[00:00:01]
HISTORIC PRESERVATION APPEALS[Historic Preservation Appeals Board on November 28, 2022.]
BOARD, AND I'M CALLING THIS MEETING TO ORDER.THE BOARD CONDUCTS MEETINGS AT THE CITY HALL ANNEX AND WITH VIRTUAL PARTICIPATION OPTIONS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 5 5 1 0.127 OF THE TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE, WHICH BECAME EFFECTIVE ON SEPTEMBER 1ST, 2021.
THE CHAIR WILL BE PRESENT IN THE ROOM BOARD MEMBERS, STAFF, AND THE PUBLIC MAY ATTEND IN PERSON OR THROUGH A VIDEO CONFERENCE LINK USING MICROSOFT TEAMS. AT THIS BOARD MEETING, APPLICANTS MAY OPEN AND SPEAK FOR A REASONABLE AMOUNT OF TIME, AND THE APPLICANTS ARE ENCOURAGED TO BE CONCISE.
IF BOARD MEMBERS HAVE QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT, YOU WILL BE GIVEN ADDITIONAL TIME TO ANSWER THOSE QUESTIONS.
OTHER PUBLIC SPEAKERS MAY SPEAK WHEN I RECOGNIZE YOU TO SPEAK.
THE CHAIR RESERVES THE RIGHT TO LIMIT THE TIME FOR SPEAKERS.
NUMBER TWO, IF YOU DO NOT SPEAK UP TO SIGN UP TO SPEAK IN ADVANCE, YOU CAN SUBMIT A SPEAKER REQUEST TO STAFF, AND YOUR NAME WILL BE ANNOUNCED AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME.
IF JOINING VIRTUALLY, PLEASE MUTE YOURSELF AND PLEASE ONLY UNMUTE YOURSELF TO SPEAK.
WHEN I CALL YOU TO SPEAK BY NAME.
USE THE COMPUTER'S MICROPHONE ICON OR MUTE, OR PRESS STAR SIX TO MUTE FROM MOST PHONES.
OR, THIS MEETING MEETS CURRENT OPEN MEETING LEGAL REQUIREMENTS, SO LONG AS THE QUORUM OF MEMBERS ARE AUDIBLE AND VISIBLE WITH A CAMERA ON AND A MIC READY TO BE TURNED ON.
IF VIRTUAL BOARD MEMBERS PLEASE UNMUTE YOURSELF AND RESPOND BY REPEATING YOUR NAME AND SAYING, PRESENT OR PRESENT VIRTUALLY WHEN I CALL YOUR NAME.
I AM CHAIR JD BARTEL, AND I AM PRESENT.
MR. IF YOU CAN SHOW YOUR CAMERA AND ACKNOWLEDGE YOURSELF AT THIS TIME, THAT WOULD BE AWESOME.
OTHERWISE, THANK YOU FOR PARTICIPATING.
AND WE'LL NOTE AS YOU'RE NOT VISIBLE, UH, ROB HELLER, WHO IS THANKFULLY HERE TODAY.
UH, DEPUTY DIRECTOR JENNIFER OSLAND OSLAND PRESENT.
I DO NOT HAVE A CHAIR'S REPORT.
UH, NEXT ITEM IS A DIRECTOR'S REPORT.
DO WE HAVE A DIRECTOR'S REPORT TODAY? A BRIEF ONE.
UM, GOOD MORNING, MR. CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.
I'M JENNIFER OLIN, ACTING SECRETARY OF THIS BOARD AND DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT.
I HOPE EVERYBODY HAD A HAPPY THANKSGIVING WEEKEND.
UH, THIS MEETING OF THE HPAB IS BEING CONDUCTED IN PERSON IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS PUBLIC LEVELS.
CITY HALL ANNEX AT 900 BAGBY STREET WITH A VIRTUAL PARTICIPATION OPTION VIA TEAMS. THIS ROOM HAS A FRONT AND REAR DOOR, EASILY AVAILABLE FOR THE PUBLIC IN CASE OF EMERGENCY, OR IF ANYONE NEEDS TO STEP OUT AND TAKE A PHONE CALL.
AS ALWAYS, THE AGENDAS AVAILABLE@HOUSTONPLANNING.COM AND IT INCLUDES PUBLIC PARTICIPATION RULES.
PLEASE SPEAK ONLY WHEN RECOGNIZED BY THE CHAIR.
YOUR 2 20 23 MEETING DATES WILL BE CONSIDERED AT THE END OF THIS MEETING.
STAFF SCHEDULES, THESE DATES TO SECURE THE ROOM AND ASSOCIATED RESOURCES.
AS YOU KNOW, AND FOR THE LISTENING PUBLIC'S INFORMATION SCHEDULED MEETINGS ARE ONLY HELD WHEN THERE IS AN AGENDA ITEM REQUIRING CONSIDERATION.
A POSTED AGENDA CONFIRMS THAT A MEETING WILL ACTUALLY BE HELD ON A SCHEDULED DATE.
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.
THE PRIOR MEETING MINUTES WERE POSTED WITH THIS AGENDA.
MAY I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO ACCEPT THESE MINUTES, BUT WHAT KEEPS HAPPENING WITH THE TEAMS? WHAT ON TEAMS? WE HAVE SOME PEOPLE COMING IN AND OUT.
SO YOU HEAR A BLIP WHEN THEY JOIN THE MEETING.
WHAT, WHAT'S THE SCREEN SHOWING? NO, IT'S NOT OFF THE SCREEN.
WE'RE, WE'RE NOT SEEING, WE'RE NO LONGER SEEING THE TEAMS. IS THAT HTV? BECAUSE ON THE TEAMS WE DON'T SEE ANYTHING, SO THANK YOU.
UH, DO WE HAVE A MOTION FOR THE MINUTES? UM, ELLIOT, UH, MOVE TO ACCEPT THE MINUTES.
[00:05:02]
DO WE HAVE A SECOND? I DON'T KNOW IF I CAN SECOND, SINCE I WASN'T PARTICIPATING IN THE MEETING.YOU CAN, THERE'S, THERE'S NOT A PROBLEM WITH SECONDING OR VOTING IT.
THE IDEA, I THINK, IS THAT YOU TRUST THE STAFF THAT THEY HAVE MADE AN ACCURATE RECORD.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? STATE? AYE.
YOU, YOU SHOULD BE VOTING ON THESE.
MINSTER, DO WE HAVE A AFFIRMATION OR A MOTION? MOTION CARRIES.
THERESA, IS, UH, EDM ADMINSTER STILL ON OR A COMMITTEE? A BOARD MEMBER? COMMITTEE EDM MINSTER IS ON BUT NOT VISIBLE OR AUDIBLE.
SO HE'LL BE ABLE TO HEAR THE PROCEEDINGS BUT NOT BE COUNTED TOWARDS THE VOTES.
AND I DIDN'T GET THE SIGNUP SHEET FOR SPEAKERS, IS THERE? SO USUALLY I HAVE ONE UP HERE, SO I KNOW.
I BELIEVE THE ONLY SPEAKER IS THE APPLICANT, PAUL LATO AND JASON WILL ANNOUNCE THAT FOR YOU.
THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS THE SIX 15 HEIGHTS BOULEVARD REVIEW OF THE CERTIFICATE APPROPRIATENESS FOR 6 1 5 HEIGHTS BOULEVARD LOT EIGHT BLOCK 2 76.
GOOD MORNING, MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.
TODAY I'M BRINGING TO YOU 6 1 15 HEIGHTS BOULEVARD.
I'LL JUST GO THROUGH A BRIEF PROJECT SUMMARY AT A TIMELINE THAT HAS HAPPENED SINCE, UH, FIRST RECEIVED, UH, TWO COAS IN JANUARY 27TH, 2022 FROM THE HAAC, THE APPLICANT, MR. APOSTOLOS LA NATOS RECEIVED A COA FOR A REAR EDITION TO THEN EXISTING CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE.
RECEIVED A SECOND COA FOR A REAR DETACHED ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT, EXCUSE ME.
APPLICANT RECEIVED A REVISION TO THE COA FOR THE REAR DETACHED ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT.
JULY 18TH, 2022 BUILDING INSPECTOR WENT OUT TO THE SITE, SAW THAT THE SCOPE OF WORK HAD BEEN EXCEEDED AND THAT WAS RED TAGGED THE FOLLOWING DAY, JULY 19TH, 2022.
AN EMAIL WAS SENT OUT BY, UH, RAY RUIZ.
IT CAME TO THE OFFICE SHORTLY THEREAFTER, I HAD RECEIVED AN EMAIL FROM THE THEN AGENT LUIS CHACON NOTIFIED ME THAT THEIR RED TALK HAD BEEN ISSUED AND ALSO HAD PROVIDED PICTURES, WHICH IS IN THE EXHIBITS HERE.
I WENT OUT TO THE SITE TWO DAYS LATER, JULY 21ST, 2022.
I WENT OUT TO AND DISCOVERED THAT THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE, ALONG WITH THE SIDING, ORIGINAL WINDOWS, ORIGINAL SHIPLAP AND ROOF SHINGLES WAS TOTALLY GONE.
WHAT EXISTED WAS A REFRAMED STRUCTURE ON THE ORIGINAL FOOTPRINT PLUS THE APPROVED REAR ADDITION.
