►
From YouTube: Historic Resources Commission
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).
B
B
County
ordinance,
we
are
authorized
to
hear
requests
for
certificates
of
appropriateness
for
alterations,
demolitions,
new
construction
and
other
work
within
historic
districts
or
for
the
alteration
and
demolition
of
historic
landmarks
and
other
duties,
including
preliminary
review
of
subdivisions
as
specified
in
the
ordinances
for
the
hrc.
All
commissioners
and
staff
are
participating
virtually.
B
We
are
streaming
live
on
the
city's
virtual
engagement
hub,
which
is
accessible
through
the
virtual
engagement
hub
link
on
the
front
page
of
the
city's
website,
as
well
as
through
the
link
on
the
hrc
web
page.
We
also
have
an
option
for
the
public
com
for
the
public
to
listen,
live
by
phone
by
dialing,
eight,
five,
five,
nine,
two
five
2801
and
entering
code
9384
welcome
to
all
of
you
that
are
joining
us
today.
B
I
will
now
ask
commission
members
who
are
participating
to
introduce
themselves.
Please
make
sure
to
mute
your
microphone
if
you're,
not
speaking,
and
when
you
have
a
question
or
would
like
to
speak
on
the
unmute.
Your
microphone.
Please
remember
to
mute
yourself
when
you
are
done
speaking
commission
members.
As
I
call
your
name,
please
say
a
quick
hello.
D
B
H
D
B
To
help
our
audience
follow
along,
I
will
state
each
section
of
the
agenda
aloud
and
will
ask
for
a
vocal
roll
call
vote
for
each
vote.
The
first
item
on
our
agenda
is
to
consider
the
minutes
from
our
december
meeting
of
the
hrc
and
to
adopt
those
minutes.
The
minutes
include
findings
of
fact
and
conclusions
of
law
for
certificates
of
approach
appropriateness.
B
Second,
thank
you,
commissioner
lazarus,
and
I
will
we
will
vote
by
roll
call.
Vice
chair,
eakins,.
D
I
B
We
will
now
begin
the
evidentiary
hearings
for
the
items
listed
on
the
agenda
as
a
quasi
judicial
proceeding.
The
hrc
is
not
setting
policy,
nor
are
we
soliciting
public
opinion
on
the
desirability
of
an
application.
The
hrc
hears
and
considers
evidence
presented
and
applies
the
standard
set
forth
in
the
guidelines
and
standards
of
the
specific
historic
district
for
that
application.
B
The
hrc
must
make
its
decision
upon
competent,
material
and
substantial
evidence
to
determine
the
facts
of
the
hearing.
The
hrc
will
use
judgment
and
discretion
to
apply
the
standards
contained
in
the
relevant
guidelines
to
the
facts.
The
commissioners
in
voting
on
an
item
will
not
have
a
fixed
opinion.
Not
susceptible
to
change
will
not
have
a
conflict
of
interest
will
not
have
engaged
in
ex-parte
communication
regarding
the
application
following
our
rules.
B
At
this
time
I
will
administer
the
oath
for
all
the
individuals
who
intend
to
provide
witness
testimony
we're
going
to
start
with
122
west
chestnut
street,
recognizing
that
other
applications.
The
applicants
may
not
have
joined
the
meeting
yet
and
we
will
follow
up
at
that
time
of
those
applicants
as
well
for
their
swearing-in.
B
So
it's
my
understanding,
alex
and
shannon,
along
with
kenny
smith,
22
west
chestnut.
J
J
Okay,
sorry
about
that,
did
you
go
already
or
do
you
need
me
to
list
who's
here
to
be
sworn
in
at
the
first
round,
yeah.
J
Here
also
for
81
cortland,
okay.
B
All
right,
I
will
read
the
oath
and
you
can
raise
your
right
hand.
I
will
acknowledge
each
of
you
by
name
for
you
to
affirm
one
at
a
time.
B
L
K
B
Okay,
we
will
now
move
to
our
first
item,
alex
I'm
going
to
turn
the
presentation
over
to
you
for
122
west
chestnuts,
which
is
old,
business
and
follow-up
up
from
from
a
previous
month.
J
J
This
item-
first,
as
some
of
you
probably
recall,
came
before
the
commission
in
october
last
year
and
has
since
been
continued
to
give
the
applicant
some
more
time
to
work
on
the
plan.
So
I
have
included
the
revised
plans
in
your
packet
and
I'm
just
going
to
go
through
a
short
presentation
and
kind
of
give
an
overview
of
just
a
recap.
I
know
we
have
some
new
some
commissioners
that
have
since
been
appointed
in
between
october
and
now
so
so.
This
is
the
primary
structure
at
122
west
chestnut
street.
J
J
So,
as
you
might
remember,
the
there's
an
alley
that
runs
along
the
side
of
the
property
and
the
accessory
structure
is
proposed
on
the
rear
of
the
lot.
There
was
at
one
point
in
time
an
accessory
structure
back
here.
That
was
a
one-story
accessory
structure
that
is
sent
has
since
been
demolished
or
destroyed.
Somehow
I'm
not
sure
when
that
structure
went
away,
but
it
is
no
longer
standing,
there's
just
like
a
little
a
little
modest
utility
shed
there
now.
So
what
they're
proposing
is
a
one
and
a
half
story.
J
968
square
feet,
so
one
thing
I
want
to
just
clarify
right
off
the
bat
is
that
there
may
be
helpful
if
I
go
to
the
elevation
drawings.
There
was
some
discussion
last
the
last
time.
J
This
was
reviewed
by
the
commission
about
how
we
look
at
square
footage
for
accessory
structures,
because
the
guideline
that
pertains
or
one
of
the
guidelines
that
pertains
to
accessory
structures,
notes
that
that
they
can't
be
larger
than
30
percent
of
the
scale
of
the
overall
of
the
scale
of
the
primary
structure,
which
is
actually
intended
to
be
somewhat
vague,
to
be
helpful
to
property
owners
so
that
they
have
a
little
bit
more
wiggle
room.
It's
not
an
exact
calculation.
J
We
are
still
looking
at
the
overall
form,
so
the
north
elevation
that
you
see
with
the
exposed
basement
level
or
first
floor
is
that
would
be
facing
cumberland
or
chestnut
street.
So
you
know
it
really
is
from
a
foreign
perspective,
more
or
less
similar
to
what
we
saw
before
the
porch
has
been
modified
since
to
not
wrap
around
the
side
of
the
structure
based
on
some
of
the
feedback
from
the
commission
last
time.
J
However,
I
do
think
that
it's
still
a
little
bit
problematic
in
that
what
the
feedback
was
since
the
porch
on
the
primary
structure,
as
you
can
see,
is
within
the
footprint
of
the
building
that
the
suggestion
was
that
it
would
be.
You
know
the
design
would
be
more
successful
if
the
porch
were
within
this.
This
footprint
as
well-
but
it's
not
you,
know
it's
it's
on
the
back
or
the
south
side,
but
it's
just
kind
of
stuck
on,
so
that
has
been
changed
a
little
bit.
J
J
I
still
have
some
concerns
about
the
overall
compatibility.
The
siding
materials
are
broken
up
on
the
primary
structure.
As
you
can
see.
On
the
first
floor,
it's
lap
siting
on
the
first
story,
so
I
tend
to
think
it
would
be
probably
helped
this
design
a
lot
if
the
structure
were
a
lap
with
you
know
the
division
between
the
the
shake
siding
and
the
lap
like
the
primary
structure.
J
The
windows
are
also
not
really
compatible
as
far
as
the
the
number
of
lights
and
the
sizes
are
all
kind
of
different.
So
and
not
that
that
you
know
like
the
primary
structure,
if
you
I
can-
and
I
can
flip
through
the
pictures
of
the
elevations
if
we
need
to-
but
this
you
know
kind
of-
has
some
places
where
the
windows
are
ganged
together,
but
then
on
the
other
elevations.
J
There
are
kind
of
you
know,
like
many
motford
houses,
the
windows
have
kind
of
you
know
mishmash
placings,
but
but
I
feel,
like
the
you
know
this
at
least
the
the
sashes
could
have
some
either
be
just
simple
one
over
ones
or
something
that
would
be
more
compatible
with
the
12
over
ones.
That
are,
you
know
the
main
windows
on
the
primary
structure.
J
So,
overall
there
wasn't
really
a
lot
of
change
here.
This
is
the
the
rendering
that
shows
both
buildings
together,
and
this
one
also
shows
you
the
building.
J
This
would
be
the
structure,
as
you
would
see
the
accessory
structure,
as
you
would
see
it
behind,
so
you
can
see
that
it's
still
pretty
tall
in
relation
to
the
primary
structure,
which
was
if,
in
reading
the
minutes,
it
was
definitely
one
of
the
biggest
points
of
contention
last
time,
as
was
the
overall
square
footage,
and
then
I
did
ask
the
applicant
for
some
additional
items
that
are
listed
in
your
staff
report,
one
being
the
perspective
rendering
as
you're
looking
from
chestnut
street.
J
I
did
talk
with
the
applicant
earlier
this
week
to
kind
of
go
over
all
of
these.
These
points
of
feedback
and
there
he
simply
didn't
have
enough
time
to
to
get
the
perspective,
rendering
that
I
was
requesting,
but
this
is
an
alternate
drawing
that
was
completed
instead.
So
that's
been
added
to
your
packet
since
earlier
this
week
also,
I
tend
to
think
that
this
rendering
doesn't
really
help
the
application.
In
my
mind,
it
kind
of
makes
it
still
makes
the
structure
feel
very
large
and
out
of
scale
with
the
the
primary
structure.
J
But
you
know
I
that's
it's
not
really
that
much
different
than
the
last
time
you
all
saw
the
application.
So
those
are
my
thoughts
and
comments
and
if
you
have
questions,
I
am
happy
to
answer.
B
Alex
this,
this
floor
plan
reflects
a
change
in
the
square
footage
the
footprint
from
our
previous
from
the
previous
application,
or
not.
J
No
sorry,
I
didn't
put
the
floor
plans
on
this
on
the
slide
presentation.
They're
the
same
so
this
is
just
showing
the
building
footprint
and
I
can
pull
that
up
if
it's
helpful
to
look
at
the
floor
plan,
but
it's
it's
the
same
pretty
much
as
the
last.
N
Alex
what
about
the
driveways
to
minimize
curb
cuts,
the
sharing
of
driveway
on
the
guidelines?
Did
you
is
that
sort
of
looked
at.
J
If
you
go
down
cumberland
alley,
there
are
tons
of
you
know,
penetrations
into
the
right-of-way
itself,
and
many
of
the
buildings
are
like
are
right
up
on
the
alley
and
there's
you
know
all
kinds
of
little
parking,
pull-offs
and
different
things
like
that.
So
I'll
defer
to
you
all,
of
course,
but
in
my
opinion
it's
not
as
not,
as
you
know,
big
of
a
deal
to
have.
You
know
multiple
pull-off
areas
or
driveways
off
of
an
alley
where
it's
like
a
secondary
right-of-way.
N
Yeah,
okay,
also,
you
last
time
you
had
the
sanborn
map,
where
you
showed
where
the
original
location
of
the
adu
was
and
the
one-story
adu.
Yes,.
N
Accurate,
but
there
is
that
footing
in
the
backyard.
J
J
J
So
it's
just
from
the
ground
level
so
27
feet,
but
that
is
not
measuring
from
like,
where
you
see
the
doors
like
where
that
would
be
dug
out.
It's
not
including
that
dimension.
So
I
don't
know
I'm
just
eyeballing
that
it
probably
looks
like
I
don't
know
five
feet,
maybe
but
I'll.
Let
kenny
the
applicant
speak
to
that.
J
J
Yes,
so
that
was
based
on
the
property
card
square
footage,
calculation
for
the
primary
structure,
and
when
I
talked
to
the
applicant
earlier
in
the
week,
he
let
me
know
that
he
had
measured
the
building
and
said
it
was
closer
to
1600.
So
that
would
be
bring
it
down
a
little
bit.
But
still
not
you
know
anywhere
close
if
you
were
using
the
30
as
a
you
know,
as
a
calculation
based
on
square
footage,
it
still
wouldn't
get
it
close,
but.
A
With
no
luck,
30
percent
of
the
1600,
if
the
structure
1600
square
foot,
30
of
that
would
be
480
square.
A
B
Okay,
I'm
going
to
ask
mr
stilwell,
if
there's
any
additional
information
that
you
would
like
for
the
commissioners
to
consider
before
we
open
the
floor
for
public
comment.
L
Yeah,
I
would
just
just
a
couple
questions
I
guess,
based
on
our
understanding,
I
didn't
realize
that
if
we
had
a
unconditioned
area
or
basement
it'd
be
considered
in
the
square
footage,
I
guess
I
would
like
some
feedback
on
the
what
I
the
original
structure,
that
was
there
as
far
as
we
could
tell,
was
17
ish
by
21
or
20,
it's
hard
to
tell
by
the
footing
that
was
there
we're
not
too
far
outside
of
that
number
I'd
like
to
know
what
everybody
feels
is
an
appropriate
size,
and
I
guess
what
direction
we're
I'm
pretty
open
to
changes.
L
My
understanding
from
from
when
I
read
the
historic
documents
for
montford
was
that
the
this
auxiliary
structure
should
be
more
simple
than
the
main
structure,
so
I
think
that's
kind
of
why
michael
drew
just
the
shake
instead
of
doing
a
lap,
siding
and
a
shake.
I
didn't.
I
don't
know
if
he
wanted
to
keep
a
simpler
exterior
on
that
as
far
as
height.
I
think
he
did
lower
it
on
this,
drawing
into
the
ground
more
and
I
think
alex's
right.
L
L
We
we
probably
could
get
the
roof
lower,
but
we're
trying
to
match
with
the
gable
roof
line
of
the
main
structure.
L
So
it
would,
it
would
be
less
of
a
pitch
if,
if
we,
if
we
did
that,
but
it
wouldn't
that
wouldn't
be
a
significant
change
for
us
to
do
so.
I
guess
I
was
just
looking
for
feedback.
If
we
were
to
submit
this,
what
I
mean,
what
kind
of
footprint
do
you
feel
that's
more
more
appropriate
and
if
you
know
we
have
a
basement
on
the
original
structure,
and
so,
if
we're
not
counting
that,
do
we
try
to
make
the
auxiliary
structure
basement
more
of
a
basement?
L
L
What
I've
read
and
with
michael's
help
we're
just
trying
to,
I
guess,
get
a
set
of
plans
that
you
guys
feels
appropriate
for
the
property.
B
B
We
need
to
also
take
a
quick
check
for
public
comment
here
in
a
minute,
and
then
we
can
follow
up
with
some
broader
discussion
and
and
offer
you
the
feedback.
I
think
that
you're
looking
for
around
the
questions
and
the
concerns
that
staff
has
regarding
the
application.
C
C
B
You
that
will
close
the
floor
for
public
comment
and
open
up
for
general
discussion.
Commissioners,
any
thoughts
or
or
info
insight
you
might
be
able
to.
We
might
be
able
to
offer
for
the
applicant.
D
It
seems
to
me
that
you
know
what
alex
has
said
about
the
the
size
is
a
an
extremely
valid
concern.
D
I
mean,
I
can't
think
of
anything
that
gets
this
down
into
the
wiggle
room
from
30,
or
so
you
know
not
the
perspective,
drawing
not
the
square
footage,
I'm
not
quite
sure
of
the
point
as
to
basement
square
footage,
given
the
square
footage
and
the
primary
structure
and
square
footage
and
the
proposed
ancillary
structure
both
include
base
clips,
I
now
it
needs
to
come
back
smaller
and.
D
I
think
that
you
know
the
porch
situation,
probably
should
you
know
it
should
be
within
the
footprint
rather
than
just
on
the
back?
Well,
those
are
my
my
thoughts.
None
of
them
original.
L
L
L
L
B
I
think,
from
my
perspective,
it
that
helps
with
a
couple
of
items.
One
is
the
topography
modifications
to
get
the
basement
exposed,
and
I
do
think
that
it
does
help
with
the
massing
from
west
chestnut,
and
I
think
that,
from
my
perspective,
certainly
this
square
footage
exercise
that
we're
discussing
is
part
of
that
consideration
for
30
percent.
B
I
do
I
do
want
to
pay
some
attention
to
the
sanborn
map
that
does
show
obviously
a
larger
structure
than
the
shed.
That's
in
the
back
right
now.
That
I
think,
is
worth
a
comparison
with
that
that
previous
footprint
to
the
footprint
that
you're
proposing
now
something
that
were
to
align
itself
more
with
what
is
what
was
in
the
sandboard,
that's
documented
in
the
sanborn
seems
like
valid
exercise
for
the
commission
to
consider.
B
I
think
that
largely
you
know
speaks
to
the
porch,
because
the
footprint
of
the
of
the
main
part
of
the
house
is
far
closer
to
the
dimensions
of
probably
what
that
that
accessory
structure
was
that's
shown
on
the
sanborn
maps.
So,
for
me,
I
think
the
the
basement
entry
is
is
a
of
concern
for
me,
largely
because
it
does
make
it
feel
taller
and
it
does
change
and
modify
the
topography
in
a
way
that
is
not
particularly
with
the
guidelines.
B
L
To
move
that
entry,
can
I
so
as
far
as
like
an
exterior
overhang
over
an
entry
door?
R
L
How
would
I,
how
would
I
address
that
porch
issue,
then?
Would
the
ports.
I
B
For
me,
I
think
the
size
of
the
porch
is
an
issue
and
I
don't
know
that
I'm
completely
ready
to
say
get
rid
of
the
porch,
because
it's
hard
to
visualize
something
smaller
than
that.
