The board encourages and recommends that the applicant use them as a resource. The historic preservation office is located at 101 East Vine Street, room 220. It is our procedure to consider the applications in the order in which they're listed on our agenda. In each case, we'll have a presentation by the staff and we'll hear any additional comments from the applicant. 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 the applications. There are certain items that the staff can approve, eliminating necessity for all applicants to appear before the Board. There are a total of 33 approved applications noted on today's agenda. They are as follows. In the Ellsford Historic District, at 212 Deshay Road, install fence and gate. At 977 Fincastle Road, renovate the structure. At 1016 Fincastle Road, construct a rear porch. In the Ellsford Historic District, at 317 Ellsford Place, Replace two deteriorated windows. At 558 Heasai Street, renovate the structure. At 347 Linda Walk, renovate the structure. At 317 East Maxwell, replace blacktop with asphalt. Replace asphalt blacktop with pavers. At 12 Preston Court, remove deteriorated trees. At 315 Transylvania Park, renovate the structure. At 372 Transylvania Park, replace fencing. In the Belcourt Historic District at 157 West Belcourt, replace the fencing. At 527 Boonesboro Avenue, replace decking. At 609 Russell Avenue, replace the window. At Ellsmore Park, in the Ellsmore Park Historic District, at 612 Ellsmore Park, renovate the structure, I'm sorry, renovate the front porch. In the Grants Park historic district on Grants Park, relay the brick walkways. In Northside historic district at 235 North Broadway, renovate the front porch. At 330 Hampton Court, renovate the front porch. At 485 West Second Street, renovate the structure. At 431 West Third Street, renovate the structure. In the Pensacola Park Historic District at 127 Lackawanna Road, replace the addition windows. At 119 Pinocchio Park, replace the fencing. At 157 Pinocchio Park, renovate and do side work. 166 Pinocchio Park, replace windows. At 147 Wabash Drive, renovate the structure. At the seven parts historic district at 317 Arcadia Park, replace the roof. At 208 Dantzler Park, renovate the slips and fencing. In the South Hill historic district at 326 South Broadway, replace the fencing. At 257 South Limestone, renovate the basement access wall. At 257 South Limestone, install the fencing. At 315 South Mill Street, replace the fence. In the western suburbs historic district at 583 West Short Street, renovate the structure. At Woodward Heights historic district at 348 Marino Street, renovate the structure and also renovate the site. Those are the approved applications. Ms. Kerr, I'll need the address for the Grants Park address, which I don't have. All right, moving on to our applications. In the Ashland, I guess we need a motion to postpone the first two? Yes. Okay, we have two postponements being requested at 415 East Maxwell Street. The request is the paved driveway, they requested a postponement until September 20. Do I have a motion to that effect? So moved. Do I have a second? Second. Any discussion? Chair, we'll call the question. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. We also have a request to postpone at 453 East Maxwell Street. The request is construct driveway and parking area. Do I have a motion to postpone until September 20? So moved. Do I have a second? Second. Any discussion? Hearing none, the sheriff will call the question. All those in favor say aye. Aye. All right, moving on to our first application. At 254 South Hanover Avenue, install solar panels. Is the applicant here? Come on up. Just speak into the microphone and say your name and address. I'm Colleen Quinn at 254 South Hanover. Okay, Ms. Quinn. The staff has recommended approval of the application subject to what I would call one substantive condition, and that being the height should be no higher than six inches from the roof pane. Are you in agreement with that? Yeah, I believe it's going to be four inches. That'd be fine. The other two are what we refer to as our standard conditions. I'll read them to you. The first one being once reviewed by the other city divisions, resubmitting changes to staff or board for review and approval prior to start of work. Are you in agreement? Say yes, please. Yes. And number three, if any changes are made that alter the information submitted, resubmit the changes to staff for review and approval prior to start of work. Are we in agreement with that? Yes. All right. Any questions or concerns from the board members? Any questions or concerns from the audience? Hearing none, I think we're ready for a motion. Chair, in regard to case number 08760254-C at 254 South Hanover, I move that we approve the Certificate of Appropriateness. All right. Do I have a second? Any discussion on the motion? Hearing none, the Chair will call the question. All those in favor of the motion say aye. Aye. Opposed, nay. Motion passes and the COA as condition is approved. Thank you, ma'am. Thank you. Good luck with your project. Just give me a moment. Now that I can get to the microphone where I can be heard. All right, so at 417 East Maxwell Street, scope of work is, what is the scope of work, replace front windows and front door. Is the applicant here? Yes. Come on up please. I believe the staff has recommended approval of the application. Subject to the standard two conditions I just read into the record, are we in agreement with those? There's a substitute. No, there's some. They're recommending further study of the pediment. Robin, I apologize, excuse me, I'm sorry. I can either have, I can either, I think, summarize the issues or I can step back and Amelia here can summarize what the issues are. I did, we received the staff report on Monday. We had a follow-up conversation on Tuesday. We met and had kind of a redesign done this morning. Staff has not yet looked at that in pertaining to the height on that. And so I can share that drawing with you now or defer to staff if they want to do a presentation first. Well, we have a couple options. We can go forward and approve the metal roof and construction of the arbors. If you have submitted just today a redesign. Well, this is a redesign that specifically, I think, was in response to staffs. But staff hasn't had a chance to review it, correct? Or make a recommendation to us. That's the procedural challenge here, that staff hasn't gotten. Well, then let's proceed with the conversation as reported by staff. And the staff actually, so you're asking for a hearing as to whether or not there needs to be further study on the fediment? No, I believe what he's saying, if I understand correctly, is that in light of what the staff report raised as concerns, that they have revised their proposal to bring the... Yeah, I think it addresses the concerns that staff had on the discussion item. We just haven't had a chance. It's... The catch is the process really doesn't... It doesn't- Well here, I think what I'm going to do then is I'm going to let Amelia just do her presentation. All right, Robin, we'll do it as you suggest. Amelia, if you'll make the presentation. So yes, we're requesting, I guess, the hearing. I take it that you're wanting to have an up and down right now on the pediment. Sorry. If we disapprove the pediment, you're going to be blocked for a year from Reese Middle. Unless it's substantially changed. I think that the way to keep this correctly in the system of the process, we are prohibited from accepting drawings just on the fly at a meeting. So we can't have the board act on what you've redesigned and brought in just now. What they could do is hear your case. First of all, I think we may have other items to sound before you get into hearing this case, if indeed you're going to. But the second thing is I think one of the options the staff would recommend in order to accommodate both the needs here is to go on and open this case when the time is right in your agenda and have your discussion and then continue and or you could act on it with the condition that all these details come back to the staff but not to the board. So I'd say there's two options at the end of if you open the case and hear it as proposed, which is I think what Mr. Mickler is suggesting is he would like to move forward today, obviously, as far as being heard. Okay, Mr. Mickler, my normal process is that we're going to have a full-scale hearing. I'd like to get the other cases that are more routine out of the way, and we'll come back to you in a minute. All right? That seems fair. All right, thank you so much, sir. Next application is 792 Caden Lane at the Caden Town Historic District, if they have to hear. Okay, Mr. Morgan, how are you today? Hi, how are you? I'm sorry, and if you'll state your name for the record, please. This is Paul Lee with Studio A. Gotcha. Staff has recommended approval of your application subject to what I've been calling the standard two conditions. Let me read those into the record very quickly. 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 or any agreement? Yes, we are. And number two, once reviewed by the other city divisions, submit all changes to staff for review and approval prior to start of any work? Yes, we are. All right. Any discussion or questions about this application? Any questions or concerns from the audience? Looks like a good design, sir. I believe we're ready for a motion then. Chair, in regards to case number 02960792-B at 792 Caden Lane, I move that we approve the certificate of appropriateness with the standard two conditions. All right. Do I have a second? Second. Any discussion on the motion? Hearing none, the Chair will call the question. All those in favor of the motion say aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed, nay. Motion passes and the COA as conditions approved. Thank you so much. Thank you so much. And good luck with your project. Thank you very much. All right. Turning now to 255 South Ashland Avenue, Scope of Work. Is the construction of an addition, is the applicant here? 255 South Ashland Avenue. I'm going to- I'm going to- Ah, dang it. All right. It was- Arcadia Park, excuse me. Sorry, this is 601 Arcadia Park. I'm having a great day today, I can tell. All right, the scope of work is demolished garage, construct new garage. I believe this is actually your- Yes, the staff has made a couple of substantive recommendations. The first one being to provide the final material details and specifications for review by staff prior to the issuance of the COA. And secondly, provide the door, window, and skylight details and specifications for review by staff prior to the issuance of the COA. Are you in agreement with those? Yes. All right. The other two are the standard conditions, if any changes are made that alter the information submitted. Resubmit the changes to staff for review and approval prior to start of work. And finally, once reviewed by the other divisions, any changes shall be returned to staff or board for review and approval prior to start of work. Are you in agreement? Yes. Any questions about this application? Any questions or comments about this application for the audience? Hearing none, the Chair is ready for a motion. Chair, per case number 00510601-G at 601 Arcadia Park. I recommend approval