[Houston Archaeological and Historical Commission on March 14, 2024.]
[00:00:15]
UM, COMMISSION MEMBERS, PLEASE UNMUTE YOURSELF AND RESPOND BY SAYING YOUR LAST NAME, PRESENT OR PRESENT VIRTUALLY.
WHEN I CALL YOUR NAME, I'M GONNA DO THE ROLE.
UM, I'M JOHN COSGROVE, ACTING CHAIR AND PRESENT.
MR. CHAIR, I'M SO SORRY TO ASK TO PAUSE.
THERE ARE SOME MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC HAVING TROUBLE HEARING.
I'M ASKING BY MESSAGE IF THE HTV REPS IN THE BACK, WE'LL ADJUST THE MICROPHONE FOR THE MAIN, UM, COMMISSION SEAT, WHICH IS BEING HELD BY JOHN COSGROVE TODAY.
AND THEN IF YOU COULD TRY AND SPEAK UP A LITTLE BIT MORE, THAT WOULD BE VERY, VERY HELPFUL.
PRESENT AND IS DAVID EK ON? MR. EK IS PRESENT.
AND NOW I WILL CALL FOR THE DIRECTOR'S REPORT.
UM, INTERIM DIRECTOR OF THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT AND SECRETARY OF THIS COMMISSION.
JUST A FEW, UM, HOUSEKEEPING ITEMS. APPLICANTS MAY OPEN AND SPEAK FOR THREE MINUTES AND MAY BE RECOGNIZED TO CLOSE WITH AN ADDITIONAL TWO MINUTES.
IF COMMISSION MEMBERS HAVE QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT, UH, THE CHAIR MAY CALL YOU FOR ADDITIONAL TIME TO ANSWER THOSE QUESTIONS.
OTHER SPEAKERS MAY SPEAK UP TO TWO MINUTES.
ONE RECOGNIZED IF YOU DID NOT SIGN UP TO SPEAK IN ADVANCE, YOU CAN SUBMIT A SPEAKER REQUEST TO STAFF VIA A FORM WHICH IS UP AT THE TABLE THERE, OR, UH, BY CHAT IF YOU ARE ONLINE AND YOUR NAME WILL BE ANNOUNCED AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME.
IF JOINING VIRTUALLY, PLEASE MUTE YOURSELF AND PLEASE ONLY UNMUTE WHEN THE CHAIR CALLS ON YOU TO SPEAK BY NAME.
USE THE COMPUTER'S MICROPHONE I ICON TO MUTE OR PRESS STAR SIX FROM MOST PHONES.
THIS MEETING, UH, MEETS CURRENT OPEN MEETINGS LEGAL REQUIREMENTS, SO LONG AS QUORUM OF MEMBERS ARE AUDIBLE AND VISIBLE WITH A MIC AND CAMERA READY TO BE TURNED ON WHEN SPEAKING.
UM, WANTED TO NOTE FOR COMMISSIONERS.
UM, WE'RE LOOKING AT SEVERAL DATES FOR THE HISTORIC TRAININGS.
AS YOU KNOW, WE ARE POSTPONING A LITTLE PAST MARCH, UM, IN ORDER TO GET THE RIGHT TRAINERS, UM, INVOLVED.
SO, UH, WE ARE LOOKING, AND I BELIEVE YOU MAY HAVE RECEIVED THIS BY EMAIL, UM, AT THREE OPTIONS.
ONE IS SATURDAY, APRIL 27TH, ANOTHER DATE IS IN JULY.
AND A THIRD DATE WILL BE DETERMINED ALL BASED ON THE PRESENTING ORGANIZATION'S AVAILABILITY AND OF COURSE YOUR OWN AVAILABILITY.
UM, AND TAYLOR VALLEY WILL BE, UM, REACHING OUT TO YOU WITH MORE NEWS HOPEFULLY SOON.
ALSO, WE ARE LOOKING AT A COMBINED APPEALS BOARD AND COMMISSIONER TRAINING ON APRIL 25TH AT TWO 30.
UH, AND THIS WILL, THIS AGENDA WILL INCLUDE, WILL COVER A LOT OF CHANGES IN THE STATE CODE, UH, PROCEDURES, UM, RULES AND OF PROCEDURES FOR BOTH THE BOARD AND THE COMMISSION.
SO WE WILL, UM, MAYBE SENDING OUT A POLL TO SEE WHO'S AVAILABLE ON THAT DAY FOR THAT, THAT IS SOMETHING, UM, KIM MICKELSON OUR ATTORNEY HAS BEEN WANTING TO DO FOR A WHILE.
SO, UM, THAT SHOULD BE COMING.
IS THAT A TENTATIVE DAY? DID YOU SAY? TENTATIVE.
AND TENTATIVELY WHAT AGAIN, PLEASE? APRIL 25TH.
UH, SEND YOU AN EMAIL SO YOU'LL HAVE THAT FREE RECORD.
UH, IF ANY COMMISSIONER HAS AN EXPIRED BADGE, PLEASE CONTACT ANGELINA PINEDA.
PLEASE LET THERESA GEER KNOW IF YOU HAVE ANY CONTACT UPDATES SUCH AS EMAILS AND PHONE NUMBERS.
AND JUST QUICK, UH, SNAPSHOT OF PRESERVATION WORK THAT'S BEEN HAPPENING.
STAFF RECEIVED A TOTAL OF 26 APPLICATIONS SINCE YOUR LAST UPDATE IN FEBRUARY.
THERE WERE SIX ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVALS AND TWO PRE-APPLICATION
[00:05:01]
DESIGN REVIEWS.WE HAVE NO LANDMARK OR PROTECTED LANDMARK ACTIVITY TO REPORT.
AND, UM, IF ANYONE HAS QUESTIONS ABOUT ANYTHING ON TODAY'S AGENDA OR ANYTHING ELSE, 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.
NEXT, WE'LL MOVE ON TO THE CONSIDERATION OF THE HAHC.
UM, THEY WERE POSTED WITH THE AGENDA.
UH, DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY CHANGES OR WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE MINUTES? UH, UH, CURRY MOVES TO ACCEPT THE MINUTES AS PRESENTED.
COMMISSIONER CURRY MADE THE MOTION.
THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS ITEM A.
IT'S A PUBLIC HEARING IN CONSIDERATION OF THE POSSIBLE ACTION ON A LANDMARK DESIGNATION FOR THE MENIL HOUSE AT 33 63 SAN PHILIPPE STREET, HOUSTON, TEXAS, 7 7 0 1 9.
THIS IS STAFF PERSON KARA QUIGLEY.
I SUBMIT FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION ITEM A FOR LANDMARK DESIGNATION OF MENIL HOUSE, LOCATED AT 33 63 SAN FELIPE, HOUSTON, TEXAS 7 7 0 1 9.
MENIL HOUSE IS A LINEAR ONE STORY BRICK CLAD FLAT ROOFED IAN MODERN DESIGN, SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING, LOCATED AT 33 63 SAN FELIPE STREET IN THE BRIARWOOD NEIGHBORHOOD IN HOUSTON, TEXAS.
MENIL HOUSE IS A KEY MONUMENT IN THE HISTORY AND UNDERSTANDING OF 20TH CENTURY MODERNIST CULTURE IN THE UNITED STATES.
THE NATIONAL SIGNIFICANCE OF THE PROPERTY IS DERIVED FROM ITS ASSOCIATION WITH JOHN AND DOMINIQUE DENE, INTERNATIONALLY RECOGNIZED AS TWO OF THE GREATEST AMERICAN ART COLLECTORS OF THE 20TH CENTURY BUILT BETWEEN 1949 AND 1951.
THE HOUSE REMAINED THE DI'S PRIMARY RESIDENCE THROUGHOUT THEIR LIFETIMES.
IT WAS CENTRAL TO THEIR MODERNIST ATTITUDES AND PRACTICES IN WHICH ART, POLITICS, AND SPIRITUALITY WERE INSEPARABLE.
THE HOUSE THAT DOMINIQUE AND JOHN DEMIL BUILT ON SAN FELIPE IN HOUSTON WAS CENTRAL TO THE COUPLE'S ACTIVITIES AND INTERESTS.
CONVERSATIONS THAT TOOK PLACE WITHIN ITS WALLS HAVE SHAPED HOUSTON'S ARTS, POLITICS, AND SOCIAL POLICIES FOR MANY DECADES.
THE HOME WAS THE BACKDROP FOR THEIR COLLECTION AND THE SEED FOR WHAT BECAME THE MENAL COLLECTION.
THE HOUSE'S ARCHITECTURE HAS HAD A DIRECT IMPACT ON THE AWARD-WINNING ARCHITECTURE OF THE IL MAIN MUSEUM BUILDING AND THE IL DRAWING INSTITUTE.
THE HOUSE CONTINUES TO BE A MAJOR PIECE IN THE COLLECTION, REFLECTING BOTH THE DI ILS COLLECTING PHILOSOPHY AND MODERNIST POINT OF VIEW.
THE HOUSE IS ALSO NATIONALLY SIGNIFICANT DUE TO THE DI MULES PATRONAGE IN THE CAREERS OF ARCHITECT PHILIP JOHNSON AND COUTURIER CHARLES JAMES.
TWO FIGURES OF EXCEPTIONAL IMPORTANCE.
IN THE 20TH CENTURY AMERICAN DESIGN, JOHNSON DESIGNED A COURTYARD HOUSE IN THE IAN STYLE, CHARACTERIZED BY THE SLAB SIDED COMPOSITION, FLAT ROOF, ELONGATED FASCIA FLUSH WITH THE ROOF LINE, GLASS WALLS, AND NO ORNAMENTATION.
THE OPEN PLAN REVOLVES AROUND A GLASS WALLED INTERIOR COURTYARD THAT SPATIALLY UNIFIES THE ENTRANCE AND PUBLIC AREAS.
LARGE GLASS OPENINGS OFFER VISTAS THROUGHOUT THE HOUSE, WHICH WHEN COMBINED WITH THE TEN SIXTH CEILINGS, MAKE IT FEEL MUCH LARGER THAN IT IS FOR CHARLES JAMES.
1949 WAS THE PEAK OF HIS URI CAREER AND ASPIRED TO BRANCH OUT INTO INTERIOR AND FURNITURE DESIGN AS WELL.
ALTHOUGH HE HAD DECORATED HIS OWN SHOWROOMS, THE MENIL HOUSE WAS HIS FIRST AND REMAINS HIS ONLY DOCUMENT AND COMMISSION PROJECT.
THE MENIL HOUSE IS THE ONLY KNOWN CHARLES JAMES INTERIOR, MAKING IT A UNIQUE AND SIGNIFICANT DOCUMENT IN AMERICAN DECORATIVE ARTS AND INTERIORS.
MENIL HOUSE RETAINS AN EXTRAORDINARY DEGREE OF HISTORIC INTEGRITY, MAKING IT A SIGNIFICANT ARCHITECTURAL LANDMARK OF THE LAST HALF OF THE 20TH CENTURY.
THE CURRENT PROPERTY OWNER, THE MENIL FOUNDATION, IS SEEKING A CITY OF HOUSTON LANDMARK DESIGNATION FOR THE PROPERTY M HOUSE AT 33 63.
SAN FELIPE MEETS CRITERIA 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, AND EIGHT FOR LANDMARK DESIGNATION.
STAFF RECOMMENDS THE HOUSTON ARCHEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL COMMISSION RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL THE LANDMARK DESIGNATION OF MENIL HOUSE AT 33 63 SAN FELIPE, HOUSTON, TEXAS 7 7 0 1 9.
THIS REPORT WAS PREPARED BY STAFF MEMBER KARA WILEY AND SUPPLEMENTED BY INFORMATION PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT.
THE AGENT, DELANEY HARRIS FINCH, IS
[00:10:01]
IN ATTENDANCE VIRTUALLY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.I'M ALSO AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
DO ANY MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE STAFF? I HAVE A QUESTION CALL.
I THINK THIS IS A REALLY AMAZING, UH, NEWS TO HEAR THAT THEY'RE GETTING IT LISTED.
IT'S SUCH AN IMPORTANT BUILDING FOR HOUSTON.
UH, WHY ARE THEY NOT GETTING PROTECTED LANDMARK? I'M NOT SURE ABOUT THE DETAILS OF THAT, BUT POSSIBLY THE AGENT COULD PROVIDE INFORMATION.
COULD WE ASK DELANEY? I BELIEVE I'M UNMUTED.
DID I DO THAT RIGHT? LET ME GO AHEAD AND OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS ITEM.
AND I HAVE ONE SPEAKER SIGNED UP.
UH, THIS IS DELANEY HARRIS FINCH, UH, REPRESENTING THE MANIL FOUNDATION.
AS, UM, OUR CLIENT HERE AT STERN REVIEW CHECK ARCHITECTURE, WE FACILITATED THE LANDMARK APPLICATION WITH THEM AS WELL AS, UH, THE FIRM PARTICIPATED IN THE RESTORATION AND REHAB OF THE, THE MENIL HOUSE BACK IN THE EARLY TWO THOUSANDS.
UM, TO ANSWER, UH, COMMISSIONER COUCH'S QUESTION AT THIS TIME, THE MINERAL FOUNDATION WAS, UM, ADVISED ON ALL THEIR OPTIONS ON LANDMARKING VERSUS PROTECTED LAND PARK LANDMARK.
AND AT THIS TIME, THEY'RE JUST VERY COMFORTABLE WITH THE LANDMARK DESIGNATION.
AND THAT'S, THAT'S REALLY ALL I, I KNOW THAT I WAS ABLE TO GET FROM THEM.
I, I, ONE OTHER QUESTION THAT'S KIND OF RELATED TO THIS.
ARE THEY POSSIBLY GETTING NATIONAL REGISTER NOMINATION ALSO? YOU KNOW, THAT I DO NOT KNOW OFF OFF THE CUFF.
I CAN FIND OUT FOR YOU AND LET YOU KNOW.
CHAIR COSGROVE MAYOR, COMMISSIONER CURRY, UH, MS. HARRIS FINCH, THIS IS COMMISSIONER CURRY.
RELATED TO COMMISSIONER COUCH'S QUESTION, ARE YOU ABLE TO SHARE WITH US, UH, UH, AND, AND ECHOING HIS COMMENTS ABOUT THE IMPORTANCE OF THE HOUSE.
WHY, WHY NOW? IS THERE A REASON THAT YOU CAN SHARE VERSUS ANY OTHER TIME IN ITS HISTORY? SURE.
I BELIEVE, UM, JUST THE TIME HAD COME THAT IT MAKES MORE SENSE.
AND I DO BELIEVE THAT THEY ARE GONNA TRY AND PURSUE SOME SUBT TAX CREDITS FOR SOME REHABILITATION WORK THAT NEEDS TO OCCUR IN THE FUTURE.
SO, NOT FOR, UH, WELL, NO, NOT FOR ANY REASON RELATED TO PARKING.
ECHOING, UH, COMMISSIONER COUCH'S COMMENTS AGAIN AND NOT REPEATING THEM, BUT IT, UH, IT WOULD BE GREAT IF THERE WAS MORE PUBLIC ACCESS TO THIS VERY IMPORTANT BUILDING IN HOUSTON.
AND SO, UH, I'LL LEAVE IT AT THAT.
UH, THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE TODAY.
I DON'T THINK THAT THEY GET THE PARKING REDUCTION UNLESS THEY GET PROTECTED LANDMARK.
BUT, UM, IN ANY CASE, UM, IT'S GOOD TO SEE IT, UM, BEFORE THE COMMISSION TODAY.
OH, AND I JUST TO COMMENT, UM, I DON'T KNOW THAT, UH, KARA QUIGLEY MENTIONED IT IN HER EXCELLENT PRESENTATION, BUT THERE'S AN, UH, ADJACENT NON, A NON-CONTRIBUTING BUILDING.
IT'S CALLED A SMALL GARAGE THAT IS NOT INCLUDED IN, IN THIS DESIGNATION.
UH, THAT WAS CLEAR IN THE, IN THE REPORT.
I JUST, FOR THE RECORD, I, I NOTE THAT.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS TOPIC? MR. CHAIR, MAY WE COMMENT THAT WE RECOGNIZE CHAIR UH, COM COMMISSION MEMBER DUBBO HAS JOINED THE MEETING? YES.
UM, HEARING NONE, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
UM, DOES ANYBODY WISH TO MAKE A MOTION? I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE ACCEPT THE RECOMMENDATION TO COMMISSIONER COUCH MAKES A MOTION.
