[00:00:01]
ARCHEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL COMMISSION.[Houston Archaeological and Historical Commission on September 8, 2022.]
HAHC IS CALLED TO ORDER.I AM COMMISSION CHAIR DAVID EK.
UM, I BELIEVE WE HAVE CONFIRMATION THAT WE HAVE A QUORUM AND I WILL, UH, CALL.
THE ROLE IS COMMISSIONER ASHLEY JONES.
PRESENT, PRESENT ONLINE IS COMMISSIONER TANYA DEBOS PRESENT, AND I THINK SHE IS NOT ABLE TO ATTEND THE MEETING.
IS COMMISSIONER SINI PRESENT? YES.
UH, PRESENT VIRTUALLY IS COMMISSIONER RON VEDA.
PRESENT, UH, CHAIR EK IS PRESENT IS, UH, COMMISSIONER, UH, ELIZABETH BETH WEAU JACKSON.
PRESENT IS COMMISSIONER JOHN COSGROVE.
PRESENT, PRESENT IS COMMISSIONER, COMMISSIONER STEVE MCNEIL PRESENT, AND I BELIEVE HE WAS NOT ABLE TO ATTEND EITHER, UM, IN PERSON OR VIRTUALLY.
UM, IS COMMISSIONER STEVEN CURRY.
PRESENT IS COMMISSIONER ANN COLLUM.
PRESENT, PRESENT IS COMMISSIONER DOMINIQUE YAP.
PRESENT, PRESENT IS COMMISSIONER CHUCK STAAVA.
PRESENT, PRESENT VIRTUALLY IS COMMISSIONER BEN COUCH PRESENT.
WE HAVE A, A QUORUM AND SECRETARY, JENNIFER OSLAN IS PRESENT FOR THE RECORD.
UM, I DO NOT HAVE A REPORT, SO I WILL, I WILL TURN, UH, THIS TIME OVER, UM, TO DEPUTY DIRECTOR JENNIFER OSLAND FOR HER REPORT.
UH, GOOD AFTERNOON, MR. CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.
I'M JENNIFER OSLAN, DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND SECRETARY OF THIS COMMISSION.
UH, JUST WANNA REMIND, UH, FOLKS ABOUT THE SPEAKER'S GUIDELINES.
UH, AS ALWAYS, OUR AGENDA IS AVAILABLE@HOUSTONPLANNING.COM AND IT INCLUDES PUBLIC PARTICIPATION RULES.
PLEASE ONLY SPEAK WHEN RECOGNIZED BY THE CHAIR.
YOU CAN FILL OUT A SPEAKER FORM OR TYPE YOUR NAME AND ITEM INTO THE CHAT TO BE RECOGNIZED TO SPEAK AT THE RIGHT TIME.
PLEASE STAY MUTED UNLESS YOU'RE RECOGNIZED.
AND IF YOU'RE ON A PHONE, UH, THE MUTE IS STAR SIX.
HERE'S A SNAPSHOT OF SOME PRESERVATION WORK.
SINCE THE JULY MEETING, UH, YEAR TO DATE STAFF HAS RECEIVED A TOTAL OF 249 APPLICATIONS.
THAT'S THROUGH SEPTEMBER 1ST WITH 36 RECEIVED SINCE THE MEETING IN JULY SO FAR THIS YEAR, THIS COMMISSION HAS CONSIDERED 80 OF THESE 249 APPLICATIONS THE PAST.
THESE PAST TWO MONTHS, STAFF REVIEWED 20 ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVED ITEMS WITH 69.
UM, AS OF SEPTEMBER 1ST, UH, YEAR TO DATE, TOTAL STAFF ALSO RECEIVED REQUESTS FOR FIVE PRE-APPLICATION DESIGN REVIEWS WITH A TOTAL OF 33 AS OF SEPTEMBER ONE PER THE ADOPTED SCHEDULE OF 4 20 22.
THE NEXT MEETING OF THIS COMMISSION IS THURSDAY, OCTOBER 20TH AT 2:30 PM IN THIS ROOM AND ONLINE, IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, YOU CAN CALL THE HOUSTON OFFICE OF PRESERVATION HOTLINE AT 8 3 2 3 9 3 6 5 5 6 OR VISIT OUR WEBSITE@HOUSTONPLANNING.COM.
AND THAT INCLU CONCLUDES MY DIRECTOR'S REPORT.
UH, WITH THAT, I'LL JUST ASK WHETHER THE, UM, MAYOR'S LIAISON HAS A REPORT SHE'S IN, IN ATTENDANCE VIRTUALLY.
THEREFORE, WE WILL MOVE ON TO, UH, UM, APPROVING MINUTES.
UH, UH, THIS IS FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE JULY 28TH HAHC MEETING MINUTES, WHICH WERE POSTED WITH THE AGENDA.
COMMISSIONER AUER JACKSON MOVES TO APPROVE.
IS THERE A SECOND CALL COLUMN.
ANY AGAINST? ANY ABSTAINING? AND THAT'LL, THAT'LL BE, I WILL BE ABSTAINING AS I WAS NOT IN ATTENDANCE.
SO, NEXT WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM A, A CONSIDERATION OF AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS, APPLICATIONS FOR CONSENT AGENDA.
UH, WILL STAFF PLEASE PRESENT THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS? I, UH, GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR AND COMMISSIONERS AND THE PUBLIC.
I'M THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER FOR THE
[00:05:01]
CITY OF HOUSTON, AND I RECOMMEND THE FOLLOWING ITEMS FOR ACTION PER STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS IN ONE MOTION.THAT WOULD BE ITEM 1 9 1 5 HARVARD IN THE, HIS HISTORIC HOUSTON HEIGHTS, SOUTH HISTORIC DISTRICT FOR APPROVAL.
ITEM NUMBER 2 18 0 6 DECATUR IN OLD SIXTH WARD, HISTORIC DISTRICT FOR APPROVAL.
GLEN CREST, AN ALTERATION AND GLENBROOK VALLEY OF APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS.
ITEM NUMBER 4 53 0 7 NORTH MAIN STREET IN NOR HILL.
AN APPROVAL ITEM NUMBER 5 13 23.
RUTLAND, AN ALTERATION IN HOUSTON HEIGHTS SOUTH FOR APPROVAL.
AND ITEM NUMBER 8 1 7 1 1 SHERN STREET IN NOR HILL.
IS IT IN NOR HILL FOR APPROVAL DISTRICT, RIGHT.
UH, AND THEN ITEM NUMBER 11 2 0 7 STRATFORD IN AVONDALE FOR APPROVAL.
AND ITEM 13 5 1 8 WEST 13TH AN ALTERATION IN HEIGHTS EAST FOR APPROVAL IN ITEM 14, 6 40 COURTLAND HEIGHT SOUTH FOR APPROVAL.
THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT REQUESTS APPROVAL OF ALL STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THESE ITEMS. SO THE ITEMS THEN PROPOSE FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION AT THIS TIME ARE ITEM 6 88 23 DOVER ITEM 7 12 0 4 STUDEWOOD ITEMS NINE AND 10 AT 1429, COLUMBIA.
SO THIS IS MR. SABA, I WOULD LIKE TO BE ABLE TO PULL ITEM NUMBER 11 2 0 7 STRAP PLEASE FOR SEPARATE CONSIDERATION.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER ITEMS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA YOU WOULD LIKE TO CONSIDER SEPARATELY? THE QUESTION, THE APPARENT CONFLICT BETWEEN, UH, WHAT WAS, WHAT, WHAT MR. MCCOWAN SAID AND WHAT'S SHOWN FOR ITEM NUMBER EIGHT.
IS IT, IS IT HIGH FIRST WARD OR IS IT NOR HILL? THANK YOU.
I KNEW, I WAS HOPING SOMEONE WOULD CORRECT ME.
ITEM NUMBER 8 1 7 1 1 SHERN, AN ALTERATION IS NOT LOCATED IN THE NOR HILL HISTORIC DISTRICT, BUT IN THE HIGH FIRST WARD HISTORIC DISTRICT.
WITH THAT, I'M GOING TO, UH, JUST ASK ANY MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC THAT'S ATTENDING IN PERSON OR VIRTUALLY IF YOU SIGNED UP TO SPEAK FOR ANY OF THESE ITEMS. UH, THESE ITEMS ARE SLATED, UH, FOR CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL.
UM, IF ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO PULL OR SPEAK ON ONE OF THESE ITEMS THAT HAVE BEEN LISTED, PLEASE, UH, MENTION, MENTION THAT NOW IT'S NOT OURS.
I'M HERE FOR TWO 10 MARSHALL STREET.
NO, BUT THAT, THAT'LL BE, THAT'LL BE REVIEWED INDIVIDUALLY.
AL ALREADY, IT'S NOT ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.
SO, UM, NOT HEARING ANY, UM, SPEAKERS THAT HAVE SIGNED UP FOR ITEMS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.
UM, I'LL MOVE FORWARD AND SEE IF THERE IS A MOTION TO APPROVE THE REVISED SLATE.
AND, UH, MR. CHECK, CAN YOU PLEASE REPEAT? YES, THE, UH, ITEMS GROUPED TOGETHER, PLEASE.
THE ITEMS ARE CURRENTLY STANDING.
ITEM 1 19 15 HARVARD ITEM 2 18 0 6 DECATUR STREET.
ITEM 3 8 3 3 9 GLEN CREST STREET, ITEM 4 5 3 0 7 NORTH MAIN STREET, ITEM 5 13 23 RUTLAND STREET, ITEM 8 17 11 SHERN STREET.
YEAH, I RIGHT, WE, WE PULLED 11.
SO ITEM 13 15 18 WEST 13TH STREET AND ITEM 14, 6 40 COURTLAND STREET.
UH, MR. CHAIR, IF IT'S, IF IT'S NOT PROCEDURALLY TOO LATE, I WOULD ASK TO PULL ITEM THREE, PLEASE.
STRIKE NUMBER, ITEM THREE LATE THAT FOR INDIVIDUAL REVIEW.
WITH THAT CHANGE, UH, COMMISSIONERS ARE, IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA? UH, COMMISSIONER WEAU JACKSON MAKES A MOTION TO APPROVE THE ITEMS, UH, AS CONSENT AND STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION FOR EACH OF THOSE ITEMS. THANK YOU.
[00:10:01]
THERE A SECOND? COMMISSIONER? HAVE A SECOND.ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION? A AYE AYE.
ARE THERE ANY OPPOSED? ARE THERE ANY ABSTENTIONS? THAT MOTION PASSES? THAT PASSES.
BUT NOW FOR THE REMAINING CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS APPLICATION ITEMS WILL STAFF PLEASE PRESENT THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA.
HELLO, THIS IS STAFF MEMBER COLEMAN.
I PRESENT FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION ITEM A 3 83 39 GLEN CREST STREET.
IT'S A CONTRIBUTING 1955 TRADITIONAL RANCH HOME CONSTRUCTED CIRCA 1955 ON AN INTERIOR LOT WITH DETACHED GARAGE.
A REAR ADDITION WAS CONSTRUCTED BEFORE THE DISTRICT WAS CREATED.
THE APPLICANT PROPOSES TO ADD A REAR PORCH AND EXTEND THE ROOF LINE AT THE REAR.
THE EXISTING LOW SLUNG ROOF PITCH IS 4.5 OVER 12 WITH COMPOSITION SHINGLES THE PROPOSED ROOF FOR THE REAR PORCH AND PATIO TO BE BUILT ON TOP OF THE EXISTING ROOF WITH THE SAME PITCH.
AND IT ALSO INCLUDES VARIOUS CRICKETS.
UM, AS YOU CAN SEE IN THE REPORT WITH MULTIPLE PITCHES IN ORDER TO HELP WITH THE DRAINAGE, THE PROPOSED COMPOSITION SHINGLES WILL MATCH EXISTING.
THE PRIMARY RIDGE HEIGHT ALSO MATCHES EXISTING AT 16 FEET, SEVEN AND A QUARTER INCHES AND EXTENDS ALL THE WAY BACK TO THE REAR GABLE.
THE E ALSO MATCH AT EIGHT FEET.
THE PORCH SQUARE FOOTAGE WILL BE 785 SQUARE FEET AND ALL SETBACKS WILL BE AT LEAST FIVE FEET FROM FROM THE PROPERTY LINE.
THERE HAS BEEN NO PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ITEM.
AND STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS AN APPROVAL WITH THE CONDITION TO LOWER THE RIDGE HEIGHT TO BE LOWER THAN THE EXISTING RIDGE.
THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S PRESENTATION.
ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FROM COMMISSIONERS OF STAFF ON THIS ITEM? UH, I DON'T HAVE A QUESTION, BUT THANK YOU FOR EXPLAINING THE, UH, CONDITION.
SO I'M JUST CURIOUS ABOUT IF THERE ARE NO QUESTIONS, UM, EXCUSE ME, PLEASE.
SO, I, I THINK ON THE WAY IT'S PRESENTED IN THE DRAWING, IT'S EVEN WITH THE RIDGE AND I THINK THE, UM, SUGGESTION FROM STAFF IS THAT IT BE LOWER THAN THE, THAN THE FRONT RIDGE.
THE, THE CONDITION IS THAT IT SHOULD NOT BE EVEN, IT SHOULD BE LOWER THAN I HAVE A CO.
UH, GLENBURG VALLEY HAS AN ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD AND THEY DID NOT SUBMIT THIS TO THEM.
IF THERE ARE OTHER QUESTIONS, UM, I'LL OPEN THIS UP TO THE PUBLIC, UM, TO THE PUBLIC FOR COMMENT ON THIS ITEM.
ARE THERE ANY, IS ANYONE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS MATTER? IT LOOKS, IT WILL LOOK VERY WEIRD IF THE
I MEAN, I JUST THINK THAT LOWERING THE RIDGE IS GONNA MAKE THE ROOF EVEN MORE COMPLICATED.
I AGREE THAT I FEEL LIKE IT'S GONNA BE WATERPROOFING ISSUES WE'RE INVITING BY DOING SOMETHING THAT YOU DON'T EVEN SEE FROM THE STREET INTERSECTION.
I AGREE WITH THE COMMISSIONER KO.
I HAD THE SAME FEELING WHEN I SAW THIS.
IN FACT, I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO UNDERSTAND THE RATIONALE OF WHY THIS CONDITION.
IF IT IS JUST A STRAIGHT LINE RIGHT TO THE BACK, UH, UH, BACK GABLE, IF YOU WILL.
THE REASONING BEHIND THE CONDITION WAS TO MAKE IT A LITTLE BIT MORE, UM, RECESSIVE SO AS NOT TO MATCH THE EXISTING TO MAKE IT KIND OF SIT BACK A BIT MORE WAS THE, WAS THE THOUGHT UP.
'CAUSE YOU CAN SEE IT, UM, FROM THE STREET ON THE LEFT HAND SIDE.
UM, 'CAUSE IT IS GONNA EXTEND DIRECTLY ON THAT RIDGE.
I THINK THEORETICALLY IT MAKES SENSE, BUT PRACTICALLY, I THINK IN THIS SITUATION, IT'S GONNA JUST BE A PROBLEM
[00:15:01]
FOR CONSTRUCTION.HOW MUCH DIFFERENCE IN THE SLOPE ARE YOU IMAGINING BETWEEN WHAT'S BEEN SUGGESTED AND WHAT IT WOULD BE OTHERWISE? I'M ASSUMING THEY'RE GONNA JUST LOWER IT LIKE SIX INCHES OR SOMETHING, BUT THEN IT'S GONNA HAVE THAT EXTRA, UH, VALET AT THE CORNER THERE.
IT'S JUST GONNA BE MORE ROOFING FLASHING AND STUFF.
I GUESS MY POINT IS, EITHER WAY IT'S GONNA NEED TO BE WELL FLASHED AND YES, I, I AGREE.
IF YOU JUST LOOK AT THE DRAWING, ADDING ANOTHER, A DROP OF EVEN SIX, EIGHT INCHES TO A FOOT WILL JUST EVEN COMPLICATED.
FURTHER, IT'S, AND IT'S VERY NOT VERY VISIBLE IS AT THE BACKEND.
I, I FEEL THAT THAT CONDITION IS REALLY NOT NECESSARY.
CAN, CAN I MAKE A MOTION PLEASE? I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE ACCEPT THE PROPOSAL AS IT IS WITHOUT THE CONDITION.
SECOND, I'D LIKE TO SUGGEST, UH, AT LEAST ANOTHER TALKING POINT AND, AND MAYBE ANOTHER, UH, UH, CONDITION.
AND IF STAFF AGREES IT, I THINK WE ALL AGREE IT AS, UH, COMMISSIONER COLLIN POINTED OUT IT, IT SHOULD BE REVIEWED AND, AND, UH, KNOWN TO BE APPROVED BY THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD.
I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S IN OUR PURVIEW AS A COMMISSION OR I'LL ASK STAFF WITHOUT MEANING TO PUT ANYBODY ON THE SPOT.
IS THAT NORMALLY SOMETHING THAT A BOX THAT YOU CHECK? OR IS IT CONSIDERED TO BE AN OPTIONAL, NOT THE SAME AS A DEED RESTRICTION? I UNDERSTAND IT ISN'T REQUIRED, BUT WE ALWAYS ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO DO SO.
IS IT, BUT IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT IS PART OF OUR, IT IS NOT REQUIRED FOR A C OF A, BUT IS IT, IS IT REQUIRED TO, TO GET A PERMIT, AN ACTUAL PERMIT FROM THE CITY FOR THIS WORK? I DON'T THINK IT'S REQUIRED TO GET A PERMIT, BUT I THINK YOU COULD MAKE IT A CONDITION OF YOUR APPROVAL.
I THINK WE KNOW FOR A PERMIT, UH, YOU HAVE TO CHECK THAT BOX FOR THE CITY REGARDLESS OF THESE ISSUES.
BUT, UH, I'D LIKE TO, UH, AMEND THE, UH, CONDITIONS TO INCLUDE THE REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD.
MR. COUCH, DO YOU ACCEPT? YES, I ACCEPT THAT.
COULD I ASK A CLARIFICATION, MR. CHAIR? YES.
IF THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE COMES BACK WITH SLIGHTLY REVISED APPROVAL, YOU WANNA DELEGATE TO STAFF AN OKAY.
AND IF STAFF FEELS IT'S TOO FAR DIFFERENT THAN THEY WOULD BRING IT BACK TO YOU.
DOES THAT SOUND REASONABLE? UNDERSTOOD.
AND THIS, AND COMMISSIONER YAP.
YOU AGREE? YES, I AGREE TO THE FRIENDLY AMENDMENT.
JUST, JUST BY DEFINITION ONLY NOT NO, NO.
ARE THERE ANY OPPOSED? ARE THERE ANY ABSTENTIONS? THIS MOTION PASSES.
COMMISSIONER HICK, WE DID HEAR ALL THOSE MOTIONS IN A SECOND.
WE HAD SOME COMMENTS THAT, UH, IT WAS HARD TO HEAR.
A COUPLE OF THE COMMISSIONERS, IF YOU DON'T MIND IF YOU'LL PULL YOUR MICROPHONE JUST A FEW INCHES FROM YOUR MOUTH AND AS WELL AS HAVE THE GREEN LIGHT ON WHEN YOU'RE SPEAKING.
THAT HELPS US HEAR YOU CLEARLY.
STAFF WILL NOW PRESENT THE NEXT APPLICATION.
UH, ITEM A SIX IS, UH, AN ITEM THAT WAS DEFERRED FROM THE JULY MEETING.
IT'S, UH, 88 23, UH, DOVER STREET.
AND THIS IS A REQUEST FOR, UH, TO REMOVE AND REPLACE 11 ORIGINAL WINDOWS WITH VINYL REPLACEMENT WINDOWS.
THE WORK WAS ORIGINALLY COMPLETED WITHOUT A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS.
AND JUST TO RECAP, UH, THAT STAFF REPORT, THE APPROVAL CRITERIA THERE FROM SECTION 33, 2 40, UH, IS WHERE WE BASE OUR RECOMMENDATION IN THIS CASE, WHICH IS FOR A CERTIFICATE OF REMEDIATION TO ALLOW THE APPLICANTS TO JUST KEEP THOSE WINDOWS IN PLACE.
AND I, THE, THE KEY CRITERIA THERE AS ITEM IS B.
SO 33 DASH TWO 40 B, WHERE THE LAST SENATE STATES THAT THE HHC SHALL TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THE CURRENT NEEDS OF THE APPLICANT AND SHALL BE SENSITIVE TO PROPERTY OWNER'S FINANCIAL CONDITION IN DETERMINING WHETHER TO ISSUE A CERTIFICATE
[00:20:01]
OF APPROPRIATENESS.THE, UH, THE NEXT PAGE HAS THE BASIC 11 CRITERIA, WHICH STILL RULE IN GLENBROOK VALLEY BECAUSE THERE ARE NO ADOPTED, UM, GUIDELINES YET, YET.
UH, AND SO OF COURSE WE KNOW THAT THE, WE, WE DON'T RECOMMEND THE REPLACEMENT TYPICALLY OF, OF, OF, UH, THE WINDOWS IN THAT WAY.
AND SO THE NEXT PART OF MY PRESENTATION, I JUST WANNA STAY AT THAT SLIDE FOR A MINUTE.
UH, YOU DON'T NEED TO GO ANYWHERE.
I WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE DATA THAT WAS SENT TO YOU IN AN EMAIL.
AND IF YOU HAVEN'T HAD TIME TO LOOK AT IT, AND EVEN IF YOU HAVE, I'LL JUST TRY TO RECAP THAT EMAIL TODAY WITH YOU.
UH, THERE WAS THE QUESTION ABOUT, YOU KNOW, HOW WE'VE, HOW THIS COMMISSION HAS RULED ON, ON, ON WINDOWS SO THAT, UM, THIS INFORMATION AND STAFF MEMBER COLEMAN PUT THIS TOGETHER FOR.
SO I WANNA SAY THANK YOU FOR DOING SO.
UH, 29 APPLICATIONS HAVE BEEN RECEIVED SINCE JANUARY OF 2020.
UH, THAT BEGINS MY TIME HERE, JUST A COUPLE MONTHS PRIOR TO THAT.
NOW THESE ARE WINDOWS, THESE ARE WINDOWS ONLY CFA APPLICATIONS.
NOT ALL THE APPLICATIONS THAT HAVE BEEN SEEN.
29 TOTAL APPLICATIONS RE RELATING TO WINDOWS HAVE BEEN RECEIVED.
17 WERE REVIEWED BY THE HHC FOUR.
THERE MAY HAVE BEEN A, AN ERROR IN YOUR SHEET, BUT FOUR WERE APPEALED TO THE PRESERVATION APPEALS BOARD.
THREE, UH, WHICH HAD A CERTIFICATE OF REMEDIATION FOR VINYL THAT HAD ALREADY BEEN INSTALLED.
AND ONE, WHAT WAS PROPOSING VINYL.
SO THEY HAD FOLLOWED THE RIGHT ORDER AND ASKED FOR THE C OF A AHEAD OF TIME.
12 OF THOSE 29 WERE ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVED.
SO STAYING WITH THE 29 15 OF THOSE WERE CONTRIBUTING PROPERTIES BY THE INVENTORY.
AND 14 WERE NON-CONTRIBUTING ITEMS. UH, SO THE 15 CONTRIBUTING 12 CAME TO THIS COMMISSION, AND THREE WERE ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVED.
OF THE 14 NON-CONTRIBUTING FIVE CAME TO THIS COMMISSION, AND NINE WERE ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVED THE HHC ACTION IN THESE CASES.
SO FIVE CERTIFICATES OF REMEDIATION WERE ISSUED BY THE HHC TO EITHER KEEP VINYL OR REMOVE AND REPLACE IT WITH APPROPRIATE WINDOWS.
AND THAT INVOLVED FOUR CONTRIBUTING PROPERTIES AND ONE NON-CONTRIBUTING PROPERTY.
THREE WERE APPEALED TO THIS PRESERVATION APPEALS BOARD AND THEY OVERTURNED THE DECISION THERE.
AND THE VINYL WAS ALLOWED TO BE KEPT.
ONE HHC REQUIRED REPLACEMENT OF VINYL WITHOUT APPEAL.
SO ONE PERSON WAS SUPPOSED TO TAKE THEIR VINYL OUT.
AND I, WE DON'T HAVE THE DATA ON WHETHER THAT WAS DONE.
WE DON'T HAVE THE, YOU KNOW, DIDN'T GO OUT AND LOOK TO SEE.
BUT THAT PERSON THEORETICALLY SHOULD BE BEING RED TAGGED IN PERPETUITY IF THEY HAVE THAT PROBLEM.
ONE HHC ISSUED A CERTIFICATE OF REMEDIATION FOR WORK COMPLETED WITH VINYL WINDOWS, UH, FOUR DENIALS, ONE FOR THREE FOR VINYL OR FX REPLACEMENT, AND ONE FOR ALUMINUM.
AND ONE VINYL OF THOSE WAS APPEALED TO THE PEELS BOARD.
THREE APPROVALS WERE FOR ALL ALUMINUM WINDOWS WITH VARIOUS VENDORS.
FOUR APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS FOR ALUMINUM TO MATCH THE LIGHT PATTERN.
AND ONE IS CURRENTLY BEING DEFERRED.
AND ON THE ADMINISTRATIVE SIDE, ACTION OF EIGHT, APPROVALS FOR VINYL REPLACEMENT, WINDOWS ONE TO A CONTRIBUTING PROPERTY, SIX TO A NON-CONTRIBUTING THREE APPROVALS FOR ALUMINUM REPLACEMENT WINDOWS, ONE TO CONTRIBUTING BUILDING AND TWO TO A NON-CONTRIBUTING BUILDING.
AND ONE APPROVAL TO REPLACE GLASS ONLY.
UM, AND THAT WAS TO A CONTRIBUTING AND IT WAS ALSO TO REPAIR THE FRAME.
SO IF YOU'D ALLOW ME TO JUST KIND OF CONTINUE WITH THIS PRESENTATION TO, TO THE END HERE, THEN I WANT TO, UH, GO TO A, WELL, LET ME, LET ME GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE DOWN PLEASE.
UH, WE HAVE SOMEONE IN THE OFFICE THAT'S HELPING US.
WILSON IN THE OFFICE IS, UH, FROM THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT'S HELPING OUR STAFF.
CAN YOU GO ONE MORE FORWARD PLEASE? UH, THERE'S THE HOME.
A LOT OF QUESTIONS GET RAISED ABOUT THE, UM, ECONOMIC QUESTION.
UH, GOING BACK TO THAT PART OF THE ORDINANCE OF THAT STATES THE SENSITIVE TO THE PROPERTY ON HIS FINANCIAL CONDITION IN DETERMINING WHETHER TO ISSUE A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS.
AND I, AND I DO HOPE THE OWNER IS ON THE LINE TODAY, THOUGH, I DID RECEIVE A TEXT.
SHE MAY NOT BE HERE, BUT YOU ASK US HOW DID WE GET THERE? AND IN THIS CASE, I RE WE RECOMMENDED, UM, THE ISSUANCE OF A CERTIFICATE OF REMEDIATION BASED ON THAT B SECTION
[00:25:01]
AND, AND, AND THE HOPE THAT THE OWNER WOULD COME AND SPEAK TO YOU ABOUT HER SITUATION, BECAUSE I DON'T FEEL APPROPRIATE AS ME AT THIS LEVEL WITH WHAT I KNOW AND THE ORDINANCE AS I HAVE IT TO ASK HER A LOT OF QUESTIONS.WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT IS A CURRENT, UH, UH, UH, A MAP SHOWING THE MAJORITY OF OUR HISTORIC DISTRICTS, NOT GLENBROOK VALLEY, BUT YOU THERE SEE HEIGHTS EAST, SOUTH, AND WEST.
YOU SEE WOODLAND HIGH FIRST WARD, OLD SIXTH WARD.
UH, YOU PROBABLY GOT AVONDALE WEST AND EAST CORTLAND PLACE, UM, SHADOW LAWN, BROAD BOULEVARD OAKS, UH, BROAD ACRES, WHATEVER OTHER SMALL ONES I'M MISSING IN THEIR FREE LAND.
THOSE ARE ALL THOSE DISTRICTS, RIGHT? YOU, YOU SEE THOSE THREE.
AND NOW THAT LOOK AT THE, UH, KEY TO THE LEFT.
AND YOU NOTICE THAT IN THESE AREAS, THEY'RE, MOST OF 'EM ARE A SHADE OF COLOR IN THE SECOND SECTION, WHICH MEANS THAT 23.1% TO 39.5% OF PEOPLE IN THERE ARE LOW TO MODERATE INCOME.
IF THERE'S A WHITE AREA, WHICH YOU SEE A WHITE AREA THERE ON THE, THE BOTTOM, IT LOOKS LIKE THAT MUST BE BOULEVARD OAKS.
YOU SEE, AND BOULEVARD OAKS IS WHITE.
THERE'S ZERO TO 23% LOW TO MODERATE INCOME IF, IF I COULD WITH YOU.
SO IF YOU GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, YOU'RE GONNA SEE GLENBROOK VALLEY.
NOW YOU SEE THE SHAPE OF GLENBROOK VALLEY AND YOU SEE A PART OF IT.
WHAT IS IT? MAYBE A QUARTER OF IT IS 73.8 TO A HUNDRED PERCENT LOW TO MODERATE INCOME STAFF.
IF I COULD ASK SOMEONE PLEASE A FAVOR, UH, TO SEE IF YOU CAN GET THE DEFINITION OF LOW TO MODERATE INCOME, MAYBE FROM THE US CENSUS SITE, UH, IN CASE THAT QUESTION ARISES.
UH, SO THEN YOU HAVE ANOTHER COLOR.
UNFORTUNATELY, I'M THE COLORBLIND GUY, BUT IT LOOKS LIKE, UH, 39.6 TO 55.9 IS IS, OR IT'S 56 TO 73 ON THE REST OF THOSE COLORS.
UH, SEE IF ANYONE CAN, THOSE ARE THE COLORS.
SO NOW WHEN THEN SOMEONE COMES AND SAYS, IT'S DIFFICULT FOR US TO MAKE A CHANGE, THAT THAT INFORMATION COMES INTO PLAY.
YOU DIDN'T KNOW IT, BUT I HAD THE MAPS LIKE THIS ACTUALLY FROM THE PREVIOUS CENSUS ON MY DOOR FOR THE LAST TWO YEARS.
UH, I DIDN'T HAVE IT MAPPED THIS WAY.
THIS IS NEW DATA COMING OFF THE CENSUS THAT THE GIS GUIDE JUST PULLED TOGETHER THIS MORNING.
SO IT WAS ALWAYS IN MY MIND, BUT Y'ALL DIDN'T HAVE THAT MAP AND YOU DIDN'T KNOW THAT.
SO THAT IT COMES PART OF OUR DECISION MAKING ON HOW WE LOOK AT A PERSON WHO SAYS, HEY, I MAY NOT HAVE THE MONEY TO CHANGE IT OUT.
NOW, WITH THAT, I WOULD LIKE TO SAY TOO ABOUT OUR RECOMMENDATION HERE.
THIS GREG SMITH WHO WORKS AT THE TEXAS HISTORIC COMMISSION, AND I DON'T KNOW HIS REAL, HIS FORMAL TITLE.
I CALL HIM THE GATEKEEPER TO THE NATIONAL REGISTER.
SO IF YOU WANT TO KNOW IF A PROPERTY'S ON OR ELIGIBLE FOR LISTING ON THE NATIONAL REGISTER IN TEXAS, YOU'RE GONNA TALK TO GREG SMITH OR ONE OF HIS STAFF MEMBERS WHO'S GONNA, WHO ARE GONNA TALK TO GREG SMITH AND FIND OUT WHAT THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO SAY.
AND TO BE REAL SPECIFIC ABOUT THE FACTS HERE, UH, A PERSON Y'ALL KNOW WELL, STEPH MCDOUGALL WAS, UH, APPLYING FOR A NATIONAL REGISTERED DISTRICT IN HER NEIGHBORHOOD OUT TOWARDS, UH, SEABROOK.
IT'S A MID-CENTURY NEIGHBORHOOD.
SHE WAS CONCERNED ABOUT A PROPERTY THAT DIDN'T HAVE ITS ORIGINAL WINDOWS AND ASKED HIM WHAT'S THE IMPACT ON WHETHER A BUILDING IS CONTRIBUTING OR NOT, OR ON THE ABILITY TO LIST THE DISTRICT ON THE NATIONAL REGISTER IF IT DOESN'T HAVE ITS ORIGINAL WINDOWS IN IT.
AND HIS RESPONSE, IT IS, IT HAS NO IMPACT.
AS LONG AS THE ORIGINAL OPENINGS REMAIN THE SAME SIZE, THEN IT'S NO IMPACT ON WHERE THAT PROP THAT DISTRICT WOULD BE, OR THAT HOUSE WOULD BE CONTRIBUTING IN A NATIONAL REGISTRY DISTRICT.
THIS ISN'T A NATIONAL REGISTRY DISTRICT, Y'ALL ALL KNOW THIS IS OUR LOCAL HOUSTON GLENBROOK VALLEY, AND WE DO SET OUR OWN RULES AS A CITY FOR, FOR OUR DISTRICTS.
UM, THAT BEING SAID, THEN, WHEN WE LOOK AT THE CRITERIA ONE THROUGH 11, AND IT'S NUMBER, UH, THE ONE WITH WINDOWS IN IT IS NINE, I THINK.
UH, YEAH, NUMBER NINE, THEY'RE OPPOSED, DESIGNED FOR AN EXTERIOR ALTERATION, MUST NOT DESTROY SIGNIFICANT HISTORICAL ARCHITECTURAL ARCHEOLOGICAL OR CULTURAL MATERIAL, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO SIDING, WINDOWS, DOORS, OR PORCH ELEMENTS.
UM, IT DOESN'T SATISFY THAT TO PUT A VINYL WINDOW IN THERE.
AND I WOULD, UM, SAY THAT SECTION 33, 2 40 COMES BEFORE SECTION 33, 2 41 AND TWO 40 IS AT A HIGHER LEVEL.
AND I, I'M A, I'M PLEADING IN A WAY TO SAY THAT YOU'RE THE COMMISSIONERS AND YOU'RE THE GATEKEEPER
[00:30:01]
TO OUR CITIZENS.YOU INTERPRET THESE SUBJECTIVE RULES FOR OUR CITIZENS.
AND WE AS A STAFF, I HAVEN'T, IF I HAD THE TIME, I'D PUT MORE TIME, I'D WORK A HUNDRED HOURS A WEEK TO BE SURE THAT EVERYONE KNOWS WHAT THE RULES ARE ABOUT.
CFAS COMMISSIONER, UH, COLLUM HAD WORKS EXTREMELY HARD TO NOTIFY THE NEIGHBORHOOD THROUGH THE, THROUGH THE MONTHLY NEWSLETTER AND, AND ON AND ON, RIGHT? THERE'S THAT BALANCE.