THIS IS IN THE EXHIBIT PACKAGE.
I EMAILED THE THEN AGENT LUIS CHACON, ASKING HIM, WHERE'S THE ORIGINAL MATERIALS.
I SAW A DUMPSTER THERE, BUT I COULD NOT GET ON THE GROUNDS AS IT WAS LOCKED UP.
ASKED HIM IF ANY OF THE ORIGINAL WINDOWS SHIPLAP ANYTHING OF THAT IS STILL THERE.
HE CAME BACK, HE CHECKED WITH THE CONTRACTOR AND HE SAID IT WAS ALREADY GONE.
SO ON JULY 22ND, FRIDAY 2022, A STOP WORK ORDER WAS ISSUED AND POSTED AT THE SITE.
THEN ON AUGUST 22ND, 2022, AN ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING WAS HELD.
DETERMINATION WAS MADE THAT THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE HAD BEEN DEMOLISHED AND IT WAS DETERMINED THAT THE STOP WORK ORDER WAS ISSUED IN COMPLIANCE WITH DUE PROCESS OF CITY ORDINANCE.
THEREAFTER, WE HAD INTERNAL STAFF DISCUSSIONS ABOUT A PATH FORWARD, WHAT ARE WE GONNA DO WITH THIS SITUATION? WE THEN INFORMED THE APPLICANT THAT HE COULD COME TO THE SEPTEMBER 8TH, 2022 HAC MEETING AND APPLY FOR A COA FOR DEMOLITION.
HAC CONSIDERED THE ITEM AND DENIED THE COA INITIATED A CUR WITH THE, UH, GOING
[00:10:01]
WITH THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO ROOF AND TO DECK AND SHEATH THE NEW CONSTRUCTION TO STRUCTURALLY STABILIZE IT MOVING FORWARD.WE HAD OCTOBER 10TH, 2022 HAAC MEETING TO CONSIDER THEN NEW APPLICATIONS FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION AS THESE WERE NO LONGER GONNA BE ALTERATIONS.
THESE WERE TWO COAS AT THE OCTOBER 10TH MEETING.
ONE WAS FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION OF THE, UH, MAIN STRUCTURE THAT INCLUDED THE REAR EDITION SECOND COA FOR A REAR DETACHED ACCESSORY DWELLING IN IT.
UH, ONE WAS APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS THAT WAS THE EXISTING FOOTPRINT WITH THE REAR EDITION.
WITH THAT, I WILL CONCLUDE THAT, UM, THE APPLICANT IS APPEALING THIS DECISION TO HISTORIC PRESERVATION APPEALS BOARD BASED ON THE OCTOBER 10TH, 2022 H EIGHT HAHC MEETING.
THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
THE APPLICANT ATOS IS HERE TO MAKE A COMMENT AND ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE.
I, MYSELF, AM AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
DOES ANY BOARD MEMBER HAVE QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? UH, I DON'T ACTUALLY, I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S A QUESTION FOR STAFF OR THE, UH, APPLICANT, BUT I JUST WANNA BE CLEAR BASED ON THAT DESCRIPTION, IT SEEMS LIKE THE APPEAL IS REALLY NARROWLY FOCUSED ON THE DENIAL OF THE, UH, ADDITIONAL DWELLING UNIT AT THE BACK.
IS THAT REALLY WHAT THE, I WOULD ADD TO THAT? IT'S NOT ONLY THAT, BUT ALSO THE TENURE PENALTY THAT WAS IMPOSED.
I MEAN, THAT'S, THAT'S NOT, THAT'S NOT REALLY AN ACTION.
I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
UM, I WILL ADD TO THAT, THAT THE TENURE PENALTY IS IN THE CODE OF ORDINANCES.
THERE ARE NO OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF.
I'D LIKE TO CALL THE SINGLE SPEAKER SIGNED UP TO SPEAK AT THIS TIME.
MR. APOSTLES, PLEASE STATE YOUR FULL NAME INTO THE MIC UPON, UH, ARRIVING AT THE PODIUM, APOSTLES LANA, UH, YOU CAN CALL ME PAUL.
UH, MR. ELLIOT? UH, YES IT IS.
UM, ALTHOUGH THE, THE PENALTY OR THE PUNISHMENT IS TO ADD ANYTHING FOR THE, THE FRONT HOUSE FOR THE 10 YEARS AS WELL.
UM, MY MAIN INTENTION HERE IS THE, UH, ACCESSORY STRUCTURE IN THE BACK.
WE ARE HAVING A TECHNICAL DIFFICULTY RIGHT NOW.
WOULD YOU MIND PAUSING TILL WE CAN GIVE A MOMENT FOR THE CONNECTION TO BE RESUMED? YOUR TIME WOULD BEGIN OVER AGAIN.
JUST TO BE CLEAR, WE JUST HAVE A TECHNICAL DI DIFFICULTY WITH THE TEAMS APPLICATION IN THE REAR.
RECONNECTING THE, MAKING SURE WE HAVE AUDIO BROADCASTING ON, UH, VIRTUAL.
[00:15:01]
TO, UH, TECHNICAL ISSUES IN THE BACK ROOM, AND WE WANTED TO ENSURE THAT THIS MEETING WAS TELEVISED PROPERLY.UH, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AGAIN AND YOU HAVE YOUR FULL TIME.
UH, GOOD MORNING AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.
I HOPE EACH OF YOU HAD A FABULOUS THANKSGIVING WITH YOUR LOVED ONES.
UH, MY INTENTION THIS MORNING IS TO GET YOUR PERMISSION TO CONTINUE BUILDING AND FINISH WHAT THE HISTORIC COMMITTEE ONCE ALREADY APPROVED ME TO BUILD.
I'M NOT ASKING FOR ANYTHING NEW, NOR AM I TRYING TO BUILD OR ADD ANYTHING THEY HAD NOT ALREADY ONCE APPROVED.
UH, BEFORE DOING SO, I FEEL I MUST EXPLAIN WHY DID NOT DEFEND MYSELF OR MY CONTRACTOR'S ACTIONS DURING THE 8 22 ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING, THE NINE EIGHT ZOOM HEARING, OR THE 10 10, UH, OCTOBER 10TH, UM, HISTORIC, UH, COMMITTEE MEETING IN PERSON.
UM, I DID NOT DEFEND MYSELF OR MY CONTRACTOR'S ACTIONS AS I DID NOT WANNA SEEM ARGUMENTATIVE, DEFENSIVE, OR ANYTHING OTHER THAN EXTREMELY APOLOGETIC AND EMBARRASSED FOR NOT FOLLOWING THE RULES AND GETTING PERMISSION FROM THE HISTORIC COMMITTEE PRIOR TO RE REMOVING THE BURNT SHIPLAP CHARGE FRAMING AND AS BEST AS SIDING.
WHAT I DID TELL THE HISTORIC COMMITTEE IS THAT I DID NOT KNOW, NOT THAT I SHOULD NOT HAVE KNOWN, BUT I DID NOT KNOW.
UH, I HIRED AN ARCHITECT AND A CONTRACTOR TO DO THEIR JOBS.
AND WHERE I FAILED MISERABLY WAS IN NOT MAKING SURE THE TWO OF THEM WERE IN COMMUNICATION WITH EACH OTHER AND KNOWING THE RULES.
MY ARCHITECT DID NOT SEND MY CONTRACTOR TO THE COA, NOR DID I.
AND MY CONTRACTOR ACTED AS HE KNOWS HOW.
AND BY FOLLOWING THE PLANS AND SPECS THAT WERE APPROVED, AND HE WAS GIVEN, I FEEL NOT DEFENDING MYSELF WAS A HUGE MISTAKE, AND THAT I SHOULD HAVE TOLD THE HISTORIC COMMITTEE WHY MY CONTRACTOR REMOVED THE BURNT FRAMING, UH, CHARRED, UH, THE BURNT SHIPLAP AND THE ASBESTOS SIDING AS THEY MIGHT NOT HAVE GIVEN ME A 10 YEAR WAITING PERIOD OF NOT BEING ALLOWED TO ADD THE NON-CONTRIBUTING ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, NOT MAKING SURE, UM, MY BIGGEST MISTAKE WAS IN NOT MAKING SURE MY CONTRACTOR AND ARCHITECT WERE IN DIRECT COMMUNICATION AND NOT GETTING PERMISSION FROM THE STOR COMMITTEE TO DEMO PRIOR TO DEMOING.
AND BASED ON WHAT WE ALL KNOW OF THE CONDITION OF THE HOUSE, I DO NOT FEEL THAT FITS OR CONSTITUTES A 10 YEAR PENALTY, ESPECIALLY ON A NON-CONTRIBUTING ACCESSORY STRUCTURE.
UH, THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO DO THIS TODAY.
AND DURING THE REST OF OUR TIME TOGETHER THIS MORNING, I'D LIKE TO GO OVER FOUR THINGS WITH YOU.
NUMBER ONE, WHY I BOUGHT THIS IS NUMBER ONE, WHY I BOUGHT SIX 15 HEIGHTS BOULEVARD.
WHY MY CONTRACTOR DID WHAT HE DID, WHY I'M APP NUMBER THREE, WHY I'M APPEALING THE 10 YEAR WAITING PERIOD FOR NOT BEING ALLOWED TO ADD A NON-CONTRIBUTING ACCESSORY STRUCTURE.
