# Board of Architectural Review - January 19, 2022 > Auto-transcribed civic record · January 19, 2022 - **Permalink**: https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/meeting/5507 - **Source video**: https://lfucg.granicus.com/player/clip/5507?view_id=14&redirect=true - **Date**: 2022-01-19 - **Last revised**: January 19, 2022 - **Length**: 10,707 words > ⚠️ **Auto-generated content.** Audio from the official Granicus video was auto-transcribed with OpenAI's open-source Whisper large-v3-turbo model, run locally by The Lexington Times. Structured facts were extracted with GPT-4o; the narrative summary was written by Anthropic Claude. Verbatim wording may contain errors. See [methodology](https://meetings.lexingtonky.news/about/methodology) or [report a correction](mailto:editor@lexingtonky.news). --- ## Meeting Overview The Board of Architectural Review convened on January 19, 2022. The meeting addressed two agenda items, including a review of minutes from December 15, 2022, which was handled as an informational matter, and Certificate of Appropriateness Applications, which were approved. The board conducted two votes during the session and heard no public comments. The meeting focused primarily on reviewing and approving architectural applications as part of the board's regular oversight responsibilities. ## Votes and Decisions The meeting included two Certificate of Appropriateness approvals, both motioned by Josh and passed by voice vote. **Certificate of Appropriateness - 108 Suburban Court** Josh motioned to approve the Certificate of Appropriateness for 108 Suburban Court with conditions. The motion passed by voice vote. The approval included the following conditions: change soffit and facia to guideline compliant material, submit a roof plan to staff for approval, and standard conditions. **Certificate of Appropriateness - 181 Rosemont Garden** Josh motioned to approve the Certificate of Appropriateness for 181 Rosemont Garden with conditions. The motion passed by voice vote. The approval included the following conditions: material in gable ends to be clapboard, open valleys for rear cross gable, transom style windows, final door and window details to staff, rear decks to have skirting, and standard conditions. Both votes were conducted as voice votes with no recorded individual vote tallies or roll call votes. No second was recorded for either motion, and no abstentions or opposing votes were noted in the meeting record. ## Contested Items The meeting included one contested item that required extended discussion before resolution. **Certificate of Appropriateness for 181 Rosemont Garden** A procedural dispute arose regarding the Certificate of Appropriateness application for 181 Rosemont Garden. The disagreement centered on two main issues: the appropriateness of the proposed window designs and the adequacy of the architectural drawings submitted with the application. Board members raised concerns about whether the window specifications met the required standards and questioned if the provided documentation was sufficient to properly evaluate the proposal. The discussion focused on technical aspects of the window designs and the level of detail needed in the architectural drawings to ensure compliance with applicable guidelines. After deliberation, the board resolved the dispute by approving the Certificate of Appropriateness with specific conditions attached. These conditions addressed the concerns raised during the discussion and established requirements that the applicant must meet to proceed with the project. The resolution demonstrates the board's approach to balancing approval of reasonable requests while maintaining standards through conditional approvals when initial submissions require clarification or modification. *Note: Specific transcript timestamps are not available for this meeting.* ## Review of minutes for December 15, 2022 The board conducted a review of the minutes from their previous meeting held on December 15, 2022. This agenda item served as an informational discussion to ensure accuracy and completeness of the recorded proceedings from the prior session. The review was conducted as a standard procedural matter, allowing board members to examine the documented decisions, discussions, and actions from the December 15, 2022 meeting. No specific transcript timestamp was available for this portion of the meeting. The outcome of this agenda item was informational in nature, indicating that the minutes review did not require formal action or voting by the board members. This suggests the minutes were either accepted as presented or that any necessary corrections were minor and handled administratively. No key speakers were identified for this agenda item, which is typical for minutes reviews that often involve brief discussion among multiple board members rather than formal presentations by specific individuals. ## Certificate of Appropriateness Applications The board reviewed multiple Certificate of Appropriateness applications during this agenda item, with Josh and Amir serving as the primary speakers for the discussion. The applications under consideration included properties at 108 Suburban Court and 181 Rosemont Garden. The board examined the proposed changes or improvements for these properties to ensure compliance with historic preservation standards and local design guidelines. During the discussion, board members evaluated whether the proposed modifications would be appropriate for the historic character of the properties and surrounding neighborhoods. The review process involved assessing the architectural compatibility, materials, and overall impact of the proposed changes on the historic integrity of the properties. Josh and Amir presented details about the applications and led the board through the evaluation criteria. The discussion covered the specific nature of the proposed work at each property, though the exact details of the modifications were not specified in the available materials. Following their review and discussion of the applications, the board approved the Certificate of Appropriateness applications. This approval allows the property owners to proceed with their proposed projects in accordance with the terms and conditions outlined in their applications. The approval of these certificates demonstrates the board's determination that the proposed work meets the necessary standards for historic preservation while allowing property owners to make appropriate improvements to their properties. --- ## Decisions - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Approval of Certificate of Appropriateness for 108 Suburban Court with conditions - **Motion** — passed (0-0): Approval of Certificate of Appropriateness for 181 Rosemont Garden with conditions --- ## Full transcript Music Thank you. in case you're wondering, predicted, and this is a quote, more than a fair share of cold and flaky weather in January for us here in Lexington. By all indications, the forecast is right on target. We're heading into our third snow in 13 days and we have plenty of salt and our first responders, street crews and contractors are ready to go. So we feel we are ready for round three. Once again I'm going to ask our citizens for help with snow, icy roads and bitter cold in the forecast. We're encouraging our residents to stay off the road if possible. As always, please help your neighbors. In particular, if you have elderly neighbors, check on them. Protect your pets. So today, we have with us representatives of different city departments and divisions to discuss our weather plans. We don't have an emergency management representative today, but the forecast from their briefing this afternoon with the National Weather Service calls for less than two inches of snow with the switch from rain to snow about 7 p.m. tonight. They are forecasting a very sharp drop in temperature. With me today are Police Chief Lawrence Weathers, Fire Chief Jason Wells, our Streets and Roads Director Rob Allen is here. From Homelessness Prevention and Intervention, we