Oh god. No, I'm good. 30 minutes away. >> I can look it. on my email. Give me a few minutes. >> Oh, you mean the comments or the motion to >> bunker people. Get your own.
>> Here's the motion. I mean, that's not what Kelly sent you, but Yeah, if you want me to. Three. You mean for comments right now or >> just generally? Yeah. Yeah. Just stick
with that. >> All right. It's 5:35. Thank you'all for your patience. Um I'd like to welcome everybody for coming out tonight. We are excited to see so many members of the public from the city of Charlottesville here this evening. It's like 100% more
than usually show up. So, thank you all for coming. Um, I want to welcome you all to this regular monthly meeting of the Charlottesville Board of Architectural Review. Um, so for tonight's agenda, staff will introduce each item uh followed by the applicant's
presentation. We should not exceed 10 minutes. Um and we're going to uh entertain a motion this evening um to allow for two things.
Uh one is we're going to truncate um the public comment time. Normally we have questions from the public and comments from the public. We're going to just entertain like one time slot for each person to speak. Um with >> the reasoning being we've got so many
people that want to speak, right? We want to make sure we get through it efficiently. Um we're not trying to curb anybody's questions or comments, just um streamline things. And the other is uh we know there's a lot of folks who are interested in um the pro the
pre-application conference for 835 843 847 West Main Street. We're here this evening. Um and so we are going to entertain a motion to allow for some comments at the very beginning of the meeting on that project. Um typically we
only um allow matters from the public that are not on the agenda. Um but considering that we've got a lot of folks here. Um we're going to entertain a motion for that. Um however um when we get to that we will we would like to encourage folks Well, I'll get to that
in just a hot second. So, do you want to make a motion, Miss Lewis? >> Um, Mr. Chair, I have a motion as permitted by the adopted bylaws of the Charlottville board of architecture review and in order to assure that that we can perform our duties tonight in a timely and orderly manner. Um, we move
to amend the usual meeting agenda as follows. Um for items two through seven on tonight's agenda. Um just to reiterate the order. Staff will introduce each item followed by the applicant's presentation which will not exceed 10 minutes and we're going to be strict about that tonight applicants
that are here. Following the staff and the applicant presentation, then the chair will invite comments from the public and the speakers can should identify themselves, give their address, and they'll be allowed to speak for three minutes as um Mr. Zemer says that'll include either questions or
comments or both, whichever you want to give, but it'll be limited to just three minutes per speaker. Um, comments should be limited to our perview. Um, that is regarding the exterior aspects of a project um, per our charge from city council and per city code for a major
historic review. Um following public comments be will will then will offer questions and comments from the applicant and then the applicant will again have three minutes to respond and that can be extended by the chair. And I guess the other part of that is we'll allow any comments at the beginning of
the meeting. Um matters from the public it it's matter a on our agenda matters from the public not on the agenda should be matters of the public on the agenda and not on the agenda will be heard right after this hopefully. >> Thank you. Do I hear a second? >> Second.
>> All right. Um >> can I just clarify uh for the applicants out there um >> they will still be allowed their time as we go through each item. >> Yeah. Um all right. Uh >> okay. >> Any discussion?
>> Just clarify that um it's clear that you either you can speak at the very beginning of the meeting or you can speak when it comes up but not both. >> Correct. We prefer folks only speak once. Um, >> can you speak in rem?
>> Yep. >> I'm sorry. >> Thank you, Joy. >> So, the the com the question or the comment was that we're we'd prefer folks to only speak at the very beginning or during the agenda item and not both. Um, and three minutes was the time. >> Three.
>> Yep. All right. Any further discussion on the motion? All right. Um, all in favor? I >> I >> Any opposed? >> All right, the motion carries. Thank you. Um, a couple of other reminders.
Um, just, uh, if everyone could please silence their cell phones to avoid disruptions. Um, when you're when you're addressing, um, the BA, please come up to the podium here. Speak into the microphone as Joyce reminded us. Um,
give your name and your address, please. Um, and just, uh, ask that there no be no interruptions, clapping, shouting. Um, respectful disagreement is welcome. Um, but we are looking for courtesy and civility tonight. Um, and we'll hold the
BA to the same standards. Um, just also as a reminder, the Board of Architectural Review is a group of uh, volunteers. Uh, we are not elected officials. Uh we are appointed by city council um to interpret and um determine
appropriateness based on applications according to city council's adopted um historic preservation guidelines um that kind of govern the historic districts and individual protected properties in the city. So that's that's what our charge is and as Miss Lewis mentioned um
it is related to the exterior of buildings and their sites. So, um, back into my preamble, uh, we will ask for questions, comments from the public and then that'll be followed by questions
from the B and comments from the B. Um, let's see. And I think we have covered all that. So, now we're at part A, which is matters from the public not on the agenda. um in particular uh for the West
Main project. Um if folks would like to speak now, that's fine. I'll remind you that just to speak once either now or later. Um we'd encourage folks to if you have time constraints, then this would be a good time to to speak. If you don't have time constraints and you're able to wait, we'd like you to please do that.
Um we also think it's more impactful to speak during the discussion about the particular project um because the applicant can hear you. the applicants are here now so they can hear you either way but um it's just more valuable because you you'll be able to under you'll be able to a see their
presentation and react to it uh and also be hear the the B's um discussion as well. So looking forward to a a good conversation this evening. Uh so with that I'd invite members of the public who'd like to speak at this point. Do I need Ah there's a there's a signup list.
Thank you. >> So yeah just go through the list. >> Sure. Then we check if there's anyone online. Um, >> sure. >> And then, >> um, so I'll there's been a signup sheet and I'll call out who's on here and then if you can just let me know if you would
like to speak now or if you'd like to wait and speak during agenda item six. Um, Joy Johnson, >> I'll speak later. Okay. The next person. >> Thank you. Um, Latricia Guiles, >> I'll speak. >> Okay. Please come up to one of the
podiums, please. Either one's fine. Uh, good evening. My name is Latricia Giles and my address is 911 Nassau Street. Um, and I serve as the executive director of the public housing association of residents, also known as
FAR. Uh, FAR is the residentled voice of Charlottesville's public housing neighborhoods. and I come before you carrying the concerns of West Haven and the Tenth and Page neighbors who have already lived through decades of broken promises, displacement, and exclusion. The proposal before you is not just
about design. It is about whether the city repeats the mistakes of the past choices or chooses a different path. Charlottesville already scarred uh West Haven once when it destroyed Vinegar Hill in the name of progress. Families
were uprooted. Culture was erased and communities were left carrying the wounds for generations. For decades, West Haven has lived at the bottom of a hill looking up at a wall. This is a daily view residents wake up to now. Now, this project would raise that wall even higher. If built, families would
sleep with headlights shining into their bedrooms. Children will be playing in the shadows of parking decks instead of under trees. Instead of the porches and open sky, uh they would be looking onto dumpsters and service doors of the backside of someone else's convenience
pushed out into our front yards. This is not repair. This is not healing. This is exclusion dressed as development. We are not opposed to change. Residents themselves have been working for years to design a future for West Haven that honors history, strength, and safety,
and keeps community at the center. But this project does not does none of that. It overshadows. It walls off. It predetermines the future of our neighborhood without our consent. That is why over 300 neighbors and allies to date have signed on for our call to
change online and on paper. Together we are asking for major reductions in the height and scale of the building for real setbacks for safe pedestrian connections and development that actually lives along alongside community
rather than looming over it. We are asking you the board of architecture review to listen not only to the drawings and the renderings but to the live reality of the people who will carry out the weight of this decision every single day. Charlottesville still carries the wounds of Vinegar Hill. We
cannot afford to make that same mistake again. The city has the opportunity to choose a different path, one that uplifts res uplifts residents, overshadowing them. Um, and so we urge you to stand with residents and say no. So, thank you and good evening.
>> Thank you very much. All right. Um, Rosia Parker, say that right. Good afternoon, bar the bar association. I mean the bar commission. My name is Rosia Parker. I have lived at the West
Haven neighborhood for 20 years. I have been a resident planner since we started 3 years ago. The height of the building does not match the neighborhood field that we are trying to create with our master plan. At ground level from Hardy Drive, it would be visible from all
angles. If our bu if our buildings are going up four stories from the bottom of Hardy Drive and then 11 stories on West Main, we basically would be looking at a 16story skyscraper on top of us. It feels like a penitentiary and we're
living in the yard. Deep stepbacks on the West Haven side might make this a little better and make our walkway/ramp feel more open. Setbacks along the memory walk side
could also help avoid creating a closedin feeling. The bar can and should require stepbacks as for pictures showing a building with big stepbacks. Thank you.
>> Thank you. >> Um Ivana Key here. Do you want to speak now or later? >> Later. Okay, um Mary Anderson. >> Good evening. >> Hello. My name is Mary Anderson.
I have lived in West Haven for eight years. I am a resident planner. I do not like the building. It is too big to be on top of our neighborhood. The only way to make it better is to
have many big stepbacks and d and have more setback spaces from the public line. Thank you. >> Thank you, Miss Anderson. >> Uh Shirley Gentry. Good afternoon.
I'm Shirley Gentry. I've been living at West Haven over 20ome years. I am a resident planner. I do not like the claim for the building being opposed. It will be seen from everywhere in West
Haven in block of us off from the rest of Charlottesville. Thank you. >> Thank you, Miss Gentry. Um Betsy Rodkar, did I pronounce that correctly?
>> I'll be okay. Um, Michael Salvatier. >> Good evening. My name is Michael Salvatier. I live at 1322 Welfford Street. Um, I have been a teacher at
Trailblazer Elementary for the last 16 years. And so I teach the kids who live in West Haven. With all the history that we have in Charlottesville of residents and neighborhoods in communities whose voices have been pushed to the side,
especially around housing, it is absurd that we wouldn't put the concerns of the West Haven community as first priority when making decisions above profit or convenience or any of the privilege of students or developers.
The community has been isolated physically and I can't believe it's going to happen again. Please listen to and prioritize the members of the West Haven community. Thank you. Thank you, Michael. Uh Brandon Brandon
Collins, >> I'll speak later. >> Okay, great. >> All right, this one got struck through, but I just want to make sure. Betty Jones. She may have left or do you want to speak now or later? Now's good. Okay.
I've been in Holland since April the 10th, 92. And I pay my rent for a whole year. I ain't paying no rent to January. And the place is too big. And I like it where I'm at.
>> All right. Thank you. Yeah. >> Um Janet Nordensson. >> Okay. >> Cynthia Ivory. Ivy. >> Good evening.
>> Hello. My name is Cindy and I live in West Haven for 21 years. I'm a resident's planner. We need bigger setbacks. We understand that a setback that is more than required is being planned.
However, it isn't enough. More space and distance needs to be found to reduce the feeling of being crowded. This is also a safety issue. When we create our master plan, we removed any small spaces where bad people gathered to do bad things.
Having openness creates visibility. Space on the ground will make the memory wall and the area used to get to the sports court more open and usable. We really need more spaces between. We need
more space between the access road, memory walk and sports court with safe safety measure measures in place. We don't want to be walking along an ugly access road. We need to see drawings that show more setbacks
and lighting plans combined with stepbacks. More setbacks might keep a neighborhood feel. Thank you. >> Thank you. Um Paul Reer, >> speak now.
>> Okay. Thank you. >> Uh members of the board, I wish to talk about the other student housing project that's uh been proposed and is on the agenda tonight. Um I wish to talk to you about the 7th Street Southwest luxury
student housing proposal. My name is Paul Reer and I'm the president of the Oak Grove Condominium Owners Association at 2115th Street Southwest which backs directly onto the land subject to this proposal. When I asked Jeff Wernern if I might
speak tonight, he asked that I be brief because he anticipates a busy agenda, which is exactly what we seem to have. I shall therefore be brief. We welcome the development of this site. As a resident here of over 20 uh uh 30 years now, I
know it is a wonderfully located parcel of land in the heart of Charlottesville. It should be developed. However, we want affordable housing, not student housing, let alone luxury student housing with a swimming pool.
I suspect you will hear the same as we have already heard from um our friends in West Haven and the opposition that we've already heard tonight. Um these two projects together I believe are over 1,300 students.
The good news for FIL, which I hope will make your agenda shorter and give you back some precious time tonight, is that this land is outside the 1/2 mile radius of the university contemplated by the zoning code and related ordinances for
student housing. This land cannot therefore be developed as student housing. May I have a handout. Can I give it? I can pass them if you like. >> You'll see from this handout the
language that is used in the zoning code that relates to this half mile radius. You'll also see on there a map from the University of Virginia which shows central grounds and there is explicit reference to central
grounds, the edge of central grounds in the uh language of the um of the affordable dwelling uh uh uh regulation. And specifically it says that the land has to be within half a mile of the
university with measurement being in a direct line from the edge of the main campus areas parenthesis central grounds and north grounds. This of course makes great sense if you're a student to the edge of the subject parcel.
Outline university owned parcels are not considered part of the campus for the purpose of this ordinance. I I uh went to Apple Maps. This land is um 7 milesi away according to Apple Maps
from the Memorial to Enslaved labor. Uh on on Google, it's8 miles away from the memorial to enslaved labor. Somewhere between a 16 and 18 minute walk. And if you look on the back side, you'll see that's the map that the uh
architects for the developers presented to you at your last meeting. I have added the arrow and a point to where the memorial for enslaved labor is. I believe that's right. It's a little tricky to tell as you'll see for
yourselves. In some student housing is an inappropriate use for this land per the city's own code and you should call the meeting early and go home. Thank you. >> Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Reader.
>> Um Wendy, is it Goro? Sorry. >> Oh, yeah. I'll speak later. >> Okay. Uh Sophia Morero, >> I'll speak later. Okay. And Stacy Rush, >> I'll speak now.
>> Okay. My name is Stacy Rush and I work for FAR. I am the community intern coordinator for the public housing association of residents. Caged like a bird. I look behind me,
there are no birds here. Caged like a zoo. I look behind me, there are no animals, but there are caring residents. This building is a clear disservice to this community. The structure is a direct impact on the
residents safety, their health, and their lives. The luxury housing is being built instead of affordable housing that can be managed is the residents who are already waking up to a concrete wall.
The standard building is that concrete wall. They're blocking sunlight. They're blocking everything else that's in the city. The impact this has on the mental health is real. Imagine waking up
to a wall as a child and being expected to be happy and even further to learn. There are so many more issues that this development will cause. Let's do the right thing by the West Haven community and listen to the residents
and their concerns and their needs. Thank you. >> Thank you, Miss Rush. Thank you. Um, thank you to everybody who's spoken so far and thank you in advance to those of you who are going to speak later. Um,
and when we get to the item, what is it? Six later, we'll certainly welcome anybody else who'd like to speak who's not on the signup sheet. Um, you'll be open to come up and just come up and speak. So, um, there were more opportunities. Uh, all right. Um the
next sorry >> did we get online people reserving? >> Oh sorry thanks. Are there anybody online? >> Thank you. There is no one online. Thank you. >> Thanks. >> And if you would like to speak later please >> hit the wave on Zoom. >> All righty. Uh
on our consent agenda, the currently they're the meeting minutes from the May 20th and June 17th meetings and also a COA application for 1600 Gordon Avenue um which I'm going to pull off the
consent agenda um for discussion. So the consent agenda currently um just holds the meeting minutes from May and June. Um any any discussion on those or motion? >> I I vote to uh approve the meeting
minutes. >> Second. >> Second. >> All in favor? >> I motion carries. Um all right. So, the the first item now on our new items, I guess, I don't know if
it's deferred now, but it's anyway, new item uh is the the door replacement request uh for the Martha Jefferson House. Um Jeff, do you want to give a >> I I will. Yeah. >> Staff report and then I think we do have
a representative that can speak. >> Oh, this street. Oh, see, we're back there now. >> Yeah, it's up there. That's fine. So Jeff Jeff will start with his staff report and then Mark I believe right you can speak after Jeff >> want him to speak. >> I just want to say we're we're trying
out something a little bit different. Um the um this is how things are presented at the council the planning commission. So uh little clunky for me to follow a script but I'll do the best. So um >> yeah yeah Kate and I have been working
on our our our nonverbal communication. Okay. >> And I I just want to add something and I'll repeat it again later. Uh so folks understand the B has no purview over how a property is used. So as we go through
these, we'll be talking about design issues, what it looks like, but um as I I've explained to people uh when they've asked me, it can be a giant building with one room. It can be a giant building with a thousand rooms or a
giant block of concrete. The BAR is only looking at that that exterior. I'm not trying to to to minimize, but it's where when people will ask about a use or that the BA should or shouldn't allow something that's not within their
perview to make decision on that. So, just wanted to offer that. All right. So, very quickly, this um this is a COA request for um 1600 Gordon Avenue uh known as the Martha Jefferson House. Uh
it was originally uh built as Aley in 1920. Um a home for uh uh Allen and Betty Wheat. Uh in 1955, it was sold uh for a retirement home. curiously was
sold to the uh Martha Jefferson um was it the sanatorium society. Uh but um the in 1956 the information we have is that the exterior was altered um by Milton
Grigg uh local architect and the request is to change um this entrance door that you see on the front uh the door the two side lights and uh because of the way the the facility is
used uh uh to and let the applicant describe better, but the idea is that a door that's more appropriate as a weather lock uh and and more easily accessed by people going in and out of here. Uh the question has been is this
opening are the elements of this opening original? Do they date to 1956? Is this alteration a um a permanent change? uh and why I put this on the consent agenda
is that um I I first look at, you know, is this reversible? Is this a a permanent alteration? Um it's and it's what in my opinion would not be. I can't determine although uh Mr. Seam and I
have had some ongoing discussion about u the the historicity of this whether it dates to the original house or to 1956. So, um I had recommended allowing the change on consent uh with the understanding that the the sidelight in
the doors would hopefully be stored on site if someone later uh sought to restore it. Uh and obviously with some photographs of what's there. Um the alternate uh the the door that um they're proposing would either be a full
light door and full light uh sidelights or would have simulated uh divided light um with an applied grill. So there is what I can offer um the applicants here and um you have any
questions for me? Okay, all yours. Yeah. So, I'm I'm Mark Barstow. I uh was the building uh director of building and grounds at Arthur Jefferson House. I am now uh just kind of in charge of special projects there at this point. That's why
this falls kind of under my uh purview and we've been uh Jeff and I have been um you know going back and forth on this for a number of months now. So, um, our our interest in this is because of the
way our facility is used. Um, and and the um the people that live there now have a um I'm not going to use the correct technical term, but they
need more assistance uh getting around wheelchairs, walkers, etc. So, um, our current entry system, this front door that you saw on the on the, um, slide and then the there's another
entry door just inside of that, it's kind of creates a bottleneck for our residents. So as well um as probably many of you are aware and this is probably the primary concern for us there have been a number increasing
number of uh safety incidents in our neighborhood and uh with student housing there as well. We're surrounded by the uh frat houses and sororities. Um,
we feel like it would be and and in fact some of our residents have expressed concern about our current front entrance for from a safety perspective and in fact it is just not substantial enough to
um keep out somebody that really wanted to get in. So uh with those factors in mind, we feel like from a practical standpoint, we need to change to a more secure entrance
and our desire would be to replace the front the forwardmost door. Um, but I understand there are questions about that and I'm happy to answer
anything that that might be uh pertinent to this if I may. >> Thank you. Um, I guess first we'll start with uh are there any members of the public that have questions or comments about this project?
Nobody here? Anybody online? Okay. Um questions from the B. >> Mr. Schwarz. >> Um the new door or the existing door that you're removing is it um do you need to make it wider? Is that part of it or? >> Uh it's part of what we would like when
if we change it out we we would like to make it wider. Okay. So it's currently I think I want to say it's 39 in. We were it it and it might be a little bit less than that, but we would like to we proposed
increasing it to a 40 42in door 40 to 42 in door. >> Is that the the primary reason that I guess I'm trying to understand why you want to get rid of the existing sidelights? Is that the primary reason or is there like a structural reason as well or >> Yeah, to to get the size door we want.
We can't with with those uh the posts there that are beside the door that frame the side lights and the door that we can't get a bigger door in there with that uh in place. And and so part of what we want to do, this would be an
aluminum type storefront door. And uh our objective is to put an opener on that that people could uh use to get uh to push to get in and out. So with that in mind, the frame would for that door
would reduce the width even more to the point of being practical for us. Yeah. So whether it happens out here or inboard of that, that's our objective. >> Any other questions from the AR? >> What do you know about the historicity
of the door? Is it original? The current >> I don't know. >> You don't know? Yes. We've tried to come up with older photographs and nobody seems to know have any that uh would be part of it.
>> But you see it primarily as a safety issue. >> That's Yeah, that's our primary concern. safety and um just allowing easier access >> and the door would now open outward or >> we we've considered both options. I
think if we can remove the right now what didn't show in there is there's an inner a door behind this that has side lightss as well. So if if we had an inswinging door on the outermost part
and were allowed to take that intersection out, it would make a very nice entrance way entry way. Um so in that case we would like to swing it in. If we had to keep the inner part of
it then we would swing it out. It's not as convenient um for the residents, but it would be an option that we would explore. >> I have a question about the mountains. Are they uh apply to both the exterior
and the interior surface of the plaz? they they would be uh both surfaces, but I don't what Jeff asked me about today and I haven't I didn't have the opportunity to confirm is whether they would have the spacer between
um and I would assume that would be available but it isn't what we talked about when we had this door quoted. >> What's your reason for going with uh glass and not just another solid door? It seems like solid would be
Uh for visibility just our security guard is just inside and to the our security personnel is just inside and to the right so he can uh see
in through that uh or see into the doorway there. And I think it's it's it's also nice to let light in. Aside from that, >> did you have a I I see we've got two options in here. I don't know if staff made that or if you did. Uh between
divided lights and no divided lights. Did you have a preference? >> Me personally or as an you represent? >> Yeah. So, I'm not a big fan of the the fake >> lights and I think um it's hard to make
them look >> Mhm. >> real. So, I think we did that as a as a way it it could be appealing in one sense, but um I think personally I would like to see it open.
uh if it if it were an issue with this board or anybody else, we're happy to do it the other way. So that's kind of why we wanted to present both options. >> Have you considered a half light instead of a full, in other words, a half window instead of a full window?
>> Uh we haven't considered it and I don't know if that would be available in this type of door. I'd have to find that out because it is an aluminum frame frame door again. And that's we we're really trying to beef up the security of that
area by putting in a a legitimate door system, not just replacing, you know, that door with another door and wooden structure. I think we're trying to get a more secure entryway one
way or another. Any more questions? Is there any comments from the BA? >> I know I've got some. >> Well, you you've got the >> Okay, so um first I want to thank you guys. I
stopped by this afternoon. Um I think Rebecca might be online, so I want to thank her for letting me take a look at the door. Um because I did have a big question after we looked at this project a couple months ago as to like the photographs was really hard to tell like how historic the door was. Um I do think
the doors probably original um based on the historic floor plans that that you found. Um the the molding profile around the panels of the eight panel door match the molding profiles of the two closet doors that are immediately adjacent to it. They also match the rear original
rear door to the building. Um, which is an eight panel door. Uh, the the archetraes around the door itself, um, they match the closet doors, they match the rear door. So, it seems to me like this is the original door along with the
original side lights. Um, so I can't by our guidelines support replacing this door. Um, you know, I do empathize with what y'all are trying to achieve. Um, and Rebecca and I talked a little bit about like possibly talking to a hardware consultant that, you know,
maybe they could find a way to beef up the hardware on the door um to provide some additional security um and an operator. Um, I've done lots of projects where we've retrofitted historic doors with um oper operators and whatnot. Um,
I know it's not our purview, but there's a sprinkler pipe right over the door on the inside. That might be a challenge. But um you know looking at our guidelines um under section 4 rehabilitation part D entrances porches and doors. Entrances
and porches are often the primary focal points of historic building. Their decoration and articulation help define the style of the structure. Entrances are functional and ceremonial elements for all buildings. Um the important focal point of an entrance or porch is
the door. Doors are often character defining features of the architectural style of the building and I think in this case it would include the skylights and the mullions that frame the door separating it from the skylights. Um you know further down in the in the details is you know do not remove or radically
change entrances and porches important in defining the building's overall historic character. Um you know the original size and shape of door opening should be maintained. All these sort of things steer me towards not being able
to to approve this personally. Um, but I'd welcome discussion from the rest of the B. Um, you know, maybe there's a way also considering like maybe storm windows with safety glass over the sidelights would be another way to um achieve higher security on the
sidelights without having to remove the historic feature. >> So, can I ask a question just certainly to kind of add to the discussion? Um, so another consideration of ours was taking out that inner door and putting this the
substantial door in there, which would not change the the front of the building. >> So that's that's outside our purview. It's inside the building. So you can do whatever you want to that door. >> Okay. >> And I also don't since I was able to see it, I don't think it's historic. So from
that perspective, it's it's not shown on the original floor plans just as an aside. Again, that's not our purview, but I don't think that was historic. So, >> so you really are the exterior of the building. That's it. >> Who would who would be is that under
Jeff's uh guidelines after >> the interior door? >> Yeah, >> that's your >> You could tear that out tonight. >> Code official because it's an eress door. >> Yeah, maybe maybe code official, but >> Okay. Well, so I totally get your concerns about that the exterior and and
I don't see a way to do it and keep it looking historic. I I will agree to that point. Uh so, >> but we do have to achieve something with this entryway. And if if this is where
where your decision stops and it and in fact you all don't agree to move forward with this request then then that's probably the place the place we would go. It's not it's does create a little more of a bottleneck for people but
currently that's our secure door. >> Sure. >> The inner one right now. So um >> so I mean there's a couple ways we can Well, first I'd like to welcome other discussion from the V. So anybody want to chime in?
