[00:00:05]
[Houston Archaeological and Historical Commission on December 14, 2022.]
AFTERNOON.IT'S, UH, NOW 2 32, WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 14TH, 2022.
TODAY'S MEETING OF THE HOUSTON ARCHEOLOGICAL AND CIRCLE COMMISSION.
I AM COMMISSION CHAIR DAVID EK TO VERIFY WE HAVE A QUORUM.
I WILL CALL THE ROLE THE CHAIR IS PRESENT.
UM, VICE CHAIR WIER JACKSON PRESENT.
COMMISSIONER TANIA DUBOSE MAY NOT BE PRESENT.
COMMISSIONER SWEENEY VAON MAY BE RUNNING LATE.
COMMISSIONER COSGROVE PRESENT.
COMMISSIONER CURRY IS EXPECTED.
HE'S, HE'S EXPECTED TO ATTEND, BUT NOT HERE YET.
I KNOW THAT COMMISSIONER YAP WILL BE ABSENT.
UH, COMMISSIONER STAAVA PRESENT.
HE'S PRESENT VIRTUALLY, UH, COMMISSIONER COUCH, I BELIEVE HE WA IS, IS EXPECTED AS WELL TO ATTEND.
AND, UH, DEPUTY DIRECTOR OSLAN PRESENT.
UM, AND I'D LIKE TO BEGIN WITH THE CHAIR'S REPORT.
OH, WELL, SORRY, NOT THE CHAIR'S REPORT, BUT THE DIRECTOR'S REPORT.
UH, GOOD AFTERNOON, COMMISSIONERS.
I'M JENNIFER OSLAND, ACTING SECRETARY OF THIS COMMISSION AND DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF THE HOUSTON PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT.
THIS MEETING OF THE HAHC IS BEING CONDUCTED IN PERSON AT 900 BAGBY STREET IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS ON THE PUBLIC LEVEL OF THE CITY HALL ANNEX WITH A VIRTUAL TEAMS PARTICIPATION OPTION.
THE ROOM HAS A FRONT AND REAR DOOR, EASILY AVAILABLE FOR THE PUBLIC IN CASE OF EMERGENCY, EMERGENCY OR IF YOU NEED TO STEP OUT TO MAKE A PHONE CALL THAT DOESN'T SAY THAT.
AS ALWAYS, THE 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 APPROPRIATE TIME.
PLEASE STAY MUTED UNLESS RECOGNIZED IF BY PHONE THAT'S PRESSING STAR.
UH, HERE'S A SNAPSHOT OF SOME OF THE PRESERVATION WORK THAT HAPPENED IN NOVEMBER THAT, UM, IS NOT INCLUDED ON TODAY'S AGENDA.
STAFF HAS RECEIVED A TOTAL OF 307 APPLICATIONS THROUGH DECEMBER 1ST WITH 31 RECEIVED SINCE THE REPORT IN NOVEMBER SO FAR THIS YEAR, THIS COMMISSION HAS REVIEWED 122 OF THESE 307 APPLICATIONS.
STAFF REVIEWED SEVEN ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVED ITEMS WITH 87 AS OF DECEMBER 1ST IN NOVEMBER.
STAFF ALSO RECEIVED REQUESTS FOR FOUR PRE-DESIGN REVIEWS FOR A TOTAL OF 44 AS OF DECEMBER 1ST.
THE NEXT HHC MEETING IS THURSDAY, JANUARY 26TH, 2023 AT 2:30 PM IN THIS ROOM, AND ALSO ON TEAMS. AND WE WISH EVERYONE, UM, HAPPY HOLIDAYS.
UM, I NOTE THAT COMMISSIONER SW HASSON HAS, HAS ENTERED THE ROOM.
UM, I DON'T THINK THERE'S, AND ALSO COMMISSIONER COUCH, THANK COMMISSIONER COUCH HAS ALSO JOINED US.
COMMISSIONER DEBO IS HERE AS WELL.
SO WE, NOW WE HAVE A SUPER QUORUM
UM, I DON'T BELIEVE THERE'S A MAYOR'S LIA LIAISON REPORT.
THERESA, CAN YOU CONFIRM? NOT THAT WE KNOW OF TODAY.
SO THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA WILL BE APPROVAL OF THE NOVEMBER 17TH, 2022 HAHC MEETING MINUTES.
UM, HAVE COMMISSIONERS HAD A CHANCE TO REVIEW THE MINUTES, UH, IN YOUR PACKET? IF THERE ARE NO CHANGES, IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE? SO MOVED.
COSGROVE ABSTAINS NOT PRESENT.
[00:05:01]
A WILL BE CONSIDERATION OF IMPOSSIBLE ACTION ON A CHANGE OF DESIGNATION APPLICATION 4 7 7 1 0.BROOK GLEN HEATH STREET, HOUSTON, TEXAS 7 7 0 6 1.
GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR PERSON AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.
THIS IS STAFF PERSON JASON LILIENTHAL.
GLEN HEATH STREET TO GLENBROOK VALLEY STAFF PRESENTS THIS ITEM TO YOU TODAY FOR CONSIDERATION OF IMPOSSIBLE ACTION ON A CHANGE OF THIS EXISTING STATUS AS NON-CONTRIBUTING AND CHANGING TO CONTRIBUTING STATUS.
THE HOUSE IS A TRADITIONAL RANCH STYLE HOUSE CONSTRUCTED IN 1960 WITH COLONIAL REVIVAL ELEMENTS.
IT EXHIBITS MANY OF THE DEFINING FEATURES OF RESIDENCES IN THE GLENBROOK VALLEY HISTORIC DISTRICT, INCLUDING A LOW PITCH ROOF WITH WIDE OVERHANGS, A BRICK EXTERIOR BOARD, AND BATTEN SIDING ON SITE CABLES, BRICK, CHIMNEY, FRONT PORCH COLUMNS, AND LARGE ALUMINUM WINDOWS ON THE FRONT FACADE.
THE MASSING AND LOT PLACEMENT OF THE BUILDING IS CONSISTENT WITH OTHER PROPERTIES THROUGHOUT THE DISTRICT.
ADDITIONALLY, NEARBY HOMES WITH SIMILAR FORMS AND ELEMENTS TO THIS BUILDING HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED AS CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES.
THE PORCH REAR ROOF ADDITION IS NOT VISIBLE FROM THE STREET, AND THE BUILDING HAS ONLY HAD MINOR CHANGES TO MATERIALS OVER THE YEARS.
OVERALL, THE STRUCTURE EXHIBITS MUCH OF ITS CHARACTER DEFINING FEATURES AND MUCH OF ITS INTEGRITY REMAINS INTACT.
STAFF RECOMMENDS HHHC REFER THIS PROPERTY TO CITY COUNCIL FOR RECLASSIFICATION.
AS A CONTRIBUTING PROPERTY CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION, I AM AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
ARE, ARE THERE ANY COMMISSION MEMBERS WHO, UM, HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT THE APPLICATION? I'M JUST CURIOUS TO KNOW WHAT PROMPTED IT.
SO, ON GLEN HEAT STREET, THERE'S ABOUT FOUR HOUSES DOWN CONSTRUCTED IN 1960.
THEY ARE LISTED AS CONTRIBUTING, AND THESE PROPERTY OWNERS KNOW EACH OTHER.
AND SO THIS ONE WONDERED WHY WOULD, WHY WEREN'T WE CLASSIFIED IN 2010? SO WHEN I WENT OUT IN SEPTEMBER, I TALKED TO THE HOMEOWNERS AND I GAVE THEM ALL THE INFORMATION.
AND SO THEY LOOKED INTO IT AND THEY DECIDED IT WOULD BE IN THEIR BEST INTEREST TO CHANGE THEIR STATUS.
AT THIS TIME, I'M GONNA, UH, THERE OTHER QUESTIONS.
I'M GONNA OPEN THIS UP FOR PUB PUBLIC HEARING TO SEE IF THERE'S, IF, ARE YOU AWARE THAT ANYONE HAS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS MATTER? I HAVE REACHED OUT TO THE PROPERTY OWNER.
UM, SHE HAS NOT RETURNED MY EMAILS OR PHONE CALLS.
I DID SAY IT WOULD BE IN HER BEST INTEREST TO SAY SOMETHING, BUT IS NOT PRESENT TO SPEAK, UNDERSTAND, AND ALSO NOT REQUIRED, UM, NOT HEARING ANY OTHER, UM, MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC REQUESTING TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM.
I'M GONNA CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING AT THIS TIME.
UM, COMMISSION MEMBERS, IS THERE A, A MOTION ON THIS ITEM? I MOVE THAT WE ACCEPT IT, AND I'D LIKE TO SAY THAT IT'S POSSIBLE THAT THAT HOUSE SLIPPED THROUGH, CONSIDERING WE HAD 1,254 HOMES.
THAT'S VERY, VERY ENCOURAGING.
UH, IS THERE A SECOND? THEDA SECOND.
ARE THERE ANY OPPOSED? ARE THERE ANY ABSTENTIONS THAT PASSES? MOVING ON, I GUESS TO ITEM B, UH, CONSIDERATION OF AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS.
APPLICATIONS FOR CONSENT AGENDA.
IT'S AN EARLY CHRISTMAS GIFT TO SEE ALL EV SO MANY PEOPLE HERE TODAY.
I'M THE PRESERVATION OFFICER FOR THE CITY OF HOUSTON.
AND STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THE FOLLOWING ACTIONS, FOLLOWING ITEMS FOR ACTION PER STAFF RECOMMENDATION IN ONE MOTION.
ITEM NUMBER 1 32 15 WHITE OAK DRIVE, NEW CONSTRUCTION IN THE HOUSTON HEIGHTS SOUTH FOR APPROVAL.
ITEM NUMBER 2 14 0 5 HARVARD STREET, NEW CONSTRUCTION, SINGLE FAMILY HOUSTON HEIGHTS EAST DENIAL AND ISSUANCE OF A CERTIFICATE OF REMEDIATION.
ITEM NUMBER 3 16 26 COURTLAND STREET AND ALTERATION ADDITION IN HOUSTON HEIGHTS EAST DENIAL AND ISSUANCE OF A CERTIFICATE OF REMEDIATION.
ITEM NUMBER 6 1 1 1 5 EAST 14TH STREET.
THAT'S 1115 EAST 14TH STREET, ALTERATION WINDOWS IN NOR HILL.
AND WE'RE REQUESTING A DEFERRAL OF THIS ITEM.
AND NUMBER 7 7 31 ARLINGTON STREET, AN ALTERATION EDITION IN HOUSTON HEIGHTS SOUTH FOR APPROVAL.
[00:10:01]
ITEM NUMBER 8 3400 WHITE OAK DRIVE, ALTERATION STOREFRONT DOORS, WINDOWS HOUSTON HEIGHTS SOUTH FOR APPROVAL.ITEM NUMBER 9 21 87 TRU ROAD ALTERATION.
ADDITION DOORS, WINDOWS, UH, THIS IS A LANDMARK.
THE TOMLINSON BLUNDELL HOUSE FOR APPROVAL ALSO, NUMBER 10 IS 2187 TRU ROAD.
NEW CONSTRUCTION OF A DETACHED GARAGE APARTMENT ON THE LANDMARK TOMLINSON BLUNDELL HOME HOUSE FOR APPROVAL.
AS THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, UH, REQUESTS APPROVAL OF ALL STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THESE ITEMS. THANK YOU ROMAN, UH, COMMISSION MEMBERS, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS LIST? AND, UH, WOULD ANY COMMISSION MEMBER LIKE TO PULL ONE OF THESE ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL DISCUSSION? MR. O'NEAL? PULL ITEM ONE, PLEASE.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER ITEMS? OKAY, NOT HEARING ANY OTHER, UH, REQUEST, UM, COMMISSION MEMBERS? I'D LIKE TO HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS AND AT THE SAME VOTE TO, UH, NOT JUST APPROVE THE LIST, BUT TO APPROVE THE, THE SUBJECT ITEMS THAT HAVE BEEN DISCUSSED, WHICH ARE ITEMS TWO, UH, 1405 HARVARD STREET, ITEM NUMBER 3 16 26 COURTLAND STREET, ITEM NUMBER 6 11 15 EAST 14TH STREET.
ITEM 7 7 31 ARLINGTON STREET, ITEM 8 3400 WHITE OAK DRIVE, ITEM 9 21 87 TRU ROAD.
I HAVE A FIRST, UH, IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND.
DO, DO WE NEED TO SEE IF ANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WANNA PULL ANYTHING OFF OR, UM, IF THERE SOME OF THOSE SURE.
SINCE SOME OF THOSE ARE THERE, WE HAVE SPEAKERS.
UM, LET ME OPEN THIS UP TO PUBLIC.
IF ANYONE HAS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK FOR ONE OF THESE ITEMS AND WANTS TO SPEAK FOR THE ITEMS, UH, IF YOU ARE IN FAVOR OF THESE ITEMS, THEY'RE ABOUT TO BE APPROVED.
IF YOU, UH, WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK, UM, UH, OPPOSED TO ONE OF THESE ITEMS, THIS IS YOUR CHANCE TO SPEAK UP AND HAVE IT REMOVED.
OKAY? SO NOT HEARING ANY, UH, MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC, UH, WE WILL, I'LL CLOSE PUBLIC SESSION AND, UH, PROCEED WITH THE VOTE.
ARE THERE ANY OPPOSED? ARE THERE ANY ABSTENTIONS? THOSE ITEMS PASS AT THIS TIME.
WE WILL, UM, REVIEW THE C OF A APPLICATION STARTING WITH ITEM 1 32 15 WHITE OAK DRIVE.
GOOD AFTERNOON, MR. CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.
MY NAME IS, MY NAME IS YASMIN LAN.
TODAY I SUBMIT FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION AGENDA ITEM B ONE AT 32 15 WHITE OAK STREET.
THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO REVIEW AND REDESIGN A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED CFA BY HAHC BACK IN NOVEMBER OF 21.
AND IT WAS DEFERRED BY HAHC LAST MONTH, NOVEMBER, 2022.
THE NEW CONSTRUCTION WILL BE A 2,402 SQUARE FEET RESTAURANT BUILDING AND 735 SQUARE FEET PATIO AREA.
THE PREVIOUS BE, UH, THE PREVIOUS APPROVED WAS 3,137 SQUARE FEET FOR RETAIL.
PROPOSED HEIGHT IS 19 FEET WITH PARAPET VENEER, STUCCO AND METAL CANOPIES WILL BE USED AS PRIMARY FACADE MATERIALS ON STREET FACING WALLS.
THE LEFT CORNER OF THE FRONT FACADE WILL BE MODIFIED WITH GLAZING AND STUCCO ACCENT AT THE TOP, METAL AWNING AND STEEL COLUMNS.
THE FRONT WINDOW OPENINGS WILL BE ENRO ENLARGED, EXCUSE ME, SIMILAR TO PREVIOUSLY APPROVED C OF A.
IT WILL BE COMPRISED OF BRICK VENEER STUCCO ON PRIMARY FACADE, STREET FACING ELEVATIONS.
THERE WILL BE ALUMINUM WINDOW STOREFRONT SYSTEM AND IT WILL BE RECESSED.
THIS MEETS HEIGHTS DESIGN GUIDELINES.
THE MEASURABLE STANDARDS FOR ATYPICAL USE.
NON-RESIDENTIAL STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE C OF A AND THE ARCHITECT IS, UH, HAS JOINED VIRTUALLY.
THANK YOU COMMISSION MEMBERS AT THIS TIME.
[00:15:01]
ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF ON THIS ITEM? I PULLED THIS ITEM JUST 'CAUSE IT WAS DEFERRED LAST MONTH, AND I JUST WANTED TO SEE THE CHANGES THAT HAD BEEN MADE TO MAKE SURE THAT MICROPHONE PLEASE DAWN, SORRY.UM, AS, AS PART OF THE REST OF THE AGENDA AS FAR AS I CAN TELL EVERYTHING.
THERE WAS ALSO A MEETING, UM, UH, WITH THE APPLICANT AND STAFF AND MYSELF JUST TO REVIEW THAT LIST OF ITEMS. YOU'LL NOTICE AT THE CORNER ENTRY THERE WAS USED TO BE A WALL OF GLASS.
SO THERE'S, THEY'RE NOW PUNCHED OPENINGS, THE FAUX WINDOWS AND THE UPPER, UM, UPPER LEVEL THAT DOESN'T ACTUALLY EXIST WHERE WE MOVED.
AND SO IT WAS STREAMLINED, UM, AND SIMPLIFIED.
SO, UM, IF THERE ARE OTHER QUESTIONS OF THE COMMISSION MEMBERS, I WILL OPEN THIS ITEM UP FOR PUBLIC.
AND, UM, ARE THERE ANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC I KNOW THAT, UM, KNOW THE AGENT IS AVAILABLE? I THINK IF THERE ARE QUESTIONS THIS TIME, IS THERE ANY MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THIS ITEM FOR 32 15 WHITE OAK NOT HEARING ANY REQUEST, I'LL CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT AND, UM, ASK THE COMMISSION MEMBERS.
WOULD ANYONE BRING A MOTION ON THIS ITEM TO SUPPORT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION? MOTION TO ACCEPT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL.
IS THERE A SECOND? WE'D DOER JACKSON SECONDS.
ANY OPPOSED? ANY ABSTENTIONS? THIS ITEM PASSES.
I THINK NOW WE'LL BE MOVING TO ITEM B 4 5 40 HEIGHTS COMMISSIONERS.
UH, ITEM B FOUR IS AT FIVE 40 HEIGHTS BOULEVARD.
THIS IS A, UH, PROPERTY IN THE HOUSTON HEIGHTS SOUTH OF THE STAFF REPORT UP THERE ON THE SCREEN.
THIS IS A NON-CONTRIBUTING COMMERCIAL STRUCTURE CONSTRUCTED CIRCA 2001.
THIS REQUEST IS SIMPLY TO PAINT THE BUILDING, UH, WHEN IT WAS CONSTRUCTED.
AND AS YOU SEE IT TODAY, WE HAVE SOME PICTURES.
THANK YOU, UH, WILSON IN THE OFFICE, UM, ON THE SCREEN BEFORE YOU ARE SOME STREET VIEWS AT WHICH PEOPLE MIGHT ENCOUNTER, UH, WHEN, UH, SEEING THIS BUILDING TODAY? IT IS, IT HAS BRICK.
UM, AND SO STAFF IN THIS CASE IS RECOMMENDING DENIAL.
UH, ONE OF THE REASONS IS REGARDLESS OF THE COLOR, UM, A BUILDING IS PAINTED ONCE A BUILDING AS PAINTED IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT.
UM, YOU KNOW, IT'S AN EXISTING PAINTED BUILDING, THEN THERE'S NO REQUIREMENT FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR REPAINTING IN THE FUTURE.
NOT THAT WE'RE AGAINST THE COLOR WHITE, BUT JUST SO YOU'RE AWARE THAT IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT COLOR, ONCE IT'S PAINTED, YOU'LL NEVER SEE IT AGAIN.
IT COULD COME BACK CALICO GOLD, PURPLE, GREEN, YELLOW, ANYTHING.
UM, THIS WE'RE RECOMMENDED IN A DENIAL, UH, BECAUSE OF, UH, SECTION 33 DASH 2 41 1 B AND THEN ONE A, UM, ACTUALLY IT'S, THAT'S, I'M SORRY, NOT THAT ONE.
SO THE PROPOSED ACTIVITY MUST MATCH THE ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES, MATERIALS AND CHARACTER OF EITHER THE EXISTING NON-CON CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE OR CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES WITHIN THE CONTEXT AREA.
AND, UH, STAFF REVIEWED THIS AND ALTHOUGH THIS IS A NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE, UH, CONSTRUCTED IN 2001 PRIOR TO CITY COUNCIL ADOPTION OF THE HOUSTON HEIGHTS SOUTH HISTORIC DISTRICT IN 2011, AND THE SUBSEQUENT ADOPTION OF THE HEIGHTS DESIGN GUIDELINES IN JULY OF 2018 AS CONSTRUCTED, THE, UH, BUILDING IS 125% OVER THE FLOOR TO AREA RATIO THAT WOULD BE ALLOWED FOR A LOT OF THIS SIZE IF AN APPLICATION WERE MADE TODAY TO CONSTRUCT THIS BUILDING.
THE CURRENT EXPOSED BRICK VENEER CONDITION IS COMPATIBLE WITH CONS, CONTRIBUTING BUILDINGS AND MATCHES THE ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES AND CHARACTER OF THE EXISTING BUILDING, PAINTING THE BUILDING.
[00:20:01]
IN THE CASE OF THIS APPLICATION, IF APPROVED, WOULD AUGMENT THE ALREADY EXCESSIVE BUILDING PROPORTION AND SCALE WITHIN THE CONTEXT AREA.AND IF WE WOULD GO FORWARD THEN, AND, UM, I MEAN, THERE IS A RENDERING THAT IT'S IMPORTANT TO SEE THAT THE APPLICANT WOULD MAY SHARE WITH YOU AS WELL, BUT THERE'S ACTUALLY, THAT'S A GOOD RENDERING OF IT THERE.