of this application of appropriateness with the conditions as established by the staff. The two non-standard conditions, one and two as read into the record. All right. the standard conditions number three and four is already written to the record right do i have a second second okay any discussion on the motion hearing none the chair will call the question all those in favor say aye aye opposed nay application that the coa as recommended as is approved as conditioned thank you so much thank you all thanks okay now i think i'm at That's at 255 South Ashland Avenue, all right. Okay, if you state your name please. Vincent Thompson. All right, Mr. Thompson, staff has recommended approval of your application. There's one substantive one, is to provide the final window and your details and specifications of staff for review and approval prior to the issuance of a COA? Are any agreement? Yes. And then the other two of the standard conditions which I have previously read are in agreement. Yes, sir. All right. Any questions? The other board? Go ahead. I have one small question. Sure. And that's the guard rail that's on the exterior, new exterior porch. It appears to me may not actually be needed if it's, the grade is less than 30 inches and that would clean up the appearance a bit, might be considered. Yep, I'm happy to remove the railing if we don't need it for code. At 30 inches. Sure, yep. Good luck. Okay, it being understood that the guard rail can be removed as not being needed. Any other questions or comments about this application? Any questions or comments from the audience? Chair is ready for a motion. Chair, in regards to case number 08760255-C at 255 South Ashland Avenue, I move to approve the certificate of appropriateness. With the first condition for the owner to provide final window and door details and specifications to staff for review and approval prior to the issuance of a COA and the two standard conditions. All right, do I have a second? Second. Any further discussion on the motion? Hearing none, the Chair will call the question. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed, nay. Motion passes and the COA as conditioned is approved. Great, thank you all. Thank you. Turning now to attachment number 6, 380 South Mill Street. Scope of work is constructed, addition in deck. Any of you, state your name please. Barron Gibson. All right, again please, what's your last name? Barron Gibson. Gibson, okay. Ms. Hill, I think you had. Yes, I would like to have a hearing on this application. Mr. Gibson, since there's two hearings, I'm going to go back to Mr. Mickler's hearing first. and then we'll come back to you in just a moment. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Mr. Mickler, did he step away on me? Is he here? Do we have attachment number seven still? Excuse me. We have 419 South Upper Street. He's here. I don't have one. I'm just having a great day. Oh, this one. Okay. All right. I'm sorry. Do you want to come back to this one? Is the applicant for number 419 South Upper Street here? That case has been withdrawn. Oh. Okay. That's on one of the many agendas you have in front of you. Okay. All right. So let's begin with your presentation with regard to the Dudley Square applications. Chair. Thank you. And let's go back. Can we go back to the 417, sorry. 417 East Maxwell, please. Yes. Quick question. Sure. So I just want a clarification. So the project at 417 East Maxwell, Mickler's has been withdrawn? No, that would be 419 South Upper Street. Okay. The last one, attachment number seven was the side yard patio or the front yard patio. Right. And that's been withdrawn. Thank you. Okay. I apologize for the confusion. Apparently I'm just hitting all cylinders today. All right, okay. I see it. So this is the property at at at 417 East Maxwell. And to give you a little bit more imagery of the building itself, this is only dealing with the florist building. And the proposal calls to install arbors across the front. The storefront has already been replaced many years ago, and it gets a lot of sun. So they're trying to minimize the effect of the sun hitting this building as it faces south. And then the proposal would be to replace the roof with a zinc metal. And then to install, and this is sort of the one that has been, this portion I'm going to say, but noting that it's been changed. Their proposal was to install arbors over the windows and then a new pediment over the front door. And just sort of give you some ideas of the front. And I thought I had the imagery of the front, but you actually, in your information, had the image of the historic image with the pediment of where it was. And sort of give you a floor plan of, this is a partial floor plan or site plan of the florist building. And look at this. Yeah, we have new equipment. What are we doing? See the dot? We have a new equipment I can point up here. And it shows up on both screens. That's right. And there. We've moved into the 21st century. That's right. the audience can see it at the same time. That's right, and we can actually speak into the microphone. Thank you, Mr. Chris. And so this was the original proposal that showed the pediment here. This would be metal supports with wood arbors. Oops, sorry. Now I've got to figure out how to use it. Sorry. At this point, and you can see this is the detailing of the overhead. headshot what that would look like it would be a low hip roof and then the side profile over here of the arbors with that pediment there and did you all find your historic image did you find the historic image because we can put it on elmo or his cousin we have a great elmo so we could put it on elmo so you want it on elmo put it on the screen let's go ahead and see what's reference And of course there was a canopy that was supported by brackets that was right at, above the door. And the- The one that was originally submitted to us? That's correct. Okay. So you can see the awning that was originally there. All right. That's two dollars. Chris is driving, so. And this, the awning and the arbors will only come out four feet from, it will be in line with the greenhouse that's existing that's already there. Guidelines are included for your reference. The proposal to change the roof is within guidelines 115D, which states roof staining seams should match in dimension seam, crimping, and seam space. The proposal to install arbors is within the guidelines 3.7a, which states pergolas arbors should not be visually intrusive or suggest a false sense history. Since these elements do not touch the building and the original storefront has been changed, the proposal to install arbors will not interfere with the reading of the front of the building or create a false sense of history. The proposal to install the front pediment does need further study. Staff found the photo indicating the original front overhang, which is just above the front door, and is not part of the roof. The original overhang was removed, and the front facade was changed some time ago. The proposal calls for the new pediment overhang to be placed higher than above the door integrated with the roof line. The proposed location of the pediment is not within the traditional location due to the applicant not wanting to block the existing signage. So previously there was signage above the door that's been, it's more the last 40 years, and so he didn't want to put it higher in a pediment form to interrupt with the signage that's on the physical building. Staff is concerned the location of the pediment is too high and creates a false sense of history. Staff suggests further study of the proposed pediment. Staff suggests that perhaps the lower pitch or shed roof be considered to reduce the impact of the front facade of the building and change the small roof of the florist building. Guidelines for the entrances 242F and details 4-2K respectively state. Divisional base placement scales should be compatible with the existing buildings along the street in the historic district. and porches should have roof forms, gables, and shed roofs that at least cover the entrance, and details should be appropriately scaled for the proposed structure and compatible with the other adjacent buildings and district. Installation ornamented details that give a building imitation historic appearance is not allowed. Guidelines for commercial structure states that new buildings should be compatible with adjacent buildings in scale, height, materials, orientation, shape, placement, and rhythm of proportion of the openings, doors, and windows. Of course, we originally recommended further study the pediment and have recommended approval of the metal roof and the construction of the arbors with the standard two conditions, and the applicant is present. And when you say further study, exactly what you're asking for. Well, may I take this? Sure. This is what was available in the formal submittal and what the staff was empowered to review for the staff report. So you're going to hear the applicant in a minute bring some additional information that does respond to some of the concerns written in your report that you've just heard, specific particularly to the height of both the arbors and the overhang for the door. So I think you have two options to consider as far as your process. One would be to do as the staff has recommended in their staff report before you, which is to continue this until the next meeting and then take your formal action then. But your second option would be, in light of the fact the applicant has, and he's going to get up and explain what he has furthered since they've thought about what was in the staff report more. It is a possibility, depending on what your response to his comments are, for you to consider taking action today and making it contingent upon the materials that needed to be further studied, be, and that's what he's brought, be reviewed by the staff and the certificate issued by the staff based on your action today. So you could, if you feel that this is headed to a successful, in accordance with the guidelines, outcome, turn that vote that you approve it with the condition that the details are worked out by staff, as you do with many proposals. And we have the additional consideration that a continuance would take us past the deadline for the approval of this application. Our next meeting is not until September 20, and the deadline is September 17. So to continue it, Mr. Michler would have to agree to it. Correct. Okay. But we also need to reflect that the staff hasn't had an opportunity to review the materials that have been brought in today, which may just solve everything. But we need to procedurally, we do not, as a process, take things on the fly and the board take formal action on that. All right, so, Ms. Dmitter, are you ready to come up? and do you have a i think i saw you bring a drawing with you is that a drawing that we can see your i believe that would be up to the board if they'd like to see that but i'm i'm happy to show it to you and i have to agree with with the staff we ordinarily is a little difficult to just say okay this is just fine without staff input and that's our difficulty right now you're asking us to prove something that literally has just arrived on the doorstep we can either disapprove this one but i i tell you what that's why i think