This meeting is called to order.

So we are in a new location.

I just wanted to everyone know that if there is any public speakers, uh you please uh you see the X on the ground, please stand over there.

And any public member get three minutes to speak.

And uh if you believe uh belong to a civic association, you get five minutes speaking.

All right.

Uh the first uh item on the agenda is the meeting minutes.

Um do any of the uh board members have any comments on the minutes from 318, please if no uh are there any members of the public who have pockets?

Oh yeah, you guys are gonna have to speak loud.

Sorry.

Okay, we'll try.

Uh do any members of the public have any comments of the minutes from 318 26?

No.

Can I get a motion on the minutes?

I motion to remember the minutes as written up.

Thank you.

Um second, minutes have approved.

Um moving on to the consent calendar.

Um you please read the items on the consent calendar.

Uh we have two items on the consent calendar tonight.

Uh first number three.

Uh represented by Scott McVeigh architect.

Is VR 2026 dash 00061?

Application for an addition at 109 distribute.

Applicant is named Christopher Dolans represented by 48.

Uh do any members of the board want to remove any i uh any of these items from the docket?

No, any members of the public would be sure to remove uh see.

No all right.

Uh I those to approve uh motion to approve the items, the two items on the consent catalog.

Okay, um, I mostly have this to that.

So I think yeah, I'll say inside second was um you can then make the motion to think if you're second.

Okay, then um we need the uh vote this is a button.

Um all in favor?

Aye.

Uh all against none.

Okay, constant calendar approved.

Uh we move on to new business.

Uh Mr.

Tanki, can you please read uh item number five and six?

Absolutely.

We have a public with ULM on the business tonight.

First item is number five and six.

This is EAR 2026 000 50 story district request for operations and admission at 623 South Royal Street.

Applicant is J and Eric on the bus, represented by Donovan Parkinson's reading.

And number six, the AR 2026-00050.

Or partial demonition encapsulation of 623 South Royal Street.

Applicant is July Best is represented by Donovan Parsons.

Yes.

Um would you like to make a presentation or just answer the question?

Um do uh any members uh of the board have any questions from the applicant?

Yes, go ahead.

Um can pull the drawing of the porch.

Uh please.

So the the as you can see from the fence picture, the peak of the building with the round window are visible over the fence.

The drawing that's um submitted for the porch.

It's it's a little unclear on that where the peak of the roof and the slim intersect with the the existing structure and the window and not through the legend.

Uh can you please stand here?

Sorry, can you please stand here and uh stage your name and address for John Parsons and the address is uh 623 South Royal Street.

Thank you.

Okay.

All right.

So in the elephant in the rear elevation.

Yeah, just this one right here.

Correct.

Yeah.

It's unclear from the drawing that just submitted how the pitch of the roof and the new porch intersects the existing structure, particularly as it relates to the realm window.

Right.

It's gonna see that drawing there.

That's that over.

Okay.

Um I think that's important information to really clarify the drawing.

Yeah.

Okay.

Yes, that's a good idea.

It's gonna be up against the siding, and so that's not the shot line and cable with the same shoe.

Same thing.

Thank you.

It's gonna be one of the drawings that she's not symmetrical, the pitch on the roof.

It's yeah, because of the show.

Yeah, right there.

It does go past a little bit because they wouldn't allow it to go any further forward because of the um get the name of it, but the lock coverage basically uh so we shrunk it in depth, but in why so the address something behind it, but just slopes differently.

One slope goes a little bit further, yeah.

Slightly different hands so that it can go one but fast.

Is it sorry?

Is something like this the opposite way?

Yep, just like that.

Like that this one is going to pass it.

It's not gonna follow this really almost like why it's because going a little bit past the corner here in order to achieve that extra width.

Uh like to be parallel at this one.

So that's because you think that's yeah, we could make it to give it the same angle.

It's gonna be a little bit further past.

From from outside, you're gonna kind of see exactly the response.

It would be if these two would be parallel in the um that's that's what we want.

Everyone can hear discussion, please.

Yeah, yeah.

Okay, we're just asking the applicant to make this parallel to the existing roof.

Um basically to align the slope of the angle of the right side with the the other side so that they're symmetrical.

Same angle.

Same angle, right?

So then the bearing point is going to be a little lower on one side and a little higher on the other, which should be okay because you don't see that.

Just as long as the angle is okay.

Thank you.

Any other questions?

No.

Uh do any members of the public have questions for the applicant?

No.

We do not be not as good as well.

Okay.

Thank you.

Uh we'll move on to a deliberation.

Does any member of the board want to comment or make a motion?

I have a motion to approve stack recommendation and then still meaning of the comments, square number.

Uh I'm sorry, Mr.

Justin.

Staff recommendations.

And and the Jamaian's recommendation that the triangular roof be square.

Yeah.

Same direction.

Can I get a second?

Perfect.

Okay.

They both all vote.

Um.

Mr.

Adam?

Mr.

Need.

Ms.

Annie.

Hi.

Thank you.

Congratulations.

Right, moving on to the next item.

Um, Mr.

Clinton.

Yes.

Okay, next one on the identified frame seven and eats.

This is uh B AR 2026 dash 00043 old spirit, request for new construction at 1126 race street.

And DAR 2026-00042, older for district request for complete demolition of 1126 Print Street.

Applicant as a place corner real estate LLC represented by Stevens Plenty to content.

Okay, thank you.

Um can you please state your name and address for our kids?

Steve Linsky addresses more for Northwest for you here at all time.

Thank you.

Would you like to make a presentation?

A little bit of history of the site and the project back in 2010, taking this uh Java on and uh had gotten an approval from the board of architect interview at the time uh that allowed for the demolition of the existing story um so that that were there on the site and on the approval of the orient style house exactly two storage units.

So well presenting tonight, not too different.

Hopefully, we we considered an improvement tweeted a little bit uh essentially the same with some improvements based on some of the comments that the board had given us back back in fashion the proportions on the door are better than what they were at the time rear of that house a little bit different because the zoning had changed, so we had to make some adjustments for that, but uh relatively straightforward in terms of the rear, not real exciting, but they're just gonna not too many options to enhance it.

We saw that that would that would be beneficial to the project or architectural value just being a little bit overdone or overwrong.

So we kept it simple.

Thank you.

Uh do any members of the board have questions for the applicant?

No.

Uh doing public speakers.

Public speakers, yes.

And we're if you have not uh already given us a um formal speech, please please play out here and we'll just go through our public speakers as we go.

Okay, can we please uh uh first public speaker?

I have decided is any cross those.

Can you please state your name and address for record?

Yes, can correct field 1118 early street, which is reporting was talking about bonus seven and eight right now.

Yes, what happens then you can look for the step well.

First off, I just want to say thank you for the opportunity to provide some information.

Part of this service chatter on the block with this uh after being posted.

So some of this is processing surprise, so we've been understanding uh of what's being requested here.

Um I understand that there was some work done back in 2010, and this was reviewed.

I had made a couple of points in my comments about basically that there's a clear understanding of facts and anything has changed because you know the property has been subdivided since 2010.

There's a different owner of 1130 or 1132, whatever the address is on the one side, and there may be some things that were considered back then, and then maybe you revisit it.

Um I was unable to concern through my review, uh, which doesn't mean it doesn't exist, is questions about were there alternatives to demolition and never considered, uh what were they and are they still viable?

My request would be to look at this and consider if there are any facts that are not understood or need to be revisited, would there be a deferment on this uh until there's more understanding?

And then secondly, I would ask had there been considerations around uh preserving the structure, particularly the front facade, is this the work in this rates back to the early 1930s?

Because there was something online this copyright 2008 and 2015 that talks about that location and some of the history of that structure.

So those are my broader requests.

There are more details here in the uh comments that I have put.

Um but I do appreciate the the bar process here.

My last point is um if this were to fall forward in a subsequent phase like permitting or something, or just understanding traffic flow.

I had to walk around up to quiet to get a rental traffic today um to get to this meeting, and knowing that there are other factors that may in fact this, just asking you know what the process is for that, and is that something that's contemplated as part of the the bars uh review process?

That's my request.

Is that going to answer that question?

Sure, yes.

Um questions about traffic, uh that are not part of the B AR review.

Um that all questions of construction, anything related to the construction of the project, um, special management, um anything like that will happen at the building permit permit process.

So that'll be part of the building permitted museum um and not part of the data.

We are considering the compatibility helping those projects with context and still touch with it.

So I'm just my my concern is I just wanted to understand we don't need any situation where there's a tear down and then we're not gonna spoke or that sits for a couple of years, and I don't understand how that process works, or is that part of the discussion?

No, it's not then so the demolition of the building is considered separately from the government.

So a permit model is allowed for the demolition of the building.

Uh without the article what we can placement, so that's not something that was working on.

Okay.

Yeah.

