* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting. [Historic Preservation Appeals Board on November 28, 2023.] [00:00:20] GOOD MORNING EVERYONE. . OKAY. UM, IT IS 9 0 8 ON TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 28TH, 2023. I AM JD BARTEL, CHAIR OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION APPEALS BOARD, AND I'M CALLING THIS MEETING TO ORDER. THIS BOARD CONDUCTS MEETINGS AT THE CITY HALL ANNEX WITH THE VIRTUAL PARTICIPATION OPTIONS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 5 5 1 1 27 OF THE TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE, WHICH BECAME EFFECTIVE ON SEPTEMBER 1ST, 2021. THE CHAIR WILL BE PRESENT IN THE ROOM. THAT IS I BOARD MEMBERS, STAFF, AND THE PUBLIC MAY ATTEND IN PERSON OR THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE LINK USING MICROSOFT TEAMS. UM, THE FIRST ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS THE CALL TO ORDER, WHICH WE'VE DONE AND THE CHAIR REPORT. I HAVE NO REPORT. THIS NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS THE DIRECTOR'S REPORT. MR. CHAIR, WOULD YOU LIKE TO TAKE A ROLL CALL? OH, YEAH. OKAY. ROLL CALL. THANK YOU, . ALL THOSE, UH, OH. I NEED TO GO OVER THE RULES TOO. UH, GO AWAY. THE FOLLOWING RULES FOR THE CONDUCT OF THE APPEAL, THE, WHEN SPEAKERS COME TO THE PODIUM, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESSED FOR THE RECORD. ADDRESS YOUR COMMENTS TO ME AND NOT TO STAFF OR THE OTHER BOARD MEMBERS UNLESS DIRECTLY ASKED A QUESTION OR TO OTHER PEOPLE IN THE ROOM. ALL COMMUNICATIONS SHOULD COME THROUGH, UH, THE CHAIR. I AM ALSO, I ALSO ASK THAT YOU REFRAIN FROM ANY DISPARAGING REMARKS, AND PLEASE KEEP YOUR COMMENTS RELEVANT TO THE MATTER AT HAND. IF SOMEONE ELSE HAS ALREADY MADE THE POINTS YOU INTENDED TO MAKE, YOU MAY SIMPLY STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD AND STATE YOUR POSITION, IE WHETHER YOU SUPPORT OR OPPOSE THE APPLICATION OF THIS ORDINANCE TO YOUR AREA, NO AUDIBLE DISPLAYS OR SUPPORT OF SUPPORT OR OPPOSITION WILL BE ALLOWED. THIS MEANS NO APPLAUDING, NO BOOING, AND NO CALLING OUT. I'M ASKING THAT YOU RESPECT EACH OTHER NO MATTER WHAT SIDE OF THE ISSUE YOU MAY BE ON. NUMBER FOUR, PLEASE SILENCE YOUR CELL PHONES AT THIS TIME. IF JOINING VIRTUALLY, PLEASE MUTE YOURSELF AND PLEASE ONLY UNMUTE YOURSELF TO SPEAK WHEN I CALL ON YOU TO SPEAK BY NAME. USE OTHER COMPUTER'S, MICROPHONE, ICON, OR MUTE, OR PRESS STAR SIX TO MUTE FROM MOST PHONES. SPEAKERS WILL BE TAKEN IN THIS ORDER. FIRST, HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE STAFF WILL BE, WILL OPEN WITH A BRIEF INTRODUCTION TO THE APPEAL BEFORE THE BOARD FOLLOWED BY THE APPLICANT OR THEIR REPRESENTATIVE WILL BE NEXT, WHICH WILL BE GIVEN A REASONABLE TIME TO MAKE THEIR PRESENTATION. STARTING WITH 15 MINUTES, YOU MAY BE GIVEN ADDITIONAL TIME AS WARRANTED. I WILL THEN CALL ANY SPEAKERS BOTH IN THE ROOM AND ONLINE WHO WISH TO MAKE COMMENTS. COMMENTS WILL BE LIMITED TO THREE MINUTES WITH AN OPPORTUNITY FOR MORE TIME AS WARRANTED. WRITTEN COMMENTS WILL BE ENTERED INTO THE RECORD. THE APPLICANT MAY HAVE FIVE MINUTES FOR REBUTTAL. BOARD MEMBERS MAY HAVE QUESTIONS FOR SPEAKERS, WHICH WILL NOT COUNT AGAINST THEIR TIME ALLOTTED FOR SPEAKING. BOARD MEMBERS SHOULD ALL LIKEWISE ADDRESS THEIR QUESTIONS THROUGH THE CHAIR. AN INTERPRETER MAY BE AVAILABLE FOR SPANISH SPEAKING PARTICIPANTS, AND ADDITIONAL TIME WILL BE GIVEN FOR TRANSLATION. UH, BOARD MEMBERS PLEASE UNMUTE YOURSELF AND RESPOND BY REPEATING YOUR NAME AND SAYING, PRESENT OR PRESENT VIRTUALLY WHEN I CALL YOUR NAME. I AM THE CHAIR, JD BARTEL. AND I AM PRESENT. DOUGLAS ELLIOT. DOUGLAS. ELLIOT. PRESENT. TRUMAN EDM. MINSTER. PRESENT. ROB HELLER. ROB HELLER PRESENT. LIBBY RA BLAND RA BLAND PRESENT VIRTUALLY. AND DEPUTY DIRECTOR JENNIFER OLIN PRESENT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. WE HAVE A QUORUM. AND AS I STATED EARLIER, UH, I DO NOT HAVE A REPORT. MAY I CALL THE DIRECTOR'S REPORT? I THANK YOU MR. CHAIR. UM, GOOD MORNING, MR. CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE BOARD. I'M JENNIFER OSLAND, SECRETARY OF THIS BOARD AND DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF THE HOUSTON PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. UM, TODAY, I JUST WANNA LET EVERYBODY KNOW WE WELCOME TWO NEW STAFF MEMBERS TO THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE. UM, AND YOU, YOU PROBABLY KNOW THEM ALREADY. WE WELCOME BACK TERRENCE JACKSON, UM, WHO WENT AWAY FOR A LITTLE BIT, BUT HE'S BACK AND WE'RE THRILLED. AND ALSO SAMANTHA DELEON, [00:05:01] WHO WAS WITH US AS AN INTERN A YEAR OR SO AGO. SO, UM, THEY'VE, UH, ROUNDED OUT THE TEAM. WE'RE HAPPY. UH, AND THAT'S ALL I HAVE TODAY. UM, IF ANYONE HAS QUESTIONS, YOU CAN CALL THE HOUSTON OFFICE OF PRESERVATION HOTLINE AT 8 3 2 3 9 3 6 5 5 6 OR VISIT OUR WEBSITE@HOUSTONPLANNING.COM. AND THAT CONCLUDES MY DIRECTOR'S REPORT. THE PRIOR MEETING. THE PRIOR MEETING MINUTES WERE POSTED WITH THIS AGENDA. MAY I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO ACCEPT THESE MINUTES? UH, ELLIOT, MOVE TO ACCEPT THE MINUTES. HELL, YOUR SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. AYE. AYE. SO THAT IS A AND ME, SO THAT WOULD BE A UNANIMOUS DECISION FOR APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES. PLEASE STATE, UM, EVERYBODY PLEASE STATE YOUR LAST NAME. 'CAUSE WE ALL JUST SAID I, SO ON THE MINUTES, THAT'S PROBABLY OKAY. ALRIGHT. OKAY. OKAY. TO HELP MARETTE, KEEP THE MINUTES STRAIGHT. THAT'LL BE GOOD. THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS CONSIDERATION OF AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON AN APPEAL OF THE DECISION OF THE HOUSTON ARCHEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL COMMISSION ON SEPTEMBER 14TH, 2023 FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR 8 0 7 WOODLAND STREET IN WOODLAND HEIGHTS HISTORIC DISTRICT. GOOD MORNING COMMISSIONERS. THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE THIS MORNING. WE HAVE A PROJECT, UH, TO LOOK AT AT 8 0 7 WOODLAND STREET IN HOUSTON, TEXAS, IN THE WOODLAND HEIGHTS HISTORIC DISTRICT. UH, AS YOU SEE AT THE TOP OF YOUR REPORT, IN SUMMARY, THE APPLICANT BUILT A TWO STORY OR A SECOND STORY EDITION ON A SIDE YARD GARAGE WITHOUT A PERMIT OR C OF A. THE APPLICANT WAS RED TAGGED FIRST IN APRIL OF 2023, AND THEN APPLIED, UH, FOR THE C OF A IN JUNE OF 2023. AND THE STAFF BEGAN TO PROCESS AS THIS APPLICATION AS AN ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL. UM, IT MET THAT CRITERIA FOR THAT. HOWEVER, ONCE WE RECOGNIZED THAT THE WORK WAS COMPLETED WITHOUT A PERMIT, WE RETRACTED THAT PROGRAM. AND WE HAD ACTUALLY THAT THE APPLICANT MENTIONS THAT SOMETHING HAD BEEN ISSUED. WELL, THAT WAS FROM THE OFFICE OF PRESERVATION, UH, NOT FROM THE HHC, BUT FROM THE OFFICE OF PRESERVATION, A PROCESS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL, BUT VERY QUICKLY. AND IN FACT, I THINK WE WERE GONNA GET A SIGNATURE OR SOME WE WERE, I DON'T REMEMBER IF THAT HAD ANY. DID THAT GET A SIGNATURE ON IT, CHARLES? I DON'T. SURE. OKAY. WELL, EITHER WAY, WE QUICKLY RECOGNIZED WE HAD WORK WITHOUT A PERMIT, WHICH REQUIRES THEN A CERTIFICATE OF REMEDIATION, WHICH BY OUR CITY ORDINANCE IS REQUIRED TO BE ISSUED, CAN ONLY BE ISSUED BY OUR CITY ORDINANCE BY THE HHC. UH, AND THEN ON SEPTEMBER 23, THE HHC DID CONSIDERED THAT APPLICATION AND DENIED IT AND DID NOT ISSUE A C OF R EFFECTIVELY SAYING THAT THE, THE SECOND FLOOR NEEDED TO BE REMOVED IN ORDER TO COME INTO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CITY ORDINANCE. THE APPLICANT APPEALED THAT DECISION AND THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE TODAY. I WOULD LIKE TO, UH, THE NEXT PART OF THAT PAGE IS THE CRITERIA WE LOOKED AT, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO GO AHEAD THEN JUST GO TWO PAGES FORWARD AND LET'S LOOK AT WHAT THE HHC WAS LOOKING AT, WHICH IS THE REPORT THAT JUST BEGINS, UH, HERE. AND THIS TALKS ABOUT WHAT, WHAT WE HAVE HERE, A 228 SQUARE FOOT SECOND FLOOR ADDITION TO A NON-CONTRIBUTING GARAGE. IT TALKS ABOUT THE DETAILS OF THE ROOF AND THE RIDGE HEIGHT. IT'S RIDGE HEIGHTS AT 21 FEET, SEVEN INCHES. SO IT'S NOT TALL. UH, IT'S SMOOTH CEMENTITIOUS SIDING. IT HAS A DOOR, A DOOR ON THE WEST ELEVATION. UM, AND THE GARAGE IS FACING THE PROPERTY LINE SIDE SET BY FIRE RATED, ET CETERA. SO GOING FORWARD ON THAT, THE, WE, LET'S TAKE A LOOK AT THE PROJECT. GO FORWARD A FEW IMAGES. WE HAVE A PIC, WE HAVE PICTURES OF THE HOUSE, UH, HERE ON THIS IMAGE. IT'S HARD TO RECOGNIZE A LOT OF TREES IN THAT TOP IMAGE, BUT THAT'S THE MAIN HOUSE AND YOU SEE A CARPORT WITH A VEHICLE UNDER IT. AND THAT'S WHERE THE GARAGE IS. UM, THE, UH, ACTUALLY NO, I'M SORRY. IN THESE IMAGES, THIS IS BEFORE THE WORK. SO THOSE TWO PAGES ARE BEFORE THE WORK. SO IS THE NEXT PAGE. AND THEN WE HAVE SOME CONTEXT IMAGES. SO LET ME GET YOU FORWARD THERE. [00:10:01] STAFF MEMBER DE LEON, IF WE COULD GET FORWARD TO PAGE 15 OF 16 WHERE WE SEE A PICTURE OF THE, THERE IT IS. SORRY. RIGHT THERE. SO HERE IS THE BACK, THE BACKSIDE OF THE PROJECT. THE BACKSIDE. SO IF YOU'RE LOOKING BETWEEN THAT GAP, YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE FRONT, THE, THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE OUT THERE. THAT'S WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE IF YOU GO FORWARD. ONE MORE PAGE, ONE MORE SLIDE PLEASE. THERE'S THE FRONT OF IT. NO WINDOW. JUST SECOND FLOOR PLEASE. NEXT SLIDE. THIS IS AN IMAGE, PRESENT IMAGE OF THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE. AND YOU SEE THE CARPORT IS TOWARDS THE FRONT. IT LINED UP ALMOST WITH THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE. AND THERE'S A, THE NEXT IMAGE, YOU KIND OF COMING BACK SOME. THERE IT IS. OKAY, LET'S GO FORWARD PLEASE. HERE IS AN IMAGE FROM YESTERDAY SUPPLIED BY THE APPLICANT OF JUST LOOKING AT THE HOUSE AT AN ANGLE FROM THE LEFT SIDE. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. AND WE'LL STAY ON THE LEFT SIDE FOR A MINUTE. HERE IT IS WHERE YOU HAVE THIS, THERE'S A TREE, OBVIOUSLY RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE, UH, DRIVEWAYS. ON THE LEFT IS THE GARAGE APARTMENT OF THE NEXT DOOR NEIGHBOR. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. HERE'S AN IMAGE SORT OF FROM THE SIDEWALK OF THE, TO THE LEFT OF THE HOUSE LOOKING BACK AND YOU CAN SEE THE, THE SECOND STORY STRUCTURE. NEXT SIDE PLEASE. AND AGAIN, JUST STEPPING BACK, UH, YOU SEE THE MAIN HOUSE PRETTY DISTINGUISHABLE, AND THEN THE, WHERE THE ADDITION BEGINS ON THE MAIN HOUSE, IT IS APPROXIMATELY WHERE THE HOU THE GARAGE IS. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. AND THIS IS IF YOU WERE JUST WALKING DOWN THE SIDEWALK AND YOU SEE THE FRONT ELEVATIONS TO SOME OF THOSE HOUSES. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. ALRIGHT, HERE'S A CURRENT IMAGE OF THE HOUSE. A LITTLE BIT FROM THE RIGHT SIDE. SO NOT VERY VISIBLE OR ARGUABLY NOT VISIBLY AT ALL. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. AND, UH, JUST ONE MORE SHOT THERE. IT'S KINDA THE NEIGHBOR'S HOUSE WITH THE GARAGE. AND TO THE RIGHT THERE YOU CAN SEE THE FENCE LINE IN THE SECOND STORE. AND LET'S SEE WHERE WE GO AFTER THAT. I THINK WE HAVE MINUTES. THERE'S, YEAH. OKAY, SO WE DON'T NEED TO GO THROUGH THE MINUTES. YOU'VE GOT THEM FOR YOUR READING. AND NOW I WANNA GO BACK, UH, COMMISSIONER DELE ON TO THE FRONT PAGE AGAIN. SO THE COMMISSION, AGAIN, AS I MENTIONED, UM, DENIED THE ISSUANCE OF A CERTIFICATE OF REMEDIATION, DENIED ISSUE, A CERTIFIC ISSUE, AND DENIED THE C OF A LET, THE CRITERIA THAT THEY WERE LOOKING AT WAS THIS CRITERIA HERE, ALTERATIONS TO NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES. AND IT SAYS THAT THE, THAT THESE ARE THE APPLICABLE ONES. AND SO WHAT WE HAVE A CHECK AT THE TOP UNDER NUMBER ONE. WE, WE HAVE ONE A, IT HAS TO MEET THESE TWO. ONE AA IS THE PROPOSED ACTIVITY IN THIS CASE. IN ADDITION, 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. THIS WAS NOT RAISED BY THE HHC AS AN ISSUE. THE NEXT LINE, THE PROPOSED ACTIVITY MUST MATCH THE ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES, MATERIALS AND CHARACTER OF EITHER THE EXISTING NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE OR THE CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES WITHIN THE CONTEXT AREA. THIS, THIS WASN'T RAISED AS AN ISSUE, BUT, AND THEN TWO DOESN'T APPLY. SO WE GET TO THREE DOWN THERE FOR, IN ADDITION TO A NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE, THE DISTANCE FROM THE PROPERTY LINE TO THE FRONT AND SIDEWALLS PORCHES AND EXTERIOR FEATURES OF ANY PROPOSED ADDITION OR ALTERATION MUST BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE DISTANCE FROM THE PROPERTY LINE OF SIMILAR ELEMENTS OF EXISTING CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES IN THE CONTEXT AREA. AND THIS, THIS IS WHERE THE, THE HAC LANDED BECAUSE IN THE END THE COMMISSIONS FOUND THAT THE LOCATION OF THIS GARAGE, UH, ON ITS SITE WAS THE ISSUE. AND IF THEY MENTIONED THAT IF IT WAS MORE TOWARDS THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY, IT'D BE OKAY. I WANT TO COME BACK TO A THOUGH AND MENTION THAT THERE ARE NO THAT I KNOW OF THAT I'VE LOOKED, I JUST WENT THROUGH THE INVENTORY THIS MORNING AND I DON'T SEE ANY CONTRIBUTING GARAGES IN WOODLAND THAT I, THAT I SEE. OKAY, SO THAT'S, THAT'S ONE THING I WANNA POINT OUT. THEN B IS THE NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE WITH THE CONSTRUCTION ADDITION IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE TYPICAL PROPORTIONS AND SCALE OF EXISTING CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES IN THE CONTEXT AREA. AND SO THIS IS A TRICKY ONE TO ME BECAUSE THIS, AGAIN, WE'RE TALK, THEY ENDED UP WORRYING ABOUT THE SITE, BUT THERE ARE NO CONTRIBUTING GARAGES IN THE CONTEXT AREA. THEY'RE JUST THE CONTRIBUTING HOUSES. BUT THIS IS WHERE THE COMMISSION LANDED. THEY RECOMMEND THEY, UH, DENIED THE C OF A AND THE APPLICANT, OF COURSE IS HERE TO SPEAK. I DO WANNA REVIEW ON THIS NEXT PAGE OVER THE APPLICANT'S, UH, THE APPLICANT'S GROUNDS, GROUNDS FOR APPEAL. [00:15:01] NUMBER ONE GROUND IS REFERRING TO, IT'S TALKING ABOUT RECEIVING A LETTER FROM HHC, BUT I BELIEVE THAT'S FROM THE OFFICE OF PRESERVATION THAT IT HAD BEEN APPROVED. THAT'S THAT, AND I'VE EXPLAINED THAT. SO LET'S GO TO TWO. UM, HE'S HAS SUPPORT OF HIS NEIGHBORS. FOUR, UH, FIVE OF THE NEIGHBORS AROUND THE PROPERTY ARE IN SUPPORT OF THE PROJECT THERE. AND ONE IMMEDIATE NEIGHBOR WHO'S HERE TO SPEAK TODAY IS NOT IN FAVOR OF THE PROJECT. NUMBER THREE, UH, JUST THE OWNER REC MAKES, UM, VERY REMARKABLE COMMENTS ABOUT HOW HE'S, UH, REDUCED HIS CARBON FOOTPRINT BY HAVING SOLAR PANELS ON THE PROPERTY, WHICH ARE ACTUALLY USED TO CHARGE HIS ALL ELECTRIC CAR. UM, AND HE'S REPLACED MOST OF THE LAWN WITH NATIVE PLANNING. IT'S VERY SUSTAINABLE SITE. THE FOURTH, UH, UH, GROUNDS FOR APPEAL IS THAT IT WOULD BE VERY EXPENSIVE TO REMOVE THE SECOND FLOOR. I WILL LET HIM ELABORATE ON THAT. BUT HE SAYS HERE THAT THERE ARE SOME CONDITIONS AT HIS HOUSE THAT NEED WORK, UM, AND THAT THIS WOULD BE, UH, EXTREMELY EXPENSIVE TO, TO DO IT ON NUMBER FIVE, UM, HE WANTS TO COMMENT THAT THE NEW EDITION MATCHES ALL THE FINISHES ON THE EXISTING HOUSE AND IS PLACED ON THE BACK HALF, WHICH IT IS ON THE BACK HALF OF THE PROPERTY. PER THE, UH, RECOMMENDATIONS OF OUR DEPARTMENT, THE HISTORIC COMMITTEE MENTIONED THAT IF HE SHIFTED THE ENTIRE STRUCTURE BACK, THEY WOULD HAVE NO ISSUE. OUR EXTERIOR DECK IS IN THE BACK CORNER OF OUR PROPERTY, WHICH IS OUR ONLY USABLE EXTERIOR SPACE. I DON'T AGREE WITH ADDING A CONCRETE DRIVEWAY IN LIEU OF VEGETATION AND DECK SPACE. WE WOULD ALSO BE LOSING SEVERAL MATURE TREES. THOSE WERE HIS GROUNDS FOR APPEAL. AND WITH THAT IN MIND, I DO WANT TO GO AND MENTION, UH, COMM, UH, STAFF MEMBER DELEON, IF YOU COULD GO FORWARD ALL THE WAY FORWARD TO THE OTHER STAFF REPORT FROM 2018, THAT'S INCLUDED IN YOUR PACKETS. AND THAT'S GONNA BE A PRETTY BIG HIKE ALL THE WAY DOWN. UH, I THINK YOU'RE AT IT THERE. IS THAT THE 2018 DOCUMENT? YES. OKAY. SO IN THE 2018 DOCUMENT, IT'S RELEVANT, I BELIEVE THAT A SITE PLAN WAS APPROVED. AND SO IF YOU'LL GO ABOUT FOUR PAGES, LET'S SEE, LET'S FIND THE SITE PLAN IN, IN THAT, UM, PROPOSAL A LITTLE BIT MORE FORWARD. AND ONE MORE. WELL, THERE'S THE GARAGE, AS YOU CAN SEE IN THAT, I'M SORRY, WE GO BACK. ONE, THERE'S A FRONT ELEVATION THAT SHOWS THAT PROPOSED GARAGE THAT WAS BUILT. AND THEN THE NEXT SLIDE, TWO MORE. THERE'S THE TWO. I KEEP GOING. THERE'S YOUR SITE PLAN, RIGHT? SOMEWHERE IN, YOU'RE ALMOST THERE. KEEP GOING THERE. I BELIEVE YOU'RE AT IT. SO THAT'S ON PAGE 10 OF 17 OF THE ACTUAL STAFF REPORT. AND YOU SEE THE, UH, THE PROPOSED SIDE, WHICH IS THE RIGHT SIDE OF THIS DRAWING, HARD TO MAKE OUT, BUT THERE'S A, A GD ROOF GARAGE PROPOSED THERE. AND THAT'S WHAT WAS BUILT. SO THE SIDING OF THE GARAGE WAS SEEN FAVORABLY AT THAT TIME. AND WE BRING IT TO YOU TODAY AND I'LL TAKE ANY QUESTIONS. UM, FOR THE AUDIENCE, I WOULD SAY, WOULD YOU DEFINE WHAT THE EXISTING CONDITION OF THE, WITH THEIR, WITH HHC, UM, ACTION, WHAT WOULD THE ACTION BE? AND JUST REAL BRIEFLY, AND ALSO, UM, WHAT WOULD HAPPEN AS FAR AS PERMIT, BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T GET A PERMIT EITHER, EVEN THOUGH WE DON'T REVIEW THAT. WHAT WOULD THE STEPS HAVE TO BE AFTER IF THERE WAS AN APPROVAL? WHAT THEY, BECAUSE I CAN SEE THERE'S POTENTIALLY SOME PERMIT PROBLEMS WITH THIS AS WELL. 