AND NUMBER FOUR, 10 REASONS WHY I FEEL YOU SHOULD AGREE WITH ME.
WHY NUMBER ONE, WHY I BOUGHT SIX 15 HEIGHTS BOULEVARD.
MY GRANDFATHER BOUGHT 6 0 2 HEIGHTS BOULEVARD IN THE MID EIGHTIES.
I MOVED TO HOUSTON KINGWOOD, SPECIFICALLY IN 1991, AND WOULD TAKE TRIPS WITH HOWDY, MY GRANDFATHER, DOWN TO THE APARTMENTS TO COLLECT RENT, CHECK ON THINGS AND ANYTHING ELSE THAT WE NEEDED TO DO.
IN 1998 AFTER GRADUATING HIGH SCHOOL, I MOVED INTO APARTMENT 15 WHOSE BEDROOM WINDOW IS DIRECTLY ACROSS FROM SIX 15 HEIGHTS BOULEVARD, 6 0 2 HEIGHTS BOULEVARD.
AND I ENDED UP BUYING SIX 15 HEIGHTS BOULEVARD 20 YEARS LATER AND CLOSE TO 40 YEARS AFTER MY GRANDFATHER BOUGHT HIS APARTMENT COMPLEX.
I THOUGHT THAT WAS TOTALLY COOL, AND I KNOW IF MY GRANDFATHER WAS LOOKING DOWN, HE WOULD BE PROUD.
MY MOM AND AUNT STILL OWN THE APARTMENT COMPLEX AND MY BROTHER LIVES THERE TODAY.
MY MOM ALSO HAS A SMALL APARTMENT IN THE COMPLEX THAT SHE RENTS SO THAT SHE'S CLOSER TO HER THREE GRANDCHILDREN VERSUS LIVING IN, IN KINGWOOD.
LIKE MOST APARTMENTS, THERE'S NO YARD.
SO WHEN SIX 15 BECAME AVAILABLE FOR SALE, I THOUGHT TO MYSELF I COULD HAVE AN OFFICE DURING THE DAY AND MY MOM COULD HAVE A HOUSE IN THE EVENINGS AND WEEKENDS FOR HER GRANDCHILDREN TO VISIT.
I'M NOT EXACTLY SURE WHEN IT WAS, BUT I REMEMBER AFTER EMAILING J JASON LENAL AFTER RECEIVING THE APPROVAL, THANKING HIM IN A LONG EMAIL EXPRESSING WHAT THIS MEANT TO ME AND MY FAMILY, AND HOW THIS WAS MUCH MORE THAN AN OFFICE TO ME.
IT WAS AN OFFICE ACROSS THE STREET FROM MY FAMILY APARTMENT COMPLEX, WHICH IS WHY WE MOVED TO TEXAS WHERE MY MOM COULD LIVE AND WHERE MY KIDS COULD VISIT THEIR GRANDMA WITH A YARD JUST A FEW BLOCKS DOWN FROM THE STREET WHERE WE CURRENTLY LIVE.
SIDE STORY, THE MAN THAT I BOUGHT THE HOUSE FROM SIX 15 HEIGHTS BOULEVARD, ACTUALLY POURED THE FOUNDATION ON THE APARTMENT COMPLEX.
MY CURRENT HOUSE IS ON NINTH STREET AND LAWRENCE STREET, JUST A FEW BLOCKS AWAY FROM SIX 15 AND 6 0 2.
AND MY KIDS ARE LIKELY GOING TO HARVARD ELEMENTARY, WHICH IS ONE BLOCK EAST AND TWO BLOCKS NORTH FROM, UH, BOTH PROPERTIES.
MY CURRENT OFFICE IS ON 11TH STREET.
I SHARE THIS WITH YOU 'CAUSE THE HEIGHTS IS MY LITTLE VILLAGE.
I HAVE WORKED HARD TO STAY IN THE HEIGHTS AND TO HAVE OUR PERSONAL HOME, MY OFFICE SINCE KIDS' SCHOOL, SO CLOSE TO MY MOM AND AUNT'S APARTMENT COMPLEX.
I SHARE ALL THIS WITH YOU AS IT'S IMPORTANT FOR
[00:20:01]
ME FOR YOU TO UNDERSTAND HOW IMPORTANT SIX 15 HEIGHTS IS TO ME, AND THAT I'M NOT JUST SOME HOT SHOT OUT OF TOWN INVESTOR WITH BIG POCKETS WHO'S COMING IN TO DO MY OWN THING WITH NO REGARDS TO THE RULE.IT'S JUST SIMPLY NOT HOW I RULE NUMBER TWO, MY CONTRACTOR, WHY HE DID WHAT HE DID.
UM, I HAVE, UM, DO WE HAVE PICTURES OF, DO YOU HAVE PICTURES OF THE CUR OF THE HOUSE, OF THE CONDITION IT WAS IN, OR IS IT WORTH PASSING THESE AROUND TO YOU? DO YOU, DO YOU KNOW WHAT THE INSIDE OF THE HOUSE LOOKED LIKE? IT'S WHICH ONE? IT'S, UM, ALL, UM, IT'S, IT'S IN THE PACKET.
IT'S THE MATERIALS ARE ON THE SCREEN AND IN YOUR PACKET AND ON THE POSTED AGENDA.
UM, THEY CAN SHARE THESE, UH,
IF, IF WE COULD JUST GO PAGE FOUR OF 21, PLEASE, ON THE TEAM'S PRESENTATION.
SO IT, I I, I WASN'T, UM, WE'RE, WE'RE NOT ALLOWED TO PRESENT NEW EVIDENCE.
SO I'M GOING OFF THE, THE PICTURES THAT WERE ALREADY IN.
UM, SO I'M, I'M SHOWING THE, THE BURNT IF YOU, IF YOU LOOK, CAN YOU GO BACK TO THAT PICTURE PLEASE? ONE ANOTHER PICTURE, PLEASE.
NEXT ONE, NEXT ONE, AND THE NEXT ONE.
SO I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW HOW TO, OTHER THAN POINTING, IF YOU, IT'D BE, IT'D BE EASIER TO HAND THESE OUT THERE.
THE POINT I'M TRYING TO MAKE IS THE INSIDE OF THE SHIPLAP IS ACTUALLY SOME OF IT'S EXTERIOR SIDING.
IF YOU SEE THE WHITE RIGHT THERE, THAT'S ACTUALLY EXTERIOR SIDING.
AND IT'S A GOOD PART OF THAT CORNER THERE.
WHAT, WHAT I'M, WHAT, WHAT I'M TRYING TO POINT OUT HERE IS THAT WHEN THIS HOUSE WAS BURNT, IT, IT WASN'T PUT BACK TO THE WAY IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN PUT.
AND THE INSIDE SHIPLAP WAS PIECE FIELD.
SO PART OF THE INSIDE SHIPLAP IS ACTUALLY EXTERIOR SIDING, UH, THAT WAS PUT ON, ON THE INSIDE, UH, WHY MY CONTRACTOR DID WHAT HE DID.
IT'S CHARRED, IT'S PIECEMEALED.
UH, IT'S DIFFERENT TYPES OF WOOD USED AFTER THE FIRE.
UH, YOU CAN SEE THAT THE BURNT FRAMING, UM, THE, A LOT OF THE BURNT WOOD WAS LEFT AND SUPPORTED WITH, WITH SOME NEW WOOD.
UM, AS VESTUS SIDING IS, UH, WHAT'S ON THE OUTSIDE, UH, PICTURES SHOW MILDEW AND POSSIBLE MOLD.
UM, THE, WHEN I ASKED MY CONTRACTOR, WHEN HE GAVE ME THE REHAB BUDGET, WHY EVERYTHING WAS BEING REPLACED AND WHY IT WAS SO EXPENSIVE, HE TOLD ME THE MATERIALS AND THE CONDITIONS OF THE HOUSE WAS DANGEROUS, HAZARDOUS, AND PIECEMEAL TOGETHER.
UM, HE ALSO ADDED THAT THE ORIGINAL AND APPROVED PLANS AND TRUSSES WERE APPROVED AND INSPECTED FOR TWO BY SIX WALLS, 16 INCHES ON CENTER.
THIS CURRENT HOUSE HAS TWO BY FOUR WALLS AND IS 24 INCHES ON CENTER.
UM, THE, OR THE ORIGINAL WALLS AND CEILING HAD BEEN AT 24 INCHES ON CENTER, AND THE APPROVED PLANS WERE SPECKED AT 16 INCHES ON CENTER WITH TRUSSES DESIGNED FOR TWO BY SIX WALLS AND CEILINGS.
THE WEIGHT OF THE TRUSSES WOULD NOT HOLD ON THE TWO BY FOUR WALLS AND THE 24 INCHES ON CENTER.
I, I THINK THAT THAT'S A BIG POINT IN HOW THE PLANS WERE APPROVED.
SO MY CONTRACTOR, THE BIGGEST MISTAKE MADE IS HE WAS NEVER GIVEN A COA.
I KNOW THAT NOW IN THE PLANS THAT HE FOLLOWED, HE KEEPS TELLING ME, PAUL, LOOK, THE PLANS THAT WERE GIVEN TO ME ARE TWO BY SIX FOR 16 ON CENTER THE HOUSE.
