Good evening. I would like to welcome you to the September 28th public hearing of the Board of Architectural Review. We appreciate those of you in attendance today. The Board was established by zoning ordinance in 1958. Our first historic district was Gratz Park. who now have a total of 14 historic districts. The board, which is appointed by the mayor and confirmed by the Urban County Council, is part of the Division of Historic Preservation. The Historic Preservation Office maintains a full-time staff to assist you with your projects. The board encourages and recommends that applicants use them as a resource. The Historic Preservation Office is located at 101 East Vine Street, Room 220. It is our procedure to consider applications in the order in which they are listed on our agenda. In each case, we will have a presentation by the staff and we'll hear any additional comments from the applicant. The board will then ask questions or make comments regarding the application and then hear comments from any other interested parties. The chair will then ask the board members to enter a motion. If you wish to address the board, please come to the microphone and state your name and address for the public record. We also ask that you write your name on the signing sheet by the door so that the information can be recorded correctly. I would like to note the following staff approvals before we begin our review of the applications. There are certain items that the staff can approve, eliminating necessity for all applicants to appear before the Board. There are a total of 16 approved applications noted on today's agenda. In the South Ashland neighborhood, 254 South Ashland Avenue, remove Dying Tree. 617 Boonesboro Avenue, renovate windows. in the Bell Court Historic District, as well as 141 Forest Avenue, renovate structure. In Ellsmore Park, at 663 Ellsmore Park, replace roof. In Northside, at 429 North Broadway, replace existing sign. 99 Hampton Court, renovate front porch. 454 West 2nd Street, replace driveway. 478 West 2nd Street, prep for painting. 411 West 6th Street, Reinforced Porch Foundation. In western suburbs at 411 West Short Street, Renovate Windows. 633 West Short Street, Repaved Driveway. In South Hill at 120 West Maxwell, Repaved Parking Lot. At 126 West Maxwell Street, Install Awning. 324 South Upper Street, Renovate Structure and Site. at Woodward Heights and 325 Madison Place and Stahl Satellite Dish and in Aylesford at 453 East High Street refurbished deck. We shall now proceed with the review of the applications for certificates of appropriateness. The first application on the agenda this evening is for 607 North Broadway to replace porch. Is that applicant here this evening? Please come to the microphone and introduce yourself. Hi there. I'm Chris Yeager. I live at 607 North Broadway. Thank you. Have you received a copy of the staff report and findings and had a chance to review that this evening? I have. Are you in agreement with their recommendations? I am in agreement with their recommendations. Very good. Let's see if the board has anything to ask of you or any comments to add. Any comments? I'm hearing none. The Chair would certainly entertain a motion. Mr. Chair, in reference to case number 02500607-E at 607 North Broadway, I'd like to make a motion to approve the application with the recommendations. number one final details of the three items which I'll read in just a second above can the findings be submitted to the staff for review and approval prior to the issuance of the COA and two all exposed wood be painted the three items are number one the spacing between the support post should all be equal as drawn there are three different dimensions number two the center lines of the support post be revised so that the bases of the post do not align with the edge of the existing concrete base. And number three, the proposed arch freeze of the porch, excuse me, the porch cornice be omitted. Thank you. Is there a second to the motion? I second the motion. Very well. Any comments concerning the motion? Hearing none, is there anyone here this evening to speak to this case besides the applicants? Seeing no motion, okay. All those in favor of the motion, please say aye. Aye. All those opposed? Very well. The motion carries. Thank you very much. Thank you. The next case on the agenda this evening is at 280 South Ashland Avenue, replace wall steps and retaining wall. Is that applicant here this evening? Good evening. If you could give us your name and address, please, for the record. John Boardman, 280 South Ashland Avenue. Great. Have you had a chance to review the staff's findings and recommendations? Yes. And did you agree with their recommendations? No. No. Just for speed's sake, could you identify which of the recommendations you disagree with? The repave of the walkway, which they recommended disapproval of. Okay. If you don't mind, we're going to move on to the next case and see if we can get through it quickly and then come back to this one, and we'll get the staff report and get into a conversation. Thank you very much. The next case on the agenda this evening is 333 South Upper Street, install paving, fencing, and landscaping. Is that applicant here? Come on down. Good evening. I'm Tony Barrett with Barrett Partners on behalf of the owner. Good to see you. Can we have your address, please? My address is 209 East High Street. Very good. Thank you. Have you had a chance to review the staff's findings and recommendations? I have. And are you in agreement with the recommendations? I'd like to talk about the tree well. Okay. The linear versus. Well, much like the applicant before you, now that we're all down just to these two, let's go back to doing it in order. And we'll be right back with you. Thank you. All right. Mr. Boardman, if you come back up and let's see. Actually, we're going to have the staff make their presentation, and we'll be right with you. Please. This is the project at 280 South Ashland Avenue. This is the drive, which had a, actually it was like a brick curb in that area. This is the sidewalk. This section right in the foreground of the entry wall was not covered with the brick. the basket will break but starting with the steps back to the porch was this is the proposed pavers that were to replace the brick wall right at steps to the porch This is looking back toward the original concrete walk is still in place, and the masonry pavers or the brick were put on top. Off to the left is the steps that were proposed to go to the driveway. and also seen at the driveways or the brick, excuse me, the stone curbing or edge that was placed. this shows actually the area that was to be paved with the pavers and the shaded area Here are the stone staffs and the stone edge and strip. On the 29th of August, staff received an email from the applicant request of COA application for pavers, for paver repair