'CAUSE TO MEET PERMIT TO MEET CURRENT BUILDING CODE. THERE'S A COUPLE ISSUES THAT I SEE IN THIS, IN THIS CONSTRUCTION. THE FIRST, THE ANSWER, I BELIEVE THE ANSWER TO YOUR FIRST QUESTION, WHICH IS I BELIEVE WHAT IF YOU, UM, UPHOLD THE DECISION OF HHC, WHERE WILL HE, WHAT WILL NEED TO HAPPEN? SO IF IN ORDER FOR THE OWNER TO COME IN COMPLIANCE, THE TOP WOULD NEED TO BE REMOVED AND THE BUILDING PUT BACK THE WAY IT WAS, THAT'S WHAT THE HAC DECISION ESSENTIALLY REQUIRES. IF THINGS WERE CHANGED AND, UH, C OF R WAS ISSUED, FOR EXAMPLE, FOR THE PROJECT AS, AS, AS APPLIED FOR IN THE APPLICATION TO HHC IN SEPTEMBER, THEN HE COULD, HE, WHICH HE COULD STILL APPLY FOR A BUILDING PERMIT, BUT THEN HE COULD ACTUALLY, OUR, OUR OFFICE WOULD RELEASE THE HISTORIC HOLD ON THAT APPLICATION. THEN THAT STILL NEEDS TO GO THROUGH THE REGULAR COMPLETE REVIEW BY BUILDINGS SITE, EVERYTHING ELSE INVOLVED. AND, AND IT, I DON'T KNOW HOW THEY HANDLE THE INSPECTIONS INDIVIDUALLY, FOR EXAMPLE, FRAMING ELECTRICAL AND PLUMBING. I'M NOT SURE HOW YOU GET TO THAT. BUT THOSE THINGS WOULD, ALL THE PROJECT WOULD BE INSPECTED. IT WOULD GO THROUGH THE REGULAR PERMITTING PROCESS. [00:20:01] SO IT MIGHT ENTAIL, SO THE, THE, MY, MY QUESTION IS, IS THE, THE OVERHANG ON THE SIDE, WE'RE NOT ALLOWED TO HAVE AN OVERHANG WITHOUT A FIRE, WITHOUT FIRE. IT, IT VIOLATES FIRE CODE THE WAY THAT IT'S BEEN BUILT. SO EVEN IF IT WAS APPROVED, THERE WOULD PROBABLY HAVE TO BE AN ALTERATION TO THE WAY THAT IT HAS BEEN BUILT. SO WOULD THAT HAVE TO GO BACK TO THE COMMISSION? WELL, ACTUALLY I WANT TO POINT OUT ON, UH, PA THE, THE, UH, SEPTEMBER 14TH STAFF REPORT, THE VERY FRONT. WE DO HAVE A NOTE HERE THAT THE IT, THE SIDE SETBACK IS A ONE HOUR FIRE RATE AT WALL. IS THAT THE WALL YOU'RE THINKING OF? THE OVER THE OVERHAND EVE. OKAY. RIGHT. WOULD THAT HAVE TO GO BACK ANY ALTERATIONS TO ANYTHING YOU ALL APPROVE WOULD HAVE TO GO BACK TO THE COMMISSION TO MAKE SURE IT COMPLIES WITH ALL THE CODES. JUST A QUICK QUESTION. UM, COMMISSIONER ERLAND, UH, SO JUST TO CLARIFY, TODAY, THEY ARE SEEKING ONLY A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS. THEY'RE NOT ASKING FOR A CERTIFICATE OF REMEDIATION. CURRENTLY TODAY THEY'RE ASKING THE COMMISSION TO CONSIDER THE DECISION OF THE HHC AND TO EITHER UPHOLD IT OR REVERSE IT. AND THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION BECAUSE IF YOU REVERSE IT, YOU WOULD BE ISSUING, I GUESS A C OF A, BUT, UM, YEAH, I, I MEAN I, I THINK I UNDERSTAND, AND YOU'VE KIND OF USED C OF R AND C OF A INTERCHANGEABLY, BUT IT'S A DISTINCT PROCESS. SO THEY'VE GOT THE C OF A FOR THIS KIND OF ESSENTIALLY AS BUILT AS DRAWN, WHICH IS BEEN DENIED. AND THEY'RE NOW APPEALING THAT, UM, IF IT'S, IF IT'S UM, DENIED, THEY CAN SEEK A CERTIFICATE OF MEDIATION WITH SOME, SOME CHANGES TO IT BECAUSE THE EXISTING WAY IT LOOKS IS NOT GOOD ENOUGH. SO YOU'RE SAYING THE, THE HHC WANTS HIM TO TEAR IT DOWN, BUT THEY HAVEN'T REALLY RULED ON THAT YET. SO HE COULD SUBMIT SOME KIND OF C OF R THAT HAS SOME MODIFICATIONS OF ANY KIND, INCLUDING IMPROVEMENTS THAT NEED TO BE MADE FOR PERMITTING. AND THEN TRY THAT FOR THAT AT THE HHC AND THEN IF THAT'S APPROVED, THEN IT, IT COULD, IT COULD GO FORWARD WITH PERMITTING. SO IT'S A, IT'S A SLIGHTLY SEPARATE PROCESS. AND IN THIS CASE IT'S A LITTLE, UH, IT LOOKS LIKE THE SAME THING. 'CAUSE IT'S A NEW CONSTRUCTION. I MEAN, OFTEN THE C OF R WILL BE AFTER HISTORIC MATERIALS BEEN LOST IRRETRIEVABLY, AND THERE'S NO WAY TO GET A C OF A, THEN YOU HAVE TO DO A C OF R. BUT THE HHC COULD SAY, WELL, IT'S NOT, WE WOULDN'T HAVE APPROVED IT IF YOU'D DONE THIS WAY IN THE FIRST PLACE. BUT BECAUSE WE'RE FACED WITH THE CURRENT, UM, IRREVERSIBILITY, WE'RE GONNA APPROVE THIS KIND OF FIX NEXT BEST THING WHEN IT'S NEW CONSTRUCTION, THAT DIFFERENCE DOESN'T REALLY APPLY. SO IT'S A VERY, SHOULD BE VERY SIMILAR, UH, OUTCOME. YOU WOULD THINK. UM, I HAD A DIFFERENT QUESTION. IF YOU'RE UP ABOUT THE ADMINISTRATIVE, UH, PROCESS THAT WENT FORWARD. UM, UH, I'M NOT REALLY FAMILIAR WITH ALL THE ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVALS AND 'CAUSE WE NORMALLY DON'T, WE WOULDN'T HAVE ANY, UH, JURISDICTION OR REASON TO REVIEW THOSE. UM, BUT IT SOUNDED LIKE IT, IT MET THE ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVALS BASED ON, ON SOMETHING IN THERE. UH, BUT THEN IT, IT WAS PULLED OUT OF THAT PROCESS BECAUSE IT HAD ALREADY BEEN BUILT WITHOUT A PERMIT OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. THAT'S RIGHT. HOW DID YOU ALL DISCOVER THAT? OH, THE BUILD WITHOUT A I, UH, BOY, THAT WAS A, UM, I REMEMBER STANDING NEXT TO YOU, CHARLES, RIGHT? IS THAT RIGHT? RIGHT. YEAH. SO I THINK WE WERE SOMEWHERE IN THE POINT OF FINALIZING OR MAILING IT OR EMAILING THE OWNER. AND WE NOTICED OWNER, THE PHOTOS THAT THEY SUBMITTED, AH, IT WAS SOMETHING IN THE, IN SOME PHOTOS THAT, WELL, THAT'S WHAT IT WAS. SO IT'S EASIER THAN THAT. OKAY. WE LOOKED AT THE PHOTOS. OKAY. AND THERE'S THE BUILDING. OKAY, SO AND IS THERE, IS THERE NOTHING? AND THEN, THEN I, ONCE WE DID THAT, THEN WE WERE, WAIT A MINUTE, THIS CAN'T GO UP. SURE. IS THERE NOTHING IN THE APPLICATION OTHER THAN THE PHOTOS THAT REQUIRES THE APPLICANT TO REPRESENT THAT THE THING HAS NOT HAPPENED YET OR THAT IT'S, UM, PERSPECTIVE IN THE APPLICATION PROCESS? LIKE A REQUIREMENT TO NOTIFY US OR, YEAH, I FEEL LIKE YOU WOULD THINK THAT'D BE SORT OF A BOILERPLATE IN THERE OR, OR THERE'S SOME KIND OF CHECK BOX THAT SAYS, YEAH, I HAVEN'T REALLY BUILT IT YET. THIS IS MY PLAN. I MEAN, I JUST FEEL LIKE THERE WAS SOME MISREPRESENTATION IN SOME WAY. 'CAUSE THAT'S NOT THE NORMAL PROCESS. AND TO SORT OF, YOU KNOW, PRESENT IT AS A NORMAL THING WHEN IT'S ALREADY BUILT IS, IS IT WOULDN'T BE WHAT YOU'D EXPECT. AND THE FACT YOU HAVE TO CATCH IT IS, IS NOT THE BEST PRACTICE, I WOULDN'T THINK. RIGHT. IT, WE DON'T HAVE ANY LANGUAGE IN THE APPLICATION PROCESS AS OF AS OF RIGHT NOW THAT ASK SOMEONE TO DO THAT. AND WE AS A TEAM NOW ARE VERY ALERT TO CHECKING IN, UM, THE PROGRAM THAT THE CITY HAS CALLED ILMS, UH, WHERE IF THERE'S A RED TAG ISSUED THAT IT'S NOTED THERE. [00:25:01] UM, WE'RE IN THAT PROGRAM QUITE REGULARLY ANYWAY FOR RELEASING ALL OUR HOLDS. BUT IT TAKES AN EXTRA STEP TO GO IN THERE AND SEE IF SOMETHING'S BEEN HAPPENING UNPERMITTED AT THE SITE. YOU ACTUALLY, YOU GOTTA SEE IT IN THE COMMENTS OR IN THE NOTES FROM A INVESTIGATOR. AND THEN YOU CAN, THEN THERE IS A VERY GOOD PROCESS IN THAT THE INVESTIGATORS PHOTO DOCUMENT THE SITE VERY, VERY WELL. AND THEY PHOTO DOCUMENT THEIR FIRST VISIT VERY AND SECOND AND SUBSEQUENT VISITS VERY, VERY WELL. SO THEN WE WERE ABLE TO GO INTO ANOTHER TAB AND SEE ALL OF THAT. UM, GOING FORWARD, I THINK WE'RE NEEDING TO LOOK AT SOME WAY OF JUST HAVING SOMEONE CHECK THAT BOX BECAUSE IT COMES UP VERY REGULARLY THAT PEOPLE HAVE APPLIED FOR SOMETHING WHERE THEY'RE ACTUALLY, IT'S A RED TAG SITUATION. IT COMES UP PROBABLY ONCE A MONTH MINIMUM. AND THERE IS, THERE IS A WAY FOR Y'ALL TO CATCH IT EARLY WITHOUT SORT OF, IT JUST KIND OF SLIPPED THROUGH A LITTLE BIT, BUT YOU NORMALLY WOULD'VE SEEN IT AS PART OF THE APPLICATION OR THESE PHOTOS OR THE FACT THERE'S A RED TAG OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. OKAY. THAT'S RIGHT. IT SEEMS LIKE IF THE INSPECTION DEPARTMENT, WHEN AN AGENT OR RED TAG WOULDN'T ANYTHING, A HISTORIC DISTRICT WOULD NOTIFY THEM RESERVATION OFFICE, THAT THEN THAT WOULD WELL CATCH IT WHEN IT DOES COME THROUGH. IT COULD, IT WOULD BE, IT WOULD BE GOOD. IT WOULD BE GOOD. WE THEN I MAY BE ASKING TOO MUCH TO NO, WELL THEY OF COURSE, YOU KNOW, IF YOU'VE SEEN THE RED, YOU'VE SEEN THE 3 1 1 MAP THE CITY HAS. SO OF COURSE THERE'S A LOT OF HAPPENING THAT'S NOT RELATED TO THE STRUCTURE. UM, BUT IF IT WAS STRUCK, WE, WE DO COMMUNICATE AS BEST WE CAN, ESPECIALLY WHEN THERE'S INVESTIGATORS WHO ARE ASSIGNED CERTAIN AREAS. SO WE GET TO KNOW THEM AND THEY CALL US A LOT WHEN, WHEN THERE'S TOPICS WE, WE CAN REFINE THE PROCESS, I'M SURE A LITTLE BETTER. OKAY. I DO HAVE, UM, A QUESTION OR TWO AND SOME COMMENTS. UM, AS FAR AS CONTRIBUTING GARAGES IN, IN, IN THE CONTEXT AREA, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT NOR HILL'S THE ONLY HISTORIC DISTRICT THAT EVEN HAS CONTRIBUTING GARAGES, UM, THEY'RE, THEY'RE NOT THE ONLY ONE. THEY'RE THE ONE WHERE MOST OF THEM ENDED UP LABELED CONTRIBUTED. OKAY. WHEREAS IN THE HEIGHTS IT'S PROBABLY A, A, A ONE IN 20 RATIO. YEAH. FOR GARAGE OVER H OR MAYBE EVEN ONE 30 OR SOMETHING. AND WITH RESPECT TO THE FIREWALL, UM, MR. BARTELL IS CORRECT. YOU, YOU'VE GOT A