>> Yeah, I'm always happy to chime in. I it as an assisted living facility, um I think for the functionality of it, um and because they'd be maintaining the entire ornate surround around the door, um I think I'd be willing to accept this
um the new door in its place. Um, and I I think I would favor the not having divided lights, but leave that up to you guys to decide. Um, as long as those divided lights meet our guidelines with the spacer and all that other >> other requirements. Um, so yeah, that
that would be me. I guess I was also uh taking into consideration the use and was willing to sort of think about a wider door until you said that the existing door is 39 in or it's >> I that's a pretty wide door. I can't
remember, but it's it's >> I wish I had um I wasn't there today, so I didn't have an opportunity to measure it, but >> and whether it's original or a 1950s Milton Greg edition, uh it's still it's pretty significant. And there's some
really fine detailing in the Mullion and the leaded glass. So, I'd be and with the thought that this is a already it's not a small door. It's a a door that a wheelchair can easily get through. Um I' I'd sort of um agree with James, Mr.
Zeamer. >> I would also um our guidelines just um looking at the portions that Mr. Zemer referenced under rehabilitation um entrances, porches, doors do not strip entrances and porches of historic materials or details. Do not remove or
radically change entrances or porches important in defining the building's overall historic character. And also don't remove transoms or side lights, which is part of your proposal. I would just and I would just say I mean it it's an opinion, but it it seems like a solid
door would be more secure, you know? I mean, you you'd want to bolster security, maybe have, you know, a push button where somebody could open it if they're if they need that help. Um, but it just seems like a solid door, you know, instead of a glass door would
offer security right from the exterior that you want. And like we all said, you know, I would remove the the side lights and kind of the things that are choking down the entryway from from the interior of the building. And I think that would
mostly solve your problem. The original kind of architecture with the closets, you know, kind of made that passage very narrow. Yeah, that door would not be usable by our residents as a primary door. We we keep that open most of the time, but it's it's too heavy and
cumbersome. >> You mean the interior one? >> No, the exterior one. >> It's it's >> it's an old >> Yeah. >> heavy wooden door. So that from a practical standpoint, we keep that open most of the time now. and the inner door
is the secure one, but it's just not >> it's not something that's really navigable by our residents for the most part. When they need to get out and we have that closed in bad weather, often times a security guy will just go out and assist them out the door, but
it's not a it's not really a practical entrance for this type of facility. >> So, the I found the notes from when you and I talked. So the the opening for the um wood door is 40 in. And the idea was
that when you assemble a frame uh a commercial storefront frame to put in there that if it fit into that opening, it reduces it below 36 in. That was the And so that's where the idea of and also
it it is anchoring it into the >> Yeah. to the wood frame that's there. So, the idea was that if it allowed the entire opening to be used, um that gave them freedom to have a wider door that anchored into the to the to the wall
frame itself. >> So, I mean, are there any other further comments? >> Just one one observation. I'm not sure it's particularly relevant, but uh with regard to Beth Israel, we allowed them to change the doors there for safety
purposes. Um I don't know exactly what those that the changes were done, but basically so the doors in that case would open outward as opposed to inward. And I assume they had to do something with the original doors uh that that modified them in order to do
that. And that's what I was suggesting was they could talk to a hardware consultant to see if they could retrofit the existing door with electronic strike um op a door operator, push button door operator that also could be tied into your security system. So your the person
at the front desk could like you know buzz it buzz somebody open and then it would also open that. So there wouldn't have to be a person out there. So like that I think that would be I would be okay with that because that's really just trying to modernize the historic door to suit your purposes, right?
>> Yeah, we haven't we haven't looked into the opener part. We do have the the strike system on the inner door right now. So um >> so we haven't I'm I'm sure that part could be done. The opener would be the uh issue because it's you know it's
currently just such a hard door to open for people. >> Yeah. So, so >> I think what they're talking about is Sorry, I've been looking over here, but nobody's chiming in. >> Are we going in order? It looks like,
um, I would say, um, James's idea would be my number one. Um, but if that wouldn't work for whatever reason, um, I'd be willing to entertain, um, a replacement. Um, however, I don't think that the kind of aluminum storefront is
appropriate here. I would want a replacement that's kind of historically more in line. And um, and I agree with Sherry and per my question that, you know, I think a a smaller light might be more advantageous to your purpose.
>> Um, yeah, I just think that I don't know. I just think that the proposals that you're showing, it is such a beautiful door and I wouldn't want to get rid of the sidelights and I think the the width is adequate for what you need, but given your use, I want to um hamper the the
people that are that are in need. So, >> yeah, I I appreciate what you're saying. The the the issue was if we had put an like Jeff said, if we had put an aluminum frame inside of that, it would have squeezed the door too much. So >> yeah,
>> but I'd also recommend by all means taking out. >> So we just need to do a little more homework on on this part. Uh if we want to change that up. >> Yeah. >> Anybody else? Are y'all good? Um so so there's sort of a couple different ways
we could go about this. We can either vote on it and see where we land. Um which would be, you know, approval or denial. Um we can defer it, which would mean you'd have to bring it back to us within a month. or you can request deferral if you'd like to explore a
different hardware option. Um I guess those are the three options >> I think >> or or recommendation would be Mark uh ask for a deferral and then he and I tinker with this a little bit more. Um >> I think that makes sense. I mean >> I think that makes sense.
>> I do too. I just make sure I want to make sure you know that that's the three options. >> In other words, that's better than voting on it down voting it down. Yes, sir. Okay. >> That gives you time to Okay. >> go back to the drawing board, so speak. So, would you like to request a deferral?
>> I would like to request a deferral. >> All right. >> Move to accept the applicant's deferral. >> Second. All in favor? >> I All right. >> Thank you much. Hopefully hopefully this was beneficial conversation. >> Um,
all righty. Uh, thank you all. Our next item is certificate of appropriatess application for 300 Ridge Street. >> Oh, is that right? Am I on the right agenda? >> Got two sitting in front of me. So, yes.
300 Ridge Street. >> Yeah. All right. >> Um, so you all this seen this before, right? >> I'm sorry. Yeah. um
a request for a COA for 300 Ridge Street. This was Don Florest. Uh that that um the applicant is going to add an addition onto um you all had had I think at least one discussion about this and had offered some um
positive feedback I felt um and asked a couple questions. the um this was on the July agenda which as we all know canceled that meeting for various reasons and also would you all remind me at the end to just give you an update on
the zoning ordinance overall which I meant to do earlier. Um so the um uh so I was I had honestly hoped that we would have u uh you could have some discussion in July if you had any
questions about the the the details of things. We weren't able to have that uh because you all have to take action within 60 days of an application that would mean tonight you all either have to approve up or down or the applicant could request deferral if if for any
reason. So you all could not defer it and um but I think that >> from the conversations that uh we had and I listened uh back on the meeting of course that's where I had that reference to the to the ephus earlier. Um
the uh to me they responded to what you all had raised. Uh you have you might have some questions about a few things. I'm sure that Greg can answer. I did ask about um the roof drainage. That's going to be done with some scuppers on the back side. Uh so that's why there's no
you don't see anything shown here. The top floor um I'm sorry, the rooftop with the railing and the the tower are um aspirational if the uh budget will allow it. So my suggestion is you all allow
either and then as they proceed um uh then start to finalize their drawings and they can make some choices along the way. Um but as I mentioned in your staff's recommendation is this is fine. Uh again given the responses that that you had at the meeting we we realize
this is a a 1995 building. It's in an area that's very industrial commercial. um this fits and I think one of while we don't as I even just said earlier the B doesn't evaluate use I think one of the
most interesting things about this that came out when when you listen to the meeting was um the enthusiasm for the continued use of this site and that that that this this allows activities uh on the street uh and and that's a a really
nice benefit of what's happening here. Um so, uh but again, staff's recommendation is to approve it. Uh don't think I had any recommended conditions. Uh and I'll
>> Okay. If the applicant would like to >> if you've got any questions for them, >> make a presentation. Um have 10 minutes. >> Let me >> 10 minutes once they get the thing up on the screen. >> I have some handouts, too.
>> Okay. Right. >> Maybe take one pass. >> And those are basically the additional sheet that >> wasn't in earlier. >> I just had to hold. >> Yeah. Really?
>> Well, cuz you closed my folder. Yeah. If you want if you want to start introducing, you're welcome to and if you need the slides. >> Yeah. So, you have the the packet and images in front of you, correct? >> Yes. >> Of the building. Uh, so I'll just briefly describe it until we maybe get a
little closer to having some graphics up. Um, but our intent is to add add another level. Uh, one of the previous u times we came to you where we're thinking we had to go to the side. There you go. There it's up. >> Mhm. >> Um,
>> sorry, Greg. I was intending for you to control that one. Apologies. >> No, no, no. You're fine. I'll do it for you. >> Okay. Um, so, uh, what we're doing is going up above it like, uh, the sketch. Um, we
are raising the height of the the main floor there. Um, and so trying to keep it all together, keep the original building. Um, but having the addition be something different, uh, but but work with it complimentary. Um,
and so what we're doing is adding three layers of soldier course, the brick with the brick similar. And I also have samples of just about everything too if anybody wants to take a look at it. Um, and then we're going with cast stone. You know, it's a fairly typical material
used in these type of with brick structures. Just trying to get that that base high because the the next floor has height as well because we need the height for the plotty studio. Uh, and that whole upper level is is metal siding. Um I have the profile here and u
it's in you know a little bit briefly you can see in in that if you make it out I know it got small in the printout. Uh it's a product uh that I I like. Um, and so we kept the corners cuz the original building has these interesting
jut out corners of a foot. And we looked at maybe just trying to keep it clean up top cuz there certainly a lot of little corners to to track when we're doing with all the metal trim and such, but uh we felt that was interesting enough to to keep going with it and then capping it at the top and making it regular um
all the way around with the band there. All tracking to kind of keep the height. And you can see that in this section. Um, and uh going with canopies instead of uh there's a porticle portico kind of you
know uh roofed uh structure with columns on the Montichello Avenue. So just with these more modern type of canopies with uh cables, balconies on the east side. Um and as Jeff said earlier version with
the sketch, we had the stairs and the tower on the the street side, Monachello side. U you can probably go to another one maybe. Um but the or go can you go back a couple to the beginning one? >> So the tower ended up being on that
corner. uh which makes it not so too much in you know of a right there demanding too much attention but it also was just a much better location for the staircase to go up and down. We have different levels because there's another level below this. It's like 9 ft, 10t
and 11t the heights basically. Um so yeah, as Jeff said, the intent is to to have the roof deck to have access up there, but we're just going to have to see how that pans out with budget code um considerations like that. It's a low slope roof to the backside to the north
side. Um if you keep going the north side basically is um without windows fairly plain um that you know there's a chance and opportunity that there might be a building of some size up against it on that property line. Um
so really I think I'll just open it up for questions, you know, not to go too long on this. >> Okay. Thank you. Uh any questions or comments from the public either here or online? Anybody online? Kate.
Okay. Uh questions from the B. >> Uh what's your HVAC situation? And I don't see >> well the the backside I'm I'm not sure if I have a good con contextual of existing that might be in a different area of what I sent it's at the
beginning of all this I believe the backside yeah there's a few pictures if you can get to it >> uh like we call it the backside it's the north elevation that is directly against the the adjacent property is without the windows that I mentioned there's area
for u air for the the units to be out there for if that's what you're talking about for exterior. >> Yeah, >> there's already a a a compressor unit out there and so we just add more. >> So, not on the roof.
>> Not on the roof. Okay. >> The the windows on the upper level, the gray area, there are two flanking windows um around a smaller kind of vertical window. Are those double hung? No. Um, what did we say those are going
to be? Um, they're probably going to be awnings. I imagine maybe there's one fix in an awning, but we wanted to have some operable windows. Wanted to have a little articulation other than just, you know, they are the same proportion and size of the lower ones, but uh we wanted
to change it up a little bit. Um, but I think that's Yeah, that it wouldn't be double hung. It'd be something like an awning or hopper >> or combination. So you um you just gave us the sheet with it looks like you got the vertical sighting profile on there. Um what are
you thinking for the horizontal sighting? >> The the color >> not color but like is it a lap siding or is it this just turned 90° >> I carried this thing in. >> Wonderful. >> So like bricks were in there. So, here's a this is >> the kind of siding and you can either
have it directly >> against each other or you could have the a variation of gaps. >> Okay. >> Uh so, we're going to have this going horizontal >> on the the middle section. And we're probably going to go with something like 16 or 18. Uh and but for the vertical on
the corners, we're going to keep that at the minimum they have in these is one foot. >> Okay. So I don't want to pass that around. >> Just as long as it doesn't end up in my office. >> You want need more samples? I did bring some bricks. Jeff
>> I have plenty of those in my office. >> So I just noticed this when you brought the horizontal up. But what what what do you do at the sophet where the indent is? >> Somebody's going to ask that. Um as far as the color that would that could still be the same material. That's one foot
and that would fit in there. We just you know I haven't detailed all the trim. >> There's a good company. They have a lot of uh you know they cover everything. >> Um it's just the color that I was thinking about >> and I'm happy to provide that when we think more about it. Could easily just
be the same as what wraps the corner. >> Um but I thought it might be interesting to make it a little bit darker and a little bit more cooler. you know, it's a detail that I'm not sure anybody other than you guys and me would would notice, but
um we're happy to kind of provide that or receive input. >> I was also just on the metal paneling. Um what do you do at the corners where the >> Yeah, you're getting you're getting me good questions. But that's a that's a
trim, you know, it's going to be a trim piece. Um, they have all that. Um, and we're happy to to show what that is. I don't think there's options on, you know, wide or thin. We'll go with the thinnest profile the most, you know, the same color, you know, so hopefully it
just blends. >> And I just have one other question. Was the idea that you would um keep the existing windows below? Are those all >> Yeah, I think so. I mean, ideally, we maybe change them all up. Uh, but they're not in bad condition. And I think that's there's an intent to kind
of stay in a certain budget. >> Um, so that's >> next to you. >> Now, there are newer windows down below, too. >> No, I know who he is. The microphone. Where is it? >> Sorry. >> Thought these were loose.
>> Would you all lean forward a little bit? >> Those are all my questions. >> I think they're having trouble. >> I've got a question. I'm getting my uh uh directions confused here. >> The face that has no windows. >> What? >> Yeah, that's that's uh that's south.
>> Yeah, I might have said north earlier. My apologies. >> Okay. >> Um yeah, so all the the lighting um and the colors on the metal the main facade's going to be north. But we tried it and when we were selecting we, you know, tried it in
direct light and indirect light and then we, you know, realized that a lot of it's just going to be in in shade shadow. Um, >> and so what is that color >> facing that that side? I'm trying to get a sense of what
is there. >> What is that blank wall up against? Well, there's about 5T to the property line and then there's a parking lot behind which is currently a tattoo >> bar and then a little market that there. >> Got it.
>> So, it's a it's a parking lot now, but I imagine at some point I mean, who knows? But at some point, it'll probably be uh you know, building close by. >> And the present
wall has no windows either. Okay. >> Correct. Right there. Yeah. Okay. >> See? Any more questions from the B? All right, I'll open up to comments from the B. I like the design. I couldn't approve it
as it is. I think it it's a very very elegant design for a space that's really boring right now. I think it'll be an enhancement to the block. >> I agree. >> I agree. Thank you for retaining those big windows on the ground floor. I think
I mean and taking them up and and using the corners um those interesting kind of brick corners and of course using the first story existing brick. Um I I hope you can do the deck because it's like a
crown. >> Yeah. >> And it really just um you know ups the the beauty of the building. >> Um but I I'm I'm I'm ready with a motion if >> other people. >> Any other comments? >> I would also like to say that I like the
design and if you can pull off doing the deck, I think that would enhance the property. >> Maybe we could start a goat fun. We're on the air, right? >> We're trying. Um, yeah, it's while we're making some decisions. Like, I would like to, you know, put in thicker
windows on that main floor for sound purposes and all kinds of things, but I'm trying to >> make this as nice as I can, but with a budget. >> Sure. >> With the hopes of being able to afford putting that to >> There'll be yoga classes up there, too, right? So, >> no, we don't really teach yoga, right? >> Oh, gosh.
>> I can't I said there would be yoga. >> I can Yeah. Yeah. Um, but we might have like Pilates or some kind of um we would probably, you know, we'll definitely utilize it. >> I'm with Craig. I Pilates for the yoga. So,
>> no, I didn't I wouldn't go that far with it. >> All right. Uh, if you've got a motion, go for it. Having considered the standards set forth within the city code, including the ADC district design guidelines, I move to find that the proposed alterations to 300 Ridge Street
satisfied the BA's criterion are compatible with this property and other properties in this ATC district and the BAR approves the application as submitted. >> Second. >> All right. Thank you. We'll call the vote. Mr. Schwarz, >> yes. >> Mr. Bailey,
>> yes. >> Mr. Burl, >> yes. >> Miss Lewis, >> hi. >> Mr. Mr. Timberman, >> yes. >> Mr. Rosenthal, >> yes. >> Miss Ta, >> yes. >> Miss Lowour, >> yes. >> And I vote yes. So motion carries. Thank you guys very much. >> Thank you guys so much. >> Thank you. Good luck. >> I just want to say you guys have all
wonderful along this process. So thank you. >> Thank you. Appreciate that. >> Good job. >> It's u when Greg said it was not going to be ephus. Um >> that's right. >> I was very excited. >> It's stone. >> Yeah. >> Quality building materials. I did fail to mention and it's something to make
sure I do on others, but looking at what was on this site and I I know I offered in the staff report, but it was interesting that, you know, this was early on, you know, late 1800s and into the early 1900s, uh the home of Henry Bouts and his and his family. And he was
turns out the city had a candy store on on West Maine. So, um I'm sure soon after then that's when a dentist came to the main street. But, uh so interesting past. Uh thank you very much. All right. Uh next up is uh hopefully a relatively
simple uh one. I know uh Caitlyn's not here. And um I >> Kevin was here. >> So this was this is on um >> at 3104th Street Northeast. This is um
opposite Court Square Park on and this is a a roof over a patio facing High Street. Honestly, this was almost an admin approval type of thing. Uh but I just as I mentioned to you guys earlier
uh and in fact this elevation here shows it. Uh there this is a it's not a historic building but it is in the district. Uh they'll be covering an existing patio. um standing sea metal roof. But the question I had
had was if that corner uh should or shouldn't have a return, an eve return similar to the roof above. You all had indicated that wasn't necessary. So hopefully it's a real quick uh unless you wanted to argue for it. Um
and uh but unless you had any questions for me, our recommendation was to approval either way on the eve detail. Um and I don't know if you all want to if you have any questions >> advocate like to make a presentation at
all or you're welcome to. >> So I'm Mark Kner Hennington Ker architects. We don't have a presentation. I think uh we're we're >> right there to be >> Oh, man. >> Fancy. This is all new, too. I mean, >> we don't know. We don't come in this
room that often. We >> haven't been here for a little while. Carl's still here. You guys are all over. >> Carl's Carl's going to stay in this room for a while. Thank you all for your time. It's the human service to be here
and do this all night uh long and talk about all the things that you do. So, I really appreciate your time. I don't have a presentation. We agree. I don't think there should be a return on the roof gables. Um the two wings are not symmetrical. Um so that would create a
asymmetrical condition on each side which would draw more emphasis to that condition. Um so it's just a polite shed with a with a straight termination. But happy to answer questions if y'all have any. Okay. >> Um just to follow process, are there any
questions or comments from the public either here or online? Coop. Uh questions from the board. >> Just one. Um or one. Uh the gable end. What What material are you putting in that little piece of gable end that's
sticking out? >> It'll be fiber cement to match the rest of the trim work. >> That's it. >> Is this being driven by the occupant, the tenant in that space? So, it's >> No, it's a little bit irrelevant. I'm
just curious >> both. I think there's an u desire to have a more um inviting space. I don't think there's a lot of use of that patio now. >> I'm covered. >> So, I think if we had a a cover over it and created more of a room outside, um
there's two tenants on that floor. I think they would both use it and appreciate it. >> I walk by all the time and I'm amazed that nobody is ever out there >> taking a break from their work. I mean, I've never ever seen anybody in that space and I'm walking frequently by.
>> I always thought, what a wasted outdoor space because it's kind of a cool space, but I think this will certainly encourage use. >> Yeah, I think a ceiling and some slowmoving fans uh will bring it down to a pedestrian scale. It's not It doesn't feel good when you're out there on the space. It kind of feels uh you're just
kind of exposed. >> Um so, I think the roof will add to that um atmosphere. All right. Any other questions? Any comments? Anybody want to make a motion? You >> can be a motion hog tonight.
>> I'll let somebody else do it. I would Mr. Timberman's going to do it this time. I'm going to do it. >> Oh, yes. >> Having considered the standards set forth within the city code, including the ADC district design guidelines, I move to uh find the proposed patio roof at 310 4th Street Northeast. satisfies
the BAR's criteria and is compatible with this property and other properties in this ADC district and that the B approves the application as submitted. >> Second. >> All right, I'll call the vote. Mr. Schwarz, >> yes.
>> Mr. Bailey, >> yes. >> Mr. Burl, >> yes. >> Miss Lewis, >> I >> Mr. Timberman, >> yes. >> Mr. Rosenthal, >> yes. >> Miss Tab, >> yes. >> Miss Lowour, >> yes. >> I vote yes. Motion carries. Thank you guys. Appreciate it.
All right. Um, so even though somebody wisely set the clock at the back of the room to 5:25, it's it's 10il 7. I'm going to call a 10-minute break just for everybody to use the restroom or get a snack or
whatever. So, we'll reconvene at 7:00 according to my watch. All right. Thanks, everybody. It's a good thing. It's a good resource. >> It's not your fault. I know it's not your fault.
It's not your fault. >> Oh, I agree. >> That's what my brother would have done to me anyway. important. Are you bringing cake? >> You're bringing cake. That's more important. >> Depression. >> I walked past a meal. All
right. Well, >> ready. I don't know where staff is. >> There's Patrick's here. >> What were you doing? All right. Of >> course.
