Board of Architectural Review Meeting   3/17/2026

I'm German.

It's called guerilla tongue.

Oh, thanks.

Here we go.

Are we waiting for Jeff?

Would you like to wait for him?

Do we need to wait for Jeff?

Oh, okay.

All right, then we can get started.

Good evening, everybody.

Happy St. Patrick's Day.

Welcome to this regularly monthly meeting of the Charlottesville Board of Architecture Review.

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

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

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

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

Speakers shall identify themselves and comments should be located 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.

All right.

Do we have any matters from the public not under items C through E on the agenda?

All right, our consent agenda, there's only one item which is the meeting minutes from the January 21st, 2026 BAR meeting.

Do we have any corrections or edits or comments?

I hear a motion to pass the consent agenda.

I'll make a motion.

Thank you.

All in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed?

All right, consent agenda passes, thank you.

So our first new item is a certificate of appropriateness application for 554 Valley Road.

Do we have a staff report?

And so the owner applicant will be participating virtually today, so I just wanted to let you guys know, so I'll be looking out for that.

This is an addition onto 554 Valley Road, which actually is a dependency of 1708 JPA, and so this originally was a garage with a dwelling on top.

and so the applicant is proposing exterior alterations including window replacements, a two-story addition on the front of this dwelling and then roof replacement.

Yeah, so Oakhurst Gildersleeve mostly is known for its kind of professor housing from the early 20th century as UVA was expanding.

I noted the period of significance for the neighborhood 1912 to 1955.

The houses surrounding 554 Valley Road are mostly from the late 40s into the early 50s.

The two right next to it are from the 1930s.

This was the second dependency for the house on JPA, and so this is a little bit later in construction, 1932.

We have the Sanborn map that was in your staff report kind of showing how it was situated right behind that other dependency from JPA.

And so it's sort of made for an awkward parcel.

You can see there's actually a little bit of a swale that you have to cross with your vehicle to access the property.

And it's very just blended into the landscape, just going out there.

You can't see it from the road.

There's a lot of vegetation and everything.

The applicant was really great in being responsive to provide us the photographs that we needed.

So I kind of noted that stone is one of the unique features of this neighborhood.

All of the dwellings around it have the kind of unique field stone look.

And then on top is the frame with stucco.

I'm going to show you what they're proposing.

The front elevation modified with fixed windows.

They are asking to replace the casement, the original metal casements with new casements, so at least they would operate in the same way.

And then I just threw the section up there so you could kind of see how it doesn't necessarily protrude too much as it really, it's meant to be a stairwell on the interior.

A couple more photographs per reference for you guys so you can really see the windows.

In red dashed lines, those are the front elevations, the windows they're replacing.

The upper story are older vinyl windows that will be replaced with casements.

The lower portion in the stone wall, those will actually be widened for safety egress issues as they're using or turning the lower level into bedrooms.

They are going to replace the garage doors.

That whole opening will disappear.

As will the stairs, railings, porch, deck.

It was originally a garage?

With the dwelling.

So kind of a laundry list of the alterations they're looking to achieve.

They are planning on using some of the existing site stone into the addition at the lower level and blending in as best possible.

The applicant stated that the casements were just not repairable.

And so that's why they're proposing

Okay.

That's it, is that good, Jeff?

Anything you wanted to add?

Any other questions for staff?

Hold on a sec, let me switch over to Zoom.

There you are.

I can hear you.

Great.

OK, thank you.

Let's start with any questions from the public.

Hi, my name is Judy Peliferro, and I'm just going to assume those metal windows that she's talking about, that they're very drafty and, you know, not energy efficient that she wants to replace.

Yes.

Did you hear my question about the windows?

Yes.

Okay, are the original windows now in place?

Are they all drafty and, you know, not energy efficient, those old windows?

Yeah, absolutely.

Okay, thank you.

Any other questions from the public here or online?

I've got a question.

How does this relate to Valley Road?

I can tell you, you can't see it.

Yeah, it's situated on the landform.

And so there's like an intentional swale below it.

And there's actually a little tiny bridge crossing that you have to access.

There's all of a screen of vegetation on the front.

I would also like to add the house is at a 45 degree angle to Valley Road and additionally this could not necessarily be considered an addition.

There's no

possible way to pass from the first floor to the second floor in an enclosed space in the existing house.

Chair, there's a site plan.

They've got a plat.

Yeah, I see it.

On page 32.

So I had a question on the gable ends of the house.

I guess maybe there's an attic space and there's two small windows up at either end.

Yes, they should be replaced.

Okay, so you would like to replace them?

And then another quick question.

In the documents, one note said something about removing the chimney and another note said something about repairing the chimney and capping it.

Sorry, my mic goes on me every time I speak.

OK, great.

Thank you.

Those are my questions.

Yes, there's a gravel driveway across a bridge.

Well, a concrete bridge and then a gravel driveway.

I guess to push that question a little further, our staff report recommends that we put a condition on here that you replace the metal roof with a metal roof for our guidelines.

Is that doable?

It's kind of a big question.

So I guess there's we have design guidelines that

that you're hoping to meet.

So I think there's what you're applying to do and what you'd like to do, but not everything that you're applying to do meets our guidelines.

And so that's why we're asking about that in particular.

Basically, one of our guidelines says avoid replacing a standing seam metal roof with asphalt shingles.

So more than likely, we're going to recommend or actually maybe put a condition that you use a metal roof.

Is it just budget or is there another reason an asphalt shingle roof would be preferable to you?

Hi.

No.

It takes a lag.

I'm calling from Estonia.

It's almost midnight here.

I'm here for a long trip, so the connection's kind of steep.

So originally, the roof was standing seating.

The budget for renovating this house came in

more than the cost of purchasing the house.

And I've been looking for ways to reduce costs for the renovation because of the exceeding the original budget.

What's the condition of the roof?

It is definitely legal.

If anyone has driven by this house, it is in the worst condition possible, not even viable for human occupancy right now.

Any other questions from the VAR?

We'll move on.

Do we have any comments from the public?

Anybody online?

It's a preference recommendation in the guidelines.

I think that we've allowed some changes on, remember we allowed one house to remove the slate and put on metal so they could do solar panels.

In fact, we did that at the church as well.

I guess I would say

As someone in an 1884 house facing a new roof, I'm not going to replace it with asphalt, but I sure wish I could.

So I think it's not an unusual question that we'll be seeing.

I think where I look at

I look at it as we've got, we know what the roof was.

I think the valid argument there, this one needs to be replaced so that if anyone were to restore it later, you could certainly return it.

So installing asphalt shingles doesn't negate that possibility.

So I guess where I'm struggling with this one is how precious is it?

It's an outbuilding for a more important house on JPA.

Is that house on JPA contributing?

It is?

Okay.

And they're doing a lot of work that is

It's a little less than reversible.

I mean, they're lowering the sills on the stone windows or the windows that are set in stone.

They're building that bump out with matching stone and some of the salvaged stone.

So I feel like if this were a more visible house and maybe a more

important contributing structure in one of our districts.

Some of these things would cause more harbor.

But as it is, I feel like at least the integral form of the house is staying the same.

There's still going to be, I guess, the knowledge that there was an outbuilding right here.

I don't know.

I feel like I'm OK, I think, with what's being presented.

I'm leaning towards.

being okay with the roof again because it's an out building and it's not really visible from the street.

A couple of comments though on the staff recommendations.

