Good for you. >> You ready? >> All right. All right. I'll call us to order. Uh, welcome to this regular monthly meeting of the Charlottesville Board of Architectural Review. Staff will introduce each item followed by the
applicant's presentation which should not exceed 10 minutes. The chair will then ask for questions from the public followed by questions from the B. After questions are closed, the chair will ask for comments from the public. For each application, members of the public are allowed three minutes to ask questions
and three minutes to offer comments. Speakers shall identify themselves and provide their address. uh comments should be limited to the BAR's purview that is regarding only the exterior aspects of a project. Following the BAR's discussion and prior to taking action, the applicant will have up to
three minutes to respond. All righty. Um first off is matters from the public not on the agenda or on the consent agenda. Um tonight's consent agenda has the meeting minutes from December. Any matters from the public not on the
agenda? Nobody online. All right. Um, next we'll go to the consent agenda. >> All right. We'll back up a little bit. Uh, someone online. Do you have a >> Mr. Snider? You have three minutes.
>> Yes. I'm Jim Snyder. I have a home at 206B Fifth Street Southwest in Fville. Um, at one of the last meetings, one of the members mentioned that an option for historic preservation
for an area like BIL might be a different type of historic preservation overlay, not one that was so specific that it detailed every window and shutter and paint color, etc. I wondered if we could get some more information
about that. The other question I had was, is there a way to nominate houses? Uh, for example, we there's one, it's now 100 years old, a very unique stone bungalow on Fifth Street that looks like it was built about the same time by the
same contractor as the Rock House. It has been restored and is in much better shape than it was when it was nominated and put into uh I think it's a contributing building. So, those were two questions I had. Thank you. Great. Thank you for calling in. Um I
think the answer to both of those questions is yes. Um Jeff, I think if you want to speak to the first one certainly. Um I think he's basically talking about in what not the ADC but uh Fville is the Filip
Register and the Virginia landmarks register as a historic district. Um building Mr. Snider is talking about I believe is contributing. A lot of them already are. So there is a uh national register district overlay but of course
you the B have purview only over what is locally designated. Um so we the city has um of course the ADC the architectural design control district. Uh we have eight of those. West Main, downtown, North downtown etc. Those are
the most rigid of the um um or the more rigid of the historic districts. Uh we look at all four sides, everything that um we also have in the city individually protected properties. Uh for example, the two houses on Seventh
Street. The reason that we were reviewing that project is because they were IPs. That um work on IPS follows the more rigid um design review. The second uh the city or the third I guess is the city has three uh historic
conservation districts. Will Mills Village, Martha Jefferson, and Rugby Road. Those are um a historic district light, if you will. Uh we look primarily at what's visible from the uh from the
public right away. Um it is a the way I've explained to folks is the design guidelines for the ADC districts about 150 pages. The design guidelines for conservation districts is maybe three maybe two and a half. Um so very
different uh to nominate um a the last uh designations we had were the historic conservation districts uh uh Martha Jeff first then Woolen Mills and and Rugby Road. Uh a community neighborhood can
propose those. Uh it would take I overwhelming community support I think for council to consider. I think even for staff to consider taking it to council. um they are not um
they're not to be he I I guess don't uh it's not a panacea and uh and I think council is very careful about um given the last time they reviewed one there was a lot of contention about I think particularly woolen so it would take overwhelming uh support from the
neighborhood uh they'd have to contact me then it would take a zoning text amendment zoning map amendment uh all the things necessary uh So to do ADC district or individual IPs or or a uh a larger historic conservation district um
and I would just caution that uh the overlay does not change the underlying zoning. So you know if it's you all the board of architectural review gets a certain amount of perview but you can't um an overlay doesn't suddenly say you can't do something here uh if it's if
it's permitted by zoning. And then uh so that's that's what I would offer uh given that area is already in the uh on the national register. Sorry, a little meandering there, but it's >> No, I think he answers his question. I think the I think what he was referring to was the a historic conservation district that we had talked about the
difference between sort of the levels of review between those two. And then I take it the second question was really sort of is there a way to list an IP, which is a good segue into our first >> new item. Anyways, >> I think the there's
>> additional IPs in Fville. I'm not sure if that house on Fifth Street is one. I know there's um there's several there that were but uh I I can't speak for the fight uh uh process but you know my understanding is that you know when that
survey was done and the national register district was discussed I I don't know why local designation wasn't pursued but I imagine it came up and just >> well I think his question was if someone wanted to pursue creating an IP for a property they can
do that there's ways there's an avenue knew to do it. We have one on our agenda tonight. And I think uh I guess a question would be for me would be does the owner have to be the person? I would assume so. >> We we won't consider it. And I said I won't consider an IP unless it comes
from the owner. Okay. We had a small conservation district proposed a couple years ago and it's stored it's somewhat still pending uh the CH Brown AC district up on 12th in roster. Uh it's only six buildings, although one is already an IP, but what I where we were
is I needed to hear from the five other property owners that they supported this. I mean, unambiguously supported that designation and that that hasn't occurred, so I can't move that forward. >> Didn't we also have a potential IP in the Greenbar district? I can't remember the street.
>> Um there was the >> like mid-century. >> There was a recently listed on the National Register. Yeah. National Registry. No one has um >> Thank you. >> That has not been brought forward. >> Um >> again, it would take Yes, it would take the owner just like we have tonight with
801 Western. >> Okay. So, I hope those that we answered your questions, Mr. Snyder, and I think that if you want to pursue either of those avenues, I'd recommend you talk to the city staff in the historic preservation uh office at neighborhood
development services, namely Mr. Warner and Mr. Richardson. Um, so thanks for thanks again for calling in. Appreciate it. Um, all right. Uh, consent agenda. Like I said, let me check real quick. Any other matters from the public? Anybody else
online? >> Um, I believe Mr. Snyder might have a follow-up question, but he didn't use his three minutes. >> If you want Go ahead. Let them. Yeah, we've got a late agenda. >> Mr. Snyder, are you still there?
So I'm still here. Um, thank you so much. It we found it very helpful when you all mentioned that one of your members mentioned last time this other variety of conservation district. I think with all the concern going on about Fville and Tenth and Paid and the
staff is looking planning staff is looking at engaging with those. My my sense is that there was concern about something that was so detailed and restrictive as the you know the architectural version. When you go to the GIS and you look at the historic
districts in the city, here are two large areas that don't show up on that map. That's nobody's fault, but the idea of saying these are important and these could be a conservation district. I know in in Fairfax County this has been done for a minority neighborhood and in Falls
Church where I recently retired, we did something similar, an overlay for the Tinder Hill uh district. And so I think the recognition that could come from that for these two neighborhoods would certainly help make a statement that
these are important areas. the collection of houses, some of them more important than others, means something and we should be careful when we do planning and other public improvements. So, that's really I just thought it was very helpful to get that advice from you all. So, I want to thank you for that. >> Again, they they have been recognized
and I'm familiar with the the designations in in Fairfax and those are state and national registered designations. Uh the the question really is a local designation and that's a step further. Um but the state and the state and the same thing with Tenth and Page
neighborhood which we surveyed in 2021 uh 456 properties we looked at uh very large I think 90 acres uh eligible uh for the National Register as a historic district. Rose Hill we surveyed uh in
2018 eligible for the National Register. Um, Fightfield of course is on the National Register and Star Hill we even had evaluated in 2016 I believe that was uh the section was eligible for listing on the National Register. Uh but once that occurs it really it has to come
from the neighborhood. Uh it it's a lot of work and um the state and if the state review board approves the designation and it takes it's it's not free. you have to prepare a nomination. Um and uh for example uh Little High
neighborhood uh we surveyed in 2019 um a small district but to prepare to go forward and prepare the uh national register nomination was around $10,000. Um so it's not, you know, not something we
just put together. uh it it's a significant amount of work and and like I said the state won't consider it unless there is significant uh neighborhood support and then following the state if it decides uh to list something on the state register
then automatically it goes to the feds for the national register. So it's not it's something we send a letter and say we support it or we paid to have the survey done but we don't have a role in it. Then uh again to do a local district doesn't require national register
nomination but we have done the survey so we know that at least that helps with the argument. >> I need to give a class >> we just like to know how to begin that process for the conservation district the historic designation light for the city. talk to Carmelita and take it
through the neighborhood association. Uh I I >> would you be our primary contact >> possibly? Uh >> okay. >> I think there's real interest. That's why I'm asking. You know, we we we have to get started and there is a lot of
discussion. Um so I want to just ask that question. I don't know if there's a form you fill out or how how you begin, but that's the question. How would we start? >> Okay, >> I've got Yeah, I'll share. Hey, Jim, I I'll I'll follow up. I We have stuff I
could share. >> Yeah, we Tonight's not the night to kind of hash all that out, but I think there are resources available at at the city level and they can at least point you in the right direction. It sounds like it does need to kind of be grassroots up from the neighborhood. Um, but it's not
impossible, right? So, >> it's not something I'm going to get to in the next two months. Fair. >> I can say that. >> Yeah. >> So, thank you for calling in. Um, all right. Uh, so we still are Yep. We're still in the matters for public not on the agenda. Anybody? Miss Keller, would
you like to come up and speak, please? >> Genevie Keller. I I live on uh First Street North uh in the historic district and I I missed because I entered when you were uh on the speaker phone. I'm not exactly sure what you were talking
about, but I wanted to be transparent that uh last evening I attended city council meeting and there there was much discussion or at least introduction of a topic of of uh architectural review control uh for the
core what they're calling core neighborhoods the RNA neighborhoods and discussion and some understanding and some misunderstanding among those attending the meeting. Uh, I did make some comments and supported using a conservation district which I thought
would be more appropriate and I think if it were to if that were to proceed that it would need to be handled in a in a different and more sensitive manner although still meeting the state requirements for a historic district of course. So, I just wanted to be
transparent that I spoke about it and there was much discussion about it last night and it is something that Preservation Piedmont uh consistently recommended through the uh at least the the code revision and possibly in the comp plan. I'd have to go back and look
at our correspondence. We saw that that was possibly one of the parts of a solution for what they were initially calling sensitive neighborhoods. And then the second thing is just general information. Since Jeff was talking about National Register nominations,
there's a a bill that's being introduced in the General Assembly uh this session that would reduce the notification requirements for National Register nominations. Um, and I don't know if you're aware of that or if Jeff's aware of it. might be something. It's not
something immediately uh of interest to the city, but down the pike it might be because what it's it's doing is uh removing uh the requirement that adjacent owners be notified by mail
of a pending National Register nomination and DHR is supporting that. uh one, it will make the notification requirements much less honorous for them and therefore also for jurisdictions like Charlottesville and it sort of contributes to a misunderstanding now
because there's no role for adjacent property owners to play when something is uh nominated to to the National Register. Of course, there would be if they were in a district, but not if they're just next door. And for example, where I live on North First Street across the street from the Charlottesville Towers, if I weren't
already contributing in a district and I wanted to nominate my house or something else, I mean, we'd have hundreds of people who had to be notified uh because of the numbers of residents and and property owners. So, it's just something would streamline the process. It also
will create a better understanding because people get notified and then they think they have some role. They don't have any role and if it were to go to court, they wouldn't have any standing. Uh so it might be something that uh the department would want to send a letter saying uh we're in we're in support of this. So thank you.
>> Okay. >> Thanks for letting us know about that. Appreciate it. >> All righty. >> Okay. >> And okay I think we're done with matters from the public. Uh we'll move along to the consent agenda this evening's one
item is the minutes from the December 16th, 2025 BA meeting. >> Move to approve the consent agenda consisting of the minutes of our meeting from December of 2025. >> Second. >> Second. >> All right. Any discussion?
All in favor? I >> I opposed. >> I abstain because I wasn't here. >> Thank you, Mr. Schwarz. >> All right. Motion carries. Uh we don't have any deferred items. And our first new item is uh recommendation
to city council for an IP or individually protected property designation of 801 West Street. Um Mr. Warner, do you have a report? >> I I had had that on the consent agenda. Did we move it? >> Oh, well, it's listed on our new items, >> but it's fine. It's fine. It's good. Um
>> then we can discuss it. It was on version 11B that uh didn't get off my desk. Sorry. Um Kate, do you want to >> I have the original agenda that was sent out by Kate whatever last week and it it's not on the consent agenda. The West >> I mean there's it's fine. It's fine.
It's just uh >> um >> we our conversation must have taken a loop. >> Yes. Yeah. >> I think then we decided no it >> it's on our new agenda. Let's go. So I I well I don't I was just offering Kate if you wish to but this is a um
I'm >> sorry >> did you want to talk about you you so Kate worked on this and that's why I'm sort of giving her but I don't want to put you on the spot >> have a full staff report because you thought it was consent >> no you do have a staff report I just don't have I'm not >> queued up
>> yeah I'm not queued up and and Kate worked on the staff report so I was going to put her on the spot and see if she wanted to um So yeah, so uh pretty straightforward in that this is um the the first steps of recommendation for this house at 801
West Street being listed as an individually protected property. It has already the initiation at planning commission occurred in December. Um and so the next step is that you all would um review um and and then determine if
you would recommend this for listing. can show >> and the recommendation goes to >> just assume that it's queuing you up. >> So yes, so the next steps then is that you all would uh have your recommendation go along to planning
commission and then to city council in the coming months uh depending on when it's placed on the agendas. there's a a uh a community meeting that would be held uh as part of the public notice process and so we would
coordinate that. Um the city is actually acting as the applicant in this situation. Um and that is just so that um we're kind of streamlining that process for the applicant and there's no fee involved um because the zoning map amendment and zoning text amendments are
actually permitted applications um within our system. So, and I wondered if Miss Richardson could just um kind of summarize or address the emails that were exchanged um this week just about um further work that was done
on the property um since the just that's not that are not represented in the photos and the description. >> Right. So, originally um you know this house was constructed in 1905ish. Um, I'm sorry I'm scrolling through. I didn't do a full presentation on this
since um, which I probably should have. Um, but so originally in 1905 there was uh, later in 1913 a dependency or garage in the rear of the property that was demolished sometime prior to the 60s,
the early 60s. Um and then in this let's see these photographs um there has been some alteration of enclosing of this porch area um which I believe Mr. Schwarz provided some documentation uh
yesterday for us. Um these images are from the Virginia Department of Historic Resources survey in uh 2020 or 2021 I believe. Um so in our efforts we would document the known changes and the sequence as best we could. Um but as far
as what is there I mean there already have been some modifications in the 20th century the addition of stucco uh and then also replacement windows. So we would like put that into our full summary of the structure.
