* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting. [00:00:01] GOOD EVENING [CALL TO ORDER] AND WELCOME TO THE CITY OF DUBLIN ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD. UH, THIS MEETING IS BEING LIVE STREAMED. YOU CAN ACCESS A VIDEO OF THIS MEETING ON THE CITY'S WEBSITE. YOU CAN ALSO ACCESS VIDEOS OF PREVIOUS MEETINGS ON THE WEBSITE AS WELL FOR ANYBODY WHO IS WATCHING THE LIVE STREAM. THIS MEETING IS BEING HELD AT 55 55 PERIMETER DRIVE IN THE CITY OF DUBLIN. COUNCIL CHAMBERS. UH, THE PROCEDURE FOR THE CASE THIS EVENING WILL BEGIN WITH A STAFF PRESENTATION FOLLOWED BY AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE APPLICANT TO MAKE A PRESENTATION. THE BOARD WILL THEN ASK CLARIFYING QUESTIONS OF BOTH THE STAFF AND THE APPLICANT. WE WILL SEEK PUBLIC COMMENT FROM THE PODIUM. ANYBODY WHO'S GOING TO SPEAK TO US HAS TO BE SWORN IN AND GIVE US THEIR ADDRESS PRIOR TO MAKING THEIR COMMENTS. UM, WILL ALSO REVIEW IF THERE ARE PUBLIC COMMENTS AND EMAIL THOSE AND THEN FINALLY THE BOARD WILL DELIBERATE ON THE CASE. UM, WE START ALL OF OUR MEETINGS WITH THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. UH OH. SO IF EVERYBODY WOULD RISE AND FACE THE FLAG. JUDY, WILL YOU CALL THE ROLL PLEASE? YES. MS. DAMER HERE. MR. JEWEL? HERE. HERE, HERE. MR. ALEXANDER. HERE. THANK YOU. UH, BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO THE ACCEPTANCE OF THE DOCUMENTS, UH, SARAH'S GONNA FILL US IN. THERE'S A NEW MEANS OF COVERING THESE MEETINGS. UM, SO SHE'S GONNA FILL US IN ON THIS? YES. THANK YOU MR. CHAIR. AND I JUST WANTED TO POINT OUT THAT WE, YOU MIGHT HAVE SEEN IN YOUR PACKET, WE HAVE A REVISED AGENDA FOR OUR NEW SWAGGART STREAMING SERVICE. AND THIS IS NOW BEING STREAMED. THE MEETING IS BEING STREAMED THROUGH THE DUBLIN CITY WEBSITE. UM, THE MEETING IS BEING RECORDED REMOTELY SO WE DON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT SOME OF THE TECHNICAL GLITCHES THAT WE'VE HAD BEFORE. YOU AS A BOARD AND AS REVIEWERS CAN STILL REQUEST OF US, IF YOU WANNA GO BACK TO A PREVIOUS SLIDE TO SEE SOMETHING IN MORE DETAIL. WE HAVE COMPLETE CONTROL OVER THE POWERPOINTS. IT IS ONLY THE RECORDING THAT'S HAPPENING OFFSITE AND REMOTELY. UM, YOU MAY NOTICE AFTER THE MEETING, AND YOU CAN CHECK THIS OUT ON CITY COUNCIL OR ANY PREVIOUSLY RECORDED MEETING UNDER THE SWAGGART, UM, BRAND, IF YOU WILL. YOU CAN ACTUALLY CLICK ON THE AGENDA AND GO DIRECTLY TO THAT ITEM INSTEAD OF HAVING TO SEARCH ALONG THE BAR FOR WHERE AN ITEM IS. IT'S A VERY, VERY NEAT SERVICE. SO JUST WANTED TO CALL THAT TO EVERYBODY'S ATTENTION. OKAY, THANK YOU. [ACCEPTANCE OF DOCUMENTS and APPROVAL OF MINUTES] IS THERE A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE DOCUMENTS INTO RECORD AND APPROVE THE MINUTES FROM OUR MAY 24TH MEETING? I'LL ALSO MOVE. OKAY. I'LL SECOND. MS. COOPER? YES. MR. COTTER? YES. MR. ALEXANDER? YES. YES. MR. JEWEL? YES. MS. ER? YES. THANK YOU. YES. OKAY. ALRIGHT. RIGHT. THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD IS RESPONSIBLE FOR REVIEW OF CONSTRUCT OF THE CONSTRUCTION AND MODIFICATIONS OR ALTERATIONS TO ANY SITE IN THE AREA SUBJECT TO ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW UNDER PROVISION OF ZONING CODE SECTION 1 53 0.170. THIS BOARD HAS THE DECISION MAKING RESPONSIBILITY ON THESE CASES. ANYONE WHO INTENDS TO ADDRESS THIS THIS EVENING ON THIS PARTICULAR CASE MUST BE SWORN IN. SO THOSE OF YOU WHO MAY BE SPEAKING TONIGHT, IF YOU WOULD RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND AND ANSWER IN THE AFFIRMATIVE YOU SWEAR AND AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH IN YOUR TESTIMONY TO THIS BOARD. OKAY. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT. ALL RIGHT. OUR, OUR [Case #23-021] ONE CASE THIS EVENING IS ONE 12 SOUTH RIVERVIEW STREET. THIS IS A MINOR PROJECT REVIEW. THE APPLICATION IS A REQUEST FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW TWO-STORY RESIDENTIAL BUILDING ON A 0.26 ACRE SITE ZONED HISTORIC DISTRICT HISTORIC RESIDENTIAL. THE SITE IS LOCATED SOUTHEAST OF THE INTERSECTION OF PINNEY HILL LANE WITH SOUTH RIVERVIEW STREET. MS. SINGH WILL BE OUR PRESENTER. [00:05:01] SO RODDY, WHENEVER YOU'RE READY. THANK YOU AND GOOD EVENING. THIS IS A REQUEST FOR A MINOR PROJECT REVIEW AT ONE 12 SOUTH RIVERVIEW STREET. SITE HERE IS SHOWN IN SOLID YELLOW LINE AND IS ZONED HISTORIC RESTRICT HISTORIC RESIDENTIAL. IT IS LOCATED ALONG THE WESTERN BANK OF SCIOTO RIVER AND IS AT SOUTHEAST OF THE INTERSECTION OF SOUTH RIVER VIEW STREET AND PINE HILL LANE. THE 0.26 ACRE LOT WAS CREATED IN 2021 WHEN 1 1 10 AND 112 SOUTH RIVERVIEW STREET WAS APPROVED FOR. DEMOLITION THE SINGLE LOT FOR FURTHER SPLIT INTO TWO LOTS. THE OTHER LOT IS SHOWN IN DOTTED YELLOW LINE HERE. THE PHOTOS HERE SHOW THE EXISTING CONDITIONS OF THE SITE. THE SITE HAS SIGNIFICANT GRAY CHANGE FROM THE WEST TO THE EAST WITH A FLAT PLAIN ON THE EAST EASTERN HALF OF THE LOT. THERE ARE NO SIDEWALKS ON SOUTH RIVER VIEW. ONE CAN SEE ONE 10 SOUTH RIVER VIEW CURRENTLY UNDER CONSTRUCTION IN THE PHOTOS. THIS IS A QUICK RECAP OF THE PROJECT. THE BOARD PROVIDED INFORMAL REVIEW FEEDBACK IN OCTOBER 22ND, 2022 AND IN JANUARY, 2023. BOTH SUGGESTED A MORE VERNACULAR CONCEPTUAL CHARACTER AND EXPRESSED CONCERNS WITH MASSING AND COMPLEX ROOF FORMS. BOTH FURTHER REQUESTED TO LIMIT THE NUMBER OF MATERIALS AND EMPHASIZED ON BETTER ORGANIZATION OF WINDOW OPENINGS. A DETAILED FEEDBACK AND ITS RESPONSE BY THE APPLICANT ARE FURTHER DETAILED OUT. ON PAGE THREE OF THE STAFF REPORT SEEN. HERE IS THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN 1 1 12 SOUTH RIVERVIEW IS SHOWN HERE ON THE RIGHT, HIGHLIGHTED IN GREEN AND 1 1 10 SOUTH REARVIEW ON THE LEFT SIDE OF THIS SCREEN. THE BUILDING PROFILE OR THE BUILT UP AREA IS REFLECTED IN GRAY ALONG WITH THE PERMEABLE DRIVEWAY IN THE FRONT. THE SITE TOPOGRAPHY REFLECTS A SERIOUS SLOPE AT THE RARE, WHICH FACES THE TER RIVER. THE RED LINE AS SEEN HERE SHOWS THE EDGE OF THE COUS LOPING DUE TO THE SITE TOPOGRAPHY CONSTRAINTS. THE PROPOSED HOME IS LOCATED CLOSER TO THE SOUTH RIVER VIEW STREET. IT IS IN ALIGNMENT WITH THE ADJACENT PROPERTY. THIS IS THE PROPOSED ROOF LAND. THE ROOF LAND REFLECTS A MASSIVE COMPLEX ROOF WITH NUMEROUS DORMERS. THE FRONT OF THE HOME FACING SOUTH RIVERVIEW STREET SHOWS A BALANCED ROOF PLAN WITH GARAGE ROOF ON THE LEFT AND THE THREE DORMER WINDOWS ON THE RIGHT. HOWEVER, THE LOCATIONS AND THE WIDTH OF THE DORMERS AT THE RARE LACK CONSISTENCY OF A SIMPLE CAPE CALLED STYLE HOME STAFF RECOMMENDS A SIMPLIFIED DESIGN WITH EQUAL WORDS OF ALL THREE DORMERS AT THE REAR. THIS WILL FURTHER REFLECT WHILE WE ADDRESS THE ELEVATION FURTHER IN THE PRESENTATION, STAFF FURTHER RECOMMENDS ALIGNING THE LEFT REAR AND THE RIGHT REAR DORMER IN THE SAME PLANE AND AT THE SAME OPPOSITE FROM THE SITE FOR CONSISTENCY AND SIMPLICITY. CURRENTLY THE ROOF PLAN DOES NOT MATCH THE FLOW PLAN AS SUBMITTED AND THIS NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED AS PER A RECOMMENDED CONDITION OF APPROVAL SEEN. HERE IS THE WEST ELEVATION OF THE FRONT FACING FACADE OF THE HOME. THIS REFLECTS A CAPE COD STYLE HOME WITH A HYPHEN AND A GARAGE. SIGNIFICANT CHANGES BY THE APPLICANT HAS BEEN MADE TO ADDRESS