i think presentation and we'll go from there maybe you've come up with a drawing that's so straightforward that we don't have to worry about it go ahead Chair, I request that we be able to see the most recent sketches and then proceed as we legally need to following that review. I concur with that. Thank you. So let me first introduce myself. My name is Robin Mickler. I'm a fifth generation florist here on Maxwell Street. I grew up in the house next to this business. and started working there probably before one normally would legally be allowed to work at a business. And we have been extensively renovating our property. We've been before this board twice for the original construction of the cafe and for our recent expansion of the cafe. And we've gotten numerous staff approvals as we have from top to bottom restored now three of our five remaining glass greenhouses. We have turned our attention now to the florist, which is the heart of the business and our busiest sector. And certainly if you consider per square foot the most important part of our business. It's also where our name is on, and it faces Maxwell Street. That front facade, I don't have any exact pictures of when that changed, but that original picture was from the original construction of the building. The sign on it said Mickler Bros. That name of the business changed to Mickler Florist in 1926, And it is believed by us, although we don't have an exact log, that around that time, the current sign, which are about three-inch thick wood blocks, were put up on the storefront. That storefront has been restored more recently than that. But the sign was taken down and essentially put back in that same spot. Um, when we are looking, when we are, um, south facing, and so we have been sort of wrestling for the past couple of years at how best to sort of responsibly address, um, the heat from those windows. And one option is to just crank up the power, replace the compressor units, and pump a whole bunch more AC into the building. We are attempting to not do that. So we have inside, this isn't before you today because it's outside of the scope of work, but for your information, we have contracted Epiphany spray foam. They're coming in to spray that roof deck on Sunday. So that's one approach. We're insulating the roof to hopefully minimize the heat. And then the other aspect is we're trying to minimize the sun through those windows. So that's sort of where this started. There's one other component, which is that pediment. Currently, the roof sheds with no gutter right over the doorway. So if it's raining, people sort of have a sheet of water. It's also a sheet of ice right in front of the door, which for a retail business is not necessarily your gold standard of construction there. We were struggling how best to handle visibility of our sign that's sort of iconic to this front of the building, and these other needs to both protect the doorway and to shade these windows. So we kind of, to be perfectly honest, were kind of on the fence before we even applied about over, under, over, under, over, under. We ended up kind of putting our original application in on over. The staff felt that was high, as I think they put in the discussion item. We don't disagree. we got out there putting sort of sticks up at the height that you see here and sort of walking backwards to see how far away from the building we would have to be to see the sign. We feel comfortable if we move those lettering up a few inches from the top instead of them being sort of centered on the board as they are today that you can still get a good visibility of the sign from sort of the approach of the building until you're maybe 15 feet away or something like that. So that was kind of our response. We heard the staff's feelings partially because we shared them initially, even before we submitted the application. and that's the drawing. That's where we are here today. Do you have a section for the other side? Do you have a section for the other side? And I should clarify that these drawings and the designer is Gary Murphy from Prajna Design and Construction. Gary Murphy is well, but he is on the tail end of his sort of quarantine from COVID and could not be here today. So is the covering that's over the doorway being supported by brackets back to the wall? Is that what I'm looking at right there? Well, I'm not the designer, so I'm not entirely sure about the term brackets back to the wall, but it would. The angled piece that goes from the pergola above to back to the wall. Yes. That's what is supporting the structure that is above the doorway, is my question. Yes. Okay. For lack of a better word, do we have an awning now? I would imagine that that's a solid piece. This is the kind of thing that can be ironed out by the staff very quickly in working with them. Okay. If the board wants to take an action that reflects on the details of this being completed at staff, this is in the category of that sort of thing. So in lieu of actually saying, okay, we want to do further study, how do you want, how should we frame up the, trying to figure out how to frame up the recommendation that Mr. Mickler, you will take your design plan under further consideration? If I may, what I suggest is that you make a finding that reflects if you're supportive of wanting to approve this with the details to be finalized by staff. That is done so often by you all. The only difference in it is it doesn't call for a study. But it is the same outcome. Okay, all right. So you just need to note in your findings that the specific information yet to be determined will be resolved in conjunction with the staff and the COA, whatever, COA to be issued by the staff. So in essence, I think we are in agreement that pediment's too high and needs to be lowered. And so the manner by which it's going to be lowered or redone can be submitted to the staff, and the details can be prior to the issuance of the COA. Correct. Okay. And this sketch is a beginning of that, and it'll be finessed and finalized by the staff working with the applicant. All right. Ms. Hill? Yes, I have two observations. One is that beside the lowering of the arbor and the entry canopy, the steel, the metal column system now has turned into a bracket, kind of a simple small change. I will observe that by lowering it, the arbor, you stand a much better chance, given the southwest facing of your building, of actually managing that sun angle as it, particularly during the higher summer months. We agree. Yeah. Okay. And that seems very reflected. I'm comfortable with the staff taking final action on- the details of the roof and the harbor. Any other comments or questions? I concur with Ms. Hill's comments. I feel that this answers the concerns that were brought up, and I think it's a more successful proposal. All right. Anything else? Sarah? No. All right, I think any questions or comments from the audience? I think we're ready for a motion. Chair, in regards to case number 12670417-L at 417 East Maxwell Street, We find that the details of the pediment can go to the staff for review and approval prior to the issuance of the certificate of appropriateness. And that we recommend approval of the certificate of appropriateness with that and the other two standard conditions. With respect to the roof itself, are they? Yes, with respect to the roof and arbors. Okay. Second. Further discussion on the motion? Hearing none, the Chair will call the question. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed nay. Motion passes and the COA as conditioned is approved. Thank you, Mr. McCullough. May I make a comment, please? Go ahead. I just wanted to commend the work that you've done. It is a very unique structure and function in a historic district and you are making great strides to keep it sustainable and contributing to the neighborhood and the city as a whole. It's a real treasure, thank you. Collective of the 21st of the first century. Yes. Turning now to 380 South Mill Street. The applicant here. One second, I'm just going to forward you and sketch. Mr. Gibson, I guess we'll move forward with Ms. Armstrong's presentation and then we'll take your comments and observations. All right, so we'll start off with some images of 380 South Mill Street, which is Dudley Square. And this is the front face on South Mill Street. All the work to this structure that's proposed will be on the West Maxwell side. As we walk around this structure, you can see this side has had the most sort of changes over time. time to its time with some little, from small little out buildings to overhangs for basement access to installation of the brick and wrought iron patio area to like a change of an addition, a little small addition that leads out this. This is historically the area where Dudley's restaurant was located for many years. And so for, I think it stood there for probably 30 years before it was shifted to its location on Short Street. So it was always known for having a tent in this location. And part of the proposal calls for the actual enclosing and construction of a brick and glass one-story addition, and plus decks leaning down, and the decks will be in this location, and it will encompass these two poplar trees and the removal, and it talks about removal of the sidewalk with two-tiered deck systems in this location. And you can sort of get a little closer and see the trees that are here, And then the brick and right iron fencing that is in the existing location that's proposed to be removed, as well as a chimney that was approved by this board, as well as the brick railing system and patio many years ago in two different time periods. So I'm just going to give you a little bit more walk around. And you can see this is a basement entrance. The basement of what would be the restaurant has been sort of redone and has access in the actual building itself versus here. You can sort of see these little touches that have been added on to over the time. And we did actually see this get reworked probably 10 years ago. With the new brick walk and stairs and new glass system. And sort of you can see from West Maxwell the area in question. And I'm going to put this rendering up as I continue forward. So the proposal calls for the one story, having an addition of approximately 36 by 39 with an upper story porch that wraps around, as you can see, that would approximately be 47 by 53 and a one-story addition and a lower story being 47 by 60. And they lead out into that front area. And the top rail will have a, the railing system round will be metal with a wood railing system they're proposing at the top, Chiffondale. And let's see, guidelines are included for your reference. I'm going to go through the plans a little bit more. more. So you can sort of see, and I can use our little thing to get a little higher. So this is the actual building of Dudley Square, and this is the location of where the building would be located. And here is this building had sort of had three stages of development so far. This is pretty much going to be their fourth practically with the main structure here and then the back edition and then this 1920s edition and then this portion here. Can I suggest you use the pointer? I liked it. I couldn't get it off. You're not the one that gets car sick as much. I can't get it off. I'm working