►
From YouTube: Design Review Committee
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
And
I
would
like
to
welcome
you
to
the
November
17
2022
design,
review
committee
meeting.
This
is
a
nine
person
committee
whose
primary
function
is
to
perform
design
review
for
projects
located
in
one
of
the
city's
three
designated
design
review
areas
downtown
the
riverfront
and
the
new
hotel
overlay
zoning
District.
This
is
a
mandatory
review,
voluntary
compliance
process
with
one
exception
and
that's
for
hotels
seeking
to
skip
Council
review
hotels.
Taking
advantage
of
this
incentive
must
receive
a
positive
recommendation
from
the
committee.
A
All
committee
members
and
staff
are
now
participating
in
person.
We
are
streaming
live
on
our
virtual
engagement
Hub,
which
is
accessible
through
the
virtual
engagement
Hub
link
on
the
front
page
of
the
city
website,
and
also
linked
on
the
committee
page.
You
can
also
watch
the
meeting
on
the
city's
YouTube
channel
either
live
or
recorded.
I
will
now
take
roll
call,
Vice,
chair,
Jeremy
Goldstein
here.
B
A
And
Kaya
here,
Christina
booer
here,
Kimberly
Hunter
is
not
here
today:
Steven
Lee
Johnson
here.
C
A
Moffett
is
not
here
today
and
Ricardo.
Seho
is
not
here.
Okay,
we
will
we
have
quorum.
We
have
six,
so
that's
good
for
voting
and
we
will
now
continue
with
the
agenda.
First,
we
will
move
on
to
the
administrative
approval
of
the
minutes
from
the
October
20
2022
meeting.
C
A
Right,
everyone
in
favor
raise
hands,
say:
I
was
stupid
for
oh
raise
your
hand
and
say.
A
Opposing
okay,
that
we
will
move
on
to
the
new
business
for
formal
designer
view.
We
have
one
item
on
the
agenda
and
that
is
102
North,
Lexington,
Avenue
and
I
will
leave
it
with
Alex.
D
Thank
you,
chair
Reigns
and
members
of
the
committee
I'm
going
to
try
to
pull
up
a
presentation
really
quickly.
So
give
me
just
a
second:
let's
see.
D
I
do
know
some
of
you,
but
obviously
have
not
met
many
of
you
in
person.
My
name
is
Alex
Cole
I
am
the
historic
preservation
planner
for
our
department,
and
so
I
am
kind
of
stepping
in
here
and
there
to
help
will
when
we're
looking
at
existing
contributing
structures
in
downtown
and
the
river
districts.
D
So
that's
why
I'm
here
to
talk
to
you
today,
so
this
proposal
is
for
a
modification
of
an
existing
early
20th
century
contributing
building
on
Lexington
Avenue
I
just
included
a
couple
of
photos
here
on
the
top
left
is
Google
street
view
from
2019,
where
you
can
see
the
the
storefront
on
the
left
side
of
the
building,
whereas
in
the
more
recent
2022
Google
Street
View.
It's
obviously
you
can't
see
much
because
of
the
tree,
but
it's
also
boarded
up
on
the
left
hand
side.
D
So,
as
you
can
see,
the
the
first
floor
has
been
modified
at
some
point
in
the
past,
but
there
are
existing
transom
windows
and
plate
glass
windows
with
the
original
wood
framing
and
then
on.
The
second
story
of
the
front
facade
are
the
original.
Six
over
six
wood
windows
are
still
present
in
the
building.
So
I
did
note.
The
only
concerns
I
noted
in
my
staff
report
were
really
related
to
those
particular
features,
since
the
the
standard
or
guidelines
recommend
retaining
original
storefront
would
or
window
features
whenever
that's
possible.
D
So
those
were
just
some
items
to
note
to
you
all
on
on
the
front
facade
the
Second
Story
windows
are
also
proposed
for
replacement,
will
and
I
met
with
the
architect
earlier
this
week
to
talk
through
our
concerns
and
just
offer
that
you
know,
perhaps
there
might
be
a
better
way
to
treat
the
first
floor
a
little
bit
more
sensitively.
If
there
was
I
know
they
need
egress
on
each
side,
because
it's
two
spaces
on
the
interior.
D
So
we
understand
that-
and
you
know
understand
that
it's
you
know
potentially
has
to
be
fully
modified
on
the
first
floor
to
accommodate
their
programming.
But
we
just
ask
that
they
consider
that
if
they
have
any
other
options
and
then
the
architect
also,
let
us
know
that
she
would
talk
with
our
clients
about
retaining
the
Second
Story
Windows,
if
that,
if
they
were
interested
in
doing
that
and
then
the
second
slide
just
shows
the
other
elevations
to
be
modified.
D
I'm
not
going
to
spend
much
time
on
this
because
they're
not
they're,
not
character,
defining
elevations
the
side
elevation
is
the
top
and
they're
just
proposing
to
replace
some
windows
there
and
and
fill
in
an
opening,
and
then
there
will
be
some
changes
to
the
rear
of
the
building
too,
and
they
are
adding
a
new
pair
pet
wall
that
will
wrap
the
back
and
sides
of
the
building
to
correct
drainage.
For
the
for
the
roofing
structure.
F
D
E
Applicant's
also
here,
if
you
have
questions
for
them,
or
you
want
to
invite
them
to
share
any
more
information
as
well.
A
C
I
believe
that
we
accept
and
approve
the
recommend
approval
of
the
projects
that's
being
presented
and
I
guess.
