2026-10-21 - Historic Preservation Commission

02:02Mhm.

02:45>> The agenda and the sign-in sheet are

02:47located on a table by the auditorium

02:48door. If you have not signed in, please

02:50go do so.

02:52We are [clears throat] a volunteer board

02:53appointed by the mayor and commission,

02:55and we are a decision-making body, which

02:57means that all decisions made this

02:58evening are final unless they are

03:00appealed to the mayor and the

03:01commission.

03:02Also, please note that all approvals

03:04given today are considered binding, and

03:05any further changes will require

03:07additional approval that must be

03:09obtained before the changes are made.

03:12Our meetings proceed in the following

03:14manner: For each agenda item, the

03:16planning department will present its

03:17report and recommendations on each

03:18request. Then we'll receive public

03:20comments, first from the petitioner, and

03:22then anyone else that wishes to speak in

03:24favor of or in opposition to a request.

03:27Then the public portion of the hearing

03:29will be closed, and the commission

03:31will discuss

03:32the request

03:34amongst themselves, and then there will

03:36be a motion

03:37of some variety. The possible actions

03:40are approval, approval with conditions,

03:42table, or denial of the request.

03:46We ask all speakers to state their name

03:47and home address, and direct

03:48communications to the commission and not

03:50to the audience, please.

03:53>> [clears throat]

03:53>> Also, please observe these time limits.

03:55The petitioner or representative will

03:57have up to 10 minutes to make their

03:58initial presentation. Then all other

04:00individuals who wish to speak for

04:02against a request may have up to 3

04:04minutes and I do want to mention that we

04:06have a very long agenda tonight and so I

04:08am going to be very strict on time

04:10limits. Please limit your comments to

04:12the time allotted. Thank you.

04:14At this time, please set your cell

04:16phones to silent or turn them off to

04:17avoid interference with the audio

04:18system. Public comments and commission

04:20deliberation. Please note the audio and

04:22video system is very sensitive and will

04:24broadcast and clearly record the softest

04:26whispering within the auditorium. Also,

04:29the camera is audio sensitive and may

04:31automatically follow and zoom in to any

04:32voice within range. This meeting is

04:34being streamed on YouTube. So, to ensure

04:36the clarity of the broadcast, it is

04:38important the speaker with the floor is

04:39the only one speaking.

04:42Um I note that we're missing two

04:43individuals, May Lynn and Katie are not

04:47with us. So, but we do have a quorum.

04:50So, we may proceed.

04:53May I have a motion to introduce into

04:54the official record the staff reports

04:56and all other documents submitted to the

04:57commission before this week?

05:00>> So moved.

05:01>> All right. Motion Chris, second Lauren.

05:03All in favor?

05:05>> Okay.

05:08>> Here's unanimous. All right, do we have

05:10any proposed changes

05:12to the agenda review minutes of the

05:15September 16th meeting? See agenda

05:18review.

05:22I see none. Do I have a motion to adopt

05:24the minutes from the September 16th

05:25agenda review meeting?

05:26>> So moved.

05:27>> All right. Motion Lauren, second James.

05:29All in favor?

05:31>> Okay.

05:32>> Approved unanimous.

05:33Are there any proposed changes to the

05:36full hearing and meeting minutes of

05:38September 16th?

05:43I see none. Do I have a motion to

05:44approve the minutes of the September

05:4516th hearing?

05:47All right. Motion James.

05:49Second Allen. All in favor?

05:52Okay. Here's unanimous. All right.

05:54Now, the last item before we get

05:55started, has any member of the

05:56commission had any ex parte

05:58communications regarding the items on

05:59tonight's agenda?

06:04Seeing none, then we shall proceed.

06:06Uh

06:07we'll begin with old business and the

06:09first item there is 163 Mill Street. Can

06:11we have the staff report, please?

06:20>> I'm starting with 163 Mill Street, COA

06:222026-09

06:251888.

06:27We do remove the existing driveway

06:30in the Bloomfield Historic District.

06:33Petitioners for this property

06:35are R.O. Myers.

06:42This subject property is located on the

06:44eastern side of Mill Street in the block

06:46between Overhurst Avenue and Russell

06:48Court Street.

06:51Uh 2025 aerial photography is fairly

06:54representative of the current conditions

06:56of the property.

06:57This property has been seen

07:00uh before the commission and the staff

07:02level for a few different uh

07:06different approvals. So, uh a commission

07:09level approval was given in December of

07:102025 for the removal of a large historic

07:13rear addition and prospective smaller

07:15rear addition.

07:18Uh

07:19This is a different approval for the

07:20retention of the existing curb cut

07:22location rather than shifting the

07:23driveway as proposed.

07:27Yeah, it's a 1947 Sanborn map showing uh

07:31the subject property.

07:33The

07:40Uh this

07:41property is considered a contributing

07:43resource to the Bloomfield Historic

07:44District, which means that you review

07:45the impacts to the overall district as

07:47well as the character of the property.

07:51Right. And this shows the uh site plan

07:55as submitted by the applicant. Um

07:58Full site showing on the the left uh

08:02side where the

08:04driveway is attached currently to Mill

08:06Street. Um goes all the way through the

08:09property and to the alley in the back.

08:12And that is proposed to be removed.

08:13That's the

08:15main thing we're looking at today.

08:17Um additionally, you'll see

08:19further further north on the property,

08:22the walkway is proposed to change. Thank

08:26you. Thank you.

08:27Uh and then you'll see these little

08:29squares. Those are a stone pathway that

08:31leads from

08:33uh new landscaping toward the back where

08:35there is supposed to be a new parking

08:38area with pea gravel.

08:40I didn't feel a bit of this. I just want

08:41to give you an overall view.

08:45Next slide.

08:48This is a picture of the house with that

08:52curb cut driveway going through there.

08:55You know, you can see where it

08:57gets on its on all leaves there, but you

08:59can still see it. Uh and then a historic

09:02photo aerial photo of the property with

09:05the

09:07front driveway highlighted in yellow.

09:11All right, and then just zooming in a

09:13little bit on that site plan. Top

09:16area showing where the driveway is

09:18proposed to be removed. And then um

09:21and at bottom where showing where the

09:24new

09:25proposed gravel parking area in the back

09:28uh fits the alleyway.

09:34Or or some pictures of the existing in

09:36the back.

09:37Um

09:38just to note, the concrete driveway

09:40access of Mill Street and

09:44that goes through to the alley at the

09:45rear is proposed to be removed. So,

09:47access would only be this parking area

09:50um

09:51from the alley. The curb cut would be

09:53eliminated and the new parking area

09:55would be gravel with cobblestone pavers.

10:03All right, and this is showing the front

10:07um

10:07new walkway that is or not walkway,

10:09steps that are proposed.

10:11And the front entry existing front entry

10:13to the porch includes three steps with

10:15narrow cheek walls and a wood railing at

10:17the top to you can see in the photo

10:19on the top left there.

10:21And these are currently concrete with a

10:22painted finish. Proposed are brick and

10:25concrete cheek walls and steps with

10:27wider cheek walls and include a step up

10:29in height to the switched lower level of

10:31the porch.

10:32And the photo, believe it's

10:36ample of what the looking is proposing.

10:40At the side entrance entrance there's

10:42also a new

10:45new porch proposed to side entrance.

10:48The existing single step and entrance

10:51is proposed to be eliminated

10:53and new one to be added that would

10:55include two steps and cheek walls.

11:00Yeah, front porch includes a single step

11:03Sorry, single sided cheek walls and it's

11:05unclear if these would be added where

11:06the side entry is being relocated or

11:08altered where it is added. New location

11:11was previously where a ramp access entry

11:13porch.

11:16Also proposed for the front porch are

11:19new shutters.

11:20Uh so that is an example photo here in

11:23green.

11:27Shutters are supposed to be operable.

11:30Shutters would have a louvered upper

11:32with solid panel lower.

11:34No depiction of the shutters included to

11:36demonstrate the positioning of the

11:37paired casements on the bay extensions.

11:41Large double um windows flanking the

11:43entry door or the paired fixed windows.

11:47It's not clear that the area exists for

11:49the shutters without being hindered by

11:50adjacent openings.

11:53Measurements not really provided there.

11:55And the applicant asserts that the

11:57shutter hardware hardware is found

11:59remaining on home but no photos of that

12:01were included in the

12:04applicant's submittal documents.

12:06And the proposed shutter material is not

12:08noted.

12:14Just some images of the existing walkway

12:18on the top and then proposed

12:21photo on the bottom of the applicants.

12:25So staff's recommendation is approval

12:27with conditions. These conditions being

12:29that the use of shutters be allowed only

12:31with the submittal to staff of an

12:33elevation demonstrating adequate

12:35placement area.

12:37That the modification of the walkways be

12:38approved as submitted.

12:41That the modification of the French

12:42equals be

12:44allowed with a simplified design

12:45submitted to staff for approval. And

12:48that the modification of the side entry

12:49to the porch not be included without

12:51documentation that this is a return to a

12:53previous known condition.

12:56Another application before the HPC where

12:58additional information would also be

12:59possible.

13:00So then I conclude staff report.

13:03>> Um

13:04If you just came in and you haven't

13:05signed in, please go sign in on the

13:07sign-in sheet, but we're on the round

13:08table. Thank you.

13:10Um is the petitioner present?

13:12>> Yeah. All right.

13:13>> Come up. You have 10 minutes. This is

13:15your 3 minute address.

13:17>> Uh Carl Myers. Um

13:19Well

13:202629 Ashford Road, Brookhaven, but

13:23163 here at 4 Mel Street.

13:27>> [clears throat]

13:29>> So I guess when I first started this

13:31project I didn't even know I had the

13:32alleyway. Um

13:34I like using the alleyway. All the

13:35houses on this side

13:37of Mel Street that have access to the

13:39alleyway that's their only access.

13:42And so

13:43I feel like

13:45I wanted to kind of go back to how this

13:47originally was set up. Just not having

13:49the driveway.

13:50Um

13:51The other items

13:52I'm I'm fine as far as the cheek walls.

13:55Um the side entry

13:59Sorry, the cheek walls we can come up

14:00with something simpler.

14:01Uh I think it's more in line with maybe

14:03what's there.

14:04Um

14:06But the um

14:08the side entry

14:09I didn't submit these pictures, but I've

14:11looked further into it and and when when

14:13look at like how the design of the

14:16porch walls are, they kind of line up

14:18for railing to be

14:20uh where the existing block steps are,

14:23and they can line up to not be a

14:26railing where the doorway comes out. And

14:28traditionally, I think on these houses,

14:30wherever a door came out, you came out

14:32and you went down the

14:34the steps straight ahead, and this is a

14:36jog to get to them. So, I don't have a

14:39historic picture. I've asked that all

14:41the neighbors around me have been there

14:43a long time. Anybody's got pictures. I

14:44haven't found

14:46an appropriate picture to say this is

14:47exactly how it was, but a lot of things

14:49point to um

14:52to that steps being over there. Um

14:55back to the cheek walls, I used

14:57five and 10 because they're

14:59that house was

15:01I don't know their address, but

15:03that's a Fredor house, and they have a

15:05um

15:06they have cheek walls, very similar wood

15:08porch, cheek walls with these concrete

15:11caps, concrete steps. Maybe that'll be a

15:14a more appropriate. This

15:16was a picture I

15:17uh

15:18got off the internet. Maybe it wasn't

15:19exactly what would be perfect for this

15:22one, but willing to like

15:24put elevations for that to show what

15:26that would look like in both the side

15:28entry and the front.

15:30Um but back to the driveway, I I just um

15:34I like just using the alleyway.

15:37This is not really an HPC thing, but the

15:40driveway is consistently used by

15:43other alleyway members.

15:45Um so,

15:47kind of would

15:48would prefer not to to do that, and

15:51personally,

15:53I I've

15:54pretty infatuated with this house.

15:56Inside, we're doing

15:59I think justice to like the original

16:00structure, and so kind of taking

16:02everything back to

16:05you know, 1912 as much as possible. We

16:08reclaimed trim and and stripped down.

16:10We've kept the fireplaces. We've kept

16:13huge pocket doors, and all those are

16:14original pieces. So, kind of want to

16:16take the whole idea back to

16:19to 1912 as much as possible.

16:22So.

16:25>> Let me give you a sheet.

16:26>> That's all right. Thanks.

16:29>> Are [clears throat] there any members of

16:29the public who wish to speak in favor of

16:31this proposal?

16:33See none. Are there any who wish to

16:35speak against this proposal?

16:38Please state your name and address.

16:39Served you 3 minutes.

16:40>> Thank you.

16:41>> [clears throat]

16:41>> My name is Tom Carney and I live at 175

16:43Wolcott Street.

16:45Um

16:46I'm all for renovating houses and

16:49getting back to their original states,

16:50etc., etc. The uh main concern I have

16:53for this property is that uh I'm not

16:56sure I haven't spoke to the owner

16:58about it, but uh is it number of people

17:01who'll be living there. And this may not

17:02be a HPC

17:05uh purview, uh but with the driveway

17:08taken away and a new

17:11parking areas with uh pea gravel or

17:13whatever it is, uh my concern is how

17:16many cars will be going down that alley

17:18and parking there overnight. Cuz in the

17:20past year or more, well, without the

17:22construction going on,

17:24uh the previous owner

17:26um and I'm not sure if you're associated

17:28with the previous owner or not,

17:29but uh he had four to five unrelated

17:34people living there. Maybe two were

17:35related and the rest were not related.

17:38So, my concern is for this RS8

17:40uh property to have the proper number of

17:43people living there and not being rented

17:45out to five five four or five students

17:47uh as other properties in the

17:49neighborhood have been have been uh done

17:51have done. So,

17:53that's my concern for the HPC. Thank

17:55you.

17:55>> Thank you very much.

17:56I was going to Um not yet. Sorry. Are

17:58there any other members of the public

17:59who wish to speak against this proposal?

18:06Please state your name and address.

18:07Served you 3 minutes.

18:08>> My name is Kelly Field. I live at 150

18:10Quiver Horse Terrace. Um I would like to

18:12speak in opposition of taking out the

18:14driveway, not putting it back. Um as

18:16long as we've all lived there, it's been

18:18there. I think that we showed them out

18:20This 1946 was the curb cut.

18:22Um it's the largest lot. It makes sense

18:24that it has a front driveway to handle

18:26the traffic. And with it being a

18:27four-bedroom home, um

18:29us along Valley, I was reading I know he

18:31wanted to change it, but [clears throat]

18:32the original plan, which was beautiful,

18:35to have it in the front um a smaller

18:37driveway with the connections. Um and

18:39what he's done in the back is really

18:40great. He has done a great job with um

18:42taking out that old dance studio and and

18:44putting the house back. Um we were very

18:46thrilled with the original plan. And the

18:48original driveway wasn't even connected

18:50to Taylor Alley. Um so we were all a

18:52little surprised when this came up where

18:54it's taken up completely. Um

18:56but it's been there for decades and the

18:58only access now for such a large home

19:00and large property is down the small

19:02alley. Um I know he wants to line up

19:03with the houses to the right of them.

19:05They're very small lots and their only

19:07access to park at their house is behind

19:10the house on the alley and they only

19:12have room for like two cars. Um street

19:14parking on Milledge is really hard to

19:16do. It's because of its proximity to

19:18campus and to like the sororities.

19:21Whenever there's um Monday night

19:22meetings, all that parking is taken up.

19:24So it is a concern of where we're going

19:26to park such a large house and how many

19:28people are living there. And if you take

19:30the front driveway out, um that

19:31alleviated a lot of that. So it is a an

19:33impact to the neighborhood. Um I said

19:36we're really thrilled with what he's

19:37done so far. It's really just the

19:38driveway and the fact it's been there

19:40for decades. We'd really like to see

19:41that stay.

19:42Thank you.

19:42>> Thank you very much.

19:44Are there any other members of the

19:45public who would speak against this

19:47proposal?

19:51I see none. We'll return to the

19:52commission and will there be discussion?

19:54>> May I ask the applicant?

19:56>> Yeah, go ahead and step up. Yeah, let's

19:57see. Questions for the applicant,

19:58please.

19:59>> Uh would you like to speak to your use

20:00of the home and how many people

20:01>> Um I'm not associated with the previous

20:03owner. Um there's no intention to

20:07for this to be a student housing at all.

20:10For one thing, we're spending a lot of

20:12money. This is not a student house. Uh I

20:14hope to keep it. That's my plan. I want

20:16to stay. Um Ultimately, uh could retire

20:20here in Athens. Um I went to the

20:22University of Georgia. My wife went too,

20:24and

20:24uh we love coming up. My daughters are

20:26here.

20:27But this is no intention to put students

20:30into

20:31um So, from a traffic standpoint, it is

20:34my wife and I um

20:37That's that's the main

20:40people. Now, I don't know

20:43five homes maybe on that.

20:45I'm not sure of the exact number of

20:47homes on that alleyway, but um

20:50it's not like

20:52I know that they've they've had elevated

20:54traffic because we use it for um for

20:57access for uh mainly our dumpster. So,

21:01I'm sure it's been disruptive and

21:04you know

21:05put a little bad taste in their mouth as

21:06far as traffic, but that's

21:09this is unusual, you know, this

21:12Those are big trucks. This not what how

21:14we're going to be using it.

21:16>> How many cars wide would the parking pad

21:18accommodate?

21:20>> Oh, that's just two.

21:23Yeah.

21:24I haven't really analyzed it. It's not

21:26huge, you know.

21:28I don't know if we can put But you can

21:29see like when you come in

21:32two if you're if you're parking more

21:34than two then

21:35you're

21:37uh

21:38blocking someone in, I would say.

21:40Um

21:42And I I don't know this for sure, but

21:43she mentioned it's not connected, but I

21:45I believe our concrete goes

21:47back to the Taylor Drive. I'm not I

21:50don't know if that's the picture, but

21:52um

21:54We're already We're already connected.

21:57Back there.

22:00>> Do you have uh questions for the

22:01>> any history um on when the driveway was

22:04installed? Is there any evidence of

22:08>> So, we have a 1946 aerial photo.

22:11>> That's the earliest we have.

22:13>> Yeah, that's the earliest aerial photo

22:15that we have access to. And um that for

22:17the driveway is highlighted there.

22:20You can even There's a little car parked

22:21there, you can see.

22:24>> Carl, would you consider a modified a

22:26condition where you keep the front

22:28driveway maybe to where side steps you

22:31want to put in and just remove the rest

22:33of the way back?

22:35Seems like you're concerned about your

22:36driveway being used through the alley.

22:38That would kind of

22:39>> That That That is a concern. This

22:42That was kind of just

22:45a secondary concern. I um

22:47for visually for me, I'm I'm excited I

22:49can straighten the front walkway and we

22:51can kind of redesign it there cuz I feel

22:52like I can open up the view of this

22:54house and anchoring with a tree and

22:57it's just the driveway

22:59I think

23:00makes it difficult to landscape it

23:02effectively

23:04um to where it does the justice for the

23:06home.

23:07Um

23:08but I

23:11I I don't think I'd get any benefit

23:13from that. Not that we're here for my

23:15benefit.

23:17Um

23:18I just never put much

23:21I I

23:22the research I do online is in the '30s

23:24it didn't have it. So, this may have

23:25been the first

23:27this first uh

23:29you know, use of the driveway event.

23:31I I'd prefer not to

23:33like your original question.

23:37>> Any other questions for the applicant,

23:38sir?

23:41>> Good. No further questions. Okay.

23:44>> All right. Chris, we haven't heard from

23:46you. What do you think?

23:49>> I mean, I I think it's appropriate to

23:50get rid of the driveway per the

23:52guidelines.

23:54The [clears throat] other stuff

23:57Um you know, I think I agree with the

24:00staff conditions here. If the staff

24:02feels confident that they can allow the

24:04shutters if

24:06that can gets enough information on

24:08that, that's some that

24:11um

24:13the cheek walls, again, if staff feels

24:15confident that they can

24:17approve it

24:18with some additional information from

24:20the applicant, that's fine with you.

24:25The side portion

24:27Do we have photos of it?

24:29We don't have good photos of the side

24:30portion.

24:31>> That's the one I didn't know. Um maybe

24:33maybe there is a question there for the

24:34applicant.

24:36So, you're saying that that side portion

24:37you're just trying to add

24:39Do you have stairs up to the porch

24:40adjacent to

24:42>> Yes, so there's a office door uh to the

24:45right of those stairs

24:47uh that had a handicap ramp when I I

24:49don't think we might I don't know if we

24:51have any pictures of it, but there was a

24:52ramp coming out of there originally,

24:54which we took off with the

24:56the 70s structure.

24:58Um

25:00So, that left that open. And so, then

25:01we're like, well,

25:03the office door is right there. I think

25:05originally this was the path out. And

25:07then when you look at how

25:09the the railing the existing shake wall

25:12is notched, it's different there than it

25:15is where the steps are currently. And

25:18then where the steps are currently

25:20matches the front where it has a

25:22railing. Can't see with the bushes, but

25:24the exact design there, it matches.

25:28>> This is from the book.

25:29>> Yes.

25:29>> December review last year.

25:31>> Yep, and so

25:32um

25:34if you see on the right where it comes

25:35off and it notches down, and then it

25:37goes over to kind of where the handicap

25:39thing came off.

25:41If you look at the shake there in the

25:42paint, all the wood around it, that's

25:45it's all original

25:47uh materials. Um so,

25:51if that was railing before and they took

25:53it down to put this ramp in,

25:55it's it doesn't line up with the rest.

25:57Now, if you look at the little short

26:00shake wall where the current steps go

26:02up, it comes over. It's exactly like the

26:05front.

26:06Same

26:07um I don't know if it's the exact same

26:09measurement, but it sure does look

26:11um exact.

26:15>> I think you're saying the little notch

26:16supports the idea that that was

26:18>> uh that was some type of walkway up, and

26:21that this lines up with everything else

26:23that's a railing.

26:24Um so, our

26:26what we'd like to do is recreate the

26:28railing that's on the front right here.

26:31And then

26:32come off, which is in line with the

26:34door. You literally come straight out

26:36and steps come down.

26:40Seems It seems like

26:42more typical

26:44um

26:46uh flow

26:48when you look at the houses with the

26:49doors and the and the walkways.

26:52The steps kind of line up.

26:55>> Thanks.

26:56Thank you very much.

26:58>> So, for staff

27:00the condition for you're saying

27:03you're conditioning to not approve that

27:06porch to change

27:07of those steps without more information

27:09being given.

27:13>> Yeah.

27:15Thanks.

27:17>> Lauren?

27:19>> Um I

27:20I'm following staff's recommendation. I

27:22think that um I'd be okay with

27:24introducing a motion adopting this.

27:30>> Jim, what do you think?