You ready? >> I'm good. >> All right. 7:02. So, forgive the couple minute delay, but I'll call us back into order, please. Um,
so we are in section E, which is other business. Um, and in our other business, we have three pre-application conferences. Um, and just as a reminder to folks, a pre-lication conference is
required by code when for a number of reasons, but kind of one of the main triggers is when it's over $350,000 um, construction budget. Um, and also, just as a reminder, these are pre-application conferences. We will not
be voting on any of these um presentations tonight. The the the primary goal of the pre pre-application conference is to introduce the project to the BA, introduce the team to the BAR, um see if the applicants themselves have
any specific questions about their project that we can answer or provide guidance on. Um, that's kind of the the main meat and reason for these pre-application conferences. It's to to help inform the design so that when it
does come to us uh as an official certificate of appropriateness application, it's sort of been flushed out a little bit. Um, so they don't, you know, present an application that's just starting from scratch, I guess. Um, so,
uh, with that said, our first pre-application conference is on 714 Ridge Street. Um, and Mr. Warner, if you'd like to give us staff report and >> if um, if you hear sometimes slip to preliminary discussion, in fact, I see
it's what I used in staff report, but we had called them for a long time and now the the ordinances calls it a pre-application >> conference. So um but this was before you for a preapp discussion I you know sign develop or here um they're
proposing on uh this is a vacant lot at Rich Street in Langford Avenue. Um so this is within the Ridge Street ADC district and I believe this is uh sub area A. Um
the two at what they're looking at now is to develop on one parcel will be two parcels and uh uh two residential units. Um this is a bit of an enigmatic site. Um it was on the market for a long time.
So, I got a lot of calls for people saying what used to be there, and the stairs suggest something was there, but I can't find any evidence of anything having been there. Uh there's no nothing in the census. There's no uh directory. We know who lived next door. We know the
address. Uh and even more unusual, and this is a good photograph there. Some of the photos you'll see an old fence. Um, and we were in a meeting last week and I asked about the old fence and then we went back a few years in Google and the fence is gone. So, I don't know where
that old fence came from. It somehow appeared in the last couple of years, but the um the the two dwellings that are proposed on this, what we'll do typically u is we look at the sub area uh what's there? How does this fit
relative to that? Um and I laid that out a bit in the um the staff report how this is comparable to the to materiality, the heights, the spacing, the the uh step back or set back from the street. Um and I would say so
generally within your broad guidelines for new construction, uh this is consistent with that. And so I think that uh really tonight is to say what questions does uh design develop have? What questions do you all have? Any
recommendations, suggestions um so that they can move forward with a a formal application that is um has the information that you all would like to see in it. So any questions for me? >> All right, Mr. Schaefer, would you like to
make a 10-minute tops presentation, please? >> Sure. >> Good evening. My name is Kevin Schaefer. I am the studio director for the Charlottesville branch of design develop here to discuss 714 and 716 Ridge Street. Thanks Jeff for the introduction
and thank you all for the very important work that you guys are doing tonight. volunteer position does not get lost. The >> um site as Jeff mentioned um is in the Ridge Street ADC district. The it is the
most southern uh parcel in that district. In fact, the district sort of jogs around um to incorporate this site. It is a RA zone and we have a max uh height of 44 feet or three stories. Um
the parcel is currently two adjacent parcels that is sort of asymmetrically sub subdivided currently. Uh this proposal includes a boundary line adjustment that creates two equal um parcels that would then house the two
duplexes. So we're talking about four uh dwelling units over two sub parcels. Um as you can see on this image, this might be the highest part of Ridge Street. It's certainly sort of up on a crest and additionally we're about 3 or 4 feet up off the sidewalk because of that
retaining wall right there. So our height became sort of a a critical design factor and because this is a preliminary discussion or a pre-application conference I'll take you be sort of under the hood and talk about our process as we were evaluating this
site. uh though albe it briefly um if you were to Google three-story brick um rowhouse for instance you might have these uh images come up and if you are in an urban context where the rowhouse
was creating a street wall um you might not need much articulation right uh we even see that here in Charlottesville at water street extended those are fourstory three and a half story um brick town houses that don't have much front articulation But when you start to consider the
context and the historic fabric of the Ridge Street ADC, u more care needs to be given um to a mass. And and a common way of breaking down the mass in a threetory brick rowhouse, for instance, if that's our typology, is to um have
this large sort of extruded um bay window or vertical element. But what that's really doing, as we discovered, was just um emphasizing the verticality and um seemingly making the building appear taller. Um so there's other
there's other strategies as well, right? We can take that threetory mass and we can add a setback. We can change material and try and get that threetory volume to read as a twotory volume. And I think some of these top presidents start to get a little bit more successful. And if the the another um
sort of uh antithesis to that approach is to add a glazing bay at the lower level and start to try and anchor that building and break break that flat brick facade down. So we're considering all these things in relationship to our adjacent context which is all very
um residential in scale. It's twotory primarily. it's traditional lapsiding brick material. If we zoom into the sub area as uh Mr. Warner encouraged us to do, it's even more of that residential
scale. And so when we started to think about a zoning envelope that is three stories and up to 44 ft on top of a ridge on top of a retaining wall. Um as we were evaluating this in a 3D model and um putting this on top of the hill
and evaluating it with the the adjacent massing of the the adjacent structures started to feel quite out of scale. So, in the sort of nature of of looking under the hood at our design process here, we did sort of a zoning envelope
height study, which is what you see on the top left. And we say, "Oh, wow, that's really tall." And so, we start to maybe, okay, well, what about a brick mass that starts to break down or excuse me, a glazing bay that starts to break down that brick mass in the front um at
iteration two, which is our lower left here. and that starts to get, you know, maybe that feels a little bit better, but it's still very much a boxy tall rhythm um mass that's approaching the street. So, can we start to um step that building back and still get our three
stories of height, which meets our programmatic needs? Um Yes. And maybe that's getting more successful. We're starting to bring a a porch element in that emphasizes the horizontal and we're starting to deemphasize the verticality. Um, but in
reality that still reads like a three-story structure in a house in a neighborhood full of two-story houses. So by iteration four and sort of just the the the evolvement of the design, we are committing to a gable roof over a
two-story brick mass at that point. Um, and we are sort of embracing that um that that form, that gable roof form. Um, iteration 4, though it's small on this screen, is still out of proportion.
The the dormers are still too tall and the the side that faces Langford, is still a very long um sort of unarticulated facade. Uh, particularly when you look at the houses around it. So by iteration five, we've stepped the
rear portion of the the mass in, changed that material and emphasized that sort of pure gable form on the side elevation. Um, as well as continue to develop the dormers and articulate the glazing bay.
And so by the time what's submitted in front of you, um, we like to evaluate things from the street level, from a pedestrian level. I like this image because uh right across Langford is um a two-story Victorian
house that has a sort of a three-story tow tower element. Um and this house and this these these two houses working together start to feel very in keeping and and appropriate within that neighborhood context. Um even on the Langford side, it's still
feeling broken down and appropriate. Um I'll draw your attention here to some pretty large retaining walls that we had submitted. Um but through the development one one last slide also sort of an evaluation of the the street level
perspective um and more of the massing of the adjacent houses and how we're sort of relating to that and keeping our roof line um purposely at that same height. But as we were continued to refine this project since submitting, I just wanted
to call a few things to your attention. One being uh and this will be in our formal COA depending on how this discussion goes, but um uh elimination of of those large retaining walls to work more closely with the existing
topography um proved to be important enough both both from just a land disturbance factor but also just a cost perspective. We've continued to revise the dormer since submitting um and working on those scale and proportion to get the right feeling uh from the street
level. We've also um in the previous submission we had the gable um and rendering as the black material sort of a panled render of of material on that up third floor. But um since then we've
we've sort of normalized the uh framing of the roof and have allowed for that wall to just be continued in plain and all be brick. Um so it's sort of the ongoing simplification and also um refinement of it of this project. And so
um I know yall have a crowded agenda and you've already touched on the um the stairs. We felt that the stairs were and the railing actually is cool enough. Whether or not it's historic, it sure seems like it's part of the street from
my memory um as long as I can remember going down that street and was worth preserving. So, um the proposal in front preserves that that fence. It's a it's a feature um even if it was added in 2015 or something. Um the scale of the houses
feel appropriate on the street. the front yard response to the uh adjacent houses. Um and um we're just we're excited about the direction this is headed and we're eager to get uh your feedback and any answer any questions
you all may have. >> All right. Thank you, Kevin. Um I think based on our um motion at the beginning of the meeting, we would welcome any public comment or question at this time if anybody wants to speak on this
project. Anybody online? All right. So I'll just open discussion uh for the bar. I don't know if we necessarily need to do questions and comments. discussion.
>> Why did you >> Oh, yeah. Sorry. Sorry. Real quick. Um, thanks for the reminder, Miss Lewis. Kevin, do you have any specific questions to ask us? >> Okay, go ahead, Jerry. >> Uh, why did you go with two buildings
instead of one? Um the RA zoning allows for two units by right. It does allow for three, but I believe at that point it's um either an existing structure preservation or a
affordable housing requirement. I cannot recall. Um but RA allows for a duplex by right. It's also we get to fall under the Virginia residential code. If it's a duplex, if you start to add more units than that, then we're introducing multif family like commercial sprinkler systems
for instance or different egress requirements. >> Can you remind me what the setback is along Langford? >> Um Jeeoff, could you remind me what setback is? I know we respond to the adjacent properties, but >> Okay. I guess that I don't really It's
not about the specific number. It just feels like um I'm just curious why you're not pushing closer to Langford with the building on the right side of the image. >> Oh. Oh, the Langford side. >> Yeah, >> sorry. Um there is a steep embankment on
that side as well as rock currently. Um so we're a little concerned about um what we may find over there if we try and put foundations in. Uh, additionally, there's the rightway is is larger than it seems from the renderings
>> the the rightway of the street. So, our property line actually doesn't start until we're pretty close to that sideyard. >> Okay. >> Sorry, Kate. I was looking at a image somewhere else. You're about >> just the setback in the distance between
Langford and uh the edge of the building on the right, I guess, south. So what and I sort of did in a rough analysis was looked at what was that rhythm that spacing of uh between buildings uh in
the sub area and so more looked so looking at >> how does that compare to with these two buildings what's in between and then uh the house uh immediately north of it is that >> typical I I didn't really look at what
it looks like you're just maintaining whatever the the zoning is requiring there. Um, but you all can certainly talk about adjusting it. >> I guess my my question arises because
the house the house with the sort of round tower on the side so clearly is addressing the corner of both streets. This feels like it's definitely privileging RI Ridge Street and I'm wondering if there's an opportunity here to I know while there's probably an
efficiency of sort of twinning these buildings um if there's an opportunity to also address Langford from kind of a facade um standpoint. >> Yeah, I think that's a great comment.
I guess picking up on one of the things Miss Tony said, um I I like she mentioned, I think I'm sure there's a kind of economy of scale of twinning these, but I really I think this would benefit to have some differentiation between the two
structures. Um you know, like I live in a bungalow. There's one right next door to me that's essentially the same, but there's details that are slight make them slightly different. And I think that adds richness to the design. So, I'd encourage you to find ways to kind of make one a little different from the
other. Um, just to give them some character, you know. >> Um, >> that could be just addressing the corner like >> right that that could solve it right there. >> Stated. >> I I really appreciate um how you
describe the process here. This I think is really uh instructive and I think you came upon the right move to do a twotory with a roof. Um, I question the need, you mentioned the uh sort of vertical bay and that that was a a move to kind
of break down the the threetory mass. And I guess I wonder if that's still necessary once you go down to a two-story mass with a roof on top of it. Um, >> I I would point out though that there's some amazing views from there. >> Yes. Um, so those are some of the best
views in the city, I'd say. >> Um, >> yeah, I think part of the move with the large glazing bay is >> it is sort of a modern take on a >> true >> historic typology. So we're we're you know differentiating ourselves in a way
in a historic neighborhood. Not trying to replicate the main turn of the century houses. >> What's the on the rear facade like the bump out at the third floor level? Can you describe that a little bit? There's like a >> See if I can. Was that helpful? So there
would be a roof deck. Um we have a threetory height and um >> three threetory max height and as soon as the grade falls >> more than six feet we have to we have to step down that building. So that's sort of our max building envelope from a
third floor perspective on this rear side. Um and then we are accessing that as the grade steps down as a roof terrace. Yeah, the roof dug doesn't bother me as much as the funny bump out on the back of the gable, right? But I suppose
that's just for So, it's not a gable with Grant's room in there. >> Yeah. A living room, >> right? >> More more more usable space though. It is a big portion of the roof. >> Is that Are the sidewalls of that inset
from the gable? >> They're inset. Okay. It's >> about a foot. >> A little Why did you um uh why why the big retaining wall on other side in the back? >> We were trying to get more light into
the lower floor unit. Um we have uh the stairway in the middle which is wide enough that we can have windows in there. Um we can also probably get another window on the side elevation um just with the natural grade
fall. Um and so once we sort of realized those things were possible, the the large large retaining walls became unnecessary and like not not particularly desirable. >> Yeah. I um I like the fact that you kept
the the wall in the front. >> Uh I think that's part of the neighborhood. Um, there's a there's a continuity that happens between this this property and the next, I believe. And then the I just kind of like the idea of keeping a remnant of of the old stair. Um
I I'll I'll be interested to see how you how you tie it into your landscape maybe um a little bit more richly, but I think that the idea of coming up using it and then you know branching off from that to the to the entries are is a is an
interesting idea and and certainly is in line with what we're doing here and trying to make something more appropriate to a historic neighborhood. Um the big retaining walls in the back on the contrary feel um a little scarring, you know, like not as
sensitive. And um I'd like to I'd like to see kind of a more dimminionative parking back there sort of in in keeping with the neighborhood. Um just to kind of um more in line with the sensitivity you're showing in the front. Uh I think
that the comments uh about the well I I'll say that I think the design is well on its way. I think that you did some really neat things. Um some elegant things. Um but I do um agree with the comments about perhaps addressing the
corner. Um, you know, when you take the Victorian house as a precedent, one of the wonderful things everybody loves about Victorian houses are the little eccentricities and the the differences uh from one uh one and to another. Um, however, you know, when you look at your
project from the front, there's a there's sort of a there's a pleasing like symmetry and there's a kind of a pleasing consistency. So, um perhaps the the way forward is to um make some of
those eentricities or nods to um the more um important parts um of the site or or ways of of of addressing the site um through the architecture. Um but also take a you know also take
the sort of u some some um lessons from um those those historic precedents and and finding ways of maybe creating a little different shield um detailing or elements on that on that front as a
playful way to kind of enhance the design. Did y'all uh explore instead of stoops doing like a porch across the front? >> Oh my god. >> On one or the other or >> Yeah.
>> Um we did um and and maybe too committed to the the brick rowhouse typology or or something like that like the the the porch especially on that corner could be a great way to mark that corner and wrap
around. What we liked about the stupid um was the horizontal line that was starting to deemphasize the vertical, >> but to your point, like a a bigger one would just keep that going on. So, I I do think that's um that's a a smart suggestion.
>> More more usable space, you know, engages the the street and the public, pedestrians on the street, you know, >> and I I had the same comment. Um porches are really important on Bridge Street. They're just fabulous porches that are great examples of outdoor spaces on just
about every house there, no matter the age. Um, you know, I don't I don't think there would be enough room with these to even put a chair or something. So, >> yeah, >> I wondered if you moved the bays completely
over so you don't have that strip. Um, although I like the brick work, you know, you could get a little bit more width on a porch, just have a little bit more room next to the door, maybe manipulate the door a little bit >> or just have the porch come in front of the bay.
>> That's another I mean, >> I don't know how. Yeah, I also um would really like for um the one unit on the corner to wrap the corner and address Langford. Langford's a really important street by itself. Um
so yeah as Kate and others have said but thank you for such a thorough application at this >> juncture. This was a lot of information including your iterative process um you know looking under the hood thing but
more than that just the contextual photos the description of what you're looking at and the thoroughess of you know this is not just a concept it's pretty well fleshed out. So thank you for getting there >> um for us. Yeah, I think and I think um
one way that it your process benefits everyone is this is the way that you've been able to break the scale down and really um reflect the the nature of the at least the scale and um starting to reflect the nature of the the neighborhood. One thing just looking at
given the fact that this is on the high ground, it might be worthwhile just doing a little bit of a context elevation just to see how you know those relate to the two adjacent properties and maybe if there's a way to tie in a little bit that might be a suggestion.
Okay. Anything else? >> We're all waiting on Carl. No, I mean I as a concept I think this is um this is our zoning code doing what it was supposed to do. Um and I do appreciate the fact that you have put a sloped roof at the front. So, it's a two
and a half story front um Zakery that may have been jarring in the historic neighborhood, but >> you're adding density in a way that's not >> I mean it it fits and it's um I think uh very appropriate and I think you've obviously you're still tweaking the
design, but um yes, you've put a lot of work into it and I think they're right now it's an attractive u project. >> I I would like to also say I find it a very attractive project as well and I like the townhouse version. Frankly, I I understand why people would like porches and so forth, but I think the townhouse
works in a sense it also harkcs back to the Bernett neighborhood as well, which is just right there. Uh, and it it doesn't get I don't think it intrudes, but it's it's it's a real attractive addition, a modern addition to an old
neighborhood that I think that helps add character to the neighborhood as showing, if you will, um, uh, that it's not dead, that it's improving, that it's growing. It's a different thing. It's not always just the same sort of domestic architecture,
which is lovely there, but has been there for a while. I like the notion that these uh have the townhouse look, but pay attention to my colleagues who are more architecturally uh adept. I did have a comment about materials. Um
you've got your roof sample on here and I just make sure that it's not a commercial roof. Um just a random picky comment. >> No, it's great. >> Yeah. >> Yep. I'll do one more random picky comment. So, the just the porch
detailing feels a little neither here nor there. It's not modern and yet it's >> not traditional either. And uh I think it would benefit from if it if you're going to use an intabe in a true capital like it's sort of suggesting here. Uh to
do it in a more traditional way or to just go modern. My two cents. >> Go modern. >> Go modern. >> Yeah. >> Be classical. So, thank you. >> Last comment here. I also appreciate the the project a lot. Um, and I would say
and I agree with Mr. Bailey that it's great to see a a townhouse typology, but I would also say that a townhouse would address the corner if it was on a corner. So, >> fair. Um just to sort of summarize what we heard so we can respond
appropriately. I think um address the corner it's point well taken and also I think to individualize them is also a great point. Um I al I like the comment about pick a decision between you know pick pick a lane it's either modern or it's traditional.
>> Um so I think this gives us a lot to work with. Did I miss anything in that summary? porch, porch, >> porch, porch, >> porches, maybe potentially >> front outdoor spaces other than the one under >> and then um maybe easing if possible the
retaining walls in the back trying to make >> Yeah, I think we're going to be able to eliminate those completely. >> Okay. So, >> if I can just offer an observation. So, the first thing about this I thought about CNO row where >> Yeah. >> Um >> those front porches are
>> I don't I ever see anybody um and they're They they hold lots and plants uh because the the accessibility is at the rear. And I think a larger porch >> could produce, as you said, that outdoor
space, a a space that is activated and not just the where you go get the mail. I don't know if that, forgive my insertion there, but >> that's a good point. I mean, the parking's in the back, so that's the primary interest is probably going to be through the back. And so giving something that provides life out front,
place to sit would do that. >> Easy to ignore a tiny porch, but a you know, you could have a BA barbecue on a large back porch >> and we have right >> because we have. >> All right. Any other final comments for
good? >> Thank you very much. >> Thank you so much. Appreciate it. >> All right. All righty. Um go uh give Caitlyn a break. That's right. Our next pre-application conference is for 8:35
843 847 West Main Street. Um, and we'll have staff give a report and then uh presentation from the applicant and then we'll uh ask the public for a question and comment. So Jeff, you want to start us off? >> Okay. Again, a pre-application
discussion. Uh this this one's somewhat unique from the last one in that uh when we're looking at West Main um the the comp plan and zoning in fact for some time have you larger buildings
taller buildings uh uh closer to the parcel line uh than what we just looked at. the um little bit of background on this site. I think as long as most people can remember, it's been vacant.
Um but prior uh I think I and I don't know when it became the parking lot, but it had been there had been a series of houses on this lot. There was 8 and a half street which connected back into Tenth and Page. And then um we have old photos
of the Queen Charlotte Hotel which was at that corner kind of where the radio tower is now. Um the uh application before you takes uh at various times over the last couple years the B has been things on one site or the other.
This has combining the three parcels that are there now. Um I had thought 847 had been a a former road. It really actually was. There were two skinny parcels there with small houses. 8 and a half street was uh separating 843 and
835. Um the concept before you is um I I think the the applicant needs to address some of the height because we've got um the images with the dotted uh lines.
We've got some uh conceptual renderings of an 11story building. So, uh I think some some conversation about what exactly they are asking you to look at would be helpful. Um, I know that, you know, the discussion
and certainly we had the conversation earlier, folks from uh the neighborhood to the north uh have some questions about uh the spacing from their neighborhood, the access uh to West Maine and um
that wall. And we I know from when even when we were doing the historic survey in the Tenton Page neighborhood in 2020, this is what we heard about was this um even if you go down the towards Wartland Street, those apartments there that loom over Page Street. So this has been an
issue that's been raised. Um the our guidelines uh design guidelines, the ADC district design guidelines do say within West Main um to consider uh adjacent neighborhoods even if they are
not uh designated uh because the historic district ends at the backside. Um I think we can all acknowledge this has been a a complicated stretch of West Maine. There there's not a lot historic there. Um there it was our old suburbia
with the automobile dealerships. Um so there's there's trying to say what is it that this what historic character is going on on this block that you're um designing to is is up for debate. But I think that the um the idea here is does
this thing fit here? um width, height, massing, scale, anything that uh uh what the community has to offer. Do you see ways that that could be addressed? Um, so I I would hope that
we leave tonight with um uh not having solved the questions, but at least having articulated that um from where you all sit when this comes back in as a formal application, assuming it does, uh
that we've been able to articulate that the uh the questions and the the things that you would want like the applicant to review. Um, no, you know, let's not, you know, dance around the issue here that this this there are concerns of the
neighborhood to the north. Um, and I think that within the guidelines, uh, and within your purview, there are some things that you can can raise. Uh, I will also just in fairness to the community uh, in the neighborhood um,
and James, you can certainly expound on this if you wish. The process is after this we'll see an application a formal application um coming in. we treat that differently in the set of we there's
more information we want to see and I think that's also part of this that you can communicate when the applicant if this comes back what are the things that you want to see what's in these drawings that's not shown that's not expressed and um but ultimately the in order to
get approval to construct this you would need the B's approval in the event that you denied a project for some reason at a later date, the applicant can appeal that. Also, our ordinance allows you can approve something and any agreed party
can appeal that as well. So, the the thing that I I hope people take home with this uh tonight is that you all are yes, you have authority and you have purview, but ultimately city council is the decider. uh 99% of the things that
go through here don't end up in city council's lap, but some do. That's the way the process is designed. So, um uh you all can't also you can't say no to a project. Uh the zoning allows a structure here of certain scale, certain
size, certain use. You're evaluating whether the aesthetics of that um are compatible with the ADC district guidelines. So, I know I'm getting a little deeper in the weeds than normal, but I thought that would be helpful
context. Uh, I know the applicants here. Um, we know that there are people that wish to speak afterwards. So, do you have any questions for me? All right. All right. Well, uh, thank you for that introduction, Jeff, and thank you for
the opportunity to be here tonight. Um, we're really excited about the the prospect of the project at 83, uh, 8 8:35 and uh, 843 West Maine. Um tonight we'll we'll be going through the site plan uh as well as the building design.
Um but just to start with some context, we understand that uh we're here to review under the guidelines of of the code um and the B bar guidelines, but we understand that there is more context here that we're uh uh abuing uh our our neighbor uh the West Haven community in
the broader tenth and page neighborhood. Um so from our first meeting um with staff earlier in um in March uh we've started neighborhood outreach um and so that started with correspondence in April uh met with CRA in May uh met with
the neighborhood uh representatives uh once in June uh and then held a community meeting at the Jefferson school in July and here we are today. Um, so just taking more context here uh identifying on the West Haven uh plan uh
seeing a connection uh being important to West Main Street. Um called out as the West Main Accessible Walk with historical interpretive signage. Um zooming in here to identify that uh in more detail.
