Thank you. All right, go right ahead, Mr. Chairman. Thank you very much. Good afternoon. I would like to welcome you to the May 19th special meeting of the Board of Architectural Review. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the state of emergency, and Governor Beshear's executive orders regarding social distancing, this meeting is being held via teleconference for Senate Bill 150, as signed by the Governor on March 30, 2020, and the Attorney General's opinion 20-05 and in accordance with KRS 61.828826 due to the fact it is not feasible to offer a primary physical location for the meeting. By way of information, the board was established by zoning ordinance in 1958. Our first historic district was Browns Park and we now have a total of 16 historic districts. The board, which is appointed by the mayor and confirmed by the Urban County Council, is a part of the Division of Historic Preservation. The Historic Preservation Office maintains a full-time staff to assist you with your projects. It is our procedure to hear cases in the order in which they're listed on our agenda. In each case, we'll have a presentation by the staff and we'll hear any additional comments from the applicant. I will ask parties that wish to be heard regarding an application to raise their digital blue hand. in order to be allowed to comment as an applicant or a citizen making a public comment. Please keep your microphone muted until you recognize to speak and as you start your comments state your name and address for the public record. Upon conclusion of the specific application you're addressing you will be returned to regular attendee status and you are of course welcome to continue observing the meeting. The board will ask questions or make comments regarding the application and hear comments from any other interested parties. The chair will then ask the board members to enter a motion and take final action. I would like to note the following staff approvals before we begin our review of the applications. There are certain items the staff can approve thereby eliminating the necessity of all applicants to appear before the board. The staff has recommended approval of the following 36 applications. They are as follows by historic districts beginning in the Ashland Park historic district at 977 Fencastle Road renovate chimneys in the Ellsworth historic district at 514 Central Avenue renovate structure at 322 East High Street Tuck Point structure 445 East High Street renovate structure 702 East High Street renovate structure in site at 350 Park Avenue construct fence at 368 Transvaney Park replace the garage roof at 372 Transylvania Park renovate structure at 157 Woodland Avenue remove tree at 161 Woodland Avenue remove tree and at 361 Woodland Avenue renovate structure in the Belcourt Historic District at 255 DeMar Avenue renovate structure at 159 Forest Avenue replace deteriorated windows. At 513 Russell Avenue, renovate structure. At 525 Russell Avenue, install storm windows. In the Caden Down Historic District at 727 Caden Lane, renovate site and install patio. In the Grants Park Historic District at 247 North Mill Street, install radon pipe. In the Mulberry Hill, excuse me, in the Mulberry Hill Historic District at 441 North Limestone re-roof structure at 343 North Limestone replace fencing. In the north side historic district at 331 West 2nd Street renovate structure at 239 North Broadway install a six-foot privacy fence at 624 North Broadway install signs at 473 West 2nd Street replace rear stoop and steps at 466 west 6th street remove deteriorating windows in the pensacola park historic district at 163 pinmocon install a patio at 164 pinmocon park replace garage door at 137 pinocon park replace steps in the south hill historic district at 340 South Broadway, Alter Alden, at 257 South Limestone Renovate Structure, at 275 South Limestone Renovate Structure, at 408 South Mill Street Replace and Rebuild Balcony Deck, at 372 South Upper Street Renovate Structure, at 376 South Upper Street Renovate Structure, at 380 South Upper Street Renovate Structure. In the western suburbs at 749 West Main Street, re-roof structure and finally in the Woodward Heights Historic District at 318 Madison Place. I'm sorry it doesn't state the scope of the application. Ms. Armstrong, you have any idea? It's re-roofing the structure. Okay, re-roof the structure and I will apologize in advance. It's allergy season and I'm going to be regretfully and I can't help it I'll be coughing from time to time. So just bear with it. All right. So we have now turned to our first application. This is 338 Linden Walk. Scope of work is Demolitor Career Edition and Constructed Edition. The applicant is Jim and Susie Goodman. CW Penn is the applicant. Are they present? Mr. Chairman, we have one person with their hand up. I'm going to bring them in. I'm not exactly sure this is okay we'll bring them we'll have them state their name for the record okay could you also bring in mr pen sw pen well he didn't raise his hand that's the problem he did raise his hand i have someone i'm not sure who that's there's mr pen thank you And I have another individual, a guy, so zero. Yes, sir. They had their hand up early on. I'm not exactly sure which case they're in. If you wouldn't mind finding out, I don't think they're on for 171 suburban court. All right. Moving back to attending. Thank you. Mr. Penn, it's good to see you again. How are you? I'm fine. How are you? I'm doing well. We're considering the application for 338 Linden Walk. I will note the staff has recommended, I believe, approval subject to what I would call one substantive provision. Let me read that to you. Provide metal roofing specifications and details to staff for review and approval prior to the issuance of the COA. Are you in agreement with that? Sure. Okay. And the other two are what I've always referred to as our standard conditions, they being if any changes are made that alternate information submitted, resubmit the changes to staff for review and approval prior to start of work. And once reviewed by the other divisions, any changes shall be returned to staff or board for review and approval prior to start of work. Are you in agreement with those conditions? Certainly. All right. Thank you, Mr. Penn. Any questions or comments from the board members? Any questions or comments from the virtual audience? I'll give it a count of 10. Hearing none, I believe the chair is ready for a motion. Mr. Chair, per case number 11720338-G at 338 Linden Walk, I move the board to approve the certificate of appropriateness per the staff conditions, which include one substantive item that I will reread, provide metal roofing specifications and details to staff for review and approval prior to the issuance of a certificate of appropriateness and items two and three are the standard conditions. Thank you. Do you have a second? Second. For Mr. Governor, Mr. Penn, did you have another comment? No. Okay. All right. No. Okay. Any further discussion of the motion? Hearing none, the chair will call the question. All those in favor of the motion say aye. Aye. Opposed, nay. The motion passes and the certificate of probableness as conditioned is approved. Mr. Penn, thank you for your time. thank you I'll see you in about four or five minutes again okay looking forward to seeing you again turning to our next application which is 256 Bell Place in the Bell Court Historic District the scope of work is to model shed and construct shed the applicant Celeste Lewis is the owner is she present bringing her in now Mr. Chairman All right. Ms. Lewis, if you'll turn on your video and your... Oh, there you are. Good afternoon. How are you? Hi, good, thanks. It's good to see you. The application has been recommended for approval by the staff subject to what I have been referring to as the standard two conditions. I'll read them into the record. Once reviewed by the other divisions, resubmit any change to the staff aboard for review and approval prior to the issuance of a COA. And the other being, if any changes are made that alter the information submitted, please resubmit the changes to staff for review and approval prior to the start of work. Are you in agreement with those conditions? Yes. All right. Thank you. Any questions or comments from the board members? All right. Any questions or comments from my virtual audience? And I'll give that a count of 10. Hearing none, the chair is ready for a motion. Mr. Chairman regarding case