["Pomp and Circumstance March No. 1"] ["Pomp and Circumstance March No. 1"] ["Pomp and Circumstance March No. 1"] ["Pomp and Circumstance March No. 1"] ["Pomp and Circumstance March No. 1"] ["Pomp and Circumstance March No. 1"] ["Pomp and Circumstance March No. 1"] ["Pomp and Circumstance March No. 1"] ["Pomp and Circumstance March No. 1"] ["Pomp and Circumstance March No. 1"] ["Pomp and Circumstance March No. 1"] ["Pomp and Circumstance March No. 1"] ["Pomp and Circumstance March No. 1"] ["Pomp and Circumstance March No. 1"] ["Pomp and Circumstance March No. 1"] ["Pomp and Circumstance March No. 1"] ["Pomp and Circumstance March No. 1"] ["Pomp and Circumstance March No. 1"] ["Pomp and Circumstance March No. 1"] ["Pomp and Circumstance March No. 1"] ["Pomp and Circumstance March No. 1"] ["Pomp and Circumstance March No. 1"] ["Pomp and Circumstance March No. 1"] ["Pomp and Circumstance March No. 1"] ["Pomp and Circumstance March No. 1"] ["Pomp and Circumstance March No. 1"] ["Pomp and Circumstance March No. 1"] ["Pomp and Circumstance March No. 1"] ["Pomp and Circumstance March No. 1"] ["Pomp and Circumstance March No. 1"] ["Pomp and Circumstance March No. 1"] ["Pomp and Circumstance March No. 1"] ["Pomp and Circumstance March No. 1"] ["Pomp and Circumstance March No. 1"] ["Pomp and Circumstance March No. 1"] ["Pomp and Circumstance March No. 1"] ["Pomp and Circumstance March No. 1"] ["Pomp and Circumstance March No. 1"] ["Pomp and Circumstance March No. 1"] ["Pomp and Circumstance March No. 1"] ["Pomp and Circumstance March No. 1"] ["Pomp and Circumstance March No. 1"] ["Pomp and Circumstance March No. 1"] ["Pomp and Circumstance March No. 1"] ["Pomp and Circumstance March No. 1"] ["Pomp and Circumstance March No. 1"] ["Pomp and Circumstance March No. 1"] ["Pomp and Circumstance March No. 1"] ["Pomp and Circumstance March No. 1"] ["Pomp and Circumstance March No. 1"] ["Pomp and Circumstance March No. 1"] ["Pomp and Circumstance March No. 1"] I believe the staff has recommended approval of your application, subject to what I refer to as the standard conditions, with a notation that the staff have found that the roof meets the guidelines and should not be higher than six inches. Okay, so the two standard conditions are once reviewed by the other LAVCG divisions, resubmitting changes the staff or board for review and approval prior to start of work, and if any changes are made that alter the information submitted, resubmit those changes to the staff for review and approval prior to start of work. Are you in agreement with that? Yes, sir. All right. Any questions or comments from the board members? Just have one clarification. On the application, it indicates that the solar panels will be put on the roof between the dormers, or is it going to be mounted on the dormer at the most eastern end? It's going to be on the dormer at the eastern end. Okay, thank you. Is that reflected in the plan, or does the plan need to be adjusted? I think you asked the question. It's the difference between the COA form and the staff review background. The staff review background is accurate. It occurs on the eastern most pop-out low shed roof. Okay, that clarification will be incorporated into the record, and that's the way you're installing it, obviously, and if there's a discrepancy between it and the record? I think we have the clarification we need. Is there a motion? Is there any comments or questions from the audience? Okay, do I have a motion then? Chair, I so move that related to case number 13971623-H at 194 North Limestone, that we approve the application for certificate of appropriateness. Subject to the standard two conditions? Yes, as noted by the staff. Okay, do I have a second? Second. All right, any further discussion on the motion? Hearing none, the chair calls the question. All those in favor of the motion say aye. Aye. Opposed, nay. Motion passes. The application is approved as conditioned. Thank you very much. Thank you, sir. Turning now to 1014 Fontane Road in the Ashland Park-Historic District. The scope of work is to construct a two-story garage. Is the applicant here? Come on up. All right, if I remember correctly, we had a conceptual review with you and apparently you took some of those comments to heart. Yes, sir. The staff now apparently likes your application. That's wonderful. And so it's been recommended for approval subject to what I've been characterizing as the two standard conditions. Have you looked at those and are you in agreement with them? Yes, sir, we are. All right, any questions or comments from the board members? Any questions or comments from the audience? All right, I think we're ready for a motion. Mr. Chairman, regarding case number 07201014-E at 1014 Fontane Road, I move to approve the application for a certificate of appropriateness with our two standard conditions. All right, do I have a second? Second. All right, is there any further discussion on the motion? Hearing none, the chair calls the question. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed, nay. Motion passes and your COA is approved as conditioned. Thank you so much. Thank you, sir, and thank you for your work with us on the conceptual review. No problem. All right, turning now to attachment number three at 127 Pinnmoken Park. Scope of work is construct a rear addition. Is the applicant here? State your name for the record, please. Margaret Sompsel. And you can bring that microphone down to there. There we go. Okay, thank you. I'm sorry, your name again? Margaret Sompsel. All right. The staff has recommended approval of the application subject to the standard two conditions I've been characterizing. I do have a question. It appears that the design plans call for the removal of a chimney. Is that, am I misreading the plans? I don't know. Mr. Berry? I was thinking that was still part of the regular house. Yes. Is that, unless I've read it wrong and I'm