Music Hello I'd like to welcome you to the December 15th meeting of the Board of Architectural Review. We appreciate those of you in attendance today. The board was established by zoning ordinance in 1958, and our first historic district was Grass Park. We now have a total of 15 historic districts. The board, which is appointed by the mayor and confirmed by the Urban City 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. The board encourages and recommends that applicants use them as a resource. The Historic Preservation Office is located at 101 East Vine Street, room 220. It is our procedure to consider applications in the order in which they are listed on our agenda. In each case, we will have a presentation by the staff and we'll hear any additional comments from the applicant. The board will then ask questions or make comments regarding the application and then hear comments from any other interested parties. The chair will then ask the board members to enter a motion. If you wish to address the board, please come to the microphone and state your name and address for the public record. We also ask that you write your name on the sign-in sheet by the door so that the information can be recorded correctly. I would like to note the following staff approvals before we begin our review of applications. There are certain items that the staff can approve, eliminating the necessity for all applicants to appear before the board. There are a total of nine approved applications noted on today's agenda. In the Belcourt Historic District, at 157 West Belcourt, remove damaging tree at 543 Boonesboro Avenue, replace storm door. At 621 Sarah Avenue, renovate structure. In the Gratz Park Historic District at 322 West 2nd Street, it's unnoted. Also in the Constitution Historic District at 216 North Limestone, remove deteriorated tree. On the north side, Historic District at 218 North Broadway, renovate balconies. At 465 West 3rd Street, replace storm windows. In the South Hill District at 347 South Mill Street, renovate structure. At 388 South Broadway, renovate rear addition. We'll now proceed with review of applications for certificates of appropriateness. Our first application is in the Ashland Park Historic District at 227 Deshea Road, construct pergola and fence. Is the applicant here? Thank you. Please come to the microphone. All right. I believe the staff has recommended approval of your application for a certificate with their two standard conditions, which are, number one, if any changes are made that alter the information submitted, resubmit the changes to staff for review and approval prior to the start of work. And condition number two is 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. Are you in agreement with those conditions? Sure. All right. Is there any questions or comments from the board or from the audience? Thank you all. All right. I'll ask if the board is ready to move, enter a motion. Chair, per case number 0555-0227 at 227 Deshay Road, I move that we approve the application for a certificate of appropriateness with the two standard conditions as noted. Thank you. Is there a second? Second. All right. All those in favor of the motion say aye. Aye. Aye. All those against say nay. The motion is passed and your application is approved. Thank you. Our second application is at 543 Boonesboro Avenue to demolish deck and storage shed, construct covered deck, shed, and patio. The applicant here. Hello, Mr. Chair. Joey Svek with Building the Bluegrass. We're the designers for the project and also the contractors. We also have Dustin Jones here, the owner of the property. Thank you. I believe staff has recommended approval with our two standard conditions. Are you in agreement with those conditions? We are. and a couple notes on there that staff had was the siding on the back of the house is currently vinyl. We were going to put like product back on there, but we've talked to them and we're going to work with staff to come up with a different product. So it'll either match the shed, which is most likely going to be hardy or another product similar, but we'll work with staff to figure that out. I'm sorry. I'm looking at the wrong application. Give me just a minute. And I think, um joey might be good to say withdraw that application for the vinyl i'm sorry if you could say you're going to withdraw that application for the vinyl because that's your disapproval so that section that's that's correct we'll withdraw the uh the application for vinyl and we'll work with staff to find a new product okay all right give me just a minute to organize this paperwork I seem to have shuffled into the wrong application. Okay, thank you. All right. Would the board members have any questions or comments about, okay, or from the audience? Would one of the board members be able to make a motion and also add the condition of the vinyl being removed from the application? Chair, as per case number 02140543-I at 543 Boonesboro Avenue, I move that we, on the condition that the applicant has withdrawn the replacement of vinyl siding with new vinyl siding from this application, I move that we approve the certificate of appropriateness with the standard two conditions. Thank you. Is there a second? I second. Thank you. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. All those opposed say nay. The motion is passed and your application is approved. Thank you, sir. Our next application is at 792 Caden Lane. It's an applicant here. Hi. Please just state your name and your address for the record. Shayla Bryant, 792 Caden Lane, Lexington, Kentucky. Thank you, Ms. Bryant. I believe staff has recommended several conditions on your application. Are you in agreement with these conditions? I'm sorry? Are you in agreement with these conditions or opposed to any of them? Yes, I'm in agreement with them. You're in agreement with them? Yes. Okay. Would the board members have any questions or comments? I only have kind of one comment. I guess it's partly a question, but it's also a comment, and it's about the drawings. Just as you're looking at those porch changes and some window changes and all, it is on sheet three or four, the right side and the left side. It appears to me that the long garage piece, that the roof ridge is shown higher on those two drawings than it shows on the rear or the front elevation. And I'd like some input from the other board members to see if I'm misreading something. And that's your ridge. And what happens is this ridge comes up higher here than it shows on the plan. I mean, I guess they can make it higher. No, they probably want to make it lower. Yeah, that seems to be inconsistent. So the rearward is lower. It does change the kind of volume visuals, particularly on that long left side. It doesn't change the application, but it does change the way you read that volume of the building. and i think that uh... consultant is actually monitoring was unable to attend so she's paying attention this meaning that will have to get their kitchen and i believe that the smaller table of the roof is probably what they're asking for more than that larger mass that that would be my assumption also in looking at it uh it's just those two long sides which are referenced in the findings um don't exist in the way that they show up on that long drawing just wanted to make sure no one was confused about that if i might i think that matters such as that that it's important that the applicants and their consultants make the confirmations. Staff certainly has its hopefully very valid opinion about something, but I think it would be important to be sure to get something back from, you have an architect? Yes, it's Taylor. Okay, so we probably would need a clarification directly from Taylor Holmes. Okay, so just a request to review and revise Sheet 3 of 4 to be consistent with the other elevations. Okay, we'll be glad to put that in. Okay. Do you understand what that means? I mean, what she's saying, you see how this roof looks like a little higher on this section. Back here. Yeah, it comes up high, but it's really going to be a lower. Does that make sense? No. So you see this guy? That is this guy. That's a lot more money. I did kind of sketch over it. So if she wants to look at it quickly, it might, I mean, it's a very simple kind of thing. So this is the one of, and this is the three of, and it just takes that volume down. In many ways, it improves the volume of the house a great deal. She's talking about it. So here, this little room. Yeah, look at the window on the left side. This side up there. So see how she's dropped that down. So it's, you see this piece right there? Yeah. This would be really lower. So it needs to be lower? Well, I see what you're talking about. Mm-hmm. Yes. Pattern of openings and such. All right. Mr. Chair? Yes. I just was talking to our legal counsel. Briefly, and I believe it's important that you all consider having a full hearing on this case. I think that the discussion and questions thus far have gone past what can be a sounded. Yeah, let's do that. Okay. Thank you. All right, Ms. Bryant, at this point we'll let Amelia give a presentation on the case. Barry? Did you get the thumb drive to him? No. Move on. Okay. Okay, so Mr. Gilpin, do you mind if we move on to the next case and then come back to this one? That would be fine, yes. So may I just make a quick clarification? I'm not objecting to any of what's being presented. I just want the applicant to have clear drawings so that it's representing accurately what the project is, which is a nice project. Okay. I think there's at least one other comment I think that we were intending to discuss. So, yeah, let's move on to the next case. And we'll see. And then come back to this. at Cadentown. The next case is at 117 Pemkin Park. Olivia Rockaway is an applicant here. Please state your name and address for the record. Olivia Rockaway at 117 Pemkin Park. Thank you. Staff has recommended approval with our two standard conditions as well as a condition of submit to staff final door and window specifications and details for review and approval prior to the issuance of a COA. Are you going to agree with that as well? Yes, I am. Okay. Would there be any comments or questions from the board on this case? Or from the audience? All right. I'll ask if the board may have a motion. Chair, per case number 14820117 at 117 Pemmoken Park, I move that we approve the application for the certificate of appropriateness with the following conditions. Number one, to submit to the staff the final door and window specifications and details for review and approval prior to the issuance of a COA and the two standard conditions. Thank you. Is there a second? Second. All right. All right. We'll