number 32930256-H at 256 Bell Place I move to approve the application for a certificate of appropriateness with our two standard conditions all right do I have a second got a second from Ms. Hill she raised her hand and I heard I could read your lips okay uh there we go uh any discussion of the motion hearing on the chair will call the question all those in favor of the motion say aye aye opposed nay the motion passes and the coa as conditioned is approved thank you um miss lewis thank you very much and good luck with your project Thank you. Okay. Turning to our next applicant, this being at 741 Caden Lane in the Caden Town Historic District. The owner applicant is Kendall and Adam Joyce. Are they present? And the scope of work is install shed and expand drive. should be coming in now Mr. Chairman I see his avatar Mr. Joyce if you can remain in avatar status but I need to have you turn on your mic can you hear us uh-oh i'm here can you hear me okay uh do you want to turn on your video or not yeah i am trying to figure that out i apologize i'm on my one it's it's always we've been doing it so much we've all become pros at it now just thinks us I'm here though Alright, very good This is the application for Catantown Historic District So if the work is install or shed Expand the drive The staff has recommended approval Of your application subject to the Standard 2 conditions Did you hear me read those into the record On the prior applications? Yes sir Are you in agreement with those? Yes Just for the record, once removed by the other divisions resubmitting changes to staff or board for review and approval prior to the start of work. The second one being giving changes are made that alter the information submitted, resubmit the changes to the staff for review and approval prior to the start of work. Any questions or comments from the board members? Okay, I will ask for questions or comments from the virtual audience and I'll give that a count of 10. all right hearing none i believe the chair is ready for a motion mr chair per case number 02960741-a at 741 caden lane i move to approve the application for a certificate of appropriateness per the condition so noted. All right. And do I have a second? For Mr. Guilpham, any discussion on the motion? Hearing none, the chair will call the motion. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed, nay. The motion passes and the COA as conditioned is approved. Thank you, Mr. Joyce, for your time and good luck with your project. Thanks, sir. All right. Thank you. Turning to our next application at 243 North Mill Street in the Grants Park historic district. Scope of work is the Mallage Garage. The applicant is Crow Allen LLC. The applicant is Darren Taylor. Is Mr. Taylor here? coming in now Mr. Chairman. All right thank you. Good afternoon. Good afternoon how are you today? I'm well how are you all? I'm doing well it's good to see you again. Mr. Taylor the staff has recommended approval of the application subject to the what we call the standard conditions. I'm going to read them into the record and ask for your agreement. If any changes are made that alter the information submitted resubmit the changes the staff will review and approval prior to the start of work and once reviewed by the other divisions any changes shall be returned to staff or the board for review and approval start of work. Are you in agreement with those? Yes sir. Thank you. Any questions or comments by the board members? Hearing none I'll ask for any questions or comments from the virtual audience I'll I'll give that a count of 10. Hearing none, chair is ready for a motion. Mr. Chair, regarding case number 13140243-E at 243 North Mill Street, I move to approve the application for a certificate of appropriateness with our two standard conditions. Thank you. Do I have a second? Second. Any discussion or the motion? Hearing none, the chair will call the question. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed? The motion passes and the COA is conditioned, is approved. Thank you, Mr. Taylor. Thank you. All right. Thank you very much. Turning now to our next case. Mr. Thompson, okay. At 315 West 6th Street in the north side of the Stark District, the scope of work is constructed retaining wall. The applicant is Megan Genro and Daniel Erdick, owner applicant. Are they present? Coming in now, sir. Thank you. Mr. Ehrlich, how are you today? You're muted. I'm good. How are you? Sorry about that. Good. I apologize. Okay. The staff has recommended approval of your application subject to what I refer to as our standard two conditions. You're nodding your head. Have you already heard me read them into the record? I have several times. Okay. In that case, then, are you in agreement with them? I am, yes. All right. I will consider them read into the record since they have been read numerous times now. Any questions or comments from the staff members, from the board members? All right. I will ask for any questions or comments from the virtual audience. I'll give that a count of 10. hearing now the chair is ready for a motion Mr. Chair per case number 17310315-F at 315 West 6th Street I move to approve the COA application per the noted conditions I do have a second. Second for Mr. Gilpin. Any discussion on the motion? Hearing none, the chair will call the question. All those in favor of the motion say aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed, nay. Motion passes and the COA as conditioned is approved. Thank you, Mr. Erwick. Thank you. You all have a good day. And good luck on your project. Thank you. All right. okay uh turning now to 163 penmoken park in the pensacola park to start district uh the scope of work is installed shed the applicant is sarah sarah williamson joshua joshua williamson brannham owner applicant are either those individuals present coming in now sir thank you Mr. Brandon Can you hear me? Yes, we can hear you now. Thank you. Mr. Brandon this is the install a shed on your property and the staff has recommended approval of your application subject to what I've been referring to as standard two conditions they being once reviewed by the other city divisions resubmitting changes to staff or board for review and approval prior to start of work and if any changes are made that altered information submitted resubmit the changes to staff for review and approval prior to start of work are you in agreement with those standard conditions yes sir all right thank you any questions or comments by the board members any questions or comments from the virtual audience i'll give it a count of 10. Hearing none, the Chair is ready for a motion. Mr. Chair, regarding case number 14820163-B at 163 Penn Mookin Park, I move to approve the application for a certificate of appropriateness with our two standard conditions. All right, thank you. Do I have a second? Second. All right. Any comments or questions about the motion itself? Hearing none, the chair will call the question. All those in favor of the motion say aye. Aye. If all those may, motion. All right, the motion carries and the significant appropriateness as conditioned is approved. Thank you, Mr. Branham. Thank you. All right, good luck with your project. Thank you, goodbye everyone. All right, thank you. All right. Turning now to 171 Suburban Court at Pensacola Park Historic District. The scope of work is replaced windows. The applicant is Linda Gassaway. Ms. Gassaway, can you turn on your, and do you want to have your video on or not? I know you're here and the staff has recommended disapproval of your application. I'm assuming that you would like to be heard on this application. Yeah, I was just following the directions I got in the mail sent to attend this meeting. Okay, let me explain to you a couple of procedural issues. We have other applications that I can probably routinely sound and dispose of before we get to yours. And so what we'll have is I'll come back to you. We'll have a presentation by the staff regarding this application. Then we'll hear any comments that you may have with regard to it. All right. Yep. So hopefully in about 15 or 20 minutes, we'll be back to you. Okay. That's fine. All right. Thank you so much. All right. Turning now to our next application at 221 Dansler Court, Seven Parks Historic District. The scope of work is Construct a Garage, and the applicant is Chris Cashin, and the applicant, again, is Mr. C.W. Penn. Mr. Penn? Mr. Finn, good to see you again. Long time. You also. All right. I