Board of Architectural Review Meeting   9/15/2020

So just keep that in mind that everything is subject to FOIA.

Those two modules, the chat and the Q&A, the chat is only reserved for panelists and the Q&A and chat function are not available for attendees anymore due to security breaches that happened in prior meetings.

Okay, great.

Sure.

But throughout the meeting, please feel free to ask me additional questions if you have any.

There's a project I have to recuse myself from, so do I just hit mute and that's it?

So yes, if anyone has any comments that are either not on our agenda or on those items I've listed, now is the time to speak.

Okay.

Do we have any motions to approve it or anyone like to pull anything?

Do we need to clarify anything with regards to the coal tower or what's the killing?

And I guess that central location.

I just have an issue with the central location, but I have to pull the coal tower from the consent agenda.

Okay.

Second.

Lewis?

Aye.

Langel?

Aye.

Ron is here.

OK, good.

All right.

I just want to say that for the coal tower, I don't see Ashley Davies in attendance, but I'll make sure to communicate anything that you decide with her.

and XYZ.

Well, I'll echo what we said at the last meeting, which I agreed with, and I think some other members might.

I think we should probably... Jeff, is that all the introduction you want to give?

So if Robert's got something that he can throw up, that would be

Sorry about that, Cheri.

I just want to make sure we.

No, I'm glad you.

Were you going to ask for public comment, Carl?

I will if, yeah, as long as if you guys don't want to present anything, I will.

And I can keep this up if we want to ask for public comment now.

And we've been given two options for the sign, I think being a typical bronze, or yeah, bronze sign, and then it looks like an aluminum sign with black letters.

Thank you for clarifying.

Do we have any questions from the public?

If so, please use the raise hand feature.

B.A.R., do you have any questions?

And so I'm just wondering if someone could direct me to where the guidelines really talk about that.

And I would suggest that it be posted at eye level, centered aligned at eye level, almost like with a picture frame.

Thank you.

Please raise your hand if you have one.

I'm looking at the list and I don't see any raised hands.

All right.

Comments from the BAR.

Yeah, I got one.

Go for it.

James, you want to go?

So that might behoove it to be put on one end or the other or something like that.

and is currently evidenced by just slapping it in the building.

I think I should still have it in my files if you'd like to see that right now as well.

It does great.

And my thing won't

That would be really helpful before we go too much further down the road on this.

Awesome.

But it may happen.

We don't want to lose the chair.

Breck.

I think Breck can keep you guys in line.

Yeah, my computer's not letting me access my image, so.

Here, let me, I'm gonna share the screen now, I found the site then.

Oh man, Ashley's gonna have a heart attack when she finds out we pulled it.

Little background, this is something that BAR was discussing for two years prior to, I even came on board, so this is.

It does appear there's pavement directly in front of the coal tower.

So is this the proposed site?

Yes.

The coal tower, yeah, is the circle.

Where's the base that we were looking at?

It's close to where that fence is, I think.

And around the circular structure is the elevated coal tower.

And so the wall of the bocce court right here, is that the wall that we were seeing?

All right, so you can see that.

Those are grasses that are about three or four feet tall.

I thought things were relatively low, but it's,

It's a very unclear plan, I have to say.

Yeah, that's why I always envisioned it on the fence.

Is there any more information on it or is that it?

Unfortunately, this is all we have.

Correct.

Yeah.

Right.

I think we have enough of an information about what the sign looks like and I think that this sign would work on either side of that concrete wall and I'd be comfortable with approving that tonight.

When we're looking here, you mean like around the corner from where it is?

On the right or left side.

OK.

I think he's right.

I mean, I think we did decide on putting it to one side or the other, which is the only reason I was asking, and I was wondering if we had missed something.

So I don't think there'll be an issue with people reading it.

What we would say is center line on eye level and to the left or the right and not centered on the wall would probably be sufficient.

I think it's more appropriate for the industrial context, but I imagine either could be argued to be within our guidelines.