work proposed in the front yard of the property. Within two days of emails, it became evidence that there had been a misunderstanding between the words repair and replace. Work had already begun, including the removal of all the existing brick entry walkway and steps down to the original concrete walk and the brick curb along the edge of the driveway. In addition, staff learned in phone conversation with the applicant on the 31st that new stone was being placed along the edge of the driveway. The applicant immediately stopped that operation and submitted additional drawings and photographs. photographs. At this time, the applicants requested that the Board grant COA to replace the existing basket-weed brick entry walk and steps with paved lock, Oxford-tumbled pavers, replace the existing wood masonry steps between the entry walk and driveway with cut stone steps, and replace the brick curb along the edge of the driveway with natural stone etching. We've listed the guidelines for your reference. The findings staff finds the proposal to replace the brick paved entry walk and steps with cement pavers, inappropriate, not according with the guidelines. Guidelines 3-4B states, sidewalks, walkways, and curbs that are added or altered should be compatible with the principal and accessory structures of the property and surrounding historic properties. In the South Ashland Central Avenue Historic District, while the predominant material for walks is concrete, there are examples of both brick and stone walks on the street and in the district, but no cement pavers. Staff finds the proposal to replace the existing steps to the driveway and the curb along the edge of the driveway with stone to be appropriate within the guidelines. Recommendation staff recommends disapproval of the request to replace the brick entry walk and steps with cement pavers. And staff recommends approval as submitted to replace the steps to the driveway and the edge and along the driveway with stone. The apricot is here. Thank you, Mr. Janocchio. So, Sarah, if you'd come back to the microphone, I'm sure we have some questions for you. Sure. I'd like to hear your thoughts on this. Sure. You want me to go first? Yeah, go ahead. Okay. And I don't think he had some of the pictures I had sent previously of the brick that was kind of falling apart. I didn't know. They have those. Okay. If you'd like to bring them up, we can shuffle through and find those. We have the packet as well. Okay. You do. Ours are black and white photos, but there might be color photos available. First, I think in talking with Martin, who has been very helpful, we found out that the existing brick that was laid down was actually never approved. There's an existing concrete pad there, and the brick that was laid was actually we couldn't find an application, I believe, after talking with Martin in the files. So as I was here a couple of months ago with the issue with the tree, the gentleman I've been working with in leveling that space afterwards said, your brick's falling apart here. Do you want me to see if I can pop some of this up for you? Because I had been talking to him about doing some repair work on that. Well, next thing you know, repair turns into all the brick's gone. And you can see from the pictures the quality of the craftsmanship on the brick was terrible. I mean, it was really poorly done. It was actually almost a hybrid of cement and caulking material that had been used to hold the bricks down. You can see just with the uneven lines and kind of spottiness in between those bright spots, that's the caulking material that's showing there. So in removing that, I have been working with Artie Butompson on this for three months, trying to come up with a good plan to make the front of the home more aesthetically pleasing. The brick didn't match the brick of the home. It's virtually impossible to match the brick on the home. It's a very unique color and size, quite frankly, of brick that's on the home right now. So we were looking at something and actually found the pavers made by PaverLock, which are made to look like natural stone, and they're tumbled to look like natural stone, and we matched those, and that's my daughter. we made them to we looked for color that would actually match the foundation of the home as it does that picture skewed a little bit because they were wet that day I think but they're not bright concrete pavers they're very much the appearance of stone thank you very much board members Do you have any questions? This question is for staff. Do you think the original sidewalk was just a concrete sidewalk? Yes. I'm looking for a concrete sidewalk. Take it away from me. Excuse me. Now, hi. Certainly, I think that's most likely. The Ashland Avenue Central District, historically, I think has all started out with concrete walks up to the houses as well as the crosswalk sidewalks on the street. And I haven't seen this in person. I don't know if anybody could even predict in looking at the existing concrete if that is indeed what is under there, still a carryover historically of what was that. But it's very possible that what is under it is the initial sidewalk. Many of those properties have 100-year-old concrete jobs still tootling right along. but it is, I can see in the images and I'm sure you all did too it now, because of having that brick laid on top of it has this sort of imposed upon it surface problems right this appeared and seemed to be the most cost effective repair to the space and again, we were trying to remove some of the red from the front of the house if that makes any sense. There was a lot of red on red. We don't have shutters. The type of home that we have doesn't allow for shutters, so there's very little colored offset dark red brick. So that was the idea of kind of softening the color of the walkway. And just to be clear, I think staff's objection is not the color as much as the material. The concrete pavers are not common throughout the area. I don't think anybody disagrees that new pavers or new walkways is a bad idea. It's what is it made of. And even the color, I don't think the color is the problem. We can talk about that. But I think the biggest objection is the material itself. That's what the staff is reflecting in their report. and the neighborhood, because it does have a history of both its early concrete sidewalks and those who continued on, it also does have, as Martin indicated in his report, brick sidewalks that have been introduced along the way over time, and it has other types of paving systems, but it does not have concrete pavers. That's the real distinction, I think, in terms of comparing and keeping up with what's the character of the district. And this system in particular is a relatively modern thing. I mean, there have been pavers forever, but the way these fit together and the way they look and their kind of regular shapes