One of the recommendations was that the windows that are in the stucco wall are, I think you said that you want them to be

This is where, you know, we were looking at the photographs and when you had, I mean when the windows were there,

I think that it appeared to me, and I couldn't very well, I do see now, but if it's reduced into the opening such that it can be done that way without producing a

whatever that return detail has to be.

I mean it looks like the existing detail has to do a stuck out return around all those windows.

I was curious about your comment.

The idea of retaining the garage door on site seems great.

It's going to disappear.

I think it's a little easier to do that when it's a big commercial building.

Sorry, I don't mean to tear out your conditions, but those are the two that I would drop.

The requirement to preserve or save the doors on site, I mean I do think they're pretty neat and they kind of are honorific of the fact that it was a garage.

I was kind of wondering if they couldn't be, you know, restored is probably not the right word, but cleaned up, repainted and maybe just even just like hung on the wall inside.

somewhere, like it's hard work almost.

That way they stay with the house.

I mean, Carl, I tend to agree with your general assessment.

I thought the staff report put it well in saying the former garage dependency was never intended as a primary residence, nor was the building given a significant position on the landscape or improved access to the street.

It is essentially a secondary structure or utilitarian outbuilding.

I mean, I do think that's

kind of how we should view this in a broader scheme.

I kind of tend to agree with Jerry on the roof, but at the same time it's sort of if allowing a Nashville shingle roof helps this building get preserved, maybe take that win.

One, I should have asked this during the questions, forgive me, but the casement windows, looking at the historic photo in the staff report and also knowing we've got metal casements in the basement level, I think it's safe to assume and I think the historic photo shows a casement window.

For the upper level, where I'm going with this is I think the Pella, sorry, what are they called?

Lifestyle windows that y'all are specking do have a divided light option.

And I would personally like to see that because you can still achieve a casement opening, but kind of honor the original appearance of the historic windows.

while still maintaining your energy standards and whatnot.

I don't object.

I mean, I understand the reasoning for enlarging the basement windows, and so I'm not going to push back on that.

But I didn't know if others would agree with that thought of going for the divided lights.

I feel like that.

I do think we know what's there because I think there's one historic photo that didn't get shown tonight but it was in our packet that's essentially in the

I love which elevation this is.

It shows the side door.

It's that window beside it.

You can see it's a casement window.

I'd also prefer if they could restore and retain that entrance door, the personnel door to the second floor.

I didn't know if there's a really strong reason for replacing that.

I'm not opposed to having the divided light for the pillow replacement windows.

I guess I have a follow-up question on the replacement for the main van door at the entry.

Okay.

I was intending to have a secure envelope for the whole house.

And since I was replacing every opening, I wanted to ensure that the envelope was sealed and energy efficient.

So I was replacing all openings at that point.

And it's not original.

It was hard to tell from the pictures because there's a storm door.

If it's not original, I'm not going to argue for it, but it would be nice to confirm.

And what do you think about trying to somehow store the garage doors on site or use them as artwork or something?

Yeah, I could definitely look into reusing work.

I talked to a contractor about reusing them as doors, but they would have to be significantly rebuilt to be rodent resistant and have the proper sealing as part of the envelope.

Okay.

Thank you.

That's the spirit of it is just kind of keeping them with the house instead of throwing them in the dumpster if that's possible.

But yeah, it doesn't necessarily need to be a functioning door.

Lindsay, why didn't the protruding part just come down to the ground?

So those were added for structural support.

I wanted to keep the base with the stone consistent band across the bottom.

I felt it go to the ground.

It would not breathe as well in the elevation.

If there's opposition to that, we could bring it fully to the ground.

But in my opinion, stone is a much robust material to be interacting with the ground.

That's great.

I was just curious what inspired you to design it this way.

I don't know if you did the design or who did the design, but I think it's just worthwhile to know.

that there's an intention to it, and that's a good intention, I think.

I think it's worthwhile to mention that he tried to do things to try to reinforce just the nature of the house.

Like what James suggested, I think it's a good suggestion, try to keep some of the items on site.

I think just with that, you know,

I wonder if there's, just on the design, I guess my other question is why are there two roofs above the part that's protruding out?

Yeah, that was an intent just to bring some of this standing scene, previous roof to visible.

When you look at the photos and you look at the existing standing scene, you really can't see the standing scene from the road, from the front road, but in the photos when you go to the rear yard, you're up on the top of the hill and that's when you see the standing scene.

I see.

Well, I guess my thoughts are just along the lines of Carl, which is that I don't feel like this building's significant enough to make you put a bill that's $50,000 more, however much more the roof is going to cost you.

For me, it's just a matter of, I think,

The only suggestions that I might offer is that the house is simple, so maybe just try to maintain the simplicity.

I found that the bay is sort of like that three-sided thing.

Okay, under set, thank you.

Also the one other thing, the brackets are, well, the brackets feel a little funny just kind of being inset the way they are.

Can we make a motion if we're ready?

Sure.

Okay.

Having considered the standards set forth in the city code, including the ADC district design guidelines, I move to find the proposed addition and alterations that 554 Valley Road satisfies the BAR's criteria is compatible with this property and other properties in this ADC district and that the BAR approves the application as submitted with the following conditions.

We would

I would recommend, though not require, that you find some way to keep the garage doors on site if you can, reuse them decoratively or wherever you think you can do.

A window and door trim that's on the stucco be treated consistently, whether it's installed recessed or flush or proud of the stucco, that it's just done consistently.

Similarly for the windows that are in the stone wall, the new gutter should be half round and the existing chimney should be retained.

I'm fine with that.

The applicants seem to be okay with it.

We recommend you look into using divided lights for the windows.

I said treat them consistently.

But I guess, yeah, in the stone they should be recessed.

So that's a modification to my.

All right, we'll call the vote.

Mr. Schwartz.

Yes.

Mr. Bailey?

Yes.

Mr. Berle?

Aye.

Mr. Timmerman?

Yes.

Aye.

Okay.

And I vote yes.

All right.

Thank you very much.

I appreciate you calling in from so far away in the middle of the night.

We really appreciate your time.

All righty, thanks everyone.

This is one that

Well, first off, it's a COA request for a temporary seasonal vestibule at the entrance to a currently being used as a restaurant on West Main Street.

The building dates to 1920, 1925.

There are bronze frame storefront windows and this is actually a section of West Main.

It's fairly intact relative to the commercial storefronts.

It's been described in our

guidelines as are in the survey as one of the best preserved stretch of historical commercial buildings on West Main Street.

And this request is a little bit unusual.

It is not a permanent change, but it is a temporary installation that is sort of taken on a different form.

About a year and a half or so ago,

asked you all about the owner of the building or the property manager contacted me and asked about during the winter could they install a temporary vestibule.

These are fairly typical in a lot of towns in the northeast over the winter.

They're intended to be installed and taken down and moved.

After talking with you all, I responded that this would, I would treat this as a, like a temporary tent, seasonal tent, which are only allowed if you all agree to them in front of a non-contributing structure, I'm sorry, in front of a contributing structure, so I was willing to entertain it as a tent, bring it to you, possibly there would be some conditions

to its installation and removal, off season, et cetera, et cetera.

And felt like I had reported that back to the building manager.

They subsequently installed the vestibule that you see here and it had, it came with, it's manufactured with a

a framed door and apparently there were some concerns expressed to them about it opening out because the entrance

to the door, the sidewalk in the alcove there is pitched so the door can't open in.

So they replaced that door with what you see here, kind of a weather opening vinyl and fabric with a Velcro strip.

As far as what is being asked of you, and that'd be something to clarify with the applicant, this is not as manufactured.

This is a sort of a cherry-rigged solution to the door opening out.

