Board of Architectural Review Meeting   5/21/2024

hand over the reins.

I'm sorry about the pizza thing.

We got an email today.

We got cheese on wheat.

We're good to go.

I'll work on that next month.

All right, we'll go into our regular preamble.

Welcome to this regular monthly meeting in 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.

Any speakers would like to use the podium up there, please.

Comments 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.

Alrighty.

First off, do we have any matters from the public that are not on our agenda or on the consent agenda?

Nobody in the room.

Remy.

Nobody on the Zoom.

All right.

Consent agenda.

There's some discussion.

Yeah, I'd like to move 113 West Main to the regular agenda.

You don't need it, actually.

One 13 West Main Street, the railing and fence at the rear courtyard will be moved to the regular agenda under new items.

For the consent agenda, the only remaining item is the approval of the meeting minutes from April 16th, 2024.

Is there any discussion or corrections needed in the minutes?

I'm going to abstain.

I wasn't here last month.

Thank you.

We don't have any deferred items this month.

So we will move to our first new item, coming off the consent agenda, 113 West Main Street.

The project is a railing and fence at the rear courtyard.

Oh, we have.

Yeah.

Let me do my song and dancing.

And then so, sorry, I'm having an eye moment.

So this is a COA request for the addresses 113 West Main Street.

Get it up on the big screen here.

There it is.

And you all saw this so a year or two ago.

Butterfly Mural, and it was on the rear and the side.

The request here is for the back, just click down, there's a paved area at the rear of the building facing Market Street, and the request is to fence that area in, create an enclosure for people in the building, just create a little more privacy back there.

The

and this is the in the original application that came in it was everything was the same but they had shown sort of unfinished wood or at least not stained or painted I had mentioned to the applicant that

and typically we'd like to see fences, railings, wood painted or have an opaque stain and also just suggested it would bring some color to the area.

You'll actually raise some interesting questions so just to clarify that the guidelines do not require

or rather the guidelines do not prohibit if you will unfinished wood other than on the mall and the cafe spaces and vendor spaces seems to be where there's only some you know something very specific about unpainted or unfinished wood so

If you all feel strongly about it one way or the other, you can certainly stick with unfinished if you'd like.

I will say that the color choice, I treat it like I do with people painting their building.

The

Questions about, as I mentioned earlier, there are some zoning questions, and I mentioned this to Adrienne there because the DX zoning, there are some constraints on fences.

I think that

How would they view this?

We didn't complete that conversation.

We're going to continue it on Thursday.

So my recommendation is that you all treat this as look at it through the lens of the design guidelines.

And also, again, speaking more to the Channel 10 audience,

Everything that you review, if it requires a building permit, then an approved COA does not supersede that.

It doesn't, nor does it supersede zoning.

So if something comes in for a building permit and it's not consistent with the building code or if it's in conflict with zoning, then they don't get a building permit issued, regardless of a COA or a BAR design review.

So just to be clear on that,

but if you all, you know, wanted to include something in considering condition of approval, you know, that it meet with the zoning you certainly can but it's not necessary.

I would say that if this went through the process and let's say for example the first panel there zoning said that had to be moved back or zoning said that height had to be

a foot shorter, whatever.

I would treat that as something I'd worked with the applicant on if it significantly altered this

I'd probably confer with you all, but this is rather minor, and I'm more concerned that zoning allows something than I am about zoning changing the design in a significant way.

So, apologize for the planning 101 course there, but I know the applicant's here and can answer the questions.

Some of them I answered today with the email I sent out.

I'm satisfied with how Adrian responded to the question about the trash.

I think that makes sense, the spacing of the beams.

And I would have no problem, again, with the questions raised.

I do recommend approval to COA.

All right.

Thank you, Jeff.

Okay, thank you.

Do we have any questions from the public?

Alright, we'll go to questions from the BAR.

I can't seem to, I can't get the internet to load, so I can't get the email that Jeff sent out.

The idea is to remove the bottom board with this fence system

It can customize the distance between the rails.

We can leave a rail off.

It's very customizable, which is why we wanted to go with this one for maintenance purposes.

Okay.

So I tried to keep that back just so there's a visual connection there at the pedestrian level.

The higher fence was just to give the residents sort of a sense of that warmth, the security of sitting against a higher wall, but then wanted to step it down as we got closer to the sidewalk.

So there's some visual connection there.

Does the retaining wall, it's about the same height all the way through?

Is that correct?

Yeah, it's about the same height and it's been leaning, I think, at that same angle for about 14 years.

Okay, and I have one on the gate.

I guess you've got a gate, what I would call a pedestrian opening on the left where you have the boards.

And then you've got like, basically, utilitarian cattle gate, as I would call it.

We still have to get.

Yeah, we still have to be able to let residents load in.

And then the maintenance team does use that gate to get their vehicle up when necessary.

I don't know if I followed the whole conversation about the painted or versus unpainted.

The original proposal was unpainted.

Okay, so that's the current proposal is to paint it.

Any more questions from the BAR?

Comments from the public?

For the painted, unpainted, I think I figured out maybe where some of the confusion is.

Under section three, materials and textures, it talks about all exterior trim, woodwork, decking and flooring must be painted or stained solid.

It doesn't mention fences, but it does mention woodwork and stuff.

And I'm not sure if that's how the whole precedent got slipped in here.

Yeah, I don't know.

Personally, I mean, I do think it's

This is a downtown urban area.

The paint makes more sense to me than leaving it unfinished to just weather.

I know there is precedent for some weather wood out there, but I do think that this is a more appropriate to paint it.

I am a little bit struggling with the idea that it is a six foot tall fence in a front yard.

I know it's not facing the front,

and the transparency that's shown is great.

But it is, you know, if this was a house on Park Street, we wouldn't allow this until it gets back behind the front of the house.

So I do see that you're pulling back where the six foot starts.

That's just what's got me a little bit torn.

I understand the reason for it.

I understand what you're

The description you provided for the maintenance of any trash or something that might slip under there.

That makes sense to me.

But yeah, I guess I'm curious.

I could say I couldn't help but think of it in that one section of the guidelines, the rear buildings.

Okay, given that on the other side of the retaining wall, it will only be about that four feet tall.

It just wouldn't provide the same secured

Security for the residents there.

Yes.

Yeah.

I mean, in the walls and fences guideline, fences should not exceed six feet in height in the side and rear yards.

So I think there's an argument this is a rear yard.

And I didn't know if that was really functionally necessary.

It seems a little vulnerable.

I could maybe see a design argument, but from an urban mystically it's not really helping anything.

Is there any reason why you didn't bring that out to the street or to the right of way?

It was more so so that there's a place if the vehicle has to pull in.

It was just to bring it out to the sidewalk.

I feel bad to pick at something like this because it really is a simple request.

My concern was precedent, but I'm fine to approve it if we're... I don't want to hold it up.

Did want to make sure you had a solution for getting junk out of there that might fall in and you solved that.

Are we ready for a motion?

Good.

May I?

Certainly.

Having considered the standards set forth within the city care, including design guidelines for ADC districts, I'm here to file a proposed fence railing at 113 West Main Street.

Satisfied with the BAR's criteria, the pedal was properly, another property student at the ADC district, and the BAR approves the application submitted with a blue fence.

With the condition of what planks be painted or have,

an opaque stain with the call to be okayed by a staff.

So we're not approving it as blue?

I think we should strike the words blue face.

Whatever Jeff likes.

But it will be painted.

Second.

Roger.

James.

I think the intent of the motion is basically as written.

And so thank you, Mr. Bailey, for the motion.

Thank you, Mr. Birle, for the second.

He beats you to it.

I'll call the break.

Hi.

Raj.

Hi.

Tyler.

Hi.

David.

Hi.

Cheri.

Carl.

Yes.

It's OK, John.

Thank you very much.

I am I. James, that happens to me, it happened to me too, as Cheri.

I wonder, I think they're probably going to put the recycling bins in that little

Alrighty.

Working out the cakes.

Next up, Muriel.

If someone's always asking me about Muriels, I want to go, it's not a Muriel.

Next up, 207 14th Street.

Let me scroll down to the right graphics.

And I know we briefly discussed this at the early meeting, but to reintroduce this, the request is for 207 14th Street.

It's a non-contributing structure in the Rugby Road University Circle, Venable Neighborhood, ADC District.

The request is to, you all saw this

A couple times over the last few years, most recently, substantial renovations and rehab to the, not renovate, rehabilitation to the exterior.

And so by the other day, it really looks nice.

It's operating as a hotel.

It's a neat building.

It probably should be a contributing structure, but when the district was established, it was not.

The

The request is this area here above this breezeway entry to install a mural.

We do not have the artwork for that.