is, again, they're tumbled to look natural. Yeah, but to put them all together and see the grid layout, you know, it's not a bad-looking thing, but it's not in keeping with the neighborhood. I'm sorry. Are the steps that go from the ground to the porch level, are they concrete or stone? Cut stone. Cut stone. And the stone is basically the same type that's used in the foundation as well. I don't know that to be a fact, but it looks similar. Okay. When you were looking at the different pavers, did you happen to look at maybe a paver that has a slightly smaller dimension? No. Okay. I think that that might help to begin with, If you look at it in terms of a slightly smaller dimension, did you look at all at some actual real stone pavers or anything like that, or stone paving systems? I don't think that he thought that that was a cost-effective option here. Okay. Well, it may not be. I don't know. I don't know if he had already looked at these things or not. We actually own these pavers, so now. That could be a problem. hindsight i think it's first of all i'd like to make it clear that i think the objection from the staff has nothing to do with your decision to make a repair i think everybody accepts that it's something you need to have i don't disagree with that yeah um i i have I think there's a difficult issue here for the board because, to me, the guidelines don't entirely support the staff's finding. And I guess I'd like to hear the other board members' reaction to this. But if you read the guidelines that are cited, the operative language consists of the following. sidewalks, walkways, and curbs that are added or altered should be, and I underlined this section, should be compatible with the principal and accessory structures on the property and surrounding historic properties. And when I read that, for me, for them to be compatible does not mean that something like that has to be there before. And I think that's an incredibly important distinction because I think that people should be able to innovate. And if you cannot use a material that has never appeared there before, then your opportunities for innovation are drastically restricted. So I would argue that this is an example where the compatibility of this material is being questioned, not because it's a material that has never been there before, but for other reasons, because I don't think that it having never been used before in the neighborhood is not an argument that could be used to prevent it from being used now. That's the way I see it. And then the following guideline, I think, also has some operative language that asks us to pay attention to it, and that is that sidewalks, walkways, and curbs that are added should not be visually dominant, intrusive, or suggest a false sense of history. So our responsibility, as I see it, is to determine if we think that this paver lock system is incompatible with the principal and accessory structure on the property and surrounding historic properties, which would give us a reason to support the staff in their finding, and or if the paver lock system is visually dominant, intrusive, or suggests a false sense of history. I would argue that it is not incompatible, but it's quite compatible. It's just a new material that hasn't been used in the neighborhood before. I don't think that means it's incompatible. That's the way I see it personally. I would also argue that it's not visually dominant, it's not intrusive, and it doesn't suggest a false sense of history. In fact, one could argue that it suggests a very real sense of history because it is a contemporary material and it is being used now. And so one could argue, in fact, that to put something else down there like brick would be erring in the direction of suggesting a false sense of history. So there is an argument for you guys. I would like to also note that both neighbors, one of which is an architect who used to be on this board, Sandy Pollack, signed this saying that he thought that the project was okay, as well as Prentice and Wheezy Douglas, who live on the other side of me, who have been 30-plus year residents of the home. So they came over and looked at it. I've talked to them through the entire process, and no one is opposed to the repair work. I think that we've had at least one instance before where a concrete paver, as opposed to a brick paver or anything, was allowed in an area that really had no direct history of the paver because it was still a concrete material, which did have a direct tie in history to the area. and I think based on what Graham was saying and the interpretation of the guidelines I can see where Martin was coming from very clearly but I also see where Graham's coming from and I think that this utilization of a historic material but in a new form can apply directly to this type of what Graham was talking about, innovation of material. So, you know, personally, I don't really have any problem with it. The only thing, I realize you already purchased these things, so I can see where there might be an issue. Yeah. I just felt that the style, the actual dimension of it is just a little bit big. If it was a larger area, like a full driveway or something, then the scale would be a little bit better. It's a pretty substantial walk, though, and it's fairly wide. Yeah, no, I understand. But as it narrows and goes down towards the street, it gets to be a smaller area. I mean, that's really the only objection I have. I don't think that really the material or the color or anything like that is much of an issue. I mean, personal taste, in my opinion, should have some weight. And that's just my opinion. My colleagues may not agree at all. Sure. But, you know, I do tend to agree with what Graham was saying about the material use. I have to say, Graham, that's a very good point. And I think that, you know, I have to agree with Rob as well. I think the scale is a little bit out, but, you know, I don't think it's detrimental. But, you know, Graham's, I have to agree with him about the visual dominance of the sidewalk. I think if you step back and look at the overall picture, I don't see this sidewalk being a visually dominant piece, especially being next to the driveway. But with Graham talking about the compatibility of material, I have to agree with you. I think the cement could be a compatible material for the fact that the original sidewalk was cement as well. So it was overlaid with brick, but really I think that the cement paver could be okay here. Thank you. Fortunately, I'm on the board with some pretty smart people. I think they've all made some very good points. I'll touch on those just briefly so as not to go through the whole conversation again but I do agree with what Graham has said in guideline 3, 4B the key word I think in this instance is compatible and it doesn't say match it it says compatible with what is there and of course after that there's