I'm finally not by myself.

I'll bring you by myself in my own little island.

I think one shall accept the vessel.

All right, good evening.

I'm going to call the Indianapolis Historic Preservation Commission September meeting to order.

We have no approval of minutes this evening.

We'll move to old business.

We have a couple of cases there this evening.

First case is 2020 COA 594 Fountain Square address 1034 Virginia Avenue, Minda Balissus.

Maybe maybe mispronounced your name.

Looking for an approval of a one-year extension.

Shelby, do you want to give us an update on that?

Yes.

So the project is for rehabbing a historic but non-contributing garage or excuse me, gas station building in Fountain Square.

It's going to be a commercial space, and that includes some site work as well.

None of the work has taken place yet.

Um so they're just looking for an approval of that extension to hopefully get that work started here in the next year.

Okay.

Any questions from the Commission on the one year extension?

Okay, if not, I'll take a motion for the one year extension, please.

Okay, thank you.

Second answer, thank you.

Any final comments?

All those in favor, please signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Thanks.

Okay, the next old business case is 2024 COA 232 Irvington.

Right of way in front of address 5460 East Washington Street, Rachel Wilson for Indigo, and they're looking for an approval of a three-year extension.

Shelby, you want to update us on that?

Um, this one's similar situation.

Um the project hasn't officially started yet or the work hasn't started yet.

Um, but this is for one of the blue line stations there in front of the George Julian School.

Um and the um projected completion date for the blue line is the fall of 2028.

So that's why they were requesting the three-year extension for that one.

Okay.

Any questions from the commission on that extension?

Now it'll take a motion for its approval.

Thanks, Michael.

Thanks, Annie.

Any final comments?

All those in favor of the motion, please signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Okay, thank you.

All right, we have no new business.

And before we move to the public hearing portion of the meeting, let me introduce the commission members and the staff and read the rules of procedure.

Uh I'm Bill Brown, President.

Uh to my left is Anson Keller, Commissioner, Anginette Savillich, Commissioner, uh, Kristen uh Wiggs, Commissioner, Michael Bibbins, Commissioner, Any Lear Commissioner, and Disa Watson Summers, Commissioner.

Our staff with us this evening is Meg Bush, our administrator, Chris Steinmetz, our legal counsel, Emily Jarson, our principal architectural reviewer, Shelby Long, our senior architectural reviewer, Grace Gedecker, our preservation planner and recorder, Morgan Marleho, our architectural reviewer, and Caroline Emminacre, our architectural reviewer.

The commission has copies of IC 36-7-11.1, the Marion County zoning ordinances, the historic preservation zoning ordinance, and all historic area plans for Marion County on file, which will be incorporated by reference into the record of each case heard by the commission this evening.

This evening's hearing will be governed by the Commission's rules of procedure, which are also incorporated in the record of this proceeding.

Anyone wanting to get notice that a decision made by this commission has been appealed, they may fill out a notification form within five days of the decision.

The forms are available and may be obtained from the commission staff.

The commission strongly recommends against submitting new written materials at the hearing.

Doing so may result in the application being continued if the commission or the staff believes the mirror material substantially alters the request or requires more review than is reasonable at a public hearing.

However, if supplemental material related to a case is being submitted this evening, please submit it to IHPC staff when you come up to testify.

The order of each case this evening will be as follows.

I'll call for the applicant to make their presentation.

I'll then also ask for comments of support of that application.

Both of those steps will be allowed up to a maximum of 20 minutes.

Then I'll ask for objections or remonstration.

That will be allowed up to an maximum of an additional 20 minutes.

We'll then get staff comments.

I'll ask questions from the commissioners, and then we'll the applicant will have a last word or rebuttal of up to a maximum of 10 minutes, and then I'll ask Meg for a staff recommendation.

So before calling the first case this evening, if anyone who wishes to speak to any of the cases this evening, if you would stand and be sworn uh by Grace, uh please do so.

Grace, thanks.

Go ahead and raise your right hand for me, please.

Do you swear to tell the truth and the whole truth?

Say I do.

I do.

Okay, Grace, thank you.

Uh we'll start with request to withdraw or continue applications, and Meg, we've got one continuance.

Yes, uh 2025 COA 301 Chatham Arch Massachusetts Avenue.

The address is 656 East Arch Street, and the applicant is Abby Robertson.

And that request is to continue to the October 1st hearing for new notice.

All right, thank you.

Could I get a motion for the continuance to the October 1st?

Commissioner mean thanks, Kristen.

Get a second, please.

And Jeanette, thank you.

Any final comments?

All those in favor of the continuance, please signify by saying aye.

Aye, any opposed, same sign.

Okay, thank you.

We'll move to expedited cases where we have five cases this evening.

Meg, do you want to take us through those five, please?

Sure.

And just as a reminder, I'm gonna ask for two votes, one for the COAs and one for the one variants.

2025 COA 260, Harrow Morton Place.

Address is 1921 North New Jersey Street.

The applicant is Eric Mattson, and that request is to construct an addition on a garage to create a secondary dwelling unit.

2025 COA 278 Irvington addresses 316 South Audubon Road.

Uh the applicant is Katie Strahan, and the request is to demolish a historic garage and construct a new garage.

2025 COA 293 Cottage Home.

Address is 1310 East Knight Street, and the applicant is Walter Racinos.

And the request is to construct a rear addition.

2025 COA 300 Irvington and 2025 VHP 008.

The address is 5936 East Washington Street, and the applicant is uh Gerardo Gonzalez.

And the request is to remodel and alter existing structure and site for new restaurant and for a variance of use.

And the last one is 2025 COA 306 Irvington.

Address is 51 North Hawthorne Lane in the re uh excuse me.

The applicant is uh Lewis Patron, the third, and the request is to demolish a historic detached garage and construct a shed.

All right, thanks, Meg.

Is there anyone with in the uh public wishing to speak to any of the expedited cases?

Seeing none, any questions to the commissioners on the expedited cases.

Anne Jeanette, please.

Um the only request I have is on the CO COA300 Irvington.

The uh second vote be taken at the light at the rear door.

It seems kind of out of character.

Okay, any other comments from the commission?

If not, I'll take a motion for approval of the five expedited cases as presented by staff.

Thanks, Kristen.

Gonna thank you.

Any final comments?

All those in favor of the motion, please signify by saying aye.

Aye, any opposed.

Okay, thank you.

And then we'll take a vote for the uh variance on the 2025 VHP 008.

If I could get a motion for its approval, please.

Thanks, Ann Jeanette.

Michael, thank you.

Any final comments?

All those in favor of the variance, please signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Thank you.

Okay, we'll now move to applications to be heard, which have been continued.

Uh the first case is 2017 COA 049, Amendment 8, Chatham Arch, Massachusetts Avenue.

The address is 901 Carrollton Avenue.

Ryan Stoud is the applicant.

If you want to come forward, state your name and address and present your case.

Uh yes, my name is uh Shade Grandbox about State U and Architects.

I'm sorry, sir.

Can you come stand over here so you're under the microphone?

Thank you very much.

Absolutely.

Sorry about that.

So I will be representing the Hendrix Commercial Properties for this one.

I just like to highlight some of the uh issues that uh were brought up at our last meeting and uh to try to explain to you how we address those.

So, first of all, the height of the building.