have Polly Ruddock. And so first, I'd like to go ahead and invite Rob Allen to the podium from Streets and Roads. Welcome. Thank you, Mayor. We'll continue to monitor the road conditions all the way around with a full shift reporting this evening and a full shift reporting in the morning. As the mayor mentioned, we have plenty of salt, chemicals, equipment. COVID remains a minor issue, just like the general populace, and we're able to work around that. We do have volunteers from other divisions assisting us again, notably Parks and Recreation, Code Enforcement. Of course, our partners from Sewer Line Maintenance are also right in there with us. The big concern with this event is going to be a light glaze of ice, as the mayor mentioned, when the temperature goes down. And folks need to drive accordingly, if at all, slow down. and of course watch for slip and falls but it's not projected to be an ice storm by any means we do not have concerns for power lines and trees at this time it's more more so with traffic conditions good thank you thank you very much rob i know your folks have been very busy for the last 13 days as have others. Next let's hear from Chief Wells to update us on his perspective from fire. Welcome Chief. Thank you Mayor. From the fire perspective we have tried to ensure that all of our apparatus are are ready that we have plenty of salt and equipment at the stations to prepare for runs. From an EMS perspective, as Rob mentioned, the glaze of ice will create slip and fall concerns. We want to make sure that people are aware of that as well as driving concerns. So please stay home if you can. From a fire perspective, this is a very dangerous time of year. We are halfway through July and we've already had 12 significant fires this year. So we want to please, once again, encourage people to first of all use any type of heating very very carefully make sure that it's an approved heating device that you're not using some sort of alternative heat and also to to make sure that those are properly monitored that you're not leaving those unattended this is probably a great time to remind everybody to check your smoke alarms make sure that you do have working smoke alarms because should there be a fire you need to be notified so that we can make sure that you get out safely and we'll be available for any questions Thank you, Mayor. Thank you. Thank you, Chief Wells. Chief Weathers from police, can you update us on your preparations? Welcome. Thank you, Mayor. First, I want to say that the Lexington Police Department is preparing for our next winter storm. Our traffic section is ready to adjust our schedule to the upcoming weather conditions. And our specialty vehicles are being prepped and our traffic control equipment is ready for deployment if needed. We will have our officers monitoring the interstate to assist motorists to respond to collisions and any other traffic hazards. As usual, I need to give out a few reminders so that you arrive at your destination safely. Please slow down when approaching intersections, off-ramps, bridges, and areas that do not get direct sunlight. These areas can become very slippery, and as the temperatures drop, the ice will form on those areas first sometime. So be aware of that. Please allow yourself extra time for your commutes and also allow extra distance between yourself and other vehicles. We are asking that everyone be patient and use caution while driving. And if you do not have to go out, please stay home and be safe. The Lexington Police Department is working with local and state agencies and will provide support when necessary. And I have to ask a special favor. Our people down at E911 can get very busy during these times. And I'd like to ask, we've had a few people call in and want to know what the weather conditions are. We'd like to save E911 for those times when people need emergency assistance. So if you could, if you want to know what the weather conditions are, you can check, you can visit at LexRex on Twitter, or you can go to the Live Green Lexington webpage, and they all keep fairly up to date on the road conditions. So thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much for that, Chief Weathers. and you know we recognize that snow and cold are especially difficult for our homeless people and so Polly Ruddock has a number of extended programs for them and she's here to tell you the latest. Welcome Polly. Good afternoon everybody. So we have again activated our community winter weather response plan and this time we've activated it through Monday. It triggers extended services to accommodate those who seek shelter during the cold weather. So each night Lexington has about 700 individuals including children who are experiencing homelessness by sleeping in one of our local emergency shelters, transitional housing programs, or a place not meant for human habitation. The city of Lexington in partnership with local shelters ensures that no person will have to sleep on the streets during extreme cold weather and right now we are looking directly at Friday night as very concerning. Anybody unsheltered currently is wet now, and then overnight they will freeze, and they will not have a chance to unthaw or dry out before we slip down into single digits. So we have actively worked with the police department and providers, and I've had a couple calls from the hospitals today. In preparation for that cold drop, we are sheltering tonight quite heavily. We have given expanded shelter information to the police department and the fire department, local churches, emergency rooms, other hospital staff. We send that out to a variety of stakeholders. Lex Tran is always a wonderful partner. They're providing free rides to any of our shelters. Again, we've already worked on several cases today and will continue tonight over the next two days. we're looking at weather under 32 degrees for the next two weeks so we we just really would like it to warm up a little bit it is critically important like chief mentioned we are asking citizens to help us out our street outreach teams cannot be everywhere at all times we are asking citizens if they see someone in need even if they just look like they're in need need some shelter please call the police non-emergency number at 859-258-3600. If you do think it is an emergency, please call 911. Thank you very much, Polly, for that update. I want to tell each and every one of you who spoke how much we all appreciate all the work that your divisions are doing. And this is just January, so we still have February and March to go for winter, and just to give kudos to those who work on this each day. And now we'll open it up for any questions. We have several people here who can answer questions. Chayate. Good afternoon. Like you just said, we're in January. Yes. 13 days, or not in, but just 13 days weather. Crews have been working nonstop, and we also have COVID going on at the same time. How do you balance the ongoing weather conditions, crew maintenance, or work that needs to go with that, and COVID? So the question, and I'll ask Rob also to start coming up here, but the question is about the fact that we've already had 13 days of weather. It's only January, mid-January. We have a pandemic going on. How do we balance all these issues? It's a lot at once, isn't it? And what do we do to maintain our coverage through another storm? And we probably aren't finished with storms and pandemic. And I think Rob has so much good experience with this, as do the others from whom you heard about the balance. And it is a balance for all of government, quite honestly. So, Rob, you may have a few details. Certainly, and we have been fortunate, and we started planning last year for COVID contingencies and things like that. But, for example, where our recycling center is being refurbished, we have been fortunate to have four individuals volunteer to drive from there that normally would be involved with that. And these folks are rock stars. They really have helped us out as far as vacancies or any COVID problems. We have four