# Board of Architectural Review - August 28, 2019 > Auto-transcribed civic record · Board · August 28, 2019 - **Permalink**: https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/meeting/4829 - **Source video**: https://lfucg.granicus.com/player/clip/4829?view_id=14&redirect=true - **Date**: 2019-08-28 - **Body**: Board - **Last revised**: February 5, 2026 - **Length**: 9,595 words > ⚠️ **Auto-generated content.** Audio from the official Granicus video was auto-transcribed by OpenAI Whisper-1, with speaker labels folded in from Granicus closed-captioning. Structured facts were extracted with GPT-4o; the narrative summary was written by Anthropic Claude Sonnet. Speaker labels and 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 August 28, 2019, with Mr. Chair presiding over the session. The board addressed three Certificate of Appropriateness applications during the meeting, reviewing proposed architectural changes and improvements to properties within the historic district. The board heard two public comments from community members and conducted three formal votes on the agenda items. Two of the three Certificate of Appropriateness applications were approved: the projects at 507 North Broadway and 280 South Ashland Avenue both received favorable decisions from the board. However, the application for 359 South Mill Street was denied following the board's review and deliberation. The meeting focused entirely on architectural review matters, with each agenda item requiring careful consideration of the proposed changes' compatibility with historic preservation standards and district guidelines. The board's decisions reflected their ongoing responsibility to balance property owners' improvement needs with the preservation of the area's historic character and architectural integrity. ## Attendance All board members were present for the August 28, 2019 meeting. **Present:** • Mr. Chair • Josh • Sarah • Jim • Susan • Carol **Absent:** None **Late:** None ## Votes and Decisions The Board took action on three certificate of appropriateness applications during the August 28, 2019 meeting. **Motion 02500507-M - 507 North Broadway** Josh motioned for approval of a certificate of appropriateness for 507 North Broadway with conditions, seconded by Sarah. The motion passed by voice vote. The approval included specific conditions requiring a four-inch spindle and disapproval of the proposed rooftop addition. **Motion 00710280-Q - 280 South Ashland Avenue** Josh motioned for approval of a certificate of appropriateness for 280 South Ashland Avenue with conditions. The motion passed by voice vote without a recorded second. The approval included conditions specifying requirements for landings and railing details. **Motion 13150359-C - 359 South Mill Street** Josh motioned to deny the certificate of appropriateness for 359 South Mill Street. The motion passed by voice vote without a recorded second, resulting in denial of the application. All three motions were decided by voice vote with no recorded individual vote counts or abstentions. Josh made all three motions, with Sarah providing the only recorded second for the 507 North Broadway application. The Board approved two applications with specific conditions while denying one application outright. *Note: Specific transcript timestamps were not available in the source materials for these votes.* ## Public Comment Two residents spoke during the public comment period, both addressing concerns about the proposed changes at 280 South Ashland Avenue. **Sanford Pollack** expressed objections to the proposal for 280 South Ashland Avenue. He raised concerns about the proposed changes to the sunroom and porch, specifically citing the potential impact on views and questioning the materials being used in the construction. Pollack's comments focused on how the modifications would affect the visual character of the property. **Louise Douglas** also spoke in opposition to the same 280 South Ashland Avenue proposal. Douglas emphasized concerns about the visual impact the proposed changes would have on the surrounding area. She additionally noted that there had been insufficient time to explore alternative options for the project, suggesting that more consideration should be given to different approaches before moving forward with the current proposal. Both speakers' comments centered on the same development project, indicating coordinated community concern about the proposed modifications to the property. Their objections focused primarily on visual and aesthetic impacts, as well as procedural concerns about the review process. *Note: Specific transcript timestamps were not available for these public comments.* ## Contested Items Two applications faced community opposition during the August 28, 2019 Board meeting, resulting in mixed outcomes for the applicants. **280 South Ashland Avenue Proposal** The proposed modifications to a sunroom and porch at 280 South Ashland Avenue drew concerns from neighboring residents who attended the meeting. Community members voiced objections regarding the visual impact the changes would have on the surrounding area, as well as specific concerns about the materials proposed for use in the construction. The neighbors felt the proposed alterations would negatively affect the character and appearance of the neighborhood. Despite the community opposition, the Board's final decision on this application was not specified in the available meeting data. **359 South Mill Street Utility Strip Application** The property owner at 359 South Mill Street sought approval to retain existing brick pavers within the utility strip area of their property. However, this application faced opposition and was ultimately denied by the Board. The denial was based on established guidelines that specifically require utility strips to maintain earthen surfaces rather than hardscaping materials like brick pavers. The Board determined that allowing the brick pavers to remain would violate these guidelines, leading to the rejection of the application despite the property owner's request to keep the existing installation. Both contested items highlight the ongoing tension between individual property owner preferences and community standards, with the Board tasked with balancing neighborhood concerns against established guidelines and regulations. ## 507 North Broadway Certificate of Appropriateness The Board reviewed an application for a certificate of appropriateness for the property located at 507 North Broadway during their August 28, 2019 meeting. Anton Giovinetto served as the key speaker presenting information about this agenda item to the Board members. The discussion centered on the specific requirements and conditions that would need to be met for the certificate of appropriateness to be granted for this North Broadway property. The Board examined the details of the proposed work or modifications planned for 507 North Broadway, evaluating whether the application met the necessary standards for historic preservation and appropriateness within the district. As part of their review process, the Board established specific conditions that would need to be satisfied as part of any approval. Following their discussion and review of the application materials, the Board voted to approve the certificate of appropriateness for 507 North Broadway. The approval came with attached conditions that the applicant must fulfill to maintain compliance with the Board's requirements and historic preservation standards. This approval allows the property owner to proceed with their planned work at 507 North Broadway, provided they adhere to the conditions set forth by the Board during this meeting. The certificate of appropriateness ensures that any modifications or improvements to the property will be consistent with the historic character and preservation goals of the district. ## 280 South Ashland Avenue Certificate of Appropriateness The Board discussed an application for a certificate of appropriateness for 280 South Ashland Avenue during agenda item 2. The discussion involved several key participants including Elizabeth Tovar, Jason Stovar, and Meredith Guy. The application generated discussion regarding concerns raised by neighboring property owners. Board members and speakers addressed various aspects of the proposed project and its potential impact on the surrounding area. Following deliberation of the application details and consideration of the neighbor concerns, the Board established specific conditions that would need to be met for project approval. These conditions were designed to address the issues raised during the public discussion portion of the meeting. After reviewing all aspects of the application, including the proposed modifications and the conditions for approval, the Board voted to approve the certificate of appropriateness for 280 South Ashland Avenue. *Note: Specific transcript timestamps were not available in the provided meeting data.