 Justin, are we ready? I think so. All right. Whenever you're ready. Great. Welcome to DVRC members, staff and guests. We ask for your patience during this virtual 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. During the meeting, you will see live images or still images of DVRC members and staff. However, images of the applicant and public will not be visible. The public will also be able to participate via three methods. When participating, please provide your name for documentation purposes. You can participate in a number of ways by watching and emailing, running in or logging into the work session. If you're watching, please turn the meetings through city TV, which is access at www.youtube.com, backslash user, backslash Columbia SC government. Calling, emailing letters and statements via email to CSC board meeting at Columbia SC.gov. We look to and or during the meeting as this account will be monitored throughout the proceedings. The number of letters will be read into the record. If you wish to phone in, you can call 855-925-2801. When prompted, please enter the meeting code 4293. Those participating by phone will receive three options on how to participate. That will be read into the record. The number of letters will be read into the record. The number of letters will be read into the record. Those three will allow participants to be placed in a queue so they may speak live when prompted. Please make sure your computer audio is muted if you're calling in live so we can avoid feedback. And last, if you'd like to, you can stream via the web. And you can reach that at publicinput.com, backslash CRC, DDRC, and you can reach that number. And you can reach that number. And you can reach that number. And I will call the roll. Mr. Baker. Present. Mr. Bram. Yeah. Mr. Dinkins. Mr. Dinkins, you may be muted. I know he's here. Okay. Can you hear me now? Yes. Thank you. Here. Miss Johnson. Here. Mr. Saliri. Here. Mr. Dinkins. Here. Mr. Wall. Here. Yeah. Great. 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 forum. 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. In order to avoid ex parte communications. 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 requests before the DDRC are allotted a presentation time of 10 minutes. This time should include, but it's not limited to an overview of the project, but it's not limited to a 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 and intervals of two minutes. Applicants may have five minutes to respond. Staff has a timer and will make presenters aware of when they need to respond. Are there any changes to the agenda? We have had one, Carl, from the urban design agenda. That was a request at 222 Main Street. It was a request for design approval for new construction in the north main corridor design district. Otherwise there are no other changes. The DDRC uses the consent agenda to approve non-controversial consent. The consent agenda is approved by a single motion and vote. If a member of the DDRC or the general public wants to discuss an item on the consent agenda, that item is removed from the agenda and considered during the meeting. The DDRC then approves the remaining consent agenda items. Will staff please read the consent agenda. The first item on the consent agenda is 1416 Victoria street. This is a request for preliminary certification for the district. The second item on the consent agenda is a request for the Bailey bill in the cotton town, Bellevue architectural conservation district. The next item is 208 watery avenue. A request for preliminary certification for the Bailey bill. And certificate of design approval for exterior changes in the Wales garden architectural conservation district. The next item is 1511 Richland street. The second item on the consent agenda is a request for the Bailey bill. And for design approval for exterior changes in the landmark district. The next is a vacant lot. Bound by part Brian and Clark streets. It's a request for certificates of design approval for new construction. And site improvements in the Elmwood park. Architectural conservation district. The next item is 1324 Richland street. A request for design approval for new construction. In the landmark district. Next to 1728 Main street. This is a request for a certificate of design approval for exterior changes. And preliminary certification for the Bailey bill. This is linked with 1730 Main street. Which has a similar request for exterior changes and preliminary certification for the Bailey bill. This is linked with 1730 Main street. Which has a similar request for exterior changes and preliminary certification for the Bailey bill. 1728. Is in the city center design development district, Columbia commercial historic district, which is a national registered district. 1730 Main street. Is also an individual landmark. And also within both of those districts. And last is 3452 North Main street. A request for a certificate of design approval for exterior changes. And preliminary certification for the Bailey bill. This is a national registered structure. And also falls within the North Main corridor design district. That's all. Great. Is there anyone from the DDRC that would like any items removed from the consent agenda? Okay. Not hearing any. Is there anyone from the public that would like to have an item removed from the consent agenda? No emails at this time. Okay. Thank you. I believe are we ready now to get a motion. I do have a caller on the line. I don't see that they've asked to speak. However, if they wish to speak, they should. Press start three. And I'll wait just a moment to see if they do so. I don't see that they're enjoying the speaker queue. So. Thank you. Please communicate by sending an email to COC board meeting at Columbia SC dot gov. Or communicate via phone by pressing start three. And I'll wait just a moment to see if they do so. I don't see that they're enjoying the speaker queue. Just a moment to continue to see if they can step up or communicate via phone by pressing star to to leave. Our start three to speak in person. I think we, we just paused here a little bit, but I don't believe we have any callers or received anything. Do I have a motion and a second to accept the agenda as well as the main minutes. Sure. the consent agenda items with all staff recommendations and the May 13, 2020, design development review commission minutes. Second. Mr. Bram. Yes. Mr. Dinkins. Yes. Ms. Jacob. Yes. Ms. Johnson. Yes. Mr. Saliti. Yes. Mr. Wolfe. Yes. And Mr. Baker. Yes. Thank you. Motion passes. Great. All right. We're now ready to move to the regular agenda. All right. This project is for new construction located at the currently vacant lot at 915 Pine Street in the Old Shandong, Lower Waverly Protection Area. It's proposed to be a two-story single family residence. The applicant originally proposed a design for new construction that did not meet the Old Shandong, Lower Waverly guidelines and deferred their project to reassess their plans. They have since been bringing their plans to be more in keeping with the standards. And staff finds that it mostly meets the guidelines. Staff's main concern with the original plans was with the front-facing attached