.

I have some concerns with the solid panels and especially with the etched circles and ovals.

That seems like it feels like a metal rail or some sort of open rail will feel lighter and nicer in this application.

I'm coming a little bit late into this conversation.

I know you've all talked about driveway access.

I think more could be done to screen the driveway between the neighbors.

And I think David was sort of alluding to that, that there could be a more kind of lattice or architectural plus landscape screen there.

I also don't find the colors to be that strong.

I did when I saw the rendering, but what I'm seeing today, you might be able to take the value down a little bit, but I don't think the hue is anything outlandish at all.

In regards to the roof of the porch, I think my favorite would be the hip roof.

I don't really have a problem with some of the other choices, but I would agree that the hip is most fitting in with the rest of the house design.

and agree with the statement about the railing being something that has some transparency to it.

The metal railing I think would be a lot nicer than the solid panel that I think would feel pretty heavy out on the front face of the house.

Looking at the gate wall, I appreciate the move.

to move to recess it further back on the site, but do agree that the height does seem to be too tall.

And I'm looking at the front elevation, and I know that the wall along the sidewalk is much further towards the street in plan, but it seems like you can draw a line

from that wall in elevation and that you're getting at that four-foot line.

So it might be something that you could carry as the sidewalk wall turns towards the house and then towards the gate.

I'd also agree that I think the gate as solid panels seems like something that could be looked at as a transparent metal railing in language with the railing on the porch.

I also agree with the statements of plantings that we've seen previously out at the sidewalk and also a screen between this house and the neighboring house on the driveway side would, I think, help screen the house a lot and be a welcome piece to the design.

In regards to the driveway itself, I think the applicant did a good job of showing examples in the neighborhood in the design district that have driveways and feel that it's not totally out of character to have the driveway on this design.

This is a residence, so I know when I review these I tend to, I like to leave a lot of latitude to the designer because it is a residence.

I have my preferences for the porch.

but I know you guys are trying to go for something a little more contemporary and streamlined so I would not deny any of the options that you presented so if your client prefers one over the other I'd be willing to accept that.

I do recognize some of the comments that have been made about the solid panels on the porch and do wonder about that but again if that's your preference

Personally, I would leave it.

It would not be cause for denial for me.

Color, I have absolutely no problem with the color you've presented.

The driveway, you have a topographical challenge.

You do have the ability to park one parking space in the back.

you know it's if you want to have more than one parking space yes you will have to use the front and I think that is a what you're doing is you're attempting to conceal the parking with the gate and the high brick wall around it and we do have precedent for parking courts in people's front yards we you know having a garage in the front yard is a big no-no

but you are working very hard to conceal that.

I don't have a concern with the six foot high wall and fence.

It's behind the front facade of the building.

You've said it back, I think you said six feet behind the front facade of the building.

We tend to allow six foot tall privacy fences as long as they are set behind the front facade of the building.

So I see no problem with the guidelines with your gate and wall as you've presented it.

In fact, I think it does a lot to conceal the fact that there is a parking court back there.

I recognize the neighbors' concerns about losing the hedge and having that green wall there that's going to be gone, but if you were to put a privacy fence right against the wall,

We'd have to approve it generally.

So I don't think we can make you put a hedge there.

At least I personally don't think we can do that.

If you can find a way to soften it or green it up somehow, that would be fantastic.

Unless you're the designer and your client's going to have to look next door to their neighbors.

If you can come up with a solution, that would be great.

The comment about the pierced brick sounds great until I start thinking about headlights.

So I don't know if the neighbors want to have headlights shining into their porch if you start putting holes in the brick.

Sorry, it was a great idea.

That was my first thought was headlights are going straight into their house.

Let's see, what else was I seeing?

Yeah, I think I got your questions, so yeah, that's it for me.

Any follow-up comments or do you have any questions for us?

Let's see.

One drawing, I'll take this one back, but I just wanted to show you that people have been talking about this giant parking court and the number of vehicles that could be stacked there.

I think that helps put it in perspective.

It's going to be a tight, tight radius to get a vehicle into the side yard.

The reason that the doors of the garage are recessed another eight feet back.

So that's why that other part is colored lightly because the face of the building is out where that car is.

The next thing is we have an option

Not preferred because there has been discussion of shielding the courtyard, which we could do with just a privacy fence that could have a gate that could open up and you could drive in if you wanted to bring in a load of mulch or whatever.

So thank you for tolerating the sort of few questions we asked.

We actually met with our landscape architect today and came up with some solutions for plantings.

I do think I don't want to offend anybody.

I have to be polite.

But if you don't have room on your own land to do screening, it is not appropriate to ask your neighbor or force your neighbor to provide screening for you.

That's just the way it is.

We have made offers and met with a downhill neighbor and have suggested some opportunities and haven't really

progress very far in that discussion.

So we've gone ahead and designed what we think is appropriate there, and you will see that in the final.

The brick wall, to clarify, that's on the right of the brick piers for the driveway.

is on the downhill side, 3 foot 11 and 7 eighths.

So it's at 4 feet, which is this height.

It is 1 foot above the parking court.

So there are no opportunities for pierced brick.

We will be putting on top of that a 2 foot metal railing.

And we have plantings planned to train across that to provide screening.

But note that that will only take it to 6 feet.

Jeff, can you go back to the site plan with the gates?

I guess that's the last drawing.

If you notice

where the words begin in the middle.

The next door neighbors have a six foot ten fence which we are going to be showing you in our side elevations when we submit them for final.

So with our four foot wall and our two foot railing, we are still not going to be at the height of their fence which covers 19 or 20 feet of their porch.

They have 17 feet exposed of their porch.

of which we will be planting pretty significant shrubbery, except for the little bit of the courtyard, which will allow for that.

We're planting at either end of the courtyard and letting it train fully across that.

So there will be a two foot tall green wall.

But

It's not really appropriate in my mind to say that we must provide the screening if someone else doesn't have the room for it on their own land.

