* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting. IT IS [00:00:01] NOW 2 45. [Houston Archaeological and Historical Commission on September 14, 2023] THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 14TH, 2023. TODAY'S MEETING OF THE HOUSTON ARCHEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL COMMISSION. HAHC IS CALLED TO ORDER. I AM COMMISSIONED CHAIR DAVID EK TO VERIFY WE HAVE A QUORUM. I WILL CALL THE ROLE, UH, THE CHAIR IS PRESENT. UM, VICE CHAIR, UH, WEAVER JACKSON. PRESENT. COMMISSIONER JONES? PRESENT. COMMISSIONER DUBOSE. OKAY. I'M NOT HEARING COMMISSIONER DEBO. UM, COMMISSIONER CHANTELLE BLAKELY. PRESENT DE BOTH. OKAY. DEBO IS CONFIRMED. PRESENT. AWESOME. UM, COMMISSIONER SEPULVEDA. COMMISSIONER SEPULVEDA SEPULVEDA IS PRESENT. UH, COMMISSIONER COSGROVE. OKAY. DON'T HEAR HIM. COMMISSIONER MCNEIL? PRESENT. COMMISSIONER CURRY PRESENT. COMMISSIONER COLLUM. OKAY. DON'T HEAR THAT. COMMISSIONER YAPP PRESENT AND I BELIEVE COMMISSIONER STAVE IS NOT ATTENDING TODAY. SO HAVE COMMISSIONER COUCH PRESENT AND ACT AND REPRESENTING DIRECT DEPUTY DIRECTOR JENNIFER OSLAN. IS, UH, NICOLE BROSSARD PRESENT. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONERS. WE HAVE A QUORUM. UH, I'D LIKE TO JUST SAY, UH, WE HAVE A NEW COMMISSIONER WITH US TODAY AND, UM, UH, DR. CHANTELLE BLAKELY, AND WE'RE VERY PLEASED THAT SHE'S HERE AND I BELIEVE THAT NOW, UH, FILLS THE OPEN SLOTS ON THE COMMISSION. AND SO, UM, AND RECENTLY I LEARNED, UM, WE ARE JUST ONE OF 163 COMMISSIONS THAT THE CITY OF HOUSTON HAS. SO WE ARE, WE ARE, WE ARE QUITE A LARGE CLUB OF, OF FOLKS, SO, UM, BUT WELCOME. UM, WITH THAT, I WILL HAND OVER TO NICOLE FOR THE DIRECTOR'S REPORT. GOOD AFTERNOON, MR. CHAIR AND COMMISSION MEMBERS. I'M NICOLE BROUSSARD, ACTING SECRETARY OF THIS COMMISSION AND DEPUTY ASSISTANT 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 VIRTUAL TEAMS PARTICIPATION OPTION. THE AGENDA IS AVAILABLE@HOUSTONPLANNING.COM, AND IT INCLUDES PUBLIC PARTICIPATION RULES. WE WELCOME NEW COMMISSIONER CHANTELLE BLAKELY, SEATED IN POSITION THREE. SHE'S A VICE PROFESSOR AND AMONG MANY ACCOMPLISHMENTS ALSO SPEAKS SEVERAL LANGUAGES. CONGRATULATIONS ALSO ON THE MAYORAL REAPPOINTMENTS OF THE FOLLOWING, HAHC COMMISSION MEMBERS WITH THE TERM ENDING. MARCH 1ST, 2025. ASHLEY ELIZABETH JONES IN POSITION ONE, DAVID EK, POSITION FIVE, AND ALSO SERVING AS CHAIR JOHN COSGROVE, POSITION SEVEN AND STEVEN F. CURRY. IN POSITION NINE, MAYOR TURNER'S ANNUAL HISTORIC PRESERVATION AWARD WAS GIVEN TO MARY FONTANO ON AUGUST 30TH, RECOGNIZING HER PRESERVATION OF THE HISTORIC AND CULTURAL LEGACY OF PLEASANTVILLE WITH PIVOTAL ROLES IN THE PLEASANTVILLE CIVIC LEAGUE AND PLEASANTVILLE HISTORICAL SOCIETY. SHE'S ALSO A CHAMPION FOR SECURING FAIR FUNDING, ENHANCED STANDARDS AND HISTORIC REVIEW FOR REBUILDING STORM DAMAGE, HISTORIC HOMES, AND MORE. SO CONGRATULATIONS TO MS. FONTANO. YESTERDAY, CITY COUNCIL HAD A PUBLIC HEARING FOR AN AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 33 TO PROVIDE AN EXEMPTION TO THE SI CITY OF HOUSTON SIGN CODE. THE AMENDMENT WOULD ALLOW ROOFTOP SIGNS ON PROTECTED LANDMARK BUILDINGS AND ESTABLISHED STANDARDS FOR THEM. PRESERVATION WORK ON THE EL DORADO BALLROOM WAS THE INITIATIVE WE EXPECT CITY COUNCIL TO VOTE ON THE ITEM AT ANOTHER DATE. SOON STAFF WILL PRESENT ORDERS OF DECISIONS FOR THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION APPEALS BOARD, OUTCO OUTCOMES. SOON. HTV ALSO HOSTS RECORDINGS OF THE MEETINGS ON THE CITY WEBPAGE. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO HEAR THE PROCEEDINGS, CITY COUNCIL RECENTLY APPROVED THE DESIGNATION OF 15 HISTORIC PROPERTIES, INCLUDING 11 PROTECTED LANDMARKS, THREE LANDMARKS, AND ONE PROTECTED ARCHEOLOGICAL SITE. YOU CAN VISIT OUR WEBSITE TO SEE MORE DETAILS ABOUT THESE OWNER INITIATED PROJECTS. TO RECAP, A LANDMARK DESIGNATION PROTECTS RESOURCES IN THAT THE SITE MUST FOLLOW THE CITY OF HOUSTON HISTORIC PRESERVATION ORDINANCE, A PROTECTED LANDMARK DESIGNATION PROVIDES SIGNIFICANT ADDITIONAL PROTECTION AGAINST [00:05:01] DEMOLITION IN PERPETUITY AND ARE ELIGIBLE TO BE NOMINATED AS SIGNIFICANT BUILDINGS. HERE'S A SNAPSHOT, SNAPSHOT OF SOME PRESERVATION WORK THAT'S BEYOND TODAY'S AGENDA. YEAR TO DATE, STAFF HAS RECEIVED A TOTAL OF 233 APPLICATIONS. UH, SINCE OUR LAST REPORT WE'VE RECEIVED, OH, SINCE OUR LAST REPORT, WE RECEIVED 28 NEW APPLICATIONS. THE COMMISSION TOOK ACTION ON EIGHT OF THESE NEW APPLICATIONS FOR A TOTAL OF 118 CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS ITEMS CONSIDERED BY COMMISSION SINCE THE START OF 2023. STAFF ALSO REFUSED REVIEWED EIGHT ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVED ITEMS SINCE LAST YEAR. THE YEAR TO DATE TOTAL FOR ADMINISTRATIVE PROPOSALS IS 88. LOOKING AHEAD THURSDAY, OCTOBER 12TH IS THE NEXT HAHC MEETING. AND IN CLOSING, IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS, YOU CAN CALL THE HOUSTON OFFICE OF PRESERVATION HOTLINE AT 8 3 2 3 9 3 6 5 5 6 OR VISIT OUR WEBSITE@HOUSTONPLANNING.COM. THIS CONCLUDES THE DIRECTOR'S REPORT. THANK YOU. UM, NEXT UP, UM, IS THERE A MAYOR LIAISON REPORT FROM MARTHA EO? UH, JUST BRIEFLY CHAIR, I WANTED TO LET YOU ALL KNOW THAT THAT CHAPTER 33 ORDINANCE WILL BE ON NEXT WEEK, SO I'LL BE POSTING THAT TONIGHT. SO THEY WILL CONSIDER THAT, UH, ON WEDNESDAY OF NEXT WEEK. THANK YOU. OKAY. NEXT ON THE AGENDA IS THE CONSIDERATION OF THE AUGUST 3RD, 2023 HAHC MINUTES MISSION MEMBERS. HAVE YOU HAD A CHANCE TO REVIEW THE MINUTES? AND IF THERE ARE ANY COMMENTS ABOUT THE MINUTES? AND IF NOT, IS THERE A MOTION TO ACCEPT? COMMISSIONER AUER JACKSON MAKES A MOTION TO ACCEPT. MAY I HAVE A MOTION? IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND DE BOTH. THANK YOU. UM, ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION? AYE. AYE. AYE. AYE. ARE THERE ANY OPPOSED? AYE. I CAN'T TELL WHO THE LAST AYE WAS. WHO, WHO WAS THAT? OH, OKAY. THERE'S THE . OKAY. OKAY. OKAY. SO, OKAY. ANY, ANY OPPOSED? ANY ABSTENTIONS THAT MOTION PASSES? THANK YOU. MOVING ON TO ITEM A, UH, PUBLIC HEARING IN CONSIDERATION OF AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON A PROTECTED LANDMARK DESIGNATION APPLICATION FOR THE NA CHEVROLET BUILDING AT 1 2 3 0 HOUSTON AVENUE, HOUSTON, TEXAS 7 7 0 0 7. GOOD AFTERNOON, MR. CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION. THIS IS YASMINE ARSLAN, STAFF SUBMITS FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. AGENDA ITEM A AND APPLICATION FOR THE PROTECTED LANDMARK DESIGNATION FOR THE KNAPP CHEVROLET BUILDING AT 1230 HOUSTON AVENUE. THE KNAPP CHEVROLET BUILDING HAS BEEN A PROMINENT PRESENCE ON HOUSTON AVENUE SINCE IT OPENED IN APRIL, 1940, ACTIVELY SERVING ITS COMMUNITY FOR OVER 80 YEARS. THE BUILDING WAS ORIGINALLY CONSTRUCTED AS AN AUTOMOBILE SHOWROOM FOR NAP CHEVROLET, A LOCALLY RECOGNIZED COMPANY SINCE 1940, STILL IN BUSINESS TODAY. THE BUILDING'S FRONT FACADE CONT CONTINUES TO REFLECT CHEVROLET'S INDUSTRIAL IDENTITY OF THE TIME, A TYPICAL CHARACTERISTIC OF ART. MODERN JOE MONTALBANO, ONCE OWNER OF THE LOCALLY RECOGNIZED MONTALBANO LUMBER COMPANY LED THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE BUILDING IN 1940. TODAY, THIS BUSINESS CONTINUES TO SERVE THE HOUSTON CONSTRUCTION COMMUNITY AS A MONTALBANO FAMILY OPERATED BUSINESS. NAP CHEVROLET BUILDING IS A SINGLE STORY BRICK VENEER COMMERCIAL BUILDING LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF HOUSTON AVENUE AND CORNER OF DART STREET, APPROXIMATELY A HALF A MILE NORTHEAST OF DOWNTOWN TEXAS, OF DOWNTOWN HOUSTON, TEXAS. DESIGNED IN THE ART MODERN ARCHITECTURAL STYLE, THE BUILDING SERVED AS THE FIRST HOME OF NAPP CHEVROLET IN HOUSTON, ONE OF THE OLDEST FAMILY OPERATED CAR DEALERSHIP BUSINESSES STILL PRESENT TODAY. THE SINGLE STORY BRICK VENEER COMMERCIAL BUILDING IS COMPOSED OF TAN BRICK VENEER WITH LONG HORIZONTAL STRIPES OF BLACK BRICK VENEER AT THE PARAPET LEVEL, THE BUILDING HAS AN ASYMMETRICAL FRONT FACADE WITH A STREAMLINED PARAPET THAT CURVES AND STEPS INTO A HIGHER CENTER BAY. THE STEPPED CENTER BAY HAS VERTICAL STRIPES OF BLACK BRICK ER, WHICH CLOSELY RESEMBLE CHEVROLET INDUSTRIAL DESIGNS OF THE TIME. THE BUILDING HAS A LARGE DISPLAY WINDOWS FACING HOUSTON AVENUE AND DART STREET, AND TWO FRONT ENTRANCES, EACH WITH CURVED AND NARROW METAL AWNINGS. THERE IS ONE GLASS OVERHEAD DOOR [00:10:01] AT THE NORTH FACADE ON DART STREET AND A DOOR LOCATED AT THE REAR OF THE BUILDING FACING EAST. THE NAP CHEVROLET BUILDING IS RECOMMENDED FOR A PROTECTED LANDMARK DESIGNATION UNDER SECTION 33 DASH 2 2 24. AS IT MEETS CRITERIA 2, 4, 5, 6, AND EIGHT FOR LANDMARK DESIGNATION AND CRITERIA ONE AND FOUR FOR PROTECTED LANDMARK DESIGNATION. STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE HOUSTON ARCHEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL COMMISSION RECOMMENDS TO CITY COUNCIL THE PROTECTED LANDMARK DESIGNATION OF THE NAB CHEVROLET BUILDING AT 1230 HOUSTON AVENUE. WE HAVE THREE SPEAKERS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK. FIRST IS LAURA CARRERA, WHO IS THE AGENT AND WROTE THIS NOMINATION REPORT. SHE IS HERE TO SPEAK AND ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THE COMMISSIONER MIGHT HAVE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. HASMEEN COMMISSION MEMBERS. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF BEFORE WE OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING? GOOD HEARING. I'M GONNA OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AT THIS TIME, AND THE FIRST SPEAKER AS MENTIONED IS LAURA CARRERA. GOOD AFTERNOON. THANK YOU ALL COMMISSIONERS AND CHAIR DAVID EK. IT'S A PLEASURE TO BE HERE AND TO NOMINATE 1230 HOUSTON AVENUE. IN ADDITION TO ITS REALLY UNIQUE STYLE, WHICH CAME, UH, ABOUT, YOU KNOW, DURING THE DEPRESSION 1940. IT ALSO, UM, IT'S A BUILDING THAT REPRESENTS SMALL LOCAL BUSINESSES CONSTRUCTED BY A SMALL LOCAL BUSINESS, UH, FOR A SMALL LOCAL BUSINESS. STILL IN BUSINESS TODAY, FAMILY, UH, OWNED, AND MYSELF AS A FAMILY OWNED SMALL BUSINESS. I, YOU KNOW, WE ALL KNOW THAT THE, ALL THE UM, UH, POSITIVES THAT COME WITH THAT IN OUR LOCAL ECONOMY. SO, UM, UH, IN ADDITION TO THAT, IT'S ONE OF THE FEW REMAINING BUILDINGS, PRE 1951 ON HOUSTON AVENUE AND FEW REMAINING SMALL SCALE MODERN BUILDINGS IN HOUSTON, UH, BASED ON SOME, ON SOME STUDIES THAT ARE NOTED ON THE REPORT. SO I COULD ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. YOU'RE NOT HEARING ANY QUESTIONS. THE NEXT SPEAKER SIGNED UP IS ROBERT CHI. BOBBY KNAPP. IS MR. KNAPP IN THE ROOM OR IS HE, UH, ATTENDING VIRTUALLY WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK. PLEASE ANNOUNCE YOURSELF. HE'S ONLINE. IS THERE A CHANCE THAT THE, HIS MICROPHONE IS MUTED? MUTED. MR. KNAPP, IF YOU'RE THERE, WE CAN'T HEAR YOU. AND THERE'S A MICROPHONE ON YOUR SCREEN. IF YOU JUST CLICK ON THAT SCREEN, YOU CAN BE UNMUTED. PARDON ME. CHAIR FOR INTERRUPTING. THANK YOU. I SEE, UM, IN THE CHAT THAT HE HAS, UH, CALLED IN AND IS MUTED. MR. KNAPP, IF YOU CALLED IN ON YOUR PHONE, PLEASE DO STAR SIX TO UNMUTE YOURSELF. I AM SO SORRY ABOUT THAT. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. THANK YOU COMMISSIONERS AND CHAIRMAN, WE WANTED TO QUICKLY SPEAK IN FAVOR OF APPROVING AND THE CONSIDERATION FOR AND OF THE ACTION FOR THE LANDMARK DESIGNATION. WE BELIEVE THE ARCHITECTS DID A GREAT JOB RESEARCHING AND PRESERVING THE BUILDING AND THE TIME PERIOD IT WAS BUILT, AND THINK IT FITS WITH THE TERMS REQUIRED TO MAKE THE DESIGNATION. SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. SORRY FOR THE DELAY IN GETTING ME UNMUTED. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. NOT, NOT A PROBLEM. UM, I ALWAYS ENJOY WHEN I DRIVE DOWN THE STREET SEEING THIS BUILDING AND THE FEW REMAINING BUILDINGS THAT ARE IN THIS AREA, BUT IT HAS THEIR, THEIR OWN CHARACTER TO THAT, THAT, THAT PART OF TOWN. UM, WE DO HAVE ONE MORE SPEAKER SIGNED UP, UH, FROM THE PUBLIC, WHICH IS, UH, EMILY WAN WITH PRES PRESERVATION HOUSTON, NATALIE, SHE IS ONLINE. HELLO. I'M, UH, EMILY WITH PRESERVATION HOUSTON, UM, WANTING TO EXPRESS OUR SUPPORT FOR [00:15:01] THE PROTECTED LANDMARK DESIGNATION. UM, 1230 HOUSTON AVENUE IS A VERY IMPORTANT BUILDING THAT REFLECTS SEVERAL ASPECTS OF HOUSTON'S HISTORY, INCLUDING NAP CHEVROLET, UM, HOUSTON THEATER HISTORY, UH, HOUSTON'S ART, MODERN ARCHITECTURE, AND THE HISTORY OF HOUSTON AVENUE. UM, IT WAS RECENTLY REHABILITATED AND, UM, THE REHAB MET THE HIGH BAR OF STANDARDS FOR HISTORIC TAX CREDIT. UM, AND SO MANY OF THE ORIGINAL FEATURES ARE RETAINED AND HAVE BEEN PRESERVED. UM, SO WE THINK IT'S DEFINITELY WORTHY OF PROTECTED LANDMARK DESIGNATION. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE IN THE PUBLIC EITHER IN THE ROOM OR ATTENDING VIRTUALLY YOU'D LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? OKAY, NOT HEARING. I'M GONNA CLOSE THE PUBLIC, UM, HEARING AND ASK COMMISSIONERS IF THEY HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS. AND IF NOT, IF THERE'S A MOTION TO SUPPORT THE NOMINATION PROPOSAL. MR. PROPOSAL SUPPORTS THE NOMINATION. OH, SORRY. GO AHEAD. SO, OKAY. I, I HAVE A MOTION. UH, AND YAP SECONDS. Y HAVE A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER YAP. WITHOUT ANY OTHER DISCUSSION. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? ANY ABSTENTIONS? THAT MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU. OKAY, MOVING ON. UM, ITEM AGENDA B, WHICH WOULD BE THE CONSIDERATION OF IMPOSSIBLE ACTION ON CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS, APPLICATIONS FOR CONSENT AGENDA. MAY STAFF PRESENT THE CONSENT RECOMMENDATIONS. THANK YOU, ROMAN. THANK YOU CHAIR. THANK YOU COMMISSIONERS FOR BEING HERE THIS AFTERNOON. UH, STAFF RECOMMENDS THE FOLLOWING ITEMS FOR ACTION PER STAFF RECOMMENDATION IN ONE MOTION ITEM 1-817-COLORADO STREET, ALTERATION, PORCH, BALCONY, ROOF, AND OLD SIX WARD FOR APPROVAL. ITEM 2 5 27 GRANBERRY STREET, AN ADDITION IN FREELAND FOR APPROVAL. ITEM 3, 7 0 7 EAST FIFTH AND A HALF STREET. NEW CONSTRUCTION OF A GARAGE IN FREELAND FOR APPROVAL. ITEM 5 7 0 5 WEST MAIN STREET, AN ALTERATION PORCH BALCONY IN FIRST MONTROSE COMMONS. APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS. ITEM 7 10 22 COLUMBIA STREET, AN ALTERATION EDITION IN HOUSTON HEIGHTS SOUTH FOR APPROVAL. ITEM 8 12 0 3 HEIGHTS BOULEVARD, ALTERATION EDITION HOUSTON HEIGHTS EAST FOR APPROVAL. ITEM 9 18 10 SUMMER STREET, ALTERATION EDITION IN HIGH FIRST WARD AND A PROTECTED LANDMARK. THE OTTO PET HOUSE FOR APPROVAL. 10 32 FUGATE ALTERATION EDITION PORCH NOR HILL APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS. ITEM 13 2 13 EAST 31ST AND A HALF STREET ALTERATION IN STARK WEATHER. THIS IS A DENIAL AND ISSUANCE. ISSUANCE OF A CERTIFICATE OF REMEDIATION. ITEM 14 6 0 5 COLUMBIA STREET, ALTERATION SIGN, HOUSTON HEIGHTS SOUTH, DENIAL AND ISSUANCE OF A CERTIFICATE OF REMEDIATION. ITEM 15, 6 36 KAISER STREET, ALTERATION EDITION IN NOR HILL FOR APPROVAL. ITEM 16, 9 0 9 TEXAS STREET ALTERATION SIGN. IT'S IN MAIN STREET, MARKET SQUARE, THE RICE HOTEL FOR APPROVAL. ITEM 17 32 0 1 ALLEN PARKWAY. NEW CONSTRUCTION, UH, IT'S ACCESSORY BUILDING AT THE STAR AND ENGRAVING COMPANY SITE FOR APPROVAL. ITEM 18 13 0 5 RUTLAND STREET, ALTERATION EDITION, HOUSTON HEIGHTS WEST FOR APPROVAL. ITEM 19 13 14, 2 LANE STREET, ALTERATION PORCH IN HOUSTON, HEIGHTS WEST FOR APPROVAL. ITEM 21 35 22 WHITE OAK DRIVE, ALTERATION HOUSTON HEIGHTS SOUTH FOR APPROVAL. AND ITEM 22, 17 15 BISMARCK STREET, NEW CONSTRUCTION, SINGLE FAMILY OH SIX WARD. WERE RECOMMENDING DEFERRAL THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT REQUEST APPROVAL OF ALL STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THESE ITEMS JUST FOR CLARITY. THEN THE ITEMS PROPOSED FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION WOULD BE ITEMS 4, 6, 11, 12, AND 20. I'LL TAKE ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU ROMAN, UM, COMMISSION [00:20:01] MEMBERS, ARE THERE ANY ITEMS ON THE CONSENT, UH, AGENDA LIST THAT YOU WOULD PREFER BE DISCUSSED INDIVIDUALLY? I HAVE TO RECUSE MYSELF FROM ITEM 15. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT NEEDS TO BE PULLED OUT OR NOT. I'D ASK LE LEGAL COUNSEL. WE COULD DO IT ONE OF TWO WAYS. YOU COULD VOTE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA AND WE COULD NOTE IN THE MINUTES THAT COMMISSIONER KASRA, UH, RECUSES HIMSELF THERE. OR YOU MAY TAKE IT SEPARATELY AND HE CAN JUST NOT VOTE UP TO THE CHAIR. CAN HE BOTH PUT IT ON THE RECORD? CAN HE VOTE BUT RECUSE HIMSELF FROM THAT ONE ITEM? LET'S DO THAT. IT'S TO SAVE TIME WITHOUT LEAVING THE ROOM. SO, YEAH. UM, COMMISSIONER YA, DID YOU HAVE A YES. UM, I WOULD LIKE TO PULL ITEM THREE, NINE AND 18. THANK YOU. OKAY, THANK YOU. SO ON THE CONSENT AGENDA, I HAVE ITEMS ONE, ITEMS TWO. WELL, BEFORE I DO THIS, LET ME, LET ME, LET ME OPEN. UM, A QUESTION TO THE PUBLIC IS, IS THERE ANYONE WHO IS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON ONE OF THE REMAINING ITEMS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA? UH, WHO WOULD LIKE TO, UM, SPEAK ON IT? CAN YOU, COULD YOU, UH, JUST, JUST NAME THE NAME, THE NUMBER OF THE PROJECT? NUMBER 13. OKAY. WHICH 12 IS ALREADY GONNA BE DISCUSSED, SO IT IS NOT ON CONSENT. OKAY. SO FIVE AND 13 HAVE BEEN ADDED. SO I'M GONNA REREAD THE REVISED CONSENT AGENDA AS I HAVE IT. UM, THE CONSENT AGENDA WILL INCLUDE ITEM 1 8 17 COLORADO STREET, ITEM TWO, GRANBERRY STREET. AND I DO HAVE A SPEAKER SIGNED UP FOR THAT, UM, PROJECT. NOW, IF YOU ARE IN FAVOR OF THE RECOMMENDATION, THEN YOU DON'T HAVE TO SPEAK. SO JUST NOTE THAT, UM, I HAVE ITEM 7 1 0 2 2 COLUMBIA STREET, ITEM 8 1 2 0 3 HEIGHTS BOULEVARD, ITEM TEN ONE ZERO THREE TWO FE EQUATE STREET, MOVING ON ITEM 14, 6 0 5 COLUMBIA STREET, ITEM 15, 6 3 6 PFIZER STREET, ITEM 16, 9 0 9 TEXAS STREET, ITEM 17 32 0 1 ALLEN PARKWAY, ITEM 19 13 14 2 LANE STREET, ITEM 21, 35, 22 WHITE OAK DRIVE. AND ITEM 22, 17 15 BISMARCK STREET IS, AM I CORRECT? YES. I, I JUST WANT TO, UH, HOUSEKEEPING ON ITEM 13. I, I WASN'T SURE. I THOUGHT I HEARD COMMISSIONER DUBOSE, BUT IT MAY HAVE BEEN SOMEONE ELSE. AND I JUST WANT, BECAUSE SOMETIMES PEOPLE GET CONFUSED AND THAT OUR RECOMMENDATION IS DENIAL OF THE C OF A, BUT ISSUANCE OF THE CERTIFICATE OF REMEDIATION FOR A WORK AS COMPLETED. SO I, WHOEVER ASKED TO PULL IT, I WANTED THEM TO KNOW THAT I DIDN'T KNOW IF THAT WAS POSSIBLY A, A, A POTENTIAL SPEAKER THAT THINKS THAT WE ARE GOING TO NOT ALLOW THAT WORK TO GO FORWARD. IF THAT MAKES SENSE. MAYBE WE SHOULD PULL IT JUST SO WE CAN DISCUSS IT THEN. YEAH, THAT SURE. THANKS. I UNDERSTAND. OKAY. SO YEAH, SO JUST ONE MORE CALL TO THE PUBLIC, JUST, UM, IF YOU ARE, SIGN UP TO SPEAK ON ONE OF THE ITEMS ON THIS REVISED CONSENT AGENDA AND YOU SUPPORT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION, YOU DON'T HAVE TO SPEAK IF YOU, IF YOU ARE, YOU KNOW, OPPOSITION TO WHAT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS, THEN YOU MAY WANT TO PULL THE ITEM AND HAVE IT DISCUSSED. SO LAST CALL TO ADD ANY OTHER ITEM TO BE PULLED. OKAY. NOT HEARING. I'M GOING TO, WE'RE GONNA MOVE ON, UH, COMMISSION MEMBERS. DO I HAVE A MOTION TO SUPPORT THE REVISED CONSENT AGENDA WITH THE CAVEAT THAT COMMISSIONER COUCH WILL NOT BE, UM, HE WILL BE ABSTAINING ON ITEM 15. I MOVE TO CONSIDER AS A CONSENT AGENDA WITH YOUR CONDITIONS AND TO APPROVE OR TO ACCEPT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS? DO I HAVE A SECOND? COMMISSIONER JONES. SECONDS. OKAY. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. AYE. AYE. AYE. ARE THERE ANY OPPOSED? ARE THERE ANY ADDITIONAL, UH, ABSTENTIONS? OKAY. THAT, THAT AGENDA PASSES AND WE WILL NOW, UM, [00:25:01] WE WILL NOW MOVE ON TO, UH, TO CONSIDER THE REMAINING PROJECTS INDIVIDUALLY AND STAFF WILL STAFF PRESENT. ITEM THREE, MR. CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION. THIS IS YASMIN ARSLAN, I SUBMIT FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. AGENDA ITEM B THREE AT 7 0 7 EAST FIFTH AND A HALF STREET IN FREELANCE SUBDIVISION. THE PROPERTY INCLUDES A HISTORIC 1,293 SQUARE FOOT. ONE STORY, WHICH FRAME WITH BRICK VENE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE SITUATED ON A, UH, INTERIOR, UM, LOT. IT'S A CONTRIBUTING BUNGALOW RESIDENCE CONSTRUCTED CIRCA 1935. THIS ITEM WAS DEFERRED FROM AUGUST 5TH LAST COMMISSION. AND, UM, THE PROPOSAL IS A NEW CONSTRUCTION FOR A TWO STORY DETACHED GARAGE AT THE REAR OF THE LOT. THE PROPOSED NEW CONSTRUCTION WILL INCLUDE A TWO STORY GARAGE APARTMENT TO REPLACE THE EXISTING NON-CONTRIBUTING DETACHED GARAGE. THE GARAGE WILL HAVE A FOUR OVER 12, UM, GABLE ROOF. CLADDING MATERIAL WILL BE, UH, FIBER CEMENT, SMOOTH SIDING. THERE'S AN EXTERIOR STAIRCASE THAT WILL BE ON THE SIDE TO HAVE ACCESS TO THE SECOND FLOOR AND APPLICANT WILL MEET CITY OF HOUSTON. CODE FOR FIRE RATING. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL AND IS AVAILABLE FOR, TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. OKAY, THANK YOU. UM, COMMISSION MEMBERS, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF ON THIS REVISED SUBMISSION? UH, COMMISSIONER YAPP? YES, UH, I PULLED THIS FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA BECAUSE I HAVE A CONCERN ABOUT THE HEIGHT OF THE ENTIRE BUILDING. UH, AND I'M NOT QUITE SURE WHETHER THIS IS QUOTE UNQUOTE REGULATED OR NOT, BUT THE PREVIOUS BUILDING WAS 20 FEET TALL, AND NOW THE NEW BUILDING, AND IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE A GARAGE ONLY IS ALMOST 40 FEET TALL. AND EVEN IN, IN THE BEST OF OUR, UH, HISTORIC DISTRICTS, WHEN WE BUILD A SECOND, SECOND, UH, SECONDARY DWELLING UNIT OR EVEN A GARAGE, WE HAVE NEVER SEEN A STRUCTURE THAT IS 40 FEET TALL, ALMOST 40 FEET TALL. SO THAT IS A CONCERN FOR ME, AND I THINK, UH, LIKELY WE'LL ALSO BE, UH, SETTING A PRECEDENT FOR, FOR ANYBODY IN THE FUTURE TO THEN HAVE AND BUILD THREE OR FOUR STORY, UH, STRUCTURES. COULD BE HIGHER THAN 40 FEET TOO. SO WHAT IS CONTROLLING? WELL, LET'S, LET'S CLARIFY IF THERE'S A, IS MAYBE THERE'S A MISUNDERSTANDING OF THE HEIGHT. CAN YOU CLARIFY ASKING THE HIGH HEIGHT? IT'S ONLY 27 FEET, UH, TALL. UM, I'M NOT SURE WHERE YOU SAW THE 40, IT MIGHT BE A TYPO, BUT ON THE ELEVATIONS, 39 FEET IS THE FIRST NUMBER. THAT'S THE WIDTH OF IT. MY, MY APOLOGIES IF THAT'S, UM, CONFUSING. UM, HE, HE HAD A TALLER, HE WAS AT 29 FEET, I BELIEVE. AND WITH THE REDESIGN, HE BROUGHT IT DOWN TO 27. UM, TERRANCE, I'M SORRY, JASON, IF YOU CAN, IF YOU CAN GO TO THE ELEVATIONS, I THINK ONE OF THEM DOES HAVE THAT 27 FEET ON IT. UM, AND YOU CAN SEE THE DEFERRED DESIGN AND THEN THE NEW PROPOSED. UH, BUT IT, IT IS NOT 40 FEET, IT'S 27. UM, CAN YOU, UH, SHOW, UH, TAKE ME TO THAT PAGE PLEASE. PAGE 18, COMMISSIONER YAP SHOWS THE PAGE 17 HAS A ISOMETRIC VIEWER, SOMETHING LIKE THAT. BUT IT SHOWS, IT SHOWS THAT THE 39 IS THE WIDTH OF THE, UH, OF THE STRUCTURE AND NOT, UM, HOW TALL IT IS. OKAY, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. BUT I CAN ADD BEFORE WE, WE, BEFORE WE GENERATE THE ACTION REPORT, I CAN ADD THAT IT'S 27 FEET TALL, UM, AS A BULLET POINT. IF, IF THIS IS, UH, NOT CLEAR AND ALSO THE, THE FORMER FLAT ROOF HAS BEEN ROOF OR DESIGN HAS BEEN REMOVED. SWITCHED TO A GABLE ROOF. YES. TO A GABLE ROOF TO BE MORE COMPATIBLE. CONSISTENT. YES. COMPATIBLE. EXCUSE ME, MR. CUR. SO, UH, TO WHAT'S ON THE SCREEN NOW, IF WE COULD SCROLL, UH, DOWN A LITTLE, WE CAN SEE 'EM SIDE BY SIDE, RIGHT? JUST SO WE'RE ALL SEEING THE SAME THING. THE TOP IMAGE THAT'S CUT OFF ON THE SCREEN CURRENTLY, UH, IS, IS WHAT WAS PROPOSED PREVIOUSLY AND DEFERRED IN THE LOWER IMAGE THERE. SCROLL BACK. IS, IS WHAT'S CURRENTLY PROPOSED? YES. YES, SIR. THANK YOU. YES. [00:30:02] AND IT IS 27 FEET BECAUSE THERE'S NO DIMENSIONS. IT'S ONLY 29 ON THE PREVIOUS, PREVIOUS PROPOSED. YES. YES. AND, UM, THE 39, UM, JUST THE WIDTH, 23, 27. THAT'S THE WIDTH. I, I'M SORRY, I'LL, I'LL MAKE SURE I PUT THE RIDGE HEIGHT. IT'S 27 TO, TO MAKE IT CLEAR. OKAY, THANK YOU. YOU'RE WELCOME. I STAND CORRECTED. OKAY. IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF STAFF, OF, OF COMMISSION, OF STAFF? NO, THAT WAS THE ONLY REASON WHY I PULLED IT. OKAY. I THOUGHT THE HEIGHT WAS 39. I'M GOING TO OPEN THE PUBLIC COMMENT, UH, THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS ITEM AT THIS TIME, I DO HAVE ONE SPEAKER SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM, WHICH IS, UM, CONNOR NOD. I BELIEVE HE WAS ON STANDBY JUST IN CASE THERE ARE QUESTIONS. OKAY. OKAY. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM IN THE PUBLIC ATTENDING VIRTUALLY OR IN THE ROOM? OKAY, NOT HEARING. I'M GONNA CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. UM, COMMISSION MEMBERS, IS THERE A MOTION ON THIS ITEM? MOTION TO APPROVE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL. A SECOND. OKAY. OKAY. UM, ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. AYE. AYE. AYE. ARE THERE ANY OPPOSED? ARE THERE ANY ABSTENTIONS? ALRIGHT, THAT MOTION PASSES. WE'RE NOW MOVING ON TO ITEM FOUR, UH, 5 0 9 T HORN STREET. MR. CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION, THIS IS YASMINE. TODAY I SUBMIT FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION AGENDA ITEM BEFORE AT 5 0 9 T HORN STREET WOODLAND HEIGHTS. THE PROPERTY INCLUDES A HISTORIC NINE 80 SQUARE FOOT, ONE STORY WOOD FRAME, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE SITUATED ON AN INTERIOR LOT. IT'S A CONTRIBUTING CRAFTSMAN RESIDENCE CONSTRUCTED CIRCA 1920. IN THE WOODLAND, UH, HEIGHTS HISTORIC DISTRICT, THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO CONSTRUCT A 3000 1 0 4 SQUARE FOOT TWO STORY ADDITION WITH AN ATTACHED GARAGE. THE RIDGE OF THE ADDITION WILL BE 28 FEET AND NINE INCHES, AND THE EVE HEIGHT WILL BE 22 FEET. THE APPLICANT PROPOSES THE FOLLOWING THAT THE ADDITION WILL BE CLAD, A NEW TREATED SMOOTH CEMENTITIOUS HARDY SIDING, ALL NEW WINDOWS WILL BESET AND RECESSED. THE NON-ORIGINAL FRONT DOOR WILL BE REPLACED WITH A CUSTOM CRAFTSMAN STYLE WOOD DOOR. TWO WINDOWS WILL BE REMOVED AT THE REAR OF THE EXISTING HOUSE AND WILL BE FILLED IN WITH SIDING TO MATCH EXISTING. THE ADDITION WILL HAVE A FIVE, OVER FIVE AND SIX OVER 12 PITCH HIP GABLE ROOF WITH MATERIAL TO MATCH EXISTING ROOF. THIS APPLICATION HAS RECEIVED THREE LETTERS OF SUPPORT FROM THE PUBLIC STAFF. RECOMMENDS DEFERRAL. THANK YOU. OKAY, THANK YOU. UM, CAN I ASK WHY STAFF IS RECOMMENDING DEFERRAL , PLEASE? UM, WE, WE BELIEVE THAT, UM, INITIALLY, UM, HE DID RESPOND TO OUR, UM, KIND OF, UH, CHANGES IN THE DESIGN TO MAKE IT GO TOWARDS AN APPROVAL. UH, BUT WE STILL, HE STILL, UM, NOT THERE YET FOR A FULL APPROVAL. UM, AND THAT THERE WILL BE MULTIPLE CONDITIONS. SO WE FELT THAT A, A DEFERRAL MIGHT BE BETTER. AND I UNDERSTAND THOUGH, THAT THE APPLICANT IS HERE OR, OR HERE VIRTUALLY TO SPEAK. YES. THE AGENT IS HERE TO, TO ANSWER ANY, UM, NO TO SPEAK AS, UM, I BELIEVE HE OPPOSES THE RECOMMENDATION, YES. OKAY. MR. MEMBERS, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS BEFORE I OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS ITEM? OKAY, NOT HEARING, I HAVE ONE. UH, I ACTUALLY, MR PLEASE. UH, IF THE APP, IF THE AGENT SPEAKS AND HAVE, UH, AND WANTS TO, UH, GO AGAINST THE RECOMMENDATION OF A DEFERRAL, THEN UH, I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW WHAT EXACTLY THE, UH, STAFF IS. UH, WHAT ARE THE POINTS THAT THE STAFF, UH, HAVE NOT RESOLVED TO THE POINT THAT IT, UH, IT HAS TO BE DEFERRED? CAN WE HEAR FROM THE, WE MAY, WE MAY WANNA ESTABLISH WHAT THE ITEMS ARE FIRST. I THINK, LIKE, AS I SUGGESTED YOU ASKED ME, COULD YOU AT LEAST EXPLAIN WHAT THE REMAINING ITEMS THAT YOU YES. UM, SO WE, IN INITIALLY [00:35:01] WE WANTED, UM, HIM TO RETAIN THE ORIGINAL ROOF, PARTIAL THE, THE PART, AT LEAST PART OF IT TO SHOW THAT DIAGONAL. UM, AND THEN YOU, YOU'RE, YOU'RE REFERRING TO THE REAR OF THE HIP ROOF, I'M SORRY, I'M SORRY, THE REAR PART OF THE ORIGINAL, UM, THE ROOF ON TOP OF THE, THE ROOF OF THE ORIGINAL HOUSE. UM, AND THEN WE ALSO WANTED, UM, HIM TO REMOVE, UM, THE DORMER. UM, WE ALSO FELT THAT AT THE ATTACHED GARAGE IS TWO STORY. AND THEN THE ADDITION IS ALSO TWO STORY, WHICH MAKES THE MASSING HUGE. UM, IT'S, IT'S A LOT OF ADDITION, UM, THAT WE BELIEVE IS OVERWHELMING. THE ORIGINAL HOUSE, UM, WE THOUGHT THAT, UM, DETACHING THE GARAGE OR, OR JUST MAKING IT TWO DIFFERENT MASSES CONNECTED WITH A HYPHEN OR A BREEZEWAY JUST TO DISTINGUISH THE GARAGE FROM THE ADDITION MIGHT BE A, A BETTER OPTION FOR, UM, THIS DESIGN AND MIGHT READ DIFFERENTLY YOU, BUT WE FELT IT'S A LOT FOR THE, FOR ALL OF THAT TO BE CONDITIONS. AND THAT'S WHY WE SUGGESTED DEFERRAL. THANK YOU. YOU ARE WELCOME. ALL GOOD POINTS. THANK YOU. OKAY, I'M GOING TO, THIS TIME I'M GONNA OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. I DO HAVE A SPEAKER SIGNED UP. UM, AND I, ONE SPEAKER SIGNED UP SAM NUAS. AND I SEE YOU, YOU'RE, UH, VIRTUALLY ATTENDING. YES. HOW ARE YOU TODAY? VERY GOOD. UH, IT RAINED TODAY. WE . IT'S, IT'S A GREAT DAY, WONDERFUL THING. I WANTED TO SIT OUT IN IT. UM, THE, UH, WE STARTED THIS PROJECT AND WE INITIALLY HAD THIS ADDITION, UH, THE GARAGE ITSELF, UH, EIGHT FOOT BACK FROM THE, UH, CORN BACK CORNER OF THE HOUSE. UM, AND YASSIN AND ROMAN HAD SOME PROBLEMS WITH THAT. SO I ENDED UP PUSHING THAT GARAGE BACK 18 FEET FROM THE BACK CORNER OF THE HOUSE. AND THEN THE LAST EMAIL THAT I RECEIVED AND, AND, AND MADE THE ONE STORY AT THE, UH, AT THE GARAGE PORTION ON THE FRONT. AND THEN THE LAST EMAIL I RECEIVED FROM YASSIN WHEN SHE SAID THEY, THEY WERE GONNA RECOMMEND IT FOR DEFERRAL SO WE COULD WORK ON IT A LITTLE MORE. SHE ASKED THAT WE DEFINE THE CORNER ON THE SECOND FLOOR ABOVE THAT GARAGE AREA, WHICH I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM DOING AT ALL. WE CAN DO THAT. AND SHE ALSO WANTED TO DEFINE THE RIDGE LINE ON THE MAIN HOUSE SO THAT YOU COULD, UH, UH, REALLY SEE WHERE THE RIDGE LINE STOPS ON THE ORIGINAL HOUSE, WHICH I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT EITHER. AND SO THAT'S WHY I WAS WANTING TO SPEAK TODAY. 