I
do
think
you
know
the
main
house.
The
porch
is
understated
and
tucked
back
into
that
footprint,
I
think
if
it
were
had
a
roof
line
that
was
more
inclusive
of
the
porch
and
not
in
this
sort
of
tack.
On
porch
at
that
entrance,
I
think
that
that
could
help
the
situation
and
the
massing.
B
L
J
L
As
long
as
it's
covered
somewhat,
I
mean
I
don't.
I
don't
have
to
have
a
15
by
15
porch
by
any
means,
but
if
we
can
work
with
the
roof
line,
maybe
more
of
a
dormer
style
entry
where
it's
smaller
and
it
just
it's
just
entry
purposes
and
and-
and
we
have
something
covered,
though,
to
enter
the
home.
If
we're
going
to
enter
you
know
if
you're
gonna
I
mean
it
just
seems
like
you
know,
every
single
historic
house
has
a
some
form
of
forced
entry.
L
So
I
don't
think
we
want
to
get
away
from
that.
But
I
you
know
if
it's
the
roof
line,
maybe
we
change
the
roof
line
and
and
less
of
a
shed
pitch
more.
I
L
Suggestions-
I
I
just,
I
think
it'd
be
really
hard
to
include
you
know
a
main
house
entry
and
then
also
you
know
basement
stairs
into
that
area
without
having
some
form
of
covered
porch.
D
How
big
a
covered
porch?
Do
you
think
that
would
end?
Up
being
I
mean
you're,
really
talking
sort
of
a
a
covered.
L
I
I
would,
I
would
imagine
it
would
be
elevated
based
on
the
you
know,
the
land
elevation
is
going
downhill,
so
on
the
backs
of
it,
I
think
you
still
have
to
step
up
a
step
or
two
for
three.
I
mean
how.
C
L
Michael
has
it
on
a
drawing.
It
looks
like
it's
three
or
four,
but
if
we
say
everything
in
the
ground
a
little
bit
more
and
kind
of
change
the
roof
line,
I
guess
if,
if
we
come
back
with
an
altered
version
and
and.
C
Q
L
D
Yeah
I
mean
I'm
inclined
to
look
at
what
you
bring,
rather
than
you
know,
try
to
design
this
in
my
own
mind
in
a
matter
of
seconds,
so
you
know
I,
I
think
you've
sort
of
got
where
we're
headed,
and
you
know
it
sounds
like
you
know,
you're
willing
to
beat
it.
D
I
would
you
know,
review
again
the
the
standard
and
the
montford
historic
district
guidelines
and
the
the
relevance
of
this
ancillary
structure
is
to
the
primary
structure,
and
so
it
needs
to
be
compatible
and
know
to
all
of
a
sudden
come
out
with
a
whole
big
porch
is
isn't
really
compatible,
regardless
of
what
else
is
in
the
historic
district.
D
So
you
know
I
would
you
know
just
try
to
make
that
that
entrance
area
is
compatible
with
the
main
houses.
The
primary
structure
is
possible.
L
Okay,
all
right
is:
does
everybody
else
feel
like
that's
agree
with
now.
N
I'd
like
to
just
clarify
something:
this
is
a
richard,
sharp
smith
building.
That's
and
that's.
I
don't
know
if
you're
aware
that
that
that's
kind
of
a
big
deal
in
asheville
and
this
exact
footprint
and
design
of
house
is,
I
think,
ben
benjamin-
can
speak
more
to
it.
There's
probably
four
of
them
in
biltmore
village.
N
This
is
the
exact
same
just
with
different
siding,
and
so
that's
the
big.
What
I'm
having
a
problem
with
is
this
is
the,
and
what
commissioner
was
saying
is
that
this
is
the
primary
thing
that
that
should
be
seen
from
the
street
and
this
large
ex.
You
know
four
feet
taller
than
than
this
main
building.
N
That's
peaking
around
and
visible,
because
there's
a
big
sight
line
to
see
this,
but
where
the
footprint
was
before
is
tucked
way
further
back
and
it
was
a
one-story
building
that
I'm
sure
was.
I
don't
know
what
I
would
just
be
guessing,
but
I
think
it
needs
to
be
in
the
location.
It
was
and
be
as
a
a
secondary
structure
to
this
main
structure
and
not
compete
with
this
structure.
N
L
Okay,
I
mean
yeah,
I'm
aware
you
know,
that's
that's
why
I
purchased
the
property,
and
you
know
I
plan
on
doing
you
know
an
extensive
historic
renovation
on
the
main
structure
too,
because
the
condition
it's
in
is
is
pretty
rough
right
now,
but
the
auxiliary
structure
is
actually
four
foot
shorter
than
the
other
building
than
the
main
structure.
It's
not
it's
there's
a
few
feet
visible
from
the
right
hand,
side
from
chestnut.
N
N
I
don't
understand
that.
That's
where
it
would
should.
It
needs
to
be,
and
that's
not
going
to
be
this
building,
it's
going
to
be
smaller
and
it's
going
to
be
a
different
shape.
Let
me
finish
for
just
a
second
and-
and
there
is
a
large
sight
line
to
see
in
that
area,
and
so
I.
C
L
Ago
it
it
is
it's
it's
very
it's
not
too
far
off
from
where
the
original
structure
was
is
he
is
he
asking
me
to
move
it
closer
to
the
alleyway?
I
guess
I'm
confi,
I
didn't
know.
N
Where
alex
back
up
to
slide
three.
N
Please
so
that
existing
I'm
using
my
cursor,
which
you
can't
see
but
alex,
could
you
show
where
that
foundation
is.
L
J
Sorry,
I
just
realized-
I
was
muted,
it's
it's
a
little
bit
hard
to
like
if
you're,
because
I
can't
compare
side
to
side.
Unfortunately,
I
wish
we
were
in
the
north
conference
room
and
I
could
put
these
up
together,
but
if
you're
looking
at
the
sanborn
map,
it
looks
like
it's.
It's
definitely
shifted
over
so
that
it's
fully
behind
the
primary
structure,
which
would
probably
help
a
lot
kenny.
I
don't
know
if
that's
possible,
you
you're,
you
would
probably
have
to
reconfigure
the
parking
a
little
bit,
but.
L
J
J
This
is
why
I
suggested
the
lap
siding
is
because,
if
it
is
sticking
out
like
this,
it
almost
looks
even
weirder,
with
the
shake
siding
as
a
competing
building,
if
that
makes
sense,
but
I
do
think
if
you
can,
if
you
can
move
it
further,
this
way
on
the
site.
That
would
probably
help
a
lot,
and
you
still
like
you
said,
would
have
room
for
the
parking
so.
J
Is
that
is
that
kind
of
what
you
were
getting
at?
Well,
I
mean,
I
know
you
had
some
concerns,
obviously
about
the
overall
size
of
the
structure.
N
N
On
the
footings
that
I
saw
in
the
backyard,
but
it
for
a
one-story
structure,
that's
that
that
goes
back
to
where
it
was
that's
what
that's?
What
the
guidelines,
unless
there's
a
hardship
that
I'm
not
aware
of
that's
what
the
guidelines
say
and
I'm
just
reading
what
it
says
and
I
think
it's
a
beautiful
structure.
I
think
it's,
I
think
it's
I
understand
what
you're
doing,
but
it's
this
is.
N
E
And
recognizing
what
we'll
said
earlier
about
down
here
in
biltmore
village,
there
are
some
richard
sharp
spots,
the
one
that
comes
to
mind
to
me
with
an
accessory
structure,
and
maybe
the
only
one
I
haven't
done
a
survey
or
anything
like
that
is
where
the
tangles,
I
believe
it
is
called.
Hair
salon
is,
and
it
is
a
two-story
building,
as
I
recall
in
the
front
and
then
a
very
small
one-story
structure
in
the
rear.
E
That
would
have
been
some
sort
of
accessory
unit
long
ago,
but
we
also,
I
think,
have
to
recognize
that
the
period
of
significance
for
the
village
doesn't
exactly
overlap
with
the
period
of
significance
for
this
area,
and
you
know
the
rise
of
the
automobile
and
all
that
kind
of
stuff
is
happening
all
during
this
period
of
time.
I
believe
I
heard
the
applicant
state
that
the
foundation
was
17
by
21,
thereabouts,
I'd
like
to
give
them
the
benefit
of
the
doubt.
The
application
materials
say:
1600
heated
square
feet.
E
F
If
I
guess
a
quick
question,
if
it's
fair,
I'm
new
more
than
you
guys
so
miss
cat
you'll
cut
me
off
of
them
and
allowed
what
is
your
intent
for
the
use
of
the
space
above
the
ground,
not
in
the
in
the
basement?
I'm
gathering
and
I
will
hornaday
help
to
clarify
the
concerns,
seem
to
be
the
height
of
the
building.
Again
has
seen
the
accessory
building
as
seen
from
the
street
and
and
the
width
and
if
tucking
it
behind
helps.
F
Is
that
what
your
use
space
or,
if
it's
just
like
living
space,
where
it's
obviously
you're
wearing
sunlight
all
the
stuff,
I
think
helping
me
get
a
sense
of
how
you
want
to
use
that
looks
like
a
living
space
might
help
in
us
deciding
things
like
lowering
the
roof
level
and
some
of
those
other
things
that
help
to
get
to
the
the
scale
of
the
building
and
again
this
is
part
of
my
learning
curve,
so
any
other
long-term
members
can
jump
in
and
correct
me.
F
L
R
L
Yeah,
it's
just
it's
a
you
know,
1600
square
foot
house
is,
I
have
two
kids
and
a
wife
and
it's
you
know
it's
enough
space
for
us,
but
when
you
know
I'm
from
I'm
not
you
know
I'm
from
michigan
and
I
have
family
and
you
know
I
currently
live
in
florida.
So
we
have
people
visiting
we're.
Probably
people
visiting
both
directions.
So
I
just
want
to
have
an
extra
space
for
people
to
stay.
F
So
the
space
you're
needing
this
amount
of
space,
whether
it's
it's
taller
or
whether
it's
longer
or
wider
or
whatever
you're
sort
of
agnostic
to
you,
because
you're
looking
for
a
purpose,
whereas
if
we
can
find
your
purpose
and
meeting
the
scale
concerns
that
that
have
been
expressed,
you
would
be
amenable
to
that.
So
it's
a
concern,
a
matter
of
saying:
hey:
can
we
find
the
space
you
need
that
meets
the
configuration
and
confines
of
what
they
need.
L
L
B
B
And
I
I
don't
see
that
as
a
detail.
That's
that's
that's
coming
through
from
the
main
house,
and
it
starts
to
to
read
taller
for
me
in
and
doesn't
do
a
lot
to
sort
of
mask
the
fact
that
there's
a
basement
so
to
speak
in
terms
of
the
scale
and
the
massing
of
the
house,
and
I'm,
I
think,
maybe
that
problem
solves
itself.
B
If,
if
you
move
forward
to
propose
that
the
basement
sort
of
would
sort
of
push
into
the
ground
a
little
bit,
because
I
don't
see
those
same
windows
showing
up
on
the
main
structure
and
of
course
it
starts
to
suggest
a
multi-story
building
which
which
we
believe
we
leak
to
a
bigger
mass
when
we're
looking
multi-story
structures.
And
so
I
think
that
that
you
might
give
some
consideration
to
how
important
those
windows
are
and
whether
they
really
are
consistent
with
the
house.
B
I
know
alex
you
had
some
other
concerns
about
the
windows
and
how
we
could
better
maybe
connect
the
style
of
the
windows
from
the
main
house
with
this
house
or
this
structure.
It's
not
really
a
house
but,
and
so
I'd
be
interested
in
making
sure
that
kenny,
you
get
the
feedback
from
us
that
you're
looking
for
with
regards
to
windows
and
some
suggestions
about
how
we
might
feel
if
other
window
configurations
might
be
proposed.
B
L
Forward,
oh
sorry,
that
and
my
only
other
concern
would
be
egress,
so
I
don't
know
what
windows
would
be
necessary
in
the
basement,
maybe
if
they're
below
grade-
and
you
can't
see
them-
you
know
with
a
window
well
or
something
I
wouldn't
think
you'd
want
to
lose
them
all.
I
think
you'd
want
to
have
some
form
of
egress.
B
B
Is
probably
a
an
answer
that
michael
can
give
you
you
know
is
looking
through
the
residential
building
code.
The
egress
requirements
vary
depending
on
how
you
intend
to
use
that
space.
Certainly
if
people
were
sleeping
down
there,
the
requirement
would
be
far
different
than
if
you're,
storing
your
christmas
ornaments
and
things
like
that
down
there.
So
you
know
certainly
providing
that
context
for
us.
When
we
look
at
this
application
moving
forward,
I
think,
would
be
valuable
for
the
commission.
B
J
And
I
would
just
add
that-
and
maybe
I
mentioned
this
when
I
was
given
my
report-
but
I
mentioned
to
kenny
that
I
just
thought
the
windows,
since
it
is
an
accessory
structure.
The
easiest
way
to
go
is
just
to
simplify,
especially
since
the
the
primary
structure.
The
main
windows
are
all
fairly
decorative
with
the
12
light
over
the
12
light,
double
hung
windows
and
I
don't
think
that
would
make
sense,
for
you
know,
a
modest
accessory
structure,
so
maybe
just
a
one
over
one
or
something
that
was
just
you
know
very
simplified.
L
Yes,
I
would
like
to-
and
I
also
as
far
as
paint
colors
and
things
like
that
I
do
plan
on
matching
the
main
structure
with
the
paint
scheme
that
we
that
we
choose
for
the
auxiliary
structure.
But
that's
that's
gonna
happen
after
I
don't
know
if
I
need
to
do
a
separate
application
at
that
time,
but
we're
not
quite
there
yet.
J
We
could
make
it
a
condition
on
the
approval
kenny
that
you
follow
up
with
staff
once
you've
decided
on
the
paint
palette.
I
would
mention
that
the
the
resubmittal
deadline
is
next
wednesday,
so
be
pretty
quick
turn
around.
I
don't
know
if
you,
if
you
can
get
it
together
between
now
and
next
wednesday
great.
You
know
we'll
welcome
you
at
the
february
meeting,
but
if
you
need
more,
if
you
feel
like
you
need
more
time,
you
might
want
to
consider
march.
So
just
throwing
that
out
out
there.
L
J
Today,
we'll
just
you
can
just
request
to
continue
to
february,
and
then
we
can
follow
up
if
you
need
to
change
it
to
march.
B
From
my
perspective,
I
think
anything
that
that
reduces
the
scale
of
it
and
sort
of
downplays.
The
focus
of
it
is
certainly
worth
considering.
B
M
I
do
have
kind
of
a
common
slash
question
from
my
fellow
commissioners,
so
looking
at
the
standards
under
carriage
houses,
garages
and
accessory
structures,
the
the
bottom
line
to
it
is
that
the
overall
feeling
of
those
accessory
structures
is
that
they're
modest
and
they
take
second
fiddle
to
the
home.
Clearly-
and
I
just
wanted
to
ask
the
architects
on
the
group
or
anybody
else
that
has
an
opinion.
I
understand
that
large
high-pitched
roof,
the
intent
of
it,
was
to
echo
the
front,
build
the
main
building.
B
I
think,
from
from
my
perspective,
I
I
think
it'd
be
an
interesting
study
to
do.
I
think
that
I'm
it's
gonna
be
a
bigger
distraction
for
me
visually
if
there,
if
the
pitch
is
different,
is
the
challenge
and,
of
course,
with
a
if
the,
if
the
constant
is
matching
the
pitch
of
the
roof,
the
only
solution
to
shorter
is
either
make
it
narrower.
B
The
proportion
right
now
is
square,
and
so
a
rectangular
proportion,
which
I
think
is
more
in
line
with
the
sanborn
footprint,
also
would
bring
the
ridge
of
that
of
that
roofline
down
if
it
if
it
weren't
as
square
as
a
footprint
as
it
is
now
is
one
strategy,
of
course,
lowering
the
bearing
line
of
the
eaves
is
is
an
option,
but
at
that
point
you
get
to
a
place
where
the
ceilings
start
to
become
unmanageable.
B
So
I
think
it
would
be
potentially
more
distracting
in
terms
of
congruity
with
the
main
structure
if
the
pitch
was
different,
but
I
think
there's
some
geometry
things
that
could
be
considered
that
might
help
without
giving
much
up
in
terms
of
square
footage,
because
that's
not
the
only
metric
that
we
use
to
evaluate
that
could
reduce
the
overall
height
of
the
of
the
structure
in
comparison
to
the
existing
house.
B
I
think
so
kenny.
I
want
to
just
make
sure
that
we've,
given
you
some
good
feedback
and
content
to
work
with
moving
forward
before
we
entertain
a
motion.
D
B
Okay,
thank
you.
We'll
vote
by
roll
call
vice
peter
ethan.
D
S
E
B
Commissioner,
west
aye,
commissioner
vaughan
hi
myself
I
as
well,
and
that
motion
carries.
B
E
B
Okay,
we'll
vote
again
by
roll
call.
Vice
chair,
eakins,
hi,
mercedes
hi,
commissioner
gardner
aye,
commissioner
hornaday
aye,
commissioner
lazarus.
B
I
commissioner
mitchell
aye
commissioner
west
aye,
commissioner
vaughan
aye
myself
I
as
well
that
motion
also
carries
moving
on
to
the
next
application,
is
81
cortland
avenue,
also
in
the
montford
historic
district,
and
I'm
going
to
let
out
get
us
all
up
to
speed
on
this
application.