ANY OPPOSED? ANY ABSTENTION? DO CHECK ABSTAINS.
THE MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY WITH COMMISSIONER VIEW.
IT'S A PUBLIC HEARING IN CONSIDERATION OF, OF AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON A PROTECTED LANDMARK DESIGNATION FOR THE CONCORD MISSIONARY BAPTIST CHURCH AT 75 0 6 NORTH MAIN STREET, HOUSTON, TEXAS 7 7 0 2 2.
[00:15:03]
GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR AND COMMISSIONERS.I'M ROMAN MACALLAN WITH THE CITY OF HOUSTON.
THE CONCORD MISSIONARY BAPTIST CHURCH WAS FOUNDED IN HOUSTON'S INDEPENDENCE HEIGHTS IN 1917.
THE FIRST PASTOR WAS THE REVEREND LUIS OR LOUIS GREEN ALEXANDER.
INITIALLY THE CHURCH MET IN THE HOME OF INDEPENDENCE HEIGHTS RESIDENT MR. ARTHUR MCCULLOUGH, WHO LATER SERVED AS MAYOR OF INDEPENDENCE HEIGHTS.
THE CHURCH WAS BUILT, THE CHURCH BUILDING WAS, UH, BUILT A BUILDING AT THE CORNER OF NORTH MAINE AND EAST 35TH STREET.
THE CONTRACTOR FOR THAT BUILDING BEING PURDY LUMBER COMPANY.
THE CURRENT STRUCTURE WAS BUILT IN 1951 TO REPLACE THAT STRUCTURE DUE TO THE GROWING CONGREGATION.
CONCORD CHURCH IS ONE OF VERY FEW SURVIVING CHURCH STRUCTURES THAT SERVE THE INDEPENDENCE HEIGHTS COMMUNITY.
AND A PROTECTED LANDMARK DESIGNATION IS REQUESTED SO IT CAN BE PRESERVED IN PERPETUITY.
THE 1951 CHURCH BUILDING WAS DESIGNED AND BUILT BY JAMES M. THOMAS, A BLACK CONTRACTOR WHO SPECIALIZED IN DESIGNING AND BUILDING CHURCHES FOR THE LOCAL AFRICAN AMERICAN CONGREGATIONS.
THOMAS BEGAN BUILDING CHURCHES IN 1937 AT A TIME WHEN HOUSTON HAD NO BLACK ARCHITECTS AND DESIGNED OVER 55 CHURCHES IN HIS LIFETIME.
HE GOT HIS START AS A DESIGNER WHILE ATTENDING PRAIRIE VIEW COLLEGE.
IN 1930, HE BEGAN TEACHING MECHANICAL DRAWING AT PHYLLIS WHEATLEY HIGH SCHOOL IN HOUSTON, WHERE HE TAUGHT FOR 42 YEARS BEFORE RETIRING IN 1972.
THOMAS DIED IN 1994, LEAVING AN IMPORTANT ARCHITECTURAL LEGACY IN THE CITY.
MOST OF THOMAS'S CHURCHES SHARE TWO PROMINENT CORNER TOWERS WITH A PYRAMIDAL CORNER HIP CREWS AND LARGE GABLE ROOFS OVER THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE.
IN MANY EXAMPLES, WIDE STEPS LEAD UP TO AN ENTRANCE ABOVE A RAISED FIRST FLOOR.
ANOTHER NOTABLE AND UNUSUAL FEATURE OF MANY OF HIS DESIGNS IS USE OF GLASS BLOCK AS A DECORATIVE FEATURE OFTEN USED IN PLACE OF BRICK BETWEEN WINDOW OPENINGS.
HIS DESIGN FOR THE CONCORD CHURCH INCORPORATES MANY OF THE STYLISTIC CHARACTERISTICS FOR WHICH HE IS NOTED A LITTLE ABOUT HIS CURRENT STATE.
IT'S, WHICH IS ON PAGE FIVE OF THE REPORT.
IN 20 13, 2 LOCAL HISTORIC PRESERVATIONISTS GARY DBE AND AVA ANGEL PURCHASED THE BUILDING, THE CHURCH BUILDING WITH THE INTENT TO RESTORE IT TO A DIFFERENT USE, BUT MAINTAIN ITS ORIGINAL APPEARANCE AND PRESERVE THE STRUCTURE.
ALL ELECTRICAL WIRING, METAL PIPE FIXTURES WERE STOLEN AND THE BUILDING HAD BECOME AN EMPTY SHELL.
WATER WAS LEAKING INTO THE BUILDING FROM HOLES IN THE ROOF CAUSING MAJOR STRUCTURAL DAMAGE.
THE SECOND FLOOR WHERE THE SANCTUARY WAS LOCATED WAS FALLING ONTO THE GROUND FLOOR AND WATER INTRUSION INTO THE BUILDING WAS CAUSING INTERIOR PLASTER TO CRUMBLE, CAUSING STRUCTURAL DAMAGE TO THE BRICKS.
GARY AND AVA CONSIDERED VARIOUS OPTIONS FOR THE BUILDING AND CONVERTED IT TO A MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL USE.
THEY MODIFIED THE INTERIOR OF THE BUILDING TO MAKE TWO UNITS ON THE SECOND AND THIRD FLOORS TO BE THE, AND TO BE THE PRIMARY RESIDENCES AND CREATED FOUR APARTMENTS ON THE GROUND LEVEL.
THEY DID WANNA PRESERVE THE ORIGINAL APPEARANCE OF THE EXTERIOR KNOWING THAT THEY WOULD WANT TO GET A HISTORIC DESIGNATION IN THE FUTURE TO ENSURE THE BUILDING AND ITS HISTORIC IMPORTANCE WOULD REMAIN INTACT FOR FUTURE GENERATIONS.
EVEN THOUGH THE BUILDING USED CHANGED, THEY WERE CAREFUL NOT TO CHANGE THE EXTERIOR APPEARANCE AND TO USE IMPORTANT ELEMENTS SUCH AS THE STAINED GLASS WINDOWS AND ORIGINAL LIGHT FIXTURES.
IN THE INTERIOR RENOVATION, THE GOAL WAS TO ALSO TO INCLUDE A GALLERY SPACE THAT COULD BE USED TO PORTRAY THE HISTORY OF THE CHURCH AND ITS IMPORTANCE TO THE COMMUNITY OVER THE YEARS.
AND IS ALSO THEIR GOAL TO BE ABLE TO USE THE BUILDING AND THE GALLERY SPACE TO HELP LOCAL STUDENTS AND COMMUNITY GROUPS.
AN APPEND AN APPENDIX TO THE STAFF, UH, OR TO THE DESIGNATION REPORT IS THE NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES, UH, DOCUMENTATION.
AND IT, THE CHURCH HAS MENTIONED TWO TIMES SPECIFICALLY IN THAT, UH, DOCUMENTATION.
UH, IT REFERS TO WHEN IT WAS ORGANIZED AND THAT SERVICES WERE HELD IN THE, IN THE BUILDING THAT WAS THERE PRIOR.
AND IT REFERS TO, UH, A REVEREND ER GREEN PASTOR OF THE CHURCH AS WELL.
[00:20:01]
TO, UH, TO MAKE IT A LOCAL PROTECTED LANDMARK.WE, WE BELIEVE THAT IT MEETS CRITERIA ONE THREE.
THIS IS ON PAGE SIX OF YOUR DESIGNATION REPORT, 1, 3, 4, 5, AND SIX AND EIGHT.
UH, AND THEN TO MAKE THE PROTECTED LANDMARK DESIGNATION THAT IT, UH, MEETS THREE OF THOSE, WHICH IT ACTUALLY MEETS SEVERAL MORE.
AND THAT IT IS, UH, RECOGNIZED IN, IN A NATIONAL REGISTER HISTORIC DISTRICT.
BEFORE I OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING, DO ANY COMMISSIONERS HAVE QUESTIONS FOR ROMAN? THIS IS COMMISSIONER DUBBO ROMAN.
I JUST WANNA CONFIRM, UM, ON THE SECOND SET OF CRITERIA, UM, DID WE CONFIRM THAT CONCORD WAS LISTED IN THE NATIONAL REGISTER HISTORIC DISTRICT? YES.
IF YOU REFER, THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER.
THE, THE NATIONAL REGISTER DESIGNATION IN THIS CASE DOES NOT INCLUDE A LIST OF CONTRIBUTING AND NON-CONTRIBUTING AN INVENTORY SEPARATE.
THAT'S A LIST OF NON-CONTRIBUTING, CONTRIBUTING, BUT IT DOES SPECIFICALLY REFER TO CONCORD MISSIONARY BAPTIST CHURCH IN TWO PLACES.
UH, THE, THE MAP TOO, I FURTHER LOOKED AT AND IT DOES APPEAR TO INCLUDE A, A LARGER, IN FACT, I THINK THERE MIGHT NEED TO BE AN ADJUSTMENT TO THE CITY MAPS BECAUSE I DO BELIEVE I SEEING A LARGER AREA DESIGNATED.
AT THIS TIME I'D LIKE TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.
I JUST WANTED TO THANK EVERYBODY FOR, UM, YOU KNOW, HEARING THIS.
I BOUGHT THE PROPERTY A WHILE BACK AND JUST, I LOVE ARCHITECTURE, HISTORIC PRESERVATION.
SO MY GOAL IS JUST TO PRESERVE THE BUILDING FOR FUTURE USE.
UM, IT'S NOT A, OBVIOUSLY IT'S NOT A CHURCH ANYMORE, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO INCORPORATE ANY HISTORY THAT ANYONE HAS ON THE CHURCH ITSELF.
WHEN I WAS RENOVATING IT, PEOPLE CAME FORWARD AND IT WAS, UM, I WAS PLEASED TO SEE PEOPLE MENTION THAT THEY WERE BAPTIZED IN THE CHURCH.
THEY HAD THEIR WEDDING IN THE CHURCH.
I WOULD LOVE TO GET ANY KIND OF INFORMATION LIKE THAT SO I COULD PUT IN THE CHURCH ITSELF.
AND I'M USING THE HALLWAY AND THE INTERIOR AS KIND OF A MEMORIAL TO THE CHURCH ITSELF.
AND I WANTED TO THANK CHUCK FOR HELPING ME MOVE THIS PROJECT ALONG.
IF THERE ANY QUESTIONS, LET ME KNOW.
DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? UH, THIS IS COMMISSIONER DEBO.
UM, MR. DRE BACK FOR BRINGING AN APPLICATION FOR A PROTECTED, UM, LANDMARK FOR THE CONCORD BAPTIST CHURCHES.
WE ALL KNOW, UM, THIS CHURCH IS ONE OF EIGHT HISTORIC CHURCHES THAT WERE BUILT DOING, UM, THE FORMATIVE YEARS OF THE, UH, INDEPENDENT HEIGHTS CITY AS A CITY.
UM, WE KNOW THAT THIS CHURCH HAS BEEN, UM, UH, HAS MET A LOT OF CONTENTION WITH THE COMMUNITY.
UH, BECAUSE WHEN YOU PURCHASED THE CHURCH, IT WAS NOT THE COMMUNITY'S DESIRE THAT A PERSON, UH, UH, AN INDIVIDUAL OR TWO INDIVIDUALS OWN IT WHEN THE CITY WAS TRYING TO PURCHASE IT TO TURN INTO A LIBRARY, UH, FOR OUR COMMUNITY.
NEVERTHELESS, UM, TODAY, UH, I AM HAPPY TO SEE AN APPLICATION TO PRESERVE, UH, WHAT'S LEFT OF THE CHURCH SO THAT IT WOULD BE AROUND FOR FUTURE GENERATIONS.
WHAT I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT IS, WHEN YOU PURCHASED THE CHURCH AND YOU CAME TO THE SUPER NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING, UH, AND MANNETTE BEZEL WAS THERE, THERE WERE SEVERAL OTHER, UH, OFFICIALS FROM THE CITY.
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT YOU DID SAY, AND I HEARD ROMAN SAY TODAY AND ALSO YOURSELF, WAS THAT, THAT YOU WERE USING THE HALLWAY OR A, THE GROUND FLOOR, A PARTICULAR SPACE THERE AS A GALLERY FOR THE COMMUNITY.
UH, PARTICULARLY YOU'RE LOOKING FOR THINGS THAT, UM, COULD REALLY ATTEST TO THE HISTORY.
WE DO A LOT OF TOURS IN THE COMMUNITY AND I'M JUST CURIOUS TO HEAR FROM YOU TODAY ON RECORD.
UM, HOW MUCH OF THAT BUILDING WOULD BE OPEN FOR US IF PEOPLE WANTED TO GET INSIDE THE GALLERY? IS THE GALLERY TOGETHER WHO CUR WHO CURATED THE GALLERY? OR WHO DO YOU PLAN ON WORKING WITH TO CURATE A GALLERY WITH THE AUTHENTIC HISTORY OF CONCORD CHURCH? I HAVEN'T REALLY THOUGHT THAT FAR IN ADVANCE OF HOW I'M GONNA DO IT.
WHAT I DID IS THE CENTER HALLWAY.
UM, I USED SOME OF THE STAINED GLASS WINDOWS IN IT.
AND, UM, I WANTED TO USE THAT AS KIND OF THE, THE GALLERY SPACE OR HIS HISTORY MUSEUM FOR THE CHURCH ITSELF, AS FAR AS HOW PEOPLE WOULD COME AND ACCESS THAT, I DON'T REALLY KNOW.
'CAUSE IT'S A PRIVATE RESIDENCE THAT'S THERE RIGHT NOW, BUT I'D BE MORE THAN GLAD TO WORK WITH ANYBODY TO TRY TO DO THAT, ESPECIALLY ANY SPECIAL EVENTS THAT'S THERE.
MY UNIT IS ALWAYS OPEN ALSO FOR ANY KIND OF EVENT.
WHAT I WOULD REALLY LOVE TO DO ALSO,
[00:25:01]
ESPECIALLY THE, UH, THE LOCAL SCHOOLS THERE FOR ARTISTS TO BE ABLE TO SHOW THEIR ARTWORK, YOU KNOW, IN THE BUILDING ITSELF.UM, ALMOST KINDA LIKE A MUSEUM TYPE PLACE FOR THAT TO KIND OF GIVE BACK TO THE COMMUNITY ITSELF ON THAT.
UM, ONE OF THE OTHER UNITS RIGHT NOW, SHE, IT'S AN ARTIST THAT USES AS ALMOST KINDA LIKE A, UM, AN EVENT SPACE.
AND SHE, IT IS HER ART GALLERY OR STUDIO THERE ALSO.
BUT AS FAR AS OPENING IT UP TO THE PUBLIC, I GUESS THEY WOULD HAVE TO WORK KIND OF WITH ME SINCE I'M THE OWNER AND THE RESIDENT THERE.
BUT I WOULD BE MORE THAN GLAD TO ACCOMMODATE ANY TYPE OF NEIGHBORHOOD OR COMMUNITY EVENT TO, TO, TO BE THERE.
AND SO MY LAST, UM, COMMENT, UM, IS THAT, YOU KNOW, UM, AS YOU KNOW, UM, IN THE FUTURE THERE MAY BE, UM, THIS PROPERTY MAY SELL, UM, AND FALL INTO THE HANDS OF SOMEONE ELSE.
AND SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT, UM, I DO WANT TO GO ON RECORD SAYING IS THAT THE COMMUNITY, UM, PARTICULARLY THE NEWLY FORMED INDEPENDENCE HEIGHTS CONSERVANCY, THAT'S THEIR ROLE, UM, IS TO WORK WITH PEOPLE THERE, UM, IN THE COMMUNITY WHO WANT TO USE THEIR PROPERTY, UH, TO TELL THE AUTHENTIC STORY OF INDEPENDENCE HEIGHTS.
AND SO I'LL DEFINITELY BE PUTTING YOU IN TOUCH WITH SOME OF THOSE PEOPLE.
I ALSO HAVE IN MY POSSESSION, UM, A LOT OF HISTORY RELATED TO THIS CHURCH THAT WE CAN GET, UH, BLOWN UP AND MADE INTO MANY, UM, STORYBOARDS OR WHAT HAVE YOU.
UM, AND SO AGAIN, I AM HAPPY TO SEE THIS APPLICATION COME FORWARD, UH, FOR A PROTECTED LANDMARK.