THE GUIDELINES. THE HOUSE FEATURES A SIMPLIFIED MAIN DOOR WITH THREE FRONT CABLE DORMER WINDOWS AND THE FRONT AND THE SIDE CABLES WITH 10 12 PICTURES. THE NUMBER OF MATERIALS HAS ALSO BEEN MINIMIZED TO TWO AS PER THE BOARD'S REQUEST. THE BOARD FURTHER SUGGESTED INCREASING THE DEPTH OF THE HEIGHTEN FROM THE FRONT FACADE AND REQUESTED IT TO BE FURTHER RECESSED. HOWEVER, THE APPLICANT CHOSE TO ALIGN THE GARAGE OF THE MAIN HOUSE BY BRINGING THE GARAGE TO THE FRONT. THESE ARE THE PROPOSED NORTH AND SOUTH ELEVATIONS. THE NORTH ELEVATION IS SEEN ON THE LEFT AND THE SOUTH ELEVATION IS SEEN ON THE RIGHT. BOTH THE ELEVATIONS SHOW THE SIGNIFICANT GREAT CHANGE WITH THE PROPOSED HOME. TRANSITIONING FROM A TWO-STORY HOME TO A THREE-STORY HOME. WITH THE PREVIOUS APPLICATION, APPLICANT PROPOSED DORMER WINDOWS ON THE TOP OF THE GARAGE, WHICH WAS FACING THE 1 1 10 SOUTH RIVERVIEW STREET. THE APPLICANT HAS REMOVED THE DORMER WINDOWS ON THIS FACADE, THUS REDUCING THE MOSS ON THE SECOND FLOOR. THE FOUR CAR GARAGE IS NOW PUSHED TO THE FRONT WITH THE DAKS NOW ADDED TO THE REAR. HOWEVER, THE ROOF HEIGHTS ARE THE REAR AND THE ANGLES CREATES AN UNBALANCED FACADE. LACKING CONTINUITY. STAFF WOULD RECOMMEND CREATING A MORE COHESIVE ELEVATION BY REDUCING THE HEIGHT AND THE DEPTH OF THE REAR GABLE TO MATCH THE FRONT CABLE FURTHER ON THE NORTH ELEVATION. THE STEP DOWN FOUNDATION DOES NOT ALIGN WITH THE INTERNAL SECTIONS OF THE HOUSE. THE CONSULTANT AND THE STAFF RECOMMEND A STEPPED FOUNDATION REFLECTING THE INTERIOR FLOOR LEVEL AND MAINTAINING CONSISTENCY TO MATCH THE SOUTH ELEVATION. VERY SIMILAR TO NORTH ELEVATION. THE SOUTH ELEVATION ON THE RIGHT HAS A SIDE CABLE ROOF LINE WITH WEARING [00:10:01] ROOF PITCHES AND THE ROOF LINES AT THE REAR. IT FACES THE SIDE TO RIVER AT THE REAR. THE REAR APPEARS TO BE TALLER SEEN HERE IN THE LIGHT GRAY. THIS IS IN CONFLICT WITH THE SECTIONS FIVE POINT 3D OF THE HISTORIC DESIGN GUIDELINES. STAFF RECOMMENDING REDUCING THE HEIGHT OF THE REAR GROOVE TO MASH THE GABLE VERY SIMILAR TO THE NORTH ELEVATION. ALSO, ONE CAN SEE A RANDOM ARRANGEMENT OF WINDOWS SIZES AND LOCATIONS DURING THE PREVIOUS INFORMAL REVIEWS. BOARD EXPRESS CONCERNS WITH THE WINDOW OPENINGS AND REQUESTED TO REORGANIZE THE WINDOWS TO CREATE CONTINUITY IN THE PATTERN. STAFF WOULD RECOMMEND A SYMMETRICAL BALANCED WINDOW PLACEMENTS AND OPENINGS ON THIS FACADE. ALL THESE RECOMMENDATIONS ARE INCLUDED AS CONDITION OF APPROVAL IN THE REPORT. THIS IS A PROPOSED REAR ELEVATION OR THE EAST ELEVATION, WHICH FACES THE STOR RIVER. IT SHOWS A THREE STORY HOME WITH NUMEROUS DECKS, BALCONIES, SUNROOMS, AND DORMER OPENINGS. THE LARGE MASSING AND THE FLUCTUATING WIDTH HEIGHT AND THE PITCH OF THE DORMERS ADDS TO THE COMPLEXITY OF THE ELEVATION. STAFF WOULD RECOMMEND A CONSISTENT CABLE FRONT AND A SIZE ON ALL THREE DORMER OPENINGS. ADDITIONALLY, STAFF WOULD ALSO RECOMMEND REMOVING THE JULIET BALCONY ON THE LEFT SIDE. THIS WOULD CREATE A MORE SYMMETRICAL FACADE AND WOULD BETTER REFLECT A SUCCESSFUL SIMPLE CAPE CALLED FRONT FACADE. THESE DESIGN CHANGES WILL ALSO BEST MEET THE DIFFERENT SECTIONS OF THE GUIDELINES. THE CONSULTANT PDL IS CONCERNED ABOUT THE OPENING IN THE RETAINING WALL, WHICH IS SEEN HERE IN THE RED AND ITS ACCESSIBILITY FROM THE INTERIOR SPACE. THIS FURTHER NEEDS TO BE INSPECTED AT THE BUILDING PERMITTING STAGE AND IS AGAIN INCLUDED AS A CONDITION OF APPROVAL. THESE SIMPLE DESIGN CHANGES WOULD PREFERABLY IMPACT THE CHARACTER OF THE REAR ELEVATION AND IT WOULD CREATE A CONSISTENCY IN THE SUB FORMS AROUND THE CENTRAL MASS. THESE ARE THESE COMEDIC ISOMETRIC REVERENCE OF THE PROPOSED HOME. IT DOES NOT SHOW THE FENESTRATION OPENINGS, HOWEVER, IT KIND OF SHOWS THE MASSING AND AS RESPONSE TO THE SITE BOTH IN THE FRONT AND THE REAR. THE FRONT HEIGHT OF BOTH THE HOMES ARE VERY SIMILAR. THE RARE BUILDING HEIGHT OF 1 1 12 SOUTH RIVERVIEW STREET IS APPROXIMATELY 32 FEET FIVE INCHES. AND OF THE ADJACENT HOUSE, WHICH IS 1 1 12 SOUTH RIVERVIEW IS 29 FEET. FIVE INCHES. LISTED HERE ARE ALL THE MATERIALS APPLICANT PROPOSES TO USE. MOST OF THESE SAMPLES ARE ALSO AVAILABLE HERE FOR THE BOARD MEMBERS. THE APPLICANT PROPOSES TO USE HARDIIM BOTH SIDING AND SMOOTH TEXTURE IN ANONYMOUS COLOR FOR THE ENTIRE HOME. FOR THE TRIMS AND SOFFIT, THE APPLICANT PROPOSES TO USE HARDI SIMMONS BOARD SIDING AND SHOW YOU WHITE COLOR. APPLICANT FURTHER PROPOSES TO USE CASSA DECISI IN TERRANA BLAND FOR THE STONEWATER TABLE ALONG WITH TENNESSEE BUFF COLOR FOR THE MORTAR. ADDITIONALLY, APPLICANT PROPOSES TO USE TAMCO HERITAGE ASPHALT SHINGLES SENIOR AT THE CENTER OF THE SLIDE. EMBEDDED WOOD COLOR STAFF IS SUPPORTIVE OF ALL THE MATERIALS LISTED HERE AND WILL NOT REQUIRE A WAIVER. THE MATERIALS LISTED HERE WILL REQUIRE A WAIVER. APPLICANT PROPOSES TO USE CLOPAY RUSTIC FOR WOOD GARAGE DOOR AND WALNUT COLOR. THESE DOORS ARE COMPOSITE MADE FROM INSULATED STEEL ON BOTH SIDES WITHIN COMPOSITE OVERLAY. THERE IS A PRECEDENCE OF APPROVAL OF THESE GARAGE DOORS IN THE PAST. APPLICANT FURTHER PROPOSES TO USE ANDERSON HUNDRED SERIES FX WINDOWS. THESE MEN ARE MADE OF RECLAIMED WOOD AND A THERMOPLASTIC POLYMER. THESE WINDOWS HAVE BEEN DISAPPROVED IN THE PAST FOR A HISTORIC STRUCTURE. EVEN THOUGH THIS IS A HIGH QUALITY MATERIAL DUE TO THE LACK OF SAMPLE, STAFF IS UNABLE TO EVALUATE THE CONSTRUCTION AND THE SHEEN OF THE CLADDING AND THUS WILL NOT SUPPORT A WAIVER FOR THIS MATERIAL. THE PROPOSED DOOR IS THERMA TRU AND IS COMPOSITE DOOR MADE FROM POLYURETHANE AND FIBERGLASS. THESE DOORS HAVE BEEN PREVIOUSLY APPROVED AND STAFF SUPPOSED THE WAIVER FOR THE USAGE OF THIS MATERIAL. LASTLY, THE DECK IS SUPPOSED TO BE TIMBERTECH AND SANDY BIRCH COLOR. STAFF SUPPOSED TO WAIVER FOR THIS MATERIAL AND AGAIN, THIS MATERIAL HAS BEEN APPROVED IN THE PAST. THE APPLICANT HAS NOT PROVIDED DETAILS FOR THE HEADER AND FOR ALL ELEVATIONS. A CONDITION OF APPROVAL ADDRESSES THIS AND REQUEST THE APPLICANT TO PROVIDE THE DETAIL PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT. ADDITIONALLY, NO LIGHTING FIXTURE DETAILS HAVE BEEN PROVIDED. APPLICANT WILL NEED TO PROVIDE THIS PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT. THE PROJECT WILL REQUIRE FIVE FAVORS. THE NEXT FEW SLIDES WE'LL DISCUSS THE WAIVER REQUEST. THE FIRST WAIVER IS REQUESTED FOR THE FRONT LOADED CARAT SETBACK AT ZERO FEET FROM THE FRONT FACADE. THE MINIMUM SETBACK REQUIREMENT AS [00:15:01] PER CODE IS 20 FEET. THE WAIVER REQUEST IS CAUSED BY A UNIQUE SITE CONDITION AND DUE TO TOPOGRAPHY OF THE SITE. THE CRITERIA ARE MOSTLY MET EXCEPT IT EXCEEDS THE 20% CRITERIA AGAIN, WHICH IS CAUSED DUE TO THE UNIQUE CONDITIONS OF THE SITE. THE HOUSE AT THE REAR HAS A MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT OF APPROXIMATELY 32 FEET FIVE INCHES. THIS IS CAUSED BY THE UNIQUE SITE CONDITIONS OF WE WILL BE REQUIRED TO SUPPORT THIS HEIGHT. THE CRITERIA ARE MOSTLY MET, HOWEVER IT EXCEEDS THE 20 PERSON CRITERIA. THESE ARE THE WAIVER REQUESTS FOR THE GARAGE DOOR AND THE FRONT DOORS. BOTH THE MATERIALS ARE COMPOSITE AND WILL REQUIRE A WAIVER. APPLICANT PROPOSES TO USE THE FX WINDOWS AS DISCUSSED PREVIOUSLY DUE TO THE LACK OF SAMPLE. UM, STAFF IS UNABLE TO EVALUATE THE MATERIAL AND THUS DOES NOT