Board of Architectural Review Meeting   12/17/2024

I think before COVID, maybe you're on the top.

Did we get checked out of the oven?

Can't recognize my phone.

Limitations.

So she did.

All right, I'll get us going and we can still keep plugging in.

Got everybody?

Did we lose David?

Did he get locked out?

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 each allowed three minutes to ask questions and three minutes to offer comments.

Speaker shall identify themselves and provide their address.

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.

And we'd like to ask any speakers to please step up to one of the podiums and use the microphone.

Alrighty.

First agenda item is matters from the public not on the agenda or on the consent agenda.

Currently the consent agenda has the meeting minutes from last month and also a COA application for 128 Madison Lane paved terrace in the front yard.

Chair, I see no hands raised.

Did you say no one's online?

Okay, sorry.

Sorry.

Hearing nothing, the next item is the consent agenda.

Does any BAR member wish to pull this for discussion?

All in favor?

Aye.

All right, consent agenda passes.

Next up is the deferred item section, COA application for 1609 Gordon Avenue.

Just for the record, I do want to say again, I really don't like this room.

And I pushed back vigorously.

when they moved us from city space, but I lost, so I apologize.

Okay, that's it.

This is an application for a COA for 1609 Gordon Avenue.

It's within the Rugby Road University Circle, Venable Neighborhood ADC District.

It is a non-contributing

and Michael Koch.

February, there was a preliminary discussion and in October it came forward, but there were some questions about one, a zoning issue related to the entry door requirements and another to the new development code requires rooftop screening, so that wasn't shown.

Mr. Schaefer and his firm have made the modifications necessary to comply with the ordinance.

And it's back before you to, I don't want to say as a new project, but it is before you for a COA.

There were various discussions about materiality the last time.

And so if

Hopefully, before you all to make a decision, either approve it or deny it, or the applicant can request deferral.

So, do you have any questions for me about this one?

Kevin, you... And it might take us a bit to figure out where the disembodied voice is, but

Kate, does he or you have it lined up?

I'm also just gonna really quickly disclose I do have design developed doing some design work for me so I'm gonna abstain from this and David if you don't mind chairing this portion that'd be great.

Sure.

Great.

Thank you, Jeff.

My name is Kevin Schaefer.

I am the Charlottesville studio director for design develop here in Charlottesville, Virginia.

Thanks to Jeff and Kate as always for the dialogue through this process, helping us with the submissions.

And thank you to Carl for raising the hand last time.

I think we talked about failing fast and it was one of those things where zoning did have some questions about the entry and we were able to work with city staff to get those resolved.

in a way that complies with zoning.

So we can jump right into it on the next slide.

That's all right.

The substantial changes that have been made since we last saw this project in October are twofold.

Obviously, the entryway that we're referencing is now street-facing, gordon-out-facing specifically.

It is a full glass door with a covered area, and we are emphasizing the entryway by pulling forward the glazing bay that's above it.

Thank you, by about a foot in an effort to emphasize that main entryway, which is covered by about a four-foot overhang.

In addition, we have recessed the balconies, let's see if I can control this here, so these balconies that were sticking proud of the front facade and the front elevation previously have now been recessed behind that facade in an effort to

Deemphasize that sort of circulation route while still maintaining a very strong kind of decisive void to make these two building forms very legible in their nature.

If we go to the next slide, I think you can see this de-emphasis of the balconies a little clearer in that

Instead of having the landing for the stairs sort of come proud of the building, they are now recessed entirely behind the front facade of the building.

And additionally, we have the four-foot overhang that extends from that walkway over to the main entrance.

We've reconfigured the first floor so that the main entrance now opens into a common space lobby.

Previously, that was a two-bedroom unit, but we've since broken up

that first floor and done units on the right side and common space to the left.

So it will open up into a common space lobby, a mail room, behind there is bike storage as you work your way back towards the garage that's several layers deep into that building.

All in an effort to kind of de-emphasize the circulation path that is in that main open area and provide that front entry element.

The other sort of zoning comment that Jeff touched on was the new screening that's required on the roof to hide the rooftop units.

Next slide.

I think we, so we went back and we listened to the previous, the February hearing and also the October hearing.

We tried to tease out, you know, sort of what was successful about the project in the eyes of the board members.

And I think one of the things that was hit on repeatedly was just the contextual appropriateness in nature.

I like this slide because it shows the roof forms that are very much in keeping with the adjacent residential scale buildings and the broken down nature.

And I think

If we could start to anticipate the discussion points that might happen today, it's the continued move of the breaking down, the very intentional and kind of explicit, if you will, breaking down into the two forms and turning the roof gable.

And then as we come back that alley, we get a third gable form as we

as we go down.

And I think it's a very recognizable form for the neighborhood, for this district.

And it's a very kind of to scale when you start to look at the widths on the street and the overall massing.

And so it felt important to reduce the visual mass of this building as we are one of the early ones in with the new zoning to make a concerted effort to break down the building facade and the building mass.

and in doing so we sort of took this strong approach with the void and I think if you go to the next slide.

Yeah, in elevation it starts to really read as these two different buildings and the rotated gable party as it comes around with this sort of, you know, the brick background building

This slide also really helps emphasize the front main entryway, the canopy that can provide some signage opportunities for our main entrance and for building identification.

But overall, it's a recognizable building form and it's a recognizable material part as well.

And so on the next slide, I think, excuse me, and this is another example of how that

The two distinct building forms really helps reduce the overall visual mass and the visual scale.

And I think that's kind of what we heard from the February hearing.

The initial preliminary hearing was the success lies and the contextual approach to the party.

I think now on the next slide we can get into the second part is not only just a recognizable mass, a recognizable scale and form, but certainly a material palette that's very recognizable.

And so if you draw four or five blocks radius around our site, stucco or use is a very, very common building material and not just

Not just any stucco, sort of a light colored cream or white stucco.

And so you couple that with a red brick that's a pretty traditional material palette with a cream stucco and it becomes very contextual and recognizable and familiar from a material palette and also a building form perspective.

On the next slide.

I think there was discussion and debate amongst the board members at the October hearing, obviously regarding the EAFs and the appropriateness of the EAFs.

I guess 15 years ago I probably wouldn't envision myself standing up here and championing for EAFs necessarily, but building technology changes and things change.

I don't know if necessarily this is a hill I want to die on, but I do want to.

I do want to say that I think how it has changed over the past 15 years is very favorable from an architect's perspective.

For first, we get two inches of rigid insulation outside of our structure.

And so the thermal bridging that's happening through studs is no longer a concern.

and actually building code and energy code is starting to push us towards continuous insulation on the outside of our building.

The other thing, the second thing that we really like about it, is that improvements in the finish coat and how the finish coat is applied, you can see between the image on the right, which is the EVE system, has a fiberglass mesh on the backside and then a base coat and then a finish coat, you know, we have a scratch coat and we have a finish coat and a last American finish coat

It's finished in very much the same way as a stucco.

It really comes down to sort of what is the back or behind it.

We can do fine finishes now that are very similar in appearance to stucco and we can control the joints which is like

and

WRBs, our water-resistant barriers.

We have dimpled drainage mats.

We have fluid-applied water barriers.

We double up our water barriers here.

So like the idea of eaves-trapping and moisture and rotting it isn't as a concern as much anymore in these mechanically fast and high-quality systems.

And I think on the next slide, previously we had talked about, or a board member had used the word, it felt cheap.

And if we were going for the cheapest building material, it would be the four by eight sheet of panel.

Just from like a cost per square foot perspective, it doesn't get any cheaper than a four by eight material.

I think there's challenges that we've seen and talked about in terms of the panelized system.

There's more joints.

The joints are harder to control where they land.

The flashing on them is questionable.

I know Carl, you've said

It's hard to find a good panel installer in the town.

And so it starts to maybe muddy the waters of the party a little bit when we start to consider that as a system.

So we didn't love going to that as a system, despite that being perhaps the most cost effective method.

On the next slide.

We think about contextual in an ADCAD perspective and what's adjacent and rugby, but we also think about from a Charlottesville City perspective and what's familiar and what's recognizable from a multifamily perspective in this area.

In particular, two of these examples, 525 Ridge Street Apartments, not only uses a stucco or an eavesome, I'm honestly not sure which one it is, but they also use a very, very deep recess into a circulation area, and yes, that hallway is glassed behind it, but if that recess, if that hallway was not glassed, it was a railing,

A balcony would we think that that project is any less successful?

And I don't think it would.

What's successful about the project is the legibility of the forms and how it breaks down on the street.

I often reference South Range Apartments to, and maybe too much, but again a similar approach is an open circulation and an open staircase that helps break down a building form.

in such a way that it feels appropriate from a pedestrian perspective, and particularly on South Range on JPA, it allows it to kind of bend the corner around Amit Street in a very successful way.

So these are projects that are recognizable in their materiality, but also kind of employing similar approaches to breaking down the mass and addressing the street, I think in successful ways.

On the next slide,

We have a spec now on our rooftop screening.

Architectural Lovers, which is a great name for a name brand.

is the actual name brand that we are specifying.

Four-inch deep vertical blades in black to sort of match our adjacent trim colors.

And in the locations shown in red, we have the luxury of having these kind of gable roof forms that help us terminate these screening elements nicely.

And it's a smart use of a screening system to hide our condenser farm on the roof.

and on the next slide I think we had some additional housekeeping items sort of on our specifications and so working with Deb Brown at Cheney no longer allied but at Cheney to specify

A brick that seemed appropriate, that felt appropriate on the street.

It's not too red.

It's not too brown.

It's the Buckingham Tudor Brick.

I have brick samples and grout samples available here, if anybody would like to look at those.

We also have the Pac-Cladd Standing Seam metal roof in matte black.

Samples available as well as the treks transcended in spiced rum sample available.

but ultimately we went back, like I mentioned, we went back and we listened and we tried to tease out perhaps the specifics that were ringing true in terms of a success and how could we emphasize those and ensure that the board's comments were heard and addressed and also that the positives were able to remain and so I'm eager to

Thank you, Kevin.

