►
From YouTube: Design and Review Board Meeting - May 7, 2019
Description
Design and Review Board Meeting live from City Council Chambers:
https://edoc.cityofaikensc.gov/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=452756&dbid=0&repo=City-of-Aiken-LF
A
Participating
in
the
process
here,
where
the
your
design
review
board
attempts
to
assist
property
owners
on
with
making
improvements
to
their
properties
in
the
overlay
districts,
both
historic
overlay
districts
and
the
downtown
overlay
district
and
you'll
see
on
our
agenda
that
often
often
there's
a
distinction
between
the
two
districts.
I
believe
that
most
of
ours
tonight
are
in
the
old,
Lake
and
overlay
district.
Is
that
right.
B
A
And
now
to
begin,
we
we
usually
have
a
few
minutes
to
to
go
over
the
minutes
from
the
last
meeting
in
April
the
work
session
regular
meeting,
and
then
we
hopefully
can
have
a
motion
on
on
that
in
just
a
second
and
then
what
we'll
do
is
normally
Mary
Katherine.
Our
secretary
will
will
read
the
application
and
and
identify
the
the
owner
or
the
applicant,
and
then
at
that
point,
when
she
calls
out
that
particular
application.
A
If
whoever's
representing
that
application
could
come
to
this
Center
lectern,
where
we
we
have
the
microphone
and
then,
of
course
you
can
add
anything
you
want,
and
we
may
have
some
questions
for
you,
but
I'll
go
ahead
and
and
just
say
after
we
vote
on
the
on
the
minutes,
I'm
going
to
recuse
myself,
because
Merck
definitely
we're
reading
the
first
item
that
I'm
have
been
involved
in
with
evaluating
that
structure.
So
I
won't
vote
and
I
won't
be
chairing
so
that
I'll
turn
the
meeting
over
to
the
vice-chairman.
Listen
those!
C
A
B
Application
number
C,
er
D
1900
one
zero.
Four,
seven
applicant
cumberland
AME
Church
requests
approval
to
demolish
the
house
located
at
427
Richland
Avenue
East
Texas
parcel
one
to
130
zero,
four
zero
zero
three,
so
the
applicant
has
requested
approval
to
demolish
the
house,
citing
extensive
damage
to
the
roof,
rear,
porch
and
various
interior
elements.
The
owners
intend
to
use
the
vacated
lot
as
green
space
for
the
foreseeable
future.
B
The
property
is
located
in
the
old,
Lake
and
overlay
district.
It's
currently
zoned
general
business,
but
it
is
included
in
the
area
being
considered
for
rezoning
to
downtown
business.
So
in
that,
if
that
were
to
happen,
the
board
would
have
more
the
guidelines
for
review
a
future
development
would
be
more
stringent.
You
have
more
oversight
of
future
development
and
per
the
guidelines
in
order
to
issue
a
certificate
of
appropriateness
for
the
demolition
of
structures
in
the
old
Aiken
overlay
district.
B
D
E
E
I'm
here,
as
any
questions,
the
board
might
have
the
remarks
that
may
make
on
behalf
of
the
church.
This
property
was
purchased
with
the
sole
intent
of
removing
it
and
clearing
a
space
for
additional
parking
for
our
members.
We
have
a
small
congregation
and
we're
attempting
to
grow,
and
we
have
severely
limited
for
parking
for
I
vets.
E
We
spend
a
tremendous
amount
of
money,
putting
in
a
big
fellowship
hall
and
back
of
the
church
two
whole
events
and
to
provide
space
for
programs
of
the
church
and
quite
frequently
when
we
do,
we
run
out
of
parking
space
and
the
street
Kershaw
Street
in
front
of
the
church
is
not
zoned
for
parking.
Aitken
Public
Safety
has
told
us
number
of
times
that
we
cannot
legally
park
on
the
street.
We
need
parking
if
we're
to
continue
as
a
viable
entity
in
downtown
Aiken.
We
need
additional
space
for
parking.
E
Mr.
light
I
had
been
in
that
house
on
the
numerous
occasions
the
outside
the
pictures
you
have
in
your
broach
in
your
program,
the
two
pictures
depicting
the
outside
of
the
house:
a
very
misleading.
If
you
go
into
that
house,
if
you
go
from
room
to
room
pictures
in
your
packet
of
information,
I
provided
and
we're
taken
by
one
other
show
that
the
plural
can
do.