Uh do we have any more uh speakers?

I think we're uh Sean person.

I'll name Sean Mark Lamb, um I address 1130, 11 street calls so you're on 113th Street.

So basically, that this proposed structure is going to look like you know, should it be approved?

So I've already thank you all.

I've reported that my concerns in uh with UV email, which is located on the table.

Should anybody want to public primary concerns and should touch upon it because more can have said that it's not just one historic building that's gonna be torn down, it's two buildings historic buildings that are going to be affected.

It's not just a front facade, it's a rear facade on the public facing alley, which of course is all you know, if I'm historic part of the analysis.

So I'm concerned about that.

Um building uh the the history of course of the two buildings are are paramount to the community as building the whole chairs that are on the table.

Uh in addition to that, I have several concerns with the order of the building.

So basically, maybe doing a lot of windows and what a natural light because it's gonna have to directly connect.

It's gonna signal to my feelings.

I don't know what's gonna happen to the wall just with me.

So I don't know exactly what they're gonna be doing to my building and how that's allowed.

Uh you know, one of them I'm researching out how to get windows put in to replace the windows, which is expensive for say that's the object architecture direct, which I agree with.

They're expensive, though, which I don't agree with that.

That's okay.

That's that's no control over that.

But how do we be so concerned?

And rightfully so about windows, but then wiping out the two of these two ways for the building.

So ultimately, and perhaps a little bit more television, but just the reality of it.

It's losing these wall windows, and it's gonna be one third of the windows in the living room, 100% of the windows in a common hallway to stairway, 100% of the windows in the kitchen, and 100% of the windows in a bathroom.

So all the natural light in those areas are going to be gone.

Uh, you know, that had no control over you know my building, but that's the reality of it.

Is that my building is going to be a fixed?

And then again, because the views from uh public, you know, and historically date backs, I think it was 1877 from the idea of the house.

My building is 1836, it would take if it would be the documents and what was available or not clear about the latest 1906 sort of thing.

Very historic area, it's gonna be affecting my own community, it's gonna be back to myself first, and don't control my but it's just going to you know, just the tracks will be only you know, a special area architecture of that area.

And I do have pictures with anyone seeing exactly what we can do.

That only residents are 1132 and 112.

I'm looking at this 11 and 1132.

It's it's one of the buildings.

It actually has three addresses to all four fetus on the other side.

This is my building, and this is where it's going to be connected.

And this is where the windows are going to be gonna be.

And they weren't addressed on what was presented or what's in the plans.

Okay, yeah.

Anybody else?

Um, so uh in the interest of time, legal uh for CP next next to speech again.

Um the last probably Robert representing historic and foundation.

Thank you.

Um so uh in the interest of time we will uh firstly put the next I don't think next to speech again the last probably Robert represents even the story foundation thank you can I always just say your name and address my name is Steve Roberts for representation foundation I'm gonna leave should um we are uh looking through about the demolition of the house but we agree with the staff that it doesn't even except in so far as there's a storage shed in the back if you can pull out the um 2010 approval there were some conditions in the 2010 approval that I think we should look forward to this in order to take in the historical parts um please sorry the these are the ones that um the VAR the conditions of the staff but the BAR came up with it more including retaining the possibly um early 19th century smoke house brick um structure in the back and there's a historic dripped wall in the back and then retaining any historic material on the house itself and documenting for the library um with uh black and plane photographs the condition current condition of the house reports and thank you if we have any more speakers well yeah I don't have any more speakers speakers um and Mr Kamaki can you briefly go over the history of this building just to clarify we're happy to um we've been doing some further research since the staff and go now we've been talking to our colleagues at Offarchaeology to try to understand the history of the building a little more um and what they're telling us their records and our records it appears that the single the single story building that we're talking about for complete demolition uh was constructed somewhere between 1893 and 1896 at that time there was a um prior to that time there was a grocery store on the corner that that building burned and this then this building was constructed originally as a temporary grocery store uh while the corner building was replaced um in 1906 that building the push store moved back into its original location and the single story uh building was recent storage uh for the grocery store at that time um in about in the mid 19th mid mid-20th century this building was subdivided into two lots and became um residential and the facade they're looking at from the front is really dates from that time it wouldn't have looked like that if it was um the grocery store or strange um also in 2010 the our staff visit the site and did a pretty expensive review of the existing conditions there and we're not able to identify any stored fabric within the structure itself at that time um we do agree that the the rear wall and the rear uh brick structure there is is all is historic and should be retained um but in terms of the building itself that that's what we were best able to come to come up with um between us and archaeology and then some previous investigations so when you mention real rear wall not this not the building itself it's like it's a it's a wall that is right next to the out right so the building itself this wall or this part of the building is that from 1800s or there may be some sections of it that that are that the dates from to the very general term of centering so right 1893 to 96 from 1900 in that in that time period when they would have been changed in this building um we don't know for certain uh again the the field work that has been done on it did not identify anything and they and they poked around pretty extensively and we're not able to find anything of a sort nature of the framing everything that they found at that time uh was modern consistent with sort of mid-20th century so um we believe that the vast majority of the building and particularly what you see from the street is mid-20th century and really not um not in 1890 something thank you um so we will now at this point we'll uh close the public um comments and uh we will uh move on to the board comments but is any member of the did have yes okay we'll move on to deliberation uh of the board uh do any members of the board wish to uh make any comments or ask questions so this particular block uh street is a sort of a modest empty block that's quite intact and consistent um i think that we're viewed from the east this building although the corner tower building is two stories this building is fully three stories plus a race tube um coming off of the rest of the block which is two pushing two and a half at the highest um so i do have some questions although I think the design is thoughtful and the the details are appropriate to the building to the west I do have some concerns about the the massing of the building and its effect on the streetscape when viewed from the front and also from the east thank you any other comments

So I do have some questions, although I think the design is thoughtful and the details are appropriate to the building to the west.

Thank you.

Any other comments?

And although this proposal aligns with the corner building here was the transition to the very lower uh massing on the street is very abrupt.

And I think the overall is so the street elevation is a little you see me because the the pitch of the two-story roof is not really how you perceive it um on the street.

So uh I don't know um one thought is if the you know the tower, I think part of it is the tower is so far forward and it's so tall, and now I have a big uh pitch on the tower right next to the two-story residences.

I don't know if there was some thought given to maybe mirroring that so that there's some sort of you know, set back where the entrance was, or it steps down because right now it's it's too it's too abrupt.

And probably the tower is um exacerbating that situation.

That's right.

Um yes, go fine.

So the the building to the left is yellow level is really small scale building.

It's got any ceilings on both levels and the threshold is inches off the bottom of the ground.

We were responding to the context of the corner building and working in using the belt forcing the windows to the wall because if we were to you use the building on the other side to just it's impractical to create a building of that scale would be here in front of you if that's all the only consideration option.

Um it's I go back to what Cox has said over the years and various hearings that I've been in and discussed the single building on a block doesn't necessarily have to relate to the height of the building next to it.

The pattern jumping up and down is very typical of old town, particularly in areas in the Southeast Quadrant, um like along South Cleast Street where it's a lot of really extreme examples of that.

Three and a half story uh tiny buildings next to two-story or one and a half story building.

So I don't see that as an egregious choice of height of the building here, particularly since we've got this rather large and more formal building on the corner or top two, both both in material and color as well as the arm is below the corners of the building.

We're still respectful to the larger scale building on the corner.

We're stepping down from it.

Yeah, I guess that that was my uh position that the sawtooth maybe is uh desirable, and so you know the proposed building should maybe address that and not just make this a larger mass block face that aligns with exactly that corner.

And so if there was some study of you know the massing, especially you know, you do have this in and out if it could step back a little bit for the two-story building.

I know this is something that's the idea of the bed was to give solid visual separation and stepping of the building to keep it from just being solid wall against the property.

So we consider that and you know that that is our design based on those factors.

So I agree with uh other uh board members that uh the height of it.

I think um could be could be reduced.

Uh the as we look at the kind of like the uh the line of the the street, I think it looking at the uh the buildings on the west, it it is a very sudden uh go and it's too high, especially when you're looking at it from the back.

Um can we look at the other drawing that has the uh the two front and back of the proposed building?

And uh I don't know uh have you considering that um I know that by law is not regulated, but uh just the the adjacent building, they're gonna lose basically all of their natural light.

Have you considered uh setting back on the side a little bit to allow for some natural light?

Well we usually design this building, it's the same order on both properties back in when we had approved in 2010, and we were careful that any windows that we were plotting off, which uh by right of owning that parcel you can build the building up to it.

All the none of these buildings were egressed or into the habit of the spaces, they were in the hallways and bathrooms, and there were still other windows in the room.

So we were sensitive to that at the time, and we can continue on with that same thought.

We're not creating you know a dangerous or completely untenable situation for the neighborhood.

