[Historic Preservation Appeals Board on July 11, 2022]
[00:00:02]
HOTEL CHAIR OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION APPEALS BOARD, AND I'M CALLING THIS MEETING TO ORDER.
THE BOARD CONDUCTS MEETINGS AT THE CITY HALL ANNEX AND WITH VIRTUAL PARTICIPATION OPTIONS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 5 51 0.127 OF THE TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE, WHICH BECAME EFFECTIVE ON SEPTEMBER 1ST, 2021.
THE CHAIR WILL BE PRESENT IN THE ROOM BOARD MEMBERS, STAFF, AND THE PUBLIC MAY ATTEND IN PERSON OR THROUGH A VIDEO CONFERENCE LINK USING MICROSOFT TEAMS. AT THIS BOARD MEETING, APPLICANTS MAY OPEN AND SPEAK ONE TIME FOR FIVE MINUTES.
IF BOARD MEMBERS HAVE QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT, I MAY CALL ON YOU FOR AN ADDITIONAL TIME TO ANSWER THOSE QUESTIONS.
OTHER PUBLIC SPEAKERS MAY SPEAK UP TO ONE MINUTE WHEN I RECOGNIZE YOU TO SPEAK.
IF YOU DO NOT SIGN UP TO SPEAK IN ADVANCE, YOU CAN SUBMIT A SPEAKER REQUEST TO STAFF, AND YOUR NAME WILL BE ANNOUNCED AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME.
IF JOINING VIRTUALLY, PLEASE MUTE YOURSELF AND PLEASE ONLY UNMUTE YOURSELF TO SPEAK WHEN I CALL YOU ON YOU BY CALL ON YOU TO SPEAK BY NAME.
USE YOUR COMPUTER'S MICROPHONE ICON TO MUTE OR PRESS STAR, UH, STAR SIX TO MUTE FROM MOST PHONES.
THIS MEETING MEETS CURRENT OPEN MEETING LEGAL REQUIREMENTS, SO LONG AS A QUORUM OF THE MEMBERS ARE AUDIBLE AND VISIBLE WITH A MIC AND A CAMERA READY TO BE TURNED ON WHEN SPEAKING.
BOARD MEMBERS, PLEASE UNMUTE YOURSELF AND RESPOND BY SAYING YOUR LAST NAME, PRESENT OR LAST NAME, VIRTUALLY.
UH, PRESENT VIRTUALLY WHEN I CALL YOUR NAME.
AND I AM PRESENT DOUGLAS ELLIOT.
ABSENT TODAY, TRUMAN EDM ADMINISTER.
PRESENT, UH, DEPUTY DIRECTOR JENNIFER OSLAND.
QUORUM FOR A APPEALS BOARD IS THREE OF FIVE APPOINTED MEMBERS.
THE DIRECTOR OR DESIGNEE SERVES AS A NON-VOTING SECRETARY, AND CURRENT CURRENTLY COUNTS TOWARDS QUORUM.
FIVE OF THE FIVE BOARD MEMBERS ARE FILLED.
MAY CALL FOR THE DIRECTOR'S REPORT.
UH, MR. CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.
I'M JENNIFER OSLAND, ACTING SECRETARY OF THIS BOARD, AND DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF THE HOUSTON PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT.
TODAY IS THE THIRD HYBRID MEETING OF THIS APPEALS BOARD IN PERSON WITH VIRTUAL PARTICIPATION OPTIONS ACCORDING TO THE SEPTEMBER 1ST, 2021 STATE CODE.
UM, JUST AS, AS REMINDERS, I THINK, UH, THE CHAIR JUST RAN DOWN THEM, YOU KNOW, BE SURE TO MUTE YOURSELF.
STAR SIX TO UNMUTE IF YOU'RE BY PHONE.
UM, PLEASE BOARD MEMBERS HAVE YOUR CAMERAS ON.
UM, MORE DETAILS ARE POSTED ON OUR WEBSITE@HOUSTONPLANNING.COM.
FOR ANYONE INTERESTED, WANT TO EXTEND A, WELCOME TO OUR NEW NEWEST MEMBERS.
UH, CITY COUNCIL RECENTLY CONFIRMED THE APPOINTMENT OF LIBBY VIRA BLAND FOR POSITION FIVE OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION APPEALS BOARD FOR AN UNEXPIRED TERM ENDING DECEMBER 2ND, 2023.
UH, WE HAVE ALSO, WE HAVE SEVERAL, UH, HISTORIC PLANNER POSITIONS OPEN ON THE TEAM.
UH, SO SPREAD THE WORD, HELP US SPREAD THE WORD.
IF YOU KNOW OF ANYONE INTERESTED, UM, IN WORKING WITH OUR TEAM, UM, PLEASE LET THEM KNOW.
AND THANK YOU AS ALWAYS, FOR YOUR SERVICE ON THIS APPEALS BOARD.
THE PRIOR MINUTES WERE POSTED IN THIS MEETING'S AGENDA.
MAY I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO ACCEPT THESE MINUTES? MOTION TO APPROVE ADMINISTER SECOND HELLER.
ALL THOSE OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES.
MR. CHAIR, MAY WE NOTE FOR THE RECORD THAT THE FEBRUARY MINUTES WERE PRIOR APPROVED, SO THEY'RE ACTUALLY OMITTED FROM THAT ACTION.
UM, THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS, UM, ITEM C 11 AT 6 0 3 EUCLID STREET IN THE WOODLAND HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD.
MAY I HAVE YOUR REPORT BEFORE I CALL ON ANY SPEAKERS? THANK YOU, CHAIR, AND GOOD MORNING COMM, EVERYONE, AND THANKS FOR BEING HERE THIS MORNING.
I'M THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER FOR THE CITY OF HOUSTON.
