[00:00:02]
I'VE BEEN INFORMED THAT THE CLOCK AT THE BACK OF THE ROOM IS NOT ACCURATE, THAT IT IS ACTUALLY SIX 30
[CALL TO ORDER]
AND, UM, WE ARE REQUIRED TO START PROMPTLY AT SIX 30.SO I WANNA WELCOME THOSE OF YOU WHO ARE HERE TO THE CITY OF DUBLIN ARCHITECTS FOR REVIEW BOARD MEETING.
THIS IS FOR ANYONE WHO'S ON THE LIVE STREAM.
THIS MEETING IS BEING HELD AT 5 5 5 5 PERIMETER DRIVE.
YOU CAN ALWAYS ACCESS LIVE STREAM, UM, VIDEO OF THIS OR PAST MEETINGS, THE CITY'S WEBSITE.
WE WELCOME PUBLIC PARTICIPATION, UM, INCLUDING PUBLIC COMMENTS ON THE CASES OF THE PROCEDURE.
THIS EVENING FOR EACH CASE WILL BEGIN WITH A STAFF PRESENTATION FOLLOWED BY AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE APPLICANT TO MAKE A PRESENTATION.
THE BOARD WILL ASK CLARIFYING QUESTIONS OF THE STAFF AND THE APPLICANT.
THE BOARD WILL HEAR PUBLIC COMMENTS FROM THE PODIUM.
IF YOU DO COME UP TO THE PODIUM, WE WOULD LIKE YOU TO INTRODUCE YOURSELVES AND GIVE US YOUR ADDRESS.
UM, WE'LL THEN SEE IF THERE HAVE BEEN ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED BY EMAIL.
AFTER WE HAVE ALL THE PUBLIC COMMENTS, THE BOARD WILL DELIBERATE ON THE CASE.
UM, THIS EVENING, FOR THOSE CASES REQUIRING A DECISION, IT WILL REQUIRE, UM, THREE OF US.
WE'RE EXPECTING ONE OTHER BOARD MEMBER HERE THIS EVENING, BUT IT WILL REQUIRE THREE AFFIRMATIVE VOTES FOR US TO RENDER A DECISION THIS EVENING.
SO, UM, JUST KEEP THAT IN MIND.
UM, IF YOU'D ALL RISE, WE BEGIN OUR MEETINGS WITH THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
JUDY, WILL YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL? MR. COTTER? HERE.
WE, WE HOPE, WE HOPE TRAFFIC BEING WHAT IT IS.
[ACCEPTANCE OF DOCUMENTS and APPROVAL OF MINUTES]
UM, IS THERE A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE DOCUMENTS IN THE RECORD AND APPROVE THE A RB MEETING MINUTES FROM THE APRIL? APRIL 17TH AND APRIL 24TH? SO MOVED.ALRIGHT, OUR BOARD IS RESPONSIBLE FOR REVIEW OF CONSTRUCTION AND MODIFICATIONS OR ALTERATIONS TO ANY SITE IN THE AREA SUBJECT TO ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF ZONING CODE SECTION 1 5 3 POINT.
THIS BOARD HAS A DECISION MAKING RESPONSIBILITY ON THESE CASES.
ANYONE WHO INTENDS TO ADDRESS THE BOARD THIS EVENING MUST BE SWORN IN.
SO IF YOU'RE GOING TO ADDRESS US, UH, PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND AND ANSWER IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.
DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH IN YOUR TESTIMONY THIS EVENING? OKAY.
ALRIGHT, WE'LL BEGIN WITH OUR FIRST CASE.
[Case #24-044-MPR ]
THIS IS, UM, A JAMES DAVIS HOUSE.THIS IS A MINOR PROJECT REVIEW.
THIS IS A PROPOSAL FOR DRIVEWAY MODIFICATIONS TO AN EXISTING RESIDENTIAL BUILDING IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT.
POINT SEVEN FIVE ACRE SITE IS ZONED PUD LEWELLEN FARMS AND IS LOCATED APPROXIMATELY 300 FEET NORTH OF THE INTERSECTION OF DUBLIN ROAD AND HERTFORD LANE.
SO, RODDY, WHENEVER YOU'RE READY.
THIS IS A REQUEST FOR DRIVER MODIFICATIONS AT 5 7 0 7 DUBLIN ROAD.
THE 0.75 ACRE SITE IS LOCATED IN LOUISVILLE FARMS. IT HAS APPROXIMATELY A HUNDRED FEET, 150 FEET FRONTAGE ALONG DUBLIN ROAD.
THE SITE HERE IS HIGHLIGHTED IN YELLOW.
HERE IS THE RECENT CASE HISTORY.
THE BOARD REVIEWED THE MINOR PROJECT REVIEW APPLICATION IN 2023 AND APPROVED A TWO STORY RESIDENTIAL EDITION.
THE PROJECT IS CURRENTLY UNDER CONSTRUCTION.
THE HOME IS LISTED IN THE NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES.
IT IS A GREEK REVIVAL HOME, WHICH DATES BACK TO 1840.
THE HOME IS CHARACTERIZED BY LARGE CUT STONE COINS AND A RESIST ENTRY FACING DUBLIN ROAD.
TONIGHT WE HAVE A REQUEST TO BUILD A NEW DRIVEWAY AND ADDITIONAL SITE IMPROVEMENTS.
CURRENTLY 5 7 0 7 DUBLIN ROAD AND 5 7 1 5 DUBLIN ROAD SHARE.
A DRIVEWAY LOCATED ENTIRELY ON 5 7 1 5
[00:05:01]
DUBLIN ROAD WITH ACCESS TO APPLICANT'S PROPERTY GRANTED THROUGH AN EASEMENT AGREEMENT.AFTER RECEIVING MINOR PROJECT REVIEW APPROVAL IN MAY, 2023, THE APPLICANT REMOVED SOME MATURE TREES IN THE SOUTHEAST AND CREATED A TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION DRIVEWAY FOR CONSTRUCTION VEHICLES, WHICH WAS BRANCHING OFF FROM THE MAIN DRIVEWAY.
THE PAINTED ORANGE LINE HERE SHOWS THE PROPOSED DRIVEWAY LOCATION.
THE APPLICANT NOW SEEKS TO FORMALIZE THIS TEMPORARY ENTRANCE AND PROPOSES A SEPARATE ASPHALT DRIVEWAY.
EXISTING CONSTRUCTION ACCESS IS HIGHLIGHTED HERE IN BLUE AND THE PROPOSED AS A SEPARATE DRIVEWAY ALIGNED TO CREATE BUFFER SPACE BETWEEN TWO PROPERTIES.
THE ACCESS POINT FROM DUBLIN ROAD WILL REMAIN THE SAME.
THE APPLICANT PROPOSES TO REMOVE EXISTING ASPHALT BETWEEN THE TWO PROPERTIES, WHICH IS AT THE RARE HIGHLIGHTED HERE IN RED.
THAT TO ALLOW FOR SOME LANDSCAPE SCREENING.
THE AREA WILL BE PARTIALLY SEATED AND PARTIALLY LEFT WITH DIRT AS IT FALLS OVER TWO PROPERTY LINES.
A NEW EASEMENT AGREEMENT WOULD ALLOW EACH PROPERTY OWNER TO DEVELOP THE AREA WITH THEIR DESIRED LANDSCAPING.
ADDITIONALLY, A FIVE FOOT SIDEWALK IS PROPOSED TO CONNECT TO THE DRIVEWAY FROM THE FRONT APPROACH INSTEAD OF THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED SIDEWALK, IT IS HIGHLIGHTED HERE IN GREEN.
THE APPLICANT HAS NO PROVIDED INFORMATION DURING THE REVIEW ON THE SIDEWALK MATERIAL AND IS REQUIRED TO PROVIDE MATERIAL DETAILS PRIOR TO AMENDING BILLING PERMIT APPLICATION.
THIS IS INCLUDED AS A CONDITION OF APPROVAL.
THE APPROXIMATE AREA OF THE PROPOSED DRIVEWAY IS 1500 SQUARE FEET AND THE PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS INCREASES A LOT COVERAGE TO 14.8% FROM 14.6%.
IT IS STILL WITHIN THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED LOT COVERAGE OF 45% WITHIN THE R THREE ZONING DISTRICT.
LISTED HERE ARE THE MINOR PROJECT REVIEW CRITERIA.
MOST OF THE CRITERIA ARE EITHER MET OR MET WITH CONDITION OR NOT APPLICABLE, BUT THIS STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE MINOR PROJECT REVIEW WITH ONE CONDITION THE APPLICANT TO PROVIDE SIDEWALK BUILDING MATERIALS DETAILS PRIOR TO AMENDING THE BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION WITH BUILDING STANDARDS.
WITH THAT, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AND THE APPLICANT IS IN ATTENDANCE TODAY.
ANY ANY QUESTIONS FOR RODDY FOR ME? WOULD THE APPLICANT LIKE TO MAKE A PRESENTATION? NO QUESTION.
DOES ANYBODY HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT? I DON'T.
HAS, HAS THERE BEEN ANY PUBLIC I WE SAW THE LETTER.
I THINK ALL OF US SAW THE LETTER IN THE PACKET.
UM, HAS THERE BEEN ANY OTHER PUBLIC COMMENT? THERE HAS NOT.
AND, AND I FAILED TO ASK, IS THERE ANYONE HERE IN THE AUDIENCE, UM, WHO WANTS TO SPEAK TO THIS? OKAY.
IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINOR PROJECT WITH THE ONE CONDITION? SO MOVED.
[Case #24-065ARB-MPR ]
EVENING IS 91 SOUTH HIGH STREET.THIS IS A MINOR PROJECT REVIEW.
THIS IS A PROPOSAL FOR EXTERIOR LIGHTING AND SIGN MODIFICATIONS TO AN EXISTING BUILDING IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT.
THE 0.19 ACRE SITE IS ZONED HD HS HISTORIC SOUTH DISTRICT AND IS LOCATED NORTHWEST OF THE INTERSECTION OF SOUTH HIGH STREET AND PENNY HILL.
TONIGHT WE HAVE A REQUEST FOR AN APPROVAL OF A LIGHTNING PLAN AND A PROJECTING SIGN FOR 91 SOUTH HIGH STREET.
THE SITE HERE IS HIGHLIGHTED IN YELLOW AND A ZONED HISTORIC DISTRICT HISTORIC SOUTH.
IT IS LOCATED NORTHWEST AT AN INTERSECTION OF SOUTH HIGH STREET IN BENE HILL LANE.
HERE IS A QUICK HISTORY OF THE PROJECT.
MOST RECENTLY STAFF ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVED MODIFICATIONS TO CURBING AND LANDSCAPE SCREENING ALONG THE NORTH AND THE WEST, AS WELL AS A CHANGE IN PAINT COLOR FOR SIDING AND TRIM.
AT THE JULY, 2023, A RB MEETING, THE BOAT APPROVED EXTERIOR MODIFICATIONS WITH ONE CONDITION.
TONIGHT THE APPLICANT REQUESTS TO ADDRESS THE CONDITION OF APPROVAL ALONG WITH A REQUEST FOR A PROJECTING SIGN.
PHOTOS HERE SHOW SOUTH HIGH STREET FACADE, MILLANE FACADE AND PINE HILL LANE FACADE.
THE SITE IS CURRENTLY UNDER CONSTRUCTION AND THE APPLICANT HAS REMOVED ALL NON-COMPLIANCE LIGHTING ON THE FACADE, WHICH FACES THE SOUTH HIGH STREET
[00:10:03]
AS A PART OF FIRST REQUEST.TONIGHT THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO REPLACE THREE EXISTING LIGHT FIXTURES WITH NEW ONE.
TWO OF THE LANTERNS ARE ON THE MAIN ENTRANCE, WHICH FACES SPINNING HILL LANE AND ONE IS AT A REAR ENTRANCE, WHICH FACES MEL LANE.
THE LIGHTING LOCATION IS SHOWN HERE IN GREEN.
APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO USE SCAPE COD WALL-MOUNTED LANTERN IN ZINC FINISH APPROXIMATELY 13 INCHES BY 26 INCHES.
STAFF IS SUPPORTED OF THE LANTERN DESIGN AND THE FINISH AND IS APPROPRIATE WITHIN THE SURROUNDING AREA.
THE PROPOSED LIGHTING INCLUDES A HUNDRED WATT EQUIVALENT 12 WATT LED LIGHTS, WHICH IS EQUIVALENT TO 1600 LIMENS PER COAT.
ANY DECORATIVE LIGHTING THAT EXCEEDS 900 LIMENS MUST BE CONCEALED OR SHIELDED WITH A FULL CUTOFF FIXTURE TO MINIMIZE GLARE.
THE APPLICANT HAS CONFIRMED THAT THE WATTAGE OF LAMP WILL NOT EXCEED 900 LE LUMEN AND THIS IS INCLUDED AS A CONDITION OF APPROVAL AS A PART OF SECOND REQUEST.
TONIGHT, APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A PROJECTING SIGN DUE TO THE CHANGE OF BUILDING USE.
THE BUILDING HAS AN EXISTING PROJECTING SIGN BRACKET, WHICH IS LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER.
THE BRACKET IS OVER A FENCE LANDSCAPE AREA AND PROVIDES VISIBILITY FOR PEDESTRIANS AS WELL AS VEHICLES FROM DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS.
APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A NEW SIGN BENEATH THE EXISTING METAL BRACKET, BUT TOP SIGN HAS A LOGO AND THE BOTTOM SIGN HAS THE TEXT.
THE PANELS ARE HUNG WITH SUPPORT OF IOS.
THE PROPOSED SIGN IS CONSTRUCTED WITH TWO-SIDED SGU IN TWO COLORS, IRON OLD AND PHARAOHS GOLD IRON OLD IS APPROVED COLOR FOR WINDOWS AND DOOR FRAME FOR THIS PROJECT.
THE SIGN FACES IS APPROXIMATELY THREE INCHES THICK WITH HALF INCHES RACE LETTERS AND THREE FOURTH INCH RACE BORDERS.
STAFF IS SUPPORTIVE OF THE PROPOSED SCIENCE AND ALL THE CODE REQUIREMENTS ARE MET.
THE APPLICANT MAY APPLY FOR A SIGNED PERMIT AFTER THE BOARD'S APPROVAL TONIGHT.
LISTED HERE ARE THE MINOR PROJECT REVIEW CRITERIA, WHICH ARE EITHER MET WITH CONDITIONS OR THEY'RE MET OR THEY'RE NOT APPLICABLE.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF MINOR PROJECT REVIEW WITH FOLLOWING CONDITION THAT AT INSTALLATION THE APPLICANT SHALL ENSURE THE LUMEN OUTPUT OF THE LAMPS ARE NO MORE THAN 109 HUNDRED LUMEN PER LAMP TO MEET THE CODE.
WITH THAT, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
UH, IS THE APPLICANT HERE, DOES THE APPLICANT WANNA MAKE ANY SORT OF PRESENTATION? NO.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? NOPE.
IS ANYONE HERE TO SPEAK REGARDING THIS PROJECT? ANYONE ELSE? OKAY.
ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS SUBMITTED? NO.
BOARD MEMBERS, ANY DISCUSSION? NO.
ALRIGHT, WE CAN MOVE ON TO THE MOTION.
IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINOR PROJECT WITH THE ONE CONDITION? SO MOVED.
[Case #24-070-MSP ]
THIRD CASE THIS EVENING IS 25 WEST BRIDGE STREET.THIS IS THE INSTALLATION OF A BUILDING MOUNTED PROJECTING SIGN AND DIRECTORY SIGN LOCATED IN HISTORIC DISTRICT.
THE 0.24 ACRE SITE IS ZONED HDHC HISTORIC CORE DISTRICT AND IS LOCATED SOUTHEAST OF THE INTERSECTION OF WEST BRIDGE STREET AND MILL LANE.
THIS IS A REQUEST FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF A MASTER SIGN PLAN FOR 25 WESTBRIDGE STREET.
THE SITE IS LOCATED SOUTHEAST OF THE INTERSECTION OF WESTBRIDGE STREET AND MILL LANE WITH FRONTAGE ON BOTH STREETS ZONED HISTORIC COURT.
THE TENANT SPACE IS LOCATED ON THE SECOND FLOOR IN THE NORTHWEST PORTION OF THE OLD DUBLIN TOWN CENTER BUILDING WITH AN ENTRY DOOR ON MILL LANE.
MASTER SIGN PLANS FOR OTHER TENANTS IN THIS BUILDING HAVE BEEN APPROVED OVER THE YEARS BEFORE THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE HISTORIC DISTRICT CODE AND THE BRIDGE STREET DISTRICT CODE.
THE OLD DUBLIN TOWN CENTER, UH, BUILDING WAS APPROVED AS A PLANNED DISTRICT, UH, WITH A COMPREHENSIVE SIGN PACKAGE IN 1999, WHICH OCCLUDED APPROVED SIGN LOCATIONS.
SINCE THE HISTORIC DISTRICT CODE WAS ADOPTED IN 2021, THE SIGN CODE FOR THE DISTRICT SUPERSEDES THE ORIGINAL SIGN PACKAGE.
APPROVAL OF A MASTER SIGN PLAN IS REQUESTED TO ADDRESS UNIQUE, UH, CONDITIONS OF THE PREEXISTING
[00:15:01]
SIGN PLAN IN THE CONTEXT OF THE HISTORIC DISTRICT CODE.SO THE LEFT IMAGE HERE SHOWS THE EXISTING SIGN BRACKET LOCATION FACING WESTBRIDGE STREET.
THE RIGHT IMAGE SHOWS A PICTURE OF THE EXISTING DIRECTORY SIGN FRAME ADJACENT TO THE TENANT ENTRY DOOR ON MILL LANE.
UH, NOTE THAT THE SIGN SHOWN WILL BE REMADE TO MEET CODE ONCE IT IS APPROVED BY A RB.
SPACES LOCATED ABOVE THE GROUND FLOOR ARE PERMITTED.
THIS INCLUDES A DIRECTORY SIGN, WINDOW SIGN, OR A PROJECTING SIGN.
AN ADDITIONAL SIGN TRIGGERS A MASTER SIGN PLAN REQUEST.
THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TWO SIGNS, A 6.13 SQUARE FOOT PROJECTING SIGN AT THE CORNER OF THE BUILDING, AND A 1.5 SQUARE FOOT DIRECTORY SIGN, UH, WITHIN THE EXISTING SIGN FRAME ADJACENT TO THE TENANT ENTRY DOOR.
THESE SIGN LOCATIONS ARE CIRCLED HERE IN RED.
THE PROJECTING SIGN EXTENDS APPROXIMATELY 2.58 FEET OVER THE MILL LANE RIGHT OF WAY WITH APPROXIMATELY 13 FEET OF CLEARANCE UNDER THE SIGN.
THE CITY ENGINEER IS SUPPORTIVE OF THE SIGN LOCATION AND THE RIGHT OF WAY ENCROACHMENT THAT ALIGNS WITH OTHER SIGNS IN THE SURROUNDING AREA WITH SIMILAR CONDITIONS.
ALL DIMENSIONAL CODE REQUIREMENTS ARE MET AND STAFF SUPPORTS THE PROPOSED SIGN LOCATIONS THAT ALIGN WITH THE 1999 COMPREHENSIVE SIGN PACKAGE SIGNS ARE CONSTRUCTED OF HDU PANELING DIMENSIONAL TEXT AND LOGO CODE PERMITS A MAXIMUM OF THREE COLORS WHERE LOGOS AND TEXTS ARE INCLUDED IN A CORPORATE LOGO IDENTIFIED AS ONE COLOR.
VARIOUS FONT STYLES AND TEXT SIZES ON BOTH SIGNS DEVIATE FROM THE GUIDELINES.
HOWEVER, STAFF SUPPORTS THE SIMPLICITY OF BOTH SIGNS.
THE DIRECTORY SIGNS TEXT DIMENSIONALITY DOES NOT MEET CODE AT AN EIGHTH OF AN INCH.
HOWEVER, STAFF, UH, SUPPORTS THE LESSER SIGN DIMENSIONALITY THAN, UH, THE CODE PERMITS BECAUSE IT IS MORE APPROPRIATE TO THE SIGN SIZE.
THIS IS A RENDERING OF THE PROPOSED PROJECTING SIGN AND ITS LOCATION AT STREET VIEW.
ALL MASTER SIGN PLAN CRITERIA ARE MET AND PLANNING RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE MASTER SIGN PLAN WITH CONDITION THAT THE APPLICANT APPLIES FOR AND OBTAINS PERMANENT SIGN PERMITS FOR BUILDING STANDARDS.
WITH THAT, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
UH, MR. THOMPSON, DO YOU, WOULD YOU LIKE TO ADD TO THAT PRESENTATION, UH, JUST BRIEFLY? SURE.
UM, SO I'M ERIC THOMPSON WITH VSW ARCHITECT.
I JUST WANTED TO SAY OH, AND, AND, AND I REALIZE YOUR ADDRESS MIGHT BE ON THE SIGN, BUT YOU DO NEED TO GIVE US YOUR ADDRESS VERBALLY.
UM, SO I THINK THE CONTENT HAS BEEN WELL COVERED.
I, WE JUST WANTED TO SAY WE'RE A 70-YEAR-OLD OHIO ARCHITECTURAL FIRM.
WE'VE DECIDED TO, UM, UH, EXPAND AND HAVE CHOSEN DUBLIN.
WE, AND PART OF THE REASON WE CHOSE IT IS THE, YOU KNOW, HISTORIC NATURE AND THE, UM, SO WE'RE VERY RESPECTFUL OF THAT.
UH, CERTAINLY ONE OF THE THINGS THAT ATTRACTED US ABOUT THIS LOCATION WAS HAVING A PRESENCE ON BRIDGE STREET.
THERE WAS AN EXISTING, I DUNNO IF, UM, MS. MULLINAX MENTIONED IT, THERE WAS AN EXISTING BRACKET ON BRIDGE STREET, APPARENTLY THAT WAS NOT, UH, OFFICIAL
SO, UH, WORKING WITH THE CITY, UH, WE'VE LOCATED IT, UH, ON MILL STREET, BUT WHERE IT STILL HAS SOME VISIBILITY AND PRESENCE, UH, FROM, FROM BRIDGE.
AND THEN THE SECOND THING I WOULD SAY IS, WHILE WHAT WE NORMALLY WOULD THINK OF AS A DIRECTORY SIGN, THIS, UH, HAS MULTIPLE ADDRESSES IN OUR CASE.
UM, IT'S SIMPLY SO THAT THEY CAN FIND IT JUST HAS OUR NAME AND ADDRESS.
SO, AND OTHER THAN THAT, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THEY MAY HAVE.
UM, AND HAS THERE BEEN ANY PUBLIC COMMENT? NO.
ANYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE HERE TO SPEAK TO THIS? I, I KNOW MOST PEOPLE IN THE AUDIENCE, SO.
UM, IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE ANY, ANY OTHER DISCUSSION AMONGST BOARD MEMBERS? NOPE.
WE APPROVE THE, UH, OH, DO I HAVE IT IN HERE? THE INSTALLATION OF THE BUILDING MOUNTED SIGN AND DIRECTORY SIGN LOCATED IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT AT 25 WEST BRIDGE STREET
[00:20:01]
MASTER SIGN PLAN AS PROPOSED WITH THE ONE CONDITION.OH, WITH ONE CONDITION? THAT'S RIGHT.
THAT THE, THE CONDITION MENTIONED IN THE PLANNING REPORT, WHICH IS THAT, EXCUSE ME.
THE APPLICANT WILL SEEK AND OBTAIN PERMANENT SIGN APPROVAL.
[Case #24-059ARB & Case #24-029ARB-MPR ]
CASE AND WE HAVE, UM, GROUPED.ALRIGHT, WE'RE GOING TO DO THESE SEPARATELY.
SO THIS IS 17 NORTH RIVER VIEW.
IT'S A DEMOLITION AND A MINOR PROJECT REVIEW.
THIS IS A PROPOSAL FOR THE DEMOLITION OF A LANDMARK ACCESSORY STRUCTURE AND A PROPOSAL FOR THE REMODEL AND CONSTRUCTION OF AN ADDITION TO AN EXISTING HOME POINT.
ONE ACRE SITE IS OWNED HDHR, HISTORIC RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT AND IS LOCATED APPROXIMATELY 70 FEET SOUTHWEST OF THE INTERSECTION OF WING HILL LANE AND NORTH RIVERVIEW STREET.
SO SARAH, IT LOOKS LIKE YOU'RE ALREADY, SO YES.
THANK YOU FOR THE INTRODUCTION.
WE HAVE MINOR PROJECT REVIEW, SOME WAIVERS AND A DEMOLITION OF A LANDMARK STRUCTURE TO CONSIDER TONIGHT.
THE SITE IS LOCATED BETWEEN NORTH RIVERVIEW AND NORTH BLACKSMITH SOUTH OF WING HILL LANE AS SHOWN IN YELLOW HERE.
THE SITE IS ZONED HISTORIC RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT AND IT'S ADJACENT TO BOTH HISTORIC CORE AND HISTORIC PUBLIC.
THIS ADDRESS IS A 1920S CRAFTSMAN BUNGALOW.
IT'S A LANDMARK BUILDING WITH ORIGINAL INTACT FEATURES.
UM, AMONG MANY FEATURES ARE THE SIDING, THE WINDOWS, AND THE UNIQUE DRAIN HOLES.
AT THE BOTTOM OF THE PORCH THERE, THE LANDMARK OUTBUILDING FACES BLACKSMITH LANE.
AND AGAIN, THAT'S THE SUBJECT OF THE DEMOLITION REQUEST.
TONIGHT WE'LL START WITH SOME OF THE SETBACK, WAIVER AND VARIANCE INFORMATION TO CONSIDER TONIGHT.
THESE ARE BASIC ZONING REQUIREMENTS AND THE LOT COVERAGE REQUIREMENTS ARE MET.
AS SHOWN ON THIS CHART, THE BUILDING FOOTPRINT FOOTPRINT REQUEST IS FOR 134.7% OF THAT ALLOWED BY CODE.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A 20% WAIVER FROM THIS BOARD TONIGHT AND WILL REQUEST THE DIFFERENCE AT A VARIANCE HEARING TOMORROW NIGHT.
IN FRONT OF THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS, THE NUMBER PRESENTED IS BELOW THE BOARD'S DIRECTION.
THIS BOARD'S DIRECTION OF 27 57 SQUARE IN MARCH OF THIS YEAR.
THE REAR SETBACK IS CURRENTLY SHOWN AT 20 FEET, WHERE THIS BOARD COULD PERMIT 24.4 FEET VIA A WAIVER.