drivers from Parks Maintenance, and it does take a village. And everything from the call takers at Lexcall getting the call to the right place so we don't waste resources kind of chasing service calls to our folks at Fleet. And we really start planning months ahead. For example, our spare snowplow parts, we knew there could be supply chain issues, so we ordered them in August. And actually, there were some delays, but we took full delivery in November. Same thing with salt. We have a nice budget this year. We've been able to order each time. You know, we've got deliveries coming actually tomorrow morning again just to keep us topped off. but as the mayor said this has been an unusual year for us so far and you know the work-life balance we have to keep an eye on that and try not to drag our folks in and out unnecessarily but we do feel like it's really important for the people that live and work in Fayette County for us to take care of things proactively versus reactively and it certainly takes fewer resources that way both in personnel and equipment. And I might just add to that it hasn't necessarily been true every year that we would go right back and replenish our salt and so that is a really good thing that's happening this year so that after each storm we have replenished the salt. And I know that each of the folks who spoke here would probably agree that this takes, this whole effort takes a lot of coordination and communication with each other. All of these folks talk. So what other questions? Yes. How much did that contractor that you guys had to help with plowing after that recent storm? How big of a help was that? And are they on standby for this one as well? That would be another Rob question. Was the first part, how much did they cost? No, how much of a help was it to have that extra? Huge help. They provided four drivers with plows, big-sized trucks. And so our plan for them is they help us with the major roads like Man of War, Alumni Drive, Holo Club, McGrathiana, which allows our crews to then focus on neighborhood roads a little quicker with our trucks that are smaller. They are actually reporting with the night crew tonight in a full shift, and we have them scheduled for a full day shift tomorrow. So big help, and kudos to the administration. We put this together relatively quickly. I know there was some concern, and folks were like, oh gosh, they weren't here for the big event. Normally that contract's set in place. For example, the state contracts their plow drivers in July, and we didn't really have the resources until later on this fall, and we said, okay, this is a possibility, and to be able to put that together has been a tremendous help and really key to us jumping on treatment. Okay. Do you have a number of comments you've been able to get into shelters in the last 12 hours or so? Polly, the question is, is there a number of people who we've been able to get into shelters during these storms? So I'd love to give you that number, but it changes by the minute. She caught me over there. She caught me over there emailing and texting because we are actually going to, Lexington Rescue Mission is going to open a warming shelter tonight at their location at 444 Glen Arvin. and we've got some people that need to go there. So that number changes minute by minute. Just, if you do. I don't have a, yeah, no worries. No, thank you. What other questions? Yes. Ma'am, do you remember last year in January in between the lasagna of ice storms that we had? I do remember last year. Yeah, and at one point you declared a snow emergency, so all the roads where cars were parked on the side, people had to make sure they move it just because trucks can go through. Do you, is it, has the situation gotten to that point yet where you need to declare that? Or what would constitute for you to declare that? It has not gotten to that yet, because if it did, we would have done that. And what that does is when the snow emergency is declared, it gives us the right to tow the vehicles that have not been moved from the side of the road, and we have not needed that yet. And if everybody remembers last year, we had, I forget which was first, maybe snow. We had snow, sleet, ice. We had three on top of each other. And so that was a little bit of a different storm, but we haven't needed it yet, knock on wood. But I know that my team, each time there's a storm, they look at the particulars of the storm and what it looks like and when it's coming to make that determination. We use all that input. What else? Anything else? Well, thank you all so much, and be safe. For substantive discussion on this, I would ask that the chair have the staff make a full presentation. Well, actually, I was trying to avoid that because I think I would rather not make any changes to this application in light of the fact we don't have public notice of it. Sarah? Well, may I, while I still, I think that is absolutely correct. And that probably, I would encourage the board to consider that and take action accordingly. Okay. Sarah? You had your hand up. You need to unmute yourself. Sorry. I did not mean to raise my hand. That was an accident. And I couldn't find my mouse to unmute myself. So, you know. Okay. All right. So, Josh, did you have a comment you want me to add? Yes, Jim. I was actually going to ask for true drawings anyways. Okay. If we look at it. Can you guys see this one? All right. If we look at this, it kind of describes like a lot of room above the door here and above the windows. And just looking at the other photos of the house, by the time they get this roof slope further out, as their floor plan indicates it would, I don't think there's going to be that much headroom available. So I would really like to see true elevations and a roof plan with roof slopes and make sure all that geometry is worked out. Okay, at the present point in time, we are. We have a staff recommendation of approval subject to the two standard conditions and the other condition involving the soffit and fascia. I'm assuming the staff took in consideration your concerns about the geometry of the drawings. So, Ms. Kerr? Could we check in with Barry on that and see if there's anything that he needs to comment reflective of the drawings? Because I think it sounds very appropriate to need more clarity on these drawings. Yes, when we were looking at the submittal and that being basically a perspective, you know, that it's not drawn exactly to scale, I understand that elevations would show it more precisely but we thought that um just because it's going to come a little lower it's still not going to impact on the windows and things that it could be approved with what was happening uh mr brown do you want to take this opportunity to submit true drawings and while you're at it try to make an argument that you do not need that step in or step out? No, sir. I think I'd like to follow the guidelines as the staff has recommended and complete this as they're requested, as they have recommended their approval. Okay. I'm trying to avoid having you go to the expense of submitting architectural drawings if we can work with your current proposal. Let's work with our current proposal. That offset is not worth the delay or the additional expense. And I'm trying now to address Josh's concern. Barry, can you work with these plans or do you actually need architectural drawings? We felt like that other than that height that the proportions and what we've shown would be true to what was actually constructed. You know, a lot of times the board does approve projects off of schematic drawings that are not exactly precise so there is some leeway and interpretation that the staff tries to do but obviously if Mr. Gilpin has questions we would defer to that. Well I have a feeling I'm inclined to let this go forward if if the rest of the board's in agreement but let me sound the audience first. Do you have any questions or comments from the audience? I'll give it a count of 10. All right. Mr. Gilbert, you're invoking what I mentally always have called the Graham poll where