 We have a nice holiday. All work. No, no. All work and all work. Trying to get a training desk, downside, all that. Casting. Now? Yeah, we got it. Okay. You got everybody here? Let's get started. Welcome. The Design Development Review Commission is made up of volunteers with expertise or interest in historic preservation and design. We generally meet on the second Thursday of the month to review cases. Staff to the commission are our urban design and historic preservation staff. They are available to answer questions if you have them, but please do not interrupt proceedings if you do indeed need to speak with one of them. The meeting generally proceeds with the staff calling the case and describing it. I will call for the applicant to come forward afterward to add to the basic description of the request if necessary or if the applicant wishes to do so. If so, the applicant should keep the presentation to 10 minutes or less. The commissioners will then have the opportunity to ask questions. At this point, I will ask if there is anyone in the audience who wishes to speak for or against the proposal. Audience comments should be kept to two minutes per person. If there is, the applicant will have an opportunity to respond. This rebuttal shall not exceed five minutes. In most of the cases, we will make a decision tonight after all information has been presented. If your case is denied or if you feel that our decision was made an error, you and anyone with standing have the opportunity to appeal it within 30 days of the decision. If you plan to speak about a specific project you must have signed in. The sheet was at the back and it's now in the front by the podium. Also, and so that members of the public understand, commissioners are under strict instructions to avoid discussing DDRC meetings and applications with members of the public or with each other outside of these proceedings to avoid ex parte communications. If you wish to speak during the course of these proceedings, please stand and raise your right hand. You affirm to tell the truth in these proceedings? Thank you. Could staff please call roll? Mr. Boknight. Here. Mr. Brim. Here. Ms. Moore. Here. Ms. Fuller-Wilt. Here. Mr. Wynn. Here. Mr. Savry. Here. We have quorum. Great. Does the agenda order still stand? We've had one change since publication under the historic version of the consent agenda. Item number three, 2009 Lincoln Street, a request for preliminary certification for the Bailey bill, has been deferred. The DDRC utilizes a consent agenda for those projects which require DDRC review, but which meet the guidelines and typically require no discussion. If anyone wishes to discuss an item on the consent agenda, I will ask that you speak up after the consent agenda is read and we can pull the item for discussion onto the regular agenda. If staff could please read the consent agenda. Certainly. Next item on the consent agenda is 1132 through 1136 Woodrow Street. This is a request for preliminary certification for the Bailey bill. The structure is in the Melrose Heights, Oakland Architectural Conservation District. The next item is 3213 Michigan Street, a request for design approval for exterior changes and preliminary certification for the Bailey bill. Again, this is in Melrose Heights, Oakland Architectural Conservation District. The next item is 3012 Lincoln Street, a request for preliminary certification for the Bailey bill. This is in Earlwood Protection Area A. The next item is 1310 Lady Street and 1224 Sumter Street. This is the Keenan Building. The request is for a certificate of site plan approval for an individual landmark, which also sits within the City Center Design Development District. And lastly is 1310 Lady Street once more. This is a request for design approval for exterior changes to the existing individual landmark. Is there anyone who wishes to take an item off the consent agenda for discussion? If not, could we have a motion to approve the consent agenda and the meeting minutes from December? To make a motion? I move that we approve the consent agenda and the minutes for last month's meeting. Is there a second? Okay. Have a vote, please. Mr. Bucknight. Yes. Mr. Brim. Yes. Ms. Moore. Yes. Ms. Fuller-Wilt. Yes. Mr. Nguyen. Yes. Mr. Sabre. Yes. Motion passes. Thank you. Could you present the first case, please? This is a request for a certificate of design approval for new construction on a vacant lot at the corner of Piccadilly and Gis Streets in the Granby Architectural Conservation District. It's addressed as 300 to 302 Piccadilly Street. This is just the second proposal for new construction in Granby since the district was created back in 2010. Granby is a unique neighborhood in which just three historic house forms exist. And on Piccadilly Street, just one of these three forms is present. Not only is there a little variation in size, style, scale and massing, but the variation in that area is down to less than a quarter of an inch. Staff has worked extensively with the applicants on the plans that are being presented today to ensure that the extreme consistency on the street is being continued. Staff finds that the plans are compatible with the guidelines and therefore will not go into detail regarding the plans, but we'll be happy to respond to any questions. So staff finds the proposal for new construction at 300 to 302 Piccadilly Street complies with section 5B of the Granby Architectural Conservation District Guidelines and recommends granting a certificate of design approval with the following conditions. The setback and height of the new structure will be consistent with adjacent structures. Roof pitch shall be 1212, 1212, 812 and 312 reading from the front to the rear of the structure. Facia cornerboards and trim shall visually match the historic trim found on adjacent millhouses. Doors shall be four panel or half light over two panel wood or fiberglass. Windows shall be one over one aluminum clad or wood. Sightings shall be smooth cement fiberboard or wood with a reveal of approximately four and a half inches. No metal vinyl or PVC products shall be used for any architectural feature. If visible from the public right of way mechanical units will be screened. Driveways will be concrete brick or granite and shall be no more than 12 feet in width and all details deferred to staff. Do you want to go through the slides or is the applicant here and wish to speak? Have you been sworn in? Hold up your right hand. Do you promise to tell the truth in these proceedings? And did you sign in? If you'd also sign in. State your name for the record. Michael Kennedy. And this is Keith Angcone. So we don't have a whole lot to add in addition to what you know the plans and everything else we've submitted but just want to say we're both excited about getting the project off the ground. We both went to the University of South Carolina and lived adjacent in Olympia in 2006 and we love the neighborhood and we're looking forward to be able to be a part of it long term. So thank you. Are there any questions for the applicants before they go? Thank you. Anybody who wishes to speak in support of the application? Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the Commission. I'm Bob Gild with the Granby Mill Village Neighborhood Association and we want to endorse enthusiastically the proposed infill for 300 and Piccadilly and also the companion lot that you'll be hearing in the next case. We're very pleased that if this project goes forward it'll represent the first infill in Granby under the Architectural Conservation District Guidelines. We're very grateful for the staff, for Amy and Megan to work very closely with both the neighborhood and the developers to make this happen and it's really nice to see some progress. A personal note, my first year in law school I spent in the house that used to be on this very lot burned down one of the handful of losses in the neighborhood because largely the mill village remains intact but the few missing teeth that are on the block make a big difference in a streetscape that's relatively uniform as Megan was mentioning. So filling in those gaps is a really important step forward for restoring the architectural integrity of the neighborhood and so we want to enthusiastically endorse the proposal and thank the developers for their enthusiasm as well. Thank you. Would you like to speak? No. Anybody else who wants to speak for? You're the only one here so I guess not. Any comments before we move to a motion from the commissioners? I'm personally glad to see this happening. The missing teeth need to be filled in so this is a great way to do it. Would anybody like to make a motion? Let me ask one question. There are a lot of conditions with this and you're amenable to the conditions that staff has outlined. So just for the record you're saying yes. Good, okay. We can't really hear you but that's fine. I think the main thing is we understand that you're on board. So would anybody like to make a motion? I'll give it a whack. Okay, based on the evidence presented and section 5B of the Granby Architectural Conservation District, I move that the Design Development Review Commission approve a certificate of design approval for the 302 Piccadilly Street. That's the name of the project I guess. I'm sorry, I'm sorry. For the approval of design for 300 to 302 Piccadilly Street proposed, I'm sorry, with all details deferred to staff. Is there a second? Second. Any discussion? Do we have a vote please? Mr. Boknight. Yes. Mr. Brim. Yes. Ms. Fuller-Wilt. Yes. Ms. Moore. Yes. Mr. Sabre. Yes. Motion passes. Thank you. Next case please. This is a request for a certificate of design approval for new construction on a vacant lot on Piccadilly Street in the Granby Architectural Conservation District. The plans submitted for this lot are identical to those from the previous case, so I don't think there's really any need to go into further detail. And the conditions for approval are identical, but I'll read them again. Staff finds the proposal for new construction at 300, or excuse me, 313 to 315 Piccadilly Street complies with section 5B of the Granby Architectural Conservation District guidelines and recommends granting a certificate of design approval with the following conditions. The setback and height of the new structure will be consistent with adjacent structures. Roof pitches shall be 12, 12, 12, 12, 8, 12, and 312, reading from the front to the rear of the structure. Facia, cornerboards, and trim shall visually match the historic trim found on adjacent millhouses. Doors shall be four-panel or half-light over two-panel wood or fiberglass. Windows shall be one-over-one aluminum clad or wood. Siding shall be smooth cement fiberboard or wood with a reveal of approximately four-and-a-half inches. No metal, vinyl, or PVC product shall be used for any architectural feature. If visible from the public right-of-way mechanical units will be screened. Driveways will be concrete, brick, or granite, and shall be no more than 12 feet in width, and I'll do details defer to staff. Thank you. Does the applicant wish to speak? Does anybody wish to speak in support? It would be the same comments. Okay. So, I guess at this point I'll ask for a motion. This pillow will please. You've had practice. This will be so much better. Right, that's great, thanks. Well, may I just ask, what is the name of the project? That's where I kind of got. New construction. Okay, based on the evidence presented and Section 5B of the Granby Architectural Conservation District, I move that the Design Development Review Commission approve a certificate of design approval for new construction proposed at 313-315 Piccadilly Street with all details deferred to staff. Is there a second? Second. Any discussion? Do we have a vote, please? Mr. Bocknight? Yes. Mr. Brum? Yes. Ms. Fuller-Wilt? Yes. Ms. Moore? Yes. Mr. Wynn? Yes. Mr. Savry? Yes. Motion passes. Wonderful. I think that's the end of our cases, and I don't believe, well, correct me if I'm wrong, does anybody have anything that they want to move into to note we're just keeping executive session under other business on the agenda, so we'll just look to hear from y'all if you feel the need for it. If not, we don't need to move into it. I think we're good. In that case, could I have a motion to adjourn? So moved. Second? Second. All those in favor? Aye. Aye. All adjourned. Thank you. Thank you. How about that? That's a record. That was quick. I can't not go back to work now. I feel guilty. I gotta go back to work.