And then looking at our site as a diagram, uh understanding that the orange is representative of the pedestrian path connecting to where the bridge uh the memorial bridge opens up with two half walls and and a placard. Um
uh and the backgrounds that you see there are the backgrounds of of the West Haven uh development plan. um conceptualizing that into a design is what we're looking at here and on the right side is an inspiration image. Um you can see that we're planning for
landscape um and u and uh brick brick pattern and pavement. Um we're focused on security. We heard that a lot. Um so location of of ballards uh of lighting of transparency. Um, so taking a look at the thresholds,
lighting and safety, uh, a combination of overhead lights, um, and wall-mounted lights, uh, where appropriate, uh, ballards, um, and then finding really that threshold on West Main Street, that connection to the Drewberry Brown Memorial Bridge, um, quite literally in
this case being, you know, um, a metaphor to to build bridges here with with the community. Uh, once again, um, some more precedent images here. um to identify how we can remember the past and bring public memory to that uh
pedestrian walkway. Um even taking some examples from our discussions with uh Miss Johnson and and Mr. Sales from their trip to Chicago to the public uh uh housing museum in Chicago. Use of QR codes to kind of deepen that
relationship uh and experience. Uh a few renderings here looking uh after you get up the staircase and and accessible ramp uh from the West Haven plan looking out onto Main Street and then taking a step and looking back. Please pardon the topo steps. Uh those
are will be at an accessible u grade. Now getting into the building design. Uh just to talk through the comprehensive plan really briefly. Uh we are on an urban mixeduse corridor. um that's where our uh property is and it steps down in density to a higher
intensity residential zone. Um now what's not on the page is is the um um the housing report associated with the comprehensive plan uh which talks in great depth about u the need for housing and specifically privately developed housing along West Main Street alleviating the need for for housing in
the uh in the city. Uh now translating that into the zoning map and what's allowed by uh by the code. Um we're looking at a CX8 uh then transitioning to the RX5 represented in the brown and the orange.
Um now taking specific and diving into the development code. Uh we can see the required setbacks um on the side and rear specifically are highlighted here to indicate zero. Now we're not prop uh we're not proposing that at all. Um you can see in
this plan uh we're showing uh our proposed project uh on the bottom right uh we're showing the in the teal the West Haven um redevelopment layout and all of their green spaces um not all of them uh in this exhibit uh and then the standard next to us and
we're analyzing them uh from a cross-section standpoint. Um you can also see our rooftop uh amenity is located on the south facing uh Main Street. Um we heard feedback that we we do not we do not want to have amenities overlooking uh our community and we we
definitely located those on Main Street. Now looking at the site sections here um you can see a comparison on the above our project and below the existing standard project. Um and we have uh at the midpoint a 75 ft step back from
building edge to building edge that ranges from 60 to 90 approximately from where buildings are are planned both ours and the West Haven buildings. There's also a existing tree line and future trees that are planned um that will cause a landscape buffer between
units so that you can get some privacy between units. That was also a sensitive point uh in this diagram. This is back to the code looking at height and what's allowed. So 11 stories is allowed um at 156 ft.
Uh going into uh a zoom in of that cross-section, you can see approximately what is allowed by uh by right and what we are building within that uh box. We also introduced a 25 ft step back at the northwest west corner as we found in
studying uh that to be the best for solar gain. Um and so these three diagrams here show the zoning envelope, the building stepback and then the current design as it stands right now. Just to show in this diagram you can see
how uh we've studied it throughout the year. Um you can see how just by nature of the topography there are uh uh shadows cast uh naturally there are shadows cast by the future developments of the West Haven uh buildings themselves. And then you can see uh how
the our proposed building uh is not impeding with the open usable space that is prop uh proposed in in their plan. Uh we can get into more details um a afterwards. Now I'd like to turn it over to our architect Muhammad Mosid which
we've done a few projects very successful projects with with Niles Bolton Architecture. Uh good evening. Uh I want to start with uh some some quick massing diagrams uh just to help illustrate some of the big design moves and the strategy that we've
done in terms of the composition of the facades. A lot of times we like to start with this just to keep it simple and you know be able to kind of articulate the overall massing strategy. This is kind of a refined version that we've kind of brought back from the from the concept design just to help illustrate a couple
of points. We talk a lot we took a lot of cues from the uh from the a from the uh ADC district design guidelines uh a strong base that's defined at the lower two levels that wraps around the corner uh introducing some insets and some change some change in materiality to be
able to break the massing uh and and we've kind of early on identified that vertical corner at the south southeast that's got a lot of visibility as potentially a a gateway element that connects the historic downtown to campus And also it is right along the
pedestrian prominade that connects West Haven to to to West Main. Uh this is kind of the back corners of the project, the northeast and northwest. And you can see we kind of brought the same language. Uh it's continued the base around the perimeter and again used the same strategies to break up the scale
and inset the facads at different areas to add interest and and uh break the massing. This here is the view. You can see the bridge. This is the southeast corner. Uh this is now with all the articulation, the windows. Uh uh we you can kind of see if we zoom in on the
base a little bit that we we've articulated a bay uh that kind of repeats along the base of the building that wraps the corner. So this is the west uh main uh uh facade there, but it wraps the corner along the prominade and it kind of creates that rhythm. Uh you
see a lot of glazing and transparency at the ground level. allows us to have doors and connections to the sidewalk to activate the streets. And then again uh the rest of the uh architecture up above gets a little bit lighter above the above the starting at the third level where we start to pick up the
residential units. This is the southwest corner. This is where our front door and the lobby is going to be. Uh you know and again you can see a lot of transparency. You can start to see the access to the uh parking deck there through that driveway. And then this this view really kind of shows how some
of these slight insets and projections that we've done with the initial massing concepts starts to really break up the mass and add interest at these prominent corners that we're looking at. Uh this is an aerial view that drops the proposed building kind of within the context. I think it helps show the scale
relative to the adjacent buildings. In the foreground is the lofts project. To the left of uh the proposed building is the standard. You can kind of see our building in the back next to the cell tower. Uh and this here is kind of views that kind of drops in the future zoning
envelope for uh the parcels uh uh west of our project. So again you can see you can see the existing the lofts the standard and the proposed building and then everything in that tan color is uh the the zoning envelope what is allowed uh within these parcels if it were to be
developed all the way. Uh really quick last couple of slides. Uh this is the ground level floor plan. you know, a lot of the, you know, you can, uh, we talked a little bit about the access around the the the perimeter of the building. You kind of see how we've held the edge of
the street, uh, continued that, uh, continued continued that street wall. Uh, and and, uh, as recommended in the in the design guidelines, we've got active use right at the edge for the entire facade. We have 220 ft of
frontage, building frontage along West Main and 100% of it is active use with a lot of glazing and transparency. You can see the rhythm of doors every 40 ft there to provide that connection to the street and all that conceals and hide the the parking deck behind it. Okay,
>> so this is level one and level two is very much the same. It's a tall ground level with basically a mezzanine level. Um, we've got the exterior elevations. I think these help show the rhythm and the uh the bays along the perimeter. Uh I'm not going to talk about these, but
they're available if we have any any questions to answer. This shows how that base and the and the bays wrap around the corner. This is the east facade where the pedestrian prominade that connects west haven to west main is located. Uh and then again the rest of the facads around the perimeter. Uh
happy to answer any questions or get into details. Uh we had to kind of run through this quickly, but we're we can bring any of the slides back and get in more in more in depth uh as needed. >> Perfect. Thank you guys for concising your your presentation down to our 10
minutes. I know y'all had some 15 minutes prepared for us, so we appreciate that. Um and yes, you're right. We can pull up slides if we want to foster the discussion so we can we can answer questions. I think um we're going to shift to public questions and
comments and then um before we start talking, we'll want to see if you guys have any like specific questions for us. But um let's start. Uh I'm just going to revisit the >> the signup sheet that we had at the
beginning of the meeting. Um, but I'll also say I know there's possibly a few folks who have joined us since then and also now after hearing the presentation. Um, if there's other folks that want to speak, you're certainly welcome. So, I'll start with Miss Johnson, Joy
Johnson. It's kind of hard to hear y'all back there. So, I'm sorry. Um, good evening everyone. My name is Joy Johnson. I am the chair of FAR and I've lived in West Haven for many, many years. I do want to
say before I go into anything, I do not appreciate using my name in your presentation um after the fact of what you did.
Um, and I know that I know your staff already told you some of what I might say you can't consider, but you know, you need to know the facts. First of all, the they started their planning in April.
We for three years worked on our site plan. The first I heard of it or we heard of it was when they came to a meeting to say this is what we're going to build.
But that's not how we operate in West Haven. That's not how we operate in the whole redevelopment of our public housing. And we suggested to them that what they should have done was have a meeting with the whole tenth and page neighborhood
which include West Haven to talk about the design and to show us and to incorporate what we were doing in their plans. So I just wanted to straighten that out a little bit. Okay, just facts. I do want to say that um
this is very disrespectful the way this went down. I know you're not you don't you're not supposed to consider this cuz your staff already told you that. But our residents work very very hard to
come up with a design of what their neighborhood could look like. And once we presented it to just come to a meeting and say this is what we going to put up and it's a big building to block us in is very very
disrespectful. I'm hoping that tonight that you all can ask do some setbacks with what they're doing. We talk about the memory wall. That's the idea you all took and went back and look at what we went to Chicago
to look at. But if you look at the side of the building, it's going to block our memory wall. It's just going to be a wall that's blocking the history of vinegar here, the v the history of what we're trying to present. And again,
you have the jewelry brown memory wall bridge right there, which is very, very historic. What I'm pleading to you all is to please think about West Haven, how West Haven was built, how it was dug
out, how we was sitting in the bottom. And if you can look at our plans, they showed you some of our um site plans. There is a renderance of where we can show where we're looking up, but we're not looking at a building. We're looking
into a community that we would like to get connected to. There's a lot more we would like to say, but I'm just going to pause there. If any of you want to talk to me oneonone, talk to me oneonone. But please don't
ever use my name unless I ask you to use it in not telling the truth. >> Thank you, Miss Johnson. Um, Evvana Key. >> Hi, I'm I'm Evan Key. I'm resident of
West Haven. I've been in West Haven for eight years and this I have a question. >> You're welcome to ask a question. >> Y'all can say how y'all want to say it. I don't care. >> You can ask a question. >> Okay. Can you show more images and ranges of lighting along the memory
walk? Because what I want to say is it's not going to be the way that I want to see it, but I'm not going to do it like that. The way that y'all show the image of the walkway, the
memory walk to Main Street is very low. Very little. >> Mhm. >> Bad enough. We have the standards right there. I'm I'm on the bottom. Right on the top.
For me, G. I have kids. I don't want my kid to be going up to Main Street. Y'all got steps. I understand y'all got steps on this side, steps on this side, but y'all got a very narrow spot. And then where the the train thing is,
can y'all just show more space? >> Put more space if y'all going to put this building up. That's all I'm asking. >> Okay. Thank you. >> All right. So, I think just uh just to
summarize, you were asking for more lighting along the memory walk and more space, especially on the memory walk side. Okay. Um Betsy Rodkar Redgar, excuse me. Thank you.
Hello. Um, I'm Betsy Redker. I'm also on the planning commission and I have to say some of my issue with this whole thing is really the city's fault. Um, but that site should have been um,
looked at more sensitively. Um, so since we're here and it's by right, some things I think that could be, um, looked at, um, I think you'll hear a lot about how West Haven feels and literally
is often walled off. Um, we heard from people on West Haven day talking about how the um, chainlink fence used to get locked to West Main Street at 900 p.m. every night. So, I feel like there's just there's a lot of um
want and uh to to get some connection back up to that street. So, that's what the site plan does. Um it connects people to bus stops. Uh right now there's no accessible way to get up there. Um you have to walk all the way
to 10th Street and around. Um the basketball court is up there. So, I think one of the concerns is how that's going to fit in with this large student housing project. Um, so some of the things I was looking down through the
guidelines that you all look for, one of them was um how the building should relate to the adjoining neighbors. And relate is kind of a subjective term. So, you know, not a lot of meat
there. Um I did think a couple things reinforce the human scale. I think along the prominade that edge um is sort of seen as a side street but in this case I think it should be seen as a public walkway just
as important as Main Street. Um if as you're driving as some of the images showed coming over the bridge looking at the building, you know, that is sort of the entrance to this cavern of student housing. Um so that edge having the
parking garage along the walkway um does lose some of the liveless that was alluded to along West Main Street. Um the transparency I would say that doesn't really have transparency along that edge because we're just looking at
cars. Um so I think that whole edge is problematic on the street street level. Um there's one exit door I believe fire exit door but otherwise it's cars. Um, another thing would be to um on the back
elevation to start showing I think so another person mentioned this the HVAC equipment, the delivery service, the garage doors and how those trees might um be able to um screen some of that. I
don't think we've really seen what it looks like from that back when you once you come up the stair or the ramp from West Haven, what that back front looks like. Um, we mentioned the headlights potentially kind of spining into the
apartments from that side. Um, I think one of the other things, sorry, I had to write this down so I don't go offkilter. Um, oh, in working with um the resident planners over a few years,
um, a couple things have come up. Um, and I've had some UVA classes who have worked with me, someone here who did a thesis on, uh, this kind of barrier of West Main and and West Haven. Um, one of the um,
oh, one of the things I think that we don't see in as architects or urban planners is some of the way spaces are used. And what I thought was very striking was um, the way that private security influences neighbors. So the
idea is that this prominade would be I assume supervised by the private security protecting the students and that's where I think there's got to be more space there. Um maybe the city I
don't I don't know how we can kind of remedy this to make it a more public piece of infrastructure rather than something that's owned by um and supervised by um the development company. Um we heard uh from some of the
kids that the security at the standard has been really difficult for them when they're just trying to cross through and you know I mean young kids that are just trying to sort of go around the neighborhood. So I think besides the history, the memory, the justice, all of
these huge issues um that edge needs a lot more work. Um, and any step backs we can get in terms of getting more sunlight down the hill would be really helpful.
>> Thank you. >> All right. All right. Uh, Brandon Collins. Good evening, everybody. Uh, my name is Brandon Collins. I've lived in Charlottesville my entire life. Have uh children here also living their entire lives. Um, I've had uh the great honor
to work with West Haven residents for the past three three years on uh developing their uh master plan and moving forward with a buildable and livable uh new community um with five
main goals. Um and those goals uh are have been really hard to meet. And I think the reason why we bring up their plan is because it does relate to this building that you're talking about today. And I do think that you all uh if
you understand our plan will see the same things we're seeing. And I think you will find the same issues. And I think you will uh find that uh your design guidelines allow you to comment on these issues that that we've seen. So, uh, two of the biggest goals we've
had is how do we increase density for affordable housing, but still have a neighborhood that's not crowded, that's not too tall, uh, and and how do we uh how do we access West Main Street uh, in
a meaningful way because that has been blocked off and the neighborhood has been secluded u from sight uh, and just from access um, since before 1964. before. Um, so amazingly, our resident
planners who have spent a lot of time on this have come up with something it it's very uncomfortable to increase density, but they have uh come up with some buildings about as tall as they can handle in the neighborhood. And as a result, we're providing more affordable housing. Um, but they've also expanded
their usable open space uh by four and a half times, which is huge, right? And when they look up, uh, when they're looking east, uh, it's not a giant cavern between the apartment buildings they'll have and the town
homes they'll have on the other side. Uh, what this building does is, uh, present 11 stories on top of three or four stories that they're building, uh, for about a 15 or 16 storys
from every point in the bottom of West Haven. Right now, folks who live in West Haven have to deal with this with the standard and it is a psychological burden and it's a symbol of exclusion. Adding something even taller than the standard, no matter how much of a
setback you get, is still going to be there. It's still a giant wall there psychologically blocking the community from the rest of Charlottesville. And I think that's a shame. And that one of our goals is making up for those uh past injustices and we're not going to be able to do
that if we continue to seclude the neighborhood. So, how can you address it? Maybe step backs, you know, if they're at a threetory and you've got a tree line and have a real deep setback and it moves up and then maybe a second
step back that gets them all the way up on Main Street. Uh that will help. the footprint needs to be smaller for that building. Uh the walkway to West Main, uh it's not enough space.
They need to put in an access road there. It's not enough space. It's not a safe space with the amount of space they've given there. Not just unsafe because of traffic, but because of how people gather and uh and seclusion, right? So on one side of that path you're going
to have the dip down to the railroad tracks and on the other you're going to have 11story wall uh with no buffer, no ground floor space and no step back. So should really consider step backs there as well to
keep that you got like one side super alley and the other side dropping off the cliff and a little narrow thing to honor your history and that that's just not fair. So, um I'm sure we'll have other comments, but thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Collins. Also, thank you
for sending us your email, um I guess earlier this week or last. Um appreciated that. It definitely summarized uh all the hard work you and the resident planners have put into that. So, thank you. Um all righty. Uh,
Janet Nordensson. My name is Janet Normanson. I've been at West Haven for 31 years. This building is a big distraction to what the residents want. It blocks everything and I just don't like it and I think it's
ugly to tell you the truth. I've been there a long time and what they have planned to put there without this building looks really nice with it. No. And I hope you all consider it. Thank you. And the safety issue is another one for everyone around it.
>> Thank you. >> Thank you. Uh Wendy Goro Goro Golo, sorry. Go ahead. >> Hello, my name is Wendy and I'm a community organizer at the Public Housing Association of Residents. As
you've already heard from many West Haven residents this evening, West Haven residents and Tenth and Page neighbors are greatly concerned about the ginormous height of this building and how it would utterly tower over West Haven, making residents feel more crowded in, claustrophobic, and
entrapped. I know I'm only supposed to comment on architecture today, but there are several historians on this board, and like Miss Joyce said, you really can't talk about architecture or height without understanding the history of West Haven. This is an 11story building which is already a gigantic building
from ground level. But to talk about height, you have to acknowledge the fact that West Haven was purposefully dug into the ground 16 ft when it was constructed in 1964 to house the displaced residents of Vinegar Hill, a thriving vibrant black community
demolished and raised by the city of Charlottesville. So when we're talking about an 11story building, this is an 11story plus building to residents of West Haven because West Haven already sits at the base of a hill. The thing about architecture is you can't divorce it from the legacies of enslavement, Jim
Crow, urban renewal, and gentrification. Further, it has long been a priority for West Haven residents to have an accessible walking path from West Haven to West Main Street once West Haven redevelopment is complete. This building would sit right on top of the West Haven residents proposed walkway and obstruct
their accessibility and visibility. Things that might help include adding several stepbacks on the West Haven side to increase height gradually, increase the setbacks even more than the develop than the developer voluntary proposal of 60 to 75 ft, and improve the safety on
the pedestrian walkway by adding an access road for the West Haven residents memory walkway. Thank you. >> Thank you. Uh Sophia Morero. >> Good evening all. Um my name is Sophia Morero and I'm a community organizer with the public housing association of
residents. you as you've heard from West Haven residents as well as FAR representatives, um there are a lot of concerns concerning this building. Um and I'm here to just further demand that
consideration is taken into place about West Haven residents and that more stepbacks starting at the second floor are increased. Uh more stepbacks at starting at the second floor are added. Um increasing the setbacks, improving
pedestrian safety by adding space to separate the road from the memory walk and removing the massive wall along the West Haven walking path to West Main and the current plans to allow for more connection. Thank you. >> Thank you. All right, so that's everybody we had on
our list, but I would again welcome anyone else. I'm sorry. Let me check online really quick. Is there anyone online? >> Nobody has their hand raised. >> Okay. Um, anyone else here, please step forward um to the podium and just state
your name and address and then you'll have three minutes. >> Good evening everyone. >> My name is James Bryant and I live on 10th Street Northwest. I'm also the vice president of the 10th and Page Street
Neighborhood Association. I came this evening because I was compelled to come um because I have a deep connection and affection for the residents of Hardy Drive.
I once lived on Hardy Drive from 1965 until 1975. And when I first heard about this project, this building being placed on West Main Street, I was astonished and dismayed
that the residents here again has to endure this tall building feeling boxed in. I'm hoping that this review board of architectural review board will take into
consideration that the residents based on the feedback that they received at the community meeting at the Heritage Center is not in favor of this project. I cannot imagine waking up every morning
looking at this tall building hovering over Hardy Drive. I took a stroll over there yesterday and I stood in the middle of Hardy Drive. I looked to my left and I looked to my right and I looked
up. And I was probably more depressed after having taken that stroll because the residents of Hardy Drive haven't even had an opportunity to rebuild
that building. Hardy Drive has not had a makeover since 1964. I don't know if any of you all have recently taken a stroll over there, but it's time for them to have a makeover. and to have a makeover and to look up at
this building hovering over them is not what the residents want to to see or have in the neighborhood feeling blocked in. And also the 10th and Page Street residents feel the same way. And to mention one last thing, um the 10th and
Page Street doesn't yet have a small area plan, but neighbors have constant consistently said we want gradual, not abrupt building height increases. So as you all are looking and dissecting this
project, I hope you will take that into consideration. the height, the way it looks, and the residents of Hardy Drive and the Tenth and Pain Street neighborhood. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Sure, Mr. Payne.
>> Thank you. Um, as you know, I like to uh be a little costic in my comments sometimes, but I do always stick to the facts. I'm going to stick to the facts tonight. >> Introduce yourself please. >> I'm Michael Payne, city councelor. Sorry. >> Thank you. >> I echo what everyone else has said, but
I want to talk which I know is beyond your purview at B. And why am I doing that? Because this is the only body at which the residents of West Haven and Tenth and Page have any opportunity to make their voice heard or have any opportunity to have democratic control
over what's built in an area that they've spent years designing. This will not go to planning commissioner city council. And there's a reason for that. It's because the zoning on this parcel is CX8. It allows 11 stories by right with unlimited density. There's a reason
it's that designation. When we developed the zoning, there was a strong push to maintain special use permits around Tenth and Page, Feithville, Rose Hill, Kindlewood, West Haven, and other public housing sites. Not to say that increased
density or height couldn't get built, but to give the residents a voice and have the ability for them to have what's built match the designs they've spent years building. That decision was rolled back by planners who thought they knew better. I think one of the exact words
in one of the meetings was, "This area of West Maine is an area where large student apartments want to go." So, that change was rolled back. Here we are. We all know the history of urban renewal. There's a lot of lessons to take from it. One of the lessons I take is the
importance of humility in city decision makers and the danger of arrogance for decision makers who will never have to live with the consequences of the decisions they've made. There's a great documentary done a few years ago about West Main Street. It is a documentary
about the 80s and 90s in West Main Street and if anyone hasn't watched it, I'd encourage you to. Um, it's a fascinating look at the history of West Maine when it was an intersection of historic black neighborhoods, working-class white residents, and UVA students. And it made me think of what
could of alternative futures have been because now it is primarily a corridor of, by, and for UVA students. What if the city had been as intentional about creating a black business district as we were in creating the downtown mall? What if we thought beyond eitheror
decision-making and beyond the free market, delivering what is going to create historic justice? Now, here we are and are we really confident that we're not
able to repeat the mistakes of urban renewal? Is this time different? Is this time the decision makers who didn't grow up in West Haven, don't live in West Haven, don't socialize in West Haven, do they know better this time?
If on reflection anyone listening feels that they are not confident that this time we do know better, we need to return special use permits and discretionary decisions into more areas of the zoning, especially areas where we're allowing seven and 10 stories by
right. It doesn't block change in density. Our largest departments were approved under the old zoning with special use permits, but it allows for community benefits agreements addressing hyper localal concerns and addressing the actual history of the
city. So please, if anyone in the audience is concerned about this, you need to email city council to change the zoning to reintroduce more special use permits. You need to come to our meetings and let us hear that. You need to go to planning commission meetings and let us hear that because unless that
changes, this is going to be the future throughout Fville, 10th and Paige and Rose Hill and there will be nothing you can do about it. >> Y >> very good. Thank you, Mr. Payne. Uh yes. >> Hi. Hello. Uh good evening. My name is
Anthony Malabat. It's um M as in Mike. A L A B as in Bravo. A D is in Delta. Um I live at 4000 Citywalk Way, apartment 246, uh here in town. Uh while I was here listening to the the first public comment period, there was uh something
that struck me, the idea of being caged in, being blocked from the outside world. And I looked into it to to look at the numbers. And what I found was concerning. And I understand the board only deals with exterior um things with
with buildings, but I feel like this is pertinent to the exterior and also to the West Haven community. Um the elevation of the front of the parcel in question is 55 ft above sea level. Uh I looked on the the city of GIS um website
to get these all these figures. West Haven the closest building in West Haven sits at 476 ft. uh that's dis difference of about 30 feet assuming 10 feet per story 11 story building is 110 feet that's 140 feet difference in total now
assuming um there's 90 ft uh in between the building and West Haven that means that somebody standing on the ground in West Haven would be looking at the top of this new building would be looking up at a 57 degree angle now if you extend
that to the 100 foot distance from uh the presentation the 75 foot distance between buildings and a 25 foot setback you only lower that angle to 54 and a half degrees and this in lies the problem uh here in Charlottesville we sit almost exactly on the 38th parallel
north meaning that the sun at equinox is reaches a max of 52 degrees above uh the horizon and while there the sun does get higher in the summertime what this building would mean is that there would be part
parts of West Haven that would be in complete shadow for more than half the year which uh I think quite frankly is unacceptable. Um and I would urge the board to listen to the concerns of the West Haven residents and um you know
take their uh concerns into account in denying this uh this building. Well, >> thanks. >> Thank you. Sure. Go ahead. My name is Earl Hicks. I live at 808
Hardy Drive, apartment 8. I'm a resident of West Haven. Also a native of Charlottville, Virginia. Well, I come here today to say to say this, I don't approve of this building.