Graham would always like to have exact drawings and sometimes that misses the point that with some people the drawings can be a fairly expensive endeavor and so that if they're workable and if the staff can live with them I'm inclined to let the staff uh we'll go with what the staff wants yes sir Suzanne um I just wanted to follow up on Josh's comment is that um I think his concern is not so much that we see exact drawings, but the slope of the roof, there's a concern that the slope of the roof, if when the addition comes out another 10 feet, that the head height on that back wall is not going to be high enough for a door and the windows had the head of the windows where they are because if the slope continues out that far that that is I think what his concern is not whether it looks appropriate but that will it work with a door where it's being placed on the plans. I would say that the wall height will be the same after the addition so it will not interfere with the door window height. But then does that mean that the slope could be somewhat shallower? Okay so the roof slope will change from the existing in order to meet that. Yes, yes. Okay. Okay, any further discussion on this? It may be, you know, the test may be in the taste of the pudding, Mr. Brown. You may run into a problem, so hopefully you won't. I think there are any further discussion on this application? yes Susan I think that Josh's concern would have been addressed somewhat with a roof plan even a roof sketch because then we would have seen if the intent was just to continue the slope of the existing roof or actually bring a shed off that back which I think is what he's doing okay Mr. Brown I think what we're going to do is suggest that you give us a roof sketch i can give a i have uh submitted a well i guess that's for uh to building inspection i can get you a roof sketch now the addition is not an additional 10 feet as was uh mentioned previously it's a total of 10 feet or an additional five feet so the head height is not going to be an issue and the reason that i didn't get a roof sketch was i did not know how you guys were going to require me to tie to it. I didn't get staff's information or staff's recommendations until yesterday morning. So it's really very limiting on what I'm able to prepare for with having such a small window. So the addition is only an additional five feet and there is plenty of head height there for windows and doors. I'm a little old school. We actually go out there with boards and lay them on the roof and try them the old school way rather than just so that I can see it in my head. So if that is a concern, there is no concern on the actual one done. And just for the record, what is your background? What is your occupation, Mr. Brown? I'm just a contractor. We've had a general contractor's license for 20 years in Fayette County and have done over 14 renovations. just they weren't actually more 17 but they weren't all district okay i think we'll go with your expertise as a contractor then okay okay all right that case then any further uh comments or observations about this application all right then i'm ready for a motion if there is a motion to be Chair, as per case number 1813-0108-B at 108 Suburban Court, I move that we approve the certificate of appropriateness with the first condition being to change the soffit and fascia to a guideline compliant material. such as wood or cementitious board and submit details to staff for review and approval prior to the issuance of a COA. Two, that a roof plan be submitted to staff for approval and three and four being the standard two conditions. Okay, do I have a second to that? Second. All right. Any further discussion on the motion? Hearing none, the chair will follow the question. All those in favor of the motion as with the four conditions, please say aye. Aye. Opposed, nay. Motion passes and the application is approved as conditioned. Mr. and Mrs. Brown, good luck with your project. Thank you. All right. Thank you very much. All right. Turning to our last application, I believe. This is at 181 Rosemont Garden. The Pensacola Park Historic District. Scope of work is demolished rear addition and deck, constructed addition and deck. And the applicant is Amir. Are you here? Stand by. All right. Thank you. Yes, can you hear me? We certainly can. I'm glad that you're here with us. Admire, the staff is, first of all, I want to compliment you and congratulate you on coming in with a new plan. we're going to have to initially decide whether the plan is substantively different from your past applications that we can move forward. Okay. In my opinion, because you have completely revised the scope of the roof, which is our principal concern, that would make it a new application for us to consider, but that's my opinion. I'm wondering if the rest of the board agrees with me on that, and if so, I need a motion. and the motion basically is basically that we can we have a prohibition of considering duplicative or near duplicative plans and so the motion basically is a finding by us that this plan is substantively different from prior applications and thus can be considered so i'm willing to try this one do i state the case number and such Please. You do. Chair, per case number 16370181-C at 181 Rosemont Garden, I submit that the application does, in fact, provide sufficient new evidence and design changes to warrant re-review of this application. May I rephrase that a little bit? What we're actually doing is we're making a finding and just a motion that we find that the application is different enough that it is not a duplicate of prior applications. And that's all that needs to be said. So moved. So move. Do I have a second? Second. All right. Any further discussion of the motion? All those in favor of the motion say aye. Aye. Okay. Now with this procedural hurdle out of the way and, you know, Senate rules and all that good stuff, we are now at the point where we can review this application substantively. Amir, staff has recommended approval of your application, but they had three, they disapproved some elements of your application. And I'm wondering, are you willing to agree to those suggested disapprovals or do you want to be heard on this? And the first one is that the recess and protrusion of the side door on the east and west side be disapproved. And if you submit new drawings on that. Yes, I agree with that. I could fix that. Okay. The second one is that you use a disapproving steel material. They're suggesting you use some other kind of material. Yes, I agree with that. Yes, sir. And the last one is that you use something other than shake siding in the eaves of the cross cables. Yes, sir. I could change that. All right. In that case, then, Ms. Curra, let me make sure I'm on the right track here. Amelia, whichever. There you are. He will need to submit new drawings to show these revisions, correct? Correct. That is correct. This case probably needs to be open and be heard formally and not just sound. Okay. All right. I'll let you open it and go through your findings and then we will make a motion, I'm assuming. Excuse me. One second. And I'm going to step away for just a moment. I'm going to, can everybody hear me well enough? Okay, I'm going to walk through this case. Mr. Goodwin. So this, of course, is the front elevation of 181. Where's my garden? Just walk through some of the images. This is the east side of this structure. It is, of course, a one-story bungalow with shake shingle on the front. And then it did receive an unfortunate rare addition in the 70s in here from some of our some of our aerials and research on the structure, as you can see in this image. Staff did stop and talk with the owner last year at this time. And of course, we've heard this case in February of 2021, March of 2021, April of 2021, and then, of course, in July, where it was finally disproved. and then they did appeal to the planning commission and also um the planning commission upheld the planning commission's motion to uh for the bors mission to discreet the project so