on it. I'm working on it. So hard on it. I'm hearing it, thank you. We're up. There, so now this is the thing we're trying to get off the other button. So we're just going to move forward a little bit, so. And speak up just a bit, please. So here is, these are the existing renderings of this on the side. And then, of course, a rendering of what we just saw in picture form of the patio. This is a little hard to see, but you've actually got the full set of plans in front of you. And then this is the proposed plan. So, let's see. I'm going to try to get it. There, it didn't work. It doesn't matter where you tap, you still see it. Okay, and so this is where Mr. Edwards left. Got caught away. Okay, caught away, okay. I would ask him how to get it off. Here we go. We should tell the audience the system is brand new. Like today. Yeah. Sorry. This is its debut. We did have a small tutorial. Next time we'll be better. Yes, what do you think? Okay, so here we go. So this is that little small addition that you saw. And so it'll continue out now and encapsulate that in this area that was sort of this greenish grass area. And this will be a solid wall with a window here and a window here. And then the addition will be here and then have the deck wrap around this. With the, noting the two trees in this location. and stepping down a bit as the grade changes and having another tiered deck system. And then with the plantings around the perimeter here. Again, sort of more of a detail of the deck itself. and then the roof will not have a rooftop deck it will just be a low pitch roof with the railing around it and here's the rendering of the proposed edition This is the back wall that would be facing Max Alley that would be perpendicular to West Maxwell in the front view looking from South Mill. section through the property and the overview. I'm going to go ahead and continue that to more of another section and then the renderings here that indicate the trees. The removal of the glass addition chimney brick wall, brick patio paver is within guidelines as they There will not alter the streetscape and not the original elements to the building of the site. Guidelines V1C1 state, demolition request for inappropriate addition and non-significant portion of the addition or non-significant accessory structure provide the demolition will not adversely affect the building or buildings that are significant as determined by the BYR. The proposal to construct the brick masonry one story additions with the guidelines, appropriate to site deadly square is a three story structure that received two sizable additions already. And any new addition will need to be sizable enough that the mass and form are compatible with the sizable square footage already existing. Staff finds the one story addition size appropriate because it does not cover up any existing architectural details of the site. The square footage is already covered by a sizable patio, and the addition does not take any more necessary green space. Guidelines state regarding additions B and C state, additions should be secondary and smaller and simpler to original building and scale design and placement. And should be compatible with the design and keeping with original buildings, design, roof, shape, materials, color, location, window, door, and corner sites. Staff does find the details can be simplified to not be imitative of earlier styles as found in guidelines 2A4D, which state that styles should not imitate or earlier style or architectural period, staff finds that details should be simplified and be made more contemporary. Specifically, the top balustrade needs to be removed or made more contemporary. And that's referring to the top balustrade around, or the railing around the roof form. Patterns of the transoms need to be simplified and the patterns of the doors need to be simplified. Guidelines 2B6K state details should not be or limited to corner boards, drake boards, cornices, blackheads, downspotting railings, column steps, doors, window moldings, and decorative elements. Architectural details should be appropriate that give them buildings that are more placed on a sense of good belonging or on the street or within the district. Details should be appropriately scaled for the proposed structure and compatible with other buildings and districts. Instillation of ornament or design or details should give a building a non-animative history, or not allowed. Each addition to Dudley is reflective of its own time period and when it's built, and the proposed addition will create its own editing compatibility for the use of walls and glass walls, or use of masonry and glass walls. And staff's going to mention too, and this will be reflective, that with regards to the balustrade, after the staff report was written and we sort of discussed this a bit more and thought that the top railing could be more artistic and not necessarily so either spindle like or obviously not Chippendale. The proposed two tier deck system is within design principles. Decks and patios and verandas are not original additions to the historic buildings. It should be designed to be compatible as possible. Staff finds the deck integrates and is compatible with the main structure and proposed additions. Staff does suggest that efforts be made to reduce the deck size, protect the tree along the East Maxwell or West Maxwell. Staff suggest the lower deck be reduced in size to be more in keeping to help protect the tree line and reduce the massing along the sidewalk. Guidelines 2A1G states decks and patios should be perfectly scaled and not overwhelm the historic structure of site. I'm going to go back and point out and give this, help you out a little bit what we were thinking about. Using our pinpoint here, this is the tree that we were concerned about. That potentially, we were thinking of tables and chairs along this side. This table, this tree, this part of the deck could be taken out a little bit to not be so impactful on the tree. The only concern would be if, and we've had discussions with the architect and we'll discuss this a bit more, and staff about the fact that that might require more footings around to support the deck. In which case we might be concerned more about if those footings are going to be more impactful for the tree. And given that we have actually, they've hired an arborist. We've had our arborist, Tim Query, go out and review the site about this significant tree. These are two very significant poplar trees. And I think what we want to make sure of is the fact that any deck changes around here would not be impacting that tree in a negative way. So that might require more further- Amelia, when you're at a pause, I need to interject a comment reflective of our report, please. Is now a good time? And it's on the topic of the trees. So we have gotten more information as Ms. Armstrong has reflected to a point, but we've gotten more detail than that since the staff report was completed and put out. And so I think we need to revise our staff recommendation, which I'll reflect in a second, because I think some substantial more study needs to go on about this deck. and its impact on both those trees potential impact the goal is not in suggesting more study and so forth to just instantly say no decks but it is to get considerably more in-depth information about the potential impacts more about the construction methods and how that alone will impact it you know the soils being compacted by construction and the building and we we just i think need considerable more information because those two trees i went over there this afternoon just to double check myself about this and um ms armstrong had more substantive discussions with our arborist and such they are just really spectacular and very significant and we need to do our due diligence so the staff would like to have the board consider an amendment to our recommendation as reflected in our previous report written report to recommend that the case be continued tied to what i've just referenced not to reflect recommending approval at this time i think we just don't have the information for this specific aspect of the project i We're not suggesting any alterations to what's reflected in the balance of the staff report relative to the architectural details and design features. But this is relative to the historic trees and any construction that this project might result in an adverse effect on those trees. And we just need to learn more before I think the staff's really properly informed to make a recommendation to you. Thank you for the interruption. And Amelia, if you want to continue with your recommendation, just reflective of the fact of what I've just referenced. Okay. Staffer recommends approval of the following conditions. Roof balustrade be changed to be more contemporary or limited altogether or more artistic details as we mentioned that with final details be submitted to staff prior to the issue of COA. The transom and door mutton patterns have more contemporary, the final details to be submitted to the staff prior to the COA. And then I think three and four are sort of a little bit together as far as we talked about. Reduction of the deck to be reduced in size of the tree with final details to be submitted prior to staff. Issued the COA with the caveat that if the deck reduction causes issues with more footings to be put around to support the deck if it has to be cut in, then that needs to be thought about. And then it has to be demonstrated the deck as proposed or admitted would not be harmful to the two existing popular trees and that recommends further study or continuing this portion of that application per what Ms. Kerr just said in the final two conditions. And of course the applicants are present. Okay, Mr. Gibson. Any questions of Ms. Armstrong? Nope. Okay, Mr. Gibson, go ahead. If I'm understanding what Ms. Kerr is suggesting, it looks like there is more concern about the impact on the trees and might have been initially appreciated. So let me just do this. Let me go through this application with you and see where you're in agreement with it and where you're not. Starting with condition number one, the roof balustrade be changed to be contemporary or eliminated altogether with final details to be submitted to staff prior to the issues of the COA. Are we in agreement with that? We are. We met with Amelia and mentioned that we could produce some design options to present to staff. That could be approved at that level. Number two, the transcend and door mutton patterns be made more contemporary with final details to be submitted prior to issuance of the COA. We would be fine submitting options on that. I guess when we had a conversation with Amelia, we like the way the mutton patterns are in terms of the two over two in the door. The design behind that was to abstract what we were seeing on the building. Obviously not mimic that at all, but changing the button patterns to a more contemporary grill type. Sometimes when you get wood aluminum clad windows, they come with a standard OG profile on the interior and a putty glaze on the exterior. our intent is for this to be a more contemporary application with a squared mutton profile. We've actually brought the sample of what that would be from Sierra Pacific. That's something we're happy to share at