I don't approve of the design of this building. We in our backyard. Also, I want to say is you look at generations that have lived in Hardy Drive. I stand on my porch every day and I look
up down Hardy Drive and I see kids playing in the street. I see kids playing, little babies running up down the sidewalks. But then I go in my backyard that I look up and then
imagine a a a 11story building standing in in our backyard depriving us of not only sunshine but locking us in. I know some of y'all heard that about
urban renewal. Do we want to go back to that again? Do we want to relive that? I know I don't. I'm 52 years old. And I have family that lived in hard drive from the eight from the 70s 80s on
up. And I'm the next generation. So I'm speaking for the next generation. So, I'm just saying I'm just saying I had to say something. I just couldn't let this time pass without saying something because I'm for my residents.
I'm from my West Haven community and I got that back all the way here. Thank you. Thank you. >> All right. Yes, ma'am. Hi, my name's Emily Axelbomb and I live on Montichello Road. Um, as you've heard, I agree with so many that have
spoke tonight about the massiveness of out of the building. Not only 11 ft 11 stories tall, but 120 feet long, I think was what was cited. Um, so not only is it too massive, the height is out of scale with all the surrounding buildings. It's even out of scale with
the incred like the standard. Um, and not to focus on those things, but I'll say like in terms of the context for each proposal tonight, I've heard all of you up here talk about your feelings about a historic door, a
rooftop patio, a porch, um, these small details. And then I've heard the community reacting to a very large structure, a very large building. And I hope you're listening really closely to how those individuals that are living
closest are feeling about this project um and taking their feelings at the center of your decision-m and though I understand and heard at the start that you all don't have all the power. Um,
but I but you do have some as individuals in this community and as the volunteers that you are on this board. And so I'm just encouraging you to use the power that you do have, even if it's a small piece of a larger puzzle of ways
that we can ask for changes that that the community wants to see. So thank you. >> Thank you. Sure. Excuse me. Well, I just have to get up and say
something. I live on 1116 Page Street. Took me 30 years to buy my home. I used to come over here. I'm from Stanton. >> Can you introduce yourself, please? >> Oh, I'm sorry. >> That's right. >> Most everybody know me. I
>> imagine. So, >> look, I'm thinking I'm a city council, I guess, cuz everybody know. Uh, my name is Gloria Beard. >> Good to meet you. >> Probably heard of me. You might not know me. So anyway, I live on 1116 Page
Street. Been there 30 years. I finally lived and retired and own my home. I used to come over here as a little girl. Well, not a little girl. I was a teenager to visit friends in Hardy Drive. And here it is 2024.
They have never given these people air conditioning. That is horrible. Cement walls. Everybody's building up, fixing up, doing whatever. Why haven't these people been raised up? What's going on now?
They want to build a big tall building. My tax is going to go up, y'all. I work too darn hard to keep take my little income tax. I mean, my little social security check to pay more taxes for other people cuz I don't know how long I
got left on this earth. So y'all consider these people in Hardy Drive and us on Tint Page. Don't I mean come on people. Y'all can find another spot to build this dog off. Let them start building. Don't have to be right there.
And then you know cuz I I'm I'm a people person. I care. It can't be all about money all the time. Think about everybody. All the people, not just some of the people. Thank you.
Yep. I think everybody's going to get to go. Uh, hi. My name is Jesse Gam. I live on 810 Page Street. Um, I think everybody's already had a lot of beautiful comments. Uh, I don't think I need to add much, but I just hope that you support the
residents of Hardy Drive and um, do the right thing. Thank you. >> Thank you. Good evening. My name is Diana Bryant. Um, I'm a Charlottesville resident. I live in the north downtown neighborhood. Um, if everyone who's able-bodied could
stand and support the West Haven residents, I think that would be great. It's always great to have a visual of the support in the room. >> Yep. >> Thank you. Um, I want to make it clear that there are folks in this room who have spoken to you this evening who have
been advocating for um, the West Haven community for decades. In fact, before I was even born. Miss Joy Johnson is an example of that. Miss Vzina Howard, my grandmother, is an example. Mr. James Bryant, they're all examples of people, Miss Gloria Beard, who have been advocating for this neighborhood since
before I was born. So, being that I am only 24, I want to be clear. This is an intergenerational fight. This is something that people who are my age and younger are paying attention to. And as someone who's a homeowner at a young age, I am thinking about how I want to
continue to invest in this community and invest in Charlottesville, um, the greater metropolitan area, and if I want to stay here, right? And so, I think it's important to think about what the trajectory of that future looks like. Counselor Payne was correct. This is the only public on there type of forum where
people are able to come bring their concerns. So, I hope that they're being taken seriously. Additionally, we appreciate your time. Thank you for not cutting anyone off who has gone off of the design comment um parameter because it is important to make sure that everyone feels like they have a voice and they have the opportunity to make
their voice heard. I'll finish by saying that in 1975 there was a riot and as someone already noted um there are historians who are on your body and there are historians who are in the room as well and it's important to remember that in 1975 there
were young people who were walking from West Haven April of 1975 who were going to the Safeway and they were being harassed by police and so when we think about the this idea of design and architecture and how that actually can either um stand in the way of community or it can create open dialogue and open
opportunities for community to be built. I do think that that 1975 riot is a prime example of what neighbors are fearing. It's a it's an incident that was documented in the newspaper. You can go back into I think it's the Virginia Chronicle to find that article. I'd be happy to send it to you. Um, but it's
discussed how the young people from West Haven felt very unwelcome in kind of that like corridor, that space between West Haven and Main Street and the neighboring um, neighborhoods there. And I think that it's just really important to think about how space will be um navigated um
and how people will exist in space who are from West Haven or from Tint and Page and what it means or what it looks like when students, those who have wealth, access and privilege are put into a neighborhood where there are folks who do not have as much wealth, access, and privilege. And kind of that
um that confrontation within space and how that happens. And someone mentioned earlier about the security, the private security that would be there to take care of or make sure that the students are safe. But I just want to close by saying that students are also looking for affordable housing. And I think that's the part that no one's saying out
loud. Students at UVA are not just willingly paying $2,000 or $1,800 for rent if they have cheaper options, which pushes them into low-income neighborhoods. Keep that in mind, please. Everyone wants to use their dollar and stretch it as much as they can, even the most wealthy people. And
so as a result, we have people being displaced. So the anger that you're hearing, the passion that you're hearing, the emotion that you're hearing, it's real problems. It's real people of real problems who are being displaced and they fear that the cycles will repeat. Thank you. >> Thank you.
>> All right. Uh my name is Eugene Young. I am a resident of Charlottesville and in the unique position of being a the landscape architecture consultant for both projects, West Haven and sort of a consultant for LB Collective
in that they have their own landscape architects. We are have been asked to work on the prominade or the connection from West Haven to Main Street. Um, and I will say that we we joined this project to be an advocate for West
Haven. Um, we really haven't been had the position to be an advocate because we were basically given the path on the edges of the building and told to and I I risk risk saying this, we're probably going to lose our job with LB Collective because um, just put the
green lipstick on the pig, so to speak. So we haven't been able to work on a prominado connection. We're just given a space to plant. Um >> so I think we spent three one and a half
years Betsy and her studio spent three years working with the community to design a neighborhood, a real neighborhood. And if you guys could step back a minute and if you designed a neighborhood and someone built a couple block long 140 foot building right over
it and you were in shadow half the year, I think you would think differently about it. Um, and lastly, this is from the last meeting that we attended. I thought was interesting the security issue. I don't know if it's Zion or somebody
said that security for white students or white people usually means violence for black, brown, and low-income people. So, that's something to consider as well. So, if there is a prominade hopefully that honors memory and history, it would
have some width and breadth to it. And as Betsy said, maybe it becomes a city security >> or police or safe prominade for everyone. All right.
Anyone else? All right. I want to thank everybody. That was really, really awesome and very powerful. And I think a lot of that's at least for me personally resonated with uh with y'all's comments and this project. And um at least for my sake,
you've been heard. So, thank you very much. Um, >> do we want to acknowledge the letters that >> we did get a number of letters uh submitted by email? >> I was going to say 24 speakers. We've had entire years. I don't know if we had
24 people come and talk to us. So, it is refreshing. I I I'm grateful for this. Um, there were um I know Mr. Collins sent the letter and that was referred to uh and Brandon, you everything I mean everything was covered in your
statement. Um then there was the um there was a note from um Bridget Moss. Um and then I had a note from Rosemary Gould. So those were the three that I had. Did you
and if you wish to read them into the record, you certainly >> if they end up in our minutes >> unless I mean if you wish to read them I can. You can. I'm just saying could they also just end up in our minutes? >> I can add them to the minutes. Yes. >> And um
>> do you want to quickly summarize them? essentially expressing similar comments to what we've heard and and that um the impact of the design on um the West Ham community and and sort of the
referencing the history uh of of of the folks in that neighborhood and um uh really seems to be asking by and large for the BA to to
um I don't want to put words in, but yeah, for the B to to to recognize what their interests are and their concerns are. So, very similar to what we've we've heard. Um, I would also, if I could, before you
start your discussion, um, I'll just say it's staff, if if you don't mind, Board of Architectural Review is responding to a zoning ordinance adopted by city council. Um and in that
ordinance, council allowed the bar two tools relative to height, masking, and scale. Um, I won't cite the whole chapter of the code here, but they told you all
that, um, you can adopt conditions that may require a reduction in height or massing consistent with the city's design guidelines and subject to the following limitations. So, this is as far as council said you could go.
Um they of course had um we had you familiar there with the downtown district um there was a limitation of what you could do. Um and then they say in all other districts so that would be the West Main ADC district the B may
reduce the allowed height by no more than two stories and the BAR may require upper story stepbacks of up to 25 ft. And I think everybody's done a good job of recognizing a setback is the distance
from the street. That step back is that distance they can push back an upper floor. So that's what council has allowed you all. Um I can't answer the question of when they say allowed height, a reduction of height, I know
more than two stories, how that is affected by something having a bonus height provision. I I don't know the answer to that and I need to get an answer on that. But um so there are I I'll just say it plainly. I'm I'm
concerned that some of the voices tonight, and I very much appreciate what they're saying, but you all are operating within a box that is the zoning ordinance that you did not adopt and you do not have the perview to
change. So, um I just want to make sure I'm clear about that when we have the conversation going forward with the applicant that um you can go. so far but you can't you can't go any further than council
has given you permission to go. >> So for the stepbacks is that >> can you can you explain that a little further? So my understanding of this when it was adopted is that you can you could have 25 stories and each one
steps back a foot or but cumulatively step backs of those upper stories 25 ft is the max >> from from where exactly >> very good question and that's not been that was not clarified. These are some
of the conflicts that we still need to evaluate and understand. >> Um, who knows if we'll have an ordinance by the end of the week. So, um, >> I have a question. >> Another story. Yes. Right. >> About this uh issue, but the um so the
bonus heights are for the bonus stories are for affordable units. Is that right? So the building because it has more than 10 units would have to either provide um 10% of those units would have to be affordable at a certain rate um and in
this case because it's student housing they would they their only choice is to pay into a fund. The bonus height is for >> more affordable or more money >> right? >> So it's like a deeper affordability or more money goes into that >> that payment. >> And because this is student housing it's
not allowed to h we're not allowed to have affordable units. Is that correct? I yeah, I don't think they could figure out a way to actually do affordable student housing. Um, so it's they're required to pay into a fund for that >> because they rent out based on the bedroom versus the unit.
>> So I can say if I and I'm old enough I'm willing to say this. This is the hard part out loud. If you all reduce the height, you will likely be castigated for reducing units um or reducing the amount of
funds. So that that I don't know, we're in a in a difficult situation and I don't know how to advise, but I think that maybe I'm saying is you have some very good questions to ask of staff and
um I've been asking some of them, but I think it'd be helpful for the bar to these are questions that you have. Um, but I I'm I'm just very concerned. We had 184t tall building a few blocks
from here and you all were roundly criticized for not supporting it because it was proposed to have affordable housing in it. And I understand absolutely what the folks are asking you
to do tonight. Um, and I don't I don't know how to advise you to, but I think some of this has to generate some questions from you >> to me that I take back uh to NDS and and and and get some
clarification on because um where does that 25 foot step back start? Very good question. Where does the um the height how does that height uh variation what is the BA allowed to do
when we're dealing with a house that or a structure that has an affordable housing bonus? So, um we might need to suspend some assumptions here and I think that um uh
we can lean on our guidelines and say our guidelines offer this direction um if it's um and I and work from that, you know, point um and that I know I have to answer some
questions when this does come in as a formal application or or even an additional discussion. So, I hate to be open-ended there, but I just want to anticipate some of the questions and I think some anticipate some of what the folks are concerned that you all are may
or may not do, but my suggestion would be to take this >> from the design guidelines and work from there. And if you've got some questions about uh you know, can something be done or not? And um the last thing I just
wanted to offer is I there's been a lot of conversation about this this memory walk which is very intriguing and I didn't understand the concept until I talked to Eugene out in the hall earlier but um you all can't require
this sounds like something at a higher level where city council may be in need to be involved in acquisition of property but you all can't require a private landowner make their property accessible. that I I
so I just want to >> I I I I don't want to sound like I'm stating the obvious there, but um I think there's a lot going on with that that needs a um that deserves a discussion, but I don't know how you all could you could
certainly talk about width, you could talk about design, you could talk about all kinds of things, but that space still, as long as it remains private property, unless there's something going on that that would add to the conversation. You all can't require um
someone allow access through their land. So, sorry for the lecture there. Um but hopefully that paves a way for a little bit of a discussion. >> Um question on the zoning ordinance is so clearly the I don't know the
allowable we've been talking about 11tory building. Is that the the full height allowable? >> Say that again. >> Is 11 stories the full height allowable? Okay. And or is there a measured height
that is >> 150 some odd feet or something? >> 150 some odd feet. And do we know where >> significantly higher than it would? That that would be like a story and a half times 11. It's a lot. >> Oh, that's even bigger. >> Yeah, the the height the foot height is
very high. And is that measured from Main Street or is that measured from West Haven? >> That was where I was planning. So if the building doesn't mean it should be >> the ground doesn't drop >> because it's not really an 11story building. It looks like it's a 13 14story building.
>> This was some of the discussion that came up on Well, that's where I was going. Where's the property line? >> Yeah. So >> it's measured from the footprint of the building. >> Yeah. >> Same way the building code would measure it. So it's >> footprint at the front or the >> um I think the the feet height is
measured from the average grade plane of the building itself and the stories I believe are measured >> because obviously the impact is going to be much greater on on right >> the north side. >> No doubt about it. >> I mean even if this weren't negatively impacting a vibrant community I think
this building is too tall on Main Street. So, it's really hard to get into the specifics of the architecture of this. We've got such bigger issues here. >> It's a minor thing considering all the things that we are wrong. But the the
whole stepback thing shouldn't just be 25 ft overall. It should be like 25 ft every five stories or two stories or have some trigger where I mean 25 feet doesn't step you back at all especially with this type of building.
Um, I I I just I mean maybe Carl has some insight into what was intended there. It just seems like there should be a measure. You know, you get >> you step back 20 at a certain height. >> That was past the planning commission. >> Yeah. Without the planning commission
council added that. >> Hold on. We can't hear you. >> Can should we just start with comments? Yeah, we I think we have >> Do you want me to >> Sorry. >> Oh, the drawing of the section. >> Sure. Yeah. >> They show the think you could do that.
>> Yeah. >> That through section that front to back from like >> Yeah. If the applicant wants to step up to the podium, we may have questions for you guys. I'm always happy to jump in if >> Go ahead.
>> I'll just also since since we've >> had a lot of discussion and whatnot, I'll just remind everybody we're not voting on this tonight. Just just to be clear, um that's not to say it's not an important discussion because it certainly is. But um there will potentially be another meeting that we
would encourage folks to attend. Go ahead, Carl. >> All right. Um, well, I'm going to get myself in trouble because uh I um I can't stand up or sit here and talk about this without admitting that I voted for this uh zoning. Um I'm on the
planning commission. Um I um you know there we have a housing shortage. So, I'm pretty sure that, you know, Council Payne, um, you might have been quoting me when, you know, I think I probably did say on West Main Street on this half
of West Main Street is where people need to be. This is where we need density. So, that's unfortunately this is um I Yes, I voted for this. Um, I also voted for it with the thought that um the BAR
would have full control uh over our massing and being able to respond to our guidelines. And um in the same reason that um special use permits got taken away because there was the concern that it would interfere with the production
of housing, um the BAR has been limited again because they there was a concern that the BAR would interfere with the production of housing. So, um, that's kind of that's where we're stuck now. Um, I I will say as far as comments for this
building, um, I, you know, I do think we need to very aggressively, uh, impose the use of the the tools that we've been given. So, the 25 ft stepbacks on um at least three sides, north, south, and east. um as
well as um taking the uh top of the building down two stories um for a good portion of the uh north side, the side facing West Haven. So basically creating two step backs um as much as we can u
facing West Haven. Um, you know, you the base of the building on three sides is parking. Um, and that's a really kind of hostile environment for uh, you know, pedestrian use which is along there. Um,
so if you are serious about creating this memory walk, um, the parking, you've got to line that with something else. I don't know what that is, some active use. Otherwise, it is it's it's going to feel dangerous. there's not going to be any eyes on
that. There's not going to be um any, you know, activity. And then at night, you're going to have um you will have plenty of light, which is unfortunate because parking garages are extremely overlit. And um there'll be a lot of light glowing into West Haven, glowing into Tinton Page. So, you guys need to
find some way to deal with these this open parking garage as it um you know, cast all that light and those headlights and security lighting and everything out of the building. That's that would be very unfortunate for the neighbors if there's that much, you know, it's not
it's not nice pedestrian lighting that creates safety for people outside of the garage. It ends up being this glare bomb for people outside looking into the garage. Um so find some way to deal with that. Um the um I I do think it's really
unfortunate. I don't want to point fingers anywhere, but the the master plan creating the for West Haven creating this walkway up to West Main Street. I don't know why that didn't make it to city planning. I don't know why it didn't become part of something. Um it's
Yeah, it's um I I I really hope you guys can try to make that walkway actually happen. Um I wish that the city had been proactive and um I don't remember this being part of any planning commission discussions. Um, we, you know, it would
have been fantastic if we could have put a road through there, but I guess that would have made made us buy the property from the property owner. And I don't know that she's she wasn't that fun to work with the first time she came to the bar. I don't know what she's like now. Um, but that was, uh, anyways, um,
that's unfortunate. So, uh, the northeast corner of the building, the corner that, uh, you guys are trying to make a statement, like a tower piece, um, as you're coming down West Main Street, that is incredibly heavy and it's incredibly tall and it's kind of banal. So, it's I'm not sure what you're
achieving there, but it's not an entry feature. It's not a gateway feature to the university. It's just this big monolith. Um, and you've got some floor uh ceiling windows there that we have a similar situation on the um the lark where there's a couple floor to ceiling
windows marking corners and you end up getting beds pushed against those windows and crumpled up Venetian blinds and it's it's a mess. So, just keep that in mind as you're designing that. um >> the um the facades in general um you
know you I I see you guys are trying to break them down but they're still pretty plain and massive and that there's all these itty bitty little windows used in a really you know repetitive pattern and the it doesn't you need to find a way to
break that down. So the you do need the small windows for scale for human scale but is there a way to group them? is our way to make them make it so it's not these big large kind of monotonous textured blocks. Um the sides facing West Haven and facing um facing the east
which um will be very visible coming down West Main Street because the um this portion of West Main that is not um that is east of the bridge will always stay lowrise or lower rise. So this facade is going to be very visible. um
all the way down West Main Street and it's it's pretty boring, pretty ugly. Um I don't know what else you can do to it. Um hopefully when you add those 25 foot stepbacks, it'll help break up the massing more. Um I don't know what materials you guys are thinking. Um I
saw the brick. Brick's great. I see a lot of white and I'm thinking that's probably white fiber cement. Um, every example of fiber cement we have in this town, you get about 5 or 10 years down the road and it is covered in mildew and it's gross. So, you're going to have a lot of white fiber cement that ends up
being covered in algae and mildew. Um, and then you have to deal with the joints. So, I'd really like you to consider what material that is so this building doesn't, you know, age incredibly quickly as it looms over West Haven and looms over the rest of the city. Um
the um uh some random points the the streetscape uh you've got a very small image of that but the trees need to be on the street side and not the building side. We've screwed up our streetscape royally screwed it up on this block and it's time to fix it and you've got a 250
foot long or however long stretch of building that you can fix it. So, um, follow our streetscape standards and put the trees where they belong. Um, and again with trees, I appreciate the fact that you are putting trees on the north side. I think you need to keep that. So,
don't don't lose that somehow. Um, because that will also help a little bit with some separation of this building from West Haven. Um, that's my ramble. Uh, I'll stop. >> Pretty good.
I I'll go. Um um I'm I'm I think it's unfortunate. I think there's a missed opportunity here um to engage more directly with the West Haven community in the the specifically
the walk that that seems very exciting and everyone's imagination and on the plan. I I believe I I would have liked to see an incorporation of the West Haven plan, a little bit more a little bit more analysis of what they were
envisioning and wanting um in their um connection to Main Street in this in this project. And I know we can't require you to seed land. Um, but I think it is uh architecturally and from an urban perspective a really amazing
opportunity to form a kind of public partnership I think with a a community and and the West Main Street community also. So, I think uh I I I would encourage you to go back and look a little bit more deeply at that
connection and how we can how you can um make it a little bit more meaningful because right now it feels like a back alley. It feels like an access road to the cell tower. Um it doesn't feel it's not a celebration of anything. It's sort of a to shove you out of the way. Um
because um that's sort of what it is right now. So, um, >> yeah, >> I'll start there. >> Would you mind pulling up to plan of the memorial walk? I know there's a sketch in the deck.
>> I actually ran out of power. Can I plug in there, Kate? >> Mhm. >> Uh, just the outlet. I can ramp it back up and share my screen. It may take a second. I'm sorry. H. Oh, sorry.
could take a break. >> Well, he not a bad idea. >> Yeah, that was >> we might lose some people, but I mean I still feel like >> people kind of just need a break. >> I don't know. It's up to you.
>> I don't have a five minute break. I was going to do it after this. >> Okay. >> For the next application. >> All right. Jenny housing. So they don't do >> Yeah. Sorry about that. Housing fundrais.
