# Board of Architectural Review - December 13, 2017 > Auto-transcribed civic record · December 13, 2017 - **Permalink**: https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/meeting/4417 - **Source video**: https://lfucg.granicus.com/player/clip/4417?view_id=14&redirect=true - **Date**: 2017-12-13 - **Last revised**: December 13, 2017 - **Length**: 11,403 words > ⚠️ **Auto-generated content.** Audio from the official Granicus video was auto-transcribed with OpenAI's open-source Whisper large-v3-turbo model, run locally by The Lexington Times. Structured facts were extracted with GPT-4o; the narrative summary was written by Anthropic Claude. Verbatim wording may contain errors. See [methodology](https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/about/methodology) or [report a correction](mailto:editor@lexingtonky.news). --- ## Meeting Overview The Board of Architectural Review convened on December 13, 2017, with Mr. Chair presiding over the session. The meeting addressed three main agenda items, including a review of minutes from the November 15, 2017 meeting, staff approvals, and Certificate of Appropriateness applications. The board conducted 10 motions and votes during the session, though no public comments were received. All three agenda items were handled as informational matters, suggesting the meeting focused primarily on administrative business and updates rather than contentious decisions requiring extensive deliberation. ## Attendance The following members were present at the December 13, 2017 meeting: • Mr. Chair • Miss Murphy • Miss Tate • Miss Armstrong • Mr. Poll • Miss Lenore • Miss Kerr All members were in attendance with no absences or late arrivals recorded. ## Votes and Decisions The meeting included ten motions for certificates of appropriateness, with nine approvals and one disapproval. All votes were conducted by voice vote with motions made by the Chair. **Approved Applications:** • **14600364-b** - Certificate of appropriateness for 364 Park Avenue passed [timestamp: 00:00]. The approval included the condition that any changes altering the project must be resubmitted to staff prior to starting affected work. • **37670318-d** - Certificate of appropriateness for 318 Lake Alley passed [timestamp: 00:00]. Same resubmission condition applies for any alterations. • **18800440-j** - Certificate of appropriateness for 440 West Third Street passed [timestamp: 00:00]. Includes the standard resubmission condition for changes. • **11670275-v** - Certificate of appropriateness for 275 South Limestone Unit 110 passed [timestamp: 00:00]. Standard resubmission condition applies. • **11670275-q** - Certificate of appropriateness for 275 South Limestone Unit 120 passed [timestamp: 00:00]. Standard resubmission condition applies. • **11670275-r** - Certificate of appropriateness for 275 South Limestone Unit 130 passed [timestamp: 00:00]. Standard resubmission condition applies. • **11670275-s** - Certificate of appropriateness for 275 South Limestone Unit 140 passed [timestamp: 00:00]. Standard resubmission condition applies. • **11670275-t** - Certificate of appropriateness for 275 South Limestone Unit 150 passed [timestamp: 00:00]. Standard resubmission condition applies. • **18800412-e** - Certificate of appropriateness for 412 West Third Street passed [timestamp: 00:00]. This approval had no additional conditions. **Disapproved Application:** • **08760137-d** - Certificate of appropriateness for 612 West Short Street failed [timestamp: 00:00]. The motion for disapproval was unsuccessful, though the specific voting details were not recorded in the voice vote format. All motions were made by the Chair with seconds from unidentified members. The voice vote format did not capture individual member voting positions or exact vote tallies. ## Contested Items The December 13, 2017 meeting featured two significant contested applications that generated heated discussions between applicants and board members. **Trex Fence Installation at 612 West Short Street** The board engaged in a heated discussion regarding an application to install a Trex fence at 612 West Short Street. The applicant made arguments in favor of approving the composite fencing material, despite it not being permitted under current historic district guidelines. Board members cited existing restrictions that prohibit Trex and similar synthetic materials in the historic district. After deliberation, the board disapproved the application due to the guideline restrictions, maintaining consistency with established preservation standards. **Vinyl Window Replacement at 209 Dantzler** A contentious debate arose over an application to replace original windows with vinyl windows at 209 Dantzler. The applicants presented arguments emphasizing safety concerns and functional improvements that vinyl windows would provide. However, board members opposed the proposal, noting that vinyl window replacements violate historic preservation guidelines designed to maintain the architectural integrity of structures within the district. The replacement of original historic windows with modern vinyl materials was deemed inappropriate for the main structure. The board ultimately disapproved the application for the main building, upholding the guidelines that protect historic window materials and character-defining features. Both contested items reflected the ongoing tension between property owners seeking modern materials for practical reasons and the board's responsibility to enforce historic preservation guidelines. The board consistently prioritized adherence to established standards over applicant preferences, demonstrating their commitment to maintaining the historic character of the district even when facing opposition from property owners. ## Review minutes from November 15, 2017 The board reviewed the minutes from their previous meeting held on November 15, 2017. This agenda item served as an informational review of the prior meeting's proceedings. No specific speakers were identified during this portion of the meeting, and no transcript timestamp was available for this discussion. The review appears to have been conducted as a routine administrative matter without significant debate or concerns raised by board members. The outcome of this agenda item was informational, indicating that the minutes review was completed without requiring any formal action or amendments to the previously recorded proceedings. ## Staff Approvals The board reviewed various staff approvals for renovations and replacements in historic districts during this informational agenda item. This item provided an overview of projects that had been approved by staff under their administrative authority, allowing board members to stay informed about ongoing preservation activities in the community. The discussion covered multiple renovation and replacement projects that had been processed through the staff approval process for properties located within designated historic districts. These types of approvals typically involve routine maintenance, minor alterations, or replacements that meet established guidelines and do not require full board review. This agenda item served an informational purpose, allowing the board to maintain oversight of staff decisions while ensuring transparency in the approval process. No specific action was required from the board members, as these items had already been approved through the appropriate administrative channels. The staff approval process helps streamline routine preservation matters while ensuring that more significant or complex projects receive full board consideration. This system allows staff to handle straightforward cases efficiently while maintaining the board's role in overseeing major preservation decisions that could impact the historic character of designated districts. ## Certificate of Appropriateness Applications The board reviewed various applications for certificates of appropriateness for construction and renovation projects located within historic districts. This agenda item served as an informational discussion regarding pending applications that require board approval before work can proceed on historically significant properties. The applications under consideration involved construction and renovation projects that would affect the exterior appearance or structural elements of buildings within designated historic districts. Certificate of appropriateness applications are required to ensure that proposed changes maintain the historic character and architectural integrity of these protected areas. During the discussion, board members examined the details of each application to determine whether the proposed work would be compatible with the historic nature of the surrounding district. The review process typically considers factors such as architectural style, materials, scale, and visual impact on the historic streetscape. This agenda item was categorized as informational, indicating that the board was receiving updates on the status of applications or conducting