So my assumption is this is what's being asked for approval.

don't have an issue with this and have recommended it be, if it had come to you a year ago before it was installed, I would have recommended approval on the condition that it be removed in its entirety.

during the warm period.

And I think we'd have to probably discuss what that is, but that it would be during cold season, winter season.

But when that period ended, then it would be removed in its entirety, not just the door taken off.

And also there is, if we notice when we went out there, that they have installed over the entrance a heater, sort of a

What's a wind curtain or air curtain?

And so that is a permanent alteration on the exterior that was not reviewed by us.

And even though it's inside this temporary vestibule, that also required a COA.

I would not recommend that we approve that.

In fact, we have even recently denied that at some request on some commercial storefronts.

My recommendation on this, or staff I say, my recommendation is that the

This is in place and it is currently a zoning violation because it did not get a COA.

I have talked to the applicant and talked to the zoning folks and it's still in place and I'm fine with that pending decision that you all make.

And I didn't want to have it taken down and then you all would say it was okay.

So tonight's discussion is important.

But my recommendation is that

as a temporary seasonal vestibule.

I'm not sure it's something we want to see throughout the city, but I think that we could, as we did several years ago, I think staff could evaluate a policy that's supportive of these.

I mean, we are seeing, as you all know, these former commercial spaces are now used as restaurants and public spaces, so there is a different need

relative to when you have tables right inside the door, that's one of the concerns.

So I think anything that continues the use of our historic buildings we need to look at, but we need a policy.

So my recommendation is to approve this.

COA, and that it be removed by April 1, 2026.

You all certainly can change that date, modify that date, but that it be removed in its entirety, including the holes filled, things like that.

This isn't just to take the thing off the front.

The second thing is that...

Sorry.

Where's my recommendation?

My instructions.

Yeah, so what I was, it's not saying exactly as I had it, but that you all instruct us, Ms. Richardson and I, to take a look at this and craft a sort of policy and to bring that back so that we can, in anticipation of

other requests and certainly anticipation of this coming back for the next cold season that we would have some guidelines in place to respond to it and that way it's sort of I think fair for everyone involved here and I think it's important to take a look at it and what the comments are up there is that don't necessarily have to

get into it now, but long ago I talked to the then city attorney about tents and she had offered that the BAR tent for temporary tents can suggest time periods when components will be permitted and conditions to the size, color, placement, and even installation methods for such components.

So that's directly from what

legal counsel for the city offered at the time.

So those are, um, suggest those are the types of conditions that you all can consider whether you wanted to adopt something for that this evening, uh, for this particular instance, or, but certainly, uh, in instructing, uh, Ms. Richardson and I to draft a policy.

So, sorry, does that

I have a few questions.

So the situation is that, and I asked back when Mr. Fox contacted me initially about it, and there is not a code issue, because I had wondered is there a code issue with a door opening out into the sidewalk.

There wasn't, but apparently the

The restaurant did this in response to some concerns that were expressed to them.

So this wasn't something they were required to do.

But no, a door couldn't go in because of the ramp part.

And also anybody that, I don't know as far as, this is another question we have to resolve and we would address it in the, or we would look at it in the policy.

Is that ADA accessible?

I do not know.

but that would have to be something that we would incorporate into that.

But you all are looking at it relative to is this compatible or incompatible with the architecture and character of that building and will address the ADA and building code issues.

Mr. Timmerman.

Yeah, well I guess, so I guess in the summertime they just take the blanket down and then they... No, we would remove the entire, in entirety, otherwise that then, I'm sorry, that's the additional piece on the recommendation.

If someone wished to do this permanently, then my recommendation would be to work with a glazing company and to fabricate

an extension of the storefront that respected what's there and that could be installed permanently.

Yeah, I'm just curious how did they use it in the summertime?

Did they just take the blanket down and they kept the

Flexi Glass panel on the side.

You said it's been up for 15 years.

I think there was a moment where it wasn't there, but I think the applicant's here.

Oh, okay.

So yeah, I want to ask the applicant to come up and speak to us.

But I didn't see their actual application.

It should be attached.

They are submitting that image right there, unless they wish to.

Well, there's no question about it being a seasonal temporary vestibule, whether they intend to reinstall the door or retain that fabric opening.

Unclear, but I'm assuming that's what they want in there.

So there you go, that's the door as installed.

Yeah, I remember that.

And so I would be fine with that.

Also, in fact, I somewhat would prefer that.

But that didn't even, even with the door, it didn't get approved.

No.

Right.

I have a question about your recommendation.

to approve it until April 1st.

Now, every application is viewed independently.

You certainly can state that.

I think you could say in any motion under the circumstances.

But what we're trying to do is we recognize this is a zoning violation, but I'm trying to find a solution that

that works for the applicant, works for us.

And because I had told the property manager a year or two ago, this is something we would entertain, we could consider it.

So I want to slam the door on it, but only as a temporary item.

And then here you can see the air curtain that was installed.

Now you all may have

an opinion of that.

There has not been an application for that.

I would have no problem if you wish to address that in the motion.

But I'm assuming unless Mr. Fox says otherwise that this

Yeah.

Okay.

Yeah, so this is a, and you've done that before, you've approved things that had, I mean, I said the only thing in our guidelines that you currently approved formally are temporary and seasonal tents.

But you have

You've applied timelines and conditions to other things.

So I'm just trying to bridge the zoning violation, resolve that.

By getting a COA, they have resolved the zoning violation.

But the COA also stipulates that it gets removed.

I'm curious about the building code potential violations.

To my understanding, there are none.

Other than whether or not this required a building permit or not, I don't know.

But I was told that the building code official said that the door can open out.

That's not really us.

OK, does the applicant want to make a presentation?

Oh, I understand.

One way or the other.

the majority of that's strip.

The application, the COA application was produced in a rush to make this meeting deadline.

The goal is to come up with a curative solution that

as much as feasible honors the historic character of the property.

If you look at 707 through 711, that's been attempted over the past decade.

What we're trying to achieve is a seasonal

temporary vestibule that can be installed or maintained.

And I understand that we may have to come back for another permit.

annually from October 1 through March 31.

It relieves a hardship for the restaurant seating.

Staff had recommended an interior solution, which knocked out eight seats, which translates

into a huge sum of lost revenue each month.

So we're trying to accommodate the tenant's needs while respecting the building.

There wasn't a COA.

The tenant was instructed to make the application back in 2024.

That didn't happen, so this is kind of a remedial process to get us current.

They replaced the door with a flexible magnetic opening thing, vinyl, this past October.

The property owners would like a solution that was completely removed from April through September with, depending on weather, a viable installation, temporary installation for the cold weather season.

Great.

No, thank you.

All right.

I just want to be clear.

When I spoke with them two years ago about a permanent solution, I had suggested that an interior vestibule could be constructed like a 3 by 3 small frame wall.

The idea of building something permanent now

Preferably, they could do it if the inside won't work.

Any questions from the public either here or online?

No?

Okay.

Questions from the BAR?

I have a question if you don't mind coming back up.

Yes, I think.

What happened?

They installed this with the opening door.

I thought this was a remedial solution that the tenant came up in dealing with building codes, fire department, and stuff like that.

So I thought they had complied by making an application, that sort of thing.

So that door is still there.

It's in the basement or something like that.

So that could be re-installed.

I mean, was there a reason why it was removed?

It was perceived from the comments we got from the city that... No.

No.

Yeah.

I think that was the tenant's interpretation.

Okay.