Rick, would you like to make a motion that positions the sign and then recommends your preferred material?

Do we not?

I've got the motion from August for the light fixtures.

Yeah.

And I think after that, Brett can insert his details.

And the board expresses a preference for the stainless steel or aluminum option.

I accept Mr. Gastinger's friendly amendment to my motion.

Can I second it?

Lengel?

Aye.

Okay.

Can I continue talking or?

Yeah, sorry, I didn't mean to interrupt.

Any questions?

I'm sorry, Kevin.

And so with that, I'll just go ahead and open it up to any questions the board may have.

Let's start first with, are there any questions from the public?

I don't see anything.

Did everyone get that?

That should have been in an email.

Just generally.

And the other with some clarifying questions on the gable roof trim details at the rake.

Okay, thank you.

You seem to hone in pretty tightly on the one brand and I'm just kind of curious what the reasoning was behind that.

OK.

um the actually uh the porch proper I'm assuming not the frieze or I'm not totally sure what that is directly above you know you see the hand drawn sketch uh the drafted one with the column and then the um architrade but it looks like there's another column on top so I'm assuming that's actually the porch band is that correct?

That was just a reference, showing the alignment of the columns.

And that may be more the model than the actual workout detail.

And it looks like that cove mold piece at the top probably, you know, but

There's just something a little weird about it.

It's a combination of a lot of different forces that we're trying to resolve.

Basically.

I just couldn't figure it out in the drawings.

Yeah, it dives into that portico and then the valley flashing from the roof.

The solution would be to pull that pediment back down in line with the eave, but I think this is where.

There's an example on I think on Madison of where the

So the roof, the bottom of the roof is low level and just where you have the porticum, much deeper entablature than the facial board.

The central photograph there.

I think that does kind of address the unique condition we have here, though, where the windows on Chancellor Street are bumped up against

Right.

And that would require a drop in that, you know, that beam bore, the beam around our front portico pretty significantly below the top of our window header.

You should look at the building directly across the street, this one, because they do that.

But it causes other problems.

To me, it's not a picture of my dog or something, but you never know.

But part of the character, I think, is that it's dealing with specific design issues and resolution of those design issues are sometimes not in the textbook, but they're part of the language of design resolution.

I'm not, I don't see any immediate way to solve it, but it's just kind of your box in the corner there is from what I can tell.

of the main building.

I don't think there's any easy way for you to do that because you've got an interesting condition around the other side.

Yeah, the tough part is the hip roof, so they, you know, they kind of dictate the spring point of the framing.

So if I'm noticing anything more about it.

I like to see the note change to say preserve the historic frame, lights, and repair as required.

And I think other members did too.

I certainly do.

So just to clarify that note.

and the things that are in rough shape need to be conserved, preserved and repaired and lights that have been replaced or were done badly and you have to replace them, then I would prefer to see them replicate the appearance of the original.

Thank you.

Is anyone dead set on changing the portico?

Carl, do you want me to share the image that you shared in the email?

And of course, this is a new building that we're looking at, but similar condition.

I think we can decide if we need any clarification.

when you align the architrave of the portico with the building itself, that second story, you've got to lean down to get a view getting on the portico.

It looks like a transformer or something, you know, it's kind of crushing.

But I agree with the statement, I don't know if it was Ron that said that y'all have done a nice job responding to all our comments from last meeting, and I appreciate that.

So I'm fine with the current state of the design.

And it really is a nice result, so thank you.

I think you guys have worked hard on this and done a good job.

Yeah, definitely.

And do we need to include any language about preserving the front door?

Just jotted some things down.

Having considered the standards set forth within the city code, including city design guidelines for site design and element, new construction and additions and rehabilitation, I move to find that the proposed alterations and additions satisfy the BAR's criteria and are compatible with the property, this property and other properties in the corner ADC district, and that the BAR approves the application with the following modifications, Cheri?