BUT FOR ME, I, WE COME TOGETHER AT, WE CAME TOGETHER STAFF AND RECOMMENDED DENIAL OF A C OF A FOR THIS AND RECOMMEND AND, AND RECOMMEND ISSUANCE OF C OF R FOR THE WORK COMPLETED.
TO SAY THAT IT ISN'T RIGHT, UH, IT WASN'T THE RIGHT WAY.
IT'S NOT WHAT WE WOULD REALLY PREFER HERE IN THIS CASE.
UM, OR IN ANY CASE THOUGH, I THINK THE DESIGN GUIDELINES THAT OUR OFFICE WILL PUT FORWARD ABOUT WINDOWS PROBABLY ARE GONNA SAY IF WE, WE, WE TALKED TO STAFF ABOUT GOOD, BETTER, BEST, GOOD, BETTER, BEST BEHAVIOR WITH RESPECT TO WINDOWS BEST, MAINTAIN YOUR ORIGINAL WINDOWS AND RESTORE THEM AND MAINTAIN THEM AND KEEP THEM, THAT'S ALWAYS BEST.
SO WE NEED TO GET TO BETTER, BETTER IS YOU'VE REPLACED THEM WITH SOMETHING THAT LOOKS LIKE THE WINDOWS THAT ARE THERE, WHICH WE NOW KNOW ARE AVAILABLE.
GOOD MILL, FINISHED, UH, LUMAN WINDOWS.
UH, AND THEN JUST GOOD FOR ME, FOR ME, AND I REMEMBER I WORKED ON THE BORDER IN BROWNSVILLE, TEXAS, ONE OF THE POOREST COUNTIES IN THE STATE.
FOR ME, IF IT'S NOT RAINING IN THE WINDOW, THAT'S GOOD.
IF, IF IT'S, IF THERE'S NO ONE IN THE HOUSE AND THERE'S PLYWOOD OVER THE WINDOW, THAT'S GOOD.
IF THERE'S A WINDOW THEY CAN SEE THROUGH AND OPEN AND OPERATE, THAT'S EVEN A LITTLE BIT BETTER.
SO IT'S ALMOST A STEP IN THERE WHERE THERE'S AN OCCUPANT, THEY'RE CARING ABOUT THE WINDOW, THEY GET TO USE THE HOUSE.
SO WITH THAT, I, I WOULD SAY THAT'S WHERE WE RECOMMENDED IT.
AND ROMAN, I JUST WANNA MENTION, YOU KNOW, AS FAR AS THE COMMISSION LEAST THE LAST 10 YEARS, THE MOST OF THE VOTES ABOUT WINDOWS HAVE COME DOWN TO, YOU KNOW, ARE THEY IN REPAIRABLE CONDITION OR ARE THEY, YOU KNOW, NEEDING TO BE REPLACED IN PART OF OUR ORDINANCE.
IF IT, IF THEY, IF THEY DO NEED TO BE REPLACED, CANNOT BE REPAIRED, UM, THEN THE ORDINANCE ALLOWS FOR REPLACEMENT THAT WOULD MATCH THE LIGHT PATTERN.
BUT THE MATERIALS COULD DIFFER IF THEY ALONG, AS THEY APPEAR TO BE SIMILAR.
THEY DON'T HAVE TO BE MADE OF THE SAME MATERIAL.
LIKE FOR LIKE, AND, AND I KNOW THAT IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD THERE'S A CHALLENGE 'CAUSE MANY OF THE WINDOWS ARE ALUMINUM AND MANY OF THE COMPANIES THAT USED TO MAKE ALUMINUM WINDOWS ARE NO LONGER PROVIDING THOSE WINDOWS THAT WERE USED IN THE PAST.
SO THERE'S A LIMITED NUMBER OF OPTIONS AS, AS I UNDERSTAND IT.
SO I KNOW WE HAD A SPECIAL COMMITTEE THAT LOOKED AT THIS, THIS ITEM, AND, AND THERE WASN'T A CLEAR, UM, I MEAN, I GUESS MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE MIGHT REMIND ME OF WHAT THEIR, THEIR ULTIMATE, UM, OUTCOME WAS.
BUT IT SEEMED LIKE THERE WASN'T, UH, WE, WE DIDN'T REACH A CERTAIN PRODUCT OR A SERIES OF PRODUCTS BECAUSE THERE THEY'RE JUST NOT BEING MADE OR THEY, THEY'VE BEEN DISCONTINUED.
AND THE ONLY ONE THEY FOUND THERE WAS, THERE WAS A DON YOUNG WINDOW, WHICH WE LOOKED AT, BUT WE DIDN'T THINK IT LOOKED VERY GOOD.
AND THEN THERE WAS A CREST MARK THAT DOES MAKE A MILL FINISH.
BUT I HAVE NOT SEEN AN ACTUAL PHOTOGRAPH OF IT INSTALLED ANYWHERE, ALTHOUGH I THINK SOME HOUSES HAVE IT.
WE DIDN'T REALLY FIND ANYTHING ELSE.
ARE THERE OTHER QUESTIONS FOR ROMAN? FOR, I HAVE, I HAVE, SORRY.
THIS ONE DID NOT GO BEFORE THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD EITHER.
AND THE SECOND THING IS ON YOUR MAPS, UH, IS THAT OF RESIDENCES OR THE WHOLE AREA? BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO REMEMBER THAT BROADWAY PART OF TELEPHONE AND PART OF BELFORT ARE ALL APARTMENTS AND THEY'RE THE GOVERNMENT SUBSIDIZED APARTMENTS.
AND THAT HAS A BIG INFLUENCE THAT DOESN'T GIVE A CLEAR PICTURE OF THE INCOME IN GLENBROOK VALLEY.
I, I CAN'T SPEAK WITH, WITH, UH, AUTHORITY ON THE DATA.
I BELIEVE THIS COMES FROM THE U THE US CENSUS.
SHOULD, IT SHOULD BE INCLUDING, ACTUALLY I'M, I'M SORRY, BUT THE DIRECTOR OR THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR COULD ANSWER WHERE THAT, YOU KNOW, THESE MAPS BETTER THAN YOU PROBABLY HAVE SEEN 'EM BEFORE.
I HAVE IT WHEN THEY PUT 'EM TOGETHER, BUT I THINK IT'S BASED ON HOUSEHOLD INCOME.
BUT UM, I THINK COMMISSIONER HAS A POINT THAT IT, WE'RE NOT SURE.
IT DOESN'T PINPOINT EACH HOUSE.
SO I NOW I, SORRY, I GET THAT WE'VE HAD THIS PROBLEM BEFORE.
GET THAT WITH SOMEBODY LOOKING AT THE CITY'S DEMOGRAPHICS AND SAYING WE'RE ONE THING WHEN, YOU KNOW, THAT WASN'T HOW IT IS.
SO WE COULD PRODUCE THAT MAP ACTUALLY THEN WE COULD GET IN HERE MORE SPECIFICALLY AND ACTUALLY PULL THAT AS A TIGHTER MAP NOW THAT I THINK ABOUT IT.
WE MAY BE ABLE TO GO DOWN TO THE, THE BLOCK GROUPS.
[00:35:01]
UM, SO WE CAN WORK, WE CAN SEE WHAT OUR TEAM CAN DO.
I'M SORRY, BUT I FAILED TO, AND MAYBE ONE POINT SINCE WE STILL UNDER ARE UNDER DISCUSSION.
UM, AND IT IS THAT, AND, AND THIS IS, I MEAN THIS IN NO, IN IN NO DISRESPECTFUL WAY BECAUSE I CONSIDER EACH OF YOU MY, MY BOSS JUST SO MUCH AS I DO, UH, MY OFFICIAL BOSSES AT THE CITY.
BUT IT FULFILLS THE PROPHECIES OF THE PEOPLE WHO WANNA SPEAK NEGATIVELY ABOUT HISTORIC DISTRICTS.
WHEN THERE IS A BOARD THAT, UH, TAKES A SUBJECTIVE LAW AND, AND DECIDES HOW IT'S INTERPRETED AND THEN APPLIES IT VERY STRICTLY.
AND IT DOESN'T HELP IN MAKING HISTORIC DISTRICTS WHEN THAT HAPPENS.
AND SO, AGAIN, AND YOU WON'T OFFEND ME EVEN NOW, IF THIS IS NOT APPROVED, IT'S FINE.
THIS IS WHERE WE, WHERE I CAME FROM AND WHERE, WHERE WE COME FROM.
WE WANNA MAKE MORE HISTORIC DISTRICTS.
WE WANNA MAKE PROTECT HOUSTON, WE WANNA PROTECT IT TO AFFORDABILITY.
WE WANNA BRING FORTH CONSERVATION DISTRICTS AND DO OTHER THINGS.
BUT IF, UH, THE COMMISSION, UM, IS SEEN AND, AND, AND WE LOOK AT THIS DATA HERE WHERE THE APPEALS BOARD OF THREE ITEMS WERE APPEALED TO ALLOW THE VINYL AND THEN SO-CALLED SUCCESSFULLY APPEAL OVERTURNED.
AND THOSE MEMBERS ARE PEOPLE WHO WERE MEMBERS OF THIS.
I BELIEVE THE APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS WERE ALL ONCE MEMBERS OF THIS BOARD.
NO, IT'S ESTABLISHED BY, BY ORDINANCE.
AND I THINK AT LEAST ONE MEMBER HAS TO BE A PRIOR MEMBER OF THIS BOARD AND THEN A PRIOR MEMBER OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION, A PLANNING COMMISSION.
I'D LIKE TO SORT OF REPEAT SOMETHING I HAD SUGGESTED ORIGINALLY AT THE, WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT THE FIRST TIME, BUT COULD WE CONSIDER HAVING THEM JUST REPLACE THE STREET FRONTING FACING WINDOWS WITH ALUMINUM? THAT WOULD BE THREE WINDOWS.
I I JUST THINK IF THEY WERE ABLE TO AFFORD TO REPLACE 11 AND ALSO CUT DOWN THIS BIG TREE THAT WAS IN THE FRONT YARD, WHICH IS NOT CHEAP.
THERE IS ABILITY PROBABLY TO REPLACE THREE WINDOWS.
WELL BEFORE WE WANNA CONTINUE WITH QUESTIONS FOR STAFF.
BUT I WOULD OPEN TO THE PUBLIC SEE WHETHER THE APPLICANT OR ANYONE ELSE WAS ALSO IS THE APPLICANT.
WELL LET'S FOR THE MOMENT, LET, LET'S LET, LET'S SEE, LET'S LET THE APPLICANT SPEAK, UH, WITH THE APPLICANT.
UH, MRS. RICO, IF YOU'RE AVAILABLE, DO WE DO SEE YOU ONLINE? IT'S STAR SIX TO UNMUTE YOURSELF, I BELIEVE ON YOUR PHONE.
OR YOU MAY NEED TO HIT THE LITTLE MICROPHONE ON YOUR COMPUTER TO UNMUTE YOURSELF.
WHAT IS THE QUESTION? I GUESS THE COMMISSION, UH, IS THIS YOUR OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK ON, ON YOUR BEHALF ABOUT THE WINDOWS THAT YOU HAVE? YOU HAVE, UH, THE VINYL WINDOWS THAT YOU HAVE INSTALLED ON YOUR HOME? OKAY.
I, UM, IT WAS 11 WINDOWS AND SEVEN OF 'EM WERE BROKEN AND WE COULD NOT OPEN NONE OF THE WINDOWS.
AND I DID NOT KNOW THAT I NEEDED A PERMIT FOR SOMETHING THAT WAS EXISTING.
SO IT WAS IGNORANCE THAT I WENT WITHOUT EVEN KNOWING THAT I NEEDED A CITY PERMIT AFTER I DID THE CITY PERMIT.
GOING THROUGH THE PROCEDURE OF DOING ALL THAT, THAT'S THEN I ENDED UP KNOWING THAT I NEEDED TO GO THROUGH THE HISTORIC AND GET PERMISSION FROM Y TWO.
I DID NOT, NO, EXCUSE MY IGNORANCE.
UM, DOING WHAT IS WHAT I CAN TO, UM, MAKE THE HOUSE LOOK NICE.
AND, UM, I, I DON'T KNOW, IT'S BEEN, UH, A LOT FOR ME TO KEEP UP WITH IT.
OH, THIS IS COMMISSIONER AS AND MOM AS COMMISSIONER COUCH, COUCH SUGGESTED.
WOULD REPLACING THE FIRST THE WINDOWS IN THE FRONT BE ACCEPTABLE TO YOU, OR WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS ON THAT? I MEAN, IT'S GOING TO COST ME TO TAKE, TAKE 'EM OFF.
AND WHAT AM I GONNA DO WITH THOSE WINDOWS? I MEAN, THEY'RE NEW.
UNLESS IF I WAS EVEN THINKING MAYBE I COULD LIKE, GET SOME GOOD PAINT AND MAKE HIM LOOK, UH, ALUMINUM, I DON'T KNOW.
I, IT'S, IT'S GONNA BE KIND OF EXPENSIVE FOR ME TO TAKE HIM OFF AND FIND MORE WINDOWS.
AS YOU SAID, THE TREE MESSED UP ALL THE DRIVEWAY AND MY SON GOT A FRIEND OF HIS TO HELP HIM CUT IT DOWN 'CAUSE HE WAS MESSING UP THE ROOF AND THE CONCRETE ON THE DRIVEWAY.
SO, I MEAN, I GUESS I HAVE TO SAVE SOME
[00:40:01]
MONEY.AND I DON'T KNOW HOW LONG IT'S GONNA TAKE ME TO REPLACE THOSE THREE IN THE FRONT.
I MEAN, 'CAUSE IT'S GONNA COST ME TO GET SOMEONE TO REMOVE THEM.
AND THEN I'M GONNA HAVE THROW IN, I MEAN THOSE WINDOWS, I MEAN WASTED.
I MEAN, WHERE AM I GONNA USE THEM AT? UM, I MEAN, NEW WINDOWS, THEY'RE BETTER QUALITY THAN WHAT THE HOUSE HAD.
THE OTHER ONES WERE, I MEAN, SEVEN WERE MIST UP.
SO THEY GAVE ME A GOOD PRICE AND PAYMENTS TO REPLACE THEM ALL 'CAUSE THEY WERE GONNA SELL OR DO WHATEVER WITH THE ALUMINUM OF THE OTHER ONES.
UM, MS. RICO, THIS IS COMMISSIONER WEAU JACKSON.
AND I THINK YOU MAY HAVE SPOKEN TO THIS, UH, MAY HAVE BEEN IN OUR JULY CONVERSATION, BUT COULD YOU REMIND ME AND THE COMMISSION, UH, YOUR, HAVE YOU OWNED THIS PROPERTY FOR A SIGNIFICANT PERIOD? MAYBE IT WAS RENTAL PROPERTY FOR A WHILE? YES.
WE LIVED IN THE HOUSE LIKE FOR FIVE YEARS WHILE THE KIDS WERE GROWING UP.
AND, UH, THE PARKING WAS NOT ENOUGH FOR THE KIDS 'CAUSE THEY STARTED GROWING UP AND HAVING CARS AND WE COULDN'T BLOCK THE SIDEWALK.
SO WE WOULD LOOK FOR A LITTLE BIGGER HOUSE FOR US.
AND WE RENTED IT OUT TO SOME FRIENDS OF OURS AND THEY STAYED IN THERE LIKE FOR 10 YEARS.
BUT THEN I LOST MY HUSBAND AND HE'S THE ONE THAT USED TO DO MAINTENANCE ON IT, AND NOW I'M ON MY OWN.
SO THE HOUSE WAS EMPTY FOR ALMOST A YEAR, SINCE OCTOBER.
I COULDN'T, I COULDN'T FIX IT.
WELL, SO I'VE BEEN WORKING ON IT.
WHAT ABOUT THE PAINT OPTION? I MEAN, THERE ARE METALLIC PAINTS YOU CAN GET.
IT WON'T BE EXACTLY THE SAME, BUT IT WOULD LOOK MORE LIKE ALUMINUM THAN THIS WHITE WINDOW FRAMES DO I JUST, I HAVE A HARD TIME, YOU KNOW, I MEAN THERE, THERE'S, THERE'S COMPASSION FOR THE, THE FINANCES AND THE DIFFICULTY ON THE PROPERTY OWNER.
BUT IF IT WAS SOMEONE WHO HAD MOVED IN WITH THE WINDOWS IN POOR CONDITION, I WOULD HAVE A LITTLE, I THINK THERE WOULD BE A LITTLE MORE LEEWAY IN MY MIND IF THEY'VE OWNED THE PROPERTY FOR 15 YEARS AND IT HAS NOT BEEN MAINTAINED AND THE WINDOWS WERE ALLOWED TO DETERIORATE TO THE POINT THAT THEY WERE, EXCUSE ME, I WENT ON THE JASON WILSON, COULD YOU PLEASE GO TO THE PREVIOUS PHOTOS THAT SHOWS THE HOME, PLEASE? THIS WILL HELP WITH THE DISCUSSION.
TO ME THIS IS, IT'S ALWAYS DIFFICULT WHEN WE'RE DEALING WITH THIS AFTER THE FACT AND AS A COMMISSION, WE HAVE TO DECIDE WHAT IS THE, YOU KNOW, WHAT'S THE BEST COMPROMISE HERE, MIKE, PLEASE.
CAN, CAN YOU PULL THE MIC CLOSER? I CAN HARDLY HEAR YOU ACROSS THE, I PERSONALLY STRUGGLE WITH THE USE OF THE ECONOMIC HARDSHIP CRITERIA AS GROUNDS FOR REPLACEMENT OF THE WINDOWS.
UM, THE ECONOMIC HARDSHIP WAS, WAS CAUSED BY THE APPLICANT.
THEY DEMON, WE NOW KNOW IN AT THIS TIME, THEY DEMONSTRATED THAT THEY HAD THE MEANS TO PURCHASE AND REPLACE THE WINDOWS.
IF WE WERE REVIEWING THIS AS A C OF A ORIGINALLY WITHOUT THE WORK BEING DONE, THAT WOULD NOT BE AN ARGUMENT THAT THAT COULD BE MADE.
AND I THINK IT'S NOT SO MUCH THIS CASE, BUT IT'S THE IDEA THAT THAT CAN BE USED AS AN ARGUMENT AFTER THE FACT WHEN THE HARDSHIP WAS CREATED BY THEIR ILLEGAL ACTION.
AND I THINK WE NEED TO BE CAREFUL, YOU KNOW, OPENING THAT BOX THAT THIS DOESN'T COME BACK IN THE FUTURE.
SO I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT REMOVED AS A, AS A CRITERIA FOR THIS PARTICULAR, YOU KNOW, APPLICATION.
AND WE DECIDE THIS BASED MORE ON WHAT ARE THE AVAILABLE OPTIONS FOR THIS PARTICULAR, YOU KNOW, APPLICANT.
I MEAN, IS IT TO KEEP THEM, IS IT TO PAINT THEM? IS IT TO MAKE THEM REPLACE THEM ALL WITH IN KIND WINDOWS? BUT I'M JUST STRUGGLING WITH THAT ASPECT OF IT.
I JUST, WHEN WE WENT ON THE ALUMINUM WINDOW TOUR OF GLENBROOK VALLEY, THE COMMISSION, THE, THE COMMITTEE SUBCOMMITTEE, I WAS STRUCK BY THE SOUTHERN HALF OF GLENBROOK VALLEY HOW IT LOOKED COMPARED TO THE NORTHERN HALF BY, BY THE SIMS BIO.
AND I, I'M INCLINED TO KIND OF AGREE WITH ROMAN THAT WE SHOULD TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION SOME OF THESE ECONOMIC ISSUES BECAUSE JUST THE, THE BIG DIFFERENCE ACROSS THAT WHOLE SUBDIVISION IS PRETTY,
[00:45:01]
PRETTY WIDE.I'M NOT OPPOSED TO TAKING IT, BUT WE'VE NOT BEEN PRESENTED ANY INFORMATION SHOWING US THE SPECIFIC ECONOMIC HARDSHIP FOR THIS PARTICULAR APPLICANT.
JUST BECAUSE WE HAVE DATA DOES NOT MEAN THAT, THAT IT'S SPECIFIC TO THIS, BUT IT'S AN UNUSUAL, THEY CREATED THE ECONOMIC HARDSHIP THAT WE'RE DISCUSSING, WHICH IS THE COST OF REMEDIATING THE SITUATION.
I MEAN, SO IT'S JUST A, I FIND IT A SLIPPERY SLOPE IS ALL.
SO THAT'S WHY I THINK WE SHOULD TRY TO GET SOME SORT OF IMPROVEMENT, AT LEAST TO THE STREET FACADE, WHICH IS WHY IT HAS MADE THOSE TWO SUGGESTIONS.
I DON'T THINK THAT WE SHOULD JUST LET IT SIT ON UNCHANGED, BUT I ALSO THINK WE SHOULD TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION OUTSIDE FACTORS THAT WE MAY NOT KNOW ALL THE DETAILS ABOUT.
MAY, MAY I ASK SOMETHING? SURE.
IS THERE ANY WAYS THIS IS SWEETIE, WAS I'D LIKE TO, IS THERE ANY WAY WE CAN STREAMLINE THE ECONOMIC HARDSHIP PROCESS? IT'S, I JUST FEEL IT'S VERY VAGUE.
PEOPLE, WE DON'T KNOW IF IT'S JUST A STORY OR THERE'S NO DOCUMENT.
WE'VE NOT OFFICIALLY SAID THAT WE NEED TO HAVE THESE DOCUMENTS TO PROVE THE ECONOMIC HARDSHIP.
SO IS THAT SOMETHING WE CAN DECIDE SAYING THAT I DON'T KNOW WHAT WE, WE CAN EVEN ASK OF TO, FOR US TO ASCERTAIN IF, IF THERE'S ACTUALLY AN ECONOMIC HARDSHIP OR IF IT'S AUTHENTIC OR NOT.
SO LEGALLY I DON'T KNOW WHAT WE CAN ASK FOR ALSO.
SO IS THAT SOMETHING WE CAN DISCUSS LATER? MAY I, THERE ARE MORE HOUSES SOUTH OF BELFORT THAT ARE RENT HOUSES AS THIS HOUSE WAS.
THEY MOVED OUT, THEY RENTED IT OUT.
AND DURING THE TIME THAT THEY WERE GONE, OBVIOUSLY THEY DIDN'T CHECK THE PROPERTY.
SO THEN WHEN THEY TAKE IT BACK, THE, THE PROPERTIES DETERIORATED.
AND WE HAD, WE WERE HAVING SEVERAL OF THE HOUSE IS SOUTH OF BELFORT THAT THE ROUTINE MAINTENANCE HAS JUST OVERWHELMED THE OWNERS.
AND SO WE'RE HAVING COMING THROUGH WHAT WE SEE ON, EXCUSE ME, DCR, WHERE THEY'RE SELLING TO THESE, UH, ALL THESE DIFFERENT FLIPPER GROUPS.
AND SO THEN THEY COME IN AND THEY'RE DOING ALL OF THIS STUFF WITH NO PERMITS, NO NOTHING.
AND, UH, IT'S, IT'S A HUGE PROBLEM.
WELL, I'D, I'D LIKE TO SEE US, AND THIS ISN'T GONNA ANSWER THE QUESTION PRESENTED TO US IN THIS APPLICATION, BUT I'D LIKE TO SEE US BE MORE PROACTIVE IN EDUCATING.
I DON'T, ROMAN YOU PROBABLY HAVE THE DATE THAT GLENBROOK VALLEY WAS DECLARED, WAS DESIGNATED A HISTORIC DISTRICT.
I DON'T KNOW IF THAT FALLS WITHIN THAT.
IT WAS 10 YEARS AGO, JUNE 10TH, 2011.
SO IF THESE PROPERTY OWNERS WERE THERE 15 YEARS AGO, THEY HAD NOTIFICATION AND LIKELY VOTED ON THAT ONE WAY OR ANOTHER.
UM, THAT WAS STILL A LONG TIME AGO.
AND IF THERE IS A, A SMALL AMOUNT OF EFFORT THAT THIS OFFICE, UM, THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT COULD PUT OUT TO NOTIFY TODAY IN 2022, YOU ARE A MEMBER OF A HISTORIC DISTRICT.
YOU ARE REQUIRED TO, UM, TO HAVE APPROVAL BEFORE YOUR WINDOWS.
WE'VE, WE'VE GOTTA BE, I THINK, A LITTLE MORE PROACTIVE, ENCOUNTERING THESE WINDOW SALESMEN THAT ARE GOING DOOR TO DOOR AND IN MY OPINION, PREYING ON MANY OF THESE SENIORS AND AND RENTAL PROPERTIES, UM, DOWN THERE.
UM, AGAIN, IT DOESN'T ANSWER TODAY, BUT I'M HAPPY TO BE PART OF THAT PROCESS AND TO WORK WITH ROMAN AND STAFF AND SEE IF WE CAN'T DRAFT A, A MAIL PIECE, YOU KNOW, THAT THAT CAN GO OUT, THAT THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD CAN SHARE THAT, YOU KNOW, SOCIAL MEDIA COULD BE SHARED VIA SOCIAL MEDIA AND ATTEMPT TO EDUCATE PROPERTY OWNERS.
SO WE'RE NOT SEEING THIS OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN.
I MEAN, IT MAY HELP, BUT I MEAN, I DO, I BELIEVE THERE'S A MONTHLY MAIL OUT EVERY MONTH IN ENGLISH AND SPANISH, WHICH SAYS THIS, ALL THESE 11 YEARS HAS, THIS OCCURS EVERY MONTH AND GOES OUT TO EVERY HOMEOWNER, YOU KNOW, IN THIS, IN THIS DISTRICT.
BUT SEE, WE CAN'T, IT'S THERE FOR 'EM.
AND IF THEY CHOOSE TO READ IT, THEY READ IT IF THEY GET EDUCATED.
BUT JUST WHEN YOU SEND SOMETHING, YOU KNOW, THIS IS LIKE WE HAD, WE HAD, UH, WHEN STEVE DID OUR THING, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE SOMETHING AND YOU'RE LETTING 'EM KNOW WE'RE DOING THIS TO HELP YOU, BUT YOU CAN'T GO TO THE HOUSE AND PUT 'EM ON THE BUS TO GET 'EM THERE.
WELL, THEN, THEN NOT MAYBE KNOWING THAT THAT THAT IMPACTS SOME OF OUR THINKING OR ACTIONS IN THE FUTURE.
IF NOTIFICATION IS THAT PREVALENT, IF ON A MONTHLY BASIS EVERY HOMEOWNER, EVERY PROPERTY IS RECEIVING SOMETHING THAT SAYS YOU'RE IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT, THEN I PERSONALLY I THINK THAT WILL CHANGE MY, UM, COMMISSIONER COLLIN, THANK, WEREN'T YOU DIRECTLY INVOLVED IN THE PROCESS OF MAKING THE CURRENT HISTORIC DISTRICT IN GLENBROOK VALLEY? I'M SORRY? WEREN'T YOU DIRECTLY INVOLVED IN THE PROCESS OF CREATING THE HISTORIC DISTRICT? YES.
FROM WALKING THE STREETS THERE? I DOUBT THAT YOU KNOCKED ON EVERY DOOR IN GLENBROOK
[00:50:01]
COUNTY.YES, EVERY DOOR WAS KNOCKED ON.
BUT I THINK HE'LL TESTIFY THAT EVERY DOOR WAS KNOCKED ON.
THAT EVERY ATTEMPT WAS MADE TO REACH EVERY OWNER, WHETHER IT WAS A RENTAL PROPERTY.
IN WHICH CASE YOU HAVE TO GO FIND THE OWNER THAT THAT'S CORRECT.
WHO DOESN'T LIVE IN THE HOUSE.
BUT, BUT IS IT POSSIBLE, I MEAN, WITH RARE EXCEPTION, IT, IT'S REALLY NOT PLAUSIBLE THAT ANYBODY AT THAT TIME WOULDN'T HAVE KNOWN THAT THEY WERE IN WHAT WAS BECOMING IMPORTANT.
NOT, NOT ONLY AND WHAT BECAME A HISTORIC DISTRICT.
UH, WE DID EVERYTHING WE POSSIBLY COULD AND IT WAS IN AVAILABLE IN ENGLISH AND IN SPANISH.
UM, I, I'LL FEEL THAT THE, UM, THE ACTIONS OR THE CURRENT ACTIONS THAT HAVE BEEN TAKEN FOR THE PAST TWO YEARS OVER BY THE HAHC IS, UH, IN SOME WAYS NOT DOVETAIL WITH THE, UH, HPAB.
BECAUSE IF YOU LOOK AT SOME OF THE ITEMS THAT WE HAVE PUT ON COR AND THEY GO TO COR, AND I WOULD SAY THREE PLUS 180% OF IT, IT'S OVERTURNED IN SOME WAYS.
AND IN, IN THIS CASE, WE CAN DEBATE ALL WE WANT HERE ABOUT WHAT WE PUT ON THE RECOMMENDATIONS.
AND IF THE APPLICANTS, AND MOST OF THEM THAT ARE PUT ON COR ARE NOT, THEY HAVE AN AVENUE OF APPEAL AND WHEN THEY GO TO APPEAL, THEY STILL GET VICTOR SUCCESS.
I WOULDN'T CALL IT A VICTORY ACTUALLY.
SO UNLESS WE RECONCILE THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THIS GROUP AND THE HPAB, WHAT CRITERIA THAT WE ACTUALLY BASE OUR DECISION PROCESSES ON, UH, WE ARE ALWAYS GOING TO, UH, BE IN A, AT A DISCONNECT.
AND THE SECOND THING THAT I WANT TO BRING UP IS THAT, UH, THE WINDOWS ISSUE, ESPECIALLY IN GLENBROOK VALLEY, BECAUSE OF THE LACK OF, OF CURRENT DAY MATERIALS TO GO INTO THE, THE REPLACEMENT, I THINK IT'S A MUCH LARGER CONVERSATION THAN JUST A NUMBER.
IT'S GOTTA BE EITHER A DOWN AT THE BOTTOM WHERE WE DISCUSS AS PART OF THE AGENDA OF COMMENTS FROM THE HAHC OR WE ACTUALLY HAVE TO HAVE A SESSION, I THINK WITHIN THE HAHC AND THE HPAB TOGETHER TO COME AND DISCUSS HOW WE TREAT WINDOWS IN THE GLENBROOK VALLEY SITUATION VERSUS LET'S SAY, HEIGHT SITUATION WHEREBY WE ALL HAVE WOOD WINDOWS, UH, SINGLE PANE, ALBEIT, BUT WE CAN EASILY REPLACE THEM WITH, YOU KNOW, MODERN DAY GEL WHEN WOOD WINDOWS, WHICH WE DON'T SEE 'EM HAVE AN OPTION HERE READILY AVAILABLE.
I MEAN, I THINK WE'VE, I THINK THERE'S PROOF THAT REPLACEMENT ALUMINUM WINDOWS ARE READILY AVAILABLE, PERHAPS NOT TO THE SAME DEGREE AS OTHER WINDOW TYPES, BUT TO DEFAULT TO VINYL WINDOWS BECAUSE ALUMINUM ISN'T AS PROLIFIC A, UH, PRODUCT AS IT WAS ORIGINALLY IS, IS I THINK IT'S, I DON'T THINK THAT'S TRUE.
WELL, I CAN STAND CORRECTED, BUT THIS IS NOT THE FORUM TO DEBATE ABOUT IT HERE RIGHT NOW UNDER ITEM NUMBER SIX.
AND WE CAN TALK MAYBE LATER IN PUBLIC COMMENT ABOUT APPEALS MORE, UM, AT ANGLE.
I THINK THAT'S AN IMPORTANT CONVERSATION TO, TO HAVE.
I THINK AT THIS TIME WE, WE, WE NEED TO MOVE ON.
I MEAN, I THINK THESE STAFF HAS MADE IT CLEAR THEY WOULD NOT APPROVE THIS AS A C OF A, SO THIS IS THEIR, THEY'RE SUGGESTING APPROVAL AS A C OF R.
THERE HAVE BEEN TWO REMEDIES SUGGESTED FOR THE COMMISSION TO CONSIDER, YOU KNOW, SO IT'S KIND OF, IT'S REALLY UP TO THIS COMMISSION.
UM, I WOULD SAY WE ARE BETTER OFF TRYING TO MAKE SOME SORT OF A COMPROMISE THAN BEING STUBBORN ABOUT IT, BECAUSE LIKE DOMINIC YAP JUST SAID, THEY'LL GO AND APPEAL IT AND THEY OVERTURN EVERY SINGLE TIME.
IT'LL BE EXACTLY THE WAY IT IS NOW.
SO THERE'S, IF, IF, IF SHE'S THE HOMEOWNERS AGREED TO DO PAINT OR SOMETHING, SHE MIGHT DO IT.
WE HAVE A BETTER CHANCE OF GETTING AT LEAST THAT.
AND THEN THEY KNOW THAT THEY SHOULD HAVE DONE SOMETHING DIFFERENT AND IT'S A LITTLE BIT BETTER.
IS THAT A MOTION? I I CAN'T GET ON BOARD WITH THE PAINT.
I CAN GET ON BOARD WITH THE THREE.
I REALLY LIKE YOUR IDEA COMMISSIONER COUCH OR YOUR SUGGESTION OF REPLACING THE FRONT FACADE.
BUT, BUT THEY'RE GONNA OVERTURN IT.
SHE'S GONNA GO TO THE APPEALS BOARD AND THEY'RE GONNA OVER, THEY OVERTURN ALL OF THEM.
WE JUST SAW THAT THEY OVERTURN EVERY SINGLE TIME AND THEN SHE'LL DO NOTHING.
MS. RICO, WOULD YOU BE AMENABLE TO REPLACING THE FRONT THREE WINDOWS? SHE DIDN'T WANT TO.
SHE DIDN'T, SHE DIDN'T WANT TO.
I BE ASKED, SHE WAS SAYING, WHAT AM I GONNA DO WITH THE EXTRA WINDOWS AND ALL THIS? SHE DOESN'T WANT TO DO IT.
[00:55:01]
SO, UM, WOULD YOU BE OKAY TO PAINT IT WITH A METALLIC PAINT AS COMMISSIONER K SUGGESTED? I MEAN, THEORETICALLY I THINK THAT'S A, A CRUMMY ALTERNATIVE, BUT I THINK REALISTICALLY THAT'S PROBABLY WHAT OUR BEST CHANCES FOR GETTING SOMETHING DONE, SHE STILL NOT MAINTAINED.ARE THEY MADE TO BE PAINTED? IF YOU PUT PRIMER ON THEM AND SAND THEM A LITTLE BIT, YOU CAN PAINT 'EM.
I PAINT VINYL WINDOWS ALL THE TIME.
UH, IT'S A DIFFERENT CONVERSATION.