not the world's best at reading. We discussed that when you were in the office that that couldn't be taken down. Right, right. It's A2.1. Aha, I did read it right. Okay. So we're drawing. Yeah, we'll keep it. It's this. Remember we had that discussion. Yeah, no, we can keep that. That's not a problem. Okay, say that again, please. We can, I can keep that. That's not a problem. Okay, thank you. I just want that clarification that the chimney will remain. Otherwise, it couldn't be approved consistent with the guidelines. Okay, all right. With light of that clarification, any questions from the other staff members, from the board members? That was my question. Okay, all right. Any questions or comments from the audience? Yes, sir. Come up to, please come up. Yes, please, if you don't mind. If you're gonna make a comment, we need to have your name on the record, please. My name is Phil Theobald. I reside, property owner at 128 Rosemont Garden. Yes, sir. I was curious, and I guess this shows it, the scope of the addition, and I've noticed that there already is an addition on the house, but it looks like that is being removed. That's correct. And this is being put in replace of it? That's my understanding. Okay, and so how deep is that, how close is that going to be to the back fence? How many feet? All right, ma'am, if you're going to speak into the microphone, please let me hear you. Mr. Chair, may I suggest that perhaps the staff should make a presentation? All right, let's have a presentation, then, please. So that we'll have, yeah, take a seat, and then we, if we have any questions, we'll resolve them. All right, Mr. Dennis. Let me get to the beginning. 127 Penmoken Park constructed rear addition. The applicant is requesting a certificate of appropriateness to demolish an existing sunroom on the rear of the historic structure and to replace it with a 20-foot by 24-foot 9-inch one-story addition. The frame addition is covered in cementitious style or shingle style siding and sets on a painted CMU stem wall. The roof is dimensional shingles. So this is the front elevation of 127, and this is looking down the west side, east side. This view from the rear, this is the sunroom that is proposed to be removed leaving the house from back where this gable occurs. Harry, would you mind, since there's also questions from a neighbor, show that on the screen that is forward so they can see the same item you're pointing out. Oh, sure. Okay, this is the front elevation, west elevation, the east. This is a view from the rear. This is the sunroom that will be removed. This gable portion of the house will remain. And here's a view that kind of shows the depth of it. These are the drawings. So as you can see from the site plan, this is the new addition. This would be the rear property line here along, it backs up to the your property in question. So the new addition is just slightly deeper than the existing. So there still will be quite a bit of rear yard remaining. Is there a dimension on it? There should be. I cannot... It indicates approximately 63 feet and 6 inches from the back of the new addition to the back of the property. Okay. Any further comments, sir? Do you have any further comments or questions? All right. Thank you. I should finish. I should let you finish, yes. The guidelines are included for your use. Findings, the staff finds that the proposed addition meets guidelines 2A, 4A, and 2A, 4B, which state, respectively, additions are most appropriately located at the rear of buildings and should be secondary, smaller, and simpler to the original building in scale, design, and placement. The use of a small connector, which is not a part of this, so I'll just skip that. Exterior walls should be stepped in a minimum of 12 inches, which they are stepped in from the edges of the existing building. Roof lines should be stepped down from the peak so that the existing roof line and the existing main roof remain evident. The proposal is compatible in design with the original building's design, roof shape, materials, color, and locations of windows, door, and cornice heights, and does not imitate an earlier historic style or architectural period per 2A, 4C, and 2A, 4D. Recommendations, staff recommends approval of the proposal with the following conditions. I'll add the one about the chimney. So number one would be that the existing chimney is to remain. Two then would be if any changes are made that alter the information submitted, resubmit the design to the staff for review and approval prior to the start of the work. Number three, once reviewed by other LFUCG divisions, any changes shall be returned to staff or board for review and approval prior to the start of the work. All right. Yes, sir. Come on up. Actually, I do have a further question, Mr. Dickinson. Sure. Could we move to that one slide where it shows the proposed side view of the old and the new? It's a drawing, it's a line drawing. Well, no, actually, no, keep going. There. Okay. I know this doesn't really pertain to this, but you know we've been involved with the 1847 property on Nicholsville Road, and what was originally presented as the buildings is now being scrapped and something else is being done in its place. Will this be the final look on this particular addition, or is that also open for change? No. Basically what this approval process does is once the certificate of appropriateness has been issued, the addition must be built in accordance with that COA. If they want to do a design change, then that has to be reposted and renoticed so that the public will know of any change in the design. I wouldn't think that would happen. Rarely, if ever, does, unless they run into some issue that we're not aware of. So what you're seeing there is what's going to be built. Right. So it'll look just like that, pretty much. It should. It better, quite frankly. Well, I was just curious because of what