[00:00:02]
UH,[Houston Archaeological and Historical Commission on October 12, 2023.]
THURSDAY, OCTOBER 12TH, 2023.TODAY'S MEETING OF THE HOUSTON ARCHEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL COMMISSION.
I AM COMMISSION CHAIR DAVID HICK.
UM, UH, VICE CHAIR AUER JACKSON? PRESENT.
I'M NOT HEARING HER AT THIS TIME.
COMMISSIONER, I DID HEAR A NOISE.
STAFF CAN CONFIRM IF THEY SEE HER.
SO COMMISSIONER COSGROVE PRESENT.
DEPUTY DIRECTOR JENNIFER OSLAN.
WE'LL FIRST START WITH THE DIRECTOR'S REPORT.
UM, GOOD AFTERNOON, COMMISSIONERS.
I'M SECRETARY OF THIS COMMISSION AND DIRECTOR.
MAY I BORROW YOURS? CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW? OKAY.
UH, GOOD AFTERNOON, COMMISSIONERS.
I'M JENNIFER OSLAN, SECRETARY OF THIS COMMISSION AND DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF THE HOUSTON PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT.
UM, JUST WANNA NOTE THAT OCTOBER IS PEDESTRIAN SAFETY MONTH.
UM, THIS IS A BIG, UM, I GUESS ONE OF OUR BIG INITIATIVES IN THE DEPARTMENT OF VISION ZERO.
AND THAT IS TO REDUCE, UH, TRAFFIC, UH, OR DO, I'M SORRY, REDUCE SERIOUS INJURIES AND DEATHS CAUSED, UM, ON HOUSTON STREETS.
UM, SO OCTOBER IS PEDESTRIAN SAFETY MONTH.
UH, PLEASE REMEMBER TO PAY ATTENTION TO TRAFFIC SIGNS AND OTHERS ON THE ROAD.
HOUSTON LOST 323 PEOPLE TO TRAFFIC CRASHES IN 2022.
36% OF WHICH WERE PEDESTRIANS.
EVERYONE HAS THE RIGHT TO ARRIVE AT THEIR DESTINATION SAFELY.
FOR MORE INFORMATION, VISIT WWW DOT LET'S TALK HOUSTON.ORG/VISION ZERO.
AFTER A RECOMMENDATION FROM THIS BODY CITY COUNCIL HELD A PUBLIC HEARING AND THEN SUBSEQUENTLY ADDED A NEW SECTION, CHAPTER 33 DASH 2 69 TO THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION ORDINANCE THAT OCCURRED ON SEPTEMBER 20TH.
THIS SECTION ESTABLISHES AN EXCEPTION TO THE CITY'S PROHIBITION ON ROOFTOP SIGNS FOR CERTAIN HISTORIC BUILDINGS THAT PREVIOUSLY HAD ROOFTOP SIGNS.
THE PROVISION CREATES A PATHWAY FOR ELIGIBLE RESTORATION PROJECTS TO RECONSTRUCT SIGNS AS THEY WERE ORIGINALLY INTENDED.
UM, I WOULD LIKE TO ANNOUNCE THAT WE HAVE A NEW MEMBER OF OUR HISTORIC PRESERVATION TEAM, AND THAT IS SAMANTHA DELEON, IF YOU COULD JUST STAND UP FOR A MINUTE.
SHE JOINED US A FEW WEEKS AGO, AND YOU MAY REMEMBER HER.
SHE SERVED AS AN INTERN, UM, FOR OUR TEAM, UM, A YEAR AGO OR A LITTLE MORE.
AND SO WE ARE SUPER HAPPY TO HAVE HER BACK AND I'M EXCITED FOR HER TO JOIN THE TEAM.
AND FOR A QUICK SNAPSHOT OF SOME PRESERVATION WORK THAT, UM, HAS BEEN OCCURRING, UM, THAT HAS NOT INCLUDED ON TODAY'S AGENDA, UH, STAFF RECEIVED A TOTAL OF 271 APPLICATIONS THIS YEAR TO DATE.
SINCE YOUR LAST REPORT, WE RECEIVED 38 NEW APPLICATIONS AND THE COMMISSION REVIEWED 22.
OF THESE STAFF REVIEWED 14 ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS WITH 102 ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVALS, UM, FOR THE ENTIRE YEAR SO FAR.
UH, STAFF ALSO PROVIDED FOUR PRE-DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATIONS OR CONSULTATIONS WITH 30 AS THE YEAR TO DATE COUNT.
LOOKING AHEAD THURSDAYS, NOVEMBER 9TH AND DECEMBER 14TH ARE TWO REMAINING, UM, HHC MEETINGS FOR THIS YEAR.
UH, YOU'LL BE CONSIDERING THE 2024 CALENDAR, UH, DATES IN A FEW MOMENTS.
AND IF YOU ANYONE HAS ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT ANY OF THESE ITEMS OR ANYTHING ELSE, YOU CAN CALL THE HIS HOUSTON OFFICE OF PRESERVATION HOTLINE AT 8 3 2 3 9 3 6 5 5 6 OR VISIT OUR WEBSITE@HOUSTONPLANNING.COM.
AND THAT CONCLUDES MY DIRECTOR'S REPORT.
UM, NEXT UP, I DO NOT SEE MARTHA EO FOR THE, UM,
[00:05:01]
MAYOR'S LIAISON REPORT.SO I BELIEVE WE WILL NOT HAVE ONE TODAY.
SO WE WILL MOVE ON, UH, NEXT TO THE RECONSIDERATION OF THE AUGUST 3RD, 2023 HAHC MEETINGS AND CONSIDERATION OF THE SEPTEMBER 14TH AND THE SEPTEMBER 19TH SPECIAL MEETING.
COMMISSIONERS, DO YOU HAVE ANY, UM, QUESTIONS OR CORRECTIONS ON ANY OF THESE THREE SETS OF MINUTES? IF NOT, UH, IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE THESE, UH, UH, ENTIRE AS AS A GROUP COMMISSIONER AUER JACKSON MOVES TO APPROVE BOTH? THANK YOU.
ANY OPPOSED? ANY ABSTENTIONS? THAT MOTION CARRIES.
UH, CHUCK STAAVA, UH, ABSTAINS.
SHOULD COMMISSIONER STAVO WILL ABSTAIN.
NOW MOVING ON TO ITEM A, UM, FIRST ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS PRESENTATION AND CONSIDERATION OF THE 2024 HAHC MEETING DATES.
GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIRPERSON, MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION, THIS IS STAFF PERSON JASON LOWENTHAL, I BRING TO YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION TODAY.
ITEM A, THE 2024 HAHC MEETING DATE STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL FOR THIS NEXT UPCOMING YEAR'S MEETINGS.
SO ARE, ARE WE JUST ASKING FOR INPUT ON THE DATES OR YOU'LL LOOK IT OVER? YOU CAN GIVE ANY FEEDBACK IF YOU WANT.
IF COMMISSION IS OKAY WITH THESE DATES, CAN VOTE FOR APPROVAL.
ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FROM COMMISSIONERS? ANY QUESTIONS ON THE DATES OR CONCERNS? OKAY.
I'M GOING TO ASK IF THERE'S A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE PROPOSED CALENDAR.
COMMISSIONER AUER JACKSON MOVES.
IS THERE A SECOND? COSGROVE SECOND.
ANY AGAINST ANY ABSTENTIONS? MOTION PASSES.
ITEM B IS A PUBLIC HEARING IN CONSIDERATION OF IMPOSSIBLE ACTION ON A PROTECTED LANDMARK DESIGNATION APPLICATION FOR THE ALEXANDER Z AND JULIUS C HESTER HOUSE AT 1 7 0 3 WEST STREET, HOUSTON, TEXAS 7 7 0 2 6.
GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIRPERSON AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.
THIS IS STAFF PERSON KARA QUIGLEY.
I SUBMIT FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
AGENDA ITEM B FOR PROTECTED LANDMARK DESIGNATION OF THE ALEXANDER Z AND JULIA C. HESTER HOUSE LOCATED AT 1703 WEST STREET IN THE FIFTH WARD.
THIS PROPERTY WAS FIRST BROUGHT TO STAFF'S ATTENTION BY THE CURRENT HOMEOWNER, MARLENA WEEKLY AS A PROPOSED GENERAL LAND OFFICE PROJECT TO ADDRESS CONCERNS RELATED TO HURRICANE HARVEY DAMAGE.
THE GLO WAS PROPOSING RECONSTRUCTION OF THE RESIDENCE, WHICH WAS NOT WITHIN THE OWNER'S WISHES, AS SHE DID NOT WANT HER HISTORIC HOME TO BE DEMOLISHED.
AFTER EXTENSIVE RESEARCH, IT WAS DETERMINED THE PROPERTY POSSESSED VALUABLE HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE AND ARCHITECTURAL INTEGRITY, DEEMING IT, ELIGIBLE FOR PROTECTED LANDMARK STATUS.
THE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE AT 1703 WEST STREET IS A ONE STORY WOOD CLAD RAISED QUEEN AND COTTAGE CONSTRUCTED CIRCA 1903 FOR COTTON SAMPLER, ALEXANDER Z. HESTER AND HIS WIFE JULIA C. HESTER, WHO WAS BOTH A TEACHER AND DEVOTED COMMUNITY LEADER IN THE FIFTH WARD NEIGHBORHOOD.
THE EXTENT QUEEN ANNE STYLE FEATURES AN ORIGINAL FRONT GABLE WITH A BAY WINDOW AND CORNER BRACKETS AND L-SHAPED WRAP PORCH, EXTERIOR WOOD CLADDING, AND DISTINCT FENESTRATION PATTERNS.
THE PROPERTY RETAINS ITS ESSENTIAL HISTORIC FORM WITH AN EARLY EDITION AND EXTENSION OF THE FRONT PORCH, WHICH IS EVIDENT ON SANDBORN MAPS.
IN ADDITION TO ITS ARCHITECTURAL INTEGRITY, THE PROPERTY'S ASSOCIATION WITH JULIUS C HESTER CONTRIBUTES TO ITS HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE.
DURING THE HESTER'S, MORE THAN 40 YEARS LIVING ON WEST STREET, JULIUS C HESTER SERVED AS AN INFLUENTIAL FIGURE IN THE COMMUNITY THROUGH HER SERVICE TO ENSURE THE SAFETY EDUCATION AND DEVELOPMENT OF NEIGHBORHOOD YOUTH.
IN THE EARLY 19 HUNDREDS, THE HESTER'S OPENED THE DOORS OF THEIR HOME TO LOCAL CHILDREN TO PROVIDE A SAFE AND NURTURING ENVIRONMENT TO HELP KEEP ADOLESCENTS OFF THE STREET.
THEIR HOME ON WEST STREET SERVED AS A CENTRAL GATHERING PLACE TO ACTIVELY ENGAGE NEIGHBORHOOD YOUTH AND CONTRIBUTE
[00:10:01]
TO THEIR DEVELOPMENT AS COMMUNITY LEADERS AND SUCCESSFUL INDIVIDUALS.FOLLOWING JULIA HESTER'S DEATH IN 1940, A COMMUNITY CENTER AND NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION KNOWN AS THE JULIUS C HESTER HOUSE, OR HESTER HOUSE, WAS NAMED IN HER HONOR ON LYONS AVENUE TO PROMOTE THE HEALTH, EDUCATION AND WELFARE OF AFRICAN AMERICAN RESIDENTS IN THE FIFTH WARD.
THE CURRENT LOCATION OF HESTER HOUSE IS LOCATED AT 2020 SOLO STREET, AND THE ORGANIZATION RECENTLY CELEBRATED THEIR 80TH ANNIVERSARY.
THE LEGACY LEFT BY JULIUS C HESTER HAS CONTINUED TO HAVE A LASTING IMPACT ON THE HISTORY OF THE FIFTH WARD THROUGH PROGRAMS OFFERED BY THIS COMMUNITY CENTER.
HER PERSONAL RESIDENCE, THE ALEXANDER Z AND JULIUS C HESTER HOUSE AT 1703 WEST STREET MEETS CRITERIA 1, 3, 4, 5, AND EIGHT FOR LANDMARK DESIGNATION AND CRITERIA ONE AND TWO FOR PROTECTED LANDMARK DESIGNATION.
STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE HOUSTON ARCHEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL COMMISSION RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL THE PROTECTED LANDMARK DESIGNATION OF THE ALEXANDER Z AND JULIUS C HESTER HOUSE AT 1703 WEST STREET, HOUSTON, TEXAS, 7 7 0 2 6.
THIS REPORT WAS PREPARED BY STAFF MEMBER KARA QUIGLEY, AND I'M AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
THE HOMEOWNER, MERLE WEEKLY IS ALSO SIGNED UP TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF THIS ATION.
THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF ON THIS PROPOSED ITEM? OKAY.
WE'RE NOT HEARING, SO I'M GOING TO OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING AND, UM, WE HAVE ONE PERSON, UH, SIGN UP AS WAS MENTIONED.
DO YOU PLEASE, UH, RE-ANNOUNCE YOUR, YOUR NAME AGAIN AND ADDRESS THE COMMISSION.
HI, I'M MARLENA WHEATLEY AND I LIVE AT 1 7 0 3 WEST STREET.
UH, I, I'VE LIVED THERE FOR OVER A DECADE AND, UH, KARA QUIGLEY HAS DISCOVERED THAT, UH, IT'S JULIUS HE HESTER'S HOUSE.
AND, UM, I'M COMMITTED TO PRESERVING HER LEGACY.
I'M VERY HONORED THAT I FOUND OUT THAT I LIVE IN HER HOUSE.
UM, UH, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? NO, BUT I MEAN, THANK YOU FOR, FOR COMING AND DOING THIS.
I, WHEN I SAW THIS PROJECT, I WAS AMAZED AND ALSO SEE THE HISTORIC IMAGE.
AND, UM, MY ONLY COMMENT TO STAFF WAS, I, I UNDERSTAND THAT THE GENERAL LAND OFFICE PROJECT WILL HELP TO RECONSTRUCT THE ROOF, WHICH I GUESS WHERE A LOT OF WATER CAME IN FROM ABOVE.
AND MY ONLY OTHER COMMENT WAS HOW STRIKING THE BUILDING WAS THAT HAD THE OPENINGS UNDER THE, UNDER THE CRAWL SPACE FOR AIR VENTILATION.
IT HELPS KEEP THE TERMITES OUT MM-HMM
AND, AND, AND SO IF THERE'S A WAY THAT THE G OF FUNDING COULD ALSO HELP TO REMOVE SOME OF THAT WOOD SIDING, THAT THE SIDING AROUND THE OKAY.
THAT, THAT TOUCHES THE EARTH, THAT'S A WAY THAT IT, IT HOLES IN MOISTURE AND TERMITES CAN, CAN GET, COULD HAVE YOUR HOME.
AND SO I, I, I LOOK FORWARD TO ONE DAY SEEING THE HOUSE LOOKING LIKE THIS AGAIN.
AND I THINK IT'S A WONDERFUL, WONDERFUL PROJECT.
NO, UH, WE ACTUALLY GOT THE APPROVAL ON TUESDAY FROM THE GENERAL LAND OFFICE.
SO THEY, WE, UM, THEY CAME OUT AND DID A LEAD TEST AND WE'RE AWAITING, I MEAN, THEY TOLD ME THERE'S LEAD, BUT WE'RE AWAITING THE RESULTS FROM THE LEAD TEST AND THEN, UH, WE SHOULD MOVE FORWARD.
AND THEY, THEY PLAN ON REPLACING THE ROOF AND REWIRING AND JUST MAKING IT SAFE TO LIVE IN.
AND SO THAT I CAN CARRY HOMEOWNERS INSURANCE AS WELL.
WHAT ARE YOU LIVING IN THE HOUSE NOW? I AM MY, SO IT'S, IT'S, IT'S, UH, YOU'RE ABLE TO STAY THERE IN IN PREPARATION FOR THIS WORK? YES.
WE WE'RE, TO MY UNDERSTANDING, WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO MOVE OUT FOR FOUR MONTHS.
BUT, BUT YEAH, NO, CURRENTLY THE FLOORS ARE ORIGINAL, LIKE WHEN WE'VE HAD TO DO SOME REPAIRS, LIKE BEHIND THE SHEET ROCK, THERE'S THE ORIGINAL WOOD WALLS, THERE'S THE, UH, BEADBOARD CEILINGS.
UM, I MEAN, THERE'S SHEET ROCK OVER ALL OF IT, AND SOME OF IT'S IN BETTER CONDITION THAN OTHERS, BUT, UH, I BELIEVE MOST OF THE WINDOWS ARE ORIGINAL.
SOME OF THOSE ARE IN BETTER CONDITION THAN OTHERS.
UM, I MEAN, THERE, THERE HASN'T BEEN A LOT DONE TO IT.
UH, I BELIEVE BEFORE I MOVED IN THAT THE PEOPLE THAT LIVED THERE PRIOR, UH, HAD PROBABLY TRIED TO FIX THE PORCH.
UM, BUT WHEN I MOVED IN, IT WAS, THERE WAS LIKE PLYWOOD, UH, FLOORS ON THE PORCH.
THERE WAS, UM, BUT WE TOOK OUT A LOAN, UH, IN 2021 AND, OR 2022, SORRY, 2021 AND REDID THE PORCH.
THIS WAS BEFORE WE KNEW THAT IT WAS JULIA HESTER'S HOUSE.
UM, I MEAN, IT LOOKS FAIRLY SIMILAR.
WE DID KEEP THE COLUMNS, ALTHOUGH THEY
[00:15:01]
WEREN'T IN GREAT CONDITION, UH, ACCORDING TO MY CONTRACTOR, BUT WE STILL HAVE 'EM UNDERNEATH THE HOUSE.UM, THEY'RE HOLLOW, I GUESS THEY COULD BE PUT BACK ON.
UM, SO WHAT, WHAT POINT DID YOU LEARN ABOUT THE, UH, THE HISTORY OF THE HOUSE? THAT IT WAS THE HESTER HOUSE MAYBE LIKE A MONTH AGO? OH,
UH, WE, I, SO WHEN HURRICANE HARVEY HAPPENED, THERE WAS A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF WATER THAT CAME IN THROUGH THE ROOF.
UM, SO IT WAS COMING IN THE WALLS, IT WAS COMING IN THE CEILING.
THE SHEET ROCK IN MY KITCHEN CAVED IN.
UM, SO, AND I GUESS IT WAS WHERE THE VENTILATION WAS ABOVE MM-HMM
SO WATER WAS COMING IN THROUGH THERE.
AND SO I CALLED FEMA AND FEMA DIDN'T THINK IT WAS ENOUGH FOR THEM TO MESS WITH, SO THAT WAS FINE.
UM, AND THEN I GOT RECEIVED A PHONE CALL FROM THE GENERAL LAND OFFICE WITH THE HURRICANE HARVEY ASSISTANCE PROGRAM OVER, I GUESS A LITTLE BIT BEFORE THE SUMMER MM-HMM
UM, TO SEE IF I STILL NEEDED REPAIRS.
AND IT WAS AT THE VERY, VERY END OF THEIR, THE FINAL PHASE OF THEIR, UM, PROGRAM.
AND SO THEY CAME OUT AND THEY WANTED TO DEMOLISH THE HOUSE BECAUSE IT WAS MORE THAN $65,000 IN REPAIRS TO BRING IT UP TO CODE.
I KNEW THAT THE HOUSE WAS OVER A HUNDRED YEARS OLD.
UM, HCA SAYS IT WAS BUILT IN 1920, BUT KARA QUIGLEY FOUND OUT IT WAS BUILT IN 1903.
UM, AND SO SHE KIND OF SAVED THE HOUSE.
SO, UH, THAT'S, THAT'S WONDERFUL.
I UNDERSTAND THAT DETERMINING THE HOUSE IS HISTORIC ALLOWS THE GENERAL END OFFICE TO USE MORE FUNDS PER FEDERAL GUIDELINES.
AND SO THAT'S THE, THAT RESEARCH THAT WAS DONE IS THE KEY THAT ALLOWS HOMEOWNERS TO GET EXTRA SUPPORT.
AND, UM, AND, UH, SO ANYWAY, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
JUST COMMISSIONER DUBOSE, FIRST OF ALL.
UM, SO MUCH FOR WHAT YOU'RE DOING.
SO MANY PEOPLE COME INTO COMMUNITIES, GET THESE HOMES, AND THEN THEY DEMOLISH 'EM AND THEY DON'T EVEN LOOK 'EM UP, UM, TO SEE.
MY DAD GREW UP IN THIS AREA AND WENT TO HESTER HOUSE, MY AUNT'S THERE TODAY, UM, FOR THE SENIOR PROGRAM.
AND SO, UM, THANK YOU FOR SAVING THIS.
UM, I KNOW THAT THERE IS A LARGER INITIATIVE GOING ON IN THE AREA, UM, WHERE THEY ARE DOING SOME STORYBOARD MARKERS, UM, FOR PUTTING THAT, THAT NARRATIVE THAT YOU ALL PUTTING IT OUTSIDE ON A STORYBOARD, MAYBE IN THE RIGHT OF WAY, IF THAT'S SOMETHING THAT YOU MIGHT BE INTERESTED IN DOWN THE ROAD, UM, BECAUSE THEY'RE LOOKING AT THE EMANCIPATION TRAIL AND TOURISM THROUGH THAT AREA.
UM, AND SO THAT WOULD BE A, A, UM, ADDED FEATURE.
I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANT THE TRAFFIC, BUT, UM, I WOULD LOVE MORE INFORMATION ABOUT THAT.
BUT, UM, BUT DEFINITELY, SO I'LL MAKE SURE YOU GET THAT, THAT INFORMATION SO THAT YOU CAN CONNECT WITH THE PERSON THAT'S IN CHARGE OF THAT PROJECT.
BUT THANK YOU SO MUCH AND I'M REALLY EXCITED ABOUT SEEING, UM, THIS AND, YOU KNOW, HAVING THIS HERE, SO THANK YOU.
IS THERE ANY, OH, I HAVE A K COMMISSIONER.
KI HAVE, MAYBE IT'S MORE FOR STAFF, BUT WILL THEY HAVE TO GET A COA WHEN THEY START THE REPAIR WORK ON THIS HOUSE? THEY GET PERMITS, YES.
THEY WOULD, UM, TO GET PERMITS AND ALL THAT FUN STUFF.
IS THERE ANY OTHER MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? IF SO, PLEASE ANNOUNCE YOURSELF.
I, I, I, I JUST WANT TO ADD ONE THING.
GLO WORKING WITH A HISTORIC HOME, UM, THIS IS LIKE ONE FOR THE HISTORY BOOKS, AND WE NEED TO GET A NEWS CAMERA CREW OUT HERE,
I MEAN, BECAUSE YOU JUST DON'T SEE THEM, UH, GOING TO THE LENGTH THAT THEY'RE GOING TO.
I HAVE A LITTLE BIT MORE RESPECT.
WELL, AND I AM, I'M AWARE THAT, UM, ROMAN AND OTHER MEMBERS OF STAFF HAVE IN THE PAST BEEN ABLE TO CIRCUMVENT DEMOLITION OF OTHER HISTORIC HOMES AND, UH, BY, YOU KNOW, GETTING FOLKS TO REALIZE THAT THESE WERE EITHER SO HOMES OR ELIGIBLE SOC DISTRICTS.
AND, UM, WHILE THEY MIGHT BE SMALL, THEY WERE VERY IMPORTANT AND, AND THAT A LOT OF, UH, AND EXTRA FUNDING HAS BEEN FLOWING THAT WAS NOT INTENDED TO, TO BE RECEIVED BY HOUSTONIANS.
UM, AT THIS TIME, I'M GONNA CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING COMMISSIONERS.
IS THERE A MOTION? SO I MOVE THAT, UM, WE APPROVE THIS AS A HISTORIC LANDMARK, UM, PROTECTED, UH, LANDMARK COMMISSIONER WEER JACKSON SECONDS.
I THINK I'M COMMISSIONER WHEATARD JACKSON WILL TAKE A SECOND.
ANY OPPOSED? ANY ABSTENTIONS? THAT MOTION PASSES.
AND NOW WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM C,
[00:20:01]
CONSIDERATION OF IMPOSSIBLE ACTION ON THE NOMINATION TO THE NATIONAL REGISTRY OF HISTORIC PLACES OF THE SILLS MILLS AT 5 8 0 4 CANAL STREET, HOUSTON, TEXAS 7 7 0 1 1.THANK YOU FOR COMMISSION FOR BEING HERE THIS AFTERNOON.
I'M ROMAN MACALLAN, THE, UH, BUILDING AT 58 0 4 CANAL STREET.
WE JUST HAVE A COUPLE OF IMAGES TO SHARE IN THE, UH, VIDEO ONLINE.
AND THEN I HAVE SUPPLIED TO YOU, AND FOR THE RECORD, THE OFFICIAL STATE BOARD OF REVIEW NOMINATION FORM.
AND THIS BUILDING IS, IS VERY, VERY, VERY INTERESTING.
AND I ENCOURAGE YOU TO READ THROUGH THE NOMINATION.
IT'S, UM, BUILDING IS IN, OF COURSE, THE MODERN MOVEMENT, THE POST-WAR MODERN LOOK.
IT'S MAINLY CONCRETE AND STUCCO.
THE ARCHITECT WAS JAMES O SILLS AND THE BUILDER, ROBERT BRASHEAR.
THE BUILDING IS BEING NOMINATED UNDER NATIONAL REGISTER CRITERIA C AND WAS BUILT IN 1946.
WE'VE WORKED WITH THESE APPLICANTS, UH, THESE, THIS PROJECT FOR A LONG TIME.