vote. All those in favor of the motion say aye. Aye. Aye. Those opposed say nay. The motion is approved. Your application is for a certificate of appropriateness is approved. Thank you very much. All right. We will go. That is it. we are going back to Caden Lane now. We're working on putting the overhead, the plans on the overhead right now. Okay. So as we had a conceptual review on this property in September and we are working on, and then the applicant has made changes and has come back to staff with the new proposal. they note we've already had much discussion with the applicants about some things they're going to be changing and I think they're waiting to make all the get the comments to make all the changes at one time and then come back with the final details so I just want to go through the plans with you here and then you also have a site plan in front of you that has a built that notes a building line and a and also the setback line it's sort of a line drawing on that and so as you could see the plan in front of you calls for the the stone on the projecting front which we've talked about and then a smaller stoop and then a larger patio cover patio in the back and then the rear gable that the cars will enter from the rear of the structure. The dimensions of the house are 43 by 36 and a half approximately and the garage being 22 by 22. Of course they're intending to do asphalt shingle roof with concrete block foundation. There will be, if we can go to the next image please. The, and the gables it does call, they have noted for a shake. They are actually intending that to be clapboard versus the shake. And then here's the floor plan that talks, that shows that the garage being in the rear. And I would note if you looked in that far corner of the master bedroom by the covered porch there was discussion about putting a window in that particular location and also along that larger stretch with windows in the garage to sort of break up that big mass and if we can go on to the next rendering please so this goes back to what Ms. Hill pointed out as far as the roof changes but also So I wanted to note the gables will be changed from the shake to a cloppered siding as well. And the windows will be single-paned, double-hung, aluminum-clad. And the rear doors, of course, will be top-light, bottom-panel as well. If we can go to the next image, please. That's just sort of the second story where there's no second story except for call space. If we can go to the next image, please. Oh, that's it. Okay. If we can go back to two images or to the side views, please. Yes. Thank you. Guidelines are included for your reference. The proposal to construct a new residence is appropriate. The size and mass of the proposed structure meets the intent of the design guideline and relates to the other buildings in the area as it's one story profile and sets back from the street. The design principle for guidelines, the new primary buildings which states, new primary buildings should be designed to be compatible with adjacent historic buildings along the block. Impatibility is demonstrated by having similar orientation, roof forms, materials, windows, door sizes, placement, porch sizes, locations, foundation heights as adjacent buildings. New buildings that are exact replications or reproductions of the historic designs are not appropriate. New construction should be clearly recognized of its time and distinguished from historic buildings. New construction may incorporate contemporary materials such as cementitious siding, fiberglass, and aluminum. Staff finds that scale is appropriate and compatible with other structures on the street and within the district. Staff does suggest the front porch have a hip or a gable roof versus a shed roof to be consistent with other structures on Canentown. The proposed material of concrete front stoop and rear patio are within the guidelines. 3B13F, which states proportion of entrances, windows, division bays, porches, or design components, or help establish balance, rhythm, scale, and proportion emphasis in structures. And entrances should be compatible in scale, size, and proportion to established patterns. Division bays and new construction should be compatible with the balance in proportion to division bays in existing buildings and on the block and within the district. Porches and decks should be compatible in scale materials with the porches and structures in the adjacent surrounding buildings. Driveway side of the structure requires further discussion. Staff suggest the window or windows be added to the garage or driveway side to break up the monolithic brick wall. As you can see in that left side portion of the picture as we're indicating. And provide more solid to ratio and break up the mass to be consistent with other structures in the historic district. Guidelines 3B1F said openings such as entrances and windows and architectural features such as division bays, porches or design components to help establish balance, rhythm, scale, and proportion and emphasis in structures. Patterns of these components on the building along the blocks within the districts create characteristic rhythm for scapes, neighborhoods. It is very important that the new construction respect the balance, proportion, and scale of existing buildings along the block and within the districts in regards to components. CEPH