had happened before at 1847. And as condition. I mean, there might be some minor changes that come back to the staff. Again, if that change is something that causes the staff to believe it needs to be renoticed, it will be, and it will come back to us for further attention. What happened on the corner of Pinnmoken and Nicholasville Road is something that predates this adoption, and this is one of the reasons why I think so many neighbors wanted to have the protection of the H-1 overlay. Exactly. I was just wanting to confirm that. And one other question. Do we have any idea when the construction, the demolition will begin in the construction? Or is that just kind of an open? That is something you can work out with your neighbors. I'm assuming that you all have a neighborhood association, do you not? Probably your neighbor might want to inform the neighborhood of what she's doing and her plans for the demolition. Okay. Thank you very much. They do have, I'll say one thing, they do have up to a year on the COA before it has to be renewed. Okay. The COA is valid for one year from today's date. Staff would just note that in addition to what the chair has said, that with their COA being good for a year, they also will be, as property owners for this or any other property, needing to get a building permit, and that will go through that process as well. That's correct. Okay. Thank you all very much. All right. Thank you, sir. Any other questions or comments from the audience? Do you have anything to add, Ben? All right. Any questions from the board members? All right. In that case, then, are we ready for a motion? Okay. Let's go ahead. Chair, in regard to case number 148-20127 at 127 Pinmoken Park, per the staff review, I recommend we approve the application for the Certificate of Appropriateness with three conditions as noted, that the existing chimney and flue is to remain on the existing house, and the number two and three are the standard conditions. All right. Do I have a second? Second. Any further discussion on the motion? Hearing none, the chair calls the question. All those in favor of the motion say aye. Aye. Opposed, nay. All right. The COA has been approved as conditioned. Thank you, and just for the record, I will do what I said. I was part of that Pinmoken stuff. Right. So, I got it. Thank you. Your board was. And I'd like to note this is a historic first. This is the first application we've had from our brand-new historic district. So, all right. Thank you very much. Going next to our next application at 118 Deshaies Road. Scope of work is construct a rear stair. Do we have an applicant? Come up. R.J. Yoswick. All right. If you stay. I'm sorry. R.J. Yoswick. All right, Mr. Yoswick. The staff has recommended approval of the application with what I'll call one substantive condition, that being apparently let the wood structure age for approximately six months prior to painting or staining because it has to season a little bit. Otherwise, I had this problem with a cousin of mine that put down a very expensive wood platform for her porch, and they promptly painted it, and it turned into a mess. So, the other two conditions are the standard ones that I've been referring to is their standard conditions. Are you in agreement with those? Yes. All right. Any questions or comments from the? My questions really relate to kind of what I would consider partial drawings. I see the photographs, and then I see the drawing sheet, but I'm having to make assumptions about. What can I see? We turn the drawing sheet. What is it? Respect sheet. Oh, okay. That one, yes. It shows no windows. It shows no details, the elevation, but appears that the stairway goes across the front of the windows on the first floor. This is in the rear of the building. The stairwell's in the rear of the building, and kind of to make it, yes, so that's the rear of the building. It's the rear, like fire egress, basically. So, we tried to zigzag it and keep it tight, so we didn't use up any additional parking spaces in the back to keep all four, so each unit can have a spot, and then with how wide we had to keep the stairs due to fire code, what Ethan Well said we had to do. Do you want a presentation from Barry? Yes. It'll be coming down the left side right there. So, unfortunately, the way the building is and the windows are, there wasn't, even the old stairs crisscrossed the windows. So, where's the laser pointer here? It'll come down this way, and then here's a landing. I think the landing is actually, is it right above this window, or is it at the window? Do you know on that? It's part of what we're trying to figure out, too, with like our renderings on how you're, I mean, it's all a math one. It's like you're rising your run on what it has to be. I'm wondering if we need to add as a condition that additional renderings be provided. We can provide that, yeah. We should be getting them shortly. It does not appear to me on the drawing that shows the stair isolated elevation that the riser tread relationships will allow that to hit at the top of that window. It'll come in at the middle of that window. And so, I would think it appropriate that a drawing be provided showing how that impacts that elevation. I can definitely provide that. All right, we'll add that as a condition, and thank you for your cooperation. Of course. I would encourage you all to have a staff presentation on this. I think there's been enough substantive questions asked that we need to have this put forward in a presentation. Okay, Mr. Dennis, you're just making them work today. I think we're going to do a presentation. Yes. 118 Deshae Road. The scope of work is to construct the rear stair. The applicant is requesting a certificate of appropriateness to construct the rear stair of wood. Yeah, those rears are messing me up. At the rear of the structure, the stairs to provide a second exit from the apartments as