That
house
is
in
the
unsafe
condition.
It's
in.
If
that
house
actually
no
way
that
house
can
be
rehabilitated,
it
would
have
to
be
completely
torn
down
and
rebuilt
I.
E
D
G
The
question
I
have
is
assuming
that
the
board
approves
the
proposal
number
one.
Well,
when
would
the
church
consider
demolishing
the
property-
and
you
know
I
like
to
sort
of
understand
what
the
process
of
demolition
would
be,
and
you
know
the
approximate
cost
of
demolition
and
where
the
funds
for
demolition
you
know
would
come
from
the
reason
I
raised.
Those
questions
is
I
have
done
some
review
recently
about
the
demolition
provision.
I.
G
Think
all
of
you
know
that
the
city
has
a
demo
or
had
a
demo
200
plan,
and
they
also
have
a
demolition
provision
under
the
amended
code,
section
10
4
and
my
understanding
is
that
the
historic
provisions
of
the
demo
200,
where
it
would
be
possible
for
an
individual
or
a
church
or
an
organization
to
come
to
the
city
with
with
the
plan,
assuming
you
would
approve
it
to
say,
hey.
Would
you
tear
this
house
down
for
me
for
$200
I
mean
that
was
the
historic
plan.
G
Now
that
plan
has
been
suspended
pending
review
in
light
of
the
new
ordinance
that
the
city
has
and
under
the
new
ordinance
of
this
type
of
situation,
the
cost
of
demolition
would
be
totally
borne
by
the
owner
of
the
property,
which,
in
this
case,
would
be
the
church
so
I'd
like
to
understand.
If
the
board
did
approve
this
demolition,
where
the
intended
funds
for
the
demolition
would
come
from.
E
D
B
F
F
G
So
that
being
the
case,
I
mean
for
you
to
approve
demolition.
This.
This
property
could
sit
there
for
another
five
years.
If
the
city
were
to
take
it
I
mean
if
they
say
we're,
but
under
again,
if
you
were
to
approve
it
and
they
were
to
do
it
and
have
their
own
funds
to
do
it,
they
could
do
it
any
time
right.
G
One
of
the
complexities
that
I
see
here
under
the
new
ordinance
ten
for
the
city
is
no
longer
allowing
property
owners
to
keep
properties
vacant,
whether
they
be
boarded
properties,
whether
they
be
vacant
properties.
They
cannot
just
remain
vacant.
Something
has
to
be
done
with
those
properties,
so
I
see
a
tremendous
conflict
here
between
the
new
ordinance
with
regard
to
allowing
these
properties
to
stay
in
perpetuity
for
vacant.
H
D
D
G
G
F
Simons,
so
my
follow
up
question
is:
is
you
know,
of
course
you
know
that
all
we
vote
on
is
appropriateness
of
whether
the
yep
and
so
having
that
in
mind
and
heard
mr.
stacks
of
concerns
in
the
fact
that
our
application
will
only
be
good
for
two
years.
Do
you
wish
to
withdraw
your
location?
No,
not.
D
Mr.
Simons
don't
go
away
so
I
have
a
slightly
different
approach
on
this
subject
in
it
that
I'm
curious
to
know
what
the
city
ordinances
and
the
effect
of
it
before
I
were
to
vote
on
this
and
I
hate
to
ask
people
to
to
come
back,
but
I'm
just
wondering
since
nobody
seems
to
understand
the
effect
of
the
ordinance.
If
that
wouldn't
be
an
appropriate
thing
to
do
or
do
we
have
somebody?
We
have
an
expert
here
to.
H
H
So
the
concern
regarding
whether
or
not
the
house
could
be
vacant
for
a
certain
amount
of
time
is
really
not
a
point
that
we
have
reached
adequately
in
the
city
as
a
as
a
as
a
department
as
a
staffing
issue.
I
believe
our
city
manager
could
speak
more
to
that.
If
you
have
further
questions
about
that,
but
the
the
demolition
200
program
is
in
limbo
right
now.
D
H
Certainly
and
I
understand
that
point
so
I
really
I,
don't
know
how
relevant
that
portion
is
to
the
vote.
I
do
understand
the
concern,
but
this
you
know
if
this
the
church
is.