So we'll ask for questions from the public.

Any questions from the public?

All these are being passed around.

Kevin, do you have samples of the stucco that you plan to use?

I don't have a physical sample of it.

Yes, we do have a specific one.

Any comments from the public or are there questions?

Some of them going once, going twice.

Well, I'm giving you a warning.

Did we even go there?

Yeah.

Yeah, definitely.

So detail on the new front door entrance.

Can you tell us?

I didn't see any detail on it.

No, that's fair.

It would be part of the Pella series.

It's impervious.

It doesn't make a door that that it's in that size.

The bike parking would be towards the rear at the parking garage.

I've got a question about the entry sequence.

So if you go into the recess to the right of the front door, does that lead you to the stairs?

No, you don't have to go through the front door.

The windows themselves, are they clad?

The impervious of fiberglass product.

It's the same product that was used at Virginia Ave.

Comments from the public?

Anybody online?

So I think there are some improvements, definitely some improvements.

I realize the door is kind of superfluous, but I do think that what you've done to the front entry has helped a little bit.

as well as pulling back the stair balconies and then pushing out that big window.

One of my main concerns from this project was just that it seemed like it was, it's very austere and it seems like it's lacking residential detail, but it also could just be, I have to keep reminding myself it's really not that big.

It's three stories and it is kind of little house-sized pieces.

I feel like I've seen this three times and I can't really... I'm a little hesitant, but I don't think that's going to hold me back.

We're going to improve it.

Right now my main concern is just the... I think the vine species you chose is still something that sticks.

So I would be worried about the getting near the stucco and it just seems like as a...

a solution to trying to perfect headlights from shining through those garage windows it would be better if there was just something more permanent like a louver system or something and I don't know if maybe that's something that I could vote approval on this and then you work with Jeff to come up with something that meets I would think maybe some you're going for contemporary design shutters aren't contemporary but maybe there's a form like that that kind of feels like it's a

Louvered Shutter or something on those windows, I don't know, throwing that out there.

That's my primary concern.

Yeah, I think you've made some good improvements.

I have two comments.

If you're trying to emphasize the front door and get people to use it, why not have the stair from the exterior sidewalk go to the front door?

And then secondly, I questioned the fine texture of the stucco

I think if you looked closely at Stucco in the neighborhood, you'd find that it's actually pretty textured.

And I think that might play into that stark feeling that Mr. Schwarz is talking about.

If this is super fine, it's going to feel very stark.

And I think the massing is actually really good.

I think the massing works in this neighborhood.

And we've said that in previous meetings, but I think that you've got that down.

That's just a matter of detailing, I think.

Can I go backwards and ask a question of the applicant?

Why put the door where the window was?

We felt that it is important enough to break down the building form in such a finite and decisive way that you have a building here that's a gable and you take that building form and you rotate it and there's a void in between.

and when we started to put the glass in between it, it becomes a singular mass.

And we looked at it and we tried to address the concerns or the comments that we had heard previously.

And when we considered the context and the other maybe initial comments that we had heard, it was important enough to hang on to.

in terms of that void and that shadow line and that distinct breakdown in the building forms.

I have two responses.

I think the configuration of the

The entry sequence is in order to get an ADA ramp onto a site.

So that's what sort of aligns the stairs and the location that they do.

We kind of need all of that square footage to get up in terms of an ADA ramp.

And then the location of the front door is sort of tied together with the overhang.

Regarding, and sorry, I'm answering your question, but then also trying to remember everybody else's comments that I'm responding to.

I think you had to, oh, the finish, the finish.

I think that's a great point.

Maybe some tactility would be appreciated here.

and maybe we go look at adjacent textures and try and match it.

I know we used a sand pebble finish before and I was upset at the time that I didn't get the fine that I wanted.

But it does have a certain tactility to it that we could again explore.

So I appreciate that.

Carl, thank you.

The louver system I think is a great suggestion and I think we've tried to find the vine species that worked and we're on like our third vine species and we're still not hitting it so let's go to a louver system or some sort of other maybe more permanent if you will way of screening those headlamps because that's exactly what it is.

So that, sorry Ms.

And what's the, is the building overhanging the two top stories four feet and then you've got an additional sort of cantilevered opening over the door or I mean how

So that trim line that's in that, it sort of wraps the difference between the brick and the proposed eaves.

And then, but then you have, you have a slight covered, like a covered part over the door.

Oh, that is.

So that includes, oh, I got it.

Flip back to three.

I think that one kind of.

I'll jump in.

I will say that I tend to agree with your argument on the EFIS stucco.

I think that it's, you know, it's advantageous over some of the other examples that you've showed, which I appreciate.

Well, it's minimal.

Minimal can be good, too.

And I think that as few iterated, I think the massing works with the neighborhood.

I think, you know, you've broken down the scale to sort of match some of the other residential houses.

on the street, so I appreciate that.

I think with Stucco, the next question is I guess the question that I had, which is what is the finish?

I think there's a wide spectrum and I'd love to see a sample.

I think there are

You know, obviously better quality ones and lesser quality ones, and I think the lesser quality ones have more of a plastic look to them.

So, I agree with Ryder.

I think it would be interesting to play with the contextual nature of this scheme.

maybe try to find something that ties in if you do a little bit of a closer dive and look at maybe if there's a pattern of stucco textures but then also just try to find something that more matches the traditional materiality that

that can be quite a nice material.

It's something that has less of a plasticized look or shiny look and something that has more of a richer finish.

And I know that they're out there, they're different levels that I've looked at in my own experience.

So I'd just encourage the sort of deeper investigation on that and understand what those differences are.

Looking at those two pictures, I like the entry sequence of the upper, even though I understand the points you brought up.

I think it's a cleaner circulation pattern.

It's just less ambiguous and I think it helps.

It helps support the building rather than detract from it.

I think the bottom one detracts a little bit because there's a little bit more fragmentation going on in the front.

I agree with Carl about the louvers.

You know, I think it depends, though, also on the kind of screens that you use.

If you find a, if you're using a screen that doesn't allow the plants to attach to the, I mean, whether it's stucco or brick, you don't really want a vine attached into that material.

So, I do like the idea of a landscape growing up and building it, too, though.

I understand Carl's opinion and I think it makes sense, especially when you think of at night and the lights coming on and the cars, you don't really want to see that.

So I'm blinding that a bit more from view and putting a blind into the parking garage so you don't see that it's a parking garage.

Would help as well.

Those are my comments.

My comments are similar to last meeting.

I very much appreciate and support the massing of the project.

I think that's a deft way of approaching the site.

I still have concerns about the EFIS and I don't find it the way that it's being deployed here compatible with the neighborhood.

I think that the examples of other light colored

Stucco in the neighborhood are fundamentally different.

They are smaller planes.

They are more architectural articulation.

And in this case, the combination of the lightness of the Stucco or the Ephesus, the way that it's elevated in the building and the flatness of the surfaces, it does very much feel like a lot of those large student housing projects that are in other parts of the city, but not in this neighborhood.

I think we're ready for a motion.

All right.

Does somebody like to give a motion?

Having considered the standards set forth when the City Code, including the ADC District Design Guidelines, I moved to find the proposed apartment building at 1609 Gordon Avenue.

Satisfies the BAR's criteria, is compatible with this property and other properties in the Rugby Road, University Circle, Vinnable ADC District.

The BAR approves the application with the

with the conditions as recommended by staff, which are that all exterior lighting and all exterior lighting and fixed lighting within the garage that produce visible outside that is excluding vehicular headlights.

Let me start that again.

All exterior lighting and fixed lighting within the garage that produces light visible outside will have lamping that is dimmable, have a color that's immature, not exceeding 3,000K, and have a color rendering index, not less than 80, preferably not less than 90.

That the e-fist material be drainable, external wall covering, consisting of sheathing, air, and moisture barrier, insulation board, reinforcing fabric, base coat, finish coat, adhesive, and mechanical fasteners as applicable.

And we're installed in areas adjacent to pedestrian traffic or prone to damage.

for example at the balconies and stairwells.

It will be reinforced or a class PN system and or a high impact resistant system and that we recommend investigating the texture of the EFIS to add more materiality to the surface.

Any ground-level mechanical equipment or utility boxes will be appropriately screened.

Meters and panel boxes for utilities, communications, and cable connections will be located preferably within the garage.

If not, then in non-prominent locations on the side elevations only and appropriately screened.

Applied grills are allowed on insulated glass windows provided they have internal spacer bars.

And in lieu of climbing vines to cover the garage windows, please provide a louvered solution to be reviewed by staff.

Someone who?

Is there an action there?

I'm leading that as a recommendation to them as they specify what Ephesus finish they want to use.

The thing about the louvers was not a recommendation that was something that needs to come back to you.

Is that okay?

So discussion?

I sort of agree with Mr. Timmerman that I'd like to see a sample or more about the EFIS and other comments, Mr. Birle, and probably to a greater extent, Breck's comments.

I don't want to delay approving this.

I just wondered for staff what we could do to bring that back.

Can we, we're looking at doing a conditional COA for another project with

or do we want for staff to review that?

What we've treated things like that is not like with the courthouse because we weren't sure what was going to happen.

We treated this separate COA.

I think for this would be to

If Mr. Schafer is okay with it, is to bring back something for the record, and you all accept for the record, there might be A, B, or C, and sort of decision what you, in that selection, and that's what goes into the archive.

I think the point being that it's not changing the material, it's not changing the joint lines.

You're really just looking at that, the texture of the coating.

So if that were understood, I don't have a problem with that.

Sure.

For the BAR.

Yeah, I mean, the understanding being you're picking, but that's smooth, that's rough, that's more rough.

We prefer this one, and that goes into the record.

You're not, again, not changing the design.

I think this is one of those details that I'm very comfortable as things go in the project and, you know, looking at it.

Right.