required by the Kentucky Building Code. This is the front of 118, and as you can see, it's a fourplex with apartments on the second floor, and only one means of egress from those. This is the rear, the stair. There is a landing that comes off of this floor line, and also one off of this, down to the, down to grade. This is a closer view, and as you can see, the stair sits off of the structure, I believe, about three feet before it turns to come down, and then, well, that's more than three feet, but then it returns back towards the structure and down to the first floor, and then from the first floor landing down to grade. The staff finds that the proposal, that the proposed addition meets guidelines 18A and 18B, which state, respectively, fire escapes should not be added unless required by building codes or where no other means of upper floor access is reasonably feasible, and shall be located on the rear or side of buildings. The proposal does not note the final finish of the project, but it should be painted to comply with 2A1B, which requires wood to be stained or painted to achieve finished appearance, and no treated lumber should be, should season for an adequate time prior to applying the finish. Staff recommends approval with following conditions. Let the wood age for approximately six months prior to painting or staining. 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, and once reviewed by other LFUCG divisions, any changes shall be returned to the staff or board for review and approval prior to the start of work. Do we happen to have a picture of how this fire escape looked before it was taken out? We do not. Did you ever see it? No. Okay. It was pretty much like falling and rotting. Oh, I'm not, I'm not advocating. Go ahead, go to the one. I wasn't advocating it had to be, had to stay. I was just wondering how did it actually, did it block the windows is the question. I know it was goopy and it zigzagged before, but I don't remember. Yeah. Unfortunately it's been under construction for about a year. I can't remember. And with Barry's help as well, we have been working with the fire department and the actual, I forget who's in front of his office, the code people, and they, they're the ones who actually tell us what our rise and run have to be for safe egress. So we gave all that to the architect who kind of, you know, the stairs have to fall within the fire code rules and then from there it's kind of where they lay out on the building. Yeah, there are regulations on what the risers have to be. Ms. Hill? So it sounds like that the removal of those stairs wasn't approved for removal, they just were rotting and decaying and were a safety hazard? They were, yeah, a very big safety hazard. Our notation that it's very important, you would have gotten a permit for that before you remove the stairs. Any demolition is necessary to get a permit just as is any new construction. So, so that you'll know for in the future, please don't do that again. Thank you, sorry about that. Your hand has been slapped. It complicates our review a little bit. I appreciate that, I'm sorry. And for future reference, if you get involved in any other demolition projects, it always helps to do before and after pictures so that we have a feel for what should have been there before and that way we know how to help work with you in terms of the new construction. As I understand our conversation, you're going to submit new drawings which will show how the stairwell will relate to the existing windows in that structure? Yes, I can get that. And that, you know, the preference is that they not block the windows, obviously. If they do, we may have to come back and discuss that. Is, is there any requirement to have a site plan that shows how this egress works with the larger site? Not that I'm aware of. There can be a requirement for that specifically from the H1 process, so it's now required. The other thing to mention, we might be able to, with Google Maps, Google photography, find a rear elevation of this and we will look for that for the board. In the photos, the white doors and the bare sheet, yeah, is that work already been, did that come through our review process already and it's been under construction? Yes, I believe we've sent this whole, like a lot of this through your review process and I know there's some more. Sorry, we have sent a lot of this through your review process and gotten the permits and everything else and then we have some new stuff for even like our front railings, so there is a lot that's come through your review process on this. I just want to make sure we don't need to ask him to also include that work on his drawings. There's, there are several different layers of review process and the building code and inspection is one. The historic overlay is a totally separate one and that's really what our questions relate to strictly. And I guess that basic question, I don't remember this particular application. That's why I'm asking. Well, and with the other person of our staff who would have been probably very involved in this not available to us, we will get into the files and research this and I think you'll want to know as the applicant that it's possible, we'll hope to find all the needed permits reflecting where you are to this point, but if not you're going to have to stop work and cannot proceed further until all aspects of this are resolved. Okay. So we'll do our research and get back with you on that. And it shouldn't take that long, but I know we've got a lot of permits and they're all up on the windows. I realize the staff is also very short-handed at this point. Admittedly, this is true. I just got claret at, so. Thank you, it is very true. All right. All right. To sum up this conversation, I believe we're going to add a condition that we provide new drawings and that you will work with the staff to make sure that all the required