'CAUSE I WAS HOPING IF, IF, IF THOSE REALLY WERE THE STICKING POINTS, MAYBE WE COULD GO AHEAD AND GET THIS APPROVED TODAY AND NOT HAVE TO COME BACK TO YOU GUYS AND WAIT ANOTHER MONTH FOR THIS CLIENT TO, TO KIND OF GET STARTED. UH, LIKE I SAY, THERE'S, THERE'S OTHER THINGS THAT LIKE, UH, MAYBE REDUCING THE ROOF PITCH A LITTLE BIT. SOME THINGS THAT I, I'M, I'M HAPPY TO WORK ON TO, TO MAKE, UH, YASSIN ENROLLMENT HAPPY. I JUST WOULD LIKE TO GET IT, UH, YOU KNOW, APPROVE SO THAT WE CAN, UH, DO THAT. JUST THAT. UH, AND THAT'S THE ONLY REASON I WANTED TO SPEAK REALLY. OKAY. THANK YOU. UH, COMMISSION MEMBERS, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OF THE, OF THE APPLICANT? I, I, I WOULD ASK COMMISSIONER CURRY, PLEASE. I, I WOULD ASK, UH, ABOUT THE DORMER. YOU MENTIONED THE ISSUES THAT WERE ON MAYBE ON THE TABLE. UM, WHAT'S YOUR TAKE ON THE PROPOSED DORMER THAT YASIN BRIEFLY MENTIONED? UH, WELL I LOVE THE DORMER. IT REALLY HELPS US EIGHT FOOT CEILINGS INSIDE THE HOUSE. UM, AND I WOULD PROBABLY, UH, I HAVEN'T CONFERRED WITH MY CLIENT ON GETTING RID OF THE DORMER, BUT I THINK THAT EVEN IF I HAD TO COME BACK TO YOU GUYS TO, TO BEG FOR THE DORMER , I'D RATHER, I'D RATHER GET THE REST OF IT MOVING FORWARD AND THEN COME BACK AND, AND STRUGGLE TO, TO, UH, CONVINCE Y'ALL THAT WE NEED THAT DORMER FOR THE INTERIOR. UM, AND SO, I MEAN, I'M WILLING TO DO WHATEVER WITHIN REASON TO GET WHAT MY CLIENT WANTS AND WHAT, UH, YASMIN AND ROMAN WONT OF COURSE. THANK YOU. YEP. OKAY. SAM AND I, I GUESS THE, WHAT I'M SEEING IN THIS IMAGE THAT'S ON THE SCREEN RIGHT NOW IS THAT THE, I GUESS THE COMMENT I UNDERSTAND FROM STAFF OF MAINTAINING THE ORIGINAL REAR HIP ROOF FORM, WHICH WOULD THEN NECESS NECESSITATE AT LEAST A SMALL SADDLE ROOF OF SOME TYPE INTO AT LEAST, YOU KNOW, DIVERT THE WATER AWAY FROM THE ADDITION. UM, IT SEEMS LIKE THAT WOULD STILL, THAT OR THAT MIGHT CONFLICT WITH THE DORMER AS PRESENTED BECAUSE IT LOOKS, IT LOOKS LIKE THE DORMER, AT LEAST ON THE LOWER ELEVATION IS BASED ON EXTENDING THE RIDGE, THE, THE TOP OF THE RIDGE LINE BACK FOR THE DORMER TO, UH, SET UP AGAINST [00:40:01] THAT IS TRUE. AND WHAT I WOULD PROBABLY, UH, ASK FOR IS THAT BECAUSE I'VE DONE THIS DORMER ON A NUMBER OF HOUSES THAT YOU GUYS HAVE APPROVED AT 6 0 5 EUCLID JUST SOLD, AND YOU CAN GO ONLINE AND LOOK AT THAT AND IT REALLY IMPROVES THE LIGHT INSIDE THE HOUSE AND, AND THE WHOLE, THE WHOLE ATMOSPHERE IN THE HOUSE. I WOULD PROBABLY TRY TO CONVINCE, UH, HISTORICAL THAT, OR YASSIN THAT I COULD, I COULD BREAK THAT RIDGE A LITTLE, LITTLE LATER THAN IT NORMALLY WOULD BE AND STILL MAINTAIN THAT DORM OR MAYBE A SLIDER SLOPE ON THE, ON THE, ON THE, UH, RIDGE OF THE DORMER. MAYBE IT GOES TO A METAL ROOF THERE. SOMETHING TO TRY TO MAINTAIN THAT DORMER. BUT, YOU KNOW, I HAVE TO CHECK WITH MY CLIENT 'CAUSE THEY'RE THE BOSS. BUT IF, IF THE DORMER HAS TO GO, THEN, YOU KNOW, THEN THE, THE DORMER WOULD HAVE TO GO. AND, UM, AND SO, UH, YOU KNOW, WE'RE JUST, WE'RE NOT GONNA FIGHT OVER A DORMER, I DON'T BELIEVE, UM, TO, TO, TO TRY TO, YOU KNOW, PUSH THAT DORMER THROUGH FOR THE WHOLE PROJECT. UM, I'M NOT SURE IF I CAN SPEAK, BUT, UM, I AM THE CLIENT AND I WOULD BE FINE WITH GETTING RID OF THE DORMER. UM, COULD, COULD YOU STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD? SO SORRY. FOR SURE. MY NAME IS MEG MILLER. CAN PLEASE PROCEED. YEAH, SORRY, THIS IS MY FIRST TIME AT ONE OF THESE MEETINGS, SO, UM, UH, THANK YOU FOR LISTENING. UH, YEAH, WE, WE WOULD BE FINE WITH, UH, REMOVING THAT DORMER, UH, AND, AND, AND CHANGING THE, THE HIP OF THE BACK A BIT. UM, HAPPY TO, TO HAVE A COLLABORATIVE EXPERIENCE HERE AND, AND MAKE SURE THAT WE, UM, BOTH CAN WORK TOGETHER TO, TO MOVE THIS FORWARD. THANK YOU. I KNOW THAT, UM, IN MANY DISTRICTS OR SOME DISTRICTS, UM, DORMERS CAN BE ENCOURAGED TO, UM, LESSON ADDITIONS. SO I THINK MAYBE THE ISSUE HERE IS WE HAVE A LARGE REAR ADDITION AND A DORMER. SO IT'S KIND OF A, IT'S A DOUBLE. UM, IT'S A, IT'S A SORT OF TWO DIFFERENT, TWO DIFFERENT THINGS. UM, BUT THAT'S JUST FROM AT LEAST SOME OF THE PREVIOUS PROJECTS WE'VE LOOKED AT. UM, COMMISSION MEMBERS. ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT'S? I HAVE A QUESTION. FUTURE YOUR COUCH PLEASE. SO IT SAYS THE ADDITION'S 3000 SQUARE FEET, IS THAT INCLUDING THE GARAGE OR IS THAT JUST THE AIR CONDITIONED SPACE? WOULD NEED TO ASK ME TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION. UM, BECAUSE THE, I MEAN, THE WAY THAT THE GARAGE IS, IS A, AN ATTACHED STRUCTURE. THEY'RE NOT, IT'S NOT AN ATTACHED GARAGE. SO IT'S, IT'S, UM, I THINK IT'S PART OF THE, THE, THE QUARTERS ABOVE THE GARAGE IS INCLUDED IN THAT NUMBER'S. YES. IT'S ALL, ALL OF IT WITH THE GARAGE. AND IS THAT, THAT SEEMS LIKE A LOT OF ADDITION TO A TINY LITTLE HOUSE. IS THAT SOMETHING LARGER THAN WHAT WE'VE BEEN APPROVING LATELY FOR THIS NEIGHBORHOOD? SO WE KNOW WOODLAND HEIGHTS, UM, HAS BIG ADDITIONS, BUT IN, IN THIS CASE, BECAUSE THE GARAGE, IT'S TWO STORY AND IT IS ATTACHED AND THE HOUSE IS, THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE IS, UM, KIND OF SMALLER THAN OTHER ORIGINAL STRUCTURES. THAT'S WHY WE FELT THAT THE ADDITION WAS A LOT. THAT'S WHY, UM, WE DIDN'T RECOMMEND APPROVAL WITH THE CONDITIONS BECAUSE WE WANTED TO DETACH THEM OR MAYBE LEAVE IT ATTACHED ON THE FIRST FLOOR. BUT WE WANT TO SEE, UM, IT DETACHED ON THE SECOND FLOOR CONNECTED WITH A BREEZEWAY OR WITH AN HYPHEN. AND AGAIN, WE FELT THAT'S A LOT TO PUT INTO CONDITIONS AND THAT'S WHY WE SUGGESTED DEFERRALS BECAUSE WE CAN'T REDESIGN ON THE SPOT. YEAH, I FEEL LIKE THIS IS AN AWFULLY LARGE ADDITION IN PROPORTION TO THE ORIGINAL HOUSE, BUT I KNOW THERE'S NO FAR OR ANYTHING FOR HERE. SO I WAS WONDERING IF WE DO DE FOR THIS, COULD WE MAYBE GET LIKE A CHART SHOWING SOME RECENT ADDITIONS VERSUS THE ORIGINAL HOUSE SO WE'D HAVE SOMETHING TO KIND OF COMPARE IT TO SIZE-WISE WE CAN. AND, AND I'M SORRY, JASON, I THINK THERE ARE EXAMPLES OF TWO RECENTLY APPROVED, NOT RECENTLY. WE HAVEN'T HAD A LOT OF WOODLAND HEIGHTS EDITIONS LATELY, BUT THE KIND OF, UM, I HAD, I HAVE TWO EXAMPLES OF WHAT WE APPROVED. YES. SO CAN, CAN I SAY SOMETHING? THIS SOUND COMMISSIONER, CAN I, IS THERE A REQUEST TO HAVE THE APPLICANT SPEAK? YES. LET'S HAVE A REQUEST. PLEASE STAND. PLEASE PROCEED. YES. UH, I, I, I PULLED A COUPLE OF ADDRESSES THAT HAVE BEEN APPROVED, UH, BY YOU GUYS, UH, IN THE PAST YEAR OR SO. AND IT IS WOODLAND HEIGHTS, SO WE DON'T HAVE ANY, UH, GUIDELINES AS FAR AS THE SIZE AND THE FAR, BUT LIKE 6 0 5 EUCLID WAS ON A 5,000 SQUARE FOOT LOT. I THINK THIS LOT HAD, THIS HOUSE HAS A REAL BENEFIT BECAUSE IT'S ON 127 [00:45:01] FOOT DEEP LOT. SO WE'RE, WE'RE 30% DEEPER THAN MOST, ALMOST 30% DEEPER THAN MOST OF THE LOTS IN THE NOR HILL AND WOODLAND HEIGHTS AREA, WHICH ARE TYPICALLY A HUNDRED FOOT DEEP. AND ON THAT PARTICULAR 6 0 5 CLE, WHICH WAS APPROVED, UH, SIX MONTHS AGO, IT WAS A 5,000 SQUARE FOOT LOT. AND Y'ALL, YOU GUYS APPROVED 27 50, UH, WHICH IS ABOUT 55%. UH, THE, THIS PARTICULAR HOUSE IS ON THE 63 BY 63 6,365 FOOT LOT. AND IT'S 3,104 SQUARE FEET, WHICH IS 48%. THERE'S ANOTHER ONE AT 7 26 23 BAIN THAT'S ON A 5,000 SQUARE FOOT LOT. THAT WAS 31 55. THERE'S ANOTHER ONE THAT'S 10 27 EAST, SEVEN AND A HALF. THAT WAS ON A 58 BY 58 50 LOT. AND IT WAS 3,720 SQUARE FEET. SO THERE, THERE'S EXAMPLES WHERE, WHERE WE'RE ACTUALLY UNDER WHAT'S BEEN APPROVED. AND I THINK IT'S BECAUSE IT'S WOODLAND HEIGHTS AND THE HOMES OVER HERE TEND TO BE A LITTLE BIT LARGER. THIS LITTLE HOUSE, IT'S COMPLETELY GUTTED. WHOEVER HAD IT BEFORE, THERE IS NO DRYWALL, THERE IS NOTHING INSIDE THIS HOUSE. THE WALLS ARE ALL TORN OUT. SO IT'S BASICALLY JUST A SHELL. AND, UM, AND SO IT, IT, UH, IT, IT, IT'S, IT'S WHAT WE STARTED WITH. UH, BUT THERE, THERE ARE OTHER HOUSES THAT ARE IN PAST THAT, UH, THAT ARE MUCH FAR LARGER. SO THOSE SIZES YOU JUST SAID, WERE THOSE THE TOTAL SIZE, INCLUDING THE EXISTING HOUSE AND THE ADDITION, OR WERE THOSE JUST THE ADDITIONS BY THEMSELVES? NO, THOSE WERE TOTAL FINISHED HOUSE, JUST LIKE COMPARING IT TO OUR TOTAL FINISHED HOUSE. OUR TOTAL FINISHED HOUSE. DOES IT SAY, I JUST SEE THE ADDITION AND THE 3,100 SQUARE FOOT ADDITION AND 980 SQUARE FOOT HOUSE? NO, THE TOTAL TOTAL IS, UH, 31 0 4. THE 31 0 4 IS THE TOTAL, INCLUDING THE OLD HOUSE. YES. SO I'M, I'M CONFUSED 'CAUSE I THOUGHT THAT WAS THE ADDITION SIZE. THAT'S WHAT IT SAYS ON OUR REPORT. OH, NO, I DON'T. IT SAYS PROPOSING 31. OH YES. CONFIRM THAT TWO STORY EDITION. UH, THE TOTAL, THE TOTAL IS, THE TOTAL IS 30, 31 0 4. ACTUALLY, I'M LOOKING AT, UH, THE LATEST BECAUSE WE KEEP MANIPULATING THIS OLD THING FOR YASIN AND ROMAN. IT'S, IT'S ACTUALLY 31 11 AND THAT INCLUDES THE ORIGINAL HOUSE. OH, THAT'S A LOT SMALLER. OKAY. SO THE SURE. IF THAT'S WHAT IT REALLY IS. YEAH. SO MY, MY OTHER QUESTION IS, I SAW ON THE PLAN IT SHOWS THERE'S PEERS OR SOMETHING BEHIND THE HOUSE. DID WE DO A COA FOR THIS HOUSE BEFORE SOMEBODY ELSE DID AND, AND I DON'T KNOW IF THEY EVER GOT A COA FOR IT, BUT THEY ACTUALLY POURED THE FOUNDATION AND HAD ALL THOSE FOOTINGS. WE'RE ACTUALLY NOT GOING BACK AS FAR AS THAT, THOSE FOOTINGS ARE, WE'RE DEMOING SOME OF THAT FOUNDATION. 'CAUSE THE CLIENT WANTED TO MAINTAIN A BACKYARD. SO THOSE FOOTINGS WERE PUT IN. UH, AND I DON'T, I DIDN'T REALLY RESEARCH THE HISTORY OF IT, BUT THOSE WERE PUT IN BY THE PREVIOUS OWNER. AND, UH, ACTUALLY ABOUT THE LAST SIX OR EIGHT OF THOSE, MAYBE 10 OF THOSE ARE ACTUALLY BEING REMOVED. UM, THEY'RE SPREAD FOOTING FOUNDATIONS THAT ARE ALREADY THERE. CAN I SPEAK? YES, PLEASE. SO THERE ARE, THERE ARE THREE OR FOUR CFAS THAT HAVE BEEN ISSUED IN THE PAST YEAR. I THINK IT CHANGED A LOT OF, UM, OWNERS, UM, A LOT OF AGENTS. UM, AND THE LAST ONE WAS WHERE THEY, THEY STARTED WITH, UM, CONSTRUCTING THAT, UM, IF WE, IF THE COMMISSION DECIDES TO DEFER, I CAN INCLUDE IF YOU WISH, UM, WELL, IF THEY DON'T OF HAVE BEARING ON THIS, THEN IT PROBABLY DOESN'T MATTER. BUT I JUST DIDN'T KNOW IF THEY WERE BUILDING IF IT WAS THE SAME APPLICANT AGAIN OR NO, THIS IS A NEW OWNER. YES. OKAY. NANCY, COULD YOU CONFIRM THE, THE SIZE OF THE ADDITION AND THE OVERALL SIZE OF THE HOUSE AS YOU, AS YOU UNDERSTAND IT, JUST FOR RECORD AS I UNDERSTAND IT, THE ADDITION WITH 3000 1 0 4. THAT'S, THAT'S HOW I UNDERSTAND IT. AND UM, AGAIN, WHEN, WHEN, WHEN WE DEFER, IF WE DEFER, I CAN PUT IN THE, I THINK WE NEED TO DEFER THIS LIKE, SCHEDULE OF THE, UH, EXACT, UM, WAY. THIS IS SPLIT UP. WHAT'S THE FIRST FLOOR? IT'S THE SECOND FLOOR. OKAY. CHAIR . MAY, MAY I MAKE A MOTION? LET ME, LET ME, I'M GONNA CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. OH, THANK YOU. UM, COMMISSION MEMBERS ASK QUESTIONS OR MAKE A MOTION. YEAH. UM, MAY I JUST SAY ONE LAST THING? THE, THE OWNER OF THE HOUSE, MEG MILLER, REQUEST TO HAVE THE OWNER SPEAK PLEASE. SO I HAVE A MOTION. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. SECOND. SECOND. MCNEIL ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. AYE. OKAY. PLEASE PROCEED. YOU MUST SPEAK. UM, OH, OKAY. THANKS. YEAH, I, I JUST WANTED TO, UM, HIGHLIGHT THAT THIS HOUSE IS, HAS BEEN IN THIS STATE FOR A VERY LONG TIME AND ME AND MY HUSBAND REALLY LIKE TO FIX IT AND, [00:50:01] AND MOVE IT FORWARD. UM, WE HAVE A, A GREAT COMMUNITY IN, IN THE WOODLAND HEIGHTS AND WE HAVE SEVERAL, UM, NEIGHBORS THAT ALSO WOULD LIKE TO SEE THIS HOUSE MOVE FORWARD. IT'S BEEN IN A VERY DECREPIT STATE FOR A LONG PERIOD OF TIME. AND, AND WE'RE DEFINITELY OPEN TO WORK WITH THE HISTORICAL COMMISSION, BUT I JUST WANTED TO, TO PROVIDE THAT BACKGROUND. WE DIDN'T, WE DIDN'T, UM, THIS IS OUR FIRST APPLICATION. SO, UH, THERE WAS A PREVIOUS OWNER THAT TRIED TO, TO MOVE THE HOUSE FORWARD. YES. OKAY. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER, MAY I RESPOND? YEAH. SO THIS IS COMMISSIONER CURRY. I JUST WANTED TO RESPOND TO YOUR COMMENTS. I I, I I APPRECIATE THAT. AND, UM, WE'D LIKE TO SEE IT MOVE FORWARD TOO. I'M SURE WE ALL KNOW NOTHING GOOD HAPPENS TO, IN A DERELICT, UH, HOUSE IN THE WOODLAND HEIGHTS OR ANYWHERE ELSE. SO, UM, WE, WE WILL JUST NEED TO BE, UH, VERY SURE OF THESE VARIABLES THAT HAVE BEEN DISCUSSED BUT NOT QUITE DOCUMENTED YET BEFORE WE'RE WE'LL BE ABLE TO, UM, ALLOWED TO GO FORWARD. JUST, I, I SAY THAT IN ADVANCE OF THE, OF MOTION AND A VOTE. THANK YOU. MAY, MAY STAFF SAY SOMETHING, PLEASE ASME, PLEASE. UM, AND, UM, THIS IS NOT ABOUT THE NUMBERS AS THIS DOESN'T HAVE FAR OR LOT COVERAGE. SO STAFF IS NOT DEFERRING BECAUSE THE NUMBERS ARE, ARE BIG. STAFF IS DEFERRING BECAUSE MA AS A MASSING IT READS IT CAN, IT CAN READ BETTER. AND WE'RE TRYING TO SEE THE GARAGE DIFFERENTIATED FROM THE ADDITION. UM, BECAUSE WE FEEL IT'S, IT'S BIG REGARDLESS OF THE NUMBER. IF IT'S 2000 OR 3000, WE JUST WANT, WE, WE, UH, NOT SUPERVISE. WE KIND OF CONTROL WHAT WE SEE FROM THE RIGHT OF WAY. AND THAT'S WHAT WE ARE, UM, A ADDRESSING AND, AND TRYING TO GET TO A BETTER DESIGN. AND IF WE WERE ABLE TO GIVE APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS, WE WOULD DEFINITELY HAVE, WE, WE DON'T WANT TO SLOW, UM, THE, THE, THE PROCESS FOR THE APPLICANT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. OKAY. I'M GONNA CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AGAIN. AND IS THERE A MOTION, I HAVE A QUESTION FROM STAFF, PLEASE. I KNOW WHERE WE'RE GOING, BUT I, BUT I AM CONFUSED. SO WE'RE, WE DON'T, WE'RE NOT UNDER HEIGHTS DESIGN GUIDELINES HERE, BUT MY READING OF THE HEIGHTS DESIGN GUIDELINES IS THAT DORMER IS ACCEPTABLE THE WAY THAT IT IS DRAWN. AND SO I'M MISSING SOMETHING FROM YOU AS TO WHAT YOUR OBJECTION IS TO THE DORMER. 'CAUSE I THINK IF I SEE THAT IN ANOTHER PART OF THE HEIGHTS, IT FITS THE DESIGN GUIDELINES. WE'RE NOT AGAINST THE DORMER. IT'S, IT'S JUST IF, IF HE'S GONNA RETAIN THAT ORIGINAL ROOF LINE, THE, THE DORMER AS IS DOESN'T WORK. WHICH IS THE, WHICH IS THE BACK, THE BACK LEFT HIP THAT YOU WANT, THAT YOU WANNA RETAIN. RIGHT? SO IF HE MAKES THE DORMER SMALLER, IT'S AL IT ALSO GOES TO THE EX TO THE EXTERIOR WALL OF THE ORIGINAL HOUSE. WE TYPICALLY LIKE THE DORMER TO BE PUSHED BACK A LITTLE BIT. SO AGAIN, WE FELT THERE'S A LOT OF CONDITIONS, UM, AND THAT'S WHY WE DEFERRED. SO IF WE WERE GOING TO, WITH A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS, WE, WE CAN'T REDESIGN THE DORMER IN THE CONDITION AND THAT'S WHY WE SAID REMOVAL. BUT IF, IF WE DEFER AND HE RETAINS THAT, UM, UH, ROOF LINE, THEN WE WILL WORK WITH HIM TO MAKE THE DORMER SMALLER TO FIT. SO WE'RE NOT SPECIFICALLY AGAINST, UH, THE DORMER. SURE. UNDERSTOOD. IN THE DORMER. UH, AT LEAST IN THE, WE'RE NOT, WE'RE, I MEAN WE'RE, WE'RE NOT, I GUESS WE REALLY CAN'T USE THE OTHER GUIDELINES BECAUSE THAT'S NOT THE DISTRICT WE'RE IN. BUT, BUT I THINK THAT IN TERMS OF HOW DORMERS HAVE BEEN DISCUSSED HOLISTICALLY THROUGHOUT THE NEIGHBORHOODS, IS THAT THEY, UM, WHEN THEY'RE RECOMMENDED, IT'S, IT'S, IT'S A WAY TO CREATE SOME SPACE UNDER THE ATTIC SO THAT THE ADDITION COULD BE MUCH SMALLER AND THE PRESSURE ON THE ORIGINAL HOME WOULD BE LESS. SO IT'S KIND OF LIKE A, IT'S, IT'S NOT A, IT'S NOT A TWO FOR, IT'S KIND OF A ONE. YOU, YOU DO ONE SO THAT YOU DON'T HAVE TO HAVE A LARGER ADDITION. AND IN, AND AGAIN, JUST AS THERE ARE IN OTHER AREAS, THERE ARE SOME INCENTIVES. IF YOU HAD A DETACHED GARAGE, YOU'RE ALLOWED MORE SQUARE FOOTAGE. WHEN IT'S A DE ATTACHED GARAGE, YOU'RE ALLOWED LESS HERE. WE DON'T HAVE THOSE SQUARE FOOTAGES REQUIREMENTS THROUGH FAR, BUT WE DO HAVE THE ORDINANCE. SO THERE, SO THE MASSING IS STILL, WE'RE BACK TO THE MASSING, I THINK IS WHAT, WHAT I'M HEARING. BUT THAT'S ALL. YEAH. SO IS THERE A MOTION I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO ACCEPT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION, UM, TO, TO BETTER REFINE THIS, UM, DESIGN. OKAY. IS THERE A SECOND? CURRY SECONDS? THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR DEFERRAL? ANY OTHER DISCUSSIONS? I HAVE TWO QUICK COMMENTS. YES. WHEN THEY, THEY [00:55:01] GO BACK TO DISCUSS SOME OF THE REFINEMENTS DESIGN, COULD WE TALK OR THE STAFF TALK TO THEM ABOUT THE GARAGE ELEVATION? 'CAUSE TO ME COPYING THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE, IT SHOULD BE A LITTLE BIT MORE SIMPLE THAN THAT FOR THE GARAGE WITHOUT THE LITTLE, UH, BRACKETS AND THINGS. AND THEN ALSO THAT LONG NARROW WINDOW ON THE ADDITION FACING THE STREET, WHICH I GUESS IS A BATHROOM OR SOMETHING, THAT WINDOW PATTERN SORT OF IS JARRING COMPARED TO THE OTHER WINDOWS THAT YOU CAN SEE FROM THE STREET. OKAY. WELL I THINK STAFF HAS NOTED THAT, UH, WITH THAT I ARE ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. AYE. AYE. AYE. UH, ANY OPPOSED? ANY ABSTENTIONS? ANY MOTION? DEFER PASSES AND NO ROMAN, YOU'LL NOW PRESENT THE NEXT PROJECT, WHICH, THE NEXT PROJECT IS B FIVE, I BELIEVE. IS THAT CORRECT? WHERE WE ARE B FIVE, CORRECT? YES. 7 0 5 WEST MAIN STREET AND FIRST MONTROSE COMMONS. THIS, UH, UH, PROJECT WILL BE FAMILIAR TO YOU. UH, THERE WAS AN APPLICATION IF WE COULD GO FORWARD, IT JUST CAME TO THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE. UH, THIS APPLICANT CHANGED THE FRONT PORCH DECKING MATERIAL AND UH, AND THEN WE BROUGHT TO COMMISSION AND THE COMMISSION SAID HE HAD TO PUT BACK THE TONGUE AND GROOVE ORIGINAL PORCH FLOORING CONFIGURATION. THE APPLICANT APPEALED THAT DECISION AND THE H THE APPEALS BOARD UPHELD THE DECISION OF THE HHC, BUT THEY DID ASK THE APPLICANT TO CONSIDER REAPPLYING AND THEY, THE HPAB ASKED ME TO CONVEY TO THIS COMMISSION THAT PERHAPS WE COULD, THE APPLICANT COULD LOOK AT OTHER SOLUTIONS THAT BROUGHT IT INTO COMPLIANCE BESIDES JUST TEARING OFF THE DECKING AND REPLACING IT. AND SO THE APPLICANT IS ASKING TO INSTALL TONGUE ONE BY FOUR TONGUE AND GROOVE PORCH FLOORING OVER THE EXISTING PORCH FLOORING, UH, PORCH BOARDS TO BE PERPENDICULAR TO THE STREET AS THEY WOULD BE TRADITIONALLY, AND TO ADD ONE TRIM BOARD TO MASK THE TWO BY SIX BOARD ENDS. IF WE COULD GO, UH, YEAH, RIGHT THERE. THAT'S A GOOD, PERFECT SHOT OF THE, WHAT WE HAVE HERE. THAT'S THE CURRENT CONFIGURATION. UM, AND HE WOULD BE INSTALLING ONE BY FOUR, UH, TONGUE AND GROOVE ON TOP OF THAT. OF COURSE, THAT RAISES SOME ISSUES ABOUT HOW THAT PAIR OF FRENCH DOORS THAT ARE NON-ORIGINAL MIGHT OPEN AND THE ENTRY DOOR TO THE HOUSE, WHICH IS TO THE RIGHT. UM, BUT IT IT, THE POINT OF THE, AGAIN, THE HPAB, THIS IS A SOLUTION THAT, UH, IN OUR OPINION BRINGS IT BACK TO SIMILAR TO COMPLIANCE. UH, WE DO HAVE A SPEAKER HERE TODAY OF, UH, TO SPEAK KIND OF AGAINST THIS OFFERED SOLUTION AND OUR RECOMMENDATION, WHICH IS DENIAL OF THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS AND ISSUANCE OF A CERTIFICATE OF REMEDIATION TO INSTALL THE ONE BY FOUR TONGUE GROOVE FLOORING OVER THE EXISTING. AND THE CONCERN MIGHT BE THE RISE OVER THE RISE OF THE STEPS. AND IF YOU LOOK AT THE OLD PHOTO, THAT LAST STEP WAS A LITTLE SHORTER THAN THE OTHER RISERS. AND THEN IF YOU DO THIS FIX, YOU'LL ACTUALLY BE ABOUT THREE QUARTERS OF AN INCH THE OTHER DIRECTION. SO IT MAKES THAT LAST STEP A LITTLE HIGH. BUT WE FEEL THAT THIS WAS A SOLUTION THAT IS, IT WOULD BE PRETTY DIFFICULT FOR SOMEONE TO RECOGNIZE, UH, THAT, THAT THIS IS A DIFFERENT WAY OF BUILDING IT. AND I'LL TAKE ANY QUESTIONS. SURE. UM, I MEAN, I DID MAKE A COMMENT. IT'S, I DON'T THINK IT MAY OUTSIDE OUR PURVIEW, BUT THE, THE, THE LAW OF STEP RISERS, YOU KNOW, THIS IN THE CODE IS JUST THAT, UM, THERE, THERE'S A, THERE'S A MAXIMUM HEIGHT, UH, FROM THE RISER OBVIOUSLY. UM, BUT ALSO THEY CAN VARY, BUT THEY CAN'T VARY MORE THAN THREE EIGHTHS OF AN INCH. SO, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE CAN, IF, IF THEY VARY TOO MUCH ANYWAY, PEOPLE, UM, IF YOU USED TO A RHYTHM AND THEN THE RHYTHM CHANGES YOUR NATURAL, UH, YOU JUST FALL DOWN, YOU THINK YOU'RE FALLING DOWN. SO YOU GO AHEAD AND FALL DOWN. AND IT'S JUST, THAT'S WHY WE, THAT'S WHY ONE STEP'S NOT ALLOWED AND HAVING STEPS WITH VARIOUS RISERS IS NOT ALLOWED BECAUSE IT'S, THERE'S SAFETY CONCERNS. AGAIN, WE, WE DON'T LEGISLATE THAT THROUGH THIS COMMISSION, BUT THAT IS, THAT IS IN THE BUILDING CODE. SO JUST BE, I'D BE JUST, JUST TO BE AWARE. SO YES. DO WE HAVE, DO YOU HAVE THOSE MEASUREMENTS? 'CAUSE I WOULD SAY THE SAME THING. WE CAN'T RECOMMEND SOMETHING THAT THEN VIOLATES THE BUILDING CODE, BUT THE BOTTOM STEPS ALREADY MESSED UP BECAUSE THE, THE PAVING STONES, YOU STILL HAVE THREE RISERS. YEAH. AND THERE'S NO RAILING. YOU JUST HAVE A RAILING IF YOU HAVE THREE RISERS. BUT WE'RE MAKING RECOMMENDATION. AND IF, AND IF IT TAKES IT OUT OF THE THREE EIGHTHS VARIANCE, THEN NOW WE'RE RECOMMENDING [01:00:01] SOMETHING THAT VIOLATES THE BUILDING CODE. WE'RE HAPPY TO, AND I DON'T KNOW FOR, FOR LIKE, I DON'T KNOW WHETHER THE, THE OTHER TREADS CAN BE ADJUSTED OR, OR SO THAT THERE'S, THAT'S NOT AN ISSUE, BUT I'M JUST BEAR, BEAR IN MIND THAT THE, THE, THE I THE SAFETY IDEA OF RISERS OR THAT THEY BE VERY SIMILAR TO EACH OTHER. SO THAT, UM, AND I, I DON'T KNOW HOW THAT AFFECTS THIS APPLICATION, BUT I JUST WANNA MENTION THAT. UH, SO, UH, I WANNA RESPOND TO COMMISSIONER MCNEIL. I'D BE HAPPY TO PROVIDE THOSE MEASUREMENTS. WE DON'T HAVE 'EM TODAY. THE APPLICANT IS IN A, UH, YOU KNOW, HE'S WORKING WITH US. SO WHAT IF, IF THERE WAS A DEFERRAL YOU WANT ME TO, WE CAN BRING IT BACK AND WE CAN PUT A TAPE ON THE WHOLE THING AND FIGURE IT OUT. LEMME JUST DOUBLE CHECK IT TO MAKE SURE. IT SEEMS LIKE FROM THE PHOTOGRAPH, IT SEEMS LIKE IT, IT HELPS, RIGHT? THAT YOU ADD THREE QUARTERS AND THEY, THEY'RE MORE, THE THREE RISES ARE MORE EQUAL. UH, BETH, DO YOU NEED TO LET MR. LONG YOU HAVE A COMMENT OR QUESTION? YEAH. WELL, I, I JUST HAD A, A QUESTION OUTSIDE OF MY, MY BANDWIDTH, WHICH IS, UH, FROM A STRUCTURAL OR FROM A, UH, FROM A BUILDING CONDITION STANDPOINT, IS THERE ANY CONCERN COVERING THESE ONE BY SIXES WITH THE TONGUE AND GROOVE IN TERMS OF GETTING MOISTURE TRAPPED IN BETWEEN OR NO? NO. OKAY. OKAY. ARE THEY GONNA GET THIS LIKE A PERMIT, A CONSTRUCTION PERMIT AND HAVE IT INSPECTED? YES. WELL, WELL WE CAN JUST LET THE INSPECTOR DECIDE IF, IF HE OR SHE'S OKAY WITH THAT. ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF STAFF, UH, FROM THE COMMISSION MEMBERS? I DO HAVE ONE PERSON SIGNED UP TO SPEAK FROM THE PUBLIC IN THAT HEARING. I'M GONNA OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. I HAVE ONE SPEAKER SIGNED UP. UH, MR. STEVEN LONGMEYER, WOULD YOU PLEASE RESTATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD AND ADDRESS THE COMMISSION? GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSIONERS. I'M STEVEN LONGMEYER. I'M THE PRESIDENT OF THE CIVIC ASSOCIATION OF THE FIRST MONTROSE COMMONS. YOU MAY HAVE RECALL, YOU MAY RECALL OUR RATHER IMPASSIONED, UM, BOARD STATEMENT ABOUT THIS SEVERAL MONTHS AGO, UH, AT THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY. LET ME JUST BEGIN BY SAYING THAT THE PORCH THAT WAS TORN OFF WITHOUT ANY PERMITS ON A SUNDAY AFTERNOON HAD SERVED THIS PROPERTY WELL FOR MORE THAN A HUNDRED YEARS, THEN IT WAS REPLACED WITH TWO BY SIXES. THEN YOU ALL MADE A JUDGMENT, WHICH REQUIRED HIM TO REMOVE THESE BOARDS, PUT BACK PORCH BOARDS, AND HAVE AN INSPECTION OF THE UNDERLYING SUPPORT AFTERWARDS TO MAKE SURE THAT NO DAMAGE HAD BEEN DONE DURING THE DEMOLITION. HE APPEALED, I ATTENDED THE APPEALS BOARD. THE APPEALS BOARD UPHELD WHAT YOU DID. AND THEN SOMEONE GOT A LITTLE, FOR WANT OF A BETTER WORD, WISHY-WASHY AND SOFT, UH, SAYING MAYBE WE COULD WORK WITH HIM. THIS PARTICULAR INDIVIDUAL HAS REPEATEDLY SHOWN COMPLETE DISREGARD FOR THE PROCESSES OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION. AND SO NOW WHAT WE'RE BEING ASKED TO DO LITERALLY IS PUT LIPSTICK ON A PIG. WE'RE NOT BEING ASKED TO PRESERVE THE HISTORIC CHARACTER OF THIS HOUSE. WE'RE ASKED TO PUT SOMETHING THAT LOOKS HISTORIC OVER MODERN MATERIALS SO THAT HE DOESN'T HAVE TO SPEND MONEY TO TAKE AWAY THIS. AND YOU ALL HAVE NOT ISSUED HIM ANY FINES. I WILL TELL YOU THAT I MORE THAN ANYONE ON THIS TABLE WANT THIS FIXED BECAUSE I WALK BY IT EVERY DAY. I SEE THIS EVERY DAY. IT'S A BLOCK FROM MY HOUSE. BUT THIS IS AN EXAMPLE WITH ALL DUE RESPECT TO, TO ROMAN AND, AND THE STAFF FOR TRYING TO WORK WITH HIM. MOTION TO GRANT THE SPEAKER MORE TIME. IS THERE A SECOND? ALL IN FAVOR, AYE. AYE. THANK YOU. PLEASE PROCEED. THIS IS AN EXAMPLE OF DISMANTLING OUR HISTORIC DISTRICT ONE BOARD AT A TIME AND ONE OF THE MOST PASSIONATE THINGS I FIGHT AGAINST EVERY TIME I COME HERE. SO I'M BEGGING YOU TO GO BACK TO YOUR ORIGINALLY SPECIFIED CERTIFICATE OF REMEDIATION, WHICH REQUIRED HIM TO UNDO THE DAMAGE HE DID. FIRST GET IT INSPECTED TO MAKE SURE THAT IT WILL HALT THE BOARDS THAT HE TOOK OFF AND PUT THE NEW PRESSURE TREATED BOARDS ON AND THEN WILL BE DONE AND IT'LL LAST ANOTHER A HUNDRED YEARS. JUST FINE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THERE. ANY QUESTIONS? COMMISSION MEMBERS OF THIS? NOT FOR MR. LAMAR. OKAY. ALRIGHT. THANK YOU. I'M, I JUST, JUST GONNA CHECK IF THERE'S ANYONE ELSE, UH, ATTENDING THIS MEETING VIRTUALLY OR IN THE ROOM THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THE ITEM. AND PLEASE NOTE YOURSELF NOW. [01:05:04] OKAY. NOT HEARING, I'M GONNA CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. UM, IS THERE A MOTION OR FURTHER DISCUSSION COMMISSION MEMBERS? I, I GUESS I, I'M NOT SURE THAT IT'S IN THE PURVIEW OF OUR COMMISSION, BUT I, I JUST, I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT THE MOTIVATION HERE. I MEAN, WE, WE MADE A RULING. IT WAS, IT'S BEEN UPHELD. WHY WOULD WE GO BACK NOW? I, I GUESS I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY THE APPLICANT IS INTERESTED IN JUST COVERING THIS INSTEAD OF DOING IT THE RIGHT WAY. UM, AND I, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE US GO BACK TO OUR ORIGINAL DECISION. WELL SECOND. SURE. AND I WELL, OKAY. AND I'LL JUST MENTION THAT IF I WERE, IF, IF YOU WOMAN HAD A PORCH AND THERE WAS A ISSUE OF DIFFERENT RISERS, I MEAN, YOU, YOU WOULD TAKE THE PORCH OFF THAT YOU HAVE AND YOU WOULD ADD SOME, YOU'D RIP SOME WOOD TO MAKE, YOU KNOW, TO BEEF UP WHAT YOUR STRUCTURE IS. THEN PUT YOUR FLOOR DOWN SO THAT YOU CAN THEN CONTROL WHAT YOU HAVE. I, WE DON'T KNOW THOSE DIMENSIONS. THAT'S, THAT'S NOT OUR ISSUE. BUT, UM, IT IS ODD JUST TO, TO, TO TRAP, YOU KNOW, PUT WOOD OVER WOOD IN A SOLID FASHION BECAUSE IF WATER GETS UNDERNEATH OF IT, I DON'T KNOW, IT USUALLY, IF WOOD CAN DRY OUT, IT'LL LAST A LOT LONGER. WHEN WOOD IS TRAPPED AND HOLDS MOISTURE, THAT IS A, GENERALLY SPEAKING, OUR WOOD ISN'T AS GOOD AS IT USED TO BE. SO IT'S, UNLESS YOU USE TREAT REALLY TREATED OR EXOTIC WOODS. BUT, UM, I'M, I'M ALL EQUALLY JUST CONFUSED ABOUT THE, THE PROPOSITION. BUT, BUT I BELIEVE I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. IS THAT FAIR AND DISCUSSION? I HAVE DISCUSSION. DISCUSSION, YES SIR. UH, I AGREE WHOLEHEARTEDLY WITH MR. LONGMEYER AND THE MOTION THAT'S BEEN MADE. AND I'M, UH, I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT IS STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION. YOU'RE GOOD. DE DENY A COA AND ISSUE A COR APPLIED FOR. SO, SO THE OWNER WENT BACK AND APPLIED FOR ANOTHER COA AFTER THE APPEAL. I THINK STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION THOUGH WAS TO C CARRY WATER FOR THE APPEALS BOARD AND TO DELIVER THAT MESSAGE. IS THAT NOT, IS THAT FAIR? I MEAN RIGHT. THE, THE RECONSIDERATION WASN'T ON OUR PART OR REALLY THE APPLICANT, THE APPEALS BOARD. I THINK THE APPLICANT MAY, I THINK FRANKLY I DON'T REMEMBER HOW THE IDEA OF LAYING THE BOARDS ON TOP OF THAT EXISTING CAME UP, BUT I BELIEVE IT ACTUALLY CAME UP IN THE APPEALS BOARD MEETING BECAUSE THE, THE DISCUSSION THERE WAS THAT IT WAS POSSIBLE THAT THE, THIS COMMISSION HADN'T CONSIDERED OTHER OPTIONS TO SOLVE THE PERSON'S, YOU KNOW, TO, TO HAVE IT APPEAR OR BE HISTORIC OR HOWEVER IT WORKS OUT. AND THAT'S WHY. SO IT WAS REALLY, SO HAS A NEW COA BEEN PRESENTED AND THEN THEY APPLIED FOR IT, PAID A NEW FEE, OKAY. AND PUT UP A A OR UPDATED THE SIGN, PAID A NEW FEE. THEY DID COME FORWARD AND TAKE THAT STEP. SO THAT'S WHY IT IS AGAIN, TO DENY AND THEN TO, TO, UH, ISSUE ROMAN. AND THEN I WANT TO COMMENT, PLEASE. ONE, ONE, I'M SORRY. CHAIR COMMISSIONER, JUST ON FINES. I WANNA SAY, I KNOW THAT THE, THE OWNER OF THIS PROPERTY WAS VERY, VERY CONCERNED, UM, THAT HE HAD A COURT APPEARANCE AND THERE WAS SOME, THERE WAS AN ISSUE BEING, HE, HE WAS VERY CONCERNED ABOUT BEING FINED. UM, AND THAT'S WHY HE'S JUST PRETTY ASSIDUOUSLY STAYING CLOSE BY WITH US. ALTHOUGH I HAVEN'T HEARD FROM THE LAST FEW DAYS. I THINK HE WORKS OUT OF THE COUNTRY. I, I WANNA BE CONSCIOUS OF ANY ECONOMIC HARDSHIP OR THE INVESTMENT THAT HE MADE. ALBEIT HE CL HE KNOWS THE PROCESS AND DID THIS WORK WITHOUT APPLYING FOR A COA IS, DO YOU KNOW IF THERE'S, WHAT THE MOTIVATION IS? IS HE TRYING TO PRESERVE THE INVESTMENT HE'S ALREADY MADE BY JUST MAKING THE APPEARANCE OF THE HISTORIC MATERIALS WITH THE OVERLAY? OR, I MEAN, IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE HOUSE LASTING ANOTHER A HUNDRED YEARS, I GOING BACK WITH THE EX WITH THE ACCURATE MATERIALS AND CONSTRUCTION METHODS, WE'RE NOT JUST ABOUT APPEARANCE. UM, THE ORDINANCE IS NOT JUST ABOUT APPEARANCE. I DON'T, I I'M SORRY, HE'S NOT HERE TO SPEAK AND I DON'T WANNA SPEAK FOR HIM. I DON'T KNOW, UH, WHY HE WOULD CHOOSE TO DO IT THIS WAY. OKAY. I MEAN, I, I SINCERELY DON'T WANNA BE CALLOUS, BUT I, I, I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND MOTIVATION. I, I WOULD BE SO CALLOUS AS TO NOT BE CONCERNED ABOUT SOMEONE'S ECONOMIC HARDSHIP WHEN THEY CHOOSE NOT TO PULL PERMITS AND CHOOSE NOT TO GET A COA AND DO WORK ILLEGALLY REPEATEDLY AS MR. LONGMEYER CAN ATTEST TO. OKAY. THEN MY MOTION STANDS, MY ONLY COMMENT WOULD BE IF HE'S ALREADY TAKEN THE OLD BOARDS OFF, HE'S GONNA TAKE THESE OFF. I THINK THE JOISTS ARE GONNA BE REALLY DAMAGED WITH ALL OF THIS REMOVAL. THAT'S WHY WE'RE HAVE AN INSPECTION BY THE CITY OF HOUSTON. SO THEY'RE, HE'S GONNA HAVE TO REFRAME THE PORCH, PROBABLY, OR AT LEAST, I DON'T KNOW HOW THE JOISTS ARE FRAMED HERE, BUT YEAH, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT'S [01:10:01] GONNA HAPPEN. 