just sort of to walk you through this did have this sort of this you all remember this um little side door that faces the street and sort of walk through. You can sort of see the blocking windows that are present. It'll be important as we talk about the windows on the side elevation, what's original, what's new. This, as you remember, we call them plans. This is the window that will be made into a door. This window is existing. And then there is some wall space back here. That's important to note. This is of course as staff stopped work last year. See as the roof is being turned up. And with Tybac on it. And this did, staff was able to look at this project and talk with a potential owner in summer of 2020 and saw the roof as it was prior to the new addition. So just to I wanted to make note for Mr. Mir specifically who's not seen this project many times, that the footprint in some fashion did exist in this fashion. However, at one side on the east side I had a rear L and then that L was filled in with a built up roof system. And you can see where the rear L was here. And of course what had happened is the sim wall started to be built and what was inside was received. The inside wall system where it was built up over, this is the existing rear L that's there you're seeing that right forward of this. And this is the interior wall is virtually closed in now. It's been closed in by the new addition of the new roof system that was built. And you can see that was the right in the wall of the original structure. And you can sort of see sort of the built-up system that occurred when we built up the roof system in the 70s and enclosed that first with a was a porch then it had became had coordinated metal okay i'm going to get plastic and some other roof storm reforms this is actually the corner of the structure and then it had a pork system on the back as well of course and so here is of course as we saw this image before and this was an image provided by the owner sort of showing the different forms you can sort of see this corpid of plastic and the existing peak and this was the build-up system and of course then later on it got reframed inside and some of the bad stuff was taken out And then we'll see how we can see the different types of different types of And then with lots of images that show that, you can see that meandering edges here that sort of eventually established the footprint that you see today. Of course, the bigger element that we couldn't resolve is the roof plan. staff have disapproved our saloon plan as it was built before. I'm going to hold this on here for a second. So the owner has contacted the staff in December of 2021 and made outpatient repair and rebuild the patient and replaced gutters and soffits of the main structure. Staff did talk to the owner and regarding reworking the existing addition and encourage the owner to hire an architect. The applicant has consulted with an architect and made changes. And at this time, the owner of this one story by the lowest requesting the board grant certificate of appropriateness to conduct the following work. In all of some of the walls of the existing one story frame addition, those are the interior elements we have showed in those images. construct a new foundation wall system that's the new concrete block stem wall that was shown construct a new roof over the existing additions change rear addition on the west window to a door on the west facing wall of addition and add a cover porch on the rear and replace and construct new pressure treated decks which will be on the sides we'll see those in plans in a second just have to look over the changes from the previous plan which is going to be from the July plan and you've got a copy of that in orange in your staff report of what you saw and what was disapproved in July that year of last year 2021. The peak and then of course from the plan from July to the plan we see now and what was actually built the there are The following work has been proposed in the new plan, which we'll look at in a second. The peak of the rear addition that meets the roof of the existing structures proposed will be lowered by three feet. This roof will be continually at the same height of the length of the roof. The rear porch will have a cross gable resulting in two side gables with a fork well through pitch. The rear portion of the addition will be clad in clapboard left siding with a sixth reveal. table image will be proposed to be shake siding. The double multi-pane doors on the east side are supposed to be recessed 10 inches and the doors will be of steel. The window calls for the proposal calls for the window to be made of steel and the door in the west elevation will project out 10 inches. The rear wall will have two doors walking out into a covered porch on and then windows that are closed on the rear portion of the addition having one window each side and that can of course still is not of course obtaining the building permit as building permits can be issued prior to the issues with coa so we walk further about the actual plans Of course, this is the elevation. This is the site plan shows the decks here and on this side, and then the 10-inch recessing and then the protrusion on the west side. And then of course here again, this is the footprint or the floor plan of the proposal. Oh, this is pre-existing. Oh, sorry. I don't know what happened. So, but it's, I think the only change was going to be showing, it showed this, but there'll two dwellings. Then here are the elevations, the new proposed elevation. And I think you've got some better copies in your staff report that I'll lend to you. You can see if you look on the right side, which would be that east side elevation that the roof is lower. And you can see the doors we're referring to in the deck. And then on the left side, which is the driveway side elevation, this of course is the original structure and this is also the original section that has that blocking window and then the window that's made into a window to a door and then another window on this location. And this should shake siding with a covered pad. And here's the roof plan that shows the proposal. And I'm just gonna go back to the previous plan that you saw before so you can see I bet this is the difference. And just to note, because here's the element, this is sort of showing the two structures inside. So this being the Rosemont garden frontage and showing the two units will be created. So, findings guidelines are included for your reference findings staff finds the proposed roof system meets the guidelines. However, there are some does discussion points regarding other elements of the project that are not within the guidelines. Roof the proposed roof meets the design guidelines. It's designed, but the roof lessens the impact of the addition on the historic of the roof lessens the impact of the addition on the historic bungalow the smaller roof addition allows the main structure to remain evident and does not overwhelm the main structure staff does recommend that the rear cable have open valleys the design principle for the room and wing addition states in planning additions the best approach is to place additions where they have least impact in the building's overall group plan likewise additions reform should be stepped down from the peak of the existing roof line so the existing main roof remains evident. In addition, guidelines 1 15 B, 2 A, 4 B, and D state open valleys should be retained and covered valleys are not allowed from existing structures. Exterior walls in the new addition should be flushed for those existing buildings and should be stepped in a minimum of 12 inches in the edges of the existing building and roof lines should be stepped down from the peak of the existing main roof line so the main remains evident and they should not, buildings should not imitate an earlier historic style or architectural period. Exterior walls. And this is from the July 2021 staff report. Staff noted that the previous post-1972 rear additions were demolished without the COA or