THESE CURRENT WALLS ARE TWO BY 4 24 INCHES ON CENTER.
I GOT CUSTOM TRUSSES TO GIVE THE, HIS, I COULDN'T RAISE THE ROOF OF THE HOUSE, AND THE CEILING WAS AN EIGHT FOOT CEILING.
SO TO GIVE IT THAT PEAK CEILING, WE GOT CUSTOM TRUSSES DONE AND APPROVED.
AND THE CUSTOM TRU IS CALLED FOR TWO BY SIX WALLS WHERE THERE ARE TWO BY FOUR WALLS, AND AGAIN, 16 INCHES ON CENTER VER VERSUS THE 24 INCHES ON CENTER.
UM, WHY NUMBER THREE? WHY I'M APPEALING, I, I FEEL THE PUNISHMENT DOES NOT FIT THE CRIME.
TEXAS IS KNOWN FOR BEING TOUGH, BUT FAIR.
UH, THE DECISION OF THE HISTORICAL COMMITTEE IS THE TOUGHEST IT CAN BE.
AND I, IN MY OPINION, I DON'T THINK THAT'S FAIR.
UM, THERE'S LITERALLY NOTHING FOR ME TO GAIN BY INTENTIONALLY GOING AGAINST THE HISTORIC COMMITTEE.
UM, I THINK, I FEEL, I UNDERSTAND THE INTENTION OF THE TENURE PUNISHMENT AS THE HISTORIC COMMITTEE WANTS TO ELIMINATE PEOPLE FROM DEMOLISHING HISTORIC HOUSES
[00:25:01]
AND THEN REBUILDING DIFFERENT HOUSES THAT LOOK DIFFERENT AND ULTIMATELY DAMAGE THE INTEGRITY OF THE HISTORIC AREAS.I, I WAS REBUILDING IT BACK EXACTLY HOW THE PLANS WERE.
UM, I FEEL THE PUNISHMENT WAS REACTIONARY AND OUT OF PASSION AND UPSET AND NOT FULLY THOUGHT OUT.
THE SPECIAL HEARING ON 10 10 WAS SCHEDULED IN ADVANCE, AND THE HISTORIC COMMITTEE KNEW THE FACTS FROM THE PREVIOUS NINE EIGHT HEARING.
UH, MR. YAP PUT IN MOTION THAT I RESTORE THE HOUSE BACK TO ITS ORIGINAL DIMENSIONS, AND THAT I HAVE A TWO YEAR WAIT PENALTY ON ANY ADDITIONS TO THE FRONT STRUCTURE AND ANY STRUCTURES.
THIS MOTION PASSED FIVE TO FOUR.
THIS WAS VERY UPSETTING AND EXTREMELY WORRISOME TO ME AS THE MONTH BEFORE, THE HISTORIC COMMITTEE ALLOWED ME TO SHEATH THE DECK AND ROOF THE EXISTING STRUCTURE OUT OF SAFETY HAZARDS ONLY TO NOW WANT ME TO DEMOLISH WHAT WAS ALREADY DONE, WHICH WOULD'VE COST ME MORE MONEY IN ADDITION TO ALL THE EXTRA MONEY I'D SPENT.
WHY WOULD THEY GIVE ME PERMISSION TO SHEATH DECK AND ROOF TO ONLY PUT IN MOTION THAT I HAVE TO DEMOLISH IT A MONTH LATER? NOT TO MENTION THAT PER THE APPROVED PLANS, ALL TRUSSES WERE CUSTOM TRUSSES AND COULD ONLY BE USED FOR THAT HOUSE BEFORE ENDING.
THE HISTORIC COMMITTEE REQUESTED COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC, AT WHICH POINT I ASKED, THEY RECONSIDERED THE DECISION AS A MONTH AGO.
THEY ALLOWED ME TO SHAVE DECK AND ROOF.
THE NEWLY CONSTRUCTION FRAMING THAT INCLUDED THE CUSTOM TRUSSES, WHICH WERE APPROVED IN THE ORIGINAL PLANS AND WOULD GO TO WASTE IF REMOVED.
THEY RECONSIDERED AND ALLOWED ME TO KEEP THE FRONT MAIN HOUSE AS IT WAS.
BUT MR. YAP THEN PUT, PUTS A MOTION THAT THE TWO YEAR PENALTY BE INCREASED TO 10 YEARS, WHICH OF COURSE PASSED.
I ASK WHY GO FROM TWO YEARS TO 10 YEARS? WHAT IS THE POINT OF THAT AND WHO DOES IT SERVE? IT DOESN'T SERVE ME.
IT DOESN'T SERVE THE CITY OF HOUSTON.
I DON'T FEEL IT SERVES THE, THE HEIGHTS HISTORIC DISTRICT.
AND IT TRULY FEELS LIKE FEW REASONS WHY I FEEL YOU SHOULD AGREE WITH MY APPEAL.
THERE WAS NO INTENTION, THERE'S NO MASTER EVIL MASTER PLAN HERE, AND THERE'S LITERALLY NOTHING FOR ME TO GAIN BY INTENTIONALLY GOING AGAINST THE HISTORIC COMMITTEE'S WISHES.
I'VE ALREADY PUNISHED MYSELF BEFORE, DURING, AFTER, AND NOW AS I'M ALREADY DEALING WITH ALL THE FALLOUT FROM THIS.
I'M FOUR MONTHS AND COUNTING ON DELAYS.
THE EMBARRASSMENT IS, I MEAN, I LIVE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD MONEY ON CURRENT OFFICE LEASE.
I KEEP HAVING TO SPEND MONEY ON MY CURRENT OFFICE, LEASE MONEY ON ADDED CARING COSTS FOR SIX 15 HEIGHTS BOULEVARD MONEY ON UNNECESSARY MATERIALS.
I, I FOUND THAT I SHOULD HAVE RESTORED THE WINDOWS.
THAT'S, THAT'S A BIG HARD LESSON TO LEARN.
MY CONTRACTOR SPENT $37,000 ON WINDOWS BECAUSE THEY HAVE TO BE A CERTAIN TYPE OF HISTORIC WINDOW TO GO TO THE HOUSE.
SO BEFORE WE EVEN STARTED ANY OF THIS WORK, HE SPENT $37,000 ON WINDOWS THAT NEED TO PASS FOR HISTORIC.
I LATER FIND OUT THAT THE WINDOWS COULD HAVE BEEN RESTORED OR THEY COULD HAVE JUST BEEN PAINTED SHUT AND NOT OPERATIONAL.
I'VE HAD ADDED INSURANCE COSTS.
MY PERMITTING COSTS HAVE DOUBLED.
MY ARCHITECT COSTS HAVE DOUBLED.
I DID A REMODEL, THEN I HAD TO PAY AN ARCHITECT TO DO EVERYTHING FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION.
I'M HAVING TO PAY FOR A COURT REPORTER THIS MORNING, NOT COUNTING MY TIME, ENERGY, AND EFFORT.
I MEAN, I'VE SPENT DAYS PREPARING FOR THIS HEARING ON I I PULLING IN.
I MEAN, THE, THE LIST GOES ON AND ON.
I HAVE CLOSE TO LITERALLY BUBBLED ALL OF MY COSTS.
AND I ESTIMATE I'VE SPENT CLOSE TO $150,000 ON MONEY I DID NOT HAVE TO SPEND.
I LOST MY HISTORIC PROPERTY TAX DESIGNATION, WHICH WILL COST ME MORE MONEY OVER TIME.
THE NON-CONTRIBUTING ACCESSORY STRUCTURE THAT I WANT PERMISSION TO BUILD BACKS UP TO AN ALLEY AND AN ELECTRICAL PLANT NEXT TO YALE STREET.
SO IT'S ON HEIGHTS BOULEVARD OR YALE, WHERE THAT BIG, UM, ELECTRICAL PLANT IS ALLEY.
THAT'S WHERE I WANNA PUT THE NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE.
UM, THIS HOUSE, IT, IT WAS NOT A CHARMING HISTORIC HOUSE.
NO ONE HAD LIVED IN THAT HOUSE FOR THREE PLUS YEARS.
UH, AND IT'S, IT'S AN EYESORE ON 600 HEIGHTS BOULEVARD.
UH, WHERE I'M ASKING TO BUILD.
MY NON-CONTRIBUTING ACCESSORY STRUCTURE IS THE SAME PLACE WHERE THERE USED TO BE A GARAGE.
THERE USED TO BE A GARAGE THERE.
AND THE NON-ACCESS STRUCTURE IS THE SAME SIZE AS THE PREVIOUS GARAGE.
IF WE, I, YOU SHOULD HAVE THE SURVEY UP THERE AND YOU'LL SEE WHERE THE OLD, UM, UH, OOPS.
UM, THERE SHOULD BE IN, IN THE, UH, IN, IN WHAT THEY HAVE.
SO THAT, UH, IF, IF YOU LOOK, IF YOU LOOK HERE THAT, SO THE RED LINES ARE WHERE THE, UM, NEW ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, NON-CONTRIBUTING ACCESSORY STRUCTURE.
AND THEN THE ORANGE IS WHERE THE GARAGE,
[00:30:01]
UM, USED TO BE.UM, ALL THAT CONCRETE, OF COURSE, HAS ALL BEEN TAKEN OUT.