* ## 359 South Mill Street Certificate of Appropriateness The Board reviewed an application for a certificate of appropriateness for 359 South Mill Street during agenda item 3. The proposal centered on infilling the utility strip area with brick pavers. Bill Hilliard served as the key speaker presenting information about this application to the Board members. The discussion focused on the appropriateness of adding brick pavers to fill in the utility strip at the property. Board members evaluated whether this proposed modification would be consistent with the historic character and preservation standards applicable to the location. Following their review and discussion of the application materials and presentation, the Board ultimately denied the certificate of appropriateness for 359 South Mill Street. The denial means the proposed brick paver infill project cannot proceed as submitted under the current application. The specific concerns or reasoning behind the Board's decision to deny the certificate were part of the deliberative process during this agenda item. Property owners seeking certificates of appropriateness must demonstrate that their proposed changes are compatible with the historic district's character and meet established preservation guidelines. --- ## Decisions - **02500507-M** — passed (0-0): Approval of a certificate of appropriateness for 507 North Broadway with conditions - **00710280-Q** — passed (0-0): Approval of a certificate of appropriateness for 280 South Ashland Avenue with conditions - **13150359-C** — passed (0-0): Denial of a certificate of appropriateness for 359 South Mill Street --- ## Full transcript უეეე ღაყტი დაღატეელის აუებას შეელისაქელიავა შეეას რივრანრელ შეებაშებატ ხედრ ხედრ ტედრ დაღა ღეეევტემისაუ ნელიაუ სადიეისარისაღა ტეეებრება წუეღაყეელი შეების ჯეგეუების certain გაუემისაძარელისარების შეებისალისგსა დელისარების ფრპეების ფიელისანეფლედისრი რარელის� სდიპუარიდია ღლალიითისუანელისსისიეყსრისოევი ფისისუასლტოი მელისტოკისინი დარელისის� მედოოითინისირიისრიცყველიღ ვფე ცელისისანისისელირირიელისიისისნისინიელინისაველი � ვივიველის. In the Western Suburbs Historic District at 514 West Short Street, extend railings and gates. At 579 West Short Street, tuckpoint-repair rear wall and restore windows. At 703 West Short Street, replace tree. In the Woodward Heights Historic District, at 321 Madison Place, renovate structure. At 349 Madison Place, remove dying Black Walnut tree. At 314 Merino Street, renovate front porch. And finally, at 355 Merino Street, replace roof and realign box cutters. We will now go to our applications, the first one being on our agenda. 507 North Broadway Street, install railing and extend railing is the applicant here. Come on up. I see you have come prepared. I've got some show and tell today. All right, if you'll state your name for the record, please. I'm Anton Giovinetto. I own and live at 507 North Broadway. Okay, the staff has recommended approval of your application for a certificate appropriateness subject to some conditions. The first one being the staff proposes they have a four-inch spindle in lieu of a three-inch spindle with final details to be submitted prior to the issuance of the COA. And the other two are what I call the standard conditions. If any changes are made that alter the information submitted, resubmit the changes to the staff for review and approval prior to start of work. And once reviewed by the other divisions, returning changes to the staff or board for review and approval prior to start of work. I'll also note that they have disapproved your application for the rooftop second story addition railing being extended to the front parapet. I'm assuming that you would like to be heard on this. I'm sorry. You'd like to have a presentation by the staff as to these recommendations? Or are you in agreement with them? I'm in agreement. I just brought the difference between the three and the four-inch mm-hmm so that you could see what the scale of the project and this is what the historic preservation is recommended and I accept that. You do accept the four-inch? I do. Okay. All right. So you're accepting the conditions and the disapproval? Yes, sir. All right. Any questions or comments from the board members? Okay. Abstaining? All right. Any, Josh, Sarah, anything from the audience? If not, then the chair is ready for a motion. Mr. Chair, I move to approve the application for a certificate of appropriateness with the following conditions. Number one, let me start over. Jim, how do we do this? We got a disapproval and an approval. Actually, what you need to do is go through and identify the case number and the address for Thank you. Sorry. Okay. And we will first take up the conditions and then we'll also then accept the staff recommendation of disapproval. Okay. Regarding case number 13150359-C at 359 South Mill Street. No, I'm sorry. We're at 507 North Broadway. I am sorry about that. I had I'm sorry about that. I had I'm sorry about that. I had I'm sorry about that. I had I'm sorry about that. I had I'm sorry about that. I had I'm sorry about that. I had Turned on over to the next one. No problem. Regarding case number 02500507-M at 507 North Broadway. I move to approve this application for a certificate of appropriateness with the following conditions. Number one, that staff proposes to have a four-inch spindle in lieu of a three-inch spindle with final details to be submitted prior to the issuance of a certificate of appropriateness. And then number two and three are standard conditions. As well as a disapproval of the rooftop second-story addition railing being extended to the front parapet. Okay, do I have a second? Sarah, I need you. I'll second. Any further discussion on the motion? If not, the chair will call the question. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed, nay. Motion passes. Your COA has been approved as conditioned. Thank you. And thank you so much. All right. Okay, turning now to 280 South Ashland Avenue. The scope of work is reclad. The sunroom and rear porch construct screen porch is the applicant here. Come on up. If you will each introduce yourselves for the record. I'm Elizabeth Tovar, homeowner. Jason Stovar. All right. Hi, I'm Meredith Guy, the architect. All right. The staff has recommended, I believe, approval of the application subject to some conditions. Let me read those into the record and then we can discuss them. The first one is add landings to the top of steps that require a building inspection and provide plans to the staff for review and approval. Number two is provide the final door details and specifications to staff for review and approval prior to the issuance of a COA. Number three is provide the final railing details to the staff for review and approval prior to the issuance of a COA. Number four and five are what we have been referring to as our standard conditions. Are you in agreement with those conditions? Yes. All right. I believe there might be people... Just a moment. Are there any questions? Yes. I'm sorry, I didn't hear you. No, we have no questions, but we believe that we have some comments from our neighbors. I believe we do. And I think probably to facilitate, let's just do a presentation. Okay. Who's various issues? Yes. We're going to do a presentation of the application. Should we move? Well, we need to turn up the game because I've got it on. Okay. Can you hear me now? Fairly. Okay. Thank you. I'll do it this way. All right. 