>> Um I just thought would you mind talking a little bit about the concept here? Maybe this was Eugene who has been working on this plan. Um I >> think you stepped. I think I'm really curious about how you're going about connecting the historic bridge with this
community. Um, and as Kate mentioned, I feel there's a real opportunity there to kind of thread a almost like a linear park or a vibrant streetscape. Um, and I just thought just hearing from you would
be helpful. >> Yeah, absolutely. Thank you for the question. Um, so I think if I were to kind of back out just to clarify something in general, um, if we look at the plan here, um, and zoom in, uh, the statement that we were kind of putting
green lipstick on a plan and and told to work somewhere is a bit mischaracterized just because when you look at the plan, it was we were quite literally taking the backgrounds and finding a way to connect that to Main Street. Um, so I just wanted to clarify that. Um, from
the east property line, there's 20 to 25 ft 20 to 25 ft of a setback in order to allow this access. The renderings that we're showing at this point are highly conceptual. They're just spatially in our first meeting with West Haven, we
asked for more renderings to be able to depict the space. I showed it in plain which were difficult to read. So they are highly um you know conceptual um in terms of the concept of of the space um really making that a celebrated
public entry. We're thinking about it as an intersection an opportunity to connect through the property. Um so looking at the pedestrian prominade and main street as a key intersection. Um that's why we were uh we had a first
attempt at the south uh east corner of the building and architecture in order to kind of call attention to it and celebrate it. And um really we were looking at kind of the entry point to that pedestrian prominade being kind of looking at our
context, right? looking at uh the existing memorial bridge, you know, taking note of what previous planners and designers had had had done and trying to see if there is an opportunity here to make that connection. And so that was kind of conceptually what we
were what we were thinking. We heard a lot of um talk about safety concern and so having adequate lighting in the space um is something that we were you know trying to do. um in the code that it talks about uh active use active and a
certain depth and so we're achieving that along Main Street and we're trying to uh incorporate more of a depth as we turn the corner on the pedestrian prominade uh with the cafe that we're uh planning. Um so a lot of transparency
something that we'll be building out and uh you know uh from day one just really trying to wrap that around as you can tell from this diagram uh you have two column bays stretching back um of active uses. Um so really just trying to make
that an active corner uh and and put outdoor seating there make it an uh just kind of an amenity for for for everybody. So um you know in in terms of uh space we were thinking about plantwalk. We're thinking about you know
moments for um you know adequate kind of tree coverage um opportunities for uh pieces of memorial art um things of that nature. Um and and just going back to the comment about uh engagement the
opportunity to have a partnership here. Um I I do want to highlight what we kind of went back to um in in the schedule and I I I don't mean to belabor the point and uh you know we came to the city we were told um you know to to make an outreach to to the um to certain
individuals and given contacts um and so we made that outreach. We've been trying to to have these meetings trying to be productive and this is just a step in the process. Um we are I'm fully aware that there is a bi-weekly meeting. um we're we're happy, you know, to to join
that and engage and and to continue that um you know, get feedback about this space. How do we how do we make it um you know, something that everybody is proud of? How do how do we fulfill kind of the original intent of that connection? Um that that's something that we're that we're open to, right? Um, I think
something that was kind of misrepresented in one of the initial renderings when we were reviewing the package from West Haven's plans was this view up the stairs. And it the view was up uh and at the top of the stairs there was nothing. And I think that was did a
disservice to the actual representation of what would of of the future development because um I think any you know uh planner, any design professional would be able to kind of go into the the zoning ordinance, understand the goals of the city along West Main Street and
understand that um you know that there would be development on this uh parking lot. And so I think there right now and and it uh the way that it is depicted on the plan is that you know you come up these stairs and you walk around the building. Um there may there very well
may be an opportunity to kind of reorient um that that staircase if if we're early enough in the process on the West Haven development to um just continue a straight corridor. Um so you're not walking around a building and you're not tying into a historic
rightway. um you're tying into an you know an actual setback that is you know contiguous. Um so there's there's a bunch of ideas floating around. We haven't necessarily have had the opportunity to really had have a productive kind of design engagement. Um
but we're very much open to that and I thank you for the u for the suggestion. Sorry for long-winded response. Um, I guess do you as the applicant have any other specific questions for us?
What you were hoping to get out of kind of preliminary uh what is it called again? >> Pre-conference. Pre free pre-application conference. Thank you. I think uh hearing hearing feedback from from each one of you um about what our team can do
uh to come back to to you in the future um and have um advancement in in uh the direction that we need to go to get to um a certificate of appropriateness uh is is our goal and and hearing feedback,
actionable feedback um would be fantastic. >> Um I think I think we would more than likely, as Carl mentioned, we would I assume we would uh require this the minimum amount setbacks and reduction in
height that's allowable by code, but that's all we would require. I think that there's a sense that we I would request more. You know, I think that's the tenor of the room. And so, you know, that's up to you as the applicant,
right? uh and and what your goals are. But I think the general the gist of the evening is make this thing smaller. Uh you know, I did go visit the site today. I went down Hardy Drive today. Um like what you're proposing is twice the
height of the standard and that's that's too big. Um, so I think that, you know, I think you you've been here, you've been listening to all these folks expressing their concerns and I think that, uh, you know, an olive branch would be to adjust
your design to try and try and, uh, you know, be hear them and, um, address their concerns. I guess >> I think that's a really um, wise statement. Um, we've heard
um um from like you said an inspirational um we had an inspirational um hour. Um I would implore that you listen to these people. um they're here um telling you real
things uh about their the place where they live and we are um you know ultimately we're we're we're we've got rules um we've got a guideline that we go by um but we you know basically we're
trying to figure out what's appropriate and um I think you should start um with the very basic idea here that we've been hearing over and over again. Um what
makes this a suitable place for the folks that have been living here um um for the last 50 years? Um we're in a very this is an unfortunate situation in some ways um given the feedback that
you've been given. But but what I would say is that we're in a we are in a fortunate position to allow for people to u be heard and um I don't know if this is anything like what you've experienced at other places that you've
worked. Um no and and we are proud of that. You know, we're proud of that we have a BR um that allows for um people to have their voices heard. Um and while it's interesting um some people have
said that you know it's on this is the one form that people have um to have their uh voices heard. It's a bit ironic given the fact that um we have lately been overturned
um um by city council. We're happy to take this on um and in any way we can. And for me that means um and I'll say it again, listen to these people, respond. You know, we've got rules that we can
enforce. Uh but as James just mentioned, um we um would like to see a response um that is aligned with um what our people are telling you. Um
I'll I'll stop there for right now. >> Thank you. I'm just curious um given the community engagement that was done during the spring of this year, how have you how do you feel that you have
responded to the community's concerns? >> So, uh a few items were kind of um we incorporated a step back in the building. Um so, what we're proposing today does have a step back in it. uh that came out of a concern about uh that
the looming feeling um the access to uh solar gain and so we did do a solar analysis. Uh we overlapped it with the outdoor usable spaces. Uh there is quite a step back in distance um from our building and where those outdoor spaces
are actually located. Um so that that was one actionable step. um engagement with with Water Street and trying to carry on the concept um of the of the pedestrian prominade um is was another
step. Um and so those two were um you know that and and kind of creating more visuals that uh was was requested just to be able to better understand the design uh to better kind of have a
dialogue. Um and so we spend you know time and resources developing those. Um so you know that that that was really um those are a few kind of key takeaways on on what we developed um kind of out of the meetings really. We we got in front
of um the West Haven resident planners in in June. Um it it it did take some time in initial meetings. Um it took some time to develop uh you know design um and uh and then we had the follow-up
meeting uh with the broader community in in the end of uh in July um and and kind of presented the material there and uh from that point we we understood uh you know we need to uh get in front of the B and understand uh what feedback that
that you all have as well. Um and so just trying to you know information gather the the best that we can engage with the community best that we can and follow the process. um in in terms and it's it's probably you know worth mentioning uh you know please understand that every time I you
know we we go onto a site we we read the code we understand kind of this is an as a right project as we all are well well aware of in the B guidelines it does discuss um up to 200% uh is is appropriate of the prevailing heightened
mass and so you know we we do we do a great amount of research before we we propose as a project. Obviously, um there are things outside of of kind of the rule of law um um that that we're hearing, you know, here uh together tonight and uh we're very much taking
that to heart. Um and so uh thank you again, you know, for that feedback, but I did want to kind of mention that that section of the VR guidelines. Yeah, I think I guess I echo everyone else that obviously there are a lot of constraints in what we can require, but
I would definitely encourage more like given the concern especially about connectivity and access and feeling closed in. I feel that the drawings about the streetscape and the pedestrian connectivity feel pretty underdeveloped right now. So, I would be really curious
to see given everybody's concerns that have been articulated today, um, how you're coming back with a better design for that. So, I I think it definitely needs an iteration, right? Some um just to better
kind of communicate the intent. Um, the intent of those images was really to display uh volume of space. Um, and then building off with with precedent imagery. Um again we we're uh we're early in the design process. Um you know
not understanding the the total um you know mass of the building. It's it's difficult uh to commit resources to develop uh design. Um it's a it's a challenging place to be. Um but but that would be the next step um is to kind of develop that that imagery there. um
better uh visualize the space uh to have a productive conversation and to kind of understand feedback better and and work with with the community. >> Um I think also Carl had some good points about materiality. I think Jeff had mentioned to me that like you know
most buildings in the city of Charlottesville over six stories are brick, right? Um especially historic buildings. Uh, and so to some regard, if there's going to have to be a building here, make it pretty. Like if if it's
got to be something that's some somebody's going to have to look at, make it make it pretty. You know, make it an attractive building. Um, use high quality materials. Uh, and and you know, make it something that's going to stand
out and people are going to enjoy looking at. >> Yeah. Yeah. We're we're we're certainly committed to it. Um something that did not make it into the presentation was um the images uh that I just put on screen.
Um and so uh we we engage very directly um you know in inhouse a lot of our development team are are trained architects. Um and so we we work with our architect team, landscape architect team, interior designers, um civil engineers to really bring bring a keen
focus on the public realm, right? developing those brick details, how does the inside kind of mesh with the outside, bringing the the landscape architecture and really working within the bounds of the civil requirements. I mean, it's it's something that we are uh really committed to.
>> I have comments, >> please. >> Um, thank you for being here. I'm sure it wasn't easy. This is not an easy thing to walk into and it and it's not completely your fault. and I'll get to
that in a second. I want to give comments directly on your application because that's why you're before us. I agree with Carl on reducing by two stories. In fact, I wish you could do more and would do more voluntarily um for all the reasons that we've heard. Um
there's no reason why you you you know your owner can't go lower than 11 minus two stories. Um the stepbacks need to be on three sides. The building itself doesn't have any architectural references um to its context in
Charlottesville or in West Maine. Um your presentation, which you just had them up a second ago, shows projects in very large cities like Atlanta, Tempe, Arizona, and Arbor, which are really not like Charlottesville, and they're really not like West Maine. We don't have we're
not a we're not a city. you know, our our f our architectural fabric is really that of a very modest town and that's, you know, West Maine's not that wide. It's not a boulevard. It's not a modern street. It's a very narrow, you know, two-lane street and
it's our main street. Um, the materiality again, like the rest of the building, needs to reference Charlottesville. I know this is a pre-application. And I know you were mostly showing us massing and things like that, but as se several others have said, I don't require it be a rebrick,
but it needs to be something that references that it's being built for here instead of Tempe, Arizona. Um the and the and the programming of the building, I think, needs to reference Charlottesville. And along those lines,
I think that the Memory Walk should have a direct and straight access to Main Street. And that would be I know that cuts right through your your programming, but that's what I think. I think Cedar Cedar Street or ETH and a half as it was called needs to be
reinstated and connecting directly to West Maine. the optics and symbol symbolism of having residents from West Haven have to walk around this project to get to our city central street don't
make sense in 2025 we will never be able to get past Vinegar Hill unless we do it right this time there has to be a straight line from the from the memory walk up to West Maine and without that I can't support this
application and that's not your fault, but that's that's where we are. You're you're applying to do business and to build something in our city. This is where we are. This is the history that we have and this is how we feel about it. The very passionate opposition that
you felt about your application again is not your fault. And I want to say this, you've walked into a maelstrom. Um, you have been told that you applied for something that under our news or new zoning ordinance is by right and you were entitled to presume that you could
build that by right. Um, I think we found out tonight how difficult that might be and I'm not I'm not here to discourage you. Um, but I want to say that it's, you know, it's the fault of our city for having adopted this ordinance because now we're realizing
that it is not what we really wanted and and I believe it was sold to us by outside pressure from professional planners from the beginning and um who told us that it would be our path to get affordable housing in Charlottesville and it just is not that. And and this is
a we're going to see this over and over again. And our board, which has very little purview, you know, is being asked to be the backs stop against something that none of us stood up and stopped. I would say I was on the steering committee, as Carl knows, for the zon
zoning ordinance and I checked out because I didn't think that I could oppose it and I really regret that now. This is my fault. This is Carl's fault also because as he said he voted in favor of it. It was, you know, there are things that were done later, but he
didn't stand up. Michael Payne also voted for this. There were there were four members of city council that voted to adopt this. Lloyd Snoke was the only one who didn't. And we all I might be wrong on that. Please correct me. Five. All five did. And and I'm not saying that Michael Payne didn't have
reservations. Everybody did. But in the end, we adopted this. So, it's all of our fault that we're sitting here and that this that everybody from West Haven and advocates for West Haven have sat here now for, you know, a long long time
for almost for 4 and a half hours to tell us what's wrong with our zoning ordinance. You know, we should have known that. This is our fault. It's my fault. I'm going to say that now. It's really my fault and I'm so sorry because we shouldn't even be at a place where you're looking at something that's 15
stories above your house. And and by the way, the modeling on West and the West Haven, everything that's been done is presuming that the redevelopment is done. You know, it it isn't looking at current what the current view is. Um for
Mr. picks um for this gentleman back here for everybody who's on Hardy Drive today. You know, if if this redevelopment didn't happen, and I'm telling you, we know how long West Haven has been told it would be redeveloped. I mean, I was just thinking about Holly
Edwards today. You know, Dave Norris, all these people, it's been going on for, you know, 20 when I was last on the planning commission 20 years ago, we were talking about redeveloping it. I hope it happens this time. I think you've got a good team. I think there's momentum. But what if it didn't? You
know, what if what if what if it's just the same and you're looking at, you know, at 20 20 stories above you? I mean, I I just this is it's not right. And I'm sorry I've gone on and I've gone on the soap box, but it's it's just because I feel really bad for you, feel
bad for these people. It is our city's fault for having adopted this ordinance. The last thing I'll say is I would like to ask everybody in this room that doesn't want this to be built by right to contact your city councilors. Now, the city staff has said that the old
Zoning ordinance is still in effect or it's about to be readopted by the planning commission any moment now. Well, Judge WH said no, it's not in effect. And I mean it we have no guidance right now. we're in this weird place. But in this moment, contact your
city councilors and your planning commissioners and tell them that this zoning is not appropriate next to West Haven. It may not be and and that we do need some special use permits. We need some back stop. We need, you know, in certain context we need to say no, you
cannot build 11 stories in 150 ft by right, next to West Haven, next to a single family neighborhoods, next to places where it just doesn't fit. So, please tell them I and I know that you spent a lot of time today, but you know,
we all have to we all have to tell Council this. It just can't be >> done. Yeah. So, please don't please tell them not to reenact this ordinance as it was passed because we'll be sitting here as this
board with very little purview. You know, all we look at is exterior, not zoning, not use, not all the things that, you know, we should that a planning commission could look at or city council could look at. We are our purview is so limited, but our hearts are with you. You know, it's been really
I mean, I'm I'm on the edge of tears, guys. And I, you know, because it is my fault. It is our fault that we did this, but we have time to undo it and we have time to make the zoning right and maybe this applicant will be still be able to, you know, develop something where it is.
>> Will you stand with us? >> Will I what? >> When we go to council, will you >> Oh, yeah. I'm I I fell down on my job. I gave up. I really I gave up and it's my fault. So anyway, sorry to go on for so long, but you know,
>> anybody want to follow that? >> We have one more on the agenda tonight. >> I know we do. I know we do. >> Um, >> God bless them. >> Yes, we're going to take a break before that. >> Yeah. >> Um, >> you guys good? We're good.
I think Miss Lewis summarized things very nicely for us this evening. Um, and I just want to thank everybody again for coming out tonight. I want to reiterate her sentiment that we very well may have an opportunity here shortly to potentially make some adjustments to the
the code and the ordinance. Um, so take advantage um of that opportunity. Um, I don't know how you how we'll find out. I guess read the newspaper, right? Um, so
again, thank you all for coming out. It's uh it's been an amazing experience to have this much public participation. Um, encourage you to talk to your neighbors and we'll have twice as many people out here next time this thing comes through. Um, I think we're going to take a
>> 10-minute break. Um, and we do have one more pre-application conference. Um, but I think we need a break. So, thank you again and we'll recess for 10 minutes. >> Thank you. All
right, Sherry. Mr. Matthews specifically requested that you tear into him. >> I told you I'd take her down a notch. See, I just did. Yeah, he just said that. >> Did you just want to be last on the agenda? >> No, no, no. >> Oh, he was Adam. We'll be last. Okay.
>> You wanted people flying in from other >> Don't miss something you may just get. >> We're technically not in session till I beg the gavl. if anybody wants to get anything else out. >> Patrick, none of that goes. >> All right. Now, I'll call us back into
session. >> Um, thank you all for that. And I I hope I made sense earlier. I'm not sure folks in the audience understood me, but this one I'm not going to get into. We had a prior discussion about it. The applicant
responded. Uh uh there's a lot of information in uh what they've presented, including several pages where they're responding to the conversation that you had the last time. I I um
I don't really want to spend a lot of time in a preamble. Um but do you all have any questions for me? And um All right. And then >> no, I think we'll just hold the applicant to the same rules we held everybody else at 10 minutes. And I
think I would just ask that y'all do focus on maybe pointing out where and how you reply or responded to our previous comments. That's always really beneficial. >> And if I could just offer at the end, I have three items that I must talk to you
about. Not an hour, not a half hour. I hope it's not more than five or 10 minutes, but there are three things your >> member of the >> per topic. We'll give her three per topic. >> That's fine. But they are important.
>> I think we'll have to amend the bylaws again to limit it to one topic. >> You told me that. >> And Mr. Chair, >> some point you're going to get fun to. So, >> and when there is time for public comment, we do have someone online who's ready to speak when that time >> on this particular project,
>> we think. I'm not 100% sure because it was raised when I was not at my desk. Sorry. >> Okay. >> Okay. All right. Well, we're at the applicant's presentation. >> Good evening. I hope everyone's in a good mood and warmed up. John Matthews
with Mitchell Matthews Architect architects, my colleague Jim Duberry, and Daniel Ellson, landscape architect. Um, we're back again primarily to ask for your permission to allow us to retain,
protect, and build behind 204. That's really the gist of it. 204 um southwest or 7th Street Southwest. Um, and we're here also to make sure we interpreted your comments correctly from the previous meeting and to make sure
we're headed in the right direction as this goes forward. So that's really the gist of of why we're here. Um at our previous discussion you suggested a number of refinements. Um >> who's who's got that?
>> Yeah. At um at the previous discussion we we suggested or you suggested a number of refinements and we thought many of those suggestions had merit and we've tried to include many of them in this um in this
latest iteration. Also since our last meeting which was June 17th we've added two small parcels to this project. And if there was a an image up there, we would just show you what they are. One's a vacant
lot on the corner of uh Southwest 7th Street or 7th Street Southwest and Divan and the other's the building next door which is 16 613 Divan. The addition of those two small parcels has allowed us
to make a number of moves uh that have permitted us to incorporate some of your suggestions. Um, and we'll go through these rather quickly. Can we That plan there shows the two small parcels on the
corner. Um, I can go fairly quickly. I just don't want to go so quickly you don't follow me. But you can tell me to slow down. Um, yeah. So, actually, you slow down. Fast for me. So um these are just slides of the
existing we go past the existing condition. Keep going please. Next. Next. Next. Uh there was some discussion about the condition of the houses. And we added this page to just show you how
um how neglected they have been for the last 20 years. Um, and to emphasize that, and I'm not sure if it got missed last time, we sort of mentioned quickly that allowing this project will help protect these buildings because the
ordinance is not protecting. And this is what the current ordinance is allowing. And by this project will in fact ensure the the longevity of these buildings. Um, I'm not sure how much longer this building's going to last if something's
not done to it. Um, keep going, Jim. So request number one that was to demolish some of the um non-contributing components that have been added on over the decades. Next, this is those those elements. Next,
we're going to um we're going to document those as you requested. We intend to document them. The request number two was to build behind um these contributing or individually
protected structures. And then we showed you examples of uh projects that are very similar that are in design control districts um that you had supported previously. Next, these are those buildings. Next, these
are those examples. Keep going, Jim. Again, if I'm going too quickly, please ask me to slow down the concept. This is our zoning. We met just this last week again with zoning on some of those gray areas that you discussed tonight. Um to get clarity from zoning and planning
that we were interpreting it correctly. Um and so I believe we are totally clear on all the zoning issues, especially the gray areas, and I won't bore you with what they are. Um so comment, keep going, Jim. That's a
So this is the roof plan and this sort of encapsulates what uh your comments have sort of generated the building the massing the p primary comment that we heard from a number of you was can we adjust the massing and move it to the back of the
building. This shows that it's not very well on this slide, but we've moved the bulk of the massing, the taller part of the building along the railway line. And then that the various shades of pink or salmon uh show the step back vertically
or the step up vertically um from 7th Street Southwest to the back of the property along the rail primarily along the railway line. And later on, some of you mentioned shadows. The majority of the shadows, we do have some shading
diagrams are cast on the tracks and on the backs of the properties on West Main because south is to the bottom of this page. So the sun sort of cast the shadow in the other direction. Um next, so some of your comments uh can the building
height along Seventh Street be reduced by moving the massing back? The answer is yes. This diagram shows that the postchade areas, the hatched areas are where the original concept uh the original iteration was. We've
moved the center of the building back 114 ft from the street. >> Wow. >> Now, they can't do that on uh the project you just looked at, but we were able to do it. Uh the building, there was some commentary about the building getting larger. It really has marginally
increased. um it's been reconfigured. The there's a whole lot of changes that go on that you don't see and that you're not really involved with, but um the the overall size of the building is not substantially different. Um we've stepped down I think a few of you asked
us to step down the wings. We've stepped those down and we've stepped the building back. And again, that little item D shows the height of the building at the very back fronting the railway line. Next uh comment number two, articulate
building facade to be more sympathetic to the scale of the houses. Yeah. And and in this one, um what was important to us was sort of that street facade. And by removing the brick towers
that somebody objected to last time, it allowed us to kind of think of this twostory volume stepping up along with the houses to kind of pull them into the street facade. Um, and then the upper portion of the building kind of material
pallet dropping back. So you got the strong brick base kind of at that um pedestrian level. Um, and then behind the houses, we did keep a one-story element. Um, you can kind of see it in this. For some reason, these are very
fuzzy. Um, but that element is the amenity space. So, that amenity space will open into that courtyard and we'll have a photograph of a rendering of that kind of view. But the idea is that you can uh that brick kind of wraps back
around behind it, adding kind of a backdrop to the building. >> Yeah, these images are far far better. I'm not sure what's happened in the translation here, but these are horrible compared to what they should be looking like. Um >> we're seeing them fine on our computers.
>> Yeah, we we have them up on our A lot of work went into them, so they're beautiful. It's problematic for me to see them like that. So, the third comment would go quickly. Could the entrances be moved? >> Yeah. And I think the idea was
originally we were going to walk between these two houses and you all kind of questioned whether that was the maybe the most appropriate entry point. So, we from a student standpoint where A is marked that'll be the primary entry for students coming and going from the
project. B will become sort of uh an extension of the interior and exterior amenity space. So the idea is that they can flow out still activating the space around those houses. Um but will not become the main entrance. Um so I think
we took that to strengthen that upper corner to get that flow of students right to Main Street and to the train station. >> Yeah. Number five to um develop the courtyard space with properly scaled
trees to make exterior to make exterior an extension of the interior. Now Dan is going to speak about the landscape but we spent a lot of time on this courtyard. >> Yes. >> Yeah. I think again the idea was an
extension of that amenity space into a outdoor amenity space um and really activate the existing buildings uh on the back side. And here we're kind of hinting at potentially opening up the back of the building so that you can
actually utilize that interior that kind of first floor space. So, somebody could come in the front door off of Seventh Street, walk through this, and then come into this uh view into that courtyard. And then with the properly scaled trees,
I think we can really create a nice shaded area as well. >> Yeah. And so, one thing on this is that we are impacting the back and of that's 208 there. You can see that it this terrace opens both off the new building
and off the old building. We're going through one window, but we're making it quite wide. So, we need to make sure you're comfortable with us opening the back of that. I think it does a lot for the activity and the interaction between the two buildings in that courtyard. It's just something to be aware of. Uh,
five, provide rendering views from the new building to the rear. That's it. Six, how does the the grading at the houses work? >> Yeah. And again here we're we're kind of combining where the existing the pink masses are represent the mass of those
two houses and then the red bands represent their floor levels and you can see nothing quite lines up except for that one first floor on 208. So that's why we thought that's where we could make a connection to that plaza. Um, and the heavy black line is sort of the
grade line at the building, the new building face. Uh, as it slopes down on seventh, then it steps back to where that amenity space, you can kind of see that glazed zone back there. That's all amenity. And there'll be some doors out into that as well.