'CAUSE IF HE TRIES TO NAIL ONTO THESE POOR OLD TWO BY SIXES OR WHATEVER, THEY'RE GONNA START TO CRUMBLE. AGAIN. I MA I MAKE THE ASSUMPTION IF HE PULLS A PERMIT THAT THEN, THEN THERE'LL BE AN INSPECTION AND THAT PROCESS WILL BE, IT'LL BE REVIEWED. YOU KNOW, I, I DON'T KNOW THAT, I DON'T KNOW THAT'S PART OF OUR PURVIEW PER SE. BUT, BUT I THINK THAT WE, WE COULD MAKE THAT, WE COULD MAKE WHATEVER, WHATEVER MOTION DOES PASS TODAY, WE CAN MAKE THAT PART OF THE MOTION IF, IF, UM, TO ENSURE THAT THE STRUCTURE IS WHOLESOME. UM, BECAUSE EITHER YOU REPLACE THE JOIST OR YOU SISTER ANOTHER JOIST NEXT TO THE, THE EXISTING JOIST. UM, BUT IT WOULD BE A SHAME IF THE PORCH COLLAPSES . WELL, HE COULD, HE COULD REMOVE THE TWO BY SIXES ON TOP OF THE PORCH AND USE THOSE TO, TO STRENGTHEN AND INSIST TO THE JOIST. AND THEN YOU WOULD BE, YOU'D BE REALLY STRONG. SO, UM, BUT FRIENDLY AMENDMENT THAT WE PUT INTO OUR LANGUAGE THAT THERE'S A PERMIT PULLED AND A INSPECTION BY THE CITY HOUSTON, OF THE STRUCTURAL BEFORE HE PUTS THE FINISHED TONGUE AND GROOVE MATERIAL ON. ANY OTHER COMMENTS I GOT TOO? UH, I, I ACTUALLY HAVE A COMMENT THAT GOES BACK TO THE ORIGINAL RECOMMENDATION. UH, ON ONE PAGE, I SEE THAT THERE IS APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS, WHICH WAS SUBMITTED EARLIER, I THINK AS AN EMAIL TO US 7 0 5 MAIN STREET. BUT THEN ON THE, UH, IPAD, I SEE THERE'S A DENIAL OF COA AND ISSUANCE OF COR. SO I GUESS WHEN THE PROPOSAL IS TO INSTALL THE ONE BY FOUR, IS THAT THE COR WE ARE TALKING ABOUT? OR IS THAT A NEW CAI BELIEVE IT WAS WE TALKING ABOUT HERE, THE FIRST THING THAT YOU SAID, AND I'M SORRY THAT PROBABLY MIGHT SOMETHING I MISSED THERE AND WHAT WAS SENT OUT TODAY, BUT THE, THE RECOMMENDATION ON YOUR SCREEN AND ON YOUR IPAD, UM, ACTUALLY NOW I'VE SET IT DOWN OVER THERE. UH, HERE IT IS UP ON THE SCREEN DENIAL OF C OF A AND ISSUANCE OF C OF R AS APPLIED FOR, WHICH WOULD BE TO PUT, TO INSTALL THOSE BOARDS ON TOP. OKAY. THAT'S, SO THAT'S AGAIN, DENIAL BECAUSE THE WORK HAS ALREADY BEEN DONE AND THEN BACK AT WHAT HE ASKED FOR. THANK YOU. SO CAN, UH, BUT I HEARD, UH, COMMISSIONER JACKSON MENTIONED WITH OUR, JACKSON MENTIONED ABOUT, UH, UH, UPHOLDING THE WORK THAT WE HAD DONE PREVIOUSLY. UH, SO DO, CAN WE REINSTATE THAT STATEMENT AND THEN PLUS THE STATEMENT THAT, THAT'S THE, THAT'S THE MOTION ON THE TABLE IS THAT THE, IS THAT THE MOTION ON THE TABLE IS TO NOT ACCEPT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION AND TO STICK TO OUR ORIGINAL DECISION. AND ON THE ORIGINAL COA AND ALSO ED MCNEILL'S POINT IN THERE. YEAH, NO, NO. DENY THE APPLICATION BACK TO THE ORIGINAL COR RECOMMENDATION. SO IT'S ON THE, IT'S ON THE IPAD. IT SAYS DENIAL OF COA AND ISSUANCE OF COR AS APPLIED FOR, WHICH I ASSUME IS THE ORIGINAL ONE THAT NO, THAT'S THE NEW ONE. NO, IT'S THE NEW ONE. NO, NO, PLEASE STICK WITH THE NEW APPLICATION. THIS IS AN ENTIRELY NEW APPLICATION. THE NEW APPLICATION IS, SO IF YOU'RE GOING TO DENY STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION, DENY IT AND SAY YOU WANT TO REINSTATE THE, UM, RECOMMENDATION FROM YOUR FIRST C OF R FROM, FROM YOUR FIRST, I GUESS C OF A, BUT YEAH, WHAT, ISN'T THAT, WHAT, WHAT'S SAYING, WHAT'S SAYING HERE, ISSUE OF COR HAS APPLIED FOR NEW COA BASED ON THE APPEALS BOARD, THE APPEAL. THIS MEANS ORIGINALLY APPLIED FOR NO, THE BRAND NEW COA FROM THE APPEALS BOARD RECOMMENDATION. RIGHT. THEY'VE, ACCORDING TO ROMAN, THEY'VE SHOWN UP, THEY'VE PAID FOR, IT'S A BRAND NEW COA. SO YOU HAVE TO DENY THE C DENY STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION, WHICH IS WHAT COMMISSIONER WEAU JACKSON'S MOTION DOES. AND THEN, AND THEN STATE THE, WELL, YEAH, AND, AND STATE WELL TO REINSTATE, RIGHT? MM-HMM . HER INITIAL DECISION. I MEAN, YOU CAN MAKE THE MOTION AND FOR THAT AND YOU CAN STATE WHY AND WHAT, WHAT IT IS THAT YOU'RE UPHOLDING. SO, RIGHT. YOU WANT ME TO DO THAT? WELL, YEAH, I THOUGHT YOU DID, BUT I THINK SHE'S UP. OKAY. ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM COMMISSION MEMBERS? WILL IT INCLUDE, WILL IT INCLUDE THE STATEMENT THAT COMMISSIONER MCNEIL ADDED? BECAUSE I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THAT THING STRUCTURALLY AS INSPECTED AS I ACCEPT THE FRIENDLY, THE FRIENDLY NO, NO, NO. I'M GONNA TELL YOU THAT, UH, LET ME INTERRUPT ON THAT ONE. I'VE THOUGHT MAYBE THAT ISSUE IS OVER. UM, UNLESS IT'S REQUIRED BY THE BUILDING CODE, YOU CANNOT IMPOSE AN ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENT THAT IS NOT ALREADY REQUIRED BY ORDINANCE. SO HE WILL NEED TO APPLY FOR A BUILDING PERMIT. INSPECTIONS [01:15:01] WILL BE DONE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS OF THAT BUILDING CODE. CERTAINLY, I THINK YOU CAN ASK STAFF TO MAKE SURE THE APPLICANT IS AWARE OF THAT CONCERN AND MAKE THAT NOTE THAT IT BE, THAT, THAT IT BE CONSIDERED. WHAT DID SHE SAY? OKAY. UM, JUST TO BE, JUST, UM, BE SAFE. I'M GONNA SAY THAT I, I'M GONNA CLOSE THIS PUBLIC HEARING AND I CAN'T RECALL AT THIS POINT IF I DID CLOSE IT, BUT, UM, IS WE HAVE A FIR WE HAVE A MOTION, WE HAVE A SECOND. AND, UH, ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION? AYE. AYE. AYE. AYE. AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? ANY ABSTENTIONS? THE MOTION PASSES. I THE NEXT ITEM, UH, ITEM SIX. YOU READY? CHAIR? YES, SIR. B SIX IS, UM, AN ITEM AT ONE, UH, PROPOSED NEW CONSTRUCTION AT 1 1 1 7 PETTY STREET IN THE NOR HILL HISTORIC DISTRICT. THIS IS TO, UH, THE PROPERTY BEING A 5,000 SQUARE FOOT, PARTIALLY VACANT LOT. UH, IT MAY BE ACTUALLY FULLY VACANT NOW, I'M NOT SURE IF IT HAS A STRUCTURE ON IT, BUT IT'S A NON-CONTRIBUTING, I THINK AT THE REAR. THE, UH, NEW CONSTRUCTION IS THE FIRST FLOOR IS PROPOSED TO BE 1,367 SQUARE FEET. THE SECOND FLOOR, 990 SQUARE FEET, THE TOTAL HOUSE, 2,357 SQUARE FEET WITH A DETACHED CARPORT OF 470 SQUARE FEET. THE, IF, LET'S SEE, HERE'S THE, UH, LOT ON THE INVENTORY PHOTO. AND YOU DO SEE THAT STRUCTURE DEEP IN THE BACK OF THE LOT THERE. UH, AND BEFORE YOU UP ON THE SCREEN TODAY OR UP THERE, NOW YOU HAVE, WE'LL GO TO THE CONTEXT AREA AND WELL, THE KEY, THE CONTEXT AREA IS KEY BECAUSE BY, BY, AS Y'ALL KNOW, OR AS A REMINDER, THE CITY OF HOUSTON DEFINES THE CONTEXT AREA TO BE THAT BLOCK FACE THAT THAT STRUCTURE IS ON. AND THE, THE, THE BLOCK FACE OF FRONTING IT ONE BLOCK BOTH SIDES OF THE STREET UP AND DOWN LEGALLY. THAT'S THE CONTEXT AREA. HOWEVER, THE CITY OF HOUSTON ORDINANCE DOES IN THE FUTURE. THIS IS SOMETHING CONSIDERED ALLOW DESIGN GUIDELINES TO DEFINE A DIFFERENT CONTEXT AREA THAT HAS NOT BEEN DONE IN THE NOR HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION YET. SO IN THIS CASE, THAT'S THE CHALLENGE, IS YOU SEE ALL THESE PICTURES, IT'S MOSTLY SINGLE STORY STRUCTURES. AND IN FACT, THERE IS ONLY ONE STRUCTURE THAT'S A CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE THAT COULD BE CALLED TWO STORIES. AND THAT'S AT 1 1 2 9 PETTY STREET. UH, IT'S PAGE SEVEN OF 13 LEFT HAND COLUMN. AND THE WAY THAT SECOND FLOOR SITS IS, UM, IN A KIND OF DORMER FASHION IN ON TOP OF THAT BUILDING. SO THE PROPOSED STRUCTURE, AS YOU CAN SEE IN THE FRONT ELEVATION SHOWN HERE ON PAGE EIGHT, UH, AND THEN THERE'S A EAST ELEVATION AND A WEST ELEVATION. ON PAGE NINE, THE APPLICANTS HAVE WORKED, UH, TRY TO WORK WITH THE NOR HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. AND YOU DO HAVE AN ATTACHMENT IN SUPPORT OF THIS PLAN ON PAGE 11 FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. AND THERE'S SOMEONE, UH, HERE FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO SPEAK AS WELL TODAY. UM, AND I WANT TO JUST GO AHEAD THEN AND SAY OUR RECOMMENDATION IS DENIAL BECAUSE THIS DOES NOT SATISFY CRITERIA IN SECTION 33 DASH 2 42, 1, 2, 3, AND FOUR. AND FOR THE RECORD, I'D LIKE TO JUST SPEAK TO THOSE. UM, AND IF JASON, IF YOU COULD PULL UP THE CRITERIA PAGE. UM, IT'S THAT, UH, FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT, WE HAVE THE FOUR CRITERIA. SO NUMBER ONE IS THAT THE DISTANCE FROM THE PROPERTY LINE OF THE FRONT AND SIDE WALLS, PORCHES AND EXTERIOR FEATURES OF ANY PROPOSED NEW CONSTRUCTION MUST BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE DISTANCE FROM THE PROPERTY LINE OF SILVER. SIMILAR ELEMENTS OF EXISTING CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES IN THE CONTEXT AREA. SO IN THIS CONTEXT AREA, THERE IS ONE TWO STORY CONTRIBUTING MAIN HOUSE 1129 PETTY. THE DISTANCE FROM THE PROPERTY LINE OF THE SIDEWALLS, AS I'VE EXPLAINED TO THAT ONE, IS GONNA BE DIFFERENT BECAUSE THE SECOND FLOOR OF THAT IS AN ADDITION IN A DORMER FASHION. SO THAT STRUCTURE, IT'S NOT SIMILAR TO THIS ONE. NUMBER TWO, THE EXTERIOR FEATURES OF THE NEW CONSTRUCTION MUST BE KEPT COMPATIBLE WITH THE EXTERIOR FEATURES OF EXISTING CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES. IN THE CONTEXT AREA WE HAVE HERE, THE MASSING AND ASSOCIATED EXTERIOR FEATURES OF THE PROPOSED TWO STORY STRUCTURE IS NOT COMPATIBLE WITH THE MASSING OF EXISTING CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES IN THE CONTEXT AREAS. FOR THE OBVIOUS REASON I JUST SAID. AND THE PROPOSED CARPORT RIDGE HEIGHT OF 16 FEET, SIX AND A QUARTER INCHES [01:20:01] AND EVE HEIGHT OF 11 FEET APPEAR SIGNIFICANTLY TALLER THAN OTHER CARPORTS IN THE CONTEXT AREA, ALTHOUGH THE APPLICANT WOULD HAVE NO PROBLEM LOWERING THAT. UM, IN AN EARLIER VERSION THEY HAD SUBMITTED, DID HAVE IT LOWER. ITEM THREE IS CRITERIA THREE IS THE SCALE AND PROPORTION OF THE NEW CONSTRUCTION, INCLUDING THE RELATIONSHIP OF THE WIDTH AND ROOF LINE, OVERALL HEIGHT, EVE HEIGHT, FOUNDATION HEIGHT, PORCH HEIGHT, ROOF SHAPE AND ROOF PITCH. AND OTHER DIMENSIONS TO EACH OTHER MUST BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE TYPICAL SCALE AND PROPORTIONS OF EXISTING CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES IN THE CONTEXT AREA. UNLESS SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES SUCH AS AN ATYPICAL USED LOCATION OR A LOT SIZE WARRANT, AN ATYPICAL SCALE AND PROPORTION AND THE OB UM, AND OBJECTS IN THE CON IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT. SO WE KNOW THIS IS JUST A BASIC LOT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE BLOCK. AND SO THE PROPEL THE PRO, THE SCALE AND PROPORTION OF THE PROPOSED NEW HOUSE ISN'T COMPATIBLE WITH THE TYPICAL SCALE SPECIFICALLY IN THE CONTEXT AREA. THERE'S ONLY THE ONE TWO STORY CONTRIBUTING HOUSE. HOWEVER, UM, AND I DESCRIBED THERE THAT THE SECOND FLOOR THERE IS COMPRISED OF A NON-ORIGINAL POP-UP EDITION THAT TAKES UP APPROXIMATELY A THIRD OF THE ORIGINAL HISTORIC HOMES FOOTPRINT. THERE ARE TWO STORY GARAGE APARTMENTS AT 1 1 5 AND 1121 PETTY IN THE CONTEXT AREA THAT ARE CLASSIFIED AS CONTRIBUTING. UM, HOWEVER, THESE ARE NOT TYPICAL, NOR ARE THEY THE MAIN STRUCTURE. FOUR CRITERIA FOR THE HEIGHT OF THE NEW CONSTRUCTION, EXCUSE ME, MUST BE COMPATIBLE, MUST NOT BE TALLER THAN THE TYPICAL HEIGHT OF EXISTING CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES IN THE CONTEXT AREA. AND THE HEIGHT OF THE PROPOSED TWO STORY STRUCTURE AT 27 FEET, SEVEN AND EIGHTH INCHES EXCEEDS THAT OF THOSE OBVIOUSLY 'CAUSE IT'S TWO STORIES. AND, UH, THEN AS IT NOTED HERE THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD ZIONS HAVEN'T BEEN ADOPTED YET FOR THE DISTRICT, THOUGH THEY MAY BE COMING FORTH SHORTLY. THAT IS WHY WE'RE RECOMMENDING DENIAL IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE. AND I'LL TAKE ANY QUESTIONS. OKAY, COMMISSION MEMBERS, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF? I'VE GOT TWO SPEAKERS SIGNED UP FOR THIS ITEM. ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT HEARING QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME? I'M GONNA OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING. THE FIRST SPEAKER WHO IS SIGNED UP ON THIS ITEM IS MR. ROD FRIGO. NEVER DID , UH, ROD FRIGO. AND I'M A AGENT AND INVESTOR WITH TOM MCC QUARTER. WE ALSO DID THE HOUSE NEXT DOOR AT 1115 PETTY. AND UH, I SEE TWO STORY HOUSES BEING BUILT ALL OVER NOR HILL NOW, HUGE. THAT WAS, YOU GO DOWN TO WEST TEMPLE BEHIND PROCTOR PLAZA AND YOU APPROVE TWO OF THE LARGEST TWO STORY HOUSES EVER DEVELOPED IN NOR HILL EVER. AND NOW YOU GOT ONE GOING AT 9 0 1, UH, KEY STREET, WELL, I'M SURE YOU ALL KNOW ABOUT THAT IS CAUSING MAJOR PROBLEMS. NOW, THE PERSON IN VIRGINIA WHO WANTS TO COME AND CONTEST THIS, SHE HAD A MAJOR FLARE UP BECAUSE SHE WAS ONLY ONE OF THE TWO THAT VOTED AGAINST THIS HOUSE, NOR HILL VOTED EIGHT TO TWO TO LET THIS THING BE BUILT, LET SUBDIVISIONS RUN SUBDIVISIONS. THE HISTORIC HEIGHT SHOULD NOT BE RUN IN SUBDIVISIONS. NOW YOU HAVE GUIDELINES. GUIDELINES ARE LIKE LEGAL OPINIONS. IT'S AN OPINION, IT'S NOT A LAW, IT'S NOT A RULE, IT'S JUST A GUIDELINE. NOW THE ALTERNATIVE WOULD BE, I'LL, I'LL PEEL THIS THING, ONE STORY, I'LL TAKE IT ALL THE WAY BACK TO WITHIN THREE FEET OF THAT BACK REAR FENCE. AND THEN VIRGINIA CAN HAVE A REAL FLARE UP BECAUSE SHE WANTS A 20 FOOT REAR SETBACK. AND ALL OF NOR HILL THAT WOULD CHOKE. YOU KNOW WHAT THAT WOULD DO TO PEOPLE THAT WOULD CHOKE OFF THESE YOUNG PEOPLE WHO BOUGHT THESE HOUSES TO WHERE THEY COULD NEVER DO A ROOM ADDITION AND HAVE A FAMILY. AND THAT'S WHAT IT'S ALL ABOUT. NOR HILL'S BECOMING AN ANTI-FAMILY, UH, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD. AND THEY KNOW IT AND THEY'RE TRYING TO STOP IT. NOW, SHE'S NOT GONNA GET THAT REAR SETBACK. I'VE ALREADY TALKED TO SEVERAL COUNCIL PEOPLE THAT'LL NEVER FLY. BUT WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS JUST BUILD A SIMPLE HOUSE. NOW THERE'S A TWO STORY, TWO HOUSES DOWN THAT WAS A HOUSE JUST LIKE, UH, IT WAS BULLDOZED BACK AT 2005. IT WAS BUILT. AND I'M SURE THERE WASN'T RULES IN PLACE, BUT, YOU KNOW, 42 YEARS AGO, I REMEMBER RANDY PACE, WILLIE CHILDERS AND I STANDING ON THE CORNER OF MISHAW AND KEY STREET THAT MY BELL GRANT MOTION TO GRANT THE SPEAKER. ONE MORE TIME. THANK. IS THERE A SECOND? YOU KNOW, ALL IN FAVOR, AYE AYE. AYE. PLEASE PROCEED, SIR. YOU KNOW, WHEN WE'RE STANDING ON KEY STREET, WILLIE CHILDERS WANTED PEOPLE LIKE MYSELF TO HELP DRUM YOU GUYS UP. AND OUR MAIN CONCERN THEN WAS WE'RE ALL FOR IT. BUT WHEN THE GOVERNMENT GETS THEIR HANDS ON SOMETHING, THE OUTREACH BECOMES HUGE, THEN IT BECOMES A DICTATORSHIP. AND WILLIE [01:25:01] AND RANDY PAID NO, NO, NO. AND YOU KNOW WHAT? THE CITY OF HOUSTON CARED SO LITTLE ABOUT THE HISTORIC BACK THEN. WE HAD TO BRING OUR PLANS TO 15TH AND HEIGHTS BOULEVARD AND DROP 'EM OFF AT RANDY PACES OFF FRONT PORCH. AND HE, HE'D OPERATE OUTTA THE LIVING ROOM OF HIS HOUSE. THEY WOULDN'T GIVE HIM AN OFFICE. AND I'M SURE YOU GUYS DON'T REMEMBER, YOU PROBABLY HEARD, TOLD ME THERE WEREN'T EVEN BORN BACK THEN, BUT I REMEMBER IT. AND I DON'T SEE BUILDING THIS TWO STORY HOUSE. FAMILY FRIENDLY. IT'S A FAMILY FRIENDLY HOUSE. THAT'S WHY WE WANT A TWO STORY. WE WANT TO HAVE SOMEONE TO BUY IT, HAVE CHILDREN HAVE A GREEN AREA TO PLAY IN. AND IT FITS IN. IT'S RIGHT IN BETWEEN TWO HUGE GARAGE APARTMENTS. AND I KNOW THAT BECAUSE I'VE WORKED ON BOTH OF THEM. AND ACTUALLY I WORKED ON SIX HOUSES RIGHT THERE IN THAT AREA, THAT ONE BLOCK. I'VE WORKED ON SIX HOUSES. SO I DON'T SEE HOW WE COULD BE DENIED. AND HERE'S ONE ON 14TH STREET THAT YOU APPROVED THAT'S IDENTICAL TO WHAT WE'RE DOING. SAME FOOTPRINT. AND YOU GOT 'EM ALL OVER THE PLACE. I MEAN, I DON'T HAVE TO TELL YOU WHAT YOU GUYS APPROVED, APPROVED, YOU KNOW WHAT YOU APPROVED. I'M SURE YOU'VE SEEN OUR HOUSES. I HAD TWO HOUSES ON THE LAST HOME TOUR, HISTORIC TOUR OUT OF THE FOUR HOUSES, TWO OF THOSE WERE MINE, 10 38 EAST 16TH, AND 7 24 WEST MELWOOD. THOSE ARE OUR HOUSES. WE DON'T BUILD JUNK. AND I JUST FINISHED ONE ON CORTLAND. THAT CERTAINLY WASN'T JUNK. I AIN'T GONNA TELL YOU WHAT IT SOLD FOR. YOU COULD LOOK IT UP AND ZILLOW YOURSELF, BUT I DON'T WANT SOUND LIKE I'M BRAGGING. BUT, UH, THAT'S ALL I COULD SAY. I MEAN, IT WAS AN EIGHT TO TWO BOAT. PBO TOLD ME THIS MORNING, HE SAYS, LOOK, I AIN'T GOING THERE 'CAUSE NOR HILL'S OUT OF THIS. WE APPROVED IT, YOU'RE GOOD TO GO. HE SAYS, AND I TOLD VIRGINIA IF SHE GOES, SHE'S GOING AS A PRIVATE CITIZEN BECAUSE ACTUALLY SHE'S RUNNING A KNIFE THROUGH THE BACKS OF HER COAL BOARD. PEOPLE BY COMING HERE. THEY VOTED AGAINST, SHE VOTED AGAINST IT. THEY VOTED FOR IT EIGHT TO TWO. THAT WAS THE COUNT. IF YOU DON'T BELIEVE IT, CALL 'EM AND ASK THEM. SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU WANNA DO WITH IT. I MEAN, IT'S A VACANT LOT. THERE'S ONLY TWO IN NOR HILL. SO THIS NONSENSE THAT THEY DON'T WANT BUILDERS COMING IN AND BUILDING MONSTER HOUSES. WELL, THERE'S ONLY TWO SHOTS TO BUILD A MONSTER HOUSE. OURS ISN'T A MONSTER. THAT ONE YOU JUST APPROVED AT 7 25 WEST COTTAGE. THAT'S BIG. THAT'S 2,800 SQUARE FEET. SO I, I KNOW IT'S, I'VE HAD A LOT OF PHONE CALLS OVER THIS AND I DIDN'T WANT TO COME HERE 'CAUSE I'M GONNA RETIRE IN JANUARY. I SAID, I DON'T WANNA GO ARGUE WITH THOSE PEOPLE NO MORE. I SAID, A LOT OF THOSE PEOPLE ARE FRIENDS. OH, THEY'RE GOOD PEOPLE. BUT THEY SAID, NO, YOU GOTTA GO MR. FRAGO. OKAY, SO HERE I AM, . I THINK WE HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU. AND I'VE GONE IN FRONT OF YOU, DAVID MANY TIMES, AND I'VE NEVER HAD A PROBLEM WITH YOU. AND, UH, I NEVER HAD A PROBLEM WITH ROMAN. I KNOW ROMAN PERSONALLY. I REMEMBER TODAY HE WAS HIRED AND, UH, WE, WE'VE HAD OUR DIFFERENCES, BUT WE'VE ALWAYS WORKED THEM OUT. AND JUST LIKE WITH NOR HILL, AND THIS IS WHERE I, I'M, I'M MORE UPSET ABOUT IS THAT I FEEL THE HISTORIC THROUGH NOR HILL UNDER THE BUS. AND NOW WHAT YOU GOT IS A SITUATION IN NOR HILL WHERE PEOPLE ARE GONNA SAY, WHY THE HELL SHOULD I GO TO THE CIVICS CLUB AND PRESENT MY STUFF IF THE HISTORICS GONNA COME IN AND BOOT IT OUT? I SPENT $3,000 IN A YEAR'S TIME NEGOTIATING WITH NOR HILL CHANGING THE PLANS OVER, OVER AND OVER JUST TO HAVE THE, THE HISTORIC COME IN AND S**T, CAN IT ALL AT ONE TIME. MR. FRAGO, I'VE GOT A QUESTION FOR YOU IF YOU DON'T MIND. OKAY. DO YOU HAVE, OR DOES YOUR COMPANY HAVE A CLIENT THAT YOU'RE DESIGNING FOR? OR IS THIS A SPEC? NO, WE'RE GONNA, THIS IS A SPEC, SPEC, SPEC. I MEAN, WE'RE, WE'VE HAD, WE HAD PEOPLE INQUIRING TO BUY IT. WE JUST SOLD ONE ON CORTLAND STREET AND THERE'S OTHER PEOPLE ASKING IF WE HAD ANY OTHER HOUSES COMING UP FOR SALE. I SAID, WELL, WE'RE TRYING TO GET PERMITS TO BUILD THIS ONE. OKAY. I SHOWED 'EM THE PLANS WE HAD AND THERE'S A LOT OF INTEREST. WE HAVE NEVER HAD A PROBLEM SELLING ONE HOUSE THAT WE GOT OUR HANDS ON. WELL, THE REASON I ASK IS IN THE SPIRIT OF, OF, UM, YOU KNOW, COOPERATION, IF THERE'S A WAY THAT, THAT, UM, WE COULD WORK TOGETHER AS THE COMMISSION, UM, TO, TO MAYBE ADDRESS SOME OF THE ISSUES WHERE, WHERE STAFF FEELS IT DOESN'T MEET THE ORDINANCE TOGETHER. I MEAN, I WORKED THE YEAR WITH NOR HILL AND SPENT A LOT OF MONEY WORKING WITH 'EM. I MEAN, I CHANGED THE PLAN. THEY, THEY'D SAY, DO THIS, DO THIS. I'D HAVE AN ARCHITECT CHANGE IT, BRING IT BACK. THAT'S GOOD. BUT WE WANT THIS, THIS, AND THIS. NOW, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO, TO UPHOLD THE ORDINANCE. AND I UNDERSTAND, AND OUR STAFF IS SAYING IT DOESN'T MEET THESE PARTICULAR CRITERIA, THE ORDINANCE. SO I'M JUST WONDERING IF THERE IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO, THEY'RE SAYING IS IT'S OPINION ORDINANCE. NOW, BUILDING DESIGN GUIDELINES ARE NOT A LAW. THEY'RE AN OPINION. THEY'RE NOT SAYING YOU HAVE TO GO BY IT. THEY'RE JUST SAYING, THIS IS WHAT WE'D LIKE YOU TO DO. NOW I USE ALL THE MATERIALS TO MATCH ALL THE NEIGHBORHOODS. I ONE OF THE FEW THAT USES TREATED ONE 17 SOCIETY, VERY FEW PEOPLE THEN, YOU KNOW, YOU COULD BUY IT, YOU'LL PAY FOR IT, BUT [01:30:01] YOU COULD BUY IT. SO, AND YOU CAN ASK ROMAN, HIM AND I HAVE HAD SOME GOOD ARGUMENTS BEFORE, BUT WE ALL WORKED IT OUT. WE WORKED OUT A LOT OF STUFF OVER THE LAST 15, 20 YEARS. YOU, YOU JUST WORK IT OUT, BUT YOU SHOULDN'T JUST, S**T CAN THE DEAL. WELL, SO THAT, THAT WAS THE SPIRIT OF, OF MY COMMENT AND MY QUESTION IS, IF THERE IS AN OPPORTUNITY, UM, INSTEAD OF, OF DENYING THIS, TO DEFER THIS, TO HAVE YOU WORK WITH STAFF, UM, OVER THE COURSE OF THE NEXT MONTH TO, TO BRING THIS INTO ALIGNMENT WITH THE COURT, WITH THE ORDINANCE. WE HAD IT PRETTY WELL WORKED OUT UNTIL THIS LETTER CAME IN, BUT YOU'RE TALKING ONE LETTER FROM 1700 PEOPLE THAT LIVE IN NOR HILL. ONE PERSON SENT A ORDER IN HERE. WELL, SIR, RESPECTFULLY, I'M SEEING FOUR ITEMS WHERE IT DOES NOT SATISFY THE ORDINANCE. SO I I THEN AGAIN, IF WE CAN BRING, IF WE CAN BRING THOSE INTO, UM, INTO SATISFACTORY, IF WE CAN GREEN LIGHT THOSE, THEN I THINK WE CAN MOVE FORWARD. KIM WANNA SAY SOMETHING? WELL, I THINK, WELL, I MEAN, LOOK, THE ORDINANCE IS THE BASIS OF THIS COMMISSION IS THE ORDINANCE. THAT, THAT'S, THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT'S VOTED ON BY CITY COUNCIL. AND SO, AND WE'RE HERE TO UPHOLD THOSE CRITERIA. AND I MEAN, THE OFFER FROM COMMISSIONER JACK JACKSON OF A POTENTIAL DEFERMENT, WHICH HAS TO BE WEIGHED OR TESTED AMONG THE COMMISSION IS JUST A, A WAY TO, UH, YOU KNOW, ALLOW, ALLOW YOU A CHANCE TO HAVE ADDITIONAL CONVERSATIONS WITH, I'D BE WILLING TO OUR STAFF, I'D BE YELL WITH ANY ONE OF THESE MEMBERS, THE, THE CHARLIE'S ANGELS HERE AND, UH, AND, UH, ROMAN AND, AND EVEN JASON. HIM AND I HAVE HAD SOME RUN INS BEFORE, BUT I'D BE WILLING TO SIT WITH ANY ONE OF 'EM, A TABLE AND WORK ANYTHING OUT. I MEAN, I CAN EVEN MAKE MY OWN DECISIONS ON THIS DEAL. I DON'T HAVE TO CALL BACK TO MR. MCCARTER AND SAY, HEY, I'M GONNA GIVE THIS UP. WE'RE GONNA GET THIS. I I CAN DO WHATEVER I WANNA DO. I UNDERSTAND. WELL, THANK, THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS AND WE DO HAVE ONE MORE SPEAKER SIGNED UP FOR THIS ITEM. ALL RIGHT. AND THEN THE COMMISSION WILL DISCUSS AMONGST ITSELF, UH, THE NEXT APPLICANT WHO HAS SIGNED UP IS VIRGINIA. KELSEY, IF YOU COULD, I'M, IF, IF YOU COULD RESTATE YOUR NAME. YES, I'M VIRGINIA KELSEY, WHO'S BEEN TALKED ABOUT, AND I AM HERE AS A PERSONAL RESIDENT OF NOR HILL AND NOT AS A BOARD MEMBER. I WASN'T GOING TO TALK ABOUT WHAT HAPPENED, BUT SINCE YOU BROUGHT IT UP BY ALL MEETINGS, I'LL JUST SAY THERE WAS CONSIDERABLE PRESSURE PUT ON THE BOARD. OKAY. YOU CAN TAKE THAT FOR WHATEVER YOU WISH THAT TO MEAN. NOW I'LL STATE WHAT I HAVE TO SAY. UM, AS ROMAN POINTED OUT THAT THIS IS A CONTEXT AREA, WHICH IS JUST THE BLOCK FACE AND THE ONE ACROSS. AND SO THERE ARE NO TWO STORY RESIDENTS IN THAT AREA, UM, THAT APPLY. THE TWO STORY RESIDENT WAS BUILT IN 2007 BEFORE THE 2015, UM, ADOPTION OF THIS, OF THE ORDINANCE. AND THEN THE MODEST APPRO, UM, UH, ADDITION AT 1129 WAS DONE IN 1992. AND AGAIN, IT WAS BEFORE THE CURRENT, UM, ORDINANCE. AND SO WE HAVE TO LOOK AT THIS AS WHAT REALLY IS THE CONTRIBUTING AREA. AND IT IS A VERY SMALL AND MODEST STREET. AND SO WHAT THEY'RE PROPOSING IS A FAR A 0.47 WHERE ALL OF NOR HILL HAS 0.30. SO THIS IS, UH, APPRECIABLY DIFFERENT. AND THEN THE SECOND FLOOR, HE HAS BACK 15 FEET, EIGHT INCHES FROM THE FRONT WALL. UM, AND THE TYPICAL SETBACK FOR A SECOND FLOOR ADDITIONS IS CLOSER TO 25 FEET OR MORE FROM THE FRONT OF A BUILDING A HOUSE. UM, THE SECOND FLOOR PLATE HEIGHT IS NINE FEET INSTEAD OF THE TYPICAL EIGHT FEET. SO THE SCALE OF THIS IS VERY DIFFERENT. LASTLY, MOTION TO GRANT THE SPEAKER MORE TIME. SECOND. SECOND. OKAY. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. THIS IS JUST A SORT OF A, A PERSONAL COMMENT THAT I DON'T KNOW WHY, UH, THEY'RE INTERESTED IN DESIGNING A HOUSE THAT LOOKS LIKE A HOUSE WITH AN ADDITION. YOU KNOW, THIS, THESE ARE BUNGALOW HOMES. THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO DESIGN SOMETHING REALLY FABULOUS, IS A NEW HOUSE. AND HISTORICALLY THERE ARE TWO STORY HOUSES THAT ARE BUNGALOWS WHERE THE SECOND FLOOR IS MODEST IN SCALE. THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY TO CREATE [01:35:01] A MODEL FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD INSTEAD OF DOING AND COPYING THE WORST THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAS HAS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. SORRY. ANY QUESTIONS OF THE SPEAKER FROM THE COMMISSION? OKAY, THANK YOU. NOT HEARING, I'M GONNA GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, UH, COMMISSION MEMBERS. WE'VE HAD A LOT OF DISCUSSIONS FROM THE, UH, SPEAKERS. IS THERE ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS OF STAFF OR IS THERE A MOTION? I I HAVE A QUESTION FOR COMMISSIONER. OW. JACKSON, DID SHE INTEND HER STATEMENT, EARLIER STATEMENT TO BE A RECOMMENDATION? UM, WELL, I WAS PREPARED TO MAKE A MOTION, UM, WITH SOME DIRECTION TO STAFF, BUT SO I, YES, BUT I HEAR COMMISSIONER K PROBABLY DO THE SAME THING. OKAY. WHY DON'T YOU GO AHEAD AND, UH, WELL, MY MOTION WOULD BE TO, UM, TO DEFER THE APPLICATION AND I WOULD LIKE TO ASK STAFF, UM, IN WORKING WITH THE BUILDER, UM, TO, TO PLEASE CONSIDER MS. KELSEY'S COMMENTS. UM, WHICH I WILL ECHO AS A HISTORIC PRESERVATION PROFESSIONAL, UM, THAT THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY, UM, TO DESIGN SOMETHING THAT IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN MASSING, UH, AND EVEN IN MATERIALS, BUT DOES NOT LOOK LIKE IT IS TRYING TO REPLICATE A HOUSE THAT HAS BEEN THERE MORE THAN A HUNDRED, 120 YEARS. UM, I, I, I TOO DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY YOU WOULD DESIGN A CAMELBACK AS A NEW CONSTRUCTION, UH, IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD. AND I'M CONCERNED THAT GIVEN MR. REGO'S COMMENTS ABOUT THE MATERIALS THAT HE'S USING, UH, THAT IN THE FUTURE THIS COULD BE MISTAKEN AS AN ORIGINAL CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE, UH, FROM THE CRAFTSWOMAN PERIOD LONG-WINDED MOTION. OKAY. UM, SECOND AND DISCUSSION. COMMISSIONER COUCH, DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENT TO MAKE OR NO, I, I AGREE WITH EVERYTHING THAT THAT WAS SAID. WELL, CHAIR RU CHECK ONE MORE DISCUSSION ITEM MR. CURRY TO CLARIFY. UH, THE CURRENT STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS WHAT? DENIAL. DENIAL. SO WE'RE THE, YOUR MOTION IS? THE MOTION IS. SO MY, MY MOTION IS IN THE SPIRIT OF COOPERATION OR, OR DEFER. YEAH. THAT, THAT INSTEAD OF DENYING IT, THAT WE WOULD DEFER THIS AND ALLOW THE APPLICANT TIME TO WORK WITH STAFF ANOTHER MONTH TO WORK WITH STAFF TO SEE IF, UM, IF HE COULD COME INTO COMPLIANCE WITH THE ORDINANCE, UM, FROM THE FOUR ITEMS THAT ARE LISTED HERE AND ALSO, UH, A LITTLE BETTER DESIGN THAT MIGHT BE MORE ACCEPTABLE TO THE IMMEDIATE NEIGHBORS AND NOR HILL COMMUNITY. THANK YOU. MR. YOU HAVE ANY QUESTION OR YOU'RE, YOU'RE GOOD? NO, I THINK THERE'S A SECOND ALREADY, RIGHT? UH, THERE'S A SECOND. I'M READY TO VOTE. WE CAN VOTE. CAN VOTE. OKAY. ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION? AYE. AYE. ALL. ANY OPPOSED? ANY ABSTENTIONS? ALRIGHT, THAT MOTION PASSES CHAIR. I APOLOGIZE. I'VE GOT TO LEAVE NOW. OKAY. DO WE STILL HAVE A QUORUM? YEAH, WE STILL HAVE A QUORUM, I BELIEVE. OKAY. MOVING ON TO THE NEXT ITEM. GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIR PERSON AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION. THIS IS STAFF PERSON TAYLOR VALLEY. I SUBMIT ITEM B NINE AT 1810 SUMMER STREET, WHICH IS THE AUTO PECK HOUSE, UM, PROTECTED LANDMARK AND IS IN THE HIGH FIRST WARD. HISTORIC DISTRICT. THE APPLICANT PROPOSES TO CONSTRUCT A TWO STORY 1,367 SQUARE FOOT TWO STORY REAR EDITION. IT WILL HAVE SMOOTH CEMENTITIOUS SIDING WITH THE FOUR AND A HALF INCH REVEAL TO MATCH THE EXISTING. ALL WINDOWS ARE TO BE INSET AND RECESSED AND THERE WILL BE A NEW HIP METAL ROOF TO MATCH. THE EXISTING COMMISSIONER YAP. REVIEWED THIS APPLICATION WITH STAFF AND HAD A FEW SUGGESTIONS THAT THE AGENT TRIED TO ADDRESS AND WE THANK HIM FOR HIS TIME. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION. THE OWNER IS AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS VIRTUALLY. I'M AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS. THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION. THANK YOU. COMMISSION MEMBERS. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF ON THIS ITEM? WHY ARE WE DISCUSSING THIS SEPARATELY? IT WAS PULLED, I DON'T RECALL WHY. YEAH. UH, UM, I PULLED IT. SO I ACTUALLY WAS WONDERING WHETHER I SHOULD SPEAK AFTER THE OWNER HAS SPOKEN OR WHETHER YOU WOULD LIKE TO HEAR MY CONCERNS. NOW. I DON'T BELIEVE I HAVE ANYONE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM EITHER. UM, I WAS TOLD BY THE AGENT, UM, WHO WASN'T ABLE TO MAKE IT, THAT THE OWNER IS ON STANDBY IF NEED BE, IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS DIRECTED TO THEM. [01:40:02] OKAY. UM, PERHAPS YOU SHOULD ASK YOUR QUESTIONS OF STAFF FIRST SO WE CAN ESTABLISH THE QUESTIONS. OKAY. UH, THE, THE FIRST THING THAT I HAVE A CONCERN ABOUT IS THAT, UH, THIS HOUSE, UH, UH, ON TOP OF IT BEING IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT IS ACTUALLY A PROTECTED LANDMARK AS WELL. AND FOR THAT MATTER, UH, MY CONCERN IS THAT IF YOU LOOK ON PAGE, UH, 14 OF 16, UH, WHICH I ALSO HAVE HIGHLIGHTED TO TAYLOR EARLIER, THAT MY CONCERN IS THAT, UH, I VALUE THIS HOUSE, UH, VERY HIGHLY IN THE FACT THAT IT'S A PROTECTED LANDMARK, THAT WE SHOULDN'T BE MOVING WINDOWS AROUND IN THE ORIGINAL PART OF THE HOUSE. UH, IF IT WAS, IT WAS NICELY, UH, RESTORED TO THE FACT THAT IT WAS, THE WINDOWS ARE SYMMETRICAL TO THE ROOMS AS WELL. AND, BUT IN THE, I GUESS IN THE FINAL RENDITION THAT CAME OUT FOR THIS, UH, HIT COMMISSION, THAT THE WINDOW WAS STILL MOVED AND THERE'S AN, UH, ANOTHER WINDOW ADDED TO THE ORIGINAL PART OF THE HOUSE THAT IS A CONCERN OF MINE. THE SECOND CONCERN OF MINE IS THAT WE HAVE TALKED FOR MANY MONTHS, UH, OVER MANY SESSIONS ABOUT REMOVING OF HISTORIC MATERIAL, UH, UH, AS WELL. WHEN I SEE A SECONDARY ADDITION THAT COMES OVER THE ORIGINAL HOUSE AND LIVING SPACES OR CONDITION SPACES CREATED OUT OF THAT, THAT MEANS THEM CAN ONLY MEAN A LOT OF REMOVAL OF HISTORIC MATERIAL, UH, ALL THE WAY FROM POSSIBLY THE FLOOR ALL TO THE CEILING, AS WELL AS TO THE RAFTERS TO ACCOMMODATE THE LIVING CONDITION. SO WHEN DO WE REALLY, UH, THIS IS A QUESTION I HAVE FOR THE COMMISSION. WHEN DO WE CRITICALLY, UH, CRITICIZE FOR THE REMOVING OF HISTORIC MATERIAL VERSUS NOT IN THIS CASE? CLEARLY HISTORIC MATERIAL ARE TO BE REMOVED. AND THERE IS ANOTHER ITEM THAT I BROUGHT UP AS WELL THAT WAS NUMBER 18 THAT I'M PLANNING TO BRING BACK THIS POINT ON THE OTHER, UH, ON THE OTHER ITEM AS WELL. SO THESE ARE THE TWO CONCERNS THAT I HAVE. UH, ESPECIALLY FOR A PROTECTED LANDMARK HOUSE, WE SHOULD APPRECIATE THE HOUSE OR WHAT, HOW IT WAS BUILT AND NOT, IN SOME WAYS RE-ENGINEER THE WINDOWS BECAUSE IT SUITS THE NEW OWNER BETTER BECAUSE THE PREVIOUS OWNER HAD RESTORED THE HOUSE TO ITS GLORY. UH, AND I DON'T WANT A PRECEDENT TO BE SET SO ANYBODY CAN JUST GO OVER TO THE OLD HOUSE AND SAY, I WANNA CHANGE THE WINDOW HERE AND THERE JUST TO FIT IT FOR THEIR FUTURE NEEDS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. BUT THERE'S NOT IT PROTECTED LANDMARK. IT'S THE SAME RULES AS BEING IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT, ISN'T IT? IT DOESN'T GET DIFFERENT KIND OF TREATMENT. YEAH, I DON'T KNOW WHY, BUT I, I THINK SOMETIMES PEOPLE APPLY FOR A PROTECTED LANDMARK JUST, UH, TO, TO, USUALLY THEY'RE OUTSIDE HISTORIC DISTRICTS, IT SEEMS TO ME USUALLY, BUT I KNOW THAT WE'VE SEEN SOME THAT ARE RN I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S JUST ANOTHER, UM, LIKE AN HONORIFIC OR SOMETHING. CORRECT. I CAN ANSWER THAT QUESTION, PLEASE. UH, I THINK, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, UH, I, I LIVE IN THE SAME NEIGHBORHOOD. THE, UH, PLM CAME FIRST BEFORE THE HISTORIC, UH, DISTRICT GOT GAZED. OKAY, YEAH, THERE YOU GO. SO THAT'S WHY I VALUE THIS HOUSE EVEN MORE HIGHLY BECAUSE IT, SOMEBODY, UH, RESTORED IT, UH, THE MYELITIS RESTORED THE, THE, THE STRUCTURE AND TURN IT INTO AN OFFICE TO SHOWCASE THE IT TO THE NEIGHBORS. AND NOW WE'RE WANTING TO REJIG THE RESTORED HOUSE. I THINK THAT'S NOT THE SPIRIT OF WHAT, UH, UH, US TRYING TO DO PLMS OR HISTORIC DISTRICT IS ABOUT. THANK YOU. BUT WE'VE MOVED, ALLOWED THEM TO MOVE WINDOWS WHEN THEY'RE TOWARDS THE BACK OF THE HOUSE ON OTHER PROJECTS WE HAVE, I MEAN, I, I WISH THEY WOULDN'T DO IT, BUT I THINK WE'VE, WE'VE DONE THAT ON, ON NUMBERS OF PROJECTS, BUT THAT'S NOT VIEWABLE FROM THE CITY AND WE HAVE NO, NO CONTROL OVER THAT. WHAT DO YOU MEAN THERE'S NO, THIS, THIS THING IS VIEWABLE FROM THE, FROM THE, THE SIDE OF THE HOUSE, THE BACK, THE BACK VERSUS THE, THE BACK VERSUS THE SIDE SIDE VIEW? YEAH. I MEAN, THE STAFF REVIEWED IT AND THEY SAID THEY THOUGHT IT WAS OKAY. IS THIS A CORNER LOT? NO, THIS IS INTERIOR LOT. HI, THIS IS THE OWNER. CAN WE MAKE A COMMENT ON THE WINDOW? YES. LET ME, LET ME OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. COULD YOU STATE YOUR NAME AND THEN ADDRESS THE COMMISSION? [01:45:01] UM, I'M ANDREA CAMPBELL. THIS IS MY HUSBAND CARL. UM, SO I BELIEVE THE REASON THE WINDOW WAS, UM, ACCEPTED IN THE INITIAL REVIEW WAS THAT THAT BACK ROOM, WHICH IS OUR KITCHEN RIGHT NOW, IS ACTUALLY IN ADDITION TO THE ORIGINAL PROPERTY. MM-HMM. BUT EVEN ITS ADDITION, IT'S PROBABLY REALLY OLD. SO I WOULD STILL SAY IT'S HISTORIC AT THIS POINT. DO YOU KNOW THE AGE OF THE ADDITION, MA'AM? I DO NOT. BUT IF IT HAS THOSE TWO OVER TWO WINDOWS, THOSE ARE OLD WINDOWS AND THE WINDOWS HAVE ACTUALLY BEEN UPDATED. RIGHT. LAURA, LAURA AND EVAN MICHAEL LEAD, I BELIEVE, UPDATED THOSE WINDOWS WHEN THEY, UH, REDID THE HOUSE IN 2009. LIKE REPLACE THEM OR, OR RE REHABILITATED THEM, REPLACED WITH THE NEW ALUMINUM WINDOWS. ARE ARE THEY, AND, AND WE ACTUALLY JUST TO, JUST TO ADD ON TO WHAT DOMINIC WAS SAYING ABOUT THEM GETTING THE LANDMARK DESIGNATION AND, YOU KNOW, DOING THIS ALL IN THE SPIRIT OF IT BEING A LANDMARK, UM, YOU KNOW, THEY STILL LIVE ACROSS THE STREET FROM US. AND SO WE WENT TO THEM WITH OUR IDEA ON THE ADDITION. AND UM, WE'RE, WE'RE WORKING WITH FOURSQUARE DESIGN, THEIR, YOU KNOW, THEIR OLD COMPANY SLASH CURRENT. I'M NOT SURE WHAT THEIR LEVEL OF INVOLVEMENT IS STILL, BUT WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH THEM ON THE DESIGN. SO, SO ARE THESE REPLACEMENT WINDOWS, ARE THEY ORIGINAL? UM, I BELIEVE WHENEVER I DID MEET WITH THE AGENT THAT SHE MENTIONED THAT THEY WEREN'T ORIGINAL, UM, SHE MENTIONED THAT THERE WAS, WAS AT SOME POINT, UM, SOME ALTERATIONS, BUT I COULDN'T REALLY FIND AT WHAT POINT IN TIME THOSE WERE DONE. UM, COMMISSIONER K IF YOU LOOK AT THE, UH, PAGE FIVE OF 16, YOU COULD SEE A SAND BOND MAP AT THE TOP, UH, WHERE IT'S, UH, REC, THERE'S A ORANGE RECTANGLE OR RIGHT RECTANGLE DRAWN IN. YOU CAN SEE THAT THE TAIL END OF THE HOUSE HAS ALREADY EXISTED BACK THEN. SO IT TO SAY THAT THIS, THE ADDITION HAS BEEN AT LEAST THAT LONG. SURE. I, I AGREE WITH YOU THAT THE EDITION'S HISTORIC AT THIS POINT, THAT THAT'S WHAT THE POINT I WAS TRYING TO MAKE. BUT IF THE WINDOWS HAVE BEEN REPLACED AND THEY'RE NOT THE ORIGINAL WINDOWS, THEN I'D BE A LITTLE BIT MORE OKAY WITH THEM BEING CHANGED IF THEY'RE ACTUALLY ALUMINUM WINDOWS THAT ARE ONLY FROM 2009. BUT, BUT I DON'T KNOW. HAS ANYONE BEEN ABLE TO, DOES THAT MEAN THEY'RE ALUMINUM CLAD WOOD WINDOWS? NO, THEY LOOK, LOOK AT THE, LOOK AT THE PICTURE AND LOOK HOW NARROW THE RAIL TILES ARE. HAS ANYONE BEEN OUT TO THE HOUSE? ROMAN? SO THIS IS THE OWNER CARL CAMPBELL PUBLIC STATE. THE NOTE THAT'S BLAZED ACROSS THE FRONT SHEET OF MY PAPER IS NUMBER ONE, THERE'S NO EXCUSE FOR NOT HAVING A FULL SET OF PHOTOS. YES. IT'S JUST MY FAULT. I APOLOGIZE. OKAY. AND, UH, SO, UH, MR. MR. CAMPBELL, COULD YOU ANNOUNCE YOUR FULL NAME AND ADDRESS THE COMMISSION? YES, UH, CARL CAMPBELL'S MY FULL NAME. AND THEN, UH, YEAH, SO WHEN EVAN AND LAURA RESTORED THE HOUSE IN THE 2009 TO 2000, I THINK 14 IS WHEN THE GOOD BRICK AWARD CAME THROUGH. UH, THEY DID A WHOLE RENOVATION TO, UH, TO THE HOUSE FROM, UH, PLUMBING, ELECTRICAL, AND UH, UPDATING THE WINDOWS TO, TO THE MODERN STANDARD WINDOWS. UH, KEEPING THE, THE SIMILAR DESIGN TO WHAT THEY WERE FOR THE HISTORIC APPEARANCE OF IT. BUT THEY ARE ALL BRAND NEW WINDOWS AS OF 2009. YEAH. OKAY. THANK YOU. OKAY, I'M GONNA ASK IF THERE'S ANY OTHER MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC THAT ARE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM. ATTENDING VIRTUALLY OR IN THE ROOM. OKAY. NOT HEARING ANYONE. I'M GONNA CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING COMMISSIONER, I GUESS COMMISSION MEMBERS. ARE THERE ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS OR DISCUSSIONS? UH, COMMISSIONERS. I THINK WE NEED TO LOOK AT PAGE ALSO FOUR OF 16. IF THEY WERE, UH, WOULD, I THINK THEY ARE, IF WE'RE LOOKING AT THE PICTURES OF THAT IN THE FRONT BELOW THE FRONT GABLE, EVEN IF THEY WERE REPLACED, I THINK THEY'RE LIKELY GEL ONE TWO OVER TWO WINDOWS, BUT THERE WOOD AND INSET, SO THEY'RE NOT LIKE, YOU KNOW, ALUMINUM REPLACEMENT WINDOWS. SO THERE WAS A, WHAT I AM TRY TO HIGHLIGHT IS THAT THE SPIRIT OF RESTORATION WAS CLEARLY, UH, UNDERLYING THIS HOUSE'S RESTORATION, NOT JUST FOR SIMPLE, UH, TURNING INTO AN OFFICE AND FOR THAT MATTER, AND THEY RESPECTED THE, UH, I GUESS THE, [01:50:01] THE DIMENSIONS OF THE WINDOWS AS WELL. UH, IF YOU LOOK AT THEM, THEY'RE REALLY TALL, UH, AS WELL HACKING BACK TO THE ORIGINAL QUEEN END PERIOD. THEREFORE, TO ME, IF THEY WERE LOOKING TO REFLECT THE ORIGINAL, UH, DIMENSIONS AND THE, AND THE, I WOULD GUESS I WOULD SAY THE SIZING OF THE WINDOWS, THEN THEY ALSO RESPECTED THE, THE EXISTENCE OF THOSE WINDOWS. ONE IN ONE ROOM TWO IN ANOTHER ROOM, AND THEN ONE IN THE BACK. SO FOR THAT, I FEEL THAT WE SHOULD RESPECT THAT, UH, THAT SPIRIT, THAT WAS HOW IT WAS RESTORED, AS OPPOSED TO NOW ADDING ANOTHER WINDOW AND MOVING THAT WINDOW, UH, A LITTLE BIT OFFSET. THAT'S MY POINT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. I ACTUALLY HAVE A QUOTE, A COMMENT THAT'S A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT ON THE ADDITION THAT THE WINDOWS ARE TWO OVER TWO. DON'T WE NORMALLY FROWN ON THAT KIND OF CHOICE, RATHER HAVE THEM BE ONE OVER ONE WINDOWS OR SINGLE PANE IF THEY'RE CASE MEANT WINDOWS? 'CAUSE WE DON'T WANT THEM TO BE MISTAKEN FOR HISTORIC WINDOWS. UH, I THINK IT'S A CON CONSIDERATION. I MEAN, I, I'VE SEEN IT GO DIFFERENT WAYS, BUT IT IS MORE OFTEN THAT THEY'RE ONE OVER ONE JUST TO MAKE THEM APPEAR TO BE OF OUR TIME. UM, THAT SEEMS TO BE PRETTY CONSISTENT. 'CAUSE I THINK WE'VE MADE PEOPLE CHANGE THE WINDOW PATTERN BEFORE WHEN THEY WERE TRYING TO DO MORE DECORATIVE WINDOW PATTERNS TO MAKE THEM LOOK LIKE THEY'RE MAYBE THESE WINDOWS THAT THEY CHANGE ON THE BACK OF THE OLD PART OF THE HOUSE. THEY HAVE TO BE ONE OVER ONE ALSO TO SHOW THAT THEY'RE NOT THE ORIGINAL OR IMITATING THE ORIGINAL WINDOWS. UH, I SECOND THAT BECAUSE THAT WAS MY OTHER COMMENT. I NEED A, I NEED A MOTION TO SECOND FIRST. SO MAKE A PROPOSAL ON, I KNOW YOU DIDN'T, BUT I'M, BUT I'M JUST SAYING, BUT I, WHAT, WHAT, WHAT I NEED IS A MOTION, UM, YOU KNOW, SECOND DISAGREE . UM, BUT I, I, I THINK, UH, I MEAN WE, WE, WE NEED A MOTION EVENTUALLY, BUT, BUT WHAT I, I CAN SYMPATHIZE WITH THE OWNER'S DESIRE TO HAVE TWO WINDOWS. I SEE THAT THEY'RE FLANKING A, A BED, WHEREAS IN THE PREVIOUS DESIGN THEY WERE, THERE WAS A SINGLE WINDOW CORRESPONDING TO THE CENTRAL AREA IN THE KITCHEN. I THINK WHAT I FIND A LITTLE BIT TROUBLING IS, IS NOT THE MOVING OF THE WINDOW, BUT THE VERY NARROW, THE HOW CLOSE THAT WINDOW IS TO THE CORNER, UM, OF THAT PART OF THE HOUSE. LIKE WHERE IT THEN TURNS AND GOES BACK. THAT SEEMS LIKE ON PAGE 14 OF 16 MM-HMM . THE LOWER, YOU CAN SEE IT ON THE BOTTOM THAT IT'S SORT OF RIGHT UP AGAINST THE CORNER, WHICH TO ME THAT LOOKS, IT'S NOT IN KEEPING WITH HOW A HOUSE WOULD'VE BEEN BUILT IN THE ORIGINAL TIME. UM, THE WINDOW WOULDN'T BE THAT CLOSE TO THE, THE EDGE. SO IT'S A DECISION THAT'S REFLECTING THE ROOM, BUT DOESN'T SEEM TO RESPECT THE APPEARANCE FROM THE OUTSIDE. BUT I, I, I'M JUST, I DON'T WANNA BE, I CAN'T HELP BEING AN ARCHITECT, BUT AT THIS POINT I'M LOOKING OUT THE CLOSET. IF THEY MOVED THE DOOR FROM ONE SIDE TO THE OTHER, THEN THEY COULD PUT THE BED AGAINST THAT WALL AND THEN LEAVE THE WINDOW WHERE IT IS AND IT WOULDN'T BE IN THE MIDDLE OF THE BED. IF THEY PUT THE BED ON, ON THE OUTSIDE WALL LIKE IT IS NOW, THEN THEY COULD JUST KEEP THE WINDOW. THAT'S WHAT WE WERE JUST ABOUT TO SAY. WE WOULD BE HAPPY TO MAKE THAT CHANGE. OKAY, THEN. SO CAN, CAN I MAKE A, A PROPOSAL ? I, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE ACCEPT THE, THE PLAN WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS. ONE THAT THEY MAKE THAT CHANGE IN THE BEDROOM SO THAT THEY CAN KEEP THE WINDOW WHERE IT IS IN THE OLD PART OF THE HOUSE, AND TWO, THAT THE NEW WINDOWS ON THE ADDITION BE ONE OVER ONE. OKAY. IS THERE A SECOND? A SECOND. CAN WE HAVE A DISCUSSION BEFORE A SECOND OR A AFTER THE SECOND? AFTER THE SECOND , WHICH IS NOW, I MEAN, YOU, YOU CAN DISCUSS. OKAY. I I HAVE A SECOND. YEAH. UH, I THINK, UH, THEY, UH, I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER, UH, COUCH ON THE, ON THE ITEM ON THE WINDOWS, BUT I'M STILL CONCERNED ABOUT THE, UH, BUILDING OVER LIVING SPACE OVER HISTORIC HOUSE WHEREBY WE ARE REMOVING HISTORIC MATERIAL AS OPPOSED TO US JUST HAVING AN ADDITION START FROM THE REAR END OF THE HOUSE. AND, YOU KNOW, TYPICALLY WE HAVE AN INSET AND THEN BUILD ONTO THAT ADDITION. AND RIGHT NOW, THIS LIVING SPACE COME OVER THE ORIGINAL HOUSE. BUT, BUT WE, AND THAT'S STILL CONCERN FOR THAT, THAT THE, THE SHALL APPROVED ADDITION THAT COVERS 50% OF THE HOUSE, THAT THAT A AUTOMATICALLY GETS APPROVED IF YOU MEET THE CONDITIONS. I, I KNOW THAT IT'S SAD TO TAKE THE MATERIAL AWAY, BUT THEY'RE LEAVING THE CORNERS EXPOSED [01:55:01] AND THEY'VE GRACIOUSLY AGREED TO REPLAN PART OF THE HOUSE SO WE CAN KEEP THE WINDOW IN ORIGINAL PATTERN. I, I, I JUST, THIS PLAN SEEMS LIKE IT'S, IT'S GOOD TO GO. THANK YOU. OKAY. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION BEFORE WE CALL THE VOTE? OKAY, SO ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION AS STATED, SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. AYE. AYE. AYE. ARE THERE ANY OPPOSED? YEP, OPPOSES. OKAY. ANY ABSTENTIONS? OKAY, THAT MOTION PASSES. WE ARE NOW MOVING, I BELIEVE TO ITEM 11 IF I'M CORRECT, 8 0 7 WOODLAND STREET. THANK YOU COMMISSIONERS. THANK YOU FOR WORKING ON THAT LAST ITEM AND STAFF MEMBER TAYLOR FOR WORKING ON THAT ONE SO HARD. THIS IS ITEM NUMBER B 11 8,000,007 WOODLAND STREET. AND THIS PERTAINS TO, UH, THIS APPLICATION IS FOR WORK THAT HAS BEEN COMPLETED WORK WITHOUT A PERMIT OR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS TO A CONTRIBUTING BUNGALOW STYLE RESIDENCE CIRCA 1945. I QUESTIONED THAT DATE, BUT THAT'S WHAT WE'VE GOT ON PAPER IN WOODLAND HEIGHTS HISTORIC DISTRICT. UM, THIS PROPERTY HAD A, AN ADDITION DONE TO IT AND A PREVIOUS C OF A, A LONG TIME AGO FOR RELATED TO, TO OURS, 2018 APRIL OF 2018, THE HOUSE HAD A SECOND FLOOR ADDITION AND A NEW GARAGE APPROVED. IT WAS A SINGLE WIDTH, SINGLE, SINGLE CAR WIDTH GARAGE NEXT TO THE HOUSE. THE APPLICANT IS APPLIED FOR A SECOND FLOOR EDITION. AND AGAIN, THIS HAS BEEN DONE ALREADY, BUT I'LL DESCRIBE IT. THE SECOND FLOOR EDITION IS 228 SQUARE FEET TO THE EXISTING NON-CONTRIBUTING GARAGE. SO THEY ADDED A SECOND LEVEL TO THAT GARAGE, UH, WITH A GABLE ROOF. THE TOTAL RIDGE HEIGHT IS 21 FEET SEVEN INCHES. IT DOES HAVE A FLUSH MOUNTED VINYL WINDOW, UH, SINGLE HUNG, AND I BELIEVE THAT'S ON THE REAR ELEVATION AS WE'VE LABELED THAT IS NOT VISIBLE FROM THE RIGHT OF WAY. IT IS CLAD IN A SMOOTH, UH, CEMENT BOARD SIDING, ALTHOUGH THE TRIM FASCIA HAS A A TEXTURED CEMENT BOARD, UH, THERE'S A DOOR ON THE SECOND FLOOR ON THE WEST ELEVATION. THE SIDE SETBACK OF THAT EXISTING GARAGE WAS THREE FOOT THREE INCHES. THE GARAGE, UM, FACING PROPERTY LINE SIDE SETBACK IS ONE HOUR FIRE RATED. THE, UH, APPLICANT ORIGINALLY APPLIED WITH US AND WE DID CONSIDER IT FOR AN ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL BECAUSE IT WAS UNDER 600 FEET MEETS THE CRITERIA FOR ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL. BUT JUST PRIOR, OR WE WERE IN THE PROCESS OF ISSUING THAT WHEN WE DISCOVERED THAT THE WORK HAD BEEN COMPLETED, THE BUILDING HAD ALREADY BEEN ALTERED, IN WHICH CASE WE NEEDED A CERTIFICATE OF REMEDIATION FOR THAT TO STAY THAT WAY, HENCE WHERE BEFORE YOU TODAY A DAY. AND THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION, UH, LET'S SEE, LET'S GO TO THE PICTURES. THERE'S A, ON YOUR SCREEN RIGHT NOW IS THE FRONT OF THE STRUCTURE. YOU'LL SEE A LITTLE SINGLE STORY CARPORT, AND THEN THE STRUCTURE BEHIND IT. UH, THE, THE SECOND FLOOR EDITION, IS IT BACK A PAGE IN THAT OR IS IT FORWARD A PAGE THERE WE HAVE, THIS IS A PHOTOGRAPH ON YOUR SCREEN NOW, FROM THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY LOOKING TOWARDS THE STREET WITH THE ORIGINAL HOUSE TO THE LEFT WITH ITS TWO STORY ADDITION. AND THEN THE BACK, YOU WOULD BE LOOKING AT THE BACK OF THAT SINGLE STORY GARAGE, WHICH NOW HAS THIS SECOND FLOOR ON IT. OKAY. THAT'S WHAT WAS BUILT, THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE ASKING TO LEAVE IN PLACE WITH THEIR REQUEST, GIVEN THE CONTEXT AREA WITH REVIEW AND BRINGING IT BEFORE THIS COMMISSION WITH THE FULL APPLICATION OF THE CRITERIA. WE, THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IN THIS CASE IS DENIAL THAT IT DOESN'T MEET THE CRITERIA. AND ON PAGE TWO OF 16, UM, WE FEEL THAT THE PROPOSED BUILDING IS, IS NOT COMPATIBLE, UM, WITH THE SCALE MASSING AND CHARACTER OF, AGAIN, THIS CONTEXT AREA THAT IS SO KEY TO OUR WORK HERE. THE OTHER TWO STORY GARAGES ON THE BLOCK ARE BEHIND THE HOUSES AND THIS IS A LITTLE FORWARD ON THE LOT. CAN WE GO TO THE SITE PLAN? IS THERE A GOOD SITE PLAN JUST TO REALLY MAKE SURE WE'RE, WE SEE WHERE THIS SITS? [02:00:01] THERE IS A SPEAKER HERE THAT IS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO SPEAK ABOUT THIS AND THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY IS HERE TO SPEAK AS WELL THERE ON THE SCREEN. CAN YOU ZOOM IN ON THAT PLEASE? IS THE SITE PLAN A LITTLE FURTHER PLEASE? WE CAN ALL MAKE OUT THAT IT SAYS TWO STORY WOOD FRAME RESIDENCE, THAT'S THE EXISTING HOUSE. AND THEN THAT RED BOX TO THE LEFT IS WHERE WE HAD THIS COMMISSION IN 2018, DID APPROVE A SINGLE STORY GARAGE THERE. AND THIS EDITION IS ON TOP OF THAT GARAGE. SO IT'S NOT QUITE REALLY SUPREMELY FORWARD ON THE LOT, BUT IT ISN'T WHERE WE'RE USED TO SEEING THEM IN THIS CASE, THE WOOD DECK AND THE REARS MORE TYPICAL PLACEMENT. I'LL TAKE ANY QUESTIONS. WE'RE RECOMMENDING DENIAL. THANK YOU ROMAN COMMISSION MEMBERS. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF ON THIS ITEM? SO WHAT WOULD DENIAL MEAN IF THE, THE APPLICANT THEN WOULD NEED TO, TO COME INTO COMPLIANCE? WOULD HAVE TO REMOVE THE SECOND FLOOR AND RESTORE IT BACK TO A SINGLE CAR GARAGE? OF COURSE, THE, THE OPTIONS OF APPEAL AND, UH, YEAH, SO, AND ANY OTHER OP THERE ARE OF COURSE MANY OTHER OPTIONS. I MEAN, FOR EXAMPLE, I, I DON'T KNOW. I MEAN, YOU, YOU COULD REMOVE PART OF THE BUILDING, PART OF THE TOP FLOOR IF IT'S A ISSUE, YOU KNOW, JUST RE YOU COULD SEND US BACK TO THE TABLE WITH THEM. THERE ARE SOME OTHER OPTIONS IN THERE, OBVIOUSLY. SO, SO SORRY, JUST ON THE TIMELINE, UM, YOU WERE SAYING THAT THEY WERE GONNA GET ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL TO DO THE SECOND FLOOR? OR WERE YOU JUST CONSIDERING THAT? WE WERE CONSIDERING THAT AND AT FIRST APPROVAL, I DON'T REMEMBER HOW THIS WORKED ITS WAY THROUGH THE OFFICE, BUT WE DID DRAFT IT UP AS AN ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL AND IN FACT, IT, IT, IT, IT COULD HAVE GONE THROUGH THAT WAY, YOU KNOW, BUT WHAT WE SAW IS THAT IT WAS BUILT ALREADY AND THEN IMMEDIATELY THAT TRIGGERS THAT, WELL, WE CANNOT ISSUE THIS. THIS HAS TO GO TO, TO THE C COMMISSION BECAUSE THE ORDINANCE REQUIRES AND STATES THAT A CERTIFICATE OF REMEDIATION IS DEFINED BY, UH, AS, UM, A THING THAT IS ISSUED BY THIS COMMISSION IN ORDER TO BRING A PROJECT THAT HAS EITHER BEEN WOR BEEN DONE WITHOUT A C OF A, OR HAS EXCEEDED A C OF A AND IT NEEDS TO COME BACK INTO COMPLIANCE. SO WE ARE HERE. SO IF YOU WERE CONSIDERING GIVING ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL FOR THE SECOND FLOOR, WHY ARE WE COMING HERE NOW AND SAYING THAT WE DON'T THINK THAT IT'S APPROPRIATE? SURE. WHAT MADE YOU CHANGE YOUR ORIGINAL OPINION? IT, IT, IT IS REALLY, IT'S, IT'S A GOOD QUESTION. AND WHEN WE DE DETERMINE THAT IT HAS TO COME TO THE COMMISSION, IT SETS IN MOTION OUR INTERNAL BEHAVIOR AND OUR RETURN ACT, WE ARE GOING TO COMMISSION. NOW, LET'S LOOK AT THIS AS A GROUP. SO ONE, IT MEANS THAT THE ENTIRE STAFF SITS TOGETHER AND LOOKS AT THE ITEM AND THEN APPLIES, UH, UH, THE, THE, THE FULL CRITERIA TO IT. AND SO THAT IT'S REALLY, THAT'S THAT OVERALL BROADER STAFF DISCUSSION THAT BROUGHT IT OUT. AND THE DECISION BEING THAT THIS ITEM, UM, IF WE HAD SEEN IT AS AN APPLICATION THAT WE HAD TO BRING TO THIS COMMISSION, WE WOULD BE RECOMMENDING DENIAL. IT DOESN'T GIVE YOU A REAL CLEAN ANSWER. IT MEANS IF THERE'S ONE PULL PERSON MAKING THE DECISION AND IT CAME ACROSS THE TABLE, IT MIGHT HAVE GONE THROUGH HIS ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL THAT, UM, BUT ROMAN, WHAT I'M HEARING YOU SAY TODAY IS THAT IF THE LOCATION OF THIS GARAGE WHERE AT THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY, WHERE THE DECK IS, WHERE THEN THE, THEN THE, THE CONCERN THAT THAT WOULD MEET, THAT WOULD MEET THAT CONCERN THERE. THERE'S ANOTHER CONCERN IN THE CURRENT LOCATION, I THINK IS THAT IT'S ONLY THREE FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINE, CORRECT. AND NOW, AND IT WAS BUILT TO THE TWO STORY STRUCTURE. SO TYPICALLY A TWO STORY STRUCTURE WOULD BE FIVE FEET AWAY FROM THE PROPERTY LINE. AND OF COURSE THAT WOULD ALSO COMPLY WITH THE BUILDING CODES IN TERMS OF THE RATINGS AND SO FORTH. BUT, BUT THERE, THERE'S THE EXTRA, BECAUSE IT'S SO FAR FORWARD, IT'S ALSO IMPENDING OR IMPINGING ON THE NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTY IN A WAY THAT A HOUSE WOULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO BE, FOR INSTANCE. RIGHT. UH, AND AND SO THERE, THERE'S SORT OF TWO THINGS HERE. THERE'S THE, IF THE, IF THE, IF THE LOCATION WERE MOVED, THAT THAT ISSUE MIGHT GO AWAY, BUT THERE'S STILL THE PROXIMITY TO THE SIDE, UH, WHICH IS NOT AN ISSUE FOR A ONE STORY GARAGE, BUT IT'S AN ISSUE FOR A TWO STORY, UM, RIGHT. STRUCTURE. YES. BUT, UH, QUESTION THEN, UH, TO, TO, UH, TO YOU, UH, AS CHAIR, BUT IF, IF I WOULD, UH, WOULDN'T, UH, IF THEY FILE RATED THROUGHOUT THAT WALL ALL THE WAY FROM [02:05:01] GROUND FLOOR TO THE, TO THE, UH, ALL THE WAY TO THE SOFFIT OR TO, TO THE, UH, FASCIA BOARD, WOULDN'T THAT BRING THEM INTO COMPLIANCE FROM A, FROM A PERMITTING STRUCTURAL PERSPECTIVE? FROM PERMITTING STANDPOINT, YES. THERE'S BACK TO THE, TO THE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR, YOU KNOW, A, A TWO STORY STRUCTURE AGAINST THE SIDE PROPERTY ALLOWING FIVE FEET JUST SO THERE'S LESS PRESSURE ON YES. ON THE NEIGHBOR, WHICH IS A DIFFERENT ISSUE. IN ORDER TO GET A PERMIT IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT, YOU HAVE TO BRING A COA IN FRONT OF THIS COMMISSION, RIGHT? AND THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN. SO WHETHER OR NOT IT'S BUILT FIRE RATE OR NOT IS KIND OF MOOT FOR ME. I MEAN, DOING WORK ILLEGALLY. YEAH. BUT WE ARE ANSWERING TWO DIFFERENT POINTS. ONE, ONE OF THEM IS BEING THE PROXIMITY TO THE PROPERTY LINE, WHICH CAN BE MITIGATED IN SOME WAYS. UH, AND THIS IS NOT IN THE HEIGHTS GUIDELINE, WHICH SPECIFICALLY SAY EVEN IN THE HISTORICAL GUIDELINES, YOU HAVE TO BE FIVE FEET AWAY. THIS IS WOODEN HEIGHTS. THERE IS NO SPECIFIC, UH, QUANTITATIVE GUIDELINE OF FIVE FEET, EXCEPT THAT IT'S A STRUCTURAL, IT'S A PERMITTING GUIDELINE. UH, BUT IN TERMS OF PROXIMITY TO IT BEING THE FRONT VERSUS AT THE RIGHT AT THE REAR, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT CANNOT BE MITIGATED, OBVIOUSLY. I UNDERSTAND. I MEAN, ALL WE HAVE IS THE CRITERIA AND WE LOOK AT OTHER CONTRIBUTING GARAGES IN THE CONTEXT AREA. AND THERE ARE NO TWO STORY GARAGES THIS FAR FORWARD THAT I'M AWARE OF, OR, OR THAT THEY'RE THREE FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINE. SO I THINK IF IT SOUNDS LIKE, I MEAN, IT, IT'S THE LOCATION OF THIS GARAGE, WHICH IS A BIG PART OF THE DISCUSSION AND THE FACT THAT IT WAS DONE WITHOUT A C OF A WELL, DO WE HAVE THE SOMEONE ELSE TO SPEAK? WE HAVE THREE. WE HAVE THREE PEOPLE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK. WHY DON'T WE HEAR THAT? THEY HAVE TO SAY. OKAY. I'M GONNA OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING AT THIS TIME, AND THE FIRST SPEAKER I SIGNED UP TO SPEAK IS THE OWNER, UH, JAKE BOEM. THERE YOU GO. HELLO. UH, I WANNA INTRODUCE MYSELF. I'M JAKE BOM, UM, ORIGINALLY FROM OAK PARK, ILLINOIS IN THE FRANK LLOYD WRIGHT DISTRICT. UH, LAST 20 YEARS I'VE BEEN, UM, DEDICATED TO PRESERVATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY, UH, EIGHT YEARS AS AN ARCHITECT, UH, SEVEN YEARS AS A BUILDER, AND RECENTLY AS A COMMERCIAL DEVELOPER. UM, SO WHEN I, UM, RENOVATED OUR HOME IN THE FRANK LLOYD WRIGHT DISTRICT OF OAK, UH, OAK PARK ILLINOIS, UM, WE DID BUILD A, UH, GARAGE. IT DID NOT HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE HISTORICAL SOCIETY. SO WHEN MY BUILDER, UH, MISTAKENLY TOLD ME THAT THEY DIDN'T HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE HISTORICAL, UH, SOCIETY, I RELUCTANT, OR I IGNORANTLY, UM, SAID, OKAY, UH, HE SAID HE WAS GETTING THE NECESSARY PERMITS. I DID NOT CHECK UP ON HIM. SO IT'S MY FAULT. I, I APOLOGIZE FULLY. UM, BUT, UM, I THINK GOING FORWARD THE THE REASON FOR THE GARAGE IS, UM, BOTH MYSELF AND MY DAUGHTER ARE AVID WOODWORKERS. UM, WE HAVE A VERY LARGE COLLECTION OF RECLAIMED LUMBER FROM MOST OF THE BUILDINGS THAT I'VE WORKED ON THROUGHOUT MY CAREER. UM, SO THE, THE REASON FOR THE GARAGE WAS FOR THE STORAGE OF THIS LUMBER. AND THE FIRST FLOOR WOULD BE TURNED INTO OUR WOOD SHOP. UM, THAT IS THE REASON FOR THE BUILDING. UM, SO, UM, I, I WAS UNAWARE OF THE THREE FOOT SETBACK. UM, I, I LOOKED THROUGH THE BUILDING CODES, UH, AND I SAW THAT IF THE WALL WAS FIRE RATED, THEN YOU COULD BE WITHIN THREE FOOT OF THE PROPERTY LINE. UM, SO I DIDN'T SEE THAT AS AN ISSUE. UM, UM, SO I, I GUESS A LITTLE HISTORY ON, ON MY PART IS, YOU KNOW, WHEN I WAS AN ARCHITECT, UM, I, I WAS LUCKY ENOUGH TO WORK ON A LOT OF HISTORICAL PROJECTS IN CHICAGO, INCLUDING TRIBUNE, TOWER COOK COUNTY HOSPITAL, UH, MOTOR ROW SHOWROOMS, AS WELL AS, UH, 32 WEST R RANDOLPH AND A DANIEL BURNHAM HOUSE IN ON ASTER STREET IN GOLD COAST. UM, I'M CURRENTLY WORKING FOR A DEVELOPER THROUGHOUT THE COUNTRY THAT, UM, MY JOB IS ON THEIR ESG PROGRAM, WHICH IS ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND GOVERNANCE. UH, MY JOB IS, UM, TO, SO IF SOMEONE IN THE FRANK LLOYD WRIGHT DISTRICT WAS TO GO AHEAD AND CONSTRUCT SOMETHING THAT WAS DONE ILLEGALLY, WHAT WOULD YOU DO? UH, WELL, CONSTRUCTING THE HOME OR THE GARAGE IN THE FRANK LLOYD WRIGHT DISTRICT. ANYTHING, ANYTHING, ANYTHING, ANYTHING THAT WAS DONE ILLEGALLY IN THE FRANK LLOYD WRIGHT DISTRICT OF CHICAGO. WHAT WOULD YOU DO SINCE YOU HAVE [02:10:01] SO MUCH EXPERIENCE UP THERE? WELL, WHAT, WHAT I DID, AND, AND I DID GO THROUGH THE HISTORICAL SOCIETY, IS, UM, WELL, THEY WOULD ASK US TO GO THROUGH THE CERTIFICATE APPROPRIATENESS, AND IF THERE WAS DECLINE, UH, WHATEVER MODIFICATIONS WERE MADE WOULD BE REMOVED. AND THEN, YEAH. ARE THERE OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT FROM COMMISSIONERS? I HAVE ONE QUESTION ON PAGE 13 OF 16, I THINK I'M LOOKING FROM THE STREET TOWARDS THE TWO STORY GARAGE. THIS IS A RENDERING OF THE EXISTING BUILDING. IS THAT ACCURATE? AND SO IS THERE NOT AN OPENING IN THE FIREWALL ON THE LEFT WHERE, IF I'M LOOKING FROM THE STREET AT THE GARAGE, THERE'S A OPENING HERE, RIGHT? JUST CURIOUS. TRYING TO MAKE SENSE OF THE BUILDING, YES OR NO? AM I THERE? THERE'S NOT AN OPENING RIGHT NOW. THERE'S NOT. OKAY. I'M LOOKING AT SOME, SOME LINES THERE THAT I'M CONFUSED BY. OH, IT'S, THERE'S A DOOR ON THE SIDE. THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT. THERE'S A DOOR, SO THERE'S A DOOR UPSTAIRS ON THE SECOND FLOOR. YEAH, THAT WOULD, ON THE SECOND FLOOR THAT'S IN THE FIREWALL. CORRECT. OKAY. BUT, BUT YOU'RE CAN HAVE 25% OPENINGS IN A FIREWALL. IT'S IN THE CODE. OKAY. I THINK IT IS. SO I'M GOOD. THANK YOU. AND THEN, OKAY, THANK YOU. I KNOW YOU HAVE TWO MORE SPEAKERS SIGN UP TO SPEAK, BUT THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THERE, THERE MAY BE ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS. UM, THE NEXT SPEAKER WHO WAS SIGNED UP, UM, WHO I BELIEVE IS THE ARCHITECT FOR THE PROJECT IS, UM, PAN PAPADOPOULOS. OKAY. AND STAFF SEE IF, IF THIS, IF THEY'RE ON THE, ON THEIR SCREENS. I KNOW WE HAD TROUBLE EARLIER WITH THE MUTE FOR THE RECORD, THAT WAS, THAT PERSON WOULD'VE BEEN HIS ARCHITECT AND THEY DON'T APPEAR TO BE ONLINE. MY STEP, WE DON'T SEE THEM. YEAH, I MEANT IT JUST SAID ARCHITECT AND I WASN'T SURE WHAT THAT MEANT, BUT I, I ASSUME THAT MEANT THAT WAS, UH, WITH, ON, ON BEHALF OF THE OWNER, BUT I WASN'T SURE. SO, ALRIGHT, WELL, I'LL MOVE ON TO THE, TO THE LAST NAME I HAVE IS THADDEUS, UM, HERRICK. THAT'S RIGHT. UM, IT'S GREAT TO BE WITH YOU. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. I'M SORRY NOT TO BE THERE. I'M TRAVELING TODAY. UM, FIRST OF ALL, THANKS FOR YOUR WORK WITH HISTORIC PRESERVATION. UM, I REALLY FOUND THE MEANING TO BE INTERESTING, UM, AND YOU GUYS GET INTO A LOT OF DETAIL, SO I APPRECIATE THAT. UH, A LITTLE BACKGROUND. UH, WE LIVE RIGHT NEXT DOOR AT EIGHT 15. UM, WE'VE BEEN IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD FOR 23 YEARS AND RAISED TWO KIDS THERE AND WORKED ON LOT SIZE PROTECTION AND HISTORIC, UH, PRESERVATION. UM, WE'RE VERY INVESTED IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UM, AND THE AESTHETIC OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. UM, AND JAKE AND HIS WIFE JEN ARE REALLY NICE PEOPLE AND THEY HAVE TWO BEAUTIFUL KIDS. UM, AND IT'S GREAT TO HAVE PEOPLE LIKE THEM IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT, UM, BUT I JUST, UH, FEEL LIKE, UH, THE, THE WAY THIS, UH, THIS BUILDING HAPPENED, WHICH WAS VERY QUICKLY OVER A WEEKEND, UM, WAS SORT OF WRONG FROM THE START. AND I INQUIRED ABOUT PERMITTING AND WAS ASSURED THAT, UM, EVERYTHING WAS IN PLACE. UM, AND ACTUALLY WHEN IT WAS BUILT, THERE WERE STAIRS THAT, THAT, THAT WERE LIKE INCHES FROM MY PROPERTY LINE. UM, AND, AND ALSO THAT DOOR JUST OPENS UP RIGHT ONTO MY, UH, MY GARAGE APARTMENT DECK. UH, AND IT'S LITERALLY, UH, I, I DON'T MEAN TO MAKE THIS INTO A, NOT NOT IN MY BACKYARD ISSUE BECAUSE FRANKLY IT DOES CHANGE THE ESTE AESTHETIC OF OUR BLOCK. UM, BUT, UM, BUT IT'S REALLY LIKE, UM, HAVING A TWO, UH, UH, TWO, TWO SHIPPING CONTAINERS, UH, STACKED ON TOP OF EACH OTHER WITH A ROOF BEARING DOWN ON YOUR, ON, ON YOUR YARD. UM, AND, AND YOU KNOW, I'LL SAY I AM, UH, WE WE'RE AT, WE'RE AT JULIAN AND, YOU KNOW, UH, WEST OF JULIAN, IT'S LIKE EVERY MAN, YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S THERE. NO, THERE ARE VERY FEW RESTRICTIONS AND, AND [02:15:01] THERE'S JUST BUILDING BOOMING EVERYWHERE AND ALL THE, IS THERE A SECOND? CURRENT SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. OKAY. PLEASE PROCEED, SIR. I WAS, I I JUST WANTED TO ADD THAT, YOU KNOW, THE WEST OF JULIAN, THERE'S, THERE'S, YOU KNOW, THE SQUARE FOOTAGE, UH, AND, AND, UH, BIG BILL, BIG HOUSES GOING UP AND, UM, AND I JUST THINK, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE SOMETHING VERY SPECIAL IN THE WOODLAND HEIGHTS AND, UM, AND, AND, AND JUST THE, THE, UH, I, I THINK REALLY THE FACT THAT THIS IS KIND OF IN THE MIDDLE OF THE DRIVEWAY, UM, IT, IT, UM, IT'S A, IT'S, IT'S REALLY, UH, UM, IT'S, IT'S NOT IN THE SPIRIT OF, UH, OF, OF THE, OF THE DISTRICT. AND IT, AND IT, FRANKLY, IT PUTS A LOT OF, IT PUTS A LOT OF BUILDING AND A LOT OF SQUARE FOOTAGE ON, YOU KNOW, ON A SMALL LOT, WHICH WAS ORIGINALLY, UM, UH, A DUPLEX. UM, IT'S, AND, AND IT WAS, UH, AND, AND, YOU KNOW, AND I DIDN'T REALLY HAVE TOO MANY OBJECTIONS TO THE RENOVATION OF THE DUPLEX AND THE SQUARE FOOTAGE, WHICH WAS A LOT ADDED ON. BUT, UM, YOU KNOW, WE, UM, UM, WE, WE WOULD JUST LIKE TO SEE THIS, UH, RESTORED TO WHAT IT WAS, UH, AND, AND THAT, SO, UH, AND, AND THE, AND THE BLOCK TO BE MAINTAINED, UM, IN, IN, IN THE SPIRIT, UH, OF, OF, OF, OF PRESERVATION IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY, UH, QUESTIONS FOR THIS SPEAKER FROM THE COMMISSION MEMBERS? OKAY. NOT HEARING IS, UM, CAN I MAKE A REBUTTAL? UM, I BELIEVE YOU CAN. UM, YES, UH, I APPRECIATE THAT. I, I, I THINK ONE OF THE CONCERNS THAT I, I DO HAVE WITH THE STRUCTURE NEXT TO ME IS THAT IT'S BEING USED AS AN AIRBNB. AND I, I THINK WHEN MOVING INTO THIS NEIGHBORHOOD, WE WERE NOT AWARE THAT AIRBNBS WERE, WERE ALLOWED. AND, AND HAVING THAT, AND, AND HIS GARAGE IS ACTUALLY ONLY TWO FEET FROM MY PROPERTY LINE, BUT OBVIOUSLY GRANDFATHER IN A LONG, LONG TIME AGO. UM, HAVING THAT STRUCTURE THAT CLOSE WITH PEOPLE RENTING DOES BOTHER US AND, AND OUR CHILDREN. AND, AND I DIDN'T KNOW IF, UM, I, I, I GUESS THAT'S JUST, I DON'T THINK THAT HAS ANY PCE REALLY, SO, WELL, NOT WITH THIS COMMISSION, UH, UH, WE, WE DO NOT BREAK USE, JUST FOR THE RECORD. IT'S NOT AN AIRBNB, BUT, BUT, UM, AND THAT'S A, YOU KNOW, THAT'S THAT, BUT THAT'S NOT A CONVERSATION TO HAVE HERE, BUT IT, BUT IT'S, IT'S, IT'S, YOU WOULD NOT FIND THAT ON AIRBNB. OKAY. THANK YOU. SURE. BUT ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF THE SPEAKERS THAT WE'VE HEARD FROM? I DON'T DO, DO WE KNOW IF THEY, IF ANYONE PULLED A PER PERMIT OR NOT? I BELIEVE IT WAS STATED THAT THAT DID NOT OCCUR. IT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING. SO THERE'S, THERE'S A, THERE'S A PERMIT IN RIGHT NOW WE DON'T HAVE THE CA SO THERE'S NO INSPECTIONS FOR ANYTHING? NOT YET. WE HAVE TO GET THE COA BEFORE WE CAN HAVE THE INSPECTION. BUT WE DID GO IN WITH THE ORIGINAL COA, I THINK THE APPLICANT CALL THE DRYWALL OFF OR SOMETHING. I THINK THE APPLICANT STATED THAT THE CONTRACTOR INDICATED HE GOT A PERMIT, BUT HE DID NOT GET A PERMIT. WE HAVE A STRUCTURAL ENGINEER, THERE'S NO DRYWALL. IT'S COMPLETELY OPEN JUST FOR STORAGE. SO IT CAN BE, CAN WE GET, IF HE'S GONNA ANSWER QUESTIONS, CAN WE HAVE HIM COME UP TO THE MIC PLEASE? SO WE CAN PICK IT UP FOR ANY RECORD? THANK YOU. SURE. GUESS, COULD YOU ANSWER THE QUESTION FORMALLY? JUST, JUST RESTATE YOUR QUESTION SO WE CAN GET IT ON THE, IN THE RECORDING FOR THE RECORD ABOUT GETTING A PERMIT? YES. SO DO, DO WE KNOW IF ANYONE GOT A PERMIT FOR THIS? WE'RE IN FOR A PERMIT. OBVIOUSLY WE NEED A COA BEFORE WE CAN PULL A PERMIT. UH, THE STRUCTURE IS OPEN SO ANY INSPECTIONS WOULD BE ABLE TO BE MADE. WHEN WAS THE WORK COMPLETED? UH, ABOUT SIX MONTHS AGO. WHEN DID YOU START THE PERMITTING PROCESS? UM, THE MINUTE WE GOT THE RED TAG, SO ABOUT FOUR WEEKS AFTERWARDS. AND, AND I, I HAVE HAD A COURT DATE AND BEEN FINED AS WELL, SO IT HAS BEEN A FINANCIAL BURDEN AS WELL. OKAY, THANK YOU. UM, I'M GONNA CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT THIS TIME AND COMMISSION MEMBERS ARE, IS THERE ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION OR IS THERE A MOTION? I HAVE A QUESTION FOR WOMEN. COMMISSIONER MCNEIL. SO I THINK I MAY HAVE HEARD THIS, BUT I'M JUST DOUBLE CHECKING FOR MYSELF. IF THIS TWO STORY STRUCTURE WAS BROUGHT TO YOUR OFFICE AND REQUESTED A COA, WOULD IT BE SOMETHING YOU WOULD APPROVE AS IT'S DRAWN RIGHT HERE? THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION. THANK YOU FOR ASKING IT. SO, LIKE I SAID ABOUT INTERNAL DISCUSSIONS, IF I HAD SEEN THIS YEAH. NOT THREE [02:20:01] MONTHS AGO RIGHT? AS AN ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL, I UNDERSTAND THE CONTEXT AREA AND, AND I SEE IT, I THINK THOUGH, I, I ALWAYS ASK MYSELF IN PRINCIPLE, DOES, HAS, IS THE WORK HAVING AN ADVERSE EFFECT ON THE HISTORICAL CHARACTER OF THE CONTRIBUTING BUILDING OR THE DISTRICT? AND IN THIS CASE, FOR ME PERSONALLY, NOT FOR THE STAFF. IF I WAS MAKING ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVALS AND HAD THE DECISION, NOT OF COURSE, AND THIS WAS APPLIED FOR PRIOR TO THE WORK BEING COMPLETED, I WOULD'VE RECOMMENDED APPROVAL. OKAY. HOWEVER, WE WORK AS A A, A TEAM AND A STAFF, AND THERE'S LOTS OF DISCUSSION THAT HAPPENS BEFORE WE COME TO THE COMMISSION. AND THE CONSENSUS WAS THAT THE PLACEMENT WAS TOO FAR FORWARD. GOTCHA. SO ANOTHER WAY OF SAYING THAT THE CONSENSUS WAS AMONGST STAFF, IF THIS PROPOSAL WAS AT THE REAR OF THE LOT, IT WOULD BE AN APPROVAL FROM STAFF YES. HOLISTICALLY, RIGHT? YES. UH, HOLISTICALLY, EVERYONE IN INCLUDED, UM, AND AGAIN, I'LL SAY OF COURSE THAT THERE WAS THE APPROVAL OF THE ONE STORY STRUCTURE IN ITS LOCATION. UH, HAVE I ANSWERED THE QUESTION OF THE, UH, CAN I, CAN I FOLLOW ON ON THAT? UH, ROMAN, I NOW, IF IT WAS A ONE-OFF, I CAN UNDERSTAND NOW, IF ALL OF A SUDDEN 60% OF THE, UH, WOODLAND HEIGHTS RESIDENTS SAW THIS APPROVAL, YOUR ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL, AND THEN THEY GO AHEAD AND PROCEED IT TO EVERYBODY NOW START BUILDING TWO STORY IN THE MIDDLE OF THE DRIVEWAY AND, AND THEY WANT TO KEEP THE BACK OPEN FOR THEIR DECK AND THE SWIMMING POOL, HOW WILL THAT LOOK INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD THREE YEARS DOWN THE ROAD? I HAVE AN ISSUE WITH THAT. YEAH. RIGHT, BECAUSE THEN THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMPLETELY CHANGED BECAUSE NOW ALL OF A SUDDEN THIS BUILDING BECOMES ANOTHER BUILDING BETWEEN THE TWO BUNGALOWS, I THINK OF THE, OF THE, OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO, TO BE VERY IMPORTANT THAT IT, THAT I WOULD BE LOOKING AT THIS APPLICATION FOR THIS SITE AND, AND PARTICULARLY WHERE IT'S LOCATED. SO WE HAD A SATELLITE IMAGE UP THERE EARLIER, AND AS WAS MENTIONED, THE ADJACENT PROPERTY, UH, DOES HAVE A GARAGE APARTMENT THAT IS TWO FEET. I DON'T KNOW THAT NUMBER, I HAVEN'T MEASURED IT, BUT WE'VE BEEN HURT HERE. IT'S TWO FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINE. IT, UM, THESE ARE BESIDE ONE ANOTHER. AND THE APPLICATION IS FOR A BUILDING THAT IS, DO WE HAVE THE DIMENSIONS HERE? I BELIEVE, BECAUSE I DIDN'T ACTUALLY DO THE STAFF REVIEW ITEM. IT'S ABOUT 10 OR 11 FEET WIDE. CORRECT. 10 OR 11 FEET WIDE. UH, AND THEN THAT PUTS IT AT HOW MANY FEET? DEEP, ABOUT 20, 20 FEET DEEP. SO TO ME, UM, EACH APPLICATION WOULD BE NOT, WE, WE DON'T, WE WOULDN'T, YOU WOULDN'T HAVE THEM POPPING UP LIKE THAT ALL OVER BECAUSE YOU'RE GONNA LOOK AT THE CONTEXT AREA VERY CAREFULLY, UH, AND, AND CONSIDER IT HOLISTICALLY AND ITS IMPACT ON THE DISTRICT AND IMPACT ON THAT STRUCTURE. WELL, MY CONCERN IS THAT THE OPENING OF THE PANDORA'S BOX, BECAUSE TO THE APPLICANT, THEY DON'T SEE IT LIKE THAT. I WOULD, I WOULD ADD THAT MM-HMM . I WOULD BE CONCERNED, DOESN'T HAVE TO BERATED TO APPROVE SOMETHING THAT WAS DONE ILLEGALLY OR WITHOUT RESPECTING THE RULES WOULD SET A PRECEDENT IN WHICH PEOPLE THOUGHT THEY MIGHT ALSO JUST GO AHEAD AND DO SOMETHING, UM, WITHOUT MAKING SURE THAT IT WAS CONSISTED WITH CODE OR WITH THE HISTORICAL, UH, REQUIREMENTS. UM, AND JUST, YOU KNOW, MAYBE THE FINES. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE FINE IS, BUT I, I WOULDN'T WANT TO ENCOURAGE THAT KIND OF, UM, WAY OF DEALING WITH THE SYSTEM. THAT'S WHAT I WOULD SAY. RIGHT. AND, UH, THERE, THIS, OF COURSE, WE HAVE MANY DISCUSSIONS ABOUT FINES AND ABOUT FOLKS DOING WORK WITHOUT, UM, UH, GETTING A C OF A WHEN REQUIRED. UM, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, WE REVIEW THE PROJECTS, WHETHER THEY CAME IN, UH, WHEN THEY SHOULD HAVE COME IN OR THEY JUST SHOWED UP, BILL, WE STILL REVIEW THEM UNDER THE SAME CRITERIA WITH THE SAME OUTCOME IN TERMS OF DETERMINING WHAT IS THE APPROPRIATE, UM, MEASURE. WE WE'RE, WE, WE, WE DON'T, UH, THIS COMMISSION DOESN'T HAVE ANY JURISDICTION OVER FINES. THE ONLY THING WE CAN DO IS WHEN WE GET TO A C OF R, WHICH IS WHAT WE'RE IN NOW, IS, IS WELL, WE, THIS HAS BEEN APPLIED AND IT'S A C OF R BECAUSE IT'S, IT WAS DONE WITHOUT A C OF A IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT WE CAN, YOU KNOW, YOU, YOU COULD REMOVE THIS FOR INSTANCE. I MEAN, YOU, WE, THAT THAT WE, THERE'S, THERE IS NO FINE, BUT WE CAN RETURN THIS TO WHAT WE WOULD'VE APPROVED AS AS A C OF A. SO IT'S, AND WE APPROVED THE ONE STORY WE WE DID, YES. AND, UM, BUT AGAIN, IT'S, IT [02:25:01] IS NOT A PUNITIVE THING THAT IS TO SAY, EVEN THOUGH WE'RE SEEING THIS PROPOSAL, THIS, LIKE THIS, THIS IS LIKE A RENDERING, BUT IT'S REAL. AND WE, WE ARE STILL, WE, THE CHALLENGE OF THIS COMMISSION IS TO STILL VOTE OR MAKE A MOTION ON THE MERITS OF THE APPLICATION WITH, AND SO IT'S, UM, THAT'S STILL, SO IT'S, IS IT APPROPRIATE, YOU KNOW, WOULD THIS, WOULD THIS HAVE, WOULD, WOULD THIS PROPOSAL HAVE REACHED CONSENSUS FOR A C OF A? THAT'S, THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT'S ABOUT TO BE DETERMINED RIGHT NOW. I'D LIKE TO MAKE A PROPOSAL, PLEASE THAT WE ACCEPT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION. OKAY. A SECOND. UM, I'M GONNA LET OUR NEW COMMISSIONER TAKE THE SECOND. SO , UH, OKAY. IS THERE ANY OTHER FURTHER DISCUSSION, COMMISSIONER? YEAH. UH, FROM MY UNDERSTANDING, WE, WHEN WE ACCEPT STAFF'S, UH, UH, RECOMMENDATION IS THAT MEANS IT'S GOING BACK TO THE ONE STORY GARAGE THAT'S BEEN APPROVED WELL AFTER THAT. WELL, THE, WE ARE, WE ARE NOT SUGGESTING ANYTHING RIGHT NOW. IS THAT WHAT WE ARE SAYING? NO, ROMAN, CAN YOU JUST DEFINE YOUR RECOMMENDATION ONE LAST TIME? WE'RE RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF THE C OF A. SO HOW, YOU KNOW, WE WOULD PLAY OUT AS THE PERSON, THE OWNER, UH, ASSUMING HE, LET'S, FOR EXAMPLE, HE DOES NOT APPEAL. IF SOMEONE DOESN'T APPEAL AND THAT STANDS, THERE'S NO C OF A, THEN THERE'S NO BUILDING PERMIT AND THERE'S A RED TAG ON THE BUILDING, AND THOSE RED TAGS WILL CONTINUE TO COME AND THERE'LL BE A COURT, I THINK THE APPLICANT MENTIONED HE'D BEEN REQUESTED TO GO TO COURT. UM, SO IT KIND OF THEN BECOMES A LITTLE BIT OF A LEGAL MATTER. UH, NOW THE, OF COURSE THE OWNER DOES, HE MAY APPEAL AS WELL, AND THEN WHATEVER HAPPENS THERE, BUT CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, TYPICALLY A DENIAL OF A COA HAS A COR TO FOLLOW. BUT WE DON'T HAVE A COR HERE. YOU'RE NOT RECOMMENDING A COR OF ANY KIND. THANK YOU. NO, THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT. THAT'S RIGHT. YOU CAN SPECIFY THAT. YOU CAN TAKE IT FURTHER AND SPECIFY THE ACTION OF REMOVAL. UH, I, I APOLOGIZE. GOOD POINT, COMMISSIONER. I THINK THAT'S ACTUALLY MENTIONED IN THE DEFINITION THE COMMISSION, UM, CAN DO THAT. AND THAT CASE, LET ME, LET ME JUST MENTALLY THINK OUT LOUD. SO WE THEN WOULD HAVE A CERTIFICATE OF REMEDIATION TO TAKE OFF THE BUILDING. AND I THINK WE RAN ACROSS THIS PROBLEM WITH THE APPEALS BOARD RECENTLY WHERE THEY SAID, WELL, THE APPLICANT DID NOT ASK FOR THAT THING THAT YOU'RE DOING. YES. SO I THINK POSSIBLY THE RIGHT, I, IT'S POSSIBLE YOU COULD HAVE THE CITY COMMITTEE TO REMOVE THAT, BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT THEY'RE ASKING FOR. THEY'RE ASKING TO LEAVE IT THERE TO, TO PUT IT ON, IF YOU WILL. THE, THE PROBLEM I THINK THAT THE APPEALS BOARD HAS IS IF AN APPLICATION GOES THERE IS THEY FEEL THAT THEIR REVIEW IS RESTRICTED TO WHAT THE APPLICANT ASKED FOR AND WHAT YOU DID. AND IF YOU DON'T ANSWER THE QUESTION THAT THE APPLICANT ASKED, THEY'RE GONNA KICK IT BACK. SO IF THE APPLICANT SAYS, I WANT A CERTIFICATE OF REMEDIATION, IF YOU SAY, NO, DO DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT, YOU'VE GOTTA ANSWER THAT PART OF IT. THAT'S THE ANSWER. THEN THERE'S ANOTHER PROCESS FOR HIM. IF THEY APPEAL IT FINE, OR IF THEY COME BACK WITH A DIFFERENT C OF A FOR ROUND TWO, THEN THAT'S SOMETHING I THINK THAT'S WHERE THE FRUSTRATION FROM THE APPEALS BOARD HAS BEEN. SO WE SHOULD JUST LET IT PLAY OUT. I CALL THE VOTE ON THIS. WELL, I MEAN, WE SHOULD LET IT PLAY OUT WITHOUT A COR OR IS THAT WHAT WE ARE, WHAT YOU SHOULD RECOMMEND US TO DO? THAT'S WHAT IT SOUNDS LIKE LEGAL'S SUGGESTING TO US. WELL, LEGAL'S NOT MAKING A RECOMMENDATION ON THIS ITEM. I'M TELLING YOU WHAT THE FRUSTRATION OF THE APPEALS BOARD IS. DOES COR ATTACHED TO THIS APPLICATION? I MEAN, I DON'T UNDERSTAND QUITE WHY, BECAUSE WE'VE DONE COORS BEFORE WITH COAS, BUT IF WE WANNA JUST LEAVE THIS ONE BY ITSELF, I'M FINE WITH LETTING IT STAND BY ITSELF AND THEN LET IT COME TO ITS NATURAL CONCLUSION, WHICH IS PROBABLY GOING TO BE SOMETHING LIKE WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. BUT IN THIS CASE, THIS COR HASN'T BROUGHT BEFORE US, SO WE, WE CAN'T GENERATE A COR. WE'RE JUST ACKNOWLEDGING TO BETWEEN OURSELVES THAT, THAT THERE ISN'T ONE FOR THIS PARTICULAR CASE. I, I THINK THERE IS ONE, BUT IT JUST HASN'T BEEN WRITTEN DOWN THAT STAFF DIDN'T WRITE IT DOWN FOR SOME REASON. WELL, IT'S NOT BEFORE. SO IT DOESN'T EXIST FOR THESE PURPOSES. YEAH. YEAH. SO I'M, I'M AGREEING WITH YOU. I THINK IN THAT, I THINK IT'S FINE TO JUST DO DENIAL OF COA AND THEN LET IT KEEP GOING, KNOW THAT WE HAVE ANY OTHER GOOD OPTION. WELL, IT SOUNDS LIKE A YOU CAN'T MAKE THEM BOTH. I DIDN'T. OKAY, . YEAH, NO, WE, WE HAVE, WE, WE, WE, WE HAVE A, WE HAVE, WE HAVE, WE HAVE THAT. UM, [02:30:01] I GUESS MY LAST QUESTION FOR DISCUSSION THOUGH YEAH. IS, BECAUSE NORMALLY WHEN WE, WE GET, UM, AN APPLICATION FOR SOMEONE WHO WANTS TO DO A C OF A, UM, WE OFTEN GET A C OF R OR, OR DO WE ONLY GET C OF R AFTER? I MEAN, I GUESS CAN YOU DEFINE THE, THE, HOW THEY'VE COME TO US IN THE PAST? BECAUSE IT'S, IT'S, I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED. WE, WE'VE OFTEN YEAH. HAD THE C OF R, BUT YOU BROUGHT A C OF R IN THIS CASE YOU DIDN'T BECAUSE THEY'RE ASKING FOR APPROVAL THAT THAT'S THE DIFFERENCE. RIGHT. AND THAT'S FOR, FOR THE, FOR THE RECORD. OKAY. YES. THEN I'M GOOD. YEAH. UH, SO ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION? AYE. AYE. AYE. AYE. COMMISSIONER ICK. THIS IS, UH, COMMISSIONER SEPULVEDA REQUESTING TO, UH, EXIT. OKAY. THE MEETING. I HAVE A HARD STOP AT FIVE 20. OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. WELL LET, LET'S CLOSE THIS OUT. SO ANY, ANY OPPOSED TO THIS MOTION? ANY ABSTENTIONS? SO IT WAS UNANIMOUS. DO WE HAVE QUORUM? WE, WE STILL HAVE A, SO DON'T A VOTE OR WE DON'T A VOTE. WE STILL HAVE A QUORUM. YEAH. I JUST WANTED HER TO STAY UNTIL WE FINISHED THIS VOTE. YEAH. SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH, RHONDA. OKAY. UH, WE'RE MOVING ON TO THE NEXT ITEM. GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIRPERSON AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION. THIS IS STAFF PERSON CHARLES SADLER. TODAY I HAVE BEFORE YOU 6 2 3 BAYLAND AVENUE IN WOODLAND HEIGHTS. THE PROPERTY IS, INCLUDES A HISTORIC 3,234 SQUARE FOOT TWO STORY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE, SITUATED ON A 5,000 SQUARE FOOT INTERIOR. LOT SIGNIFICANCE IS THE CONTRIBUTING BUNGALOW RESIDENCE IS CIRCA 1920, LOCATED IN THE WOODLAND HEIGHTS HISTORIC DISTRICT INTERIOR LOT. AS A SORT OF A NOTE, UH, THE ORIGINAL HOME WAS 1,180 SQUARE FEET. AND SO IN 2002, A COA WAS APPROVED FOR A 2054 SQUARE FOOT ADDITION. AND THE PROPOSAL BEFORE US TODAY IS TO BUILD A NEW ATTACHED CARPORT THAT WOULD BE 374 SQUARE FEET ATTACHED TO THE EXISTING RESIDENCE, UH, ROOFING SHINGLE COMPOSITION TO MATCH THE EXISTING ROOF, ROOF PITCH THREE OVER 12 WOOD CONSTRUCTION, UH, WITH A THREE FOOT SETBACK FROM THE PROPERTY LINE. AND THERE IS A SIDE WALL, WHICH YOU CAN SEE IN THE DRAWINGS, UH, WHICH DOES NOT GO ALL THE WAY TO THE, TO THE ROOF LINE. SO IT'S A, IT'S A PARTIAL WALL THAT THAT WOULD BE, AND, AND ALL THE COMPONENTS WOULD BE FIRE RATED. AND WE'VE SPOKEN WITH THE BUILDING INSPECTOR, PETE STOCKTON, THAT HE'S, HE SPOKE WITH THE BUILDER, SO THEY HAVE COME TO AN AGREEMENT OF HOW THAT WOULD BE DONE. UM, AND SO THE STAFF HAS COME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT IT WOULD BE THAT THE INITIAL HOME, ACTUALLY, IF YOU GO TO THE VERY BEGINNING, UH, DID HAVE A CARPORT, BUT IT WAS A VERY HUMBLE, LIKE ABOUT A THOUSAND SQUARE FOOT HOME, ONE STORY. AND THE, NOW IT'S OVER A 3000 SQUARE FOOT HOME. AND SO THAT THE, THAT THE CAPACITY, SORT OF THE, THE CARRYING CAPACITY OF THE PROPERTY, OF THE MASSING IS, IS AT THE MAXIMUM. UH, AND SO THAT THIS CARPORT, UH, WOULD EXCEED THAT. AND SO THAT, I THINK THAT CONCLUDES MY REPORT. IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS, I, I HAD A FEW QUESTIONS. SO THE, BUT THE CARPORT THAT WE SEE IN THE IMAGE, UH, FOUR WAS NOT AN HISTORIC CARPORT. THAT WAS SOMETHING ADDED AT SOME POINT IN TIME. SO IT WASN'T, IT DIDN'T HAVE SIGNIFICANCE. AND, UM, I GUESS IN YOUR DISCUSSIONS WITH, UH, IN AMONGST STAFF, UM, WAS THERE AN ATTITUDE ABOUT THE CARPORT THAT'S BEING PROPOSED VERSUS, 'CAUSE IT'S ATTACHED TO THE HOME, RIGHT? CORRECT. VERSUS WHAT, WHAT WOULD, WHAT WOULD THE DISCUSSIONS HAVE BEEN AMONGST STAFF IF THAT CARPORT WERE DETACHED, FOR INSTANCE? UH, WOULD THAT AFFECT, WOULD THIS CONVERSATION WE'RE HAVING? UH, I THINK THE CHALLENGE IS, AS I RECALL, AND STAFF CAN CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, IS THAT IT'S SUCH A TIGHT AREA AND SO TO HAVE IT [02:35:01] DETACHED, I THINK WE WERE IN FAVOR OF THAT, BUT IT'S, IT'S A VERY TIGHT AREA, SO IT'S, UM, IT WOULD BE DIFFICULT. WHAT'S THE DEFINITION OF DETACHED? UH, THAT IT'S, THAT THERE'S, THAT'S ONE INCH, HALF AN INCH, THREE INCHES, SIX INCHES, THAT THERE'S DAYLIGHT BETWEEN IT. I THINK IT'S FREESTANDING AND IT'S, AND IT'S NOT TOUCHING. I'M ASKING THE QUESTION JUST TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE, BECAUSE IT, IT IS THE MASSING OR PRESSURE OF THIS ELEMENT ON BE GIVEN TO SOME. THERE'S THE HOME, THE HOME IS SO LARGE AND MOST OF THE NEGATIVE SPACE IN THE LOT IS TAKEN UP, UM, BY THE PROPOSED STRUCTURES. I WOULD JUST ASK, THERE'S NO FRONT ELEVATION FOR ME TO LOOK AT. THERE'S NO, THERE'S A SIDE ELEVATION, BUT THERE'S NO STANDING IN THE STREET ELEVATION TO LOOK AT THE PROPOSED CARPORT AND THERE'S NO PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE SIDE OF THE HOUSE. SO IT'S HARD FOR ME TO UNDERSTAND AND PROCESS THIS IN A REALLY GOOD WAY. OH, YES. WHAT HAS THE APPLICANT HAS SOME PHOTOGRAPHS FOR ME TO LOOK AT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MA'AM. DOCUMENT CAMERA. AND I DO HAVE TWO SPEAKERS SIGNED UP FOR THIS ITEM. LET'S SEE. JUST TURN THIS, UH, JUST A HOUSEKEEPING. UH, WE HAVE PUT UP ONE IMAGE THAT I JUST COVERED, SORRY. UM, THERE'S A SKETCH OF THE FRONT, UM, AND ALSO THE A THERE'S OTHER DOCUMENTS HERE. I WANT TO NOTE THAT THE APPLICANT HAS BROUGHT AND THAT WE CAN SHARE FURTHER WHEN THE APPLICANT WISHES TO SPEAK TO THEM. THERE ARE OTHER QUESTIONS OF THE STAFF. UM, I'M GONNA GO AHEAD AND OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. I DO HAVE TWO SPEAKERS SIGNED UP. THE FIRST SPEAKER, UH, THAT I HAVE WHO WAS SIGNED UP IS, UM, UH, PETER RODRIGUEZ. HI, HOW ARE YOU? THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. AND IF YOU DON'T MIND, I PREFER TO READ BECAUSE I NOT VERY USUALLY TO SPEAK IN PUBLIC, SO I'M KIND OF, EH, WELL, EH, GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS PETER RODRIGUEZ. I'M AN APPLICANT AND PROJECT MANAGER FOR THE PROPERTY AT 6 2 3 BALEN AVENUE. WE HAVE BEEN INFORMED FOR THE STAFF, THE OFFICE OF REP OF PRESERVATION OF THEIR, UH, RECOMMENDATION FOR THE COA APPLICANT FOR THE NEW ATTACHED CAR. UH, CARPORT IS DENIAL. WE ARE VERY DISAPPOINTED AFTER A MONTH OR COMMUNICATED WITH THEM ABOUT PROJECTS BECAUSE WE'VE BEEN JUST DEALING WHERE TO PUT THE, THE CARPORT IN THE BEGINNING WAS IN THE MIDDLE OF THE, OF THE HOUSE. AND THEN THEY RECOMMEND TO MOVE AT THE BACK OF THE HOUSE. SO WE KEEP THE HISTORIC PART OF THE HOUSE COMPLETELY CLEAN AND THEN ATTACH TO THE BACK OF THE HOUSE. THAT IS THE, THE NEW PART OF THE HOUSE. EH, THE CARPET ADDS A LOT OF VALUE FOR THE PROPERTY, THE PROPERTY WITHOUT A GARAGE. OF COURSE, THEY MANAGE THE VALUE AND WE'VE BEEN TALKING WITH ALL THE NEIGHBORS AND THEY'RE VERY HAPPY WITH THE HOUSE. THE HOUSE WAS, EH, COMPLETELY EH DOWN. AND EVERYBODY'S HAPPY BECAUSE THEY'RE, WE ARE GIVING VALUE TO THE, TO THE NEIGHBORS, TO THE OTHER PROPERTIES, EH, AND ACTUALLY WE HAVE A PENDING CONTRACT ON THE HOUSE, BUT THEY REALLY WANT THE CARPET. WE DON'T HAVE THE CARPET. THEY'RE GONNA BE BACK OUT OF THE CONTRACT. UM, UM, WE UNDERSTAND THEIR, UH, APPROVAL CRITERIA, BUT BASICALLY SUGGESTS THE PROPOSED CARPET PLANS DO NOT SATISFY THE HISTORIC CHARACTERISTICS OF THE PROPERTY AND THE AREA. WE PLAN TO ADD ACCURATE DUPLICATION OF HISTORICAL FUTURES. EXAMPLE IS KILLED CRAFTSMANSHIP SIMILAR TO THE PROPERTY AND THE ENVIRONMENTAL. THE PROPOSED CARAL WILL BE ATTACHED TO THE RECENT ADDITION OF THE PROPERTY AND WILL NOT AFFECT ANY HISTORICAL ARCHITECTURAL OR ARCHE OF CULTURAL MATERIAL. THE PROPOSED DISTANCE FROM THE LINE TO THE FRONT AND SIDEWALKS ARE COMPATIBLE WITH DISTANCE TO THE PROPERTY LINE. SIMILAR ELEMENTS OF SIMILAR STRUCTURES IN THE AREA. AS YOU SEE IN THE PICTURES, [02:40:01] EH, IN, WE HAVE A SIMILAR CARPET IN THE AREA IN THE SAME STREET THAT IS BALEN THAT CAN MATCH WHAT ARE WE ARE, UH, ASKING FOR OF, OF COURSE, WE ARE WILLING TO WORK WITH YOU OR TO MATCH ANY, UH, CRITERIA THAT YOU CAN GIVE US IN ORDER TO HAVE THE, THE, THE CARPET. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. I HAVE ONE MORE SPEAKER SIGNED UP FOR THIS ITEM, WHICH IS YOLANDA ES HELLO EVERY HI. HELLO EVERYONE. I'M FROM MEXICO AND WE, MY HUSBAND AND I WERE THE INVESTORS OF THIS HOUSE. OKAY. COULD, COULD YOU RESTATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD? YOLANDA ANTES. YEAH. SO IT'S BEEN QUITE AN ADVENTURE TO COME TO A DIFFERENT COUNTRY AND DO AN INVE, A BIG INVEST INVESTOR JUST LIKE THIS ONE. AND IT HAS BEEN AN ADVENTURE BECAUSE WE HAD A, A PREVIOUS CONSTRUCTOR, UH, TO THAT GUIDED US IN THE WRONG DIRECTION ABOUT WHAT THIS WAS SUPPOSED TO BE. WE WERE LUCKY ENOUGH TO FIND PITA AND, AND HER HUSBAND TO HELP US OUT WITH THE REMODELING. AND OF COURSE, WE HAVE BEEN, WE HAVE, WE HAVE LEARNED THROUGH THE WHOLE, UM, EPISODE TO UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU ARE PRESERVING. OF COURSE, WE LOVE THE AREA AND WE, I THINK WE MEET, WE TRY TO MAKE A STANDARD OF OUR HOUSE AT, TO ADD VALUE, BUT OF, WELL, OF COURSE WE WANT TO, TO REALLY, TO MAKE THIS HAPPEN TO US AS WELL AS INVESTORS. OF COURSE, WE NEED THE CAR POT BECAUSE THE SECOND MOST VALUE FOR EV ANY FAMILIES ARE THE CARS. SO IN A WAY, WE WERE HOPING THAT SINCE WE BOUGHT THE, THE LOT WE BOUGHT THE HOUSE WITH AN EXISTING, I, I'M NOT AN AN HISTORICAL HISTORICAL, SO I DON'T KNOW IF THAT WAS BUILT IN 19 20, 19 21 OR 1950. THERE'S NO WAY FOR ME, I JUST KNEW IT WAS THERE. SO AS LONG AS IT'S THERE, WE HAVE THE OPTION IN MY, IN MY OPINION, TO HAVE, UH, HAVE IT BUILT AGAIN. OF COURSE, I THINK THAT THE OPTION OF PUTTING IT IN THE REAR WHERE THE, WHERE ALL THE, THE MODERN, THE OF HOUSE IS, IT MAKES IT LOOK LIGHTER. BUT I REALLY GIVES US BOTH FOR YOU, THE HISTORIANS, TO MAKE THE, TO KEEP THE ORIGINAL HOUSE CLEAN, AND THEN FOR US, UM, FOR THE FUTURE FAMILY, UH, TO, TO REALLY HAVE THE, THE, THE CAR ALL THE WAY BACK TO THE, TO THE END OF THE HOUSE. AND, UH, I JUST WANT TO LET YOU KNOW AS WELL THAT UH, WE HAVE A, A, A CLIENT VERY INTERESTED AND IF WE DON'T PULL THIS DEAL, LIKE WE ARE GONNA LOSE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO SELL IT. OKAY. THANK YOU. OKAY. THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OF THE APP, THE SPEAKERS OR COMMISSIONERS, BACK TO PRESENTATIONS? WHAT SHOULD WE MAKE ANY DISTINCTION BETWEEN WHAT'S BEEN HANDED OUT VERSUS WHAT'S BEEN FORMALLY, UH, PART OF THE AGENDA OR NOT? YOU CAN ALWAYS CONSIDER INFORMATION JUST DISTRIBUTED AT THE MEETING. YEAH. THANK YOU. ROMAN, YOU GONNA TELL US SOMETHING? I JUST WENT BY ONE POINT 'CAUSE THERE WAS A PICTURE OF THE PROPERTY OF A CARPORT AT 8 0 3 BAILIN. UH, JUST LOOK THAT UP. SEE WHAT IT IS. THAT IS A CARPORT. UM, ON, ON THE REAR OF THE HOUSE, THAT HOUSE IS ON THE CORNER AND THAT LITTLE CARPORT IS ON THE, THE VERY BACK OF THAT LOT ON THE CORNER. AND UH, THAT'S A FULL RESTORATION OF A, OF A BIG HOUSE HERE. AND I JUST WANTED TO LOOK THAT UP, UH, IN CASE YOU WERE WONDERING ABOUT IT. I HAVE A QUESTION. UH, FOR, FOR THE SPEAKERS OR THE, OR THE, OR STAFF. I GUESS MY QUESTION, I'M NOT SURE, BUT THE ENTRANCE ON THAT SIDE OF THE HOUSE IS MORE TOWARD THE FRONT. THE CARPORT IS PULLED PRETTY FAR BACK, SO IT ISN'T AS THOUGH YOU WOULD DRIVE UP AND THEN SORT OF STEP RIGHT INTO THE HOUSE. YOU'D HAVE TO COME THEN BACK DOWN THE DRIVEWAY AND ENTER. UM, IS IT INTENDED TO BE BUILT THAT WAY? WELL, IN THE BEGINNING WE TRIED TO PUT MORE TOWARDS THE, THE DOOR, BUT OF COURSE IT'S PART OF THE, THE, THE ORIGINAL HOUSE. SO, EH, ROMAN WAS TELLING THAT PROBABLY IT'S BETTER JUST TO MOVE ON THE BACK. SO WE KEEP THE, THE HISTORICAL PART OF THE HOUSE COMPLETE BECAUSE YOU SEE ALL THE WINDOWS THAT IS IN THAT SIDE IS VERY NICE WINDOWS. SO WE DON'T WANT TO COVER THAT [02:45:01] PART OF THE, THE HOUSE THAT REALLY IS THE, THE PART OF THE HISTORICAL OF THE HOUSE. SO IF I MAY CHANGE THE QUESTION IN THIS, WHAT YOU PASS OUT TODAY IN THE MEETING YOU'RE RECOMMENDING THE, THE LOWER MM-HMM . YES. DRAWING. YEAH. THAT PUSHES THE CARPORT TO THE REAR YEAH. OF THE, OF THE HOME. YEAH, OF COURSE. OKAY, THANK YOU. MAY I CHAIR? SORRY, ONE MORE QUESTION. I ASK A QUESTION. YEAH. ABOUT WHAT WAS HANDED OUT. CAN YOU SEE THESE TWO? DID YOU CREATE THESE OR ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH THEM? YES. SO THIS ONE SAYS, UH, THE, THE PHOTO WAS TAKEN OF THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE, PRESUMABLY FROM THE STREET, UH, IN MARCH OF THIS YEAR. WELL, YEAH. WHAT WAS WHAT THE WHAT? WE PURCHASED THE HOUSE? NO, AT THAT ONE, UH, IS FROM THE, FROM THE HISTORICAL. UH, OKAY. BUT IT SAYS, IT SAYS MARCH OF THIS YEAR. THAT'S, THAT'S MY FIRST QUESTION. 22. 22, NOT 22 BOUGHT THE HOUSE. OKAY. BUT, BUT THIS IS, THIS IS WHAT IT LOOKED LIKE, UH, A YEAR, YEAR AGO WHEN WE PURCHASED A HOUSE. YES. A YEAR AND A HALF AGO. AND THIS IS WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE TODAY. YES. YES. SO THE FRONT, THIS I KNOW WE MAY NOT BE TALKING ABOUT, THIS IS ABOUT THE CARPORT, BUT I'M JUST NOTICING A BIG DIFFERENCE. THE FRONT, THE WHOLE FRONT PORCH IS NEW. NO, I THINK IT WAS BEHIND THE CAR. I THINK THAT WAS UNDERNEATH THE CARPORT. IN THE SHADOW. THERE'S THOSE PINK LETTERS ON THE, ON THE PICTURE THAT KIND, YOU CAN SEE THE WINDOWS BEHIND IT ALL BECAUSE THEY GOT SEAL AWAY. BUT THE PORCH IS DIFFERENT ON THE, I MEAN, THE HOUSE IS SLIGHTLY RAISED HIGHER AS WELL. THE HOUSE AND THE PORCH. ROMAN, CAN YOU CONFIRM ALL THE WORK ON THE HOUSE THAT'S BEEN DONE WAS ALL DONE WITH PERMIT AND A COA, IS THAT NOT ACCURATE? YEAH, WE ALREADY HAVE THE FINAL. YES. WELL, THE PORCH IS TWO FEET HIGHER. SO WHEN, WHEN, UH, WE WENT OUT TO VISIT THIS PROPERTY? THANK YOU FOR THE GOOD FOR THE QUESTION. CAN I ANSWER THE QUESTION THAT YOU SAY WE NEED TO RAISE A LITTLE BIT? THE HALF. SO PROBABLY IS WHEN YOU SEE THE DIFFERENCE. THANK YOU. I WASN'T GONNA RAISE THE ISSUE, BUT SINCE YOU ASKED THE QUESTION AND WE WENT OUT TO VISIT THIS, THIS HOUSE THERE, THEY DID MENTION THAT UH, PIZZA IS A RECENT PERSON, UH, WORKING ON THIS, BUT THERE HAD BEEN A PREVIOUS CONTRACTOR AND I DON'T KNOW ANY OF THAT HISTORY. BUT IF YOU LOOK AT THE TWO DRAWINGS, JASON, CAN YOU GO BACK PLEASE TO THE SIDE ELEVATION DRAWING HERE. CAN WE ZOOM IN AS BIG AS WE CAN WHILE HAVING BOTH DRAWINGS ON THE PAGE? SO IF YOU CAN GET BOTH A LITTLE BIT SMALLER, YOU KNOW, OUR FIRST, THE DRAWING ON THE BOTTOM IS WHAT WAS SUBMITTED IN, UH, FOR C OF A TO, TO MAKE THIS CARPORT. BUT AS YOU CAN SEE, THE ROOF IS DIFFERENT. YOU CAN SEE THAT THE HIP, THERE'S A, THERE'S A GAP THERE IN BETWEEN THE ORIGINAL HOUSE AND WE DON'T SEE IT IN THE DRAWING. SO MY FIRST CONCERN WAS TO, LET'S GO LOOK AT THE SITE AND SEE WHAT'S GOING ON OVER THERE. AND IN FACT, THE WAY IT WAS FRAMED AND BUILT IS, IS IN FACT WHAT'S IN THE LOWER PICTURE, WHICH IS NOT WHAT WAS APPROVED BY THE C OF A NOR, IN FACT, WAS IT WHAT WAS STAMPED BY PERMITTING, THE PERMITTED DRAWING SET LOOKS LIKE WHAT'S ON TOP, WHAT GOT BUILT IS WHAT'S ON BOTTOM. AND THERE WERE ALSO, UM, AS YOU SEE, IF YOU COULDN'T, YOU CAN'T SEE HERE BECAUSE THE CARPORT IS PROPOSED AND SO THERE'S A WALL ON THE CARPORT. BUT IF YOU COULD SEE BEHIND IT THE DOUBLE WINDOWS, THE LAST DOUBLE WINDOWS ON THAT, LET'S CALL IT THE ORIGINAL PORTION OF THE HOUSE OR THE PART OF THE HOUSE, WITHOUT THE ADDITION, THOSE WINDOWS AREN'T THERE. AND ON THE WEST ELEVATION THERE ARE ALSO SOME FENESTRATION CHANGES THAT REALLY WERE QUITE ALARMING TO ME WHEN I SAW THEM. THE OTHER THING IS THAT THE ORIGINAL DRAWING SET DIDN'T SPECIFY THAT THE EAVES WOULD BECOME BOXED. THEY WERE ACTUALLY EXPOSED ROW RAFTER TAILS AND TO THE PORCH CONDITION, THE RAILING WAS REBUILT. I BELIEVE THE COLUMNS WERE REBUILT. THEY'RE REBUILT PRETTY ACCURATELY AND IT'S NOT, UH, BUT THEY DID USE CEMENT BOARD ON THE, ON THE COLUMNS. AND SO, UM, OVERALL WE HAD SOME DEEP CONCERNS ABOUT THIS. NOW WHY DID I MAKE THE DECISION THIS MORNING AS WE'RE TALKING TO CHARLES, WHAT TO, WHAT TO DO WITH THIS IS AS COMMISSIONER MCNEILL, YOU'LL KNOW. WELL, WE'RE GONNA LOOK AT, UM, WE DID 3 1 1 ALREADY WHEN WE SAW THESE COMPLAINTS. HOWEVER, THE POINT IS THERE ARE NO OP, THERE'S NOT A SIGNIFICANT OPEN PERMIT ON THIS. AS, UH, PIZZA MENTIONED THERE, THE PERMIT WAS FINALED FOR THE REMODEL. SO WHEN I SPOKE TO THE GUYS IN INSPECTIONS, UH, [02:50:02] WELL TO A GUY, YOU KNOW, WELL HERE, HE SAID ROMAN, YEAH, THAT'S CLOSED OUT. THERE'S NOT MUCH YOU'RE GONNA DO ON THAT. NOW THAT MEANS THAT WE COULD, WE BEING ME STAFF COULD 3 1 1 AND PRESS THE HAMMER AND TRY TO FIGURE THIS OUT. BUT I THINK WE HAVE A HOUSE THAT'S FOR SALE AND WE CHOOSE OUR BATTLES. AND IF IT LOOKS LIKE A BATTLE THAT WE'RE GONNA HAVE A HARD TIME GETTING SOMEONE TO COME INTO COMPLIANCE ON. SO THEN WHY ARE YOU DENY, SO WHY ARE YOU DENYING THE CARPORT SPECIFICALLY AND WHAT WOULD HAVE TO HAPPEN IN ORDER FOR YOU TO PROVE IT? WELL, JUST AS AS, UM, AS, UH, CHARLES MENTIONED, THE CARPORT BEING ATTACHED TO THE BUILDING ADDS TO THE MASSING OF THE BUILDING IN A WAY THAT WE DON'T THINK IS, IS SUPPORTED BY THE CONTEXT AREA. IT DOESN'T MEET THE, THE 11 CRITERIA. AND UM, THAT'S WHY IF THAT WERE A FREESTANDING CARPORT AND IT WAS ABLY RECOGNIZABLE AS SUCH, I I THINK WE, WE PROBABLY WOULD BE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL. BUT IT'S HOW IT'S ATTACHED. IT DOES SEEM TO ADD TO THE MASSING AND ROMAN JUST, WELL, GO AHEAD PLEASE. MY EDIFICATION AND PERHAPS THE EDIFICATION OF EVERYONE IN THE ROOM, A DETACHED CARPORT COULD BE LITERALLY ONE INCH AWAY FROM THE EXISTING HOUSE. I MEAN, JUST SO LONG AS IT'S ITS OWN SEPARATE STRUCTURE, THE WORD FREESTANDING COMES TO MIND. OKAY. AND UNDER ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVALS, THE DIRECTOR MAY ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVE A FREESTANDING CARPORT. UH, UNDER CERTAIN DOESN'T MEAN WE WILL. SO IT'D HAVE TO HAVE EIGHT POSTS. 