will note that with respect to this application, the staff has recommended approval subject to the standard two conditions, which I have previously read to you. Are you in agreement with those conditions? I've got those memorized. Okay. I'm sure you do by this point. Mr. Cashin you just now came in I review with Mr. Penn the standard conditions being once reviewed by the other divisions resubmitting changes to staff or board for review and approval prior to start of work and if any changes are made that alter the information submitted resubmit the changes to staff for review and approval prior to start of work your architect has agreed to those are you in agreement as well yes I am thank you so much thank you do I have any questions Do I have any questions or comments from the board members? All right. I'm going to ask for questions or comments from the audience. I'll give that a count of 10. Hearing none, the chair is ready for a motion. Mr. Chair, for case number 05-220-221-C at 221 Gantzler Court, I move to approve the COA application per the noted conditions. Thank you. And do I have a second? Second. All right, I have a second. Any discussion on the motion? Hearing none, the chair will call the question. All those in favor of the motion say aye. Aye. Opposed, nay. The motion passes and the COA as conditioned is approved. Thank you for your time and good luck with your project. Thank you, sir. All right. Thank you. All right. Turning to our next application. This is a two, I'm sorry, 523 Arcadia Park in the Seven Parks Historic District. The scope of work is paint a brick structure. And I'm looking for Hardin and Christie Field. uh mr joyce sorry i'm having mr joyce come back up to see he's gone okay this field yes and i apologize for coughing it's just it's the season it's summer in contacter and you've got a great background by the way i love the windows Thank you. with no conditions, recommends approval of the program, because there's nothing else to do. I'll pick out the right pink color. Hope you don't shock your neighbors too much. No purple. Enjoy your project. Okay. No purple. Thank you. Any comments or questions by the staff members? I'm not sorry. Board members, excuse me. Hearing none, I'm going to give the virtual audience a moment to comment, so I'll give them a count of 10. Hearing none, the chair is ready for a motion to approve this application. Mr. Chair, regarding case number 00510523-E at 523 Arcadia Park, I move to approve the application for a certificate of appropriateness. All right. And do I have a second? Second. Okay, it's been seconded. Any further discussion of the motion? Hearing none, the chair will call the question. All those in favor of the motion say aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed, nay. The motion passes and I'm so used to saying it as condition. Your application is approved, period. Thank you. Good luck with your project, ma'am. Thank you. Okay, thank you. Bye-bye. Okay, turning to 258 South Ashland Avenue in the South Ashland Central Avenue Historic District. That's always a mouthful. The scope of work is modify brick porch, construct deck, patio, and landscaping. The owner is Andrew and Anna Smith, and the applicant is Scott and Robin Campbell. Are those individuals present? Come in now, Scott. Okay. And I would just know for the record, the modification of the porch has been withdrawn from this application. So it's all right. Did I miss that? And it I think it may have written on something. I just want to let you know that was the case. I think that's actually in the stack part, but just sort of read still on the. All right. So all we have right now is constructed deck patio and landscape, correct? Right. All right. Mr. or Ms. Campbell. yes Ms. Campbell do you want to remain in avatar status or share a video with us I'm trying to it's a process I don't know I can't seem to make it somewhere on your computer either at the bottom or at the top you'll see some toggle switches and one will have a video video start video how about that there you go you succeeded miss campbell how are you good to see you very good thank you okay um as we noted before we got started apparently you have withdrawn the application the part of the application dealing with modifying your brick porch correct and so we're only dealing with your application to construct the deck patio and landscaping Right. All right. The staff has recommended approval subject to what we've been referring to as our standard two conditions. I'll read them into the record again. Once reviewed by the other divisions, resubmit any changes to staff aboard for review and approval prior to start of work. And secondly, if any changes are made that alter the information submitted, resubmit the changes to staff for review and approval prior to start of work. Are you in agreement with those conditions? Aye. Thank you. Thank you. Any questions or comments by the board members? Okay, do I have any questions or comments from my virtual audience? I'll give it a count of ten. Hearing none, I believe I'm ready for a motion. Mr. Chair, per case number 00710258-E at 258 South I move to approve the application for the certificate of appropriateness per the conditions noted. Thank you. Do I have a second? Second. All right. Is there any further discussion on the motion? Hearing none, the chair will call the question. All those in favor of the motion say aye. Aye. Aye. All those opposed? The motion passes and the COA is conditioned as approved. Good luck with your project, Ms. Campbell. Thank you very much. Thank you. All right. All right. Turning to our next application at 107 South Ashland. Again, in the South Ashland Central Avenue Historic District. Scope of work has demolished dormer and constructed a new larger dormer. The owner applicant is Ralph and Emily Whitley. Are they present? Yes sir coming in now. All right thank you. Mr Whitley how are you today? I'm good how are you? I'm good. Good. Ms. Woodley, unfortunately, the staff has reviewed your application. I know we had a consideration at the last meeting. They are recommending disapproval of your application. I'm assuming you want to be heard on that. Yes. Our procedure says I have another application ahead of yours that needs to be heard first. So I'm going to go ahead and take that one up and then we'll come to you. Okay, thank you. Okay, all right, thank you. All right, so let's go back to, and thank you for your time, Mr. Whitley, this is just the way the process works. Can we go back to Ms. Gassaway? Coming in, sir. Thank you. Okay, Ms. Gassaway, thank you for your time. this is 171 suburban court you're now starting what we call the hearing on on your application you have the staff has recommended this approval and i'm gonna allow miss armstrong to make a presentation of the staff's findings with respect to the application and then you'll be given an opportunity to discuss it and then we'll have some questions for you probably okay okay uh Ms. Armstrong? Okay, hold on one second. Bring my slideshow up. Oh, there we go. This is the property at 171 suburban court and the proposal is to replace windows. As you can see in the staff report, there's a timeline that's been sent by both Ms. Gassaway and myself regarding our conversations regarding the windows on this. The proposal that or what had occurred has been the replacement of a combination of a two-over-one and six-over-one historic wood windows with vinyl windows having a mutton sandwiched between glass that has a prairie style. And we'll see that here in a little bit. And also, of course, there's been the wrapping of the material around the surround as well that at the window casing itself. And this began back in December when Ms. Gassaway had actually contacted the Heritage Council, sort of trying to find out more about the National Register and they sent her to us. And then Ms. Gassaway had various conversations and emails back and forth. As you can see in the staff report that there's much conversation about this. And we advised the applicant that it was not appropriate to replace the windows and suggested meetings, but the holidays sort of got in the way, and then the windows had been replaced. So staff sent a stop work order to the applicant and an application for her to fill out to make application for the windows that had been replaced. And I'll walk through the house styles. As you can see in this image, the windows here, the two over one, the six over one here. And