It's yeah, um, it's a difficult situation.

Uh, but my other comment was that uh typically in um historically uh if the front of the building is brick, I recommend to wrap the brick all around, not to have two different uh material in the front and the back, the back is the siding.

Uh so to have the whole uh the back uh brick as well, or all of it siding, just one material.

Um looking from the back, it's really uh it's taller than any of the buildings on either side.

Uh so that that's what I what I'm referring to, that it's really high in the front, it it's not as noticeable.

Uh still it is higher, you know, than the buildings on the left, but in the back, it really stands out that it's it's one whole story bigger than any of the buildings on the on that street height to be.

We agree with you, but then we're aware of that, and we try to represent the building as a two-story structure on the front, but in the back, we're not as saying we're not as judicious in how we handle the height, just because it's it's barely visible now, it is a public alley, so yes, the public can walk down and do it, but it affects a lot of us pay-landing architecture and design, some things are both the taller in the back version or simple design intent and money is being spent on the front to make it land with the rest of the street as best possible.

Have you uh, I mean, if you can consider maybe the second and the third floors to have a shorter the floor to ceiling height rather than the first floor, that'll be because it's desirable for the first floor to have a higher ceiling, but if the other uh levels could be a little bit shorter, anything I think else uh and I mean could could we could we yes uh but typically the design principles, particularly in the Victorian style and the lower house here at higher ceilings.

That was originally more of a that doesn't look very victorious to me.

So it's it is some sense what we're going for it, and you know, it's a more modest vernacular piece that uh I mean we could recreate that, but you know that that's not my fine switches, and that's not just sort of architecture thing that we think.

I do urge you because we we consider the context, and this is not responding to the context when you're looking at the back, especially uh the the front you did a good job.

Sorry, the brick all around, and to bring a little bit more character to the back line, it's the back of the building, but still it's nice to see uh because typically we have senior work, you do a great job in uh and you have done in the front.

So if you can bring a little bit more character to the back, that's uh that's better.

Uh I appreciate it, but um yeah, I think that's all my comments.

If uh anyone else has comments, go ahead.

Um I didn't originally comment on this building because I intended to approve it.

I like it.

I think it's um I think you've done a good job of uh representing the building as a two-story building on the front, and I think the choice here was to either go small, yeah, go smaller as the building to the left of the mid, or to complement the building to the right.

And I think that you've just slightly stayed under the scale of the building on the right because the corners line is beneath it.

And um, I I think it is acceptable.

This is we see a lot of of um beyond acceptable.

I think the facade is good.

We see a lot of this as in field projects uh in a given block in the 21st century.

Uh I also want to say the building next door is it appears to be only two-story to the to the right on the corner, but it has very high ceilings.

I've been in that building, both the first floor and the second floor have very high ceilings, and the windows are higher.

So it does appear to be a two-story oh, and yours from the front.

I think as I said, you've done a good job, in my opinion, with the the facade and the front.

And yes, there's room for improvement on the back side, but I think we see that quite a lot.

So um, but anyway, those are my thoughts.

I like it.

Ms.

Happy.

Um, this is such a special block, both north and both sides.

Um it's like a jewel box.

And I think the design is beautiful.

What the and the choice of the Victorian vernacular is good, and as usual, you do a lovely job.

Um responding to some of the other comments.

Um, I think the uh about demolition that uh we've learned that it's not sort of mid 1950s.

I forget the date exactly what we see there is not that special, so I don't think it's a tragedy to lose it.

And it's unfortunate about the neighbors' windows, uh, but that was uh situation with that property regardless.

And they're not uh bedrooms or living rooms, they're secondary rooms.

Um one thing that comes to mind, Ms.

Robinson mentioned about this the uh scale, and I wonder also Al Cox has sometimes talked about streets where the level of the street was altered, and because it seems to me this block, every house is the front doors right on the street, is which may not have been the original situation.

I don't know exactly, but often you had a couple stairs to keep the weather out of your house.

So I wondered if you could lower it might help with the volume and the height of it just to that's the basement.

That would help from a particular consideration.

We're trying to avoid that because it's more expensive.

And you lose the windows and lose things like that.

But we could push the you could push the basement deeper to the ground, which would help.

It might help both front and back.

Um comments about the the front the sawtooth of the neighborhood.

I think that's right that you're adding to it.

Um and plan as well as elevation.

Um so um I think those things I wanted to say.

And of course, uh HAF's comments about documenting the houses seems uh of course correct.

Thank you.

No issue with the documentation.

I think I'm nothing else.

No, thank you.

Um can I get a um motion?

Um we madam chair who we asked that whether you want to come back with another right um rendering.

Would you like us to make a motion or you would like to go back?

If I'm not mistaken, there's two different items on the table.

One is a demolition and the other is the construction.

Right.

Prefer prefer to have a motion on the demolition and then consider a deferral.

Sure.

Can we go into um so to do that?

Should I remember a second demo?

I'll do a roll call on that, and then remove them all.

Okay.

Uh can I get a motion on I'll I'll motion to approve uh the demolition.

Yeah, can I get a second on that?

Second.

So we'll call vote.

Ms.

Robert?

Aye.

Mr.

Abs.

Aye.

Abstain.

Uh sending.

Aye.

Thank you.

Um approved.

The modition is approved.

Motion to the section except us to follow.

Yes.

So if you have the request we had a four-hour and to vote to approve it.

Right.

Before before we finish the demolition.

Motion might stay anything possible.

Yes.

Um sorry.

Just a demolition.

Just demolition.

No, uh good point.

Uh are we are we approving the demolition of just the building?

Or is this does this include the back wall?

They're not being proposed to be demolished.

Okay.

So the back wall and the shed are not supposed uh proposed to be demolished.

So they are gonna say we are just approving the demolition of the building, the front building.

So we should clarify.

Um I'd ask for a clarification on uh from Ms.

Daniel now to make the motion.

Are you uh going to approve the demolition with staff applications as the current system?

Is that is that the first one?

Yes, with staff recommendation, and just want to make a comment on uh not to demolish the back the historic back wall at shed.

Okay.

So now we move on to the alley wall procedure for all sorts of wall if it's reading 1126 and stack and that we're actually on the answer.

You mentioned 1120 1126 and half of the one it's one this is the wall there for anything.

Basically rendering on the house.

So uh this question for the applicant.

Uh do you are you uh planning to demolish that wall that is between 1126 and the the garden like the the next one?

No share with a small on the back or any connection how about the wall the wall behind it this wall here different error than the the wall on the back.

I have some photographs and it's lunch in the world wall.

Um the idea was the idea was to demolish a portion of it.

Um we can always exclude that from this motion and come back come back to it because there's no back an old alleyway that was created between the two pages.

Is that a historical that and have given the the staff opportunity to investigate that one?

Okay, so we will exclude the wall that's between 1126 and um 1124.

Is that right?

Uh for this we visit that um in the day for okay so now if we're gonna super motion and second to approve the floor.

Um so motion to um to defer the construction the new construction.

Uh can I uh get a second on that second uh you made motion?

Uh can I uh get a second on that second you've made roughly yes this is not a whole public right um all in favor aye aye uh all against Mr.

Coffee thank you thank you well we'll want to the next item expectation I guess I wouldn't um that question we got here more often to was it about this no a different matter sorry it's kind of the consent calendar I didn't know if I need to make clarification I think it's four day in the OSC architect on it and uh I think represent the client at that address so I didn't know if you want to meet the prototype thank you so much for taking it all right um next item on the docket number nine yes that's like number nine yeah 226 that there's a zero five question construction if we correspond to caving screens have a little speed everything about the key that's the other side of them and uh we work for you for concept review and we have some comments from my specific certificate has I just wanted to make sure when you do make your motion that you're aware of the staff now um I say that include the archaeology conditions um because they aren't part of your purview so um and sleep the architect I think a presentation development or answer any questions thank you records to anyone see more important questions thank you can you here tonight we've been here already with uh the AR concept preview for the ceiling and we did the city and received the planning commission as well as city council's approval and this is a kind of final step and process and part of all that development we take it in and uh responded to not only the the planning departments comments as the conditions to work with it also everything to all the comments of the board has had in the past so I'm gonna do hopefully uh a quick or brief overview of the things that have changed that that have kind of but the design mature is part of the building based on your feet uh use this is it was it possible to go back one to so this are point on that just for that was a point I'm getting all this technology stuff so uh the original concept submissions at the top and then a program submission on the bottom uh one of the one of the main comments was that the uh on the base level that our columns were too spinning too too thin didn't really support um the building above so you can see that we we've widened those more break that we've made it more so now the the second second and third stories sit on people one of the other things was the windows and proportions uh the windows and the commercial space down low were much larger they're now smaller and the windows that were only residential levels on the second and third stories we take them from three unit windows were much larger and we reduced the scale and take them down to two individual windows and you can see there's also a break piece in between that to help separate them and kind of reflect the residential work that's going on behind it.