UM, MY CONTRACTOR, HE, HE MADE, HE, HE, HE MADE A WRONG CALL IN, IN, IN NOT GETTING, UH, PERMISSION, OBVIOUSLY.
UM, WHERE, WHERE HE AND I FAILED WAS TO GET PERMISSION FROM THE HISTORIC DEMO PRIOR TO DEMOING.
UH, AND BASED ON WHAT, WHAT HE KNOWS, UM, WITH THE PLANS AND SPECS AND, AND THE CONDITION OF THE HOUSE, I JUST DON'T, DON'T FEEL IT WARRANTS A, A 10 YEAR WAITING PENALTY.
UH, THIS IMPACTS ME FINANCIALLY AS A PROPERTY LOSES VALUE WITHOUT THE NON-CONTRIBUTING ACCESSORY STRUCTURE AND OR A GARAGE.
UM, IT IMPACTS ME EMOTIONALLY.
REMEMBER, THIS IS WHERE MY MOM WAS GOING TO LIVE.
UH, AND PLEASE FORGIVE ME IF I'VE MENTIONED THIS AS I'VE MENTIONED THIS NUMEROUS TIMES THIS MORNING, TO THE POINT OF BEATING A DEAD HORSE.
AND I AM SORRY ABOUT THAT, BUT I'M TRYING TO BUILD A NON-CONTRIBUTING ACCESSORY STRUCTURE.
SO I'M BEING PENALIZED FOR NOT BEING ABLE TO BUILD A NON-CONTRIBUTING BUILDING.
UM, THERE ARE INTENTIONS, RULES, AND THE RULES AND THE INTENTION OF THE HISTORIC COMMITTEE IS TO PROTECT, I FEEL, IS TO PROTECT THE CHARACTER, CHARM AND INTEGRITY OF THE HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, WHAT, WHAT WAS TORN DOWN, UM, COULD BE ARGUED.
IT, IT COULD BE KEPT, COULD BE ARGUED.
IT, IT, IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN REPLACED.
UM, BUT IT'S BEING REBUILT EXACTLY HOW IT WAS APPROVED, JUST HOW IT WAS APPROVED, UH, WHICH IS FULFILLING, WHICH I FEEL IS FULFILLING UPON THE INTENTION OF THE HISTORIC COMMITTEE AND THE HISTORIC DISTRICT.
WHAT WAS ONCE A VACANT EYESORE WILL SOON BE A HISTORIC CHARM ON ONE OF THE MOST BEAUTIFUL STREETS IN OUR CITY, RESPECTFULLY.
AND IN MY OPINION, NOT GETTING PERMISSION TO DEMOLISH THAT IN ADVANCE SHOULD NOT EQUAL A 10 YEAR WAITING PERIOD.
I'M A HEIGHTS RESIDENT OF 20 PLUS YEARS.
AND THERE WAS NO EVIL MASTER PLAN HERE.
I'M SIMPLY A BUSINESSMAN WANTING AN OFFICE, A FATHER, WANTING A PLACE FOR HIS CHILDREN TO PLAY WHEN VISITING THEIR GRANDMOTHER, A SON TRYING TO MAKE HIS MOM PROUD.
AND A GRANDSON WHO WISHES HIS GRANDFATHER IS SMILING DOWN ON HIM FROM HEAVEN.
AND I'M HERE TODAY TO ASK YOU THAT YOU ALLOW ME TO FINISH WHAT I STARTED AS I STARTED IT BY ALLOWING ME TO BUILD A NON-CONTRIBUTING ACCESSORY STRUCTURE.
THANK YOU VERY KINDLY, AND I SINCERELY APPRECIATE YOU TAKING OUT THE TIME TO HEAR ME THIS MORNING.
UM, BEFORE YOU STEP AWAY, THEY, THEY PUT, STAFF HAS PUT THAT UP IN THE FRONT.
YOU WERE POINTING AT SOMETHING ON THE SCREEN EARLIER.
WE COULD NOT SEE WHAT YOU WERE POINTING AT ON THE SCREEN.
SHE CAN PUT THAT IMAGE OF THAT PHOTOGRAPH ON HER PROJECTOR.
SO YOU CAN POINT AT WHAT YOU WERE TALKING.
I KNOW SPECIFICALLY ROB HILLIER COULDN'T SEE WHAT YOU WERE POINTING AT ON THE SCREEN.
BUT SHE HAS THE, SHE HAS THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT THAT IS ALLOWED FOR US TO SEE, AND SHE CAN, UH, THE, SO THE PHOTOGRAPH OF THE INTERIOR? IT'S THE INTERIOR MA'AM.
UM, I CAN SHOW YOU ON HERE WHICH ONE THERE IS THE QUESTION SPECIFICALLY ABOUT THE GARAGE OR NO, HE WAS POINTING AT AN IMAGE ON THE SCREEN TV SCREEN AND WE COULD NOT SEE WHAT HE WAS POINTING AT IN HIS ORIGINAL PRESENTATION.
AND JUST TO CLARIFY WHAT HE WAS TALKING ABOUT.
SO WE HAVE THAT, UH, THAT'S, THAT'S THE PICTURE, UH, RIGHT THERE, MR. BARTELL.
UM, AND WHAT I'M TRYING TO SHOW IS, UM, IF YOU SEE THE RED CIRCLES WHERE THE WIPE IS, THAT'S ACTUALLY EXTERIOR SIDING THAT WHEN THE HOUSE WAS BURNT, THEY TOOK THE EXTERIOR SIDING AND PUT IT ON THE INSIDE AS, AS SHIPLAP.
UM, THAT, AND THAT, THAT'S WHAT I WAS ALSO, UM, YOU CAN SEE THE TWO BY FOUR AND, UH, THE, THERE IT'S MORE THAN 24 INCHES ON CENTER.
UM, SO THAT'S WHAT I WAS TRYING TO SHOW.
AND THEN I, AND STAFF CAN CORRECT ME, BUT, UM, YOU WERE, YOU'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT THAT YOU WANT PERMISSION TO BUILD A NON-CONTRIBUTING BUILDING.
TECHNICALLY THE HHC HAS ALREADY ALLOWED YOU TO BUILD A NEW, A NON-CONTRIBUTING BUILDING BECAUSE THE MAIN RESIDENCE THAT IS BEING, THAT THEY HAVE ALLOWED YOU TO DO IS ALREADY A NON-CONTRIBUTING BUILDING.
SO THEY'VE ALLOWED YOU ONE ALREADY.
SO JUST AS A CLARIFICATION, IT WOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED A CONTRIBUTING BUILDING TO THE DISTRICT AT THIS POINT.
I ONLY THOUGHT I WAS CONFUSED WHEN I WAS REVIEWING THIS OVER THE WEEKEND.
UH, TO ASK YOU A FEW QUESTIONS.
UM, WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT THE CUSTOM TRUSSES AND TWO BY SIX WALLS, ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE ADDITION OR THE RECONSTRUCTION OF THE ORIGINAL HOME? UH, I'M TALKING ABOUT WHAT WAS APPROVED ORIGINALLY BY THE CITY TO REMODEL THE HOUSE.
SO THE ORIGINAL PLANS, THE, UM, THE FRONT HOUSE.
SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE FRONT HOUSE, UM, HAS TWO BY FOUR WALLS CURRENTLY.
AND EVERYTHING'S 24 INCHES ON CENTER
[00:35:01]
WITH THE CUSTOM TRUSSES THAT WERE APPROVED ORIGINALLY IN THE ORIGINAL PLANS CALL FOR TWO BY SIX WALLS AND 16 ON CENTER TO GIVE MORE SUPPORT.'CAUSE ALL THE LOAD IS GONNA GO ON THE OUTSIDE WALLS.
SO YOUR ORIGINAL APPLICATION WAS TO REFRAME THE ORIGINAL HOUSE? YES.
IT, IT, MY CONTRACTOR HAS BEEN THE WHOLE TIME SAYING, PAUL, I KNOW I MISSED IT.
I KNOW I MISSED IT, BUT WHY WOULD THE CITY APPROVE THIS IF A TWO BY SIX 16 ON CENTER IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT? LIKE, WHY? IT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE.
AND THE WHOLE TIME I'VE SAID, LOOK, LET'S JUST BE QUIET ABOUT THAT.
WE SHOULD HAVE GOT PERMISSION.
LET'S NOT GIVE REASONS, SAY WE'RE SORRY AND SEE WHAT HAPPENS.
AND I NEVER IMAGINED A 10 YEAR PENALTY WOULD BE GIVEN OUT, BUT IT, IT'S, IT'S A, I WANT TO ASK, UH, STAFF A QUESTION.
WAS THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION APPROVED TO DEMOLISH AND REFRAME THE ORIGINAL HOUSE FROM THE FOUNDATION UP? I DIDN'T.
SO I HAVE HERE FROM JANUARY 27TH.
NO, WE DON'T, AND WE DON'T LOOK AT THE TRUST PLANS, BUT DEAN OF COA, DO YOU WANNA PUT THAT ON DOCUMENT CAMERA? WHAT'S COMING UP ON THE SCREEN IS GONNA BE SHOWING, DO I NEED TO SAY OVERHEAD PROJECTOR DOCUMENT CAMERA PLEASE.