then, oh, you can't see this very well, but this is sort of another image from Google Street View. This is an image from the survey that was done with the H1 overlay or the National Register 2, showing the six over one here. And then this is most recently with the replacement of this prairie style window that's vinyl. As you can see here, the images of the change in style, change in material. and loss of profile and also in sidelights. There's more details. This is the west side of the structure. And this is the back. Pacing north. and this is the south side or the east side sorry and this is the side windows on the driveway side is that a compressed glass mutton or what um between glass okay all right or in between glass Okay. You have a question in that style before? This is sort of a prairie style, not used often in Lexington. Okay. And the guidelines are included for your reference findings. The proposal is in direct violation of the design guidelines. Typically, staff is able to review the windows prior to the replacement to determine if they are candidate for replacement where the windows may be repaired however staff was not able to review the windows because they had already been replaced without a coa staff attempted to make contact to determine the condition of windows numerous times and the applicant was informed of the guidelines prior to the work the replacement of the existing historic sashes and installation new satch is not appropriate nor in keeping with the lopc design guidelines the design principle says window openings windows window details size and shape of the elements help establish rhythm scale proportion of buildings and reflect architectural style and character windows should be maintained or repaired to match the original design and if windows are deteriorated beyond repair the installation of new wood windows to match the original design is recommended when is a baked enamel or anonized aluminum clad may be considered only if windows cannot be repaired final vinyl cloud windows are not allowed staff finds the replacement should occur only to match in the materials size and design the windows that the applicant installed do not meet the materials design or the profile design in addition the wrapping of the brick mold or casing is not within guidelines 1af that states architectural details should not be covered with vinyl aluminum or artificial siding and of course staff recommends and style the application to replace the windows and wrapping them. Ms. Armstrong, before we go to the applicant, can you characterize to me the conversation you had with her prior to the installation of these windows with respect to your advice that you gave to her as to what she can and cannot do? It was pretty clear that I told her we could not, vinyls windows were not allowed, and that I really wanted to set up a meeting to have a conversation with her about this, But it never seemed to happen. You know, she went out of town and things got sort of shifted around. And so in, you know, the guidelines were sent to her about what the guidelines were besides verbally telling her. And then staff also did talk to the contractor to tell them that that was not permitted. These are Roger windows. What kind of windows? Roger windows, which is a vinyl. It's just a style windows. It's a Roger's windows, and they only do vinyl windows. And so staff was clear about that. as you can see um she did actually submit a timeline as well about talking to that but apparently by the time she talked to um miss thompson at the harris kentucky harris council she had actually already purchased the windows um staff told her that it was a violation for to put those in and that she would need to go before the board to ask for those and she went ahead and did that work um and then staff did cider and and then you can see that um staff did send in the email conversations that we had had with the applicant as well. You know, trying to get a hold of her and trying to talk to her a bit more and they had already done. But I've also submitted a timeline about our conversations and what had been said to her. Okay, Ms. Casaway? Can we bring her in or bring up her? of my screen. Ms. Cassaway, this is your opportunity to be heard on this issue. I'm sorry we're in this situation and I'd like to hear what happened from you. Yeah, well, I mean, I'm not I would just like to add a few things. I'm not going to be redundant and and copy over things that Amelia already said about the process. Yeah, my first understanding of what I read was that it was within scope of doing something. It had to do with the paperwork we received through the neighborhood newsletter that was sending the information out. And it was my misunderstanding. landing. And so we started the process of looking for new windows, as Amelia said. And then it was through that and talking to someone down the street, they asked a question. I said, well, I wonder, you know, maybe I misunderstood. So that's when I contacted Frankfurt, who put me in touch with Amelia. And but we had already signed the proposal with back construction. so I was trying to at least I mean I was I wasn't trying to be dishonest I just said okay apparently we don't understand so I know I spoke to Amelia a couple times and then Amelia spoke to Joe who was the salesman contact for our job I guess you call it and since the windows were already in production fabrication they couldn't cancel it and so um you know they joe and amelia spoke back and forth and it was my understanding that you know what am i supposed to i can't cancel it i mean i could cancel it that'd be just twenty thousand dollars um down the drain um that we would eat um which sounds like I'll have to eat it anyway in the end. So then once I got the paperwork in the mail, the letter that ceased the work or something, it had already been done. And that was the understanding that Joe had with Amelia that, well, they were going to be produced and installed because they couldn't cancel the order. That wasn't going to eat the cost. I know it's a small 20,000 inches. the drop in the bucket for, I mean, it's not that much money when you're talking about construction, but, you know, they didn't want to, they weren't going to just say, oh, okay, never mind, we'll just forget about the windows. So, yeah, and then I was gone over Christmas break, so we were back and forth a little bit, and then once I got that letter about the cease and desist or whatever, I'm not familiar with all these terms the first time I've done this, so bear with me, and that was I guess late March or early April and that's when my mom died so I was in New Jersey for a couple weeks because that was an unexpected death and so that that but I was forthcoming with Amelia and she said that's fine just get the paperwork filled out I had a little trouble filling out the paperwork had some questions because it felt I couldn't understand why I was requesting a certificate of approval prior to work when the work was already done. Like, so some of it seemed non-applicable or something, you know. So I tried to state everything and that's where we are. So I just need to find out, you know, I'm sorry it's happened. I didn't try to go ahead without. I just got to the point where I had a proposal that I agreed to pay and really couldn't afford to just lose $20,000. So I just need to know what happens now. What do we need to do? Have it torn out? You know, I talked to Joe at that construction about what it would cost to do the windows as recreate the wood windows and all that. And that was totally out of our price range. So, you know, it was either cancel the order let's you know we eat the cost and then just let the windows just be just leave them because i wouldn't be able to afford you know replacing them like that not my not working in education okay uh if you leave the windows in place ultimately you're going to have a problem selling your house because if i understand the procedure correctly if this matter cannot be resolved by agreement, then the city has the right to take you to court to have you remove those windows and have them replaced. I am sorry this happened. And we've been, unfortunately, dealing with these kinds of situations too often lately. But the guidelines are expressly and explicitly clear that vinyl windows are not permitted. Now, you do have an opportunity to take this up on appeal. You can take it to the Planning Commission, which is why Ms. Armstrong was fairly diligent