So we are going to be providing the full landscape things and I appreciate that.

Street trees will also be coming back, but there is an overhead line that goes right through the sidewalk.

That's what that dark line is.

So the amount of space that is allowed for a street tree is barely going to be on the left corner at the old hedge street.

We have one, it's not a giant tree, because if I drew on there a 40-foot canopy of an oak tree, a quarter of the house would be covered.

So we'll show that to you to explain why a large street tree is not going to fit on this property.

But we are going to have some nice trees planned for this.

Let's see.

I think, Brent, somebody talked about needing a guardrail, and I don't know which retaining wall they were talking about.

No, in the front, because of the elevation that you showed with at least six or seven to eight risers behind it, if you're above 30

Yes.

Right.

We appreciate that.

There won't actually be lawn.

There will be just shrubbery.

And sometimes that works.

As a landscape architect, I can tell you sometimes that works, sometimes it doesn't.

Exactly.

Let's see.

Thank you for the comments on the roofs and the railings.

I think one of you had concerns about the weathering of it.

You know, if we use ASEC panels, they are going to hold paint very well and not rot and decay.

So there will be some detailing done for those railings.

We're definitely going to go solid on the side because I think that's just a nice privacy thing to have, you know, three foot railings.

And on the front, we can discuss, we'll discuss with the client whether they need to be open railing or closed on that upper porch.

And we're all in concurrence with moving that gate back.

I think that just makes a big difference.

And that immediately puts all that parking, it's not in the front yard, it's actually behind the house.

So at this point it just happens to be there's another piece of the house behind that.

I have a question about the doors, the two doors, one on top of each other.

Has that style been selected yet?

I'm looking at a rendering.

That's probably from the 3D, the old 3D.

The current hardline elevations are what are ruling.

Client has seen a lot of these portal doors that sort of go along with some of the styling inside and some things that he's trying to do outside.

So that's the style that we're going to be going through, and we can show you some pictures of those.

Yeah, thank you.

Any last-minute comments from the board?

And Ms.

I think we're ready to bring the final choices for you guys.

Okay, thank you.

I described that as three foot eleven and seven eighths from the ground, four feet on your side, four foot on the parking court side.

So for the public that's listening in, if there is anyone listening in, the question was the height of the retaining wall on the parking court.

And it's about four feet with a two foot metal railing on top from the downhill neighbor side.

Oh, yes.

Thank you, Breck.

I'll move to approve the deferral.

All in favor?

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

That's everyone.

Thank you, Breck.

All right, finding our next item.

Somewhere in here.

Our next item tonight is 507 Ridge Street.

507 Ridge Street, it is in the Ridge Street ADC district.

Both the house and the cottage at the rear are contributing structures.

That's why the demolition of the cottage is before you.

This is known as the GNNE Bailey House.

It was built, it looks to be around 1895.

has kind of an interesting Mr. GNN.

He built it and appears to have sold it in two years and then five years later moved back in and a few years later was out again.

So it's doing some tracking of who was there and when.

It's quite a lot of people.

So, and this is a request from the property owners to, and I'll scroll down, there is in the back

Yard.

It's identified as a servant's cottage.

I've gone extensively through the census and other information, and I cannot at any point identify

anyone at that residence that was listed as a servant now that may have been happened during between census years.

I think if anyone, I know that the G&E's employed someone when they lived in a house in 1910 down on Market Street so possible that this was constructed with that individual living there.

As I think I've shared with you on the Sanborn maps,

I'm pretty sure it's moved at least once, possibly twice.

While referring to it as a servant's cottage, I think it's probably traditionally served as a shed.

myself, Molly and Mr. Zehmer went out to the site, walked around and spent some time with the owners, spent some time in the house, which was a beautiful house, and the situation such that

and I think I've expressed it in the staff report.

It's not in terrible shape, but it's not, I mean it definitely needs some TLC.

Recommendation would be, unless the VAR considers the request, preference would be to find another home for it.

I know that the ladders have a plan for something else here, or something in their backyard, possibly to even relocate on the property, at least to give it a stay of execution, if that would help.

I think this is a difficult one because reading the guidelines very clearly would not support a demolition recommendation.

But I think, and I didn't mean to sound too lawyerly in my staff report, but sort of lay out what the options are for the city and so that everybody understands what the options are.

The BAR can approve the request.

in which case it's allowed demolition or even offer direction on allowing it to be relocated elsewhere.

The BAR can deny that request, in which case that is appealable to city council by the owner.

In circumstances of an appeal related to demolition, there is a process

by which I laid it out in here and I haven't had to deal with the demolition at that, you know, far into the game so I don't, I'm speaking more from reading the ordinance and not having gone through it but there would be a process by which the property or the building could be offered at a market rate and I believe it's something by the code

because of the cost or the valuation of this would be a couple of months.

If no one offered to purchase it, then the demolition would be allowed.

So there's, and I offer that because the solution,

trying to find a solution is probably the best option to saving this structure because I guess getting into a disagreement about it, I fear that the building is then going to be what loses.

And then the last thing I'll offer is that the

You all have an option.

You do not have to take action tonight.

BAR can defer something once.

An applicant can certainly defer it if they wish.

If you all defer it, then it would come back.

A decision would have to be made at the December 20 meeting.

But if that was necessary in my recommendation to

sort of pursue or discuss some options, maybe that would allow that conversation to happen.

So, as I said, I've got, I think I've shared the photographs.

It's, well, it's in the report, and I know Mr. Lauder and his wife are here tonight to, I believe, present their side, and you all are here to listen.

And I can flick through or not, whatever you want to do.

All right.

Good evening, everybody.

It's actually Clayton, not Clayton.

All the time.

So thanks for allowing me to come address you this evening.

A couple of things I want to point forward by background.

We love the shed.

It's cute.

But it's a question of value tonight.

I've got an 81 year old father-in-law with limited resources living in an assisted living facility in Sandusky, Ohio.