I wanted to bring it forward, and as I had mentioned earlier, one way to approach it was approval of a mural in this location and then when the artwork was complete, if there seemed to be any issues to bring it back to the BAR,

one caveat being what, regardless how it's done, if the mural is determined by zoning to be a commercial sign, then it's not allowed.

So that's not a burden on you all.

In the conversation that you had earlier, the sense was to have it as you can discuss about this location and what

where it should be or not be, but that a determination for a COA would require reviewing of the proposed artwork.

And my suggestion is that the BAR have a conversation with the applicant who is here, resolve any questions.

I think it's

This is a painted building, so it meets all the requirements for allowing a mural there.

I think you can get a lot of that out of the way and then have the applicant request a deferral so that they can get that artwork completed and then return and get the formal approval if granted.

I really don't have a presentation per se, mainly here just to answer any questions I might be able to help with.

As he mentioned, we're basically looking to put a decorative mural on the really stark space of the building to kind of bring color to the building into the area as well.

We are working with the Charlottesville mural project to do that.

The cost is going to be anywhere from 8,000 to 15,000 depending on the design.

So from our perspective we're wanting to try to get at least approval that a mural can go on there before we start the design work with them and the expense of that.

All righty.

We'll go through our process.

Are there any questions from the public?

Sure.

So first and foremost, there's no political message or anything that could be perceived as anything.

The hotel is a mid-century modern design.

The theming throughout the guest rooms and everything.

So the color schemes and designs would be something that would tie in to the field of the 60s.

It would not have any

Boarding on it or anything that could be construed as signage or anything like that either.

That's the extent of the design at this point.

You have a size in mind?

Any more questions?

I think the staff reports done a good job of calling out not marring any architectural features on the facade there, but beyond that, I think it's a fine place for a mural.

I think one thing we talked about at our pre-meeting, I think you listened in on some of that, was

There's a number of us that do feel we should see the content before we can make an official final ruling.

As Jeff described, possibly the process would be that you request a deferral and that gives you plenty of time to get that design done before you bring it back to us.

If we ask to defer it, then you have one month to get that turned around.

Sure.

But any other comments on binding, but I was just gonna say, I mean, yeah, the way that the staff reports marked out places that you're not going to touch with the mural, I don't see that you could have any possible way of this being problematic.

I mean, I don't want to say guaranteed, but it seems pretty guaranteed.

I would love to see it wrap the corner and actually be on two facades because you've got whites based on the other side.

I was thinking of some Trump-Loy thing, like some really creative thing where

You see one thing on the front side and then it turns or tricks one on the second facade.

Anyway, I'm not an artist, but there is a lot of white space on the other facade.

So I was just going to comment, I wouldn't actually want to hamper you by saying

You need to be eight over eight, above, you know, centered over the breezeway door and two feet up or, I mean, you've got a lot of white space there and it'd be cool to use it in a very creative way.

You know, I don't, if you wanted a piece of art hung up there, you would put a piece of art up, but a mural is quite different.

And again, I agree with Cheri.

I don't think we want to limit you to these

I think that definitely helps with the creativity from the artist.

I agree.

I think this is a great space for a mural.

And the main reason, the left part is much more visible.

And is the mod not always like that, or I thought it's... No, so it is actually permanent.

So having spent part of last week in Cincinnati, the artwork on the walls, it's really fascinating where that sort of an end of a building that maybe a part of the block's been removed and how

I mean, it really activates it.

I agree with you all entirely.

We should probably allow more and be, you know, encourage more.

The only thing I would ask in this is that if, and in helping Jim in the conversation with the artists, if there are any of these, I really, with this note kind of

kept it above that opening, away from the window in the canopy and below that band, brick band.

If there's anything there that you want to remove, and I share, I thought, interesting what you said about letting the artist incorporate things into the artwork.

I think the safe answer is to look at that note, but I think what we're all saying, someone correct me if I'm mis-speaking, you can ignore it entirely if you want to.

But the really safe thing would be to... I think there's Section J in Chapter 6 is really the pertinent section in our guidelines to look at, if you haven't.

One guideline that jumps out at me is painting directly onto the walls of a non-contributing building, and then a side note about a contributing building, but it will be considered on a case-by-case basis.

Technically, this is a non-contributing building, so we're going to look at it on a case-by-case basis, which I think actually, from what I'm hearing, is going to give you plenty of freedom.

I think there's some sentiment that this would be a great contributing building to the district, but it's currently not.

And for example, I think the belt course could be used as part of the mural in a contrasting color.

You know, I think that's what we're saying.

We don't want it to disappear.

But I wouldn't necessarily say that the mural has to be limited to the area below.

It would be kind of cool to use that as some sort of framing or some part of the mural.

I don't know if I'd want it to be painted over, like I said, then it would disappear and it is a significant feature, but I wouldn't say that you have to stay away from it.

I'll just add to the conversation, I just want to commend you on what you've done so far, looking at the before and after.

I think it's worth saying that I think you've treated this with sensitivity and grace and simplicity that really adds to the street.

Thank you.

I think getting it on the register

with our contributing or not on our local designation, getting it on listed, getting it that eligibility for rehab tax credits, which I know you all had experience with.

So that's one of the things I'd like to say.

I think so.

In the spirit of a straw poll, I just want to make sure, does anybody have hard objections to a mural with this location?

I'm not ready to do that.

I think we just... I also think we're a very good point up during the pre-meeting, which is the BAR is an open public meeting, and so we need to make sure we provide that forum for the public to comment on these things.

So I think you're getting good feedback from the folks sitting up here.

Does that need to be in writing or just right now?

Do we need a motion to accept the deferral?

Correct, yes.

All in favor?

Aye.

There you go.

Thank you.

Good luck.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you.

Come back with something cool.

Thank you.

Otherwise, James might forget his name.

Thank you.

But David's like one of my middle names, so I should be good.

Cheri's not your middle name.

All right, so next on our list is 130 Madison Lane.

We had talked to the applicants about bumping it to after our preliminary discussion of Portland.

It does take at least 15 minutes to get through the off the plane and to the exit doors.

I thought he was coming into Charlottesville.

I love always.

No promise.

Let's not wait for that.

We're not going to wait for that.

So this is 130 Madison Lane.

Yeah, I mean, I could just use this if it's what he sent.

So Bob, since you're there, we do need another architect coming up in August.

We do.

Oh, really?

I just want to add on that.

I was not aware she was an architect at the ERB because I hadn't met her yet.

But I'm sitting and listening going,

She's better than an architect.

She teaches architecture, so she lives and breathes it.

All right, so, wait, let me just, sorry, I'm getting lost in thought.

This is a COA request for some renovations at St.

Elmo's Hall, a fraternity house over at the university.

This has come to you a few times in the past couple of years for most recently renovations or rehabilitation of the roof and the dormers.

There's been some things over the years with the railing at the top.

This request is coming in to change out one of the windows within the center dormer to make it an operable door and with that

to make that door the full height to be consistent with building code requires some alterations on the floor level above the portico.

And I'll get back to that in a second.

And then at the rear is a new egress from the second floor that will involve a new stair, two wall lights, which will match what's on one side of the building already.

The new door at the back will, you know, modified masonry opening, although the width will remain, the height will be changed, and that new door will be manufactured to simulate the window that's there now with panels below it.

So that's what's going on there.

That is a function of emergency egress.

The circumstances on the front, this is a space that is used.

It's accessed.

There's, I would say, it's simply an acknowledgement that it will be accessed, and whether it's out windows or up the gutters.

So in lieu of

saying no, you can't go there.

The next best is acknowledging that that is going to occur and to make that access in and out safe and meet code.

The window that's currently in the middle is a

was installed I think in a 1980 renovation, so this is not replacing an existing window, although the windows that's there does simulate the windows that are on either side of it.

So in that regard, I think

Those circumstances here help me be comfortable with this change.

It's been thoroughly documented what's occurring.

If it's ever has to be replaced, we know it was changed.

It is the change in a way that meets the building code relative to the height of this door or the door that will be installed.

My recommendation is approval on this, but I'll leave that to you and Mr. Pinio will answer any questions.

Do you have any for me?

So I'm just going to do his presentation.

While we're here today to discuss the required path of egress from the Portico Roof, a significant amount of relevant work has already been performed at the roof of the Portico in an effort to ensure its longevity and protect the occupants.

It's relevant enough that we'd like to take a moment to review the work performed already and then get into the next natural evolution.

So I think the next slide.

on July 7th.

And this project has kind of come to us organically.

It started as a kind of a triage that we have some significant rot.

It's an unsafe situation.

Can you help us ameliorate it and get safe?

On July 7th of 2022, we were called by concerned members of the St.

Elmo Board regarding the state of the Portico Roof.

