 Good afternoon everybody. Welcome to DDRC members, staff and guests. We ask for your patience during this meeting. Multiple staff members are behind the scenes to make sure that the meeting runs smoothly and all applicants and citizens are able to communicate with the Commission at the appropriate time. If you are watching virtually you may see images of anyone present at the meeting. However images of anyone participating virtually will not be visible. In addition to watching the meeting virtually the public will be able to participate via these methods. Email, phone, logging into a web session or participating in person. When participating please provide your name for documentation purposes. If you're watching you can stream the meetings through City TV accessed at www.youtube.com backslash user backslash Columbia SC government. You may submit letters and statements via email to COC board meeting at Columbia SC dot gov leading up to and or during the meeting as this account will be monitored throughout the proceedings. Emails and letters sent during the meeting will be read into the record. Emails or letters received prior to the meeting have been forwarded to the Commission. You can participate via phone calling 855-925-2801. When prompted please enter the meeting code 2552. Those participating by phone will receive three options on how to participate. Star one will allow you to listen. Star two will allow you to record a voicemail message that will be read into the record and star three will allow a participant to be placed in a queue so they may speak live when prompted. Please make sure your computer audio is muted if calling in live via your phone. There's virtual participation via the web. You can join the virtual meeting at public input dot com backslash COC DDRC dash octo OCT 2021. And if you're here in person today to speak about a case, you must speak up when the chairperson calls for public comment. I'll call the roll. Miss Branham here. Mr. Graham here. Miss Jacob here. Mr. Salidi here and Mr. Wolf here. We have quorum in order to avoid ex parte communications. DDRC members are under strict instructions not to discuss cases under consideration with the public or with each other outside of the public form. The meeting typically starts with staff calling the case giving a summary of the project and then calling on the applicant to present if they wish. Decisions are typically made in one evening. Decisions may be appealed within 30 days to a court of competent jurisdiction. Oaths will be administered individually as we hear either from applicants or from live speakers. Applicants with request for the DDRC are allowed at a presentation time of 10 minutes. This time should include but is not limited to an overview of the project case history in a permanent meeting held regarding the request. This time also includes all persons presenting information on behalf of the applicant such as attorneys, engineers and architects. This time limit does not include any questions asked by the DDRC or staff regarding request. Members of the general public are given the opportunity to address their concerns in intervals of two minutes. Applicants may have five minutes to respond. Staff has a timer and will make presenters aware of when their time has expired. And I've asked they kind of give a minute warning today for people as well. Are there any changes to the agenda? There are no changes. The DDRC uses the consent agenda to approve noncontroversial or routine matters by a single motion and vote. If a member of the DDRC or the general public wants to discuss any item on the consent agenda, they must speak up immediately after the consent agenda is read and ask that a project be removed from the agenda and considered as part of the regular agenda during the meeting. The DDRC then approves the remaining consent agenda items. Will staff please read the consent agenda? Certainly. The first case is 306 Saluta Avenue. This is a request for design approval for an addition and exterior changes in the Wales Garden Architectural Conservation District. The next is 1920 Henderson Street, a request for preliminary certification for the Bailey Bell and for design approval for exterior changes in the Landmark District. There's also 1131 Shirley Street, a request for design approval for an accessory structure in the Melrose Heights Oakland Architectural Conservation District. Is there anyone from the DDRC that would like an item removed from the consent agenda? All right. Is there anyone from the public either here today in person or who is participating virtually that would like to have an item removed from the consent agenda? When participating, please provide your name for the minutes. Please communicate by sending an email to COC board meeting at Columbia SC.gov or communicate via phone by pressing star two to leave a voicemail or star three to speak in person. We will pause to allow communication from the public. Checking all technology portals. We don't have any emails at this time. Was there anything? No. Okay. Can I have a motion and a second to accept the consent agenda and also the September minutes? Make a motion to approve the consent agenda and approve the September minutes. Second. Second. Mr. Bram. Yeah. Yes. Miss Sims Brannum. Yes. Miss Jaco. Yes. Mr. Salidi. Yes. And Mr. Wolf. Yes. The motion passes. Ready for the regular agenda. First case. The first case on the regular agenda is 4404 North Main Street. This is a request for certificate of design approval for exterior changes and site improvements in the North Main Corridor Overlay District. This proposal is for the renovation of the existing building to serve as office and storage for janitorial business. The applicant is seeking exceptions from the North Main Corridor guidelines due to the unique site conditions and due to the proposed use of the building. The evaluation which follows is for the renovation section of the North Main Corridor guidelines. So the guidelines state pedestrian connections from the public sidewalk to the primary entrance must be provided in the form of a sidewalk with landscape buffer to the parking area. With the current condition of the property, which is a continuous curb cut along the length of the parcel, while non-conforming to current conditions for parking lots, the existing buildings are in a location that prevents adequate circulation and parking space in front of the building. As well, the circulation space for adjacent parcels depends on crossing property lines in the paved area to access the parking spaces. Given these conditions, it's not feasible to provide a pedestrian connection from the public sidewalk to the building entrance without impeding access to the only available parking and also exacerbating pedestrian safety issues. Then the guidelines also state all applicants still check with the City of Columbia Land Development Planner to determine what's required regarding the landscape ordinance for renovation projects. Whether landscape ordinance is invoked or not, a landscape buffer shall be provided between the pedestrian walks in the parking areas. The staff comments are that due to the continuous curb cut and the circulation pattern, an exception is being requested to the landscape requirement. In the building design section, the guideline states window openings cannot be decreased unless approved by the DDRC. The proposal includes retaining storefront windows on the left portion of the facade and removing both large storefront windows on either side of the door on the right building facade. The removal of the windows is due to the applicant's security concerns. The guidelines are intended to support a vibrant commercial corridor over time by maintaining and encouraging flexible building spaces that engage pedestrian interest. Staff has concerns about removing existing storefront