UH, I MEAN, IN THE LAST FOUR YEARS, I'VE MADE SEVERAL VISITS WITH STAFF OUT AS THEY, UH, VERY ON A VERY, VERY TIGHT BUDGET, HAVE BEEN WORKING TO RESTORE THE BUILDING.
IT'S ASSOCIATED WITH SO MUCH OF HOUSTON'S HISTORY.
IT'S, IT'S IMPOSSIBLE FOR ME TO COVER IT, UH, BUT I'LL JUST MAKE A FEW POINTS THAT I THINK SHOULD BE READ INTO THE RECORD.
THE BUILDING IS 7,500 SQUARE FEET.
IT HAS A POURED CONCRETE FOUNDATION ON A REC IN A RECTANGULAR PLAN.
AND THE MOST PROMINENT FEATURE IS THE CANFORD CORNER AT THE JUNCTURE OF THE BUILDING'S PRIMARY, NORTHEAST AND NORTHWEST FACADES.
AND AN, AND THE UP CURVED STUCCO CLAD CANOPY WITH A STANDING SEA METAL ROOF ON IT.
NOW, TODAY, UH, IT WAS REALLY LEAKING BAD, AND, AND THEY'VE MADE A GOOD CORRECTION THERE.
THE, UM, THE OWNERSHIP IN HISTORY, JAMES OLIVER SILLS WAS THE ONE WHO HAD THE BUILDING CONSTRUCTED.
UH, HE HIRED ROBERT BRAHE, A FATHER AND SON ARCHITECTURAL COMPANY, TO CONSTRUCT THE TWO STORY COMMERCIAL BUILDING WITH A DRUG STORE AND A BEAUTY PARLOR ON THE STREET LEVEL IN A MEDICAL CLINIC.
ON THE UPPER LEVEL, THERE'S NO INDICATION THAT THE MEDICAL CLINIC EVER WAS, UH, IN THE BUILDING.
THE UPPER LEVEL APPEARS TO HAVE BEEN A UNION HALL SINCE 1947, AND HAS THE BUILDING, HAS HAD THREE BUSINESSES ON THE STREET LEVEL.
UH, ONE OF THE EARLIEST TENANTS WAS THE MODERN PHARMACY OWNED AND OPERATED BY HAROLD MILLER, SON-IN-LAW TO HOUSTON'S THEN MAYOR OSCAR HOLCOMB, UH, THROUGH MOST OF THE 1950S AND THE SIMMONS AND COMPANY AND OIL WELL SUPPLY, UH, FIRM OWNED BY DUDLEY SIMMONS ALSO WAS THERE SINCE THE 1960S.
THE BUILDING HAS BEEN ASSOCIATED WITH THREE LABOR UNIONS, EACH WITH THEIR OWN HISTORIES.
UH, AND YOU, YOU CAN GO THROUGH THE REPORT ON THAT.
IN THE LATE 20TH CENTURY, HOWEVER, UNIONS BECAME A LITTLE STILTED, AND THE TEXAS WORKFORCE FLOODED WITH NON-US UNIONIZED WOMEN AND HISPANIC IMMIGRANTS.
SO THE LOSS OF JOBS IN TRADITIONAL UNION FIELDS, THE INCREASING CONSERVATIVE POLITICAL LEANING IN TEXAS, AND A DECREASE IN SUPPORT FROM LABOR UNION NATIONAL LABOR UNION FIELDS, UM, CHANGED, CHANGED THE, THE LANDSCAPE.
THE, UM, THE UNION UNITED STEEL WORKERS OF AMERICA IN LOCAL NUMBER 1742 WAS LIKELY THE FIRST UNION TO USE THE BUILDING SECOND LEVEL WITH THE STEEL WORKERS HALL NOTED IN 1947 AT CANAL AND NORWOOD STREETS.
IN, IN THE 1940S, THE USWA WAS ACTIVE IN LABOR DISPUTES WITH HUGHES TOOL, THE NATIONAL WAR LABOR BOARD, AND THE INDEPENDENT METAL METAL WORKERS UNION, THE ME ANOTHER, UH, THE OTHER MAJOR LABOR UNION AT HUGHES, TOOL LOCAL NUMBER TWO 11 WAS INVOLVED IN, THERE'S SO MANY INTERESTING STORIES, WAS INVOLVED IN SOME RI INTERNAL AND RIVAL UNION TURMOILS DURING THE FIFTIES, AND A BOMB WAS PLANTED AT THE HALL AND EXPLODED ON AUGUST 12TH, 1955, DAMAGING THE BUILDING.
THERE WAS ANOTHER ATTEMPT, UM, LATER, LET'S SEE THIS, THE, THE SEAFARERS INTERNATIONAL UNION OF NORTH AMERICA AND THE MARINE ENGINEERS BENEFICIAL ASSOCIATION USED THE HALL FROM 1960 TO 1978.
THERE WAS ANOTHER, UH, DISPUTE IN A BOMB WAS PLACED THAT DIDN'T GO OFF THE, THE SOCIETY RE MEXICANA HALL AS IT'S KNOWN SMOM TODAY, THEY ACQUIRED THE SMOM, ACQUIRED THE BUILDING IN 1978, AND IT WAS DIRECTLY ACROSS FROM AN IMPORTANT MURAL, DAN GOMA'S SYMBOLIC
[00:25:01]
1973.THE REBIRTH OF OUR NATIONALITY MURAL IS ACROSS THE STREET.
SO THAT'S A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE BUILDING.
AND, UH, WE, WE COME TO YOU TODAY, UH, BECAUSE OF THE, BEING A CERTIFIED LOCAL GOVERNMENT UNDER THE TEXAS HISTORICAL COMMISSIONS PROGRAM, UH, THE, THIS COMMISSION IS REQUIRED TO, UH, SHOW SUPPORT OR NOT OF THIS NOMINATION TO THE NATIONAL REGISTER, AS WELL AS THE MAYOR OF THE CITY.
SO WE COME TO YOU TODAY TO CONSIDER IT.
THANK YOU ROMAN, UM, COMMISSION MEMBERS, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OF ROMAN ON THIS, UH, APPLICATION? YOU'RE NOT HEARING ANY? I'M GONNA OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND SEE IF THERE'S ANY MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC EITHER IN PERSON OR ATTENDING VIRTUALLY.
WOULD, IF YOU'D LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM, WOULD YOU PLEASE ANNOUNCE YOURSELF AND ADDRESS THE COMMISSION? OKAY.
ARE THEY ONLY APPLYING FOR NATIONAL REGISTER OR ALSO CITY OF HOUSTON LANDMARK? THEY, I BELIEVE THEY ALREADY ARE A CITY OF HOUSTON LANDMARK.
WE'VE BEEN OUT THERE MULTIPLE TIMES.
I DON'T REMEMBER IF IT'S A LANDMARK ONLY OR A PROTECTED LANDMARK, BUT THAT IS ONE OF THE REASONS WE'VE BEEN OUT THERE SO OFTEN.
AND, UH, SO, SO FOR THE WORK THAT THEY'VE BEEN DOING, THEY'VE BEEN GETTING COAS FOR ALL OF THOSE.
MOST OF IT'S BEEN ROUTINE MAINTENANCE OR DEFERRED MAINTENANCE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
THERE MAY ACTUALLY BE, WELL, THERE MAY HAVE BEEN ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL OF A C OF A BECAUSE THERE WERE A LOT OF, UH, ELEMENTS TO THE BUILDING THAT WERE NON-ORIGINAL AND NON APPROPRIATE, WHICH ARE ALLOWED TO BE A CHANGED UNDER ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL.
MOST OF THE STREET LEVEL FACADE IS JUST NOT ORIGINAL.
UH, BUT THEY DID ON THE CANAL SIDE, RETAIN THE OPENINGS THAT YOU SEE.
YOU'LL SEE TWO DOORS WITH TRANSOMS ABOVE THEM.
AND THOSE ARE THE ORIGINAL OPENING LOCATIONS.
IS IS THIS A TAX CREDIT PROJECT? I BELIEVE THEIR GOAL IS TO TRY TO GET BACK SOME OF THE, AND THEY, IT'S WONDERFUL.
THEY'VE USED STUDENT, UH, WORK.
THE UPPER STORY CASEMENT WINDOWS WERE REALLY RUSTED OUT AND DECAYED AND THE LATCHES DECAYED AND FROZEN.
AND THEY'VE HAD LOCAL METAL WORKERS THERE TEACHING YOUNG PEOPLE HOW TO, YOU KNOW, HOW TO, UH, GRIND THEM DOWN AND PAINT THEM.
AND THEY'VE JUST DONE A LOT OF HANDS-ON WORK ON THE BUILDING.
THERE ALSO WAS A, A, THE ROOF WAS A BIG CHALLENGE.
UH, THERE WAS A ROOFER THAT CAME IN AND DID SOME KIND OF, UH, THINGS A LITTLE, GOT A LITTLE OFF THE RAILS, BUT PETE STOCKTON WORKED WITH US TO STEER THAT WORK BACK INTO COMPLIANCE.
IT, IT SHOWS TO BE A PROTECTED LANDMARK CITY OF HOUSTON.
THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER CURRY.
AND ON THAT PREVIOUS ITEM, I JUST WANNA SAY IT'S FOR THE GLO.
UH, I, I KNOW THIS IS NOT THE SAME ITEM, BUT IF UNTIL THAT ITEM PASSES CITY COUNCIL, UH, WE WOULDN'T NEED TO, UH, ISSUE A C OF A YET SO THAT, THAT GLO WORK.
BUT THE GOOD THING IS THE GL O'S TALKING WITH US ON, ON THOSE SO THAT WE, WE HELPED KEEP THOSE GOING THE RIGHT WAY.
I'M GONNA CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING THIS ITEM.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF STAFF FROM COMMISSION MEMBERS? IF NOT, IS THERE A MOTION, UM, FROM COMMISSION TO APPROVE? I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE ACCEPT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION TO RECOMMEND THIS FOR ENTRY INTO THE NATIONAL REGISTER.
IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND IT.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? AYE.
ARE THERE ANY OPPOSED? ARE THERE ANY ABSTENTIONS? OKAY.
WE ARE NOW GOING TO MOVE TO ITEM D, CONSIDERATION OF AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS, APPLICATIONS FOR CONSENT AGENDA.
UH, SO, UH, ITEM D WE STAFF BRINGS BEFORE YOU, UH, WE WERE ASKED, WE REQUEST YOUR UNANIMOUS, UM, UH, APPROVAL ON CONSENT OF THESE ITEMS PER STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS.
AND THE ITEMS ARE ITEM 1 37 0 9 MONTROSE BOULEVARD, NEW CONSTRUCTION FOR APPROVAL.
ITEM 2 5 0 9 TET SHORN STREET IN WOODLAND HEIGHTS FOR APPROVAL AND AN ADDITION THERE.
1 1 1 3 2 LANE STREET AN ALTERATION THE DISTRICT AT IN THE HOUSTON HEIGHTS WEST APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS 1 1 3 2 LANE NEW CONSTRUCTION, THE GARAGE APARTMENT ON THAT SAME SITE IN THE HEIGHTS WEST FOR APPROVAL.
2106 DECATUR NEW CONSTRUCTION IN OLD SIX WARD FOR APPROVAL.
NUMBER 6 11 29 WEST GARDNER, AN ALTERATION EDITION IN NOR HILL FOR APPROVAL.
NUMBER 7 2 11 EAST 31ST AND HALF STREET.
[00:30:01]
ADDITION, AND REALLY A RESTORATION IN STARK WEATHER FOR APPROVAL.UH, ITEM 8 9 1 5 KEY STREET, AN ALTERATION ADDITION IN NOR HILL DENIAL AND ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATE REMEDIATION.
ITEM NUMBER 9 7 0 2 WEST COTTAGE STREET, AN ALTERATION EDITION IN NOR HILL FOR APPROVAL.
ITEM NUMBER 10 20 28 WEST GRAY STREET, THE IN THE RIVER OAKS THEATER SHOPPING DISTRICT, LANDMARK FOR APPROVAL.
AND THEN ITEM NUMBER 13, 17 15 BISMARCK STREET, NEW CONSTRUCTION IN OLD SIX WARD FOR APPROVAL.
AND ITEM 14, 3400 WHITE OAK DRIVE, THE STOREFRONT THERE IN HEIGHTS SOUTH FOR DEFERRAL.
SO STAFF THEN IS ASKING TO THAT ITEMS 11 AND 12 BE CONSIDERED INDIVIDUALLY, AND WE THEN REQUEST YOUR CONSIDERATION OF THESE ITEMS ON CONSENT.
ROMAN COMMISSION MEMBERS, ARE THERE ANY ITEMS ON THIS CONSENT, PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA LIST THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO PULL FOR INDIVIDUAL? CONSIDER, UM, DISCUSSIONS.
NUMBER 14, DOES THE APPLICANT CONFER WITH DEFERRAL? YES.
STAFF HAS BEEN WORKING, UH, WITH THE APPLICANT ON THAT STILL.
AND I, I BELIEVE THAT, DID THE APPLICANT WANT TO ALSO BRING, WE HAVE A MEETING WITH THEM TOMORROW MORNING.
WE MEET WITH THEM TOMORROW MORNING.
WE'RE STILL WORKING, WORKING ON THAT.
DO YOU HAVE A YEAH, I WOULD LIKE TO, UH, PULL ITEM SIX.
ANY OTHER COMMISSION MEMBERS WANNA PULL AN ITEM? OKAY.
I DO HAVE, UH, I'LL FOR THE PUBLIC, I DO HAVE, UM, FOLKS SIGN UP FOR ITEM EIGHT, BOTH FOR AND AGAINST.
UM, IS, IS ANYONE ON ITEM EIGHT WOULD LIKE TO HEAR THAT DISCUSSED INDIVIDUALLY? BASED ON THAT INFORMATION? I'D LIKE TO PULL ITEM EIGHT FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION.
UH, UH, COMMISSIONER NUMBER EIGHT.
THOSE SPEAKERS WERE FOR A RECOMMENDATION.
I, WELL, I HAVE ONE SIGNUP OPPOSED, SO.
WE'LL, WE'LL PULL NUMBER EIGHT JUST IN, JUST TO BE SAFE, UM, COMMISSION MEMBERS, IS THERE A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE REVISED CONSENT AGENDA, UH, WHICH IS INCLUDING ITEM 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 9, 10, 13, AND 14? IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MO TO TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AND APPROVE THE ACTIONS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF? COSGROVE MAKES A MOTION TO APPROVE THE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE AFOREMENTIONED ITEMS. THANK YOU.
IS THERE A SECOND? COMMISSIONER SALVA SECONDS.
ARE THERE ANY OPPOSED? ARE THERE ANY ABSTENTIONS? OKAY.
THAT MOTION PASSES AND WE WILL NOW, UM, BEGIN WITH ITEM 6 1 1 2 9 WEST GARDNER STREET COMMISSIONERS FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
ITEM D SIX IS AT 1129 WEST GARDNER IN THE NOR HILL HISTORIC DISTRICT, AND THE APPLICANT PROPOSES TO CONSTRUCT A PARTIAL 750 SQUARE FOOT.
SECOND STORY ADDITION TO THE EXISTING CONTRIBUTING ONE STORY STRUCTURE.
ALL EXISTING WINDOWS AND EDGES OF THE HOME ARE TO REMAIN NEWLY ADDED WINDOWS ON THE ADDITION.
AND THE ONE ADDED ON THE REAR WILL BE ONE OVER ONE DOUBLE HUNG AND ONE CASEMENT.
IT WILL BE CONSTRUCTED WITH WOOD SIDING AND A, WITH A FIVE INCH REVEAL TO MATCH THE HOME.
AND THE ROOF WILL BE A FIVE OVER 12 PITCHED HIP AND GABLE ROOF WITH ASPHALT SHINGLES.
THE NOR HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION APPROVES OF THE PLANS AND STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL.
ARE THERE QUESTIONS OF STAFF FROM COMMISSION MEMBERS? UH, YES, I DO.
UH, QUESTIONS FOR THE COM UH, STAFF.
UM, ONE THING I'D LIKE TO CLARIFY, UM, AT, AT THIS, AND, AND PLEASE CHIME IN AS WELL, UH, MS. MICKELSON IS THAT WHEN WE HAVE A NEW
[00:35:01]
STRUCTURE COMING OVER AN ORIGINAL HOUSE, WHAT IS THE PERCENTAGE THAT IS ACTUALLY ALLOWED TO, TO COME OVER FOR ONE? UH, THAT'S QUESTION NUMBER ONE.UH, OR HOW MANY FEET, UH, FORWARD AS OPPOSED TO USING THE BACK WALL.
AND THE SECOND QUESTION I HAVE IS THAT, UH, WE HAVE ALWAYS OFTEN DEBATED AND DISCUSS ABOUT PRESERVATION OF HISTORIC MATERIALS.
WE TALK ABOUT SHIPLAP ON THE INSIDE.
UH, DOES THIS PRESERVATION OF HIS HISTORIC MATERIAL ALSO GO TO HISTORIC RAFTERS, HISTORIC CEILING JOISTS? BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY THEY'RE MAKING A SECONDARY DWELLING OR ON THE SECOND FLOOR AND THEY'RE TEARING ALL THAT OUT.
SO CAN YOU, UH, SHED SOME LIGHT ON THAT OR IS ONLY THE PRESERVATION OF VISIBLE MATERIAL AND NOT REALLY INTERIOR MATERIAL? THANK YOU.
SO THE, LET'S JUMP IN STAFF, IF I GET IT WRONG.
THE, UH, THE NOR HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION HAS NO FORMAL GUIDELINES.
SO THERE'S NO MEASURABLE STANDARD, THERE'S NO PERCENT REQUIREMENT TO THE REAR THAT THE ADDITION NEEDS TO BE.
SO THEN YOU'RE JUST WITH THE 11 CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL THAT ARE UP HERE ON THE BOARD.
AND SO WE LOOKED AT THIS AND CONSIDER, YOU KNOW, THE CONTEXT AREA.
BASICALLY YOU'RE BACK AT THE SUB I, LET'S CALL IT, I LIKE TO CALL 'EM THE SUBJECTIVE 11 CRITERIA.
AND, UM, THAT'S WHERE WE GOT WITH A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL.
WE ALSO TAKE INTO STRONG CONSIDERATION THE NOR HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION'S GUIDANCE, BECAUSE IN THIS EXAMPLE, AS YOU SEE ON PAGE 18 OF 21, THERE'S AN ELEMENT HERE WHERE THE REAR PART OF THAT HOUSE IS OVER A PORCH.
THAT IF WE HAD SEEN THAT IN, IN HOUSTON HEIGHTS WHERE WE HAVE TO MEASURE A FLORIDA AREA RATIO, WE, WE'VE BEEN ASKED TO CONSIDER THAT AS AS CONDITION SPACE, AS PART OF THE FLOOR CAL FAR CALCULATION.
BUT HERE WE'RE LOOKING AT THIS ELEVATION AND THE OTHER ELEVATIONS, AND THEY ALL ARE EXTERIOR ONLY.
WE, TO THE SECOND PART OF YOUR QUESTION, UH, YES, THE SHIPLAP BY ORDINANCE OF THE EXTERIOR WALLS IS REQUIRED TO BE PROTECTED.
AND THE, YOU'RE NOT TO TO REMOVE THAT.
BUT WHEN IT COMES TO HOW THAT STRUCTURE, I BELIEVE YOU'RE THINKING LIKE FOR, FOR EXAMPLE, POSSIBLY IF THE, UM, IF THE FLOOR, THE CEILING, THE CEILING JOISTS NEED TO BE REINFORCED OR, OR ADDED TO OR SOME OTHER WAY, THAT YOU'VE GOTTA CARRY THAT LOAD FOR THAT UPPER LEVEL AND THAT CHANGES THINGS.
WE, WE AREN'T REALLY LOOKING AT THAT.
IT'S JUST NOT, THE ACCORDANCE DOESN'T TAKE US THERE.
SO THAT'S WHERE WE JUST LOOK AT THIS AND LOOK AT THE PROJECT AS PROPOS AND CONSIDER IT IN THE CONTEXT AREA AND RECOMMEND AN APPROVAL.
A LOT OF TIMES ON THESE ADDITIONS, WE ASKED THEM TO MAKE THE DETAILING MORE SIMPLIFIED THAN THE ORIGINAL HOUSE.
SO I'M KIND OF TROUBLED BY THE BACK PORCH WITH THESE VERY ELABORATE COLUMN DETAILS.
AND I SEE THAT IT SAYS MATCH EXISTING, BUT I, I THINK THAT THAT DOESN'T REALLY KEEP IN THE SPIRIT OF WHAT WE'VE DONE IN THE PAST TO, TO HAVE THOSE, NORMALLY WE HAVE THEM JUST DO A POST OR SOMETHING AT THE, OF THE BACK OR THE ADDITION, AND THEN ALSO THE RAFTER TAILS ON THE SECOND FLOOR PART.
I THINK IT WOULD POSSIBLY LEAD PEOPLE TO BELIEVE THAT THIS IS PART OF THE ORIGINAL HOUSE WHEN IT, IT CLEARLY ISN'T.
I BELIE, YOU KNOW, THE, UM, TO THE FIRST POINT ABOUT THE REAR COLUMNS AND THE REAR ELEVATION IN GENERAL, I JUST CHECKED ON PAGE FIVE TO SEE THAT WE'RE, IT'S AN INTERIOR LOT AND A REAR ELEVATION.
SO IF, IF THEY HAD BUILT WHATEVER WE HAD APPROVED, EVEN IF THAT WAS DONE IN A WAY THAT, FOR THAT, THAT WAS, LET'S CALL IT BY YOUR EXAM MORE APPROPRIATE, THEY COULD ALTER THAT WITH NO C OF A WITH NO CONCERN, BUT IS, IS EXEMPT.
SO I THINK THAT'S WHY FOR US, THAT REALIZATION, I SAW THE DETAILING TOO.
IT JUST DIDN'T COME INTO PART OF OUR CONVERSATION BECAUSE IT'S FACING STRAIGHT BACK ON AN INTERIOR LOT.
THE, UM, THE OTHER CONCERN, I MEAN THE YOU OR IF YOU'RE REFERRING TO MAYBE HAVING BOX SOFFITS ON THE SECOND FLOOR, IS THAT WHAT YEAH, I SEE THOSE FRONT ELEVATION HAVING THE, UH, ON THAT LEFT SIDE SOME TAILS EXPOSED.
UM, IF THAT'S WHAT I MEAN, THAT'S A, I I WE WOULD THIS COMMISSION TO DECIDE IF WE ON, ON, ON A SECOND, ON ANY ADDITION OR A SECOND FLOOR EDITION, SHOULD THE ADDITION HAVE A, A DIFFERENT SOFFIT DETAILING? UH, CAN I ADD TO THE RESPONSE? UH, PLEASE.
[00:40:01]
NOT CLEARLY HEAR THAT I HEARD ABOUT SHIP LAB AND SHIP LAB, EVEN IF THEY HAD PRESERVED THE WALLS, THE, THE, THE RARE WALLS, THAT'S FINE.BUT I WAS MORE CONCERNED ABOUT, UH, THE CEILING JOISTS AND RAFTERS THAT WILL BE REMOVED, OBVIOUSLY TO MAKE WAVE OF THE SECOND FLOOR AND ALSO THE RAFTER TAILS THAT PROTRUDES OUT OF THE HOUSE, SIDES OF THE HOUSE ON BOTH SIDES THAT HAVE BEEN REMOVED NOW TO MAKE WAY FOR THAT SECOND STORY.
UH, AND I THINK, UH, AND ALSO TO DOVETAIL INTO WHAT COMMISSIONER COUCH JUST SAID, I WOULD'VE PREFERRED THAT IF THE RAFTER TAILS WERE PRESERVED ON THE ORIGINAL, BECAUSE THAT'S HOW THE LENGTH OF THE HOUSE WENT ALL THE WAY BACK AND THEN HAVE BOX MM-HMM
UH, SOFFITS, UH, ON THE SECOND FLOOR TO, TO INDICATE THAT THAT IS AN ADDITION THAT WAS PUT ON MUCH LATER THAN THE ORIGINAL HOUSE TO JUST DO IT LIKE THIS TO ME.
AND YOU'RE REMOVING ALL THESE HISTORIC MATERIALS, UH, AS A CONCERN FOR ME, UH, R TAILS OR NOT, YOU KNOW? MM-HMM
SO, UH, I, I, A COMMISSIONER, I, I SEE THAT IF, IF THE, IF THIS COMMISSION FEELS THAT THAT COULD BE A CONDITION FOR APPROVAL, I THINK THAT IT'S, UH, IT'S UP TO YOU.
BUT I, I UNDERSTAND THAT COMPLETELY, THAT THAT'S A CARPENTRY, UH, WORK THERE ON THE SIDE TO LEAVE THOSE ORIGINAL.
MR HAS A COMMENT, MR, PLEASE, PLEASE ADDRESS THE COMMISSION.
I WANNA POINT OUT, I'M A LITTLE BIT CONFUSED ABOUT THIS BECAUSE THE POINT THAT, UM, THAT FROM YEARS AGO, UH, MANY, THE C OF THE, UH, THE CITY HAD TURNED DOWN THE, THE C OF A IN ADDITION ON TOP OF IT.
'CAUSE IT HAD ENCROACHED BECAUSE, UH, BECAUSE OF CRITERIA NUMBER EIGHT WHERE IT SAYS PROPOSED, UH, ADDITION OR, UH, CHANGES MUST BE DONE IN, IN THE MANNER THAT, UH, THAT'S REMOVED IN THE FUTURE THAT WOULD, UH, UN IMPAIR, UH, THE FORM, UH, OF THE BUILDING.