What was the interpretation?

that the outopening door was a fire code issue or a building code issue because it opened out across the sidewalk.

So this is basically a curtain that you pull aside and walk in?

I got a question.

So you mentioned the building, you're the property manager, but you mentioned the building owner.

Does the building, the whole length of the building have a single owner?

Yes.

Yes, okay.

They want the tenant to do what they're supposed to have done.

Gotcha.

Because I could potentially see a way forward.

I mean as much as that recessed opening is part of the

historic form of the building, possibly a more successful approach at this would be to storefront across the entire thing to each of those is it two or three entrances across there and provide sort of a uniform vestibule for all of those instead of this little one-off telephone booth right there.

But I think that's to be discussed in a future submission potentially.

Sorry, I'm getting off track.

I guess I have a question about our role tonight.

Because it's already existing, we can't really say we want to modify it in such a way to, it's either we're approving it or denying it, sort of end of story.

Or are we discussing how we would make, if we deny it, are we discussing how we would modify it to make an approval?

I'd rather that for another date, personally.

I mean, I know where I stand on this.

Well, wait till comments.

Sorry.

Yes.

I guess we can answer your question.

And this is, you know.

There's the give and take of this.

I try not to draw too bold a line, but Mr. Fox could say, hey, we want the option of leaving this up for the next X weeks or putting the door back up for a period of X weeks.

The only caveat I would say to that is I don't know if either of these, whether the door or this fabric opening,

whether there are any code issues relative to ADA or building code.

So I don't know.

So I just want to be crystal clear about, even if you all say you love this thing and it can stay up for perpetuity, the reality is that the building code or the fire department might tell me something else.

But if you all wanted to, I mean, the timeline for it is a,

You certainly can modify that.

The point being that this is not the result.

The result, because the applicant has stated that this is a seasonal temporary installation, so I'd be crystal clear that that means at some point it gets removed and you all can determine when that is.

Does that help?

I mean you can be flexible here.

So the question is, if we wanted to, what we could do is simply say, this must be removed by April 1st.

That is my recommendation.

And with that, then, and not part of the COA, is you all instructing, because it helps when it comes from you all, because Kate and I can then say, we were asked by the BAR to do the following.

And it goes to the top of the list.

or you all may say, nah, we're fine.

The current provisions for temporary seasonal tents covers this.

Yeah, I would agree with Ron's assessment if that's a strategy that we can take.

And then we can come back and say, yeah, but you can't put a curtain.

It's hard to react to something that we don't know what it's going to be.

I don't think this is acceptable for one of our main streets.

I do think it would be useful, I know it's burning our own time, but useful to have somewhat of a discussion about what is and is not acceptable.

Because if it ends up that they come back in September with this and we say, oh that's fine, just put it back up, we're running into an issue where they're

you know, potentially damaging the existing wall and whatever by taking this thing down and putting it back up because it's currently fastened into the storefront and the wall.

Let's get to the comments section and then we can do that.

I think I know where I stand but I also agree.

I do want to accommodate this tenant.

The restaurant is a benefit to our community.

I want to commend the chef for his honors that he has received recently and I think that we will want to work

and make sure that the seating is available inside and that we come up with a good design that is

Just to get through the motions of the meeting, are there any more questions?

I do have one more question.

I will try.

Was this, whoever procured this, was it, was it, is the intention for it to be a permanent or an impermanent structure?

Is it something that's meant to like be put up and taken down during summer, the summer season?

Question mark?

That was a question, that was a question.

Do you mind coming up, actually, because there's people online, potentially.

Last year we applied and then it was denied because the door was blocking the sidewalk and then we removed the door and I thought that was the issue to not approve and then I'm like okay, summer is I don't need the door

and then I asked my next door, is it blocky or not?

They said okay.

And then winter came, freeze, super cold and we booked the curtain.

I know maybe it's not best design what you recommended.

It was the temporary but also after maybe your approval or not.

I would like to work on a better design or take it off because I have a violation right now.

That's the thing.

I was just wondering.

I guess you sourced it.

You found this item.

Did you buy it?

The first company went to Westville.

and then the door we removed after the bar last year because again it was blocking the sidewalk and we realized yes that shouldn't be in the deadwalk side it should be the other side but it wasn't going to block the other side

and then the bar recommended to us to put to Westville inside.

But it's, I was gonna lose.

At that plan, I'm losing the three tables.

Yeah.

Yeah, that makes sense.

That means be offered for monthly or yearly, you know.

And the solution, okay, let's remove the door, not the block sidewalk, at least, and then winter,

Again, if it's not, I am open mind to better curtain, air curtain too.

But that's not the only one solution, I think, because we tried that.

That's kind of open.

I'm OK to buy the new one.

Just the inter-time, because it's not on the first tables.

And when you did your research on this,

Westerville is, yes, with the screw, and then again, he is, Mr. Schwarz is right, if I take that and put it, it's gonna be the screw issue after maybe like several times, maybe not in the second time, but again, my purpose is the seasonal solution, that's why I apply for the seasonal, but if Barr says, he says,

You can keep that aside, you know.

Okay.

At least since like 2012.

That's on me.

Alright, any comments from the public?

Online?

All right, now we can get into comments.

I start with one technical comment.

Okay.

So I hate to disagree with the code official because I need him to be my friend, especially I've got actually a meeting tomorrow trying to get some exceptions, but... Just setting yourself up for your call.

I know, and I don't want to, you know, but no, there is a section in the code.

I had this

up here right now.

Yeah, 3302.2 basically forbids doors and windows from projecting or opening into the public right away.

And I will say, I never, I only complained to you, Jeff.

I never, I wasn't complaining to you guys or the city other than Jeff, but I got smacked in the face by that door when it was first installed.

I know you guys think it looks better, but it's a wide door.

It's wider than three feet and it swings way over the sidewalk all the way to where the tree pit is.

People just walk out of the restaurant.

I told Mr. Fox that.

When we first talked about it, I said that's probably the bigger headache is that even if the code official had said that they didn't have a problem with it, they said the first person you hit is just going to be a PR nightmare kind of thing.

I swear, I wasn't a PR nightmare.

It didn't happen.

I just want to emphasize again is that

I don't know.

I don't know.

I know you've just written the code, but this would come from the code official and certainly from whatever ADA review if necessary.

So I want to stay away from that and make sure that we're clear that even if you all love this thing, if the life safety code people tell me it's a problem, then it's a problem.

Sorry, Carl.

So I guess I want to just maybe help frame this.

I'll try and take some notes about what we talked about.

I agree with Carl if we can give any sort of constructive feedback to the applicant so that when they come back they aren't just starting from scratch.

That's a bonus.

It'll help us out too in the long run.

They also want to echo Jerry's sentiments that we do want to support our businesses up and down Main Street and make sure that they're successful as they can be because that's what keeps thriving city and especially

keeping folks using our historic buildings.

So we appreciate that.

I'll just jump into it and say I would prefer for us to go ahead and approve this until April 1 as recommended in the staff report and then ask that it get taken down and that you all bring us a formal COA application with a real design so that we can do our thing and get into it and get something approved for you so that you've got your plan moving forward.

I'd be willing to support either a permanent solution or a temporary seasonal solution, but I think it does need to be well thought out and designed.

I think, to your point,

taking screws out of the same hole over and over, it's going to wallow that hole out and it won't hold anymore.

So possibly some sort of track system that this thing can clip into and then has toggles or something that would make it easier to remove and reinstall each year or each season would make sense.

And I do wonder whether

Something that would actually go across this whole opening.