DOOR AND LIKE A LITTLE BALCONY OF SOME SORT ON THE SECOND FLOOR. YOU COULDN'T HAVE THAT NO OPENINGS AT ALL. UM, WITH RESPECT TO THE EVE OVERHANGING OR THAT, YOU KNOW, THE, THAT DOOR GOES AWAY AS LONG AS IT DOESN'T ENCROACH WITHIN TWO FEET OF THE PROPERTY LINE. THE EASE ARE, BUT THEY STILL, THEY HAVE TO BE FIRE RATED AS WELL ENCLOSED, YOU KNOW, NO OPEN RAPTOR TAILS AND SO FORTH. UM, BUT OTHER THAN THAT, I MEAN, THERE ARE ALL KINDS OF OTHER CODE FLASH INSPECTION ISSUES, YOU KNOW, WINDSTORM F FRAMING, OF COURSE PLUMBING, ELECTORAL, AND I, THAT'S A QUESTION MORE FOR THE OWNER WHEN WE GET TO THAT, UM, AS FAR AS THE INTERIOR OF THAT SPACE. BUT, UH, I THOUGHT THE STAIRWAY WAS ON THE SIDE, BUT APPARENTLY IT'S JUST A PULL DOWN STAIRS TO GET TO THE SECOND FLOOR. ACTUALLY, I DON'T KNOW THE FLOOR BECAUSE I DON'T SEE ANY KIND OF A STAIRWAY IN ANY OF THE PICTURES GOING UP. I THOUGHT IT WENT UP TO THAT DOOR. IF IT DOESN'T APPEAR TO, I, I, I WILL LET LET THE OWNERS SPEAK. OKAY. I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH THE FLOOR PLAN. UM, DO YOU THINK IT WOULD HAVE, HAD IT NOT ALREADY BEEN CONSTRUCTED, RECEIVED ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL? OH, I THANK YOU FOR RE BECAUSE I THOUGHT THE COMMISSIONER ELLIOT WAS GETTING TO THAT WHOSE THING. SO, UH, YOU KNOW, I WILL, IF YOU WILL FALL ON THE CROSS BECAUSE THE ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVALS, WE, WE REVIEW 'EM AS A TEAM. WE LOOK EVERY WEEK AND WE SCAN APPLICATIONS LOOKING FOR THEM. AND WHEN WE FIND THEM, I CALL, I CALL 'EM, THERE'S NO BRAINER AAS THAT BOY, JUST GET IT THROUGH ON ONE PAPER. AND THEN THERE'S SOME THAT NEED MORE REFLECTION AND THERE'S ALWAYS THE OPTION TO TAKING SOMETHING TO COMMISSION, WHICH WE'VE TAKEN THINGS TO COMMISSION JUST BECAUSE WE SAY THAT'S A COMPLEX PROJECT, IT'S GOTTA GO TO COMMISSION THIS ONE AND THIS APPLICATION, IT KIND OF FALLS ON ME AS THE LEADER OF THE GROUP. AND I LOOKED AT IT AND I LOOKED AT THIS, THE, THE CRITERIA, IF WE'LL GO BACK JUST TO THE FRONT PAGE IF YOU DON'T MIND, AND THE FRONT PAGE. AND I FOUND IN A QUICK REVIEW THAT IT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING, MY THINKING, THAT THE PROJECT MET THIS CRITERIA THAT IT MET FOR ONE IN THREE IN, IN ESSENCE. AND SO, WHICH IT CAN BE, IT'S ANY THAT'S APPLICABLE, BUT ARGUABLY, LET'S SAY THAT ONE IN THREE, YOU COULD FIND APPLICABILITY FOR, BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T ALTER MORE THAN 67% OF THE, OF THE STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS OF THE GROUND FLOOR. SO THAT GETS YOU INTO ONE. THE PROPOSED ADDITION ISN'T TRYING TO CREATE AN EARLIER OR LATER APPEARANCE IS A AND B, IT, [00:30:01] ITS FEATURES MATCH EITHER THE CHARACTER OF THE NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE, THE GARAGE OR, OR CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE. WELL, WE DON'T HAVE CONTR, SO IT IT MEETS ITSELF. IT, IT'S A SECOND FLOOR ON TOP. AND THEN ON THREE, I THINK IT, IT MUST JUST BEEN, SO WE HAVE A, A NON-CONTRIBUTING ONE STORY GARAGE THAT'S BACK FROM THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE. IT'S NOT TUCKED IN THE CORNER. AND, UH, STAFF MEMBER, UH, CHARLES WENT THROUGH THE DISTRICT YESTERDAY VERY CAREFULLY. IN FACT, WE DO HAVE, IF YOU WANTED TO SEE HIM, WE HAVE, UH, PROBABLY A ONE BLOCK RADIUS AROUND THE CONTEXT AREA OF QUITE A FEW PHOTOS LABELED WITH ADDRESSES. WERE READY TO SHARE THAT SHOW GARAGES IN THE AREA IF YOU WANT TO SEE THEM OR SHARE 'EM. BUT IT WAS MY SENSE THAT IT MET THAT. HOWEVER, THEN ONCE WE WERE, WAIT A MINUTE, THIS NEEDS A CERTIFICATE OF REMEDIATION, WE'RE GOING TO HISTORIC COMMISSION NOW STAFF GETS TOGETHER AND MORE THOROUGHLY REVIEWS THE ITEMS. WHEN WE GO TO COMMISSION, WE SIT DOWN WITH OURSELVES, WITH THE DIRECTOR OR THE, UH, OR, OR WITH THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR, WITH UH, UH, ANOTHER DEPUTY DIRECTOR. AND WE REVIEW 'EM ALL. AND IN THAT REVIEW PROCESS, WE LOOK FOR, IT'S KIND OF A DEMOCRATIC PROCESS AND, AND WHAT'S THE MAJORITY FEEL WHERE THIS PROJECT, WHAT'S OUR RECOMMENDATION GONNA BE? AND AT THAT TIME, OUR RECOMMENDATION WAS DENIAL. AND SO THAT'S HOW WE GOT THERE. OKAY. SO IF, IF I HAD SIGNED IT AND SHOT IT OUT ON ME, WOULD'VE JUST BEEN ON ME. I WOULD'VE, I WAS JUST CURIOUS ABOUT A HYPOTHETICAL SITUATION. YEAH. IT WOULD'VE BEEN APPROVED OR WOULD'VE NOT HAVE, HAD IT NOT ALREADY BEEN BUILT AGAIN. DO YOU THINK IT MET THE CRITERIA? THIS SPECIFIC SITUATION COULD HAVE BEEN APPROVED IF IT YEAH, THAT'S RIGHT. COULD HAVE GONE, THAT'S ALL. THEN WE WOULD'VE HAD THE PEOPLE WHO DON'T LIKE IT RIGHT HERE AT US TELLING US THAT. BUT THAT'S THE ADMIN AND THAT'S WHY, FOR EXAMPLE, YOU, YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE AN OLD SIXTH WARD WHERE WHILE MANY SEVERAL YEARS BACK, OLD SIXTH WARD ASKED STAFF TO NOT ISSUE ANY ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVALS. AND IN FACT THEIR DESIGN PROPOSED DESIGN GUIDELINES AS DRAFTED TODAY. THEY DON'T ASK FOR NO ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVALS, BUT ACTUALLY THEY, THEY ACTUALLY ARE ASKING WHEN A PROPOSED AUXILIARY BUILDING IS ON A PROPERTY LINE OR AT THE REAR OF THE LOT THAT WE BRING IT TO COMMISSION, EVEN THOUGH THE ORDINANCE SAYS YOU DON'T HAVE TO. SO WE'RE GONNA, THAT OR THOSE GUIDELINES WILL SORT OF TIGHTEN UP OR SORT OF REIGN IN. MM-HMM . THE ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVALS, THE IMAGES THAT YOU MENTIONED, WERE THOSE PROVIDED TO THE COMMISSION OF THE ADDITIONAL GARAGES? NO, WE HAVE THEM, WE HAVE 'EM READY TO SHARE HERE NOW IN A LIVE FORM, BUT WE DON'T HAVE 'EM TO GIVE. THEY WEREN'T IN YOUR REPORT? UH, THAT WOULD BE A QUESTION FOR LEGAL IF WE SHARE CONTACT OR AREA PHOTOS THAT WE HAVE. DO YOU HAVE ANY? YES. HE'S ASKING IF HE, WE HAVE THEM ONE. WE CAN PULL 'EM UP. WE'RE READY. I REQUESTED, I REQUESTED TO KNOW IF THEY WERE PROVIDED TO THE COMMISSION, NOT THE, THAT THAT, YEAH, THAT WAS MY QUESTION TOO. YEAH. I MEAN, THEY HAVE NOT BEEN, BECAUSE WE REALLY ARE REVIEWING WHETHER OR NOT THE COMMISSION FOLLOWED THE ORDINANCE. SO WE REALLY ARE NOT THANK YOU. NO PROBLEM. NOT LOOKING AT NEW EVIDENCE, RIGHT? CORRECT. ROMAN, I HAVE A QUESTION. UH, COMMISSIONER M MINSTER, THE, THIS IS WHERE I'M CONFUSED AS FAR AS THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS BEING FILED AND THEN IT WAS GOING THROUGH ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL AND THEN WOO, NO, WE, WE CAN'T DO THIS. WE PULLED IT OUT, BUT STILL THE CFA WAS GOING FORWARD TO THE HISTORIC COMMISSION. AND WHY WASN'T THE APPLICANT ADVISED TO CHANGE IT TO A C OF R AT THAT POINT BY STAFF ONCE IT WAS PULLED OUT OF THIS ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESS? THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION. THE, UM, WE DON'T, APPLICANTS ONLY APPLY FOR C OF A IN OUR PROCESS. AND, AND THE C OF R SORT OF, IT'S, THIS IS, UH, AN AREA THAT, YOU KNOW, I HAD, WE INHERITED WHEN WE, WE WERE WORKING WITH THE PROGRAM. SO THE C OF R IS DESCRIBED IN THE ORDINANCE AND IT SAYS THAT IT MAY BE ISSUED BY THE HHC FOR VARIOUS REASONS AS COMMISSIONER ELLIOT MENTIONED. AND THE, UM, RIGHT NOW WE DON'T DISTINGUISH IT AND I, WE NEVER HAVE, WE NEVER ASK THE APPLICANT TO APPLY FOR A CERTIFICATE. HOW, AGAIN, THAT'S WHERE WE ARE TODAY. WE COULD HAVE, UH, THAT BE THE CASE. IT'S JUST THE ORDINANCE IS NOT SET UP THAT WAY. YEAH, I WAS JUST GONNA ADD THE, THE ORDINANCE IS NOT SET UP FOR AN APPLICATION FOR A C OF R. IT IS SET UP ONLY FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS AND THEN WHEN STAFF REVIEWS IT, IF THEIR RECOMMENDATION IS A PARTIAL APPROVAL OR A DENIAL, THEY MAY OR MAY NOT ADD ON A CERTIFICATE OF REMEDIATION IF THEY CAN WORK WITH THE APPLICANT AND FIND A WAY TO [00:35:01] MAKE IT COME TOGETHER. I'LL JUST, I MEAN, I CAN, I REMEMBER WHEN THAT WAS ADDED TO THE ORDINANCE AND EXACTLY WHY IT WAS BECAUSE OF SITUATIONS WHERE, I MEAN, IT DOESN'T, IT DOESN'T MATTER IF THINGS BUILT OR NOT, WHETHER OR NOT IT'S A C OF A OR A CFR. YOU CAN APPLY FOR A C OF A FOR SOMETHING THAT'S ALREADY BUILT. AND SO THAT'S WHAT YOU DO. UM, IN SOME CASES THE COMMISSION WAS HAVING TROUBLE BECAUSE PEOPLE HAD DESTROYED HISTORIC MATERIAL DONE ON INAPPROPRIATE ADDITIONS THAT NEVER WOULD'VE BEEN APPROVED AND COULDN'T BE REVERSED ESSENTIALLY. SO EVEN IF WE LIKED SCALING IT DOWN OR THOUGHT THE ADDITION WAS OKAY, IT NEVER WOULD'VE BEEN APPROVED BECAUSE IT DESTROYED ALL THE HISTORIC WINDOWS. SURE. AND SO WE DID NOT WANT TO, I WAS ON THE COMMISSION AT THE TIME, EVER ISSUE A C OF A FOR SOMETHING THAT HAD DESTROYED SIGNIFICANT HISTORIC MATERIAL. AND SO WE WANTED SOMETHING IN THE ORDINANCE THAT WOULD