J
Thank
you,
chair
kype,
so
this
application
is
for
construction
of
a
new
primary
structure
on
cortland
avenue.
I
included
a
site
map
in
here
just
to
orient
everyone.
This
is
these
lots
were
newly
subdivided
last
year.
I
believe
it
was
one
of
the
first
subdivisions
that
the
that
the
commission
considered,
so
these
lots
are
a
little
bit
tricky
because
they're
kind
of
in
this
you
can
see
like
the
it's
a
little
bit
of
a
bowl.
J
If
you've
driven
around
this,
the
that
from
houston
street
around
on
cortland,
you
can
see
down
into
this
property,
so
the
topography
is
a
little
bit
tricky,
but
so
the
proposal
is
for
roughly
2700
square
foot
primary
structure
and
the
tricky
thing
with
the
topography
here
is
for
all
of
these
lots,
for
the
most
part
is
going
to
be
parking,
as
you
might
note,
so
that
is
definitely
noted
as
a
concern
on
my
staff
report.
J
J
The
parking
comes
up
right
to
the
front
elevation
when
the
application
was
first
submitted
or
when
I
first
met
with
the
applicant
and
as
architect,
I
noted
to
them
a
couple
of
things,
the
parking
being
one,
the
other
being
that
when
the
when
the
application
was
first
submitted,
the
this
l
on
the
front
of
the
house,
where
you
see
this
gang
of
three
windows
was
protruding
pretty
far
out.
It
was
a
little
bit,
in
my
opinion,
out
of
proportion,
especially
if
you
look
at
it
from
the
side
angle.
J
J
So
it's
definitely
a
little
bit
a
little
bit
better
in
terms
of
not
appearing
out
of
proportion,
this
gang
of
windows
was
changed
and
overall,
I
think
the
architect
is
he
used
to
be
on
the
hrc
some
years
ago,
so
he
is
well
versed
in
working
with
our
design
standards.
So
so
I
feel
like
overall,
this
project
is
is
is
pretty
close
to
where
it
needs
to
be
to
be
approved.
J
J
There
seem
to
be
some
question
marks
there
about
how
much
they
would
have
to
or
a
retaining
wall
and
how
much
they
would
have
to
to
build
out
there
for
the
to
accommodate
a
driveway.
I
also
made
the
suggestion
that
they
could
perhaps
just
do
one
parking
space
off
to
like
you
know,
try
to
tuck
it
kind
of
a
little
bit
farther
over
here,
if
possible,
rather
than
having
the
two
that
would
just
you
know,
kind
of
just
sit
right
in
front
of
the
house.
J
I
do
think
when
I
was
working
on
my
staff
report.
I
was
thinking
through
many
of
the
lots
that
are
left
in
the
historic
district,
as
you
might
know,
such
as
the
ones
that
were
approved
not
too
long
ago
on
the
corner
of
cumberland
and
caudle
kabul.
They
do.
You
know
we
are
going
to
kind
of
see
more
lots
like
that
that
have
challenges
around
parking,
so
I
am
not.
J
We
don't
have
the
mechanical
unit
specifications.
Obviously
that
is
not
a
big
deal.
We
can
just
make
that
a
condition.
The
other
thing
is
that
I
asked
the
the
applicant
and
the
architect
to
confirm
the
wall
heights.
There's
a
retaining
wall
on
this
side
of
the
house.
J
D
Alex
the
correct
square
footage
is
the
2765
footage.
J
T
K
B
If
there's
anything
that
you'd
like
to
add,
and
then
we
can
respond
with
questions
at
this
point,
but
if
there's
anything
in
response
to
things
that
alex
has
mentioned
or
or
anything
that
you'd
like
us
to
know
sort
of
before
we
dive
in
with
any
questions
that
you
have
or
that
we
that
would
be
appropriate.
K
Okay,
that'd
be
great.
Thank
you.
I
won't
take
too
much
time,
but
I
think
you
know
alex
codified
the
lots
and
the
situation
pretty.
Well,
it's
it's
a
it's
a
bit
of
a
difficult
area.
I
actually
own
a
second
lot
there
too,
so
you
know
I
did
it.
There
was
no
topographical
survey
done
prior
to
my
purchasing
of
these
lots,
I
performed
a
topographical
server
which
helped
to
add
some
additional
clarity.
K
You
know
you
know
pursuant
to
that,
it
it
bro.
It
clarified
some
issues,
but
it
certainly
there's
quite
a
presentation
of
what
you
know
can
and
cannot
be
done.
The
full
intention
was
to
use
as
much
of
that
building
footprint
or
the
the
building
envelope
as
available.
However,
to
put
the
you
know,
the
parking
area
on
the
side
so
based
upon
the
topographical
survey,
we
just
we
had
a
difficult
time
doing
that
and
aaron
wilson
wanted
me
to
communicate
that
we
did
look
at
it.
K
Looking
up
the
I'm
trying
to
think,
I
don't
have
the
in
front
of
me
which
rendering
it
is,
but
the
upper
side
where
alex
was
talking
about
putting
some
parking
and
the
comment
from
aaron
was
that
the
retaining
wall
would
have
been
closer
to
10
to
12
feet
there.
So
it's
actually
significantly
taller
if
it
does,
if
it's
even
possible
to
go
on
the
side
of
the
house.
K
Then
it
would
be
even
on
that
front,
putting
those
parking
spots
on
the
front
which
I
think
we're
at
about
six
feet
or
six
and
a
half
feet
for
the
primary
wall
and
then
another
two
for
the
secondary
wall.
So
the
intended
purposes
was
to
do
that.
Unfortunately,
this
looked
like
the
best
option
based
upon
that
topography
and
then
the
other
thing
too
alex
we
did
make
the
accommodation
to
shorten
the
length
of
that
room.
K
K
So
again,
the
net
gain
is
four
feet,
difference
which
I
think
created
more
symmetry
and
in
the
lot
and
excuse
me
on
the
facade
of
the
of
the
house
and
the
intent
is
so
everybody
understands
if
they've
seen
the
plan,
there's
a
full
adu
which
will
have
its
own
service
and
heating
and
water
and
electrical.
K
B
Applicant,
I
am
going
to
open
the
floor
for
any
public
comment
that
we
may
have
and
following
that
I
will.
We
will
continue
our
conversation
and
give
you
some
feedback.
Erin.
N
N
That's
a
good
example
chair
kite
of
an
elongated
roof
back
to
the
previous
case.
What
alex
is
showing
on
the
yeah
that
too
not
about
this,
but
just
about
the
other
one.
I
need
to
move
on.
B
I
think,
from
my
perspective,
obviously
we
spent
a
lot
of
time
in
the
commission
talking
about
parking
in
montford.
B
A
fair
amount
of
time
talking
about
parking,
and
I
know
it-
it
certainly
comes
up
in
the
subdivisions
and
and
some
of
these
newer
lots
that
are
being
created
in
the
district.
B
You
know
I
wish
I
had
more
clarity
on,
and
that's
me
for
not
having
read
right
prior
to
this
application,
the
guidelines
around
parking
parking
in
the
front
in
general.
We
know
that
that's
not
particularly
in
alignment
with
the
with
the
with
the
standards
for
montford
and
so
I'd
love
to
to
talk
a
little
bit
with
this
commission,
maybe
alex
and
get
some
some
clarity
from
you
on
the
guidelines.
It
looks
like
alex.
The
montford
standards
in
the
google
drive
are
locked.
J
J
You
get
to
the
right
page,
so
there,
these
guidelines
are
a
little
bit
funny
in
that
you
know,
usually
we're
kind
of
referencing
the
guidelines
on
the
or
the
standards
on
the
odd
number
pages,
because
they're
the
you
know
the
kind
of
numbered
list
so
I'll
tell
you
that
these
do
contradict
themselves
a
little
bit.
Let's
see.
J
So,
if
you
look
at
page
50,
what
it
says
is
because
mofford
is
predominantly
residential.
Large
off-street
parking
areas
were
not
typical.
The
introduction
of
additional
off-street
parking
must
be
weighed
carefully
and
should
only
be
considered
if
the
parking
area
can
be
located
unobtrusively
in
the
rear
or
rear
side
yard,
no
parking
will
be
allowed
in
the
front
yard.
J
And
then,
if
you
go
to
the
next
page,
it
says
parking
shall
not
be
located
in
the
front
yard
or
in
the
side
yard,
unless
there
is
no
access
to
the
rear
yard
due
to
the
slip
of
the
land
or
there
is
no
room
in
the
rear
yard,
because
the
depth
of
the
lot
is
too
shallow.
New
off
street
parking
area
should
never
significantly
alter
the
site
topography
nor
destroy
the
residential
character
of
the
site
by
eliminating
landscape
features.
J
So
it's
sort
of
hovering
in
that
weird
place,
which
that
was
where
my
suggestion
that,
if
it
was
you
know,
it
obviously
is-
is
meeting
the
standard
that,
where
the
topography
or
the
slope
of
the
land
is
not
easily
accommodated,
but
I
still
think
it
might
help
to
like
minimize
it
to
one
space.
I
don't
know.
I
am
interested
to
hear
all
of
your
thoughts.
I
don't
have
any
other
great
ideas
as
far
as
solutions.
N
J
J
K
N
N
Do
you
just
let
this
creep
further
or
does
there
need
to
be
a
hard
line
that
montford
doesn't
do
that
historic
momford
doesn't
do
that
and
and.
Q
N
J
Yeah-
and
I
think
that
was
the
intent
of
that
number
3b
on
page
51,
where
it's
you
know
saying:
no
parking
is
allowed
and
that's
the
case,
and
you
know
with
most
of
the
historic
buildings,
but
obviously
many
are
not
there's
not
a
ton
of
land
and
offer
that
hasn't
been
developed.
But
obviously
what
hasn't
been
developed
is
mostly
the
not
the
harder
to
develop
on
lots.
You
know
they
aren't.
They
haven't
been
developed
for
a
reason.
J
So
I
think
that
I
do
think
that
I
agree
with
what
you're
saying
that
it
is
kind
of
like.
Is
this
setting
a
precedent,
but
I
do
think
that
we're
just
gonna
keep
running
into
this
issue
repeatedly
with
these
newer
lots.
If
we're
you
know,
I
think
we
just
the
commission
just
needs
to
be
mindful
about
how
they.
J
N
Well,
it's
complicated
as
well
by
having
a
a
such
a
a
large
home
with
an
adu
which
would
be
three
cars
or
at
least
two
cars
kind
of
complicates
that
if
you
do
that,
one
parking
space
kind
of
leave.
Somebody
on
the
street.
A
I
I
was
just
going
to
if
the
commission
isn't
already
aware
just
to
let
you
know
that
off
street
parking
is
actually
not
required
in
montford
for
the
udo
you
can
park
on
the
street
if,
if
on
street
parking
is
available,
though
I
I
don't
know,
I
don't
recall
this
part
of
portland
if
it
is
available,
but
just
in
general
as
it
relates
to
all
of
these
newly
created
lots.
B
C
B
Go
back
for
to
the
standards
for
just
one
more
second,
you
had
read
a
portion
that
talked
about
significantly
altering
the
topography
to
accommodate
parking,
and
that
you
know
I'm
weighing
whether
or
not
I
have
concerns
about
retaining
walls
there,
obviously,
with
heavily
sloped
lots,
retaining
walls
become
important
to
make
things
flat
and
parking
a
lot
of
times
really
wants
to
be
flat,
but
it's
also
pretty
substantial
altering
of
the
topography,
and
so
I
want
to
maybe
have
you
re-read
that
for
me
for
a
minute,
please.
J
B
B
J
B
I
mean,
I
think
it's
also
worth
noting.
Obviously
this
is
not
a
historic
structure
in
the
district,
so
it
would
not.
We
are
often
asked
to
look
at
new
construction
in
a
somewhat
different
light
than
we
would
if
this
were
a
historic
property.
J
There's
not
anything
around
this
house
there's
this
little
this
little
one
for
houston
street
is
a
contributing
structure.
I
can
pull
up
the
property
card
for
that
one,
but
it's
a
little
like
one
story,
you
know
like
a
little,
not
not
a
ranch
but
kind
of
like
an
er
like
a
bit
that
between
time
between
like
a
cottage
and
a
ranch,
but
this
is
like
you're
outside
of
the
district.
Once
you
go
farther
south
west
on
courtland,
so
there's
not
really
any
kind
of
context
to
tie
it
to.
J
As
far
as
from
a
square
footage
standpoint,
I
didn't
think
in
terms
of
the
overall
square
footage
that
it
was.
You
know
inappropriate
in
a
way,
especially
because
of
the
way
it
was
designed
from
the
street
perspective
level.
You
know
it's
not
it's
not
overwhelming
from
the
front
elevation.
It
is.
I
mean
it's
pretty
big.
It
does
have
that
finished
basement
if
you're
looking
at
it
from
the
rear,
which
you
will
see
from
houston
street
until
these
other
lots
are
built
on.
B
B
Are
there,
commissioners,
with
strong
concerns
about
parking
that
we
haven't
talked
about.
D
D
It's
you
know
it's.
It's
not
going
to
be
a
great
prospect,
a
great.
Q
O
I'm
a
little
bit
conflicted
about
this,
but
does
it
say
in
the
packet
what
the
material
of
is
of
the
driveway?
Is
it
just
concrete.
K
O
I
just
didn't
know
if,
if,
if
they're,
not
I'm
not
a
designer
either,
but
if,
if
there
was
something
that
was
a
little
less
harsh
than
concrete,
would
be,
that
would
maybe
blend
in
a
bit
better.
If
it
is
in
the
front.
K
Yeah
you
have,
I
don't
have
a
huge
familiarity
which
is
sort
of
contemporary
for
the
time,
but
something
that's
permeable,
maybe
would
make
some
sense.
I
don't
know
if
that's
a
you
know
a
gravel
composite
something
like.
C
M
The
guidelines
do
speak
to
having
pervious
surfaces
or
at
least
minimizing,
reducing
impervious.
U
B
I
think
there's
some
value
in
considering
that
for
sure
I
do
appreciate
the
landscaping
in
that
sort
of
tiered
retaining
wall
around
the
corner.
I
do
think
that
the
opportunity
is
there
to
provide
some
screening.
Obviously,
it's
sort
of
screening
from
the
non-historic
side
district
side
of
the
property,
but
you
know
I
think,
having
something
to
look
at
in
the
front.
Besides
the
cars
and
I
think
that's
been
sort
of
primary
driver
of
the
no
parking
in
the
front
thing.
B
B
You
know,
I
think
it
not
to
to
relive
old
conversations
with
regards
to
subdivisions,
but
certainly
many
of
the
subdivisions
that
we've
reviewed
in
this
commission
in
the
recent
past
in
montford
have
been
these
very
challenging
sites,
with
somewhat
limited
options
in
terms
of
how
to
how
to
build
on
there
and
so
we're
having
those
conversations
at
that
level
as
well.
But
I
think
once
it,
it
is
moves
beyond
approval
of
a
subdivision
both
from
this
body
and
from
planning
and
zoning.
B
B
You
know,
I
think,
for
me,
I
would
have,
I
think,
maybe
greater
concerns
about
it
if
it
were
a
historic
property
with
a
historic
structure
on
it,
I
do
think
it.
This
is
in
some
ways
precedent
setting
for
the
lot,
certainly
right
adjacent
to
it
and
and
other
lots
that
we've
we've
talked
about
in
the
in
the
last
year
or
so
as
well.
So
I
think,
as
a
commission,
we
need
to
be
considering
making
sure
that
we
can
be
consistent
in
how
we
make
these
decisions.
N
Is
it
possible
to-
and
I
don't
know
the
answer
if
the
owner
of
this
lot
owns
the
other
three?
Do
you
own
the
other
three
slots.
K
No,
the
only
other
lot
I
own
is
eight
houston,
which
is
directly
diagonal
to
this
lot.
N
If
there
was
a
communal
parking
space,
a
parking
area
for
these,
but
you
still
have
to
get
down
there
there's
I
I'm
I'm
kind
of
I'm
of
the
opinion
and,
as
shannon
said,
that
on
street
parking
is
allowed
and
there
needs
to
be
a
difference
between
the
historic
district
and
it's
gonna
cause.
But
I'm
it's
going
to
cause
problems
on
cumberland
and
it's
going
to
cause
problems
here.
I
think,
with
the
number
of
the.
N
But
but
parking
in
the
front
yard,
just
by
that
line
that
says
no
parking
will
be
allowed
in
the
front
yard
is-
and
I
know
it
gets
watered
down
a
little
bit
more
later
on,
but
there's
a
there's,
a
strong
feeling
when
this
was
written,
that
that's
not
what
montford
wanted
to
to
sh
to
be
was
not
about
the
car,
and
this
is
a
a
large
portion
of
your
front
yard
is
paved
for
a
car,
that's
visible
from
the
street.
N
I
think
it
drops
off
quite
a
bit
the
the
east
side
of
our
lot.
That's
where
I'm
struggling.
K
I
mean
I
can
address
the
other
lot.
If
you
want
what
I'm,
what
we're
trying
to
do
there,
it
may
be
helpful.
I
mean
we,
for
example,
in
turn
on
that
lot,
to
accommodate
that
I
have
plans
already
at
least
partially
committed
to
that,
and
just
so
you
understand,
it'd
be
advantageous
to
move
that
building
to
one
side
of
the
lot
line.
Again,
I
don't
have
the
north-south
my
bearings
on
that,
but
we
actually
decided
to
move
it
to
the
other
lot
line,
which
creates
another
set
of
downstream
issues.