The
address
I
need
to
State
the
address,
but.
A
H
G
A
Item
B
on
the
new
business
has
been
continued
to
December
15th.
You.
A
A
G
E
Yeah,
it
might
be
I,
have
the
I
have
the
plans
up?
I,
don't
know
if
you
wanted
to
through
it
and
present
on
what
proposing
or
what
does
okay,
okay
sure.
E
E
So
I
have
a
number
of
items
available
for
us
to
review,
including
site
plans
and
elevations.
Essentially,
the
project
included
a
new
multi-family
building
and
the
preservation
of
the
historic
Mill
and
smokestack
building.
So
just
some
background
about
the
project
itself.
E
Just
going
to
give
you
some
a
little
more
context
here,.
E
So
in
the
documents
folder
most
of
these
things
should
be
submitted.
I,
don't
believe
the
previous
approval
plans
were
in
there,
but
I
can
I
can
provide
access
to
that,
perhaps
trying
to
think
the
best
way
of
doing
that
yeah.
This
is
the
this
is
the
previously
approved
plans
that
were
viewed
back
in
June
of
2021.
E
E
We
do
have
more
information
that
shows
the
comparison
of
that
approval
versus
what's
being
proposed
now
as
well,
so
we
will
have
a
little
bit
more
to
share
so
essentially,
the
new
building
is
a
five-story
tall
building,
Max
height
of
70
feet,
I'm,
trying
to
find
a
number
of
units
total
number
of
students
Peter
the
residential
units.
Was
it
a
hundred
and
335
residential
units?
E
E
E
Kind
of
get
a
sense
of
the
new
proposed
building
to
the
South
and
page
right
here
and
then
the
preserved
Mill
building
with
a
new
upper
story,
Edition
and
then
the
smokestack
behind
it
kind
of
a
further
further
view
of
that.
E
That
is
correct,
yep,
so
throughout
the
Project's
progression.
Basically,
let
me
go
to
this
other
one.
E
It
was
discovered
that
the
mill
building
is
not
structurally
sound
and
due
to
issues
with
the
foundation
and
mortar
and
other
technical
aspects
of
the
building
itself,
it
will
have
to
be
reconstructed
so
the
proposal
which
meets
the
project
condition
and
the
conditional
zoning
that
the
project
be
adaptively
reused,
so
they're
proposing
to
rebuild
it
using
the
same
materials
as
existing,
but
take
the
opportunity
to
modify
a
little
bit
of
the
openings
on
the
ground
level
and
also
have
a
taller
addition
at
at
the
top.
E
You
can
see
a
little
bit
better
on
on
this,
exhibit
what's
being
proposed.
E
As
far
as
that
goes
and,
like
I
said
some
of
the
the
openings
were
already
proposed
to
be
modified
through
the
through
the
initial
review.
E
So
the
fact
that
they're
kind
of
modifying
what
was
proposed
is
would
still
be
changing
what's
there
currently
in
the
historic
building.
But
we
want
to
take
the
opportunity
to
bring
it
back
to
you
all
to
you
know,
get
any
feedback
about
the
rebuilding
of
the
building
using
established
materials
and
also
this
kind
of
taller
element
above
the
building,
and
at
that
point,
going
forward.
E
But
this
is
a
good
first
stop
to
kind
of
get
your
feedback
about
what's
being
proposed.
As
far
as
the
rebuild
goes,
and
also
a
taller
upper
story
level
on
that
building,
so
I
have
some
renderings
those
elevation
drawings
as
well.
E
It's
hard
to
zoom
in
much
more
lose
lose
them
both,
but
so
you
can
kind
of
see
that
the
prior
proof,
one
kind
of
had
an
angular
slope
to
the
existing
building
and
had
a
kind
of
a
shorter
lower
addition
on
top
and
the
new
one
is
10
feet
taller.
So
it
was
definitely
a
larger
structure
on
top
and
has
a
flat
kind
of
border
between
the
old
and
and
the
new.
G
B
I
Afternoon,
everyone,
my
name,
is
Peter
albaris
I'm,
a
director
with
mha
works
and
head
of
the
Asheville
office
I'm,
also
the
project
architect
for
159
Riverside
Drive.
We
this
project
we've
been
working
on
since
the
latter
part
of
2021
and
when
we
were
engaged
in
the
project.
It
was
right
about
the
time
when
it
was
scheduled
to
go
to
playing
its
owning
commission
and
city
council.
One
of
the
and
there's
several
things
I'd
like
to
talk
about
here
that
we
hope
will
justify
approval
of
this
change.
I
One
one
is
that
the
D1
conditions
and
in
the
negotiations
with
city
council,
the
client
agreed
to
put
a
green
roof
on
the
mill
building
which
we
are
intending
to
do.
The
other
condition
was
that
we
would
not
take
down
the
Smoke
Stack
that
that
is
going
to
be
retained,
that
that
is
not
part
of
what
we're
asking
for
to
be
demolished
and
rebuilt.
I
I
It's
debatable
as
to
what
what
that
really
means
in
that
elevation,
but
as
we
got
into
the
detailing
of
the
project
and
looked
at
what
was
in
our
proposal
back
to
the
client,
they
clearly
wanted
three
levels,
one
at
the
street
level,
one
at
the
work
on
the
first
level,
which
is
where
the
bridge
is
that
provides
handicap,
accessibility
to
the
main
building
and
then
at
a
second
level
in
the
middle
building.
That
would
be
multi-function
space
to
be
determined
by
the
owner.