The woods were on top here which is kind of how that is being kind of not the right material kind of thrown on there to separate the the balconies and we took that to heart and we came in also uh Mr Spencer you had a comment about just the end of the building as you looked at it how you step down very you know didn't like the effect it was giving us so we created a masonry separation between the two paths of the building saying on the balcony and that gave us some visibility on anchor the building all the time and then also um I think it was mentioned the trellis some sort of shaking sort of controls that we are facing to the south and it's going to get some march lights so we use the use this masonry effort to to then uh provide some controls is which will give us some some of that um

So we use the use this masonry network to then uh provide some trellises and which will give us some some of that.

Um so you get more of a sense of that in our appropriate submission versus the concept where it was kind of kind of saying trail we you know, kind of a naming up at the top, it's now more solid at anchored.

We now have a little bit more of a definition of the space after the Charles So another thing that we did have to literally use uh we brought a bay around the common street, one of the comments is actually common street was two-plane and kind of like all the rest of the 1980s warehouse type of buildings that were styled building in in this area.

So we brought a bay down, but we also extended over to give us the one across the entry to the walls of the bottom to the apartments of the bottom.

And one of the things you can see is also you know, in this representation, you've got thicker, more substantial columns, which you know look a lot better, it looked like they're sort of doing their job or square spinning.

Um the other thing that we've done is our masonry detailing has gotten to be improved.

We've got more detailing more sold reports.

Uh we've got the vector bricks around the window around the windows, openings.

We just took it to the next level.

We had a chance for design children and open games.

So that's the basic gist of it is how we respond to everything that you gave us comments and questions.

Thank you.

Uh, are there uh any board members uh would like to ask questions?

No, um I guess I had a question in the staff.

You had mentioned um some thoughts about the plaza, and it's uh skills but so we we have been working with the city uh set on the details of the deposit on the front, and we're going to advance into the nice slide for that because it was pretty big.

Um they had a lot of input in common.

So we we've got a planting, we've got the planter built into, we've got the bench on the common street, which we have the bench built into it.

Um our inspiration for this was these images here, the idea that metal frame was up and bulbers, wires, and it's gonna be hopefully get the on you to row up and over it and give it some shielding because it's gonna be very exposed, but it is a private place for the occupants on the ground.

So they will the occupants will be on the ground floor and they will maintain it because it's such a connected part of the up there experience.

We're confident that it's not going to be neglected and just left and built there, but it will feel that way when it's initially built, and then hopefully within a season growth and start feeling closer to this.

Thank you.

Um I guess I had a question on how what's the height of the these dividers on the upper levels that they're up to the units?

Not uh yeah, the dividers between the units on the other trellis.

They're about 10 foot tall, right?

Part of that is that the trellis needs that anchored into the the top, otherwise we wouldn't get them around eight feet tall because that's a company separated, but that 10 foot also gives you say a more solid field because it really looked at break that corner down.

Okay, thank you.

Any other board board members have questions?

No, thank you.

Sorry.

One public speaker signed up for this setting or Steam Roberts.

Like I was gonna get them and speak in favor of this design on my own personal behalf because I think it really would add to this neighborhood.

It's really um especially in that super land.

But now I'd like to stand on behalf of historic Alexander Foundation and suggest that you do indeed um incorporate the archaeological conditions.

Um it's not clear to me that it is outside of the review as historic context, it's absolutely reviewed, and every single approval has to add archaeological some sort of past at least 30 years.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Uh Professor Plankey, I agree with that, and we always do uh is you know, included in the conditions.

Um separate things and prescription or supplement.

So the BAR specific appropriateness um doesn't include archaeological work, right?

Is the scope of the standard movement what's to be reviewed on the zoning order for the strategic appropriate list?

Is the building appropriateness of that?

Yes, does not that does not mean the archaeological stuff is not applying, it just applies through the archaeological code, and which is different than the ARP.

That makes that make sense.

Well, I can clarify that so archaeology does not apply to a certificate of appropriateness pursuant to the zoning ordinance, which says that you're supposed to be looking at the architecture of the building, uh the exterior of the building.

However, this building required uh site plan, and through the site plan, the same conditions that are here are in the site plan, but they are not appropriate in your certificate of appropriateness.

However, um, even the archaeology Eric Fessler, when we talked about this, said, Oh, I just included them as a reminder so that nobody forgets he said, but you're right, uh they they don't belong in the uh BAR staffing board.

So that's Garrett Fessler, who's with RBLogy.

And so I spoke with both Garrett and Mr.

Conkey, and they both agreed with me.

And there's a memo from staff saying to remove those conditions from this approval, but for your comfort, they are included in the site plan.

Yeah, thank you.

So there's two separate packs.

It's just it's just like just like when there are issues with governments uh building bill and code stuff.

You know, we don't include that in our conditions, it's handled to the result code on review.

So this is also handled separately through the site plan process.

Um so that's why it's it's already being handled somewhere else, it doesn't need to be doesn't need to be a redo.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you for just for clarification as well.

Right.

So it would be in this case, this is a project that's going through a site plan review and the demolition is being covered through that site plan review as well.

So in this case, all that stuff's being handled through that site plan, so it's being covered there.

Then we're keeping going forward, we would have to make sure that this stuff is being handled someplace.

I think we have to figure out how to welcome that in the public part.

Thank you.

Uh is there any other public speakers?

No.

Um close it uh to public and open up for delegation.

Uh is there um any board members who'd like to make comment?

I think it's a nice improvement uh plan that was already pretty nice.

So ready for that neighborhood.

I'll comment uh I think it's really cool.

Uh you took a lot shaped like an ice cream cut and turned it into this project.

I think it's very nicely done myself.

Um you've done as we asked two four or five months ago now.

Um, and I like the improvements.

I'm not really comfortable making a vote based on archaeological conditions issue because we usually do have some in our approvals.

I just really want to make sure I understand what's going on before I build on that.

But when this is isn't this like a phase one study, like it's that that's requiring um to hire an independent archaeologist to do a documentary study, right?

This is the condition is beyond what normally in you know we can this that's correct.

This is an addition additional to standard archaeological comments.

Standard archaeological comments refer to things like uh another time, things like that, right?

Just above and beyond that, it's it's handled through the site planning process, not through this process.

So it's it is as well suggested.

Which is different than what we normally beyond the miss uh Mr.

Adams.

Yes, I just feel that our comments were so I don't remember exactly what we said.

Thank you for reminding us, but it really resulted in the or we have some input and it's uh collaborating your staff.

You made it into something really sculptural and all improvements makes this real worthwhile.

That's not what's happened.

So thank you.

It's one of the I agree with the colleagues.

I think it's a really strong challenge lot and the encounter.

It's too much thing.

It's not that big of a deal.

To me, it's not a um thank you for your presentation and once again a nice work as usual.

And thank you for uh coming back to us.

I actually appreciate I think the scale of the windows are a little more appropriate or more appropriate, not just a little more appropriate.

And it feels more like a residential building than it did previously.

I do appreciate the work you've done to make it a better project.

Um I have no problem supporting it.

Thank you.

Yes, okay.

Um, so thank you for the changes and the presentation.

Uh the I had only uh minor comment.

I think it I appreciate that you have created the privacy in between the uh with with that wall in between the two spaces.

I think it I would have liked it to be a little bit like when when you were showing us the two from before and after, the before was much more open that I kind of like it, but I do want privacy.

So if the wall could be lowered a little bit from like 10 feet to eight or seven, it would be good.

I did mention uh did realize you mentioned uh structural um reason, but that that's my only comment that if it can be lowered a little bit to let make it a little bit lighter.

Studied or the construction document phase and bringing it down, it's hard for me to give you a uh height there with you know if you can study it.

It's not we'll consider the boards okay, bring it down totally fine, introducing itself if possible.

Yeah, okay, all right.

Uh and the other thing uh originally I wanted to make comment that to see a little bit more greenery and biophilia in the in the plaza, which you showed me.

You showed us the uh examples of the presidents, and that's that's perfect.

That's fair enough.

Thank you.

We're looking forward to that being stage, but I know it's not gonna happen.

Okay, okay.

Does um I'll I'll make a motion.

Um make a motion to approve per staff recommendations and to if uh to study lowering the dividing wall and work with staff on final solutions to work, yes.

Um can I get a second on that?

Second.

Okay, I have just having right one back and watch the second.

Ms.

Miller can have it.

No, all right, all right.

Thank you.

Um okay.

Uh all uh all in favor.

Aye.

All against I forgot to say I.

With the recommendations for staff.

The staff recommendations have automated okay.

Thank you.

Congratulations.

Thank you.

Okay, moving on to the next item, number 10.