UM, YOU KNOW, OUR RESPONSE IS THAT THAT WOULDN'T BE A GOOD THING TO DO.
I THINK PART OF THIS, UH, THIS, THIS, UH, THIS ISSUE IS THAT MAINSTREAM BUILDINGS WITHIN THE DISTRICT ARE NOT, ARE NOT ALLOWED TO, TO BE PAINTED, UH, AS WELL.
AND SO, UM, IF MATCHING THE BUILDINGS IN THE DISTRICT, WHICH WE DID NOT ALLOW TO BE PAINTED, THAT'S PART OF THIS QUESTION.
I THINK THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING OF YOUR DENIAL.
IT, IT, YOU, IT IS, YOU'RE REQUIRED TO HAVE A CERTIFICATE OF APP TO PAINT AN UNPAINTED MASONRY BUILDING IN ANY HISTORIC DISTRICT.
UH, IT DOESN'T MEAN ONE COULDN'T BE APPROVED, BUT THAT, THAT'S A REQUIREMENT.
SO YOU NEED, YOU HAVE TO HAVE A C OF A IF YOU'RE GOING TO PAINT AN UNPAINTED MASONRY BUILDING.
SO THEN WE COME BEFORE YOU, BUT WE HAVE A NON-CONTRIBUTING BUILDING.
AND SO THAT'S WHERE WE, THE CRITERIA COMES INTO PLAY OF DOES EVEN THIS PAINT, DOES THIS MATCH THE CONTRIBUTING, THE NON-CONTRIBUTING BUILDING ITSELF? OR DOES IT FIT WELL WITHIN THE CONTEXT AREA? RIGHT.
BUT MY MY POINT WAS, UM, WE'RE CONTRIBUTING BUILDINGS THAT ARE NOT CURRENTLY PAINTED.
WE WE'RE NOT ALLOWED TO PAINT THEM.
IT'S ONLY IF THEY WERE PREVIOUSLY PAINTED BEFORE.
THAT THEY ARE ALLOWED TO BE REMAIN PAINTED.
AND THAT STANDARD IS WELL, UM, DOCUMENTED, SUPPORTED LOTS OF PRECEDENT, UM, IN ANY DISTRICT THAT YOU DON'T PAINT UNPAINTED MASONRY.
I GUESS COMMISSION MEMBERS FIRST, ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS THAT YOU HAVE FOR ROMAN? NOT HEARING ANY QUESTIONS.
I, AT THIS TIME, I'M GONNA OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.
I KNOW WE HAVE TWO SPEAKERS SIGNED UP FOR THIS ITEM.
UM, THE FIRST SPEAKER SIGNED UP IS MR. GORDON JONES.
PLEASE, UH, ADDRESS THE MICROPHONE AND, AND, AND RESTATE YOUR NAME.
UH, MY NAME IS GORDON JONES WITH, UH, FIVE 40 HEIGHTS REALTY LIMITED.
I APPRECIATE YOU TAKING THE TIME TO, TO HEAR OUR, UH, OUR PETITION.
UH, SO, UH, AND, AND ROMAN IS BRINGING UP A, A PRESENTATION, UM, THAT I HAD PUT TOGETHER WITH OUR, UH, UH, YOU KNOW, OUR CASE THAT WE'D LIKE TO, TO PRESENT BEFORE YOU.
SO, UM, AS HE MENTIONED, THE, THE PROPERTY IS, CAN YOU ALL HEAR ME? UH, IS IS LOCATED ON HEIGHTS BOULEVARD JUST SOUTH OF, UH, OF SEVENTH STREET, UM, IN HOUSTON HEIGHTS SOUTH DISTRICT.
IT IS, UH, AS HE STATED, A NON-CONFORMING BUILDING.
UH, AND SO, UM, IN REVIEWING THE, THE, UH, HISTORIC DISTRICT DESIGN GUIDELINES, IT IS OUR UNDERSTANDING AND INTERPRETATION THAT, UM, SINCE NON-CONTRIBUTING BUILDINGS ALREADY DO NOT SUPPORT THE HISTORIC QUALITIES OF THE DISTRICT, THE CRITERIA FOR MAKING CHANGES TO THEM ARE LESS STRICT THAN THOSE FOR CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES.
UH, HOWEVER, THE VISUAL QUALITIES OF NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES STILL IMPACT THE CHARACTER OF THE HISTORIC DISTRICT.
SO MANY CHANGES TO THEM MUST BE MANAGED.
UM, OUR, UH, INTERPRETATION AGAIN IS THAT, UM, PAINTING THE, UH, AGAIN, PAINTING THE BRICK SHOULD ONLY BE RELEVANT SO LONG AS THE AESTHETIC DESIGN IS CONSISTENT WITH OTHER BUILDINGS IN THE DISTRICT.
AND SO, UH, IN OUR INTERPRETATION AND, UM, AND, AND, AND OPINION, UH, THERE ARE TWO, TWO ITEMS AT STAKE.
ONE IS, UH, THE DESIGN AESTHETIC AND ITS CONSISTENCY WITH OTHER BUILDINGS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
THE OTHER IS, UM, THE IMPORTANCE OF PRESERVING THE QUALITY OF THE BRICK.
UH, SO I'LL ADDRESS THE, THE DESIGN, UH, FIRST AND THEN, AND THEN ALSO THE, THE PROTECTION OF THE BRICK.
SECOND, UM, UH, OUR POSITION IS THAT THE WHITE BRICK IS COMPATIBLE WITH OTHER BUILDINGS IN THE DISTRICT.
UH, IN A MINUTE I'M GONNA, UH, SHOW YOU SOME, SOME OTHER BUILDINGS THAT ARE IN THE HOUSTON HEIGHTS SOUTH DISTRICT THAT ARE, UH, BRICK BUILDINGS THAT HAVE BEEN PAINTED, UM, UH, PER THE GUIDELINES, A NEW BUILDING SHOULD BE COMPATIBLE WITH, BUT DIFFERENTIATED FROM THE EXISTING CONTRIBUTING BUILDINGS IN THE CONTEXT AREA.
SO HOW WE READ THAT IS THAT, UM, FOR THE NON-CONTRIBUTING BUILDINGS, IT IS IMPORTANT THAT THEY, UM, HONOR THE, UM, THE, THE HISTORIC NATURE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, WHILE AT THE SAME TIME, UM, IMPARTING MORE MODERN DESIGN AESTHETICS TO, UH, TO THOSE NON-CONTRIBUTING BUILDINGS.
UM, WHITE PAINTED BRICK IS, UH,
[00:25:01]
IS A CERTAINLY POPULAR, UH, DESIGN AESTHETIC.UM, IN, IN RECENT TIMES OVER THE LAST 10 YEARS OR SO, THERE ARE, THERE ARE WHITE PAINTED BRICK, UH, BUILDINGS, UH, ALL ACROSS THE, THE CITY, THE TOWN, THE COUNTRY.
UM, AND SO, UH, WHITE BRICK HOMES, UH, AND BUILDINGS OFFER A MODERN BRICK LOOK, UH, WITH AN OLD WORLD FEEL TO IT.
UM, MOVING TO THE NEXT PAGE, UM, YOU KNOW, AND, AND THIS IS JUST A SMALL HANDFUL OF, UH, HOMES THAT WE, YOU KNOW, WERE ABLE TO FIND.
BUT, UM, YOU KNOW, THERE ARE, UH, NO DOUBT MANY MORE.
UM, BUT EXAMPLES OF OF PAINTED BRICKS BUILDINGS IN THE HISTORIC, UH, THE HOUSTON SOUTH HISTORIC DISTRICT INCLUDE, UH, FOUR 20 HEIGHTS BOULEVARD, UH, 505 24 HEIGHTS BOULEVARD, WHICH IS, UH, LITERALLY THE BUILDING RIGHT NEXT DOOR TO OUR FIVE 40 BUILDING.
UH, THAT BUILDING IS PAINTED BLACK.
UM, BOTH OF THOSE ARE NON-CONTRIBUTING BUILDINGS.
UH, SIX 11 HEIGHTS BOULEVARD IS, UH, PAINTED, UH, THAT IS A PRO PROTECTED AND CONTRIBUTING LANDMARK BUILDING AS IS 6 42 HEIGHTS BOULEVARD.
UH, 5 15 36 HEIGHTS BOULEVARD IS A PROTECTED BUILDING, UH, JUST NORTH OF OUR SITE, UM, THAT EVEN, UH, HAS A PLAQUE THAT DESIGNATES THE, THE STRUCTURE AS HISTORIC.
UM, IT IS PAINTED WHITE IN A VERY SIMILAR MANNER TO THE, THE PROPOSED DESIGN THAT WE HAVE PUT TOGETHER FOR FIVE 40 HEIGHTS.
UH, 6 0 7 HARVARD STREET, 35 18, WHITE OAK B UH, DRIVE.
UH, 1322 COURTLAND, 1341 COURTLAND.
UM, I COULD GO ON TIME MOTION TO EXTEND THE SPEAKER'S TIME.
IS ANY ANY OPPOSED? OKAY, THANK YOU.
UM, THIS NEXT, THE NEXT TWO SHEETS ARE JUST, UH, SOME OF THOSE SAME BUILDINGS THAT I HAD MENTIONED.
UH, IT'S A LITTLE HARD TO READ, MAYBE EVEN UP ON THE SCREEN, BUT THESE ARE JUST VISUALIZATIONS OF THOSE BUILDINGS THAT I HAD, UH, HAD JUST LISTED.
I'M HAPPY TO EITHER PASS AROUND, I'M GONNA LEAVE MY PRESENTATION WITH, UH, WITH THE FRONT, UH, TABLE AS WELL.
SO THAT, AND I, I HAVE ELECTRONIC COPY THAT I'M HAPPY TO SHARE DIGITALLY WITH, UH, WITH THE COMMISSION.
UM, AND SO THAT IS, UH, YOU KNOW, OUR, OUR POSITION AND, AND, YOU KNOW, PROPOSAL WITH RESPECT TO PAINTING OF THE BRICK.
UH, AS FAR AS THE DESIGN AESTHETIC IS CONCERNED, UM, WE DO FEEL THAT IT'S CONSISTENT WITH, UH, WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND WITH, UM, THE DESIGN GUIDELINES, UH, WITH RESPECT TO THE BRICK PROTECTION, WHICH WE TAKE VERY SERIOUSLY.
UM, AND ALSO, UH, WANT TO ADDRESS SPECIFICALLY, UH, IN THE GUIDELINES, UH, THAT, THAT LISTS, UH, MASONRY RECONSTRUCTION IS DESIGNED TO ALLOW MOISTURE TO MOVE FROM INSIDE OF A WALL OR BUILDING TO THE OUTSIDE THROUGH EVAPORATION OR WEEP HOLES.
IF MOISTURE IS A PROBLEM, ADDRESS THE SOURCE OF THE LEAK, AVOID PAINT COATINGS AND SEALERS, WHICH CAN TRAP MOISTURE INSIDE A BUILDING WALL AND CAUSE DAMAGE AND DETERIORATION.
UH, FURTHER ON IN THE GUIDELINES.
PAINTING UNPAINTED BRICK IS NOT PERMITTED WITHOUT A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS, AS DOING SO CAN CAUSE DAMAGE BY TRAPPING MOISTURE INSIDE THE BRICK.
UM, SO TO ADDRESS THOSE CONCERNS, WHICH AGAIN, UH, ARE VERY VALID AND WE TAKE VERY SERIOUSLY, UM, WE, UH, ARE PROPOSING TO WORK WITH A, UH, A, A A A, SOME MATERIAL SUPPLIER, UH, THAT, THAT SPECIALIZES IN HISTORIC PRESERVATION OF MASONRY, UM, THAT CAN PROVIDE A BREATHABLE MINERAL PAINT THAT DOES NOT SEAL THE BRICK AND ALLOWS THE MOISTURE TO RELEASE.
UM, WE WOULD CLEAN THE BRICK PROPERLY BEFORE PAINTING, UM, AND MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE WORKING WITH A, A PAINTING CONTRACTOR THAT IS, UH, IS EXPERIENCED IN THIS TYPE OF WORK.
AND, UH, AGAIN, WE'LL DO EVERYTHING THAT WE CAN IN OUR, IN OUR POWER TO PRESERVE THE BRICK.
UM, TWO COMPANIES I JUST LISTED HERE, UM, ARE NOT THE ONLY ONES THAT I FOUND, BUT TWO THAT ARE, UH, PRETTY GOOD EXAMPLES OF, OF, UH, SUPPLIERS OF THIS TYPE OF PRODUCT.
LIME WORKS, WHICH IS BASED IN PENNSYLVANIA, UM, AND PRO SOCO, WHICH IS A NATIONAL, UH, BRAND.
UM, LASTLY, UH, AND I THINK LESS TO THE POINT, BUT ALSO JUST WANTED TO BE ON RECORD IS, IS PRESENTING THIS BECAUSE, UH, IT'S, IT'S ALSO RELEVANT TO OUR PROJECT.
UM, THE BACK OF THE BUILDING IS, UM, IS, IS, IS, UH, FINISHED WITH A, LIKE A WOOD, JUST WOOD SIDING, WOOD COLLABORATE SIDING, UH, THAT, UH, IS CURRENTLY PAINTED LIKE A, A DULL GRAY.
UM, NOT SURE IF THAT ALSO FALLS INTO THE, UH, PURVIEW OF, OF THE HISTORIC COMMISSION, BUT WE, IT THAT IS DETERIORATING AND WE WOULD LIKE TO PAINT THAT WHITE AS WELL.
PAINTING THE WOOD DOES NOT, IT'S NOT PART OF THE PURVIEW OF THE COMMISSION AND YOU ARE ALLOWED TO PICK YOUR OWN PAINT COLORS FOR WOOD OR WOOD APPEARING ITEMS. SO, OKAY.
UH, SO, SO THAT'S, UH, THAT'S EVERYTHING I HAD.
THANK YOU AGAIN FOR TAKING THE TIME TO, TO HEAR ME OUT.
ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE SPEAKER? OKAY, THANK YOU.
I KNOW THERE'S ANOTHER SPEAKER SIGNED UP.
UM, IS ANN THOMAS HERE? THANK YOU ALL.
[00:30:01]
I, I JUST WANNA, I'M, I'M CURIOUS, UM, 'CAUSE I'M VERY FAMILIAR WITH THIS BUILDING.WHAT, WHAT IS YOUR REASON FOR CHANGING A PAINT COLOR? IS THERE, YOU KNOW, SOME SIGNIFICANCE TO IT OR ARE YOU TRYING TO MAKE IT MORE CONTEMPORARY, URBANIZED, OR WHAT? UM, WE JUST, WE THINK IT WILL IMPROVE THE LOOK OF THE BUILDING TO BE PERFECTLY HONEST.
WE, UM, WE ARE, UM, WE ARE CON CONVERTING THE, WHAT IT WAS BASICALLY A, A MULTI-TENANT, UM, UH, RESIDENTIAL HOME, UH, INTO AN OFFICE BUILDING.
AND SO, UM, KEEPING IN LINE WITH OUR, UH, WITH THE, UH, DESIGN AESTHETIC OF, OF THE OFFICE BRAND THAT WE WERE, UH, PLANNING TO, TO PUT IN THERE, UH, ALSO TO, TO MODERNIZE AND TO BREATHE AND BREATHE NEW LIFE INTO, UM, THE BUILDING.
WE, WE REALLY LIKE THE LOOK, WE THINK IT LOOKS, UH, CLEAN AND SHARP AND AGAIN, CONSISTENT WITH THE REST OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO, SO I SAW, AND I DON'T KNOW ROMAN, IF THAT WAS YOU A OF RENDERING, UM, OF THE SPACE, DID YOU PROVIDE THAT RENDERING TO STAFF? UH, YES MA'AM.
SO THAT IS THE NAME OF THE BUSINESS, URBAN, UH, URBAN OFFICE IS A, UM, IS AN OFFICE, UH, AN OFFICE CONCEPT, YES, THAT'S, UH, THAT'S RELATED TO OUR, OUR COMPANY THAT, THAT DEVELOPS THE SITE.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONERS FOR ALLOWING ME TO SPEAK.
MY NAME IS ANN THOMAS AND I WORK FOR HARRISON FLETCHER.
I AM THE PROJECT ARCHITECT FOR THIS PROJECT.
UM, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I WANTED TO POINT OUT IS THAT, UH, UM, I'M HERE TO SUPPORT GORDON OF COURSE, AND WE'RE HERE TO GET THE BUILDING PAINTED, BUT, UM, THE, UH, GUIDELINES DO NOT PROHIBIT PAINT.
WHAT IT SAYS IS THAT WE HAVE TO OBTAIN A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS PRIOR TO PAINTING.
UM, AND THAT'S ON PAGE FOUR SEVEN OF SECTION FOUR.
UM, BUT ONE OF THE REASONS WHY THE CLIENT DID WANNA PAINT THE BUILDING IS TO UPDATE IT, TO MODERNIZE IT, TO CLEAN IT UP, AND TO GIVE IT A NEW LOOK.
UM, AND THE RENDERINGS, GIVEN IT A LITTLE BIT OF A DISPORT IN THE PORTIONS, IF YOU WERE TO PAN TO THE SOUTH, YOU'LL NOTICE THAT THE HOMES AND THE BUILDINGS ON THAT SIDE ARE MUCH LARGER THAN THE ONES TO THE NORTH HERE TEMPORARILY.
BUT OF COURSE, WITH THE RENDERING, WE WANNA PROJECT THE BEST SIDE AND THIS IS THE BEST SIDE OF THE BUILDING AS MOST OF YOU KNOW.
UM, SO THAT'S WHY THE RENDERING MAKES THE BUILDING LOOK A LITTLE BIT BIGGER THAN IT DOES.
BUT DO Y'ALL HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR ME WHILE I'M HERE? WELL, I JUST SAID I, I'LL JUST ASK OR MAKE ONE, UH, STATEMENT.
I THINK THE ISSUE FROM THE COMMISSION STANDPOINT HISTORICALLY HAS BEEN, UM, THE, THIS CONCEPT OF MATCHING THESE OTHER CONTRIBUTING BUILDINGS, UH, WITHIN THE PERIOD OF CONTEXT, IT'S THE PERIOD OF CONTEXT THAT IS THE DIFFERENCE THAT WE, THAT I DIDN'T HEAR DISCUSSED EARLIER.
THAT IS TO SAY THESE DISTRICTS WERE CREATED IN A CERTAIN TIME PERIOD, UH, WHEN THEY WERE BEING BUILT.
THEY, THEIR TIME PERIODS HAVE A RANGE IN THEM DEPENDING ON WHEN THEY WERE LARGELY BEING CONSTRUCTED.
AND, UM, TYPICALLY IN, IN THIS DISTRICT, IN THE TIME PERIOD, THESE MAINSTREAM BUILDINGS WERE NOT PAINTED.
NOW IN THE FIFTIES, LIKE THE SIXTIES AND SEVENTIES THINGS HAPPENED BEFORE THESE BUILDINGS BECAME, UM, OFFICIALLY PART OF THE DISTRICT.
AND SO WHEN THE COMMISSION LOOKS AT THESE THINGS, WE DON'T, WE DON'T LOOK AT WHAT'S THERE TODAY, BUT WE LOOK AT WITHIN THE PERIOD OF, OF SIGNIFICANCE, WHAT DID THOSE MAINSTREAM STRUCTURES LOOK LIKE? AND THAT'S, THAT'S, THAT'S THE LENS THAT WE ARE ASKED TO LOOK THROUGH.
AND I UNDERSTAND THAT MY DEGREES FROM U OF H AND A AND M ARE WITH HISTORIC PRESERVATIONS.
AND I'VE ALSO BEEN A DOCENT WITH THE HERITAGE SOCIETY, WHICH IS RIGHT NEXT DOOR, UH, SINCE 1996.
SO I UNDERSTAND ABOUT PAINTING BRICKS BECAUSE I'VE HELPED, HELPED PAINT KELLUM NOBLE.
SO I UNDERSTAND ABOUT THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THAT, BUT THAT'S ALSO TAKEN THIS INTO CONSIDERATION.
IT IS NOT AN OLD BUILDING, IT IS A NEW BUILDING, AND WE WANNA KEEP THAT MODERNIZATION LOOK TO THAT BUILDING SO PEOPLE DON'T THINK IT IS AN OLD BUILDING.
AND COMMISSIONER BROAD, COMMISSIONER DUBOSE.
SO I'M, I'M, AND I MAY BE TOTALLY LOST ON THIS, BUT I WANNA GO BACK BECAUSE OUR ROLE IS TO, UM, PRESERVE THE HISTORY AND THE HERITAGE OF A, OF A SITE.