suggests the materials for the building for further discussion that finds that either shake or clapboard is acceptable. However, the cultured stone is not within the guidelines because it is not consistent with the material in Caden Town. CEPH suggests the stone be brick and guidelines 2B1J and 2B1K, state material, color, texture, patterns, and construction techniques help define buildings in character and scale. And brick, if the construction is in brick exterior, the brick should closely match the typical mortar joint for styles and tones along the block and in the district and most foundations are brick and poor concrete block and frames if new construction is framed preferred exterior material is horizontal wood siding with a minimum of four inches and maximum six inches in width the use of smooth cementitious siding board is acceptable as long as it meets those recommendations and porch and deck materials should be appropriate to the building in which they are located and the use of windows for the use of wood or anonized aluminum windows is appropriate details. Architectural details to help give a building character and scale. Architectural details be appropriate as they give the building in which they're placed a good sense of belonging on the street and within the district. Details should be appropriately scaled and proposed structuring compatible with adjacent buildings and district. In installation ornamental details give a building an imitation historic appearance it's not allowed. The proposed driveways within the guidelines because it allows the parking to be in the rear and staff just suggest that a walkway be installed that leaves from the front door to the street. Guidelines 3, 4 and F respectively state sidewalks should be compatible and surrounding historic properties and driveways that are new should be located in the rear and and not be visually dominant. Very hot here, yeah. And then I would say if you all, I'm going to put this up. As we noted that this particular lot is not as deep as the neighboring lot that you saw earlier, which is a larger house. this is has a smaller it's not as deep because that this there's a properties that are coming from Canetown Road or Canetown come and meet sort of that neighboring property so So this is the cave lane and then this is the driveway and they'll turn into the garage on this way. And there's a 30 foot building line in the back and a 12 plus a 20 foot line across. this is sort of a consistent setback to the other properties and and we're going to be pulling up some of the photograph images so we can walk through caitlin Let's see. There's also included your packet. There are two other images of examples of this house style that it's included. Of course they're able to sort of modify. Do you know the dimensions from the rear elevation of the house to the back property line? That would be, I would say the lot, the dimension is 169.25 dimensions long from the driveway. Okay, are you interested? From the back of the house. For questions. I think information. Okay. And let's see. Thank you. What do we need? Thank you. Well, so everybody will be aware we're having technical problems about getting the photographs up that show the context in the neighborhood. So thank you for your patience and we'll hope to have this rectified in a minute. I'll go ahead and provide a little bit of comment for the board on some context to Cadentown. Can I have to pull your mic a little closer? Yes, sorry. When Cadentown first became a district, the lots were much bigger. And they have since been subdivided. So the type of lot we're looking at today is new to the district, so to speak, since its initiation. So just kind of keep that in mind as we're studying what we had to present here. And this is the corner of Caden Town and Caden Lane Road. And Ms. Kendrick, who was here, it was her family's property for decades. and her father raised horses out here on this particular land. And she was one that subdivided it into what we call piano key lots. Still longer, but within the realm of Caden Lane as far as having... So the way it was split up is you have this corner property and then two longer piano keys to... between that and the Hayes' house, which we saw... you discussed or reviewed earlier. and then some going down towards Canetown towards Old Todd's Road. I'm having trouble advancing now. Okay, and so just to give you some of these are the newer images. These are structures that were built as of within the last 15 years. As you can see, some of these are two-story structures, one-on-one story. If we could advance to the next one, please. and oh there we go and this is um this is actual parcel in this location you can see the the horse fencing and this would be towards us and you could see the sort of the tree for some reason this is now decided our technical karma i know Our techno karma is not working because this thing is not operating very well. Excuse me. There we go. So here we go. This is the lot here. And, of course, Ms. Kendrick's property went all the way over on this side. And so this is the lot of the Wilsons and the Bryants that are going to be in this location. Could you please advance the next image? And then this is one of also the newer structures that are out there. Next image, please. This is the first of the new properties that was constructed. This was in 