>> And that colonade above is is open to another terrace that goes back another 70 ft. So, it's a little hard to read here. Maybe there'll be a better view, but let me remind you that there's a threetory drop across the front of the build building down Seventh Street. So, it's a really challenging site
topographically to have your front facade on that step on that steep slope. Um, what is the pedestrian experience along the sidewalk? This was a question I think we were all interested in knowing the answer to.
Well, and the idea again here was to create kind of a porous nature as you walk up that street. So, it's not about a building, a continuous building face, but it will feel more like four separate buildings with courtyard space and
access between them. So, we feel like the flow of people in and out, the way it'll be lit, uh the landscape lighting, which Dan will talk about, you know, sort of the feel that that will lend itself. And the minimal porches, these
have porches, but they're not super big. >> Yeah. So, Sher, you were concerned about the porches. Those porches are staying. We're not touching them. They're exact. We'll be repairing them. But um there was some concern I think that we were somehow moving those, but we're we're
retaining those. Um recognize, did I jump ahead here? Recognize and honor the houses. So we intend to recognize and honor those houses as follows. We're going to repair repair, rehabilitation, and long-term maintenance of the houses. the houses
will there will be an introduction of programming that is consistent uh with the residential nature of the entire project. Um we're honoring these small structures by saving them carefully repairing them and incorporating them into a larger
residential project. Through our actions in retaining and repairing the houses, we're acknowledging that the important surviving structures that represents Charlottesville's architectural legacy and history. And to further distinguish these buildings, we intend to provide individual names for each house. We
thought Hawkins Cottage and Cottage One and Hawkins Cottage 2 or Hawkins House one where Hawkins House 2, whichever um B would think would be more appropriate. We're fine with both of them. We intend to also provide historical markers um
giving a brief history of these houses. Um B comment number nine. Can the vertical brick elements be removed? There was a comment about them. You can see we have removed them. Um and this is an elevation. We'll just
flick through these. This is an elevation of that street face. It doesn't really do justice to the slope. Um but you can see how far back that center portion has moved. These trees also represent what Dan is going to talk about as best we could in the landscape
plan. Um, and remember in front of those existing houses, there's not much space. We can't move those existing houses back. This is another example of that street scope which I think will be a vast improvement over what's there now.
And I don't know if you reme you read um uh some of the commentary in Seville today that spoke about this site as being Morabond and I think that's a pretty good description. Um and I think as you can see here it's going to be far
from that when this project is complete. Um this is looking down Seventh Street. >> Yeah. And I think this one also demonstrates that corner being activated with that main student entry. So that's where you'll have kind of the inflow of people. It'll create an active corner on
that. Um and then the center portion will be more of a kind of gathering space more than a pass through that we had originally envisioned. >> So we've gone over time. Do you think you can wrap it up in like five minutes? >> Yeah. Sorry. We
>> Yeah, we don't want to keep you >> streetscape materials. Well, I don't think we need to go through there. Fairly straightforward. I know I know Carl you were concerned about panels and batten system that you see and I know you wanted us to do that but we're we're not doing that. We we don't the only we
only have a few little panels and bat in there between the windows but everything else >> uh there's not that doesn't appear anywhere else on the building. Um keep going. Sorry we're wrapping this up. Keep going. Keep going. Whoa.
It looks terrible. Okay. Keep going. Keep going. Yeah, if I move too fast, it's >> Oh, yeah. >> All right. >> Okay. So, I just turned it over to Dan on the landscape. >> No, it's okay. I mean, we want to make sure we hear about the site. So, >> yeah. I just wanted to say that as you
can see on 7th, we have now like three really intimate spaces. Um, you know, you have the front entry where there's there's a place to enter and sit and then as you go into the middle where the historic houses are, there's three intimate courtyards at different levels. They're all connected by stairs. The one
in the middle connects to the first historic building, creating a plaza. There'll be an enlargement later. And then I don't want to forget about the uh plaza at the end of the property on the corner that's kind of open to the public. It's it's a place where people can sit as they're walking through
walking their dog. It's a nod uh to the neighborhood to uh to meet there. And then uh street trees all the way up along 7th uh pretty consistently uh large shade trees. And then we also have um midsize shade trees in the middle and
all the plaza and of course wrapping around the building perimeter. Um and then these are those intimate courtyards I mentioned the feel of it. It's going to be uh interlocking um pavers. There's going to be organic wood benches with LED lighting under them.
And then the whole place will be pretty much low voltage lighting with soft flooding of the of the walls and some specialty lights. And I hope you guys can see this. This this this basically shows the three different levels of that
central courtyard and how they interact within the existing uh historic structures. So, you know, the students can move up and down through each space and plus they can move to the street and get out to the street from each level as well. And there's a cross-section that
kind of see shows how we're going to how we're going to make it work with retaining walls and planters and things like that. >> Yeah. And that cross-section is important because we're trying to keep away from the existing building footings because I don't think there is a >> Yeah. Yeah. We will touch the building.
So, we have to be very, you know, conscious of that. Is there one more? Yeah, there's that. There's that U neighborhood corner pocket park we call it. And then uh full landscape plan of
course uh with tree species, types of trees. Saw that last time. Um this is uh about trees that we're removing, trees that we're preserving, a little bit of both. And then a lighting plan. He asked for a photometrics plan,
which we have as well. So um there'll be street lighting and of course all the courtyard lighting. >> And if you go go back to 26, >> you can just get a sense of that courtyard. >> The shape of the courtyard.
>> Yeah. Just >> I see it fast. I move too fast. >> 26. >> Is that my new computer? >> Look how fast it goes. >> Is that a Mac? >> This one. So that's
There was a lot of discussion about this last time and we wanted to make sure you unders Yeah, that's better. You understood how it was working. >> Yeah. And I had asked that question of you was like there's a lot going on in
front of behind. So does that all are there any questions you guys like how that there's stairs there's higher levels lower levels >> shows in the landscape best.
>> So we're we're done. I think we can try to answer your single question or questions. >> There are um is there some >> uh so right so we've been uh allowing public comment and question
um tonight on pre-application conferences. Uh you said you had somebody online. Do you want to >> Yes. Uh James Snder, if you'd like to unmute. >> Hello. Can you hear me? >> We can.
>> Okay. Thank you all. Um, first I wanted to mention my name. I'm James Snder. I'm an original owner at 206B Fifth Street Southwest. That is one of the cottages that were built in 2005 uh along with another project across the
street. Um, I I'm uh talking tonight about a couple of things. uh listening to the earlier discussion u this property architects have done a lovely job uh talking about this project
but the difficulty is is this is this even an allowed use I would remind you of of my neighbor Paul Reer's um early discussion to you about half mile radius >> and right now we face projects that show
the dangers of treating student housing as if it were apartments, the 800 unit 11story project and the this one the 600 bed 7story project. They reveal the flaws in our zoning code. Uh what's it
it's it's as though the Starship Enterprise landed on a small heavily treed village in this little site. So that's not really planning that's market speculation which has overwhelmed community fabric. The difficult the problem is the ceiling of the RX5 zone
has become the floor. Uh if you read the intent was supposed to develop duplexes, cottages, forplexes, middle middle uh middle housing. Instead, what you have now is that the they've gone to the
maximum because they can't. Student housing is an asset class that is economically much more competitive than any other use. So, as as long as you're allowing this, that's all you're going to get. They can finance it. The the company that does this is very skilled
at this. They rent by the bed. And so, what you're not going to have is any affordable housing. You're going to have student housing, and you're basically going to be selling density. You're going to get a pile of money, and that's what you're going to have. The problem is you're going to risk the neighborhood
character. uh the the housing project that was where we heard wonderful and passionate and real testimony tonight and historic neighborhoods like Fville will be overshadowed, destabilized and economically displaced,
displaced. Charlottesville um has recognized the needs for limits. That's where this half mile issue came up that that Paul mentioned. And many communities, other universities have defined student housing as as a distinct
use. It's not the same as apartments. You really need to be having that half mile overlay rule work and contain student housing where it belongs within walking distance of UVA. Special use permits need to be involved
because you're not getting the things that people want. Um, there are a lot of issues with student housing like on-site management, noise, trash, etc. that can be at odds with a community. So, I would suggest that the city is really at a
crossroads where we either allow the market to build these starship dormitories that land in our neighborhoods or we can set clear, fair, and forceful rules to protect residents while accommodating student demand near UVA grounds. and that half mile radius
uh it already exists in city policy. Why aren't we why aren't we using it? >> Last thing I would say to the uh east of this property, you can't really see it in these drawings, but uh Jeff, I don't know if you can show this, but there is an historic home that faces history that
is directly behind on the line of this property. Can you I don't know if you can pull that up. that house uh which was built and continues to be occupied by the original family as well as the Oak of Oakrove cottages literally are going to have
this sevenstory building right on the property line. Real people live here and we got reszoned to this RX5 why I don't know but it was a huge surprise to us. And now our our our neighborhood, our houses which were
stable, good places are now going to be under threat for redevelopment. I don't know if you can pull up pull that up, but that is an a protected home. The uh the one that faces fifth street, which also faces the tub lot across the street. This is a very fragile edge of
of fill. uh projects that were built 20 years ago are the kinds of things people are trying to do around the country. But apparently here in Charlottesville, we want to we're doing these massive by right projects over which the community has no control. So I I just would ask
you all to I don't know Jeff if somebody can pull that up but you all need to see what the impact is. It's like three feet from uh >> from Paul Reer's house. Can you can you pull up that that map that site map? I don't I don't think we're able to pull
it up to this evening, but this is >> I think your your developer had it. It's the eastern side. >> Can I respond to that? Just >> Yeah, >> sure. >> So, Mr. Snder, if you look at sheet three, you will see that half mile radius. So, we do enforce it. We would
not I mean, we do abide by it. >> We we >> Hang on. Let let me let me finish, sir. I'd let you >> would like to see the concern about the edge condition where an historic home individually protected. >> Yeah. One at a timely you have a zero
setback against on the eastern side >> one item at a time. So the half mile radius is taken care of. That building that you're talking about is built on your whoever owns it is built on the property line and our building is held back about
13 ft. So your suggestion that it's 3 ft from the property line is in error. Our the building that we're talking about, but the building that you're talking about may be on the property line. So you probably need to get your facts straight. >> My concern is for the board, the
architectural board and the staff. This is we are part of a of a national historic district. These properties now you all have individually protected districts but the the pile driving that's going to be done, the
construction that's going to be done is going to affect all of these properties. And because they've been reszoned RX5 and not left RA or whatever, the setback requirements are nil. And uh Mr. Werner, can you uh
do you know the I sent you some information. Do you know the the the house that's that's sitting there that where we now greater height right behind it? >> This is the brand house, I believe. >> I I don't have my computer and I'm not I mean I understand the issue. I know
what's an IP. I know about the historic districts. I can talk to it. Uh but >> well, if you if you pull up you can see the shadow of these in your drawings. um where where these these were built as transitions in the early 2000s by local
builders, local architects and the the brand house was built in 1850. It's probably one of the best houses in in Fville, but it will be they will be uh because the city in their infinite wisdom reszone them above what their
existing density is. They're under threat of redevelopment and and very negative impact by these projects because no setback. They shouldn't be zoned RX5. They're 18 units an acre in the case of the cottages. That's that's
that's missing middle housing. So, I just think uh just like the other side of of the street, this area, these areas, these sensitive areas of Fightville and and the uh neighborhood on the other side, the 10th Page area,
these need special planning. You all need to take a look at this. This is this is not good. What's been done here, and you're going to destabilize neighborhoods that need >> So, Mr. Snider, >> planning and protection. >> Thank you for your comments. We appreciate that. Um, I think we touched
on this in our last uh uh agenda item and the fact that um the zoning could be potentially or the ordinance could be overturned and there might be an opportunity to look at this um and we would encourage you to please write to your city councelor and the planning
commission. It's not our job to redo the planning or the or the zoning um from an RX to an RA. Uh so but we hear you and especially in regards to the individually prot protected property I think we would look into that um as this
application moves forward. So thank you for calling in. I appreciate it. Um do we have any other comments from the public? Um Mr. Reer, uh I think you Thank you for speaking earlier on this
application. Um, I do think it would make sense. Just could you pull up the slide from the presentation that shows your half mile radius? Because I think it is a question. >> Sheet three. >> Sheet three. Thank you. >> Um, you know, it' be interesting to see
y'all's interpretation of the half mile versus maybe uh Mr. readers and and it is a good question as to um maybe how the city defines uh where is this orange boundary like
what's that coming from property >> sure uh but I would argue that that's not central grounds per se that's the the hospital >> district okay >> years ago you know where is it can't be
some sort of outlying piece of property out in Gordensville that UVA owns, but it's the contiguous grounds of UVA. It's not meant to be measured from the rotunda or the center of the lawn. >> I also don't know if it's meant to be
measured from the outskirts of the hospital, which is not central grounds. >> That was what I was thinking. >> And I and I sorry, I'm speaking right now. Um before Mr. the reader comments. I actually was curious myself today
because I couldn't believe that that would be a 10-minute walk from this location and I put it in my phone and I just did it a few minutes ago. It says from 2027 Street, which you know it would be the
point closest to West Main I believe. Um and you could I could do it from one of the two historic houses to 204. um to the rotunda is a 19minute walk and it's 0.9 of a mile and I would say that the rotunda is a good you know and I think
you know the enslaved laborers memorial is about the same maybe it's point8 but um but I think the rotunda pretty much represents the center of the university and I mean and students can't get I mean there's no cut through I had a conversation with staff about this
because of the railroad traction you really do have to follow up West Main. They're not until you get to Lee Street at the hospital, you really can't veer over and kind of go south. Um, you know, if you were going to Old Cabell or something else at the end of the lawn.
So, it is quite a long walk. Um, >> I'm not doubting it, Cher. I'm telling you that what we were told is that it's half a mile from the contiguous grounds of UVA. If that's not the case, then we need to change it. But that's what we were told repeatedly. Jim Freeze told you that.
>> Yes. >> I guess >> I mean it was an important important question. >> Yeah. And you and you want to clear it. I mean we all do. >> We thought it was clear. We've submitted these types of diagrams to planning to zoning multiple times and this is the
first time I'm hearing a question. But if it's not correct, we can correct it. >> But tonight we're reviewing this and I mean I know I'm always the one that's saying, "Oh, look at zoning first." But this is not our call. This is James' call. So, let's review what they gave us
and then let them deal with my fallout. >> Sure. >> Sorry. I just I'm getting right now. >> I'm sorry. What? >> I'm hungry and I'm grouchy. >> No, I mean I think it's a good point in that like >> I I was just curious because I looked and I just you know all of us are
walkers and I was just curious myself and just plugged it in. >> Yeah. No, that's I mean that's fair >> and it it is you know if our ordinance doesn't isn't clear about what part of the grounds and >> yeah fair enough. May the ordinance
needs to gain clarity and define what is UVA. >> I I I I just would just >> I mean this could be a home for my mom um you know and her friends. So, I I think the use of this is how it's being used. And I and I maybe I missed
something when I ran to the bathroom, but um whether this is student housing or apartments for 20 year olds or apartments for 80 year olds, um um somewhat taking away from the discussion
of how does this architecturally fit and impact these sites? And and I'm I'm sorry, maybe I'm hungry and grumpy, too. Um, I for the record, I I live in an IP, so I I want to make sure everybody knows when they and not any of you, but anybody out there, I I know what an IP
does and doesn't do. Um, but the the the what you're looking at in a strict reading of the code and I know the context of the prior uh conversation weighs heavily on this, but your per the
ordinance are evaluating the um compatibility of this project relative to the in this case the two IPs that are impacted and yes, it's adjacent to a national register district. It it
it in fact includes parts of it. It is adjacent to an IP. Um I I think uh that's what makes this a challenge. It is not within a district. It's not we're not it's a different context
from something downtown or something in West Maine. But the the the question before you is however these buildings are used or whoever they are leased to the compatibility of it architecturally with
the adjacent uh IPs. Um that's one of the things that's challenging about this site and I and I shared this with some of the people that have have communicated with me and is they very well could have eliminated those two buildings from this project. you
wouldn't be seeing it at all. Or or uh they could have come in and and asked to knock these two buildings down. >> Uh would they have survived an appeal? I don't know. So, um there's a little bit of a there's some uniqueness to this.
So, my suggestion is let's step back and look at it again just like the other one. What are the guidelines telling you? How what are you seeing? Is this compatible? You're not weighing that, but are there questions you have that um could allow
this thing to move forward into a a a formal uh present a formal application that you all would would consider for a COA? >> Um I had just a couple notes um if we want to just jump into actual comments on the design. Um
uh I think he did a pretty decent job of answering most of our questions. So, thank you for putting the work and effort into that. Um, I think moving the entrance to the corner, like I guess the north corner, right? Um, was successful. Um, I think if you're true to your
commitment to preserving and saving the historic buildings, then that that's a big plus and and I really um strongly encourage you to do so. Um, I am a I got one question on and I I don't know which one's which, I'm sorry. uh the southern
one. Um were you intending to save that I guess one-story white edition on the south side of it? It looked like you were. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> Is that a >> If it's a if it's a later edition, I don't know how much that like you might
have some play there, but >> it may have been a porch at one time. >> Okay. Interesting. >> A brick mass behind it. >> Okay. >> Um so we're Sure. We haven't >> gotcha reference on it.
>> Yeah, it's been there a while, but it >> and I and John's response was don't know what's exactly inside. >> Sure. Well, then I think you're taking the conservative route of preserving it. So, that's a good thing. >> Pretty old. >> Sure. I am a little I I think we would
definitely want to see more details um related to where you're talking about opening up the backside of the one building um to see what that would look like. And you know, I think that it's on the back side, so it's not the street facing side. I think that, you know, um,
if it saves the building, that some concessions could could be made there. >> So, we did that just to finish that off in response to your suggestion about properly putting bathrooms. We thought this was a simpler, cleaner, and it would just be a very clean masonry opening. We would would try to minimize
>> uh the impact on the existing wall other than the opening itself. >> Sure. That was the intent. >> Great. Um, and then my only other comment or thought was I liked what you guys did right here with um just the
kind of the base of the new building, kind of respecting the height uh and materiality of the historic structures to kind of give it a streetscape, if you will. And it's hard to tell from the drawings, but I guess I was just It sort of looks like it's there. Like, have you
got a cornice line or a belt line that kind of strengthens that separation between the brick and >> Yeah, we do higher up. Okay. >> We do have a brick a ribbon band running across the top of the windows that separates. >> If you zoom in on that or we actually
have a >> Well, I wouldn't think of the top of the windows as much as the top of the brick. >> Well, the top of the windows in the brick which goes Yeah. You can see it a little bit there. It's a bit fuzzy. >> Yeah, I guess I was just up up in the next that next soldier course or or lock
course below your dash line. >> Just making sure that was a strong line. >> We haven't actually designed the brick detailing, but it's to be very very simple brick detailing. Nothing fancy. Sort of a modern just like the original buildings. They're pretty simple.
>> Yeah. Well, I guess I'm saying just maybe having it project a little bit >> a shadow line. Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Those were my comments. >> Um, so I just took and ran with it, but somebody else go.
>> I just have one little comment. Um, but just because we haven't talked about it yet. I have no problem with um demolishing any of the accessory shed additions, any of that. Just so we can check off that. >> I think we talked about last time. Yeah.
I think we did, but now but it's specifically been presented tonight and they're called out. So >> um I love what you have done with um the changes to this building. I remember last time it felt dicey like you know
how can we decrease the facade and push it back? And I feel like the space that you've made in the front to honor those houses and incorporate them into a a courtyard is is wonderful. And I also love that it's a it's a kind of courtyard experience that then opens
into other courtyards within the building mass. I like the additional courtyard on the streetscape. The pocket park is really great. Um I love the brick kind of base that honors the scale of those structures. I feel like it
makes the whole building feel like it's more at a pedestrian scale. Um, and I like what you've done with stepping back the uh two towers on the sides. So, I think this is great. Thank you.
>> Thanks. >> Um, I have a slightly different opinion. Um, I think Oh, well, I do agree that there have been some improvements um especially with the uh relationship to the structures, the small historic structures. Um, I do think this is an
inappropriate scale on the Delivan Street side. Um, I think I do understand that, you know, there's I I don't see a section exactly cutting through the historic context or the the neighborhood context and then the Delivan. It just I
don't I don't really understand the relationship between the building and the the context so much on that side. Um, I think this building massing feels appropriate in this like the Stonefield context, but I don't think appropriate in this context
of the neighborhood, the historic neighborhood. Um um I would I would seriously hesitate to uh approve this without some more reduction in
height along the Delivan street side. Um >> yeah right right now what you're seeing there is is sort of this piece here that is a threetory element facing on the delivan which is what's required no more
than three stories or 44 feet. Um so and then we step back the required 20 feet. >> Um so that is sort of the >> what the zoning ordinance says right
now. Um trying to find that right. >> So just to be clear there's a step back then we have three stories then there's a step back and then so I'm not quite we probably need to give you a section as you requested so you can understand that it does there's quite a distance from
Divan and what we didn't mention and our civil engineer is not here is that Delivan Street is really narrow. We're giving up some of our land. I'm not sure that's the correct term, but we're um >> agreeing public amusement. >> We're going to donate some of that land
so that we can widen the street for emergency vehicles and it's on us. >> Um we don't have to do that, but we thought it would be more appropriate to have a street that's >> more regular. So, so that increases that width even more. >> Okay. Um I have another question about
the courtyard on the seventh street side. Um there are um are you controlling access in any way? >> Well, >> with gates or things like that >> to what >> to the street from well the sorry the
building itself will have serious access control to the building but not we hadn't planned to have control to the terraces >> um that are accessible by sidewalks. So, so anyone from the neighborhood could walk into that space?
>> I expect they could. >> Good. Yeah. Um, >> I mean on these sorts of buildings, um, access control at all universities and student housing is a really high priority. So, it would be access control
at the building for sure. Yeah, we kind of envisioned it as that pocket park and then the corner pocket, you know, sort of creating two um outdoor amenity spaces >> that would be accessible by the public. The one in the middle is probably more
of a, you know, the idea why we put the amenity facing there with a lot of glass is it's going to give it a lot of visibility from a secure standpoint so that people that do walk in there >> will be viewed from inside the building, >> you know, students. And
>> I also wanted to ask you if you all have read the um the Cherry Avenue small area plan. >> Yes, we have. >> Okay. And are you planning to in great >> engage with the neighborhood association in Fville? >> Yes, we are. We I was overseas when they
when we spoke to them or communicated with them. So we're attending their September 11th. >> Mhm. which is actually a good point if I can just segue onto it that we've been coming to these B meetings or at least I have for 30 or more years and now I'm
hearing these community enga they usually they were always required for special use permits resonings but is this going to be a new requirement for BA because most of the people are concerned about the use which is not a B issue but
>> so I just would like some clarity on that just for because we have a lot of projects going on. Is this a this community engagement suggestion going to be something that's new or >> Well, I think my question is about really about the scale of the building. Um I know that we don't have a question,
you know, we don't have perview of the use at all unfortunately. Um but the scale is something that we do have. >> Yeah. So we are meeting with with them. But I just your question just generated another question which is is this going
to be a requirement that there's >> um Okay. >> I would think that would be inappropriate for us to require that. >> Yeah. I mean we're going to do it anyway, but it's just a bigger question if we're going to hear this at each future meeting and >> we just need to know that's all so we
can plan for it. >> Very good question and uh but I can't tell you what the bar may ask. Um, and I think it would be fair for them to ask questions. Uh, uh, what they can require. Um, I I
>> I think you >> Yeah, we're happy to do it. It's not a problem at all. Come wood is the one that we're dealing with. >> With the uh changes that you've done, have you changed the amount of rooms?