At the subsequent site visit, significant amounts of rot were discovered through extensive water infiltration of the existing rubber roof.

Images on the screen here show the extent of damage to the roof and

A first for me was squeezing water out of saturated roof sheathing.

Most concerning in this scenario was the failure of the railing attachments and the portico roof was immediately closed by the board to all unauthorized occupants.

Next slide, please.

A follow-up site visit on July 13 with Steve Barber from Dunbar Engineering involved careful selective demolition of the portico ceiling in order to better analyze the state of the joists.

Water infiltration was discovered along the port beam as well as some navigation of the original historic joists.

This degradation was not as severe as the roof sheathing and sleepers that compromised the upper layer of the roof, but was noteworthy enough to require reinforcing of the historical structural elements, both the joist and the beam.

Steve Barber of Dunbar proceeded with the design that would immediately address the existing conditions.

And this maintenance project to stabilize and reinforce the historic roof was performed over the summer of 2022.

With the roof open, the St.

Elmo Board opted at the time to design for an assembly use loads and code compliant horizontal loading on the guardrail in an effort to ensure the safest, most accident resistant portico or a rooftop portico.

Next slide, please.

It's no secret that the residents of student housing along Madison Lane often occupy areas not authorized for use or occupancy.

Acknowledging this fact, we as architects and engineers with the support of the St.

Elmo board have the ethical and professional requirement to plan for and design with this in mind and make this space as safe as possible.

The proposal in front of you outlines the next steps in doing so by making code compliant egress from the portico rooftop.

Next slide please.

The proposal outlines two ways of ensuring safe egress.

What you're looking at here, we have a 3D point cloud scanner

We'd love to sell this service to anybody who wants it, but it's a very, it's a digital duplicate and it allows us interior spaces, exterior spaces, floor elevations.

We know what the existing conditions are and we know how to design to it.

So there's that level of kind of review.

We scan the entire building and all of the roof structures.

Let's see, where am I?

The proposal outlines two ways ensuring safe egress must occur.

The first is through creating a code-compliant egress door from the portico roof.

In order to ensure the correctness of the proposed design, we utilized our 3D point cloud scanner to understand exact elevations of both the interior floor level and the exterior roof level.

By understanding these elevations, we are able to confidently propose a solution that lowers the elevation of the roof by approximately 10 inches while still retaining the historic joist and original trim for the existing portico.

Code compliance necessitates a three-foot platform on either side of the door, and that's why lowering the roof helped.

Next slide, please.

The new egress door will be custom fabricated from wood and made to match the existing adjacent historic windows.

The introduction of the egress door does not require altering the shape or form of the original dormer.

We aim to merely lower the sill of the existing opening, grille patterns, and profiles

The grill patterns and profiles will match the adjacent historic windows and jam trim that matches the existing profiles will extend down to the lower roof deck.

Code compliant lighting at the door along an egress path will tactfully be placed at the sides of the roof cutout.

It should be noted that the existing central dormer window is not original and was replaced twice

between 2008 and today.

A metal French case window is in the opening currently.

The image below highlights the difference between the original opening and the metal replacement window.

The lowering does, however, drop the elevation of the waterproof membrane below the adjacent gutter line, requiring us to propose two new copper downspouts directly behind the existing portico columns.

These downspouts and scuppers will match the existing original downspouts found on the exterior corners.

The image of the existing conditions as well as the others provided in the submittal booklet show how the alterations will have minimal to no impact from a pedestrian perspective as an existing curve on the top of the portico conceals the view of the roof.

The second requirement for making the portico roof a code compliant, occupiable space is the introduction of exterior egress stair on the rear facade and contained with the existing walled courtyard.

In order to access the stairs, this proposal outlines lowering the sill of an existing window opening.

The width of the masonry opening is able to remain as is a new custom wood door intended to replicate the look of adjacent original windows by replacing jam and header trim profiles, grill trim locations and profile, and then feature a solid two panel section below.

Next slide please.

As staff mentioned, in 2008, the BAR reviewed and approved changing windows to doors on the rear elevation of this building.

So this approach is not without precedent.

It was also imperative for us to avoid the large palladium window, which this proposal successfully accomplishes.

The overarching message of this presentation is life safety.

How can we create a code-compliant path of egress from this roof in order to officially consider it an occupiable space?

However, life safety cannot be the only criteria for design in a house of this historic prominence and contextual importance.

Recognizing the significance of the district and the structure, the proposal has gone to great lengths to ensure a historically compatible and contextually sensitive intervention that meets our egress requirements.

We want this building to be used safely, but we also want it to last another 200 years, and we aim for it to continue to be an important stitch in the fabric of the corner ADCD.

St.

Elmo's Board should be commended for their proactive approach.

The Board has left no stone unturned when it comes to encouraging us to explore the solutions to the challenge at hand.

Despite this being the first time in front of the board, we would like to request a vote, if possible, to allow the construction of this project to proceed this summer while students are away.

We are eager to hear any comments and feedback you might have and we are happy to answer any questions.

I'm ready.

Thank you all so much.

I appreciate it.

Kevin would be proud.

Do we have any questions from the public?

Do you mean like the, not the jam, but like the floor itself of the deck?

Yeah.

Okay.

And that's existing, right?

Currently, there are like wooden deck tiles.

I have a constructional question about the slate that you're adding.

You're adding, of course, a slate at the bottom.

I believe we're removing the slate below the central window.

If you thought, what's the extent, what's going to happen to the existing slate?

Does this have to be removed?

Didn't we just replace this?

Yeah, the slate that's on there now came before us about a couple years ago.

So it is synthetic slate.

I guess the tricky part is usually

Yeah.

I guess that's probably true.

Yeah, it's not an issue.

It's not a historic.

Basically to make this code compliant because of the load of that and the capacity to be able to get out.

Basically.

Yeah, because the sill detail on the middle, you know, on the door, you'd have to be maybe from Bailey, you know, like you, you just won't be able to see it.

It's so high up that elevation.

Well, there's a curb that goes around too.

There is, and that's historic.

You can see it in that picture and you can see it in the, in the, oh, it's a kind of a cool, it's kind of weird in some ways, but

It mirrors the portico columns and it kind of jumps up and moves and that's why the railing goes with it.

Any other questions?

There's some festoon lighting up there that's in some of the pictures, but I'm assuming that's not part of the proposal.

The string lights.

Yeah.

They're seasonal.

All right.

No one's online.

I like the idea.

Kevin usually starts with like a gushing thank you to the camera.

He didn't set me up there.

Alright, Ms.

I'd like to second that.

Mr. Schwarz?

Yes.

Ms.

Lewis?

Aye.

Mr. Timmerman?

Aye.

Aye.

Mr. Birle?

Yes.

Mr. Bailey?

Mr. Gastinger?

Aye.

And the chair votes aye as well.

Thank you all very much.

Congratulations.

Thank you.

Thank you.

All right.

There's, oh.

I was.

Alright, we're done with our regular or rather new items and we're on to other business.

Alright, let me just tee this up and go back there.

They actually got enthused when I said we might be bumping them ahead, so that's a good thing it didn't take too long.

It's supposed to be at six o'clock.

I used to keep track of when we stopped and started things, but there's no trend line whatsoever.

So this is not, this is a preliminary discussion.

They are required for any project within a

ADC District, or IPP, in excess of $350,000.

It's a rather low bar to get over, but this project is very unique, and I've had conversations with the applicant for several months, and I hope I didn't get too confusing with the whole.

There are

Grant Funds associated with this and because of the proximity to the National Register District, just wanted to make sure that that distinction between what's on the National Register and what is a local designated district, make sure that we didn't have any problems later down the road.

But this is a project

being pursued by University Real Estate Foundation.

It is at that northeast corner of 10th Street and Wirtland.

It is the three parcels here are not within the district.

But the reason this is coming to you all is that there is a segment of the parking lot at Stacey Hall that will be incorporated into this.

That is within the West Main ADC District.

Therefore, well, if this had been a UVA project, then the university is not subject to local zoning.

However, this portion will become part of the VREF project.

So that's why it's now subject to zoning and subject to BAR review.

It's a, normally I know in a preliminary discussion I offer some sort of a review of what's nearby, setbacks, stepbacks, spacing between buildings, heights, materials.

I didn't know exactly what to do with this one because this also is probably one of the first large scale projects you all have looked at.

and

Fortunately, the height that's allowed here is, I think, up to 13 stories with the bonus that's not being pursued.

So that makes life a little easier in regards to we're not getting into a very, very, very tall building and having that discussion.

but I don't know, relative to the spacing and setbacks, I've come down and after some thought last week, again, when I was in Cincinnati at a new urban congress discussion, sort of, and bounced the idea off some folks there, that this really is a, this site

is, allows, we want a good design there, but there's really not necessarily a, it's not taking its cues from what's next to it or what's nearby.