UM, I MEAN, I I WOULD, I'M NOT VOTING ON THIS UNLESS THERE'S A TIE, BUT YOU KNOW, I THINK I'LL JUST SAY I, I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD CHANGE OUR DECISION MAKING BECAUSE OF WHAT THE APPEAL BOARDS AND APPEALS BOARD MAY DO OR NOT DO.
I MEAN, I, I'LL SAY THIS, UM, I REMEMBER WHEN THE PLANNING COMMISSION WAS IN EFFECT OVERTURNING, YOU KNOW, ALL OF OUR DECISIONS.
UM, SO, UM, AND, AND THERE COULD BE AGAIN, AND, AND I'M NOT SURE THE REASONING FOR OVERTURNING THE ONES THAT THE APPEAL SUPPORT HAS DONE, BUT I KNOW THE DECISIONS MADE BY THIS COMMISSION WERE BASED ON THE ORDINANCE AND BASED ON HOW WE HAVE UNDERSTOOD THE ORDINANCE AND FOLLOWED IT.
SO IT MAY BE GOOD TO HAVE SOME KIND OF EDUCATION SESSION AS WE HAVE IN THE PAST WITH THE PLANNING, BOTH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, UH, FOLKS, UH, WHICH WE HAD DONE IN THE PAST WHEN THEY, WHEN THEY WERE IN CHARGE OF OUR APPEALS.
AND THAT DID LEAD TO, UH, UNDERSTANDING WHAT ISSUES THEY WERE DISCUSSING SO THAT WE WERE AWARE AND THEY WERE AWARE OF WHAT WE WERE, UH, DOING.
AND THAT I THINK FOR A LONG TIME HELPED.
AND THEY WERE, THERE WERE LESS THINGS BEING OVERTURNED SO THAT, THAT MAY BE DUE.
THAT, THAT, THAT'S NOT GONNA SOLVE THIS ISSUE FOR THIS APPLICANT TODAY.
BUT, UM, THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING.
UNTIL WE HAVE THAT CONVERSATION OR MEETING OR SERIES OF MEETINGS, I THINK IT WOULD BE BEST TO AVOID PUSHING THE APPLICANTS TO APPEAL BECAUSE WE WILL BE OVERTURNED DESPITE ALL OF OUR GOOD INTENTIONS.
WELL, I LIKE TO, UH, MR. CHAIR, CAN I CALL FOR A, A VOTE IN THE SENSE THAT WE HAVE A RE WE HAVE A STANDING RECOMMENDATION BY THE STAFF.
UH, I THINK MAYBE IT'S TIME TO, UH, VOTE UP AND DOWN TO, UH, AND THEN ONCE WE FINISH THAT VOTE, SOMEBODY ELSE CAN COME UP WITH A RECOMMENDATION THAT IS DIFFERENT.
NOW, WE MAY ALSO NOT AGREE WITH EVERYBODY AGREE ON THE RECOMMENDATION, BUT THEN THAT'S A SECOND VOTE.
YEAH, SO CAN SOMEONE, SO IS THAT A MOTION FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION COMMISSIONER COMM? YEAH.
UH, WE HAVE, SO MY RECOMMENDATION IS RIGHT NOW TO ACCEPT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.
MOTION TO ACCEPT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.
AND IS THERE A SECOND? UH, COMMISSIONER STAFF WHAT MASS THAT IT BE REPEATED EXACTLY WHAT IT IS.
UH, THE RECOMMENDATION IS WHAT IS THE RECOMMENDATION? OH, OKAY.
MY UNDERSTANDING IS THE MOTION IS, I'M SORRY TO DENY THE COA AND ISSUE A COR.
SO BASICALLY DON'T DO ANYTHING.
SO THE C OF R IS TO ACCEPT HIM AS IT IS.
THAT'S WHAT ROMAN'S WHOLE PRESENTATION WAS.
AND THE SECOND, I THINK, UM, DID I HEAR A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER STA? YES.
SO, UM, ALL IN FAVOR OF THIS MOTION AS AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF, PLEASE SAY AYE.
RIGHT, BECAUSE I, I
I'M NOT SURE YOU'RE ON THE RECORD THOUGH, BUT, UH, YEAH, I DIDN'T SAY ANYTHING
I, I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION.
BEFORE WE GET TO ANOTHER RECOMMENDATION, THEN WE HAVE TO, WE HAVE TO CONCLUDE THIS ONE.
YEAH, SO I, SO OKAY, WE CAN MAKE ANOTHER MOTION.
WE DON'T, WE WE CAN, BUT FIRST WE'RE GONNA, WE'RE GONNA GO THROUGH THIS ONE.
SO IS THERE ANYONE ELSE IN FAVOR OF, OF STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION? AND PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME SO WE CAN MAKE SURE WE HAVE THE COUNT RIGHT? YEP.
AYE, MR. STAAVA VOTES FOR THE, UM, PROPOSAL OR THE, UM, UH, THE MOTION.
IS THERE ANYONE OPPOSED? UH, TO THE, TO THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION? AYE.
SO IS THERE ANOTHER MOTION THAT COULD BE BROUGHT? SORRY, FOR THE RECORD.
I'M SORRY THAT THAT MOTION FAILED.
IS THERE ANOTHER MOTION ON THIS ITEM?
[01:00:01]
I, I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE, UM, ASK THE HOMEOWNER TO REPLACE THE, THE FRONT FACING, THE FRONT FACADE WINDOWS WITH AN ALUMINUM MILL FINISH THAT'S MORE IN KEEPING WITH THE WINDOWS THAT WERE REMOVED.IS THERE A SECOND? CURRY SECONDS.
IF YOU'RE, IF YOU'RE VIRTUALLY, CAN YOU STATE YOUR NAME IF APPROVE? THREE WASON APPROVES.
IS THERE, UM, ALL THOSE OPPOSED, OPPOSES.
COMMISSIONER JONES OPPOSES, MAN, THIS IS WORSE THAN SOCCER MATCH
SO DOES THAT PASS PASSES THEN? I WAS GONNA ASK FOR A ROLL CALL ON THESE BECAUSE THIS IS WITH, WITH COMMISSIONERS VIRTUAL AND IN ATTENDANCE HERE.
I THINK THAT WILL KEEP THE RECORD CLEANER.
AND WE'RE GOING THROUGH A LOT OF MOTIONS.
I UNDERSTAND, AND I KNOW THIS IS WINDOWS, BUT THIS IS AN IMPORTANT PRECEDENT SETTING, UH, DECISION.
UH, SO I'LL, I'LL CALL THE, UM, I'LL CALL THE ROLE, UM, COMMISSIONER ASHLEY JONES.
OPPOSED? COMMISSIONER WANSON BAR? AYE.
Y YOU'RE FOR YES, UH, I'M FOR THE MOTION.
COMMISSIONER STAAVA, UH, FOUR.
AND COMMISSIONER COUCH? I, THERE'S NO WIN SITUATION HERE.
I, I WOULD RATHER VOTE SO THE MOTION PASSES AS ACCEPTABLE.
AND IF IT GETS OVERTURNED, THAT'S NOT, I MEAN, AND WE WILL WAIT TO HEAR FROM THE APPEALS BOARDS.
SO TO BE CLEAR, THE VOTE WAS TO APPROVE THE MOTION AND I AM TRYING TO GET THE MOTION AND THE VOTE ON THE RECORD.
THE MOTION WAS TO APPROVE WITH REPLACING THE THREE WINDOWS ON THAT FACED THE STREET WITH ALUMINUM AND IT WAS BY WHAT NUMBER? THAT'S ALL I'M TRYING TO GET.
I HEARD SIX AFFIRMATIVE AND TWO OPPOSED BEING YAP AND J UH, JACKSON, AUER JACKSON.
ALSO THAT, THAT'S WHY I'M TRYING TO MAKE CLEAR JONES OPPOSED? JONES.
OKAY, TO THE NEXT AGENDA ITEM STAFF.
WHICH ONE? OKAY, UH, CHAIR AND COMMISSIONERS.
I'M TRYING TO GET UP ON MY SCREEN AND MAYBE I NEED, THERE IT IS.
ITEM SEVEN IS 1204 STUDER WOODS STREET.
AND AT THIS ADDRESS IS A TWELVE HUNDRED AND FIFTY SIX ONE STORY WOOD FRAME, DUPLEX.
AND IT, AND WAIT, LET ME LOOK AT THE PICTURE.
MAKE SURE I GOT THE RIGHT HOUSE.
THERE'S NOT PRESENTLY A GARAGE SITUATED ON THAT PROPERTY.
UH, THIS IS AN ALTERATION AT A TWO STORY REAR ADDITION.
A LITTLE WORK HAS BEEN COMPLETED ON THIS PROJECT WITHOUT A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS, AND THAT IS THAT THEY'VE RAISED THE CEILING PLATE OF THE FIRST FLOOR BY APPROXIMATELY ONE FOOT.
[01:05:01]
SO, BUT THE REST OF THE PROJECT IS A NEW SINGLE VEHICLE VEHICLE DETACHED GARAGE, UH, ORIGINAL SIDING WINDOWS TO BE RETAINED.THE RIDGE HEIGHT OF THE PROPOSED REAR ADDITION IS 24 FEET AND SIX INCHES.
THE NEW WINDOWS WOULD BE INSTALLED, UH, IN SET AND RECESSED ON THAT ADDITION.
THE SIDING OF THE ADDITION TO BE CLAD IN 1 1 7 WOOD MATCHING SIDING AND ONE ORIGINAL FRONT DOOR OPENING IS TO BE CHANGED TO A WINDOW.
SO IF YOU, UH, CAN GO FORWARD PLEASE IN THE OFFICE ON THE SLIDES TO, UM, THE NEXT SLIDE.
WE'VE GOT AN INVENTORY PHOTO HERE.
HERE'S AN, HERE'S AN INVENTORY PHOTO OF THAT DUPLEX, WHICH IS ORIGINALLY BUILT AND CONSTRUCTED AS A DUPLEX.
UH, AND SO IN THE PROPOSED DRAWING SET, WHICH YOU HAVE IN YOUR PACKET, AND I DIDN'T DO THE HIGHLIGHTING, I'VE, I'VE BEEN ON PATERNITY LEAVE AND TRYING TO KEEP THINGS GOING THOUGH.
LET ME ASK THE INSIDE OFFICE TO GO FORWARD ABOUT THREE PAGES.
IT, ONE, THERE'S EXISTING AND ONE MORE FORWARD PLEASE.
ON OUR LE LEFT HAND UPPER CORNER, WE SEE THE NEW PROPOSED FRONT ELEVATION.
SO THEY WILL RETAIN THE TWO PORCH PORCH ROOFS THAT COME OUT THE PORTICO EXTENDING.
THEY WILL RETAIN, UH, THE ORIGINAL BRICK, UM, UH, PLINTS THAT ARE THERE NEXT TO THE STAIRS.
UH, BUT IN THAT, ON THE RIGHT SIDE, THAT DOOR WOULD BECOME A WINDOW.
OTHERWISE, IT'S A TWO STORY REAR EDITION, UH, OFFICER TO THE REAR.
UH, CLEARLY DEFINING THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE ROOF FROM THE, FROM THE SECOND FLOOR.
AND STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL HERE.
COMMISSION MEMBERS, ARE THERE QUESTIONS FOR STAFF NOT HEARING ANY QUESTIONS? IS, ARE THERE ANY, UM, SPEAKERS SIGN UP FOR THIS ITEM TO SPEAK? THERE ARE, I BELIEVE SOME, THERE'S SOMEONE'S IN THE CHAT IF YOU'RE ONLINE.
AND IS THIS APPROPRIATE TIME CHAIR FOR THEM TO SPEAK OR? YES.
I DON'T HAVE ANYONE SIGNED UP HERE.
IF YOU HAVE, YOU HAVEN'T SIGNED UP, BUT IF YOU'RE ONLINE, YOU'RE HERE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM, NOW'S YOUR TIME TO DO SO.
AND YOU WOULD DO STAR SIX IF YOU'RE ON A PHONE OR HIT THE MIC ON YOUR COMPUTER PLEASE.
MR. CHAIR WAS ASLEEP FOR A MOMENT THERE.
I DID NOTE THAT THERE MAY BE A RICHARD GRIFFIN FOLLOWED BY ZAFAR, AND I'LL SPELL THEIR NAMES WHEN THEY SPEAK.
SO FIRST WOULD BE RICHARD GRIFFIN IF AVAILABLE.
MR. GRIFFIN, ARE YOU THERE? AND, AND ABLE TO SPEAK? I'M SORRY THAT HE'S NOT ON THIS ITEM.
THEN WE HAVE SADDI ZAFAR, S-A-D-I-Q-G-H-A-Z-A-N-F-A-R.
THE APPLICANT? YES, I'M AVAILABLE.
UM, I JUST, NOBODY OPPOSED OF ANYTHING YET, SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO SAY.
OH, THIS IS COMMISSIONER SWEENEY WATSON.
WHAT'S YOUR, UH, I GUESS, UH, DO YOU HAVE ANY STATEMENTS I MAKE OR DO YOU JUST WANNA ANSWER QUESTIONS THAT WE MAY HAVE? NO QUESTIONS.
I GUESS, UH, COMMISSIONER, COMMISSIONER SW, AUSTIN, DO YOU HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT? HAVE QUESTION? YES.
SO OUR, UH, SO YOU REPLACING ONE OF THE ORIGINAL DOORS WITH A WINDOW? THAT'S CORRECT.
SO ARE YOU GOING TO BE RE I MEAN, IS THE WIDTH OF THAT DOOR GOING TO CHANGE OR ARE YOU PUTTING THE WINDOW WITHIN THE EXISTING OPENING? BECAUSE THE DRAWINGS LOOK AS IF IT SEEMS ALREADY? YEAH, IT WILL, IT WILL GO, IT WILL GO WITH THE EXISTING OPENING OF WHERE THE DOOR IS AND IT WILL BE REPLACED WITH THE ACTUAL SIDING OF 1 1 7 7.
SO HAVE YOU, I MEAN, IT'S, IT'S KIND OF A VERY SYMMETRIC, UH, FRONT ELEVATION.
HAVE YOU CONSIDERED KEEPING THE ENTIRE TRIM OF THE DOOR AND JUST KIND OF PUTTING THE WINDOW AND PROCESSING THE PART BELOW THE IL TO KIND OF, UH, SHOW THAT THERE WAS A DOOR THERE BEFORE? HAVE YOU CONSIDERED THAT OPTION? WE, WE DID.
UM, IT'S JUST THE SOMETHING, SORRY, GO AHEAD.
YEAH, SO IT IS JUST THE SECOND DOOR, UH, SINCE IT'S NOT A DUPLEX ANYMORE, THE SECOND DOOR JUST DIDN'T MAKE SENSE.
WE, AND, UH, SO WE DECIDED, DECIDED THAT A WINDOW WILL BE MORE APPROPRIATE.
[01:10:01]
NO, I, I TOTALLY, I MEAN, IF, I MEAN, CHANGING AN ORIGINAL DOOR IS ONE QUESTION, BUT YEAH, THE DOOR HAS IN THE PAST.SO, OKAY, SO YEAH, YOU, IT'S NOT THE ORIGINAL DOOR.
YEAH, IT IS NOT THE ORIGINAL DOOR.
I WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION THIS WAS THE ORIGINAL DOOR.
THE LOCATION IS, UH, IS OF THE ORIGINAL DOOR, BUT IT IS NOT THE ORIGINAL DOOR.
THE THE OPENING IS ORIGINAL IT, YES.
BUT IS THE TRIM AROUND THE DOOR ALL ORIGINAL IS BECAUSE THAT'S GONNA GO RIGHT WITH THE WINDOW? YES, BUT, BUT IT IS NOT ORIGINAL.
I JUST WANTED, UH, I THOUGHT, YEAH, I JUST WANTED THAT CLARIFICATION.
HAVE THEY STARTED THE WORK ALREADY? I I DON'T UNDERSTAND EXACTLY WHAT'S GOING ON.
UH, THE RECOMMENDATION THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT SAYS DENIAL DOES NOT SATISFY CRITERIA OF A COR.
AND THAT IS THERE BECAUSE OF WHAT COMMISSIONER COUCH JUST SAID THEY DID BEGIN THAT WORK.
I WOULD'VE, WE WOULD'VE RECOMMENDED APPROVAL FOR THIS PROJECT.
BUT LIKE ANYONE ELSE WHO'S DONE BEGUN WORK WITHOUT AUTHORITY, WE DON'T WANT TO ISSUE A PROPER C OF A, WE'RE ASKING FOR A C OF R AND, AND FOR WHAT THEY HAVE APPLIED FOR.
SO THEY'RE NOT, UH, OH, HAVE THEY ALREADY RAISED HALF OFF THE THEY'VE ALREADY RAISED THE ROOF.
THEY HAVE ACTUALLY, THEY TOOK ALL THE ROOF AND REPLACED IT.
NO, I DON'T KNOW HOW THE CARPENTERS DID IT, BUT THEY ACTUALLY PICKED UP THE WHOLE FRAMING SYSTEM AND BLOCKED IT, UH, BLOCKED BETWEEN THE TOP OF THE, UH, CEILING PLATE, UH, WITH, WITH WALL PLATE TENANT'S WITHOUT A PERMIT.
I, I, I, THEY'RE ON HERE THAT, THAT, I DON'T KNOW IF THIS BUILDING WAS RED TAGGED OR HOW WE GOT BROUGHT TO US, BUT WE CAN VISUALLY SEE, IF YOU GO TO YOUR GOOGLE STREET VIEW TODAY, YOU'LL SEE THE ELEVATED ROOF.
BUT THERE'S AN IMAGE I THINK, IN THAT, IN THE APPLICATION.
THAT'S, I THINK, AND IF, I DON'T KNOW IF I, IF WE'VE DROPPED THAT ONE IN THERE, BUT IT, AND WHERE YOU NORMALLY SEE A WRAPAROUND, UH, BOARD, A HORIZONTAL MEMBER THERE, THAT'S WHERE THEY HAVE IN, IN THAT SPACE.
AND THAT'S WHY IN THE PROPOSAL YOU SEE THAT THERE'S A, A ONE BY BOARD PROPOSED TO GO AROUND.
SO WE DON'T KNOW NOW IF IT'S CURRENTLY RED TAGGED OR NOT.
NO, I DON'T, I IT'S, IT'S GOT A RED TAG ON IT.
SO THAT, THAT'S WHERE THEY'RE, SO THAT IS THE COMMISSIONER.
WE, OUR JACKSON, THE REASON FOR OUR DENIAL OF THE C OF A AND ISSUANCE OF THE C OF R, UH, IS FOR THAT REASON.
I ALSO WANNA POINT OUT, JUST, I FAILED TO STATE THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION NOR HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION DOES SUPPORT THIS APPLICATION.
THEY'VE ALSO CHANGED OUT THE DOORS.
THE FRONT, NO, THOSE DOORS WERE NOT ORIGINAL AT, AT ACQUISITION OF THE PROPERTY CAN, BUT THE, BUT THE DOORS OF THE, THE FACADE OF THE BUILDING IS AS IT WAS BUILT WITH THE TWO DOORS, IT WAS A DUPLEX, IT HAD THE TWO PORCHES REGARDLESS OF THE PHYSICAL DOOR THAT OPENS.
SO MY FURTHER QUESTION IS, UH, HAS THE OPENING OF THE DOOR BEEN CLOSED IN ALREADY FOR A WINDOW RIGHT NOW? NO.
TODAY, I BELIEVE THERE'S TWO, UH, METAL CLAD PRE, PRE-HUNG, UH, UH, DOORS WITH A, A FAN LIGHT AND OA HALF CIRCLE FAN LIGHT ON EACH, ON EACH DOOR TODAY.
SO THE TWO, THE TWO DOOR OPENING STILL EXISTS YES.
WITH THE, WITH THE LITTLE, UH, GABLE ROOF.
SO WHAT IS THIS PROPOSAL THAT IS AT THE END TO SAY, CLOSING ONE OF THE, ONE OF THE, SO ONE OF THE DOOR OPENINGS, WHICH WOULD BE THE DOOR ON THE RIGHT IF YOU'RE FACING THE HOUSE, IS PROPOSED TO BE PARTIALLY CLOSED IN, IN A ONE OVER ONE WINDOW INSTALLED IN ITS PLACE.
I DON'T THINK WE WOULD EVER ALLOW THAT TO HAPPEN.
THERE'S BEEN LOTS OF PROJECTS WHERE THEY TRIED TO CHANGE THE DOOR OPENING.
WE SAID NO, THERE HAVE BEEN OTHERS THAT WE HAVE APPROVED THOUGH COMMISSIONER CASH IN THE, IN THE HEIGHTS OF GON WOULD WE KIND OF GO THE CONSERVATIVE ROUTE THERE SPECIFICALLY STATES THAT ON A DUPLEX THAT'S BEING CONVERTED TO A SINGLE FAMILY, ONE DOOR CAN BE SWAPPED OUT FOR A WINDOW.
AND WE'VE DONE A LITTLE BIT OF BOTH WAYS ON THAT.
CAN IT BE THE SAME SIZE AS THE DOOR? WE DON'T.
I MEAN, AT LEAST THAT WOULD DEMONSTRATE THAT, THAT IT WAS A DOOR AT FIRST.
I'M STILL MESSED UP ABOUT THIS ROOF LINE.
WE, WE, WE MIGHT HAVE NEED ANOTHER SESSION ON THOSE, ON THE, THE, THE WINDOW, THE DUAL WINDOW, THE DUAL OPENING.
BUT AT, BUT THE STAFF LOOKED AT THIS IS WHAT'S THE ADVERSE, IS THERE AN ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE HISTORICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE LOCAL HISTORIC DISTRICT OR OF THAT PARTICULAR HOUSE AND, AND THAT YOU HAVE TO WEIGH WHETHER THAT REMOVAL OF A DOOR AND REPLACEMENT WITH A WINDOW WHERE, YOU KNOW, WHAT IS THE IMPACT? I HEARD SOMEONE MENTION, YOU KNOW, YOU COULD FILL IN THE SPOT BELOW THE WINDOW WITH SORT OF A GHOSTING OF THAT ORIGINAL OPENING IF YOU ALREADY DON'T HAVE THE ORIGINAL MATERIAL.
SO IT'S JUST A QUESTION OF WHAT'S IN THAT SPACE.
YEAH, BUT IT'S AN CUL IT'S A ARCHITECTURAL AESTHETIC TO ME.
I MEAN, YOU HAVE TWO GTS AND THEN YOU HAVE ONE WITH A DOOR AND ONE WITH A WINDOW.
TO ME, THE HOUSE WAS NOT BUILT THAT WAY.
[01:15:02]
RIGHT.BUT I THINK THE ISSUE OF THE, I MEAN THE, THE, IN THIS CASE, THERE ARE DESIGN GUIDELINES WHICH ADDRESS THIS ISSUE.
SO THAT, THAT'S IN WRITING, I THINK.
AND SO, UM, I THINK THAT'S WHERE THAT'S ALLOWED BASED ON THE DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR THE DISTRICT.
UM, IF IT'S A DUPLEX CONVERTED TO SINGLE FAMILY, BUT THAT NOR HILL HAS IT.
I'M SORRY, THAT IS, WAIT, NO HILL CLARITY THERE.
I WAS REFERRING TO THE HIGHEST DESIGN GUIDELINES, BUT THIS ISN'T NOR HILL STORAGE.
I MEAN, FOR WHAT IT'S WORTH TO ME, THE, THE, UM, THE DOOR TO WINDOW CONVERSION IS MUCH LESS OFFENSIVE THAN RAISING THE ROOF.
AND WE'RE GOING TO JUST RUBBER STAMP THAT IS THE RECOMMENDATION.
BUT I THINK THERE'S AN IMAGE OF THE, THERE'S AN IMAGE OF THAT EXISTS, OF THAT.
I'M NOT SURE WE CAN PULL THAT UP.
YEAH, I DON'T SEE THAT IN THE PACKET.
DO YOU? THIS IS HARD TO SEE 'CAUSE THE PAGES COME SO BIG.
IF, IF ROMAN, WE DON'T, I DON'T HAVE IN, IN MY PACKAGE A PICTURE OF THE, A CURRENT PHOTO.
HE SAID IF YOU GO TO STREET VIEW, IT SHOWS UP THE WAY IT LOOKS.
I THINK ROMAN WILL BRING IT UP ON HIS COMPUTER, BUT OKAY.
NOW WE DO, WE KNOW STRUCTURALLY IF WHAT THEY DID IS SAFE HURRICANE, WILL IT BLOW AWAY IF THEY'VE SAW THE, THE TOP PLATE OFF? YEAH, I PLEASE, LEGAL, CAN WE SEPARATE THE BUILDING QUESTION FROM THE HISTORIC QUESTION? SURE.
THEY'RE GONNA HAVE TO COMPLY WITH BUILDING CODE REQUIREMENTS AND GET THAT PERMIT.
THEY'RE GONNA HAVE TO PAY A TRIPLE FEE, UM, FOR NOT DOING SO AGAIN.
SO I, I THINK THAT THAT QUESTION IT, WHILE IT MAY HAVE BEEN, I MEAN, YES, WE DON'T WANT THE ROOF TO BLOW OFF, OBVIOUSLY, AND NEITHER DO WE HERE, BUT, BUT THAT'S A SEPARATE DEPARTMENT, I THINK, FOR CONSIDERATION.
SO BRO, WE, YOU HAD A PICTURE OF THE SIDE VIEW JUST A MOMENT AGO, BUT THERE'S A SCREEN ON TOP.
SO IN THIS IMAGE, YOU CAN SEE THAT AREA RIGHT ABOVE THE WINDOWS WHERE THE SIDING IS NOT IN EXISTENCE.
THAT'S THE AREA THAT WHERE IT WAS RAISED.
IT'S LIKE A PONY WALL ON TOP OF THE PLATE.
AND MY UNDERSTANDING FROM THE APPLICATION IS THAT THEY'RE, THEY'RE PROPOSING TO PUT, UH, A ONE BY BOARD THAT WOULD, UM, WOULD, WOULD CLOSE IN THAT GAP BETWEEN THE SIDING AND THE, THE BOTTOM OF THE OVERHANG, THE, OF THE EAVE.
I ALSO WANNA BUILD SOME SORT OF A DECK IN BETWEEN THE TWO LITTLE, THAT THAT'S ALSO IN THE APPLICATION.
SO IS THAT SOMETHING WE'RE BEING ASKED TO ACCEPT? CORRECT.
THAT, THAT'S IN THE APPLICATION.
IN, IN THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDING APPROVAL FOR THAT AS WELL.
BUT THAT'S, I DON'T THINK THEY SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO CHANGE ANYTHING ON THE FRONT.
WE, WE DON'T LET 'EM DO IT ON OTHER PROJECTS.
I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY THIS ONE WILL GET A PASS, ESPECIALLY SINCE THEY'VE BEEN BEEN DOING THINGS THE WRONG WAY WITHOUT ASKING PERMISSION.
UH, I ALSO HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE COMMISSIONERS THAT'S BEEN ON THIS FOR MANY, MANY, MANY YEARS, UH, HAVE ANY, ANY, HAVE YOU ACTUALLY APPROVED ANYTHING THAT, UH, EXTENDED THE, UH, THE TOP OF THE TOP PLATE FROM ONE FOOT TO NINE FOOT? UH, UH, WE'VE NEVER SEEN THIS BEFORE.
BUT AGAIN, THIS WAS DONE, SO WE'RE SEEING IT AFTER THE FACT AGAIN.
BUT, BUT, BUT WE'VE NEVER SEEN THAT EVEN A GOOD APPLICANT.
YOU, WE HAVE NOT APPROVED THAT.
THE CHANGE, THE COMPLETE CHANGE OF A HOUSE.
I CANNOT RECALL EVER CHANGING.
WE, WE'VE RAISED, WE'VE ALLOWED FOLKS TO RAISE THE FOUNDATION, FIRE THE FOUNDATION, YES.
UH, WITHIN CERTAIN RESTRAINTS, BUT NOT, IT'S, I'VE NEVER SEEN THIS BEFORE.
[01:20:01]
MOTION OR I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO DENY THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS AND ISSUE A COR WITH THE CONDITION THAT THE DOOR BE RETAINED AND THAT THE PLATE BE RETURNED TO ITS ORIGINAL HEIGHT.AND WHAT ABOUT THE DECK WITH THE DECK? THE FRONT DECK, THEY'RE, THEY'RE TRYING TO MAKE A DECK THAT CONNECTS THE TWO PORCHES ACROSS THE FRONT.
THE FRONT FACADE SHOULD BE RETAINED AS IT WAS BILLED BECAUSE THAT, THAT IS, WE KNOW WHAT THIS HOUSE LOOKED LIKE WHEN IT WAS BILLED.
WHEN THERE'S, WELL, WHILE YOU'RE AT IT, YOU MIGHT AS WELL ADDRESS THE, THE DOOR.
THAT'S WHAT I GUESS YOUR MOTION WOULD INCLUDE, LEAVING THE NON-ORIGINAL DOOR AS IT IS CURRENTLY.
AS IT IS THEY CAN I UNDERSTANDINGS THE PHYSICAL DOOR YEAH.
I HAVE NO ISSUE IF THEY CHANGE THAT WITH SOMETHING.
WELL, NO, THAT'S WHAT WE'VE HEARD IS THAT THE NON-ORIGINAL DOOR WOULD BE REPLACED BY A WINDOW.
BUT THE NON-ORIGINAL DOOR WOULD, IT WOULD REMAIN A DOOR, JUST THE DOOR OF THEIR CHOOSING, I GUESS.
THIS IS, THIS IS GETTING INTO HYPOTHETICALS, BUT IF THEY DO GO TO THE APPEALS BOARD AND IT GETS TOSSED OUT, WOULD, WOULD THEY TOSS OUT EVERYTHING OR JUST THE TOP PLATE OR HOW, I MEAN THAT WOULD, WHAT KIND OF, HOW DOES THAT UP TO THE APPEALS BOARD AND HAVING BEEN ON THIS COMMISSION LONG ENOUGH TO SEE THINGS OVERTURNED BY THE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON A REGULAR BASIS? YOU KNOW, WE CAN ONLY VOTE HOW WE SEE FIT ON A PROJECT AND IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO PREDICT WHAT'S GONNA HAPPEN IN THE FUTURE AND WHAT CONTROL, YOU KNOW, OUR PROCESS OF COMING TO A DECISION.
YOU KNOW, WE, WE CAN'T RELY ON, ON THAT AS A, AS A WAY.
UH, I TYPICALLY JUST, YOU KNOW, WE'VE ALL READ THE ORDINANCE, WE ALL INTERPRET THE ORDINANCE.
IS THERE A DISCONNECT MAYBE BETWEEN THE DIFFERENT ORGANIZATIONS? SOMETIMES, YES, BUT THAT'S JUST THE NATURE OF IT.
AND, BUT IF WE WANNA DO DAMAGE CONTROL, WE KNOW THAT THEY'RE PROBABLY GONNA OVERTURN THIS.
SO MAYBE WE JUST FOCUS ON THE THINGS THAT WE CAN DEAL WITH, LIKE THE DOOR AND THE PORCH AND STUFF AND TRY TO DO AS MUCH AS WE CAN REALISTICALLY.
I DUNNO, IT'S FRUSTRATING TO, TO BE ON A HIGH HORSE AND THEN GET KICKED OFF EVERY SINGLE TIME.
AND I, I KNOW THAT THAT'S POINT OF ORDER.
DON'T WE HAVE TO HAVE A SECOND? YES.
BEFORE WE HAVE A DISCUSSION? UH, WE, YEAH, WE DIDN'T HAVE A SECOND.
UM, DO YOU WANT ME TO RESTATE THE MOTION? YES.
SO WE'RE DENYING THE C OF A ISSUING A COR.
WITH THE CONDITION THAT THE PLATE BE RETURNED TO THE ORIGINAL HEIGHT.
THAT THE, IN THE FRONT FACADE REMAIN INTACT, INCLUDING A FUNCTIONING DOOR AND NOT CONNECTING THE PORCH.
YOU HAVE TO, I'M NOT SURE WHICH DISCUSS ON THIS.
SO WE WE'RE KEEPING THE DOOR BASICALLY KEEPING, OKAY.
SO FINAL DISCUSSION ON THE MATTER NOW WITH A SECOND.
I, I, COMMISSIONER COSGROVE, I, I APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS AND I, I THINK WE CAN'T ACT BASED ON WHAT MAY OR MAY NOT HAPPEN, BUT I ALSO THINK THIS IS LIGHTING A FIRE TO, TO GET WITH THE APPEALS BOARD AND TO VISIT, UM, CLOSELY WITH THEM TO SHARE, AS COMMISSIONER YAPPA SAID EARLIER, SOME OF OUR REASONING AND SOME OF THE PROCESS HERE, I'LL VOLUNTEER IF THERE ARE NO MORE DISCUSSIONS.
UM, ALL ROMAN, DO YOU HAVE SOMETHING TO SAY? MY APOLOGIES.
AND JUST A POINT OF ORDER FOR OUR STAFF GOING FORWARD, COULD YOU STATE UNDER THE CRITERIA THE REASON FOR THE DENIAL SO THAT WE HAVE THAT FROM IF WE, IF WE HAPPEN TO NEED TO GO FORWARD TO APPEAL.
AND FOR CLARITY, I'M UNDERSTANDING THAT IT'S A MOTION TO APPROVE WITH THE CONDITION THAT THE, THE ROOF CEILING PLATE BE RETURNED TO WHERE IT WAS, UH, AND THAT THE FRONT ELEVATION STAY THE SAME, BUT THE ADDITION AND THE, THE REST OF THE PROJECT IS STILL OKAY.
SO THERE'LL BE SOME ADJUSTMENTS THERE IN THE DRAWINGS, BUT I JUST, OKAY.
MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THE REAR EDITION IS, YEAH, I'M GONNA ADD THE CONDITION THAT YOU NEED TO REVIEW THE DRAWING FOR SCALE.
I MEAN, 'CAUSE I, I, YES, OBVIOUSLY THE ADDITION IS GONNA BE IMPACTED A LITTLE BIT BY, BY THE, THE PLATE HEIGHT, BUT, OKAY.
AND AGAIN, JUST ON THE CRITERIA PLEASE.
'CAUSE UH, WE STAFF SAW THIS CRITERIA FOUR TO, TO DENY 'CAUSE WE HAVE THE BOXES ALL CHECKED FOR PR, UM, THAT IT MEETS
THE PROPOSED ACTIVITY MUST PRESERVE THE DISTINCTION, QUALITIES, OR CHARACTER OF THE BUILDING STRUCTURE OR OBJECT SITE IN THIS ENVIRONMENT.
AND FIVE, THE DISTINCTIVE STYLISTIC EXTERIOR FEATURE.