>> Is the widow's walk original? >> I'm sorry to our understand it's to our knowledge. Yes. Um, >> is there roof access up there? >> I don't know. I I don't know if that's a >> decorative feature or not. Um, so the
story on the house uh the gentleman that built it for him and his family uh u was a I don't want to say I can't say well known or regarded, but he he was a known uh builder and craftsman. And when you see the photographs of the interior, you certainly see um the attention to
detail. And interestingly about this house is that this was this section of Tenth and Page. Uh that northwest or northeast corner um was originally the white section of uh Tenth and Page. And you saw that you see the ownership
changing over in the 30s and 40s. And um that's when um Mr. Hunt's family uh who who's contacted us, they acquired the home and they've lived in it and owned it ever since. So, uh, it it's really an interesting in in the consultant identified it as one of the older homes
in Tenth Page. It certainly is. Uh, but I just do want to be clear there are we think several 1880 era homes down near uh uh the old Cox's Row uh that were associated with the railroad. But um it is one of the older homes and to the
best that we can determine um it's in pretty good condition from from when it was constructed. >> What was the original sighting before the stuckco? >> The we assume as with a lot of houses
that it was sighting. Um I uh stucco in Charlottesville is sort of, you know, and being a Baltimore guy, it's sort of like the uh the aluminum sighting that you we saw all over uh Baltimore in the the 50s. Uh but Stucco was a uh a thing
that was sort of added in uh you know, early 20th century to a lot of homes around here. I mean, to the extent that it's almost become uh that is the sighting of the house, but uh presumably it it was a uh wood sighting and it's
probably still there. >> What are the oldest photos that we have of Does the owner have any early photos? >> So, yes, I'm on the hunt for that. Um Mr. Hunt, who is online, um he he shared um the interior photographs that you see
and some additional ones. Um, but this might be a good question for him. But we are looking through our archives. Um, I have actually 10 page survey photographs from like the 70s and 80s. So I haven't found they haven't surfaced yet. But >> yeah, I think anything we have wouldn't
go back further than the 70s >> at least here in NDS. >> Folks, I unmuted myself. Are you interested in hearing from the peanut gallery? So yeah, I guess uh yeah, >> this is >> Mr. H.
>> Yes. So he's the applicant. So yeah, he can. >> So just if I can clarify something. So zoning text amendment, zoning map amendments, there are there's not get in the weeds of the process, but the best way to do something like this
is to ask the planning commission to initiate it. and that then takes some of the burden off of the applicant for for something like this. So, um so Mr. Hunt approached me uh I think sometime last summer uh with the idea and we've been
talking about it >> and so yes he is you know officially the the requesttor of this but in um in the sort of on the paperwork that that was initiated by the planning commission >> right >> but you can call in the applicant
>> but in terms of our procedure in our meeting yep >> now is the time when the applicant or >> I think person would like to present or speak about the project. So, sure, Mr. Hunt, would you like to speak about your project, please? Or the the desire to
list this as an IP? >> Sure. And you can call me the applicant because I've been called far worse. >> Thank you everybody in the board and especially Jeff Werner, whom I I just laid on eyes on tonight for the first time. He's a handsome devil. Um,
I am a son of Charlottesville. I was born University Hospital. Uh my grandparents are from Charlottesville. My grandmother, Ma Fleming, taught at Jefferson School for 40 years. My great great greatgrandfather,
you might know, Henry Martin, the bell ringer at UVA. >> Wow. >> Uh I if you prick me, I bleed Charlottesville. And much of my heart and soul and a whole lot of my money has gone into preserving the home that my
grandparents purchased uh during the war. And it stands there because I love Charlottesville because it's a monument to them and to my mother who passed it down to me. And I want to make sure that it's there for as long as it's standing and as an
example to the to the community of the respect that the city would confer on the people of Tenth and Page for the things that we went through for the things that we've developed to our contributions to the city's culture to our contributions to the city's economy.
Um, and by the way, it's a beautiful house. And one of these days, I hope you will all come by and take a look. Um, I do, to answer a previous question, have a photograph, I think, of my grandfather holding me when I was 2 years old in
front of that house. And it looks exactly like it does now, which answers the question in part about when the Stuckco was on. It's been there as long as I've been here. And that makes it about 69 years. and county. >> There you go.
>> Excellent. Thank you so much uh for your summary and and your passion for the project for sure shows through. Um I guess are there any questions from the public? Anybody online? Nope. Okay. Any questions from the B?
Um, any comments from the public? >> Yes, there is someone online. Mr. Snyder again has a question or a comment. >> Okay, >> Mr. Snyder, do you hear us? >> Yes, I do. And I'm seeing the picture. And Mr. Hunt, I just want to congratulate him. It's a beautiful
house. Your family's been a great steward of it. And it's houses like this that are kept up by the families and been there that make a community. So, um I think that whole neighborhood uh could use your help if we can u help preserve
it and help it be enhanced and survive all the development that's going on around it. So, love to meet you. I live in in in older neighborhood and appreciate older homes. So, just congratulations. Beautiful place.
>> If I just I guess as Mr. public person uh speaking on this. I I will share, you know, I've talked to Mr. Hunt and I have communicated back and forth on email. Uh we talked on the phone. Um we've talked a lot recently. He's had some some some email issues that um I hopefully we've
we've resolved. But uh the the backstory of these places is what's always so amazing to me about Charlottesville and the the connections that exist. Um, this is a small town and and when you piece together the names, I knew the story of
of Mr. Hunt's mom. I did not know the story, the connection to Mr. Mr. Martin. And and I I see these stories woven through this quilt that is this town. And it's really amazing. Uh, Miss Keller's here and
she'll often, you know, in the historic resource committee meeting, we talk about places in the city that are, you know, a place that's important for a certain thing or certain event and then and you'll look at a name and then see, for example, when we were looking at the
Carver in uh the woman that that that worked there and and the other things that she did within this community. And it really is just I I I just continue to marvel uh that we have these stories and I wish we had a a way to to tell them
all and then show all those connections. But um so I just say from where I the job I get to do every day is very much a privilege to be part of these things and part of these stories, the stories of the two, you know, houses in Field that
we recently talked about. And I I just I I applaud Mr. Hunt. uh you know, we even have a Baltimore connection, so we had a a good chat about that. But I I think the sincerity and and and concern for this family property is just incredible
and uh I I tip my hat to him. Thank you. >> Um comments from the B. >> Anybody make a motion? >> Yeah. >> Although I do have like one comment. Um I mean we've got um you know the item
association of the building structure site with historic person or event. Is there a way to add >> this? Yeah. And we'll even you know Mr. Hunt's mother working at um Jefferson School. >> Yeah. I think as this moves forward um I
mean I gave it as much and I I was able to piece together from the census and from the directory some information but I I certainly think there are some u the evolution of this story uh we can work on as it moves forward to the planning commission and city council
>> just so if you know there's some future owner 50 years from now and they want to do something you've got your the text is there for that >> and that Sorry, but that's actually one of the, you know, if Kate and I didn't sleep or eat um and could, you know,
accomplish a thousand things. One of them is to have within the GIS layer um the ability to show uh sites in this town that are associated with these stories such that yes, in the future when someone um uh you know, it may not
be a designated property, but we can at least connect that story to it. uh that someone may not otherwise know. So, wish us luck. Sorry. >> A quick question. So, if this gets designated, I believe that it will, does
it mean that it is preserved as it currently stands? >> All that means is that it is a um it's like my house. Uh I not it's not a bell jar. It's like any other house in a historic district. Um, alterations to the exterior would require BAR review,
new construction, demolition. Um, >> but this is the starting line. This is the base. >> This is right. This >> within a district already, right? >> No, because 10th and page is just served. Okay. Got it. Got it. Got it. >> Right. >> I think >> this is the baseline from which
modifications are made. >> Um, Mr. Hunt, I might be mistaken, but I think you and I worked together at uh celebration at the UVA Chapel to rering the bell uh that we had restored there. So, if I'm correct, pleasure to see you
again. Um >> Wow. Well, that that's that's awesome. Pleasure to see you again. >> I'm glad you were there. You can you can testify that I'm telling the truth and the whole truth. >> That's right. That's right. >> As long as James didn't dance. >> No, not that day. Not that day. when the
bell ring. >> No, but um >> All right. Yeah. No, I mean I think Carl, your point's well taken that potentially a historic person associated at least at the local level would be a prominent educator. >> At least Miss Fleming who actually lived in the house. We're not sure Mr. Martin
did, but >> No, I was saying that's who I was referring to. >> Wouldn't have, but yeah, for sure. >> Local local prominent educator um Ma Fleming lived in this house also. So, um >> do I hear a motion? I'll make um having
considered the criteria for designation of individually protected properties per city code chapter 34 section 2.9.3 I move the B recommend that city council approve the request to designate 801 West Street parcel 31-42 as an individually protected property um and
just request that staff um supplement the record of this with um current photos and um the um uh um history of uh who's lived there >> and document perhaps documentation of
>> recent modifications. >> Did Richard just put his picture? >> He did. >> That's the Richard Hunter Remember meeting. So, we're good. We're good. Uh, do I hear a second? >> Second. >> All right. Uh, Mr. Schwarz. >> Uh, yes.
>> Uh, Mr. Bailey, >> yes. >> Mr. Burl, >> I. >> Miss Lewis, >> I. >> Mr. Rosenthal, >> yes. >> Miss Tab, >> yes. and I vote yes. Thank you very much. We uh we hope it succeeds in approval. Um we would support approval
by city council uh of this listing this property as an IP. >> Thank you very much. And uh the next step is so we have to do uh the the zoning map amendment zoning amendments like this require a public meeting
typically typically because you're changing what the allowed use uh while this is just the overlay going on it still have to do that so Kai will work on that once that's taken care of um I'll proceed with this going to the planning commission and the city
council. So, um hopefully that's in March. >> Possible. >> Um okay. Next up is a um >> that's my part. >> Make sure I'm >> Next up, we've got section E other business.
>> So, so this >> preliminary discussion for 705 St. Charles Street. Um Mr. Warner, thank you. So the situation we have um in the staff report if you all uh there's a map and
um you'll see that there is a portion of where this site is located is at the rear of a of a lot on Lexington Avenue. Um, as most of you know, when something's in the back of a
conservation district lot, we typically don't look at it. Um, can't see it from the the road in the district in front of the property. Um, a new parcel was created that now fronts on St. Charles. St. Charles, you clearly can see there's
a twob block section that is not included in the district. U, so this new lot is fronting on St. Charles. It's part of that that you will non-desated section of of the Martha Jefferson neighborhood. However, when a parcel is subdivided, it doesn't
change the overlay unless the applicant unless they had come and and requested that the boundary be shifted, but the subdivision doesn't change the overlay of the conservation district. So, and I think as I expressed in the staff report, one if this had been an out
building on the back of 710 Lexington, um I probably would have reviewed it with the chair. It depends, you know, on it. It if it wasn't visible from Lexington, I may not even, you know, have asked to review it. However, now it is a separate parcel visible from the
right of way. Um, so I I and I I don't think you all can answer how to handle it, but as far as the code reads, then you know, you all have to review it. The good part is that you get to determine the extent to which you look
at things. And in a conservation district, as we talked about in the premeating, it's a much lighter touch. Um, the reason I'm bringing this to you is um the the design is I'm not I mean I'm
I think I say in the staff report as politely as I can I mean it it it's not I know what the intent of the design is. My issue with what you have here is it's um it's vinyl and um PVC uh material
which um while we do not specifically say in ADC district that's simply not recommended and almost to why I'd say not allowed in a conservation district the guidance is to uh use materials that are typical um and and to use materials
that are you know sustainable uh permanent etc. Uh I I don't find vinyl or PVC material to to to meet that standard. Um so on one side of the coin it could be given the uh given the
circumstances of this site that it fronts on St. Charles. It fronts it it it joins a series of buildings that are not um under your purview. they're not designated and um and won't won't be to
my you know foreseeable future. Um is this is this something that um I feel strongly about the materials. Uh but that would be for you all to decide and then I would then say is there
anything else about the design um that that you would like to point out so that we can communicate with the applicant other here tonight. The next piece of this just one second is that the design is you're looking at um there are some code issues that need to be resolved. For example, the ordinance requires that
garage be located 10 ft back from the facade. Um, I think, you know, if even if they change where the garage is located or even rearrange the elevation somewhat, we're still talking about this type of
of design and the materials involved. So, I felt I I thought it would be helpful for you all to have some input even though we know this might change to some guidance to the applicant. Sorry, that's a lot to take in there, but it
before we get too far down the road, um, and this is one the reason it came in as a zero St. Charles, which is not something that's in a district, and it was once we put the pieces together and
realized, wait, this is the back of that lot, so that's why it's here. So, if you have questions for me, I know folks uh from the the builder are here. Quick question would be potentially if it looks like the the lot next door to this also extends all the way back.
>> Correct. >> And so potentially we could see this again if that back portion of that lot also were to be developed. >> Correct. And and so that's where I would say is that it's a if you wish if to treat this differently and I and I think the circumstances allow it to be very
clear, you know, where that line was. Um, and I think part of that being that the intent when the district was established was the houses on Lexington those and it's and >> so but they just when they drew the district they just trace the parcel boundaries. >> Correct. Correct.
>> So a qu another question might be what would it take to um amend the district boundary if the parcel I guess the parcel would need to be split? >> It would be the reverse of what we just discussed with Mr. >> and Yeah.
>> Okay. Just >> would you have to get like overwhelming community support for that change? >> No, that's a district. This would just be for it would be it would come to you as a recommendation of to remove it or
not uh to to change the boundary. Um and then it would go to the planning commission and then it would go to city council. Um it would certainly be publicly noticed uh just like with the IP. So folks could come in and say, "No, we don't think you should remove that."
But I think it's it's one where uh as an individual parcel, I think planning commission and council would look at it from that perspective. >> But you're correct. If it were if the overlay were removed just like the IP
piece on Seventh Street, you wouldn't be looking at anything over there. >> Sure. >> All right. One more question for this uh for staff is do we have a street view? I'm sorry I don't have the >> packaging from from Lexington. >> Um
>> we can look one up. Yes, it's a vac it's an empty lot. Um and on the adjacent houses are >> she was asking what this if we have the street from Lexington >> Google map. >> Yeah. >> I'm sorry. I did include the images of
of some of the houses up there. thought, but that's okay. Look, you can go to street. >> I think she's concerned about sight >> lines. Charles pictures. >> Is your main concern like what are the sight lines from Lexington Avenue? >> Yeah. Yeah, exactly.