280 South Ashland Avenue. The scope of work is to reclad the sunroom and the rear porch and to construct a screen porch. Before I go through the staff report, I'll show the photos. This is looking from Ashland to the east of the existing historic structure. This is a rear elevation. This is the screen or the sunroom that is proposed to be enclosed. And the screen porch would be in about this location here. This is the side porch that will be enclosed. It's a view of the side porch. Obviously, the finished floor will be about here. And then there'll be the CMU stem wall below. Just another view. And this is the best shot I could get to try to show the north elevation. This is looking to the north across the fence at the neighbor's property. And these are a couple of photos that were provided by the Douglases of their backyard. This is looking from the east to the west. This is the sunroom in question. And this is the sunroom in question. This is the sunroom in question. So the applicant is requesting a certificate of appropriateness for the following work. Reclad a later sunroom addition and construct a screen porch at the end of the sunroom. The sunroom is approximately 19 by 19 feet and sets into an L created by a later brick addition, which I didn't mention, but it sets between the porch and the sunroom. The proposal is to reclad the existing structure with cementitious clapboard siding on the north and east elevations. Two windows and a fireplace are located on the north wall. And the fireplace is expressed with brick on the exterior. The screen porch is stepped in from the corner of the sunroom to meet the LFUCG zoning regulations and also to meet the guidelines for the one foot setback of our process. The porch is approximately 15 feet 8 inches by 14 feet 8 inches and has a five foot deep natural stone patio along the south wall and a set of steps located on the east end of the south wall. So this is the floor plan. This is the sunroom to be enclosed. And then this is the proposed screen porch. This is the side entry porch on the southeast corner. This is the deck or the patio outside the sunroom, steps, and then also steps off of the other porch, which is where I noted both of these might require landings by building inspection. Barry, how deep is the yard? How deep is the yard? How do you know? I will have to... 216 feet 11 inches. Thank you. All right. We have in our... Had you finished your presentation? I have not. I'm sorry. Excuse me. Sorry. That's all right. I did finish with the background. Okay. Finding the guidelines are included for your use. The findings, staff met with building inspection about filling an addition that does not meet the Kentucky Building Code requirements for openings and fire rating adjacent to a property line, i.e., the sunroom, because of the distance from the sunroom to the property line is less than, with openings, five feet is required by the building code and six feet by the zoning in the R2 zone. Building inspection's opinion is that because the infill of the wall adjacent to the property line would be one hour rated and will reduce the area of openings from the all glass to the two windows, that they would support the change. The staff finds that the proposal to reclad the sunroom, add the screen porch, and enclose the porch addition meets the guidelines. In compliance with Guideline 2A4A and 2A4B, the changes are appropriately located at the rear of the building and are secondary, smaller, and simpler to the original building in scale, design, and placement. The changes are also to a later addition, not the main mass of the historic structure. In addition, the screen porch north wall is stepped in the minimum of 12 inches from the edges of the existing building. The proposed changes are compatible design in keeping with the original building's design roof shape materials, and I should mention that the roof will not be changed from what is currently existing. Roof shape materials, color, and location, window and door cornice heights per 2A4C. The proposal also complies with 2A4E and 2A4F, which state respectively, additions should not imitate an earlier historic style or architectural period and should reflect characteristics of the current period in design and be compatible with the original building. The proposed deck is per 2A1A, located at the rear of the building. The staff believes that building inspection may require landings at the top of the two sides, sets of steps. Staff finds that the deck complies with 2A1G and is appropriately scaled and does not overwhelm the site. Staff recommends approval of the COA with the following conditions. Add landings to the top of the steps if required by building inspection and provide plans for staff for review and approval. Provide final door details and specifications to the staff for review and approval prior to the issuance of a COA. Provide final railing details to the staff for review and approval prior to the issuance of a COA. 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 work. Once reviewed by other LFUCG divisions, return any changes to staff or board for review and approval prior to the start of the work. And the deadline for board action is October 20, 2019. All right, thank you. The chair will note for the record that we have an email from Louise Douglas, aka Weezy Douglas, dated August 21, objecting to the application primarily because of concerns about blocking the view of two large lovely old trees and also concerns about diminishing the size of the backyard and raising concerns about water runoff. We also have a letter from Sanford Pollack at 282 South Ashland Avenue dated August 22, raising similar concerns, specifically concerned about the encroachment on the five-foot side yard at the northeast side of the property, also concerned about the transparency being taken away from the three-season porch, and therefore they believe that the solidification of the encroachment should not be permitted. In addition, there is a concern raised about the type of material being used, which is not common for Ashland Avenue, and there is also concern about the freestanding landing and stairs descending from this enclosed porch design that brings yet another rejection into the regard and seems like another element unrelated to the larger structure. I believe the people making these comments are present, if you'd all like to come up one at a time. Who wants to go first? I want to limit the comments you may have to about five minutes. Mr. Pollack. My name is Sanford Pollack. I live at 282 South Ashland, immediately to the right of the tow bars as you face it from Ashland Avenue. I've read, reviewed, and thought about the guidelines and findings I received from the Historic Preservation staff by the following comments. I understand the proposed new porch will be set back from the side yard property line of six feet to comply with present zoning, but the renovation of the existing sunroom, which violates a six-foot, and I believe the previous five-foot setbacks, remain in the same location. The findings state that Booney-Barton required this to be a one-hour rated wall. I'm curious as to why this is acceptable, it's