'CAUSE THIS WAS A DUPLEX AND AT LEAST IN THE TIME I'VE BEEN ON THE COMMISSION THAT THE FEW DUPLEXES WE'VE SEEN CONVERTED, WE HAVE, UM, THEY WERE PROBABLY WERE PRE HEIGHTS GUIDELINES 'CAUSE I THINK MAYBE BOTH OF THEM WERE THERE.
BUT WE DID, DID, UM, ASK THAT THE DOORS BE RETAINED BOTH ENTRY DOORS BECAUSE THAT WAS HOW THE HOUSE WAS, WAS ORIGINALLY PRESENTED.
[01:25:01]
MOTION.ANYONE OPPOSED? COULD YOU PLEASE? THIS IS COMMISSIONER STAAVA.
UH, ARE THERE ANY OPPOSED? AND IF SO, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME.
ARE THERE ANY ABSTAINING? OKAY, THAT MOTION PASSES.
BEFORE I BEGIN, WILSON, WHEN I BEGIN SPEAKING, WOULD YOU PLEASE USE A TWO SECOND PAUSE PER SLIDE UNTIL YOU GET TO THE END WITH THE RECOMMENDATION? GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIRPERSON.
THIS IS STAFF PERSON JASON LINGO.
I SUBMIT ITEM A NINE AT 1429 COLUMBIA STREET, HOUSTON HEIGHTS EAST.
THIS WILL BE NEW CONSTRUCTION FOR A TWO STORY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TOTALING 2,624 SQUARE FEET.
ITS RIDGE HEIGHT WILL BE 30 FEET FIVE INCHES WITH COMPOSITION SHINGLES AND EIGHT OVER 12 ROOF PITCH ON THE MAIN AND A SIX OVER 12 ROOF PITCH.
ON THE REAR ROOF SEGMENTS, IT WILL USE SMOOTH CEMENTITIOUS SIDING WITH A FIVE AND A HALF, FIVE AND A HALF INCH REVEAL AND WOOD INSET AND RECESS.
ONE OVER ONE SINGLE HUNG JELLED WIND WOOD WINDOWS.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL WITH THE CONDITION THAT THE SECOND FLOOR ON THE NORTH ELEVATION BE INSET THE SAME LENGTH AS THE FIRST FLOOR ON NORTH ELEVATION.
AT THIS TIME, STAFF HAS RECEIVED A PUBLIC COMMENT REGARDING THE COA APPLICATION AND IS AVAILABLE IN THE APPLICATION FILE AND PRESERVATION TRACKER CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION, THERE ARE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC YOU HAVE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK.
THE AGENT, SAM KOS, IS AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS.
I TOO AM AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS.
THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
COMMISSION MEMBERS, ARE THERE QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? CAN WE PULL UP THE DRAWINGS? IS WHAT, WHAT WE'RE DISCUSSING? WILSON, IF YOU WOULD GO BACK TO THE DRAWINGS, START WITH THE SITE PLAN PLEASE.
IS, HAS THAT RECOMMENDATION, STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR THE INSET BEEN REVIEWED WITH THE APPLICANT AND, AND DO WE KNOW, IS THAT AN ACCEPTABLE CONDITION TO THEM? I WILL SAY WITH THE HISTORY WORKING WITH THE ARCHITECT, THEY ORIGINALLY DID THIS ON THE SOUTH ELEVATION.
I INFORMED HIM THAT IT NEEDS TO BE INSET ON FIRST AND SECOND FLOOR SET REVISED VISIONS AND PUSHED IT TO THE NORTH ELEVATION.
IS THIS PROPERTY DEED RESTRICTED? THIS IS IN THE HOUSTON HEIGHTS HISTORIC DISTRICT.
I DO NOT BELIEVE THERE'S DEED RESTRICTIONS.
THERE'S DEED RESTRICTIONS ON INDIVIDUAL PROPERTIES THERE.
AND NOT THAT DURING THE TIME I'VE BEEN HERE, BUT DOES MEET THE HOUSTON HEIGHTS DESIGN GUIDELINES.
BECAUSE THE, THE DEED RESTRICTIONS FOR THE, THAT ARE JUST THE HOUSTON HEIGHTS, THEIR OWN DEED RESTRICTIONS SAY THAT THEY HAVE TO HAVE A PURE AND BEAM OR SOMETHING THAT LIKE PURE AND BEAM FOUNDATION.
THERE IS IN THE HOUSTON HEIGHT DESIGN GUIDELINES, LEMME YOU BRING UP, THIS WAS ACTUALLY FROM, UH, APPROVED THIS YEAR, FEBRUARY FOR 1550 OXFORD AS A NEW CONSTRUCTION.
HOUSTON HEIST DESIGN GUIDELINES SECTION SEVEN, PAGE SIX.
A NEW BUILDING MAY BE BUILT ON SLAB ON GRADE FOUNDATION AS LONG AS IT IS DETAILED TO LOOK LIKE PURE BEAM.
THIS DOESN'T LOOK, LOOK LIKE IT'S DETAILED TO BE PURE AND BEAM TO ME.
IT'S JUST THE, THE SIDING GOING DOWN TO THE SLAB.
ANY DECISION OF THIS COMMISSION IN CONSIDERING THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS CANNOT OVERRIDE DEED RESTRICTIONS.
THE PROPERTY OWNER WILL STILL HAVE TO COMPLY WITH THAT.
SO IF THERE ARE DEED RESTRICTIONS ON THE PROPERTY, UM, THAT WILL HAVE TO BE COMPLIED WITH.
THEY HAVE TO SIGN AN AFFIDAVIT WHEN THEY GET THEIR BUILDING PERMIT, UM, STATING THAT THEY ARE NOT VIOLATING DEED RESTRICTIONS.
UM, THAT CAN OBVIOUSLY BE CHALLENGED BY NEIGHBORS IN THE AREA.
SO, SO NEITHER THE DESIGN GUIDELINES OR THIS GROUP CAN OVERRIDE OR DO ANYTHING TO, UM, IMPEDE THE ENFORCEMENT OF THE DEED RESTRICTIONS.
BUT A COMMISSION MEMBER COULD MAKE A STIPULATION THAT IF IT'S NOT APPEARING BEAM, IT HAS TO APPEAR TO BE PEERING BEAM IN IN THEIR APPROVAL, UH, MOTION.
[01:30:01]
YOU COULD ALSO ADD THAT AND, AND A NOTE PERHAPS TO THE OWNER, DOUBLE CHECK YOUR DEED RESTRICTIONS BUT NOT MAKE COMPLIANCE WITH DEED RESTRICTIONS.PART OF THE, UH, PART OF THE DA PART OF THE C OF A FROM, FROM US.
BUT NOT REFERENCE DEED RESTRICTIONS SPECIFICALLY.
YOU, WE, YOU COULD, WE'RE NOT IN THE DEED UH, RESTRICTION ENFORCEMENT BUSINESS.
IS THAT YOUR POINT? WE'RE NOT IN THE RESTRICTION ENFORCEMENT BUSINESS.
BUT A COMMENT BACK TO THE APPLICANT TO DOUBLE CHECK THEIR DEED RESTRICTIONS, I THINK IS A COURTESY IF NOTHING ELSE.
THERE'S ABOUT A THIRD OF THE PROPERTIES ARE DEED RESTRICT AND THERE'S A LIST ON THE HOUSTON HEIGHTS PROPERTIES OWNER ASSOCIATION THAT YOU COULD, I MAY ANSWER YOUR QUESTION.
THEY FILL OUT THE APPLICATION FORM.
THEY CHECK THE BOX SAYING THAT YES, THEY DO IT, BUT WE DON'T MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE, THAT THEY'RE MEETING THE DE RESTRICTIONS, JUST THE CRITERIA AND DESIGN GUIDELINES.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF FROM COMMISSION MEMBERS ON THE SIDE? UH, THE, THE QUESTION I HAVE ABOUT THIS HOUSE IN PARTICULAR, UH, IS ACTUALLY IT IS MADE BUILT TO MAKE, LIKE, LOOK LIKE A SLAB AS OPPOSED TO IT BEING, UH, MADE TO LOOK LIKE, UH, IT'S THREE FOOT OFF THE GROUND WITH LETTUCES AROUND, UH, AS A CRAWL SPACE TYPE OF, UH, LOOKING, WE WERE REQUIRED TO DO THAT IN HIGH FIRST WARD, UH, FOR ALL THE, UH, NEW CONSTRUCTION THAT WAS BEING BUILT THERE.
SO I DO NOT SEE WHY THIS THING SHOULD, SHOULD BE ANY DIFFERENT IN THAT REGARD.
IT'S NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE SPIRIT OF A NEW CONSTRUCTION IN HONORING THE, THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
I I DON'T THINK IT, THAT'S WHAT STANDS OUT TO ME IS IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE IT'S A PURE BEAM.
IF THERE NO MORE QUESTIONS, I'M GONNA OPEN UP TO, TO PUBLIC COMMENT.
'CAUSE IF WE DO HAVE SOME SPEAKERS SIGNED UP, UM, AT THIS TIME I'D LIKE TO ASK, UM, IS BOB ALBAN YOU'RE, HE'S NOT, YOU'RE NOT HERE VIRTUALLY.
I'M THE OWNER OF 1425 COLUMBIA, WHICH IS THE PROPERTY ON THE DIRECT SOUTH SIDE OF THIS, UM, PROPOSAL.
UM, AND WHILE I'M, I LIKE THE LOOK OF EVERYTHING, THERE ARE THINGS THAT I'M CONCERNED WITH.
AND IN LIGHT OF MRS. MICKEL, UM, NICHOLSON'S COMMENT ABOUT, UM, MAKING RECOMMENDATIONS IN, IN NUMBER FOUR OF THE, UM, APPROVAL CRITERIA.
THE HEIGHT OF THE NEW CONSTRUCTION IS OF CONCERN 'CAUSE IT'S AT 30 FOOT AND FIVE INCHES, WHICH IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE, THOSE IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, AND THE AVERAGE EVEN SAYS THEIR TYPICAL RIDGE HEIGHT IS 27 FEET.
THE PURE AND BEAM ISSUE HAS AL ALREADY BEEN BROUGHT UP.
I I PERSONALLY AM CONCERNED BECAUSE IN THE, UM, SOUTH ELEVATION, UH, IT EXPOSES THE ROOF TO OVER ALMOST A THOUSAND SQUARE FEET OF ROOF SURFACE ALL POINTED TOWARDS MY DRIVEWAY.
AND CONSIDERING THAT THE, THE PROPOSED SETBACK IS ONLY FIVE FEET, THAT DOESN'T TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE TWO FOOT OF EVE EXTENSION, WHICH NOW PUTS THAT WATER RUNOFF STRAIGHT ONTO MY PROPERTY.
AND AS WE KNOW THE HEIGHTS, I MAY BE THE HIGHEST POINT IN THE HEIGHTS, BUT IT STILL GOES SOMEWHERE ON.
UM, SO THIS BRINGS UP THE QUESTION OF, AND IT MAY NOT HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH Y'ALL'S RESPONSIBILITY OF AESTHETICS OR WHATEVER, BUT I NOTICED THAT THERE AREN'T ANY MENTIONS OF, UM, GUTTER ALLOWANCES AND THINGS LIKE THAT, THAT WOULD MITIGATE THOSE THINGS THAT ARE ALREADY INCLUDED IN THIS, THESE ELEVATIONS.
AND THOSE ARE ESSENTIALLY MY CONCERNS AS THE SOUTH SIDE HOMEOWNER.
IS THAT A QUESTION? PLEASE, PLEASE, COMMISSIONER? UH, A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS.
SO YOU'RE, YOU'RE IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO THIS, UH, THIS PROPERTY THAT, THAT'S CORRECT.
AND, AND I'D LIKE TO, I'LL GO AHEAD AND AND AND SPEAK FOR US AND SAY IT, IT, IT, IT'S, AS YOU SPECULATED IT'S TRUE THAT THE, THE WATER ISSUE'S NOT OURS AT ALL.
I MEAN, THEY'RE, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR OWN RUNOFF AND DRAINAGE, BUT I FIGURE IF IT'S NOTED IN, IF IT COULD BE NOTED IN THE, ARE THOSE BEING CONCERNED WHEN FEE JUST LIKE DEED RESTRICTIONS? WELL, THAT'S LEADS, EXCUSE ME.
THAT LEADS MY OTHER QUESTION FOR YOU.
[01:35:01]
IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT.DO YOU KNOW, OR YOU, ARE YOU IN A DEED ON A DEED RESTRICTED PROPERTY? YES, WE ARE.
AND DO YOU HAVE WE ARE A, A, A BLOCK BY BLOCK VOTED DEED RESTRICTIONS.
AND I'M GOING TO DE TO MR. WILLIAMSON RIGHT HERE, UM, WHO Y'ALL MAY BE FAMILIAR WITH ALREADY.
I'M NOT, BUT IS MR. WILLIAMSON PLANNING TO SPEAK? YES, HE IS.
THEN I'LL, THEN I'LL HOLD FURTHER COMMENTS.
AND AS MENTIONED, UH, WE HAVE ONE MORE SPEAKER SIGNED UP, UM, MARK WILLIAMSON.
ACTUALLY, I THINK THERE ARE AT LEAST A COUPLE MORE OF US.
I HAPPEN TO OWN THE PROPERTY TWO HOUSES NORTH, AND THE PERSON I BOUGHT THE PROPERTY FROM 30 YEARS AGO WAS THE DEED RESTRICTION, UH, CAPTAIN FOR MY BLOCK.
AND I KNOW FROM HIS RECORDS THAT ALL OF THE PROPERTIES, BUT SAVE ONE, AND IT'S NOT THIS ONE, THE SUBJECT, UH, IS SUBJECT TO THE DEED RESTRICTIONS.
AND I PULLED FROM THE COUNTY LAND RECORDS, THE SPECIFIC DEED RESTRICTIONS ON THIS PROPERTY, SHOWING THE FORMER OWNER SIGNING AND SHOWING THE AMENDMENT.
THAT INDICATES THE FOUNDATION REQUIREMENT ON THIS PROPERTY IS PREFERENCE, STRONG PREFERENCE FOR PURE AND BEAM.
AND IF IT IS NOT PURE AND BEAM, THEN IT MUST BE AT LEAST A TWO FOOT, UH, FOUNDATION.
AND IT DOESN'T SAY IT, UNFORTUNATELY.
THE PEOPLE WHO WROTE THIS OVER 30 YEARS AGO DIDN'T SAY YES.
THEY DIDN'T SAY, BUT THE OBVIOUS PREFERENCE WAS THAT IT IS TO LOOK LIKE A PURIN BEAM FOUNDATION.
IT'S, IT IS, IT'S WRITTEN AS RAISED FOUNDATION REQUIRED THAT IT HAS TO BE ON A PURE AND BEAM FOUNDATION OR IF IT'S NOT PURE AND BEAM FOUNDATION, AT LEAST A TWO FOOT FOUNDATION.
AND MY CLAIM IS THE INTENT IS IT BE, AND WHEN WE WERE DISCUSSING WHAT THE, UH, GUIDELINES LOOKED FOR, LOOKED LIKE FOR OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, THAT WAS WHAT WE WERE TRYING TO WRITE INTO.
IT WAS SOMETHING VERY SIMILAR TO WHAT WE PUT IN THE, UH, THE DEED RESTRICTIONS.
DEED RESTRICTIONS AT THE TIME.
UH, I HAD A COUPLE OF OTHER COMMENTS, IF I MAY.
THAT WAS THE PRINCIPLE THING I CAME TO MENTION IS THAT, OH, AND THAT MEANS THAT HE'S GONNA NEED TO BUMP HIS ALREADY OVER TALL BUILDING UP ANOTHER FOOT AT LEAST TO MEET OUR DEED RESTRICTIONS, WHICH MEANS IT'S GONNA BE 31 AND A HALF.
IT'S ALREADY GOING TO, IF YOU, IF YOU DISCOUNT ALL THE HOUSES THAT HAVE BEEN BUILT ON MY BLOCK SINCE I MOVED IN, THIS HOUSE IS GONNA BE FAR AND AWAY THE LARGEST ON THE BLOCK TIME.
ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE SPEAKER? I WOULD VOTE A MOTION TO EXTEND HIS TIME.
EXTEND THE SPEAKER'S TIME? YEAH.
UM, WHO'S A SECOND? I'LL SECOND IT.
ANY OPPOSED? ANY ABSTAINS? PLEASE RECEIVE.
THE DE RESTRICTIONS ALSO CONTAIN A SETBACK, WHICH IS 15 FEET, AND THAT'S HIS HOUSE'S DESIGN IS COMPATIBLE WITH THAT.
WE ALSO ARE ON A SPECIAL MINIMUM BUILDING LINE OF BLOCK OF 20 FEET.
AND I DON'T KNOW WHETHER PORCHES COUNT TOWARD THAT.
UH, DOES A PORCH EX IT IS BUILT AT 15 FEET.
IS THAT COMPATIBLE WITH A 20 FOOT SPECIAL MINIMUM BUILDING LINE? I, I DEFER TO LEGAL OR TO THE STAFF? I THINK THE PORCH, THE FRONT OF THE PORCH HAS TO MEET THE 20 FOOT.
MY EXPERIENCE, THAT'S WHAT'S BEEN THE WAY IT'S BEEN.
SO, SO THE STEPS CAN STAND OUT PAST ALSO BE TOO FORWARD, FAR FORWARD.
IT, IT DEPENDS ON THE TYPE OF PORCH.
SO WE, WE WILL LOOK AT THAT TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S CONSISTENT WITH THE BUILDING LINE.
AND SO, SIR, WHILE YOU'RE HERE, I, I JUST POINT OUT THAT THIS PRO THIS, UH, PROPOSAL SHOWS THE FINISHED FLOOR FOR THE NEW CONSTRUCTION.
IT'D BE ONE FOOT ABOVE GRADE, RIGHT? SO IT'S, IT'S MO IT DOESN'T MEET OUR DEED RESTRICTIONS.
HE NEEDS FOUND TWO FEET OF FOUNDATION AND THEN FINISHED FLOOR ABOVE THAT.
SO DOES IT SAY I'M, I'M JUST ASKING IT SAY TWO FEET.
DEED RESTRICTIONS, SAY TWO FEET OF FOUNDATION.
AND THEN FINISHED FLOOR ABOVE THAT.
AND, AND I, AND IF I MAY, THE PREVIOUS HOUSE HAD THE PROBLEM THAT IT FLOODED, SO IF HE BUILDS IT ON GRADE, HE'S GONNA FLOOD AT ONE FOOT.
THE, THE HOUSE THAT WAS, OR PERHAPS ORIGINALLY ON THE SLOT, THE, IT WAS A GARAGE, FRANKLY.
AND Y'ALL, IT, IT WAS EXTENDED FROM A GARAGE.
YOU GAVE HIM THE AUTHORITY TO DEMOLISH IT.
IT'S STILL THERE, BUT IT WAS, IT WAS ALWAYS FLOODING.
[01:40:01]
YOU LIKE TO KEEP THIS, UH, DOCUMENT? I BROUGHT SEVERAL OTHER PIECES OUT OF THE, I'LL, I'LL KEEP A COPY.I ALL PIECES FROM THE COUNTY LAND RECORDS.
ARE THERE OTHER MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC SIGNED UP ON THIS ITEM TO SPEAK? SIR, WE HAVE ONE SPEAKER FORM WE JUST BROUGHT YOU.
THERE ARE NO PUBLIC SPEAKERS, BUT THE ARCHITECT SAM KOS IS AVAILABLE.
SO I HAVE A SPEAKER SIGNED UP.
I LIVE NEXT DOOR TO THE PROPERTY THAT'S PROPOSED TO BE BUILT.
AND UH, I'M ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE PROPERTY.
THE EXISTING HOUSE THAT WAS BUILT IN 1930 WAS THE GARAGE APARTMENT TO THE HOUSE THAT I LIVE ON.
SO WHEN THEY BROKE IT UP, IT'S THE SMALLEST LOT ON OUR STREET.
I THINK IT'S 44 FEET, SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
THE HOUSE IS BACK, OF COURSE, BECAUSE IT WAS A, A GARAGE.
THE OWNER THAT HAD OUR HOUSE PUT THE APARTMENT ON IT AND THE HOUSE DOES FLOOD HAS FLOODED.
BUT I, MY CONCERN IS THE 30 FEET, I THINK THAT THAT'S A LITTLE EXCESSIVE.
I DON'T KNOW IF THAT MEANS IT'S GOING TO INCLUDE A THIRD STORY.
I DO KNOW THAT A HOUSE DOWN THE STREET FROM US HAS THREE STORIES.
AND IT WAS BUILT BEFORE THE HISTORIC DISTRICT WAS FORMED.
I UNDERSTAND PERHAPS THAT SAM IS ALSO ON AVAILABLE, WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK VIRTUALLY? UH, YES, I AM HERE.
HOW ARE Y'ALL DOING, SAM? WITH CREO DESIGN? HI, SAM.
UM, NUMBER ONE, UH, NUMBER ONE, WE ARE NOT IN DEED RESTRICTED, UH, AREA.
AND THE DEED RESTRICTIONS THEY'RE REFERRING TO ARE NOT ENFORCEABLE DEED RESTRICTIONS, BUT THEY'RE A DEED RESTRICTION THAT WAS APPLIED TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, YEARS AGO.
AND THAT EVERY TITLE COMPANY WILL BASICALLY REMOVE FROM YOUR TITLE REPORT IN THE AREA SAYING THAT I, I, I WANNA DO THE RIGHT THING.
SO WE WANT TO DO THE RIGHT THING FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
I'VE LIVED IN THE HEIGHTS SINCE 1976.
THIS HOUSE HAS BEEN, AND AND UNFORTUNATELY JASON HAS NOT SHOWN THE 3D RENDERING, WHICH I REQUESTED AT LEAST TWO OR THREE TIMES TO SHOW YOU GUYS.
UM, BUT HE HAS NOT SHOWN THAT RENDERING.
BUT WE DID A 3D RENDERING OF THIS HOUSE.
AND THIS HOUSE FITS BEAUTIFULLY IN THE HEIGHTS.
WE ARE, UH, 30 FEET IS A BIT RESTRICTIVE WHEN IT COMES TO, UH, HEIGHT.
AND I THINK THAT IT'D BE GOOD FOR Y'ALL TO LOOK AT THAT BECAUSE BY THE TIME YOU DO A 10 FOOT CEILING DOWN AND THE NINE FOOT CEILING UP AND YOU HAVE YOUR FLOOR CAVITY, PLUS YOU HAVE YOUR FOUNDATION, IT, YOU'RE BUMPING UP AGAINST 32 FEET BEFORE YOU'RE DONE.
BUT WHAT WE DID WAS WE REDUCED THE OVERALL PITCH OF THE ROOF IN ORDER TO GET THIS HOUSE DOWN TO AROUND 30 FEET.
UM, WE CAN GET THE ROOF PITCH LOWER.
I DON'T WANT TO DO IT BECAUSE I THINK IT MAKES THE HOUSE UGLY.
UM, BUT WE CAN REDUCE THE ROOF PITCH AND WE CAN RAISE THE FOUNDATION TO TWO FEET, UH, VERY EASILY.
I PREFER THE FOUNDATION BE AT TWO FEET, TO BE HONEST WITH YOU.
BUT WE HAVE BEEN FORCED BY THE RESTRICTIONS TO, UH, REALLY DUMB THIS HOUSE DOWN.
UH, IF YOU GO TO ANY TWO STORY HOUSE IN THE HEIGHTS IN THAT VICINITY, BART TRUCK'S HOUSE AT 18TH AND HARVARD, THOSE HOUSES ARE WELL OVER 30 FOOT IN HEIGHTS.
AND SO FOR SOMEONE TO SAY 30 FOOT IN HEIGHTS IS NOT REALISTIC, DOESN'T UNDERSTAND THE BUSINESS, AND, AND JUST IS WORKING FROM
I WOULD PREFER YOU DEFER IT SO I CAN WORK WITH STAFF TO GET IT APPROVED.
UM, BUT I DID UNDERSTAND THAT THE REQUEST FOR AFFIRM IF NEEDED, UM, YES.
SO COMMISSION MEMBERS, I, THERE, THERE ARE NO MORE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC SIGN UP TO SPEAK, I BELIEVE.
SO AT THIS TIME I'LL CLOSE PUBLIC CON UM, UM, UH, COMMUNICATIONS AND COME BACK TO COMMISSION TO SEE IF THERE ARE ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS OF STAFF.
ARE THERE, IS THERE QUESTIONS ABOUT THEIR MEASURABLE
[01:45:01]
STANDARDS THAT ARE BEING APPLIED IN THIS CASE? I HAVE ONE JUST QUESTION FOR STAFF.JUST CLARIFICATION ON THE DESIGN GUIDELINES THAT IF, IF IT'S ON A SLAB, IT NEEDS TO HAVE THE APPEARANCE OF BEING ELEVATED.
IT'S IN SECTION SEVEN, PAGE SIX.
HOW DO THE NORTH AND SOUTH ELEVATIONS MEET THAT CRITERIA? STATE YOUR QUESTION ONE MORE TIME PLEASE.
I SAID HOW DO THE NORTH AND SOUTH ELEVATIONS AS PRESENTED MEET THAT CRITERIA? IF I WOULD SAY THAT NO, THEY DO NOT APPEAR AS PURE BEAM.
WELL, SINCE THIS DOES NOT MEET THE CRITERIA, THEN I WOULD SUCCESSFULLY DEFER IT.
WELL, I WAS GONNA SAY IT'S NOT IN THE MEASURABLE STANDARDS, BUT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE QUALITATIVE, NOT THE QUANTITATIVE ASPECT.
BUT IN MY OPINION, IT DOESN'T MEET, IT'S NOT MEETING WHAT THE INTENT IS.
DEFER THAT THE MOTION ALLOW THEM TO, TO REPRESENT THIS, THAT, THAT IS MORE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE ORDINANCE.
UM, I, I HAVE A QUESTION, UM, OF STAFF AND THE COMMISSION.
SO I KNOW OF CERTAIN HOMES, UH, IN THE HEIGHTS, WHICH ARE, UM, THEY'RE PRIMARILY ONE STORY HOMES, BUT THEY ARE PEER IN BEAM, BUT HAVE WOOD SIDING THAT GO RIGHT INTO THE GROUND, BASICALLY.
YOU KNOW, THEY NECK, OF COURSE THEY HAVE A, THEY HAVE OPENINGS ON SOME REGULAR SPACING TO ALLOW SOME VENTILATION.
SO YOU KIND OF KNOW IT'S PURE BEAM.
'CAUSE YOU CAN SEE THAT THERE'S A, THERE'S A GRILL PATTERN AND OFTEN THERE'S LIKE, IT'S DETAILED WHERE THERE'S A SKIRT, YOU KNOW, AND THERE'S, THERE'S LIKE A, THERE'S THEY, YEAH, THOSE, THE ONES I'M DESCRIBING FLARE OUT TO, TO KICK THE WATER AWAY.
UM, AND OTHER ONES THAT I'VE SEEN AT LEAST HAVE SOME TYPE OF, UH, YOU KNOW, TRIM THAT KICKS THE WATER OUT IF THERE'S A SKIRT BOARD BELOW THAT.
SO, UM, IF, IF IT'S BEING DEFERRED, I WOULD JUST MENTION THAT BECAUSE I THINK, UH, MAYBE LOOKING AT SOME OF THE EXAMPLES OF PIER AND BEAM, UH, IN THIS, IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, IN THIS DISTRICT WOULD BE WARRANTED IF IT'S DEFERRED TO FOR THIS CONVERSATION.
BUT, UM, UM, UM, MR. CHAIR, I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO ADD THAT EVEN THOUGH THEY HAVE A, A FLAT SKIRT ON, ON THE, UH, CRAWL SPACE SECTION, THERE IS STILL A DISTINCTION BETWEEN THE WALL AND THE FLARING.
EITHER A A WATER TABLE OR ACTUALLY A ONE BY 12 SKIRT BOARD THAT DISTINGUISHES THE, THE, THE SKIRTING, WHICH IS REPRESENTING THE FOUNDATION AND NOT PART OF THE SIDING.
I UNDERSTAND, BUT I'M JUST SUGGESTING THAT I KNOW THERE ARE EXAMPLES AND IS, I GUESS ONE, ONE CAVEAT WOULD BE IF THEY CAN, IF IT'S BASED ON AN EX EXAMPLE IN THIS DISTRICT, THAT WOULD BE, UH, ADVANTAGEOUS PERHAPS.
I'D ALSO LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT A LOT OF TIMES THESE PEOPLE GET HAMSTRUNG WITH THE CEILING HEIGHTS.
I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF OPPORTUNITY, ESPECIALLY ON THE SECOND FLOOR FOR VAULTED CEILINGS.
SO YOU COULD HAVE AN EIGHT FOOT CEILING PLATE RATHER THAN NINE OR 10 AND STILL HAVE A NICE TALL CEILING IN THOSE ROOMS AND NOT HAVE A SUPER HIGH ROOF.
'CAUSE I THINK A LOT OF TIMES PEOPLE THINK YOU HAD HAVE THESE BOX ROOMS AND YOU REALLY DON'T.
THERE'S LOTS OF WAYS TO GET TALL CEILINGS WITHOUT HAVING SUPER HIGH CEILING PLATES.
AND WITHOUT HAVING TO, UH, GO TO AN INAPPROPRIATE, UH, ROOF SLOPE.
'CAUSE THAT'S, THAT'S THE, THAT'S WORSE SOMETIMES THAT'S NOT WHAT ANYBODY WANTS.
THAT'S NOT WHAT ANYBODY WANTS FOR THE, UH, POINT OF ORDER.
MAY I ASK A QUESTION ON THE COMMISSION? YES.
UH, ALSO TOO, IT WAS BROUGHT UP EARLIER ABOUT FIVE FOOT SETBACK ON THE SOUTH ELEVATION THAT'S GOING TO THE WALL.
AND IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SETBACKS, DO YOU WANT THAT TO BE TO THE EVE THAT WAS BROUGHT UP BY PUBLIC COMMENT OR KEEP IT FIVE FOOT TO THE WALL? SO THE WALL, I THINK, I THINK THE WAY, THE WAY THINGS ARE WRITTEN TO THE WALL AND THE EVE IS ALLOWED TO EXTEND NO MORE THAN I THINK TWO FEET INTO THAT FIVE FEET IS MY UNDERSTANDING.
I MEAN, FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK, COME ON.
AS YOU, I GUESS A POINT OF DISCUSSION.
YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S UNCLEAR TO ME, I GUESS FROM OUR, FROM THE LEGAL SIDE, WHETHER OR NOT THESE RESTRICTIONS ARE ENFORCEABLE OR NOT, BECAUSE THERE ARE PEOPLE THAT LIVE ON THIS STREET THAT MADE THESE RESTRICTIONS AND BELIEVE THAT THEY'RE IN EFFECT.
BUT, YOU KNOW, NONETHELESS, I THINK, UM, ALL THESE THINGS CAN BE WORKED OUT IF, IF, IF THIS IS DEFERRED, IF THIS VOTE IS SUCCESSFUL FOR DEFERMENT.
BUT I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING IT WOULD BE GOOD AT LEAST I'D BE CURIOUS TO KNOW, UH, WHETHER THEY ARE OR NOT IN EFFECT, UH, UH, IT'S MY INTERPRETATION.
I HAVEN'T HEARD PEOPLE SAY THEY CAN OVERTURN THEM BECAUSE THEY WANT TO.
SO IF THERE ARE NO MORE QUESTIONS, UM, ARE, IS EVERYONE IN FAVOR OF DEFERRING THIS ITEM? TILL NEXT, THE NEXT MEETING PLEASE SAY, AYE.
UH, ANY OPPOSED? SINCE THE DESIGN ANY ABSTENTIONS, THIS MOTIONS
[01:50:01]
HAS BEEN DEFERRED.CHAIRPERSON MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION, THIS IS STAFF PERSON JASON LILIENTHAL.
I SUBMIT ITEM A 10 AT 1429 COLUMBIA STREET, HOUSTON HEIGHTS EAST.
THE APPLICANT PROPOSES TO CONSTRUCT A TWO STORY GARAGE AND GARAGE APARTMENT TOTAL 1027 SQUARE FEET WITH THE GARAGE BEING 550 SQUARE FEET AND THE SECOND FLOOR GARAGE APARTMENT BEING 477 SQUARE FEET.
THERE WILL BE COMPOSITION SHINGLES WITH A SIX OVER 12 ROOF PITCH CEMENTITIOUS SIDING WITH A FIVE AND A HALF INCH REVEAL AND WOOD INSET AND RECESSED ONE OVER ONE SINGLE HUNG GELLED WIND WOOD WINDOWS.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL CHAIR OF MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.
THERE ARE MEMBERS TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM, INCLUDING THE ARCHITECT, SAM GIANNOS MYSELF, I'M AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS BY THE COMMISSION.
THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
COMMISSION MEMBERS, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF? I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION.
IS THE ALLEY ACCESSIBLE OR BLOCKED OFF HERE? LISTEN, IF YOU COULD GO TO SITE PLAN, PLEASE.
IT SHOWS ON THE SITE PLAN THAT THERE IS A 15 FOOT ALLEY, BUT WHETHER THAT ACCESSIBLE OR NOT, I DO NOT KNOW.
I, I I JUST THINK WE CAN ASK THE, UH, ARCHITECT.
I MEAN, THERE'S SPEAKS LET'S ASK, BUT, UM, UH, YES, WE CHOSE TO USE THE DRIVEWAY INSTEAD OF THE ALLEYWAY BECAUSE THE ALLEYWAY HAS, IS BLOCKED IN SOME RESPECTS AND IT'S A MUCH MORE DIFFICULT GET THE ALLEYWAY DONE, UH, MR CHAIR.
AND WITH A SMALLER LOT WE HAVE LIMITED SQUARE FOOTAGE, SO WE, IT WAS EASY ENOUGH TO DO JUST A DRIVEWAY.
SAM, IF YOU, IF I HOLD FOR A SECOND, I'M GOING TO OPEN UP PUBLIC COMMENT, BUT I HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION FROM A COMMISSION MEMBER.
UM, MR. CHAIR, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR, FOR SAM.
SAM, CAN YOU HEAR ME? DOMINIC? YES, SIR.
UH, SAM, SINCE YOU, UH, WAS AGREEABLE TO DEFER THE, UH, THE, UH, HOUSE ITSELF, UH, WOULD YOU LIKE TO DEFER THIS SO YOU CAN PLAN EVERYTHING HOLISTICALLY AND AND REDRAW IT AGAIN? OR DO YOU WANNA SEE THIS, UH, VOTED ON? UH, MR. YAP, I'D LIKE TO DEFERRED.
I'VE BEEN WORKING WITH THE COMMISSION SINCE, UH, JUNE, END OF JUNE ON THIS.
AND I SENT THEM THE DRAWINGS END OF JUNE.