building permits and do establish a footprint of a lot coverage that has the right to continue with the amount of square footage of the rear of the house as it is grandfathered in. However, once the previous editions were demolished, the owners must comply fully with the H1 overlay process, and this includes following the design guidelines and scope of work with the required COA permits. H1 overlay process includes, which also allow properly documented amount of the same square footage of ground utilization, which has not been demonstrated by the applicant in the previous editions covered on this lot with the print design details. the roof construction may be adjusted and meet the compliance design guidelines allowing variety of form and footprint to facilitate appropriate scale of proposed new construction the as-built addition connects on the west wall to a sawn off mid-wall length run at remaining exterior wall covered in butt-cut wood shingle and on the east side in the same plane of what was the quarter of previously just an existing addition. They have proposed to add undulation in the side wall of the wall system. On the west side the proposed plan calls for the wall system which includes a door jutting out from the existing wall plane on the east side. The proposed wall is recessed 10 inches to include the multi-sane doors. The new concrete block addition is continuous and affects the historic foundation in the same plane as the east elevation and what was the existing concrete block on the west elevation staff finds the new changes the roof orientation of existing material style changes additionally step clients that proposed projection and recessing of the door of the east and west are ineffective to make substantial changes to the wall system staff would note that it would be considered would be considered on the east elevation but is not necessary however on the west side it seems to be distracting visually dominant especially since it doesn't meet the corners if that means that the opening that whole door didn't come up to the top the design guideline principle for room and green addition states as planning additions the best overall approach is to place additions where that the least impact the building's overall form and plan an addition roof line should step down from the main peak of the existing roof line to the existing main roof remains evident guidelines two one four c f and g stage room and wing additions should be compatible design and keeping with the original buildings design group form shapes color location of window door and corner sites should not be built in a manner that avoids substantive removal or loss of historic material and should not damage or destroy the main architectural features of the building and should keep the exterior of the walls of visual building and tactics as possible and use window and door window opens for connecting the addition to the building. Door and window changes. Other elements on the request involve the proposal to change the window on the west-facing end, the existing addition to the door, which is in with the guidelines, as this area is not part of the house, but in the later addition. The proposal to install print doors on the east side are with the guidelines because it marks the end of the historic fabric and beginning of the construction. Guidelines 1.7 should be located on the sides and rear elevations rather than main facade. The proposal calls for the one window to be installed along the east and west elevations on the new rear addition. Staff finds the windows are out of scale with historic structure and should be more vertical. Staff recommends the two new windows be added on the east. They should be vertical oriented and narrow windows and meeting the compatibility of the existing windows in the the main structure. And in guidelines 2B1 outstate windows should open should be compatible in size scale proportion to establish patterns of openings and adjacent surrounding buildings. Next the proposal to replace the decks along the east side is within design guidelines with states new deck and windows should be placed on the rear side elevations. There There is an existing floating deck and the applicant is proposing to replace that deck and the prototype meets the guidelines mentioned above. Materials that propose cementitious siding material on the newly constructed elevation is appropriate. It does help distinguish the change in the wall system. Staff does find the rear gables should have clapboard, cementitious siding in lieu of shake siding. And shake mimics history. The windows in the new construction are proposed to be aluminum clad. Catalents 2B2J states the use of smooth cementitious board siding is acceptable as long as it meets the size allocation. And the use of wood and anonized aluminum windows is appropriate. Title is not allowed. The use of plastic snap and buttons is not permitted. However, the plan calls for vinyl steel doors on the sides and staff recommends that they be changed and not, and as new construction may incorporate contemporary materials such as synthetosis, cord and fiberglass and aluminum, staff recommends that another use of material and steel or vinyl on the sides of the structure. recommendations staff recommends denial of the following the recessed and protrusion of the side doors on east and west the steel doors on the sides and the shake siding on the eaves of the cross cable and i would say staff does recommend approval of the material of the following conditions materials in the gable ends the rear of the cupwork style and new shake siding so that's in this location we AS FOR THE POP ROAD VERSUS SHAPE. BUT THE FINAL DETAILS CAME BACK TO STAFF AND PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF COA. THE CROSS CABLE HAVE OPEN VALLEYS VERSUS CLOSED. AND FINAL DETAILS COME BACK TO STAFF PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF COA. THE REAR DISHON NO LONGER HAVE MORE LONGER WINDOWS ON BOTH ELEVATIONS IN THIS LOCATION AND THIS LOCATION. instead of the spotty windows the final details come back to staff prior to the issues of the coa final door and windows details be returned prior to the issues of the coa rear decks have skirting at the foundation of such as ladders vertical board to have a finished appearance and then the final two standard conditions and i would note i think there was discussion that i might have missed over about this right side or the east side elevation have two windows versus just the one spotty window and of course as they are the longer more slender windows flanking that versus the one single window and of course the applicant is present okay Amir we were having a conversation initially that you were willing to accept the disapprovals of the staff and I'm not sure I guess we would need plans to show that you use materials other than steel and also you're going to revise plan that would eliminate the recessed and protrusion of the side door but we also need to go through the staff recommendations of what they approved and their conditions. Mary can you bring down the plan so we can see each other? Here we go. Thank you. So, Amir, starting with what they have approved with their conditions, the first one being the material in the gable ends of the rear edition be Clappert style in lieu of shake. Will final details come back to staff? Are we in agreement with that one? Yes, sir. Okay. Number two, that the rear cross cable have open valleys with final details to come back to staff prior to the issuance of the COA. Are we in agreement? Yes, sir. All right. Number three, that the rear addition have longer, more narrow windows in lieu of the squatting window. And I think this is where they're calling for two windows as opposed to one. The final details to come back to staff prior to the COA are in agreement with that one? I should probably have a chat with Ms. Armstrong because on that, that's the far east of the building. That corner is a bedroom. And the reason we put that one window is because we didn't want that unit to have access to