He's got maybe enough money for 18 months at $8,000 a month to live in that facility.

His daughter, my wife, and her sister all are in Virginia.

One's in Washington DC, my sister-in-law, and my wife and I are here.

No other family under 80 years old is nearby him.

As I said, limited resources and little things like his driver's license expired.

There's no one there to help him get an ID.

right, except for the facility owners who are, and I don't know what your opinions are on assisted facility living situations, but they want every last dime you have and that's what we're facing.

It's a nine hour drive to Ohio.

that we have to pay at personal expense and time away from her children, our three special needs kids, two autistic and one type one diabetic in order to facilitate her seeing her father.

So that's one value.

The second value is this shed.

I know your report and I've read it and it's unremarkable.

It says it in the report, right?

The windows are busted out.

There's nothing but plywood on the floor.

Birds and a groundhog live in it.

The chimney is falling down.

It leaks.

It's been a great place for the last 13 years to keep my table saw.

But it's not intended for any living.

Were it a historic brick cottage, I would completely support renovating it.

One of the reasons we bought the home, and as Jeff said, is in such good condition, is we care.

I've been before you once already to get gutters because the roof was falling down.

We put solar panels in our backyard because we care about the environment and our footprint.

There are other things of value than simply maintaining a structure because it once stood.

Right?

So it's really a question of value.

It's a question of value of the quality of life for my father-in-law and his remaining days and how we can afford to keep him happy and well and engaged in life when his family is nine hours away and he sits in his chair all day long.

That's all he does.

Think about your family, your dad, your mom, your grandparents.

is that more important or less important than this?

I appreciate you all want to protect and value the history of this town.

I do too, which is why we bought the house, which is why I spent.

Thousands of hours ensuring that house is is a good house is a beautiful home.

But I don't think that this shack, which I do like, is more important than my father-in-law.

So.

We've got to find a way forward.

If you defer to, if we have to defer to December 20th, we will for a little while, but his funds are running out.

I don't know, any of you guys got 8K a month just lying around?

Because I know he doesn't.

Social Security is only $1200 a month.

We can extend, if he were to, and he's in great health, he may live another 10 years.

And if that's the case, we with an accessory building that we want to put there so that we can use the electrical and the water from the home, within code tastefully done, I'm happy to even, if need be, get approval from a design from you all.

But his life matters.

The value of his life matters more than this.

Thank you for that.

Are there any, do we have public?

Are you public or are you an applicant?

You're an applicant, okay.

Do we have any questions from the one online public?

Please press star nine or raise your hand.

Nope.

Okay, questions from the BAR.

I don't have any questions for the applicant.

I guess I have questions for Jeff.

You stated that, you know, you haven't found evidence of this being a, I guess, having a resident from the census, but we have

multiple documents that suggest that this was one of the last servants quarters in this part of the city and it has a chimney in the structure which is not usual for an exterior structure.

Yeah, I looked for, I mean, there's a lot of information in census, also in city directories.

It's, you can kind of piece things together and then try to, you know, see what

If there's a gap, is there something on either end that suggests someone at this house?

I think it's very possible.

I think it would have been during the period that Mr. Giannini and his family were there, I think from 1897.

I don't have my dates in front of me.

I think the reconstruction of the, I think what I saw is

It does not look like this building's been there a long, long time.

And it's possible, I mean, I was thinking about if this were in my yard, I would have that there as something to warm the shop.

That was my first thought.

I just did not, it does not appear to me

to be in an original location.

That said, there's no denying this is something probably from 1895.

If it's associated with Mr. Giannini, it either occurred at 1895 or I think back then in 1901.

It definitely dates to the house.

I think it's unique.

I have gone through every survey of the Ridge Street Historic District.

I can't find

another cottage or servants quarters.

I find kitchens and things like that.

So in some ways they could say this is the only one I'm aware of.

But in the context of its setting and its association with someone there, I can't put someone there.

I have a question for the applicant.

I was a little confused.

Yes, an accessory drawing unit.

A home for him, right?

That's what I thought, but I just wanted to know.

Yeah, no, no, sir.

I'm sorry for the lack of clarity.

So that we can have

Adjacent access for him, but he's not necessarily in the home So that there's a problem we can be there and we can get Meals for Wheels and we can you know build a something that adds value to the end of his life and then should one of our children fail to launch it so is common these days and

that would be appropriate as well depending on him.

But it's really trying, we have a great deal of land and some of it which is not in the historic area, but it doesn't make any sense from a utility standpoint.

Limited funds, he's got maybe $125,000, maybe $150,000 depending on the market.

Pardon me.

And one follow-up.

Yes, sir.

No, we have not looked at it.

I don't, I mean, these are the experts.

If I try to put a forklift under there and move it, I know it's going to fall apart.

And I've moved a number of buildings with forklifts.

But again, I'm no expert.

You know, it's, I don't find it remarkable.

I think some of the wood in it,

is heart pine.

It's beautiful.

It could be milled and added.

I think Jeff indicated in his report that we would incorporate what was appropriate in the new dwelling because

It matters to us aesthetically to match the current home and make it look nice.

But from a functional standpoint, the building's falling down.

The footers are falling down.

It's rotten on the back if you want to go to the former picture.

I've got termites in there.

I've got, you know.

So I will tell you that we do not have the resources to provide the quote unquote TLC that you mentioned.

We don't intend to.

Yes sir?

No, we have not looked at that because it right underneath that is a sanitary line Right.

It makes the most sense and we don't want to eat up our entire backyard without buildings We kind of want to enjoy the space right?

It's a beautiful area.

So putting another building next to it and retaining that Aesthetically, no, we have not considered that

who we have considered down further on the property doing that, but that's cost prohibitive.

I've got to run additional electrical.

It's going to have to have its own service.

At this point, it is feasible to trench from its location into our basement and run electrical and run water.

Then I'm all on one meter and I meet the city's guidelines for an ADU.

So the notion of, again, we're a constrained family resource.