AND THE ITEM THAT WE, UH, WISH TO TALK TO YOU ABOUT TO PRESENT TO YOU TODAY IS 6 0 3 EUCLID STREET, AND THERE'S A PICTURE OF 6 0 3 THAT'S KIND OF A, A RECENT, UH,
[00:05:01]
IMAGE OF IT THERE ON THE FRONT, WHICH IS ALSO IN YOUR REPORT.THE ITEM BEFORE YOU TODAY IS HERE, UH, BECAUSE ON APRIL 25TH, 2022 A, UH, THE HHC, UH, VOTED TO APPROVE A C OF A WITH A CONDITION ON IT.
AND, UH, THE, AND THE APPLICANT, UH, WOULD PREFER THAT CONDITION NOT BE THERE.
SO THAT'S WHY THEY APPEAL THE ITEM.
BUT TO GET A LITTLE INTO THE DETAILS OF IT, THEY'RE REMODELING AN EXISTING DUPLEX INTO A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE BY ADDING A REAR ADDITION TO CONNECT TO THE EXISTING ONE STORY DETACHED GARAGE, AND A SMALL SIDE ADDITION TO THE HOUSE ITSELF, TO THE BUILDING.
IT'LL BE ON THE RIGHT OF THE HOUSE.
THE ADDITION, UH, AND WAIT, I'M NOT GONNA, AGAIN, THEY'VE APPEALED IT.
IT'S A, UH, FIRST OF ALL, IT'S A CIRCA 1920 HOUSE AND IT, UH, THEY'RE PROPOSING TO ADD 351 SQUARE FEET AND REMOVE THE EXISTING SYNTHETIC SIDING AND RESTORE THE ORIGINAL WOOD UNDERNEATH THE, UH, AND RESTORE THE ORIGINAL WINDOWS.
THEY DO PROPOSE TO CHANGE THE FRONT DOOR LOCATION.
NOW, THE HHC REVIEWED THE ITEM AND THEIR PRIMARY OPPOSITION, UH, WAS THAT CRITERIA NUMBER NINE, UH, WHICH IS THAT THE PROPOSED DESIGN FOR ANY EXTERIOR ALTERATION OR ADDITION SHOULDN'T DESTROY, MUST NOT DESTROY SIGNIFICANT HISTORICAL ARCHITECTURAL ARCHEOLOGICAL OR CULTURAL MATERIAL, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO SIDING, WINDOWS, DOORS, AND PORCH ELEMENTS.
THE HHC DETERMINED THAT THE PROPOSED ALTERATIONS TO THE FRONT ENTRY AREA OF THE HOME WOULD RESULT IN LOSS OF ORIGINAL MATERIAL ON THE FRONT FACADE, THEREBY VIOLATING, UH, THAT SECTION NINE AND THE APPLICANT HAS PROPOSED TO APPEAL IT.
THEY STATE THAT THE ORIGINAL ENTRY DOOR IN THE CORNER IS A FUNCTION OF THE DUPLEX CONFIGURATION, AND IN AN EFFORT TO CONVERT THE DUPLEX, THEY WANNA RELOCATE THE FRONT ENTRY DOOR TO THE FRONT FACING THE STREET.
ACTUALLY, THEY HAVE A PAIR OF DOORS SUGGESTED, UH, PROPOSED FOR THE FRONT ENTRY WHERE THERE ARE PRESENTLY, WHERE THERE'S PRESENTLY A PAIR OF, UH, ONE OVER ONE WINDOWS.
THEY PROPOSE TO REPURPOSE ONE OF THOSE WINDOWS IN THE LOCATION, UH, WHERE THE DOOR IS TODAY.
AND IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THE DOOR THAT'S THERE TODAY ISN'T ACTUALLY AN ORIGINAL DOOR.
IT LOOKS SORT OF MID-CENTURY IS SOLID WITH A, A TRIANGLE.
UH, I DON'T HAVE AN IMAGE OF IT, BUT, UH, THE APP, THE, UH, ARCHITECT IS BEHIND ME AND WILL SPEAK LATER.
THE, UH, THEY PROPOSED TO REUSE THE EXISTING OPENING AND MATERIALS TO ACCOMPLISH THAT CHANGE ON THE FRONT ELEVATION, AND THEY FEEL THAT THE CAREFUL RECONFIGURATION OF THE ENTRY DOES NOT DISTRACT FROM THE OVERALL, UH, APPROPRIATENESS OF THEIR WORK, OF THEIR PROPOSED WORK.
UM, WANNA JUST MAKE SURE I'VE COVERED EVERYTHING FOR YOU IN YOUR, IN YOUR IPAD THERE UNDER THE IBOOKS TAB IS THIS ITEM? UH, AGAIN, THIS IS IN WOODLAND HEIGHTS ON EUCLID STREET.
WE DO HAVE A HISTORICAL PHOTOGRAPH ON PAGE FOUR OF 20 OF THAT STAFF REPORT FROM THE COUNTY DATING THE 1965.
THE HHC TOOK ALSO INTO CONSIDERATION CHANGES TO THE FRONT LEFT ELEVATION, AND THERE WAS MUCH DISCUSSION THERE, UH, THAT IN THE END WAS RESOLVED AND THEY WERE OKAY WITH HIS PROPOSAL FOR THE ALTERATIONS TO THE LEFT SIDE ELEVATION.
IT HAD TO DO WITH A LOCATION OF ORIGINAL WINDOWS.
AND YOU, IF YOU WATCH THE VIDEO, THEY'RE DISCUSSING WHAT'S BEHIND THAT, UH, STAIRWELL ON THE LEFT THAT GOES UP TO THE REAR.
UM, THE, IN THE LAST TWO AND A HALF TO THREE YEARS THAT I'VE BEEN HERE, THE HOUSTON, THE ARCHEOLOGICAL COMMISSION HAS MOVED A LITTLE TO BE A LITTLE MORE ACCEPTING OF ALTERATIONS TOWARDS THE REAR OF A SIDE ELEVATION, MORE IN LINE WITH THE UNITED STATES SECRETARY OF INTERIORS, UH, STANDARDS, WHICH THAT, THAT REAR HALF OF THE SIDE ELEVATION IS OF THIRD MOST IMPORTANCE.