THIS IS WHAT WAS APPROVED JANUARY 27TH.
NOW, WE DID HAVE A DISCUSSION BEFORE WE WENT TO THE JANUARY 27TH DISC, UH, MEETING.
UH, PAUL WAS THERE, ALONG WITH HIS ARCHITECT, THEY ASKED ME IF THEY COULD RAISE THE ROOF.
I SAID, NO, YOU CAN'T, BUT YOU CAN REASE THE CEILING ON THE INSIDE.
THAT'S AN INTERIOR MODEL THAT'S NOT UNDER OUR PURVIEW.
SO THAT WAS, YOU KNOW, I SAID, YEAH, THAT'S FINE, BEAR.
EVERYTHING ELSE REMAINS THE EXTERIOR WALL ASSEMBLY, THE ORIGINAL WINDOWS.
SO, AND AS YOU SEE HERE, THIS IS WHAT WAS APPROVED JANUARY 27TH.
DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, HONOR.
THE DESIGN, THE DESIGN PROFESSIONAL THAT YOU HAD HIRED ON THIS PROJECT SHOULD HAVE ALSO CONSIDERED NOT DESIGNING A ITEM THAT DESIGNING IN A WAY THAT HA INJURED, INJURED OR DAMAGED THE ORIGINAL CHARACTER OR NECESSITATED THIS TYPE OF ACTION.
UM, YEAH, MR. BARTEL, I, I COULD, UH, DEFINITELY SEE THAT, YEAH, THE ARCHITECT SHOULD KNOW, HEY, IF YOU CAN'T DO THIS, 'CAUSE WHAT YOU'RE WANTING TO DO PUTS TOO MUCH LOAD ON THERE.
UM, LOOK, THERE, THERE WAS A COMMENT MADE AFTER THE 10 10 HEARING.
IT'S, I MEAN, EVERYBODY WAS, WAS, WAS VERY COMPASSIONATE.
PAUL, IT'S, IT'S TWIDDLE DUMB POINTING AT TWIDDLE DO.
AND, YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S, IT'S WHAT DO WE DO? IT'S, WELL, I'M, I'M THE ONE HERE WRITING, WRITING THE CHECKS FOR ALL OF IT.
AND I HIRED AN ARCHITECT THAT DIDN'T KNOW THAT, UH, YEAH, THAT IS THE COA, THE BIG PROBLEM IS MY, MY CONTRACTOR WAS NEVER GIVEN A COA, UM, I, I THOUGHT I HIRE AN ARCHITECT.
I HIRE A CONTRACTOR, THEY'RE GONNA BE IN COMMUNICATION WITH EACH OTHER.
DO YOU HAVE, UH, THE ARCHITECT HAD EXPERIENCE IN HISTORIC DISTRICT? WHAT HE TOLD ME, UM, SO THAT, THAT'S MY, MY CONTRACTOR'S BIGGEST COMPLAINT, OR BIGGEST BACK TO ME HAS BEEN THE WHOLE TIME.
IT'S PAUL, DON'T GET MAD AT ME.
THEY SAY TWO BY SIXES, HOW COULD I DO ON TWO BY FOUR WALLS? HE GOES, YOU KNOW, WE, YOU CAN'T START S********G THE WALL.
YOU START DOING ALL THESE DIFFERENT THINGS.
IT'S CHARRED, IT'S BURNT SHIPLAP, IT'S BURNT FRAMING.
UM, IT'S BEEN PIECEMEAL TOGETHER.
SO I, WITH WITH, WITH, WITHOUT BEATING A DEAD HORSE AND, AND GOING OVER AND OVER, IT'S, IT, IT'S KIND OF, YEAH, I AM, I AM TWIDDLED DO OVER HERE GOING.
WELL, WELL, I, WHAT DO I DO? WELL, I'M NOT SURE.
I MEAN, AT THIS POINT IT'S REALLY GERMANE TO OUR, OUR DECISION ABOUT, ABOUT THIS.
I MEAN, I, I'D BE SHOCKED THOUGH.
ANY CONTRACTOR COULD LOOK AT PLANS FOR OR REMODEL AND CONCLUDE THEY NEED TO THROW AWAY ALL THE WINDOWS AND BUY NEW ONES.
THAT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE TO ME.
THAT SEEMS BEYOND WHAT ANYBODY WOULD DO.
AND I DON'T THINK Y'ALL GOT A DEMOLITION PERMIT OR SEWER DISCONNECT.
SO SOMETHING, UH, WAS GOING ON THERE THAT SOMEBODY, ANYBODY WOULD'VE KNOWN, EVEN A FIRST TIME CONTRACT, THEY WERE EXCEEDING THE SCOPE OF WHAT THE PLANS TOLD THEM TO DO.
SO I UNDERSTAND THERE WERE SOME, SOME CHALLENGES Y'ALL DIDN'T EXPECT.
BUT THE, THE POINT REALLY OF ALL OF THAT IS, UH, YOU SHOULD HAVE GOTTEN NOT JUST PERMISSION TO DEMOLISH, LIKE THAT'S AN EASY THING.
THAT'S A HARD BURDEN TO GET, GET ACROSS.
AND THE STAFF HELPED YOU AND ACTUALLY RECOMMENDED THAT YOU GET ONE.
AND YOU'RE NOT APPEALING THAT TODAY, WHICH, YOU KNOW, ALL THE THING YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT NOW WOULD GO TO THAT.
AND THE FACT YOU'RE REBUILDING SOMETHING THAT'S ALMOST THE EXACT SAME FOOTPRINT THAT YOU ENCOUNTERED CHALLENGES IN THERE, THAT YOU DIDN'T EXPECT.
THAT THE BUILDING IS NOT THE MOST CHARMING ONE THAT WAS EVER BUILT IN THE HEIGHTS.
ALL THAT STUFF WAS THE UNUSUAL AND COMPELLING CIRCUMSTANCES, WHICH WAS PRESENTED AND RECOMMENDED BY STAFF AND DENIED BY THE HHC.
AND IF THAT'S REALLY YOUR MAIN POINT, AND THAT WOULD FREE YOU FROM ANY OTHER RESTRICTIONS ON BUILDING ON THE PROPERTY IF
[00:40:01]
YOU HAD A APPROVED APPROPRIATE DEMOLITION, UM, UH, YOU KNOW, REAPPLY FOR THAT.IF YOU THINK THAT YOU'VE GOT NEW EVIDENCE OR A BETTER CASE, OR YOU WANT TO CHANGE YOUR TACTICS ABOUT HOW YOU DISCUSS THAT, REAPPLY FOR THAT, THAT'S NOT BEING APPEALED RIGHT NOW.
SO WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT THAT ANYMORE, MS. MR. LEY? I'M, I'M, I'M SORRY.
THE, THE WHAT, UM, WHAT I SHOULD HAVE APPEALED.
WELL, YOU, UH, I BELIEVE IT WAS AT THE, THE FIRST MEETING, UM, WHEN YOU GOT THE, UH, CERTIFICATE OF, UM, REMEDIATION.
THERE WAS ALSO, UH, UH, PUT FORTH A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR THE DEMOLITION ITSELF.
UM, WHICH I BELIEVE, IF I'M RECALLING CORRECTLY, THE STAFF ACTUALLY RECOMMENDED THAT THE, THE, THE CATEGORY OF THE ORDINANCE RELATING TO UNUSUAL AND COMPELLING CIRCUMSTANCES, WHICH WOULD ALLOW A DEMOLITION, NORMALLY IT HAS TO BE A COMPLETE ECONOMIC LOSS.
THE BUILDING HAS TO BE COMPLETELY BEYOND ANY REASONABLE REPAIR.
THERE'S ALSO A CATEGORY FOR UNUSUAL AND COMPELLING CIRCUMSTANCES WHERE, YOU KNOW, UH, MAJOR CONFUSION WITH THE, THE CONTRACTOR, THE, THE BUILDING IS A VERY MARGINAL BUILDING.
YOU'RE GONNA BUILD BACK SOMETHING THAT'S EXACTLY THE SAME CHARACTER ON THE SAME FOOTPRINT.
SO I THINK ON THAT BASIS, I BELIEVE STAFF RECOMMENDED THAT BE APPROVED BY THE HHC.
THAT WAS A MEETING WHERE THEY APPROVED YOUR CERTIFICATE OF REMEDIATION AND LET YOU TO, TO DECK AND SHEATH WHAT YOU'D ALREADY BILLED.
SO, UM, AND, AND ALL THAT, WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT NOW, I BELIEVE GOES TO THAT ISSUE WHETHER OR NOT THE DEMOLITION SHOULD HAVE BEEN ALLOWED UNDER THE ORDINANCE.
UM, BUT THE CONCLUSION WAS, UH, AND HASN'T BEEN APPEALED OR, OR QUESTIONED TO THIS POINT, EXCEPT ANECDOTALLY IN THE FACT THAT THIS IS A BIG, HUGE MESS WE ALL RECOGNIZE.
AND IT'S BEEN A BURDEN ON YOU.
I TOTALLY RECOGNIZE THAT, IS THAT, UM, UH, UH, THE CONCLUSION WAS IT WAS A DEMOLITION THAT WAS NOT AUTHORIZED AND DID NOT GET A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS.