SO THAT'S A, WE DID THAT LONG AGO.
WE'VE DENIED THAT IN THE PAST.
SO I DON'T KNOW UNDERSTAND WHY WE'RE, UH, WE'RE PROVING IT AT THIS TIME.
AND ROMAN, I'LL JUST SHARE, I GUESS THERE ARE A FEW OF US WHO HAVE BEEN ON THIS COMMISSION FOR A LONG TIME AS WELL.
AND, UM, UM, WELL, I APPRECIATE THE, THIS ADDITION IS ISRAEL ARE SMALL COMPARED TO ONES WE HAVE SEEN THAT COME BEFORE US.
THE, IN THE PAST WE'VE, THERE HAVE BEEN ACCOMMODATIONS TO ALLOW SECOND FLOOR EDITIONS ON TOP OF THEIR, THE ORIGINAL HISTORIC HOME, BUT AS I CAN RECALL, THEY'VE BEEN PUSHED BACK TO AT LEAST 75% BACK FROM THE FRONT, UM, WALL OF THE BUILDING.
SO WHATEVER HAPPENS TODAY, I JUST WANT TO MENTION THAT BECAUSE I WOULD, WHATEVER THE OUTCOME IS, I WOULDN'T WANNA SET A PRECEDENT.
THAT'S BEEN A LONGSTANDING RULE, ALTHOUGH, YOU KNOW, COMMISSIONS CHANGE AND STAFF CHANGES.
BUT I, I, I DO KNOW THAT WE HAVE ALLOWED, UM, SMALLER ADDITIONS TO BE BUILT ON TOP OF THE HOME IF THEY WERE NOT OVERLY LARGE, BUT THEY, BUT THEY WERE ASKED TO AT LEAST BE 75% OR, OR FURTHER BACK SO THAT THERE'S LESS OF AN IMPACT, I GUESS, FROM WHAT'S BEING DISCUSSED.
COULD ROMAN, COULD YOU REMIND US IS ISN'T THERE A SHALLOW PROOF WHERE YOU CAN DO AN SECOND FLOOR ADDITION IF IT MEETS CERTAIN CRITERIA? OR IS THAT ONLY FOR THE HEIGHTS? THERE IS A SHALL APPROVED, UH, AND IT'S, YOU CAN DO A SECOND FLOOR ADDITION AND IT ACTUALLY DOESN'T REQUIRE A PERCENTAGE BACK.
IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, IT JUST CAN'T EXCEED THE FOOTPRINT OF THE ORIGINAL HOUSE.
I THOUGHT IT WAS LIKE 50% OF THE, TO THE FRONT OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
IT HAS TO BE AT LEAST 50% BACK.
BUT YOU CAN'T BUILD BACK OR OUT SIDEWAYS, SO YOU HAVE TO BE ABOVE THE ORIGINAL FOOTPRINT.
AND IF YOU'RE 50% BACK, YOU WOULD NOT BE ELIGIBLE TO MAKE A REAR EDITION IN THE FUTURE OR COME BACK TO THE COMMISSION AT A LATER TIME.
SO IT'S, IT'S A, IT'S A ONE TIME DEAL.
I THINK IT WAS PART OF THE ORIGINAL LIKE OFFERINGS TO THE PUBLIC TO IN, TO BRING THE HISTORIC DISTRICTS INTO, INTO BEING, BUT THAT 50% IS FURTHER OR WOULD BE FURTHER FORWARD, BUT IT WOULD NOT ALLOW ANY ADDITION BEYOND THEIR REAR WALL AT ALL UNDER THE SHALLOW PROOF FOR THAT.
AND THERE ARE, THERE ARE OTHER SHALLOW PROVES AS WELL FOR A, A REAR EDITION AND ALSO A SIDE EDITION MM-HMM
UM, THIS, THIS DOESN'T FALL UNDER THAT CATEGORY THOUGH, RIGHT.
SINCE THIS IS OUT OF THE FOOTPRINT TO THE REAR MM-HMM
THEN IT, THIS COULD HAVE, THIS WOULD'VE BEEN A SHALLOW PROOF IF THEY HADN'T GONE PAST THAT BACK WALL.
SO WE WERE JUST BRINGING UP, I JUST WANT TO BRING UP THAT, UM, PARTIAL SECOND FLOOR ADDITION ONLY HAS SIX REQUIREMENTS UNDER THE SHALLOW PROOF.
IT'S CONSTRUCTED ON TOP OF A ONE STORY STRUCTURE DOES NOT EXTEND OUTSIDE THE FOOTPRINT OF THE EXISTING STRUCTURE IS SET BACK FROM THE FRONT WALL OF THE EXISTING STRUCTURE, AT LEAST HALF THE DISTANCE FROM THE FRONT
[00:45:01]
WALL OF THE EXISTING STRUCTURE AND THE FARTHEST POINT OF THE REAR OF THE EXISTING STRUCTURE.SO 50% BACK HAS A PLATE HEIGHT THAT DOES NOT EXCEED THE PLATE HEIGHT OF THE STORY BENEATH.
IT HAS A ROOF PITCH THAT IS LESS THAN OR EQUAL TO THE EXISTING STRUCTURE IS CONSTRUCTED WITHOUT THE REMOVAL OF ANY EXISTING, EXISTING EXTERIOR WALLS AND IS NOT CONSTRUCTED ON A BUILDING THAT HAS HAD AN ADDITION APPROVED UNDER THIS CHAPTER.
SO THAT'S WHERE YOU WOULD GET IT.
AND THEN OF COURSE THERE'S THE SIDE, THE SHALL PROVE SIDE EDITION, AND THEN THE, UH, SIDE APPROVED, UH, THE SHALL PROVE REAR EDITION.
BUT LET ME GO BACK FOR, FOR ONE COMMENT, COMMISSIONERS TWO, IT, IT WASN'T WITHOUT THOUGHT.
WE, WE, WE WERE AWARE OF, OF THE IDEA OF HOW FAR FORWARD, UH, WE COULD, WE COULD COME.
BUT ONE THING THAT IS KIND OF WE'RE AWARE OF FROM THE NOR HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS THAT, UH, THERE'S A DESIRE TO KEEP FOR PEOPLE TO KEEP THEIR BACKYARDS MORE, I DON'T KNOW, IT'S JUST SOMETHING WE GET FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
AND MY GUESS IS THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS THAT THEY WERE SUPPORTIVE.
AND THERE IS ACTUALLY SOMEONE HERE FROM THE NOR HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION TODAY, IF THEY WANT US TO SPEAK ON IT, BUT IT WAS PARTIALLY DRIVEN BY BY THAT.
SO, UM, I GUESS MAYBE THE SHALL PROVE DOESN'T APPLY THOUGH.
THAT'S NOT WHAT WE BROUGHT YOU, BECAUSE ONCE WE DON'T TAKE ONCE OUTTA SHALLOW PROOF, THEN YOU'RE BACK AT THE 11 CRITERIA THAT THAT COME UP.
I, I THINK THIS, THE DESIGN AND THE MASSING IS FINE.
I JUST DON'T AGREE WITH THE DETAILING.
THINK IT'S NICE TO SEE AN ADDITION THAT'S NOT LIKE THREE TIMES THE SIZE OF THE EXISTING HOUSE.
CAN I MAKE A, MAKE JUST A COMMENT? YEAH, YEAH.
SO, UM, YOUR COSGROVE, I HAVE LESS ISSUE WITH HOW FORWARD IT IS AND, AND THE SIZE IS FINE.
I I PROBABLY, MY BIGGEST ISSUE WITH IT IS THAT THE SECOND FLOOR ADDITION EXTENDS TO THE OUTER WALL OF THE FIRST FLOOR.
AND IT WOULD BE, IN MY OPINION, MORE PALATABLE IF IT WAS TUCKED IN AND THAT YOU, THE, THE WHOLE ORIGINAL BUNGALOW WAS INTACT.
AND I MEAN, I WOULD PROBABLY BE MORE INCLINED TO BE SUPPORTIVE IF IT WAS LIKE INSET TWO FEET, SAY PUNCHING THE ROOF RATHER THAN YES, THAN I THINK IT WOULD, IT WOULD MAKE IT, I MEAN IT WOULD JUST PRESERVE MORE OF THE ORIGINAL HOUSE, INCLUDING THE RAFTER TAILS.
AND I DON'T, I DON'T PARTICULARLY HAVE AN ISSUE IF THEY WANT EXPOSED RAFTER TAILS ON THE SECOND FLOOR.
BUT, UM, THAT WOULD BE MY SUGGESTION.
AND I, I WOULD ADD TO THAT, MR. CURRY, UM, IT'S A LITTLE SPECIOUS EXACTLY HOW THIS WOULD BE STRUCTURED IN ANY CASE.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT NOT REMOVING EXISTING MATERIAL BELOW THIS PROPOSED SECOND FLOOR EDITION, BUT I MEAN, HOW WOULD THAT REALLY BE DONE? I MEAN, TO PULL IT IN, AS MR. COSGROVE SUGGESTED, YOU'VE GOT STRUCTURAL ISSUES, IT SEEMS TO ME IT WOULD BE EASIER DEALT WITH, UH, ON THE INSIDE, ON THE INTERIOR SLIGHTLY THAN AT THE EXTERIOR WITHOUT HAVING TO REMOVE AND REINSTALL EXISTING MATERIAL OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
YEAH, I'VE LIKE, WE DID HAVE ALL SORTS OF BEAMS AND THINGS TO HOLD IT UP.
'CAUSE IT WOULD BE, IT'D BE SIMPLER JUST TO BEAR ON THE EXISTING WALLS THAT ALREADY HAVE THE PIERS UNDER THEM.
AND, AND OR ADD PIERS, BUT IN ANY CASE, LEAVE THE EXISTING, UH, ENVELOPE INTACT AND WORK WITHIN IT.
WHAT, WHAT, I GUESS I'LL ALSO SAY WHAT WE FOUND WHILE THAT MAKES, OR THAT THAT'S A, THAT SEEMS COMMON SENSICAL.
UH, WHAT WE LEARNED MANY YEARS AGO WAS BECAUSE OF THE FORCES AND THE ADDING COLUMNS AND POINT LOADS INTO, OR I GUESS NOT A POINT LOAD, BUT ADDING THAT MORE UNIFORM LOADING.
UM, OFTEN APPLICANTS WERE TEARING THE WALL DOWN, TAKING SIDING OFF, RECONSTRUCTING THE WALL.
AND SO PETE WOULD COME TO US ON A GREAT, A LOT.
SO THAT'S WHERE, UM, WE'VE, WE'VE TRIED TO MAKE SURE IF WE, IF WE DID BUILD ON THE SIDELINE THAT THEY DON'T TEAR OR WE, WE MAINTAIN HISTORIC FABRIC THAT'S THERE BECAUSE IT'S THE, THE WALLS, HISTORIC WALLS THAT WERE BUILT TYPICALLY CANNOT SUPPORT THE LOADS ABOVE THAT YOU ADD, YOU HAVE TO AUGMENT THEM WITH NEW STRUCTURE.
AND SO, UM, THAT'S KINDA HARD TO DO WHEN, SINCE WE'RE GIVING APPROVALS, YOU KNOW, FROM ON BEFOREHAND, AND THEN PEOPLE START DOING, THEY DEVIATE AND THEN WHEN, THEN WE LEARN ABOUT THE DEVIATION AFTER THE FACT.
SO IT'S, UM, I GUESS IT ALL COMES DOWN TO HOW GOOD YOUR CONTRACTOR IS AND HOW GOOD YOUR ENGINEERS ARE TO DESIGN A WEIGHT THAT YOU CAN DO THOSE THINGS WITHOUT LOSING THE FABRIC IN THE FIELD.
UH, WELL I THINK I, I HEAR MANY COMMENTS AND SINCE I STARTED THIS AND I PULLED THIS, UM, I JUST WANNA MAKE ONE MORE COMMENT TO STOP BEFORE THAT MAYBE, UH, I, I WOULD SUGGEST A PROPOSAL.
UH, HOW ABOUT OPEN PUBLIC COMMENT, JUST A SECOND THOUGH, FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING.
SO THE, UM, THE COMMENT TO ACTUALLY FOR ROMAN WAS THAT I, I POSSIBLY SEE THE REASON WHY THIS PERSON CAME SO FAR FORWARD BECAUSE THEY WANTED TO KEEP THE GARAGE APARTMENT IN THE, UH, THE GARAGE AT THE BACK.
[00:50:01]
UH, BUT THEN AGAIN, I'M EVALUATING THE HOUSE, NOT SO MUCH OF THE APARTMENT, AND NOT BECAUSE OF THE YARD, UH, BECAUSE ONCE WE SET THIS PANDORA OUT, IT'S NEVER GOING TO COME BACK IN, UH, IN, IN THE FUTURE.AND THAT'S NOR HILL, THAT IS A NEIGHBORHOOD PRETTY MUCH INTACT, UH, IN, IN, IN, UH, YOU KNOW, NEXT TO THE HEIGHTS RIGHT NOW.
UM, SO THAT'S JUST A COMMENT AND THEN I'LL MAKE THE PROPOSAL LATER AFTER THE PUBLIC COMMENT.
I'M AT THIS TIME I'M GONNA OPEN UP A PUBLIC HEARING.
I HAVE NO ONE SIGN UP TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM, BUT I UNDERSTAND THERE MAY BE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR, OR PERHAPS THE APPLICANT IS HERE.
BUT IF ANYONE WANTS TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM FOR THE PUBLIC, PLEASE ANNOUNCE YOURSELF AND ADDRESS THE COMMISSION.
UM, I'M A MEMBER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
UM, I JUST WANNA SAY THE HOMEOWNERS WORKED REALLY CLOSELY WITH US.
THEY, UM, THEY TOOK COMMENTS INTO CONSIDERATION, BROKE THE, THE UPPER STORY INTO ELEMENTS WE ASKED.
IT WAS ORIGINALLY KIND OF MORE BOXY AND THEY, THEY WERE, UM, REALLY RESPONSIVE TO, TO THAT ELEMENT AND ADDING OTHER ELEMENTS.
UM, AND AS FAR AS THE DETAILS, AND I KNOW AS A NEIGHBORHOOD WE KIND OF THINK THEY'RE A LITTLE MORE CHARMING.
UM, WE DIDN'T ASK FOR THEM, BUT I THINK, YOU KNOW, WE ALWAYS SUPPORT THOSE AS WELL.
EVEN, EVEN THOUGH I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, BUT I, I, THEY REALLY WORKED WITH US TO TRY TO, TO MINIMIZE IT.
AND WE REALLY DO THINK IT'S A MODERATE ADDITION.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE FROM THE PUBLIC EITHER IN THE MEETING, UH, ATTENDING THE MEETING OR ATTENDING VIRTUALLY THAT WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THIS ITEM? PLEASE ANNOUNCE YOURSELF IF SO.
I'M GONNA CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
AND IS THERE A MOTION? UH, YEP.
WE'LL PROPOSE, UH, A MOTION BASED ON WHAT WE'VE HEARD SO FAR.
UH, NUMBER ONE, UH, THE CONDITIONS, UH, TO PRESERVE THE ORIGINAL RAFTERS ON BOTH SIDES OF THE BUILDING.
UM, NUMBER TWO, TO MAKE THE BACK POST AS SIMPLE AS POSSIBLE AND NOT MIMIC THE ORIGINAL IN THE FRONT.
UH, NUMBER THREE IS TO PUT A BOX, UH, SOFFIT ON THE SECOND FLOOR.
UH, AND OH, I MAY HAVE TO SEE THIS POINT, UH, TO HAVE THE ADDITION MAYBE 70% BACK FROM THE FRONT.
I DON'T KNOW WHETHER THIS WILL TAKE HOW MUCH OFF THE CURRENT PROPOSAL RIGHT NOW.
I HAVE A MOTION, UH, IS THERE A SECOND TO THE MOTION THAT'S BEEN OFFERED? SO, MR. CHAIR? YES.
SO TO BE CLEAR, THIS IS NOT RECOMMENDING STAFF REC STAFF RECOMMENDATION, BUT NOT AN ARCHITECT, BUT IT SOUNDS TO ME LIKE YOU'RE SUBSTANTIALLY CHANGING THE DESIGN.
I WAS GONNA, IS THE OWNER HERE SUGGEST MAYBE WE DEFER IT WITH THOSE POINTS AS WHAT THE COMMISSION IS INTERESTED IN SEEING? SOUNDS LIKE A LOT TO ME AS A PERSON BECAUSE I DON'T THINK I CAN VISUALIZE ALL THAT IN AND MAKE A RATIONAL DECISION ON, ON, SO EITHER THE MOTION'S WITHDRAWN OR YOU LOOK FOR A SECOND.
WELL, IF THERE'S NO SECOND, THERE'S NO MOTION.
SO, UM, YEAH, AND I KIND OF AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER, UH, OKAY.
WITH JOINT GRO TOO, I CAN PULL IT BACK AND SAY, UH, LET'S, SINCE THERE ARE NET A MOTION NUMBER OF FIVE POINTS, I WITHDRAW MY MOTION AND, UH, PRESENT ANOTHER ONE TO DEFER THE PROJECT.
IS THERE A SECOND POINTS IN MIND FOR THE STAFF? I'LL SECOND THE DEFERRAL.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? DISCUSSION? YEP.
SO ONE, I DON'T THINK WE HAVE PURVIEW OVER THE BACK OF THE HOUSE ON THE INTERIOR LOT.
SO TELLING THEM TO REDESIGN THEIR BACK PORCH SEEMS NOT REALLY WHAT WE'RE CHARGED WITH.
AND THEN I'M CONFUSED JUST FOR THE FUTURE AND TODAY'S DISCUSSION.
IF THIS THING COMES BACK IN 30 DAYS, HOW DOES ANYONE PRESERVE RAFTERS AND DO AN ADDITION UNLESS WE ONLY NOW ALLOW ADDITIONS ON THE BACK OF A HOUSE.
AND SO THEN WE'RE TAKING OFF HISTORICAL MATERIALS, WHICH WOULD BE THE SIDING ON THE BACK OF THE HOUSE AND BUILDING STRAIGHT UP, AND THAT'S THE ONLY ADDITIONS THAT WE'RE GOING TO ALLOW IN THIS COMMISSION.
SO I'M, UH, I LITERALLY AM CONFUSED HOW YOU PRESERVE RAFTERS AND DO AN ADDITION.
UH, NO, THE, THE ORIGINAL INTENT WAS ACTUALLY NOT TO BILL OVER THE ORIGINAL HOUSE.
SO WITH THAT, I HEAR THE NUMEROUS POINTS FROM THE COMMISSIONERS THEMSELVES THAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT MAYBE AT 75% OR, OR OF, SO YOU MOST PROBABLY WILL TAKE AWAY THE HIP OF THE BACK OF THE HOUSE AND, AND NOT, AND TAKE AWAY THE ORIGINAL MATERIALS, UH, FROM THERE.
BUT ON THE ON, ON THE OTHER HAND,
[00:55:01]
THEY MUST FIND A WAY THE, THEIR, THE, UH, CARPENTERS FIND A WAY TO PRESERVE ALL THE RTA TAILS THAT STICK OUT BECAUSE WE WANT TO PRESERVE THE ORIGINAL RTA TAILS OF THE ENTIRE HOUSE.SO, UH, I'M SILENT ON PRESERVING RAFTERS ON THE INTERIOR.
I'M NOT GONNA SAY ANYTHING FOR THIS PARTICULAR HOUSE, BUT I THINK WE HAVE HEARD NUMEROUS COMMISSIONERS SAY THAT WE SHOULD PRESERVE THE, THE ORIGINAL EXTERIOR ARCHITECTURE OF THE RAFTERS OF THE ORIGINAL HOUSE.
SO WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT THE, THE ADDITIONS BILL IN THE BACK OF THE HOUSE, THE ONLY NUMBER I HEARD WAS 50%.
SO I DON'T QUITE UNDERSTAND WHERE THAT NUMBER COMES FROM.
I, I GUESS I DON'T THINK WE CAN LIKE TELL THEM EXACTLY WHAT THEY CAN DO PERCENTAGE WISE OR MATERIAL WISE ON THE BACK OF THE HOUSE.
I THINK THAT ALL WE'RE DOING IS PROVIDING FEEDBACK THAT THERE WAS SOME CONCERN ABOUT THE ORNAMENTATION OF THE COLUMNS IN THE BACK.
THERE'S SOME CONCERN ABOUT THE SECOND FLOOR EXTENDING WALL TO WALL AND THAT, YOU KNOW, MAYBE SETTING IT IN WOULD PRESERVE MORE OF THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE.
I, I, I DON'T THINK THE, I MEAN, I THINK THAT WE JUST HAVE CONCERNS AND I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD BE TRYING TO OUTLINE EXACTLY WHAT WE NEED TO SEE WHEN IT COMES BACK.
THEY SHOULD TAKE OUR FEEDBACK, THINK ABOUT THE DESIGN AND REPRESENT WELL, I HATE TO TO DO THAT.
I DON'T LIKE IT COME BACK, SHOW ME SOMETHING THAT I DO LIKE.
AND SO I FEEL LIKE WE SHOULD HAVE SOME CONCRETE THINGS TO TELL THEM BECAUSE I'VE GOTTEN THIS KIND OF PROCESS BEFORE AND IT'S DEEPLY FRUSTRATING WHEN I'M ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE HORSESHOE.
AND SO IF WE, IF WE DEFER IT, I THINK WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO TELL THEM A COUPLE CONCRETE THINGS WE'D LIKE THEM TO LOOK AT.
MY, MY COMMENT EARLIER THOUGH WAS JUST HISTORICALLY ON THIS COMMISSION, SINCE THE TIME I'VE BEEN ON THE COMMISSION, THE RECOMMENDATION HAS BEEN TO START TWO STORY REAR ADDITIONS AT THE REAR WALL OF THE ONE STORY HOME IN IN FRONT.
THAT'S BEEN THEIR RECOMMENDATION.
THAT IS THE EASIEST WAY TO BE CLOSER TO THE ORDINANCE AND WHAT IT STANDS FOR.
THE COMMISSION HAS ALLOWED ADDITIONS, HOWEVER, TO BE ON TOP OF THE STRUCTURE, BUT WHEN THEY, UH, BUILT BACK BEHIND THE REAR WALL, HISTORICALLY, THE COMMISSION HAS MAINTAINED A 75% BACK, UH, CONCEPT.
AND IT ALL, IT'S ALL SUBJECTIVE TO THE ACTUAL PROJECT.
AND THIS COMMISSION'S NOT SUBJECT TO A NUMBER.
IT'S, IT'S, IT'S TO, IT'S THE, IT'S THE MAJORITY OF THIS COMMISSION TO DETERMINE ON A GIVEN PROJECT WHAT THEY, THEIR FEELING IS SO THERE.
BUT, BUT THAT IS, THAT IS THE, I GUESS THAT'S WHEN COMMISSIONER STAVO WAS TALKING, HE WAS TALKING ABOUT JUST BUILDING IT AT THE REAR LINE THAT IS RECOMMENDED, BUT IT, THAT'S NOT BEEN REQUIRED BY THIS COMMISSION HISTORICALLY.
BUT THERE HAS BEEN, UM, THE ONLY REASON I'M SAYING THIS IS BECAUSE IN THE OLD DAYS, 10 YEARS AGO, THERE WERE A LOT OF MAMMOTH EDITIONS, THREE TIMES AS BIG AS A HOUSE, AND THEY WERE PROPOSED 50% BACK FROM THE FRONT.
UM, WE WENT ON TRAINING AND WE WENT ON SOME TOURS IN THE HEIGHTS.
WE LOOKED AT SOME OF THESE PROJECTS AND THE COMMISSION MEMBERS OF THE TIME LOOKED AT THOSE DECISIONS AND SAID, I THINK WE NEED TO PUSH THOSE ADDITIONS BACK SLIGHTLY TO AT LEAST 75%.
AND AGAIN, I KNOW WE'RE GONNA BE DOING OTHER TRAINING VERY SOON, WE'RE GONNA TAKE A TOUR IN THE DIFFERENT AREAS AND WE'RE GONNA BE LOOKING AT THINGS SO THAT YOU ALL CAN MAKE YOUR OWN DETERMINATIONS ABOUT THESE MATTERS.
BUT THAT'S JUST HISTORIC INFORMATION FOR REFERENCE.
AND THAT'S, IT'S NOT WRITTEN, IT'S, BUT IT'S, IT CAME FROM GOING ON TOURS, LOOKING AT THE RESULTS OF OUR DECISIONS.
AND, AND THAT WAS A DISCUSSION POINT WE'VE HAD.
UM, THAT SAID, I'VE GOT, I'VE GOT A, I'VE GOT A MOTION IN AND A SECOND TO DEFER AND I THINK WE HAVE PROVIDED A LOT OF FEEDBACK, BUT I'M, I'M NOT SURE IF IT WAS CLEAR AS MINE.
SO IT, MY MAIN CONCERN IS A DUE PROCESS.
ONE, THE APPLICANT IS NOT HERE, THEIR ARCHITECT IS NOT HERE.
WE DON'T HAVE, WE DON'T HAVE ADOPTED STANDARDS YET.
I KNOW WE'RE IN THE PROCESS OF LOOKING AT THOSE, BUT, SO THAT'S MY CONCERNS THAT THEY HAVEN'T HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO ASK QUESTIONS OR DISCUSS THIS WITH YOU.
SO I, I WOULD RECOMMEND DEFERRAL.
WITH THAT, IS THERE, UM, I THINK THE MOTION IS DEFERRAL, RIGHT? WELL, THAT'S THE MOTION, BUT I, IF THERE'S NO FURTHER DISCUSSION, I'LL CALL THE VOTE.
ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION TO DEFER.
ARE THERE ANY OPPOSED TO THE MOTION? MCNEIL? OKAY.
ARE THERE ANY ABSTENTIONS? OKAY, THAT MOTION IS DEFERRED AND WE WILL NOW MOVE.
UM, TO MS. MICKELSON'S, UH, POINT ABOUT THE PROCESS.
I JUST WANTED TO MENTION THE INTERMEDIATE,
[01:00:01]
UH, OPTION OF, UH, STAFFS CHOOSING TO HAVE THE APPLICANT INFORMALLY, I THINK IS CORRECT.REVIEW THE PROJECT WITH SOME OF THE COMMISSION BEFORE THE NEXT.
YEAH, I THINK ABSOLUTELY STAFF CAN MEETING AND THAT MIGHT BE A WAY TO DISCUSS WHAT'S BEEN PRESENTED HERE.
IF THEY DON'T, IF THEY HAVEN'T WATCHED OR DON'T SEE IT, BUT IT'S, IT, NO, I THINK ABSOLUTELY THEY CAN GIVE THEM THAT FEEDBACK.
OKAY, WE'RE MOVING ON NOW TO ITEM 8 9 1 5 KEY STREET.
GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIRPERSON AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.
THIS IS STAFF PERSON CHARLES SADLER.
I SUBMIT FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
ITEM D 8 915 KEY STREET IN NOR HILL HISTORIC DISTRICT.
THE PROPOSAL IS AN ALTERATION.
IN ADDITION, THE ALTERATIONS TO THE HISTORIC STRUCTURE ARE REMOVE DAMAGE FRONT COVERED ENTRYWAY AND REPLACED WITH NEW WOOD PORCH, INCLUDING RAILINGS, STEPS AND HANDRAILS.
REMOVE OLD VINYL SIDING EXPOSING ONE 17 LAP SIDING, RESTORE AND REPLACE WITH ONE 17 LAP WOOD SIDING, REMOVAL OF TWO WINDOWS FROM EAST ELEVATION.
THIS IS A NON-ORIGINAL PREVIOUS ADDITION REPAIR AND REROOF WITH COMPOSITION.
SHINGLES REPLACE EXISTING FRONT DOOR WITH CRAFTSMEN LIKE DOOR, WHICH YOU CAN SEE ON PAGE 12 FOR THE NEW ADDITION.
ADDITION OF 170 SQUARE FEET AT THE REAR SIDED AND TRIMMED WITH SMOOTH CEMENTITIOUS SIDING REMOVED TWO NON-ORIGINAL WINDOWS FROM THE REAR OF WEST ELEVATION, WHICH YOU CAN SEE ON PAGE 14, SINGLE HUNG, ONE OVER ONE INSET AND RECESSED VINYL WINDOW.
THAT'S A SINGLE WINDOW ON THE REAR ELEVATION.
NEW DOOR ON RIGHT ELEVATION OF ADDITION TOWARD REAR OF PRO REAR OF PROPERTY.
NEW ROOF OF COMPOSITION SHINGLES STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL OF COA SINCE THE OWNERS DID NOT SEEK A COA IN ADVANCE.
THEY DID THE WORK WITHOUT A COA, NOT REALIZING IT WAS A HISTORIC DISTRICT.
SO DENIAL OF COA ISSUANCE OF COR WITH THESE CONDITIONS.
WORK WITH, WORK WITH STAFF ON FINAL DESIGN OF FRONT PORCH TO BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE CONTEXT AREA.
INSET AND RECESS, ALL WINDOWS WINDOW TRIM TO MATCH CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES.
INSTALL ONE 17 SMOOTH LAP SIDING, WORK WITH STAFF ON FINAL APPROVAL OF FRONT DOOR.
I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF FROM COMMISSION MEMBERS ON THIS ITEM? COMMISSIONER MCNEIL.
SO YOU SAY THEY DID THE WORK, SO YOU'RE DENYING THE COA IS THIS, THE DEMOLITION WORK ON THE EXTERIOR THAT WE SEE FROM THE, THESE PHOTOS WITH THE BLACK FELT PAPER IN PLACE.
THOSE ARE THE MOST CURRENT PHOTOS.
UH, THEY HAVEN'T BUILT THE NEW ONE YET, CORRECT? RIGHT.
THEY WERE RED TAGGED FOR WORKING WITHOUT A COA, SO IT'S BEEN JUST SITTING HALF, HALF TAKEN APART.
DO WE, ROMAN, DO YOU HAVE A, A COMMENT TO MAKE AS WELL? OH, SURE.
TO COMMISSIONER MCNEIL'S POINT THAT THE BLACK TAR PAPER WAS, IT WAS UNDERNEATH THE VINYL JUST SO YOU, THEY DIDN'T GET, THEY JUST, ALL THEY DID WAS REMOVE, WHICH IS SOMETIMES A GOOD THING.
REMOVING THE YEAH, NO, IT'S GOOD.
THEY JUST DID THE DEMOLITION WORK.
THEY HAVEN'T STARTED ANY NEW WORK, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE REMOVAL OF THE PORTICO, WHICH WAS MORE SUBSTANTIAL.
THAT WAS THERE NOT, BUT THE PORT NOT ORIGINAL.
THE BORDER IS NOT, ALSO NOT ORIGINAL TO THE HOME.
IT'S FROM THE SEVENTIES, I THINK.
AND THE, THE APPLICANTS HAVE BEEN VERY, UH, AGREEABLE IN WORKING WITH ME AND COMMUNICATING COMMISSIONER JACKSON.
I'M JUST WONDERING WHY IT'S WAS LISTED AS NON-CONTRIBUTING
UH, IT'S FROM THE 19, IT'S 1930 AND YEAH.
WHAT'S THE, DO YOU KNOW THE DATES OFFHAND FOR NOR HILL? UH, I'M NOT SURE.
THE, SEEMS LIKE IT WOULD INCLUDE 1930.
IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN CONTRIBUTING
THAT'S WHEN THE PORTICO THAT'S WAS PUT ONTO.
ARE THERE OTHER QUESTIONS OF STAFF FROM COMMISSION MEMBERS BEFORE I OPEN UP THE, UH, PUBLIC HEARING? I GUESS I JUST HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THE FRONT PORCH.
'CAUSE THAT PICTURE FROM 1978, THAT PORCH LOOKS LIKE SOMETHING THAT COULD HAVE BEEN BUILT IN THE THIRTIES TO ME.
AND SO I DON'T KNOW IF I FEEL TOTALLY COMFORTABLE
[01:05:01]
WITH THE WAY THE PORCH THAT THEY'RE SHOWING NOW, ESPECIALLY THE FACT THAT THEY'RE PUTTING RAPTOR TAILS ON IT.WHEN I DON'T SEE ANY RAPTOR CHAIRS ON THIS HOUSE.
I THINK THAT, AS I RECALL, THERE WAS A, A SAND BOARD OR THERE, THERE, THERE WAS INFORMATION IN THE PACKET THAT SHOWED THAT THAT PORCH WAS NOT ORIGINAL.
SO THE, THE FRONT ELEVATION, THE, THE RIGHT HAND SIDE WAS A PORCH, UH, WAS AN INSET PORCH THAT'S BEEN FILLED IN.
AND THAT PORTICO IS FROM 1977 WHEN IT WAS BUILT.
SO THE, THE APPLICANTS ARE PROPOSING A COVERED PORCH, WHICH WOULD BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE, WITH THAT CONTEXT AREA.
AND WE'VE MADE RECOMMENDATIONS, WHICH TO WORK WITH THEM, TO HAVE TAPERED COLUMNS AND, UH, HAVE DETAILS THAT ARE COMPATIBLE, EVEN THOUGH THE ORIGINAL HOUSE, THAT ORIGINAL HOUSE DID NOT HAVE A PORCH.
AND I AGREE THAT THAT PORTICO PORCH LOOKS VERY APPROPRIATE, BUT IT IS NOT IT, BUT IT'S NEW FROM, IT STATES FROM 1978.
SO THAT'S, THAT'S, THAT'S THE REASON I BELIEVE STAFF HAS BEEN SUPPORTIVE OF THE APPLICANT TO REVISE THE PORCH IN THAT REGARD.
SO WHAT DOCUMENTATION IS THERE THAT IS FROM 1970? I'M JUST CURIOUS.
THE, THE, SOME OF THE SAN SOME OF THE BLA DOCUMENTS, WHICH WOULD BE PAGE SEVEN.
SO WE HAVE THE SANBORN MAP, THEN WE HAVE 1936, WHICH IS THAT, UH, GRAPH PAPER DRAWING, THE 1968, NO FRONT PORCH.
THEN 1978 THERE IS A FRONT PORCH.
AND THAT DETAIL, 1977 THAT THERE WAS WORK DONE.
SO, AND THERE WAS, THERE WAS ANOTHER DOCUMENT, WHICH I'M NOT SURE OF IS INCLUDED, WHICH, WHICH SHOWED THAT THE, THAT IT WAS DONE IN 1977, LIKE RIGHT BEFORE THIS 1978 DOCUMENT QUESTION.
IF THIS IS A NON-CONTRIBUTING HOUSE AND WHAT THEY'RE WANTING TO PUT ON, IT LOOKS LIKE IT FITS WITH IT AND IT COULD HAVE BEEN CONTRIBUTING.
WHAT'S THE PROBLEM? UH, THE, THE PORCH AS IT'S DRAWN? UH, I THINK STAFF IS SUPPORTIVE OF THE APPLICATION, RIGHT? OF THE, OF THE NEW PORCH, THE NEW PORCH.
WE'RE SUGGESTING SOME MINOR MODIFICATIONS.
SO IT WOULD TAPER COLUMNS, UH, SOME MINOR DETAIL CHANGES THAT WOULD MAKE IT A LITTLE MORE COMPATIBLE WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
BUT USUALLY WHEN WE DO NEW CONSTRUCTION LIKE THIS, WE TELL THEM TO MAKE IT SO IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE IT'S BUILT IN 1920.
SO WHY ARE WE DOING THAT IN THIS CASE? UH, GROMAN OR YASMIN, WOULD YOU LIKE TO COMMENT ON THAT?
I HAVE A LITTLE ISSUE WITH JUST TELLING THEM WHAT SIDING THEY CAN USE.
I MEAN, LIKE, I, I, I THINK WHAT'S DRAWN IN THE DRAWING, JUST A PLAIN OLD PORCH, SINCE WE DON'T KNOW THERE WASN'T A PORCH THERE BEFORE, WE, I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD TRY TO MAKE IT LOOK LIKE IT'S 1920.
WELL, SO, UM, THE, HANG ON, CAN I, CAN I INTERRUPT HERE? SO, YEAH, UH, I'M GETTING CONFUSED.
ULTIMATELY, IS THERE A TYPO ABOUT IT BEING NON-CONTRIBUTING OR THIS IS REALLY A NON-CONTRIBUTING 1930 STRUCTURE? THAT'S CORRECT.
WELL, THAT'S WHAT I WAS ASKING.
I MEAN, I THINK IT, IT SOUNDS, IT LOOKS LIKE IT GOT OVERLOOKED THERE.
THERE ARE A FEW IN THE, IN HOUSTON HEIGHTS THAT ARE NON-CONTRIBUTING, THAT WERE BUILT IN THE TWENTIES THAT UNDERWENT LIKE SUBSTANTIAL ALTERATIONS, MAYBE IN THE SIXTIES OR SEVENTIES.
AND THEY WERE JUST CLASSIFIED THAT WAY WHEN THE ORIGINAL INVENTORY, AND MY GUESS IS THIS DOESN'T CONFORM WITH THE, THE MAJORITY OF HOMES, AND IT WAS JUST EXCLUDED.
I MEAN, MAYBE IF WE WERE DOING THE SURVEY TODAY, IT WOULD BE A LITTLE DIFFERENT, BUT THAT WAS THE TIME.
BUT I MEAN, BUT, BUT THE COMMENT ABOUT THE PORCH COLUMNS IS NOT RELATED TO THAT.
IT, IT'S MORE ABOUT SINCE IT NEVER WAS THERE AS, AS, AS APPLICANT PROPOSED IT, UH, MY MY UNDERSTANDING IS COMMISSIONER COUCH WOULD PREFER TO SEE THE MORE SIMPLE PORCH COLUMNS AS THE APPLICANT PROPOSED THAN THE, THAN THE C FFR RECOMMENDATION.
THAT, THAT'S ALL THE ONLY THING I'M, I'M HEARING IN THE, IN THE DISCUSSION THAT'S TAKING PLACE.
BUT I DO HAVE PEOPLE SIGN UP TO SPEAK AND AT LEAST THREE.
SO, UM, SO LET'S, IF THERE, WE CAN RESUME OUR CONVERSATIONS AFTER PUBLIC HEARING.
I'M GONNA OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.
THE FIRST IS THE APPLICANT, UH, MIKE MCGEE, IF YOU COULD, IF YOU COULD RESTATE YOUR NAME AND, AND PLEASE ADDRESS THE COMMISSION.
SO I'VE BEEN HEARING ABOUT, UH, NON-CONTRIBUTING.
CAN YOU ALL EXPLAIN IT TO ME WHAT THAT ACTUALLY IS? IT MEANS, WELL, I'VE NEVER GOT A GOOD ANSWER.
WELL, WE'LL LET, WE'LL, I'LL TELL DEFER TO ROMAN, BUT
[01:10:01]
HE, HE'S OUR, HE'S OUR GUIDE.I, WE'RE, WE'RE LAUGHING, BUT IT'S, I KNOW IT'S A SERIOUS QUESTION AND IT'S A GOOD ONE.
YEAH, IT'S A GOOD PLACE TO START WITH THIS.
WELL, I DON'T, AND IT'S A LITTLE BIT OUTTA ORDER I'M SURE TO ANSWER A QUESTION, BUT I'LL JUST GO AHEAD AND SPEAK TO IT.
THE CONTRIBUTING AND NON-CONTRIBUTING, WHEN THE HISTORIC DISTRICTS ARE CREATED, THEY'RE, THE CONSIDERATION IS GIVEN TO WHEN THE HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF THAT NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO, UH, WHEN THE DISTRICT IS SORT OF INVENTORIED EVERY PROPERTY, AND IF THE NEIGHBORHOOD WAS DEVELOPED IN THE CASE HERE OF PROBABLY BETWEEN 1920 AND OR 1910 AND 1930 OR 40, THEN THE HOUSES OR BUILDINGS THAT HAVE THE ARCHITECTURAL INTEGRITY OF THAT DEVELOPMENT PERIOD ARE THE ONES THAT GET LABELED CONTRIBUTING.
NOW, HOUSTON IS A LITTLE, HAS A LITTLE ODD THING THAT WHEN THIS WAS DONE, SOME BUILDINGS WERE LABELED, POTENTIALLY CONTRIBUTING.
NOW THE CITY NEEDED TO AMEND ITS ORDINANCE AND FOR PROCEDURAL REASONS, CHOSE TO CHANGE, POTENTIALLY CONTRIBUTING BUILDINGS INTO CONTRIBUTING BUILDINGS.
BUT THIS BUILDING, AND IT'S MOST EVIDENT, IF WE COULD GO TO PAGE, UM, TO THE PHOTOGRAPHS ON PAGE FIVE OF 23, WHERE YOU CAN SEE THAT WITH ITS VINYL SIDING AND THE STORM WINDOWS ON IT, THAT I WOULD SUSPECT THAT WHAT HAPPENED IS PEOPLE DETERMINED THAT THE AL, THAT THE BUILDING WAS SO SIGNIFICANTLY ALTERED THAT IT NO LONGER REPRESENTED THAT IMPORTANT PERIOD OF DEV, THAT SIGNIFICANT PERIOD OF DEVELOPMENT.
SO HE GOT LABELED NON-CONTRIBUTING, AND THAT'S MORE EVIDENT AGAIN, IF WE COULD GO TO PAGE FIVE OF 23, UM, AT THE TOP PHOTO AND KIND OF ZOOM IN.
THE ADDITION TO THE RIGHT, WHICH WAS WHERE THE PORCH ORIGINALLY WAS, WAS FILLED IN.
BUT THE, IN THIS PHOTO HERE, WHAT IT, IT LOOKS LIKE IT DOESN'T EVEN HAVE ORIGINAL WINDOWS, BUT IN FACT IT DOES, IT HAS STORM WINDOWS ON TOP OF THE ORIGINAL WINDOWS.
AND THEN THE TRIM WAS COVERED UP, UH, BY THE VINYL.
SO I COULD SEE WHERE THE PEOPLE DOING THE INVENTORYING SAID NON-CONTRIBUTING TOO, TOO MUCH WORK.
BUT ACTUALLY YOU, YOU MADE IT MORE OBVIOUS THAT IT SHOULD BE CONTRIBUTING.
BECAUSE ONCE WE LOOKED UNDERNEATH AND SEE, YOU KNOW, ALL OF THE ORIGINAL SIDING OF THE ORIGINAL PORTION OF THE HOUSE IS INTACT, ALL THE ORIGINAL WINDOWS ON THE ORIGINAL PORTION OF THE HOUSE, AT LEAST THE ONES I COULD SEE FOR THE FRONT WERE THERE AND INTACT.
WE REALIZED, HEY, THIS IS THE HOUSE THAT BY THE WORK YOU'RE ABOUT TO DO IS GONNA BE CLEARLY, UH, A HOUSE THAT LOOKS WITHIN THE CONTEXT AREA TO THE SIZE OF THE PORCH.
AND IT'S ACTUALLY YOUR TURN TO SPEAK.
AND THE REASON WE RECOMMENDED APPROVAL, THE CONTEXT AREA SPEAKS REAL CLEARLY THAT MANY OF THE HOMES, UH, CHARLES KNOWS THE NUMBERS, BUT ON THE BLOCK, UH, IN THE CONTRIBUTING CONTEXT AREA OR THE CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES IN THE CONTEXT AREA, HAVE PORCHES ABOUT OF THE SIZE THAT'S BEING PROPOSED.
SO, UM, BEING A NON-CONTRIBUTING BUILDING AND PUTTING IT BACK, I I, WE, WE, WE LIKE THE 1978 PORCH AS WELL.
AND MAYBE IT'S NOT 78, MAYBE IT'S 76 OR 75, I MEAN, WHENEVER THE HCA WENT BY AND CHANGED THINGS.
BUT IT, IT DOES, IT IS A NICE PORCH, IT LOOKS LIKE NOR HILL.
UM, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, AS I ALWAYS TELL STAFF, AND WHAT WE, WHAT I TRY TO DO IS WHEN WE'RE AT, WHEN WE'RE 50 50 AS STAFF, WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT THE CRITERIA AND IT'S 50 50, I'M, YOU KNOW, PREFERENCE IS TO DEFER TO THE APPLICANT.
AND IF THAT SUPPORTS THEY WANNA PUT ON AND IT FITS AND WE CAN MAKE THE ARGUMENT FOR IT.
THAT'S, THAT'S, THAT'S THE WAY I'VE AND, UH, SHOOT ME DOWN FOR IT.
AND I'LL JUST SAY MAKE IT SHORT, THAT IF, IF IT'S NOT CONTRIBUTING, WE HAVE A LITTLE BIT MORE DEFERENCE AND LEEWAY WHEN WE'RE MAKING THESE DECISIONS.
WE THINK YOUR HOUSE PROBABLY SHOULD BE CONTRIBUTING, BUT WE'RE STILL GONNA GIVE YOU A LOT OF DEFERENCE IN LEEWAY.
I'M, I'M CERTAIN, UM, THERE'S A LOT OF SUPPORT.
I'M, I'M HEARING FOR YOUR APPLICATION, BUT THIS, THIS IS YOUR OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF YOUR, WHAT YOU PROPOSED TO, TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF YOUR PROJECT.
SO WHEN I DID THE, UH, APPLICATION, I, I WAS TOLD I, I HAD TO KEEP THE, THE FIN TRIM SIDING AND THE ORIGINAL WINDOWS, BUT THERE WERE HOUSES ON MY BLOCK WITH BRAND NEW SIDING, BRAND NEW WINDOWS.
JUST CURIOUS, HOW DID THEY GET THAT? AND I, I'M HELD TO THESE RESTRAINTS BEING NOT CONTRIBUTING.
I, I, I STILL COULD NEVER GET THAT ANSWER, BUT I'M, I, I WANT TO MAKE THIS HOUSE AS SURE PRETTY AS I CAN, AS STICKLY TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
BUT ON THE OTHER HAND, I WAS LUCKY IT WOULD BE EFFICIENT AND MATCH MY NEIGHBORS, UH, 9 31 BRAND NEW SIDING, BRAND NEW WINDOWS NINE 20, OUR STREET BRAND NEW SIDING, BRAND NEW WINDOWS, AND THEY'RE HISTORICALLY CONTRIBUTING.
AND SO HOW DO I GET THERE? I CAN'T SPEAK TO THOSE PROJECTS, PER SE 'CAUSE WE'RE NOT IN FRONT OF US.
BUT WHAT I CAN SAY IS THAT WHAT ALL PROJECTS THAT COME BEFORE THE COMMISSION HAS TO DO WITH THE CONDITION.
THE SIDING IS IN THE FACT THAT YOU DON'T HAVE SIDING
[01:15:01]
ON YOUR, YOUR, YOUR SIDING'S NOT THERE THOUGH, RIGHT? RIGHT.THE SIDING ON THE, IT'S, THEY'RE ON THE LEFT SIDE.
SO, SO IT, IT HAS TO DO WITH THE MATERIAL, WHAT SHAPE THE MATERIAL IS IN, WHETHER IT'S REPAIRABLE VERSUS IT'S NON-REPAIRABLE.
IF IT, IF, IF NONE OF THE SIDING IS REPAIRABLE, IT'S, IT, EVERYTHING'S A TOTAL LOSS, ALL WINDS A TOTAL LOSS, THEN THE COMMISSION CAN GRANT NEW ONE AS A NEW SIDING.
SO IT HAS THAT, THAT'S A DIFFERENT PART OF THE CRITERIA WE LOOK AT.
THERE ARE, THERE ARE MANY DIFFERENT ELEMENTS, BUT, UM, NO, I'M MORE THAN HAPPY TO KEEP THE AESTHETICS.
I WANT TO MAINTAIN THE AESTHETICS FOR SURE.
HI, AMANDA REYNOLDS FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
UH, WE REVIEWED, UM, THE SUBMISSION AROUND EARLY SEPTEMBER.
UM, WE SENT BACK, UH, SEPTEMBER 5TH AN EMAIL TO THE HOMEOWNER.
UM, OUR FIRST QUESTION WAS ON THE FRONT PORCH.
UM, IT'S NOT THAT WE HAVE AN ISSUE WITH THE SCALE, BUT, UM, WHAT WE ASKED WAS, IS THERE ANY EVIDENCE THAT THIS WAS HISTORICALLY THERE PER THE SANDBORN MAPS, UM, OLD COLUMN FOOTING SOMETHING? UM, IT'S NOT SO MUCH THE SCALE, BUT WE TYPICALLY ARE PRETTY, UM, STRINGENT ON CHANGING THE FRONT FACE OF THE PROPERTIES.
AND WE FEEL, UM, SLIGHTLY UNCOMFORTABLE ABOUT ADDING PORCHES WHERE THERE WERE NO PORCHES.
UM, WE ALSO JUST MENTIONED IF THERE WERE ORIGINAL WINDOWS OR ORIGINAL SIDING TO PLEASE RESTORE THOSE.
UM, WE DIDN'T GET AN ANSWER, BUT WE DID GET A, THAT THEY WOULD, UM, ON, UH, THE 14TH THAT THEY WOULD, UH, REVIEW WITH THEIR CLIENT.
UM, WE HAVEN'T GOTTEN ANYTHING SINCE, SO WE'VE DEFERRED IT.
I HAVE ONE MORE SPEAKER SIGN UP TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM, WHICH IS ALAN FISHER.
I'M REPRESENTATIVE OF THE, UM, THE CLIENTS OR THE PROPERTY OWNER.
SO IN, IN RELATION TO THE NOR HILL COMMENTS.
SO WE WERE WAITING TO, TO OBTAIN THE, THE SUGGESTIONS FROM STAFF FROM HAHC BEFORE WE PROCEEDED WITH ADDRESSING.
IF YOU LOOK, I'M ALMOST POSITIVE ALL THE COMMENTS THAT WERE IDENTIFIED BY NOR HILL ARE ALSO THE SUBJECT OF DISCUSSION FOR HAHC.
SO THAT'S WHY THOSE HAVE BEEN DEFERRED.
BUT ASIDE FROM THAT, I HAVE NO FURTHER, NO FURTHER COMMENTS.
COMMISSION MEMBERS, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OF ANY OF THE SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM? CAN I ASK? I HAVE A QUESTION, LADIES FIRST.
BUT, UM, COULD BRING, THERE, THERE WAS A PORCH THERE RIGHT, ON THE RIGHT SIDE THAT HAS NOW BEEN ENCLOSED.
REMOVE SQUARE FOOTAGE AND ADD THE PORCH.
IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE ASKING ME? RIGHT? CORRECT.
THAT'S WHAT YOU SAID? YEAH, THAT'S WHAT I'M ASKING.
I MEAN, THAT, THAT'S, THAT'S, THAT'S A COMPLETE BEDROOM.
MY IDEA WAS JUST TO MATCH THE NEIGHBORHOOD, HAVE A PORCH OR I OR SOMEBODY COULD SIT OUT THERE, TALK TO THEIR NEIGHBORS IF THEY WALK BY CURRENTLY, THERE'S NOT THAT OPPORTUNITY.