windows and setting a precedent which could have a negative impact on the corridor over time. A preferred alternative to removing the window openings and filling in with CMU block and brick veneer would be to retain the openings in the CMU wall and fill with a more durable material such as brick, glass block, or something else that would provide the needed security, but retain the original openings for future windows to be reinstalled with minimal damage to the wall. Staff recommends approval of the request, including an exception to the sidewalk connection and the landscape buffer conditional upon a solution to be worked out with staff for the right-hand facade that maintains the structural window openings without the requirement of storefront glass. And I'm not sure if the applicant is present. Is the applicant here? Yes, hi. Do you wish to comment on anything? No, I'm here if you have any questions. We have, first let me thank you for the work you do and certainly the expertise that's been provided by the staff as we navigated this process. Being proactive, we went in to consult with them prior to any submission and we ended up following this pathway here. Now, sir, just let me technically, just can you state your name and do you swear to tell the truth in these proceedings? Yeah, I didn't know. Sorry, yeah, I'm sorry. I'm Clarence Hill. I'm the designer along with John Tucker for the owner of the property, 4404 North Main Street, Mr. Irvin Wesley. And I swear that I tell the truth. All right, thank you. Again, the staff has been more than helpful to us. We navigated this process due to the existing age of the building and the condition of the building. We moved forward to try to raise the level of aesthetics and to improve the quality of what the building was. And you see the existing conditions there. We addressed those and given the concern of the owner with respect to safety and security, we ended up with the right side being closed as you stated. Now, we have gone over and over with the staff about the requirements for the overlay to maintain the integrity of open, not closing any windows. So we prefer the design we have. We hope that the committee will commission will consider what we have created here in terms of improving the aesthetics in the area. And we hope that you will be able to give us consideration and allow us to move forward with the design we've created. John, you want to say? So with that, we appreciate the waivers you've given us. And we will certainly do what we can with respect to landscaping to maintain those ordinances that you put in place. I have any questions I'd be happy to answer. First of all, Mr. Hill, I just want to just applaud you for really a nice straightforward but very uplifting design for what the building was and where it's going. So I just want to applaud you for that. You know, looking at how to rehabilitate some of our areas. And this is a really nice, nice clean approach to that. So I really appreciate that. John Chuckles here with me. He was the principal designer that I don't want to take that credit. Okay. I've got to live with him. So then I applaud you, sir. But I do agree that that not necessarily having to keep the existing windows as the staff recommends. I do think that there's a way to perhaps express the fact that there was a window there by recessing it. And I think that's what the staff is proposing that it be something that reflected what the integrity of the building was to begin with but maintain the security that you're looking for. And I think you could still keep a lot of the detailing that you're showing in the brickwork and the reveals and that sort of thing within that same patterning. Okay. Well, any other questions? I have a question. Speaking of the brick veneer, is that to be sandblasted? And I mean, you show two different colors. It's white right now, but on the rendering you've got a little darker color. What you see, I don't know if you have in front of you, but the existing building was plastered. There were some tiles there. They moved them off. What you see is the impression that the mortar made along the surface of the exterior. We're going to put an additional brick in front of that. That's a new brick. What you see here on the bottom right, I don't know what you can see. I don't know. Those are new brick. It's a grayish, brownish brick. I see that in your section here. If you go back to the pictures and look above the one that you see there and you look above the door on the left, you'll see how jagged that wall is. So it would be no way that we could sandblast that or get it smooth again. So we decided to put another exterior envelope of brick on the front and wrap it around the side so we can kill it on the side. Thank you. Go ahead. Oh, no, go ahead. Just was checking the commissure. Any other comments or? We have given due consideration to the staff dialogue with respect to how we manage the right side. And we've been in consultation with the owner as well. We think we can address the situation with respect to maintaining the integrity of the opening. But use in relief a brick. We take that brick and set it back about an inch and a half and just maintain that opening and reconstituting, maintain that opening. I think that'll satisfy the entire commission request as well as the staff. Staff, any comment on that? I mean, that sounds like what we had recommended. I think so. It sounds to me like we're all agreeing with the recommendation. So I'm feeling pretty good about that. All right. Thank you again. Thank you. We encourage those that would like to communicate via email to begin sending a letters and emails. You may email COC board meeting at ColumbiaSE.gov or go on the web at publicinput.com slash COCDDRC-OCT2021. For those wanting to leave a voicemail or speak live, call 855-925-2801. When prompted, please enter the meeting code 2552. Then press star two to begin leaving a voicemail. If you would like to speak live, press star three. We will now hear any comments from anyone else here in person or received in writing or voicemails or email. We do not have any voicemails, callers, or emails. All right. Thank you. Thank you for ready to move then to just making sure are we ready to move on. All right. I think we can move to a motion. I will accept a motion and a second. I'd like to make a motion to grant a certificate of design approval for the exterior changes to the building located at 4404 North Main Street, including an exception to the sidewalk connection and landscape buffer requirements conditional upon a solution for the right hand facade that maintains the structural window openings with details that we worked out with staff. Do I have a second? Second. Mr. Graham. Yes. Ms. Sims-Franham. Yes. Ms. Jacob. Yes. Mr. Salibi. Yes. And Mr. Wolff. Yes. The motion passes. The next case is at 800 UG Street. This is a request for certificate of design approval for changes to an existing building. I don't know where my map went, but to an existing structure in addition and site improvements. Let's see. I'll just go ahead and go to the beginning of their presentation. The proposals for the renovation and expansion of the existing South Carolina State Credit Union facility on the block between UG and Pulaski and between College and Green Streets. Most of the block is controlled by the Credit Union except for the southeast quadrant. The scope of the work includes demolition of the existing one-story building, reskinning of the existing two-story building, a three-story addition, and the relocation of an existing drive-through, which requires a special exception from the Board of Zoning Appeals. An additional service parking lot will be built on the southeast corner of Pulaski and College. As contextual information, additional contextual information, this site is at the northeast corner of Green and UG and