Um yes, sorry, I wasn't too many items.

Yes.

Uh number we are zero five five.

Here are five store districts operations and at the kitchen at 732 North Washington Street.

We have to make a 733 with 806 development LLC representing the represented by Kevin Meyer returned.

Uh a wind note on this project.

This project doesn't involve demolition um through some administrative whatever um demolition is not in front of you tonight.

So you you we can vote on the um uh alterations to the building, and then demolition will come back secondly.

Okay, thank you.

That's why you that's why you're not seeing that mission.

Okay.

Um developing development.

Sorry to make it tonight.

It's a little bit busy now, but um sorry, can you please move forward uh for the speaker to explain how this is starting slide one three?

Can you state your address, please?

Um 732 North Washington, a couple blocks away, like right here.

Um you have the what do you know?

Sedition.

And would you like to make a uh presentation?

Yes, I think that's your building.

Yes, yes, where we're heading up.

Um I'm gonna go through some of the existing conditions.

Um, but we think we'd be pretty happy with uh the way it turned out, I hope we all agree.

So uh this project is an existing masonary uh office building of approximately five stories.

Um and maybe on the copy for steel uh for the shell.

And right now there's uh you know a bunch of existing conditions that kind of really make it boring and uh we don't uh invite the kind of the residential character that we're going for.

So we made some kitchen to the fixed.

Um next slide, please.

Um attached in uh the post-sight link.

I will see in yellow or balconies that are projecting uh about four feet uh over the over the but outside the face of the existing building.

Um we have a communal roof deck at the top that uh is it's really not visible from the street based on the existing glass.

Uh next slide, please.

You'll see we drew inspiration uh from other areas that are very local to this uh 706 north Washington, 900 north Washington.

Uh we really uh thought the pitch of the answer was was more proportional to the scale of these buildings, and uh we tried to mirror that adjustments that we made to the existing shelf.

Um next slide, please.

This is the north uh 900 north Washington, so um just for orientation.

This is approximately uh two blocks uh to the north uh of major C site, and that's one of my north Washington and uh 706 is approximately two two blocks to the south.

And this is a very similar uh steep mansor, which uh fits well uh with the character of the building.

Um we'll see how we're gonna uh when I show you some of the building sections.

Here are some more examples.

These are more of a modern interpretation.

Uh uh answers.

Uh it's a closer down to the hall, but okay, we have one stop model street, 500 king.

Uh and sorry, one more items we're one.

And uh one item southwest.

Oh sorry, so sorry, do you want to King Street?

Next slide, please.

So you're probably very familiar with this building.

Um jumped down that you got the barbed way.

Um it's you know fairly boring, boring character, and it has more of a uh you know the office look.

It's currently office, and even though we're converting it to residential, um to expand the light and air in 6 minutes.

Um part of our design, which really taking the center line of the windows and expanding the openings to allow for uh two double hook windows.

Um we'll have you know external buttons um on the on the windows, which uh will feed into the character and support kind of thing that Alexander is looking for.

Um we have existing cast domain that we've painted uh around the first floor windows.

Our intention is to uh power wash or uh you know stand positive and uh and clean it up the story, uh and then we want to take down that span roll panel uh and expand to a full head window to have really more like kind of um a modern thin thin profile steel drill uh code again outside of windows.

Um we will be restoring and adding keystones uh to uh to both um North Washington and Madison.

And you see at the top, which is kind of the the portion of the building that really bothered me the most when we started.

Um you see that it's it's very shallow in pitch, and uh part of part of the correction here, I think architecturally uh is to is to make that pitch steeper uh and more important to fit with the massing of the building.

So this is an example of the window reload.

Um see the uh existing base that has good dots that's that's kind of defined by a water table that's harder part to see from here because it's the existing color.

Um so one of the bigger that we can see is we add just cast on water taping, which we thought was very effective.

At the bottom really helps press the building.

Uh and we thought it was effective to get away from kind of the white uh windows of the red there, I think we've seen and transition to the uh a black brick to larger format.

Um demoning the root on the back, and then we'll just use the surface one.

Next slide.

You'll see it's a little bit difficult to see here, but what we've shown is we've got the existing window openings and then how we're expanding those on the center line, right?

And we're gonna expand the keystone details above to line that window format.

We're gonna keep it a natural brick.

Um, and again, working with the bones of the project to make it more residential.

Next slide.

This is an elevation for Madison.

Again, showing the same thing.

See that by expanding the windows, it's a little more appropriate to the to the base of the building, which you know tends to be a little bit wider in most cases, but um it drops down, it's pretty effective.

I just want to be clear here that um an admission I just taught in reviewing this again is that that will be brick all the way down, we're not painting that base.

Um that is a step.

So here's the elevation from North Washington.

Um we thought it would be important uh to add outdoor space to these units.

It's uh again going back to natural air and daylight, bringing out it might uh you'll see it's a little bit further in that if we have really nice um decorative uh detail that um I think we'll add uh some character to the street on stuff that maybe see that I think uh I think there's a board would be some forward level.

Um we've added windows um to the to the center line there.

I'm sorry, um here's the grid line VC, which are basically two lines either side of the main entry doors.

Um we've added the window to the left and right of them to add um you know additional uh layout flexibility inside and see the helmet character uh of the building.

Uh you'll see that uh we're using a turnbug system, but this in many ways this has a lot to do with uh you know what's what's there existing, uh you know, in order to in order to you know kind of float these, it would be pretty difficult from a construction standpoint.

Um so adding the turbuckles um we're able to install you know knife edges into the into the masonry in the back, and it's a much easier install.

We also think it you know adds to the style of the building.

Um and then we try to on the mancer, we try to uh create outdoor space that uh you know complements the the lower floors, uh, but also preserves kind of the the mass of the mansion.

So that this occurs on both North Washington uh and Madison, uh which would be our our our penthouse event.

Next slide.

Again, you'll see we have the outdoor space um uh for the upper region.

Um our intention here is to use a synthetic slate um on the Mansard roof, uh, and then build dwarfers in uh to uh to allow uh again more than half the light and air into it, uh but we feel it fits in the context.

We were I did read the stack report, and I see those recommendations to potentially move that one split armors.

I think that's workable.

Um I looked at the layouts uh right before our meetings.

I think I think we can we can accomplish that.

There's quite a bit of difference here uh with the red line there.

That is the old um answer.

And you'll see how much of a difference it makes just kind of changing that pitch, right?

Next slide.

This is the rear of the building.

Um little bit less detail.

Uh a lot of the keystone and corn soldiers above it are they're still in place, but again, we're going to expand it and um try to mirror you know partially the detailed other of mass and uh northwashing, which are really more prominent faces of the building.

Next slide.

Um briefly, I'll kind of touch on the layouts.

Um these units tend to be uh larger units, um, large open spaces, um, elevator access.

There's about three units on the fifth floor, and then go stack from the fourth down to the second, uh, the four units, and then five of the reverse board.

Uh next slide.

Uh next slide.

Next slide.

Uh, this is the outdoor roof deck.

Um, really one of the main amenities uh the only medium is that you have a light uh doghox in station for for uh red.

So uh really you intend to utilize you know the exiting shell and height of the building to capture some views and some nice amenity spacing uh for you for the full measurement.

Uh you'll see on the right hand side we have um screen wall um pulled back off uh at least I can't tell exactly what this uh the setback is, but it's at least one to one, and it's only 142 inches tall, so it should be visible for the street.

Next slide.

Uh this gets into kind of the ingredients of details.

Um you'll see the um you'll see kind of examples of the existing keystone there on the left hand side.

Your plan is to emulate that, match the color, uh, get it fabricated and installed, and then um the detail the soldier course that sits above uh the added double um windows, uh kind of fans out to either side, and so we'll just kind of expand the next detail with each window metrics.

We have the uh low right hand side here.

You'll see that that is the that is the style of the slate we would like to use.

It's tend to be a little bit more consistent, durable.

Uh don't mention in the staff report, it's it's you know, five stories up and uh not very visible uh from the the walker buys and people looking at street level.

Next slide.

Um this is top right hand side.

We're kind of going with the class of the classical uh design balcony, and these little arches at the top that kind of fan in.

We thought that was very interesting detail that would work well and track the design.

Um and these had uh prefabricated metal decks below, so uh the underside of the net will need to look completely black sealed.

Um, so you won't have any um you know exposed pressure attributed or anything like that.

It's very successful for the uh 805 compass.

And then below on the bottom left hand side, there's kind of like thin focus wheel window, and we think what's what really makes the window work well is uh instead of you know we're going for more of a custom shape, so we're filling that arch at the top of the window instead of trying to um instead of trying to do something where you know it's a flash the you know detail header detail above the window and cut straight across.

So we think this really adds a lot of a lot of value to the settings of the building.

Next slide.