not an option under the zoning ordinance. That's just a question. It seems that something else has been opened up there, which I wonder about. If this board concurs with this part of the findings, I still feel the side yard elevations are in question relative to their appropriateness. I'm sure they will be carefully reviewed by this board. The proposed elevation on the northeast side is in sharp contrast to the glass wall it's replacing. This proposal is to replace a basically transparent elevation, which at times is reflecting the trees and other landscaped objects with a basically opaque wall. This wall has two windows, horizontal siding, and a brick section, which gives the impression there is a wood-burning fireplace behind it. I was under the impression by staff that a fireplace would be a manufactured type, and the brick, in fact, has no place for it in terms of need or code. It's simply there for an effect. I do not remember seeing a flue indicated on the drawings, but it may be there. I may have missed it. I do not think this gratuitous portion of brick adds a positive relationship to the existing brickwork. I do not agree with the staff on recommendation of the use of horizontal siding on the southwest elevation. There is no horizontal board siding on the existing house or the adjacent houses, or generally on Ashland Avenue. I think the siding would be appropriate on a freestanding shed or a detached garage, but not on this solid brick house. I would hope that some other material could be suggested. That would be open, but I just think that wood gives the wrong impression of the quality of this neighborhood and of that house. I further feel the added screen porch could be looked at with a sloped peak roof reflecting the existing roof and the earliest addition, and thereby lowering its height at the southwest elevation and allowing some borrowed light to reach the proposed enclosed remodeling, which I think the owners would welcome once they feel that much further back away from the light. I also think it is very important to see additional dimension drawings showing an accurate picture of the proposed landing steps and railings. The location of a large tree, which is right off the steps coming down from the now mudroom is directly in front of that, and I think if the building department requires a four-foot or three-foot eight-inch landing at the top of those stairs, those steps themselves would project out very closely to that tree. I don't know exactly where, and I would hope that would be presented, because it may be a conflict. It may not be, but I don't know. This should be clarified is all I'm saying. Just another minute here, and I'm done. Presently there are painted wood stairs and railings. I hope something much more substantially dignified may be proposed other than the wooden stairs. You saw those stairs in the photograph. Again, they really don't belong in an H1 district as they're designed, the painted, even if they were left as natural wood. I think we should be looking at a masonry stair or a concrete stair, something permanent with good railings. I requested the board not recommend approval of this proposal at this time and allow the applicants and other interested parties to come to some agreement on an appropriate solution. Thank you. All right. Thank you, sir. Any questions at all? Not at this time. Let's hear from Ms. Douglas. Where the Douglas is, we see in Prentice and live at 276 South Ashland. We are having a problem with the sound system tonight, so you're going to have to speak very directly. I'll speak. There you go. Right into that microphone so we can hear you. Thank you. Before I raise any objections, I would just like to say that when we got the letter from you all, we made an appointment to come down two or three days later with the Pollocks, and when we got to the office on Vine Street, there was one drawing of the side elevation. It did show the roof, and it showed the back porch, but there were no measurements. There was nothing. It did not show the trees or anything. Sanford immediately asked about that, and we were promised that we'd be called as soon as the plan, the site plan and the elevations came. That was the following Wednesday. We couldn't go down until Friday, I guess, just last week. I'm telling you all this because I feel that we have not really had time to explore all our options. We did contact an attorney. I don't think legally we have any grounds about the setback being only three feet, but visually it's quite a difference. We have a six-foot scalloped picket fence, and this is just not quite three feet away. It's glass now. You're used to it. The glass reflects our yard, and you can see right through the trees in their backyard, and it really does make a nice effect, I think, and the cladding is a big difference. I think we need more time. We have written the TOVARs. We have talked with them. They came to our house. We went to their house, and Elizabeth has talked with Sandy on the phone. I think something could be worked out that's more satisfactory. I think these two little high windows, four by three, that's, I figured out, 12.5% window on this 190-square-foot wall that we see when we go out our back door. I read all the guidelines. I saw pictures in the guidelines of a series of windows that was much more attractive. I know you don't want to copy the exact windows of the house, or that's been the idea, but I think something could be accomplished. In that, there is no space to plant much of a tree to screen the property. I don't know what could be done. I think there's no space for heating and air conditioning should that be needed for this new room. Are you talking about the proposed porch, screen-in porch, is that what you're talking about? Or are you talking about the new room itself? The new room that's going to be clad, the existing porch slash sunroom. It's very confusing. And I contend that this is new construction, really. I guess the foundation is there, and something can be built on that foundation. But I don't know when that was built and have not had time to check that out. But did I make myself clear? Yes, you have. Thank you. Mr. Douglas, do you have anything you want to add? Sir, do you have anything you want to add to the conversation? No, I don't think so. He's up here to keep me from talking too long. Okay, thank you. All right. We've been there 44 years, 44 plus years. So I guess we're just kind of used to what we've got. The glassed-in porch, we can't remember when this was done. Before H-1, right before H-1. Apparently before H-1. There was a lot of activity next door with the owner with H-1. I won't get into that, but we'll just leave that like it is. Okay. Mr. Dennis, would you come back up? Thank you very much. Thank you, sir. Thank you, ma'am. Any questions or concerns from the board members about this proposal, starting with Sarah? Do you have any questions? I can give you the dates of the permitting of the sunroom. When was that? It was June of 1989. I pulled the permits from the inspection. Okay, so it's been there quite a while. Okay. Any questions or concerns for the board members? Observations? I'm not sure if I have a mic that works. Susan, can you share the mic beside you? We apologize for the technical problem. One way to keep me from talking. There we go. That works. Okay, I have a couple questions. Really a couple questions of the applicant. One is about the fireplace. It's a freestanding stove right now, right? Is this being changed from a freestanding stove to a fully built fireplace? Yes, it's a freestanding stove right now, you're correct, but I think they actually just want to have gas logs. Okay, but forming a full fireplace. Yes. Okay. These are just kind of questions. The issue about the windows along that side where the new great room is being enclosed, a little question