If
the
city
is
not
able
to
do
it,
the
church
is
not
prepared
to
say
whether
or
not
they
can
or
cannot
pay
for
that
demolition.
Tonight.
As
we
stand,
the
churches
has
not
received
an
estimate
for
those
types
of
works,
but
that's
not
to
say
that
we
could
not
afford
to
do
the
demolition
on
our
own.
H
However,
that
just
has
it's
a
point
that
we
have
not
reached
yet
so
you're,
a
member
of
the
church,
I
am
I,
am
I
attend
the
church.
I
am
NOT
a
member
of
the
church,
but
I
do
attend.
The
church
on
special
occasions
would
like
me
to
admittedly,
but
I
do
not
come
as
a
member
of
the
church.
I
come
as
the
the
legal
analysis
for
the
city.
Thank.
H
B
Vice-Chair
I
would
point
out
that
so
property
maintenance
is
a
in
a
different
houston
city
code
versus
the
zoning
ordinance.
That
planning
is
that
we
enforce
in
planning
and
zoning
property
maintenance
is
not
treated
in
the
zoning
ordinance
it's
treated
in
city
code,
but
we
have
a
staff
of
property
maintenance
enforcement
officers
who
uphold
the
property
maintenance
code,
so
in
voting
tonight
to
determine
whether
or
not
it
is
appropriate
for
this
property
to
demolished.
You
are
considering
the
reuse,
the
proposed
reuse.
So
these
comments
and
concerns
are
arguably
relevant
to
that.
B
E
I'd
like
to
emphasize
madam
chairperson,
is
that
this
is
a
process
step
by
step.
The
process
tonight
would
be
get
permission
to
demolish
that
woman.
If
the
perceived
Avenue
that
we
thought
we
might
be
able
to
use
is
not
available
to
us,
then
I
must
report
back
to
the
church
and
they
must
find
a
way,
but
the
requirement
and
the
need
to
demolish
that
building
still
exists.
The
space
for
parking
still
exists,
regardless
of
whether
the
city
has
a
program
or
not.
J
My
name
is
Beverly
Clyburn
and
I
am
a
member
of
Cumberland
AME
Church.
One
of
the
concerns
I
have
is
that
when
the
weather
gets
cold
and
rainy,
and
in
situations
like
that,
you
find
people
who
tend
to
look
for
places
like
this
to
have
shelter
and
and
I.
Think
that's
probably
a
little
bit
more
on
on
some
of
our
minds
than
finding
the
funds
to
take
the
house
down.
J
I
think
it
is
more
important
to
take
away
the
danger
of
having
the
house
there
then
than
it
is
to
worry
about
the
$200
program
that
you
have
it
might
be.
We
could
interview
people
and
find
someone
who's
willing
to
take
it
down
for
that
amount,
or
maybe
just
a
little
bit
more,
and
some
of
us
will
probably
come
together
and
be
able
to
assist
the
church
with
that.
But
we
do
need
parking
spaces
and
we
do
need
to
remove
the
danger
of
someone
going
in
there
and
harm
coming
to
them.
J
While
we
have
control
over
the
house,
I
have
had
people
to
tell
me
that
they've
seen
people
go
in
and
come
out
and
I
really
would
would
feel
a
lot
better
if
we
could
reduce
our
obligation
to
the
community
as
far
as
providing
a
place
for
vagrants
to
go
and
stay
and
just
go
ahead
and
and
get
some
places
where
we
could
park
and
have
enough
parking
spaces.
So
we
don't
eat
up
the
grass
in
the
front
of
the
church.
Thank.
D
C
D
C
C
F
F
Know
we
could
we
could
get
something
like
that.
I,
don't
know
if
it's
really
that
important
in
terms
of
an
application,
whether
or
not
to
demolition
a
house
as
to
how
you
design
a
parking
lot
on
the
funding
side
of
it.
I
understand
your
question,
but
you
know
when
anybody
else
comes.
If
there
was
an
application
to
rebuild
part
of
the
house,
we
don't
ask
them
how
much
how
they're
gonna
fund
it.
D
B
D
D
B
D
Built
and
I'm
not
I'm,
not
sure
that
just
the
you
know
just
a
green
space
with
just
green
I
mean
if
it
was
going
to
be
decorated
and
then
planted
green
space.
Well,
that
might
be
for
something,
but
I
don't
think
this
is
green
space.