And I think I'm fine with that amendment.

I guess I just would like this to be more of the applicant's choice versus us choosing something, like getting a selection and saying, we like B out of ABC.

I'd much rather you guys tell us what you like.

Sure.

But this is just me.

The motion stands as it is.

I think further investigation based on the comments that we heard is totally appropriate and warranted and we are happy to bring back, you know, go out, walk the neighborhood with an eaves supplier and say what feels right, you know, based on our design and bring back something that we'd recommend.

Yeah, based on how much discussion we've had on that material alone during the meetings, probably we should have requested a sample of it, which would have been great, or just a little bit more detail on it.

Yeah, I agree.

And it's a worthwhile effort.

Totally fair.

Yeah.

Thank you, Kev.

Shall we take a vote?

So the amended motion is that

I'll second that.

Let's take a vote.

and Mr. Bailey.

Yes.

Mr. Schwartz.

Yes.

And Mr. Burrell.

Yes.

And I vote yes as well.

Thank you, Kevin.

Thank you.

Thanks, Kevin.

I think I would put this in a context of almost a three-tabbed asphalt shingle.

Are they going to go with gray or light gray?

That's not something that's going to be a significant change, so I'm comfortable with it that way.

I didn't realize until last night at the council meeting that they're looking at this screen, so would it help if Kevin was pointing at that one?

Would it help if the applicant just looked at that one?

There are multiple screens in the room.

It's this room.

And if it switches to football game or something, just let us know.

Well, we might not.

Christine's here.

So this next up is...

A project at 606 Lyons Courts in the north downtown, the ADC district.

This is a 1939 colonial revival, Cape Cod.

There's a series of alterations that are being proposed at the house.

So just in talking with the applicant and their architect, there were some questions back and forth last week.

The overall staff is quite comfortable with what's being proposed and, for the most part, consent agenda type things.

But there is a question relative to alterations to the front entrance and the pediment above it.

And so in that light, I thought it would be helpful to bring it forward, to have a conversation about it.

If there was anything else that you all were thinking about the project, but maybe just offer some direction on which, if you're okay with it, or if you have issues with it, et cetera, et cetera.

But the first thing is replacing the front stoop there at the entrance, modifying the front

the door, the frame around it, the trim around the pediment above it.

Around the back side, there'll be infilling some basement windows.

There's an old garage opening at the rear basement, installing a carousel door there.

There's some replacing and relocating of the doorway and windows at the back porch.

There's an existing driveway in a sense of, I think it's

maybe two gravel ruts but they're looking to replace that with some sort of permeable surface and then the walks in the front are being reworked to allow access to that driveway and that's yeah that's what I have here and Ms.

Martin is here tonight and can you answer the question down?

And so I said my concern and I expressed to Ms.

Martin is that removing the entrance feature and altering the pediment above the front door

I wanted to get some feedback on that, but otherwise, everything else on this request is fine.

So there's not going to be any action taken tonight.

Mr. Zehmer.

All righty.

That's entirely up to you.

So I think we'll just open it to the BAR for questions and it will do questions and then comments.

So and I guess first is the applicant.

Well, I guess I'll just comment that, you know, living in this neighborhood and walking in this neighborhood is a very modest home of the time.

And I don't feel like there's a real strict style as I see many, many keep cards of this.

Nature.

Some have, like, this one has a bay window off the side.

I don't know how colonial revival that is.

I don't know.

Some, I feel like the second-story dormers are small for this house, whereas I'll see another keepcott.

The second-story dormers will see more appropriately scaled.

Some have a very steep roof, like mine.

Some don't.

I just feel like there's a lot of variability around the style and I think because it was built in 1939 and it was a smaller home over time before there were few boards, people have made modifications to suit their families, growing and changes.

For me personally, I

I like other Cape Cods in my areas fronts better, but mine sits very close to the street.

And I already have something that projects forward.

So what I asked my architect to do was come up with a way to give me a covered port, portico, so to speak, without creating an actual portico, because it's a modest home.

And so her solution was a bracketed style with a shed roof.

I've seen a lot of racketed porticoes around town.

I've been spending a lot of time trying to come up with an ideas and drawing them myself.

And initially thought maybe keeping the triangular, sorry, kind of echoing that shape.

But ultimately, I liked this best because I felt like it sort of stopped the house looking like it's coming at you.

That was my thought.

Now, whether that's historical or appropriate, et cetera, I don't know.

I also wonder what the pediment that was brought up by Jeff at the beginning.

To me, it looks kind of small relative to the front of the house.

And I don't know whose decision that was, whether it was originally there when it was first built or whether it was applied at a later point in time.

Because to me, it looks a little not to the correct scale.

If it were my house, I wouldn't have put it there in the first place.

when I built it.

The house was built, my understanding for the principal of Jackson Viya, Miss Viya.

This was her house.

So she's just an educator, teacher.

She did not live extravagantly and the house is an extravagant.

So the changes that I'm making, I'm trying to keep.

I don't want it to look extravagant.

And I feel like adding some big porch feature would

to create an extravagant that the house is just not suitable for.

The way that you access the front door right now, this side entrance on both sides, again, I don't know if that's original or if that's something that came later on, but it makes it really hard to get in the house, particularly if you're helping someone who needs help getting into the house, like an aging parent or something like that.

It also makes it really hard to move furniture out.

So I am waterproofing around the exterior of the house and so thought let's just get rid of that front and put something about the same size but that can be accessed from the front like

so that people can walk from this sidewalk directly to the front door and then I'll do something to kind of access the driveway.

The driveway right now is crumbling asphalt that goes all the way back to the rear of the property and I'm going to excavate and get rid of all that asphalt.

I really don't want an asphalt driveway, but I'm also not prepared to do anything really expensive in terms of a hard skate for the driveway.

So that's why I suggest this is something permeable.

whether it's a gravel or a, it won't be fancy right now, but that will at least give me a chance down the road to make a change that I want to with a paver, permeable paver or something like that.

Thank you.

I have a couple of questions.

OK.

Did not show up on our list, Jeff, at the top.

The other question is, there's a sketch with some red lines on it.

Are you raising the soil in front of the house to get rid of the steps?

So there will be, I don't believe that this sketch really shows the way the land falls away from, oh, you're seeing some struts were drawn it.

It's already, the way it is now when you

This was replaced once before because of water issues and the way they regraded it as the soil goes up and then it goes back down into the house.

So it's just going to be improved to get drainage away from the house.

But it's not a very, it's maybe two steps, three steps from, it's not, it's the steps were in process.

In fact, I'm not wet on the whole railing step thing here.

And I

would rather have suggestions, and I don't even know if you need to approve that part of it, but that's been a sticking point for me, but I can't hold up the remodeling or the renovation because I'm not sold on how I exactly want the stoop.

Yeah, the windows were not in the initial conversations I had.

Yeah, that's not just fault.

That's my fault.

I'm getting a ultimate the Marvin ultimate window with the coconut cream is the exterior color.

It's not as yellow as the ivory white, I think it's called, but it's not pure white.

Right now my house is a cream trim, which looks really nice with the

And on the front door, it looks like you're keeping the screen door and the surround except for the little triangle on the top, is that correct?

But there's a little pediment at the top.

I know.

I don't think that it would, based on how she has it drawn.

I think we'd be fine with, if we consider it a historic artifact, we'd be fine with building over it.

But it hits at a sort of funny point.

So, I mean, if you replace it, if you remove it, you're going to have to fill in that space with something above the entablature.

I thought about that at first, and I kind of drew it myself a little bit, and I just felt like it just seems, it almost like those stacking dolls, like one thing stacked in the other, and it's just sort of coming at you, and so, yeah, I didn't want, I would rather not have that at all than have something, so this to me kind of

solved the problem.

It could be a better solution, but we've already spent like a ton of time on this.

And what gave me this idea initially was I saw a photo of a Cape Cod of the same era in Atlanta that had something similar done, and I liked the idea of it.

So Joe, I guess in terms, not necessarily stacking, but did you consider taking the roof line of the cross gable, I guess, that's your front foyer when you enter and just taking that roof line all the way out and essentially dropping two columns down or posts to create

The challenge for me with this house is that I like that idea, except that I already have that protrusion out, and then it's just that much bigger.

I've seen, there's a house on where Evergreen turns into Lexington around that corner there, where they have something similar, and they added, they just extended that out.

They did do sort of a curved thing, Magigar, in there.

And it just looks too much.

I don't know, it just looks, and maybe this looks, my suggestion looks too much.

I think it's awkward

I'll say I find it elegant actually.

I agree.

I agree too.

An elegant solution too.

I agree with the assessment.

I think that the original facade was not all properly proportioned.

I would like to second that.

It's also a fairly elegant solution and it doesn't protrude out in a way that detracts from the structure of the house itself.

To me, the solution is one that

It is the least modification to the house.

Like if you were to extrude your foyer out, you'd be removing that whole wall and changing the mass of the house more.

This seems like the most... That would be what I was suggesting.

So some perspective that might help is you've looked at two, in the last year or two,

Changes to front porch is exclusively one rugby road conservation district and that was one where the front porch didn't fit but the request was to allow the change and to document what was there and an option here is that

It's not being removed.

It's being altered.

So the documentation, we can see what's there.

What I told Ms.

Martin last week is that the option would be to

to at least do something that is appropriate and fits.

So as long as we're not knocking something down and we're altering it, but is it altering it appropriately?

I think you guys have allowed that with documentation.

So that's where it comes down to me.

Yeah, and I think that's where we might have to, some people think that it's awkward and some of us think it's not.

I feel like the nice thing about what's been designed is that if at some point some future homeowner changed their mind, they could lock this off and put the little pendant back and it would be exactly as it always was.

So it seems much more reversible.

How deep is that?

A comment on your, since it sounds like you're still figuring out the railings.

I mean, I agree.

It would be nice if, because if the drop from the side of your porch is less than two and a half feet, you don't need a railing.

You don't need a guardrail.