at the west end of the Green Street Bridge project. The bridge is being constructed to span the railroad tracks and connect the U of S C campus to the river, which is the primary east-west connection envisioned in the Innovista Master Plan for which the guidelines herein were created to support. This is a lengthy evaluation. I'm not going to read through it, but I will just read the staff recommendation and then I'll turn it over to the applicant for their presentation. Staff recommends approval of the request with the following conditions. That all right-of-way improvements be coordinated with staff and SCDOT is required through the encroachment process to include the provision of shade trees adjacent to the pedestrian zones wherever possible, as well as any changes to on-street parking, required sidewalks, landscaping, irrigation, and lighting. That the monument sign not exceed six feet in height from finished grade, and then all other details be coordinated with staff as the design develops through permitting. And the the applicant did put together a PowerPoint. I wonder if they're here in person? Okay, we can certainly just, I guess, click through the PowerPoint that they very nicely put together. So let's see. And this was also all in the DDRC packet, so I'll keep it short. But basically this is the site plan. You can see this is actually north is to the left. So this is the, you can see the new parking lot at the top, which is across Pulaski Street from the existing complex. And then the gray portion is what's not their property. This is sort of the addition that you're looking at on the corner of green and UG. There's another look at the site, the existing conditions. These are the existing buildings that you're probably familiar with. These are the portions that are being demolished. And then this sort of outlines where the addition is and how it connects to the existing building. The new parking area, floor plan, site plan. And then I think these renderings really do tell the story of how the new addition connects to the existing building and what they're doing to the existing building to try to tie it all together. And this is the UG Street elevation on the west materials pallet, the Green Street elevation, the drive-through, which is just being moved and then reduced in size. Some signage. Lucinda, did they express any concerns with staff recommendations? Um, no, I don't think so. We've talked through most of these things and they were, it was just, yeah, it felt like a big enough project to deserve the public presentation and any questions that you guys might have. So, yeah, staff is, you know, thinks it meets most of the guidelines and we're still working together on some of the encroachment stuff and the street trees and they've been coordinating with the Green Street streetscape and bridge project. So that seems to be going pretty well. So, yeah, but they're here if I'll have any questions. Well, let me, um, I'll see if any commissioners have any questions so we can go from there. Anybody? No, just job well done. Oh, yeah, that's an exciting project. Yeah. I do have a question. Oh, you do have a question? I know that, I know that area very well and by there a hundred thousand times. And I thank you for the improvement. It's going to look a lot better. What I'm concerned about is the Green Street. My understanding there, putting up a traffic pipe at that intersection and I understand they put in precast curb and gutters alone, huge in my career. And Green Street is a bridge over the tracks and it's almost complete. A question is, is that going to generate a heavy traffic on Green Street from UG? Because I'm concerned about your building being that close to the traffic pattern. You know, got to be, they have accidents and we don't want to get away car come crashing into your building, especially in the corner. And that's my only concern about that corner of that building. The location of the building along Green Street. Yeah, we come up here please. Yeah, and state your name. Who are you with? I'm Chris Beard. I'm with Boudreaux. We're the architects. Boudreaux, okay. And do you swear to tell the truth in this procedure? I do. Thank you. So you heard the concern, right? We do. And so we were just trying to buy by the recommended setbacks. Basically, no one at that corner is very prominent. And there's basically the minimum setback for 10 feet, our maximum setback for 10 feet. We actually apply for a staff approval to move it back 12 feet just to get a little bit further back and make sure we have proper sight lines. We know traffic is going to be increased in that area, but we actually think more of our traffic would probably go more down College Street because that's actually where more of the staff are becoming and we actually think the public would be coming in more down the College Street entrance as opposed to Green Street. And so we don't think our project would actually increase traffic, but there will be an increase in traffic eventually. I hope that helps. I'm not sure if it does. I appreciate that. Thank you. Any other questions? Well, I was looking at the renderings and I see that in her presentation it shows two columns on the front entrance and right lobby on the front. The old rendering I was looking at when the author showed one column each in the back and I think you're showing two columns in the back and the front. Correct. There's two columns in the front and the back now. I was going to say something about it. Done deal. Any other questions from staff or are we good over there? Okay. All right. We encourage those that would like to communicate the email to begin sending in letters and emails. You may email at COCBoardMeeting at ColumbiaSC.gov. Or go on the web at publicinput.com slash COCDDRC-OCT2021. For those wanting to leave a voicemail or speak live, call 855-925-2801. When prompted, please enter the meeting code 2552. Then press star two to begin leaving a voicemail. Or if you'd like to speak live, press star three. We will now hear comments from anyone in person or received in writing or via phone or email. We don't currently have any emails or voicemails. Okay. Great. Then I will ask for a motion. One second. I'll make a motion to grant a certificate of design approval for additions and site improvements at 800 UG Street with the following conditions. All right of way improvements be coordinated with staff in South Carolina Department of Transportation through the encroachment process to include provision of shade trees adjacent to pedestrian lanes or zones wherever possible as well as any changes to on street parking required sidewalks landscaping irrigation and lighting to that the movement or that the monument sign not exceed six feet in height from finished grade and three that all other details be coordinated with staff as the design develops through permitting. Second. Mr. Bram. Yes. Ms. Sims-Branham. Yes. Ms. Jacob. Yes. Mr. Salivi. Yes. And Mr. Wolk. Yes. The motion passes. Thanks for this. Thank you all very much. Appreciate it. Great project. Yeah. This is 3012 Longleaf Road. It's a request for certificate of design approval for new construction in the Melrose Heights Oakland architectural conservation district. This is on a vacant lot at the edge of the district meaning there is a limited historic context in the immediate area. The current proposal is for new construction of a 5,700 square foot two story single family home with an attached garage at the basement level. Staff has recommended adjusting certain details of the house to be more in keeping with historic district patterns for single family residences most of which the applicant is amenable to. However staff suggests that initial focus and comments today from DDRC be focused on revisions to big picture items such as adjusting massing and reforms. As proposed the building has