That's
designed
to
be
used
by
the
public,
just
sort
of
what
I
infer
that
green
space
is
right.
D
A
A
F
F
F
I
F
I
A
B
Number
C
Rd
1900
one
zero:
five,
zero
applicant
William
McGee
requests
approval
to
relocate
the
house
currently
located
at
129
Sumter
Street
southeast
tax.
My
parcel
one,
two
one:
two:
zero:
six
1600
five
to
138
Marion
Street
southeast
tax,
my
parcel
number
one
2106
1000
six,
both
parcels
are
located
in
the
old
a
can
overlay
district.
The
first
is
current
liaison
general
business.
The
Marion
Street
say
is
owned.
B
A
B
K
G
K
C
K
H
H
K
House
moved
that
was
going
to
be
torn
down
by
Wesley
Methodist
Church
parsonage.
We
moved
that
house
two
and
a
half
blocks
the
mover
that
I
have
gotten
an
estimate
for
moving
the
friendship
house.
It's
the
same
one.
He
is
from
Columbia
Carolina
movers
and
he
sees
no
problem
in
moving
the
house
structurally.
It
will
be
intact
intact
and
the
lot
will
be
clean.
A
Validate
your
your
experience,
because
I've
watched
you
moving
houses
around
that
neighborhood
and
and
they're
all
occupied
I,
think
now
and
then
several
would
have
been
good
candidates
to
demolish
as
well.
Let
me
see
if
we
have
any
questions,
I
think
the
proposals
pretty
straightforward
and
we
know
where
the
site
is,
and
it
will
be
pretty
much
what
we
see
from
the
street,
but
but
perhaps
without
some
of
the
the
wings
on
the
back
at
least
the
move
won't
involve
those
wings
on
the
back.
Is
that
right?
Yes,.
A
K
A
A
And
I,
don't
I
think
we're
discussing
the
plans
that
are
required
sometimes
for
reuse
of
property,
but
I
don't
know
that
we
have.
It
says:
demolition,
relocation
of
structures,
Mary
Katherine,
there's
the
demolition
portion
you're
reading
was
on
paragraph
5.1
demonstrate
clear
plan
for
ease
of
site
after
demolition.
Now,
as
far
as
for.
A
A
The
design
point:
that's
the
one,
that's
what
I
was
thinking
about
while
ago,
so
I
apologized.
So
really,
there's
no
no
requirement
to
tell
us.
How
are
you,
gonna,
arrange
the
driveway
and
what
you're
gonna
do,
but
you
said
clean
up
the
site.
Well,
yeah,
when
you
move
it
so
I
think
that's
all
this
required
yeah
any
other.
Any
other
questions,
yeah
I,
just.
F
K
A
A
K
L
L
L
F
L
Yes,
plans
for
the
lot
that
house.
If
you
look
at
the
map,
we've
purchased
about
five
Lots
along
we've,
come
before
this
board
in
the
past,
and
we've
demolished
I
think
four
houses
I
mean
they
were
in
terrible
shape
when
we
bought
them,
they
were
basically
havens
for
drug
use
and
and
that
type
stuff,
and
so
we've
sort
of
run
some
of
the
bad
element
out
of
the
neighborhood
in
that
area.
You.
L
A
A
A
A
B
Application
number
CRH,
1903,
eighth
applicant
Arthur
Bremer
requests
approval
to
replace
existing
access
gate
with
a
new
gate
at
607
colleton
Avenue
South
East
text.
My
parcel
one,
two,
one:
zero:
nine,
ten,
zero
zero
one,
so
the
proposed
gate
design
was
provided
in
your
packets.
It's
a
much
more
ornate
gate
than
the
existing
solid
black
metal
piece.
That
is
there
now
and
so
it'd
be
black
wrought-iron.
And
it's
worth
noting
that
the
gate
that's
there
now
was
replaced
at
least
as
recently
as
2015
mm-hmm,
not
originally
property
right.
A
A
A
A
A
A
D
A
Second,
right
and
I:
don't
think
we
have
any
more
discussion,
we
we've
talked
it
all
out
and
thank
you
again
and
we'll
all
in
favor
of
the
new
gate
raise
your
right
hand,
so
that
that's
approved,
and
let's
see
we
have
one
more
one
more
item
here
that
is
Mary,
Catherine's
application
and
I.