2005. If we can go to the next image, please. Of course, this is new and then next to the older structure. And then also this is across the street. And here's the site plan again. Does anybody have any questions? I have a question about a front sidewalk to be poured that leads from the front stoop to the street. I noticed in the images that some of the properties do have sidewalks, have had since the houses were built, and this property does not yet. Is there anticipation that there will be? Well, part of our recommendation is for them to add one. Okay. This is actually the, just to clarify, this would be the front walk from the front stoop to that, not the sidewalk, because only one side of the street actually has a sidewalk. Okay. All right. Like a main public walkway. So this side, the side of the street that this house is on will not have a public way sidewalk parallel? Right. Well, that's at the present time, and we don't know of any city government plan that's on record now to put a sidewalk on that opposite side of the street, that being the side this proposal is for. but I think that it's long-term, highly likely, that both sides of the street, but that may be 10 years from now. But there is no current commitment other than what property owners developing the parcels choose to do as part of their projects. Would it be inappropriate to run a sidewalk to the driveway? there's a actually um we we need to get the applicant at the mic if they want to comment if y'all want to come forward there's actually some that do some that don't i'm sorry mr chair i didn't mean to interject but thank you it's okay we do need for the record to get everybody so we can hear them If you will let the applicants explain what they would like to say to us. We just put up aerials of what they've submitted. they sound won't goes to the driveway that's that was our plan instead of having it come our way to the street and most of the houses out there the sidewalk comes from the front porch over to the driveway and not to the street okay Amelia, what other influence is there for going straight to the street? I think there is consistency about having the, I think there are some that do go to the street and some that come to the driveway. So I think it's what, we were wanting to just make sure they had a sidewalk that's consistent with Caden Town. Okay. All right. The board have any other questions? I had a question not about the site, but about the placement of windows. There was some reference that you all had talked to staff about adding more windows. on those elevations, which I think will definitely help that elevation side have kind of the rhythm that we like to advocate. the window that is in the front bedroom, it's shown on the left side elevation. Bedroom number two. Yes, that is in bedroom number two. The one window that's actually shown on the left side elevation So my concern is the placement of that window. If it can, I know that it is placed in order to be centered in the room, in the inside of the room. But where it ends up on the outside is it needs to be moved towards the center of that. it needs to move that way about two or three feet so that it doesn't, so that the gable of the roof above does not land right on top of the window. So that makes it not centered on the inside of the room, but it really would help this greatly. It would also help them have a better option about where to put a bed in that room. That's true, yes. And then the other question I had was on the floor plan, off of the kitchen, where it goes into what I assume is a laundry room and a pantry. there's a hallway back to those two rooms that kind of dead ends into the outside wall. Is there any intention of that being a door out to the driveway or having a window there or anything? At this area that we talked about before. like a window there was discussion about a window okay because i think either a window there or a window that goes into the laundry room also would be very helpful for that elevation and it'd be nice to have a window in your laundry room too So those were two comments that I had that I felt could improve those two locations. I agree with those. I have a comment. I believe I heard in the findings from the staff there was concern about the roof over the porch. I also feel the porch would be more appropriate if the roof on the front porch connected to the gable on that bedroom or, as Amelia suggested, if it itself were a gable. I think you had an example house here in this photo that you guys submitted. The way they put that porch together, I think, would be more appropriate for the style of house that you're proposing here. that seems to be more consistent with that style house instead of the shorter central kind of porch that I see on the drawing now. And I would recommend it on the back too if you're going to cover that and it would help you out covering the door from your garage onto that back patio as well if you're willing. Do the other board members have any thoughts on that concern? So are you suggesting that as opposed to changing the single slope to a gable, but instead just lift them in? As an alternative, yes. They're saying you could either do a gable here, and then maybe a flatter move back here. I believe at this point that would be an added condition to what we have on our list. It could be a revision, right? Because the