K
Had
decided
to
do
it,
which
would
have
put
the
parking
on
the
side
of
the
other,
the
lower
end,
where
the
existing
structure
was
on
the
lower
side
of
houston,
and
it
was
so
steep
and
untenable
that
you
couldn't
even
do
it.
So
I
had
to
move
the
building
the
opposite
side,
which
makes
the
foundation
a
little
bit
more
untenable.
So
it's
sort
of
you
know
like
pushing
on
a
balloon
there,
you
kind
of
push
one
side
and
something
else,
pops
out
the
other
side.
K
So
we've
we've
endeavored
to
put
the
parking
on
the
upper
side.
You
know
towards
the
confluence
of
cortland
and
houston
on
the
other
side
of
that
lot
and
we're
successful
in
doing
that
with
a
minimizing
or
retaining
wall,
which
would
be
probably
a
couple
feet.
That's
at
least
the
preliminary
plan
as
it
exists
today.
So
just
to
give
you
some.
B
I
think
feedback
that
we've
heard
regarding
the
parking
is
consideration
of
use
of
other
materials
to
make
it
less
impervious
and
soften
it.
To
some
extent,
there's
been
one
suggestion
for
abandoning
the
the
front
yard
parking
in
favor
of
on
street
parking
on
cortland
as
a
as
a
a
way
to
meet
the
guidelines.
J
Can
I
take
one
other
note:
it's
really
uncommon
in
montford
to
have
an
18
foot
wide
apron
like,
like
you
know,
entry
into
a
parcel
too.
Unless
we're
talking
about
kind
of
a
almost
a
shared
driveway.
You
know
those
are
where
they're
kind
of
you
know
right
immediately
next
to
each
other,
but
on
two
different
properties,
and
so
that
was
why
I
made
the
suggestion
of
narrowing
it
to
one
car
and
and
limiting
in
that
way,
because
I
don't
think
it
makes
sense
for
to
have
an
18
foot
wide
cut
into
the
property.
B
B
We've
also
not
really
talked
about
the
massing
of
the
house
or
the
style
or
the
look
of
the
house,
and
it
I
think,
gail.
I
appreciate
your
description
of
that.
I
think
it's
it's
a
it's
a
nice
solution.
B
I,
like
the
scale
of
the
front
of
the
house
that
it's
not
quite
as
as
as
big
as
it
appears
from
the
back.
I
think
the
scale
is
is
appropriate
in
the
front
for
the
district,
and
so
I
I
think
as
a
design
solution,
the
house
is
is
a
pretty
good
one.
I
don't
have
a
particular
concerns
about
that,
and
so,
as
with
many.
B
I
think
at
this
point
the
the
really
the
options
for
you
are
to
amend
your
application
today
to
reflect
some
of
the
changes
that
we've
suggested
and
I
don't
have
a.
I
don't
know
that
the
commission's,
given
us
a
really
strong
sense
of
of
one
solution
over
the
other.
B
K
I
mean
I'm
actually
open
to
doing
whatever
the
commission
sees
to
be
the
best
fit
for
the
greater
good
of
montford.
So
I'm
not
wedded
to
anything.
In
particular,
you
know
I
would
accept
certainly
on
street
parking.
You
know
that
comes
with
other
issues
that
unrelated
to
me
in
terms
of
congestion
with
the
street
and
things
like
that.
But
you
know
I
understand
the
consideration
there.
So
I'm
willing
to
accept
what
the
overall
consensuses
of
the
commission
for
sure.
F
If
I
may,
on
the
off-street
parking
issue,
kennel
worth
is
not
a
historic
district,
but
it's
a
historic,
a
neighborhood,
and
we
have
this
issue
where
it
causes
safety
issues
it
it
causes
damage
to
vehicles.
We
get
scraped
cars
all
the
time.
I
don't
know
how
wide
this
particular
street
is.
I'm
sorry.
I
did
not
get
a
chance
to
drive
through
here,
but
I
am
going
to
be
that's
going
to
be
one
of
my
bugaboos
is,
to
the
extent
the
kitchens
and
bathrooms
we
have
to
adjust
to.
F
You
know
to
modern
life,
and
I
I
understand
we
don't
want
it
yet
to
try
and
park
along
here
and
then
you
try
and
get
trucks
through
here
trying
to
get
other
cars.
It
is
a
nightmare
on
child
avenue,
and
so
my
soapbox
is
always
going
to
be
when
it
comes
to
off.
Street
parking
is
take
into
consideration
the
neighbors
and
the
other
people
who
have
to
try
and
get
through
these
neighborhoods
off
my
soapbox
thanks.
M
M
Created
and
if
you
go
further
down
that
street,
you
can
see
where
other
folks
have
used,
that
which
is
a
little
bit
of
a
compromise
between
a
full
pull
and
straight
driveway.
That
takes
up
the
whole
front
yard,
and
maybe
it's
a
way
to
minimize.
You
know
that
that
wide
appearance
in
the
front
of
the
building
as
part
of
the
entry-
oh,
no,
it's
just
a
thought.
I
had
not
sure
if
it
would
actually
work,
but.
K
J
So
I
would
just
add,
like
going
back
to
what
shannon
said:
there's
parking
isn't
allowed
in
the
front
setback.
I'm
not
sure
how
that
was
created
so
that
actually
isn't
an
option
like
right
now,
you're
cutting
it
close.
I
did.
I
did
send
your
site
plan
or
we
sent
your
site
plan
to
to
our
our
development
services
staff
to
to
see
whether
they
could
approve
this.
J
As
a
from
a
zoning
perspective
and-
and
I
think
from
what
I
know
it
would
be-
it
would
be
probably
okay,
but
it
would
be
pretty
close
to
what
they
would
not
allow.
So
I
don't
think
that
they
would
let
you
do
kind
of
what
what
gayle
is
describing.
Although
that
is
I
you
know,
I'm
sure
that
there
are
plenty
of
places
where
that
exists,
where
it
just
didn't,
get
an
approval
or
just
as
old
and
has
been
there
for
a
while.
J
So
I
think
it
I
mean
I'm
interested
to
hear
what
the
commission
would
want
to
do.
But
my
thought
is
that
aaron,
you
go
back
to
work
with
aaron
a
little
bit
to
tweak
the
site
plan
to
see
what
might
work
from
a
design
perspective.
J
J
I
think
the
landscaping
alongside
it
obviously
helps,
and
it
is
stipulated
by
the
guidelines
that
driveways
and
parking
will
be
screened
with
landscaping.
But
if
there's
any
way
to
like
minimize
it
or
kind
of
tuck
it
a
little
bit
farther
off
to
the
side
rather
than
it
being
kind
of
like
right,
front
and
center,
I
think,
would
be
a
step
in
the
right
direction.
K
Yeah,
I
see
you
guys
see
your
point
yeah
just
you
know
you
can
see
the
again.
I
don't
know
the
direction
south
east
northeast,
I'm
the
downslope
corner
there
of
the
lot
and
the
idea
was
there
was
to
create
this
step
down
approach
to
actually
create
some
screening
for
that
wall.
You
see
it
steps
down,
24
inches
and
then
it
sort
of
fans
out
at
a
20
degree
angle
more
or
less
from
the
retaining
wall
that
goes
along
the
foundation
line.
K
So
it's
right
at
the
end
of
the
building
envelope
and
they're
very
consistent
about
six
feet
right
there.
So
there
is
a
possibility
of
doing
that.
Like
you
said,
alex
and
getting
probably
six
feet
over
would
make
sense
if
we
wanted
to
maintain
that
two-step
look
to
give
it
some
static
appeal
from
the.
C
J
Does
the
commission
have
any
thoughts
on
that
in
terms
of
what
you're
most
comfortable
with
from
an
approval
standpoint?
Do
you
think
that
if
they
work
on
the
site
plan
to
limit
it
to
to
narrow
it
and
to
move
it
over
to
the
southwest,
I
think
is
that
direction
there
that
you're,
where
the
walls
are,
do
you
would
you
want
to
see
that?
Would
you
want
to
make
a
condition
on
the
ca
and
let
staff
look
at
it?
What
what
are
your
thoughts.
B
For
me
personally,
I
think
all
of
the
suggestions
that
have
been
made
are
moving
in
the
right
direction,
including
reducing
the
width
moving
it
over
changing
the
the
surface
of
it,
I
think,
are
all
valid
considerations.
My
concern
aaron,
for
you
would
be
without
some
additional
time
in
talking
with
a
designer.
Do
you
make
a?
Is
there
not
sort
of
fully
vet
the
solution
and
and
get
the
most
the
most
creative
opportunity
there
for
you,
so
that
it
does
work
for
you
long
term,
but
also
better
meets
the
intent
of
the
standards?
K
Mean
I
just
again,
I
think
the
I'm
really
agnostic
to
the
solution.
I
think
it's.
It's
only
I'm
to
the
I'm
sorry,
the
the
gentleman
that
spoke
earlier,
I'm
mindful
of
trying
to
reduce
congestion
on
the
street
because
of
on-street
parking.
That
was
the
intent,
I'm
not
wedded
to
saying
you.
I
have
to
have
a
driveway,
but
it's
the
way
of
reducing
that
now.
Maybe
that's
not
my
it's
an
ask.
It's
not
really
a
requirement,
so
I
mean
somewhat
agnostic
to
the
having
the
parking
in
the
in
the
front
or
having
parking
at
all.
K
K
I
think
it
fundamentally
if
it
comes
down
to
like,
I
think
it
comes
down
to
if,
if
parking
in
the
front
of
the
house
at
any
level,
whether
it's
a
smaller
apron,
different
materials,
whatever
the
accommodations,
if
that
of
those
don't
isn't
acceptable
to
the
commission,
then
I
think
it
becomes
moot.
So
I
don't
know
if
that
is
the
case.
If
you
know.
C
B
I
mean
I
think
that
we've
certainly
heard
feedback
from
one
commissioner,
that
that
would
be
their
preference
would
be
to
say
no
to
to
off
street
parking
in
the
front.
Certainly,
I
think
the
commission
would
feel
that
that
met
the
intent
of
the
standards
to
abandon
off-street
parking
altogether,
but
I
don't
know
that
we've
heard
a
lot
of
voicing
that.
That's
the
only
solution
that
other
folks
are
interested
in
and
because
we
have
had
consideration
for
some
other
of
other
suggestions
that
would
allow
for
some
parking
in
the
front.
B
So
it's
a
little
hard
to
predict
is
that
as
the
chair
you
know,
and-
and
so
I
you
know,
I
think,
without
a
decision
on
your
part,
in
what
your
preference
is,
it's
a
little
hard
to
get
additional
feedback
from
the
commission.
With
regards
to
you
know
a
particular
proposal.
Beyond
what.
K
Yeah,
no,
I
understand
I
I'm
not
familiar
with
the
process.
I
apologize.
No,
it's
just
a
simple
majority
or
it's
a
it's.
I'm
not
sure
how
that
works,
but
I'm
I
understand
you
know.
I
mean
we've
internally
between
aaron
me
and
aaron
w
we
have
looked
at
multiple
options.
We
tried
to
find
multiple
opportunities.
We
looked
at
moving
it
further
to
the
south.
I
think
it's
itself
again,
I'm
not
against
itself
it's
further
down
down
the
street
or
even
the
opposite
side,
which
I
talked
about
earlier
and
it
just
it.
K
It
looked
like
this
was
the
most
tenable
and
that's
why
we
ended
up
here.
So
I
mean
I'm
certainly
in
again
the
the
latency
in
the
process.
You
know,
for
me,
it's
been
kind
of
a
bit.
As
you
might
know,
it's
been
a
bit
latency,
I'm
not
in
this
tremendous
hurry,
of
course,
but
certainly
want
to
proceed
as
quickly
as
possible,
also
want
to
do
all
the
right
things
that
meets
the
standards
and
is
acceptable
to
the
commission.
So
it's
kind
of
a
difficult
one.
K
B
B
We
could
entertain
a
motion
today,
but
so
I
you
know
I'd
like
to
hear
maybe
from
other
commissioners
at
this
point.
M
I
can
give
my
two
cents
on
the
the
driveway.
M
My
feeling
is
that,
since
I
mean
the
design,
standards
are
very
clear
with
don't
park
in
front
of
the
house
and
that's
just
not
in
keeping
with
the
district,
and
I
understand
that
we
also
don't
want
to
set
precedent
with
you
know
somebody
pointing
to
this
decision
saying.
Well,
they
have
a
driveway
right
in
front
of
the
house,
but
I
think
because
it's
a
new
property,
because
it's
an
infill
because
it's
not
interfering
or
getting
in
the
way
of
any
historic
landscape
features
that
are
there
because
there
aren't.
M
I
mean
this
is
kind
of
a
blank
slate
here
that
for
all
those
reasons
that
it
makes
sense
to
have
a
driveway
in
the
front
of
the
house,
I
think
as
much
as
it
can
be
minimized
and
made
modest
would
be
good
as
much
as
maybe
you
could
use
materials.
I
like
the
idea
of
more
permeable
materials-
that's
not
going
to
be
quite
as
in
your
face
as
a
big
swath
of
concrete,
but
that's
my
opinion,
and
I
do
feel
like
that.
D
J
Yeah,
I
think
that's
the
standard,
driveway
width,
I
should
know-
and
it
looks
like
you
have
room,
but
this
would
be
something
to
check
with
aaron
on
the
driveway.
Apron
itself
has
to
be
set
at
least
five
feet
off
of
the
front
property
corner.
So
that's
just
something
to
be
aware
of.
J
I
know
this
is
sort
of
a
small-ish
detail
in
the
grand
scheme
of
things,
but
I
think
I
would
be
more
comfortable
with
this
coming
back
to
you
all,
especially
if
it
is
to
some
degree
setting
precedent
for
these
newly
subdivide,
subdivided
lots
and
also,
if
there's
any
kind
of
material
that
is
like
a
pervious
paper
or
something
that
it's
not
that
you
all
couldn't
approve
it.
It's
just
that
the
guidelines
say
that
they
will
be
considered
on
a
case-by-case
basis,
and
that
is
something
that
is
more
subjective.
J
That
really
is
not
appropriate
for
staff
to
approve.
So
I
would
be
my
suggestion
that
that
aaron
and
aaron
work
together
to
kind
of
look
at
the
solution
that
might
work
best
for
your
programming,
aaron
and.
J
Comfortable
with
and
then
and
then
come
back
for
a
second
review,
and
then
hopefully
it
can
just
be
really
quick
and
we
can
just
okay
move
through
it
is
that
yeah.
C
G
This
is
janice.
I
just
wanted
to
mention
the
guideline
just
or
the
standard.
There's
a
second
part
to
that
standard,
and
I
don't
know
if
everybody's
reading
it
for
those
who
are
concerned
about
setting
precedent.
It
says
no
parking
shall
be
located
in
the
front
yard
or
side
yard
unless
there
is
no
accent
to
the
rear
yard
due
to
the
slope
of
the
land
or
there
is
no
room
in
the
rear
yard,
because
the
depth
of
the
lot
is
too
shallow.
G
J
N
How
much
of
that
is,
I
understand
what
you're
saying,
but
the
the
footprint
of
the
house
kind
of
dictates
that
there's
no
more
room
more
than
the
along
with
the
slope,
so
they
worked
together
force
this
to
where
there's
no
place
for
us
to
wiggle.
G
Okay
yeah,
so
you
can
look
at
it.
That
way,
and
I
know
sometimes
when
you're
looking
at
even
subdividing
a
lot,
it
becomes
a
matter
of
what
could
you
build
there
at
all
and,
and
it
ends
up
being-
maybe
a
very
small
house
oriented
in
a
certain
way,
but
and
then
it
will
pass
subdivision
so
you're
right
it
you
know.
Part
of
that
is
how
large
they're
making
the
house
it
did.
Look
like
it
slipped
significantly
in
the
back
there.
So.
J
Well-
and
I
think
it
is
really
more
of
an
or
thing
I
mean-
I
know
that
they
can
be
related
to
each
other,
but
it's
not
you
know
there
is
room
on
the
like
northeast
side
of
the
lot
to
put
a
driveway,
but
it's
just
not
it's
just
would
be
a
big
challenge
due
to
the
topography.
So
I
think,
even
if
the
house,
you
know,
even
with
the
house
the
size
that
it
is
it's
still
mostly
the
topography,
that's
dictating
the
challenge,
but.
K
Can
I
can
I
just
make
a
comment
so
that,
unless
is
an
interesting
word
too,
because
I
didn't,
I
didn't
realize
that
I
guess
I
must
have
missed
that
that
that
is.
That
is
an
important
word
there.
So
I
thank
you
for
reading
that.
I
I
didn't
almost
have
missed
that,
so
it
is
not
either
or,
and
then
I
will
tell
you
we,
we
I'm
the
intent
of
the
structure
that
the
building
envelope
is
quite
long
and
and
shallow
in
general,
in
just
in
general.
K
If
you
look
at
the
actual
measurements,
it's
quite
long
in
terms
of
road
frontage,
but
very
shallow
in
terms
of
depth,
when
most
houses
are
turned
the
other
way
really
they're
more.
You
know
longer
in
nature,
and
that
applies
to
the
houston
mod
itself,
actually
as
much.
The
building
envelope
is
longer
and
more
narrow,
much
easier
to
accommodate
this.
This
took
quite
a
few
iterations,
even
just
to
come
up
with
this
plan
in
the
intent
of
a
three
bedroom.
K
Two
and
a
half
bath
was
to
make
a
property
that
was
sort
of
you
know
not
so
constrained
and
potentially
of
the
people
that
might
inhabit
the
property
that
not
just
I'm
trying
to
squeeze
every
square
footage
piece
out,
because
I
was
actually
trying
to
reduce
as
much
as
I
possibly
could.