COAs have already been properly issued. Okay. Any other questions? Any comments from the audience? I think we're Ms. Currow, do you want us to perhaps postpone this or continue this proceeding? I think that would be the most appropriate thing for the board to consider in light of the level of things that need to be resolved here. Sometimes I get on my locomotive and I don't slow down. That's a good suggestion. I think, sir, what we're going to do is, because there is some confusion about your plans, I think what we're going to do is we're going to continue this. What we have done is we've opened a public hearing as to your application, and instead of concluding it today, we're going to postpone it or continue it two weeks out. And I hope that gets us past, yeah, we should be filing the deadline. Okay, two weeks from now? Whatever the next, I said two weeks out of habit, we're in an odd three weeks. It'll be the second. No, it'll be February 12th. Unfortunately, we're just having one this month. It'll be the second week in February. February 12th. That's before the deadline. I'm sorry. That is before the deadline, so we don't need a waiver. Yes, and also, if you would, we need your architects' full drawings for the before in time for them to be included in the board's staff reports before it comes back on February the 12th. So we would need that information. You indicated drawings are underway? I'm having a tricky time getting a hold of my architect, but I'm under the impression they should be done. Well, we would need that information in order to get it put in the board pack no later than February the 3rd. Okay. Monday, February the 3rd. Thank you. Okay. All right, do I then have a motion that we continue this proceeding to February 12th, 2020? Mr. Chair, regarding case number 05550118-B at 118 Deshaies Road, I move that we continue this application to February 12th. Okay, do I have a second? Second. All right. Chair will call the motion. All those in favor of the motion, say aye. Aye. Opposed, nay. The motion passes and we are continued to February 12th. Thank you. Thank you. All right, turning now to 439 Fayette Park, scope of work is change of opening. I've been informed that Ms. Hill is going to recuse herself, but recognizing there is a legal doctrine called the rule of necessity, that if I have to have someone give me a second to adopt a motion that we'd like to approve it, then she can make that second. She cannot participate in the vote or the discussion. All right, now that I got the legalese out of the way, I believe your application has been recommended for approval subject to what I call the standard conditions, and I've read them enough times. Have you looked at them? Yes, they're in front of me. Are you in agreement with them? I am, yes sir. All right, do I have any questions from the other board member? No. Any questions or comments from the audience? If not, then I think we're ready for a motion. Mr. Chairman, regarding case number 069-00439-0 at 439 Fayette Park, I move to approve the application for a certificate of appropriateness with the standard conditions. Standard two conditions, okay. Do I have a second? Second. All right, any further discussion on the motion? Nothing from the audience? If not, the chair will call the question. All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Opposed, nay. I'm voting in favor as well. Motion passes and your COA has been approved as conditioned. Thank you. Thank you all. All right. Okay, we now are at, I believe, the conceptual review, is that correct? All right. And I have, of course, no minutes. Correct? All right. Okay, this is the conceptual review at 255 South Hanover Avenue. Cici and Charles Beach are the owners. Aaron Eisenhower, are you the applicant? Yes, I'm Aaron Eisenhower, Eisenhower Incorporated. Our normal procedure is to allow Mr. Dennis to give a presentation about your proposed plan. That'd be fine. And then there'll probably be some questions and comments addressed to your plans. Absolutely. Perfect. So if you'd just take a seat, sir. Okay, Mr. Dennis, we have really been working you today. Excuse me? We've been working you hard today. All right. I might get used to it eventually. 255 South Hanover Avenue. The scope of work is to change openings in a historic garage and replace the garage door with a sliding glass door and remove two windows and close their openings. That would be on the east elevation and replace, not necessarily replace, but install in a new opening between the two filled-in windows, a picture window. Also replace two windows on the north elevation. The garage appears to have been constructed in the same time period as the primary structure. And you can see in the Sanborn maps, the first available that we have is 1934, and both the house and the garage appear at the same, on that map. Guidelines are included for your use. This is a conceptual review. We do not have findings at this time, but the following are some questions that the BOAR may want to consider in providing recommendations. And I guess I should take you through the project first. So this is the front elevation of the main structure. You follow the drive back through this gate. Once you're there at the gate, this is the view of the historic structure, the garage. It's brick. This is the east elevation and the two windows that are proposed to be removed. And then in this center location would be a picture window. This is obviously the garage door that would be replaced. This is a addition that was done in the past that was approved by the board. This is what I could get of the north elevation, and those are the two windows that are proposed to be replaced. So just to see if I followed, it's the two windows facing the house that would be infilled? Is that the... That is correct. The idea. And then a new window kind of in the middle of the wall? Correct. Okay. And then the garage