But you will need railings at the steps.

So theoretically, if you're trying to open it up even more,

Yeah, if you're just careful of how far the drop is off the side, you may not need to have a guardrail at all.

Just a simple handrail.

Yeah, it does.

I think, well, the windows always end up being a sticking point, but I think it's a simple house.

You have simple six over six windows, or actually six over one, but they're

Do you know if there are true replacement windows?

Yes.

I believe these would be larger.

because we took the trim off.

We removed the trim from the outside of the house and looked at where the sill was and how they had to build up the window to put the windows that are currently in.

I think that's a better way of doing it.

It's a superior installation method.

I think so.

I wanted to put the

The mullions on the bottom sash as well, just because I felt like, you know, it doesn't have, it's this plane, and I think it would just dress it up, but not too much.

That's my thought.

Oh, good.

That makes that so much easier.

Good.

I have a – my house, which is not too far from here, is about the same era, and I do consider it historic.

These houses were built during the war.

Yours was probably built, you know, as the war was starting up, but everybody kind of knew it was imminent.

And that's really significant, because houses were not, as I'm told, being built during World War II.

It was a really pretty bleak time in the United States.

People that could afford an architect and could afford to have a house built were fortunate people, as you found out.

And I do think that the pilasters and the pediment are character defining features of the entrance of this house.

You know, I agree with all of your intentions, including, you know, not doing not doing columns, just doing brackets, trying to keep it low profile.

I just think that there are other solutions where you could retain that.

And as you go under a new roof awning space, you would still see what I believe are those original colonial revival features.

Even on a modest house, they were a big deal because nobody was paying to build houses then.

And even that little bit of detail reflects something that was going on at that time locally.

I don't think this house was ever meant to be a craftsman house or to be vernacular.

It's what it is.

That highly pitched roof is really pretty significant.

It's really remarkable, as are the gables.

Three on the back that are quite handsome and the two on the front.

When the polyesters move up and look, and that little detail at the top, which is at the top of your screen or storm door, it introduces the rest of the columns that the pediment sits over.

And I do think it's a significant character defining feature of your

What about, because I agree, like I really, it's important to me to keep the house close to what it originally was.

So I, and I'm trying to solve a problem and preserve.

I'm not a designer.

There are a lot of really talented people here, and that's what your architects job would be.

We can make suggestions.

I think you've heard a couple this evening, but we are not a design team, and that would be the least

There's always a good solution to be had.

I appreciate your point, Cheri.

I think the idea of putting this in some kind of historic context is important.

That's what we're doing here.

And I think it's worthwhile to mention that, you know, whether it's

Perfectly proportional door or not.

It retains some aspect of the 1940s that's just part of every other little detail probably on your street that makes your street what it is.

I appreciate the thought behind some of these comments and the cajoling you to try to preserve what's there.

I would probably come down a little bit more on the side of, it's a little awkward to me, the design, because I feel like it doesn't quite fit with the nature of the house and the style of the house.

It does feel more crass than to me.

But I think that's your prerogative, stylistically, with what you want.

I think that if you're looking for more of a seamless design that works with enhances or tries to support the style that your house is, then I think there are probably other options to look at.

But I think that the idea of

like this Lewis was saying to try to preserve what's on there is a good idea.

And why not?

And it's funny too because I really didn't like the way the wind is or the current front door is because it was trying to take a house that's not a craftsman and trying to make it a craftsman.

And I really didn't like that, so I wanted to

All right.

I think we've provided some conflicting advice.

I think we have indeed.

But I think it might give the applicant some idea of approximately where we are, so there's always the

Here we can.

I mean, I guess after hearing some of the comments, I think I side with Ms.

Lewis and Mr. Timmerman that I'd like to see the element of the pediment over the door preserved, but I'm not against some sort of extension of a roof over the porch.

assuming it could be preserved, but they still had this shed roof on the front.

I do.

I mean, even if you all, or half of you, or more than half of you, I guess is what's an important number.

Go with it.

I think I

feel like I have reservations myself.

So I think importantly, I don't want my renovation held up because of the door.

That's important as I'm living in an apartment right now.

So yeah.

But I would be very willing to come back and I'd be willing to either abandon it

Well, you know, I think the solution really depends on whether we decide we can accept taking that down or not, because the solutions are completely different if we're saying that you have to keep the pediment.

So I guess first raw pooling.

Pediment or no pediment?

I think it's entirely replaceable.

If it were to come off and someone wanted to put it back in the future, it's just a triangle of wood.

It's just a crumble, is what it looks like, or a bedmull.

Yeah, so I'm clear.

I mean, we're all using the same language.

That brick pediment above the door, stick.

You just said brick pediment.

That's it.

We've really gotten the weeds tonight.

I mean, when I talked to Ms.

Martins last week, I meant she was...

I was surprised, not surprised, but it was really enthusiastic about the brackets and so she really pushed back hard so I really want to make sure we give her at least a clear image of what we're saying without I realize not giving you approval or anything.

I was just going to comment not on the pediment which kicked that around.

And I would say this to all the applicants, we don't need to see interior drawings unless it impacts something that you need to do on the exterior.

And Ms.

Outlaw has submitted these before and she's pretty

She's pretty well known.

She knows about our process, but we got them again.

And, you know, it looks like beautiful plans, but we don't need to see them unless something in the inside is impacting the outside and you'd like to show us that condition or that need or something.

Oh, no, no, no, no blame on staff at all.

I mean, it's just easier for them to include it because they don't know what's important.

But just to encourage you, our packets are like sometimes almost 300 pages long.

I actually thought it was kind of, I mean, I know they're not required, but I was actually geeking out over them.

It was interesting.

Ignore the architects.

Just so Christine has the background, we've had applicants, you know, put in their, you know, little Timmy's bedroom, where the whole safe is located, and I try.

You know, I know that you did not need that.

I think this was just a result of a sort of kind of

making some decisions in the 11th hour, fatigued and just like get it there.

All right.

Thank you very much for bringing this to us.

Okay, I understand.

This is just a pre-application conference.

I did.

I applied in October.

And what happened was going into the November meeting, things had changed.

There was some

Miss Communication on what was needed and what we had to have.

And I had thought about just putting this on the November meeting for a discussion.

When it looked like things were going to get a little complicated, as they did, I asked

Christina, if we can move it to December, because I was away for two weeks, I wasn't able to really dive into this.

So, but then last week with again some sort of

information coming in that didn't line up with prior information, that was my decision to know I need to have a coherent set of drawings and not several different things.

But I think that what has been presented, what we got last week with these drawings, they're fine if

whatever is that they prefer to pursue with the front entrance if there's options or what they want and that we plan to bring this to you in January for formal approval.

Okay.

Thank you.

So we'll see you again in January.

I hope.

Okay, so how does that affect me and like me moving forward with things with

I say it's not, I mean I'm not trying to.

Yeah, so I just, you know, in fairness to everyone here, I think

it wasn't complete and it was there was some conflicting information so we did get these what you're looking at now I think middle of last week but I wasn't able to address it in the staff report and get it it didn't go out with the I think the regular packet or it was right there at the end so I mean it is where it is but

I think this is part of what I was saying earlier in the preliminary meeting.

We really need to do a better job at our end of communicating with folks what do we need from you and if we don't have it by this date, we just can't.

We can't bring it forward.

I actually thought I had a different understanding is that basically you, as staff, had already looked at a lot of the other things that she was proposing and basically said you saw a particular problem with them and the only thing that you were concerned about the way I understood what you said was the entrance.

And that's what we had to think about.

My interpretation of that was that

Everything would be okay for her to go forward with in remodeling the house, except for the front.

I thought you had approved it as staff.

That's why I took it out.

I mean, it really just, I'd be very blunt.

We had an application come in the end of October.

It was some sketches and rough drawings and some photographs.

A week later I got some different photographs and some different sketches and different elevations.

We then asked for a final drawing and got

The drawing with the four renderings on it with red notes saying this isn't the final set.

This is subject to change.

That was last Monday.

I was trying to work with people and be helpful, but the application was not complete.

Yes, the things in the backyard, the driveway and stuff like that were fine.

We could have

You know, if I had all the time in the world, I would have said, do a COA request for the stuff that's simple, and omit the in front, and come back later for that.

You know, in hindsight, that would have been the brilliant move.

I failed in that regard.

But the fact remains is, the architect, it was not providing me with the information I needed to present to you all.

Whether I thought, in concept, it was good or not, it was not,

I'm a little bit confused myself because my understanding was that it could be

I was told this is basically a simple, will be pretty simple because I'm not making many changes.

When it became more difficult was when I decided I wanted to add a cover on.

So the cover is really the challenge here and the rest of it is very simple and it's not

and just in this conversation we've had this evening there's been really no questions aside from the six over six windows that would change whether we could afford with that.

So I guess you're right, I don't really appreciate the process and I am sorry my architect submitted the porch drawings delayed but in part I didn't quite appreciate that everything

Part of this would have to be drilled down because initially when we initially talked there was something about how you can, they can approve something and conditionally approve something else.

I am concerned about myself moving forward with this in a timeline that is possible for my builders ready to move forward and I will ask the porch if I have to or the cover if I have to.

That is really important to me to get moving on this.

and I really just don't understand what other elements of this would even require a whole lot of conversation since I'm actually going backwards.

I'm taking out the craftsman style windows, replacing them with a higher quality window that is consistent with the color of the trim and will be historically accurate and that's my whole goal.

I think we appreciate that.

I think the problem is this wasn't, unfortunately it wasn't formally presented to us and there's a process that we go through where we invite public comment because you're in a historic district and we didn't do that and so in order to officially vote on this and approve it we have to go through our standard process and I understand this is like the epitome of bureaucracy and that's gonna

Okay, let me ask another question then because I heard you say to Jeff that potentially could this be staff reviewed and approved with the exception of these things?

I mean, oftentimes windows replacements is something that comes before the BAR and it usually requires

some more detailed photographs and sort of an assessment report showing that either the condition of the windows is poor or that they're clearly not original.