SO, UH, WE DO SEE THE COMMISSION AND IN THE END, SO THEREFORE THEY, UM, THE APPLICANT IS RETAINING THE FRONT FOUR, TWO UP AND TWO DOWN OF THOSE SIDE WINDOWS.
AGAIN, JUST WANTED TO POINT THAT AS A LITTLE HISTORY ON THIS, ON THIS ITEM, BUT THIS ITEM IS FOR YOU BECAUSE OF THAT FRONT ELEVATION, UM, CONDITION THAT WAS PUT UPON IT.
[00:10:04]
I HAVE A QUESTION.UH, ADMINISTER, THE THING I WAS LOOKING AT IN THE STAFF REPORT SHOWED THAT I BELIEVE THAT ALL 11 CATEGORIES WERE SATISFIED.
WAS THAT INCLUDE WHEN STAFF REVIEWED IT? WAS THAT INCLUDING THE RELOCATION OF THIS FRONT DOOR TO THE PROPOSED LOCATION? THANK YOU COMMISSIONER FOR THAT QUESTION.
I NOTICED THAT IN PREPARING THIS AS WELL, THE, THE PERSON WHO PREPARED THE STAFF REPORT MUST HAVE BEEN THINKING THAT WITH THE CONDITIONS THAT WE WERE PUTTING ON IT, IT WOULD MEET THE CRITERIA.
UH, SHE'S, SHE'S ACTUALLY LEFT OUR STAFF AS SHE'S A GOOD STAFF MEMBER, BUT IT, YOU KNOW, NEW TO HISTORIC PRESERVATION AND DRAFTING REPORTS.
AND WE DID HAVE ALL THOSE BOX CHECKED AS SATISFIED.
BUT I AM RELATIVELY CERTAIN THAT THE REASON THOSE WERE CHECKED AS SATISFIED IS THAT IF THE CONDITIONS WERE MET, AND WE HAD ACTUALLY TWO CONDITIONS AT COMING OUTTA STAFF, WE HAD THE CONDITION OF RETAINING THE FRONT DOOR THE WAY THAT IT WAS, AND ALSO A CONDITION ON THAT LEFT WINDOW ELEVATION.
THE HHC UH, IGNORED THAT CONDITION, BUT DID REQUEST TO KEEP THE CONDITION THAT WE WERE SUGGESTING, WHICH WAS THE FRONT DOOR AT THE TIME.
SO STAFF DID RECOMMEND THE CONDITION GOING INTO THE FIRST HEARING? WE DID.
AND SO THERE, I WANT TO COMMENT, COMMISSIONER, WHO I WAS VERY CAREFUL WHEN I REVIEWED THE VIDEO RECORDING OF THIS.
UM, AND, AND, AND THAT'S WHERE IT TO ME IS VERY CLEAR THAT WHAT THEY WERE HANGING ONTO AT THE COMMISSION WAS, UH, CRITERIA NUMBER NINE.
THAT WAS CLEARLY WHAT THEY WERE WORRIED ABOUT AS THE REMOVAL OF ORIGINAL MATERIAL, WHICH OFTEN COMES UP.
WHAT WAS THE CONCERN OF STAFF ABOUT THE ONE CONDITION BEING APPLIED? WAS IT THE SAME THING OR SOMETHING IN ADDITION? THE OTHER ONE THAT WAS NOT FOLLOWED? NO, NO, NO.
THE ONE FOR THE, UH, MOVING OF THE FRONT DOOR WAS THE CONCERN THAT YOU HAD ON WHY YOU ADDED THE CONDITION GOING INTO THE HAHC.
OH, THAT'S HAVING TO DO WITH, WITH MATERIALS.
I THINK THAT IT, GENERALLY SPEAKING, IT WAS, I'D HAVE TO THINK ABOUT DISCUSSIONS THAT GONE ON AS STAFF.
'CAUSE AND, YOU KNOW, STAFF DON'T, DOESN'T ALWAYS, UH, LAND ON THE SAME PAGE.
WE LOOK FOR ORIGINAL, ORIGINAL REMOVAL OF ORIGINAL MATERIAL, AND THERE'S A TENDENCY STILL AT THE, THAT WE SEE, I SAY STILL AS IF IT SHOULD GO AWAY, BUT IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY NEED TO.
AND THAT IS THAT, YOU KNOW, WHENEVER WE SEE TWO FRONT DOORS, WHICH IS SO COMMON UP IN THE HEIGHTS, UM, THERE'LL BE PEOPLE WHO COME FORWARD TO CHANGE, UH, TO ONE ENTRY DOOR.
AND SO WE'VE SEEN THAT USUALLY DENIED AT THE HISTORIC COMMISSION.
UM, UH, THOUGH IN THE, IN THE HEIGHTS DESIGN GUIDELINES, IT'S, IT'S, IT'S, UH, LISTED AS AN OPTION TO PUT A WINDOW WHERE A DOOR IS.
SO, UM, I THINK THAT STAFF WAS, UH, FEELING THAT THE CONS, THE MOVEMENT OF THIS OFFICE, THE STAFF AND THE HHC HAS BEEN TO RETAIN THAT FRONT ENTRY ORIGINALITY.
WELL, YOU BRING UP ANOTHER ISSUE THEN.
GOING IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE HEIGHTS GUIDELINES, CONVERTING A WINDOW TO A DOOR OR VICE VERSA IS ACCEPTABLE IN THE HEIGHTS GUIDELINES.