a massing that is more varied than typically seen in the neighborhood. The configuration of one story and two story sections of the building creates a complicated reform not typical of the neighborhood. This is due in part to an effort to disguise the two story portions on the house from visibility at the front. But the result is a combination of forms and pitches that is not typical of the neighborhood. Examples from the neighborhood typically have a centralized two story block with one story wings either to one or both sides under separate roofs. Staff recommends consolidating the two story portions similar to other neighborhood examples and illuminating the need for complicated reforms and to simplify the overall massing. Staff initially recommended that the applicant explore options of using a separate garage structure with living space above to accommodate spaces currently proposed for the house and thus reduce the size and simplify the massing of the house. However, the applicant is not interested in this option. However, staff does believe that there are options to expand the house either further back on the property using wings connected by a hyphen so that it appears separate or that there's an option of slightly reorganizing the second floor so that the two story portion is consolidated and may thus be further separated from the one story wings and eliminate the need for roofs to hide the two story portion on the back of the house. And the applicant did submit a little bit of additional information today that was forwarded on to DDRC. If you had to not have a chance to look at that that is this slide here to show context some drawings of other houses in the neighborhood that have a kind of colonial revival design similar to this one. Staff did look at this design that was since and just to illustrate a little bit what staff means by the complicated roof forms looking specifically at the roofs of the existing historic homes which have a two story mass under a very simple reform one of which has a one story wing under a separate roof form whereas as submitted the house has multiple roofs connected at different levels and you can see in the the pink highlighted the way the roof from the proposed house at the center contrasts with the other houses on either side if you can move forward that's just up close because it was small and two this is just an illustration of very rough obviously of where the two story mass of the building could be located if it could be consolidated and centralized a bit more the hashed areas on the other side could be the one story wings whereas in the center you could have the two story mass of the building if the floor plan was slightly rearranged that would be more in keeping and form and massing with existing houses in the neighborhood so for staff recommendations staff finds that there are significant parts of the overall proposed design that are not in keeping with section five of the Melrose Heights Oakland architectural conservation district design guidelines and as such staff recommends deferring their requests so that these bigger issues such as massing size and scale and reforms may be further developed to better meet district patterns do you have any questions for staff thank you minister have any questions at this point is that for staff here I have a question on the presentation I know that here I forgot to name in the street Shirley and Lonely and if you're standing on line way it goes straight up with the house it's going to be going to be much higher is that what your concern is well I mean that's part of the concern I mean it's if you can look at the pictures here that provided that showed a lot there are houses behind it that are going to sit up above it there are houses over on the other street not houses sorry apartment buildings that sit very high up on a hill it's not unusual this lot has difficult topography which they've tried to kind of accommodate with retaining walls and putting the garage you know at basement level so it's not as far as the height as you see it from the street I'm not sure that I think it's incompatible my concern is more the overall massing in the way that the parts of the building interact with one another you have that matter on the presentation the what I'm sorry yeah as a patient matter do you you gave us to this morning oh um yeah the applicant is here and he will oh yeah he will discuss yeah he'll discuss his points in just a moment is there any other questions for staff applicant present please come on down if you can state your name and do you swear to tell the truth in these proceedings I'm Marty White I'm Marty White design group in Columbia and I swear to tell the truth thank you we know this is a fairly large home and um kind of the context of what we're trying to do is tuck as much underneath the roof line as much as possible because when you're standing in the street looking at this house you are going to be looking up to it we are actually recessing the garage into the basement level and wrapping around wrapping a retaining wall around to mask that whole lower level with um with the intentions of squatting the the facade the front facade on the two wings especially because if you don't do that that right that left hand side where the garage is actually has living space above it that is a full full story and that wall becomes extremely tall it almost becomes a two-story house and then a two-story house that just jumps down the hill so bringing the grade across to a retaining wall and then curving it as far left as possible and then tucking the driveway around was used to accomplish that but also to eliminate the um the view of garage doors to the street I believe you will see there's um if you go to the um side elevation there you go those garage doors right there the wall to the right would come out and curve towards the street so if you're standing at the end of the driveway you would probably glimpse the end of the third garage door you wouldn't see the first one at all you might see a little bit of the second one but tucking that under was was the number one thing if you look at the rear elevation of the house there's a lot of wall and it's a massive wall originally the customer wanted to have a two full two-story house very Williamsburg a lot of windows and um knowing the area having worked with DDRC before I said that's probably not going to happen I said we're going to need to try to soften this thing down combine some of these windows a little bit um that their goal was to have a lot of glass but to consolidate wall space as much as possible tuck it underneath the roof it is a lot of square footage in a house that has a very small package it's kind of like having a a fellow that looks tiny but he's very the house behind it is the power of residents it's a very large stucco sort of a Frank Lloyd Wright style with a massive roof that house I was actually surprised when Rachel emailed him and told me the square footage of that house because it looks a lot larger than it truly is I was trying to do the opposite with this house it does have a suburban feel to it trying to pull in some downtown aesthetics was the goal one of the things that we did do from the original plan was remove the portico we had a front portico that was one level and we pulled that off to try to soften some of the in and out jobs and then just the complexity of the house dormers were necessary for the second floor of that house because of the bedrooms that are up there the number of bedrooms that are going into this house are actually four bedrooms upstairs and um is that correct? am I? can't remember four bedrooms upstairs I tucked into that with the two little shoulder wings on either side being bathroom and then bedroom on the right hand side that was the intent was to try to tuck it away we've I've actually