I
At
some
point,
it's
intended
to
be
an
assembly
occupancy
with
you
know
for
different
types
of
events,
so
that,
but
where
we
proceeded
with
in
the
design
of
the
project,
meets
the
intention
of
what
the
client
had
asked
us
to
design
and
what
city
council
had
approved.
I
We
didn't
want
to
have
an
elevator
Penthouse
popping
up
through
the
green
roof
and,
having
a
you,
know,
an
obstruction
that
would
be
viewed
from
the
neighbors
behind
down
onto
the
roof.
As
a
you
know,
we
feel
that
that
would
be
a
negative
and
what
you're
seeing
in
the
image
right
now.
That's
not
the
panel.
It's
not
just
the
access
hatch
to
get
up
to
the
roof.
To
maintain
it
now
give
me
a
minute:
I
have
paper
copies
of
the.
E
Process
we
could
recommend
that
it
comes
back
for
formal
review
depending
on
the
feedback
it
gets
today
and
once
we
look
at
it
more
closely
at
a
staff
level.
So
if
it
needed
a
Amendment
to
the
conditional
zoning,
it
would
come
back
formally.
E
I
What
we
would
prefer
you
know
we're
respectfully
requesting
that
we
provide
the
information
to
you
as
to
why
the
design
was
changed.
The
design
is
changing
for
a
variety
of
reasons.
The
existing
building
is
not
structurally
stable.
The
a
lot
of
the
foundations
have
been
eroded
and
from
a
life
safety
standpoint,
there's
absolutely
no
way
we
could
rebuild
the
building
in
place
safely,
and
that
has
been
documented
in
an
engineering
study
that
we
provided
Will's
Department
several
weeks
ago,
and
we
also
have
some
testing
that's
been
done.
I
We
have
the
engineering
report
again,
it's
in
the
flood
way
the
building
had
the
roof
had
to
be
raised
up
in
order
to
accommodate
space
for
the
elevator
equipment
that
has
to
be
above
the
cab.
On
the
top
floor,
we're
trying
to
eliminate
any
type
of
protrusion
on
the
roof
so
that
the
green
roof
has
is
a
very
clean
look
to
it
from
chicken
Hill
with
people.
Looking
back
down
on
the
roof,
aren't
going
to
see
a
penthouse
or
any
other
equipment
up
there.
I
We
feel
that
it's
it
substantially
meets
the
intention
of
adaptive
reuse
as
that's
what
we're
doing
we're
reusing
the
masonry
material.
We
I've
done
a
lot
of
research
on
brick
and
like
to
share
this
with
you.
If
you
would
that
in
the
early
part
of
the
20th
century,
when
brick
were
manufactured,
it
was
it's
not
controlled
like
it
is
now.
I
Bricks
were
basically
raw
shapes
from
clay
and
they
were
put
in
a
kiln
and
the
source
of
the
heat
was
at
one
side
of
the
pile
of
or
the
stack
of
bricks.
The
bricks
closest
to
the
fire
were
too
burned
to
be
used,
so
they
were
cast
aside.
The
second
row
of
bricks
were
considered
the
veneer
brick
and
the
other
rows
of
bricks
behind
it
were
fired
and
they
became
over
a
pink
color
and
they
they're
referred
to
as
salmon
brick.
So
in
this
building,
we
have
exterior
brick
on
the
outside.
I
That
is
typical
of
that
era,
and
then
at
least
three
layers
like
two
to
three
layers
of
salmon,
brick
on
the
inside,
that
was
the
interior
finish
of
the
building.
What
we're
planning
on
doing
and
what
I'm
specifying
is
that
the
brick
be
carefully
dismantled
and
sorted
and
cleaned
by
type,
so
the
exterior
brick
will
be
a
series
of
pallets
that
will
be
reused
for
the
exterior
the
Reconstruction.
The
salmon
brick
will
be
stacked,
sorted
stacked
and
cleaned
and
the
use
for
the
interior
part
of
the
construction
and
the
wall
itself.
I
The
interior
structure,
part
of
the
wall
will
be
eight
inch
concrete
masonry,
which
will
not
be
seen
so
there'll,
be
a
brick
on
the
outside.
Concrete
may
seem
to
provide
this
structure
to
support
the
window
system
above
and
then
the
existing
interior,
brick
or
salmon
brick
would
be
the
interior
surface
of
the
building.
I
The
footprint
of
the
new
building
is
going
to
be
within
inches
of
the
exact
footprint
of
the
old
building,
the
connection
between
the
old
building
and
the
smokestack,
which
was
part
of
the
the
flu
assembly,
we're
we're
hoping
that
we
can
salvage
that
and
not
take
it
that
we're
not
going
to
be
doing
anything
to
the
chimney
other
than
repointing
the
rig,
the
geometry.
If
you
look
at
the
original
draw
where
it's
sloped,
that
is
what
the
original
roof
profile
was.
I
What
we
feel
is
during
the
demolition
and
removal
and
soaring
of
the
Brick,
we're
probably
going
to
lose
some
of
the
exterior
of
your
near
brick.
They
won't
be
usable.
So
what
we're
proposing
as
the
angle
B
shifted
down,
so
that
it's
flat
and
with
the
assumption
that
there'll
be
some
brick
that
we
will
not
be
able
to
you
know
to
use.
I
We
don't
feel
that's
a
substantial
change
in
the
overall
design
of
the
project
that
it's
in
keeping
with
what
the
original
intent
was,
so
that
that's
an
overview
of
where
we
and
how
we've
come
to
this
proposal
and
why
we
feel
it's
justifies
because
it
substantially
meets
the
intent
of
the
original
design
and
the
reason
we're
doing
it.
