 Members, staff, and guests, multiple staff members are present to make sure the meeting runs smoothly and all applicants and citizens are able to communicate with the Commission at the appropriate times. Ms. Brannum. Here. Mr. Bram. Here. Ms. Jacob. Here. Mr. Ledecker. Here. And Mr. Salibi. 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 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. Decisions are typically made in one evening. Decisions may be appealed within 30 days to a court of competent jurisdiction. Oafs 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 is not limited to an overview of the project, case history, and any pertinent meetings held regarding the request. This time also includes all persons presenting information on behalf of the applicant, such as attorneys, engineers, and architects. The time limit does not include any questions asked by the DDRC or staff regarding their 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 their time has expired. Are there any changes to the agenda? We have two changes to the agenda under the historic portion of the regular agenda. We have 1414 Woodrow Street, which is a request for a CDA for exterior changes in the Melrose Heights, Oakland Architectural Conservation District has been deferred. And then 200 Mulberry Lane, a request for a CDA for construction of a duplex in the Whaley Protection Area has been withdrawn. 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 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 review the consent agenda? Our first item is 1401 Geiger Avenue, a request for preliminary certification for the Bailey Bill in the Cottontown Bellevue Architectural Conservation District. 1502 Heygood Avenue, a request for a CDA for exterior changes in the Melrose Heights, Oakland Architectural Conservation District. 2229 Gadsden Street, a request for a CDA for exterior changes and preliminary certification for the Bailey Bill in the Elmwood Park Architectural Conservation District. 2001 Lincoln Street, a request for a preliminary certification for the Bailey Bill in the Governor's Mansion Protection Area. And 907 Meadow Street, a request for a CDA for new construction of a single family home in the Old Chandon Lower Waverley Protection Area. Is there anyone from the DDRC that would like any item removed from the consent agenda? Is there anyone from the public that would like to have an item removed from the consent agenda? Do I have a motion and a second to accept the consent agenda and all conditions contained herein as well as the February minutes? I'd like to make a motion to approve the consent agenda designed historic and the February minutes. Second. Mr. Broom. Yes. Ms. Sims Brannam. Yes. Ms. Jacob. Yes. Mr. Lee Decker. Yes. And Mr. Salivi. Yes. The motion passes. Great. Move on to the regular agenda. So the first case on the regular agenda, this is a project at 2109, 2119, and 2121 Sumter Street, 1212, 1214, and 1222 Scott Street, and 2110 and 2120 Main Street. This is in the North Main Corridor Overlay District, and this is a request for certificate of design approval for new construction. This proposal is for a mixed use development fronting Main Street, Sumter Street, and Scott Street. The development proposes two four-story buildings totaling 103,000 square feet, including 102 proposed residential units, a resident center at 2,550 square feet, and a commercial leasing area at 1,800 square feet. The development utilizes surface parking located interior to the block with ingress and egress on Scott Street and ingress on Sumter Street. And I'm just going to read a couple of the guidelines where there were some staff comments and then the staff recommendation and then I'll turn it over to the applicant. So under site planning and parking placement, one of the guidelines reads, where surface parking is adjacent to public sidewalks, a low seat wall integrated with the architecture of the building shall be provided within the side protective yard. And under facade elements, one of the guidelines reads, windows are not to be flush mounted with exterior walls. Windows are to be located as far inward into the wall to maximize depth and shadow. This is particularly important in stucco or brick applications. Alternate detailing should be explored to provide a maximum window recess. So the staff recommendation is staff recommends approval of the request with the following conditions, that the addition of a low seat wall between the sidewalk and surface parking on Sumter and Scott Street, and exploration of added articulation around windows mounted in cementitious siding, and that all other details be deferred to staff. And I believe Trip Raleigh, the architect from Studio 2LR is here to make a brief presentation. Okay, please come on up. Swear you in. First, please state your name. Trip Raleigh. And do you swear to tell the truth during this proceeding? Yes, I do. Okay, great. Just make sure that microphone is catching you too. That better. That better. Can y'all hear? Can everybody hear? Can you hear? Test, test. Hi, Mike. A little louder. Is that better? I can't hear myself either, so I get it. So thank you. Well, good afternoon commissioners, and I want to thank you for your time today. We have really appreciated working with the staff on this project over the past several months, and look forward to continuing our dialogue to ensure that this project does meet all of the design guidelines that are established for the North Main Corridor Design District. The Woodley project, I'm just going to give a brief kind of overview of the design of the project, and then I will be turning it over to Lauren Taylor, who will provide a little more commentary on the history and background for this project. As mentioned