door becomes... This is a plan. I take it they're converting this garage basically into a studio storage area? And so it loses its function as a garage? The one bay would, the rear bay that was constructed will remain a garage or storage. So back to the questions. Is it appropriate to replace the garage door with a sliding glass door? Is it appropriate to close the two original window openings? Is it appropriate to make a new window opening for a picture window? Is it appropriate to replace the two windows in the north elevation? And typically staff would review those and determine the extent of either repair or not having the ability to repair them. Do the proposed changes adversely impact the design of the garage? Do the proposed changes adversely impact the historic character and significance of the garage? There are no recommendations at this time. Mr. Kerr, before we get started, I have a... I guess I have an overall conceptual question. Have we previously dealt with a redesign of garages into a more functional structure, if you will? Something less industrial and utilitarian and something a little more human occupancy driven? Yes. I really can't think of any examples of period garages, which this is a period garage, period being built, if not at the same time of the house, very close to that time. I can't imagine it's not. It is documented on the 1934 Sandburn, and so it's not far behind if it didn't come when the house was built. I suspect it was at the time the house was built. So we really... I can't think of an example in the category of what you're raising about changing something from being an outbuilding for automobiles to being a secondary building that has not constant human occupancy, but use for people needing lighting and... It's being turned into a he-or-she shed of some kind. Could be one word for it. And certainly architecturally, they bring that change in functionality does bring different items of architectural outcome as a desire. So while this process is not empowered to address the land-use zoning usage that's allowed, it is of course charged with addressing the architectural manner and the impact in which how you accomplish that. And I take it that your position would be that the design standards are applicable to this outbuilding? Absolutely. As it would be for any outbuilding or anything, regardless of its age, much less in light of the fact that it's original to the property or we think so. Yes, so your criteria are to be weighed in the same manner as with any other proposal. Okay, I just wanted to get those clarifications out there for a discussion. So Mr. Eisenhower... Barry, were you finished? I'm sorry. I tend to step on you and keep... I move too fast sometimes. I was finished. Okay, Mr. Eisenhower? Tell us what you want to do. They're proposing to turn the space into a studio space, which would mean we're taking it from an unconditioned space to a conditioned space as well. And that was one of the only other hurdles that I saw that were for that age of the building. They're planning on installing a mini-split on the fence side of the of the structure to HVAC the space. So you're putting in heat? Yes. That was the plan. You may have some issues with planning as well. Yeah, I assumed we would have probably some some situations with insulation. It's beginning to look like a little house. And that may be an issue. Okay, well, as far as... it's not going to have bathroom, kitchen. Okay. So no plumbing. That's a good step. So the intended purpose is for a studio space. Artist studio or painting or music? Artist studio. All right. The intention with the large picture window is to bring a lot of light into the structure. The other intent is that if you see the opposite elevation of the back of the home that has had an addition put on approximately four years ago, I believe, that was approved by Historic as well, I believe, it also has that large picture window and that elevation. So it kind of would mirror each other in the backyard was the intent for that design element. Any explorer skylights? Skylights in the roof. That could be a possibility. It would consequently, we would end up having to vault the ceiling, possibly, or bring them down via shafts of the... And I'm not sure that's... It's going to be a challenge. I'm going to shut up right now. Ms. Hill, do you have any questions or comments? Well, that's why we're starting here, you know. We've got to get a concept first and then we'll... That's why we have a conceptual review. Exactly. It's both a challenging and a wonderful little project. So, kind of basic questions. The windows to the northeast, so on the end of the building... Ms. Hill, can you move into your mic a bit? I don't think we're picking you up. Okay. The windows to the northeast on the end of the building, the opposite end from the garage door, are those proposing to be replaced because the windows are not in good condition or why? It's not so much that they're not in good condition as we wanted to create a condition space now in their single pane so that we'd have trouble getting approval for building inspection, insulation requirements for that space. Unless they would give us an exemption because it's a historical window and then I'd have to... That'd be a question for building inspection, I suppose. But the idea was, yes, that we'd make those double pane windows so they'd be up to insulation. So, basically they are windows that are currently in original and in good, reasonably good condition. Reasonably, yeah. So, there might be other ways than just complete replacement to be able to... Possibly like a storm situation could, as long as that would sufficiently satisfy building inspection and their insulation requirement. Right. So, going to the other end of the building, I'm gonna wait on this southeast elevation. Okay. To me, that's the most challenging one. The elevation with a garage