Board of Architectural Review   4/16/2019

Do you have any hard copies of the agenda?

Do you have a city guest network?

What are you waiting for?

Wait for Tim.

I mean, I'm sure I won't continue that for you.

Have we got a quorum here?

Welcome to the meeting everybody.

So just to do a quick recap, welcome to this regular monthly meeting of the Charlottesville BAR after presentations by staff and the applicant and members of the public will be allowed two opportunities to speak.

Speakers shall identify themselves and give their current address.

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

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

Members of the public will have, for each case, up to three minutes to ask questions and up to three minutes to comment.

Comments should be limited to the DAR's jurisdiction, that is regarding the exterior design of the building and site, following the DAR's discussions.

Before the vote, the applicant shall be allowed up to three minutes to respond for the purpose of clarification.

Thank you all for participating.

This is a huge crowd here.

Okay, so.

Matters from public, not on the public agenda.

Anybody have anything to introduce?

No, okay.

Consent agenda.

Minutes from March 13th, the February make-up meeting and minutes from March 19th, the regular meeting.

Anybody have any comments about the other meeting?

As always part of those minutes, yes, I guess you're right.

So we have a certificate of appropriateness for the 1102 Carlton Avenue, the solar panel additions.

Any comments about that?

All right, and then a certificate of appropriateness on the consent agenda for the replacement of the loading lock door, dock door at 134 10th Street Northwest.

Comments?

And I will recuse myself from the minutes of March 13th, but otherwise, all in favor?

Aye.

All opposed?

The ayes have it.

Okay, so now we're going to do deferred items.

You're done.

Good evening.

for the Sigma Chi Renovations.

In addition, a little bit of background.

This is a building constructed in 1929.

It is a contributing structure within the Rugby Road University Circle Venable Neighborhood, ADC District.

Last month, you all reviewed or you all approved some modifications to the planned building renovations and some site landscaping features, including some fencing.

You requested additional information on the proposed exterior lighting, and that is what's being presented this evening.

Staff recommends approval.

Also suggests two conditions, one that all exterior lighting, including LED lighting, should have one color temperature less than 3000 K and any exterior lamping that admits 3000 or more lumens should be full cut off.

The applicants here.

Okay, so any questions from the public?

Alright.

Any questions from the BAR?

I do have two questions.

I was wondering about the wall packs.

Meaning the WST sconce.

Okay, great.

So it's purely for security?

Yeah.

Okay.

And my other question had to do with the specified compact fluorescent in the hanging lamp in the front entrance there.

I don't think the color temperature of that, it was just a compact fluorescent, but it didn't specify color temperature that I noticed.

Oh okay, because it was circled, for some reason somebody had the TT, the 242TRT circled.

Okay.

Those are my only two questions.

Anybody else have a question?

So they're putting an LED A lamp, I believe there are two bulbs in that fixture.

I was just questioning the use of compact fluorescence because of the light quality and often they aren't dimmable for that matter.

A lamp is an imitation of an Edison bulb.

I don't see any innards and bulbs here, but they used to be all ubiquitous, you know, the round bulb with the tungsten filament in it.

Yeah, A light bulb.

A lightbulb in the whole building.

No comments from the public?

Comments from the board?

I'm done.

You're cooked?

Okay.

As specified, yeah, that's true.

So, who wants to make a motion?

You don't have to do it, Carl.

Fine.

Having considered the standards set for the city code including city design guidelines for site design elements, I move to find the proposed lighting plan that satisfies the BAR's criteria and is compatible with this property and other properties of the Rugby Road University Circle Venable Neighborhood ADC District.

All in favor?

Aye All opposed?

All right, so now we have a certificate

Correct.

So we're clear this is both the demolition of an existing garage and the proposed construction of a new garage and accessory apartment building or unit.

So a bit of background, the main house of 713 Park Street was constructed around 1861.

It is among the city's oldest remaining buildings.

The brick garage behind the house is not original to the house.

The concrete foundation brickwork and extant window molding suggested dates to the early 20th century.

The garage is shown on the 1929 Sanborn maps.

However, maps prior to 1929 did not include this area.

The garage is not mentioned in city surveys that were completed in the 1970s and 80s.

Nor is it mentioned in the 1980 National Register of Historic Places Historic District nomination of this area.

However, when the city adopted the North Downtown ADC District, the garage was included as a contributing structure.

Again, this is a request to demolish the existing 18 foot by 18 foot single story brick, single car garage and to construct in the same location a new two car, two story, 25, I'm sorry, 24 foot by 30 foot garage with a loft space above and with a 10 foot by 10 foot

storage space at the rear for lawn and garden equipment.

Now, just so we're hopefully you all saw the email sent out.

But Doug sent me something last week.

The design's been revised somewhat since you all looked at it in the initial discussion and from the initial submittal.

And the garage has been shifted slightly uphill towards Park Street and the footprint has been reduced.

They've eliminated that 10 foot by 26 foot

segment that was designated for stores and so they pulled the 10 by 10 outdoor equipment shed uptight with the garage.

So first on the proposed demolition of the existing garage.

While locally designated as contributing structure, the garage is not original to the main house and it was likely built 50 to 60 years later.

The design materials are utilitarian and not unique.

There's nothing noteworthy in its design or its features.

The demolition of the garage in staff's opinion is compatible with the BAR guidelines for demolition and in the staff report Cami did a really good job of addressing each of those questions in the demolition guidelines and we can review those if you want.

Staff also recommends a condition of approval that prior to demolition the applicant will provide staff with a sketch plan and photographs of the existing garage so it may not be

of tremendous architectural merit but it's still something we would like to record its existence.

Relative to the proposed new garage, you all reviewed this last month in a preliminary discussion.

You indicated support for the design of the new garage but expressed concern about its width and orientation.

You suggested that it not compete with the main house from the front or from the rear in location, scale or design.

I attached to the staff reports excerpts from the minutes that sort of laid out some of the questions you all had asked.

Staff's opinion the BAR should discuss if the proposed design addresses the questions and comments that you all raised.

You all can request additional details and information.

For example, if you want to see renderings or photo simulations that's within your purview to request if you think it's necessary.

That said, staff also recommends that you address this in two motions.

One, to approve the demolition of the garage, if you do, and second to, well, approve or deny the proposed new building.

So, a little complicated in, I said, in the staff report and how we addressed each item, but if you have questions, we can talk about it, but I won't get into that, into the staff report further, unless you want me to.

and just to be clear, did you all have, it's a drawing that, make sure you're all looking at the right drawing, has on the front on the plan, you can see where they've shifted the footprint slightly and reduced the footprint of the building.

Any questions?

Members of the board, good evening.

I'm Doug Gilpin and I am representing James and Cordelia Gellie who are in the audience, the new owners of 713 Park Street.

It's good to have them here with us.

Jeff, you did a great job.

Sit down and let you do the entire presentation.

I took a lot of your comments, especially Tim's and Mike's and your chairperson's comments to heart from the standpoint of the general massing, the footprint of the building that we discussed last time.

And we first of all made it smaller, which was the plan that was originally shown in the submittal.

And then a week ago, Thursday, we were out on the site and we were looking at some of the trees and the landscaping and some of the other areas and also thinking forward about the addition that is going to be planned for the House in the next upcoming BAR meeting.

and we said why don't we move that 26 by 10 foot condition area which I think was also one of your suggestions to the present house.

So we did that and we reduced this footprint significantly.

We also were able to place the garage, the front right corner of the proposed garage in the exact location of the present right front corner of the garage the way it stands which allows us

There is plenty of clearance to a significant hackberry tree right on the property line, i.e.

we will not be cutting into the roots at all of the tree.

It also allows us to nestle it into the little

Notch area in the back where there is a sewer easement across the property.

So the footprint of the building is now 30 feet by 24 feet deep with that 10 foot by 10 foot appendage for the garden storage in the back.

Jeff, I have put together the complete package for all of the board members and also have large scale drawings of the same drawing plan submittals here.

Everything that's in the big roll of drawings is within the book of themselves.

Disregard the center section of the image.

above you that you see in the second and third elevations.