a gray area that we can debate and that's what we're here to do I feel like the material you're trying to use compatible. You know it's not a dead-on match for everything that's there, but that's not what compatible means. There is an interesting contrast. The next guideline, 3, 4C, the word to hang on there, I think is intrusive and dominant. I don't think that we're talking about an area that is dominant. I think it is a different grid pattern than what is what is seen anywhere else on your property or near your property, that it is a newer, more modern take on how pavers would be put together for this location. But I don't think that it's so much that it is intrusive. It certainly doesn't suggest false history, which is something we always try to stay away from with new things. So I don't have a real bad feeling about it. I do agree with Rob, though there are some scale issues that if I were doing it myself, it might be a little different, but I think it's not bad to the point that I wouldn't allow what you've proposed. I'm happy that it's a dry system. I think you're going to avoid the big mess that you had with the pavers before. If you can avoid the temptation to put grout or anything in between them in the future, Right. You'll be doing yourself a big, fat favor. You know, the bricks that were there before had problems with free thaw, I'm sure. Looks like they've popped out and been patched forever. It was very poor craftsmanship, I think, more than anything. Well, it was just the wrong installation to start with. So after that, it's just going to have problems. All that is to say a dry system is much better, and I'm glad that's part of your proposal. Now, all the friendly chit-chat being out of the way, of course there's a process here that you're aware of. I'm glad you reached out and contacted Martin when you did. I wish it could have come out a little cleaner with the proposal before you did get into purchasing material. I think that's an unfortunate mishap for whatever reason that words got flipped around or there was misunderstanding there. But, yes, continue to use the process. You've been here before. You know how it works, so you understand. But all that being said, I don't have a big problem with what's been proposed here to be added. I will say I understand the staff's take on it and why they gave the recommendation they did, or I believe I do. But I also think we've got a pretty strong argument to overturn that, and then we'll see how that goes. Anything else to add? Does staff have anything else to add? Anyone in the audience to speak to this case? I have one more observation, and that is it comes from Rob's remembering that a concrete paver had been approved in the past. And it brought to mind for me the difference between this product and a concrete paver. and to my mind the difference being that a concrete paver is being an honest piece of concrete and this product is being dishonest in that it's sort of trying to look like stone and in fact has been tumbled in a deliberate way to make it look aged and so one could think about it as having a false sense of history in that the manufacturing process very deliberately creates something that's not really what it is. And so there's an example of where we could look at this and talk about it from that perspective, and the staff could talk with you about it. Had you gone to the staff earlier, that might have been part of the discussion, and you might have found a product. They may have been able to suggest a product that would be a little more ideally suiting the guidelines and ideally suiting the neighborhood in your home. So just an observation. The product could have been tumbled in order to protect the sharp edges and create an eased edge to the paver that wouldn't crack. Right, right. Or they could be faking the funk also. It could be argued both ways. Sure. I agree. And it works both ways, right? I've had to talk myself into using products with the same argument before, but it's an interesting point. Let's see what motion comes out of it. With no further comments and no one in the audience to speak to this case, the Chair would entertain a motion. Keeping in mind we have to cite a reference if we're going to overturn the staff's recommendation. I'll give it a try. Okay. I would move that in case number 00710280-L regarding 280 South Ashland Avenue, that we move to award the certificate of appropriateness and that we are making that decision based on our interpretation of Guidelines 3, 4B, indicating in our conversation that the material proposed is in fact compatible with the principal and accessory structures on the property and surrounding historic properties and guideline 3.4c indicating that we don't feel that the material or its application are going to be visually dominant, intrusive, or suggest a false sense of history. Thank you. Is there a second to the motion? I'll second that. Any further discussion of the motion? All those in favor say aye. Aye. All those opposed? Very well. Thank you. Motion passes. Thank you. Thank you. If your questions about the staff findings, if you have those narrowed down to a few points, if you want to identify those, we can have the staff's presentation centered on just those issues. Or do you want to talk about the whole kit and caboodle? It's purely the curve versus rectilinear shape of the two tree wells out front. Okay. We'll have Amelia speak to those points and then see what we find out. This is the property at 333 South Upper, and this gives you an indication of what the sidewalk looked like prior to the removal. Of course, we've seen this project several times before the board. They're finally wrapping up the exterior construction, and they are looking to do some site work improvements here. and to walk you through a little bit more of the front situation here. This is the existing sidewalk. You can see that there was two trees. Both of them are now removed. And so the proposal is to install new trees back in these same locations and to give them a bit more of a wider area for growth. They'll be in these locations in the proposals to install a curved tree well system. This is the rear courtyard picture. And this is its present state. Right now they've removed the sidewalks in preparation. and to give you an idea, this would be one of the tree well locations. And then the other one would be in this location. Most of these pictures deal with other issues, but to sort of familiarize yourselves with the project, this is the courtyard area. And looking back to where the Herbie Corral area will be located with the low brick wall in the foreground and then in the way foreground is the brick wall across the front. And here's the proposed site plan. These are the locations of the curved tree wells. This will be a green landscape area where this will be brick. Guidelines are included for your reference. Findings