>> So, it's a valley question. >> I have a staff question. >> I mean, it's related to this one and it's more of a general question about these types of lots. Um you said that if it was a a building in the back of um 710 Lexington, it would you'd
administratively review it or review with the chair. Um are we not considering um like the zoning code considers a lot to have two fronts if it is like this? >> Do we not >> and I I know the question you're asked. So this is where um first off I didn't I
don't know what I would done because that's not the the situation before us. The ordinance is written as anything visible from a right of way. >> Um I understand that in this strict rigid sense you could almost you know
>> and I I know people that have said well if I stand here and look through it and that tree is not there I can see something two blocks away. I if if you know I may be uh my my judgment is this is a non-historic
section of the district. It's it's non designated. It's not part of the district. And um my having I'm familiar I wasn't with the city at the time, but I'm familiar with when this district was created and I know
what some of the intent was with um uh and >> it it was to have a very light touch >> and I I I have difficulty from Lexington and the the buildings that are on at and
then going down to St. Charles, which is not in the district, and saying, "Oh, well, cuz I can." So I >> The answer is that it's a case by case. >> It a case by case. >> That was kind of where I was. >> Yeah. >> So like the next lot over obviously would be a similar sort of >> Right.
>> Correct. And you're actually going to see that. Well, I'm sorry. The front one you'll see >> in a month on Lexington. Yeah. >> Oh, interesting. Because I think this happened on Kelly. I think there was a some back garage that we talked about whether we
>> So I treated Kelly somewhat differently because the out buildings visible from Kelly are all contributing. >> Mhm. >> And so it it it it changes things a little bit from >> so I was just curious if there was a
>> and I and I'm I I'm open to >> you know disagreement on interpretation. I I I >> Do we know how long ago they separated? >> Very recently. And the folks here probably can tell you. I mean, this is this all happened the last 6 months, I
think. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> So, the parcel has been split. >> Mhm. It does exist and and it has its own address now, right? It is 705. >> Got it. >> Yeah. So, it was in as zero because the address had not yet been assigned.
>> Signed, right? Sure. >> And we have zeros all over town. So, it's interesting. >> Kate, can you take the street view uh at St. Charles, too, please? >> Where she started, where she started, but >> this K versus Lexington,
>> don't go through stop signs. So, so our are our choices essentially we review this as within the control district or recommend that it we get a boundary change for the district. Is that the sort of
>> it's not before you yet as a formal application. So, you know, but I think that there's I think there is room for some judgment. Um and um and that the the the intent of the conservation districts allows for that um that
flexibility and the fact that this is not that row and think about when you look at a uh something changing in a historic district, a conservation district like Lexington, you're going down Lexington and looking at those buildings on either side or you're going down Locust and you're you're focused on
those elevations. You don't look at the sides. you don't look at the rear. And it it it just it's a little tricky here that you're sort of saying, well, this lot. And I think that you all are allowed some judgment because, you know,
you could say, hey, I'm fine with it. I'm fine. I'm going to review this. I'm fine with this COA for the following reasons. Or you can say, no, I want this to be a rigid application of design guidelines. And um >> but it's a a but it's a historic
conservation district so it's got lesser guidelines to begin with. >> Mhm. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Any other questions or for staff? >> Was there a site plan? I mean I see the I see the survey >> but it doesn't show kind of uh
>> it says building permit plan is what we got and I want to know why the driveway runs through the house. >> Well, that's the existing path. >> It doesn't. It says proposed as >> So you you you have an application drawings which were the drawings
submitted for the the building permit. >> I took the elevations all that >> and put them on a sheet just to make them, you know, so you weren't looking at framing plans and things like that. >> And then there is what what Miss Lewis just pointed to was a uh a site plan,
although it it it it's more of a a plat. It doesn't show there's no landscaping. Uh uh what I'm looking for is uh a context of setback whereas this if we go back to the street view where >> 21.9 according to this
>> yeah how does that relate to the houses next to it? Yeah, good question. >> But >> one of the >> Yeah. >> that are outside the district >> that are outside the district, >> right?
>> And also weren't built >> with a new zone zoning ordinance. Correct. Let's be real about that. The facts mostly are determined not by our guidelines, but >> of a new ordinance. So, this would be the first house on St. Charles probably that's
>> uh yes it would be um right and I think that they can we could go there waiver I don't want to get into the zoning on the setbacks that that's a comp Carl probably knows more about that there's a process >> yeah I think what what I'm
primarily looking at is >> how rigidly you all want to look at this and if so then is are the design materials uh compatible or is this um is this is taken in the context of St. And
>> um >> okay. >> Um so this is just a preliminary discussion. So we're not going to have any questions or comments from the public. Um I guess applicant, y'all are here. Do you have a do you want to speak to this have a presentation at all or do you just want to answer questions? Up to you.
>> Yeah, I think I can clarify some things. Um I'm Bobby Green with Nola Builds, uh 1304 East Market. Um we'll be the contractor building this home. um pending approval. Um first thing we can clear up uh is it will not have vinyl
siding. It will have fiber cement uh lap siding and shake. I've got samples of those if needed. Uh dimensional shingles. Um we won't be putting metal on the roof, but I think that's acceptable. Uh no vinyl rails on the
porches. Those will be black metal. Um, so that's one hurdle here. >> Um, biggest thing I believe is the garage requirement. Um, so this is a unique lot with the location and the
district. Um, how it's more or less grandfathered into the Lexington property. Um, and for reference, that driveway on the plat is the construction driveway to the project on Lex. >> Thank you. >> Uh, yeah. So, it's just it's an overlay
cycle. >> Got it. >> Um, the surrounding properties range from 20 a little over 20 years maybe to 50 years old from 800 square ft to probably 2600 ft². Um, the houses
directly across are similar style with the front gables. Um, I don't remember the sighting type, but I know it's lap siding. I don't know if it's vinyl or hardy, but um, there's a mix of homes around it. the setback requirement. We've squeezed every bit we can out of this home size
of this lot. Uh hoping for some kind of acceptance for the 10-ft rule with the garage. Um I have a couple structural changes that we could implement. It's significant
change to our uh CAD team, but we'll kind of see where that goes from there. Um, for surrounding P surrounding property pictures, we have those, but you can get those on Google Earth as well. What can we I guess what can we do to
accept this home being that it'll be um I'd say well priced well above the surrounding properties helping their value um a lot of tax dollars to the city as well. Uh what can we do to accept hopefully the
garage rule being set 10 ft back? >> Yeah. So you all don't have any say in that. My recommendation to the BA is that you in a conservation district when you've looked at something
um you can authorize me to to approve it or authorize me to approve it with the the chair's review or something if I was primarily concerned is does the design overall and yes you have um there are similar uh types of architecture visible
in in the uh there are some things that are you know it's not a pure example of it but that's that's up for you to decide but I think that if you are okay with the design in concept uh however whatever results with the the garage uh
relocation or being kept where it is but the fact that the materials um are you know would not be PVC or vinyl I that's fantastic um so I think my question for you all would be is if you unless you have some questions about the or
concerns about the design. Uh consider allowing our staff uh the design review at least to okay it or but otherwise uh it would have to come back to you all for a formal vote.
>> Quick question. How big is the lot? That's best if you look at the staff report, you get the idea of the >> the the second or third page of the staff report the map >> and you get a context of the >> it is and one other consideration that we're working with then was the current
owner who we're purch and within that we are allowed to plant screening and our intention with the landscape design is to provide for additional privacy not only for him as as a resident on Lexington but also for a future owner on uh this project as well. >> Could I ask again what the shake siding
is going to be? What the material cuz vinyl was specified in what we receive. >> It's noted on the elevations there, but it will be fiber cement. >> Fiber cement. Okay, this says vinyl if I can read it correctly. That's why staff was worried about that. >> Should be edited on the >> Thank you very much.
>> I've got a question about the uh on the uh site plan. It talks about a retaining wall at the front. Yeah, there's about five feet of maybe four feet of fog from back to front on this property. Uh so
you can see it from Google Earth as well. Right now there's a temporary wooden I think it's probably 6x6's that have been there for well past their use shelf life um that that's holding that up. Um and so installing something that aesthetically matches with the design of
the home is our intended and hope that we can do. Yeah, it would be under 4t tall for the retaining wall. Um, >> and what would that be made of? >> What's overgrown right there is a few feet tall. >> The And so, but that's going to be replaced with a new one. >> That would be the same stone as the the
veneer stone that you're using for the foundation or >> probably I would we don't have a selection for that right now, but I would think something more of a landscape material for retaining wall block uh something attractive, but we don't have a selection for it right now.
That way we keep the yard as flat as we can. Um, ease the steps into the home on the front. >> And then the garage floor is sort of at a half level. >> Uh, so that's just top. Yeah. Top of slab would >> kind of be a split level between the
basement and the first floor. Uh, subfloor >> gravel fill. >> Stone fill. Yeah. That would not be excavated. Uh just digging out the basement to grade or to subgrade. >> So any other I guess questions for the applicant?
Okay. Um, I have a question about the garage and not pertaining to code, but is it is it common I guess from I don't know. I'm not super familiar with the street. Is
there is it a common to have garages on >> in the district or even on St. Charles? I wonder. >> It's a great question. I mean, truthfully, as somebody works and I I'm Jeff Maddie. I'm a core real estate partner. So, I'm representing the investor in this project. Um, and so as somebody who works in real estate and
talks to buyers and sellers all the time, I mean, garages are not necessarily a common thing in anywhere in the city, truthfully. Um, and people that are moving down from the north always kind of give me a an interesting look when I try to explain that to them, but uh, in new construction, um, you
know, is it a necessity? Like I could argue for or against it truthfully. Um, is there a contingency plan where we could convert that into a finished space with, you know, to meet parameters if that's what you all would prefer? Like >> um, sure. Um, you know, I spoke with Ben
and I apologize, but thank you. I spoke with him last week and I I played phone tag with Mr. Warner um, as well, but um, in talking to him, you know, we could explore designing it as a carport where we extend the siding within that space and and you still have sheltered parking
um, but you just don't have it back door. Um so you know our goal in in this discussion is to try to get the yes um and and what does that look like um and and to do it in a timely fashion. Obviously we're working with um a great builder here and then the investor who's
who's funding this project is eager to get started. And so um you know the hope is to to work with you all to find an amicable agreement. You know it is a unique circumstance uh because of the road that it's on. Um it's something that kind of popped up at the 11th hour for us that we weren't planning for. So, you know, the hope is is that we can all
look at it objectively and talk about fully. >> My answer would be uh if this were up on Lexington or Locust, no, there aren't. I mean, probably count on one hand the number of garages that are integral to a to a a house. Uh primarily they're to
the side or to the rear. Uh but if this were up on Locus or Lexington, I would have said to the in fact the house next door we were going to be seeing in February. We've been working with them to to dissipate uh the garage. Um here
I'm I'm less concerned about it, but no, within the district, in fact, it's one of the characteristics within the district is that the garages do tend to be in the back or um to the side. Um I think in this location and not too concerned.
>> Thanks. So, I guess my opinion, it's like at a certain level, I'd love for this parcel to get carved out and kicked out of the conservation district, so to speak, right? Or removed from the conservation district, just so that that way it just frees up any sort of
>> um bureaucracy. Um but I also just therefore I kind of feel like I would I would look at this in the context of St. Charles Street that's not in the district and not really in relation to Lexington Avenue. >> That's how I read it. But others are
agree. >> I I agree. >> Yeah, we I mean we can uh sort of critique the design, but that doesn't really make sense here. the the biggest issues for me when I saw this were were the materiality. And you've addressed all three, the railings, the um siding,
and yeah, it's it's those are good moves. I can I can live with that. And it's going to be a hardy hardy product or >> Yes, sir. Correct. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. So, I think I would support, you know, administrative approval if he wants to bounce it off on me to confirm
that they've the the actual application has those changes to the design and make sure that they meet the materiality requirements. >> Be fine with me. >> Do we have to vote on a COA? This is >> preliminary discussion. So, >> but it's pre-application. So, >> you're giving me instruction. I mean,
it's I think it's it's something I I'm comfortable with. Um, Yeah, this is one of the things that's happening and and you know Jeff and Bob may don't not know this but the how things go in this went in as a building permit then sort of went in
>> wherever it goes and there was no reason for us to you know and and then all a sudden somebody asked Kate about it and like well where is it and it it then of course cascaded from there but um I I'm
quite comfortable uh working with Ben Kobe on and I've known Jeff a long time. I am very comfortable working with him. Uh I think I'm okay and if something when the zoning gets resolved, if something's significantly different uh
in intent, uh we can talk about it, but I I I think I I'm fine uh having the review on this one. >> Okay. >> Does that help you guys out? >> Sounds great. >> Thank you all very much. Really appreciate Thanks. So, your next step is just work with Jeff on a formal COA and
>> should be good to go. >> I'll be in touch very soon. >> All right, Jeff. >> Thanks. Appreciate your appreciate your time. Thank you guys for coming out. >> All right. Uh, next we've got a work session. >> Um, items include reviewing draft
changes and revisions to the B bylaws and minor historic reviews of scenario planning. >> So, um, two ways we can we can stay in here. we can adjourn to the other room. Uh I'm whatever you all are more com most comfortable. Um I had and then the
order of things uh we can I'll leave to you to decide but I had um not necessarily a scenario plan but but Kate and I have been discussing the the need to just share with you all what what we
do how we treat certain things that come in how we treat um um administrative reviews uh how we treat inquiries. So, um I have a series of slides. We can go through those uh quickly and then talk
about the bylaws or we can get the bylaws out of the way if you guys have um any thoughts on I mean maybe you have no questions or >> like I guess it >> the question would be do we need to vote on >> you're not voting on anything
>> changes or vote on recommending them or anything? >> Nope. No action. and I just you give me direction what I then that's why I said in my notice I don't worry about the legal ease I'll sit down with the you know the the the the smart people in the in the building and ask how to word
things correctly um I and I curious if I've captured um I know uh Miss Lewis offered some recommendations we've address I I addressed those um I also it
had been recommended to me um you're the only body that you know the city body that that that takes the double um public comments. Now what I would my response to folks was >> we don't ever get anybody you know the
aside from the October and August meeting or you know we don't get um a lot of people speaking so it's not a problem or you know hasn't created a burden but it is an opportunity if you all thought that you know to simply
simplify things and say that you know after a project's introduced and the applicant speaks people get three minutes to talk. Um what and that it's important to look at that closely because when I went through the old
bylaws I noticed that because we say you know are there any questions from the public and then we allow people to ask questions then we have questions from the bar but there was nothing in there that said then who how does the applicant respond? So I I said and the
applicant can respond to those questions. you you all have just simply done it as a matter of the routine ask the applicant but then once the questions are done then we move to comments from the public comments from the bar after which the applicant then can respond to those so I've I've
clarified that it each of those steps uh the applicant has an opportunity to speak >> and then I added the the the additional piece of um >> when you all have had and and and I I don't I don't want to ask Sher to give
a legal opinion on this, but I think maybe it could help with some of the wording because there's >> one more person says that I'm going to throw up. >> Yeah, please stop. >> Oh, I'm sorry. >> I read the memo we talked about at the premeating. >> I'm No, I meant offended at this point. Just please stop.