Right.

I mean, I'm sure you have applicants come in here who money is not an object.

We are not one of them.

Right.

So doing it for its own sake is adds no value in our world.

I'm sorry.

Did that answer your question, sir?

Other questions?

All right, comments from the public.

Person who's calling in, if you want to press star 9 if you have any comments.

If you want to go first, Breck, otherwise we can start.

Up to you.

Sure, I'll go real quick.

I do think this is a remarkable structure.

I think it's pretty unique in what we've seen, what we reviewed, the history that's been given.

It tells a pretty interesting story about the house, the neighborhood, and the development of the city.

We are set up as a board to follow our guidelines,

For all of the personal stories and realities that I know are very present for the applicant, that is not part of our mandate and review process.

So just as we don't evaluate what is happening within the walls of the structure, we are looking to protect the historic fabric and character of our community where we can.

That being said, it's not to say that those things are any less real.

It's just that we're not the body to evaluate those other circumstances that would be City Council.

So I feel it's pretty, in my mind, it's very straightforward that this is a structure that we want to try to protect and retain.

I think it adds to the property and adds to our community.

And I'm interested in ways that we can do that certainly would be preferred to

protect it in place secondarily to protect it on the property.

And thirdly, to protect it in some other fashion.

But certainly, I think it does.

I think I do find it to be an intriguing and interesting, even in its smallness, an important part of our city's history.

Sure I think Brett put it very well you know our purview is this is a contributing structure in the historic district and that's our duty to protect it.

I appreciate the applicants.

personal situation.

I think it makes it difficult, but I think our purview again is just to protect the contributing structures.

And I think that I did visit the site, I looked at the building,

You know, it's certainly in rough shape, but I've seen worse.

I think, in particular, looking under the building, there's a number of pressure-treated floor joists, so it's seen some care at some point.

There are some pretty easy ways to help mitigate some of the termite damage.

There's a lot of mulch piled up around the building itself that can be raked back.

just from a preservation standpoint.

I also, you know, in a way to try and meet the applicant's goals, I agree with Brecht that possibly relocation on the property would be an acceptable solution.

There's, you know, there's considerable room further down the hill.

I know there's a

There's solar panels further down the hill, but maybe even further down, I don't know.

That would sort of be, Breck laid it out perfectly.

Choice one is preserve it in situ and repair it.

Choice two is relocate on the property.

And choice three, I'd say relocate within the district, maybe, as opposed to just somewhere else completely out of context.

And our guidelines really discourage demolishing a building.

First of all, I just want to tell you that I sympathize with your situation.

I have a mother that's 93, and unfortunately she lives alone independently still, but I still go over there once a day, so I understand.

She's in town.

Yeah, we moved her here before, you know, code red.

So I understand, you know, what you're going through.

I do agree with my colleagues and that even if you don't see that thing as a remarkable structure, you might consider

seeing it in a different way and that it's remarkable for sort of the more overall what it kind of gives us as a little piece of the overall puzzle of our historic, you know,

District.

I live in an old house.

There's a certain weight that you carry when you're in these things.

We all have to make our own decisions about that from a personal standpoint.

Do we keep these windows that are drafty and they're single pane?

You know, I mean, it's a bit of a burden, you know, honestly.

But on the other side, when you look at those photographs, just that one photograph alone where you have the cottage in front of the old house, I mean, to me, that adds quite a bit of value to your property.

I mean, there's a wonderful sort of

connection of the smaller little house with the larger house in your yard.

It seems to have a sort of symbiosis relationship, at least in the photo that I was looking at.

But again, I think we're talking about biases here.

But what we're really here for is upholding the guidelines.

and so, you know, how do we do that?

You know, I don't know if, I mean, I'm looking at your site plan and I do see that the, you know, I'm not exactly sure what's going on in the rear of the yard.

I haven't been out the property.

I don't think it's necessarily a bad thing given the fact that the original location

of the cottage was further back.

I mean, I sort of like the idea of restoring it to an original location if it has to be moved.

It does seem like there's not a good amount of space.

to work around back there and I understand the proximity issue as far as cost goes.

So that, I don't know, that seems like a viable option to me.

It might be again a value-added thing where you might sort of develop some of the rest of the property further back to sort of extend that backyard.

this is me coming at it from a perspective of understanding the pressures that you feel but also wishing that there was a way to sort of view this thing for what it is which is a little piece of a much bigger history lesson and I think somewhere in the report there are some lines about every little bit you chip away you lose something so when you take those

single pane windows out of your 100-year-old house, you take a little something away from it.

And so our job here is to recognize these little, the big things obviously are easy, the little things are harder because we sympathize with the kind of positions that people are in economically, socially, and everything.

We don't want to be a burden in that way, but we are here to protect that fabric.

We're here to protect those stories so that we can keep this place as special as we know it is.

So those are my thoughts on it.

I think I'm in agreement with a lot of the statements that the board has made and don't think I really have anything else to contribute beyond what has already been said.

I would encourage the applicant to try to find a way to relocate it on the site.

I do understand the applicant's desire to build and all the reasons.

set forth for trying to build an ADU in this location.

I don't think he heard you.

I'm so sorry.

Time out?

No, no, no, sorry.

Take it back.

So, Clay sent me a note the other day and asked about, in the staff report, a C and a D, which, so there's, for whatever reason, there's two lists for demolitions.

And in the, I just, in the second list, it really just referred back to the first list.

And he said, well, where are C and D?

And I said, well, and I, I just realized,

they aren't they they weren't there so so now they're they're answered but I just would I'm going to I guess my suggestion is this just because if this does get into a situation where there's an appeal well let's let's you know do do the right steps so these and I I was like it's been on my list plate to say what now I know what I was yeah

yeah so it's always where I figured it was just word had just changed the lettering so and so there that's those were the three things and so the so as far as you know me being in fairness to the applicant I just want to point that out again the overall condition and integrity I think I stated it you know I've shared that we know that it was not an engineering report whether to what extent the

You know, means methods for moving or moving, you know, it is to be demolished clearly.