SUPPORT THE REQUEST. LASTLY, APPLICANT PROPOSES TO USE THE TIMBERTECH DECK AT THE REAR OF THE HOME. CRITERIA ARE MOSTLY MET OR NOT APPLICABLE. LISTED HERE ARE THE CRITERIA FOR THE MINOR PROJECT REVIEW. THE CRITERIA ARE MOSTLY MET WITH CONDITIONS AND WAIVERS OR ARE NOT APPLICABLE. ALL THE CRITERIA ARE FURTHER DETAILED OUT ON PAGE 15 OF THE STAFF REPORT LISTED HERE ARE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE WAIVERS. AS DISCUSSED PREVIOUSLY, STAFF WOULD RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF WAIVER OF THE FRONT LOAD GARAGE SETBACK AT ZERO FEET. STAFF WOULD APPROVE A WAIVER FOR A MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT OF PER 32 FEET, FIVE INCHES. AT THE REAR. STAFF WOULD RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF FAVOR FOR THE COMPOSITE GARAGE DOOR AND FRONT DOOR. STAFF WOULD RECOMMEND WAIVER OF TIMBERTECH DECK. HOWEVER, THE STAFF WOULD RECOMMEND THIS APPROVAL OF THE WAIVER FOR FIVE BRICKS. WINDOWS FOR STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE MINOR PROJECT REVIEW WITH FOLLOWING CONDITIONS. THE DESIGN PLAN AND ELEVATION SHALL BE REVISED WITH THE FOLLOWING CHANGES TO BE APPROVED BY STAFF PRIOR TO THE BUILDING PERMIT DESIGN PLAN TO ADDRESS THE INCONSISTENCIES IN THE ROOF PLAN WITH DESIGN CHANGES AS DISCUSSED WITH THE UNIFORM SIZE, SHOWING THE WIDTH, DEPTH AND HEIGHT OF ALL THE GABLES AT THE REAR OF THE SECOND FLOOR CONSISTENT WATER TABLE ON THE NORTH AND THE SOUTH FACADES. SHOULD THE BUILDING PERMIT REVIEW REQUIRE THAT THE REAR FACING WINDOWS BELOW THE GARAGE NEEDS TO BE REMOVED, THEY MAY BE DONE SO WITHOUT FURTHER A ARB APPROVAL. SHOULD THE REVISED FLOW PLAN DOES NOT MISS THE PITCHES AS LISTED IN THE CODE, THE PITCHES WILL REQUIRE A BOARD APPROVAL IN A SUBSEQUENT HEARING APPLICANT TO FURTHER PROVIDE MATERIALS FOR HEATHERS AND ILS TO BE APPROVED BY THE STAFF PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT APPLICANT TO PROVIDE NEW WINDOWS SPECIFICATIONS AND DETAILS. MEETING THE HISTORIC DISTRICT CODE APPLICANT TO WORK WITH STAFF TO CHOOSE ALL APPROPRIATE LIGHT FIXTURES AND APPLICANT TO PROVIDE YOU TO ADVANCE DETAILING THE SCOPE OF WORK TO BE REVIEWED, APPROVED, INSPECTED BY ENTERING PRIOR TO BUILDING BURNET. AT THIS. I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. BOARD MEMBERS, ANY INITIAL QUESTIONS FOR RODDY? JUST ONE RIGHT? JUST ON THE BUILDING HEIGHT SO IT EXCEEDS THE 20% THRESHOLD. HAVE WE APPROVED MORE BUILDINGS ABOVE THAT BEFORE? YEAH, CUZ THE ONE BESIDE IT IS ABOUT RIGHT AT 20%. IT'S 29. FIVE IS CLOSE TO 20%. WE HAVE, UM, ESPECIALLY IN THIS LOCATION WHERE THE TOPOGRAPHY IS SO STEEP. BUT BUT THE ONE BESIDE IS 20% ROUGHLY WE SAID. RIGHT. IT'S 29.5 OUT OF 24. SO IS THAT RIGHT? SOMEHOW CLOSE TO 20%, RIGHT? YEAH. YEAH. IS THAT RIGHT? SO, AND I DON'T REMEMBER ON THAT SIDE. I DON'T REMEMBER ANOTHER, THERE'S NOT ANOTHER ONE RIGHT. AS WE RECALL. OKAY. SO THAT WOULD BE 35%? YES, CORRECT. OKAY. YES. YEP. R RODDY, I HAD A QUESTION, UH, EARLIER IN THE PRESENTATION YOU, UM, POINTED OUT, LOOKING AT THE SIDE ELEVATION, THAT THE DORMERS WERE NOT COMPLIANT WITH THE CODE BECAUSE THEY'RE TALLER THAN THE SHED DORMER. THAT THEY'RE, THEY'RE GROWING OUT OF THE, THE, THE STEEPER ROOF PITCH AND THEN THE SHED DORMER IS DOWN AND THEY'RE ACTUALLY ABOVE THE SHED DORMER. IS THAT WHY YOU'RE SAYING THEY'RE NOT COMPLIANT WITH THAT SECTION OF THE CODE? YEAH, SO I MEAN BY THE GUIDELINES. SO THE GUIDELINES WOULD RECOMMEND STEPPING IT DOWN WITH THE TOPOGRAPHY OF THE SITE. HAVING SAID THAT, THE PITCH ROOF FOR THE CENTRAL PART HAS NOT BEEN PROVIDED. SO HOWEVER IT APPEARS TO BE TALLER OR [00:20:01] EQUAL TO THE FRONT FACADE. OKAY. THAT'S OKAY. YOU YOU ANSWERED MY QUESTION IN A DIFFERENT WAY, BUT THAT, THAT'S FINE. SO, OKAY. ALRIGHT. UM, WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANTS? UH, DAVID JOHNSON, 89 65 CO DRIVE, PLAIN CITY, OHIO. I'M ALSO THE ARCHITECT OF RECORD. UM, I THINK THE STAFF CAN APPRECIATE THE, THE PROGRESSION THAT WE'VE GONE THROUGH THE TWO FIRST, UM, PRELIMINARY, UM, UM, SUBMISSIONS FROM CLEARLY A LARGE ARCHER STRUCTURE THAT THE, THE BOARD FELT LIKE WAS VICTORIAN. UM, WE TRIED TO SIMPLIFY THAT FRONT FACADE TO BE MORE IN CHARACTERISTIC WITH, WITH OLD DOON. AND IT FITS IN, UM, SCALE WISE WITH THE NEIGHBORING HOUSE THAT'S BEING CONSTRUCTED. UH, ALSO I FEEL THE ROOF ROOF LINE HAS BEEN SIMPLIFIED AND THE REAR IS A LITTLE MORE COMPLICATED BECAUSE IT, IT ADHERES TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF OF THE RESIDENT, UM, THE HOMEOWNER AND THEIR DESIRE TO HAVE SOME MORE GLAZING IN THE BACK FOR THE VIEWS BEING ON THE RIVER AND THE RAVINE WITH THE TREES. I FEEL THAT SMALLER DORMERS WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO ACCOMMODATE THEIR NEEDS AND THEIR WANDS. AND BECAUSE IT IS ON THE BACKSIDE OF THE HOUSE, IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT TAKES AWAY FROM THE, THE PUBLIC STREET VIEW FROM THE FRONT. SO I'M, HOPEFULLY WE CAN FIND A HAPPY MEDIUM TODAY WITH MAYBE SOME ADJUSTMENTS IN THE BACK THAT EVERYONE'S HAPPY WITH. UM, I FEEL THAT DOING, SETTING THE DORMERS EQUALLY ON THE BACK IS SOMETHING THAT WE COULD PROBABLY MAKE HAPPEN. I'D LIKE TO, TO DO LIKE A PRIMARY GABLE IN THE FRONT, OFF THE MASTER BEDROOM AND THEN MAKING THE TWO OTHER DORMERS SOMETHING THAT WE COULD DO, UM, AS A SECONDARY MATCHING DORMERS ON EITHER SIDE. UM, SOME OF THE OTHER RECOMMENDATIONS ON THE WINDOW SPACING ON THE RIGHT SIDE ELEVATION. I DON'T SEE A PROBLEM DOING ALL FOUR WINDOWS THE SAME HEIGHT AND SAME SIZE. AND THE STEP ON THE FOUNDATION, THE STONE FOUNDATION ON THE LEFT SIDE BY THE GARAGE EVENING, EVENING THAT OUT. SO IT'S MORE IN TUNE WITH, WITH THE RIGHT SIDE. I DON'T, I DON'T SEE A PROBLEM WITH THOSE CHANGES AS WELL. UM, WE TRIED ON THE NEW DESIGN TO HAVE THE MASSING STEP DOWN WITH THE GRAY. THAT WAS ONE OF THE, THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS. SO THAT SHOWS UP IN THIS SUBMISSION. UM, OVERALL WITH THE SIMPLICITY OF SOME OF THE DETAILING ON THE FRONT ELEVATION WE'VE DONE. AND I THINK IT, YOU KNOW, IT IT'S, THE HOUSE IS NICE AND SIMPLE AND STRAIGHTFORWARD IN THAT REGARD. UM, SO WITH THAT, I'LL ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. THE BOARD DOES HAVE MY WAY. UH, THERE WAS A QUESTION ABOUT, YOU KNOW, CHIMNEYS, FIREPLACES ABOUT SOME LAYOUT, I THINK IN THAT PRELIMINARY PLAN, UM, BECAUSE THERE'S NO CHIMNEYS SHOWING UP, THERE'S NO VENTS FOR HEATING OR, YOU KNOW, AN EXTERNAL HEATING. SO WHAT'S THE PLANS? IS THERE ANYTHING GONNA BE DONE? UM, THOSE, THAT'S, IT'S A SELF-CONTAINED LIKE ELECTRIC FIREPLACE. OKAY. IT'S SELF. SO IT'S JUST SELF VENTING. SELF VENTING. THERE'S NO, THERE'S NO NEED FOR. YEAH. OKAY. YEP. MAYBE JUST BEFORE WE GET INTO THE DETAILS UNDERNEATH THE GARAGE, WHAT'S, I MEAN, I SEE THERE, WHAT'S, WHAT'S UNDER THE UH, IF I'M AT THE BELOW GRADE, IT'S JUST FILL RIGHT? UM, WE'RE ACTUALLY GONNA TRY TO DO A FLEXCORE TYPE PLANKING SYSTEM SO THEY AT LEAST HAVE SOME, SOME STORAGE UNDERNEATH, AT LEAST THE BACK PART OF THE GARAGE. OKAY. IT'S SOMETHING WE'RE EXPLORING WHEN WE DO THE FINAL CONSTRUCTION PLAN. OKAY. SO THAT THE DOOR THAT'S BACK THERE, IT WOULD BE ACCESSIBLE TO SPACE. IT WOULDN'T BE A FAKE OR A