K
I
tried
to
make
the
room
sizes
and
so
forth,
as
as
small
as
I
could,
that
was
the
intent
and
but
before
we
broke
the
commission
broke
I
if,
if
we
ended
up
moving
that
that
to
the
north,
I
think
the
northeast
side
alex
you,
the
upper
the
other
opposite
side
of
the
house.
The
upper.
K
Confluence
of
the
two
streets
and
we
ended
up
doing
a
plan
that
was
try
to
get
it
on
the
side
of
the
house,
and
there
was
a
large
retaining
wall
of
eight
to
ten
feet.
Just
hypothetically
would
that
be
something
that
the
commission
would
be
agreeable
to,
or
is
that
something
that
would
just
create
another
set
of
downstream.
D
Into
my
mind,
in
that
location,
with
that
topography
with
appropriate
landscaping
that
might
mitigate
the
visibility
of
the
retaining
wall
and
so
on,
it
would
certainly
be
something
I'd.
Consider
okay,
strongly.
K
K
You
know
we,
the
is
the
conversation
with
aaron
wilson.
The
architect
was
that
the
retaining
wall
would
be
quite
high
from
the
order
of
10
feet
potentially,
and
obviously
you
need
to
be
careful
with
the
pitch
of
the
actual
driveway
itself.
You
know
to
try
to
reduce
that
retaining
wall,
nothing
over
a
20
pitch
because
it
does
slope
down
and
we
know
what
happens
when
you
get
some
ice
or
any
type
of
freezing
and
it
slopes
down.
You
end
up
in
the
yard.
N
One
last
slight
perspective
is,
I
would
approve-
or
I
would
feel
comfortable
with
approving
on
street,
only
parking
and
and
handling
this,
and
just
for
traffic
calming
and
also
just
kind
of
bringing
this
to
a
head
and
saying
if
this
is
for
neighbors
to
get
involved
and
let
them
know
what
they
think.
You
know
I
don't
know
aaron
if
you've
spoken
with
any
of
your
neighbors
about
about
this
plan.
N
But
I
know
I'm
just
looking
ahead
like
chair,
kite
was
saying
about
these
other
cumberland
circle
and
things
that
are
exactly
the
same
thing,
where
there's
a
split
up
lot
with
a
very
steep
drop
off
the
road
and
it's
going
to
be
really
hard
to
park
on
it.
So
I
would
be
fine
with
on-street
parking
as
this
is
shown
now
and
because
I.
N
And
I
think
the
the
road
can
it's
pretty
empty.
R
There's
nothing
on
the
north
side
of.
N
Size,
I
assume,
especially
with
a
accessory
dwelling
unit.
That's
my
two
cents.
Oh
that's
my
statement.
J
I
think
I
just
want
to
go
back
to
a
comment
that
you
made
well
about
talking
with
the
neighbors.
You
know
we
do
notice
all
the
properties
within
200
feet
of
a
subject:
property
for
major
works,
as
required
by
state
statutes.
So
all
the
neighbors
should
have
received
a
notice
and
and
and
have
the
link
or
you
know,
to
look
at
plans
online.
So
I
haven't
heard
any
comments
or
concerns
from
any
of
the
neighbors
about
the
proposal,
but
to.
J
There
is
parking
shown
on
the
site
and
they
would
be
more
concerned
if
they're
only
on
street
parking.
I
don't
know.
I
know
I
do
know
that
I
have
worked
with
multiple
folks
around
arborvale
and
houston
and
cortland.
Generally
speaking,
that
area
is
very
tricky
with
parking,
especially
arbor
rail.
If
you
go
through
there,
it's
one
way,
but
it's
even
still
being
one
way
is
a
little
bit
dodgy.
J
You
know
it's
from
especially
from
a
life
safety
perspective,
so
I
you
know
can
see
that,
even
if,
if
you
all
out
at
least
one
parking
space,
you
know
that's
one
less
car
that's
got
a
park
on
the
street.
I
I
think
it's
worth
worth
the
applicant
considering
some
of
the
suggestions
that
were
made
today
that
might
work
for
him,
and
then
you
know
seeing
what
what
you
all
think
about
the
solution
that
they
arrive
upon,
because
I
don't
I
do
agree
with
janice.
J
I
think
that's
why
the
provision
and
the
guidelines
for
you
know
when
the
site
is,
has
limitations
like
the
steepness
of
the
topography.
I
think
that's,
obviously
why
that
guideline
was
created,
so
I
do
think
that
you
all
should
consider
it.
It's
not
ideal,
but
it's
also
on
the
edge
of
the
district.
As
you
all
said,
it's
not
an
area
where
it's
going
to
you
know
obscure
any
other
architectural
features
or
landscape
features,
etc.
B
I
think
aaron
at
this
point,
if
you
are
inclined
to
consider
alex's
suggestion
to
continue
the
project.
That
would
be
something
you
would
request
to
us
for
a
continuance,
and
then
we
would
make
a
motion
around
that
request.
K
Yeah
absolutely
I
mean
I
understand
this
is
a
broad,
you
know
potentially
broader
issue
than
this
one
property
and
I'm
sensitive
to
that.
So
I
I
understand
that,
and
I
understand
the
precedence
nature
of
it,
so
there's
varying
opinions
and
and
views
of
it.
So
I
I
think
continue
a
month
would
give
the
commission
time
to
think
about
it
independently
and
then,
perhaps
when
we
come
back,
we
have
a
another
solution,
some
bifurcated
approach.
That
would
maybe
work
better.
K
I
I
think
the
suggestions
already
made
were
good
ones
and
so
carry
those
back
and
continue
would
be,
certainly
would
be
amenable
to
that.
D
G
I
B
K
Oh
yeah,
thank
you
to
everybody
really
is
a
pleasure.
It
was
a
good
good
process.
So
thank
you
very
much,
and
should
I
just
drop
from
the
call
yeah.
J
Yes,
you
can
just
drop
off
and
then
just
let
me
know
in
between
now
and
next
week.
If
you
have
questions
or
want
to
follow
up
on
anything
happy
to
help.
K
E
I'm
chair
kai,
it's
been
doing
mitchell.
Do
you
have
a
quorum
if
I
were
to
step
away
for
a
family
obligation.
J
B
To
suggest
a
short
break,
I
think
we
ended
up
with
eight
left
one
two
three.
Q
B
J
V
V
V
Lee
would
be
you're
on
mute.
You
want
to
oh
peter,
I
hear
you
say
say
something
you
sound.
T
V
T
T
V
T
T
T
V
A
Just
so
you
know
you
have
to
start
again,
yeah.
J
J
V
A
Ability,
I
think,
when
we
have
a
large
number
of
people,
it
will
automatically
mute.
But
let
me
see
if
I
can't.
V
V
A
And
sean
who
who's
going
to
be
speaking,
I
it
seems
like
we
have
a
number
of
people
we'll
have
to
do
a
new
swearing-in.
We
have
a
number
of
folks
who
weren't
sworn
in
originally.
V
We
so
two
things:
if
there's
too
many,
we
could
drop
a
couple.
If
we
need
to
peter
looper
from
mha
works
will
be
speaking
and
presenting
we
have
I.
I
will
speak
only
if
he
needs
assistance
with
a
question
that
he
may
not
have
an
answer
to,
and
then
we
have
lee
woodby
and
john
toller
from
united
elevator
same
story.
They're
here
they'll
sit
in
the
background
and
if
there's
a
specific
question
related
to
the
elevator
or
a
fixture
that
peter
may
not
have
the
answer
to,
they
can
answer
that.
For
us.
A
V
S
S
Okay,
so
we've
got
the
sound
check.
S
V
We
are
not,
I,
I
think
the
next
step
is
we're
all
going
to
get
sworn
in.
Is
that
your
scream,
denise
and
peter?
Are
you
guys
presenting
right
now.
U
U
We,
you
know
we're
not
going
to
alex,
would
be
presenting.
J
U
S
J
J
B
B
B
And
we
will
go
ahead
and
square
in
I'm
going
to
read
the
oath
to
all
of
you,
and
then
I
will
call
each
of
your
names
individually
so
that
you
can
affirm
the
oath
one
at
a
time
so
that
it's
clear
for
the
record.
B
If
you
wouldn't
mind
for
those
of
you
that
we
can
see
to
raise
your
right
hand,
do
you
solemnly
swear
or
affirm
that
the
information
you
present
during
the
hearing
from
certificate
of
appropriateness
before
the
historic
resources
commission
shall
be
the
truth,
the
whole
truth
and
nothing
but
the
truth.
Peter.
B
B
R
E
C
B
Carl,
I'm
going
to
circle
back
around
to
you
for
one
last
check,
so
we
don't
miss
your
affirmation
if
you're
on
it
doesn't
maybe
doesn't
look
like
he's
on
the
list.
V
B
Well,
if
we
come
back
around
to
it,
we
can
touch
back
on
that
point.
If
we
need
to
okay
alex
I'm
going
to
turn
the
the
floor
over
to
you
for
the
staff
report
on
this
application.
J
Thank
you
sure
kite,
so
just
to
provide
you
all
with
some
context.
The
existing
elevators,
hopefully
you've
all
had
an
opportunity
to
experience
them
over
time.
They're
lovely,
beautiful,
old
elevators
that
are
manually
operated.
These
are
our
capital
projects.
Department
has
been
considering
for
some
time.
J
Modernizing
the
elevators
in
part
due
to
the
elevator
on
the
far
left
is
the
only
one
out
of
the
three
that
accesses
the
basement
and
it
has
been
out
of
commission
for
quite
some
time.
J
The
other
two
elevators
are
are
fully
operable,
but
they
do
obviously
require
kind
of
constant
maintenance
and
repair
because
they
are
so
old
and,
as
you
might
imagine,
some
of
the
mechanical
equipment
is,
is
very
old
and
and
also
has
some
there's
a
mercury
piece
in
the
the
upper
story
of
our
building,
and
so
there
are
multiple
reasons
for
the
desire
by
city,
the
city
to
upgrade
the
elevators
or
to
modernize
them
into
into
non-manually
operated
elevators.
J
So
the
first
image
I'm
just
going
to
go
through
there's
a
there's
a
if
you
look
at
the
staff
report,
you'll
see
the
ca
request
is,
has
a
fair
amount
of
components.
So
I'm
just
going
to
kind
of
pick
through.
I
will
say
that
this
application
did
come
to
their
to
the
commission
or
not
this
exact
application,
but
an
application
for
modernization
came
to
the
commission
back
in
2018.
J
J
So
that
is
where
we
are
at
present,
and
so
the
group
that's
with
us
today,
they're
all
part
of
of
varying
businesses
that
are
part
of
that
team
that
are
working
on
the
design
build.
So
I
think
overall,
the
the
current
application
is
is
way
more
successful
than
what
we
saw
before.
J
Just
you
know,
based
on
the
amount
of
original
material
that
will
be
preserved,
so
I'll
just
go
through
some
of
the
items
that
will
be
changes,
and
then
we
can
go
through
any
questions
that
you
have
so
basically
as
you're
looking
at
the
the
the
doors
and
the
surrounds
are
different,
depending
on
which
floor
you're
on
so,
if
you're
on
the
main
floor.
This
is
the
this
is
what
you'll
see
from
the
outside.
J
So
the
original
brass
doors
will
unfortunately
need
to
be
replaced,
but
they
are
contain
asbestos,
so,
but
otherwise
all
the
surrounds
and
the
floor
indicators
will
be
preserved
and
restored
as
needed.
J
J
I
think
there's
still
some
things
to
be
worked
out
when
construction
plans
are
created,
but
it's
my
understanding
that
from
the
architects
that
they
think
they
can
like
recast
from
the
original
plates
and
then
they'll
be
the
same
size.
The
biggest
change
will
be
that
the
mother
pearl
buttons
that
are
there,
cannot
be
reused.
J
They
will
need
to
be,
I
think,
a
bigger
button
that
will
also
need
to
be
illuminated
and
then
another
change.
You'll
see
on
the
first
floor
will
be
between
the
other
two
between
the
middle
cab
and
the
right
cab.
There
will
be
a
fireman
call
station
there
that
will
be
match
the
the
regular
call
station
in
dimension
and
appearance,
and
so
those
are
kind
of
like
the
main
changes
that
you'll
notice
from
the
outside.
J
On
the
first
floor,
the
other
floors
have
cut
more
basic
steel
doors,
so
those
will
be
replaced,
but
will
you
know
obviously
look
pretty
similar
to
what's
there
now?
J
So
I
kind
of
organized
this
to
some
degree,
my
my
just
my
slides
to
some
degree
to
kind
of
follow
what
was
typed
up
in
the
ca
request,
but
the
the
this
is
the
picture
on
the
bottom
is
the
is
the
are
the
it's
a
threshold
to
into
the
elevator
cab.
Those
will
need
to
be
replaced
to
accommodate
accommodate
the
new
doors.
So
I
did
get
a
couple
of
images
last
minute
that
I
added
to
the
application
packet
that
I'm
happy
to
pull
up.
J
If
it's
helpful,
the
the
new
thresholds
will
be
brass
and
obviously
new
brass
does
not
look
the
same
as
brass.
J
That
is
this
old,
so
it
will
be
pretty
starkly
different
right
off
the
get-go,
but
it
will
patina
pretty
quickly
as
far
as
I
understand
so
so
that
will
be
the
the
change
there
and
this
just
there's
some
close-ups
of
the
other
features
that
you
can
see
like
the
the
floor
indicator
that
will
be
restored
and
then
the
call
plate
that
will
need
to
be
replaced
as
you
go
into
the
cab
one
of
the
biggest
issues
last
time
where
there
were
just
a
lot
of
unknowns
about
what
could
work
with
ada
compliance.
J
So
this
can
all
the
good
news
is
that
all
of
these
original
brass
features
can
remain
in
place
and
the
biggest
change.
I
think
that
you'll
notice,
if
you're
looking
at
the
sidewalls,
is
that
they
will
need
to
be
shortened
but
a
little
bit.
I
think
they're
a
little
bit
unsure
of
how
much
at
this
point,
but
I
was
told,
give
or
take
four
inches
which
will
be
taken
out
of
the
center
and
then
I'm
not.
J
So
I
I
think
that
is
a
little
bit
of
a
maybe
an
unknown
at
this
point.
So
I
think,
if
that
is
the
case,
that
it
is
somewhat
unknown,
that
we
need
to
make
sure
that
we,
our
all
of
that,
is
verified
with
staff
when
when
it
is
known
as
far
as
like
the
dimension
and
how
the
venting
will
be
cut
and
whether
there
will
be
a
seam
here
or
what
that
will
will
look
like
appearance
wise.
So
I've
just
included,
you
know
more
shots
of
the
interior
of
the
cabs.
J
J
So
we
are,
of
course
recommending
that
you
know
I've
noted
that
as
a
concern,
but
at
the
end
of
the
day,
if
the
commission
is
comfortable
approving
an
elevator
modernization,
I
think
that
you
know
it's
going
to
come
with
some
small
compromises
and
I
think
that,
given
the
amount
of
other
features,
that
is,
that
they're
able
to
retain
and
preserve,
I
think
that
you
know
we
kind
of
have
to
give
a
little,
and
I
would
add
too,
that
I
did
reach
out
to
the
shippo
staff
to
the
jennifer,
cathy,
the
restoration
specialist
with
their
office,
to
get
her
courtesy
review
on
the
application
and
she
had
the
same
feedback
that
I
did
that
overall,
if
this
were
a
you
know,
rehabilitation
project
that
the
that
the
changes
that
are
being
proposed
would
be
acceptable
and
meet
the
secretary
of
the
interior
standards.
J
So
I
was
pleased
to
get
that
feedback
from
her.
So
I
I
think
one
of
the
things
we
should
probably
consider
today
is
if
the
gates
are
removed.
Where
did
they
go?
What
do
we
do
with
them?
Surely
we
don't
want
them
to
get
lost
in
some
city
facility
somewhere?
Not
have
some
kind
of
second
life,
I
I
don't
know
that
I
have
any
great
ideas
today,
but
I
definitely
can
ponder
it,
but
if
you
all
have
any
thoughts
on
that
shirley
would
be
open.
J
I
know
that
that
the
capital
projects
department
has
talked
about
updating
some
space
on
the
first
floor,
to
perhaps
have
a
newer,
updated
museum
space
of
some
kind,
which
might
make
be
a
good
place
for
the
gates.
So
just
a
couple
of
other
pictures,
the
ceiling
this
will
all
be
retained,
restored,
cleaned
up.
J
J
On
the
wall
here
as
you're
facing
the
the
doors,
there
will
be
a
new
control
operating
panel
here,
and
so
the
dimensions
of
that
are
are
estimated
here,
but
not
known
specifically.
So
I
think
we
would
just
need
to
verify
that
in
the
field
once
it
is
known,
but
that
is
how
the
elevators
would
be
operated.
J
This
slide
also
shows
the
proposed
color
palette.
I
added
to
your.
It
was
not
until
yesterday,
but
I
added
in
1988
the
in
conjunction
with
the
the
restoration
school
that
used
to
be
at
ab
tech.
J
There
was
a
restoration
report
or
investigation
and
certain
report
that
was
done
regarding
the
elevator
colors
and
the
in
the
in
the
lobby
colors,
and
in
that
report
they
noted
that
in
the
walls
in
particular,
I
think
had
over
18
layers
of
paint,
so
they
examined
all
of
that
and
and
all
the
different
features
and
took
samples,
and
it's
really
interesting
to
report.