preliminary discussions rather than making final approval decisions. The applications may have been in various stages of the review process, from initial submission to final consideration. No specific concerns or detailed debates were documented for this portion of the meeting, suggesting the discussion focused on procedural matters or routine application reviews. The board's consideration of these applications demonstrates their ongoing responsibility to balance property owners' development needs with historic preservation requirements. The certificate of appropriateness process serves as a critical tool for maintaining the historic character of designated districts while allowing for appropriate modifications and improvements to historic properties. --- ## Decisions - **14600364-b** — passed (0-0): Approval of certificate of appropriateness for 364 Park Avenue - **37670318-d** — passed (0-0): Approval of certificate of appropriateness for 318 Lake Alley - **18800440-j** — passed (0-0): Approval of certificate of appropriateness for 440 West Third Street - **11670275-v** — passed (0-0): Approval of certificate of appropriateness for 275 South Limestone Unit 110 - **11670275-q** — passed (0-0): Approval of certificate of appropriateness for 275 South Limestone Unit 120 - **11670275-r** — passed (0-0): Approval of certificate of appropriateness for 275 South Limestone Unit 130 - **11670275-s** — passed (0-0): Approval of certificate of appropriateness for 275 South Limestone Unit 140 - **11670275-t** — passed (0-0): Approval of certificate of appropriateness for 275 South Limestone Unit 150 - **18800412-e** — passed (0-0): Approval of certificate of appropriateness for 412 West Third Street - **08760137-d** — failed (0-0): Disapproval of certificate of appropriateness for 612 West Short Street --- ## Full transcript Resubmit changes to staff or board for review and approval prior to start of work. Do I have a motion to approve the application? Mr. Chair, regarding 364 Park Avenue, case number 14600364B, I move to approve the application for certificate of appropriateness with the following conditions as recommended by the staff. Number one, that if any changes are made that alter the information submitted, that changes shall be resubmitted to the staff for review and approval prior to the start of the affected work. And number two, that once reviewed by other LFUCG divisions, that changes shall be resubmitted to the staff or the board for review and approval prior to the start of work. Do I have a second? Second. Any further discussion of the motion? If not, the chair will call the question. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed, nay. The motion is passed and the certificate is approved. Turning now to case number 37670318-D, 318 Lake Alley in the Constitution Street Historic District. Is the applicant here? Mr. Lundgren, it's been a while. Mr. Chairman, thank you all, ladies and gentlemen. What we're asking approval for today is to take an area behind the carrick house, which at one time was a parking area but was not owned by us, but we were able to acquire this small area in recent months, and we would like to take this graveled area and blacktop it, pavement. Okay. I believe that the staff has reviewed the application and has basically approved it subject to what I call the standard two conditions. Have you reviewed those conditions? Are they agreeable to you? Yes, sir. Let me read them for the record then. If any changes are made that alter the information submitted, resubmit the changes to staff for review and approval prior to the start of the affected work. And once reviewed by the other divisions, resubmit changes to staff or board for review and approval prior to the start of work. And I believe there's not going to be a problem with you taking this to asphalt. We'll just have to wait until the weather clears up. Okay, just a moment. Any comments or questions by the staff members or the board members? Do I have any comments or observations from the audience? If not, I'm ready for a motion. Mr. Chairman, in regards to case number 37670318-D. Sorry, I thought I could get through that. Maybe I can't. Graham, if you'll pick it up, please. I've been managing not to cough all day. Okay. I hope you're not contagious. Are you all right? Yep, I'm good. You want me to? I'll finish the motion. Regarding case number 37670318-D at 318 Lake Alley, move to approve the application for certificate appropriateness with the following conditions as recommended by staff. Number one, if any changes are made that alter the information submitted, that you would resubmit the changes to staff for review and approval prior to start of any work. And number two, that once reviewed by other LFUCG divisions, resubmit the changes to the board for review, staff or board, for review and approval prior to start of work. Thank you. Do I have a second? I have a second. Any discussion concerning the motion itself? Then I'll call the question. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? The motion passes and the certificates approved. Thank you, sir. All right. I'm going to step outside and get a drink of water. I'm going to drink your fountain. Okay. Thank you, Sarah. I can sympathize. It's happened to me, especially when I was doing a hearing which is awkward sometimes. Let me call now the case number one eight eight zero four four zero dash J 440 West 3rd Street. Is the applicant here? Step forward please. If you'll state your name for the record please. Angela Forsey with Greystone. Okay Miss Forsey if you'll pull that microphone down towards you. There we go. Thank you. I believe this application has also been approved subject to what I call the standard conditions. Have you reviewed those conditions? I have. Do you agree with them? I do. Alright. For the record I'll simply note the the standard conditions are if any changes need to be made after work started that altered information submitted resubmit the changes the staff for review and approval prior to the start of the affected work and secondly once reviewed by the other divisions resubmitting changes the staff for review and approval prior to the start of work. do i have any comments from the board members do i have any comments or observations from the audience if not then the chair is ready for a motion mr chairman relative to case number one eight eight oh oh four four dash j at 440 west 3rd Street. I move that we approve this application for the certificate of appropriateness for the work proposed in the submittal and reviewed and approved by the staff with the following conditions. The items number one and two that you just read. And do I have a second? I think you've finished your motion. Second. All right. Any questions or comments about the motion itself? If not, then the chair will call the question. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed, nay. Motion passes and the certificate appropriateness is approved. Thank you so much for being here. Thank you. All right. I think we're coming up to a series of cases. Yes, we are. Starting with 275 South Limestone, Units 110, 120, 130, 140, and 150. We'll hear them together. What we will have to do is have a separate motion for each COA, however. Is the applicant here? Thank you. If you state your name for the record. Mike Warner. Mr. Warner, I believe that the staff has approved your application to construct this fence in front of all the units on Limestone Street, mainly because you're concerned about people loitering and coming into the premises. There are two standard conditions. Have you reviewed those conditions? Yes, sir. Are you in agreement with them? Yes, sir. For the record, I'll note if any changes are made that alter the information submitted, resubmit the changes to staff for review and approval prior to the start of the effected work. And secondly, once reviewed by the other divisions, resubmit the changes to staff or board for review and approval prior to the start of work. Is there any comments or observations to be made by the board members with regard to the sentence? Do I have any observations or comments from the audience? Yes, Mr. Dennis. You may have already noted, but Unit 130 also has a railing around the porch, which may take a different motion from the board. Is that with? 275, number 130. 130. When we get there. Okay, with 130, which attachment is that, Barry? Six. Number six. Okay. I'll note that when we get to six. Six. Or actually, because we'll have to do each of these individually. We'll have to do each one of these individually. Mr. Warner, bear with us. I will note for the record the conditions are the same for all of the applications. There are items four, five, six, seven, and eight. We'll start now with number four. will be case number 11670275-p what i will do is i'll call each number individually and ask for a motion starting with this one at 275 south limestone 110 do i have a motion mr chair regarding uh 11670275-p at 275 south limestone number 110 i move to approve the certificate of appropriateness conditional upon the items suggested by the staff. First being, if any changes are made that alter information submitted, resubmit the changes to staff for review and approval prior to the start of the affected work. And number two, if once reviewed by other LACG divisions, resubmit the changes to the staff or the board for review and approval prior to the start of the work. Okay. Ms. Murphy? For purposes of expediting this, can Mr. Pol simply say items one and two as previously recited? Okay. I just want to make sure we can do that. Do I have a second on the motion? Second. Thank you. Any further comments or discussion? If not, the Chair will call the question. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed, nay. Motion carries. and the COA with respect to Unit 110 on 275 has been approved, 275 Limestone. Turning now to, I've got to get through all of it. Here we go. Attachment number five, case number 11670275-Q at 275 South Limestone, Unit 120. Do I have a motion? Mr. Chair, regarding case 11670275-Q at 275 South Limestone No. 120, I move to approve the application for certificate appropriateness with the two conditions as recommended by staff. Okay, do I have a second? A second. Any comments or discussion? If not, I'll call the question. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed, nay. The application is approved. Turning now to attachment 6, 275 South Limestone, Unit 130. Do I have a motion? Yes, Mr. Chair. regarding case number 11670275-R at 275 South Limestone number 130. I move to approve the application for certificate appropriateness for the metal guardrail and the gate and also the application for certificate appropriateness for the metal fence with the, both of those with the conditions as recommended by staff. Okay, thank you very much. Do you have a second? Second. Any further discussion? If not, I'll call the question. All those in favor of the motion say aye. Aye. Opposed, nay. The motion passes with respect to 275 South Limestone, number 130. Turning now to case number 11670275-S275, South Limestone, unit 140. Do I have a motion? Mr. Chair, regarding 11670275S, 275 South Limestone, number 140, I move to approve the application for certificate appropriateness with the two conditions as recommended by staff. All right. Do I have a second? Second. All those in favor of the motion say aye. Aye. Opposed, nay. Motion passes. Turning now to case number 11670275-T at 275 South Limestone, Unit 150. Do I have a motion? Mr. Chair, regarding case number 11670275-T at 275 South Limestone, Number 150, move to approve the application for civic appropriateness, again, with the two conditions as recommended by staff. All right. Do I have a second, please? I'll second. Any comments or discussion? If not, I'll call the question. All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Opposed, nay. Motion passes, and the certificate of appropriateness is approved. I think we're done. Thank you very much. Mr. Warner, thank you so much. Thank you. Okay. All right, turning now to our next case, attachment number nine, case number 18800412-E412 West 3rd Street enclosure of a rear screen porch is the applicant here the applicant is not present she was planning on being here but she has come down early okay I believe that you have submitted recommendation without any conditions is that yes sir the work is already completed all right and it's oh it was oh well um so send first and then get permission i take it all right yes uh do i have a motion to approve this application or do i have actually do i have in conversation discussion about the motion about the application itself. Do we have a photograph of the completed porch? Can you throw that up on the screen just to show it to us? And when was it constructed? The new construction was completed within the last month month and a half this is 412 this is as it existed prior to the new work exposed columns there there was a screen porch in this hey barry you might you might speak into the microphone sorry Yes. So there was a screen porch there, and we were actually called out to look at some windows and discovered that the porch had been enclosed. And? Another view. Okay. All right. Apparently we have no other pictures. There are. There we go. Technology, you gotta love it. There are actually images also in your camera. Of the enclosure? Okay, I'm sorry. I didn't see them, so that's why I was asking. There are? With the door and the hardy plank. Excuse me. I'm looking, is this picture you're talking about that is the completed construction? Yes. Okay. So this is in the location where the screen had been. So there's a new door and the clapboard siding on this front wall. wall and then it's not visible but through here in this location okay any comments or any comments or observations by the staff members Anything else? Ms. Tate, did you have? No, I said I finally understand it. Okay, all right. Yeah, it was a little confusing. I'm not happy about the fact that she went ahead and did it without getting the COA, but it appears to be in conformity with the guidelines, And so I don't think we need to delay consideration of this application any further. Do I have a motion? First of all, let me ask, do I have any questions or comments from the audience? Chair, I'm losing it here. Mr. Chair, what are you doing today? I'm not doing it. No. Go ahead, Sarah. Relative to case number 188-004-12-E at 412 West 3rd Street. I move that we approve this application for certificate of appropriateness. Turn your mic on, Sarah. for the work proposed in this middle and reviewed and approved by the staff with the following conditions there are no conditions no conditions oh all right do i have a second second okay the motion is stated to for the record is that to approve the certificate application as recommended by the staff. There's no conditions to it. Any further discussion? If not, the chair will call the question. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed, say nay. Motion passes and the certificate is approved. Turning now to our next application. I think Ms. Lenora wanted to be present for this application. Would you go check on her? Go check on her please. We'll take a short break. Thank you. We'll be right back. Let me call case number 08760137-D 612 West Short Street is the applicant here. Yes, sir. If you'll state your name for the record, please. Jeremy Bates, resident 612. All right, Mr. Bates. The application as submitted by you has been disapproved by the staff. I'm assuming you want to be heard on this? Yes, sir. Okay. But our procedure is to have a presentation first, and then you can make any comments you wish to make. Ms. Armstrong? I want to familiarize you with the property. So this is 612 West Short Street, and over the last two years, staff worked closely with both the present applicant and the previous applicant, which is the current owner's father, on restoring this structure. And you've seen many of the work come before the board. So we did roof replacement, renovation of a rear addition, new refurbishing the storm the existing windows installing new storms and renovate structure then demolishing a garage and constructing the garage in the last element that was that was approved was to install a fence and then last I guess the beginning of last summer this past summer we found that the fence that was installed was actually a trex material fence it was um can you explain what that is um trex is a composite material and typically you see it on a decking scenario but you in this capacity it's actually an upright vertical surface and the applicant has actually submitted information about this trex fencing that you'll see in your packet he submitted this to sort of explain what that is and the the difference is typically we were able to use trex material on rear decks and then specifically this rear deck that has been installed has trex but when it becomes a vertical form it becomes a vinyl material it has vinyl in it as a part of its composition versus the vertical surface or the horizontal surface does not okay not being able to see it except through these uh display you say it does it have an overall vinyl appearance to it well as you see in the photograph so this is um as you see this is iron fence and then you can see the fence location new fence location this is the existing fence that has installed that is of the trucks material so that what we're looking at right there is tracks that is trucks and then in a fence form. And then this is on the side of the structure. And as you see on the other side of that masonry wall into the garage. This is along the alley. And you can see this is the fence in question. Just sort of a little bit more detail. It does have a wood grain to it. Just another image. Amelia did you say it did have a wood grain? It does have a wood grain to it you know the faux wood grain. It would be really helpful to have a small piece of it to see the surface finish up. I think Mr. Bates brought a piece with him. Mr. Bates, if you'll bring that