AND AGAIN, THE APPLICANT WILL BE REQUESTING THE DIFFERENCE AT BZA TOMORROW NIGHT.
TAKING A LOOK AT THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN, THE HISTORIC HOUSE IS IN DARKER GRAY AND THE ADDITION IS IN LIGHTER GRAY.
THE LANDMARK SHED SUBJECT OF THE DEMOLITION REQUEST IS SHOWN IN ORANGE.
THE HIGHWAY EASEMENTS ARE SHOWN IN RED WITH THE BLACKSMITH RIGHT OF WAY SHOWN IN BLACK STAFF.
AND THE APPLICANT HAVE AGREED THAT THE BUILDING MAY START FIVE FEET BEHIND THE REAR RED LINE.
AND THAT'S TO MINIMIZE INTERFERENCE BETWEEN VEHICLES, BLOCKING THE RIGHT OF WAY AND EVENTUAL SIDEWALK IN THAT AREA.
MOVING ON TO THE REAR YARD SETBACKS, UH, THE REQUIRED SETBACK IS SHOWN IN LIGHT BLUE.
THE WAIVER REQUESTED SETBACK IS IN DARK BLUE AND THE VARIANCE REQUESTED SETBACK IS IN PURPLE.
THE TREES TO BE REMOVED ARE SHOWN IN GREEN HERE.
TAKING A LOOK AT THE ELEVATIONS, THIS IS THE NORTH RIVER VIEW OR FRONT ELEVATION.
AGAIN, IT SHOWS THE CRAFTSMAN BUNGALOW WITH THE ADDITIONS BEHIND.
AGAIN, THE STRUCTURE IS VERY INTACT IN BOTH FORM AND MATERIALS.
THE APPLICANT, UH, IS KEEPING THE HISTORIC PORCH DETAILS AND WE HOPE THAT THAT INCLUDES THE WEEP HOLES IN THE FRONT OF THE PORCH AS WELL.
[00:25:01]
NORTH ELEVATION.THERE ARE A NUMBER OF ROOF PITCH WAIVERS NEEDED, AND THESE ARE SHOWN IN THE ORANGE CIRCLES.
THEY REPEAT THE ORIGINAL SHED ROOF FORM SHOWN IN BLUE.
THERE'S A SINGLE WINDOW HERE BEING ADDED.
IT'S CURRENTLY A DOUBLE WINDOW.
IT APPEARS TO BE A LITTLE UNLIKE THE ORIGINAL WINDOWS IN THE ASPECT RATIO.
THIS WINDOW HERE IN THE BASEMENT IS BEING ADDED.
THE FOUNDATION IS TO BE REPLACED AND SLIGHTLY RAISED ACCORDING TO THE APPLICANT.
AND STAFF HAS CONCERNS ABOUT THOSE MATERIALS, WHICH WE'LL DISCUSS IN DETAIL IN A LITTLE BIT.
THIS IS THE SOUTH ELEVATION NOTE, THE USE OF VERTICAL SIDING ON THE ADDITION.
THAT HASN'T BEEN PREVIOUSLY OR IT HASN'T BEEN APPROVED YET UNDER THE NEW CODE.
IT WAS APPROVED PREVIOUSLY FOR A PROJECT ON SOUTH HIGH STREET, BUT UNDER THE OLD CODE, THERE'S ANOTHER ROOF PITCH WAIVER HERE LOCATED IN ORANGE.
THE DEEP PORCH ON THIS ELEVATION EMPHASIZES THE HYPHEN THROUGH SHADOW LINES.
THE WINDOWS HERE SHOW TRADITIONAL PATTERNS ACCORDING TO THE GUIDELINES, AND THE SKYLIGHTS ARE APPROPRIATELY LOCATED WITHIN THE HYPHEN.
THIS IS THE PROPOSED VIEW FROM BLACKSMITH SHOWS THE VERTICAL SIDING AGAIN, AND THE HISTORIC HOUSE IS SEEN ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE.
THE PROPOSED THREE OVER ONE WINDOWS MATCH THE ORIGINAL WINDOWS AND NOTE THE BI-FOLD GARAGE DOOR.
MOVING ON INTO THE PROPOSED MATERIALS, UH, AT HIS STAIN OR STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF IS PROPOSED IN MEDIUM BRONZE.
THE FOUNDATION IS PROPOSED AS THE COLONIAL TAN LEDGE STONE FROM STONEYARD.
AND BY THE WAY, ALL OF THESE MATERIALS ARE UP IN FRONT OF YOU FOR 17.
THEY ARE ON THE LEFT HAND SIDE AS YOU'RE LOOKING AT THEM.
ALSO PROPOSED IS HARDY SHAKE, STRAIGHT EDGE SIDING TO REPLACE ALL OF THE ORIGINAL SIDING.
THIS PRODUCT DOES NOT REQUIRE A WAIVER, BUT STAFF DOES HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THE REPLACEMENT OF THE HISTORIC FABRIC.
ON THE ORIGINAL BUILDING, IT'S PROPOSED TO BE PAINTED DORIAN GRAY.
AND THEN PROPOSE FOR THE TRIM IS LP SMART SIDE, WHICH DOES REQUIRE A WAIVER WHICH STAFF SUPPORTS, AND IT'S TO BE PAINTED BLACK FOX.
TAKING A LOOK AT SOME OF THE MATERIALS THAT WE HAVE, SOME CONCERNS THAT ABOUT, UM, WE NOTE THAT REPLACEMENT OF HISTORIC MATERIALS IS THE LAST RESORT ACCORDING TO THE CODE, THE GUIDELINES AND THE ALTERNATIVE MATERIALS.
PRESERVATION AND REPAIR IS THE FIRST AND SECOND CHOICE.
SO LOOKING AT THE FOUNDATION, THE EXISTING ON THE LEFT IS A STONE FACE CONCRETE BLOCK.
IT'S VERY TYPICAL OF THE TIME.
AND IT HAS A STURDY RUSTICA APPEARANCE.
AND IT'S STILL AVAILABLE OR YOU CAN GET FAIRLY CLOSE REPLICAS OF THAT MATERIAL.
THE REQUESTED REPLACEMENT IS THE LEDGE STONE ON THE RIGHT.
IT'S MORE OF A DRY LAID APPEAR APPEARANCE THAT'S A LITTLE PERHAPS LESS ROBUST.
UM, IT'S LESS REGULAR IN SHAPE THAN THE CMU AND IT'S HIGH QUARTZ CONTENT GIVES IT KIND OF A, A SPARKLY APPEARANCE AS YOU'LL SEE ON THAT, THAT SAMPLE THERE.
THE SECOND AREA OF CONCERN IS THE SIDING.
THE APPLICANT WISHES TO REPLACE ALL THE SIDING ON THE HISTORIC HOUSE.
UH, IN DISCUSSIONS WITH THE APPLICANT TEAM, THEY BELIEVE THAT THE SHAKES ARE NOT ORIGINAL TO THE HOUSE.
THAT PERHAPS THIS WAS A FAUX SIDING OR A FAUX MATERIAL ADDED LATER.
THE OWNER ACTUALLY PROVIDED US WITH A COUPLE OF THE SHAKES, UM, WHICH ARE UPFRONT, AND WE FEEL THAT THEY MAY INDEED BE ORIGINAL TO THE BUILDING.
UH, SHOWN ON THE LEFT HAND PHOTO THERE IS TONGUE AND GROOVE SHEATHING UNDERNEATH.
THESE SHAKES WERE TAKEN FROM THE FRONT PORCH.
PERHAPS THIS IS A UNIQUE PORCH DETAIL.
[00:30:01]
TO DO A LITTLE BIT MORE INVESTIGATION TO FIND OUT EXACTLY WHAT'S THE STATUS OF THESE CEDAR SHAKES.BUT WE ARE CONCERNED WITH REPLACEMENT OF HISTORIC FABRIC.
THE REPLACEMENT MATERIAL WILL NOT HAVE THE CHARACTER AND THE IMPERFECTIONS OF THE CEDAR MATERIAL.
AS YOU CAN SEE ON THE PROPOSED MATERIAL UP FRONT, CEDAR SHAKE IS CERTAINLY WIDELY AVAILABLE FOR AREAS THAT NEED REPAIR.
STAFF AND THE APPLICANT HAVE AGREED TO A CONDITION THAT IF THE SHAKES ARE NOT ORIGINAL, UH, THE HARDY SHAKE MAY BE USED.
IF THE CEDAR SHAKES ARE FOUND TO BE NOT ORIGINAL, IF THERE'S DIFFERENT SIDING UNDERNEATH, FOR EXAMPLE, IF THAT WAS ADDED AT A LATER DATE, THE APPLICANT SHOULD MATCH THAT.
AND IF THE CEDAR SHAKES PROVE TO BE ORIGINAL TO THE ENTIRE HOUSE, THEN UH, WE'RE HOPING THAT THE APPLICANT WILL REPAIR AND OR REPLACE THOSE.
LIKE FOR LIKE, ADDITIONAL MATERIALS INCLUDE THERMALLY MODIFIED ASH STAINED WHITEWASH FOR THE SIDING.
ON THE ADDITION, IT'S A VERTICAL TONGUE AND GROOVE APPLICATION AS SEEN ON THE ELEVATIONS.
THEY PROPOSE TO USE MARVIN ULTIMATE ALUMINUM CLAD WINDOWS FOR THE ENTIRE HOUSE.
AND THESE WOULD BE THE THREE OVER ONE CUSTOM TO MATCH THE ORIGINALS FINISHED IN BRONZE.
THE SKYLIGHTS WILL BE VL FIXED IN MEDIUM BRONZE AND THE MAN DOORS ARE NOT YET KNOWN AND SUBJECTIVE.
A CONDITION OF APPROVAL SITE RELATED MATERIALS INCLUDE BELLARD, CAMBRIDGE, COBBLE PAVERS AND PEWTER FOR THE FRONT WALK.
THE GARAGE DOORS ARE BIFOLD, UH, STAINED WHITEWASH TO MATCH THE SIDING.
WE HAVE SOME CONCERNS THAT THE BIFOLD DOORS MAY PREVENT PARKING IN THE DRIVEWAY SINCE THAT DRIVEWAY IS RATHER SHORT TO BEGIN WITH, BASED ON THAT NEGOTIATED DRIVEWAY LENGTH, UM, WE DID QUESTION THAT CHOICE AND WE FEEL IT WILL DIMINISH THE UTILITY OF THE DRIVEWAY AND FORCE CARS BACK OUT INTO THE RIGHT OF WAY, WHICH IS NOT WHAT WE WANT.
THE LIGHTS ARE TO BE VINTAGE, SUSPENDED, PAINT SCONCE AND OIL RUBBED BRONZE.
AND THEN MOVING ALONG TO THE OUTBUILDING DETAILS.
THESE EXTERIOR AND INTERIOR PHOTOS WERE PROVIDED BY THE OWNER.
THE STRUCTURE IS IN THE HIGHWAY EASEMENT AS SHOWN ON THE DOCUMENTS.
SO ONTO OUR ANALYSIS FOR DEMOLITION CRITERIA FOR LANDMARK, UM, THEY ARE MOSTLY MET OR NOT APPLICABLE FOR THE WAIVER TO PERMIT A 20% INCREASE IN BUILDING FOOTPRINT, THIS WOULD EQUAL TWENTY THREE HUNDRED AND SEVENTY FIVE SQUARE FEET.
THESE ARE MOSTLY MET OR NOT APPLICABLE.
THE WAIVER TO PERMIT A 20% DECREASE IN REAR YARD SETBACK TO 24 FEET FOUR INCHES, OR 24.4 FEET.
MORE SPECIFICALLY IS EITHER MET OR NOT APPLICABLE.
THE WAIVER TO PERMIT ROOF PITCHES OF 2.5, 3.5, AND FOUR TO 12, WHERE A MINIMUM OF SIX 12 IS REQUIRED.
THE WAIVER FOR THE SMART SIDE TRIM MOST ARE MET OR NOT APPLICABLE AND THE MINOR PROJECT REVIEW CRITERIA ARE MET OR MET WITH CONDITIONS AND WAIVERS TO OR NOT APPLICABLE.
AND WITH THAT STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL FOR ALL WAIVER REQUESTS AS SHOWN HERE AND IN YOUR STAFF REPORT.
AND FINALLY, WE RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE MINOR PROJECT WITH THE CONDITIONS.
I'LL, I'LL JUST SUMMARIZE HERE, INSTRUCTIONS IN CASE THE VARIANCES ARE NOT APPROVED BY BZA.
THE HISTORIC FOUNDATION AND WINDOW WELL MATERIAL TO BE MORE LIKE THE ORIGINAL, THE HARDY SHAKE SIDING INSTRUCTIONS AS I EXPLAINED EARLIER, SPECS FOR THE MAN AND PATIO DOORS ARE NEEDED AND TRENCH DRAIN CONNECTIONS NEED TO BE SHOWN AT BUILDING PERMIT.
AND WITH THAT I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
[00:35:01]
DO YOU WANT ME TO, I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS FOR SARAH.UM, YOU HAD SAID THAT THE VERTICAL SIDING ON THE NEW, ON THE ADDITION, UH, IT'S BEEN APPROVED IN THE PAST, THE OLD CODE, BUT NOT UNDER THE NEW, WHICH IS NEW.
IS THERE A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO CODES AS IT APPLIES TO THE SOCIETY? THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION.
I'M NOT SURE TO BE HONEST WITH YOU.
UM, I KNOW THAT THERE WAS A LOT OF DIFFERENCE WITH MASSING AND SIZE.
I THINK THAT THE GUIDELINES ARE PROBABLY MORE STRICT AND MORE LOOKING FOR TRADITIONAL MATERIALS UNDER THE CURRENT CODE MADE IT LOOK DIFFERENT FROM THE YES.
AND THEN I THINK YOU ANSWERED IT WITH THE ACTUAL WORDING OF THE CONDITION.
MY QUESTION IS, WHO DETERMINES WHETHER THE CEDAR SHAKE SIDING IS ORIGINAL OR NOT? IS IT STAFF OR IS IT THE APPLICANT YOU HAVE HERE IN THE CONDITION? UH, MAYBE USED IF THE APPLICANT CAN PROVIDE EVIDENCE THAT THE CEDAR SHAKES ARE NOT ORIGINAL TO THE HOUSE, TO THE SATISFACTION OF STAFF.
SO IT'LL BE A, A MUTUAL DISCUSSION.
AND IF THERE'S A CONFLICT THAT COMES BACK TO THE BOARD, I'M ASSUMING IF, IF IF CAN'T RESOLVED, YES, THAT COMES BACK BECAUSE THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE CANNOT APPROVE ADMINISTRATIVELY.
AND THAT'S, THAT'S FINE FOR ME.
I WANT TO ASK ABOUT A COUPLE THI UH, OTHER THINGS THAT ARE IN YOUR STAFF REPORT THAT YOU DIDN'T MENTION.
UM, YOU MENTIONED THE STAFF HAS RECOMMENDED DIFFERENTIATION OF THE ROOF COLOR SO THAT JUST LIKE THE SECRETARY INTERIOR STANDARDS RECOMMEND, WE DIFFERENTIATE ADDITIONS FROM EXISTING STRUCTURES.
THAT SAME APPROACH IS TAKEN IN THE ROOF.
SO YOU, YOU REC YOU REC YOU HAD RECOMMENDED THAT AND IT'S NOT OCCURRING.
YOU ALSO MENTIONED THE COLORS ARE NOT FROM THE RESEARCH LIST THAT STAFF IS PREPARED FOR THE DISTRICT.
UM, AND THE THERMALLY MODIFIED ASH, YOU MENTIONED IT, IT, I JUST WANNA CLARIFY IN YOUR, YOUR LAST ANSWER TO HILLARY VERTICAL SIDING.
BUT THERMALLY MODIFIED ASH HAS NEVER BEEN USED IN THE DISTRICT TO MY KNOWLEDGE.
THAT'S, THAT'S AT ALL AT ALL TO MY KNOWLEDGE.
UM, WELL, WE WILL HAVE MORE QUESTIONS I'M SURE.
BUT, BUT THAT, I THINK THAT'S A, THAT'S A START.
SO, UM, MR. TAYLOR, WOULD YOU LIKE TO MAKE A PRESENTATION? RICHARD TAYLOR.
RICHARD TAYLOR, ARCHITECTS, 48 SOUTH HIGH STREET.
THANK YOU AGAIN FOR SEEING US THIS EVENING.
UM, THE, UH, COUPLE OF KIND OF HIGH LEVEL THINGS ON THIS, THE GOAL, AND AGAIN, AS THIS PROJECT'S EVOLVED, THE GOAL ON 17 IS WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE THREE DISTINCT PIECES.
WE'RE TRYING, WE, THE CENTERPIECE, THE HYPHEN IS PINCHED AND LOWERED TO SEPARATE IT FROM THE PIECE THAT WE'RE ADDING AT THE BACK AND TO EXPOSE THE EXISTING BUILDING AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE.
AND WE'VE ALSO MADE CHANGES IN MATERIALS, UH, BETWEEN THE THREE PIECES SO THAT, AGAIN, THEY'RE DISTINCT, WE THINK MAKING THE ROOF TWO DIFFERENT COLORS AND WE THINK MAKING THE FOUNDATION TWO DIFFERENT FOUNDATION MATERIALS WOULD, AGAIN, WOULD, WOULD HELP SEPARATE THOSE.
BUT IT'S, IN OUR OPINION, IT'S GOING TOO FAR.
WE THINK THERE NEED TO BE SOME THINGS ABOUT THIS THAT TIE IT TOGETHER AS ONE HOUSE.
SO THE ROOF COLOR, WHICH OBVIOUSLY VERY LITTLE OF THE DIFFERENT COLORS OF THE ROOF WOULD BE SEEN FROM GROUND LEVEL.
UM, WE, WE'D LIKE TO KEEP THAT ALL THE SAME TO AGAIN, TO HELP TIE THAT TOGETHER WHILE AT THE SAME TIME THE MASSING KEEPS THEM AS THREE SEPARATE PIECES.
AND THE SAME WITH THE FOUNDATION.
UM, THE FOUNDATION IS BASICALLY CONCRETE BLOCK NOW, AND THAT WAS A, A, A APPROPRIATE MATERIAL AT THE TIME.
WE'D LIKE TO USE THE SAME FOUNDATION MATERIAL ON THE WHOLE THING SO THAT AGAIN, WE CAN AT AT LEAST AT THE TOP AND THE BOTTOM TIE IT TOGETHER AS ONE HOUSE.
UM, THE OTHER TWO WISHES I'LL SPEAK ABOUT IS THE VERTICAL SIDING.
IF YOU'RE NOT FAMILIAR WITH THERMALLY MODIFIED SIDING, BASICALLY IT'S JUST A PROCESS.
IT'S KIND OF LIKE KILN DRYING EXCEPT THAT IT'S DONE UNDER A WET PRESSURE AND IT STABILIZES THE WOOD.
SO THE WOOD'S NO DIFFERENT THAN ANY OTHER WOOD.
IT'S JUST THE, THE NICE THING ABOUT IT IS IT DOESN'T WARP, IT DOESN'T CRACK.
SO IT'S, IT LASTS MUCH LONGER.
[00:40:01]
THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO WITH BOTH OF THESE PROJECTS IS AS WE REBUILD THESE AND RESTORE THESE, WE WANT THEM TO LAST FOR ANOTHER A HUNDRED YEARS.WE DON'T WANNA LEAVE PROBLEMS FOR THE NEXT PEOPLE THAT COME ALONG WITH THESE.
UM, BUT WE'RE USING VERTICAL BECAUSE IF YOU LOOK AT THE PICTURES OF THE, BOTH OF THE BARNS AT 17 AND 27, THEY BOTH HAVE VERTICAL SIDING.
SO THE, THE REAR ADDITION THAT'S HOLLOW ADDITION IN 17, WE'RE KIND OF SUBTLY MIMICKING THE BARN, UM, BECAUSE IT HAS THE PROPORTIONS OF A, OF A BARN.
AND THEN WE'RE USING VERTICAL SIDING SO THAT IT ALSO IS TIES INTO THAT KIND OF, THAT HISTORY OF THE BARN THAT WAS ALREADY THERE.
SO THERE'S SO MUCH PAINT ON THAT CEDAR SIDING.
WHEN SARAH ASKED ME ABOUT IT BEFORE I WENT AND LOOKED AT A PIECE IN THE BACK AND MY FIRST IMPRESSION WAS THAT IT WAS THE OLD, UH, CRUMBLY, UM, FIBERBOARD.
IT TURNS OUT IT'S NOT, UH, IT MAY BE IN SOME PLACES, BUT THE MAJORITY OF IT APPEARS TO BE CEDAR.
IT'S OVER AN UNUSUAL SHEATHING MATERIAL THAT WE ARE NOT SURE IS THE ORIGINAL, UH, SHEATHING IN THE HOUSE OR NOT.
THOSE ARE ALL THINGS THAT OBVIOUSLY WE'RE GONNA FIND OUT MORE ABOUT AS THE REBUILDING OF THE HOUSE, UH, GOES AND, UH, BEGINS TO HAPPEN.
BUT OUR BIGGEST CONCERN IS WE WOULD LOVE TO KEEP THE LOOK OF THE, OF THE SHAKES ON IT.
BUT AGAIN, WE, WE NEED TO, AS WE PREPARE THESE HOUSES TO, FOR NEW OWNERS, WE DON'T WANT TO LEAVE THEM PROBLEMS, UM, THAT ARE A HUNDRED YEARS OLD AND UNRESOLVED.
SO WE DON'T LIKE I WHAT YOU'RE SEEING HERE, IF THAT'S THE SHEATHING UNDERNEATH THE, THE BOARDS, UH, ON THE SIDE, THERE'S NO RAIN SCREEN, THERE'S NO INFILTRATION BARRIER.
UM, SO ANY INSULATION THAT WE PUT ON THE WALLS IS GONNA BE, UH, AT RISK.
SO WE WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE DO THE WORK TO THESE HOUSES TO SQUARE THEM UP.
'CAUSE THEY'RE A LITTLE BIT OUTTA SQUARE.
PUT STRUCTURAL SHEATHING ON THERE, PUT THE PROPER RAIN SCREEN, PUT THE PROPER INFILTRATION BARRIER ON THERE SO THAT THEY'RE DURABLE HOUSES FOR THE NEXT GENERATIONS OF PEOPLE THAT USE THOSE.
AND THE HEARTY SHAKE GOES ALONG WITH THAT.
SO, UM, THE SAMPLES APPEAR, THE REAL CEDAR SHAKES, YOU CAN SEE THE, THE TEXTURE, UH, OF THE WOOD ON THE UNPAINTED PARTS ON THE PAINTED PARTS.
IT HAS 50 COATS OF PAINT ON IT.
SO THE HARDY SHAKE WHEN IT'S PAINTED WILL LOOK JUST LIKE THIS STUFF DOES RIGHT NOW.
AND AGAIN, OUR GOAL THERE IS TO MAKE THAT DURABLE AND LASTING, UH, FOR THE NEXT GENERATION ABUSERS OF THIS HOME.
ANY QUESTIONS? UM, MAYBE JUST A COUPLE.
I'M SORRY I MISSED THE LAST TWO MEETINGS, SO I'M CATCHING UP FROM THE VIDEO I WATCHED.
GOOD TO SEE YOU BACK FOR THREE HOURS.
SO JUST, UH, SO, UH, A COUPLE OF THINGS.
MAYBE I'M GOING TO JUMP AROUND A LITTLE BIT FOR ME.
UH, UH, SO WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, I'LL START WITH THE SHAKES.
AND SO YOU HAVE THAT ONE UP HERE.
SO WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS YOU, BECAUSE IT, YOU'RE SAYING THAT FROM AN ENGINEERING STANDPOINT UNDERNEATH THAT YOU'RE NOT GONNA BE ABLE TO PROTECT THE HOUSE FROM THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT MOISTURE, WHAT, WHATEVER, WHATEVER IT COULD BE.
AND YOU COULD NOT DO THAT WITH THE SHAKES THAT ARE ON THERE OR EVEN REP REP REPURPOSING AND REPLACING THEM.
SO I MEAN, YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO PUT SOMETHING ON THERE.
SO, AND DOING WHATEVER YOU NEED TO DO.
WHY COULDN'T THAT BE DONE WITH A, WITH A SHAKE? WELL, COULD, AS IT IS TODAY, IT, IT COULD, SO THE SHAKES COULD COME OFF.
UH, AGAIN, WE DON'T KNOW IF WE'RE REPLACING SHEATHING OR NOT.
'CAUSE WE'VE ONLY LOOKED AT SMALL PARTS OF THE HOUSE.
WE DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS THE ACTUAL SHEATHING UNDER THE SHAKES.
BUT IF WE KEEP THE EXISTING SHEATHING OR IF NEW SHEATHING GOES UP, UM, THEY'LL HAVE TO BE INFILTRATION BEERS AND, AND, AND RAIN SCREENS AND THINGS APPLIED TO THAT.
AND THEN WHATEVER THE FINAL MATERIAL THAT GOES ON THE OUTSIDE, WHETHER IT'S CEDAR OR WHETHER IT'S THE COMPOSITE MATERIAL GOES ON TOP OF THAT.
OUR, OUR PREFERENCE WOULD BE TO USE THE HARDY FOR LONGEVITY.
BUT FOR YOU, CEDAR COULD GO ON TOP.
I MEAN IT'S, UH, AS ONE OF THE CONDITIONS IS IF IT'S, IF THEY, YOU FIND IT TO BE ORIGINAL CEDAR IS ONE OF THE CONDITIONS I THINK THAT YOU HAVE AS STAFF, YOU COULD PUT CEDAR BACK.
UM, AND THEN FROM THE, AND JUST FOR ME, MAYBE ON THE BOARD, THE, LET'S SAY THE VERTICAL BOARDS, THE ASH, WHY DID YOU PICK THAT? I MEAN, AS YOU SAY, IT'S NOT SOMETHING WE'VE USED BEFORE.
SO WHAT IS SOMETHING THAT'S ALREADY KIND OF FROM AN ENGINEERING MATERIAL, THE REASON YOU DIDN'T PICK SOMETHING THAT WE, THAT EXISTS? BECAUSE I HAVE TO SAY, LOOK AT THAT.
IT LOOKS, AND I'M ONLY SEEING, UH, YOU KNOW, A FEW SQUARE INCHES OF THE THING.
IT, IT LOOKS MANUFACTURED JUST FROM WHAT I SEE THERE.
WELL, YOU KNOW THAT THAT'S NOT THE COLOR NECESSARILY THAT'S GONNA BE USED.