FAUX DOOR. OKAY. SO THERE'S GONNA BE, THERE WILL BE SOMETHING POTENTIALLY YEAH. THAT, THAT'S THE GOAL AT THIS POINT. OKAY. DO WE HAVE ANY, UH, BEFORE I'M GONNA ASK US TO GET PUT THOSE, UH, CONDITIONS UP. MAYBE WE SHOULD PUT THOSE CONDITIONS UP NOW AND AFTER, CUZ I WANT TO GO THROUGH THEM LINE BY LINE BECAUSE WE'VE HEARD A LITTLE BIT ABOUT, UM, POTENTIAL COMPLIANCE WITH THOSE. BUT LET'S GO THROUGH THOSE ITEM BY ITEM AND THEN I'LL CHECK TO SEE IF THERE HAVE BEEN ANY PUBLIC PUBLIC COMMENT. MR. JOHN, MAYBE JUST ONE MORE. AND YOU SAID ORIGINALLY WHEN WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THE BACK, THEY WANTED EXTRA GLAZING. YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT MORE, MORE WINDOWS [00:25:01] SURFACE AREA. MORE WINDOWS. YOU WANT MORE WINDOWS SURFACE AREA. OKAY. BY DOING THAT, IT OBVIOUSLY THEY'RE GONNA MAKE THOSE BIGGER THAN THE FRONT WINDOWS THAT ARE MORE, MORE OF THE ECLECTIC STYLE . OKAY. SO IF OUR NEW SYSTEM IS FAILING, I THINK WE'RE YES. IF WE HAVE IT, IF WE HAVE IT ON, WE'RE JUST WAITING TO SWITCH OVER TO THE POWERPOINT. OKAY. YES, IT'S DONE FROM MY END. YEAH. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. ALL, OKAY. SO THE FIRST ONE, AND I'M GONNA GO BACK AND FORTH. I'M GONNA CLARIFY WHAT I THINK THIS MEANS FROM THE STAT'S POINT OF VIEW AND THEN SEE IF YOU CAN ADDRESS THAT. BUT AS I READ THE FIRST ONE, IT SOUNDS LIKE WHATEVER WE DECIDE WITH THE ROOF, WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THE DRAWINGS ARE CONSISTENT. IS THAT, IS THAT RIGHT? AND YES. SO THERE ARE A COUPLE OF THINGS. FIRST YES. TO YOUR QUESTION. AND THE SECOND ONE IS CURRENTLY THE ROOF PLAN DOES NOT MATCH WITH THE PLANS AS SUBMITTED EVEN WITHOUT THE CHANGES. SO IT NEEDS TO MATCH WITH THE CURRENT PLANS. RIGHT. SO ALL THE DOCUMENTS ARE CONSISTENT. OKAY. SO THAT'S JUST SORT OF CLEANING UP THE DRAWINGS AND RECORD KEEPING. OKAY. UM, NOW B DESIGN CHANGE TO ALIGN THE SECOND FLOOR MASTER BATH AND BEDROOM TWO WITH EACH OTHER. SO THAT WILL REQUIRE THAT YOU EITHER BRING THAT YOU MAKE A CHANGE IN THE PLAN. IS THAT A CHANGE THAT YOU CAN MAKE? I THINK THAT, UM, BRINGING THAT GABLE BACK TOWARDS THE CENTER OF THE HOUSE IS GONNA BE, UM, COMPLICATES THE CONSTRUCTION. CUZ RIGHT NOW THAT WALKS OUT ONTO A FLAT AREA OVER THE HEARTH ROOM BY PULLING IT BACK IN, IT'S CUTTING PART OF THE ROOF OUT EVEN MORE. SO, UM, THAT'S WHY I'D LIKE TO EXPLORE MAKING THAT A PRIMARY ELEMENT ON THE BACK AND THEN DOING TWO, TWO RELATIVELY SCALE-WISE MATCHING DORMERS ON EITHER SIDE OFF OF BEDROOM TWO IN THE MASTER BATH. WELL, I THINK FOR US TO APPROVE IT, WE NEED TO TONIGHT, AND MAYBE THAT'S NOT POSSIBLE, BUT WE NEED TO BE REALLY CLEAR BECAUSE THE DORMER ON THE RIGHT SIDE IS NOT A DORMER. YOU'VE CLIPPED ESSENTIALLY A HIP ROOF FOR, SO FOR YOU TO MATCH THE LEFT SIDE WITH THE RIGHT, YOU NEED TO BRING THE ROOF FORWARD MM-HMM. AND CLIP IT THE SAME WAY. SO I JUST, YOU KNOW, I THINK IF IT'S GONNA MATCH THAT EXACTLY AND YOU'RE GONNA NEED TO BRING THE FOOTPRINT OF THE SPACE BELOW OUT OKAY. TO MATCH THAT. I UNDERSTAND. AND AND IN LIGHT OF THAT, I, I WOULD BRING THAT DORMER OF BEDROOM TWO OUT TO MATCH THE MASTER BEDROOM, POSSIBLY BRINGING THE MASTER BEDROOM BACK A LITTLE BIT, BRINGING BEDROOM TWO OUT, AND THAT WAY I CAN MATCH THOSE TWO. UM, SOMETHING ELSE I DIDN'T, DIDN'T MENTION IS THERE WAS A LOT OF, IN THE INFORMAL TALKING ABOUT THE MASSING OF THE GARAGE AND I FEEL LIKE THIS, THIS NEW DESIGN DEFINITELY ADDRESSES THAT. THE MASSING MAKING IT REDUCING THAT FEEL OF THE MASS OF THE REARER OF THE GARAGE. AND YOU CAN REALLY SEE THAT IN THE 3D YEAH. IN THE 3D MODEL. I DON'T THINK'S THERE'S, THERE'S WHILE THIS, WHILE THE CONSULTANT'S REPORT SUGGESTS REDUCING IT MORE, I THINK TO ME THAT'S APPARENT AND, AND SO THIS STAFF IS NOT MAKING IT A CONDITION OF APPROVAL THAT YOU REDUCE THE GARAGE FURTHER. OKAY. THAT'S NOT A CONDITION OF APPROVAL. OKAY. SO NO ONE'S SAYING YOU NEED TO REDUCE THE GARAGE TO TWO CARS THAT YOU NEED TO CHANGE THE ROOF. BUT I'M JUST, UM, I WANT TO, BECAUSE FOR US TO APPROVE, APPROVE THIS, WE NEED TO BE CRYSTAL CRYSTAL CLEAR. OKAY. AND YOU NEED TO UNDERSTAND IF THAT'S GONNA MATCH. YOU'RE CHANGING YOUR FLOOR PLAN AND SO, YOU KNOW, YOU MAY I UNDERSTAND THAT. YEAH. OKAY. SO, SO B YOU'RE GOING TO ALIGN THAN FOR, SO YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT SOMETHING DIFFERENT THAN B RIGHT? AT THIS POINT I CAN DO EXACTLY HOW IT, THE DESCRIPTION OF THE, WE CAN DO, WE CAN ALIGN BOTH OF THOSE WITH EACH OTHER. YES. OKAY. BECAUSE BECAUSE C SAYS THEY'RE ALL GOING TO BE THE SAME WIDTH, DEPTH, AND HEIGHT, AND YOUR SLOPES, THE HIP, THE HIP ROOF THAT YOU'VE CREATED IS A DIFFERENT SLOPE THAN THOSE OTHER DORMERS. SO, UM, TO DO THAT IS GONNA REQUIRE A DESIGN CHANGE. UH, AND, AND SO YOU'RE GONNA PULL 'EM ALL OUT FINE. THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT THEY'VE ASKED. BUT THEN TO MAKE 'EM ALL EQUAL IN THE SAME SLOPE, DO YOU [00:30:01] WANT TO, I MEAN, DO YOU THINK YOU CAN DO THAT? I'D LIKE IF, IF WE CAN HAVE, IF I CAN MAKE THEM SCALE-WISE, THE SAME SIZE, HOWEVER, PULLING THE MASTER BATH SINCE IT IS EXTENDED BEYOND, IF, IF THE BOARD WERE ALLOW US TO KIND OF ADJUST, THAT'S WHAT, IT'S NOT LINED UP IN PLAN, BUT ELEVATION WISE, THEY'RE ALL SIMILAR AS FAR AS THE SLOPE AND THE SIZE OF THE DORM ITSELF, SCALE WISE IS NOT AS PRECISE AS THE LANGUAGE HERE. SO, SO IF YOU CAN'T AGREE TO THIS OR NOT SURE THE, THEN MAYBE YOU KNEW YOU WANT TO, YOU WANT A TABLE. BUT WE CAN GO THROUGH ALL OF THESE TO, TO SEE IF YOU CAN, IF YOU CAN MEET THESE AND MAYBE EVERYTHING'S APPROVED, BUT ONE OR TWO ISSUES. BUT, SO GARY, I THINK IF YOU PULL THAT DORM FORWARD, YOU'RE GONNA, YOU'RE GONNA EXTEND THE FIRST FLOOR TOO. WELL THAT'S, I MEAN, I MEAN IT'S, THAT'S IT'S, THAT'S EXACTLY THE POINT I WAS MAKING, SEAN. IF YOU PULL IT FORWARD TO MATCH THE ONE SIDE YEP. THEN YOU HAVE TO BRING THE FLOOR BELOW OUT, WHICH, WHICH WOULD BE FINE. I THINK YOUR DESIGN WOULD BE IMPROVED IF THOSE TWO, IF INSTEAD OF THE SHED, YOU HAD TWO HIPS ON BOTH SIDES, THE WIDTH WAS THE SAME, YOUR IDEA ABOUT CENTERING THINGS WOULD, WOULD THEN BE REINFORCED BY THAT. BUT, UM, BUT YEAH, YOU'RE RIGHT. BUT YOU'RE GONNA, THEN YOU'RE YEAH, THAT JULIAN BALCONY COMES, STICKS OUT THE WALKOUT DECK YEAH. CHANGE IT'S AT DOING THAT IS A WELL, BUT, OKAY. I KNOW THAT'S WHAT I'M GOING THROUGH THERE, THERE ARE BIG DESIGN IMPLICATIONS TO ALL THESE AND I WANT TO MAKE, YOU KNOW, I I DON'T WANT TO TRAP THE APPLICANT. YEAH, YEAH. UM, IN AGREEING TO SOMETHING THAT YEAH. YEAH. IT'S GONNA BE HARD TO, TO DO SO, OKAY. OKAY. SO IT'S NOT SURE WHETHER YOU CAN MAKE C WORK, RIGHT? NOT, NOT EXACTLY SURE AT THIS POINT. OKAY. YEAH. OKAY. SO WE'RE NOT, WE'RE NOT SURE ABOUT THE C OKAY. AND YOU'VE MENTIONED YOU'RE FLEXIBLE ON THE WATER TABLE. ABSOLUTELY. OKAY. IT'S SOMETHING THAT DEFINITELY WE CAN MAKE THAT WORK. SO D D COULD WORK. I, I, I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY THE CONSULTANT HAD E IN, BUT, UM, I MEAN WE CAN, DO YOU HAVE AN ISSUE WITH E IN THERE? I MEAN THE BUILDING, EVEN IF WE APPROVED IT AND THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT SAID YOU COULDN'T DO IT, YOU'D HAVE TO TAKE IT OUT ANYWAYS. DO YOU I THINK THEY