There was even a suggestion of well can you tell your BAR that

They don't review it.

The code doesn't allow that discretion on your part, but I do think that there's a way to look at this, you know, with certainly fitting into the city, but that it's not taking its cue from the spacing of the buildings across the street at Wirtland or

or the building forms that are up on West Main.

So I'm not saying it's a free for all, but I think that there are some opportunities here for architectural creativity.

The other piece about the zoning, and I can't answer it tonight, is obviously with buildings, with the code, there's the open space requirements.

There's also the tree canopy requirements.

What we're finding in some of the development review discussions is

The buildings are being proposed right up to the parcel line or right up to the setback, but that's not leaving enough space for that required tree cover.

And I'm not prepared to say tonight what should be required, what should be left and what space is needed for those trees to go.

But I know that landscaping is under your purview and that's something that you pay a lot of attention to.

So, I'm introducing this with a lot of caveats, and I apologize for that, but like other large-scale projects, and I think I shared this with you all, we were, we are not, you all are not allowed to approve incremental COAs.

You can't vote and say, yeah, we're fine with the height or the masking scale.

as had been the case several years ago.

But we've understood with these projects that there's the iterative development of the design and the building of the design.

So this is the first preliminary discussion.

At some point, preferably the next round, I would ask you all to make it a formal application.

but the understanding that it may be those discussions may end with a as with the prior or with 14th Street.

You all we know that not going to vote on something.

So you would say, all right, requested deferral and we can talk about that process.

It's a bit of a gentleman's agreement or general person's agreement.

Um, but that's the best way we found to make it function.

And, um, and the reason I just

We have that formal application is that yes, we could say we're just going to have a series of preliminary discussions and then when you're ready, bring back the final plan.

But then that sort of says to the public, oh, we'll let you know.

So that formal application then makes it a public process, not this isn't.

Long-winded there, but I think I gave myself a good note for how to do next on this.

But again, this is not entirely in the district.

You can apply the West Main criteria as you wish, but I would suggest you not let it constrain you all.

And with that, I'll step back if you have any questions for me.

Otherwise,

and I will just one image while I'm scrolling here.

The old sandborn maps, nothing was, anything that was here earlier is gone.

So there are no historic buildings or structures on this.

It really is to a certain extent an empty canvas.

Is the Koch building an IPP?

Yes.

Yes.

Hi, I'm JT Englert with National Housing Trust, a member of the development team that was selected by the UVA Foundation or UREF to develop affordable housing at this site.

This initiative I think was, you know, widely known, so I'm not going to go into too much detail, but our proposal and our development team consists of

The chosen developers for this site consist of preservation of affordable housing, a nonprofit based in Boston that has significant experience doing large-scale development with universities and other institutions.

National Housing Trust, where I work, we co-own and are co-developing Kindlewood, formerly known as Friendship Court Apartments with Piedmont Housing Alliance.

and WDC, Wickliffe Development Consulting.

They're a Northern Virginia based SWAM and they're a for-profit, National Housing Trust is a non-profit.

The three of us are the development team and our proposal was really predicated on meeting the goal

set out by the UVA Foundation in their RFPs to thoughtfully and collaboratively develop affordable housing.

Since then, the new zoning code was enacted and were

really just this preliminary and we're in a process and our goal is to design this in context and collaboratively with the university, with the surrounding community and something that is financeable.

Thank you, JT.

So I just want to walk you quickly through an outline of the site.

Jeff has sort of given us a good overview to begin with, but a lot of the reason that we're here tonight is that we have a lot of questions about how to apply the ADC recommendations and guidelines.

So as Jeff mentioned, there are four properties that are in the process of being combined to become the new project site.

And so part of that will include a subdivision of the current Stacey Hall lot.

Go ahead, Jeff.

Just the same image, but giving you that 3D overhead view.

So the total lot acreage will be just over two acres.

And so you can see it again here in the bird's eye.

And I think it's helpful to just get to really see that context of what the other buildings are doing.

And I know this is an intersection that most of you probably

go past frequently, but really understanding how different those different approaches to this intersection are depending on which way you're coming and the architectural context as you come to this intersection.

Next slide, please.

So this is the current state of the site.

There is a small apartment rental building that is on the property.

It's the one that has the Buffalo mural on it.

But the rest of the site is almost entirely parking lots.

And there's a little bit of landscaping here and there, but primarily

either weeds or, you know, self-zoned trees.

Next slide, please.

So the new zoning code, this site is zoned CX-8.

And you can see some of the surrounding zones where we're mostly surrounded by CX-8, but there is the some residential across Wirtland as well.

So our allowable base height is eight stories, but the affordable housing bonus would allow us to go up to 11 stories.

And as JT mentioned, because the project is planned to be 100% affordable, that could apply to us, but that's not what we're proposing.

We're proposing something that would be six stories high.

And next slide, please.

So here's where it gets complicated.

As Jeff mentioned, we're straddling the West Main ADC.

However, immediately across the street from us, we're looking at the Wurtland ADC, and additionally the Coca-Cola building is an individually protected property, and that's immediately across 10th Street from us.

and to the south side of the property at 10th and a half, you'll notice we're right up against, basically against the face of an existing contributing building to the West Main ADC that is, you know, that is hugging the property line.

So, and you see the existing structure that is on site already which is not a contributing structure to any district.

Next slide please.

So just a reminder of the flavor of the two districts that we're talking about right here.

So the contributing structures in the West Main District that are in our immediate area are a little bit of everything.

We have monumental feeling buildings.

We have 1950s shopping centers.

We have historic homes.

We've got it all.

Next slide, please.

So this slide is specifically looking at the buildings that are across the street from us on Wortland, as well as sort of what's happening along 10th Street.

So in that image number one, images number one and two, you see the Coca-Cola building.

Image number three is actually a building that fronts to Main Street and is technically in the Main Street ADC but this particular side of it is what faces onto 10th Street and feels like it's more in the realm of the building that we're proposing and so might be a precedent for what it is we want to do.

We're unsure.

The other four images that you see are some of the multifamily housing that's in our vicinity in the Wurtland district.

And again, it's a little bit of everything.

Next slide, please.

So as I mentioned before, the CX-8 zone, we are again proposing six stories, even though 11 stories would be permitted.

There is no density limit for us on this site.

There is no building coverage limit for us on this site, although we are required to have 10% outdoor amenity space.

Next slide, please.

and so this is showing you what is permissible under the current zoning code.

Again, the 11 stories and if you'll go to the next slide.

This is what we are proposing.

So this would, due to the existing topography, this would give you six stories facing 10th Street.

We're proposing that that top story would step back approximately 10 feet.

And then because of the topography going up Wirtland, by the time you get to the far right corner, which is up near Stacey Hall, it would be five stories.

And again, with that top story stepping back.

Next slide, please.

Oh, and I should mention, we are assuming that facing 10th Street, we would have a series of retail bays as well as a garage entrance.

The garage would be at grade, but behind the retail on 10th Street, but it would be below grade once you're to the higher portion on Wortland.

And then the balance of the building would be

residential spaces with an interior courtyard.

We're assuming somewhere between 150 and 190 affordable rental units.

And that large range is largely driven by wanting to work with community stakeholders to understand the types of residential units these should be, whether they're more geared towards single individuals or families.

And we haven't had those conversations yet, so we don't really know yet.

Alright, and we're looking at somewhere on the order of 80 to 90 parking spaces that we should be able to fit in the parking garage.

Next slide please.

And so this is, we put some windows and modulation in this just to give you an idea of what this might look like, but by no means should you assume this is a design, it's just to give you an idea.

So I have three very specific questions that I'd like to ask you all to consider when you are deliberating.

So although we are located in the West Main ADC, should precedents from the Wurtland ADC or the Coca-Cola building be considered equal to or stronger influences than our ADC designation?

What historical cues or architectural principles found in the surrounding ADCs and neighborhood do you see as most critical to the design and development of this site?

and my third question, are you able to identify any exemplary pedestrian experiences in the surrounding area that should be considered as precedents for this site?

Both retail and multifamily residential examples are helpful.

Thank you this is great and exciting to see something you know happening in this location I think it's a really good spot and I thought we had got a good amount of information and I feel

I'll just start by saying I think the massing makes some sense.

In some ways I'm wondering if we know why not go higher, but I'll try to gear my question, especially that first question, because I think this

is an interesting property that is right in between three districts.

And I don't know that the guidelines are written.

It's not that you're really taking elements or details.

I think really, for me, it's more of a question of probably material and scale.

and there are a couple of guidances that we have.

This would essentially fall in what our guidelines call the neighborhood transitional where it says commercial office buildings are located on sites that adjoin residential areas and the design of these buildings should attempt to relate to the character of adjacent residential neighborhood as well as the commercial area.