But yes, to your point, I think some of these other minor things probably could have been approved by staff.

Certainly the front porch is on the primary facade of the building that would need BAR review and approval.

So you may be able to

I don't know if they can amend the COA or somehow, as Jeff kind of suggested, get staff approval on some of these minor things and then maybe bring before us just the change to the porch.

Well, this is a process that's required by code.

So I can't leap over it, even if this were my own house.

But we've now done it.

Yeah, move their stepping stones in the front.

That's minor.

When I say things are minor, that doesn't mean just go ahead and do it.

I really do think there was some miscommunication here.

But the fact remains, I didn't know anything about the windows being replaced.

I think I noticed that in the packet.

What I'm saying is that I asked for a set of drawings and received them in the middle of last week after we had written a staff report.

And so we shared it.

I didn't dive into it because I knew I was bringing it to you.

It was just a discussion item.

So I said, I don't want to.

I'm not trying to point fingers here, but I did not get the information I needed to present to you a complete application.

Well, the deadline for this meeting was three Tuesdays prior, and we received information

The End of October, but again it was bits and pieces and it was not a coherent set of drawings.

But I don't know, yeah, there's no way, I mean, I can't suddenly elevate this to a formal COA request.

The ordinance doesn't allow me to do that and I'm not going to put my job on the line to suggest you do that.

This is not a constant occurrence.

There's some miscommunication here and I think we pick it up and the process is we look at it in January.

I think that there are questions to be asked about windows we've talked before about when doing replacement windows in non-conforming houses or not contributing in or buildings which have had replacement windows if they are not the original windows.

It's possible

I mean, if I had known that, I would have certainly included that in a discussion.

We're not proposing to.

For January, can you work with the applicant so that she can

We can set up the approval so that we can approve everything and the porch would be separate just in case we don't like what she comes up with with the porch.

Well, I did not mean to waste anybody's time, for sure.

I truly, when I applied in October, thought this was as simple as I was told.

It was relatively straightforward.

It evolved.

That is true.

And my architect was delayed in getting the last piece of it to Jeff's team, which is true.

I didn't appreciate that it had to be reviewed as a whole unit.

I honestly thought that my original meeting, which was set up for November and I had a sign in my yard about it, I was told by Jeff that it was getting delayed because he had too many things to address at the November meeting and he was punting mine to December.

I said that's fine.

I didn't realize that the meeting itself changed.

I thought it was the same kind of meeting that we were going to be reviewing for approval to get a building permit going and that there might be some elements that would be conditionally approved.

That was my understanding moving forward.

So I'm frustrated, yes, because I think there

I think there is some miscommunication in what I was involved, what I was required to provide, particularly from the October or from the November meeting.

Like I said, wherever we had a sign in our yard, we're moving it to December.

I thought it would be the same kind of meeting.

Had no idea it would be a different kind of meeting.

No, I don't think so.

Thank you.

As Christine said, her project, there was some evolution to it and it's continued to evolve.

has not been my best six weeks at work.

There's a lot going on.

And so, sorry, I wasn't able to be at 100% on this one.

But again, I just will emphasize that I didn't have complete information.

and

and 184 foot tall building on West Main in 1939 Cape Cod in North downtown and we have to come up with some guidance on that.

What I try to do, and I try to do this very honestly to help applicants, is that sometimes when it's not quite there yet,

to still bring it to you all to have a conversation so we keep things moving forward.

And I take a lot of pride in that, but I also get a lot of grief from it.

But I want to try and keep things moving forward because any input we can offer.

But I definitely need to come up with a better process for this.

And if someone does not have everything that I need to take to the BAR, then I'm not going to bring it.

And I'm sorry, I'm getting

The burden of

When this was initially presented, it was relatively simple.

I do.

I do.

I don't like hearing that this is trying to be helpful.

If I knew exactly what was required, when it was required, that would be different than saying just submit what you can and we'll keep things moving forward.

I moved out of my house, I moved everything out of my house, my whole family out of my house.

Had I realized that I would be in a position of potentially waiting another month to deal with this for something that's

quite honestly, aside from that front porch, pretty simple and will improve the home overall.

I would have obviously not put myself in a position of limbo.

So I appreciate help and I appreciate, I just don't understand where we get from.

I'm putting a sign in your front yard.

Oh, I've got too much to do.

I was gone and busy.

Things got complicated.

My project really evolved in the porch overhang.

And so therefore, to me, this meeting could have been taken place tonight with everything except for the porch overhang.

I don't understand that.

I will share the emails with the BAR.

We asked for very specific information, and the roof on the front came as a photograph of a building on Bloberstaff.

It then came in as a bracketed thing.

We shared with you last week, I laid out, I even spent time laying out.

I need these four elevations, I need these four photographs, I need these four changes shown.

We got a page with rendering, so on it with notes that said this is not a complete design.

So I appreciate everything you're saying, but I asked for information.

I was trying to be helpful.

Yes, the reason we had at the time we came here in October and we're ready to learn November had that meeting.

I was working with another set of images that have been shared and not what the B.A.R.

is looking at tonight.

So I really do appreciate your situation, but at no point in time did I communicate that this was going to be approved easily.

I said it would require approval, it didn't look complicated, and we needed the following information.

And I again appreciate your situation, but I can't

But thank you, Christina.

A agenda item is a pre-application for a conference for 745 Park Street So this is Mr. Riddle back again with the latest iteration of his little home project on Park Street You've looked at this property a couple times a couple of years ago and I was surprised how long ago

The BAR did approve a COA to raise the 1957 House at 745 Park.

Then Mr. Riddlechages then explored a new structure at the back which you all looked at had approved and I'm giving Kevin a hard time because it's

What's before you tonight is a request to the existing kid house will not be raised but it will have basically a pop-up addition done to it.

I, in the staff report,

sort of offered two ways to look at this.

One is because of the fact that a demolition COA was approved.

Now granted, that has since expired, but because the demolition had been approved that you could look at the addition as being essentially a new construction, a new building, or you could look at it in terms of an addition onto an existing building.

I don't know if there's a right or a wrong because the guidelines for additions generally follow some of the new construction guidance.

And so the one way to think about this is yes, this is something that is building on top of an existing 1957 house.

The other is this is the introduction of

and a rather contemporary design into the historic district.

So because of what we mentioned earlier of the cost requirements in order to have a preliminary, sorry, pre-application conference, I advised the riddles to come forward and have that with you all.

The purpose of that being as I've outlined in the staff report really to introduce you to the project, answer any questions they have.

Do you have any guidance that you might have so that they can come back when they complete applications?

Good evening, everyone.

Yeah, the demolition request did lapse and we no longer have any intention of demolishing the existing house, but we are planning to change it a lot.

So our interpretation is that this now is an addition rather than totally new construction.

And I'll be very brief.

I think the

Booklet describes it pretty well.

We just want to remove the top half of the house with the gable roof and replace that with a full story.

We are cladding it in a metal siding.

We are adding a porch and a covering over the porch.

We'll be painting the existing brick.

And I think that describes it pretty well.

I have a question.

I would say this is independent.

We don't mean to abandon that approval, but I think our direction has changed somewhat, or at least not

The Phasing, you might say.

So we see this as the priority.

I mean, the house, it needs something.

And this is overdue.

Yeah, that makes sense.

Yeah, that's right.

And I think it strengthens the argument and probably more than anything, but just curious.

I have a question.

What is the roofing?

Is that an EPDM?

And how are you draining that?

It's draining to the rear.

I think the rear elevation will indicate that there's a gutter there and downspouts.

And I'm sorry that the text didn't show up there on the left image, the left existing plan.

I'll start.

So that's a bonus location, you know, on the lot, even with the structure that we had approved in the in the rear yard, I think the location is fine and on the lot and with regard to other historic assets that you've got on either side of you on Park Street.

I mean, I don't don't quite meet that the new editions should not destroy historic materials.

You're going to destroy something.

We're not sure how historic or significant it is, but that's kind of the nature of of editions.

But the good thing is that you are not replicating or trying to replicate the original style of the house.

It's radically different.

And that's what we look for in editions.

And, you know, it's hard to

This is not just an addition and adding a room or adding something that's a little bit more freestanding but in the true, it meets that guideline.

And I don't think that the materials and the features of the house do meet parts of the historic district.

I think it would be really lovely to have a contemporary home, maybe one of the first on Park Street.

So I applaud it.

I have no objection to it.

We're all trying to keep our comments as brief as Mr. Riddles.

And I was just going to throw in some guidelines for, because I did approve this for demolition, I still view it as a new construction.

And I mean, the height and width meet the guidelines for new construction.

There's a lot of stuff in the new construction chapter about porches.

You clearly have a porch.

Shallow pitch roofs and flat rooms are appropriate in historic residential areas, not contemporary design buildings.

Check.

You're keeping the rhythm, pattern, ratios of solids and voids similar to what's already there.

the more porch stuff, the materials I mean it's I so the metal on the walls is unique but I think I could see it as being a reflection of metal roofs in the neighborhood it's kind of replacing what was your roof it is

It's definitely different.

The bright blue, you know, you've got bright blue in your neighbor's house, so I definitely can't get you for that.

and

You have a strong design aesthetic that you've tried to create and I'm not gonna, just because it's different from what's historic, I don't think I can knock you for that.

So yeah, I think this is, you've made a nice project.

I'm sorry, I'm rambling.

I need to shut up.

Be quick.

Now, Carl, one thing I wanted to clarify, really, for the sake of the BAR fee,

Is it OK to technically regard this as an addition rather than new construction?

I'm thinking philosophically.

I agree.

We want it to be a pretty

You know, significant transformation even though it's still a pretty modest house.

We ran into this with the sorority on a rugby that was essentially a new building.

Yeah, it's a tricky one.

If you look at the new construction additions guidelines, you know, limit the size of the additions so there's not visually overpower the existing building.