IS THAT TRUE? IT IS STATED IN THE GUIDELINES THAT AN OPTION FOR FRONT DOORS IS TO REMOVE ONE, UH, WHEN YOU HAVE A PAIR OF FRONT DOORS TO REMOVE ONE AND REPLACE IT WITH THE WINDOW.
THAT IS AN ITEM IN THE GUIDELINES ONLY WHEN THERE'S A PAIR OF FRONT DOORS.
THE, YOU'RE SAYING IN THE HEIGHTS DESIGN GUIDELINES, THIS IS WOODLAND HEIGHTS, DOES THE HEIGHTS GUIDELINES COVER THE WOODLAND HEIGHTS? LEGALLY IT DOES NOT.
THE GUIDELINES ARE FOR EACH INDIVIDUAL DISTRICT.
WE REFER TO 'EM ONCE IN A WHILE AND WE'LL, WE'RE, WE'RE IN THE DISTRICTS WHERE WE DON'T HAVE GUIDELINES AND SOMEONE CALLS WITH, WOW, WHAT CAN I DO TO MY HOUSE? SOMETIMES WE'LL SAY, YOU KNOW, LOOK AT THEM.
BUT AS WE KNOW THAT THE HEIGHTS DESIGN GUIDELINES HAVE THE MEASURABLE CRITERIA, THE, THE, THE FLORIDA AREA RATIO, UH, LOT COVERAGE AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
BUT ALL TOGETHER, UNTIL THEY'RE ADOPTED FOR AN INDIVIDUAL DISTRICT, THEY DON'T LEGALLY APPLY.
SO IT'S THESE NINE CRITERIA ONLY, UH, FOR WOODLAND HEIGHTS.
YOU'VE MENTIONED, UH, AND, AND, AND SECTION NINE IT SAYS TO PRESERVE ORIGINAL MATERIALS, THE FRONT DOOR'S NOT ORIGINAL.
UH, THOSE TWO WINDOWS, IT WAS HARD TO TELL FROM TRYING TO ZOOM IN ON THE PICTURE IF THEY'RE ORIGINAL OR NOT.
COMMISSIONER, I HAVE NOT INSPECTED THIS HOUSE.
I, I REMEMBER THAT THE, IN THE HHC MEETING THAT THE ARCHITECTS HERE COULD ANSWER THAT FELT THAT THE WINDOWS DO APPEAR ORIGINAL AROUND THE HOUSE.
WE DIDN'T SPECIFICALLY DISCUSS THIS ONE, AND I'M SORRY I'M NOT IN THE OFFICE, BUT IF THE, UM, IF
[00:15:01]
A STAFF MEMBER COLEMAN COULD ZOOM IN ON MAYBE THE CURRENT FRONT ELEVATION IMAGE OF THE HOUSE, IT, UM, I, AGAIN, I LOST ARCHITECTURE.MY, MY HUNCH IS GIVEN THAT EVERYTHING LOOKS PRETTY INTACT ON THAT STRUCTURE, THAT WE'RE MM-HMM
UH, WE'RE PROBABLY NOT BE ABLE TO SEE IT VERY WELL THERE, BUT, UH, THAT WE PROBABLY HAVE A PAIR OF WOODEN ONE OVER ONES THAT MAY DATE TO THE ORIGINAL PERIOD.
IT WAS HARD TO TELL, I THINK IN PART BECAUSE OF THE SHADOW YES.
WELL, AND IF YOU LOOK AT THE, THE ONE IMAGE IN YOUR REPORT ON PAGE, I MEAN, THERE'S JUST A LOT OF RE RETAIN.
SO 65 WE KNOW THERE IT WAS WITH THE AWNINGS AND THE, AND THE, UH, SIDING.
AND THEN ON PAGE NINE OF 20, YOU SEE WHERE THEY PEELED BACK THE, UH, SYNTHETIC SIDING, UM, YOU KNOW, BASIC ORIGINAL SIDING THERE.
SO I THINK WE, WE HAVE A UNDERNEATH HERE, PRETTY MUCH A VERY TYPICAL, UM, INTACT, UH, STRUCTURE OF THE PERIOD.
WHAT WAS THE, I DID NOT WATCH THE VIDEO OF THE, UH, COMMISSION MEETING, THE DISCUSSIONS ON THE WINDOWS ON THE, I GUESS THAT WOULD BE THE WEST SIDE, THE LEFT SIDE OF THE HOUSE.
UM, WHAT, WHAT WAS THE, THE SUBJECT? SURE.
IF WE COULD GO TO, UM, MAYBE A SIDE ELEVATION.
LEMME SEE WHERE WE WANT TO LAND WITH THAT.
EXCUSE ME, JUST ONE MINUTE PLEASE.
LET ME GET A GOOD, NOT SURE WHAT, YEAH, SO NIGHT, YOU COULD BE ON 19 THERE IF WE COULD ZOOM IN.
I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S POSSIBLE THERE JUST ON THE, WELL THAT YOU CAN GET IT FROM THERE.
SO, AND THEN I WAS ACTUALLY GOING BACK TO THE, A LOT OF TALK COM COMMISSIONER, UH, HELLIER WAS THE, UH, ON PAGE FOUR OF 20.
IT WAS THE PEOPLE WERE GOING BACK AND FORTH BETWEEN THE 1965 COUNTY IMAGE AND THE, THE DRAWINGS BECAUSE, AND THEN 65 COUNTY IMAGE THAT YOU HAVE THAT STAIR AGAIN, UH, QUESTION IS STAFFING, UH, STAFFING IN MY OFFICE.
BUT ACTUALLY WE ENDED UP WITH A RECOMMENDATION, UM, THAT WE RETAIN, LET ME, LET ME GO WITH THE STAFF REPORT.
WHAT WE SAID WAS TO KEEP THE FRONT DOOR LOCATION AND ENTRY WINDOWS AND KEEP THE LOWER SET OF DOUBLE WINDOWS ON THE WEST ELEVATION.