AND SO PART OF WHAT I'M THINKING ABOUT IS, YOU KNOW, A LOT OF HOMES THAT WERE IN THAT AREA HAD TO BE TORN DOWN FOR WHATEVER REASON, THE HISTORY OF THE SPACE DOES NOT CHANGE.
UM, AND SO WITH THAT, UH, I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S ANYBODY ON THIS COMMISSION THAT WAS HERE WHEN THE ORIGINAL BUILDING WAS THERE AND WHAT DID IT LOOK LIKE, BECAUSE I'M SURE THAT AT SOME POINT WHEN THEY GOT READY TO BUILD THIS PARTICULAR BUILDING, THAT THEY HAD TO DO SOME KIND OF, UM, YOU KNOW, BUILDING THAT WAS COMPARABLE OR COMPLIMENTARY TO WHAT WAS ALREADY THERE.
AND SO WE DON'T WANT TO GET LOST DOWN IN HISTORY WHERE WE START TO CHANGE THE COLOR OF PAINT.
WE START TO CHANGE THINGS ON THE BUILDING BECAUSE THE WHOLE CONTEXT OF
[00:35:01]
WHY IT WAS, WHY IT'S IN THIS DISTRICT STARTS TO CHANGE.AND I UNDERSTAND IT WAS NON-CONTRIBUTING, BUT I'M THINKING ABOUT BEYOND THE ARCHITECTURE, ALL OF THE OTHER FACTORS THAT PLAYED INTO, UM, THIS SPACE.
AND THAT'S JUST A COMMENT THAT I'M MAKING.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE SPEAKER? THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
I, I DON'T HAVE ANY ELSE ONCE, UH, ANYONE ELSE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM, BUT I WANT TO JUST, UH, GIVE ANYONE A CHANCE IF YOU'RE IN THE ROOM OR VIRTUALLY ATTENDING THE MEETING, WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? NOT HEARING ANYONE ELSE? I'M GONNA CLOSE, UM, THE PUBLIC HEARING AND, UM, UH, ASK COMMISSION MEMBERS IF THERE ARE ANY OTHER DISCUSSIONS YOU'D LIKE TO HAVE OR WOULD ANYONE BRING A MOTION ON THIS ITEM? I MOVE THAT WE ACCEPT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.
I'VE GOT A MOTION TO ACCEPT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.
COMMISSIONER STAAVA, SECOND COMMISSIONER STAAVA SECONDS.
UH, A BEFORE I ASK FOR THE VOTE, IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? I'M, I'M TORN ON THIS ONE BECAUSE I, I AGREE THAT WE ALWAYS SAY THAT THE BUILDING SHOULDN'T LOOK HISTORIC LIKE COPYING A HISTORIC BUILDING LIKE THIS ONE HAS HALFHEARTEDLY TRIED TO DO.
SO
SO IT, IT DOES SEEM LIKE A DIFFICULT, BUT IT IS NOT CONTRIBUTING.
SO I, I DON'T KNOW WHAT WE, EVEN IF IT'S OUR RIGHT TO BE RESTRICTING THE DECISIONS OF PEOPLE FOR THESE THAT OWN THESE KIND OF PROPERTIES.
OKAY, MR. MCNEIL, YOU HAVE A COMMENT? OUCH.
THAT A NON-CONTRIBUTING BUILDING SHOULD, THEY SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO PAINT IT AND IT DIFFERENTIATES IT FROM THE REST OF THE DISTRICT SO THAT, YOU KNOW, IT'S A NON-CONTRIBUTING BUILDING, WHICH IS WHAT OUR, UM, YOU KNOW WHAT, WHAT THE, WHAT IT READS, HOW IT READS IS, IS THAT WE DON'T WANT A NON-CONTRIBUTING BUILDING LOOKING LIKE AN ORIGINAL BUILDING, WHICH IT DOES TO SOME DEGREE.
HARKEN I'M ASSUMING IT WAS BUILT BEFORE THE DISTRICT WAS PUT IN PLACE.
SO, UM, I I, I WOULD VOTE AGAINST THIS MOTION.
ARE THEY DOING ANYTHING ELSE BESIDES PAINTING THE EXTERIOR OF THE BUILDING? 'CAUSE IT, ON THIS RENDERING, THERE'S SOME SMALL CHANGES I SEE TO THE BRICK.
AND I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S JUST 'CAUSE OF THE COMPUTER RENDERING OR THEY'RE ACTUALLY CHANGING THINGS.
MAY I ADDRESS THAT? I'M NOT SURE.
UNLESS, UNLESS I MAKE A MOTION OR IF THERE'S A MOTION MADE.
UM, 'CAUSE STAFF NEEDS TO LET US KNOW IF THERE'RE SHE, SHE CAN ANSWER THE QUESTION.
YOU'RE, YOU'RE ALLOWED TO ASK THE APPLICANT'S BACKUP TO ANSWER OKAY.
SO YEAH, TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION, YES.
WE'VE ALREADY GOT A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS TO REPLACE ALL OF THE WINDOWS AND THE DOORS TO MODERNIZE THEM TO LOOK LIKE COMMERCIAL WINDOWS TO COMPLY WITH CURRENT CODES AND ENERGY CODES.
SO THAT, THAT'S THE ONLY CHANGE IS BECAUSE I'M LOOKING, THERE'S LIKE A RAILING WHERE THERE'S SOME FISH SCALE STUFF ON THE SECOND FLOOR BALCONY, AND THERE'S THESE LITTLE EARS THAT ARE ON THE GABLES THAT AREN'T SHOWN ON THIS RENDERING.
THE, THE BALCONY WAS THE RENDERER, UM, HAD A HARD TIME TRYING TO DO THE FISH SCALES AND SO HE TOOK SOME ARTISTIC LICENSE AND CHANGED THE BALCONY.
SOME OF THE BALUSTRADE ON THE PORCH IS GONNA HAVE TO BE REPLACED DUE TO LACK OF MAINTENANCE.
THERE IS SOME, AND WE'RE REPLACING THE HANDICAP RAMP ALONG THE, UH, SOUTH SIDE DUE TO LACK OF MAINTENANCE.
AND I'M OKAY AS LONG AS THE COLOR IS WHITE, BUT AS ROMAN MENTIONED IN THE PACKAGE, ONCE WE ALLOW IT TO PAINT, IF SOMEBODY WANTS TO DO A BRIGHT YELLOW OR SOMETHING, THERE'S NO WAY WE'RE GONNA STOP IT.
BUT THAT, BUT THAT COULD BE SAID FOR ANY HOUSE.
I MEAN, ANY WOODHOUSE CAN BE PAINTED ANY BRIGHT COLOR.
SO I DON'T KNOW IF THAT ARGUMENT IS, IS NECESSARY NECESSARILY.
SO COMMISSIONER MCNEIL, THAT ADDITIONAL INFORMATION SHOULD MAKE YOU FEEL EVEN BETTER ABOUT IT'S, UH, NOT BEING MISTAKEN AS CONTRIBUTING SINCE THE WINDOWS ARE GONNA GO FROM CANARY YELLOW ONE THING TO ANOTHER.
AND I'M, I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT COLOR, I'M TALKING ABOUT FENESTRATION, BUT YES, IT COULD BE CANARY YELLOW NEXT YEAR, APPARENTLY.
SO ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? I DO HAVE A MOTION IN A SECOND.
SO I NEED, I NEED A CALL FOR THE VOTE FOR THAT MOTION.
AND, UM, JUST TO BACK UP, UM, THE,
[00:40:01]
THE MOTION WAS TO ACCEPT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.UM, ALL IN FAVOR PLEASE SAY AYE.
DO WE HAVE, DO WE NEED A ROLL CALL? I MIGHT RECOMMEND A ROLL CALL.
I CAN'T TELL IF THAT WAS HOW MANY VOTES THAT WAS.
SO YEAH, YOU MIGHT GO AROUND THE DIET AND THEN TO THE ONLINE.
UM, COMMISSIONER JACKSON? AYE.
COMMISSIONER SWEENEY VASAN AYE.
IS IT REALLY A SPLIT VOTE? DID, DID YOU GET COMMISSIONER SVETA? MM-HMM
AND COMMISSIONER DUBOSE? OUR OUR OUR LIST IS SIX TO FIVE.
SIX EYES, SIX AYES, AND FIVE AGAINST.
SO THE MOTION, SO THE MOTION PASSES TO SUPPORT STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
THE MOTION UPHOLDS THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
SO MOVING ON NOW TO ITEM B FIVE EIGHT.
COMMISSIONERS, UH, ITEM B FIVE INVOLVES, UH, 83 22 GLEN LOCK DRIVE.
THIS IS A HOME IN GLENBROOK VALLEY HISTORIC DISTRICT CIRCA 1960, A CONTRIBUTING MID-CENTURY RANCH HOUSE.
I'M SORRY, CONTRIBUTING MID-CENTURY HOUSE.
UH, THIS IS A PROPOSAL FOR A NEW CARPORT, NEW WINDOWS IN THE FRONT ELEVATION, AND TO, UM, FILL IN THE GABLE FENESTRATION.
THIS WORK WAS, UH, DONE MOSTLY ALREADY, UH, WITHOUT A C OF A, WITHOUT A BUILDING PERMIT.
UH, IF WE COULD GO FORWARD, WILSON, IN THE OFFICE JUST TO THE PICTURES.
LET'S, LET'S START, UH, IF YOU'LL GO BACK A LITTLE BIT, PLEASE TO ABOUT THE SECOND PAGE OF THE REPORT, I'LL JUST PLEASE THANK YOU.
I WANT TO JUST KIND OF REALLY WALK YOU THROUGH THIS.
HERE'S THE INVENTORY PHOTO FROM 2010 OF THIS HOUSE FROM THE INVENTORY MADE WHEN THE DISTRICT WAS CREATED.
NEXT SLIDE PLEASE, IS JUST A, A MAP OF THE, UM, DISTRICT.
IT'S ON THE EASTERN, SORRY, THE WESTERN EDGE OF THE DISTRICT.
WE HAVE TWO IMAGES ON THIS SLIDE.
IT'S, UH, FIGURE THREE IS IN JUNE OF 2020.
THIS WAS THE FIRST VIOLATION, NOTICE THE PROPERTY RECEIVED, AND IT'S FOR THE LARGE STEEL CARPORT THAT YOU SEE TO THE LEFT OF THAT IMAGE AT THE TOP THERE, THERE WAS NOTHING IN THAT SPACE BEFORE, IF YOU MISSED IT IN THE OTHER PICTURE.
THE NEXT PICTURE BELOW, UM, IS A SUBSEQUENT VIOLATION NOTICE A MONTH LATER FOR POURING IN THE DRIVEWAY.
YOU, WHAT YOU SEE IN THAT PICTURE IS REBAR OVER WHERE THE PREVIOUS SLAB HAD BEEN REMOVED.
UM, AND THERE WAS NO PERMIT FOR, FOR THAT WORK.
SO THIS, THIS WORK AND THIS WHERE WE WERE AT THAT POINT CONTINUED THROUGH THE REST OF 2020.
THERE'S A, THESE ARE, UM, NOTICES THAT COME FROM THE INVESTIGATION DEPARTMENT.
AND YOU SEE THERE'S THREE MORE IN 2020 AND I DON'T KNOW ABOUT A DOZEN.
THEN THE NEXT SLIDE, YOU HAVE A PICTURE.
THERE WAS A FIRE, UH, ON UH, JANUARY 23RD.
AND SO THEY, THERE WAS A NOTICE AGAIN FOR THE CARPORT AS THE FIRST NOTICE IN THAT POINT.
AND THE SECOND NOTICE WAS AFTER THE FIRE.
UH, AND THE PICTURE BELOW IS REFRAMING FROM THE FIRE AND THAT FRAMING'S ALSO GOING ON IN THE STRUCTURE.
AND THE SPACE YOU'RE IN IN THAT PICTURE IS WHERE THE, THAT'S ACTUALLY A NEW CARPORT ABOVE YOUR HEAD BEING CONSTRUCTED WHERE THE STEEL ONE WAS.
AND THEN YOU'RE LOOKING INTO THE GARAGE.
AND THEN IF YOU PAN, IF YOU HAD THE PICTURE AND YOU PAN TO THE RIGHT, YOU'D SEE INTO THE
[00:45:01]
STRUCTURE WHERE IT WAS BEING REFRAMED.UH, SINCE IN OCTOBER, 2019, GOOGLE IMAGE OF THE HOUSE, UM, AND THAT AT THAT POINT IT WAS, UH, BEFORE THE CARPORT, SO IT WOULD LOOK LIKE.
AND THEN JU JUNE OF 2021, WE HAVE A SITE VISIT PHOTO.
UH, YOU SEE THE CARPORT AND YOU STILL SEE THE FACADE.
AND I THINK I WANNA NOTE THAT CHIMNEY THERE, 'CAUSE I THINK WE, THE CHIMNEY MAY HAVE BEEN MISSED.
NOW THE NEXT SLIDE, OR MAYBE MISSING NOW, NEXT SLIDE IS JANUARY 26TH, 2022.
THAT'S AFTER THE FIRE AT THE TOP.
BUT AFTER THE FIRE, I DON'T KNOW THE CONDITION OF THE INTERIOR OF THE HOME, BUT THAT FRONT GABLE SYSTEM WAS STILL INTACT.
AND YOU SEE THE FOUR BEAMS THAT ARE COMING OUT THAT HELPED TO DEFINE THAT ROOFING SYSTEM.
THEY'RE ABOUT A FOUR BY 12 INCH THICK BEAMS, UM, THAT ARE, THAT ARE COMING OUT OF THE FRONT.
SO THEN BELOW THAT IS JULY 12TH, 22 FROM THE CURRENT STATE OF THE BUILDING WITH, UM, THE FENESTRATION AT THE TOP AND THE GABLE HAS BEEN FILLED IN, THOSE BEAMS HAVE BEEN TAKEN OUT AND THERE'VE BEEN OPENINGS PUT INTO THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE.
THERE'S A LINE DRAWING ON THE LAST SLIDE AND, UH, THE, THE, AND THEN IN YOUR PACKET WOULD BE OTHER LINE DRAWINGS.
UM, THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION HERE, UH, IS DENIAL DOES NOT SATISFY THE CRITERIA.
ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATE REMEDIATION TO REMOVE THE CARPORT, REMOVE THE FOREFRONT WINDOWS AND REPLACE THE BRICKWORK AND TO REOPEN THE FRONT FACING GABLE AND INSTALL GLASS AS WAS ORIGINALLY CONSTRUCTED IN THE FINAL DETAILING TO BE APPROVED BY STAFF.
UM, ON, IF YOU GO TO PAGE NINE IN THE OFFICE, WILSON PLEASE, THE, UM, CRITERIA WE USE THEN, UH, THAT WE WERE LOOKING AT THEN IS SECTION 33, 2 41.
UH, CRITERIA NUMBER ONE IS NOT SATISFIED AND THE THE REASONS KIND OF ARE THE SAME.
AND WHETHER YOU'RE LOOKING AT ONE, FOUR OR FIVE, THOUGH THEY'RE NOT ENTIRELY THE SAME.
SO WE HAVE SEVERAL CRITERIA THAT CAN BE, BUT LET ME JUST READ ONE.
THE PROPOSED ACTIVITY MUST RETAIN AND PRESERVE THE HISTORICAL CHARACTER OF THE PROPERTY.
THIS CONTRIBUTING HOME WAS DESIGNED AND CONSTRUCTED IN THE MID-CENTURY STYLE.
THE CLEAR STORY GABLE WINDOWS THAT WERE FILLED IN ARE A DEFINING CHARACTERISTIC OF THE ORIGINAL BUILDING.
THE DEEP FORWARD FACING EAVES SUPPORTED WITH CANTILEVER FOUR BY 12 INCH TIMBERS WERE ALSO A DEFINING CHARACTERISTIC.
THE SOLID FRONT WALL BELOW THE GABLE WAS ALSO A DEFINING FEATURE OF THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE AND WAS CHARACTERISTIC OF THE MID-CENTURY STYLE.
THE TWO ADJACENT MASONRY WALLS CONSTRUCTED WITH THE SAME BRICK AS THE HOUSE WERE INTEGRAL TO THE DESIGN OF THE HOME AS WELL.
THIS IS A FORM OF MID-CENTURY HOUSE THAT IS IN THE FORM OF A PATIO STYLE STAFF HAS NOT CONFIRMED AT THE TIME OF THIS REPORT, BUT IT APPEARS THE MASONRY CHIMNEY MAY HAVE BEEN REMOVED AS WELL.
AND YOU SEE THE SAME, UH, POINT WE MAKE ON FOUR AND FIVE.
I JUST WANNA SEE IF ANY OF THESE ARE REALLY DIFFERENT.
AND SIX, UM, SIX IS NEW MATERIALS TO BE USED FOR ANY EXTERIOR FEATURE, EXCLUDING WHAT IS VISIBLE FROM THE PUBLIC ALLEYS MUST BE VISUALLY COMPATIBLE WITH, BUT NOT NECESSARILY THE SAME AS THE MATERIALS BEING REPLACED IN FORM DESIGN, TEXTURE, DIMENSION AND SCALE.
AND IN THIS CASE THE LAPSE CEMENTITIOUS SIDING ON THE FRONT GABLE AND CARPORT, AS WELL AS THE WHITE SIX OVER SIX SIMULATED DIVIDED LIGHT WINDOWS.
AND THE MUTTONS ENC CASE BETWEEN GLASS ARE NOT COMPATIBLE WITH THE REPLACED MATERIAL.
AND, AND THOSE ARE THE OTHER POINTS.
AND I DO KNOW THAT OUR CODE, AS, AS I WAS REFLECTING ON THIS AND PUTTING THIS TOGETHER AND I APOLOGIZE, UH, MS. MICKELSON, MS MS. MICKELSON ILLEGAL.
I WANTED TO, UH, MAKE A POINT THAT I JUST HAD A REALIZATION AND I'LL ADMIT THAT I DIDN'T CATCH IT MENTALLY BEFORE, BUT THERE IS A CAVEAT IN THE CODE OF ORDINANCES FOR STIPULA PERMITS WHEN THERE'S BEEN A FIRE.
AND, UM, I NEED TO GO SIT AND, AND LOOK AT THAT.
BUT THIS IS WHERE WE ARE RIGHT NOW.
WE ARE RECOMMENDING, UM, REMEDIATION TO PUT IT BACK WHERE IT WAS.
ARE THERE QUESTIONS OF COMMISSION? MEMBERS OF STAFF, MR. MCNEIL? HEY ROMAN, WHAT IS THE RESPONSE FROM SOMEWHERE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OF 18 NOTICES FROM THE CITY OF HOUSTON ABOUT THIS, UH, ILLEGAL CONSTRUCTION? WELL, THEY, THEY, THEY JUST DID THE, THE INVESTIGATORS AS FAR AS I KNOW JUST DO THEIR ROLE
[00:50:01]
THAT THEY COME AND, AND, UM, RED TAG AND FOLLOW UP AND FOLLOW UP AND FOLLOW UP.I HAVEN'T BEEN IN, IN CONTACT, UH, WITH ANY, ANY PARTICULAR INVESTIGATOR IN ANY MEMORABLE WAY THAT THAT HAS BEEN INVOLVED IN IT.
UM, HAVE YOU, OKAY, I, WE, I WANT TO ASK, UH, UH, STAFF MEMBER LILLIAN THOUGHT TO COMMENT ON THAT.
SO IN JUNE, 2021, THIS CAME ACROSS MY DESK, BUT NOT FROM A BUILDING INSPECTOR.
THIS CAME FROM THE HOUSTON PUBLIC WORKS AND, UH, TRYING TO REACH THE APPLICANT OF PLEASE APPLY FOR A CARPORT.
UH, HE'S NO LONGER WORKING FOR THE CITY.
I WORKED WITH DANIEL TO SAY THIS IS WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE IF YOU WANNA APPLY FOR A CARPORT.
UM, DANIEL BRA BRAZIL IS FLUENT IN SPANISH.
SO HE, I HELPED HIM PUT IN THE LANGUAGE IN AN EMAIL IN SPANISH OF THE INSTRUCTIONS NEEDED.
AND IN THAT EMAIL IN JUNE, 2021, UM, THAT WAS SENT TO, UH, THE PROPERTY OWNER.
BUT AT THAT TIME WE DID NOT RECEIVE A RESPONSE, UH, EXCUSE ME, A RESPONSE BACK.
SO THERE HAS BEEN OUTREACH TRYING TO DO THIS, UM, THROUGH HOUSTON PUBLIC WORK OUTSIDE OF A BUILDING INSPECTOR AND TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT IT WAS AVAILABLE IN SPANISH AND, AND THE RED TAGS, I THINK ROMAN MENTIONED THERE WERE NUMEROUS RED TAGS BEFORE THE FIRE, BOTH BEFORE AND AFTER THE FIRE FOR ALTERATIONS TO THE HOME.
AND THIS TIME, UH, THIS WAS JUNE, 2021.