SAY, OKAY, YOU'RE NOT GONNA BE IN PERMITTING LIMBO FOREVER BECAUSE YOU'VE DONE THIS, YOU'VE VIOLATED THE ORDINANCE, BUT THERE'S GONNA BE SOME WAY TO MOVE FORWARD. AND THAT'S THE C OF R PROCESS. SO IT'S, YOU KNOW, IT, IT'S NOT ALWAYS JUST BECAUSE SOMEONE HAS ALREADY BUILT SOMETHING OR YOU'RE, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE KIND OF DOING THE NEXT BEST THING. IT'S, IT'S IF A C OF A IS NEVER GONNA BE POSSIBLE BECAUSE OF WHAT'S ALREADY OCCURRED, AND SO YOU'RE GONNA DO A C OF R TO LET THE PE PEOPLE PROCEED WITH PERMITTING AND PROCEED WITH THEIR PROJECT. AS LONG AS GIVEN THE STATE OF NATURE AS IT IS NOW WITH MATERIAL DESTROYED AND SOME THINGS YOU CANNOT RES RESTORE, YOU CAN AT LEAST MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS, UH, COMPATIBLE IN CHARACTER SORT OF, UH, WORK. SO AGAIN, I THINK WHEN IT'S A NEW CONSTRUCTION, ESPECIALLY ON NON-CONTRIBUTING BU BUILDING, THERE'S REALLY NO DISTINCTION BETWEEN THE TWO. BUT IT'S ALWAYS INITIALLY A C OF A APPLICATION, I THINK. I THINK THE, THE, IN THE ORDINANCE, IT ALSO IS, THERE'S SOME BENEFITS IF YOU HAVE AN APPROVED C OF A RELATED TO LIKE TAXES AND STUFF OF THAT NATURE. AND IF YOU HAVE A C OF R YOU'RE NOT REFLECT, WOULD IT NOT BE REFLECTIVE IF YOU HAVE A C OF A AND IT'S APPROVED, BUT A C OF R YOU WOULDN'T BE BECAUSE YOU'RE, YOU'RE NOT, YOU, YOU DIDN'T GET A C OF A, YOU GOT A C OF R YOU'RE NOT HISTORICALLY ACCURATE, RIGHT? YEAH. 'CAUSE OF EITHER LOSS OF MATERIALS OR YEAH, IT CO EXACTLY. IT REFER, UM, YOU, YOU, UM, ONE SIMPLE THING IS YOU HALF OFF OF YOUR, YOUR PERMITTING FEE, IF YOU HAVE AN ACCURATE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS, IT'S IN OUR NOTE PERMITTING DOES RECOGNIZE THAT, THAT THAT WILL GIVE HALF OFF OF A PROJECT'S PERMIT FOR WITH AN APPROVED C OF A, IT ALSO COULD COME UP WITH HISTORIC TAX CREDIT, UH, OR TAX EXEMPTION THAT THE CITY HAS. AND A C OF R WOULD NOT NECESSARILY BE REFLECTIVE IN THOSE, THOSE BENEFITS. RIGHT. ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF STAFF? UH, WE COULD LIKE TO CALL THE APPLICANT FORWARD? PLEASE STATE YOUR FULL NAME INTO THE MICROPHONE. GOOD MORNING. I'M JAKE BEUM, UM, OWNER OF 8 0 7 WOODLAND STREET IN HOUSTON HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD. UH, FIRST OF ALL, THANK YOU FOR TAKING THE TIME TO, UM, REVIEW THIS. UH, I KNOW YOUR TIME IS VERY VALUABLE AND I I APPRECIATE IT. UM, JUST TO KIND OF TOUCH ON A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT ROMAN SAID, UH, I WANTED TO GO THROUGH, UM, THE ITEMS THAT, THAT WERE DECLINED ON THE HOUSE. UM, SO I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S ON THE SCREEN OR NOT, BUT UM, IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW, ONE OF THE ITEMS THAT PUSHES IT STRAIGHT THROUGH IS CONSTRUCTION OF FREESTANDING GARAGE, INCLUDING GARAGE APARTMENTS, FREESTANDING CARPORTS, AND OTHER SECONDARY STRUCTURES STRUCTURES THAT HAVE A FOOTPRINT OF 600 SQUARE FEET OR LESS AND ARE LOCATED AT THE REAR OF THE LOT. UM, I FEEL LIKE OUR, UH, STRUCTURE MATCHES ALL OF THOSE, OR IT'S 238 FEET SQUARE FEET. UM, IT'S FREESTANDING. UM, IT'S NOT A GARAGE APARTMENT, IT'S JUST A STORAGE AREA AND IT IS LOCATED ON THE BACK, THE, UH, REAR HALF OF THE PROPERTY. UM, SO THAT'S FOR THE ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW. AND THEN FOR THE ITEMS ON NUMBER THREE THAT, UH, ROMAN ALREADY KIND OF WENT THROUGH, SO I'M KIND OF JUST REPEATING WHAT HE'S SAYING. UM, IT SAYS THE DISTANCE FROM THE PROPERTY LINES OF THE FRONT OF THE SIDEWALK, PORCHES AND EXTERIOR FEATURES OF ANY PROPOSED ADDITION OR ALTERATIONS MUST BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE DISTANCE FROM THE PROPERTY LINE OF SIMILAR ELEMENTS OF EXISTING CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES. UH, AGAIN, THERE'S NO CON CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES THAT ARE DETACHED GARAGES WITHIN THE AREA. SO TO ME THAT'S AN NA NOT A DECLINE. UM, AND THEN THE NEXT ONE, THE, THE NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES, [00:40:01] UH, WITH THE CONSTRUCTED ADDITION IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE TYPICAL PROPORTIONS AND SCALE OF THE EXISTING CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES WITHIN THE CONTEXT AREA. SO THE SCALE OF THE ADDITION, UM, MATCHES THE EXACT SAME FLOOR PLAN OF THE APPROVED GARAGE THAT WAS APPROVED IN 2018. UM, IT'S ALSO, UH, SHORTER THAN ANY OTHER TWO STORY, UH, GARAGE IN THE AREA. IT'S SIGNIFICANTLY SHORTER THAN MY NEXT DOOR NEIGHBORS, SIGNIFICANTLY, UH, SHORTER THAN THE, THE NEIGHBOR, THE TWO NEIGHBORS RIGHT BEHIND US AS WELL. SO I FEEL THAT PROPORTION WISE, IT'S WITHIN PROPORTIONS OF EXISTING GARAGES, NON-CONTRIBUTING GARAGES IN THE AREA. SO TO ME THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN A SATISFY. UM, AND THEN UP HERE, WHAT I WAS A LITTLE CONFUSED ABOUT WAS THE DOES NOT SATISFY FOR THE PROPOSED MATERIALS. THE MATERIALS ARE THE EXACT SAME MATERIALS AS THE, THE ORIGINAL HOUSE. UM, IT'S, IT'S HARDY SIDING THAT HAS THE SAME PROFILE, SAME PAINT COLOR, UM, THERE'S NO WINDOWS. UM, SO ANYTHING THAT'S FRONT FACING MATCHES THE MATERIALS ON THE EXISTING HOME. UH, THE ROOF PITCH IS THE SAME AS THE ROOF PITCH THAT WAS APPROVED ON THE EXISTING GARAGE AS WELL AS THE ROOF PITCH ON THE EXISTING HOME. UM, SO EVEN THOUGH IT DOES SAY SATISFIED, I DID WANNA, UH, POINT THAT OUT AS WELL. UM, AND THEN, UH, A COUPLE OF THE ITEM ITEMS THAT I HAD INCLUDED IN MY EMAIL, UM, WAS KIND OF WHAT ROMAN WAS SAYING, IS IF MY BUILDER, UH, WOULD'VE GOTTEN A PERMIT RIGHT WHEN WE STARTED, IT WOULD'VE GONE THROUGH THE C OF A PROCESS AND WE WOULDN'T BE STANDING HERE, EVERYTHING WOULD'VE BEEN FINE. UH, WE WOULD'VE PAID THE PERMITS FEES AND, AND WOULD'VE MOVED ON. OBVIOUSLY THAT DID NOT HAPPEN. UM, WE ARE, UH, WORKING WITH THE CITY ON THE PERMIT. I KNOW YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT THE, THE FIREWALL. UM, SO THE WALL IS, UH, A TWO HOUR RATED WALL BECAUSE IT IS WITHIN THREE FEET OF THE PROPERTY LINE. IT'S ACTUALLY THREE FEET SIX, SO IT'S OUTSIDE THAT, OR THREE FEET, FOUR AND A HALF. IT'S OUTSIDE THAT THREE FOOT ZONE. UM, THE, THE EASE OR THE, UM, PARA PARAPET THAT DOES, UH, COME OVER IS, UH, AN AN EIGHT INCH PARAPET. SO IT'S TWO FOOT 10 FROM THE PROPERTY LINE. AGAIN, IT IS TWO HOUR RATED. UH, TYPICALLY WITH, UH, AVE THOSE ARE, THOSE WOULD BE VENTED. UM, THEY'RE NOT VENTED BECAUSE OF THE TWO HOUR FIRE RATING. SO, UH, THE BUILDING DOES COMPLY. AND I KNOW WE MENTIONED THE DOOR. UM, FIRST OF ALL, I'M, I'M HAPPY TO REMOVE THE DOOR. UM, BUT IT DOES MEET THE PERMIT BECAUSE WE DID START GOING THROUGH THE PERMIT. WE DID GET SOME COMMENTS BACK BECAUSE IT'S, I THINK IT'S A PERCENTAGE OF THE OVERALL FACADE, UH, ON WHETHER WHAT KIND OF OPENS OPENINGS YOU CAN HAVE. BUT AGAIN, I'M FINE REMOVING THE DOOR. ABSOLUTELY FINE WITH THAT. UM, AND THEN A COUPLE OTHER ITEMS I HAD IS, UM, I HAVE, UH, I'VE, I SPOKE TO MOST OF MY NEIGHBORS, UM, HOUSE ACROSS THE STREET, UM, 8 0 2 WOODLAND, 8 0 8 WOODLAND, UM, AND 8 0 8 BAYLIN, UH, AND 8 0 3 WOODLAND. ALL OF THEM ARE IN SUPPORT OF THE PROPERTY. UH, SPECIFICALLY THE NEIGHBOR RIGHT BEHIND ME ON 8 0 8 BA, OR SORRY, I THINK IT'S 8 0 8 OH YEAH, 8 0 8 BAYLAND. UM, THEY DO HAVE A GARAGE THAT IS IN THE MIDDLE OF THEIR PROPERTY AS WELL. THIS IS A, A CONTRIBUTING HOUSE. IT WAS BUILT RIGHT WHEN, UH, THE WHOLE BAILIN AVENUE, UH, CAME TO BE WHEN THEY PLANTED ALL THOSE GREAT POST OAK TREES. SO THE, THAT HOUSE DOES HAVE, WHICH WAS I BELIEVE A CARRIAGE HOUSE AT ONE POINT, UM, DOES HAVE A GARAGE THAT IS RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE. UH, AND IT'S ABOUT THE SAME HEIGHT AS AS MY GARAGE AS WELL. UM, A COUPLE OTHER ITEMS I, I HAD WAS, UH, THE COST. UM, OVERALL THIS PROJECT HAS BEEN EXTREMELY COSTLY. UM, IT IS MY FAULT, UH, AND I TAKE FULL BLAME THAT MY BUILDER DID NOT GET THE APPROPRIATE PERMITS. UH, BUT WITH THAT BEING SAID, TO REMOVE THIS STRUCTURE, IT'S ROUGHLY THE SAME COST AS ADDING THE STRUCTURE. UM, IT, YOU KNOW, TENS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS I'D BE LOOKING AT TO, TO REMOVE THIS, UM, ALL OF THESE PERFECTLY GOOD MATERIALS WOULD END UP IN A, YOU KNOW, TWO TO THREE DUMP CIRCLES INTO A LANDFILL, WHICH KILLS ME. UM, [00:45:02] AND THEN, UH, AS WELL AS THAT, I AM BEING FINE BY THE CITY. I AM WORKING WITH THE, THE CITY TO, UH, PAY THESE FINES. UM, I'VE HAD TWO CONTINUANCES BASED ON, UH, THE FEEDBACK FROM THE HISTORIC SOCIETY. UM, SO MY NEXT ONE I BELIEVE IS IN JANUARY. UM, THE FINE RIGHT NOW IS WELL OVER, UH, $2,500. SO I'M SPENDING A LOT OF MONEY ON FINES, WHICH RIGHTFULLY SO I SHOULD BE, THAT IS, THAT IS, UH, ON ME AND I, I TAKE FULL BLAME FOR