BUT I WOULD BE REMISS IF I DID NOT GO ON RECORD, UM, BECAUSE THERE WERE SEVERAL MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY WHO CALLED BECAUSE THEY GOT LETTERS THAT WERE SENT TO THEM AND THEY WERE CONCERNED ABOUT WHAT ALL OF THIS MEANT.
UM, THEY FELT LIKE IT WAS BENEFITING YOU, UM, AS AN INDIVIDUAL AND NOT A BENEFIT TO THE COMMUNITY.
AND I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT IN SOME WAY WHEN WE WALK AWAY FROM THIS, UH, THAT THERE IS A BENEFIT TO THE COMMUNITY AND THAT IT ACTUALLY TELLS THE STORY OF THE COMMUNITY AND NOT JUST THE STORY OF THE ARCHITECTURE.
UM, AND SO AGAIN, THANK YOU FOR SUBMITTING THIS OUTPATIENT.
UM, I WAS, I WAS, THE REASON I BROUGHT THIS FORWARD IS I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT BENEFIT IT'S GONNA BE FOR ME.
I WAS ADVISED IT WOULD PROBABLY BE BETTER FOR ME PERSONALLY NOT TO DO THIS.
SO IN THE FUTURE, YOU KNOW, IF SOMEBODY WANTED TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT THIS STRUCTURE, BUT TO ME BEING HIS PRESERVATIONIST, I'D RATHER EVEN AFTER I'M GONE, TO SEE THE BUILDING STANDING AND SOMEHOW INCORPORATE THE HISTORY OF THE, THE COMMUNITY AND THE CHURCH IN THERE.
SO MY WHOLE GOAL WAS JUST SO THE BUILDING WILL REMAIN STANDING EVEN AFTER I'M GONE.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR EFFORTS ON THIS.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? HEARING NONE.
I WILL NOW CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
UM, ROMAN, WOULD YOU LIKE TO RESTATE THE
DO I HEAR A MOTION ON THIS ITEM? UH, YAP.
MOVES TO ACCEPT, UH, THE PRESENT THIS MOTION OPPOSED SECOND COMMISSIONER SECONDS.
ANY, ANYONE? ABSTAINING? MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.
MOVING ON TO ITEM C, CONSIDERATION OF IMPOSSIBLE ACTION ON CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS, APPLICATIONS FOR CONSENT AGENDA.
GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR COMMISSIONERS AND TO THE PUBLIC.
I'M STAFF MEMBER TERRENCE JACKSON.
TODAY'S STAFF RECOMMENDS THE FOLLOWING ITEMS FOR ACTION PER STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS IN ONE MOTION.
THE ITEMS ARE ITEM C 1 1 3 1 9 RUTLAND STREET ALTERATION EDITION IN THE HOUSTON HEIGHTS WITH WEST HISTORIC DISTRICT.
APPROVAL ITEM C 2 1 1 1 0 WEST GRAY STREET, ALTERATION OF A SIGN, UH, LANDMARK, THE QUALITY LAUNDRY BUILDING, RECOMMENDATION APPROVAL, 2 1 2 BAYLIN AVENUE, ALTERATION WINDOWS AND DOORS IN THE WOODLAND HEIGHTS HISTORIC DISTRICT RECOMMENDATION APPROVAL 1 0 3 1
[00:30:01]
EAST 14TH STREET, ALTERATION EDITION IN THE NOR HILL HISTORIC DISTRICT.RECOMMENDATION APPROVAL C 7 1 6 2 8 HARVARD STREET ALTERATION EDITION IN THE HOUSTON HEIGHTS EAST HISTORIC DISTRICT.
RECOMMENDATION, APPROVAL ITEM C 8 1 6 2 8 HARVARD STREET, NEW CONSTRUCTION OF A GARAGE IN THE HOUSTON HEIGHTS EAST HISTORIC DISTRICT.
RECOMMENDATION, APPROVAL ITEM C 9 1 1 1 5 LAG GREEN STREET ALTERATION EDITION IN THE NOR HILL HISTORIC DISTRICT.
THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT REC REQUEST APPROVAL OF ALL STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR THESE PROCEEDING ITEMS, ITEMS PROPOSED FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION, THEREFORE ARE ITEM C FIVE, C SIX, AND C 10.
WE ARE HERE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
UM, JUST TO, JUST TO GO OVER IT, WE'RE CONSIDERING ITEM C 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 8, AND NINE TOGETHER, DO ANY MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION WISH TO TAKE ANY OF THESE ITEMS OFF OF THIS AGENDA FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION? UM, HEARING NONE DO ANY, SO WE'RE GONNA VOTE ON THESE AND THE RECOMMENDED ACTION WILL BE APPROVED.
ARE THERE ANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WHO WISH TO TAKE ANY OF THESE ITEMS OFF? I DO HAVE TWO SPEAKERS SIGNED UP FOR 1628 HARVARD IN SUPPORT OF, UM, HEARING NONE.
UM, I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION ON THESE ITEMS. I MOVE THIS.
MOVES TO ACCEPT STAFF RECOMMENDATION? I HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER YAP.
SECOND DE BOTH AND A SECOND BY DEBOSE TO CONSIDER ITEMS 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 8, AND NINE.
ANY OPPOSED? ANY ANYONE ABSTAINING? THE MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY.
SO THE FIRST ITEM, ITEM C 5 77 15 WILMAR.
DEAN, GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIRPERSON AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.
THIS IS STAFF PERSON SAMANTHA DEION.
I SUBMIT ITEM C FIVE AT 7 715 WIL MEINE STREET IN THE GLEN BROOK VALLEY HISTORIC DISTRICT FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
THE 1,888 SQUARE FOOT ONE STORY, TRADITIONAL RAN STYLE CONTRIBUTING PROPERTY WAS BUILT CIRCA 1960.
THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO REPLACE FOUR ORIGINAL ALUMINUM WINDOWS WITH VINYL WINDOWS ON THE FRONT AND SIDE ELEVATIONS OF THE PROPERTY.
THE APPLICANT HAS ALREADY PURCHASED THE CUSTOM VINYL WINDOWS AND ARE NOT RETURNABLE AND HAS ALREADY REPLACED AND INSTALLED THE VINYL WINDOWS IN THE REAR OF THE HOME.
STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL AS THE WINDOWS DO NOT SATISFY CRITERIA.
1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, AND 10 OF SECTION 33 DASH 24 1 CHAIRS AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.
THE APPLICANT IS AVAILABLE VIRTUALLY FOR QUESTIONS.
I'M ALSO AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
UH, BEFORE I OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING, DO ANY COMMISSIONERS HAVE QUESTIONS OF STAFF? UM, HEARING NONE, I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.
I HAVE TWO SPEAKERS SIGNED UP.
UM, I'M NOT SURE WHO WAS, WANTS TO GO FIRST, BUT I HAVE A DOLORES THACKER AND AN AMELIA SILVA.
I BELIEVE THAT THEY'RE ONLINE AND PRESENT.
CAN YOU PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME? UH, MY NAME'S DOLORES THACKER.
THIS IS AMELIA SILVA, THE PROPERTY OWNER ON WILER.
WE ARE THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE WINDOWS, WHICH ARE MOSTLY IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD BECAUSE THE MATERIALS THAT ARE REQUESTED ARE NOT AVAILABLE ANYMORE.
YOU CANNOT GET THE ALUMINUM WINDOWS THAT ARE IN THE HOUSE NOW.
SO ALL THE NEIGHBORHOOD, MOST OF IT HAVE BEEN REPLACED WINDOWS WITH THE, THE VINYL WINDOWS.
SO THIS REALLY TURNING DOWN THIS APPLICATION FOR REPLACEMENT WOULD BE A HARDSHIP ON MS. SILVA.
[00:35:01]
SPEAK IN SPANISH WITH YOU IF YOU PREFER THAT.UH, BECAUSE THE WINDOWS HAVE BEEN PURCHASED, THEY ARE CUSTOMED AND THEY'RE NON-RETURNABLE.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT OR WHAT'S SUGGESTIONS Y'ALL HAVE FOR PURCHASING THE ALUMINUM WINDOWS, BUT IF YOU'LL LOOK THROUGH THE WHOLE NEIGHBORHOOD, THOSE ARE THE WINDOWS THAT ARE BEING REPLACED WITH THIS MATERIAL.
SO I DON'T KNOW, UNLESS ONE OF Y'ALL HAVE A VENDOR FOR THE ALUMINUM WINDOWS, UH, WOULD LIKE TO HEAR ABOUT IT.
IT NOW ANN COLLUM, WHO IS A GUEST IN IN THE MEETING, IS FAMILIAR, VERY FAMILIAR WITH OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND IT WOULD, SHE COULD, UH, MAYBE ELABORATE MORE ON THE MATERIALS THAT ARE BEING USED.
THE WINDOWS ARE BEING REPLACED BECAUSE, UH, IT WOULD BE MORE ECONOMICAL FOR HER TO HAVE THE NEW WINDOWS FOR THE HEATING THE AIR.
THAT'S A REASON FOR THE REPLACEMENT OF THE WINDOWS, SO THAT SHE CAN STAY IN HER HOME COMFORTABLY AND BE ABLE TO AFFORD TO STAY THERE.
NOW, I DON'T KNOW WHAT OBJECTIONS OR IF ANYBODY HAS ANYTHING TO SAY ABOUT IT OR ANY QUESTIONS FOR HER.
UH, WE'LL BE GLAD TO TO ANSWER THEM.
I'D LIKE TO COMMENT COLUMN, YES, THERE ARE VINYL WINDOWS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT THEY WERE ALL DONE UN PERMITTED.
AND MANY OF 'EM HAVE COME BEFORE US TO GET A CERTIFICATE OF REMEDIATION OR WHATEVER.
BUT THE MOST COMMON THING THAT'S HAPPENING IS THE FLIPPERS ARE COMING IN, THEY'RE PAINTING THE BRICK AND THEY'RE CHANGING THE ALUMINUM WINDOWS OUT FOR THE VINYL WINDOWS.
AND THEY'RE DOING IT ALL WITHOUT PERMITS, WITHOUT CONSULTING THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD.
I PERSONALLY LIVE IN GLENBROOK VALLEY, HAVE HAD MY WINDOWS REPLACED.
THE DESIGNATION, THE HISTORIC DESIGNATION.
PLEASE, PLEASE LET THEM TALK ONE AT A TIME.
THE PEOPLE CAME OUT AND APPROVED THE WINDOWS.
THEY LOOKED AT THE WINDOWS AND APPROVED THE REPLACEMENT OF MY WINDOWS.
WELCOME TO COME BY AND LOOK AT 'EM.
I DO HAVE, I DON'T HAVE THE NUMBER.
'CAUSE IT'S BEEN SO MANY YEARS OF WHAT, WHAT THE APPROPRIATION COMMITTEE GAVE ME, BUT THE SIGN WAS OUT IN MY YARD.
A COMMITTEE CAME OUT AND VISITED TWO OR THREE PEOPLE FROM THE CITY.
I DID NOT DO 'EM WITHOUT PERMITS.
UH, THAT ARGUMENT DOES NOT FOR THE FLIPPERS.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY'RE DOING.
THAT IS NOT MY CONCERN RIGHT NOW.
UNLIKE EMILY'S, THE ONLY CONCERN WITH HER IS CHANGING HER WINDOWS OUT.
BUT WHEN WE HAD EARLY ON THERE, BEFORE WE WERE FULLY STAFFED, YOU KNOW, WITH THE INSPECTORS AND STUFF, THERE WAS A LOT OF THINGS ALLOWED IN GLENBROOK VALLEY THAT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN ALLOWED.
AND IT COULD BE DOLORES THAT YOU GOT THROUGH, YOU KNOW, ON ONE OF THOSE.
BUT RIGHT NOW, UH, WE'VE, YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE TO HAVE THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS.
I DON'T DOUBT THAT YOU HAVE IT, I DON'T REMEMBER.
BUT, UH, WHAT WE'RE HAVING, THE PEOPLE THAT ARE CHANGING THEIR WINDOWS TODAY ARE DOING IT WITHOUT PERMITS AND WITHOUT A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS.
IT'S VERY FRUSTRATING FOR ALL OF US THAT ARE TRYING TO, YOU KNOW, CONTROL, NOT CONTROL, BUT TO, LIKE WITH THE CIVIC CLUB, WE'RE TRYING TO FOLLOW THE ORDINANCE, BUT IT HADN'T DONE HAPPEN.
AND WITH THAT, ROMAN, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU AGAIN.
AT WHAT POINT IS GLENBROOK VALLEY GOING TO HAVE DESIGN GUIDELINES? MR. CHAIRMAN, LET, LET ME INTERJECT HERE.
WE, WE NEED TO FOCUS ON THE ITEM THAT IS POSTED ON THE AGENDA, WHICH IS THIS PARTICULAR HOUSE.
IF THERE'S A QUESTION ABOUT THE GENERAL ISSUE OF WINDOWS OR DESIGN GUIDELINES, WE NEED TO RESERVE THAT PERHAPS FOR PUBLIC COMMENT IN A LATER REPORT.
I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THE, SO DID THE PROPERTY OWNER APPLY FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS BEFORE SHE BOUGHT THE WINDOWS? YES.
IS THAT THE STAFF? IS THAT TRUE? YES, SHE, UH, DOLORES THACKER HELPED, UH,
[00:40:01]
AMELIA WITH THE APPLICATION.THE APPLICATION WAS SUBMITTED AND THEN DURING THE PROCESS, SINCE I WOULD SAY FEBRUARY 6TH, SO IN THE PAST MONTH, UM, WE DID GET A CALL FROM DOLORES LETTING US KNOW THAT AMELIA ALREADY WENT AHEAD AND PURCHASED THE WINDOWS.
SO SHE PURCHASED WINDOWS BEFORE GETTING THEIR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATION, CORRECT? YES, SIR.
SHE DIDN'T UNDERSTAND COMPLETELY ABOUT THE APPROPRIATION, UH, CERTIFICATE.
SHE UNDERSTOOD THAT WHEN WE WENT TO THE APPROPRIATION COMMITTEE, THAT WAS THE PERMIT TO INSTALL THE WINDOWS.
SHE WAS NOT GOING BEHIND ANYBODY.
AND IF ANYBODY CAN TELL US WHERE WE CAN GET THE ALUMINUM WINDOWS TO BE RE YOU KNOW, REPLACED, THAT WOULD BE GREAT.
THE WHOLE NEIGHBORHOOD WOULD PROBABLY APPROVE IT.
BUT LIKE I SAY, RIGHT NOW, AMELIA HAS THOSE WINDOWS SITTING IN HER, HER GARAGE.
BUT WE, WE WE'RE GONNA MOVE ON.
IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT FROM THE COMMISSION? SO ARE ALL THE WINDOWS REPLACED OR SOME OF THE ORIGINAL ONES JUST ON THE BACK? JUST ON THE BACK ONES IN THE, THEY'RE JUST ON THE BACK.
THE OTHER, THE WINDOWS THAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT IN THE PICTURES, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT 'EM, ARE THE ONLY TWO THAT HAVE NOT BEEN REPLACED BECAUSE THE OFFICE DID TELL US WE COULD GO AHEAD AND REPLACE THE BACK WINDOWS.
THE ONLY TWO WE'RE HOLDING ON IS THE TWO IN THE FRONT.
UH, MS. THACKER, CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES.
YOU'RE, YOU'RE THERE WITH, UH, MS. SILVA, THE, THE OWNER.
AND, AND SO YOU'RE, YOU'RE REPRESENTING HER.
SO I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU AND, AND THEN FOR, WELL, WELL, I I HAVE A QUESTION FOR BOTH OF YOU.
ONE OF THE OPTIONS, RATHER THAN REPLACEMENT OF ORIGINAL WINDOWS, WHICH ARE VISIBLE FROM FROM THE STREET, UH, TO IMPROVE THE PERFORMANCE OF THE ACOUSTICAL PERFORMANCE AND THERMAL PERFORMANCE IS, IS AN INTERIOR INSERT.
UH, A SORT OF A STORM WINDOW, IF YOU WILL.
ANOTHER LAYER OF PROTECTION, WHICH, WHICH LOOKS, UH, GOOD AND WHICH WORKS WELL, WHICH IS EASY TO INSTALL, WHICH IS LESS EXPENSIVE THAN REPLACEMENT, I THINK, WITH ANY PRODUCT.