the unit next door, backyard. Okay. So that's something I could have. a rectangle window closer to the ceiling so they won't have access to the backyard of the unit next door. Okay, Ms. Armstrong? So are you suggesting that I think what you're saying is you're not talking about access, you're really talking about view shed. Exactly. So what you're looking for is a smaller window in the back. Yes. And I think I would just note that if you all saw the previous plan in July, there were two higher windows. Yes. of those. Of course, staff's recommendation is based on the fact that we wanted the windows to have some kind of compatibility with the main structure versus the, you know, this would be different. And so our suggestion about being long and slender was based on the fact we wanted to have not necessarily mimic, but have some kind of character defining, a similarity or I would say compatibility with the main structure. Yes. So I think at that point, that's going to be all the board has. Sorry, what? I think that goes back to we made our conversation about wanting to have longer, slender windows. I think that's a discussion that the board might have to weigh in about their feeling. Okay, so go ahead, Mayor. If I could just make a clarification comment here, I'm all for more windows. But the only problem that I have with this recommendation is if you have a normal window, you know, you would unit one would have access. They would be able to to view the unit, the second unit backyard. This is why, you know, we suggested the architect, you know, suggested to have a rectangle window, you know, higher up. So they would still have light, but they won't have, you know, the visual access to the first unit backyard. All right. That makes sense. Okay, let me move on and make sure I got all the other. We're coming back to this one in just a moment. Okay. Okay. Let's move on to number five or number four, that the final door and windows be returned. Details is the final door and windows be returned to staff prior. I'm sorry. Let me start over again. The final door and windows to be returned prior with final details to come back to staff prior to issues of COA. Ms. Armstrong, what did you mean by that? We mean all the final window and door details. We know there are going to be a cloud which is the final details of all that since also we asked all the doors to be changed from steel to another material. Okay, are you in agreement with that? Yes, sir. Okay, number five, the rear deck have a skirting at the foundation with lattice of vertical boards to have a finished appearance? Yes. Okay, and then of course the last two of the standard conditions, six and seven, I'm assuming you're in agreement with those? Yes. Okay, let's return back now to number, let's talk about this window again. And Ms. Irwin, I believe you had a comment. Just wanted to clarify what I'm understanding. The desire for these windows are to be a more of a transom type window, which would be a higher window that doesn't give a view shed to that deck, which belongs to the other unit. That is accurate. OK. And to be clear, apparently now we're proposing a duplex proposal here. correct? No, this has always been a duplex and that was actually confirmed through a planning, I have the email, that it's been a duplex since the 70s. Okay, all right. I'm not sure it had ever been clear to me until now that we were actually dealing with a duplex structure. Yes. Okay, so with a transcend type of weather, that would cut down on the ability of one unit to look on the other unit. Is that something that we can simply solve through submitting additional details on the window? Are we talking about this? And what is this? The darkened things are windows, high windows. High windows, yes, ma'am. I mean, it's something like that. Yes. And Ms. Armstrong, is that all right with you? Well, I mean, I think this is going to be up to the board. Okay. I don't see a problem, to be honest with you. Mr. Gilpin, do you have any questions or comments about this? I think that kind of window change, I think that kind of window occurs on all kinds of bungalow houses. So I think that would be appropriate. Ms. Hill? I'm uncomfortable with change. Sarah I guess I'm a little I'm comfortable with the change of going to story window I don't think the squatting window that we're talking about is it's too low to really give the privacy that the owner is talking about so I think changing that proportion and thinking about another way to deal with that window is appropriate and I'm comfortable with the staff reviewing it with him to come up with a better solution, but I don't think the way it's designed is doing what he's saying he wants it to do as is. In that case, then, I think we have a consensus. Amir, you need to submit new window design to the staff for their review and approval, probably along a transcend or clericery type style that will give what you want and protect the V-shade. Okay. Okay. Okay. All right. No problem. I think that would be the same treatment on the west side in the rear corner on the driveway side. So you're looking at the plan. In memory, there's a, you know, you have the new door that was a window to door. And then there's a new window that's going to be above where the kitchen area is. and then there's a wall space. That was the other concern. So the recommendation for that west side, which is in the living room kitchen area from the plan, is that that single window that's beside the door or the single window to the left of the door on the west elevation be changed to two separate windows that are more rectangular, taller. Right. That window, because it's above the kitchen, could be there. We're sort of suggesting the area, that space between the cabinetry and the corner, maybe there'll be another longer window that might have more of a vertical nature to match up with the vertical windows in the main structure. I can share screen for a second. I feel like that would be too close to the corner. This area. And to be clear from the elevation, left elevation is the west elevation, is that right? Or do I have that backwards? Left is west. Thank you. Meaning right is east, hopefully. All right. Mr. Gilman, did you have a comment first? I'm actually okay with the window as he drew it. I have no problem with it. Ms. Hill? I'm also okay with the window as he drew it on the west side. What I would like to see is the floor plan with the east side. The elevation is showing that one window. I'd just like to see the floor plan on that side. Go ahead and submit that to the staff. I have to do that. Okay, let's look at it. So, it would be on the west side, you're saying? East side. That you signed? So that would be, that's got the single window in this location. That's. Oh, no, sorry, the wrong way. That's not the new plan. This plan is out of date. Yeah, for some reason I have the wrong plan on it. But there, I'm going to give you, here's the. That's also the wrong plan, or not the one that I have anyway. It's not, it's existing plan for some reason. I'm not finding that. But you have that plan in your... And that's why I ask. My plan is the one from July that shows two windows. Yeah. So it shows the two windows? Mm-hmm. I don't have a revised plan showing just one window. So at least I understand the rooms that we're talking about for the three transom windows. and those all make sense to me, given both what Amira is mentioning and given the fact that one of them is a bathroom. So I'm fine with those street transoms also. Are we talking three transom or two transoms? I just, I sketched in three, but it, I mean, just it, just to show that it's a a transom. I'm not saying that it has to be three across there. Okay. Let's compliment. All right. So let's see if we've got some consensus on that number three. I think maybe we have to break it down into two parts. If someone would make some language with regard to before we move any further do I have any comments or concerns from the virtual audience let me give it a count of ten sorry there is no one you what now