THAT. UM, AND THEN THE, I I DID WANNA JUST KINDA, UH, TALK ABOUT THE USE OF THE STRUCTURE. UH, IT IS NOT A GARAGE APARTMENT. UM, IT DOESN'T HAVE PLUMBING. UM, WHAT IT WILL BE USED FOR, UM, IF IT DOES, UM, MEET, UH, CODE IS UM, IT'D BE A STORAGE UNIT FOR, UM, ALL MY RECLAIMED LUMBER. UH, I'M A AVID WOODWORKER, UM, OR WAS, WE CAME FROM CHICAGO, MOVED ON HERE ABOUT TWO AND A HALF YEARS AGO. UM, SO MYSELF AND MY DAUGHTER LOVE TO DO WOODWORKING. UM, SO WE'RE GONNA SET UP A SHOP IN THE FIRST FLOOR AND THEN STORE ALL OF OUR MATERIALS ON THE SECOND FLOOR. SO IT'S NOT GONNA BE A GARAGE APARTMENT. THERE'S GONNA BE NOBODY THAT LIVES IN IT. UM, THERE'S NO PLUMBING. UM, THERE'S, UH, SOME ONE 20 OUTLETS, BUT THAT'S ABOUT IT. SO IT'S NOT INSULATED. UM, IT'S NOT GONNA HAVE ANY FINISHES. IT'S PURELY FOR STORAGE OF MATERIALS. UM, AND THEN, UH, LAST ITEM. I, I THINK I BELIEVE THAT THAT'S ALL THE ITEMS THAT I HAD BROUGHT UP. UM, SO, UH, HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? EXCUSE ME. I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS. UM, I DID LOOK AT THE 2021, UH, INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE, WHICH IS THE CURRENT CODE THAT CITY OF HOUSTON USES MM-HMM . ON THIS FIREWALL THING. AND IT CATEGORICALLY SAYS NO OPENINGS IN A ONE HOUR FIREWALL. OKAY. I RECENTLY, I'M A BUILDER, HAD AN, AN APPLICATION APPROVED IN WOODLAND HEIGHTS FOR AN ADDITION THAT WAS SIX FEET OFF THE PROPERTY LINE, BUT A SIDE PORCH DID ENCROACH INTO THE BUILDING SETBACK NOW FOR A FIREWALL IS FIVE FEET. IT WAS THREE FEET. WHEN THAT GARAGE WAS BUILT, IT'S NOW FIVE FEET. WE HAD TO BUILD A ONE HOUR FIREWALL AROUND THIS STAIRS. EVEN WHEN I PROPOSED DOING A STEEL STAIRCASE, THEY SAID, YOU STILL HAVE TO PUT A FIREWALL AROUND IT. SO IT'S LIKE, WELL, I'M NOT GONNA PUT STEEL UP IF WE STILL HAVE TO BUILD A FIREWALL. SO THAT WOULD NOT, THAT DOOR ON THAT SIDE WOULD HAVE TO BE, YOU'D EITHER HAVE TO DO A WALL ALL THE WAY FROM THE GROUND FLOOR UP, WHICH KIND OF ELIMINATES THE YEAH. VERSUS OF HAVING THAT. BUT THE EAVES, IF THEY DO PROTRUDE BEYOND, WELL, THEY CAN'T PROTRUDE BEYOND THE TWO FOOT SETBACK. YOU'D HAVE TO CUT 'EM BACK AND FIRE PROTECT THEM AS WELL. AND I DO, I THINK THAT, AND I BELIEVE WE'RE IN AGREEMENT, WE CAN ONLY UPHOLD OR OVERTURN THE HA'S DECISION. WE CAN'T ISSUE A CERTIFICATE OF A REMEDIATION. WE CAN OFFER FEEDBACK TO YOU OF WHAT WE MIGHT BE OKAY WITH. BUT AGAIN, WE'RE NOT COMMISSIONERS. AND ONE OF THOSE THAT I, 'CAUSE MY BIGGEST PROBLEM IS THERE'S NO APPLICATION FOR HIS CERTIFICATE APPROPRIATENESS BEFOREHAND, PARTICULARLY WHEN IT PROBABLY WOULD'VE BEEN, OR LIKELY WOULD'VE BEEN ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVED. BUT THEN YOU HIRE A BUILDER WHO TELLS YOU THAT HE PULLED A PERMIT, UH, WHEN IN FACT HE DIDN'T. UM, AND I READ THROUGH THE MINUTES, AND IT'S IN YOUR BACKGROUND IN THE FRANK LLOYD WRIGHT HISTORIC DISTRICT. AND, UM, YOU JUST CHOSE A BAD CONTRACTOR THAN IT SOUNDS LIKE TO ME, AND ONE WHO DOESN'T KNOW OR DOESN'T RESPECT THE HISTORIC DISTRICT REQUIREMENTS. UM, IT GIVES MY INDUSTRY A BAD NAME, AND I ALWAYS GET A LITTLE BIT ON MY SOAPBOX ABOUT THAT. BUT AS OPPOSED TO TEARING IT OFF, AND I DON'T WANNA GIVING YOU AN OPINION THAT MIGHT FLY WITH THE COMMISSION, IS IF YOU REMOVE THAT DOOR, YOU MOVE IT TO THE OTHER SIDE, DO THE STUFF THAT YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO DO TO GET IT PERMITTED. THERE'S GONNA BE SOME ISSUES WITH INSPECTIONS, I GUESS IF IT'S NOT CONDITIONED UPSTAIRS, THEY CAN SEE ALL THE FRAMING. PROBABLY MOST OF THE WINDSTORM STRAPPING, YOU MIGHT HAVE TO REMOVE SOME SIDING SO THEY CAN, WHAT YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO DO IF YOU MOVE THE DOOR OVER ANYWAY, INSPECT NAIL PATTERN AND DO SOME THINGS LIKE THAT. AND WE DID GET A STRUCTURAL, UH, ENGINEER AND PUT ALL THE, THE STRAPPING IN DURING CON OR BEFORE CONSTRUCTION STARTED. WELL, THE, SOME OF IT YOU [00:50:01] CAN SEE FROM THE INSIDE, BUT YOU CAN'T SEE NAIL PATTERN ONCE THE SIDING'S PUT UP. GOT IT. UM, AND THEY PROBABLY WOULD WANT, AND IT'S A KEY COMPONENT OF THE, OF THE WINDSTORM INSPECTION. OKAY. BUT, UH, I MEAN, THERE'S TWO SEPARATE ISSUES AS WHAT COMMISSION WILL APPROVE AND WHAT THE CITY WILL PERMIT, BUT I WOULD NOT HAVE AS MUCH OF A PROBLEM WITH IT IF IT WOULD'VE BEEN BUILT. WELL, CERTAINLY , IF IT HAD ALL BEEN THE PROCEDURES AND PERMITS AND EVERYTHING HAD BEEN DONE BEFOREHAND, BUT WITH A FEW ALTERATIONS RATHER THAN JUST TEARING OFF. BUT WE CAN'T MAKE THAT, YOU KNOW, CONDITION OF ANY KIND OF A DECISION HERE. UNDERSTOOD. ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT? UM, I DO SEE THAT THERE'S SOMEONE IN THE AUDIENCE, BUT I DON'T HAVE A CARD THAT SAYS THAT THEY, THAT ANYBODY WANTS TO SPEAK. SO IS THERE ANOTHER SPEAKER? SO I NEED THE, UM, SO WE'LL CALL YOU BACK IF WE HAVE ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. UM, SO I'LL CALL THE SPEAKER SINCE I DON'T HAVE THE CARD OR CALL YOUR NAME. PLEASE STATE YOUR FULL NAME INTO THE, UH, SPEAKER AND INTO THE, UH, MICROPHONE. MY NAME IS THADDEUS HERRICK. I LIVE AT EIGHT 15 WOODLAND, WHICH IS, UM, DIRECTLY WEST OF, UH, OF 8 0 7. SO FOR CLARIFICATION, YOUR HOUSE IS ON THE LEFT HAND SIDE OF THE HOUSE RIGHT IN THE PHOTOGRAPH, FA FACING, FACING THE HOUSE. IT'S TO THE, IT'S FIRST TO THE LEFT. OKAY. UM, ACTUALLY DO, COULD WE, YEAH, UM, COULD YOU GO BACK TO ONE? LEMME JUST SEE, I'D GO, YEAH, I'D GO TO THE OTHER ONE BECAUSE IT'S CLOSER. UM, I, I JUST WANNA MAKE THREE POINTS. OH. UH, FIRST OF ALL, UM, THANK YOU FOR, UH, BEING, TAKING THIS UNDER CONSIDERATION AND WE APPRECIATE THE ATTENTION TO DETAIL ON HISTORIC MATTERS. UM, SO I'VE MOW WOODLAND HEIGHTS RESIDENT SINCE 2000, RAISED MY FAMILY IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. UM, AND WE HAVE WORKED, UM, YOU KNOW, HISTORIC HISTORIC PRESERVATION, LUCY TAYLOR, GIVING SUPPORT TO, UM, HISTORIC PRESERVATION AND LIFE SIZE. MY NAME IS CLEAN AND CLEAR PLUMBING. MM-HMM . BUT I WANNA MAKE, UM, I JUST WANNA MAKE THREE POINTS ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT AND THAT, AND THEN ADDRESS A COUPLE OF THE ISSUES THAT HAVE COME UP IN THE COURSE OF CONVERSATION. UM, THE FIRST IS THAT THIS, UH, WAS BUILT HASTILY OVER THE COURSE OF A WEEKEND, UM, AND WENT UP, YOU KNOW, IN A COUPLE DAYS. UM, AND, AND WE AS NEIGHBORS WERE ASSURED THAT THERE WERE PERMITS. UM, THERE WERE NOT. AND, UH, I MEAN, FUNDAMENTALLY I THINK THAT'S A REAL PROBLEM. UH, AND SO THAT'S A BAD PRECEDENT FOR OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. YOU, YOU ONLY NEED TO GO, UH, ONE BLOCK TO THE WEST IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD TO DO PRETTY MUCH ANYTHING YOU WANT ON YOUR PROPERTY IN TERMS OF DEVELOPMENT. BUT IN THE, IN THE, IN THE, IN THE WOODLAND HEIGHTS HISTORIC DISTRICT THERE, YOU KNOW, THERE ARE PROCESSES AND THIS WAS IGNORED. AND, YOU KNOW, WHETHER THAT'S THE BUILDER'S ISSUE OR JAKE'S ISSUE, IT'S AN ISSUE. AND, UM, AND, AND TO ME THAT'S WRONG FROM THE START. THE SECOND IS THAT I REALLY FEEL THIS BUILDING, UM, A, IT, IT, IT'S A LOVELY HOUSE THAT, THAT ACTUALLY WAS A, UH, A DUPLEX XAAA, AN, UH, A GREAT AMOUNT OF SQUARE FOOTAGE WAS ADDED TO THAT HOUSE, WHICH, WHICH RESULTED IN A VERY, VERY SMALL PATCH OF LAND FOR OUTDOORS. UM, BUT TO ME IT REALLY, UH, UNDERMINES THE CHARACTER NOT ONLY OF THE HOUSE, BUT OF THE BLOCK. AND FRANKLY, YOU KNOW, I'VE LIVED, UH, YOU KNOW, IN THE WOODLAND HEIGHTS SINCE 2000, I, I HAVE NOT DONE A DIRECT SURVEY, BUT I, I SEE VERY FEW GARAGE APARTMENTS THAT ARE BUILT AT THAT POSITION IN THE DRIVEWAY. AND, UM, AND SO, AND, AND, AND I DON'T, I, I DON'T RECALL. I, I KNOW THE HOUSE BEHIND IT, BUT I DON'T RECALL THAT THAT GARAGE APARTMENT BEING IN THE MIDDLE OF THE DRIVEWAY, YOU GUYS WOULD KNOW BETTER THAN, THAN THAN ME. BUT, UM, TO ME THAT, THAT THE, THE HISTORIC CHARACTER [00:55:01] OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, THIS IS VERY, THIS IS VERY INCONSISTENT AND INCONGRUENT WITH THE HI HISTORIC NATURE OF, OF, OF THE PATCH THAT'S DESIGNATED HISTORIC. AND, AND, UM, DOES ANYONE, DO WE WANT TO EXTEND, WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO EXTEND IF ONE OF THE, UH, BOARD MEMBERS WOULD LIKE TO EXTEND? I WOULD LIKE TO EXTEND THE TESTIMONY COMMISSIONER AD ADMINISTER HIS FINAL POINT IS THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, IT, IT, IT, IT REALLY DOES ALTER, UH, MY YARD. AND I, AND I DON'T WANT, YOU KNOW, THIS IS OBVIOUSLY NOT ABOUT ME. I'M ONE HOMEOWNER, BUT, UM, BUT IT IS A BIG WHITE WALL THAT FACES DOWN ON MY, I'VE GOT A, I'M FORTUNATE ENOUGH TO HAVE A LOT AND A HALF, BUT THAT HALF LOT IS GREEN SPACE AND, YOU KNOW, OUTDOOR SPACE AND EATING