AND IT, UM, CIRCUMVENTED THIS ISSUE OF, UM, WHAT ORIGINAL MATERIAL IS VISIBLE FROM THE STREET AND THEREFORE PART OF, UH, WHAT'S INVOLVED IN PURVIEW WITHIN A DISTRICT.
SORRY, THAT WAS A LONG QUESTION.
YEAH, THAT WAS A LITTLE COMPLICATED FOR ME TOO.
THERE ARE PRODUCTS CALLED INSERTS THAT FIT ON THE INSIDE OF THE WINDOW THAT ARE VISUALLY UNOBTRUSIVE ATTRACTIVE AND, AND FUNCTIONALLY IMPROVING THE THERMAL AND ACOUSTICAL PERFORMANCE OF THE EXISTING WINDOWS WITHOUT HAVING TO REPLACE THE WINDOWS.
I'M CURIOUS IF THAT'S AN OPTION THAT'S BEEN CONSIDERED.
WELL, IT WOULD BE AN OPTION IF WE DIDN'T HAVE THE WINDOWS SITTING IN THE GARAGE.
BECAUSE THEN THAT WOULD BE MORE EXPENSE TO HER.
UH, WE'LL DEFINITELY, OF COURSE.
WE WERE GOING TO APPEAL THIS AND, AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT'S NECESSARY TO APPEAL, BUT I JUST THINK IT'S, IF YOU WOULD LOOK, IF I COULD GO AROUND THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND TAKE PICTURES.
THANK YOU FOR ANSWERING THE QUESTION.
SO THEN CAN I MAKE A MOTION? YES.
WE ACCEPT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.
COMMISSIONER COUCH MAKES A MOTION TO ACCEPT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.
DO I HAVE A SECOND? COMMISSIONER STA STAAVA SECONDS.
ANY OPPOSED? ANY ABSTAINING? AYE.
COLUMN ABSTAINS COMMISSIONER COLUMN ABSTAINS.
UH, THE NEXT ITEM, ITEM ON OUR AGENDA IS 85 30 GLEN VALLEY DRIVE.
GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIRPERSON AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.
THIS IS STAFF PERSON SAMANTHA DELEONE.
AGAIN, I SUBMIT ITEM C SIX AT 85 30 GLEN VALLEY DRIVE IN THE GLEN BROOK VALLEY HISTORIC DISTRICT FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
THE 1,971 SQUARE FOOT ONE STORY TRADITIONAL RANCH STYLE NON-CONTRIBUTING PROPERTY, WAS BUILT CIRCA 1958.
ON JANUARY 9TH, 2024, THE APPLICANT RECEIVED A 3 1 1 COMPLAINT FOR CONSTRUCTION WITHOUT A PERMIT OR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS.
ON JANUARY 10TH, 2024, AN EXPECTOR OBSERVED THAT THE NEW WIN, THAT NEW WINDOWS AND NEW GARAGE DOORS HAD BEEN INSTALLED.
THE HOUSE HAD BEEN RE-ROOFED AND THE ORIGINAL UNPAINTED BRICK HAD BEEN PAINTED AND ISSUED A RED TAG.
APPLICANT APPLIED FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS ON FEBRUARY 1ST, 2024.
[00:45:01]
AS THE WINDOWS DO NOT SATISFY CRITERIA ONE AND ENSURE AN ISSUANCE OF COR FOR WORK COMPLETED ON THE WINDOWS AND GARAGE DOORS, AND FOR THE APPLICANT TO WORK WITH STAFF ON PROPER REMOVAL OF THE PAINT CHAIRS AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.THE APPLICANT IS HERE FOR QUESTIONS.
I'M ALSO AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS AS WELL AS STAFF PERSON ROMAN MCALLEN.
THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
UH, BEFORE I OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING, DO ANY OF THE COMMISSIONERS HAVE QUESTIONS OF STAFF? MR. MCG? I HAVE A QUESTION WHAT OUR PURVIEW IS OVER, UH, NON-CONTRIBUTING HOUSES CONSIDERING THE RECENT APPEALS BOARD COMMISSION, UM, REVIEW OF OUR, I DON'T KNOW WHICH MEETING IT WAS.
DO YOU RECALL LAST MONTH OR THE MONTHS BEFORE IN GLENBROOK VALLEY? WE VOTED ON A NON-CONTRIBUTING HOUSE AND WE WERE SHOT DOWN UNANIMOUSLY, UNANIMOUSLY FOR THE, UH, FOR US TELLING THEM THAT THEY HAD TO CONFORM TO HISTORIC DISTRICT GUIDELINES.
AND IT WAS A NON-CONTRIBUTING HOUSE.
SO I'M CURIOUS TO HEAR FROM LEGAL OR ROMAN OR JENNIFER, WHAT EXACTLY HOW WE'RE SUPPOSED TO MOVE FORWARD ON A NON-CONTRIBUTING HOUSE IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT.
I, I WAS NOT HE PRESENT FOR THAT MEETING, ALTHOUGH I DID WATCH PART OF IT.
SO I'M GONNA DEFER TO ROMAN AND MAYBE, UM, MS. MICKELSON.
YEAH, UH, I'LL ADD, I'LL JUMP IN FIRST AND, AND HAVE ROMAN ADD TO IT.
BUT THAT'S WHY YOU HAVE THE FORM THAT YOU DO BEFORE YOU IN THE, IN THE DOCUMENTS TODAY, WHICH ARE MORE THE NON-CONTRIBUTING STANDARDS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVALS GRANTED.
BUT THAT IS AN ACKNOWLEDGEMENT THAT NON-CONTRIBUTING PROPERTIES ARE TREATED SOMEWHAT DIFFERENTLY THAN THEY ARE, THAN THE, THE CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES.
SO I'LL JUMP IN FOR STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS.
COMMISSIONER MCNEIL WOULD, WOULD YOU SUMMARIZE THAT QUESTION AGAIN, PLEASE MAKE SURE I JUST GET IT RIGHT ON POINT.
OR IS IT IT DID COME FROM YOU, RIGHT? IT DID COME FROM FROM ME.
UH, THE SUMMARY OF THE QUESTION IS THE APPEAL, THE HOUSE THAT HAD THE DIAMOND LEADED LAST WINDOW, THE BAY WINDOW IN THE FRONT YEAH.
VOTED TO REPLACE RIGHT SITE WENT TO APPEALS ION.
THE APPEALS COMMISSION VOTED UNANIMOUSLY THAT THAT HOMEOWNER DID NOT HAVE TO ADHERE TO HHS RECOMMENDATIONS.
SO GIVEN THAT, UH, PRECEDENT SET BY THE FIELD BOARD, MY INCLINATION IS TO SAY I DON'T HAVE ANY PURVIEW, I DON'T HAVE ANY, UH, RESPONSIBILITY FOR A NON-CONTRIBUTING HOUSE IN THE DISTRICT.
AND I'M NOT SURE IF I'M READING THAT ACCURATELY OR NOT.
AND SO I'M LOOKING FOR SURE ASSISTANCE FROM THOSE OF YOU WHO DO THIS FULL TIME AS TO WHAT OUR RESPONSIBILITY IS FOR NON-CONTRIBUTING HOUSES IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT SO THAT WE DON'T SET UP A SITUATION WHERE THEY JUST GO HAVE TO COME HERE AND THEN GO TO THE APPEALS BOARD AND THE APPEALS BOARD OVERTURNS WHAT WE TELL THEM TO DO.
IT, I THINK THAT IT WAS ALSO, WHICH IS KIND OF A TWO PART DECISION OF THE HPAB, THIS LAST MEETING THAT THEY HAD ON, ON THAT ITEM.
AND ONE OF THEM, FRANKLY, WAS THAT IN THE STAFF REPORT THAT WE BROUGHT TO YOU GUYS, AND THIS IS WHAT, UM, LEGAL IS REFERRING TO, IS THAT WE HAD THE 11 CRITERIA AND NOT THE, UH, THE 11 CRITERIA OF A CONTRIBUTING BUILDING REALLY, WHICH IS MY MISTAKE BECAUSE I SHOULD HAVE CAUGHT THAT STAFF REPORT AND IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN WRITTEN WITH THE ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL RULES.
SO IN, IN WHAT IT SEEMED TO ME THAT FROM THE APPEALS BOARD'S DECISION, AND I'M NOT A HUNDRED PERCENT SURE OF THIS, BUT IT SEEMED LIKE THEY WERE SORT OF SAYING IT WAS CONS, IT DIDN'T GET, GET THE RIGHT REVIEW AT THE HHC LEGAL, JUST SAY I I THINK THEIR PART WAS TO FOLD IT WAS THAT YOU ALL USED THE WRONG STANDARD.
THAT THERE SHOULD HAVE BEEN THE USE OF THE NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE STANDARD THAT IS CONTAINED ELSEWHERE IN THE ORDINANCE, WHICH YOU HAVE IN YOUR PACKET TODAY, WHICH IS THREE ITEMS. THIS COMMISSION DOES HAVE AUTHORITY OVER NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES WITHIN HISTORIC DISTRICTS.
BUT YOU TREAT THEM DIFFERENTLY THAN CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES, WHICH ARE AT LEAST IN THEORY, MORE IMPORTANT ARCHITECTURALLY OR MEET THE, THE AGE GUIDELINES, UM, TO BE CONSIDERED CONTRIBUTING, ET CETERA.
AND, AND I THINK THE OTHER PART OF THE PROBLEM, BOTH WITH STAFF REVIEW ON THE, THE, I'LL CALL IT THE DIAMOND PAINT HOUSE IN GLENBROOK VALLEY WAS THAT IT WAS PROBAB.
IT MAY HAVE BEEN A HOUSE THAT WAS OLD ENOUGH TO HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED AS A CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE AT THE TIME AND MAY HAVE BEEN
[00:50:01]
MISLABELED AT THE TIME OF THE DISTRICT.SO I THINK STAFF NOW KNOWS THAT, YOU KNOW, MAYBE REVIEW OF THOSE ON AN ONGOING BASIS MIGHT BE HELPFUL.
SO WE CAN GO BACK TO COUNCIL TO GET THAT CHANGE.
AND IT'S NOT A SITUATION WHERE STAFF OR THIS COMMISSION CAN SAY, OH, THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN A CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE.
AND WE SHOULD CONSIDER IT AS SUCH BECAUSE IT'S AN ORDINANCE PASSED BY COUNSEL.
SO WE HAVE TO GO BACK IF WE WANNA RECONSIDER THE DESIGNATION OF CERTAIN STRUCTURES AS CONTRIBUTING OR NON-CONTRIBUTING.
BUT YOU DO HAVE SOME AUTHORITY.
IT'S JUST YOU CAN'T APPLY NECESSARILY ALL OF THE SAME STANDARDS TO, TO A NONCONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE ON, I'M READING THIS ON THAT SUBJECT THING RIGHT HERE ON THAT SUBJECT.
BEN, MAYBE WE'RE SAYING THE SAME THING.
COULD WE LOOK TOGETHER, EXCUSE ME, TOP OF PAGE? YEAH, LET'S READ WHAT IT SAYS AT THE TOP OF PAGE TWO.
COULD WE ALL LOOK AT THE TOP OF PAGE TWO, BEN? WAS THAT WHAT YOU WERE GOING, WHERE YOU WERE GOING WITH IT? YEAH.
CATEGORY A AND BI THINK ARE EXACTLY WHAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT.
THE, THE TOP OF PAGE TWO SAYS, DIRECTOR SHALL ISSUE A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR THE ALTERATION REHABILITATION OR RESTORATION OF A NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE IN ADDITION TO A NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT.
UPON FINDING THE APPLICATION SATISFIES THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA AS APPLICABLE AND AB AND ONE, AB AND A AND B.
AND AND NUMBER TWO, I MEAN, AREN'T THOSE THE CRITERIA WHERE TO APPLY? CAN WE, THE STAFF IS TO APPLY.
CAN YOU READ THOSE OUT LOUD? YEAH.
AND, AND THOSE ARE THE CRITERIA YOU'RE LOOKING AT IN THE DIRECTOR OF ME, EXCUSE ME.
THE DIRECTOR'S MADE THE DETERMINATION THAT AN AN ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL IS NOT CORRECT, SO THAT'S WHY IT'S HERE.
BUT TO THE, BUT CAN WE READ FROM CRITERIA FROM COMMISSIONER, UH, MCNEIL ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THIS COMMISSION HAS PURVIEW OVER NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES? ISN'T THE ANSWER RIGHT HERE AT THE TOP OF PAGE TWO? THIS, SO NO, I, I THINK WE NEED TO LOOK AT THE ORDINANCE IN ITS OVERALL, UM, TRYING TO GIVE, GIVE WEIGHT AND INTERPRETATION AND, AND VALIDITY TO ALL OF IT.
UM, THESE STANDARDS ARE AS YOU NOTE UNDER, AND AS I THINK I SAID INITIALLY, THEY'RE UNDER THE SECTION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVALS.
IT'S THE ONLY PLACE THAT THERE ARE ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVALS FOR, OR EXCUSE ME, THAT THERE'S A SEPARATE SET OF STANDARDS FOR NON-CONFORMING STRUCTURES.
I THINK IT'S APPROPRIATE IN THE CASE WHERE THERE'S NOT AN ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL POSSIBLE BECAUSE THE DIRECTOR HAS NOT FOUND THEM TO, TO, TO SATISFY THOSE CRITERIA THAT THEN IT CAN COME TO THE COMMISSION.
UM, AS A FOLLOW UP QUESTION THEN LET'S, UH, I WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THIS PARTICULAR HOUSE MORE DIRECTLY THEN.
UH, WE'VE READ ON PAGE ONE, WHAT WAS DONE TO THE HOUSE OR WITHOUT PERMITS AS YOU SAY.
AND THEN ON THE SECOND PART, ON THE SECOND PAGE, YOU HAVE A, UH, SOMEBODY WHO MARK UNDER ONE, UH, CHECKED OFF ON DENIAL, I GUESS D YES.
AND ONE, ONE A AND ONE B IS DENIAL.
AND I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE, UH, A, A MORE, UH, EXPLANATION ON WHAT IS THE THOUGHT PROCESS THAT WENT INTO THE DENIAL.
IF YOU CAN SPEC SPECIFICALLY, TELL ME WHY.
THEN I CAN LOOK AT IT AND SAY, OKAY, WHAT IS IT THAT THE PERSON IS IN VIOLATION RIGHT NOW? YOU DECIDED THAT THE VIOLATION, SO THE, UH, YOU'RE JUST ASKING WHY DID WE MARK THE BOX THAT IT DOES NOT SATISFY A AND B? YEAH, IT'S, IT'S MARK D FOR A REASON.
I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW THAT PARTICULAR REASON WITH REFERENCE TO THIS HOUSE, NOT TO THAT PAST DIAMOND SHAPE HOUSE, BUT TO THIS PARTICULAR HOUSE.
UH, SO THE, UH, A BEING THEN THAT THE PROPOSED ACTIVITY MUST RECOGNIZE THE BUILDING AS A PRODUCT OF ITS OWN TIME AND AVOID ALTERATIONS THAT TO SEEK AN EARLIER OR LATER APPEARANCE.
ACTUALLY THAT ONE, IN RETROSPECT NOT CHECKING IT, THAT COULD HAVE BEEN SATISFIED.
THEY'RE NOT TRYING TO CHANGE TO, TO A DIFFERENT APPEARANCE.
BUT B, THE PROPOSED ACTIVITY MUST MATCH THE ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES, MATERIALS AND CHARACTER OF EITHER THE EXISTING NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE OR CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES WITHIN THE CONTEXT AREA.
THAT'S DEFINITELY EASY TO SAY THAT ONE DOES NOT SATISFY BECAUSE THE INSTALLATION OF THE, UH, THE WINDOWS DON'T MATCH THE ORIGINAL STYLE OF THE HOUSE AS WELL AS THE HOMES IN THE CONTEXT AREA.
IN RETROSPECT, LOOKING AT THIS REPORT, WE MIGHT HAVE BEEN ABLE TO CHECK A AS SATISFIES BECAUSE YOU'RE NOT TRYING, THEY, THEY, THEY'RE NOT SEEKING TO CREATE AN EARLIER OR LATER APPEARANCE.
AT LEAST I DON'T SEE WHERE THAT GETS THERE.
BUT, BUT THAT SAID THE ANSWER TO THAT.