>> I'm not going to legal ease anything. >> No, I don't want to. Sorry. >> I was asked to review the bylaws. >> No, I meant I meant in terms like we say >> I mean staff asked me to review the bylaws for the public information. Anybody listening online, I am a practicing attorney. >> I am not a city attorney. I have lots of
gaps in my knowledge about public, you know, public representation of public bodies >> and so I don't intend to do that. >> I'll repeat again. I don't intend to legalize this. Okay. Thank you. >> It's the word discussion. We use discussion a lot and um and I'm trying I
just want to make sure I use that correctly because where when you all have I say you you discuss the comments but then you have your discussion that leads to your motion in a vote and I put in there um that the chair's discretion
you can have following that discussion you can allow the applicant to respond and I just don't know if discussion is the right word to use repeatedly. So, um, >> so I mean, >> your thoughts on that would be helpful, but >> it's my understanding on Robert's rules of order. When you're taking a vote,
you've got a motion, you've got a second, there's a period of discussion, and then you take the vote. >> And I'm not talking about the I'm talking not I'm talking about when you all have had your conversation. You haven't had a motion yet. >> You've had your conversation. You following the comments from the public,
comments from the B. You've had a convers you've had a discussion, >> right? That's that sort of final opportunity. Yes. >> For you know, so or if there if something comes up, I'm simply stating that the chair can say, "Well, let's ask the or there's an opportunity there."
But no, once a motion's been made, >> I there's nothing in there about um uh having further conversation with the applicant, >> right? >> I was just trying to think of the right word for discussion. That was the the core of the question.
So, where's I was trying to find I guess you sort of summarized all the changes to the bylaws, right? That you've >> tried to put them in red. Track changes got a little >> for some reason instead of showing
things as >> where's this part about >> questions and comments from the public. >> All right, let's let's try let's do this. So at the very beginning and >> 4.4 four 4.3
>> cuz I was struggling with >> start with four. >> Yeah, I got you. Okay. So, I guess I mean ultimately what it gets question following function, right? So ultimately one thing it gets down to is do we want to continue to have a split
questions and comments from the public and the V for that matter or do we want to combined at least really combine them into two just questions and comments from the public is one thing and then questions and comments from the V another. >> Is there benefit to bringing them up? I
also personally I disagree and I don't know if this is in here. I do not think that the applicant should directly address the public in their responses to their questions. I think it's more I feel like it's if someone has a question
from the public, they pose it to the BAR >> and then the BA can turn around and ask the applicant. I think that helps to keep tempers down etc. potentially. >> So I have yes a question from the public followed by questions from the B then
following that. So after you all have asked questions um the applicant has three minutes to respond. So, and I and I I will actually tell I I try to encourage applicants to not get in, you know. >> Yeah. I think when you were summarizing it earlier, you seem to insinuate that
that there was a back and forth. >> Yeah. The sequence of >> but ultimately I think the primary question is do we want to have that sort of two separate things? cuz sometimes it gets a little repetitive, gets a little confusing where you know I find myself having to try and
like oh this is just this is the question time versus the comments time you know and it gets a little tricky. I know Carl I don't know how does the planning commission do it if >> Yeah. So I when I for the planning commission meetings I try and I remind people questions first only questions um
because I think it just if there is if it is a public hearing I think it helps the public to actually hear questions because then they only get one chance to respond whereas um they can so during comments they don't get to ask questions. >> Who sorry who's they >> the public. >> Okay. Um, so yeah, in that sense it
helps to do >> just do questions so that everything can be clarified >> and then the public gets to respond um to that. But I personally I like having the we've had applicants before ask questions and then come back later and have comments about those.
>> And as long as we're not thinking that it's a big time sync, I don't see the hurt. >> Yeah. >> Or the harm in that. Sometimes it is or at least in recent memory >> and you have the opportunity and my response when I was asked by colleagues. So the reason I bring it to
you is because folks ask me why did you do this? I said in fairness I'll raise it and let you all decide. But I I I I think the process as we have it works and then you have the you have the means to modify that process should circumstances call for
>> as chair you also have the the ability to tell someone you stopped asking questions at this point. >> Yeah. Right. Let's move on. >> The way that 4.3 is written right now I just want to make sure that this is actually the way we want to do it.
There's questions from the public, questions from the bar, and then the answers. I mean, in real the way it really works, it seems like you ask a question and you get an answer. >> Yeah. >> Um I mean, and are they allowed three
minutes per question or are they do we have to like save all our questions and then they have to >> Yeah, it's a little tricky. Um >> that these are where this is where I have fun having discussions with my colleagues about it is you know explaining that this is a
very different process from legislative action or something where we're having a discussion about a design and and it does evolve. I think the um traditionally uh the way we've done it is the people line up and we'll ask in in one after the other their questions
then that's done. You all can um I think depending upon how the chair feels or you all feel individually um it is weird to ask nine questions and or maybe 18 questions and then have the applicant >> Yeah. Um >> what's supposed to take notes on each
question and then be limited to three minutes >> and and I've seen we we rarely get questions from the public. we get comments >> so that and that the I see where it cuz what I'm saying the way it's written is like no you can't talk until the bar is
done and um I mean I can explore that and the other there's no urgency to we want to get this right so and the process is that once I have once we have what we all sort of are working towards then you all get to vote on it formally
and I have to put on the agenda so uh but the way you're currently operating is fine. It it it just it does need a little bit of updating. So, let's let's take our time. >> Does this language this language doesn't seem to negate sorry
>> it still allows you the chair to allow the applicant to answer questions whenever they want. I mean, that's kind of your your purview as a as chair. So, I'm not sure that this language hurts that. It just lets it so if things get out of control, we've got a way of saying we got to limit it to 3 minutes
and move on. >> Mhm. >> I I think I agree with Mr. Burl and Mr. Short. it the the way it's written, you could read it either way that that that once the questions are asked from the public and from the BA that the
applicant wouldn't have an opportunity, but we know naturally they would probably, but but I mean there's just no, I guess follow on in that first sentence that says and the applicant will have an opportunity to respond to those questions, but then it just and I and I understand the second sentence
which is sort of like his his overall response or whatever it's called in debate. I don't know. You know, the final word that he gets to just wrap up, you know, >> which they should which they should have time to do that
>> like summarize or whatever it is edit is what's causing the confusion here a little bit. Like when I read this without the edit, chair shall ask for questions from the public followed by questions from the bar. >> That's sort of what we've been doing. piece of it doesn't say that the
applicant can answer, >> right? I mean, it could just what if it just says, what if we >> tried to rein this in a little bit that just says the chair shall ask for questions from the public and questions from the B followed by a
response period. The questions then the chair will ask for comments from the public and comments from the V followed by a response period. I mean there some you know just simplifies >> but usually the applicant does have like three minutes at the very end please somebody remember the word it not
record it's there's a debate word for it it's not a legal word but >> I mean it is more of a >> I think like for instance on seventh street we allow Mr. Matthews to to speak, you know, some final word before the vote. I think that's the essence of
what it is after those questions. Um, >> so and then so under 4.3 the um the the the applicant shall be allowed three minutes to respond. That that's already in our current preamble. So that's sort
of there. I just I think just rewarded it slightly. But I I I'm gonna ask let me ask Missy how the planning commission does it with that you know sort of well I guess they don't do it but the point is is that at the during the questions not from the public but during the
question period for the bar there is some interaction and I want to word that uh so that it's understood it's what K and I were talking today it's like you know if both neither of us came into work tomorrow and somebody picked this up we're talking about the ordinance you know how would someone interpret it so
to try to make sure that it it there's some clarity in that. So, let me let me I know what you're asking me, so let me find the right words. >> What if we just called it questions and answers? >> Yeah. Well, that doesn't and I can even we have our practice
>> the Q&A for the B bar. >> No, no one's going to stand up and say you all broke the B law uh and we get hauled away. and and 4.7 says nothing contained herein shall be construed as prohibiting the chair from conducting
orderly meeting. That's right. >> You have a 4.7 version. Do you >> I don't have a 4.7. >> Yes, you do. >> Yes, you do. >> Orderly meetings >> on the version that you gave us. >> Just fire us all. >> That's the reason I gave you.
>> It's There's no It was formerly 4.6. >> Pranking Jeff tonight. Is that what this is? It >> was formerly 4.6. >> Formerly, >> but it's now 4.7 because he >> because he carved Well, that's right. Because he Right. Okay. Just
>> he carved out >> he took 4.3. >> Just so I >> he took 4.3 and made 4.3 and 4.4. So bumped 4.6 to 4.7. >> This is a previous version. This is from the 14th. >> Here, Jeff. This is from the 20th. still
working on the one with the IP on the consent agenda. >> This is the current this is the current version. I had an extra copy. >> All right. There you go. >> Considering the one call it a question and answer question and answer go
>> like a question and answer session from the public. Question and answer session from the B. >> And that way it implies that the applicant has a chance to respond. But we could also preface it by saying, you know, we'd like the public and the applicant to address the bar, not one
another. >> Correct. Correct. Um, you get the gist. >> I gotcha. Next item. Next, next thing. >> Thanks. Um, that was the one that was >> Can we I'm sorry. Go back to this one more time.
>> Sure. So, the original 4.3 has sort of language that says the three minutes that we're giving them to respond is at the end of all of this. It's sort of right just before the vote. >> That's what I >> That's how it reads.
>> And and but that's what we've been sort of doing, isn't it? >> Yeah. >> Uh allowing like um >> as an additional thing like when we're done talking and just >> But it should be it should be after the comments, I think. a final word. It
should be like down after 4.5 or after 4.4. I don't know exactly that that that 3 minutes. >> Good question. When you've asked questions, >> you've gotten responses. Um because we >> then your comments are built on those. Right. Right.
>> That would take a lot of brain power. >> Yeah. >> All right. Well, >> but we have I think you know what we're what we want. >> But uh to me, the uh pre-edited version is actually a little more clear. Okay. >> I kind of agree with you.
>> Yeah. >> I mean the system as it is isn't broken is it? I mean I want to say that we have seemingly done very well even when we had very large audience and thanks
>> and a bunch of stuff going on. The chair and the everybody seemed to keep things in order and did >> Yeah. I mean, I will say uh, you know, I think that the three minute thing can it
helps us. It also, you know, we we try and keep people to 3 minutes. I try my best to kind of like gauge it, right? Like if somebody I can tell somebody's got another like 30 seconds or maybe a minute, you let them go and you finish. I think I have seen folks in the public like when our applicant rambles longer
than three minutes, you know, I've seen people hold up their phone with a timer on it, you know, and kind of trying to say which I think is fine and I think it's basically them saying you got to hold them to the same standard as you're holding the public and we should. So I think maybe Jeeoff that's maybe that's what you're trying to get at here a little bit is trying to like
>> level the playing field a little bit, keeping it fair. Um so and I think that's but at the same time the applicant knows the project, right? And so and their explanation of an answer might take longer than three minutes, but it's valuable. >> That's your discretion, right? And that's your discretion.
>> I think maybe it's sort of we need the three minutes when we need it, but we also need to allow for the the right amount of discussion. >> The scenario I had in mind is so you know the three people here have asked three questions and then each of you have asked a question that you don't
just go right into comments. I and I I we have to go back and look at the old minutes and see what we've done in the past. I could see the applicant saying, "Well, can I can I answer that question?" And it my recollection is you've had some of sort of conversation
before you've then gone into the comments. So, let me go look at the old I just want to make sure that that's clear. That way when somebody comes up and says, "Well, can I can I respond to those questions?" and somebody, you know, we're not going I don't know if you're allowed to. Uh, but let me give
it a look. I I understand exactly what you're saying and let me have a solid answer from the past. And sorry if somebody's covered this, but you know the the I think what you're trying to say is the irritating situation is where the
applicant wants to respond to every single question >> um or even comment >> from the public which can be tiresome >> you know >> that retort or that gotcha or you know whatever it is I mean that that's and the chair has >> and there's also sorry
>> yeah no >> there's also sort of sometimes questions get asked or comment a lot of times question or comments get made that really don't fall within our purview and you can't you know I try sometimes sometimes I'll stop people sometimes you just let them say their thing and get on
and so I try and jot those things down and things that are within our purview or really do have a bearing on the application then I'll kind of bring that back up and say can you respond to this one maybe not all 10 >> the tendency has been when each of you has a question you're essentially asking
the applicant at that moment um Mr. Burl said, "What's going on with this um what's the height of this retaining wall?" And it wasn't, you know, here's the question. Set it aside and answer. He You need the answer. >> We asked them to respond. Yeah. >> So, it just So, that's been our
practice. I >> Yeah, that's 30 seconds. >> So, I I don't mean I didn't want to complicate. I guess I was trying to just say, "Yeah, that's the practice is when we ask questions, they're responding." >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Can I make a comment about how this um just section 4 is organized? Like the
preliminary part says, "Okay, here's how you here's how the agent the it here's how your order is going to go." >> And it starts to tick through first staff report applicant and and you get all the way down to which is great 4.5 B discussion
>> but then 4.6 is is not shouldn't start I I don't think at least it should be titled public questions. It's meant to be like 4.7 there additional guidelines, >> but if we leave it there, I'm afraid that the public or someone's going to think that, okay, at the end of our
discussion, >> um, there are more public comments. So, >> yeah. >> Do you know what I mean? Like there should be, if I were to, it's an outlining thing. I would I would I would make like a I would create the preliminary paragraph after current
paragraph four as 4.1 and they go A B C D like little letters through the agenda and then 4.2 2 would be public questions and comments, you know, identify themselves, get their address, and then 4.3 would be orderly meeting. Does that make sense?
>> While you jot that down, a minor thing, um I got my wrist slap for asking someone's address in the plan commission and apparently they don't do that anymore. >> Wow. >> Um because I guess it just people didn't want to Yeah. privacy issues. So I don't know if we include that or not. Do you have to say that you're a resident of the city or
>> um I would like it to be that way. I think that's a good idea. >> I will I will find out. That's a good point though about the privacy thing and also just >> fair. I think I mean I guess a question we've had plenty of people who aren't residents of the city still make comments.