'CAUSE IT SHOWS FOUR POSTS ON THE RIGHT SIDE. SO IT WOULD'VE TO HAVE FOUR POSTS ON THE LEFT SIDE IN ORDER FOR IT TO BE FREESTANDING, STRUCTURALLY INDEPENDENT, BUT IT VISUALLY, IT WOULD NEED TO BE VISUALLY TOO. SO IF WE WERE REVIEWING THAT, IS IT HAVING AN ADVERSE EFFECT ON THE STRUCTURE? IF IT GETS A LITTLE TOO CLOSE, THEN WE'RE BACK WHERE WE STARTED. RIGHT? YOU COULD FRAME IT UP, LIKE YOU COULD FRAME IT IN SUCH A WAY TO BE ACH EVEN AS, AND YOU WOULD HARD BE HARD TO TELL AS YOU KNOW. SO WOULD A FLAT ROOF BE VISUALLY MORE APPEALING TO YOU THAN A PITCHED ROOF? WE GET IN, I, IT'S HARD FOR ME TO JUST SAY RIGHT STANDING HERE, JUST ASKING QUESTIONS SO THE APPLICANT MIGHT, AH, KNOW WHAT RIGHT NEEDS TO HAPPEN IN ORDER FOR IT TO GET TO THE NEXT STEP. LET ME REVERSE THAT. COMMISSIONER. WOULD A FLAT ROOF BE MORE ATTRACTIVE AS A FREE STANDING BUILDING THAN A A HIP ROOF? I THINK IT WOULD BE, IT WOULD BE VISUALLY A VISUAL DIFFERENTIATION BETWEEN THE ORIGINAL HOUSE AND THE CARPORT. OKAY, THANK YOU. AND ROMAN, I HAD A QUESTION BECAUSE I, IN THIS IMAGE THAT'S ON THE SCREEN, I JUST WANT TO, UH, DOUBLE DOWN ON SOMETHING YOU SAID BECAUSE ARE WE CERTAIN THOUGH THAT THE REAR ADDITION IS NOT IN FACT MUCH LARGER THAN WHAT WAS IN THE C OF A? BECAUSE, UM, UNLESS I'M MISTAKEN, UM, LOOKING AT THE DRAWING ABOVE, IF I LOOK AT THAT REAR HIP, THAT POINT AND UH, BETWEEN WHERE, WHERE THE, WHERE THE, LIKE LET'S SAY LET'S, LET'S SAY THE TOP OF THE RIDGE OF THE HOME AT ITS HIGHEST POINT, WHEN IT STARTS TO SLIDE BACK DOWN IN THE REAR OF THE ORIGINAL HOME, THERE'S A GAP BEFORE THE VERTICAL WALL OF THE SECOND FLOOR ADDITION OCCURS. THAT LITTLE, LITTLE TRIANGLE, RIGHT? THAT, THAT VOID, RIGHT? NOT THAT CLOSE. JUST YOU CAN SEE 'EM BOTH, BUT AS CLOSE AS YOU CAN. AND WHAT I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND IS WHEN WE LOOK AT THE DRAWING BELOW, THAT GAP IS NOT THERE AND IT APPEARS THAT, THAT THE REAR ADDITION IS STARTING AT THE, WHERE THAT RIDGE PEAKED NOW. SO EITHER THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE WAS REFRAMED OR THE, OR THE REAR ADDITION WAS ELONGATED FORWARD. I, I CAN'T TELL YES. UH, WHEN I LOOK AT THIS, BUT SOMETHING IS NOT RIGHT, LIKE SOMETHING, I HAD THE SAME QUESTION CHAIR, AND MAYBE IT'S THE DRAWING. THE FRONT PART OF THE HOUSE APPEARS TO HAVE BEEN REFRAMED BECAUSE THE OTHER THING YOU CAN TELL THE ORIGINAL DRAWING ON TOP, THE, THE SECOND, THE FRONT WALL OF THE SECOND FLOOR ADDITION IS MORE OR LESS IN LINE WITH THE LAST WINDOW OF THAT SET OF WINDOWS ON THAT PORCH. AND THOUGH YOU CAN'T SEE IT IN THIS DRAWING WITH THE CARPET BELOW, IT IS IN THAT EXACT LINE ALSO AT THE SITE, YOU CAN SORT OF SEE HOW THE PEAK WAS SORT OF BROUGHT UP, FRAMED UP, AND YOU SEE IT REAL PRETTY CLEARLY IN PERSON. IT, IT LOOKS A LITTLE, UH, HOW SHOULD I SAY? YOU CAN SEE WHAT HAPPENED, SOMETHING MOVED THERE WITH THE FRONT MAIN PART OF THE HOUSE UP TO HIT THAT PEAK. AND, AND IT STILL DOESN'T WORK BY THE EYE NATURALLY, BUT UNDER THE SITE YOU'LL SEE. SO I DON'T THINK THE ADDITION GOT AND IS LARGER SQUARE FOOTAGE AND IT, IT, IT'S AN ILLUSION, I BELIEVE. OKAY. UH, I, I'M CONCERNED ABOUT DISCREPANCY BETWEEN THE PLAN THAT WAS PROVIDED AND THE PHOTOGRAPHS. THE PHOTOGRAPHS SHOW A DECK AT THE BACK OF THE HOUSE AND FRENCH DOORS IN A POSITION WHERE IN THE PLAN WE SEE A BED PUSHED UP AGAINST A SOLID WALL. UM, I STARTED WONDERING ABOUT [02:55:01] THIS BECAUSE IT SEEMS TO ME THAT IF THE CARPORT WERE BUILT IN THE POSITION PROPOSED, IT WOULD BE EXTREMELY, IT MIGHT BE INCONVENIENT BECAUSE IT'S SO FAR FROM A DOOR TO GET IN. SO IF YOU BROUGHT IN YOUR GROCERIES, IT DOESN'T SEEM THAT IT WOULD BE A CONVENIENT LOCATION, WHICH MAKES ME THINK THAT PERHAPS IT WOULD BE BETTER TO CONSIDER A PROPOSAL BY SOMEONE WHO WAS LIVING IN THE HOUSE WHO HAD, COULD SHOW MORE DEFINITELY THAT WITH MORE CONVICTION ABOUT WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED. WHEREAS I CONCERNED THAT WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED HERE IS SIMPLY TO PUT A SYMBOLIC CARPORT ON THE HOUSE THAT MIGHT NOT BE FUNCTIONAL, THAT MIGHT BE CAUSED TO ACTUALLY BUILD IN A DIFFERENT WAY, JUST AS THERE'S ALREADY A DISCREPANCY BETWEEN THE PLAN AND THE PHOTOS. THOSE ARE, I THINK THAT'S, THERE'S AN AMBIGUITY IN THE WHOLE PRESENTATION THAT I FIND WORRISOME. COULD WE, I GUESS, COULD WE BLOW UP THE PLAN? I, I'M JUST TRYING TO SEE WHAT THE, WHAT IT'S PAGE SEVEN OF SEVEN THERE, FOUR PLANS IN 2022 SHOWS A BEDROOM BACK THERE, AND NOW THERE'S FRENCH DOORS BACK THERE AND A DECK. YEAH, IT'S A, IT'S A, UH, UH, FAMILY ROOM. I'M SORRY, CAN I ASK THE OWNER TO, TO COME FORWARD, EXPLAIN THE DISCREPANCY THEY WANT, PLEASE. THAT GOES TO THE, THE, THE DECK IS A FAMILY ROOM. SO YOU HAVE ALL THE, THE, THERE'S A HALLWAY THAT GOES FROM THE BACK TO THE KITCHEN. SO COULD WE ENLARGE THE PLAN ON THE SCREEN TO, TO LOOK AT THE UPPER PLAN JUST, JUST FOR CLARITY? YEAH, THEY SAID THAT IT'S A BEDROOM, BUT IT'S NOT A BEDROOM. THEY DECIDE NOT TO PUT A WALL, A DOOR. SO IT'S JUST A GAME, A FAMILY ROOM. SO WHAT I'M SAYING IS, FOR EXAMPLE, IF YOU WERE BRINGING GROCERIES HOME, WHICH DOOR WOULD, WOULD THEY LIKELY USE? WOULD THEY TAKE THE GROCERIES AROUND THE BACK TO THE FRENCH DOORS OR WOULD THEY TAKE THE GROCERIES BACK? NO, I BELIEVE NOW, EH, PROBABLY TO THE FRONT BECAUSE YOU'RE GONNA, EH, JUST PARKING STRAIGHT, SO PROBABLY TO THE BACK, TO THE FRONT OF THE, THE HOUSE. SO I, WHAT I'M SAYING IS IT SEEMS A BIT AWKWARD, SO I'M CONCERNED THAT ABOUT ITS PLAUSIBILITY AS A, AN AMENITY TO THE HOUSE BECAUSE IT WOULD BE SO AWKWARD. WELL, IN, IN, IN THE HEIGHTS, AS THEY SAY, ALL THE GARAGE ARE ON THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY. SO ANYWAY, YOU NEED TO RUN FROM THE GARAGE TO THE BACK OF THE BACK DOOR OR THE FRONT DOOR TO PULL YOUR GROCERIES. UH, ADDING COMMENTS AS WELL. UH, I HAVE STOOD A NUMBER OF TIMES WHERE PETER HAS STOOD IN HISTORIC DISTRICTS AND BUILT CARPORTS, UH, ADDING CARPORTS TO HISTORIC HOMES. THEY ARE, UH, FREESTANDING, THEY WERE SPECIFICALLY AT MY TIME OF BEING AN APPLICANT, WERE ASKED TO, UH, BUILD A, A ROOF, NOT A SITE SHEDDING ROOF BECAUSE THEN IT WOULD LOOK MORE LIKE A GARAGE, UH, LIKE A GARAGE, UH, UH, UH, A BACK GARAGE. SO THAT WAS SECOND REQUIREMENT. AND THE THIRD REQUIREMENT WAS I HAVE TO BUILD A CARPORT WITH THE FRONT TWO POLES STARTING ON THE BACK 50 FEET OF THE PROPERTY, ASSUMING THAT WAS A HUNDRED FOOT DEEP PROPERTY. SO THERE WERE THE THREE REQUIREMENTS THAT, UH, THAT WERE REQUESTED OUT OF ME. AND IN THIS CASE, IF WE ARE APPLYING THE SAME SPIRIT OF IT ALL, I THINK YES, WE SHOULD HAVE A FREE STANDING CARPORT. UH, THE QUESTION OF HOW MANY INCHES AND ALL THAT? UH, I THINK IT'S, IT'S A SECONDARY ONE. AS LONG AS IT'S A FREE STANDING, IT NEEDS TO BE LOW PITCH ROOF, UH, AND, UH, HOW THEY EXIT TO GO INTO THE HOUSE. TO ME, I DON'T THINK WE, WE, THAT'S OUR BUSINESS, UH, UH, AS, AS LONG AS, BECAUSE YOU ONLY HAVE DRIVEWAY ON ONE SIDE OF THE HOUSE, NOT, NOT ON BOTH SIDES OF THE HOUSE. SO THE CARPORT HAS TO BE THERE. UH, THE QUESTION IS, IS THEN IS THIS SETBACK 50 FEET OR HALF THE LOTS LENGTH? YES, THAT'S THE CASE THEN. UH, I MEAN TO US THAT SHOULD BE ENOUGH FOR A CARPORT REQUIREMENT. IT'S A FREE STANDING STRUCTURE. IF THE PERSON WHO BUYS IT DON'T LIKE IT, THEY CAN TEAR IT DOWN, UH, AND BUILD SOMETHING DIFFERENT. AGAIN, THEY CAN BUILD A GARAGE AT THE BACK IF THEY WANT TO AND COME BACK BEFORE THIS COMMISSION. THAT'S, THAT'S MY COMMENT. THANK YOU. OKAY. CAN I MAKE A MOTION THAT'S, WELL, LET ME, I'M GONNA CLOSE, CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND THEN MAKE YOUR MOTION. [03:00:02] I'M CLOSE. I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT THE STAFF, THE STAFF WORK WITH THE APPLICANT TO, UH, COME UP WITH A FREE STANDING CARPORT AND THAT YOU'D BE ABLE TO ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVE IT AND NOT BRING IT BACK BEFORE THE COMMISSION. MAY I ASK, UM, JUST TO CONFIRM WITH STAFF, WERE THERE OTHER CONDITIONS OF THE OTHER ITEMS THAT WERE MODIFIED OUTSIDE OF THE C OF A OR, OR BECAUSE IT WAS CLOSED THAT, THAT IS CLOSED ESSENTIALLY THAT, IF I UNDERSTAND CORRECTLY AT THIS TIME, WE JUST, I JUST DIDN'T, YOU KNOW, UH, TALKED TO PERMITTING. WE HAVE A 3 1 1. UM, UH, IT, IT MAY, IT'S GONNA BE HARD. MY, MY QUESTION, IF THAT'S CLOSED, IT'S CLOSED, BUT NOW IS IT, BUT IS IT REOPENED IF THERE'S ANOTHER C OF A ON THE PROPERTY FOR THE CARPORT PERMITS DEAL? I BELIEVE IT WOULD, THAT PERMITS FINAL, THEY WALKING TO WHATEVER. OKAY, THAT'S MY QUESTION. YEAH, I'M JUST, JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND. THERE IS ONE PER, UH, PROJECT NUMBER IN THERE. IT WAS FOR WASTEWATER CONNECT, BUT SEEING THE HOUSE AND WHERE IT IS IN THAT EVERYTHING ELSE WAS FINAL. I I'M JUST GUESSING THAT MIGHT BE A FLUKE. I CAN CHECK ON IT A LITTLE BIT. UM, SO SO COULD YOU JUST RESTATE YOUR MOTION AND WAS IT ALSO INVOLVING, WE JUST, IF YOU COULD RESTATE IT FOR THE, MY, MY UNDERSTANDING IS TO REQUEST THAT THE APPLICANT WORK WITH STAFF TO COME UP WITH A FREE STANDING CARPORT THAT SAT AND THAT STAFF BE ABLE TO ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVE THAT PROJECT SO THEY CAN GET IT BUILT AND THEY CAN SELL THEIR HOUSE AND THEY DON'T HAVE TO COME BACK HERE AND HAVE US BLESS WHATEVER ROMAN'S ALREADY GONNA BLESS. AND PART OF THAT WOULD BE, IT WOULD BE SET BACK A CERTAIN AMOUNT SET BACK FIF AT LEAST HALF THE DISTANCE, WHICH I BELIEVE IT ALREADY SATISFIES THAT LOOKING IT'S A HUNDRED FOOT LOT. IT'S, HUH? IT'S 45 FEET. IT'S 45 FEET BACK. YEAH, IT'S 15, 14 FEET FROM THE BACK AND IT'S 40 FEET LONG SO THAT THE CARPORT STARTS 50 FEET FROM THE FRONT HALFWAY. THEY CAN MAKE IT 35 FEET FROM, FROM THE FRONT OF THE LOT, FROM THE FRONT OF THE, FROM THE FRONT OF THE LOT, FROM THE LOT LINE AT THE PROPERTY LINE AT THE FRONT OF THE, AT THE FRONT. OKAY. AND ALL OF THAT IS ON YOUR MOTION TO APPROVE STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR DENIAL, ASSUME? NO, I'M NOT, I'M NOT APPROVING STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION FOR DENIAL. I, I, I FEEL LIKE DEFERRING FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO DEFER INSTEAD. THERE'S A LOT OF MOVING PARTS HERE. I FEEL LIKE STAFF COULD EASILY REVIEW THIS DESIGN OF A FREESTANDING CARPORT, ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVE IT. THEY HAVE A, THEY HAVE A CONTRACT FOR SALE. THEY HAVE NO NEED FOR FOR THEM TO WAIT 30 DAYS TO BRING US BACK EIGHT POSTS AND A FLAT ROOF. WELL THEY'VE, THEY'VE HAVE A HISTORY OF DOING THINGS DIFFERENTLY THAN WHAT THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO. SO I KIND OF WANNA MAKE 'EM FOLLOW THE RULES. THIS TIME. YOU'RE GONNA HAVE A SET OF DRAWINGS WITH A, WITH A COA AND A CITY INSPECTION. YOU'RE PROPOSING A C OF A WITH CONDITIONS AND RESOLVED BY STAFF. I HAVE A MOTION. SO I STILL, I'M GONNA ASK FOR A SECOND ON THAT MOTION. THANK YOU. UM, IS THERE A SECOND FOR THE MOTION? UH, UH, COMMISSIONER MCNEIL, ARE YOU OPEN TO A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO SAY THAT THE ROOF HAS TO HAVE A, A PITCH ROOF AS OPPOSED TO A FLAT ROOF? UH, YEAH, ABSOLUTELY. IF YOU THINK A PITCH ROOF LOOKS BETTER THAN FLAT, ABSOLUTELY. I WAS GONNA LET ROMAN DECIDE WHAT FLAT ONE ON 12. TWO ON 12 THREE ON 12. AS LONG AS IT'S FREE STANDING AND DIFFERENTIATED FROM THE HOUSE. RIGHT? OKAY. THEN, THEN I SECOND WITH, WITH THE CONDITION THAT THERE IS A, ALSO A PITCH ROOF. I DON'T CARE. 2 12 3 12 AS LONG AS THIS PITCH AND NOT FLAT. ALRIGHT, I'M GONNA TEST THIS MOTION BEFORE I DO THERE ANY OTHER DISCUSSIONS? 'CAUSE I, I DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GONNA HAPPEN WITH THE MOTION. IT MAY, IT MAY SUCCEED OR IT MAY NOT. SO, I, I JUST WANNA SAY THIS IS ONE OF THOSE THINGS WHERE IT SEEMS LIKE A DEATH BY A THOUSAND CUTS. 'CAUSE WE'RE DOING, THEY'VE ALREADY DONE STUFF THAT DOESN'T FOLLOW THE DRAWINGS. WE'RE LETTING THEM DO THIS TO WORK WITH STAFF. WE'RE NOT GONNA SEE IT UNTIL IT'S BUILT OR WHATEVER. I, I'M JUST, AND, AND I, I'D LIKE TO ADD, I'M FEELING ANXIOUS ABOUT IT. I'D LIKE TO ADD THAT THIS IS, THERE'S ALREADY AS DISCUSSED AMBIGUITY TO WHAT'S BEEN PRESENTED HERE TOO. UM, IN ADDITION TO EVERYTHING YOU SAID, I AGREE WITH YOU. I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY AMBIGUITY ABOUT THE CARPORT. I THINK IT'S COMPLETELY AMBIGUOUS. . THAT'S, THAT'S WHY YOU'RE GONNA LET 'EM REDESIGN IT WITH THE STAFF AND NOT HAVE, EXCEPT FOR WHAT IT IS AND WHERE IT IS AND WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE. IT'S, ITS ALL PRETTY CLEAR. IT'S A 30 FOOT BY NINE FOOT CARPORT WITH EIGHT POSTS AND A TWO ON 12 ROOF. LET'S PUT YOUR SEAL ON IT. HAPPY [03:05:01] TO DRIVE BY IT. ALRIGHT, I'M GONNA CALL THE VOTE ON THIS MOTION. ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION AS DESCRIBED. AYE, UM, LET, LET'S, LET'S, LET'S DO A ROLL, UH, ROLL CALL. SO, SO ALL IN FAVOR. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME. YEP. MCNEIL. OKAY. ALL OPPOSED, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME. KA CURRY BLAKELY JONES. THE BOTH. OKAY. AND ANY ABSTENTIONS. OKAY, SO THAT MOTION FAILS. UM, I HAVE HEARD ANOTHER POTENTIAL MOTION IF IT WERE MADE, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE'D DEFER THIS AND LET THEM WORK WITH STAFF AND THEN BRING IT BACK TO US TO LOOK AT CURRY SECONDS. AND BEFORE WE VOTE THE CAN I, CAN I, THE, THE, THE PUBLIC HEARING IS CLOSED, SO, UM, YOUR MOTION, YOU STILL S YOU SUPPORT IN GENERAL, THE IDEA OF THE CARPORT AND BEING 50% BACK PROVIDED THAT YOU COULD SEE WHAT IT IS AND IT'S DESCRIBED AND IT'S VERY SPECIFIC. IT'S, IT'S STILL, IT'S STILL BASED ON THE MERITS OF THE DESIGN ABOUT IT, BUT, OKAY. ALL IN FAVOR OF THIS, THIS, THIS MOTION? I DON'T THINK SO. UH, LET'S, LET'S, UM, I I COULDN'T HEAR HIM. UM, I, I THINK JUST SAY I, BECAUSE I THINK IAAA. AYE. AYE AYE. OKAY. ANY OPPOSED? ANY ABSTENTIONS? MM-HMM. OKAY, SO THAT MOTION PASSES. SO A MOTION TO DEFERRAL HAS PASSED, SO WILL BE ADDRESSED NEXT. OKAY. GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIRPERSON AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION. THIS IS STAFF PERSON CHARLES SADLER. I SIT SUBMIT FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. TWO 13 EAST 31ST STREET, WHICH IS IN THE STARK WEATHER NEIGHBORHOOD SUBDIVISION. THE PROPERTY INCLUDES A HISTORIC 840 SQUARE FOOT TWO STORY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE AND DETACHED GARAGE SIT SITUATED ON A 5,000 SQUARE FOOT INTERIOR LOT. IT'S A CONTRIBUTING CRAFTSMAN STYLE RESIDENCE CIRCA 1927. THE PROPERTY HAS BEEN IN THE APPLICANT'S FAMILY FOR FOUR GENERATIONS. THE HOME WAS RECENTLY REPAIRED FOR A FAMILY MEMBER TO LIVE IN, AND THE APPLICANT'S INSURANCE COMPANY REQUIRED THEM TO RENOVATE AND UPDATE WITHIN 30 DAYS IN ORDER TO STAY INSURED. AND SO THE INSURANCE COMPANY'S REQUIREMENT IS WHAT PROMPTED THEM TO RENOVATE. APPLICANT DID NOT APPLY FOR A COA. UH, SO STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS DENIAL IF COA AN ISSUANCE OF A COR FOR WORK COMPLETED AS, AS SUBMITTED. UH, A CONSIDERATION IS FINANCIAL HARDSHIP THAT TO, THIS IS NOT A PRIMARY RESIDENCE, THIS IS A HOME THAT'S BEEN IN THE FAMILY. UH, BUT THE, THE SON, THE OWNER, UH, OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICANT, UH, PERSON THAT WAS LIVING THERE, UH, HAS WRITTEN ME A LETTER EXPLAINING THAT THE, IT WOULD BE A FINANCIAL HARDSHIP TO RETURN THE HOUSE TO THE CONDITION THAT IT WAS IN. AND SO THE PRIMARY RE THE THE PRIMARY RENOVATION WAS PUTTING IN, UH, FLESH MOUNTED VINYL WINDOWS, UH, A CEMENT BOARD, SIDING, UH, TEXTURED AND THEN RENOVATING THE FRONT PORCH. THOSE WERE THE, THE RENOVATIONS. AND THEN I HAVE EXAMPLES OF THE CONTEXT AREA. AND THERE ARE SIMILAR HOMES. THERE ARE HOMES THAT HAVE BEEN SIMILARLY RENOVATED THAT ARE CONTRIBUTING. AND SO I THINK THAT'S THE END OF MY PRESENTATION IF THERE'S ANY, ANY QUESTIONS? ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF COMMISSION? SO, UH, THIS IS ALWAYS TRICKY QUESTION. HOW DO WE KNOW THE FINANCIAL HARDSHIP? LIKE WHAT WAS, HOW HAS THAT BEEN [03:10:01] VERIFIED? UH, GOOD QUESTION. I ASKED THE APPLICANT TO WRITE A LETTER. UH, HE AND HIS WIFE ARE RETIRED SCHOOL TEACHERS AND THEIR DAUGHTER AND SON ARE ON STANDBY AS SPEAKERS. UM, THE DAUGHTER WAS RECENTLY DIVORCED AND THIS HOUSE WAS BEING PREPARED SO SHE'D HAVE A PLACE TO LIVE. AND PRIOR TO THAT, WHAT WAS THE CONDITION OF THE HOUSE? OR WAS IT, WAS IT OCCUPIED OR WAS IT THE SHAPE OF THE HOUSE WAS, UH, THERE ARE THE INSURANCE PHOTOS WHICH ARE IN BLACK AND WHITE. THOSE SHOW THAT IT WAS IN, IN POOR CONDITION. AND, AND THE, THE, AS YOU STATED, THE CHANGES THAT WERE MADE WERE IN RESPONSE TO THE INSURANCE DEMANDS? RIGHT. IT WAS, I MEAN, FAIR TO SAY, HAD LIKE A HIGH PRESSURE THREATENING, VERY THREATENING LETTERS. UM, AND THAT, THAT I THINK THEY HAD TO COMPLY WITHIN 30 DAYS, WHICH HAPPENED LIKE LATE SPRING AND THEY'VE BEEN VERY COOPERATIVE. THE CONTRACTOR, THE OWNER, THE CHILDREN, THEY'VE COME IN TO MEET ME AND WE'VE COMMUNICATED EXTENSIVELY AND THEY HAVE PLANS TO PAINT THE FRONT PORCH ALSO, WHICH IS CURRENTLY NOT PAINTED. OKAY. UM, I DO HAVE TWO SPEAKERS SIGN UP FOR THIS ITEM. SO IF THERE ARE NO QUESTIONS AT THIS MOMENT, I'M GOING TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND, UH, INVITE THIS FIRST SPEAKER TO SPEAK. THE FIRST SPEAKER IS JOSEPH MARTIN. HELLO. UM, MY NAME IS JOSEPH MARTIN AND, UH, I GUESS BEFORE I GET STARTED, I DID WANT TO THANK THE COMMITTEE, UM, FOR THE SENTIMENT OF WHAT THEY ARE TRYING TO DO, UM, PRESERVING THE AREA TO ITS HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE. BUT, UM, MY FAMILY AND I ARE A BIT CONFUSED AND A LITTLE FRUSTRATED. UM, WE HAVE HAD DEEP ROOTS IN THIS AREA FOR, UM, LIKE OUR SPEAKER SAID, FOR OVER 70 YEARS. MY GRANDFATHER MOVED INTO THIS HOME IN 1948 AND HE ACTUALLY MET A GIRL TWO DOORS DOWN WHO WOULD LATER BECOME MY GRANDMOTHER. SHE HAD, I BELIEVE HER AUNT STAYED ON 36TH STREET AND MY GRANDMOTHER AND MY GRANDFATHER ENDED UP GETTING MARRIED IN HER BACKYARD. AND WE'VE HAD OTHER RELATIVES STAY IN THE AREA. I THINK MY GREAT-GRANDFATHER OR GREAT-GREAT-GRANDFATHER HAD A GENERAL STORE IN THE AREA. AND SO WE, WE HAVE A LOT OF LOVE AND, UM, APPRECIATION FOR THE AREA AND IT WAS NEVER OUR INTENTION TO TAKE AWAY. WE HAVE ALWAYS THOUGHT THAT WE WERE ADDING VALUE. UM, BUT LIKE THE SPEAKER ALSO SAID, UM, MY SISTER, UH, SHE WAS PLANNING ON MOVING IN. WE BEFORE SHE MOVED IN, WE DID HAVE A RENTER WHO WAS A FRIEND OF THE FAMILY. AND, UM, SHE IS ALSO FROM THE AREA. HER MOTHER STAYS ON THE SAME STREET AND LIVED A FEW DOORS DOWN. AND DURING THE PANDEMIC SHE MOVED OUT, UM, TO HELP TAKE CARE OF HER AGING MOTHER. AND, UM, THE HOUSE WAS SITTING VACANT FOR SEVERAL MONTHS. UM, IT WAS IN NEED OF REPAIR ANYWAYS, BUT WITH MY SISTER'S SITUATION, IT BECAME AN INCENTIVE TO FIX UP THE HOUSE. AND SO WE TRIED TO GET, UH, A HOME EQUITY LOAN TO BE ABLE TO FIX THE HOUSE. AND THE INSURANCE COMPANY WAS SAYING THAT WE HAVE TO GET IT DONE WITHIN A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF TIME OR THEY WILL DROP US. AND SO WE BASICALLY TRIED TO COMPLY WITH THEM. UM, WE ALSO WORKED WELL WITH OUR GENERAL CONTRACTOR. WE TRIED TO JUST UPDATE THE HOUSE, BUT KEEP THE GENERAL INTEGRITY OR, UM, CHARACTER OF THE HOUSE. UM, TO ME IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE IT HAS CHANGED TOO MUCH. MOTION THE SPEAKER MORE TIME. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND, PLEASE. UH, ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. PLEASE PROCEED. THANK YOU. UM, BUT YEAH, SO WE'VE, WE'VE JUST BASICALLY TRIED TO UPDATE THE HOUSE. WE TRIED TO ADD A HVAC SYSTEM. UM, HE SAID IF WE'RE ADDING HVAC, WE SHOULD CHANGE THE WINDOWS. UM, WE HAD SINGLE PANE, ORIGINAL WINDOWS. UH, SOME OF THEM WERE CRACKED, SOME OF THEM WERE STUCK BECAUSE THE HOUSE WAS UNLEVEL, SO WE HAD TO LEVEL THE HOUSE. UM, THE OUTSIDE THE EXTERIOR WAS ROTTING AND DAMAGED. AND, UM, WE TRIED TO REPLACE THE BOARDS. AT FIRST WE THOUGHT ABOUT SANDBLASTING IT, BUT THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR SAID THAT WOULD COST TOO MUCH AND IT WOULD BE A WASTE, SO WHY NOT JUST USE NEW MATERIAL? AND SO WE THOUGHT THAT THAT WOULD BE A BETTER IDEA. UM, THE PORCH WAS IN DISREPAIR. UM, IT, IT WAS WATER DAMAGE. UM, IT WAS WEAK AND WE TRIED TO [03:15:01] BUILD A NEW PORCH. WE WIDENED THE STEPS. UM, IF MY SISTER WERE TO MOVE OUT AND WE WERE TO RENT THE HOME OUT AGAIN, UM, YOU KNOW, THE STEPS WOULD BE LARGE ENOUGH TO PUT A RAMP IN CASE, UM, SOMEONE, UH, DISABLED STAYED THERE OR ANYTHING. UM, BUT YEAH, THIS, I , I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO SAY. IT'S, IT'S, IT'S INTERESTING. THIS IS DIFFICULT. UM, AND JUST TRYING TO GET THE HOUSE BACK TO THE WAY IT WAS, UH, IS AN IMPOSSIBLE ASK. UM, WE BARELY GOT ENOUGH MONEY TO BE ABLE TO DO THE WORK. UM, WE HAD TO PERFORM SOME OF THE WORK OURSELVES THAT WAS NOT PERMITTED, UH, LIKE INSTALLING SOME OF THE LIGHT FIXTURES AND PUTTING DOWN THE FLOORING AND TRYING TO PAINT THE INSIDE. UM, SO WE TRIED TO, YOU KNOW, CUT BACK THE SCOPE OF WORK TO TRY TO DO SOME OF THE WORK OURSELVES, BECAUSE THE MARKET IS INSANE. HOUSING PRICES ARE INSANE, THE COST OF MATERIAL AND JUST GETTING SOMEBODY TO DO THE WORK COMPLETELY WAS JUST ASTRONOMICAL. SO, UM, WITH THAT BEING SAID, I GUESS I YIELD BACK MY TIME. THANK YOU. UH, WE DO HAVE ONE MORE SPEAKER SIGNED UP. UH, ADRIANA MARTIN. I DO NOT THINK SHE IS AVAILABLE RIGHT NOW. SHE IS RUNNING ERRANDS, SO IT WOULD JUST BE ME. OKAY. THANK YOU. UM, IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM EITHER IN THE ROOM OR ATTENDING VIRTUALLY? PLEASE ANNOUNCE YOURSELF IF SO. OKAY. NOT HEARING. I'M GOING TO, I'M GOING TO, UNLESS THERE'S QUESTIONS. I'M GONNA CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND, UH, COME BACK FOR DISCUSSION WITH COMMISSIONERS. UM, SO HOW DID, HOW DID WE FIND OUT THAT THE WORK HAD BEEN DONE? OKAY. THERE WAS A, A CALL TO OUR OFFICE ABOUT THE PROPERTY TO THE IMMEDIATE LEFT OF THIS HOUSE THAT HAD, THERE HAD BEEN A FIRE AND IT, THE PROPERTY WAS FOR SALE. AND WE HAD RECEIVED A NUM, A COUPLE CALLS ABOUT IT. BUT, UM, UH, ONE TIME IN PARTICULAR, IT, UH, I DON'T REMEMBER HOW I WAS ON THE PHONE WITH SOMEONE WHO WANTED TO MEET US OUT AT THAT SITE. AND I WAS ACTUALLY USING GOOGLE STREET VIEW AND JUST, I, I SAW MY PANNING THAT THIS HOUSE HAD BEEN ALTERED. I THINK THE TRUCKS WERE IN FRONT OR SOMETHING AND, YOU KNOW, THE GOOGLE CAMERA GOING BY. SO THAT, THAT'S HOW WE FIRST SAW IT. AND THEN WE DID GO OUT AND MEET ABOUT THE FIRE NEXT DOOR. AND THAT HOUSE NEXT DOOR, UH, DID WE APPROVE THAT C OF A LAST MONTH? IT'LL BE ON THE AGENDA NEXT MONTH. OH, OKAY. NEXT MONTH YOU'LL SEE AN APPROVED, UH, RESTORATION REHABILITATION OF THE ADJACENT PROPERTY WITH A SMALL ADDITION. AND, UH, WE MET THE OWNERS WHO HAPPENED TO PULL UP, UM, TO THE PROPERTY THAT BEFORE YOU NOW, AND WE TALKED TO HIM THEN. AND, UH, HE, IT HAD ALREADY BEEN REPORTED AND, UH, WE MET THEM. AND SO THEY MADE THEIR APPLICATION AND THAT'S WHY WE GOT HERE. WITH RESPECT TO THE LIST OF APPROVAL CRITERIA, WHAT ARE SOME OF THE REASONS FOR DENIAL TO BE CLEAR IN, IN CASE THE, THE GENTLEMAN, SPEAKER OR ANYONE ELSE STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THAT THE HOUSE BE ABLE TO STAY AS IT IS AND MOVE FORWARD TO AND GET FINAL PERMITTING AND, AND EVERYTHING? THAT'S WHAT OUR RECOMMENDATION IS. IT'S DENIAL OF THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS BECAUSE YOU CAN'T LEGALLY HAVE A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR WORK THAT WAS DONE WITHOUT A PERMIT. INSTEAD, WE ISSUE A CERTIFICATE OF REMEDIATION. UM, AND SO THAT THE, THE OF PAGE THREE OF 14, UM, WELL, WE HAVE THE, THE CRITERIA AND YOU SEE A LOT OF DOES NOT SATISFY THERE DOWN THE MIDDLE. AND THE, SO THE, THE 11 CRITERIA THERE, UH, THIS SORT OF ALTERATION WHERE YOU'RE REMOVING ORIGINAL MATERIAL, REMOVING ORIGINAL WINDOWS, AND, UM, YOU KNOW, AT LOOKING AT THIS HOUSE, THIS HOUSE WAS IN THE VERY TYPICAL CONDITION THAT WE WOULD SEE OF A BUNGALOW. UM, IF WE'D SEEN IT AHEAD OF TIME, WE WOULD'VE RECOMMENDED, UM, REPLACEMENT AS SIDING AS NEEDED. UH, WE WOULD'VE PROBABLY RECOMMENDED, MAYBE RECOMMENDED REPAIR OF THE WINDOWS. IT'S NOT, WITHOUT SEEING, IT'S REALLY HARD TO KNOW. UM, AND SO IT WOULD BE DENIAL BECAUSE WE WOULD NOT HAVE APPROVED THE THIS IF WE HAD SEEN THIS APPLICATION WHICH REQUESTS THE WHOLESALE REMOVAL OF ALL THE SIDING AND ALL OF THE WINDOWS. UH, IT'S LIKELY THAT WOULD BE A NO, OR SOME PART OF THAT WOULD BE A NO. MAYBE IT'S JUST THE SIDING. SO THAT'S THE DENIAL. BUT THEN THE REME RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL, WE DO FEEL THAT SECTION 33, 2 40 [03:20:01] COMES INTO PLAY. UH, AND WE RECOMMEND THAT THE HOUSE STAY THE WAY THAT IT IS. AND TO BE CLEAR, I MEAN, YES, IT'S BEEN ALTERED, BUT IT IS STILL THE ORIGINAL FRAMING, THE ORIGINAL FOOTPRINT. WE HAVE EXPOSED ROOF RAFTER TAILS, WHICH A NICE FEATURE. UM, IT'S NOT OUTTA SCALE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. UM, I THINK IT'S AMAZING THAT THIS PARTICULAR, THIS BLOCK OF STARK WEATHER HISTORIC DISTRICT, I THINK THE, THE DISTRICT HAS HAD A VERY FAVORABLE IMPACT. IT SEEMS TO ME, FROM LOOKING AT IT, YOU DO DRIVE DOWN THAT STREET AND WE'VE HAD A NUMBER OF SUCCESSFUL PROJECTS WHERE WE'VE CORRESPONDED WITH, UM, DEVELOPERS AND CONTRACTORS IN THERE, AND THE HOUSES HAVE TURNED OUT WELL. SO THAT'S A LONG ANSWER, BUT IT, IT, IT WOULDN'T MEET, WE WOULDN'T HAVE SAID YES HAD WE SEEN THIS UPFRONT, BUT WE'RE SEEING IT AS IT IS WHERE IT IS IN THIS MOMENT WITH THESE APPLICANTS AT THIS TIME. UH, AND SO WE FEEL THAT IT, IT COULD STAY THE WAY THAT IT, THAT THEY'VE BEEN PROCEEDING TO GO. SO JUST TO BE CLEAR, THEY DIDN'T GET A PERMIT. THEY HAVE PROBABLY APPLIED FOR ONE AND IT'S NOT BEING ISSUED BECAUSE IT NEEDS SOMETHING. AND THE CERTIFICATE OF REMEDIATION TAKES THE PLACE OF A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS IN OUR SYSTEM. WELL, THE REASON I'M ASKING IS IT LOOKS LIKE THE ELECTRIC METER'S BEEN MOVED FROM THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE TO THE SIDE OF THE HOUSE. I, I DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW SETTER POINT WOULD DO THAT WITHOUT A PERMIT FROM THE CITY. I DON'T KNOW IF I COULD SPEAK WITH IT. SO OUR GENERAL CONTRACTOR TOOK CARE OF THE PERMITS, BUT I KNOW FOR SURE THAT WE GOT BOTH ELECTRICAL AND PLUMBING PERMITS. BUT THAT WAS ALL TAKEN CARE OF BY OUR GENERAL CONTRACTOR AS WELL AS THE, UM, I KNOW THE GAS, DO YOU KNOW HOW, UH, DO WE HAVE PRIVACY? I'M SORRY, I DON'T WANNA CUT THE GENTLEMAN OFF. SURE. IT'S HARD TO TELL WITH TECHNOLOGY, SIR. YOU DID. YOU CAN I, ARE YOU, DID YOU COMPLETE THAT YOUR STATEMENT? YES, YES, I DID COMPLETE MY STATEMENT. OKAY. TO THE COMMISSIONERS, IF WE HAVE SINGLE TRADE. THAT'S RIGHT. SO HE PROBABLY PULLED A PERMIT FOR, UH, SINGLE TRADE, AND MAYBE HE DID THEM SEPARATELY, BUT WE WEREN'T TOLD THAT THERE WOULD BE EXTERIOR ALTERATIONS. SO WE WOULD RELEASE SINGLE TRADE PERMITS. WE DO, STAFF DOES THAT AT WASHINGTON. AND, AND THANK GOODNESS THEY DO BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, 23 OVER 7,500 PROPERTIES PROTECTED. THEY AT THE BUILD, AT THE PERMITTING CENTER. IF IT'S A SINGLE TRADE PERMIT, THE RECOMMENDATION OF OUR OFFICE IS THAT THOSE BE ISSUED. AND SO THAT'S WHAT HAPPENED HERE. IT'S JUST THAT THEY DID OTHER WORK. WELL, IF WE'RE GONNA ALLOW THEM TO HAVE THE CORC, CAN WE VERIFY THAT THE PERMITS FOR THE ELECTRICAL AND GAS ARE ACTUALLY GOOD, BECAUSE THAT COULD BE DANGEROUS? SURE. I THINK THAT WOULD BE, UH, I MEAN THAT GOES BACK TO WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT EARLIER. THAT WOULD HAPPEN, UH, AS PART OF THE PROCESS FOR SURE. INSPECTORS WORK TOGETHER, NOT WITHOUT A PERMIT. NONE OF THE WORK THAT'S BEEN DONE HAS BEEN INSPECTED, RIGHT? THAT WE KNOW OF. NO, NO. THE OWNER HAS MENTIONED, AND I, I DON'T REMEMBER IF CHARLES, IF WE LOOKED IN THE ILMS SYSTEM, BUT WE BELIEVE WHAT WE'RE HEARING IS, AND I, I WOULDN'T DOUBT IT, THAT THERE WAS ISSUED, AND IT'S PROBABLY NOT CLOSED. AND MAYBE THE GENTLEMAN COULD SPEAK TO THAT, TO HIS CONTRACTOR, BUT MAYBE THOSE PERMITS ARE PULLED. BUT RIGHT NOW THEY MIGHT BE IN A HOLDING PATTERN DUE TO THIS, UH, THIS NEED HERE. WELL, CAN YOU LOOK THOSE UP? LIKE DO YOU HAVE ACCESS? YES, WE CAN. I WOULD JUST, YOU KNOW, ESPECIALLY SINCE THE HOUSE NEXT DOOR BURNED DOWN, WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THE WIRING AND STUFF IS CORRECT. I THINK MR. MARTIN SAID THAT THEY INSTALLED SOME OF THEIR OWN LIGHT FIXTURES IN THE PROJECT. YEAH, LEGAL. YOU CAN DO YOUR OWN PLUMBING AS A HOMEOWNER, BUT NOT ELECTRICAL. IT CAN BE DANGEROUS. IT WOULD BE IF I DID IT. I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW WHAT WE DO HERE. RIGHT? THE HOUSE IS DONE. STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THAT. WE JUST KICK IT, YOU KNOW, KIND OF KICK IT DOWN THE ROAD. I SIT HERE FRUSTRATED. 