WELL, THANK YOU BECAUSE THAT WAS WHAT I WAS DRIVING AT.
[00:55:01]
I DON'T BELIEVE ONE A SHOULD BE A D, UH, BUT YES ON TWO ONE B, THE D BECAUSE OF THE CHANGE OF MATERIALS IN THIS CASE, RIGHT? CORRECT.SO IM, UH, THE B UH, UH, VINYL WINDOWS AND A DOOR THAT MAY NOT BE APPROPRIATE AND GARAGE DOOR THAT MAY NOT BE APPROPRIATE.
PAINT, PAINT, PAINT AND PAINTING AS WELL.
SO THIS, I THINK WE HAVE A PURVIEW.
WE CLEARLY HAVE A PURVIEW ON THIS.
AND, AND I THINK BASICALLY WE SHOULD BE WHAT, THAT'S WHAT WE ARE VOTING ON, WHETHER, UH, THIS PERSON AND ON TOP OF THAT DID IT WITHOUT ANY PERMITS.
THE OTHER, AND THE REASON FOR OUR RECOMMENDATION THOUGH, DOES, AND WE'VE BROUGHT THIS TO YOUR ATTENTION BEFORE, AND THAT IS THAT SECTION 33 DASH TWO 40 B.
AND, AND THAT IS THE CONSIDERATION OF THE, UH, SINCE BEING SENSITIVE TO THE PROPERTY OWNER'S FINANCIAL CONDITIONING, UH, CONDITION, SORRY, IN DETERMINING WHETHER TO ISSUE A C OF A AND THAT, WELL, WE HAVE THIS PROBLEM ALL THE TIME AND WE DON'T HAVE A WAY TO EVALUATE THEIR FINANCIAL SITUATION.
AND I ASK THIS EVERY SINGLE TIME WE BRING IT UP AND WE JUST SHRUG OUR SHOULDERS AND SAY, YOU JUST HAVE TO BELIEVE ME.
BUT WE DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH MONEY THEY HAVE OR DON'T HAVE.
WE KNOW THAT THEY'VE SPENT MONEY TO DO THESE THINGS, BUT I DON'T SEE HOW WE CAN EVALUATE THEIR FINANCIAL SITUATION WITHOUT SOME SORT OF OBJECTIVE CRITERIA.
CAN I ASK A QUESTION? DO, DOES THE, I KNOW IN OTHER HISTORIC RESERVATION ORDINANCES FOR UNDUE HARDSHIP, THERE ARE CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS.
DOES OUR ORDINANCE HAVE THAT? UM, I KNOW WITH DEMOLITION IT DOES, BUT I'M NOT A HUNDRED PERCENT SURE ABOUT OUR WHEN ITEMIZED THINGS.
'CAUSE I KNOW THERE, THERE'S A WHOLE PROCESS THAT YOU HAVE TO SUB SUBMIT THAT FINANCIAL INFORMATION.
AND OUR ORDINANCE IS NOT SPECIFIC.
UM, I WILL ADD ON BOTH OF THESE POINTS BRIEFLY.
WE HAVE STARTED WITH STAFF TO LOOK AT CHAPTER 33 HOLISTICALLY TO, UM, ADDRESS PROCEDURAL ISSUES FROM THE POWELL DECISION AND ALSO SOME OF THESE OTHER ISSUES TO SEPARATE OUT AND THEN MAKE CLEARER FOR YOU ALL THE STANDARDS FOR NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES IN PARTICULAR.
I DON'T KNOW IF STAFF IS READY TO TACKLE YET SOME OF THE OTHER, INCLUDING FINANCIAL HARDSHIP ISSUES, BUT WE, WE MET TWO WEEKS AGO TO START WORKING ON THAT.
ON OVERALL SOME OF THE, THE, AGAIN, PRIMARILY PROCEDURAL ISSUES, BUT WE'RE LOOKING AT TRYING TO CLARIFY SOME AREAS AS WELL.
NOT CHANGE THINGS SUBSTANTIVELY, BUT YEAH.
THIS IS COMMISSIONER, COMMISSIONER COUCH, SORRY, TO WHO? I, WHOEVER I JUST INTERRUPTED.
AND THAT ISSUES OF FINANCIAL HARDSHIP ONLY SEEM TO COME UP BEFORE THIS COMMISSION IN A SITUATION WHEN THEY'VE SPENT ALL THEIR MONEY ON DOING PROJECTS WITHOUT PERMITS AND WITHOUT PERMISSION FROM, FROM THIS COMMISSION.
AND THEY COME BACK TO US AND ASK FOR FORGIVENESS AND SAY, WELL, I'M HAVE A FINANCIAL HARDSHIP BECAUSE I CAN'T AFFORD TO REDO 'EM THE SECOND TIME.
WHEREAS IF THEY'D FOLLOWED THE RULES AND GUIDELINES OF THE HISTORIC DISTRICT, THEN THEY WOULD'VE DONE IT CORRECT THE FIRST TIME.
THEY WOULD'VE HAD PLENTY OF MONEY TO DO IT, CORRECT.
I KNOW IN THE COURT SERVICE, I BELIEVE YOU CAN'T CREATE YOUR OWN HARDSHIP, RIGHT? YEAH.
COMMISSIONER CHE COMMISSIONER.
UH, UH, COMMISSIONER EK, I, I, UH, I WOULD LIKE TO ASK A QUESTION OF COMMISSIONER CURRY AS CHAIR OF THE WINDOW SUBCOMMITTEE.
UH, BECAUSE FOR THIS PROJECT AND THE PREVIOUS PROJECT DISCUSSED, AT LEAST WITH THE PREVIOUS PROJECT DISCUSSED, THERE WAS A, A STATEMENT MADE BY THE APPLICANT THAT THERE ARE NO ALUMINUM WINDOWS THAT ARE AVAILABLE FOR USE IN GLENBURG VALLEY.
AND THAT IS NOT WHAT I RECALL IN OUR MOST RECENT CONVERSATION OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE.
AND I WAS JUST WONDERING IF, IF MR. CURRY, AT LEAST FOR THE RECORD, IF THESE PROJECTS ARE GOING BEFORE THE APPEALS BOARD AND THEY ARE GOING TO BE EXAMINING THE INFORMATION DISCUSSED IN OUR MEETING FOR THE PURPOSE OF THAT, OF THAT, CAN YOU AT LEAST, UM, REVEAL YOUR CURRENT UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT IS AVAILABLE THAT WOULD BE ACCEPTABLE, BOTH FOR CONTRIBUTING AND NON-CONTRIBUTING USE? AND THAT, THAT'S MY QUESTION.
UM, COMMISSIONER HICK, UM, BECAUSE SOMEONE COMES HERE AND SAYS THAT THEY HAVEN'T FOUND ALUMINUM WINDOWS FOR REPLACEMENT OF THEIR ORIGINAL ALUMINUM WINDOWS, DOESN'T MEAN THAT THERE AREN'T ALUMINUM WINDOWS IN PRODUCTION THAT ARE AVAILABLE.
SO WE'RE UPDATING THE RESOURCE GUIDE FOR MANUFACTURERS WHO CURRENTLY ARE MAKING ALUMINUM WINDOWS, WHICH ARE MUCH CLOSER IN PROFILE
[01:00:01]
AND APPEARANCE TO, IN EVERY WAY TO THE ORIGINAL, UH, MATERIALS THAT ARE CONSTANTLY BEFORE US FOR REPLACEMENT.AND I'LL ADD, UH, UH, AT THIS OPPORTUNITY THAT THERE ARE OTHER OPTIONS AS WELL.
ORIGINAL WINDOWS CAN BE REPAIRED WHERE THEY'RE FUNCTIONALLY PROBLEMATIC.
AND AS I'VE MENTIONED, THERE ARE OTHER SOLUTIONS TOO, WHICH DON'T REQUIRE THE REPLACEMENT OF THE WINDOWS AND BOTH OF THOSE OTHER OPTIONS, REPAIR AND INTERIOR MODIFICATIONS, UM, CIRCUMVENT THE ISSUE OF, UH, OF THE APPEARANCE OF THESE CONTRIBUTING PROPERTIES, NON-CONTRIBUTING PROPERTIES IN DISTRICTS AND INDIVIDUAL LANDMARKS.
AND I KNOW THAT THERE WAS, THERE WAS AN ACTUAL WINDOW, ALUMINUM WINDOW REPAIR WORKSHOP THAT WAS OVERSEEN BY OUR STAFF, UM, IN GLENBROOK VALLEY.
AND I BELIEVE THERE'S A VIDEO OF THAT ONLINE.
THERE WAS A WORKSHOP AND THERE WAS A PRESENTATION SPECIFIC TO GLENBROOK VALLEY, UM, IN ONE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD CHURCHES AT THE CELEBRATION OF THE 10TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE, UH, DISTRICT OF GLENBROOK VALLEY BECOMING A DISTRICT ABOUT, UH, TWO YEARS AGO NOW.
UH, AND THE COMMITTEE WILL UPDATE THE RESOURCE GUIDE TO THE STAFF SHORTLY SO THAT IT'LL BE AS CURRENT AS POSSIBLE.
CAN, CAN, IS ANYBODY SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS? THAT'S WHAT I WAS GOING TO.
WE, I WAS GONNA OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND TABLE OUR DISCUSSION TILL MAYBE AFTER WE HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT WHO IS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK OF FLO ALVARENGA, ARE THEY PRESENT? ANY HELP? REACH OUT TO ME.
CAN YOU PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD? UH, MY NAME IS FLOUR ALVARENGA.
ARE WE HERE WITH WHATEVER THE QUESTION YOU HAVE? OKAY.
DOES ANYBODY HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT? UM, UH, UH, I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW WHETHER YOU ARE AWARE THAT, UH, TO DO THE WORK THAT YOU PLAN TO DO.
THERE WAS SUPPOSED TO BE APPLICATIONS THAT YOU HAVE TO GO THROUGH BEFORE DOING THE WORK.
UH, SHE SAID WHATEVER, WHEN HE DO THE TRAUMA TO BUY THE HOUSE, HE WAS ATTEND THE OWNER BEFORE HE WAS THE ONE WHO STARTED, DO ALL THE, CHANGE ALL THE WINDOWS AND DO ALL THE WORK.
AND SHE DON'T KNOW SHE WAS, UH, HISTORIC SELLING HER.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? UH, HOW COMMISSIONER COUCH.
HOW LONG HAVE YOU OWNED THE PROPERTY? SO THE WORK WAS DONE PRIOR TO YOU OWNING THE PROPERTY OR DID YOU NO.
WAS WAS THE WORK DONE BEFORE SHE OWNED THE PROPERTY BY THE OTHER, UH, PREVIOUS OWNER OR NO? UH, I DON'T, I DON'T, I DON'T HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
DID HE DO THE WORK FOR, OR NO, NO, HE, HE, THE GUY, HE WAS DO THE OTHER, THE WINDOW.
DO YOU WANNA JUST GO AHEAD AND SAY YEAH, UH, THE OTHER OWNER, HE WAS THE ONE, HE DO OTHER WINDOWS.
SO SHE HOW LONG HAS SHE BEEN THERE? HOLD ON, PLEASE, MS. COMMISSIONER COLLIN.
JUNE UP IN DECEMBER? NO, DECEMBER.
IN DECEMBER DID, SHE BOUGHT THE PROPERTY.
SO YOU PURCHASED THE HOUSE IN DECEMBER 23.
SO HCA SHOWS THAT IT CHANGED OWNERSHIP IN
[01:05:01]
OCTOBER OF 23.I MEAN, I'M NOT SURE THAT'S GERMANE TO THIS CONVERSATION.
I THINK WE NEED TO EVALUATE THE PROPERTY BASED ON IT.
THE ISSUE BEFORE YOU ALL IS NOT REALLY WHEN THE PROPERTY CHANGED.
YOU'VE GOT THE QUESTION BEFORE YOU, IS THIS APPROPRIATE FOR THIS NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE OR NOT? DID SHE WANTED TO GIVE SOME CLARIFICATION? THEY BOUGHT THE HOUSE IN OCTOBER, BUT THE, THEY DID NOT MOVE IN UNTIL, YEAH, DECEMBER.
AND SO WHO INSTALLED THE NEW WINDOWS? AND WHO PAINTED THE BRICK? DO YOU KNOW WHO INSTALLED THE WINDOWS AND DID THE BRICK? UH, I THINK THE, THE, OR BEFORE HE HIRED SOMEBODY TO INSTALL THE WINDOW AND PAINT THE, THE HOUSE.
SO, SO THEY'RE STATING THAT THE PREVIOUS OWNER IS THE ONE THAT DID THE, THE WORK THAT WAS CHANGED.
SO WE DON'T, I, I, ALONG WITH THAT A FLIPPER HAD IT
SO WE DON'T KNOW WHEN THE WORK WAS DONE.
SO, 'CAUSE THIS PICTURE SAYS JANUARY, 2024, BUT THAT'S NOT WHEN IT WAS DONE.
THIS IS WHEN THE 3 0 1 COMPLAINT WAS FILED AND WHEN THE INSPECTOR WENT TO GO VISIT, CORRECT? I DON'T KNOW WHEN THE WORK WAS DONE.
SO THE WORK, WE DON'T KNOW WHEN IT WAS DONE.
IT WAS DONE SOMETIME BETWEEN JANUARY, 2022, SOMETIME WITHIN THE LAST TWO YEARS, CORRECT? CORRECT.
IT WAS JUST THAT THIS HOUSE WAS, AGAIN, THAT 3 0 1 COMPLAINT WAS MADE.
UM, IT'S UNCLEAR, YOU KNOW, FROM THE REPORT, FROM THE 3 1 1 INVESTIGATOR, WHETHER OR NOT IF THE WORK WAS DONE IN JANUARY, IT WAS JUST DISCOVERED AND REPORTED.
SAMANTHA, CAN I OFFER SOME ASSISTANCE HERE AS WELL? UH, WAS THIS HOUSE PURCHASED THROUGH H HR R OR DID SHE MADE A PRIVATE PURCHASE TO A BUYER? DIRECTLY.
DID SHE THEY DID IT THROUGH A FRIEND.
THEY DID IT THROUGH THE OPEN MARKET, RIGHT? OR THROUGH A FRIEND.
THEY DID NOT GO THROUGH A REALTOR OR THROUGH HAR? NO, NO, SIR.
SO WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW IS, UH, DO, DOES SHE HAVE ANY PHOTOS OF THE HOUSE WHEN SHE BOUGHT THE HOUSE THAT THIS THING ALREADY EXISTED WHEN SHE BOUGHT THE HOUSE? UH, YES.
I'M TRYING TO ASCERTAIN BECAUSE IF IT IS SOMETHING THAT WE CAN SEE, THAT MEANS IT WAS DONE BY THE FLIPPER AND NOT NECESSARILY BY, I DON'T KNOW WHO'S THE OLD ONE.
BUT IT DOESN'T, IT DOESN'T FACTOR THAT OUR DECISION TODAY, WHAT THE OWNERSHIP HISTORY OF THE PROPERTY IS.
WE NEED TO EVALUATE THE APPLICATION IN FRONT OF US BASED ON THE MERITS AND THE ORDINANCE AND HOW THIS IS WHAT'S BEFORE YOU TODAY.
THIS WAS DONE AT SOME POINT WE'RE KIND OF SLIDING OFF TRACK HERE, WE NEED TO JUST LOOK, WE'VE GOT AN APPLICATION IN FRONT OF US FOR A COR FOR THE WINDOWS THAT WERE REPLACED WITHOUT A PERMIT OR A C OF A AND WE NEED TO EVALUATE IT SOLELY ON THAT.
AND THE OWNERSHIP HISTORY OF THE PROPERTY OR WHO DID IT AND WHEN IT WAS DONE IS NOT AS IMPORTANT.
WELL, I BE TO DEFER BECAUSE IF THE JOB WAS NOT DONE BY HER AND SHE DID NOT DO IT, UNPERMITTED HERSELF, THEN I COULD BE MORE LENIENT BECAUSE NOW SHE FELL INTO IT.
UH, AS OPPOSED SHE DID NOT DIG THE HOLE, SHE FELL INTO THE HOLE.
SO TO ME, I WOULD REACT DIFFERENTLY COMPARED TO SHE WILLFULLY, UH, DID IT WITHOUT PERMISSION, IF YOU WILL.