>> Is there a prohibition against that? >> No, but I think it does need to be clear >> if they are. uh if they are I mean yeah as um said if they are a resident or not but I'm not sure that >> yeah or maybe they own property if they're a neighbor or you know whatever
>> I mean there's definitely been people who are >> you know a business owner or practice practicing architect other jurisdictions where they do ask the address >> we used to it used to be even city council >> it's still part of our
>> last couple years they stopped doing that And yeah, I I didn't realize and I asked someone's address like one or two meetings ago and they said, "No, you can't do that." >> We rarely We rarely >> I got changed, I think, by council sometime last couple years. >> Yeah. Well, that's the case. >> Nobody goes No one comes to our meetings
to know about that. >> If that's the case, then if y'all could check on that. >> It was kind of not. >> We're going to ask staff to do that. >> You don't have to give your address, but you could just state your street residence, the name of the street. >> St. Charles Street >> or state like a like a >> Some streets Some streets are short.
little straight. I don't know. >> See what council does. >> One of the things we're also doing is um there are we we found council has over the years approved various resolutions >> on things. For example, and we didn't know this, Miss Kell in the room found
out about last year that oh you can't be on two boards. Now, Carl can because he's appointed as the planning commissioner, but you can't be on the B and the BCA or you can't be on the B and the historic resources committee. Um, I
didn't know that that was there. >> Are you sure? >> Is well that was >> I think that that was unique to being on the board of zoning appeals because the board of zoning appeals says >> that you cannot be a member of any other city board except one member may be a
member of the plan >> planning commission and we're think it's unique to the BCA >> and I >> and the other might be parliament >> right >> I don't think it's law >> I >> I could be mistaken >> it it's just and I I want to double
check that cuz right as I recall >> but there are these there are these resolutions sorry it's not necessarily I'm saying is there are some things that council has put into place in um how things are treated that we are also going to make sure anything like that has to be in here we'll put that in But
thanks Jenny because that was that was I didn't realize that finally commissioner might be on the >> Yeah, planning commissioner. So I was on TJPDC and >> that might help our landscape architect not as in B.
>> Okay. Um Mr. Seore comment on this. Um I know you said this is maybe not our in the bylaws but procedures wherever it needs to go. Can we please find a solution for snow days and miss quorums? Um I think planning
commission did something that's it's not waiting a whole month but is like the next something that complies with um notification thing. >> Does that include lack of quorum issues? >> I think so. I don't know. Uh but it was
it was what to do in case a meeting can't happen. the meeting is canled for you know weather act of god whatever >> right >> it's not out of our hands >> right but it's because because we do have the issue of like things could be automatically approved >> right I know yeah we did
>> I think there is a I think the plan commission had some sort of thing that let us have a meeting at the next possible date um I mean this day a meeting because of a lack of quorum could we meet again in a week or
>> only if I could meet the public notice or requirements. >> Now, here's here's something cuz Kate and Ily went through some weird scenarios uh a week ago. an answer to the one question that is Carl's raised about the automatics or if you all don't
have a quorum something is approved the code allows any agreved party to appeal uh a decision and and even if it's a decision by you know default uh including the director of neighborhood development so I could or I could if
let's say there were a project that was controversial or had issues and you know for whatever reason you all were unable to meet and I felt strongly that that approval just wasn't um right.
I could ask my boss to rate to appeal that to council. So there's a there's a means to an end in there that if we really felt like something egregious has occurred, uh you can al always ask council to to review it. Um but
>> that is a two to three months process, right? Yes. >> And it wouldn't go to council with a B recommendation either, right? >> I'm sorry. >> It wouldn't it wouldn't arrive at council with a B recommendation. It
would just sort of be >> it would be that the agrieved party would have to make No, you all certainly and then the B can say, you know, we weren't able to meet because that asteroid hit. Um but here's how we feel about that. >> My first meeting of the planning
commission was on 911. Yeah, >> that was a Tuesday. >> Yeah, >> true. >> Start. >> I was like, "What's the fuss? Let's have a meeting." And then I didn't realize how bad >> they didn't call working and didn't realize really what had happened.
>> Well, so let me look let me look at that and I'll see what the planning commission is doing. And uh but uh it's a valid question. We did have as said earlier tonight, we we had this happen I think in 2019, a massive ice storm. So it's it can happen. um a couple times
before that too. Um I mean again more than once in my time discussed it at last meeting in December and it felt like you know Sherry brought it up um as a possibility for this meeting >> and it felt like it just removed that option of deferral entirely because it
sort of forced a decision which feels a little bit like we should have that option. you >> the option to >> to request deferral from the >> you because if if if we don't have that
30 days it's like okay well maybe we won't be able to meet again tore this and so it's not real it's not a real option at that point. >> Well one thing is this is why I tried very very hard to before you all see something or before it comes to you
formally let have a conversation about it. I I really if someone comes in and I just say this is dead on arrival, I I I do everything I can to either discourage it or or to get them to change it. Um I I mean there's there's so many unforeseen things out there and I'm just
saying that we can I will find out what we can do. It will be a function of of of the notification and then it's a it's a function of what you all have available. But let me let me >> Is the deferral listed in our bylaws >> or is it just part of the guidelines?
>> The deferral is in the um policy. It's in our process manual. >> Okay. >> Is that process manual available to the public? >> Absolutely. I you should have reviewed >> available to us >> cuz it's not with the ordinance, right?
>> Have I seen it? >> It's with the code of development. If you go to uh >> go right now go to >> So wait, it's in the zoning code. That's what you're saying. That's the process. >> You're you're asking a question that I hear I hear people in the public asking and I I'm not kidding. I I So let's go
to the neighborhood development web page. >> Hold on. Let me share so you can see how many clicks away it is. >> So >> was it in our binders that are brought to every single meeting except for this one where you could have shown us the >> where there I think somebody needed a binder and took them. Um,
>> it was a test to see if you all noticed that they ever were handed out. So, when you go to neighborhood development, it's >> cuz you was concerned. >> You see nice picture of my boss. You see the development code and procedures manual right there. Boom.
>> Where is it? >> Where? >> Huh? Look at that. >> So, what is the difference? Well, never mind. So, this is the this is the how-to for um and then go down to the design review section.
>> Maybe we should just do this. >> Why isn't length? >> This This makes me so frustrated. >> I thought the planning commission reviewed this. >> I don't We reviewed the zoning code and we reviewed the We may have looked at
this at some point in the you know, all the documents we looked at, but I don't remember >> and we recently modified this and it had to get approval before it went live. >> There may have been some trust that staff did. >> K, can you remind us what the public
notification requirements are? >> I can't is it >> we don't do letters anymore, >> but we have to post on the property and >> property and maybe online or something or >> there is a if you scroll to the public notice section. Yeah.
>> What was great is the code said per state code. What does state code say? And it was like well you have to do five days, >> you know. So >> just five days, >> we do more. >> We do more code dictates, >> right? And that's the policy. >> So where I was going with that is like
kind of if we defer it, >> if you can't meet, >> right, >> my first call is to the applicant and say >> it says we have 60 >> an asteroid hit. We really can't discuss this tonight. Will you will you bump it to the Let me bump it to the next
meeting. >> In the few occasions that's happened, they've said, "Sure." >> And then if they won't do that, you know, I've never we've never dealt with it. It's at the end when public notice >> days. >> No, it's 30 for property in AC district
following the bill for complete application. The bar will have 30 days. >> Page seven, bottom of page seven. >> Go up one. 60 days. 30 days. >> 80 is 60. HC is 30. >> That's HC. 60 is ADC. >> Yeah. >> Right. So, I'm saying the historic conservation districts, we only have 30
days, >> right? >> Oh, that's what you >> That was the problem. >> Thank you. >> Oh, okay. >> Is there any language in the whole thing that speaks to acts of God or weather? >> Not in here. >> No.
>> Yeah. I think it was our plan by the next month. I don't know. >> And to give us more flexibility, would it be possible to make it 60 in the HC at 90? >> No. But could we not is this like can
they not modify it to say 31 days and then you know you'll get to the next meeting? >> The intent as I understood it was to say >> the next meeting >> to get one meeting. >> All right. So >> you get one meeting past Yeah.
>> What about when you defer to the next meeting and it's 32 days because we meet on a Wednesday. So, um I mean this is a this is one of these all things being equal. It's worked. Um but I can So the reason the 30 days is in there is in the
old ordinance that's when you were required to to act on a conservation district. With that logic, someone could submit it the day after we meet and if our next meeting isn't until 32 days later, they can get it submitted and
approved without us even seeing it. >> No, this is not it's not a I mean there are submitt and application deadlines and then I make a determination of a complete application. >> And when you look at it now, you know, I'm not I have not memorized this thing.
So I'm not prepared to have a a mental joust about the the the what the commas and the colons and semicolons mean in practice. It has been when you look at a thing in a historic district that's meeting one conservation district. The
applicant defers it. I've actually by the way added language in here into this document. an applicant used to be able to defer something and if you recall several years ago Bushman Jeff Drifus brought something back that they had deferred like 10 years ago and I like I
don't know what to do that does that I written in here a policy that it if after I think 18 months you haven't brought it back that it needs to be a new application >> the but the 30 days are intended to say that when I bring something to you as a
complete act application for action on it as a in In a conservation district, you get that one meeting or the applicant can defer it. >> And for an ADC district, if you defer it, you can only defer it to that next
meeting. That's right. >> And you have to take action on it. >> Yeah. >> So it it it prevents you all from saying, "We'll defer it. Defer, defer, defer." You have to you to decide up or down. And if you're not willing to vote on it to approve it, then you have to
vote to deny it. You you can't defer it further. So this is a fairness to the applicant as much as anything. >> That's just for ADC though. >> ADCN it was an old ordinance for both. Um I incorporated it into the um process
guidelines. That's what I was instructed to do because it's not in the code now. So since we're also residents of the city maybe as the B because I think right now it sounds like staff doesn't want to argue for
this. We could send a letter or speak to council that says this is silly. let's change it to 60 days and council is the ones who determine what is the public, you know, what the public wants because I kind of disagree that this was
a I think this was an accident without knowing what the full consequences were. Um, and I believe it was done when Mills was made a historic conservation district. It was >> Yeah, a lot of this chang >> I think we had 60 days when when Martha Jefferson was created. I think it was still 60 days for the that district. And
and to back that up, my concern is not what you talked about tonight or an addition on someone's house in a conservation district. It's a large-scale residential project like uh the Tarleton Oak or or the um that large project that that ran along Lexington
Avenue uh there next to the hospital. The large scale project, we can't just treat that as a you know, let's just so I I and that's why I think the language be If we could clarify the type and scale of project, that might be helpful. But
>> I'm also worried about just um part of the job of historic conservation district is demolition review and you could get a demolition approved if someone got lucky and we didn't have a meeting, >> but you could appeal that. >> Yeah, I understand. >> But then we're hoping that council is
going to want to go for that appeal. It's a fair question and I I I will speak to council or send a letter, but >> Carl, thanks. >> I've been trying I mentioned it to st I've mentioned the plan commission staff. I've mentioned it, you know, here and it it seems like it's all there's a
lot of this was what the public wanted at one point and it things get boring >> for a lot of different things in the zoning code. Things get kind of pushed aside for that reason. All right. >> If you could go to item 2.2 is where I
inserted something. It might be unnecessary, but we did have some >> Which one did you say? >> 2.2. >> 2.2. >> Yeah. >> I mean, that's how we >> I'm stating the obvious fun. >> That's fun. Adding the the Wednesday
meeting. >> Yeah. >> Yep. >> Yeah. Yes. It's essentially January, February, right? >> I guess potentially the board potentially June. >> We actually had a situation a couple years ago where
>> July >> the going >> it it shaped the it the third Wednesday was actually the Wednesday prior. So, but I um in 2.5 uh provisions of the Virginia Freedom of Information Act as
clarification uh added uh um Miss Lewis offered just to clarify what that code section was. The reason in 2.6 and 2.7 um the way it had been written is notice of meetings. Um, and I was supposed to
give written notice to all of you and deliver it to your homes. Um, and so I I clarified the notice of the meetings for you all. >> I used to get a packet of my home. >> I Yeah,
>> Carl still has his envelope. >> Did you get one? >> I've just got a stack of applications somewhere. >> That was my wife and I. We That was our together time on a Saturday. So the so I call it the public notice of the board meeting. I'm giving you notice of the
meeting uh on working days and I delete the word written uh I I don't know what the maybe we need to call it something else but I'm not hand delivering something to you >> and then I refer to public public notice which is different from what you all
have and so that's what those two things say. >> Do we get notice? >> Do we get notice for meetings? I guess >> when she sends out the packet, I think that email, >> that's our notice. >> That's our notice. >> But we could start we could go back to deliveries. That was
>> I wait to Kate to show up on my front door with my matcha or something in the packet. And then under 3.1 I just simply added that >> diffy >> because a question came up with um the majority of the membership of the bar
and um but if there's only three members appointed and at that time well then two would be a quorum. So just sort of making that's a clarification may not be necessary but I have >> I got a question there is >> so appointed members
>> um for example Jenny's appointed but she's now no longer a member because she moved out of town. >> Right. She has she has resigned from the B. So that seat is vacant. There are currently eight members appointed members of the B. >> Is appointed the right word though or is it
>> I guess vacant? If she's resigned then she's not appointed anymore. current members have a >> I can get the right language on that. It's it's just that in case >> there was on mass resation. >> I think appointed makes sense to me
because like with the planning commission, we had two members that were appointed the day before our last meeting and they might not have shown up but they our quorum suddenly became more because those two members were finally appointed. >> Um >> well that would also be current members.
>> Yeah. Yeah, I think so. Yeah. Yeah. I mean >> I I I'll get the warning right when >> the appointed also encourages us to get everybody here and to enforce the attendance. We've had that. >> Yeah. People remember a commercial member of you know owner of property
commercial district that I won't name names but there were two different members that especially one in particular >> never showed up >> with the initials HS who never showed up but then that because he was appointed it would make our quorum higher and you
know our ability to get a majority vote a porum and then the majority to vote is Charlottville trivia question um how Many members of city council voted to do the downtown mall. >> Wasn't it three to two? >> Wasn't I thought it was like so many
people recused themselves for various was like one or something. Jenny, what was it? >> Excuse me. >> How many people actually voted on council to evolve and two? >> Yeah. Because so all these recusals. So >> So I'm just trying it. >> Yeah. >> Which is great.
>> What What is our quarum requirement? >> The majority. >> We currently have eight members. So it'd be >> far >> five >> until we fill our vacancy, >> right? >> Okay. >> And then still five. Still five.