SO IT WAS REALLY JUST THE CARPORT, THE FIRE OCCURRED IN, UH, 2022.
SO AT THIS TIME IT WAS JUST FRILEY ABOUT THE CARPORT.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER MR. COLLIN.
YEAH, THE CARPORT WAS A SETBACK VIOLATION IN THAT IT CAME OUT BEFORE THE FENCE AND CITY OF HOUSTON LEGAL DEPARTMENT MADE THEM MOVE THAT BACK, BUT THERE WAS NEVER A PERMIT WITH THAT CARPORT NOR WHEN THEY INITIALLY MOVED IN AND PAINTED THE BRICK.
YEAH, I THINK THERE WERE TWO CARPORTS, ONE METAL STRUCTURE AND THEN LATER AFTER THE FIRE, A WOOD CARPORT.
WELL, YEAH, THE METAL ONE WAS THERE FIRST AND THEN AFTER THE FIRE, WE, THE FIRE WAS UNFORTUNATE, BUT THEY BEEFED IT UP.
SO WAS YOUR SWEENEY VAON? YEAH.
SO DID THE FIRE ONLY IMPACT THE CARPORT OR DID IT IMPACT THE STRUCTURE THAT WAS REDONE ALSO? IT WAS MAINLY THE STRUCTURE OF THE HOUSE.
WHAT USED TO BE THE GARAGE WAS MY UNDERSTANDING OF HOT WATER HEATER BLUE.
SO THE FRONT PART WAS NOT AFFECTED.
SO MS. MICKELSON, IF THE CITY HOUSTON LEGAL DEPARTMENT SHOWS UP AND SAYS THERE'S A SETBACK VIOLATION FOR A CARPORT, AND THEN THEY ADHERE TO THE SETBACK, BUT NO ONE EVER DEALS WITH THE FACT THERE'S NO PERMIT AND NO, UH, APPROVAL BY THIS COMMISSION, DOES THAT GIVE TACIT APPROVAL TO THOSE, TO THE PROJECT THAT LEGAL NEVER ADDRESSED THE FACT THAT THERE'S NO PERMIT? NO.
AND I SUSPECT THIS WENT THROUGH NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES THROUGH DEED RESTRICTION ENFORCEMENT.
THE SETBACK VIOLATION DID, BUT THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE CARPORT THEN SEPARATE.
ALL THE OTHER STUFF WENT THROUGH 3 1 1 TO THE WHEREVER IT GOES, THERE'RE SEPARATE AVENUES FOR THAT.
THEY DON'T NEED TO COMBINE ALL OF THEM.
OUR DEED RESTRICTION ENFORCEMENT ATTORNEYS GO OUT AND LOOK AT WHAT THEY VIOLATED ON THE DEED RESTRICTIONS.
UM, THE PROSECUTION OF A VIOLATION THAT, THAT RESULTS IN A RED TAG IS A DIFFERENT PROCESS, FRANKLY, DIFFERENT LAWYERS, I KNOW IT MIGHT MAKE SENSE TO COMBINE THEM, BUT, BUT, BUT THERE WAS STILL NEVER A PERMIT ISSUED FOR ANY OF THE WORK IS MY UNDERSTANDING.
THERE, THERE WAS A, EXCUSE ME, GO, GO RIGHT AHEAD.
THERE WAS A PERMIT FOR THE REBUILD AFTER THE FIRE, BUT IT WAS NOT FOR ANY CHANGES.
IT WAS JUST TO DO THE CORRECTION OF WHAT BURNT NOT, NOT THE CHANGES.
SO FROM WHAT WE'VE HEARD, I SURMISE THAT THE FIRE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH IT'S UNFORTUNATE CERTAINLY, BUT IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH ANY OF THE THINGS THAT ARE BEFORE US NOW.
JUST TO BE SURE WE ALL AGREE TO THAT.
AND THEN NOT TO LET MS. MICKELSON OFF THE HOOK, BUT I, THIS IS, I'M SURE THIS IS APPALLING TO ALL OF US.
WHAT, WHAT IF IT WERE UNSAFE? WHAT, WHAT, WHAT RECOURSE DOES THE CITY HAVE TO PREVENT OCCUPANCY AND, AND, AND NOT JUST ADD MORE RED TAGS TO THE PILE? THIS IS, AND I'M THINKING ABOUT THIS PROJECT BECAUSE IT'S HERE IN FRONT OF US, BUT I'M THINKING ABOUT OTHER ONES THAT I SEE.
AND, AND I THINK WHAT USUALLY HAPPENS IN THE CASE OF A FIRE IS THAT A PERMIT IS SOUGHT TO GO BACK IN AND DO THAT WORK, AND THEN THE SCOPE OF THE WORK THAT'S NEEDED IS, IS PERMITTED AND THEN INSPECTED.
BUT SORRY, MY QUESTION IS ABOUT EVERYTHING EXCEPT THE FIRE IS, MY
[00:55:01]
QUESTION HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE FIRE ITSELF, BUT I'M TALKING ABOUT, UH, FLAGRANT, UH, DISREGARD FOR THE, THE REQUIREMENTS FOR CONSTRUCTION.WHAT IF THIS PERSON DECIDES HE NEEDS A SECOND STORY ON THE HOUSE? WHO'S, WHO STOPS THAT A THIRD STORY? WELL, NO, I'M THE SAME SORT OF, SAME SORT OF PROCESS FOLLOWS DOES THE, AND WHAT, WHAT PERMITTING DOES IN INSPECTING THAT I'M NOT ENTIRELY CERTAIN.
UM, BUT I, I DON'T DISAGREE WITH YOUR CONCERN, BUT THE, THE ENFORCEMENT PROCESS IS DESIGNED TO WORK THROUGH 3 1 1 OR IT GETTING THAT THE ATTENTION OF THE INSPECTORS OUT THERE TO ISSUE THE STOP WORK ORDER YEP.
AND HOPEFULLY THAT STOPS WORK.
UM, HOW FAR THEY GO BEFORE, WHEN THERE ARE MULTIPLE STOP WORK ORDERS? UM, I I AGREE.
THIS IS, THERE WERE, THERE WERE OBVIOUSLY MULTIPLE, THIS WAS A LONG TERM PROBLEM, UM, HOW FAR THEY GO BEFORE THEY TAKE THE NEXT STEP TO ENFORCE IT IN MUNICIPAL COURT.
I'M NOT CERTAIN WHAT THEIR REGULATIONS ARE ON THAT.
I'M I, YEAH, HAPPY TO FIND THAT OUT FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION.
I SHOULD HAVE, UH, HAD THIS IN MY REPORT BECAUSE IT RELATES TO THE TOPIC AND THAT'S THE PART OF OUR CODE SECTION 33 DASH 2 37 AND IT HAS SOME PERTINENT LANGUAGE.
UH, UH, I'M GONNA MAKE SURE 30 SECTION 33 DASH 2 37.
AND THEN WE WANT TO GO DOWN JUST A LITTLE BIT.
TWO, UH, B AND THIS TALKS ABOUT FIRES.
A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS IS NOT REQUIRED FOR THE RECONSTRUCTION OF THE PORTION OF A CONTRIBUTING OR NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE THAT WAS COMPLETELY OR PARTIALLY DESTROYED BY A FIRE, NATURAL DISASTER OR OTHER DAMAGE NOT INTENTIONALLY CAUSED BY THE OWNER OF THE STRUCTURE, ONLY IF THE RECONSTRUCTION IS BUILT WITHIN THE SAME FOOTPRINT AND HAS THE SAME EXTERIOR FEATURES AS THE CONTRIBUTING OR NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE.
SO I, I BOTH WANTED TO KINDA SAVE MYSELF FROM HAVING MISSED THAT, BUT THAT'S WHAT IT APPLIES HERE.
SO IF THEY HAD REBUILT IT AS IT WAS PRE, BEFORE THE FIRE, THEY WOULD NEED A C OF A FOR, FOR THAT RECONSTRUCTION AS WAS MENTIONED BY COMMISSIONER COLLUM THAT THEY HAD APPROVAL FROM THE CITY TO RECONSTRUCT THOSE DAMAGED AREAS.
THAT RECONSTRUCTION PERMIT DOESN'T GIVE THEM A CARTE BLANCHE TO CHANGE THE EXTERIOR OR THE FEATURES THAT MAKE IT CONTRIBUTING.
I UNDERSTAND THERE ARE NO OTHER QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME.
I KNOW WE HAVE TWO SPEAKERS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM.
I'M GOING TO OPEN PUB THE PUBLIC HEARING.
UM, THE FIRST SPEAKER I HAVE IS, UH, ARDO ROMERO, THE OWNER OF THE HOME, AND I BELIEVE HE WILL BE SPEAKING WITH THE HELP OF A TRANSLATOR.
AND I I ALSO HAVE ANNA ANNA GAM.
AND THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO TALK.
UH, MY NAME IS OLA AND I'M HERE TO TALK ON BEHALF OF MR. ROMERO.
AND, UM, I, UH, I WORK FOR THE CITY AS WELL.
AND, UM, I'M A FRIEND OF THE FAMILY.
HE, UM, I HAVE, UM, EXPERIENCE AT THE PERMITTING CENTER BECAUSE I WAS THERE AND, AND I DIDN'T KNOW THE, WHAT HE WAS GOING THROUGH NOW.
UM, HE DIDN'T HAVE A GOOD GUIDANCE TO, YOU KNOW, TO LET HIM KNOW PROPERLY WHAT WAS NEEDED TO GET THE PERMITS AND, UM, UNTIL I HELPED HIM TO SUBMIT THE, UH, THE APPLICATION FOR, TO GET THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS.
UM, I KNOW THE REPAIRS THAT HE GOT THE PERMIT FOR IS JUST TO PUT IT BACK AS IT WAS BEFORE THE FIRE.
AND, UM, IT DOESN'T EXEMPT HIM TO DO, HE, THE SCOPE OF WORK WAS BEYOND RIGHT.
UM, HE IS IN A CONDITION THAT HE NEED THE CARPORT BECAUSE OF THE RAIN.
SOMETIMES WHEN HE GOES TO DOCTOR'S APPOINTMENTS, HE CAN'T.
HE IS IN A WHEELCHAIR AND HE'S RIGHT THERE, MR. ROMERO.
AND, UM, UM, HE HAS, UM, A HANDICAP CONDITION THAT HE NEEDS TO COVER HIMSELF FROM THE INCLEMENT WEATHER.
UM, AS WELL AS, UM, I KNOW HE CHANGED THE WINDOWS AND, AND IT CHANGES COMPLETELY THE STRUCTURE OF, AND THE PURPOSE OF THE HISTORICAL, UM, GUIDELINES.
BUT, UM, HE, THE PEOPLE THAT RECONSTRUCTED THE, THE CARPORT TOLD HIM THAT THEY GOT A PERMIT HE DIDN'T KNOW DID, DIDN'T HAVE IT.
AND, UM, AND OF COURSE HE PROBABLY THOUGHT THAT IT WAS OKAY TO PUT WINDOWS BECAUSE DUE TO HIS CONDITION, HE WANTED TO LOOK OUTSIDE THROUGH THE WINDOWS.
AND, AND HE THOUGHT IT WAS JUST, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING THAT HE COULD HAVE BECAUSE HE CAN'T BE OUTSIDE.
AND, UM, I JUST, YOU KNOW, WANTED TO, UM, ASK YOU, TAKE CONSIDERATION HIS CONDITION AND MAYBE THINK ABOUT HE'S WILLING TO REMOVE THE WINDOWS AND PUT IT BACK AS IT WAS BEFORE.
[01:00:01]
WOULD LOVE TO KEEP THE CARDBOARD BECAUSE HE REALLY NEEDS IT.AND OF COURSE, IF THEY'RE VIOLATING ANY SETBACKS WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT OR THE BUILDING CODING, WE, UH, HE'S WILLING TO REDO IT AS AS THE PERMIT REQUIREMENTS.
UM, UH, I'M GONNA ASK COMMISSION MEMBERS ANY QUESTIONS, UH, FOR YOU AS WELL.
I KNOW ONE QUESTION I HAVE IS MY UNDERSTANDING, ONE OF THE ISSUES WITH THE CURRENT CARPORT IS IT'S ATTACHED, IT'S ATTACHED TO THE HOUSE AND IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT IT SHOULD BE DETACHED.
UM, IT STILL BE FLASHED SO THERE'S NO WATER COME, YOU KNOW, AND SO FORTH.
BUT, UM, IF IT'S ONE ISSUE, I THINK, UH, I, I HAVE FOR STAFF JUST TO CONFIRM THAT ASPECT OF THE CURRENT CARPORT, UH, IN TERMS OF THE, THIS, THE, OUR ORDINANCE, BUT YEAH, AND THERE'S, THERE'S TWO DIFFERENT TYPES OF PERMITS.
IT COULD BE A DETACH CARPORT OR ATTACHED, AND THAT'S CONSIDER AN ADDITION.
AND IT'S DIFFERENT, UM, DOCUMENTATION THAT YOU HAVE TO SUBMIT FOR PERMITS, BUT OF COURSE THEY NEED YOUR APPROVAL FIRST.
BUT MY UNDERSTANDING IS IT'S, IT'S, IT'S ALSO A NUANCE WITHIN THE STORE COMMISSION BECAUSE A SITE EDITION THAT, THAT STARTS AT THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE IS, IS PROBLEMATIC, UH, IN THAT REGARD.
SO, UM, I MIGHT ASK STAFF TO COMMENT ON THAT, BUT WHILE YOU'RE HERE, IF ARE, ARE THERE OTHER MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION, HAVE YOU HAVE QUESTIONS FOR THE SPEAKER? MR. MCNEIL? MA'AM? UH, I'M LOOKING AT, UM, SOMEWHERE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OF 18 VIOLATION NOTICES STARTING IN OCTOBER OF 2020.
AND SO I'M JUST CURIOUS WHY IT'S TAKEN 26 MONTHS TO GET HERE IF THE CITY'S REPEATEDLY PUTTING RED TAGS ON THE HOUSE.
WHY IS CONSTRUCTION CONTINUING TO MOVE FORWARD ON A PROJECT THAT'S CLEARLY, UM, ILLEGAL IN TERMS FOR THE CITY PUTTING VIOLATION NOTICES THAT'S SAYING, HEY, YOU NEED TO HAVE A PERMIT AND YOU NEED TO DO THIS, THIS WAY.
AND, UH, IT'S HARD FOR ME TO UNDERSTAND WHY IT'S TAKEN SO LONG AND IT TOOK SO MANY NOTICES FOR YOUR, UH, ASSOCIATE TO COME BEFORE US AND, AND TRY TO MAKE THINGS RIGHT FROM HOW THINGS ARE SUPPOSED TO MOVE FORWARD IN A HISTORIC JURISDICTION.
AND EVEN WITHOUT BUILDING WHAT HE BUILT WITHOUT A PERMIT IS ILLEGAL IN THE CITY OF HOUSTON AS WELL.
AND, UM, LIKE I SAID, HE UNFORTUNATELY, HE HAS TRUSTED THE WRONG PEOPLE AND HE REALLY THOUGHT HE WAS DOING, HE WAS, UM, HE TRUSTED THE WRONG PEOPLE, LET'S PUT IT THAT WAY.
HE HIRED SOMEBODY THAT WAS GONNA HELP HIM WITH THIS AND THEY DIDN'T.
AND IT WAS ON TO NOW I'VE BEEN WORKING WITH MR. ROMAN, UM, SINCE WHEN I LEARNED THAT THIS WAS GOING ON WITH MY, HE IS A FRIEND OF MY UNCLE, SO IT IS WHEN I LEARNED THAT AND, AND THAT'S WHEN I STARTED ACTING AND SUBMITTING PROPER DOCUMENTATION TO PROBABLY GET A, A CERTIFICATE TO CONTINUE OR TO GET A PERMIT BECAUSE WE CAN, THEY CANNOT MOVE FORWARD IF THEY DON'T HAVE THE CERTIFICATE FIRST.
SO I HAVE TWO, UM, ONE, I'M NOT SURE WHEN ALL OF THESE VIOLATIONS OCCURRED.
COULD IT, COULD IT HAVE BEEN OVER THE, UM, TIME THAT WE WERE OUT FOR COVID? UM, BECAUSE THAT CAN ACTUALLY WEIGH ON WHETHER OR NOT A PERSON CAN RESPOND EFFECTIVELY TO CITATIONS THAT THEY RECEIVE.
UM, SO THAT'S ONE, AND THAT'S A COMMENT.
UM, THE SECOND PART IS, IS THERE ANY, UM, DOCTOR'S NOTICE OR ANYTHING CONCERNING A DA COMPLIANCE THAT WE SHOULD KNOW ABOUT THAT MAY, UM, REQUIRE A COVERED PARK PARKING, PARKING SPACE OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT? I JUST WANT TO KNOW IF THERE'S SOMETHING THAT EXISTS.
HE DOESN'T HAVE ANY, ANY DOCTOR'S LETTER RIGHT NOW, BUT HE HAS BEEN HOSPITALIZED BECAUSE OF WHEN HE GETS WET BECAUSE OF THE WEATHER, THE COLD WEATHER OR THE RAIN.
HE HAS BEEN HOSPITALIZED BECAUSE OF THAT.
I JUST, YOU KNOW, UM, SOMETIMES, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE, WHEN WE TALK ABOUT, UM, YOU KNOW, ALTERATIONS AND THINGS THAT HAPPENED TO A BUILDING AFTER THE STORM, YOU KNOW, SO MANY PEOPLE HAD TO CHANGE THINGS, UM, ON THEIR HOMES OR WHAT HAVE YOU.
AND SO THERE'S A FINE LINE THAT WE HAVE TO LOOK AT.
AND SO I DIDN'T WANNA ASSUME THAT THERE MAY NOT BE AN A DA, UM, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING THAT CAME FROM A DOCTOR THAT MIGHT SAY THAT THIS HAS TO HAPPEN.
DO I THINK YOU HAVE A QUESTION? YEAH, I HAVE A QUESTION.
IN PICTURE SIX OF 11, IT SHOWS WHERE THE GARAGE WAS.
IS THAT GOING TO BECOME A GARAGE AGAIN? YES.
OR PART OF THE LIVING SPACE? IT'S GONNA HAVE CONTINUOUS
[01:05:01]
GARAGE.SO THEY, THEY CAN'T ENTER THE, THEY CAN'T PUT THE VEHICLE IN THE GARAGE DUE TO HIS CONDITION.
AND THE, THE NEED OF USING HIS WHEELCHAIR, IT DOESN'T FIT WHEN HE PUTS THE CAR INSIDE THE RAMP THEY USE IS, HE CANNOT GET INTO HIS CAR.
THE, IT'S A TWO CAR GARAGE AND THE CARPORT IS A TWO CAR WIDTH.
SO HOW COULD YOU DO IT IN ONE AND NOT THE OTHER? THEY DON'T HAVE ACCESS TO THE HOUSE FROM THE GARAGE.
I, I'M NOT, UM, UH, UH, TO COMMISSIONER DEBOS COMMENTS.
I MEAN, I, I THINK IF, IF THERE'S A, A WAY TO, TO WORK, UM, TO MEET HIS NEEDS IN THE MIDDLE, THAT, THAT WE CAN DO THAT.
BUT I, I AM OBJECT TO THE, UH, THE DESIGN AND THE MATERIALS OF THE CARPORT.
SO I WOULD, WOULD LIKE TO SEE US TRY AND WORK WITH THE APPLICANT TO PROVIDE SOMETHING THAT MEETS HIS NEEDS.
BUT IS WITHIN KEEPING, IS IN KEEPING WITH, UM, THE, THE DESIGN AND THE CHARACTERISTIC AND THE PERIOD OF SIGNIFICANCE OF THE HISTORIC DISTRICT.
UM, SO THAT AGAIN, WOULD STILL, I THINK BE IN KEEPING WITH STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION THAT IT BE REMOVED AND THAT THERE BE, YOU KNOW, ANOTHER APPLICATION, UM, STRICTLY ON THE CARPORT SIDE, UH, THAT WE COULD WORK WITH STAFF AND WITH THE COMMISSION TO MEET, UM, TO MEET THE HOMEOWNER'S NEEDS, UM, MEDICAL NEEDS AND, AND OTHERWISE, BUT SOMETHING THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S MORE IN KEEPING WITH, IS THERE, UM, THEY'RE WILLING TO, YOU KNOW, TO REMOVE THE WINDOWS AND JUST PUT IT THE WAY IT WAS BEFORE.
AND, UM, BUT THEY WILL, YOU KNOW, TAKE, UM, THEY WILL LIKE FOR, UH, YOU TO TAKE IN CONSIDERATION TO KEEP THE CARPORT MEETING, OF COURSE, THE, UH, REQUIREMENTS AS WELL.
IF IT'S TOO ATTACHED TO THE HOUSE, JUST MOVE IT AS THE MEASUREMENTS THAT NEED TO BE.