door, it appears to me that that garage door is likely reasonably new. It certainly doesn't appear to be something historically... It's a replacement door. Okay. So, given that the dimension of the opening itself isn't changing, I'm I find myself not uncomfortable with changing what the nature of that is within that historic original opening. Yeah. Our intent was to kind of have a double slider that would open both directions and that would kind of keep that almost carriage style symmetry of the, probably what was originally on the... Yeah. So, your greatest challenge there is going to be that it faces southwest. You're gonna have some hot sun to deal with on a large piece of glass. Yeah. What I'm struggling with more is the elevation that faces into the backyard and fundamentally really changing what the rhythm and the pattern of that elevation is. Okay. I agree with both of her comments on... And I can propose to the owners that we keep that elevation. That was just one of their requests that they had me present, but if that's something that is not achievable and we could still move forward with the project, they would probably consider keeping those window sizes as is and possibly move into a skylight or something like that to bring more light in. And let me just make sure I'm not misleading you, Ms. Kerr. That would be a new opening in that roof but would that be a issue for the design? No, I think that the skylights could be a very positive way to get light into the space but still retain that elevations integrity. And of course there's skylights and there's skylights. So, careful attention would have to be paid, which I know you all would do, to how you would accomplish that and have those skylights be reasonably scaled and low profile and all the things which staff's glad to visit with you further about. But I do think, you know, you're seeing that this the cornice run on this side does have appear to have medallions in terms of some architectural trim and so forth. And so, as it does on the front, and you're not altering those, I'm not saying that, but I'm just saying it does have some attention to detail as an outbuilding. And it has integrity of its role on the site and in conjunction with the historic main house. So, I do think, in following with what the board members have been saying, just while we're talking about that elevation in those two windows, that it's pretty important not to eradicate that rhythm that exists currently. And certainly I would encourage storm windows. I'm not privy myself to knowing if those are the early wood windows, if their sashes are still the real deal, and that kind of thing. But we'd be delighted to talk to you further about nuances such as that and just know that it was important for the board and for you all with the board to get the opportunity to kind of outline this concept. And I will add, with respect to those windows, that you may be thinking about trying to get a better thermal, a solution might be to simply install an indoor plexiglass or glass covering. That will give you a pretty good insulated factor. I have used that in my house on the inside and they work pretty well. But you could also consider, either in conjunction with or separate from, doing the thin exterior metal as well. And then you could have operable for ventilation, if you wish for that. And so there's several, as you're suggesting, Mr. Chair, several alternatives. Are mostly we concerned as far as replacing windows with the primary facade of the front elevation or would those also be talking about the two windows facing the fence? The guidelines are applicable 360 degrees. Okay. So it's applicable to the entire building and it's not just what can be seen, as some people may think. I'm assuming that garage door is what, steel or is it wood? It's a steel door, I believe. Okay, that may be a factor in your favor because that's obviously not the original door for that building. And if I might on that, when you're ready, let me know when you are ready for a little more stuff. I think we're going to need a really good detailed drawing of what you want to do with the sliding doors. Okay. So that we have a better feel for how that's going to actually look and work with the rest of the building. I included the window or door specifications with the application, size-wise, and so the aluminum plaid. Here's the problem, you hit stuff on the back side. It was the double side and I didn't catch it, I'm sorry. It would be a Marvin product. And I'm assuming you'll keep that dental work? Yes, all the, the only thing that the door would be doing would be infilling the garage door. We'd be keeping all the dental work and the header intact. Okay. I somehow don't seem to have, have you all got the specifications? I'm afraid that the Xerox elf may have eaten something that was intended to be included. I don't think we saw that. Chris, rather than get into Elmo, this is pretty small print. If I may, board, I'm just gonna hand this to you all because I think you'd enjoy it better than Elmo. I didn't realize it had a name. So my, my other question would have to do with the divided lights, which I know are part of the main house, but do not appear to have been part of this outbuilding, whether it's appropriate with any window that's changed to have divided lights. Do the, do the, the double hungs, are they at full pane? I'm sorry, can we flip back one? I might not have that picture. They're divided as well. And that may be an issue as well, the buttons. Yes, whether or not to have, I have multiple pane versus one or single, you know, streamline, single light doors, that kind of thing. All that, the guidelines are predicated upon what's the character in the house and what's the character of the garage and then to kind of figure out what would result in making it apparent that it is not a copy of either one and or still be in keeping with the