If we could go to the next slide, uh we reduced the height of the podium by four feet six inches, which makes it very close to the previous version uh the height of the podium and the previous version that was approved.

Uh, and we did increase the height of the tower portion uh just slightly uh by increasing the height up to the top floor to make the top floor a little bit more special.

This helps with the proportions.

Um on these images you can see a little red dashed line that indicates the height of this middle that we gave to you originally.

Um we did also increase uh the root the size of the rooftop terrace slightly and opened it up.

Uh we added articulation to the uh podium portion of the building, and this articulation is sort of a nod to the historic bottling plant relating to its scale.

It's uh shows up at sort of a bump out on the facade.

Uh and then we also added a few exhibits.

If we go to the next slide, here we can see the Bell Fountain elevation.

Next slide.

Here's a detail of the materials.

Uh and with this, we just added a little bit of clarification.

There was a little concern that maybe there wasn't clear glass, and uh just want to reassure everybody, all the glass of the building is going to be clear glass.

Uh next slide.

And then here are our renderings.

This is an aerial looking down Carrollton Avenue from the north.

Next slide.

This is uh again an image from the north, but this died down at ground view.

You can see the opening of the terrace, the reduction of the height of that podium.

Next slide.

Here you can kind of get a sense for that articulation in trying to really give a little bit of a nod to the bottle of works bottling plant uh next door.

You can see there's just a little bit of a bump out in the corner elements.

The corner elements of this podium have been treated a little bit differently than everything else, and that is again relating to the uh the bottling plant.

Again, another image down Bell Fountain uh looking at that relationship between the two buildings.

Oh boy.

Sorry.

Oh, no problem.

This one doesn't like me.

This next image.

Okay, here we are.

And here's a perspective looking down 10th Street, giving you kind of a sense for the detail and the articulation of what that podium will be uh look like.

Next one.

This is an image of the front door of the building uh along Carrollton Avenue, giving you a sense of the entry plaza in front of the building.

Gives you a little bit of a look uh down Cherry Street, but I think the next slide gives you a little bit clearer view of that.

Here you're actually in that alley space looking out towards the podium.

Um you can see the building on the right.

We also there was uh some concern for the facade of the garage portion, the podium portion, and we thought maybe this section will kind of help describe what's happening there.

There's there's quite a few layers, quite a bit of detail in this particular facade.

And finally, there is a little bit of resolution uh, or we have a little bit more update on the traffic air, if you want to speak out.

Yeah, yeah.

Aaron Hurt with Civil and Environmental Consultant Civil Engineer on the project.

Um the next slide that you were getting to was a traffic memo.

So we since the last meeting, we were able to meet with DPW, had a meeting with them, talked through some of their traffic comments or items, and so we we met with them and summarized that in a memo, which hopefully you all received.

Some things we clarified was just the number of parking spaces.

So the garage is intended to be a public parking garage with the office tenant having the right to rent up to 200 spaces during the week, uh work weekday.

Currently in the existing lot, there are 79 parking spaces, and there are 309 total uh parking spaces in the garage.

So clarified some of those items.

I think there was some confusion on that.

Um talk through the uh trip generation uh for the use.

Um we then uh discussed the 10th street uh location of the curb cut and um some of the benefits of that um on Bell Fountain Street.

I think we mentioned previously that uh if you're heading northbound on Bell Fountain, there's limited stacking ability as you go northbound.

So you can easily uh with with four cars there, you're gonna block any right turn lane movement onto 10th street.

Whereas on 10th street, we're stacking up to eight cars.

Um as part of that discussion with DPW, they um suggested or recommended looking at adding a turn lane eastbound on Belfoun or on 10th Street that would sync up with a left southbound turning movement on Bellfoun.

So that would be a dedicated U-turn lane if if required if it was deemed necessary by DPW, they wanted us to study that, and it is possible.

That median is 28 feet wide currently, so it's a wide median, and you could easily add a lane, and we could sync up the traffic signal movements so the left bound southbound turn lane would sync up with a potential U-turn movement without conflicting with the car turning movement.

So they asked us to look at that.

It is possible.

Uh we'll Hendrix is willing to do that as part of this.

Um as part of this improvement on 10th Street.

So we shared all that information and um you know went back and forth and provided the memo and happy to talk about that more, you know, if needed.

So thanks.

All right.

Any other comments from the applicant?

Okay, all right.

Anyone wishing to speak in support of the application?

Anyone wishing to speak in remonstrance to the application?

Come forward, name and address, please.

Uh Larry Jones, 1125, Brookside Avenue.

Um, like I said, basically I'm a person big supporter of Henrich property and bottle works.

You know, the fact we've got them in there doing the hotel, the garage, that the site didn't end up with a bunch of cardboard painting clock apartment buildings is a huge benefit for everybody to involve.

But I think in general, they've been here long enough that they're no longer the new kid on the block, and it's time that they kind of step up and participate in the downtown development.

My first request is the same request I made before.

I'd like to see a commitment made to this prior to the permits being released that they fix that parking lot on the north side of 10th Street.

It is a mud pit.

Uh people are accessing it off of 10th Street by driving up on the sidewalks in front of the IPL station.

They go back and forth on 11th.

It's I, as the owner of the property at 11th college, and I was the one that put the parking spaces along 11th, bear the brunt of cleaning up the vandalism, everything else.

If, like the original commitment was made, the street was open from 10th up to 11th, the parking lot installed, it would make that corner of the area a little safer, a little better, a little cleaner, and frankly, I think they have the wherewithal to do it.

It's just a choice not to.

What's going to happen is when they start this new building, the uh variants they have that goes through December of 2026 will get extended.

So I'm looking at another two, three, four years of mud and crap.

And it's it's time to go away.

Two regarding the access lining to uh 10th Street.

Uh I went down there today on my truck and made a few use.

The first issue is that you cannot make a left turn U at where am I at here?

Not about at uh Carrollton and do it in the incoming the inside lanes.

Once they try to add a blister to make a left turn or left U-turn, they're gonna force traffic to drive and make that loop into the second lane.

So 10th Street on the south side going east is one lane, 10th Street going west on the north side is two lanes.

So there is sufficient room, but you have to cross both lanes, which will impede any type of eastbound traffic.

Um secondly, I think for westbound traffic.

Secondly, I think you know, this entire process is really going to put the burden back on the city of Indianapolis to reconfigure that intersection to make do for their building.

Um, the the access off of Bellefontaine, um, you know, uh I kind of did the count.

Access off of 10th Street, there's only one way in going from west to east, there's only one way out going from west to you know, farther east, making the use of whatever.

When you do the access in and in and off of Bellefontaine, you pick up the ability to go on exit both north and south, go to 10th, go down Mass Ave, go over, collect the St.

Clair to Fulton to get back to the interstate, and same for incoming traffic.

In the report, one of the things they put in there about how people will you know leave this building, make a right heading east, make another right on Bell Fontaine, then go down Mass Avenue to then go down to the intersection of St.

Clair College and Mass Avenue to get going north on college.

It just didn't gonna happen.

What we're gonna have is there's a continual problem with U-turns and traffic on 10th Street using this access point.

Uh as I drove over here at 515, traffic already is solid from uh Carrollton all the way back to college.

There is no breaks in it.

You know, there are you know it's people leaving downtown, heading to the east side, and you know, all this commentary about how there's plenty of access, plenty of space for U turns is incorrect.

Uh bottom line is they just don't want to change the location of the access point.