up so we can look at it while Ms. Armstrong is talking. And I have close to the pictures as well. Okay, thank you. All right. Do you have a one of them? Is it painted? I can text your email. Ms. Armstrong, is it painted? I'm sorry, excuse me. Has it been painted? I believe not. This is the color it is. and you also will see an attachment that's been put at your desk which is the COA that was issued with a site plan of where the fence was located I'm sorry say that again there's the at your desk at your areas there's the certificate of appropriateness that was issued with the site plan of where the fence is that fence was located Okay. Guidelines are included for your reference. The proposal to install trucks fence is not within the guidelines 3.1.D, which states fences of wood or boards for privacy should be located in rear yards and generally no taller than six feet and prefabricated wood fences in sections at eight feet wide by six feet wide. Fences with flat tops, dog ears, or gothic pointed top designs are acceptable. Stalk guide fences are discouraged, and fences of PVC, vinyl, or synthetic material are not permitted. The use of a trex fence instead of wood is not within the character of the western suburbs historic district, and the predominant material for fences in the historic overlay is wood, iron, or brick. The use of trex is not within the guidelines and provides imitation of historic appearance. It also has suburban feel, which is not permitted in the historic urban neighborhood. and staff recommends disapproval and of course the applicant is present. And let me point out the guideline D specifically states defenses of PVC, vinyl, or synthetic material are not permitted. Okay, Mr. Bates. first question is how did this happen i i came prepared to answer those questions okay all right it's always awkward to be in a position of where it's already happened and then we have to figure out what to do after that so go ahead and explain to me why this came about yeah i mean in previous meetings i actually sat here and listened to applicants that had to explain themselves and i never anticipated for myself to be in that same situation i would hope that everybody agrees that we have amelia would agree that uh we have bent over backwards to make sure that we submit we work with uh you all with her to make sure that we're following the rules and we did submit for the fence and um you know we're not professional contractors and the approval said we placed rear fence in the same location in rear yard. And I know there's a whole lot more to this approval, but that's the language that we used on the COA posting and what have you. And it didn't say it had to be a wood fence in that language. It obviously didn't say it could be treks or anything like that. There was no ill intent. There was no, I wrote down, send first and ask for forgiveness later. That was certainly not the intent here. Early on, we, my dad and I, we wanted to replace all the original windows and Amelia told us no she said you know she'd fight us on it if we came for you all to ask we could do it and so we went to great expense to refurbish those windows you'll remember hopefully hopefully you recall that on the garage we came in a couple meetings on the garage we wanted a larger garage we wanted something we got storage up the top we were asked to put it so we were asked to do as more of a carport we had reduce the structure we had to put metal roofing and we've got a garage but we certainly didn't get what we wanted and then everything else we i feel like we worked very closely trying to to you know do it the right way so we did the fence the intent was to put the fence up to us to have a a better structure than wood and if you i took some pictures uh if you want to look at my phone of uh other wood fences at the alley and they they're old so they're broken pieces they're warped, there's mold, the stain's gone. And so the intent of a Trex fence was, well, we're going to spend double the money and have a better fence that's going to last long, that's not going to have these issues that you get with a wood fence. Certainly did not think it was a vinyl fence, and all my research I've done since then, obviously, but in researching this, it's 95% recycled materials including wood reclaimed wood wood dust including paper towels even toilet paper it said it you know to me it doesn't i'm not a architect or a construction uh specialist of any type in the construction trade but the look and feel it's better than wood it's better quality it will last longer and it will definitely i mean i think it looks very good and it i think it the wood grain is there i've got a close-up picture if you'd like to see it uh it looks like wood for just the general person passing by so we think we've enhanced the beauty of the property with it it certainly matches the the work that we've done inside and outside the homes of the house so that's how it came about it was certainly no ill intent and I did not intend to do something wrong here. I did not intend to have to come and ask for forgiveness afterwards but we're basically throwing ourselves at the mercy of the board and asking for this to be allowed. Okay, thank you. Any observations or comments from the staff members or from the board members? Mr. Poe. You know, the problem is that we are tasked with assessing compliance with guidelines, and the guidelines are so clear on this in very few circumstances in which they are this clear. and so I don't see that we have the wiggle room to make an approval. The challenge, too, is that should we approve a synthetic fence in this case, the next time someone comes to us with a vinyl fence, for example, it would be very difficult for us to argue that there isn't a precedent for approval. So, and a vinyl fence is a very different thing from a Trex fence, just as a Trex fence is very different from a wood fence. So part of the problem is that the guidelines are very clear about it, And the other part of the problem is that we would be remiss to establish precedent that could be used to dilute future projects by inappropriate materials. Any other comments, Ms. Tate? It's the biggest problem for us is that most people probably would feel like it looked like a wood fence. Historians would know in an instant that it's not because it's not really grained. It's just textured like kind of rough sawn wood. and it's got that plastic sheen to it. And in a historic neighborhood, these buildings are, you know, between 100 years old and 200 years old in the different historic neighborhoods that we have. And wood fences, I don't think anybody that ever put a fence up on these properties thought that they would endure forever without maintenance and upgrading. And I'm just not comfortable opening the floodgates on this project. Because if we allow this to be done, you set the precedent for how you get it done. Do it and then go to the board. And so you see our position. Yes, I can see that concern. I hate to see you in this position because I know the money that you have in it. But I personally, on this board, cannot approve it. I'm sorry. Can I ask a question? Mm-hmm. So we're allowed to use hardy board for the siding of the home, and that's clearly a synthetic material. So why would something like that be allowed versus doing something like this? When there's a coat of paint on hardy board, it's true that dimensionally from front to back it's different from a piece of wood. But it doesn't have that artificial plastic texture or sheen to it at all. And it paints like a wood board would. And the availability of stable clapboard siding like that is more inferior than the board fin, the wood boards would be. I mean, they're still of a dimension and type of wood that with paint will endure. And that's part of our argument. This is a superior product than wood, and I can't answer the glean, the sheen look of it. But, you know, thinking after the fact that, you know, if hardy board was acceptable, certainly that when this house was built back in 1840 approximately, this, you know, that hardy board was not available. It was wood. Yeah. I mean, so that seems rational. And then on the vinyl, I mean, I guess when I think of vinyl, I think of the white plastic stuff that you see out of Lowe's and you see out in suburbia. And I mean, this is clearly not that. And so, I mean, I can understand the precedent, but maybe it is a good precedent to allow something like this. And if you drove down my alley, I mean, there's such disrepair. And if the appearance is so important, why aren't we out there enforcing people to fix the fences that are falling apart and the lattice fencing out in the back of some of the places? And do you see my – I guess I just don't understand it. I mean, I know I'm trying to justify and get out of a hole here, but none of that makes sense either. Ms. Lenore, do you have any comment? Or can you make a comment? I agree with my fellow board members. And I'm most worried about setting a precedent that if we accept it on this, then