Understanding that some of it is not original, as the applicants pointed out.

So well said.

I accept that amendment.

I'll second.

Lengel.

Aye.

Lewis.

Aye.

Aye.

You know, ask the fraternity that they can remove the sign that's up on the wall or the post or wherever, wherever we put it.

All right, guys.

Jeff, you know, it's going to end up on the retunded that you let them move it.

Next is 112 Park Street.

Yes, I'm going to bail.

And Tim, before you bail, is there anyone other than Paul Josie who will be speaking on behalf of the project?

No, I think just Paul.

OK, thank you.

So I'll be turning off my video as well for the discussion and recusing.

And it's just always good to kind of know what our review actually results in.

So what is your pleasure on that?

I'm trying to remember if I saw it.

I have it.

I don't know.

Thank you, Robert.

I guess with that, Paul, would you like to present on this?

That works.

All right.

And I thank you for your time.

Use the raise hand feature on Zoom.

But should I unmute this person, even though I don't recognize the number?

Can you do a breakout room with that person and see if there's a project they'd love to speak to?

And I apologize that this didn't work out.

Does that, do you know what that is?

Hey, hey Robert, what's the question?

And I just didn't know if the protocol would be to unmute them or not.

And then if they would like to speak.

Otherwise, we can move on.

Questions from the board?

Thank you.

Paul, could you please just clarify the position of the fence, the proposed position of the new fence?

Okay, thank you.

I believe you do.

You can see the current fact it's a mix of aging wood pickets and metal wire that extends in the bottom right and then the bottom two images.

Is there any concern with the type of equipment that you'll be using to excavate as far as weight on the tree roots?

So then we can work that area to get in planting soil.

I also got an email just now from Miss Kanter, and she wanted to note that the wood pile that's noted in the plan is now gone.

Okay, thank you.

Then can he give his response to the messages?

If in the design guidelines, there is something that raises a concern about the landscaping, the fencing, the treatment of the trees and landscape, that's all that the board can focus on.

Thank you, Jeff.

In the meantime, I'm sure you can continue your deliberations.

Are you aware of any proposed changes to this design or this is the design that we're voting on?

It's also, you could have a full turnaround in their front yard if you wanted.

And so I think, you know, focus on the design guidelines and relative to this request.

Are there other questions from the board?

I understand.

And I just want to make sure if we, if this was something that was, had plans for deferral or something, but we should vote on what we have and vote per the guidelines.

Yeah, I just wanted to let you know that I'm in the process of helping Miss Cantor log in.

We can wait until she's ready.

Would that be helpful?

Yeah, could we maybe take a five minute break if that's possible?

We'll be right back.

Thank you.

Jamie.

Jeff, are we going to see your hair the entire night?

I appreciate that.

But we are legally bound to act on this.

I second the motion.

Lengel.

Aye.

Mr. Gastinger.

Aye.

Thank you.

Robert, you got it?

What were some of the details that were requested?

I don't have the minutes in front of me from the meeting.

OK, yeah.

What are the colors?

It was submitted supplementally yesterday.

Okay.

Sorry.

Yes.

Are we ready for the, would the applicants like to make a presentation?

If you would like us to kind of go on the record with the kind of design intentions and presentation, Bill will certainly give you a brief discussion of that to enter the record, or we could go right to questions if you have your desire.

I mean, if there's anything you want to highlight, or I'm fine going straight into diving right into this, but up to you guys.

We can go talk about that in more detail in response to questions, but it may be easiest at this hour, a better use of time simply to respond to questions that you all have about the design.

In kind of working through the design and talking with our civil engineer and issues of permeability and just aesthetics, we are now proposing that we'll do that front entry in brick pavers on the sand bed and it will be designed in a means to be that as a permeable surface.

Well, let's start with questions from the public.

If you're a member of the public, can you raise your hand using the raise hand feature?

Questions from the board.