UH, FOR, UH, INITIAL REVIEW WE MADE ALL OF THE CORRECTIONS.
THEY ASKED FOR LITERALLY EVERY CORRECTION.
SO WE'RE, WE ARE WITHIN THE DESIGN GUIDELINES, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF AT THE VERY LAST MINUTE, UH, JASON BROUGHT UP THIS FRONT PORCH, UH, THE SECOND FLOOR ENCROACHING OVER THE FRONT PORCH A LITTLE BIT.
I FELT LIKE THE ELEVATION WAS STRONG ENOUGH THAT IT WAS A GOOD LOOKING HOUSE FOR THE HEIGHTS.
AND JASON TO THIS MINUTE, HAS NOT SHOWN THE 3D RENDERING I DID FOR YOU GUYS, SO TO PROVE IT UP.
SO I, I WOULD LOVE FOR JASON TO SHOW THAT AT SOME POINT, BUT IT'S A REALLY PRETTY LITTLE HOUSE AND IT WOULD FIT BEAUTIFUL ON THAT LOT.
UM, BUT YES, ABSOLUTELY I WOULD PREFER IT DEFERRED.
AND I LIKE THE ELEVATION WE DREW.
I THINK IT FITS WELL IN THE HEIGHTS.
AND JASON, I'D APPRECIATE IF YOU'D SHOW, SO YOU WOULD LIKE TO THEN DEFER THE, UH, GARAGE APARTMENT, UH, UH, SECTION AS WELL RIGHT NOW? NO, I MEAN, I THINK WE CAN GO AHEAD AND GO.
THE GARAGE GARAGE IS PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD.
UM, WHAT, WHAT I NEED TO DO IS SHOW THE CRAWL SPACE, SHOW THAT I'M TWO FEET OFF THE GROUND, LOWER THE ROOF PITCH ON THE HOUSE.
UM, I JUST, YOU KNOW, UH, I THINK GO AHEAD AND APPROVE THE GARAGE, THAT WAY WE HAVE THAT OUT OF THE WAY.
AND WE'LL JUST COME BACK TO YOU GUYS FOR THE HOUSE NEXT MONTH.
IS THERE ANY OTHER MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC THAT WOULD SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? UM, C CAN YOU APPROACH THE, THE, THE MICROPHONE AND MR. WILLIAMS? COULD YOU COULD RE COULD YOU RESTATE YOUR NAME?
DO I NEED TO FILL OUT ANOTHER FORM? UH, YEAH.
I, I HAPPEN TO KNOW THE ANSWER ON THE, UH, CITY COUNCIL, UH, ABANDONED THIS ALLEY TO THE, UH, ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS DECADES AND DECADES AGO.
I DON'T REMEMBER THE EXACT DATE, I'M SORRY, I DON'T HAVE THE ORDINANCE NUMBER.
I DIDN'T KNOW THAT, THAT THAT USE OF THE ALLEY WAS GOING TO BE, UH, AN ISSUE.
AND FOR THE, ALMOST THE ENTIRE BLOCK, THE, THERE'S A FENCE DOWN THE MIDDLE OF THE ALLEY, SO THAT'S NOT A FEASIBLE ALTERNATIVE FOR HIM.
I THINK THERE MAY EVEN BE AN INTRUDING HOUSE AT ONE END OF THE ALLEY.
[01:55:01]
NOT AN ISSUE FOR HIM.UH, AND I BELIEVE THAT THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO WILL DEFEND THE, UH, DEED RESTRICTIONS.
UH, BUT THAT'S BACK ON THAT OTHER ITEM.
SO UNDERSTAND, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR, YOUR COMMENTS.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC AT WHICH TO SPEAK? I HAVE A COUPLE OF SECONDS.
THE HOUSE IS, UH, VERY LOVELY.
IT LOOKS LOVELY IN THE HEIGHTS, UH, BUT THE BLOCKS IN THE HEIGHTS ARE NOT ALL IDENTICAL.
AND THE HEIGHTS, THE HOUSE, THE BLOCKS GRADE OFF THE BOULEVARD.
WE MISSED GETTING THAT INTO THE GUIDELINES.
WE'RE VERY FAR OFF THE BOULEVARD AND THE HOUSES SHOULD BE A SMALLER IN SCALE IN OUR BLOCK.
WITH THAT, I'M GONNA CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT, UM, COMMISSION MEMBERS AT THE END OF THEIR QUESTIONS OR DISCUSSIONS OR IS THERE A MOTION I'LL, I'LL MOVE TO ACCEPT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION ON THE GARAGE? IS THERE A SECOND? YEP.
UM, ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? I MEAN, WHAT? OKAY.
ALL IN FAVOR OF APPROVING OF THE GARAGE, SAY AYE.
ANYONE OPPOSED? ANY ABSTENTIONS? THAT MOTION PASSES.
THIS IS STAFF PERSON JASON INGAL.
I SUBMIT ITEM A 11 AT 2 0 7 STRATFORD IN AVONDALE EAST.
THE APPLICANT PROPOSES TO DEMOLISH THE EXISTING DETACHED GARAGE AND BUILD BACK A GARAGE WITH A SECOND FLOOR CONDITION SPACE THAT CONNECTS TO THE REAR OF THE HISTORIC STRUCTURE.
THERE WILL BE A ONE FOOT INSET WHERE IT CONNECTS PRESERVING THE ORIGINAL CORNER OF THE HISTORIC STRUCTURE.
THE PROPOSED RIDGE HEIGHT WILL BE 26 FEET.
THIS WILL BE TWO FEET LOWER THAN HISTORIC STRUCTURES RIDGE HEIGHT, CREATING DIFFERENTIATION.
THERE WILL BE A REPLACEMENT OF ONE WINDOW ON THE UPPER FLOOR ON THE WEST ELEVATION WITH A 12 OVER ONE LIGHT PATTERN.
SINGLE HUNG FIBERS COMPOSITE AND INSET RECESSED.
APPLICANT PROPOSES TO PUSH BACK A NON HISTORIC BUMP OUT WINDOW BAY ON EAST ELEVATION AND LEVEL.
THE EXISTING FOUNDATION STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.
THE AGENT COULD, DIAZ IS AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
I'M AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
COMMISSION MEMBERS, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THE SIDE? YES, THIS IS COMMISSIONER STAAVA.
I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THE FOR STAFF.
UH, HAVE YOU EVER BEEN INTO THE HOUSE? HAVE Y'ALL BEEN TO THIS HOUSE AND, AND OBSERVED THE DINING ROOM? UH, BUMP OUT, UH, WINDOW COMMISSIONER STAAVA? YES, THIS IS JASON LAL.
I DID DO A SITE VISIT WITH CHRISTIAN DIAZ.
WE DID A SITE VISIT INSIDE AND OUT OF THE STRUCTURE.
I, WELL, THE REASON BECAUSE I'VE BEEN INTO THE HOUSE MYSELF MANY YEARS AGO, AND I CAN CONFIRM THAT THE DINING ROOM, UH, BUMP OUT, UH, IS THE ORIGINAL ONE BECAUSE IT'S THE SAME FLOOR, UH, FLOOR, UH, IS THERE'S NO BREAK IN THE FLOOR.
AND PLUS, AND ALSO MANY OF THE, MANY OF THE HOUSES IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD HAVE THE SIMILAR, UH, BUMP OUT.
AND THAT THAT DOESN'T SHOW ON THE, UH, SANBORN MAP BECAUSE, UH, IT WAS TOO SHALLOW, UH, TO BE SHOWN ON THE MAP AT THE TIME.
SO, FOR EXAMPLE, MY HOUSE HAS ONE AND IT'S, IT IS ORIGINAL TO THE HOUSE AND IT'S NOT ON THE MAP.
SO I JUST WANTED TO MENTION, UH, I'VE SEEN IT, I MEAN, IT IS ORIGINAL, UH, TO THE HOUSE.
I, I LOOK AT IT AND I THINK THAT THAT'S PART OF THE DESIGN OF THE ORIGINAL HOUSE.
IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE, UH, SOMETHING THAT WAS ADDED LATER.
AND, AND IT WILL BE VERY ODD FOR A CRAFTSMAN PERIOD HOUSE AT 1912 TO HAVE A WALL THAT IS TOTALLY LIKE A DINING ROOM WITHOUT ANY WINDOWS.
I MEAN, THAT IS, IF YOU LOOK AT THE LOWER PICTURE ON PAGE 12 OR 14, UH, IT WILL BE VERY ODD TO HAVE A TOTAL WALL, UH, EXTERIOR WALL THERE.
AND SECONDLY, UH, IN, IN THE, UH, THE MANY AREAS THAT I'VE WORKED IN THE FIRST WARD AND IN, UH, OH SIX WARD AS WELL, SANDBORN MAPS ARE FIRE INSURANCE MAPS.
THEY ARE NOT ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN, UH, MAPS.
THEY, THEY DO NOT GRAPH OUT THINGS THAT ARE BUMPED OUT SIX INCHES OR A FOOT
[02:00:01]
OR EVEN TWO FOOT THAT, THAT IS NOT IMPORTANT TO THEM.UH, WHAT WAS LIVING AND WHAT WAS PORCH WAS IMPORTANT AND FIRST FLOOR VERSUS TWO FLOORS, FOR EXAMPLE.
SO WE, WE SHOULD NOT HANG OUR HATS ON SANDBORN FIRE MAPS ON ARCHITECTURAL INTEGRITY, PERIOD.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM, FOR STAFF OF THE COMMISSION? I'M JUST GONNA MAKE A MOTION TO, UM, I JUST NEED TO FIND OUT IF THERE'S ANY SPEAKERS OUT.
I'M NOT SURE IF STAFF IS AWARE OF ANY SPEAKERS THAT ARE, WE ARE NOT AWARE OF ANY SPEAKERS.
YOU MIGHT ASK IF THERE'S ANY BY CHAT THERE IS STATE OR VIRTUAL.
I'LL JUST OPEN, OPEN UP FOR A PUBLIC COMMENT ARCHITECT CHRISTIAN DIAZ.
YES, THIS IS, UH, CHRISTIAN DIAZ AND I'M AVAILABLE TO SPEAK, UH, ABOUT THE DESIGN.
UH, JUST CHECKING IF YOU CAN HEAR ME.
UH, I GUESS, UH, ON MY DEFENSE, UH, UH, ON THE BUMP PAL, THE EVES UH, DESIGN THAT IS CURRENTLY ON THE BUMP PAL, UH, DOESN'T MATCH THE REGIONAL EVES OF THE, UH, OF THE PORCH.
SO THAT'S, THAT'S, UH, HOW WE GOT TO THE CONCLUSION AS WELL THAT IT WASN'T PART OF THE ORIGINAL ELEVATION ON OUR ORIGINAL HOME.
AND THAT'S WHY WE'RE PROPOSING TO, UH, TO CANCEL IT OUT.
UH, IF YOU, UM, SEE THE PICTURES, UH, ABOVE THAT JASON HAS IN THE REPORT, YOU CAN NOTE, UH, THAT THERE IS A DIFFERENT EVES DESIGN THAT DOESN'T FOLLOW THE, THE HOME DESIGN, UH, BACK IN, BACK IN THAT TIME.
AND THAT'S HOW WE, UH, ALSO, UM, YOU KNOW, DECIDED TO NOT INCLUDE IT AS, UH, AS PART OF THE NEW DESIGN.
ARE THERE ANY
JUST I WANNA POINT OUT THAT THERE'S, THAT THERE IS A HOUSE, UH, A COUPLES DOOR DOWN.
I THINK IT'S, I CAN'T REMEMBER THE NUMBER, BUT THE EXACT SAME, UH, KIND OF BUMP OUT AND THE EAVES DON'T MATCH EITHER, SO IT'S PRETTY COMMON FOR THAT PARTICULAR AREA.
AND IS THERE ANY RECORD THAT, THAT, UH, WAS ORIGINAL? UH, DO, DO WE HAVE ANYTHING VISUALLY LIKE WHAT WE ARE PRESENTING RIGHT NOW, UH, THAT INDICATES THAT THAT WAS AN ORIGINAL, UH, PART OF THE HOME THAT YOU CAN PRESENT US WITH? WELL, COMMISSIONER SVA SAYS, UH, ONE THING I WANT TO ADD, THE WINDOWS ORIGINAL AND THEY, AND THAT, 'CAUSE THEY HAVE THE, UM, THEY HAVE A, LIKE A WAVY GLASS.
SO I, I GUESS THE QUESTION IF, UH, FOR THE APPLICANT, UM, UH, BASED ON SOME OF THE FOLKS WHO'VE BEEN INSIDE THE STRUCTURE WHO BELIEVE BASED ON THE FLOOR AND THE, AND THE WINDOW THAT, UH, THAT THIS IS AN ORIGINAL FEATURE, IS THIS SOMETHING THAT YOU ALL WOULD CONSIDER RETAINING AS PART OF THE DESIGN? UM, YES.
WE, UH, WE ARE RETAINING, UH, PRETTY MUCH ALL OF THE, UH, PARTS OF THE HOME THAT ARE DETERIORATING.
UH, WE ARE PRETTY MUCH TOUCHING ON ALL OF THE WINDOWS OF THE HOME BECAUSE THEY'RE IN, UH, IN PRETTY ROUGH CONDITIONS.
UM, BUT, UH, WE WOULDN'T LIKE TO INCLUDE THIS AS PART OF OUR DESIGN, UH, IN THE NEW DESIGN.
SO IF THERE'S ANY WAY THAT THE COMMISSION, UH, COMMISSIONARIES INVOLVED CAN, UH, BO VOTE IN, IN FAVOR OF THIS, THEN THAT'S WHAT WE'LL PUSH FOR.
UH, IF NOT, THEN, UM, I DON'T KNOW ABOUT OUR DEFERMENT DEFERMENT MAYBE TO FIX THE ISSUE.
UM, BUT WE STRONGLY BELIEVE THAT THAT WASN'T PART OF THE ORIGINAL HOME.
AND IT DOESN'T REPORT ANY, UH, ANY VISUAL VISUAL, UH, TO THE HOME.
'CAUSE IT'S NOT VISIBLE FROM THE STREET EITHER.
UM, SO YEAH, THAT'S, THAT'S ALL I HAVE.
JUST LET ME KNOW IF THERE'S ANYONE ELSE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS MATTER.
UH, IF ANYONE ELSE IS OUT THERE TO SPEAK ON THIS, PLEASE SPEAK UP.
NOT HEARING ANYONE I'LL CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT AND, UM, I THINK THERE'S MORE DISCUSSION FROM COMMISSION.
I WAS GONNA MAKE A MOTION TO ACCEPT STAFF'S APPROVAL WITH THE CONDITION THAT THE BUMP OUT WINDOW REMAIN ONCE STAFF EXAMINES FURTHER TO, TO BE CERTAIN THAT THAT WAS AN ORIGINAL COMMISSIONER STAVE SECONDS.
IS THERE ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? I I, THIS IS ROMAN PLEASE.
[02:05:01]
I'M SORRY.JUST A POINT I'D LIKE TO MAKE THAT THE ARCHITECT I THINK TRIED TO DESCRIBE IT.
I, WHEN WE REVIEW THIS AS STAFF, WE IT DID, IT DID APPEAR TO ME THAT IT'S POSSIBLE THAT THAT BUMP OUT IS NOT VISIBLE FROM THE RIGHT OF WAY YOU MENTIONED.
AND IF IT ISN'T, UM, THEN IT'S NOT EVEN, UH, THERE'S THIS, OR THE ORDINANCE, AS YOU KNOW, HAS NO PURVIEW OVER IT WHATSOEVER.
THERE ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? HISTORICAL STRUCTURE.
ALL ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION.
I WANTED TO, FOR, UH, MS. JACKSON TO REPEAT THE, UH, PROPOSAL.
I THINK WE VOTED, UH, MY MOTION WAS TO ACCEPT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL WITH THE CONDITION THAT THE BUMP OUT WINDOW REMAIN IF IT IS CONFIRMED BY STAFF, BELIEVED BY STAFF TO BE AN ORIGINAL DESIGN ELEMENT ON THAT.
SO I GUESS I'D, I'D ASK STAFF TO GO OUT AGAIN, UNLESS JASON, YOU'RE CONFIDENT FROM YOUR, FROM YOUR FIRST SITE VISIT AND CHECK AS COMMISSIONER STAVE SAID THE FLOORING AND, AND SOME OF THE, THE, UM, LOOK AT THE SUBFLOOR AND SEE IF IT'S CANTILEVERED OUT.
HOW IT'S ATTACHED AT THE BOTTOM, THE RAFTER ENDS APPEAR BEHIND THE GUTTERS TO HAVE THE SAME KIND OF CUTOUT MOLD THAT THE OTHER RAFTER ENDS ON THE ADJACENT WALL HAVE.
SO SIGNS LIKE THAT, THAT MIGHT HELP YOU CONFIRM THAT A BELIEF THAT IT IS ORIGINAL.
AND IF IT IS VERY LONG-WINDED MOTION THAT IT BE, UH, RETAINED, I COULD CERTAINLY DO ANOTHER SITE VISIT AND I'LL MAKE SURE I TAKE ROMAN MCGOWAN WITH ME THIS TIME.
AND COMMISSIONER APT, DID SO DID YOU VOTE AFFIRMATIVE? UH, YES.
SO ARE THERE ANY, UM, OPPOSED TO THE MOTION, SORRY, IT'S WRONG ME AGAIN, AGAIN, WE'RE STILL VOTING, BUT GO AHEAD.
UH, WE CAN'T DO THAT RIGHT, BECAUSE IF IT'S NOT VISIBLE FROM THE RIGHT OF WAY NOW, I'M NOT SURE.
I JUST TRY TO USE GOOGLE'S TREAT VIEW.
'CAUSE I HAVEN'T BEEN TO THE LAST TIME I SAW THIS HOUSE, IT WAS THE FIRST HOUSE THAT, UH, PETE STOCKTON SHOWED ME, WHICH THIS TERRIBLE BUNCH OF WORK WITHOUT A, IT HAD A THIRD FLOOR AT IT, Y'ALL PROBABLY KNOW ABOUT IT.
SO IT'S ALL BEEN, IN A WAY, THIS IS REALLY GREAT WORK.
IT'S COMING BACK INTO COMPLIANCE WITH OUR CITY AND EVERYTHING, BUT IF WE CAN'T SEE THAT FROM THE RIGHT OF WAY, THE ORDINANCE EXEMPTS ALTERATIONS TO THAT.
SO EVEN IF WE THINK, NOT THAT IT'S ORIGINAL AND I'M INCLINED, UM, YOU KNOW, MY SANBORN EXPERIENCE IS A LITTLE DIFFERENT THAN A LOT OF PEOPLE.
I HAVE FOUND THEM TO BE HIGHLY ACCURATE.
SO, UM, AND THAT'S ACROSS THE WHOLE STATE OF TEXAS AND LOOKING AT A LOT OF 'EM.
SO THAT I, FOR US, THAT'S WHAT WE SAW.
WE DID IT, WE DID BELIEVE THAT ACTUALLY THAT WAS ADDED ONE, TWO, WE THOUGHT IT WASN'T VISIBLE FROM THE STREET.
SO WE APOLOGIZE FOR THE, THE DIFFERENCES HERE, BUT THAT'S WHERE WE WERE.
WELL, I, I HAVEN'T CALLED FOR EXTENSION EXTENSIONS YET, SO TECHNICALLY I, I THINK I CAN ASK YOU THE QUESTION BECAUSE I MEAN, IT'S, I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU DEMONSTRATE THAT WE CAN'T SEE IT, BUT WE, I MEAN, I DIDN'T SEE AN IMAGE SHOWING THAT I CAN'T SEE IT.
WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE, WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE TO PULL UP THE, UH, GOOGLE MAPS? BECAUSE YOU, YOU CAN CERTAINLY LOOK IT UP FROM THERE AND, AND SEE THAT IT'S NOT VISIBLE.
UH, IT'S ACTUALLY, THERE'S A FENCE, UH, A LINE, UH, FENCE FROM THE ADJACENT, UH, PROPERTY.
UM, YEAH, THE STARTS RIGHT, THE LINE OF THAT PROPERTY AND IT JUST DOESN'T LET YOU SEE WHATSOEVER.
BUT THERE, BECAUSE OF THE, THE ORDINANCE DOESN'T RECOGNIZE FENCES, SO FENCES AREN'T OBSTRUCTIONS FOR THIS REVIEW.
UM, THOSE FENCES COULD BE REMOVED IN THE FUTURE.
AND SO THAT, THAT'S HOW THE ORDINANCE IS, IS, IS BASED.
BUT, BUT I WAS GOING TO GO THROUGH MY SECOND POINT, WHICH IS THAT THE PORCH IS WIDER THAN THE ACTUAL, UH, BACK OF THE HOME.
AND THAT'S THE, THE MAIN REASON WHY THIS BUMP OUT CANNOT BE SEEN FROM THE, UH, THE FENCE, UH, COMMENT WAS MORE OF A REFERENCE TO LET YOU KNOW THAT THAT FENCE STARTS RIGHT THERE ON THAT POINT TO WHERE THE, UH, WHITENING, UH, OF THE PORCH OF CARS.
AND IT, IT DOESN'T LET YOU SEE ANYTHING BEHIND THE PORCH, UH, DINING ROOM.
AND THAT'S FROM THE MAPS AS WELL.
WELL, UM, WE'RE, WE'RE, I'M JUST LOOKING AT A STREET VIEW AND I CAN, I CAN SEE IT FROM THE, FROM THE STREET.
SO I THINK THAT'S A, THAT'S AN ISSUE.
UM, UM, UM, IF I CAN SEE IT ON A CELL PHONE, THEN IT'S, IT'S THERE.
SO WE HAVE, UH, VOTES FOR, UM, ANYONE ABSTAINING FROM THIS VOTE?
[02:10:02]
UM, MR. CHAIR, HOW IS IT? I'M SORRY.WE, WE'VE CLOSED PUBLIC COMMENT AT THIS, AT THIS TIME, BUT, BUT KIM, I'M GONNA EMPHASIZE WHAT, WHAT MR. MCALLEN WAS SAYING, THAT THE ORDINANCE DOESN'T GIVE YOU JURISDICTION IF WE CAN'T SEE IT FROM THE STREET.
I'VE JUST SEEN A PICTURE ON AN IPHONE AND I CAN SEE IT.
IT'S FROM THE, FROM THE RIGHT OF WAY.
SO I'M, I'M JUST ASKING, I'M PULLING IT UP, BUT IF SURE.
AND THAT'S, BUT, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO, LIKE TO RESOLVE IT TODAY AND NOT HAVE IT PUSHED TILL NEXT MONTH.
BUT I, I THINK MY MOTION DID INCLUDE STAFF SITE VISIT, AND PERHAPS I, I CAN ADD A COMMENT THAT, THAT IN ADDITION TO EXAMINING IF IT WAS ORIGINAL, THAT STAFF DO A, A CLOSE INSPECTION FROM ALL ANGLES OF THE STREET, EVEN BEYOND THE FIRST HOUSE, UH, TO SEE IF THAT BUMP OUT IS VISIBLE.
CAN I ADD THAT TO MY MOTION? THEN WE CAN VOTE TODAY.
IT, IT HAS TO BE AN AMENDMENT TO YOUR, TO YOUR MOTION.
BUT WE, WE'D HAVE TO REVOTE BECAUSE WE'VE ALREADY, WE, WE'VE ALREADY VOTED, BUT, UM, OKAY.
I, I NEED TO ASK STEVE LEGAL HOW TO DO THAT, BUT I MEAN, I DON'T WANNA DO THIS ON GOOGLE MAPS, ON CELL PHONES.
WE CAN GET IN THE CAR AND DRIVE OUT THERE AND SEE.
YEAH, I WOULD RECOMMEND A SITE VISIT BECAUSE I'M PULLING IT UP ON MAPS AND I CAN'T TELL THAT I CAN SEE IT FROM, OKAY.
SO, SO I'D LIKE TO MAKE AN AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION THAT HAS ALREADY PASSED THAT DURING STAFF SITE VISIT TO THE PROPERTY, THAT THEY DETERMINE IF THE BUMP OUT WINDOW IS VISIBLE FROM THE RIGHT OF WAY, FROM THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY.
IS THERE A SECOND FOR THE NEW MOTION? I'LL SECOND THE AMENDMENT.
ANY OPPOSED? ANY ABSTENTIONS? OKAY.
MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION, THIS IS ME AGAIN.
I SUBMIT ITEM MAY 12 AT TWO 10 MARSHALL STREET IN WESTMORELAND.
APPLICANT PROPOSES TO REPLACE EXISTING ASBESTOS SIDING WITH SMOOTH CEMENTITIOUS SIDING.
REPLACE EXISTING WINDOWS WITH DOUBLE HUNG ONE OVER ONE, AND SET RECESS WOOD WINDOWS, AND REPLACE NON HISTORIC DOORS VISIBLE FROM PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY WITH CRAFTSMAN'S DOORS.
STAFF RECOMMENDS PARTIAL APPROVAL.
THE PARTIAL APPROVAL IS TO APPROVE ONLY REMOVING THE ASBESTOS SIDING AND THE DOORS.
IF THE ORIGINAL SIDING IS FOUND UNDERNEATH THE ASBESTOS SIDING MUST CONTACT STAFF TO INSPECT CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.
THE OWNER, RICHARD GRIFFIN, HAS SIGNED UP TO MAKE A STATEMENT.
I'M AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF FROM THE COMMISSION? UH, I HAVE A QUESTION.
UH, WHY DOES A PARTIAL APPROVAL OR NOT, WHY NOT AN APPROVAL WITH A CONDITION? WHAT, WHAT IS SO SPECIFIC ABOUT THAT? YOU NEED PARTIAL APPROVAL? ONLY BECAUSE HOW WOULD I DO APPROVAL OF CONDITION TO KEEP THOSE ORIGINAL WINDOWS THERE? SO I JUST AM PARTIALLY APPROVING TO REPLACE THE FRONT DOORS AND THE ASBESTOS SIDING.
I INSPECTED THE WINDOWS, THE ONLY NEED TO UNDERGO ORDINARY MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR.
I AM GONNA OPEN UP A PUBLIC, UM, COMMENT.
I THINK THERE IS SOMEONE THAT'S, THAT'S HERE, THAT'S JOINED US TO SPEAK ON THIS MATTER.
I'M JASON GRIFFIN, PART OF THE GROUP THAT OWNS TWO 10 MARSHALL STREET.
UH, I'M SPEAKING SPECIFICALLY ON THE WINDOW MATTER.
UH, THE DRIVE BEHIND THE RENOVATIONS THAT WE'VE REQUESTED FROM YOUR COMMISSION IS TO IMPROVE THE ENERGY EFFICIENCY OF THE BUILDING FOR THE TENANTS.
AND, UH, WITH THAT SAID, UH, THE WINDOWS THAT WE, UH, UH, PUT IN OUR APPLICATION WERE THOSE RECOMMENDED BY THE STAFF.
UH, WE FOUND OUT ABOUT THEIR REPORT FINDINGS JUST TWO DAYS AGO.
UH, AND I WAS GIVEN TWO STATEMENTS BY MS. MR. LENAL, ESSENTIALLY, THAT THEY BELIEVE THE CURRENT WINDOWS STILL HAD LIFE LEFT IN THEM, AND SIMPLY WOULD THEY COULD BE RESTORED, AND THAT WOULD BE SUFFICIENT ENOUGH.
AND SECONDLY, THAT IF THESE WINDOWS
[02:15:01]
WERE TO BE REPLACED, THE WINDOWS WE SELECTED WERE SUFFICIENT.UH, OUR PROBLEM IS WE HAVE TENANTS THAT COMPLAIN OF HIGH ENERGY BILLS.
AND, UH, AND THIS IS DESPITE HAVING NEW, UH, ENERGY EFFICIENT AC UNITS, THESE APARTMENTS LEAK LIKE SIEVES.
UH, AND IT'S SIMPLY BECAUSE THESE WINDOWS ARE SINGLE PANED AND AT LEAST OVER 80 YEARS OLD, WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS MAINTAIN THE HISTORIC CHARACTER WITHOUT, UH, WHILE MAINTAINING MODERN COMFORTS OF ENERGY EFFICIENCY.
IT'S MY KNOWLEDGE OF THE PRESERVATION MANUAL, THAT THERE IS NO REQUIREMENT TO USE SOME ITEM ON A PROPERTY UNTIL THE VERY LAST LITTLE BIT OF LIFE THAT IT HAS BEFORE REPLACING IT.
AS LONG AS WE MAINTAIN THE CHARACTER, UH, OF THOSE ITEMS, AND WE BELIEVE WE ARE DOING THAT BY SELECTING THE TYPES OF WINDOWS THAT THE STAFF TOLD US TO SELECT.
AND WITH THAT, I'LL LEAVE IT TO YOU TO ASK ME ANY QUESTIONS.
ARE THERE ANY, UH, QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? I HAVE A QUESTION OF STAFF.
ARE THE, ARE THE REPLACEMENT WINDOWS IN THE PACKAGE, OR HAVE WE SEEN THOSE, OR WOULD THEY BE REPLACED COMPLETELY IN KIND THE, YOU WANT ME TO ANSWER THAT? THE ONE I I THOUGHT YOU WERE SAYING THAT I THINK IT'S MORE FOR JASON ANSWER.
YEAH, IT JUST, IT'S WONDERING WHETHER THE REPLACEMENT WINDOW OPTION IS IN COMMISSIONER SERENA VASAN IS ANNOUNCING HER DEPARTURE FOR THE RECORD.
SO THE WINDOWS THAT WERE PROPOSED TO REPLACE WERE DOUBLE HUNG ONE OVER ONE AND SAID IN RE RECESSED WOOD WINDOWS.
SO THEY WOULD LACK THE, UM, ADDITIONAL MUS THAT WE SEE IN THE EXISTING WINDOWS ON THE UPPER, THE UPPER SASHES WOULD BE, WOULD BE LOST.
AND YOU'LL SEE THAT ON THE FRONT ELEVATIONS ON THE FIRST FLOOR AND SECOND FLOOR WHERE THERE'S A LITTLE BIT MORE, UM, LIGHT PATTERNS HAPPENING.
AND THE, IN YOUR CONVERSATION WITH THE APPLICANT, DID YOU EVER TALK ABOUT INTERIOR STORM WINDOWS? NO, WE DID NOT.
IT'S, IT'S ONE, UH, METHOD THAT'S OFTEN USED TO ADD ANOTHER LAYER AGL GLAZING LAYER ON THE INSIDE OF THE WINDOW.
THEY'RE AIRTIGHT AND THEY ARE USED, UM, ON MANY HISTORIC BUILDINGS THAT HAVE, UH, LEAD RATINGS, UM, IF YOU, IF YOU WILL.
SO, UM, IT, IT HAS TO DO WITH THE AIR TIGHTNESS OF THOSE STORM WINDOWS, WHICH ARE REMOVABLE FOR CLEANING, BUT, BUT ARE WELL SEALED AND MAKE, MAKE A, A COMPARTMENT.
UM, THEY'RE OFTEN USED IN OUR CLIMATE.
AND, AND WHAT ARE THE NAMES OF THOSE? ONE IS CALLED MAGNETITE.
UM, BUT, UM, IT, IT'S AN INTERIOR STORM WINDOW THAT CAN BE RETROFIT, UM, FOR PROJECTS LIKE, LIKE THIS.
BUT EVEN FOR COMMERCIAL BUILDING, HISTORIC BUILDINGS, IT CAN BE USED.
JUST TO MENTION THAT THERE'S ANOTHER THANK YOU BRAND NAME.
I'M NOT, NOT, UH, RECOMMENDING IT PER SE, BUT YOU MIGHT LOOK AT ONE, IT'S CALLED END O IT'S THE WORD WINDOW WITHOUT THE FIRST W THAT'S THE BRAND NAME OR THE COMPANY NAME, OR THE BRAND NAME OF THE PRODUCT.
SIMILAR, UH, SIMILAR, UH, EFFECT IS, UH, DESCRIBED.
I WOULD, I WOULD BE INCLINED TO, TO APPROVE WOOD DOUBLE HUNG REPLACEMENT WINDOWS BEYOND THOSE THAT HAVE THIS DECORATIVE PATTERN.
IF THERE WERE SOME SORT OF COMPROMISE WHERE, YOU KNOW, FOR THREE SIDES OF THE PROPERTY, UM, THE ENERGY EFFICIENCY COULD BE IMPROVED, UM, WITH REPLACEMENT.
BUT THAT FRONT FACADE IN THESE DECORATIVE WINDOWS REALLY MAKE THAT, YOU KNOW, THERE'S THERE CHARACTER DEFINING FOR THE HOUSE.
UM, IF THERE WERE SOME, UM, MIDDLE GROUND THERE WHERE THE INTERIOR STORM WINDOWS OR SOME OTHER FORM OF, OF EFFICIENCY COULD BE APPLIED WITH SOME REPLACEMENT WINDOWS, I WOULD BE INCLINED TO, TO SUPPORT THAT, I WILL SAY ON THE PROPERTY.
AND MR. LENAL CAN CONFIRM THOSE WINDOWS ARE ONLY ON THE FRONT FACADE.
THEY ARE NOT, UH, ON ANY OTHER SIDE OF THE PROPERTY.
I GUESS TO FINISH MY THOUGHT THERE, WOULD YOU BE, WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO CONSIDER YOU AND YOUR TEAM BE WILLING TO CONSIDER SOMETHING LIKE THAT? IF I WERE TO MAKE A MOTION, I, I THINK A MIDDLE GROUND, UH, YES, I'M WILLING TO FIND A MIDDLE GROUND.
AND REALLY THAT'S HOW IT CAME INTO THIS ORIGINALLY.
WHEN, I MEAN, WHEN TALKING TO THE STAFF BEFORE EVEN MAKING THE APPLICATION,
[02:20:02]
I THINK ONE OTHER CONCERN OUR CONTRACTORS IS BROUGHT UP, AND YOU GUYS CAN SPEAK TO THIS 'CAUSE IT'S NOT MY DEPARTMENT, IS THAT THESE WINDOWS, BECAUSE OF THEIR AGE, THEY, THEY'RE ESSENTIALLY SEALED SHUT.AND THEY'RE WORRIED THAT NO RESTORATION DROP JOB WOULD ACTUALLY EVER ALLOW THEM TO FUNCTION PROPERLY AND OPEN AND SHUT.
UH, AND SO THAT'S ANOTHER CONCERN THAT THEY HAD HAD.
UM, AND, BUT I, I CAN'T, SURE.
I MEAN, I, I CAN, I CAN ATTEST THAT THESE WINDOWS ARE, UH, CONCEIVABLY COULD OUTLAST ANY REPLACEMENT WINDOW PUT INTO THEM IF, UH, THEY'RE PAINTED SHUT.
BUT, UM, THEY CAN BE THAT, THAT CAN BE UNDONE.
THEY CAN BE REPAIRED AND, AND THEY ARE DESIGNED FOR A VERY, VERY LONG LIFESPAN.