To that end, I brought something from uh I was hoping Susan Williams would be here.

Uh I stood in front of you guys on April 4th, 2007 with a building that I thought was immensely good looking, and Susan Williams, in no uncertain terms, told me if they were ever going to approve my building, I had to do better.

And it sent me packing back to Perkins and the Black Line Architects where we came up with a building, it still exists.

I was also told at that very same meeting when I was threatening to build maybe a four or five story building because that's how the land is a title, that if I ever tried to bring the point of making some sort of threat to the commission about doing something else, I'd probably never get another thing approved.

Bottom line is the only reason for whatever reason they want to exit on and off 10th Street is because they do not want to go through the burden of changing the plan, even though in so doing would provide better access to their property as well as not put the burden on the city of Indianapolis to rebuild 10th Street and not put it on the rest of the residents having to deal with the traffic of a flawed system.

So thank you, thank you.

Anyone else wishing to speak in remonstrance?

We're ready for staff uh comment and so uh Emily, sorry.

So just kind of reiterate um in terms of some of the couple of the recommendations that staff made when meeting with the developer between the last hearing and this hearing uh was to do some things to kind of trick the eye to try to bring that base down.

Um it was dropped four feet six inches, but there are some you know, there's always times that we're asking someone, hey, actually you need to try to make it look taller, try to make it look smaller.

So to try to bring that down, which they try they um with you know stronger horizontal lines, maybe better articulation to line kind of align part of it with that two-story building that was that's next door.

Um the other couple things that staff did recommend was um the commission had asked to see the material for the screen, um, and there is uh photo in there, so it's just a metal, it's a metal screen, so the ramps and the bumper, the concrete bumper walls will be visible behind.

Um staff did recommend that perhaps a different approach be taken with the with the screen.

Obviously, a ventilation is an issue, and you have to have a certain amount.

However, thought that perhaps something more refined or at least something that would cover the bumper guards either on the exterior or the the bumper walls themselves on the interior, something that would um be more aesthetically pleasing than just the mesh with the concrete wall.

Um, and they did indicate that you know perhaps they could look at something, but it might be in the future, and they wanted to have you guys weigh in on that.

Um in terms of so staff is is has suggested perhaps a recommendation of approval with with some design changes.

Um staff also did share again concerns about traffic one way in, one way out on 10th Street.

Um unfortunately DPW, I did follow up with DPW late yesterday.

They were working on another traffic impact study and had not had a chance to look at this memo.

They did share that they still have very strong reservations about the access in and out of 10th Street.

Um, and but unfortunately we don't have anything else from them because they have not had a chance to look at that memo.

So if the commission makes an approval, there is the potential that that access is going to need to be relocated based upon DPW's feedback.

Um, and so I just wanted to make you aware of that and I can answer any questions.

All right, thanks, Emily.

Questions from the commission, please.

Who wants to start?

No one?

Annie, please.

The one thing I would suggest I made this comment last time about um the parking lot across the on the north side of 10th.

Well, Larry just mentioned.

Um, I do think more effort needs to, and I think it would go a long way for those of us who live in the neighborhood to be sort of forward thinking about that, not like it being an afterthought.

I'm guessing it will be somewhat of a staging area because they're running out of staging area, so I suspect that will be a bit of that in the beginning.

I have to guess.

Is that probably what's gonna happen?

Correct.

I believe it will need to be used for stage during construction.

Okay.

Um so I guess that kind of changes that, but in the end of that, would depending on because I figured it might be a staging area.

There needs to be effort put forth to what that looks like in the end, whether it's lighting, all of those things protects everybody involved, you know, coming and going from the property and the neighborhood and all that, and and buildings like Larry has on 10th in college and things like that.

So that's one thing I feel pretty strongly about because I'm around the area, and um to his point, that commitment has been made kind of multiple times.

We'll clean it up, we'll make it look nicer, and we'll and to have such an amazing property and to have that kind of as an afterthoughts a little frustrating because you know, so much effort's put into great landscaping and all those things uh around the property.

So that would just be an ask that I have.

Thanks, Annie.

Other comments, please on the commission.

So I I continue to be concerned with this bumper wall, as you know, staff mentioned, and you even in the renderings, it's highly visible, and uh which you've taken great effort to decorate around it, but there's no effort to actually screen it.

So it looks like a bumper wall, you can see that it looks like a garage.

It everybody's gonna see the bumper wall, they're gonna see the cars moved around in there.

There's really no effort to have screened the garage, it's really just decorating the the screen in front of it.

So I would like to see more effort actually screening the garage rather than decorating the screen in front of the bumper walls.

So you know, it continues to be a concern of mine and will continue to be a concern of mine that you know that it's pretty clear that that's a parking garage, and there's not much effort to disguise it as anything else.

That's really the only comment.

I um I still have concerns with traffic coming out directly onto 10th.

I came in this way tonight, and the fire department actually had to go down the north side of 10th street because it was so backed up with it only being one lane eastbound.

Um traffic was a constant flow going eastbound.

So trying to get in that left U-turn lane, I think is going to be problematic.

Um I also agree with Anson, the I am still not convinced on the parking podium.

Um yes, you did kind of make an effort to kind of relate to the bottling company next door, but I still don't think that it's enough.

Okay.

Any other comments?

I'll just offer a couple of comments.

I'm I too am concerned about the 10th street access.

I is if you haven't gotten approval from DPW yet on this, I don't know how this gets approved, I guess.

I we're not gonna, I don't believe we should approve this, waiting for DPW to then deny it and then have to come back and do it all over again.

I I think this is uh an issue that needs to be resolved.

We talked about it last time as being something that needed to be approved by DPW.

And if they have great reservations about this, then I uh we're going to have similar reservations.

You obviously heard that this evening.

I guess a question, you know, without needing to flip the garage, isn't there a way just to have you drive through to Bell Fountain?

I I realize that there is some there's some sp uh I don't know if it's back of house space or whatnot that's on Bell Fountain.

Isn't there a way to just get a drive out there and not change your circulation and just continue on?

Um yeah, there would there would be a way to to do that.

We just felt that uh this access point was more visible and had some advantages to it.

Right.

But uh but I guess from a traffic standpoint, I mean you're obviously if everybody's relying on doing U-turns, it's gonna be a real challenge there.

You know, that I've been on the traffic there, it's it gets really busy, and I don't know how that's gonna work at five o'clock.

So go ahead, please.

Yeah, I was name and address just for the record, thanks.

Right.

Um just to kind of add to, I think, the the response to the question.

So, in regards to the traffic condition, I think what Aaron was mentioning previously.

Right.

We have a coordination with DPW, and to be honest, we are a little dumbfounded that this idea that there's severe reservation out there.

Because in our conversations with them, we specifically asked if there were severe reservations, and they told us no.

Uh, we in our conversations with them, they were quite proactive about 10th Street as the the in and out of the parking garage.

They did see there were pros and cons to each one, which is why I think as part of the submission, we also added um the staging drive, which actually showed that we had more staging if we entered and exited on 10th Street and some of that circulation and what um as well as what Aaron mentioned about the you know the left turn U-turn line uh requirements.

So I do understand there's concerns about it.

I don't think anyone wants to discredit any of those concerns, but I guess where that reservation has come has not been made uh clear to us from DPW in our direct conversations with them.

So it's not necessarily a stance that we're saying, you know, it's we're trying to avoid another situation.