SO ON THE TOP IN THE MIDDLE, THE COLORED WINDOWS, THE PAIR ONE OVER ONE, WE HAD REQUESTED THAT THOSE BE RETAINED.
AS YOU CAN SEE IN THE PROPOSAL BELOW, THOSE ARE TWO SMALLER WINDOWS NOW, AND THEY'RE SLIGHTLY SEPARATED.
AND THE STAFF REPORT FELT THAT THEY, THEY WERE REALLY RELYING ON THE, ON THE BLACK AND WHITE 65 IMAGE TO SAY THAT THAT WAS NOT APPROPRIATE.
THAT THAT PAIR OF DOUBLE HUNG AND THE PAIR ABOVE ACTUALLY, SO IT'S BOTH WINDOWS.
WE ONLY ASKED FOR THE LOWER PAIR.
SO I THINK THE REASON, THE COMMISSION, I THINK RIGHTFULLY DETERMINED THAT THAT WAS AN UNNECESSARY CONDITION IS A, YOU CAN'T QUITE SEE THAT LOWER PAIR AND IT ISN'T REALLY CLEAR.
AND THEN THE UPPER, I'M SORRY.
NOW I KNOW WHAT THE UPPER PAIR, THE UPPER PAIR, CLEARLY ONE OF THOSE WAS A DOOR.
SO, SO WE KNOW, SO OUR, OUR BASIS WAS WE FELT THAT THE LOWER ONES AND THAT THE COMMISSION DETERMINED IS, YOU KNOW, WE'VE BEEN MOVING TOWARDS APPROVAL OF ALTERATIONS OF WINDOWS ON THE REAR HALF OF AN ELEVATION.
UM, AND I THINK, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, THERE MAY HAVE BEEN A CASE BASED ON SANBORNS THAT THAT WHOLE REAR PORTION WAS ADDED LATER.
AND WHERE I WAS GOING WITH THIS IS WHETHER RELOCATING THOSE TWO FRONT WINDOWS AROUND TO THAT SIDE OF THE HOUSE WOULD BE RETAINING ORIGINAL MATERIAL.
IT, IT LOOKED LIKE THERE WAS A PAIR DOUBLE HUNGS SURE.
IN THE ADDITION THAT THEY'RE WANTING TO DO, BUT, UM HMM.
ANYWAY, I DO KNOW THEY'VE PROPOSED TO REPURPOSE ONE OF THOSE PAIR ONE TO THE FRONT, TO THE SIDE.
AND THE ORIGINAL MATERIAL, IT, UM, IT'S A GOOD THOUGHT.
AND I, I, I THINK THAT ARCHITECT MAY HAVE OTHER, UM, IDEAS ABOUT THAT.
UM, AND I'M RUNNING OUTTA QUESTIONS HERE QUICKLY.
UH, ORIGINALLY BUILT AS A DUPLEX OR SOME POINT IN TIME, LIKELY LATER CONVERTED.
AND IS IT SERVING AS A DUPLEX NOW OR AS A SINGLE FAMILY HOME JUST WITH MULTIPLE ENTRANCES?
AND I DON'T HAVE A SANBORN, WE COULD ANSWER THAT QUESTION.
[00:20:01]
DON'T HAVE IT IN FRONT OF ME, I APOLOGIZE.MAYBE IF ANYONE, IF AMANDA, IF YOU COULD CHECK IN THE FILE, IF YOU SEE A, UM, WE COULD COME BACK TO THAT QUESTION ON WHAT IT LOOKED LIKE ON A SAND BOARD WHEN IT WAS CONSTRUCTED.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS AMONG STAFF OR, UH, BOARD MEMBERS? WE HAVE, WE HAVE ONE SPEAKER SIGNED UP TO SPEAK, WHICH I BELIEVE IS THE ARCHITECT THAT YOU'VE BEEN REFERRING TO.
PLEASE STATE YOUR FULL NAME INTO THE MICROPHONE.
I AM, UH, REPRESENTING, UH, MR. AND MRS. ECKER ON THEIR PROPERTY AT, UH, 6 0 3 EUCLID STREET.
UNFORTUNATELY, MR. AND MRS. ECKER HAVE, I MEAN, UH, UH, ECKER HAD, UH, FAMILY VACATION PLANNED OR THEY, SHE WOULD BE HERE OR THEY WOULD, ONE OF THEM WOULD BE HERE.
UM, THE, UM, ONE, ONE THING I JUST WANNA SAY, SORT OF IN, IN, IN GENERAL ABOUT THE CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES, YOU KNOW, THE THOUSANDS OF BUILDINGS, UH, THAT ARE DE DESIGNATED AS CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES IN THE WOODLAND HEIGHTS, THE MAJORITY OF THE BUILDINGS THAT DON'T REALLY POSSESS ANY UNIQUE OR SPECIAL ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES.
BUT WHAT MAKES THEM SIGNIFICANT IN MY MIND IS THEIR ORIGINALITY.
UH, THE, THE SCALE AND THE SIZE.
TO ME, THAT'S ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT THINGS ABOUT TRYING TO MAINTAIN THE, THE, UH, THE, THE STRUCTURES THEMSELVES.
AND IT ALSO, ONE OF THE MOST DIFFICULT, UH, THINGS TO MAINTAIN WHEN YOU'RE, WHEN YOU'RE UPDATING THESE BUILDINGS, IS TO KEEP 'EM SMALL AND KEEP 'EM NICE AND, AND KEEP THE PROPORTIONS, UH, ORIGINAL.
BUT, AND IT'S REALLY DIFFICULT TO DO THAT, ESPECIALLY WHEN, UH, OUR, OUR CLIENTS ARE ASKING FOR SO MANY THINGS THAT THEY WANT IN A MODERN HOUSE.
UH, A LOT OF THESE STRUCTURES, LIKE A LOT OF, SO WE WE'RE ASKING A LOT OF THESE OLDER STRUCTURES, YOU KNOW, MANY OF THEM WERE NOT REALLY WELL BUILT.