So, and so I don't, I don't see anything left out of the discussion, but it is absent in the staff report.

So I'll say that.

So, um, and you asked about moving or so, um, the there's, I mean, moving it to, it could be moved

Sorry, that's cut and paste from our guidelines and we need to fix the spelling.

Moving it to a site that is not within a district

I don't know what it would take to establish it as a contributing structure.

I don't know that step.

I know we've talked about, we've moved entire houses in this city without them losing their designation.

I know the one behind the church, not the one behind the, in front of Wurtenbacher where,

20 years ago they moved that house.

And then I know that there was a discussion of relocating the house on Preston Place.

So it's been discussed, the mechanism by which it would be protected, I don't know.

It would be, but it would, that's the piece to kind of try and figure out if that's the opportunity.

And in my conversation with Clayton, it was,

I said all the questions to him that you all had.

It's like, well, what about rolling it down the hill?

And he said, all right, then it costs to move it down the hill.

Then I got to maintain it when it's down the hill.

So that's where I'm.

I'm not trying to make a judgment on it, I'm saying is that they're, what's best for this structure?

And that's where in the zoning ordinance, yes, you can, if someone knocks this down, if they knocked it down without BAR approval, there's a fine.

I talked to the city assessor and they have a valuation of this at $2,700.

It would be the maximum the city could find someone for such a demolition would be not more than two times that value.

So there's one number.

If the building fell into disrepair, the city does have the means by which a contributing structure in an historic district, if it's not maintained, et cetera, et cetera.

I'm not entirely clear on, as you see in here it says, I think it's $200 or $500 and an X amount for every additional

incident.

It's sort of saying, all right, well, what does that mean?

And I know that there's a threshold, at least at which it won't go any further.

So there are there are ways we could compel this owner to not let something happen.

Um,

but in my conversations with them, they really don't want to put the expense into moving it, then moving it, then what's necessary to, the roof is in bad shape.

The bottom, in a sense, if it doesn't shed water.

So there's a cost associated with that and that's my concern is that these other avenues might lead to the building's loss.

Is there a way to find a solution?

That said, taking everything off the table of

how we you know feel about this the VAR could very just cut and dry say our job is to you know evaluate these guidelines and the remedy for that and Clayton I talked about this the remedy for that is an appeal to council so and and that's I think that is an option and that that's what built into the ordinance that that City Council then can consider those other things

So I think that's, so A, I would say, I think I would recommend deferral simply because if there's an appeal and a denial, you know, there's been this omission.

I mean just what everyone else is pretty much saying but I would add that to me moving it on the property is just as good as keeping it where it is because it looks to me like it has been moved more than once possibly and I think moving it away or selling it you just take it out of context that has very little value to me at that point.

And I think our focus does have to be pretty narrow here.

It may be that it's for others to consider other issues, but it's pretty cut and dry, I think.

I feel like I'm always the argumentative one.

I don't think I'm able to help your case much, but I think ultimately would support demolition for this just through precedent.

I know most of our board is very new, but I've seen quite a few demolition approvals where whole servants' quarters get chopped off the back of large houses.

something much more significant than this small building that we don't actually know if a servant actually lived in.

I recognize the sense that it's rare in the neighborhood, but it's just out of precedent.

We've approved demolitions like this, much more significant demolitions than this in the past.

I think Jeff seems to be dodging this quite a lot but I mean it's coming down no one's gonna take it it's coming down whether it comes down and we fine you for it whether it you know you get a you go through council appeal and pay for the appeal I mean everything it's

It's coming down and we're going to cost you money by delay.

But that's, as others have said, that's not our purview.

But I guess what is our purview is the fact that we've demolished much more significant structures in the past.

But I don't think I'm helping you much.

What might help you, we could defer this, we could prolong it, or we could just make a motion tonight and you could take that motion and do what you want with it, whether it's an appeal or just

put this to bed.

So that's up to you.

Would you like to defer it?

I would allow you folks to reconsider his comments.

If you're intractable on that and you think that this, I mean, I would remind this group that not an eighth of a mile away,

is cited a hotel in the historic district, is cited condominiums in the historic district that my wife and I and many in our community fought against in front of you and council about eight years ago with tooth and nail.

So that's okay, but my 10 by 12 shed

is the holy grail of the neighborhood?

I mean, come on folks.

And we're talking, I mean, I appreciate you want to stay in your swim lane and my father-in-law is 81, quality of life.

but let's talk precedents, let's talk reality.

It's coming down one way or another or get moved.

If this council would like to fund its movement to somewhere on my property, write me a check.

But if the expectation that me and my wife with our limited resources have to go find $10,000 to move this on our own nickel when it's coming down anyway,

That's the question of value I pose.

Historic value does have value.

So does current value.

This is current.

This is now.

Him being anyone is now.

No one, I'm not going to be selling tickets to this little shed on my property.

No one's going to come want to see it.

And if they did, they're going to get my, they're going to require my permission to walk onto my property.

So I'm more than happy if you all want to divert and consider it.

That's fine.

The clock's ticking on my father's quality of life.

So I understand it's fine to keep your blinders on and stay within your mission statement.

Why do you think I put solar panels on my property?

Because it was free?

I did it because I care about the environment and our world and our capital.

Absolutely, but it's the right thing to do.

Our world is much bigger than simply the ordinances under which you're operating.

I'm fine if you defer until December 20th, but at that point in time, you know, and this is not anything other than my feelings.

It is coming down, one way or another.

One thing that I sort of wonder about is this idea of precedent.

I'm new to the board.

There have been a couple houses on Park Street that, large houses, where someone took the entire back half of the house off so they could put a new addition back there.

And those back halves were inferior in the sense that they had lower ceilings and smaller rooms, presumably because they were service quarters.

I can think of two examples.

One is Chris Long's former house.