It's
not
because
it's
just
because
it's
an
unstable
building
and
for
everyone
to
say
general
public,
all
of
us
that
we
feel
that
it's
prudent
to
take
it
down
and
rebuild
it.
I
We
would
like
and
respectfully
requesting
that
this
design,
Review
Committee,
approved
this
today,
so
that
we
can
complete
our
construction,
drawings
and
move
forward.
If
there's
anything,
that's
an
issue
that
requires
further
study,
I'd
like
to
be
able
to
discuss
that
today
and,
if
required,
come
up
with
a
solution,
while
we're
here.
I
Not
using
it,
assuming
that
all
we're
using
all
the
old
brick
if
we
use
any
new
brick,
it
will
be
unseen.
Okay,
that's
the
intention
Robin.
It
may
be.
We
start
taking
this
apart.
If
the
whole
thing
is
falls
apart,
like
the
like
Michelle's
building
on
right,
you
know
they
just
is
a
big
pile
of
powder,
but
I'm
working
on
specifications
right
now
and
I
have.
I
F
Are
that
it
looks.
G
F
I
I
Yeah,
the
difference
is
that,
as
we
work
through,
the
articulation
of
the
overall
design
concept
of
the
building
was
to
have
it
look
like
an
industrial,
an
old
industrial
building.
That's
why
they're
more
mullions
in
the
new
design
than
in
the
original
one,
but
it's
not
going
to
be
reflective,
glass
or
mirror
glass
or
anything
like
that.
It'll
be
a
an
insulin.
You
know
two
layer,
insulating
glass.
J
B
I
B
Great
building
and
I
have
zero
problem
with
you
know
the
height
differential.
B
For
me,
you
know,
as
the
non-designer
I'm
more
concerned,
with
looking
at
if
these
conditions
or
the
conditions
that
were
ultimately
passed,
number
17
says
a
building
design,
site
design
orientation
must
substantially
comply
with
the
approved
site
plan
and
elevation,
which
I
think
you
meet.
You
can
meet
with
staff
modification.
The.
C
B
Thing
that
concerns
me
that
specifically
says
adaptive
reuse
of
the
remaining
historic
cotton
mill
building
and
smoke
stack
and
I
just
again,
I
think
what
you're
doing
is
fine,
but
it's
not
being
definitely
reused,
it's
being
taken
down
and
rebuilt,
and
if
staff's
okay,
with
setting
that
precedent
going
forward
and
allowing
other
people
to
do
the
same
thing
in
future.
Conditional
zones,
then
so
be
it
but
be
be
prepared
to
support
that
in
the
future.
Is
all
I
would
think
and.
B
Modification
I've
dealt
with
a
number
of
projects
where
the
code
specifically
states
that
they
have
the
right
to
modify
on
the
staff
level
and
then
I'm
told
on
different
projects
that
the
city
attorney's
telling
us
we're
not
allowed
to
use
that
power.
So
if
you're
going
to
use
it
be
prepared
to
use
it
for
everybody,
not
just.
E
Sure
I
absolutely
agree
regarding
the
Adaptive,
reuse,
I
think
one
thing
we've
maybe
learned
from
this
is
that
we
need
to
be
more
explicit
in
in
stating
that
the
exact
type
of
historic
preservation
for
projects
like
this,
so
you
know,
I,
think
this
is
kind
of
vague
which
helps
the
applicant
to
pursue
what
they're
looking
to
modify,
but
in
the
future.
If,
if
staff
and
the
public
and
the
applicant,
you
know
really
felt
strongly
about
the
preservation
of
a
building,
you
would
probably
be
more
clear
in
that
language
so
going
forward.
E
We
can
adjust
our
language
on
future
projects
like
this
to
be
more
clear
about
what
we're
suggesting-
and
in
this
case
you
know,
staff
felt
that
the
language
was
kind
of
broad
enough
to
allow
the
rebuilding
of
the
of
the
building
with
established
materials.
In
this
case.
E
B
I
Maybe
a
month
ago,
five
weeks
ago,
we
had
assumed
from
prior
engineering
studies
that
we
could
keep
the
original
building
we're
going
to
build
a
brand
new
steel
structure
within
it,
embrace
the
existing
structure
back
to
the
steel
when
we
got
into
actually
having
an
engineering
a
test
report
done
of
the
existing
Foundation,
which,
unfortunately,
due
to
the
way
testing
labs,
are
running
now
they're
so
far
behind
in
all
this
type
of
testing,
that
was
the
quick
scribble
to
get
that
information.
Is
that
the
day
we've
received
that
information?
That's
we
said.
I
Look
we
need
to
revisit
this
because
there's
no
way
that,
from
a
as
designers,
from
a
liability
standpoint
in
our
you
know
the
due
diligence
that
we're
required
to
do
to
protect
health
safety
and
Welfare
of
the
public
that
we
could
rebuild
it
without
in
its
existing
condition.
So
I
think
that
I
think
that
from
well
I
know
from
our
standpoint,
our
firm
standpoint
is
that
we
we
can't
go
in
and
rebuild
this
building
as
it
is
right
now.
I
It's
not
going
to
be
safe
for
anyone
not
only
to
be
in
it
when
it's
finished,
but
to
work
on
it
when
it's
under
construction,
so
I
think
Jeremy
to
your
point
about
a
future
situation
where
this
may
come
up.