I'M, I'M THINKING MORE ALONG THE LINES OF A COMPLETE REDESIGN,
'CAUSE THAT TYPE OF PITCH I, I DON'T THINK IS SOMETHING THAT, THAT WE WOULD SEE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
BUT I MEAN, THIS IS A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF WORK.
I THINK IF WE WERE TO APPROVE A CARPORT, IT WOULD HAVE TO BE ALMOST TEMPORARY IN NATURE, THAT IT COULD BE EASILY REMOVED.
AND IT CAN'T IMPACT THE EXISTING HISTORIC PROPERTY.
AND YOU KNOW, IT, IT MIGHT FALL UNDER THE HARDSHIP CATEGORY OF OUR ORDINANCE, YOU KNOW, THAT THIS IS MEDICALLY NECESSARY FOR EGRESS FROM THE PROPERTY, FOR THE HOMEOWNER.
BUT IT, IT COULDN'T BE INTEGRATED INTO THE STRUCTURE OF THE EXISTING PROPERTY.
BUT THEY WOULD HAVE TO DESIGN THAT AND BRING IT BACK TO, TO US.
AS, AS A NEW C OF A, AND I THINK WE HEAR, UM, I, I WANT TO MAKE ONE, ONE MORE COMMENT.
I, I THINK WE HEAR OFTEN, UM, THERE'S A LACK OF, OF ACCESS TO, UM, TIP FORMATION SPECIFICALLY IN, IN GLEN BUR VALLEY.
I, I DIDN'T KNOW I, I MET, YOU KNOW, I, I WAS WORKING WITH THE WRONG FOLKS.
UM, AND I, I WANT TO HAVE COMPASSION AND TRY AND, AND WORK WITH THE APPLICANT TOWARDS THAT.
BUT 18 PLUS RED TAGS IS NOT, I DIDN'T KNOW.
AND THAT'S THE PART THAT'S REALLY UNSETTLING WITH ME RIGHT NOW IS THAT I, I HEAR THE APPLICANT SAYING, I WANT TO DO RIGHT AND I WANNA MAKE BETTER.
BUT THE NUMBER OF RED TAGS AND THE WORK THAT CONTINUED AND THE EXPENSE THAT OBVIOUSLY WAS OUT HAS BEEN OUTLAID.
UM, AND, AND TO THIS DOESN'T SNEAK UP WITH, WELL, I DIDN'T KNOW.
NO, HE, HE'S NOT, HE NEVER SAID THAT.
HE JUST TRUSTED THE WRONG PEOPLE.
'CAUSE HE THOUGHT HE WAS GETTING HELP AND IT WAS MANY TIMES, NOT JUST ONE TIME.
AND ALSO, UM, DUE TO HIS CONDITION, IT'S VERY HARD FOR HIM TO, YOU KNOW, TO TRAVEL AND TO TRY TO FIX THINGS, UM, ON HIS OWN.
AND, UM, SOMETIMES, YOU KNOW, THE, THE WIFE NEEDS TO TAKE CARE OF HIM.
THE, UH, DAUGHTER NEEDS TO WORK.
SO IT, THEY'RE LIVING IN A HARD SITUATION RIGHT NOW.
AND, UM, THEY REALLY NEED, UH, A LITTLE BIT OF HELP.
BUT I AM GONNA BE GUIDING THIS PROJECT.
I'M GONNA MAKE SURE THEY DO FOLLOW THE, UH, THE
[01:10:01]
RULES AND, AND, UM, THE BUILDING, CODING AND EVERYTHING THAT IS NEEDED TO GET THE PROPER PERMITS AS WELL.AT THIS, OH, AND ANOTHER THING, PLEASE.
WE GATHER SOME LETTERS FROM THE NEIGHBORS SAYING THAT THEY'RE NOT BOTHERED BY THE, UM, CHANGES THAT THEY MADE FOR THE CARDBOARD AS WELL.
UM, I'M GOING TO JUST ASK IF THERE IS ANY OTHER MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC HERE IN PERSON OR VIRTUALLY THAT WANTS TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM.
NOT HEARING, I'M GONNA CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT THIS TIME AND, UH, MOVE BACK TO A DISCUSSION WITHIN THE COMMISSION.
I GUESS MY, I HAD A QUESTION FOR STAFF REGARDING THE CARPORT.
IT WAS, UM, UM, LOOK, WHAT I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT IS WHETHER OR NOT THIS IS A CANDIDATE FOR A DEFERRAL IN ORDER TO GIVE, I'VE, I'VE HEARD THAT THE APPLICANT IS WILLING TO MAKE SOME CHANGES IN RESTORE SOME OF THE ELEMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN ALTERED.
MY MY, MY QUESTION THEN IS ABOUT THE CARPORT.
MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT POTENTIALLY A CARPORT COULD BE, UH, CONSIDERED BY THIS COMMISSION IF IT IS NOT ATTACHED TO THE HOUSE.
AND PERHAPS I'M LIKE, I'M IMAGINING LIKE IT WAS LIKE A FLAT ROOF STRUCTURE, FOR INSTANCE, THAT DIDN'T HAVE A PITCH ON IT.
UM, AND I, I GUESS I WOULD WANT TO KNOW FROM STAFF'S POSITION IF THAT WERE THE CASE, HOW FAR BACK THAT WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, FROM THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE.
BUT IT, ARE YOU PREPARED TO, HAVE YOU HAD ANY CONVERSATIONS AMONG THIS INTERNALLY ABOUT HOW YOU WISH THIS HAD GONE AND ORIGINALLY? WELL, THANK YOU CHAIR.
UM, THE, A CARPORT CAN BE ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVED BELOW 600 SQUARE FEET, UH, IF IT'S APPROPRIATE AND FREESTANDING NORMALLY.
BUT THEN IN THIS CASE IT WOULD BE A CERTIFICATE OF REMEDIATION WE'RE SEEKING.
AND LEGALLY, OUR, OUR CODE SAYS THOSE ARE ISSUED BY THIS COMMISSION, NOT BY STAFF.
SO I WOULD LIKE TO REVISE THAT ONE DAY IN OUR CODE.
BUT RIGHT NOW, STAFF CANNOT ADMINISTRATIVELY ISSUE A CERTIFICATE OF REMEDIATION.
UH, HOWEVER, THAT'S A, A VERY GOOD, YOU, YOU DID ASK, I THINK YOU ASKED EARLIER IF IT'S CONNECTED IN, UM, WILSON IN THE OFFICE, PLEASE.
IF YOU GO TO PAGE SIX OF A 11, SIX OF 11 OF THE REPORT, UM, IF YOU KINDA ZOOM IN ON THE PHOTO AT THE BOTTOM, YOU'LL SEE THAT THERE'S A, THERE SEEMS TO BE A CONNECTION THERE.
AND THEY'VE CREATED A VALLEY BETWEEN THESE ROOFS.
SO THEN IF YOU ALSO GO TO THE, IT, THIS IT, I MEAN, I THINK A FLAT CARPORT ACTUALLY SOLVES A PROBLEMS. I THINK THEY'VE CREATED A MAINTENANCE PROBLEM WITH THE VALLEY CREATED BETWEEN THE TWO ROOFS COMING TOGETHER IN THE WAY THAT THEY DO CHAIR HICK, MAY I PLEASE, MR. CURRY? ROMAN, UH, COULD WE ALSO, WHILE YOU, WHILE YOU'RE, WHILE YOU'RE STANDING THERE, WHILE YOU'RE WITH US, IF WE COULD JUST SCROLL DOWN TO THE NEXT PAGE TO PAGE, UM, SEVEN OF 11 AND LOOK AT THE TOP PHOTO WHICH SAYS, UH, GOOGLE IMAGE OCTOBER, 2019.
CAN WE ALL LOOK AT THAT TOGETHER? MM-HMM
SO DOES, DOES THAT, UH, REPRESENT THE ORIGINAL CONDITION OF THE HOUSE, WOULD YOU SAY? BUT, YOU KNOW, MINUS THE GREEN PAINT AND YES.
UH, WHATEVER MIGHT BE COVERING THOSE CLEAR STORY WINDOWS MM-HMM
AND THAT, SO THAT'S WHAT IT WAS, WAS AN ATTACHED A COMMODIOUS TWO CAR GARAGE RIGHT.
AND PRESUMABLY THERE'S A WAY TO GET FROM THAT GARAGE TO THAT HOUSE.
RIGHT? I'M NOT ASKING HOW, I'M JUST, DON'T YOU IMAGINE? ISN'T IT LIKELY THERE'S A CONNECTION BETWEEN THE, THAT'S LOW.
THERE'S A PLAN IN THE DRAWINGS, AND THE PLAN IN THE DRAWING SEEMS TO INDICATE IT'S A STEP OUTSIDE AND THEN A STEP IN.
I DON'T KNOW IF THAT PLAN IS, DOES, DOES THIS IS NEW OR DOES THIS PHOTO LOOK LIKE THE GARAGE IS ATTACHED TO THE HOUSE? IT IS, IT IS.
SO ARE WE CONSIDERING REQUIRING THE HOUSE TO BE PUT BACK IN THIS CONDITION MINUS THOSE FOUR LOW BOY WINDOWS UNDER THE CLEAR STORY, MINUS THE COVERING OF ALL THAT CLEAR STORY GLASS UNDER THE GABLE AND, AND PERHAPS WE'RE DEBATING IT, BUT MINUS THE CARPORT EDITION SO THAT IT LOOKS LIKE THIS? AGAIN, THAT'S OUR RECOMMENDATION.
BUT I, YOU KNOW, EVEN LISTENING AND LOOKING AT THE PHOTOS, AND I'M NOT IN YOUR PLACE, SO I GET TO DO THE DISCUSSION PART OF IT.
BUT WHEN I LOOK AT THE FOLLOWING PAGE EIGHT OF 11, AND ITS CURRENT PICTURE THAT I TOOK THE OTHER DAY, 1212, IT'S GONNA BE REALLY DIFFICULT TO MAKE THIS HOUSE HAVE THE CHARACTERISTICS THAT IT HAD PREVIOUS.
IF WE WERE PICKING HOUSES IN GLENBROOK VALLEY THAT REPRESENTED THE DISTRICT, BUT THAT ARE THE REASONS WHY IT, IT, IT DESERVES TO BE A DISTRICT.
THIS WOULD BE ONE OF THEM, OR WOULD HAVE BEEN ONE OF THEM.
AND, AND THIS HAS BEEN PICKED AWAY AT FOR ALL KINDS OF REASONS, APPARENTLY TO THE POINT WHERE I'M SKEPTICAL THAT SOMEONE COULD SAY, OH YEAH, LET
[01:15:01]
ME PUT IT BACK THE WAY THAT IT WAS FOR YOU.I MEAN, IS THAT, DOES ANYBODY THINK THAT COULD REALLY BE DONE? ESPECIALLY THE BEAMS, I, I LOOK AT AND THINK IT'S IS GONNA BE, YOU CAN DO IT AND REPLACE THAT, UH, BRICK AND MATCH THAT GREEN PAINT AND ALL THAT STUFF.
YOU CAN'T PAINT YOUR NEW BRICK NEW.
I DO HAVE ONE OTHER QUESTION WITH REGARD TO THE WINDOWS.
ARE THOSE WINDOWS NOW COVERED UNDER THE, THE FRONT, THE HIGH WINDOWS UNDER THE GABLE? YEAH.
I, I CAN'T TELL WHAT THIS HAPPENED.
I BE, THEY'RE NOW COVERED, BUT PRESUMABLY THE, BUT, BUT I'M NOT, WHAT I'M NOT SURE ABOUT IS WHETHER THEY STILL EXIST UNDER THE COVERING.
THEY WERE REPLACED WITH HARDY PLANK.
SO THAT'S NOT GLASS THAT'S BEEN PAPERED OVER OR SOMETHING.
SO WE NEED TO DEFINE OUR TERMS. ARE WE TALKING ABOUT RE REGLAZING THAT FRAMING? PRESUMABLY.
TYPICALLY WINDOWS LIKE THIS, THEY'RE NOT STORE, STORE-BOUGHT.
THEY'RE JUST FRAMED WITH WOOD AND THEY JUST HAVE SIMPLE FRAMES AND YEAH.
PROBABLY STOP A FUNNY TOP CUT.
BUT MY QUESTION, I GUESS FOR THE COMMISSION IS, UH, LIKE TALKING TO ROMAN, IF, IF A CARPORT IS SET BACK FAR ENOUGH AND SAY WAS A FLAT ROOF DIDN'T EXCEED 600 SQUARE FEET AND WAS DETACHED FROM THE STRUCTURE, UM, WOULD THE COMMISSION FIND THAT TO BE APPROPRIATE? I MEAN, BECAUSE THE 600 SQUARE FEET FREESTANDING AND THE APPROPRIATE, THE THREE ITEMS THAT IT TAKES TO GET ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL, THIS IS NOW BECAUSE IT'S A BECAUSE IT'S BEEN DONE, IT'S NOW BEFORE US.
BUT THOSE THREE THINGS HAVE TO STILL BE ADDRESSED.
AND SO I'M JUST WONDERING, UM, I DON'T KNOW HOW BIG THE CURRENT STRUCTURE IS AS WELL.
UM, WELL, IT'S BIGGER THAN A HOUSE.
I THINK THE CARPET WOULD EVER BE REALLY APPROPRIATE FOR THAT HOUSE.
BUT I THINK IN LIGHT OF THE APPLICANT'S MEDICAL CONDITIONS THAT THE COMMISSION MIGHT BE WILLING TO, TO WORK WITH THEM TO ALLOW THE CARPORT, AS LONG AS I SAID IT'S TEMPORARY.
SO, AND THAT'S SORT OF SUMMING UP WHAT, UH, MR. MCALLEN CHAIR HICK AND, AND YOU COMMISSIONER COSGROVE HAVE SAID IF THE HOUSE WERE, WERE, UH, RESTORED TO SOMETHING, UH, LIKE ITS ORIGINAL CONDITION, UM, AND IT, UH, PRESUMED TEMPORARY FLAT PREFAB CARPORT, WERE DISCREETLY LOCATED IN A USEFUL POSITION, BUT ALSO IN, IN A COMPLIANT, UH, LOCATION.
UM, IT SEEMS LIKE THAT'S SOMETHING WE, WE WOULD BE WILLING TO CONSIDER.
BUT I THINK FOR WHAT'S IN FRONT OF US TODAY, I MEAN, I DON'T HAVE A TROUBLE MAKING A MOTION TO ACCEPT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION FOR THE REHABILITATION OF THE ORIGINAL HOUSE.
I MEAN, I, I DON'T THINK THAT THE EXISTING CARPORT CAN BE SALVAGED IN ANY WAY IN THE WAY WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WHAT WE WOULD CONSIDER AS AN APPROVAL.
SO I DON'T THINK DEFERRING IT AND DELAYING THE RESTORATION IS GONNA SERVE ANYBODY.
UM, BUT I WOULD SORT DEFINITELY ENCOURAGE THE APPLICANT TO, TO FOLLOW UP ABOUT THE REPORT.
WELL, YOU, YOU COUNSEL NO, GO AHEAD.
YOU WELL, I'M SAY YOU CAN MAKE A MOTION.
I JUST, IF YOU MAKE A MOTION, THEY CAN, THEY, THERE IS WILLINGNESS TO MAKE CHANGES.
I'VE, I'VE HEARD, AND, AND PERHAPS WITH THE DISCUSSION OF THIS COUNCIL ABOUT THE CARPORT, UM, MY SENSE IS THE CARPORT'S NOT GOING TO TO PASS GIVEN THE COMMENT I'M HEARING.
WE CAN PUT THAT TO A VOTE, BUT, UM, YOU KNOW, WE CAN DEFER IT, WE CAN VOTE ON IT.
THEY CAN STILL COME BACK AND, UM, THANKFULLY THERE'S A, SOMEONE IS HELPING NOW THE APPLICANT TO GET TO, TO GET THROUGH THE PROCESS.
WAIT, I, I'M SORRY, I'M CONFUSED.
ANYONE ELSE?
YEAH, WE NEED, WE DO NEED, NEED CLARITY.
WE NEED CLARITY AROUND WHAT WE ARE GOING TO FILE A MOTION ON.
I I WAS ORIGINALLY GONNA SUGGEST THAT YOU DIVIDE THE MO THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION INTO TWO ITEMS AND DEAL WITH THE HOUSE, DEAL WITH THE CARPORT.
UM, HOWEVER, IF YOU DECIDE TO JUST MAKE A MOTION TO ACCEPT STAFF RECOMMENDATION, THERE'S NOTHING TO PREVENT THE APPLICANT FROM WORKING WITH STAFF IN THE NEXT MONTH TO COME BACK WITH A PLAN FOR A PROPOSED CARPORT.
YOU'VE MADE IT CLEAR, I THINK THAT YOU ARE WILLING TO WORK WITH THEM TO DO THAT.
I WILL SAY UNDER THE A DA, YOU'RE NOT, WE'RE NOT LEGALLY REQUIRED TO MAKE THAT ACCOMMODATION.
IT DOES NOT MEAN A BODY DOESN'T WANT TO.
BUT, UM, YOU KNOW, THAT'S CERTAINLY WITHIN YOUR PURVIEW IF YOU ALL DETERMINE THAT IT IS, IT IS ARCHITECTURALLY DEFENSIBLE I GUESS.
BUT, UM, BUT YEAH, SO I THINK GIVEN THE DISCUSSION, IT MAY, IT MAY BE EASIER TO LEAVE THAT AS ONE MOTION WITH STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION, GET
[01:20:01]
THE HOUSE BACK AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE AND CONSIDER THE CARPORT AT A DIFFERENT MEETING AS A SEPARATE ITEM.ONE SUGGESTION, CAN WE NOT ISSUE A COR AND THEN ALLOW ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL OF AN APPROPRIATE CARPORT SO THAT THEY CAN CONTINUE ON AND NOT HAVE TO VOTE ON THIS AGAIN IN JANUARY ON A CARPORT.
'CAUSE IT, IN ESSENCE, IF THEY RESTORE IT BACK TO ITS ORIGINAL, IT WOULD NO LONGER BE A C OF R AT THAT POINT.
THEY COULD JUST MAKE APPLICATION FOR THE CARPORT AND THERE WOULD BE NO NEED FOR THEM TO COME BACK IN FRONT OF THE COMMISSION.
UNLESS, UNLESS THE STAFF DETERMINES THAT IT'S NOT, UNLESS THE STAFF DETERMINES, I MEAN THEY WANT OUR OPINION ON IT.
BUT I MEAN, THEY STILL COME BACK TO YOU.
I GUESS THAT WAS MY THINKING AS WELL, IS THAT WE SHOULD JUST DEAL WITH WHAT WE HAVE IN FRONT OF US.
I THINK THERE'S ABSOLUTELY, WE'RE SOMEWHAT IN AGREEMENT THAT THE CAR EXISTING CARPORT IS NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH ANY, ANYTHING WE WOULD CONSIDER ACCEPTABLE TO CHECK.
MY READ IS THAT THIS COMMISSION WOULD BE WILLING FOR THE APPLICANT TO MOVE FORWARD AND DO WHAT HE NEEDS TO DO TO TAKE CARE OF HIS MEDICAL CONDITION WITH A CARPORT THAT'S APPROPRIATE GIVEN STAFF THE ABILITY TO DISCERN THAT UNDERSTOOD I TO BRING IT BEFORE THE BODY, OR DON'T BRING IT BEFORE THE BODY IN JANUARY, BUT BRING THE HOUSE BACK INTO COMPLIANCE, WHICH THEY APPEAR TO BE DOING.
AND THEN MY ONLY, MY ONLY WAFFLE IN MY BRAIN IS HOW MUCH DETACHMENT DOES THERE HAVE TO BE SO THE GENTLEMAN DOESN'T HAVE TO GET WET GOING IN AND OUT? 'CAUSE HE IS GOTTA USE A WHEELCHAIR, SO HE'S GOTTA HAVE A RAMP.
AND IT MAY NOT BE, BUT I THINK THE WORD DETACHED, I MEAN MY, WHAT I'VE SEEN, UM, IS YOU CAN HAVE LIKE WHERE THE ENTRANCE TO THE HOME WOULD BE, YOU COULD HAVE A SMALL LITTLE ROOF LIT THAT PERHAPS IS, YOU KNOW, EXTENDS UNDER THE SOFFIT, BUT THERE'S A WAY TO KEEP WATER OUT.
UM, AND I THINK, BUT THAT, THAT'S A VERY SMALL THING AND I THINK THAT WOULD NOT, BUT I GUESS MY QUESTION FOR LEGAL IS WHAT I'M HEARING IS WE, WE HAVE A MOTION WHICH I, UM, I THINK I NEED TO HEAR STAFF REPEAT THEIR RECOMMENDATION, BUT WE COULD APPROVE THEIR RECOMMENDATION, WHICH I BELIEVE IS TO PUT THE HOUSE BACK AS IT WAS BEFORE, WITHOUT THE CARPORT.