That one I'm grappling with a little bit because I recognize that that is a historic step in to the building entrances, but maybe that makes this feel like less of a one-off and you can have a better overall design there.

And then on the air curtain thing, yes, if you could take it down, I think that'd be great.

It does block the transom window over the door.

I would generally agree, except I would also encourage you to come up with a permanent solution for this.

Get a design professional to help you come up with a solution.

I think so, and that's kind of why I asked that question about whether the whole building had a single owner, that then this feature would benefit their multiple tenants, right?

I've got the mic real quick, and I may have said this, possible, something we would look for is maybe holding the face of this thing back, you know, even just an inch or two from the original storefront plane is something we do often when you're kind of adding on to historic building.

It gives a sense of that original opening, right?

You're correct, we've in fact talked to Mr. Fox about the vestibule that was approved at the Jefferson Theater, which is deep inside that.

Now that was for privacy, but it was a full glass wall and opening.

But I'm thinking about like the courthouse and the vestibule area there that they're enclosing in glass.

So there is precedent for doing that.

ADA is another thing.

It's not our purview, but I do wonder how that's going to turn out if this ends up coming in for a building permit.

Speaking of the storefront, I know there's some disagreement with the staff report, but the storefront, I'm pretty certain, is original.

It's kind of like a folded, I think it's bronze.

And it matches what's happening on the adjacent building where Cape Bloom and the one that we just looked at for replacing the windows.

So whatever they come up with, I guess I would just hope that it was something that

It doesn't destroy that storefront every time it attaches to it.

Because it is, although it's original, I think it's still in decent shape.

It's also got some places where there's some holes and stuff, and it looks like it's pretty thin.

I mean, you could damage it pretty easily.

So that would be my one caution, is if we're having them remove and replace something constantly, that it's having to do that without damaging it.

But are we?

I guess what they have, in my understanding that that's not, we don't want to see that again, I'm not sure how you do it better than what they have.

I can't think of any other solution that would, I mean it's not the most attractive thing, but it's also, I can't think of anything that would be

Lighter, unless again you did some structural glass thing like in the Jefferson, but then you still have, at least from my preference, you still have a curtain in the front.

Down at Public, well they have a different situation where they have their own little alcove for their door but they've just strung a heavy curtain across that and that shows up every winter and it seems to be functional and doesn't cause a problem so I don't know, is this specific curtain that they have something that we have a problem with or is it, like what's our

I have some thoughts that I could share.

Similarly, I'm so glad Smirna is a restaurant on Main Street and really want you all to succeed.

So I think whatever we suggest is in the spirit of wanting to help you out.

But I would say materiality is a big one for me.

Mr. Zeemer's comment about pushing it back a few inches would be really helpful.

There's a kind of a jog on the top where the top of the glass meets the ceiling.

I think if you moved it back to that point of the jog, that would be enough for me, sort of moving it beyond the sort of trim detail of that front facade.

You know, on one hand I think the kind of galvanized

aluminum is a little jarring next to the bronze, but it's also I don't have a huge problem with it.

Maybe something a darker color would blend a little bit better.

And I also think a curtain could be nice.

But there's something about the kind of continuation of that glass facade that I find like

I think

fabric material that I know that could, you know, if it pushes back then you wouldn't get the same kind of rain damage there, but some sort of weatherproof material that won't fade too much in the sun.

I think those are all really good points and I think it leads to the

You know, the issue of creating guidelines for these things, I think it's really hard to do.

I think it's the reason why you need to come back and when you submit for a design, we have a chance to provide these kinds of solutions.

It's sort of place specific.

and I will support letting you keep this till April the 1st and then ask you to come back with designs and you can decide whether you want something permanent or

That will be seasonal.

But you've heard some thoughts from the bar about those designs.

And I think it's fine to talk to staff, get a little bit further stuff, and come back to us with your designs.

I actually have a question about the April 1st thing.

I mean, does that work for your business?

Is that going to impinge in your business?

I can't think right offhand how cold it is on April 1st versus April 15th, but I mean, I'm willing to make that date flexible to make sure that if you don't lose anything in the business.

Okay.

No, that's not the reason the curtain, I bought the mini heavy curtains, but it's windy and then it goes over there and then it was not helpful.

And also I, then the idea was coming from the public.

So I saw that, as he mentioned.

But I don't know, are they having an issue, because George is however able.

But this is the only magnet, keeps it straight, doesn't need to push it, and not very easy to open.

I am happy to remove the curtain if the vest side vest stays there because even that's going to be very helpful because the wind is not coming from just one straight direction from everywhere and I can put the leather ear curtain on top of the door and at that point I wouldn't need any door or curtain over there

I understand.

I think it can be as high as it needs to be.

I can't find the meaning curtains and I would be the best.

And also, if you are not okay with any curtains, I am okay to not do anything.

Right.

And just, I think it's important to reiterate, I don't want to speak for you, but it sounds like, you know, one of the ideas was that the point of the curtain is that it's a different material than the beautiful glass facade that's existing.

And our point is that we want to be sure that we're, as much as we can, we support moves that preserve that, you know, that accentuate that.

And so one idea that came up here is a curtain is a different material set in.

It allows that beautiful facade to kind of remain.

It keeps people's attention on it.

It provides you maybe with an opportunity to kind of shield in a certain way the wind and the cold weather.

But I think, again, I think my point of view is that the discussion about whether the left-hand panel is appropriate or not, I think it's

You've got to think about it comprehensively.

Can I just clarify?

I think just to clarify I think there's support to suggest this get removed or to request this to be removed either April 1st or if we want to discuss a later date I'm happy to entertain that but my understanding is this gets removed

Mr. Fox, just to be clear, we want this thing removed in its entirety.

So not just the curtain, the wall needs to come down, the transom over the curtain needs to come down, like the frame needs to all come down, and then we'll see the new design.

Okay, any other thoughts?

So what is our motion?

I think our motion is simply to, is there discussion on the April 1st date?

It sounded like the applicant was okay with that date, so it's a couple, three weeks away.

Right.

Having considered the standards set forth within the city code including the ADC district design guidelines, I move to find the proposed seasonal vestibule as currently installed at 707-709 West Main Street satisfies the BAR's criteria and is compatible with this property.

and other properties in this ADCs district and that the BAR approves the application with the condition that by April 1, 2026, the vestibule in its entirety be removed and impacts of its installation be repaired and that any future vestibule be brought to the BAR with a new certificate of appropriateness application.

I'll second that.

Thank you.

Any discussion?

I think we've had a plenty.

All right.

Mr. Rosenthal?

Yes.

Mr. Timmerman?

Yes.

Mr. Burrow?

Aye.

Mr. Bailey?

Yes.

Mr. Schwartz?

Yes.

I vote yes.

All right.

All clear?

Good.

Thank you much.

Best of luck.

Thank you.

And if you all would mind

So I propose the BAR instruct staff to examine and submit a recommendation by September 1, 2026 regarding how similar and related temporary weatherproofing components should be evaluated and considered consistent with the BAR criteria.

These recommendations should include possible conditions of approval, including suggested time periods when temporary components will be permitted.

and or the color, size, placement, even installation methods for such products.

Do you all agree with that?

OK, thanks.

And one other thing is to make sure that they understand that the removal now is total, even though that was NOS.

That was clear.

This Friday it will be inspected by the zoning inspector and I will inform the zoning inspector.

So this will become a actually somewhat of a condition of resolving the zoning violation.

So that was a remedy for the zoning violation was the COA.

So the COA and also a COA is a

is a function of zoning.

You all are in our code of development.

That's why we have a BAOR.