J
So
this
project
also
includes
repainting
the
cab
interiors,
as
well
as
installing
new
marmoleum
or
linoleum
flooring,
which
it
has
now,
and
that
was
typical
elevators
of
this
era
so-
and
I
think
that
this
point
that
the
architect
has
sent
me
several
different
types
of
linoleum
and
colors,
and
so
I
think
it's
just
kind
of
up
to
this
group
to
make
the
determination
on
what
the
color
appropriate
color
for
the
flooring
is
so.
But
that
is
all
I
have,
and
I
will
answer
questions
if
you
all
have
any.
U
Hey
alex,
can
I
interject
just
a
couple
of
clarifications.
U
Well,
just
briefly
and
I'll
make
this
quick,
the
threshold
is
really
two
parts,
one
is
the
the
hall
threshold
and
the
second
is
the
car
threshold
or
the
cap
threshold.
The
the
whole
one
will
remain
so
if
they're
parallel.
So
it's
really
only
part
of
that
overall
threshold
that
will
be
replaced,
so
that
was
one
you
if
you'd
like.
I
can
give
you
a
brief
idea
of
that.
Our
idea
of
the
decorative
venting
and
how
that
will
change.
U
So
the
idea
is
essentially
finding
the
right
point
to
to
remove
it,
so
that
and
probably
doing
it
symmetrical
symmetrically,
so
the
symmetry
still
makes
sense,
but
so
likely
just
a
little
off
of
each
in
so
the
the
pattern
makes
good
sense
and
really,
you
know,
let's
see,
oh
the
new
operating
panel.
I
wanted
to
say
also
that
the
the
drawing
that
I
have
up
there
is.
T
U
Actually,
like
about
the
location
is
retaining
everything
that
was
existing,
but
then
the
new
door
wall,
essentially
it's
there.
So
what
is
new,
is
you
know,
houses
that
so
I
I
think
it
detracts
less
from
what
was
there?
That's
that's
all.
I
wanted
to
say.
B
Commissioners,
do
y'all
have
any
additional
questions
for
alex
at
the.
C
N
Alex
you
had
said
there,
there
was
a
picture
of
the
mail
slot.
Is
that
coming
out,
or
why
was
that
in
the
packet.
J
I
think
so,
like
the
the
applicant
or
the
city
staff
shared
with
me,
a
packet
of
photos
that
were
taken
at
some
point
and
I've
been,
I
will
let
walter
ear
from
our
capital
projects
department
is
here.
Walter
was
I
I
think
I
was
thinking
that
that
photo
was
just
in
that
packet
of
images
like
it's
context
for
original
features
down
there
is
that
correct.
I
J
Yeah
we're
just
talking
about
the
elevator
cabs
themselves,
and
it's
if
you
read
the
report,
it's
pretty
interesting
because
it
it
describes
the
original
paint
color
ish
to
be
like.
I
don't
know
to
have
some
more
like
intense
green
themes
down
there
that
had
some
kind
of
sparkle
to
it.
I
don't
know
it's
interesting
to
read
to
read
through
that
report,
but
there's
no
other
proposed
changes
on
the
first
floor
as
part
of
this
application.
It's
just
the
elevator.
B
B
Hey
I
we
can,
if
the
applicant's
got
any
kind
of
additional
information
or
if
commissioners
have
questions
for
the
applicant.
I
know
you've
clarified
a
few
things
already.
But
if
there's
any
questions
at
the
moment
for
the
applicant
to
clarify
from
commissioners
and
then
we'll
check
in
for
some
public
comment
and
then
have
a
bigger
discussion
following
public.
N
N
I
can
ask
for
the
applicant,
since
these
are
character,
defining
elements
of
the
building.
Is
it
possible
that
what
is
what
hap
the
asbestos
inside
the
doors
if
it's
left
alone,
isn't
it
fine.
Q
S
U
Simple
as
just
the
asbestos
aspect,
it
also
relates
to
some
of
the
other
fireworks.
N
I'm
just
asking
about
the
specific
if
it
was
left
alone
I'm.
I
think
this
is
an
important
piece
of
the
of
the
building
and
the
gates,
the
scissor
gates
as
well,
and
if
you
put
in
the
back
somewhere
the
video
and
and
kept
it
being
run
by
operator,
you
wouldn't
have
to
do
any
of
this.
Would
you.
U
I
guess
technically
you
really
wouldn't
it
would
essentially
all
be
grandfathered
in,
but
I
I
do
know
that
it's
my
understanding,
they're
they're,
you
know
they're
plagued
with
downtime
and
that
sort
of
thing
which
may
be
a
part
of.
U
I
mean
I
think
you
can
service
it
sure
yeah,
it's
my
understanding
that
you
can
still
find
someone
to
service
this.
I
think.
Oh
there
was
originally
otis
equipment.
Sure.
J
W
Okay,
I'm
john
tolley
with
the
united
elevator
services
to
answer
your
first
question.
The
we're
still
looking
at
it's
gonna
depend,
but
but
I've
done
doors
where
I
kept
the
asbestos
doors.
It's
not
a
great
idea,
the
the
way
door
operators
work.
Nowadays
we
don't
have
to
drill
them.
The
only
problem
with
asbestos
is
we
drill
through
them
matching
is
going
to
be
a
challenge.
We
think
we
can
handle
it
either
way
as
far
as
the
gates
go.
You
only
see
a
gate
like
that
in
the
movies
that
is
dangerous
for
anybody
there.
W
Somebody
can
stick
their
hand
through
that
in
a
heartbeat,
so
the
liability
that's
running
on
that
is
really
high.
As
far
as
the
machinery
in
the
machine
room
that
really
needs
to
change
out,
because
is
it
still
available
to
a
point?
We've
got
a
dead
elevator
because
it
would
be
a
huge
amount
to
try
to
repair
it.
It's
almost
in,
I
won't
say
it's
impossible,
but
it
would
cost
more
to
repair
that
a
lot
of
these
other
costs.
W
If,
if,
but
you
you're
at
the
point
where
even
at
some
point
somebody
said
this
has
got
to
go,
this
is
so
unusual
so
unusual
to
have
a
manual
elevator
in
a
public
building.
There
are
few
out
there,
but
they're,
not
in
any
kind
of
public
buildings,
so
yeah
and
as
far
as
the
again
the
gate,
the
gates
just
is,
is
an
accident
waiting
to
happen
in
a
lot
of
ways.
It's
beautiful
and
it's
cool
and
having
operators
is
awesome,
but
there's
a
lot
of
liability
going
with
that.
N
Right,
I
think,
like
alex
when
we
were
talking
about
the
drummer
building
and
its
windows,
cost
isn't
in
our
purview,
correct.
J
No,
it's
not.
I
mean,
like
we've
talked,
we've
usually
talked
through
this,
that
you
we're
all
human
beings,
so
we
all
understand
that
it
is
very
expensive
and
you
know
being
that
the
city
is
a
municipal
body,
so
we
tend
to
have
less
funding
for
some
of
the
more
you
know
in
this
building.
I
do
know
I
work
with
walter
all
the
time
on
ca
requests
for
all
different
parts
of
this
building,
because
it's
a
lot
to
maintain.
J
So,
yes,
we,
I
think
we
could
consider
it
just
from
a
human
standpoint
that,
yes,
it
is
a
substantial
cost
to
the
city
and
taxpayers
to
you
know,
maintain
the
existing
elevators,
but
no
cost
is
not
within
your
purview.
As
far
you
can
only
base
your
decisions
on
the
standards.
B
Interested
in
hearing
a
little
bit,
we
haven't
talked
a
lot
about
what's
happening
in
the
machine
room
and,
and
it's
certainly
not
part
of
the
sort
of
character
defining
features
of
the
elevator
but
alex
one
of
the
things
that
you
mentioned
in
your
report.
That
struck
me
was
sort
of
you
know.
There
is
a
uniqueness
to
this
elevator
and
the
way
it
operates,
and
certainly
those
of
us
that
have
ridden
up
the
elevator
and
experienced
it.
B
B
I
think
in
some
way
and
and
highlighting
that
as
something
that
was
very
unique
to
the
building
is,
is
interesting
and
and
probably
appropriate,
and
I
would
say
to
that
sort
of
ties
into
my
question
around
the
sort
of
guts
of
the
elevator
in
the
michigan
room
and
what
happens
to
those
components
of
the
of
the
elevator
that
we
don't
see
and
that
the
pool
doesn't
see
and
is
there
an
opportunity
for
them
to
be
able
to
see
it
now
that
it's
not
going
to
be
in
use
anymore?.
U
Sure
we,
you
know,
it's
really
not
part
of
the
scope.
I
guess.
However,
we've
we've
had
some
conversation
about
retaining
anything
that
is,
you
know,
has
aesthetic
or
historic
value
or
turning
it
over
to
the
owner
for
a
potential
exhibit
space
or
something
to
that
effect.
Some
of
these
components-
they're.
Q
U
Nice
in
their
own
way,
they're
beautiful
industrial.
You
know
pieces,
but
I
think-
and
I
know
the
cd
is
also
archiving
some
of
this.
It's
my
understanding
with
the
video
and.
T
U
Of
that-
and
we
also
have
some
other
photographs
but
beyond
that,
we
really
don't
have
provision
in
in
this
scope
of
work
to
actually
create
an
exhibit,
but
we've
recommended
that
that
happen.
U
You
know
one
of
the
the
big
problems
up
there
honestly
is
this:
it's
a
mercury
switch
gear
and
literally
has
open
little
pools
of
mercury
and
it's
incredible.
It's
really
cool,
but
obviously
it's
toxic,
and
so
whether
you
know
that
could
be
cleaned
up
and
turned
over.
I
don't
know.
I
U
U
U
They
could
be
a
petition
law
and
there's
a
lot
of
things
that
could
be
done
with
those
maybe
they're
a
petition
wall
that
that
partitions
off
a
section
of
a
room
that
then
displays
the
elevator
stuff.
I
don't
know,
but
I'm
kind
of
rambling.
I
don't
know
if
I'm
answering
the
question
exactly,
but
I
think
I
think
in
some
ways
the
best
opportunity
would
be
to
photograph,
because
a
lot
of
it's
going
to
be
almost
difficult
to
to
hang
on
to
unless
she
had
a
large
large
room.
J
I
would
say
that
would
be
staff's
suggestion
too.
I
don't
think
the
city
that
we
probably
don't
have
any
location
that
would
adequately
store
all
that
equipment
or
have
a
place
for
it,
but
I
I
also
would
say
just
to
the
commission
that
I
did
just
stacy
martin,
who
was
the
historic
resources
director
for
many
years.
I
did
ask
her
thoughts
on
that.
Just
to
see
what
she
thought
and
she
said
photographing
would
be
the
best
way
to
document
as
well.
B
I
know
in
other
projects
that
have
landmark
designation
or
national
register
designation.
There
have
been
some
requirements
to
archive
and
to
store
original
things
that
have
been
replaced
on
site
somewhere.
We've
done
that,
for
example,
at
the
smith,
mcdowell
house
and
other
places
where
we've
had
we're
repairing
and
restoring
what
was.
There
was
not
an
option
that
we've
had
to
do
some
retaining.
H
Of
those
original
components,
on-site,
obviously
that's.
J
Yeah,
I
don't
disagree.
I
think
it's
sort
of
I
mean
I
I'm
not
of
the
mind
to
say
that
they're
not
character,
defining
features
like
the
actual
mechanical
parts,
but
they're,
not
they're,
not
visual.
No
most
members
of
the
public
have
never
seen
them.
I
in
fact,
have
never
been
up
there
to
see
them,
so
I
I
mean
I
would
say
that
that
the
character
defining
features
that
are
really
most
critical,
obviously
are
the
elevator
cabs
themselves,
which
are
clearly
called
out
in
the
designation
ordinance.
J
So
I
think
that
is
that
is
more
critical
to
me,
not
that
we
shouldn't.
I
think
we
absolutely
should
document
the
mechanical
parts
but-
and
I
think
and
I'll
let
walter
speak
to
this,
but
and
that
because
I
was
not
in
the
last
meeting
or
two,
but
I
know
that
our
some
staff
have
been
working
on
a
documentary
for
the
elevators,
and
I
don't
know
where
that
is
at
this
point,
but
any
update
walter.
I
Yeah
we
are
working
on
a
a
video
documentary
of
the
elevators.
It's
going
to
include
photography
of
the
elevator
machine
room
as
well
as
each
spores
and
the
cabs.
You
know
on
the
ambitious
side
of
that,
we
would
like
to
get
character
actors
to
deploy
period,
but
but
it
will
be
a
video
photography.
Video
recording
of
you
know,
documentation
of
of
the
elevators.
U
And
in
addition
to
that,
we
have
a
photographer,
who
is
who's
taken,
the
images
that
are
presented
in
the
the
drawings
but
she's
an
amazing
photographer.
Initially,
we
had
hoped
she
would
do
the
machine
room
as
well,
but
she
was
completely
concerned
about
entering
the
machine
room.
It's
not
good
to
do
so
in
addition
to
the
mercury
there's
until
it
is
cleaned
up,
there's
a
lot
of
asbestos.
So
I'm
not
sure
we
can
count
on
her
for
that
to
record
its
original
state.
U
But
all
of
these
stuff,
you
know
the
tabs,
the
lobbies
and
stuff
she's
already
started
started,
taking
some
really
very
good
photos.
I
To
key
off
of
that
peter,
we
are
scheduling
for
the
videographer
to
go
up
to
the
machine
room
once
the
between
the
period
where
the
abatement
or
the
cleanup,
especially
the
cleanup,
is
done
and
before
we
start
doing
other
work
up
there
to
provide
a
fire
enclosure,
so
they
will
photographer.
They
will
do
photography
up
there
during
that
period
when
it's
clean.
B
Peter
I
had
maybe
one
more
question
and
I
think
I'm
left
a
little
bit
still
unclear
on
the
on
what's
happening
with
the
vented
sort
of
screen.
That's
at
the
top
of
the
elevator
calves.
U
Right
so,
basically,
as
we
discussed
the
the
the
the
length
of
it
needs
to
change
a
little
bit
to
coordinate
with
the
the
size
of
the
car
that
it's
a
domino,
I
think
it
all
relates
to
the
door,
replacement,
etc.
U
So,
having
said
that,
my
intent
would
be
to
remove
shorten
it
so
that
it
ends
up
with
a
symmetrical
design.
If
you
take
a
look
at
the
design,
the
scroll
work
essentially
would
be.
It
would
be
the
same
at
each
end,
I
mean
that's.
My
gut
reaction
is
the
best
way
to
do
it
once
if
that
is
done
properly.
I
think
it
would
be
very
difficult
to
even
tell
that
it's
been
done,
but
the
reason
is
is
to
again
coordinate
with
a
slight
change
in
the
in
the
dimension
of
the
cab.
U
B
U
B
And
at
this
point
I'm
going
to
open
the
the
floor
for
public
comment.
If
there
is.
A
B
Thank
you
shannon.
I
will
close
the
floor
for
public
comment
and
we
continue
can
continue
the
conversation.
I'd
love
to
hear
from
other
commissioners
feedback
that
you
all
have
on
this
application
to
give
the
the
team
an
opportunity
to
to
get
that
feedback.
B
O
Yeah
so
I'll
go,
but
I
think
this
is
a
really
challenging
vote
for
sure,
because
you
know
I
I'd
need
to
see
some
of
those
components
go
or
change,
but
we
also
appreciate
you
know
giving
accessibility
to
folks
that
are
disabled
and
providing
important
life
safety.
O
M
Proposed
this
is
a
challenging
project
and
as
a
person
who
loves
old
things,
it's
a
little
hard
to
see,
especially
as
chair
kite
mentioned,
that
gate.
M
However,
I
feel
really
comfortable,
especially
knowing
that
alex
did
a
courtesy
review
with
shippo
and
that
their
feeling
is
that
it
meets
secretary
of
interior
standards
for
rehabilitation,
there's
only
so
much
you
can
do
when
you're
rehabilitating
mechanical
mechanical
equipment
of
this
age.
So
that's
my
immediate
take.
X
Yeah,
I
definitely
agree.
I
think
that
it's
unfortunate,
that
we're
losing
these
fantastic
pieces
in
you
know
everyday
use,
but
when
something
like
this
comes
to
the
forefront,
safety
has
to
be
number
one
and
the
fact
that
any
piece
of
these
elevators
is
dangerous
to
anybody.
I
think
that
is
a
concern,
so
I
think
these
are
good
changes.
O
I
do
have
one
more
comment
about
just
where
some
of
this
stuff
is
going
to
go.
Ideally,
you
know,
I
don't
know
if
we'll
really
have
any
control
or
say
so
over
that
aspect
of
it
and
it
would,
you
know,
obviously
be
great
to
have
some
kind
of
documentation
of
it
as
well.
O
But
you
know
if
these
items
could
be
something
that
is
on
public
display
just
based
on
my
work
in
historic,
commercial
buildings,
things
end
up
shoved
in
the
basement
and
then
you
know
hauled
away
over
the
years.
So
I'd
really
hate
to
see
that
happen
to
things,
maybe
not
so
much
some
of
the
mechanical
equipment,
but
you
know
for
sure
you
know
the
cages
and
things
like
that
or
the
original.
O
J
Yeah
I'll
just
offer
to,
for
my
part,
I'm
certainly
happy
to
work
with
walter
outside
of
this
meeting,
to
have
an
inventory
of
the
mechanical
pieces
and
just
be
really
clear
on
kind
of
what
we
think
is.
You
know
where
those
things
are
going
and
just
so
just
so.