27:31>> Uh

27:33I don't have a problem really with any

27:34of this except for the uh removal of the

27:38curb cut there. And I'm just on the

27:41fence about that, honestly.

27:46>> Alan?

27:46>> All right. I'd like to see I wish there

27:49was some documentation of the prior

27:50condition of pre-46.

27:53I'd like to

27:55help me kind of persuade me. I I'm

27:57generally okay with it because the

27:59guidelines are okay with it.

28:01Um I'm kind of

28:03on board with the side porch. That makes

28:04perfect sense to me that she that she

28:06would line up and that that it's

28:08look like Fred would design that that

28:10way.

28:14Um so I would be okay with um the

28:16modification proposed.

28:18Um I don't know if the shutters if if

28:20there were prior shutters and there was

28:22some proof of that, I'd be fine with

28:23that.

28:24Um

28:25seems like a lot of busy stuff here to

28:27try and get

28:29I've got to prove this we can get them

28:31shot.

28:35>> So, we're going to

28:36to be made or

28:39>> I'll make a motion.

28:41I move for COA 2026-09-18882

28:48approve the applicant application with

28:51staff's conditions.

28:54>> Second.

28:55>> Second.

28:56>> All right. Motion Lauren, second Chris.

28:58The motion is to approve with conditions

29:01and in accordance with staff

29:02recommendations. All those in favor?

29:08Okay.

29:09All opposed?

29:10All right. Let's say that it's three in

29:12favor, one opposed with Alan being the

29:13no vote. Motion carries.

29:22All right. That brings us to 387 South

29:25Milledge Avenue. Can we have the staff

29:27report on that one, please?

29:30>> The 387 South Milledge Avenue COA number

29:332026-09-1974.

29:37Petitioner is Joseph Smith with Arcop

29:39Lab as the agent for

29:42the Georgia House Corp. Uh

29:46Um they are requesting to replace the

29:48column capitals and shafts.

29:54Oops. But this parcel is located on the

29:57eastern side of South Milledge Avenue

29:59and is the second

30:00lot of the northeast intersection of

30:02South Milledge Avenue and Henderson

30:04Avenue.

30:081947 Sanborn map shows uh the parcel

30:14with a a house on

30:20And in this 25 aerial view, it is

30:24representative of the current conditions

30:26of the property.

30:28Previous certificates of appropriate for

30:30this property included May 2026 approval

30:33for a replacement of Jessica column

30:35bases.

30:37There have been additional approvals for

30:39changes

30:41like the June 2017 approval of a major

30:43addition

30:45as well as some site modifications.

30:47And

30:49property is an individually designated

30:51local historic landmark as well as

30:54contributing considered contributing to

30:55the Mel Avenue Historic District.

30:59Constructed in 1913 when the

31:00neighborhood was first included

31:03or sorry, constructed by them when they

31:05were first included in the neighborhood

31:07and Warners and the landmark designation

31:08report said the date of construction was

31:111860.

31:13This

31:14right here shows the building that we're

31:16looking at and the columns that are uh

31:20are to the applicant and their submitted

31:23documents are deteriorating.

31:26Uh you can see on the plan in the bottom

31:28corner there where those columns are

31:30located around the front porch.

31:35All right, and then I just provided some

31:38photo or I'm sorry, put onto our slides

31:40some photos provided by by the applicant

31:43um showing the deterioration to the

31:46capitals and

31:49those the shafts uh

31:51one shows cracking through the

31:53up there uh

31:55the corner column they show as uh 3 ft

32:00I'm sorry, 3 in

32:01ft lower than the next column to the

32:03straight

32:05um and

32:07additional thing that they're showing

32:09keep

32:09scrolling through

32:11um showing further deterioration

32:14the existing plaster capitals, existing

32:16wood fluted shafts, and wood bases and

32:19their construction

32:20of the assembled wood has led to the

32:22failure of the wood and joints and

32:24compromise the stability of the columns

32:25according to the applicant.

32:28This request is to replace all of these

32:30column parts with cast that exactly

32:31match the existing and will have a

32:33painted

32:37The applicant requests that the material

32:39of the new columns be chosen with

32:40staff's help. Possible materials to use

32:42would come from the following list that

32:44they provided.

32:46For the capital

32:48Maybe a of the list to make it easier.

32:51For the capitals, they suggest

32:52reinforced fiberglass, cast resin,

32:54paintable fiber reinforced polymer,

32:57cellular PVC, or cast terracotta.

33:00For the shafts, they suggest wood,

33:02reinforced fiberglass, cellular PVC.

33:05For the bases, they suggest wood and

33:06aluminum,

33:08reinforced fiberglass, cast stone, or

33:11cellular PVC.

33:13They say that all options of would be

33:15exact replicas of the existing.

33:21And

33:21just that's a photo

33:23laid out of what um

33:27make up of the columns as they are.

33:31And then staff's recommendation is

33:32approval of this application. The staff

33:35recommends this as a

33:38uh finds that the use of replicas that

33:39give the appearance of the original

33:40columns is appropriate for preservation

33:42of the property and integrity of the

33:44district.

33:46With staff's support.

33:47>> All right. Is the petitioner present?

33:50>> Mr. Let the record show the petitioner

33:52>> My name is Franklin Frost, 180 Indale

33:55Avenue. Um I am here on behalf of Argo

33:58Lab. Um good evening. I'd like to thank

34:00the plain department for their analysis

34:01and review of the repair and replacement

34:03of the existing wood columns on the

34:05front porch colonnade of the Alpha Phi

34:07Sorority located 387 South Milledge Ave.

34:11The existing wood columns show

34:13signs of significant degradation as as

34:16visible in those images with one column

34:19that's closest to the stair actively

34:22deflecting when you put your hand on it.

34:24Um

34:25This and the additional deterioration

34:27we've seen on multiple columns raises

34:29the concerns about the structural

34:30integrity of the entire front porch. Um

34:32and the sorority has requested that we

34:33take measures to stabilize and repair uh

34:36the columns. Uh we're here to request a

34:38series of materials to be approved for

34:40these repairs

34:41of the existing columns, which allow our

34:43team to work closely with the planning

34:44department staff to select the best

34:47option once the further investigation

34:49takes place.

34:51In the immediate, our goal is to remove

34:52that worst column to the right of the

34:54front stair

34:56um

34:56to fully assess the column itself, the

34:59condition of the footing, the the pier

35:02that exists there, the connections to

35:04the roof, and understand exactly how

35:07that front porch colonnade is built

35:10because those columns are actually

35:12hollow shells. And so, we are looking at

35:14the different strategies on how to

35:16structurally reinforce that front porch

35:20while maintaining the historic character

35:23of the the existing conditions.

35:25So, once this in-depth assessment takes

35:27place, our team will be able to create

35:29the best plan of action for both repair

35:31and replacement

35:33of each column on the colonnade. So,

35:35each one will be individually looked at

35:37and assessed to whether it needs a full

35:39replacement or just repair. Um

35:43and then this pre-approval allows the

35:45materials or excuse me, this

35:47pre-approval of materials this evening

35:49allows the work

35:50to continue in an efficient pace with

35:53the coordinated effort between the

35:54design team, the construction team, and

35:57ACC staff. Our goal is to return the

35:59colonnade to structural stability while

36:01maintaining the existing historic

36:03conditions as best as possible. To this

36:05end, each replacement will be a replica

36:07of the existing columns in form and will

36:11have a painted finish to match what is

36:12existing.

36:13Thank you for your time and I'll be

36:15happy to answer any questions.

36:17>> Have a seat, sir. Thank you.

36:19Are there any members of the public who

36:20wish to speak in favor of this proposal?

36:24I see none of the any members of the

36:25public who wish to speak against this

36:26proposal.

36:29So, seeing none,

36:31I'll turn over to the commission. Will

36:32there be discussion?

36:34Who else wants to start?

36:35>> I'll start.

36:37I like I like what you said about

36:40assessing uh, the columns uh,

36:43on

36:44case per case or column per column

36:48basis. If we're talking about, uh,

36:51wholesale

36:52replacement of historic fabric, I'm

36:55against it adamantly.

36:58I love it.

36:59I think these columns can be taken down

37:02and repaired. This whole thing is a big

37:05job any way you look at it, total

37:07replacement or not. But, I think, uh,

37:10cons-

37:12conservation

37:14repairs

37:15can, uh, return those columns to use.

37:20And the bases that are rotten can be,

37:24uh, remilled by with a stock that is,

37:29uh, fairly impervious to the weather,

37:31like mahogany, for example.

37:34Um,

37:35so, uh, I would suggest that.

37:39And, the way this

37:41uh,

37:42application I have in front of me was

37:44written, it sounds like wholesale

37:46replacement. Replace everything,

37:48capital, shaft, bases, all that. And I

37:52don't think that's the best approach

37:54here. Maybe we need to,

37:56uh,

37:57reassess the verbiage

37:59in the application and change that.

38:02Another, uh, point is, uh,

38:05the cast aluminum bases,

38:08uh, now, are those intended to, uh, rest

38:11on a wood substrate or a masonry

38:14substrate?

38:15>> You can go ahead and answer the

38:16question.

38:18>> So, I guess to to go back to the

38:20original, we have already done,

38:23uh,

38:24rehabilitation to the existing columns.

38:26It was done when the addition part of

38:29the addition was done a few years ago,

38:31and the columns are continued to, uh,

38:34show signs of of degradation. So, we are

38:37here

38:38four columns that are actively failing

38:40that are beyond kind of repair, and then

38:43there will be assessment of each

38:44individual column. So,

38:47um

38:48the

38:49a fully turned wood column is still on

38:52the table that would match the existing

38:54profile of the columns.

38:56>> A solid column.

38:58>> Yes, sir. A wood A wood column. So, that

39:00is one of the materials in which we are

39:02proposing

39:03>> to have joints in it or you're going to

39:05find a joint big enough to

39:07>> That's what we're actively pricing

39:10um because

39:12the numbers that we have gotten back for

39:14the first column is

39:16relatively expensive. And so, we are

39:18looking at at various strategies on

39:22what makes the most sense to maintain

39:25the historic front porch without it

39:28failing.

39:29>> Mhm.

39:30>> Um

39:30and and so, from the base that you

39:33mentioned of the aluminum

39:35there is a masonry pier that is below

39:39the front porch wood decking. And there

39:42is signs of of kind of the the column

39:46base that you see the as the rectangular

39:48base that that the column kind of the

39:50column plinth

39:52that is pitched in two directions

39:54because that is solid wood and it is

39:56actively failing. So, we are suggesting

39:59creating an aluminum break

40:01that the column itself sits on so you do

40:04not have wood sitting essentially in

40:07water on that deck. And then there will

40:09be trim

40:10wood trim to match that existing column

40:13base but the the column itself would no

40:16longer be resting on a wood surface

40:19because you know, over 120 years of of

40:23wear and tear and neglect, you know, if

40:26you're not actively painting this, there

40:28are joints and seams in that

40:30construction and those have taken on

40:32water.

40:32>> Mhm.

40:32>> And so, we're trying to actively repair

40:36um

40:37damaged materials where possible and

40:40replace what has to be replaced because

40:43we've already made uh a round of repairs

40:47to the columns and we're back trying to

40:50to solve the the issues.

40:53>> You've repaired the shafts.

40:55>> That's correct and the bases.

40:57>> Okay, and the bases have they been

40:59replaced with an in-kind material or is

41:02>> No, that's that's what we're here for is

41:04because they were essentially limped

41:06along and repaired in some in

41:10to be filled in some areas

41:14and now we are we're basically at the

41:17point of having to go back and and look

41:19at each one individually because I mean

41:22if you go to the property the stair the

41:25column to the right of the front stair

41:28has a

41:303 or 4-in deflection in not not just

41:33dropping but there's a deflection in the

41:35actual column.

41:36>> In the shaft itself.

41:38>> That's that's correct.

41:39>> Well, these these things have to be

41:41buckled.

41:42Coopered is what we call them. Coopered

41:45column, correct, which is built like a

41:47barrel staves. We call it coopered. And

41:51this is a typical construction form for

41:54this sort of thing rather than a solid

41:57column. I think there probably some

41:59instances where you might find that but

42:01>> What's smaller?

42:03>> They're rare.

42:04And getting back to my question about

42:06the aluminum plant

42:09that

42:10my experience has been that those

42:12typical aluminum or some type of cast

42:16metal plants with with feet on the

42:19corners so that

42:22air is allowed to pass under and through

42:25are intended to rest on a masonry

42:28substrate. The ones I've seen applied to

42:31a wooden substrate tend to deflect more

42:35down into the wood. So I think that

42:36would be a mistake.

42:38>> Well, we have a masonry

42:40pier that it sitting

42:41So the deck itself is that

42:43>> decking between

42:45okay.

42:45>> No, sir.

42:46>> It's on a masonry substrate.

42:48>> There's there's masonry piers so So, see

42:49that gray

42:51that those are all masonry piers

42:52directly located underneath the deck.

42:54And the for the framing stops and

42:56there's about a 3 and 1/2 in space

42:59between the top of the decking and the

43:01top of that masonry

43:03pier.

43:04It is covered by the band, but you can

43:07again, that's sitting below.

43:09>> Well, I'm a little still a little bit

43:11confused. So, so the uh aluminum plant

43:15will rest on the masonry column, the

43:17pier. That's screwed beneath. And then

43:20the

43:21uh the wooden decking is applied around

43:24that.

43:24>> Wooden decking already exists. We're

43:25basically going to be recreating that

43:27existing wood plinth that you see

43:30>> Mhm.

43:31>> as basically plinth.

43:34So, the structural column will act like

43:36right now that is a that is a

43:39that is deflecting. And so, we are going

43:41to be creating a new aluminum plinth

43:44that sits on top of that existing

43:46>> will be concealed. Is that what you're

43:48saying?

43:49>> Yes, sir.

43:49>> Okay. All right. Uh because I did notice

43:53in some of the photographs that the

43:54plant that you see, the wooden plant, is

43:58tapered to match the pitch of the porch

44:01decking.

44:02>> Correct. It pitches away, but it is also

44:04failing. So, it's actively pitching in

44:06two directions.

44:07>> Mhm. Okay.

44:08>> So, it's collecting water as well. So,

44:10yes, originally it was pitched away just

44:13like the deck,

44:14but it is actively pitched in two

44:16directions

44:17so because of failing.

44:19>> Because of failing.

44:20>> Yes, sir.

44:20>> Okay. And uh

44:22as far as determining what is to be

44:25repaired and what's to be discarded, uh

44:29who who has the authority to determine

44:32that?

44:32>> So, that's why we are working with both

44:35uh structural engineer as well as our uh

44:39construction

44:41uh professionals who do historic

44:42preservation work and they've worked on

44:44on multiple projects throughout the

44:45state um that are qualified for doing

44:48repairs of this scale. And that's why we

44:50would We're basically proposing coming

44:52in, stabilizing the front porch,

44:54removing that one column, getting the

44:57assessment and the plan together to then

44:59work with staff about what our best

45:01options are moving forward.

45:03>> [clears throat]

45:04>> Hoping to get approval for the

45:06the different types of materials to

45:09allow that process to be

45:12uh

45:13pretty basically efficient and and not

45:15have to

45:16get approval to disassemble one column,

45:19come up with a action plan, and then

45:21come back because of events in the

45:23spring at the sorority that we are

45:25hoping to uh be have have the the single

45:29column repaired by uh

45:32early spring.

45:35>> Um

45:39So, with that, there'll be some some

45:41bearing between the shaft

45:45and the uh uh supplemental plant that

45:48you're installing on top of the masonry

45:50there.

45:50>> That's correct.

45:51>> I I think we'd like to see some uh

45:54reports or comments from the engineers

45:58uh

46:00you know, towards this effort.

46:01>> Absolutely. That's what we plan on

46:03working with staff for.

46:04>> You'll submit that to staff.

46:05>> Yes, that I mean, that's that's

46:06basically what what our you know,

46:08approval with those conditions of

46:09working with staff.

46:10>> So, the bearing uh the the uh load path

46:15will come down the shaft and land on the

46:19base there, and and the aluminum plant

46:22will support the base. Is that correct?

46:26>> Yes, and that could be aluminum, it

46:28could be cast stone, but again, it will

46:30all be trimmed to match

46:32the what is existing.

46:34>> Okay. All right. Well, that's kind of a

46:36creative repair, I think. Uh

46:40but sounds good. So, uh

46:43the uh

46:44the turned bases there, will they be

46:48reinstalled in sections or something or

46:51>> That's what we're working with. We the

46:53supplier who or the the subcontractor

46:56for uh doing the repairs has done both a

47:01solid turned that has been hollowed,

47:03also sections. So, it will just depend

47:06upon um what's

47:10what's available for sourcing because

47:11also these columns are very unique size.

47:14>> Yeah.

47:14>> And so, whether it is going to be, you

47:16know, anything from there could be

47:18structural steel put in the

47:21basically the cavity of and have it be

47:24coopered again. And so, then it is both

47:26a

47:27segmented structural wood column, but

47:29there is a redundancy in structural

47:31steel. So, you don't have the continued

47:34staging of the front porch because the

47:36front porch is actively deflecting.

47:38>> Staging of the porch beam or the

47:40>> There is no porch beam. See, that's

47:41that's the way that these are framed is

47:43there's two walls that then are

47:45>> Well, there's some kind of beam up

47:46there. It's a box beam, which is hollow

47:48or something. It has been temperature at

47:51the top of the cost.

47:52>> It's two framed walls with a 1 by 12 top

47:54of it.

47:57>> So,

47:58the porch beam, so to speak, is actually

48:01a a framed pony wall

48:04>> That's correct.

48:04>> that's that's trimmed out with

48:07>> And there are basically from other

48:10examples of this type of construction,

48:12there are four 2 by 4s at the top of

48:14that wall that are behind the capital

48:17that brace that wall.

48:20>> On top of the capital?

48:21>> No, through the capital. So, the capital

48:23is wrapped basically four 2 by 4s.

48:25>> Okay.

48:26>> So, it is it is a when you look at it,

48:29it it

48:30kind of looks precarious when it's

48:31deconstructed.

48:32>> Yeah.

48:33>> Yeah.

48:33>> I'm sorry to go on and on about this,

48:35but there are so many details in my mind

48:38that have been overlooked in our report

48:40here

48:41that that concerns

48:43>> Well, and and that's again why we're

48:44we're wanting to work with staff

48:47for basically individual assessment, but

48:50it would be a whole lot easier to work

48:52once we know a path forward and the

48:55strategy in which we can So, one of

48:58these columns just needs to be removed,

48:59temporary bracing put in, and

49:01>> [clears throat]

49:02>> that's where we will assess

49:04the appropriate path forward.

49:05>> will be repaired in situ, so to speak.

49:08>> Every single one will be individually

49:11uh

49:12diagnosed for uh

49:14>> Mhm.

49:14>> you know, lack of a better term, and and

49:16what exactly needs to be done on a

49:19column-by-column basis.

49:20>> Yeah, and you should uh also have a

49:22contingency for all that because once

49:24you get in there, it's probably going to

49:26be different than

49:27uh

49:28>> Correct.

49:28>> What's apparently in front

49:29>> Ab- absolutely. And that's why we don't

49:32want to go in a one-for-one column and

49:34and come back to you guys 14 times.

49:37>> Yeah, yeah, I understand that. Well, the

49:39the history that I read uh about this

49:42particular building uh indicates that

49:44the column nave was added in 1909.

49:47Uh if you weren't aware of that, just

49:49for your information.

49:51Uh

49:52Okay, I think that answers

49:55my question.

49:55>> Okay. So, thank you very much, sir.

49:56>> Absolutely.

49:58>> All right. Let's hear from Alan.

50:01>> I'm fine with the staff's recommendation

50:03of approval. Those Those columns have

50:05been repaired numerous times in 1985

50:08when I lived at 846 South Milledge.

50:11Wilkins family and fraternity um

50:14undertook to repair columns on both

50:17properties, and those aren't original

50:19caps, and they've been

50:21patched together for decades.

50:23I'll prove this.

50:26>> I also would approve this, and Jim, I I

50:28think maybe

50:30this can give some context here. I think

50:32that what the applicant is seeking here

50:35is

50:36approval from this body to not have to

50:38come back to this body every single time

50:41they make a decision over the next year

50:44plus that's going to take them to

50:45actually fix all these columns.

50:47Um and I think the real question is is

50:51replacement material that is not in

50:53kind, so wood,

50:55for every aspect of this, is that an

50:57appropriate thing for our guidelines?

51:00Um

51:02these are all replacement materials.

51:04This group is very

51:06very good at this. ArgoLab has

51:09done a lot of this. Um

51:11one of their principals

51:13teaches the building materials

51:14conservation course at UGA.

51:17Um

51:18they know what they're doing. I trust

51:19them.

51:20I think that all of these are things

51:22that the National Park Service is now

51:25much more amenable to approving as

51:28um replacement material when it's

51:30required to be replaced in a way that is

51:33going to last longer than wood if

51:36modern ways of dealing with materials

51:38can't meet the functional needs.

51:40>> Mhm.

51:41>> And so

51:42for instance, like cellular PVC, um

51:45it changes different than wood does in

51:47different moisture and sun environments

51:49and heat exchange and all this. So, like

51:51all of that will be assessed

51:53on a case-by-case basis, it sounds like.

51:56Um so, maybe if if you're uncomfortable

51:58with this

52:00not having to like or just passing this

52:02off to staff to make that decision with

52:05the applicant, maybe you want to

52:06condition this approval further, but for

52:09me these are all

52:10potentially

52:13just as good as in-kind replacement

52:15materials

52:16in a lot of different aspects. It's just

52:17going to be case-by-case for every

52:19aspect.

52:20>> Yeah, and sometimes better. So,

52:22I think that's what they're going for

52:24here is just like, "Hey, here's our

52:25palette of materials. It's all going to

52:26be painted to look the same.

52:28We'll figure out the assembly

52:30to get it to look exactly the same." And

52:33so, for me this is an approval as

52:35written. But, if you want to condition

52:36it otherwise, I'd I'd entertain that.

52:38>> Well, Andrew, that's good information

52:41for my sake to have, and also uh what

52:43Alan said about the

52:45uh capitals being changed. Uh I can

52:48accept that. Uh

52:51I think it goes without saying that uh

52:53cyclical maintenance

52:56is important to keep from returning to

52:59this condition again and again.

53:03So, I would suggest maybe

53:06applying that in some way.

53:11What do you think?

53:13>> Um, I would approve the application as

53:15it is.

53:16>> Yes, Mr. Woodburn.

53:18>> I move that COA 2026-09-1974

53:22for the approval as submitted.

53:24>> All right, motion on table is to approve

53:27as submitted by Allen and second

53:29second Warren.

53:31All those in favor?

53:35I thought I heard you say you seconded

53:37that.