I WOULD, I WOULD AGREE AS WELL WITH COMMISSIONER YAP.
AND THAT IF THIS WOMAN BOUGHT A HOUSE THAT HAD, THAT WAS, THAT HAD THE BRICK PAINTED AND NEW WINDOWS IN OCTOBER OF 23 AND SHE MOVED IN AND SHE WAS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY OF THE WORK, THEN I WOULD NOT GO PENALIZE HER.
SO I DON'T, YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW IF WE DEFER TO TRY TO FIND OUT WHEN OR WHAT, BUT, BUT I'M NOT GONNA, WE HAVE HAD OTHER PEOPLE WHO HAVE PAINTED BRICK THAT WE HAVE SAID TO THEM, HEY, YOU HAVE TO REMOVE ALL THE PAINT OFF THE BRICK.
BUT IF SHE DIDN'T PAINT THE BRICK, I DON'T KNOW WHY SHE SHOULD BE RESPONSIBLE.
EVEN THOUGH IT IS INCORRECT FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UH, COMMISSIONER EK, I WOULD, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO STATE THOUGH, OUR ROLE AT THIS COMMISSION IS TO REPRESENT THE RESOURCE AND FOR THIS RESOURCE TO BE HERE WHEN WE ARE GONE.
AND MANY TIMES THE ADVICE HAS BEEN THEY NEED TO GO BACK AND SUE OR GET THE PEOPLE WHO DID THEIR WORK BEFORE.
UM, BECAUSE THEY, THEY, THEY, THEY DIDN'T FOLLOW THE, THE, THE PROCEDURE.
WE HAVE MADE CONCESSIONS FOR CERTAIN FOLKS, LIKE THEIR HOUSE BURNED DOWN OR THEY'RE IN A WHEELCHAIR AND THEY NEED TO ADD AN ELEVATOR.
UM, HISTORICALLY, BUT I WANNA SAY THAT AGAIN, IT'S THE RESOURCE THAT WE'RE HERE TO EVALUATE AND TO EVALUATE STAFF'S
[01:10:01]
RECOMMENDATION.AND I, I, LET'S, LET'S SEE WHAT HAPPENS WITH THE COMMISSIONS THINKING STAFF PERSON DE LEONE.
UH, JUST WANTED TO MAKE A COMMENT THAT SHE DID CONFIRM TO ME THAT WHEN SHE BOUGHT THE HOUSE, IT WAS ALREADY PAINTED.
ANY MORE QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? THANK YOU FOR COMING.
ANY COMMENTS, QUESTIONS OF STAFF MOTIONS? UH, THIS IS COMMISSIONER BLAKELY.
UM, UH, SO I JUST, I'M TRYING TO WRAP MY MIND AROUND THIS.
SO WE HAVE A NON-CONFORMING HOUSE THAT IS IN VIOLATION OF ONE OF THREE CRITERIA FOR NON-CONFORMING STRUCTURES.
UM, AND THE, THE, WE HAVE SOMEONE WHO PURCHASED THE HOUSE AFTER, APPARENTLY, AFTER THE DEEDS WERE ALREADY DONE.
UM, SO WE DON'T SEEM TO BE IN A POSITION TO, I, I FEEL, I FEEL THAT THOSE TWO THINGS TOGETHER, LIKE EITHER ONE OF THEM MIGHT BE DOWNPLAYED, BUT TAKEN TOGETHER, IT FEELS SORT OF POINTLESS TO PENALIZE SOMEONE WHO WAS HOODWINKED, UM, FOR A, A CHANGE TO A NON-CONFORMING STRUCTURE, GIVEN HOW IT PANS OUT IN THE CRITERIA, EVEN THOUGH I DO FEEL IT'S TOO BAD THAT THIS, THESE ACTS WERE DONE.
I'M ALSO TORN BECAUSE I'M NOT SURE THAT IT WOULD BE WORTH, UH, THE HARM THAT WOULD BE DONE TO, TO TRY TO MAKE A STATEMENT ON BEHALF OF THIS NON-CONFORMING HOUSE.
HOUSE THAT WAS NON-CONFORMING IN THE FIRST PLACE THAT WASN'T REALLY QUESTIONED.
WELL, UM, FISHER HICKS STAFF HAS MADE A RECOMMENDATION, UM, I MEAN, ROMAN, CAN YOU RESTATE YOUR RECOMMENDATION FOR THIS PROJECT? COMMISSIONER, UH, SAMANTHA'S RIGHT HERE.
SO STAFF RECOMMENDS TO, STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL AS THE WINDOWS DO NOT SATISFY CRITERIA ONE AND ISSUANCE OF A COR FOR WORK COMPLETED ON THE WINDOWS AND GARAGE DOORS, AND FOR THE APPLICANT TO WORK WITH STAFF ON PROPER REMOVAL OF THE PAINT.
SO IF, IF I'M, IF I, JUST TO TAKE THIS ONE STEP FURTHER, WHILE YOU DON'T APPROVE OF THE REPLACEMENT OF THE WINDOWS, YOU'RE NOT ASKING THE APPLICANT TO CHANGE THE WINDOWS, CORRECT? YES, SIR.
BUT YOU ARE ASKING THE APPLICANT TO REMOVE THE PAIN AS WE HAVE ASKED OTHER APPLICANTS TO DO.
AND THAT IS YOUR, THAT IS WHAT, THAT IS THE ASK THAT IS BEING DISCUSSED IN TERMS OF WHAT THE REMEDY IS FROM THE POSITION OF STAFF? YES, CORRECT.
I THINK, I MEAN, SINCE IT CLEARLY VIOLATES CATEGORY ONE B FOR NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES, I FEEL LIKE WE SHOULD GO WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND THEN THEY WANNA APPEAL IT.
I MEAN THAT, IS THAT A MOTION? YES.
SO COMMISSIONER COUCH MAKES A MOTION TO ACCEPT STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
IT'S ALL, SO FOR CLARIFICATION, BEFORE WE GO TO THE VOTE, SO BASICALLY THE STAFF IS OKAY WITH NOT REPLACING THE, UH, WINDOWS, AGAIN, WITH ALUMINUM, NOT REPLACING THE GARAGE DOOR, NOT REPLACING THE FRONT DOOR.
AGAIN, THE, THE STAFF IS JUST MAKING A RECOMMENDATION JUST TO REMOVE PAINT.
SO MCNEIL AND YAP OPPOSES THE MOTION CARRIES.
I BELIEVE THE BLEAKLY ALSO ABSTAINS.
COMMISSIONER BLAKELY ABSTAINS.
AB WHAT'S THE POLICY ON ABSTENTIONS? I THOUGHT IT WAS YES OR NO.
I'LL DEFER TO SO, SO FOR ABSTENTIONS, YOU SHOULD ABSTAIN IF YOU'RE, YOU HAVE EITHER A FINANCIAL OR REAL ESTATE INTEREST SINCE COMMISSIONER COLLUM LIVES IN THE AREA.
I UNDERSTAND THAT ABSTENTION, BUT, UM, COMMISSIONER BLAKELY? OKAY.
NO, I DO NOT HAVE ANY SORT OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST,
[01:15:01]
SO I SHOULD JUST SAY OPPOSED.COULD YOU CONFIRM THE MOTION CARRIES? THE MOTION CARRIES? YEAH.
UM, ITEM C TEN FOUR FORTY THREE COLUMBIA STREET.
GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIRPERSON AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.
THIS IS STAFF PERSON JASON LATHAL.
TODAY I PRESENT TO YOU FOR CONSIDERATION ITEM C TEN FOUR FORTY THREE COLUMBIA STREET AND THE HOUSTON HEIGHT SOUTH HISTORIC DISTRICT.
THIS WAS ORIGINALLY A 780 SQUARE FOOT, ONE STORY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENT.
AND ABOUT 1998 IN ADDITION OF 851 SQUARE FEET WAS CONSTRUCTED INCREASING THE TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE TO 1,631 SQUARE FEET.
TODAY THE APPLICANT IS BRINGING BACK PLANS THAT HE SUBMITTED BACK IN JANUARY, 2020, WHICH WAS APPROVED BACK THEN.
THESE ARE THE SAME PLANS THAT HE IS BRINGING FORWARD IS A SECOND STORY EDITION.
IT IS GONNA BE STARTING ON THE REAR OF THE NON HISTORIC REAR ADDITION.
THERE WILL BE A SMALL DEMOLITION TO MAKE WAY FOR AN INSET ON THE LEFT, UH, ELEVATION.
THIS WILL BE BRINGING THE MASS, UH, THIS TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE WILL BE 1,221 SQUARE FEET.
WE'LL HAVE A MAX RIDGE HEIGHT OF 21 FEET, SEVEN INCHES COMPOSITION SHINGLES WITH A SIX OVER 12 ROOF PITCH.
IT WILL HAVE SMOOTH CEMENTITIOUS SIDING, MIX OF FIXED CASE MAN DOUBLE HUNG, ONE OVER ONE INCENT RECESS WOOD WINDOWS.
ALL THE WINDOWS ON THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE WILL REMAIN EXCEPT FOR THE ONE EXCEPTION ON THE LEFT REAR ELEVATION THAT WILL BE REMOVED INSIDE IT OVER STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL THAT DOES NOT SATISFY CRITERIA 10.
AND THE HOUSTON HEIGHTS DESIGN GUIDELINES, THE HOMEOWNER, VAL COSTELLO HAS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS MATTER.
THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
STAFF IS AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
I MAY ANNOUNCE FOR COMMISSIONER, UM, DEBO THAT SHE LEFT AT 3 47.
I HAVE A QUESTION FOR, UM, MR. LENAL.
COULD YOU HELP ME UNDERSTAND HOW THIS WAS APPROVED IN 2020, UH, BUT THEN NO LONG THAT THE EXACT SAME SUBMISSION NO LONGER, UM, IS APPROVED BY GUIDELINE NUMBER 10? SURE THING.
IF I DIRECT THE COMMISSION MEMBERS TO PAGE TWO, WHERE WE LOOK AT THE APPROVAL CRITERIA, ONE, NUMBER 10, THE PROPOSED ALTERATION, UM, MUST BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE MASSING SIZE, SCALE MATERIAL AND CHARACTER OF THE PROPERTY AND CONTEXT AREA.
THE PROPOSED ADDITION MASSING IS CON, IS INCOMPATIBLE BEING ABOUT 1.5 TIMES LARGER THAN THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE PRIOR TO THE 1998 EDITION.
SO IT'S NOT MEETING THAT THE MASSING THE SCALE, THE PROPORTION OF IT'S NOT MEETING THAT ALSO TWO, UH, SINCE WE'VE BEEN DEALING WITH A LOT OF CONDITIONED SPACE ABOVE AN ATYPICAL PORCH DIMENSION SINCE 2022, CALCULATING THE FAR AND MAXIMUM LOT COVERAGE CALCULATIONS IS NOT MEETING FAR, WHICH I HAVE PLACED NEAR THE END OF THE STAFF REPORT.
THE FAR IS DIFFERENT BETWEEN 2020 AND 2024.
AND, AND SO IT, WHAT IT MET THE GUIDELINE IN 2020, BUT DOESN'T MEET IT IN 2024.
NO, I WOULD SAY THAT THIS WAS NOT FACTORED IN IN 2020, BUT SINCE 2022, SINCE WE'VE BEEN HAVING MORE PROPOSALS DEALING WITH, UH, SECOND STORY CONDITION SPACE ABOVE AN ATYPICAL PORCH, THAT THE PAUSE HAS NOW BECOME THAT WE FACTOR THIS INTO THE MAXIMUM LOCK COVERAGE AND FAR CALCULATIONS.
AND AS I PUT ON PAGE 17, I'VE TRIED TO DELINEATE WHERE IT SAYS WITHOUT, WITHOUT, WITH WITH, TO KIND OF HIGHLIGHT WHERE THOSE SQUARE FOOTAGES FALL WITHIN.
SO I'M LOOKING FOR SOMETHING VERY SPECIFIC.
AND SO IN, IN ITEM 10, WHAT YOU'RE TELLING ME IS THAT THE MASSING AND SCALE ARE NO LONGER COMPATIBLE WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
BUT FOUR YEARS AGO IT WAS COMPATIBLE WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO THERE'S NOTHING SPECIFIC FOR ME THERE.
AND I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND, IS IT JUST THE FAR CALCULATION THAT WE'RE HANGING OUR HAT ON THAT THIS THING NO LONGER CONFORMS? WELL, I WOULD, I WASN'T HERE JANUARY 24TH, 2020.
I CAME IN IN AUGUST OF THAT YEAR.
BUT I COULD SAY IT WAS A DIFFERENT MINDSET WITH THE COMMISSION AND IT WAS A DIFFERENT CASE BACK THEN.
SO, YOU KNOW, THE, THE GAME HAS CHANGED SINCE 2022.
SO THE GAME'S CHANGED, BUT THERE'S NO SPECIFIC RULE OR LETTER THAT WE'RE POINTING TO TO SAY THAT THIS APPLICATION NO LONGER FITS OR IS NO LONGER APPROVED.
I BELIEVE IT'S AN INTERPRETIVE CHANGE OF THE DESIGN GUIDELINES IS WHAT THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN
[01:20:01]
THE PRIOR SUBMITTAL AND TODAY'S SUBMITTAL, COMMISSIONER MCNEIL, THE INTERPRETATIONS WITHIN THE STAFF'S MINDSET.'CAUSE YOU'RE THE ONE TELLING US THAT IT'S, THAT YOU'RE DENYING IT.
AND, AND I WOULD SAY CONSISTENT WITH THE RULINGS OF THIS COMMISSION OVER THE LAST, PREVIOUSLY EIGHT, EIGHT, I DON'T, 12 MONTHS, 18 MONTHS THAT WE HAVE, WE HAVE ASKED PEOPLE TO SCALE BACK.
THE DESIGN GUIDELINES ARE SILENT ON THAT TERM.
SO THAT LEAVES IT UP FOR STAFF INTERPRETATION AS WELL AS BASED ON THE, THE COMMENTS FROM COMMISSION.
AND I BELIEVE COMMISSIONER COSGROVE'S IS CORRECT.
I WOULD SAY THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS HAVE SEEN THAT DISCUSSION HAPPEN.
I WOULD LIKE TO, THERE WAS NO FAR IN 2020, RIGHT? NO, THERE WAS FAR AS THE DESIGN GUIDELINES WERE PASSED IN 2017.
I, I WOULD LIKE TO ADD TO THE, THE POINT MADE BY, UH, COMMISSIONER MCNEIL, IT'S NOT THE STAFF THAT'S MADE THE CHANGE IN THE, IN THE IN INTERPRETIVE MINDSET.
I THINK IT'S THE COLLECTIVELY THIS IN THIS COMMISSION ALSO HAS MADE THAT CHANGE INTERPRETATION WISE BECAUSE SINCE THAT TIME WE HAVE LOOKED UPON, UM, LIVING QUARTERS OVER A, UH, SITE PORCH OR A BACK PORCH, UH, HAS BEEN, I WOULD SAY OUR MINDSET HAS BEEN, UH, HAS, HAS BEEN CHANGED IN THAT REGARD AS WELL.
SO IT'S NOT JUST FAIR TO SAY THAT IT'S FROM THE STAFF, IT'S ALSO US ON THIS SIDE OF THE COMMISSION AS WELL.
BUT WE PASSED IT IN 2020 AND AS IT'S BEING PROPOSED TO US, IT'S BEING PROPOSED TO US AS A DENIAL.
SO WE HAVEN'T EVEN HAD A CHANCE AS A NEW COMMISSION TO PROJECT OUR MINDSET ON IT IN 2024.
WELL, THAT'S WHY WE'RE TALKING ABOUT NOW.
I'M STILL TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHY IT'S A, WHY IT'S AN APPROVAL IN 2020 AND WHY IT'S A DENIAL IN 2024.
BECAUSE WE KEPT GETTING ALL THESE, THESE BIG OVERHANG PORCH THINGS AND THEY WERE, THEY WERE ALARMING TO US AND WE DECIDED THAT WE WANTED TO TRY TO NOT HAVE THOSE HAPPEN BECAUSE THEY WERE COVERING THE WHOLE BACKYARD.
I'VE BEEN TOLD BY LEGAL THAT I'M SUPPOSED TO TAKE EACH SUBMISSION WITHIN ITSELF AND THAT A PREVIOUS VOTE ON SOMETHING SHOULD NOT REFLECT ON WHAT I'M LOOKING AT HERE AND NOW.