These buildings may be larger in scale than residential structures, their materials, roof forms, massing, and window patterns should relate to residential forms.

And it suggests West Main Street is one area where this happens.

Also, I think in the multi-lot, it talks about

trying to relate to.

In this case, there's not a lot to relate directly to.

But those houses across the street in on Wartland, they are lifted up.

It would be pretty interesting and maybe helpful to know the relationship to them.

So they're not looking at what the height differences are.

They're set back quite a bit.

So I imagine they're not getting totally shaded out.

They will impact those structures.

It will impact the Coca-Cola building.

I'm not very concerned about them, but I think just using your skills as designers to, you know, relate, you know, this is a building that straddles.

I think there's a real opportunity here to prove this intersection in this.

I mean, it's pretty ragged right now.

I think it looks like your inclination is to look at the co-building for some inspiration.

And I think that's actually a really good way of going here.

I'm glad that you're not going 11 stories.

And I think that that's wonderful that it's going to be six.

But to me, the fenestration and the massing

The Koch building and the building's up the hill, too.

Some of the one on the left that you've shown earlier.

I think it's really important that you make this a nice pedestrian experience.

It isn't right now.

And it's sort of hard to tell how landscaping would work here as far as setbacks.

The current CX zone says that we need to be zero to ten feet back from the lot line.

Really tight.

Yeah, no, actually, that's so it's not in conflict.

The streetscape requirements set your actual, they don't set your property line, but they set where your setback start from.

So if it requires, I forget what it's

downtown it's I think a six foot tree zone and eight foot walking zone and then your setback would start from that.

So that becomes a that becomes a public easement any part that doesn't fit on your property would then yeah become a public easement that then your building would be able to set back further if you wanted to.

So that should allow you to fit street trees, and if you wanted to have further vegetation or something there, should you allow you to get that?

I have some questions.

Yeah, I wonder, are we asking questions or do we?

Well, they also asked us.

Yeah, so I mean, I think the first, and I'm going to kind of try and round them off quickly.

So let us know if I get it right or wrong.

The first was we're in the West Virginia ADC.

And in essence, how much should the Wartland ADC factor into it and how much should the Koch building factor into it?

I think Breck has spoken really well to that point already, and Roger.

Personally, I think it wants to be more part of West Main because of the massing and size of some of the buildings up there, but we need to respect the fact that there's a much more residential neighborhood behind it.

And I think from a materiality standpoint, and maybe fenestration, the code building is a really good thing to look to.

So, yeah, you do have to figure out how to bring them all three together, and that's the challenge.

But I don't think we need y'all to make it look like a Victorian house, right?

Nor maybe the Sears building.

Stacey Hall.

Yeah, I mean there's a lot of, so that kind of is a good lead into the next question, which is like, I think, are there precedents within the district that you want us to point you to or that are maybe good examples of design?

There's probably a range of opinions on that.

I provided for the for the Verve and for the 2117 IV and I can pull it up a collage if you will of architecture throughout the city and essentially offering that you know there is no typical and in fact there's been some really unique stuff you go over to the University Hospital and you know the glass on the facade so there is no

And I was sort of anticipating the question on that one of, oh, shouldn't this look like what Charlottesville looks like?

And the question would be, well, what is that?

So you've struggled with that, or we've struggled with that on a number of things.

I think I would offer that a similar path to follow would be in the discussions at 60612 West Main, that idea of the continuous

to break up the facade somehow to have that permeability, and I know that the word that Legal had trouble with, but the permeability of the building, what are the lengths of it, does it need to be a continuous

does this need to appear a single building or can it have different appearances to it?

Can I speak to this?

It's an excellent question and it is so kind of ironic that Charlottesville has one of the best examples of pedestrian urban experience and then the most

The way that West Main has been treated, and I think because of the plan that was batted around for a long time and then never happened, essentially there has been almost zero design of the pedestrian environment along West Main.

And so there's trying to think there's not very many good examples in the rest of Charlottesville.

This leads me to say that because it's a really good question and it's actually really, it's imperative for this project.

This segment of this street that we're looking at right there in the image is a really critical corridor for Charlottesville, not just like from a transportation but from like

What Charlottesville is as a city that that road cuts across all social economic lines and it's for the goals of your clients for the city to you know to continue to function better having this be a really You know Excellent example of a good pedestrian environment.

I think is is is almost as important as

So if I can follow that, just a little bit.

One thing that jumped out at me, I'm assuming y'all are going to have, I don't know, maybe it's a bad assumption.

Do y'all have like a traffic engineer as part of your team?

Okay, great.

Because I noticed you had the vehicular entrance off 10th Street.

I know right now, Workland is sort of more pedestrian, but

10th Street is also very busy from a traffic standpoint.

Right.

Because it goes up a hill to a stoplight.

and that's a short light.

Basically, I really think you might want to consider parking access off Wirtland.

Possibly even 10th and a half street.

Because it's 20 feet higher than the site.

And I will also, you know this, but those two buildings on 10th and a half street are quite historic.

One of them is, I think, very old.

So, you know, it is what it is.

You know, I wonder if you could almost, it's not your property.

You know, maybe this will lend itself to 10th and a half becoming more of a penestrian

Pathway, or something.

I don't know.

But that's not on your project.

And then, I guess, Breck kind of touched.

The third question was about the pedestrian experience.

So I think Jeff can lend you some of his advice.

I mean, on Main Street, I mean, I think the Draftsman looks nice.

broken up massing flat roofs and glass.

It seems to be pretty common.

Yeah, I had some questions, actually, just to kind of go backwards a little bit.

I was wondering if you could talk about some of the choices that you made with the general massing?

Why six stories?

Why a donut?

Yeah, so right now we're assuming that just based on very, very preliminary financial investigation that a podium, a concrete podium with wood construction on top is going to be the most feasible to actually fund the project and have it move forward.

and so the the donut shape is really looking at trying to maximize the goals that the university has for getting as many units as possible on the site while still making it financially feasible to build.

We have looked at some other forms but this is where we are right now.

Just that for

Yeah, I agree.

Makes sense.

So the, where you guys are currently thinking of public versus private exposures on this building?

Am I understanding correctly that 10th is, you had mentioned retail, is that where that's going?

So it'd be more residential windows and whatnot facing Portland?

Okay.

That's correct.

Yeah, I guess that was my general question.

Just trying to make sure I didn't understand.

Because it does seem like a little bit of a shame.

I understand the financial reasons for the doughnut.

It just, it does feel like it's walled itself off a little bit.

And you have, I guess it does make a very safe public space for the residents, which is great.

You should be most concerned about the residents.

It's

and just a comment.

It does feel a little bit fortress-like as it's big.

It is a very big footprint as big as some of our other very large projects on West Main Street.

And I think a lot of that is

and

They definitely, you can get bigger trees out there and you don't have power lines, so it would be, but we do have, we do have storm there right now.

Okay.

Time public works.

But and it's similarly on Wortland Street, I think that would be a point where the further back you could pull back, probably the better.

I mean, it's, it's going to be a big building.

You're never going to be, you're not, there's no sense in trying to imitate the houses.

It's a big building.

So treat it like a big building.

But at the same time, Wirtland does have front yards.

So if there's a little bit of space to put some more vegetation in there, I think that would go a long way in making it feel more cohesive with that street.

Let's see, your questions were... Yeah, so the precedent, I mean, yeah, it's

Wirtland isn't a precedent, but it is something to respect, at least in my opinion.

So I mean, you've got a big building.

It's going to be a big building.

Don't try and fake it.

We have had applicants that have peppered a big building with little houses before.

And I don't think you guys are going to do that.

I mean, it doesn't sound like Grumman Parker, but just don't do that.

Yeah, to echo some

OK pedestrian experiences on West Main.

Actually, not bad ones.

Yeah, the draftsman isn't bad.

Battle building would be nice if they actually had a use to that big open area.

And there was actually something in those retail spaces.

But again, that's just pulling your building further back in.

I don't know how much wiggle room you've got.

I'm assuming this is really preliminary.

But if you guys are going to tell me that you need every square inch, that might be problematic.

It'd be nice if you could

provide that streetscape.

That's my ramble.

So I totally agree with what everybody has said so far.

I agree with Carl's point in the nature of it being almost fortress-like as a big doughnut.

And I'd actually point to, I mean, not, you know, not a particular building, but, I mean, I just love east-west Maine.

I mean, I think I would point to the pedestrian experience of just the street, you know, and what I love about it.

is the variety of the kind of experience of the structures and the architecture and the building, but maybe more so what I like are all the nooks and crannies, the experience and the curiosity of walking down the different, some are alleyways, some are different streets,

and the fact that they lead somewhere, maybe not someplace particularly grand, but that they lead through.