of the proposal to conduct changes to the front sidewalk and to install brick walkways, walls, walkways, patios, fences, gates requires further discussion. While the building's individual history is quite extensive and well-documented, its location in the South Hill neighborhood necessitates that the building's site work be reviewed in the context of the South Hill neighborhood. The proposal to install the brick in the sidewalk is in keeping with the South Hill Historic District. However, the proposal to install brick edging around the brick utility strip and curved tree wells and the green utility strip is inconsistent with the pattern development of the South Hill streetscape, therefore not in keeping with the LFUCG design guidelines. Many properties do have brick sidewalks and utility strips, and they're either original or consistent with each property's history. Some of these homes have the front step projecting onto the public lock, as in this particular case. The proposal to dress the front sidewalk by adding new brick edging suggests a false sense of history. SEF suggests the front sawgwa be consistent with the South Hill neighborhood and be brick with no edging. Guidelines 3-4-C state sidewalks, walkways, and curves that are added should be not visually dominant or intrusive and suggest a false sense of history. The proposal to install tree wells is within the guidelines. However, the shape of the wells needs to be reculinear and not curved to be consistent with the South Hill neighborhood. Guidelines 3, 4C, and 3, 6F respectively state sidewalk, walkways, curbs that are added should not be visually dominant or intrusive or suggest a false sense of history. In landscape, land features, and land formations, view sheds, and archaeology of vistas and approaches should be maintained, retained. The proposal to install the brick blocks and traditional iron gate is within the guidelines and consistent with South Hill Historic District Guidelines 3, 1E. and there are many brick walls in the South Hill Stroke District. The proposal to install this wall is consistent with the neighborhood. Final details of the gate need to be submitted. The proposal to install the brick walkways, courtyard, water feature, and landscaping is with the guidelines. The use of brick for paving along the 300 block of South Upper is visible in driveway, service walks, sidewalks, rear yard paving entry walks, even pub walks exist in the neighborhood. Reference Guidelines 3, 4B, and 3, 6E. The proposal to change the steps from the continuous run is within the guidelines and appropriate for this project in keeping with Guideline 2B1K. and the proposal to install the new hardy plank fence at the rear is consistent with contemporary designs of the structure and consistent with guideline 2B1K. Recommendation staff recommends approval for the proposal of the following with the conditions. The front walk be concrete and brick as proposed with no brick edging. Also, the tree wells be rectilinear in lieu of curbed. Final details of the front, back gate, stone steps, water feature come back to staff, and any all final details come back to staff or board. And the applicant is present. Thank you very much. If you'd like to come back up and give us your thoughts on these two elements. Okay. First, I just wanted to thank Amelia and Martin for their help in filing the application and follow through on communication. It was very helpful through the process. But basically, with regards to the tree well, we evolved ourselves as a design office to the shape, basically for a couple of reasons. First was to increase the size of the tree well for the health of the tree. The curve kind of allowed us to do that while minimizing a projection into the walk aisle along the building there. And also addressing the projection of the front steps from the building into the walk aisle. It allowed us to kind of maintain a scale for the space while kind of directing traffic around the tree wells, back in front of the steps and back around the tree well. It seemed to kind of flow. But also in doing so, we felt we were kind of respecting or reflecting the fan of the doorway, be it historically appropriate or inappropriate, I'll let you all address that. But I don't believe it to be a visually dominant element. I believe it to be a subtle design statement. But those were basically the thoughts in coming up with the curvilinear design. And I'm fine with removing the edging. We kind of debated about that internally as well. So we'll agree to that, of course. And also, by creating the curved shape, we were hoping to eliminate what we frequently have in Lexington on our urban sidewalks with a tree well is the cow path that forms on the edge of the tree well between the walk and the tree. And we were trying to establish a little more of a flow than you have in your rectilinear tree wells. So that was kind of the process we went through, and I'll let you all kind of advise as to your perspective. If you have any questions. Thank you. we may thank you anybody have question or comment to start with mr barrett yes uh in the event that since since you're in agreement that the brick edging would not you you're okay with eliminating that aspect of your design um what would be the condition at at the end of the brick run where it butts the tree well, would the brick just come to a stop there? Would you want to run the concrete out to the curb? Well, I was kind of debating about that when I was sitting there with Mr. Boardman's case. But I think we'll probably just use a metal edge or something to hold it in place without being a band across there. so it would be more concealed than the concrete. But if you all would prefer a concrete, I'm fine with that. But I kind of like the floating element, I guess, of the brick across the front of the steps there in the center. you're not going to be using any kind of iron grate around the trees well we talked about that too about wickets and things which are you find a lot in larger cities but we haven't proposed that at this point The size of the tree well, you know, there's been a lot of discussion within the profession. I'm a landscape architect. I didn't identify that when I introduced myself. But with structural soils under sidewalks, the effectiveness of those, But kind of the logic, the science now, I guess, is just good soil around the tree. You need so much soil around the tree. But that was our effort was to try to increase the tree well without imposing on the walkability of the sidewalk. I interrupted your question. Oh, no, I was just going to say, throughout South Hill, the tree planting, the initial tree planting in the last 40 years or so was done mostly in the late 1970s, mid-1970s. It was almost all the Bradford Pairs, thank you, because that's what the Neighborhood Association did. and they just planted wherever basically they could. There's