53:384-0 nothing unanimous approval, okay.

53:41>> [laughter]

53:43>> All right, let's

53:45makes sense, okay.

53:46>> [laughter]

53:47>> Uh, let's move on now. Third item is 363

53:49Reese Street. Can we have a staff

53:51report, please?

53:55>> 363 Reese Street, hearing number

53:572026-09-1978.

54:02This owner is SPG Planners and Engineers

54:05as agent for Emma Holdings LLC.

54:09Request is for demolition and site

54:11modifications.

54:14It's in the Reese Historic District,

54:16Reese Street Historic District and

54:19property is considered non-contributing.

54:22The property is located on the southern

54:24side of Reese Street mid-block between

54:26Pope and Lee Streets.

54:31This is a 2025 aerial view of the

54:34property currently

54:37representative of property.

54:40This 1947 Sanborn map shows

54:44the original structure of the house and

54:46in here, you can see where um

54:50uh where this small structure was built

54:53uh likely in 1908 when the block

54:56uh was first included in the Sanborn

54:58maps.

54:59Um there have been large additions added

55:02to the house that have obscured the

55:04historic character um which is why the

55:08property is designated as

55:09non-contributing.

55:11You can see this in this photo here

55:12where the original home is highlighted

55:14in blue and then the additions are

55:18both on the front and back of the house

55:19at

55:20or

55:21hard to see [laughter] the actual

55:22historic

55:24part of the house.

55:28And then these are some photos of the

55:30house recent photos of the house that is

55:33proposed for demolition.

55:36That's what you're seeing and all.

55:38This is a

55:40image of the topography of the property.

55:42You can see

55:45we speak there at the north

55:47leading down

55:48toward

55:49a creek

55:51that

55:52is

55:53partially still existing.

55:55Part of this plan there is where the

55:57applicant is proposed to open this creek

56:00back up a bit. Um

56:02Um applicant is likely to speak to that.

56:05Oops, put my boundary.

56:07All right, and then this

56:09is a

56:10part of the proposal. So, once that if

56:13the house is

56:14allowed to be demolished, the applicant

56:16would like to put in a park here.

56:20A green space or terraced area.

56:23So, a walking path is proposed that

56:26comes off of B Street and heads south

56:28down the property in a keyhole shape.

56:31It'll be constructed out of clay pavers

56:33with stone edging.

56:34At the bottom of the keyhole, a stadium

56:36seating is proposed. It'll be

56:39constructed out of precast concrete that

56:41looks to a stage area

56:43in the middle of the keyhole circle.

56:45Synthetic turf

56:47is proposed.

56:49Walls that lead to

56:51uh

56:52down and around of the keyhole are

56:54proposed as well. This uh plan notes

56:56that the height will range from about 4

56:59ft to 9 ft tall uh this wall and that it

57:02will be constructed of a stone veneer

57:04over a concrete base.

57:06But there will be attached wood seating

57:08on the wall.

57:10There

57:11will be a smaller a shorter seat wall

57:13around as well

57:15also a stone or granite typically a for

57:19one drawing seat

57:20a veneer over a concrete base. Railings

57:23are shown on the drawings but no

57:25materials were listed

57:27for those railings.

57:29And this is a drawing provided by the

57:31applicant showing the park um

57:34from a side view as it as it goes down

57:37toward that that creek that was

57:39semi historic.

57:41Um

57:43and then these are some images provided

57:45by the applicant of

57:47um materials to be used.

57:51And then this is

57:53uh an image from the 2026 May concept um

57:58as the commission will remember this has

58:01been seen twice now by the commission as

58:03a concept. Um so this was

58:06this all

58:08here

58:09um

58:10and then showing the current site plan

58:12that's proposed

58:14the red is the outline of the parcel

58:17that we're looking at today 360 Henry

58:18Street um

58:20the yellow that goes around you can kind

58:22of see it outlines which part of uh this

58:27block is in Henry Street Historic

58:30District and so you can see that not all

58:33of what we're looking at today

58:35um or sorry part of the proposal is

58:37outside of

58:39um this historic district.

58:43All right. And here we are

58:45the applicant has broken down a bit of

58:47what is proposed for kind of their whole

58:50project um but the blue is outline is

58:53showing you

58:54what we're actually looking at today for

58:56this proposal. So showing the

58:59um base there at the at the north end of

59:03the existing structure that's to be

59:04demolished is outlined in black.

59:07And then you can see where the

59:10the mixed-use building that is proposed

59:12for the parcel um the south of this one

59:16and there is a small section of that

59:19mixed-use building that's in this

59:21parcel. So, it's approximately 2,500

59:23square feet of that building.

59:27It is within your purview here to

59:30look at today.

59:32Showing that again in red of the parcel

59:36of how much of the mixed-use building is

59:38in

59:40parcel today. So,

59:42this

59:43view as provided by the applicant shows

59:46where uh

59:48kind of shows some of what is proposed

59:51for this building.

59:53Very small section that's actually in

59:55this property.

1:00:00All right. And then the applicant has

1:00:01provided

1:00:03as this context for the commission to

1:00:06see

1:00:07there are

1:00:09other large buildings that were nearby.

1:00:13They are not within the Re Street

1:00:14Historic District, but they are

1:00:17very, very close to this this parcel.

1:00:21And then

1:00:22also provided by the applicant some some

1:00:24views

1:00:25toward the property

1:00:27from the neighboring

1:00:29neighboring property from West Broad

1:00:31Street which is behind Re Street.

1:00:35And then from North Finley, North Pope

1:00:37as well.

1:00:40And then applicant has shown our

1:00:42elevations here

1:00:44with just the section that is actually

1:00:47in

1:00:48or on 363 Re Street.

1:00:51It is rectangle out in in blue there so

1:00:54you can get an idea of what section of

1:00:57the building mixed-use building is

1:00:58actually what we're looking at today.

1:01:01Some of the materials used are shown as

1:01:05brick red brick,

1:01:07cast stone trim as a band. There are

1:01:12um

1:01:13four-light windows shown, some paired

1:01:15and some single.

1:01:17They're using cast stone heads and sills

1:01:20with dividing one thing.

1:01:23Um and the the upper floor will have two

1:01:25light windows, some paired and some

1:01:27single.

1:01:32But here the applicant has provided some

1:01:35of their historic references for

1:01:37why they've chosen some of the materials

1:01:39and shapes that they're suggesting on

1:01:42the building.

1:01:46And then these are some elevations of

1:01:49uh

1:01:50what is proposed and kind of some views

1:01:52from different areas. So this one has

1:01:55the uh

1:01:56section that is 363 Street in that

1:01:59brighter yellow circle. Then the the

1:02:02smaller circle down to the right there

1:02:03is uh

1:02:05just wanted to highlight that that is a

1:02:08an existing playground that is a part of

1:02:11the Re-Street Historic District. So this

1:02:14kind of shows a little more of what is

1:02:17in that historic district. Um not not

1:02:19part of the

1:02:21request for today, just kind of noting

1:02:22that that exists there.

1:02:25And then

1:02:26um

1:02:27this shows again that part of the

1:02:30section of the building that is on 363.

1:02:33And I want to show the

1:02:34whole parts that are proposed.

1:02:39And staff's recommendation today is

1:02:41approval with conditions.

1:02:44Staff would like to see details on the

1:02:46proposed railings on the walls around

1:02:48the green space um and thinks that they

1:02:50could be approved by staff.

1:02:52Uh additionally uh

1:02:54staff would like to see grass or another

1:02:57natural material to be used inside the

1:02:58keyhole instead of that synthetic turf

1:03:01um the green space area. And this

1:03:03concludes staff report.

1:03:05>> Is the Fisher present?

1:03:06>> Yes.

1:03:07>> All right. Please come up and state your

1:03:08name and address, and you have 10

1:03:09minutes.

1:03:09>> Sure thing.

1:03:11Uh West Riles, SPG Partners and

1:03:13Engineers, um at 1725 Electric Avenue in

1:03:17Watkinsville, Georgia.

1:03:19Good evening and uh good to see you all

1:03:20again.

1:03:21Uh we're pleased to bring our request

1:03:23here tonight for a cert cert excuse me

1:03:26certificate certificate of

1:03:28appropriateness.

1:03:29As the commissioner has reviewed the

1:03:31broader development

1:03:33over the course of two previous

1:03:34occasions, I'll briefly recap the

1:03:37overall approach before focusing on the

1:03:39specific request here tonight.

1:03:42Um our COA request is twofold. First,

1:03:45we're seeking approval to demolish the

1:03:47existing structure

1:03:49at 363 Reese Street which we believe is

1:03:51non-contributing in its current form.

1:03:54Secondly, we are seeking approval for

1:03:56the proposed work architectural work as

1:03:59it relates to and about the Reese Street

1:04:02historic district.

1:04:04Since our last review with you guys,

1:04:06we've continued researching the property

1:04:09and located the 1987

1:04:11National Register nomination for the

1:04:13Reese Street neighborhood.

1:04:16Notably, the existing structure at 363

1:04:19Reese Street was not identified as a

1:04:21contributing resource in that

1:04:23nomination.

1:04:24Um that parcel was left out.

1:04:27We believe this provides relevant

1:04:29historic context for the commission's

1:04:31consideration and we

1:04:33respectfully ask that the structure be

1:04:35evaluated on its current merits and in

1:04:38the context of the specific request

1:04:40before you tonight.

1:04:43Um as far as the overall development

1:04:45approach,

1:04:46um at a broader level, this project

1:04:48represents an opportunity to reinvest in

1:04:51an underutilized property

1:04:53along the Broad Street corridor while

1:04:55addressing long-standing infrastructure

1:04:58and environmental challenges.

1:05:00Our goal is to support the city's vision

1:05:02for the corridor while creating

1:05:04meaningful benefits to the surrounding

1:05:06neighborhood.

1:05:08Um as discussed during our previous

1:05:10reviews, we've been very deliberate

1:05:12about the develop about how the

1:05:15development interfaces with the

1:05:16established historic neighborhood.

1:05:19Um

1:05:20in response to community feedback, we've

1:05:22oriented the most active commercial uses

1:05:25towards Broad Street, um revised the

1:05:27site circulation to direct vehicular

1:05:29traffic towards Finley Street,

1:05:32rather than farther into the

1:05:33neighborhood. Um we've also eliminated

1:05:36the need for surface parking previously

1:05:38required under the ACC design standards

1:05:41through the use of the inclusionary

1:05:42zone.

1:05:44Um the project also creates an

1:05:45opportunity to address uh deteriorating

1:05:48infrastructure, uh stabilize and restore

1:05:51one of downtown's last remaining open

1:05:53stream corridors,

1:05:55improve water cal-

1:05:57improve water quality, and restore a

1:05:59protective natural buffer between our

1:06:02primary development and the

1:06:03neighborhood.

1:06:05As far as uh the neighborhood feedback

1:06:07um and responses to that, our

1:06:09conversations with the neighborhood

1:06:11residents and Hill Street, First Baptist

1:06:13Church uh leadership continue to guide

1:06:16our development approach.

1:06:17The collective feedback we have received

1:06:19has helped shape our proposal,

1:06:21which now includes an addition of a

1:06:23permanently protected community green

1:06:25space um that will function as a

1:06:27continuing contiguous extension of Reese

1:06:30Foot Park.

1:06:32Uh the green space will be protected

1:06:34through a permanent easement that runs

1:06:35uh forever with the land.

1:06:38Beyond providing open space, we see an

1:06:39opportunity to recognize the history of

1:06:41Reese Street and the people who've

1:06:43called this neighborhood home.

1:06:45Our hope is that this space can serve as

1:06:47a lasting community resource uh with

1:06:49potential to incorporate commemorative

1:06:51elements and outdoor educational

1:06:53opportunities,

1:06:55as you might have noticed in the the

1:06:56site plan,

1:06:57that acknowledges uh the neighborhood's

1:06:59history.

1:07:01Ultimately, these elements reflect our

1:07:03broader commitment to addressing

1:07:04infrastructure and environmental

1:07:06challenges, responding to the

1:07:08neighborhood concerns, and creating a

1:07:10meaningful community benefit as part of

1:07:12this redevelopment.

1:07:14For tonight

1:07:15For tonight, however, we recognize that

1:07:17the commission's consideration is

1:07:18focused on this ZOA request for 363

1:07:21Reese Street.

1:07:22With that context, I'll turn it over to

1:07:24my colleague colleague who will present

1:07:26more detail

1:07:28architecture.

1:07:32>> Hi, good evening. My name is Timothy

1:07:34First. I'm a senior project architect

1:07:36with Niles Bolton Associates out of

1:07:37Atlanta. We're the architect on the

1:07:40project. I'm I'm up here to kind of wrap

1:07:43up a little bit with

1:07:44some recap and context to the

1:07:46architectural component of this

1:07:48of this

1:07:50proposal.

1:07:51Um

1:07:54from the last meeting, our instructions

1:07:56were to look at the historic references

1:07:58of the neighborhood and look at how to

1:08:00apply to the limited portion of the

1:08:02building that's our zone or in the

1:08:04parcel here.

1:08:06As shown in the images, it's about a

1:08:0895-ft section of of a much larger

1:08:11building that's subject to this historic

1:08:14parcel.

1:08:15Um so, our strategy and our goal is to

1:08:17look at the neighborhood first and look

1:08:18for references. So, the Reese Street

1:08:21neighborhood

1:08:23um does have a couple of really nice

1:08:24existing

1:08:26buildings where we will take reference

1:08:27from including the Hill First Baptist

1:08:29Church right across the street, the

1:08:31Reese Street down the Reese Street

1:08:32School down the street and the former

1:08:35Knox Institute which was

1:08:37um at this intersection. Um now,

1:08:39unfortunately, the rest of the neighb-

1:08:41the rest of the neighborhood is

1:08:43you know, smaller single-family homes of

1:08:45a different scale and different

1:08:47character. So, we had to expand our

1:08:48reference to the rest of Athens. We

1:08:51started looking downtown for um

1:08:54similar scale for our project. So, that

1:08:56included looking at the Morton Building

1:08:58and the Georgian, both brick buildings

1:09:01of similar scale and character. We were

1:09:03able to take

1:09:04more direct reference from. We also

1:09:05looked at kind of the history of brick

1:09:08industrial architecture in the region

1:09:10as evidenced in the Athens Cotton Press

1:09:13Building on our example sheet. So,

1:09:17after gathering this collection of

1:09:19reference images and studying kind of

1:09:21the

1:09:21the the elements in them that define the

1:09:24character, We

1:09:26took a couple strong moves back to our

1:09:28section of the building um

1:09:30when the main moves was the classical

1:09:33division of the base, the field, and the

1:09:34cap

1:09:35uh using um cast stone trim bands

1:09:38between those sections. That's that's a

1:09:41reference to

1:09:42the cast stone the Morton building and

1:09:44and frankly a lot of

1:09:46classically structured buildings in the

1:09:49downtown area. Um

1:09:51we looked at kind of just increasing the

1:09:53quality of the brickwork in this section

1:09:55uh increasing the pilasters

1:09:58um creating more

1:10:00more traditional detailing with the

1:10:01brick instead of just being a flat wall.

1:10:03Uh we looked at uh cast stone head and

1:10:06sills for the windows and then

1:10:08increasing the the muntins to give a

1:10:11more traditional look to the the windows

1:10:14in this

1:10:15par- or in this elevation of the parcel.

1:10:19Um and lastly we want to call out the

1:10:21the base

1:10:22uh using kind of the brick arches that

1:10:25we see in a couple different references

1:10:28to kind of ground the base and then

1:10:30infilling with inside those arches

1:10:32greenery screens which we are

1:10:35using across the facade both to kind of

1:10:36soften it and also as a reference back

1:10:39to the historic botanical gardens that

1:10:42were on this site.

1:10:43Um

1:10:44and then to wrap up I just want to

1:10:47uh talk a little bit. So even though

1:10:49just this section is subject to this

1:10:52parcel and this historic preservation we

1:10:54just want to call out that we

1:10:55started to make moves to treat so that

1:10:57the entire rest of the building with

1:10:59some of these historic references from

1:11:00the from the neighborhood including the

1:11:03material choices using the white lap

1:11:05siding and the white brick. Those are

1:11:07calling back to the First Baptist Church

1:11:09in the rear street. We used that pretty

1:11:12predominantly on West Broad.

1:11:14Um also the relationship of

1:11:17white material over top of red brick

1:11:18base we use on West Broad.

1:11:21Um

1:11:22and that we have some opportunities both

1:11:25in the park and on the building. There's

1:11:27a a large space for a mural on Pope

1:11:29Street that's going to be dedicated

1:11:31towards

1:11:32something to call back to the history of

1:11:34the neighborhood.

1:11:35So,

1:11:36I'm just wrapping up with our strategy

1:11:38was to take your instructions to look at

1:11:40the neighborhood.

1:11:41We started there, expanded to the rest

1:11:43of Athens to kind of bring some some

1:11:45elements to call back to

1:11:48the surrounding area.

1:11:51Thank you.

1:11:54>> Are there any members of the public who

1:11:55wish to speak in favor

1:11:56>> Can I um uh I'm Awesome. I'm the

1:11:59developer.

1:12:00>> Tommy Sinnett on behalf of this.

1:12:01>> Um how much time do we have left?

1:12:02>> A little more than a minute.

1:12:03>> A minute? You got a minute.

1:12:04>> We can do it. Cool.

1:12:05>> We got it. Hi, I'm Tommy Sinnett with

1:12:07the developer on this project, 3449 Wine

1:12:09Dot Street. Um I just wanted to further

1:12:12kind of walk you guys through. I know we

1:12:14talked about it in May as well as last

1:12:16time. Um so, the uh historic

1:12:18commemorative park and outdoor classroom

1:12:21uh is something that we met with Hill

1:12:23First Baptist Church over eight times

1:12:25over the last six months. Um it was a

1:12:27design charrette in which they gave all

1:12:29the input and the design into what they

1:12:31want to see, what the what the Reese

1:12:33Street neighborhood wants to see.

1:12:35Um and so, I want to overemphasize how

1:12:38much we have invested in becoming a

1:12:40partnership not only with Hill First,

1:12:41but as well as the neighborhood and make

1:12:43sure that this is something

1:12:45um that can commemorate their history um

1:12:48and will be a benefit to the whole

1:12:49community. So, um just wanted to I

1:12:52overemphasize the commemorative park.

1:12:53We're really excited about this

1:12:54opportunity.

1:12:55>> Thank you.

1:12:57Now, are there any members of the public

1:12:58who wish to speak in favor of this

1:12:59proposal?

1:13:02Let's see, none. Are there any members

1:13:03of the public who wish to

1:13:05>> Oh, yeah. You don't have to get up.

1:13:06[laughter]

1:13:07>> I'm sorry. I shouldn't have given you

1:13:09extra time.

1:13:11>> Good evening.

1:13:12>> Be yourself.

1:13:13>> State your name and address and you've

1:13:14got 3 minutes to speak.

1:13:15>> Okay. My name is Gail Hurley. My address

1:13:18is 237 North Church Street. Uh I'm here

1:13:21in support of the uh 363

1:13:26Reese project. Um

1:13:30we

1:13:31uh as a community and as a part of the

1:13:34church have met

1:13:37multiple times with the developer and

1:13:41have come to

1:13:44uh feel that they have taken

1:13:46uh into

1:13:49understanding what we want uh

1:13:52from this uh project and uh

1:13:55I am

1:13:56encouraged uh

1:13:58by the proposed 363 Street

1:14:02community park which wrap uh which

1:14:05presents an opportunity to preserve and

1:14:08celebrate the African-American history

1:14:11of this community for for generations to

1:14:14come.

1:14:15The community park came from our

1:14:18conversations.

1:14:19Uh I am in support

1:14:22of the demolition of the dive

1:14:24contributor

1:14:25and tributary property at

1:14:29and

1:14:31at ease and but I also am

1:14:36uh

1:14:38believe that a develop

1:14:41the developer demonstrated a sincere

1:14:44willingness to work with the historic

1:14:46African-American community rather than

1:14:48simply build around it. We sought we

1:14:51seek to acknowledge that effort.

1:14:55For too long communities like Grace

1:14:57Street have had development happen to

1:15:00them rather than with them.

1:15:03Uh Cardinal has given us an opportunity

1:15:05to pursue something different. And that

1:15:08is why I support the moving forward this

1:15:11project with the appropriate safeguards

1:15:14and continued community partnership.

1:15:17Thank you.

1:15:20>> Anyone else wishing to speak in favor of

1:15:22this proposal?

1:15:27Welcome. Please state your name and

1:15:28address. You have three minutes.

1:15:30>> Good evening. Um my name is Hope

1:15:32Eagleheart. I live at 237 North Church

1:15:34Street.

1:15:35Um, I am here in support of the,

1:15:39um, proposed commemorative park.

1:15:42Um, as several of you know, I was the

1:15:46the the person who spearheaded the local

1:15:49historic designation for Reese Street

1:15:51community 18 years ago.

1:15:54Um,

1:15:55over the years we've had several

1:15:57developers that come to Reese and none

1:16:01of them have taken the taken the care,

1:16:04taken the time that Cardinal has done.

1:16:07Um,

1:16:08Cardinal took their plans for a parking

1:16:11lot and

1:16:14made this into a green space.

1:16:16Um, a space that they received, um,

1:16:20input from the church and from the Reese

1:16:22West Hancock Reese West Hancock

1:16:25Neighborhood Association.

1:16:27Um, we discussed making this space a

1:16:29meaningful space for out for outdoor

1:16:32classroom to teach about Reese and also,

1:16:36um,

1:16:37a space that our church can utilize for

1:16:40outdoor worship and also the community

1:16:44can the neighborhood

1:16:45the neighborhood association can utilize

1:16:47as well.

1:16:49Um, I am in support of the demolition

1:16:51because this property is a

1:16:53non-contributing property

1:16:55and, uh, for the commemorative park.

1:16:58As someone whose family has been

1:17:00connected to Reese Street for four

1:17:02generations, this matters deeply to me.

1:17:05Um, what I appreciate about the process,

1:17:08uh, is that Cardinal Group gave the

1:17:11neighborhood an opportunity to have a

1:17:13say in this process.

1:17:15Um, this also restores the Tanyard

1:17:17Branch.

1:17:18Um, and if you haven't seen Tanyard

1:17:21Branch recently, you should go take a

1:17:23look because this will definitely make

1:17:26the difference for this space in

1:17:28downtown Athens. Um, it also will pay

1:17:32ode to,

1:17:34um, our first botanical garden

1:17:36here in Athens, and then also the Reese

1:17:38Street community.

1:17:40We have with us several people here

1:17:42tonight from our neighborhood, uh,

1:17:44long-term residents from our

1:17:46neighborhood, and from the, um, church.