YOU DON'T GET TO BE NEIGHBORLY WITH JUST STAIR A STAIRCASE TO YOUR DOOR.
I'D LIKE TO SIT OUTSIDE ON MY SWING OR MY ROCKING CHAIR AND TALK TO THE NEIGHBORS SO THEY WALK BY.
I I WAS JUST WONDERING IF THERE WAS ANY APPETITE FOR THAT AND MAYBE LOOKING AT, AT ADDING THAT SQUARE FOOTAGE ELSEWHERE.
I, SO I DON'T THINK IT'S IN MY FUTURE.
YOU HAD A QUESTION THOUGH? OH, I THINK AFTER THE OWNER MENTIONED KEY STREET, I, I LOOKED IT UP ON H HR R AND 9 31 HAS HAD A LOT OF WORK DONE TO IT.
HOW DID THAT ONE SLIP THROUGH THE CRACKS? THAT'S MY QUESTION.
DOES IT HAVE A COA THEY, THEY CLEARLY REPLACED THE WINDOWS AND TAKE ANOTHER WINDOWS OUT.
YEAH, I MEAN, WE COULD RAISE THAT AFTER THAT'S POINT OF ORDER.
WELL, WE CAN DISCUSS ANOTHER PROPERTY AT THE END OF THE MEETING JUST IN, IN OUR HAC COMMENT PERIOD.
BUT, UM, I MEAN, TODAY WE'RE JUST LOOKING AT THIS APPLICATION.
[01:20:02]
'CAUSE I, I MEAN, I NEVER KNOW WHAT'S HAPPENED ON THESE OTHER PROPERTIES, BUT, BUT WE CAN ASK STAFF TO GIVE US A REPORT ON THEM, IF NOT TODAY, UH, WHEN THE NEXT TIME WE MEET, BUT NOT ON THE AGENDA.THAT COULD BE SOMETHING THEY TELL US ABOUT LATER.
IT IS FRUSTRATING WHEN YOU SEE THIS KIND OF STUFF.
UH, MR. CHAIR, CAN I GO AHEAD.
CAN I HAVE A NEXT QUESTION, PLEASE? UM, I WOULD LIKE TO, UH, UH, PRESENT THIS QUESTION, UH, TO ALSO THE HOMEOWNER AND, UM, TO THE GENERAL, UH, COMMISSIONERS AS WELL.
UH, I HEAR TO BOTH SIDE OF THE STORY ABOUT A PORCH BEING IN FRONT.
UH, WHAT ABOUT JUST A, BECAUSE THIS, THIS FRONT, THIS PORCH IS TOTALLY NEW IN CREATION.
WOULD YOU BE OPEN TO HAVING A, A DECK INSTEAD THAT THAT IS NOT CONNECTED TO THE HOUSE AS PART OF A SEPARATE THING? IS THAT OPEN TO THE COMMISSIONERS AS WELL? WELL, I THINK ROMAN, YOU, YOU WANNA ADDRESS THAT? I MEAN, I DO, I WANT, PLEASE, IF I DON'T MIND IF YOU DON'T MIND, COMMISSIONERS.
I WANT TO ADDRESS THAT IN A DIFFERENT WAY.
THAT, AND, UM, STAFF MEMBER ARSLAN WANTED ME TO POINT THIS OUT.
SO THE REASON, IF THEY HAD A, IF THIS APPLICATION HAD COME IN AND THE WORK HAD NOT BEEN BEGUN, BEGAN, WE WOULD'VE APPROVED THIS ADMINISTRATIVELY UNDER THIS CRITERIA YOU SEE HERE.
AND I'D LIKE TO GO THROUGH IT AND IT'S THAT THE DIRECTOR SHALL ISSUE A C OF A FOR THE ALTERATION RESTORATION, REHABILITATION OF A NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT UPON FINDING THE APPLICATION SATISFIES THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA.
AND THE ONE THAT APPLIES WOULD BE ONE, UM, ONE A AND B, THE FOR AN ALTERATION OR RESTORATION OF REHABILITATION THAT DOES NOT REQUIRE THE REMOVAL OF 67% OF THE STRUCTURE.
A THE PROPOSED ACTIVITY MUST RECOGNIZE THE BUILDING STRUCTURE, OBJECT OR SITE AS A PRODUCT OF ITS OWN TIME AND AVOID ALTERATIONS THAT SEEK TO CREATE AN EARLIER OR LATER APPEARANCE.
AND B, THE PROPOSED ACTIVITY MUST MATCH THE ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES, MATERIALS, AND CHARACTER OF THE, EITHER THE EXISTING NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE OR THE CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES WITHIN THE CONTEXT AREA.
AND THAT'S THE CRITERIA WE BRING TO YOU TODAY.
AND THAT'S WHY WE HAVE A RECOMMENDED APPROVAL.
THE CONTEXT AREA, CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES HAVE PORCHES LIKE THE PORTS THAT'S PROPOSED.
THE BUILDING IS LEGALLY NON-CONTRIBUTING, AND THEY'RE NOT TRYING TO MAKE IT LOOK LIKE IT WAS BUILT IN ANY OTHER TIME PERIOD.
AS AS THAT'S WHY AS THEY, AS THEY PROPOSED IT, IT'S, IT'S A SIMPLIFIED STRUCTURE.
I'M NOT TRYING TO BE ARGUMENTATIVE OR ANYTHING, I'M JUST SAYING THAT'S WHY WE'RE BRINGING IT TO YOU.
BUT WHAT I THINK WE SHOULD JUST SAY THIS IS FINE.
AND THEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ADDING RAPTOR TAILS AND TAPERED COLUMNS AND STUFF THAT CONTRADICTS OUR, OH, LET DON, ON THAT POINT, ONE QUICK QUESTION.
WHAT, WHY ARE YOU RECOMMENDING THE USE OF ONE 17 AND NOT LETTING HIM REPLACE THE WINDOWS? IF IT'S NON-CONTRIBUTING AND HE MADE APPLICATION TO DO THAT, THEN THAT WOULD'VE BEEN GRANTED ADMINISTRATIVELY.
I MEAN, IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE A PRODUCT OF ITS OWN TIME, WHICH IS, IT DOESN'T MATTER.
NO, WE WOULDN'T HAVE APPROVED THE REPLACEMENT OF THE WINDOWS, THE NEGOTIATION.
AND THAT'S WHY THEY'RE, THEY'RE, THEY'RE IN, IN, IN, IN AGREEMENT WITH OUR CONDITION.
SO, UH, THE ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN THAT WE WOULD'VE MADE THE SAME AGREEMENT.
BUT, BUT WITH ONE CONDITION, I APOLOGIZE.
THERE IS SOME, AND CHARLES AND AND I WERE SPEAKING TO THEM, THE ROOF RAFTER TAIL QUESTIONS, IF WE GO TO THE 1978 HISTORICAL PHOTO, THE LEFT SIDE ORIGINAL SIDE OF THE HOUSE DID HAVE EXPOSED ROOF RAFTER TAILS.
BUT THE RIGHT SIDE WHERE THAT ADDITION WAS MADE, THEY BOUGHT, THEY EITHER BOXED THE SOFFIT OR JUST HAD A FES FASCIA BOARD THERE.
I'M NOT SURE WHICH ONE I GIVEN THAT, I DON'T KNOW WHAT'S TO THE RIGHT, BUT WE DISCUSSED CHARLES.
IN FACT, WE JUST AT THE LAST MINUTE WERE SAYING WE, AND I THINK YOU READ IT THAT WAY.
SO WE APOLOGIZE THAT WE HAVE A, OUR, OUR PRESENTATION IS NOT IN LINE WITH OUR FINAL RECOMMENDATION, WHICH IS THAT THERE WE'RE NOT REQUIRING TO EXPOSE THE ROOFER AFTER TAILS.
SO COMMISSIONER MCNEIL CALL ME CONFUSED.
WHAT LEGALLY MUST I IMPOSE ON THIS HOMEOWNER WHEN HE'S IN NOR HILL? AND IT'S A NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE.
I MEAN, WELL, I MEAN, AGAIN, WE WE'RE, I THINK WE'RE, WHAT'S, WHAT'S MY LEGAL OBLIGATION TO THIS GENTLEMAN? BECAUSE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT REARRANGING A LOT OF WHAT HE'S COME BEFORE THE COMMISSION ASKING.
IT SEEMS LIKE HE'S WORKING HARD WITH NOR HILL AND STAFF TO TRY TO DO THINGS IN A GOOD WAY.
[01:25:01]
IS GOT A NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE.WHY CAN'T HE PUT SIDING ON THERE? WHY CAN'T HE CHANGE WINDOWS? IT'S A NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE.
I MEAN, HE COULD, WELL HE COULD MAKE APPLICATION TO DEMOLISH THE HOUSE AND IT WOULD BE GRANTED.
I MEAN, I'M JUST, I I'M NOT UNDERSTANDING, I KNOW WE'VE HAD NON-CONTRIBUTING HOUSES IN FRONT OF THE COMMISSION AND PEOPLE HAVE REPLACED WINDOWS.
I MEAN, I'M NOT UNDERSTANDING WHY WE'RE HOLDING IT LIKE IT'S CONTRIBUTING.
WE WASTED WHEN IT IS ACTUALLY NON-CONTRIBUTING.
BUT I THINK THAT, UH, SORRY I LEFT OUT A KEEP IS BECAUSE THE WORK WAS BEGUN WITHOUT A PERMIT.
WE NEED A CERTIFICATE OF REMEDIATION, WHICH ONLY THIS COMMISSION CAN ISSUE AND, AND HAS A STILL NON-CONTRIBUTING, STILL NON-CONTRIBUTING.
IT DOESN'T MAKE IT CONTRIBUTING.
HE, HE STILL, WE, THE ORDINANCE HAS A SPECIFIC SECTION FOR NON-CONTRIBUTING HOUSES.
AND THE PROPERTY NEEDS TO BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THAT, NOT THAT ORDINANCE THAT COVERS CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES.
AND I THINK WE'RE, WE'RE, WE'RE WE'RE ASKING MORE THAN THE ORDINANCE SAYS HE NEEDS TO DO.
EVEN I, YOU KNOW, HE SHOULDN'T HAVE DONE IT WITHOUT A PERMIT.
BUT I, I DON'T FEEL LIKE WE CAN PENALIZE HIM FOR DOING IT WITHOUT A PERMIT.
IT, IT'S A LITTLE, OKAY, SO THEN YOU MIGHT ASK, WELL, WELL SURE YOU CAN RECITE IT AND PUT IT IN THE WINDOWS.
SO WE ARE THE PRESERVATION OFFICE AND THE ORDINANCE IN THIS TIME, WHERE I SEE IT WORKS IN OUR FAVOR IS IF THIS DIRECTOR DOESN'T ISSUE A C OF A OR AN ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL, YOU GO TO THE 13 CRITERIA AND YOU BRING IT TO THIS COMMISSION.
SO WE AREN'T WITHOUT SOME CONVERSA, WE HAVE SOME ABILITY.
WE DON'T ALWAYS, I SEE ODD LOOKS AT US.
THERE'S A PART OF THE ORDINANCE THAT SAYS THAT IF THE DIRECTOR DOESN'T ISSUE A C OF A WITHIN 15 DAYS, THAT ITEM COMES TO THIS COMMISSION FOR CONSIDERATION.
THE QUESTION THEN IS, YOU KNOW, AND I BELIEVE AT THAT POINT YOU'RE USING THE 13 CRITERIA.
WE'VE BROUGHT IT TO YOU HERE AND YOU CAN CHECK MY THINKING ON THAT.
BUT THE THING IS, IT'S NOT, WE, WE DON'T, WE WE, WE ARE NEGOTIATING THE, THE, THE THING.
AND SO WE SEE ORIGINAL SIDING, WE SEE ORIGINAL WINDOWS, AND THIS IS HOW WE GOT DO WE GOT BEFORE AND THE CFR.
RIGHT? BUT, BUT THERE'S CURRENTLY A PROPOSAL ON IN THE APPLICATION THAT YOU STAFF SUPPORT.
UM, AND THE ONLY COMMENT I'VE HEARD ABOUT THAT PROPOSAL IS TO REMOVE THE ASK ABOUT TAPERED COLUMNS AND LET THE SIMPLE SCORE COLUMNS REMAIN.
AS ASKED FOR BY THE APPLICANT.
AND, AND SO, AND YOU DON'T HAVE AN ISSUE WITH THAT? I DON'T, I DON'T HEAR.
SO WE WE'RE, WE DON'T HAVE AN ISSUE WITH ANYTHING.
BUT THE CERTIFICATE OF REMEDIATION IS THIS COMMISSION'S CHOICE.
SO MAYBE THAT'S THE WAY TO LOOK AT IT.
COMMISSIONER COSGROVE, YOU CAN'T, YOU HAVE THAT FLEXIBILITY ON THAT C OF R.
YOU CAN SAY WHAT THAT C OF R SHOULD SAY.
AND MAYBE THAT'S, THAT'S THE MOMENT WHICH GIVES US THE OPPORTUNITY TO SAY, IF YOU DO IT THIS WAY, WE'RE ALL GOOD.
THAT'S I THINK THE WAY WE'RE, SO I GOT A QUESTION FOR YOU CHAIR, MR. YAP.
UH, ALTHOUGH IT IS BEEN DOCUMENTED AS A NON-CONTRIBUTING, UH, HOUSE, BUT WHEN YOU REMOVE ALL THE 1970S OR EIGHTIES EDITION, YOU FIND THAT IT IS ACTUALLY A CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE.
SO ARE WE STILL STUCK IN THE NON CONTRIBUTION, NON-CONTRIBUTING, OR ARE WE ACTUALLY IT'S STILL NOT CONTRIBUTING.
I BELIEVE AS LEGAL KIM, IT WILL NEVER BE MADE CONTRIBUTING.
IT'S A NON-CONTRIBUTING HOUSE.
IT'S A NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE.
THAT'S THE WAY IT WAS ADOPTED WHEN THE, UH, HISTORIC DISTRICT ORDINANCE WAS.
SO WE HAVE TO STAY WITH THE ADOPTED, THAT'S AN ORDINANCE BY COUNCIL.
SO YEAH, WE HAVE TO, I MEAN, THAT'S THE DESIGNATION THERE.
IT'S A NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE THAT HAS TO BE TREATED AS A NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE.
AND THIS WHOLE COMMISSION'S TALKING ABOUT IT LIKE IT'S CONTRIBUTING HOUSE.
SO C CAN WE MAKE A MOTION? I I NEED TO CLOSE A PUBLIC HEARING FOR THAT MOTION TO BE MADE.
BUT DO YOU WANNA GET I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE OWNER.
WHAT, OKAY, I'M GONNA OPEN A PUBLIC HEARING AGAIN.
IS IT, ARE, ARE ANY OF THE WINDOWS ORIGINAL ON THE HOUSE? I BELIEVE THEY'RE ALL ORIGINAL.
JUST THEY NEED ALL THE REFURBISHING OF COURSE.
AND THEY'RE GO, GO AHEAD WITH YOUR STATEMENT.
AND YOU KNOW, IDEALLY I WANT TO MIMIC WHAT I YOU SAW IN 9 31, WHICH I THINK IS A BEAUTIFUL HOUSE, STILL FITS THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND ME BEING NOT IN, FOR ME, THAT'S WHAT I WAS HOPING TO ACHIEVE.
UM, MY APPLICANT WAS JUST TO, YOU KNOW, GET THIS BALL ROLLING BECAUSE I WAS BEING HELD TO THESE STANDARDS OF CONTRIBUTING.
AND I, WHAT I REALLY WANT IS NOT THAT, BUT I, I'LL, I WANNA MOVE FORWARD IN MY PROJECT.
WHAT I WANT IS NEW SIDING, NEW WINDOWS IN THAT NEW PORCH.
BUT I, I, I MEAN, I, I CAN'T SIT IN LIMBO FOR SIX MORE MONTHS.
I GOTTA MOVE FORWARD WITH SOMETHING.
'CAUSE RIGHT NOW IT'S JUST AN EYESORE.
AND WE'RE COMING UP ON CHRISTMAS AND I'M SURE THE
[01:30:01]
NEIGHBORS DON'T WANNA SEE THIS HOUSE WHILE THEY'RE HAVING GATHERINGS OF A, IT'S IN PRETTY BAD SHAPE.SO I GUESS THAT BEING SAID, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW WHAT I WANT, BUT I'M, I'M, I CAN COMPROMISE.
SO, UH, I'M GONNA CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
I'M GONNA CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND, OKAY.
COMMISSIONER IL, PLEASE OFFER A MOTION.
BECAUSE IT'S A NON-CONTRIBUTING BUILDING AND IT'S NOT SUPPOSED TO MIMIC THE ERA IN WHICH IT SITS.
SO IT'S NOT SUPPOSED TO LOOK LIKE A 1930S BUILDING DISCUSSION.
WELL, I NEED, I NEED A SECOND FIRST.
HOWEVER, ARE WE GOING TO, IN, IN ALLOWING THAT, IS THE BUILDING GOING TO BECOME SUCH THAT IT APPEARS TO BE OF THE PERIOD OF ITS NEIGHBORS DOWN THE STREET WHEN IT CLEARLY IS NOT CONTRIBUTING? NOT WITH HARDY BLINK SIDING.
I MEAN, THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAS ONE 17 SIDING THROUGHOUT IT.
SO IF YOU PUT UP EVEN SIX INCH, SEVEN INCH HARDY PLAN SIDING, IT'S NOT GONNA LOOK LIKE A 1920S HOUSE.
BUT, BUT WE'RE TRYING TO PUT A PORCH ON IT AND THE PORCH IS NOT.
I KNOW 'CAUSE IT WASN'T THERE ORIGINALLY.
WELL, BUT WITH A FOUR BY FOUR POST AND THAT HANDRAIL, IT'S DOES NOT LOOK ANYTHING LIKE A 1930 THIRTIES PORCH.
CAN I ASK A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT? ABSOLUTELY.
JUST THAT THE WINDOWS BE WOOD ACCEPTED.
UH, HOW MANY BUILDINGS DOES IT TAKE TO DEFINE THE DISTRICT? SO HOW MANY CONTRIBUTING BUILDINGS VERSUS NON-CONTRIBUTING BUILDINGS ARE THERE? OH, I THINK THERE, WOULD YOU REPEAT THE QUESTION WITH YOUR MIC? YEAH.
CAN YOU MOVE THE MIC CLOSER? SORRY.
YEAH, THAT'S SOMETIMES I DON'T CATCH.
SO MY, CAN I, IS THIS BETTER? IT'S STILL VERY FAINT.
UH, THE TONE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS IN THE CASSETTE.
I THINK THERE'S THREE ON THE BLOCK, THREE OR FOUR THAT ARE NON-CONTRIBUTING.
SO THE MAJOR, THE VAST MAJORITY ARE COULD JUST TO FULLY ANSWER THE QUESTION, COULD SOMEBODY, UH, IDENTIFY THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT THE MAP TOGETHER ON THE SCREEN AND THAT THE, IS IT RIGHT THAT THE DARK ORANGE, THE DARK RED ARE CONTRIBUTING AND THAT THE TAN ARE NON-CONTRIBUTING? CORRECT.
THE RED ARE CONTRIBUTING ON THIS MAP.
SO THE VAST MAJORITY IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD ARE CONTRIBUTING.
THE MAJORITY ON THE BLOCK FACE ARE ALSO CONTRIBUTING.
BUT, BUT WE ALSO LOOK MORE CLOSELY AT THE BLOCK FACE THAN THE WHOLE NEIGHBORHOOD.
THERE ARE TWO ON THIS BLOCK FACE THAT ARE NON-CONTRIBUTING, WHICH YEAH, IT'S A SHAME THAT THEY DIDN'T MAKE THIS A CONTRIBUTING.
IS THERE ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THIS ITEM BEFORE I CALL THE VOTE? OKAY.
I'VE GOT A, I'VE GOT A MOTION AND A SECOND.
ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION PLEASE SAY AYE.
COMMISSIONER, WE OUR JACKSON OPPOSES AND COMMISSIONER.
AND ARE THERE ANY ABSTENTIONS? OKAY, SO THAT MOTION PASSES.
MAY I JUST GET TO CLARIFY THE MOTION THAT SO THEY CAN REPLACE THE SIDING WITH CEMENT BOARD? THEY CAN REPLACE THE WINDOWS.
[01:35:01]
OKAY.SO THAT WASN'T EVEN IN YOUR APPLICATION, WAS IT? THAT WAS A PITCH HE MADE ON THE STUMP.
I WOULD CALL YOU WHAT? I NEED TO SELL SOMETHING
AS OKAY, WE ARE GONNA MOVE ON TO ITEM 11.
GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIRPERSON MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.
THIS IS STAFF PERSON KARA QUIGLEY.
I SUBMIT ITEM D 11 AT 7 7 1 1 WINDLEY STREET IN GLENBROOK VALLEY FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION, THE PROPERTY IS A CONTRIBUTING RANCH STYLE RESIDENCE.
THE APPLICANT PROPOSES TO REMOVE ONE OF THE TWO EXISTING GARAGE DOORS AND INFILL THE GARAGE DOOR OPENING WITH A NEWLY CONSTRUCTED WALL AND WINDOW TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL INTERIOR CONDITIONED SPACE AS PART OF THE EXISTING LIVING ROOM.
THE PROPOSED WORK HAS BEEN COMPLETED WITHOUT PERMITS AND AN APPROVED AND APPROVED CFA.
THE APPLICANT REMOVED ONE OF THE TWO EXISTING GARAGE DOORS AND REPLACED THE OPENING WITH A HARDY PLANK SIDING AND A ONE OVER ONE WINDOW TO CONVERT HALF OF THE GARAGE INTO PART OF THE EXISTING LIVING ROOM.
STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL OF COA AND ISSUANCE OF COR TO INSTALL A NEW INSET GARAGE DOOR, SIMILAR TO EXISTING GARAGE DOOR WITH VERTICAL COLUMN AND MATCHING DIMENSION PRIOR TO ALTERATION APPLICANT TO WORK WITH STAFF ON FINAL DESIGN CHAIR.
MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION, THE PROPERTY OWNER BRENDA EROS, HAS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK VIRTUALLY ON THIS ITEM.
I'M AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
UM, COMMISSION MEMBERS, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF ON THE SIDE? I HAVE A QUESTION.
SO REPLACING THE, THE GARAGE DOOR, ARE YOU SAYING TO TAKE THE WINDOW OUT? SO WE WERE, UM, ADVISING THAT TO RETAIN THE INTERIOR SPACE, BUT, UH, REMOVE THAT EXTERIOR WALL AND INSET IT BACK IN SO THAT WAY IT WOULD, UH, RESEMBLE ANOTHER GARAGE DOOR OPENING.
IS IT, IS WHAT'S THE ROOM BEING USED FOR? IT'S PART OF THE LIVING ROOM.
UH, IF YOU GO TOWARDS THE END, SEPARATE ROOM, THERE'S A PICTURE.
THERE ARE PICTURES TOWARDS THE END OF WHAT THE INTERIOR SPACE IS TOWARDS THE END.
MAY I MAKE A COMMENT? PICTURES TOWARDS THE END? YES.
YOU CAN ASK A QUESTION OR COMMENT.
A FLIPPER BOUGHT THIS HOUSE AND A FLIPPER DID THIS, AND I THINK THIS LADY BOUGHT THIS HOUSE.
VERY UNSUSPECTING OF WHAT HAPPENED.
THIS HAPPENS REPEATEDLY IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
THEY COME IN AND THEY CHANGE THE WINDOWS, THEY DO STUFF LIKE THIS.
THERE WERE RED TAGS ON IT, BUT HE KEPT WORKING ANYHOW.
SO, UH, I HA I, THERE ARE OTHER PLACES THAT THEY PUT THE FAKE DOOR THERE, SO, YOU KNOW, TO SAVE TIME WE CAN GO ALONG WITH THE FAKE DOOR.
WE JUST CAN'T, YOU KNOW, IT CAN'T BE TO WHERE THE APPEARANCE IS THAT IT'S BEEN CONVERTED BECAUSE WE HAD OTHER CONVERSIONS THAT WE TURNED INTO THE H TWO APPRAISAL DISTRICT AND THEY INCREASE BECAUSE THEY DO THE CONVERSIONS AND THEY'RE NOT PAYING THE TAXES.
SO, I MEAN, CALL ME UGLY, BUT WE PROTECT OUR NEIGHBORHOOD COMMISSION MEMBERS.
ARE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF STAFF FROM THIS ITEM BEFORE I OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING? OKAY.
UM, I'M GONNA GO AHEAD AND OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.
SORRY, I DO HAVE A QUESTION, COMMISSIONER FOR CLARIFICATION.
SO YOUR IDEA IS, UH, IF I WILL LOOK BACK ON TO PAGE SIX OF 12, WAS TO BASICALLY ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE, REMOVE THE WINDOW INSIDE THAT WALL AND MAKE IT LOOK LIKE THE GARAGE DOOR ON THE LEFT.
IS THAT CORRECT? IS THAT ALL YOU ALL YOU ARE ASKING FOR EFFECTIVELY? YES.
SO IF YOU LOOK AT THE PICTURE ABOVE, UM, HOW IT ALSO HAS THE COLUMN SEPARATING THE TWO THAT WAS ALSO REMOVED.
SO WE WOULD LIKE IT TO BE OKAY.
SO PUT IT UP SORT OF A FAKE COLUMN SHAPE IN THERE.
AND TO PUT A GARAGE DOOR BACK TO RESEMBLE TWO GARAGE DOORS.
UM, BUT THAT SHE CAN STILL RETAIN THE INTERIOR SPACE.