the staff level if that's something that could be approved there. And as always, if you can't reach agreement, you can always come back. And does the board want to see that detail? Did you say you have it with you? I do. Does the board wish to see that detail? We'll look at it. Yes. Okay. Mr. Gibson, for the record, you need to have the microphone with you and- He's seeking it now. Whatever you're commenting, it needs to be heard in the record. Sure. Yeah, we're proposing the 5-8 or 7-8 contemporary profile, whichever staff would prefer of those two. That's what we're looking for. It has a more squared-off profile and does not have the, you know, traditional putty glaze or OG profile that you might typically see on a traditional window. So that's that sample down here. All right. I'm good. So any further questions about those issues? Okay, so turning now to the reducing the size of the deck. I think basically if I'm hearing the staff correctly, probably a lot more studies going to have to be made with respect to how that deck's going to impact the trees. Sure. Are you in agreement that I'm doing that? I guess I just have questions as to what the particulars of that study needs to be. Right now we've developed a pretty developed schematic layout for this. And we have a pretty good understanding of where those peers would be. And I can pretty much tell you now what foundation is going to need to be put into the ground to make that deck stand up. But the discussion, and I'm going to try to figure out how to turn the pointer on. Let's see. It was to potentially notch around the deck to preserve it. Our thought on that was that that would ultimately create more foundations, more pier footings that would have to go around the tree canopy. Our thought in preserving the tree is to span like so, so that we only have one foundation at that corner. If we notch around that tree, that's going to be at least one at that corner, two, three, and then four if we return. So that's four pier footings versus the one that we're showing. That would be if we were to notch around it. Our client has consulted with an arborist at the preliminary level that his initial finding was that this should be sufficient in sustaining the tree. But we would definitely like to know, aside from moving forward with full construction details, what additional information do we need to provide in order to receive approval? Are you in agreement to bring on an advisor or consultant and have that consultant arborist review your plans and submit a findings to the staff where the staff review and approval? We would. A detailed finding at that. We would. I'm sorry, Mr. Chair. We were having a subconference over here about spanning things. What was the comment? My question was, I think they're in agreement that they'll bring on board a arborist to do a study of the deck structure? Yes. And to submit to you detailed findings as to what impact that structure would have on the trees? That would be an important part of this. Thank you. Am I hearing agreement from you on that? We agree. All right. Have I stated what the staff would like to have correctly? Yes, that takes care of hearing from the arborist angle of it, but I think we still need to understand more in what was just being talked about, which is how does it get supported and how does that impact the root system of both trees? It's not just that corner tree. Part of the problem is, and I know where you're coming from, as you do construction work, there's going to be a considerable amount of disturbance to the root structure. And I think that is where the staff needs to have more information from your arborist. Sure. To assure them that the damage that might be done to the root system of those two popular trees is not going to be such that those trees will die in four or five years. Sure, I think that we'd be more than happy to consult with an arborist and have their professional opinion in writing in conjunction with this proposed plan. My client owner of Dudley Square would also like to make a comment on that. Is that okay? And to that end, let me ask one more thing. It might be best just to continue this case until that study is completed or in agreement with that? if that's we would obviously love to receive approval today but if that's the I think if I'm reading the board members correctly I think we're hesitant to approve this right now without further study and I think to make this conversation shorter probably what we need to do is to continue this case the problem is we'll need a waiver from you to continue Okay. If you give us that waiver, then I think we're okay. And Mr. Chair, and their architect could clarify this, please. I'll hold off a second. Just a moment. Can my client, he would like to, he has an opinion on the matter. Sure. And state your name for record, please. Matt Burton. Yes, Ms. Burton. How are you all doing? So we're okay with the schedule and complying with the required studies. So we're not pushing on that. But I do want to identify a couple items. Preserving the two poplars, tulip poplars, is paramount to me. It's the most important part of this project. And so that's why I identified the plans that were revised about notching it out as to why we can not do that. Okay. So that's where the entire tree discussion originated from this week and why the staff recommended approval has shifted to we need more study is because addressing the tree of why I cannot notch out around it and put in four times the amount of peers around it. because preserving and keeping them, like I said, is a critical, if not the most critical component of this entire project to me, which my offices are right above it, look out to it every day, and I'm going to plan on being there as long as I can be. So fundamentally speaking, we're all on the same page is our goal here. And I think what Barron was addressing earlier was an adequate study that the board would feel comfortable with as far as the review and markup of the least invasive approach to this to preserve them. Because it's a focal point for this restaurant, for this business. And so limiting the footer and pier structure around it and wrapping the tree, which is a common practice that we know can successfully be done and maintain the strength and longevity of the tree. There is one additional item where the window line is, where the doors are proposed to be put in and the brick wall. There is a substantial footer. in place there that we have excavated out and we will not have to replace that footer so we will not be putting in new footers for the primary structure so that will really help us in not having to re-earth anything around the trees and not not to push for any answer or move forward today i just wanted to let you know that's where our hearts are and that we'd like to continue to work with historic on at a staff level and and report level to all get comfortable with this. Well obviously your restaurant business is highly dependent on those trees remaining healthy. Correct. I mean I've had many a wonderful dinner under those trees. So other comments from the board members before we take any action? Ms. Hill? So two items. one has to do with um having undergone 40 years of watching construction is that you can talk about trying to protect a tree but part of what happens in construction is not just the isolated issue of that one pier but is when you have trees of that significance and you have as limited a site as you have to work on every square inch gets filled with bodies and staging at first staging of all sorts and the staging and the compaction that happens under those trees is as detrimental to the long-term health of those trees and so hearing a plan on your all's part about how to prevent in the arborist's recommended areas, how not to allow that compaction to happen, because once it's happened, there's no moving back. There's no moving back. You just have to hope the tree figures it out. So that's one item. The second item is that you talk about an arborist looking just at that one pier that's right along Maxwell. I would like to see some additional studies on what that terrace and deck could look like that wouldn't be right up against that tree, that would still accomplish what you're trying to accomplish, but not presenting such a threat to the tree that you've already acknowledged is really critical to making that space what it is. Without that space, you've got an overheated terrace is what you have without that tree. And so looking at are there slightly different ways to reform that terrace so that you aren't right up against the trunk of the tree? As to the pertaining to the first item, we can provide a staging schedule that will outline our loading and unloading zones as far as all material and equipment. and we'll have it drafted to not damage the root system. And we have ample space and parking throughout this entire corridor that we can allocate towards it. So hopefully that provided a schedule can help ease any concerns regarding staging. That the arborist would be a part of. Correct. And as to redesign, I can't on the fly speak to scrapping kind of what we've put quite a bit of work into at this point. But only that preserving the trees was such a concern of mine that I'm the one that addressed the issue after having approval. That it needs to be done in a manner that preserves them. So I hope that gives you some comfort that that's our position. Yes and no. I'm not asking you to scrap anything. I'm just suggesting some slight, some proportionate modifications so that that tree has, not only is it going to be impacted by the general overall site construction, but that large pier up against it can also be very threatening. So that's all. Thank you for the clarification, and I understand that better now. And as to why we have our presented design right now, because it is the least invasive approach versus even if we did not wrap it and we brought it back by wrapping it and keeping it in the interior of the decking, because this isn't a heavy, you know, concrete slab structure we're putting in around it. It's going to be open air all below it with the correct irrigation. So, irrigation. So, again, we will continue to explore in hand with our specialists to see, okay, Okay, let's look at this again and see if there's anything we can do to improve what we already believe is our least invasive plan. I have full confidence that your design professional can come up with some ways that are not nearly as threatening to that specific tree. Understood. Okay, Suzanne, just a moment for her. Any questions? Oops. No questions, just to reiterate what Ms. Hill has said. And there's been a lot of comments about notching around the tree, but please do not, please look at other options rather than just notching around it. Brett? Ms. Marquette? So underneath the building portion, the floor of that part of the building is decking material? Can you restate that please? Under the building portion. Correct. Where the tables are going to sit, that floor for those tables is decking material? On the exterior, yes. No, the interior. On the interior. We have not sourced a product ID for that, but it will be a structure on footers. It's a crawl space. It is a crawl space. Okay, thank you. It's a crawl space. And the existing poured concrete slab for