AND SO, UH, AND THAT LEADS ME TO THE NEXT POINT REALLY, IS THE HHC IS NOT REALLY IMPOSING A PENALTY OR CREATING SOMETHING OUT OF THEIR OWN IMAGINATION.
UH, IT'S IN THE ORDINANCE THAT WHEN THERE IS AN UNAUTHORIZED DEMOLITION OF A CONTRIBUTING BUILDING, THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS NEXT IS THAT, YOU KNOW, PERMITS WON'T BE ISSUED.
UM, SO, UH, I'M NOT SURE WHAT WE CAN DO ABOUT THAT.
I DON'T THINK WE ARE, WE CAN AMEND THE ORDINANCE HERE, YOU KNOW, UH, UH, THERE, THERE GROUNDS FOR DENYING THE ACCESSORY UNIT WAS THAT THAT ORDINANCE PROHIBITED THEM ESSENTIALLY FROM APPROVING IT AT THAT POINT.
UH, THE ONLY THING THAT'S KIND OF UP IN THE AIR IS, IS IT NEW CONSTRUCTION? IF IT'S AN ACCESSORY UNIT, I THINK BECAUSE IT'S ALL BEING BUILT AT THE SAME TIME, IT IS NEW CONSTRUCTION.
I DON'T KNOW HOW THAT ORDINANCE APPLIES IN THE FUTURE, BUT I'M, I'M SAYING FOR US, I KNOW IT'S A HUGE THING.
IT'S ALL IN ONE BIG BALL OF THINGS THAT HAPPENED TO YOU AND DIFFERENT THINGS YOU'RE DEALING WITH.
FOR US, WE HAVE THIS ONE, UH, C OF A THAT YOU APPLIED FOR, FOR THE ACCESSORY BUILDING THAT WAS DENIED.
AND YOU ARE APPEALING THAT BASED ON A LOT OF THINGS I KNOW, BUT THEY, THEY DENIED IT ON VERY SPECIFIC NARROW GROUNDS.
SO THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO FOCUS IN FOR OUR ROLE TODAY.
AND, AND THANK YOU FOR THAT, UH, THE, THE 10 YEARS.
UM, I, MY INTERPRETATION IS THAT THAT'S THE MAX AND IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE, UH, A GIVEN THE FULL 10 YEAR PENALTY.
WELL, WHEN I READ THE ORDINANCE, AND I THINK YOU'RE, YOU GOT IT RIGHT THAT WHAT THE KIND OF, THE GOAL OF THAT WAS IS THAT WOULDN'T BE SOMEBODY COME IN, DO AN ILLEGAL DEMOLITION AND THEN JUST SAY, OH, YOU KNOW, IT'S GONE.
UH, BUT NOW I WANNA BUILD SOMETHING NEW AND, AND THEN WE DON'T, WE IGNORE THE FACT THAT THERE'S BEEN ILLEGAL DEMOLITION.
SO WHAT THAT THE PIECE OF THE ORDINANCE SAYS IS, UH, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN, THERE'S GONNA BE A PENALTY.
YOU CAN'T BUILD ANYTHING FOR TWO YEARS.
'CAUSE ILLEGAL DEMOLITION IS LIKE THE, THE WORST CRIME
UH, BUT AFTER TWO YEARS YOU CAN BUILD BACK PRETTY MUCH THE THING YOU DESTROYED THAT'S ALLOWED AFTER TWO YEARS IN, IN AUSTRALIA AND AFTER 10 YEARS, YOU CAN, IT'S, IT'S LIKE, IT'S A, IT'S A VACANT LOT.
FORGET ABOUT ANYTHING THAT HAPPENED IN THE PAST AND JUST APPLY FOR A NEW CONSTRUCTION UNDER THE CRITERIA.
SO THAT'S, AND I KNOW YOU'RE NOT THAT CASE, YOU'RE NOT REALLY THAT SITUATION BECAUSE IT'S A VERY UNUSUAL WAY THIS HAPPENED AND PRIOR APPROVALS AND ALL THAT.
BUT, UM, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT MEANS THE ORDINANCE DOESN'T APPLY AT ALL TO YOU IN THIS CASE.
'CAUSE IT, IT SEEMS LIKE IT DOES, BECAUSE THERE'S BEEN A, AN UNPEELED, ILLEGAL DEMOLITION THAT'S, UM, IS, IS A FACT OF WHAT HAPPENED ON THIS SITE.
SO YEAH, I I, I COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND IT.
WHAT, I GUESS WHAT, WHAT I'M ASKING FOR IS, IS TO LOOK AT THE, THE ILL INTENT THERE.
THERE WAS, I, THERE WAS NO ILL INTENT IN, IN DEMOLISHING A HISTORIC BUILDING TO, TO GET AWAY WITH SOMETHING.
IT WAS MY CONTRACTOR IN, IN BUYING THE WINDOWS AND, AND NOT NEEDING TO DO THAT.
[00:45:01]
ALL THAT.THAT'S, YEAH, I MEAN, THEY, THEY'RE, I THEY, LOOKING BACK AT IT NOW, AND, UM, ACTUALLY ON THE NINE, UM, I I, IT WAS THE NINE EIGHT OR THE 10 10, I, I WAS TALKING WITH PETE, PETE STOCKTON, UM, AND WHILE I'M ON THE PHONE TALKING WITH HIM, I'M DRIVING DOWN ARLINGTON AND I SEE THIS GUY IN THE FRONT YARD AND HE'S RESTORING WINDOWS.
AND I TELL PETE, THIS IS, YOU KNOW, GOD'S FUNNY HUMOR AND SHOWING THAT WINDOWS BE RESTORED.
SO AFTER THE FACT, EVERYTHING DOES, DOES COME VERY CLEAR.
UM, YOU KNOW, THERE WAS, THERE WAS A TWO YEAR PENALTY THAT WAS INITIALLY MR. YAP PROPOSED, SAID TWO YEARS.
AND THEN WHEN THE HOUSE, WHEN IT WAS ALLOWED TO BUILD IT AS I WAS BUILDING IT, HE THEN TOOK IT TO 10 YEARS.
COULD THERE NOT BE CONSIDERATION TO TAKE IT FROM 10 BACK TO THE TWO YEARS THAT HE ORIGINALLY GAVE? I, I UNDERSTAND.
AND FRANKLY, I DON'T THINK THEY HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO DO THAT PERSONALLY.
I DON'T THINK, YOU KNOW, THEY'VE GOT CERTAIN THINGS THEY CAN DO OR THAT WE CAN DO ABOUT INTERPRETING THE ORDINANCE.
I DON'T THINK WE CAN AMEND THE ORDINANCE OR IGNORE PARTS OF THE ORDINANCE JUST BECAUSE WE WANT TO.
I MEAN, AND THAT, THAT PART OF THE ORDINANCE ABOUT THE TWO YEARS AND 10 YEARS, THAT DOESN'T JUST APPLY TO THE HHC ISSUING C OF A'S THAT SAYS, ANY BUILDING OFFICIAL CAN'T ISSUE ANY PERMIT.
SO I MEAN, IT'S, IT'S IF THEY'RE GONNA, THE CITY WILL DECIDE, YOU KNOW, THEIR OWN DISCRETION ABOUT HOW TO DO THAT.
BUT, YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S A, IT'S A, IT'S AN ORDINANCE THAT APPLIES TO OTHER PEOPLE BESIDES JUST THE HHC, UH, MAKING THEIR DISCRETIONARY CALLS ABOUT THING.
IN MY OPINION, WHEN I READ THAT, THAT'S HARDWIRED RIGHT INTO THE ORDINANCE.
IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT WE MAY OR MAY NOT DO OR HAVE FLEXIBILITY ABOUT IMPOSING THIS OR THAT PENALTY.
'CAUSE POSING PENALTIES IS NOT SOMETHING HHC DOES.
THE, THE ORDINANCE ALSO HAS A PENALTY ABOUT BEING FINED, WHICH YOU MAY BE FINED FOR VIOLATING THE ORDINANCE.
IT RARELY HAPPENS, BUT IT'S, AND IT'S KIND OF MINIMAL TO BE HONEST, UNLESS THEY DO IT ON A EVERYDAY BASIS.
SO WE DON'T, WE DON'T CHANGE THAT OR SAY, HEY, IN THIS CASE, THE FINE OUGHT TO BE $5,000.
YOU KNOW, WE DON'T, IT'S NOT SOMETHING THE HHC DOES OR WE DO.
'CAUSE IT'S WRITTEN IN THE ORDINANCE WHAT THE PENALTY IS.
AND I THINK THAT'S WHAT THIS SECTION IS.
SO YES, THEY DISCUSSED VERY LOOSELY, HEY, LET'S MAKE IT TWO YEARS OR DO THIS OR THAT.
AND THEY WERE TRYING TO COME SOME UP, SOME COMPROMISE THAT YOU WERE VERY MUCH IN FAVOR OF, BY THE WAY.
AND I UNDERSTAND THAT YOUR POSITION HAS CHANGED, BUT YOU SEEMED VERY HAPPY WITH THE RESULTS.
SO, I MEAN, NOT ON, ON THE TENURE, MR. ELLIOT.
UM, THE, THE, THE FRONT HOUSE, THE LAST PART YOU SAID, I'M NOT GONNA BUILD ANYTHING ELSE ON THE PROPERTY, IS WHAT THE TRANSCRIPT SAID.