AND, AND IF THEY WERE TO PROPOSE A CARPORT THAT COULD MEET THE ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVALS AS PART OF THAT WORK, THEY COULD THEN DO THAT.
IT WOULDN'T HAVE TO COME BACK HERE.
IS THAT WHAT, WHAT THAT'S WHAT I'M HEARING.
THAT IS WHAT I'M HEARING AS WELL.
TO THE EXTENT IT CAN BE ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVED.
I THINK YOU ALL ARE ARE RELEASING THAT ITEM TO STAFF UNDER THE ORDINANCES NOW.
SO ROMAN CAN JUST REPEAT YOUR RE YEAH, IF YOU COULD YOU JUST, I REPEAT YOUR RECOMMENDATION ONE MORE TIME, I THINK.
AND THEN LEGALLY THE CODE SAYS THE HHC IS THE BODY THAT CAN ISSUE A CERTIFICATE OF REMEDIATION.
THEY'RE ISSUING A CERTIFICATE OF A REMEDIATION TO, TO TAKE IT DOWN AND RESTORE THE HOUSE.
THEN THERE, THEN THAT'S, THAT'S A, THAT, THAT'S A TABULAR RASA.
THAT, THAT'S A BLANK SHEET OF PAPER THEN.
AND THE CARPORT BECOMES A NEW APPLICATION SEPARATE BECAUSE THEY'VE COMPLIED WITH THE CERTIFICATE OF REMEDIATION TO TAKE THE CARPORT DOWN.
THAT'S A GOOD, THAT'S A WAY TO DO IT.
BUT ROMAN, IF YOU COULD JUST REPEAT WHAT ONE THING I WANTED TO ASK TO COMMENT ABOUT THAT THE OPTION OF A DEFERRAL WAS JUST THAT, UH, IF THEY DO HAVE TO APPLY LATER, IT'S ANOTHER FEE.
IT'S NOT THAT, I MEAN, THIS IS A BIG PROJECT BECAUSE IT'S GONNA COST A LOT TO DO ALL IT'S ALREADY HAS COST THEM A LOT, SOMEBODY A LOT.
SO, BUT JUST TO MENTION THAT DEFERRAL, IF IT SOMEHOW CAME BACK AS ONE PACKAGE, THEN THERE'S NOT ANOTHER FEE TO MAKE IT.
BUT ANYWAY, THAT'S MOTION TO ACCEPT TO ISSUE A COC OF R UH, PER STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION, STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
DO WE NEED FURTHER CLARIFICATION? I HEARD SOMEONE SAY THAT THEY ARE STILL CONFUSED.
WELL, I, I JUST WANTED STAFF TO REPEAT THEIR, THE FULL RECOMMENDATION SO IT'S CLEAR WHAT, WHAT THE MOTION IS FOR.
UH, STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS DENIAL OF ISSUANCE OF A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS AND ISSUANCE OF A CERTIFICATE OF REMEDIATION TO REMOVE THE CARPORT, REMOVE THE FOREFRONT WINDOWS AND REPLACE BRICKWORK AND TO REOPEN THE FRONT FACING GABLE AND INSTALL GLASS AS WAS ORIGINALLY CONSTRUCTED FINAL DETAILING TO BE APPROVED BY STAFF.
AND, AND ROMAN, I MEAN, A FINAL DETAIL WOULD BE THOSE RAFTER ENDS AS WELL, OR DOES THAT NEED TO BE PART OF THE MOTION? PART OF THE, I THINK WE SHOULD MAKE IT PART OF THE MOTION.
[01:25:01]
OKAY.IF WE COULD JUST ADD THAT, I'M HAPPY TO ADD THAT.
AND IT ALSO SAYS FINAL DETAILING TO BE APPROVED BY STAFF.
SO I KIND OF HAD AN ASSUMPTION THAT THAT WOULD BE PART, PART OF IT.
SO I MAKE A MOTION TO, UH, ISSUE A COR TO REMOVE THE CARPORT, REMOVE THE FOREFRONT WINDOWS, REPLACE BRICKWORK, AND TO REOPEN THE FRONT FACING GABLE AND INSTALL GLASS AND REPLACE THE THREE OR FOUR ORIGINAL, UM, RAFTER TAIL ENDS ON THE FRONT GABLE AS WELL AS, UH, ALL AS ORIGINALLY CONSTRUCTED FINAL DETAILING TO BE APPROVED BY STAFF.
ARE THERE ANY OPPOSED? ANY ABSTENTIONS? OKAY, THAT MOTION PASSES.
MR. CHAIR, WHO DID YOU RECOGNIZE FOR THE SECOND PLEASE? MR. COSGROVE? THANK YOU.
MAY I MAKE A COMMENT? PLEASE? YOU SAID YOU HAD LETTERS OF PEOPLE THAT THOUGHT THAT WAS OKAY.
I'VE HAD MULTIPLE CALLS FROM ANYBODY THAT EXITS GLENBROOK VALLEY GOING DOWN GLENROCK LOCK PEOPLE COMPLAINING ABOUT WHAT'S GONE ON AT THAT HOUSE FROM THE TIME THAT THEY PAID IT UNTIL ALL OF THIS CONSTRUCTION.
SO, YOU KNOW, THAT COUNTS THE WASH.
BUT I JUST WANTED YOU TO KNOW THAT THERE IS OBJECTION TO IT AS WELL.
UH, PLEASE, WOULD YOU PLEASE APPROACH THE MICROPHONE? THANK YOU AGAIN.
UM, I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THE COMPLAINTS, BUT WE DO HAVE LIKE THE NEXT DOOR NEIGHBORS AND AROUND THE WHOLE BLOCK SAYING THAT.
AND, UM, AND IT'S BEEN A LOT OF MOVEMENT BECAUSE DUE TO THE FIRE, IT WAS FIRE IN THE GARAGE AND TWO BEDROOMS MM-HMM
INSIDE THE HOUSE, SO THAT'S WHY IT WAS A LOT OF MOVEMENT THERE.
WELL, THANK YOU AGAIN FOR COMING AND BEING HERE ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT AND WE LOOK FORWARD, UM, HOPEFULLY YOU CAN WORK WITH THE STAFF ON THE CARPORT AND, AND NOT NEED TO COME BACK TO THE COMMISSION IS WHAT HOPEFULLY THE, THIS CAN BE WORKED OUT PARA, MAY I, UH, ADDRESS THE FAMILY? YES, PLEASE.
WHAT I SAID JUST IN TRANSLATION IS TO THANK HIM FOR COMING IN SPITE OF HIS, HIS DEBILITATING CONDITION AND THAT WE APPRECIATE THAT HE IS CONSIDERING, UM, UPGRADING, GOING BACK TO THE WAY THE HOUSE WAS ORIGINALLY CONSTRUCTED.
I HAVE ONE LAST ITEM ON THE AGENDA.
ITEM B 11 IS 1204 STUDER WOOD, WHICH IS AN ITEM YOU'VE SEEN RECENTLY.
THIS IS A, UH, CONTRIBUTING VERNACULAR CRAFTSMAN STYLE DUPLEX CIRCA 1930, LOCATED IN THE NOR HILL HISTORIC DISTRICT.
AND THIS PROPOSED THE APPLICATION FOR YOU TODAY.
YOU'VE, YOU'VE SEEN THE REQUEST BEFORE, BUT I'LL REPEAT IT.
IT'S THE, THAT THE, THE REQUEST IS TO, UH, RAISE THE CEILING PLATE BY APPROXIMATELY ONE FOOT TO NINE FOOT AND REPLACE ONE ORIGINAL FRONT DOOR OPENING, UH, WITH A WINDOW.
THIS WORK OF THE ROOF RAISING WAS DONE WITHOUT A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS, AND THIS BUILDING WAS ALSO A RED TAGGED A NUMBER OF TIMES.
THE APPLICANTS INITIALLY HAD ASKED ALSO IN THIS APPLICATION TO BE ABLE TO PUT A, UH, UH, A PORCH FLOORING BETWEEN THE TWO EXISTING PORCH FLOORINGS.
BUT THEY HAVE TOLD ME THAT THEY WILL, UM, BE HAPPY NOT TO DO THAT IF THEY COULD GET APPROVAL ON THESE OTHER TWO ITEMS TODAY.
[01:30:01]
THE FULL PROJECT WAS PRESENTED AT THE SEPTEMBER, 2022 MEETING, AND THE DECISION WAS TO ISSUE A CERTIFICATE OF REMEDIATION, ALLOWING FOR THE ADDITION AND A NEW SINGLE CAR GARAGE, BUT DENYING THE ELEVATION OF THE CEILING PLATE.IN OTHER WORDS, IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN RETURNED TO THE ORIGINAL HEIGHT AND REQUIRING THAT BOTH FRONT DOORS BE RETAINED AND FUNCTIONING AND NO ALTERATION TO THE FRONT PORCH, AND IT WAS DENIED FOR CRITERIA NUMBER FOUR AND FIVE.
WE HAVE RECEIVED FOUR LETTERS IN SUPPORT, WHICH I HAVE WITH ME HERE TODAY, FROM NEARBY PROPERTY OWNERS THAT ARE IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT AND THEY OWN CONTRIBUTING HOMES.
AND THEY ARE ALL IN SUPPORT OF THE APPLICATION THAT YOU SEE BEFORE YOU AND THE NOR NOR HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION OR THE CIVIC ASSOCIATION ALSO SUPPORTS THE PROJECT.
AND WE MAY HAVE A MEMBER ON VIRTUALLY TO JOIN.
IF BRIAN, UM, WE COULD START WITH PAGE, I'M SORRY, WILSON IS WITH PAGE FIVE OF 23.
UH, IF WE STEP BACK, I, I'M GONNA PRESENT A LITTLE MORE HISTORY ON THIS HOUSE THAN WE PRESENTED LAST TIME.
THERE'S THE INVENTORY PHOTO FROM WHEN THE DISTRICT WAS CREATED.
ON THE NEXT PAGE, PLEASE, I HAVE SOME INFORMATION FROM THE HARRIS COUNTY BUILDING LAND ASSESSMENT FORMS. I JUST WANT TO KINDA WALK THROUGH ITS HISTORY HERE.
WE CONFIRM IN THE 1930, THIS WAS A DUPLEX.
UH, IT SAYS, UH, ONE, IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S SAYING BEDROOM, DUPLEX THERE, AND IT GIVES A LITTLE FLOOR PLAN SKETCH.
I'LL NOTE THAT THIS FLOOR PLAN SKETCH DOESN'T SHOW ANY OF THE PORCHES.
AND TO ME IT'S PLAUSIBLE THAT THERE WERE NONE.
BUT, UH, IT'S ALSO PLAUSIBLE THAT THESE, THE ONES WE SEE THERE ARE TODAY ARE ORIGINAL.
UH, THIS IS FROM SEPTEMBER, FEBRUARY, 1964.
I WANNA NOTE THAT THE HOUSE WAS NOTED TO BE HOUSE NOT IN LIVABLE CONDITION.
HOUSE BEEN VACANT MORE THAN SIX MONTHS.
HOUSE WILL NOT BE REPAIRED, HOUSE TO BE DEMOLISHED AND GIVEN AWAY ACCORDING TO THE OWNER.
EIGHT OF 23 IS THE, UH, 64 MARCH OF 1964.
AND HERE WE CLEARLY SEE THE PLAN DRAWN WITH THE PORCHES THAT WE SEE TODAY ON THE BUILDING, TWO IN THE FRONT AND ONE ON EACH SIDE.
AND, UH, SCREENED IN BACK PORCH, ELEMENTS OF WHICH I BELIEVE ARE THERE TODAY.
BUT, UH, THEY'VE, IT'S GONNA BEEN FILLED IN AND DIFFERENT PIECE WORK THERE.
PAGE NINE OF 23 IS A LITTLE LATER AUGUST OF 65.
AND I JUST WANNA, AGAIN, NOTE THE REMARKS.
THE BUILDING WOULD BE HARD TO RENT IN ITS CONDITION, NEEDS LEVELING AND REPAIRS OR OBSOLETE.
AND THEN ON PAGE 10 OF 23, UH, BUILDING ASSESSMENT FROM 1978.
AND IT SAYS WOOD SIDING, UH, ROOF, UH, SOMETHING IN VERY BAD CONDITION.
I COULD READ THAT EARLIER, NOW I CAN'T READ IT.
WOOD SIDING, UH, SOMETHING, SORRY, I APOLOGIZE IN VERY BAD SHAPE.
AND THEN TO THE RIGHT, UM, SIDING IS ROD.
IT NEEDS REPAIR AND PAINTING FOUNDATION BLOCKS ARE LEANING.
FOUNDATION IS SUNKEN THE INTERIOR'S INTO THE SAME CONDITION AS THE EXTERIOR RENTAL PROPERTY.
SO AGAIN, FROM THE NINE ON THE SANDBORN MAP, WHICH GOES FROM 1924 TO 1950, THIS IS THE DRAWING.
I DON'T THINK, UM, THAT, UH, IS IN QUESTION, BUT I WANNA MAKE THE NOTE HERE.
LET ME MAKE IT HERE BECAUSE I THOUGHT I HAD THE PHOTOS.
AND WE'LL GET TO A PHOTO THAT SHOWS THE INTERIOR SHIPLAP IN THE WALL THAT RUNS STRAIGHT DOWN THE MIDDLE OF THE BUILDING.
AND YOU CAN SEE A LONG TIME AGO, A DOOR WAS FILLED IN, IN THAT WALL, UM, MEANING THAT YOU COULD PASS BETWEEN THE TWO UNITS.
AND SO I, MY GUESS IS THIS WOULD BE ONE OF THE HOUSES THAT DOESN'T GET TALKED ABOUT IN THE HEIGHTS DESIGN GUIDELINES.
AND I HAVEN'T HEARD IT, AND WE THROW THE WORD DUPLEX AROUND A LOT.
BUT IN MY EXPERIENCE, MANY OF THESE BUILDINGS WEREN'T WHAT WE WOULD CALL A DUPLEX TODAY WITH A KIT, TWO KITCHENS AND TWO BATHS, BUT INSTEAD, A SINGLE FAMILY HOUSE THAT HAD AN EXTRA ROOM IT COULD RENT.
UH, THERE'S A BOOK OUT RIGHT NOW.
UH, THE COLOR OF THE LAW, WHICH TALKS ABOUT HOW THE FHA IN ORDER TO ENSURE MORTGAGES FOR DEVELOPERS SAID THAT THEY WERE MORE LIKELY TO ENSURE IT IF YOU HAD AN EXTRA GUEST ROOM IN THAT STRUCTURE THAT COULD BE RENTED SINGULARLY.
SO I JUST WANNA POINT THAT IT, WE CALL IT A DUPLEX.
IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY MEAN THAT IT WAS ALWAYS BUILT AS SUCH AS ACTUALLY A SINGLE FAMILY WITH AN EXTRA ROOM TO RENT.
I RESTORED ONE OF THOSE IN THE WEST END.
TWO FRONT DOORS, TWO BACK DOORS, NEVER HAD MORE THAN ONE KITCHEN AND ONE BATH.
UH, THE NEXT PAGE SHOWS THE PLANS THEY PROPOSE ON PAGE.
UM, WELL, THE NEXT PAGE THAT POPS UP, IT'S NOT NUMBERED.
SO WE KNOW WHAT THE PLAN IS HERE.
IF WE GO TO THE NEXT PAGE, PLEASE.
[01:35:01]
PROPOSAL, THIS IS A, A GOOD DRAWING ABOVE AT THE TOP, IT'S THE EXISTING ELEVATION.AND THEN BELOW, UH, THE APPLICANT'S, UH, THE, AGAIN, THE, UH, ADDITION IN THE REAR HAS BEEN APPROVED, BUT YOU SEE THE YELLOW HIGHLIGHTING ON THE STRUCTURE.
SO WE SEE THAT THE YELLOW HIGHLIGHT OVER THE RIGHT DOOR, WHICH WOULD BE A WINDOW, THE LEFT DOOR, WHICH THEY ARE PROPOSING TO REPLACE THE CURRENT NON-ORIGINAL DOOR WITH A MORE AUTHENTIC CRAFTSMAN STYLE DOOR.
AS WE SAW IN THAT PICTURE FROM THE INVENTORY PHOTO ON THE RIGHT, THERE WAS A CRAFTSMAN STYLE DOOR WITH THE THREE LIGHTS IN IT.
SO THAT WOULD BE AN IMPROVEMENT.
THE CURRENT DOORS, UH, ALL THE WAY AROUND ARE NON-ORIGINAL.
AND THE FRONT DOORS, THE TRIM AND THE DOORS ARE NON-ORIGINAL.
UH, AND THEY WOULD NEED, IT'S HIGH.
I HIGHLIGHTED BETWEEN THE PORCHES.
THEY WOULD NEED A TRIM BOARD OR SOME WAY TO FILL THAT GAP.
I WOULD THINK YOU WOULD ACTUALLY HAVE A ONE BY 12, UH, THAT OR 10 THAT MOVED BETWEEN THOSE TWO PORCHES.
MORE OF IT IN THE NEXT PAGE, PLEASE.
WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE SIDE ELEVATION, THE PROPOSED SIDE ELEVATION ON, ON PAGE 14 OF 23, IF WE COULD ZOOM IN A LITTLE ON THAT LOWER PHOTO.
JUST TO BE CLEAR, THE DIFFERENCE OF WHAT WE WOULD SEE ON THIS STRUCTURE IS THAT THERE WOULD BE A TRIM BOARD PROPOSED, UH, RIGHT BELOW THE ROOF RAFTER TAILS, AS YOU SEE THERE, THAT IS A BAND THAT WOULD GO AROUND THE HOUSE.
UM, SO NEXT SLIDE, AND LET'S JUMP FORWARD TO PLEASE.
I WALKED THIS NEXT FEW BLOCKS AROUND THIS HOUSE, AND JUST TO GIVE YOU SOME CONTEXT PICTURES, UM, THIS, THESE TWO STRUCTURES ARE, ARE ON THE SAME BLOCK ON STUA WOOD.
THE, THE ONE IN THE LOWER PICTURE IS A BOARDED UP STRUCTURE THAT APPEARS TO BE VACANT.
UH, THE PICTURE AT THE BOTTOM IS A QUEEN ANN.
THAT'S COMPLETELY OUT OF PLACE, BUT ON THE OPPOSITE END OF THIS BLOCK, UH, WITH VINYL SIDING, ALSO VACANT.
AND THEN THE HOUSE ON THE TOP THERE IS A, A ON THE SIDE STREET, A DUPLEX WITH TWO DOORS, ACTUALLY.
AND THEN THE NEXT TWO PAGES ARE JUST, UH, NO, I'M SORRY, ONE PAGE IS JUST ANOTHER, THIS ONE HERE IN FRONT OF US.
AND YOU CAN SEE ON THIS ONE THE TOP BUNGALOW.
THESE ARE IN NOR HILL, THE GAP BETWEEN WHAT I WOULD CALL THE TOP OF THE WINDOW AND THE, AND THE ROOF.
THE CEILING PLATE, IT VARIES THROUGHOUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
IF YOU NOTICE IN THE BUNGALOW BELOW, IT'S A PRETTY BIG DISTANCE.
AND THEN I HAVE SOME MORE PHOTOGRAPHS SINCE Y'ALL DIDN'T HAVE A CHANCE TO GO TO THE SITE.
ON PAGE 19 OF 23 IS A REMINDER.
THERE'S THE HOUSE TODAY WITH ITS ELEVATED, UM, ROOF AND, AND THE PICTURE BELOW JUST TO SHOW THE PORCH CONDITION.
AS A, SOME CLOSEUPS OF THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE AND THE WINDOWS AND THE LEFT SIDE OF THE HOUSE.
WELL, ACTUALLY, THIS PHOTO SHOWS THE LEANING, I DON'T KNOW, SINCE THE 1970S THEY EVER FIXED THE LEANING, UH, BRICKWORK.
BUT IT'S, IT'S LEANING IN A FEW PLACES AND THERE'S AN INTERIOR SHOT.
ALL OF THE SHIPLAP, YOU KNOW, THE MAJORITY OF THE SHIPLAP IS THERE AND IN PLACE ON THIS STRUCTURE.
AND THIS IS WHERE I POINT OUT, UM, I ZOOMED IN AND YOU CAN SEE THE INFILL DOOR WITH SHIPLAP MATERIAL.
AND I, THAT GETS TO WHAT I WAS TALKING ABOUT EARLIER.
THEN I HAVE CUT AND PASTE INTO THIS, THE DRAFT, THE LANGUAGE FROM THE NOR HILL DESIGN GUIDELINES DRAFT, WHICH IS A COPY OF WHAT'S IN THE HEIGHTS DESIGN GUIDELINES.
AND IT STATES A STRUCTURE WITH TWO FRONT DOORS FOR A STRUCTURE THAT HAS TWO FRONT DOORS.