So it would just be the building itself that is gone.

It's been coupled together.

As I say, 30 foot by 24 foot with a 10 foot by 10 foot appendage on it.

It fits beautifully on the site.

I think the key thing that we all discussed last time, let's talk about the demolition.

It's probably an early to mid to maybe even late 1920s garage.

If you've been to the site, you've noticed the cracks in the foundation.

There are cracks in the brick itself, two bricks thick.

The roof structure is sagging.

The sliding door I think hasn't moved in some years.

And there's a window and a access door on the north side.

That particular person door is also inactive.

So we are requesting demolition, or I call it removal, of that particular building and replacement with the new structure.

As noted before when I was here last month, the new structure, we're looking from the standpoint of materials of using board and batten siding on the exterior of the one and a half story section.

Materials for the trim work would be a composite material, all would be painted.

The roofing material we have reviewed is material that Mike's probably familiar with out at Bundoran Farm.

It's called EnviroShake.

I use the term, I say EnviroShake is the name of the company, but they have a

And of course I don't want to put

if not the Enviroshake we would look for other composites which again I have not seen the character that I like of the Enviroshake's shingle roof.

We'd be looking at a fiberglass asphalt shingle roof or a pre-finished metal roof.

The concern I have with the pre-finished metal roof is that it just does not weather or have the patina of say a copper roof or

a roof that we're considering for the main house a freedom gray which is a zinc tin coated roof which will definitely have a nice patina after many years.

So I felt from the standpoint of brightness and looking down the alleyways probably just to keep it as low key as possible using this EnviroShake

Shingle material, which after several years will impart the appearance of an aged cedar shingle roof.

Colors, we are discussing colors at this time.

First of all, we'd like to be doing a paint analysis of the main building to see if the white color of the original house is originally white.

My gut feeling is it could have been more of a creamy color and may use that cream in the addition or in this outbuilding.

But globally we're looking at possibly a warm gray in that range for the garage outbuilding with maybe a creamier trim and maybe a dark green for the doors.

Again, at Bundoran Farm there was a house recently repainted, lower Bundoran House, using Stonington Gray Benjamin Moore color with white dove.

It's a remarkable

First of all, I like it.

I think it's a remarkable difference and I really like how it fits there.

I am glad that you've moved the footprint back to where the old one was, to the front, because I feel like that drop does help.

From the standpoint of the height of the ridge, I would estimate that the present building is probably about 16, 17 feet in height.

This building is going to be about 23 feet in height.

Yeah, okay.

OK, comments are fine.

So I'm going to go back to the questions from the bar.

Just wanted to make sure the public got addressed.

So speaking of colors and finishes, just so I'm clear, is this a semi-solid stain finish so you're going to see what wood you're in coming through?

We're looking at all the avenues of that.

My personal feeling with regards to, I've been on several other architecture review boards, my feeling is

As it's going up, we'd like to do a sample panel on the site, maybe two-sided so you see it in the sun and the shade at the same time.

I have not narrowed down a manufacturer.

I think it may be Overhead Door Company, but it's one of their standard ones that would have that particular appearance that we're looking at.

But again, it's going to be a painted finish on it.

I do not want to do a wood door just because, again, I don't think that a wood door is going to last with longevity.

Exactly.

In the supplementary information that I submitted, I had one of the great things about the overhead door company is you can do a sort of a visualizer and that came directly from their website.

Any other questions from the VAR?

My name is Colette Hall.

I live at 101 Robertson Lane.

My land is contiguous with the property we're talking about.

In other words, my backyard abuts with their backyard.

So I can look from my backyard and see the present garage.

So the house, it's called the Judge Watson House, built in 1840, is a magnificent, beautiful structure.

I have no feelings about the garage.

It's old, and as the gentleman said, it was probably built around 1920.

I don't know when it was built, but I don't have any feelings about it.

You shouldn't remove it.

I don't care about that.

What I care about is what they're going to replace it with.

So I understand there was a meeting about this property in March.

I didn't get any notification of that and I would have loved to have gotten notification of that so I could have come in more on the ground up to speak about this.

It almost feels more like a fait accompli.

but it's not totally because you're still asking a few questions.

I'm glad they're not going to take down the hackberry but they are going to take down, I believe, and I'm asking this question, other trees?

And when they take it, one might be a walnut but I have not actually verified what the trees are.

That means I will see that garage more clearly than I see it now.

There are multiple trees in that backyard

There used to actually be about 50 and the past owner whom they bought the property from took a plow or whatever you call it.

A bulldozer.

A bulldozer, thank you.

And bulldozed down 50 trees.

But anyway, it's his property.

But still there's some big trees there and so I wonder number one are they taking down

any trees, although they're going to save the hackberry.

Number two, I'm glad to see they're making it smaller because my bedroom windows and my main eating area, kitchen area are what looks onto my backyard, which sees their garage.

So anything that's going to impact, so it's going to impact just my visual side of it.

So I'm glad they're going to be very careful about colors and shapes and

and I'm very glad they're going to make it smaller.

One of my questions is, and I can see it at least on this sketch, there is going to be, going to the second floor, a walkway, a stairway.

And I believe when I read the schematics about it on the BAR website, I think they said it was going to be metal.

Now, that dovetails into my second question, which I'll get to.

Metal is loud.

And I don't care how carefully somebody walks up a metal walkway, stairway, it reverberates.

I hope I don't have to stop, because I have no more questions.

I mean, I don't think there's a lot of people that want to talk about this.

And it reverberates.

I would love, instead of metal, if they could make it wooden.

a wooden staircase and that goes into my second question which is what are they going to use the second floor for?

It says on your website it's going to be an apartment but then one of my neighbors noted she didn't see any plumbing.

that was noted.

And if it's going to be an apartment, you obviously have to have a water source.

So is it going to be like an office, a home office?

Is it going to be like their art studio?

I'm just throwing these out.

What are they going to use that for?

Because if it's going to be an entirely different people than the people who live in the main house, then we're going to have more traffic, more noise, more light coming through the windows, more

So that part actually isn't part of the BARS purview.

Use is not our Even though it's our one zone you don't deal with that.

That is not our not our call and our one zoning allows for for rental accessory So I mean they're by right

I do know that.

The question about the tree, maybe Doug, do you have some idea about the landscape side of this?

Is that the best?

Our jurisdiction is strictly the exterior, the massing of the building, the detailing, materials choices, that sort of thing.

Yeah, that's what I said it would be.

But I didn't even know if they had moved in.

My second and very last question was, I thought I just heard the contractor say, or maybe it's the architect, so excuse me, something about an addition to the main house.

Yes, and that will be addressed in a separate review.

There's an extensive restoration of the House plan with some modifications possibly on the rear, but that will all come back as a separate.

So when something comes in as an action item for the VAR, that's when we send out.

Sure thing.

Doug, would you like to just address the site plan question?

James is going to answer the tree question.

From the standpoint of the stairs, it is a metal stair.

We looked at maintenance from the standpoint we also want to try to keep it as light as possible visually.

There's another important factor and that is just the safety of going up.

So it was an open gridded tread system, open risers, just to allow rain, snow, ice not to be able to accumulate on it.

I didn't want to do a

As a matter of fact, it's not an apartment house where you'd be having people going up and down the stairs.

Can you state your name for the record?

It's James Gelli, G-E-L-L-Y.

My wife, Cordelia, almost in the back row there.

The question asks about a tree.

There is a smaller, younger hackberry tree that would, as I can

We'll lay out the size of the new garage.

I don't think we'll be able to save it.

There may be as many as three smaller volunteer trees.

But the objective is to save as many trees.

We had an arborist out today and basically our concern I think is the same as my neighbors.

which is to conserve as much of what we've inherited in terms of a landscape and that especially includes the trees.

But I think there's one smaller diameter hackberry that just is in the footprint of the proposed garage.

Thank you.

So, any comments from the public?

Mark Cabot, first I'd just like to ask you all, please pull your microphones to you.

Because I know there's some people watching at home and they can't hear you if you don't have your microphones to you.