porch roofs were both the suggestion of changing the roof form. So it would just be revising that. Which one? What number? Okay, hang on. Hang on. Amelia, if you all will use the mic and all your discussion, please. I was just saying that explaining what a hip would look like for them if they didn't do because right now this is a shed roof. And if you did a hip, then you wouldn't have to have siding on the side. But if you did a gable, then you would have material in the center. So you set up. That's a shed. And that would just be lower and come across as Mr. Gilpin suggested. like this would be lower and not so high on the roof. As you see here, it just means that this would come down lower like this and not so high. But if you did a hip roof, then you wouldn't have to worry about siding on the side. Yeah, I think this picture would embody what I was referring to. Yeah, and we needed that. Okay, good. Do you want that put on Elmo? Pardon? Do you want the photograph put on? Yeah, that would be helpful if possible. So just to clarify, this is a finding that is talked about in the paragraph form of the findings, but there is not actually a recommendation. It's not a condition in the recommendation. Correct. That's right. As it stands. Yep. And my staff asks you all to clarify when you do get ready for your motion. I'm making a little list about things for clarification, please. But you were on this topic, Mr. Chairs, while I'm asking. You referenced and discussed pretty thoroughly the front porch roof, but what did you want to propose relative for your consideration for the back porch roof? The back porch would be the same condition, either a gable or a shed that connects over to the garage. And so think if you would in your conditions, if you want to stipulate what that is or make it two options, but please put it in your condition considerations. We would have a condition of the porch roofs both front and back either connect to their adjacent gable roofs or keep their same size as a simple gable where they are. But either way, they need revised. So on sheet one of four, on the rear elevation, if that goes to a gable roof with a similar overhang to the garage, then you end up with the gutter edges along that gable roof as being very close. It's a bit of a drainage ice potential condition. So the condition does not exist in the same way on the front elevation, but does on the rear elevation. I would suggest the shed roof, the full width, or not the full width of the house, but fully connected to the gable beside it. That would be a shed roof. Is there for the back? The back porch? Yes, they're on the back porch. In many ways, the shed roof connected over to the gable projection on both the front and the back, that shed roof then gives more presence to the door. because otherwise that gable of where the door is is quite a bit smaller than the gable of the projecting part of the house. And it's a simpler installation. It also, if the extension of those shed roofs on the front and the back will allow you to have a porch that is much more usable instead of the really small stoop, you actually have a porch that you could sit on and enjoy. Thank you. summarize we talked more about the sidewalk as far as what the recommendation i just I understand fully the desire to have a sidewalk that connects all the way to the street when you have a public sidewalk present. I just am unsure since there is not a sidewalk there if we need to require that as a condition. I agree with that. I agree. and for my clarification it is your all's desires the applicants to have the sidewalk come from your porch to the driveway correct yes thank you and that is a condition that already exists in cadent town in other areas yes that's correct okay Okay. Should we also say anything about the drawing just to have it on the record as part of the change of the ridge line? showing on sheet three of four, the long ridge line, just to get that adjusted per the front and rear elevation drawing. I think we could, we might be able to simply put it as provide revised drawings. For sheet three or four, well, it's other drawings too. Yeah. Okay. I really admire your guys' neighborhood. The front yards and the open area is wonderful. Do we have any other comments or we? I do not. I would, well, I will offer a suggestion. This is not anything to do with guidelines. I think whenever you can do a detached garage on these narrow, skinny lots, it'll really help your back patio and your backyard interface with your house better. Now, I know there's all kinds of other influences that would attach it to your house, but consider it if it were ever an option to you. I think you would love to use the dining room and the kitchen and have windows straight out onto the backyard and kind of come and go in and out of the house instead of having the garage right there kind of blocking the back facade. But I think for today, we'll stick to the conditions we've listed so far. Go for it. Would there be a motion? I apologize if this is going to be sort of clumsy. but chair as per case number 02960792-A at 792 Caden Lane I move that we approve the certificate of appropriateness with the following conditions One, the rear and left side elevation have added windows with final details submitted prior to the issuance of the COA. Two, the cultured stone elevation be changed to brick. 