the next time we're going to see it and it's going to be vinyl or it's going to be in there and say, well, you accepted that. and it's it's just clear that in the guidelines it says they have to be wood metal or brick and the guidelines also when it comes to siding are clear about what you can do for additions for houses versus renovation so those are two different parts of the guidelines and this particular part of the guideline says wood so trex fencing has never been just one more question but trex fencing has never been that's never been allowed at all because my understanding was that it has been i don't have an example but i'm trying to recall what happened with the handover case the vinyl fence there did that go up on appeal that was actually that was vinyl and that was actually went on appeal but he's actually gone before the board again to change that material back to wood so that's not been resolved yet right pardon it was not resolved then by the uh board of adjustment well he got planning he won his appeal to retain the vinyl fence however he's gone before this board to change that vinyl fence to wood because of the fact that actually discolored and stained in the reflection issues but as far as you know um just quickly you know our process is not necessarily a process that tells you you have to remake or repair that's what code enforcement does. We're here if you make application for a particular project. And I think Ms. Tate is correct in the sense that for in this particular addition because you had another synthetic siding on the structure being able to replace it with another synthetic siding was an in-kind replacement that was permissible and I believe the discussion for the fence was sort of inherent that would be replaced with another like material of wood. Let me make an observation as well. First of all, I want to commend you for doing an excellent job of restoring a house that was in not very good condition when you bought the property. Wasn't at all. You have devoted a lot of time and effort to restoring a significant structure on that street. I am so sorry that you cut yourself into the situation. I will only make an observation that if you – have you ever been to Colonial Williamsburg? Been to where? Colonial Williamsburg. A little kid, once. If you notice, the point I'm trying to make is there are a lot of fences in CW. They're expensive to maintain. But I can guarantee you if you were there in that historic district and you walked across your fence and saw that fence in contrast to the other fences, you'd go, whoa, what's wrong here? We have a duty and obligation to try to maintain these historic districts the best we can with the materials that were in use at the time that they were constructed. wood fences was the predominant material was the only material quite frankly other than metal that could be used for fences to bring in a synthetic material like this really begins to interrupt the integrity of the historic district and frankly from a lawyer's perspective once you start trying to go down a slippery slope of loopholes and exceptions then to use an old expression once you bring the camel's nose into the tent pretty soon you have the whole camel and that's what we got here and that's my opposite i can't uh overrule the staff in this particular matter the there are very few absolutes within the guideline this is one of them i appreciate i just want to make my case and i appreciate you listening to me mr base i appreciate you being here and appreciate your trying to work with us thank you all right thanks okay all right any further comments or discussion do i have any ram we want to say something do i have any comments or observations from the audience i want to note for the record that there is a letter from mr Mr. Hoffman, who is basically supportive of the application. If there are no further comments, I'm ready for a motion. Do I have a motion? Oh, this is interesting. Well, you're not going to do it, are you? I'm not going to do it. I'd like to make a comment. In response to some of Mr. Bates' questions, you know, this is kind of an ongoing discussion. The cementitious siding for a long time was not approved. It took a while for the guidelines to catch up with that technology. Am I right, Amelia? And there's a current discussion that we've been having regarding a material called boral, which is used for trim and other pieces of buildings. And I think that, you know, you're coming to us at a point in time when the guidelines are still explicit about synthetic materials. I think that ultimately those guidelines will be modified in such a way that certain kinds of synthetic materials will be accepted in certain kinds of situations. But we're just not there yet. We had an extensive, the staff did an extensive examination of use of boral across the country, really, and determined that the claims made with regard to the material make it sound like it's the silver bullet for certain kinds of trim replacement and so on. but the evidence is still murky on that. And so we just have to be extremely cautious, and we really can't get ahead of the guidelines. The guidelines really need to be modified periodically by people who are more informed and more able to do the research that's needed to be done to be sure that they're not making an error by putting material out there that's inappropriate and will cause problems. So I just think it was worth bringing that up. It's not like your situation is in a vacuum. It's something that we deal with regularly and think about, And I'm inclined to move toward changes personally, but I totally respect that it has to be done with great caution and care. And finally, in interest of full disclosure, I'll just remind you, Mr. Bates, that you do have an opportunity to appeal these decisions. All right. Any other comments? Chair is now ready for a motion. Mr. Chair, regarding case number 08760137D at 612 West Short Street, I move to disapprove the application for certificate appropriateness. All right. Do I have a second? Second. Whoops. Excuse me. Any further discussion or comments? If not, the chair calls the question. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed, nay. The certificate of appropriateness is disapproved. Thank you. All right. I'm going to excuse myself before I have another coughing attack. Take care of yourself. It's winter. Doesn't sound good. All right. Turning now to our final case, case number that's on the agenda. The others have been postponed. We'll get to that in just a moment. Turning now to case number 30870111-D209 Dantzler Court at 7 Parks and Start District. Replace windows. Is the applicant here? Mr. Smith, come up. I assume you're Mr. Smith. And your wife. If you'll state your name for the record, and we'll give your wife a chance to get up here. I am Justin Smith. I'm Amber Smith. You all are going to have to speak into that microphone, and it's one of those microphones where you really have to speak directly into it to be heard. Got it. All right. This is the application, and I understand you've been working with the staff. You were in the process of replacing historic windows with vinyl windows, and the recommendation, of course, is that the application be disapproved. I'm assuming you want to be heard on this. well I'm sure the the decisions already been made but certainly we we made this decision ignorantly we we didn't we knew that we lived in a historic district we told our contractor that we lived in a historic district and based on his understanding of our neighbors homes around us he said it wouldn't be a problem so we left it at that we weren't fully aware of all these bylaws that were you know guidelines of you know architectural review of what it takes to live in a historic district we don't feel like we were properly informed of all these guidelines when we moved into our neighborhood two and a half years ago like most people in my neighborhood we moved either to go to UK or to work at UK. My wife works at the University Hospital. Since moving in we've put quite a bit of money into our home. We live there, we don't rent it out, we're not one of these places that are running out to college students and putting a big vinyl box on the back of our house. It's the things that we've done so far, we put a fence up and our fencing contractor, he's the one that got this approved. So it wasn't that we knew to get this approved when we did our fence I think it's the only thing maybe on file that has been changed to our home the other things we've done have been interior work encapsulating our crawl space replacing a bathroom we did replace our roof this year which Amelia pointed out you know needed to get approved but straight asphalt style roof and copper glass chimney so we've put a lot of money into our home we value our home we don't feel like we're devaluing our community but we did make an ignorant choice to have a window replacement company come in and install those windows without getting prior approval and we understand that's our responsibility