before, the Woodley project consists of 102 apartments spread over two four-story apartment buildings, and it will have a mixture of one bedroom, two bedroom, and studio units. The project will also include a residence center, some outdoor green space areas, and then 1,800 square feet of commercial retail space that fronts on Sumter Street. The exterior of the building, as you see in the elevations up there, feature several different materials. We've incorporated red brick and lap siding, which is prevalent in many of the surrounding homes in Cotton Town neighborhood, and the project also features metal panels, which can be found on many of the commercial warehouse structures along the North Main Corridor. We appreciate the staff's recommendation for approval, and we'll continue our coordination to address existing review comments, along with any additional comments that you may have today. And finally, we are particularly excited about this project and about our participation as we are a Cotton Town business ourselves. We've invested in this community for a number of years, and we really believe in this project. Our offices are only two blocks away from the project site, so we look forward to this development, not only from a professional perspective, but also from a personal neighbor perspective. Thank you. Did anybody have any immediate questions for him, or do you want to hear? Oh, I'll leave Bob's screen's not working. Do you want to grab that other one over there? Hold on just one second. IT correction. What? That sounds... It wasn't doing that a little earlier. Oh, there we go. Yeah, I'll go for it. Well, I'm going to have to use it. All right. Will you please state your name? Yes, I'm Lauren Taylor. And do you swear to tell the truth during this proceeding? I do. Thank you. Good afternoon, commissioners. We're excited to be here today to present the Woodley multi-family apartment complex. My name is Lauren Taylor, and I'm an owner's representative, and I'm here to give a history of the project and answer any public questions. I'm also a neighbor. My husband and I live about a block away in Omwood Park, and we're kind of excited, as you can't tell, to welcome our first child. Two of my colleagues are here. Should any additional questions arise that need their particular expertise? Lisa Persaud, which is also an owner's representative, and Dylan Golf, which is our legal counsel. I have two audiences I'd like to address. First, to the commissioners. I want to follow up on Tripp's note of appreciation to the staff. We've genuinely enjoyed working with staff to hear their feedback and suggestions for the project, and we look forward to partnering with you on any additional feedback that you may have today. I also want to recognize that we anticipate you've heard criticism of the project from some of the neighbors. As you can see from the plans we've submitted, this project is simply a well-designed multi-family apartment complex. To the neighbors in attendance today, first, thank you. We've had many meetings with you, both formal and informal, large groups and small, and via email, and we've really tried to listen to and incorporate your feedback. As you can see from the submission packet, the design and aesthetics of the project has really improved thanks to the feedback of the community. We wouldn't have reached such an attractive design without your help. Second, to echo what was said at the Planning Commission last week about the use of the project, this is a multi-family apartment building, nothing else, not a homeless shelter, not a healthcare facility, not a soup kitchen, not a halfway home. The designs presented today clearly reflect that use. Please do not fear the plans will change. We've submitted an incredibly detailed plan, spent a lot of time and effort and energy in making it what it is today, and upon approval of these designs today, this is what we will build. Commissioners, I'm grateful for your time today and we're grateful for the opportunity for the Woodley to be a small part of a much larger rebirth of the Main Street corridor. My team are delighted to answer any questions around the submission that you may have. Thank you. All right, thank you. Anybody have any questions? One quick question, do you have any concerns with staff's recommendations? We do not. Both our engineers and architects feel confident we can incorporate those changes to the plan. I guess I'm having an issue too. Must be the whole mic. Got a little technical difficulty here. My question is, my understanding there's no parking garage. Is that correct? Okay. One of the things in the staff recommendations that I'm looking at pretty carefully is the recommendation to have the seating wall along the entrances. And you look at the two entrances, one on Scott and Sumter. It looks like it would be very difficult to achieve what the guidelines say is articulation. I'm wondering if that's even possible without crossing the sidewalk entrance to the parking lot there. And the other observation I have is there's a site plan in the packet that has a lot of landscaping, tree screening, and I guess I'd put it out there for the rest of the commissioners. Would putting a seat wall there be a less desirable solution than the landscaping that's already proposed? And I don't know if the developer wants to comment on that or whether the staff has a comment on that? I mean, I think the intent was that it not be in replacement of the landscaping, you know, in addition to, and it really is a very small amount of seat wall that's actually, the parking that's adjacent to the sidewalk is a minimal amount. It's a really tiny little bit of the parking lot that's actually adjacent to the sidewalk. So I think it would just be that little