UH, THEY'RE NOT ENERGY EFFICIENT.
UH, THEY'VE BEEN POORLY MAINTAINED AND BADLY ALTERED.
AND OUR BUILDING ON 6 0 3 EUCLID FITS ALL OF THESE.
BUT, UH, WE ACCEPT THE CHALLENGE.
MY CLIENTS AND I, WE, WE ACCEPT THE CHALLENGE AND THE POTENTIAL, UH, THE COST OF MAINTAINING, UH, THE ORIGINAL INTEGRITY OF THE BUILDING.
HOWEVER, WE ARE ASKING FOR A VARIANCE TO RELOCATE THE FRONT DOOR, FOUR FEET, ALLOWING IT TO FACE EUCLID STREET.
WITH THIS ARRANGEMENT, WE CAN MORE EASILY CREATE A PROPER ENTRY THAT IS PRIVATE AND SECURE.
IF YOU'VE EVER EXPERIENCED LIVING IN A SMALL HOUSE WHERE THE FRONT DOOR IS IN YOUR ENTRY, IT CAN BE A CHALLENGE WHEN AN UNEXPECTED VISITOR COMES UP, KNOCKS ON THE DOOR, AND YOU'RE, HEY, HEY, WATCHING TELEVISION, OR YOU'RE HAVING, YOU'RE EATING OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, AND YOU, THERE IS, THERE'S THIS MAD SCRAMBLE, UH, TO, UH, FIND OUT WHO'S AT THE FRONT DOOR, UH, TO, TO GET YOURSELF, UH, PRESENTABLE.
UH, AND SO FOR US, THE, UH, THE DESIGN OF THE, THE BUILDING TO, TO, TO PUT A PROPER ENTRANCE IN THERE FOR THESE, FOR, FOR THE HOUSE, UH, WAS MORE EASILY DONE ON THAT PART OF THE HOUSE.
NOW, IF YOU ASKED IS TO SAY, UH, HARDSHIP CASE, OF COURSE NOT.
I MEAN, WE CAN DESIGN ANYTHING, WE CAN MOVE THINGS AROUND.
BUT IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, THE BEST DESIGN OPTION WAS FOR US TO, TO CREATE A SMALLER ENTRY ON THAT SIDE OF THE HOUSE AND THEN RELOCATE THE FRONT DOOR.
AND AS ROMAN SAID, WHEN WE, WE WERE THE ONES WHO ACTUALLY PROPOSED ORIGINALLY, UH, TO, UH, TO REPURPOSE THE, THE WINDOW TO MAINTAIN AS MUCH OF THE, UH, THE ORIGINAL MATERIALS AS WE CAN IN, IN CREATING A NEW FRONT DOOR.
UH, THE FRONT DOOR ITSELF, THE DESIGN, WE'RE SHOWING A FRONT DOOR THAT'S A TWO LIGHT, UH, OPTION THAT IS, REPRESENTS SOMETHING THAT MIGHT LOOK LIKE A DOUBLE HUNG WINDOW, A ONE OVER ONE.
UH, BUT THE FRONT DOOR REALLY, IF, IF THAT'S AN ISSUE DESIGN WISE, CAN BE, CAN BE, UH, LOOKED AT OR ADJUSTED, BUT IT'S REALLY THE LOCATION OF IT, IT THAT'S THE MOST IMPORTANT THING.
AND SO WHAT WE'RE ASKING, UH OH, AND, UH, MRS. EKER HAD LATE LAST NIGHT EMAILED ME A, A MAP, IF I CAN PRESENT IT, OF JUST DIFFERENT BUILDINGS ON HER STREET, DOCUMENT CAMERA, PLEASE.
THAT SHE JUST, SHE WALKED UP THE STREET AND, AND JUST TOOK, MADE A NOTE OF ALL THE PLACES, UH, THAT HAVE ENTRANCES THAT FACE THE STREET AND THAT HAVE ENTRANCES THAT ARE ON THE SIDE LIKE HERS.
AND, UH, AS A REFERENCE, I THINK SHE JUST WANTED TO SHOW
[00:25:01]
THAT, YOU KNOW, THE, THE MAJORITY OF THE, OF THE BUILDINGS HAVE A FRONT DOOR THAT IS FACING THE STREET.AND I THINK IN HER OWN, IN HER OWN HAND, I THINK YOU CAN SEE WHERE ALL, ALL THE BLUE ARE ON HER STREET ARE, ARE BUILDINGS THAT HAVE THE DOOR THAT FACES THE FRONT, AND THEN THE THREE OR FOUR IN RED ARE THE ONES THAT ARE ON THE SIDE.
AND SHE WOULD PRESENT THAT HERE IF SHE WAS HERE, IF AVAILABLE TODAY.
AND LASTLY, I JUST WANT YOU TO CONSIDER, UH, THE, THE, THE, UH, THE PROJECT AS A WHOLE.
YOU KNOW, WE WANNA MAINTAIN, UH, THE INTEGRITY OF THE WOODLAND HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD AS MUCH AS ANYBODY ELSE.
UH, I WANNA THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME, AND IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, HELL, YOU'RE ASKING, UM, UH, MY PREVIOUS QUESTION ABOUT THOSE FRONT WINDOWS BEING ORIGINAL OR NOT.
YOU KNOW, WHEN I'M THERE AND I'M LOOKING AT EVERYTHING AND THEY'RE ALL PAINTED AND THEY'RE ALL CRUSTY AND EVERYTHING, THEY LOOK LIKE THEY'VE BEEN THERE FOR A WHILE.
I'M NOT A FORENSIC, UH, YOU KNOW, UH, ARCHITECT, SO I CAN'T TELL YOU HOW ORIGINALLY THEY ARE, BUT I WOULD SAY IF I HAD TO MAKE A GUESS, YES.