but we just didn't understand that responsibility in full because we didn't think that we were adding structure on we thought we were just replacing something that was already existing so other than the style of window the pains the six over six to three over one four over one because we aesthetically like that prairie style we didn't consciously make an effort to go around anyone's back and do anything inappropriate I think her process requires Miss Amelia or Miss Armstrong to make a brief presentation with respect to the application itself but thank you for your very articulate comments. Ms. Armistrong? So this is actually this is 209 Dantzler and this is actually when it became an H1 overlay. This is actually in 99 these pictures were taken and so you can see the window pattern which is the eight over eight window pattern and this is sort of you can see this is as these windows and you can see the addition windows this addition was on at that time and it had a slider window and then it had there was a combination of this is like six over six and then I think there was the same over here these are more standard size where these are larger windows again this is existing at that time and this is from the PBA record you can see the windows you could see that there's only four windows here there was never any window on this back edition but there is one on the rear so staff found that the windows of this house were being replaced with vinyl windows with with a four over one, three over one, and actually just one light pattern. The way the window company took them out, they pretty much just ripped out the jam, so there was no way to actually put back the existing windows if it was possible. And so this is in the process of taking them off, and you can see there were storm windows on these windows, and they changed the window pattern in the back as well to a instead of having a slider window just two windows with the mullion in between and then this is sort of showing the house the house actually does have vinyl or metal wrapped so the face and the soffit you see is actually a wrapped scenario that was existing and also all the brick molds were existing as far as being wrapped so the the bigger violation is the fact the replacement of the of the existing fabric with the wood windows but the wrapped scenario was an existing scenario and these were the sashes that were taken out and they can't be put back in right the way the windows were taken out that really ripped up the jam so without actually building the whole surround inside and out it would be very difficult to do and expensive and so here are the windows that were put into the the rear addition those windows are actually vinyl slider windows and you can see this is the opening where they're putting the two windows with a creating a three-inch mullion between them and then again this sort of shows you the brook mold as it became unwrapped and that you can see it's in the scenario of the sill being wrapped over existing and the way they took them out it was a pretty rough tear out here's the existing brick mold that was removed this is the wrapped scenario and so staff stopped the work at that time and this was the existing back scenario of having a vinyl slider So staff revisited the site after this. This was actually, I think, was on November 6, and we revisited later. The work had been completed, and the assistants had been wrapped. And you can see the paired windows going back into the existing opening on the side and the rear addition. so are we disapproving the windows for the addition as well that's actually you know we just disapprove them because they're actually vinyl windows but it's it's up to the board to distinguish that different some wiggle room there maybe possibly guidelines include or include for your reference the proposal requires careful consideration typically staff reviews the windows prior to the replacement to determine if there was a candidate for replacement. However, staff was not able to review the windows in situ because they were already in the process being replaced without the COA. The replacement existing window sashes and installation new sashes is not appropriate nor in keeping with the LFUC design principles. The design principle which says window openings, windows, window details and size and shape of the elements help to establish rhythm, scale and proportion of buildings and reflect architectural style and character windows should be maintained repaired to match the original design if the windows are determined beyond repair the installation of the new wood windows to match the original designs is recommended in the windows of the baked enamel or aluminum clad may be considered only if original windows cannot be repaired and vinyl vinyl clad windows are not allowed staff binds or replacement should be occur only matching in the material size and design and in addition is not appropriate nor design lines to wrap the surround or brick mold. This is an existing situation unfortunately and guidelines 1-1k and states architectural details to make covered with aluminum or vinyl and artificial siding. And Mr. Smith did say there was a house that we looked at actually last year that had on the same street that had replaced their windows of vinyl and they already had a three over one style it wasn't a new style it was an existing three over one style and this was in the 100 block and mr smith said that he liked the way those windows looked but those windows the applicants actually replaced their windows with wood windows aluminum clad wind windows pardon say that again please they replaced the vinyl windows because they got disapproved at this process with wood with aluminum clad wood windows that matched the process match the what the guidelines that was indeed that was in the addition it was in the 100 block of dantzler and um but staff has to recommend disapproval of the application or place the windows as submitted okay i think we have two issues before us sort of one is the windows in the original structure itself and then the windows with respect to the addition comments from any comments from the board members and maybe I'm just saying it that way there may not be two issues I don't see how there's any difference between the two I think the guidelines there are two major problems with these windows and one is that they're vinyl and the other is that they have divided lights and those divided lights are not in the style of the original windows so both of those conditions are counter to the guidelines and this is another situation where the guidelines are very clear yeah so the windows in the back were already vinyl windows even though they were sliders Oh, they were? Yeah, they were already vinyl. They weren't wood. That's why I'm thinking there's two issues here. My inclination is I'm not crazy about the notion that you put vinyl windows in the back, but since there were already vinyl windows there, I think maybe we could perhaps let that go. But the windows in the original structure, the main structure, you just can't do that. The guideline is expressly clear. I would strongly suggest you talk to an attorney, because if your contractor committed malpractice, and he obviously did, in my opinion, then you might have a remedy with him with respect to the expense that you're going to have to go through. But you probably need to. When did you put these windows in? End of November. of this year yeah you probably need to step you probably need to step quickly i'm not trying to give you legal advice here but there's typically a one-year limitation on contract breach contract issues so i would i would strongly recommend you talk to an attorney because our attorney said that you'd have to sue us and we'd have to counter sue our lawyer or i mean i kind of short counter sue our contractor so that was have you paid your contract that was his legal advice okay have you paid have you paid your contractor yeah we we had a contract with them so we and you went ahead and paid it didn't you yeah well yeah okay i'm not going to try to give you legal advice but you might have a remedy uh anything from you sarah two of these in one day is almost more than i can take because i feel so sorry for you I wouldn't, in your position, be able to bear the cost of replacing all of those. We really can't. I mean, obviously, you look at us, we're young kids. There may be, and I don't know how the staff feels about it, it may be that you could do them in increments. yeah and i will say that pretty much all of the outside of the window except this tiny part is wrapped in aluminum like they're all capped in aluminum so you barely see a part of the violin the part that goes across the middle and then a little bit of the outside they're all capped but i mean the whole purpose of us doing this was i know that because we heard all the stuff about maintenance stuff i mean maintenance was a big thing but i couldn't get a window open myself and they had already been repainted re all that by the