1:17:49If you would raise your hands.

1:17:52Thank you so much.

1:17:54Um, I would like to say this, historic

1:17:56preservation should not simply be about

1:17:57protecting buildings and physical

1:17:59structures. It should also be about

1:18:01preserving the stories, honoring the

1:18:03people, and recognizing the cultural

1:18:05legacy that gives them place, gives

1:18:07these places meaning.

1:18:09Um, I believe the proposed 363 Street

1:18:12Commemorative Park offers us this

1:18:14opportunity to do exactly that. And

1:18:18we thank you for considering this, and

1:18:21we hope that you will support it. Thank

1:18:22you so much.

1:18:23>> Thank you.

1:18:25Any further, wishing to speak in favor

1:18:27of the proposal?

1:18:31Okay, now I'm seeing none. Anyone wish

1:18:33to speak against the proposal?

1:18:37All right, I don't see any. So, uh, turn

1:18:39over to the commission. Who wants to to

1:18:41start the discussion?

1:18:43>> I can start.

1:18:44>> Go ahead.

1:18:45>> Um,

1:18:46as I appreciate that y'all took plans

1:18:49for a parking lot and turned it into

1:18:50something that I think would be much

1:18:51more beneficial to the community and

1:18:53work with them on that. Um, and also

1:18:56support the demolition of the house

1:18:57because it is not being,

1:18:59um, I think I'm still maybe unclear on

1:19:04given that only that little part of the

1:19:05building is part of our approval and the

1:19:07rest is not, um,

1:19:10if we were just looking at that part of

1:19:11the building,

1:19:12the scale is just so much bigger than

1:19:14the rest of the neighborhood, um, and so

1:19:17I don't think that that

1:19:19would be appropriate. Um,

1:19:21but again, Amber, you might need to

1:19:22clarify for me and everyone else like

1:19:24how that relates to the rest of the

1:19:26project because I know it's just one

1:19:28facade.

1:19:33>> I mean, there is some degree of

1:19:36relevancy as far as, you know, what you

1:19:38are looking at, um, but keeping in mind

1:19:42that

1:19:46it's only this portion of the building

1:19:49on those levels.

1:19:50>> Mhm.

1:19:51>> Um, that's within the district. Um,

1:19:54there's there's absolutely no way for

1:19:55the HPC to comment on, you know, the

1:19:58scale and massing

1:20:00of what goes on around it.

1:20:03Um,

1:20:05>> I guess even that portion that is

1:20:08within the outline that is within the

1:20:10district, which is a small portion,

1:20:11still seems out of scale

1:20:13for the neighborhood.

1:20:15Be my main sentiment.

1:20:23>> Next question for Laura.

1:20:25If this all gets approved, does the does

1:20:28the does the original

1:20:30plat still stay in the historic

1:20:32district, or does it What happens? Do

1:20:34they merge, or does it all become one?

1:20:36Does the whole thing become subject to

1:20:38the historic

1:20:40district?

1:20:42>> The boundaries of historic designations

1:20:44don't change even if platting is done

1:20:48that moves property lines.

1:20:51>> Um,

1:20:53I was just I was just curious.

1:20:55I think this is a great project. I we've

1:20:57seen this more

1:21:01with

1:21:01Um, even though this might be out of

1:21:04scale, I'm okay. It's a fair trade to

1:21:06with what you're doing for the community

1:21:08and the neighborhood there.

1:21:11Adaptive reuse and historic preservation

1:21:14we want to see. We've got to kind of

1:21:15blend things, and I can I can

1:21:18I can live with that. So, I can support

1:21:20this.

1:21:23>> Jim?

1:21:24Very comfortable with this proposal. I

1:21:27think it's a wonderful contribution to

1:21:30the, uh, community. Uh, the only thing I

1:21:33would add is I'd like to ask the

1:21:36representatives for the,

1:21:38uh, development here, if if you intend,

1:21:41uh, to propose any documentation of the

1:21:44building that's to be torn down.

1:21:47>> Who wants to come up to the next

1:21:48speaker?

1:21:48>> Which is a fine trade-off, I think, and

1:21:50what we're getting now.

1:21:51>> Absolutely commit to that. We're working

1:21:54very closely with the neighborhood and

1:21:55the church too. We've already kind of

1:21:58designated historic individuals that go

1:22:00back four generations that were That's

1:22:02going to be a commemorative walk. So, if

1:22:03you've been to like Washington D.C. with

1:22:05like the undulating like it's a it's a

1:22:07panel with a description of of a

1:22:09historic time or a person or an event.

1:22:14So, something like that. So, we can

1:22:15absolutely pay homage to the the

1:22:17contribution.

1:22:19>> You're talking about the house.

1:22:20>> Just so we Yeah, so that we could

1:22:22include a description about the house.

1:22:24Is that your Is that the question?

1:22:25>> Well, there's

1:22:26supposedly a historic house encapsulated

1:22:30within that building. Encapsulated by

1:22:34additions that have occurred.

1:22:38But, there is some historic bonafide

1:22:40historic fabric inside there somehow.

1:22:44And I would like to see some effort made

1:22:48to document that what is there before we

1:22:52take it all away and forget about it.

1:22:53>> Tell the story about the house.

1:22:56>> No.

1:22:56>> No.

1:22:57>> You're not to tell any stories. It's

1:23:00>> [laughter]

1:23:00>> It's more about documenting it. This is

1:23:03something typical that that we often ask

1:23:05when a house is being demolished that it

1:23:07gets documented to a half standard,

1:23:09which is historic American building

1:23:11survey. And basically taking pictures

1:23:13and writing down drawings of what is in

1:23:17there. Sorry.

1:23:18>> I

1:23:18I understand. We'll have to We're going

1:23:20to take it

1:23:22>> [laughter]

1:23:22>> We'll have to come up.

1:23:23>> to that. So, we would take it down in

1:23:25pieces. We would photograph what is

1:23:27being removed.

1:23:28>> Right.

1:23:29>> Yeah. If it makes sense to you, you

1:23:31don't have to

1:23:32I got it.

1:23:33Okay. [laughter] All right.

1:23:34>> Tell me to come back up.

1:23:36>> If you commit to that, then I'm

1:23:39>> Okay. Yes.

1:23:40>> Okay.

1:23:41>> So,

1:23:42I feel like I'm ready to make a motion

1:23:43then.

1:23:44>> All right, we're ready for it. Go for

1:23:45it.

1:23:45>> I'll move that

1:23:48and however long that took, COA

1:23:502026-09-1978

1:23:56be approved with the following

1:23:57conditions.

1:23:59That the applicant document the historic

1:24:01core remaining within the home at 363

1:24:07and provide that to staff

1:24:09and that details on the proposed

1:24:10railings

1:24:11on the walls around the green space to

1:24:14be approved by staff.

1:24:17>> And the grass?

1:24:18>> I wasn't going to say anything about the

1:24:19grass. Do you guys want to

1:24:20>> Can I speak real quick to that and why

1:24:22we selected that?

1:24:24Unless you all want to vote.

1:24:26>> I wasn't going to condition it. So, do

1:24:28you guys Do you guys want to give the

1:24:30applicant a chance to talk about the

1:24:31grass?

1:24:32>> Sure.

1:24:33>> Okay, that's fine with my motion.

1:24:34>> Come on. Okay.

1:24:36>> [clears throat]

1:24:36>> So,

1:24:38we're we're certainly beholden to, you

1:24:40know,

1:24:41bringing in materials that are

1:24:42appropriate for the the district. The

1:24:44reason why synthetic turf was chosen

1:24:46here is because that

1:24:48keyhole is one, it's it's very small.

1:24:51And we imagine this park would

1:24:53get a a fair amount of use. And so, if

1:24:55we bring back turf or some kind of

1:24:57planning, that stuff is going to get

1:24:59worn down and it's it's going to have to

1:25:01get replaced over time.

1:25:03Um synthetic turf has come a very long

1:25:05way since the Brady Bunch days.

1:25:07Um it it now looks and it feels almost

1:25:10well, it it looks and it feels like

1:25:12turf. And we've used it on several other

1:25:13projects where it actually has thatch

1:25:16woven into it. The blades feel soft and

1:25:19lush just like grass would. So,

1:25:22that's

1:25:23that's the reason.

1:25:24>> So, it's a maintenance issue.

1:25:25>> It's a maintenance thing.

1:25:29>> So, I finished my motion with that and I

1:25:31don't have the grass.

1:25:33You can friendly amend it.

1:25:34>> If the if the

1:25:36um

1:25:38I guess I would I'm okay with it if it's

1:25:40staff approved. They approve the

1:25:43the turf the synthetic turf to be used.

1:25:46>> Staff is

1:25:47they want it to be natural. I'm saying

1:25:49we can allow it to be synthetic. Staff's

1:25:52approval of the type of synthetic grass

1:25:54to be

1:25:55approved.

1:25:56>> Okay, so third condition.

1:25:58>> All right.

1:25:59>> That now I

1:26:01>> Really?

1:26:02>> [laughter]

1:26:03>> My motion is is without the is that

1:26:05without the natural?

1:26:06>> All right.

1:26:06>> And do I have a second?

1:26:09>> Okay, all right. So so you

1:26:10is

1:26:11um

1:26:12is approved with conditions

1:26:14>> Habs

1:26:15>> Habs and

1:26:16>> Habs yep.

1:26:17>> railings

1:26:18>> Habs and railings, okay. And that's it.

1:26:20All right, so that's the motion we have

1:26:21to have a second.

1:26:22>> I'll second.

1:26:22>> All right, so that's that's the question

1:26:25approve with conditions on the details

1:26:27of the proposed railings and the Habs

1:26:30documentation.

1:26:31All in favor.

1:26:35Okay, we have two

1:26:36>> Actually keep it.

1:26:37>> All opposed.

1:26:39All right, that's a tie which means I

1:26:41get to break the tie.

1:26:43And I'm going to break the tie in favor

1:26:45of the motion, so the motion carries

1:26:47three to two.

1:26:52>> Second that.

1:26:53>> Who were some natural turfs?

1:26:55>> Yeah, so the two no's were um

1:26:57were Allen and Lauren.

1:26:59>> And the second of the motion was

1:27:01>> Uh James second.

1:27:09>> All right, let's let's move on. By the

1:27:10way, as soon as we finish old business

1:27:12I'll call for a 10-minute recess.

1:27:14>> All right.

1:27:16>> Thank Rick. So let's go forward with 815

1:27:19North Chase Street. We have the staff

1:27:21report on that, please.

1:27:27>> 815 North Chase Street, BOA number

1:27:292026-09.

1:27:35It is for a patio enclosure system with

1:27:38some site changes.

1:27:41Applicant is Seth McKinnon as agent for

1:27:44Bruno Rubio.

1:27:46It's in the Boulevard Historic District.

1:27:53This parcel is located at the northwest

1:27:56corner of the intersection of Boulevard

1:27:58and Chase Street.

1:28:021947 Sanborn map that shows the subject

1:28:06parcel

1:28:07there on the corner.

1:28:10That time it was

1:28:14a house, but the existing structure was

1:28:16built in approximately 1966.

1:28:20This is a 2025 aerial photo of the

1:28:24parcel. Um

1:28:26There have been changes made

1:28:29since then.

1:28:30Um

1:28:31Some of those changes include

1:28:34uh modifications to the canopy, site

1:28:37changes, modifications to storefront

1:28:39windows, and accessory structure

1:28:41addition, uh approval to

1:28:44fencing changes, um

1:28:46modifications to the canopy that were

1:28:48all commission level reviews, approvals.

1:28:52Uh there's also a staff level approval

1:28:55in 2025 to relocate an entrance, um as

1:28:58well as 2026 to expand the canopy on the

1:29:00accessory structure.

1:29:03And this is the

1:29:04the building that we're looking at

1:29:06today.

1:29:09And then a site plan provided by the

1:29:11applicant showing

1:29:13uh the site. So,

1:29:16building is there, um

1:29:20it's sort of to the left of the red. The

1:29:22red is the covered patio.

1:29:24And that has been

1:29:27approved and then changed a bit over

1:29:28time, and uh

1:29:30so seeking some

1:29:32approvals for

1:29:34uh

1:29:34different changes. So, um so part of the

1:29:37patio faces Chase Street, part of it

1:29:39faces Boulevard.

1:29:41Um additionally, at the

1:29:44I guess north of this um

1:29:46site plan, you can see the accessory

1:29:48structure that is on the property, and

1:29:52and

1:29:53we're looking at some changes on that as

1:29:55well.

1:29:56As well as some

1:29:59some walls that have been

1:30:01they're proposed for the property.

1:30:05>> [clears throat]

1:30:06>> So, here we're looking at designs that

1:30:09have been some that have been approved,

1:30:11some that have been changed.

1:30:13See approved design of this restaurant

1:30:17you can see down on the bottom there

1:30:19from September of 2023.

1:30:23Design from May 2026.

1:30:27Some of those changes were not approved.

1:30:29What was approved was changes to the

1:30:31fascia

1:30:33and that the steel tubing that was added

1:30:35would be removed.

1:30:40So, the applicant has um

1:30:43added on some steel framing to the patio

1:30:47in just this one section so that the

1:30:49commission can get an idea of what of

1:30:51what the proposal is.

1:30:53So, they're looking for what weather

1:30:55proofing enclosure be added to this

1:30:58patio and to the canopy.

1:31:01So, they're suggesting framework that

1:31:04goes all the way around from basically

1:31:06from top to bottom. There's a mechanized

1:31:08roller that would be installed

1:31:11and

1:31:12that would be there at all times and

1:31:15that then would be

1:31:17rolled down those

1:31:19horizontal slats that you can see would

1:31:20be when it is rolled in.

1:31:23Clear vinyl panels would be in those

1:31:26in that mechanized roller so that you

1:31:29would be able to see through the patio

1:31:33when the weather proofing panels are

1:31:36down.

1:31:39More photos of of what's proposed. There

1:31:42is also proposed

1:31:43a door that would be there

1:31:46whether or not the rollers are are down

1:31:49but it is using that clear vinyl.

1:31:52You can see.

1:31:55Again, more more views of what it looks

1:31:57like when it's open.

1:31:59So that you can see that the structure

1:32:00does remain,

1:32:02which is why we're looking at this as as

1:32:05the HPC as it is more

1:32:08our view of structure than it is more

1:32:12just like patio furniture.

1:32:17All right, and then additionally the

1:32:19applicant is proposing

1:32:21uh

1:32:22downspout locations that are different

1:32:24from what was approved in a previous

1:32:26proposal. So you can see

1:32:29downspouts that go

1:32:32at the two

1:32:34corners facing Chase Street

1:32:36on on the the long gutter, and then two

1:32:40smaller gutters that go at the back

1:32:42where there's two smaller downspouts

1:32:43that are at the back of the building.

1:32:45Kind of on the back of the restaurant.

1:32:47Uh additionally, there are two

1:32:49downspouts proposed for that accessory

1:32:52structure that's down there.

1:32:55And then showing the gutters here. So

1:32:57we've got

1:33:00We did have

1:33:02gutters and downspouts proposed in the

1:33:04July 2026 review.

1:33:06Uh

1:33:07these are slightly different details

1:33:09given. So the request now as far as 6-in

1:33:12K style gutters to be located on the

1:33:15eastern or Chase Street side of the

1:33:17canopy, as well as the west side of the

1:33:19building.

1:33:21Uh these gutters are also to be used for

1:33:24like I said, on the accessory structure.

1:33:26And for the accessory structure, the

1:33:28downspouts

1:33:29are to be 5-in mount type.

1:33:33Um additionally, the applicant is

1:33:36proposing a site wall and that is to

1:33:41capture some grading changes.

1:33:44It was proposed there.

1:33:49The wall is proposed to be no more than

1:33:5118 in in height. It would go on the

1:33:54Chase Street and Boulevard areas

1:33:55adjacent to a planted area at the

1:33:58intersection.

1:34:00The wall is proposed to be masonry to

1:34:02match the existing wall at the northern

1:34:04property line.

1:34:06Uh staff did want to know that the plan

1:34:07did not show steps up from sidewalk

1:34:09level on Boulevard to the walkway. It is

1:34:12unclear if this is an oversight or if

1:34:14the grade declines to no longer require

1:34:16steps at that point.

1:34:18Uh it's also unclear if the wall would

1:34:19extend above the grade of the retained

1:34:21ground on the side of the property.

1:34:29This is This is showing the accessory

1:34:31structure. So uh

1:34:33accessory structure has already been

1:34:34approved. Uh it was approved

1:34:37at a previous uh proposal and then in

1:34:40June staff did approve um changes to the

1:34:44awning over the entrance.

1:34:46Uh This part of the proposal is changing

1:34:50or adjusting the ramp access to that

1:34:52storage structure. Um

1:34:54The applicant

1:34:56he says the ramp to the west side of the

1:34:58building will be adjusted to accommodate

1:35:00a support post and would be concrete.

1:35:05And so

1:35:09Right. And then this is a screen fence

1:35:11around a walk-in cooler. The cooler is

1:35:14existing. Um

1:35:17The original approval included that this

1:35:20fence around the walk-in would be

1:35:23horizontal composite slats. The current

1:35:26request is to use the same type of wood

1:35:28louvered slats as the existing that was

1:35:30approved at the May 2020 proposal.

1:35:33proposal.

1:35:34Um it is unclear what the height and

1:35:36finished

1:35:37uh it is intended to be.

1:35:40Uh additionally, your packets showed um

1:35:44paint color change and

1:35:46uh planting plans, but staff just wanted

1:35:49to note that those were not under the

1:35:50purview of the ACC.

1:35:52Um so they're there, but not and then

1:35:55you'll need to look at.

1:35:56And so staff's recommendation on this is

1:35:59approval with conditions to address some

1:36:01areas of insufficient information. So,

1:36:04specifications to be provided for the

1:36:06location of each roller section and

1:36:08doorway for the patio enclosure. Um as

1:36:10y'all saw from the pictures, we only

1:36:12just got information on that one side.

1:36:14So, if we could get info on

1:36:16all of the sides of the patio.

1:36:18That clarification is needed on any rise

1:36:21of the retaining walls above the

1:36:23retained grade.

1:36:24Details to be given on the changes to

1:36:27the wall and retention for the ramp to

1:36:28the accessory structure.

1:36:30Finally, details to be provided on the

1:36:32fence screening around the walk-in

1:36:34cooler including the height and finish

1:36:37of that screening.

1:36:39So,

1:36:40that concludes the staff's report.

1:36:42>> All right, is the petitioner present?

1:36:43>> Yes.

1:36:43>> All right. Please come on up. State your

1:36:45name and address. You've got 10 minutes.

1:36:47>> Uh my name's Seth McCann. I'm speaking

1:36:49on behalf of the property owner, our

1:36:50client, Ronald Rubio.

1:36:52Address is 355

1:36:54Anita Street. Uh I have some

1:36:56supplemental

1:36:57uh reference material that helps offer

1:36:59some clarification. I have it here.

1:37:01[clears throat] Is it something I can

1:37:01pass out? I have a copy for everyone.

1:37:03>> Um with the commission's permission,

1:37:05does anyone have any objections?

1:37:07>> Motion to accept that.

1:37:08>> Motion to accept. Can I get a second?

1:37:10>> All right, all in favor?

1:37:12All right, we'll accept your documents.

1:37:14Add it to the record.

1:37:24>> It's just two sheets.

1:37:31Thanks.

1:37:44>> Um I appreciate the overview

1:37:47uh tonight by staff.

1:37:48Uh and while this is my first time up

1:37:50here, I realize this is not our first

1:37:52time in front of y'all

1:37:54uh for this project. So, thank you for

1:37:56the time to speak this evening. And I

1:37:57wanted to offer some additional context

1:37:59and clarification for the items on the

1:38:02agenda for approval at 8:15 on Chase

1:38:04Street.

1:38:05Um

1:38:06I listed them the way that they were

1:38:07listed on the report, so I'm going to

1:38:08start with the gutters.

1:38:10Um the gutters the proposed change to

1:38:12the case style gutters is an intentional

1:38:14effort to maintain continuity with the

1:38:16adjacent properties and the uh

1:38:19surroundings.

1:38:20This style of gutter uh matches all

1:38:22gutters on the buildings uh within

1:38:24eyesight from our property.

1:38:27Um

1:38:28additionally [clears throat] that OG

1:38:29profile matches any of the millwork and

1:38:31trim that you would see up on like a

1:38:32fascia or cornice

1:38:34on any of the gables or eaves

1:38:37that do not have gutters.

1:38:39Uh so I think it just maintains that

1:38:41continuity

1:38:42uh for the neighborhood.

1:38:44The accessory building ramp

1:38:47the proposed change to that ramp and pad

1:38:49come from the need to create the most

1:38:50efficient and easiest access

1:38:52uh to that accessory building since it

1:38:54provides storage for the restaurant

1:38:56uh and staff will be in and out of it

1:38:58throughout the shift.

1:39:00Uh we propose to slightly alter the

1:39:03layout of the ramp allowing the concrete

1:39:04slab to be a little bit wider extending

1:39:07from exterior corner to exterior corner

1:39:09on that north facing side of the

1:39:10accessory building.

1:39:12Um

1:39:13additionally we propose to extend that

1:39:16uh pad north so that it connects and

1:39:18directly ties into the stair that

1:39:20already exists there so that it just

1:39:22cuts down on any type of hazard if

1:39:24people were utilizing the stair as they

1:39:26go up and try and step down into

1:39:29you know, some type of grass and then

1:39:30back up on another pad

1:39:32while carrying something.

1:39:33Um the retaining wall or seat wall

1:39:36around the perimeter of the property

1:39:38um it will be it is correct that it will

1:39:41be no higher than 18 in above the

1:39:42existing sidewalk as it travels

1:39:45north down Chase Street and west down

1:39:48Boulevard. It tapers from 18 in in the

1:39:51corner where that little nipped corner

1:39:53is. It tapers from 18 all the way down

1:39:55to 6 in to just create a curve like a uh

1:39:59water shedding curve.

1:40:00Um so no stairs would be necessary and

1:40:02you see that there's a sidewalk on each

1:40:04end so that you would enter at the end

1:40:06of that curve on the left side and on

1:40:09the bottom of the drawing there.

1:40:12>> [clears throat]

1:40:13>> The intent is to have the finished

1:40:16green space to be flushed with the top

1:40:18of that seat wall everywhere. That's the

1:40:20whole point of having that retaining

1:40:21wall is to retain that grade as the lot

1:40:24elevation and grade dip as they go

1:40:26towards that corner currently.

1:40:29Um

1:40:30and so I'm confident to say that we

1:40:32would never exceed more than 2 in above

1:40:34that grade, you know, give or take. If

1:40:36we just didn't hit the grade exactly by

1:40:37the time the grass went down then

1:40:40there may be a little bit of an edge,

1:40:41but it wouldn't be a enough to cause a

1:40:43step or anything.