It's sort of, it's hard to call an addition, it's sort of like a swap.

I like the approach.

I think it'll be an improvement upon the current situation and I think together with the other project if that gets built at some point would also strengthen the two, speaking to one another.

The only two, I have two comments.

One is that the

I think it would be more appropriate to cover the ends of the joists on the stair.

They're open and it becomes kind of a striking rhythm.

It feels a little less finished in the context.

And then the other is, to my eye, the bright white under the black

calls more attention to itself or makes it more a little louder than I feel like it could or should be.

I can offer one.

When Kate and I looked at this,

It's a building that almost reaches the sculpture on the landscape.

And we both kind of wondered, like, how does the landscape plan help it, hurt it, harm it, or is that, I don't know.

If you could advance it a page or two to maybe the second perspective, the one after this.

Brex can have some free time.

Any other thoughts or questions?

Yeah, I think so.

All right, we've been we're going to take a five minute break.

We'll reconvene at 7 30.

I hate that they are, but I think they are

Sorry, I, I used to get along with them, right?

So what work are they doing for you, Ronald?

I don't know if it's true, but I think we're going to be leading through the rest of the session.

I have a feeling of fear.

Yes, I guess you're right.

I guess I said two years, I think it's actually one year that you got, and it doesn't sell, and it's Adelaide, I don't know if it's determined for you, but it's probably more of a 10-story building, but as a two-story building, a two-story building.

He was having some real issues in middle school.

I don't know.

I might be wrong.

No, it's not the right one.

It's not it.

It's not it.

I don't know.

No, it's not it.

That's funny how that happened.

I know that.

I know that.

I know that.

I know that.

I know that.

I know that.

I know that.

I know that.

I know that.

I know that.

I know that.

I know that.

I know that.

I know that.

I know that.

I'm going to call us back to order.

Since we are still just having pre-application conferences, I think we'd like to just keep the ball rolling on tonight's agenda.

So Mr. Warner stepped out of the room.

Mr. Richardson, I don't know if you

They're prepared.

They'll be great for 1,000 Wartland Street, I think.

Are you all the applicants for this?

Great.

So there's some folks that can speak to it as well.

Sure.

So this is your second continuation of a preliminary discussion, the 10th and Wartland Project large scale.

They are continuing to seek design feedback.

Great.

I'd like to ask applicants, if y'all don't mind coming up and if you've got a, do you have a prepared presentation or just sort of, okay, fantastic.

I'll kick it off briefly.

JT Engelhardt with National Housing Trust.

NHD, and me in particular, I've been involved in the Kindlewood redevelopment.

We co-own and are co-developers of that with Piedmont Housing Alliance.

That's just background.

This is a continuation, so I said this before.

I'll be brief.

A development team consisting of POA, Preservation of Affordable Housing, National Housing Trust, and Wycliffe Development Consulting was chosen by the UVA Foundation to be the developer of affordable housing on this about two acre site.

the subject site.

And the last thing I'll say is we are on a schedule that would submit for competitive low-income housing tax credits on March 20th, 2025.

And we need site plan approval before then.

Thank you.

I'm Liz Chapman with German Parker Architects.

And if you could advance to the next slide, please.

So just for a brief recap for everyone or anyone who might not have been present when we first discussed this, the current site is divided into four different properties.

There's a mix of ownership between UVA and the UVA Foundation Those two entities are in the process of doing a number of different configurations But eventually we will end up with this site being one single site And if you can move to the next slide, please I'll get a little bit more into the complications here just as a quick refresh but

There is one existing building on site.

It is a non-contributing structure from the early 80s.

Next slide, please.

And so there, again, you can see kind of the complicated current use.

I'll also note that in addition to the existing structure, the balance of the site is primarily used for surface parking currently.

Next slide, please.

some images of that current building and the current surface parking just for reference.

Next slide.

So the new zoning code defines this as CX8, which in this case, because we are proposing all affordable housing, would allow us to take the full bonus density and go as high as eight stories.

What we are proposing here is only six stories.

Next slide, please.

So when we met last time, it was really to get you all to help us figure out how to use the guidance of the various districts because of the complication here that we are partially in the West Main Street ADC, but really the site more relates to the Wirtland ADC and the individually protected property that are both right across the street.

So you did help us get a little bit of clarity on that.

And again, for context, these are some of the other structures that are in the Main Street, ADC, and moving on, and then the ones that are in the Wurtland, ADC.

And there's a very wide variety in both of those districts.

So your help was appreciated in trying to figure out how to address that.

and go ahead to the next slide, please.

So again, up to 11 stories is allowed, but we are only proposing six.

So if you can go ahead through that next slide.

And one more.

So again, this is all review for all of you, but here's the new stuff.

So what we are proposing

and this particular view, I'm sorry that it's cut off on the bottom, but this view is the Wurtland Street Elevation.

So on your far right, you'll see where we're proposing to have the pedestrian entrance to the apartments.

And you'll note that at this corner, it'll have a relative feel of a four-story building because there are some pretty significant grade changes.

And we're also proposing that sixth story to step back

approximately 10 feet on both the Wurtland Elevation and the 10th Street Elevation.

So from the perspective of someone standing on the street on either Wurtland or 10th, it should feel like a four or five story building depending on where you are.

The majority of the first floor of this elevation where it's partially underground is a parking garage.

So we've been working with the city with their new ordinance to figure out how best to deal with some of those blank wall conditions, looking at different types of landscaping.

However, this is the north elevation, so we need to be sensitive to things that are actually going to be able to

grow and thrive given the shading that's happening here.

If you could go to the next slide please.

So this is our street section across, across Workland.

And so you can see we've been exploring different types of plantings along this area with the city, particularly with the urban forester, trying to find cultivars that can work with our

are conflicts that we have with utilities that are in the street in this area.

And for that reason, because of all the utilities, we have proposed to flip the sidewalk and the planting strip from what current ordinance requires to what is more similar to what's there currently.

Mainly because any type of tree that we would propose, basically the utilities were shooting down.

So by flipping them, if we look for some more

colander species or shade tolerant species or even large bushes we feel like we can be more successful in getting those plants to survive and thrive.

And so across the street from this is existing homes that are well set back so there's not really a lot of context immediately across the street in this area.

Next slide please.

So this is our elevation from 10th Street

And again, you'll see it kind of looks like a five story building from this perspective because that top floor is set back.

So we are planning for the ground floor here in front of the garage to have retail bays.

The owner is planning for a mix of uses that will serve the residents who live in this building and the greater community.

And that will will almost certainly include early childhood

Care Center.

Next slide, please.

And so here's the street section across this area.

Again, we have a pretty big issue with some very substantial utilities in the street and under the sidewalk in this area.

So we're again proposing to leave the sidewalk where it's currently located and move the street trees to an area with no encumbrances.

again working with the city to try and find something that's maybe a little more small scale or columnar so that it's not going to you know be interfering with those utilities or be in conflict with the footings of the building.

Next slide please.

So there is an extensive landscape plan that has been developed

and we are happy to get more into the details of that with you.

But again, working to find that balance to understand these specific species with the city that are really going to work and thrive in these conditions because they are fairly extreme conditions that we're asking these plants to survive in.

We're looking at individual entry points, sorry, with

with hardscaping to define the individual retail entrances.

And you'll see in the center of 10th Street a little bit more to the south side there is the garage entry and also a secondary pedestrian entry into the building.

We have been working extensively with the traffic engineer in order to find the right place for that home.

Additionally, in the top left-hand corner, you'll see where our loading bay and service entry is planned.

So trying to separate those uses so that larger trucks and pedestrian vehicles or single family vehicles are not in the same place.

And I'll just mention also the relationship.

The rear of the south and the

Western portion of the site, which butt up against the UVA property at Stacey Hall.

Those areas are intended to be largely prairie grass areas.

That's going to be doing a lot of our stormwater management.

There will be some underground stormwater in addition to what we're doing at the surface with all of that prairie grass landscaping.

Next slide please.

So here's an image of what we're proposing for you all.

This is the corner of 10th and Wirtland right at the traffic light.

We've been having discussions with the city and Dominion about whether or not we can underground some of the overhead utilities that are at this intersection, which are quite extensive.

But it kind of gives you a flavor of what we're thinking for that, that pedestrian view at the intersection.

Next slide, please.

So this would be your view looking along Wirtland towards 10th Street.

So again, you can see the pedestrian entrance, and it won't actually say entrance, it'll say whatever the building address is or the building name ends up being.

But again, that view sort of into the main lobby and amenity areas and leasing office right at that entry point.

Next slide, please.

And so this would be your view standing

on 10th Street looking toward Wortland.

So the immediate retail bay right there in front of you would be the Early Childhood Center, and their outdoor play area would be behind that fence off on your left-hand side.

All right, next slide, please.

This is Wortland.

Yeah, we're standing on 10th, looking toward Wortland.

and so this is a view, again, a long 10th looking sort of at the individual commercial entry points into the building.

You can kind of see what we're thinking with the landscaping and some hardscaping in order to define little nodes at each entry point.

Next slide, please.

And there are some

some basic floor plans here just to help you kind of understand a little bit the frame of reference.

I know they're not really necessary, but I think helpful in this case to kind of understand kind of what's going on behind some of those windows.

So this is your garage floor, which is more than 50% below grade.

Next slide, please.

This is the first floor, and you can see in blue would be all the amenity spaces.

So we have a small sliver of those amenities that'll be facing Wirtland.

But the majority of them would be sort of to the back and the rear of the property.

Mainly because we want to keep that sort of more, that rhythm of more residential sized windows really up at the street.

Next slide, please.

and just a typical floor that is all units surrounding a courtyard.

And then you can see sort of the step back on that top floor and we're envisioning that there would be some sort of amenity space on that top floor up at the corner.

So there might be a little activity up in that top corner.

And so because of the affordable housing component and the tax credits that JT mentioned were really

told what materials we have to use.

And those are primarily brick and fiber cement.