not really a pattern to it. There are areas in South Hill where the area between the sidewalk and the curb is grass. There's areas where it is brick. There's areas where it's mud. There's areas where it has been planted with, we call it monkey grass. Lariope. Thank you. If you just look at South Upper and South Mill and then the perpendicular streets just in that area, there's probably about 60 different conditions of what's going on. So to absolutely say one way is historically correct or not is very difficult in this particular area. So first of all, I think that the brick in front is perfectly appropriate because that obviously occurs in many, many places throughout the district. The fact that the trees, for the most part, that have been planted in South Hill were kind of this quick afterthought, not done by professionals, I think allows for a sort of study of how trees should be planted in the South Hill district, how the conditions should be developed for ongoing tree planting. Because a lot of those Bradford pairs have all come down. There's a lot of places where there aren't any trees yet, and people have been sort of putting in wherever they could stick them in. So the idea of kind of opening up the tree well and using the arch form, although it is not something that's traditionally done in the South Hill District, I'm looking at it as that might be a really good solution for the ongoing tree planting in the neighborhood. And while it doesn't have any direct historical precedent, because historically the trees are just planted in line without any cutout for trees, that may be a really good solution towards maintaining the tree life of new trees as they come into the neighborhood. So all in all, what I'm saying is I don't really have a problem with this. I mean, it's referenced to the arch on the door and all that. Yeah, it works at that site, but looking at it in the larger terms, maybe that is a good solution for this particular area. Thank you. I'd like to just get some clarification on something you said earlier about the round shape of the area eliminating the cattle path. Do you mean if it were rectilinear, it would be as big as the rounded out area is and people would cut across the corners? Well, if it were rectilinear, we would probably bring it back to reduce the opportunity for that. Sure. we're kind of hoping to create a little more of a serpentine, I guess, foot traffic through there in hopes of eliminating that in that it's not a, you don't come to an abrupt and you kind of bend with it. And that was kind of the design logic for trying to dissuade people from walking through it. Sure. I agree with what Rob had to say about just you may be setting a better precedent than what's been done before in that sometimes the narrowest of strip is not the best place for a tree, which certainly has been the pattern. To make a home for the tree and the sidewalk is, I think, a nice thing to do for the tree. And if there's enough sidewalk, it works really well. And I think in this instance, you know, the plans are showing 5'2", plus or minus, at the tree to the house. And that's ample. I believe it's ample for the scale and where it is. So I'm not – I don't have a problem with the size of it. And the context with the house that's there, too, I think is a nice touch. so I don't have that much issue with this at all the brick edging you know I think there's some more thought to be done there and for the brick edging to go away is fine I would add that if that motion were to go through I think that the final details would have to come back to staff or to us for review to make sure just because it's new and different from what we've seen up until now if the brick edging were to go away. I'd want to know what the solution was for that. Other than that, I don't really have anything else to add or ask about. Any other comments? I have a question for the staff. When you were recommending against approval of the elliptical tree wells, were you thinking that by going to a rectilinear configuration that there would be no exception to the line made by the grassy area between the sidewalk and the curb or were you thinking that the applicant could in fact carve a little bit into the sidewalk but in a rectilinear fashion? In discussing this, I think we really were responding to what is the characteristic rhythm of the streetscape, and that it is rectilinear driven, whether grass or concrete or planting coverage on these strips and so forth, and that there really hasn't over time been a characteristic feature of coming into that sidewalk profile. We really didn't discuss, I don't think, the idea about if it were not the rounded edge, could it be a square that comes into the footprint. And part of it, there's been some discussion about the fact that these steps coming out into the public space and handicap accessibility of people traditionally, if you're in your wheelchair, you kind of like a straight shot. But that's not really possible on this property because of those stairs as an existing condition and obviously quite historic coming out into the step. And so it does necessitate that if a handicapped person had, that they will need to manipulate somewhat, which is possible. It's not that there's not room for that. But it's not perhaps your first and foremost solution to that. So mostly, though, to answer your question, I believe what we were responding to was what is the more characteristic rhythm in the streetscape, in the rectilinears? And there isn't a history of tree wells being carved up into the sidewalk? Not that we're aware, no. In the South Hill area, it's pretty uniformly rectilinear with narrow and a reasonably even sidewalk edge being on the outer side toward the street. So any kind of carving up into the traditional sidewalk space would be seen as something not characteristic of the... It would be a variation to the sort of existing condition. Now, South Hill is a very old neighborhood, as we all know, and as Rob was saying, it has a little of everything in terms of how those spaces are treated and so on. And one of the reasons you see reflected in our recommendation about using brick in what is traditionally the utility strip versus it being a green space, this process normally tries very hard to hang on to the green planting strip. But in this instance, the precedent is in place because it's been a paved surface for many years. It's had that sidewalk come all the way out to the curbing. And so it is consistent with how it's evolved to have it be a paved surface in that utility strip, if that helps you. I think the other thing about the South Hill District that causes that slight fluctuation in the sidewalk system is, over the years, I know that upper and mill have both been widened. And if you go up and down the streets, there's examples of the structures where the steps do protrude pretty far into the sidewalk. And