I DON'T IS THAT THE COLOR ON THAT ONE? BECAUSE IT'S STA BECAUSE IT SAID IT WAS GONNA BE STAINED.
I THINK IS WHAT IT'S A STA IT'S GONNA BE IS I WAS THINKING IS THAT THE STAINED COLOR ROUGHLY? IT'S, IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE A WHITEWASH STAIN IS THE STATED COLOR.
I THINK WE, WE TURNED IN THE COLOR SAMPLE FOR THAT, DIDN'T WE? YEAH, BECAUSE I THINK IN STAFF REPORT, THEY TALK ABOUT PAINT IS A NOR
[00:45:01]
PAINTING IN THE PAINTING IN THE, IN A DISTRICT LIKE THIS WOULD BE THE NORMAL, UH, WOULD BE A NORMAL, UH, WOULD BE NORMAL.SO THIS, THE STA I THINK IN STAFF, BEFORE WE TALK ABOUT THE STAIN.
AND IF I LOOK AT THAT, IT LOOKS A BIT, IT, IT LOOKS ARTIFICIAL.
I'M ONLY LOOKING AT A COUPLE OF SQUARE INCHES.
THE, IM JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THE, THE WOOD ITSELF OR THE STAIN THE WOOD ITSELF.
SO I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND.
I MEAN, BUT THE WAY THAT, HOWEVER, WHATEVER THE PROCESS IS, IT LOOKS, UH, IT LOOKS FOR ME IT DOESN'T LOOK AS NATURAL.
WELL, THE PROCESS DOESN'T CHANGE THE EXTERIOR AT ALL.
IT'S THE INTERIOR, THE WOOD, IT CHANGES THE, MAYBE IT'S THE STAINED THEN THAT MAKES IT LOOK LIKE IT STABILIZES THE CELL STRUCTURE OF THE CELLULOSE.
SO MAYBE IT'S THE STAIN THAT THAT'S GIVING IT THE UNUSUAL IT MAY BE A STAIN.
AND THAT THE WOOD ABSORB STAIN DIFFERENTLY.
SO THERE'S A REASON YOU WOULDN'T PAINT IT.
IS THERE STAIN? IS THERE YOU WANT IT TO BE STAINED FOR A AESTHETIC REASON OR FOR WHAT'S THE, WHAT'S THE REASON FOR STAIN? UH, IT WAS THE COLOR THAT, UH, OKAY.
SO IT WAS, IT WAS THE STAIN MATCHED THE COLOR PATTERN.
A PALETTE THAT, THAT THAT, THAT THE, THE
BUT YOU'RE LOOKING AT ONE PIECE AND ONE SAMPLE, THERE'S VARIATION.
I MEAN, I'M LOOKING AT THIS MUCH.
THIS, THIS PARTICULAR PIECE HAS A LOT OF GRAIN.
MAYBE THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE SEEING ON THERE.
UM, YOU'RE PROPOSING TO THOSE ORIGINAL WINDOWS IN THE HOUSE, AND OF COURSE, I'M SORRY, THOSE ORIGINAL WINDOWS IN THE HOUSE, RIGHT? WE'RE PROPOSING TO WHAT? THOSE ARE ORIGINAL WINDOWS IN THE HOUSE.
UH, WE'RE PROPOSING TO REPLACE THE WINDOWS IN THE HOUSE.
AND WE'VE ONLY APPROVED THAT TWICE BEFORE.
AND BOTH TIMES THERE WAS A DETAILED ASSESSMENT OF THE CONDITION BY A RESTORATION CONSULTANT OF THE CONDITION OF THE WINDOWS INDICATING THAT THEY COULD NOT BE REPAIRED.
BECAUSE WHETHER OUR GUIDELINES OR ANY HISTORIC DISTRICT, YOU, YOU KEEP THE WINDOWS AND THE FIRST THING YOU DO IS YOU REPAIR 'EM.
IT'S NOT LIKE A NEW HOUSE, BUT YOUR CLIENTS PURCHASED AN OLD HOUSE.
AND OUR MISSION IS TO PRESERVE THE OLD HOUSE.
SO I THINK MY FEELING IS FOR THAT TO BE APPROVED, THAT NEEDS TO BE TREATED THE WAY EVERY OTHER APPLICANT HAS BEEN TREATED.
SO I, THAT'S, THAT'S ONE ADDITIONAL QUESTION I HAVE.
THE GARAGE DOOR IS SOMETHING THAT COMES UP IN THE STAFF REPORT AS WELL, BECAUSE THE, I THINK THERE ARE A COUPLE REASONS WHY YOU WANT TO USE THAT GARAGE DOOR.
AND IT'S NOT JUST TO HAVE THE TRADITIONAL CARRIAGE HOUSE LOOK, BUT, OR THE CARRIAGE HOUSE ACTION BECAUSE IT'S NOT A CARRIAGE HOUSE.
LOOK THAT GARAGE DOOR, YOU WANT THE UNIFORMITY OF THE SURFACE TO CONTINUE AROUND.
SO THE VOLUME IS ESSENTIALLY UNDIFFERENTIATED MATERIALLY, WHICH IS AN O IN SOME SETTINGS IS AN OKAY.
BUT HERE WHAT IT DOES IS YOU'RE GONNA REDUCE THE PARKING AREA BY FOUR FEET.
AND WE, IF WE DO, IF WE DO GRANT, YOU ALLOW YOU TO GO TO 20 FEET, YOU'RE GONNA PUSH A PARKING SPACE BECAUSE THE DOOR CLEARANCE OUT INTO THE RIGHT OF WAY.
AND THAT'S NOT WHAT THE CITY ENGINEER WANTS.
SO THE DOOR OPERATION OF THAT DOOR, I THINK IS, IS, IS QUESTIONABLE WITH, IF YOU WANT TO GO BACK TO 24 FEET AND THEN, 'CAUSE A PARKING SPACE IS 90 18, SO THAT DOOR OPENS UP STANDARD PARKING SPACE, YOU'RE OUT IN THE RIGHT OF WAY.
UH, THAT'S, YOU KNOW, AND, AND YOU, YOU'VE, YOU'VE REDUCED THE NUMBER OF PARKING STALLS, WHICH IS GOOD.
SO CHANCES ARE THERE'RE GONNA BE MORE THAN TWO CARS HERE.
SO SOMEBODY'S GONNA BE OUT POTENTIALLY PARKING IN THAT RIGHT OF WAY.
SO, I MEAN, I THINK THE GARAGE DOOR IS ANOTHER ISSUE THAT, UM, THE OPERATION OF THE GARAGE DOOR, WHAT, WHAT WE DECIDE WITH THE SIDING IS A DIFFERENT QUESTION.
BUT THE OPERATION OF THAT GARAGE DOOR, I THINK CALLS INTO QUESTION WHETHER YOU SHOULD HAVE 20 FEET OR WHETHER WE SHOULD BACK OFF AND SAY YOU WANT THAT GARAGE.
I MEAN WE HAD THIS CONVERSATION BEFORE.
UM, AND UH, WE ARE, WE'RE BACK FIVE FEET FROM THE HIGHWAY EASEMENT.
WE'RE NOT ALLOWED TO PUT A CAR IN THE HIGHWAY EASEMENT AT ALL.
SO IF WE PULL THE HOUSE UP TO THE VERY FRONT OF THE GARAGE, IT'S STILL STICKING INTO THE HIGHWAY EASEMENT.
THIS WHOLE THING BEGAN WITH THE LOCATION OF THE HOUSE AND THE DRIVEWAYS AND THE EASEMENT WITH THE DISCUSSION OF USING THOSE PARKING AS PARKING SPACES.
AND WE WERE VERY CLEAR, WE AGREED THAT THEY WOULDN'T BE, AND THEY CAN'T BE, THE DRIVEWAYS NOT LONG ENOUGH, EVEN WITH THE HOUSE, THE CAR PULLED ALL THE WAY UP TO THE GARAGE DOOR CLOSED, IT STICKS SIGNIFICANTLY INTO THE EASEMENT.
SO WE CANNOT USE THOSE FOR PARKING SPACES.
AND I'M NOT, I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT THE EASEMENT LINE, I'M TALKING ABOUT THE RIGHT OF WAY LINE.
BUT THERE'S GONNA BE IMPROVEMENTS IN THAT EASEMENT.
THERE'S GONNA BE A TREE LINE AND SIDEWALKS AND UTILITIES AND THE THINGS THAT THE CITY HAS TOLD US THAT THEY WANT TO USE THAT EASEMENT FOR.
[00:50:01]
MM-HMM.SO, I MEAN, IT'S JUST NOT POSSIBLE WE'D BE PARKING A CAR ACROSS THE SIDEWALK.
UM, AND WE, AGAIN, WE DISCUSSED THAT AT THE LAST MEETING AND WE AGREED THAT THOSE WOULD NOT BE USED FOR PARKING.
WE DID, BUT IT WASN'T IN THE CONTEXT OF THE OPERATION OF THIS DOOR.
AND SO THAT PRESENTS A DIFFERENT DILEMMA HERE.
SO, YOU KNOW, BUT IF WE'RE NOT PARKING THERE, WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE IF THE DOORS OPEN INTO THE, WHAT PUSHES THE CAR BACK? BUT IF WE'RE NOT PARKING THERE, WHAT DIFFERENCE IT MAKE? UH, YOU WON'T IN HOUSE, WE CAN'T PARK THERE.
WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE? YOU CAN'T.
BUT THE QUESTION IS, LOOK, JUST BECAUSE YOU CAN'T, DOESN'T MEAN PEOPLE WON'T.
SO JUST BECAUSE YOU AGREE RIGHT HERE AT THIS MEETING, THE REALITY IS A HOUSE OF THIS VALUE, THERE'RE GONNA BE MORE THAN TWO CARS AND YOU'RE NOT GONNA BE THE PERSON THAT'S RESPONSIBLE LATER FOR THE WAY PARKING GOES ALONG THIS ALLEY.
SO JUST BECAUSE YOU SAY WE WON'T, BUT THE REALITY IS THEY'RE GONNA BE MORE THAN TWO CARS AT A HOUSE OF THIS.
SO WOULD IT BE LEGAL FOR A CAR TO BE PARKED AND HAVE IT INTO THE HIGHWAY EASEMENT WHILE IT WAS PARKED IN THE DRIVEWAY? I'M NOT, WE DIDN'T HAVE OUR LEGAL PERSON HERE TONIGHT.
SO I'M NOT GONNA ANSWER WHAT'S LEGAL OR NOT.
BUT PARKING GENERALLY IN THE RIGHT OF WAY.
I I THINK YOU, YOU, YOU CREATE AN ISSUE HERE WITH THE OPERATION OF THE DOOR.
AND THAT'S WHAT I'M CONCERNED ABOUT.
AND SO WE MAY SAY THE THE APPEARANCE IS FINE AND EVERYBODY ELSE ON THIS BOARD MAY BE FINE WITH, WITH WHAT YOU'RE DOING.
UM, BUT IT'S JUST ONE QUESTION I HAVE ABOUT THE OP, WHAT THE OPERATION DOES TO THE DOOR.
AND, UM, WELL I, GARY, I DON'T MEAN TO BE ARGUMENTATIVE, BUT IT'S IT'S IRRELEVANT FROM YOU FROM YOUR POINT OF VIEW.
SO, UM, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? WELL NOW I HAVE A QUESTION.
ARE WE, AND I GUESS IT'S FOR SARAH, THE GARAGE DOORS, DO WE HAVE TO SPECIFICALLY APPROVE THEM? DO THEY REQUIRE A WAIVER? THE GARAGE DOORS DO NOT REQUIRE A WAIVER.
IT IS PART OF THE MATERIALS AND OF THE MINOR PROJECT.
SO WE COULD MAKE IT A CONDITION TO TAKE, MAKE IT A CONDITION THAT THEY CHANGED TO A NORMAL LIFT DOOR SO THAT, YOU KNOW, IF WE'RE CONCERNED, HAVING A CAR IN THE RIGHT OF WAY GOES TO APPEARANCES.
SO ANYWAY, THAT'S SOMETHING FOR THIS BOARD TO CONSIDER.
EXCUSE ME, CAN YOU PUT THE, IS THAT POSSIBLE? POSSIBLE? IT'S 20 FOOT TWO, BUT I'M NOT SURE WHAT THAT THE DIMEN IS THE DIMENSION THAT YOU SHOW ON YOUR DRAWING.
AND SO 15 FEET OF THAT IS IN THE HIGH BASEMENT.
YOU SAY THAT, YOU SAY THAT, BUT THE REALITY IS, UM, WITH ONLY TWO ONSITE SPACES IN YOUR GARAGE, WHICH WE APPRECIATE, THE GARAGE GOT SMALLER AND THAT'S GOOD.
BUT YEAH, YOU'RE NOT ALLOWED TO PARK IN THAT, IN THAT HIGHWAY EASEMENT.
BUT I THINK THE REALITY, THE PRACTICAL REALITY IS PEOPLE WILL BE PARKING THERE AND THE POLICE, WE, WE, WE WILL SEE, WE WILL SEE THERE'S DOUBLE PARKING ALL OVER AND THERE ARE OTHER VI PARKING VIOLATIONS ALL OVER.
YOU SEE CARS THAT ARE PARKED LONGER THAN THEY SHOULD BE IN ONE SPOT IN, IN MANY NEIGHBORHOODS.
UM, SO I, I JUST, AND, AND LIKE I SAID, NO OTHER BOARD MEMBER MAY AGREE WITH ME, BUT A STANDARD PARKING SPACE IS 18 FEET.
AND IF THAT DOOR OPENS AND THAT DOOR'S OPENING FOUR FEET, THEN YOUR STANDARD PARKING SPACE EXTENDS BEYOND THE PROPERTY LINE INTO THE RIGHT OF WAY.
WHICH I THINK IS QUESTIONABLE.
THAT'S, THAT'S PERHAPS WE CAN ASK IT THIS WAY.
[00:55:01]
WHY WOULD WE WANT THOSE DOORS? 'CAUSE THEY ACT LIKE KARA DOORS AND THEY'RE VERY UNIQUE AND WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE THIS, CAN WE SEE THE DRAWING WITH THE EASEMENT MARKS, THE PURPLE BLUE, ET CETERA.THE RED IS THE HIGHWAY EASEMENT AND THOSE ARE THE SETBACKS.
IF YOU GO BACK, THE BLACK IS THE ROAD, THE BLACK IS THE RIGHT OF WAY FOR BLACKSMITH LANE.
THAT'S BLACKSMITH'S RIGHT OF WAY.
THE CITY HAS AN EASEMENT OVER 15 FEET OF THAT DRIVEWAY.
BUT, BUT THE EASEMENT IS A RESERVE FOR THEM TO PLACE UTILITIES IN, DO THINGS AT A LATER DATE.
THE E THAT DOES NOT NECESSARILY MEAN THEY'RE GOING TO USE THEIR, THAT EASEMENT EVERY DAY.
'CAUSE IF THAT WAS THE CASE, THEY WOULDN'T PERMIT A DRIVEWAY RIGHT THERE.
SO, AND I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT THE EASEMENT.
MY CONCERN IS, AGAIN, WE HAD THIS DISCUSSION, BUT THAT WE HAVE TO DRIVEWAY HOUSE.
THEY, AND THE CITY'S BEEN VERY CLEAR THAT A TREE ON THE SIDEWALK, WELL ELIMINATE THE DRIVEWAY, BUT THEY'RE BEAT THIS ONE DUMB ISSUE UP.
WELL THEN WE'RE NOW ALLOWED CARTER
I'M, I MADE MY POINT AND YOU'VE MADE YOUR POINT AND, AND THERE ARE PROBABLY A FEW OTHER DISCUSSION ITEMS ON THIS TOO.
SO I JUST AS WE DELIBERATE, I THINK THE GARAGE DOOR IT'S BROUGHT UP IN THE STAFF REPORT MAY NOT BE AN ISSUE FOR ANYBODY ELSE, BUT I DO THINK IT'S SOMETHING THAT DESERVES SOME ATTENTION.
SO BEFORE WE, WE HAVEN'T ASKED IF THERE ARE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT.
ARE THERE ANY IN ADDITIONAL INITIAL QUESTIONS FOR I DO.
I MEAN, SO WE DIDN'T GET TO THE FOUNDATION YET, SO THAT THAT'S WHAT I WANT.
SO, SO FOR ME, UM, YOU, YOU'RE, YOU'RE PROPOSING THE FOUNDATION OVER THE FOUNDATION MATERIAL ON THE LEFT.
SO TELL ME WHY NOT KEEP THE EXISTING EXISTING? OKAY.
HISTORIC, UH, WHAT DO WE CALL IT? THE CMU THAT'S THERE.
WHAT AS, AS THE GUIDELINE SAYS, WE SHOULD TRY TO MAKE IT AS IT AS BEST WE CAN, AS IT WAS WE DON'T WANT EVERYTHING.
WHY WOULDN'T YOU, THE, WHY WOULDN'T YOU USE A HISTORIC MATERIAL? I MEAN, BUT I MEAN, FOR ME, THE GUIDELINE TELLS YOU YOU SHOULD TRY TO MAINTAIN THAT LOOK.
WHY WOULDN'T YOU MAINTAIN THAT LOOK IF THAT'S WHAT YOU WANT TO DO.
IT'S WHAT THE GUIDELINE TELLS ME THAT WE SHOULD BE TRYING TO DO.
SO IT'S NOT, DOESN'T HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH ME.
THE ONLY ISSUE FOR US IS WE'RE TRYING TO TIE IT ALL TOGETHER.
SO YOU WANT THE CONCRETE, IS THERE A WAY TO DO THE CONCRETE BLOCK? IF, IF THE TIE IN IS SO IMPORTANT? CAN WE DO THE CONCRETE BLOCK ON THE NEW SECTION? IT'S A LOW END MATERIALS.
OKAY, THEN, BECAUSE I SEE THE PRESERVATION OF THE ORIGINAL HOME FOUNDATION AND SIDING TO BE VERY IMPORTANT.
AND IT'S CERTAINLY WHAT THE GUIDELINES, IT'S WHAT THE GUIDELINE ASK DIRECT US TO DO.
AND NOT ONLY GUIDELINES, BUT THE CODE ASK US TO DO THAT.
SO IT'S NOT A GUIDELINE ISSUE.
UM, I'M, WE'LL DO THE, WE'LL LEAVE THE EXISTING, WE'LL, WE'LL PUT THE, UH, CONCRETE BLOCK ON THE EXISTING HOUSE.
THE SIDING, WE DON'T HAVE THOSE ANSWERS YET.
SO WE DON'T HAVE THE ANSWERS IN THE SIDING YET.
WE DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHAT'S THERE.
WE SHOULD BE TRYING TO AT LEAST SEE IF THEY'RE SALV, UH, REPAIRABLE, I SAY SALVAGEABLE OR REPAIRABLE.
UH, BECAUSE RIGHT NOW YOU'RE SAYING REPLACE THEM MONEY, YOU BROUGHT IT UP, BUT I DIDN'T HEAR THE, YOUR RESPONSE THAT WE, I MEAN, GENERALLY WE HAVE ASKED PEOPLE TO LOOK AT THE WINDOWS TO, TO SEE IF THEY'RE REPAIRABLE, SALVAGEABLE AND REPAIRABLE, WHICH I DON'T, AS FAR AS I KNOW YOU HAVEN'T, YOU HAVEN'T DONE THAT? UH, NO.
BUT OUR CONCERN IS THAT WE WOULD NOW HAVE TWO DIFFERENT WINDOW MATERIALS ON THE HOUSE, AND WE'D RATHER NOT DO THAT.
BUT, BUT AGAIN, IT COMES BACK TO THE SAME POINT, RIGHT? WE'RE TRYING TO PRESERVE THE EXISTING HOUSE, THE HISTORIC HOUSE.
SO WE'RE TRYING TO ENSURE THAT WHAT WE CAN CONTINUE TO HAVE IT BE HISTORIC OR SHOULD STAY THESE I I SEE YOUR POINT.
BUT THAT BE, YEAH, I MEAN THAT'S THE, THAT'S THE, THAT'S THE, THAT'S THE PURVIEW OF THE BOARD HERE IS TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT STAYS AS ALL THESE AS BEST WE CAN.
[01:00:01]
THESE HOUSES JUST, AND, AND WE WILL GET MORE INTO THIS WHEN WE DO MORE OF THE DELIBERATION, BUT ALL THESE HOUSES ARE THE LANDMARK STATUS HOUSES.THEY'RE NOT BACKGROUND HOUSES.
SO AS A RESULT, BECAUSE THEY'RE LANDMARK STATUS HOUSES, WE HAVE TO FOLLOW THE LETTER OF THE GUIDELINES.
AND SO, I MEAN, THAT'S WHY I UNDERSTAND AND, AND SOME OF THE DESIGN THINGS YOU WANT TO DO, I, I, I THINK ARE APPLAUDABLE AND I LIKE, BUT, UM, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE TO FOLLOW THE GUIDELINES BECAUSE OF THE STATUS OF THESE HOUSES.
SO, AND, AND YOU KNOW, YOU COULD, AND WE CAN TALK ABOUT, YOU COULD FOAM THE INSULATION.
THERE ARE OTHER WAYS YOU, YOU COULD, IF YOU DON'T HAVE THAT BARRIER, YOU COULD AT LEAST IMPROVE THE FABRIC IN A WAY THAT YOU STILL, IF THERE IS WATER PENETRATION, YOU, YOU'RE PROTECTING SOME OF THE AREAS.
AND I'M NOT, IT'S NOT A PERFECT SOLUTION.
BUT, BUT I DON'T WANNA, I I'M JUST TRYING TO PROVIDE CONTEXT FOR WHERE IT, IT SOUNDS LIKE WE'RE BEING DIFFICULT, BUT WE'RE ALSO HAMSTRUNG BY WHAT, WHAT WE'RE WORKING WITH.
BEFORE WE GET INTO THE, THE DELIBERATIONS IN A LITTLE BIT MORE DETAIL, ARE THERE ANY MORE, AND, AND WE'RE GONNA HAVE MORE CON QUESTIONS.
BUT LET'S MAKE IT CLEAR WHAT WE AGREE ON.
SO THE, THE WINDOWS YOU WANNA KEEP, WHAT WINDOWS WE CAN KEEP W HERE WE, WE, WE'LL AGREE TO THAT, BUT WE WANT TO KEEP, WE WANT TO, THE FOUNDATION OF THE EXISTING HOUSE WILL BE THE SAME LOOK AS WHAT THE EXISTING HOUSE IS NOW AND THE SIDING.
WE AGREE WITH THE WAY THAT THE CONDITION IS WRITTEN, THAT THERE'LL BE SOME EXPLORATION OF THAT AS THE PROJECT BEGINS.
THAT I, WE WE'RE GONNA HAVE A FEW MORE QUESTIONS, BUT, BUT I THINK YEAH, BUT THOSE ARE THE THINGS, THREE THINGS WE TALKED ABOUT.
LET, LET'S, LET ME SEE IF THERE ARE ANY OTHER INITIAL QUESTIONS AND IF WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT AND THEN WE CAN, WE CAN CONTINUE THIS PART OF, UM, ANY OTHER INITIAL QUESTIONS FOR MR. TAYLOR? OKAY.
AND THAT IS THAT YOU ARE AGREEING TO MAINTAIN THE WINDOWS THAT ARE EXISTING AND REPAIR THEM.
IF YOU'RE ASKING ME IT, WILL WE AGREE TO THAT? WE'LL AGREE TO LOOK AT THE WINDOWS AND DETERMINE WHICH ONES ARE REPAIRABLE.
WE, WE WILL, WE'LL WE CAN DISCUSS THE CON HOW WE MIGHT WORD, WORD THE CONDITION AND THE LANGUAGE ON THIS.
HAVE WE HAD ANY PUBLIC COMMENT? WE HAVE NOT.
THIS MAY SEEM MINOR TO YOU, BUT WHAT ABOUT THE STAFF REPORT REQUESTS, KEEPING THOSE PORCH WEEP HOLES? IS THERE ANY, IS THAT JUST, ARE YOU GONNA KEEP THOSE OR IS THAT JUST A WE'RE NOT MAKING ANY CHANGES TO THAT AT ALL.
IT MAY NOT SHOW CLEARLY ON THE, I MISSED WHAT YOU SAID.
COULD YOU JUST REPEAT WHAT YOU SAID? I'M SORRY.
WE'RE NOT MAKING ANY CHANGES TO THAT AT ALL.
THERE'RE THOSE LITTLE TRIANGULAR OPENINGS.
UM, LET'S, LET'S GO THROUGH THE BIGGER ISSUES, WHICH WILL IMPACT I THINK TOMORROW NIGHT.
AND, UM, AND I, I'D LIKE THE WAY THAT SARAH HAS, UM, LISTED THESE, 'CAUSE A LOT OF THEM WE'VE, WE'VE DISCUSSED, AND I, AND I DON'T, WE HAVEN'T, I, I'D BE SURPRISED IF WE CHANGED, BUT THE FIRST ONE TO APPROVE THE DEMOLITION OF A LANDMARK BUILDING, THE STAFF REPORT INDICATES THAT BECAUSE OF WHERE IT'S LOCATED, THE CITY'S PROBABLY GONNA HAVE TO TAKE IT DOWN ANYWAYS.
SO, UM, AND I THINK LAST TIME WE DISCUSSED THIS, WE WERE ALL COMFORTABLE WITH IT.
I'M, DO WE WANNA, AS WE CAN MOVE THROUGH THESE, DO WE WANT TO MAKE MOTIONS INDIVIDUALLY AND, AND PASS THEM OR WAIT BECAUSE, BECAUSE THERE'S GONNA BE A LOT OF CONVERSATION AND THAT WAY WE DON'T HAVE TO GO BACK THROUGH.
I THINK WE PROBABLY SH IT PROBABLY WOULD BE MORE EFFICIENT TO GET RID OF THEM AS WE CAN.
I MEAN I THINK THAT'S OKAY TO DO, SIR.
I MEAN WE CAN JUST MAKE A MOTION AND PROVE EACH WAIVER.
UH, THESE ARE GONNA BE THE DEMOLITION.
THE DEMOLITION IS NOT ABSOLUTELY BE CONDITIONED ON US APPROVING THE MINOR PROJECT BECAUSE THEY CAN'T PROCEED WITH DEMOLITION WITHOUT AN APPROVED PROJECT.
AND THEY CANNOT DEMOLISH UNTIL THERE IS AN APPROVED BUILDING PERMIT FOR THE REPLACEMENT STRUCTURE.
SO ALL OF THAT HAS TO HAPPEN BEFORE THEY CAN TAKE DOWN THE OUTBUILDING.