'CAUSE WE SEND SO MUCH TIME TALKING ABOUT ALL THESE HOUSES AND MASSING AND SCALE AND HISTORIC MATERIALS AND PEOPLE NOT BEING ABLE TO PUT CARPORTS ON A HOUSE THAT, THAT ARE DOING EVERYTHING RIGHT. WE'RE DENYING THEM THE OPPORTUNITY TO PUT A CARPORT ON A HOUSE IN A QUICK MANNER. AND WE LET SOMEBODY MOVE THEIR ELECTRICAL SERVICE, PUT IN HVAC, CHANGE THE PLUMBING, PUT SIDING ON, PUT STAIRS ON, DO ALL THIS WORK WITHOUT A PERMIT, DO ALL THIS WORK WITHOUT A COA AND WE JUST SAY, HEY, SO LONG AS YOU COME IN HERE AND ASK FOR FORGIVENESS, YOU'RE GOOD. I'M, I'M, I'M, I THINK IT'S WORTH, I DON'T HAVE ANY SOLUTION. I'M JUST P****D AND P****D ABOUT IT, FRUSTRATED ABOUT IT. THIS IS COMMISSIONER DEBO. CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES, WE CAN. OKAY. SO THIS IS COMMISSIONER DEBO. UM, FIRST OF ALL, MR. MARTIN, THANK YOU FOR COMING IN. UM, AND SHARING, UM, THIS PARTICULAR HISTORIC DISTRICT IS LOCATED IN THE INDEPENDENCE HEIGHTS COMMUNITY. AND THIS IS A LEGACY FAMILY HERE IN OUR COMMUNITY. I THINK SOME OF THE CONDITIONS BY WHICH THEY'RE COMING TO US, UH, WITH THE HARDSHIP ALSO, UH, HAS TO BE TAKEN. THERE ARE OTHER THINGS THAT NEED TO BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION. ALL OF THE HOMES ON THIS [03:25:01] STREET THAT WERE THE ORIGINAL STYLE IN BUNGALOW, THEY ALSO RECEIVED DAMAGE DURING THE WINTER STORMS. AND SO IT PUT A LOT OF FAMILIES IN HARDSHIP TO HAVE TO CHANGE OUT THE PIPES AND ALL OF THE PLUMBING AND THINGS THAT HAPPENED DURING THAT WINTER STORM. UM, ADDITIONALLY STARK WEATHER, THE HISTORIC DISTRICT IS PROBABLY THE SMALLEST DISTRICT IN THE CITY. IT IS ALSO PROBABLY ONE OF, UM, ONLY A FEW AFRICAN AMERICAN DISTRICTS IN THE, IN THE CITY. AND SO WE KNEW WHEN WE APPLIED FOR THIS HISTORIC DISTRICT THAT THERE WOULD BE PEOPLE WHO WOULD HAVE HARDSHIPS TO TRY TO KEEP UP WITH THE WINDOWS AND THE DOORS AND ALL OF THE TYPES OF SIDING, UM, THAT IS THERE. AND I'M DEFINITELY NOT SAYING THIS TO MAKE AN EXCUSE FOR ANYONE TO BYPASS THE RULES, UM, THAT ARE LAID OUT FOR US TO FOLLOW. BUT THEY CAME TO US WITH A HARDSHIP AND WE WANNA VERIFY WHETHER OR NOT THEY ACTUALLY HAVE A HARDSHIP. AND NOW WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A CARPORT VERSUS ELECTRICAL AND PLUMBING. AND SO I AM MAKING A MOTION THAT WE GO WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATION. UM, AT THIS POINT, THANK YOU TO COMMISSIONER DUB BO'S POINT. ALL THOSE HARDSHIPS WOULD'VE BEEN CONSIDERED IF THEY HAD JUST COME BEFORE THE COMMISSION AND ASKED FOR PERMISSION. BUT WAS IT NOT MENTIONED? AND THEY'RE HERE NOW, AND I THINK THE, THE INSURANCE, THEY'RE HERE COMMITTEE GAVE THEM 30 DAYS TO COME TO FIX THEIR HOUSE. YES. THAT'S TOO SOON. BUT, BUT WE DON'T, WE, WE NEED TO SEE PROOF OF THAT. 'CAUSE THAT COULD BE SOMETHING THAT WE'RE BEING TOLD. MAYBE WE COULD SEE DOCUMENTATION OF THE, THE, THE INSURANCE DOCUMENT IS, IS RIGHT IN THE PROPOSAL. IT'S LIKE A, UH, BLACK AND WHITE PHOTOS. WELL, I, I'VE HAD EXPERIENCE WITH INSURANCE COMPANIES, UH, FORCING PEOPLE TO MAKE CHANGES TO OLDER HOMES, UH, OR LOSE THEIR COVERAGE AND ASK FOR THINGS THAT ARE NOT EVEN IN THE BUILDING CODE BEYOND THE BUILDING CODE. AND I, I HAVE SEEN THAT, WHICH IS FRUSTRATING BECAUSE IF IT'S OLD, THEY JUST ASSUME IT'S BAD. AND WHICH IS, I MEAN, THE, THE SAD TRUTH IS THE SIDING THAT WAS ON THE HOUSE BEFORE, EVEN THOUGH IT WAS PROBABLY IN A ROUGH STATE, WOULD LIKELY LAST LONGER THAN THE REPLACEMENT SIDING THAT'S BEEN PUT ON THE HOUSE. AND THAT'S JUST A MISCONCEPTION BECAUSE NEW ISN'T ALWAYS BETTER, UM, IN THIS, IN THIS CONTEXT. SO IT, IT IS ALL RELATIVE TO THE HOUSE AND THE CONDITION IT WAS IN. BUT WE DON'T KNOW WHAT IT WAS BECAUSE IT'S BEEN CHANGED. WE CAN'T, WE CAN'T EXPECT IT. UH, THE, THE OWNER DID SUBMIT TO ME THE EMAIL AND THE FULL INSURANCE DOCUMENT, WHICH, WHICH STATES ALL THE REQUIREMENTS AND THE CONDITIONS, AND IT SAYS 30 DAY PERIOD TO DO YES. COMPLETE. DOES IT ACTUALLY SAY, DO YOU, DID YOU READ IT? DOES IT SAY COMPLETED IN 30 DAYS? I MEAN, THAT'S, THAT'S A, THAT'S THE INFORMATION THAT THE OWNER GAVE ME. AND I BELIEVE THAT THE DATES, UH, MATCHED THAT IN THE LETTER. BUT IF YOU TOLD THE INSURANCE COMPANY YOU LIVE IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT, LIKE, SO I WOULD IMAGINE YOU PROBABLY COULD BUY SOME TIME. AND THE OWNERS WERE NOT AWARE THAT, THAT IT WAS A, A HISTORIC DISTRICT TO BEGIN WITH. COMMISSIONER DUBOSE MADE A MOTION. I WOULD SECOND THAT MOTION. I DON'T SEE ANY OTHER WAY OUTTA THAT. AND, AND, UM, SO I'LL MAKE A SECOND. OKAY. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION BEFORE I CALL THE VOTE? I'VE GOT A MOTION IN A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? I I HAVE, PLEASE JUST GO BACK TO THE WIRING. I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THERE'S SOME WAY WE CAN VERIFY THAT THAT'S BEEN INSPECTED. I, I DON'T KNOW. WE CAN WE ADD THAT TO THE COR? SHE'S GONNA TALK TO YOU. HELLO. I JUST WENT INTO THE SYSTEM AND THEY DO HAVE, UM, UM, A RES PLUMBING PERMIT AND AN ELECTRICAL PERMIT THAT IS ACTIVE. IT WASN'T CLOSED OUT, I THINK BECAUSE OF THE 3 1 1 AND THEM COMING HERE, BUT THEY DID PULL IT. ONE WAS PULLED IN FEBRUARY AND THE OTHER ONE IN MARCH. OKAY. THAT FINAL INSPECTION. BUT THEN THAT, THAT'S FINE. IT'S FINE. AND THEY'RE BOTH STILL OPEN, CURRENTLY OPEN? YES. SO TWO OF THEM ARE ACTIVE AND I, AND I BELIEVE THE REASON IS BECAUSE THERE WAS A 3 1 1 AND, AND THEY APPEARED THIS CAME TO COMMISSION. SO THERE'S A HOLD ON IT. THANK YOU. YOU'RE WELCOME. OKAY, SO I'M GONNA CALL THE VOTE. ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. AYE. AYE. ARE THERE ANY OPPOSED? ARE THERE ANY ABSTENTIONS? ALRIGHT, THAT MOTION PASSES. I THINK WE'RE DOWN TO TWO. GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIRPERSON AND COMMISSION MEMBERS. THIS IS STAFF PERSON JASON LIAL. TODAY I SUBMIT FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION, [03:30:01] ITEM B 18 13 0 5 RUTLAND STREET IN HOUSTON HEIGHTS WEST. APPLICANT PROPOSES TO CONSTRUCT A ONE STORY REAR ADDITION TOTALING 419 SQUARE FEET. IT WILL FEATURE AN OFFSET OF THREE FEET, EIGHT INCHES ON THE LEFT ELEVATION. THERE WILL BE A SIX OVER 12 ROOF PITCH WITH COMPOSITION SHINGLES. SMOOTH ONE 17 LAP SIDING WITH A FIVE AND A HALF INCH REVEAL. A MIX OF SINGLE HONK AND DOUBLE HONK. ONE OVER ONE INSET AND RECESSED JELLED WIND WINDOWS. THERE WILL BE A SINGLE TRANSOM STAINED GLASS WINDOW AT THE PRIMARY BATHROOM. AND IT'LL ALSO EXTEND THE ROOF LINE ON THE REAR OF THE EXISTING STRUCTURE. STRUCTURE. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL CHAIRPERSON AND COMMISSION MEMBERS. THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION. I'M AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. THIS WRITER WAS PULLED. IF THERE'S A QUESTION. YEAH, UH, LET ME FAST TRACK THIS AND JUST MAKE, ASK A QUESTION FOR CLARIFICATION. UH, IF YOU LOOK BACK ON PAGE NINE OF 15, PLEASE. OKAY. I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW ON THE, UH, ON THE EXISTING FLOOR PLAN ON THE, UH, SO-CALLED SOUTHWEST CORNER, THE OFFICE, THE WORD IS WRITTEN THERE. CAN YOU SEE THAT? IS THAT ORIGINAL TO THE HOUSE? IF YOU WOULD GO UP, PLEASE TO PAGE FIVE, I HAVE FOUND THAT THERE IS A SANBORN IMAGE. THERE IS ALSO TO, I HAVE A BUILDING LAND ASSESSMENT SURVEY FROM HARRIS COUNTY AND THE CURRENT AERIAL SATELLITE. YOU PASSED IT. GO BACK AND YOU CAN SEE THAT THERE HAS BEEN ALTERATIONS MADE OVER TIME THAT THE REAR OF THE HOME CONTINUED TO BE PULLED BACK. PAGE FIVE OR PAGE SIX, LOOK FOR SANBORNS PLAS. THERE YOU GO. YOU PASSED IT. SO THERE HAS BEEN CONTINUOUS ALTERATIONS THAT THE REAR HAS BEEN CONTINUOUSLY EXTENDED BACK AND WE HAVE LOST THAT ORIGINAL CORNER OVER TIME. SO HAVE YOU DETERMINED, UH, BASED ON MAYBE A SITE VISIT, WHERE IS THE ORIGINAL BACK CORNER? CAN YOU STILL DETERMINE THAT? FROM MY, FROM MY BEST KNOWLEDGE? I'M NOT LOOKING AT THE FLOOR PLAN THOUGH, BUT IT WOULD BE, CAN YOU ZOOM IN ON THE SATELLITE IMAGE PLEASE? YOU WOULD BE ABLE TO SEE WHERE IT BEGINS TO SLOPE TOWARDS THE REAR. THAT'S WHAT THE ORIGINAL CORNER WOULD'VE BEEN, IS MY BEST GUESS. CAN YOU POINT IT WITH THE, THERE'S A RECTANGLE? YEAH. IT WOULD'VE JUST BEEN LIKE THIS. THERE WOULD'VE BEEN A LITTLE KITCHEN THERE. YEAH, BECAUSE MY CONCERN IS THAT, UH, AND I'M TALKING FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF JUST USING THE OFFICE AS THE REFERENCE POINT HERE, THAT THIS PERSON HAS GONE ON AND BA BASICALLY TOTALLY REMODELED THAT PART. AND MY CONCERN IS WHETHER ARE WE REMOVING THE ENTIRE BACK CORNER, WHICH IS MAYBE ORIGINAL AND YET TO BE CONFIRMED AND PUTTING THE ADDITIONAL OVER THERE. I WOULD BELIEVE THAT THIS IS A NON HISTORIC REAR. AND SO HE IS REMODELING THAT. THAT'S ALSO WHY IN THE RECOMMENDATION THAT THERE'S AN OFFSET SINCE THAT ORIGINAL CORNER HAS ALREADY BEEN LOST. BUT I MEAN, NOT TO BE A PAIN, BUT THIS ROOM WAS ADDED BEHIND THAT BEDROOM IN, AT LEAST IN 1967. SO IT'S WELL OVER 50 YEARS OLD. AND THAT'S KIND OF A STANDARD CUTOFF FOR HISTORIC THINGS. 'CAUSE I'M SURE THE HOUSE ORIGINALLY JUST WAS LIKE THE TWO BEDROOMS AND THE BATHROOM THING IN THE MIDDLE AND THEN THAT, THAT OFFICE OR WHATEVER ON THE BACK WAS ADDED. BUT IT COULD HAVE BEEN ADDED LIKE SOMETIME BETWEEN 1950 AND 1967 OR WHENEVER THE SANBORN MAP WAS, YOU KNOW? YEAH, WE DO GO BY THAT MARK OF AT LEAST 50 YEARS. AND SO, BUT THERE WOULD'VE BEEN ALTERATIONS HAPPENING FROM THAT BLA IF I HAVE THE DATE ON THAT. IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN IN THE 1960S. SO BETWEEN THAT AND OUR ARROW IMAGE, YES. IT SAYS 1967 THAT THERE WAS ADDITIONS GOING ON. I ADD THAT, UH, MANY TIMES THERE ARE WHERE EVEN THOUGH IT IS MORE THAN 50 YEARS OLD, WE ARE TALKING ABOUT WHAT IS ON THE REAR. WE ARE MORE OPEN TO ALTERATIONS HAPPENING MORE IN THE REAR THAN VERSUS THE FRONT. AS WE'VE HAD EARLIER DISCUSSIONS TODAY. I MEAN, I'M INCLINED, I I THINK THAT YOU'RE TAKING THAT OLD ROOM OFF, BUT [03:35:01] THE WAY THIS ADDITION DONE, IT'S, IT'S NICE TO SEE A SMALLER ADDITION COMPARED TO A LOT OF THE OTHER ONES WE'VE BEEN SEEING, UH, BEFORE THE COMMISSION. SO GOOD STORY. IT WOULD BE NICE IF THEY DIDN'T KEEP THAT ROOM, BUT IT'S ALSO NOT THE END OF THE WORLD TO ME. THE ADDITION IS LOWER THAN THE ORIGINAL HOUSE RICH. WHEN, WHEN, WHEN'S THE LAST TIME I SAW THAT? JASON, DO YOU KNOW IF THERE'S ANY, UH, APPLICANT IS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK. I MEAN, THERE'S NO ONE SIGNED UP ON MY LIST, BUT IS, UM, ANYONE ON BEHALF OF THE OWNER? NO. WHEN THEY SAID WE'RE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL, NICK ARANCO, WHO IS THE AGENT, OPTED NOT TO ATTEND, BELIEVING THIS WOULD'VE GONE ON CONSENT. CAN I MAKE A MOTION? LET ME JUST OPEN PUBLIC HEARING AND JUST ASK IF ANYONE, UH, ATTENDING WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THE MATTER IN THAT HEARING. I'M GONNA CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING. UM, MAKE, PLEASE MAKE YOUR MOTION. I MOVE TO ACCEPT STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL. SECOND DISCUSSION. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED? ANY ABSTENTIONS? THE MOTION CARRIES. AND I BELIEVE WE ARE OUR LAST ITEM. YEP. OPPOSED? THIS, I GUESS. I'M SORRY. YEAH. THANK YOU. YEP. GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIRPERSON AND COMMISSION MEMBERS. THIS IS STAFF PERSON JASON LENAL. TODAY I SUBMIT FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION ITEM B 20 3400 WHITE, WHITE OAK DRIVE IN HOUSTON HEIGHTS SOUTH. APPLICANT PROPOSES TO REMOVE THE EXISTING FRONT FACADE DUE TO DETERIORATING BRICK THAT IS SUBSTRATE TO NON-ORIGINAL. REMOVE THE ROTTED WOOD STUDS AND FRAMING, REPLACE WITH BLACK BRICK AND RUST, BROWN STONE PANELS AND STEEL SUPPORTS. REMOVE A NON-ORIGINAL CORNICE ALONG THE FRONT AND RIGHT ELEVATIONS AND REPLACE WITH RUST BROWN STONE PANELS, AGAIN BEING ON THE CORNICE. INCREASE THE VEHICLE BAY AREA ON THE FRONT FACADE TO 25 FEET BY 12 FEET FOR ADDED PARKING SPACE INSIDE THE STRUCTURE. ALSO TO CREATE THREE NEW OPENINGS AT THE REAR OF THE STRUCTURE AND INFILL THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE STRUCTURE. STAFF RECOMMENDS A PARTIAL APPROVAL. PARTIAL APPROVAL IS FOR THE PROPOSED EAST ELEVATION, EXCEPT THE PROPOSED SOUND PANELS. PARTIAL APPROVAL FOR THE WEST AND NORTH ELEVATIONS AS SUBMITTED AND RECOMMENDS DEFERRAL ON THE PROPOSED FRONT ELEVATION, INCLUDING THE STONE PANELS THAT WRAP TO THE EAST ELEVATION AND DEFERRAL ON THE PROPOSED TRELLIS CHAIRPERSON COMMISSION MEMBERS. THE AGENT TIM CISNEROS, HAS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM. I'M AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS. THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION. OKAY, THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS? THE STAFF? OKAY. NOT HEARING. I'M GONNA OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND INVITE, UM, UH, MR. TIM CISNEROS TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION. GOOD AFTERNOON. WELCOME, UH, COMMISSION. MY NAME'S TIM CISNEROS. WE'RE ARCHITECTS ON THIS, UH, BUILDING THAT WAS BUILT IN THE, UH, PROBABLY IN THE LATE TWENTIES, EARLY THIRTIES ON WHITE OAK BOULEVARD. IT'S ACROSS THE STREET FROM, UH, TO THE WEST OF, UH, WHERE CULTIVAR IS LOCATED ON WHITE OAK. UH, THE BUILDING FACADE. HIS, UH, THE, THE BUILDING'S ORIGINAL FACADE WAS REMOVED IN THE 1970S AND REPLACED WITH A FULL BRICK SOLID NON HISTORIC FACADE. UM, WHICH IS, UH, WAS THE SUBJECT OF A PREVIOUS COA, UH, FOR DEMOLITION OF THAT FACADE. IN THAT WE SUSPECTED THERE WAS A HISTORICAL FACADE UNDERNEATH THAT 1970S ERA FACADE. UH, YOU CAN SEE SOME OF THOSE PHOTOS THERE. IT IS NOW ON THE BOTTOM OF THAT ONE PICTURE. AND SO THAT FACADE WAS REMOVED AND A, UH, ALL THE HISTORIC BIT BRICK UNDER THE FACADE HAD BEEN TAKEN OFF. THERE'S THE MODERN FACADE EXISTING, SO THAT HAD BEEN PUT UP IN THE SEVENTIES. IT'S VERY, UH, NO WINDOWS AS SUCH. SO IN ANTICIPATION OF, UH, HAVING LOCATED WHAT WE THOUGHT WAS A HISTORIC FACADE UNDERNEATH, WE PULLED IT OFF. THE HISTORIC FACADE HAD BEEN PULLED OFF IN THE SEVENTIES. AND, UH, LOAD BACKING, LOAD BEARING BACKING BRICK, UH, WHICH IS IN DEPLORABLE CONDITION. UH, WE'VE BEEN ADVISED, UH, THAT THIS SHOULD REALLY BE CONSIDERED A DANGEROUS BUILDING. [03:40:01] SO, AND WE HAVE ENGINEERS WHO HAVE WRITTEN AND DONE, UH, FIELD INSPECTIONS. UH, SO WE'VE HAD BEEN WORKING WITH JASON, UM, AND HAVING HIM COME OUT TO THE SITE AND TAKE A LOOK AT IT. THE ONLY HISTORIC MATERIAL LEFT ON THE BUILDING IS THE EAST FACADE. WE ARE PLANNING TO MAINTAIN THE ENTIRE EAST ELEVATION IN ITS, UH, WINDOW CONFIGURATION AND, UH, REPLACE THE SOUTH FACADE WITH A NEW, WITH A NEW FACADE THAT, UM, WOULD BE, THERE'S A RENDERING OF IT THERE, WHICH WOULD BE USING, UTILIZING THE SAME STRUCTURAL, UH, RHYTHM OF THE FRONT IN THAT WE'RE NOT TAKING DOWN THE BUILDING, WHICH IS REALLY THE SWEET PART. THE INTERIOR IS REALLY THE SWEET PART OF THE BUILDING. UH, IN THAT IT'S ALL, UH, WOOD CONSTRUCTION AND WILL BE LEFT EX, UH, LEFT EXPOSED AS THE, UH, SHELF SPACE. NEVERTHELESS, THERE IS NO HISTORIC FACADE REMAINING OR HISTORIC MATERIALS REMAINING ON THE SOUTH ELEVATION. SO WHAT WE WOULD LIKE TO DO IS TO, MAY I GRANT THE MOTION? MOTION TO BEGIN THE SPEAKER ONE MORE TIME. SERGEANT. THANK YOU. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. WHAT WE WOULD LIKE TO DO IS WITH A NOD, IF YOU MAY, TO THE HISTORIC RHYTHM OF THE STRUCTURAL AND SUCH. WE WOULD LIKE TO, UH, BUILD A NEW FACADE OF SIMILAR MATERIAL, MEANING THE DARK BRICK THAT HAS BEEN EXPOSED ON THE HISTORIC EAST FACADE. AND THEN, UM, FINISH THAT FACADE WITH, WITH, UH, A GLASS STOREFRONT AND, UH, STONE DETAILS. I SEE A PHOTOGRAPH OF THE SOUTH FACADE IN MY PACKAGE. I DON'T SEE A PHOTOGRAPH OF THE E FACADE. DO YOU HAVE THAT, JASON? YES. NOW. SO THAT WAS IT. SO THESE FACADE REMAINS THE SAME. WE'VE UN WE'VE TAKEN THE STUCCO OFF OF THE HISTORIC BUILDING MATERIAL AND EXPOSED IT, AND WE'LL LEAVE IT. YOU HAVE A PHOTOGRAPH? YEAH. YES. AS THE EAST FACADE THAT'S PAINTED. WHAT? UH, THE, THAT'S THE ONLY THING THAT'S, THAT'S THE ONLY FACADE THAT'S STILL ORIGINAL AND SALVAGEABLE. YES. AND WE'RE GONNA LEAVE IT A HUNDRED PERCENT. OKAY. OF COURSE, REPLACE THE WINDOWS, UH, BACK TO THOSE. BUT YOU SEE ON TOP OF, YOU HAVE THOSE FENESTRATIONS FROM THE IN BECAUSE YOU CAN SEE 'EM FROM THE INTERIOR. WELL, THEY'RE, UH, COVERED IN PLYWOOD CURRENTLY. OH, I SEE. BUT IF YOU LOOK AT THIS, IF YOU LOOK AT THIS PHOTO THERE, THERE'S AN EXISTING, UH, FASCIA THAT'S ABOUT THREE FOOT THICK THAT IS ALSO OF 1970S AND 1980S AS VESTUS CORRUGATED PANELS, WHICH ARE NOT HISTORIC EITHER. SO THE, THE HISTORIC FACADE DOESN'T GO FROM THERE TO THE ROOF. SO WE WANT TO REPLACE THAT PANEL WITH THE SAME STONE THAT WOULD BE USED ON THE NEW SOUTHERN FACADE. SO WHAT'S UNDERNEATH THE, THE, THE BIG WHITE BAND ON TOP? YES. THE ROOF STRUCTURE, IT'S EXPOSED. UH, YOU CAN SEE IT ON THE DEMO PHOTOS OF THE SOUTH ELEVATION. IT'S JUST EXPOSED THE WOOD TRUCK. YEAH, THERE WOOD TRUST. THE INSIDE IS BEAUTIFUL. IT LOOKS LIKE A JAPANESE WOOD STRUCTURE. SO WE'RE PLANNING TO SAVE ALL OF THE, AND I BELIEVE THERE ARE INTERIOR PHOTOS ALSO, BUT WE'RE PLANNING TO SAVE ALL OF THE INTERIOR DIAGONAL TRUSSES. SO IS THAT JUST BRICK ORIGINALLY IN FRONT OF IT AND, AND THAT ARE EXPOSED INSIDE? INSIDE, INSIDE? NO, INSIDE. IT'S ALL ORIGINAL. IT USED TO BE. NO, NO. AND IT IS, BUT GO AHEAD. OH, ANYWAY, THE IDEA IS THAT WE WERE GONNA CREATE A, A A A A RUSTIC KIND OF WINERY SORT OF ENVIRONMENT INSIDE BY STAINING THE EXISTING WOOD TRUSSES. UM, THE, THE ELEMENTS THAT HINTED TO US THAT THERE WAS A HISTORIC FACADE WERE LIKE THOSE DOORS RIGHT THERE, BUT THEY'RE TOTALLY ROTTED. AND SO THE ENGINEERS CAME IN AND ACTUALLY WANTED US TO SHORE UP THE BUILDING. UH, YOU CAN SEE FROM THE BRICK CONDITIONS THAT IT'S, IT'S UNSALVAGEABLE, IT'S NOT HISTORIC BRICK, IT'S THE BRICK THAT WAS USED INSIDE THE SUBSTRATE TO HOLD UP THE HISTORIC BRICK. YOU MENTIONED ENGINEERS, YOU'RE CONSULTING ENGINEERS ON THE PROJECT, NOT CITY OF HOUSTON, RIGHT? I'M SORRY? NOT CITY OF HOUSTON. CITY OF HOUSTON. NO, THE ENGINEERS, CONSULTING ENGINEERS WHO CAME IN TO INSPECT [03:45:01] IT. GOT IT. WE, THE FRONT FACADE WAS ACTUALLY LIKE ONE OF THOSE JENGA TOYS, , WHERE, WHERE WHEN WE TOOK OFF THE 1970S ERA FACADE, AT TIMES IT FELT LIKE THE REST OF THE BUILDING WAS GONNA CAVE IN. SO WE, WE, WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR IS NOT A PARTIAL APPROVAL. WHAT WE'D LIKE TO DO, WHAT WE'D LIKE TO ASK FOR IS A CONDITIONAL APPROVAL FOR, SO THAT WE CAN PROCEED WITH, UH, SHORING THE BUILDING UP. UM, UH, AND THEN THE CONDITION, THE CONDITION BEING THAT WE RESUBMIT FOR A ANOTHER COA, UM, SO THAT WE CAN, WITH JASON SELECT MATERIALS FOR THE FRONT FACADE THAT WOULD EITHER COMPLIMENT OR SUCH THE HISTORICAL MATERIAL THAT WE'RE PRESERVING. THERE WAS SOME CONSTERNATION THAT MAYBE THE COLOR SCHEME WASN'T RIGHT, OR MAYBE USING MARBLE OR GRANITE OR SOMETHING OF THAT MIGHT BE INAPPROPRIATE. SO WE'D LIKE TO FINALIZE THAT, BUT AT LEAST GET A CONDITIONAL APPROVAL SO THAT WE CAN START WITH SELECTIVE, UM, YOU KNOW, REMOVAL OF THE ELECTRICAL, REMOVAL OF THE EXISTING HVAC SUTURE. WHAT, WHAT ABOUT THE TRELLIS? THAT'S THE OTHER THING THAT'S SAID TO BE DEFERRED. WELL, THERE WA THERE WAS, IN, IN, IN GROCERY STORES, OR I THINK THIS WAS A PHARMACY IN THE TWENTIES, IT'S PRETTY STANDARD IN THE HEIGHTS, ESPECIALLY THAT THESE OLD COMMERCIAL STRUCTURES HAD SOME SORT OF, UH, SHADE COVER OR AWNINGS. AND THERE'S NO PHOTOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE OF WHAT WAS THIS BUILDING WAS LIKE OF HISTORICAL NATURE. SO WE THINK THAT WE WOULD DO SOME SORT OF, UH, SIDEWALK COVER. SO YOU'RE OKAY WITH A DEFERRAL ON THE TRELLIS? YEAH, BECAUSE WE COULD, BECAUSE YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT IT IS YET. AND EITHER WAY. AND, AND WE MIGHT GET A CLIENT, WE MIGHT GET A TENANT WHO WOULD HAVE A PREFERENCE TO USING A CANVAS AWNING OR THIS AWNING OR WHATEVER. AND THEN THE, THE BRICK TYPICAL OF THIS ERA IS NOT DEEP COLORED ROSE COLORED BRICK. IT'S ACTUALLY MORE BEIGE, WHICH WE'RE FAMILIAR WITH, LIKE AT, AT JU AT, UH, JULIP OR, UH, AVARI OR THE BALDWIN, UH, BUILDING ON STUDEWOOD. THE, THE, THE, THE BRICK HERE IS ALMOST BLACK, BUT IT HAS A WINE COLOR. SO WE'RE GOING TO, WE'RE GONNA BE WANTING TO PICK MATERIALS FOR THE FRONT THAT WOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH THAT. I DON'T, I I MEAN WHEN YOU LOOK AT AS PRESERVATION, IT SEEMS LIKE THE FRONT FACADE OUGHT TO CONTRAST WITH THE HISTORICAL ONES. SO THERE'S A DIFFERENTIATION AS TO WHAT WE'RE PRESERVING AND WHAT WE'RE DESIGNING. AND THAT PRESERVATION IS NOT A MATTER OF RECREATING SOMETHING THAT COULD HAVE, MIGHT HAVE MAYBE BEEN THERE. SO THE, THERE IS GOING TO BE A CONTRAST AND WE WOULD LIKE THE FINAL RESOLUTION OF IT TO BE, YOU KNOW, IN CONSISTENT WITH WHAT YOUR, THE STAFF IS WOULD LIKE TO SEE. BUT IN THE MEANTIME, THERE'S MORE, UH, CRITICAL MATTERS OF KEEPING THE BUILDING EVEN STANDING UP. SO I HAVE A QUESTION ON PAGE 12 OF OUR, OUR THING, THERE'S TWO DRAWINGS OF THE FRONT. YES. THE SOUTH ELEVATION ONE'S COLORED IN WITH, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THIS COLOR IS. AND THE OTHER ONE IS A BLACK AND WHITE. YES. ONE OF THEM SHOWS WINDOWS WITH ARCHES OVER THEM. AND THE OTHER ONE SHOWS RECTANGULAR WINDOWS. THE ORIGINAL. THIS THIS IS, YES. UM, GOOD QUESTION. THE ORIGINAL BUILDING HAD WHAT WE CAN TELL FROM THE ROTTED WINDOWS THAT WERE IN BETWEEN THE TWO LAYERS OF BRICK HAD SOME TRANSOMS THAT HAD SOME ARCHES ON 'EM. SO IN ONE SCHEME, IN CONVERSATIONS WITH JASON AND SUCH, WE SAID, WELL, WHAT WERE, WHAT IF WE WERE TO REPLICATE THE STOREFRONTS WITH THE ARCHES? IN OUR LATEST CONVERSATIONS WITH STAFF AS RECENTLY AS FRIDAY, IT WAS DETERMINED THAT MAYBE PUTTING THE ARCHES IN THERE WAS KIND OF A FALSE KIND OF, UM, A, A FALSE MOVE. AND SO THERE IS ANOTHER ONE THAT WAS SENT ON FRIDAY ACTUALLY THAT DOESN'T HAVE THE ARCHES, WHICH IS THE FACADE THAT WE WOULD ACTUALLY PREFER TO. SO IF THE ARCHES ARE YOU, YOU'VE FOUND THEM IN BETWEEN THE WALLS, RIGHT? YES. SO YOU DON'T THINK THEY'RE ORIGINAL? UH, THERE'S NO ONE KNOWS, THERE'S NO HISTORICAL EVIDENCE. SOME OF THE, SOME OF THE STUFF IN BETWEEN THE WALLS LOOKED OLD, SOME OF IT LOOKED OLDER. IT'S ALL ROTTED . SO IT WAS JUST, IT WAS THE DEVELOPMENT OF SCENE HAS STOCK IN OR ANYONE. I, I MEAN, TO ME THE ARCHES ARE INTERESTING. DESIGN MOTIF AND TO JUST, IF THEY'RE PART OF THE ORIGINAL DESIGN [03:50:01] AND YOU'VE UNCOVERED THEM AND THEY'VE BEEN THERE FOR, FOR HOWEVER MANY YEARS, IT WOULD BE A SHAME TO TOSS THEM AWAY. THEY'RE, THEY, THEY'RE, THEY'RE FALLING APART. WELL, EVEN IF THEY'RE FALLING APART, YOU COULD MAKE NEW ARCHES AS ONE OF YOUR DRAWINGS SHOWED. BUT, BUT I DON'T UNDERSTAND. ARE THEY, ARE THEY REAL ARCHES OR ARE THEY JUST LIKE, THEY'RE A PIECE OF WOOD? BECAUSE BECAUSE THE STOREFRONT IT LOOKS LIKE JUST A PIECE OF ARCHED PAGE EIGHT. NO, THEY, THEY, THEY'RE NOT, THEY'RE NOT BEING PRESERVED. THEY'RE, THEY'RE NOT USABLE. BUT WHAT ARE THEY MADE OUT OF? PHOTO EIGHT? YOU SEE THE PHOTOGRAPH ON PAGE EIGHT SEEMS TO PAGE EIGHT. SO ARE THEY PLYWOOD? THE, THEY'VE BEEN, THEY'VE BEEN REPAIRED WITH PIECES OF PLYWOOD WITH MODERN TWO BY FOURS. SO ARE THEY, IS IT LIKE A SASH THAT'S, THAT'S IN THE SHAPE OF AN ARCH? 'CAUSE THIS LOOKS LIKE A TRANSOM, LIKE IT LOOKS LIKE SOMETHING LIKE THERE'S A LITTLE CHAIN THAT WOULD'VE HELD IT IF IT SWUNG BACK OR SOMETHING. YEAH. AND YOU CAN SEE THAT BELOW IT. IT'S ALL MODERN TWO BY FOURS THAT WERE PUT IN WHEN THEY, WHEN THEY, WELL, YOU KNOW, I'VE SEEN A LOT OF TIMES THEY LEAVE THE TRANSOMS 'CAUSE THEY'RE TOO HARD TO GET TO. AND YOU HAVE THE HISTORIC TRANSOM AND THEN YOU HAVE LIKE A BIG PLATE GLASS WINDOW BELOW. 'CAUSE I, I'VE, I'VE WORKED ON OLD BUILDINGS WHERE THEY'VE DONE THAT AND THEN YOU CAN RECREATE THE DESIGN. BUT TO ME THESE MIGHT BE FROM THE 1920S. I THINK IT WOULD BE GOOD IF PETE STOCKTON OR I DON'T KNOW WHO WOULD GO OUT AND LOOK AND SEE WHAT, WHAT THEY THOUGHT ABOUT THAT 'CAUSE. 'CAUSE THAT'S A VERY INTERESTING SHAPE OF A WINDOW TO MOVE. YEAH, THEY, THEY'D HAVE TO, THEY'D HAVE, THEY'D PROBABLY FALL APART AND THEN WE'D HAVE TO RECREATE 'EM, WHICH ISN'T REALLY PRESERVING THEM. I THINK A KEY QUESTION IS WHAT ARE THEY LIKE, ARE THEY MILLIONS OR ARE THEY I THINK IT'S SOMETHING FLAT THAT WAS CUT OUT. YEAH, BECAUSE WE, WE CAN'T TELL. UM, WE WERE REALLY KIND OF ADVISED TO GET OUT OF THE INTERIOR BECAUSE OF THIS, BECAUSE OF THE, WELL, WHEN WE KNOW THERE'S A HISTORIC THING, WE LET PEOPLE RECREATE IT. LIKE WE TALKED ABOUT THAT GUY WITH THE PORCH AND THE SIXTH WARD AND HE FOUND GHOSTING THAT SHOWED THAT THERE WAS SOME SORT OF GINGERBREAD TRIM AND WE, WE GAVE HIM PERMISSION TO RECREATE GINGERBREAD TRIM BASED ON THAT. SO TO ME THIS WOULD BE SOMETHING WE'D WANNA RECREATE. ESPECIALLY IF WE HAVE EVIDENCE THAT IT'S THERE. AND IF IT'S ORIGINAL TO THE BUILDING, IT WOULD BE SHAME TO THROW IT OUT AND NOT RECREATE IT. TIM, WHAT YOU'RE ASKING TODAY IS APPROVAL TO LEAST SHORE THE BUILDING AND MOVE FORWARD AND THEN DO MORE EVALUATION AND COME BACK TO US WITH A MORE WELL, WHAT I'M WORRIED ABOUT TION QUESTION MIGHT INCLUDE DEMOLITION AND THEN THEY WOULD GO AWAY AND WE WOULD NEVER BE ABLE TO FIND THEM. LIKE, WE SEEM TO HAVE HAPPEN. OR THAT'S WHY I'M HESITANT. YOU MIGHT FIND PORTIONS OF THESE. THEY THEY WOULDN'T, THEY WOULD, THEY'RE THEY WON'T. I MEAN, I KNOW PETE, I'VE WORKED ON PETE WITH PETE FOR ON DOZENS OF PROJECTS. PETE WOULD TELL ME, THIS IS A DANGEROUS BUILDING, LET'S GET RID OF THIS STUFF. I MEAN IT'S, WELL, I'D LIKE TO IN PRETTY BAD SHAPE SAY THAT. 'CAUSE WE COULD DOCUMENT THEM SAY SUGGESTION IS THAT THEY KEEPING THEM, ESPECIALLY NOT RIGHT. BUT ONCE, ONCE THEY DOCUMENTED AND BEFORE LOST. YEAH. I'M JUST WORRIED THAT THE SHORING UPS GONNA ENTAIL OF DEMOLITION. AND THEN WE'RE GONNA COME BACK WITH SOMETHING WHERE THERE'S THINGS THAT AREN'T THERE ANYMORE AND WE WON'T BE ABLE TO, TO, TO DISCUSS THEM OR EVALUATE THEM. AND WE HAVE LIKE A HISTORIC DOOR HERE THAT WE COULD MEASURE AND, AND THINGS LIKE THAT IN ONE OF THESE PHOTOGRAPHS. 'CAUSE I'D HATE TO JUST PUT BACK STOREFRONT WHEN WE KNOW WHAT IT USED TO LOOK LIKE. 'CAUSE STOREFRONT DOESN'T LOOK HISTORIC. COULD WE, COULD, JASON, JASON, COULD WE COME BACK AND RESTATE THE RECOMMENDATION? SO I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THAT. I'M TRYING TO PARSE WHAT, WHAT TIM IS ASKING FOR CONSIDERATION AND WHAT STAFF, WHAT YOU STATED AND, AND ALSO WHAT THE CONVERSATIONS ARE BEFORE. BEFORE YOU DO THAT, BEFORE HE SAYS THAT. CAN I MAKE A COMMENT PLEASE? YEAH. BECAUSE BEN, MAYBE YOU COULD TIE IT TOGETHER. MICROPHONE. UH, I DID VISIT THE SITE. I DON'T KNOW WHEN I WALKED THROUGH, BUT I HAD AN OPPORTUNITY AT SOME POINT AND I SAW, UH, WITH THE WINDOWS FROM THE INSIDE AND THIS, WE, WE KIND OF ZOOMED IN HERE. 