piece. But I mean, I think that's a detail that could certainly be deferred to staff if we, you know, unless the commission just wants to change the recommendation, which is your purview to do that. Well, what the guidelines say, it has to articulate. And does that mean it has to join up with the nearest adjacent structure? No, not necessarily. It says it just, I think that's visually, that's intended to mean visually integrated so that it not be like concrete block. It should be integrated. Visually integrated, like with the design. Maybe, I mean, I think the intent of what it meant when it was written was that the materials be compatible, visually compatible, but not physically necessarily connected, because that's often not going to be possible. Yeah, I think that's going to be probably a conversation that would involve the contractor too to figure out some different solutions. I know there's different installation techniques, depending on what the window types that we wind up with. You know, looking at the window package is always a challenge with these projects. And sometimes they can limit you. So what we'll do is look at options for either creating some shadow lines to give that relief. I think that's really what the goal is, is to have some relief up there so it's not just so flat. So we could either look at a trim detail that creates that relief, or figure out, as you suggested, maybe a way to recess those windows if that's possible, depending on which window we end up going with. So, yeah, we agree. It'd be nice to have some articulation. So we're on the same page. That's it. Yes, now we'll hear comments from the public. So whoever comes up one at a time, a minister knows, and then you'll... the timer will start. Hi, yes, step one up. My name's Dick Harputlian. It's where to tell the truth. Yes, ma'am. Got two minutes, so let me make this brief. The design looks fine. I'm not here to talk about design. I'm here at the last minute because the neighbors called me and indicated to me that they'd been told by these folks that this would be occupied by veterans who have vouchers from the VA through HUD. My brief look at that indicated that means those are homeless veterans. Now, I may be oversimplifying this, but I'm just here to say this has nothing to do with your decision, but I'm going to talk to HUD. I'm going to talk to the VA. And if their economic wherewithal to do this is predicated on getting those vouchers, these folks don't need homeless people living in their neighborhood. My office is up two blocks from here. I don't need more homeless people defecating in my parking lot every morning, which is what is happening right now. So I'm going to talk to the folks at HUD. I'm going to talk to the folks at the VA. And if this isn't, if this is for homeless veterans, they should not be housed in the middle of this residential neighborhood. So I will be calling Senator Graham in the morning and trying to deal with this. But thank you for my two minutes. Thank you. From the public? Okay. Amy, where are we on our prompts here? Yes. And so the applicant, you do have an opportunity if you have anything you want to respond to or are we good? Good. Okay. All right. Any follow-up questions? Okay. I did have a quick question about the recession. Above the third story, it says that adjacent to sidewalks, buildings taller than three stories shall be recessed back at the third floor or 45 feet from ground level, a minimum of 10 feet. I read that as mandatory. Can staff kind of shine some light on that? I guess, I mean, I guess the way we interpreted it was it was or 45 feet, meaning if the building is that height or taller, I mean a three-story building could conceivably be that taller, taller. So. Right. I guess I read it as if it's more than three or taller than three stories. It shall be recessed and the recession can be at the third floor or at the 45 feet level. But I could be misinterpreting that. Well, I guess there are different ways to read that. That's not how we interpreted it. So I'm not sure where to go from here, but we're recommending approval. So maybe it's an exception, but that was the conversation that we had. We did not ask for them to do that. So I don't know what else to say. For what it's worth, I think I read it the same way as the staff in that it's either three foot, three stories high or above 45 feet should be recessed. Just for any other clarifications. Statement. I went to the Cotton Town Art Festival a couple of weeks ago. And I wasn't last weekend, I'm not sure. But I want to come in on the development of that area. Much needed. It would help improve our cultural living in that area. And the Cotton Town Art Festival made it happen. So I think we should continue. Hopefully we get more development. All right. Well, with that, I'm going to open it up for a motion. Yes. I moved to approve the request for certificate of design approval for new construction for, okay, I'll read all these two. 2109, 2119, 2021 Sumter Street, 2012, 2014 and 2022 Scott Street, 2010 and 2120 Main Street. With the following staff recommendations, the addition of a low seat wall between the sidewalk and surface parking on Sumter and Scott Street with the exploration of an added articulation around the windows mounted in cementitious siding and all other details referred to staff. I have a second. I can. Mr. Broom. Yes. Ms. Sims Brannam. Yes. Ms. Chaco. Yes. Mr. Lee Decker. Yes. And Mr. Salibi. Yes. Motion passes. Do we have any other business? We have a few items. I just wanted to let you all know that the Historic Preservation Conference held every year at the State Historic Preservation Office is going to be held Friday, April 26. I will send out an email to all of you. They have their schedule set, so