It's this idea of porousness versus a solid block, something impenetrable.

You know, just to bring up the easy example, the standard, you know, has a variety of materials in the front, but it's still, it is what it is.

It's a wall, right?

I mean, in some ways the materiality just is a bit of a false nod to trying to

and so on.

I think everybody's pretty eloquently brought up the fact that as much as you can enhance the pedestrian experience of 10th Street, do that.

If there's setback rules that you can bend and push back and create maybe more than just a sidewalk, maybe it's a garden or a walking experience that happens there.

It's been wonderful.

and it would honor the Coca-Cola building across the street.

I agree with the comments about the driving the parking lot entrance off of there.

That could kind of destroy that experience of walking up and down that street.

So to answer your question about

What would inspire this?

I sort of see the good part of West May and the part that we all respond to as an inspiration for that.

and to take that a step further, is there a way to create more porousness?

I mean, is there an opportunity to sort of break up the doughnut to maybe create that safe space but also create porousness that brings people

from, you know, that other part of West Main down 10th and a half or, you know, some other path to Wortland.

And I like the idea of somebody brought up the idea that this is sort of a location that straddles three different areas, three different zones.

And maybe you take that idea of this thing, this thing straddling as an inspiration, you know, that could be a kind of a

A symbol or a key into what maybe drives the form of this.

Show us that there's a way to do this that's not the fortress that we're all kind of balking.

And I don't see any way to better honor the transition from a residential to a dense commercial, which is what we're getting into pretty hardcore in this city than finding this symbolic gesture.

Brexite, this is a really important location.

for a lot of reasons.

You know, something you said, I'm sorry, you haven't spoken yet, something you said, David, about the kind of porosity and sort of individual character.

Maybe the corner has some decent precedent where it has fairly consistent street wall, but there are a number of businesses that have

Carved out space on the interior, they open up quite a bit, and actually, so that feeling of public nature of this condition, it's much deeper.

In fact, I love the, when it was the, what was it, a QDoba or something?

Now it's the bank, they filled it in, but there was that really deep kind of like porch that was behind the facade.

That was a great, that does some of that, that this also happens on

I'm not an architect, but one of the ways, I understand the interest in porosity and just two ideas I might throw out.

Maybe, and it's not one of my favorite buildings, but to a certain extent I think the code building downtown works with regard to porosity.

People can walk, there's a plaza, there's something there.

I don't know if that would fit your design at all.

I just suggest you to look at.

And just off the top of my head, I don't know how these buildings work again, but it's possible for the retail space would be possible, for example, to recess them a little bit and create courtyards for that kind of feeling, again, and more green space and so forth.

Just some thoughts.

I did have one thought on Wordland, and I don't know if this makes sense, but if you give that facade a more residential feel with like small porches or things like that entering onto apartments that would really engage the sidewalk and make people want to hang out outside like in front of the building, you might get a more like personal connection and then you turn the corner and it's

It is much more commercial.

It starts to make you feel like, okay, yeah, I'm going up to the West Main District.

I don't know how you get a turn in.

given our comments on the traffic on 10th Street.

I mean, that's beyond my pay grade, not a traffic engineer.

But I would think, from a design point of view, that you might want, you might be forced, but it might be a design opportunity to kind of create, for lack of a better word, a drop off lane or a valet parking lane that would, on the far side, include the entrance into your

Parking, but be a place where Ubers can pick residents up or somebody could meet somebody and pick them up.

Because otherwise, you really, I mean, I don't know how, if I had a friend in the building and I wanted to pick them up on the condition that the street is right now, you can't stop on 10th Street.

There's no way.

And I don't even think you can turn very easily without being backended anyway.

So maybe there's an opportunity there to create, along with that vehicular entrance,

and so on.

And we haven't seen anything but just massing and what the density is and everything.

I know that's all.

We'll see the articulation and fenestration and all that later.

But yeah, it could be an opportunity to create, to say this is a pedestrian people building.

Yeah.

And where do you enter?

You know, if somebody

Somebody has a friend, you know, a friend down at West Haven wants to visit someone in this building.

You know, they would walk up 10th, and where's the entrance?

I mean, anyway.

I don't have a whole lot of other comments.

I did want to, I wanted to echo whatever VL said.

I think if I tried to answer your questions, I would just be duplicating what my colleagues have said.

I do want to ask you whether you've read, I have a question for you.

We're in a very long process with a very long runway of revising these guidelines, but they won't be revised any time soon.

Some are just might just fly in the face of the new zoning ordinance, and you would know that by reading it, and we would know that too.

But there might be a lot of guidelines in Chapter 3 for you on how we

Build New Construction in the City, which, like we said, doesn't happen all that often.

It's a great opportunity.

Did we do a good job of answering your questions?

Your voice went up, it doesn't sound good.

One more comment, because we've been talking a little bit about the transition from sort of residential work

and so on.

That's right on the corner.

When doesn't cancel out the other one?

The crime is when the whole block gets, like three blocks get taken up so you can't experience it, right?

There's no way to engage it.

and maybe a good exercise would just be like to take the whole West Main and study it, like study the different sections of it and why some are successful and some aren't.

You know, even if you just did like a figure ground of like the, you know, the pathways, the streets and the circulation patterns and go and look at the experience of one section of West Main and compare it to another section, I think you pretty quickly see sort of the areas that engage

Ready.

Can I offer just a couple observations that might help, I hope help.

One,

We, the guidelines do recommend they do not encourage EFAS.

We're seeing a lot more of that.

We are certainly seeing at the Verve project, which is

Huge.

It's almost entirely EFIS.

I was sort of in an unfortunate position of asked where I stand on EFIS by the ERB.

And I, and with Mr. Schwarz sort of adding his knowledge as well, is that we know that it's changed, we know the materials changed, but

It still comes down to the installation of it and there are a lot of questions.

I would have to say that after those discussions, if something comes in with proposing EFIS, I'm going to strongly point out that it's discouraged in our guidelines.

There just were a lot of questions raised and I wasn't able to answer them.

So I think the materiality, I know it might be early on here, but

I just want to offer that thought.

The other thing is in looking at some of the materials that we've seen in other buildings on West Main and around town, we've seen a lot of new materials come in and the draftsman being one of them.

I say this as a former builder.

Some of these new materials are really interesting.

You see some of these metal panels that snap together.

Carl can probably expound on what they're looking at at the Verve.

I think there's something to be said about just a masonry building.

You can, you know, 20 years from now, I'm worried that buildings like some of these new materials, you're not going to find tradesmen that know how to fix it.

So I think it's important maybe to

go back to our roots a little bit in some of the materials.

So just again, offering a perspective on some of what's come up.

The second, I would offer caution on, I know every building wants to be mixed use and have commercial space and retail space.

I get a lot of calls from people on some of the buildings that have been improved on West Main.

They don't know what to do with the empty retail.

I would encourage designing those

with some flexibility in mind because every building in this city cannot have a coffee shop downstairs.

It may well be that's an apartment.

So I think the design for that flexibility should end up with a space that you don't know what to do with.

the second or the third piece I do think topography is an interesting piece of this site I tried to create to look at it a little bit but it really does drop and it and it it's to the advantage of that height it's almost we were looking at the there are the market central building the way that Water Street drops down so you can take advantage of that although it's going to create there's some

Complications with that.

But it would be good to show that and see what it could be doing with it.

I think vehicular entrances, and I again go to some projects that you all have looked at and some that the Planning Commission have looked at.

A success at 2005 JPA was getting that entrance

on the side.

your guidelines do address that.

And I think, you know, not so I think personally from a traffic situation, I know that that road there, it's, it's going to be difficult if there's right hand left hand coming in and out of a garage there.

So Workland makes sense.

But within your guidelines, does allow, you know, looking at to try to keep those

The last is, everyone will indulge me for a second.

Okay, so if you'll apologize, my really, nope, that's not it.

I want this.

Yep, here.

So, so,

It comes down to this sketch here, and I'm not saying there's any right or wrong in it, but one of the, I've sat through, every Wednesday we have a pre-development or pre-submittal discussion.

Applicants have come in and presented, and everyone that might be involved in neighborhood development, engineering, utilities is involved.

And a thing that continues to be a sticking point is the tree canopy.

And the zoning for this requires 10% tree canopy.

And I'm learning a lot about tree canopy.

In fact, I'm going to talk about it in one of my questions for you all.

But let's assume, you know, and it's a tree, the calculation is at

A ten year old tree, and the tree list has those in it.

in talking with my colleagues.

So here's the building.

Sidewalk, let's say that's the property line.

The tree canopy can be inside the public right of way as long as the tree is on the property.