the patio. Our intent was to not disturb it. Okay, so this building with airflow is going to go above the slab that's currently there. Okay, and so then when you come out at the same level onto the deck that surrounds the trees, that will be decking over currently what is grass? That's right. Correct. Okay, and then it steps down, and that's also decking material. None of that is concrete or permanent material. Correct. That's correct. and what is the height of the top of the deck from grade around the trees? Approximately, I can't zoom in. I'm not sure how to zoom in. I'm guessing around three or four feet, somewhere around there. Mr. Member? I don't have any additional comments that haven't already been covered. Okay, I think if I'm hearing conversation correctly, and I want to make sure we're all on the same page, that we're in agreement to continue this case pending further study and a submission by an arborist that will show a mitigation plan that will demonstrate to the staff's satisfaction, reasonable satisfaction, that the trees will not be harmed by the construction that's going to take place and that mitigation plans will be in place for the protection of those trees. Okay. So let's go ahead and then we're going to continue this case to September 20 for a motion. I need you all, you will need to sign a consent to waive it past the mandatory deadline for the approval of this application, which I believe is September 16th. So there's a waiver that you have to sign. So the waiver will be for something like 45 days. We don't really do it a date to a date. We do it in a blanket of time. We have this conversation every time. But it will encompass the next available, you know, the September meeting. Yes. And what we'll do is email that to you and then you all can sign it and send it back. and in the meantime we'll get the chair's signature before we send it to you and gentlemen I want to thank you all for I know how important this tree is to you we want to make sure that we don't love the tree so much that we kill it so let's make sure we have the best plan possible all right so do I have a motion to continue this to September 16th so moved second any further discussion chair will call the question all those in favor of the motion say aye aye Aye. Motion passes and this case is continued to September 16th. The next meeting date, wait a minute, I'm checking. September 20th. It's not the 16th. It's 20th, September 20th. I'm looking, if I could get my phone to open, I could tell you this. It's the 20th. I know, okay. Thank you so much. Thank you. Thank you. All right, we are now, I would like to take a five minute break if we could. And we'll come to the conceptual review after that. Thank you for your patience. ¶¶ ¶¶ ¶¶ The End Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. ¶¶ Thank you. We do have one item of business that we need to attend to before we get into the conceptual review. And that is the election of the officers. We appointed a nominating committee at our last meeting. I think a report has been submitted. And who's heading up that nominating committee? Suzanne, was that you? I am. Okay. Procedurally, you need to make your report to the full board, and then we can act on that. Okay. So the committee's report and recommendation to the board is to nominate Jim to continue as chair and Susan to be elected as vice chair. All right. So I'll accept that as a motion. And do I have a second to that motion? Second. I'm willing to do yet another year. And Ms. Hill, are you willing to stay on for as vice chair? I am, thank you. All right. As much as I bum-fuzzled today, I'm wondering, do you really want me to? Yes. Okay. Yes. All right. We as staff certainly do, and we thank the two of you for your willingness to serve. And we thank the other three of you, even if you don't have titles. All right, so if there's no further discussion on this motion, all those in favor of the motion say aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed name. All right, so the officer will be myself as chair for another year and Susan Hill as vice chair for another year as well. All right, now I think we're ready finally for the conceptual review. Normally our process, as you said, this is not your first rodeo. I believe Barry has the chair on this one? Yeah, the floor. So he'll do the presentation of the conceptual review and the questions that I think they want for us to consider and for you all to look at. And Mr. Chair, during the break, a new set of drawings were put at your places. Of course there are a new set of drawings. This is a conceptual. It's allowed. Oh, I know that. All right. Thank you so much. Can I get to my... No, okay. All right, Barry, the floor is yours. Thank you, sir. If it will behave, that is. Aren't you being slick? Okay, conceptual review, 501 West Short Street. I'll just take you through the site a little bit. This is the parking that's to the north of the structures. You enter from the east. So this is basically the back of the building. And I'm just walking through from the parking. This is the transformer that is noted to have the living wall screen around it. and across from that the planter. So this is looking south more or less, and if you look, you can see the ramp, and there's some stairs on that side, so there's a significant change in elevation at about that location. Hopefully you can see that a little more clearly. So this is looking back to the north from the lower elevation. The ramp on the right and the stairs on the left. And the Brossard House is the building on the left. So the applicant is requesting a conceptual review to construct a community plaza. The plaza is proposed to be constructed primarily of concrete with planters and an octagonal section of brick surrounding the fountain. An additional fountain is to be constructed to the north of an existing patio that is proposed to be modified. A living wall is proposed to be constructed to screen the existing transformer, and a trellis porch is located on the north wall of the Brassard House. So that would be to the north of this wall. The guidelines are included for your use. Findings. As this is a conceptual review, staff does not have findings at this time. The following are some questions that the board may want to consider for comment and discussion. Is it appropriate to construct a hardscape plaza on the existing softscape area? Is it appropriate to construct a trellis porch at the Brassard House? And is it appropriate to use a living wall as the transformer screen? Recommendations, as this is a conceptual review, staff does not have any recommendations at this time, nor is there a deadline for board action. So I'm going, since we have new drawings available, I'm going to let the applicant take you through those. i don't know if you have to show me yeah so this is i probably won't use that okay so he's pulling yours up now i just know how to advance if you'll state your name for uh forward reverse okay thank you sure i'm mark naylor i'm a landscape architect um spent most of my life in the western suburb here in lexington and got wooed away and now live in louisville you need to speak into the michael sorry my name is mark naylor and i spent a lot of time here in lexington the western suburb i've been not not before you guys but before this board quite a bit over the years for different projects so i'm the landscape architect for this project this has been been going on for probably 10 years or so in a conceptual way, and the church has finally decided to try to move forward and hopefully build what this ends up being next year. So just having dealt with historic preservation and a board, I felt like it was appropriate before we got too deep into the game to come show you what we're thinking, get any random feedback you want to give us, including staff, so that we can work that in before we come back for an actual COA approval. So that's what today is. This is a site plan which I'll go through in some closer views a little bit more, but essentially this project really comes from Peter LaFalce is here with me from St. Paul's who's really in charge of all this, in charge of the building committee as well. This project really started as a memorial to two different parishioners that passed in those 10, 12 years. I'm probably wrong on my time. And so it started that way, and it's kind of grown into with other parishioners, Hispanic community and the church, which is what's led us to create more of a gathering space and that kind of thing. So it's really got two prongs. One is the plaza area, which is where all the landscape is rendered around it. And then the left is a smaller area here attached to the church would be a columbarium. and we're lucky that when Peter did all the work on the steeple and had all that rebuilt, we actually have bricks that we had made to match the bricks on the building that were custom made. So we plan to use those. We won't need a lot of them. But we're going to go in between two of the buttresses or pilasters with that. This is an elevation of it. So we're primarily going to use brick and limestone and there'll be two benches there. This is, let me see if I've got a, okay, hold on, sorry. Oh gosh, here we go. I'm gonna have to go through the whole thing, I guess. I don't know how to go backwards. Oh, I see. Okay, sorry, got it. Okay, so this is the place where the columbarium would go between those two buttresses or pilasters. And again, you can see the building is limestone and brick. So we would use those same materials. The face of the columbarium, you can see in this rendering to the right there, you can see the two benches and then the face of it would likely be a granite of some sort. So that hasn't been selected yet, but that's kind of what we're thinking. So really the idea is to keep this simple, have it blend in with the wall. It's real important to the people that already want to use this spiritually to have it connected to the church as opposed to freestanding. They're done both ways, but in this case we would like for it to be part of the church. So that's what we've done there. The plaza, I guess I want to talk a little bit. The octagon, let me skip ahead here. I'll show you in the church itself, but the octagon in the church means, represents like a new beginning, eternal life, and you can see in the old sanctuary, the church itself, it's been used several times. Once at the baptistry, once in the shape of the back of the church where the altar is, and then the columns on the inside of the church as well are octagons, have octagon bases. And then the steeple is actually, once you get up high, an octagon. So that's kind of, sorry, where the shape of the statue base kind of started. So at this point, we haven't really drilled down on materials. We want to kind of repeat some of what's out there with, and it's kind of hard to tell in this picture, but with concrete scoring. but we're going to use all pavers of some sort and all brick. The patio to the right where the lady's sitting on the bench was an Eagle Scout project that was done some years ago. The young man that did it was my oldest son's age, so I would have to guess 15 years ago. So our intention, those bricks are all labeled, all have names of benefactors, so those would all get reused. So we're not going to tear