1:40:45Um

1:40:46>> [clears throat]

1:40:47>> The walk-in fence, that proposed change

1:40:49of the assembly

1:40:51um

1:40:52is just to match the perimeter fence

1:40:53that was already approved.

1:40:55Uh that is consistent with 6 by 6 wooden

1:40:58post at 6 in at 6 ft on center

1:41:01uh with 2 by 6 boards run horizontally

1:41:03with an inch and a half lap just create

1:41:06a look like beveled siding or

1:41:08a louvered look, if you will.

1:41:11Um that will you can refer to the first

1:41:14page on that supplemental piece that I

1:41:17gave that offers the elevations of that

1:41:19wall. So, in front of the proposed

1:41:21walk-in cooler and freezer, which is

1:41:23roughly 30 linear ft it's already been

1:41:25approved for it to be 12 ft high. We

1:41:27would just maintain that, not deviate

1:41:29from the plans here.

1:41:31And then once you as you go left in that

1:41:34drawing, you would see once we get

1:41:35outside of the footprint of the freezer

1:41:37and cooler, we'll drop down to 6 ft as

1:41:39we come around that corner where the

1:41:40gate and access is and the condensing

1:41:42units would be.

1:41:48Um as far as the enclosure goes

1:41:52the enclosure would consist of

1:41:54um

1:41:56the enclosure would would exist of a

1:41:58fixed balance panel consisting of brown

1:42:00vinyl ordering evenly throughout the

1:42:02space as you see in that picture.

1:42:04Uh with clear vinyl panels uh it's an

1:42:06average of 14 in from the roofline

1:42:08above.

1:42:10Um

1:42:11there are to add clarification, the

1:42:13second page in your reference material

1:42:15will show you a legend and all the

1:42:19blue areas. Well, so first, I guess the

1:42:21black squares are for all the vertical

1:42:23posts and columns. They'll support the

1:42:26track system at the end of each end of

1:42:28the panel.

1:42:29Um and so there are 13 motorized roll-up

1:42:31panels that you'll see in blue on there.

1:42:34There are four points of entry, so four

1:42:36of those doors will be there.

1:42:38Um

1:42:40you'll see those marked in red. The one

1:42:42on the uh east side of the

1:42:46awning enclosure is a double door.

1:42:49Those doors are The single doors are 40

1:42:51in wide and the double door is an 80-in

1:42:53wide double door.

1:42:55Um and they would be there at all times.

1:42:58Um

1:43:00as far as the vinyl itself goes, it

1:43:02carries an 8-year warranty. It has a

1:43:0412-year so lifespan.

1:43:06Um there is hazing or scratching that

1:43:08can happen over time depending on the

1:43:10exposure, but all the soft goods can be

1:43:13uh replaced without having to pull down

1:43:16any of the structural elements,

1:43:17mechanical elements, or roof elements as

1:43:19far as the motors. They can all just be

1:43:21taken down and replaced as needed.

1:43:23Um

1:43:26and then uh

1:43:28based on a previous based on one of our

1:43:30previous um

1:43:32applications here coming in front of

1:43:34y'all, it was requested that we remove

1:43:35all of the tubing steel that had not

1:43:37been approved yet. That has been done

1:43:38outside of that one sample

1:43:41section that is still up currently just

1:43:43to provide a very good reference

1:43:46uh and visual aspect. Um

1:43:49that's all I have. Uh

1:43:51I'm happy to answer any questions. Thank

1:43:52y'all again for your time.

1:43:53>> Thank you very much.

1:43:54Uh

1:43:55were there any members of the public who

1:43:56wish to speak in favor of this proposal?

1:44:00Seeing none, does anybody wish to speak

1:44:01against this proposal?

1:44:04All right. Seeing none, it's a motion of

1:44:05the commission for discussion.

1:44:08>> Ted, I've got a question for staff. So,

1:44:11these four conditions here, it seems to

1:44:14me all of these are

1:44:17covered by

1:44:18his presentation the applicant's

1:44:20presentation, but also

1:44:23mostly in the supplemental.

1:44:26Does this supplemental documentation

1:44:28this goes in record with the

1:44:29application, correct?

1:44:32>> I mean this sort of record is turned in.

1:44:34It is something that if you wanted to

1:44:36you know, do an approval without

1:44:39conditions or you could do an approval,

1:44:42you know, that is

1:44:43accepting and referencing this, you

1:44:46know, exhibit A.

1:44:49>> Okay.

1:44:51Thanks.

1:44:52Yeah, so to commission, I think

1:44:55this covers

1:44:57Well, it doesn't cover

1:44:59the retaining walls actually I think are

1:45:01are covered in the

1:45:03application documents cuz they give

1:45:04heights.

1:45:06It dots and say 6 ft here or 6 in here

1:45:10all of that. So, I feel good about the

1:45:11grade. I feel good about the

1:45:15the height of the wall, the screen wall

1:45:17here and the

1:45:20location of the rollers and doors is

1:45:23documented in this if they call this

1:45:25exhibit A. So, um

1:45:27what does that leave?

1:45:31The

1:45:34ramp. The ramp is dealt with with

1:45:38site plan, right?

1:45:48Seems the conditions are kind of cover

1:45:51if we call this exhibit A.

1:45:56That's what I That's my two cents.

1:45:59>> So, this is submitted as part of the

1:46:01application.

1:46:02>> So, we need to make a condition that

1:46:04this be considered exhibit A in addition

1:46:07to the application documents.

1:46:09>> Right.

1:46:13>> I agree with you.

1:46:15>> Is there any other

1:46:16>> Yeah, sure.

1:46:16>> I'm only one.

1:46:17>> I'm ready to hear a motion.

1:46:18>> Okay, all right.

1:46:19>> I have a motion.

1:46:20>> Okay, I'll move that COA-2026-09-1980

1:46:27be approved

1:46:31as

1:46:34proposed with

1:46:36exhibit A

1:46:39included as additional information to

1:46:41the application on file.

1:46:44>> Okay, motion is to approve with the

1:46:46condition that the additional

1:46:48documentation except A be added to the

1:46:50file. Is there a second?

1:46:52All right, so motion Chris, second

1:46:54Lauren. All in favor?

1:46:57Unanimous. Okay, all

1:47:05All right, that brings us to 399 Buena

1:47:09Vista Avenue.

1:47:10>> So, can you give us the staff report,

1:47:11please?

1:47:18>> 399 Buena Vista Avenue, COA

1:47:222026-09-1981,

1:47:26uh dormer expansion and material changes

1:47:28in the Buena Vista Heights Historic

1:47:30District. Lane Seboldt's agent for

1:47:32Allison and David Miller.

1:47:36The property is located at the southwest

1:47:39corner of Buena Vista Avenue and Santa

1:47:42Hayla extension.

1:47:46This 2025 aerial photo is representative

1:47:49of the current conditions of the

1:47:51property.

1:47:54While the

1:47:56computer system's a little often,

1:47:59its location, the house is shown here on

1:48:01the 1947 Sanborn map. Um but the earlier

1:48:04maps indicate the structure was built

1:48:06between 1918 and 1926.

1:48:09It is considered a contributing

1:48:11structure to this historic district.

1:48:14This project came you last month but as

1:48:18a concept review. The scope of the

1:48:20project remains unchanged from what you

1:48:23saw at that time.

1:48:25Changes at the front elevation would be

1:48:27limited to new windows at the existing

1:48:31front dormer.

1:48:32These windows, as with all of the

1:48:35windows on the upper level that are

1:48:37proposed for replacement, are not

1:48:40original or historic windows, but are um

1:48:44vinyl replacements that occurred at some

1:48:48previous time.

1:48:51At the Nantahala extension

1:48:54elevation, the paired window in the

1:48:57gable would be replaced, but the small

1:49:01window to its west would be retained.

1:49:04This is the only wood window

1:49:07at the upper level.

1:49:10The new dormer expansion

1:49:14is also visible to the rear of the

1:49:16structure

1:49:17using the same roof slope as that

1:49:19existing and reuse of the brackets.

1:49:25The south side would see the one window

1:49:29beside the door replaced. You can also

1:49:32see the rear dormer expansion. Again,

1:49:35the same roof slope, reuse of the

1:49:38brackets.

1:49:40The rear elevation,

1:49:43you can see the entirety of the proposed

1:49:45dormer expansion.

1:49:49The new windows on this dormer would

1:49:51match the windows that are proposed for

1:49:54the replacements elsewhere on the upper

1:49:56level.

1:49:57Um

1:50:00The window placements on the dormer

1:50:02would relate to the existing openings on

1:50:04the ground floor.

1:50:07This image shows more clearly

1:50:11the changes with the dormer expansion as

1:50:14far as the existing dormer being off

1:50:17center and um there being

1:50:19a little bit of addition to the north

1:50:22with a more dormer addition to the

1:50:25south.

1:50:27Some photos of the existing structure.

1:50:33We have an aerial photo from 1946.

1:50:38It's a little challenging, but you can

1:50:40see both the front and rear dormers on

1:50:42this photo. We also have um a 1995

1:50:47architectural survey photo.

1:50:51Staff's recommending approval finding

1:50:54that the rear dormer change would not be

1:50:57to a primary reform

1:50:59um and it's consistent with the solid to

1:51:01void ratio and materials

1:51:04um

1:51:06further the new windows are to be wood

1:51:08within the same openings to replace

1:51:10non-historic vinyl with the one um wood

1:51:14window that remains to be retained.

1:51:17This completes the staff report.

1:51:19>> Is petitioner present?

1:51:22>> Yes, he is.

1:51:23>> All right.

1:51:24Please come up to the microphone and

1:51:25address the board. You have 10 minutes,

1:51:26sir.

1:51:26>> Hey, my name is Eugene Seabolt. Uh I

1:51:28live at 112 Prospect Church Road in

1:51:30Athens. Um

1:51:31and uh yeah, I was here last month.

1:51:34And

1:51:37it's pretty simple from my perspective

1:51:39at least. Um I obviously think that uh

1:51:41staff did a wonderful job in deciding to

1:51:45vote for approval. Um

1:51:47we did make one major change.

1:51:49We kept the window.

1:51:51>> The front window.

1:51:52>> Yeah, so um

1:51:54yeah, the homeowners were of course like

1:51:57I mean it's a yeah, it's neat, it's fun,

1:51:59and by the end of last month's hearing

1:52:01y'all convinced me, so

1:52:03I'm on board. Um

1:52:05and just to reiterate, the only thing

1:52:07we're proposing, I mean the main thing

1:52:10is obviously expanding

1:52:13that dormer on the back of the house

1:52:15that's not visible.

1:52:17Um it's visible in profile from adjacent

1:52:20properties.

1:52:22From behind the property, it's not it's

1:52:23non-historic

1:52:25bus storage um

1:52:27and uh dilapidated uh mobile homes as

1:52:31well.

1:52:31Um otherwise, there are those vinyl

1:52:34windows which we provided photos of in

1:52:36the application for this month. Uh in

1:52:39the upstairs that we just like to

1:52:40replace with solid wood windows. We're

1:52:41happy to meet with Amber to go over that

1:52:44to make sure that she approves those

1:52:45things. Um

1:52:48I think we hashed it out really well

1:52:49last month, but if you guys have any

1:52:50other questions, I'm happy to talk

1:52:52through it.

1:52:52>> All right. Let's see.

1:52:55Does anyone members of the public wish

1:52:56to speak in favor of this proposal?

1:52:59Let's see. None. Does anyone wish to

1:53:00speak against this proposal?

1:53:04See none. Um so with the commission, uh

1:53:08are we ready to go ahead with a motion

1:53:10or do we need discussion?

1:53:13Just go ahead, Lauren.

1:53:14>> Um I move that COA-2026-09-

1:53:191981 be approved as submitted.

1:53:23>> Okay. Motion is to approve COA as

1:53:26submitted and that's a motion by Lauren

1:53:28and second by James. All in favor?

1:53:32Roll up. That's unanimously.

1:53:34All right. Motion approved. Okay. So at

1:53:36this time, we're going to take a

1:53:3810-minute recess. So back at about uh

1:53:417:33.

1:53:43See you then.

1:56:28>> Mhm.

1:58:30>> Mhm.

2:00:33>> Mhm.

2:02:35>> Mhm.

2:04:24>> New businesses. So, the first item is

2:04:26new businesses. 515 Franklin Street, can

2:04:28we have the staff report, please?

2:04:33>> 515 Franklin Street, BOA 2026-09-1950,

2:04:36modifying the main level openings in the

2:04:38Cobham

2:04:41Historic District. Michael Solomons,

2:04:43first agent for Cord Sibylski.

2:04:52The property is located on the northwest

2:04:55corner of Franklin Street and Cobb

2:04:57Street with a structure located at the

2:04:59northwest corner of the parcel.

2:05:03This 2025 aerial photo remains

2:05:05representative of the current

2:05:07conditions.

2:05:10The um

2:05:13structure is seen here in the 1947

2:05:15Sanborn map having been built between

2:05:181926 and 1947.

2:05:20However, the structure is considered

2:05:23non-contributing to the Cobham Historic

2:05:25District

2:05:27based on a 1988 designation.

2:05:32Changes to the structure are um that are

2:05:34proposed are limited to the ground

2:05:36level. Um at the front elevation, it's

2:05:39proposed to modify a single window at

2:05:42the southern end into a new entry door.

2:05:45And the two bays of the front porch to

2:05:48the north um

2:05:50are proposed to be screened in.

2:05:54Um in addition to being considered

2:05:57non-contributing, the structure received

2:05:59significant changes with a

2:06:012016 approval uh that included um the

2:06:05single window opening that's proposed to

2:06:07become a door having been added as a

2:06:10result of those changes.

2:06:15These are the plans um from that 2016

2:06:18approval that are reflective of the

2:06:21current conditions.

2:06:24>> [clears throat]

2:06:24>> Some photos of the front porch including

2:06:28the um window and that is involved um to

2:06:32become a doorway.

2:06:34Um and the area that is proposed to be

2:06:37screened,

2:06:39Highlighted in that area, no information

2:06:43um

2:06:44has been included regarding further

2:06:45supports necessary for the screening or

2:06:48where any screen doors may be placed.

2:06:53Replacement of all the windows on the

2:06:55ground floor is also proposed. This

2:06:58would be within the existing openings

2:07:00with the exception of the window that's

2:07:02becoming doorway.

2:07:04Uh the proposed windows are noted as

2:07:07being all wood with simulated light

2:07:10divisions noted as being 6 over 6.

2:07:14Um I would like to point out that the

2:07:17existing windows on the south side

2:07:20elevation that's the left um are

2:07:23currently 8 over 8.

2:07:27A closer image of one of the windows

2:07:30that's representative

2:07:32um

2:07:34it does have a a storm window in place

2:07:37over the um

2:07:41existing window that's proposed for

2:07:43replacement.

2:07:47Staff's recommending approval of this

2:07:49request with a condition that the porch

2:07:51screening not be included in the

2:07:53approval as a non-contributing property

2:07:57window replacement and modification of a

2:07:59main entry um are allowed even at staff

2:08:02level but the guidelines do discourage

2:08:05screening of a front porches. This

2:08:08completes the staff report.

2:08:09>> All right, is the petitioner present?

2:08:11>> I am.

2:08:12>> All right, please state your name and

2:08:13and address and you have 10 minutes.

2:08:14>> Yes, my name is Michael Songster. I live

2:08:16at 1450 uh West Hancock Avenue. Um

2:08:22so

2:08:23as to the unanswered questions uh that

2:08:26staff had um I attempted to answer them

2:08:29and send an email but either I screwed

2:08:31that up or it got lost in the ether and

2:08:33so I'll do my best to describe uh the

2:08:35answers to those questions here and you

2:08:38know, if Uh, is amenable and you are

2:08:41willing to approve it, we could approve

2:08:43it with the conditions that she, you

2:08:45know, that the staff accepts the, you

2:08:47know, changes as, um, described here.

2:08:50So, it's not complicated, and so I don't

2:08:53think it's going to be that much. We'll

2:08:55start with the windows.

2:08:57Um,

2:08:57yes, we are going to replace the

2:08:59windows, um, with

2:09:01uh, sash replacements. They're Sierra

2:09:04Pacific all wood. They would go into the

2:09:07existing frames. The exterior trim would

2:09:10not be disturbed. Um,

2:09:13depending on how square those frames

2:09:17are, there might be some adjustment to,

2:09:20to accommodate for that, which would

2:09:22require either the addition of, um,

2:09:24exterior trim, or adjustment of the,

2:09:28sort of, the reveal between the trim and

2:09:30the frame. Um, that's, you know, would

2:09:32happen under construction, and whatever

2:09:34difference would be minimal on the

2:09:36exterior.

2:09:37Um,

2:09:37but the the siding and the the exterior

2:09:41casing would be unchanged.

2:09:43Uh, the

2:09:44the door and the screening

2:09:47are, um, of a piece. Like, the purpose

2:09:50behind the door is to provide an, a

2:09:53main, an, a,

2:09:55a new main opening for the downstairs,

2:09:58and the door that is existing as the,

2:10:01um, entrance to the building would

2:10:04become a door that only accesses a

2:10:07screen porch that has no access to the

2:10:09exterior, so there would be no screen

2:10:10door. Um,

2:10:13and so

2:10:15so if if the

2:10:18screening does not get approved, we're

2:10:19probably not going to, um,

2:10:22change that door, and we'd be replacing

2:10:24that window with our, with a, window

2:10:27like the other replacements. Um, okay.

2:10:30So, I will discuss the screening at this

2:10:33point. Um, and though staff noted that,

2:10:36um,

2:10:37screened front porches isn't typical in

2:10:39the district, it's also not unheard of.

2:10:41There are several houses on Cobb Street

2:10:43that have screened front porches, but I

2:10:45think more importantly, there is nothing

2:10:48typical about this building. It is

2:10:51clearly

2:10:52a garage at one point. There's a It's

2:10:55It's on a slab. There's a raised

2:10:58retaining wall as the bottom of the

2:11:00structure that is invisible cuz it's

2:11:02covered with siding on the exterior.

2:11:04Um it's below grade in some cases, um

2:11:08especially in the back.

2:11:10The porch, which was added in 2016, is

2:11:14uh on grade with flagstones.

2:11:17Um the upstairs and downstairs are

2:11:20completely separate units. There is no

2:11:22interior stair. The stair is exterior.

2:11:25Um even though it is a single-family

2:11:27house by definition, um their setup is

2:11:30two completely separate units that

2:11:33neither of them have had kitchens.

2:11:35Um and the house doesn't even though it

2:11:38it seems like I'm surprised to see on

2:11:40the sandborn map that there was never a

2:11:42house that faced Cobb Street. Clearly,

2:11:44that lot was designed for a house that

2:11:45faces Cobb Street, and this is way to

2:11:48the back where an accessory building

2:11:50would be. And so, and you know, our

2:11:53intent is to keep the entrance to the

2:11:56building that that

2:11:58most um the leftmost section of that of

2:12:02that porch um unscreened. And so, the

2:12:05screening would just be the two that are

2:12:07on the right there. Um the details for

2:12:10our intended screening would There would

2:12:12be no divisions. It would be a um

2:12:17a low wall

2:12:18um that would go from column to column,

2:12:22and then from column to building.

2:12:25And

2:12:26which would be about 30 in tall with a

2:12:28wood cap, and we would use the same type

2:12:31of novelty siding that is on the

2:12:35building currently, which is, you know,

2:12:37the shiplap with the cove top for the

2:12:40top 2 in or so of the

2:12:43of the siding. Um

2:12:46and

2:12:47and then above that, which we have about

2:12:505 and 1/2 ft left of of screen area, it

2:12:53would be screened without any division.

2:12:55Um

2:12:56so that is our proposal. And if you have

2:13:00any questions, I'm happy to answer them.

2:13:02>> Right. Thank you very much.

2:13:04Uh are there any members of the public

2:13:05who wish to speak in favor of this

2:13:06proposal?

2:13:08Seeing none, is there any members who

2:13:09wish to speak against this proposal?

2:13:13Seeing none, will there be discussion

2:13:14now?

2:13:15>> Um I drove around, looked. There are um

2:13:18there's back screen porches that are

2:13:20visible from the road. This this porch

2:13:22you can't hardly see.

2:13:24It's clear to me that it sits so far

2:13:25back. It's probably kind of the the

2:13:27backyard. And so

2:13:29um

2:13:30I don't think it's a

2:13:32going to be an issue for me to approve

2:13:33the screen

2:13:35porch

2:13:36design. I'll take a structure there.

2:13:39Within three blocks, there are back

2:13:41porch screen

2:13:42porches that you can see from the roads

2:13:45that are It just hasn't I think it's

2:13:47going to take away. This sits right at

2:13:49the edge of Franklin. It's mostly I mean

2:13:51it's the only house in that side. I

2:13:53think maybe there's one right next to

2:13:54it. It's backed up to the church. So

2:13:57it's

2:13:57you know, it's

2:13:59right up on the commercial part of the

2:14:01street. It's

2:14:02I don't know if that's part of the

2:14:03district or not, but it's certainly part

2:14:05of the Prince George area. So I'm good

2:14:08with this.

2:14:10>> I agree that I don't think the screen

2:14:12would necessarily be inappropriate since

2:14:13the porch didn't exist until 10 years

2:14:15ago anyway. I don't think that it's

2:14:17taking away from the district by adding

2:14:19a screen to the porch.

2:14:21>> Yeah, I like a screen porch.

2:14:23>> [laughter]

2:14:25>> Keeps out the mosquitoes.

2:14:26>> Yeah, uh

2:14:27I have a question though about the uh

2:14:30windows being replaced there. It looks

2:14:33like what we've got are true divided

2:14:35lights.

2:14:36>> Yes.

2:14:36>> windows, but are you uh asking for a

2:14:39simulated uh light division

2:14:41>> They would be a simulated divided light.

2:14:43Yes.

2:14:44>> Simulated.

2:14:44>> Yes. Dual pane simulated divided light.

2:14:46And I mean, as you know, we can achieve

2:14:49a a smaller division between them by

2:14:52doing that. I'm I'm I'm sure divided

2:14:54light now, the division between the

2:14:57windows is so is so large because you

2:14:59have to have the frame member plus the

2:15:01stop members to deal with with um

2:15:04insulated glass. But, yes, it'd be a

2:15:06simulated divided light.

2:15:07>> Okay. So, uh

2:15:10true divided lights are being ruled out

2:15:12in this case.