in making you submit your paperwork, because this gives you an opportunity to have this application considered by the Planning Commission. but they're bound by the guidelines as well but that is the process I wish you had consulted with an attorney about your situation with BAC because frankly they know better they know this is a historic district they need too much like I said I was just trying to listen to professionals both in the short preservation I understand and I am so sorry this happened to you but frankly to some extent that construction should take some of the blame because they know better they know where the historic districts are yeah he said he wasn't aware you know i'm i'm sorry he does uh or the said or the company does the sales rep may pretend that he didn't but i mean this is this may be an issue you might have said back to your contractor because they do too much construction work in this town not to know where they're working. Any comments from the staff members? I mean, from the board members? All right. I'm going to ask for any comments from the virtual audience. I'll give the count 10. All right. Ms. Gassaway, first of all, my condolences about your mother. I know this has probably been a very difficult time for you. But the regulation and the staff and the guidelines are too clear. So I'm going to go ahead and ask for a motion to disapprove your application. And as I say, you can consult with the staff attorney, if you like, about the appeal process. I believe Mr. Hurt. Consult with what? You can consult with the staff attorney, Mr. Kurt, I believe is his name, about the appeal process. There will be a letter sent about that. Okay. You can't really contact our attorney's process. So I'll get some information about what to do. You will. And I would strongly encourage you to... Attorneys aren't as expensive as people sometimes believe, especially in this kind of a work. I strongly encourage you to talk to an attorney. I understand. All right. I would say after, you know, when talking to Mr. Henson at Back Construction, who we've worked with quite a bit, he was not aware that this had become an H-1 overlay. yeah that's what he told me and and it had been fairly new for us it was less than a year i think when we started so right it was a bit of a learning curve so it wasn't that i i guess people don't read the paper go ahead ma'am it wasn't i'm sorry never mind it would just be reiterating so that's fine no no there was a great deal of publicity about this overlay being put in place. There was also public meetings and public hearings. Right. I'm not saying I didn't know about the overlay. I knew about the overlay. I didn't understand the paperwork that I had where it started out with a paragraph about there are no federal restrictions. But if you want, you can check your local people. There might be some things. And it just was kind of a, I didn't see that second section. And I admit fault for that. So it wasn't that I knew that I couldn't get the vinyl windows until after they were already. Either way, it's okay. I'll follow up. Thank you. You're welcome. All right. I'm going to call for, I'm going to ask for a motion to disapprove of this application. Do I have emotions? I cannot make emotions. Clearly, that's really difficult, Jim. I know that. It's both heartbreaking and feels counter to what we want to be accomplishing, but the guidelines are clear. I don't disagree with that. I don't like it either. I have a general question. What would a process be to get Pensacola Park out of the historic district? that process began I'm not sure to be honest with you whether the entire district can be has to be withdrawn or whether certain streets can withdraw it require modification and probably a petition process Ms. Armstrong you're muted I wasn't quite sure if Mr. Horn would answer that question Mr. Orn? I would have to go back and look at the process, but I'm pretty certain it would require, it's sort of like a reverse process to have the H-1 put in place. So if that's something you want to examine, we can certainly examine it. And Josh, I don't think that's the solution. I think the solution may be the Neighborhood Association should take upon itself the obligation of really educating their members about what is included and what is not included in the guidelines. Staff is available, I'm sure, to meet with the association to take them through a tutorial of what is required by the guidelines. If we don't have a motion, this application just sits dormant and she can't take it up on appeal. Chairman, Mr. Chairman, regarding case number 18130171-A at 171 Suburban Court, I very painfully move to disapprove the application for a certificate of appropriateness. Okay, and I'll say you use the problem. I'll second the motion to move it forward. All right. We need to move forward with this. It's not easy. So I call any further discussion on the motion? Hearing none, the chair calls the question. All those in favor of the motion say aye. Aye. Aye. All right, motion passes and the COA is disapproved. Ms. Gassaway, thank you for trying to work with the process and thank you. And I really do strongly advise you, you need to talk to an attorney. This is a lot of money. I apologize. Okay, thank you. All right, let's move to our next application then. Do we need to take a break? Okay. All right. This is going to be, this is 107 South Ashland in the South Ashland Central Avenue Historic District. Proposal is to demolish Dormer and construct new larger Dormer. There's the applicant here. What is the name, sir? I'm sorry, Ralph and Emily Whitley. I didn't realize you didn't have them in front of you. Coming in now. Thank you. All right, Mr. Whitley, afternoon. Our normal procedure, I think you've already heard me go through this a little bit, is for the staff to present their findings with respect to your application. And then there's an opportunity for you to present your reason for why you believe the application should be approved. And then we'll have a question and answer period and discussion period. Okay. Okay. Yeah. All right. So who is the staff member in charge of this one? I think it's Barry, isn't it? I've lost. It is Barry. I think I've lost my chambers. It looks like you've lost the chamber feed. Yeah. It should be gone. There we go. There we go. All right. Barry. Turn on your microphone and can you bring up the share screen? Yes. All right. This is, of course, 107 South Ashland. As you mentioned, you've heard this case in the last meeting. So 107 South Ashland, the Ashland is requesting a certificate of appropriateness to remove an existing dormer and to construct a new larger dormer in its place. At the June 26, 2019 BOAR meeting, the board approved a COA to renovate the rear addition, remove the exterior fire escape, construct a deck, garage, driveway, and sidewall. This proposal was in front of the BOAR in the April 21st meeting. The applicant has submitted revisions to the proposal for this meeting. The proposal is to remove one of four matching historic dormers. One dormer is located on each of the roof plates of the main pyramidal roof of the structure on this circa 1918 American Forestile historic structure. The existing dormers are nicely intact, gable-roofed with two windows that have diamond-shaped tracery pattern. The proposed dormer is to be located on the north-facing roof plate, removing the historic dormer and constructing the new gable-roofed dormer that will rise from the exterior north wall, the brick wall, of the main structure. It'll be longer than the scale of the existing historic dormers and reuse the historic windows. The guidelines are included for your use. Findings. Staff finds that the proposal to demolish the historic cable roof dormer and replace it with the new longer dormer does not meet the design guidelines. The design principle states, architectural detailing is a major component of defining the building's character and style. Historic architectural detailing should be preserved and maintained. Guideline 11A requires that architectural details should be maintained and retained and shall not be removed or changed if original to the building. The construction of a new longer dormer in place of an existing dormer of the same gable roof design reusing the historic windows does not meet guideline 11D, which states architectural details, including the installation of additional ornament, which gives a building an imitation of historic appearance is not