I hope that everybody received the email that I sent out a few days ago.

Just want to recap a few things that I put in that.

The comments that I've heard from some people were concerned about the size of

The drilling is planned to be put there but it sounds like they reduced the size of that so that's good.

Hopefully it's reduced sufficiently enough.

I do remember being over at Collette's house in the past years and that you could be there and not even see that house because there were a lot of trees and shrubberies and so on there that had been removed.

I hope that the house that's being proposed will architecturally fit into the style for that area and I'll count on you all to basically make sure that that is correct.

I hope that some screening will be done in the way of trees, bushes, and so on on the property.

That's all.

Comments from the board?

If I could offer a comment, I would just, that on the site plan that Doug's provided, I see a maple mulberry, this is for the, I guess for the rear of the property, I don't see any other

vegetation or trees noted, but certainly there's some I guess other than what's at the garage noted for removal so I guess possibly could request some, make a statement of clarification that no other trees are being removed and maybe submittal for the record of a more detailed

I don't see a whole lot of trees in that backyard right now.

I'm sorry, my mic doesn't work.

I have to use my coach's voice a little louder.

So that would be my only suggestion.

If you have some questions about what's being removed or left, you can request that that be noted.

Mr.

Actually, some discussion.

Yeah, photos and a plan, I believe.

Sketch plan and photographs.

I would like to amend my motion to add that the applicant provide a sketch plan and photo documentation of the existing garage.

All opposed?

Motion passes.

Okay, now we are on to the COA, request for a COA for the garage itself.

Anybody?

I'd just say that I find that the changes have been very positive.

I think it makes the building holds together better.

It's more appropriate to the site.

It's in keeping with the neighborhood and with the style of the house.

The only element that really sticks out to me for some discussion, perhaps, is the scale of the window in the dormer facing the street.

I gather that it's probably picking up on some of the proportions of the larger window above the main house, which is almost the scale of an entire door.

But to my eye, at least on this garage structure, it seems out of scale with the scale of the garage doors and with the other fenestration on the building.

I didn't really notice that but now that you're pointing it out I agree that it does feel big.

On the metal stairs, noise tends to be a factor of gauge and support.

One thing that I noticed about these stairs that I would think about is that metal stairs in a straight run of this length tend to bounce a lot and that can be really annoying.

So I would consider that or maybe figure out how it's going to be supported.

The size of the unit upstairs, too, is such that it seems like a mother-in-law type apartment.

Any other comments?

Here's the simple answer.

The Pella software does not have an archtop window that I liked, and I put it in there, but if you look at the construction drawings, it has an archtop window, and if you also, if you go back to some of the original sketches, I had a nice archtop window which mimicked the character, so it was much softer.

If you look back at some of the preliminary ones, that's what's going to be utilized on that.

It just happened to be, yes, there you go.

Justin's got the sketch.

That's what it's going to be looking like.

Does that answer?

So you submitted a lot on CATEC.

Blame it on Pella.

So it's on the large drawings?

It actually is in the

It may be even a little smaller because at one time we were looking at that as being a bedroom and now the bedroom is going to be on the north side of the house so we made

make it slightly smaller so it does not have to be egress compliant.

For official purposes, so we're referring to Doug's drawings, dated 4-12-2019, sheet BAR 2 and elevation 1.

Well, no, because this doesn't have the urge to come.

to contrast and compare.

So this was from the preliminary design discussions last year.

When was that?

This is dated.

The 19th.

Now, that was something even before that.

Did I not put a date on there?

I just can't remember the date.

That's why.

It's the last VA Army.

They've gone through here every minute.

March 19th preliminary design east elevation March 19th

and more specifically, we're referring to the window as presented in the drawings dated 4-12, 2019, that that window on elevation one will match what was presented in the preliminary drawings.

And I would say that the minutes would probably capture that.

Okay, so anybody care to make a question?

I'm sorry if you would also clarify that this is again this is

which was not the preliminary assumption.

So the staff report submitted, last week we received drawings dated April 12th that eliminated that 10 by 26 space, shifted it.

So there's the revised book, and then there's the three sets of three pages of drawings, which are BAR 1, BAR 2, and BAR 3, dated 4-12-2019.

and the amended bound version and specifications dated 4-12-2019.

So those are the two changes.

So, are we all square on that?

I'll go for it.

Having considered the standards set forth in city code, including ADC guidelines for new construction additions, I move to find the proposed new garage satisfies the BRS criteria

is compatible with this property and other properties in the North Downtown ADC District.

The BAR approves the application as submitted per the submittal received on April 12, 2019, with the window over the garage doors.

more closely match the window from the pre-application preliminary discussion materials with the arch top with a recommendation for a heavier gauge metal and some extra supports on these stairs.

And anything else?

All in favor?

Aye.

Anyone opposed?

Yankta, sign off the, if you're forgetting that, and welcome to the neighborhood.

Let's see what else does.

This is, we'll be presenting next month, submitting next month the edition on the back of the building and I wanted to at least do this as, I don't know, call it a teaser or what have you, but at least to familiarize yourself with the basic project in a schematic layout so have you take a look at it, just give you more time to review it.

Pardon me?

Do you want any of these packaged back?

All yours.

Recycle.

We'll talk.

Sorry, Alan, I mixed you up in my, uh,

All right.

This is a COA request for a mural to be painted on the west side of 600 West Main.

This is the same one of the buildings we've been discussing with the 600 West Main project.

You all know the history of it and what's been going on there, but this would be the James Hawkins House, which was built in 1873 and later became, well in addition, became the Midway Market.

The application is by the Bridge Project of Charlottesville and the proposed mural is proposed by a South African artist, Faith 47.

overlays design elements and lines over the approved wall color and leaves plenty of negative space in order to account for the maintaining of the

architectural elements of the building.

Kera was taken to design a mural that would look appropriate alongside the existing foliage on West Main Street, but we're also, we know that the trees may or may not stay in the long run and we wanted to make sure that the mural would stand alone.

Strongly, either way whether or not the foliage was to remain or was to be removed at some future date.

Additionally, we believe that the

Mural is congruent with the cropping and the appropriate considerations made for past murals to allow for the shape of the building to stand out, stand alone by itself and not be obfuscated by harsh lines or drastic design elements.

We really believe that this mural will be a beloved fixture along West Main Street.

Questions from the public?

Well we use paint typically that has a

30 year color lock technology to it.

That's typically the level of paint we use.

We put a mural up to stay, but we also acknowledge that murals are just part of the landscape and they have to come down, they have to change over time, they have to get removed.

While we're putting a mural up to last forever,

There's no prep that we're doing.

However, the building has already been slated to be repainted.

It's already been approved.

I believe y'all have approved the color design.

There is a color sample that I included on the PDF that Forest Wood color that is going to be used to give the whole building a fresh coat of paint and that will be the fresh base coat that this design will be overlaid.

The process involves almost like a transparency effect, so it's not a hard, stark image, and it's not quite as graphic as this rendering might imply.

That's why I included some work samples of her previous work as well, to sort of show that she sort of works in those layers like that, to give you a clearer idea of that.

So basically, she's getting a primed, ready,

It seems like you guys are putting, it's an awful lot of work and it really looks like a beautiful mural that is going on a wall that may not be visible for a long time.

We were contacted by the building owners and we know that there are risks in that regard.

Right, but it's also kind of magical back there, right?

You can still see it, see that old mural back there and even though it's kind of obfuscated, I don't know.

But yeah, we know that there are risks to that.

There's always that risk when you put up a mural.

So, comments from the public.

I'm Jeff Dreyfus, Bushman Dreyfus Architects.

To your point, Carl, we'll be talking in just a few minutes about the property directly adjacent.

And if we can, the owners would like to determine a way that that mural may actually be a part of the next project.

There's no guarantee in that regard.

Our agenda beat you to it, I guess.

Are we still in question mode?

Anybody else have any questions?

OK, comments from the public?

Other than Jeff's answering Carl's question.

I like the location.

I think it's I think it's nice whether it gets obscured or not.

Like you said, the chief, it's back there and I walked by it the other night and it's it's fun to see back there.