>> But if someone else were leave, would we go down to four? >> Yeah. >> The things that I added though underneath 3.2 were these are something of you had asked me about and I spoke with the clerk of court about the clerk
of counsel about this. um if you have a policy then you can you know on how you participate. though, you know, Carl wasn't here um wasn't present. He could have called in and participated. Um and
we're going to say that, but he we cannot you all I council has allowed themselves to participate uh and vote remotely. I I you all can't get there. I mean it would take some heavy lifting but I think it
would be helpful to state that you know it's okay if if Carl calls in participates and also I I additionally stated that for if someone can't attend a meeting and but provides comments that I mean we already do that people call in remotely
so I I wouldn't want someone to say you can't consider Mr. Schwarz's comments he's not here. So I'm just clarifying >> and so why can't they vote? They can't. So, let's I don't I don't have I I All I heard was no and I went all right and I wasn't going to debate
it. >> Did the planning commission do it, Carl? >> I don't think so. >> So, >> I thought someone told me last time it was state law said you couldn't do it, but >> the answer is >> you told me this group last time you can.
>> You can't um >> because >> the council can't. >> That's right. Yes, >> my mom. My mom said it and we're not going to argue with my mom. >> We're not elected officials. That may have something to do with it. >> I I'm not going to I can't speculate the
um the next thing that I added 3.6 >> allowed to speculate. >> I don't know if this is necessary, but because we refer to sections of the meeting, I don't I know the historic resources committee, we kind of have a a segments of our meeting agenda. It's It's not critical, but I didn't know if
it was it was just helpful and I can keep it or leave it. >> Um, it doesn't hurt. Just It's fine. >> It's helpful. >> And then the um >> Does it need to does this imply they have to come in that order?
>> Well, you all according to another section, I can't recall which can rearrange the agenda, but it gives at least some That's in the one above. >> Yeah. Okay. Gotcha. >> Yeah. >> 3.5. >> Yeah.
>> No matter um >> and >> whatever. >> Reason the agenda of the meeting. >> Yeah. One reason I did it is there's um I know like I don't think council used to do it. If something was pulled from consent, it went to the end of the meeting.
>> Yeah. No, we used to do that more time. >> So, I'm saying we have an order to our meeting. here's our order and then if something occurs and that >> here's where it falls. Um >> we've we've had it where for example we know an applicant is coming and they you
know by traffic or bad weather or something >> agenda too quickly and they were told by the old Robert time schedule that it was 7:30. >> That's right. So, I mean, I do think there's a little bit of value in having some flexibility there um for special cases like that, especially on important
applications where we want to hear from the applicant. Um, but I wouldn't do it like lightly. >> Well, we did once upon a time we did if something got pulled from the consent agenda, no matter how small it was, >> it went to the end and that was almost cruel because it was like
>> it's like punishment. >> Yeah. >> No, at least what I've done lately is we've done it right away. >> Yeah. Mhm. >> as as sort of the first new item. >> And I I I think I said that somewhere. >> I'm sorry. I should be reading this before. >> Yes. Four items pulled from the consent
agenda will be heard prior to items in section C. >> Sorry about that. >> Where's that? >> Uh in four preamble four. >> Yep. >> Which will become 4.1. >> Yes. >> Wait, there prior items in section C.
Where's how are you referring to section C? >> We'll make that clear under 3.6. >> So it' be really uh uh prior to items in section right C 3.6.3. >> Oh shoot. >> Right. We'll make that clear.
>> Like you're calling it C based on our ABC. >> I hate track changes. I hate it. >> No, it's not a track changes thing. I think it's a I think it's an outlining. >> Yeah. They're not outlining. >> Yeah. It's a b c d. >> We understand what you mean, but yeah, for clarity, we should get that
corrected. Okay. Thank you. Um, I also circle back to on the next part, section four. We already had a healthy discussion on that. >> Can I could I shift back to 3.5? >> Yes, ma'am. >> Sorry. The uh Oh, no. The 3.4
>> 3.4. >> Um, I guess from there was the moment of the in one of the seven street meetings when Mr. Matthews mentioned he thought I should recuse myself and >> uh I just I'm just like curious that I should have he told me I should weren't
here. >> I live in the neighborhood >> Phil. So >> he actually said she's biased and that she should remove herself. He he used the word bias. >> Right. Right. So I mean is >> trying to get >> I guess I just want to understand what
this personal interest of any kind. So she my understanding is Miss Lewis had offered I thought >> so there's two ways to tilt on this. Um there's the here's what the state code says >> and just refer to it.
>> That's interesting. Um and and Sher you would ask a question and and I'm going to get you know again they'll look at this but my my response to all any anybody on this board who has asked me over the years I've a said a a
by the state code a conflict of interest is that if you will will you gain or lose from this decision you know and you financially, you know, do you have do you have an investmentbacked expectation
in the outcome of the Bar's decision? Um, that's the sort of true sense of conflict of interest. Um, but I also know that there are times when folks say, "This is my my mom's the applicant. I don't feel comfortable or
you know and I have always said to B members if you're not comfortable you know we're not I don't want to bludgeon anybody to now I would we did have something a year or two ago where a lot of people were stepping back and
it's like I I need we we need to have a discussion about this. We need to I need a vote. I know you may not be comfortable with it but I mean some of it was even like oh I had done work for that architect in the past or that builder in the past >> that's not >> so yeah so it's not a conflict of
interest so that just trying to distinguish between the legal term is if you have you know if you stand to make or lose money don't participate >> okay and >> but I guess to Kate's question should we because these are are bylaws and bylaws are rules of governance
>> should we insert a provision about recusal, like voluntary recusal, like if Kate did decide, hey, this is just too white hot and this is right across the street from me and you know, I've been out there picketing the applicant, you know, every day or whatever, you know,
and there was and I don't know, you know, probably more to that, but >> and and I had I had an applicant in the last year. I represented a party adverse to the applicant, right? Um I just yeah I participated the last time they came
before us because it was a slightly different thing. But um I felt I felt personally unlike Kate who was not biased. I was so biased against the applicant that I knew that I couldn't and I didn't tell the applicant that um
I was trying to be kind about it but he knew I recused and he didn't contact me outside the meeting and ask for anything. He knew because I had gained such information that I couldn't look at him and I couldn't do my job here. Miss Loose and I discussed that and I and I I
thought her her her concerns were valid and and reasonable and you know I wasn't going to question that and I I think what I'm hearing is what we need is something that says for a voluntary recusal what are not saying you know here are the 800 reasons you can do it but there are
reasons when someone recuses himself voluntarily that's different from >> well I was just conflicted should be that you announce it you know before the when the chair raises the application, you announce it then and you step down off the dis. Maybe you should go out of
the room. I don't know, you know, but just how it's handled is what I would want to put in here. >> Got it. >> Maybe not necessarily the reasons why we do it because that might be a little more. I know Carl wanted Sorry. >> Well, no, I don't mean to interrupt you. I mean, >> it's okay. >> Um, no, just because this is only saying
um you may recuse yourself. Um, this isn't going into the whole what constitutes a conflict of interest. >> So, I think it's if you're asking like what what allow what allows you to recuse yourself. This is just saying if you feel uncomfortable, you're allowed to recuse yourself. It also seems like
it's saying that anyone in the meeting can request a determination by the city attorney to say so an applicant could say >> to the city attorney actually like she shouldn't be able to >> vote on this.
>> I mean it does reference the code of Virginia section 2.2 >> 3100. So I don't know if there's language there. There there is language and I think what Jeff has in I mean I suggested it but what Jeff has in here reflects the code language.
>> It's really just like you have a financial statement in the outcome of the decision. Maybe one way or another it could be against or for frankly >> um >> but >> well >> but it but it I commented to Jeff and I
mean I I don't feel strongly about it but it says the Commonwealth attorney and that's actually a prosecutor. That's not the city attorney, you know, that's a commitment. That's like >> Joe Platania like is going to determine whether I can vote on this. I'm like, does he have time to do that? >> Well, right. And I mean, it seems like
this could a criminal prosecutor. I don't know if he opinions about that. But I feel like this also, it's almost like that needs to be brought up before the meeting itself because if you're going to sit here in the middle of a re meeting and ask for a ruling from a city
attorney, >> it's really >> there's no way that's going to happen. >> Yeah. Cuz they don't That's what I said. >> There's no way that's going to happen. >> Yeah. Less than 30 days, right? Right. Well, that's what we used to have city attorneys occasionally appear here when we had like a hot application that might
be appealed or something and maybe they watch remotely now. You know, it could be, >> but um yeah, that was my question. Does it kind of like grind everything to a complete halt? >> I mean, my correct me if I'm wrong, my opinion and my the way I read this is that if you know that you have a
financial conflict of interest, it's it's on you to say so and recuse yourself >> ahead of time. Well, or right then like when that item comes up like Miss Lewis said and I think that >> you know
>> I think that if it's a personal recusal I don't know if we need to codify that in any sort of in the bylaws. I mean is that not just common practice for board meetings in general? Is that not under the sort of >> like
>> like if you vote if you abstain from you can >> you abstain from a vote >> but I think when someone says you know in Miss Lewis's circumstances where she said I'm removing myself from this >> I I that was done >> prior and it it wasn't you know she didn't say I'm just going to sit up here
and listen and and that was >> and or I've had a conversation with the chair and therefore I'm going to recuse myself. >> Right. Right. But then you're removed in the proc and when it's done >> but that I can't sit up here and >> and that and that you have to do it before like I don't hear the whole
discussion. I'm like oh this is going the other way or this is not going my way. I'm going to now decide I'm going to recuse myself at the beginning of the discussion. >> So that's I just phrase that because that's not current recuse is not currently in here. Volunteer. >> I guess that's my self. >> Do we feel like it needs to be or is it
just a that's a standard practice >> on boards in general? I don't think it is. I don't mean I've seen this >> uh it happened in Louisa. A board member son was a developer and he was that's a
conflict of interest. The board member did not have a direct financial >> interest in this but he recused himself for the implic
>> right and I think it's appropriate the thing that I >> I didn't realize is when people have said I'm recusing myself or I'm you know Missy said to me well they leave the room right I'm like oh they're supposed to >> well that's the other thing >> yeah so you say if you're recusing yourself. This isn't this is different
from obstainers out there. >> Conflict of interest or you're excusing yourself. >> You are not participating in that discussion. You also um I mean >> well I didn't know we should leave the room so I sat in the back of the room. >> Yeah. I mean I think probably you're
supposed to. So I mean I guess Okay. So to make it clear, why don't we add a little language in here perhaps under the >> maybe it's a three point >> a new 3.5 right that bumps the others to 3.6 said it says voluntary recusals. Any
member may recuse themselves voluntarily if they have a personal conflict with the application or something like that. I don't know. And um for any conflict >> you say if they can't carry out their duties as a board member. Yeah. However you want to word it. >> Have to say why. Why isn't that murky?
>> I wasn't saying to say why. >> Bias and um I guess I was just trying to differentiate between a true conflict of interest. Mhm. >> They feel they can't participate in, you know, >> they prefer not to participate or
>> you could say in an unbiased fashion. >> The reason to have it in the bylaws and then have a procedure on how to do it is so that an applicant doesn't impeach a decision we make because I sit up here and I listen and then I'm like, "Oh, I'm out of here." And then it looks bad.
>> So, I think it's that's what I'm trying to say. >> Like he's losing support or he, you know, whatever. I think you should say that if any member feels they need to recuse themselves, they should do so at the outset of the agenda item >> and they should leave the room until
that agenda item has been fully closed. >> Yeah. >> At which time >> we know that >> sta at which time staff >> pull it up on our phone. >> At which time staff will go and bring them back into the room. >> There used to be TVs out there. I haven't been out there for a while. No, just say at which time staff a staff
member will go and bring them back into the meeting >> or leave them out there if they really sergeant-at-arms retrieves them. >> The baiff will go get them. >> One thing I miss on this though is that I think what this is also saying, >> yeah, thanks.
>> This is saying if you have some sort of personal interest that even if it doesn't cause you to recuse yourself, this is saying you need to disclose it. So I just to make sure that's not missed by this because it goes into personal interest but then it says you have the option of recusing yourself.
>> Yeah. It's sort of funny that >> so it is kind of just saying you need to make sure you disclose any sort of interest >> ahead of time. >> Yeah. >> Which I think is good policy just for having >> you use the example of Theo Van Gro like having his own house as an application and he still sat on the B and voted on
>> share the B. I heard he voted on Ron Bailey's house. >> Interesting. Um, Mike Ostein had to have his wife present and he had to go sit in the hallway >> when they were doing one of his projects, >> right? >> It is sort of funny that this the word may um you know it says basically if I'm
reading this right even if I have a financial interest I may excuse myself or I may not. I don't think so. >> No, but then it says at the very end it refers to the um >> the state code >> the yeah state code where if you do have a financial interest you do have to >> okay >> so I I
>> I had recommended that we adopt wholesale the the Virginia code language that says you're out of there if you do and >> that would anyway that wasn't taken. >> Okay. And the only other item I really want to
get your your feeling on is item at least on mine is item five. Um and this was at the recommendation of some of you to to clarify uh the trip >> you're not working. >> Those those 1hour training videos you sent us were very helpful. >> Yeah.
>> You want to continue to do that. I think we'll be able to fulfill this requirement. I think this is the first year we we hit except for one half hour, but it um >> I also like that it's in there >> aside from it clarifies the importance of this
>> the CLG that I think is it's it's helpful that we have that in there. I asked um DHR if there is a time requirement. Uh some states do four hours. Uh some don't say. uh Virginia Department of Historic Resources who
administers this program and Kate and I are right now working on our annual report to them um says that one hour is um appropriate every year. Uh DHR has
and usually in October, November has a um couple of workshops. This past November we went to Hopewell for a dayong session. uh I think it's the third one I've been to and typically intended by well the the professional
staff but a lot of bar members from localities are there. So it's it's you know we'll see when that comes out next time but um I think the way I I will try to do it for this coming year is to say um let's have some sort of one hour here
>> and and then we we knock it out because it it's um they've been very lenient with us. All right, I'm going to I will get all these and share the edits and >> we'll keep moving forward. Thank you. >> What happened? >> Nothing. Um,
all right. >> Let's stay here. Kate, can you >> Does anybody want a bathroom break? >> Yes. >> All right. We're gonna take a >> I was fighting it, though. >> Well, what else is there? >> The scenarios, which um I think we need a bathroom break before we go into any sort of scenario or trust trust fall activity.
>> It's a It's like a bar dungeons and dragons. >> Let's take >> I'm scared. What are we I'm confused. He's got minor historic review scenario planning as a topic awards and we have to talk about our vacancy.