SPACE AND, YOU KNOW, IT IS A BIG STRUCTURE FACING DOWN ONE WALL, FACING DOWN, UM, YOU KNOW, ESSENTIALLY, UM, IN THE MIDDLE OF OUR YARD. SO, YOU KNOW, TO ME THAT, THAT IF YOU, IF YOU SAID, YEAH, THIS IS OKAY, THEN I WOULD SAY, WHAT IF, WHAT IF THIS WAS THE CASE ALL OVER THE WOODLAND HEIGHTS? I MEAN, THAT SEEMS TO BE, UM, AESTHETICALLY, UH, AN ISSUE. CERTAINLY IT IS FOR ME. NOW, I'LL JUST TAKE A COUPLE, A COUPLE MORE SECONDS. UM, YOU KNOW, AS I SAID THERE, IT SEEMS TO ME THERE ARE PLENTY OF PLACES IN HOUSTON TO DO, TO BUILD LIKE THIS IF, IF YOU NEED TO, BUT MAYBE NOT IN A HISTORIC ONE. UM, IN TERMS OF MY NEIGHBORS, I, I DON'T RECALL SORT OF A REFERENDUM ON, ON THIS, UM, ON THIS STRUCTURE. UM, I DON'T SEE ANYBODY IN SUPPORT HERE. THAT'S NOT TO SAY THAT THEY HAVEN'T SPOKEN TO JAKE AND THAT'S, YOU KNOW, UP TO THEM, BUT I DON'T, I'VE LIVED THERE FOR A LONG TIME. I DON'T NECESSARILY SEE A GROUNDSWELL OF, OF, OF, OF SUPPORT. UM, YOU KNOW, IN TERMS OF, OF I AGREE, UH, AT THE END OF THE DRIVEWAY. MAKES SENSE. AND, UM, BUT, BUT IF IT, IF THE CASE IS THAT, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN'T DO THAT BECAUSE YOU LOSE GREEN SPACE, THEN, YOU KNOW, THEN I WOULD WONDER WHY YOU WOULD BUY THE HOUSE IN THE FIRST PLACE BECAUSE THERE'S SO LITTLE GREEN SPACE LEFT AFTER IT WAS REDEVELOPED. UM, AND, AND, UH, AND, AND, AND, AND, AND THE SQUARE FOOTAGE WAS ADDED. UM, I, AND I WOULD ALSO SAY, UM, JUST WE WERE TOLD THIS WAS FOR WOODWORKING, NOT FOR STORAGE. UM, AND, AND, AND THAT MAY BE NEITHER HERE NOR THERE, BUT NOW IT'S BEING CAST AS A STORAGE AREA. UM, WHEN INITIALLY IT WAS THIS WAS A PLACE TO DO WOODWORKING. UM, THE, THE, THE FINAL THING I'LL SAY IS INITIALLY WHEN THIS WAS BUILT OVER THE COURSE OF THAT WEEKEND, UM, THERE WAS A SET OF STAIRS RUNNING UP TO THAT DOOR. THERE WERE LITERALLY INCHES FROM OUR PROPERTY LINE. SO, UM, THEY CAME DOWN AND THAT'S GREAT. BUT, UM, BUT YOU KNOW, I THINK IT'S AN ILL-CONCEIVED PROJECT AND I THINK IT WAS, UM, DONE OUTSIDE REGULATIONS AND THE LAW AND I, I THINK IT SHOULD BE REMOVED. OKAY. UH, WITHOUT ADDING TO YOUR TIME, I JUST NEED A YES OR NO, BUT FOR THE AUDIENCE, THE HOUSE IN THE PICTURE WITH THE PORCH IS YOUR HOUSE. IT IS. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE SPEAKER? THANK YOU, SIR. I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF. IN THIS PHOTOGRAPH, IT SHOWS A, IS IT A WINDOW ON THE SIDE, ON THE SECOND FLOOR OF THE BUILDING? I BELIEVE THAT'S THE DOOR THAT WE CAN SEE IN THAT WINDOW. YES. IT, SO THE, THE DRAWING THAT WAS PROVIDED ON PAGE 13 OF YOUR APPLICATION DOES NOT SHOW THAT DOOR, I DON'T THINK. OR IS IT ON THE NEXT PAGE? OH, IT DOES SHOW IT ON THE NEXT PAGE. OKAY. IT'S ON PAGE 14. THANK YOU. IT IS JUST A COMMENT AND THAT IS THAT THE FACT THAT THIS WENT UP QUICKLY ON A WEEKEND TELLS ME THAT BUILDER KNEW HE WAS VIOLATING THE PERMIT AND HE DID IT WHEN THERE'S NO INSPECTORS WORKING AND LI NOT LIKELY TO BE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. UH, AND, AND THAT WAS HIS THINKING. I SEE STUFF HAPPENING FREQUENTLY ON WEEKENDS THAT, UH, TO GET AROUND THEM GETTING CAUGHT. USUALLY NOT ANYTHING OF THE SCALE, BUT, UH, CERTAIN THINGS WE'VE HEARD FROM THE APPLICANT AND A NEIGHBOR. ARE THERE ANY COMMENTS OR DOES ANYONE NEED TO MAKE A MOTION? WANT [01:00:01] TO MAKE A MOTION? I, UM, I JUST WANNA MAKE A COMMENT ABOUT THE ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL CRITERIA VERSUS WHAT HAPPENED HERE. AND I THINK IT WAS CLEAR TO ME FROM READING THE, THE COMMISSIONER'S COMMENTS AND LOOKING AT IT AND TALK TO THE NEIGHBOR, THE ISSUE IS REALLY WHERE IT'S LOCATED ON THE LOT. AND I GUESS THE ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL SAYS REAR OF THE LOT WOULD BE OKAY. AND THAT'S WHAT THE APPLICANT THOUGHT. I JUST, YOU KNOW, MAYBE FOR STAFF NEEDS TO MAKE SURE THEY HAVE A CLEAR IDEA IN THEIR HEAD WHAT IT MEANS REAR OF THE LOT. 'CAUSE ACTUALLY REAR OF THE LOT TO ME MEANS SORT OF SET BACK FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE, NOT ON THE BACK HALF OF THE LOT. 'CAUSE I THINK SOME, SOMETIMES WE SAY, YOU KNOW, BACK HALF OF THE LOT OR REAR OF THE LOT THAT'S NEAR THE HERE NOR THERE, IT'S VERY UNUSUAL. I I THINK EVERYONE AGREES TO HAVE SOMETHING, TWO STORY IN THIS LOCATION. SO I, I, I WOULDN'T THINK THIS WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS INTENDED BY THE ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL. 'CAUSE NORMALLY THOSE THINGS ARE A LITTLE MORE OBJECTIVE, A LITTLE LESS CONTROVERSIAL. SO IT JUST, I GUESS IT'S SOMETHING TO BE AWARE OF IN THE FUTURE THAT, UH, YOU KNOW, UNUSUAL LOCATION, EVEN IF IT'S TECHNICALLY THE REAR OF THE LOT IS PROBABLY SOMETHING THAT SHOULD GO TO THE HHC. 'CAUSE THAT WAS TO ME CLEARLY WHAT THEIR ISSUE WAS AND WHAT THE PROBLEM WITH THIS IS. UM, YEAH, YOU MAY RESPOND TO THAT CHAIR. YES. I JUST WANNA COMMENT ON THAT 'CAUSE IT WAS BROUGHT UP, UM, BY THE NAME STATE YOUR NAME, ROMAN. THIS IS ROMAN, UH, PRESERVATION OFFICER, CITY OF HOUSTON. UH, BECAUSE THAT WAS BROUGHT UP UM, BY THE APPLICANT ABOUT THAT. NOW THAT CRITERIA IS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THOSE THINGS. WE WERE ALT, THIS IS AN ALTERATION TO AN EXISTING GARAGE, SO WE WOULD NOT HAVE LOOKED AT THAT CRITERIA. AND THAT'S THE ONE THAT SAYS REAR OF THE LOT. THAT DOES NOT, WAS NOT A PART OF IT. SO FOR THE ALTERATION, YOU JUST LOOK AT THE, UH, CRITERIA THAT THE HHC APP, UH, APPLIES. ALSO, WE WOULD'VE FOR ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL MOVED TO THE, IF WE GO TO PAGE ONE AGAIN, THAT, THAT, THAT THREE, THOSE THREE, THAT'S THE CRITERIA FOR THIS. IT'S AN ALTERATION TO A NON-CONTRIBUTING BUILDING. OKAY. AND IT DOESN'T HAVE THAT, UM, IN FACT IT NEVER MENTIONS THE LOT REAR OR NOT. ALRIGHT. I THINK THAT WHAT, UM, MAYBE FURTHER CLARIFICATION, THE FACT THAT IT'S THE SECOND STORY IS WHERE THE, UM, CHANGED SOME OF THE STAFF'S THINKING. UM, IT'S NOT, YOU KNOW, TOTALLY CLEAR IN THE ORDINANCE. UM, THERE'S SOME DISCRETION, BUT I THINK SOME OF THE STAFF FELT THAT THE, THE FACT THAT THERE WAS A SECOND STORY MAYBE, UM, DOUBLING WOULD CAUSE YOU TO LOOK AT THE LOCATION. I UNDERSTAND. AND I DON'T, I DON'T THINK IT ACTUALLY A AFFECTS MY DECISION ON THIS PARTICULAR CASE. I JUST WAS MAKING SOME COMMENTS FOR THE FUTURE. 'CAUSE I THINK THE IDEA OF ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVALS IS THEY'RE GONNA BE SO NON-CONTROVERSIAL THAT IT WOULDN'T BE AN ISSUE. SO IF WE'VE BUMPED UP AGAINST SOMETHING WHERE YOU ALL THOUGHT, YOU KNOW, TECHNICALLY IT LOOKS MAYBE, UH, APPLIES, BUT YOU REALIZE, OH, HERE'S A CASE WHERE IT WOULD BE CONTROVERSIAL. JUST KIND OF MENTALLY FLAG THAT AS SOMETHING TO APPLY IT MORE JUDICIOUSLY PERHAPS, OR, UH, BUT I THINK THE MAIN PROBLEM OF COURSE WAS, UM, Y'ALL, UH, THE CONSTRUCTION ALREADY BEEN DONE BEFORE THE, UH, APPLICATION WAS MADE. UH, ROMAN I DO HAVE A, AN FOR CLARIFICATION 'CAUSE WE DO HAVE PEOPLE REVIEW THESE AND WATCH THESE LATER ON. UH, THE APPLICANT MEN MENTIONED THAT HE HAS RECEIVED FINES IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,500 ON THIS. CAN YOU DEFINE HOW, WHAT THOSE FINES ARE? HOW THEY WERE DETERMINED SO THAT SOMEONE WOULD KNOW, UNDERSTAND WHAT THOSE FINES ARE? 'CAUSE WE DON'T SEE FINES TERRIBLY OFTEN, THANKFULLY. OKAY. WELL, I, I DON'T KNOW THE SPECIFICS OF HIS CASE, BUT IN THE CASE OF THE PRESERVATION SECTION 33 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCE, THERE IS A, UM, THERE'S A SECTION UP FRONT ABOUT THE ENFORCEMENT. AND THIS, I'M TALKING ABOUT SECTION, UH, 33 GENERALLY SOMEWHERE UP HERE AT THE TOP, THERE'S A SECTION, UH, ENFORCEMENT HERE IT IS SECTION 33 DASH 2 0 3 OF THE CITY'S CODE OF ORDINANCES. UM, AND THIS IS TYPICAL IF YOU'RE GONNA HAVE A HISTORIC DISTRICTS AND YOU'RE HAVE HISTORIC CODE, YOU'VE GOTTA HAVE SOME ENFORCEMENT. AND SO UNDER THIS SECTION, UM, IT SAYS, AND I THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THAT UP BECAUSE, UH, IT JUST, IT'S SAYING THAT IF YOU VI OR YOU'RE IN VIOLATION OF THIS SECTION OF THE CODE, THEN YOU MAY BE CITED, UH, OR IT SAYS MAYBE IT'S, IN FACT I'LL JUST QUOTE IT. ANY PERSON WHO VIOLATES ANY PROVISION OF THE ARTICLE OF THIS ARTICLE SHALL BE GUILTY OF A MISDEMEANOR. AND UPON CONVICTION SHALL BE CON PUNISHED BY A FINE OF NOT LESS THAN $50 OR MORE THAN $500 FOR EACH VIOLATION. AND EACH DAY THAT ANY VIOLATION OF THIS ARTICLE CONTINUES SHALL BE CONSTRUED AS A SEPARATE OFFENSE. UH, SO I DON'T KNOW THE PARTICULAR THIS CASE OF HOW IT WOULD ACCUMULATE OR WHERE THEY ARE. UM, AND I WOULD HOPE THE JUDGE WOULD USE DISCRETION IF IT, IF, IF, IF THEY, IF IT EVENTUALLY IS PERMITTED. BUT, UM, SO THAT'S ALL I HAVE ON THAT. WE ARE NOT, WE ARE NOT