2:15:13>> They are. And and I I'd like to say that

2:15:15the the windows that are that are

2:15:17existing um

2:15:19are it's kind of a hodgepodge. Um they

2:15:22are all true divided light, but they

2:15:26most of them are non-functional. They

2:15:28have, you know, full um

2:15:31uh full storms on the exterior that are

2:15:34not tracked storms, so that it's just a

2:15:36a solid

2:15:38um

2:15:39>> Fixed panel

2:15:39>> fixed panel piece of glass. The the

2:15:44Some of them were originally double-hung

2:15:46windows that had pulleys and and

2:15:48weights, but there are neither pulleys

2:15:50nor weights in those. Some of them are

2:15:52metal tape windows with the metal tape

2:15:54balances in them. So, it's really kind

2:15:56of a it it's it's a windows of different

2:15:59eras, it seems like, that were were used

2:16:01in the

2:16:02in the in the house as it is.

2:16:05>> So.

2:16:05>> All right. Thank you.

2:16:09>> Um see.

2:16:11Chris,

2:16:12anything to say?

2:16:13>> I think um

2:16:15yeah, I

2:16:19I I think that um the screen porch is

2:16:22good.

2:16:23It's the

2:16:24accessory dwelling to a

2:16:26primary dwelling that never got built.

2:16:28So,

2:16:30seems like a yes to me.

2:16:31>> Sounds like we got a motion ready here

2:16:33for somebody if they would like to be so

2:16:35bold as to make it.

2:16:37>> I'll make a motion.

2:16:38>> All right.

2:16:39>> I'm going to have that COA 2026-08-1688B

2:16:44approved as submitted.

2:16:46>> All right, motion is to approve the COA

2:16:47as submitted. I'll second.

2:16:50Second by Allen. So, that's Lauren,

2:16:52second Allen. All in favor?

2:16:554-0 unanimous. Approved this submittal.

2:17:02Okay, that brings us to 362 West

2:17:04Cloverhurst Avenue. Can we have the

2:17:05staff report, please?

2:17:12>> 362 West Cloverhurst Avenue, COA 2026

2:17:17section 09-1977.

2:17:20Rear porch addition in the West

2:17:21Cloverhurst Springdale Historic

2:17:23District. Chris Garrow is the applicant.

2:17:29The property is located at the northern

2:17:32side of West Cloverhurst Avenue. It's

2:17:34the second parcel west of the

2:17:36intersection with Mount Vernon Avenue.

2:17:40This 2025 aerial photo remains

2:17:42representative of the current

2:17:43conditions.

2:17:46This is the 1947 Sanborn map showing the

2:17:49house with earlier maps indicating that

2:17:53it was in place by 1980.

2:17:59The proposed new rear porch would have a

2:18:02breezeway style connection

2:18:04with the northwest rear corner of the

2:18:08house. The porch would be 21 ft 8 in

2:18:12square.

2:18:13This is very similar in size to the

2:18:17detached carport existing on the

2:18:19property that was approved in 2021.

2:18:23The breezeway like connection would be

2:18:26about 8 ft deep and 12 ft wide extending

2:18:29from the northwest rear corner

2:18:34to meet with the southwest rear corner

2:18:36and porch.

2:18:38This means that about 10 ft of the width

2:18:41of the new porch would extend beyond the

2:18:43existing side building line on the west.

2:18:48We can see that here in proposed front

2:18:51elevation um

2:18:54as well as a photo that shows the area

2:18:56where the porch would be extending.

2:19:03The west or left side elevation would

2:19:06include a brick chimney occupying the

2:19:09center third of the proposed porch.

2:19:13Uh with the areas to each side

2:19:16being open aside from the uh 10-in

2:19:19square support posts.

2:19:23The hipped roofline of the porch, um

2:19:26and the gable roofline for the

2:19:28breezeway-like connection are um visible

2:19:32here.

2:19:33Uh they are shown uh with metal roofing.

2:19:40The rear elevation um shows the new

2:19:43hipped roof form of the porch, um as

2:19:46well as some changes to the rear of the

2:19:48house.

2:19:50The existing rear stoop and steps would

2:19:52remain, but the rear entry way is

2:19:56proposed to be changed. Currently, there

2:19:58is a door with a transom and it's

2:20:00flanked by side lights. Proposed to be

2:20:03changed to um a door with no transom and

2:20:07a single window abutting it to its west

2:20:10side. That new window would match um the

2:20:13existing window

2:20:15um that is further west on this

2:20:18elevation.

2:20:20Um the paired window that's to the east

2:20:22of the doorway is proposed to be

2:20:24eliminated with the opening fully

2:20:27enclosed and stuccoed over.

2:20:32At the east side of the new porch, um

2:20:35there would be paneling at the back of

2:20:37cabinetry running the full uh depth of

2:20:41the porch. No material is noted um you

2:20:44know, for the the cabinetry backer

2:20:46paneling

2:20:47effect.

2:20:50Some photos of the area involved in this

2:20:54request.

2:20:59Staff recommending approval with several

2:21:01conditions.

2:21:04The new roof lines utilize architectural

2:21:07shingle shingle roofing to match all of

2:21:09the other roofs on the property.

2:21:12That the paired window on the eastern

2:21:15side of the rear elevation be retained.

2:21:19The applicant worked with staff on

2:21:22appropriate modification to the rear

2:21:25entry that limits the impact on the

2:21:27solid to void ratio, the rhythm of

2:21:29openings, and the formality of this

2:21:31feature.

2:21:33This completes the staff report.

2:21:35>> All right. Is the station present?

2:21:37>> Yes, sir.

2:21:37>> All right. Please come up state your

2:21:39name and address and you've got 10

2:21:40minutes. Thank you.

2:21:42>> Good evening. My name is Chris Garrow,

2:21:44362

2:21:46West Cloverhurst Avenue is my address

2:21:48and appreciate you all taking the time

2:21:51to uh

2:21:53Please speak slowly. So, the

2:21:56the house we took

2:21:59actually a lot of care um to not have to

2:22:02touch any other sides of the house

2:22:04except for the rear of the house with

2:22:05what we were planning to do with the

2:22:07house.

2:22:08Um

2:22:09the reason for the metal roof on the

2:22:12addition

2:22:13is because

2:22:15both house west and east on that touch

2:22:19these property lines

2:22:21both have mostly shingle with some

2:22:23standing seam.

2:22:25So, it was more to fit in

2:22:27in the neighborhood.

2:22:29Um

2:22:32I have to be honest and when I got the

2:22:34report and took a step back, I actually

2:22:37kind of agree with not getting rid of

2:22:38the window on the left side.

2:22:41Cuz if it does throw off symmetry of the

2:22:43house.

2:22:44Um but I do

2:22:47I'm I'm fine to work with staff.

2:22:49However,

2:22:50uh

2:22:50but I do need to make the I would like

2:22:54to make the back door

2:22:56less wide

2:22:57and uh the original or the current door,

2:23:00it's actually not the original opening

2:23:02or entrance to the house, but you can't

2:23:04tell that unless you walk inside the

2:23:06house. And to the right right there, you

2:23:08can still see the opening of the window

2:23:09next to it. That's in the wall.

2:23:12Um

2:23:14but the current door is has no lights

2:23:16and

2:23:17I'm not married to those lights in that

2:23:20door, either. So.

2:23:23And the the additional window was an

2:23:25attempt to get

2:23:27you know, the additional

2:23:29scale of what was there.

2:23:34>> That's interesting. All right. Thank

2:23:36you.

2:23:37Do we have anyone who wishes to speak in

2:23:38favor of this proposal?

2:23:40Does anyone wish to speak against this

2:23:42proposal?

2:23:43Okay. Seeing none, will there be

2:23:45discussion by the commission? Who wants

2:23:47to start?

2:23:48>> I'll start. Uh

2:23:50like I said, in addition to the concerns

2:23:52that the staff has expressed in the

2:23:53report, I I was concerned about the

2:23:56visibility of of the addition from the

2:23:59street.

2:24:00How it sticks out beyond

2:24:03the sidewall of the house, and I'd be

2:24:06interested in what my fellow

2:24:07commissioners think about that.

2:24:12>> Fellow commissioners?

2:24:13>> Um I'll Go ahead, Paul.

2:24:15>> I I was going to say, I thought the same

2:24:18thing when I looked at it, but given how

2:24:19far back it would be, I think it will be

2:24:22more diminished than maybe the

2:24:24architectural drawings made it look.

2:24:26I think

2:24:26>> And there'll be space behind the house,

2:24:28and the house is really deep.

2:24:30>> There's a lot of foliage in front of

2:24:31there, too, that blocks some of the

2:24:33view, but

2:24:35it also has a way of being temporary.

2:24:37Could be.

2:24:40Uh I just wonder about that impact on

2:24:43the rest of the neighborhood. If it's

2:24:44done here, other people are going to

2:24:47want to cite that as an example.

2:24:55>> I am.

2:24:56>> But I mean, it's clearly subordinate in

2:24:58its size to me. It's It's an open It's

2:25:01an open-air kind of

2:25:03pavilion, so I don't think it's going to

2:25:04really be that intrusive from the front.

2:25:07>> But the chimney has quite a presence,

2:25:09though.

2:25:11>> It's far back. And I'm okay with the

2:25:14metal. I think that's fine. It's just I

2:25:16mean, I don't know why we we talk about

2:25:18how addition should look like it's

2:25:20original.

2:25:21Uh

2:25:22if it's added on and

2:25:23so that just sets it apart. It's clear

2:25:26it will I'm just making it more clear

2:25:27that it's not a part of the original

2:25:28historic structure.

2:25:31Hearing what's been done around [snorts]

2:25:32it. So, I'm kind of good with that.

2:25:35Uh

2:25:36So, I'd approve this with

2:25:39which is the staff

2:25:41recommendation.

2:25:47>> I don't have a whole lot of comments. I

2:25:48I think it's not too big. It's

2:25:52I think

2:25:54I don't see it that much. I mean, it is

2:25:57the the chimney's tall, but

2:26:00And I think the the metal actually

2:26:02differentiated but compatible in the

2:26:03district. I think it's okay. We would If

2:26:06it was secondary structure, we would

2:26:08want it to probably be a different roof

2:26:10type. I hear what staff's trying to say

2:26:12there. My on the window in the back, I

2:26:15mean, I'm looking at your floor plan.

2:26:17Let me ask the applicant.

2:26:18>> Yeah, of course.

2:26:19>> Are you amenable to

2:26:21to keeping that window and just like

2:26:22flip your master to where you can have

2:26:24the

2:26:26door on the other side of the bed?

2:26:28>> I would have to ask my client.

2:26:31>> Man, it was just

2:26:33I I think that

2:26:35>> [laughter]

2:26:38>> I mean, it it looks like you could do it

2:26:39if you flip the vanities. I'm not I'm

2:26:42sitting here designing for you, but you

2:26:44know, I think that the guidelines would

2:26:46say we really shouldn't lose a window

2:26:49that's in pretty great shape and has a

2:26:51character defining aspect to it. It's

2:26:53the back. So, I hear you. Um

2:26:57And then I'm I'm confused about the

2:26:58door.

2:27:00It you got this

2:27:02So, that is That's the existing

2:27:05condition. Like I'm just confused how

2:27:07you landed where you did.

2:27:08>> So, it basically takes that existing

2:27:11opening transom on the left and moves

2:27:13the door over there.

2:27:14>> Yeah.

2:27:16>> And creates the window on the right.

2:27:20>> Right. And I I think

2:27:21>> And it helps it it it does help

2:27:23internally, but

2:27:26that's

2:27:27the panel there.

2:27:28>> So, would you be taking out part of the

2:27:29wall that is stucco to the right of it

2:27:32or

2:27:33just making the opening itself smaller?

2:27:35>> So, it would it would

2:27:37I think fit in

2:27:39that

2:27:40>> existing opening.

2:27:43>> Yeah, I mean you can see it.

2:27:44Like they're trying to get back to the

2:27:45original door

2:27:48>> I do not believe it is the original

2:27:50door, I don't think. Because you can

2:27:52tell there's an old exterior. If you

2:27:54walk through that current opening,

2:27:56there's an old exterior wall to the

2:27:57right of it. And then you would walk in

2:27:59what I assume was an old kitchen at some

2:28:01point through a doorway that's still

2:28:04there and a window.

2:28:16>> I don't know where I sit.

2:28:18>> Do you have any questions for the

2:28:19applicant or is that it?

2:28:21I can see it as well.

2:28:24>> [clears throat]

2:28:24>> Mr. Jackson has no idea what he's going

2:28:26to do, so

2:28:28someone else help him out.

2:28:32>> Would there be a possibility of moving

2:28:34the chimney around to the side there so

2:28:38it's not so visible from the street?

2:28:42>> Yeah, I mean

2:28:43kind of that question.

2:28:46>> I wouldn't say it would be impossible.

2:28:50Um at all.

2:28:53I would have to ask my client.

2:28:54>> [laughter]

2:28:57>> Ask the person who's in charge.

2:28:59>> I mean I I this running the risk of like

2:29:01designing at this table. And

2:29:04like in a concept review we would talk

2:29:06about this stuff and this stuff, but I

2:29:08know you probably want an answer.

2:29:10Um

2:29:12staff is saying

2:29:13approve it, but use shingle roofs,

2:29:17leave the paired window, and

2:29:20work with them on the back door.

2:29:25>> I'm saying

2:29:27you let them have the metal roof and

2:29:28keep the other two staff.

2:29:34I'll make them mad.

2:29:34>> Thank you. That's what I thought.

2:29:36>> All right, go ahead.

2:29:37>> I'm the COA 2026-09-1977

2:29:41to be approved

2:29:43with the original condition submitted

2:29:46for the metal roof and

2:29:48with the staff conditions that the

2:29:50paired window on each side of the rear

2:29:52elevation be retained and that the

2:29:54applicant work with staff on appropriate

2:29:56modifications to the rear entry that

2:29:57limit any impact to the solid void

2:29:59ratio, rhythm of openings, and formality

2:30:02as a feature. So, I'm done.

2:30:04>> All right, motion on the floor is by

2:30:06Allen is to approve with conditions to

2:30:07have a second.

2:30:08Seconded by Lauren. All in favor?

2:30:11Was there a

2:30:13unanimous? With the conditions.

2:30:20All right, and that brings us finally to

2:30:22190 Beulah Avenue, the last uh

2:30:25action item on the agenda.

2:30:27>> [clears throat]

2:30:29>> 190 Beulah Avenue, COA 2026-09-1982,

2:30:35metal roofing in the Boulevard Historic

2:30:37District. Bart Jackson is agent for Matt

2:30:41Hardy.

2:30:47The property is located at the southeast

2:30:50corner of the intersection of Nantahala

2:30:53Avenue and Beulah Avenue.

2:30:56This 2025 aerial photo remains

2:30:58representative of the current

2:31:00conditions.

2:31:03The um structure is not seen here on the

2:31:051947 Sanborn map, not appearing until

2:31:09the 1960 Sanborn map. Um although it is

2:31:13uh can be seen in the 1953 aerial photo.

2:31:18Despite this construction date, the

2:31:20property was deemed contributing with

2:31:22the district designation in 1988.

2:31:27Some photos of the structure today and

2:31:30from the architectural survey record um

2:31:34done in the late '80s.

2:31:40This is looking at locations where metal

2:31:45is used as the primary roofing today and

2:31:49where the 1950 Sanborn maps indicate

2:31:53metal was in place by 1950.

2:31:56The yellow being um

2:31:58the current metal roofs, blue for those

2:32:01um that used metal historically.

2:32:06The proposed metal roofing is noted as

2:32:09to be either 29 gauge Georgia rib or 26

2:32:13gauge 5V metal.

2:32:18While 5V metal roofing is a product that

2:32:21was found historically in some places,

2:32:23metal roofing does change the character

2:32:26of a contributing structure by having a

2:32:28different visual appearance. Um

2:32:30therefore denial is recommended. This

2:32:33completes the staff report.

2:32:36>> All right, and uh Commissioner has

2:32:37already taken his spot, so please let us

2:32:40have your name and address and you have

2:32:4110 minutes, sir.

2:32:41>> Thanks for having me. Y'all uh my name

2:32:43is Bart Jackson. I live uh right around

2:32:46the corner at 474 Boulevard.

2:32:49Um I've got some pictures with your

2:32:51permission. Can I

2:32:53>> Uh yeah, I should have a motion to

2:32:54accept the pictures as additional

2:32:56motions.

2:32:57>> So moved.

2:32:57>> Okay, I'll move to accept.

2:32:58>> one for everybody.

2:32:59>> All right, second. Lauren, all in favor?

2:33:02All right, show us up. Thank you.

2:33:05>> This is a 1908

2:33:07historic house in Jefferson.

2:33:11It's a beautiful

2:33:14house.

2:33:17You'll notice it has one of those low

2:33:19slope

2:33:21front porch.

2:33:23There's a standing seam roof.

2:33:27Um

2:33:28because it's

2:33:29it low slope, it it needs to be standing

2:33:31seam. It can handle the low slope. But

2:33:34you'll also notice at the top, uh the

2:33:36main roof is in fact a 29 gauge Georgia

2:33:39rib.

2:33:40Um

2:33:41I just

2:33:43thought the

2:33:44visual would be helpful.

2:33:46Um

2:33:50So

2:33:52the main question here is

2:33:56if they

2:33:57I'm here representing uh the Hardys.

2:33:59Matt had to go to a meeting, but Sarah

2:34:01and Rose are with us.

2:34:03Again, they're my neighbors.

2:34:05Um

2:34:06and customers of Athens Roofing.

2:34:09Um

2:34:12I think I told them when they first said

2:34:14they wanted uh

2:34:15the Georgia rib metal that we would need

2:34:18to come ask permission.

2:34:20Um

2:34:21and I struggle many times, including

2:34:23with my wife, who also wants the Georgia

2:34:25rib on my house, which currently has

2:34:27shingles.

2:34:28Um

2:34:29to explain

2:34:31to customers in Boulevard area

2:34:34um

2:34:35why they can't have a 29 gauge Georgia

2:34:39rib roof

2:34:40when there are 50 of them

2:34:43within a half a mile

2:34:45of

2:34:46of their house.

2:34:47Um

2:34:49and I would love to

2:34:50the balance of my 10 minutes for for

2:34:53someone to educate me about that, so I

2:34:56can help explain to folks in the

2:34:58neighborhood who want that roof.

2:35:00Uh and then I'll just point out that the

2:35:02garage, which is in front of the car

2:35:04back there,

2:35:06uh is low slope and has old metal

2:35:09roofing.

2:35:10Uh but it has asphalt on top of it now.

2:35:14And this house was built in 1952. That's

2:35:17why it wasn't on the older pictures, but

2:35:18it was on the 1960s.

2:35:21Um I'm not sure why it's a contributing

2:35:23house. Um and the only other question I

2:35:26have uh just for clarification,

2:35:29we did a house on Grady right around the

2:35:30corner last year.

2:35:32Um it's a house that was built 25 years

2:35:36ago in 2001.

2:35:38Uh and when I that gentleman wanted a a

2:35:41Georgia rib, and when I came and spoke

2:35:43with Amber, the staff,

2:35:46uh I said, "No, it was built in

2:35:492001, 25 years ago,

2:35:52you can put a metal roof on it. You

2:35:53don't have to come to the hearing. We

2:35:55don't have to ask permission."

2:35:56So, again, just for clarification,

2:36:00so that house that we could put a

2:36:02Georgia rib roof on on Grady in the

2:36:05Boulevard Historic District,

2:36:07it was 25 years old.

2:36:09This house is 75 years old, but not of

2:36:12the vintage of, you know, my house and

2:36:14the older houses in the neighborhood.

2:36:16So, is in the statute, is there a date?

2:36:19Is there a cutoff?

2:36:20Where if the house was built in

2:36:231995 or sooner, it can get a change of

2:36:27material without a hearing?

2:36:29Um you know, is is or if not, you know,

2:36:33how how do we know?

2:36:35How do we come to that? Where where do

2:36:37we look to to make that decision?

2:36:40Um

2:36:41and so those are those are my main

2:36:42questions. And then finally, just uh

2:36:45if they can't have a Georgia rib,

2:36:47does that mean that they can have uh the

2:36:505V or standing seam? Or do we need to

2:36:54reapply for that?

2:36:57Thank you. Thank you very much.

2:36:59>> Do we have any members of the public who

2:37:00wish to speak in favor of this proposal?

2:37:03>> Yes, and you know what? Let you talk.

2:37:05>> Yes, I'll do. I haven't prepared

2:37:07anything. Hi, everyone.

2:37:09Um this is our house.

2:37:11>> Please state your name and address.

2:37:11>> My name is Sarah Boland. Um my partner

2:37:14Matt Hardy and our daughter Rose Hardy

2:37:17Boland.

2:37:18>> Yes.

2:37:18>> Come come up with me to support. Um we

2:37:22live at 190 Beulah um in the Boulevard

2:37:26Historic District. Um we uh bought this

2:37:30house from the original owner and

2:37:32builder, Mr. J.D. Simmons, who was quite

2:37:35a character. Um he you know, he built

2:37:39this house um himself, so he said um

2:37:43when he got back from Korea.

2:37:45And um he told us that

2:37:48when we offered to buy it from him, he

2:37:50said, "Well, as a renter, you've always

2:37:53taken care of it, and I trust you to

2:37:54take good care of it um going forward."

2:37:57So,

2:37:58um we would love to continue to uh honor

2:38:03that um

2:38:04you know, that uh that trust to the late

2:38:07great J.D. Simmons

2:38:09um by just continuing to take care of

2:38:12this house in a way that's as lasting as

2:38:14possible. So,

2:38:16I think that you know, we would we would

2:38:18love to put a high-quality metal roof on

2:38:21there so it doesn't continue to leak. Um

2:38:25we would love to take care of this house

2:38:27and make sure that it continues to

2:38:30stand the test of time.

2:38:32It's quirky and it's little, but it is

2:38:34ours and you know, we love it, so.

2:38:37>> [laughter]

2:38:39>> Um that's it.

2:38:40>> All right. Thank you very much.

2:38:41>> Thank you.

2:38:42>> Good.

2:38:43Good to go.

2:38:44We will switch to speaking in favor or

2:38:46opposed.

2:38:47Anyone wish to speak against it?

2:38:50Okay. Seeing none.

2:38:52>> I have a question for them.

2:38:54What color roof are you proposing?

2:38:56>> They haven't They haven't picked a

2:38:57color. Um but that's a great point

2:39:00though. Is that a Is that something that

2:39:02we need to

2:39:03get approved also?

2:39:06>> We can

2:39:08prescribe finish, but I don't believe

2:39:09color is part of that, right?

2:39:13>> Right. And so, we can similar to like

2:39:15with um

2:39:17chain-link link

2:39:18we can require that something have a

2:39:20dark finish, but we can't tell you, "Oh,

2:39:22it's got to be a black chain link

2:39:24fence." Kind of

2:39:25>> Yes, my Yes, are we Are you thinking

2:39:27light or dark?