It was that this situation was actually preferable logistics logistically, as well as to be honest, if we do have that thoroughfare lane that you're that you're mentioning, you're you know, as a suggestion.

Uh technically, of course, one would say yes.

It does impact uh where some of that mechanical space, you know, all the other bits and pieces of the building which you know aren't part of this conversation and to be on so there's there is definitely alternatives, but they are not preferred for uh an assortment of reasons which are leading this way, and which kind of hinge on this DPW response, which we have not heard.

Okay, I don't know, Emily or Meg, do you want to speak to that?

Yeah, I mean, I honestly have had limited conversations.

Um again, I I bought up a couple times and they've just explained they've got a lot of backlog.

Um, and so all what I can tell you is that basically they said we've gotten the memo, we haven't had a chance to look at it.

Um still don't at on initial look, do not like the 10th street in out, and said they were hoping to see something that might convince them otherwise, but had not had a chance and said we don't think we're gonna have a response for you by today today.

Yeah, okay.

Yeah, I guess that's the issue is that uh obviously the timing isn't isn't great because we were hoping to get a response from DPW, you know, tonight so that we could act accordingly.

I you know it's just to you know, knowing how many of these attorneys are likely heading north, I you know they're gonna be, you know, well, they're gonna quickly be going down, I would guess Bell Fountain, because they're not gonna be able to make these U-turns during traffic.

If I can comment on that like so we did look like if you're going to Carmel, Zionsville, north side of India, it is actually quicker to go further eastbound and out that way than do a U-turn.

So, like if you if you're going up north, it would be other better to go east or go east and then head south and hit I-65 coming back north.

Right.

Um, rather than do a U turn, try to go up college and fight that traffic.

So the data suggests they're gonna want to head east or head south.

Um another thing when we met with DPW, they said they are studying 10th Street.

They're actually look on the westbound 10th Street.

There's two lanes, but they're actually looking at taking away one of those lanes to add parking on the north side of 10th Street.

So that's something they're currently looking at.

And um, so they relay that to us.

Um so they have the suggestion of the U turn lane, so we've added that and are waiting for their feedback.

Um, but we're willing to do that, you know, for this project.

Right.

No, I understand that.

Yeah, I get it.

I think other because this is really a traffic engineering question and sounds of a debate.

So we do understand there is uh uncertainty with not having their formal response and can appreciate that situation and but it is something we're willing to from our conversation because it was so positive, we were willing to have as a requirement, you know, as part of that COA that you know, it has to be DPW's you know, blessing has to be there, right?

Because we have not heard anything that's yeah, obviously our staff has, and yeah, and that's the that's the challenge here.

Correct.

Yeah, I you know, maybe there is a way to craft it.

I don't know, I have to look at Meg to see if we can set it up so that if it doesn't work, then that then how does it work?

Yeah with a COA.

So yeah, I mean I ultimately that's your call on how you'd like to proceed, but I I really think that we should coordinate with DPW first, especially since it will impact the design significantly.

Right, and we've also heard a lot of other comments about the design itself that probably need to be looked at.

So I think that given the scale of this project, it's probably better to work with staff and then come back in October.

Yeah, I hate to you know keep pushing this along, and I know that's not what you're looking for.

I understand that, but I just this is such a significant issue with the traffic that you know, we've had these kind of issues before on other projects, and I really I wish that could have lined up this evening and it would have solved this.

Um obviously there's some conversation about the bumper wall and making the garage look a little bit more like a building rather than a parking garage and a building sitting on a garage.

So you want to address that at all?

Sure.

I think there's a the overall discussion if I understand correctly above in that fenestration.

Let's talk about it.

I guess it has to do with the materiality of the wire mesh and how that could be more opaque to a degree, there are open air requirements, but what that material is.

So if it's a wire mesh or a punch metal or another materiality within that fenestration, I think in our conversation uh with staff at staff level was that we're happy to continue those conversations and develop a material for that as part of that uh process, and it's also part of our requirement, I believe, currently in the COA for the district, is that whole facade has a physical mock-up that's being built for approval.

Sure.

So we do understand that material that's shown is not the final material, it's an image that we do need to coordinate, and we're happy to do that.

That material mesh may change to a perforated panel, you know, some custom design, it could be anything at the moment, it is just an inset panel to a fenestration of the facade.

And yes, it has to deal with we have a minimum requirement for openness for a garage, so there are different requirements as well as aesthetic construction.

So that's not an issue with us in terms of that collaborative approach and getting that through it as part of the process for our material submission.

Okay, yeah, go ahead, Mike.

Um, since Mr.

Jones has showed up twice now for this meeting, I just want to address that real quick.

So that as you know, that parking lot was heard under a separate COA case number.

They have until December of 2026 to finalize that.

So it is addressed in a separate approval if that helps.

Can you can you speak to what you're going to do with that property after you used it for staging and so forth?

Is your intent to to clean it up or get it to a place you could just speak to that?

Yeah.

Um 100% we are intending to uh clean up that area and actually refinish it.

The biggest concern though is as we've got two parcels left to complete to be honest, the largest uh concern is the adjacent this project at the um building two, is that we do need a staging area because of constrained site for this one as compared to the later staging is more critical where if we can use that site for staging, we have less interruption with everything else around the area compared to terms of scale.

So once that is complete, the intention is to finish off that uh across 10th Street.

And you would finish that before you're doing the I'll call it the last phase of your development.

Yeah, I mean the it would be correct that we would need to get the construction of this building would be.

Oh no, understand right.

So after this development of this building, is then that would be completed.

Okay.

So and that would be as part of that request for a separate COA to set that date.

That timeline.

Yeah, I just say obviously it would be very good if that could occur as a part of the end of this project.

So I just have a question.

Yeah, please, Annie, go ahead.

Um you say finish that, like what does that mean?

Like, what will it turn into when the staging and the project is done, if I may ask?

Um I don't like will it be a parking lot?

Well, what will it be?

Will it be a grassy meadow that we will read about in two future?

Well, Hendricks.

Aaron's put together a plan that shows a parking lot similar to like when we built buildings nine through twelve at the corner of College and Mass Avenue.

Before we built those buildings, you had a nice parking lot with the islands that had landscaping, lighting, all of that.

So it'll be the same as that.

Perfect.

Thank you.

I think I'd like to comment on that.

Um those drawings were approved.

We had a drainage approval, landscaping approval, and all that, and I think the timing was the biggest issue because I knew this project was coming, so I think it would resurrect those plans, I believe.

Yeah.

Thank you.

All right.

Any other questions from the commission?

Okay, final comment from the applicant.

No, no for the concept.

You guys, good.

Okay.

I think we're going to continue to October, even though I know that's not what you came here this evening to hear.

But I think we've got to resolve this traffic engineering issue as well as working on the garage a bit more with staff.

So I thought I'll uh just take a motion to continue the case to October 1st for the Commissioner.

Annie, thank you for the motion.

Chrisman, thank you.

The second any final comments?

All those in favor, please signify by saying aye.

Aye, any opposed?

Okay, thank you.

We'll see you next next month, and hopefully everything with DPW will be in a good place for everyone.

So thank you.

All right.

Um we'll move to applications which are to be heard new this evening.

Uh the first case is 2025 COA 252 Irvington.

The address is 373 Burgess Avenue.

Larry Dorfman is the applicant.