WE CAN, I'M, SINCE A BUILDING PERMIT'S A LONG WAY OFF AND I'M ASSUMING WE CAN GO AHEAD AND, 'CAUSE IT'S CON IT WOULD BE CONDITIONAL ON GETTING THE BUILDING PERMIT AND GETTING THE MINOR PROJECT REVIEW APPROVED.
WELL WE CAN MAKE IT CONDITIONAL.
[01:05:01]
HAVE, I THINK THIS ONE'S EASY.YOU COULD DO THIS ONE AT THE END.
WE JUST DO THIS ONE LAST AND YOU, I THINK, AND THEN THAT WAY IT'LL BE, IF THAT SOMETHING ELSE COMES UP THAT CAUSES AN ISSUE, THEN IT'LL BE CONDITIONED THERE.
WE, UM, HAVE DISCUSSED TWO AND ARE WE MAKING A RECOMMENDATION TO THE, AT OUR LAST MEETING, WE WERE REQUESTED TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION ON THAT, UM, INCREASE FROM THE 20%.
'CAUSE WE WERE, WE DISCUSSED WHAT NUMBER WE'D SUPPORT AND THAT'S HOW THEY CAME UP, UP WITH THAT NUMBER.
I THINK THE MOTION TO APPROVE THE WAIVER TO PERMIT THE INCREASE IN BUILDING FOOTPRINT BY 20% IS, IS EASY.
WHICH I THINK THAT'S THE RIGHT WAY.
WE'RE GONNA PROVE IT TO THERE.
AND IF WE GETS APPROVED HERE AND GETS A REJECTED, IF THEY WOULD POTENTIALLY GET REJECTED, THEY WOULD STILL HAVE THE WAIVER.
THEY WOULD STILL HAVE A WAIVER AT 20%.
AND, AND THEY WILL HAVE, THEY CAN USE THE MINUTES FROM THE LAST MEETING TO SAY THE BOARD SUPPORTS THIS INCREASE BEYOND THE WAIVER.
AND MS. MULLINAX IS HERE TONIGHT.
SHE IS GONNA BE PRESENTING TO THE BZA TOMORROW.
SO SHE IS OUR, OUR CONSISTENCY.
SO YOU'LL BE ABLE TO GIVE THEM THE REASON THAT THEY WENT FROM 20, THE REASON THAT THE TWO TIE TOGETHER.
APPROVE THE WAIVER TO PERMIT THE INCREASE OF THE BUILDING FOOTPRINT BY 20% TO 2,375 SQUARE FEET.
SO IS THERE A MOTION? SO MOVED.
THIS IS ANOTHER ONE THAT WE DISCUSSED AND, UM, WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THE GARAGE DOOR.
DO YOU WANNA COME BACK TO THIS ONE? WE'RE GONNA COME BACK TO THE FIRST ONE.
LET, LET'S COME BACK TO THIS ONE.
BUT LET'S LOOK AT THE ROOF PITCHES.
MOTION TO APPROVE A WAIVER TO ALLOW THE ROOF PITCHES.
NOW THE, THE WAIVER FOR THE LP SMART SIDE TRIM.
WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT THE SIDING HERE.
AND, UM, WE'VE APPROVED THE USE OF THIS MATERIAL IN THE PAST, IN OUR ALTERNATE MATERIAL BOOK.
AND, AND WE BASE THE APPROVAL OF THIS MATERIAL AS JUST A REMINDER BECAUSE IT LOOKS LIKE ONE OF THE ORIGINAL MATERIALS THAT WE SEE IN THE DISTRICT.
SO, AND THAT'S THE RATIONALE WE'VE USED TO APPROVE ALL THE ALTERNATIVE MATERIALS.
SO IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE WAIVER TO PERMIT THE USE OF THE LP SMART SIDE TRIM? I'LL MOVE TO PERMIT THE USE OF THE LP SMART SIDE.
SO WE'VE GOTTEN THROUGH FOR US THE EASY ONES.
ALRIGHT, SO NOW, NOW WE HAVE, UH, TO, TO GO THROUGH SOME OF THE DETAILS IN THE STAFF REPORT BECAUSE I THINK THERE ARE THINGS THAT THE STAFF INDICATED SOME CONCERNS ABOUT THAT WE AT LEAST SHOULD DISCUSS.
SO, UM, IF WE COULD HAVE THE DRAWINGS UP AND I'M JUST GONNA TAKE THEM IN ORDER THAT I DOCUMENTED THEM.
SO THE STAFF REPORT INDICATES A CONCERN REGARDING THE NORTH ELEVATION AND THE SINGLE WINDOW THAT IS, IT'S REPLACING A PAIR OF WINDOWS AND THE, THE PROPORTIONS OF THAT, JUST FROM WHAT THE CONCERN IS JUST BECAUSE WE'RE, WE'RE CHANGING WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY THERE.
I MEAN, THAT WAS THE STAFF'S CONCERN 'CAUSE IT CHANGED DIMENSIONALLY KIND OF HOW THE SIDE OF THE HOUSE IS.
IS THAT WHERE THE CAME? WE'RE NOT WORRIED ABOUT CHANGING IT FROM A DOUBLE WINDOW TO A SINGLE WINDOW.
THE QUESTION IS, DOES IT MATCH THE PROPORTIONS ON THE OTHER ELEVATION
[01:10:01]
ON THE, THE RIGHT HAND SIDE, THE HISTORIC SIDE? MM-HMM.IT LOOKS SQUATTER AND FATTER THAN THE ORIGINAL WINDOWS ON THIS SIDE OF THE HISTORIC PORTION OF THE BUILDING.
BUT DID WHAT WAS THE ORIGINAL WINDOW ON THE OTHER ELEVATION? DO WE HAVE AN ORIGINAL OF THAT? IT'S A DOUBLE WINDOW NOW.
IS IT PROPORTION TO THE OTHER ELEVATION? IT'S NOT AS A DOUBLE WINDOW.
SO YEAH, YOU'RE SAYING DIMENSIONALLY.
SO IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT IT, IT'S DIMENSIONALLY DIFFERENT THAN THE OTHER SIDE.
CORRECT? CURRENTLY IT'S DIMENSIONALLY DIFFERENTLY.
TWO, BUT IT'S HISTORICALLY ACCURATE.
WE DON'T KNOW THAT I'M SAYING THAT DOUBLE WINDOW IS AN ORIGINAL OR SOME LATER RIGHT.
SO THE, THE REASON THE STAFF DOESN'T LIKE THE PROPOSED ONE IS 'CAUSE IT DOESN'T MATCH THE SOUTH ELEVATION, RIGHT? YES.
BUT WHAT'S CURRENTLY THERE, ONE MAY NOT BE ORIGINAL AND TWO DOESN'T MATCH EITHER.
SO, UM, MR. TAYLOR, CAN WE ASK YOU WHY? HOW THAT, WHY THAT WINDOW SIZE THE WAY IT IS? I'M SURE, I'M SURE THERE'S A, I'M SURE THERE'S A REASON FOR IT.
THAT'S THE SMALLEST WINDOW I CAN GET THAT MEETS THE EGRESS CODE.
IF I MAKE IT PROPORTIONAL, IT'LL GET TALLER, WHICH IS BIGGER.
SO MY CHOICES ARE I CAN, THAT FRONT ROOM IS A BEDROOM.
I CAN LEAVE THE DOUBLE WINDOWS ON THAT SIDE AND I CAN CHANGE THE WINDOWS IN THE FRONT TO AN EGRESS WINDOW, WHICH WILL DO THE SAME THING JUST ON A DIFFERENT ELEVATION.
UM, REMEMBER THAT THIS HOUSE IS THE ONE THAT'S TO THE SOUTH, SO THERE'S ONLY ABOUT 15 FEET BETWEEN THESE HOUSES.
AND THIS IS AN, THIS IS ONE OF THOSE ELEVATIONS THAT NO ONE WILL EVER SEE.
UM, SO NOT THAT THAT'S A CRITERIA TO, TO DO THAT, BUT IT'S NOT NEARLY AS VISIBLE AS IT APPEARS IN AN ELEVATION VIEW.
WE'RE PROBABLY GONNA HAVE A, BECAUSE THE OTHER OPTION, AND YOU I'M SURE YOU CONSIDERED THIS, IS TURN IT INTO A CASEMENT THAT HAS A CHECK RAIL ACROSS IT.
SO IT LOOKS LIKE A DOUBLE HUNG BUT IT'S NOT GONNA FUNCTION.
YOU COULD GET THE PROPORTIONS RIGHT.
I CAN DO THAT IF YOU'RE OKAY WITH THAT.
WELL, I MEAN IT'S THE SAME, IT'S THE SAME ISSUE.
IT'S THE SAME ISSUE WITH OUR CODE.
WHETHER YOU DO THIS OR WHETHER YOU DO IT, I'M PROPOSING WE COULD GET SOMETHING PROPORTIONALLY IT'S CLOSER, BUT WE STILL HAVE THE QUESTION.
IT'S NOT THE ORIGINAL OPERATION.
MY OPINION IS EVEN WITH THE CHECK RAIL, IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE A DOUBLE HUNG WINDOW EXCEPT IN AN ELEVATION DRAWING.
YEAH, IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT A PERFECT SOLUTION.
NO, IT DOESN'T HAVE, THE SASHES AREN'T OFFSET, SO IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT A PERFECT SOLUTION.
I MEAN, BUT THAT WOULD BE A WINDOW WE'D HAVE TO CHECK.
'CAUSE IT'S A WINDOW THAT'S EXISTING OR THEY'RE EXISTING TODAY.
THERE'S TWO EXISTING WINDOWS IN THE FRONT AND TWO ON THE SIDE.
NONE OF THEM MEET THE EGRESS CODE.
SO WE'VE GOTTA EITHER CHANGE THE, ON THE FRONT, WE'RE GOING BACK AND LOOK AT ALL THE WINDOWS AND NOW WE, THIS, THIS IS A BUILDING CODE, LIFE SAFETY, RIGHT? YEAH, EXACTLY.
THAT'S WHY I'M, SO, I, I'M, I'M, YEAH, I THINK THIS IS ONE YOU ALMOST HAVE TO, YEAH.
I THINK WE HAVE TO GIVE IT, WE ALMOST HAVE TO SAY THAT'S FINE.
WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THE FOUNDATION MATERIAL AND UM, THE APPLICANT'S INDICATED IF WE REQUEST A MATERIAL CLOSER TO THE ORIGINAL ROCK FACED BLOCK ON THE FOUNDATION OF THE EXISTING, THEY'RE OKAY WITH THAT.
I THOUGHT THAT IF WE WANT THE ORIGINAL FOUNDATION, THEY CAN LEAVE.
THERE'S NOTHING WRONG WITH THE ORIGINAL FOUNDATION, RIGHT? REMEMBER FOR WE'RE PUTTING A NEW FOUNDATION UNDER THE ENTIRE HOUSE.
THAT THE OLD FOUNDATION IS JUST NOT, WELL FROM THE OUTSIDE IT LOOKS LIKE BLOCK ON THE INSIDE THAT'S PATCHED TOGETHER A LOT OF DIFFERENT MATERIALS AND IT'S BEEN ADDED ONTO AND IT'S, YOU KNOW.
I JUST NEEDED THAT CLARIFICATION.
SO, SO, SO WE CAN PUT ANY VENEER ON THERE THAT WE WANT.
YOU JUST, EARLIER YOU SAID IF WE WANTED SOMETHING THAT'S CLOSER TO THE EXISTING, YOU WOULD, YOU WOULD DO THAT AND DIFFERENTIATE IT FROM, SO WE'RE GONNA HAVE A POURED CONCRETE FOUNDATION SO WE CAN APPLY THE MATERIAL THAT LOOKS WE'LL FIND SOMETHING THAT LOOKS LIKE THE EXISTING HOUSE, UM, TO THAT PART OF THE HOUSE, RIGHT.
[01:15:01]
WHICH WOULD, YEAH, I THINK YOU USE THE TERM VENEER, BUT I UNDERSTAND YOU'RE NOT GONNA, THAT MEETS THE GUIDELINE.SO THAT'S DEPENDS ON WHAT KIND IT'S RIGHT.
I THINK THERE'S A DIMENSIONAL
I THINK WE JUST MAKE IT SUBJECT TO STAFF APPROVAL.
IF THAT'S, IF THAT'S A PART OF OUR, THERE'S A DIMENSIONAL PART OF VENEER FINISHES.
I KNOW THERE'S SOMETHING IN THERE.
WE JUST MAKE IT SUBJECT TO STAFF APPROVAL.
UM, THE SIDING, WE'VE, THAT'S, THERE'S ALREADY LANGUAGE IN THERE FOR HOW TO HANDLE THE SIDING AND YOU'RE OKAY WITH THE LANGUAGE THAT'S IN THERE CURRENTLY.
YOU WROTE THE LANGUAGE SO YOU'RE OKAY WITH THE LANGUAGE THAT'S IN THERE.
UM, HOW ABOUT THE COLOR? WE, WE, THE COLORS THAT ARE PROPOSED ARE NOT FROM OUR APPROVED LIST.
UM, SO WELL MAYBE WE SHOULD BACK IN AND TALK ABOUT THE SIDING BECAUSE THE SIDING HAS A GIVEN COLOR.
UNLESS YOU PAINT IT LIKE YOU'RE, LIKE YOU'RE PROPO LIKE PART OF THAT LATTER CONVERSATION WAS YOU MIGHT PAINT IT, BUT IS PART OF THE COLOR PALETTE THAT YOU PROPOSE BASED ON THE FINISH OF THE SIDING? AND IF IT'S NOT, JUST TELL US ABOUT THE COLOR PALETTE.
I WANNA MAKE SURE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE SAME SIDING.
ARE WE TALKING ABOUT THE VERTICAL SIDING ON THE BARN PART OF IT? YEAH.
THE VERTICAL SIDING ON THE, ON THE ADDITION.
'CAUSE YOU, YOU'VE PROPOSED A COLOR SCHEME THAT'S NOT A PART OF OUR APPROVED COLORS.
SO I JUST WANT TO GET A LITTLE BIT MORE BACKGROUND BEFORE WE, WE SPAWN.
SO I MEAN THE, THE, THE IDEA BEHIND THIS, BESIDES THE LONGEVITY OF THIS MATERIAL, UM, IS WE WANTED TO THIS TO HAVE AN OLD BARN APPEARANCE TO IT.
SO THIS HAS A WEATHERED, I MEAN, YOU, YOU SAID IT, I FORGET WHAT YOUR COMMENT WAS, MR. KOTTER, BUT THE, YOU CAN SEE SOME OF THE GREEN HERE IN THE, IN THE COLOR, THE WAY IT'S WHITEWASHED ON THERE, IT HAS AN OLD BARN APPEARANCE.
AND THAT'S WHAT WE WERE GOING FOR ON THAT.
AND SO THEN THE REST OF YOUR COLOR SCHEME COMES FROM THAT PARTICULAR CHOICE FOR THE REST OF THE HOUSE.
SO THAT GIVES US, SO THAT'S GONNA BE, NO, I'M JUST NOT SURE THAT'S GONNA BE THE, YOU THINK THAT'S ROUGHLY THE COLOR? IT'S THE THING.
WHAT IS THAT? IS THAT MORE OR LESS YOU THINK THAT'S THE COLOR THAT IT'S GONNA BE? THAT'S THE WHITEWASH.
YOU THINK THAT, YOU THINK THAT'S WHAT IT'S MORE OR LESS? YEAH.
LIKE, LIKE YOU SAID, IT'S A FEW SQUARE INCHES, BUT IT, THERE IS A LOT OF VARIANCE IN THE WHOLE THING, SO.
SO LET'S, LET'S TALK, OH, DID YOU WANNA SAY SOMETHING? NOPE.
SO, YOU KNOW, I MENTIONED EARLIER THE OTHER ALTERNATIVE MATERIALS WE'VE APPROVED ARE BASED ON THEIR APPEARANCE TO SOMETHING WE SEE IN THE DISTRICT OR THAT WE HAVE SOME HISTORY WITH.
SO, UM, THERE'S VERTICAL SIGHTING ON BARNS.
UM, WE, WE HAVE THE BARN IN THE SOUTH, THE SOUTH PART OF OUR DISTRICT AS VERTICAL SIDING.
UH, I DON'T THINK IT'S THIS NARROW, BUT, UM, BUT THERE IS A PRECEDENT FOR VERTICAL SIDING.
UM, BUT IT'S, BUT IT'S VERTICAL SIGHTING THAT I'M AWARE OF.
AND I WAS LOOKING THROUGH THIS LAST NIGHT.
UM, THERE'S SOME, YOU SEE THAT'S REALLY PAINTED A SOLID COLOR, SOLID WHITE OR PASTEL.
AND THEN THERE'S SOME THAT, THESE PHOTOS AREN'T GREAT, BUT THERE'S SOME THAT APPEARS TO BE PAINTED SOLID, BUT A VERY DARK, SO ONE, HOW DO YOU FEEL ABOUT THE MATERIAL? AND THEN IF WE'RE NOT COMFORTABLE WITH THIS MATERIAL, THEN WE'LL HAVE THE CONVERSATION ABOUT THE COLOR.
WELL, FIRST STEP I'M OKAY WITH THE, WITH THE VERTICAL
I MEAN, IN THE BACK IT MAYBE LOOKS A, MAKES IT LOOK A LITTLE TALLER IN THE BACK AND MAYBE A LITTLE LESS DIFFERENTIATED.
BUT I, FOR ME IT IT, IT DIFFERENTIATES THE HOUSE ALL, ALL, ALL AROUND.
SO I'M, FOR ME IT'S NOT, NOT NOT FROM, FROM A AESTHETIC LOOK, IT DOESN'T LOOK TOO BAD FOR ME FROM A, FROM JUST FROM THE ORIENTATION.
THE COLOR, I'M STILL A LITTLE, I'M STILL STRUGGLING A LITTLE BIT TO UNDERSTAND IF THEY'RE GONNA, AS WE'VE, AS WE'VE SAID ON A STAFF SOMEWHERE THAT WOULD, I'M NOT SURE THAT EXACTLY LOOKS PAINTED TO ME.
THAT'S WHAT, UH, YOU KNOW, I, I, I THINK AND YEAH, IT'S NOT MEANT TO BE PAINTED, BUT IT ALL, AS YOU SAY, THE BARNS AND ALL THESE ARE PAINTED AND THAT'S NOT A, I MEAN STAIN IS NOT A THING THAT WAS IN THE 18.
[01:20:01]
I SUBMITTED ARE AT LEAST IN MY SOFTWARE, THOSE ARE USING THE ACTUAL COLORS IN THERE.SO I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAVE THOSE IN FRONT OF YOU, BUT THOSE ARE THE, THAT'S IF YOU WANNA SEE THE WHOLE THING.
AND THE ACTUAL COLORS WE'RE PROPOSING, IT'S ON THE 3D DRAWINGS.
THE OTHER SAMPLE THAT YOU HAD EARLIER, THERE WERE TWO SAMPLES THERE, THERE WERE, THERE WAS A LIGHTER VERSION AND THEN THE DARKER VERSION.
WEREN'T THERE TWO SAMPLES THERE? YES.
FOR THE OTHER, FOR THE OTHER HOUSE.
OH, NOW THE ONE'S OVER THERE, YEAH.
SAME MATERIAL, DIFFERENT HOUSE.
AND MAYBE JUST, AND THE REASON FOR NOT SHA CHOOSING SOMETHING OFF THE COLOR, LET'S SAY THE SOME FOR NOT CHOOSING SOMETHING OFF THE, OFF THE, LET'S SAY THE APPROVED COLOR PALETTE.
WHAT'S THE REASON THAT ONE OF THOSE DIDN'T, UH, DIDN'T, UH, STRIKE ME? YOU'RE FANCY
WE'RE TRYING TO DO SOMETHING THAT LOOKS GOOD AND UH, AND WE THOUGHT THESE COLORS WERE, WERE CLOSE THAT THEY WORK IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT AND, AND WE'RE NOT TRYING TO MATCH EVERYTHING ELSE.
SO I DUNNO WHAT I CAN SAY EXCEPT THAT WE THOUGHT IT WAS TASTEFUL AND ATTRACTIVE.
THEY WORK FOR, THEY WORK FOR HOW THE DESIGN WAS, UH, IMAGINED.
NOW THE OTHER ONE IS LIGHTER, SO THE OTHER ONE IS MORE OF A, WHAT I SEE IN THAT SAMPLE'S MORE OF A WHITE WASH.
SO YOU HAVE, WE HAVE THE MATERIAL ISSUE, BUT THERE ALSO IS THE MATERIAL ISSUE.
SO THERE'S THE MATERIAL ISSUE.
IS THAT COLOR DARKER THAN ANYTHING ON OUR CURRENT COLOR PALETTE? THE PROPOSED SIDING FOR NUMBER 17 IS THE WHITEWASH.
SO IT'S A LOT LIGHTER THAN MAYBE WHAT WE WOULD SEE.
AND IT HAS, BECAUSE IT'S A STAIN, IT DOESN'T HAVE THE SAME LOOK AS PAINT.
WE DON'T ANTICIPATE USING STAIN IN THE DISTRICT, SO.
AND NOW LOOKING, I DID FIND YOUR DRAWINGS AND I CAN SEE WHERE YOU'RE TRYING TO GET THE EFFECT OF A WEATHERED BARN AND THAT'S WHY IT'S NOT PAINTED.
A WEATHERED BARN IN THE DISTRICT WOULD LOOK LIKE THIS STAIN LOOKS AS OPPOSED TO PAINTED.
IF WE'RE LOOKING FOR MAKING IT LOOK LIKE A RESIDENCE IN THE DISTRICT, THEN IT PROBABLY SHOULD BE PAINTED.
BUT THE, HOW WIDE IS THIS PRODUCT AGAIN? IS THIS FORM? SO IS IS ACTUAL THREE AND A HALF OR IS IT A TRUE FOUR INCHES.
WERE YOU SWORN IN EARLIER? WERE YOU SWORN IN EARLIER? OKAY.
SO YOU, IF YOU, IF YOU WOULDN'T, IF, IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND, IF YOU WOULD RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND AND ANSWER IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.
DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH IN YOUR TESTIMONY OF THIS BOARD? YES.
AND YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS? ANDREW RO.
UM, NOW YOU WERE SAYING THIS MATERIAL COMES IN OTHER WIDTHS.
IT COMES IN FOUR INCH, SIX INCH AND 12 INCH AND IT'S EXACT EXACTLY FOUR INCHES.
YOU, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WOULD SEE BARN BOARDS THIS NARROW SO WIDER SEEMS TO BE, I'M SURE THERE'S A REASON YOU PICKED THE NARROWER.
CAN WE PUT UP A PICTURE OF THE EXISTING BARN SHED, EITHER ONE OF 'EM.
'CAUSE THEY HAVE ALMOST THE SAME SIDING ON THEM.
YEAH, I KNOW WITH THE SHOTGUN WHERE, WITH, WITH THE SHED, BECAUSE IT IS, YEAH, IT IS THREE AND A HALF, BUT IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S, IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S A, UH, ISN'T IT MORE LIKE A ONE BY SIX DIVIDED? 'CAUSE THE HOUSE, WHAT I LOOKED AT THE HOUSE, THE HOUSE LOOKED LIKE THE, THE SHEATHING WAS ONE BY EIGHT AND THEN WITH A, WITH A V GROOVE IN IT AND THE SHEATHING ON THE SHED LOOKED LIKE IT WAS THE NEXT DIMENSION DOWN.
SO YEAH, THE V GROOVE OCCUR IS OCCURRING AT A THREE AND A HALF INCH MODULE.
SHED DO WE HAVE AN EXTERIOR VIEW OF THAT THAT WE CAN SEE? THESE ARE THE EXTERIOR VIEWS.
OKAY, WELL WE CAN'T SEE THAT, BUT OKAY.
SO YOU'RE TELLING US YOU'RE TRYING TO MATCH WHAT'S ON THE SHED? WELL, WE'RE NOT TRYING TO MATCH IT, BUT WE'RE TRYING TO BE OF THE SAME CHARACTER, VERTICAL SIDING, INFORMAL BARN KIND OF, THAT'S NARROW.
[01:25:08]
ANY THOUGHTS? I HAVE TO ADMIT AS I EARLIER JUST DOESN'T LOOK WEATHERED.RIGHT? WHEN YOU LOOK AT IT'S SHINY, RIGHT? THAT'S THE PART THAT THROWS ME OFF A LITTLE BIT.
UH, I MEAN I'M, I'M I'M HUNG UP ON IT, BUT, UH, IT'S JUST, IF WE'RE LOOKING FOR WEATHERED LOOK, IT'S NEW MATERIAL, RIGHT? IT'S HARD TO MAKE IT LOOK WEATHERED WHEN IT'S, UH, WOULD YOU APPROVE IT IF IT AS AN ALTERNATE MATERIAL, WOULD YOU APPROVE IT IF IT WERE PAINTED ONE OF THE COLORS THAT MATCHED THE COLORS IN THE DISTRICT? BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT THE SHED IS.
'CAUSE UH, THAT, THAT'S JUST HOW THE PAINT LOOKS ON IT.
I I'M ACTUALLY, I'M NOT COMPLETELY HUNG UP ON THE THING, BUT I CERTAINLY, IF I LOOK AT THAT, THAT DOESN'T SAY TO ME, UH, OLD BARN, BUT IT DOESN'T, IT DOESN'T GO AHEAD.
BUT IT'S, IT'S A TWO INCH SQUARE TOO, SO IT'S A LITTLE DIFFICULT TO UH, MAKE SENSE OF IT.
HUH? SO THIS SAMPLE WAS STAINED JUST A COUPLE WEEKS AGO AND IT HASN'T BEEN EXPOSED TO THE ACTUAL WEATHER.
UH, SINCE THIS IS A STAINED REAL WOOD MATERIAL, IT WILL START TO LOOK ACTUALLY WEATHERED WITHIN AS LITTLE AS SIX MONTHS
SO WE DON'T APPROVE MATERIALS THAT ARE RELATIVELY NEW.
SO WHEN WE, WHEN WE HEAR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, THAT WE WANNA SEE IMAGES OF AGED INSTALLATIONS, AND I, I APPRECIATE WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO COMMUNICATE, BUT THAT'S IN FACT GROUNDS THAT WE TRY TO AVOID, YOU KNOW, THAT IT'LL, IT'LL MATCH WHEN IT'S WEATHERED AND ON SITE AND THEN IT'S TOO LATE, THEN IT'S TOO LATE FOR US.