It's better than just a plain old painted crummy wall.

And that wasn't meant to be a leading question.

I think this is perfectly appropriate.

I think it's beautiful.

I mean, yeah, I can't wait to see it.

I just, I hope we get to see it for a while.

I mean, I feel like it's upped the game also in terms of the sophistication that we've seen, you know, thus far.

Yeah, how does that work?

Well, all that being said, I'm very much in favor of this.

I'm a huge fan of the mural project itself, so I'm very thankful to you all for what you've done and are continuing to do.

Yeah, so I think it's well done.

I agree with Stephen.

I think for all of the guidelines we have, this meets those very clearly.

And as a citizen, I find it beautiful and powerful.

Or I've got it if you don't.

Having considered the standards set forth within the city code, including city design guidelines for rehabilitation and public design and improvements, I move to find that the proposed mural satisfies the BAR's criteria and is compatible with this property and other properties in the West Main ADC district, and that the BAR approves the application as submitted.

All in favor?

Aye.

Those opposed?

And the motion carries.

Really appreciate it.

All right.

Can we start calling it number nothing?

Rugby Road.

Zed.

Get a little circle.

Local.

Don't go there.

Zero Rugby Road.

Okay, this is a certificate of appropriateness for new construction at 0 Rugby Road.

As you know, it's a vacant parcel.

It is within the Rugby Road University Circle, Venable neighborhood, ADC district.

Request for a COA for a proposed three-story, 12-unit housing facility.

that will be built above an underground parking garage.

The building is composed of two distinctly different architectural blocks.

The front section facing Rugby Road will be of a traditional design intended to complement the adjacent 513 Rugby Road.

The rear section, which is connected by a brief hyphen, will follow a more contemporary design.

You all looked at this in a preliminary discussion last June.

and had discussed this also last month at the February makeup meeting and I've attached the meetings to the staff report again if they're helpful.

There was a lot of discussion.

I tried to distill down the key points.

There was general support for the scale and the massing.

The questions and comments were focused primarily on three things.

One, the design of the central bay of the front elevation.

Two, the roofline of the building facing Rugby.

And three, the conflicting designs of the front and rear buildings, whether or not they should represent a hybrid of two styles, should they be distinctly different or be different yet related.

In comparing and contrasting, I'm sorry, in comparing and in contrasting the various design approaches, three terms were frequently mentioned by you all, color, materiality and connectiveness.

So regarding the entry, as you see, the design has been revised, the pediment, the two-story columns and upper balcony are removed and replaced with a simple single-story portico with columns.

And regarding the two designs, there is still a variation.

The upper story breaks right at the base of the window.

It seems like there's an odd gap of space between the second story and the upper story.

I think there's the brackets, the proportion of the brackets and how they support the Eves is

Not quite a wood dimension, or the brackets aren't doing anything.

So there's definitely, I'm sure, a lot of additional work that can be done.

But I think that for a well-ordered façade on that street, and it's in the abstract, it makes a lot of sense.

As far as massing is concerned, you showed it pretty well with your elevation diagrams.

I think it would fit pretty well right there.

Absolutely.

I mean really the only difference you've made externally is putting this central door here but you're still keeping the side door.

You're still keeping most of the walls here so you're doing clearly a lot of different things inside the building to make it functionally work for them that we don't see.

Currently there's six rooms across the front façade, six bays, and that makes the bedrooms on the interior such that between the two beds, which are smaller, that are custom sized beds, smaller than a standard twin sized bed, that leaves about a two foot four aisle way between the two beds, which isn't even enough for one person to pull out their dresser that's tucked underneath the bed and the other person to be able to get out of bed.

So instead of six bedrooms across the front width of the building, we're completely modifying the interior and changing it to five.

So it's five bays across the front.

So that's a major modification which totally changes the rhythm of the window placement.

There's not actually a continuous.

But it's the appearance of a continuous lintel.

My point is because you want to do five bays or whatever doesn't mean that you have to then do an Italianate revival building, which what you're showing reminds me of.

You're creating a false historicism by changing this to an Italianate building.

Well, I'm just one person up here and you've heard others already say that they'd be okay with the Italianate.

I'm just one person who has a personal connection with this building and has lived too long.

but now the things that I saw being built are outdated.

Well, I'd say please don't be embarrassed.

The whole reason we have nine people up here is to get nine different opinions.

So I think your opinion is very important and well taken.

I think that's sometimes one of the more difficult things to explain to people about what this job does and what you all do.

Everyone believes this is historic preservation and we're wringing our hands about old brick buildings and that new design and adaptation to old buildings is probably a bigger part of it than the preservation side of things.

And it's, but I will say it is the guidelines relative to non-contributing structures, it really is as far as what does the change do relative to that neighborhood and it doesn't really

offer anything on that sort of on the edge.

I mean, for example, that the fraternity house, a few down.

That's the, you know, the one that everyone seems to hate.

The Freddie Nichols?

Yes.

Right.

Right.

But the chair of the architectural history department?

Exactly.

Exactly.

And I didn't realize that.

Who's on the Park Street Bank?

You know the one I made?

I think it's that period of...

You have to look at different functions, but it's clearly the same.

So that would be you know as far as the guidelines would say is you're getting a new building essentially does it fit within the neighborhood.

Fitting it to a

You know, a 40-year-old non-contributing structure, I don't know.

That would take some sort of pouring through the guidelines to find how we could substantiate that.

I don't know.

That's a good question.

I was wrong.

So the Republic Plaza was a contributing building at one point.

Well, there are buildings, for example, in the downtown A.D.C.

district where everything is contributing regardless of age.

But I'd just be a devil's advocate for a second, and Mike, I don't know if you looked at it the same way I did, but I always think of, all right, what looks good now?

And then when someone says, all right, we have to value engineer this, what's the first thing to come off?

And when I see things sort of being added to an existing facade,

those bumped out columns at the corners, if you will, sort of...

I was thinking the same thing.

Well, I think, I mean, forgive me, I kind of like the transitional Italianate feel of it.

We just don't have a lot of that around here and I like mixing it up a little bit.

Yeah, I feel like if we give the buildings around here enough time, the uncommon will be almost contributing in 50 years.

I'd like to think in 50 years I'd still like to tear it down.

Yeah, you're right.

It's also got a lot of John Matthew's signature roof and there's a lot of, you say there's not a lot of this in Charlottesville.

There actually is kind of a lot of this in Charlottesville, both in the last 10 years.

Well I think a lot of those are kind of failing on the details a little bit and that is, as Jeff's saying, what I would worry about here a little bit.

This implies a high level of detail?

Yes.

but whether that happens when value engineering happens.

Right, I'm just saying that would be

Disconnect the overlay for a second and you say okay is this building the existing building?

Legitimately, you know, if you just said money all money aside just said well, we're gonna try this building down and build this building Where do we land on that?

Because it's sort of like right now it's kind of in that funny zone kind of like was it the fountainhead, you know where they stuck everything on the modern buildings

So it's got a little bit of that overtone, which isn't philosophically maybe what you're trying to do.

I don't think it is.

So I think the way one would parse that is I think the game you have to say is, is this building something we would object to having torn down?

and then how they tear it down isn't really our concern.

Then our next concern is what is it?

Does this work as a standalone building?

And what happens if we tear the other building down?

I understand where Jody's coming from also.

This is brick and the rendering does kind of give this sort of almost a flat plaster look but this will be a brick painted brick does that help with any of

sort of what you're thinking.

I will say, having visited Clemson a lot in the last couple years, this design is really heavy down there and it really works.

It's really neat with these big brackets and this overhang roof and that upper story.

So I really like that.

UVA may not like the idea of

It's true the visual texture of the brick is not popping off.

Right, and I think once you do the brick, I don't think you would have to do the pilaster corners either.

Out of curiosity, I would love to see a diagram of old overlaid on nuc.

Well, that's part of the reason why we're painting it, because it is going to be brick surgery in certain conditions.

The front elevation is the most drastic surgery.

The side elevations

Particularly the north elevation is probably 99% intact with what is there.