submitted here the other drawing that shows the other two houses actually went and measured those houses last night yesterday afternoon I went and asked the residents would you mind if I pull some tape so they're accurate to width and height I pulled from the GIS the images to line up what I had done and it did line up correctly massing wise the facade walls were what I was looking at more than the roof line because of the elevation of the house being on the hill that as it lays down you're not going to see as much of that the house on the right side right there on the screen when you're standing at the road you you barely see any of that roof and it's when I drew it out looking at the GIS map plus the measurements in the field I was surprised at how tall that roof really was but anyway so that's that's where we've we've been with with design development so far open it up to questions any questions anything so let me just say I spent a lot of time looking at this submittal when it was first sent and what I didn't get as much time to do is to see the new stuff that you sent recently I didn't get a chance to really um look at that in detail enough to I picked up a couple of things like you agreed with maybe some of the the millions in the windows you changed and you lined up some of the some of that sort of thing at the bottom of that picture there right I will tell you that this kind of development gives me great pause because even though you're meeting the setback requirements and whatnot we're we're putting a really massive house in an in an area that has not had that kind of messing on that size lot and even though the setbacks are allowed to be doing that way there's also kind of respect for the neighborhood right and the fact that the Powell house it may be very similar in square footage but it has much more land than property around it so that it doesn't look like it's dwarfing that right so I I mean I'm I'm an architect I face the same challenges I totally appreciate that but so I kind of disagree with staff in the sense that I I agree that that thank goodness you brought down some of the scale on the sides of the house in terms of the roof to to help bring the scale down a bit but it doesn't take away from the overall just real massing of this yeah the house so because I haven't had time to really review some of the other changes I appreciate these other elevations that you've shown I do think and I don't know if you've explored some of these I know you've talked with staff back and forth but I mean the idea of maybe a hyphen that allows us to to break up the massing I'm not necessarily suggesting it has to come down to two stories I'm not even suggesting maybe I realize that all the bedrooms client wants them all on the same level but there are ways architecturally as you well know to be able to kind of divide up the massing a bit so that but I also understand the constraints I mean frankly what concerns me more is this massive retaining wall that the neighbors are going to be seeing I don't know if there's any kind of requirement or things that we can do about that but to me that's more almost more bothersome to me than the house itself the site plan actually has some elevations on it the the wall I managed to work it out the where the height of the the most height to the wall at the back corner would be I believe 11 feet right it might be hard to see on that spot no I can see it's on page um doing the once it gets up there you go the retaining wall on the back to the left of this one if you're looking at plan left top left that would be literally almost at grade but then as it travels up the hill to the right it's almost 11 feet tall right it doesn't start creeping up to 11 feet until you get past where the swimming pool is drawn I think that's about five or six feet there and then it just abruptly goes up as it comes down the site come and plan down the wall comes down to I believe it's 30 inches at the most at the near the end and then it gets shorter as it trails out that'll all of course depend on how the lot next door is the grading is over there but the front wall I only did a retaining wall from the middle where it's the sidewalk is going towards the driveway in order to get that level for the front yard to literally just sink the house down into the ground as much as possible we already know from previous DDRC involvement with the neighbors to the left of this house that they were concerned about water and I know that's not something that y'all worry you deal with but I know it's going to be an issue so we were trying I was trying to stamp that out so I actually took the grades from the now granted this is from GIS so it's not exact but trying to round it in to keep it as close to pre-construction conditions as possible coming up that driveway so I set the basement level I believe it's at 102 I think that's the grade that I had that so it's it's an incline going up the driveway but it's not a very steep one and then turning into the house that dictated really what I did with the rest of it less going to an eight foot ceiling in the basement which is possible you can sink down into the house but the problem is on the right hand side the retaining wall gets to the back wall of the house and it's almost reaching up to the socket line it's just below the socket about about literally 18 inches to two feet being that it's going to be right on the retaining wall it kind of limits us from being able to do the hyphen because I did think about that there is a house on Shirley that is not part of the district this near Trinam and it's a beautiful house it's a monster from the road you cannot tell it's that big from the aerial photo it's huge and they did that with the hyphens to have the land to do it with this just doesn't have it unless we start to pull forward to the street which is just going to push it up even higher so this is a very difficult lot to work with and we knew that from the go but trying to keep that retaining wall from being just a a 20 foot tall wall was the challenge I believe that there's 27 feet Rachel is that correct from point to point with grade now I counted 22 but it could be 22 it could be 27 yeah so there was a lot of distance so we did not want to come in at grade at the bottom and cut that thing right in sure sure so terracing it off and using the houses as a retaining purpose was kind of the goal what is the front setback staff that were they have to have well within the start district there's no true it's just it's just whatever's adjacent what the established setback is on this lot I looked at the zoning the new zoning it's a 15 foot minimum so they have a 25 right now I mean I'm not proposing to bring it up 15 to 50 feet I was just curious if I actually did place it on the 25 for the the structure the steps are proud of that I have a question about the retaining wall okay on the right hand corner you're gray I can't read this very well your your current gray is what up against say the wall is built is it 123 I believe so yes and to finish slab is 111 so that's 11 to 12 feet high yeah the backyard actually would tear us up a little bit into the corner and then water would divert kind of down the retaining walls between the wall and the house and then down the back and we'll have to have some subgrade drainage to take it away to the front but yeah the backyard goes up I think I think it comes up pretty close to the same level as the floor of the house haha the wall above the gray in the very back once you really just about 11 feet no your gray your gray and your wall haha the wall the wall from the the gray in the backyard to the top of the wall would be about 11 feet in height my question is I'm standing on the re gray hill on the hillside yeah on the hillside it's gray it's gray have to have a rail top of the wall am I understanding them correctly