SO I'M STILL LOOKING FOR A VERY COMMISSIONER MCNEILL QUANTIFIABLE DIFFERENCE COMM BETWEEN COMMISSIONER BETWEEN 2020 AND 2024.
LEMME LET COMMISSIONER DUCEK SPEECH.
COMMISSIONER MCNEILL, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A, A STATEMENT OR, UM, TO SAY THAT NOTHING'S CHANGED.
UH, WHEN THE FAR WAS CREATED, IT WAS CREATED BY USING MASSING MODELS PRESENTED TO THE PUBLIC.
AND THE FAR IS LOOSELY BASED ON THE MAJORITY OF WHAT THE PUBLIC DECIDED WAS APPROPRIATE, ADDED TO AS A CONCESSION WAS TO, AT THE END OF THE PROCESS OF MAKING SAUSAGE, WAS ADDING AN OUTSIDE KITCHEN THAT WOULD BE TACKED ONTO THE SIDE OF THE MASSING MODEL.
THE, THE PORCHES WERE NEVER PART OF THE FAR MASSING THAT THE PUBLIC APPROVED.
AND THIS IS WHY IT'S, IT'S, UH, IT'S REALLY NOT A CHANGE.
IT'S JUST THAT PEOPLE HAVE BEEN TRYING TO MAKE THIS CHANGE AND DOUBLE DIP IS, DOES THAT, IS THAT CLEAR? AT LEAST FROM, FROM THAT VANTAGE POINT? IT'S HELPFUL.
SIR, IT WAS NEVER IN, IT WAS JUST NEVER IN THE CALCULATION OF THAT THE FAR THAT SET, THE FAR, BUT IT WAS ALLOWED TO BE TACKED ON AND THEREFORE THE OUTSIDE PORCHES OF THE REAR, LIKE THESE OUTDOOR KITCHENS THAT PEOPLE REALLY WANT.
THEN THE REQUIREMENT WAS, WELL THEN THEY STILL HAVE TO, YOU KNOW, CONFORM TO THE, UM, UH, THE PREVIOUS COVER MINIMUM STANDARDS BECAUSE THEY WERE DETERMINED TO BE, UH, AN ISSUE OF IMPERVIOUS COVER AND THEY WERE NOT WITHIN THE FAR.
AND SO THAT, THAT'S WHY I THINK, UM, YOU KNOW, I, I THINK THAT WE SHOULD WORK TOWARD GETTING BETTER LANGUAGE, BUT THE, THE FAR WAS NEVER CREATED WITH THIS MASTERING MODEL IN MIND.
AND, AND, AND SO IF, IF IT SO HAPPENS THAT TODAY THIS COMMISSION SAYS WE, UH, MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE ALONG, ALONG STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS, WHICH IS DENIAL AND THEY GO IN FRONT OF THE APPEALS COMMISSION, I'M JUST LOOKING FOR LIKE, WHAT, WHAT ARE WE ACTUALLY SAYING IS DIFFERENT BETWEEN 2020 AND 2024, SO IT DOESN'T JUST GO TO APPEALS AND GET KICKED AND KICKED BACK OUT.
AND SO I'M REALLY JUST ASKING QUESTIONS LIKE, SO HELP ME UNDERSTAND WHAT IS THE QUANTIFIABLE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN 2020 AND 2024 THAT WE'RE DENYING THIS PROJECT ON? WELL, I THINK IT'S A QUALITATIVE RULE.
IT'S, IT'S NOT NECESSARILY A STRICT NUMBER, BUT WE, WE DIDN'T, IT DIDN'T OCCUR TO US THEY'D BE DOING THIS.
AND SO THEY'VE BEEN, LIKE DAVID SAID, TRYING TO DOUBLE DIP AND GET EVERYTHING THAT'S MORE THAN WHAT IS SEEMS LIKE APPROPRIATE FOR THOSE DISTRICTS.
WE BEEN CONSISTENTLY DENYING THE SECOND STORY ABOVE THE PORCHES.
[01:25:01]
I, SO THERE'S ONE WAY TO LOOK AT IT.WE'RE, UH, COMMISSIONER BLAKELY.
I'D LIKE TO JUST SUGGEST THAT ONE WAY TO LOOK AT IT MIGHT BE TO SAY THAT WHAT'S CHANGED IS THE CONTEXT OF OTHER APPLICATIONS THAT ARE TRYING TO DO SOMETHING ANALOGOUS.
AND THAT UN MASS IN THE INTERVENING TIME, THEY HAVE EMERGED AS A KIND OF ALARMING TREND.
LEMME GO AHEAD AND OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS SO WE CAN HEAR IT FROM THE APPLICANT WHO'S SIGNED UP TO SPEAK OF VAL COSTELLO.
CAN YOU PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD? VALAIR COSTELLO.
UH, GOOD AFTERNOON, MR. CHAIRPERSON.
UM, I'VE LIVED IN THIS HOUSE FOR 10 YEARS.
UH, LOVE THE HEIGHTS, LOVE THE WHOLE HISTORIC ARCHITECTURAL CHARACTER OF THE HEIGHTS.
WE'VE BEEN VERY CAREFUL AS A FAMILY TO ADHERE TO THAT.
UH, EVERY, EVERY INTENTION OF DOING SO AND A LOT OF TIME, ENERGY AND, UH, MONEY WAS SPENT IN PUTTING TOGETHER THE 2020 APPLICATION, UM, PLANS AND, YOU KNOW, WE'RE VERY PLEASED TO GET THE APPROVAL.
PREVIOUSLY, THE ONLY REASON WE DIDN'T PROCEED IS BECAUSE COVID, SO COVID KIND OF PUT THINGS ON THE SIDE BURNER FOR US WHILE WE TRIED TO FIGURE OUT WHAT WAS GONNA HAPPEN TO THE WORLD.
AND NOW FOUR YEARS LATER, UM, WE ARE PREPARED TO PROCEED.
SO WHEN I WAS IN A POSITION TO REAPPLY, UM, I WAS, I WAS SHOCKED IS A, MAYBE A STRONG WORD, BUT I WAS DISAPPOINTED TO FIND OUT THAT MAYBE THIS WOULDN'T WORK.
AND SO I INQUIRED AND WORKED WITH STAFF TO AT LEAST MAKE SOME OF THE SMALL CHANGES THAT I UNDERSTOOD.
WE HAD, FOR EXAMPLE, IN THE ORIGINAL PLAN, A GABLED ROOF.
AND SO WE MADE THAT HIP TOWARDS THE FRONT.
'CAUSE I UNDERSTAND THAT'S SOMETHING THE COMMISSION WOULD LIKE.
THERE WAS A LITTLE CHANGE ON THE SIDE AND INSET THAT WAS ONLY ONE FOOT NEEDED TO BE TWO FEET FINE.
BUT WHEN IT CAME TO THIS ISSUE OF THE OVERHANG IN BACK, THAT'S PROBLEMATIC FOR ME TO ADDRESS BECAUSE THAT WOULD MEAN REDUCING THE SQUARE FOOTAGE.
WHEN I APPLIED AND WE BOUGHT THE HOUSE, WELL, WE BOUGHT THE HOUSE, THERE WERE INFANTS AND WHEN I APPLIED THERE WERE BARELY TODDLERS IN 2020.
AND NOW WE HAVE A HOUSE THAT'S 1700 SQUARE FEET.
SO WHAT WAS PROPOSED WAS NOT AN EGREGIOUS DEMAND AT ALL.
IT WAS VERY REASONABLE, JUST A 1200 FOOT ADDITION.
THE REASON THAT IT WAS PROPOSED, THE WAY IT WAS ON TOP OF THE ADDITION THAT WAS MADE IN 2000, WHICH WE WEREN'T EVEN AWARE OF, THAT WAS MADE IN 2000 WHEN WE BOUGHT THE HOUSE.
BUT IN ANY EVENT, IS WE HAD TO BE BEHIND THE ORIGINAL HOUSE.
AND I DIDN'T WANT TO TOUCH THE BOTTOM FLOOR BECAUSE THE BOTTOM FLOOR BY AND LARGE WORKS FINE.
WE'RE JUST GONNA REMOVE A WALL AND WHAT'S NOW A BEDROOM WILL BECOME PART OF THE LIVING AREA.
UH, AND A BATHROOM WILL BE REMOVED AND THEN ON.
SO THAT'S, WE'RE LOSING A BEDROOM.
AND THE IDEA ON THE SECOND FLOOR WAS TO GAIN TWO BEDROOMS. AND THE ONLY WAY TO DO THAT WAS TO EXTEND, THERE WAS NO, I I HEARD WHILE I WAS WAITING HERE, I HEARD REFERENCE TO DOUBLE DIPPING AND EVERYTHING.
THERE WAS NO INTENTION TO GAIN THE SYSTEM AT ALL.
THERE WAS NO, THERE, THERE WAS AN EXISTING DECK BACK THERE.
THERE'S NO INTENTION TO CREATE, UH, YOU KNOW, ADDITIONAL LIVING AREA THAT WE WOULD LATER ENCLOSE OR, OR CREATE SOME SORT OF OUTDOOR KITCHEN.
AND I MEAN, THE DECK COULD HAVE BEEN REMOVED FOR THAT MATTER IF I KNEW IT WAS THAT IMPORTANT.
SO THE IDEA WAS JUST TO GET A REASONABLE 2,900 SQUARE FEET BACK, YOU KNOW, EIGHT YEARS AGO WE COULD HAVE GOTTEN MAYBE 3,500 SQUARE FEET.
BUT OF COURSE, THINGS CHANGE WITH THE GUIDELINES.
SO WE, YOU KNOW, WORKED CLOSELY WITH STAFF AT THE TIME IN 2020 TO GET IT APPROVED.
SO I, I, I THINK I CAN PRETTY MUCH REST MY CASE ON THAT.
I JUST WOULD LIKE TO SEE RE-APPROVAL OF WHAT WAS PREVIOUSLY APPROVED.
DID ANYBODY HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT? DO I SIT DOWN, HAVE A SEAT? YEAH, IF, IF WE HAVE, IF SOMEONE HAS A QUESTION, WE'LL CALL YOU BACK.
I, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF ACTUALLY.
UM, LOOKING AT, UH, LOOKING AT THE ELEVATION, IF, UH, LET'S SAY ON PAGE 14 OF 20, JASON, ARE YOU THERE? YES, I'M RIGHT HERE.
UH, HYPOTHETICALLY IF THAT, UH, SECOND FLOOR WAS BROUGHT ALL THE WAY DOWN AND
[01:30:01]
TO THE FIRST FLOOR AND THEN CLOSE, WOULD IT BE, WOULD IT PA WOULD IT UH, BE, UH, PAST A MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE FAR? THAT WOULD BE CORRECT.'CAUSE PACE BASED ON THAT PARTS DIMENSION IS ABOUT 18.33 FEET WIDE WITH A 10.92 FEET DEPTH TO IT.
THAT COMES TO A TOTAL OF 200 SQUARE FEET AND THAT PUSHES IT OVER THE FAR, SO IF IT WAS ENCLOSED, IT WOULD'VE BEEN PAST THE FAR, IT WOULD'VE SURPASSED IT.
PUTTING IN THE NEGATIVE, YEAH.
NOT MEETING THAT MEASURABLE STANDARD.
WOULD THAT BE JASON? I HAD SAID IT WOULD BE 200.16 SQUARE FEET BECAUSE I THINK THE STAFF REPORT HAS A DIFFERENT NUMBER THERE.
WELL, JUST THE CALCULATIONS IS 200 FACTORED INTO THE OVERALL COMES OUT TO THAT ONE, THAT NUMBER YOU SEE THERE.
BUT I WAS JUST DOING THE PORSCHE DIMENSION AND THEN ADDED INTO THE CALCULATION.
THAT'S THE TOTAL RESULT FOR MY OWN CLARITY.
DOVETAILING OFF OF COMMISSIONER YAP.
IF HE WERE TO REDUCE THE UPSTAIRS BY 130 SQUARE FEET AND STILL LEAVE THE DOWNSTAIRS OPEN, HE WOULD THEN MEET THE FAR STANDARDS.
EVEN IF YOU ADDED, IF YOU ENCLOSED DOWNSTAIRS, THAT WOULD BE CORRECT.
AND IF I COULD TURN YOUR ATTENTION TO PAGE 17 WHERE I DO THE MAXIMUM FLOOR AREA RATIO, IT SAYS REMAINING AMOUNT TO 70 WITHOUT THE SQUARE FOOTAGE BELOW THE CONDITION SPACE.
AND THEN YOU ADD IN THE 200, IT'S A NEGATIVE ONE 30.
THERE IS ALSO TOO, IF WE COULD GO TO THE RIGHT ELEVATION PLEASE.
THERE ARE A NUMBER OF LINES ON THE SCREEN, KIND OF ONE, THE FIRST LINE THAT'S IN THE MIDDLE OF THE STAFF REPORT KIND OF SHOWS WHERE, WHERE THE, UH, REAR WALL OF THE NON HISTORIC CONDITION BEGINS.
AND YOU PUSH BACK TO WHERE THAT SECOND LINE IS FROM THE END.
YOU KNOW, THAT COULD BE WHERE IT COULD BEGIN WITH MAYBE AN INSET TO START TAKING OUT SOME SQUARE FOOTAGE.
AND THEN, BUT AGAIN, WE CAN'T DESIGN FROM THE TABLE, BUT THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WHERE YOU CAN KIND OF SEE WHERE IT BRINGS IT IN AND THE PORCH DIMENSION BECOMES SMALLER.
UM, YES, BUT A GOOD THING IS YOU HAVE ANSWERED MY QUESTION B, BASICALLY, IT BASICALLY, THE ISSUE IS THE MASSING HERE, RIGHT? AND THE MASSING AND THE SCALE.
AND SO JUST TO LABS, IT'D BE 130 SQUARE FEET OVER IF THE SPACE WAS ENCLOSED.
AND I JUST, UH, WANNA POINT OUT ON A SLIGHT COUPLE, JUST WANNA POINT OUT FOR CONVERSATION PURPOSES HERE.
THIS APPLICANT, I'VE BEEN ON THIS BACK PORCH.
WE'VE BEEN TO, UM, SEVERAL STAFF MEMBERS HAVE BEEN TO THE APPLICANT'S, UM, RESIDENCE A FEW TIMES, A COUPLE OF TIMES AT LEAST.
AND THAT BACK PORCH, IT, IT REALLY FEELS LIKE A BACK PORCH WHEN YOU'RE ON IT.
WE TALKED ABOUT THE FACT THAT SOME OF THE PROPOSED ADDITIONS THAT WE'VE SEEN, THE THE REAR PORCH SEEMS OUTTA SCALE TO WHAT A TYPICAL REAR PORCH IS.
AND IT JUST, I JUST FROM EXPERIENCE AND BEING IN THE SPACE AND BEING IN THE PROPERTY, I WOULD SAY THAT THIS IS NOT ONE OF THOSE REAR PORCHES.
AND SO ONE AND THEN TWO, IT EXISTS ALREADY.
SO WE JUST TO, JUST TO BE, UH, FAIR AND BALANCED, IF YOU WILL.
IN THE CASE HERE, THIS IS NOT AN APPLICATION OF A WHOLE NEW ADDITION, BUT AN ALTERATION TO AN EXISTING BUILDING, WHICH WAS APPROVED IN THE PAST BEFORE YOU.
BUT WE DO HAVE THE MEASURABLE STANDARDS TODAY.
AND, UH, OUR RECOMMENDATIONS SORT OF BASED ON THAT.
AND IT IS IMPORTANT TOO THAT IN THE FRONT OF THE DESIGN GUIDELINES, WE DO HAVE THIS STATEMENT THAT EVERY APPLICATION SHOULD BE CONSIDERED ON ITS OWN.
AND WHAT'S APPROPRIATE FOR ONE PROPERTY MAY NOT NECESSARILY BE APPROPRIATE FOR THE OTHER ROMAN.
UM, IF LIKE UNDER THAT CON THE IDEA OF THIS DISCUSSION POINT ABOUT THE DECK THOUGH, IF THE SECOND FLOOR THOUGH BEGAN SLIGHTLY BACK WHERE THE RED LINE IS SHOWN MIDDLE OF THE FIRST WINDOW AND THE REAR STAYS WHERE IT IS AND THE PORCH STAYS AS IT IS, THEN THE MASSING ALSO CHANGES AS A MASSING POINT.