Those are what the tax credits require of us.

In this case, I think it's fortunate because I think they really do work fairly well with the neighborhood, particularly the brick and the sort of the lap siding style works well in this neighborhood.

And with that,

Welcome your comments.

All right, thank you.

That's, yeah.

A quick question.

A lot of it has to do with the funding mechanisms and what we can structurally, what we can afford to build.

Basically, we couldn't do 100% affordable housing in steel and concrete in this region or pool for Virginia housing.

There's simply not enough tax credits.

Our ask would be too high.

It's not financeable.

So we're trying to stick with wood construction because that's what

Yeah, so we will have two main entrances to the apartments, but really that is by design that the way that

The nature of the population that they are serving and the way that they provide their services, it's really important that staff see and check in with tenants on a regular basis.

And so the best way to facilitate that is to have everyone come and go from a common point and to have the mailboxes be as close to the leasing office as possible so that folks can really

So along, along 10th, sorry, there is a one, sort of one story, two story retail building that includes a ramen noodle shop and a Starbucks

those types of things.

And then between that building and this one, there are a few small homes that are contributing structures in the Main Street District that actually front on 10th and a half Street.

But their sort of entry and their parking lots are accessed from 10th Street.

But they're well set back onto 10th and a half.

And they're

They were originally single family homes that are now being used for commercial purposes.

Did you say in that garage plan, what was the space in the bottom?

There were two areas where you had, it looked like there were retails.

Okay.

Yeah, and then the other three that are in the top portion, the development team is planning for some resident services and sort of larger neighborhood services that will occur in at least two of those spaces.

To be determined is the answer.

for that use, it's collaborative.

Definitely.

I don't think we can say that that is what it's going to be.

And then I had a question on where you got the Prairie Grass.

So the high corner is down in the southwest and then it's sloping down toward both streets.

Right.

Yes, it's quite old.

So I guess I'll just bring that up because those are that retaining wall on that edge.

It'll be 180 units total and they will all be affordable.

The range would be between 30% area median income, all the way up to 80% area median income.

So, within

and we're not set on the actual levels yet, but that's the range.

It will be 100% affordable, but going up to 80% is pretty, from 30 to 80 is pretty serious mix if you think about what the area median income is in Charlottesville.

And the traffic engineers are happy with the

Yeah, we're well aware.

So we have not been having those conversations.

That's been the civil engineer and the traffic engineer having those conversations with the city.

But my understanding from what I've heard secondhand through them is that after some pretty in-depth analysis, they're sticking to this location.

and they are fairly far through their site plan approval process with those city engineers.

We did have at one point a lay-by proposed a long 10th Street for the childcare and they absolutely nixed that.

It is flat.

Yeah, so the project is hoping to meet zero energy ready homes and passive house.

And so with that in mind, we are planning to put solar panels on.

All right.

I want to introduce some things about the zoning.

I understand that you guys do have your site planning process and there were some comments back from the city so you guys will be getting some exceptions to our zoning code and I just want to run through those real quick just so that we understand what's

being asked so that maybe those are some areas that we want to talk about.

The extra deep setback on 10th Street.

And I understand that's to get your landscaping in, whatever, to avoid that utility line.

The building width on Portland is longer than we would normally allow by zoning.

The entry spacing on Portland, we require an entrance door every so many feet.

And I think you guys have two, I guess, one on each end.

Cheri mentioned some vertical design in finished floor elevation, and I'm assuming that's also along Wartland where the ground floor doesn't step with the topography, and it kind of results in that blank wall that I think you guys had referenced.

And then, yeah, I guess those were the items that were flagged for the BAR.

I think you hit all the points that we have highlighted to staff that we will need to request either an administrative approval of or a variance of some type.

and to be clear with everyone here, these are matters during the development code and so we're talking about waivers that would be through the zoning administrator or special exception through council so I don't know exactly how to work that into the loop of

We're looking at something, obviously the guidelines and this is the work on street elevation talk about not having blank walls but if there's an exception granted in the zoning and it's sort of a little bit of a chicken and egg conundrum here

No, I think my point was just that these are some areas that don't match your zoning code, not all of their areas that we want to

For example, there's the big plank wall.

Do we want to talk about that?

And that's a result of some of these exceptions, some of these waivers that they're requesting.

And I assume that we're okay with it.

I'm okay with a deeper step back along 10th Street if it gets more landscaping in there.

So I don't know if that helps the administrative process at all.

I think that one in particular is a really big improvement over what we saw earlier.

I think it would, you know, from an urban standpoint and architecturally will help this project fit better into its context.

And my only comment relative to the trees is that now that you have a little bit of planting space and a little distance away from that wall

that you need not be necessarily restricted to columnar trees.

In fact, I would encourage you to look at other forms as they will use that open light space of the street.

And columnar trees have a limit, less impactful in terms of providing shade.

In fact, you can kind of see in the renderings that the ones that carry their foliage down to the ground actually create

some sight line issues and some visibility issues.

Most of the apartments we've seen have put HVAC units on the roof.

Is that the expectation here?

And I knew, I mean, where we used to look at the rooftops and say, is it screened?

It actually is a requirement of the ordinance now, so we can take the burden off of us to remember to address it.

One other thing, I wasn't sure how to respond to is the inter-court yard and the landscaping in there.

We've reviewed it in the past, but like you say, it's, yeah, it's very lenient.

I think the only thing I would say about it is that it's there from the outside.

I don't know if that's feasible, but my biggest comment about this, and I think this came up last time, is that

The donut feels very monolithic, very fortress-like, and the elevations feel, I think you're starting to break it up nicely and create scale that's appropriate for kind of its mixed location.

It still feels, I think, just due to the size of it and the amount of kind of repetition, it starts to feel more relentless and it feels some calling some attention to particularly important corners or particularly important locations.

Again, I don't know if it's possible to break up the doughnut in certain areas to get a sense of what's going on.

Inside I'd like to I'd like to have a peer you know being able to peer in at least and whether it's a security issue or not just to have a sense of

you know, a break in the armor there and understand sort of even and you know as I think about it like if there's some if there's some natural daylight advantages that you can get by cracking the donut in a certain way to sort of create some depth into the courtyard and create some link there.

I'll try that to be

I think that's a good example.

Yeah, I'd reiterate that, especially on Workland.

You know, there was talk about the transition from kind of a more urban Workland, I mean, 10th Street to Main Street, 10th Street to Workland, but the building really doesn't make much of a change in the facade.

It seems like there could be an opportunity there on the Workland facade to open that up a little bit.

and I guess I have a question.

for Carl.

When you talked about the blank wall, are you talking about the workland?

Yes.

It formed where the grade is starting to rise.

It's kind of a half-level right there.

And that is also a concern of mine that, again, on that most residential of all the sides of this, it feels fortress-like even more so than on the 10th Street side, which you've, I think, done a really great job of animating that elevation.

Those are actually comments we had last time too.

Yeah.

I think one thing I'd like to see are the other two sides of the building.

You'll have probably just shown us two sides of the building.

I want to see the impact of the west side of the building on the residential neighborhood that's immediately adjacent to it.

And I'd really like to see a view of the south, I guess.

Sorry, it's getting my bearings.

As seen from West Main Street, because there are

You know, we know it's not on West Main Street, but there are viewpoints where you're going to be able to kind of look through some of the buildings along West Main and over them, it's going to be popping up over top of these buildings.

One of the things I noted, if this was helpful, is that

The relationship to Stacey Hall and a lot of these large projects, particularly with entrance corridor projects, I've been looking at them at the block scale that these are forming blocks.

and so, just as James just said, that relationship on the west side to Stacey Hall, whether it's just the meadow that ends at a parking lot or is there some sort of, you know, go to, if you would, Kate, I'm sorry, just the oversight, the overview, looking down on it.

Back, back, back, back, back where they had the landscape in the garden in the middle.

And so, it's

Yeah, so the southern parking lot of Stacey Hall is an entire story higher than the northern parking lot, so there is a substantial grade difference between the front and the back.

So there will be a retaining wall between that loading dock area, although we're trying to bring it down a little bit.

And it's just a local observation.

If I may, there's a lot of criticism of Charlottesville High School and its design of having those

Quartz.

You know, I don't know the truth of it, but the long story was designed almost like a prison.

You have those inner courtyards.

And so I just, I would hope that, or I don't know if you've sort of sensed in the community, are people reading that inner courtyard as something sort of like at Charlottesville High School, where, oh yeah, this

You know, where we go and keep our eye on everybody type of thing.

Oh no, I was going to say, well, my high school is like that as well.

Okay, yeah.

Yeah, but just for everyone else's reference, it's 326 feet.

So I guess the standard is 380 feet, so it's smaller, but I'm just using this as a reference of what I'm used to walking by all the time.

And I think we all can recognize that the standard is pretty unsuccessful as a streetscape experience.

It's an urban setting, more urban setting there than what Portland is, which makes me a little bit more concerned, especially since you also have two-thirds of it is

kind of garage space, blank wall.

So I guess I would encourage you to find some way to break that up somehow and more other than just this kind of repetitive back and forth of material changes.

And I don't know if that's

It could be as crazy as maybe you make it look like two buildings.

I hate saying that, I feel like I have architecture professors that would come after me for saying that.

Maybe the portion that's two-thirds of it would be a different-looking building, and maybe the top floor doesn't step back, so then it actually does kind of appear like it's stepping with a topography, if that makes any sense.

The intention of the zoning code is that when you have a sloping site, the buildings are supposed to step with a topography.

Obviously, that's not very practical, and when you have a big building like this, you can't do that.

But if there's a way to

and so on.

I don't know if that would help that at all.

Make it less monotonous, less of a big wall on Wardlin Street.

Because that's what my worry is.

I mean, I do appreciate the, a lot of the moves that you're making, the stepping back on the top floor, the variation of materials.

I hate five or some panels, but I guess that's what we're stuck with.