Is Larry here to come forward?

Yeah, please come forward, state your name and address and present your case to us.

Yeah, go ahead, please.

Okay.

Yeah, just step up.

It's okay.

There you go.

Uh good evening, everyone.

My name is Larry Dorfman, as you just heard, and my clients, uh Brad Amniano, DJ Smith, 11373 Burgess Avenue, I believe, which is in Irvington.

Okay.

Uh erect a two-story addition on the east side of the house.

It's kind of an unusual lot in that the excuse me.

In that it's bounded on three sides by streets, so it doesn't truly have a rear yard, as you might say.

The rear yard is actually to the east, which is to the side of the house.

In fact, several years ago, this uh commission approved putting a shed into the backyard, so to speak, which isn't to the east of the uh structure.

Another problem with putting a uh addition on any side of the house, whether it be north, south, east or west, is the setback lines uh for the streets on three sides, which prevent pretty much from doing uh much with the south elevation of the home.

That's even neglecting the fact that to add a two-story addition onto the house on the south side would be extremely difficult based on the architecture of the house.

So, with that in mind, the two-story addition that was been planned, would replace the non-conforming shed roof structure to the east with the two-story addition that would include a uh kitchen and an owner's suite above it.

Uh the house is a nice home.

It's been uh taken care of well by these owners, and they've renovated the exterior of the house as was approved by this commission a few years ago.

I don't know if you've got the four pictures of the home before the renovations of the exterior, but it was a spectacular renovation, and the home looks terrific today.

And some of the pluses of allowing them this addition, in addition to the removal of the Chevrolet structure that's now on the east side of the addition, we'd also eliminate a lot of uh concrete, particularly the concrete on the south side of the addition, which is a a uh parking area, because we'd be erecting a uh one and a half car garage with a new driveway.

Uh that kind of sums up what it is.

Um like to ask DJ to step forward also and have a few words about their caretaking of this residence.

Uh name and address.

Hi, my name is Don Smith, and I'm the owner of 373 Burgess.

Um bear with me, I've never done this before.

You're fine, go ahead.

But um, this is the first home that I bought back in 2012.

Prior to our purchase of the home, the home stood vacant for five or six years.

Prior to that, it was a rental property for five or six years.

Ever since the construction of this house, the the upkeep of the house has just kind of gone downhill.

And in fact, before we bought the house, no one walked on Burgess Avenue.

No one, no one went that far because it wasn't safe enough.

And then we came in and gave it a little bit of love, uh, facelift that it needed, and now properties have been converted to ownership versus rentals on our street, and I think that that's made a positive impact in the neighborhood.

Um, I'd like to highlight just a couple of things that were written in the report that I think uh need to be mentioned that since the construction of this house, there is a historic precedent for development on this house.

And I know that the district guide, I mean we are aware of what the district guidelines say.

We're not we weren't constructing these plans without like knowing, oh yeah, like you know, additions are supposed to be on the on the back of the house.

We knew that going into this, but um the historic precedent that has been set ever since the construction of this house is that all development on the property has been to the east.

Um I think that that needs to be noted.

Also, anyone who visits the property and actually stands there and sees the traffic flow along Ritter Avenue going north and south, and on Rawls Avenue behind us going east and west, it is extremely unsafe to develop a property, any accessory structure or a house along the property line of uh Rawls Avenue.

There's no curb line, there's nothing that prevents people.

I mean, they drive through our easement already that um is uh from the road to the I I that that's not safe.

So from a safety standpoint, from a historic precedence standpoint, and um you know I think that uh we have been uh the best stewards that we can be of this property since it was built, and I think that um the needs of our house have changed, and we want to grow all over their house, and in order to do that, we need more space.

So I think that's it.

Okay for now.

A couple quick additions to what DJ just said was that I know you haven't been in the house, but it would be a tricky house to add on to in the way the floor plan lays out.

The existing area that was the original kitchen, promise uh you if you see if you've seen any pictures of that, I think supply some uh was pretty much a uh eight by ten area, which would be a little hard for most of us probably to have a family or enjoy our kitchens.

So we needed more space, and that was the prime mover of trying to find a way to add on to the house.

Um addition, placing the garage in that area.

We didn't want to place it too close again to Rawls Avenue for the same reasons that uh DJ mentioned.

The traffic there is uh difficult, and like they like to be able to park one car at least in the garage and one car in a driveway.

So just wanted to throw those ideas out at everybody.

Any questions?

Okay.

Anything else?

Probably a lot, but that's all right.

Okay, I'll ask for anyone wishing to speak in support of the application.

Anyone wishing to speak in remonstrance to the application?

Hearing none or looking for staff comment, Shelby, please.

Staff is not in support of this request as the aspects of the addition and the placement of the garage are in direct conflict with the plan.

Um per the plan addition should be constructed on the rear away from the front facade, which is intended to limit the negative impact on the visual integrity as well as the physical form and mass of the historic structure.

Um overall, regarding um the garage, we find the design to be acceptable, but the placement isn't appropriate.

The plan states that accessory building should be located behind the historic structure, and so we've recommended that that just be pushed back more towards that rear or southern property line to be in better compliance with the district plan.

Um and so for this evening, we have recommended the commission discuss the proposal, and if the commission is open to the addition and garage placement in this case, we recommend a continuance to allow time for any updates based on the commission's feedback, and I can answer any questions.

All right, thank you, Shelby.

Questions from the commission, please.

Go ahead, I'll jump in if you don't.

Well, just to recognize the difficulty of this site, it's got three fronts really.

I mean, Rawls is probably an alley, but it it's actually a street.

So I mean that's a particularly difficult site.

So back, I would say is relative on a building like this, and I would say the east is as back of the building as possible, and and plus they're sight constrained by the back of the building.

There's uh there's really nothing, no room behind the building to if you say south is behind.

So I I don't think we should be constraining homeowners to not being able to build anything.

So I I the only problems I really see with the the just some discrepancies between renderings and and elevations where you know the the door on the garage was different between the rent the elevation and the rendering.

Uh the rendering is probably better.

I think the carriage house style garage door is probably more appropriate than the the plane um garage door shown, and then the trim on the windows uh is shown as it exists on the elevations, but then on the rendering is shown squared up.

So it just maybe some uh consistency with some of those depictions would be helpful.

But overall, I I think you know if the garage is appropriate scale, the addition is appropriate scale, and I think they're kind of landlocked, and the addition going to the east as well as the garage is about as appropriate as you're gonna get for this site.

So I think there probably needs to be a little bit of recognition of that comments from the commission?

Mike, please.

This might be a question for staff initially.

Um the uh location of the garage as it's proposed on the drawings.

Is it your position that it should be farther south?

So that it's not aligned with the house on east-west but closer to Rawls Rawls Avenue.

Okay.

Did you provide like I guess guidance on how close to Rawls you would prefer it to be, like to the property line or um no?

We didn't get into specifics as far as a dimension.

Um I think in an ideal world, if it could be the let's say the north elevation of it could be towards that rear elevation of the house, so it is at least as close as to behind the house as possible.

Um I know the owners were concerned about having driveway for their vehicle, so if the commission is open to you know, somewhere in between there, I think that's also open for discussion.

And then for the applicants, is the um the length of the driveway as it is designed as at a set distance for a number of vehicles, or is it possible to maybe pull the garage farther south?

We've discussed that.

Excuse me.