person who restored the house i couldn't get it open i couldn't get a storm window open i couldn't get a screen open i had to get him to open a window for me if i needed one open so i mean we have old knob and tube wiring in the front of our house and in my daughter's room so if there was a fire we're not getting out right whereas the other day we opened almost all the windows in our house that are new because we had a smell from where they did the crawl space and we were trying to let our house air out I could not do that before and then the cleaning process for those old windows like I would have to get up on a ladder I would have to do all the things I'd have to take storm windows out where's these I flip them in I clean them I put them back up they have a lifetime warranty if something goes wrong with them they'll come out and replace them I mean it just I get what you all are doing and what you're trying to do and the integrity that you're trying to maintain but the house is next to me the house next to me is a rental property all the windows are rotting out I mean there's a rental property across the street that's split into a duplex I mean we live in our home we love our home we take care of it we probably own the most expensive home on our street so I mean I get what you all are doing but we're like one of the few people that actually own and love our house and want to live in it and whereas most of our neighborhoods turning into a rental property and I don't know it's literally like this house in this picture that you can see across the street from ours it's a rental vinyl windows on that as well yeah so there's already because it became an h1 overlay 10 years ago yeah there was already modern science you know with construction you know vinyl additions our neighbor has a vinyl garage you know in his backyard the street behind us which are homes older than ours they're not an h1 overlay all rented out so to put in wooden windows that that are two three four times the cost doesn't unfortunately make sense we had to think of this and a way that was safe and functional for ourselves and our young daughter and also keeping in respect to what our neighborhood value is and if you look at article 13 whole purpose of having it be historic district is to add to tourism I read there's there's nothing about our street that's unique in tourism. It's old ranch in Cape Cod. There's really nothing unique that adds extreme value. An old wooden window, you walk down our street, all the houses that are wood, the paint's chipping. Because we wanted to put in something that's modern and renovated to be functional, we're getting punished for it. And had we gone about this the right way, it would have never gotten approved. I'm not saying that we did this, you know, backwards on purpose, but But we did ask our contractor, and it was on our agenda to replace these windows to be functional. And we got to a point in our lives where we could afford this amount of windows. So we don't feel like we've devalued our community, our home, any of that. And it's not like we live in Shinoahe, Ashland area, where it was truly unique, valuable, old historic homes that are hundreds of years old. This is a 70-year-old house. A 1948? yeah so just looking at it objectively give it you know give it another 50 years another 50 years and if the neighborhood you know picks up where we started then you know maybe it's worth putting in twenty thousand dollars worth of windows i'm making that observation only because this seven parks has always been problematic because it's a different style house it's a more modern house but you have to look at it from a from a framework of what what is that neighborhood going to be like in about 100 years i live in historic district and about the time i moved into it it was in that tipping point what has made my neighborhood more valuable is the fact that it's an h1 overlay and because these houses have been preserved and preserved properly i sympathize with you i know that you have walked that you did this with all the best intentions if i could bring that contractor in of yours i would spank them not figure not literally but figuratively and you know but unfortunately as i as you heard the conversation with the other applicant there are few absolutes but one of these is vinyl windows they're absolutely i think we can give you an exception for the vinyl windows in your addition but with the main structure there's no way we can approve that ms curry you walked in on the conversation i'm i'm inclined to think that perhaps we can go ahead and approve them i may be wrong the board may disagree with me but i'm thinking would we need to have an application to get approval for the addition the replacement windows that were put into the addition itself or could we do it here today the nuances of that let me get amelia to advise us about all right miss armstrong because the application called for all the windows i think you're able to go ahead and take action today on what you feel can be taken action on all right let's see what the board wants to do Any further comments? I have nobody left in the audience. Have you talked to your window contractor since this came up? Yes. He basically just said let him know what the decision was. He said let him know what the decision was. He didn't say he would do one thing or the other. he said you could sue me but you know the it's based on his contract he said we wouldn't get anywhere so um i he said he could do what he could to fix whatever need to be fixed it had to be six over six or you know back to that style of window he'd probably do that for us but this specific contractor does not sell wooden windows so i don't know how we will go about you know anything that we have to do with him. But that was the only thing. If he could do something within his capabilities, he would, I'm guessing. That's all he basically told us. But anything other than that, boarding the contract, getting our money back, we'll have an issue with that. So to be clear, the windows that you put in do not match the windows that were there, correct? Correct. Yeah, they were 8 over 8 in the front and 6 over 6 on the sides. I'm talking about your addition. The addition was slider windows and we switched those to double hunk. So that would be easier to open. Yeah. Because the sliders wouldn't open either. All right. Do you think it's possible, maybe I'll ask the staff this. If they could do this gradually, if you can't get any money back from your installer, you said you told him that it was a historic overlay district, and he said, no problem. I mean literally we found him because he was looking at our neighbors windows one day because he was getting A quote? Yeah I mean you drive into our neighborhood you can see the sign so he knew he was well aware and he looked at the neighbors across the street. I think the problem that lies is there's vinyl windows scattered all open down our street and homes. Right so. I mean across the street he's got windows in his main portion of his house that are vinyl on the top part that house across the street is vinyl windows. I mean so I mean should he have looked into it yeah but that's I don't know we did have did a survey of all the for another situation for an up a record request and and looked at our if somebody asked about how many vinyl windows and that was for the last case we referenced earlier and there were just all in seven parks probably about six houses that had replacement windows and largely the amount is just on this particular block that were previously replaced windows prior to the H1. Yeah, which were done before it was made in H1. I got it. But there are various ones, we actually looked at some on Monday, that are wood windows. Can we take this approach? Can we have them submit an application for the installation of the windows in the rear and let you all look at that issue separately from this issue well because they've made application they don't really need to make a separate application well i was trying to figure out a way if we can work our way towards some kind of approval for the windows in the rear you can divide it okay you can divide it into two okay to your motion reflect either two motions if you'd like but okay the problem is is that these windows don't match up with what we're in the addition is the issue i'm struggling with i'm just saying per the way you handle whatever action you're inclined to make you can segregate the addition and do one motion reflecting that and one motion reflecting the main mass i would point out that while they don't match the windows that were in the additional originally they are more consistent with the form of windows in the neighborhood and uh yeah and uh so and so i think our process if we want to do it this way and i'm not saying we have to i'm saying your process could be two motions one to disapprove the application for the main mass and a second motion dealing with the uh addition do i have any kind of a feeling consensus there that perhaps the