So let's say a 60-foot canopy and a little more than half is on the property and slightly less than half is out.

You're still with a 60-foot tree canopy

There's, you know, that's not going to fit on an eight foot sidewalk.

And I'm not saying we solve it here.

I'm not saying, you know, we have to figure it out here.

But I think this is the discussion that I'm going to be pushing internally is kind of what's the point of a require 60 foot

and

This is something we're going to have to solve internally.

And I don't know, maybe some of it can be solved in the courtyard with the tree canopy.

But this is following up on some of the discussion we had about 218 West Market Street last month.

And there was no space left for trees.

And in a corresponding discussion about where did the trees go,

and I.

I think it really need to solve this, and I don't know how, and I don't know how you will do, but I don't know how you fit, and 10% of this site would be 8,300 square feet of tree cover.

That's a lot of trees to fit onto this site if you're pushing everything up to the sidewalk.

So I'm not trying to throw any water on anything.

Applicants are not realizing that their setbacks start after they provide the streetscape.

So applicants come in and they want to fill their entire property.

And our zoning code clearly says, no, you can't do that.

OK.

Well then, I worry that this is that where the design, we get down the road and

We're going to have to coordinate these better.

We've heard that these applicants are aware of it, so maybe we can let them go.

It's a challenge we've discussed.

had our meetings with the city departments.

It's a challenge.

If it makes any, I don't know if this, maybe others disagree, but for me on this site, the more important connection and linkage is north to south, actually not between, not along Wartland.

I just don't think that's as critical of pedestrian linkage or, and so,

These things may be intertwined in terms of like where you choose to put tree canopy.

Thank you for letting me bring you into my Petri dish because we have some policy things that I'm going to be discussing later with the BAR.

It's helpful to have you offer comment on what I just offered too.

So I apologize for being long winded, but there is purpose behind it.

All right.

Thank you all.

Thank you.

That concludes the meeting.

If you want to take a break, anybody?

So would you be continuing to do BAR?

Okay.

Okay.

Now, you know, you were going up to the city council and I didn't know if we were going to lose that.

Okay.

Yeah, one of the same architect.

Personally, I still prefer EFIS to the fiber cement, board and batten stuff that we see, like the back of the flats and the back of the standard.

Some of it is framing.

It was interesting, a guy at Cincinnati was talking, he was using the framing carpenter as a sort of analogy metaphor for a project, but I know as, you know,

from my builder days of love.

A good framing carpenter drives everything and a bad framing carpenter can make the rest of the project miserable because, you know, they haven't, their walls aren't straight square level plumb.

So I think that might be, yeah, it's the mechanics and, you know, what's, what's accepted.

But I do think that we're, we're entering a, you know, we're seeing some really interesting new materials

if they're done right, but at the same time, I still don't know if they how will they stand the test time because you can't, you know, someone will come in and say, well, they don't make that anymore.

Now, we know they make bricks when they would sighting make, you know, loon sighting, but there are some of these really precise, you know, tiles and things that I'm worried we won't be able to replicate or repair in the future.

All right, so just

We have some policy things to discuss and I said I can't resolve it tonight but

I think that one of the things I want to work for and draft is that when things are brought into us I've never in the past I haven't hesitated to bring you something in whatever form because I figured that conversation is good you all are professionals you know how to guide you know but I I think that I need to

Like, to me, when something goes to the planning commission, I always tell people, get your site plan squared away, because there's no use going to them with the design until you've determined that it can go there, it will fit there.

I haven't done that with you all.

But I think I need to.

And I, and I, you know, for example, this project to say, you know, make sure that, you know, where you're showing that wall is where that wall will go.

Same thing.

You are going to be getting some preliminary discussions coming in.

And I, um,

We can have a discussion more, but I need to draft a policy about this.

You all are looking at something that's, you know, we're going to find out it's got to be pushed back further.

It can't be this tall or that tall or the trees have to go here or there.

Or that you can't put trees there at all because that's where the sewer line goes.

So I'm going to tinker with something, and I know it got a lot on our plates.

Or are you all okay?

Give this some thought.

Hey, you know, you're okay seeing it as early as possible.

So that was the reason I sort of wanted to bring that, introduce that here.

I think it's, I think for a project of that scale,

Sorry, I'll stop eating.

I think for a project of that scale, I think it's appropriate that we meet.

It's okay that we meet six, seven times with an applicant on a complex project.

I would rather meet more frequently than less, and I know it represents a lot of design work to get to that site planning level.

The criticism, you know, internally is that, and I don't think my colleagues realize that, you know, you all weren't doing preliminary discussions just out of, you know, curiosity and, you know, your willingness to spend time with applicants because they're required.

So the critique came back, well, how much time am I spending preparing a staff reporter or evaluating something?

And that's a fair question, at least certainly in the last five months.

But it's a, again, something we can, maybe there are parameters that we establish and say, you know, you want a preliminary discussion, at least have this ready.

Yeah, and because it does take time, I do have to go through and, I mean, even for this, which I didn't get to the type of review I normally do, it takes eight to ten hours per submittal, just getting all the things ready.

So, if I don't have to do something for a preliminary discussion, I know, you know, it used to be like, here it is, what do you all think?

But I think it helps to have things up front.

I agree with Brack, I think

You know, we could have a couple preliminary discussions.

But the... Can I just ask, because there are professionals in the room that know more than I do, so not to pick on this applicant, but we just heard this, and it's a big project, would members of this board want, theoretically, for this applicant to have brought more to us?

or was this, you know, coupled with, like, the water, the market street?

That was a big project that we saw last meeting.

Was it just enough to bring the massing and kind of say, we want to go up this many stories?

Here are the neighborhood conditions.

They obviously had, you know, what district should we engage with?

But, I mean, I just

was this enough?

I mean, we got like a donut as far as the, I mean, we got, we got height, we got set back.

We know we don't have any dimensions on the court, you know, on the courtyard.

We want to build a building.

I figured I wouldn't talk about that.

It is.

And I just wonder if design professionals would say in an ideal situation and say our docket was much busier like we used to be, which we will be hopefully, would we require more of them and not to pick on them at all.

I thought it was

and so on.

And maybe you don't say the first meeting, second meeting, you know, you don't say how many times we'll come back to us.

But at some point, if you've agreed on this, then here are the things that you're working on.

Robert Watkins prepared a very good outline that, you know, when we were having that discussion, what, four years ago about, how to go about this.

The hardest, the most difficult part is that

is having that a willing, the applicants willing to go on the process with us and not say, no, I want you to vote up or down.

And, and, you know, there's always that risk that someone say, you know, tough voted down, I'll go to council and appeal.

even if the drawings aren't finished.

But it's establishing that trust.

And we currently have it.

I guess Jeff Levine's been our test buddy, but he's been very willing.

I wasn't around for Blue Moon, but the building that did get to be built on West Bay

I felt like we we sat through that one too many two too many meetings.

I felt I didn't understand why we were like things were coming back to us and then and then I suspected and it was true that they were changing the materiality which was a big big you know a big regret of all a lot of ours that was on the board at that point and I did feel like that could have been

I'm a big believer in

Going back to last meeting at the hotel project on Market Street, I didn't find that conversation very productive at all.

They didn't have a site plan with context of the real buildings next to it.

They wanted to talk about massing and the building and I think they got a little bit out of it.

I think what we're seeing in this, probably especially with the new zoning code is that it's, developers aren't sure

what they can do.

They see that the zoning code allows so much, and then they're like, oh, well, wait, there's the BAR, and they're probably not going to want us to do that much.

So it becomes like a go-no-go.

Do I hire the architect to do full designs or even schematic design?

I mean, it's a big investment.

And I think that's just what we're seeing right now.

I'm a bit puzzled.

No, but we can tell them to make the building smaller.

We can.

So as you can be very clear, you all do not have the final say.

All decisions are appealable, right?

I agree that certainly the conversations are easier when there's more information.

But that being said, I still think there's a lot of assumptions about what we will or will not say, so I think it's helpful to have them out in a public meeting and have the chance to talk about what's important for a certain project.

It also gets it in our head as we are driving around town and thinking about certain places.

I would certainly look at 10th Street a little differently now.

and it gets it in the public realm earlier.

So even though I certainly understand why the conversation is a little trickier with this early massing, I think it would be helpful to have better context.

That's one takeaway for me is that if we're going to be discussing massing, we really need to understand it in relationship to the existing context.

I think this conversation was appropriate.

I think much more than that would have been going a little bit ahead of us.

It's almost like we could have a conversation without any visuals.

It's like, here's the site, here's the context.

Let's talk about what you all think ought to happen here.

I don't know how to answer the question of height.

We have some things coming.

There's a lot of lanes right now of things happening.