It
I
think
it'll
need
to
be
taken
on
a
case-by-case
basis,
because
all
all
existing
Rehabilitation
projects,
they're
all
different.
C
I
think
that
kind
of
the
Lessons
Learned
aspect
of
this
is
is
interesting
and
important,
and
going
forward.
I
know
that
everybody's
going
to
be
aware
of
the
challenges
with
with
trying
to
do
adaptive,
reuse,
I
think
that
this,
the
the
new
design
here,
definitely
to
me
eks
the
spirit
I,
think
of
what
the
city's
intent
was,
because
it
basically
is
the
same
footprint
and
it's
reusing.
The
brick
material
I
think
that
if
this
were,
you
know
in
a
historic
district
and
there
were
other
buildings
that
were
a
part
of
the
district.
C
You
know
we've
all
like
been
to
Charleston
and
we've
seen
these
houses
that
basically
were
falling
in
that
were
being
supported
and
held
up
an
amazing
expense
in
order
to
maintain
the
facade
I
think
if
we
were
in
something
like
that
again,
we'd
be
in
a
different
situation,
and
but
Peter,
like
you
said,
I
mean
I,
think
every
project
every
site
is
different.
I
actually
think
the
new
design
is
going
to
be
more
exciting
when
you're
on
the
greenway
down
there.
Looking
at
it
to
me,
it
looks
better
than
what
was
originally
intended.
C
So
I
think
it's
I'm
going
to
recommend
approval.
F
A
F
G
C
H
Don't
have
any
thoughts,
I,
just
I'm,
not
working
on
this
project,
but
I
think
that
you've
talked
to
some
people
in
my
office.
So
if
this
is
informal
review,
I
just
don't
know
if,
if
we're
voting
or
what
I
don't.
H
Okay,
I
thought
yeah,
there's.
E
No
there's
gonna
be
no
vote
on
this
item
today.
If
there
is
the
appearance
of
a
conflict,
I
would
probably
just
recuse
yourself
or
just
not
provide
any
feedback
in
the
informal,
even
in
the
informal
setting
just
to
be
on
the
safe
side.
I
That
was
a
as
I
understand
it
and
again
our
firm
wasn't
involved
in
the
in
the
entitlement
portion
of
the
project.
I
think
that
was
something
that
the
client
offered
to
council
as
part
of
the
conditional
zone,
so
that
that's
where
you
know
we're
happily
committed
to
doing
that.
I
mean
we.
We
like
green
roofs,
yeah.
B
J
B
E
Yeah,
you
know
I
think
like
I
said
going
forward,
will
be
more
clear
and
intentional
that
language
and
for
now
it's
broad
enough
to
be
interpreted
that
it
could
be
rebuilt
on
site
and
I.
Guess
the
reality
being
that,
regardless
of
what
would
happen
going
forward,
that
building
is
not
going
to
be
kept
in
its
current
situation.
In
any
case,
so
I
think
trying
to
make
the
best
of
it
is
logical.
E
I
I
E
I'll
need
to
check
with
our
director
since
he's
the
one
that
authors
minor
modifications
to
the
conditional
zoning.
Okay.
I
E
This
conversation
has
been
helpful
in
that
no
additional
hurdles
have
been
identified.
That
would
be
an
issue
as
far
as
we
can
tell
so
we'll
we'll
huddle
up
and
get
back
to
you
to
be
clear
on
that
for
sure.
Okay,
but
yeah
I
think
this
discussion
has
been
helpful
to
understand
and
get
feedback
from
the
committee
that
they're
generally
okay
with
the
new
design,
so
that
that'll
weigh
into
our
thinking
as
well.
E
E
Waiting
until
this
meeting
and
then
airing
on
their
feedback
and
then
getting
back
on
to
you
about
how
to
proceed
so.
I
E
Early
next
week,
we
all
get
together
and
and
figure
out
a
great
path
before
it
is
so.
Okay.
E
That
should
be
possible.
Todd
is
out
today
and
tomorrow.
So
I
can
get
with
him
first
thing
next
week
and
get
back
to
you
yeah
before
before
Thanksgiving
I
think
it's
reasonable.
Okay.
E
So,
let's
give
a
brief
precursor
on
this
project.
E
E
So
essentially,
one
of
the
main
conditions
was
regarding
some
of
the
design
elements
that
were
shown
on
an
earlier
version
of
a
color
rendering
that
was
submitted
that
the
committee
preferred
to
what
was
on
the
official
submission
that
included
items
such
as
the
kind
of
use
of
the
of
the
red
exterior
features
along
on
the
west
elevation
of
the
building.
E
The
arched
Arch
features
under
the
Breezeway
at
the
corner
of
the
courtyard
here
on
the
mullion
configuration
of
some
of
the
windows
and
and
and
the
applicant
was
amenable
to
incorporating
those
elements,
and
then
one
of
the
conditions
was
that
the
project
returned
to
you
all.
E
It's
like
an
informal
courtesy
review
after
it
had
a
chance
to
go
to
Planning
and
Zoning
commission,
which
it
did
the
November
2nd
meeting
where
it
was
approved,
with
just
one
condition,
which
relates
to
one
of
the
commercial
spaces
being
offered
at
a
below
market
rate,
which
is
now
part
of
the
project
conditions
and
we'll
go
to
city
council
at
the
December
15th
meeting.