so you're putting rails rails on top of the wall yes if you're standing up on the grade above and you're looking down the wall right there would have to be some sort of a guard rail there there would have to be something to keep people from falling down because you're right out the property line the power property is behind that as you approach that that drop off I mean that's a drop off that's 11 feet raising the wall higher to keep someone from to create a barrier as possible it's just going to make the wall even taller so we decided that probably the best move would be to do a some sort of a fence not an open rail it would have to be a fence that has pickets that would comply to keep people from going through it right and it would be about four inch distance between so we're thinking probably some sort of an aluminum anchored fence thank you I couldn't see from GIS and and I you can't navigate the property very well to get out there to see what the power has had on their retaining wall I believe they have a large shrub that's across theirs and then if you go through that shrub you're going to go down the wall so this one that was actually one of the first comments that I made to the customer I said this is going to have to have it's a heck of a wall for one but two it's going to have to have some sort of barricade at the top to protect people from falling and I think that wall is really the largest challenge with this whole property you know when I first looked at it I said oh great this is going to be fun you know but um but once I started thinking about how to terrace that house out and uh hide the garage because that was a very important feature was they actually purchased this as two lots and there's all the boundary to create the double lot that was one of the the key features was to have that three car garage and um I did look at separating it based on staff's recommendation of doing an outbuilding and in order to do that certainly the house can be shrunk but the need of a lot of the space that is actually on the first floor sure they can do without that extra living room it's nice to have that extra living space um especially in the house of this size and and the price point it's nice to have two living areas in a house like this but they could do without that the guest bedroom could have been relocated so the main level could have been changed but then the garage still has to be underneath the house in some way shape or form so we're still cutting underneath it still turning a driveway underneath it and we're just occupying more land by building and outbuilding most likely the back left corner plan left at the rear and that's just putting more mass on the property so I I kind of real quickly said well it's not going to that's not really accomplishing what we're trying to do us or staff I mean I appreciate that it that it is a lot of grade you're using the grade to this advantage but that's just adding more mass to your upper story that you're saying may or may not really be needed but you're adding so again it's just kind of creating that overall massiveness that I feel like maybe could be I appreciate that you've looked at this but I feel like maybe it needs a little more if we got who's rolling the screen but let's go back to the basement level please there you go so the back left corner could occupy the third base so we could push that leg that comes down we could push that in but if we do that we're eating into the backyard so if we do that we would actually prefer to pull the house forward so the the retaining wall that comes in just past that third base now would pretty much remain where it is so the house would just pull forward another 10 or 12 feet and since we don't have a minimum setback the 25 is recommended that's what we would do in doing that it's going to steep in the front yard or raise the retaining wall at the street level the garden wall would just get taller it's currently designed for about 30 inches I believe is what I put on there and so we would have to go up to about five so then when you're driving down the road you look right and you're looking at a five foot tall wall rather than a 30 inch wall that gradually gets taller as it gets past the house so that was that was another issue that I looked at and I did Rachel and I worked on a couple of ideas of how to eliminate that jog out on the front and again modifying that main floor with that living area is possible to push that the the Judd out in so that the only thing that sticks forward would be the the two-story front but I think we've got more that is concerned with staff beyond that one so you know I didn't make any changes to it that way we actually had another version of this house that we were going to submit and Rachel and I both knew that it was not going there was no possible way the house was going to fly it was a full two-story it was massive and it was more along the lines of the apartments that are on Shirley Street on the right that type of massing and I did not know and we never discussed it that those were not in the district I thought they were and then when I found out that this property was the only one on that street that is in district and it's kind of separated from the others I was like well wow this is so divorced from the district and there's so many different styles around it I mean it's almost like they threw every style in and hit pure A including the Powell house but then I said well maybe that's to an advantage that we could maybe get some elements of the district intertwined into the design of the house but maybe introduce some others that would make that roof not be so right there the dormers cutting into the roof was actually an idea to do that staff wanted me to lower the soffit line on that front elevation to more of the first floor level the customer wanted me to push it back up but getting it to be in that mid-range took it from looking like a one-story home with this massive hat sitting on top of it and actually there's comment also on there about the roof pitch being a little different it's an 8 and 12 on the mid section of the house and then I hid into believe this a 10 on 12 for the wings I tried to hide that the way I would tie it together in order to bring that roof line down yeah if the lower that front soffit goes the higher that roof is just going to get so I was just going to say I'm encouraged to hear here that you and staff have been trying to work through these challenges because I mean I I agree this is a unique opportunity and it is within the district so and I don't I'll let you resume in just a second I mean I really am inclined to think that we need to defer and keep working on the solution that makes everybody happy on this one but tell us what any other highlights you want to hit from what you said today honestly being here today was just to get some information back from you guys on what you would prefer to see so that we can apply that into the design I mean we know that we're going back to the computer to work on this this plan is a little bit different than what actually we have that jerkin roof on the right side elevation that gable is gone now that's all roofline and on the front elevation the jog out to the right it just trails up and runs into the the two story portion so I was able to soften that down the left hand side is just there and there's not a good way to kill that width without making it one flat wall which we did not want to do because I believe that would make it look extremely suburban well it sounds like we're inching there I'm just going to ask Dan did you have any other comments or follow-up after getting the new material today or are we still digesting that well yeah one option I haven't discussed with Marty which I mean I just want to put out there we have done subcommittees before if there are kind of design