And some of the inquiries are, well, if something comes in with the bonus, we eat all the bonus provisions, you know,

How dare the BAR tell us?

It can't be that tall.

Again, the one thing I remind everyone is the BAR doesn't have final, but I think some from the other direction of, all right, well, if you're

This is what we can ask counsel, and this is what we can do with the guidelines.

Is that a given?

If the given is that, then say that, then treat it as such in the guidelines so that both, you know, the BAR and the applicants know.

And it's that, you know, eliminating the unknown, Breck, you just refer to it, that what is the BAR going to do?

That's some of, that's what I'm getting a lot of questions about internally.

How can

The point of us, even being a board and the fact that we don't have just a pictorial design guide for the city is that every

Let's see.

No.

You're welcome to a, you're welcome to adjourn if you wish.

Now we see who has the power.

You all, you know, it's what I tell kids when they're saying, oh, I'd be a recruiter.

This coach is looking at me and I'm like, they're not looking at what you think they are.

And your conversations

are really helpful and sometimes it may not sound like it, but I hear things that are extremely helpful and they're helping me internally as we go back into this, as we continue with

I guess the thing I would say is I hate being out on an island.

One of the people we interviewed the other day was asking me, what's the collaboration with everybody in NDS?

And I said, well, we collaborate, but the truth is

We're, you know, the design and preservation.

We're doing what we do and everybody else is like, yeah, I'm not sure what they do back there.

So you all are my, you're my mentors, you're my my my advisors, and I appreciate when you take the time to help me out.

All right, let's see if I can get to this.

No, we did not.

Oh, I was just surprised that there wasn't any public for that last meeting.

No, I'm not.

Please.

All right, so y'all are not here.

You're not here from June, are you?

Correct.

Yeah.

I don't have an exact date yet, but we'll be here until July.

10th through the 24th.

I don't have a social life.

I'll just toss it out.

Last year we did it on a Thursday night, which I think was a Thursday night.

Thursday nights.

Thursday the 18th, I'll be flying to Seattle for a wedding.

But it doesn't stop anybody else.

I mean, do we want to do it after our July 3rd?

Does it matter?

We never know how long the dock it is.

Not immediately.

until your wife put him out on the street with every bottle of something.

She quietly walked me to the door.

That's the way to get guests out.

Whenever they're drinking, remove it from your home.

The story about one of the presidents in the immigration party is that they, like, interjected or someone had to... They basically, the White House got overwhelmed because they let everyone in and to get them off.

I say yes.

Well, what sounds good to me?

Uh, I will be at the, uh... You're telling me?

July 25th?

25th?

I could probably host that.

If we're looking for, are we looking for a place?

It would be... I'm gonna, you know, I don't know, hopefully be a smoker by then.

I'm here in July 25th.

Yes.

Three Thursdays in a row?

Well, he's probably gone the rest of the month, too.

It's not just there for a day.

How about this?

I think 17th would be a splendid day.

I have no idea.

Can we stand to be with each other two nights in a row?

The Rock would be the 17th.

Are you here at the 17th?

I think so.

Let me confirm.

Let's coordinate.

Don't say that.

Yes.

Yeah, we'll have with the swim team for sure, I think.

I know, David's like... I mean, we'll find a way around the swim team.

Is the swim team earlier?

It's all day long.

On a Wednesday?

Yeah, it's all those Wednesdays.

It's like five to ten, so it needs to be absolute.

They're rough.

Sandys in New York that we can't.

Oh no, I'm good.

Okay, okay.

July 16th.

I'm sorry, it's somehow switched to the 16th.

Okay.

It's a police order.

who's in front of me all along.

So this is sort of a broad, specific question.

And 409 Park Street, interesting needle building.

Someone has bought it and wants to put a fence up.

My first question to them was that you're not touching the historic fence front, no.

But the...

There's this building next to it that I just thought was connected, but it's not.

It's like one inch off of and it's separate.

So it's some sort of fence along this side.

The north side gets a little strange because I'm not quite sure where the property line is.

I'm going to

I'll work that out with the, but this is the back facing the courts.

So now there's, we have done just a, we've done, we approved some fences next door.

This is two down.

So we have some precedent for wood fences painted.

on the back, and it would be, you know, I said that whatever they did on the front, really, at least to the face of the house, this height dictates.

So I'd like to get to where fencing

is not something I have

an administrator for view, not an email review, but I treated a formal, but formally an administrator for view, which is the $100 fee.

I don't, the intent is to keep the boxwoods, I believe, but I just, I don't know, it's not, would you all be okay with me approving fences?

It's just saying, I think... Is it our decision to make this?

Well, I'm going to interpret the ordinance as, you know, that this could be a minor review.

There aren't things that are specific, but I think that fences

and I think you all know me.

We know what's been allowed and I think some of these things can be done administratively and I'm not bothering you.

So I'm telling you that I'm probably going to be approving some fences as administrative reviews.

You will know about them, but unless somebody wants to do an eight-foot fence in the front yard,

I'm going to be you know this would be a painted fence dark no discussion you know it would be painted dark it wouldn't be any higher than that but the one of the challenges here is that this is something that Carl has to go through the development plan so where it yeah it used to be that only a site plan had to be

and

to not have the BARP and an extra problem in that process.

Not sure.

That's the only reason I could think you'd want to fence.

Why not?

Yep.

Six to eight page like fences guideline for especially for like downtown a separate not not the little like one page that we used to have in that we have in their guidelines.

There was a separate fences manual.

I haven't seen it, but I think it's what we're, again, working towards, you know, some of these things to say, yeah, here's the stuff that's okay.

This is 503 16th Street, Northwest.

But again, it can serve as an example for lots of other discussions.

So this is

16th Street here, Gordon Avenue down here, and on the site is, when they did the addition, they built this brick wall down here and enclosed, there's a parking lot and then there's like underneath, you can see the parking spaces.

Alright, so there's

Do I?

My bet.

You know, I get confused, wander around the hallway.

So there is a non-historic brick wall there.

Now this is, you had that preliminary discussion a few weeks ago.

with the Design Develop Project about a block away, so that there is, on Gordnath, there's this large right of way there, so that's not an error.

But the nonhistoric brick wall is being heaved by these two oak trees, and so it's a chicken and egg kind of thing here.

I had suggested to them

So here's the wall and there are the two trees that we're talking about.

I don't know.

I haven't been out there.

I don't know the extent of what it's done to the wall.

I said, well, you can always do something like that.

I could not find a picture of that arch that's at UVA, but that's one thing to do.

The other is, if there's trees, and I don't know if the species of tree, there's others that are preferable to being adjacent to a brick wall, but it's, you can knock down the brick wall and save the trees, but being a sorority that they would, you know, want to maintain that enclosure, and I understand that.

Thing is, if they knock down the wall,

then, guess what, the new ordinance kicks in, creates some problems with building a new wall.

So, they've been in touch with Veniers about options and, of course, you know, the Veniers saying, what can we do to save the trees?

They're oaks.

Yeah.

Yes.

And and then just on this side, on the other side, there are two on the front of, you know, facing 16th.

This one is fine.

The other it's twin is dying.

So that's going to be replaced.

So we're going to have to remove three large trees, replace them somehow to get their tree canopy, and I don't know how, and I don't know if there's a tree that doesn't heave a brick wall, but the question is sort of, I don't think, to me, I've said to them, the BAR

would prefer to keep trees.

A nonhistoric brick wall is not critical.

And if it had to end up being a fence or something, that probably would be.

For those of us who are not familiar with what can be done with a wall and under the new zoning ordinance, tell us why you and Carl were juggling in that.

It's a non-compliant.

But I think that's the thing is because it's non-compliant, it's always one of those things where you just can't make it worse, I thought.

I don't know.

I just don't know the extent that, I mean, again, I haven't been out there.

Well, here's the question.

Otherwise, no wall.

It seems like if it's the portions directly next to the trees, there's also big hedges outside the wall.

Yeah.

You've strengthened me on the tree thing.

And I want to say, and then to them, is BAR will work with you on how you fix it.

OK.

Good idea.

that's damaged or it's broken up.

Again, not asking to approve.

It's a very nice alum who's volunteered to help usher this throw.

So I'm really trying to be as helpful as I can because they got a lot going on over there.

They have a lot they need to do and I'm trying to strip away as much of

Is everybody good with saying we feel comfortable with that?

Yeah.

And I agree with you all on that.

And so the trees are paramount and we'll figure out the wall.

That's all I had.

I really, that's all I had.

And then let's see the

Yeah, I mentioned everything else.

Hopefully, I have some good news for you in a couple weeks, or a week, and we'll have, someone will help get some of the, you know, get my mess cleaned up.

Wait, I don't like that.

Sorry, I'm just trying to do my job.

I have not heard that.

Aye.