So um the actual corners, right now there's an existing corners.

Um we're gonna alter the details.

Um my architect did send uh send you builds of additional details away.

I'm sorry it was late.

Um but uh you know we have to integrate um uh a gutter system into it.

So uh while we have an option for for castone, we feel the metals more appropriate because it kind of shields the shields the the rainbow trenching of rain and bringing it into internal storm winders.

Um bottom and left, I'm sorry, bottom center, uh an example of the of the mechanical spin walls.

Um be including on the rib deck to shield um shield you know any potential views um from way way further down in Washington.

Next slide.

And here's just uh uh an example elevation view color rendering.

Um, and so the intention here is to sign a colorlessly, uh, make sure that it kind of matches and it space well, uh lines in um with kind of a metal brake metal paintable that wraps around the normal.

Um so that kind of all melt up works well together.

Um we could go more of a darker color, but I really do think that uh the gray color you've got to add some character to the topic.

Uh next slide.

Uh here is some sideline views.

You'll see that um we are we are spanning um some light and safety.

Um and you see so that red line, the red line on the left hand side is what the existing uh stair tower is located, um exiting the top of the roof, and in order to be uh code for you know you don't have spaces on the roof deck.

You need to add another layer that you're setting on the elevator to make sure that um you have direct access to the roof deck.

Um really are you taking approximately six feet off the street?

You'll see that the roof deck's not visible, screen screen walls not visible.

Um so it's pretty well shielded from the side.

Um next page.

Uh and here just a couple couple more renderings.

Um baseline locations.

Um the grids uh having having the buttons on the lower windows, kind of uh going to a kind of a four-panel system at the at the upper roof line was a good way to kind of mix up the penetration.

Um so we're pretty happy how it turned out.

And you'll see right there, you'll see how the mole in there uh lines up with the water table.

And you know, as it stands now, there's a white panel above that.

So kind of bringing that to the floor really adds a caricature.

Next slide.

Um, and that's it.

So we can notice some questions.

Thank you.

Um do we have any public speakers for this?

Yes.

You can fill it out afterwards.

So um I I'm generally um okay with this project.

So speaking first for Gallizander Panich.

My concern about this project particularly is that there's no um mention or analysis related to the Washington Street standards.

And I I wasn't able to put up on my phone in order to read them, but I think one of them is the monumental nature of the facade that faces Washington Street, and I think having these attached balconies on that primary facade takes a wing from that on the original design.

I don't think as much on the sides, and then you know, not really collections, but I do think how much you think we have.

Thank you.

Any other um speakers, questions from public?

If not, we'll close the question section to the public and uh oh.

Sorry, I forgot to ask from the members first.

Is there any questions?

Uh anyone have questions from the members?

No, we'll open it to deliberation uh for the members.

Um I can go first.

Uh uh no one else is ready.

So I do uh also believe that the um the balconies are not appropriate for the Washington Street.

Um they look kind of attached, especially on the I mean, besides the balconies that I don't think they're appropriate for Washington Street.

I think the windows should not be also it's kind of strange that it's uh brought down uh on the first floor to to kind of uh cut that white line, horizontal line.

Uh so I think those should you know the the it should follow the line basically should be pushed up.

Um the side also the balconies are too too far out.

Uh and it looks like as if it's like an after thought that is attached to the building.

Uh, if you want to have balconies, which I generally think are very uh appropriate for residential building, I think they should be either fully recessed or semi-recessed to the building.

Um the other comment is that everything uh especially on the only on the facade that's on the uh Washington Street, everything is very symmetrical, but on the very top level, uh in the middle, the the doors and the windows are off center.

So that if you can make that also a symmetrical to the middle.

Yeah.

Um I think that's uh that's all my comments.

Otherwise, it's uh it looks very nice and it's an improvement to the building.

Thank you.

Anyone else would like to make comments?

Prodams.

I also agree about the uh balconies on Washington Street.

Um I think either more monumental structure of those balconies or not at all is probably more suitable to this facade.

Um I think Mr.

Spencer may speak about the grills of the balconies, also.

Um question I had is the staff report.

I didn't see it read it carefully enough.

The the top floor, the window.

Were you suggesting that the wind there are too many windows up there?

No, no, it's centerful.

The center like you met.

Yeah, everything is symmetrical.

So this one is off, yeah.

The side one is also sort of plan off.

Yeah, almost everywhere they're aligned with what's below if it's just that we're suggesting that they pick them over the.

Oh, thank you.

That's a that's I noticed that too.

Um, so that is the fact recommendation.

That's okay.

Uh I think the windows on the ground floor, at least the larger one with the uh segmented orange have they have this horizontal button pattern.

And I think the language of traditional windows is to have vertical, and then maybe they could even be divided into three elements and then smaller patterns between so the turf the panels are up and down, not laying sideways.

Uh I think Sill also I don't think I'd want to have an apartment with a floor level windows on on uh Washington Street.

So I think that was some also just leave it up higher.

Um the top floor, I I do think maybe the um the windows.

It it looked nice in the renderings, but I wonder if there are too many.

And for instance, the corner bedrooms has six, I mean it has huge windows in the so it seems like you could reduce the number of windows in some of the rooms where it's appears in plan to be overloaded with windows.

Um yeah, the two corners.

The bedrooms have six windows each.

It's hardly a place for the bed.

Um anyhow, those I think it's the ground floor windows, the balconies, and I wouldn't mind if there were fewer windows on the top floor.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Spencer.

So thank you for their project.

I appreciate the fact that you're taking this on.

Um with the balconies.

They feel like an attachment to me, and and the turnbuckles don't help.

I understand you're doing them for structural reasons, but I kind of feel like if this building had balconies, they probably would have decorative stroke elements underneath them to support it.

Um something a little more oriented ornamental, and I would feel like this building would maybe wouldn't have square balconies on them.

It probably would have curved balconies on them, kind of tying into the arches that are below, which I think would be a nice softer feel.

I kind of agree about the balconies on Washington Street.

Uh a lot of people have talked about that.

One of my larger issues are the large openings on the roof level or the the upper level.

I know this is a commercial building, but for it to feel residential, that span seems too far without having a couple of columns to make that span feel appropriate for residential scale.

So I think you know, and it did the windows are set further back, so I don't really have a fight about the windows not aligning perfectly on the facade, but I think if you added some columns to that, those large openings up there, that would help actually um break it down and also when people look at it, it you would see those columns and it would be like you feel like there's something special up there right now.

They just like dark holes.

And that's one of the first things I noticed when I looked at this was that opening is just too far of a span for it to feel like a residential scale.

So I I would think you should work with Mr.

Conki to probably try to resolve that.

Um, I think those are my big comments.

I agree with uh Mr.

Adams' comments about the windows being on the ground floor, the arch windows running horizontal when they should probably run vertical.

Um the mutton pattern kind of your upper windows are a nice kind of typical vertical pattern, and then you can do the ground floor and they become a horizontal pattern.

So I think the architect should look at that again just to revise that and I think that's all I had.

Thank you.

Thank you.

So Miss Miller, yes, I'll speak.

Um thank you for taking the project on as Mr.

Spencer said.

Um okay, I do have some issues that I want to tell you about.

Visually, I think the fifth floor is disconnected or disjointed from the look of the rest of the building.

Um, and oftentimes top floors are different, but I don't think it's into the rhythm or the symmetry of the rest of the building.

So that's one thing on my palette or my place.

Um I would go so far as to say they know um well, I think the there's no other building on one street that I can think of after the grass are built balconies.

That does they don't have balconies on the Washington Street standards.

So that's a concern of mine, but it's even a greater concern of mine for the whole building because that to me it almost looks like a ward or a car bubble on someone um something that is non-organic to the building and not complement to the building.

So I know you've worked really hard on this, but I'm gonna say I do not agree with the balconies all the way around.

Um and then other things that were of concern with me, where is the parking for this building?

Oh, there's a service working back across the alley.

Okay, across the back.

Yeah, it's a concern for me that there are only six spaces for a 20 unit building.

No, there's there's there's 23 sites.

Oh, there are 23 spaces.

Um nine can them.

Yes.

They are on the other side of the alley.

So that's 18.

Yes.

Two for seven years.

Uh, and then six right along the night in the building.

So there's a pretty good amount of well.

I think that's more reasonable.

Thank you.

Um, I didn't understand that.

So they are allocated to this building.

Okay.

Uh, and then say uh there's an elevator.

This is an elevator building.

Okay, that's fine.

And um I would prefer that you continue to improve the building around to the back side.

And uh we see more and more buildings, commercial or commercial buildings are being renovated into residential buildings or even built new buildings, and the backsides aren't being embellished as the rest of the building is and uh that back side is the front side to the person's on another street, and it's beginning to stand out to me as I go around old town and see the facade, the front sides are done, but many of the buildings that come to the backs to the to the property line of the backing street, it's not done for the building, but um I think that's an improvement that can be made in general when somebody can when it's visible from a the right from a right of way.