allowed. Per the window design principle, window openings, windows, window details, and the size and shape of these elements help establish rhythm, scale, and proportion of the building and reflect architectural style and character. Windows should be maintained. Guideline 124A states, windows should be preserved and maintained in their original location, size, and design with the original materials and number of paints. Original framing of the opening should be retained and maintained. Dormers per 2A5A and 2A5B should be in keeping with the character and scale of the building and should not be introduced on front elevations, but may be added to the rear or secondary elevations, if compatible with the building design. The proposed dormer is located on a highly visible prominent elevation, which along with the other elevations is historically significant. The proposed dormer is not in character or scale with the historic structure, which has small significant character defining dormers on each of the main roof plates. The existing dormers create a symmetry and design language. The proposed longer dormer is not compatible with that symmetry and language. The location of the proposed dormer is on a primary, not a rear or secondary elevation of the historic structure. The proposed dormer is not secondary, smaller and simpler to the original building and roofline and scale design and placement, per 2A5D. The volume of the proposed new dormer is out of scale to the four existing dormers and will directly rise from the exterior north wall of this historic structure and be longer than the four matching historic dormers on the pyramidal roof, one of which is proposed to be demolished. demolished. It's over-scaled and inappropriate to the character and design of the American four-square style historic structure. The replacing of the historic dormer with the new longer dormer of the same design reuses historic windows. If allowed, we'll confuse the eye and create a false sense of history. Now let me go through the photos and show exactly what we're talking about. This is 107 South Ashland. Looking from Ashland. This is the dormer in question. And as you can see, it matches this front dormer. They're both readily visible from the main street of Ashland and somewhat Main Street. Another view of it. and as noted the front of the storm would be extended out and would come to the face of this brick wall. Okay. So this is the proposed drawings. So this is where, from this elevation actually, will be, the change will be mainly in the height of the dormer to the bearing of the roof of that dormer. And here, You can see, well, I keep pulling up stuff on Zoom that I'm not wanting to look at. So you can see how in the section it's going to come to this exterior wall, and it will be the same height, but it would be significantly longer than the four remaining dormers that are all symmetrical. about the roof. And that is the end of the staff report. All right. Thank you, Ms. Whitley. I think we had discussed, you know, perhaps we could finesse something, but I'm not sure we're going to be able to succeed in that. But I want to hear your proposal. Sure. So I don't know if you've looked at the revised sections and elevations. I believe they were in our packet, yes. Yeah, if you look at the photo that Barry had up a second ago, which I may have something similar, but probably not. Or if you were to, let me see if on grant these elevations. Which photo were you? It's the one where you showed the dormer where you're standing in front of Donato's. In the dormer that you can clearly see from Richmond Road? Well, you can't. Well, Richmond, it's got an increase here. East or West rather. Yeah, from Richmond Road, it's got an HVAC unit in front of it. This is actually on Ashland looking at it diagonally. I know. Unfortunately for you, I drive by that house almost every day. Yeah. I'm coming down Richmond Road, and I see it clearly. Yeah. Are you bringing that photo up? It should be up. Shared the screen. Nope. actually you need to click on the photo itself he brought up the PowerPoint slides or PowerPoint program you know it just hit me you're not masked Yes, it's a very odd feeling, but much more comfortable. Can you see that? Nope. Well, why can I not? I believe that photo is in our pocket, Mr. Whitley. In fact, I know it is. It should be. It is. We have that photo, Mr. Whitley, in our package. I don't have it, but I thought there was a key feature that is on that photo that I think is worth mentioning. I mean, I guess, honestly, I mean, the interpretation of the staff is that we are requesting to modify the size of the dormer, which is pull it forward slightly. If that, you know, that is the request. If that can't be accommodated even slightly, then there really is nothing that can be said. But I do think that the request to move the dormer is not as extreme as it might seem. If you were to look at that photo, the bottom of the windows are about two inches above the roof. If you were to look at our elevation, we're essentially matching the dimensions that are above those windows between the eave of that gable end of that dormer on both sides of the window. So if you look at the section view, you'll see that we're doing what I think her name's Susan or Susanna. That was on the other call last time. She was recommending. Okay, thank you. If you can go to that number five. They're always there. Okay, exactly. So if you kind of take a look there, you can see how the bottom of those windows is barely above the flashing for the roof. How much distance is there? How many inches is that? I would say two. Inches or two feet? No, two inches above. Oh, you're talking about between the edge of the window and the edge of the roof? Yes. I would guess two feet, but we can look at the section for that to be specific. All right. But more what I'm talking about. Yeah, that section here. Let me see if I can share my screen. Two foot three inches. Okay. So if you zoom in on that. It looks like drawing number two has got the dimension close enough. You can zoom in to it. Can you zoom in on this? What I see is three foot one in the staircase. So there would be additional. Yeah, zoom in right there. There you go. There you go. Oh, Barry, you're getting better and better. Yes. So my point is, is that in our last conversation, you know, we were talking about widening the dormer and extending it all the way out to the very, very edge of the roof. And Suzanne, I think, had brought up the concept of, can you fur the wall out? And at the time, didn't really see how that could possibly work. I didn't quite understand it. And then there was a conversation about, you know, can you bring the dormer out and not widen it? So basically, we took those two ideas and combined them, furred the wall out and then brought it out only as much as necessary to try to get a stairway in there that would fit. So it's kind of, we're trying to make both of those worlds work. If you look at the other elevation, which is the side elevation, Barry, if you could move to that, which shows the front of the dormer. Right. Elevation? Yeah, the one that shows the front of the dormer. This? Yes, that right there, if you zoom in on that dormer. That took me back. Yeah, so if you can see, I mean, it's hard to see, at least on my sketch, it's broken up, the one I'm seeing, but you can see the existing dorm roof intersection that's bubbled. That arrow points to a line where the existing roof line is. Yes, exactly. It's two inches below the bottom of the window. and essentially effectively from the elevation view, we've made the area below the window and above the window essentially equal. So that's the difference in perspective that we've created by trying to use those two ideas to find a way to make the stairs work. If it ultimately is that no dormer can be modified on a street, on that elevation, then there really is no option that I can see other than you do have to decline it. But, I mean, if there is an option to modify it at all, I don't know how you can be any more careful than what we've proposed. I clearly would be requesting some sort of consideration for the whole circumstance, which was and I don't know if you remember the way that the stairs on the second floor moved to the attic I've got those photos available if you want to see those again as to why this is all kind of coming up To be clear this is rental property No, this is it was rental property so you kind of walk through