WOULD LIKE TO HAVE ACCESS TO THAT AREA. SO, WELL, WE'RE NOT GONNA PUT A DOOR IN, WE'RE NOT SAYING YOU CAN'T DO THAT. YEAH. WE'RE SAYING WHAT YOU DO WILL APPROVE THE APPEARANCE IF THE, IF THE BUILDING OFFICIALS SAY YOU CAN'T DO IT, IT MAY HAVE TO COME OUT AT, THAT'S, THAT'S NOT A DEAL BREAKER FOR, FOR US FOR SURE. YEAH. I, I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY THEY HAD THAT, BECAUSE WHAT YOU DESCRIBED IS VERY LOGICAL. UM, BUT, BUT, UM, I DON'T UNDERSTAND E SO YOU'RE OKAY WITH E? YES. OKAY. ALRIGHT. OKAY. NOW SOME OF YOUR PITCHES. OKAY, NOW, NOW TWO, SOME OF YOUR PITCHES, THOSE DORMERS LOOK PRETTY FLAT BACK THERE. UM, UM, THEY'RE ALL AT EAST AT SIX 12 FOR SURE. OKAY. ALRIGHT. SO YOU'RE OKAY WITH, WITH ITEM TWO THEN? YES. OKAY. OKAY. ALL NOW, USUALLY WE LIKE TO SEE A WALL SECTION WHEN WE, UM, PROVIDE A MINOR PROJECT REVIEW. UM, AND SO THE WALL SECTION SHOWS US THOSE THINGS THAT ARE REQUESTED THERE. MM-HMM. , UM, THERE, THERE'S SOME, THE, UH, STAFF, THERE'S SOME FLEXIBILITY HERE. YOU, YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO PROVIDE IT TO 'EM SOME WAY. UM, IT MAY HAVE TO BE A DETAIL, IT MAY NOT HAVE TO BE A FORMAL WALL SECTION, BUT, UM, ARE YOU OKAY WITH UM, THREE? UM, YES, I CAN, WE CAN. WE'RE NOT TELLING YOU HOW IT'S DESIGNED RIGHT NOW. YEAH. BUT STAFF MIGHT TELL YOU IF THE APPEARANCE DOESN'T MEET THE STANDARDS, HOW IT NEEDS TO BE DESIGNED. OKAY. OKAY. UM, WE'VE NEVER APPROVED WINDOWS LIKE THAT BEFORE. IN FACT, THE CODE SPECIFIES, SO ANDERSON'S STRUCTURAL WOOD [00:35:01] WINDOW WITH THEIR VINYL CLADDING WOULD BE AN APPROVED WINDOW FOR THE HOUSE. BUT, UM, THE REASON THIS IS IN BOTH THE, IN THE RECOMMENDATIONS HERE IS WE'VE NEVER APPROVED THIS. SO I'M SURE IF IT'S NOT ANDERSON, WE CAN DO A CLAD, CLAD WINDOW THAT'S THE SIMILAR APPEARANCE. IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE THAT MANUFACTURER, BUT SINCE YOU HAD ANDERSON, I'M JUST TELLING YOU WHICH PRODUCT LINE, UM, I'M SURE OUR CLAD LINE WOULD BE, WOULD BE CERTAINLY SOMETHING THAT WE COULD DO. OKAY. SO YOU'RE OKAY WITH FOUR? YES. ALL RIGHT. AND FIVE SEEMS HOUSE FIVE. SO I, I I LIKE A, UM, YOUR TYPICAL GOOSENECK GOOSENECK LAMP ON THE FRONT DOOR OVER THE DOORS, IT SEEMS TO BE AN APPROPRIATE LIGHT FIXTURE IN THE DUBLIN HISTORIC DISTRICT VERSUS A COACH LIGHT. MM-HMM. , BUT WE COULD DEFINITELY PROVIDE, YOU KNOW, THE MANUFACTURER CUT AND SPEC. OKAY. WHEN, WHEN WE, WHEN IT'S ORDERED. SO, SO YOU'RE OKAY WITH FIVE? YES. OKAY. AND HOW ABOUT SIX? YES, ABSOLUTELY. THAT, THAT'LL BE FINE. OKAY. ALRIGHT. OKAY. GARY, CAN I JUST COME BACK TO TWO, JUST MAKE, CAUSE MAYBE I WAS UNCLEAR. SO IF I COME BACK TO TWO, SO ON THIS ONE YOU'RE SAYING THE, ALL THE, THE, THE, YOU'RE TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT INCLUDING THE, INCLUDING THE SHED IN THE BACK, THE, ALL THE USE OF SIX 12 OR, OR MORE. OKAY. BECAUSE IF THEY'RE NOT, THEN YOU'RE, THEY'RE THEY WOULD HAVE TO COME, WE'D HAVE TO COME BACK AND DO IT. SO YEAH, AT THIS POINT, THE CURRENT DESIGN THAT IS THE CASE 12. OKAY. YES. OKAY. UM, AND GOING BACK TO SIX, YOU OKAY WITH SIX? YES. OKAY. RODDY, IS THAT EVERYTHING? OKAY. SO BEFORE WE HAVE ANY DISCUSSION AMONGST OURSELVES, HAVE WE HAD, I KNOW WE HAD A LETTER FROM THE NEIGHBORS OF SUPPORT FOR THE PROJECT IF WE HAD AND, AND EVERYBODY THAT WAS IN OUR PACKETS. SO I'M SURE EVERYBODY REVIEWED THAT. IF WE HAD ANY OTHER PUBLIC COMMENT, WE HAVE NOT. OKAY. ALRIGHT. OKAY. ALRIGHT. UM, GO AHEAD MIKE. I HAVE A QUESTION MORE TO STAFF. UM, BECAUSE WE HAD THIS ELECTRICAL EASEMENT LOCATION NOTE THING. WHAT WAS THE RELEVANCE OF THAT? CUZ WE HADN'T HAD ANY DISCUSSION. IS THERE ANYTHING THAT NEEDS TO BE DONE OR WE'RE UNSURE. OKAY. WE ARE UNSURE ABOUT THAT. SINCE THE NEW UTILITY PLANS HAVE BEEN PROVIDED, IT'S VERY DIFFICULT FOR THE STAFF TO SAY ANYTHING AT THE MOMENT. SO ONCE WE RECEIVE ALL THE UTILITY PLANS AND IT'S INSPECTED BY ENTERING, PROBABLY, YOU KNOW, WE'LL HAVE A BETTER WORD TO SAY, BUT THAT'S NOTHING'LL HAVE TO COME BACK TO US AT THIS POINT. OH NO, THAT'S JUST WANNA MAKE SURE NO, I, OKAY. ALRIGHT. ANY THOUGHTS ABOUT WHAT WE'VE, FROM, FOR ME THERE'S ONLY, I MEAN TWO, I THINK, UH, WITH THE, WITH THE ARCHITECT WITH MR. JOHNSON, I MEAN, TRYING TO FIND A WAY TO, TO MATCH THAT, I THINK THAT THAT'S A GOOD STEP. LOOKS COMPLEX TO ME. I DON'T KNOW HOW WE GET TO THE POINT WHERE WE CAN SEE WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE. THAT'S A BIT OF A CONCERN FOR ME. AND JUST MAYBE AMONGST JUST THE, THE HEIGHT AGAIN CUZ WE COME BACK. CAUSE I KNOW WE'VE GOTTEN QUESTIONS ABOUT HEIGHT BEFORE ON THE, ON THE NEWER BUILDINGS AND NOW WE'RE GONNA BE 35% HIGHER THAN THAN OUR, I'LL SAY THE 20% OVERAGE. WE'RE GONNA BE MORE THAN 20% OVER THE 20, THE 24 FEET. WHICH AGAIN, UH, I MEAN I GET THE TOPOGRAPHY HERE, BUT I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE WE DON'T GET INTO A SPOT WHERE PEOPLE KEEP SAYING WE WANNA MAKE THESE BUILDINGS HIGHER AND HIGHER. THIS ONE HAS A CERTAIN THAT WE'RE CLEAR ON THE CONDITION OF THE LAND IS THE REASON WE'RE GONNA MAKE IT MORE THAN 20%. JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE, IN OUR MINDS WE'RE CLEAR THAT THAT'S SOMETHING THAT, UH, THAT WE WANNA MAKE AS A, NOT A PRECEDENT. IT'S A THING THAT'S HAPPENING HERE. YEAH. AND I THINK IT'S A GOOD POINT CUZ THERE'S STILL SOME OTHER PROPERTIES ALONG THAT ABSOLUTELY. RIVER THERE THAT POTENTIALLY DOWN THE ROAD WOULD COME UP. YEP. TO THAT. CAN WE GO BACK TO THE SLIDES TOO? SO WAS IT B, B AND C LOOKED LIKE THE TWO THAT CORRECT. WE'RE IN DISCUSSION AND I REALLY THINK IN MY MIND THOSE ARE THE TWO THAT'S REALLY GOING TO MAKE THE DIFFERENCE IN THE BACK. UM, THESE OTHERS I'M COMFORTABLE WITH, BUT I DEFINITELY THINK B AND C IS SOMETHING THAT I'D LIKE TO SEE HOW THAT LOOKS WHEN IT COMES AND GETS REWORKED AND BROUGHT BACK TO US. SO YOU'D LIKE TO SEE THAT COME BACK? YES. I'D LIKE TO SEE THAT COME BACK. YOU WOULDN'T, YOU WOULDN'T BE COMFORTABLE. OKAY. ALRIGHT. YEAH, I WOULD TOO. I'M A LITTLE UNCOMFORTABLE WITH A MAJOR DESIGN LOOK CUZ THAT'S WHAT WE'RE HERE FOR IS THE APPEARANCE. MARTY, HOW DO YOU FEEL? I'M A LITTLE UNCOMFORTABLE IN NOT REALLY UNDERSTANDING HOW THE ISSUE GETS ADDRESSED WITHOUT [00:40:01] A SIGNIFICANT DESIGN CHANGE. SO I THINK I WOULD AGREE. I DON'T REALLY LIKE THE IDEA OF HOLDING UP A PROJECT FOR SOMETHING THAT HOPEFULLY COULD BE ADDRESSED EASILY. BUT WHAT IS BEING DISCUSSED HERE IN ONE B AND C AND WHAT IS DRAWN IN THE APPLICANT'S PICTURES DOES NOT GET EASILY RECONCILED IN MY OPINION. SO, YOU KNOW, I I THINK YOU HAVE MADE MAJOR STRIDES. I THINK THE CHANGE IN THE GARAGE WAS A BIG HELP. AND I THINK, I WISH ALL YOUR DRAWINGS WERE LIKE YOUR 3D WHERE YOU BROUGHT THE, THE DECK OUT ON BOTH SIDES THE SAME AMOUNT BECAUSE THE ONE DRAWING THAT WE HAVE HAS THE DECK COMING OUT, UM, TO THE SAME EXTENT. UM, AS ON BOTH SIDES. THE OTHER DRAWINGS THERE'S AN OFFSET, BUT WHAT WHAT THAT DOES IS YOU KIND OF CREATE A SCREEN IN FRONT OF THE TALLER BUILDING. SO IT HELPS, IT HELPS BREAK THE MASS DOWN FURTHER. NOT JUST THE ROOF CHANGE. YOU MADE THE GARAGE CUZ IT, IT, AND I THINK THE PROGRESSION YOU PROVIDED US WAS, WAS HELPFUL TOO. WE CAN SEE YOU'RE TRYING TO, YOU'RE TRYING TO MAKE IT LESS MASSIVE