So that when someone is in violation of a COA, it is in fact a zoning violation.

That's why they were cited for this because of the fact that a COA had not been there.

Especially because you've got doors one after the other out swinging.

It's very true.

That's why I'm serious.

Maybe it's lighter.

I appreciate your patience.

And it's a good indication of where I've said the PAR, we're here to find you all, staff, find solutions.

And I appreciate your patience with staff and explaining it and certainly working with the applicants.

Sure.

Next up.

And I do think Mr. Timmerman's comment earlier about the fact that all these situations are different.

I think y'all helping us kind of with some guidelines is good, but we still want to see them, each one.

So this is one that's very dear and dear to Carl's heart.

I used to, every third, I guess every second Friday, bang on that window midnight and he'd be back there, hunched over his desk, designing something.

But this is a COA request for alterations to the facade of this building at 208 3rd Street Northeast, across 3rd Street from the library.

as we can determine it was constructed in 1960.

That photograph there is, it's undated but I'm guessing it's probably from the 70s.

It was Merrill Lynch eventually at one point.

It was a what?

It's a, because of the year of the survey for the downtown Charlottesville Historic District, and that's actually the Charlottesville Historic District, which is also called the Charlottesville Albemarle Historic Courthouse.

I don't like that one.

So the Charlottesville Historic District.

this wasn't old enough to be considered in the National Register survey.

So you look around town trying to, we looked at the building next to over from VMDO and Kate said well look these sort of

reflecting these Williamsburg-esque windows on there.

And we found the home photograph of that.

And it's big plate glass.

But to the extent we can discern, what you're looking at is, at least as far as the, it is 25 light.

We counted it one day and came up with 20.

An hour later, we came up with 25.

So it's checking for sanity.

But the 25 light,

Windows are original, the trim on the outside, the pilasters, the paneling, everything appears to be what you see in this photograph.

On the, there have been on either side of the entry door wall sconces have been added and it appears that above the

The transom, some crown molding has been installed over the trim, but otherwise the frame and the transom appear to be original.

The door has been replaced.

And the request is to change the glazing on the storefronts to full lights.

with the four lights above.

The non-historic doors are going to remain, the trans will remain, the wall sconces will be changed out, and then on either side of that entrance alcove new windows will be installed in the wall.

And that at some point, we don't have the details on it, but

what do you call that, the floor?

Threshold.

Coming up to the threshold right at the door.

So they want to tile that floor and I don't have any information on that but I probably will review that administratively as long as it's not a sign or anything too garish unless you all have some feelings about it.

We were torn on the replacement of these windows.

On one side, it really is a characteristic of it and it is part of the original building.

On the other, this is somewhat similar to Valley Road, this is an adaptive reuse of

rather unforgettable building.

So there's some pros and cons to it.

I think that if we rigidly want to apply the guideline we would not change out the windows.

However, given the age of this, I think that as long as we were able to

to document some photographs, some measurements showing what was there and that that's retained if someone ever wanted to put the windows back in.

Again, the changing the windows does not prohibit that change in the future.

Of course, the thing about VLT, the glass being clear, we also recommend a condition that it's always an opportunity, building like this, to

require that they remove, to the extent possible, wires, cables, conduits, and there's a lot of them on the south side of the building to clean that up.

On the north side of the building, there's some trash receptacles that are kept there on the side.

I would recommend putting some screening up for that.

And as I said, anything, allow us to take a look at the tile, unless you all had any reservations about that.

That's where we stand on it.

Yeah, the history said that there was a renovation in 1968.

And are they taking out these 25 panes on each side because they are energy inefficient?

So yeah, come on up.

So I am the new owner of this building, Jennifer Glickman, and the purpose and intent of the future use is to be an interior design studio.

I'm an interior designer.

And then also a retail space for home wares.

OK.

Thank you.

All right.

Any other?

Did you want to?

Is that all?

OK. All right.

Any questions from the public, either here or online?

Yeah, sure.

Staff had asked about the, or mentioned the trash receptacles.

Yes.

Should I just hang?

You're welcome to do that without our approval.

The intent is to make this a charming destination.

We don't have parking, so I want to make this feel warm and welcoming so that people want to come visit.

So you have one paint color selected for the entire front.

I would just offer this one.

Paint color, that's something staff can approve.

So if they were, you know, Ms. Brooke Glickman came in this fall and wanted to change the colors, I would take a look at it and weigh it.

I used to be adamantly against that sort of color palette until

I don't know, maybe five or six years ago, Robert Watkins shared with me an image from Williamsburg and said, so you don't like this.

And in Williamsburg, this is very much a common color palette.

So I had to yield on that.

But I would also yield to you all if you feel strongly, but I otherwise

Yes, I've been working with Sarasand tile on appropriate materials that would withstand weather, but most of all the salt.

Because the salt has eroded, it's hard to see in this rendering, but the brick below the wood portion of the facade, so we've been re-pointing that.

You could actually see through some of the former mortar locations into the interior of the building.

I don't think that's something I'm very comfortable looking at unless it comes in with dancing pickles or something.

You never know.

Yeah, I wasn't sure if I'd submit that separately to a separate person.

Okay.

But the hope was potentially two locations.

One is above the door on the wood portion of the façade, similar to the historic image that you had of a moment ago, and then potentially something etched onto the glass.

There is a flat roof.

Yes, the HVAC is up on the roof, so we are planning to remove the current defunct HVAC unit that's there.

Yeah, that's something we'll take care of if the new ordinance requires a rooftop.

Our new HVAC unit will be much smaller than the current one.

My contractor who's on Zoom said that the current HVAC unit that's sitting on the roof was installed.

I was wondering if you could talk us through your decision to get rid of the divided lights.

Certainly.

I hope to bring my clients into this space, but also welcome people who happen to be strolling around the downtown mall on a nice afternoon.

So on the interior of the space, on both the left and right side, we are building platforms.

And on top of the platforms, I'll have vignettes of furniture, decorative objects, things like that.

So just welcoming

warm scenes to draw people inside.

And having the Muntins, as they are today, block a lot of that view.

Yes.

A lot of it's falling apart, yeah.

Oh.

I don't think so.

So it could have been,

Yes.

So you'd replace both of them?

Yes.

I'm going somewhere with this.

Sorry, the structural integrity of the doors has been compromised.

Yes, something very similar with glass above.

So there's a photo that's called Shapiro Office, August 1974, which I would venture to guess maybe those are the original doors.

Basically got a single panel.

and the lower portion of the door still glazed above, but they are slightly different than, do you have that one on this slide show?

That's a door that you can get pretty easily made to look like that.

I wouldn't object to that.

Certainly, yeah.

If it's an applied grill,

Yeah, these will be a single.

There are specs that I printed that may receive today.

They actually do have them, Jeff.

How are they in the?

I have a parent.

Putting something on my desk is, uh, putting something on my desk.

I think the important thing particularly with the large sash is that this is a true storefront and this is where that clear glass specification becomes important.

When people are walking outside, they're not looking in a mirror, they're actually seeing through the glass through that higher VLT.

Now, we have as a matter of

Guidance established a 70% VLT as clear glass, but there is some flexibility in that, but you might, if you could ask Carl what they can, what the VLT is at.

Okay.

So this, um, um, cut sheet has, uh, eight lights on the transom of the big windows.

Um, there's an alternate.

No, you're sorry.

Okay.

So, well, we were looking at both, so we're open to both options.

Um, we have explore, I should leave it at that.

We've explored many renderings and, um,

This one.

Any more questions?