that out completely. We may tear it completely up and put it back down. So this would be a view, so let me go back. So there we are today. This would be a view of the statue, the planter under it, the bench. And then I'll show you something else that shows the gathering space to the right. Could you go back one more time and show the existing and then the new? So that's what it is today. And what does it end? Okay, go to the gallery. Thank you. That's new. So the statue is meant to be visible from Short Street as well. So we've actually done sight line studies. It's meant to be a welcoming kind of committee, let's call it, as the parishioners come to the church. Ninety percent of the parishioners when they come to Mass come from that parking lot. But we also want it to be visible from Short Street. So that's why it's kind of raised up on this multi-tier platform. So we've done some little things. There's some, if I go back to the site plan, if you can see it, maybe you look at the handout I gave you. There's some axes there that we've tried to, like, line all this up with. One of the parishioners that this was initially inspired by is from Mentor, Ohio. So that's pretty much due north, running from the altar through the statue over to that corner. At one point in the design, we had fountains and we had water over there. We've sent feedback from St. Peter and Paul's school and the parish. We've taken the water out of the plan, except for a small fountain we'll have over in the meditation garden that's over on the upper left there. So again, we haven't exactly picked out all the materials, but we do want to use the living walls, which would be made of essentially steel and a wire grid, heavy wire grid, and then planted. There's that. This is the existing patio that's out there now. And it's kind of gotten in bad shape and needs some work. You can see there's a small modular wall around it that we're going to remove. And then this would be the view looking back at that. So the stepped area is meant to be a gathering space that can be used by the parish. We've got room to add fire if we want to in terms of moving around, just a temporary fireplace that we can bring in there. It would also be used by the school as an outdoor classroom. They already kind of use the old one, but this would make both tiers accessible and welcoming. and it would also be used, it could be used as not for mass, but it could be used for other gatherings. We do have a trellis that's there in the left that we want to put on the back of Brossert. That's meant to be another gathering space, and we haven't fully developed what that's going to look like, so it's kind of conceptual at this point. And then this would be some version of how we would do that platform around. And the intention is to, if we can, for code reasons, is to actually fill behind this wall and around the sides of it so that we don't get into some unattractive railings and that kind of thing. So that's our intention is to, like, keep it simple, blend in, not disappear, but, you know, that kind of thing. So I think that's the last slide. Yeah. So, Peter, is there anything you would like to add that you think I skipped over? Yeah, I mean, I could talk about it all night, so we've worked on it forever. Do you have any details on the trellis porch? Not yet. We'll still work. We'll probably... Is that going to be freestanding or attached to the... It would be attached, unless we just find out we can't. It's a pretty low eave right there, so we've got to figure... It's got a gutter on it, so we have to figure that out, yeah. I think that's an issue we have to look at as to whether it should be attached or not. Yeah, and really either way would function the same way. So I didn't want to get into a bunch of, I didn't want to get all the way into construction documents and not have come here and discuss this with you guys. So the meditation garden that's up there at the top, we've already replaced the fencing between the two properties of this. and I believe it's Parker Place, right? Boy, what a memory I have. We actually worked with that neighbor and split the cost of that fence, and that was approved by staff. So anyway, any comments or? One other thing to point out. It's showing. Did you read across the microphone? Yeah, I'll talk about that, Peter. So up at the left, kind of top of the page, you'll see a notation there about some crosses those would be temporary that would be used and placed by the hispanic community at easter as a part of stations of the cross so they would be just temporary structures that they i mean they're literally wood crosses so our intention there is to put in a permanent base that they can just slip those into and then pull them back out so they wouldn't be up they're not permanent yeah sockets in the ground it's just for easter living stations across on Easter Vigil. So they go in and they come back out. Okay, starting with our, we'll start off with Matt. The question was raised about the living fence around the transformer. Could you discuss that, why that is a question? Well, the space as you all look at it now, let me see if I can get back to Bill. I went down today and took these pictures, which is probably really close to when staff got theirs. It doesn't always look this green. So we've had a green summer. It's not irrigated right now. So without sounding mean to the parish, which is my parish, over time that can turn into kind of a dusty, I won't say muddy, but like grassless area, especially with the kids when they start school back. So, the intention was with the living walls is just to add some more green into the plan as opposed to like putting up a brick wall or whatever. We'll have to work with KU on the location of that screening, but the other thing that we'll probably end up doing that's not fully developed, let me go back. Okay, I'm getting confused on that. It's right there in the bottom right. You can see that's a rendered version of what this might look like. But we're also going to have a sign. The old sign I think shows up in the pictures. There you can see on the left the old wooden sign. So we're going to ditch that and do a new sign and it'll be part of that living wall. But it will probably be faced with limestone or brick or whatever, but it'll be a permanent sign. that's what the living walls are for. We just want to keep some greenery in the plan and not go all hardscape with everything, which is also kind of, if you look on the left there, the reason that we've kind of jutted in and out and did leave quite a bit of grass in landscape area. But with regard to the transformer, Is there a specification or a restriction? That is an existing transformer that should have shown up in the photos that I presented. I can go back to it. I think what Matt is trying to get at, why have you raised a concern about the green space? I'm sorry, sir, I could not hear you. Why have you raised a concern about the living wall? So typically, that's a heads up that you have a concern. And why are you concerned? I was not concerned. I wanted to point it out to the board. Okay, thank you. Seeing the drawings, I think it could be better if it was a little taller. But instead of just keeping it at transformer height, make it a hug. Okay. Thank you. That was the point. Yeah, it was put in when we built the school. Right. That's what it serves. And like all these utility things, and I'm not telling any of you all anything you don't know, I'm sure the utility will have some limitations to what they'll allow you to do. Yeah, 1-800-KU, I can't wait. The question is. The final number three, is it appropriate to use a little wall as a transformer? Yes, the transformer is existing and they are planning to use the living wall as a screen around the transformer just so it's not visible. It's a big green box that. Yeah, I don't think. And there's really not a question about should it be screened. It's just to be sure everybody understands what's being proposed. And of course there are other ways to screen things, but there's no reason to not pursue a living wall, partly because they have very limited footprint for all of the nice features that they have and are adding. And so a lot of people would just put evergreen bushes around it and call it a day. But in this instance, you know, they're kind of keeping something tight and tidy, but greenery. There is no red flag attached to that comment. I think, Matt, to explain the process of what the staff is doing when they give us a conceptual review, when they look at the conceptual review, these are the thoughts that occur to them that they will have to specifically address in their recommendation to us. It's not necessarily a negative. It's just a concern. It's a question that needs to be resolved. And it's a, hey, be sure you're aware this is part of the plan. Right. Obviously, we always want to disguise, if you will, transformers and utilities that are ugly, quite frankly. But Betty's right. The utility company will have some questions about that as well, and limitations is what you can do. Yeah. One thing I failed to mention, that's St. Paul statue. So we have a benefactor for that who's a parish, long-term parish member, Kate Savage, and she's taken that on. That's her project. She's going to basically work with trying to commission the statue. Yeah. So we'll actually have it made. It's not going to be like store-bought, but we haven't identified an artist or anything like that yet, but it'll be custom for this location. Do you know what medium it will be in in terms of? It's going to be, no, but it's going to be, I will tell you that part of it's going to be traditional just because of the diocese and all that. It will be, yeah. Well, the other thing to know, this process doesn't technically review art. It reviews what it's placed on and the placement of what it's on relative to the site plan and all the things you already know. But, and I don't mean this in any way to be sacrilegious, but it could be of an airplane or any topic. And it's yours to put the form that you want in that location if the board approves the rest of the plan. Mr. Marquette. The pointer doesn't work on overhead. Anyway, the transformer is to the left of the photo. Am I wrong in remembering that the guidelines do ask that certain things be screened? Utilities be screened. Right, yes. That is correct. It is encouraged in the guidelines. Encouraged to screen the utilities. I didn't have a problem with it. I was just curious. The question was in the report. So I was wondering what's the problem. Yeah, no. There is no problem. I think the Chair's explanation about what the questions exist for is very timely for everybody to be reminded that those questions are, if it appears on that list of questions, it may be good, bad, or indifferent as the impact of each of those entries, but it is to just reference them. So admittedly, you will see in those questions usually a more heavy-handed level of entry on things that are problematic, partly because they just need a lot more consideration. but don't any of you please assume that the questions are by their presence calling attention to a problem. That is not the case. Peter reminded me that the school actually has two transformers we had to put in. The other one is way out of the plan over by the drop-off