E
This
is
an
opportunity
for
the
applicant
to
check
back
in
with
you
all,
make
sure
the
spirit
of
that
approval
and
condition
is
Incorporated
in
the
new
design
and
then
and
then
your
feedback
can
be
presented
to
city
council
at
the
at
the
December
15th
meeting.
So
that's
kind
of
nuts
and
bolts
to
that
I
invite
the
applicant
to
speak
at
all
or
I
have
exhibits
up
the
renderings,
the
site
plans
and
whatnot,
so
rendering.
E
So
this
is
the
prior
rendering
the
October
meeting
and
sorry
you
can
see
well
before
I
know
before
and
after
and
then-
and
this
is
kind
of
like
the
inspiration
image
for
lack
of
a
better
word.
That
was
that
was
submitted,
and
the
committee
picked
up
a
lot
of
those
kinds
of
features.
If.
E
Right
and
the
elevation
drawings
have
been
updated
to
reflect
the
use
of
those
materials,
the
archway
and
this
Breezeway
section
of
the
building
on
the
courtyard
side
and
then
also
the
the
window
mullions
too
so
they've
they
had
yeah,
Incorporated
and
and
staff
felt
that
those
those
design
changes
have
been
Incorporated
sufficiently
to
to
meet
the
committee's
condition
of
approval
and
therefore
moved
it
forward
to
planning
zoning
commission
or
those
discussions
were
relayed
and
and
ultimately
approved.
E
J
K
Hey
everybody,
I'm
Lisa,
with
housing,
Studios
good
to
see
you
in
person
and
thank
you
for
giving
us
an
opportunity
to
come
back
to
you
and
and
perfect
this
project
a
little
bit
for
you
Okay.
So
what
we
understood
and
what
the
response
to
the
original,
what
we
brought
to
you,
the
last
meeting,
it's
a
little
harder
lined
and
we
didn't
have
enough
of
that
warmth
from
the
weathering
Steel
in
our
concept
or
in
our
in
our
design
as
it's
developed.
So
what
we've
done
is
we've
come
back
and
we've
tied.
K
You
can
see
this
cursor
sort
of
falling,
so
we
had.
We
maintained
the
stair
element
which
that
acts
as
a
piece
that
runs
the
entire
elevation
of
the
building
and
we
brought
in
more
of
the
weathering
steel
and
we
framed
the
corners
of
the
building,
both
the
West
and
East
corners
of
that
building.
So
as
you're
coming
either
direction
on
Lyman.
As
it
turns
alignment
alignment,
you
can
see
that
weathering
steel,
that
sort
of
warm
texture
on
this
corner
and
on
that
corner.
But
you
don't
see
it
as
well
in
this
rendering.
K
We
also
brought
this
vertical
element
back
in
at
this
location,
which
ties
this
use
of
the
brick
from
the
site
that
we're
bringing
that
Arch
language
back
into
that
elevation
of
what
is
a
Breezeway,
but
also
serves
as
a
an
Armature
or
support
element
for
a
deck
where
people
are
able
to
mingle
as
part
of
the
co-working
function
of
this
overall
design.
It
gives
people
who
are
wanting
to
work
remotely
or
have
some
place
to
go
out
and
have
a
view
of
the
landscape
and
the
River
itself.
K
So
we
brought
that
weathering
steel
element
back
from
the
original
concept
into
that
too.
To
tie
those
pieces
together
so
really
the
way
that
we're
using
the
weathering
steel
is
to
sort
of
tie
these
elements
and
the
way
the
building,
undulates
and
the
function
of
the
building
and
turning
Corners
with
it.
So
it's
a
little
bit
more
playful
than
what
we
had
originally
had
in
the
design.
I
think
is
pretty
successful.
K
One
thing
we
also
did
too
and
I:
don't
know
if
you
can
see
it
exactly,
but
we
did
increase
the
mullion
spacing
along
these
facades
along
the
storefront
and
window
elements
and
fenestration
on
the
first
two
levels
so
that
it
gives
more
of
that
Industrial
Field,
which
we're
hearing
is.
K
Design
Elements,
and
that
is
one
of
the
things
that
we
wanted
to
replicate
here.
So
we're
tying
back
to
the
historic
elements
of
the
site.
B
K
Needed
to
change,
because
in
one
of
our
previous
review
sessions
there
was
an
additional
access
point
to
the
garage,
and
that
was
where,
where
I
had
a
stair,
which
was
really
great
and
I,
could
create
that
language
the
stair
had
to
rotate
around
the
building.
So
it's
one
of
those
things
you
have
to
sort
of
wrestle
with
when
designing
these
things.
K
What's
a
convenient
access
point
for
move-in
and
and
residents,
and
also
for
trash
pickup,
so
I
thought:
if
I
can't
have
that
stair
element
anymore,
then
I'll
frame
these
corners
and
really
celebrate
those
balconies
and
give
that
relationship
the
material
and
that
to
that
material
that
weathering
steel
or
that
texture.
That
color
is
continued
all
the
way
around
the
building
in
a
ribbon,
which
is
essentially
almost
our
flood
elevation
height.
F
K
E
Image,
yes,
would
you
want
to
scroll
down
yeah.
E
E
F
K
The
windows
have
been
there:
okay,
we
wanted
to
go
ahead
and
add
that
mural,
so
we
would
really
see
the
intent
of
what
we're
trying
to
accomplish
here
and
if
the
mural
doesn't
happen.
It's
still
interesting
because
we
replicate
fenestration
because
at
that
portion
of
the
building,
there's
bathrooms
and
closets.
C
I
think
I
think
they
were
pretty
much
addressed
last
time.