AT THE BACK. UM, SO I THINK THE WAY THE DECKS WORK CAN HELP YOU MAKE A SCREEN TO FURTHER BREAK THAT UP. UH, BUT UM, I I THINK WE ALL FEEL LIKE WE NEED TO REALLY SEE HOW THAT ELEVATION LOOKS BEFORE, BEFORE WE'RE COMFORTABLE BECAUSE AS WE DISCUSS DIFFERENT THINGS, THEY HAVE BIG IMPLICATIONS FOR THE FLOOR PLAN. AND SOME OF THE THINGS IN THE CONSULTANT'S REPORT WOULD REQUIRE WOULD REQUIRE YOU TO REDUCE THE FOOTPRINT ON THE UPPER FLOOR. AND, YOU KNOW, EVERY SOME OF THE, WHAT I MENTIONED AND THEN SEAN ACCURATELY POINTED OUT WHAT I MENTIONED MEANS YOU INCREASE THE FOOTPRINT ON THE MIDDLE FLOOR, ON THE LIVING, ON THE LIVING FLOOR. SO, AND, AND YOU, THE OWNERS, YOU MAY NOT LIKE THE CHANGES. UM, SO I THINK TO THE PLAN, THE CHANGES THE ELEVATION REQUIRE. SO I THINK THERE'S A FEELING HERE THAT WE CAN'T APPROVE THIS TONIGHT BECAUSE WE CAN'T HAVE A REAR ELEVATION THAT WE'RE COMFORTABLE WITH. THE OTHER ITEMS IT SOUNDS LIKE ARE RELATIVELY MINOR. YOU FEEL LIKE YOU CAN ADDRESS THOSE. AND THE FRONTS CHANGE TOO. I MEAN YOU'VE LISTENED TO US OVER TIME. UM, SO THE FRONT, THE FRONTS CHANGED, BUT I THINK ALL OF US HERE NEED TO SEE WHAT IT'S GONNA LOOK LIKE. AND I THINK YOU AND YOUR CLIENTS NEED TO KNOW WHAT IT DOES TO THE FLOOR PLAN, YOU KNOW, AND HOW IT'S GONNA CHANGE THAT, CHANGE THAT FLOOR PLAN. AND IT DOESN'T MEAN YOU, IF YOU DO CHOOSE TO TABLE THIS AND COME BACK, IT DOESN'T MEAN THAT YOU CAN'T HAVE INTERIM INPUT FROM THE STAFF BECAUSE YOU CAN TEST THESE THINGS WITH THE STAFF. THEY PUT, THEY'RE THE ONES WHO LOOK AT THIS FIRST AND THEY WRITE A REPORT. SO IT GIVES YOU AN OPPORTUNITY TO, TO SAY, OKAY, HERE'S WHAT WE'D LIKE TO DO. THIS DOESN'T WORK. TEST DIFFERENT IDEAS WITH THEM, SEE WITHIN THE CODE. SO IT'S NOT LIKE YOU, YOU'RE STARTING FROM SCRATCH, YOU COME BACK TO US AND WE'RE NOT QUITE HAPPY. SO THERE ARE WAYS TO REFINE IT BETWEEN THIS MEETING AND WHEN YOU'D COME BACK TO US AGAIN AND GET SOME FEEDBACK FROM THE STAFF. ANXIOUS. I KNOW, I KNOW THAT THE RAZORS ARE ANXIOUS OF GETTING THIS PROJECT GOING. THIS, DOES THIS PUT US BACK TO AN AUGUST, AUGUST REMEET AT THIS POINT. THAT, THAT'S NOT MY CALL. I THINK WE CAN DO IN JULY. MM-HMM. IF WE GET REVISED YEAH. PLANS SOON. LIKE VERY SOON. BECAUSE TECHNICALLY THE DUE DATE FOR A JULY MEETING HAS COME AND GONE. MM-HMM. . BUT IF YOU CAN GET US REVISED PLANS, SAY AFTER THE HOLIDAY BY THE FIFTH, WOULD THAT WORK? YES. OKAY. THEN WE CAN GET YOU ON FOR THE JULY HEARING. GREAT. THAT'D BE VERY BENEFICIAL. THANK YOU. RIGHT. WE'D BE HAPPY TO DO THAT. AND IF SOME OF THESE, UM, CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL COULD BE ADDRESSED IN THE REVISED DRAWINGS, THEN WE CAN REMOVE THEM AS WELL REFLECT. PERFECT. WE WANNA JUST MAYBE CLARIFY AND JUST ONE MORE TO MAKE, I MEAN YOU'RE CLEAR ON WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT HERE. NO, I, I WANNA CLARIFY THAT A LITTLE BIT. YEAH. I WANNA GO BACK THOUGH TO THE PROCESS HERE BECAUSE YOU CAN PROBABLY HAVE AN INTERMEDIATE SIT DOWN WITH YOU. RIGHT. HE CAN PROBABLY HAVE AN INTERMEDIATE MEETING, [00:45:01] GET SOME FEEDBACK, HE CAN SKETCH TEST THINGS, THEN HE MAKES THE DRAWINGS HE NEEDS FOR US. SO YOU MIGHT WANT TO HAVE A MEETING WITH THE STAFF SOON SO THAT I CAN GET THEM DRAWINGS, GET THEM DRAWINGS BY THE FIFTH AND WE COULD HAVE AN INFORMAL MEETING WITH THEM THE COUPLE, TWO OR THREE DAYS AFTER THAT WOULD AS LONG. I JUST WANNA GIVE YOU AS MANY OPPORTUNITIES TO GET BEFORE US IN JULY. WHAT YOU THINK MEETS MEETS THE GUIDELINES. THAT'D BE GREAT. OKAY. SO SEAN HAS ASKED, AND RICK, AND I THINK IT'S A GOOD IDEA TO GO BACK THROUGH, JUST MAKE SURE THE ONES OF THE, UH, B AND C JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT, THAT WE'RE ALL CLEAR ONE MORE TIME SO THAT, UH, JULY GOES EASY. LET'S SAY THE, OKAY, SO B DO YOU IT THE, THE SUGGESTION OF B IS BASED ON GETTING TO C RIGHT? BUT IT DOESN'T MEAN IT HAS TO BE B. OKAY? YEAH. SO, SO KEEP THAT IN MIND. THE GOAL IS TO GET TO C AND HOW YOU GET THERE, BUT B WAS ONE OF THE WAYS YOU COULD, YOU COULD DO THAT. YES. BUT IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE EXACTLY WHAT B SAYS, BUT KEEP IN MIND ALL OF THOSE CONDITIONS IN THE REPORT ABOUT THE PORTIONS OF THOSE DORMERS THAT DON'T COMPLY WITH THE CODE. OKAY. CUZ THAT, THAT WILL COME UP AGAIN. SO YOU, YOU NEED TO TRY. YEAH, I'LL MAKE AND MAKE SURE THE ROOF PITCHES AND EVERYTHING ARE ALL THE ROOF PITCHES AND THE HEIGHT OF THAT MM-HMM. AS WELL. OKAY. SO DID I CLARIFY THAT? I THINK THAT'S IT. I MEAN THE JULIA BALCONY WAS THERE. I MEAN THERE'S A FEW THINGS THAT WERE IN THERE THAT WERE IN THIS. THE REPORT JUST, I WILL TELL YOU WHAT IT WAS, BUT YOU CAN, UH, BUT THE STAFF DID NOT HAVE THOSE IN THE STAFF DID NOT PULL OUT EVERYTHING IN THAT REPORT. THESE WERE CORRECT. THESE WERE THE, THE, SO I DON'T THINK HE HAS TO ADDRESS THE REPORT. HE NEEDS TO ADDRESS WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT THE CONDITION. I'M TALKING ABOUT THE CONSULTANT'S REPORT AND I DON'T KNOW IF YOU, YOU READ THAT, BUT THE CONDITIONS HERE. YES. OKAY. I I WANNA SAY ONE THING ABOUT THE HIKE. WE MAY HAVE ALSO GRANTED THIS WAIVER FOR THE HOUSE THAT'S FINISHING UP ON UM, SOUTH HIGH STREET BECAUSE THE SLOPE THERE REALLY FALLS AT THE REAR. IT MAY NOT BE QUITE TO THIS EXTENT, BUT I THINK WE HAD THE ISSUE THERE TOO. SO HEIGHT WAIVER FOR GRADE CHANGE AT THE REAR, I DON'T THINK IS IS AN UNUSUAL QUESTION. NO. AND I'M NOT CONCERNED WITH THAT. I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE WE DON'T KEEP GOING FROM 35 TO FOUR. I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE AS WE, CUZ ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE ROAD WE'RE GOING, WE'RE GONNA HAVE SIMILAR ISSUES, RIGHT? SO JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE AS A BOARD AND AS A STAFF, WE FIND SOMEWHERE WHERE WE SAY IT'S NOT GONNA BE DOUBLE OR SOMETHING LIKE THIS. SO I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE FOUND A CONSISTENT WAY TO DO THAT AS WE MOVE FORWARD. OKAY. SO, UM, I'LL ASK YOU IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO TABLE, IF YOU'D LIKE TO REQUEST WE TABLE THIS. YES, I, OKAY. ALRIGHT. DO YOU WANT TO EITHER THE APPLICANT OR US OR THE STAFF WANT TO DEAL WITH THE WAIVERS OF MATERIALS NOW OR SHOULD WE JUST HOLD THAT OFF TILL JULY AS WELL ALL TOGETHER? HMM. THAT YOU THINK WE SHOULD I WOULD CONSIDER IT ALL AT THE SAME. OKAY. IT DEPENDS ON PEOPLE WHO NEED IT MIGHT NEED IT TO MOVE FASTER THAN US. BUT DO YOU, DOES IT MAKE ANY DIFFERENCE TO YOU? I MEAN, IT'S PRETTY CLEAR AND WE'RE NOT GONNA CHANGE OUR MINDS ABOUT THE GARAGE DOOR, THE FRONT DOOR, UM, THE HEIGHT. DOES IT HELP YOU IF WE APPROVE THOSE NOW OR DO YOU JUST WANT TO I THINK ANYTHING, I THINK ANYTHING THAT REDUCES THE AMOUNT OF VERBIAGE ON THE NEXT ONE, WE CAN GET APPROVED NOW. THAT'D BE GREAT. OKAY. ALRIGHT. CAN WE, CAN WE MOVE FORWARD, FORWARD WITH HOW THAT WOULD WORK? WOULD IT'S ALL ONE APPLICATION? I DON'T KNOW HOW WE WOULD AND IT WOULD JUST, EITHER YOU TABLE IT OR YOU DON'T. RIGHT. I MEAN THAT SOUNDS TABLE IT AND THEN HE KNOWS AND HE'S WILLING AGREE. WE'LL, WELL WE WITH TWO LAWYERS I WOULD THINK YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO, I SEE IT AS IT'S JUST THE WAY I SEE IT