elements that want to have talk through a little bit more I mean obviously if Marty is open to that or if y'all are that is an option as well just to say and do we feel this is that needed do you think I mean I'm not sure it's up to the DRC if they feel like that would be productive and Marty if he thinks that would be there's a lot of challenges here to make this a success Rachel and I have worked very well together I mean we've built a very good report I mean I'm fine if you want to just plug out a little bit further and see where we can go we know that we're going to be back again yeah we're probably going to be back again we want you to we want a successful project definitely that's right but we definitely gotta be respectful to what's going on here and we we acknowledge this is a lot of house going in this is a 20 pounds of you know oranges 10 pounds here yeah it is a lot this is a big one so hiding it into the hiding it into the hill but not letting that wall devour it was one of the goals hiding that garage was a big goal and then reducing that facade was one of my main points that I wanted to try to accomplish unfortunately we ran into a few issues with dormers and things like that so it is something that is different than what you see in the Melrose Heights area I did ride around yesterday when I was trying to find some of the other houses that were suggested to kind of look like or the examples and I found the two and was fortunate to walk up and speak with the folks and the two-story house with the front gabled porch they were actually on their porch and they had a lengthy conversation with me and they they were like that's a lot of houses going over there but hey you know good luck with that and you know they asked a few questions very nice people there well I think on the right road what do you think I'm sorry I have one more comment I just I wanted to revive something that I said earlier I like the idea of you simplifying some of these elements in the floor plan that will help kind of allow the roof moves not to be so complicated I mean I I do agree that okay to bring some of the scale down but it is a complicated roof that feels like it just yeah could be a much more straightforward solution back to kind of what's back to recommending that yeah whether ends up being you know straight across like the other precedents in the area maybe not but at least don't don't let the three-car garage drive the massing on this yeah what it feels like I actually explored a little bit of that idea of taking the two shoulder two-story sections and combining it with the first one and when I did that that just became a 48-foot long bridge and I said wow that's that's that's quite a bit I feel like the shoulders are more of an issue I mean I feel like I don't know that we need a real workshop for this I do think that that you know we're obviously already working well together and I appreciate you coming here to let us see where you got so far but I do think a little bit more really needs to to happen in the massages a little bit more so that it would be really sensitive to the neighborhood and this lovely point neighborhood that I'm very familiar with and it just I just want to kind of maintain some of that character that it deserves I did want to ask a question the one of the recommendations was reducing the size of the windows and my thought was is if we do do that we're pushing ourselves to the point where the wall starts to look a little naked and it may need shutters on it to me that complicates the elevation even more and I was hoping to get some feedback from you guys on how you feel about that is that something that you would prefer to see or is that would you prefer to stay away from shutters on a house like this I feel like it's too many vertical elements when we start doing that breakfast is going to add to the massing field but even if it's covered up by a shutter I like this implicitly in the cleanness of it that's what that's really what we're going for this is going to be a um but I do like let me just finish but I do like the proportions of the women of the other 2000s so that they're longer and thinner I don't know you might just think about that because I don't know I do I wouldn't say I do like the proportions of the 2000s you show on your side but the window proportions I'm not trying to reduce what's necessary but if there's two windows here yeah and I think two when you added the mullion between the windows if you beef that up a little bit your the windows can be thinner and still take up more space of the wall and that's just something to think about how how your dimensions work there yeah one of the one of the concerns from the customer was wanting to utilize as much glass as possible and it was suggested doing triple windows on either side of the front door and I said I don't think that that's that's it is it is in the district but I don't think that it goes very well with this so I'm doing those are twin 36 by seven foot windows they're tall instead of doing transoms so that was the the idea was to get some width but also to keep the link so it does have that linear look in in the beginning the house really mimicked the one to the left with the two-story part but then it has the shoulders on either side and the second floor shoulders and then the one-story shoulders that was just too much wall so I I suggested that we separate it and then combine the windows on the lower level and then do the single window for the dormer above so just trying to see what's happening upstairs where you have those windows there's no cool it's just somehow you're not relighted to that open space alone there no those those two dormers are actually bedrooms not at the window both the door the door that's a two-story for you um we did squat that down faintly seal and that drawing the dotted in ceiling line that's the ceiling height of it's a 10 foot ceiling on the main floor nine foot for the second floor and um that front portion is going to have a um a clipped cathedral tying into the two-story part of that four-year it could be brought down a little bit more um the uh I don't think that we could get it down to the soffit line and make it effective with windows above the door unless it went to a single window which is more indicative of like an English tutor or a manor house I mean that is possible I'm just looking at a few words that was a monumental looking entry there that doesn't seem to be character within any of the other entry there right yes I agree I agree it could be when you actually bring it all within and you have a third door over there I mean I'm not proposing that I'm redesigning it but again anything that helped say I'm fitting into my context yes better in terms of the batsmen and the stale of all the elements I had not actually explored the idea maybe a third door or um that that's possible and that could look good and that would bring that facade down and uh right and then it does create more roof but like we all know that as you're standing in front of you're looking at it in architectural form now when you're standing in front of it you're not going to see as much of that if a lot at all you're not going to see a lot of that um and it's simple about the roof that's what it's like yeah that's right and that's exactly what I was hoping to hear from you guys was suggestions on things like that because this is getting to this point and the first version of what we did with the two-story was hey this is what we came up with I know you're not going to like this the second one was almost like going going to dark and um and sometimes that's throwing a dark and dark and we don't know until we get some feedback so in an effort of time and of course we have time we knew we were going to go through DDRC I told the customer that we would probably go through two or three times