SO IT'S GONNA, IT'S GONNA LOOK LIKE WHAT, WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO AIM FOR FOR LIKE 30 YEARS AND IT'S JUST GONNA LOOK NEW FOR A COUPLE MONTHS.
IT'S GONNA LOOK WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING SHOOTING FOR.
I UNDERSTAND WHETHER IT LOOKS LIKE WHAT WE'RE SHOOTING FOR.
WHERE THE, WHERE THE DEBATE IS.
SO, UM, I, I GUESS I WOULD BE WILLING TO COMPROMISE AND SAY IF, IF THEY PAINTED IT AND WE HAD A SCHEME THAT WAS ONE OF OUR APPROVED COLOR SCHEMES, UM, I THINK THE RATIONALE THAT IT'S CLOSE TO THE SHED THAT IT'S REPLACING MAKES SENSE TO ME.
I THINK NOW, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE TRYING TO AVOID CORNER BOARDS WITH THIS MATERIAL.
SO, SO IF
SO I KNOW WHAT YOU'RE GETTING AT WITH THE USE OF THIS MATERIAL.
SO, UM, IT IS MORE OF A MODERN LOOK IN TERMS OF THE WAY YOU'RE DETAILING ALL THOSE RETURNS.
AND I'M NOT SUGGESTING YOU CHANGE THOSE, BUT YOUR ARGUMENT'S A LITTLE SELECTIVE.
BUT LIKE I SAID, I I I WOULD BE OKAY IF THE MATERIAL WAS MORE PAL OR WITH WITHIN THE PALLET.
YEAH, I COULD AGREE BECAUSE I THINK IT'S A BETTER MATERIAL THAN ALL THE, ALL THE BOARD AND BATTEN THAT WE'RE SEEING DONE AND, AND IT'S NOT DONE VERY WELL.
UM, I THINK THIS IS A BETTER, A BETTER CHOICE, BUT, SO, UM, BUT HOW DID THE, HOW DID THE REST OF YOU FEEL? YOU MAY SAY NO.
WELL, I LIKE, I LIKE THE MATERIAL AS WELL AND I'M OKAY WITH THE WIDTH THAT HE'S SELECTED TO MIRROR THE LOOK OF THE OUTBUILDING THAT THEY'RE TAKING DOWN.
I, I THINK THAT IT'S, THAT PART IS FINE ON THE, IN FACT, I THINK IT IMPROVES THE APPEARANCE OF THE MASSING OF THE BUILDING BY HAVING THAT VERTICAL SIDING.
SO, UM, AND HILLARY, HOW ABOUT YOU? UM, YEAH, I'M OKAY WITH THE MATERIAL ITSELF.
UM, I THINK I WOULD PREFER A COLOR IN THE PALETTE.
SO, SO WHEN YOU SAY YOU'RE OKAY WITH THE MATERIAL, THE POINT I MADE WAS YOU COULD USE IT IF IT WAS PAINTED ONE OF OUR COLORS.
LIKE THE OUTBUILDING ITSELF ORIGINALLY, WELL I SHOULDN'T SAY ORIGINALLY, WHO KNOWS WHAT IT WAS ORIGINALLY, WHAT IT'S CURRENTLY PAINTED.
BUT DO YOU MEAN THE GRAY OF THE CURRENT OUTBUILDING? YOU JUST MEAN PAINTED SOCK PAINTED? YEAH.
'CAUSE IT'S NOT AN OUTBUILDING, THEY'RE BUILDING A RESIDENCE.
SO IF, IF THEY WERE BUILDING AN OUTBUILDING IN THE SETBACK
[01:30:01]
OR IN THE EASEMENT OR WHATEVER, THEN WE COULD TALK WEATHERING.BUT I'M NOT SURE THERE, I I JUST, I DON'T THINK IT FITS MARK MARTY.
IS THAT OKAY WITH YOU? YEAH, I, I GUESS I HAVE LESS OBJECTION TO THE STAIN CONCEPT, BUT I CAN'T, I AGREE.
I CAN'T PICTURE IT EVER BEING USED IN THE DISTRICT, SO THAT GIVES ME A LOT OF PAUSE.
UM, BUT I DO LIKE THE MATERIAL AND AS I ALREADY SAID, I LIKE THE DIMENSION THAT YOU'RE USING.
I THINK THAT HELPS THE WHOLE MASSING APPEARANCE.
SO I MEAN, WE JUST HAVEN'T SEEN IT ALSO HOW IT WORKS LONG TERM, EVEN SIX MONTHS OR A YEAR OR FIVE YEARS.
AND IN MY EXPERIENCE WITH STAINING ON WOOD MATERIAL EXPOSED TO WEATHER IS EVENTUALLY YOU HAVE TO RESTAIN IT.
THAT HAPPENS ALL THE TIME WITH DECKS.
SO I GUESS I DON'T SEE A LONG-TERM BENEFIT OF THE STAINING OVER PAINTING.
AND IF YOU CHOSES A COLOR THAT WAS WITHIN OUR COLOR PREVIOUSLY APPROVED COLORS THAT COORDINATE WITH YOUR OTHER COLORS, THEN WE HAVE I THINK FOUR VOTES IN FAVOR.
SO TO ME IT'S, IT'S ACTUALLY NOT EVEN WHAT IT'S GONNA LOOK 20 YEARS FROM NOW.
IT'S THE FACT THAT EVEN IN ITS ORIGINAL CONDITION, IT DOESN'T MATCH THE PALETTE.
UM, AND IF THE RE I KNOW WHAT I'M TRYING TO GIVE CREDIT FOR IS THE REASONING OF TRYING TO IMITATE A WEATHERED BARN.
IT'S JUST NOT WORKING BECAUSE IT'S ATTACHED TO THE HOUSE.
IF IT WERE A WEATHERED BARN OUT BUILDING, THEN MAYBE I'D THINK ABOUT IT DIFFERENTLY, BUT IT'S NOT.
AND IT'S MEANT TO BE A RESIDENCE.
SO, SO IN THE INTEREST OF TIME, COULD WE CONDITION, AND THIS WOULD APPLY TO BOTH HOUSES THAT WE'LL COME BACK WITH A WHOLE NEW COLOR SCHEME, UH, THAT USES EXIST, USES THE COLORS FROM THE HISTORIC PALETTE.
UM, IF WE CAN GET THESE THINGS THROUGH SO WE CAN APPLY FOR BILLING PERMITS AND GET THAT PROCESS STARTED.
WELL, LET ME PROPOSE WHAT SARAH'S ALREADY PUT DOWN
OTHERWISE, YEAH, IT HAS TO COME BACK TO US.
YES, THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT I'M SAYING.
AND THAT, UM, AND, AND THAT ADDRESSES THE TWO THINGS THAT MATERIAL.
AND DO WE HAVE A, IS ONE OF OUR MOTIONS A WAIVER FOR THAT MATERIAL? NO, YOU ALREADY DID THE SIDING.
SO WHAT YOU HAVE LEFT IS THE DEMOLITION AND THEN THE MINOR PROJECT ITSELF.
SO WE'RE JUST GONNA LUMP THIS IN.
YEAH, WE'RE GONNA, 'CAUSE WE'RE GONNA TALK ABOUT THE GARAGE DOOR.
OKAY, SO THE WINDOW REPLACEMENT, WE SAID UM, THERE NEEDS TO BE MORE INFORMATION PROVIDED ON THAT BEFORE GARY.
LOOK AT CONDITION, NEW CONDITION NUMBER FIVE.
IS CONDITION OF THE ORIGINAL WINDOWS, IS THAT SPECIFIC ENOUGH? THE OTHER TWO, UH, THE OTHER TWO APPLICANTS HAD AN ACTUAL CONSULTANT GO OUT AND LOOK AT THOSE CONSULTANT OR A COMPANY WHO REPAIRS HISTORIC WINDOWS.
LIKE THE ONE INDIVIDUAL WAS FROM NORTHERN OHIO AS I RECALL.
SO HOWEVER YOU WOULD LIKE TO WORD IT.
AN INDEPENDENT CONSULTANT'S REPORT.
WITH THIS CONDITION, I ASSUME WE'RE LEAVING IT TO STAFF TO DETERMINE OR 'CAUSE THE OTHER ONE THEY HAD TO COME BACK TO US.
AND RIGHT NOW YOU JUST HAVE, IT SHALL PROVIDE STAFF AS MANY ORIGINAL WINDOWS SHALL BE KEPT AS POSSIBLE.
NOBODY'S MAKING, WELL I SHOULDN'T SAY NOBODY, THIS PUTS IT IN THE APPLICANT'S DETERMINATION AS TO WHAT SHOULD BE KEPT OR WHAT SHOULDN'T BE.
BUT THE CHANGING OF THE WINDOW ALSO HAD TO DO WITH THE, UH, EGRESS ISSUE.
THEY WERE GONNA REPLACE ALL WINDOWS.
THIS IS ALL THE IN THE ORIGINAL HOUSE.
UM, DO YOU WANT TO, DO YOU WANT THEM TO COME BACK TO THE BOARD FOR THIS OR DO YOU WANT THIS TO BE A STAFF APPROVAL? I'M OKAY WITH STEPH APPROVING IT, BUT JUST WITH THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN RIGHT NOW, IT LOOKS LIKE THE APPLICANT'S
[01:35:01]
GONNA MAKE THE DECISION.NOT STEPH, I JUST ADDED A PHRASE.
I MEAN THAT FOR YOU SITTING THAT SITTING WITH YOU IS YOU DON'T, IS OKAY MINE THAT BURDEN.
THE GARAGE DOOR ISSUE NOW THE, THE VER THE GARAGE DOOR, I THINK PART OF THE REASON IT'S SELECTED IS SO YOU CAN PUT THAT VERTICAL SIDING ON IT, RIGHT? SORRY? PART OF THE REASON YOU SELECTED THAT GARAGE DOOR IS SO YOU COULD PUT THE VERTICAL SIDING ON IT, RIGHT?
HOW DO YOU FEEL ABOUT THE ACTION OF THAT GARAGE DOOR? COULD SOMEONE EXPLAIN IT TO ME? IT'S GONNA DO THIS INSTEAD? THAT'S WHAT I ASSUMED FROM THE DESCRIPTION INSTEAD DOING THAT.
I MIGHT HAVE SOME INFORMATION THAT WOULD HELP CLARIFY THIS.
OUR DRIVEWAY STANDARDS, I'VE LEARNED A LOT ABOUT DRIVEWAYS OVER THE PAST FEW WEEKS, ARE A MINIMUM LENGTH OF 20 FEET.
THE REASON BEING THAT WE NEVER WANT CARS TO OVERHANG SIDEWALKS.
WE WANT THE SIDEWALKS TO STAY CLEAR.
SO IRRESPECTIVE OF THAT HIGHWAY EASEMENT, WHAT'S HAPPENING HERE IS WE HAVE A 20.2 FOOT DRIVEWAY THAT IS NOW WITH THE BI-FOLD ACCORDION ACTION ON THE GARAGE.
DOORS GOING TO BE EFFECTIVELY REDUCED BY FOUR FEET BASED ON THE FOLD OF EACH OF THOSE ACCORDIONS.
AND CHAIRMAN, YOU ARE CORRECT THAT WE CANNOT ENFORCE AND THE APPLICANT CANNOT ENFORCE SOMEBODY NOT PARKING IN THAT DRIVEWAY.
AND WHAT WE FEAR WILL HAPPEN IS IN A VERY PEDESTRIAN ORIENTED LOCATION, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE SOMEBODY PARKING IN THAT DRIVEWAY THAT WILL EITHER COVER THE SIDEWALK OR BE OUT IN THE RIGHT OF WAY IN A VERY, VERY NARROW SITUATION WHERE WE DON'T HAVE ANY SPACE TO SPARE.
AND IT'S, IT REALLY IS IRRESPECTIVE OF THAT EASEMENT.
SO WE COULD, UM, JUST FOR ME, I MEAN THE EASEMENT, THE SIDEWALK CAN GO ANYWHERE IN THAT EASEMENT.
THE SIDEWALK CAN GO ANYWHERE IN THE EASEMENT THAT HAS YET TO BE DETERMINED.
AND WE'RE JUST TRYING TO PRESERVE THE GREATEST AMOUNT OF SPACE POSSIBLE SO THAT WE CAN CREATE THIS PEDESTRIAN DISTRICT.
I MEAN, FOR ME, IF YOU, NO MATTER WHERE IT GOES, IF THERE'S A CAR THERE, IT'S GONNA OVERHANG A SIDEWALK UNLESS WE HAVE A PUSH THE THING BACK 20 MORE FEET.
SO IF YOU HAVE THE FOUR FOOT ACCORDION DOORS, NO, IF THE, IF THE SIDEWALK GOES ANYWHERE IN THE HIGHWAY U USUALLY THE SIDEWALKS ARE RIGHT AT THE, AT THE RIGHT OF WAY LINE, UM, THE RIGHT LINE.
WELL, NO, I WANT, I WANNA FIGURE OUT WHAT SEAN IS TALKING ABOUT.
SO, WELL, I MEAN THE RIGHT OF WAY LINE, LET'S SAY WE HAD ZERO CLEARANCE DOORS, YOU KNOW, REGULAR ROLLUP DOORS, YOU'RE STILL WORRIED ABOUT IT.
I I MEAN I THINK IT'S 20 FEET TO THE RIGHT OF WAY LINE.
IF I'M READING THIS, IT IS, IT'S 20.2 FEET.
IT'S WHERE WE'RE GONNA PUT THE SIDEWALK CAN BE ANYWHERE INSIDE OF THE EASEMENT.
WELL, IT DEPENDS WHERE IT'S SIDE, IT DEPENDS ON WHAT YOU PUT THERE.
SO IT'S A, IT'S A DIFFICULT, IT, IT, IT, IT STILL MATTERS IN TERMS OF THE PROJECTION INTO THE, THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN PROJECTING INTO THE RIGHT OF WAY.
'CAUSE THE, THE CODE IS BASED ON THE DISTANCE BETWEEN THE HOUSE AND THE RIGHT OF WAY.
AND THAT'S WHAT DEFINES YOUR DRIVEWAY LENGTH.
SO IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT IN COMPLIANT WITH THIS DOOR.
'CAUSE IT'S, IT'S NOT A FUNCTIONAL DRIVEWAY THAT'S 20 FEET LONG WITH THIS DOOR.
SO IT DOESN'T COMPLIANT THEN IT SHOULD BE, WOULD IT BE FUNCTIONAL GARY, IF THEY HAD REGULAR ROLLUP DOORS? OH YEAH.
'CAUSE OTHERWISE WE HAVE TO DENY OR CHANGE THE WAIVER FOR THE SETBACK TO GIVE THEM A LONGER DRIVEWAY, WHICH IS NOT, I I I THINK THEY GET THE SQUARE FOOTAGE BY KEEPING THE RIGHT, I UNDERSTAND THAT COMPLETELY.
AND I DIDN'T MEAN TO SUGGEST THAT I'M YEAH, BUT, BUT FOR ME, THE QUESTION IS, IS IT A CODE ISSUE? IS IT A CODE, IS IT A CODE ISSUE? BECAUSE IF YOU PUT THE SIDEWALK RIGHT INSIDE THE RIGHT INSIDE THE RIGHT OF WAY, WHICH MAY OR MAY NOT HAPPEN OR INSIDE THE EASEMENT COULD GO IN, IT COULD GO ANYWHERE, RIGHT? 'CAUSE YOU HAVE A TREE LINE, WHATEVER'S GONNA GO IN THERE.
[01:40:01]
IT'S UNDE INDETERMINED AT THE MOMENT.THE ANYWHERE BETWEEN THE, ANYWHERE BETWEEN, UH, OKAY.
SO ANYWHERE IN THERE IT THINGS COULD GO IN THERE.
WELL, THE SAFETY OF THE SIDEWALK IS, IS DIFFERENT THAN THE CODE REQUIREMENT.
BUT YOU'RE RIGHT, YOU'RE RIGHT.
BECAUSE IF RIGHT TODAY IT'LL BE INDETERMINED, THEY'RE BOTH, THEY'RE BOTH, UM, ISSUES WITH THE ROLL UP ISSUES.
BUT WITH THE ROLL UP DOOR, YOU STILL HAVE THE SIDEWALK, BUT YOU DON'T HAVE THE POTEN AS MUCH A POTENTIAL FOR PROJECTION INTO THE RIGHT OF WAY.
UM, WE, WE CAN USE A REGULAR DOOR IF THAT MAKES THE DECISION EASIER.
YOU WANT, DO YOU WANT US TO GET ON THE 27 IF YOU'D LIKE.
AND THIS IS GONNA POP UP AGAIN ON 27TH, SO WE CAN USE A REGULAR DOOR THERE TOO.
ALRIGHT, SO SUBJECT TO STAFF APPROVAL A, A DOOR, THE DESIGN IS SUBJECT TO STAFF APPROVAL.
A DOOR THAT DOES NOT PROJECT BEYOND THE FACE.
I, I THINK IT'S IRRELEVANT MYSELF, BUT THAT'S, UH, THAT'S MY OPINION.
'CAUSE IT WON'T, IT WON'T MAKE A DIFFERENCE IF SOMEBODY PARKS IN THAT DRIVEWAY.
THEY'RE GONNA BE SITTING ON THE, ON THE, ON THE SIDEWALK.
BUT, UM, IN THE NEW GARAGE ROOM, I'M OKAY, BUT THEY'LL LEAVE YOU.
BUT IF THE DOORS ARE ACCORDION, THEY AREN'T GONNA BE ABLE TO PULL UP TO THE DOOR EITHER.
SO THEY'RE GONNA BE IMPOSING THAT PROBLEM ON THEMSELVES.
UNLESS THEY PULL IN YOU'RE, YOU'RE SUPPOSING THAT, UH, YOU CAN OPEN THE DOOR AND PULL UP.
YOU CAN CLOSE THE DOOR AND PULL UP.
I MEAN, I'M IMPOSING A FUTURE CONDITION ON THEM THAT THEY CAN OVERCOME BY CLOSING OR OPEN THE DOOR.
SO, UH, WE CAN GO ON, UM, IF THE, IF THEY CAN, IF THE APPLICANT'S OKAY WITH A NEW DOOR.
I THINK IT'S, UH, FOR ME IT'S SARAH, IT'S GONNA BE A PROBLEM REGARDLESS.
CAN WE, INSTEAD OF SAYING A ROLL UP DOOR, SAY A ZERO CLEARANCE DOOR OR SOMETHING, IN CASE THERE'S SOME OTHER MECHANISM THAT I DON'T KNOW IF THERE IS, DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? E THERE'S, THERE ARE OTHER OPTIONS.
THAT'S WHAT I MEAN IS A PLANE COULD PIVOT.
RIGHT? I'M THINKING, YOU KNOW, WHATEVER THEY CALL THOSE BARN DOOR SLIDERS, THINGS LIKE THAT.
WE'LL DO A OVERHEAD GARAGE DOOR.
WE'LL JUST GIVE YOU AN OPTION TO DO SOMETHING.
WE'RE JUST TRYING TO MAKE, GIVE YOU OPTIONS WHEN IT'S OPEN DOESN'T PROJECT OUT, YOU CAN, OKAY.
YOU CAN DO WHATEVER YOU WANT AS LONG AS IT'S A ZERO.
WE'RE TRYING TO KEEP YOU IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE, WITH THE 20 FOOT REQUIREMENT.
I LIKE THE FACT JUST THE, THE SELECT DOOR SHALL BE OF A TYPE THAT DOES NOT REQUIRE A WAIVER IS GOOD.
BUT THAT COULD, THAT COULD GIVE YOU THE OPTION THAT COULD GIVE YOU THE OPTION TO MAKE IT A PLANE AS WELL.
IF YOU WANT TO PUT THE SIDING ACROSS IT AND NOT HAVE ALL THE BREAKS.
A PLANE THAT ROTATE, THAT PIVOTS UP, IF DOESN'T WELL, WHEN IT'S OUT OF THE WAY, YOU, IT'S FAR IN THE WAY.
IT'S, IT'S THE SAME ALL IT'S, IT, WE, WE, WE'LL JUST, WE'LL JUST LEAVE THE LANGUAGE BECAUSE OTHERWISE YOU HAVE THE SAME ISSUE.
WELL LET'S JUST LEAVE THE LANGUAGE.
UM, THERE'S ONLY ONE MORE THAT I CAN THINK OF AND, YOU KNOW, HOW DO YOU FEEL ABOUT DIFFERENTIATING THE ROOFS BETWEEN THE ORIGINAL HOUSE OH AND THE HOUSE IN THE BACK.
AND YOU COULD, YOU COULD DIFFERENTIATE THE SEAM SPACING.
YOU COULD DIFFERENTIATE, SEEM THE, THE COLOR OF THE MATERIAL.
THE IDEA IS YOU DISTINGUISHING THE ORIGINAL HOUSE FROM THE ADDITION.
WHAT, WHAT YOU WERE SHAKING YOUR HEAD.
I MEAN, YEAH, I MEAN THAT'S WHAT I MEAN, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IN ALL OTHER DIMENSIONS.
SO I THINK IT'S SOMETHING SHOULD BE DONE, WHETHER IT'S COLOR AT SCENE SPACING COULD BE SOMETHING, BUT THAT IT'S CLEAR FROM KIND OF ALL SPOTS THAT IT'S, THAT IT'S TWO DIFFERENT THINGS.
I MEAN THAT'S THE BASIS FOR THE, FOR THE, FOR THE CODE.
THERE'S A PROJECT EARLIER WHERE WE DID NOT REQUIRE IT ON AND UM, WE PROBABLY SHOULD HAVE, BUT WE DID NOT REQUIRE IT ON AN EARLIER PROJECT.
IT WAS NOT BROUGHT UP, BUT IT, IT, UM, SO AND STAFF ON THIS ONE HAS A CONCERN ABOUT THE, IT COMES UP IN THE STAFF REPORT.
AND I THINK YOU'LL SEE SOME OF THESE ROOF PLANES FROM YES, WE OKAY.
SO WE, WE WANT TO SEE, YOU CAN ACTUALLY SEE IT FROM THE, THE BRIDGE TOO, LOOKING OVER IT.
WE WANNA SEE SOME DISTINCTION BETWEEN THE TWO ROOFS, THE ROOF.
MARTY, MARTY MARTY'S SHAKING HER HEAD AGAIN TO STAFF'S DISCRETION.
ARE WE OKAY WITH THAT? OR DO THEY NEED TO COME BACK? IS STAFF OKAY WITH THAT? BECAUSE THIS PUTS A BURDEN.
I THINK THIS, THIS COULD BE RELATIVELY MINOR.
DOES, THERE'S NOTHING DMA DRAMATIC ABOUT THE SOMETHING JUST TO MAKE IT, YOU KNOW, THAT THAT ROOF IS NOT IN LINE WITH THE OTHER ROOF.
[01:45:02]
SO IS THAT OKAY FOR STAFF IS OKAY.I'M SORRY YOU'RE WRITING AND I'M TALKING.
AND I CAN CHANGE IN COLOR AND OR DIFFERENCE IN SEAM DISTANCE.
SO ANY OTHER ISSUES? ALRIGHT, LET'S GO BACK THROUGH THESE SINCE THEY'RE FRESH, SORT OF FRESH.
UM, AND JUST MAKE SURE WE UNDERSTAND THEM.
MAKE SURE THE APPLICANTS UNDERSTAND THEM.
SO ONE, SHOULD THE VARIANCE REQUEST NOT BE APPROVED BY BZA, THE APPLICANT SHALL ADJUST THE PROPOSAL TO MEET WAIVER CRITERIA AND PRESENT AND PRESENT THE CHANGES TO THE A RB FOR APPROVAL.
ALRIGHT, THAT WAS ALWAYS A PART OF THE RECOMMENDATION.
HISTORIC FOUNDATION AND NEW WINDOW WELL SHALL BE CHANGED TO A MATERIAL THAT MORE CLOSELY RESEMBLES THE ORIGINAL FOUNDATION TO BE APPROVED BY STAFF PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT ADDITIONS.
FOUNDATION MATERIAL MAY REMAIN AS PROPOSED.
STAFFS OR APPLICANTS INDICATED THEY'RE OKAY WITH THAT.
THE APPLICANT SHALL REPAIR THE EXISTING CEDAR SIDING, REPLACE IT AS NEEDED USING REAL CEDAR SIDING.
THE HARDY SHAKES SIDING MAY BE USED IF THE APPLICANT CAN PROVIDE EVIDENCE THAT THE CEDAR SHAKES ARE NOT ORIGINAL TO THE HOUSE.
HOWEVER, THE APPLICANT SHALL PROVIDE STAFF WITH INFORMATION REGARDING ANY POTENTIAL DIFFERENT SIDING UNDER THE CURRENT SHAKE SIDING.
IF THIS EXISTS, THE APPLICANT AGREES TO MORE CLOSELY MATCH OR RESTORE THAT SIDING TO BE APPROVED BY STAFF PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT.
AND I THINK THEY'VE, YOU'VE INDICATED YOU'RE OKAY WITH THAT.
THE APPLICANT SHALL PROVIDE TWO STAFF FOR APPROVAL PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT SPECIFICATIONS FOR ALL MAN AND PATIO DOORS.
DOES THAT WORK WITH YOUR SCHEDULE? FOR APPLYING? FOR BUILDING PERMIT? OKAY.
THE APPLICANT SHALL PROVIDE STAFF INDEPENDENT CONSULTANT INFORMATION REGARDING THE CONDITION OF THE ORIGINAL WINDOWS.
AS MANY ORIGINAL WINDOWS SHALL BE KEPT AS POSSIBLE, AS DETERMINED BY STAFF.
YOU'RE OKAY WITH, YOU'RE OKAY WITH FIVE.
AT BUILDING PERMIT, THE APPLICANT SHALL SUPPLY SUFFICIENT, SUFFICIENT GRAPHIC INFORMATION ABOUT HOW THE PROPOSED TRENCH DRAIN TIES INTO THE STREET.
NOW THAT'S, UM, SOME ENGINEERING.
ARE YOU, YOU'RE GONNA BE ABLE TO DO THAT.
UM, I, I KNOW THE MINOR PROJECT REVIEW CRITERIA DOES ASK FOR SOME SITE ENGINEERING.
UM, I KNOW THAT'S, THAT'S IN THE DOCUMENT THAT DESCRIBES OUR MINOR PROJECT REVIEW PROCESS.
IS THAT WHERE THIS COMES FROM? IT DOES.
SO IT'S, YEAH, IT'S, IT'S RIGHT FROM THE APPLICATION GUIDELINES, THE VERTICAL SIGHTING SHALL BE PAINTED RATHER THAN STAINED.