and see what we're dealing with here Yeah, so see that that that is about a 54 foot head clearance 54 inch so we're really just trying to we're already going to fur the wall out bring it over a little and then try to make it work uh is is kind of the the request um it is not a rental property it was we bought it to turn it into single family and we've got the documents done, but we are, and we live in it. We live in about two thirds of it. And we are basically trying to make, this is the last piece to make the drawings work. Okay, so the upstairs is going to be used for what purpose? The attic. Yeah. It would probably be a bonus room, ultimately. Occupied space is the plan. We've talked about a bedroom, but you've got escape. You probably got something that had to be done to, you know, facilitate getting out of the third floor, fifth or bedroom. Well, if it's not, if it's being used for personal use, except for your own personal protection, no, you don't need that fire escape. Oh yeah, maybe so. I was just kind of going, I'm not researching depth on the bedroom. I just know I'd heard someone say that. Okay. All right. Any other questions? Are there any questions from the staff member or from the board members? And let's bring back our grid if we could. So I just have a few comments and maybe questions, but there was a thorough discussion last time. And Mr. Whitley was very accommodating and trying to, because the last dormer was gigantuan, it was a large dormer. and in the scale of what he's proposing now with the ridge line matching the ridge line of the dormer on the front of the house and the width matching it's just really the the extension of the width that extra two feet out to sit on the masonry wall and below that wall we have an opening historic opening or at least i understood it to be a historic opening um that went into that stairway historically that's being closed up in a new fixed glass window being put in its place because of the reconfiguration of the stairway. And please correct me if I'm wrong on that. So I'm just wondering if there isn't, is it the duplication of the reuse of those exact historic windows, that as just, it's the face of it, it's the length of that dormer. I'm trying to think through, since I do think the scale is much more respectful and accommodating to the other dormers, whether it's the reuse of the historic windows, whether by making this, the length of it to work as a stairway whether change in the window type to acknowledge that the face of that the exterior face of it has changed whether that would get us where we need to go and and that it have some more contextual relationship to that new fixed glass window that's in the brick wall down below it so that's the question I'm posing for board conversation Okay. Mr. Guilford? I really tend to agree with staff on this one, to be honest. And if, I mean, if this did go forward with tearing off the dormer and putting a new one back, it should be noticeably new, right? So I certainly agree with the staff when they say that reusing the old window would be a problem. I'm certain of that. And I think that's the dilemma that we're confronted with, is that those dormers are so uniform in their appearance, they are a defining feature of the force wear. Yes. Your solution, Mr. Whitley, frankly strikes me as a pragmatic one, that let's save the window, let's make it not look too terribly different from the other dormers, but give yourself just a little bit more room to maneuver in. and part of me is inclined to agree with that because I'm not sure just by lengthening that bringing it down if you will to the roof line if that's going to be such a disparity between from the other dormers that is going to be disruptive to the rhythm of that that four square. I was thinking am I sort of touching on your question there kind of? Yes Mr. Ridley? Oh I was just going to say I thought we only extended it about one foot, three inches. But I'll know you're right. It was two foot three. I did want to point out it wasn't going to rest on that exterior wall. We were just doing the minimum we could on the dormer. But I mean, you know, it doesn't have to be the historical window that's there. if that's the problem. I mean, the back dormer has been kind of modified by somebody. And I know that's probably not an important elevation, but it no longer has the hexagonal windows. I mean, I could reuse them there if that helps. But I mean, ultimately, I don't really know what less I could do to that dormer to make this work. But I mean, I'll do whatever. I just don't. I thought that I thought this was in response to the conversations we last had. Well, and to be honest with you, you have. I mean, you have given us a proposal that we actually thought would be approvable. We didn't make any promises that could be approved. Of course. You have made a good faith effort to make this work. I think I think an issue that we didn't give full consideration to is when you take out the historic window and be true to the fact that this is going to be a new change that you are upsetting the scale and rhythm of that building and that's I think that's our dilemma at this point you have unfortunately a very unique building with those managing dormers miss hill you anything yeah i still it's not rebuild if i understand correctly it's not rebuilding the whole dorm room it's pulling the exterior what i call face of the building which faces northeast i guess um pulling that out toward donato's uh that two feet three inches It's not reforming. It's not tearing down the whole dormer and rebuilding, resizing the whole thing. It's it's to. And so this conversation has so many levels of issues. And I do understand the purity of the historic four square. But when we talk about use of historic buildings in growing need for density to protect our the growth in our community and protect our historic neighborhoods and buildings. All that I hear that Mr. Whitley is trying to do is to get code clearance headroom to be able to get up that chair. And he has shrunk down all of his ideas to the bare minimum he can present to us to accomplish that. And so given that and given that it's just that it's just stretching that dormer out, it's not reshaping or resizing the rest of it, is the acknowledgement that that elevation of face of it is all new and needs a different type of newer window to distinguish it. So that I'm not as alarmed about the when I look at the different dormers, there are some slight variations. I do agree this one comes out closer to the edge of the roof, but there still is roof slope that shows beyond it. It doesn't extend all the way out to that. But to acknowledge that there has been some adjustment made where that original window was no longer exists. That's what I was asking for board consideration. Okay. Mr. Whitley, take me through, how would you actually construct this dormer? Are you going to keep the existing dormer in place and just add to it? Is that what you're going to be doing? Or do you take it off and rebuild? Well, I mean... What would you flat it with? Go ahead. Sorry. What would you flat it with? Oh, it was just hardy board. And then use the, well, conceptually, for the other dormers, when those renovations come, it's just going to be lapped hardy board. And then it's got the shake on the front. And then restore the trim that's there. And just use what's there, essentially. Or have it shaped if it's not salvageable. On the dormer face in Main Street, the thought was to do exactly the same thing. I mean, use hardy board, shake for the front, trim it out. And then it's just got on the face of the dormers where the windows are surrounded. It is simply it looks like it's just one by six plank. It's not really anything special. It's just flat wood with a butt joint. now your proposal doesn't say anything but the dormer facing Ashland does it remember there is a previously approved COA of course I don't remember that that was just there was nothing special about anything else we were doing on the outside of the building I don't think we were going to tatter down those stairs that have been there forever when it was rental property So kind of clean that up. I know one thing, Josh, when we were here last time was making sure that the driveway didn't touch the building. But the the for the other dormers, we were just doing the party board and the shake on the front. That's what I thought for the dormer that faces Richmond Road. It doesn't have to