COMING IN, BUT YOU GUYS WOULD KNOW BETTER JUST THAT IT, I SEE IT AS FIVE DIFFERENT APPLICATIONS OR SIX DIFFERENT, WHATEVER IT IS. YOU KNOW, THE WAIVERS ARE DIFFERENT FROM THE, THE OTHER, BUT I HAVE NO OWNERSHIP TO ANY OF THIS OR TO ANY, IT DOESN'T BOTHER ME IF WE WAIT OR NOT SIR. MR. MR. ALEXANDER AND BOARD MEMBERS, WE WOULD PREFER TO KEEP THE MINOR PROJECT AND ITS WAIVERS TOGETHER, SO, OKAY. WE WOULD NOT WANNA SEPARATE THEM JUST IN CASE THE MINOR PROJECT DOESN'T COME BACK OR IT COMES BACK IN A TOTALLY DIFFERENT FORM. SURE. FOR [00:50:01] CLARITY OF RECORD. OKAY. ALRIGHT, THAT'S FINE. WHATEVER IS THE BOARD FEELS IS MORE THE EXPEDIENT WAY TO DO IT. THAT'S FINE. ALRIGHT. IS THERE A MOTION, DO WE WANT TO BE MEETING SPECIFIC OR JUST TABLE THE APPLICATION TO A FUTURE MEETING? I WOULD TABLE IT TO A FUTURE MEETING JUST IN CASE SOMETHING HAPPENS. ALRIGHT. I CAN SO MOVE THAT WE TABLE THIS APPLICATION AND THE ASSOCIATED WAIVERS, UH, TO A FUTURE MEETING. NO, I'LL SECOND THAT. WAS THAT DESCRIPTIVE ENOUGH? PARDON? WAS THAT DESCRIPTIVE TO ENOUGH OF WHAT THE MOTION? YES. OKAY. ALRIGHT. MS. COOPER? YES. MR. CO. YES. MR. ALEXANDER? YES. MR. JEWEL? YES. MS. DAMER? YES. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. THANK YOU. OKAY. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. SARAH HAS SOME COMMUNICATIONS [COMMUNICATIONS] FOR US. I DO. AND I DO HAVE A COMMUNICATION FOR YOU, ACTUALLY A NUMBER OF THEM. AND I WANTED TO START OUT WITH, UM, A LITTLE UPDATE ON ENVISION DUBLIN, WHICH OF COURSE IS OUR NEW COMMUNITY PLAN UPDATE. AND, UH, WANTED TO SHARE WITH YOU SOME INTERIM LAND USE PRINCIPLES SO THAT YOU ARE KEPT ABREAST OF WHAT WE ARE DOING AND HOW THIS IMPACTS THIS BOARD TO RECAP THE STATUS OF THE COMMUNITY PLAN UPDATE AND THE BACKGROUND. YOU KNOW, THAT OUR PREVIOUS COMMUNITY PLAN WAS APPROVED BACK IN 2006 AND THESE NEW PRINCIPLES, WHICH, UM, THERE THEY ARE. UM, THESE NEW PRINCIPLES THAT YOU ARE GOING TO BE SEEING WERE DEVELOPED BASED ON THE INITIAL ENVISION DUBLIN INPUT SESSIONS THAT WE'VE HAD WITH THE PUBLIC, THE STAKEHOLDERS, BOARDS, AND COMMISSIONS. THEY ARE MEANT TO BRIDGE THE GAP BETWEEN THE OLD COMMUNITY PLAN AND THE NEW PLAN PRIOR TO ITS ADOPTION, ESPECIALLY SINCE THAT PLAN IS RATHER DATED AT THIS POINT. THEY ARE ALSO MEANT TO PROVIDE SOME CLEAR DIRECTION TO, UM, HELP EVALUATE DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS. AND THESE WILL ALSO SUPPORT THE EXISTING COMMUNITY PLAN, THE CODE PLANS PRACTICES, THE GUIDELINES THAT THIS BOARD USES. AND TO THIS END CITY COUNCIL RECENTLY ADOPTED THESE PRINCIPLES BY RESOLUTION AND YOU WILL START TO SEE THEM AS PART OF THE STAFF REPORTS AND THE ANALYSIS THAT COMES BEFORE YOU. SO GETTING INTO THE PRINCIPLES THEMSELVES. UH, THE FIRST ONE IS TO THINK COMPREHENSIVELY AND USING THE BIG PICTURE. SO EACH PROJECT IS MEANT TO CONTRIBUTE TO A LARGER VISION FOR LAND USE ACTIVITY NODES, OPEN SPACE PARKING, CONNECTIVITY. UM, ANOTHER PRINCIPLE IS TO START WITH THE PUBLIC REALM, ENSURING THAT PUBLIC SPACES ARE APPROPRIATE FOR BOTH SOCIALIZING, RECREATING, AND THEN ENFORCING THE PUBLIC REALM. NEXT WE SEE A BALANCE OF MIXED USES. WE WANT TO CREATE LOCATIONS WHERE DAILY, UH, NEEDS OF BOTH RESIDENTS AND BUSINESSES ARE MET. AND WE WANT TO CONTINUE THE 60% RESIDENTIAL, 40% NON-RESIDENTIAL POLICY AND PRACTICE THAT WE HAVE ALWAYS HAD IN THE CITY. WE ALSO WANT TO LOOK AT PROVIDING, UM, HOUSING VARIETY AND NEIGHBORHOOD CHOICES. AND THIS INCLUDES FOR ALL AGES AND WAYS OF LIFE, INCLUDING THE EVOLVING NEEDS OF EXISTING NEIGHBORHOODS. NEW RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT SHOULD BE CONTEXTUALLY APPROPRIATE. NEXT WE SEE, UM, A DESIRE TO FOCUS GROWTH, BOTH USING AND LEVERAGING EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE TO GUIDE FUTURE GROWTH LOCATIONS, INCLUDING [00:55:01] THE REUSE, ADAPTIVE REUSE OF UNDERUTILIZED AREAS. WE WANT TO RESERVE ECONOMIC ASSETS AND THIS ESPECIALLY HAS TO DO WITH ALONG OUR HIGH VISIBILITY CORRIDORS. AND THESE CORRIDORS SHOULD BE FOR ECONOMIC GROWTH PURPOSES, NOT FOR RESIDENTIAL USES. WE WANT TO PROTECT NATURAL RESOURCES INCLUDING TREE STANDS AND LANDMARK TREES, WILDLIFE AREAS, WATERWAYS, WATERSHEDS, AND MOST IMPORTANTLY TO THIS BODY. WE WANT TO PROTECT AND ENHANCE OUR HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES. SO WE ARE CELEBRATING BOTH OUR CHARACTER AND OUR HISTORY. NEXT, WE'RE LOOKING TO INTEGRATE SUSTAINABLE DESIGN FOR BOTH SITES AND BUILDINGS. TO MINIMIZE, WE WANT TO CREATE CONNECTED A CONNECTED NETWORK OF TRANSPORTATION THAT'S BOTH SAFE AND EFFICIENT, OFFERS DIFFERENT MOBILITY CHOICES, AND IT INCLUDES BOTH LOCAL AND REGIONAL CONNECTIVITY. WALKABILITY IS ALSO A GOAL, MAKING IT EASIER TO BOTH WALK AND BIKE. AND FINALLY, WE WANT TO CONTINUE TO BE DISTINCTLY DUBLIN WHERE WE EXPRESS OUR IDENTITY THROUGH HIGH QUALITY MATERIALS, DESIGN, PUBLIC ART, ALL THE THINGS THAT THIS COMMUNITY IS KNOWN FOR. SO IN SUMMARY, AGAIN, YOU CAN MAYBE START TO ENVISION HOW SOME OF THESE PRINCIPLES WILL APPLY TO THIS BOARD'S WORK. AND YOU WILL AGAIN, START TO SEE THIS ANALYSIS IN YOUR STAFF REPORTS. AND WE'RE JUST ASKING THAT YOU KEEP THIS IN MIND FOR YOUR UPCOMING REVIEWS AND COMMENTARY. AND I AM HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS IF YOU HAVE ANY THERE. MAYBE ONE, MAYBE FOR ALL OF US. I MEAN, WE HAD THE MEETING OUT HERE IN THE FOYER, A FEW YES. WEEKS, SOME MONTHS AGO WHEN IT WAS, AND I REMEMBER ONE OF THE COMMENTS WAS, THE BOARD SHOULD THINK MORE STRATEGIC. WE SHOULD TALK AMONGST OURSELVES AND TRY TO BETTER UNDERSTAND WHY WE'RE, WHAT, WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO. AND WHEN, IF I GO BACK TO EIGHT, UH, PRINCIPLE EIGHT, AS WE TRY TO THINK ABOUT ON THIS BOARD, HOW DO WE, WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? KIND OF TO, TO US A BIT BECAUSE I MEAN, WE START TO SEE THE, THE, SOME OF THE HISTORIC BUILDINGS. OKAY. SOME OF THEM ARE IN DISREPAIR. A AND SOME OF THEM WE HAVE OKAY. WHETHER, WHETHER THEY'RE HIGHLY CONTRIBUTING, BUT WE THINK ABOUT THE, THE, THE, THE DENTIST OFFICE AND, AND THE THINGS DOWN THERE. HOW DO WE MAKE SURE THAT WE, THAT, THAT IT IS THIS? AND SOMETIMES FOR ME IT'S, YOU GET INTO THIS, THIS DEBATE ABOUT THE WALL AND THESE THINGS AND OKAY. COST TOO MUCH AND ALL THESE THINGS. AND HOW DO WE AS A BOARD THINK THROUGH WHAT DOES NUMBER EIGHT MEAN AND HOW DO WE TRY TO APPLY THAT? I DON'T HAVE AN ANSWER FOR THAT, BUT IT COULD BE MAYBE WE TAKE ONE OF THE MEETINGS AND WE TAKE A HALF HOUR AND JUST WHEN PEOPLE, IT'S JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND HOW WE THINK THROUGH THAT AS TIME GOES ON AND SOME OF THESE AREAS COME UP AND AT SOME POINT, EITHER WE'RE GONNA SAY YES OR WE'RE GONNA SAY NO. AND THEN HOW DO WE MAKE SURE THAT FROM A CITY, FROM A CITY COUNT, IF YOU SAY NO TO THINGS, I MEAN PEOPLE, PEOPLE WILL NOT BE HAPPY POTENTIALLY. AND HOW DO WE MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE, WE'RE WE'RE DOING THIS IN A THOUGHTFUL WAY BECAUSE THEY, THEY TEND TO COME UP ONE BY ONE AND RIGHT. WE'RE TRYING TO PAINT A PICTURE NOT KNOWING WHAT IF WE PICKED JUST DOWNTOWN, WHAT'S THE NEXT BUILDING GONNA, WHEN IS IT GONNA GO, WHEN'S IT GONNA COME UP FOR A REVIEW? AND THEN WHAT DO WE DO