And I'm just curious if you're running into issues with the city related to that, certainly raises some issues related to the neighborhood.

but that is the, that's the goal behind it.

or is it something else happening there?

So what you're seeing then in that elevation drawing is just the stone wall running in front of the concrete wall.

That helps me understand that.

And then to the right of the stone wall is just the remaining grade kind of warping down to the existing parking.

Is it going to be fiber cement panels with fiber cement battens that look like the window trim or?

So it'll look like it's fully integrated with the trim detailing on the windows.

I think you had some bollards.

And what is there a fourth light?

You have an LED strip light.

So it'd be a recessed light up there as well, meeting the kind of minimum standard lighting for the parking lot.

So that's our philosophy is that we want to see the light where the light should be, only where the light should be and not actually see the fixtures to the extent possible.

That's like a dimmable and or timing, that kind of stuff, you know, where you can actually knock it down and then have motion sensors or something.

Yeah, the goal would be to provide the, you know, the minimum code requirement for lighting and so to have it illuminating at that level at night, that would be the minimum level required by code for the parking.

We're not trying to twinkle on the building.

You know, if it's, for instance, if you were to dim it down and have detectors, so that when you drove in and picked up and then went back down in 10 minutes, that kind of thing.

Yeah.

What's the other place right behind you there?

It's a hair salon.

Yeah.

I'm wondering if it would be helpful for the applicants to go through the supplemental materials they've just submitted yesterday in case there are any questions from board members or a need for additional details.

Yeah, I mean, I've read through them, but why don't you, Bill or Tom, if you guys don't mind quickly summarizing.

Tom, would you like to go through those?

And we're certainly willing to provide additional information and answer additional questions with more graphics, more drawings as required.

Please use the raise your hand feature if you have one.

OK.

I also think softening up that concrete edge with the additional reeling also makes sense from a scale standpoint.

I think it would be a bad precedent for this street.

In other words, I think softer surfaces would be nice, but I think being able to unify it because they have to accommodate the cars is an issue.

Well, everybody has to accommodate cars.

Right, but in the front yard is the problem.

So let's just get rid of yards.

Get rid of the cars.

Well, where the cars are going is, that's not changing.

Right.

I think there's a project a little further down that we recently approved a replacement for a stone wall and they've paved their front yard, but they still have a border of planting around it, which really helps.

successful small plantings.

There's just going to be benches and not going to be planters then.

You guys do have two planters, I think, perpendicular to the house?

But it is something that if you want us to, we will continue to study and make alternate proposals if that's what's required.

kind of glare or heat island, there's something that happens when your eye doesn't, nothing breaks those hard surfaces.

So I'm always, this is Jody, I'm always in favor of adding more green when you can, but otherwise I believe that I'm satisfied with the design and believe that it complies with our guidelines.

I basically agree with Jody on this one as well.

Are there items, any other items anybody sees that they feel like they need to see for the record in this?

Just want to echo Brett Cinnamon.

Appreciate that.

Any other thoughts, anyone?

What is that, a cotopa?

Ginkgo immediately to the north.

Is it gum?

Ginkgo.

I was just curious more about just, and this isn't necessarily something they can address, I was just curious about the general level of shade there.

Directly across the street, no.

Yeah.

Yeah.

It's not the most cohesive street to be sure.

From the photograph.

Were you asking for locusts with stain?

Yeah, I'm curious.

I think we were looking at the liriope and the shrubbery that's in the water.

Okay.

I think it's a really nice project.

Let me see this again.

So is there a way to go forward with this with some recommendations or amendations?

Something that can't be legally binding, but can at least say, yeah, when this comes back, we might be able to put on the consent agenda next month.

So the idea is to get this onto the consent agenda if possible?

I guess about any major changes beyond what we've talked about tonight.

Is that how we would do that?

A general consensus that we find this design meets our guidelines and that the information presented in the supplemental packet meets our guidelines and we would like to see a revision to the front to introduce some more vegetation.