SO I MEAN, ON THE FRONT HOUSE NO, THAT'S WHAT I MEANT MR. ELLIOT ON, ON THE FRONT HOUSE, I A FOR JUMPING IN.
UM, UH, BUT YEAH, NO, I DON'T KNOW.
I DON'T REALLY, UH, THINK THEY DISCUSSED THE WAY THE ORDINANCE WORKED PERFECTLY
SO, UM, THAT'S MY, MY UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT IT IS FOR THE RECORD, UH, MEMBER EDM MINSTER IS VISIBLE AND AUDIBLE ON TEAM SINCE 9 25.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE SPEAKER? ARE THERE, IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION THAT WE HAVE? DO WE NEED TO CALL SPECIAL? DOES ANYBODY HAVE A MOTION ON THE OF ACT OF ACTION ON THIS ITEM? UH, I MOVE, WE, UH, APPROVE THE ACTION OF THE, UH, HHC IN DENYING THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE.
IS THERE A SECOND ON THIS MOTION? UH, HELL YOUR SECOND THE MOTION.
WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
HELL, YOUR SECONDED THE MOTION.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME.
UM, SINCE WE HAVE THE APPLICANT STILL, OR THE, UH, SPEAKER, DO YOU WANNA RESTATE WHAT THE, WHAT WE JUST APPROVED, WHAT YOUR MOTION WAS? UM, YOU MAY, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU NEED TO.
YEAH, I MEAN, WE, WE HAVE, I THINK THE DECISION WAS UNANIMOUS BY THE BOARD MEMBERS IN ATTENDANCE TO UPHOLD THE DECISION OF THE HAHC.
IF I MAY ASK THE, THE, THE TWO BY SIX, UH, THE TRUSSES THAT WERE APPROVED ON TWO BY SIX WALLS AND 16 INCHES ON CENTER.
[00:50:01]
THAT THAT'S, THAT'S A PRETTY, THAT'S A PRETTY BIG DEAL IN THAT THAT'S THE PLANS THAT WERE APPROVED.UM, HOW, HOW COULD I, HOW, HOW WOULD I OR MY CONTRACTOR OR ANYONE KEEP WHAT WAS THERE AND STILL DO THE, THE APPROVED PLANS AND THE ASBESTOS SIDING? THE, THE SIDING WAS AS VESTUS.
LIKE, WHY, WHY AM I BEING PENALIZED FOR REMOVING ASBESTOS SIDING? I WOULD, I WOULD SUGGEST YOU, YOU WOULD HAVE TO SPEAK TO STAFF ABOUT THAT MORE.
THE HHC REVIEWED A VERY PRECISE, UH, IDEA CONCEPT OF WHAT YOU WANTED TO DO AND WHAT WAS, WHAT WAS SUGGESTED AS FRAMING WITHIN THOSE PARAMETERS IS ON THE PLANS THAT ARE, WERE APPROVED BY THE PERMIT DEPARTMENT.
THE INTENT WAS THAT YOU WERE, YOU HAD SPECIFIED AN INTENT THAT YOU WERE GOING TO MAINTAIN THE EXISTING CHARACTER OF THE EXISTING BUILDING IN YOUR ORIGINAL APPLICATION.
IT WHAT YOU DO WITHIN THE INTERIOR OF YOUR STRUCTURE IS NOT REGULATED IN THE SAME MANNER.
SO WE, THE HHC IS NOT REVIEWING YOUR ARCHITECTURAL PLANS WITH THAT LEVEL OF PRECISION.
THEY ARE FOLLOWING YOUR INTENT AND YOU HAVE A WRITTEN RECORD OF YOUR INTENT FOR THAT ITEM.
UM, AND LEGAL CAN SAY, IF I SAID SOMETHING WRONG IN THAT REGARD, SO THE CITY APPROVES ONE THING AND THE HISTORIC DISTRICT DOESN'T LOOK AT WHAT THE CITY'S APPROV, I WOULD DEFER TO STAFF AND, AND I'LL, I'LL SAY THIS.
I THINK THAT THE QUESTION ABOUT WHAT WAS APPROVED ON THE PLANS FOR THE MAIN STRUCTURE IS NOT THE APPEAL.
IT'S BEFORE THE BOARD, UH, THAT, THAT, UM, YOU'RE, YOU'RE ABLE NOW WITH THE CERTIFICATE OF REMEDIATION TO, TO GO BACK TO THOSE PLANS AND REBUILD THAT STRUCTURE.
I THINK THE QUESTION, AS THE CHAIR HAS INDICATED, WAS A NARROWLY FOCUSED ONE ABOUT THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, THE BACK, WHICH WAS A NEW STRUCTURE.
BUT, YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S A, IT'S A REASONABLE QUESTION IF THAT'S, YOU FEEL LIKE THAT WAS THE PROBLEM WHEN THINGS LIKE THAT HAVE HAPPENED IN THE PAST? I USED TO BE ON THE HHC, PEOPLE WOULD COME BACK, UH, FOR AN AMENDMENT.
THEY SAY, I CAN'T ACTUALLY BUILD THIS AS I THOUGHT, YOU KNOW, THIS IS NOT, THIS IS GONNA REQUIRE ME TO DO SOME DEMOLITION OR SOMETHING.
THERE'S, THERE'S NO WAY THAT THE RIGHT ANSWER IS, I'M GONNA GO AHEAD AND DEMOLISH IT BECAUSE IT TURNS OUT THE THING THAT WAS APPROVED, I CAN'T ABIDE, I CAN'T COMPLY WITH THAT CAN'T BE THE ANSWER.
AND I DON'T THINK YOU'RE SUGGESTING THAT'S THE WAY TO DO IT.
NO, MR. ELLIOT AND, AND, AND EVERYBODY HERE.
I'M, I I'M JUST STUCK IN A SPOT OF LIKE, REALLY, LIKE, YOU KNOW IT, THAT THIS, THIS IS WHAT IT IS.
LIKE I HAVE TO WAIT 10 YEARS BECAUSE OF, I MEAN, IT'S, IT'S THAT BAD OF A MISTAKE.
LIKE WHAT WAS TORN DOWN WAS BURNT SHIPLAP CHARGE FRAMING AS VESTA SIDING ON, AND, AND 10 YEARS TO NOT THAT THAT'S, YOU MENTIONED A FINE.
I'D MUCH RATHER HAVE A FINE, THAT'S A HUGE FINE.
THIS IS A FEW HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS FINE IS WHAT I'M BEING FINED HERE BY NOT BUILDING IT FOR 10 YEARS.
DO I HAVE ANY TA I, I DON'T, I DON WANT TO CUT YOU OFF.
I DON'T WANT BE DISRESPECTFUL TO YOU, BUT WE HAVE HAD A MOTION.
THERE'S NO FURTHER ACTION WE CAN TAKE AT THIS TIME BECAUSE WE HAVE CLOSED THAT TOPIC.
UH, SO UNFORTUNATELY, IF ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS, I WOULD REFER YOU TO STAFF.
SO IF I'M LOOKING FOR A, A, A PATH FORWARD, IT'S, IT'S GO TO STAFF.
CAN I REACH OUT TO YOU, UH, INDIVIDUALLY VIA EMAIL? AND, UM, I'M, I'M A BIT LOST.
UH, YOU KNOW, WILL, THERE WAS SOMETHING ELSE THAT I COULD HAVE APPEALED IS WHAT I HEARD HERE, AND I APPEALED THE WRONG THING.
YOU DO HAVE TO GO TO STAFF OR THE CITY LEGAL IF YOU, IF YOU FEEL THAT'S NECESSARY.
THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR TIME THIS MORNING.
THE NEXT ITEM ON OUR AGENDA IS CONSIDERATION OF THE PROPOSED 2 0 2 3 APPEALS BOARD MEETING DATES.
UH, EVERYBODY HAS A COPY OF THAT IN THE MATERIALS PROVIDED.
DO I HAVE A MOTION OR A DISCUSSION ON THAT ITEM? VERY
MY, UH, MY CALENDAR IS NOT THAT ORGANIZED, SO I'VE GOT NO REASON TO OBJECT TO ANY
[00:55:01]
OF THESE DATES.DO I HAVE ANY MOTION OR FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THIS ITEM? HELLER MOVES TO APPROVE THE SCHEDULE FOR NEXT YEAR.
SECOND ELLIOT, IS MR. EDMUND IN FAVOR OF THIS SCHEDULE OR HAVE COMMENTS? STILL HERE? I CAN SEE HIM, BUT YES.
UH, I HAVE NO QUESTIONS AND I SUPPORT THEM.
I ALSO SUPPORT THE, UH, MOTION FOR THE PROPOSED DATES.
UM, NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS PUBLIC COMMENTS.
DO WE HAVE ANYONE ON THE COMPUTER FOR, ON THE INTERNET FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS? DO WE HAVE ANYONE FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS IN THE AUDIENCE, HAVING NOBODY APPROACH FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS? I AM ADJOURNING THIS MEETING OF THE HOUSTON PRESERVATIONS APPEAL BOARD TODAY ON NOVEMBER 28TH.
THE MEETING HAS BEEN ADJOURNED.
IF YOU'LL PLEASE DISCONNECT ALL ELECTRONIC DEVICES.