Um I don't think there's any issue with moving the garage a little bit further south.

I'd like to keep I think the garage somewhat close to the mud room, so it's not so it's rather short walk on in bad weather.

But other than that, I don't think there's any objection to moving this somewhat to the south.

Okay.

Um, I would just stand that I agree with three frontages.

You've you don't have much to work with, but um if I'm understanding staff uh if if the uh accessory building for lack of a better word were more subservient to the Burgess Avenue uh frontage, maybe uh let this let the house stand close to the street and the garage stand a little excuse me a little bit farther back, maybe that solves enough.

I don't leave it to the rest of uh the commission to add any color, but I think that might be one option where it wouldn't be so problematic from a uh proximity standpoint.

Okay, other comments from the commission.

I'll just offer similar comments.

I I actually think the addition is fairly handsome and does a pretty good job of finding its spot on the building, so I I'm not objecting to that.

And and I guess I'm trying to understand the need to push the garage.

You know, frankly, if the front was to the west, the garage is in the right place on the east.

So it's you know, you have this dilemma of three fronts, and it sort of feels to me like it's in the right spot because it's behind the uh it's sort of behind the house when you're looking at it from the west.

Now, obviously, you can look at it from the north and from the south, you know.

I it's a really challenging site, and the only place to add on to the building is really to the east, and I think that the design of it is appropriate.

So I you know, like Anson said, there may be a few discrepancies between you know the drawings and the renderings, but I think overall it seems like it's a pretty good solution from my standpoint.

So I I don't know if the small discrepancies can be just handled, you know, with the staff and just approve it this evening rather than going through a continuance or um and I do believe um they mentioned there were some discrepancies just in the lack of ability of their program.

Yeah, um, but I think if the commission is comfortable with staff working out those details, like as far as the garage door design and things of that nature, I think we can do that with the final construction drawings.

Okay, I think that that's probably the way to go here.

I don't there's not enough here to continue it, I don't think this evening, based on what I'm saying.

So any final comment from the applicant?

No, appreciate the thoughts you're putting into it, and uh some of the same thoughts we had when trying to put the thing together as well.

Yeah, I would just add that like no one enters our property from Burgess Avenue.

If we're if the concern is about approaching the house, and like it's not like other houses in the area where you drive up to the house and you turn in and you're coming in from the front.

The entryway to the house is the west from Burgess, the west from Rolls or North and South on River.

So I think that like you had mentioned about the placement of the garage, like depending on where you're looking at it, it's it's in the right place.

Right.

Okay.

All right, Meg, I'll take a recommendation then, please.

Sure, and just so the applicant is aware you have not seen this recommendation because I just wrote it.

So pay very close attention.

There's three stipulations at the very beginning.

One is to work with Shelby on final construction drawings.

You're gonna need to get with her to do that.

We're also gonna have you have a pre-construction meeting to go over all the finishing materials and then meet on site to stake out the footprint of the addition in the garage.

Um I'm gonna read this, listen to it, make sure that you're okay with it, because in fairness, you haven't seen it yet.

So staff recommends to approve a certificate of appropriateness to construct a two-story addition on the east side of the house and a one and a half story detached garage with a driveway, alter opening and existing roof line on the south elevation, demolish an existing shed roof addition on the east side per submitted documentation.

Do I have that all right?

Shall we?

Yeah.

Okay.

We haven't consulted around the porch on the air.

One moment.

We forgot about your porch on the back.

So let's I'm just gonna modify this real quick.

After alter opening and existing roof line on south elevation, demolish existing shed roof edition on the east side, and add a new porch, right?

And a new porch on the south side.

And for site work as well.

Per submitted documentation is subject to, and I have nine stipulations.

Most of them are boiler point stipulations with those three stipulations I mentioned earlier.

And the one note, which is the owners responsible for complying with all applicable codes.

This is a requirement prior to issuance of permits.

So make sure you follow through with Shelby after that.

And we'll get you a hard copy of this.

Absolutely.

You'll get your certificate of appropriateness with all of this on there.

I just want to make sure you understand what you're agreeing to tonight.

Okay.

Okay.

Are you all comfortable with what she just read?

Yeah, I've done that before a few times.

All right.

All right, I'll take a motion for the staff recommendation is red, please.

Thanks, Anjanette.

Get a second.

Annie, thank you.

Any final comments?

All those in favor of the motion, please signify by saying aye.

Aye, any opposed, same sign.

Okay, thank you.

Good luck with your project.

Real quick for everyone's sake.

This is recorded, so you can go online and listen to this again if you missed anything and had any questions about it.

Okay, great.

Thank you so much.

Okay.

All right.

Go to the next case, which is 2025 COA 297 Chatham Arch, Massachusetts Avenue.

Uh, and variance 2025 VHP 007, address 401 East Michigan Street.

Kurt Green is the applicant.

Kurt is here, and uh so is Craig.

So name and address, please.

Present your case.

Good evening, Kurt Green, um, studio access 618 East Market Street.

So we have uh a drawing set um put together, so it's our it's our building, um, or correct building, not my building.

Not my building effective.

So I'm guessing everybody here knows where this building is, but we're a intersection of Mass and New Jersey and Michigan Street on the east side of the building.

There's a gate that was not actually the original access to the building, but it's become that for the past about a hundred years.

And so um this is just showing the demolition of the existing, the portion of the existing wall that's having some structural issues.

The eccentric load of the existing gate is not adequately supported by the foundation underneath that portion of the garden wall.

So demolishing that portion of it and then also taking down the existing gate, which is from I believe the late 70s or early 80s.

And then replacing like with like when it comes to the wall itself, so we have a brick match and a mortar match, um, and then same height as existing, and then same basic structure when it comes to the gate.

The only thing that's changing as far as structure goes is having uh a track below the gate that the gate actually rests on, so that we don't have an eccentric load anymore, because that was the problem all along.

And then if you go to the next slide, um you can see the elevation.

So a big change on the gate is actually dividing it into thirds, and we'll have some renderings later on that explain why we're doing this, but um it provides a lot of flexibility that's um that's much needed at this location, and then the design of the gate itself is is changing dramatically, so um, instead of having the very functional, very orthogonal setup that's they're now having something that echoes the existing vocabulary of the building.

Um so here this what you're seeing is um a breakdown of the elements of the gate panels, which I'm happy to dive into later, but I think it might be better to start with the the next slide that shows the inspiration for the gate.

So the original entrance to the bureaucracy was actually on the west side of the building through this wrought iron gate that's still on New Jersey Street.

It just kind of goes nowhere because of that townhouse that was added around 1910, I believe.

So drawing inspiration from that wrought iron gate as well as from the muntins throughout the building because there's so many stained glass windows that have these really magnificent patterns to them.

So finding a lot of geometric inspiration from those elements, and then as far as materiality goes, um, there's already been work done around the building by um a local artisan named Quincy Owens, so we've talked with him about material possibilities.

So we've talked with him about material possibilities.

Um working with plasma cut aluminum plate for the patterns themselves, and then having um two by two steel tubes as the perimeters of these gate panels, and then infilling them with um perforated uh um colored powder coated aluminum to have a little bit of transparency but still durability.

Um we looked at like glass and plexiglass and stuff like that, but there are concerns about the maintenance of it.

So having the perforated aluminum gets us the best of both worlds with again the little bit of transparency and then the durability of it.