AND THE OTHER QUESTION ROMAN WAS NOT ABLE TO ANSWER, IS THIS CURRENTLY, UH, SERVING AS A DUPLEX OR A SINGLE FAMILY HOME? SO IT, IT'S CURRENTLY A DUPLEX.
UH, AND IF YOU LOOK AT THE, THE PLANS OF THE HOUSE AS THEY ARE CURRENTLY NOW, UH, THERE'S, IT'S, THEY'RE, IT'S A, THEY'RE FLATS.
SO THE KITCHEN'S AND KITCHEN STACK EVERY ROOM STACKS ON TOP OF EACH OTHER, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE, THE ENTRY PORCH AND THE, THE BUILDING OR THE ROOM THAT'S ABOVE THE ENTRY PORCH.
THOSE ARE THE D TWO DIFFERENT ITEMS. IT'S KIND OF AWKWARD THAT IT WOULD BE THAT, AND THAT, THAT YOU WOULD HAVE TO ENTER THROUGH THE KITCHEN.
BUT I DON'T THINK THAT WAS UNCOMMON BACK THEN WHERE THE, THE, THE, THE FIRST FLOOR, UH, UH, FLAT HAD AN ENTRY FROM THE FRONT, THE SECOND FLOOR FLAT ENTERED FROM THE BACK.
UH, I THINK THAT'S PRETTY, THAT, THAT, THAT WOULDN'T BE UNCOMMON BECAUSE I DON'T SEE ANY EVIDENCE OF ANY INTERIOR OR STAIR ANYWHERE WHERE THAT MIGHT BE THAT YOU HAD A SINGLE FRONT DOOR OR TWO FRONT DOORS THERE ON THE PORCH THAT WOULD TAKE YOU TO THE SECOND FLOOR.
THERE'S, THERE'S REALLY NOT ANY EVIDENCE OF THAT FROM MY, FROM WHAT I CAN TELL.
IT'S, IT WAS ORIGINALLY A DUPLEX.
UM, I JUST USUALLY LIKE TO BE VERY CLEAR ON DOCUMENTS THAT ARE PRESENTED ON PAGE 13.
WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT A DOUBLE DOOR ENTRY ON PAGE 13, THE PLAN THAT WAS PROVIDED WITH THE HH WITH THE, WITH THE APPLICATION, IT SHOWS A SINGLE DOOR ON THE PLAN VERSUS A DOUBLE DOOR AS THE MAIN ENTRY.
AND SO THE, SO WHEN WE RESUBMITTED THE DRAWINGS, THESE ARE, THESE, THERE'S SOME CONSUMPTION, A LITTLE CONFUSING ABOUT WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT NOW, BUT THE DRAWINGS THAT WE RESUBMITTED, UH, SHOWED, UH, THE DOUBLE DOOR.
SO, UH, UH, THE, UH, MADELINE, UH, WHEN WE HAD RESUBMITTED, WE SAID WE SENT, WE SENT THEM BACK WITH THE DOUBLE DOOR ON IT, AND THEN, UH, SHE HAD ASKED US FOR ONE OTHER DOCUMENT, WHICH WAS TO SHOW THE, UH, THE ORIGINAL BRICK LOCATIONS AND TO MAKE SURE THAT, THAT THOSE WERE DELINEATED ON THE DRAWINGS, WHICH WE DIDN'T FORWARD THAT TO HER.
SO, UM, AND IF YOU LOOK AT THE WAY THIS PARTICULAR DOCUMENT FOR WHATEVER REASON IS, IF YOU LOOK AT THE FLOOR PLAN RIGHT NOW, UH, IN OUR, IN OUR EITHER SECOND SUBMISSION, WE ACTUALLY OFFSET THE CONNECTION BETWEEN THE, UH, THE MAIN BUILDING AND THE, THE GARAGE SO THAT, THAT WE COULD MAINTAIN A PLACE TO, TO STOP, UH, THE, THE ORIGINAL SIDING AND THEN START THE NEW SIDING.
SO IT, IT SHOWS THAT IN OUR ROOF PLAN, BUT IT, IT, FOR SOME REASON, IT'S NOT SHOWING ON THE FLOOR PLAN.
SO I FEEL LIKE THERE, THERE'S SOME DISCREPANCIES IN THE, IN THE PRESENTATION, BUT ALL, ALL OF THE DOCUMENTS WERE SUBMITTED, UH, CORRECTLY AS A FOLLOW UP QUESTION TO THE DOUBLE DOOR IN THAT SAME PLAN WAS MISSING THE WINDOW WHERE THE EXISTING DOOR IS.
TODAY IS STILL, THE NEW DOCUMENTS DO HAVE A WINDOW AT THAT LOCATION.
IN YOUR ARCHITECTURAL OPINION, WHAT DO YOU THINK THE SIGNIFICANCE OF BEING ABLE TO, UH, RELOCATE AS MANY OF THE ORIGINAL MATERIALS BACK AND FORTH AS FAR AS THE SWAP BETWEEN A WINDOW AND DOUBLE DOOR? UH, YOU KNOW, THAT FOR IN, IN MY PRACTICE, THAT'S PRETTY COMMON.
WHENEVER WE CAN DO THAT, I THINK IT'S ALWAYS, IT'S, IT'S ALWAYS OUR PREFERENCE TO TRY TO REUSE THE EXISTING MATERIALS.
UH, IT'S, IT'S, IT'S PRETTY COMMON.
WE USE, WE REUSE DOORS, INTERIOR DOORS, HARDWARE, WINDOWS, ANYTHING THAT, THAT CAN MAINTAIN THAT, THAT THAT'S IN, IN, IN, UH, SERVICEABLE CONDITION IS, UH, THAT'S, THAT'S PRETTY COMMON, I THINK.