about how that's a fire rated. It's that wall that we're talking about being fire rated. How is that fire rated with those windows? Because that impacts the discussion about enlarging those windows and changing them. It's my understanding from discussions with the building department that their belief, since it's glass right now, that the area we are fire rating is an improvement from the glass that's there right now. So therefore, we can leave the windows. We're just going to fire rate everything else. Okay, so they're not making any restrictions about what the area of that glass may be. They're just noting that any kind of infill on a full glass wall is improvement, but that still gives flexibility for what that glass might be. That's my understanding from initial conversations. Now, we haven't submitted for permit, obviously. Okay. I think those are my kind of—I do agree about the exterior landings and stairs. That kind of was a note. And the only other thing, and this really is more of a—well, it is a code issue, but moving from the original floor line of the historic building down into the screened-in porch, which is a 30-inch change in elevation based on the drawings, it appears to me there are only two steps that go. So I'm not sure. Are those 15-inch high steps? No, we've got one step going down and then another two step out. So I think you're correct. I'll probably have to look at that elevation. We're going to build that patio up a little bit. Okay. Well, I'm really—this is an interior question, so it's not addressing the issues that are being brought about. You're talking about towards the screened-in porch? Yeah, I'm talking about going from the dining room inside the house to the new great room. Yes, yes. It appears to be only one step. Yes. And then from the great room to the screened porch is one step, but that's— Two more down. Yeah. Okay. The great room, the floor will be replaced, and so it will be— Is that what you're asking? Are you concerned about the drop from the dining room into the great room? From the dining room to the screened porch, on the drawing, shows that there's a 30-inch elevation, but interior, there are only two steps making that 30-inch elevation. So one step down to the screened porch, one step there, and then another step there, and then two more on the side. So there's four steps. Is that what you're asking? Yeah. Yeah. Okay. All right. And then I do want to point out that we have had a licensed structural engineer look at the foundation, and he says that we can build on it as it is. Okay. So I just wanted you all to know that. Those are all the questions I have. Can someone take the microphone back, please? Do you want us to stay up here? No, stay put. Mr. Gilpin, do you have any questions? So did we determine that the existing sunroom occurred before H1? That is a fact? Yes, it did. Okay. That's the only thing I was curious about, really. Do you have any photographs in your documentation that show the trees that your neighbors are talking about? I don't know if it's in this. It might be marked on the site plan. I'm sorry. Is it? I had it. I may have taken it off for this, but I had it marked on the site plan. If you go right there, that's the tree. And if you go with that little L, there it is. Oh, it's far back. Where is it? There you go. Can you show the view from the tree? It's there. That tree. Okay. Okay. I can't tell from the photograph what the species is. Is it a maple? I don't know. I don't think it's a maple. I'm not sure. Do you know what kind of tree it is? Yeah, I think it's a maple tree. All right. Okay. There was a voiceover that said it indicated tulip poplar. Tulip poplar. Is there any questions? I believe the consensus is this is a maple. And where is the tulip poplar? Is it at the back close to the carport? Is that where it is? Is it at the back? There it is. There's one at the back close to the carport. It's in the back close to where the carport is. So the one in the back wouldn't be blocked by the screened-in porch. All right. About how far from the structure is that tulip poplar? How far is it? We could measure. Do we have the survey? Would that be on the survey, the tree? It's a ways away, right? It is. Okay. All right. Any other comments? Can I make one comment about the sunroom? You know, currently it's not insulated at all. There's already duct work in place, but it's not working well. There is a gas stove in one corner and then an air conditioning unit in the other corner. People that have lived there in the past have said they haven't been able to use it in the winter, so they close off the kitchen door, close off the dining room door because it's just too cold. So the glass isn't going to work. It's just not insulated well. That's why it's called a three-season porch. True. Yeah. And you're intending to close it in, and you do have – and, you know, this is an issue for you to be concerned with, not us, about your heating and air conditioning for that new addition. It's already in there, so it would be more efficient because it's going to be closed in. Does that make sense? It does make sense. Yeah. I will have a couple comments to make, one of which is I'm hearing that you've had some conversations, and I'm wondering are you willing to continue having those conversations or you want to move forward with this application? So as we've discussed, it is unfortunate that this is happening. We are not willing to not close in the glass door or the glass room. We're not willing to not do that. Now, whatever restrictions you give us, if we have to come in six feet, then we can't fight that. Now, we're willing to negotiate with the screen porch, but I understand that that's not a big concern. My understanding was that it's the glass. Are there still concerns about the cladding that you're going to be using? I'm flexible with the cladding. Like, if you have a recommendation for a different material, I'm completely fine. We are completely fine with that. We just want it closed in. It's going to be our family room, our family den. We're opening up the kitchen, taking the wall out, and it's going to be, like, you know, great room, kitchen. That's what we want to do. We have four children. That's where, you know, in our current house now, that's the hub of our house, and so that's what we want to do, open it up, close it in, make it a den. From my perspective, the guidelines have been satisfied for your application. The aesthetic concerns I'm hearing is something that the board really cannot address. You may have been seeing that particular structure for a very long time, but that doesn't mean that they cannot change it if they like to. And so I think the staff has gone through the guidelines. I think they have appropriately decided that the addition is appropriate in size, can be clad in the way that you're proposing. Perhaps you can still have some conversation about the overall dimension of the sun porch and or the cladding itself, but in terms of the aesthetic concerns that have been raised, that really isn't part of this conversation today. Okay. Do I have any additional questions or comments? Carol? Okay. Did you have something you want to add, Barry? Well, yes, sir. I believe I have a comment over where you were headed with the change of the size. It's an existing building. They're planning on enclosing what is existing. If they came to an agreement with the Prentiss's, I'm sorry, with the Douglass's, to reduce that size, that's a major change to what the board would be approving if you approve it. They reduced it in size? That would be something they'd have to come back? I believe so. I don't believe that that is a minor enough change that you could assign that to the staff. I will withdraw the comment then. All right. Okay. Any further comments? Is the sunroom that you have, is it like a kit sunroom, or is it like a