IN THE PUNISHMENT BUSINESS. WE DON'T GET TO IT MUCH. SO LEGAL HAS A [01:05:01] COMMENT, I THINK. YEAH, YEAH. I, I'D SUGGEST THIS IS REALLY A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT WHO'S, WHO'S ALLUDED TO THE FINES. HE CAN BE A, AS ROMANS MENTIONED, THERE IS AN ENFORCEMENT PROVISION UNDER CHAPTER 33. THERE ARE ALSO ENFORCEMENT PROVISIONS UNDER THE, THE BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION CODES. SO WHETHER THOSE, YOU KNOW, WHICHEVER ONES HAVE BEEN IMPOSED AT THIS POINT, I DON'T KNOW THAT WE HAVE THAT INFORMATION. AND SO IF YOU WANT SPECIFICS, BUT YOU KNOW, IT'S CLEAR, IT'S GONE THROUGH SOME PROCESS. AND OF COURSE WHEN YOU TRY TO SECURE, WHEN YOU DO WORK WITHOUT A BUILDING PERMIT, IF YOU THEN GO BACK, YOU GET, YOU KNOW, TRIPLE CHARGED FOR THE PERMIT COST AND SO FORTH. SO THERE'S THAT ADDITIONAL PENALTY AS WELL. BUT THE SPECIFICS OF THE AMOUNT HERE WOULD BE UP TO THE, WOULD I JUST PROBABLY BE BETTER CLARIFIED BY THE APPLICANT? YEAH. I JUST WANTED TO ADDRESS THAT THAT WAS STATED AND HAVE SOMETHING IN THE RECORD TO ADDRESS WHAT THE, WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WITH FINES. AND THE, UH, I JUST ALSO JUST WANNA POINT OUT AS A, AS A STAFF MEMBER AND, UH, AND AT THE CITY AND DEALING WITH OUR, THE MANY CFAS WE'VE GOT. UM, I I DON'T KNOW THAT, I MEAN, IF YOU UPHOLD DECISION, THEN I THINK YOU'RE, I'M, MAYBE I NEED TO JUST TALK THIS THROUGH TO UNDERSTAND WITH YOU THEN YOU'RE THINKING MAYBE THE APPLICANT MIGHT GO BACK AND APPLY FOR A CERTIFICATE OF REMEDIATION. WE DON'T HAVE A PROCESS LIKE HE'LL HAVE TO APPLY FOR A C OF A AGAIN. UM, AND THEN WE'D HAVE TO BRING IT UP IN A DIFFERENT WAY. YEAH. ALTERNATIVELY, I DON'T, IT SEEMS TO ME THIS COMMISSION COULD ALSO OVERTURN THE DECISION AND THERE'S GONNA BE TRIPLE FIND WHEN HE APPLIES FOR THE PERMIT. ANYWAY. I, I, I THINK THE PROCESS WOULD BE IF THE DENIAL IS UPHELD THAT HE NEEDS TO APPLY FOR SOMETHING ELSE TO GET IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE ORDINANCE. 'CAUSE THE DENIAL MEANS HE'S VIOLATE THE ORDINANCE, NOT IN COMPLIANCE. HE'D BE FREE TO, YOU KNOW, MAKE SOME ALTERATIONS SHORT OF FULL DEMOLITION THAT MAYBE WOULD GET APPROVAL. AND I THINK THAT WOULD PROBABLY BE LIKELY COURSE. SO IT, IT COULD ALSO ADDRESS THE POTENTIAL CHANGES THAT THE PERMIT MAY REQUIRE, BECAUSE THAT'S GONNA HAVE TO BE REAPPROVED ANYWAY. SO THAT HAS, YOU KNOW, IF THEY HAVE TO MAKE CHANGES TO MAKE A PERMIT APPLICABLE, THEN THOSE CHANGES WOULD CHANGE WHAT THE APPLICATION IS. THEREFORE IT WOULD HAVE TO BE RE-REVIEWED. THANK YOU. MAKE A MOTION. YEAH. UM, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE, UH, APPROVE THE HH C'S DENIAL OF THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS. OR, I'M SORRY, WHAT'S THE ACTUAL LANGUAGE UP? UPHOLD, UPHOLD, UPHOLD, UPHOLD. YEAH. THANK YOU. UM, COMMISSIONER VEER BLAND. I WOULD SECOND THAT MOTION. ALL THOSE IN. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME. AYE. ELLIOT. AYE. M AYE. MR. VIELAND. AYE. AND I'M THE CHAIR. AYE. IT PASSES. THE UPHOLDING OF THE HH C'S UH, DECISION HAS BEEN UNANIMOUS. THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS THE CONSIDERATION OF AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON PROPOSED 2024 HPAB SCHEDULE. WE SUPPLY THAT IN THE PACKET. WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO ASK FOR A DEFERRAL OF THAT ITEM. WE DON'T HAVE IT IN THE, WE DIDN'T SUPPLY TO THEM. OH NO. YEAH, NO, WE HAVE IT. YOU DO HAVE IT? YEAH. OH, ALRIGHT. WELL, LET'S SEE. DOES THAT WORK? LEGAL, IF THEY HAVE IT. WE DON'T HAVE IT ON THE SCREEN, ON THE AGENDA. AND IT WAS IN THE PACKET. YOU CAN DISCUSS IT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. SORRY FOR THAT. AND, UH, UH, THANK YOU. UM, SO WE HAVE THEN WITH SUPPLI IN YOUR PACKET, THE COM, THE, UH, THE SCHEDULE FOR 2024 OF THE HOUSTON PRESERVATION APPEALS BOARD FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. AND AS A WAY OF BACKGROUND, A LOT GOES INTO, A LOT MORE THAN YOU CAN IMAGINE GOES INTO GETTING THESE PROPOSED SCHEDULE, JUST SO YOU KNOW. 'CAUSE OF COURSE IT INVOLVES, UH, SCHEDULING AND STAFF RECOGNIZING WHEN PLANNING COMMISSION IS MEETING. HHC IS MEETING THE TOWER COMMISSION AND IT'S KIND OF ABOUT WHERE STAFF CAN BE AND WHEN AND, AND, AND OF COURSE HISTORIC OPERATES SEPARATELY. BUT ALL THAT GOES INTO CONSIDERATION HOW WE COME UP WITH A DRAFT SCHEDULE. WELL, IT'S JUST MY CALENDAR DOESN'T GO THIS FAR AHEAD. SO I'VE GOT [01:10:01] AND I KNOW THEY'RE ALL SUBJECT TO CHANGE EVEN THE WEEK OR SO BEFORE THEY HAPPEN. SO, UM, YOU KNOW, THIS SEEMS OKAY TO ME IN GENERAL. , I'M OKAY WITH THIS. JUST TO CLARIFY THESE GO AHEAD. THESE MEETING, UM, THESE MEETING DATES ARE AS NEEDED. NOT, UM, DEFINITIVELY GOING TO HAPPEN. THAT'S CORRECT. IF THERE WERE NO, UM, APPEALS, THEN WE WOULD, UM, CANCEL THE MEETING. WE'RE NOT GONNA MAKE A MEET JUST TO MEET THAT. WE LIKE SEEING YOU . AND I'M, I'M, I'M OKAY AS WELL. THE ONLY ONE THAT I WOULD HAVE POTENTIALLY A PROBLEM WITH WOULD BE THE JUNE 10TH. DO I HAVE A MOTION ON APPROVING THE POTENTIAL SCHEDULE? SO MOVED. ADMINISTER SECOND. ALL THOSE IN. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE SCHEDULE, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME. ELLIOT. AYE. MUNSTER AYE. HELLER. AYE. I, AND I'M THE CHAIR. I THE SCHEDULE PASSES. NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS PUBLIC COMMENT AND IN THE PUBLIC COM, IN THE PUBLIC COMMENT. I HAVE A QUESTION FOR ROMAN, UM, OR FROM STAFF. UM, WE'VE SENT SET A COUPLE THIS YEAR. WE'VE SENT A COUPLE OF APPLICATIONS BACK TO THE COMMISSION. HAVE ANY OF THOSE BEEN PROCESSED OR HAS ANY CHANGE HAPPENED TO THOSE ITEMS? I AM NOT PREPARED TO THINK ABOUT WHAT WE WENT BACK. UH, UM, DO YOU RECALL IF, IF YOU'D GIVE ME A PARTICULAR CASE? I COULD PROBABLY REMEMBER IT, BUT I DON'T, UH, NO. IT WAS THE, IT WAS TWO SESSIONS AGO. WE SENT TWO BACK. SO I WOULD REQUEST THAT, UM, IN THE FUTURE WHEN WE HAVE SOMETHING THAT WE'VE ADDRESSED THAT HAD TO GO BACK TO THE COMMISSION THAT YOU REPORT. WHAT, SO THAT WE HAVE IN THE PUBLIC RECORD. 'CAUSE THIS, OUR MEETING IS IN PUBLIC RECORD. SO WE HAVE A RECORD OF WHAT HAPPENED TO THOSE AGENDA ITEMS THAT WE SENT BACK SO THAT THERE'S A CONTINUANCE OF THE, UH, HISTORY OF THE ITEM. ABSOLUTELY. AND JUST FOR THE RECORD, WE CAN COMMENT ON BOTH. NOW, I KNOW YASMINE'S HAND IS UP VIRTUALLY FOR ONE. I KNOW ONE OF 'EM, IT WAS 7 0 5 WEST MAIN STREET, UH, THAT WAS A, A PORCH, UM, FLOOR OF A SMALL PORCH THAT WAS REMOVED. AND THEN TWO BY SIX MATERIAL WAS PUT ON IT. THE APPLICANT REV REVISED HIS APPLICATION TO JUST PUT A TRADITIONAL ONE BY FOUR LAP FLOORING ON THAT D ON THAT PORCH. AND THAT WAS APPROVED. AND AS FAR AS I KNOW, HE'S PROBABLY PUT THAT PORCH ON THERE TO GET STOP THE RED TAG. HE'S CLEARED OFF ON THAT ONE. AND I BELIEVE COMM UH, STAFF MEMBER ARSLAN MAY HAVE A COMMENT ON THE OTHER ONE. IS SHE STILL? HI, GOOD MORNING. YES, I'M HERE. SO WE HAVE TWO OTHER ITEMS. WE HAVE 11 13 2 LANE STREET THAT WAS FOR DEMOLITION. UM, THEY ENDED UP NOT GOING BACK TO COMMISSION. THEY KEPT THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE AND UM, THEY APPLIED FOR AN ADDITION, UM, THAT THEY, THEY GOT AND THEY HAVE THEIR BUILDING PERMIT AND, AND THEY'RE BUILDING IT NOW. I BELIEVE THE OTHER ONE WAS IN OLD SIX WARD. UM, I, I CAN'T REMEMBER THE ADDRESS, BUT IT WAS THE, THE ONE ABOUT, UM, IT'S ON THE NINE 1800. IT'S 1819, UH, CANE STREET. YES. YES, SIR. THAT'S, THAT'S IT. UM, THEY DEFERRED A COUPLE OF TIMES BECAUSE THEY WERE OUT OF, UM, OUT OF TOWN. UM, AND THEY MISSED THE COMMISSION, THE FIRST COMMISSION. AND THAT'S WHY, UM, THAT WAS ONE OF THE REASONS, UM, UH, WHY THEY WERE SENT BACK. UM, THEY HAVEN'T GONE TO COMMISSION YET AGAIN. THEY, THEY KEPT DEFERRING. THANK YOU. AND IT'S NOTED THAT, WE'LL, IF YOU DO THAT AGAIN, WE'LL HAVE IT AS PART OF OUR PROCESSING FOR THESE. THANK YOU. UM, I DO NOT SEE ANY OTHER SPEAKERS OUTSIDE IN THE AUDIENCE FOR PUBLIC COMMENT. DOES ANY COMMISSIONER HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT? IS THERE ANYONE VIRTUALLY FOR PUBLIC COMMENT, HEARING NO ADDITIONAL PUBLIC COMMENT? DO I HAVE AN A, UH, MOTION FOR ADJOURNMENT? SO MOVED. MUNSTER SECOND ER. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME. ELLIOT. AYE. M AYE. SORRY. NO, AYE. AND IT APPEARS WE ALSO HAVE LOST MRS. BLAND ON THE SCREEN, SO SHE'S NO LONGER IN ATTENDANCE. [01:15:01] SHE HAS ADJOURNED. I, I AM THE CHAIR. I SAY AYE. SO MOTION TO ADJOURN IS UNANIMOUS. YOU DON'T REALLY NEED A MOTION TO ADJOURN. YOU'RE THE CHAIR. YOU JUST GET TO CALL IT ADJOURNED. GOOD TO BE THE KING. RIGHT? RIGHT. * This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.