AND, UH, COMMISSIONER CALM HAD SAID THAT THIS HAD BEEN DONE AT PREVIOUS, UH, PROPERTIES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THERE WAS ONE DONE, UM, PREVIOUSLY IN THE SAME SECTION
[01:40:01]
OF LUMBER VALLEY AT, UH, 77 46 WIL MERIDIAN.UM, WITH THE SAME RECOMMENDATION THAT WE'RE GIVING TODAY, THEY WERE ALLOWED TO KEEP THE SPACE AND HUB A FAUX GARAGE DOOR.
THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION.
HAS THE DOOR ON THE LEFT BEEN REPLACED WITH A WIDER DOOR OR IS IT JUST A DECEPTION OF THE PHOTO THAT IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S MAYBE NO LONGER POSSIBLE TO FIT ANOTHER IDENTICALLY SIZED DOOR NEXT TO IT? UM, I'M UNSURE OF THAT.
UM, BUT AS FAR AS I'M AWARE, IT IS THE SAME GARAGE DOOR.
YOU CAN SEE LIKE THAT JOINT IN THE CONCRETE IS ABOUT THE SAME PLACE ON THE OTHER DOOR.
I THINK IT JUST LOOKS WIDER 'CAUSE THIS PICTURE IS BRIGHTER.
YEAH, I JUST ASK 'CAUSE IT COULD, I DON'T KNOW IF THOSE ARE OLD GARAGE DOORS THAT ARE NARROWER AND MIGHT ENTAIL REPLACING TWO DOORS OR JUST WONDER WAS REMOVED.
JACKSON, DO YOU HAVE A COMMENT, UM, QUESTION.
SO THE, THE RECOMMENDATION IS NOT TO REPLACE WITH A FIXED GARAGE DOOR, BUT TO CREATE THE SAME INDENTATION, UM, AND REPLACE THE COLUMNS SO THAT IT'S NOT A GARAGE DOOR THAT'S FIXED IN PLACE.
IT IS ACTUALLY A, A STUD WALL THAT IS INSET.
AT THIS TIME I'M GONNA OPEN A PUBLIC HEARING.
I DO HAVE A SPEAKER SIGNED UP.
UM, AND, UH, BRENDA, UH, QUIN.
HOW ARE YOU? COULD YOU RESTATE YOUR NAME AND PLEASE ADDRESS? YES, MY NAME IS, MY NAME IS BRENDA CANDOS.
UM, UH, WELL, I'M NEVER DEAL WITH THIS.
UM, CAN I START BY READING A LETTER? YES, PLEASE.
UM, IT'S A ONE PAGE, UM, LAND.
I AM THE HOMEOWNER OF 77 EZ STREET, UH, HOUSTON, TEXAS 7 7 0 6 1.
WHEN I PURCHASED THIS HOUSE BACK IN JANUARY, 2023, THE HOUSE WAS, UH, THE HOUSE NEEDED WORK TO BE HA HABITABLE, MEANING THAT IN ORDER FOR SOMEBODY TO LIVE IN THERE IN, THAT'S ON MY OPINION, UH, BECAUSE NO ONE HAD LEAVE ON THE, UH, ON THIS PROPERTY FOR A WHILE.
I TOOK A LOAN FOR, UM, FOR IT AND EXTENDED THE LIVING ROOM BY MAKING HALF OF THE GARAGE PART OF THE LIVING ROOM AS WELL.
I HIRED A GENERAL CONTRACTOR TO DO ALL THIS WORK AND I GOT RIPPED OFF WHEN THE WORK WAS DONE, I STARTED GETTING RED TAGS FROM THE CITY AND I ASKED THE CONTRACTOR IF HE GOT THE PERMITS.
'CAUSE I WAS, I WAS NOT EVEN AWARE THAT OF SUCH A THING.
AND I HAVEN'T HEARD FROM HIM BACK.
HE NEVER ANSWERED MY PHONE CALLS.
I WAS NOT AWARE THAT I HAD TO GET PERMITS, NOR DID I KNOW THAT THE HOUSE WAS IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT.
AT SOME POINT I'D HAD THE HOPE THAT THE CON UH, THAT THE CONTRACTOR TOOK CARE OF IT AFTER GETTING RED TAGS.
UM, ON MY WINDOWS, I AM THE FIRST, I AM THE FIRST ONE IN MY FAMILY TO OWN A HOUSE.
AND I WAS COMPLETELY UNAWARE OF ALL THESE PERMITTING THINGS.
BUT WHEN I HIRED THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR, HE SAID HE WAS GOING TO TAKE CARE OF EVERYTHING AND I JUST HAD TO PAY HIM AND HE WAS GOING TO DO EVERYTHING TO MAKE SURE THINGS WERE DONE RIGHT.
MOTION TO, UM, IS THERE A SECOND TO A SECOND? SECOND.
UM, I'M ALREADY IN DEPTH FOR THE EXTENSION OF THE GARAGE AND IF COM IF THE COMMISSION, IF I'M SORRY.
AND IF THE COMMISSION WERE TO ORDER ME TO REMOVE IT, IT WILL COST ME MORE MONEY, WHICH I DON'T REALLY DON'T HAVE.
I HONESTLY DON'T HAVE ANY MONEY.
AND, UM, IT WOULD, IT JUST GIVE ME, UM, IT WOULD JUST GIMME MORE DEPTH.
I CURRENTLY WORK PART-TIME, IT WILL IMPACT MY PERSONAL LIFE AND WELLBEING, WHICH IT ALREADY IS DOING BECAUSE THERE ARE NIGHTS THAT I CANNOT EVEN SLEEP.
UM, I STAY AT NIGHT THINKING OF THIS MATTER.
I HAVE A DAUGHTER, UH, WHOSE LIFE WILL ALSO BE IMPACTED BECAUSE SHE FULLY
[01:45:01]
DEPENDS ON ME.I REALLY LIKE MY HOUSE THE WAY IT LOOKS.
AND IF COMPARE IT WITH THE OTHER HOUSES ON THE SAME STREET THAT HAVE ALTERATIONS DONE, BECAUSE THERE ARE MANY, THERE'S LIKE, UM, APPROXIMATELY SEVEN HOUSES.
AND I THOUGHT IT WAS OKAY FOR ME TO DO IT.
I NEVER THOUGHT IT WAS GONNA CAUSE ME SO MUCH TROUBLE.
UM, I THINK MY HOUSE MAKES THE NEIGHBORHOOD LOOKS NICE, NICER.
I NEVER MEANT TO DISRESPECT OR BREAK ANY RULES AT ALL.
UM, THIS HAS REALLY, UH, THIS IS REALLY HARD FOR ME AND MORE THAN STRESSFUL, I FEEL LOST BECAUSE I'M SO IN DEPTH WITH MY HOUSE WHENEVER MONEY LEFT.
BUT AFTER ALL, THE HOUSE LOOKS PRETTY ALSO, I'VE BEEN DOING MY HOMEWORK IN EDUCATING MYSELF AND, UM, THE HOUSE HAS INCREASED A LOT IN VALUE.
AND WITH THAT SAID, IT HAS ALSO INCREASED THE VALUE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
IT'S SO FAR RIGHT NOW, IT'S THE MOST EXPENSIVE HOUSE IN THE STREET.
AND, UM, I WOULD LIKE TO GIVE MY HOUSE AS IS.
ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT? I JUST WISH THERE WERE WAY TO MR. JACKSON.
UM, YOU DON'T HAVE ANY CONTACT WITH YOUR CONTRACTOR? UH, NO, I DON'T.
I WISH THERE WERE A WAY TO HOLD THE CONTRACTOR RESPONSIBLE.
IS DID YOU HAVE A CONTRACT WITH YOUR CONTRACTOR THAT STIPULATED THAT HE WOULD TAKE CARE OF ALL PERMITTING ISSUES? NO, I WAS NOT EVEN AWARE OF SUCH A THING THAT I HAD TO GET PERMITS.
I WAS LIKE, WELL, UH, YOU KNOW, I MEAN, I I MEAN, I'M LIKE, WELL, IT'S MY HOUSE.
LET ME JUST MAKE THE LIVING ROOM BIGGER AND MAKE THE NICE THE HOUSE LOOK NICER.
SO IT SOUNDED LIKE, YEAH, I UNDERSTAND.
IT SOUNDS AS THOUGH YOU ACCEPTED HIS ASSURANCES THAT HE WAS LOOKING INTO ALL THE ISSUES SURROUNDING THE RED TAGS, BUT HE NEVER WAS CONTRACTUALLY ACCOUNTABLE FOR, FOR THAT.
AFTER HE FINISHED THE WORK, IT'S WHEN I STARTED GETTING RED TAGS, IT WAS RIGHT AFTER HE FINISHED.
IT'S WHEN I STARTED GETTING RED TAGS AND THEN I TRIED TO CONTACT HIM AND THAT'S WHEN I BECAME AWARE OF PERMITTINGS AND, AND, AND I STARTED DIGGING MORE.
AND THAT'S WHEN I FOUND OUT THAT IT WAS IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT.
HE NEVER MENTIONED ANYTHING TO ME.
QUIN QUINTERO IS YOUR, IS THE PROPERTY FOR SALE RIGHT NOW? I'M LISTING IT BECAUSE AFTER ALL OF THIS, I AM LITERALLY BROKE AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO.
I DON'T KNOW IF I WANNA STAY OR I WANNA LEAVE.
I'M JUST, CAN I ASK A LEGAL QUESTION? NO, YES, OF COURSE.
YOU MAY
SO IT WOULD HAVE TO BE DISCLOSED TO A FUTURE BUYER.
UM, WHETHER OR NOT IT'S, YOU KNOW, I I THINK IT'S, YEAH.
SO YES, IN ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION, YES, THAT WOULD TRAVEL TO THE NEXT PERSON.
IF IT WAS NOT CORRECTED AT THIS STAGE, SHE MAY WELL, OF COURSE HAVE A CLAIM AGAINST HER CONTRACTOR FOR THE COST OF HAVING TO DO THIS WORK.
UM, THAT'S A DIFFERENT OUTSIDE THIS COMMISSION QUESTION, BUT, UM, YEAH, I THANK YOU.
SO, BUT SHE PERSONALLY HAS TO DISCLOSE THAT ON A FORM, WHICH SHE MAY ALSO JUST CHOOSE NOT TO DISCLOSE THAT.
SO IS THERE ACTUALLY ANYTHING BY THE CITY THAT ATTACHES TO THE PROPERTY THAT WOULD THEN GO THROUGH TITLE? YEAH.
AND IF THAT WAS YOUR QUESTION, I DON'T KNOW.
DO YOU, I DON'T BELIEVE YOU ALL FILE C CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS OR REMEDIATION
[01:50:01]
IN THE REAL PROPERTY RECORDS.ALL THOSE IN, IN THE REAL PROPERTY RECORDS IS THE DESIGNATION OF IT AS BEING WITHIN A HISTORIC DISTRICT, WHICH SHOULD BE, AND I EMPHASIZE, SHOULD BE PICKED UP ON TITLE, BUT I SUSPECT IS NOT ALWAYS, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S THE CASE HERE, BUT I HAVE HEARD THAT COMM COMMISSIONER JACKSON, POTENTIAL BUYER IS AWARE OF THE VIOLATION.
UH, COMMISSIONER JACKSON, I MAY BE ABLE TO SHED SOME LIGHT ON THIS, UH, SINCE I'VE BEEN DOING THIS QUITE REGULARLY.
UH, A RED TAG IS NOT A DOCUMENTABLE THING IN THE HARRIS COUNTY OR IN FOR UNDER THE RESTRICTIONS.
THAT'S JUST BETWEEN PERMITTING AND THE HOMEOWNER.
BASICALLY, IT DOES NOT GO BEYOND, UH, TO A NEXT BODY, THEREFORE TITLE WILL NOT PICK IT UP.
UH, HOWEVER, I WOULD SAY A SAVVY REALTOR REPRESENTING THE BUYER WOULD'VE ASKED, BECAUSE THIS HOUSE WOULD'VE COME WITH ALL THIS NEW, UH, WORK, WOULD'VE ASKED WHETHER THIS WORK WOULD'VE BEEN PERMITTED OR NOT.
UH, IF THIS REALTOR DID NOT ASK THAT QUESTION, THE REALTOR SHOULD BE FIRED, BASICALLY.
BUT THAT'S ALSO ANOTHER BUYER REALTOR RELATION.
AND I WOULD JUST ADD, UH, UH, NO, TO YOUR POINT, NO ONE SHOULD HAVE BEEN ABLE TO PURCHASE THIS HOUSE WITHOUT KNOWING THEY WERE IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT.
UH, YES, BUT DOING THE HISTORIC DISTRICT DOES NOT MEAN THAT THE RED TECH, UH, IS, IS IS, UH, FOLLOWING THE, THE COUNTY WHEN THEY DO A TITLE SEARCH.
YOU'RE RIGHT, IT'S TWO, TWO SEPARATE.
SO BOTH ABOUT DISCLOSURE FROM, UH, VIA REALTOR.
SO YES, SO MS. QUINTERO, DOES YOUR POTENTIAL BUYER UNDERSTAND THAT, THAT THIS IS A, IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT AND THAT THERE ARE, UM, YOU KNOW, THAT THEY POTENTIALLY WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS? I AM BEING RESPONSIBLE FOR IT BECAUSE I DID THE CHANGES AND I AM, I DON'T WANNA, I WOULD REALLY LIKE TO STAY AND LIKE I SAID, I'M IN A 50 50, BUT SINCE I, I, I LISTED THE PROPERTY, UH, IN THE, UH, THERE'S, THERE'S A FORM THAT I FILLED OUT FOR THE REALTOR AND WE STATED THAT THERE IS BEEN RED TAG THAT WE'RE WORKING ON THE ISSUE.
AND, UH, WOULD, UH, ALSO, UM, I WOULD NOT FORWARD THIS TROUBLE TO ANYBODY 'CAUSE I WOULD NOT LIKE ANYBODY TO BE IN MY POSITION.
AND BASICALLY, UM, IF THERE'S A BUYER, THEY WILL BE FULLY AWARE, BUT IF ANYTHING, I WANNA SOLVE THIS MATTER IN ORDER TO MOVE FORWARD AS WELL.
WELL, I THINK THAT'S VERY ADMIRABLE OF YOU.
UM, AND I PERSONALLY THINK THE SOLUTION THAT'S BEEN OFFERED IS, IS FAIR, UM, ALLOWING YOU TO KEEP THE CONDITION SPACE ON THE INSIDE, UM, EXPAND THE, THE LIVING AREA OF THE HOME.
UM, BUT ULTIMATELY IT'S, IT'S NOT THE COMMISSION'S RESPONSIBILITY, UM, TO BE AWARE OF THE, OF THE HISTORIC DISTRICT, UM, THAT YOU PURCHASED IN.
AND SO I, I'M SUPPORTIVE OF THE RECOMMENDATION AT THIS TIME.
I'M GONNA ASK IF THERE'S ANY OTHER MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC THAT WISHES TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM.
ARE THERE NONE OTHERS SIGNED UP? BUT IF YOU ARE OR YOU'RE ATTENDING VIRTUALLY, WOULD YOU PLEASE ANNOUNCE YOURSELF? OKAY, NOT HEARING, I'M GONNA CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING COMMISSION MEMBERS.
IS THERE FURTHER DISCUSSION OR IS THERE A MOTION ON THIS ITEM? I'M GONNA MAKE A MOTION THAT WE ACCEPT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.
COMMISSIONER AUER JACKSON SECONDS.
OKAY, ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? OKAY, ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION? AYE.
ARE THERE ANY OPPOSED? ARE THERE, ARE THERE ANY ABSTENTIONS? OKAY.
AND AGAIN, I DON'T KNOW THE LEGAL VOCATIONS OR YOU KNOW, ABOUT TRYING TO GET COMPENSATION OUT OF THE CONTRACTOR.
THAT'S, I MEAN, THAT'S, THAT'S BEYOND THE PURVIEW OF THIS COMMISSION, BUT, BUT POTENTIALLY THERE'S A, THERE'S A PATH FORWARD THERE.
UM, IF, IF AND THE BID OF BUSINESS BUREAU.
OKAY, WE'RE GONNA MOVE ON NOW TO ITEM 12, WHICH IS 9 0 3 WEST MELWOOD.
[01:55:03]
GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIRPERSON.MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION, THIS IS STAFF PERSON KARA QUIGLEY.
I SUBMIT ITEM D 12 AT 9 0 3 WEST MELWOOD STREET IN NOR HILL FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION, THE APPLICANT, THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A 673 SQUARE FOOT ADDITION AND COVERED PORCH TO THE REAR OF THE EXISTING HOUSE.
THE ADDITION WILL BE TOPPED BY AN EIGHT OVER 12 HIP ROOF TO MATCH AND CONNECT TO THE EXISTING HOUSE.
ADDITIONALLY, THE GARAGE ACCESS WILL BE RELOCATED FROM THE NORTH ELEVATION TO THE WEST ELEVATION TO ALLOW SPACE FOR THE NEW REAR PORCH.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS THE EXISTING REAR HIP ROOF TO REMAIN PARTIALLY EXPOSED.
SO THE LOWER RIDGE OF THE LOWER THE RIDGE OF THE ADDITION CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION, THE PROPERTY OWNER HAS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM.
I'M AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
IS THERE, ARE THERE OTHER QUESTIONS OF STAFF ON THE ITEM? OKAY, NOT HEARING.
I'M GONNA OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS ITEM AND I DO HAVE TWO, UH, INDIVIDUALS THAT HAVE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK.
THE FIRST, UM, AS MENTIONED IS JOHN HERRING, WHO IS THE APPLICANT.
COULD YOU, IF YOU COULD RESTATE YOUR NAME WITH A MICROPHONE JUST SO, UH, JOHN HERRING, OWNER CHAIRPERSON COMMISSIONERS.
THANK YOU FOR LETTING ME SPEAK.
UM, I AM ASKING FOR THE, UH, APPLICATION TO BE APPROVED AS IS.
UH, THIS IS MY FIRST TIME, UH, OWNING A HISTORIC HOME.
I'M A BUSINESS OWNER IN THE HEIGHTS.
IT'S A, IT'S A WONDERFUL NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, THAT BEING SAID, GOING UP THE LEARNING CURVE, UH, SOME OF THE REQUIREMENTS ARE SUBJECTIVE AND WE'VE BEEN VERY THANKFUL FOR ALL THE HELP AND THE FEEDBACK THAT WE'VE HAD ON GETTING A DESIGN THAT EVERYBODY IS HAPPY WITH.
WE VERY MUCH WANTED TO KEEP THE HOUSE LOOKING, YOU KNOW, TRUE TO TYPE, TRUE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, YOU KNOW, KEEPING THAT WE HAD A MUCH BIGGER ADDITION PLANNED ORIGINALLY, AND AFTER SPEAKING, UM, WITH HISTORICAL SOCIETY MEMBERS, THEY, THEY KIND OF EDUCATED ME ON HOW IMPORTANT IT IS TO KEEP, YOU KNOW, THAT ESSENCE.
AND THAT'S WHAT I LOVE ABOUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AND I WAS VERY EXCITED TO DO THAT.
SO WE MASSIVELY REDUCED HOW MUCH WE WANTED TO ADD DOWN TO THIS VERY KIND OF SMALL ADDITION.
UM, THE CHANGING OF THE ROOF LINE WILL REMOVE, UM, I, YOU KNOW, SOME, MY, MY, MY CONTRACTOR TELLS ME IT'LL LOWER WALLS OR THERE, IT'LL CHANGE SUBSTANTIALLY.
KIND OF THIS LOOK THAT WE'RE GOING FOR, YOU KNOW, THIS CONGRUENCE, THIS, THIS, YOU KNOW, FITTING INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, SO THAT IS, THAT IS MY REQUEST OF THE COMMISSION IS TO APPROVE AS IS.
I DO HAVE ANOTHER SPEAKER SIGNED UP.
HI, HOW ARE YOU DOING? MY NAME IS YARA, I'M THE CONTRACTOR AND ALSO THE ARCHITECT IS, WORKS WITH ME AND MY COMPANY.
UM, AND WE WERE, UH, WORKING WITH, WITH JOHN, I'VE, I'VE DONE SEVERAL PROJECTS WITH JOHN AS WELL AND FOR FRIENDS AND FAMILY MEMBERS OF HIS.
UM, WE WERE PLANNING ON BUILDING A, A TWO STORY ADDITION ON THIS PROPERTY.
UH, AND YOU KNOW, AS YOU GUYS SAW WITH THE FIRST EXAMPLE THAT WAS BROUGHT UP TODAY, IT'S KIND OF COMPLICATED TO TRY AND DO SOMETHING LIKE THAT AND HAVING TO BUILD BEYOND 50 OR 75%, UM, AND, AND NOT BUILDING ABOVE THE EXISTING.
AND SO WE SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCED THE FOOTPRINT OF THIS, THIS PROJECT IN ORDER TO, UM, WORK WITH JOHN AND, AND HIS FIANCE'S, UM, YOU KNOW, STANDARDS AND, AND, AND TO TRY AND GIVE THEM THE MOST AMOUNT OF SPACE WITHOUT REALLY BLOWING THE ADDITION OUT OF PROPORTION TO THE EXISTING.
UM, WE'VE WORKED VERY CLOSELY WITH THE HOA TO, TO, UH, TO GET TO THIS, TO THIS POINT.
AND THE HOA HAS APPROVED OUR PLANS AND, UM, WE JUST LOOK FORWARD TO GETTING THIS PROJECT UNDERWAY.
UH, WE WANT TO, YOU KNOW, MAINTAIN ALL OF THE EXTERIOR AESTHETICS AND, UM, JUST TRY AND MAKE IT LOOK CONGRUENT WITH THE EXISTING AND THE ADDITION, SO THAT WAY, UM, YOU KNOW, WE DON'T HAVE TO PUSH WALLS BACK WITHIN THE EXISTING, UH, STRUCTURE AND TRY AND HAVE IT, YOU KNOW, MAX TRY AND MAXIMIZE THE AMOUNT OF SQUARE FOOTAGE THAT WE CAN, UH, FIT ON THAT PROPERTY, UM, WITHOUT GOING BEYOND THE LIMITS.
SO I HOPE YOU GUYS TAKE OUR CONSIDERATION AND I APPRECIATE ALL OF YOUR TIME.
THIS TIME I'M GONNA ASK IF THERE'S ANY OTHER MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM.
IF YOU CAN PLEASE RESTATE YOUR NAME.
UH, AMANDA REYNOLDS NOR HILL ASSOCIATION.
[02:00:01]
UM, AS, AS WAS MENTIONED, THE, THE HOMEOWNERS DID WORK WITH US QUITE A BIT.UM, WE FELT THAT THE BUMP OUT WAS NOT TOO FAR AND IT'S AS IT'S THE BUMP OUT WAS ALL, IT WASN'T TOO MUCH TO THE SIDE AND IT WAS FAR BACK ON THE PROPERTY.
UM, THEY CHANGED THE REAR PORCH TO JUST ADD A LITTLE BIT MORE SIMILARITY TO THE ARCHITECTURE OF THE REST OF THE HOUSE, UM, IN THEIR ORIGINAL DESIGNS.
SO WE FEEL THAT THE SCALE IS REALLY IN LINE WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, GOING BACK TO THE CONVERSATION EARLIER ABOUT HISTORIC MATERIALS BEING PRESERVED, UM, WE RECOGNIZE THAT THAT'S IMPORTANT, BUT I, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING, I THINK WITH THE NOR HILL NEIGHBORHOOD IN GENERAL, UM, IT'S HISTORICALLY PROTECTED, NOT BECAUSE THOSE HOUSES AS INDIVIDUALLY ARE ARCHITECTURALLY SIGNIFICANT, UM, OR THAT ANYTHING, UM, ABOUT AN INDIVIDUAL HOUSE IS SIGNIFICANT.
IT'S REALLY THAT THOSE 800 HOUSES TOGETHER ARE HISTORICALLY SIGNIFICANT AS KIT HOUSES.
UM, SO WE FEEL, UM, IN THAT WAY IT'S HISTORICALLY A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT.
UM, THAT'S WHY WE, WE APPROVE THE SECOND STORIES AND DON'T WORRY ABOUT THE ARCHITECTURAL MATERIAL THE SAME WAY.
UM, AND WE FEEL THE SAME WITH THIS HOUSE, THAT IT FITS THE, THE MOST IMPORTANT PART OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD HISTORICALLY, UM, WHICH IS THE SCALING.
LEMME JUST ASK IF THERE'S ANY OTHER MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC.
SO IF, IF THERE ARE ANY OTHER MEMBERS THAT DIDN'T SIGN OUT THAT WANT TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM, PLEASE ANNOUNCE YOURSELF NOW.
THAT HEARING, I'M GONNA CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT THIS TIME IN COMMISSION MEMBERS.
I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE ARCHITECTS, UH, ON THE COMMISSION.
SO ON PAGE 17 AND 18, THE EXISTING WEST ELEVATION ON 17, THE EXISTING EAST ELEVATION, THOSE ARE NOT DRAWN CORRECTLY.
AM I? THAT'S NOT SHOWING A HIP ROOF ON THE BACK, IS IT? IT LOOKS LIKE A HIP ROOF TO ME.
IS THERE A, I THINK, I THINK THE ISSUE IS THAT THE SCALE, THE TWO DRAWINGS ARE NOT THE SAME.
IS THAT THE DRAWING ON THE TOP IS A, I MEAN, I, I'M LOOKING AT PHOTO, I CAN'T QUITE TELL PHOTOGRAPH ON I'M, I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND.