wood frame that's been wrapped in metal? What is it? It's like a kit sunroom. Okay. You can see in the pictures, I mean, it's glass. So when you start taking this apart, what's left to hold up your roof? I'm kind of torn about if this is more to treat it like a covered porch or to treat it like an actual addition. That's where I'm trying to figure out. Once you get into this, is it still going to stand up by itself once you? Structural engineer. Yeah. So, I mean, they're going to have to shore it, obviously, during construction. But we've had a structural engineer look at it, and he did not send me his drawings before I had to submit these, unfortunately. But I do have his drawings now on how we're going to support it. But, I mean, you can see it's supported in the corners as it is. Okay. So I guess where I'm going is if you guys get into this and you wind up tearing down that entire addition, then we need to look at it as a whole new addition. A hundred percent. But I think the whole, I guess what, obviously the roof is in really good shape. We're hoping not to have to change the roof, have to change the foundation, you know. I mean, I think when they purchased the house, they were under the expectation, that they would be able to use the room and just enclose it. So, obviously, we know that we have to follow your all's recommendation. But, you know, it's whether or not they're going to enclose it regardless. So it's whether or not you all feel like it's worth having to tear down what's there to, you know, to incur that cost, basically. And certainly that's within your prerogative. You have to submit plans to this course. Of course. And one way or the other, they intend to enclose this room. You can do that as well. Yeah. Whether they, you know, hang curtains on the inside. You know, one way or another, they need a more energy-efficient room and they would like for their family to have privacy. More privacy. I mean, they plan for this to be their family room. All right. So. I understand. Okay. Anything else? If not, then yes, Barry. I will look at those stairs. I'm sorry. I can answer some of those questions Josh had. I have the drawings that were submitted for the building permit. And the floor is two by eights. The posts are six by sixes at five foot on center is what. Anything else? Okay. So my question really has to do with the elevation that impacts the Douglasses. And that was the reason I was asking about whether it was a freestanding stove or wood burning or gas logs or what. It seems like to me that I'm hearing from both sides that there's some capacity to revisit that elevation that has such an impact on them and see if you can find a middle ground to meet there before moving forward. Is that what I'm hearing? That would be nice. It would be so nice to have more space for landscaping. Please come on up, please. I'm not sure I'm talking about the slides. It would be nice to have more space for landscaping. It would be nice if it were six feet back. I saw some beautiful trees last night, magnolias, that had been trimmed close to a wall and immediately thought about that. We would have to remove part of our fence, but even that could be done. I do think there's a compromise, and I hope it works out. Thank you all so much. Yeah, it does seem kind of important for neighbors to be able to work through things. We were getting along. Oh, and we will get along. I mean, we will. We've had some wonderful conversations, yeah. I mean, this is really unfortunate. What she wants is the glass to stay, and we're not going to keep the glass, whether it's six feet back or three feet back. So if you want to require that we spend the extra expense to redo the whole thing to make her happy, then that's really your choice. But it's going to get closed in. And what we've said, and we talked, we see, and it was, you know, what else can we do? Would you like to compromise on the porch? Is it this? Is it that? I don't care that it's the glass. It's the glass. That's what she wants to keep. So, yes, I'm willing to compromise on many things, but not the glass. Yeah, I think these are details. Some of these details can be worked out perhaps as the project's underway. We don't have a right to restrict how you're going to do this addition so long as the addition conforms to the guidelines. And I'm not sure if that setback is so intrusive that it does not meet the guidelines. Aesthetically and probably from a visual point of view, it might be more pleasing to your neighbors, and that's something perhaps you ought to take into account. I don't think we can require that. Okay. And I'm not going to suggest that we should require that. We will take that into account. Poplar trees would go. I've already asked. If I understand, your principal concern is you want privacy and you want to close off the windows. The rest of it, as far as you're concerned, is negotiable? Yes. Including the landscaping. Yes, sir. Absolutely. We can take the roof and create a whole new structure. Just as a side for the record, the three-foot setback, they are grandfathered in on that, so they are allowed to do that. That's not necessarily a guideline issue. They're already grandfathered to use a three-foot setback, and that's the reason. Thank you, Ms. Murphy. That's a good observation. That's a good point to make. All right. I think we have discussed this as thoroughly as it can be discussed. The chair is now ready for a motion. Somebody? Somebody else. There it is. All right, Josh. All right. Case number first. Let me make sure I get that address and the case number right. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, I move to approve the application for a certificate of appropriateness on case number 00710280-Q at 280 South Ashland with the following conditions. Number one, to add landings to the top of steps if required by building inspection and provide plans to the staff for review and approval. Number two, provide final door details and specifications to the staff for review and approval prior to the issuance of a COA. Number three, provide final railing details to the staff for review and approval prior to the issuance of a COA. And number four and five are our standard conditions. All right. Do I have a second? I second. All right. Any further discussion on the motion? If not, the chair will call the question. All those in favor of the motion say aye. Aye. Opposed, nay. The motion passes. The COA is conditioned. It is approved. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you all for coming. This is part of the process. All right. I think let me find my agenda if I can. Item four, item three, 359 South Mill Street. Is the applicant here? Is the applicant here? There you are. All right. Let me find my notes. Here we go. This is 359 South Mill Street in the South Hill Historic District. The scope of work is the infill utility strip with brick pavers. The chair will note that the staff has disapproved your application. I assume that you would like to be heard on this? Yes, sir. All right. If you state your name for the record. Bill Hilliard. All right, Mr. Hilliard. Will the staff please make a presentation then? 359 South Mill Street. The scope of work is to infill the utility strip with brick pavers, which has already been done. The applicant is requesting a certificate of appropriateness to infill the utility strip with brick pavers. The staff discovered that the utility strip of the reference property had been infilled with brick pavers, and subsequently the staff sent a violation letter to the property owner who then submitted a COA application to retain the brick pavers. The guidelines are included for your use. Findings. The staff finds that the proposal to retain the brick pavers does not meet 3-4-B and 3-4-C, which state, respectively, sidewalks, walkways, and curbs that are added or altered should be