2:39:28>> Uh well, just on a just from a practical

2:39:32matter, I usually recommend dark for two

2:39:35reasons. One,

2:39:36the all the metal are very energy

2:39:39efficient as compared to asphalt

2:39:41shingles.

2:39:42Uh but the the reflectivity has nothing

2:39:45to do with their energy efficiency.

2:39:47Uh a silver or a white metal roof is

2:39:50just as energy efficient as a black or a

2:39:52dark bronze. However, the light-colored

2:39:55ones uh get really dirty with tree

2:39:58cover. Uh so, my recommendation is

2:40:01usually darker, but also don't pick

2:40:03colors for customers, you know, whatever

2:40:06they want. Um I don't know if you

2:40:09>> I

2:40:09>> Did y'all talk about color?

2:40:10>> A little bit. My thinking is we were

2:40:13leaning towards a dark red to bring in

2:40:15the same color of that original brick on

2:40:18the non-original side um addition there.

2:40:22Um which Mr. Simmons told us came from

2:40:24the Georgia Brick Company that is since

2:40:27closed, so

2:40:28we can't get bricks like that anywhere

2:40:30else now.

2:40:31>> Yeah, we we did a uh around the corner

2:40:33of the bows

2:40:35uh

2:40:36we did a 5V and it's in uh some of them

2:40:40depending on the manufacturer, they call

2:40:41them barn red or um

2:40:44rust uh red

2:40:46uh but not the UGI red, you know, not

2:40:48the really bright, but the uh

2:40:51the darker and really a little darker

2:40:53than those in the in that picture, too.

2:40:55Um

2:40:56but I think barn red is the usual color.

2:40:59Uh

2:41:00But there are with the 5V, there are

2:41:02about five colors available. With the

2:41:05Georgia red, there are about 20.

2:41:07Uh and then of course, standing seam

2:41:09is the same as you can get that in any

2:41:11color you want, but so I think darker is

2:41:14darker in color would be the answer to

2:41:16your question.

2:41:17>> All right. Thank you.

2:41:19>> Yes. Uh I drove around the I mean, since

2:41:22we're on the barn theme, the the

2:41:25as it goes to metal roofs and on

2:41:27historic houses in Boulevard, the horse

2:41:30is out of the barn.

2:41:33So

2:41:34>> What did I'm sorry, what did you say?

2:41:34>> The horse is out of the barn. They're

2:41:36>> There are There are more than 50

2:41:38>> There Yeah, they're everywhere. I I just

2:41:40don't see

2:41:41>> [clears throat]

2:41:42>> this small of a house to have an

2:41:45uh that dramatic of an impact on the

2:41:48on the district to let that feel a dark.

2:41:50>> You know, I'm assuming this is the

2:41:52requested thing.

2:41:54>> Despite the guidelines.

2:41:56>> Can I maybe go ahead and say my piece?

2:41:57>> Yes. Yes, say your piece, Chris.

2:41:58>> 2A.3, roof material.

2:42:01I I This is not the Sorry, guys. Not the

2:42:03appropriate place to talk about the

2:42:05rules, but I will give you a little

2:42:07piece. There's a There's a document that

2:42:09says what's a contributing building,

2:42:10what's not. That is based on dates and

2:42:13it's based on evaluation criteria that

2:42:15was

2:42:16created and all is in our binder. It's

2:42:18all public information. You can go look

2:42:20at

2:42:21There's a set of guidelines for this

2:42:22house and it 2A.3 says basically

2:42:27we should not allow you to change your

2:42:29roof from shingles to metal.

2:42:31So, for me, this is a pretty cut-and-dry

2:42:33one.

2:42:34>> Is Is I'm sorry, can I Is there a date

2:42:37cut off for

2:42:38>> Like I was asking a question for staff.

2:42:40Um

2:42:41I don't remember the

2:42:44the period of significance for

2:42:45Boulevard, but there is a date for

2:42:48Boulevard and there's

2:42:49>> contributing structures within the

2:42:50period of If that's the whole

2:42:52>> Right.

2:42:53>> Right, it wouldn't be contributing to

2:42:55>> This is a character-defining feature of

2:42:57Yes, it's a small house, but it's

2:42:59post-war house. It had a shingle roof

2:43:02always.

2:43:03And the guidelines basically say that it

2:43:05should always.

2:43:08>> Yes, the the caveat is if you have

2:43:09evidence that it previously was metal,

2:43:12that would definitely be worth

2:43:13considering. Um when I look at the

2:43:15aerials, it does look like the roof is a

2:43:16little bit lighter than what's around

2:43:17it, but it's hard to tell from black and

2:43:19white in the '50s. Um but if you have

2:43:21any kind of evidence that it was metal,

2:43:22that would certainly help.

2:43:24>> No, it was not my

2:43:27>> Uh but to your point about the house on

2:43:28Grady, the reason that it

2:43:31was allowed to have changed material to

2:43:32be different is because it's not

2:43:34contributing. Right. Whereas this being

2:43:36contributing.

2:43:37>> And is there a date that decides what's

2:43:39contributing?

2:43:39>> Yes,

2:43:40there is. I don't we don't know it off

2:43:41the top of our head. If you look at the

2:43:43map

2:43:43>> look at it.

2:43:45>> And any time the period of significance

2:43:47for the designation, but the designation

2:43:50also, you know, went in with each

2:43:53each parcel and designated whether they

2:43:56were contributing or non-contributing at

2:43:58that time in 1988.

2:44:00>> I did. Okay.

2:44:04Yeah, what do you think?

2:44:05>> Uh that seems like a pretty low pitch on

2:44:08that roof. Another good consideration.

2:44:10Pitch.

2:44:10>> It's about in the back it's 3 12 and in

2:44:13the front it's 4 12. Another real good

2:44:15reason to put metal on there.

2:44:17>> Oh.

2:44:18Uh

2:44:19I I had a

2:44:20an acquaintance that installed uh real

2:44:23standing seam roofs for a living and he

2:44:26used to say that you know, the reason

2:44:28they call that barn roofing

2:44:31is because the cow don't the cow don't

2:44:33care if it leaks.

2:44:35>> [laughter]

2:44:35>> Uh so I I assume you would install an

2:44:39ice and water shield or something as a

2:44:41on the substrate.

2:44:43>> Uh everywhere.

2:44:44>> Yes, sir.

2:44:45>> Yeah.

2:44:46>> To to account for that. [clears throat]

2:44:48Uh

2:44:51I don't know. I think I'd have to go

2:44:52with the

2:44:54the guidelines and what they impose on

2:44:57that.

2:45:00Maybe architectural shingles would be an

2:45:02improvement.

2:45:06>> All right, you already said your piece.

2:45:07Do you have anything else to add?

2:45:09>> No, I'm not going to

2:45:11make my motion.

2:45:12>> Can Can I ask one more question?

2:45:14>> Yes, sir.

2:45:14>> Uh sure, go ahead. Come on.

2:45:16>> Just to Just to clarify. So

2:45:20was it from 1988 on when all this was

2:45:24written up? Like

2:45:25why are there

2:45:2850, literally we counted,

2:45:3050 Georgia rib roofs within a half mile

2:45:34of their house?

2:45:35>> Are they in a historic district?

2:45:37>> Yes, within a half mile.

2:45:39>> Could be either before the district was

2:45:41designated, those people put those metal

2:45:43roofs on before approval was needed, or

2:45:46they historically were built with metal

2:45:48roofs, and so because they always had

2:45:50metal roofs, they're allowed to continue

2:45:51having them.

2:45:52>> Right, I understand that for sure. It's

2:45:54just it's hard to explain to people

2:45:56who,

2:45:57>> [clears throat]

2:45:57>> you know, have are surrounded by Georgia

2:46:00rib roofs that they can't have a Georgia

2:46:03rib roof.

2:46:04>> I can explain that

2:46:06to you.

2:46:07So,

2:46:09in the early days of the designation of

2:46:13the Boulevard district and the early

2:46:15days of Georgia rib roofing existing, it

2:46:19is not a historic material, it is not a

2:46:21historic roofing profile.

2:46:23Um, the design guidelines had not

2:46:27accounted for modern roofing profile

2:46:30changes, and they did not distinguish

2:46:33those from any historic metal roofing

2:46:36profiles. Therefore, when it was going

2:46:39when a metal roof was being replaced,

2:46:42there wasn't a consideration over

2:46:43whether it was a new modern profile.

2:46:47Um,

2:46:50as those happened, it was quickly

2:46:52realized that those but it does make a

2:46:55big impact, those um the profiles

2:46:57differences in roofing, and that that

2:47:02was not deemed to be an appropriate um

2:47:05material, an appropriate resulting

2:47:07texture, visual appearance. And that

2:47:10metal roofs, where they are allowed,

2:47:12should

2:47:13um you know, have a metal roofing

2:47:16profile that was that's historically

2:47:18accurate, which typically means the

2:47:20standing seam or 5V.

2:47:23>> I guess they felt different in

2:47:24Jefferson.

2:47:26>> This may or may not be in a district

2:47:27where they have to get that approved.

2:47:30>> Yeah.

2:47:30>> Uh it might be a national register

2:47:31district where you don't actually have

2:47:33to have approvals for anything.

2:47:34>> Okay. Thanks.

2:47:36Thank you.

2:47:38>> I'll move to

2:47:40for on COA 2026-09-1982

2:47:46to deny

2:47:48on the

2:47:51grounds that um

2:47:53a metal roof is not an appropriate

2:47:55replacement.

2:47:56>> Right. Motion

2:47:58Floor by Chris is to deny. You want to

2:48:00second?

2:48:02>> I'll second.

2:48:03>> All right. Second by James.

2:48:05All in favor of denial?

2:48:09Okay. That's three in favor. All

2:48:10opposed?

2:48:12All right. Motion carries three to one

2:48:14with Allen being a no vote.

2:48:20I don't know who wrote the one no votes

2:48:22today. I've got you on the list, but I'm

2:48:23pretty sure that

2:48:24>> Yeah.

2:48:25>> You wrote the comment.

2:48:26>> I wrote the comment.

2:48:27>> [laughter]

2:48:28>> Okay. So, that takes care of new

2:48:29business. We've got a couple of

2:48:31conceptual design reviews that Mr.

2:48:34Matheny has brought with him.

2:48:36All right. So, he's been so patient, but

2:48:38we'll go ahead with the staff report on

2:48:40710 South Milledge, please.

2:48:51>> 710 South Milledge Avenue, COA

2:48:532026-10-2105.

2:48:57Uh concept review uh for the concept of

2:48:59demolition and new construction in the

2:49:02Milledge Avenue Historic District. David

2:49:04Matheny's agent for Hodges Own Milledge

2:49:07LLC.

2:49:09The property is located at the southwest

2:49:12corner of the intersection of Milledge

2:49:14Avenue and Springdale Street.

2:49:18This 2025 aerial photo remains

2:49:20representative of the current condition

2:49:23of the property.

2:49:26The existing structure is not shown here

2:49:30on the 1947 Sanborn maps. Um

2:49:33construction is suggested as

2:50:46a hip front porch

2:50:49with an arched brick treatment at the

2:50:52ground level.

2:50:54porch

2:50:56The Springdale Street elevation

2:50:59that's proposed to shown here as well as

2:51:02a Google image of the current side view.

2:51:06Please remember this is a concept

2:51:08review. No decisions are to be made

2:51:11tonight. This completes the staff

2:51:13report.

2:51:13>> All right, David.

2:51:15Please approach.

2:51:19>> My name is David Matheny. I live at 200

2:51:21Mount Vernon Place and I hope this is

2:51:23less scary.

2:51:25>> [laughter]

2:51:27>> It's classy, David. I'm going to say

2:51:29that.

2:51:30>> perfect hair

2:51:31>> What?

2:51:32>> [laughter]

2:51:32>> I was thrown a gauntlet.

2:51:36That the previous was not my best work,

2:51:39so

2:51:39>> [laughter]

2:51:40>> And I took that constructively. Yes.

2:51:43>> I can see that.

2:51:44>> Well, I mean, so here we go. Um

2:51:47this is

2:51:49Can we go to the front?

2:51:53>> [laughter]

2:51:53>> All right. I think the idea of going

2:51:56with the three-story building that it

2:51:58seemed to be appropriate that we have

2:52:00more of a base.

2:52:02And that was the idea behind the

2:52:06uh arch bricks

2:52:08columns at the first floor.

2:52:10And um

2:52:13I I don't know what else to say. I'm

2:52:15happy to listen to whatever y'all might

2:52:17have to say.

2:52:19>> I have a question. Would it still be

2:52:21within the same footprint as the last

2:52:23one?

2:52:23>> Yes, and still in the same position.

2:52:27>> Do you have to call for public comment

2:52:29on this?

2:52:30>> Pardon?

2:52:30>> Oh, yeah. We Yeah.

2:52:32We have

2:52:33If anyone wants to comment publicly

2:52:35>> MHP students.

2:52:37>> No?

2:52:38>> Say something.

2:52:39>> Make some comments.

2:52:40>> This is your moment.

2:52:41>> [laughter]

2:52:42>> It's never right easier than this.

2:52:46>> I guess the answer's no, so we can go

2:52:48ahead and proceed with the review.

2:52:53Sorry to cut you off.

2:52:54>> I didn't really have much. I

2:52:56Do you know how the height would compare

2:52:57with the surrounding buildings?

2:52:59>> Um well, this is 40 ft. And then that's

2:53:03to the ridge, so

2:53:05the guidelines would allow me to go

2:53:07slightly less than that by measuring it,

2:53:09but it is

2:53:11it is lower than the KD house, which is

2:53:15up on a basically up on a hill and it's

2:53:18rather large.

2:53:19So, it is not taller than the

2:53:24Shorter house to the left.

2:53:27>> It looks like a lower pitch than the

2:53:29last submission.

2:53:32>> Mhm. I don't know that it is. It may be

2:53:34just

2:53:35the angle that we're looking at it, but

2:53:37it's

2:53:39it's uh it's a uh I'm recalling it is a

2:53:43It is a

2:53:446 12 pitch.

2:53:47>> Still plan on being commercial on the

2:53:48ground floor.

2:53:49>> Commercial office on the ground floor

2:53:51and

2:53:53each second and third floor are

2:53:56each independent condominiums,

2:53:58two-bedroom condominiums.

2:54:00And there's one unit on the one single

2:54:04unit on the second floor and one single

2:54:06unit on the third floor.

2:54:07>> Staircase inside?

2:54:08Inside?

2:54:09>> No, actually that's

2:54:12that's

2:54:14We determined that there would be access

2:54:16on the rear of the building.

2:54:19Independent.

2:54:20>> I like this design much better,

2:54:21obviously. This is This looks great.

2:54:23This That's

2:54:26Save that tree? Probably not, but

2:54:30I like this definitely an improvement

2:54:32over the last design and

2:54:35uh I'm glad you took our comments to

2:54:38heart. I think uh

2:54:40Alan

2:54:41disagreed with the column situation on

2:54:43the prior plan and I believe Katie

2:54:46suggested the hip roof and I think all

2:54:48of that

2:54:49comes into play and looks very nice.

2:54:51>> And I don't have any

2:54:53feeling one way or the other, but maybe

2:54:55having a band along this building you

2:54:57could further differentiate with some

2:54:58kind of a

2:55:00some kind of

2:55:02I don't know what you call that. I'm not

2:55:04>> Honor table.

2:55:05>> What do you call it?

2:55:06>> Just putting the

2:55:08Something to just put a Yeah.

2:55:10Of course they kind of make it show more

2:55:12of a base, but I don't I'm not saying

2:55:14that has to happen.

2:55:19>> Okay, Chris.

2:55:20>> I think it looks great.

2:55:22>> I think approved.

2:55:24>> All right, I

2:55:24>> [laughter]

2:55:24>> I think you've made them happy.

2:55:26>> I think so.

2:55:27>> I think that's right.

2:55:28>> Does anybody have anything else you want

2:55:29to talk about this week?

2:55:30>> Can you paint it pink?

2:55:32>> [laughter]

2:55:33>> Break it everything.

2:55:35>> If you don't have any color

2:55:38I think I could do pink and both purple

2:55:40polka dots.

2:55:42>> Say nothing.

2:55:43>> Say nothing.

2:55:44>> I get I agree the design

2:55:47is a is a big improvement. Um still a

2:55:49little concerned about the height

2:55:50compared to the contributing things

2:55:52around it cuz I know Katie is not

2:55:53contributing. So,

2:55:55um

2:55:56but

2:55:56when you bring your application, if you

2:55:58could just have a comparison of what's

2:56:00around it, that'd be helpful.

2:56:01>> Okay.

2:56:05Anything else?

2:56:08>> Okay.

2:56:08>> All right. I think that's it. Thank you.

2:56:10>> Now, I appreciate

2:56:11>> there.

2:56:12We'll move on to the next one.

2:56:15And uh we'll do the staff report on 495

2:56:18South Milledge,

2:56:19please.

2:56:42>> 495 South Milledge Avenue, COA

2:56:452026-10-2108.

2:56:49Concept of replacing the front doors um

2:56:51in the Milledge Avenue Historic

2:56:53District. David Matheny's agent for Ryan

2:56:55Strider.

2:56:59The property is located at the northeast

2:57:01corner of the intersection of Milledge

2:57:03and Baxter.

2:57:07The apartment buildings were not in

2:57:09place on the 1947 Sanborn map. Um they

2:57:12were built in 1954.

2:57:14So, you can see them on the 1960 map, um

2:57:18which is the inset uh map that's in

2:57:20color.

2:57:21The property is considered contributing

2:57:23to the Milledge Avenue Historic

2:57:25District.

2:57:29This um 2025 aerial photo remains

2:57:32representative of the current condition

2:57:34of um the property as the rear porch

2:57:37additions that were approved in August

2:57:40are not yet built.

2:57:42Um

2:57:44just a reminder, this is what

2:57:46not approval was for.

2:57:49Um

2:57:53This request involves changing the front

2:57:56entry doors at both buildings.

2:58:00That is three doors facing Baxter.

2:58:03Um one door facing Milledge and then a

2:58:08basement level

2:58:10door at the rear of the Milledge facing

2:58:12building.

2:58:15So

2:58:17what you see here, the white door is

2:58:21representative of the existing doors

2:58:24that are all street facing.

2:58:26The black door is the existing basement

2:58:30level door and it is thought to be

2:58:33representative of

2:58:35um

2:58:36the original

2:58:39design knowing that the white doors are

2:58:41not historic.

2:58:43Um the orange door that you see is what

2:58:46is proposed to be used. It is

2:58:49a three panel door um like the black

2:58:53one, however, the panels are glazed

2:58:55rather than solid.

2:59:00This is a very grainy

2:59:03photo

2:59:04from a scan of

2:59:07the newspaper in 1954 that was an

2:59:10article talking about the opening of

2:59:12this building.

2:59:13Um it is hard to tell. It

2:59:17does kind of look like it was a three

2:59:19panel door.

2:59:21Um

2:59:23It definitely did not appear to have

2:59:25glazing um and then there's the two, you

2:59:27know,

2:59:28glazed side lights, the side lights to

2:59:30each side that are um

2:59:32that you can see.

2:59:34Um

2:59:37Just a reminder, this is concept review,

2:59:39no decisions made tonight.

2:59:42Um and this completes the staff report.

2:59:44>> All right, go ahead, David.

2:59:47>> Um

2:59:49Well, clearly we would like to eliminate

2:59:51the six-panel colonial door with

2:59:53something that was more mid-century

2:59:55modern since this is mid-century.

3:00:00Um

3:00:02I have to

3:00:04believe that the black door that was

3:00:06going to the basement would be

3:00:07representative of what might have been

3:00:09there.

3:00:11The newspaper picture is hard to say,

3:00:13but it looks like it was painted white,

3:00:16maybe. I don't know. But

3:00:18um

3:00:19Clearly I'm not after any color

3:00:22suggestion for the orange door, but

3:00:26uh you know, the design team for this

3:00:29have talked about it. The interior

3:00:31designers

3:00:33really wanted light coming into the

3:00:36place, and so I said, "Well,

3:00:39I will ask and bring it up and talk

3:00:41about it." And I mean, clearly the three

3:00:44glass panels would be representative of

3:00:46mid-century modern door.

3:00:49And the sidelights

3:00:52um we would be replacing with

3:00:56the um glass that is

3:01:00I really meant to try to look up that

3:01:01name, what it would be, but

3:01:04maybe a

3:01:05I mean, it's basically a wavy glass, but

3:01:07it's it

3:01:08>> It's sort of bright. Bright.

3:01:10>> Bright. Yeah.

3:01:12And so

3:01:13you can't tell from this, but maybe in

3:01:15for your photo, but the glass in the

3:01:19uh door

3:01:20uh orange door is the same

3:01:23type of glass.

3:01:25>> Like fluted?

3:01:25>> Fluted would work. Yeah, that's a good

3:01:28good term. So the glass The sidelights

3:01:30are fluted glass. I mean, many have been

3:01:31replaced with plain glass because I

3:01:33didn't want to go to the trouble, but

3:01:35the fluted glass is certainly available.

3:01:38And uh so you would have the fluted

3:01:40sidelights and then the fluted glass in

3:01:43the panels in the

3:01:45door.

3:01:46Um

3:01:47So I mean, you know, I thought I would

3:01:49just bring it up and see about it. I

3:01:51mean

3:01:52see what your thoughts were if you

3:01:54I mean, we don't know

3:01:57for sure what the doors were. We don't

3:01:59have any

3:02:02definitive

3:02:04answer about what it was, but I I have

3:02:06to believe that it would be something

3:02:08like that black door.

3:02:10>> [snorts]

3:02:10>> But, January 2025 street view shows all

3:02:13of them like that black door, and it

3:02:14looks like they put the white ones on

3:02:16them when they sold it. Similar to how

3:02:18they

3:02:18>> second, Laura. I I don't think I need to

3:02:20ask, but I want to make sure there's

3:02:21nobody who wants to speak on this.

3:02:24Okay, I didn't think so. All right.

3:02:25Sorry, you can go ahead.

3:02:27>> Sorry, I think it's another case of how

3:02:28whoever owned it before Rain replaced

3:02:31the windows without approval, they also

3:02:33replaced the doors, I think, without

3:02:34approval.

3:02:35>> Oh, yeah, clearly.

3:02:36>> Cuz if you the street view shows that

3:02:38they all used to be those black doors,

3:02:39three panel.

3:02:41>> Oh, you saw a picture with the black

3:02:42doors?

3:02:43>> Like this one with the reddish panel?

3:02:44>> Mhm.

3:02:45>> On [clears throat] the front.

3:02:46>> Yeah.