be. Again, I'm just trying to figure out a way to make make it work. So if there's something that you guys would rather see that even more makes it look less like it's historical or something, we can make all that work. Mr. Dennis? Did you have anything you want to add, Barry? No, I'm standing by the staff report. Okay. Okay. It's a pickle. Let me see if there's any comments from the virtual audience. I'll give that a count of 10 just to check. All right. There are no comments. Do I have a motion at this juncture to go ahead and disapprove the application as is? Before you motion, can I ask a question? Most certainly. Is there other information or anything else I could do to help you have more information for your decision? Would it possibly be talking to other people in the neighborhood or perhaps looking at other options? There was some conversation about what had happened to the dormer across the street. Now, I'm not sure that had happened prior to the institution of the historic overlay or not. If I recall correctly, there was that conversation that it sort of mimics that dormer. Am I correct in that thinking? Well, we're not aware of when that took place. Would you think it took place prior to the historic overlay? We're not aware it could have. If it happened afterwards, then we should have proved it. And if we did prove it, then that's some kind of a precedent. So I would say that my understanding is that historical tax credits were levied on that property when it was constructed. That could be a national register of credits and it has something to do with H1 Sure, that's completely true I haven't looked that up, that was just from a conversation amongst the community, the design community but I don't know if it was like that originally I know that the only reason I even brought that building up was because the concept of modifying the dormer or having a dormer a little bit different than other dormers to try to make a stairway work is kind of what was done there. Not being, you know, it's just us finding a way to try to make it work. Right now, I'm just trying to sound the board for where they want to go. They may be going in an entirely different direction. Do I have a motion to approve a COA with some findings and accept his drawings. Oh, we are stuck. I wonder if you could postpone. I'm not pushing for that. I'm just trying to move this process along a little bit. What do you say, Josh? I wonder if you could postpone until Suzanne comes back. are you amenable Mr. Whitley to letting us have a full board review now we've got someone else going to be gone next time don't we Miss Hill aren't you no I'm here I'll be gone in June you're gone you're going to be the one gone right Josh yeah I'll be gone in June yes Yes, I am. I mean, I appreciate you giving it at that point. You're talking about three looks. So I do appreciate that. Well, we have to postpone out to August to make sure we have Josh. Can you participate? No, that catches your location, doesn't it? Yeah, I'm gone then. OK. So we're not all here in July. I thought Josh said he was away. He'll be gone in June. Oh, well, by July. We do not know of anyone that's gone in July at this point. Okay, I'm not. I don't think. All right. In that case, then, I think, Mr. Whitley, would you be amenable for us to jump this to July so we can have a full board to consider this? Yes, I would. I appreciate that. Okay. You will need to sign a waiver. Sign a waiver? Yeah, you have to sign a waiver. where we're there is a time cap that is imposed by I think regulation I don't think it's binding but it's what we do so if you sign the waiver we can take a motion at this point and postpone this out to July that would be the third Wednesday in July and I don't have my calendar in front of me what date is that 21st 21st in person meeting well I don't know about that I like working from home Mr. Ridley I would suggest this may be the time for you to get some of your neighbors involved and maybe look at other proposals or other modifications in your neighborhood that may be similar to this one. I would suggest particularly trying, if you can find other fourspares that look like this one and see if they've been modified, that may be of assistance. I'm halfway inclined to agree that perhaps we can find a way to a solution, but I think we need to have everyone here to do it. Ms. Hill? Yes, my only hesitancy is that in making, inciting the very specific kinds of reasons for this, I just need time to do some research on it. Okay. And, you know, it's part of the learning curve. And I think as more historic homes, single family dwellings want to be using those third floors, most historic homes, the stairways that go to the third floor don't meet current codes. So, you know, this is not going to be an issue unheard of in the future. and I appreciate your foresight on that because as you well know attics were sort of there only because of the slope of the roof that's right so the stairways usually are I won't take you through the time of the stairway on this house in Arcadia that's an out in the world did they put that in alright let's have a motion then to continue to July 21st and we'll pick this up then so moved do i have a second thank you okay we have succeeded in kicking the can down the street one more time uh mr whitley thank you for your cooperation and your efforts i do appreciate personally that you took the efforts to really change substantially your your your your drawings it was a big help and thank you thank you appreciate it okay all right we're done with This application is, well, I haven't called for the vote. All those in favor of the motion say aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Motion passes. This case is continued to July 21st. All right. The only other item remaining on our agenda is the approval of Barry. Am I getting ahead of myself? I believe so. We have some withdrawals I need to acknowledge. All right. And of course, I managed to misplace my agenda. Do we not have a conceptual review? No, it's been dropped. They're really looking at situations and they didn't want to go forward with the draw. I mean, with the hearing it's time for that. So that would be the first case of course is 415 East 3rd Street, which was postponed from our John from the regular meeting or postponed and then can be put down into conceptual. Now they're doing with John. Okay. Do I have a motion to that first? I'm sorry. I'm having. Please repeat that. Let me step away for a moment. I'm going to have to get off my earbuds. I can't hear you. What were you saying, Amelia? I was saying that 415 East Thirds have withdrawn their application instead of being a postponement, which is item number 2. They've withdrawn that, and they've also withdrawn the conceptual review. Jim, you have no idea. Ah, I can hear you now. All right. Okay, Ms. Armstrong, could you take us back through the agenda? What needs to be continued? Okay, no cases actually need to be continued at this point. We have withdrawn number two, which is 415 East High Street. Okay, we don't need anything to do. That's right. 159 Forest Avenue has been withdrawn and so has 340 South Broadway. And the conceptual review has been withdrawn as well, right? Right. All right. So I am correct in thinking there was no other items for us to consider other than the approval of the minutes. Correct. And that is which month? That would be February. All right. Do I have a motion to approve the minutes for February 2021? so moved do you have a second second all right all those in favor of the motion say aye aye aye all right the motion is passed the february minutes of 2021 are approved uh our next meeting as noted will be july 21st 2021 do i have a motion to adjourn what yes all right i have a motion for mr gilbert to adjourn i have a second from Ms. Silver's trying to say goodbye. Okay, all right. I thought you had a question. I do have a question. Okay, I'm sorry. We're meeting in June, right? Yes. Maybe June. I am so sorry. Yes, June 15th. I'm sorry. 16th. 16th. 16th, okay. My apologies. I got ahead of myself. And our July meetings will be in person? No, nothing's been decided yet. Say again, please? Nothing has been decided yet. Okay, all right. all right okay we're adjourning to our june meeting do i have a motion to adjourn so moved all right second second we stand adjourned thank you so much Thank you. Thank you. I'm going to take on my name. Never turn my back on what I believe. Or let my heart be ruled by.