The other one is, I can't remember the name of it, but it's, Hard Bargain was the name, and it's way down Park Street, almost at the end of the district.

We took down, on Virginia Avenue, there was the last three

kind of working class little bungalow type houses on the street.

Took down two of those, did keep one for an apartment building.

I'm trying to think what else.

Carl, I mean, I think those are, you know, they have some precedent value, but they're not quite like this.

And this is unusual in its age and its association with the house at this age.

My recollection of some of those precedent is those were more recent

Editions, and in different series of conditions.

I do think that there was a chance that if the applicant came to the board and demonstrated that there was no way that the ADU could be built and that required the demolition, that might change some minds.

On the other hand,

What is it that you mean the ADU required as demolition?

Well, for instance,

We have had requests for demolitions in the past that were of maybe in some ways similarly modest, not significant structures, but historic nonetheless.

But we have approved demolition with

along with a successful building that was going in its place.

So we understood the necessity of removing the structure.

That's one of our evaluation criteria.

I think what Brett's saying is that if we could see what the hardship is, if we could see the design and understand, hey, there's a setback on this side, there's a setback on that side, so that leaves us with 20 feet to put our accessory unit.

There's no other place for it to go on our property that is governed by you all.

Fundamentally, there's no other place for it to go.

You can't put it in the front yard.

That is the only place it can go based on setback.

If you look at where that fence is, I've got to come five feet off that fence with current guidelines.

I can go back, but then I have a parking area that is nothing but gravel.

We can cost effectively put an ADU in its area that's maybe, I don't know, 16 by 25 feet long, so a little bit larger than this, but not significantly, match it in form and structure, hopefully, to what we have there currently, and add value.

Again, the notion that

You know, someone's going to pick up and buy it.

I don't see it, but maybe you guys are the bar.

Maybe you know someone who has that interest.

For me to use my father-in-law's limited funds to pick it up, move it, and replace it, and then have to maintain it somewhere else on my property?

Again, I'm sure you have very wealthy people come before you and have the funds and resources and means to do that every day.

I am not one of them, right?

So, you know, I think this is a logical value-add thing.

I appreciate and I'm more than happy to allow Jeff and whomever else would like to document the process by which it comes down.

I'm cool with it.

Absolutely.

Let's get pictures, let's get videotape, let's do whatever.

But the notion that it's going to sit in perpetuity well maintained by me and my family who don't plan on selling this album anytime soon is... I wouldn't put money on it.

So, you know, you guys gotta do what you gotta do.

And I hope you do it in conscious understanding that you approved the hotel at the corner of my street.

and you improved, I mean I've got a 9mm round in the front of my house.

My kids saw the shooting across the street 18 months ago.

So, you know, believe me, not many people are just walking up on my property.

Well, so you have a choice.

If you want to request a deferral, if you want us to defer it, we can do that or we can vote.

It sounds like it's going to be voted deny the demolition, but that would let you move on.

Can I ask a question?

Sure.

There are people that will take it, and they're not going to buy it.

They'll take it for free and take it down, and this is something that would need to be removed at wholesale.

I don't think that, I mean I don't know if that meets their criteria with regard to preservation, but

That sounds like a reason to defer.

Would you be alright with that?

It's not going to be me.

I'm more than happy to defer.

Understanding that, you know, I know you don't want to consider

Well, it's not that we don't want to.

It's that we can't, actually.

That's not part of our, we're volunteers that are governed by the statute.

And, sir, and I apologize.

I'm actually going to have to cut you off.

Yeah, it's cool.

I'm sorry.

No, it's all right.

But I just want to make sure that we're, so you're OK with the deferral to investigate, but it sounds like the applicant is not going to do the investigation.

ended and put out the ministry is assuming a denial, it then places some choices to make.

I would assume the loss of the building.

I cannot tell you sitting here right now what I could offer, what exactly I would do tomorrow or if I would even do it tomorrow, but I know that

if at least it's deferred.

I mean I know that you all don't have a you don't have a proposal for you for a new ADU in the back so something's not being constructed next Tuesday.

You know that so so a deferral does not in any way shape or form

cause any financial problem to anybody.

I said, you know, if we had before you all tonight a project to be approved to construct something new, then there would be, you know, a little bit different sense of urgency here.

So my feeling is that just maybe in a month I can think of something and maybe I can't.

But at least I know that

A decision hasn't been made that's final for that structure.

And I don't want to, you know, speak for Clay, but, you know, just in our conversations it did seem like a, you know, it was almost, yeah, if someone is willing

to take this or in some way, there's not opposition to that.

And so I just keep thinking, all right, well, what can we do that will provide some certainty for this building?

And if there's a deferral, there's maybe a chance that you don't have to pay the fine.

I'm fine with that, folks.

But I think that there is also there is an ADU process that we need to be having underway as far as the design for something.

I do want to offer one additional thing.

I spoke with DHR and in their staff opinion, the removal of this building would not place the overall district at risk.

That's a good thing to know now.

yes and but there's been a it's something I meant to it was probably in what whatever I deleted that removed that other stuff just one of the questions so what this is

So as far as one of the criteria is an evaluation of its impact on the National Register District, not the local district.

The reason that you're having this discussion is BAR's purview is a function of the local designation.

However, one of the questions is about DHRs.

Would the demolition of a structure

There must be reason for delisting the district and that answer was no.

There's two designations, there's a local one up.

But that's all I'm trying to say.

I don't want to lose the building and if an option presents itself, a month gives me another 30 days to figure it out.

May I get an updated corrective report that has items C, D, and E?

Well, they're in the report.

Well, I mean, if we're, you know, I can show you what they were up on the screen, and we discussed.

I don't know what you meant by that when you said confidential.

And actually, Clayton, I'm trying to be helpful here.

I'm not trying to be.

Yeah, I mean, I just, I admitted these things, these three things, they were the things that I read.

And they were all, you know, they were all answered in the report.

In my discussion, I just didn't link them to CD&E.