So those are really all my comments.

Uh, and thank you for working on this.

Thank you.

Uh Ms.

Robinson, I can't for the comments.

Thank you.

So thank you for keeping the natural break.

I think that's nice.

And I like the I like the colors um that you've selected, and um I have no problem changing the pitch of the group.

But I do want to pick up a little bit on what Ms.

Millen mentioned on the fifth floor.

Um the Mansford roof is the angle is very sharp.

Um, I think that generally a man's roof is about 70 degrees, and you're just over 80.

I don't know.

If you can look at uh bringing that more into a convention, it's it's certainly much larger than what's existing there, but right now it looks like another full floor, and the floor doesn't seem to um relate very well with the floors below it.

And I think part of the issue there is you know the windows are so much wider than the ones that are below it, and they seem taller.

The shed dormers starts at the bridge, most dormers start below the ridge.

Um but I I think that corner, especially at uh Washington and Madison, Madison the dormers that are you know, but kind of getting just so close together that you're not really expressing the corner, the corner of the mancer group.

Too close to the corner, yeah.

Yeah, yeah.

I mean the pitch that we have would matches uh the iteration street.

It's very similar.

It's less and I would I would like to avoid going in the opposite direction.

I think it's appropriate.

It seems very uh I do agree, it does seem too much, it could be reduced.

Okay, we'll look at it.

Yeah, you know, it's looking at people.

70.

Um it's just putting it back a little bit.

And um I'm also wondering if it's possible to turn that answer around the south elevation.

I see right now it's just a brick wall, and we're gonna be seeing.

I think we're gonna be really be seeing that this building it really stands out on Washington Street.

You see all the sides of it.

Yeah, just sitting in the side.

Um can we see the side that is break?

The the south elevation, the south of the gardening.

Yeah, down right, right.

Yeah, so yeah, yes, it is.

So maybe it turns it more or just to your you know, the vertical stairs thing this there except that makes sense.

And I agree with um other board members above the the balconies on Washington Street, and uh Esther Spencer's idea about softening it, maybe supporting the balcony from below on that.

Can I add some context to the residential balconies?

Sure.

Um so as you know, there's a project with called 808 like Washington, and we added Juliet's balcony.

What exists now is really a very commercial street, strict couple blocks, right?

And then it does down to these more residential and um box buildings.

One of the signature things that we can residential conversions is making sure that you're making it look more residential.

So I think it's a critical part um of adding uh character to the building in the residential perspective.

We had very interesting Juliet's on the 808.

Um, but they really didn't the layouts allowed for French tour speciality.

So we don't necessarily have as much flexibility here.

And in working with Bill, we've already purchased that from that.

And I agree with you at the time.

It's disproportionate about five and a half feet.

Now they're down to four.

That's about as this tight as you can go to get a couple chairs out there.

So I'm open to kind of adjusting some of the details, maybe the curvature.

So I think a good idea.

If there's a corbel or something, maybe if you go under it, decker coral.

We're not close to that either, but we're really it's really important from a market standpoint to have these units have outdoor space.

I just think from what I see right now, they feel more firescapy.

Right.

Yes, and uh that's why I was trying to soften it somehow.

I think the edge rhyme is and and and the turn, like I said, the turnbuckles definitely don't help.

Okay, we can and definitely not on the Washington street.

No bad when he's on the Washington street.

What about reduced it to a jeweler?

You just got it approved very close.

Might be a little more appropriate.

Yeah, it might be more appropriate.

It's just bring it back, we can look at it and see what it looks like.

The first floor or the second floor.

Um I feel it's too close to the arch of the lower above the first floor.

Uh that's the only issue.

But if you can the second floor balcony, the second floor balconies.

Just like I mean, the good thing about this way on the balcony, I mean more Washington on the right side.

Also part of the emergency version of the balcony.

That's so if I in theory, I could reduce that.

So now it's a word.

I think it's not sitting here.

Switch the city.

On the side the right balcony on the wash more side.

That's part of the corner.

Still have an outdoor city.

So you could you could take out is that what you're saying?

I don't want to take it out.

I just want to reduce it to it.

Obviously, bring it back and let us see it.

It's more appropriate, Juliet, than um the balconies, but um any other comments.

I just have some clarification.

What building has been approved with Juliet with balconies on Washington Street?

This is the building uh directly across the street.

Um previously, which is important.

Wasn't that the building that was a hole in the ground?

I mean, I'm sorry, that was on the ground for a very long time.

I think there were some extenuating circumstances with that.

And I I don't think Washington Street standards allow for balconies on Washington Street.

I just want to reiterate that because uh I believe that's your building, also, isn't it?

The one with the approved Julia now.

Uh I think more.

I see.

But yes, I think it was the process.

I think that was an exception to the rule.

We we we do not do Julia.

We don't do balconies on Washington Street, it's not allowed in the standards.

No, it's not, but but that building pushed the limit on how one would interpret the Washington Street standards, and I think there was a lot of pressure.

I guess there were, I don't know if it's financial pressure or the city wanted that the uh wanted it done, and you all were doing in some way.

I don't want to get into all of that, but what I do want to say we cannot possibly improve Juliet or whatever we call those balancing something down in Washington street, it's not um in the standards, and it would be and I don't think the cabin in this particular particular in particular I understand the need for fresh air and uh uh sunsets of outdoors when you're indoors.

Uh I definitely understand that, but um I don't even think it's an improvement to the building visually, it may be for the occupants.

Um that's all I agree with that, and especially for at least one of the units you do have balcony already uh on the side.

So Madison Street.

Yeah, on the Madison Street.

Um altogether, um, it's not in our purview to kind of uh the in interior of the building, but um we don't redo I think most of us think that balconies are not appropriate for Washington Street, like that with the south elevation.

Maybe there's an opportunity to you know recess a balcony there, and then that way you don't need to have a one-hour part of separation, you know, at the property line, and you can have additional light and the thing of the um southeast corner because that might be a nice option.

Yeah, so I'm talking about reducing um like the space recess there, uh yeah, we that has been done before recess corner than you can start to add windows as long as you've set that yeah, just so um considering the comments.

Um we have the additional comment uh columns uh to the balcony, um upper levels, um removing the balconies from the Washington side and potentially recessing on the sides um or semi-recessed um or somehow study to make it look smaller.

Um first floor windows uh to modify the divisions to look more vertical or square rather than horizontal.

uh uh columns uh to the balcony um upper levels um removing the balconies from the washington side and potentially recessing on the sides um or semi-recessed um or some hot study to make it look smaller um first floor windows uh to modify the divisions to look more vertical or square rather than horizontal um very uh to reduce the sharp mass groove uh and to kind of uh work on the dormers to either uh to both not to be close to the corners and also if you can center them on the um if possible to move it a little bit to center them on the uh on the windows below um and then um turn the mansor groove on the sound elevation up to the stairs so we i think considering the number of changes that we are asking we do like to see it again um to look at how it has come up would you like to ask for a decoral yes um so we'll have to make a proof that's the more if you'll be the bottom section uh i'll make a motion to uh approve the defer second second by mr spency everybody um all in favor aye aye all opposed um thank you thank you all right we have one more uh thing tonight number left we are going to fix that zero to you know part of four on the new at least four that was it's fixed that would be eight or three that would be what you have there and have we holding LC but again the by series would be dark type oh that should we got to tire the same directly state thank you would you like to make a presentation yeah that's so uh new development project and we start in the process of the city we kind of went back and more than something the best way to the town the northern metric street um rather than taking the long strictly so we'd respect kind of the existing development of that map is in there is a long metric street um madison street across it's gonna be an larger seven story building that's under development's already been improved we construction or building the next one but they're right now it's part of the bars that was there so we're in a kind of a position where we are across here from the Charles Houston break center across the street we're gonna be next to a across the street from a large you know large full full block building and then the development is very comfortable here to all whole story um apartment building and then we have some more modest ones in the laws and more magic street and then behind our project on Madison ripping up against the top shop top some industrial room but we figured at some point in the future that is going to be redeveloped just the way that the old closing and lighting is redeveloped and there's a larger building there.

So we're trying to kind of position ourselves as a in that mix it's something's kind of in the medium size which is the the the lot of allows that we cross the street from much taller buildings to corner to one slightly taller than what we're enclosing and also city corner on the same block or shorter than the building there so that kind of formed our building to are how do we do it we wanted to do residences of town we approached it looking at the the history of the area as well as the new development in the area a lot of stuff warehouses um we wanted to respect the fact that there are a lot of small aware from the scene and then we can go to old parts of old town for inspiration particularly like acrylic warehouse and pork brewery to say you know what have they done and how's it working so the detail that's what you see see here our kind of interpretation of that for our site and for our project so that's just kind of background I'm gonna give you hopefully you guys can give you the same sort of feedback you gave me on an other job and then we could do a an improved version of this and come back ultimately once we get a little further along city development process thank you looking for some feedback in public yes is there any any um member of the public who would wish to speak um there are we don't have any thank you we'll close it to the public um sorry yes you have to fill out a form to fill it on here

So thank you.