THE FOLLOWING ARE, ARE ACCEPTABLE ALTERATIONS.
AND THE SECOND POINT IS REPLACE ONE OF THE DOORS WITH A WINDOW AND LEAVE THE OTHER DOOR AS IS.
NOW, UH, MR. WILSON OR WILSON IN THE OFFICE, IF WE GO BACK TO THE CRITERIA PAGE, I WANT TO TALK TO YOU ABOUT THE CRITERIA NUMBER FOUR.
SO THE REASON THAT BEFORE WE SAID THIS WASN'T APPROPRIATE WAS FOUR AND FIVE.
FOUR IS THE PROPOSED ACTIVITY MUST PRESERVE THE DISTINGUISHING QUALITIES OR CHARACTER OF THE BUILDING STRUCTURE, OBJECT OR SITE AND ITS ENVIRONMENT.
THE DISTINGUISHING QUALITIES, I THINK ARE THE KEY, IS THE KEY WORD.
THIS BUILDING HAS HISTORICALLY HAS BEEN HISTORICALLY A DUPLEX OR AT LEAST A DOUBLE FRONT AND DOUBLE REAR DOOR BUILDING.
THAT'S ITS HISTORICAL, UH, BUILT, UH, SITUATION.
AT LEAST TWO REASONS EXIST TO ALLOW THE ONE FRONT DOOR TO BE CHANGED INTO A WINDOW.
FIRST THE DRAFT NOR HILL DESIGN GUIDELINES SPECIFICALLY ALLOW FOR THIS.
THE DRAFTS DOCUMENT HAS GONE THROUGH RIGOROUS PUBLIC INPUT.
SECOND, THE FRONT ENTRY DOORS AND TRIM HAVE BEEN CHANGED TO CONTEMPORARY MATERIALS.
THE REPLACEMENT OF A DOOR WITH A WINDOW DOES NOT REQUIRE THE REMOVAL OF ORIGINAL MATERIAL.
[01:40:01]
IF THE APPEARANCE OF A SECOND DOOR DEFINES THE BUILDING, THEN MOVE, THEN A MORE FRIENDLY RESOLUTION WOULD BE TO RETAIN THE OPENING WITH SOLID INFILL AND REINSTALL APPROPRIATE TRIM.I'M NOT ASKING, WE HAVEN'T DONE THAT, THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE RECOMMENDING.
BUT IT COULD BE THE ELEVATION OF THE FIRST FLOOR CEILING PLATE RAISING THE ELEVATION BY ONE FOOT, WHILE NOT AN INSIGNIFICANT CHANGE, DOES NOT RISE TO THE LEVEL OF A CHANGE THAT ELIMINATES, ELIMINATES ANY DISTINGUISHING QUALITIES OR CHARACTERISTICS OF EITHER THE EXISTING BUILDING OR ITS ENVIRONMENT.
THE THIS IS EVIDENCED BY THE VARIOUS PROPORTIONAL RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN ROOF RAFTER TAIL ENDS TO WINDOW TOPS THROUGHOUT THE CONTEXT AREA.
YOU KNOW, ONE BOOK WE GO TO A LOT, THE FIELD GUIDE TO AMERICAN HOUSES BY MCALLISTER.
WHEN IT TALKS ABOUT CRAFTSMAN BUNGALOWS DOES NOT CALL OUT ANY PROPORTIONAL RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE LENGTH, HEIGHT, OR WIDTH OF WALLS AND ROOF TE RAFTER TAILS OR MOOF MASSING AS A DISTINGUISHING CHARACTERISTIC OF A VERNACULAR BUNGALOW.
AND JUST TO SPECIFICALLY, THE LITTLE PARAGRAPH THAT DEFINES THE FEATURES OF A CRAFTSMAN ARE LOW PITCHED GD ROOF WITH WIDE UN ENCLOSED EAVE OVERHANG ROOF RAFTERS, USUALLY EXPOSED DECORATIVE BEAMS OR BRACE COM COMMON BRACES COMMONLY ADDED UNDER GABLES PORCHES, EITHER FULL OR PARTIAL WIDTH WITH ROOF SUPPORTED BY TAPERED SQUARE COLUMNS.
COLUMNS ON PIERS FREQUENTLY EXTENDED TO THE GROUND AND COMMONLY ONE OR MORE OF OR COMMONLY ARE ONE OR ONE AND A HALF STORIES HIGH.
THE OTHER CRITERION NUMBER FIVE, WHICH WAS DENIED NUMBER FOUR, IS THAT THE PROPOSED ACTIVITY MUST MAINTAIN OR REP REPLICATE DISTINCT, DISTINCTIVE STYLISTIC EXTERIOR FEATURES OR EXAMPLES OF SKILLED CRAFTSMANSHIP THAT CHARACTERIZE THE BUILDING STRUCTURE OBJECT OR SITE.
THE APPLICANT HAS PROPOSED TO RETAIN BOTH ENTRY ROOFS AND SETS OF ENTRY STOOPS.
THAT PROPOSAL WILL MAINTAINS THE STYLISTIC FEATURE, PERHAPS THE STRONGEST FEATURE THAT DELINEATES THIS QUOTE, DUPLEX FROM A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE.
THAT IS, IT RETAINS TWO FEATURES THAT CHARACTERIZE THE BUILDING AS IT IS TODAY.
NONE OF THE DETAILS OF THIS BUILDING TODAY REPRESENT EXAMPLES OF SKILLED CRAFTSMANSHIP.
SO THAT'S WHY STAFF THEN, AS WE DID BEFORE, RECOMMENDS DENIAL OF THE ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS, BUT DOES RECOMMEND ISSUANCE OF A CERTIFICATE OF REMEDIATION AS APPLIED FOR.
AND ROMAN, YOU MENTIONED THAT THEY WERE WILLING TO REMOVE THE CONNECTING PORCH BETWEEN THE TWO FRONT STOOPS AS ONE, AS ONE OFFER TO THE COMMISSION.
SO, SO THAT IT WOULD BE ESSENTIALLY DIFFERENT THAN WHAT THE COMMISSION REVIEWED IN OUR LAST MEETING.
AND UH, UH, ONE OF THE OWNERS IS HERE TO SPEAK AS WELL.
SO FIRST, UH, UM, I THINK MR. JACKSON HAS A QUESTION, ROMAN, FOR THE OWNER.
OKAY, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? I I I HAVE A QUESTION.
DID WE ISSUE COR ON THIS PROPERTY OR DID WE DEFER I THINK IT WAS A DENIAL.
WE DID ISSUE A, A DENIAL, A SUPERIOR MEDIATION TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE ADDITION IN THE GARAGE, BUT TO LOWER THE ROOF AND NO CHANGES.
SO THE COMMISSION HAS ALREADY SAID TO MAINTAIN THE DOOR AND LOWER THE ROOF AND NOT FILL IN THE PORCH.
THAT'S THE SO ARE THEY JUST COMING BACK AND ASKING FOR THE SAME THING AGAIN? YES, ALMOST.
EXCEPT FOR THAT THEY, I DON'T WANT TO CONNECT THE PORCH.
THEY'RE ASKING US TO DO WHAT WE DID NOT DO LAST TIME.
ALTHOUGH THEY'RE OFFERING NOT TO EXTEND THE, CONNECT THE PORCHES, BUT WE DON'T BELIEVE THAT WAS IN THE APPLICATION LAST TIME.
YEAH, 'CAUSE I REMEMBER TALKING ABOUT THAT MM-HMM
YEAH, IT WAS IN THE APPLICATION LAST TIME.
NO, BUT WE ISSUED BUT THE CFR WAS TO MAINTAIN THE APPEARANCE AS IT IS IT YOU TOLD THEM THAT YOU NEEDED.
BUT, BUT MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT, UH, I THINK THERE WAS MENTION, BUT I THINK, I DON'T KNOW, I DON'T RECALL THAT ON THE DOOR TO TO WINDOW.
I DON'T RECALL THAT WAS SHOWN AS PART OF THE UNADOPTED.
BUT WHAT APPEARS THAT WILL BE APPROVED IN THE, IN THEIR DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR NOR NOR HILL.
SO THE, THE, THE QUESTION OF THE DOOR IS THAT THE GUIDELINES WHICH ARE EXPECTED TO PASS AS WRITTEN, WOULD ALLOW THE CHANGE THAT THE COMMISSION DID NOT ALLOW REGARDING THE DOOR TO THE WINDOW.
SO THAT, THAT'S, THAT'S, THAT'S A NEW CONVERSATION.
OR, OR IT'S, IT'S MORE, IT'S MORE INFORMATION ABOUT THAT TOPIC.
AND THE APPLICANT IS WILLING TO NOT EXTEND THE PORCH TO CONNECT THE TWO PORCHES.
IF, IF THAT WERE THE CASE, THEN WHAT, WHAT THEY'D BE ASKING OF THE COMMISSION IS TO ALLOW THE ROOF
[01:45:01]
TO REMAIN RAISED ALONG WITH A, A BOARD, UH, TO COVER UP THAT GAP AND FOR THE COMMISSION TO CONSIDER WHAT THE GUIDELINES WILL ALLOW WHEN THEY ARE IN EFFECT.SO THAT, THAT'S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN AT LEAST.
SO WHEN ARE THE GUIDELINES GOING INTO EFFECT? THAT'S ANOTHER QUESTION FOR, FOR THE CITY AS WE CAN GET 'EM TO YOU GUYS.
WE JUST, UH, HAVEN'T HAD THE STAFF TO GET LIKE WITHIN A YEAR, TWO YEARS.
UM, I THINK WE CAN BRING 'EM TO YOU IN THE FIRST QUARTER OF THIS YEAR.
AND I, AND I KNOW THE NOR HILL FOLKS HAVE BEEN ASKING AND PLEADING TO GET THESE THINGS ENACTED, AND IT'S, IT'S, THEY WERE ON HOLD FOR A TIME.
IN FACT, THE NEXT STEP FOR THEM NOW, WE DON'T REALLY NEED TO GO BACK TO THE, WE JUST NEED TO HAVE A PUBLIC, UH, HEARING OR MEETING, WHICHEVER IT IS HERE IN THIS SPACE, UH, ON THOSE, BECAUSE THAT'LL BE THE NEXT NOTICE TO THE, TO THAT NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND THAT SHOULD BE SUFFICIENT BECAUSE THEY'VE BEEN INVOLVED ALL ALONG.
CAN I CLARIFY WHILE YOU'RE HERE, ROMAN, WHICH GOES TO MY QUESTION OF THE APPLICANT DURING HIS TIME TO SPEAK, THE GUIDELINES ALLOW FOR A DOOR TO BE REPLACED WITH A WINDOW.
HAVE WE, HAVE WE SPECIFIED THAT THERE'S ANY SIZE OR MATERIALS ATTACHED TO THAT? I MEAN, I, I, I WOULD BE AMENABLE TO THE DOOR BEING REPLACED WITH A FIXED GLASS WINDOW IN THE SAME PROPORTION.
AND THAT'S WHAT I WANNA ASK THE APPLICANT IF HE WOULD HAVE AN APPETITE FOR IT BEING A FUNCTIONING SO WINDOW, BUT IN THE SAME PROPORTION AS THAT DOOR.
SO DO TO YOU, BEFORE I ASK THAT QUESTION OF THE APPLICANT TO STAFF, DO THE PROPOSED GUIDELINES SPECIFY? NO, EITHER WAY.
IT, UH, SAYS, UH, THEY, THEY DO SUGGEST MAINTAINING THE, THE WIDTH OF THE DOOR, I BELIEVE.
IT'S JUST, IT, IT, THE GUIDELINES ARE ALTERNATIVE TO REPLACE ONE OF THE DOORS WITH THE WINDOW AND LEAVE THE OTHER DOOR AS IS.
THAT'S ALL THAT'S STATED ABOUT THAT.
SO YES, I MEAN THE WIDTH AND, AND IN THIS CASE, THE HEIGHT FOR ME, RIGHT? I MEAN, IT MIGHT NOT GO TO THE FLOOR, BUT IT MIGHT BE A TALL WINDOW AND IT MIGHT, BUT IT MIGHT BE THE SAME WIDTH IF, IF THE COMMISSION WERE WILLING TO, TO, UH, ENTER THIS, THE GUIDELINES WHICH HAVE NOT GONE INTO EFFECT.
BUT IF, BUT TO, BUT TO KIND OF GIVE WEIGHT TO THAT.
I HAVE A, THIS IS KIND OF OFF TOPIC, BUT SURE.
I DIDN'T EVEN KNOW THERE WAS GUIDELINES BEING DEVELOPED.
AND WHEN THE HEIGHTS DESIGN GUIDELINES WERE DEVELOPED, THEY HAD PRESENTATIONS TO THE COMMISSION BEFORE THEY WERE ADOPTED FOR COMMENT AND STUFF.
IS THAT GONNA HAPPEN OR ARE THEY, ARE THEY DONE AND THEY'RE READY TO GO? THEY'RE, THEY, THEY WERE REVIEWED.
SO I THINK ALL, AND IT'S BEEN A LONG TIME, BUT IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, IT WAS SORT OF UNDER UNDERSTOOD ALONG THE WAY THAT THE, THE FUNDAMENTAL BASIS FOR THE, UH, WOOD WOODLAND HEIGHTS AND NOR HILL AND OH SIX WARD, THE FUNDAMENTAL BASIS WOULD BE THE HEIGHTS DESIGN GUIDELINES.
SO IN A WAY, A LOT OF WHAT YOU'VE SEEN, JUST LIKE I'M SAYING, THIS LANGUAGE IS VERBATIM COMING FROM THE HEIGHTS DESIGN GUIDELINES.
SO IN THAT SENSE, THEY'RE NOT GONNA LOOK EXTRAORDINARILY DIFFERENT.
THEY'RE, THEY'RE NOT GONNA HAVE MEASURABLE STANDARDS WAS A BIG, A BIG FACTOR.
ALTHOUGH, UM, I THINK WE DO NOW HAVE A COUPLE LITTLE MEASURABLES IN THE NOR HILL ONE BECAUSE THE NEIGHBORHOOD WAS ASKING FOR SOME SPECIFIC THINGS.
SO, BUT WE WE'RE, UH, YOU KNOW, THEY DON'T HAVE TO, WHEN WE BRING 'EM TO COMMISSIONER, HOW YOU ACT AT THAT POINT, DEFER 'EM A MONTH THOUGH, WHATEVER, ALL THE KINDS OF WAYS WE CAN ADDRESS, THEY CAN BE LOOKED AT MR. LAWSON.
SO, SO MY MAIN POINT IS, UH, SO THESE GUIDELINES YOU'RE QUOTING IS, HAS NOT YET BEEN LIKE APPROVED OR ANYTHING.
THEY'RE STILL IN THE PROCESS OF BEING DEVELOPED.
SO I JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW THEY CAN BE BROUGHT HERE, BECAUSE IF IT WAS A MORE STRINGENT REQUIREMENT, YOU THE, THE ARGUMENT WOULD BE THAT, YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT YET APPROVED.
BUT, SO WE TEND TO AVOID USING STRINGENT REQUIREMENTS FROM GUIDELINES THAT ARE GOING TO COME.
IF IT WERE, IF IT WERE MORE SO SIMILARLY, I THINK THE SAME APPROACH SHOULD BE APPLICABLE HERE.
THESE GUIDELINES HAVE NOT BEEN APPROVED.
SO WE ARE NOT OBLIGED TO APPROVE ANYTHING BY THIS GUIDELINES.
AM I CORRECT? I I DON'T THINK WE'RE OBLIGED TO DO ANYTHING ABOUT ANYTHING, BUT, UM, HONESTLY, UM, BUT, BUT AGAIN, I THINK THE ADDITIONAL CLARIFICATION IS SIMPLY PHRASING.
RIGHT? BUT IF, BUT IF THE SAME STRUCTURE WERE LOCATED IN THE HEIGHTS, IT WOULD BE, IT IS APPROVABLE BECAUSE IT IS IN EFFECT.
AND, AND MY UNDERSTANDING IS WHAT I'VE LEARNED SINCE THE LAST MEETING IS, IS THAT THE LANGUAGE IN, IN THE NOR HILL GUIDELINES ARE NOT EXPECTED TO CHANGE.
AND THEY'RE, AND THEY'RE EXPECTED TO COME TO US AS THEY HAVE CURRENTLY EVOLVED.
AND IT'S BEEN YEARS IN THE MAKING.
[01:50:01]
IT, IT WAS, IT WAS DONE IN TANDEM OR JUST RIGHT AFTER THE HEIGHTS GUIDELINE PROCESS WAS UNFOLDING, AS I RECALL.SO THEY'RE GONNA BE IDENTICAL TO THE HEIGHTS DESIGN GUIDELINES.
WELL, THEY WON'T HAVE THE MEASURABLE STANDARDS AS, AS THE MAIN DIFFERENCE, I THINK, IN TERMS OF, OF A LARGE, A LARGE METRIC IS THAT THEY WON'T HAVE THAT, THAT ASPECT.
BUT MANY OTHER ASPECTS ARE THE, THE SAME.
AND THE REASON THAT I WANTED TO PUT IT IN THERE IS, IS THAT THAT LANGUAGE EXISTS.
AND THEN I THINK JUST COMING BACK TO, YOU KNOW, WHAT, WHAT DEFINES THE BUILDING? SO AGAIN, A CHARACTER FOR WHAT MAKES IT A A TWO DOORED STRUCTURE, A TWO, UH, DOUBLE ENTRY STRUCTURE.
BUT THAT, THAT'S WHY WE PUT THAT THERE.
ALSO, AGAIN, I MEAN THESE ARE FOUR NEIGHBORS TO THIS PROPERTY IN CONTRIBUTING BUILDINGS IN THE NOR HILL HISTORIC DISTRICT.
AND WE MAY HAVE ONLINE THAT ONE OF THE PEOPLE FROM THE NOR HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
IS, IS, AND AND I THINK IT, I DON'T THINK THAT'S A DEFINING, THEY MAY BRING UP, UM, THERE WAS A DUPLEX ON KEY STREET THAT'S BEEN REMARKETED THAT YOU GUYS APPROVED IT.
UH, I'M NOT SURE IF WE'LL HAVE AN IMAGE OF THAT LATER.
I THINK BRIAN WAS GONNA SHARE THAT, BUT, UM, IT, IT STILL READS LIKE A DUPLEX EVEN WHEN IT, RIGHT.
BUT I THINK THAT ONE HAD BEEN PREVIOUSLY MODIFIED BEFORE IT CAME BEFORE COMMISSION.
SO IT, UM, COMMISSIONER MCNEIL MIGHT HAVE BEEN THE PROJECT I WAS THINKING OF.
IT WAS A DUPLEX THAT SOMEONE APPLIED TO TURN INTO, THEY WERE CONVERTING IT TO A SINGLE FAMILY IN THIS COMMISSION, DENIED THEM THE OPPORTUNITY TO GET RID OF TWO DOORS.
THEY, WE TOLD THEM THEY HAD TO KEEP TWO DOORS.
AND THEN I'M ALSO THINKING OF THE BOULEVARD OAKS PROJECT THAT WE ALLOWED A DOOR TO BE REMOVED, BUT WE MADE SURE THE WINDOW FIT INTO THE EXACT SAME HOLE THAT THE DOOR WAS PULLED OUT OF.
SO I, I'M JUST MINDFUL OF, OF THE HISTORY OF WHAT WE HAVE SAID YES TO IN THE PAST AND DON'T WANT TO GET TOO RADICALLY DIFFERENT BETWEEN PROJECTS OF WHAT WE'RE, SO WE'RE NOT FLIP-FLOPPING BACK AND FORTH, UH, OF A WHAT WE APPROVE AND IF THIS DOOR GOES INTO A WINDOW.
I AGREE WITH, UH, COMMISSIONER, WE NOW REJECTION THAT IT SHOULD BE THE SAME SIZE AS THE DOOR.
SO AT LEAST READS AS A TWO DOOR STRUCTURE FROM THE STREET.
'CAUSE THE WAY I LOOK AT THE PLANS NOW, I, I DIDN'T KNOW THAT THERE WAS A DOOR THERE.
IT JUST LOOKS LIKE A WEIRD PORCH KIND OF THING WITH TWO PORCHES.
'CAUSE THE WINDOW'S THE SAME SIZE AS ALL THE OTHER WINDOWS.
AND, AND PERHAPS APPLICANT IS WILLING TO, TO, TO DO THAT IF THAT WERE GRANTED.
BUT I DON'T, I DON'T HAVE ANY ISSUE WITH KEEPING THE CEILING HEIGHT THE WAY THAT IT IS, GIVEN THE AMOUNT OF EFFORT AND, AND THE WAY THE BUILDING REALLY DOESN'T READ TO ME ANY DIFFERENT WHATSOEVER BETWEEN EIGHT AND NINE FOOT PLATE HEIGHT.
AND THEY'VE KEPT ALL THE SHIPLAP ON THE INSIDE.