AND, AND THEY DO TAKE MAINTENANCE PAINTING, AND THERE, THERE'S SOME COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THAT.
UM, WE DON'T OFTEN SEE THIS MUTTON PATTERN THAT COME BEFORE US.
AND SO IT'S A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT THAN JUST A ONE OVER ONE PATTERN.
BUT, UM, YOU KNOW, THERE, THERE ARE WAYS TO MAKE THESE WINDOWS, YOU KNOW, REPARABLE, UM, AND, AND MEET LEAD STANDARDS IF YOU, IF YOU WILL.
SO THERE, THERE ARE A LOT OF EXAMPLES OF THAT INCREASINGLY IN, IN OUR AREA HAVE BEEN DONE HERE AND IN GALVESTON, WHERE, WHERE HUMIDITY'S EVEN EVEN BIGGER THAN A CONCERN FOR US.
CAN I, IF IT WASN'T CLEAR, I WOULD BE WILLING TO, OKAY.
SO I GUESS I'D THROW IT BACK TO YOU THEN FOR HOW YOU WANNA PROCEED.
I MEAN, UH, WE CAN, UM, EITHER DEFER THIS AND LET YOU GO INVESTIGATE THE INTERIOR STORMS, UM, YOU KNOW, AND PUT TOGETHER YOUR PLAN GOING FORWARD.
OR WE CAN MAKE A MOTION TODAY WITH THE CONDITION THAT ANY OF THESE WINDOWS WITH THE CROSS HATCH DIAMOND MU PATTERN BE RETAINED.
UM, AND, AND MY MOTION WOULD BE THAT, THAT THOSE ONE OVER ONE WINDOWS, UM, ELSEWHERE ON THE THREE NON-PRIMARY FACADES COULD BE REPLACED.
UH, COULD I MAKE A COUNTER PROPOSAL THAT'S SOMEWHAT SIMILAR? MM-HMM
IS TO CARVE OUT, GO AHEAD AND CARVE OUT THE APPROVAL FOR THE SIDING AND THE DOORS, AND ALSO FOR THE WINDOWS THAT AREN'T ON THE FRONT FACADE.
UH, AND THEN DEFER THE FRONT FACADE PORTION SO WE COULD FIGURE OUT WHAT IS BEST AND DEFER, UH, DISCUSS THAT WITH STAFF.
KIM, CAN WE, MRS. MICKELSON, CAN WE DO THAT? OKAY.
ROMAN, THAT SOUNDS REASONABLE.
IF COMMISSION IS AGREEABLE, JUST A LITTLE POINT ON IT THAT SURE.
THOSE WINDOWS ARE ALSO ON THE SIDES OF WE'RE, I'M LOOKING, WE HAVE, YEAH, YEAH, THERE'S THE SIDE THERE.
SHE'S SAYING WHEREVER THOSE WINDOWS HAVE THAT PATTERN THAT WE'RE, THAT WE'RE GONNA LOCK IN, WE'RE GONNA, THOSE ARE GET RESTORED OR, OR SOMETHING, OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
THERE'RE ALSO WINDOWS WITH OTHER MU PATTERNS.
BUT THE ALUMINUM, IS IT ALL THE WINDOWS? NO, NO.
THERE'S A, THERE'S ONE WITH A VERTICAL MUTTON PATTERN.
THERE'S A VERTICAL THREE, THREE, UH, UH, THREE LIGHT, FULL LIGHT PATTERNS.
I THINK THE MOTION WAS FOR WHAT PAID YOU WAS FOR ONE OVER ONE.
I THOUGHT, I THOUGHT THE MOTION WAS THAT WE WERE RETAINING ALL OF THE WINDOWS WITH MUTTON PATTERN, REGARDLESS OF THE MUTTON PATTERN OR JUST THE DIAMOND.
NO, WE CAN DO, I'M JUST, I WAS JUST LOOKING FOR CLARIFICATION BEFORE WE WERE TO VOTE.
UM, I, I THINK THAT'S A GOOD CLARIFICATION.
SO LET TRY AND RE LET ME TRY AND REWORD THIS.
I SEE THE ONE, THE MORE CRAFTS COMM ALPA WANTS TO ADD SOMETHING IF I MAY.
I'M A LITTLE BIT CONFUSED ABOUT THE DOOR.
I'M NOT SURE WHICH DOOR IS BEING REPLACED BECAUSE THE DOOR IN THE FRONT SEEMS, UH, IT'S APPROPRIATE IN THE FRONT DOOR.
SO I'M JUST, I'M JUST SEEKING CLARIFICATION.
JASON, CAN YOU ANSWER THAT QUESTION? OKAY.
SO THERE, THAT HAS BEEN SHOWN ON THE SCREEN, THAT IS THE DOOR TO THE RIGHT WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT IT FROM THE PUBLIC, UM, RIGHT OF WAY.
AND THEN THERE IS ANOTHER SIDE DOOR TO THE LEFT OF IT.
YOU KNOW, WE'RE LOOKING AT, THIS IS A CRAFTSMAN DOOR, HE WANTS TO REPLACE IT, BUT I, I BELIEVE DURING OUR DISCUSSIONS, UM, THERE WAS ISSUES WITH THAT.
AND I THINK WE, IF YOU RE AND I'LL HAVE JASON ANSWER THAT, UH, ABOUT THAT ONE DOOR THAT'S PAINTED RED, MR. LENAL IS CORRECT THAT THAT PARTICULAR DOOR DOES ACTUALLY MATCH THE CRAFTSMAN STYLE.
UH, HOWEVER MANY OF THE DOORS ON THE PROPERTY DO NOT MM-HMM
AND SO WE WERE GOING TO MAKE IT ALL CONSISTENT.
THAT'S ONE OF THE BIGGEST ISSUES WITH THIS PROPERTY IS EVERYTHING IS MISMATCHED FROM LAYERS OF RENOVATION OR WAVES OF RENOVATIONS.
I'VE GOT THREE DIFFERENT TYPES OF SIDING, THREE DIFFERENT TYPES OF WINDOWS,
[02:25:01]
UH, MULTIPLE TYPES OF DOORS.AND SO, UH, THERE, THE FRONT BUILDING IS A DUPLEX, AND ONE OF THE DOORS IS NOT CRAFTSMEN.
WHILE THIS ONE THAT YOU SEE IS, THANK YOU.
IS THE CRAFTSMAN DOOR THAT, IS IT ORIGINAL? DO WE KNOW THAT? IS IT A REPLACEMENT? OUR, OUR GROUPS OWN THIS PROPERTY ONE YEAR, SO I DON'T KNOW MUCH IF IT'S ORIGINAL OR, OR NOT.
WELL, WOULD YOU, WOULD YOU, AND TO MR. S, THE, UH, YOU POINTED AT THE DOOR ON THE LEFT, UM, IN THE VERY BACK TO THE LEFT SIDE.
IS THAT, THAT, IS THAT ORIGINAL NOT THE ONE THAT, NOT THE ONE THAT'S PAINTED KIND OF REDDISH BROWN? UH, IT'S ON THE, UM, IT'S ON THE PORCH WHEN YOU COME OUT THE PORCH.
THAT, THAT ONE IS ORIGINAL AND, AND, UH, I DON'T BELIEVE ME REPLACING, I THINK, OH, YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE ONE ON THE TOP.
IT'S THE, IT IS A LITTLE BIT HARD TO SEE.
UH, UH, YOU CAN, YOU, YOU CAN SEE FROM THE STREET VIEW PRETTY, UH, ON THE GOOGLE, YOU CAN SEE THAT THE GLASSES THAT'S IN THE MIDDLE, IT SEEMS THAT TYPICALLY OF THAT PERIOD TIME PERIOD, UH, IT, IT MAY VERY WELL BE, UH, UH, THE, WE WERE, OUR MAIN REQUEST WAS JUST TO MAKE IT ALL UNIFORM.
WE WERE GOING TO HAVE, UH, MORE MODERN, MAYBE BETTER INSULATED DOORS, UH, THEN WHATEVER THESE DOORS.
I DO NOT KNOW IF THEY WERE ORIGINAL.
I BELIEVE THIS WAS A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE THAT AT SOME POINT IN ITS HISTORY WAS CONVERTED INTO A DUPLEX, AT LEAST IN THE FRONT BUILDING.
YEAH, I HAVE THE SAME, THIS IS COMMISSIONER.
I HAVE THE SAME DOOR AT MY HOUSE.
UH, SO, AND THAT WAS BACK FROM 1911, SO I BELIEVE IT'S THE SAME DOOR.
MY AND MY HOUSE HAS PRETTY MUCH THE SAME DOOR.
AND I BELIEVE THAT WAS ADDED TO, UH, YOU COULD ONE MORE THING, UH, ON THE BUMP OUT, LIKE SAME FROM THAT DINING ROOM THAT WE WERE JUST SPEAKING OF THE BUMP OUT, I'M LOOKING AT THE, UH, THE SANDBORNE FIRE MAP, AND THEY DON'T, UH, THEY DON'T SHOW THAT ON THE MAP EITHER.
SO IT'S KIND OF THE SAME AS A PREVIOUS, UH, APPLICANT.
BUT WHAT I'M HEARING IS THAT THIS WAS CONVERTED TO A DUPLEX AT SOME POINT.
SO ONE OF THE DOORS IS NOT ORIGINAL AND ONE MAY BE ORIGINAL.
UM, BASICALLY IT, IT'S A FIVE UNIT, UH, COMPLEX, RIGHT? SO YES, MANY DOORS DO, BUT, BUT IT'S APPROPRIATE FOR THAT HOUSE THOUGH, THOSE IN THE FRONT.
AND THE, AND THE USE OF, WE DON'T REGULATE USE, BUT THE USE OF THE THIS HOME WILL CONTINUE TO BE A MULTI-UNIT, UH, RESIDENCE.
UM, COMMISSIONERS, IS THERE A, A MOTION THAT MADE IT RIGHT?
I, I GOTTA REMEMBER WHAT IT WAS.
OKAY, SO I MOVED THAT WE ACCEPT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION FOR THE SIDING AND THE EXISTING WINDOW REPLACEMENT WITH A CARVE OUT FOR ANY WINDOWS WITH A SPECIALIZED MUTTON PATTERN.
SO ANYTHING OTHER THAN A ONE OVER ONE OR THE ALUMINUM WINDOWS BASED ON WHAT I'M SEEING.
AND THE DOORS WITH THE RECOMMENDATION THAT YOU KEEP THE FRONT DOOR AND REPLACE THE TWO OTHERS.
IS THERE A SECOND? IT'S VERY DETAILED.
ANY OPPOSED? COMMISSIONER? STAVO.
OPPOSED? ANY ABSTENTIONS? THE MOTION PASSES.
THANK YOU FOR WORKING WITH US.
NOW WITH THAT, I, I THINK WE'RE GONNA MOVE TO ITEM B, UM, PUBLIC HEARING CONSIDERATION OF AND POSSIBLE ACTION FOR SIX 15 HEIGHTS BOULEVARD INVOLVING A DEMOLITION IN HOUSTON HEIGHTS SOUTH.
ALRIGHT, WILSON, FOR THIS PRESENTATION, WILL WE PLEASE ADVANCE ON MY QUEUE, PLEASE? NEXT SLIDE.
FIRST I WANNA START WITH THE APPLICATION.
THERE IS A APPROVED COA FOR TWO THINGS.
ONE, A REAR EDITION OF THIS ORIGINAL HISTORIC STRUCTURE.
THERE'S A SECOND ONE THAT WAS APPROVED FOR A DETACHED ACCESSORY DWELLING, AND, UH, THAT OCCURRED IN JUST IN JANUARY, I BELIEVE.
AND THEN WHAT WE HAD WAS A REVISION TO THE ATTACHED OR DETACHED ACCESSORY DWELLING.
THERE'S A REVISION AND WHAT OCCURRED, AND LET ME GO THROUGH THE TIMELINE.
[02:30:04]
NEXT SLIDE.OKAY, SO HERE YOU CAN SEE HERE'S THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE.
ON THE TOP IS THE INVENTORY PHOTO THAT WAS INCLUDING THE STAFF REPORT EARLIER THIS YEAR.
I DID A GOOGLE STREET VIEW TO SEE IF IT STILL REMAINED.
YOU CAN SEE IT HAS REMAINED UNCHANGED.
SO WHEN THEY BEGAN THE WORK AND THEY'RE REMOVING THE, UH, DRYWALL ON THE INSIDE, THEY DISCOVERED THAT THERE WAS SOME FIRE DAMAGE.
AND SO THE BUILDING INSPECTOR WENT OUT TO LOOK AT THE SITE AND THE FIRE DAMAGE.
BUT IF YOU LOOK BEHIND THE PHOTOS, NEXT SLIDE PLEASE.
THERE WAS ALSO SHIPLAP WAS REMOVED FROM THE EXTERIOR WALL ASSEMBLY.
THE BUILDING INSPECTOR RED TAGGED HIM.
THEY WERE NOT SUPPOSED TO TAKE OFF THAT SHIPLAP AND THAT WAS IN THE PERMIT WHEN IT WAS, UH, PRINTED OUT, WHEN IT WAS PURCHASES.
UH, HAVE CONTACT STAFF TO INSPECT ANY DAMAGED MATERIALS BEFORE THAT HAPPENED.
AND THAT LOWER IMAGE, YOU CAN SEE THAT'S THE DEMOLITION PLAN THAT WAS APPROVED.
THEY'RE ONLY GOING TO DEMONSTR THE INTERIOR WALLS, BUT AS YOU CAN SEE, IT SAYS THEIR EXTERIOR WALL ASSEMBLY TO REMAIN AS WELL AS THE ORIGINAL WINDOWS.
THERE'S A LITTLE BIT CLOSER VIEW OF ALL THAT.
ALSO TO PLEASE NOTE THE DATE OF THESE PICTURES.
OKAY, HERE IS THE PERMIT THAT WAS PRINTED OUT.
I HAVE CIRCLED WHERE IT SAYS THAT STAFF MUST INSPECT IF THERE'S ANY DAMAGE MATERIALS.
SO I WENT OUT TWO DAYS LATER, OH MY GOD.
AND TWO DAYS THE SHIPLAP WAS GONE, THE ORIGINAL WINDOWS WERE GONE.
AND LET ME GO THROUGH MY TIMELINE HERE.
I WAS IN CONTACT WITH THE AGENT, LUIS CONE, NOT THE OWNER, BUT LUIS CONE.
AND I SENT THESE PHOTOS TO HIM.
AND I SAID, LOOK, THIS IS NO LONGER THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE.
AND I SAID, EVERYTHING'S BEEN REMOVED.
I ASKED HIM, PLEASE ASK IF THE ORIGINAL WINDOWS AND SHIPLAP IS IN THAT DUMPSTER.
THE PROPERTY WAS LOCKED, I CANNOT GET ON GROUNDS.
THIS IS ALL PHOTOGRAPHS THROUGH A CHAIN LINK FENCE.
AS YOU CAN SEE, ALL OF THIS IS NEW FRAMING, NEW WOOD, UH, THERE ON THE TOP IMAGE THEY PROVE COA DID SAY THAT THEY WOULD ALTER THE FRONT PORCH, THE CONCRETE STEPS, BUT NOT ANYTHING ELSE.
SO AGAIN, I'M JUST TRYING TO GET AS MUCH AS I CAN FROM THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY.
CANNOT GAIN ACCESS ONTO THE PROPERTY ALL, ALTHOUGH LUIS JOON SAID I COULD GO ON THE PROPERTY.
NOW YOU CAN SEE FROM THIS IMAGE WHERE THE ORIGINAL FOUNDATION WAS KEPT, BUT THEY DID ALTER IT A LITTLE BIT AND WE'LL SEE THAT WHEN THE STOP WALK ORDER WAS ISSUED.
SO THIS WAS, UH, THE DAY AFTER THIS STOP WORK ORDER WAS POSTED AT THE SITE.
AND WHEN THEY WENT OUT THERE, THEY WERE TO GET MORE COMPREHENSIVE UP CLOSE PHOTOS.
AND THERE YOU CAN SEE HOW THE FOUNDATION, IT STILL REMAINS.
BUT AS PETE STOCKTON POINTED OUT, THESE STUDS ARE NOT GOING DOWN TO THE FOUNDATION.
THEY'RE STOPPING ABOVE THAT, UH, FOUR BY SIX OR SIX BY FOUR, I BELIEVE.
SO WE HAD THE STOP WORK ORDER ISSUED.
THERE'S, UH, INTERNAL STAFF DISCUSSIONS THAT WENT ON AND, UH, THE OWNER APOSTOLOS, AKA PAUL MTOS, UH, WAS CONTACTED AND A ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING WAS SET UP TO HEAR.
AND THIS TOOK PLACE ON MONDAY, AUGUST 22ND, 2022.
CAN I CLARIFY THAT, JASON? YES.
SO, SO THAT THE COMMISSION UNDERSTANDS THE ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING WAS OVER, WHETHER OR NOT THE STOP WORK ORDER WAS PROPERLY ISSUED, UM, THAT'S ALL THAT CAN BE DECIDED AT THAT HEARING.
SO WE WENT AND THE HEARING OFFICER UPHELD THAT STOP WORK ORDER.
SO THAT STOP WORK ORDER IS STILL IN EFFECT.
UH, PRESENTER, WOULD YOU PLEASE ZOOM IN ON THIS, THE, UH, CONCLUSION
[02:35:01]
OF THIS STOP WORK, UH, ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING, PLEASE.I BELIEVE IT'S GOING TO BE THE SECOND TO LAST PARAGRAPH.
PLEASE ZOOM IN ON THAT PLEASE.
AND SAYS THE PHOTOS SHOW A DEMOLITION OF THE ENTIRE STRUCTURE WITH NEW FRAMING.
THE PROPERTY OWNER HAD NO EVIDENCE TO PRESENT AND ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THE SCOPE OF WORK ON THE CERTIFICATE OF REP APPROPRIATENESS HAD BEEN EXCEEDED.
ALRIGHT, PLEASE ZOOM OUT AND MOVE TO THE NEXT SLIDE.
WE WOULD PLEASE ENLARGE, ENLARGE ON THE UPPER DEFINITION, PLEASE.
SO AFTER THIS ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING HAD CONCLUDED, THERE WAS INTERNAL STAFF DISCUSSION ABOUT, YOU KNOW, DEMOLITION AND SUCH AND WHERE WE WOULD GO FORWARD.
AND ALSO TOO, I DO WANNA POINT OUT WHEN I HAD THIS DISCUSSION WITH THE OWNER, UM, ATOS, I DID POINT OUT THAT THIS IS IN THE CRITERIA.
THERE IS, UH, THE DEFINITION OF, AND THERE'S ALSO THIS WORK IS SECTION DON'T HAVE IT.
2 0 3 D AND ITS ENFORCEMENT PENALTIES.
I DID MAKE SURE THAT INFORMED THE HOMEOWNER OF THIS.
NOW AGAIN, OUR INTERNAL STAFF DISCUSSION WAS OFFERING A PATH FORWARD, AND THAT WAS WHEN WE CAME UP WITH THIS RECOMMENDATION.
PLEASE GO TO RECOMME RECOMMENDATION SLIDE PLEASE.
AND SO WE'RE GONNA DENY THE CERTIFICATE OF APARTMENT IS FOR DEMOLITION AND ISSUE A CUR TO DECK AND SHE, THE NEW CONSTRUCTION TO STRUCTURALLY STABILIZE IT.
THAT IS WHAT, UH, WE HAVE COME TOGETHER AS STAFF.
AND THIS IS OUR RECOMMENDATION.
UH, THE OWNER, AKA PAUL MTOS IS AVAILABLE AND HE ACTUALLY WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A STATEMENT BEFORE THE COMMISSION.
I AM AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS IF YOU MAY HAVE.
THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
WE DON'T APPROVE THIS WORKAROUND.
THERE'S EITHER A TWO OR 10 YEAR PERIOD WHERE THEY CAN'T BUILD ANYTHING ON THE PROPERTY.
SO IN THAT SECTION, THERE'S A SEGMENT WHERE IT SAYS THEY CANNOT BUILD FOR TWO YEARS, THEN THEY MAY APPLY FOR A COA BEFORE THE COMMISSION TO BUILD BACK THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE ONLY IN SIMILAR DIMENSIONS, BUT NOTHING ELSE CAN BE APPLIED FOR, FOR 10 YEARS.
THAT'S TALKING ABOUT REAR ADDITION AND DETACH ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS, GARAGES, GARAGE, APARTMENTS.
BUT THIS, I AM LEAVING UP FOR THE COMMISSION TO DECIDE WHETHER IT GOES STAFF RECOMMENDATION OR NOT.
BUT JASON, THE, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THIS HEARING THAT WAS REFERRED TO, UH, ALSO DETERMINE THAT THIS MET THE DEFINITION OF DEMOLITION.
UH, CAN I ASK THAT QUESTION FOR THE YEAH, OF COURSE.
AND, AND YOU KNOW, THAT IS WHAT THE HEARING OFFICER PUT IN HER LETTER.
UM, I THINK THAT WAS PART OF WHAT THE PRESENTATION DISCUSSION WAS, THAT IT WAS AN EFFECTIVE DEMOLITION, UM, OF THAT, OF THE STRUCTURE.
WE DID NOT GO INTO, IN GREAT DETAIL THIS PROVISION IN THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION ORDINANCE.
AND ALTHOUGH THIS, THIS PROVISION WAS COPIED IN THE MATERIALS I HANDED TO THE APPLICANT AND THE HEARING OFFICER.
UM, BUT WE DISCUSSED THAT, YOU KNOW, THERE WERE REALLY SEVERE PENALTIES FOR THIS TYPE IF IT'S FOUND TO BE A DEMOLITION.
UM, AS JASON MENTIONS AMONG STAFF, WE HAD LENGTHY AND COMPLICATED DISCUSSIONS ABOUT, YOU KNOW, WHAT COULD BE A PATH FORWARD.
IS IT BETTER TO GET SOMETHING THERE THAT'S STABILIZED VERSUS A VACANT LOT VERSUS WHATEVER.
THAT'S WHY WE CAME UP WITH THIS RECOMMENDATION, BRINGING IT TO YOU GUYS WHO GET PAID THE BIG BUCKS TO MAKE THE TOUGH DECISIONS
UM, BUT, AND MAYBE, MAYBE THEY'LL DOUBLE THAT NEXT YEAR.
UM, BUT, BUT IN OTHER WORDS, THERE ARE SOME, SOME FACTORS FOR YOU ALL TO DISCUSS.
YOU MAY RECALL, UM, THERE WAS A PREVIOUS ONE AND I SUDDENLY AM BLANKING ON THE, I HAVE THAT ADDRESS.
JASON, JASON CAN BRIEF YOU ON THAT.
WE HAD SOMETHING SOMEWHAT SIMILAR, UM, ABOUT WHAT, TWO YEARS AGO AND KIND OF HAD THE SAME ISSUE.
IS IT REALLY TOTALLY DEMOLISHED? AND WE BROUGHT THAT I TO YOU SO JASON CAN GO OVER THAT AND REFRESH STREET.
SO I WOULD SAY THAT THAT CAME UP AS 1526
[02:40:01]
COURTLAND STREET IN HOUSTON HEIGHTS EAST.THIS CAME BEFORE THE COMMISSION ON MARCH 21ST, 2019.
AND THE STAFF BACK THEN PUT IN FOR THE CUR DETAILS, WHICH THEY HAD SAID WAS, THIS IS TO INFORM YOU THAT OUR OFFICE IN CONSULTATION WITH THE CITY OF HOUSTON PERMITTING AND LEGAL DEPARTMENTS HAVE CONCLUDED THAT THE REMAINING STRUCTURE OF 1526 COURTLAND AS STABILIZED DOES NOT MEET THE THRESHOLD OF DEMOLITION UNDER SECTION 33 2 0 1 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF HOUSTON.
THAT WAS WHAT CAME UP IN 2019.
BUT I WAS NOT HERE AT THAT TIME.
THERE WERE A NUMBER OF CONDITIONS, THERE WAS THREE CONDITIONS.
I CAN GIVE THAT TO YOU IF YOU SO, SO DESIRE, BUT I'LL NOT READ THAT.
WAS THAT QUEEN ANN
BUT IF I, IF I RECALL THAT THERE WAS QUITE A BIT OF ORIGINAL FRAMING LEFT IN THAT HOUSE.
THEY HAD TAKEN A LOT OF MATERIAL OUT, BUT THERE WERE STILL ORIGINAL WINDOWS THAT WERE RETAINED ON SITE.
I I DO BELIEVE THESE ARE DIFFERENT SCENARIOS AND YOU ALL MAY TOTALLY BE ABLE TO DISTINGUISH AND EACH PROPERTY IS UNIQUE.
WELL, I'M GONNA OPEN IT TO PUBLIC COMMENT.
CAN I ASK JUST ONE CLARIFICATION REAL QUICK, PLEASE? WHAT IS, TELL ME WHAT IS FRAMED RIGHT NOW? LIKE WHAT DOES THAT IN ENCOMPASS OF THE C OF A THAT WAS ISSUED? IS IT JUST THE ORIGINAL HOUSE OR HAS THE WHOLE ADDITION BEEN FRAMED? SO THERE'S A WHOLE NEW FRAME OF THE ORIGINAL HOUSE AND THE REAR ADDITION.
WILSON, WOULD YOU GO BACK COUPLE SLIDES UNTIL I TELL YOU STOP PLEASE.
UH, STOP, GO FOR, IS THAT THE REAR EDITION? IT SHOULD BE ABLE TO SHOW THAT THERE'S THE REAR EDITION.
AND IS THIS THIS SINGLE STORY EDITION THAT WAS APPROVED? IT WAS, GIMME ONE SECOND SHOWS PORCH, I THINK IN THE, IT WAS A ONE STORY MM-HMM
308 SQUARE FEET REAR EDITION THAT LOOKS LIKE IT'S GOT, AND THERE YOU GO.
YOU CAN SEE THERE ON THE IMAGE THAT IS THE REAR EDITION ON THE BACK.
YOU CAN SEE HOW IT CUTS IN ON THE INSET.
AND THEN IF YOU GO IN, YOU'LL SEE THE REAR EDITION GOES UP AND THEN THERE'S A INSET WHERE THE ORIGINAL CORNER USED TO BE.
UM, YOU PERSONALLY WENT TO INSPECT THIS HOUSE AS IS BEEN FRAMED NEW TODAY.
SO I JUST WANNA CLARIFY THAT THE, UH, ALL THE ENTIRE BALLOON FRAMING AND THE BALLOON, UH, STUDS ARE ALL TAKEN OUT AS WELL AS THE ORIGINAL FLOORS WERE ALL TAKEN OUT.
SO THEY PUT A, THEY PUT A NEW SUBFLOOR ON AND EVERYTHING HAS BEEN BOTTOM PLATED.
IS THAT CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT.
AND AGAIN, I'LL POINT OF ORDER IS I COULD ONLY SEE THIS FROM THROUGH A CHAIN LEAK FENCE, BUT THROUGH THE LENS OF MY CAMERA, THIS IS WHERE I WAS ABLE TO GET THESE PHOTOGRAPHS AS DONE BY THE BUILDING INSPECTOR WHO ISSUED THE STOP WORK ORDER AND THEY'RE ABLE TO GET ON THE SITE.
I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT OUR ORIGINAL FLOORS ARE TOTALLY GONE AS WELL.
I THINK SO I'D LIKE TO OPEN UP TO THE PUBLIC JUST IN JUST A MOMENT, BUT I, I THINK, KIM, MY QUESTION AFTER, UM, MORE DISCUSSION, WHAT I'D LIKE TO KNOW IS, IS FROM YOUR PERSPECTIVE, WHAT ARE OUR OPTIONS AS YOU SEE THEM? I, I JUST, I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THE, THE GAMUT OF WHAT, OF, OF YOUR INTERPRETATION OF WHERE WE STAND BECAUSE IT'S, I HAVE AN, I HAVE AN IDEA, BUT IT'S STILL, IT'S A LITTLE, THIS IS, THIS IS IT? WELL, WE, WE DON'T SEE THIS KIND OF, I MEAN, WE'VE ONLY SEEN THIS ONCE BEFORE, AS WAS POINTED OUT.
SO THIS IS A VERY RARE OCCASION AND THREE OF US HAVE BEEN ON THIS COMMISSION A VERY LONG TIME.
SO, UM, BUT AT THAT, BUT AT THIS TIME I'LL OPEN TO, UH, TO PUBLIC COMMENT.
AND I THINK THAT, UM, THE APPLICANT IS, IS, IS HERE VIRTUALLY TO SPEAK.
WOULD, WOULD YOU, COULD YOU STATE YOUR NAME AND PLEASE, UM, ADDRESS THE COMMISSION? UH, YES.
DAVID, UH, NAME IS ALOS LA NATOS.
UM, I ASSUME EVERYBODY CAN HEAR ME WELL, I'LL JUST CONTINUE TALKING.
UM, SO, SO FIRST I I, I JUST REALLY WANNA SAY THANK YOU, UM, TO, TO JASON AND, AND KIM AND, AND TEVIN GIVING ME A, A, A PATHWAY FORWARD.
UM, I MEAN, CLEARLY AFTER WE HAD THE HEARING, UH, YOU PUT YOUR HEADS TOGETHER AND, AND HAVE COME UP WITH, WITH AN OPTION.
I REALLY, REALLY APPRECIATE THAT.
UM, WHAT, WHAT I LIKE TO LET EVERYBODY KNOW IS, UM, A TERM WAS USED NEGLIGENCE, UH, EARLY ON IN THIS, THE, THE PROCESS, RIGHT? AND TOWARDS THE END OF JULY, EARLY AUGUST, UM, WHEN THIS STARTED COMING ABOUT, AND YOU KNOW, I
[02:45:01]
I I LOOKED UP THE TERM AND IT'S, IT'S VERY, IT'S A VERY APPROPRIATE TERM, UM, TO BE USED WITH, WITH WHAT'S TRANSPIRED AND WHAT HAPPENED.AND, AND THE NEGLIGENCE, IT'S, IT'S ON MY PART AND, AND TRULY NO ONE ELSE'S.
UM, THE, I I SAY THAT 'CAUSE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF EVERYTHING THAT'S OCCURRED IS, IS ON ME.
I AM THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY.
I'M THE ONE THAT PAYS THE BILLS.
SO POINTING FINGERS, UM, AT THE END, IT, IT, IT, IT'S WHAT HAPPENED.
BUT THE RESPONSIBILITY IS MINE.
UM, I HIRED A GOOD FRIEND OF MINE TO BE THE CONTRACTOR.
UM, I HIRED A GOOD FRIEND OF MINE TO BE THE ARCHITECT.
UM, I ASSUMED THAT I'M PAYING THEM, IT'D BE HANDLED.
UM, THE COMMUNICATION BETWEEN THE TWO OF 'EM, UM, WASN'T, WASN'T THERE REGARDING THE COA, MY CONTRACTOR SAYS, HEY MAN, I NEVER GOT IT.
UM, ARCHITECT GOES, I, I SENT IT.
UM, AND MY CONTRACTOR TELLING ME THAT ALL THE MATERIALS ARE REALLY BAD AND THAT THEY NEED TO GET TORN DOWN.
YOU GUYS, UM, CONTINUE, CONTINUE MOVING THE PROCESS FORWARD.
UM, DURING THE, THE DEMOLITION, I, ON A FEW OCCASIONS SAID, YOU KNOW, DO WE REALLY HAVE TO TEAR ALL THIS STUFF DOWN? LIKE, CAN, CAN WE NOT REPLACE, CAN WE NOT SALVAGE ANY OF IT? BECAUSE FROM THE VERY BEGINNING I LOOKED AT IT AND I SAID, YEAH, IT'S A REALLY UGLY BUILDING, BUT IT'S, IT'S MADE WITH, WITH OLD PINEWOOD.
IT'S GOT OLD MATERIALS THAT REALLY CAN BE RESTORED IN THIS.
BUT THAT, AGAIN, IT'S NOT MY BUSINESS.
THEY'RE GONNA MOVE FORWARD WITH IT.
WELL, DURING THE, UM, THE WINDOWS, WHEN THE REHAB BUDGET, UH, CAME TO ME, UM, I'M HAVING TO SPEND $37,000 ON WINDOWS.
AND I GO, WHY ON GOD'S GREEN EARTH AM I SPENDING $37,000 ON WINDOWS? WELL, MY CONTRACTOR TELLS ME THEY HAVE TO BE A CERTAIN GRADE 'CAUSE THEY'RE HISTORICAL TYPE, AND YOU CAN'T JUST GET ANY WINDOWS.
SO THAT'S WHY WE HAVE TO DO IT.
WELL THEN WHITE LINEN KNIGHT'S GOING ON, AND I'M ACROSS THE STREET AT 6 38 HEIGHTS BOULEVARD AT, UH, MY FRIEND SEAN MANDER'S OFFICE.
AND HE HAS A HISTORIC HOUSE THAT HAS THE, THE BIG THING IN THE BACK OF IT.
AND I'M LOOKING AT HIS WINDOWS AND I NOTICED THAT HIS WINDOWS, THEY HAVEN'T BEEN REPLACED.
UM, ACTUALLY THEY'VE JUST BEEN PAINTED SHUT AND THERE'S NO FIRE HAZARD OR REGULATION AGAINST THAT.
AND SO RIGHT THERE, I START TO GET A LITTLE UPSET.
WHY ON GOD'S BURN EARTH DID I HAVE TO SPEND $37,000 ON WINDOWS THAT A, THE HISTORIC DISTRICT DIDN'T WANT ME TO REPLACE BI DIDN'T HAVE TO REPLACE, I COULD HAVE JUST PAINTED OVER AND HAD THE, AND IN THE PHOTOS, IF YOU SEE TWO OF THE WINDOWS WERE OPEN, SO THEY'RE EVEN FUNCTIONING WINDOWS.
IT, IT'S, IT'S, I, MY, MY NEGLIGENCE IN THIS, IN, IN TAKING MY HANDS OFF AND ASSUMING I NEVER ASKED MY CONTRACTOR IF HE'S WORKED IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT BEFORE.
I NEVER FOLLOWED UP WITH MY CONTRACTOR TO MAKE SURE THAT HE SENT OVER THE COAI NEVER SCHEDULED A MEETING WITH MY CONTRACTOR AND MY ARCHITECT FOR US TO SIT DOWN AND GO OVER EVERYTHING.
I AM IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT, AND THE HOUSE GOT TORN DOWN.
LIKE I, I'M, I'M NOT SURE THE GENTLEMAN THAT SAID, YOU KNOW, BEEN ON THIS COMMITTEE FOR A LONG TIME AND HAS, HASN'T SEEN ANYTHING LIKE THIS COME UP.
I'VE LIVED ACROSS THE STREET AT 6 0 2 HEIGHTS BOULEVARD.