in those areas, almost uniformly, if the utility strip was not already paved with concrete at some point, they've been filled in with concrete or with brick or something to allow people to go actually around the projecting steps. There's even a couple houses, I think, where they made a recessed doorway and pushed the steps into the house, so they wouldn't have to do that. But that, historically, is where the street line has been very straight. It's the actual buildings and their steps and their protrusions are what creates the irregularity along the streetscapes of those two areas. And I think that this building probably falls in that category where having had the street widened is one of the big reasons that the steps seem to project so far into the public sidewalk. Well, I was going to make two quick comments. One, I kind of agree with you, Rob. This could be a new way that that district could look at the way trees could be planted, which I think on this plan seems to be very nice. I actually like the curved aspect of these because it does talk about a movement instead of some rectilinear form that tends to be more of a blockage, at least in my mind. So actually I think I like the curved wells. I think that the intrusion of the wells into the sidewalk is going to lead to people walking over the wells, whether it's rectilinear or curved. I think it's just a fact, to tell you the truth, especially if what's in the well is anywhere near the same elevation as the sidewalk. I think people just walk across things. Maybe I've been too near campus for too long, but that seems to be the tendency. Maybe not. I don't know. I don't know if that lends you to consider a more walkable surface, something that's prepared for that, or if there's a great in the future here. I don't know what the best answer is for that. But given what's been said so far, as well as, as I said earlier, the ample width of the sidewalk, I really don't take issue with the size of the well. And I think there's a curve or rectilinear. I'm pleased either way, to tell you the truth. Good night. Can I suggest that probably one might think of the staff's objection as being much more about a concern about, I don't want to put words in your mouth, but this is what I'm reading. This is what I'm beginning to get a sense of, that the objection is not so much about the curve as it is about the projection of the opening into the traditional zone of the sidewalk. So breaking what in that neighborhood has always been sort of a consistent clean line between the grassy area, between the curb and the sidewalk, and the sidewalk itself. So for someone who is particularly sensitive to the community there, it might be understood that this, in fact, is a landscape or feature that should be retained or maintained. and that is the decision that, for me, that's the tough decision for me personally that is being made here. It has nothing to do with the elliptical shape or rectilinear shape. To me, it has to do with the fact that there is a consistent land feature there in that neighborhood that has always been defined by a simplicity along that edge and that this proposal changes. So you're basically saying that you think there's probably a good reason not to have any intrusion into the sidewalk with a tree well. Well, you know, I mean, I've walked around Southville a little bit, but I've never lived there, and I'm probably not nearly as sensitive as the staff is about this kind of issue. So in this case, I would sort of defer to them about whether this guideline is in fact being threatened by the proposal. Well, they are sitting right over there. So, staff, if you don't mind clarifying, I guess the question boiled down is, is the objection for them to cross the line that's always been there, whether they're rectilinear or curved, or is the curved issue separate altogether? Well, I think it's a valid comment that does tie into what the staff was responding to, which is the rhythm, which is a rectilinear rhythm. And hence, when you stand and look down Mill Street, Upper Street, that planting strip-sidewalk relationship has a flow to it, which tends to be very little variation in terms of curb, planting strip, sidewalk, framing a parameter. And so if you, whether with a curvilinear or a reptilinear piece, step toward the house, you are breaking that line in a linear interpretation. So whether the box side is square or curved at the top, if it crosses that plane, that's one? It would be breaking the rhythm of what has been characteristic of the South Hill area. Having said that, there are pluses, and it's a little outside of the staff's purview, but for trees to have as much growth capability as is possible, we don't misunderstand that more open and less paved could be a very positive thing for a tree. But if you're thinking of something that starts to step into that sidewalk being something that could be continued as a concept throughout the South Hill, you would in the long term be changing something that has been a character-defining feature for a long time. And the only other consideration, I guess, would be some of the properties where people might desire to do this, and I'm not suggesting we're not looking specifically at this property. We certainly are. But just thinking about the concept, they won't have enough space to still have a wide enough sidewalk for the needs of everybody and so forth and so on. So it would have to, as with all of our applications, be on a case-by-case basis. But I think the kind of defining rhythm does not step in toward the House, and that's what I think Mr. Pohl has hit very well in his comments. The staff would concur with that. Okay. Do you feel... Now what? I don't see anyone else in the audience to speak to this case this evening. Are there any other comments or questions from the board? Anything to add? I guess, Tony, do you have a strong feeling about that particular issue? I'd like to see. Do we have a photograph of the street? I'm not convinced that some of these other tree wells don't project into the sidewalk. Because the house right next to us, we had a hard time delineating where the utility strip is because their sidewalk is, I don't know if we tore it up or if it was bad before construction. You're referring to the house to the immediate left if you're facing the building? Correct. They're looking about the pictures. Okay. She didn't go down. She didn't go down. I think we're going to be out of here. I don't know if you can tell the difference, whether it's shadow or if it's concrete or grass. I don't have any evidence other than just that was my recollection. because when we were delineating the sidewalk utility strip to establish it on our side, there was some question that we had as to whether it was here or here, and I think that was the result of the sidewalk being cut where the tree was. I believe that further down Upper Street, but I don't know what the address is. Anyway, it's the house that is your Stillfield cabin, if you're going south. And then it's, I believe it's the house just south of Stillfield. Anyway, I mean, I know who lives there. Anyway, the point is that I believe they have put some trees in, but I think they have a grate that intrudes into the sidewalk. So the flush grate. So it is, I may be dreaming this, but it seems like the sidewalk, I mean, there's a walkable surface that goes across it. So the intrusion is there, but because of the grate, it doesn't really cut off the surface. Amelia is basically reporting, because she's the most knowledgeable of this on a day-to-day basis, that that is 365, did you say, Amelia? You think? Mr. Kovach is the one you're thinking about. Right. 