I think that this is what we're going to get into later with our discussion.

Jeff.

So the deferral says this is coming back next month, the deferral from the BAR.

So that will allow us.

You don't need a request from the applicant.

So my recommendation would be that you guys request a deferral and then we can make a motion based off of that.

Speaking for the applicant, we'll request a deferral, please.

I think that'd be something we want to see because the picture's got like Carolina blue in there and that's just not going to fly.

That's Buford Middle School blue.

Yeah, I feel like the front entry is too much of a mishmash of stuff from previous submittals and then this submittal and we really need to kind of give you kind of a hold together submittal that reflects everything we've talked about.

Second.

Lengel?

Aye.

Thank you very much.

I'm sorry about the technical issues.

So before we start the next application, I'll just go ahead and promote the applicants to panelists.

The next thing on the agenda, what do we got Robert?

It's the 1619 University Avenue and we're joined by Ryan McGrath and Josh Wagoner.

All right.

For the applicant's presentation, I'm happy to share the screen to the application that you submitted or you can just speak.

They are, they know the more specifics about this.

OK.

Well, let's start with if there's any questions from the public, please use the raise your hand feature.

I don't see anything.

Questions from the board.

It's like, are they, do they have something better than 70 CRI I was noticing?

I don't know if you guys have received it yet.

Yeah, that'd make a difference.

So not the highest I've ever seen, but it's definitely not the lowest.

Is that correct?

If I'm looking at the plan for me in reference to what you were referring to.

It's lighting plan E04.01.

I'm sorry.

Is that correct?

We try to strive for 10-foot candles within a five-foot radius of an ATM, strictly because we want everyone to be safe and be able to see around the ATM.

SA02, let's see.

Yeah, so they're on a canopy.

So we would like to light all the way around.

The tree trimming that's part of this application, were the trees actually reviewed on site or are the numbers that you've recommended for how high to trim them up just based on light elevations?

So we're just recommending that the canopy, not recommending, asking the canopy up to 15 foot just for the visibility and new pole light for people to be able to see around the ATM and walk around sidewalks and things like that.

Because it seems like some of the trees are already, the leaf, the leaves are all fairly high up, it's just the branch, some of the lower branches are below that number and it would be

So we're just trimming them up so it's all uniform.

It's not based off of just where the light fixture is located on the building.

We know exactly how big these trees are, how wide their spread is, and how much we can trim them up without damaging the tree moving forward.

Are those getting trimmed at all or are they just going to leave them as they are?

Okay.

Those are not new floods?

All R1 fixtures are non-full cutoff flood fixtures facing up.

And they're new or existing?

They're existing.

And they're not changing at all?

Right, there are ones that are existing to be removed.

Oh, okay, excellent, thank you.

Everything's on the building for the most part.

You're strictly pole lights, wall lights, and canopy amount of fixtures.

And just out of curiosity, do you have any examples of other buildings you've lit with a similar strategy?

So you need an example of a 30k site that we had designed, I can absolutely get that to you.

I'm just curious what your modeling does exactly.

or not, but those renderings are actual light renditions of what it would look like.

So we don't have any of that, do we, Jeff?

Nope.

Was that something that you guys just created internally or was that intended to be sent to us?

I was going to say, so this has been going through the site plan review process.

So, I mean, that's where I've been primarily focused is getting that spec sheet to where it meets that standard, so.

I'd love to see that actually.

so you can review and see what the lights will do on site for you.

Really being able to judge it is not such an easy thing to do just from, you know, taking a scan at a foot-candle map.

You probably disregard that one, but the full site at grade is the one we're most concerned with.

Right.

I guess it would also be good, and this is a little bit for Jeff, to make sure that what we're seeing is what is the final thing that the city is looking at for the site plan.

So that's my bad on that one.

I think that's all it was, is trimming.

Yeah.

But it sounds like it's a little less trimming than what we were seeing in our drawings.

So now.