Think
you
can
you
don't
have
to
go
to
the
lectern.
You
can
just.
B
So
in
reviewing
the
code
for
our
most
recent
special
tax
assessment
application,
we
noticed
some
discrepancies
between
the
letter
of
the
law
and
practice,
and
so
we
want
to
make
sure
that
those
are
consistent.
So
that
is
the
more
substantive
recommendations
are
to
correct
that
and
provide
clarity
on
what
is
expected
of
in
terms
of
reviewing
additional
work
after
final
certification.
B
The
way
the
code
is
currently
written.
All
work
that
is
proposed
outside
of
ordinary
maintenance,
after
final
certification
is
issued
for
a
period
of
10
years,
would
come
before
the
full
board
at
a
public
hearing.
So
that
could
arguably
mean
painting
you
know:
interior
painting,
it's
a
very
vague.
The
wording
is
very
vague
and.
G
B
Additionally,
the
the
requirement
that
everything
any
work
go
before
the
Design
Review
Board
leaves
the
full
board
at
a
public
hearing
leaves
no
room
for
administrative
review,
so,
for
example,
mr.
Bremer's
gate
would
normally
be
eligible
for
administrative
review,
but
because
he's
now
a
tax
assessment
property.
This
was
additional
work
and
it
had
to
come
before
a
full
hearing.
So
so
we
included
language
that
would
allow
for
you
all
to
delegate
that
authority.
Like
you
during
the
normal
certificate
of
appropriateness
process,
we
also
added
a
specific
time
period.
B
So
for
those
it's
still
preferable,
you
should
come
before
the
board
to
receive
approval
for
work
before
you
complete
it,
but
being
aware
of
practice,
which
is
you
know,
sometimes
people
get
in
start
working
and
then
realize
that
they're
they're
going
to
be
eligible.
We
have
added
language
that
would
allow
as
long
as
the
work
was
completed
within
twelve
months
before
their
application
for
the
preliminary
certification.
They
can
include
that
in
the
eligible
work
to
be
reviewed
for
the
that
threshold
to
meet
the
minimum
expenditure
threshold
for
the
assessment,
so.
A
A
B
1994
work
has
been
allowed
to
be
considered
as
a
part
of
the
program
when
the
code
says
you
have
to
the
board
has
to
approve
all
work
before
it
started
in
order
for
it
to
be
eligible,
but
that's
not
actually
what's
been
happening,
so
we
just
want
to
be
consistent
with
you,
since
that
hasn't
been
the
practice
we
want
to
make
the
code
match
what
actually
is
practiced,
while
still
giving
assigning
some
definite
confines
so
that
people
can't
say
oh
I've,
been
working
for
six
years
now
board.
Let
me
slide
in
and
improve
this.
B
I
K
A
A
Our
procedures
we've
never
had
I
tell
her.
We've
never
had
we've
had
good
people
working
on
staff,
but
they
never
really
had
the
training
I
think
to
go
back
in
and
really
sort
out
what
what
needs
to
be
corrected
and
there's
a
lot
of
loose
ends
here
and
and
you
I
guess
we
don't
have
that
that
many
of
the
tax-
and
you
know
especially
tax
assessments.
B
B
So,
just
a
heads
up
next
month
up
to
three
pages
for
a
some
revision
to
how
we
determine
landmark
versus
contributing
versus
non
contributing.
This
is
stemming
from
the
concerns
we've
had
and
reviewing
in
finding
properties
that
were
not
included
in
the
survey.
It
should
have
been
led
to
backtracking
all
the
way
back
to
the
80s.
So
we've
got
a
good
time
line
to
bring
y'all
next
month
and
we
can
begin
wading
through
how
we
can
what
is
contributing
and
what
is
not
contributing
and.
C
B
C
B
C
B
C
B
A
B
A
Place
of
what
what
the
plan
is
going
forward
to
the
people
in
the
past,
and
that
might
be
a
little
bit
of
a
you-
know:
wake
up!
Oh
yeah,
maybe
I,
maybe
I
shouldn't
renovate
my
kitchen
or
move
house
or
whatever,
but
it's
a
little
bit
tricky
it's
hard
to
enforce.
Cuz,
we
don't.
We
can't
really
go
in
people's
houses
to
see
what
what
they're
doing.
We
can
see
things
on
the
exterior,
obviously
well.