AN OVERALL COLOR SCHEME SHALL BE MORE IN KEEPING WITH THE GUIDANCE IN THE PRE-APPROVED PAINT DOCUMENT FOR CRAFTSMAN BUNGALOW STRUCTURES TO BE APPROVED BY STAFF PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMITS.
AND YOU'VE INDICATED YOU'RE OKAY WITH THAT.
THE GARAGE DOOR SHALL BE A TRADITIONAL OVERHEAD DOOR TO BE APPROVED BY STAFF PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT.
THE SELECTED DOOR SHALL BE OF A TYPE THAT DOES NOT REQUIRE A WAIVER.
UM, YOU KNOW, IF YOU COME, IF THEY WANT TO COMPOSITE DOOR, IF THE, THAT WOULD REQUIRE A WAIVER, RIGHT? IT WOULD.
UM, SO YOU COULD ADD OR COME BACK FOR FOR APPROVAL? YEAH.
UM, I MEAN I'M TRYING THIS, THIS IS GONNA NARROW YOUR OPTIONS A LITTLE BIT IF WE LEAVE THAT SECOND SENTENCE IN THERE.
UM, 'CAUSE IN, I THINK YOU'VE USED IN SOME OTHER PROJECTS, MAYBE YOU HAVEN'T, BUT OTHER APPLICANTS HAVE DOORS THAT REQUIRE WAIVERS IN THE GARAGE.
SO, UM, WHAT ASPECT OF IT WOULD REQUIRE A WAIVER? IF THE MATERIAL IS A COMPOSITE TYPE MATERIAL? IF IT'S LIKE A A SO WE WOULD DO THE SAME THING THAT WE'RE DOING NOW.
WE WOULD APPLY THE SIDING TO THE DOOR, UM, AND IF IT WAS WOOD IT'D BE FINE.
BUT IF YOU WANTED TO USE A DIFFERENT SUBSTRATE, YOU'D, YOU'D HAVE TO COME BACK HERE.
WE YOU WANT THE SAME LOOK THAT WE HAVE WITH THE BI-FOLD DOORS? SO WE, IF WE DO AN OVERHEAD DOOR, WE'LL APPLY VERTICAL SIDING TO THE OVERHEAD DOOR.
BUT, BUT MY, MY POINT IS, IF, IF THAT SUBSTRATE IS NOT WOOD, IF YOU PUT IT TO A, A SANDWICHED DOOR OR A LIGHTER
[01:50:01]
MATERIAL DOOR LIKE A COMPOSITE DOOR, THEN YOU'D HAVE TO COME BACK FOR A WAIVER FROM, I'M NOT SUGGESTING THAT YOU'D BE GOING THROUGH THIS, IT'S JUST A PROCESS FOR THE NON-TYPICAL MATERIALS.UM, IS THERE A WAY THAT WE CAN, I WANT TO GIVE YOU FLEX.
MY GOAL IS TO GIVE YOU FLEXIBILITY IN A WAY THAT THAT DOESN'T, UM, LENGTHEN YOUR PROCESS.
BUT DOES THE, DOES THAT, UH, IS THE INTENT OF THAT THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE DOOR OR THE FINISH OF THE DOOR? IT'S BOTH.
IF THE WOOD IS, OR I'M SORRY, IF THE DOOR IS CLAD IN WOOD, THEN THAT WOULD NOT REQUIRE A WAIVER.
SO WE CAN, WE CAN, THEY COULD USE A COMPOSITE DOOR THERE THAT HAS FIBERGLASS IN IT AND HAS INSULATION IN IT.
A COMPOSITE REQUIRES THAT'S THE TEXTURED.
WELL IF THE COMPOSITE DOOR WERE CLAD IN WOOD, THAT WOULD BE OKAY.
IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? BECAUSE YOU COULD, THEY COULD TAKE A FLAT PANEL COMPOSITE DOOR FOR THE INSULA INSULATING VALUE AND APPLY THIS TO THAT AND YEAH.
SO YEAH, I THINK THERE'S A TERMINOLOGY CONFUSION HERE.
'CAUSE A COMPOSITE DOOR WOULD TYPICALLY BE A STEEL DOOR WITH A, LIKE A, A, AN AZAC OR SOME OTHER MATERIAL ATTACHED TO THAT TO CREATE THE LOOK.
SO WE WOULD BE GETTING A PLAIN FLUSH DOOR THAT WOULD ONLY BE ONE MATERIAL AND APPLYING THE SIDING TO THAT.
SO IF IT'S WOOD SIDING APPLIED TO THAT, THAT WOULD NOT NEED A WAIVER.
THE ROOF ON THE HISTORIC HOUSE SHALL BE DIFFERENTIATED FROM THE ADDITION BY A SLIGHT CHANGE IN COLOR AND OR DIFFERENCE IN SEAM DISTANCE TO BE APPROVED BY STAFF PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT.
WE'VE DISCUSSED ALL THESE, THERE'S BEEN ACKNOWLEDGEMENT I THINK OF EACH OF THESE.
YOU COMFORTABLE? ARE YOU OKAY WITH THESE? YEAH.
UM, SO DO WE WANT TO GO BACK TO THE START OF OUR LIST? BECAUSE NOW WE HAVE SOMETHING THAT I THINK WE'RE GOING TO APPROVE BASED.
SO DO WE WANT TO GO TO THE FIRST ONE TO APPROVE THE DEMOLITION OF THE LANDMARK BUILDING? IS THERE A MOTION? I'LL MOVE TO APPROVE.
I'LL MOVE TO APPROVE THE DEMOLITION OF THE LANDMARK OUTBUILDING.
WHO WAS THE SECOND? MARTY? MARTY.
WE'VE ALREADY APPROVED THE SECOND.
IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE A WAIVER TO ALLOW REAR YARD SETBACK REDUCTION OF 20% TO 24.4 FEET? SO MOVED.
YOU HAVE AN UPDATED REPORT IN YOUR YEP.
AND THE LAST ONE IS TO APPROVE THE MINOR PROJECT REVIEW WITH THE, ARE WE UP TO NINE CONDITIONS NOW? YES.
IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINOR PROJECT REVIEW WITH NINE CONDITIONS? SO MOVED.
SO NOW WE'RE GOING TO DISCUSS 27 NORTH.
UH, DOES ANYBODY NEED A, A BREAK? JUST A, A BRIEF, BRIEF BREAK.
ALRIGHT, WOULD EVERYONE, IS EVERYONE READY TO COMMENCE? OKAY.
[Case #24-060ARB & Case #24-030ARB-MPR ]
LAST CASE THIS EVENING IS 27 NORTH RIVERVIEW STREET.IT'S A DEMOLITION AND A MINOR PROJECT REVIEW FOR AN ADDITION TO HISTORIC HISTORIC HOME.
UM, THIS ACCESS, THIS LANDMARK WE'RE, WE'RE, THIS IS A PROPOSAL FOR DEMOLITION OF A LANDMARK ACCESSORY STRUCTURE AND A PROPOSAL FOR THE REMODEL AND CONSTRUCTION OF AN ADDITION TO AN EXISTING HOME.
[01:55:01]
THE 0.21 ACRE SITE IS ZONED HDHR HISTORIC RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT AND IT'S LOCATED SOUTHWEST OF THE INTERSECTION OF WING HILL LANE AND NORTH RIVERVIEW STREET.AND, AND SARAH, IT'S CLEAR YOU'RE READY SO PLEASE, PLEASE PROCEED.
UH, AS YOU MENTIONED, THE LOCATION IS AT THE INTERSECTION, NORTH BLACKSMITH WING HILL AND NORTH RIVERVIEW STREET.
THE SITE IS WITHIN THE HISTORIC RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT BETWEEN BOTH THE CORE AND HISTORIC PUBLIC.
THE HOUSE IS AN INTACT LANDMARK GABLE L FOLK VICTORIAN, AND THE LANDMARK OUTBUILDING IS THOUGHT TO BE UNORIGINAL TO THE SITE AND IT IS THE SUBJECT OF THE DEMOLITION REQUEST.
TONIGHT, JUST AS WE DID WITH THE PREVIOUS PROJECT, I'M GONNA GO THROUGH THE SETBACKS, THE WAIVERS AND THE VARIANCES AND LOT COVERAGE REQUIREMENTS ARE MET.
THE BUILDING FOOTPRINT IS CURRENTLY SHOWN AT 132.6% OF THAT ALLOWED BY CODE.
THE APPLICANT REQUESTS A 20% WAIVER FROM THIS BOARD TONIGHT AND THE REMAINDER FROM THE BCA TOMORROW NIGHT.
UH, THE 27 57 SQUARE FEET IS THE NUMBER THAT WAS CALCULATED BY THIS BOARD IN MARCH.
THE REAR SETBACK IS SHOWN AT 20 FEET WHERE THIS BOARD COULD PERMIT 21.57 FEET.
SO THE APPLICANT REQUESTS THE 20% WAIVER TONIGHT AND THE ADDITIONAL VARIANCE AT BZA TOMORROW.
TAKING A LOOK AT THE SITE AGAIN, THE HISTORIC HOUSES IN DARKER GRAY AND YOU MIGHT REMEMBER THAT THIS IS THE ONE THAT IS PROPOSED TO BE MOVED.
UM, THE ADDITION IS IN LIGHTER GRAY.
THE LANDMARK SHED IS SHOWN IN ORANGE.
THE HIGHWAY EASEMENTS ARE SHOWN IN RED AND THE BLACKSMITH RIGHT OF WAY IS SHOWN IN BLACK.
THE CODE REQUIRED REAR YARD SETBACK IS SHOWN IN THE LIGHT BLUE.
THE WAIVER IS SHOWN IN THE DARK BLUE AND THE VARIANCE IS SHOWN IN PURPLE.
THE TREE TO BE REMOVED IS SHOWN HERE IN GREEN.
IT SHOWS THE VIC FOLK VICTORIAN FORM WITH THE ADDITIONS ADJACENT AND BEHIND IT.
THE BLUE LINE SHOWS THE HISTORIC BUILDING ON THE RIGHT AND THE ADDITION ON THE LEFT HERE.
THERE'S NO REQUIRED BREAK OR CHANGE OF MATERIAL AS DISCUSSED IN THE REPORT.
THIS MAIN WINDOW HERE HAS AN OFFSET MOUNTAIN THAT WE WILL DISCUSS LATER ON IN THE PRESENTATION.
AND THIS EAST FACING DOOR OPENING IS TO BE RETAINED AND UM, WE'LL DISCUSS THAT IN A COUPLE OF SLIDES.
THE ORANGE CIRCLE INDICATES A ROOF PITCH WAIVER LOCATION.
AND AGAIN THE BLUE LINE DIFFERENTIATES BETWEEN THE HISTORIC BUILDING ON THE LEFT AND THE ADDITION ON THE RIGHT, AGAIN WITHOUT THE REQUIRED HYPHEN OR BREAK OR CHANGE IN MATERIAL.
UM, THE SIDING IS PROPOSED TO MATCH ALL THE WAY ACROSS THIS ADDITION.
THE APPLICANT'S ALSO KEEPING THE PEDIMENT, UH, WINDOW LINTELS ON THE HISTORIC PORTION.
AND IN THE, UM, ON THE ADDITION, STONE IS USED ON THE MAJORITY OF THE ADDITION AND VERTICAL TONGUE AND GROOVE SIDING IS USED AS AN ACCENT.
THE WINDOWS ARE SHOWN AS TWO OVER TWO REPLACEMENTS.
THE SOUTH ELEVATION SHOWS THE ROOF WAIVER LOCATIONS IN ORANGE AGAIN.
AND THEN THE SAME COMBINATION OF MATERIALS.
THIS IS THE VIEW FROM BLACKSMITH AND WE HAVE A BI-FOLD GARAGE DOOR AGAIN.
AND WE NOTE THE SAME CONCERNS AS WITH THE PREVIOUS APPLICATION.
THESE ARE THE MATERIALS FOR THE HISTORIC PORTION OF THE PROJECT.
THE GAF SLATE LINE SHINGLES AND WEATHERED SLATE AT AS UH, STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF AND BLACK.
AND AGAIN, ALL THESE MATERIALS ARE UPFRONT.
THE LP SMART SIDING AND TRIM HERE BOTH NEED WAIVERS.
UM, AGAIN, MORE DISCUSSION ON THE NEXT SLIDE.
THE FOUNDATION IS TO BE THIN BRICK AS INDICATED HERE.
STAFF HAS NOTED PREVIOUS CONCERNS ABOUT THIS PRODUCT.
UM, IN THE STAFF REPORT, MARVIN ULTIMATE WINDOWS
[02:00:01]
ARE TO BE CLAD IN SIERRA WHITE ON THIS PORTION OF THE OLD HOUSE.AND THEN THE SIDING IS TO BE PAINTED SEAL SKIN WITH THE TRIM MUSLIN.
TAKING A CLOSER LOOK AT THE SIDING, WE ARE CONCERNED ABOUT THE LOSS OF ORIGINAL FABRIC, WHICH IS NOT SUPPORTED BY THE CODE, THE GUIDELINES OR THE ALTERNATIVE MATERIALS DOCUMENT.
THIS SLIDE SHOWS THE DIFFERENCE IN TEXTURE BETWEEN THE TWO, UH, SIDING TYPES.
ON THE LEFT IS THE HISTORIC DROP SIDING ON THE BUILDING RIGHT NOW.
AND ON THE RIGHT IS A PHOTO FROM THE LP SMART SIDE WEBSITE.
UM, WITH THE WAIVER THERE IS A HIGHER THRESHOLD TO APPROVE THAT PRODUCT AND YOU CAN SEE THAT THERE'S A DIFFERENCE IN THE AMOUNT OF DETAIL.
STAFF DID REQUEST THE APPLICANT USE THE DROP SIDING BUT THE APPLICANT DECLINED.
WE DO HAVE A CONDITION OF APPROVAL TO USE A FOUR INCH REVEAL OF THE LAP SIDING IF THE DROP SIDING IS NOT AVAILABLE.
MOVING ON TO UH, THE FRONT DOORS AND THE FRONT WINDOW.
THERE ARE TWO FRONT DOORS ON THIS HOUSE AND EACH OPENING HAS ORIGINAL DOORS, TRANSOMS AND TRIM.
THE DOOR FACING SOUTH IS TO BE REMOVED.
THE DOOR OPENING FACING EAST IS TO BE KEPT AGAIN THE CODE, THE GUIDELINES AND THE ALTER ALTERNATE MATERIALS SUPPORT PRESERVATION RATHER THAN REPLACEMENT.
SO WE'RE SUGGESTING A CONDITION OF APPROVAL TO KEEP THE ENTIRE DOOR SYSTEM FACING EAST.
THE RIGHT SIDE SHOWS THE MAIN WINDOW ON THE FRONT FACADE.
IT HAS A UNIQUE MUON LOCATION.
THIS IS THE SAME CONDITION AS WAS FOUND AT 30 SOUTH HIGH WHERE WE DID CONDITION.
THE BOARD DID CONDITION THAT WE KEEP THAT MUNTON ARRANGEMENT.
ON THE ADDITION, WE HAVE THE SAME STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF, UH, THE SAME SIDING AND TRIM AS THE HISTORIC OPTION.
UM, THE REMAINDER OF THE ADDITION IS THE THERMALLY MODIFIED ASH WHERE THE ACCENTS AGAIN IN THE TONGUE AND GROOVE WITH THE VERTICAL PLACEMENT.
AND THIS TIME IT'S STAINED THE DARKER COLOR.
THE ASHWOOD, WE SEE CRAFT ORCHARD LIMESTONE VENEER IN TIMBER WOLF COLOR AND THE WINDOWS ARE THE SAME BUT CLAD IN BRONZE.
THESE ARE THE REMAINING MATERIALS TO BE USED ON THE PROJECT.
WE HAVE HALF ROUND COPPER GUTTERS AND ROUND DOWNSPOUTS VL FIXED SKYLIGHTS AGAIN IN THE MEDIUM BRONZE.
THE SOUTH PATIO PAVING IS SHOWN AS THE AIAN PEARL PAVERS.
THE LIGHTING IS AS SHOWN FROM LOMBARD.
I GUESS IT'S ACTUALLY FROM REJUVENATION.
THE FRONT WALK PAVERS WILL BE THE SAME THIN BRICK MATERIAL IS SEEN ON THE FOUNDATION AND THE GARAGE DOORS ARE THE SAME BIFOLD THAT WE, UH, JUST DISCUSSED.
TAKING A LOOK AT THE OUTBUILDING DETAILS, UH, THESE PHOTOS WERE SUPPLIED BY THE APPLICANT AND THIS IS A LANDMARK OUTBUILDING REQUESTED FOR DEMOLITION.
UM, WE SEE FRONT AND REAR OUTSIDE PHOTOS AND THEN SOME INSIDE PHOTOS WHERE THERE'S A WORK BENCH AND A SINK.
IT LOOKS LIKE THERE WAS MORE ACTIVITY IN THIS OUTBUILDING THAN JUST STRICTLY USE FOR CARRIAGE OR GARAGE.
YOU HAVE THE FULL PHOTOS IN YOUR PACKET OF COURSE.
SO MOVING ON TO THE CRITERIA, THE LANDMARK DEMOLITION CRITERIA ARE MET OR NOT APPLICABLE.
THE WAIVER FOR THE BUILDING FOOTPRINT INCREASED BY 20% TO 27 54 SQUARE FEET.
THE CRITERIA ARE MOSTLY MET OR NOT APPLICABLE.
THE REQUEST TO REDUCE THE REAR YARD SETBACK BY 20% TO 21.57 FEET ARE ALL MET OR NOT APPLICABLE.
THE WAIVER FOR THE USE OF 4 12, 3 12 AND FLAT ROOF PITCHES, THE CRITERIA ARE MET.
[02:05:03]
THE USE OF THE SMART SIDE SIDING, WE FIND THAT FOUR CRITERIA ARE NOT MET, FOUR ARE NOT APPLICABLE, ONE IS MET THE USE OF SMART SIDE TRIM.THE MAJORITY OF THE CRITERIA ARE MET AND THE REMAINDER ARE NOT APPLICABLE.
AND FINALLY WE COME TO THE MINOR PROJECT CRITERIA.
THESE ARE MET, MET WITH CONDITIONS AND OR WAIVERS.
SO WE ARE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE DEMOLITION REQUEST FOR THE LANDMARK OUT BUILDING.
WE'RE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF ALL WAIVERS EXCEPT FOR THE SMART SIDE SIDING.
AND THEN FOR THE MINOR PROJECT, WE ARE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS, THE SAME INSTRUCTIONS IN CASE THE VARIANCES ARE NOT APPROVED, THE PRESERVATION OF THE DROP SIDING OR USE OF A REPLICA ON THE HISTORIC PORTIONS AND THE ATTACHED ADDITIONS.
AND IF THAT IS NOT POSSIBLE, AND THIS IS ONLY DUE TO AVAILABILITY, THE SMART SIDE LAP SIDING WOULD BE USED IN A FOUR INCH REVEAL.
WE'RE RECOMMENDING THAT THE EAST FACING FRONT DOOR TRANSOM AND TRIM ARE TO BE PRESERVED AS THE SAME AS THE OFFSET MUON AND THE MUNTON IN THE HISTORIC FRONT WINDOW.
WE NEED MANOR SPECS TO BE PROVIDED AND THE SAME TRENCH DRAIN CONNECTION INFORMATION NEEDS TO BE SUPPLIED.
AND WITH THAT I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS, ANY INITIAL QUESTIONS FOR SARAH? I I I JUST HAD ONE.
MAYBE IT'S FOR THE WHOLE GROUP.
'CAUSE I WAS LISTENING TO ALL THIS FROM LAST TWO MONTHS AGO AND I REMEMBER GARY IS WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT THE, THE, THE FOOTPRINT, I REMEMBER YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT HOW WE WERE TYING THE 20% FOR THIS KIND OF THE SAME SQUARE.
WE WERE TRYING TO MANAGE THE SQUARE FOOTAGE, SAY, HEY, THE WAIVER WOULD BE 20%, WHATEVER THAT WOULD BE WOULD BE APPLIED TO THE OTHER.
AND HERE IT LOOKS LIKE THERE'S STILL MORE THAN THAT.
I DIDN'T HEAR WHAT IT WAS SAID.
IS THAT, 'CAUSE I REMEMBER THAT'S HOW WE, IT WAS TALKED ABOUT IN THE MEETING AND NOW IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S, IT'S IT'S MORE THAN 20% THE, I'M JUST TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT I UNDERSTOOD WHAT, WHAT CAME FROM THE, THE, HOW THE AGREEMENT CAME FROM THE LAST MEETING SINCE I WAS LISTENING TO IT.
SO YES, SO THE NUMBER THAT WAS AGREED TO BY THE BOARD WAS THE 27 57.
AND SO BOTH PROJECTS MEET THAT NUMBER.
NOW THERE'S BEEN SOME CHANGES BASED ON SOME SURVEY DATA VERSUS CIVIL ENGINEERING DATA.
I AM GONNA LET THE APPLICANT EXPLAIN, OKAY.
BUT THE, WHAT THE PERCENTAGES ARE DIFFERENT ON THE TWO DIFFERENT LOTS 'CAUSE THE LOTS ARE DIFFERENT SIZES.
SO WHAT WE FOCUSED ON WAS THE ABILITY TO HAVE BASED ON THE SMALLER LOT, UM, THAN HAVING EQUIVALENT HOUSES IN TERMS OF SQUARE FOOTAGE.
SO THERE, THERE PERCENTAGES ARE DIFFERENT, BUT IT'S BECAUSE THE LOTS WERE SO DIFFERENT SIZE WISE.
JUST THE WAY I UNDERSTOOD IT THOUGH IS THAT ONE OF THEM WAS GONNA BE FIXED TO WHAT WE COULD WAIVER.
AND THE OTHER ONE WAS GONNA BE, WAS GONNA TAKE WHAT THAT AND THERE WAS GONNA BE OVERAGE BECAUSE OF THE LOT SIZE IT WAS GONNA END UP IN THE 35.
I MEAN THE 135 RANGE MORE OR LESS.
BUT HERE WE'RE LIKE 1 32 OR WHATEVER IT SAID THERE.
I'M JUST MAKING SURE I UNDERSTOOD WHAT WAS SAID JUST TO MAKE SURE I'M CLEAR ON WHAT WE DISCUSSED LAST TIME.
AND, AND IT IT'S STILL CORRECT EVEN THOUGH THE PERCENTAGES ARE SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT DUE TO A SURVEY.
SO THE END NUMBER ENDS UP THE SAME AS WHAT WE DISCUSSED.
IT JUST PERCENTAGES ARE GONNA BE DIFFERENT AND NOW THIS ONE WILL HAVE TO GO TO BZA ALSO.
A COUPLE QUESTIONS FOR YOU SARAH.
COULD YOU ELABORATE ON YOUR CONCERN ON THE THIN BRICK ON THE FOUNDATION? THIS BOARD APPROVED THIN BRICK FOR 94, FRANK BECAUSE IT WAS ON AN ADDITION THAT WAS SET WAY BACK FROM THE ROAD, BOTH FRONT AND BACK.
IN THIS INSTANCE, WE ARE AGAIN REPLACING ORIGINAL HISTORIC FABRIC AND IT IS MUCH CLOSER TO THREE ROADWAYS, THREE PUBLIC RIGHTS OF WAY.
SO THAT IS WHERE THE CONCERN COMES IN.
IT'S, IT'S, IT IS TECHNICALLY PERMITTED BY THE CODE.
[02:10:01]
DOESN'T ALWAYS HAVE THE SAME LOOK AS BRICK.IT DOESN'T ALWAYS STAND UP AS WELL AS BRICK.
WE'LL, WE'LL WE'LL GET BACK TO THAT.
THE, UM, THE MU ON THE WINDOW, UM, NOW THOSE ARE REPLACEMENT WINDOWS IN THAT STRUCTURE, CORRECT? SO I DON'T BELIEVE THOSE, THOSE ARE ORIGINAL WINDOWS.
I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THIS IS A REPLACED WINDOW, BUT I'M NOT SURE.
UM, WELL WE CAN, WHEN MR. TAYLOR COMES OUT, WE'LL TALK A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THAT.
'CAUSE IT, IF IT'S A, IT LOOKED TO ME AND MAYBE, MAYBE IT'S MAYBE THAT THIN HORIZONTAL IS AN ORIGINAL DIVISION.
SO I, I UNDERSTAND WHERE YOU'RE COMING FROM AND, AND WE'LL TALK A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THAT.
AND I WANT TO BE CLEAR, YOU'RE, UM, THE REASON FOR YOU NOT RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE SMART SIDE IS BECAUSE IT'S REPLACING THE ORIGINAL MATERIAL.
AND SO THE REAL ISSUE IS THE USING IT TO REPLACE THE ORIGINAL SIDING.
IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S RIGHT.
AND WE LOSE A LOT OF THE DETAIL AND YOU CAN SEE IT ON THESE PHOTOS IN FRONT OF YOU, JUST THE DETAIL THAT IT ADDS TO THE HOUSE.
UM, AND I THINK THAT COVERS YOU IN YOUR, IN YOUR, UM, NOTES YOU MENTIONED THE WINDOW AND THE GABLE OF THE FRONT ELEVATION OF THE HOUSE.
SO IS THERE A, A SMALL GABLE WINDOW UP HIGH IN THAT, THAT YOU WERE REFERRING TO IN THE STAFF REPORT? I MEAN, IT'S OKAY.
DO YOU HAVE A LOCATION FOR THAT COMMENT? FRONT GABLE WINDOW.
NOW MAYBE THAT'S THE LANGUAGE, MAYBE THAT'S ANOTHER, ANOTHER WAY YOU WERE REFER, YOU WERE REFERRING TO THE, THE WINDOW WITH THE HORIZONTAL DIVISION.
SO I JUST, I JUST NOTED THAT AND I I DON'T HAVE THE ENTIRE REPORT, I JUST HAVE MY NOTES FROM THE REPORT, SO.
YOU, YOU ALSO MENTIONED YOU WOULD PREFER TO SEE A WATER TABLE ON THE STONE ON THE NEW, AND YOU WANNA ELABORATE ON THAT? WE HAVE REQUESTED THAT PREVIOUSLY AT 57 0 7 DUBLIN ROAD.
THAT CAME TO US AS BASICALLY A, A SLAB SIDED HOUSE, UM, WITHOUT THAT DETAIL.
UM, THOSE ARE ALL THE QUESTIONS I HAVE RIGHT NOW.