I was going to say real quick that as far as the historical significance of the building, I think that, Cam, you did an excellent job for that demo review before by how you went and articulated each line, and I think that that could be a really good process to go through for all of us to see.

How is this significant?

Was the architect significant?

What are the defining features?

How many other buildings are there like this?

And so that could, I think, perhaps

But I think that that argument, because this wasn't scooped up as a contributing structure, becomes more of

It's not, I mean, they could tear down the building if they wanted to.

I guess in my mind it's, you know, whatever they do to it.

It's almost like a new construction.

I mean I think it would be useful for us and I think it would be useful for you know if we ever decide to re-evaluate our districts for what's contributing and not contributing.

For example maybe that bank on Park Street needs to be re-evaluated but yeah I think we are legally kind of bound to look at this more as a new construction.

Gotcha.

I mean, we don't have enough to do, so I just was saying what I was going to say there.

I know, I'm totally aware of that, Cammy.

There are buildings that come up that

You know, the house on Rich Street, if you recall, that that couple's been working on is the one that doesn't fit.

It actually is, what, a 60-year-old home, and it would be an interesting addition.

I think, though, now that you're sort of turning that page and looking at this as, yes, this is essentially a new building, then the guidelines then come into play of, all right, let me just take, leapfrog one house over.

Does this fit into what this street is?

I mean, if we can suspend, and I sympathize with where Jody is, do you see this then fitting into this district, if you will?

I'd ask some more questions about that on those lines.

Could we go back to the front elevation of the proposed?

I think there's something handsome in what you all are presenting.

I think it's different and fun and I appreciate that as well because I think that's important in our fabric to have diversity.

But I guess when I consider whether or not it's compatible with this district, I'm curious about what the design intent was to accomplish.

Like, why is there this deep even?

Why are those brackets that are barely articulated?

And, you know, why is this, you know, pilaster corner there?

You know, and how is that pilaster corner contributing to the overall aesthetic and goal that you're trying to achieve stylistically?

You know, and then how will the railing

you know, be integrated with that and what is the unified design language that you're trying to accomplish?

Rather than like we're calling it Italianate, I mean would you all call it Italianate?

So the overall goal is to, I shouldn't speak for Erin, but we're working on it as a team, but our goal is to try to come up with a building

you guys will approve, but it meets the functional goals of the fraternity and that's sort of paramount.

And a lot of the things that you've mentioned, I didn't jump in, are all totally functional responses.

So it's sort of a, what you may not see it, and this is again the 15th iteration.

We don't mind doing more iterations to try to address some of the concerns

to make sure we're clear on that.

We're happy to keep going back until we get it as close.

We'll never get everybody to agree that getting it as close is to a fine product or an appropriate solution.

But we sort of look at this as a sort of, you might find this funny, but sort of classical modernism.

If you ask the question, that's the direct response is that it's a functional response or an aesthetic response to a functional request, because as Aaron explained, those bedrooms were just unusable.

Not to mention accessibility, life safety, all of those things that come to play in a significant renovation.

Just to answer one of the questions, I'm not sure which one of you asked it, but about how can we be assured that what we're seeing here will get built.

We're pretty clear, and they have a very, at least at the moment, a robust budget, so we expect that

If there's not a modern classical style, how does that translate to the detail of the railing, for example?

Okay, great.

And so that's why I'm trying to be helpful in the sense of saying I would love to see that resolved or at least that presented in a way that this is clearly, there's a holistic stylistic goal that you're aiming to achieve.

and I think to me that would be quite convincing that it's well thought out, it's well presented, in itself it's got a unique character that can add to the neighborhood as opposed to feeling like oh this is just a mix of the different desires that the people wanted.

I think one thing that may help is, this has your signature all over it, your firm signatures.

It looks like a lot of the stuff that you guys have done before.

I mean, not exactly, you've definitely reinterpreted things, but I'm almost, I feel like looking at some of their other projects in the area, you might, you've made your own style, I guess, in some of the previous work that you guys have done, and I kind of see a lot of that in there.

I'm wondering if maybe that's the intention, that's what's coming up.

Primarily the way the roof and the eaves are treated.

Yeah, and just like a cohesive kind of thesis or like a clear idea of what stylistically and aesthetically you're trying to achieve.

Right.

The discussion we had, if you feel like watching the video, the work session on the

Zero, Rugby.

This is almost, you know, a reprise.

Yeah, it is.

And and just quickly and two things in the guidelines, and it really would be all that we'd have to offer.

But, you know, it says when designing new buildings in a historic district, one needs to recognize that while there is an overall distinctive district character,

There is nevertheless a great variety of historic building types, styles, and scales throughout the district and sub areas.

And then this would fit sort of within the sub category, this residential infill component.

These buildings, this is new buildings, new dwellings that are constructed on the occasional vacant lot within a block of existing historic buildings.

Setback, spacing, and general massing of the new dwelling are the most important criteria that should relate to the existing historic structures

along with residential roof and porch forms.

Right, I mean we're not, we shouldn't, we're not mandating a style and what we're asking for is scale more than anything and also just something that, you know, if it's,

Fuchsia, that might be a problem.

But in general, but you know, you could make an argument in the street, Fuchsia, but the point is like, I think that, you know, we're trying to just make sure everybody plays well with the neighbors.

I think Jody's heartburn speaks more to issues, I think, in terms of what is, you know, what constitutes a contributing structure right now.

And, you know, unfortunately that one does not.

But I think our attitude has to be more, you know, divorce.

What's the final result?

What are you trying to do?

Does it make sense in terms of context of the thing?

And how you parse it out of that building is really, I think, kind of a secondary issue for us.

Yeah, I think in the main, the building is very in line with the spirit of our guidelines as written.

To be clear, I do as well.

So when I'm asking for further articulation of what the style is, I think that the scale and the approach is quite handsome.

So please, I hope it's not overstated that I'd love to see to better understand your stylistic and aesthetic decisions and direction.

Sometimes that stuff doesn't all stick together until the very end.

But maybe what we should at least say is does the board in general feel like they're headed in the right direction?

Right, and you know, per the guidelines and appropriateness, I think generally, yes.

I mean, my first reaction I think was very much like Jody's, and maybe

just a condition to include here might be that it is a locally significant building.

So before it's altered, let's have measured drawings and photographs for the archives at the very least.

But if we are thinking about it as, okay, let's set that 70s, whatever, 1980 thing aside,

I agree.

I think about, you know, when someone wanted to paint Bob Vickery's house and the response that, that's why I was sitting here thinking about Jody's probably like wants to hit me, but I remember that was a visceral response and I remember the owners just couldn't, they really, that really baffled them and I said no this is a

This is somebody that meant a lot to the architecture community.

So, yeah, I get it.

I now know another old building to tear down here.

Thank you.

Is Jeff here?

While you're pulling that up, can I just note that I don't think this is just a UVA thing.

I've seen in other college towns that fraternity architecture in many different parts of the country is trying to out-big each other and out-classicize each other.

I think part of the pangs that we feel is that contemporary or modern architecture hasn't

I think that's right.

Well, I think it's also a general lack of appreciation of international style buildings, good international style buildings, and the mid-century modern

There are some movements that are coming in now that are

acknowledging them and the importance of them.

They're still in the general population of international style and wanting to see detailing and postmodernism, you know, brought into this period.

I think there's a movement to it.

The Greek community,

It's not as strong, but it's not what it was.

And I think there's a lot of competition to keep them

New.

That's what I think we're seeing a lot with these designs and changes.

You say, how can we make our fraternity look newer and our sorority house?

And I think that's certainly the situation here.

You know, let's make our house look cool.

But I don't know, that's not the

Let's switch gears here.

I talk about sororities, fraternities, the fun I used to have.

Jeff asked me to add this to the agenda and I and I some of you when we were earlier at the meeting, I think I did.

I tried to introduce this.

I understood it.

And I'm going to let Jeff ask the question.

But I did just to offer I went back and looked at

Yeah, I just looked at when things when you all just sort of look at mass and scale alone and what was sort of presented and this was can be suggested looking at at the quirk and sort of how they presented.

period.