So I guess I would just ask that you, I like that you're doing the recessed reveals, it's not like, or the, I think that's what you said, or,

You're not doing the board and baton thing.

My fear is again, I'm traumatized from the standard.

It's done so badly.

The board and baton is all wonky and crooked.

You've got flashing sticking out all over the place.

So that is why I really hate this material, but if you do it cleanly, then maybe it'll look good.

I'm getting to the point of rambling, but I think you've got the my point is that this is your Whartland Street elevation, although you've tried really hard to modulate it.

It's unsuccessful in the fact that there's so many similar modulations that I think it's just going to be a big too long of a wall.

So I don't know what you guys can come up with to try and break that up somehow.

And again, I wouldn't mind the step back of the top floor is great, but if to change that massing somehow, if part of it doesn't step back,

I think I would be willing to accept that extra height right there in exchange for getting rid of this monotony on that side, if that makes any sense.

You know, one thing that you could think about, Carl's point, is make a little more of the pedestrian entrance.

The Verve was a massive project, yet at the street level they did a lot of things to, this was an ancient corridor project, but there was a lot going on to break up that street level, and I realized you just can't put

and so many little shops, but that project was a massive project for his and I think that they addressed some of those.

Yeah, or for like maybe a third of it or two thirds of it so that that portion reads more like a new building.

to the courtyard.

So we currently, I believe we are required to have

I can't remember, it's 14 feet or 16 feet on the garage floor level.

I apologize, I don't have that on the tip of my tongue.

And then it's nine foot ceilings on the other floors above that.

I think there is.

Yeah, so Carrie Rainey has clarified for us that the courtyard can count as that.

But we also have the outdoor area, the outdoor child care play area that can also count toward it.

And I wasn't saying that we would be able to enjoy that space, but for 180 families, if you had one kid of family, that's 180 kids that really don't have a park very close by,

The closest one is not much, it's a little pocket park at Venable, we determined, and Washington Park is pretty darned far away for a kid to walk.

That definitely gets into driving distance or older kid biking distance, but it's a ways.

So this just doesn't seem like a whole lot of play space for 180 kids, even with, you know, I know some would be in the daycare, maybe younger kids, but I'm glad it meets our code.

Sorry, I just shared with Mr. Schwarz in this second page of staff reports, just a list of things that

Do you guys need that write-off or what Jeff has listed for what we need for a complete submittal?

Page 115 of our packet.

So we've got elevations with dimensions, typical wall sections, brick selection and coursing, joint detail, cut sheets of doors and windows, location and screening of street level utilities, such as meters.

and Transformers, rooftop screening, existing site plan, detailed landscaping plan for street trees, spacing, etc.

The street trees with an analysis of shade, compatibility with underground and overranked utilities, species selection, canopy requirements, and then relationship to Stacey Hall, spacing, bike-ped routes, access between West Main and Warland Street.

Reading that I will, I'm going to reiterate with Brexit with a, if you can get some canopy trees, I think that would be, I mean, or small canopy trees, but something that spreads a little bit.

I'm thinking of, as a point of reference, Market Street, there's a very narrow sidewalk and trees that are right up against the buildings, but I can't imagine that experience without those trees.

It would be pretty awful.

I know there's Zelkova, and we don't seem to not want to use Zelkova anymore, but

I mean, anything to get some sort of canopy right there as opposed to just the columnar plantings.

I can't think of anything, but I appreciate all of your comments.

Yeah, we took your comments last time and we're struggling with trying to manage the constraints and, you know, really try to design a building that we can all be proud of and that you guys would approve.

And it is a struggle.

So I nod my head at many of the things you say because we take them and we

Yeah.

Yeah.

And your tax credit requirements.

Thank you guys, we appreciate it.

Thank you.

Alright, our next is 200 West Main Street.

Alright, Mr. Levine is here.

This is a continuation of the discussion on the November meeting.

There was some, at the last, at the meeting in November, there was some information.

It came in a little late relative to looking at the, so the trap, sorry, the shading.

some renderings of the building so we thought now that we had the opportunity to look at those and Mr. Levine was also evaluating some additional shade information that we've circulated and that he wanted to discuss with you but again this is not a

at this point in time, this is not anything that you will take formal action on.

I think it would be very helpful to

Discuss with the applicant what it is that I described to Jeff out in the hall and to you earlier is the result of this building.

We all understand the importance of the mall and other things around it.

What is the impact and you all don't have to

to answer it this way, but my suggestion is to address one of the important factors that you want to preserve, protect, not impact, such that a building could then be shaped around that or to meet those, and then certainly the design of the building itself, but I think there's sort of the tension here is

what's going on at the mall and what's an appropriate sized and scaled building from that perspective.

Just to be clear again, at this point, we don't have a formal application.

I've talked to Jeff about that and what some things he needs to be doing internally.

They will need a demolition COA for the existing building.

I believe that may be coming soon.

and we're moving forward but there's the situation we have is this is the first really big test of how a three-dimensional ordinance works and trying to line up which direction comes first and what directions subordinate to others and so it's a bit of a gordian knot but I think we can still look at this in large scale and

and keep moving this towards some direction that is helpful to the applicant.

That said, I know it's a bit conceptual right now and there was an awful lot said at the last meeting Mr. Zehmer asked us to share with you all the highlights of that conversation and you really don't want to be revisiting things or contradicting so hopefully you have some fresh views on this and fresh information that we can

I keep the project moving forward and I appreciate y'all's patience on this one.

But do you have any questions for me?

Hi everyone.

I want to spend

one quick minute on some key points that I think are just important.

I'm not sure they're actually germane to the COA process, but I think they're good contextual, contextually part of this.

I said last time, I get it.

This is a seminal project for our city, for downtown.

Complete deference has to be given to

The Historical Nature of the Mall, and watching some of the presentations tonight with all that detail, we're not close to there yet.

We will spend a year going through a ton of those things and collaborating on that as to how this fits right on the Mall.

What I mentioned last time, we're discussing is how to unlock that development and what this envelope is, what this box can be, and then send me off with my architects to do that.

Second, I don't know where any notion arose that I'm not complying with the affordable housing requirement.

I'm presenting to an 184 foot building which by its nature has to have affordable housing, 10%.

So that's something to clarify.

Also, I was approached by the theater owner.

I didn't go knocking on their door asking if they could close and leave and I could develop this site.

I was carefully selected from a short list of local developers.

and so similarly, just like I've done with Art Fallage or the retailers, I have no intention of kicking out any tenant or moving any tenant along, but the plan is to develop this property under the new zoning.

And lastly, which I think is, from my research in talking to city staff,

The economic development resulting from this project would be enormous for this city.

I mean, talking millions of dollars in annual revenue, 10 to 20% increase of pedestrian traffic on the mall, and what I found interesting is

which I take directly from the Charlottesville 24-28 Economic Development Strategic Plan.

This project will create a vision that people can invest in and that's the plan of Charlottesville going forward.

So now I know none of what I said should really be taken into consideration for the envelope of this building but I do think it's important context as we move forward.

Sinau will turn it over to my architect who's on Zoom who can go through a lot of the details that we've progressed based on our feedback we got from you last time.

And again, my goal, and Jeff said, is to bring you for a COA the permission to demolish this building and to have clarity that this envelope

is consistent with that section that talks about BAR having the right to control context and step back.

So Joel, are you there?

You want to?

Yes.

I thought I was going to take that off.

Thank you all for taking the time this evening with us again to reopen this discussion.

Next slide, please.

So introduction, Jeff, we'll actually cover this.

So we can, yes.

So again, relying to our request here, which will happen further down the line.

Next slide, please.

I think everyone's familiar where the site is at this point.

Just reiterating, we're at .43 acres, 100 lineal feet of frontage along the mall.

We're in the DX zone, 184 feet height.

You know, Step X is in the zoning apartments.

So next slide, please.

Again, just relining our attention to some context reviews here of the existing conditions on the surrounding heights of buildings adjacent.

Next slide, please.

Just some things we've considered to kind of, you know,

realign everyone on the same page here that we're kind of working towards a solution that everyone agrees is a net positive here.

So I think number one, BAR is the curator of the mall.

So we take all considerations seriously and understand the big responsibility on the mall and with the need to uphold what has already been codified to date.

The long-term health of the mall trees

which has come up in our previous discussion is something we've continued to consider and take sort of a deeper dive into the understanding of what is required and how our new architecture proposal potentially impacts that.

And then thirdly, the mall experience as a priority also came up in our last discussion.

So Sun Access and Sunset Views was talked about in addition to the continuation of retail.

Next slide, please.

So just showing here what we presented previously for everyone's kind of memory here, what we proposed was a building that had several different stepbacks above the podium level.

The fourth story to help try to

bring this building back off of the streets.

And in this proposal, we were sort of treating a lot of the streets the same, much the same way, with a little bit more preference to the mall side.

And we'll show kind of how we responded to comments in subsequent slide.

Next slide, please.

And this is just a kind of more robust solar study that we did to kind of capture sun hours.

So each of these four studies is showing bed analysis on each of the equinoxes and solstices.

So on the upper left, we have the spring or vernal equinox on March 21st, showing in the bright yellow color that is

area that has nine plus sun hours per day and obviously these are all snapshots of four moments throughout the year but I think in aggregate total these can kind of give you a good sense of how the entire span of the year will pan out.

On the upper right we have the summer solstice

showing much of the mall's trees having full access to sun with our current massing proposed.

And I'll also direct your attention to the dash circles in each of these that are kind of calling out our determined, I guess, highest impact area for trees, the trees directly north of our site.

Next slide, please.

So some

To kind of take away and feedback from last time, height was not considered to be the main concern, but rather to be perceived presence on the mall, so largely experiential.

Making efforts to preserve the mall experience as a priority, of course.

Prioritizing stepping back on the mall side and pushing more height towards Water Street was advised.

In addition, step back above the podium

keeping that consistently 25 feet all the way across as a minimum.

And then also trying an additional step back further up the building.

Next slide, please.