SO THE, THE ROOF ON THE REAR ELEVATION, I MEAN THE ROOF IS HIP.
NOW THE PHOTOGRAPH ON, UM, OF THE REAR ELEVATION ON PAGE EIGHT.
OH, THE EXISTING DRAWING YOU'RE SAYING? YEAH.
DOES THAT SHOW A HIP ROOF? THE EXISTING, I MEAN, I'M, NO, THAT'S WRONG.
IF YOU LOOK AT THE EXISTING VERSUS WHAT'S BELOW, THEN IT DOESN'T APPEAR TO BE A PROBLEM BECAUSE YOU'RE NOT, YOU'RE JUST ABUTTING THE ROOFS.
BUT WHAT'S HAPPENING IS THEY'RE GONNA TAKE THAT THE, THE REAR PORTION OF THE HIP OFF AND CONTINUE THE ROOF LINE, OR THEY EXTEND IT FOR THE EXTEND THE ROOF EXTEND LINE.
THAT'S, UH, BUT THEY'RE, EXCUSE ME, BUT THEY'RE EXTENDING THE ROOF IN EITHER CASE, RIGHT? WHAT, WHATEVER IT IS NOW, THEY'RE GONNA RUN.
WELL, IT'S HARD TO TELL WHERE THE HOUSE ENDS AND THE ADDITION STARTS.
LIKE I I, I WOULD LIKE THERE TO BE A LINE OR SOMETHING ON THE DRAWING SHOWING WHERE THE CHANGE IS.
I DON'T READ DRAWINGS AS, AS WELL, WELL AS YOU GUYS DO, BUT I HAVE A STRUGGLING WITH AN EXTENS I COMMISSIONERS.
I JUST WANT TO COMMENT THAT WE AS STAFF, I THINK IT WAS THE LAST COUPLE OF DAYS, MAYBE IT WAS YESTERDAY, UH, COMMISSIONER, I MEAN, STAFF MEMBER QUIGLEY AND I WERE NOTICE THE COMMENTING THAT THE DRAWING IS INCORRECT.
COMMISSIONER AUER JACKSON IS CORRECT.
THAT WHERE IT SHOWS EXISTING, IT'S SHOWING IT AS A GABLE, A GABLE ROOF, NOT A HIP ROOF.
WHEN IN FACT CURRENTLY THERE'S A HIP ROOF THERE.
AND IT WAS AT, YOU KNOW, THAT THE POINT WHERE WE, OUR CONDITIONAL APPROVAL IS THAT WE'RE, SO WE THINK THAT SHOULD BE EXPOSED.
I UNDERSTAND WHERE THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATES FEELS OF SCALE IS APPROPRIATE, BUT FOR US IT WAS JUST, AND WE WERE, WE VISITED THE SITE AND IT JUST FELT LIKE THAT WOULD KEEP THE ORIGINAL PROPORTION OF THE HOUSE CL CLEAN.
ALTHOUGH THE ADJACENT PROPERTY IS A, IS A, IS A LONG HOUSE
HOW, HOW MUCH FURTHER IS THE, THE RIDGE LINE BEYOND, BEYOND THE ORIGINAL? DO WE, IS THAT A QUESTION WE CAN ANSWER? SORRY.
YOU'D HAVE TO DRAW, UM, A DIAGONAL LINE AT THE REAR WALL OF THE HOUSE.
AND SO THIS PORTION, SO THE ORIGINAL, AM I, AM I READING IT WHERE THE ORIGINAL HIP? I'M SORRY.
WHO'S ANSWERING THESE QUESTIONS? THESE A QUESTION FOR STAFF.
[02:05:01]
I'M GETTING QUESTIONS, BUT YEAH, BUT I MEAN, I GUESS I'M, I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT IF IT'S A HIP ON THE BACK OF THE HOUSE.I THINK THE STAFF PERSON IS CONTROLLING THE PROJECTION COULD DRAW ON THE PLAN AT A 45 DEGREE ANGLE AT THE STARTING FROM THE REAR RIGHT THERE.
AND YOU CAN ESTABLISH BASICALLY WHERE THE HIP STOPS CURRENTLY.
I I GUESS THE POINT OF MY, UM,
UM, BUT, BUT IF THIS IS A COUPLE OF FEET OF EXTENDING THE RIDGE LINE AND WE'RE STILL COMING DOWN IN A, HE A PARTIAL HIP TO THE REAR, UM, IS THAT MORE PALATABLE TO THE COMMISSION THAN A TWO STORY EDITION OR I, I DON'T MIND A DIFFERENT MIND EDITION.
I JUST KEEP GOING BACK TO CATEGORY THREE WHERE WE'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO CREATE THE APPEARANCE OF SOMETHING MORE MODERN OR, OR MORE HISTORIC THAN THE ORIGINAL.
AND HERE WE ARE AGAIN DOING THE BRACKETS AND THE COLUMNS AND ALL THESE TRADITIONAL DETAILS.
WE, WE KEEP VIOLATING CATEGORY THREE OF WHAT WE'RE SUPPOSED TO BE LOOKING AT.
LIKE WE'VE DONE IT THREE TIMES SO FAR.
UM, SO I CAN SPEAK TO THE ROOF LINE.
UM, SO LIKE YOU WERE SAYING, IF WE WERE ALLOWED THEM TO NOT RETAIN THE REAR HIP ROOF, IT COULD GIVE THE IMPRESSION THAT IT IS NO LONGER ORIGINAL.
THAT WAS THE POINT THAT WE WERE TRYING TO KEEP IT SO THAT WAY YOU COULD SEE WHERE THE ORIGINAL HOUSE ENDED.
UM, AND JUST LIKE THE NEIGHBOR, IT IS SIGNIFICANTLY LONGER AS IT EXTENDS OUTWARD.
UM, CAN YOU GO BACK TO THE PICTURE, JASON, THAT I HAD TOLD YOU? THE TOP ONE, THAT ONE DOES THE ORIGINAL HOUSE END WHERE THE BUMP OUT BEGINS THE BUMP OUT? YES.
SO, SO DOESN'T THE BUMP OUT SERVE AS THE DIFFERENTIATION BETWEEN THE ADDITION IN THE ORIGINAL HOUSE? I MEAN, WE USE THE INSET ALL THE TIME IN THE, IN THE HEIGHTS.
IT'S PART OF THE DESIGN GUIDELINES.
I MEAN, THAT'S HOW WE DO DIFFERENTIATE IT.
SO WHY ARE WE ASKING THEM TO DIFFERENTIATE THIS TWICE? YEAH.
UM, SO ON THE RIGHT SIDE, THAT IS A STREET CORNER AND SO IT IS DIFFERENTIATING THERE.
BUT THE OTHER SIDE, IT IS A CONTINUATION.
IT'S A CONTINUOUS LINE ABOUT 60 FEET AND UM, IT WOULD ESSENTIALLY MATCH THE HOUSE NEXT DOOR, WHICH WAS ORIGINALLY THAT LONG.
UM, AND WE HAVE THE SAME BOARD MAPS TO SHOW THAT IT WAS ORIGINALLY THAT LONG.
AND WE DON'T WANT TO GIVE THE IMPRESSION THAT THAT IS HOW THE HOUSE ORIGINALLY WAS WHEN IT WASN'T.
AND I ASSUME THAT HOUSE THAT WAS VERY LONG WAS AN OUTLIER IN TERMS OF THE MM-HMM
THE BLOCKED FACE RIGHT THERE? YES.
SO THEN WHY NOT SO POINT, IS THERE A POINT OF COMPROMISE WHERE WE COULD ASK THEM TO INSET ON THE LEFT SIDE AND WE GIVE THEM THE ROOF? WE HAD ORIGINALLY ASKED THEM TO DO THAT AND THEY WERE NOT WILLING TO.
CAN WE ASK THE APPLICANT THAT QUESTION IF THAT'S A COMPROMISE THAT YOU WOULD BE WILLING TO, TO KEEP THE ROOF? I MEAN, WE'VE ALSO USED OTHER METHODS LIKE A VERTICAL BOARD.
I MEAN WE, IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY HAVE TO BE AN NSAID, BUT I THINK THAT'S A, A BETTER WAY TO DEAL WITH THIS THEN ASK HIM TO REDESIGN THE WHOLE ROOF STRUCTURE FOR WHAT LOOKS TO BE NOT VERY MANY FEET OF ADDITION.
SO IN NOR HILL NOR THE THE NEIGHBORHOOD APPROVES IT? YEAH, I MEAN IT WOULD BE MY RECOMMENDED.
I WOULD, I WOULD MAKE A MOTION TO JUST, THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAD TO AGREE TO HAVE HISTORIC GUIDELINES PUT IN PLACE AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD APPROVES OF THIS EDITION.
SO I DUNNO WHY WE'RE TRYING TO GO AGAINST THE WILL OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
WELL, ONE, I THINK THEY STILL NEED TO POINT OF ORDERS SPECIFY, JUSTIFY THE DETAILING BECAUSE CATEGORY THREE SAYS TO NOT MIMIC HISTORIC DETAILING, COULD WE AT LEAST PUT THE DRAWINGS UP OR ELEVATIONS OF THE SIDE THAT MIGHT ADDRESS THE, THE DETAILING THAT'S BEEN DISCUSSED, THE BOARD ON THE LEFT, AND ALLOW THE DIFFERE DIFFERENTIATION AND THEN PUT DIFFERENT SIDING ON THE BACK RID I IT'S BRACKETS OR THE COLUMNS ARE ON THE REAR ELEVATION, THEN I DON'T THINK WE CAN, I MEAN, WE DON'T, TYPICALLY YOU SEE 'EM FROM THE STREET AT THE CORNER PROPERTY, BUT THE GARAGE IS BLOCKING THE, THE BACK OF THE PORCH.
I MEAN, LOOK AT THE SIDE ELEVATION.
I MEAN YOU CAN'T SEE ANY OF THE, THE DETAILING.
CAN WE ENLARGE THAT IMAGE BY CHANCE OF THE PROPOSED,
[02:10:20]
CAN WE ALSO BRING A PHOTOGRAPH UP OF THE HOUSE ITSELF SHOWING THE DETAILING AT THE SOFFIT THAT'S BEING DISCUSSED, AT LEAST ON THE ORIGINAL HOME FOR REFERENCE.IS IT, IS IT TRUE THAT ON THE DRAWINGS THAT THE, THE EAVES ARE NOT BEING RENDERED? CAN YOU REPEAT THAT? I'M SORRY.
WELL, UM, I WANNA PUT UP THE SIDE OF THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE, LIKE THE, LIKE THE SIDE ELEVATION OF THE HOUSE PHOTOGRAPH.
SO, 'CAUSE I SEE RECTOR TAILS IN SOME OF THE IMAGES AND I DON'T SEE RECTOR TAILS IN THE DRAWING IF WE, IF WE ENLARGE THEM ON THE DRAWING.
SO I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT, I KNOW THE ROOF WAS NOT DRAWN CORRECTLY ON THE HIP.
THE RAFTER TAILS ARE NOT ON THE DRAWINGS, BUT THERE ARE RAFTER TAILS.
YES, IT WAS DRAWING CORRECTLY.
SO THEN I GUESS TO ANSWER JUST TO, UH, MR COUCH, UM, I DUNNO HOW WE DEAL WITH, LIKE, WE HAVE A DRAWING THAT'S NOT SHOWING RAFTER TAILS ON A HOUSE THAT HAS RAFTER TAILS ON THE EXISTING, THE DRAWING'S NOT ACCURATE THAT WE ALREADY SAW A MISTAKE ON THE EXISTING, LIKE, LIKE THESE DRAWINGS ARE NOT VERY PRECISE.
SO I, MAYBE WE JUST NEED TO HAVE THEM REDRAW IT AND SHOW WHAT THEY'RE REALLY WORKING WITH.
WELL, TO TO YOUR POINT THOUGH, UM, IF, IF WE CAN WE, I MEAN WE CAN SEE THAT THERE ARE RAFTER TAILS ON THE ORIGINAL HOME.
AND, AND THEY, IF WE CAN LARGE THAT IMAGE FOR INSTANCE, THAT'S ON SCREEN CURRENTLY TO FOCUS ON THE FASCIA.
SO ON PAGE EIGHT OF 26, THE RIGHT ELEVATION, THE EAST ELEVATION, THERE ACTUALLY ARE NOT RAFTER TAILS BEING SHOWN.
SO THE DRAWING ACTUALLY IS CORRECT.
WELL, SO SOMETIMES THERE'S A VERTICAL BOARD OVER THE RAFTERS, BUT THERE'S STILL EXPOSED FROM UNDERNEATH.
I'M JUST TRYING TO GET AN UNDERSTANDING.
WHICH IS IT HERE? IT'S, IT'S THAT THERE'S A, THERE'S A FASCIA BOARD, THERE'S A FASCIA BOARD COVERING THE TAILS, AND THEN THE GUTTER THAT'S AT THE REAR.
ROMAN JUST WENT OVER THE OWNER.
OKAY, SO THERE'S, OKAY, ROMAN, PLEASE GO AHEAD.
THERE'S A FASCIA BOARD COVERING THE RAFTERS AND THEN THE GUTTER IS ATTACHED TO THAT.
UM, I GUESS THE DRAWING IS IN BETWEEN, I DON'T KNOW.
DO YOU DRAW THE
YOU, YOU KNOW, THERE, SO MY QUESTION I GUESS FOR COMMISSIONER COUCH IS THAT THE, THE MAIN HOUSE APPEARS THAT IT DOES HAVE RAPTOR TAILS THAT ARE COVERED BY A VERTICAL BOARD, WHICH IS SOMETIMES THE CASE, SOMETIMES THAT BOARD IS, IS FULL DEPTH, SOMETIMES IT'S NOT FULL DEPTH.
UM, YOU'RE CONCERNED ABOUT THE, THE DETAILING ON THE REAR ADDITION.
IF YOU WERE FINE WITH THE MASSING, IF THERE'S A VERTICAL BOARD BETWEEN THE TWO, WHAT WHAT WOULD YOU RECOMMEND FOR THAT SFA CONDITION TO SIMPLIFY IT? YOU CAN JUST DO A BOX SOFFIT OR SOMETHING.
I MEAN, I'M ONLY GOING BY WHAT'S ON THE DRAWINGS AND I CAN SEE THE PORCH COLUMNS AND THE BRACKETS ON THE BACK OF THE HOUSE THAT ARE COPYING WHAT'S ON THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE.
AND I'M GOING TO, TO CATEGORY THREE THAT SAYS AVOID THE APPEARANCE OF HISTORIC WHATEVER WHEN YOU'RE REPLACING THINGS.
SO I'M JUST TRYING TO RECONCILE WHAT I SEE WITH WHAT THE GUIDELINES SAY.
SO THE TWO THINGS I'M HEARING AT LEAST ON THE COMMISSION WAS ADDING A VERTICAL BOARD TO DIFFERENTIATE BETWEEN THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE AND THE ADDITION AND SIMPLIFYING THE REAR SOFFIT WITH A, WITH A MORE BOX, LIKE, AND DO WE KNOW WHAT THE SIDING'S GONNA BE ON THE ADDITION? IT WOULD BE HARDY HARDY SIDING.
SO IT'S GONNA, IT'S GONNA APPEAR DIFFERENT.
YES, BUT THANK SMOOTH THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE IS, UH, TEARDROP SIDING.
JUST IT'S LIKE 1 17, 1 17 TEARDROP.
BECAUSE IT SAYS HORIZONTAL WOOD SIDING TO MATCH EXISTING HOUSE ON THE, ON THE DESCRIPTION HERE.
YEAH, I DON'T SEE WHERE IT SAYS HARDY SIDING.
YES, IT IS HORIZONTAL WOOD SIDING.
WELL, I THINK THE MASSING AND STUFF
[02:15:01]
IS FINE.I THINK IF WE MAKE SOME SMALL SUGGESTIONS ABOUT DETAILING, THEN IT WOULD BE FINE.
UM, I'M GONNA POSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS ITEM.
UM, COMMISSIONER COUCHER, ARE YOU PREPARED TO MAKE A MOTION? YES.
I WANTED TO POINT OUT THAT IN THE PAST THE COMMISSION HAS NOT ENCOURAGED WINDOW REMOVAL, UH, ON THE STREET FACING SIDE OF A HOUSE ON THE CORNER.
YOU KNOW, THE SMALL WINDOW ON THE EAST SIDE, BUT HAS BEEN REMOVED.
I MEAN, THERE'S NO MENTION ON THE APPLICATION OF THAT IF, IF THE WINDOW WILL BE REMOVED ON THAT EAST SIDE OR NOT.
IS THAT THE CASE? IT, UH, THE APPLICATION ON THE FRONT, UM, DOES SAY, UH, ONE SMALL SINGLE PANE WINDOW TO BE REMOVED ON THE EAST RIGHT ELEVATION.
AND THEN, UM, ONE SMALL SINGLE PANE WINDOW TO BE ADDED ON THE WEST LEFT ELEVATION.
KARA, IS THAT, IS THAT SINGLE WINDOW NOW AND A NON-ORIGINAL WINDOW? I MEAN, IT'S, IT'S A, AT THAT SQUARE SINGLE WINDOW.
IT'S A MISTAKE THEY'RE NOT REMOVING.
UH, WE JUST RECEIVED A WORD THAT THEY'RE NOT REMOVING THE WINDOW AFTER ALL.
COMMISSIONER STAAVA, IS THERE ADDITIONAL, UH, QUESTIONS? NO, THAT WAS IT.
I WAS JUST CONCERNED ABOUT THE REMOVAL OF THE WINDOW ON THIS, ON THE STRAIGHT ON THE STREET FACING SIDE.
CAN I, UH, JUST, UH, MAKE A FRIENDLY SUGGESTION TO, UH, COMMISSIONER COUCH BECAUSE I THINK HE'S ABOUT READY TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION.
UH, THAT I ACTUALLY WOULD'VE LIKED THIS PROJECT TO BE DEFERRED JUST AS MUCH AS THE OTHER ONE THAT WAS DEFERRED EARLIER BECAUSE THERE WERE SO MANY LITTLE THINGS HERE THAT ARE INACCURATE AND IMPROPERLY DRAWN THAT I DON'T HAVE THE CONFIDENCE THAT WHAT WE EVER SAY VERBALLY HERE WILL BE TRANSLATED ONTO PERMITTING.
AND THEN AFTER THAT, THE LAST THING I WANNA SEE IS A COR.
AFTER THAT, I THINK, WAIT, THIS HAPPENS.
IF WE CAN DEFINE CONDITIONS AND THEY'RE NOT MAJOR, UM, WHEN THEY PULL THE PERMIT, THERE'S A HOLD ON.
THE PROJECT STAFF HAS TO RELEASE THAT HOLD.
SO THE COMMENTS THAT WE MAKE TODAY WILL HAVE TO BE PUT INTO THE DRAWINGS THAT GO TO CITY PERMIT IS MY UNDERSTANDING.
AND STAFF, YOU, YOU CAN LET ME TELL ME IF I'M WRONG.
AND ONLY ONCE THEY, THEY GO DOWN THEIR CHECKLIST AND MAKE SURE THAT ALL THE ITEMS, INCLUDING THESE CONDITIONS THAT MAY BE MAY OR MAY NOT BE DISCUSSED ARE SATISFIED, THEN THEY WILL RELEASE THE HOLD FOR CONSTRUCTION TO BEGIN.
BUT, BUT AS LONG AS WE, THEY'RE DEFINABLE AND IF THEY'RE SMALLER IN NATURE SO THAT THEY, THEY DON'T REQUIRE REDRAWING.
'CAUSE WHENEVER I GET A DRAWING RELEASE, I HAVE TO STILL, THEY HAVE TO, THEY HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE DRAWING AND MAKE SURE THAT EVERYTHING THAT YOU SAID YOU WOULD DO IS IN FACT ON THE PERMIT DRAWINGS.
WELL, MR. CHAIRMAN, I WOULD LIKE TO LISTEN TO HOW SMALL AND DEFINABLE IT IS RIGHT NOW.
BECAUSE THE OTHER ONE WAS PRETTY, PRETTY COMPLICATED AND WE DEFERRED IT.
MR. COUCH, ARE YOU READY? SURE.
I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE ACCEPT THE DESIGN, THE PLAN, AND THE MASSING AS IT STANDS, BUT WITH THE CHANGES IN THE DETAILS, INCLUDING THE SIDING.
ON THE ADDITION IS HARDY SIDING AND NOT ONE 17.
THERE'S A VERTICAL BOARD BETWEEN THE NEW SIDING AND THE OLD SIDING ON THE WEST ELEVATION.
THE COLUMNS ON THE BACK PORCH ARE PLAIN POSTS.
THERE'S NO BRACKETS ON THE ADDITION.
AND THE ADDITION HAS BOXED EAVES.
IS THERE A SECOND? COMMISSIONER WEAU JACKSON.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? FRIENDLY AMENDMENT.
CAN WE JUST STATE IN THE MOTION THAT THAT WINDOW IS GOING TO BE RETAINED SO IT'S ON THE RECORD? SURE.
AND THE WINDOW THAT'S CURRENTLY MARKED TO BE REMOVED ON THE EAST ELEVATION REMAINS IN THE FINAL PROJECT.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? UH, CAN YOU RESTATE THE THING ABOUT BRACKETS, BUT BRACKET YOU WERE NO BRACKET? NO, NO BRACKET.
[02:20:01]
ARE THERE ANY ABSTENTIONS? THAT MOTION PASSES.WE'RE MOVING ON TO ITEM EI BELIEVE.
COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC, NOT HEARING ANY COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC.
I'M GOING TO ASK FOR COMMENTS FROM THE HAHC.
I ASK THIS FREQUENTLY, BUT IS THERE ANY MOVEMENT ON FIGURING OUT FINES FOR NON-COMPLIANCE? I'M SORRY, WHAT? I SAID, I ASKED THIS QUESTION RATHER FREQUENTLY, BUT HAS THERE BEEN ANY MOVEMENT ON BEING ABLE TO LEVY FINES FOR PEOPLE THAT ARE IN NON-COMPLIANCE FOR THE HISTORIC ORDINANCE? THERE, THERE ARE ALREADY FINES IN EXISTENCE IN, IN THE CODE.
THE PROBLEM IS GETTING CODE ENFORCEMENT TO GO OUT AND ISSUE CITATIONS AND GO THROUGH THAT PROCESS THAT IS ALREADY THERE.
AS YOU MAY RECALL, WE WERE WHILE, UM, STAFF, WHILE THE LITIGATION ON THE WHOLE HISTORIC PRESERVATION PROGRAM WAS PENDING, WE WERE WORKING ON AMENDMENTS TO, UM, THE CODE TO CHAPTER 33 THAT WOULD ALLOW STAFF TO TAKE ON IF PROPERLY TRAINED AND LICENSED TO DO SO, UM, ADDITIONAL CODE ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITIES.
AND THAT IS STILL, IT'S DRAFTED, IT'S, IT'S THERE, BUT IT GOT PUT ON HOLD AS STAFF WAS LOOKING AT YET AGAIN, ADDITIONAL AMENDMENTS.
AND OF COURSE, DURING THE PENDENCY OF THAT LITIGATION, YOU DON'T MESS WITH THE CODE WHILE THAT'S GOING ON.
SO, UM, THAT JUST, I THINK PROBABLY FROM A TIME PERSPECTIVE JUST HASN'T YET BEEN PICKED BACK UP.
SO IS THAT SOMETHING LITIG THAT'S OVER AND IS IT YEAH, IT'S, IT'S BEEN OVER FOR A WHILE NOW.
SO CAN I UNDERSTAND, I'M ONE ATTORNEY.
CAN WE CLONE YOU? I KEEP ASKING FOR A CLONING MACHINE.
I TELL SANTA I'VE BEEN REALLY GOOD, BUT THEY HAVEN'T GIVEN ME ONE YET.
AND I HAVE, I HAVE OF COURSE LET HIGHER UP KNOW THAT, YOU KNOW, PLANNING HAS A LOT GOING ON, SO, SO JUST, I'M HOPEFUL.
WHEN YOU SAY THE STAFF WANTED TO MAKE AMENDMENTS, WHAT WERE, WERE YOU WORKING WITH LIKE ROMAN AND THEM ON, ON THESE CHANGE, WHATEVER THESE ARE? I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT THEY ARE.
THIS IS THE FIRST I'VE HEARD, UH, HE CAN DESCRIBE THE PROJECT.
I CAN DESCRIBE IT BRIEFLY, BUT WE, THE STAFF WENT THROUGH, UM, CHAPTER 33 AND MADE KIND OF WHAT THEY CONSIDERED, I'LL CALL PART A AND PART B AMENDMENTS VERY URGENT AND KIND OF WOULD BE NICE IF WE COULD DO IT.
UM, SO THERE'S TWO LISTS PROPOSED.
UM, AMANDA WAS WORKING ON THOSE WHEN SHE WAS HERE.
UM, SO I DON'T, I, I KNOW WITH TURNOVER AND SUCH, I DON'T KNOW WHERE THAT'S LANDED, BUT YEAH.
WE, WE DO HAVE THOSE DRAFTED THOSE, THOSE AMENDMENTS DRAFTED NOW THAT THE PRESSURE'S OFF AND, UH, LEGAL HAS AN EXTRA PERSON, I THINK TOO, MAYBE WE CAN BRING, BRING THIS FORWARD.
THEN YOU HAVE A NEW PERSON THAT'S WORKING WITH YOU, I THOUGHT.
UM, SO YEAH, BUT THEY, WE REMEMBER AND WE BROUGHT THOSE IN.