and this is going to be a lot of back and forth communication with preservation so we're anticipating this and um getting the the ins and the outs I would love to be able to get this to be be less suburban that's still be able to maintain everything on the lower level the garage the main floor of the house which is you know can be maneuvered around a little bit but fitting it on the property was the biggest problem pulling it forward I'd love to pull it forward but I know if I pull it forward those those retaining walls are just getting taller or the yard's becoming steeper so we kind of have a lot of a lot of variables here to deal with we'll be exciting to see the next version all right any other comments from staff let me just say I'm not about to do anything because I'm sure I didn't think that would be helpful well and that's why I had asked them earlier if they what they wanted it sound like it sounded at the time y'all were comfortable doing staff on staff um if you feel that need I mean you reach back out when you go from there I mean that's okay whatever if it's if it's if y'all would say that we should do that then we'll do it just as a note a subcommittee meeting requires a formal motion from y'all to establish that so that's just a factor if y'all think it would be helpful and you want to do it that's something that you would need probably to decide today I'm going to make I mean I'm looking for staff's feelings on this I mean if you feel that y'all too can come to a better solution and want to bring it back next time I mean I think Marty's getting some good feedback and let me ask a question about that so if if you have to formalize that that has to be done in a meeting or can you do it on your own and then send it through Rachel and then say hey they want to form a meeting does it have to be done now it has to be done now it has to be done now the next time you come right let's go ahead and do it if we can I would like to do it you want to do it okay yeah yeah if we decide that we don't need it then so y'all have to make sorry y'all have to make a motion to hold a subcommittee meeting we would send out a doodle poll for scheduling purposes and then we have to advertise it so you know we usually try to schedule those pretty quickly if it's wanted so yes so thank you for clarifying that process so if that's something you want to do or do you want to try first with staff then look at that so you are can I ask a question on that yes does that involve public input that's just no it's intended to be a working session between commission members and gosh okay then yes I'd like to do it okay all right it is it is open to the public because it is it's a meeting but right you're not allowed to comment but it's just a month right I understand now that we're not virtual I mean I guess that would be conducted here just like these meetings as well or yeah okay yes okay yeah we're getting ready to move to I think some additional public input I think we're good right now all right yes ma'am all right thank you thanks we encourage those that would like to communicate via email to begin sending in letters and emails hold on let me pause a second should we take anybody in person before we go through this or does this let me let me go through it and then we'll just take everybody start again we encourage those that would like to communicate via email to begin sending in letters and emails you can email at cocboardmeeting at clummysc.gov or go on the web at publicinput.com slash coc ddrc dash oct 2021 for those wanting to leave a voicemail or speak live call 855 925 2801 when prompted please enter the meeting code 2552 then press star two to begin leaving a voicemail or if you would like to speak live press star three we will now hear comments from anybody in person please come up and state your name and my name is Sidney Strucker on the duplex next door at 3016 3018 long leave okay I just come here to hear and do you swear to tell the truth of these proceedings I'm sorry when you tell the truth of these proceedings I'm sorry these here and there don't work too good that's all right well you tell the truth in these proceedings just do you swear to tell the truth in these proceedings okay thank you well what it is I've just been listening and I've watched a little bit the plans and you know that's a difficult lot these guys have done good to try to figure out that thing because you know I've got the duplex next door and you walk up that hill you look down and it's a difficult lot so I think that you know if y'all would work with them and try to help them figure out because something needs to go on that lot I mean they paid a lot of money for that lot and that profit is valuable so I'm just here to say that I hope that everything goes good for y'all and I'm the neighbor next door and I just hope that the drainage situation will be taken care of when the house is built that's all I got to say no well thank thank you any follow-up questions that we do okay any other comments received in writing we do we have two letters currently the first is from Josh Shelton so I'll go ahead and read that now DDRC I am writing in regards to 3,012 Longleaf Road TMS number 13902-08-12 our neighborhood association supports the city of Columbia preservation office staff's findings and write up which states that this building goes against the Melrose Heights Oakland architectural conservation districts design guidelines our neighborhood will welcome a new build on this property if it isn't keeping with our our guidelines and fits within the unique character of our neighborhood which is listed on the National Register of Historic Places the Historic Melrose Neighborhood Association requests that you reject or defer the submission and request the applicants to work with city staff to create a design that isn't keeping with our guidelines again that's from Josh Shelton the president of the Historic Melrose Neighborhood Association the second one it says my name is Heather Mitchell and I am an architect who lives around the corner at 1411 Shirley Street I confess that I did not see the signs in advance and have not reviewed the submittal thoroughly I just happened to be watching from out of town for another project on the agenda I am emailing to share that as I look at these drawings and given how well I know the site and context as currently designed this house feels inappropriate for the site and neighborhood thank you Heather Mitchell and I don't believe we have any other voicemails or emails at this time all right so I think we're ready to move to a to a motion here to a place upon our conversation I'll open the floor for a motion I'll move that we create a supplement I think you would make two separate motions if you wish to defer then you would make that motion and then a separate motion I got you Mr. Brannon do you want to tackle for the first motion let's see I would like to move to defer the 3012 Longleaf Road request for certificate of design approval in keeping with the staff recommendations is that sufficient all right do I have a second second Mr. Brannon yes is Simms Brannon yes Ms. Jacob yes Mr. Salibi yes and Mr. Wall yes motion passes all right now I'll open up for the next motion so now I would like to move that we create a subcommittee for reviewing the design with the applicant and staff to look at the details in more detail second Mr. Brannon yes Ms. Simms Brannon yes Ms. Jacob yes Mr. Salibi yes and Mr. Wall yes motion passes any other business on the agenda I just wanted to let y'all know that Mr. Baker has stepped down from DDRC and so we'll be exploring bringing in another at-large member for the commission so we appreciate his service all right great well there's no other business we have a motion to adjourn I'd like to make a motion to adjourn a second all right thank you everybody thank you