Like all these buildings have garage doors on their main street entrance just against one of our stipulations.

and that is something we can talk about.

But what Jeff is getting at, and I think I understand correctly, is two projects that will likely involve special use permit requests.

And those go before the BAR for its recommendation.

And so the question is, what level of information is appropriate for the BAR review?

Thanks Jeff.

Hello again.

Jeff Dreyfus, Bushman Dreyfus Architects.

This is a more philosophical question and a process question that we have for you all.

612 West Main Street, the university tire site, is going to be developed by the same team that is building 600 West Main Street.

And so we are embarking on that process.

We are going to request a special use permit for increased density.

This zoning district no longer allows increased height as part of an SUP, so we are simply requesting for increased density.

Current density is 43 units per acre, so this particular site would by right be 20 dwelling units.

With the SUP, 120 dwelling units per acre would be 55 dwelling units.

The question before us is what is required by the zoning ordinance of the BAR in the instance of an SUP.

I'm sort of working backwards from where we ended the SUP process with 600 West Main Street.

We almost had the entire elevation designed as it's being built by the time we got into the SUP process.

And that was only for density, that was not for increased height as well.

And honestly, it seems

an unfair burden to a potential developer if the envelope is already defined what you can build by right, which the zoning ordinance now does and the diagrams before you show you what the zoning ordinance says we by right can build.

If the zoning ordinance says you can build that and we still have to go for the certificate of appropriateness for 20 units, how far do we have to go to be able to fill that same box with 55 units?

The ordinance says that when the property that's subject to the application for an SUP is within a design control district, city councils shall refer the application of the BAR as may be applicable for recommendations as to whether the proposed use will have an adverse impact on the district and for recommendations as to reasonable conditions which, if imposed, it would mitigate any such impacts.

It's the use.

It's not...

because it's in a control district, we are going to have to go through the certificate of appropriateness process anyway, and we're all on board for that.

But do we, and it's hard to design an elevation, a detailed elevation if we don't know what we're going to be allowed to put in it.

So do we design a building for 55 units, not knowing that we're going to get that in the end of the process?

So in this particular instance,

We'd like to, and so the massing that we showed here really and truly is the box, we understand.

You will see, to harken back a little bit the last page, the question regarding the mural and what might be done there.

Well, we assumed something might be there.

Some mural would be there.

So, we're not proposing a design here, but it seems in this particular instance the use and having to work within the already defined limits of the zoning ordinance of the envelope, how far should we go?

We can do diagrams of elevations of what a 55 unit

It's within the same envelope.

Exactly.

But you can't design, if you're going to do 20 units, it's going to be very different than if you have 55.

I think for us, I mean,

This is part of the guideline to make sure that, for example, it's 201, the clock tower building, when they were applying for their SUP.

And this is the only specific one that I think many years that I've been here.

The fact that they had parking on the first floor, and then they had condos, and it was a mixed-use building, one of the things for the mixed-use building is it's supposed to

Okay.

Okay.

In this case, if you're talking about 20 versus 55 residential units, and we can take that as a given, I don't

I don't see where, well I mean public use for an SUP but that can be debated but in terms of design we're talking about the same envelope.

and I mean honestly for us to see this sort of schematic, you know, what does zoning allow and what's the max build out, you either get the SUP or you don't and then you design a 20 or 55 unit facade for this, it comes to us and it passes or you know.

I think it's a formality just in case there is something that we have that could, I mean like Kami was saying, I mean if some project comes up.

So in this case for us I think it is a formality, but I think it also could be an opportunity for you to test us on what kind of massing we'd be okay with approving.

For example, perhaps the complete build out version that you've proposed might not

We might not be happy with that, or maybe we are, but it would be probably important for you to ask us that before going through the whole process of the SUP.

And that's probably more important than

What are the massing implications of that higher density?

That's the only thing that would really, you can have it as dense as you want as far as we're concerned.

It has more to do with what are the implications on the street.

But how can you not have parking on your an entrance parking on your property?

Right, or else you have to have a, you know, not a regional, but a local solution brokered by the city probably to make that happen.

You know, if you compare like to a larger city like New York or something, that'll have like a single lane entrance.

Then on the other side of the block will be a single lane exit, you know, so you don't get these gaping maws.

But I just think that's been one of the things that we've really had to wrestle with.

Unfortunately, it's this requirement that we're backed into as designers.

Honestly, there's a slight hope that we can connect to the parking garage below 600.

Right.

Now, on the other hand, in this case, you have a long enough street level that you could actually make a hyphen or basically break the block in two, drive something down through there, and wouldn't be an issue because you wouldn't, your entrance per se wouldn't be on the street level.

But I think having, I would think, I mean, one of the things we've been trying to do is

and I know that I guess Lisa sort of has a problem with this.

We were trying to tailor I think these bigger projects that the whole review process needs to be tailored differently so it acknowledges that larger projects have to go in phases and we have to be able to give people some sort of assurance that going forward it works.

I mean can't wait for somebody to design you know a multi-billion dollar building and then say well you know we don't really like that very much.

See, I think height's been focused on too much.

Well, and I understand that as well.

It seems to me, though, that as a

as an opportunity.

I mean, I think this particular owner would say, would take the risk if you say, yes, we have no problem with the increased density, which is a recommendation to city council, you get the SUP.

But I would say that it would make a lot of sense to at least at that point figure out what the implications of that higher density are and throw some massing models at us right then and there.

You know, in other words, say this is what we're hoping to do so that you don't get that density.

Well, but I think we're going to have that same conversation either way, whether it's before or after.

You have the trump card of not granting the certificate of appropriateness ultimately and if you don't want the massing that's presented as the first meeting after the SUP is granted

It's no different than working through that process before, in my mind, because you have that final vote.

So, it's a process question and there is considerable risk involved for an owner if they don't have the knowledge that, okay, at least density-wise, you're willing to say, yes, we want that.

Then we can start the design process.

And in this particular instance, it seems to me that this is exactly what the city is asking for, is increased density.

So we're ready to go through the process of working with the BAR.

Well, we've also been, some of our decisions have been mistakenly confused as being density consistent, you know, judgments which had nothing to do with density.

It's totally been about amassing.

I think we can make that clear in our, because we do have, I mean as a formality we have to approve, or we have to recommend the SUP to the Planning Commission and then recommend the council and we could make in our recommendation.

We don't condense these funds.

To be clear, we have to submit massing and elevations and a site plan.

I'm not saying we're trying to get out of that, but how far that goes is really the question here.

Sure, and I think, to elaborate further, I think perhaps, Tim, correct me if I'm wrong, but I think there's a good chance that everyone tonight, there's a good chance that everyone's going to approve the increased density.

I could be wrong, but I feel like all of us are a lot in favor of increased density.

We're more concerned, like they're saying, about how the building looks and the massing.

So assuming that that happens, I think what Tim is trying to offer helpful advice and saying before you even get into fenestration necessarily, the massing is something that we can really offer feedback on before we even go into that direction.

I totally understand why you did it.

I'm not arguing that, you know, but I think that's the right thing to do for this discussion the way you presented it.

But just to say that in order to be helpful I think that you could come in with massing models that don't even necessarily address administration first.

to really get some good feedback on what we're going to be considering and what is important to us.

So what I'm hearing you suggest, Steven, is the submission we make next month come up with at least some concept of massing as broad or as generalized as it is.

Frankly, if we want to throw some windows on it and some elevations, we might have the opportunity to get approval or the recommendation from the BAR to

The City Council that the use is not detrimental to the district, which is all that is required.

And the use parameters I think are pretty low bar.

I mean it's really like no parking on the ground level.

I think important to me though is the mixed use component of what you're showing here and retail on the first level and a high activation between the sidewalk and that first floor.

Well, I think that's right.

And I mean, what you're showing here is residential on the first floor.

Excuse me.

Street retail at

St. Louis.

inside, how many units?

We don't care.

The massing just has a structurally significant intention shown and it can't just be kind of a Walmart box where you just, you know, how did you go around with the edge?