AND IT, IT DOES DO EXACTLY WHAT, WHAT THE, WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH, WHICH IS TO
[00:30:01]
MAINTAIN THE INTEGRITY, AN OLD WINDOW WITH THAT OLD GLASS, THAT OLD WAVY GLASS.YOU KNOW, YOU CAN'T, YOU CAN'T DUPLICATE THAT.
AND SO, UH, THE, THE NEWER, THE NEWER MATERIALS, WHILE THEY'RE MORE EFFICIENT, EASIER TO USE, THEY STILL DON'T HAVE THE CHARACTER.
AND THEN I CAN, WE CAN APPRECIATE THE, YOU KNOW, THE EFFORT THAT IT TAKES JUST TO, YOU KNOW, TO, UH, TO MANAGE AND TO MAINTAIN THAT, THAT, UH, THAT PART OF THE, THE INTEGRITY OF THE STRUCTURE.
YOU WANT ME TO, I JUST REMEMBER, DID YOU SAY MM-HMM
UH, WE, THERE WAS ONE THING THAT, UH, I THINK ROMAN'S GOT A POINT.
UH, WE HAD, UH, IN OUR ORIGINAL DRAWINGS THAT THERE WAS A, WE WERE PROPOSING TO REBUILD THE FRONT PORCH PORTIONS OF THE FRONT PORCH.
UH, THAT WASN'T, UH, REALLY MENTIONED IN ANY OF THE, OF THE, UH, UH, UH, UH, THE DISCUSSIONS.
AND SO, UH, AS A, SO AS, AS IT STANDS RIGHT NOW THAT THAT PART OF THE DESIGN WAS, WAS APPROVED, BUT IF AS A CONSIDERATION TO RELOCATING THE FRONT DOOR, WE WOULD BE MORE THAN WILLING OR HAPPY TO, TO TAKE THAT PART OF THE REDESIGN OFF THE TABLE AND PUT IT BACK, LEAVE IT AS IT IS NOW, SO THAT THE, THE ACTUAL FRONT STEPS DON'T ALIGN WITH THE, WOULDN'T ALIGN WITH THE ORIGINAL WINDOWS OR NEW FRONT DOORS.
UH, AND THAT WAS, UH, AS, AS A, YOU KNOW, AS A, I'M NOT SAYING A GESTURE, BUT, UH, TO, YOU KNOW, IN, IN THE, IN THE BIGGER PICTURE, THE WHOLE, THE BIGGER PICTURE AS, AS OF WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH, I WOULD LIKE TO, AS A REMODELER BUILDER WHO ABOUT A YEAR AGO COMPLETED THE REPURPOSING OF A 1920 HEIGHTS DRUGSTORE INTO WHAT HAS BECOME MY PERSONAL SINGLE FAMILY HOME.
UH, I HAVE AN APPRECIATION FOR THE COST OF DOING THESE KIND OF THINGS AND WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE AND EXPRESS MY APPRECIATION TO, TO YOUR CLIENTS FOR ATTEMPTING TO DO THIS, UM, REMOVING THAT SIDING AND, AND RESTORING WHAT'S UNDERNEATH THERE, UH, ALONE, PLUS ANY OF THE OTHER STRUCTURAL AND, UH, ALL THE MECHANICALS AND SO ON SO FORTH, ASSOCIATED WITH THAT.
UM, AND I KNOW MY PERSONAL OPINION,
IT'S, IT'S WHAT THE DESIGN, OR NOT THE DESIGN GUIDELINES IN THIS CASE, BUT THE PRESERVATION ORDINANCE CALLS FOR.
I THINK CHANGING THE FRONT ELEVATION TO THE FORWARD FACING DOORS IS AN IMPROVEMENT OVER WHAT'S THERE NOW.
UM, AND SINCE THE SOLE CRITERIA FOR THE CONDITION IS NOT TO DESTROY ORIGINAL MATERIAL WITH NO REFERENCE TO CHANGING THE FRONT ELEVATION, UM, AND THAT THE DOOR IS NOT ORIGINAL, IF THOSE TWO WINDOWS COULD BE REUSED SOMEWHERE, UM, I'D BE MORE INCLINED TO SUPPORT IT.
WELL, I WOULD SAY THAT, THAT THE ALL ONCE WHEN WE START REMOVING THE ALL THE OTHER OR, UH, WINDOWS AND EVEN THE ONES THAT WE'RE NOT GONNA USE, I, I PROMISE YOU THAT, THAT THERE WILL BE A BONEYARD OF WINDOWS THAT WE'RE GONNA NEED ALL THOSE PARTS FROM.
SO TO, TO TELL YOU THAT WINDOW WHEN I TAKE IT OUT IS GONNA BE SERVICEABLE AGAIN.
YOU KNOW, WE ARE, WE ARE HOPING THAT WE CAN REPURPOSE A LOT OF THE OTHER WINDOWS FOR EVEN PART OF PART OF THE NEW BUILDING.
DO BOARD MEMBERS HAVE ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? UH, DO I HAVE ANY, DO I HAVE A MOTION ON THIS ITEM? ADMINISTER? I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT THE, UH, HISTORIC APPEALS BOARD OVERTURN THE DECISION OF THE HISTORIC, UH, HAHC.
AND SO FINDING THAT THE, THERE IS NOT A DESTRUCTION OF SIGNIFICANT MATERIALS FOR THE ALTERATION THAT HAS BEEN PROPOSED, AND THEREFORE WOULD LIKE TO AFFIRM THE PETITIONER'S REQUEST.
I'D LIKE TO SECOND WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
DO HAVE ANYBODY? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE.
ALL THOSE OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES.
UH, NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS, UH, PUBLIC COMMENTS.
ARE THERE ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC? HEARING NONE.
I'M ADJOURNING THIS MEETING OF THE HOUSTON PRESERVATION APPEALS BOARD.
[00:35:03]
THANK YOU ALL.PLEASE DISCONNECT ALL DEVICES.