So here you can see the the gate as it would be when it's all the way closed.

So again, similar setup as what we have now with the trolley trolley system overhead, but again, adding the track below to get rid of the eccentric load, and then dividing the gate into thirds, and then if you go to the next slide, it'll show you the different arrangements uh up against the existing gate.

So there's the existing gate top left and then top right.

You see if there's just an employee, a Ratskeller employee or athenium employee showing up.

You don't need to open the whole gate, and that's how it is now, and it's it's a problem because it's so heavy.

And so opening just one third of it allows one person to get through and then just close it behind them.

And then when there's more semi-public events in the beer garden, like a wedding, sometimes there are weddings back there.

Um, opening up just the middle panel creates that sense of entry, um, a little bit of privacy, and also I think a pretty pretty magnificent entrance, sense of entry into the building between the two contours, and then of course, um, for evenings when it's open to the public for pup for light music can be opened all the way.

And then it would show up pretty much the same way on the inside.

It ends up looking a little bit different just because of the way the materiality is kind of the materials stack up in the panel arrangements.

Again, happy to dive into more detail on that if needed.

And then I believe the last slide is just the view from Michigan Street.

So, like you can now, you can see a glimpse of it from Michigan Street, and when there's lighting in the beer garden, it would it would come through because again we have the perforated aluminum panels.

Okay, anything else?

I think that was everything.

Okay, all right.

Anyone wishing to speak in support of the application?

Anyone wishing to speak in remonstrance to the application?

Okay, staff uh comment, shall we?

Staff doesn't typically support requests for walls and fences that exceed the district plan's uh recommended height maximums for those um elements.

But since this gate would align with the historic masonry wall, we're comfortable with this proposal.

Um, and I did want to mention um we received a letter of approval today from landmarks for the design, um, and I have a copy of that if any of you would like to review that.

Okay, thank you.

Questions from the commission.

I think it's quite handsome and should be a very nice addition to the uh to the alley.

So I think it'll be quite nice.

Any final comments?

Go ahead, Anson.

Please the only concern I had is for the the finished material on the steel beam support.

Um that is something that you know what it's gonna get a lot into the flat surface.

Are you modifying the top at all to shed ice and snow, or is it just gonna sit on top there?

Because you gotta take some really tough consideration of how you're gonna coat that because it's a too big a beam really to be coated in in the shop, and so you're probably gonna need to field coat it somehow.

Um maybe some sort of field uh fluoropalymer or something like that.

But uh I would just advise that you take some uh consideration on how you address that ice and snow that'll sit on top of that because it'll wreck that beam.

Thank you.

That's that's it.

Okay, any final comment from the applicant?

Good.

Okay, ready for staff recommendation and Meg, please.

Staff recommends to approve a certificate of appropriateness to repair an existing masonry wall and replace gate and for a variance development standards per the submitted documentation and subject to the 11 stipulations and two notes in the staff's written report, and then I'll ask for various recommendations after that.

I'll take a motion for the staff recommendation is read, please.

Thanks.

Kristen, thanks, Mike.

Any final comments?

All those in favor, please signify by saying aye.

I any opposed.

Okay, thank you.

And for the variance, staff recommends to approve a variance of development standards to exceed the maximum permitted height of a gate per submitted findings effect.

Okay.

I'll take a motion for the variance presented by staff.

Excuse me, by staff.

And Jeanette and Anson.

Thank you.

Any final comments?

All those in favor of the variance, please signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Okay, thank you.

Good luck with your project.

Thank you all.

Yep.

We have no.

I'm sorry.

Well, Anson is he's got a light mic.

He's he's talking about it.

So I didn't want to.

Oh, okay.

All right.

Thank you, Chris.

All right.

I'm sorry.

No, no, it's fine.

No, it's no worries at all.

It's all good.

It's all good.

Yeah, what's the date?

We have no uh no preliminary reviews, but we have one case.

Uh work started without approval.

Uh the case is 2025 COA 282 Heron Morton place.

The address is 2106 North Talbot Street.

The applicant is Alex Alec New.

And uh Alec, it looks like you are here.

I just wanted to maybe uh state Meg, you might just uh state why this is a work started without approval.

It's not really an applicant issue here.

Just want the commission to be aware of that this evening.

Do you want me to do it?

Yeah, you want to do that.

Yeah, go ahead, Morgan.

Yeah, that's fine if you would do that.

So in March of this year, we received a call from the co-chair of the Heron Morton Place Land Use Committee that work was being done at 2106 North Talbot, um, and they hadn't received notice about it, so they were asking us what was going on, what was happening.

Um I discovered that permits had been issued without a certificate of appropriateness.

Um freshly at 8 a.m.

on a Monday.

So I jumped in, I called up um BNS.

I asked for a stop work order to be issued and those permits to be put into abeyance.

Um, all of that was done.

Um work has stopped and has not continued since the discovery of this.

Um what I do know is that the foundation was dug, and I believe footers were poured, um, but nothing else has continued since then.

Right.

And Meg, you're going to be following up with BNS.

You might just mention that.

Sure.

Um, we we are aware that the permitting process can sometimes get um tricky with the release of permits a little too soon without the final sign-offs or without certificate of appropriateness.

We had a couple incidents with that this year, so I've already reached out to BNS to provide some training to their team to help educate them.

Um, they do have a pretty significant turnover rate over there, so it's probably a really good idea for us to have that conversation with them and make sure that they understand what we are what our expectations are and what the um statutory requirements are.

So we'll be doing that here soon.

Yeah, so I just want to make sure the commission was aware of this.

The applicant was not really at fault.

He had a permit, he thought he was doing what he was doing properly, but obviously we've got caught it.

He's come here this evening, obviously.

So go ahead and present your case.

I'll get Alec name and address, please first.

My name's Josh Smith.

Um with RG Development 1073 Oliver Avenue.

Um property owner hired us to help him get through the permit process.

Uh we do the permits on a lot of his other homes as well.

Um so back, you know, like everybody said back in January.

We apply for permits, got approval.

Once we had permits, they closed on the lot.

You know, once the lot was closed on, sale transfer happened, they started construction.

Here we are, six months later.

Um I don't know if this is allowed, but we only got a copy of the staff report yesterday.

Um, so we've revised the plans to address four out of five of their comments.

I don't know if I can pass those out or not.

Yeah, sure.

Yeah, seven copies.

That's yeah, we can get out before our printer died.

Yeah, that's okay.

Um I did email those to Morgan earlier today as well.

Okay, go ahead, please.

Okay, yeah.

So our plan is to build a two-story duplex.

Um, these guys they like to build vertical duplex instead of side-by-side duplex.

Um so they we have worked with staff over the past several months to make some additions to make it make it look like it's a side-by-side duplex, like from the front.

You know, the doors are on the opposite sides.

They typically do the both doors on the same side with the stairwell and the the outer wall.

Um they've added some windows, change a bunch of height.

Um, from the time of the staff report till now, they did change the roof pitch to a 912, so that got it up to 33 feet to match the neighboring houses.

We also switched the front porch from an open wood deck with screening around it to be a concrete, a poor concrete foot porch to match the rest of the foundation.

Standard siding materials, you know, smooth hardy fiber cement, um architectural shingles, uh there will be a parking pad in the rear.

Uh we did modify that for staff's request to be wide enough for three cars instead of two cars.

Um I don't think there's enough room to widen it to four cars.