I mean because like your current project, you know, you've got distinct facades and scales going on there, the one right next to it.

and so I think that works really well.

And I don't disagree with any of that, but those are all conversations we likely, in my opinion, we should be having once we know that we've got the increased density approved.

I mean, ideally, the greater density means you have some more room to manipulate the envelope.

I didn't say real quick off that comment.

I think it's really important about, because obviously you have to calculate whether or not 55 units can fit within this volume, right?

And that's going to take some calculus.

But I think what, correct me if I'm wrong, I'm hinting at is that

And as you know, there's very little likelihood that we'd have approved anything close to what that looks like.

And so it's going to have to require some cuts and give and take on that front.

We have, honestly, within the studio, we've started that process and we're churning away on it.

But we also thought, wait a minute.

And it may be helpful to revisit some of the reasoning behind the Planning Commission's change of zoning from

on West Main Street.

Previously, there was a change of zoning from the east side to the west side of the street, and then we changed it to from, I'm sorry.

from the north to the south, but we change it from west to east of the bridge and that's because the character of the two sides has changed so much and we have more of the historic character still left on the east side and that character is more

is a more modest size and scale than what has the Westside has become.

And not only the height, but also then

the pattern of the buildings going down the street and that plays into creating breaks in that long block.

Well, we were a part of that whole change of zoning.

We were part of the team.

And also to the point that, for example, the slight moves that were made at the flats clearly aren't successful enough, right?

Your current project basically has an urban street to the back of the facade, so I think having

Pedestrian spaces and interstitial spaces that actually break the buildings up that are occupiable to go back and through.

Like the one at the residence, what's that thing called, at the corner?

Can I offer, and I think Jody's got the right point with what, I think what the Planning Commission did down there on Gallatin Court, where you went from sort of an out, a slow building with outdoor access, you know, visible parking, now everything was behind a wall.

And so the real push was, all right, we need to activate this.

They kept saying that.

So the fact that, you know, this is good as a

graphic representation that you all would look at for the SUP.

That's great.

But you will also get with that process.

You get to make recommendations and it could be it doesn't have to be something drawn.

It would be when this comes back with the design, given the more intensive activity or use of we don't want a wall, an apartment wall.

We want a very active street, you know, something that's permeable.

And those become something that you offer as your

Special use permit recommendation, and they become sort of more than the guidelines, so to speak.

They become something that really must be presented later in the design.

So you don't have to have the design, but you can make recommendations.

Does that help?

I'd love to say something I've been wanting to editorialize on this.

And I think there's a great lesson to be learned from the flats and that thing was built across the street.

Did you do that?

No.

I've never been all that disappointed with the flats.

I think it's fine.

I think it's far more successful with its relationship to the street than the thing across the street.

And the thing across the street, it has those great breaks, but the way it crowds the sidewalk,

and you can't get vegetation, the trees aren't going to live there.

I mean, it's terrible for what it does to the street and to the community and the people who want to use the street.

The flats are far more successful.

A lot more glass, they're set back, you've got vegetation, you feel comfortable walking there.

I don't disagree.

The other thing that we're excited about is that

The two existing contributing structures that are part of 600 West Main Street sit forward of the required setback for this new building.

Because the flash is actually going to end up with more sidewalk eventually, because it doesn't West Main head over more, I mean up the flat, the standard.

They don't move it over a little bit?

I don't recall.

It's been a little while.

There's so much pressure on the existing right-of-way.

I don't think anything's given up.

I think my recollection of that is that nothing was ever really done on the interstitial space between the right-of-way and the front of the building because nobody really knew what was going to happen on West Main.

Because the public way requires... And also the standards got an enormous amount of parking.

So they don't need to have street parking right now.

So thank you.

This is very helpful.

To me, it's a rational way to proceed.

So we'll see if we can do that on the next round.

No, I mean if we can make that process work.

So thank you for that feedback.

The other is that we are also, so I think 612 West Main may have been the surprise.

The non-surprise is that 218 West Market is also being considered for redevelopment because we've got a conditioned demolition permit for the building.

And so that, if we were to come for

If we were only looking for the increased density, I think we already have the basis of how we could frame that discussion.

The question is then also, and it may be more reference to previous examples, but hearing from you all if we were to come for a height increase, what is it the kinds of things, what are the things that are important and that are critical to you all to address right up front?

The context north of downtown is definitely different from that south of downtown.

That's my theory.

OK, well, can we quote you on that?

Sure.

Well, I mean, I think the landmark

All of its peccadilloes is I think that's pretty successful from a massing standpoint because it allows light and air around it and it's not a block.

Certainly lets light and air around it right now.

Robert and Cecilia's project, you know, I think that's pretty successful and I don't think it overwhelms the King building.

I think it's appropriate to along the railroad tracks where you have this

Classically you would have grain elevators and lumber sheds and you have a huge amount of variety.

Height as a single element is being pilloried unfairly.

Well, we can each start contributing our parts to it.

Exactly.

Or building.

Well, you're doing all the projects down there.

Yeah, I think massing definitely is in context, the biggest thing.

And then scale, of course.

Like, as you know, there are many things you can do to help to assist, you know, to augment scale, verticality, horizontality.

And so, when you're presenting this mass, you know, to whatever extent, if you feel like you want to express, you know, verticality more, horizontality more, if you want to make it seem smaller by breaking tripartite or something,

That, to Cammie's point, allows you to start conditioning what you would expect to see as something moves forward.

That makes sense.

I can understand a more detailed massing

I don't know whether there was an aberration of their reading of the height rules at the time, but one thing I think was interesting about Robert Celia's building is that it was kind of like, you know, they pushed down here, this kind of came up and it pushed up higher, but it seems to me that if there was a more volumetric approach to density where

You did, for instance, I can see the flats having been a better building.

Yeah.

And some of that might then give you breathing space to have said, you know, one of the things that would have been really great there is where their main entrance is, there is actually a courtyard on the other side, you know, and if they had just busted that through, that would have made a huge difference to that, it would have been much more of a

Almost like a college, like you'd find in some of the older schools.

Quadrangle.

Or Tudor City in New York, something like that, where you have this sense of an urban landscape moving through the buildings.

I think that's the problem with these big blocks is they don't have any of that.

Well, that was before the zoning change.

Yeah, because it makes connections, it makes urban space.

Monolith.

Superblock.

Yeah, it sounds like a superblock.

Yeah, it doesn't just fill up the block.

And I think that's important.

For me, what it does for community, for the city at the street level, amenities or interactivity, it needs to be part of the community at the street level.

Anything about like also really successful residential districts where you'll have sort of a little node where it expands and there's a cafe or something like that.

It's also, I mean that is such an interesting knuckle in the urban landscape.

And I don't know if this becomes a diagram that's part of your presentation or certainly something that we're going to think about too since it's such an odd mixture of properties and scales of building is what are the other future development pressures in that block

You know, many of those are protected buildings.

Some of them would not be, you know, I guess all of them are.

They're all protected.

But some of them are historic.

But what are the, where are the, what are the development pressures over the next 20 years?

Brown's Lock and Key comes immediately along.

Oh yeah, yeah.

It's the next logical question.

That's one bedroom per floor apparently.

It's like a Portman hotel.

Yes.

Thank you all very much.

Appreciate it.

Thank you.

So, place report.

There was no place meeting.

No meeting.

However, I met with the putative lighting meeting, a lighting group which now consists of... Putative?

Putative, not putative.

Punitive lighting, yes.

We'll start doing punitive lighting.

I like that idea.

That which consists of Mark Schuyler, Andrew Monschine, Philip Iannana, a guy named Ricky Patterson.

Ricky and Phil Iannana are both associated with the astronomy department.

And Phil and Mark helped write the original dark sky code for Albemarle County.

working with Mary Joy amongst other people and then the city kind of adopted it but there were some things that were done to it by both the county and the city that kind of undercut its effectiveness but basically we're trying to gin up some enthusiasm for tackling that again and Mark is currently working with the downtown

Business Association, to start looking at relighting the downtown mall, start to take some study cracks with that.