WHEN WE'VE ALREADY BUILT SOMETHING BESIDE IT? RIGHT. AND I THINK THE COMPLEXITY THAT THINKING ABOUT THAT IN FOUR OR FIVE YEARS OR, OR THE OSCARS PROPERTY, THESE THINGS, YEAH, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY LOOK LIKE, BUT HOW DO WE THINK THROUGH THAT AND MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE, THAT WE HAVE A VIEW OF WHAT IT COULD BE. UNDERSTANDING WHAT THE POSSIBILITIES. PEOPLE WILL COME WITH POSSIBILITIES THAT ARE BIGGER THAN WHAT WE THINK, BUT WE WANNA MAKE SURE WE THINK ABOUT THEM AND DO THAT IN A GOOD WAY. IT'S KIND OF A LONG WAY TO SAY AS I, HOW DO WE MAKE SURE WE DO THE RIGHT THING IN THE RIGHT WAY IN THE FUTURE? AND IT'S A TERRIFIC POINT, MR. COTTER. WELL THERE ARE TWO, I THINK TO SOME EXTENT WE DO THIS EVERY TIME WE MEET, BUT TO A BIGGER EXTENT, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT WITH THE 3D MODEL, WE COULD JUST TAKE THE ZONING ANYTIME WE HAVE SOMETHING BEING BUILT ON A NEXT TO AN OPEN PARCEL, YOU COULD JUST BUILD A 3D MODEL OF WHAT THAT MASSING CAN BE. NOW THAT DOESN'T TELL US ABOUT COLORS AND IT DOESN'T TELL US ABOUT, BUT IT WOULD BE EASY TO USE THAT TOOL STAFF. YOU PROBABLY HAVE ALREADY TOO MUCH TO DO, BUT SOMEBODY COULD BUILD THE MODEL BEFORE WE HAVE THE MEETING. AND BECAUSE WE DO TALK ABOUT CONTEXT AND THEY, OUR BUILDINGS NEED TO RESPECT CONTEXT. AND THAT WAS IN THE REPORT A LOT ABOUT THAT HOUSE TONIGHT. SO THERE IS [01:00:01] A WAY THAT WE CAN BEGIN TO DO THAT WITH THE TOOLS WE HAVE. YEAH. CAUSE I THINK AS YOU, THE NEXT GENERATION WILL START TO COME UP AND WE KNOW IT WILL. AND HOW DO YOU FIT THOSE IN THERE? MM-HMM. AND YOU'RE LIKE, OKAY, IT COULD LOOK LIKE THAT. AT LEAST IT HELPS US SEE THE FUTURE IN A WAY THAT BUILDS, AS YOU SAID, BUILDS CONTEXT AROUND THAT. YEAH. YEAH. THAT'S RIGHT. AND WE, I THINK WE ALSO HAVE TO REMEMBER THAT THE COMMUNITY PLAN IS A, IS UM, A TOOL FOR THE ENTIRE CITY. THE VISION OF THE ENTIRE CITY, THE HISTORIC DISTRICT SPECIAL AREA PLAN, WHICH WE ARE ANTICIPATING TO COME OUT OF THAT COMMUNITY PLAN EFFORT WOULD BE A SUBSET. MM-HMM. , IT'S GONNA BE A LOT MORE SPECIFIC THAT WE'LL BE ABLE TO GET TO JUST THESE QUESTIONS. AND THEN AS A THIRD ELEMENT AND A DIFFERENT ELEMENT YET IS SOME OF THE THINGS THAT YOU WERE ALLUDING TO, WHICH IS THE CODE UPDATES THAT, UM, JENNY PRESENTED TO US LAST MONTH. KIND OF A A A DIFFERENT APPROACH ENTIRELY OR A A A DIFFERENT BUCKET ENTIRELY. BUT YOU ARE CORRECT THAT ALL OF THESE THINGS NEED TO MESH. AND IF THIS IS OUR STATED GOAL, THEN ALL OF THESE THINGS SHOULD BE SUPPORTING THAT. AND I THINK A LOT OF THAT HAS BEEN THAT RECENT DISCUSSION ABOUT CONTRIBUTING VERSUS NON-CONTRIBUTING, WHICH WAS JUST PRESENTED TO US. SO I THINK THAT'S GONNA BE HELPFUL FOR US TOO. WE KNOW THOSE PROPERTIES THAT ARE, WERE SHADED OUT AND, BUT, SO, BUT YOU'RE RIGHT. I, IT'S, UM, GONNA BE A LOT. IT'S HARD TO DETERMINE WHAT'S THE CHARACTER THERE, . MM-HMM. . YEAH. SO ANYWAY, UM, ANY MORE QUESTIONS? NOT ON THAT. OKAY. . VERY GOOD. DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE FOR US? OKAY, I JUST, A COUPLE OF OTHER UPDATES. UM, THE ALTERNATIVE MATERIALS DOCUMENT, I AM DUE TO HAVE A FINAL DRAFT AT THE END OF JULY. UM, SO HOPEFULLY THAT DOCUMENT WILL BE COMING BEFORE YOU, UM, FOR ADOPTION. AND IT IS AGAIN, JUST MEANT TO BE A RESOURCE FOR BOTH STAFF AND APPLICANTS AND YOURSELVES, YOU KNOW, THAT BE WOULD BE WITHIN THE LIBRARY OF RESOURCES THAT WE CAN ALL REFER TO. UM, OUR 3D DEMONSTRATION FOR NEXT MONTH IS STILL ON TRACK. WE ARE STILL PLANNING TO DO THAT AND I'M NOT SURE TO WHAT EXTENT WE'LL BE DOING THAT. PERHAPS WE LOOK AT SOME OF THE, UM, SUGGESTED CODE UPDATES OR DEPENDING ON HOW MUCH TIME THE FOLKS WHO ACTUALLY ARE DOING THIS WITHIN OUR DIVISION HAVE, WE MAY DO SOMETHING SIMPLER, BUT YOU WILL SEE A DEMONSTRATION NEXT MONTH AND SEE THE POWER OF THIS TOOL, WHICH IS PRETTY AMAZING. AND THAT IS ALL I HAD. SARAH. I I WANT TO COVER THIS LAST TOPIC IN THE OPEN MEETING BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO BE ACCUSED SINCE IT'S A CONVERSATION WITH THE FIVE OF US. I DON'T WANT TO BE ACCUSED OF VIOLATING THE, UM, THE OPEN MEETINGS LAW AND UNDERSTOOD. AND I THINK IF THE, IF THE PARTIES WATCH THIS, I DON'T THINK IT'S GONNA BE NECESSARILY OFFENSIVE AND MAYBE NONE OF YOU WILL FEEL THIS WAY. BUT WHEN I READ THE REPORT THAT OUR CONSULTANT PREPARED, AND I THINK OUR CONSULTANT DOES A REALLY GOOD JOB OF POINTING OUT ARCHITECTURAL ISSUES, POINTING OUT HISTORIC PRECEDENTS, HOW, HOW APPLICANTS, UM, THEIR APPLICATIONS RESPOND TO OUR CODE. BUT THERE WERE TWO THINGS THAT STRUCK ME AS MAYBE THEY SHOULDN'T BE IN THERE. ONE OF THEM IS THE, UH, THEY REFER TO COST A NUMBER OF PLACES. AND IT SEEMS THAT'S NOT A PART OF WHAT WE DISCUSS. AND SO FREQUENTLY OUR BOARDS LIKE OURS ARE ACCUSED OF INCREASING THE COST OF PEOPLE'S PROJECTS. UM, WHETHER OR NOT THAT'S TRUE IS A WHOLE DIFFERENT CONVERSATION, BUT, AND WE, AND SO WHEN YOU'RE APPROVING MATERIAL OR MAKING MATERIAL CHOICES, YOU DON'T DO IT BASED ON COST. AND WE'LL EVEN TELL THAT TO OWNERS, YOU KNOW, THIS ISN'T ABOUT COST AND WE CAN'T MAKE A DECISION, IT'S ABOUT OUR CODE. BUT THERE ARE A COUPLE PLACES WHERE, UM, SHE WAS QUESTIONING A CHOICE BECAUSE IT'S EXPENSIVE. WELL, I THAT'S THE OWNER'S DECISION. I AGREE. IT STUCK OUT FOR ME AS WELL. OKAY. AND I THOUGHT IT'S NOT OUR CHOICE. IF WE SAY SOMETHING, IT, THEY MAKE THE DEC THE, THE APPLICANT WOULD MAKE THE DECISION OF WHETHER TO, AND, AND SINCE IT'S A PUBLIC DOCUMENT, I I THINK THEY, THEY COULD FIND IT OFFENSIVE [01:05:01] AND YEAH. YOU KNOW, THE, THE APPLICANT OR THE MORE LIKELY THE OWNER WHO READS THIS. THE OTHER, THE OTHER WAS A LITTLE BIT ABOUT TONE. UM, THERE ARE WAYS TO SAY THINGS DON'T MEET THE CODE, UM, WITHOUT CALLING 'EM PROBLEMS. UM, WITHOUT SAYING IT MAKES NO SENSE. AND, AND I THOUGHT, I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU FEEL ABOUT THAT NOW WHEN YOU'RE AN ARCHITECTURE STUDENT OR YOU'RE TEACHING ARCHITECTURE, PEOPLE SAY A LOT WORSE THINGS ABOUT PEOPLE'S PROJECTS, BUT PEOPLE SAY WHAT A LOT WORSE THINGS ABOUT PEOPLE'S A LOT WORSE. UM, BUT, AND SO MAYBE THESE ARE YOUNGER PEOPLE WRITING THESE REPORTS, SO MAYBE THEY'RE, THEY'RE UM, SORT OF FOLLOWING THAT PATTERN. BUT TO ME, THE TONE OF THOSE KIND OF COMMENTS. YOU CAN SAY SOMETHING DOESN'T MEET THE CODE OR IS INAPPROPRIATE, BUT YOU DON'T HAVE TO SAY IT'S A PROBLEM OR IT MAKES NO SENSE. UM, SO I DID THAT. DOES THAT STRIKE ANYBODY ELSE OR NO, NO. I AGREE. IT'S A GOOD, GOOD POINT ON THAT. YEP. WE WILL MAKE NOTE OF THAT AND WE APPRECIATE THAT FEEDBACK AND WE WILL WORK WITH OUR, OUR CONSULTANTS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE THE RIGHT TONE AND, AND WE, I THINK THEY DO A GOOD JOB, SO MAKE SURE YES, MAKE SURE THEY'RE, THEY'RE AWARE OF THAT, THAT, AND IF THEY'RE WATCHING, BUT I THINK THEY DO A GOOD JOB AND IT'S JUST, YOU KNOW, HOW YOU SAY THINGS, I THINK IS YEP. OKAY. WE CAN POLISH THAT. ALL RIGHT. WELL, YOU'RE NOT, YEAH, THEY'RE THE ONES, BUT. ALL RIGHT. IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE TO DISCUSS TONIGHT? ALL RIGHT, SIR. I'LL GO AHEAD AND MAKE A MOTION TO ADJOURN. ALL RIGHT. OR ADJOURNED. . * This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.