3. Final window details be submitted to staff prior to issuance of the COA. 4. The hardy plank siding at Gables be smooth in lieu of woodgrain. Five, all final details and revised plans be submitted to staff prior to the issuance of the COA. Six, the front and back porch roofs, the front and back porch shed roofs be extended to the adjacent gable roofs. and seven that the owners submit corrected drawings to staff prior to issuance of the COA and the final two being our standard two conditions. is there a second yes a second thank you all those in favor has a couple of questions clarification please okay um on the what is currently in your packet number five the front sidewalk to be poured that leads from the front stoop to the street did you did i miss that did What did you mean to amend that? I intentionally deleted that, but... We do need to put something about the sidewalk in the conditions. Okay, so I did not. So another condition would be a front sidewalk be poured that leads from the front stoop to the driveway. Okay, thank you. And then the other one relative to the windows, which let's see, where am I? I've lost track of which number you had your windows. The number one was the added windows. Right. Would the board be interested in enumerating to be sure to include the two windows that you've discussed, moving the one both on that same elevation moving the one relocating the one and putting one in the laundry room uh do we do we need just can we say that we would i mean that if they're going to be added that we were it's all based on if the board wants those two windows adjustments well the one One window is a proposed window's adjustment of location and the other to be an additional window put on that elevation. If you want it to be conditioned, as in to be an outcome for sure of this project, you would need to be sure to put it in your conditions. I would suggest a number of windows instead of a put it in this room. Right. I don't want to condition exactly how many windows need to be added. I was thinking that's a minimum of the ones we've discussed. Can you say that again? I'm sorry. I say these masks are fine. I know. I was from hearing your all's discussion thinking that those two adjustments would be a minimum. of other window considerations. And then the staff is glad to review any other additional windows and will do so. But it's important that we consider getting this in a condition so that we're in a position to do so. So I would like to revise the first condition and saying that the left side elevation have at least one added window. and that the existing window be shifted as discussed? Well, actually, it's a proposed, as proposed, you know, it's currently a proposed window, but... The proposed window be... As drawn. Shifted prior to the issuance of the COA. away from the valley, away from the intersection of the roof valley, because that was the main thing, and they may revise it without that. Well, the staff's got that detail in mind, so we're good with that. Just want to have a baseline noted in your actions, and then the staff is glad to work with the applicants further and with any other openings that, you know, the other side needs looking at too for openings and staff will do that. But we want to be very sure that your action reflects your intent so that everybody's straight when we do this. Okay, so that's the motion. Thank you. Is there a second? Second. Thank you. All those in favor of the motion say aye. Aye. Aye. All those opposed nay. The motion is approved. Your application for certificate of appropriateness as conditioned is approved. Thank you very much for working with our staff and with the board. Thank you. All right. We are done with our cases. There are some meeting. Yes, Ms. Kerr. I was not sure that you got the opportunity to approve. Excuse me, turn on my mic. To read into the record, the previously approved by staff. Did that get done? Yes. I was in transit. So thank you for that. Now, yes, we do have minutes to approve, please. All right. There are minutes from September 1st, 2021. Is there a motion to approve those minutes? The minutes we have are from November? November, not September. Sorry, I have a new agenda. Sorry. Thank you. November 17th. Would there be a motion to approve the minutes from November 17th? I move that we approve with the correction that Richard Maines has an S at the end. The name Richard Maines. Thank you. All right. Second? Second. Opposed and favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed nay. The minutes are approved. Is there any other? We would like to introduce a new member of our team. This is Sarah Reynolds. Hello. Sarah has joined our staff as of Monday. Thank you. And is a historic preservation specialist. And she'll be working on a lot of significant things. Not necessarily too much with the local historic district process. but we're a small staff and we all do a bit of everything. So we welcomed Sarah and wanted you all as the board members to get an opportunity to see her face and, well, all right, see her mask. And we're delighted to welcome her. Thank you, Sarah. Welcome. Thank you. And the staff would like very much to thank the board for all their service in this really odd year and to wish you happy holidays. That's it. All right. You're very welcome. Motion to adjourn. So moved. We are adjourned. Thank you. Thank you.