Let me go to comments.

Any comments from the public or online?

No.

Okay.

Now we can jump in.

I think conceptually it's a good idea.

I'm looking at the rendering and your cut sheet and I'm seeing like two different situations.

I think in the rendering I'm seeing like

the bottom bar of the divided light portion higher than the, I guess it would be helpful to see elevations of this straight on and, or hear your intention.

Are those windows supposed to be the same height with the same

You know, transom top being the same dimension.

I think it would be better if they matched.

Like in this version, you see how the bottom of the divided light portion is higher than the side wall.

And then that's different than the door.

Yes.

It's better reflected in the cut sheets that those lines will be consistent.

So the current, what's currently in the transom is the six lights which are in the old photograph.

So this is a, or is the intent to change

It is.

It is.

It also looks like your cut sheet says the windows are coconut cream clad sash exterior, but you're showing the blue painted.

Are you planning to paint the cladding?

So I guess I'll just go ahead.

I can get behind some of this proposal.

I can get behind the tile on the floor.

I can get behind the sconce lights.

I can definitely get behind replacing the doors with original.

I can get behind the walls, the new windows in the alcove walls.

I can't get behind replacing the big windows myself, just because I think they are one of the major character defining features of this building, along with maybe the pilasters.

Other than that, there's not much else going for this particular building.

That's just where I stand.

We're a board, there's a panel, so I may get outvoted.

But I just find it hard to agree to replace what's, as far as we can tell, the original windows.

I think they are kind of a storefront.

you know they're large even if they've got muntins breaking it up and so I do think you could still still kind of have your vignettes and whatnot personally but so that's just where I am.

I guess I disagree with my colleague here.

I think that getting rid of those would be fine.

There was originally an office building, and this is now going to be a storefront.

And I think that the idea of displaying your wares is exactly what you need to do, and this would definitely get in the way.

If you go to this original Walson & Company issue,

Clearly, they have blinds in the window.

They didn't intend for people to look in necessarily.

So I think that the design is appropriate, actually, for what you're intending to reuse this.

Sadly, a rather undistinguished building.

I don't think the building's precious enough to warrant preservation of the windows.

They don't represent handcraft, they don't represent something that can't be replaced.

I tend to agree.

I think form follows function in this case, and it's going to be a boon for you to have a large storefront window.

What I will say is that I would like to see an action.

I don't know who brought up the idea of bringing up an elevation.

I think it would be good for you to show a true building elevation.

Because especially now that we know that's an AI rendering, who knows what is going to come.

Is it going to be, you know, eight panes?

Is it going to be seven panes?

And that stuff does tend to make a difference, those details, whether you align, whether we decide that it's a good idea to align the door, the head of the door with the bottom of the window or not.

We won't know until we see it as a building elevation.

So I think I'd like to see that just to make sure it's, you know, we don't miss anything.

You don't miss anything.

It's a new design.

I don't know.

So there's a couple of different ways this can go.

We can either vote for approval as is or with conditions.

We can deny it, which doesn't sound like that's going to happen.

You can request a deferral, which means you've got your own timeline to bring it back to us.

Or we can request a deferral, which means you have to bring it back to us within a month.

I think that's right, Jeff.

So just letting you know kind of the next steps.

We'll shake out here in a minute.

I think I'm in support of the project.

I think it would be important to see the elevations.

But I'm also maybe comfortable saying if the windows are the same height and the

Muntins are continuous across the multiple units, the window units.

I might not need to see it again, I think.

But I do see in your cut sheet again that windows are different sizes, the vertical sizes.

to ask about things.

I noticed that, but I was assuming it's because the window on the bottom has a little frame around it, while the one on the top doesn't.

Is that what's causing the difference?

And one of them is 78 5-8 inches tall, and the other one is 81 9-16 inches tall, so there's just about three inches there that's different.

Right.

I just didn't know.

I mean I would offer, it seems that the most, something with the longest lead time is ordering these windows.

So if there's something that you would like to see modified,

Yeah, I mean, this is where I wish we had a big whiteboard, and yeah, you could just, so if there's something, some alignment that you would like to see, you know, doodle it for me and we can all agree on it.

Yeah, and this AI image is showing a big mullion in between, but that's not what's happening on that side window.

So what you're looking at is we've got this line on those, we've got the large windows, and then of course we've got that, well the spring line whatever there at the door, between the door and the transom.

I think the door is never going to align.

I think the driver might be the ceiling height of the alcove.

That line could conceivably align.

They're not going to be the same height.

You want the bottom of that.

You want that horizontal along the track.

I don't think we're the designers.

All I want to see is I want somebody who's going to build it to show me what it's going to be.

Because right now we don't know.

So I'm comfortable.

I mean, primarily you're OK with replacing the two storefronts and with installing

a window on either side of the door.

What the question is is that we're clear on with that Spring line and if the applicant can demonstrate what that alignment is, I can circulate that to you all.

Again, because you seem prepared to approve the COA.

You are fine with these alterations.

there's a detail that you want some clarification on.

That would not, it's not as if, because I won't sign off on the building permit until, or the COA until we're comfortable with this, but it is, we have in the past asked for some clarification that has been provided after the fact.

So as long as that's stated clearly I think in your condition and that you express

which is it that you prefer as the result and instruct staff to confirm that.

Can you hear me?

Yes you can.

Yes, the answer on the size of the window, the original frame on the front is staying in, we're just replacing the sash, and that's why the difference looks, they're not the same size on the drawings, they will actually be the same size on, when you look at this, the lines will all line up, the cell will line up,

and the top line and the trail zones are lined up on the windows.

The door is completely different because it's a door.

I was trying to line the windows up because in the room you're looking at the windows.

The doors are a nylon door similar to what was there originally, but I think it's a tube panel underneath.

Just because that would be a custom door then.

And they're like 10 times as much to have a custom door made with a single panel underneath.

Other than that, as far as the windows go, they will look exactly the same height inside and out.

It's just we're replacing the sash, not the window frame on the other one.

Does that make sense?

Yes.

and they will have a bar between the SDLs, which is standard for us.

So that's what makes, if you're looking at the drawings, they just look different because it's the height of the window on the inside and the front of the window slides down a little bit because that one has a following still on the original window.

The actual window itself is exactly the same size.

So that the line is maintained?

Yes.

Yes, it can.

Oh, there's enough height there?

Yes, there is.

The only thing, we're not taking the original one to sell out because I didn't want to take, I used to do historic preservation so I knew there was going to be some issues.

I did that in and around Caroline County, all over King George and all that.

So we duplicated the exact size, height, the width is obviously a lot narrower because it's fitting in the alcove and so everything else will line up.

The Spring Line will be the same all the way around, except for the door, because it's only a 6-8 door and it's a 19-inch light above the transom.

It's going to be a different height there, but when you're in each room, on the interior, those windows, everything lines up.

It's the original one that didn't line up with the 48th or so.

And the light configuration of that transom is exactly what's on the details that you have of the window.

That's the actual order.

So that gives you, I don't remember how many lights it is, but it's more than what's in the structure.

Or do you all want to see it again?

It sounds like possibly some more fleshed out design would get submitted to Jeff for his review in circulation and sign off.

Just to verify.

Verification, thank you.

That's the word.

I'm not going to make the motion, but just remind folks

Never mind, you got tile in here.

I'll do it.

Having considered the standards set forth within the city code, including the ADC district design guidelines, I move to find the proposed window replacements and alterations at 208 3rd Street Northeast satisfies the bar's criteria and is compatible with this property

and the others.