'CAUSE IN THIS IMAGE, UM, I MEAN JUST TO BE CLEAR WHAT THAT, THE THING YOU SEE WITH THE ARCH WOULD BE THE NORMALLY IN THE PLACE WHERE I MIGHT EXPECT TO FIND A SCREEN. SO THE FRONT ELEVATION, THIS IS WHERE, UM, MR. CI AND I WERE TALKING LAST WEEK WAS THAT I THINK THE ORIGINAL FACADE ACROSS THE FRONT RED IS EITHER ALL SQUARES OR RECTANGLES. AND THAT'S WHAT KIND OF STANDS OUT. AND AT SOME POINT, SOMEONE, UH, WAS BEING CREATIVE AND, AND BROUGHT FORTH THAT DECIDE THOSE ARCHES ONLY EXIST ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE BUILDING, NOT ON THE LEFT SIDE. AS YOU SEE IN THIS IMAGE AND IN THE REMNANTS THERE DON'T HAVE THAT DETAILING. SO, AND IT'S NOT MADE OF PLYWOOD. THEY'RE MORE LIKE, UH, ONE BY 12 PLANKS, WHICH HAVE BEEN SISTERED AND THEN CUT IN AN [03:55:01] ARCH. BUT IT IS, AS YOU DESCRIBED, COMMISSIONER COUCH, UH, A LITTLE, UH, YOU, I FORGOT WHAT THE LANGUAGE YOU USED, BUT IT WAS LIKE A GLASS. BUT IT, IT'S AT THE POINT, IT'S AT THE POINT IN THE WALL WHERE YOU'D EXPECT A SCREEN SCREEN SYSTEM TO BE. BUT IT'S, IT'S A LITTLE THROWN ME. I'VE DONE, I'VE REDID A LOT IN BROWNSVILLE, TEXAS. WE HAVE OF COURSE A LOT OF THESE SYSTEMS AND UH, SOMETIMES IT'S THE WINDOW THAT TILTS IN, BUT IN THIS CASE IT SEEMS TO BE THIS SORT OF SECONDARY LAYER, LAYER TILTING. BUT THIS FOR SURE WOULD'VE HAD SOME OTHER FENESTRATION A FOOT FORWARD OF IT THAT WE DON'T SEE. SO IT'S, AND I AGREE IT'S IN, UH, IT COULD BE DOCUMENTED AND IT COULD BE REBUILT AND, BUT THE MATERIAL, IS IT NOT, UM, FIRM? THE MATERIAL'S NOT SURE. I'M, I'M NOT SAYING NECESSARY TO KEEP STUFF, BUT, BUT WE LET PEOPLE RECREATE THINGS WHEN WE KNOW I'LL GET OUTTA THE WAY. I THINK. UH, THE, THIS IS A VERY INSTRUCTIVE PHOTOGRAPH ALSO. AND THAT YOU SEE THE, THE FASCIA ON THE, ON THE TOP IN THAT SPOT THAT'S OVER TO THE RIGHT HAND SIDE. YOU CAN SEE THAT THE ONLY THING BEHIND THAT ARE THE TWO EYES THAT, THAT HOLD UP THE ROOF STRUCTURE. AND, AND ONCE AGAIN, THERE'S NO INDICATION THEN IN THE ORIGINAL BUILDING THAT THIS WAS, OH, WAS ARCHES BRICK OR METAL OR I THINK THEY'RE WINDOW SASHES THAT ARE IN THE SHAPE OF AN ARCH. WHAT ARE ALL THESE TWO BY FOURS IN FRONT OF THEM? THEY WOULD BE THICK. THEY, THEY WRITE UP WOULD BE THICKER. THEY PUT THAT IN WHEN THEY TOOK THE WALL OUT AND, AND PUT THE NEW BRICK IN FRONT OF IT. WHAT THEY DID IS THEY TOOK THE HISTORIC MATERIAL OFF. THEY PUT A TWO BY FOUR, UH, PARTITION THAT THEN THE NEW BRICK WAS THEN, YOU KNOW, TIED TO MM-HMM . AND NOW THAT NEW BRICK HAS BEEN TAKEN OFF AND NOT, WHILE NOT EXPOSING A STOREFRONT, WHAT IT EXPOSES IS A BUNCH OF BRICKS. ITS MORTAR BEAM AND THE OLD WOODEN BEAM FOR THE TWO BY FOURS THAT HAVE BEEN ROTTED OUT IN BETWEEN ARE THESE WOODEN BEAMS, THE OLD WOODEN BEAMS FOR THE STOREFRONT THAT LOOK LIKE THEY'RE NOTCHED INTO THE BRICK WALL. IT LOOKS LIKE A FOUR BY SIX BEAM OR I DON'T KNOW WHAT SIZE IT IS, BUT YEAH, THEY'RE, THEY'RE REMNANTS WHERE THE TOP OF THE OLD STOREFRONT MIGHT HAVE BEEN, BUT THEY FILLED PHOTOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE OF ANY MATERIAL. AND THESE STUDS ARE LIKE UNDERNEATH THAT BEAM. THOSE ARE NEW STUDS THAT WERE APPLIED TO THE BUILDING TO HOLD UP THE BUT ARE THE STUDS, THE, THEY'RE LIKE, THEY'RE NOT IN FRONT OF THE BEAM. THEY'RE LIKE UNDER IT RIGHT. UNDER ABOVE. SOME ARE SC BUT THEY'RE NOT, WHAT I'M SAYING IS THEY'RE NOT IN FRONT OF IT. IT'S NOT LIKE THEY BUILT A SCREEN WALL IN FRONT OF THIS. THIS IS ALL PART OF THE ORIGINAL FACADE THAT THEY'VE SEEN? NO, THERE'S THERE'S NO, THERE'S NO ORIGINAL FACADE LEFT. YEAH. YEAH, THAT'S THE PROBLEM. THEY, THEY JUST TOOK THE WINDOWS OUT AND PUT THESE STUDS IN PLACE OF THE WINDOWS. WELL, THEY TOOK THE WINDOWS AND THE FRAMING AND, AND ALL THE TRIM OUT. SO ONLY THE INNER, ONLY THE INNER BRICK IS ORIGINAL. YEAH. AND THE TRUSS IS INSIDE HOLDING UP THE ROOF. RIGHT. WHEN AND, AND ALL THE COLUMN, ALL THE STRUCTURAL BRICK COLUMNS, UH, ARE NOW, UH, DRY MORTARED. AND EVERY TIME THE WIND BLOWS, MORE OF IT DISAPPEARS. AND THAT'S WHY WE'RE SAYING IF WE CAN ARREST THE DERE FURTHER DEGRADATION OF THE BUILDING, THEN WE CAN STILL STILL FIGURE WHAT THE NEW FACADE WILL BE. BUT THERE IS NO FACADE. IT, THE FACADE IS DISAPPEARING EVERY DAY . SO YOU CAN SEE ON, ON THE TOP. BUT THERE, I GUESS THERE IS AT LEAST SOME FABRIC AS YOU SAY, IN A, IN A, THE FABRIC IS IN THE INSIDE OF THE BUILDING. AND WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS TO REPLICATE SOMETHING ON THE FRONT. BUT IT IS NOT PRESERVED PRESERVATION. IT'S, IT'S, IT'S ONLY PRESERVATION ON THE EAST WALL THAT FACES ARLINGTON THAT WE ARE DELIBERATELY TRYING TO LEAVE IN THAT. AND THE, AND AND THE ENGINEERS TO, TO YOUR POINT, THE CONSULTING ENGINEERS ARE PEOPLE WHO, UH, ARE ENGINEERS WHO HAVE BEEN INVOLVED IN OTHER HISTORIC RENOVATIONS THAT HAVE GOTTEN GOOD BRICK AWARDS AND ALL. THEY'RE NOT, YOU KNOW, THEIR INTEREST IS PRESERVING BUILDINGS ALSO. YOU TALKED ABOUT 'EM TOO MUCH. NOW I HAVE TO ASK WHO, WHO ARE THE ENGINEERS ON THE PROJECT? IT'S EVC ENGINEERS. THANK YOU. HENRY RETO. CAN WE HEAR FROM THE STAFF PLEASE? COMMISSIONER COUCH? YES. UH, I'M TRYING, MAYBE I WANT TO THROW OUT A QUESTION FOR ALL OF US HERE. IF YOU, UH, GO BACK TO THE SAME PAGE OF 11 OF 20, I THINK THAT WHERE ALL THESE PICTURES ARE COMING FROM MM-HMM . AND IF YOU LOOK IN BETWEEN THE TWO BRICK COLUMNS, THEY, THEY ARE LIKE, THEY ARE LIKE, UH, BETWEEN THE TWO REALLY BIG COLUMNS HERE BETWEEN THESE TWO PHASES. YES. THERE ARE THESE BRICK COLUMNS HERE. IF YOU LOOK AT THE ARCHES THINKING THAT IF IT WAS ORIGINAL, I'M LOOKING AT IT SHOULD BE ALMOST SYMMETRICAL BECAUSE THEY WILL BE BUILT PART OF [04:00:01] THE ORIGINAL SYSTEM. BUT I, I FIND STRANGELY THAT THERE IS NO YEAH, NO, UH, EQU DISTANCE TO ANYTHING HERE. ALL THE ARCHES ARE SOME OF THEM LONGER AND THEN SOME OF THEM SHORTER. AND I'M SURE OUR FOREFATHERS WERE A LOT SMARTER THAN WHAT THE ARCHES ARE SHOWING. RIGHT. . OKAY. SO I'M NOT SURE WHY THEY CAME UP WITH ALL THESE LITTLE LIKE COVERUPS KIND OF THING, YOU KNOW, LIKE ARCHES AND THEY'RE JUST STUCK IT IN THERE. WHICH BEGS THE QUESTION, UH, YOU KNOW, ARE WE READING TOO MUCH INTO IT AS WELL? I'M JUST PLAYING DEVIL'S ADVOCATE, YOU KNOW? SURE. YOU GUYS KNOW I'M A PRESERVATIONIST? YEAH. I I'M NOT SEEING ANY SYMMETRY INSIDE THAT'S, THAT'S A CONCERN TO ME. AND IT WAS JUST SOMETHING LIKE SOMEBODY JUST WILLY-NILLY THROW IN A BUNCH OF THINGS AND THEN QUICKLY JUST WHATEVER, THEY CAN SLAP IT BACK IN THERE AND JUST SLAP IT BACK IN THERE. YEAH, I MEAN THE, THE ELEVATION HAS A VERY IRREGULAR PATTERN TO IT, WHICH I MEAN, I PERSONALLY FIND COMPELLING, BUT I COULD IMAGINE IT BE THE PRODUCT OF ALTERATIONS OVER TIME. OR MAYBE THE BUILDING STARTED OUT AND THEN THEY ADDED ONTO IT. OR MAYBE THE ARCH BUILDING IS ONE PART AND THE OTHER BUILDING WAS ANOTHER ONE THAT WAS BUILT AFTER THE FACT. LIKE, I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW, YOU COULD PROBABLY TELL MAYBE IF YOU LOOK AT THE STRUCTURE, LIKE IF THERE'S A, A PARTY WALL OR SOMETHING, EVIDENCE OF THAT SOMEWHERE. BUT, UM, I JUST THINK WHEN YOU'VE GOT SUCH INTERESTING ELEVATION, IT'S A SHAME TO LOSE ALL OF THAT VISUAL INTEREST. NO, I'M, I'M ALL FOR DOCUMENTING IT, BUT I'M NOT SURE SURE WHETHER DESIGN IS JUST VERY SEVERE AND, AND DOESN'T HAVE AS MUCH CHARACTER TO ME AS THE, AS THE EXISTING ONE WITH ALL OF ITS QUIRKS THAT, THAT'S JUST THE POINT THAT I'M TRYING TO MAKE. AND IF, IF PEOPLE THINK DIFFERENTLY THEN WE GO TO THE VOTE AND, AND DECIDE IT THAT WAY. I'M JUST STATING MY OPINION. WELL, LET'S DEFINE THE VOTE. 'CAUSE THIS IS OUR LONGEST MEETING IN, IN MY QUITE A WHILE TENURE ON THIS. NO, THIS SINCE 2010. AS FAR AS I CAN, JASON, I CAN, IF I CAN, I CAN MAKE ION WHY DO YOU WANT A DEFERRAL IN THE SOUTH DURING THE STAFF? LEMME SWITCH GLASSES DURING STAFF DISCUSSIONS. WE FIND THAT WHEN YOU LOOK AT THAT FRONT FACADE THAT THERE ARE FENESTRATION PATTERNS THAT WOULD INDICATE THE STOREFRONT WHERE YOU STILL HAVE THOSE LARGE, UH, STOREFRONT WINDOWS THERE THAT ARE JUST RIGHT ABOVE THE BRICK. MM-HMM . AND ALSO TOO, YOU HAVE MORE OF THE SQUARE AND RECTANGLE ONES ABOVE AND, BUT WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR THOSE HALF MOONLIGHTS TO STAY. 'CAUSE YOU SEE THOSE ARE MORE ON THE INSIDE. I THINK THEY'RE JUST ALLOWING IT TO ALLOW, BUT WE WANT TO MAINTAIN AND REPLICATE THOSE FENESTRATION PATTERNS IN THE SAME CONFIGURATION. AND THAT ALSO GOES BACK TO THIS IS FACING WHITE OAK. AND SO THIS IS A VERY PROMINENT FEATURE. IT'S A CHARACTER DEFINING FEATURE THAT IS SIGNIFICANT JUST AS MUCH AS THAT EAST SALVATION, WHICH IS ARLINGTON. SO THIS IS A CORNER LOT. AND SO WITH THE PROS PROPOSED RENDERING, WE SEE WE'RE LOSING THAT. AND THEN ALSO TOO, IF WE GO BACK TO GO UP ONE PAGE ON THE LEFT HAND SIDE, WE FOUND EVIDENCE ON THE INTERIOR WHERE YOU HAVE TWO WINDOWS AND A DOOR. SO WE KNOW THAT IS STILL EVIDENT. SO WE'RE LOOKING FOR MAINTAINING THAT WE ARE GIVING WAY ON WHERE YOU HAVE THAT VEHICLE BAY AREA ON THE LEFT HAND SIDE OF THE FRONT AND THEY WANNA EXPAND IT TO 25 FEET, WHICH, WHICH IS FINE, BUT ONE, IT'S STILL MAINTAIN AND REPLICATE WHAT WE DO SEE HERE AS, AS UH, PHYSICAL EVIDENCE. AND THAT'S WHY WE'RE DEFERRING. 'CAUSE WE WANNA GET CLOSER TO, UH, MAINTAINING WHAT WE SEE HERE. HOPE THAT ANSWERS YOUR QUESTION. CAN WE DEFER BUT ALSO GIVE THEM THE ABILITY TO SHORE SO THAT THE BUILDING REMAINS SAFE? I MEAN, I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE, THE TWO SUGGESTIONS. ME TOO. HENRY, HOW DO WE, HOW DO WE MAKE SURE THAT THE SOUTH ELEVATION THAT FACES WHITE OAK REMAINS AS HISTORIC AS POSSIBLE AND WELL DOCUMENTED AND GIVE YOU THE POWER TO MAKE SURE THE BUILDING DOESN'T FALL DOWN? I MEAN, IT IS, IT IS IN FACT NOT HISTORIC. WHAT'S THE, WHAT'S ALL THE HISTORIC MATERIAL IS GONE. WHAT, WHAT, WHAT? BUT YOU DO HAVE HISTORIC OPENINGS THAT ARE, CAN BE DOCUMENTED. I THINK THAT'S WHAT STAFF IS CONCERNED WITH. AND WE'VE DONE AND WE'VE DONE THAT WITH THE PROPOSED NEW ELEVATION. BUT BUT ARE YOU SAYING SAYING COLUMN, THE COLUMN THE BRICKS ARE NOT HISTORIC? YEAH. NO, THEY'RE NOT. YEAH. THE BRICKS ARE NOT HISTORIC. THE HISTORIC FACADE WAS TAKEN OFF IN THE 1970S THAT, THAT THE, THE EXISTING MATERIAL HAS BEEN DEEMED DANGEROUS AND HAS TO BE DEMOLISHED IN ORDER [04:05:01] FOR THE, FOR THE REST OF THE BUILDING TO STAND UP. THOSE BRICKS ARE ORIGINAL. I BELIEVE THEY, THEY ARE THE INNER BRICKS THAT THE LESS, THEY'RE, THEY'RE NOT THE FACE BRICK, THEY'RE THE BACKER BRICKS. BUT THEY ARE SO LOOSE AND THEY'RE DRY. THEY'RE, THEY'RE NO LONGER, UM, AS I UNDERSTAND, THEY'RE NOT STRUCTURAL ANYMORE. THE BRICKS ARE NO LONGER CONNECTED TO EACH OTHER WITH A MASONRY. THEY, THEY, THEY HAVE SEPARATED STORY IF THE IF BY BY THEIR AGE. BUT IT'S A STORY. RIGHT. BUT, BUT, BUT WE CAN'T GET, WE CAN'T GET, WE CAN'T GET A PERMIT ON A STRUCTURE WHERE YOU CAN WALK OVER AND JUST PUSH THE BRICK IN. AND SO THE STRUCTURE HAS TO ACTUALLY BE REDONE. AND SO WHAT WE DID IS WE REPLICATED THE SAME RHYTHM, THE SAME PLACE. IT DOES APPEAR RANDOM ON THE PROPOSED ELEVATION BECAUSE IT IS RANDOM ON THE OLD ELEVATION . SO YEAH. SO CAN WE, CAN WE LOOK AT PAGE 12 VERSUS PAGE 11? SURE. SO THIS IS WHERE YOU'RE GETTING HUNG UP AND I'M TRYING TO MM-HMM . SO THIS, THIS IS, WE'RE SEEING THIS YES. AND THERE'S OBJECTION FROM THIS BODY, I BELIEVE TO THIS BEING THE WHAT WHAT WE'RE GONNA APPROVE. AND IF YOU GO TO PAGE 11, NOW THIS IS A REPLICATION OF WHAT WE SEE IN THE EXISTING BUILDING WHEN IT'S SOME SQUARE FRONT, SOME ARCH FRONT. IS THIS ACCEPTABLE TO YOU TO REPLICATE? WE'RE FOR YOUR, IT'S, IT'S NOT PRESERVATION IN THIS AT THAT, AT THAT POINT. WE HAVE TO, WE HAVE PRESERVATION. WE'RE JUST REPLICATING THE OPENING PATTERN. THE OPENING PATTERN IS THE SAME. IT'S NOT A DUPLICATION OF THE STOREFRONT BECAUSE THERE'S NO PHOTOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE THAT THERE WAS EVEN STOREFRONT. CORRECT. SO, SO WHAT WE, WHAT WE'RE BEING ASKED TO REPLICATE IS SOMETHING THAT WE THINK MIGHT HAVE EXISTED RATHER THAN OF ANY EVIDENCE THAT IT EXISTED AT ALL. WELL, WE HAVE EVIDENCE THAT THERE'S SQUARE WINDOWS ON THE LEFT AND OUR, OUR, UH, SPARE OPENINGS ON THE LEFT AND ARCH OPENINGS ON THE RIGHT. WELL, NOT ONLY THAT, BUT LIKE DOORS, THERE'S NO DOORS HERE. LIKE, LIKE, LIKE HERE'S DOOR, DOOR, DOOR AND THEN HERE IT'S JUST, SO TIM, TIM, WHAT? LIKE IT'S WHAT WE SEE IN THE PHOTOGRAPH, LIKE THE INTERIOR IMAGES THAT WE SEE OF THE DOORS AND THE TRANSOM WINDOWS. AND IF I TAKE, EVEN IF I TAKE THE ARCH OUTTA THE EQUATION, OKAY, WHAT DO YOU THINK THE AGE OF THAT WOOD WORK IS RELATIVE TO THE BUILDING'S HISTORY? YOU CAN SEE THAT OVER THE DURATION OF THE, OF ITS LIFETIME, IT'S BEEN SCABBED ONTO ANY, ANY NUMBER OF TIMES. IT USED TO BE A PHARMACY, THEN IT WAS A PRINTING SHOP THAT DID DO, DO WE THEN, DO WE, WHAT ASSUMPTIONS DO WE MAKE ABOUT THE OVERHEAD DOOR OPENINGS THEN THAT WERE PUT ON PUT IN AT SOME POINT? DO WE PRESUME MAYBE THERE WERE OPENING DOORS BACK THEN? I DON'T KNOW. THERE'S NO, THERE'S NO HISTORIC EVIDENCE OF WHAT, OF WHAT IS HISTORIC AND WHAT HAS JUST BEEN DONE BECAUSE WE, WE, I DON'T THINK WE, IT SUGGESTS THAT IF WE TAKE THE EXISTING, THAT WE REPLICATE THE, THE OVERHEAD DOORS. RIGHT. AND, AND YOU BUT BUT LIKE YOU, YOU DON'T HAVE LIKE A HISTORIC, LIKE A HISTORIC FINISHES REPORT OR ANALYSIS MEAN NO, THIS IS JUST, YOU'D BE PEELING AWAY LAYERS AND TRYING TO UNDERSTAND IT AS YOU GO ESSENTIALLY. RIGHT. RIGHT. SO, SO I I MEAN IT IT, IT, IT ALSO DEPENDS ON YOUR, YOUR DEFINITION OF WHAT IS PRESERVATION OR NOT. I MEAN, IT'S FAIR, YOU CAN GET ON PINTEREST AND SEE LOTS OF EXAMPLES WHERE A VERY CONSCIENTIOUS DELINEATION IS MADE BETWEEN OLD AND NEW. THE BUILDING'S ALL OVER EUROPE THAT ARE BEING DONE RIGHT NOW. SOLID GLASS VERSUS MASONRY, ET CETERA IS, I THINK WE'RE, WE'RE, WE'RE TOYING WITH SOMETHING HERE THAT BORDER'S NOT ON PRESERVATION, BUT KIND OF A, A A A AN APPROACH OF RECREATION. BUT CURRENTLY YOU, YOU AGREE WHERE THE OPENINGS AND THE MASONRY WALLS WERE BASED ON THE REMAINING MASONRY WALLS THAT SUGGEST WHERE THEY STARTED AND STOPPED MORE OR LESS WHERE THEY STARTED AND STOP. AND THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE USED FOR OUR STRUCTURAL GRID BECAUSE REMEMBER THE BEAMS THAT ARE HOLDING UP THE EXISTING ROOF YEAH. THEY STILL TERMINATE AT A CERTAIN POINT. YEAH. SO WE STILL NEED STRUCTURE WHERE THERE USED TO BE STRUCTURE. SURE. SO THAT THAT'S, THAT'S COMMONSENSICAL I THINK. RIGHT. AND UM, AND IF WE, WE ALSO HAVE THE, UM, PATTERNS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, YOU KNOW, IF, IF WE'RE MISSING SOMETHING AND NEED PUTTING BACK UNDERSTANDING HOW OTHER BUILDINGS, SIMILAR BUILDINGS ALONG THIS BLOCK FACE WERE EXISTED RIGHT. IS STILL A TOOL THAT WE CAN USE. RIGHT. IT'S NOT EXACT, BUT IT IS THAT THAT'S OUR ONLY OTHER LEGITIMATE OPTION AS OPPOSED TO PINTEREST OR SOME WHAT THEY DID IN NEW JERSEY OR [04:10:01] SOMETHING. RIGHT? THAT'S RIGHT. IT'S, IT'S WHAT'S HAPPENING HERE. WELL, I MEAN E EVEN EVEN EVEN WITH THIS BUILDING, IT'S NOT UNUSUAL OF A BUILDING OF THIS ERA TO HAVE AN INDENTED ENTRANCE WAY. YEP. WE HAVE 'EM ON MONTROSE, WE HAVE 'EM ON WASHINGTON BOULEVARD AND WHAT HAVE YOU, BUT THERE'S NO EVIDENCE OF THAT HERE. SO WE WOULDN'T, WE, WE AREN'T THINKING I UNDERSTAND THAT WE WOULD REPLICATE A OR A CORNER ENTRANCE EVEN. SO YES. HOW DO WE PUSH THIS DOWN THE ROAD? WHAT SO I I HAVE, I HAVE THIS, THIS REPLICATION OF WHAT WE PERCEIVE IS ALL THE OPENINGS AS WE CAN SEE 'EM HERE. AND I GET THAT NONE OF THE MASONRY, ALL THE MATERIALS ARE GONNA GO AWAY BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT SALVAGEABLE. BUT I GUESS THAT'S WHAT I THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT I HEARD YOU SAY. YES. THEY'RE NOT RIGHT. THE MASONRY'S BLOWING IN THE WIND EVERY DAY. YEAH. AND SO I THINK STAFF IS CONCERNED THAT IF WE GO TO PAGE 12 AND YOU, AND WE APPROVE THIS, THAT THAT'S NOWHERE NEAR HIS HISTORICALLY SIMILAR TO WHAT WE CAN SEE ON PAGE 11. WELL THE, THE IS IT, IF THAT'S THE DRAWING WITH THE ARCHES, THIS IS THE DRAWING WITHOUT THE ARCHES. WITHOUT THE ARCHES. OKAY. THEN THAT IS THE MOST, THEN THAT IS THE MOST RECENT. IS THAT CORRECT JASON? THAT'S FOR ME AND WHAT I PERCEIVE FROM THE REST OF MY COMMISSIONERS, YES. THAT'S NOT REALLY ACCEPTABLE TO US BECAUSE THAT DOESN'T MIRROR AT ALL WHAT'S ON PAGE 11. YEAH. WELL THE, BECAUSE WE CAN SEE THOSE BEAMS LED INTO THE BRICK AND WE CAN SEE THE RECTANGULAR OPENINGS. AND SO THAT FOR US IS WHAT'S MORE HISTORICALLY ACCURATE. THE RHYTHM REPLICATE THE RHYTHM OF THE OPENINGS PAGE. ARE YOU WILLING TO REPLICATE THIS AS YOUR, AS YOU'RE SOUTH THE SIDE? WELL, WELL THE, THE, THERE'S, THERE'S KIND OF A TWOFOLD PROBLEM BECAUSE WE'RE REPLICATING THE STRUCTURE 'CAUSE WE HAVE TO KEEP THE ROOF HAND, RIGHT. SO, SO WE'VE TAKEN THE FIRST STEP TOWARDS DOING THAT. BUT THEN DO WE NEED WINDOWS WHERE WE, OR DO WE NEED, IF WE, IF WE MAKE SOME ASSUMPTIONS ABOUT WHERE THEY WERE DOORS MM-HMM . AND WINDOWS, I DON'T KNOW THAT WE'D BE SPOT ON WITH THE REPLICATION OF WHAT DOESN'T HAVE, I DON'T THINK THEY WOULD'VE CHANGED THE WINDOWS AND DOORS VERY MUCH ONCE THEY BUILT IT. LIKE I THINK WHAT'S THERE NOW IS PROBABLY PRETTY CLOSE TO WHAT WAS THERE WHEN IT'S, IT'S NOT, YOU HAVE TWO 12 FOOT WIDE OVERHEAD DOORS ON THE EXISTING FACADE. RIGHT. THOSE AREN'T, THOSE ARE INTERRUPTIONS. BUT THE THINGS THAT WEREN'T TOUCHED, I THINK ARE PRETTY GOOD REPRESENTATION. EXACTLY. LIKE ALL THE STUFF IN BETWEEN THE TWO LOADING DOORS IS, IS IS THE SAME SIZE AS THE GLASS ON MY ELEVATION ON MY PROPOSED ELEVATION. BUT YOUR DOESN'T, YOUR PROPOSAL ALSO ELIMINATES THE LENTIL, WHICH IS SUCH A STRONG FEATURE IN THE STRUCTURE. THE LENTIL, THE WOOD LENTIL THAT'S NOTCHED INTO THOSE PIERS OF PAINT. YEAH. THAT LENTIL WILL HAVE TO COME OFF. RIGHT. BUT THE PROPORTION, LIKE WHERE THAT SITS ON THE ELEVATION, THE FACT THAT THERE'S A CERTAIN HEIGHT OF TRANSOM ABOVE IT AND A CERTAIN HEIGHT OF STOREFRONT BELOW IT CREATE THE PATTERN OF THAT BUILDING. MM-HMM . UM, I THINK, I THINK WE CAN GET THERE. YOU KNOW, IF WE DON'T MIND KIND OF A, BECAUSE THERE WAS PROBABLY AN A I AND RESPECTFULLY I WOULD SUGGEST THAT WHAT WE'RE STARTING TO DO IS TO TOY WITH A DISNEYLAND RECREATION KIND OF THING HERE. I, I DON'T THINK SO. I AND TIM, I THINK LIKE WHAT I'M TRYING TO STRUGGLE WITH, 'CAUSE I ALMOST WANNA GO SEIZE THIS PROPERTY AND LIKE LOOK AT IT. YEAH. BECAUSE I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT SEEMS LIKE IT'S ACTUALLY OF THE BUILDING AND WHAT, AND SEPARATE THE CHANGES THAT WERE MADE BECAUSE I THINK THERE'S LIKE, IS THERE AN UNDERLYING PATTERN OF FABRIC THAT IS STILL INTACT OF HOW IT OR ORIGINALLY ROLLED? YOU'RE SAYING IT'S NOT YEAH, BUT I CAN'T, BUT I, BUT I, BUT WHAT I'M SEEING LOOKS REALLY OLD ON TERMS OF THE, THE, THE WOODWORK. AND I'M, I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT THE, THE, THE, THE BIG DOORS. MM-HMM . I UNDERSTAND THOSE WERE CHANGES MADE, BUT THERE SEEMS TO BE EVIDENCE OF A FAIRLY OLD FENESTRATION PATTERN THAT'S STILL VERTICALLY STANDING FOR A FEW MORE DAYS BEFORE IT BLOWS OVER IN THE WIND. AND THAT'S, THAT'S THE KEY ISSUE. AND, AND THAT'S, AND AND I UNDERSTAND THAT A LOT OF STUFF WAS ADDED IN BETWEEN TO SHORE THINGS UP AND NONE. AND NONE OF NONE OF THAT'S BEING DISCUSSED RIGHT NOW. I THAT'S, THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT I THINK IS WHAT I'M HEARING. WELL, AND IT'S HARD TO, IT'S HARD TO LOOK AT A SCREEN AT 30 FEET. YEAH. AND NOT, AND NOT SEE SOMETHING IN REAL LIFE WHERE YOU SEE AS YOU SEE IT BECAUSE YOU SPEND A LOT OF TIME LOOKING AT THIS. RIGHT. AND THAT, THAT'S ALL IT, WHAT PROBLEM I THINK THE EVIDENCE IS THERE. AND ONE CAN SAY THERE WAS A DOOR THERE AND ONE CAN SAY THERE WAS A, A WINDOW HERE. THE PROBLEM IS IT'S IN SUCH DEGRADATED CONDITION THAT THE QUESTION THEN BECOMES IN THE PROCESS [04:15:01] OF STABILIZING THE BUILDING AND CREATING A NEW FACADE, HOW FAR DO YOU GO TO REPLICATING WHAT WAS THERE THAT IS NOW GONE THAT WOULD BE AT THAT POINT, GONE. I THINK WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS WE WANNA RESPECT OR DO SOMETHING THAT CONTRASTS WITH THE HISTORIC MATERIAL, THE, THE ACTUAL HISTORIC MATERIAL THAT WOULD'VE BEEN, THAT IS THERE WE SHOULD, WHICH WE'RE SAYING WE'RE PRESERVING. WE WANNA RESPECT THE RHYTHM OF THE, OF THE OPENINGS. AND THAT'S NOT BEING DONE ON THIS. THE LAST DRAWING, THE PURPLE ONE. WELL, IT'S, IT'S, IT'S, THERE'S A THICKNESS IN THE AREAS WHERE THERE'S BRICK BETWEEN THE TRANSOM AND THE STOREFRONT. THERE'S DOORS AT EACH ONE OF THESE LITTLE STOREFRONT SPACES. THESE THINGS ARE NOT BEING KEPT. THEY'RE, THEY'RE BEING CHANGED A LOT. AND THERE'S A LITTLE INDICATION OF A HORIZONTAL ELEMENT, BUT IT'S JUST A PIECE OF, OF STOREFRONT MOA. AND IT'S, IT'S NOT LIKE A BEAM LIKE IT WAS. 'CAUSE THERE IS PROBABLY A HORIZONTAL CANOPY IN BETWEEN THE, THE STOREFRONT WINDOWS AND THE TRANSOM. SO THE HEAT COULD COME OUT LIKE, LIKE I'VE, YOU SEE THAT OVER AND OVER LIKE IN GALVESTON, ALL THOSE OLD STOREFRONTS WHERE THEY'VE GOT THE TRANSOM WINDOWS ABOVE THE CANOPIES. AND SO I, I JUST THINK WE HAVE THIS EVIDENCE AND MAYBE WE NEED TO DEMOLISH IT 'CAUSE THERE'S NOT STRUCTURALLY SOUND. BUT IF YOU REBUILD IT, IT NEEDS TO BE REBUILT IN A MANNER THAT REFLECTS WHAT WE CAN DOCUMENT AS, AS THE HISTORY OF THE BUILDING. WELL, LET'S PRETEND WE DIDN'T DEFER THE SOUTH FACADE. WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IN THE NEXT 30 DAYS? WELL, WE, MAYBE WE WILL GET, UH, WE PROBABLY WON'T GET A PERMIT BECAUSE THEY'RE GONNA WANT TO SEE SOME SORT OF COA, YOU KNOW, ACTION. THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE FOR OUR SECOND COA. BUT WE, WE HAVE TO ARREST THE FURTHER DEGRADATION OF THE BUILDING IF WE, IF WE, IF WE I HEAR THAT. AND, AND I THINK THERE'S A DISCONNECT BETWEEN THE WILL OF THIS COMMISSION AND WHAT YOU WANNA HAVE HAPPEN ON THE SOUTH FACADE. AND I WANT YOU TO PRESERVE YOUR BUILDING AND I WANT YOU TO KEEP GOING FORWARD. SO SOMEWHERE IN THE FUTURE IS SOME SORT OF DESIGN REVIEW OF YOUR SOUTH FACADE AND DOCUMENTATION THOROUGH DOCUMENTATION OF THE SOUTH FACADE AS IT STANDS TODAY. YEAH. AND THAT'S WHY, THAT'S WHY IT'S, DO YOU HAVE A SOLUTION FOR THAT, ROMAN? THAT'S WHY IT'S A CONDITIONAL RE UH, CONDITIONAL, CONDITIONAL APPROVAL. RIGHT. YEAH. AND I THINK ROMAN HAS A, A, HAS A COMMENT. UM, YOU KNOW, THE, FIRST OF ALL, THANK YOU, UH, FOR, FOR EVERYONE STAYING LATE AND WORKING ON THIS ONE. AND THEN ALSO, NO ONE CAN EVER ACCUSE A COUNCIL MEMBER CISNEROS OF GETTING FAVORITISM BECAUSE WE WAITED SO LATE TO HAVE HIM ON THE AGENDA LAST. UM, BUT SO , WE, WE WERE HERE. BUT WHAT I THINK WE NEED, WE PURPOSELY AND I BEING THIS STAFF, WE, WE KNEW THIS WAS A CHALLENGE. THIS IS AN INCREDIBLE BUILDING IN, IN APPEAR IN APPEARANCES. YOU KNOW, YOU LOOK AT, AND I, I, I DON'T RECALL THE CEILING WORK IN THE DETAILING, BUT I KNOW I TRUST YOU. IT'S REALLY NEAT. THE TRUST, THE TRUST WORK. OKAY. BUT YOU CAN'T GET A GRASP FOR THIS WITHOUT SEEING IT. I RECOMMEND THAT MAYBE THIS COMMISSION CONSIDER, UH, A CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OR SOME SORT OF APPROVAL, WHICH WILL ALLOW STAFF TO MEET WITH ONE OR TWO COMMISSIONERS WHO WOULD VOLUNTEER THEMSELVES OR SOMETHING. LET'S MEET ON SITE. LET'S LOOK AT THIS BUILDING CAREFULLY AND WORK TOGETHER TO FIND IT. IT IS EXTREMELY UNUSUAL. ITS CONDITION IS UNUSUAL. I LOOKED AT IT FROM THE INSIDE AND THOUGHT TO MYSELF, THIS IS A PROBLEM. THIS IS IN REALLY, THIS IS, AND I DON'T EVEN THINK THE BEAM THAT YOU'RE READING AS A BEAM IS ACTUALLY THAT. AND I'VE HAD THAT HAPPEN WHERE A PHOTO REALLY LOOKS ONE WAY AND THEN WHEN YOU GET IN FRONT OF IT, YOU'RE LIKE, OH, THAT'S WHAT THAT WAS. UM, AND SO I JUST THINK IT WOULD BE REALLY THAT IF THERE'S SOME SOLUTION AT HAND WHERE PERHAPS THIS DOESN'T NEED TO GO ALL THE WAY TO NEXT MONTH, BUT THAT WE CAN, UM, YOU KNOW, LET'S SEE. SOMETIMES WE SAY WE RECOMMEND APPROVAL WITH, UM, STAFF, WORK WITH THE CLIENT ON FINAL, BUT INSTEAD IT COULD BE A COUPLE OF COMMISSIONERS OR SOMETHING. SO WE CAN, SO WE CAN GET TO, TO SOMETHING LIKE THAT. THAT WOULD BE LIKE ANOTHER SPECIAL, UH, SUBCOMMITTEE. 'CAUSE I MEAN, WELL I I I, I AGREE THAT IF, IF A FEW PEOPLE COULD PUT THEIR EYES ON THIS, BECAUSE WE'RE, WE'RE, WE'RE SEEING SOMETHING IN THE PHOTOGRAPHS THAT I'M SENSING IS NOT WHAT IS SEEING ON THE SITE. AND THIS BUILDING IS A MESS. I MEAN THAT, THAT'S THAT PUT OF SELF-EVIDENT AND, AND IT IS STANDING UP. BUT I DON'T QUITE KNOW HOW TO GET, HOW TO ADVANCE THIS CONVERSATION. 'CAUSE I, I'M SEEING A SYNERGY ON WHAT THE ADMISSION WOULD LIKE TO DO AND STILL KEEP THE BUILDING STANDING UP. AND SO I, SO I WAS THINKING TO MYSELF EARLIER THAT WHAT THIS CONVERSATION WAS STARTING TO SOUND LIKE WAS A FIELD TRIP . AND THAT MEANS I THINK WE CAN POST A MEETING OF THE COMMISSION AS A FIELD [04:20:01] SITE VISIT. IT HAS TO BE PUBLICLY POSTED. IF THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO WANNA COME AND TAG ALONG QUORUM, WE IDENTIFY THREE COMMISSIONERS OR TWO COMMISSIONERS. I'D STILL, I I I WOULD IDENTIFY NO MORE THAN TWO IF YOU DON'T WANT TO DO IT THAT WAY. BUT I'VE HEARD ENOUGH QUESTIONS HERE. I'D BE SURPRISED IF, IF WE'RE FIGHTING FOR THOSE TWO SLOTS, SO, UM, ARM WRESTLE IN ROMAN TWO SITE AND THEN HAVE A DECISION MADE. I THINK TO HAVE A DECISION, WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO HAVE A QUORUM. WELL, AND AND THAT'S THE OTHER OPTION. IF YOU DO CALL IT AS A MEETING, YOU COULD MAKE A DECISION THEN. SO IF WE COULD FIND A TIME TO MEET NEXT WEEK, YOU COULD GET OUT THERE AND GET THINGS DONE. BUT YOU MEAN A MEETING OF THE IN FULL COMMISSION WITH QUORUM ANYWAY. OH, QUORUM. YEAH. YEAH. A QUORUM FULL MEETING YOU WOULD NEED SEVEN OF YOU. YEAH. SO I MEAN THAT'S, THAT'S AN OPTION. AND, AND THAT HELPS MOVE IT MORE QUICKLY THAN 30 DAYS. BUT GETS YOU ALL IN THERE DAYS. MM-HMM . IF THE BUILDING'S LITERALLY FALLING DOWN. WELL, I DON'T WANNA WAIT 30 DAYS. YEAH. 'CAUSE THAT'S MY CONCERN IS HOW DO WE EXPEDITE THIS SINCE THE BUILDING IS COMING DOWN? HOW DO WE SAVE THE MATERIALS THAT ARE THERE THAT WE WANNA SAVE? EXACTLY. WELL, I, I HEARD ONSITE MEETING WITH QUORUM. I JUST NEED A MOTION. THAT'S THE PROCESS STRAIGHT FORWARD. I NEED A MOTION PRECEDENT FOR THIS. I LEGALLY TELL ME WRONG, BUT WE GOT A STAFF RECOMMENDATION BEFORE YOU HEAR PARTIAL APPROVAL, APPROVAL OF CERTAIN ELEVATIONS HERE. WE, UM, WE, WHAT WE'RE NOT APPROVING IN THIS PARTIAL APPROVAL IS THE, WHAT WE'RE NOT RECOMMENDING FOR APPROVAL IS THE FRONT ELEVATION AND THE, THE MATERIAL THAT'S BEING PUT ON THAT TOP SECTION ON THE EAST ELEVATION, THAT THREE FOOT PANEL MM-HMM . UH, WHAT WOULD BE, I DON'T SEE HOW IT WOULD BE DIFFERENT IF YOU TOOK OUR RECOMMENDATION, BUT INSTEAD SCRATCH IT. DON'T TAKE THE SECOND PART. AND THE SECOND PART IS THAT THE FINAL DETAILS OF THE FRONT ELEVATION AND THAT ARE TO DETERMINED BY STAFF WITH INPUT FROM COMMISSIONERS OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. AND THEN IT'S JUST, WE CAN STILL HAVE, UH, I DON'T KNOW, LEGAL. I'M SORRY. THAT'S WHERE I'M, THEY'RE NODDING YES, BUT I SEE SKEPTICISM SYSTEM, SO I'M NOT SURE I, I'M CAUTIOUS ABOUT THAT JUST BECAUSE I THINK I'VE JUST HEARD SO MUCH DISCUSSION AND SO FORTH. IT'S ULTIMATELY UP TO THE COMMISSION. UH, I'M VERY UNEASY OF GIVING APPROVAL TO ANYTHING RIGHT NOW. I WANNA SEE THE WEST TOO. AND, AND THE EAST. NOT JUST THE SOUTH. BECAUSE I THINK THEY'RE ALL DOVETAILS TOGETHER. WE'LL BRING, WE'LL BRING SNACKS AND APPLES ALL. SO, I'M SORRY, BUT THERE'S NO PROBLEM. WE COULD A SEVEN, TWO HOUR CALL A MEETING WHERE I NEED SEVEN OF YOU THERE. LET'S MAKE A DECISION. NO, WE DO NEED TO POST IT. YEAH. SO WE, WE NEED AT LEAST THAT 72 HOUR NOTICE. SO NEED 72 HOURS FOR THE PUBLIC NOTICE. MM-HMM . WHICH, SO THIS IS THURSDAY. THE BEST WE CAN DO BE TUESDAY NEXT WEEK. WOW. WOULD YOU BE OKAY IF WE GOT IT POSTED TOMORROW? DO IT MONDAY, ROMAN TIMING? WE DO IT MONDAY. DO WE HAVE THE SANBORN MAPS? AND IF CHECK WITH HARRIS COUNTY TO SEE IF THERE'S ANY INFORMATION ON THIS BUILDING. 'CAUSE I DON'T SEE THOSE IN THIS PRESENTATION. WE HAVE NO HARRIS COUNTY. I CHECKED NO. HARRIS COUNTY. THEY HAVE SAND BOARDS, BUT NO HARRIS COUNTY. I ALREADY CHECKED BECAUSE SOMETIMES THE SANDBORN ONES ARE MORE DETAILED ON COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS. DOESN'T SOUND LIKE A WELL DO, DO WE NEED A MOTION TO HAVE THIS MEETING OR, I MEAN THIS IS JUST A, IF SO WE CAN, SO FOR WHAT WOULD OUR, WHAT WOULD YOU RECOMMEND OUR ACTION BE FOR TODAY? FOR TODAY? I WOULD ASK THAT YOU DEFER IT UNTIL STAFF CAN SET UP A SPECIAL MEETING NEXT WEEK. ADMINISTRATIVELY, WE CAN DO THAT FAIRLY EASILY AND WELL, I SAY WE, BUT STAFF CAN DO THIS FAIRLY EASILY. YEAH. THIS IS UNPRECEDENTED. BUT I, I HAVE A, I HAVE A FEELING THAT IF, IF, IF A MAJORITY OF MEMBERS COULD BE ON SITE AND SEE IT, I THINK WE'D BE IN A BETTER PLACE THAN WE ARE RIGHT NOW. 'CAUSE WE'VE NEVER SEEN A PROJECT THIS SORT OF DE DECONSTRUCTED. I MEAN THIS IS, THIS IS, THIS WAS, I MEAN, I THINK YOU WORKED ANOTHER ONE , UH, ON THE EAST SIDE ACTUALLY. BUT THIS ONE IS A LITTLE BIT MORE COMPLEX AND, UM, ANYWAY, MOTION TO DEFER UNTIL STAFF TELLS US ABOUT A SPECIAL MEETING DISCUSSION ON HIM FIRST BEFORE PLEASE. UH, A QUESTION. TIM, WHO, UH, ARE YOU WITH ANYONE TODAY? ARE YOU HERE ALONE? HUH? THE OWNER? SO BEFORE WE VOTE, MY HAT'S OFF TO YOU BOTH FOR, UH, STAYING THIS LONG, STAYING THIS LONG, STAYING THIS LONG WITH THIS BUILDING BECAUSE I'M, I'M SITTING HERE THINKING A LOT OF CASES PEOPLE WOULD, UH, DO SOMETHING ELSE. WELL, IT, UM, WHEN THE, WHEN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT OR WHATEVER WAS DONE, IT WAS, WE, THE 1970S BRICK WAS INCLUDED IN [04:25:01] THE BUILDING AND IT WAS DETERMINED TO BE A CONTRIBUTED STRUCTURE. I, I WOULD EXPECT SO. YES. IT'S NOT, BUT IT'S NOT. THAT WAS A NEW FACADE THAT WAS PUT OH, I SEE. IN, IN THE PLACE OF AN EXISTING, SO, SO THAT LITTLE HICCUP HAD TO, HAD US THEN HAVING TO DO THIS RENOVATION AS A CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE, WHICH ALL OF THE BUILDINGS THAT LOOK LIKE THIS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD ARE DEEMED NON-CONTRIBUTING. SO HERE WE ARE. UM, BUT IT HAS, IT HAS SOME ADVANTAGES IN TERMS OF PARKING FOOTPRINT, SETBACKS AND WHAT HAVE YOU. SO THAT'S WHY WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE IT WORK. SO AS CHAIR HICK SAID, IT'S OBVIOUSLY AN UNUSUAL SET OF CIRCUMSTANCES. SO, SO MY HATS OFF TO YOU FOR FOR SURE TRYING TO SEE IT THROUGH. BUT MY SECOND QUESTION FOR YOU IS MAYBE MORE RELEVANT TO WHAT WE'RE ABOUT TO VOTE ON. I, 'CAUSE I HAVEN'T HEARD EXACTLY, AND YOU, I DON'T MEAN TO, WELL I DON'T MEAN TO, UM, TRY TO STUMP YOU, BUT WHAT IF YOU HAD CARP BLANCHE, WHAT WOULD BE NEXT IN TERMS OF STRUCTURAL REINFORCEMENT TO BE ABLE TO CONTINUE WITH THE PROJECT WITHOUT DANGER OF LOSING THE BUILDING? SERIOUSLY, WE PROB WHAT, WHAT WHAT WE WOULD PROBABLY DO IS PUT, UH, EITHER INTERNAL JACKS OR SCAFFOLDING OR SOMETHING TO HOLD UP THE ROOF WHILE THE FRONT FACADE WOULD, YOU KNOW, WOULD FALL DOWN. WOULD, SO WE WOULD, WHAT WE ARE, THE INTENTION IS TO, IS TO HOLD THIS ROOF UP WHILE THE FAC THE FRONT SOUTH ELEVATION IS. AND, AND IF YOU HAD, AND AGAIN, THEORETICALLY IF YOU HAD CAR BLANCHE, THAT YOU'RE PREPARED TO MAKE THAT HAPPEN ALMOST IMMEDIATELY. YEAH. ALMOST IMMEDIATELY. AND, AND, AND THE, THE RE THE REALITY IS, WITHOUT A RESOLUTION TO WHAT THAT FACADE WOULD, UH, WOULD BE, UH, WE DON'T WANT TO DO THAT WORK UNTIL THAT'S A LITTLE BIT MORE RESOLVED. UNDERSTOOD. BECAUSE THE FRONT FACADE LITERALLY HAS TO BE TAKEN DOWN. YEAH. TO EITHER BE PUT UP AS A RECREATION OR TO BE PUT UP AS A, AS A NEW FACADE. SOMETHING HAS TO HAPPEN AND THE BUILDING'S, UH, SECURE. NOW IN TERMS TERMS OF, UH, ACCESS, IT'S FENCED OFF IN SOME MM-HMM . SAFE WAY. YEAH. THERE'S NO PUBLIC ACCESS TO THE BUILDING. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT. I JUST NEED A SECOND. A SECOND. SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. AYE. MS. DEFERRAL FOR THE NOTICE? RIGHT. UM, ANY OPPOSED, ANY ABSTENTION? SO THAT MOTION PASSES, THAT MOVES US TO ITEM C COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENT. OKAY. FROM THE PUBLIC, UH, ITEM D COMMENTS FROM THE HAHC, WHICH WE COULD, WE COULD POSTPONE UNTIL WE MEET ON SITE AT THIS, AT THIS MEETING. , I'M HUNGRY. COMMENT. MAYBE THE, MAYBE THE NEW COMMISSIONER HAS A COMMENT. , DID ANYBODY TELL YOU OF THE MEETINGS CAN RUN LONG? YEAH. WELCOME. THANK YOU FOR GIVING ME A WINDOW INTO HOW THE COMMISSION WORKS. THIS IS A SHORT MEETING. CHANTAL . THIS IS THE SHORTEST MEETING IN HISTORY. COME ON. I TOLD HER THEY USUALLY ONLY LASTED UNTIL FOUR OR FOUR 30. COME ON, YOU GUYS ARE MAKING ME LOOK BAD. SHE KNOWS YOU'RE A LIAR NOW. YEAH. ARE YOU REAL ? NO. NO REAL. BUT WE, WHAT WE ARE THANKFUL OF, YOU'RE HERE AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS TODAY. AND, UM, THIS IS AN EVOLUTIONARY PROCESS AND WITH MANY DIFFERENT POINTS OF VIEW. UM, MOVING NEXT ON THE AGENDA, UH, THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER'S REPORT. I DON'T HAVE A REPORT, BUT IT'S NICOLE BRUCE SARS BIRTHDAY, SO OH WOW. HAPPY BIRTHDAY. HAPPY BIRTHDAY NICOLE. TIME FOR YOUR DINNER. . WELL, UM, ITEM F ADJOURNMENT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. * This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.