He's also working with LexisNexis to do lighting underneath the bridge.

So I'm hoping that we get enough critical mass there to also address the bridge and the mall in general.

Because the bridge lighting is kind of stalled out, right?

What section are we doing?

We made it through lighting.

We made it through lighting.

Okay, you didn't even touch chapter three.

Turn your head off to chapter three.

And I will get the updated, it sounds like we talked about Ligand then chapter two is basically wrapped up with the exception of I think Garagas and then the introductions.

By phone, I can do it.

I'm sorry, I can't.

It's peanut butter and jelly sandwiches, I believe.

Bunch of cuts.

Do you have any suggestions?

Actually, you know what, tonight was fantastic.

Six people, not sticks.

Sorry, I was a little behind as you were working on a database project that starts in 2003 and does all the actions up until now.

All right, so just quickly, but probably already heard, Cami will be leaving us, going across the street.

But I just want to say, Cami, I could not have done it the last 14 months.

In fact, my first day here, I said, please don't go anywhere until I have my feet on the ground.

And I can't thank her enough for that.

I'm not leaving the city.

I'm going across to Jared IQ.

I'm going to be their operational manager.

So I'm going to be getting into some finance and marketing and managing the office.

even closer to the tin whistle.

All right, don't leave.

Quickly, I did meet with Mike Murphy.

He has authorized the removal of the tree in front of Westminster Prez with some conditions and so I'm working through that legally so that we can at least move forward on that.

Second and third and fourth, some things I just need to ask you guys

you all for some assistance on.

This is 872 Locust Ave.

It's in the Historic Conservation District.

I just threw this together so that I could kind of see what's going on.

But the things that are of, there are some tree removals in order to facilitate a new garage, pool to pool house, not so worried about down behind, some terrace, part of the work.

And then what,

They have is this brick wall in front.

They'd like to breach the wall in order to to have a walk from the sidewalk.

The question is whether or not I can review this administratively or do you all feel that this is something that needs to come?

So here here is in their site plan existing and what's proposed.

So I don't know which graphic.

No.

It's a different one.

No, this is my project.

So like the design of the pool house down back, and then there's the design of the garage.

So the rules allow me to approve things administratively in a historic conservation district with the consent of the board chair and co-chair.

But I still just wanted to try to think, who's the...

Can't Think of the Arctic, all of a sudden.

You can't speak for Melanie, but I'm

Thinking of her past comments has been she'd prefer that this had public comment.

So that's helpful.

Yeah.

And then the 450, yeah, so this is law office, Mr. Summer.

So, why is it blue?

So what they are asking to do is

Take off the porch.

Fence this area in in the back just to add and this is the plan to sort of put like a four-foot tall picket fence around this portion and have return you know didn't just have parking right here.

This is they said it's more serving as their residence now than as their law office and they just would like to create a little privacy there.

So again a four-foot simple fence.

One thing that, I don't know, in my opinion there are some things that could be done administratively.

What is, the poor house?

I don't know the name.

I mean I think you could probably tell them that.

They're trying to add a backyard where there was pavement, which is fantastic.

I was like, yes, please.

And he said, is there any opposition to me, you know, putting grass down?

Oh, my God.

Absolutely not.

But that's fair enough.

And I can tell him, you know, that he needs to get a submittal.

We'll go through B.A.R.

Yeah, it's all four foot.

I said, please tell me there's a fence there that you're right.

He goes, well, I got this old wire fence.

But then this one, I got a call today.

There's a new juice place going into the juice place here.

And it's a bummer because that ceramic mosaic's gone already.

So this is a young man, it's got the Juice Place over on the corner, is in the middle of renovating this space.

And this window right here, they'd like to put something like the dits Roy has out of there, just out of the catalog.

a folding window and this, they already reviewed, there's no ADA issues or anything, there's no access, this is rather compact.

The question is, well, they need to order the window and it's like an eight week lead time.

I said, tell me you can get it in 70 VLT and it looks like they can, the manufacturer assured them today.

So again, the question comes down to is this something, if this goes to the BAR,

Correct.

And when it folds, it's folding in?

It's folding.

And I didn't copy the plan, but it folds.

It does the same as this.

It does fold out.

Yeah.

Yeah, Red Pump does.

It opens against this here and this is like a, well, whatever.

There's no issues with this.

The staircase is wide enough.

As I said, if it's 70 VLT, it's an existing opening.

It's not changing a dimension.

I don't even know.

Jeez, Jody, talk about buildings that kind of have a, like what era is that?

Transition.

Yeah, transition.

I like that.

Is there going to be a white frame?

You know, I do have to ask them what this is here.

I'm not sure about... What do you call it?

Paint?

I cut it off.

But yeah, paint.

I'm going to clarify.

Look, you guys aren't changing anything other than this window and this window opening.

I wish my photo were clearer.

Are you sure?

It looks like a stucco.

Parched.

Yeah, you're right.

I saw red and thought I saw brick.

Well, what I'm going to do is be clear with them.

But as far as replacing that window in the existing opening, given what was at the Fitzroy at Red Pump, I just felt like it's one of these things that

No, and that's going to be their hold up, so if it bumps it a month...

No welder, it's collapsing against this

This part of the frame here is not coming out.

It's going to stick out.

It's going to stick out at two or three feet, right?

Yeah, that would be my concern.

The building department.

Right, so I'll... Because that doesn't look, that looks like it's all in plain.

I think he just was trying to create this sort of open it up to the mall, create a

There's some accessibility of air, not necessarily people coming in and out.

That's not going to become a patio, but just to sort of have a, I don't know.

Alright, I'm good with those two, and I'll take care of getting these others in.

Yes.

You know, this is where the historic conservation districts, they're still somewhat, you know, we're still learning.

It's the way, you know, Mary Joy used to make some judgment calls on things.

that I'm probably just not, you know, as I say, you know, ask me in a year.

It'll be things that I'll be a little more comfortable with, but these are not the street trees.

I mean, this one back here is a large tree, but I, so.

It's a big hickory, a nice tree.

They're not that big.

I said, anything that's not seen from the road is... Well, you can see them from the road.

It just almost... Well, the reason I ask is because if we do it, they're going to want to move forward on it and removing those trees is a big part of moving forward on it.

You know, fencing.

I thought the city had a tree ordinance over a certain caliber.

Actually, I don't think you are, but I think that's if you have to get a site plan.

Actually, as soon as this is getting a site plan, this is getting a garage.

It's a residence, so.

It's residential.

Okay, yeah.

But there was a caliper, there was a, yeah, okay.

I know, I was pretty sure there was a caliper restriction.

I think there is.

I used to ask, who would you come out and let me cut trees down?

Big one in my backyard that's not there.

But it was hollow.

I mean, I imagine if you all had said no, you have to keep it.

But, you know, again, this is just part of this evolution of I think, you know, as we're looking at our guidelines as well, you know, try to think back.

What are the things that we've consistently looked at that we can

You know, you trust me to make some decisions on what are things that, you know, because these are the questions people say, do you think I need to do this?

And it's like, well, let me ask.

And so that's what I'm doing here.

That's where

Yes, I know there were some things to admit it.

I tell you guys, the enormity of stuff that I get asked to comment on and respond to and it's like,

because there are certain things where, you know, when someone says, hey, I'm painting my front door, I'll say, you know, where are you?

But, I mean, she would, I think she actually mentioned painting and stuff would be.

Really?

Yeah, she, I mean, it was a list.

I think she.

Did she read it?

Sent an email with it out because it wasn't read out in the actions I could take because I just don't know the problem with it.

Right, they're pretty much an FYI.

And I mean, if it's an administrative referral, you do like the... Well, I think Lisa required it.

Well, you and I were talking about it.

I think there's administrative approvals where I say, yeah, do it.

You're fine.

Then there's the $100 administrative approvals.

And I think that there's probably a place.

I was talking today with Brian Holoska.

I said, it's probably something valid in a $25

I think I'm going to have to have a two year after that.

You know, my son's home in three weeks.

There aren't.

I'm really excited.

Yeah, you know like yeah the stuff

That was that hotel.