I
understand
that
too,
because
that's
certainly
you
know
it
might
be
worth
knowing
you
know
and
just
seeing
the
photographic
documentation
and
maybe
just
considering
how
any
of
it
might
be
displayed.
Obviously
the
gates
are
something
that
is
visible
to
the
public.
J
Now
we
certainly
want
to
retain
to
to
you
know
present
to
the
public
in
some
format
down
the
road,
but
if
there
are
any
other
components
that
aren't
visible,
I
don't
know
walter
if
there's
anything
up
there,
if
it's
all
like
really
massive
or
what
what
the
pieces
are.
That
might
be
something
interesting
to
share,
but
we
can
talk
about
that
outside
of
the
meeting.
If
it's
helpful.
B
We
for
the
commissioners
I
want
to
also
maybe
withdraw
your
attention
to
in
our
packets
that
we
received
the
secretary.
The
interior
standard
for
rehabilitation
is
in
our
included
in
the
design
in
our
whatever
folder.
That's
called
design
standards
folder.
So
you
may
there's
a
really
strong
list
of
sort
of
ten
criteria
for
rehabilitating,
which
I
think
is
valuable
for
us
to
read
as
we're
considering
this,
I
don't
know.
B
You
know
in
general,
I
feel
like
the
application
is
strong
in
that
regard,
and
certainly
would
reiterate.
I
should
lose
feedback
and
alex's
feedback.
What
I
most
really
want
to
know
is
how
many
times
you
have
to
push
the
call
button
to
get
the
elevator
to
come.
P
Five
times,
though,
that
certainly
is
a
novel
part
of
the
experience
but
yeah,
but.
U
N
When
this
first
came
up
for
in
in
august
of
2018
there
was,
it
was
proposed
to
leave
one
of
I'm
for
keeping
them
all.
I
think
this
is
unique
to
asheville.
I
think
this
is
unique
to
the
building.
N
I
think
this
is
character,
defining,
I
think
it's
a
hassle
for
people
who
live
in
the
building
and
it's
charming
for
everybody
in
the
city,
and
this
is
city
the
city
building
as
much
as
it
is-
and
I
know
it's-
a
pain
for
y'all
for
city
staff
and
but
the
the
the
first
application
that
came
in
that
was
keeping
one
of
these
calves.
N
Even
if
it's
mothballed,
instead
of
throwing
away
something
that
we're
all
going
to
look
back
and
say
I
you
know,
we
were
happy
that
we
are
a
part
around
when
this
existed,
even
if
it's
mothballed
and
shut
the
demand
on
these
elevators,
I
don't
think
is
that
a
po
I
would.
N
N
Why
other
commissioners,
since
this
is
closed
right
now,
the
is
that
something
that
other
commissioners
or
are
there
other
commissioners
who
want
to
keep
this
this
part
of
this
building
and
not
modify
it
and
not
take
it
out
to
because
this
is
ada
accessible
right
now
and.
C
N
To
other
commissioners,
is
there
any
appetite
for
that
instead
of
a
wholesale
removal
of
historic
of
the
I'll
stop
talking,
you
know
what
I'm
saying.
N
Exactly
keeping
it
operate
operational
as
is,
but
it's
probably
shut,
and
it's
only
for
special
occasions,
but
at
least
it's
there.
It's
not
gone
and
around
the
corner
is
a
good
example
of
you
know.
The
the
freight
elevator
has
been
modified
in
this
space
and
just
feels
weird
the
way
it
looks
with
the
buttons
and
the
it's
just
not
right
it
just
doesn't
look
the
the
carpet
doesn't
match
the
drapes
on
that
much
and
then
so.
That's
where
I
was.
J
Correct
me,
if
I'm
wrong
to
the
to
the
to
the
team
working
on
this
project,
but
is,
would
it
even
be
possible
from
a
mechanical
standpoint,
to
keep
one
elevator,
because
I
know
that
came
up
that
question
came
up
last
time
and
there
wasn't
there
wasn't
a
team
of
experts
such
as
yourselves
in
the
room
to
answer
that
question.
So
it
was
one
of
the
unknowns.
So
can
you
all
speak
to
that.
U
W
Yeah
I
understand
this.
These
elevators
were
put
in,
I
think
in
26,
the
or
maybe
actually
installed
when
this
building
was
built.
The
elevators
were
craned
in
there,
probably
with
mule
teams,
before
that
tile
roof
was
put
on
okay,
because
that's
how
they
did
it
back
then.
So
you,
this
is
the
most
original
other
than
paint
elevator
just
about
I've
seen
in
or
rarely
ever
see,
still
operational.
W
By
now,
an
elevator
like
this
would
have
been
modernized,
probably
three
and
getting
ready
to
start
its
fourth
time,
because
you
generally
modernize
an
elevator
every
25
to
30
years.
The
equi
yeah.
Can
I
we're
keeping
them
running,
but
it's
very
difficult
because
they're
very
stupid
and
yeah
it's
cool
to
have
somebody
in
there
driving
and
running
it,
and
I've
had
my
opportunity
because
I
wanted
to
play
with
it
and
when
I
was
13
years
old.
I
worked
in
a
place
and
that's
what
I
did.
W
I
ran
the
elevator
part
time
and
it
was
great,
but
it
they
don't
hit
the
floor
and
you
got
to
look
at
what
your
public
is
and
again
yeah
nobody's
gotten
hurt
yet,
but
it
doesn't,
it
can
happen
and
it
does
happen
and
you've
got
that
liability.
You've
got
the
liability
of
not
being
at
floor
level.
Your
mechanics
up
there,
each
one
of
those
machines
weighs
right
at
two
and
a
half
tons
for
us
to
get
them
out
of.
There
is
going
to
be
challenging.
W
The
newer
machinery
is
similar,
but
it's
much
smaller
and
can
be
taken
apart
for
me
to
get
any
of
that,
as
this
is
going
to
come
out
in
pieces,
there's
some
fly
ball
governors,
which
is
what
everybody
thinks
is
cool
that
come
out
and
they've
got
the
balls
on
them.
They
spin
when
the
elevator
moves,
that's
something
to
keep
that's
kind
of
cool.
The
gates
are
cool
the
gates,
just
lift
off,
and
you
can
take
them
anywhere.
W
W
W
How
long
is
it
going
to
be
down
when
it
does
that
you
know
in
doing
this
we're
able
to
to
to
schedule
your
downtown
downtime,
whereas
nobody's
wanting
to
spend
the
money,
the
elevator
that's
dead
right
now
has
been
down
quite
a
while
and
any
way
you
look
at
it
when
it
goes
down.
You're,
looking
at
elevators
coming
down
for
16
plus
weeks
and
and
maybe
longer
during
the
covet
time
that
that
time
has
gone
out
quite
a
bit.
N
W
R
N
I
get
that
I
get
that,
but
you're
saying
new
elevators
have
a
lifespan
of
is
that
new
elevator
mechanics
the
what
pulls
it
up
and
down
that's
what
has
a
20-year
life
span
or
the
cab.
W
Well
now
the
machine
will
probably
have
another
lifespan
of
50
years.
Quite
honestly,
the
stuff
that's
in
there's
last
hundred
years.
That's
great!
You
don't
build
stuff
like
nobody
builds
anything
like
that
anymore,
but
they're
also
old
and
they're
they're
wearing
down,
and
you
can't
even
like
I
said
I
know
people
can
come
in
and
do
it,
but
for
how
long
they're
gonna
be
able
to
do
that,
the
keeping
it
running
and
especially
on
a
temporary
base?
Is
it
feasible,
yeah
the
control
part
of
it?
You
want
to
hit
floors.
W
W
It
it's
challenging
to
explain,
but
you
wouldn't
drive
down
any
of
you-
are
driving
a
96
year
old
vehicle
every
day.
So
I
love
the
seller.
Believe
me,
I'm
I'm
an
elevator
guy
through
and
through
I
love
going
to
this
job
and
I'm
with
y'all.
I
love
riding
this
elevator
and,
unlike
y'all
I
love
it
more
because
I've
gotten
to
drive.
So
I'm
with
you
on
that
side
of
it.
O
N
Yes,
that
is
not
daily
operational,
but
it
is
ceremoniously
if
that's
a
word
operational,
just
like
the
subways
in
new
york
that
they
find
that
were
mothballed
and
I
think
below
city
hall
there
where
they
came
back
and
it's
there
and
it
and
then
they
read
it
and
and
leave
it
the
way
it
is
it's
the
original
one
of
these
is
the
original.
All
three
aren't
going
up
and
down
you
have,
but
all
day
every
day,
but
for
instead
of
putting
it
in
a
museum.
R
N
But
yes,
that
that's
what
I
was.
N
V
Well,
this
is
sean
bowman
with
weaver
cook.
One
challenge
we're
faced
with
leaving
an
elevator.
Is
that
we're
going
to
rebuild
the
machine
room
and
bring
that
machine
room
up
to
code
and
leaving
the
old
equipment
would
not
pass
current
day
code?
V
W
Another
issue,
because
I'm
trying
to
be
practical
with
what
you
said
is:
okay,
emily,
I
believe,
mentioned
the
push
buttons
in
there.
You
only
got
one
set
of
push
buttons
now
I
can't
attach
that
that
would
strictly
be
for
somebody
running
somebody
up
and
down.
You
can't
tie
that
controller
into
the
other
one,
and
I
can't
control
tie
a
modern
controller
into
a
gate.
Car
switch
where
somebody's
turning
the
crank.
N
Foreign
sean,
if
the,
if
you
don't
touch
one
of
them,
you
don't
have
to
bring
it
up
to
code,
is
what
I
understood
from
the
the
last
time
this
was
brought
up.
You
only
have
to
bring
it
up
to
code
sort
of
and
tell
me
if
I'm
wrong
on
that,
but
my
mothball
plan
we
shouldn't.
I
know
this
sort
of
like
a
a
compromise.
N
V
Yeah,
I
think,
generally,
when
it
comes
to
so,
for
instance,
if
we
weren't
to
touch
the
stairwell
during
the
renovation
we
wouldn't
have
to
bring
the
handrails
up
to
code.
I
think
and
I'll
let
john
speak
more
of
this,
but
because
the
three
elevators
share
a
hoist
way
and
share
a
machine
room
there.
That
might
be
a
difference
here,
but
I'll.
Let
john
speak
to
that.
W
Thank
you
so
much
here's
the
thing
when
y'all
first
came
out
with
this
2018,
you
also
didn't
have
2019
code,
which
the
state
of
north
carolina
has
adopted
and
they're
going
to
be
kind
of
lenient
with
y'all
and
what
we're
doing
with
this,
because
I
spoke
to
them
they're
like
yeah.
We
want
to
get
as
much
done.
There
are
some
things
I
have
to
put
in
here
to
make
2019
code.
W
These
are
not
truly
ada
elevators.
They
just
aren't
that
you
don't
have
a
wheelchair
turning
radius.
We
cannot
get
that
so
we're
going
to
do
every
other
possible
feature
that
we
can
here's
the
thing
right
now,
the
building's
fairly
empty.
Okay.
From
what
I
understand
and
what
I've
seen
since
I've
been
been
in
that
building
for
the
last
few
years,
what
if
the
building
gets
that
building
was
designed
to
have
three
elevators
that
size.
So
now,
maybe
what
one
thing
I'll
promise
you,
no
matter
what
these
elevators
are
gonna
break
at
some
point.
W
W
I
I
I'll
you
know,
obviously
we're
good
good
with
how
we
all
have,
but
it
there's
a
lot
of
challenges,
a
lot
of
just
the
practical
application
of
having
enough
elevators
to
move
people
in
and
out
of
the
building
when
court's
in
session
or
when
what
all
the
business
of
the
city
is
going
on,
and
those
elevators
especially
right
now
think
about
covet
right
now,
where
only
maybe
two
people
should
even
be
in
that
elevator.
W
N
I
don't
think
the
building's
practical
if
it
was
a
practical
building,
you'd
move
into
a
toys,
r
us
on
the
edge
of
town,
and
that
would
be
a
good
place
for
all
the
city
to
meet.
But
it's
it's
a
it's
a
it's
a
it's
an
oddball
building!
That's
too
small
for
city
council,
it's
too
small
for
the
elevator,
it's
too
small
for
alex
to
have
a
conversation
without
overlapping
conversations
getting
in
her
office.
N
B
B
I
love
the
opportunity
to
to
preserve
the
experience
of
the
elevator
and
I
think
that's
one
thing
that
is
part
of
the
character
defining
thing
of
it,
but
it's
I
don't
see
a
practical
pathway
to
that
and
I
and
without
I
think,
putting
burden
and
hardship
on
the
city
in
the
long
run,
and
I
think
that
there's
a
balance
there.
B
I
think
that
the
secretary
of
interior
standards
acknowledges
the
balance
between
preserving
what's
there
and
the
need
to
rehabilitate
in
a
way,
that
is
that
that
does
have
good
balance
in
terms
of
when
you
restore
and
when
you
replace
and
how
much
you
preserve
and
an
acknowledgement
that
modernization
is
necessary,
and
so
for
me,
I
you
know,
I
think
I
I
get
excited
with
an
opportunity
to
preserve
it
and
to
keep
it
operational.
B
The
way
that
it
is,
but
I
think
it
gets
stuck
in
a
little
bit
of
balance
of
that
practicality-
piece
that
I
think
we
have
to
be
sensitive
to.
So
that's
that's
where
I
get
stuck.
J
J
D
D
Now
I'm
unmuted
yeah
just
to
go
on
record.
I
I
completely
agree
with
chair
kites.
F
Observations,
I
agree
with
chair
kite
too,
and
I
question
look
ahead
politically,
you
go
to
the
council
and
say
we
want
to
maintain
two
elevator
systems
in
essence,
and
we
want
you
to
pay
for
it.
You
know
what
would
their
reaction
be
and
what
could
they
do?
Can
they
come
back
because
they
could
legitimately
say
our
own
standards
say
we
we
can
meet
these.
F
This
is
what
can
be
done
and
we've
decided
that
for
for
justifiable
and
understandable,
and
will
I
respect
your
viewpoint,
nostalgia
of
the
experience
but
to
say
by
the
way,
with
all
the
other
challenges
you
have
in
the
city
and
services
and
needs
that
we're
going
to
make
you
do
this
at
the
expense
of.
This
is
also
a
little
unfair,
I
think,
to
to
chair
kite's
viewpoint.
So
I
I
agree.
I
would
love
to
keep
the
experience,
but
we
have
to
be
practical
as
well
and
it
does.
X
Yeah,
I
definitely
agree
with
turki
and
the
other
opinions
on
this.
I
think
that
it's
such
a
wonderful
idea
to
consider
like
the
experience
of
seeing
that
elevator
in
that
in
that
space,
where
it
was
used
for
sure,
but
I
think
the
value
of
trying
to
keep
that
running
for
any
length
kind
of
doesn't
make
any
sense
when
we
know
that
it's
going
to
break
down
and
then
eventually
just
become
like
a
standstill
monument
when
it
could
have
been
that
in
another
space
if
we
moved
it
anyway.
X
B
I
will
or
bill
before
that.
I
have
one
question
for
for
alex
and
I
don't
it
may
tie
to
a
potential
motion
on
some
level.
I
think
that
there's
a
general
consensus
from
the
commission
about
around
the
idea
of
documenting
the
elevators
the
way
that
they
are
including
machine
room
components
and
things
like
that,
and
I
acknowledge
that
that's
maybe
outside
of
the
scope
of
the
design
team
and
the
construction
team,
that's
presenting
and
looking
obviously
to
move
forward
with
the
modernization
project.
B
But
I
wonder
what
sort
of
our
next
steps
might
be
alex
in
in
sort
of
reinforcing
the
the
consensus.
I
think
of
this
commission
that
there
be
obviously
concerted
effort.
I
know
there
is
home
already
in
terms
of
documenting
and
I
think
the
documentation
is
important.
But
how
do
we
still
provide
access,
maybe
to
the
public
to
experience
it
on
some
virtual
level
and
to
be
connected
to
the
to
the
history
around
the
elevators?
B
And
so
I
don't
that
I
know
there's
not
a
plan
yet,
but
I
would
hope
that
you
know
an
eventual
motion
from
this
commission
and
the
project
proceeding
forward
doesn't
isn't
an
indication
that
this
commission
doesn't
think
that
that's
important
or
that
that
doesn't
need
to
really
follow
through
with
what
I
think
everyone's
intention
already
is,
but
that
I
would
wait
for
it
to
get
lost
in
the.
H
J
I
don't
think
I
mean,
I
think,
that
you
can
make
it
a
condition
that
the
features
are
documented.
I
mean
in
some
cases
they
already
have
like.
We
have
the
photographs
that
have
already
been
taken,
and
then
our
communications
staff
have
been
working
with
capital
projects
on
the
documentary
video
thing
that
will
include
the
the
machinery
as
well
as
the
you
know,
features
that
are
visual
visible
to
the
public.
J
So
so
I
mean
I
guess
I
can
just
reassure
you
that
that
is
happening.
It's
already
that
has
work,
has
already
started
and
started
several
months
ago.
So
I
can
just
you
know,
make
a
point
to
when
that
information,
or
you
know
when
that
final
product
is
available
to
share
it
with
all
of
you
and
I'm
sure
it
will
be
posted
on
our
website
and
probably
some
other
places
as
well
as
we
think
about.
J
You
know
how
we
want
to
make
that
information
available
to
the
public
so
that
it
you
know
it
is
easily
accessible
that
it
is.
You
know
where
we're
honoring
the
history
of
our
building
and
making
sure
that
you
know
people
can
can
experience
that,
for
you
know
future
generations
for
sure,
and
that
was
you
know
the
idea
of
doing
the
documentary
was
for
that
purpose.