SO I WOULD CERTAINLY VOTE TO ALLOW THAT TO JUST MAINTAIN A NINE FOOT CEILING HEIGHT.
AND AS I SAID, I UNDERSTAND FROM STAFF THAT THEY'RE WILLING TO NOT CONNECT THE TWO PORCHES.
SO THAT, THAT WAS ONE ANOTHER COMMENT THAT WAS RAISED IN THE COMMISSION.
BUT, UH, AS WERE HOURS INCREASING, I'M GOING TO, AT THIS TIME, OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING 'CAUSE WE DO, I DO HAVE TWO SPEAKERS SIGNED UP FOR THIS, UH, APPLICATION.
AND UM, THE FIRST SPEAKER IS MR. ED, WOULD YOU PLEASE APPROACH THE MICROPHONE AND RE RESTATE YOUR NAME? KASSAN FOR SADIK.
SIR, WOULD YOU SPELL YOUR NAME BRIEFLY FOR US? THANK YOU.
I, I HAVEN'T ACTUALLY PREPARED ANYTHING TO SAY, UH, IN OTHER TERMS. I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT ANYTHING TO GET IT APPROVED AND MOVE IT FORWARD.
I, I DID KNOCK ON A LOT OF DOORS.
I DID LOG TALK TO A LOT OF PEOPLE AROUND IN THE AREA AND EVERYBODY WAS, AND I, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'RE GONNA SHARE THE KEY PICTURE.
UH, WHEN, WHEN THAT WAS OUR IDEA, THIS IS WHAT WE WANTED TO DO AND IT WOULD BRING A LOT OF VALUE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
WE ARE GOING WITH THE GUIDELINES THAT, THAT, THAT, THAT WERE ASKED.
WE DO APOLOGIZE BECAUSE IT WAS OUR FIRST TIME TRYING TO DO A NEW HOUSE, NO IDEA.
AND WE RAISED IT AND WE APOLOGIZED FOR THAT.
BUT I DID GO AND TAKE THE PERMISSION OF THE NEIGHBORS.
THEY WERE MOSTLY NINE FEET HOUSE, SO WE DIDN'T GO OVER.
UM, BUT IF, IF THERE'S A STRICT CONDITION ON TWO DOORS, WE WILL FOLLOW IT.
BUT IF NOT, THEN I SEE KEY AND SOME MANY OTHER HOUSES THERE WHERE THE WINDOW WAS ALLOWED.
NOW, IF THE WINDOW IS ALLOWED WITH ALL THE OTHER SIZES OF THE WINDOWS, WE WILL, WE'LL FOLLOW THAT.
BUT IF NOT, AND YOU WANT THE ENTIRE
[01:55:01]
GLASS DOOR SIZE THING, WE CAN DO THAT TOO.UH, EITHER WAY, UH, IF WE ARE ALLOWED TO MOVE FORWARD, WE'LL JUST GO WITH WHATEVER THE RECOMMENDATIONS WOULD BE AS LONG AS WE'RE ALLOWED TO KEEP THAT HEIGHT.
IT IS JUST A LOT OF WORK TO BRING IT BACK DOWN.
THE REST, EVERYTHING YOU GUYS ASK WHAT WE'LL DO.
IT'S JUST BEEN ON HOLD FOR SIX MONTHS.
UM, IT'S REALLY HARD TO PAY TWO MORTGAGES.
ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT?
ARE YOU PLANNING TO LIVE THERE? NO, I HAVE, I HAVE FOUR OR FIVE KIDS.
NO, I HAVE FOUR KIDS AND WE ACTUALLY JUST, UH, GOT A, A BEAUTIFUL DOG, UH, BECAUSE IT WAS MY TWIN'S BIRTHDAY, SO FIVE KIDS.
UM, WELL, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO, I HAVE ONE MORE SPEAKER SIGNED UP.
AND, UH, I KNOW I HAVE ONE MORE SPEAKER SIGNED UP, UM, WHO MAY STILL BE ON VIRTUALLY ATTENDING, WHICH IS, UM, MR. BRIAN DAVIS.
ACTUALLY IT'S, IT'S BRIAN WILSON FROM THE NNA.
THAT'S MY, THAT'S WHAT I HAVE IS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT.
BUT, UM, AND YOU'RE WITH THE NOR HILL NEIGHBORHOOD NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION? I SURE AM.
WELL PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME ONE MORE TIME AND AND, AND PLEASE ADDRESS THE COMMISSION.
IT'S BRIAN WILSON AND I'M THE VICE PRESIDENT OF DEED RESTRICTIONS FOR NOR HILL.
I'M HEARING A BIT OF AN ECHO, SO IT'S A LITTLE DISTRACTING, BUT I THINK THAT'S OKAY.
NOW, UM, WE, WE HEAR YOU VERY CLEARLY.
YOU HEAR, YOU HEAR ME OKAY? YES, SIR, VERY CLEARLY.
UM, YEAH, WE'D JUST LIKE TO SAY THAT, THAT, UH, WE HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH, UH, THE, THE, THE DEVELOPERS HERE ON THIS PROJECT FOR SOME TIME.
THEY'VE BEEN VERY, UM, AFTER THE INITIAL MISTAKE, AS HE ADMITTED RAISING THE CEILING WITHOUT AUTHORIZATION, THEY'VE BEEN VERY COOPERATIVE.
UM, THEY'VE WORKED WITH HOP, UM, REALLY TRYING TO GET THIS PROJECT DONE.
WE'VE REVIEWED IT AS THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, WE ARE OKAY WITH, AS YOU GUYS HAVE TALKED ABOUT ALREADY, UM, KEEPING THAT CEILING HEIGHT AT THE NINE FEET.
UM, WE HAVE, UH, WE, WE ARE, WE'RE OKAY EITHER WAY.
UH, WHICH WHICHEVER WAY WOULD BE, UH, ACCEPTABLE WITH THE DOOR, UH, VERSUS WINDOW IN THE FRONT.
UM, WE DO AS A NEIGHBORHOOD, WE REALLY WOULD LIKE TO SEE, UM, THE ABILITY, IF, IF IT'S POSSIBLE, IF YOU WOULD ALLOW IT TO JOIN WITH JUST A WALKWAY BETWEEN THE TWO STOOPS.
UM, NOT WITH ANY KIND OF COVER.
UM, SO JUST THAT WALKWAY WITH A HANDRAIL ACROSS THE FRONT, UM, IF THAT WOULD BE ALLOWED.
UM, THERE'S SOME OTHER SMALL, UH, ITEMS THAT WE LIKE TO SEE ON THE, THE DRAWINGS THAT WE'LL WORK WITH THEM SEPARATELY ON.
BUT BASICALLY AS IT'S PRESENTED, WE ARE, WE'RE GOOD WITH IT.
UM, SO I JUST WANTED TO GIVE OUR SUPPORT FOR THE PROJECT.
WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE HOUSE, UM, COMPLETED.
UH, IT'S BEEN IN PROGRESS FOR A LONG TIME AS WE'VE NOTED.
UM, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE SPEAKER FROM COMMISSION MEMBERS? I HAVE A QUESTION.
UM, JUST LOOKING AT THE INTERIOR PHOTOGRAPH, IT LOOKS LIKE THERE'S BEEN A LITTLE ONE FOOT TALL PONY WALL BUILT ON TOP OF THE OLD WALL.
AND SO HAVE THEY CONSULTED WITH A STRUCTURE ENGINEER TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT'S ACTUALLY STRUCTURALLY SOUND? UH, SO THAT DOESN'T BLOW OFF IF THERE'S A STORM OR MOVE AROUND.
'CAUSE IT DOESN'T SEEM VERY STRUCTURALLY STABLE TO ME.
I, I GUESS THAT HAS A QUESTION FOR STAFF.
I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT, BUT I, BUT I THINK THAT WOULD STILL THAT WOULD I, THAT I THINK THAT MIGHT BE, UNLESS PETE GOT INVOLVED, I MEAN, I, I THINK PROBABLY PETE WOULD BE GOOD IF PETE OR SOMEONE, UM, THAT, THAT PETE OVERSEES COULD ENSURE THAT REGARDLESS OF, UM, DEPENDING ON HOW THIS, THIS, THIS VOTE GOES, I THINK THAT COULD BE, COULD BE LOOKED AT.
'CAUSE PETE OFTEN LOOKS AT FRAMING ISSUES AND MAKES SURE THAT HE'S, HE'S HAPPY WITH WHAT THE RESULTS IN THE FIELD ARE.
AND I HAVE, I BELIEVE THOSE DRAWINGS WOULD STILL NEED TO GO THROUGH STRUCTURAL REVIEW FOR THE PERMITTING.
SO THAT'S WHERE THAT WOULD GET ADDRESSED.
AND I THINK THAT WOULD LEAD AND YEAH, SOME GOOD HURRICANE STRAPS WOULD, WOULD PREVENT THAT.
I HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION, MR. COUCH AGAIN, COULD WE TALK ABOUT SOMETHING BESIDES THAT, THAT ONE BY 12, LIKE MORE ONE 17 SIDING OR SOMETHING? BECAUSE I THINK THAT HORIZONTAL LINE ACROSS THE FRONT OF THE, THE BUILDING'S GONNA LOOK AWKWARD AND SOME OF THESE OTHER HOUSES, THEY JUST HAVE THE ONE 17 GOING ALL THE WAY UP.
THEY DON'T HAVE BANDS OR ANYTHING AROUND 'EM.
I THINK IS THERE A REASON WHY WE COMMISSION TALKED ABOUT BILL CAN MAKE MOTIONS AND CAN DESCRIBE PER, UH,
[02:00:01]
PERHAPS SOME MODIFICATIONS TO WHAT'S BEEN PROPOSED, UM, JUST AS WE ALWAYS DO.BUT, BUT BEFORE WE MOVE ON, ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THAT, FOR THE SPEAKER? UH, CHAIR HICK.
I, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR MR. WILSON.
MR. WILSON, CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES.
THIS IS, UH, COMMISSIONER CURRY.
I WOULD LIKE TO ASK, UM, WHY THE HO A'S ADVOCATING FOR THE CONNECTION OF THE TWO PORCHES? UH, WE JUST FEEL LIKE IT, WHAT WE DO IS WE FEEL LIKE IT, IT ADDS TO THE APPEAL OF THE HOME AS A SINGLE FAMILY HOME, UM, WHILE STILL MAINTAINING THE ORIGINAL, UH, LOOK FOR THE MOST PART OF IT BEING A DUPLEX.
UM, YEAH, WE JUST, WE, WE, WE LIKE THAT DESIGN.
WE DO KIND OF KNOW THAT IT WAS A LITTLE DIFFERENT SCENARIO OVER AT 1118 KEY, UM, BELIEVE, WE BELIEVE THAT TURNED OUT VERY WELL.
UM, AND SO WE JUST, WE JUST THINK IT WOULD BE, UH, AN, AN ATTEMPT TO MAKE IT LOOK A LITTLE MORE LIKE, AND FEEL A LITTLE MORE LIKE A SINGLE FAMILY HOME AS OPPOSED TO A, A STRICTLY DUPLEX LIKE IT, LIKE IT APPEARS NOW.
UM, THANK YOU FOR THE EXPLANATION.
AT THIS TIME I'M GONNA CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING, UH, COMMISSION MEMBERS.
IS THERE A MOTION OR FURTHER DISCUSSION? UM, YES, I WILL MAKE A MOTION.
LET ME, I'M GETTING BACK TO STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.
UM, SO THE RECOMMENDATION IS DENIAL 'CAUSE IT DOES NOT SATISFY THE CRITERIA AND THE ISSUANCE OF THE COR IS APPLIED FOR.
MAY I, UH, COMMENT THAT I DREW THE YELLOW, UH, TO COMMISSIONER COUCH'S POINT ABOUT THE FRONT ELEVATION AS PROPOSED.
IT, UH, DOES NOT HAVE THE ONE BY 12 IN THAT ON THE FRONT ELEVATION.
SO IF THEY ACTUALLY, IF THEY'RE ALLOWED TO, YEAH.
UH, EXISTING FRONT AND LET'S PROPOSED FRONT, THEY DIDN'T HAVE THE TRIM BOARD IN THERE.
SO THEIR DRAWING FOR THE FRONT ELEVATION HAS THE SITING.
SO I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION, UM, THAT REFLECTS THAT WE ARE WILLING TO MOVE THIS PROJECT FORWARD.
THAT WE WANT TO MOVE THIS PROJECT FORWARD, UM, WITH THE TWO PORCHES SEPARATE, ALLOWING FOR THE RAISED PLATE HEIGHT, BUT ASKING THE APPLICANT TO MAINTAIN THIS SIZE, WIDTH, AND HEIGHT OF THE OPENING OF THE SECOND DOOR WITH THE WINDOW, WITH A WINDOW.
AND THAT THE MATERIALS, UM, BE MAINTAINED AS PROPOSED.
AND THAT'S FOR THE SIDE, AND THAT'S WITHOUT THE CONNECTING PORCH AND THAT'S WITHOUT THE CONNECTING PORCH TWO PORCHES.
SO I DON'T KNOW HOW THAT READS WITH, WITH THE DENIAL.
SO I'M, I'M PROPOSING A DIFFERENT RECOMMENDATION.
BUT I THINK, BUT ALLOW FOR THE HOUSE TO BE RAISED, DENIAL OF THE C OF A, AND THEN YOU'RE MODIFYING THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION ON THE C OF R, BUT ALLOWING TO THE HEIGHT RELATION TO CHANGE, TO, TO, TO BE MAINTAINED, TO, TO, TO BE MAINTAINED, TO BE KEPT AS IT IS TODAY.
AND ALLOWING FOR A WINDOW IN PLACE OF THE DOOR, IN PLACE OF THE DOOR AT THE SAME DIMENSION, MAINTAIN WITH A SIMILAR PROPORTION.
DO I HAVE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND IT.
ARE THERE ANY OPPOSED? ARE THERE ANY ABSTENTIONS? THAT MOTION PASSES.
UM, WE'RE GONNA MOVE ON TO ITEM C, COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC.
ARE THERE ANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WHO WISH TO SPEAK? OKAY.
UM, ARE THERE ANY, UH, COMMENTS FROM THE HAHC MEMBERS CHAIR MR. MCNEIL? JUST FOR MY OWN EDIFICATION MORE THAN ANYTHING ELSE IN THE, UH, PREVIOUS APPLICANT OF GLENBROOK VALLEY AND TO COMMISSIONER DE BO'S QUESTION ABOUT HAVING A DOCTOR'S LETTER AND THE A DA REQUIREMENTS, I PERSONALLY DON'T KNOW WHAT OBLIGATION I HAVE TO A CITIZEN WHO FULFILLS A DA REQUIREMENTS AND HOW THAT IMPACTS ANY APPLICATION THEY MAY MAKE IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT OR HISTORIC STRUCTURE.
[02:05:02]
EXCEPTIONS OR DO WE HOLD HARD AND FAST ON HISTORIC GUIDELINES IN A NEIGHBORHOOD? SO FIRST OF ALL, IF YOU'LL RECALL THE A DA, AND I'M SURE Y'ALL HAVE HAD TO DEAL WITH IT IN YOUR PROFESSIONS, BUT THE A DA HAS A SPECIFIC EXEMPTION FOR HISTORIC STRUCTURES AND THERE ARE ADDITIONAL CHANGES THAT DON'T HAVE TO BE MADE TO HISTORIC STRUCTURES.UM, SECOND OF ALL, IN THE CASE OF, OF THE APPLICATION OF LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS OR ZONING APPLICATIONS OR ZONING REGULATIONS LIKE HISTORIC DISTRICTS, UM, YOU DON'T HAVE TO, UH, THERE'S CLEAR CASE LAW THAT YOU DO NOT HAVE TO MODIFY THOSE STANDARDS.
SO TECHNICALLY, AGAIN, AS I STATED EARLIER, THERE'S NO LEGAL OBLIGATION FOR THIS BOARD TO DO, SO YOU MAY WANT TO DO SO, BUT BEAR IN MIND THAT ANY DECISION YOU MAKE ON A C OF A C OF R IS AN ALTERATION TO THE STRUCTURE.
IT IS NOT SPECIFIC TO THE PERSON, AND THAT IS PARTLY WHY IT DOES IT.
THERE IS NOT A LEGAL OBLIGATION TO DO IT BECAUSE WE'RE REGULATING LAND.
CERTAINLY, AND I KNOW FROM MY, JUST MY PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE, UM, GREAT EFFORT IS MADE TO ACCOMMODATE ACCESSIBLE COMPLIANCE ABSOLUTELY.
WITHOUT ALTERING, ESPECIALLY THE FRONT FACADES AND THE, AND THE PRIMARY LOOK FROM THE RIGHT OF WAY.
BUT OFTEN THERE ARE OTHER WAYS AND, AND THINGS FURTHER BACK OR IN A MORE SERVICE PART, YOU KNOW, PART WHERE I'VE YET TO SEE AN HISTORIC BUILDING THAT COULD NOT BE, UM, RETRO MADE ACCESS ACCESSIBLE.
UM, BUT USUALLY THOSE THINGS HAPPEN ON THE REAR OR A, A SIDE THAT AREN'T AS NOTICEABLE TO THE FRONT.
SO IT'S, IT'S KIND OF, AND I KNOW THE COMMISSION, WE HAVE SEEN A PROJECT WHERE IT WAS BUILT BEFORE THE FAR IN HEIGHTS.
UM, IT EXCEEDED THE FAR AND THEY WANTED TO DO AN ADDITION FOR AN ELEVATOR THAT COULD ONLY BE DONE AS AN EXTERNAL ADDITION BASED ON HOW THE HOUSE WAS CONFIGURED.
THE OWNER WAS IN A WHEELCHAIR AND OF THE COMMISSION, UM, ALLOWED FOR THE, THE NEW ELEVATOR TOWER ONLY TO ACCOMMODATE HIM AS A SIDE EDITION, UM, OVER THE FAR, BUT IT WAS, WE, WE MADE AN ACCOMMODATION AND I THINK WE WILL CONTINUE TO BE, TO ACCOMMODATE FOLKS WITH SPECIAL NEEDS.
WE WILL CONTINUE TO LOOK AT THAT, UH, AND, AND DO SO IN A WAY THAT DOES NOT DETRACT OR IS NOT ADVERSE TO THE HISTORIC FABRIC THAT WE'RE HERE TO UPHOLD.
SO, AND, AND I TOTALLY AGREE THAT THAT IS, I THINK THE PURPOSE OF, AND THE INTENT OF THE A DA IS TO TRY TO REACH THAT.
UM, AND ANYTHING IS POSSIBLE WITH AN ARCHITECT'S CREATIVITY AND ENGINEERING.
WE LEAVE IT TO YOU GUYS, MR. COUCH.
IT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT A DA OR TIS IN TEXAS ONLY APPLY TO, TO COMMERCIAL AND PUBLIC BUILDINGS, NOT TO TO SINGLE FAMILY HOUSES OR LIKE GROUP DWELLINGS OR HOTELS OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
SO I, I THINK ANYTHING THAT WE WOULD DO WOULD BE DISCRETIONARY ANYWAYS.
IT'S NOT REQUIRED BY LAW AS FAR AS I KNOW.
BUT, BUT I JUST THINK AS CITIZENS OF THE CITY OF HOUSTON AND, AND, AND, AND AMBASSADORS OF GOODWILL, I MEAN, I THINK THAT'S, THAT'S JUST, IT JUST EXTENDS TO WHAT I THINK WE WE'RE DOING BECAUSE, UM, UM, PEOPLE HAVE NEEDS AND WE NEED, YOU KNOW, WE NEED TO TRY TO WORK WITH, WITH OUR CONSTITUENTS TO MAKE, TO MAKE A COMPROMISE OR MAKE, MAKE SOME, UH, MAKE THAT WORK OUT.
I THINK IT'S, YOU KNOW, THE MORE TALENTED, THE ARCHITECT OR DESIGNER IS, THE, THE EASIER IT IT FROM WHAT, FROM MY EXPERIENCE, IT, IT COULD BE DONE, BUT IT TAKES THOUGHT.
WITH THAT, I'M GONNA MOVE TO ITEM E.
THIS IS THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICERS REPORT, ROMAN.
I ONLY HAVE ONE THING TO REPORT.
WE HAVE TWO, UH, PEOPLE GOING THROUGH THE VERIFICATION PROCESS.
WE HOPE TO HIRE THEM IN OUR DEPARTMENT SOON.
SO, UH,
THANK YOU ALL AGAIN SO MUCH FOR EVERYONE SHOWING UP TODAY, AND I HOPE EVERYONE COMES TO THE NEXT MEETING TOO.
IT'S NICE TO HAVE A FULL COMMISSION AND, UM, YES, UH, HAPPY HOLIDAY, WHATEVER YOU CELEBRATE THIS TIME OF YEAR.
IF Y'ALL WANT A LONG VERSION, JUST CALL.
UM, UH, MOVING ON TO ITEM F ADJOURNMENT.