canopy, and it's currently screened by a lot of landscape that's now becoming overgrown and probably going to have to be dealt with soon. And then in the other photograph you had up, you saw that concrete planter. Peter and I were both instrumental in working on the school project, and that was originally meant to be a kitchen garden or a garden for the children to work with. The problem is things don't grow in January and February. So we're going to take that over as part of this and clean all that up because right now it's just basically full of weeds. Well, they may argue it may be a butterfly garden. I don't know, but we're going to try to kind of clean that up with everything else as we go. So. Okay, Sarah. I have a question on the columbaria that you're putting in. Are you planning on removing any of the brick from the church itself, or you're just kind of building it in front of the existing brick and kind of around that downspout that is there? So you're not going to be changing the flow of the water coming off and in that space? We are going to move a downspout, but we're just going to flip it to the other side of that pilaster. I didn't know this because I've never worked with a columbarium before, but it's a whole industry if you've never dealt with it. So essentially, once we narrow down how many niches we want, whether they're singles or doubles, all that, it's ready-made essentially. We just provide a base. It comes, sits in there, cap it off. We're done. So we've got a lot of research done on that, pricing, but we haven't selected the final materials. But it'll be like bronze or metal. It'll be heavy, obviously. And then we haven't picked out the granite face, but it will be some kind of granite face. Susan? It looks like a lot of fun. And I did go and walk through it. The new trellis porch looks in the kind of elevation drawing like it is detached with four columns on the corners. And probably will work better that way because of the way the gutter system works on that one story enclosed part of the building. Okay. The living walls, my favorite living wall was the first one I ever saw in Columbus, Ohio, where they put up this huge metal screen. And then facing south, and then it just, everything started to grow, and then the sun hit it and just fried everything. It was like an architect trying to do something that they should know better, and hopefully you do. Yeah. My only question has to do with water movement, and I don't see any rain garden kind of things, so you may feel like that the grass area, the green area, is enough to absorb what's going to come off of this additional hardscape. but any concerns about given that we're having the kind of rain events we're having over the last couple years that will likely only increase, is that a consideration? It's a really good point I hadn't thought about. I do know that as a part of the steeple renovation, we did go in, really, I guess, the project that we did between Brossard and the church where we redid all the sidewalks, We put in all new storm drains down through there. So it was all originally, it was all cast iron. We've replaced it all, put in inlets, regraded it, so it all drains really well. So I know we have a system there that we can work with. And I do a lot of work just from our day job doing all kinds of bioswales, rain gardens, that kind of stuff. So that's a great comment, and we'll think about how we can do that. We do have room for something. I would say the plaza concept started 14 years ago. So part of the delays is redoing the steeple tower, and then we had groundwater getting into Brossard. So we had to take up all the hardscape, put all new storm drains in. That was all designed with this plaza in mind. So I think we're already there. Excellent. Good. Good. If you will take me to the picture where you're showing the tree in your hardscape. I believe that's back, isn't it? Well, okay. So it's that tree you're talking about, which is really- Yeah, I'd like to see the picture or your conception of it. Yeah. Let me- It looked a little overwhelmed by the hardscape. Can you find it again? Well, now we have it in a rendering, right? We'll get there. I don't think I do. Yeah, I thought there was a close up. There you go. Yeah, that one. That doesn't look like quite enough ground. Okay. And landscape artists sometimes are guilty of it. I always feel sorry for these trees. They're meant to be good sized trees in a overly small plot of ground. So you may want to think about making that more oval and making it a little larger. Okay. And also, that brings me into my next question. Have you done a comparison between the greenscape you currently have and what you will have after you do this plan? I haven't calculated it yet, no. That will be a question the staff will probably be looking at in terms of, is it going to be too much hardscape versus greenscape or softscape, as they call it? Yeah, so we've tried. Let me go back to the plan. I mean, we have tried to leave. So the larger patio up the upper right is already there. We're just restructuring that. So it's pretty much, I know you can't see it. It's actually on this drawing, but the outline of the existing. It's really not adding a whole lot there. But we definitely are adding space off the trellis because, again, we consider that to be a new gathering space. But you can see that we've also used like the stepping stones through the turf as opposed to just putting a concrete path there or whatever. So we are mindful of it. We've also, to the, let me see, northeast of the new patio, we're leaving all that green. So we are trying to, yeah, conserve it and keep it green. Want to make a comment? Yep. Is any of that materials permeable? Yeah, probably in my day job, like I do a lot more commercial work than this, and I'm forced to use pervious pavers, forced to use a lot of products because they sound great, like pervious concrete, pervious asphalt. no bueno like it's a lot of maintenance so i would much rather approach it from a standpoint of i don't remember who said it either adding a rain garden or some other water quality feature that we can work into our landscape to solve that problem as opposed to like that's just my answer yeah yeah no i understand that but it is correct that the process will be evaluating the ratio of And it's not got a mathematic formula that, you know, if you meet this number, you got it, or that you don't. But both in a visual sense, but even more importantly in a water sense, keeping enough green is hard for a project like this, particularly with your existing condition of having that, what will become kind of the classroom space. You might have been choosing to do something like that, even if it were still a green earthen surface. But you're dwindling in your greenery department. But the overall plan is terrific. I mean, it's nobody, I don't hear anybody saying, oh, this has got, you know, but not that that's the way anybody would say it. But the nuances of even some quadrant where you just get, say, six by six feet of green, you know, scattered, give a little bit of chance and a little bit of planting to come along, that kind of stuff, if you can find a spot. And while I'm commenting, if I might, Mr. Chair, is that okay? Sure, go ahead. Your sign, don't forget you'll need to provide the details of that when the time comes. Yeah, that should have been identified as an issue of concern that your sign has to be appropriate for a historic district. And I think the current sign is, so just keep that in mind. Well, and it's all about scale and materials and all that good stuff. But I know you all know to know that, and I see you've marked where it's going to go and so forth. The last quick question I have is since you've got residential, I think you've maybe got, I don't know if Parker Place, its own business. I think it's a B1 property or B2A. But do you see any need either for your all's intent and use, or if you were being a nice neighbor wanting to be sure you're not from somebody living next door going to, you know, say that you're having classes in your classroom space and so on, Is there a need to consider the opportunity, at least, even if you don't install it currently or when you do this, for any kind of evergreen screens or, you know, low privacy sort of planted materials to separate the two? Or is that an issue? So I don't know his name. Peter does. What's his name? Eduardo. Yeah. So we've worked with him a lot on the transition between the church property and his property. What was there previous was a ragged, horrible wooden fence that was in constant disrepair. It was overgrown with a lot of, you know, not even native invasive species growing up and through it. And if you look at the pictures now, this was a group, well, a combined project between, let me see if I can find that picture again. So that, everything you see there, I mean, he's added a lot of landscape on his side, but that whole project was done with him. So we don't have any problem working with him, showing him the plan. I don't think that he's very, did we put a gate in it? I can't remember. There is a gate right about to the left of that picture. Because we end up with balls and school stuff over there. So we work well together with him. But by all means, we'll run this by him and, you know, let him know when we come back for a formal approval. And that way, if he's got comments, he can come. Well, and to turn it around, he may actually want to be able to look onto your pretty grounds. Yeah. Yeah. And you do have, I think, screening further down where the automobiles are. Don't you have meeting whatever's the landscape requirements for the automobile parking area? You've already, in the past, I think, met that. Yes. We haven't really worked out all the greenery that's going to go in here. Again, it's a concept and we want to add as much as we can. I want to just give a little more general background I think would be helpful. The original restricted fund that was put in place 14 years ago for this project was called a reflection garden. That was what was in my head at the time. The idea of having an urban-type plaza really kind of grew through a lot of interaction with all the communities that use this space. We have 600 Hispanic families in the parish, 300 Anglo families. There are a lot of things that happen outdoors. We also have a school with 600 students, I think. So normally that is just trampled brown space that you're seeing right there. And so we kind of evolved over time from all green space to a combination of hard space and green space. And thus the plaza also is a reflection back to what the communities in Latin America have in their town centers. So we're trying to nod to them and we're making a nod to the school so that the children can use this and also have learning spaces. So there's a fine line going on here between green and hardscape that this has finally evolved to. Thank you very much. Any other questions? If not, I think we're done with the conceptual review. Thank you. I appreciate your comments. It really is a very pretty plan. Thank you for giving us the opportunity. Okay. Is there any other business we need to conduct? I've got the official go ahead then to say I need a motion to adjourn. So moved. Second? Second. Stand adjourned. Thank you so much. Oh, no.