compatible with the principal and accessory structures on the property and surrounding historic properties, and that are added should not be visually dominant, intrusive, or suggest a false sense of history. These were always landscape utility strips. By landscape, I assume you mean grass? Multiple things. Okay, sorry. Monkey grass, turf grass, different people have options. Recommendations. The staff recommends the denial of the COA. The deadline for board action is October 20, 2019. This is the structure in question. The utility strip. And this is a view from across the street. And then one from each end. And this is the driveway. And then another driveway on that side of the utility strip. All right. Any questions of the staff? Mr. Hilliard? What happened? So I bought a really cool house at 359 South Mill Street, not knowing that tons of people in town, including Mr. Dennis and Amelia, knew a lot more about the house than I did when I bought it. But I didn't realize how conspicuous it is. Anyway, when I got it, I had Phil Bishop, my landscaper, come and do some work in the backyard. We walked out in the front yard, and I said, you know, this is a weed patch. I've already had a couple people in the neighborhood say, you know, you're kind of embarrassing us. You know, you've got weeds in your front yard. So I said, what do you think? And he said, well, the curb is all broken out. He said the soil is very shallow. He said you're never really going to be able to keep something looking really good in here. So I got overly enthusiastic, and I said, well, while you're here, let's go ahead and put in some brick. And I don't know if this – I brought some pictures. Do you think this will work, Randy? So pictures that I did, and this is some pictures that I took. And that's the house. And I do admit that I did put in the brick. I did call Phil. I said, go find some old brick if you can somewhere. And so we got some from Will Chapman. But anyway, this is a picture of the house. You'll have to let Randy know when you want to change this. Okay. So this is a picture from across the street looking one direction. Want to do the next one, Randy? This is a picture from across the street looking the other side, next one. And this is a close-up of the brick that I put in there. And then you'll see, if you look at it, you'll see that there's essentially no curb between the – when you want what we call the infill and the street. So, you know, it floods in there. The dirt was, you know, coming out. So that's that. And the next one, Randy? And so this is – what I did was I stood in my front yard and just looked around. And so this is my – this is from the middle of my infill. If you look straight, the next door, they have brick almost identical to what I have put in here. Next one, Randy. Across the street, you can't really see it as well, but that's stone infill. Next one, Randy. Across the street, there's brick that's in that infill. Next one, Randy. And then this is – I don't want to throw my neighbors under the bus, but that's lava rock. And, you know, last time I saw lava rock like that, I was at a Long John Silver's. So, in any event, so I felt like, you know, I was trying to keep in keeping with the nature of the property. You know, I'm very proud of it. I obviously want to be a good neighbor, and I admit all my mea culpas from what I did. But I took some additional pictures. So, Randy, the next one. And this is just down the street a little bit. Again, you've got brick that's almost identical to mine. Next, Randy. Again, another house on the street with brick. Next. Another house on the street with brick. Next. The brand-new brick that's been installed in the Adam Rankin house right there. Brick. Next, Randy. Oh, is that all of it? I thought I put some other pictures on there, so I guess they didn't go in there. But, anyway, as you can see, it's not a novel approach to put brick on the infill in the roads. And I admit fully that I got overly enthusiastic, and I'm really not a lawbreaker at heart. And I just, you know, I was trying to get things done and enjoy the new house and make everybody proud that I was going to be a good neighbor. So I apologize for what I did. But I think that basically I think that what I've done is in keeping with both the regulations that Barry mentioned and in the nature consistent with what's been done elsewhere on the street. So I would just respectfully ask that you reconsider the recommendation of the staff and approve my certificate of appropriateness post-haste. Well, not post-haste, but post-mortem or whatever you want to call it. Okay. Thank you. Who did you annoy enough to be the only one that got it? So I put it in on July 7th, and I got my notice from Mr. Dennis on July 8th. So I'm not exactly sure who is so vigilant in the neighborhood, but it's a conspicuous house. You know, I'm very proud of it. I want to make sure that I'm a good neighbor and a good owner. But, you know, the people on that street, particularly that area, are very proud of their property, and I don't blame them for, you know, for jumping on me as quick as they did. I don't know who it was, though, to answer your question. Mr. Dennis, have you come up? I have a question, I think. Have we done any kind of a survey of that area to show how many of those utility strips have actually been infilled with brick? No, we have not done a survey like that. And I'm sure you have. There are 10 of 21. I'm speaking to the speaker. I'm sorry. Come back. You can speak. Just speak into the microphone. No. I counted them. There's 21 yards or 21 houses facing that street, and 10 of them are brick or the stone and one concrete. All right. And when was this historic district incorporated into the H1 overlay program? In the 1970s. I don't know the exact date. Do you have that? 79. Do we have any idea whether some of those prior areas had already been bricked in, or do we know? We do not know. Okay. So we do know that this one actually had green in it, and it was cited by staff. I'm sorry? Staff saw them, just saw that they had just finished bricking it in. And Ms. Kerr is very frustrated because she wants to comment, but the microphone won't cooperate. Do you want me to help you? Thank you. All right. Can we have Roe? So it's about from the numbers that Mr. Hilliard mentioned, which he's probably come the most recently to survey the area on Long Mill Street. So it's about a 50-50, I think, of the existing condition. And with grass being 50%, or earthen with the ability to have green planting, and most of them do, that are earth. So throughout all the historic districts, the guidelines are very clear that keeping those utility strips earthen is what the criteria of the guidelines intend. And so as with any of these historic districts, whatever was the existing condition at the time the district is created, and some have been, like South Hill, designated as a local historic district for a very long time, and then even the ones that come along more recently, as I think all of you know, the districts come with whatever those existing conditions are. And the intent of the guidelines is to not add to and or lose, if you want to flip it around that way, the context of a grass utility strip where they survive. And so that's kind of the situation here. It survived until, I don't know, a couple months ago or a little less as an earthen strip. And so the guidelines are rather plain spoken about that the focus is to retain that concept. And it's not, you know, our guidelines, of course, are applicable in all the historic districts where those are the character. And so for each one that comes up, if somebody, and certainly not with any ill intent, we understand that this happened without knowing about it, what to do. But for every one you lose, you're setting a precedent under this process of then the next folks saying, well, you