>> Uh, yes. a small increase. So, is is your first name Jerry? Are you you are Jerry? Okay. I remember you from when I was a boy. Okay. Good to see you again. Um >> love it. >> Yes. So, >> story there.
So, >> Jerry, did you live down under? >> He is the most interesting man at Charlton. >> Um sorry, now I lost the question. Uh yes, we did. We we did >> recognize him. So uh from Louisa but yeah when he was
on the run um yes so there has been a small increase in the number of beds um I don't have the exact number but yes and the number of units >> by also adding those two parcels we were able to move that tower that was kind of
crowded behind uh 208 move it out to the street and create more of a street base. Um and also those corner lots which are pretty small, you know, it it found a use for them that had, you know, created
created that park on the corner. >> Well, my general comment is I I think you've responded very well to the questions that were asked and I I like the this design for what it is very well. I think that uh it I don't actually have any other requirements or
requests on on my behalf. I think that you've done a good job here. I like the building. >> Thank you. >> Yeah, I think should be commended for listening to our concerns last time. I have a question. Um, are you proposing a
new sidewalk on this >> on both sid and does that increase your frontage? Because I see in the site plan there look like very nice trees on the streetscape, but then when I look at the
photographs of what's there, it seems like there's hardly any space at all between these houses and the and the street. >> Yeah, that's going to be the tough part of his magic. But yeah, we We're going to have to some like on where that
structure is going to be tucked around the sides and then we're going to have to go work our way up. It is it's a small sidewalk. I think it's 4 ft. >> Yeah. There's no room in front of the house, I think, to plant any sing any trees right in front of those. Not nor
would you maybe want them right in front, but >> um I think it's fairly accurate depiction of what's being planned on these renderings. And >> well, the roof plan seems to show some larger trees in front of the the houses.
That's what I was asking actually. Um >> on the roof plan >> 21. >> Yes, 21. >> So Oh, sorry. >> When when we're done, I have a question for Jeff. I was going to say I know Carl is a big fan of trees so we paid special
attention to putting >> I'm a fan of trees that actually get planted >> right I guess that's part of the question >> well >> um >> yeah our intention >> is this is this doable what what you're showing here on the on the north plant >> and I I don't want to first off Carl's
just big across the board um the I'm just an average size interest in trees Um, believe it or not, I I have an undergraduate degree in forestry, so I do understand trees a little bit. Uh, and if I could offer, and I know this is
going to have to come up in the site plan, but we see a property line and a building, and then we see, you know, trees and I I I this something I've been raising internally with my colleagues is, you know, that tree wants to be
round, but there's it can only fit so much. So I I I think this one of the wayward things uh or one of the questions we need to resolve internally again also about the tree cover because uh
you know a tree wants to be 60 ft 40T in diameter and putting in a space that only allows 10T. Um >> I think we have >> it's another it's another situation where like John would say where's some clarity uh that they need to lessen. I
think we have about 12 or 14 ft. And this is a good one to show Mr. Snder, the guy that called in, how close his house is to the property line. And the 3 ft he said our building was is really back about 12t for what it's worth. This this depicts it more clearly. I think
what would be helpful is to see the articulation of um like the actual tree planters like where they're being planted on the street and how wide they are because I think typically like we wouldn't recommend a tree to be planted
in in any anything narrower than like five or six feet you know and but my understanding from the pallet I mean I just assume that most of these trees on the frontage here are like smaller understory trees is more and upright and narrow a little bit smaller.
>> Yeah, >> do like maybe an enlargement of that area. >> That could be helpful. >> Yeah, it's interesting. The Zelco Cove is play planted on West Main Street. I'll be quick. You notice how well they've done and that's just 18 in. I'm not suggesting we plant in 18 in, but
it's amazing how they've survived and how in just an 18 in planter and how big they are. >> Whoops. >> Can I can I ask a few questions just >> so so what is what is the height of is
this is this stories? >> Uh so the maximum in this area is seven >> seven. >> So we're stepping down. This building is very complicated based on the audience because it's modulated. You know, we're building in modules. So, I believe right
there it's seven stories, but those buildings in the >> Oh, I see. Because you've got the change of grade. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. It's a threetory drop from top to bottom. >> And then from here to So, >> that's three stories. >> That's three stories above. >> And in the front, is that three stories,
too? >> No, that's um six. >> Okay. >> Is it? Uh yeah, this is seven right here. But the corners is where we step down. And actually there is a line missing right there. But >> yeah, it's probably easy to understand
this. Yeah, in those elevations. >> So I I unfortunately I'm seeing this all for the first time. So I I'm not I'm a little bit behind. Um so I'll just give you my initial thoughts. Um, I actually agree with uh
Kate in that I feel like um the scale I mean the scales a little out of whack. Um um I think for one thing
um this is a matter of our of our zoning, right? I mean, this is the same thing really in a lot of ways we were talking about uh the previous project. >> No, I wouldn't conflate those at all. I think that would be a big mistake. Yes.
>> Why? >> Because they're totally different sites and they have different issues, different forces acting on them. >> But anyway, finish your point. But but I think that I think there needs to be a balanced view and conflating this with the previous project I think would would
not be fair. Well, what I I guess what I'm what I'm saying is that um I mean this is a this is a a massive increase in scale um adjacent to a you know pretty particularly
special neighborhood in our city. And um and all that being said, I think my my more particular response to this would be when you look at the elevation um you've got two towers that are pretty
much the same size. One's lower because of the elevation, you know, it's moving down um hill. Um, I would want to see and and I I guess I'd want to see a um
um a more direct response um to the neighborhood down the hill which where you really get into them into Fightville. And maybe this has to do with this section that you were saying, you know, maybe I'm not seeing it as as well here. Um but um that would be one
concern I'd have is that it appears that this side was treated in the same way as that side while that side's closer to Main Street and it's right on the railroad tracks. That seems you know appropriate and where you kind of want to be more dense. You'd expect kind of
um a different um you know um response on on that side. Um, the second and I'll be quick with all these. Um, but this the second concern that I have, while I
I certainly appreciate like the the um willingness and the way that you've um preserved the buildings, obviously that's number one priority of with what we're dealing with here. Um I just I just um I'm a little concerned maybe
about the way um those two towers kind of just hang in those buildings. Um um and and maybe this is a matter of having a little bit more understanding about like the courtyard in between. But
there's, you know, there's the the the the building on the left hand side, the little the little building on the left hand side, so close to that north tower. Um, right there.
>> So, you looked at the precedents on page whatever that was that you guys approved previously. I just listed four of them. And the one that's most >> the one we didn't approve. It was a preliminary discussion that you brought to us, John, on Milsteiner. No, that's
not the one I was talking about. >> The other three we did. >> The Doyle. >> Yes, >> the Doyle. That is I think what did I have? 3T 4. You approved 3'4 from the face of that to the back of the existing building.
We've got way more than that. But um I mean what I mean there needs to be a certain degree of consistency on on these directions because you can't ask allow them to do 3 ft and then require 15 ft from us and that you know there were
some mis misstatements on that building as well which you know that's that is six levels five levels at least even though you might read four from the street if you count them up you'll see it's taller than that. Well, I think I think to be more specific then um that
could actually be a pretty nice space that little alleyway between you know sometimes these tight spaces can actually be quite level. I think for me it's a matter of just understanding the courtyard like one level one level up. Um, but I think to be more
specific, I think it for me it's the sort of um the the symmetrical treatment of the two towers. And um I I just feel like um in you know in the same way um
aligned with with Kate that um that uh there needs to be a um you know a scale differential um between the two relate more to what's going on in that side and that and again
>> thrown off a little bit by retaining that one story the one story addition on the south house right makes the brick part look further away from the tower. >> See what I'm saying? >> You're talking about um >> a little, >> right? That by retaining this, you know,
it makes the brick portion of this further away, right? And then that's >> No, I'm not worried about that. Actually, to me, it's it's this compared to that. And they're basically the same thing. And and they're I mean, they're totally out of
scale fight. I mean it's you know it's in that way it's similar to what the previous >> so the transct concept if you're familiar with it has that gradation uh this is right on the edge of fill on the very edge I mean it's one block
>> so sort of I'm not we can look at what you're suggesting I'm not sure that's a strong argument um to to scale down that size of side of the building um keep in mind that this what we're showing is totally consistent
with the comp plan with the affordable housing manual and with the zoning ordinance. So, we're not asking for any special treatment here. Um, it's totally in line with that. And in your office, you would probably do the same thing. I would s suspect trying to get most
efficient use of the site is really the goal here to use the land efficiently that benefits everybody. Well, we're >> I think that's the goal of the zoning ordinance, but not necessarily our perview. That's true. And I have to be honest, >> I did have a question for staff and now
it's become even more relevant and it may be rhetorical and I may, you know, I apologize, Carl. I know you're hungry. So, and this is like the first time I've ever really thought of this. So, our guidelines, which and this is in the staff report, new construction, height
and width. You know where I'm getting. Specifically, attempt to keep the height and width of new buildings within a maximum of 200% of the prevailing height and width in the surrounding sub area. And in commercial areas, which is not really pertinent, height should be
within 130% of the prevailing average on both sides of the block. You know, are are we just saying that like none of us have even discussed that these are guidelines? This is not like we like the building or it's pretty or
thanks for matching up the historic building to the first two stories, but these are our guidelines and it just it and I guess do they are we just presuming that they don't apply anymore because the zoning because we couldn't possibly
build this building under the zoning. So, we just throw them out the window. I mean, where are we with that? So, at least for me, when I'm looking at this, um, the majority of this building, 90% of this building is by right in the sense that it's not on those two parcels that we're looking at.
>> So, I by right in the >> if he wasn't wanting to build on the back of those two little houses, he could build this U-shaped building >> as tall as he wants it to be um, and meet the zoning code and we wouldn't be looking at it at all. So, I agree. I
don't like what's happening on Delphin Street, but I'm not going to knock you for it because I don't feel like it's our purview. Um, I feel like we could make you whittle away even more on the piece that's around the two houses that's on the property on the IP properties, but I don't know that's going to make the project any better.
So, I guess my focus would be kind of on Seventh Street. And for me personally, when I'm looking at this, I'll look at Seventh Street and I'll look at the area around the houses. But, >> do the guidelines say that that because we're Can we can look at the whole building if we want to, but he can also
redo a property boundary on this and we don't get to look at it at all. >> And aren't the guidelines for a a ADC districts and this is not in a district. These only reason we're looking at this is because of those. But the guidelines
still do the guidelines apply outside of ADC districts to >> it does apply. >> Yeah, they do apply. >> So it's a very good question. >> The guidelines app. Yeah. So tell me
what we're supposed to just >> Oh, if only I knew. And I don't mean that sarcastically. >> And I I just wish there was some other. >> Yeah. And I think that what >> we're >> I can't apply that to this >> to wash the laundry in front of John first.
>> Um >> this was in your staff report previously though as to that exact question. This is where I can offer I think ridge street where I offer here's within that sub area here's within the district here are here's what's typical um very
applicable there it becomes very difficult when we are talking about something of this scale and there are conflicts like this all over the city >> and if only
I had a couple of weeks I didn't where I could just focus on this and I knew after I focused on this, I didn't have to spend a month responding to the last three weeks of emails and questions. I I could maybe help. I I can't get there. So there I'm
capitulating on that. I think >> Oh, no. No. BL we just know it's just >> I just I think you know >> what's troubling is that >> we don't have any guidance now. we're just throwing these out the window. Whereas I wish there was some formula
that would help us here um you know with Kate and David's concerns but would would still give what this applicant is able to do by right like just typically some some tool that would mllify
modify this. Typically, you were dealing with height in large buildings because a decision had been made as a special use permit or something that to allow that. So, you were almost handed the height and you couldn't really tinker with it
that much. And forgive me John for but just tonight what I heard and in reflecting on this was and what I've heard the last several weeks the bar is you all are the the opportunity to get it right. You're the
opportunity for the community to be heard. You're the opportunity to you know you can fix this. And I've also heard you the bar you're the problem. You're why we can't get things done. why we don't, you know, and I'm I'm I'm really
quite concerned right now about a number of things, but I think my suggestion on this one would be to we just talked about a project on West Main and talked about its impact on the neighborhood to the north. >> We come over here to the other side of
West Maine, the other side of the railroad tracks, and we're somewhat saying, "Oh, it's only about these two little houses." Um, I mean, I have I have I know you received the letter uh from Lindseay Aguero and then there was another note
from someone urging you all to make sure the houses are are preserved. So, you've heard that. I I I I I'm I'm very personally saying I don't know how I separate the two. I don't know how to advise you all to separate the two. All
I can offer is right now that if we take our if you we can use the guidelines to say you know how is how is this building impacting these um is that scale working
is the materiality working I I I can't get into feet and inches about that um and I think the guidelines are still helpful there um no the guidelines would suggest that a building of this height not be there. The the guidelines would
suggest a building of this width uh not be there. You all could, as with the West Haven uh question, that was sort of what I was trying to get at is you all are within your,
you know, bounds to take these guidelines and apply them and say this is what they say because it and and and and not in a flippant way or sarcastic, but to say this is what they say council is what you've charged us with. This is how we're going to review this. Um
I have often said to people B is not concerned about height. we can mitigate the impact of height. What's most important is how do things step back? How do they interact with the street? How they interact with adjacent buildings and that you all know that good consign can solve that. So that's
that's where I I I I so I think that the guidelines give you some tools here. They don't give you a direct path. And I know in this community right now a lot of people are saying I want this to be predictable. I want to come in and I want you know the BA to have its checklist and you know everything gets
scored 0 to 10 and if at the end I get 100 points I get my COA and I don't know how to provide that. So um it's a very good question. We need to evaluate how things are going on this sort of situation throughout the city. But as
far as where John's thing goes, um I think they've been responsive to the questions that you all had asked. >> So that's another part of my job is somewhat hold you all, you know, and say, "All right, we did have a conversation. You asked some questions
and they've been responsive. have they been responsive in a in a way in a capacity that you all are comfortable with? Um you will have that opportunity when this comes forward as a COA. But so I I would leave it as
are you all comfortable moving forward with what you've heard notwithstanding the I know some uncertainties there but >> yeah I think we are I think um it's problematic when we're not going to be able to keep
everybody happy that's for sure um that's an impossible task and if we came back at next time our concern is well somebody has another set of issues and then we come back again. And there's another set of issues. Um, that's the part that's really really expensive. I
don't think you And on the bottom of those, if you look carefully, we're up to we're well over 300 sketches to this point. So, it's it's a long process. And I think we're we're we feel strong enough to to move forward and to submit.
Next week, we're going to try to incorporate some of these changes. Um, we're not going to be able to get them all. Some of them just won't work. the project's not feasible. And I think to Sherry's point about the guidelines, they are guidelines and you have you can rely on them, but they are guidelines.
They're not requirements and that they don't mesh with the zoning ordinance. For instance, if you went with that 200%, you'd have to take three floors off. >> Yeah, it was a question. >> Yeah. Well, people might think that are listening in, why can't you do that? Well, then
then it wouldn't comply with the ordinance. Yeah. >> So it's and also the project wouldn't be feasible. That's a secondary point. But it's getting the ordinance and the the design guidelines to drive which is not an easy task in itself. >> Yeah.
>> And I think I'd like to answer Mr. Timber's question about proximity and I I think maybe that enlarged plan of that center courtyard would be great help >> because I think the important part that we tried to mention but maybe didn't
come across is that you can walk between that in each section. Yeah. >> So it's never like there's this leftover sideyard. It's part of the landscape flow around the buildings >> so that you're actually interacting with the building
>> versus you know if we move that building >> 20 ft away >> then you feel like there's this chasm between what we were trying to do in this was to create that street facade. Certainly. I mean, certainly appreciate that. And again, part of this is me just
coming in not having a chance to air anything the first the first time around. And I I I suspect, you know, you're absolutely right. And and I think that um you know, first and foremost, preserving those really interesting and
unique houses is a is a wonderful thing that you're you're maintaining. Um I wish we could have done that with the the little house the IP over on um um JPA could I wish the developers would have come with that same responsiveness you
know to let's try to work with the existing context >> so a thought if I can there the opportunity I'm trying to look at this as an opportunity design professionals bar architects
designers ers, we can show that this zoning can be successful, that it can interact and interface with what's adjacent to it. Um, because we heard tonight
a lot of people are not pleased with this. And I don't know when when council gets to revisit this, they may say, "My gosh, we can't have all this. We can't have the increased height. we can't have these taller, bigger buildings because
the community doesn't want them. So the opportunity for the BA and I think the opportunity for the design community is to show it can't happen everywhere but in some places these things can successfully exist
because I think what's at risk is that the BAR might end up being well the BAR is a problem and we have no design review or or we get uh an ordinance that says we're just not doing these things because nobody wants them and because and so I I'm trying to think that this
is an opportunity and I know you're hired to do something and you're hired to design this building but it and you all are looking at it but we have to I if if the answer is this can't be done there are some greater things at risk that I'm concerned about.
Can I add some quick comments for just to um so the uh I I think it was brought up before about the street trees and just to clarify I mean it sounds like you guys are saying they're they're super tight. Um I get that that we're not going to have you move the existing
buildings but you do need to provide the streetscape where you can so the new portions of the buildings have to push back a little bit further so you can actually get some street trees in there. >> Um I think you do need to do that. Um, and I am going to my focus again is
mostly on Seventh Street and I think it is a narrow street and I believe the street experience that you've created now is is much more interesting than you had before and you're going to have these two towers are going to feel like two two separate buildings because that middle portion set back so far back that
um yeah, I do think this new scheme you've come up with is much more successful than you have before and agreed on if you can do anything to delve street, that'd be fantastic. But again, I I don't feel like I can push you on that because it it's so far away
from the IP. All right. Any other comments? >> Your wish. >> All right. Uh Kate >> um are you allowing secondary comments from the same individual because Mr. >> No, we're not. I'm sorry. >> Okay, good. I'll leave you.
>> We just allowed everyone one opportunity to speak. >> Yeah, there was an email that wasn't referenced. It was Jennifer Braxdale and it came in today. I don't know if we just want to add that or we want somebody to read that. Sorry, I just popped my stuff and I just remember >> it. She lives at 307th Street, so she's
right right here. People have expressed in in that you know the concern for large fasting and scale adjacent to the to to to the the national register historic district adjacent to IPS adjacent to residential scale
development. I would say you all have are aware of that um and and and that but I'll include those in the notes. this will get a formal >> review in which case again people are are
welcome to participate. We get a lot of emails got a lot of things flying and and and uh >> but I >> so the last two things September 2nd the beat I believe the city council they're done >> I think we're good thank you guys for
your presentation um thanks for the progress on the design >> September 2nd um I >> September 2nd >> believe I have a date with council for the Tuesday of 1301. >> Sorry that's Tuesday. Tuesday
>> September >> meeting correct >> is a city council meeting because when Monday's Labor Day >> 130 is the Warden Ber House. >> Yeah. I have not had formal confirmation from that but it has gone into the it has gone in council's agenda.
Everything's being reviewed. The last step is for the the city manager to confirm the final agenda, but >> 1301 Wland, >> I have no at this point no reason to believe it it won't be unless something
occurs. So, >> so to be clear, this is the applicant appealing our denial of the demolition permit to city council. Can you please send us an email once we know that that is >> I absolutely would agenda wanted to share that. >> It's coming off a really long weekend
for me, but I'll be I'll be there. >> You guys could also support the historic resources committee that is presenting to council that we're playing. >> We could I couldn't hear you. Somehow you're we Kate, we couldn't hear it. I think your mic might be off or something. >> Maybe that's for a good thing.
No, Jeff's also with the historic resource committee at council their 4:30 time slot. So >> reviewing their work plan, that's another thing. Yeah, that's going to be another busy night. >> Um is that the same meeting?
>> Second, um pay attention to the news this week. Uh I I there's the possibility of a uh I'm leaving this the uh some announcements about the zoning
ordinance. I believe there's there's probably you guys have seen in the paper. So um uh >> well the hearing was yesterday that uh the the rehearing was it was heard that well I should say the city had until yesterday to refile,
>> right? wasn't a motion, but whatever. A brief as to why, >> but >> but the judge hasn't ruled as of today, I don't think. >> Follow the news, but we'll know right away. If per chance >> you know something that we don't know
>> we heard >> I know some assumptions and and and and if per chance >> uh and here's the reason I'm saying if per chance we don't meet in September I need something from you all
>> and that is and I've said this and I we are required from you one hour in order for the city to retain its status as a certified local government, which is a program through the Department of Historic Resources. I need each BAR
member to show one hour of relevant training per year. We've completed about a half hour of training through some things that we've had conversations with you on. I had hoped to have a halfhour discussion about architecture in Charlottesville, which would cover the
second half hour. I don't know if we'll be able to have that, but I'm asking all of you now to if you've taken professional training about design, about preservation, about historic landscapes, about uh that would be
relevant to your activity on the B. I need you to let me know because the the reporting period goes through the end of September. So if we don't meet in September and I can't have a 30 minute training discussion with you all then I
have to report for maybe third or fourth year in a row that you all have not completed the required training. So I mean sorry please >> um do you mean within the past year from October 1st? >> Who isn't doing it?
>> What I usually fulfill it some way or another. >> Yeah. >> Say that again. I can't. >> Many of us are are fulfilling it. >> Correct. >> So, >> but not everyone is. And so, from October 1st of last fall through the end of September coming up, you need to we
need to demonstrate that each of you has done one hour of relevant training. DHR has been >> all or nothing kind of thing, right? >> We all have to do it. >> Yeah. And if you if you can't meet that then
maybe you consider if we don't meet in September we have a 30 minute Zoom meeting and we have a discussion a train session about architecture in Charlottesville but >> keep the date on your calendar. >> Thank you. And so pay attention to
>> if we get disbanded we're still meeting but >> I said if we get disbanded we're still meeting for a training session. >> Good for now. Just hold that date. >> It's very possible. So I that's all >> I can also probably facilitate there are levels I can't zoning
ordinance gets passed out then we don't exist. >> Is that all you have >> there's high low and so that's >> that's all I have. >> Thank you for your patience. >> We don't exist because >> we we required to go over our admin approvals.
>> So I know we're all right now but we don't be sure we're doing this. I could also just on the training on the training session I could probably uh coordinate a tour of Montichello if that would that would >> that might be great. >> Um
>> I was just going to have a a show and tell of the architectural styles in Charlottesville and I know >> most of you would go I know this but it would be helpful. I I haven't approved anything. >> No, I just think we just need to it's one of our many things of process that we need to
>> Yeah. get better at. >> You can also email us those the admin approvals >> periodically. I think would that count? Would that count for us? >> I think you just have to notify it.
>> Can I Can I get a um give a quick comment? We um a couple years ago, those who are on here um reviewed over and over again the new courthouse that's just been built. And I mean courouses don't get built very often, especially new ones. It really is really beautiful.
I haven't been in the court rooms per se, but I've been in a couple times. The only thing that I would say like we just need to make a note. There are benches that are like black, >> I don't know, stone out front and when it's way hot, nobody sits on them. And
apparently everybody's sitting on the brick wall that surrounds it and that's where people sit and smoke and the Redlands Club doesn't really like that. But anyway, whatever they drink if it's like after hours or whatever, but nobody's actually using the black benches that we get too hot
>> because they're way too hot in the summer. >> I actually think that like didn't probably win, but they're really warm. >> If you go back, I think that actually came up and they talked about when the trees and all >> the trees are like not going to provide
any shape for a long time. Those trees are not very big. The calibers are like But it's it's a it's you know we did a deal. >> I was going to ask if we could get a tour of the courthouse. >> Have we solved a rep problem? >> I haven't asked you rather get another
tour in a while. >> Well, we were saying the tour of the courthouse too would be cool. >> Yes. Uh there's space there's yet >> thank you for coming. Thank you for sticking
>> and thank you for sending me that hand out to my email. I appreciate that. >> Appreciate that. >> Yeah. >> All right. This is a gall time. >> He's the deputy city manager. >> That's a good question. >> Deputy city manager. free.
>> Sure. >> She has a badge.