Looking for some feedback.

Yes, uh, is there any any um member of the public who would wish to speak?

Um we don't have any forms.

Thank you, they'll close it to the public.

Um sorry, yes, you have to fill out a form here.

Um here on their time.

Can you please say your address as well?

We have to say that um Patrick.

Um, and I just wanted to come on the action online just to our position with the uh the situation is we just would like to be kept abreast of where things stand, uh progress it doesn't regress, uh we just would like to develop where things stand so that we can appropriately you know know which direction that we're gonna be going in uh and not being caught by and a state of flux with was transparent.

So that's really um only concern is just knowing where things stand if it does are you adjacent to the building?

Is your property adjacent to the building?

No, we're actually gonna tell it at 728.

Um that would be to the property author.

I think it would keep you the neighbors uh reach out to you.

Um just the fact that we are in the last year from the lead.

Um recently version of the button so we you know we just want to get where it stands where we're gonna make research as well if they decide to control them.

So like some that's important.

So then I think we'll probably speak if it's a public hearing process, and there's a layers at least two.

There's at least three more public hearings on this project before we we get anything from the plot on approval.

So those things you should be noticed and should be built publicly published.

And then we placable.

So like like this one, there was a sign on the final property.

They'll be signed in front.

Every time there's a public meeting, there'll be a sign in front as well.

We have some reasons.

Yeah, you know what I'll think.

Uh Documenting the builder, we are in constant contact with Tanner's Gales, who is a real estate agent.

We have expressed the same concerns that you'd be kept abreast to the landlord.

And most of our players can keep you well informed or Charles here you can talk to them any time.

Okay, and the other the reason why I'm bringing it up is um you were made aware that that the property did go under contract.

Um, but then after that, there wasn't really any more information they provide to us until I think about two and a half weeks ago.

They would put it in the house now, and then we thought I received the call, and then also there was something like that recently reached out to Tanner um for our permission, and um I wasn't made aware of that until yesterday when you text message that the approach time scales are referenced to the conversation, and I wasn't even you know aware of that, and that bothered myself and my wife because someone was asking like they were acting on our behalf, and we didn't have to talk to him giving permission to have a complex.

So in an Show, you know, I've dealt with the VAR people in the past, um, and they've been nothing but great with you know, they're with them, but in this situation, you know, we could comment from the Alsa, and then there was a reporter that that reached out to us and put something and uh think the Alexandra or something, and we didn't even know that that was being published by like you know, so we just kind of like academics of a problem.

You know, so we just kind of like academic simple thoughts.

Questions, you know, now someone was approaching us about things.

So we just would like to better where what's the name because that at this juncture should really have been so but I don't want to speak there.

I have a problem.

Thank you.

Uh any other public speakers?

No, at this point we'll close it to public and open up for comments.

So I just wanted to remind that this is a concept review, so we won't be making any decisions, and it's just um just comments.

Or yeah.

Um any board members would like to start comments.

Or questions.

Yes, go ahead.

So first of all, I think I like to commend you on your material's way of your attention to detail, but there's more than it's quite replying because it's pointing in the game to think the window articulation further in it.

I think it's it's a very interesting facade.

Um I think the tower ends, um height of the tower ends with the lower center in the setback is a really effective way to create that variation in height.

Um I think my concern or comment would be you know, it does appear to have a very vertical facade, and I realized you've sat back those three center units, but it's only about a foot.

Um and I think if they sat back potentially a little further, or there was a way to create a little more variation in depth that might help the entire facade.

Talk about your no the street line, the whole the whole space, the whole facade.

Oh, should this transition right now?

Correct.

If it could be a little deeper, I think it would be more effective.

Um because those steps sit close to a busy street, and I don't know how far they're extending back to the sidewalk, but that would be another thought.

Um there's any kind of interference with the side block itself.

That's it for me.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Um els midner.

Uh I'll just say um, I'm always more pleased than not pleased with your work.

And um, this looks good to me so far.

Thank you for your submission.

Thank you.

Anyone else?

I can go.

Uh I uh I agree with uh Ms.

uh Robinson on just if you can push back the middle part a little bit to to create more different uh differentiation between the two surfaces.

Um otherwise it's pretty simple and very clear, a nice um design.

The only thing is that if we can see next the next time uh your comment, we can see samples uh of the brick and the uh and the upper portion as well, that would be great.

That's all my comments.

Anyone else?

Okay.

Scale architectural character, I have no issue with your height.

I have no issue with the massing the scale is fine, the architectural character is always good with you at least, sir.

Um the question I have is I like the choice of materials on the brick.

I just was wondering if the the end units might be a different color brick to help kind of give a little more variety to this.

Because we're all taking the you know, in kind of referring back to the current warehouse, yeah.

And other sort of warehouse structures all kind of built contemporaneously, it was the same brick.

These are townhouses.

I understand that.

But these are townhouses, so I would I I don't I actually like your the material in general.

I just think the two end units possibly could be a different color to make them pop off a little bit more.

And also, what is the material?

I can't really read the notes on here.

What are the what is the material on the the setback?

Uh material setback is a channel lock signing.

Right.

It's a it's a oral polymash siding, but you know, it'll have that kind of square gap as it just goes up.

Okay.

That was uh kind of all I had.

That was my comments, but other than that, I think you think it's a good job.

I think the corners mean the power elements could be different public.

Thank you.

Ms.

Adams.

I like the idea that it has sort of a historic reference because a lot of other new buildings along there don't cyber call.

Thank you.

Yeah, I know.

Um contrary to my important remnants.

I kind of like the proposed west elevation better than the one just because um of the transitions with the smaller, you know, I'll see the slice on the block with that.

Again, you're coming up against some pretty small uh residential buildings, and I think that's helping transition it down.

And appreciate that.

And we had the the debate in the office of your shoulder and try to bring the shoulder down slot and make that change.

And didn't that didn't work well?

All of the townhouse projects like this that we've done recently seemed to benefit from a stronger tower element.

It's just kind of defines the building better.

It turns the corner better.

Yeah.

Um I think the corner is that's fine if we just want to get further down the block and um the symmetry is beautiful, but we can also find ways that that's maybe that's self-standards brilliant.

That's great.

And the way you detailed the um siding above, I think is appropriate and set back a little bit.

So that's nice.

Yep.

Yeah, this one's been quite interesting, trying to figure out what what is appropriate in this location of town, how do we respect the immediate facility?

You know, the immediate buildings around us, but also the just the larger context too.

What level of detail can we take it to move?

This one is you know, stepping down from what's further north.

See transition.

And we're trying to also anticipate what's going to be there in the future too.

Replace the chop shop and the auto.

I don't know.

Chomp shop's good.

Thank you.

Any other comments?

If not.

Thank you.

Great.

Thank you, Chair.

Um couple of announcements real quick, and then we can all go on our way.

Um, I just want to thank everyone on the audience line.

We are trying out our new space here.

Some hiccups we're getting we're getting better, we'll get better every time.

Just this is our temporary home while um city hall is being renovated.

It's either this or we draw out the room to the mark center.

I don't think we need to make the board at least all appreciated the um proximity over the some of the conveniences of the mark center.

So this is uh sorry, if I could just make an observation about it, there's a lot of movies.

Yeah, I think if you switch it so the V ARs on the side, and the audience is there, and just we know we have silence behind us.

I'm a little I'm a little afraid of having them look out the window because they may get most.

I've seen some data behind it.

And it's just the programming back here stop all the thread to make it.

We're also gonna explore some uh typically um microphones.

Microphones as much about it.

The presenters are bad end.

The acoustics really are bad.

Yeah, trying to reflecting.

So we'll so we will be back here um two weeks.

We'll get back in this building, but in the room down the hall, graph that right so moving around a little bit, and then I I hate to tell you this, but we do have to go back out in the mark center.

A few meetings from now.

This party building is booked up, so we'll have to back out there.

I'll make sure everyone knows when it's happening, but bouncing around a little bit.

Like I said, we're trying to get all the pork down.

It's it's challenged.

But thank you all for the taking.

I don't think Mike may even make it.

I'm a little worried about things too, actually.

I think people just have to push have to project a little better.

That's all.

Oh, okay.

Oh we're trying to take it out.

We just found out that I'll book on here.

So we'll see.

It's a it's a challenge, right?

That's a challenge.

We're gonna get here.

That's all I have.

All right, thank you.

Great, thank you everyone.

Yeah.