Since
you
know
they
are
so
unique
and
the
experience
is
unique.
J
So
so,
if
you
all
are
comfortable
with
that,
you
know
just
my
reassurance
that
that
is
happening
behind
the
scenes.
Now
you
can
certainly
put
a
condition
on
the
ca
of
some
kind,
but
I
don't
think
you
know
like
I
don't.
I
don't
know
how
I'm
not
sure
how
we
would
word
that,
but
you
could
just
say
that
city
staff
continues
to
form
a
complete
documentary
or
documentation
of
the
elevator
and
elevators
and
their
mechanical
features.
If
that
makes
sense,.
M
J
Goes
it's
a
good
question.
I
think
that
it
would
be
really
a
discussion
between
walter
and
myself.
Walter
is
a
project
manner
manager
director.
J
I
can't
remember,
I'm
sorry,
walter
I've
bought
your
title,
but
he-
and
I
can
outside
of
this
meeting,
try
to
make
a
game
plan
for
for
where
the
features
live,
and
certainly
if
we
have
an
idea
for
using
the
gates
or
you
know,
displaying
any
of
the
other
materials
we
can
come
bring
that
bring
those
ideas
to
you
all
for
your
recommendation
like
if
we
decided
to
do
a
display
of
some
kind
or
or
whatever
we
can
certainly
bring
that
information
to
you,
and
then
I
mean
I'm
assuming
that
for
now
the
gates
would
be
stored
somewhere
in
our
building
when
the
molybdenum
begins
and
then
I'd,
I'm
not
sure
about
the
mechanical
parts.
J
I'm
sure
it
just
depends
on
whether
it's
anything
we
can
keep
from
a
safety
perspective
or
whether
we
can
you
know
physically,
keep
it
due
to
space
issues
or
or
whatever.
So
I
can
certainly
talk
offline
with
walter
about
that
and
and
try
to
figure
out.
J
You
know
what's
going
to
work
best,
because
I
don't
know
that
we
know
what
we're
going
to
you
know.
The
gates
may
just
have
to
live
in
storage
temporarily.
Until
we
figure
out,
you
know
a
place
where
they
can
be,
you
know,
displayed
or
put
out
somewhere
where
the
where
the
public
can
enjoy
them.
I
mean,
certainly
the
last
thing
that
I
want
is
for
them
to
sit
in
a
dark
closet
somewhere
too.
J
So
so
I
certainly
share
that
thought
that
they
should
be
in
a
place
where,
where
the
public
can
experience
them-
and
I'm
just
not
sure,
we
know
that
what
that
will
look
like
yet
so.
W
If
I
can
plug
in
on
that,
as
far
as
doing
a
history
of
it,
we
would
be
more
than
happy
to
help
with
that
by
saying
this
component
does
this.
This
is
how
this
component
was
made.
This
is
how
this
component
worked,
get
inside
the
hoist
way
and
show
what
it
looks
like
on
top
of
the
car
and
what
everything's
doing
we'll
be
happy
to
work
with
y'all.
To
make
that
pres,
I
mean
again,
I
love
elevators.
W
W
It's
it's
fascinating
because
understand
that
these
elements,
I'm
feeding
the
thing
for
one
to
keep
them
that
elevator
idea
goes
back
to
1880,
goes
through
into
the
1940s,
mainly
with
freight
elevators,
but
same
idea
carried
through
for
for
the
the
first
in
the
first
it
says
the
first
hundred
years
of
elevators.
There
was
a
lot
of
those
that
basic
idea
going
on,
but
then
they
just
get
outmoded
and
they
get
outdated.
G
This
is
janice
ashley.
I
was
just
going
to
mention
that,
if
you
are
thinking
of
the
condition,
I
think
you've
decided
to
definitely
add
that
condition,
and
it's
a
good
idea,
because
just
remember
the
city
is
an
applicant
just
like
any
other
applicant.
If
any
other
applicant
came
forward,
you'd
be
sure
to
be
putting
a
condition
to
say
this
is
what
you
want
and
it
helps
the
city
staff.
G
Maybe
it's
not
that
specific,
but
at
least
the
idea
of
it
got
the
certificate
of
appropriateness,
with
the
condition
that
we
make
every
effort
to
retain
these
historic
pieces
and
keep
them
in
a
place.
That's
publicly
accessible
as
much
as
practicable,
or
something
like
that,
because
that
that
again,
it
helps
sitting
staff
to
make
the
case
that
we're
going
to
have
to
find
a
way
to
meet
that
condition,
and
I
and
I
think
that
that's
helpful.
D
Okay,
no,
there
wasn't,
including
exhibit
a
project
description,
two
pages
exhibit
b
photographs
and
plans.
Eleven
pages
exhibit
c
local
historic,
landmark,
designation,
ordinance,
number
1709
and
designation
report.
Eight
pages
added
by
staff
january
4,
2021,
exhibit
d
elevator
photographs,
22
pages
added
by
staff
january
4,
2021
exhibit
e
additional
call
plate
and
cop
panel
images.
Four
pages
received
january
7,
2021,
exhibit
f
1988,
biltmore
campbell
smith
and
report
on
original
paint
treatment.
D
The
elevator's
lobby
area
16
pages
received
january
12,
2021,
exhibit
g
image
of
proposed
brass
cab.
Threshold
received
january
12,
2021
exhibit
h
panel
renderings
received
january
12.
2021
exhibit
I
color
palette,
rendering
received
january
12.
2021,
exhibit
l
manufacturer
specification
for
replacement
flooring
received
january
12
2021.
J
There's
nothing
that's
on
this
list,
but
I
do
think
we
need
to
make
a
condition
on
the
ca
that
the
that
the
color
for
the
leno
look
for
the
flooring
will
be,
I
guess,
determined
in
the
field
with
the
applicant.
J
D
Yeah
and
we
need
that
wonderful
language
that
gail
had
as
well,
okay,
we'll
go
on
and
the
commission's
actual
inspection
and
review
of
subject
property
by
all
members,
except
I
guess
most
of
us
haven't
been
there
with
covid,
but
we've
all
been
in
city
hall.
So
I
think
we
can
say,
we've
all
been
there
right.
J
Sorry,
that's
supposed
to
say,
brass
new
brass
thresholds
just
to
correct
that.
D
Okay,
replace
new
existing
brass
threshold
cabinet
cab
thresholds
with
new
bronze
cab
thresholds,
new
brass
and
brass
threshold
to
accommodate
so
we're
replacing
bronze
with
brass
thresholds
to
accommodate
new
doors,
six
clean
and
restore
all
original
brass
cab
panels,
including
multi-capacity
plate
floor
plate
capacity,
plate
cab,
switch
and
call
station
seven
rebuild
ceiling,
light
and
fan
and
clean
eight
clean
and
repaint
ceiling
walls
and
prim
nine
clean
and
restore
original
venting.
Ten
reduce
width
of
side
walls
by
four
inches.
D
D
17
elevator
cabs
will
be
repainted
consistent
with
the
colors
listed
as
matching
original.
On
page
8
of
the
1988
paint
restoration
completed
by
biltmore
campbell
smith,
restoration
thing,
all
work
will
be
in
accordance
with
attached
drawings
and
plans.
All
permits,
variances
or
approvals,
as
required
by
law,
must
be
obtained
before
work
may
commence.
B
Before
we
get
to
a
second,
I've
got
one
clarification,
we're
referencing
a
specific
floor.
Color
is
that
is
that
decision
been
made
or
do
we
need
to
leave
that
open
for
staff?
For
you.
U
Please
not
to
not
to
muddy
the
water,
the
four
inch
dimension
of
the
cab
size
change.
We
think
it's
around
four
inches.
It
may
be
a
little
slightly
more,
maybe
slightly
less
the
objective
on
our
end
to
keep
it,
reduce
it
as
little
as
possible,
but
there
are
still
some
variables
about
that
until
we
have
the
the
actual
shock.
U
D
D
Two
secretary
of
employer
standards,
rehabilitation,
specifically
the
standards
for
spaces,
features
and
finishes.
Mechanical
systems,
accessibility
and
health
and
safety
were
used
to
evaluate
this
request.
Three,
this
application
does
meet
the
design
standards
for
the
following
reasons:
a
features
and
finishes
that
are
important
in
defining
the
overall
historic
character
of
the
building
are
being
retained
and
preserved,
b
original
call,
plates
and
gates
are
required
to
be
removed
or
replaced
in
accordance
with
nc
building
code
c.
D
New
call
plates
will
match
original
call
plates
as
closely
as
possible
in
terms
of
materials.
Finish,
dimension,
design
and
location
d.
Original
brass
gates
will
be
retained
and
preserved
on
site.
The
visible
features
of
the
building's
mechanical
systems
that
are
important
in
defining
the
historic
character
of
the
building
are
being
retained
and
preserved,
f,
original
brass
doors
right
yeah.
B
N
C
D
J
The
documentation
and
gail
said
it
said
it
really
well.
J
Right
the
dimensions
of
the
cab
of
the
of
the
sidewall
widths
and
and
the
dimensions
of
the
cop
will
be
verified
by
the
applicant
and
approved
by
staff.
B
S
J
Thanks
everyone,
I
guess
probably
the
easiest
thing
for
me
to
do
I'll,
follow
up
with
peter
and
sean
and
walter
just
on
next
steps.
As
far
as
this
approval,
that
makes
sense.
J
Then,
chair
kite,
I
think
we've
got
a
couple
of
other
business
items
if
you're
ready.
I
can
move
on
to
those
okay,
so
just
really
quickly,
because
I
know
it's
been
a
long
meeting
the
so
the
soundly
award
discussion.
I
would
just
ask
that
you
all
be
prepared
to
to
pass
some
kind
of
resolution
on
that.
The
next
meeting
just
bring
your
ideas
on.
J
If
you
have
thoughts
on
potential
names,
for
if
you
are
in
support
of
renaming
it,
if
you
have
any
ideas
on
on
names
as
well
as
consideration
of
whether
or
not
you
want
us
to
re
use,
the
existing
keep
giving
the
existing
silver
cup
that
we
have
used
since
the
inception
of
the
award
or,
if
you
want
to
consider
a
different
type
of
award
format,
certainly
open
to
your
thoughts
and
ideas
on
that
as
well,
and
also,
I
think
we
talked
about
how
we
might
provide
some
context
when
giving
the
award
as
to
kind
of
like
how
the
name
was
you
know,
came
about
in
the
first
place
and
then
the
evolution
of
the
name
change.
J
J
So
right
around
the
corner.
So
and
then
I
know,
will
you
have
thought
you
know
mentioned?
Maybe
consideration
of
maybe
like
somehow
like
some
concession
to
andrea
clark,
kind
of
you
know
inviting
her,
maybe
to
when
we
do
finally
make
that
decision
to
kind
of
help
show
some
appreciation
that
her,
you
know
her
her
life
experience
was
part
of
how
we
was
part
of
the
process
for
us
kind
of
initiating
the
discussion
on
on
changing
the
name
of
the
award.
So
does
that
help?
J
We
kind
of
I
know
we
we
we
can
anticipate
having
a
pretty
hefty
agenda
in
february,
so
it'll
probably
be
a
lot
to
get
through.
So
so,
if
you
guys
want
to
pass
along
ideas
to
me
before
the
meeting
feel
free
and
then
I
can
kind
of
try
to
organize
it
all
in
a
in
a
place
for
everyone
to
look
at
and
be
considering
ahead
of
time,
if
you
all
want
to
do
it
that
way,
we
can
certainly
do
it
that
way.
Just
so,
we
can
try
to
make
it.
J
D
J
There's
one
more
other
business
item:
real,
quick
burton
street
neighborhood
architectural
survey.
This
is
something
that
just
sort
of
like
started
to
happen
really
quickly
right
before
the
holidays,
at
least
for
me
not
for
other
city
staff,
who've
been
kind
of
in
conversations
with
burton
street.
For
some
time
they
have
been
interested
in
doing
what
we
would
call
a
pattern
book
which
is
sort
of
like
a
publication.
J
That
kind
of
it's
sort
of
like
a
design
guidelines
but
kind
of
like
a
little
bit
lighter
it's
not
as
detailed
as
a
set
of
design
standards
so
really
to
to
initiate
the
pattern
book.
We
really
need
to
finish
architectural
survey
of
that
neighborhood.
There
has
been
some
survey
there
as
part
of
I-26,
but
if
you
look
at
gis,
you
can
see
that
the
it's
mostly
stuff,
that's
like
right,
along
240
that
has
been
surveyed
and
not
the
stuff-
that's
farther
west,
going
into
that
neighborhood.
So
we
really
need
to
to
finish
that.
J
So
we
have,
I
will
be
managing
the
project
and
stacy
will
be
working
on
it
with
me
we're
about
to
draft
the
rfp,
and
it
will
be
interesting
to
see
what
we
end
up
with
there,
because
the
last
time
around,
when
we
were
doing
initiating
our
first
african
american
heritage
resource
survey
back
in
2018,
we
had
tried
to
get
some
more
diversity
from
our
applicant
pool.
Didn't
come
up
with
anything
great
there.
J
So
I'm
more
hopeful
this
time
around,
but
but
I'll
keep
you
all
abreast
of
that
as
we
move
along
so
and
that
is
being
funded
in
part
by
the
burton
street
neighborhood
association
and
in
part
by
our
department
departmental
budget.
So.
J
You
know
I
it
would
be
interesting
to
see
that
I'm
not
sure
that
that's
what
they're
after
I
know
that
they
really
want
the
pattern
book
to
kind
of
be
more
be
partly
a
storytelling
tool,
and
I
think
we'll
probably
do
that
in-house.
Once
we
get
the
survey
completed,
we're
planning
to
use-
I
don't
know
if
you
guys
are
familiar
with
the
esri
story:
map
software.
We
have
a.
If
you
go
on
our
website.
J
We
have
a
local
landmark,
one
that
I
created
gosh,
four
or
five
years
ago,
and
so
it
seems
pretty
dated
now,
but
they
have
they
story,
maps
for
all
different
kinds
of
topics
and
and
information
sharing,
but
it's
a
great
tool
because
you
can
kind
of
it's.
It's
really
interesting
from
a
visual
standpoint.
J
I
think
that
that-
and
this
will
be
interesting-
this
is
a
topic
that
I'm
personally
very
interested
and
interested
to
see
where
the
evolution
of
historic
preservation
as
a
field
goes,
as
we
try
to
find
ways
to
preserve
more
resources
for
underrepresented
communities
that
have
often
been
you
know,
obviously
highly
impacted
by
urban
renewal
projects
and
insensitive
infill,
and
you
know
the
properties
may
not
have
what
the
you
know:
the
integrity
that
is
needed
for
a
district
in
the
eyes
of
the
state
and
federal
offices
that
we
work
with.
J
But
I
kind
of
have
a
gut
feeling
that
that
is
evolving.
It
may
be
slow,
but
I
think
we'll
see
more
support
from
the
shippo
in
particular
about
you
know
having
some
kind
of
built-in
understanding
that
that
is
part
of
their
historic
context.
You
know
that
they
were
impacted
by
urban
renewal
and
that
may
have
resulted
in
a
significant
loss
of
resources
for
those
neighborhoods
and
that
that
is
part
of
their
story
right.
So.
J
Right
right,
it's
just
a
continual
threat
to
those
neighborhoods.
Unfortunately,
although
we
did
see
some
interesting
funding
kind
of
come
online,
I
I
kind
of
skimmed
it
because
I've
been
really
busy
getting
ready
for
this
meeting,
but
there
was
some
emails
circulated
internally
that
was
related
to
some
funding.
J
I
think
that
might
be
introduced
for
for
kind
of,
like
reverse
urban
renewal,
in
a
way
like
taking
like,
like
kind
of
what's
been
considered
for
the
boeing
bridge
already
like
turning
into
more
of
a
boulevard,
but
even
like
all
of
240,
like
that,
that's
right
there
like
trying
to
reconnect
the
neighborhoods
that
were
cut
apart.
You
know
where
it
would
be
like
a
kind
of
big
pot
of
transportation
department
funding
not
from
our
transportation
department,
necessarily
about
the
federal
transportation
department.
So
so
that
should
be
interesting.
J
I
mean
not
that,
obviously
it
won't
fix
the
damage.
That's
been
done,
of
course,
but
it's
you
know
interesting
to
see
that
there
are
a
lot
of
positive
projects
or
you
know,
funding
sources
coming
online,
around
kind
of
re-realigning
those
areas
with
with
kind
of
valuing
what
the
community
has
based
in
terms
of
their
loss
and
then
kind
of
helping
them
try
to
have
some
voice
and
rebuilding.
J
So
so
that
should
be
interesting
but
burton
street
yeah.
I
don't.
I
can't
it's
been
a
while,
since
I
looked
at
the
environmental
impact
survey,
so
I
know
that
they
will,
like
obviously
be
impacted.
They'll
lose
probably
some
resources
right
along
that
side
of
240.
So
so
it's
a
bummer-
and
I
I
mean
it's
a
neat
that
neighborhood
has
really
neat
history.
J
It
was
part
of
ew
pearson
was
a
very
early
land
developer,
like
the
only
african-american
land
developer
that
I'm
aware
of,
and
he
that
was
a
neighborhood
that
he
developed.
So
it
does
have
a
lot
of
historical
significance.
So
it'd
be
interesting
to
see
what
we
learned
from
this
project,
so
we're
expecting
that's
on
our
work
plan
for
the
rest
of
2021
and
then
we'll
start
working
on
the
pattern
book
next
winter.
So
so
I
will
keep
you
guys
posted
when
we
get
the
once.