And so, yes, then when you read the report, there was a reference to these three things.

They aren't there.

I will include them in the next one.

They don't add, there's no additional points added.

So that's where, yes, that's why I stated so.

I think it would be wise for the BAR to defer this.

I will second that.

Jeff, can you just do a roll call?

Do you mind?

Sure.

Mr. Zehmer.

And this is a motion for a BAR deferral.

Aye.

Mr. Timmerman.

Aye.

Mr. Gastinger.

Aye.

Mr. Whitney.

Aye.

Mr. Schwartz.

Yes.

Okay, so this is deferred until December 20th.

I will see what I can do.

And we will discuss it then.

Fair enough.

All right.

Good.

Sorry, you're late for the concert.

All right, well, thank you.

That is painful.

Are you guys good?

Do we need a break?

It's been two hours, so.

OK, no one's saying anything, so we'll move on.

OK.

John, are you here?

Been fun.

I'm sorry, my estimating is really off tonight.

I'm sorry, who seconded it?

Tyler, you made the motion, the second was... So, let me get to my

By the way, I was going to tell you, John, while I'm pulling this up, I did find an old 1986 photo of the house, but it didn't offer anything on what was on the roof, on the front porch.

This is a COA request for 914 Rugby Road,

This is in the historic conservation district.

The house was constructed in around 1921.

It is contributing to the conservation district.

This is a request to... Actually, sorry, Brecht.

And it's COA request to, they'll be removing a side addition and reconstructing a single story addition and at the front they'll be reconstructing the front porch.

and within a conservation district, remember that what you all have purview over is what you see from the road.

So while the applicant has shown what's going on on the side and the rear, really what falls under your purview is sort of what you see there.

And I certainly, and I hope John will address how the bricks repair there on the side coming towards the front by the chimney there.

I normally for something like this within a conservation district I probably would have reviewed this administratively with the discussion with the BAR chair and vice chair.

What gave me hesitation was the Mansard

type roof.

And Mr. Zehmer had asked some questions about the door opening.

It's out of alignment.

And so he had a pretty good question about that.

But I said, within a conservation district, it's a much lighter touch.

I would have been comfortable approving it, except for that roof, like I said.

We know that the existing front porch was reconstructed

sometime before the district was established.

I do know there was a single story porch on the side to the left that sort of grew up sometime between 1920 and I believe the 1980s.

So what you see there is not original.

Any questions for me?

I think your report was a pretty good summary of, and I agree with the assessment of it, thank you for doing that.

Actually, very easy to work with, Jeff, thank you.

The one thing that I did take exception to was the use of the word mansard.

And I never really thought of these curved roofs, I call them deck on hip roofs.

I understand why they call it mansard, but when you say mansard, to me it has a different connotation.

kind of a French or Italianate detail on houses.

And this curved roof that we're talking about here is something that you often see on a Colonial house above a bay window, for instance.

So it's not foreign.

There are quite a variety of different porch styles and roof styles in the neighborhood, so I don't know that that would necessarily disqualify it.

So that's really the only thing I wanted to address is the use of the word mansard.

I would probably call it something else.

Anything else?

The attendee who's called in?

I don't know.

OK, there we go.

Don't click on it yet.

So any questions from the public, please press star 9.

If you're calling in, you want to ask a question.

Nope, OK.

For who?

Is that Remy?

No, all right.

I'm just listening.

No, I don't.

Jeff put up a couple of pictures from the rest of the neighborhood and I noticed one other house that was probably built by the same guy.

It was 807 Rugby.

The answer to your question is it's off center because the room on the left side is wider than the room on the right so the center hall of the house is off.

But in most cases, you would still find the door centered on the window and the dormer above.

In this case, it's not.

So this porch has been redone at some point, and I think what they did was they widened it to try to conceal the asymmetry.

So we're trying to change that.

And I think the other comment you made, Jeff, was that the door is actually being refashioned.

So what's there now is an existing elliptical opening with two side lights.

I guess I have one question.

And I'll kind of couch it within my comment, so maybe you don't even need to come back to me.

But my, I think generally that this is going to fall safely within the Conservation District guidelines.

My only concern is about the EPDM and it's the detail of the intersection of those two materials and given that kind of

The elevation of the street, it feels like the EPDM is going to be going to be visible.

But maybe that's so my question is, you know, for the architect to explain a little bit more about that detail and maybe lay any clear visibility of that group.

One of the things about this property which is hard to really tell from the photographs that we have is that the property falls about six feet from the sidewalk.

So you're always really, the public is always looking at this property from slightly above it.

I know that's really not represented in the photographs that I've given you because I'm standing in the front courtyard.

But one of the things I was trying to do is not do a completely flat roof like you see in some of the other properties that Jeff gave you.

921 Rugby, for instance, is probably the knee-jerk way to add on a wing to the house with a value straight at the top.

I'm concerned about looking down from the street and seeing a flat EPDM roof.

So I was thinking the copper roof that

Curves back away from you in perspective is probably a softer way to deal with that, and it helps prevent seeing the rubber roof from above at the street level.

I feel like we are, given the lower slope.

And at what color would the EPDM be?

We'd have to model it and lay it out and figure it out and use a story pole of some sort to figure it out, but that was the reason of raising it a bit.

And if you were to chase this elevation around the side, the reason that roof doesn't get taller is because it would begin to clip the second floor windows, which we'd like to preserve.

For what it's worth, that addition is going to recede from the front of the house a fair bit, and it's in shadow with the house next to it.

That's possible.

You're basically building two roofs on there because it's a broad expansive roof.

OK.

Comments from the public.

Nope.

OK.

Comments from the board.

unless there's any dissent.

Not dissenting, but Roger, I think the suggestion was flat lock.

That's kind of where my mind went.

And I think the size of the front porch covering could handle it.

Although looking at it here and I rode by the other day, it doesn't seem like you really can see much of that.

Forgive me, is this a preliminary discussion?