character. It's going to take a little bit of inventorying, if you will, of what the main house has, what the new addition has, which we have that, of course, in our files. Yes, and there should be, well, would it help to have pictures of the back addition that was put on a few years ago? Yes, it would. Because that would kind of, you can stand and see both from the backyard. So I think that probably, and I know they had, this is the exact, that was the exact picture window that we used from the previous project. Which surprises me because picture windows, I mean, it could be a pair of vertically hung windows that read as one, you know, but it'd be rare. I don't know this process off the top of my head until I come over to this property and stand there and go, hmm. Though don't, picture windows are sort of not traditionally within the bounds of the historic district process. I'm not doubting what you're saying, I'm just questioning sitting here. So we're going to need to do, in conjunction with you, a little more inventorying of things, of elements and so forth, and getting more visuals for the board, and getting your drawings that are obviously going to be, with hopefully some assistance of what you're hearing in concept from here, you know, to kind of get us to the next step. Okay. And if I may add, you may really want to study the light patterns in that backyard. Ms. Hill touched on it. You're on a southern elevation and, you know, in the winter you could have a lot of sun coming through those windows. Sure, yeah, yeah. The, it is a pretty, pretty shaded neighborhood if, you know, you all remember. Leaves are gone in the winter. Yeah. But, okay. It's something that you should keep in mind, because you may, what may happen, you may go through all this, you get the windows approved, and what do they do? They'll promptly put up curtains. Yeah. All right. It's a nice little project. Anything else? Ms. Kerr, anything else? No, I'm just sitting here. Staff is realizing that something got eaten out of your report as it got copied for all of us, and so Barry is going to figure out if we do indeed have all this and just somehow missed it. You do have it, so let me gift you back your copy, and we apologize to the board that somehow, it looks to me like it copied one side and failed to copy the back side. It happens sometimes. So we apologize for that, and we can send you that material by email if you'd like it in the meantime, or just wait until the next. I think it can wait. Okay. And, you know, you know, those silly copiers, they just don't know how to copy two-sided. And they don't read our minds. I don't understand that. All right. Anything else? Okay. Thank you so much for, and it is, as Ms. Hill has pointed out, this is a neat little project, and we want to work with you on it. Okay. Do I talk with Mr. Dennis about, from this point on, how to better present or how to? The next step will be you'll prepare your application that will be submitted to us for our review and approval, and Mr. Dennis knows pretty much how we think about these things. So you need to massage it in such a way that it can get. And what the guidelines call for. And stay within the guidelines, and get us down to that wonderful, where I'm saying we're just talking about the standard two conditions. Absolutely. Okay. All right. And certainly, as you would know to know, you're welcome to come back for another informal review, such as this one with the board, before you get to making final drawings, if you so desire. I think we can. But it's going to be your choice. Okay. That's an option as well. How strongly are we feeling about that large picture window, just so that I can more accurately talk to the homeowners and present proper plans next time? Ms. Hill? I do think it fundamentally changes the nature of that elevation. I appreciate the desire to be able to have more kind of view and connection, I think, as much as light itself, because I think controlling the light is going to be a bigger issue. And so having that connection with the backyard, but there may be other ways to do that than actually impacting that elevation of the building. There may be kind of yard ways of doing that. Okay. Josh? I would, yeah, I think you should keep your existing openings as they are. Okay. I think the guidelines pretty much dictate that you can't do what you want to do with that elevation in terms of that picture window. Okay. And they just need to know that. Okay. And the staff would concur with the board's interpretation per the guidelines? Okay. We can work with you on the garage door infilling. That's a different issue. Okay. Every now and then we can add an opening, but it has to relate to the scale and the proportions of the rest of the project. Would another exterior door between those two existing windows be a more favorable addition? Perhaps. Perhaps. But yeah, to get rid of the two existing windows would not work with the guidelines. Okay. Bear in mind, it was a garage and it still sort of needs to be like a garage. Sure. Okay. And I would just say off the top of my head is a caution about the idea of maybe putting a single light door or something between the two windows, that any interruption of that is going to affect your ratio of solids to voids. And that's part of what is making the character of that elevation is the ratio of solids to voids as a garage. Okay. So. All right. Thank you. Thank you for your help. Okay. I don't think we have any other business? No, I don't believe so. In this case then, I think we're ready for a motion to adjourn. So moved. Do I have a second? Second. We stand adjourned. Thank you very much. You belong to the night, living in a river of darkness, beneath the neon light. You were born in the city, concrete under your feet. It's in your blood, it's in your moves, for a man of the street. You can feel it. You can taste it. You can see it. You can face it.