UM, WAIT, GARY, CAN I ASK A QUESTION PLEASE? IT OCCURRED TO ME WHEN I SAW THE PICTURE OF THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE, COULD YOU DESCRIBE AGAIN, WHAT'S THE CONCERNS ARE WITH THE DOOR AND WHAT YOU'RE, THE, THE FRONT DOORS, THE TWO FRONT DOORS AND WHAT YOU'RE SUGGESTING? WHAT WE'RE SUGGESTING IS, FIRST OF ALL, WE, WE DON'T HAVE ANY DOOR DETAILS WITH THIS APPLICATION.
SO WHAT WE WANNA ENSURE IS THAT THIS FRONT DOOR SYSTEM, THE EAST FACING ONE THAT WE SEE ON THIS ELEVATION IS PRESERVED IN ITS ENTIRETY.
IF WE GO BACK TO THE PHOTOGRAPH, THESE DOORS ARE AMAZINGLY ORIGINAL AND THEY ADD A LOT OF CHARACTER AND DETAIL TO THIS HOUSE THAT IS ACTUALLY QUITE UNIQUE.
WE HAVE MANY MORE VERNACULAR STYLE HOUSES.
THIS IS A RELATIVELY, I CAN'T QUITE SAY HIGH STYLE, PERHAPS IT'S A MEDIUM STYLE, BUT IT'S RATHER UNIQUE TO OUR DISTRICT.
IT HAS A LOT MORE DETAIL ON IT THAN OTHERS.
SO IT WOULD BE WISE AND IT WOULD MEET CODE AND GUIDELINES AND ALTERNATIVE MATERIALS TO PRESERVE THESE DETAILS, UM, INCLUDING THE SOUTH FACING DOOR.
SO TO NOT REMOVE THAT, NO, WE'RE NOT SUGGESTING THAT BECAUSE THAT DOESN'T WORK WITH THE PROGRAMMING OF THE HOUSE.
SO IT IS JUST THE EAST FACING DOOR THAT WE'RE SUGGESTING.
THIS WAS JUST THE WAY THAT THE DOORS ARE SITUATED.
WE WERE ABLE TO GET THE DETAILS SURE.
AND YOU ALSO MENTIONED THE COLOR ISSUE NOT
[02:15:01]
BEING FROM THE, UM, COLOR SCHEMES.TYPICALLY IT'S DARKER ON THE TRIM AND THE SASHES.
THE, UM, PICTURE THAT YOU HAD OF THE DROP SIDING, IS THAT FROM THIS HOUSE WHEN YOU, THE COMPARATIVE PICTURE BETWEEN THE DROP SIDING AND THE PROPOSED, SO SOMEPLACE IT'S PAINTED WHITE LIKE THAT? OR IS THAT JUST THE WAY YOUR PHOTO PHOTOGRAPH? SO THAT IS FROM THIS HOUSE.
YEAH, IT DOESN'T LOOK AS, IT DOESN'T LOOK AS DARK GREEN AS THE, OR TEAL OR WHATEVER THE HOUSE COLOR IS.
IN THIS PICTURE IT DOESN'T LOOK THAT WAY? IS IT JUST A FLASH? MAYBE CHANGED IT.
UM, MR. MR. TAYLOR, WOULD YOU LIKE TO COME UP AND, OKAY.
WELL, I'M SURE WE ALL HAVE SOME INITIAL QUESTIONS FOR YOU.
YOU CAN, IF YOU COME UP, IT'LL BE EASIER TO HEAR YOU.
WHO WOULD, DO ANY OF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS FOR MR. TAYLOR? UH, QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? I DON'T KNOW.
WHICH, I DON'T YOU DUNNO WHAT, WHICH ONE IT IS, BUT QUESTIONS GO AHEAD.
I CAN, I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS I CAN START WITH.
AND THEN DO YOU THINK THAT THAT CHIMNEY THAT YOU'RE KEEPING IS ORIGINAL? BECAUSE WHEN I LOOKED AT THAT, THAT CHIMNEY THAT'S ON THE NORTH SIDE AND COMPARED IT TO ONE ON THE SOUTH SIDE, THE MORTAR JOINTS WERE COMPLETELY DIFFERENT.
IT LOOKED LIKE THE ONE ON THE NORTH SIDE HAD BEEN REBUILT AT SOME POINT.
DO YOU THINK, DO YOU THINK IT'S ORIGINAL OR? I COULDN'T ANSWER THAT EXCEPT TO TELL THAT THAT'S A KIND OF A MORE DECORATIVE CHIMNEY AND FIREPLACE.
AND THE ONE ON THE SOUTH SIDE IS JUST A FLU FOR THE MM-HMM.
SO IT'S KIND OF A ONE'S UTILITARIAN AND ONE'S A LITTLE MORE FANCY.
YEAH, THE BRICK SEEMED DIFFERENT TOO, BUT THAT, THAT'S, I GUESS THAT'S MINOR.
UM, AND THE BRICK THAT ANDREW HAS, THE, THE GLENGARRY KWA BRICK IS A REALLY CLOSE MATCH TO WHAT'S ON THE CHIMNEY.
THE, UM, THERE ARE TWO ADDITIONS AND THE STAFF BRINGS THIS UP IN THEIR REPORT AND, AND SARAH TOUCHED ON IT EARLIER, THERE ARE TWO ADDITIONS TO THE ORIGINAL HOUSE AND WE TALKED ABOUT THESE LAST TIME YOU VISITED US, AND I THINK, UM, MARTY EVEN SUGGESTED THE ONE ON THE FRONT DOING SOMETHING D DIFFERENT WITH THAN THE REST OF THE HOUSE.
AND WE TALKED ABOUT THE ONE ON THE BACK THAT EXTENDS THE GABLE, BUT YOU CHOSE NOT TO DIFFERENTIATE THOSE FROM THE VOLUME OF THE ORIGINAL HOUSE.
COULD YOU TELL US WHY? SO BACK TO OUR ORIGINAL DISCUSSIONS THAT WE HAD ON THIS ADDITION, IF YOU LOOK AT THE ORIGINAL HOUSE PHOTOGRAPHS, THERE'S KIND OF AN AWKWARD SHED ROOF ON THAT.
SO PART OF OUR REDOING THIS IS EXTENDING THAT OUT AND PUTTING A GABLE ROOF ON IT SO IT'S A BETTER FIT.
AND I THINK IS MORE, I MEAN THE, THERE'S, THERE'S OLD HOUSES AND THERE'S BAD HOUSES AND I THINK IT MAKES THIS HOUSE BETTER, UM, BECAUSE IT'S A, IT'S MORE OF THE ORIGINAL GABLE RES AS OPPOSED TO THE SHED ON THAT.
AND CREATING A DISTINCTION IN THAT, THOSE LITTLE SECTIONS THERE, WE LOOKED AT SOME OPTIONS AND IT, THERE'S JUST NO WAY TO DO THAT AND NOT MAKE IT LOOK LIKE AN AFTERTHOUGHT.
AND PROBABLY MORE IMPORTANTLY, ON THE ONE ON THE NORTH ELEVATION.
AND GARY, YOU SPECIFICALLY TALKED ABOUT MAYBE USING, DOING PANELING PANELED SIDING, DOING, MAKING MORE LIKE A SLEEPING PORCH.
WE, I WENT THROUGH A BUNCH OF DIFFERENT SCHEMES ON THAT.
UM, AND ALL OF THEM MADE IT LOOK EVEN MORE LIKE A POOR ADDITION.
UM, THE, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I BROUGHT UP LAST TIME WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT THIS IS THAT WE'RE, WE'RE JUST EXTRUDING THE EXISTING HOUSE.
SO I THINK WE'RE KEEPING THE CHARACTER OF THE HOUSE INTACT HERE BY DOING THAT.
AND MAYBE THE BIGGEST CHANGE IS WE COMPLETELY CHANGED THE FENESTRATION ON THIS SIDE.
UH, SOME OF THE COMMENTS LAST TIME WERE THAT THINGS WEREN'T LINED UP.
WE WENT OUT OF OUR WAY TO MOVE THINGS AROUND AND LINE THEM UP SO THAT I, I THINK IT LOOKS ORIGINAL.
UM, AND I THINK IT'S A, I REALIZE THAT THERE ARE THINGS IN THE CODE AND THERE ARE THINGS IN THE GUIDELINES, BUT I THINK THIS LOOKS A LOT BETTER THAN IF WE DELIBERATELY TRIED TO DO SOME KIND OF A DIFFERENTIATION BETWEEN THE TWO.
AND I THINK THAT'S GONNA BE THE CHALLENGE FOR US BECAUSE YEAH, IT DOES, IT DOES LOOK GOOD.
AND ON THE OTHER SIDE IT LOOKS GOOD TOO, BUT THE QUESTION BECOMES HOW WE HANDLE HANDLE WHAT WE'RE REQUIRED TO DO.
KNOWING, KNOWING WHY HE DID THAT.
I THINK THE ALIGNMENT OF THE WINDOWS IS, IS, IS NICE.
THE WHY, WHY DON'T, DO YOU THINK THE SIDING'S IN BAD SHAPE ON THE EXISTING HOUSE? WELL, IT HAS A MILLION COATS OF PAINT LIKE THE OTHER SIDING ON THE OTHER HOUSE.
UM, WE DON'T KNOW WHAT'S UNDERNEATH IT.
[02:20:01]
IS IN FAR WORSE SHAPE THAN THE 17 HOUSE.UM, IT'S VERGING ON STRUCTURALLY ON SOUND 'CAUSE OF THE LACK OF THE FOUNDATION.
SO ONE WAY OR ANOTHER IT'S GONNA HAVE TO HAVE SOME STRUCTURAL SHEATHING ADDED IN SOME FASHION TO THE WALLS AND SEEN, AS I SAID IN THE OTHER HOUSE, TAKING OFF THE SIDING SO THAT WE CAN PROPERLY REBUILD THOSE EXTERIOR WALLS SO THAT THIS HOUSE IS, UM, SUITABLE FOR THE FUTURE.
AND LAST ANOTHER A HUNDRED YEARS IS, THAT'S OUR GOAL.
UM, AND, UH, SINCE WE DROP SIDING ISN'T MANUFACTURED IN, UH, UM, IN A A FIBER CEMENT MATERIAL, UM, WE DECIDED TO USE THE FIBER, PROPOSED THE FIBER CEMENT FOR THE EXTERIOR IN A SIMILAR, UH, EXPOSURE.
THE, UM, THE FOUNDATION AND MY MEMORY, UM, IS FAILING ME HERE.
IS THE ORIGINAL FOUNDATION, UM, BRICK HERE OR IS IT STONE? DO WE HAVE PICTURES OF THAT? THERE IS NO ORIGINAL FOUNDATION AS FAR AS WE CAN TELL.
THE SIDING SITS RIGHT ON THE GROUND WHEN YOU, THIS THIS HOUSE HAS SOME, DOES IT HAVE SOME SMALL CRAWL OR BASEMENT SPACE IN IT? AND AND ARE THOSE WALLS STONE? IT'S, IT'S ALMOST INACCESSIBLE AND SO I, I CAN'T TELL YOU THAT.
WELL, YOU KNOW WHERE I CAN TELL YOU THAT THERE'S HOLES IN THE FOUNDATION AND ANIMALS COMING IN AND OUT AND THE SIGHTINGS THAT'S ON THE GROUND.
I'M JUST TRYING TO GET MORE INFORMATION.
'CAUSE YOU, YOU'VE HEARD THE STAFF'S COMMENT ABOUT THAT AND I UNDERSTAND WHY YOU'VE DONE WHAT YOU'VE DONE.
I'M JUST TRYING TO GET A LITTLE BIT MORE BACKGROUND.
SO, UM, AND YOU, YOU HAVE, UM, CHOSEN NOT TO, UM, PUT A WATER TABLE HERE.
UM, ANY REASON FOR THAT YOU THINK IT'S, I CAN'T THINK OF A REASON TO PUT ONE ON.
IT'S, IT'S NOT A DETAIL THAT I WOULD DO ON A STONE HOUSE.
SO I MEAN, THAT, THAT'S A VERY FANCY DETAIL, I THINK TO PUT ON A RELATIVELY SIMPLE STRUCTURE LIKE THIS.
AND WHY DON'T YOU WANT TO KEEP THE EXISTING DOOR? IS THAT DOOR IN BAD SHAPE? THE FRONT DOOR? YEAH.
'CAUSE THAT BY, AS FAR AS THE MUTTON LOCATION ON THAT WINDOW, THAT'S JUST A DRAFTING ERROR.
UM, BY THE WAY, JUST AN AN ASIDE, I WALKED THE PROPERTY ON MONDAY AND THAT DOOR IS OPEN, THE FRONT DOOR, THE ONE DOOR WITH THE LOCKBOX IS, IS, LOOKS LIKE IT'S SECURED.
I DIDN'T DARE WANT TO GO IN, BUT THAT THE DOOR, THE OTHER MAIN DOOR IS WIDE OPEN, SO YOU MAY WANT TO SECURE THAT.
ANY OTHER, WELL, I MEAN, IT'S MORE FOLLOW UP TO WHAT YOU'RE, OKAY.
YOU'RE GOING INTO THE DETAILS, SO IT'S, WE'LL START WITH THE SIDING.
SO YOU'RE CERTAINLY GONNA HAVE TO REBUILD THE STRUCTURE, RIGHT? IF IT'S OUTTA SQUARE, WHAT, WHATEVER.
SO YOU'RE GONNA TRY TO, I MEAN, TO TRY TO THINK OF A WAY TO KEEP THE SIDING RIGHT? ARE YOU GONNA TRY TO RE I MEAN, IF YOU REBUILD IT FROM THE INSIDE, I MEAN YOU'RE GONNA GUT IT.
I, I ASSUME SO YOU'RE GONNA TAKE THE WHOLE INSIDE OUT, YOU'RE GONNA MOVE IT OR YOU'RE GONNA TRY TO SQUARE IT BACK UP AND SET IT ON A FOUNDATION? UH, WELL THAT WOULD GO MORE TO THE CONSTRUCTION SIDE, BUT YEAH.
BUT YEAH, BUT TO, TO SHORT CIRCUIT THIS, WE'LL ACCEPT THE CONDITION THAT'S IN THE, IN THE REPORT.
YOU'RE GOOD WITH TRYING TO DO WHAT WE CAN YEAH.
WITH CAN ON THE, ON THE, ON THE, YEAH, WE, THAT WAS OUR PLANE ANYWAY, TO TRY TO DO IT.
UM, FOUNDATION ORIGINAL FOR THE BRICK.
I'M NOT, SO THE BRICK I THINK LOOKS OKAY.
MAYBE THE MATERIAL'S WRONG, BUT THAT MIGHT BE, WE CAN TALK A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THAT IN A MINUTE.
'CAUSE I THINK THERE'S A, A RATIONALE TO THAT.
YEAH, BUT I, I DO HAVE JUST, I MEAN, I THINK THE QUESTION, I MEAN THAT, THAT THE ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM IS CERTAINLY FROM A CODE STANDPOINT, THE WAY THAT THE, LET'S SAY HOW THE NORTH ADI, THE NORTH EDITION AND CERTAINLY THE SOUTH EDITION AREN'T DIFFERENTIATED IN A, IN A, IN A MEANINGFUL WAY.
I MEAN, WHEN I LOOK AT THE, I MEAN, 'CAUSE THE CODE IS PRETTY SPECIFIC TO THAT.
I'M HAVING A HARD TIME OVERCOMING THAT PARTICULAR THING.
I MIGHT HAVE TO, I'M, I'M JUST NOT SURE HOW TO GET THERE WITHOUT, IT'S DIFFICULT FOR ME TO SEE HOW WE UNWIND THAT, UH, UH, WHATEVER THE NUMBER IS IN THERE.
1 37 TUBE C UH, 1 73 E TWO C SAYS IT HAS TO BE DIFFERENT.
IT HAS TO BE, UH, THERE HAS TO BE A DIFFERENTIATION IN THE, IN INTO THE TWO CODE.
WHAT DOES THAT SAY? I DON'T, OH, THAT'S IN FRONT OF ME.
IN THE, SO IT'S IN THE CODE HERE.
LEMME JUST FLIP TO MY FANCY CODE THING HERE.
SO IT SAYS IN TWO E TWO C BUILDING EDITION SHALL BE CLEARLY SEPARATED FROM THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE IN DESIGN.
IT'S NOT A GUIDELINE STATEMENT.
SO FOR ME, JUST TRY AT LEAST WHERE I SITTING THOSE, THE, AT LEAST THE ONE ON THE NORTH IS CLEARLY FOR SURE NOT DIFFERENTIATED THE SOUTH ONE.
IT COULD FIND, I THINK YOU COULD FIND A WAY TO MAKE SOMETHING LIKE, AND I, I DON'T KNOW HOW TO SAY THIS IN A WAY THAT'S GONNA CONVINCE YOU OF ANYTHING, BUT
[02:25:01]
I THINK GARY AND I WOULD AGREE ON THIS, IS THAT YOU CAN DESIGN A BEAUTIFUL BUILDING THAT DOESN'T MILL COAT MEAT, COAT OR DESIGN A REALLY UGLY BUILDING THAT DOES.I THINK THIS IS A CONDITION WHERE IT LOOKS MUCH, MUCH BETTER AS A, A BUILDING AND A HOUSE WITH THE ADDITIONS THE WAY THAT THEY ARE AS OPPOSED TO DIFFERENTIATING THEM.
I'M, I'M, I WON'T DIFFERENTIATE ON THAT, BUT THAT, THAT'S ALL I GOT FOR YOU.
THIS IS FOR ME, THIS IS THE, THIS IS WHERE WE GET INTO A PICKLE HERE, RIGHT? UH, BECAUSE THE CODE IS MANDATING US TO DO SOMETHING.
IT'S, IT'S IN THE, IT'S IN THE CODE, IT'S IN THE LANGUAGE.
AND THAT'S THE SAME CHALLENGE.
I YEAH, YOU, YOU, THE HOUSE LOOKS GOOD.
THE WAY YOU DO THE HOUSE LOOKS GOOD.
I'M NOT, CERTAINLY WON'T DISPUTE THAT.
WE CAN'T, BUT WE CAN'T, WE HAVE TO FOLLOW THE GUIDELINES AND, AND, AND YOU KNOW, IF WE APPROVE THIS FOR YOU, WE SOMETIMES HAVE LESS SKILLED PEOPLE COME BEFORE US.
AND THEN, UM, AND THEN WE SEE THINGS.
THEY'RE, THEY'RE, THEY'LL USE THE SAME RATIONALE.
UM, BUT THAT'S NOT FAIR TO ME, GARY.
WELL WAIT, YOU'RE HOLDING ME TO A LOWEST NOW.
HERE, NOW HERE, HERE'S THE OTHER POINT I I CAN MAKE.
ONE, UM, YOU COULD CHANGE, YOU COULD FIND A WAY TO, TO CHANGE YOUR BUILDING PROGRAM.
YOU COULD CHANGE, YOU COULD FIND A WAY TO CHANGE YOUR BUILDING PROGRAM.
AND I KNOW THAT'S NOT WHAT YOU AND YOUR CLIENT WANNA HEAR AT THIS POINT, BUT DO YOU NEED TO DISTRIBUTE THE SPACE IN THE MANNER THAT IT'S BEEN DISTRIBUTED SO THAT YOU HAVE TO ADD THERE? I KNOW THAT'S A BIG CHANGE FROM WHERE YOU ARE RIGHT NOW, BUT THAT WOULD BE ONE WAY TO SAY, OKAY, YOU KNOW, WE, WE WILL ADDRESS IT THIS WAY.
UM, YOU KNOW, THAT'S ONE OPTION.
BUT, BUT THE OTHER IS JUST CHANGE THE MATERIALS.
THE, THE GUIDELINES ACTUALLY DO SHOW AN ADDITION AT THE SIDE OF A STRUCTURE IN OUR GUIDELINES.
BUT IT'S A ONE, IT'S A DIAGRAM, BUT IT'S, IT'S ONE STORY.
IT HAS A HIP ROOF, IT'S ON THE SIDE.
SO IT, IT REALLY MEETS THE NATURE OF BEING SUBORDINATE AND SECONDARY TO THE TWO STORY VOLUME THAT IT'S ADJACENT TO.
BUT I, I HAVE THE SAME STRUGGLE THAT SEAN HAS BECAUSE YEAH, THIS ONE FOR ME, IT'S, IT'S JUST NOT, IT'S NOT A, FOR ME IT'S NOT, I HAVE TO ADMIT THIS ONE, IT'S NOT VERY INTERPRETIVE.
THIS IS A CLEAR STATEMENT FROM THE CODE.
SO THAT, AS YOU SAY, THE BUILDING FOR ME LOOKS, LOOKS, UH, THE, THE SOUTH ONE, I THINK, I THINK THERE'S AN EASIER WAY TO SEE THAT THE ONE ON THE NORTH IS, I MEAN, IT'S CLEARLY YOU ATTACH TO THE SAME BUILDING, A SIMILAR BUILDING TO AN EXISTING HISTORIC BUILDING THAT IS FOR ME, NON-COMPLIANT FUNDAMENTALLY.
SO IT'S ONLY THE CODE THAT YOU'RE NO, IT'S THE GUIDELINES ALSO.
I MEAN, WELL THE CODE AND THE GUIDELINES BOTH SAY ARE STATING THAT.
SO FROM FROM, LEMME ASK, LEMME ASK A HYPOTHETICAL THEN.
IF, IF THERE WERE NOT A CODE REQUIREMENT, WOULD YOU BE OKAY WITH IT? IT'S NOT HYPOTHE THERE, THERE'S NO HYPOTHETICAL
WE, I MEAN, I MEAN IF IT WASN'T AN HISTORIC, IT'D BE, I, OKAY, WELL, BECAUSE THERE, THERE ARE WAYS TO VARY TO GET VARIANCE TO THE CODE.
WE'RE GOING TO BE Z TOMORROW NIGHT FOR VARIANCES TO THE CODE.
UM, I, I MIGHT, I DON'T THINK I WOULD IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT AND I DON'T THINK THEY COULD GIVE YOU VARIANCE TO THAT.
YEAH, I DON'T THINK THAT THIS ONE CAN'T BE VARIED.
I WAS GONNA SAY, THIS IS NOT VARIABLE I DON'T THINK IN A, IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT.
'CAUSE THE STANDARDS WE ARE HOLDING HERE AREN'T, I MEAN THEY'RE BASED ON A SECRETARY OF INTERIOR STANDARDS AND IF YOU WERE DOING THIS, I MEAN THEY'D PROBABLY BE NASTIER IN SOME OF THE DISTRICTS IN COLUMBUS REGARDING THIS.
SO, UM, I I WE'RE NOT, WE'RE JUST FOLLOWING WHAT OUR GUIDELINES AND OUR GUIDELINES ARE BASED ON STANDARD PRESERVATION PRACTICES AND THERE'S NOT IT.
THIS ISN'T THE KIND OF THING I THINK YOU COULD GET A VARIANCE.
UH, SO WHAT ARE YOUR SUGGESTIONS THEN? WELL, ONE, I DON'T LIKE TO MAKE SUGGESTION DIFFERENTIATE IT, AND I WOULD LEAVE IT AT THAT BECAUSE WHAT HAPPENS WHEN WE MAKE, I, I AM FINDING, WHEN WE MAKE SUGGESTIONS, THERE'S SO MUCH RESISTANCE TO THE SUGGESTION THAT IT'S POINTLESS.
SO WE RUN A, A VERTICAL, UH, TRIM BOARD AT THE POINT WHERE THE OLD AND THE NEW COME TOGETHER AND WE USE A DIFFERENT SIDING AND A DIFFERENT COLOR AND WE DO A DIFFERENT WINDOW TRIM.
IS THAT ACCEPTABLE? I THINK MAYBE ANOTHER WORD FROM, I THINK THE GUIDELINES WOULD, AGAIN, GO BACK TO THAT SUBORDINATE, THE ADDITIONS ON THOSE TWO SIDES ARE NOT SUBORDINATE, THEY ARE EQUIVALENT.
[02:30:01]
EXTENDING A 2004 HOUSE IN 2024.WE'RE EXTENDING AN 1890S HOUSE IN 2024.
IT NEEDS TO BE BOTH DIFFERENTIATED AND SUBORDINATE.
AND THAT COULD BE ROOF HEIGHT, IT COULD BE INSETS.
THERE ARE DIFFERENT WAYS OF DOING THAT.
AND THAT WOULD PROBABLY HELP WITH THAT.
YOU DON'T NEED JUST A, A, A VERTICAL SIDEBOARD AND DIFFERENT SIDING, WHICH I, I TOTALLY AGREE WITH.
IT WOULD NOT BE AESTHETICALLY APPEALING AT ALL.
I THINK IT WOULD ONLY SAY, I THINK AS HILLARY SAID, IT ONLY SOLVES ONE PROBLEM, SOLVES THE EXTENSION PROBLEM, BUT DOESN'T SOLVE IT BEING SUBORDINATE IN THAT NATURE.
IT WOULD JUST SAY, OKAY, HERE'S, I GOT VERTICAL SIDING, NOW I GOT HORIZONTAL SIDE OR VICE VERSA.
IT WOULD, IT WOULD CLEARLY, AS YOU SAID, IT WOULD LOOK INCORRECT, RIGHT? 'CAUSE IT WOULDN'T BE, WE'D JUST BE CHANGING THE SIDING.
YEAH, I SEE THE, THE, THE DILEMMA AS I, AS YOU SAY, I THINK THE, THE, THE BUILDING LOOKS FINE, BUT IT DOESN'T LOOK FINE IN THE SPOT THAT IT SITS IN.
OR DOES I SAY, DOES IT, DOES IT FIT IN THE SPOT THAT IT SITS IN? AND, AND JUST TO REINFORCE THAT THIS IS NOT JUST COMING FROM THE CODE, THE LANGUAGE, WHEN THESE LOTS WENT FOR SALE AND THE LANGUAGE THAT THE CITY COUNCIL PUT TOGETHER REGARDING THE PRESERVATION OF THE ORIGINAL, THE ORIGINAL CHARACTER OF THESE HOMES IS ALSO SOMETHING THAT LIMITS US.
SO, YOU KNOW, THEY, THEY WERE REALLY SPECIFIC ABOUT, AND SO THAT'S WHY I EVEN THINK YOU NEED TO BE CAREFUL WHEN YOU SAY, WELL, WE'RE JUST GONNA REBUILD EVERYTHING BECAUSE THAT'S NOT WHAT THEY INTENDED TO OCCUR HERE.