let this one happen over here and this one happen over here. So it comes down to those things of you accept districts with their existing conditions, and then from there forward, what is the charge of the historic district process? I am recalling we had a rather contentious debate with Maxton Childers over his infill, where he had done it with a very nice decorative stoneware and thought he was doing something to improve the overall appearance of the neighborhood. I was in Western Suburb. In the Western Suburb. And actually it was attractive, but the problem was he did infill. And if memory serves me correctly, we disapproved his application. My thinking is that, Mr. Hillary, I think you were fooled by the appearance of your neighborhood and that there had been so much infilling done, and probably some of that infill dates back to the 60s, that it was that you were just thinking you were consistent with the overall appearance of the neighborhood. Regretfully, I don't think the guideline allows you to remove something from the neighborhood that was a utility strip that was vegetation. So you're going to probably have to buy a weed eater after you remove the brick, unless the other panel members disagree with you. Ms. Hill, do you have a comment? If you will, while you're deliberating, the picture on the screen now is one off of Google Maps that shows it when it was able to sustain growing vegetation. With the utility strip being attended to, apparently? Yes, there's some sort of plantings in it. Any comments from the other staff members or board members? I don't think that it – I mean, I'm just taking the advice of Phil Bishop, my landscaper, who said there is no curb there to keep the dirt inside there. And actually, that would have been – probably your remedy would have been to put in a new curb, and that you could have done. Well, what does that mean? Well, whoa. I think – I've not stood in front of your house and looked at the curb, but I think it looks from this image to be an old limestone curb that is almost flush with the street and therefore not serving the purpose we think of, of course, for curbs. But throughout the historic areas, what we're doing with that is that the curb would need to be reset. Those limestone curbs are actually historically almost always the case, usually three to five feet in depth. And so what it needs is you don't throw it away. You excavate and you pull it up, and you get it to be a legitimate curb height and set it in place. Okay, I just learned something new then because – It's something that we do it in that fashion all over the historic districts. And I did have a conversation with Mr. Hiller yesterday and explained that process as well. Okay, all right. Okay, in that case, then I'll shut up. I'm sorry. You know, with all due respect, I didn't take pictures of all of the other supposedly floral areas on the street. And I'd say that more often than not, there is not a beautiful, grassy area that you might expect is. I mean, you have some places that are just plain old dirt. In fact, I think the majority are probably just a dirt. And this process can't order people to make pretty green spots on the earth, but it is charged with keeping the earth footprint in place so that the next person like yourself who comes along and wants to do pretty and beautiful things to their property will have that earthen strip to enhance. All right, any other comments? If not, the chair is ready for a motion of some sort. Somebody. Am I hearing or feeling that perhaps we should approve the brick pavers? You can make that motion as well. You know, this is a sticky situation because if you go back to what was intended, which was grass or some living thing, and if you get into it and do a really nice job, it would set a precedent for the other people in the neighborhood who will probably get cited for their brick infill. And, you know, it just seems like a real sticky thing to have to address, but it's not a beautiful surface, the brick one. And that last slide that you put up that somebody is starting, not grass, but something. I don't know what that was that they got in their new bed. You mean the lava rock? No, no, no. Some kind of a decorative grass. I think the Google Maps picture that is of this gentleman's house that has greenery growing, it's something like monkey grass. Right, exactly. Something like that. We can't tell in looking at it, but it is something that is growing out of earthen, and it's little hillocks that I think are some sort of a, they were planted at some point. No one's arguing that anything needs to look exactly like that. Okay, Ms. Murphy, am I permitted to make a motion? Am I permitted to make a motion or not? Okay, all right. One of you three. All right. May I say something? I'm not sure. Am I allowed to say something? Sure. When I look at, when I read the design principle here, it doesn't say anything about earthen or landscape or anything like that. It says walkways, sidewalks, and curbs are constructed primarily of concrete with brick walkways and limestone curbs. Is that, am I missing where in this statute it says that it should be earthen? If you look at C, which talks that our adage should not be visually dominant, intrusive, or suggest a false sense of history, that section is actually addressing your infill. Okay. When you did the brick, you were creating a false sense of history, and it's dominant, visually dominant. Okay. All right. Motion. Let's get a working system here sometime. Mr. Chair, regarding case number 13150359-C, located at 359 South Mill Street, I recommend that we deny the COA and follow the staff's recommendations. All right. Do you have a second? Second. All right. Before I call the question, I'll make the observation. Mr. Hill, I certainly appreciate your cooperativeness and your understanding of this process, and I realize that this may be of some expense to you, but the guidelines are what they are, and I wish we weren't in this situation. But thank you for your courtesy, and we've had some people come here madder than a hornet, and I appreciate it. So I'll call the question. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed, nay. Motion passes, and the COA is not approved. Thank you so much. All right. Turning to the rest of our agenda, I believe it's my understanding that 591 West Short Street, we have now received an e-mail where Kelly is withdrawing the application. Yes. This is a case that you all have been working with the applicant for quite some time. The applicant, by her e-mail that was received late yesterday afternoon, confirmed that she is going to remove the shed and is asking to withdraw the case. And so you just need to note for the record that it's a withdrawal, and she indicates on her note by e-mail that she will give us a timeline next week as to when the company from whom she's been purchasing this shed will be collecting it. Okay. So the Chair will note that it's been withdrawn. Item 5 is a pave, a gravel driveway, which has now been postponed until September 11, 2019. And finally, the 601 Boonesboro Avenue, the replacement brick molding with Burrell has been withdrawn. Yes. We will see that case most likely coming forward to you again in a couple of months, tied to the timeframes that must have passed before a matter can be considered again. Okay. Got you. All right. We also have the proposed minutes from the August 14, 2019 meeting. I have some minor notations that I will pass on to you. Do I have a motion to accept the minutes? I move to accept the minutes. And do I have a second? Second. All right. The minutes stand approved then. And do I have a motion to adjourn? So moved. We stand adjourned. All right. For Robert's Rule of Order, you don't have to have a vote on it. We just stand adjourned. Thank you. All right. That concludes today's meeting. Thank you all. Thank you.