>> Nobody gets an award this year. You're sitting back down. >> We're back in session. >> Yeah. I was talking to Miss Lewis. It It seems odd to discuss the V awards on live on channel 10. Um so I'm not sure how best to do that and
we don't have to do it tonight. I know we we had talked about a short meeting. I want to keep it short, but um let's communicate. Uh I'll just, you know, put back out there again some of the idea. If you have some ideas, let's circulate them. I mean, it's not that it's not public. Somebody can demand to
see it, but I I think it's it's odd to talk about granting an award to someone and deciding on an award. >> Well, there's it's such um an extraneous kind of optional award anyway. and you know, we're not required to do it. So to sit here and go,
>> hey, what do you think about the house on second and then no, I think it's ugly or it didn't turn out well or they didn't do what they're supposed to do. And those sort of public comments, you know, are hard. So that's why >> so I mean in the past I feel like we've done it in the premeating. Is that a
more acceptable time? I mean it's a public meeting but it's not not on live stream TV. >> Yeah, I that's that's reasonable. So I would say give some thought and then next month at the premeating we can have that conversation and if it seems like it's an an uncomfortable moment we can
talk about that. But I I've only heard one recommendation and I think we're good on that. But let's if that's all we have then we'll talk about that at the premeating next week. >> So So these are projects that have been completed. >> The project that Yes, it it has been
>> that came to us. It came to us. Do you is there any way y'all can send us a list? >> Well, it's a secret. >> That'd be helpful. >> It's secret. >> I don't drive around and >> Nobody knows who won the Oscar until they open the envelope. >> But there have been ones that we that went the my last time on the B that we
recognized that didn't come before the BA. >> Correct. >> Um just for some like it could have been somebody who's not doesn't have an IP, not in a district, but they did a really good job rehabbing or renovating something that we wanted to recognize. Um, so it could be, you know, that's
like another category. Um, there's also, forgive the term, but we've done like we did kind of a lifetime achievement award for Mary Joyce Scala. Um, we recognized Gil Gabe Silverman for like outstanding restoration work, you know, as a local
property owner. And then he refused to accept the award. We invited him for like three meetings, you know, cuz Gabe was so ordinary and he he just was like, "No, I don't want to. I don't like you guys. So anyway, >> and irony of ironies um
>> but I mean but we we also can recognize a person, a player, a professional. Um I'm trying to think of who else we we've recognized like that in the past, but um anyway, yeah, >> in the 1980s, city council awarded uh a
preservation recognition to the folks who own 1301 Portland for the >> restoration rehabilitation of that building. Wow. So there you go. Um, so what >> we recognized Herman Key served on the planning commission with me. Um, and um,
it was I hate to say this, but it was my idea to to um, name the rec center after him because they were it's been around, but they were renaming it for some reason. And I don't know why, but all of a sudden we were like, he played played wheelchair basketball there four nights
a week. Okay. That that that he's not recognized within the building is still startling. Uh but that's another discussion for another committee and Kate and I have been >> toying with that one. So what I wanted to just share with you all is >> we would always have a beer at Miller's
before our meetings. I was fascinated. >> Oh. Before the planning >> and I know this is a public meeting, but God rest his soul. I went went to his open casket funeral. It was a good friend of mine. But >> he's like, "How do you have a beer and sit through a four-hour planning commission meeting?" I'm like, "That's a righteous person."
>> Yeah. I couldn't >> like >> So, what I wanted to Sorry, I >> digress. what I wanted to share with you all uh and then follow up on um for one uh Kate and I have kind of been pulling
together because of the the system with which we have applications we've been able to get a better look at what um um what we've looked at over the last year um and we there was a lot went through
um you all had I think your applications and what you reviewed were up but We're also what um we wanted to share is that there a lot comes to us that you never hear about that you never see and I I didn't necessarily want to say what do you
think of this so I didn't want to say this isn't coming to you as a scenario are you okay with it but certainly if I show you something here and you're like wait a minute let me ask you a question that's fair game but I I just went through the last two years tried to
organize best I could it's not everything but there are a few repeat themes to show you how we treat things when they come. >> Quick question. Yes. By minor historic reviews. >> So you have >> is that the same as administrative approvals?
>> So I wish I wish it was we >> okay >> we use the term too loosely. Um and so in our current code so let's just take the current code forward. Our current code has a minor historic review and
that's the um um that's where we look at it at a staff level administratively approve it. >> Okay. >> Um >> but it's not a COA. >> It is a COA. >> Okay. Um what people we used to use the term
administrative review incorrectly and it was the hey are you okay with it as the first several things I'm going to show you where I say yeah I'm fine do it. Um that's we could call it administrative but it's not in the in the sense of the
word of a formal COA. You can have a minor review by staff or a major review okay by you all or council. >> I guess maybe I'm not asking the question correctly. >> Is administrative approval like just a term we shouldn't use anymore? Is that
what you're saying? >> I think it would be helpful if we didn't >> happy to not use it. I just want to make sure it wasn't something different. >> I just don't like saying email. Okay. Cuz that sounds >> that's not a COA. >> That's not a COA. So I don't
COAs. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. And so for transparency in the permit portal like a minor COA application, it's a permit. It says COA application and it'll say whether or not it has been referred to the bar, >> right? >> So if somebody shows up in your office
and they are in a one of our >> let's go to the video tape. We'll go >> conservation >> slide one. Slide one. >> Yes. Right. >> Queen Charlotte building. Um, Jefferson
Street, High Street, they were changing their plants. Um, I said, "I'm calling it maintenance repair." I sent them an email and said, "Thank you for the drawing. This looks fine. Uh, you can proceed." I and I
called it an email, okay? because I don't know what to call it, but I don't feel like I can say to someone, you know, you're doing you're taking care of your property. I'm not going to say, fill out this form and give me a $100 check. Um, when it
>> that's what would be required for a COA in in a in a pure sense, right? And so for a minor or an administrative review per the code, it would be a fee and it would become a formal application. I just think right >> if I can keep things moving it's the I
can res you can you're doing what we want you to do and and I can resolve this in 30 seconds. So this would be an email. Okay. >> Sure. >> Um >> they they showed up with that picture. >> They they we communicate with me and I
you do it with an email and this is this is the piece Kate and I are trying to capture is what do we call this? So when it's the end of the year, I tell my boss, "Yeah, I think I think I got 457 inquiries." And we had thought about saying, "Well, let's tell people go into the portal and
then well now you're asking someone to fill out a form just not write a check." And I'm saying yes. And so the next example be so I've gotten where uh Sherry recognizes the ability a replacement of a roofing kind.
>> Yep. And and I am that to me is made into repair in kind. >> So are you asking just for what you should call this? >> No, no. I'm just sharing with you what what we do and what we're up to. So So like to Jerry's question, someone comes
into me and says here here are some examples of the questions I get. Okay. >> And then I have to weigh is this >> is this a COA or is this maintenance repair? Is this a decision? Um, >> as long as this roof doesn't have a clip-on cap. >> What's that?
>> I said as long as it does not have a clip-on cap. >> So, I'm always very and and that's why I like to do it even with these, I still do it by email so that I, you know, we have a record of it and I'm telling people and you're going to do it this way. >> Um, you know, the next one, another
example, this was um they wanted to fix their stairs. They said, well, what are you fixing? And they said, well, these are TX stairs to B approved a couple years ago. I was like, "Why did you you know, these are where I want to say, why did you even ask?" But, you know, at least so I can I get a lot of these and
I'm glad people ask. I mean, it's it's it's good. This is a um the IP Cardinal Hall. They were changing out their security lights. They were fixing some rotten some windows. >> Take maintenance, repair, take care of it. Here's one where um at Charlesville
Towers where I don't know if any of you have been in that back there, but it's it's one of those lost alleys and the it's a mess back there and they're just trying to clean up the the drainage. Everything's washing down into the to the lower floor. So, I said, "Fix it.
Take care of it. Uh I don't need the B does not need to review your uh erosion mitigation." Um the the next thing we get to are >> now a lot of people are going to do it and never come and ask you
>> and that's right and that's why I try to do it because the minute I say yeah if you want to fix your gutters or you want to do something you need to fill out this form. Now these are a little bit different from maintenance and repair. These are where you all have things
change on a construction site and um and I you know maybe because of my background a little bit uniquely positioned to look at these things but the the next two are actually from the house on Hartman's Mill Road where we we quite a few project came through. Um,
you ought had reprove replacement of a bunch of the windows and they had hoped to salvage this one, but when they took it out, it was is in bad shape. It really wasn't. Uh, >> so I said, "You're fine. We've looked at
other things. You they've been working with us on so much. Go ahead and you can do another window." And also here where um you all had okayed adding a window and an opening and there or closing the door, putting
in a window and they said, "Well, can we just we don't want to even do we're just going to have a wall there. It's the bathroom." I I it's where I I can make a judgment of this is consistent with I'm okay with it with um what was in the
COA. It's not an application. It's just me responding. Then um you know other things like this at the IP over on um 10th Street they wanted to put some shelving out there for some temporary shelving.
>> I know is the mail store and I was like it is it is it bolted to anything and >> No. >> So and then it's on the old edition too, right? >> Yeah. >> It's not attached to the building. >> Yeah. And so like here um uh Joey
Conover and I don't know where she ultimately ended up but they were talking about removing those panels or painting the panels the same color and and I said those aren't original. You're fine. Just tell me what you end up doing. Um so now we get to what we the
true minor historic reviews. And so the first two are um as most of you know the code allows a administrative a minor review of something that has a is a real rehabilitation tax credit project being
done with DHR. Um now this one at the top of second street I don't know what's happened. It's sputter sputtered. But but this and then the next one >> they're gonna other clients of mine. They're they're about to rev up again. >> Good. Some had some other projects.
>> So yeah. >> And and and >> only because their names are on the top. I figure I can say that. >> And you know in this one um you know just just another one of Mr. dispersive projects which he's taken advantage of tax credits or I don't say taken he's used tax credits um uh to to maintain
and rehab historic buildings. So it's uh it's always nice to work on those. >> What's the age of that? What's in >> I think it's a 1930s. >> Really? >> Yeah. And um this is similar to the buildings that UVA tore down over there behind um
the hospital that now here is a minor review on an IP. This is silk mill but it's on the the new edition or well the contemporary edition they're adding ramps right yeah >> so on this minor review they are applying formally and they're paying a
fee >> but we're not seeing it >> no unless I really feel >> awkward about the end of a meeting would just say like hey what about this >> yeah right >> which you guys love you know those >> Dor find Doric porch go ahead
>> and And um next, you know, this is some lights. They added some lights to the to the Oh, what's the name of the the I can't think of the >> name of it. >> Maclin. >> So, you know, something like this. Uh
you know, now if this were a um the Dinsore House on West Maine, absolutely. You know, I don't care how minor it is, you all are going to see it. Um these this is at um Beth Israel. uh done a lot of work over the last
several years in their courtyard. Uh they were adding some additional lights. I we went through the site plan review. They did a a phototric analysis and all that. So I was I was comfortable looking at this one. Um and as you all know, I
get to review uh vendor carts and cafe spaces. Those are typical minor reviews. >> There's some MCS or something going on there. >> Yeah, it's crazy. It looks like a legend project. >> It uh and and I mean it's quite a a
machine if you He's on the mall. It's it's a pretty he was very excited about this and it was pretty cool. Um and so awnings and things like that we can approve administratively and we do. Uh the what else is up? What's um
>> cell towers? Um so or not sell towers, sell wireless sites. Um by law we cannot um we cannot deny >> prohibit them. >> Yeah. Something well we can't an existing wireless site we can't prohibit
expansion of an existing site so to speak. So what we do is and this one is not the best example. The next one's a better one. U this is the big tower on West Main. we can at least require an administrative review and that lets us
have a record of what's going on so we're you know they're they're not just out hanging stuff. We can say all right what's there and what's being added and is it changing significantly. Um, this is >> was that state law that said >> it was the federal law.
>> It was the very last page of the very la of the um the Obama administration's um oh what was it that recovery bill? Very last paragraph. >> Are we still allowed to require like the stealth enclosures around them and things like that? Um if it's a new
facility um you can or if it's >> you can't you can't call like acquire the >> like like you we could not I couldn't as I understand it and I'm welcome to be wrong. I could not say to them yeah I'll
let you do this but you have to conceal those. >> Okay. What about the the apartment building on >> they were already concealed. They were they were simply changing out and it was going to be a stealth company. >> Okay. So it was already concealed. Okay. So that's where like because yeah we had
the the Hampton Inn I think had fake chimneys and we allowed them to add a new one at some point and Okay. >> So like the top of Montichello Hotel is just constantly being >> tweaked and upgraded. And >> was that you or Mary Joy that was part of that? >> Which part?
>> We all got a a tour up there at one point. >> Oh, really? That must have been very joy. >> I like that. >> Yeah, they told us not to walk in front of the uh the arrays right after I walked in front of the >> explained a couple things that happened >> and you haven't been the same.
>> I explained a few things. >> Um again, in a conservation district, uh a lot more latitude for uh minor review. This one uh they were doing the fence. This is where we had the porch change uh a couple years ago. And so
as long as it meets the guidelines, I sign off on it. Uh West Main, and this is where non-historic building, yes, we you all approved it. I say as long as it you're consistent with what the design that's there, um minor
review. Um >> that building, you need to pay attention to the lighting that they keep doing on that building. It keeps changing and getting a lot brighter and a lot bluer. Is this the >> every time they update when the store >> the star? >> What is it? >> What? >> Across from the flats.
>> It's the flat. This is the flats >> world. >> Yeah. >> Oh, you mean the standard? >> Standard's on the north side. This is on the south side. >> Oh, this is the flats. >> Yeah. >> Okay. I recognize it. >> This was Kate's first COA review. Oh, I thought it was your
Oh, okay. >> She's been doing this secretly >> before you hire her. >> She does. She'll sit in the meeting. >> Yeah, I don't care that much. >> This is might be the first one that Craig Craig Fabio and I had to go back and forth with the applicants quite a
bit because it's the leasees and the tenants that are the issues with a lot of these. Thus, the filled windows, >> all that. >> What's the deal with that? >> That's not the world of beer, is it? >> Yeah. >> This is like in the middle. >> Um, this is something Kate has become an
expert in. Um, vehicle chargers. So, you can figure it's prominently on on the building over here on Seventh Street. Um, we told them to put it in the back. They did. What we're working towards, >> it's well, >> this red X show the building.
>> They And so, I've said, you know, these things are they look like a hose bib and a hose reel. Um, I'm not going to say no to them. What we would like to get to, we're working on is to say this is something that we would review as an electrical permit and just sign off on
that and that that would that would serve as the COA. So, we're trying to streamline a couple of >> the weirdest location for that. Nobody ever parked against the back of the building. You park the opposite how the cars are parked in the other photo.