there is no one in the audience okay now you're done alright okay in that case let's come back to three for just a moment and let's sort through the window issue and what we're going to try to tell the staff and Amir what we're bringing to. So with respect to the west side, what should our recommendation be? Go ahead, Susan. I'm fine with the window as it's shown. I think it gets close to the corner. I agree with Josh by adding a second window on that west on the west side. So we need a second window. Is that right? Or no? No, we don't. OK. All right. No window on the east side. What do we need, if anything? I would propose that we state it that we are, that we feel that transom type high windows being more than one transom type high windows on the east elevation or proposed right side elevation that are into the bedroom and bathroom of the floor plan would be appropriate on that elevation. The final detail is coming back to staff. All right, very good. Anything else we need to do with number three. Number four. I'm assuming that's pretty standard that all the final door and windows come back to staff for review and approval. Correct? Okay. Amir, is that going to be satisfactory for you, I hope? Yes, sir. Okay. All right. In that case, then, I think the only other thing we need to do with respect to the elements of your application that have been disapproved, Amir, you're going to have to redraw your plans to accommodate those disapproval of that protrusion. Do you understand? Are we talking about the two doors, the recessed doors? Yes. Yes. Yes, I could have the architect Craig rushing to get that done. Okay, very good. I have one other comment. Okay. I just wanted to bring out it's on the pose left side elevation. It's where the I'm going to just show this picture again because it's easier than trying to verbalize exactly where I'm talking about. It's worth a thousand words. Okay, this location right here, that's going to, there's going to be a side of that elevation, if you're looking from this side, that's going to create a bit of siding there above the new roof and I think we need to talk about what kind of what type of siding that we feel meets the guidelines because that's on the existing house it's on the existing bungalow the original bungalow but that's a part of the bungalow that's never been exposed to the outside and needed siding before so it's a new application of siding on an existing and it's butting right up against the existing shake siding and we need to probably make a statement as to what we feel the guidelines will allow and if i understand correctly the shake siding is being changed into the the shake siding on the new addition in the gables needs to be changed to cementitious plank siding so that it doesn't imitate the original. Right. Now the question is for the new siding or the exposed siding, if you will, on the existing building, what should that be? I think I mean, it needs to match the existing shingles, but we need to say that, I think. All right. We can add that in. Any objection to that? hearing none we'll add that in I don't envy whoever's going to try to do this motion I'll try it I don't want to reverse things have we gotten everything straightened out because I suspect there may be a mirror you are going to have to revise your plans but I think you're in agreement with that so anything else that we need to talk about all right yes Ms. Hill um just one small thing and and this is more just a comment um kind of a heads up for Amir on the east side in that same kind of zone that we're talking about where the double doors are um there there will be a lot of roof drainage coming into that area and with the double glass doors where and how you put a downspout and what that construction looks like is going to need to take some real care during construction so that you don't end up with an ice dam in that location every time we have the kind of weather that we're going to have tonight. So it's just a comment, not something that needs to go in the record. Thank you. I'll make sure to mention that to the architect, Craig Rushing. Thank you. This is where Ms. Hill has earned her money as an architect by foreseeing problems with water. All right. So if there's no further substantive conversation, are we ready for a motion? I believe we may be. Josh, did I hear you say that you want to take a stab at it? Sure. Go for it. Mr. Chairman regarding case number 16370181-C at 181 Rosemont Garden. I move to deny the portions of the application. Number one being the recess and protrusion of the side door on the east and west side. number two the steel material of the size doors and number three the shake siding in the eaves of the cross plate across gables and i move to approve the remaining the remainder of the application with the following conditions very good number one the material in the gable ends of the rear edition be clabbered style in lieu of shake siding with final details coming back to staff with final details to come back to staff prior to the issuance of COA. Number two, the rear cross cable have open valleys with final details to come back to staff prior to the issuance of the COA. And number three, the rear addition east wall. If window changes are needed to the east wall of the rear addition that the window would change to a more transom style and proportion in lieu of the squatting window with final details to come back to staff prior to the issuance of a COA. Number four, final door and windows be returned prior with final details to come back to staff prior to the issuance of a COA. Number five, the rear decks having skirting at the foundation with lattice or vertical boards to have finished appearance. Conditions number six and number seven are our standard conditions. And I would also add condition number eight, that the newly exposed area of wall above the roof, which is located along the west side of the building, where the original roof meets the newly refinished roof area, would continue the shake siding that is adjacent to it around its corner. Very good. Do I have a second? Second. All right. I don't. Very good. Any further discussion on the motion? Josh, I want to compliment you. You did a great job with a very complicated motion. Any further comment? If not, then 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 by the board. Amir, congratulations. I wish you the best of luck and success with your project. Thank you, sir. And I just like to thank all the board members and also the staff for your time and being patient. time and being patient with this project throughout the course. Okay. Ms. Hill, did you have something? Yes, I just wanted to thank the applicant for coming back to the process and the staff working with him so closely. I think he's going to have a project he's really pleased with. Thank you, Matt. We have shown that it's taken us a while, but I think we have shown that this process does work the way it's supposed to work. Amir, when you get the house finished, maybe just show it off as an open house for us. We'll do it. Thank you. Amir, best of luck. Thank you for sticking with it. It's a good neighborhood. It is a great neighborhood, actually. Sure is. Thank you. That finishes the application review portion of this meeting. We have minutes to approve from December 15, 2021. Or do we? We didn't get them, did we? That's correct. I didn't think I had seen them, but I was going to say, okay, I just missed them. Okay. All right. So I'll strike that from the agenda. All right. Is there anything else that we need to do at this time? All right. I want to thank you. This has been a good meeting. And again, I appreciate your endeavors and your hard work with this matter. And I look forward to seeing you in February, maybe in person, probably in Zoom. But we'll take it one day at a time. All right. Without any further business to conduct, do I have a motion to adjourn? So moved. Second, please. Second. All right. With the second, it's a non-debatable motion. We stand adjourned. Bye. Thank you. Good to see you, Jim. I'm sorry.