I
know
that
you
know
I've
got
a
lot
of
feedback
from
other
groups
as
well,
but.
G
A
C
Why
you
have
those
like
the
column,
kind
of
the.
K
Articulation
at
the
top
yeah
we
wanted
to
engage
that
space
and
bring
the
brick
because
it's
a
double-sided
brick
and
we're
reusing
the
brick
from
the
old
colonized
building.
So
you
can
engage
that
when
you're
under
that
platform
right
here,
you
can
engage
under,
but
you
can
also
see
it
up
above,
and
so
we
have
glass
railing.
Instead
of
just
having
the
sort
of
start
glass,
rail,
we
wanted
to
break
that
form
and
carry
it
up.
K
In
our
original
scheme,
we
were
just
going
to
maintain
or
hold
that
facade,
and
we
wanted
to
just
keep
that
same
language.
We
were
going
to
at
one
point:
we
had
a
whole
steel
structure
and
Armature
that
was
just
going
to
maintain
that
old,
original
facade
and
I
think
that
that's
sort
of
how
we
envision
it,
it's
sort
of
broken
out,
pushed
out
from
the
building.
It's
its
own
thing
and
I
feel
like.
If
we
turn
the
corner
and
engage
it
I
feel
like
that
might
be
a
little
bit
tenuous.
G
K
H
Else
have
anything
I
have
a
comment,
but
it's
not
about
the
architecture.
Okay.
So,
but
just
thank
you
for
that.
You're.
K
I
H
So
I
think
this
is
a
really
good
example
and
just
for
consistency
we
can
bring
some
things
up.
You
did
a
great
job
of
hearing
our
feedback
and
going
exploring
possibilities
of
materials
and
cost
I'm
sure
sure
and
I
just
want
to
see
that
same
design,
process
and
Sensibility
applied
to
the
site,
storm
water-
and
this
is
the
perfect
in
capitalization
letters-
opportunity,
because
this
is
new
development,
we're
maximizing
the
the
building
footprint
on
this
property,
which
I'm
excited
about
all
the
housing
it's
provided.
H
We
should
be
maximizing
The,
Green,
Storm,
water
infrastructure.
We
haven't
really
talked
about
that
too
much
and
it's
it's
not
a
requirement.
You're
meeting
your
requirements,
but
I
just
want
to
encourage
you
to
continue
to
use
that
front
garden
as
storm
water,
because
between
the
that
that
part
of
the
property
and
the
roof
you
can
satisfy
all
of
your
storm
water
requirements
and
probably
at
a
much
affordable
cost,
as
opposed
to
because
you
could
potentially
avoid
your
underground
storm
water
system
and
that's
a
win
for
the
project.
H
The
budget,
our
community,
the
river
that
this
building
sits
on
the
bank
sub
and
so
I.
Don't
this
project
is
one
project,
but
I
think
it's
it's
a
missed
opportunity
in
that
we
could
have
explored
other
possibilities
to
manage
our
storm
water
in
in
meeting
the
goals
that
we
have
as
a
city
in
terms
of
our
water
quality
and
what
we,
how
we
want
to
design
and
build
things,
and
this
aside
from
from
a
site
perspective
and
a
storm
water
perspective.
H
Heard
that
question
are
not
a
comment
in
the
last
meeting
about
it
being
a
TPO
roof
on
wood
structure.
Some
of
the
oldest
green
roofs
in
the
Southeast
are
built
like
that
that
we
built
them
all
the
time.
So
that's
not
a
and
I
know
that
this
project
is
far
long,
but
I
just
can't
help
myself
and
again
it's
consistency
so.
B
H
And
I
and
I
think
that
that
is
at
the
Spirit
of
my
comment
is
that
we've
explored
all
these
things
wonderfully
through
the
architecture
we
need
to
be
doing
the
same
thing
at
grade
and
that
every
project,
it's
not
appropriate,
we
just
should
not
be
putting
greeners
on
every
single
project.
This
is
a
perfect
example
of
one
because
it
could
serve
as
infrastructure.
It's
new
construction.
We
don't
have
a
lot
of
space,
agree
to
measure
storm
water
outside
of
great
infrastructure.
So
just
it's
a
it's
a
good
opportunity.
H
Again,
I
think
it's
just
my
point
is
the
investigation
and
the
exploration
rather
than
just
doing
things,
how
we've
always
done
them,
because
if
we
did
that
through
the
architecture,
the
project
wouldn't
be,
as
it
is
right
now
which
we're
all
I
think
more
excited
about.
So
that's.
That's
really,
generally.
My
point.
Thank.
A
You
oh
you're,
welcome,
I
do
want
to
say
we
received
one
public
comment
and
it
mostly
was
concerned
with
the
number
of
parking
spaces
provided
the
commenter
felt
there
were
too
many
spaces
for
this
particular
area.
H
There's
another
comment,
though,
about
the
west
side
of
the
building
facade
and
that
it
was
devoid
of
any
activity
but
I
think
because
of
the
flooding
it
has.
It
has
to
be
for
parking,
but
just
wondering
I
think
there's
a
pretty
wide
planting
strip
there,
and
so
maybe
there's
an
opportunity,
as
that
gets
further,
designed
that
that
long
strip
could
be.
L
You're
right
orange
side
with
civil
Design
Concepts
I'll
touch
on
a
couple
things
to
your
to
your
point
and
your
discussion
earlier
I
would
encourage
us
as
a
community
to
just
have
more
and
more
education
about
green
roofs
from
a
civil
standpoint.