MY GRANDFATHER BOUGHT THAT APARTMENT COMPLEX IN THE MID EIGHTIES.
UM, I LIVED THERE FROM 1999 UNTIL 2018 WHEN I BOUGHT MY FIRST HOUSE.
SO I LITERALLY LIVED DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET FROM THIS HOUSE FOR, UM, CLOSE TO 18 YEARS.
I KNOW THE NEIGHBORHOOD, I LIVE IN THE HEIGHTS NOW.
THE OFFICE THAT I'M IN TALKING TO YOU TODAY IS ON WEST, IS ON 11TH STREET, 6 0 0 3 WEST 11TH STREET.
SO I, I AM SO EMBARRASSED AND I'M SO SORRY THAT, THAT THIS HAS HAPPENED AND IT HAS COST ME CLOSE TO $150,000 THIS AIR.
AND I, I I GET THAT THERE'S, I GET THAT YOU'RE IN FULL WITHIN POWER TO SHUT THIS DOWN FOR THE NEXT TWO YEARS.
AND I'M, I'M, I'M, I'M ASKING THAT YOU DON'T.
YOU KNOW, IF I WAS IN A COURTROOM AND I, I KIND OF GET THE SETTING, YOU KNOW, I'M THROWING MYSELF AT THE MERCY OF THE COURT.
THERE WERE MISTAKES MADE ALONG THE WAY, BUT THEY WEREN'T INTENTIONAL MISTAKES.
THEY, THEY WERE OUT OF JUST, I NEVER INTENDED TO DO ANYTHING WRONG.
AND IF THERE'S ANY QUESTION ABOUT THAT, HOW DO I BENEFIT BY GOING ABOUT IT THE WRONG WAY AND ENDING UP IN THIS SITUATION WHERE IT'S COSTING ME $150,000 MORE, IT, I'M PAYING RENT ON THE OFFICE I'M IN RIGHT NOW.
I'M PAYING MY MORTGAGE ON THE HOUSE THAT YOU SEE, I HAVE PROPERTY TAXES.
I'M HAVING TO RENEW MY INSURANCE POLICY FOR SIX MONTHS.
AND I WISH I WOULD'VE JUST SAT DOWN AND SAID, HEY, YOU'RE NOT GONNA TEAR ANYTHING DOWN.
AND IT'S COST ME A LOT AND I DON'T WANT TO KEEP GOING, BUT THAT'S, I REALLY WANNA MOVE THE PROJECT FORWARD.
I'M BUILDING IT THE EXACT SAME
[02:50:01]
WAY IT WAS.IT'S THE EXACT SAME SHIPLAP, THE EXACT SAME ROOF, THE EXACT SAME WINDOWS.
I MEAN, THE HOUSE IS THE EXACT SAME WITH THE, UM, THE DIFFERENCE WITH THE ADDITION IN THE BACK, UM, ADDING ON AS, AS YOU SEE IN THE PHOTO THERE.
SO EVERY, ALL THE MATERIALS THAT HAVE BEEN ORDERED, THE WINDOWS, THEY'RE SITTING, UM, IN STORAGE RIGHT NOW, THEY'RE THE HISTORICAL EXACT GRADES.
AGAIN, THE, THE SIDE, EVERYTHING ON THAT HOUSE IS GONNA LOOK EXACTLY THE WAY THAT IT DID, JUST BRAND NEW AND STRAIGHTER AND, AND ALL THAT STUFF.
SO I, UM, WITH THAT, I, I, AGAIN, I APOLOGIZE.
I DEFINITELY DIDN'T DO THIS ON PURPOSE.
I, I MADE A MISTAKE THAT'S COST ME A LOT OF MONEY.
I THINK THERE MAY BE SOME QUESTIONS FROM COMMISSIONERS, I THINK COMMISSIONER JACKSON? YES.
UM, I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT, GIVEN THE TIMELINE THAT JASON HAS LAID OUT HERE ON JULY 19TH, WE STILL SAW THE SHIPLAP, THE WINDOWS, THE, THE FLOORING, THE ORIGINAL MEMBERS ON THE 22ND, IT WAS ALL GONE.
AND I THINK JASON ASKED FROM OUTSIDE THE CHAIN LEAK FENCE, IF THOSE ORIGINAL MATERIALS WERE IN THE DUMPSTER ADJACENT.
IT ALL HAPPENED SO QUICKLY, IT APPEARS, YOU KNOW, YOU, YOU WERE ON IT.
NONE OF THOSE MATERIALS ARE SALVAGEABLE.
THE DUMPSTER, WE, LET ME ASK STAFF FIRST, PLEASE.
SO I WAS HAVING, UH, EMAIL CONVERSATIONS WITH THE ARCHITECT LUIS RACON ABOUT THIS.
I SAID, I CANNOT GET ON THE PROPERTY, BUT I SEE A DUMPSTER I CANNOT SEE.
AND IT IS THE ORIGINAL SHIPLAP AND ORIGINAL WINDOWS IN THERE.
HE REPLIED, LET ME GET WITH THE CONTRACTOR, CAME BACK TO ME, WAS GONE.
BUT I DID TRY TO SEE IF ANYTHING WOULD BE LEFT AVAILABLE TO SALVAGE.
AND DO YOU, AS THE PROPERTY OWNER KNOW WHERE, WHERE THOSE MATERIALS WERE GONE TO, IF NOT THE DUMPSTER ON SITE? UH, THEY WOULD'VE GONE TO THE, THE SALVAGE YARD.
THOSE WE ENDED UP, I, I BELIEVE WE DID SIX DUMPSTERS TOTAL.
UM, SO AS THEY WERE FILLING UP, THEY WERE JUST GETTING OUT OF THERE AND THEY WOULD'VE JUST BEEN TAKEN TO ANY, ANY SALVAGE YARD THAT WOULD TAKE ALL THE, THE ITEMS. UM, BUT NOT NOTHING.
WAS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE OWNER? UH, NO.
I, I ACTUALLY HAVE A QUESTION FOR, UH, KIM.
SO, UM, NOT TO BELABOR THE ISSUE, WE CAN SEE WHAT'S THE PROBLEM.
CAN YOU LET US KNOW WHAT ARE THE DIFFERENT PATH GOING FORWARD? PLEASE.
I, I I CAN CERTAINLY TELL YOU SOME OF THE PAST THAT STAFF AND I DISCUSSED AND I INVITE STAFF TO JUMP IN IF I FORGET ANYTHING.
UM, AND I DON'T NECESSARILY MEAN THAT THIS IS A FULLY INCLUSIVE LIST, BUT, UM, CERTAINLY, YOU KNOW, WE BROUGHT YOU THIS BECAUSE IT WAS SIMILAR TO THE ONE THAT YOU ALL HAD SEEN IN 2018, PERHAPS DIFFERENT IN SOME DEGREE, BUT THEY SALVAGED THE FLOOR AND THE, THE PIER AND BEAMS AND THE, AND THE FRONT MAIN PORTION.
I THINK THE ORIGINAL PORTION OF THE STRUCTURE THOUGHT THAT WAS NO PUN INTENDED ENOUGH TO STAND ON TO AT LEAST GET THE QUESTION TO YOU ALL.
UM, SO I THINK YOUR, YOUR CONSIDERATIONS GOING FORWARD, I THINK WHAT STAFF HAS SUGGESTED AS FAR AS THEIR RECOMMENDATION TO SHEATH IT AND GET IT STABILIZED AND PROTECTED SO THAT THE WOOD DOESN'T FURTHER DETERIORATE.
WHILE, AND THIS, THIS PART OF THIS IS A QUESTION FOR STAFF, BUT I DO NOT BELIEVE PLANS HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED YET FOR THE, FOR THE FULL RE REDEVELOPMENT OR RENOVATION OF IT.
AND HE MAY, THE OWNER MAY BE WAITING UNTIL THIS DECISION IS MADE, BUT YOU COULD CERTAINLY APPROVE THAT AS STEP ONE, I THINK, AND PUT SOME TIME LIMIT ON HOW, HOW LONG IT CAN BE BEFORE HE CAN COME BACK.
UM, THE LANGUAGE IN THE, IN THE CODE REGARDING THE, UH, LONGER LENGTH OF TIME, UM, BEFORE SOMEONE CAN ADD AN ADDITION IS CERTAINLY, UM, ANOTHER ELEMENT IN THE PRIOR ONE ON COURTLAND, IF YOU'LL REMEMBER, THOSE OF YOU WHO WERE ON COMMISSION, IF YOU'LL REMEMBER BACK, UM, THE, UH, FINAL DECISION ACTUALLY INCLUDED ALLOWING THE IMMEDIATE CONSTRUCTION OF THE ADDITION.
UM, WHICH WAS AGAINST STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS.
AND, UM, FOR SOME TIME, I THINK, DID WE, DO WE ALSO NOT HAVE SOME SALVAGE MATERIALS THAT HAD TO BE USED? UH, YOU MAY HAVE, AND YEAH, I DEFER AGAIN, JASON'S REVIEWED THE TAPES.
I THINK IN THE, IN THE RECORD OF THAT
[02:55:01]
PARTICULAR ITEM, PROBABLY, PROBABLY MORE IN DETAIL THAN I HAVE.I WENT BACK AND WATCHED THE TAPES.
BUT, UM, BUT I THINK YOU, YOU COULD CERTAINLY DENY THE C OF R AND, AND DENY THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION THAT'S WITHIN YOUR PURVIEW TO DECIDE THAT THIS HAS BEEN DEMOLISHED TO A POINT THAT IT CAN'T BE PUT BACK TOGETHER.
AND THEN I GUESS THE QUESTION IS, IS DO YOU HAVE ANY DISCRETION TO SAY HE CAN COME BACK IN SOONER THAN TWO YEARS? AGAIN, TALKING WITH STAFF, KIND OF WHAT WAS THE INTENT OF, OR THE PURPOSE OF THIS ORDINANCE.
IS IT REALLY PUNITIVE AND IS IT WHAT'S BETTER IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT? WAS PART OF WHAT WE, WE WENT THROUGH.
SO, UM, I HATE TO TO COMMISSIONER YAP TO NOT SAY THERE'S A CLEAR CUT A OR B.
UM, BUT IT'S KIND, IT'S FAIRLY, I THINK OPEN AND SOMEWHAT FLEXIBLE IN DETERMINING WHICH PATH FORWARD YOU GO TO.
I'LL, I'D LIKE JASON TO COMMENT ABOUT THE AVAILABILITY OF PLANS OR THAT TIMING AND THEN, UM, ANYTHING ELSE I'VE FORGOTTEN.
SO KIND OF FILL IN A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT OUR STAFF DISCUSSIONS THAT WE HAD.
AND ONE OF THE OTHER THINGS IS, YOU KNOW, THE RECOMMENDATION TO DECK AND SHE IS STRUCTURALLY STABILIZED.
IT WAS, IT WAS BROUGHT UP, WE DON'T WANT TO LEAVE THIS AS IS IS JUST FRAMING.
WE WANT, WE DON'T WANT THIS TO BE AS AN ABANDONED BUILDING.
AND SO THAT WAS THE OPTION TO COME UP WITH THE OTHER DISCUSSIONS WAS ALLOW THE HOMEOWNER TO KEEP WHAT'S HERE AND USE SALVAGE MATERIALS, BRING BACK ORIGINAL SHIPLAP THAT YOU CAN GET AT SALVAGE YARDS, UH, ORIGINAL, UH, WINDOWS, DOORS AND BUILD BACK.
THAT WAS ANOTHER OPTION THAT WE HAD DISCUSSED.
UH, THE OTHER THING TOO, THAT GOING BACK TO THE RECOMMENDATION FOR DECLAN SHEATH IT TO STRUCTURALLY STABILIZE IT IS WE ARE IN THE HURRICANE SEASON.
IF WE GET HIGH WINDS, WE DON'T WANT THOSE FLYING THROUGH THE AIR AND CAUSING ANY HARM.
AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE DISCUSS ABOUT A PATH FORWARD IS IF THE COMMISSION DECIDES TO ACCEPT THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION, THEN THE HOMEOWNER WILL COME BACK AND APPLY FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION WITH THE EXACT SAME PLANS AND COME BEFORE THE COMMISSION ON OCTOBER 20TH.
BUT AGAIN, THIS WAS INTERNAL STAFF, UH, THESE WERE THE OPTIONS THAT WE DISCUSSED, UH, AD NAUSEA.
BUT AGAIN, WHAT WE CAME DOWN TO WAS WE'RE GONNA OFFER THIS AS A PATH FORWARD, BUT AGAIN, REALLY THE ULTIMATE DECISION, WE'RE LEAVING WITH YOU, BUT WE WON'T GIVE YOU ALL THE INFORMATION POSSIBLE ON THE ALTERNATIVES.
AND I FEEL LIKE I'M LEAVING ONE MORE THING OUT.
YES, THERE WAS ALSO THE OPTION IS DO WE ASK THE HOMEOWNER OR DOES COMMISSION ASK THE HOMEOWNER TO RAISE IT TO THE GROUND? I MEAN, THERE'S A LOT OF ALTERNATIVES THAT WERE DISCUSSED, BUT AGAIN, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT KIND OF CARRIED SOME WEIGHT WAS, IS THIS WHAT WE WANT IN HISTORIC DISTRICT? WE WANT A STRUCTURE TO BE THERE.
AND SO I LEAN MORE FORWARD TOWARDS THIS STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
THE QUESTION I HAVE FOR YOU, UH, AND, AND THANK YOU KIM, UH, I DIDN'T, I DIDN'T EXPECT YOU TO HAVE A BC ANSWERS OF WHAT WE CAN CHOOSE.
UH, BUT MY, MY WHOLE POINT IS THAT, OKAY, SO WE HAVE A BUILDING THAT'S BEEN COMPLETELY DEMOLISHED.
THIS, THIS HOUSE IS A LOT WORSE THAN 1526.
COLLIN, THIS HOUSE HAS NO SEMBLANCE AT ALL OF THE OLD HOUSE, EXISTING HOUSE.
SO THIS IS A COMPLETE NEW CONSTRUCTION.
SECOND THING IS WE SAY WE WANT TO PRESENT, UH, TO SHEATH THE HOUSE AND SHEATH THE FRAMING TO, TO SHEATH.
AND AS, AS WELL AS OBVIOUSLY YOU NEED TO PUT A ROOF AS WELL IN THAT SHEATHING MEANS THAT YOU ALREADY HAVE PERMITS THAT, UH, YOU KNOW, THE LIKES OF STRUCTURAL HAS ALREADY INSPECTED ALL THIS, UH, FRAMING WINDSTORM AND SO ON, BECAUSE YOU JUST CAN'T SHEET IT WITHOUT THOSE APPROVALS.
SO DOES THAT MEAN THAT THEN NOW WE HAVE TO GO BACK TO THE STEP OF GOING TO THE PERMITTING AND THEN, UH, GET THIS DRAWING APPROVED? UH, IF THAT'S THE CASE, THEN THEY WILL GO TO A POINT WHERE YOU, THEY GET A NEW DRAWINGS DONE AND THEN THEY GET EVERYTHING APPROVED AND THEN GET INSPECTED AND THEN SHEATH AND THEN I SIT THERE FOR TWO YEARS.
IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SUGGESTING? NO, SIR.
THERE ARE NO PERMITS RIGHT NOW TO DECK AND SHE, IT, IT'S ONLY IF YOU ACCEPT THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION THEN CAN THE HOMEOWNER GET THE PERMITS TO DECK AND SHE IT, AND THEN AGAIN, IF YOU ACCEPT THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION, HE WILL APPLY FOR THE OCTOBER 20TH COMMISSION WITH NEW CONSTRUCTION PLANS AND THEY'LL THEN FALL UNDER
[03:00:01]
THE CRITERIA OF A NEW CONSTRUCTION.THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT YOU, YOU WERE ASKING FOR SHEETING, BUT YOU ACTUALLY GOING TO HOLD PROCESS OF PERMITTING AS WELL.
AND MY STAFF RECOMMENDATION, I DID SAY, UH, SHEATH AND DECK.
AND, AND I, I WILL ADD THAT THAT RECOMMENDATION WAS IN PART FROM THE BUILDING, UH, INSPECTOR SIDE INSPECTOR, YES.
WHO WERE CONCERNED ABOUT A WIND.
THEY HAVEN'T INSPECTED IT BECAUSE THIS EXCEEDED THE SCOPE OF THEIR ORIGINAL BUILDING PERMITS SINCE IT EXCEEDED THE SCOPE OF THE C OF A.
SO, UM, IT MEANT THAT, UM, YEAH, AS JASON MENTIONED, THEY HAVE TO GET THIS C OF R IN ORDER TO GO GET A PERMIT TO GET IT INSPECTED TO, TO PASS THAT, TO GO ANY FURTHER.
AND I WOULD LIKE TO ELABORATE OFF OF KIM IS WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT DEC AND SHE THAT TO STRUCTURALLY STABILIZE IT, THEN IT REMAINS AS SUCH FOR TWO YEARS.
THAT'S PART OF THE DISCUSSION IS WE DO DO NOT WANT AN ABANDONED BUILDING THAT OPENS IT UP TO IT BEING, UM, ILLEGALLY O OCCUPIED AND MISS NEAR SCHOOL AGAIN THE DECK.
AND SHE, THAT IS THE PATH FORWARD FOR HIM, THE HOMEOWNER TO APPLY FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION AT THE NEXT COMMISSION MEETING.
THAT'S THE, UH, THE RATIONALE FOR THE DECK AND SHEATHING.
BUT WE DO NOT WANT IT TO REMAIN AS ABANDONED BUILDING FOR TWO YEARS.
THAT'S THE OTHER PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY CONSIDERATION IN STAFF DISCUSSION.
CAN I ASK A QUESTION PLEASE? DID YOU ASK, DO YOU HAVE A PICTURE OF 1526 COURTLAND? I DO NOT HAVE THAT IN THE STAFF REPORT TO KNOW WE HAVE ACCESS TO THE COA WHEN IT WAS DONE.
JUST, I'D JUST LIKE TO SEE WHAT IT LOOKED LIKE FROM THE STREET AS A POINT OF COMPARISON.
OH, FROM JUST TO JUST THE ONE ON FOUR ONE, WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE NOW? NO, WHAT IT LOOKED LIKE WHEN WE DID THE APPLICATION, I DID NOT INCLUDE THAT IN THIS, BUT I DO REMEMBER WHAT IT WAS IS IT WAS THE FRAMING, THE STUDS, THE SUBFLOOR.
WELL, LOOKING AT THOSE STILL HAD THE SCALP, UH, SIDING ON THE FRONT GABLE WITH A FRONT WINDOW AND THE ROOF WAS STILL THERE TALKING ABOUT THE COMPOSITION SHINGLES.
THERE WAS MORE THAN, THAN I OH, I AGREE.
I MEAN, THIS IS THE MOST EGREGIOUS OFFENSE THAT CAN BE COMMITTED IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT.
AND YOU KNOW, MY KNEE JERK REACTION IS THAT THEY SHOULD, WE SHOULD ENFORCE THE ORDINANCE IN FULL AND THEY SHOULD DEMOLISH IT AND IT SHOULD SIT VACANT.
AND, BUT I UNDERSTAND THAT THAT IS NOT NECESSARILY THE BEST PATH FORWARD WITH THIS.
BUT I THINK DISREGARDING THE ORDINANCE ALTOGETHER, WHICH IS IF WE WERE TO LET THEM PROCEED AS THE, AS THE RECOMMENDATION IS, IS THEY WOULD GET A NEW HOUSE WITH THEIR ADDITION WITH NO PENALTY AT ALL, OTHER, OTHER THAN WHATEVER THE PERMIT PENALTIES ARE.
AND SO I'M STRUGGLING WITH THAT.
IT'S LIKE, YOU KNOW, I MEAN, I WOULD BE MORE INCLINED TO TELL THEM THAT THEY COULD REBUILD THE ORIGINAL HOUSE AND REMOVE THE ADDITION AND THEN WAIT 10 YEARS TO DO THE ADDITION.
IF I MAY ADDRESS COMMISSIONER COSGROVE, THAT'S CERTAINLY IN YOUR PURVIEW.
YOU COULD CERTAINLY SAY JUST ONLY BUILD BACK, UH, THE ORIGINAL TAKE OFF THE REAR AND NOT BUILD ANY, UH, DETACHED ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS.
I MEAN, THAT IS SOMETHING FOR THE COMMISSION TO DECIDE AND RECOMMEND.
I, I AGREE WITH YOU COMMISSIONER COSGROVE.
I, I FEEL I I CAN'T GET OVER THE, THE PUNITIVE PART OF IT.
I MEAN, THIS IS THE MOST EGREGIOUS THING.
UM, AND YEAH, NEGLIGENCE IS NOT A DEFENSE AND YOU, YOU CAN BUILD BACK SOMETHING THAT LOOKS VERY SIMILAR, BUT IT IS NOT THE SAME HOUSE, IT IS NOT THE SAME MATERIALS, AND IT WILL NOT HAVE THE SAME LONGEVITY AND STORY IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD AS THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE DOES.
UM, SO I'M, I'M PROBABLY LEANING, LEANING MORE TOWARDS THE CLOSER TO ENFORCING THE ORDINANCE.
WHAT ABOUT A, A POSSIBLE COMPROMISE THAT OKAY, WE, WE GET TO THE PERMITS WHERE WE SHEATH THE HOUSE AND WE ROOF IT AND WE DECK IT AND THEN, AND THEN JUST, UH, LOCK THE PROPERTY FOR TWO YEARS.
IT'LL BE LIKE THAT OTHER HOUSE THAT CAME UP OVER AND OVER AND AT 9 0 1 HEIGHTS BOULEVARD, WHICH WAS, YEAH, WE, WE SAW IT LIKE FIVE TIMES.
ALMOST A DEMOLITION BY NEGLECT.
AND HE TOOK IT ALL THE WAY TO CITY COUNCIL, I BELIEVE, AND LOST AND THEN SOLD IT TO, UM, IS IT GILBERT PEREZ? IT BUNGALOW FIXED IT UP AND THEY'VE NOW FIXED IT UP.
THEY, THEY'VE DONE A REALLY NICE JOB WITH IT, BUT THE, THE PEOPLE, THE NEIGHBORS KEPT COMPLAINING.
THEY SAID PEOPLE WILL GO IN AND CLIMB IN THE HOUSE AT NIGHT AND DO STUFF IN THERE, AND THEN THEY
[03:05:01]
WERE STEALING, LIKE THEY'LL STEAL THE TWO BY FOURS OUT OF IT AND ALL SORTS OF THINGS.AND I BELIEVE THIS BACKS UP TO THE, UM, THANK YOU.
THIS BACKS UP TO THE, THE POWER I WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT THING ON YALE.
IT, IT SEEMS LIKE YOUR OPTION TO BUILD IT BACK THE WAY IT IS OR TAKE IT TO THE GROUND AND JUST BE A VACANT WATER BY THE TWO.
YEAH, MY, MY POINT OF TAKING IT TO THE GROUND, YOU KNOW, I, I FEEL THAT I NEED TO SPEAK ABOUT THE TREES THAT ALL DIED FOR NO REASON HERE.
THAT WE'RE REMOVING EVERYTHING THAT'S BEEN ALREADY BUILT AND FRAME.
SO YOU RE YOU'RE REMOVING ALL THESE ITEMS, YOU KNOW, AND IT'S A WASTE AS WELL.
I MEAN, UH, BUT YOU CAN'T JUST LEAVE IT CLOSED UP.
IT, IT'S GONNA BECOME A NUISANCE.
IT'S GONNA BE WORSE TO HAVE A HALF BUILT HOUSE SITTING THERE FOR YEARS AND YEARS.
IF YOU LOOK AT THE PICTURE BEHIND YOU, I MEAN, IT'S AN INTERESTING, WHAT ARE WE LOOKING AT NOW, PLEASE? THAT'S FOR 1526 COURTLAND.
THE SECOND IS AFTER MUCH REMOVAL AND NEW FRAMING.
THE SECOND PICTURE WAS AFTER THE HURRICANE CAME THROUGH.
SO AT LEAST THAT ONE STILL HAD A ROOF AND SOME OF THE MATERIALS WERE STILL ON SITE.
NOTE FOR THE RECORD, COMMISSIONER COLLUM DID DEPART AND WE STILL DO HAVE QUORUM AT THIS TIME.
SO WHO WANTS TO MAKE THE RECOMMENDATION? UM, I DUNNO.
SO COMMISSION MEMBERS, UM, UM, THE, THE, THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS JUST TO SHEATH THE STRUCTURE TO PROTECT WHAT'S THERE.
AND THEN, UM, BUT, BUT IT, IT, IT ALL HINGES ON WHAT THE NEXT, THE NEXT UH, DECISION'S GONNA BE.
CERTAINLY, YOU KNOW, REGARDING IT, ITS ADDITION AND WERE TO BE REMOVED PERMANENTLY, YOU KNOW, FOR A TIME.
SO WITH THAT IN MIND, PRESUMABLY THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION TO DECK AND SHE IS, IS UH, WHAT'S IMPLIED IS SOME FUTURE UH, PROGRESS TOWARDS SOME REPLICA OF WHAT WAS THERE.
WHAT'S IMPLIED HERE IS, UH, WHAT'S THERE IS FITTING ON THE ORIGINAL DIMENSIONS OF THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE.
'CAUSE THE ORIGINAL FOUNDATION IS STILL LEFT THERE.
SO YOUR LENGTH AND WIDTH IS THE SAME WITH THE ADDITION OF THE REAR ADDITION AGAIN GOING FORWARD IS ACCEPTING THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION THEN ALLOWS A HOMEOWNER TO APPLY FOR THE OCTOBER 20TH COMMISSION WITH NEW CONSTRUCTION WOULD BE THE EXACT SAME SET OF PLANS THAT WERE APPROVED FOR THE REAR EDITION AND ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT.
I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD LET 'EM DO THAT.
YEAH, IT'S LIKE, BUT WHAT IS THE, WHAT DO, THAT'S NOT THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
THAT IS JUST ALLOWING, DOESN'T MEAN YOU HAVE TO ACCEPT THAT U UNDERSTAND, BUT THE RULES SAY FOR A DEMOLITION IT'S TWO YEARS.
I DON'T KNOW WHY WE WOULD NOT DO THAT, KIM.
WELL, I WOULD SAY UNDERSTAND THESE ARE TWO SEPARATE QUESTIONS.
THE QUESTION BEFORE YOU TODAY IS STAFF RECOMMENDATION JUST TO DEAL WITH THIS, WITH WHAT'S ON THE GROUND CURRENTLY.
HE CAN'T GO ANY FURTHER WITH, WITHOUT A C OF R NOT EVEN TO STABILIZE IT.
AND AS MENTIONED, THAT WAS THE RECOMMENDATION FROM THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT.
EVEN TO HAVE IT INSPECTED AND THEN HE COULD GET A PERMIT, THEN HE COULD GET INSPECTED, THEN HE COULD COME BACK HERE.
AND THEN THAT OPENS UP THE NEXT SET OF QUESTIONS THAT I THINK SOME OF YOU ARE GOING TOWARDS.
UM, IN OTHER WORDS, THIS WOULD HAVE TO BE SHEATH AND STABILIZED TO THE POINT THAT YOU MIGHT ANTICIPATE NOT BEING ALLOWED TO PUT ANYTHING TO DO ANYTHING ELSE FORWARD.
OR YOU MIGHT SEEK THE PLANS AND SAY, YES, WE CAN GO FORWARD AND PUT WHATEVER CONDITIONS YOU WANT ON IT.
THAT'S A SEPARATE FUTURE QUESTION.
IN OCTOBER, NOVEMBER, WHENEVER.
I THINK THAT NEEDS TO BE SAID CLEARLY.
THAT THAT IF WE TOOK THAT ACTION OF RECOMMENDATION, ACCEPTING RECOMMENDATION NOW THAT'S, THAT'S NO, UH, INDICATION OF WHAT COULD HAPPEN IN OCTOBER.
SO IF THE CONCERN IS ABOUT PLOWING MONEY INTO A A DOOM PROJECT THAT IT, THAT'S CONTINUED RISK.
WHAT IS IT THEY SAY IN FINANCE? CURRENT PERFORMANCE IS NO GUARANTEE OF OF FUTURE EARNINGS OR
WE DO SOMETHING WHERE WE MAKE THEM TEAR OFF THE ADDITION AND STABILIZE WHAT'S LEFT OF THE ORIGINAL HOUSE FOUNDATION AREA.
WHEN YOU SAY STABILIZE DOES, WHERE IS A PUNITIVE POT COMES IN THAT TWO YEARS? WELL, I THINK THAT'S WHAT KIM'S SAYING.
THE QUESTION BEFORE US, AND I'M REPEATING THIS FOR MY OWN CLARIFICATION,
[03:10:01]
IS, UM, WHAT DO WE DO WITH WHAT'S THERE NOW AND THEN IF THE APPLICANT COMES TO US AT ANY POINT IN THE NEXT SIX MONTHS OR TWO YEARS, THEN WE GET TO, TO DETERMINE IF WE CHOOSE TO ALLOW HIM TO DO SOMETHING OR IF WE WANT TO ENFORCE THE ORDINANCE FOR THE TWO YEAR STAY AND ESSENTIALLY A 10 YEAR STAY, IS THAT RIGHT? WELL, IT'D BE TWO YEARS FOR THE, FOR THE INITIAL FOOTPRINT IN 10 FOR THE ADDITION.MY CONCERN ABOUT SEPARATING OUT OR REQUIRING DEMOLITION OF THE ADDITION AT THIS POINT IS THAT WE JUST DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT I CERTAINLY DON'T KNOW, UM, WHAT THAT DOES TO THE, UM, STABILITY OF THE STRUCTURE.
WOULD THAT WEAKEN THAT REAR PART? I I I'M JUST TOSSING THAT OUT THERE AS A, AS A, AS A TOTAL NON-TECHNICAL, COULD THAT BE A CONDITION THAT, THAT THE ADDITION PORTION BE REMOVED AND THE REAR BE STABILIZED? YEAH, OF THE, OF THE, THE ORIGINAL FOOTPRINT OF THE HOUSE BASED ON THE FOUNDATION.
I JUST, I JUST THINK IF, IF THE TWO YEAR TIME WE SHOULD, WE SHOULD START THAT NOW.
'CAUSE THE, THE HOUSE IS GONE INSTEAD OF LIKE KICKING IT DOWN THE ROAD AND SAY, OH, NEXT MONTH WE'LL DECIDE IF WE WANT TO ENFORCE.
I TEND TO AGREE THAT LIKE IF THE ACTION IS TO PRESERVE JUST THE ORIGINAL HOUSE AND REBUILD IT AND WE DON'T NEED TO APPROVE SOME STRUCTURAL MEASURES FOR THE WHOLE THING THAT'S THERE NOW, ONLY THEN TO TELL HIM A MONTH FROM NOW OR SIX WEEKS FROM NOW THAT WE WANT HIM TO TEAR OFF THE BACK.
IT SEEMS LIKE IF WE CAN COME TO A CONSENSUS AGREEMENT, IT'S BETTER TO SAY YOU CAN MOVE FORWARD AND THIS IS THE ONLY PATH FORWARD RIGHT NOW.
I MEAN OBVIOUSLY IT CAN BE APPEALED, UM, BUT IS THAT BEFORE US? IS THE QUE IS THAT THE QUESTION? FOR US, I THINK ANYTHING IS BEFORE US WE'RE ALLOWED TO MAKE OUR OWN DECISION.
DO WE STILL HAVE QUORUM? WE STILL HAVE QUORUM.
AND, AND AGAIN, I THINK THAT UM, AND THE RECOMMENDATION TO SHEATH AND THE STRUCTURE IS TO SHEATH A STRUCTURE AND NOT TO HAVE IT ABANDONED AND LOOK LIKE A SKELETON OUT THERE AND B, CAUGHT IN A WIND.
SO I THINK THAT, I STILL THINK THIS CONVERSATION HAS MERIT BECAUSE IT, IT SEEMS ODD TO SHEATH SOMETHING THAT YOU'D HAVE TO TAKE OFF IS WE SPEND MONEY.
I THINK THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT I WAS TRYING.
I MEAN, AND IF THE CITY JUST WANTS TO SHEATH, WHATEVER'S GONNA REMAIN ON THAT PROPERTY, WHATEVER THAT MAY BE.
AND AGAIN, THAT'S, THAT'S UP TO THIS COMMISSION TO DECIDE.
BUT, BUT HONESTLY, EVEN IF THEY DEMOLISHED AT THIS POINT, THERE'S HARDLY ANYTHING THERE.
IT'S JUST TWO BY FOURS CONCRETE BLOCKS.
I MEAN, THERE'S NO OTHER MATERIALS.
IT LOOKS, LOOKS LIKE BASED ON THE PHOTOGRAPHS.
IT'S NOT LIKE THERE'S, THERE'S TONS OF STUFF THAT'S BEEN DONE.
THIS IS COMMISSIONER STAAVA, PLEASE.
UH, I JUST, I DO WANNA ASK IF, 'CAUSE I HAVE TO LEAVE BECAUSE THE CITY SCHEDULED THE INTERPRETERS UNTIL FIVE 30 AND IT'S APPROACHING SIX O'CLOCK.
SO, UM, I HAVE TO LEAVE, UH, PRETTY SOON.
SO IF I LEFT, WOULD THAT MEET? IF I LEFT, WOULD THAT BILL, UM, WHAT WOULD THAT DO TO THE QUORUM STATUS? THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER STAAVA.
WE WOULD STILL HAVE QUORUM IF YOU LEFT.
WE WOULD BE RIGHT AT QUORUM WITH YOUR DEPARTURE.
COULD WE SEE THE, THE PHOTO AGAIN, PLEASE? OF, OF THE EXISTING CONDITIONS? YEAH.
AND FOR TIME, I GUESS I, I'D LIKE TO ASK THE HOMEOWNER ONE MORE TIME.
JUST YOU CAN, YOU'RE LISTENING TO THE CONVERSATION.
I JUST, IF YOU HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS.
UM, AND SO THERE WAS A, WAIT AGAIN, I, I, I DON'T KNOW, GIVEN WHAT I'M, YOU KNOW, I'M HEARING, YOU KNOW, IT MAY BE, THIS IS MAYBE SOMETHING WE NEED TO DEFER IN ORDER TO GET, YOU KNOW, MORE INTO THIS, BUT I'M JUST CURIOUS IF YOU HAVE ANY MORE COMMENTS, I'D LIKE TO ASK YOU THAT QUESTION.
UM, LOOK, MY, MY TRADE, I'M A LENDER.
UM, AND YOU KNOW, MY, MY INDUSTRY IS RULES.
UM, THERE'S THIS RULE AND THERE'S THAT RULE.
SO MR. COSGROVE AND MS. JACKSON, I, I, I CAN CERTAINLY SEE WHERE YOU'RE COMING FROM AND, AND UN TO, I DON'T KNOW IF I, I I QUITE UNDERSTAND.