These are currently in in permit. Okay. >> Yeah. I'm not sure what they're >> No, I mean like we're not requiring an additional COA application. >> We're signing off as an electrical, right? >> Okay. >> And um and then that's to make sure then
we can record it. >> For example, when we approve a sign permit in a district, that is a COA. So we figure if we can do that for a sign permit, we can then do the same thing for some of these things like this. So the next thing is you all are have are
not looking at solar projects. Um um and these although we've prim I think what we've looked at have been in the historic conservation districts and so as long as they follow the roof plane >> to the extent possible they're they're
not on the primary elevation. Um, >> and these I sort of leave up to the applicant. So they just go ahead and already apply for a COA. There's no fee because they're in a conservation district, but a lot of times we can just do it on the solar permit sign. So that's yeah one of the things the
streamlines um you know so yeah the um then we have of course the other reviews that like for example a couple years ago uh McGuffy Cottages somebody wanted to install
what do you call that >> chair lift >> chairlift >> I said I'm fine with it just get a building permit me and um work well >> and okayed on the building permit. This is uh over on University Circle area.
This tree was split by the property line. It it it was in a situation I talked to the arborist. He's like, "This thing should just come down." And I said, "Fine with me. Uh I'm not I'm not going to split a tree in half or argue.
This looks like a bad situation." >> Removal of trees. >> So, >> go ahead. Good question. So, where I am with trees, um, the city code has a tree removal permit requirement.
It's a little bit I'm not sure exactly how it it it there's some uncertainty on what the routing of that is. My approach to trees is that if if it's in a front yard, if it's a monumental tree, I mean, if it's a significant piece of that
landscape and it doesn't need to come down, it's just I don't want it, I might use you all as bad cop to take a look at it. But 99% of the time, it's a situation like this where someone's saying, "Oh, I'm I I have to remove it.
It's unsafe." or an arborist has said this trees you a lot of the are the ash trees that I know once they die are very unsafe. Um, so I say, "Show me the nar has attested to this or in some cases an
engineer has said we got a problem." And then I ask, "What are you replacing it with?" And um, >> but is this tree removal anywhere in the city or just in these? >> Well, I only look at what's in the district. And then as far as where new construction goes, um, if something's
coming in, someone's building a house or building an addition, you'll see that tree removal. But I I'm I I know in the past it had been a the B is going to look at every tree. I I I tried to just use some judgment on that. So um I mean not you know I don't say
yeah if you don't like the tree you can cut it down but you know show me that it has to come down and if it's going to be you're replacing with something it has to show me that you're doing it or show me what your species you're going to use. Um, but I never when there are emer
I had someone call me and say in a big storm last summer a tree came down on the side of their house. Did they need to get your approval? I said no. No. And anyone tells you you do. Now this is one where um the we had talked about this a
couple of years ago. Um the trees were heaving the uh the brick walls and I remember some of the comment in fact Mr. Gaser said, "Why, you know, before you cut down trees, tear down the wall type of thing, you know, and so I worked with
uh the applicant to a landscaping plant, a repair to that fence along the front, and then I approved it via it required a site plan. So, I reviewed it via the site plan." And that's >> a fence now, right? >> What's that? >> It's a wood fence now, right?
>> Better not be. Um, it's supposed to be a metal fence with landscaping. >> Oh, metal. Okay. It's Yeah, just wood. They saved the trees >> to the extent we could. Yeah. Um the >> takes a long time. Some of them were just like volunteer that I don't even know what kind of tree but they were um yeah they work with vigneris and
landscaping and company and um so you know it was to get them to a result that that you know met our concerns and then by working with her on the on the the site plan process then I was able to sign off on that uh and not treat it as
a separate COA. We're going to work on trying to do more like that. Um, only a couple more. Kate, what do I have? Or is that was that it? >> This last slide. >> Yeah. So, that's that's sort of the a nickel tour of the range of things we
see. And, um, I mean, I really like we work for an organization want to know wants to know what have you been up to, what are you doing? >> Um, >> to the extent we can, we try to keep track of it, but yeah, a lot of times it's trying to just keep things going.
Um, and uh, >> I think everything you showed us, you've guys have gotten right. So, >> yeah, >> I've been wrong about our support >> a couple times, but >> everything you showed us. >> No, that made sense. >> The stuff you didn't show us, but we're slid
>> the other slide deck that way. >> So, Jerry, would I'm sorry. And did that answer kind of what you were getting at? You know, I mean, it it's obviously much better for the people who are coming here to have it
easily taken care of by you guys without going through paying the $100. That's right. Doing this, doing that. If you can do it using common sense and also save us from
having to deal with stuff that >> just chew up our time. >> That's right. >> And by and large, and I tell people up front, if I haven't seen it on my house, you know, it it the problem doesn't exist. So, I mean, it's something I've
dealt with or some and I that's a filter for me is to say, all right, at my house, what did I do? and um and and and use that as my sort of my fairness doctrine. Um and uh I'm not going to do I'm not going to treat somebody more
rigidly. Uh Mary Joy said, you know, there were certain things that had she she had said it was like a a co a scream coefficient. You know, who's going to scream at me, you know, more or or less? But I try to be fair to people and I try to be what is it that we want to
achieve? And if if we can get that result, that's the goal. It it's it's not about generating revenue from the bar. And that allows us freedom then when we do have things that really need your attention in time, you know, that we can focus on those
>> in time. >> Something's got to pay for that pizza. >> That's true. >> Yeah. people people in my neighborhood which is not in ADC or a historical district there's empty lots that are there and
somebody's going to come in and build an apartment or something else that's there. They asked me is there a process that the other people have to go through that the people in the neighborhood can come and talk about? No, it it's it it's
not built that way for by right. Now if it's a large apartment building or something there are there's a scale at which it it tips and there is a I don't know what the numbers are but there's a scale at which you do involve requires a
neighborhood uh meeting and and and the last thing I'll share is I know we talk about a lot about the guidelines and the updates where I've I don't want to say I've taken a step back because that's not what it is but what Kate and I have really been picking at
this thing trying to see what is it what's the problem we're trying to solve and and we realize that um you know a lot of things have come to the four in the discussions that we had about West Main project and the seventh street project and and I would also encourage all of you to you
know watch last night's uh uh city council's work session at 4:30 and the discussion they had because it it is germanine to where the B is on things. Could you summarize it for us since Keller mentioned it? >> Um, I hesitate to because I I I have my
own biases. So, I would say just listen. But there is a question of well, let's say what is the B's role when we're discussing heights of buildings and uh achieving u the city's
objectives. And so where Kay and I went back, we said, let's take a step back and say, well, where are the where are the areas that there's potential for conflict and we have, you know, I have a whole page of funky data where we looked at each we we worked with some of the
GIS wizards in the city and said each of the districts and each of the sub areas of the districts, >> we looked at a whole bunch of stuff. One of them being what is the zoning in each of those districts? What is so when we say um how much of a city you know the
claim that well we can't build a large uh apartments because the bar won't let us you people would be surprised how much is out there that is not under your purview and it's it's significant and so I I we reached the conclusion of saying
well we were kept talking about we got to fix the guidelines and I go back to something Carl had said to me some time ago But it's like, you know, our guidelines still work. You know, we can they're not it's not like they're just unusable. Um but there's a perception that, oh, I can't do this or can't do
that. So, we're starting from now looking at where do we have where are the really obvious conflicts and then we can talk about how to address those. And another piece of it and this came my boss asked said, "Well, what's the lowhanging fruit that we can resolve?"
And some of that's where Kate and I have this list of things that saying things that take our time where we're looking at something that you know explain to someone you need an application all where we can we look at this as a site plan review or a building permit review. So trying to peel back and what what
what obvious you all is we don't get that many large scale projects. I mean really it's not like I mean I think you've looked at four in the last couple of years. Um even the planning commission it's not like you know anything
>> there was a rush right as the zoning code was being done cuz people wanted to get in before it that was I think it >> right and so projects >> uh the reason we're not seeing these large buildings is because the B won't approve and the planning commission won't approve >> you should drive down Ivy or JPA and see
some large build >> so it's just try to get some some reality to what's the problem we're trying to solve. So we are we have been working on it and I I can update and if you're any of you are data wonks so I you know we'll share the database and
you can play around with it all you want but um that's the update on that but there that's a an an update on what we've been up to in the administrative reviews the minor reviews and if you all have any questions or concerns
>> to look at city council's meeting >> go to um >> streaming Charlottville.govstreaming or I can show you there's a widget right at the top of the main city page for streaming. >> Hang on. I've disconnected myself. >> But it's not streaming right now.
>> It's not. >> When is it available after the meeting? >> Yeah, hang on. >> It's there. It's there. >> All the meetings can be found at sevillecommunications.com. >> Could you say that again? >> Oh my god. You can find them on someone. >> You can find them on
sevillecommunications.com. >> Also, they're on the city website on the agendas and minutes section. Most of the uh videos of the meetings can be found there as well. >> And how far back will it go? Does it go back a year? >> Uh at least a few years.
>> Complex version of AI. >> Where do you sit? Where do you sit during these meetings? I'm just curious. >> Back in there. >> We don't know. Behind you. I don't know YOU EVERYWHERE. >> This is like the wizard of >> It's It's like Mary Poppins bag inside
that door. >> You can go here. >> Can we ask Remy questions like AI? >> So, okay. And it's and it's meeting during the >> Give directions to >> Remy. Can you give us directions to home?
>> No. >> Are you walking today? >> Thank Thank you all. And um and uh we do need a landscape. >> Yeah, I put a feeler out to a landscape architect who lives in Earlyville, but said he'd spread the word.
>> What about the uh I forgot her name, the woman that was a a resident of the Fville neighborhood that was so eloquent. >> Shanti Levy. Yeah. >> Everybody >> ask her to join. >> She had a very good quote. >> Everybody has everybody. >> What's that? >> Has everybody?
>> Well, I'm encouraging you all to >> ask her. She's on the tree commission. >> Oh. >> So, I don't know if that's, you know, too many, but >> Jenny might be right. I I I may have incorrectly concluded on that um that serving thing. So um cuz we also have
someone on the HRC who had mentioned uh some interest um >> uh question though uh that this person had was do they need to be a licensed landscape architect? >> I don't believe it or just practicing in the field. >> Yeah, I think it's
>> for some reason it doesn't say I think the >> I can white that out too. I just >> I can I no um I will check that. I don't believe it does. cuz I had to look up something the other day. It says licensed architect and then it just says landscape architect.
>> Interesting. >> The reason why the name that I circulated might have been good and I think one of the reasons why we had a hard time filling this in the past is just like for licensed architects for example you know when you have clients and colleagues locally and you know then
have to recuse yourself or figure out okay you know is my firm doing it. I know Rogers had that happen. you know, my mom's working on it. >> Not a big deal. But >> is the appeal from Matthews going to the city council?
>> So, >> you mean Seventh Street? >> Yeah. >> Seven. We're calling it the mark seventh street. That's I'm using that just for So, I am in the process of preparing response. Um I when that response is ready, I have to
then submit it to the clerk and the city manager and say I would like to get this on agenda and and my goal is to finish that this week or early next week so that by the 30th I'm asking them to get me on agenda which and the earliest then
if I hit that would be sometime in March. But then it comes down to what is what does council have on its agenda. It is not um there is no shot clock requirement for council. Um but I do think I I I I suspect they'll I hope
they'll want to look at this. Um and >> so presuming you'd like me to attend this. I would love to talk to you. >> I have the dates. >> It would either be second or >> do you think we you and I could chat? >> I don't know. just to to understand what
your response is going to be because I have thoughts too. And then um >> yeah, >> and I saw that city council is taking up a proposal to deal with quote student housing.
>> Watch the video. There's a yeah >> the staff is doing a study right now on different options for dealing with student housing and at some point it will come back to the plan commission and council for some direction >> but I think council may already have some ideas as Jeff is
>> okay >> yeah the conundrum is that to change something in the zoning code so what we did the last time with the updating of the code was a comprehensive zoning you were able to sort of address it all but to go back now and address pieces of that it's a different process.
You have to be you can't just say, "Hey, uh, council decides they want to change something." It there is a a process that is not quick. So, and that's Kelly Brown, you know, you'll see in the video because that question came up last night. And so, they have to follow those
steps. And I think council is also saying all right, not in lie of it, maybe in addition to or or are there things that could be done policywise or or process-wise that
don't involve that, you know, lengthy timeline for a zoning change. So that's where staff sort of looking at it. Now, I I'm I'm a little bit involved in that, but uh where I need where I'm directly involved is try and respond to uh
the again some of the comments that were made last night that was referenced to well the B's authority to not allow something you know sort of paraphrasing and it's like well no we don't your authority goes only as far as council allows it to make sure everyone understands you know you're all you're
not like some rogue outfit out there you vetoing construction. Um, but to find out, and that's why this data is helpful, where are their where are their conflicts? And if council when they look at the seventh street project, you know, they're going to have
to decide um is it are they okay with a building of this, you know, height, masking, and scale adjacent to these two IPs and and to the neighborhood? You know, you all
determined that there was too much. This was not this was out of scale with those IPs. Council gets to decide whe they are or not. The big question is, is there a way to
is there a way for council to communicate to you all, hey, we really want buildings to be this tall? We really don't want you guys to make buildings shorter or we're with you. And and I I don't I don't know how we get there. the affordable dwelling unit manual study. Um they want to wrap that up
between March and May. So that'll come back to planning commission and council sometime between March and May um for review. >> And yeah, they're looking at >> at that >> student housing and the um the afford the inloo fees and all that fun stuff. Um, one other low planning commission
thing is that um, so the we just recommended a bunch of zoning changes to um, council and I think they're going to look at them in the middle of February. U, but these are just like small items. There's still some things they call tier three that'll be coming up in a year from now. um planning commission and
staff seem to be at a little bit of a standstill on um uh it there's some um requirements for build two zones that um for example if if you have an existing building you can add onto the back of it but if you put a building behind it then
you actually have to be building in front of that building. So, we've had some instances where this is a little weird and it's yeah, it um basically it's the philosophy of the new zoning code is to bring everything up to the street and unfortunately that means that existing buildings there's a lot of
exceptions and ways around this but generally the philosophy is construction will end up in front of those buildings um depending on how they're done. Um, so that's some of the stuff that we're trying to push back on and say, "Hold on, you have this existing building, you should be able to build behind it, but
our zoning code is so interwoven with how all these um how the rules and regulations work that it's kind of hard to >> untangle all that." >> So random little thing, but that's something we're working on. >> Thank you. >> Thanks.
>> We do. We have a motion to adjourn. >> All yay. Hi. >> Hi. What you say?