We're in discussion, yes.

Okay, so we'll see details later.

No.

No, no, no.

Oh, no, no, no.

This is a request.

And one of the things with this,

If you all have some instructions, you don't even have to take a motion.

Does anybody have anything else they want to say?

Or I would make a motion.

Cool.

Thank you.

There we are.

Jeff, where did you hide it?

There it is.

OK.

Having considered the standards set forth in the city code, including city design guidelines for historic conservation districts, I move to find that the proposed side addition of front porch alterations at 914 Rugby Road satisfy the BAR's criteria and are compatible with this property and other properties in the Rugby Road Historic Conservation District, and that the BAR approves the application as submitted.

I second.

Second.

Jeff, do you want to, sorry.

Is there any discussion of that motion?

I don't think there is.

Mr. Zehmer?

Aye.

Mr. Timmerman?

Aye.

Mr. Whitney?

Aye.

I'm throwing things up, mixing it up here.

Mr. Gastinger?

Yes.

and Mr. Birle.

The motion passes.

John, thank you.

And I actually have to say, I've learned a lot.

John's responses have been very thorough, and it's like, oh, oh.

And as not an architect, I very much appreciated your willingness to put the time into your answers.

So I appreciate that.

Thank you all.

We're going to take a quick five-minute break before next.

I don't know these are still going to be

It's going to take more than, I mean this photograph obviously only moved on unless you've got something and I think another one I've seen shows it so far.

If these weren't there or if they're not original, then sort of how do you present them?

But yeah, I mean all this stuff, scaffolding to get going.

The, um, you'll need an outlet when you go and talk to Chuck.

Say, what do I need from you for a building permit or whatever?

I don't have to talk to them.

You know, a sidewalk closure permit.

But the, um,

I'm not going to stop you from fixing the bricks.

I'm not going to stop you from fixing them.

I thought I had a bunch of us.

These are your photos.

Oh, what else do we have left?

I mean, I can, it just, so it's easier,

There you go.

We'll walk through that first page.

So what we have is this will be, they're aware of the project.

I mentioned it.

at the October meeting and talked about, yeah, this is something people are enthused about, the city's enthused about, it's an opportunity.

It's not really, not to cover the history, you really don't talk about the inside, it's really getting at these key things that you want and what they'll have your view and what information you'll need to get to them.

and I think they've got any questions for you.

and then the next deadline is the 29th.

I don't have to ask.

But when we had that discussion about, there was the maintenance stuff we wanted to do and then the idea was get something in here for that preliminary discussion.

So the scale and then December.

We can get things approved or get things, you know,

you've got something you've got drawings ready to go I think it's it's an

I walked by this wall every day for years, and it's like, let's look at it and hang out.

But I can still wonder what an earthquake in 2001, how much shook some of these things.

Can we start?

Everybody to their places.

So let me, I know we're behind.

Let me get rid of this image here of John's house.

and what we will be discussing next.

This is 300 Court Square.

I don't know how long it's been, 300 Court Square, because it's had several other addresses.

But this is known as the Farish House.

It's at the corner of 6th Street Northeast and East Jefferson.

It's opposite sort of to the southeast of the county courthouse.

and the, I mentioned this to you last month, talking about some of the BRIC repairs and things that, are these yours?

And so we talked about some of the repairs and I've been talking with the owners and applicants about

The things that can be done that are maintenance and repairs that could be done, should be done and working with them on that.

We're working with the folks in the building inspector to sort of, we're all on the same page with that.

But what they've also got are some alterations to the building that are going to require BAR approval.

Excuse me, my recommendation was to have this being the scale of the project, preliminary discussion, but also really try to get into some of the key design things that

we would want to see, the BAR would want to see relative to reviewing these alterations.

Particularly the reconstruction of the East Portico, although because of the property line it would have to be a slightly or somewhat reduced scale reconstruction, there is the question of the small

windows on the front elevation, the four small windows.

And then there's the, I was calling it a courtyard, but that rear area in the back, whether to construct a sort of the pavilion area there and sort of what information you all would want to see.

You know, I just noticed these

Those are gone, aren't they?

It's pretty neat.

I did go through the building.

It's a surprise.

I was kind of scared going into it, because I've walked by this building for 20-some years, and I've never seen anybody in it.

So I didn't know what I was walking into.

But it's going to be pretty wild when this work gets done.

So with that, I think I want to pass it off to Barry and Candice and let them

you know I will move a screen or slide however you want me to and I think again my mention to them was to get to a discussion with you all about

what details you want not necessarily I don't think there's anything here that's troubling as far as some of the alterations but you know have that conversation about preparing an application.

Hi I'm Candace Loach.

I know a few of you guys and I just wanted to introduce our property.

I have the Inn at Court Square for 22 years, which I restored as the oldest house downtown.

So I'm very excited about doing the oldest hotel downtown.

And it's an 1850s hotel.

And there's been many different hotels through the 1960s.

And we're very just

We just love the building, it's beautiful and I just want to bring it back to life and make that corner more lively.

Right now, like Jeff said, it's very dark and dreary when you walk by and we're just hoping to bring life back to that end of Court Square.

So you have the handouts in the list of items and I'm not going to go verbatim through each one of those.

I'm just going to ask Jeff to slowly page through this document and he's already mentioned the windows on the front.

We have a photograph where one window is not there.

We do not have

photographic evidence of all for not being there, but our Mason tells us, John Halpern, that there's evidence that those windows were added at some point because of a saw cut rather than the toothing of the brick, per se.

But if you just keep paging through, this is a photograph of the paint.

You've seen this.

That was on the building for a number of years.

It's been removed at this point.

And John was there today and they actually painted back in the red color of the brick.

So he was doing a sample.

I don't know if you had a chance to get by and see the paint colors for the trim or doors, but he was also doing a sample of the limewash.

Next slide.

just showing some of the damage that's there.

And we plan on replacing that with this common brick.

Yeah, you want to show that?