UM, IT, IT'S, IT'S COST ME SO MUCH AND IT, THAT, THAT BEING REMOVED, IT, IT SEEMS THAT TEARING IT DOWN AND MAKING ME WAIT TWO YEARS AND REDUCING AND, AND TAKING AWAY THE FRAMING.
IT, IT, IT WOULD BE DONE TO, TO PUNISH ME.
AND IT, YOU KNOW, THERE THEIR RULES AND THEN THEIR INTENTIONS TO THE RULES.
AND YOU KNOW, I, I ASK IF, IF ANY OF YOU REALLY TRULY FEEL THAT THIS, THIS WAS DONE ON, ON, ON PURPOSE, AND THEY, THEY, THEIR RULES AND THEIR INTENTIONS, AND YOU COULD SAY IT DOESN'T MATTER,
[03:15:01]
DOESN'T MATTER IF YOU DID IT ON PURPOSE OR NOT, THE RESULT IS STILL THE SAME.BUT IT, THAT HOUSE, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE HAVEN'T LIVED IN THAT HOUSE FOR YEARS.
IT, IT'S, I AM GOING TO IMPROVE THAT, THAT BLOCK AND MAKE IT LOOK BETTER THAN WHAT IT WAS BY MAKING IT LOOK EXACTLY THE SAME.
UM, I, I TRULY HOPE, AND I, AND I PRAY THAT I'M ABLE TO CONTINUE THIS, THIS, IT'S A DREAM OF MINE.
MY, MY MOM HAS AN APARTMENT ACROSS THE STREET IN OUR COMPLEX.
IT SEEMS I'M, I'M ABLE TO RIDE MY BIKE TO WORK.
I MEAN, NEVER DID I EVER LOOK AND SAY, LET ME TEAR ALL THIS DOWN AND BUILD SOMETHING NEW AND, AND TRY TO STICK IT TO THE HISTORIC DISTRICT.
I MEAN, IF ANY, ANY RATIONAL PERSON, IF, IF, IF I HAD THAT MUCH THOUGHT INTO IT, I WOULD'VE KNOWN HOW TO END UP IN THIS SPOT AND TO JEOPARDIZE THE TWO YEARS.
I, I MEAN, MR. COSTCO, I REALLY APPRECIATE WHAT YOU SAID.
AND IT, IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE TO HAVE ME, SHE THE BACK PART OF IT AND DO THAT.
IF, IF IN A FEW WEEKS IT'S, IT'S GONNA COME BACK.
BUT I MEAN, THE HEIGHTS IS MY NEIGHBORHOOD.
I MOVED INTO THE HEIGHTS IN 1999.
I KNOW A LOT OF YOU HAVE LIKELY LIVED THERE LONGER, BUT IT'S, IT'S SO DEAR TO ME.
AND, AND I WOULD NEVER DO THIS ON PURPOSE AND TO TURN AROUND AND PUT A TWO YEAR WAITING PERIOD ON ME.
LIKE, WHAT, WHY, WHY? IT'S SO, I I DON'T, IT'S, IT'S GETTING LATE AND I DON'T, I DON'T WANT TO KEEP GOING ROUND AND ROUND.
AND, AND DAVID, I REALLY APPRECIATE YOU ALLOWING ME TO, TO TALK.
I I JUST ASK THAT Y'ALL RECONSIDER I'M MAKING IT THE WAY IT WAS, YOU KNOW, TO NOT ADD ON TO THE BACK.
BUT, BUT WHAT, WHAT DOES THAT DO? LIKE, IT, IT, IT, THERE'S, THERE'S GOTTA BE IS THERE'S SOMETHING ELSE I COULD DO THAT'D BE MORE IMPACTFUL AND, AND, AND MORE HELPFUL AND, AND, AND JUST REDUCING IT.
LIKE, I, I WOULD ASK WHAT WHAT IS THE INTENTION OF THAT? AND, AND WHAT DOES THAT TRULY DO? BUT I'M, I, I DON'T SIT ON THE BOARD.
I'M, I I'M THIS, IT'S NOT MY JOB.
AND, YOU KNOW, I'VE HEARD A FEW TIMES THAT NEVER, YOU GUYS HAVE NEVER SEEN THIS BEFORE.
I MEAN, I, I PUT MY HEAD DOWN EVERY TIME.
I, I NEVER, EVER, EVER WOULD'VE IMAGINED OR WANTED IT TO GET TO THIS POINT.
I I JUST WANNA BUILD AN OFFICE THAT'S ACROSS THE STREET FROM AN APARTMENT COMPLEX WE OWN, WANTED TO HAVE A PLACE THERE TO WHERE MY MOM COULD, IS NOT STAY AT THE APARTMENT.
AND I'M, I'M CREATING A LIFE HERE.
I, I DON'T, I'M NOT MOVING OUTTA THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
I DON'T WANT MY COMPANY OUTTA THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
I, I RIDE MY BIKE TO WORK HALF THE TIME.
I JUST, I I I JUST PRAY THAT I'M ABLE TO MOVE, MOVE FORWARD WITH IT.
I'M, I'M MAKING THE HOUSE BETTER.
IT DOESN'T, UM, I, YOU KNOW, HAVING IT VACANT OR HAVING IT SIT THERE, IT, IT DOESN'T DO THE NEIGHBORHOOD ANY FAVORS AT ALL.
UM, BUT I NEED TO STOP TALKING 'CAUSE IT'S LATE AND I WANNA BE RESPECTFUL OF YOUR TIME, PAUL.
SO, COMMISSION MEMBERS, UM, I MEAN, I THINK MY, WE MAY, MY STRUGGLE WITH IT IS THAT IT'S NOT LIKE I WANT HIM TO HAVE TO TEAR OFF THE ADDITION.
I DON'T THINK IT'S NECESSARILY PRODUCTIVE.
WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT SOMETHING THAT'S, YOU KNOW, 2000 FEET, YOU KNOW, IT'S TUCKED IN BEHIND.
AND I, YOU KNOW, CAN SEE DIFFERENT SCENARIOS.
IT'S THE PRECEDENT WE'RE SETTING THAT SOMEONE CAN JUST TEAR DOWN A HOUSE AND THEN COME IN AND SAY, I DIDN'T MEAN TO DO IT.
AND THEN WE JUST APPROVE YOU TO DO EXACTLY WHAT YOU WANTED TO DO.
AND I, YOU KNOW, IT'S, I FEEL LIKE WE ARE CONSTANTLY BATTLING THAT WITH THE, THE COR, WHICH SEEMS TO BE IN FRONT OF US MORE OFTEN THAN IT USED TO BE.
AND I JUST WORRY THAT, THAT IS MY CONCERN AND REALLY MY RESPONSE TO, TO WHY WE'RE TAKING A HARD LOOK AT HOW SERIOUS THIS IS AND WHAT THE RAMIFICATIONS OF IT ARE.
WE WANT TO PREVENT THIS FROM HAPPENING AGAIN.
MY MY QUESTION FOR KIM IS THE WAY THE ORDINANCE IS WRITTEN, IS IT WRITTEN BASED ON TEARING DOWN AN EXISTING HOME? IF IT'S FREESTANDING AND THEN THEN SOMEONE TRYING TO GO BACK AND PROVIDE A NEW STRUCTURE? UM, I MEAN, BECAUSE WE DON'T SEE THIS WHEN IT'S DEMOLITION, WHEN WE HAVE A C OF A INVOLVED, RIGHT? SO IT'S, UM, YOU KNOW, THE DEMOLITIONS I I WORRY ABOUT ARE JUST SOMEONE JUST KNOCK THE HOUSE DOWN, YOU KNOW, IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT AND THERE WAS NO C OF A, THERE WAS NO APPLICATION, THERE WAS NO ADDITION PLAN, THERE WAS JUST NOTHING.
AND WE'VE SEEN THAT IN THE CITY, RIGHT? AND, YOU KNOW, DOWNTOWN
BUT SO I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND, UH, FROM YOUR PERSPECTIVE, THIS IS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT.
I MEAN, BECAUSE WE HAD APPROVED C OF A, IT WASN'T A VERY LARGE ADDITION, IT WASN'T A TWO STORY EDITION, IT WAS A, IT IT WAS, AS MR. COSGROVE SAID, BEHIND THE MAIN STRUCTURE, STILL ONE STORY.
[03:20:01]
AND, AND MR. CHAIR, I THINK YOU'RE EXACTLY RIGHT.THE, THE PROVISION IN THE CODE IS WRITTEN IN SUCH A WAY THAT IT'S, IT TALKS ABOUT IF THE STRUCTURE IS DEMOLISHED WITHOUT A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS REQUIRED BY THIS ARTICLE.
AND WE CAN KIND OF READ THAT TWO WAYS.
ONE, WAS THERE A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR ANYTHING? OR WAS THERE NO CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS TO DEMOLISH FOR PERMISSION TO ACTUALLY DEMOLISH THE BUILDING? SO IT, IT'S VAGUE ENOUGH THAT THAT'S, YOU KNOW, IT, THAT'S WHY WE ALSO THOUGHT IT GAVE SOME LATITUDE, OR MAYBE VAGUE ISN'T THE RIGHT WORD, BUT IT'S CERTAINLY INTERPRETIVE AND INTERPRETABLE TWO DIFFERENT WAYS.
SO, UM, YOU KNOW, THAT I THINK I, MY READ OF IT IS THAT IF THERE'S NOT A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS AT ALL, THAT'S WHEN THE TWO YEARS KICKS IN.
THAT'S WHEN THE 10 YEARS KICKS IN.
AND I THINK THAT'S WHEN I WENT BACK AND, AND WAS LISTENING BACK TO THE TAPE ON THE OTHER, UM, YOU KNOW, THAT'S, THAT POINT DIDN'T EXACTLY COME UP.
BUT, YOU KNOW, I WENT BACK AND LOOKED AT NOTES AND, AND THAT WAS PART OF THE DISCUSSION.
THEN THEY ALSO HAD A C OF A IF THEY, BUT THEY EXCEEDED IT.
AND WE'VE SEEN, I MEAN, WE'VE SEEN SIDING, DEMOLITIONS OR WINDOW REMOVALS THAT WERE REPAIRABLE AND WE MADE THEM PUT BACK SALVAGE OLD WINDOWS.
WE MADE THEM PUT BACK SALVAGE SIDING.
WE'VE MADE THEM LOOK LIKE IT'S OLD BECAUSE EVERYTHING YOU SEE IS, IS ACTUALLY SALVAGED AND HAD A PAST LIFE.
AND SO THAT WAS ALSO PART OF THE RATIONALE OF, AGAIN, MEETING THE BUILDING OFFICIALS CONCERNS, PLUS AT LEAST GETTING THIS, THIS SQUARED AWAY.
I, I WILL ADD WITH REGARD TO THE QUESTION ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THIS IS A, YOU KNOW, A PRECEDENT SETTING, AND I KNOW WE'VE REFERRED TO COURTLAND, BUT AS I NOTED, EVERY PROPERTY IS UNIQUE.
SO IT DOESN'T MEAN YOU WOULDN'T GET MORE OF THESE.
AND PEOPLE WOULD SAY, WELL, HEY, WHAT ABOUT THAT, THAT ONE, BUT EVERY PIECE OF PROPERTY AND EVERY SITUATION IS, IS GOING TO BE DIFFERENT, IS GOING TO BE UNIQUE, UM, MAYBE FROM THE AMOUNT OF ORIGINAL MATERIALS LEFT TO, YOU KNOW, WHAT'S PLANNED IN THE FUTURE OR HOW THE DEMOLITION CAME ABOUT.
SO, UM, AND AS, AS A HYPOTHETICAL, IF, UM, IF ONE COULD KEEP THE HOUSE, THE, THE STRUCTURE AND THE ADDITION IN CLA IT WITH OLD MATERIALS, IS THERE A WAY THAT NO ADDITIONAL ADDITIONS OR COULD BE MADE IN A CERTAIN TIMEFRAME? YEAH, FOR, FOR INSTANCE, YEAH.
I, I I THINK IF YOU SEE FUTURE PLANS FOR THIS COME BACK BEFORE YOU, I THINK YOU CAN IMPOSE CONDITIONS TO USE ORIGINAL MATERIALS.
I'LL LET YOU ALL DECIDE TO WHAT EXTENT, UM, AND THAT THERE WOULD BE A LIMITATION ON, ON FUTURE ADDITIONS OR CHANGES TO THE PROPERTY.
I, I, I DO THINK THAT SECOND STEP GIVES YOU ALL A LOT OF LATITUDE COMMISSION MEMBERS POINT OF ORDER.
IF I WOULD, I'M ASKING THE PRESENTER, PUT UP THE CRITERIA WHERE THERE'S TWO SUBSECTIONS OF THE APPLICATION FOR DEMOLITION, UH, FINANCIAL HARDSHIP OR A UNUSUAL OR COMPELLING CIRCUMSTANCES.
AND IF YOU COULD PLEASE ENLARGE.
AND SO WE CAN READ THE RED THANK YOU.
DURING THIS EPISODE, IF YOU HAVE A LITTLE BIT MORE INFORMATION TO MAKE AN INFORMED DECISION, UNUSUAL OR COMPELLING CIRCUMSTANCES.
SO THE DETERMINATION OF THE EXISTENCE OF UNUSUAL AND COMPELLING CIRCUMSTANCE SHALL BE BASED UPON THE FOLLOWING.
UM, ONE WHICH DOES NOT APPLY, UH, CURRENT INFORMATION DOES NOT SUPPORT THE HISTORICAL OR ARCHEOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE OF THIS BUILDING.
NUMBER TWO, WHICH STAFF HAS CHECKED AS APPLIES, UM, WHETHER THERE ARE DEFINITE PLANS FOR REUSE OF THE PROPERTY OF THE PROPOSED DEMOLITION IS CARRIED OUT.
AND WHAT EFFECT SUCH PLANS HAVE ON THE ARCHITECTURAL, CULTURAL, HISTORICAL, OR ARCHEOLOGICAL CHARACTER OF THE CONTEXT AREA STAFF IS ADDED IN THE RED, THE COMPELLING CIRCUMSTANCES THAT THE ORIGINAL HISTORIC STRUCTURE HAS BEEN DEMOLISHED.
NEW FRAMING HAS TAKEN PLACE THAT IS SIMILAR IN SIZE AND DIMENSIONS OF THE ONCE EXISTENT HISTORIC STRUCTURE.
AND YOU'VE HEARD, I'LL ADD, YOU'VE HEARD FROM THE APPLICANT THAT HE INTENDS TO OR HOPES TO BUILD BACK JUST IN THE SAME, YEAH.
[03:25:02]
SO COMMISSIONER, I NEED A, I NEED A MOTION OR TO DEFER.I WE'RE TALKING ABOUT FOR A LONG TIME, I, I'M, I DON'T KNOW WHY I'M ASKING.
DO WHAT TO WHAT DEGREE IN CASE IT'S PART OF WHAT, UH, IS, IS BEFORE US BECOMES, BEFORE US AS A MOTION.
TO WHAT DEGREE DO YOU THINK IT'S PRACTICAL POSSIBLE TO REPLICATE WHAT WAS THERE ON THIS NEW FRAMING WITH RECYCLED, UH, AUTHENTICALLY PERIOD MATERIAL? UH, TO A HIGH DEGREE ACTUALLY.
UM, BECAUSE THE, THE SHIPLAP AS WELL AS, UH, ALL HISTORIC FLOORS, FOR EXAMPLE, UH, SHIP LAB AND SIDING, THEY ARE ALWAYS AVAILABLE IN DIFFERENT VARIOUS SALVAGE, UH, PLACES.
UM, AND BASICALLY IF WE DO REQUIRE THE PERSON TO PUT BACK SHIP LAB ON THE INTERIOR, UH, IS ONLY THE EXTERIOR WALLS, WE ARE NOT, WE DON'T NECESSARILY NEED THEM TO PUT BACK THE SHIPLAP ON THE INTERIOR WALLS.
SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT EXTERIOR MATERIAL, EXTERIOR MATERIAL.
I, INCLUDING WINDOWS, DOORS, TRIM, AND, UH, AND INSIDE, OH, WINDOWS, I'M NOT A HUNDRED PERCENT SURE BECAUSE YOU, TO GET THE ORIGINAL BAG, YOU NEED MAYBE 10 TO 12 OF THE ORIGINAL SAME SIZE WINDOWS.
AND SALVAGE HOUSES TYPICALLY DOESN'T HAVE THAT KIND OF, UH, UH, STOCK.
LET'S, AND PERHAPS WE WOULDN'T HAVE SEEN THE, THE PLAN TO RELA TO, UH, RETAIN THE ORIGINAL WINDOWS ANYWAY UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES.
SO TO ME, UH, SHIPLAP, THE, THE, THE, THE, THE, THE TRAGEDY HERE IS THAT EVEN THE CEILING, IF YOU LOOK AT THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE, HAS SHIPLAP ON THAT.
SO, UH, UH, THAT IS REALLY HISTORIC MATERIAL THAT SHOULDN'T HAVE BEEN THROWN AWAY.
UM, THEN YOU CAN MAKE HIM, UH, BUY BACK, LET'S SAY A HISTORIC DOOR, A PRETTY APPROPRIATE HISTORIC DOOR.
I WOULD ACTUALLY ASK THE PERSON, SINCE IT'S ALREADY NEW FRAMING AND YOU HAVE TO SHEET IT ANYWAY TO ACTUALLY PUT BACK GEL WIND WINDOWS AS A REPLICATION OF, UH, THE HISTORIC LOOK.
UH, BUT THEN ALL THE OTHERS CAN, CAN BE SALVAGED, CAN CAN, YOU CAN BUY THEM OR SALVAGE YARDS.
UH, IF YOU WANT TO GO THAT ROUTE, YES.
COMMENT ON THE ROOF WITH THE SHIPLAP, BE IT, BECAUSE IT'LL BE INSIDE THE WALL WHEN IT'S DONE.
I THINK THE COMMENT THOUGH IS, WELL, THE COMMENT'S MORE ABOUT SIDING.
I THINK HISTORIC SIDING, BECAUSE THIS, IT'S NOW WESTERN FRAME, SO IT DOESN'T REQUIRE SHIPLAP ALLY, I'M GONNA SAY SHIPLAP
WELL, THE, THE BUT THE SHIPLAP IS NEEDED WHEN IT WAS BALLOON FRAMED.
IT'S, IT'S, NO, IT IS NOW IT'S WESTERN FRAME.
UM, YOU, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY.
NO, BUT I, I WOULD LIKE TO KEEP IT THERE BECAUSE THEN YOU CAN HAVE THAT AS PART OF THE, UH, HISTORIC NATURE OF THE HOUSE, UH, IN THAT REGARD.
NOT, NOT, I SEE BECAUSE OF THE FRAMING, BUT BECAUSE IT'S THERE.
AND THEN ONE DAY YOU CAN SIT THIS REPLICATED THE OLD HOUSE, AT LEAST THE, YOU WANNA SWITCH IT TO BALLOON FRAME TOO? I MEAN, HOW, WHERE DO YOU STOP THERE? I THINK THE ISSUE AT HAND HERE IS WHAT WE DO WITH, WE CAN DISCUSS WHAT WE POTENTIALLY WOULD DO WITH A FUTURE APPLICATION.
I MEAN, RIGHT NOW WE'RE JUST, THE ONLY RECOMMENDATION THE STAFF IS MAKING IS DO WE ALLOW THEM TO KEEP THE EXISTING STRUCTURE, WHICH IS JUST THE ORIGINAL HOUSE IN THIS MODEST EDITION.
AND THEN THEY WOULD HAVE TO RESUBMIT AN APPLICATION FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION, WHICH WOULD THEN ALLOW US TO GIVE GUIDANCE AS TO THE MATERIALS THAT WE CHOOSE.
WHETHER THAT IS ALL ORIGINAL SIDING AND AS MANY SALVAGE PIECES AS POSSIBLE, AND ANY FUTURE ACCESSORY UNIT TO BE BUILT ON THE SITE, WE COULD REGULATE THAT AT THAT TIME.
SO I THINK THE REAL QUESTION WE HAVE TO ASK OURSELVES, ARE WE WILLING TO ACCEPT THE STRUCTURE THAT IS THERE OR ARE WE GONNA TRY TO IMPOSE SOME KIND OF PENALTY WITH THE, WITH THE ADDITION THAT WE ALREADY, WE ALREADY APPROVED THIS COMMISSION ALREADY APPROVED AS APPROPRIATE.
AND THE FACT THAT IT PINCHES IN, YOU WOULD, YOU'RE NOT GONNA SEE IT FROM THE RIGHT OF WAY, REALLY.
CAN WE JUST MAKE A MOTION? SO I WOULD MAKE THE MOTION THAT WE ACCEPT THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION AND LET THEM SECURE IT.
BUT YOU KNOW, PERSONALLY, I THINK THAT THAT IS SETTING THE STAGE THAT WE ARE AGREEING THAT WE ARE GOING TO ALLOW WHAT IS CURRENTLY BUILT TO BE FINISHED.
AND AS FAR AS OTHER SITE IMPROVEMENTS, I WOULD, I WOULD SAY THAT, THAT THAT'S UP IN THE AIR, UH, UH, THAT DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? AND THERE MAY BE, AND THERE MAY BE CONDITIONS ON THE PHYSICAL MATERIALS THAT WE SEE.
SO THAT, BUT WE WOULD NEED TO SEE THE, THAT, THAT NEED TO SEE PLAN APPLICATION BEFORE, I MEAN, THIS IS JUST STEP ONE OF THE COR AS I SEE IT, THAT THERE
[03:30:01]
IS GOING TO BE, THIS IS, THEY'RE NOT GONNA BE ABLE TO GET ANY TAX CREDITS TO, TO, AM I CORRECT THAT EVERYTHING GOING FORWARD IS GONNA BE A COR ON THIS PROPERTY? NOT PROBABLY.SO I'M GONNA TAKE THOSE AS A MOTION AND I'M GONNA ASK HIM A SECOND.
ANY ABSTENTIONS? SO THAT MOTION PASSES AND, UM, WE WILL SEE THE APPLICANT PROBABLY IN THE NEXT MEETING.
UH, MS. MOVING QUICKLY, UM, COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC THANK YOU IS MR. WILLIAMSON, I JUST HAD A COUPLE, A FEW AMPLIFYING COMMENTS FROM LAST TIME.
I GIVE YOU MS. NICHOLSON, I GAVE YOU THREE SHEETS OF SETS OF PAPERS LAST TIME.
THE SMALL ONE IS AN EXTRACT FROM THE OTHER TWO, SO THERE IT ISN'T A COMPLETE SET OF PAPERS.
AH, I, I JUST GAVE YOU THE COVER SHEET.
SO YOU HAD THE, THE COUNTY'S COVER NUMBER AND THE ONE SHEET WITH THE SIGNATURE PAGE AND THE ONE SHEET WITH THE RELATIVE RELEVANT COMMENT.
THE OTHERS ARE COMPLETE LISTINGS.
UH, THE, UH, DEED RESTRICTIONS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WERE CREATED IN 1988, WHICH SOUNDS LIKE A LONG TIME AGO FOR ME, IT WAS JUST BEFORE I BOUGHT INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
IT WAS AMENDED AS RECENTLY AS 2002, SO ONLY 20 YEARS AGO.
UH, THAT LIST IS, UH, ON THE HEIGHTS ASSOCIATION WEBPAGE.
IT'S, UH, UNOFFICIAL, BUT IT'S THE BEST THE HEIGHTS ASSOCIATION CAN DO.
THE COUNTY CLERK'S INDEX IS REALLY CONFUSING AND MISLEADING, BUT YOU CAN FIND ALL THOSE THINGS IF YOU LOOK HARD ENOUGH, THAT PIECE OF PAPER THAT I FOUND THAT HAS THAT SIGNATURE PAGE ON IT IS LISTED FOR ONE PROPERTY ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF THE STREET AND NOT FOR MAX'S PROPERTY.
SO IF YOU DON'T KNOW HOW TO LOOK FOR IT, YOU WON'T FIND IT.
I'M SURE THAT A CASUAL COMPANY WOULD REALLY FIND IT, AND I'M DISTRESSED TO HEAR SAM SAY THAT THEY'RE, UH, REGA DISREGARDING THOSE THINGS.
AND AS A PROPERTY OWNER IN THAT SAME DEED RESTRICTION DOMAIN, AND AS A VOLUNTEER FOR THE HOUSTON HEIGHTS ASSOCIATION INVOLVED IN ENFORCING DEED RESTRICTIONS, I'M DOUBLY DISTRESSED TO HEAR THAT.
THANK YOU ALL FOR WHAT YOU DO EVERY MONTH.
UM, NEXT DOOR COMMENTS FROM THE, UH, THE COMMISSION? UH, I JUST WANNA COMMENT ABOUT OUR EARLIER CONVERSATION.
I, I, I AM CONCERNED ABOUT THE, UH, THE APPEALS BOARD AND I, I DO THINK THAT, UM, I KNOW THAT THERE WAS A COMMITTEE, YOU KNOW, LONG AGO, UH, WITH THREE MEMBERS FROM EACH COMMISSION.
BUT, BUT WHEN IT WAS THE PLANNING COMMISSION, WHICH WAS DECIDING APPEALS, AND, UH, THERE WERE DISCUSSIONS WHICH, UM, ALLOWED COMMUNICATION, UH, BETWEEN THE COMMISSIONS AND, UM, THEY REACHED A CONSENSUS ON A LOT OF DIFFERENT ISSUES, WHICH THEN, YOU KNOW, ENDED UP BEING CODIFIED IN REVISIONS TO THE ORDINANCE, FRANKLY.
SO, UM, AGAIN, I DON'T KNOW WHETHER THERE'S A PROCESS OF JUST, OF COMMUNICATION, BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S THE ONLY REAL WAY TO GET AN UNDERSTANDING FROM BOTH SIDES.
BUT, UM, I PERSONALLY THINK THIS COMMISSION NEEDS TO, NEEDS TO INTERPRET THE ORDINANCE AND MAKE DECISIONS AND WHAT OTHERS DO THEY DO, BUT THAT, THAT, THAT IS LIFE.
UM, SO ANY OTHER COMM COMMENTS FOLLOWING THAT UP WITH QUESTIONS? I THINK COMM, WHO GOES TO THE, UH, WHO HERE GOES TO THE APPEALS BOARD MEETINGS, YOU GO TO ALL OF THEM.
LIKE YOU DO THESE, YOU GO TO ALL OF THEM, LIKE YOU DO THESE AND ROMAN, SO YOU SEE THESE, UH, DECISIONS, THESE APPLICATIONS, THESE DECISIONS FOLLOWED ALL THE WAY THROUGH FROM FROM WHERE YOU'RE, WHERE YOU'RE SITTING AS STAFF AND, AND LEGAL TO THIS COMMISSION THEN TO THE APPEALS COURT.
WOULD IT BE APPROPRIATE FOR A MEMBER OF THE COMMISSION TO ATTEND THOSE MEETINGS AS WELL? I MEAN, WOULD WE BE ALLOWED TO PARTICIPATE AND KIND OF SPEAK TO WHY THE DECISION OF THE COMMISSION? WE, WE SHOULD TALK ABOUT THAT.
UM, BUT I THINK WE'VE HAD, UH, COMMISSION MEMBERS AT SEVERAL, NOT RECENTLY, BUT WHEN I FIRST STARTED, AND I WANNA SAY COMMISSIONER COLLINS CERTAINLY, CERTAINLY ATTEND AT THIS POINT.
YOU COULD CERTAINLY ATTEND AT A PUBLIC MEETING.
UM, I DO RECOMMEND THAT WE HAVE A JOINT MEETING WITH THEM AND KIND OF, YOU KNOW, GET THAT OUT.
THIS IS NOT, REMEMBER HISTORIC PRESERVATION HAS BEEN DETERMINED BY THE SUPREME COURT TO BE ZONING.
AND, AND WITH A ZONING COMMISSION AND A ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS,
[03:35:01]
WE OFTEN HAVE REPORTS BACK AND, UM, YEAH, WORK OUT WHAT ARE THE KINKS, WHY ARE THEY DECIDING THIS WAY? IS IT THAT THE, THE LANGUAGE NEEDS TO BE CHANGED OR ARE THEY TRYING TO GET IN THE POLICY? I MEAN, THERE ARE, YEAH, THERE'S SOME GOOD DISCUSSION TO HAVE.AND IF I COULD ALSO ADD, UM, WE IN, WITHIN OUR HPAB REPORTS, WE DO AN ENTIRE TRANSCRIPT OF THE WHOLE ITEM.
SO THEY HAVE THE TYPED OUT VERSION, AND THEN THEY ALSO HAVE THE RECORDING OF THE MEETING TO REVIEW.
THEY KNOW EVERYTHING THEY SAID.
I'M GLAD TO KNOW THAT I REALLY AM.
I, I DON'T MEAN TO BE SMART ABOUT IT, BUT I MEAN THEY, THEY HAVE ACCESS TO IT.
DO THEY EVER REALLY LOOK AT THE TRANSCRIPT? YES, THEY DO.
SO WE POST THEM POTENTIALLY BEFORE I 72, 74 HOURS BEFORE.
WELL, BUT THEY STILL OVERTURN 80% OF OUR DECISIONS.
SO I DO NEED TO UNDERSTAND THE RATIONALE BECAUSE THEY MAY KNOW US, BUT WE DON'T KNOW WHAT, WHY, WHY THEY MAKE COMMISSIONER THE DECISION COMMISSIONER, WE, JACKSON IS VOLUNTEERED.
I KNOW, I HEARD HER TO, UH, TO LEAD
UH, 'CAUSE I THINK WE'RE ALL AGREEING THAT WE'D LIKE TO KNOW MORE ABOUT THE THINKING AND FOR THEM TO KNOW MORE ABOUT OURS IF POSSIBLE.
UM, ON A, ON A DIFFERENT NOTE, I, I HAVE A, A COMMENT, UH, FOR, UH, UH, COMMISSIONER CURRY, YOU KNOW, UM, I ACTUALLY LIKE THE WAY HE WAS GOING DOWN THE PATH OF, LET'S SAY, OKAY, IF WE DON'T, IF THE PUNITIVE DAMAGE IS, IS NOT THE TWO YEAR, AT LEAST WAIT FOR THIS PERSON, IS TO THEN, UH, BASICALLY TRY TO MAKE THE HOUSE AS HISTORIC AS POSSIBLE BACK, I THINK AS, AS A PENALTY EITHER WAY.
YOU EITHER MAKE HIM PAY IN TIME OR YOU MAKE HIM PAY IN FUNDS.
I, I WOULD IMAGINE, AND PAY IN TIME SEEMS IN THIS CASE, AT LEAST TO ME, SEEMS LIKE A POOR, A POOR ARRANGEMENT FOR EVERYONE FROM THE, YOU KNOW, EVERYONE ALL, ALL OF US, ALL TWO AND A HALF MILLION OF US
YOU KNOW, AND SO YEAH, IF THERE'S ANOTHER WAY TO GET THERE, YOU KNOW, HE, UM, REGARDLESS OF, OF THE TRAGEDY OF WHERE WE ARE, UM, MAYBE WE CAN FIND A WAY.
WELL THEN THANK YOU FOR SAYING, WELL THEN I, THEN I WOULD LIKE TO PUNT THE QUESTION OVER TO KIM.
SO WILL WE BE ABLE TO MAKE THAT WHATEVER RECOMMENDATION THAT WE WANNA IMPOSE ON THIS OWNER IN THE FUTURE TIME? YOU KNOW, WE, WE'LL BE TALKING A LOT ABOUT THAT BOTH, UM, AMONG US AND AND STAFF, UM, BEFORE IT COMES TO YOU.
AND WE WILL TRY AND COME WITH A FULLER LIST OF OPTIONS AND, UM, WHAT THINGS YOU MIGHT DO.
I THINK IT'S REASONABLE IN THAT IN APPROVING A C OF R YOU CAN IMPOSE REASONABLE CONDITIONS.
UM, I'D URGE YOU TO BE REASONABLE.
THE, THE WORD I JUST HEARD, AND, AND THIS WAS ALSO PART OF STAFF'S CONCERN, WAS PUNITIVE.
ARE WE JUST DOING SOMETHING TO PUNISH SOMEONE OR IS THERE REALLY A PUBLIC PURPOSE TO THE ACTION THAT YOU'RE, YOU'RE TRYING TO TAKE? RIGHT.
BUT THAT'S, THAT'S WHY I WAS TRYING TO SUGGEST THAT WE HAVE SEEN PEOPLE REMOVE SIDING THAT WAS GREAT CONDITION AND WINDOWS, AND WE'VE MADE THEM PUT BACK SALVAGE SIDING AND SOME CASES, SOME CASES SALVAGE WINDOWS ARE PUT IN WOOD CONSTRUCTED NEW WINDOWS THAT ARE IDENTICAL TO THE WINDOWS THAT CAME OUT, WHICH IS ANOTHER MM-HMM
BUT, BUT, BUT THEN IT DOES LOOK LIKE THE HISTORIC HOME THAT WAS THERE PRIOR TO, WE DON'T SEE THE INSIDE STUDS, AND WE HAVE ALREADY ALLOWED, YOU KNOW, ALLOWED THE ADDITION APPROVED OF THE ADDITION, WHICH WAS SMALL, BUT WE COULD SAY NO OTHER ADDITIONS FOR SOME TIME.
AND THAT COULD BE, YOU KNOW, A MEASURE, BUT RIGHT.
IF, YEAH, IF THERE'S NO OTHER CONFIDENCE FROM THE COMMISSION, UM, WAIT, I, I'M SORRY.
OR I WANNA MAKE ONE MORE COMMENT.
SINCE IT'S SIX 13, UM, SINCE WE'RE NOT MEETING AGAIN TILL LATE OCTOBER, I WANNA REMIND EVERYBODY OCTOBER IS TEXAS ARCHEOLOGY MONTH.
UM, SO BE ON THE LOOKOUT ON THE THC WEBSITE FOR A BUNCH OF GREAT ARCHEOLOGY THINGS GOING ON IN OUR REGION AND ACROSS THE STATE.
UH, I KNOW ROMAN'S NOT HERE, SO I TAKE IT THERE'S NOT GONNA BE A, A PROVISION OFFICER'S REPORT.
THERE IS NO HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER, THEREFORE NO REPORT.
WELL, THERE IS ONE, BUT HE'S JUST ABSENT.
WELL, I'M, I'M, I'M GONNA, I'M GONNA BRING THIS TO ME TOO, AN ADJOURNMENT.
SO THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR COMMITMENT AND SERVICE.
I KNOW IT WAS A ROUGH MEETING.
WELL, AND YOU HEARD IT, KIM SAY WE CAN DOUBLE OUR SALARY NEXT YEAR.
I'LL MAKE THAT RECOMMENDATION.