AND SO WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT, YOU KNOW, WE'RE GONNA TAKE THE SIDING OFF, PUT NEW SHEATHING ON, PUT A NEW, UM, YOU KNOW, AIR BARRIER ALONG THERE AND ALL OF THESE, ALL OF THESE CHANGES, UM, WE, WE, WE'VE GOTTA, YOU KNOW, WE'RE JUST FOLLOWING WHAT WE'VE BEEN INSTRUCTED TO FOLLOW.
ANYTHING ELSE? WELL, THANK YOU.
WELL, THE GARAGE DOOR ISSUE, YOU KNOW, IS GONNA BE THE SAME ISSUE.
SO I THINK THEY ALREADY SAID THEY'D GO ALONG WITH THE GARAGE DOOR.
SO, SO I, I, I CAN'T BELIEVE I'M GONNA ASK THIS QUESTION, BUT THE FACT THAT THE STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF ALL OF THIS WITH THE CONDITIONS APPARENTLY DOESN'T MATTER.
UM, I MEAN THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT PEOPLE COMPLAIN ABOUT IS THAT THEY WORK ALL THIS STUFF OUT WITH STAFF AND COME HERE AND YOU HAVE A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT OPINION ON IT.
THE, THE STAFF REPORTS SUGGEST, OTHERWISE THE STAFF REPORT SUGGESTS THERE WERE SUGGESTIONS THAT WERE MADE.
THE ONLY THING THAT MATTERS STAFF REPORT IS THE APPROVALS.
WE READ THE WHOLE, WHOLE REPORT.
THAT'S MY STAFF REPORT INDICATES THERE WERE MANY OF THESE COMMENTS WERE MADE AND THEY WEREN'T ADDRESSED.
SO THAT TELLS US THAT THERE'S SOMETHING ELSE THERE.
AND THESE ISSUES NEED TO BE ADDRESSED.
THAT'S NOT WHAT I READ IN THERE.
I MEAN, HERE, HERE'S, YOU KNOW, WE'RE WE JUST, UM, AND, AND THE OTHER THING IS THERE'S A REASON WHY YOU COME BEFORE US AFTER HAVING THE STAFF.
WE'RE NOT, IF THE CODE REQUIRED AS, OR THE ORDINANCES REQUIRED US TO DEFER TO STAFF, WE WOULDN'T NEED TO BE HERE.
AND IF SOMETHING IS BOTHERING US, THAT STAFF EITHER POINTED OUT OR DIDN'T POINT OUT, WE STILL CAN DO THAT.
SO IT'S NOT THAT WE'RE SAYING IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT STAFF RECOMMENDED.
IT SAYS THAT WE'RE POINTING OUT SOMETHING THAT'S IMPORTANT TO US AS A BOARD.
WE'RE NOT ALLOWED TO DEFER TO STAFF.
I, I WOULD PREFER TO NEGOTIATE WITH THIS BOARD THAN TO NEGOTIATE WITH STAFF.
I THINK SARAH KNOWS THAT VERY WELL, BUT, UM, WELL, NEVERMIND.
SO ANYTHING ELSE I'VE, I'M LOOKING AT, WE COULD GO THROUGH THE, THE REST OF THE NOTES.
NO, WE TALKED ABOUT THE FRONT DOOR, WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THE TWO ADDITIONS.
THE THIN BRICK, I'M ASSUMING, WELL YOU HAVE A CON, YOU'RE RAISING THE ELEVATION, YOU'RE REBUILDING IT, AND YOU HAVE A CONCRETE FOUNDATION, RIGHT? AND YOU'RE MM-HMM.
AND YOU'RE TRYING TO FIND A WAY TO COVER THE CONCRETE FOUNDATION.
SO, UM, AND IF, AND TRUE, UH, TRUE DEPTH BRICK WOULD REQUIRE YOU AT LEAST ANOTHER FOUR INCHES ON YOUR FOUNDATION WALL.
[02:35:02]
IS IS THE STAFF CONCERN THE MATERIAL THAT IT'S PROBABLY WITH STONE AND YOU WOULD PREFER STONE ON THERE? OR JUST THAT IT'S A KIND OF GLUE ON PRODUCT.THE ORIGINAL MATERIAL IS THE BRICK.
SO WE WOULD ABSOLUTELY PREFER BRICK.
THE CONCERN IS THE LONGEVITY OF THE MATERIAL, THE ABILITY TO APPLY IT FOR LONGEVITY, AND ALSO CONSISTENCY WITH WHAT THIS BOARD HAS RECOMMENDED AND COMMENTED ON IN THE PAST.
I MEAN, WE DID THIS BECAUSE THE LAST THIN BRICK WAS IN A DIFFERENT SPOT, RIGHT? 94 FRANKLIN.
YEAH, THERE WAS DISCUSSION ON THAT.
I DON'T MIND THE BRICK, ACTUALLY, I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THE I THE BRICK LOOK I THINK IS FINE.
I DON'T KNOW MUCH ABOUT THE MATERIAL.
I, I KNOW WE'RE, WE'VE JUST DISCUSSED IT.
MAYBE IT'S NOT THE LONGEVITY, BUT, BUT IT'S APPROVED THAT, THAT MATERIAL'S APPROVED THIN BRICK.
THIN BRICK IS A, IS AN APPROVED MATERIAL.
IT DOESN'T QUITE HAVE THE SAME LOOK AND DURABILITY, BUT IT, IT'S A BETTER OPTION TO JUST PAINTING SO MANY OF THE CONCRETE FOUNDATIONS.
THE FORMWORK HAS PRESSED BRICK EMBOSSED INTO THE CONCRETE FOUNDATION WALL.
SO YOU CAN PAINT THAT, BUT THIS IS A BETTER OPTION IF THEY USE THE TRUE MATERIAL.
AND IT'S ALREADY A NEW FOUNDATION WALL.
FOR ME, I'M A LITTLE LESS CONCERNED, OR AT LEAST I'M A LITTLE LESS CONCERNED.
THIS TO ME IS, IS NOT AS, UM, YEP.
MARTY, YOU'VE BEEN PRETTY QUIET.
WHAT, WHAT ARE YOU THINKING OVER THERE? I HAVE NO ADDITIONAL COMMENTS.
SO WE'VE, THE SIDING'S BEEN ADDRESSED.
MR. TAYLOR SAID THE WINDOW IN THE FRONT, THEY WOULD KEEP THE DIVISION THE WAY IT, THE WAY IT IS.
UM, WE HAVE THE, WE'RE USING THAT MATERIAL AGAIN, BUT WE'RE USING A LOT LESS OF IT.
WITH THAT MATERIAL, BUT WITH STIPULATION WE HAD BEFORE AND THE COLOR PALETTE, I MEAN, I THINK THAT'S THE SAME STIPULATION WE HAD.
I THINK THE MATERIAL I THINK WE AGREED IS, IS OKAY, BUT WE PROBABLY SHOULD TRY TO MAINTAIN THE PALETTE THAT THE STAFF HAS WORKED A LONG TIME TO TRY TO WE SUSTAIN.
CAN WE, ARE WE OFF THE AIR? I NOTICED THE SCREEN WENT BLANK.
CAN WE, THE, THE BIG ISSUE I THINK FOR ALL OF US, BECAUSE IT'S THE APPLICANTS HAVE BEEN WILLING TO GIVE ON SOME OF THOSE OTHER ISSUES.
THE BIG ISSUE IS GOING TO BE THOSE TWO ADDITIONS.
SO I DON'T KNOW IF WE CAN PASS SOMETHING WITHOUT SEEING THOSE DESIGNED.
YEAH, THAT WAS MY QUESTION WAS, I MEAN, HERE WE ARE, IT'S GOOD FOR US TO ANSWER THE QUESTIONS OF WHAT ELSE CONCERNS US, BUT I DON'T WANT US DRAFTING, UM, CONDITIONS UNLESS WE'RE CONVINCED WE'RE GONNA APPROVE THIS.
AND I CAN TELL YOU NOW I'M NOT GOING TO, I DON'T KNOW WHY I HAVE A CONDITION.
I THINK YEAH, I I DON'T, I I DON'T THINK WE WANT TO DESIGN IT NOW AND, AND WANT THE APPLICANT TO HAVE TO DESIGN IT IN FRONT OF US AND SAY, OKAY, WILL YOU APPROVE THIS? OR WON'T YOU APPROVE THAT? OR, I THINK WE NEED TO SEE SOMETHING.
SUGGEST TO THE APPLICANT A TABLING OF THIS? I DON'T WANNA SAY WE'RE GONNA APPROVE IT.
I, I I THINK WE'RE RATHER THAN VOTE NO WE DON'T WANT VOTE.
THAT'S, WE DON'T WANNA, THAT'S WHAT I'M PROPOSING ON CURRENT APPLICATION.
SO BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO START THE PROCESS OVER AND THE FEES.
AND SO, UM, NO, I DON'T WANNA DO THAT.
DO YOU, DO YOU WANT TO TABLE THIS? OKAY.
IN THAT CASE, I MOVED TO TABLE THIS APPLICATION, UM, HOW IN THE JULY AGENDAS ALREADY SET.
WHY DON'T WE GET A SECOND AND THEN WE CAN DISCUSS IT.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND? WELL, FIRST BEFORE, WELL JUST MAYBE BEFORE WE HAVE A SECOND.
SO DO WE, DO WE NEED ANY MORE COMMENTS IN HERE ABOUT THIS? JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT AS WE TABLE THIS,
[02:40:01]
THAT, THAT, THAT WE'RE TABLING FIRST DO WE NEED A SPECIFIC KIND OF, OKAY, THIS IS THE FOCUS AREA OF THE WHY WE'RE TABLING OR, OR I THINK WE'VE HAD ENOUGH DISCUSSION.I THINK WE'VE HAD ENOUGH DISCUSSION TO KNOW WHY.
I WOULD LIKE TO SUGGEST THAT IF THERE ARE ANY OTHER ISSUES OF CONCERN, WE WRITE THEM DOWN AS NOT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, BUT FOR THINGS THAT THE APPLICANT CAN ADDRESS WHEN THEY RETURN.
BUT I THINK THAT'S SEPARATE OF THE TABLE.
I THINK THAT'S SEPARATE OF THE TABLE IN MOTION.
I MEAN, BUT I, I CAN WITHDRAW MY MOTION IF NOBODY'S GONNA SECOND IT FOR NOW.
WELL, I THINK WE COULD HAVE THE DISCUSSION NOW AND NOT AND WITHDRAW THE MOTION UNTIL WE'RE FINISHED WITH OUR DISCUSSION.
YEAH, NO, THAT'S WHAT I WAS THINKING.
I WASN'T THINKING I WOULDN'T BRING IT UP AGAIN, BUT I CAN WITHDRAW IT.
I AGREE THAT GIVING THEM AS MUCH GUIDANCE AS POSSIBLE IS PROBABLY THE BEST.
BUT, UM, WE CAN DO THE MOTION NOW AND THEN AD JUNE, MY MOTION TEMPORARILY.
DO WE NEED TO SECOND THE WITHDRAWAL? NO, 'CAUSE IT WASN'T, MY MOTION WASN'T SECONDED, SO WE'RE OKAY.
THAT WOULD BE A PARLIAMENTARIAN, NOT AN ADMINISTRATIVE.
I'LL, I'LL RELY ON THE LAWYERS FOR THAT.
SO I'M JUST GONNA GO THROUGH THE THINGS THAT I NOTED.
SO THE APPLICANT HAS INDICATED WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE FRONT DOOR AND, AND TRANSOM REUSED.
SO, AND, AND YOU'VE INDICATED THAT YOU'RE OPEN TO THAT WE, WE, I THINK AT LEAST TWO OF US ARE OKAY WITH THE THIN BRICK ON THE FOUNDATION.
SO WE'RE OKAY WITH THE THIN BRICK, THE SIDING, I THINK THE LANGUAGE THAT'S IN THERE.
YOU'VE AGREED ON, ON THE SIDING THAT YOU TRY TO REUSE THE EXISTING SIDING IF POSSIBLE.
UM, THE FRONT GABLE WINDOW, UM, YOU'VE INDICATED THAT, UM, THE TRIM SHALL BE THAT THE, THAT THAT SHALL BE PRESERVED AND YOU SAID YOU, YOU CAN DO THAT.
THE, UM, OKAY, THAT'S THE DOOR, THE MUTTON AND THE, OKAY.
AND THE, I MEAN, I MEAN IT'S NOT, NOT CONTENTIOUS ITEM.
THE LANGUAGE FOR THE, UM, THE LANGUAGE FOR THE GARAGE DOOR.
WOULD YOU BE ACCEPTABLE TO THE SAME LANGUAGE THAT WE HAD ON THE GARAGE DOOR? OKAY.
HOW ABOUT PAINTING THAT ALTERNATIVE MATERIAL? I THINK WE'RE WILLING TO APPROVE THE ALTERNATIVE MATERIAL WITH THE CONDITION THAT IT'D BE PAINTED COLOR PALETTE IN THE, SO THE SAME CONDITION THAT WE HAVE ON THE OTHER HOUSE YOU'RE OKAY WITH.
SO, UM, THE WATER TABLE IS NOT A, UM, IT, IT, IT, IT'S NOT A MAKE OR BREAK ITEM FOR ME.
I, I DO YOU FEEL LIKE WE HAVE TO, HOW DO YOU FEEL ABOUT THE WATER TABLE? UH, I'M, OH, I'M OKAY WITH NOT HAVING IT.
I DON'T THINK IT'S, BECAUSE THE WAY THAT THIS IS COMING DOWN TO THE GROUND IS SIMILAR TO THE OTHER GARAGE.
SO, UM, AND I ACTUALLY LIKE THE STONE FACING OF THE, THE NEWS SECTION AND I, I THINK IT WOULD BE DISRUPTIVE WITH THE WATER TABLE.
SO THE ISSUES THAT WE HAVE DIFFICULTY WITH ARE THE TWO ADDITIONS AND, AND HOW THEY'RE DIFFERENTIATED FROM THE VOLUME OF THE EXISTING HOUSE.
SO, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR US? OKAY.
I MOVE TO TABLE THIS MATTER TO A LATER DATE.
IF YOU SECOND IT, THEN WE CAN DISCUSS THAT LATER DATE.
SO JUNE'S UM, MEETING IS FULL AND THE DUE DATE FOR THOSE PROJECTS HAS COME AND GONE.
SO WE WOULD BE LOOKING AT JULY.
SO JUST FOR EVERYBODY'S UNDERSTANDING, THAT WOULD BE OUR NEXT AVAILABLE.
DO WE HAVE TO YOU OKAY WITH EVERYTHING OR DO YOU UNDERSTAND EVERYTHING NOW? OKAY.
JUDY, WILL YOU CALL THE ROLL PLEASE? YEAH.
IT'S TABLED TO THE JULY MEETING, RIGHT? CORRECT.
NOW SHOULD WE, IF THEY'RE FILING FOR THE VARIANCE, IF THEY HAVE THEIR HEARING, THEY NEED OUR APPROVAL FOR THIS? NOT NECESSARILY.
[02:45:01]
I THINK WE CAN DO IT EITHER WAY.SO LATER, IF WE DID THE VARIANCE, WOULD THAT GIVE THE SIGNAL TO THE BZA THAT WE'RE OKAY WITH ITS VARIANCE? IT WOULD BE THE, THE WAIVERS.
BUT IF YOU COULD PERHAPS INDICATE THAT YOU SUPPORT THE WAIVERS AS REQUESTED ON BOTH.
IT'S IRRELEVANT NOW BECAUSE IF WE HAVE TO CHANGE THE CONFIGURATION OF THE HOUSE, THE FOOTPRINT SIZE IS GONNA CHANGE THE LOT COVERAGE IS GONNA CHANGE.
SO WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO WITHDRAW THAT APPLICATION FOR 27 FROM THE AGENDA FOR TOMORROW NIGHT.
BUT THE VARIANCE IS JUST FOR THE AMOUNT.
RIGHT? IF IT, IF YOU REDISTRIBUTE IT, IT DOESN'T MATTER.
WE'RE JUST, WE'RE JUST DOING A SQUARE FOOTAGE.
BUT THE NUMBERS THAT ARE IN THERE, I I I, I CAN'T SAY THAT REDESIGNING THIS, WE'RE GONNA HAVE THE EXACT SAME SQUARE FOOTAGE NUMBERS.
SO, ALRIGHT, WELL THAT'S YOUR, THAT'S YOUR CHOICE.
BUT IF IT'S, BUT IF IT'S LESS AND YOU'VE, THEY'RE JUST GONNA SET A TOP END TOMORROW NIGHT, IF IT'S LESS THEN, THEN YOU'D BE GOOD.
IT'S UP TO YOU WHAT, WHATEVER YOU WANNA DO.
WELL, I MEAN, THAT WOULD BE PREFERABLE, BUT, UM, ARE, ARE YOU GONNA MAKE A, A RECOMMENDATION ON THOSE THINGS TONIGHT THAT WE CAN TAKE TO BZA TOMORROW? YEAH, WE CAN MAKE A RECOMMENDATION ON THE, ON THE NUMBERS.
WE CAN VOTE ON THE WAIVERS AND THE SETBACK.
DO WE WANNA VOTE ON THE WAIVERS? YEAH, THE, THE VOTE ON A WAIVER WITHOUT A, WITHOUT A, YEAH.
A WAIVER WOULD BE BECAUSE WE'RE JUST TALKING ABOUT THE WAIVER.
'CAUSE THEY STILL WOULD HAVE TO GET ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW.
SO I, YOU, I DON'T THINK YOU HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT, UM, SOMEBODY COMING BACK AND, AND HAVING SOMETHING THAT DOESN'T COMPLY BECAUSE YOU STILL HAVE THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW.
BUT, BUT I THINK WE COULD VOTE ON THE SECOND ONE.
RIGHT? I THINK WE COULD VOTE ON THE THIRD ONE.
UM, AND, AND THOSE ARE THE ONES THAT I, I THINK WOULD HELP 'EM OUT TOMORROW NIGHT, RIGHT? YEP.
SO IS THERE, LET'S, IS THERE A WAIVER TO, TO APPROVE A WAIVER TO PERMIT? EXCUSE ME.
SO IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE A WAIVER TO PERMIT AN INCREASE OF THE BUILDING FOOTPRINT BY 20%? SO MOVED SECOND.
AND THEN THE SECOND ONE IS TO APPROVE A WAIVER TO ALLOW A REAR YARD SETBACK REDUCTION OF 20% TO 23.4 FEET.
OKAY, WELL WE'RE STILL ON THE AIR, SO
[DISCUSSION ITEM]
ALRIGHT.UM, WE HAVE ONE DISCUSSION ITEM THAT MR. KOTTER IS GONNA TAKE CARE OF FOR US.
AND I JUST WANT TO, UH, I MEAN FROM ME PERSONALLY AND I THINK FROM ALL OF US IN THE CITY, YOU KNOW, THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE.
I THINK FOR ME PERSONALLY, I'VE LEARNED A LOT IN MY THREE YEARS HERE AND CERTAINLY MUCH, UH, MORE ABLE TO, UH, UNDERSTAND THE NUANCES OF WHAT WE DISCUSS HERE.
SO I, FOR ME, I REALLY APPRECIATE ALL YOUR GUIDANCE AND YOUR INSIGHTS TO ALL THE STUFFS HERE AND CERTAINLY HOW YOU PREPARE AND, AND TRANSMIT THAT INFORMATION TO EVERYBODY HERE.
SO CERTAINLY FOR MYSELF, I WANT TO, UH, THANK YOU FOR THAT AND, AND SAY THANK YOU FROM, UH, FROM ALL OF US FOR YOUR, FOR CERTAINLY FOR YOUR SERVICE HERE ON THE BOARD.
DOES ANYBODY ELSE? NO, I, I JUST WANNA SECOND THAT IT'S, I HAVE LEARNED A LOT FROM YOU GARY, AND HOPE THAT I CAN BE SOMEWHAT AS ASTUTE
AND I'VE LEARNED A LOT IN TERMS OF LEGAL ISSUES FROM FROM THE TWO OF YOU.
SO WELL, WE'LL CHANGE THAT ALL UP NEXT MONTH.
BUT I DO ALSO WANNA ECHO THAT I THINK YOUR, UH, EXPERTISE HAS BEEN INVALUABLE TO THE BOARD.
AND I KNOW WE WILL MISS YOU AT THE VERY FIRST TIME.
WE HAVE TO SIT HERE WITHOUT YOUR EXPERTISE.
SO IT'S, UM, IT'S REALLY HARD.
IT'S HARD ON, UH, AS MUCH AS YOU'RE PROBABLY TOUGH READY TO BE DONE WITH YOUR ROTATION, IT'S HARDER ON US, I THINK.
YEAH, NO, I'VE REALLY ENJOYED WORKING WITH EVERYBODY.
AND WHEN, WHEN WE'RE OFFLINE, I WANNA SAY A COUPLE PERSONAL THINGS, BUT I'VE REALLY ENJOYED WORKING WITH EVERYBODY HERE.
[02:50:01]
BUT YOU ALL, AS I MENTIONED TO YOU AT THE END OF OUR MEETING LAST MONTH, IT WAS LIKE, I DIDN'T HAVE TO SAY A WORD BECAUSE I AGREED WITH EVERYTHING THE FOUR OF YOU HAD SAID ABOUT THE ONE PARTICULAR PROJECT AND ITS RELATIONSHIP TO OUR CODE.SO YOU'LL FINE
SO
BUT HERE AND WE HAVE A RESOLUTION THAT WE'RE GONNA READ INTO THE, TO THE RECORD.
HOPEFULLY IT'S, UH, I CAN GET THE THING RIGHT.
SO THIS IS A RESOLUTION TO HONOR GARY ALEXANDER FOR SEVEN YEARS OF DEDICATED AND EXEMPLARY EXEMP LARRY SERVICE TO THE CITY OF DUBLIN DUBLIN ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD.
WHEREAS GARY ALEXANDER SERVED ON THE CITY OF DUBLIN'S ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD FROM 2017 THROUGH 2024, INCLUDING THE LAST THREE YEARS AS CHAIRMAN.
AND WHEREAS MR. ALEXANDER HAS ALWAYS BEEN WELL PREPARED, FAITHFUL IN HIS ATTENDANCE, AND PROVIDED INVALUABLE LEADERSHIP AS A PUBLIC SERVANT.
AND WHEREAS MR. ALEXANDER PLAYED A CRITICAL ROLE ON THE BOARD, EXHIBITING EX EFFECTIVE MEETING MANAGEMENT, CREATIVE PROBLEM SOLVING, ARCHITECTURAL, ARCHITECTURAL EX EXPERTISE AND OBJECTIVITY IN THE BOARD'S DELIBERATIONS, ESPECIALLY DURING PERIODS OF SIGNIFICANT DIS DISTRICT GROWTH AND CHANGE.
AND WHEREAS MR. ALEXANDER ALSO REPRESENT, REPRESENTED THE ARCHITECTURE REVIEW BOARD ON THE ENVISION DUBLIN COMMUNITY PLAN, PLAN UPDATE IN THE NORTH RIVERVIEW STREET ADVISORY COMMITTEE, HELPING GUIDE GROWTH IN A COORDINATED FASHION FOR BOTH THE CITY AND HISTORIC DUBLIN.
AND WHEREAS MR. ALEXANDER, MR. ALEXANDER'S PRESENCE ON THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD WILL BE GREATLY MISSED.
YET HIS KNOWLEDGE, LEADERSHIP, AND INFLUENCE WILL HELP, UH, ALL OF US IN OUR CONTINUED EFFORTS ON BEHALF OF THE CITY AND THE CITIZENS OF DUBLIN.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN, SECTION ONE, THAT THE DUBLIN ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD ON BEHALF OF ITS MEMBERS AND STAFF HEREBY RECOGNIZE HONORS AND COMMENDS GARY ALEXANDER FOR HIS INVALUABLE CONTRIBUTIONS IN YEARS OF SERVICE TO THE BOARD AND THE COMMUNITY.
TWO, THAT THE DUBLIN ARCHITECTURE REVIEW BOARD ON BEHALF OF ITS MEMBERS AND STAFF EXPRESSES THROUGH THIS RESOLUTION.
ITS GRATITUDE AND APPRECIATION FOR MR. ALEXANDER'S LEADERSHIP AND DEDICATION.
THREE, THAT THIS RESOLUTION BE PRE PRESENTED TO MR. ALEXANDER AND THAT A COPY MAY BE MADE PART OF THE PERMANENT RECORD OF THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD SO THAT ALL PERSONS MAY SHARE IN THIS EXPRESSION OF APPRECIATION FOR HIS GENEROUS CONTRIBUTION OF TIME AND ENERGY PASSED ON MAY 29TH, 2024.
I I ENJOYED WORKING WITH EVERYONE HERE, SO I, I REALLY, AND KIND OF SAD, SAD TO LEAVE, UM, BUT, UM, CHANGE IS GOOD.
SO I THINK THAT THAT'LL BE GOOD.
SO, AND WHEN WE, WHEN WE, WHEN THE MEETING'S OVER, I HAVE A COUPLE PERSONAL THINGS I WANNA SAY THAT DON'T NEED TO BE ON HERE.
[COMMUNICATIONS]
YEAH, JUST A COUPLE OF, UM, BRIEF COMMUNICATIONS.UM, THERE'S A BOARD APPRECIATION EVENING THAT YOU SHOULD HAVE RECEIVED INVITATIONS FROM CITY COUNCIL ON THAT'S, UM, THE 3RD OF JUNE FROM FIVE 30 TO SIX 30, I BELIEVE.
AND THEN YOU MIGHT REMEMBER THE BROWN HARRIS CEMETERY PROJECT THAT WE DID A LITTLE WHILE AGO.
THEY ARE HAVING A DEDICATION WITH MEMBERS OF THE BROWN AND HARRIS FAMILIES.
THIS IS ON THE 28TH OF JUNE AT 11.
AND, UM, I'M GONNA GET INVITATIONS FOR ALL OF US TO ATTEND.
UM, IT'S, AS YOU WILL REMEMBER OFF OF UNIVERSITY, THERE'S A, A ROAD STUB KIND OF EAST OF THE HOSPITAL AND A PATH THAT LEADS TO THE CEMETERY.
IT WOULD BE GREAT IF WE CAN ALL COME.
SARAH, COULD YOU SEND US AN EMAIL, UH, WITH THE DATE AND TIME? I JUST WANNA PUT IT IN MY CALENDAR NOW.
I WILL MAKE SURE THAT WE GET INVITATIONS AND I PASS THEM ALONG TO YOU.
SO IT'S IN THE EARLY STAGES OF DEVELOPMENT, BUT WE HAVE CONFIRMATION FROM THE FAMILIES, WHICH IS REALLY NEAT.
SO WE, CAN I MOVE TO ADJOURN? WE'RE ADJOURNED.