I
can
I
can
certainly
do
some
things,
but
I
can't
do
green
roots
on
top
of
buildings.
L
You
know
I
think
we
could
all
learn
a
lot
from
it
specifically
down
to
that
Western
Edge.
There
is
a
little
bit
of
a
gap
there,
and
that
is
where
we're
tying
the
the
courtyard
public
private
space
and
the
drainage
from
that.
That
will
happen,
but
we're
also
tying
the
storm
water,
that's
happening
with
the
with
the
roof
area.
We
certainly
want
to
look
at
that.
It
will
be
a
depressed
area.
I
think
it
will
serve
some
some
function
of
some
storm
water
control,
because
there
is
some
leftover
area.
L
There
are
some
utilities
through
there
as
well
I,
don't
know
how
formalized
it
will
be
as
far
as
like
being
a
true
rain,
Garden
but
I
think
it'll
function.
A
lot
like
that
there
is
an
existing
pipe
under
old
lineman
that
runs
north
south
with
River.
There
today
I
think
it's
a
24
24
inch
and
then
there's
a
30
inch
actually
under
the
railroad.
So
it's
it's
one
of
those
weird
situations
where
you
have
a
bigger,
bigger
size,
pipe
Upstream
than
you
do
Downstream,
but
yeah.
L
H
That
planting
strip
on
the
west
side
that
the
person
emailed
is
there,
it
looks
like
there's
some
space
for
like
under
plantings,
I'm
just
thinking
of
along
the
greenway,
all
those
great
plantings,
and
that
maybe
there's
a
way
to
incorporate
some
of
that
plant
material
into
that
planting.
Bed.
It's
I,
don't
know
they
seem
to
be
concerned
about
it,
just
being
a
major
pedestrian
you're.
H
Building
Edge:
that's
what
they
said:
the
west
side
of
the
building
facing
the
greenway
and
River,
just
wanting
it
to
be
a
little
bit
more
interesting,
but
so
just
there
might
be
an
opportunity.
L
K
That
point
did
come
up.
You
know
we
did
discuss
that
strip
along
the
west
elevation
and
potentially,
along
with
plantings
and
other
opportunities
along
that
run
along
the
street.
There
could
be
seating
bench,
seating,
a
place
for
someone
to
just
sort
of
take
a
break
and
engage
or
sit,
and
that
was
one
of
the
things
we
did
discussed.
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
that
was
heard,
because
we
are
incorporating
that
okay.
A
So
that's
the
next
thing
on
the
agenda
is
future
discussion
topics.
C
I
think
that
maybe
we
think
about
it
for
a
moment
about
what
would
be
a
great
way
to
begin
just.
B
G
C
I
think,
in
addition
to
Green
we've,
just
stormwater
made
an
Innovative
storm
water
management
as
a
whole,
because,
like
the
like,
this
whale,
we
were
just
talking
about
on
the
West
Side.
C
You
know
it
takes
a
lot
to
make
those
things
really
function
properly.
It's
not
just
back
so
back
filled
with
soil
that
put
plants
in
I
mean
it's
like
a
cake
mixture
and
it's
going
to
drain
and
all
this
kind
of
stuff,
but
I
think
it's
a
great
idea.
H
I
think
what
would
be
really
great
the
stormwater
task
force
could
be
I,
believe
that
he's
on
that
task
force
and
maybe
working
with
sorry
I've,
been
asked
you
working
with
them.
But
we've
talked
a
little
bit
about
the
here.
Who
has
done
some
of
these
studies
to
find
out?
How
do
we
apply
it
to
the
requirements
now,
because
it
doesn't
make
sense
for
people
to
do
it
unless
it's
going
to
get
counted
for
storm.
H
Unless
they
have,
they
just
want
to
do
it
because
they
want
to
do
it.
But
if
there
was
a
simplified
way
that
we
could
look
at
what's
required
and
and
what
are
the
thresholds
and
how
green
roofs
and
green
storm
water
infrastructure
like
biosoils
and
Marine
Gardens
can
meet
those
requirements,
because
I
think
that
if
there
was
more
of
an
understanding
of
how
to
use
those
applications
to
fulfill
the
requirements-
and
they
would
be
used
a
lot
more.
H
J
H
F
B
C
And
kind
of
examining
in
layman's
terms
some
of
the
data
that's
coming
out
like
what
difference?
Does
it
make?
What
are
the
long-term
savings?
What
are
the
maintenance
requirements?
What
are
the
what's
the
maintenance
requirements
for
storm
Tech
I
mean
those
things
are
expensive
to
maintain.
H
Unfortunately,
we
have
a
lot
of
great
samples
from
other
municipalities
of
Philadelphia
is
a
great
example,
the
reason
they're
highly
incentivizing
green
storm
water
infrastructure.
All
different
types
of
it
is
because
the
city
is
saving
an
enormous
amount
of
money
by
prolonging
their
infrastructure,
not
having
to
add
to
it
and
also
water
quality,
and
so
all
these
places
are
doing
it
not
because
they
want
to
do
it.
It's
because
there's
real
economic
value
to
it
and
environmental
value
too.
C
Another
state
of
Virginia
is
really
strict
about
what
the
water
quality
as
well
and
I.
Think
there's,
probably
more
green
grips
going
in
Virginia
than
anywhere.
Aren't
there
a
lot
of
colleges,
and
it's
not
a
question
of
if
but
it's
like,
you
have
to
and
I
think
it
has
to
do
with
the
Limestone
issue.