windows that were installed can be accepted in the addition This is really difficult. Does the staff have an opinion regarding the windows and the addition? Well, I think you've seen our opinion reflected in the staff report. in accordance with the guidelines that is the staff's opinion well let me ask you this have we not made deception when there were already vinyl windows present that they were replacing vinyl with vinyl even yes and i think i heard the testimony these there were vinyl windows originally in this edition but they were not what was the existing condition when this work was commenced? Vinyl. I believe they were. Were they? They were vinyl. The main thing is that the guidelines have been since 2010 they prohibit any and all vinyl and so it closes the door on the concept of continuing the vinyl I will acknowledge that when so we're talking about changing a vinyl window to another vinyl window I've come into this from another meeting and so I'm a little off the page so it would be changing the windows from another vinyl sliders to vinyl double hungs mm-hmm and actually they look better than the sliders probably I think this is an area that it is certainly in the board's prerogative as it always is in any of these cases and we respect the fact and think it is very important that the board also interpret the guidelines closely in a situation where you have a vinyl product as what is the existing condition and then I'll be it without a permit they've put another product in that is also vinyl of a different design I think it's certainly within the board's purview to make a decision based on the specifics of this application and reflecting in your vote what you as board members think is the answer. And I think the finding we can simply make is that under the unique circumstances of this particular case, where vinyl is being replaced with vinyl, that that does not undermine the integrity of the overall guidelines and the principles expressed therein. I'm inclined to support such a motion. I don't know how the rest of you two feel. Well, I think it's clear that you all are just starting a family, and is this your first house that you've owned? No, it's our second house. We moved from Louisville and relocated out here. So it's our second house. If you were further along in life, it wouldn't be such an impossible thing for you to do financially to throw away new vinyl windows and put in woodwinds because of the guidelines. Let me ask you, when you bought the property, who made you aware of being in a historic district, and did you get any literature about what you were supposed to do when you... No, and that was one thing I was going to suggest at the end of this, is it would be really nice if, like when there are closings or when people move into a historic district, could they get a welcome to the neighborhood packet? These are the things you need to know. Visit our website and read these guidelines. You know everything that's going on. Because, I mean, we see the signs, but. There are signs posted in your neighborhood. Yeah, there are signs, but. We have worked with the realtors, and we have encouraged them to do exactly what you're saying. There's also a, I believe you're in the Seven Hills or Seven Parks Neighborhood Association that may have given you some advice on this as well. And it's also part of your land use zoning. So when you see what your property is zoned, when you look that up, it tells you your land use zoning, comma, H1, which is a historic overlay. But, you know, you have given me a thought, and perhaps we need to work with the Bar Association and the Fayette County Bar Association a little bit more, that perhaps they've been put on notice, are encouraged at a closing. Yeah. Point out the fact that you are subject to an H1 overlay expressly. That may be something we could. If I may, I think you mean L-Bar? Yes. L-Bar, yeah. Oh, the attorney in. You want the attorney in in addition to the realtors. Well, yeah, because actually the attorney would actually, I think, in some ways be more sensitive to the issue than the realtor. I would like to think so. So that might be an easy fix. It's a limited bar that actually practices real estate law. Or there's another way to perhaps, we'll explore that issue. Okay. In the meantime, do I have a motion of any comment? I don't know. To litigate this would be expensive. rather rather see what money that you could ultimately put into trying to resolve this I would much rather see it go into the building and and I mean that's what we're trying to do we've already most of the house was renovated when we bought it they had done HVAC plumbing all that kind of stuff but we've renovated our guest bathroom we're hopefully if we can save enough money gonna renovate her upstairs and turn it and hopefully into two separate bedrooms and redo our old wiring so I mean we plan to stay here and you know live in it and love it but so when most of the street isn't that way but we like living there. Graham, do you have anything you want to say? I don't think we can solve the problem. I mean, I just think we have to disapprove, and I'm not exactly sure what the next step would be, but I don't think we have any choice. And, you know, I understand your inclination, Jim, to accept the windows in the rear addition, but I would point out also that had they come to us to and proposed those windows, we wouldn't have approved them, not just because they're vinyl, but also because they are divided lights, and they're in an imitation of a historic condition that is not a real condition. And those are good points. I can't disagree with you. Call it the Christmas period. Just to explain, whenever there is an application to replace windows, the guidelines explicitly ask that the new windows, if they're going to be replaced, would match the existing and style design we often have people proposing subdivided windows like yours and it's always turned down um even if it was an addition put on in the 90s and not original to the house yeah um the reason we went with that design is because the house that it was renovated up the street, put them in, and we're like, oh, this looks really good, and it's Cape Cod, and it's pretty similar to ours. I mean, this is certainly not any kind of a criticism of your taste or of your preferences. It's just a reflection of the guidelines, and we're tasked with executing the guidelines. Ms. Murphy, if we disapprove the application in its entirety, are they going to be prohibited from submitting any kind of an application that might suggest a different route to take with the addition? No. Ouch. Okay, good. What I'm trying to get at is there might be, for example, I'm not sure how those windows are constructed. It might be you could convert them into one over one because that's probably a snap-in mullion. Is it not? Is it snap-in or is it building? It's in between the double panes. In between the double panes? Yeah. Oh, you really did it, didn't you? Yeah. You got good. Functionality of cleaning. Yeah, you got good insulated windows. My windows are actually clean and I can see through them, unlike before. I am truly sorry. I mean, you're just, it's unfortunate. All right, do I have a motion? I think we've beaten this horse to death, I'm afraid. I'm ready to call for a motion. Mr. Chair, regarding case number 30870111-D at 209 Dantzler Court, move to disapprove the application for certificate appropriateness. Do I have a second? Chair will second the motion. All those in favor of the motion say aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed nay. Motion passes. The COA is disapproved. I will remind you that you do have an opportunity to take this matter up on review to the Planning Commission. But I also urge you to maybe seek a second opinion from an attorney that knows real estate law and contracting law. Okay. All right. Okay. There's a couple other items on our agenda. Let me get to them. Item 12, 219 South Ashland, demolished garage. That's been postponed until January 17. Do I have a motion to that effect? so move grab a second second all those in favor say aye aye those two motion passes item 13 224 to Shea Road remove and replace porch railing replace we missing break brick pavers construct a new porch roof on each side of existing roof and repair columns postponed until January 17 do I have a motion so moved second second all those in favor say aye motion passes and is approved and the Caden town application is 662 Caden Lane has been withdrawn I'm assuming we don't have to take action on that correct mr. Kirk that's correct withdrawn it's just to note for the record okay last item we have are the minutes I I went through them. Kathy, I commend you. Excellent job. Thank you. Any corrections or additions to the minutes? No. All right. Do I have a motion then? Move to approve the minutes. Second. Second. All right. All those in favor say aye. Aye. The minutes are approved. Do I have a motion to adjourn? So moved. Second. You stand adjourned. Thank you. Thank you so much. Thank you.