VLT of not less than 70%, all orphaned service lines, cables, wires, and unnecessary attachments when the exterior of the building are removed.

And that the staff review and approve the tile for the alcove and that the staff also get a

Verification.

Can I offer one caveat?

And that is on the clear glass definition, we refer to our, I don't remember the date,

of the guidance of the BAR's 2018 guidance on the definition of clear glass that allows some flexibility.

I mean 70% is pretty high and it's not always

immediately available.

So sometimes you might end up with 65 or 68, but that was acknowledged in that direction.

I'm going to amend it to say that the glass meet the 2018 standards for clear glass.

In the policy.

Second.

It is a clear glass, but it'll be a loaded glass also, so it doesn't fade everything out of the building.

Thank you.

All right, we'll call a vote.

Mr. Schwartz.

Yes.

Mr. Bailey.

Yes.

Mr. Burrell.

Yes.

Mr. Timmerman.

Yes.

Mr. Rosenthal.

Yes.

Ms. Taveny.

Yes.

Thank you.

All right, that's all of our new business.

I expected Carl to be far more emotional about that.

Alright, so very quickly, one, and just to ignore what's on here, one we have advertised for right now.

The landscape architect position, we've received some applicants, but council's not going to make, I thought we had at least one.

They bailed.

There was a question from someone I know actually about the link not working.

I was told by Kirk of Council that they were in the process of opening up the application period and so they had not yet activated the BAR link, but that is active and it is available in the drop-down menu.

Correct, yes.

I did reach out, but I think that's yes.

We have an opening deadline.

Council makes appointments on a quarterly basis.

I inquired if when there was a vacancy due to someone stepping down,

they could expedite that but it appears that the policy is to do that on a quarterly basis regardless of when someone has stepped down.

On, and then I'll defer to Kate, but on the 218 West Market Street cultural resource assessment, didn't have to read it but didn't know if anybody did or had any questions but staff finds it that satisfies one of the conditions of the COA for 218 West Market and

I mean, unless anybody had any reservations or questions, that then would be added to the BAR archive.

Again, meeting the condition of the COA.

I'm so confused.

I thought we were talking about Preservation Month.

We will.

I can't flip my eyes.

Oh, I thought, OK, my bad.

I thought that was who we included in the link.

No.

All right.

We will include that.

We will circulate that.

And it did complete a phase one of the site at 218 West Market, the site of the Arvo Lodger, where the new hotel will go.

And then on

I just wanted to bring you up to speed on the fountains quickly.

Kate and I were on a very

on a phone call a couple of weeks ago with a who's who of people in the city talking about efforts to free the fountain.

There continue to be concerns expressed by the ADA coordinator and the city's risk manager.

So the conclusion of that meeting was the Parks and Rec was going to retain a qualified

A designer qualified in ADA and accessibility issues to evaluate what options were available or might be available in order to remove the barriers around the fountain.

So I don't have any updates on that, but I did appreciate, again, your patience and help the last time we talked about it.

This is a, um, I don't have the printout with me.

I guess what I'm wondering is,

Shouldn't there also be someone on the team who is either a landscape architect and also is versed in historic sites, because technically it's a historic site.

The big hang-up is that the disagreement on

whether the various solutions that have been proposed meet ADA or risk analysis.

So I think that's what they're asking someone is that do these things that have been proposed, these ideas that have been floated, are any of them viable relative to these concerns?

One quick one, going back to the 218 West Market,

No, we're in good shape there.

So that's the stuff that I had on here.

And I think as far as the mall, 50th, there had been discussion.

I had been asked about installing a plaque similar to the one, the 25th anniversary plaque, installing it on one of the granite piers there next to the central fountain.

because it would be installing something permanently onto an element part of the original design.

I said that it was appropriate to take it to the BAR unless there was direction from council or the city manager's office, but I would not, I wasn't willing to

to okay that without you all addressing it formally.

So we'll see where that goes.

I suspect you all don't have any issue with it.

I should talk to Brett Gasterner about it.

So we're not replacing it?

It would be adding another one addressed the 50th.

I did recommend it to text.

Somebody installed one on the wall of the draft house.

We can look at it this evening.

I don't know who.

I haven't been able to determine that.

I have been asked about installing a plaque, and there is a standard plaque.

It would just be a matter of where and in what manner.

There are little 8x10 plaques.

I have no problem doing it.

The friends of Charlottesville asked me about doing it, but we certainly can.

Last thing and then I'm going to hand it over to Kate for Preservation Month.

The conversation down the hall after you all left, the engineer, and that's the engineering firm hired to design

the crossing, not comfortable with the monolithic pavers, although when I went back again, there's, so there's two rows, one is the two by two and the other is the 12 by, I'm sorry, the two foot by two foot and one is two foot by one foot.

He said he might be comfortable okay with a 12 by 24, but that the two foot by two foot, he just wasn't convinced that they would be

would hold up in traffic.

So the question that they asked me, they were still debating it.

They may still be down there now.

The question they asked me was, if the engineer felt strong about going with the smaller modules,

and maybe that's the 12 by 24 on one and then the 4 by 8 mod, you know, essentially bricks on another band.

If you had, or I can circulate this, since this isn't a decision, I can certainly circulate some more information.

We kind of discuss it online if you want, but

So that's where the engineer just wasn't comfortable.

He feels that it'll, the large paver will fracture.

The answer was that two foot by two foot is not going to work.

12 inch by 24 inch.

more comfortable with preference for a four inch by eight inch modular brick.

We can, however, I have those pieces they left, they're heavy, but we can cart them down the mall.

They did ask if by the end of this week the color schemes that are available in those two, if we would walk down and take a look at them.

I'd be happy to do that sometime this week just to look at it.

So that's a little bit of an update on that.

So this idea is actually part of our intern, Sarah, who's been working with us since last October.

She knew very early on this is something I always wanted to do since I began with the city.

It's just that staff often is told, you know, hey, you have capacity.

And so with her help, she's organized

the preservation event for the city open to the public.

It's on May 5th and we've kicked around an idea of a more professional geared session separately and then before that, so it was during the work day.

Not quite sure where that status is sound.

I know Jeff had mentioned having some sort of round table discussion or just to check in to talk about what we've all been up to.

But what I do know is that we've confirmed at City Space on May 5th.

It's a Tuesday from 5 to 730.

The city has opened up City Space to the public to have all sorts of organizers and sponsors there to celebrate preservation, which is the same week as the National Preservation Month.

I'm really excited about our preservation fair that's happening.

If you guys can make it, that would be great.

We'd love to see you.

So far, we have a few booth stations.

So the thought is from 5 to 5.30, there's going to be kind of a registration, getting people in, seeing who's here, and then time for people to grab some food and mingle.

and then from 5.30 to 7.00 we're planning to have open house style booths.

So one table we're planning to have is the Historical Society having a research table so people can learn how to do property research or genealogy research, stuff like that.

We're also working with our GIS specialist in NBS to

Work on a story map for how people can create story maps for their families.

We're also trying to have a fun station.

Right now the idea is to do a guess the photo when it was taken or what the location is and hopefully there are prizes to distribute.

We also are planning to have a tax credits booth so anyone interested in that would be able to talk to a specialist.

Hopefully someone from DHR.

We are planning on that.

We are also getting involvement from the Historic Resources Committee so that people from their group can come and talk to people about

how to join, what the Historic Resources Committee does.

We are also working with Parks and Rec, specifically Steve Gaines, about tree preservation on the downtown mall and how they're going to restore, or not restore, but figure out different ways to use wood from the trees on the mall.