You know, they could probably go property line to property line, but I don't it would be really tough to get a fourth car in there.

So um in the front yard, um working with the land use committee at the Harry Morton Place.

Um actually the weekend that all this everything unfolded back in March, um, they were doing a big tree planting and beautification neighborhood beautification project, and they were gonna plant a tree in the front yard to replace one that was removed over the past couple years.

Um so we're working with them.

Um our plan show I think it's a white oak tree we're gonna put in the front yard.

Uh work with them to replace that tree.

Um I think that's on page two or C2.

Yeah, so some of the other changes we made, we moved the air conditioning units around to the rear and added a second sidewalk around the side.

Typically they do one sidewalk and then you know the air conditioning units are on the opposite side of the house on the sidewalks.

So yeah.

Okay, anything else?

Okay.

Anyone wishing to speak in support of the application?

Anyone wishing to speak in remonstrance?

All right, seeing none, Morgan, you want to give us the staff comments, please.

Yeah, so um the newest plans that you guys have were sent to me after day F packet went out, so that's why they were not included in that.

Um, originally my comments were that the applicant has worked with staff and the neighborhood throughout the application process and introduced some of our design changes and comments made during these meetings, um, but there were still items that had not been addressed, and I'll go over those and the ones that he did address.

So the overall building height did get increased to match the rest of the block or fall within that range.

Um the front building wall setback does look like it came up to be in line with the rest of the block.

Uh 2118 north tobit was added to the site plan.

The front porch floor was originally going to be um like a wood lattice framed out but open wood deck.

Um and then the last one was the quality and detailing drawings, which I have not fully gone into yet, but it does look like it got some of the stuff got cleaned up, and the last item that was not addressed was that secondary doors should be added for each of the units, either side or rear doors.

Uh, this was a staff comment as well as a land use committee comment, more so on means of egress, but they do fit Indiana building code.

Um so overall, staff was recommending that the case be continued to the October 1st uh hearing to allow the applicant time to make the changes above and recommend that were recommended by staff and any additional changes from the commission after discussing the case.

Um thank you, Morgan.

Questions from the commission, please.

Green light, alright.

Here we go.

Um is this a rental?

They will be rental units, yes.

Was it presented that way to the neighborhood?

Yes, and they were supportive of that.

They have not told me they're not supportive.

I've not seen a formal approval letter or anything yet.

Um suspected it was a rental because the vertical property regime for duplexes requires separation of the utilities and things like that.

So I'm not super supportive of build to rent in residential neighborhoods, but I don't think we really have purview over that, so I'm not really sure that's a decision that we can really zoning.

Right, that's what we can speak to.

Right.

Um I think that's really my only question or concern.

Other questions from the commission?

I will give one clarifying point.

I have not gotten an official letter of support from land use yet.

I don't know if they're planning on doing that, but the last I heard from them, they gave me the last comments that they had for RG.

Um, but I did not receive official support from them.

Okay.

And I guess that it's uh can you tell me what the materiality is?

I'm just trying to get a handle on what the is it some kind of siding or what do we yeah?

The um is it board and batten or yeah, it's gonna be board and batten panels, but the fiber cement panels with the lath strips over the top to get the board and batten look, and then the lower portion is horizontal fiber cement.

And it maybe my eye is off, but it doesn't look like the windows are symmetrical to the gable.

It looks like they're just slightly shifted to the left a little bit.

Is that accurate?

Or just seems like it's just a touch off.

I don't know if it's the drawing or I I think what throws it off is that the the dual gable frontage there, and so on the first floor how the one door is off to the far right, and it's not it's not set in with that bump out on the front wall.

Yeah, as I look at it though, it looks like the right side's wider than the left side.

It's got a full board between the left window and yeah.

I think I think if you could the other thing is that I think you're gonna want the window sill to be a little bit higher than the roof flashing and of the porch.

I think you're that detail is gonna be a hard detail to accomplish.

And yeah, it it's a fine line of the building code because the the window if it if it's a certain heights, then it's gotta be tempered glass and all that.

Sure.

I don't I don't know if the porch needs to come down a few inches to allow you to flash that properly or whatnot there.

And then you said the porch was going to be lattice.

What did so what is it if it's not lattice?

Yeah, the original plan of it wasn't a lattice, it was like a two by two or pattern made out of two by two pieces of wood and then painted.

Um we did switch that in the set you've got in front of you to a port concrete foundation with a four-inch porch cap on top.

And so what's the Poche that I'm seeing below this porch slab?

This was the original set that was putting the packet.

I see.

Yes, this is the original.

Okay.

It it's like a a wood grid made out of two by two tree to pine and painted um treated pine per staff recommendation that's off the table now.

It's all right.

Yeah, I well, my sense is you need to work with staff a little bit more on this.

It feels a little raw to me as far as the detailing.

Um, and obviously, there's a lot of homes that have been built in here in Morton that are pretty high quality, and I just this feels a little rough to me as I'm staring at some of the detailing and the sill, there's no real sill on the windows, and feels real kind of flat to me right now.

So if you could work with staff on just some of the detailing and try to get this a little more refined, because you're going into a neighborhood that's really done pretty well here with their with their new homes, and so just work with staff and try to get the detailing a little bit tighter.

It's really hard to tell from the documentation, it's just a little bit uh uh sketchy on some of the elevations and so forth.

It we usually see a little higher quality on the drawing, not being critical, but just suggesting that it might need to just come up a little bit so that we can understand it.

The window sizes on the side are there's a lot, there's not very many windows, little tiny windows, and so try to work with staff and and see if we can clean this up just a little bit and then come back and on October 1st.

Here would be my recommendation.

Just to add a little bit to that, is that neither of the elevations actually match the plans when it comes to um the the weight of the line work.

Uh so those of us that read plans are having a tough time understanding where the setback is for the especially where that door is.

It's we know that there should be a dark line there, and right it's shown kind of that way on partially on the streetscape elevation, not shown at all on the actual elevation.

Uh I think it we just need something that we can actually read that shows what the the building's gonna be.

the plans when it comes to um the the weight of the line work uh so those of us that read plans are having a tough time understanding where the setback is for the especially where that door is it's we know that there should be a dark line there and it's shown kind of that way on partially on the streetscape elevation not shown at all on the actual elevation i i think it we just need something that we can actually read that shows what the the building's gonna be the trim shows up one way in the streetscape elevation different way in the actual elevation we just need like I said some drawings that we can we can actually read yeah so just work with Morgan and try to get that and then we'll likely get you through the next time but just need to need to get a little more detailing here yeah go ahead please um this is sort of a sidebar but since the applicant is here I wanted to comment on this staff has worked with the Rivera group on several projects now and we have consistently had this same issue on all of the proposals it is my recommendation that you internally really have a conversation about the software that you're using we've had to spend a significant amount of time dealing with these little minutiae details that need to be accurately shown as I'm looking at them on the screen I'm finding new ones so it it's really something that it investing in a program that helps you prevent these sorts of things is a worthwhile investment presenting to the commission.

So I'm sure you'll be back with other projects so just please give that some serious consideration.

Okay any final comment okay all right uh we'll I'll take a motion for the continuance of the case to the October 1st meeting thanks Annie get a second please Lisa thank you any final comments all those in favor of the continuance please signify by saying aye aye any opposed okay thank you we'll see you next month any final business Meg okay all right thank you always stand adjourned