371. It's one of the earliest houses over there. And why don't you tell them what you know? We approve these at staff level when they put the trees in, but he pretty much has what Mr. Barrett is referring to as a wicket around the tree, but it's in the utility strip area and not. Oh, okay. It's not a grade. It's vertical. Right. Because the way that sidewalk was poured, there's a bit of a walkway piece right out directly in front in the utility strip area that is sort of an entryway, so to speak. But the wickets are on the other side, and they do have the larobee or the monkey grass in that utility strip that is green. Okay. And so the sidewalk line is consistently held there is what you're, I believe, saying. Thank you. I think this is a really tough problem, but I'm going to suggest a justification for the request, and that would be that the property is a corner property and that one often sees deviations at corner properties. Corner properties often present elements that are a little more elegant or a little bigger or set precedents in one way or another. So there is an argument for an exception there. and personally I don't have any problem with the elliptical the issue of the ellipse the only concern I have is the issue of the penetration beyond the line of the sidewalk toward the house if there are no further comments questions from the audience or otherwise I would certainly entertain a motion. Well, Mr. Chair, in reference to case number 19450333-C at 333 South Upper Street, I'd like to make a recommendation to approve the application as submitted with the staff recommendation that number one, the front walk be a concrete and brick as proposed but with no brick edging. And that I'm going to make the tree well issue another recommendation. So that ends the first one. Number two, the front details of the front and back gate, stone steps, and water feature come back to the staff. And any of the details come back to the staff. As far as the tree well, to allow the curved tree well as submitted protruding into the sidewalk area, citing guidelines number 34C, 36A, 36B, 36C, 36E, 37A, and 37B. And that, of course, is without the brick edging. Could staff make a suggestion? Absolutely. That you consider in your motion just suggesting striking the second sentence in item one, just for further clarity. Okay. The second sentence in item one, which states also the tree wells be rectilinear and will have curved be stricken. Thank you. Is there a second to the motion? I second the motion. Is there any further discussion of the motion? All those in favor say aye. Aye. All those opposed? Very well, the motion carries. Thank you. Thank you. Next on the agenda this evening is 607 North Broadway to construct paved areas. That applicant is requested to postpone until October 12, 2011. Can I get a motion to that effect? So moved. Is there a second? I'll second that. Any discussion of the motion? Hearing none, all those in favor say aye. Aye. All those opposed, motion carries. The final four items on this evening's agenda have been withdrawn by the applicant, which leaves us with one bit of business at the end of the meeting, and that is, I'm sorry, I, yes, that's correct. Mr. Chair, if you wouldn't mind just noting the four addresses, those withdrawals, please. We can do that. The final four applications withdrawn from this evening's agenda are at 625 East Main Street. The application was to replace garage doors. 325 L's replace. The application was to replace roof and remove chimney. 200 East Belcourt. Construct outbuilding. 200 East Belcourt. Renovate garage to living space and construct patio. Again, all of those were withdrawn. The final order of business on the agenda this evening is the approval of meeting minutes from August 10, 2011. Present at that meeting were myself, Graham Pohl, and Ron Jackson. Have the three of you had the chance, well, the three of us. Have you guys reviewed the minutes from that meeting? I have. Yes. Do you guys have any comments? No comments. No comment? I have just one. A statement with my name associated with it lacks a verb and doesn't make much sense, so I just want to make sure that's corrected so nobody looks silly in the end here. If you really left the verb out, we'd be glad to fix your speech pattern, but I suspect it's very possible that we didn't quite catch all that. Well, I would at least like to correct the intent if it's possible. or the typo if that's the case. In the final sentence of the third full paragraph on page three, tell me when you're ready. It states, Mr. Hossfield stated, that having the peers a part of the house rather than a freestanding new object, that is competing element. And I think what I might have meant to say if I didn't say it was that Mr. Hussfeld stated that having the piers be a part of the house rather than a freestanding new object that is a competing element is preferred. Hold on. Seeing it, how many lines are there? Wait a minute, wait a minute, we're doing better. Okay. You said you were ready. We thought we were. It was a false alarm. We were on page four. Page three. We're now on page three. Third full paragraph. Last sentence, starting with Mr. Hossfield stated. Yes. I believe it should read, Mr. Hossfield stated that having the peers be part of the house rather than a freestanding new object that is a competing element is preferred. This time we have it. Wonderful. We'll make that change per your request and correction. Thank you. I appreciate that. Thank you. Otherwise, I thought everything looked hunky-dory. With no other changes being made to the minutes, I believe that concludes our business for this evening's meeting. Do we need to approve these? Oh, and then there's that. All the comments being gathered, do I have a motion to approve the meeting's minutes? So moved. A second? A second. All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Aye. Very well. They've been approved. That concludes this meeting and everything on the agenda. I would entertain a motion to adjourn. Motion to close meeting. Second. Very well. All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Aye.