WE, WE SHOWED THOSE TO COMMISSION, UH, AS FAR AS THERE WERE SOME, UH, ENFORCEMENT WORDS AND SOME THINGS IN THERE ABOUT THAT MM-HMM
AND, AND WE CAN MOVE THAT BACK UP AND UNDERSTAND, YOU KNOW, CERTAINLY FROM PLANNING AND, AND CERTAINLY FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, YOU KNOW, WE'VE HAD A LOT OF PRIORITIES THAT HAVE BEEN COMING OUT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES AND THE MAYOR'S PROGRAMS THAT HAVE TAKEN PRIORITY.
AND SO WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON THOSE.
WE DID GET CONSERVATION DISTRICTS DONE.
UM, MOVING ON TO THE NEXT TOPIC, I GUESS IS, UH, I WOULD LIKE TO ASK HOW SOON CAN WE GET THE CLASS TOGETHER? BECAUSE, UH, THROUGHOUT TODAY WE HAVE HEARD 75, MAYBE 50, MAYBE 70, AND ALSO FIELD TRIPS, PRESERVATION OF HISTORIC MATERIAL.
WHAT? AND, AND I LIKE IT TO BE US TO HAVE ALL HAVE CONSISTENCY SURE.
IN THIS GROUP, INCLUDING APPEALS BOARD AS WELL.
UM, SO I GUESS, UH, MY, MY PRESSURE IS TO HAVE THIS SOONER RATHER THAN LATER.
WE TALKED ABOUT THIS IN OUR LAST MEETING WHEN WE HAD A WHOLE BIG GROUP TOGETHER, BUT I HAVEN'T SEEN YES, WHEN WE'RE GONNA DO IT.
UM, WE, UM, WE DID, UH, RECEIVE A GRANT FROM THE NATIONAL TRUST FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION TO DO THE CLASS, UM, THAT WE JUST HEARD ABOUT THAT, UM, A WEEK OR TWO AGO.
SO WE ARE, UM, WORKING THROUGH THE PROCESS OF GET, BEING ABLE TO ACCESS THOSE FUNDS AND THEN WE WILL START WORKING ON THE DETAILS.
[02:25:01]
SOON.SO IS THIS, IS THIS CLASS OR CAMP OR WHATEVER YOU CALL IT, IS THAT GONNA INCLUDE A TOUR OF THINGS THAT WE, THAT'S WE DISCUSSED? YEAH.
SO WE CAN SEE THE RESULTS OF OUR DECISIONS.
AND I THINK MR. JACKSON WEAU HELPED, HELPED KIND OF FACILITATE OR JUST, JUST POINTED WHERE TO APPLY FOR THAT GRANT TO, TO KIND OF, WHICH IS ALWAYS HELPFUL IF YOU KNOW WHERE TO LOOK.
SO WE WERE YEAH, THANKFUL FOR THAT.
AND, AND TAYLOR ON OUR TEAM DID A LOT OF THE HEAVY LIFTING TO GET THAT.
I THINK WE DO HAVE A, ACTUALLY ANOTHER GRANT WE WERE WAITING TO HEAR FROM.
WE WANNA HAVE THE A TOUR, IT WOULD, UM, YOU KNOW, REQUIRE, YOU KNOW, A HALF DAY OR MORE OF YOUR TIME.
UM, AND WE'LL START TALKING ABOUT SCHEDULING THAT AND YEAH.
MAY I ALSO SUGGEST THAT WHEN WE HAVE THIS CLASS OR CAMP THAT IT'S TAILORED MORE TOWARDS HOUSTON'S PARTICULAR NEEDS AND NOT FROM THE NATIONAL REGISTRAR OR SOME, SOMEBODY THAT HAS GENERIC THINGS AND THEN DON'T PERTAIN TO EXACTLY WHAT WE ARE DEALING ON A DAY-TO-DAY BASIS HERE.
YEAH, BECAUSE THE ONE COMMISSIONER STA HAS A COMMENT.
UH, SINCE THE LAST FEW YEARS WE'VE BEEN GIVING A LOT MORE, UH, UH, C OF R AND UH, I'VE NOTICED THERE'S NO TIMELINE AND I'M AFRAID THAT THEY'RE LOSING THE, GETTING LOST IN THE SYSTEM 'CAUSE THEY'RE NOT DOCUMENTED AS PART OF THE TITLE.
AND FOR EXAMPLE, I'M HEARING A STORIES THAT, UH, SOME HOMEOWNERS, FOR EXAMPLE, ARE SELLING, UH, THE FRONT, UH, SABINE ON, ON SABINE STREET AND THAT, UH, THEY HAD A C OF R FROM A FEW MONTHS AGO AND THEY DECIDED TO IGNORE IT AND PUT THOSE ON HOLD FOR YEARS AND YEARS UNTIL THEY SOLD IT.
AND SO I'M JUST, I'M AFRAID THAT THERE'S GONNA BE A BIG TURNOVER WITHIN THE OFFICE AND THEN THE, THE C OF R WILL BE KIND OF BECOME LOST.
SO I THINK THAT WE SHOULD CONSIDER THAT, UH, CONSIDER A TIMELINE OR AN EXPIRATION DATE OF SORTS.
WELL, AND AREN'T THE C OF R THOSE STILL TIED TO ANY BUILDING ACTIVITIES? SO IF YOU PUT PULL A PERMIT OR IS THERE A MAYBE ROMAN OR KIM? YEAH, A BUILDING PERMIT'S USUALLY 180 DAYS, BUT IT CAN BE EXTENDED AND EXTENDED AND EXTENDED.
SO THE C OF R IS, IS IS HELPFUL BECAUSE YOU USUALLY GOT THAT BECAUSE YOU'VE GOT RED TAGS.
AND IF YOU'VE GOT RED TAGS, THEN YOU, YOU'RE HOPE YOU'RE HELD UP IN PERMITTING IN EVERY WAY.
SO FOR EXAMPLE, I MEAN THAT, THAT, THAT DOESN'T GO AWAY, RIGHT? YOU, IT GOES IN THE SYSTEM.
FOR THE MOMENT, THE NEXT PERSON BUY, BUYS IT AND PULLS A PERMIT.
IT'S GONNA GET FLAGS AND GO UP.
SO I MEAN, IF THIS, YEAH, IF IF THIS EXAMPLE TODAY, IF WHICH HAD A SALE PENDING, IF IN GLENBROOK VALLEY, IF, IF IT SELLS AND THE PROPERTY OWNER DOESN'T GO PULL ANY PERMITS, THEN HE COULD, HE OR SHE COULD LIVE WITH THE COR FOR UNTIL IT EXPIRES.
MAY I, WELL THEY KEEP GETTING RED TAGGED THOUGH, WHICH MR. MCNEAL WOULD BE PRETTY INTIMIDATING.
UH, I, I'D LIKE TO THANK THE WOMAN FROM NOR HILL FOR COMING.
IT WAS SUPER HELPFUL FOR ME TO HEAR FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO THANK YOU FOR ALL YOUR TIME HERE TODAY.
FOR ME, IT'S SUPER IMPORTANT TO HEAR FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD WHERE THE HOUSES ARE.
AND THEN, UM, WE HAD A DEMOLITION, THE HOUSE THAT WE TALKED ABOUT ON TULANE ABOUT THREE MONTHS AGO, ABOUT DEMOLITION.
AND THEY BROUGHT UP THE 50% RULE.
I EMAILED OUR ESTEEMED LEGAL COUNSEL, SHE WAS ON VACATION.
I WOULD LOVE TO REVISIT THAT 50% RULE.
SO I UNDERSTAND BECAUSE THEY CLAIMED RIGHT, THE 50% RULE, WHICH IS WHY I VOTED FOR DEMOLITION, HOW I READ THAT RULING.
AND THEN I MAY BE INTERPRETING IT TOTALLY WRONG.
SO WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT CAMP, I'D LOVE TO SUBMIT MORE INFORMATION ON THE 50% DEMOLITION RULE AS TO WHERE I VOTE YES FOR DEMOLITION, WHERE I VOTE NO FOR DEMOLITION BASED ON THAT LANGUAGING, EXCUSE ME.
AND THEN ALSO TO COMMISSIONER YAPS, UM, POINT ABOUT SAVING RAFTERS.
LIKE THERE'S ITEMS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA TODAY THAT WE ALLOWED HISTORIC MATERIAL TO BE REMOVED.
BUT IF IT COMES UP IN OUR DISCUSSION, OH MY GOD, WE HAVE TO SAVE HISTORIC MATERIAL.
I WANNA KNOW, BECAUSE WE VOTE ALL THE TIME FOR ADDITIONS TO MOVE FORWARD AND HISTORIC MATERIAL'S TAKEN AWAY.
SO WHAT'S THE ACTUAL LITMUS TEST FOR PRESERVATION? HISTORIC MATERIAL AND NOT, I MEAN, 'CAUSE YOU'RE, WE'RE NOT SAVING RAFTERS AND CEILING JOISTS AND SHIPLAP ON THE BACK OF A BUILDING WHERE THEY'RE DOING AN ADDITION.
SO IT'S KINDA LIKE, WHY ARE WE DOING IT HERE AND NOT DOING IT HERE? UH, I DON'T UNDERSTAND SOMETIMES.
AND THE, AND THE, AND THE LACK OF CONSISTENCY
[02:30:01]
FRUSTRATES ME.SO I'D LOVE, I'D LOVE TO, UH, HAVE A GREAT DISCUSSION ABOUT IT AND KNOW WHEN I'M SUPPOSED TO VOTE YES.
AND WHEN I'M SUPPOSED TO VOTE NO.
AND I THINK PART OF PART OF THAT IS, I MEAN, IT'S STILL A CASE BY CASE SCENARIO 'CAUSE EVERY EVERY PROJECT IS A DIFFERENT PROPORTION, DIFFERENT ASPECTS TO IT.
BUT I, WHAT I HAVE FOUND OVER THESE MANY YEARS THAT MANY OF US HAVE BEEN HERE FOR SOME TIME, THESE CAMPS ARE VERY INTERESTING BECAUSE JUST PUTTING UP SIMPLE DIAGRAMS, KEEPING THE CONVERSATION VERY, A VERY EASY LEVEL TO UNDERSTAND HAS TRANSFORMED THE UNDERSTANDING OF OF THE COMMISSION OVER TIME.
IT LED TO MORE CONSISTENT RULINGS.
QUESTIONS ARE WELCOMED IN THAT, IN TO TRY TO COME TO THAT CONSENSUS SO THAT IT'S NOT JUST US, BUT ALSO STAFF.
SO WE'RE CALIBRATED IN A, IN A, IN A BETTER WAY.
AND THE, THE MORE EVERY TIME WE HAVE HAD CLASSES, I, I'VE WITNESSED THAT THERE'S BEEN MORE ALIGNMENT, UM, IN TERMS OF UNDERSTANDING.
AND I THINK IF EVERYONE UNDERSTANDS THE CONCEPTS AND UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENT POSITIONS PEOPLE HAVE ON COMMISSION AND STAFF, IT LEADS TO BETTER DISCOURSE AND BETTER SOLUTIONS.
AND, AND, YOU KNOW, THE RESOURCES REMAIN MORE PROTECTED FOR FUTURE GENERATIONS, WHICH IS OUR TASK.
BUT I, I WOULD JUST TELL YOU, AS A CONSUMER, THE MOST FRUSTRATING THING FOR ME IS INCONSISTENCY.
WHEN I CALL A DEPARTMENT OR AN ORGANIZATION, I GET TWO.
SO MY ONE AS A COMMISSIONER IS FOR HOMEOWNERS TO BE ABLE TO COME TO US AND EXPECT CONSISTENCY OUT OF OUR COMMISSION.
SO THEY KNOW WHAT TO BRING US.
SO THEY GET A CONSISTENT LEVEL OF VOTING.
AND MY LAST SHOUT OUT IS TO MR. COSGROVE FOR HIS LONGEVITY ON THE COMMISSION.
NO, BUT I REALLY APPRECIATE 'CAUSE YOU HAVE SUCH LONGEVITY AND YOUR HISTORY AND YOUR KNOWLEDGE OF THE, OF THE, OF THE CODE OR, OR YOU KNOW, THE HISTORIC, HISTORIC DOCUMENTS AS THEY WERE.
I, I DO APPRECIATE YOUR INPUT ALL THE TIME.
AND I WILL, I WILL SECOND WHAT, WHAT DAVID'S SAYING IS THAT, I MEAN, I CAN REMEMBER THE SPECIFIC HOUSE FROM THE TOUR WE TOOK THAT CHANGED OUR MIND ABOUT HOW FAR BACK AN ADDITION COULD COME INTO A HOUSE.
IT IS A BLUE HOUSE ON CORTLAND AND 500 BLOCK AND IT, WE DID THAT BACK IN THE DAY WHEN THE PLANNING COMMISSION WAS OUR APPEALS BOARD AND TALK ABOUT A DISCONNECT.
AND WE DID THE WHOLE THING WITH THEM.
AND SURPRISINGLY THEY'LL REMEMBER THEY, THEY CAME ALONG AS WELL WITH US.
THEY, THEY STARTED TO SUPPORT OUR, YOU KNOW, WHEN THEY GOT AN APPEAL.
THEY SUPPORTED US MORE REGULARLY THAN THEY HAD BEEN BECAUSE THEY HAD BEEN OUT THERE AND SEEN SOME OF THE THINGS THAT, THAT WERE DONE.
AND YOU KNOW WHAT, WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE ON PAPER IS NEVER WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE IN PERSON.
SO IT WILL BE TREMENDOUSLY HELPFUL.
'CAUSE I KNOW A LOT OF Y'ALL HAVE NOT BEEN ON ONE OF THOSE, SO.
AND WHEN WE JOINED THE COMMISSION, THE COMMISSION WAS APPROVING REAR EDITIONS THAT WERE FOUR TIMES LARGER THAN THE LITTLE ONE STORY HOUSE IN FRONT.
BUT I WOULD SAY WE WERE OUT HERE IN LIKE 30 MINUTES.
BUT IT, AND WE HAD A LOT OF COMMISSION THERESA, WHO HAD, WHO HAD 5 0 7.
I HAVE ONE MORE ITEM ON THE AGENDA, BUT WE WE'RE NOT FINISHED YET ON, I HAVE A, I HAVE A FUN ANNOUNCEMENT THAT I KNOW NOBODY'S GONNA HAVE AN ISSUE WITH.
OCTOBER IS ARCHEOLOGY MONTH HERE IN TEXAS.
SO THERE'S ARCHEOLOGY ACTIVITIES HAPPENING ALL OVER THE STATE.
IF YOU WANNA KNOW WHAT'S NEARBY, GO TO THE TCS WEBSITE.
SO G IS THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER'S REPORT.
UM, UH, JENNIFER MENTIONED THE GRANT THAT WE'VE RECEIVED FROM THE STATE FOR THE CAMP TRAINING.
SO WE WILL SCHEDULE THAT AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.
WE ARE ALSO WAITING TO SEE IF WE GET THE FEDERAL GRANT BECAUSE I BELIEVE THAT IS A, DOESN'T REQUIRE A MATCH IF WE DO GET THAT ONE.
THE NOR HILL DESIGN GUIDELINES, UM, BEEN ASKED TO SCHEDULE TO BE PRESENT AT A MEETING THE WEEK OF OCTOBER 30TH WITH THE NOR NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION TO DISCUSS THE CURRENT DRAFT OF THOSE GUIDELINES.
SO THAT IS, UM, AND OUT OF THAT, IF, IF THERE'S REASONABLE SUPPORT FOR THAT AS THE WAY THEY'RE CURRENTLY DRAFTED, THEN WE WILL BRING THOSE TO THIS BOARD WITH A PUBLIC, A FORMAL PUBLIC MEETING OR COMMISSIONER AFTER WE CHECK WITH LEGAL ON, ON, ON THAT.
UM, SO, BUT WE DO, THERE'S A SENSE OF URGENCY THERE BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY THIS, THE CASE WE HAD TODAY, UM, OH AND I WANNA SAY ABOUT THE CAMP TRAINING TO COMMISSIONER
THEY, THEY COME AND READ YOUR LOCAL OR PART OF THEIR COMPENSATION 'CAUSE THERE'S SORT OF A COMPENSATION THERE IS THAT THEY REVIEW THE LOCAL ORDINANCE AND C OF AS THAT HAVE BEEN ISSUED.
AND THEY REALLY DO SOME WORK THERE.
THEY DON'T JUST TALK ONLY ABOUT THE SECRETARY INTERIOR STANDARDS.
AND THEN I JUST WANNA SAY ABOUT THAT ITEM ON KEY,
[02:35:01]
AND I THINK I REALIZE NOW THE FIRST SECTION 33 DASH 2 27 C OF CITY ORDINANCE SAYS THAT THE DIRECTOR OF PLANNING MAY INITIATE RECLASSIFICATION.AND YOU'LL SEE ONE OF THOSE COME UP SOON.
WE JUST MET WITH SOMEONE ABOUT A GARAGE APARTMENT IN THE HEIGHTS.
AND THIS WHAT THE, I THINK THE WAY I WAS LOOKING AT IT AND, AND I THINK STAFF TOO WITH THE THAT ITEM AND THE REASON FOR OUR RECOMMENDATION, HOUSTON'S THE ONLY PLACE WHERE THERE'S NO POTENT POTENTIALLY CONTRIBUTING.
TYPICALLY THAT'S STILL A, YOU KNOW, YOUR INVENTORY IN A LOCAL DISTRICT IS GONNA HAVE POTENTIALLY CONTRIBUTING AND THE TREATMENT FOR POTENTIALLY CONTRIBUTING IS THAT IF SOMEONE'S GONNA START WORKING ON IT, THAT YOU'RE TRYING TO TAKE IT BACK TO CONTRIBUTING.
AND HENCE IN THAT CASE WAS THE IDEA, OKAY, WELL THERE'S ORIGINAL SIDING, THERE'S ORIGINAL WINDOWS, SO YOU CAN AT LEAST EXPOSE THAT.
AND AS COMMISSIONER WEAU JACKSON WAS SAYING, HEY, WOULD YOU GIVE US THAT PORCH BACK IS WHAT THE CONVERSATION WAS, YOU KNOW, UM, BUT WE DON'T, YOU KNOW, AND SO WE DIDN'T GO THAT FAR WITH IT, BUT WE, WE HAD 'EM HERE AND THAT.
AND SO THE DISCUSSION, I THINK WHAT HAPPENED IS, SO WE HAVE SOME CONFUSION BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE POTENTIALLY CONTRIBUTING, WE HAVE NON-CONTRIBUTING.
SO THEREFORE YOU GUYS SAY, WELL JUST LET IT GO.
UH, LET IT GO AND JUST, AND IT'S STILL NOT GONE RIGHT? IT'S JUST, JUST LOSES A LITTLE MORE OF THE ORIGINAL MATERIAL, WHICH IS WHERE I THINK FOR ME IT'S A LITTLE CONFUSING.
WHERE DOES THE ORIGINAL MATERIAL MATTER? THERE WAS ORIGINAL SIDING IN GOOD CONDITION ON THAT HOUSE.
UM, AND THE APPLICANT COULD CHOOSE TO CHANGE THEIR MIND AND, AND ADDRESS THAT.
THERE ARE, THERE ARE REASON, THERE ARE VERY OPERABLE WOODEN WINDOWS OR REPAIRABLE WHERE WOODEN WINDOWS ARE HISTORICAL ON THAT BUILDING.
NOW, TODAY THERE WON'T BE AFTER THE SEA OF A IF THEY REPLACE ALL THAT.
SO THAT'S WHERE WE UM, THAT'S WHERE WE DIFFERED THERE ALL THAT TO SAY STAFF IS ABOUT TO GET ONE NEW, UH, STAFF MEMBER BACK.
UM, YOU'LL, I'LL SEE 'EM NEXT, NEXT WEEK OR NEXT MONTH.
AND SO WE'RE PRETTY STAFFED UP AND YOU KNOW, IT, IT CAN BE THAT WE ASSIGN TO SOMEONE TO GO THROUGH AND IT'LL TAKE A WHILE TO GO THROUGH THE 7,000 PROTECTED OR THROUGH THE, THE 7,000 RESOURCES AND SEE IF THEY'RE LABELED CORRECTLY.
'CAUSE MAYBE WE COULD COME TO, TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND TRY TO CORRECT SOME OF THESE.
'CAUSE THEY'RE, SOME OF 'EM ARE REALLY, REALLY BAD.
I MEAN, THEY'RE MISLABELED AND THEY CAUSE, UM, TROUBLE, UM, LIKE THE ITEM APPROVED ON CONSENT TODAY FOR THE NEW CONSTRUCTION ON MONTROSE WAS REPLACING WHAT WAS CLEARLY A CONTRIBUTING BUILDING THAT WAS DEMOLISHED THERE.
UM, BECAUSE LEGALLY IT WAS NON-CONTRIBUTING.
ENROLLMENT, I THINK WE'RE ALSO, SEE WE HAVE A BUNCH OF INVENTORY THAT'S NON-CONTRIBUTING THAT NOW MEETS THE AGE REQUIREMENTS THAT WE COULD ALSO GO BACK AND REASSESS AND POTENTIALLY ADD IN.
GLENBROOK VALLEY'S GOT A LOT GLENBROOK VALLEY THAT WOULD REALLY APPLY TO, I GUESS IT WOULD APPLY MORE TO GLENBROOK VALLEY BECAUSE THE PERIOD OF SIGNIFICANCE IS SO HOW LONG DO WE HAVE TO STAFF IT? ACTUALLY THE, THE CITY CODE SAYS THAT IT, THE PROCESS IS, IS INITIATED BY THE DIRECTOR OF PLANNING.
WE HAVE IT LIKE WE HAD TODAY WHERE SOMEONE'S GONNA MAKE A REQUEST THAT WE LOOK AT ONE.
BUT IT IT, IT CAN BE, AND IT, YOU KNOW, IT JUST, IT IT SHOULD BE RIGHT.
WE HAVE SOMEBODY WE NEED TO REVIEW 'EM ALL.
SO ROMANS, GOING BACK TO YOUR POINT ABOUT THIS NON-CONTRIBUTING, THAT WAS MOST PROBABLY, WHY CAN'T YOU HAVE DONE THAT BEFORE WE CAME TO THIS COMMISSION THAT BECAUSE YOU SAW ORIGINAL WINDOWS, YOU SAW ORIGINAL 1 1 7 SIDING AND COULD WE NOT HAVE ABSOLUTELY NOT GOTTEN THE CONFUSION? UH, IT'S SORT OF A, I BELIEVE IF I CAN IMAGINE, I CAN KINDA KIM'S EYES RIGHT HERE.
SO THEY HAVE COME FORWARD WITH AN APPLICATION, UM, AND WE WOULD THEN HAVE TO SAY, OH, HOLD, HOLD ON A MINUTE.
YEAH, I WOULD, I WOULD THINK LEGALLY WE REMEMBER NOW THAT EVERYTHING THAT GOES TO COUNCIL IN THE FORM OF AN ORDINANCE IS ZONING.
AND SO THAT MEANS IT'S A ROUGHLY A 90 DAY PROCESS.
IF SOMETHING COMES HERE ON AN APPLICATION, IF THEY HAD COME IN AND THE DISCOVERY WAS MADE, OH, THIS WAS MISLABELED, WE'D REALLY LIKE TO TAKE IT AND CHANGE THAT.
WE COULD DO IT WITHOUT THE OWNER'S CONSENT TO A POINT.
BUT, SO IT BECOMES MORE DIFFICULT IF YOU CATCH IT MIDSTREAM LIKE THAT THAN IF WE STARTED OUT LOOKING AT LIKE GLENBROOK VALLEY AND WHAT, WHAT BUILDINGS HAVE AGED IN.
BUT REMEMBER IT HAS TO COME HERE FOR A RECOMMENDATION AND PUBLIC HEARING HAS TO THEN BE PUBLISHED AND GO TO CITY COUNCIL FOR A PUBLIC HEARING AND THEN GET READOPTED BY ORDINANCE.
AND NOT JUST MENTION LIKE IF, IF YOU'RE PULLING A BUILDING PERMIT, FOR INSTANCE, WHEN YOU MAKE YOUR APPLICATION, IT'S UNDER THE, PER THE, THE, ALL THE RULES THAT ARE IN PLACE AT THE MOMENT, AT THE TIME YOU MAKE YOUR APPLICATION.
IF THE CODE CHANGES BEFORE YOU ACTUALLY SATISFY
[02:40:01]
YOUR PERMIT REQUIREMENTS, YOU'RE STILL ONLY SUBJECT TO WHEN YOU STARTED THAT.YOU'RE NOT, YOU'RE NOT SUBJECT TO ANY CHANGES THAT OCCUR ONCE YOU'VE ALREADY MADE APPLICATIONS.
SO IT, IT SEEMS TO ME LIKE THAT, THAT THE ANSWER'S NO.
AND, AND REMEMBER TOO THAT IF THE OWNER DOES NOT AGREE TO ITS INCLUSION IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT OR THE CATEGORIZATION OF IT, THEN IT TAKES A 75% VOTE OF THIS COMMISSION AND COUNSEL TO GET IT DONE OVER THE OBJECTIONS OF THE PROPERTY OWNER.
MAYBE NOT YOURS INDIVIDUALLY, BUT I HOPE ALSO, YOU KNOW, MY CONSCIENCE.
ANYONE ELSE? DISTRICT YOU WANT PUT BACK ON? UNLESS I COME FORTH COMMISSION TO SAY OH I WANT, BUT WE COULD, BUT I MEAN WE CAN, IT CAN BE THE CARROT OF THE STICK.
OKAY, I'M GONNA CALL THE MEETING ADJOURN AT FIVE 15.