3:02:47>> Really?

3:02:48They're

3:02:48>> They're there.

3:02:50>> Is that it?

3:02:53Yep. Oh, yes, there is. Okay, so it's

3:02:55just a matter of whether you would

3:02:58next entertain the idea of doing

3:03:01something different, but I mean, that's

3:03:06what this exercise is about.

3:03:09>> What's

3:03:10Did they Mhm.

3:03:13I mean, that the the one you're

3:03:14proposing, I think, is

3:03:16a

3:03:17pretty big difference

3:03:20compared to this, you know, true paneled

3:03:23version. I just don't know like was that

3:03:25the original door?

3:03:28Also, I mean, I'm assuming those are

3:03:30solid wood doors and could have come

3:03:33from the original.

3:03:35This is

3:03:37>> We had it's on on Google street view.

3:03:40Did you have Do were there other dates?

3:03:42Was there any earlier dates?

3:03:43>> Yeah, Google street view only

3:03:45only goes back to I think 2008.

3:03:48>> Yeah. Yeah.

3:03:50>> My view is I would it.

3:03:53Even though it's not exactly what's

3:03:55there even that there's a high

3:03:56probability it was probably a three

3:03:58solid three panel solid.

3:04:01These

3:04:02properties aren't 1950s residences

3:04:05anymore. They're 2026 residences.

3:04:08They're being renovated. They need to be

3:04:10livable. They're dark. They're small.

3:04:13Adding some diffuse light I think just

3:04:15makes it a better place to live and

3:04:17pays homage to the missing potential

3:04:20original door

3:04:22style or manner that was.

3:04:24So I would approve it.

3:04:26>> You're referring to the orange door?

3:04:28>> Yeah.

3:04:28>> The white and I would put that with

3:04:29clear glass

3:04:31the side lights.

3:04:33This basement door looks kind of funny

3:04:35to me. It

3:04:36looks like that may be a

3:04:38a wider opening and

3:04:40somebody

3:04:42uh hooked up some auxiliary

3:04:45styles on each side. You can almost see

3:04:47a seam there or something.

3:04:51>> Mhm. I don't know.

3:04:52>> I don't think the proportions are off.

3:04:53The proportions are off.

3:04:55>> Yeah.

3:04:57Well, I don't think that it's a wider

3:04:59door than any of the others, but I mean

3:05:01I think it's just the way the photo's

3:05:04taken maybe.

3:05:06I mean the idea that you know with the

3:05:08difference obviously is that you've got

3:05:10a raised panel

3:05:13insert in the three

3:05:15panel door.

3:05:17But which So it I think that the

3:05:20basically the size of the glass in the

3:05:22orange door

3:05:24would be more or less representative of

3:05:26the size of the panel in the other, but

3:05:30it's glass and not wood, so.

3:05:32>> Seems like a nice update to me.

3:05:34>> Yeah.

3:05:34>> When there's not an original to be

3:05:37painted.

3:05:42>> I I think I could get on board with the

3:05:44glazing and what have the three panels.

3:05:46I thought what may have been original,

3:05:48would it be possible to have it as a

3:05:49wood door rather than metal?

3:05:52>> Oh yeah.

3:05:53Is that metal that door?

3:05:55>> I don't even know what that door is

3:05:57metal or not, to be honest, but it it

3:05:59would do it for sure.

3:06:03>> And

3:06:03>> [clears throat]

3:06:03>> with all the evidence which might be out

3:06:04there since this is a very

3:06:06common corner, there might be more

3:06:08pictures out there, but I think getting

3:06:10it closer to the black door would be

3:06:12ideal.

3:06:13>> Oh, yeah. I mean, I would do black. I

3:06:15would do a black door, and I probably

3:06:17would suggest that it be wood for sure.

3:06:19>> Okay.

3:06:20>> So.

3:06:24>> Chris.

3:06:25>> I'm on the fence. I don't love the the

3:06:27fact that it's the three glass looks

3:06:30very much like a very different door

3:06:32than a three-panel door, but

3:06:35you don't have the three-panel doors

3:06:36anymore, so

3:06:38that has to go in the in the evaluation,

3:06:41so.

3:06:43Personally, I I would I'd want it to

3:06:46match the doors you got cuz we know

3:06:47those were on the front.

3:06:49Since we know that we know

3:06:51we know they were there.

3:06:52You got light on the fluted side side

3:06:54lights.

3:06:57>> Yeah.

3:06:58>> But I'm only one vote.

3:07:00>> [laughter]

3:07:00>> Are you changed?

3:07:02>> Bruce Spence.

3:07:04>> Well, uh

3:07:05I don't totally object to the to the

3:07:07orange door there. The it had does have

3:07:10a mid-century modern look and it fits

3:07:14buildings

3:07:17reflect that era.

3:07:18>> Cuz it looks more mid-century modern

3:07:20than the the black one.

3:07:21>> Yeah.

3:07:22Well, the black I mean, with the

3:07:24with the fluted side windows is

3:07:27adding some more

3:07:28um to it.

3:07:30>> But again, I think that whoever owned it

3:07:32before your client did

3:07:35changed it so much that it I don't know

3:07:36that it the intent was mid-century

3:07:38modern. It used to look a little more

3:07:39traditional with those panels beneath

3:07:41the windows, and it had

3:07:43steel windows.

3:07:44>> And FYI, we're going to be removing the

3:07:47shutters because we have photos that

3:07:49show they did not have shutters in the

3:07:50beginning.

3:07:51>> So, all those windows, those final

3:07:52windows too.

3:07:53>> The windows will be replaced.

3:07:55>> You'll be back.

3:07:57You'll be back.

3:07:57>> Well, I mean, we've got we've got

3:07:59evidence of what those windows were

3:08:01before, so I think that's something we

3:08:03can do at staff level.

3:08:05Um and also with the shutters being

3:08:07removed

3:08:09to go back to what it would have been

3:08:10more likely to be.

3:08:11>> Yeah.

3:08:12>> So, you know,

3:08:16just an idea to come up with something

3:08:18different here.

3:08:19>> What is the intended occupancy?

3:08:22>> They're going to be condominiums. And

3:08:24the front door those doors

3:08:26>> are owner occupied?

3:08:29>> And the doors that you see now will be

3:08:31going into

3:08:33the unit. That right now they go into a

3:08:35foyer

3:08:36and are divided into multiple

3:08:38one-bedroom

3:08:40units. So, now that will actually be the

3:08:43front door of the owner's unit that you

3:08:45where you see those.

3:08:47And so, that was

3:08:49some of it, too, but I guess it's just

3:08:51that now it's

3:08:54>> There's nothing different in that space.

3:08:55You're going to have this directly

3:08:56behind it. You're going to have the

3:08:58porch.

3:08:59Right?

3:09:03>> Amber, would there be pictures of this

3:09:04in the Milledge Avenue designation

3:09:07report?

3:09:10>> Yes, um but that Milledge Avenue was

3:09:12designated in 2010.

3:09:15So, they're not going to

3:09:18Yeah, they're they're not going to be

3:09:19different than what it was before was.

3:09:27>> [laughter]

3:09:29>> And I think it'll be coming back with

3:09:31for a COA application for windows,

3:09:35other like trim and all that sort of

3:09:37stuff, or no, you think you can go

3:09:38through staff?

3:09:39>> Because we have evidence. We have

3:09:41photographs of the

3:09:43type of windows that were there.

3:09:44>> the known previous conditions.

3:09:46>> Yeah. So, the only thing that that we

3:09:48didn't have any evidence

3:09:51hard evidence on was

3:09:53the doors, and so we just thought we

3:09:55could take an opportunity and

3:09:58check your temperature on it.

3:10:02Okay.

3:10:02All right. Okay, appreciate it.

3:10:04Thank you very much, David.

3:10:05>> Thank you.

3:10:07>> [clears throat]

3:10:08>> Okay, so that brings us to

3:10:11designations. We've got two designation

3:10:13reports. Ambra, do you want to start us

3:10:16off with the Miller Circle Historic

3:10:17District Boundary Amendments?

3:10:20>> Yes.

3:10:23There are not any designations that are

3:10:25up for a vote.

3:10:27The

3:10:28There are two pending designations that

3:10:30will be on your November agenda.

3:10:33Um where we will be seeking a vote for a

3:10:35formal recommendation, Mayor and

3:10:37Commission.

3:10:38Um and so tonight it's just a matter of

3:10:42keeping you and the public appraised of

3:10:44the timeline

3:10:46and giving um another opportunity for

3:10:48public comment ahead of that meeting.

3:10:52Um for

3:10:54the proposed expansion of the Miller

3:10:57Circle Historic District, the proposal

3:10:59would add four parcels um to the

3:11:02existing district boundaries. Um all

3:11:05four are on the Highland Terrace. Uh you

3:11:08can see the hatched area kind of at the

3:11:10top left of the map.

3:11:17Looking a little bit more closely at

3:11:19those, um

3:11:22three of the four are considered

3:11:24contributing.

3:11:26Um

3:11:27One non-contributing property.

3:11:33The open house uh for the proposal was

3:11:37held last Friday.

3:11:39Um the support survey forms will get

3:11:42mailed out by the end of um this week.

3:11:45Uh and as mentioned, this

3:11:47uh

3:11:49proposed amendment to the Miller Circle

3:11:51District would go would come to you for

3:11:54official recommendation vote at the

3:11:56November meeting.

3:11:58Um

3:12:00this completes this

3:12:02staff report.

3:12:03>> All Let me go ahead and see if there's

3:12:05any public comments on

3:12:08this

3:12:09boundary amendment.

3:12:10>> Okay. It's late. I don't want to keep

3:12:12you guys here.

3:12:13>> All right. If you'd like to give your

3:12:14name and address, please.

3:12:15>> It's been 3 hours. Um my name is Dorothy

3:12:18O'Neal and I live at 174 volunteer's. Um

3:12:23So I'm just I kind of here to support

3:12:26that proposed amendment. I'm really here

3:12:27to find out what the timing was

3:12:30on when it will go forward to the mayor

3:12:32and commission. Did I hear you say

3:12:33you're trying to get it to November? I

3:12:35mean the December. Um

3:12:37>> I mean we're they're going to be asked.

3:12:40>> Okay.

3:12:41Okay.

3:12:41>> I can't tell you what's going to happen.

3:12:43>> Okay. I understand. And you have a So

3:12:44that's not quite settled yet. Um And

3:12:48yeah, my neighbors and I am I'm speaking

3:12:51uh on behalf of them as well. We would

3:12:53love to see our

3:12:55be attached to this municipal district

3:12:57and we've been

3:12:59hoping on it since 2018 and more

3:13:01recently working since this past this

3:13:04past summer. So some of you have seen it

3:13:06designation committee

3:13:08meetings. Um

3:13:09And I'll just add one little note. The

3:13:11uh

3:13:13Grand Allen One Apartments that David

3:13:14was just speaking about, the first

3:13:16occupant of my home at 174 was Grandison

3:13:20Caskey and that he is the grandson He is

3:13:23the grand of Grand Allen.

3:13:25>> I like that.

3:13:26>> [laughter]

3:13:27>> Um

3:13:28Anyway, so there's a history there.

3:13:31Okay. Thanks.

3:13:32And um

3:13:34I appreciate all the support we've had.

3:13:36Wish especially Amber. You're working

3:13:38with us.

3:13:38>> I hear you now.

3:13:41Okay.

3:13:42Um

3:13:43>> Next looking at the proposed designation

3:13:46for Thomas and Lay Park and Community

3:13:49Center at 297 Hoyt Street.

3:13:52Um this is a proposed landmark

3:13:55designation. It would be for the entire

3:13:57parcel as it exists today. Um which does

3:14:01include

3:14:03the Wear Linden House which was received

3:14:06a landmark designation in 1988.

3:14:09The area you see highlighted reflects

3:14:12what already has a landmark designation.

3:14:15And so with this proposed designation,

3:14:18it would be everything within the the

3:14:20red boundary.

3:14:23This designation is a little bit

3:14:25different from most of those that we

3:14:27see. The community center building's

3:14:30comparatively young. It was completed in

3:14:331975.

3:14:35Built using funding from the Model

3:14:37Cities program.

3:14:39This was after the city of Athens

3:14:41obtained the land

3:14:44um

3:14:46for clearing it all as part of an urban

3:14:48renewal program.

3:14:50Um

3:14:52the Lyndon House property had been

3:14:54purchased by the city of Athens in 1939

3:14:57using playground bond monies.

3:15:00And

3:15:01when that was remembered, it was deemed

3:15:03best to not move forward with removing

3:15:06that building and having it replaced.

3:15:09Um

3:15:12there had been a whole new residential

3:15:14development proposed, which is what you

3:15:16can see here on the screen.

3:15:19And

3:15:22instead the um

3:15:25plan was to go for a park use instead

3:15:28that fit with the goals of the Model

3:15:30Cities program.

3:15:32This program was

3:15:33uh

3:15:35plan was designed to bring

3:15:37socio-economic improvements and

3:15:39community participation into

3:15:41impoverished neighborhoods.

3:15:43Unlike many of the Model Cities projects

3:15:47nationwide, this project was a success.

3:15:50It resulted in a facility that truly

3:15:53became the center of a neighborhood, a

3:15:54safe place for generations, and a place

3:15:57representative of the racial integration

3:16:01of both parks and the parks department.

3:16:04Um for the city of Athens. um, and the

3:16:07importance of Lake Park is something

3:16:10that continues today.

3:16:14The designation process has been

3:16:17completed through the open house, um,

3:16:20that was done on Monday.

3:16:22Uh, as with the earlier, um,

3:16:27designation status, this one is also to

3:16:30be placed on the November 18th agenda,

3:16:33um, to receive a vote for your official

3:16:35recommendation to the mayor and

3:16:37commission.

3:16:39This completes

3:16:42>> All right.

3:16:43>> that review.

3:16:44>> Any public comments on this particular

3:16:45designation?

3:16:47Seeing Okay.

3:16:50All right. Thank you very much, Amber.

3:16:52We'll look forward to getting that in

3:16:53the the those things on the next agenda,

3:16:55hopefully.

3:16:56If things work out.

3:16:58>> [clears throat]

3:16:59>> Okay, that moves us no demolition

3:17:01relocation requests, so we're now to

3:17:02other business, strategic plan update.

3:17:05>> Um, several things that have recently

3:17:07been completed or in the works do relate

3:17:10to the strategic plan,

3:17:12um, including the proposed Lake Park

3:17:14designation as an example of protecting

3:17:17a cultural resource,

3:17:19um, and the recently completed window

3:17:23condition assessment guide, which I have

3:17:25copies for all of you.

3:17:28Um,

3:17:29this guide provides greater

3:17:31clarification,

3:17:33um,

3:17:35that can be included in the design

3:17:37guidelines of what we need to see when

3:17:39assessing window conditions and how to

3:17:42present that information in a way that

3:17:43allows,

3:17:45um, you all to be able to better review

3:17:48those applications.

3:17:51Um,

3:17:55designation committee met, uh, September

3:17:5828th.

3:17:59In addition to giving the go-ahead for

3:18:01the two designations we just discussed,

3:18:04the committee, um, discussed the need

3:18:06for a windshield survey for the proposed

3:18:09Westland Park District

3:18:11as a result of the 480 North Phillips

3:18:14demolition review and um

3:18:17as well as discussing the status of the

3:18:20demolition review for 140 Rose Street,

3:18:23the Magnolia Street property.

3:18:25Um

3:18:27no additional information on the

3:18:29condition of that property has yet be

3:18:32submitted from the property owner.

3:18:35Um

3:18:37at the designation committee meeting

3:18:40they recommended that a vote go ahead

3:18:43and be taken tonight about um proceeding

3:18:47towards a landmark designation

3:18:50um using the boundaries

3:18:54you as best they relate to the 1948

3:18:57subdivision

3:18:58um plat um and not looking at a

3:19:01designation for the entire church

3:19:03property.

3:19:05Um I have an image of that

3:19:11I can pass out to you all.

3:19:20>> Has there been no communication from the

3:19:23church or

3:19:23>> No.

3:19:26Nope.

3:19:30>> No, thanks.

3:19:53>> See, they're sticking together.

3:20:20>> If it's something that you all are

3:20:22comfortable with, if you want to discuss

3:20:26um whether or not you want to

3:20:29actually

3:20:31vote to

3:20:33>> But see we're looking at a landmark

3:20:34designation.

3:20:38>> That's something ultimately the property

3:20:39owner has to agree to.

3:20:46>> I don't know that I would say it's

3:20:47something they would have to agree to.

3:20:49I mean as something that, you know, got

3:20:51sent to you through this demolition

3:20:54review process.

3:20:56It is something that you all can propose

3:20:59that a landmark

3:21:01designation, you know, be

3:21:03prepared

3:21:05and as with all of our designations,

3:21:08there would be a support survey that it

3:21:10would be sent out.

3:21:11And um the feelings of the property

3:21:14owner

3:21:15would be all in the mayor and

3:21:17commission.

3:21:18Um but it's not something that is

3:21:22that has to happen.

3:21:24Politically it often needs to happen,

3:21:27but it is not something that legally has

3:21:29to happen.

3:21:30>> Where's this direction coming from?

3:21:34>> Where's the directors going?

3:21:36>> Designation committee.

3:21:37>> committee

3:21:38>> is recommending we vote on this.

3:21:40>> It's recommending that you and you're

3:21:42not you're not making a formal

3:21:44recommendation to make it a landmark,

3:21:46but proceed with doing the research and

3:21:49preparation of a landmark designation

3:21:52report

3:21:53study.

3:21:54>> So we're like we did with Bill Street,

3:21:56we're doing a motion to do a report to

3:21:59on this property for landmark

3:22:01designation.

3:22:03>> That's what [snorts] that's what I

3:22:04understand it is.

3:22:07>> Discussion for the motion.

3:22:09>> Yeah, do you want to

3:22:10>> I feel like I did so bad at the motion

3:22:13last time and I meant to write it down

3:22:14what I'm supposed to say.

3:22:17Um,

3:22:18sure I would move that we

3:22:21um

3:22:22recommend that given the history, the

3:22:26known history of this property, and this

3:22:28building, and its condition,

3:22:31that this city work to

3:22:35um [snorts]

3:22:36draft a landmark designation for this

3:22:38property, or a study of the landmark

3:22:40designation.

3:22:41>> Second.

3:22:43>> All right. So, motion is to direct that

3:22:45a study begin to draw landmark

3:22:47designation.

3:22:48Motion Chris, second Allen. All in

3:22:50favor?

3:22:51>> 4-0.

3:22:54>> Betsy, please proceed.

3:22:58>> Uh education committee met on October

3:23:015th.

3:23:03Um they gave approval to move ahead with

3:23:05the window assessment package, uh which

3:23:08I handed out to each of you. Um voted

3:23:11that we go ahead and share it with you,

3:23:13and get it incorporated into the

3:23:15application requirements.

3:23:18Um

3:23:20They also discussed the annual report

3:23:22for 2026, that's to be prepared for

3:23:25release in January of 27.

3:23:29Um discussing the stories that need to

3:23:31be written, and um also talked about the

3:23:34need to start thinking about a

3:23:36storyboard, or some other sort of

3:23:38presentation ahead of the 40th

3:23:40anniversary of our local preservation

3:23:43program.

3:23:44The date that you consider to be 40

3:23:46years is

3:23:48can vary depending on how you think

3:23:50about it. Um the ordinance

3:23:54for the local preservation program was

3:23:56adopted in November of 1986.

3:23:59Adopted with an effective date of

3:24:01January of 87,

3:24:03and then it was in 88 that the first

3:24:05designations happened.

3:24:08And so, you know, exactly which date

3:24:10you're using for that 40 years

3:24:13um

3:24:15can vary.

3:24:16>> [laughter]

3:24:17>> Um but

3:24:19it does seem like there we should do

3:24:20something to kind of recognize that and

3:24:22and look at all of the work and things

3:24:24that have happened in that time.

3:24:27Um,

3:24:30designation committee meets next

3:24:31Tuesday, October 27th. That's next

3:24:34Tuesday at noon.

3:24:37Um, education meets on Monday, November

3:24:412nd at 4:00 p.m.

3:24:45Um, as far as miscellaneous

3:24:47announcements from me, we have five COA

3:24:50items on the November 18th agenda, plus

3:24:53those two designations.

3:24:55Um, we could still have concept reviews

3:24:58added.

3:25:00Um, does anybody expect to be absent on

3:25:04the 18th, November 18th?

3:25:08>> I'll be here.

3:25:09>> Okay.

3:25:12That is it for my miscellaneous.

3:25:14>> Okay.

3:25:16>> [clears throat]

3:25:16>> Um, unless anybody has anything else, I

3:25:20will entertain a motion to adjourn.

3:25:24>> Second.

3:25:24>> Okay, that's Alan moved, Alan motion by

3:25:27Alan, second by James. All in favor of

3:25:29adjourning. All right, we are out.

3:25:33>> I sure [clears throat] can.

3:25:34>> Thanks.

3:25:35>> I appreciate you talking about it.

3:25:42>> I think paper is the thing.

3:25:45>> Um, [clears throat] well, you know, I

3:25:46should have said that.

3:25:47I should have said that.

3:25:48>> Would you be thinking of you to sign

3:25:50this sign this?

3:25:52>> Oh, sure, ready to go.

3:25:56>> Okay, I mean, I can look at the sign in

3:25:58the you got to go.

3:25:59>> Oh, no, that's

3:26:00>> Um,

3:26:03I have no idea.

3:26:06I mean, I sent you the digital one. I

3:26:09don't know. I just I like paper

3:26:10sometimes. It's very I mean, you're

3:26:12welcome to keep it.

3:26:13But, I don't know.

3:26:16I don't know what the boxes have been.

3:26:18I mean, that has You can keep it. You

3:26:19can put it in the recycling.

3:26:21>> Uh, it's not mine.

3:26:22>> Okay.

3:26:22>> them.

3:26:23>> I didn't realize this is my first

3:26:25>> Maybe it's because you're having 10

3:26:26dogs.

3:26:27>> [laughter]

3:26:28>> I got two.

3:26:29>> You have 10 dogs?

3:26:30>> Yeah, yeah, yeah. It's That's That's my

3:26:31equivalent of my

3:26:32>> I don't That's me. You don't have to.

3:26:34>> Like I said, it's like owning 10 dogs.

3:26:37I'll take care of all of them.

3:26:39>> Oh, so thank you. It's been fun.

3:26:41>> I got to go. I'll see you guys.

3:26:42>> Okay, see you later.

3:26:43>> I'll see you guys next week.

3:26:45>> It varies.

3:26:47>> [laughter]

3:26:47>> There's not a We don't have a limit on

3:26:49how many applications.

3:26:51You never know.

3:26:54>> Be