it looks interesting. It's a great way to get in hours and meet people. It's a really interesting conference. So I'll send that out to you, but I just wanted to make sure you had that on your calendars. I believe we have a few people who will be gone next month. Right. So we have right now two commissioners that will not be here. So those of you that will be in town, must be here. We need you. Must. Yes. So please mark your calendars for April to be sure and try to stay healthy. And I also have some sad news. We are sorry to say that Skye is going to be leaving us. She will not be haranguing y'all forthwith to come to the meetings to make quorum, to make your training. But we have so appreciated her and her hard work and her efficiency and her organization and just herself. And we are really going to miss her. Definitely. Well, thank you, Skye. Wish you best wishes. Yes. She's moving on to a great job. Oh, great. That will miss her. But that was all of my business. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Just know that I'm sorry. Y'all may have heard but the city is embarking on a strategic planning process for the downtown area. We just have kicked this off within the last week or so. And so be looking for, you may have already gotten an email with a survey attached to it. So we're looking for feedback. We have a few stakeholder meetings coming up in the next week. But at the end of April, and as soon as the dates and locations are set, we'll send that information to you, but we'll have a couple of public meetings where there's going to be more opportunities to get engaged in that process. So anyway, it's just starting, but it'll probably be going through the end of the year. And the ultimate goal of that process is to kind of rewrite the design guidelines for our two primary urban design districts, which are city center and Inovista as one geographic area. And so, you know, both of those plans are kind of old. City center was adopted in 1998 and Inovista in 2007. So they're badly in need of updating. So we really anticipate this being a great process and look forward to your participation in that. So thank you. We'll look forward to it. Questions. There is a rumor, I guess, going around for a pretty reliable source. Inovista plan is being updated by a third party. I'm not sure if you can comment on that, but I've heard that from our councilman. Well, the city, this, I mean, this process that we're embarking on is kind of updating. It's a planning process for the area that includes Inovista, but I mean, the Inovista master plan is still, you know, a master plan that exists that was a partnership between the university and the city, you know, back then. So this is, you know, yes, I mean, it is being updated and refreshed as part of this process. So that's another consultant. Is that? It's one, it's one process. So we have one consultant that's looking at both the Inovista area and the city center area as one downtown, if you will, instead of, but it's focused on the design guidelines. So because lots of changes have happened in both of those areas since these plans have been adopted that need to be reflected in, you know, the vision and the goals and also the design guidelines for how those areas continue to develop. So that it is, it's not a rumor. I mean, that the plan will encompass the Inovista area and the city center geographic area. Yes. One of the things that strikes me when you read the old guidelines is how different they are from reality today. And I'm not sure whether that was by the city council taking initiative to do something or whether... For Inovista or for city center. For the whole downtown area. I mean, the way they hierarchy did the streets and the way they laid out who was going to be on the DDRC and what the other advisory commissions would be and all that is... I mean, it was 25 years ago. I mean, I wasn't here during that time. So I can't really speak specifically to the process. I'm understanding it was a very involved process and certainly things probably changed between the time the plan was adopted and then the implementation of that plan as always a case, like putting together, you know, turning the landmarks commission into the DDRC was part of that process. And I'm sure that the administration of the plan probably resulted in some changes from what was recommended, but that's typically what happens with plans, you know, that things reality does change things. So specifically, I can't really speak to that because I wasn't here in 1998, but the point is it's a very old plan that doesn't really reflect our current city. And so the process is desperately needed and we've got a great consultant on board and we're really looking forward to the process. So. So will it go to council after you guys have updated then? It'll have to. Absolutely. Yes. Maybe other hearings. Hopefully they will adopt the plan and also any guidelines that move forward do have to be adopted as well by council before they are used, you know, since it's part of our zoning ordinance. I'd like to make a statement. You know, I overheard, I mean, I heard talking about homeless in that area, you know, on that corner opposite of the new development is a transition. And on the board and in under construction, I heard talking about the new development of the city of Jackson. And renovating the four buildings at death square for transition. So, you know, it doesn't stop there. That corner is being moved. And I don't know they're moving out of there, but I know they're being developed at death square. All right. Any, any other business? Anybody? Everybody good? I'd like to make a motion to adjourn this meeting. Well, I'm going to ask for that. So that's perfect. All right. We'll adjourn. Thank you.