garage, which directly disregarded both the sense of entry requirements, garage location requirements, massing, and driveway specifications for city ordinance. Since the initial plans, however, the applicant has removed the front-facing garage, also reducing the driveway to 12 feet. I was originally proposed at 16 feet, which was four feet over the maximum allowance. They've also brought the front porch in line with the right bay of the front facade. It was originally recessed. And they've also widened the front porch to about 9 feet to have a better sense of entry. With all of these changes, there are still some minor tweaks to the design that staff recommends to better meet the guidelines. Considering these changes and the efforts made by the applicant to meet the guidelines, staff recommends granting a certificate of design approval with the following recommendations. The faux windows on the front elevation be removed, and the two paired windows be moved to be in line with the center point of the front-facing gable to create a better rhythm of openings, as well as the front porch column be replaced with a more simple traditional column in place of the craftsman-style bolt column that's depicted on the plans to help open up that entry. Both side elevation windows be arranged to have a better sense of rhythm, as depicted by staff recommendations. And then with the exception given due to the extreme narrowness of the lot and the efforts of the applicant to meet the design guidelines for the new construction, staff recommends that the proposed driveway be reduced to 10 feet and move four feet towards the right property line. So the driveway only takes up six feet of the front elevation, thereby reducing any visual impact to the main structure and all details to purchase staff. And I believe the applicant is on the call. Is the applicant on? Yes, I am. I'm here. Hi. Can you please state your name? My name is Julius Thomas. And do you swear to tell the truth in these proceedings? I do. Thank you. Well, thank you for having us today. We have had to defer a couple of times to try to meet the city's requirements. And I think we've worked very hard at doing that. We love our neighborhood. We've been here for 17 years. And our family just have grown the house that we're in. So we're trying to get a little bit bigger home. Didn't get everything that we wanted in the new design, but we are happy with it. And we have just met with our home designer and all the staff recommendations can be accommodated, the ones that are laid out and read. So we are hoping to move forward with the project with you guys' approval. OK, so just Mr. Thomas, my clerk. So you're comfortable with all the recommendations the staff just laid out? Yes, ma'am. OK. Any questions from any DDRC members? I have a question now. Outside of the house, the driveway itself, when you reduce the driveway, you're limited only to one car park. I think the owner is thinking about two cars park side by side. Is that correct? Well, Bob, I think that any driveway with in the area is going to have to be really one car anyway. I think 12 feet to the maximum. So I don't see where that's OK. OK, 12 feet to the maximum. Yeah, you're right. OK, thank you. I do think it might encourage parking elsewhere, but I don't think that's any different any other situation. Any other DDRC members? Any other follow-up questions? The staff recommended a slender column instead of the Craftsman column. What kind of column have you had in mind? A square column, a round column, or what? On the original plans submitted by the applicant, there was a cylindrical column, kind of a typical traditional column that was depicted. That would be acceptable. Just the current bulk column seemed to take up a lot of that sense of entry and a smaller column would open up that space a little bit better to draw the attention to the front entry. Thank you. We encourage those. Oh, I'm sorry. Go ahead. Is that Mr. Dinkins speaking? Yeah, how long have they been working with staff? Have you guys been working with staff on this? I believe originally Mr. Thomas reached out back in October of last year, first plans that staff saw was in March for the April meeting. They also had to go before BOSA for a little bit of variance to which they just they had to reduce some of the square footage for the zoning square footage allowance as well. OK. All right. So F has been, I mean, fully vetted. And I just see a lot of recommendations, but that's not atypical. So I'm OK. Thank you. We encourage those that would like to communicate via email to begin sending in letters and emails. You can email at cocboardmeeting at columbiasc.gov or go on the web at publicinput.com slash cocddrc-junjun2021. For those wanting to leave a voicemail or speak live, call 855-925-2801. When prompted, please enter the meeting code 4293, then press star 2 to begin leaving the voicemail. If you would like to speak live, press star 3. And please make sure your audio is off your computer to have any backlash. We will now hear any comments that have been received in writing. And I do not see any emails at this time. OK. Now, hear any voicemails received, as well as anybody calling in live. And likewise, I do not have any voicemails. And I should not have anyone that has unheard of speaker here. Have we received any correspondence? I think we've received everything, correct? Don't think we have any follow-up questions, do we? I think we all ended pretty much in DDRC comments. I think now we'll move to see if anybody would like to make a motion. Sure, I will. I move to grant a request or an approval for request for a design approval for new construction at 915 Pine Street. Based upon the design is generally in keeping with section four of the design guidelines with the following conditions. The foe windows on the front elevation are removed. And the paired windows be moved to be in line with the corner point of the front facing gable to create a better rhythm of openings. Both side elevation windows be arranged to have a sense of rhythm as depicted by staff recommendations. The front porch column be replaced with a simple traditional column to help open up the entry. With exception given due to the extreme narratives of the lot, staff recommends, well, let me just rephrase this, that the driveway shall be reduced to 10 feet in width and moved four feet to the right of the property lines so the driveway only takes up six feet in the front. All other details defer to staff. I think right. Do we have a second? Second. Jebron? Yeah. Mr. Dinkins? Yes. Ms. Jacob? Yes. Ms. Johnson? Yes. Mr. Salimi? Yes. Mr. Wolfe? Yes. And Mr. Baker? Yes. The motion passes. All right. Was there anything else on the regular agenda? The only other thing that I had was just that we have had our architect with the Start Preservation Experience slot filled. Mary Beth Brannum with LS3P will be joining us in July, which is good news. Oh, that's great news. Yes. Is that is that conclude any other business? That's all I've got. All right. Wow. OK. How about a motion for a motion to adjourn this meeting? Second. Thank you. All right, everybody, y'all have a great rest of the rest of the day. Thank you. Thank you.