AND ALSO THERE'S A SLIGHT REDUCTION IN SQUARE FOOTAGE.
SO, I MEAN, I THINK THERE ARE DIFFERENT WAYS TO LOOK AT THIS AND MEAN, I THINK THERE, THERE'S STILL DISCRETION AMONGST THE COMMISSION IN TERMS OF THESE PORCHES AND, UM, IN, IN THESE NUMBERS.
I MEAN THERE, I THINK IT'S, I THINK IT'S A COMBINATION OF MASSING AND, AND WHERE, WHERE WE, WE ARE IN RELATIONSHIP TO THAT FAR.
[01:35:01]
I GET CONFUSED EASILY BY THIS MASSING AND SCALE CONVERSATION BECAUSE FROM THE FRONT, NOTHING WILL CHANGE BY REDUCING THE SIZE OF THE BACK.SO, AND THERE'S NOTHING SUB THERE'S NOTHING OBJECTIVE ABOUT MASSING AND SCALE.
FOR ME, EVERY TIME WE HEAR THE TERM, FOR ME IT'S COMPLETELY SUBJECTIVE.
AND, AND SO I HEAR THAT BY REDUCING THE SIZE OF THE BACK, IF HE, IF HE REDUCES THAT OVERHANG AND ALIGNS IT WITH THE DECK AND HE, WE KNOCK HIM BACK 130 SQUARE FEET THAT WE REDUCE THE MASSING, BUT FROM THE STREET, NOBODY SEES IT.
NOBODY'S GONNA STAND IN THE GENTLEMAN'S BACKYARD AND LOOK AT THE BACK OF HIS HOUSE.
THAT'S MY WHAT NEEDS TO HAPPEN IN ORDER TO SATISFY THIS COMMISSION.
BUT IT'S JUST A CONFUSING TERM TO ME 'CAUSE WE'RE NOT CHANGING ANYTHING ABOUT HOW THIS HOUSE IS SEEN FROM THE STREET.
BUT THAT LOGIC, YOU COULD SAY, YOU COULD HAVE THE HOUSE GO ALL THE WAY TO THE BACK PROPERTY LINE AND IF YOU CAN'T FREE IT FROM THE STREET, THEN DOESN'T MATTER.
AND THEN THAT NO, 'CAUSE IT WOULDN'T MEET THE FAR, YEAH, SO, SO A HOUSE COULDN'T GO ALL THE WAY TO THE BACK PROPERTY LINE BECAUSE IT WOULD BE SO FAR OVER THE FAR THAT IT WOULD NEVER GET TO AN APPROVAL.
I UNDERSTAND THAT IF HE CLOSES IN THE DOWNSTAIRS, THEN HE IS OVER THE FAR AND THAT IS THE TREND OF THIS COMMISSION IS A LEGITIMATE REASON TO, WHAT I WOULD SAY IS DEFER THE APPLICATION AND ASK THE GENTLEMAN TO COME BACK AT 130 SQUARE FEET LESS, STILL DOESN'T DISSUADE MY MASS AGAINST SCALE CONFUSION.
THE APPLICANT WOULD LIKE THE STATE SEND, WOULD LOVE TO ASK THE APPLICANT A QUESTION.
IS IT POSSIBLE FOR YOU TO REDUCE THE SIZE OF YOUR ADDITION BY 130 SQUARE FEET? THAT'S THAT'S THE WHAT, MAYBE 600,000, $700,000 QUESTION.
SO I MEAN, THAT'S WHAT THE ORDER OF MAGNITUDE OF THESE, OF THE COST OF THESE KIND OF ADDITIONS IS THESE DAYS.
THAT THAT'S REALLY THE KIND OF THE CRUX OF THE ISSUE.
I GUESS I'M LOOKING FOR THE STAT OR COMMISSION'S, INDULGENCE AND, AND, AND, AND, AND LATITUDE ON THIS IS THAT TO THE EXTENT THAT I DON'T MEET TODAY'S VISION OF WHAT, UM, THE FAR SHOULD BE OR HOW FAR IT SHOULD GO OUT RELATIVE TO FOUR YEARS AGO, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A VERY MARGINAL AMOUNT, RIGHT? IT'S MAYBE ORDER MAGNITUDE 130 SQUARE FEET.
AND TECHNICALLY I COULD REDUCE THE SECOND FLOOR AND STICK OUT BACK ON THE FIRST FLOOR A LITTLE BIT AND GET MY 2,900 SQUARE FEET AND MEET THE FAR, BUT I DON'T WANT TO TOUCH THE FIRST FLOOR BECAUSE IF I TOUCH THE FIRST FLOOR, THAT MEANS DEMOING A WALL, MOVING A WALL, THE COST IS GONNA GET ASTRONOMICAL.
I DON'T WANT IT TO DO ANYTHING IN THE FIRST FLOOR.
SO REMOVING ANYTHING, IF YOU LOOKED AT THE PLANS, UH, IN DETAIL, THERE WAS A LOT.
I MEAN, I DESIGNED EVERYTHING ON THE SECOND FLOOR.
IT ACCOMPLISHED WHAT I WANTED TO DO, WHICH IS TWO BEDROOMS, TWO BATHS, AND, AND A
SO REDUCING EVEN A FEW SQUARE FEET IS GONNA INVOLVE A LOT OF MOVING THINGS AROUND, GETTING ARCHITECTS INVOLVED AND SPENDING A LOT OF MONEY.
AND IF THAT'S THE ONLY SOLUTION AT THE END OF THE DAY, I GUESS I MIGHT BE FORCED INTO THAT.
EITHER THAT OR SELL THE HOUSE AND MOVE AND GO SOMEWHERE ELSE.
I WOULD PREFER THAT THERE COULD BE SOME UNDERSTANDING OF LATITUDE HERE AND SAY, LISTEN, WE APPROVE THIS BEFORE, MAYBE WE CUT THE GUY A BREAK BECAUSE IT'S REALLY NOT THAT EGREGIOUS OF A DEMAND.
I'M, I WOULD MOVE FOR THE GUY TO MOVE FORWARD AS THE PLAN IS DRAWN, BUT I DON'T THINK I'M ON THE LOSING END OF THIS DISCUSSION.
DO YOU WANT TO PUT FORTH THE MOTIONS? I I WOULD LIKE TO TAKE, MAKE ANOTHER COMMENT AS WELL.
I MEAN, UH, I'M NOT SURE WE CAN GO BACK AND LOOK AT HOW I VOTED FOR THIS, BUT I MAY NOT, I MAY HAVE VOTED NO IN THE BEGINNING, BUT MY, ONE OF MY CONCERNS IS THAT IF I LOOK AT ANY OF THE, OF THE ELEVATION SECTIONS ON PAGE 14 OR UH, PAGE, UH, 13, I'M GETTING HEARTBURN BY SEEING HOW MUCH THE NEW IS GOING OVER THE ORIGINAL HOUSE.
THIS IS, IF YOU LOOK AT THE ORIGINAL HOUSE, THIS THIS NEW SECOND, SORRY, ADDITION IS ALMOST HALFWAY INTO THE FRONT OF THE, OF, OF THE FIRST, FIRST FLOOR.
AND THAT MEANS WE HAVE ALL HAD THIS DEBATE ABOUT, UH, REMOVAL OF HISTORIC MATERIAL AND SO ON AND SO FORTH.
IN THE PAST FEW COMMISSIONS, THIS IS GOING ALMOST TO 50%.
WE, I BELIEVE THAT WAS DONE PRIOR TO TOS, A NON-ORIGINAL EDITION THAT'S A NON BACK OF THE HOUSE ORIGINAL EDITION ON THE BACK OF THE HOUSE.
I DON'T, IS THIS HAS ALREADY BEEN, BEEN DONE.
THEY'RE, THEY'RE NOT PROPOSING TO ENCROACH ANYMORE ON THE ORIGINAL HOUSE THAN HAS
[01:40:01]
BEEN ENC ENCROACHED IN THE PAST.WE DON'T, BUT THE COLOR, I'M GETTING CAUGHT UP IN THE COLOR.
THEN THERE SHOULD BE A THIRD COLOR THEN SAYS WHAT WAS DONE PREVIOUSLY AND WHAT WAS DONE NOW, NOW TO ADD AS OPPOSED TO PUTTING IT ALL IN ONE COLOR.
AND I'M THINKING THIS IS THE NEW YEAH.
DO DO WE HAVE LIKE A SANDBORN MAP OR SOMETHING TO SHOW? YES, WE PAGE FIVE.
SO DO WE KNOW WHERE THE ORIGINAL HOUSE ENDS ON THESE DRAWINGS? YES.
HAVE WE HAVE WE, IS THAT ONE OF THESE LINES ON HERE? RIGHT, ON THIS ONE, RIGHT.
LIKE ON PAGE 13, IS THERE A LINE THAT SHOWS WHERE THE ORIGINAL BUNGALOW ENDED? IT'S ON PAGE 14 AND IT'S THE CENTER RED LINE.
SO THAT'S THE BACK OF THE OLD BUNGALOW.
THE CENTER, THE LINE IN THE MIDDLE OF THE HOUSE.
IF, IF I MAY POINT OF CLARIFICATION, THAT'S MORE OF THE REAR OF THE NON HISTORIC CONDITION THAT WAS BUILT IN 1998.
WHERE DOES THE BUNGALOW END? LIKE, LIKE THE ORIGINAL BUNGALOW FROM 19 WHATEVER YOU GO UP TO THE SANBORNS, THAT'S MORE ABOUT PAGE THREE OR FOUR OR FIVE.
I KNOW, BUT IS IT DRAWN ON THESE DRAWINGS? NO, IT'S NOT DRAWN ON THE DRAWINGS.
SO WE DON'T KNOW HOW FAR THE SECOND FLOOR ENCROACHES OVER THE ORIGINAL PART OF THE HOUSE, BUT THAT LITTLE BUMP OUT DOES SHOW ON THE SANDBORN AND THE BLA AND I HAVE THEM LINED UP.
AND THEN WHICH BUMP? WHICH BUMP OUT? SO PAGE FIVE OF 20, THERE'S A BUMP OUT, THERE ARE TWO REAR WALLS.
AND THE, THE APPLICATION IS STARTING AT THE BACK OF THE REAR WALL THAT IS CLOSER TO THE FRONT STREET OF THE TWO REAR WALLS.
SO WHAT PERCENT OF THE ORIGINAL HOUSE IS COVERED BY THIS ADDITION ON THE SECOND FLOOR? LIKE HOW FAR THAT IS? THE LIKE, SO JUST FOUR FEET OF IT OR SOMETHING? IT'S LIKE 14 FEET TIMES THE BUMP OUT IS THE BACK WALL.
WELL HE SAID THERE'S TWO BACK WALLS ON THE OTHER SIDE.
YEAH, THIS IS, THIS WAS A VERY SMALL HOUSE TO BEGIN WITH.
SO THIS IS A ATYPICAL HOUSE ALSO YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT JUST THAT LITTLE NOTCH? YEAH.
OR WHATEVER THAT THING ISCH HE'S COVERING UP WHO IS SPEAKING? OKAY.
YEAH, I, I WANTED TO, UH, THIS IS COMMISSIONER BLAKELY WITH RESPECT TO THE SIZE OF THE ADDITION, UH, THAT I WAS A LITTLE BIT CONCERNED ABOUT THAT AS WELL.
BUT UM, AFTER LOOKING AT THAT LOCK, THE NEIGHBOR NEIGHBORING HOUSES ARE ACTUALLY QUITE A BIT TALLER THAN THE CURRENT HOUSE.
SO I DON'T FEEL THAT THE HEIGHT IS SUCH AN ISSUE FOR WHAT IT'S WORTH.
I THINK THE HEIGHT WON'T BE SUCH A DISASTER GIVEN THE CONTEXT, BUT THOSE HOUSES DON'T MEET THE CURRENT RULES, THEY WOULDN'T BE ALLOWED TO BE BUILT.
SO WE WOULDN'T REALLY USE THOSE AS A GUIDELINE FOR EVALUATING WHAT'S GOING ON WITH THIS HOUSE.
WOULD WE, THE HEIGHT ISN'T AN ISSUE.
IT'S, IT'S, IT'S THE OVERHANG THE HEIGHT MEETS THE RIGHT GUIDELINES, THE OVERHANG, THE HEIGHT MEETS THE ISSUE.
IT'S, IT'S THE POSSIBILITY OF FILLING IN BELOW THE OVERHANG THAT THEN INCREASES THE FAR BEYOND THAT, THAT IS THE ISSUE AT HAND.
WELL, SO CAN I MAKE A MOTION? YES.
I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE DEFER THIS AND HAVE HIM TRY TO REDUCE THE SIZE BY THE 130 FEET OR WHATEVER WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT AND THEN RE RESHOW IT TO US.
CAN I CAN SUMMARIZE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION AGAIN? I'M SORRY, WHAT? I, I WAS JUST WONDERING, I'VE LOST TRACK OF WHAT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION WAS.
CAN WE REREAD STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION? AND THEN I BELIEVE ROMAN HAS A COMMENT, THE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS ON THE SCREEN THAT IT WAS A DENIAL ALTOGETHER OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT.
AND MY COMMENT WAS, AS YOU'VE SEEN ON, IF YOU'VE BEEN ABLE TO WATCH THE SCREEN, WE HAVE SHOWN, UH, THE FRONT ELEVATION A FEW TIMES.
AND I JUST WANT TO POINT OUT THAT THAT RATHER LARGE STRUCTURE TO THE RIGHT, UM, IF WE COULD PULL THAT UP NOW, THAT STREET VIEW.
I THINK YOU'VE GOT IT HANDY THERE.
WE'RE GONNA PULL IT OVER AGAIN.
FRANKLY, IF, IF I HAD, IF, IF THE PROPOSAL, LET'S SAY THIS HOUSE ALREADY HAD A TWO STORY ADDICTION ADDITION ON IT.
AND THEN WE WERE LOOKING AT AN APPLICATION TO ADD SOME SQUARE FOOTAGE AT THE REAR ON THE SECOND FLOOR.
EVEN IN THAT BACK RIGHT CORNER, AS YOU LOOK AT THE
[01:45:01]
HOUSE TODAY, THE CURRENT CODE SAYS YOU EXEMPT FROM THE C OF A PROCESS ALTERATIONS THAT ARE NOT VISIBLE FROM THE STREET.AND I REALLY WOULD I JUST PAUSE LOOKING AT THIS STREET ELEVATION HAVE BEEN TO THE HOUSE AS TO WHETHER SUCH AN ALTERATION WOULD EVEN BE SUBJECT TO THE CODE.
AND I AND MAYBE THAT'S SO ARE YOU SAYING YOU DISAGREE WITH THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION? I THINK IT'S, IT'S, IT'S PLAUSIBLE.
I I'M PUTTING IT OUT THERE FOR DISCUSSION THAT THERE'S AN, THAT THAT COULD BE SOMETHING.
SO AS THE PRESERVATION OFFICER, YOU'RE SAYING YOU DON'T AGREE WITH YOUR OWN STAFF? WELL, NOT NECESSARILY.
I'M JUST PUTTING IT OUT THERE.
THE, THE, THE REPORTS WERE PREPARED AND, AND UH, YOU KNOW, WE'RE, WE'VE BEEN OUT TO THIS HOUSE, WE LOOKED AT IT A FEW TIMES AND THERE IT IS, IT'S, WE'RE LOOKING AT IT AGAIN.
SO LEMME UNDERSTANDING MY WAY.
SO IF YOU ARE SAYING THAT THE HOMEOWNER NOW WANTS TO BUILD OUT SOMETHING THAT CAN BE SLIGHTLY NARROWER BUT GOES OUT ALL THE WAY TO FIVE FEET BEHIND THE BACKYARD, YOU ARE SAYING WE DON'T HAVE PURVIEW OVER THERE.
I'M JUST SAYING THE CODE OF ORDINANCE SAYS THAT ALTERATIONS THAT ARE NOT VISIBLE FROM THE STREET ARE NOT SUBJECT TO THE PRESERVATION ORDINANCE TO THE C OF A PROCESS ACTUALLY, YEAH, BUT IT BREAKS THE FILE RULE.
IT BREAKS THE MINIMUM LOT COVERAGE RULE.
THAT RULE DOESN'T GET KICK IN UNTIL YOU'RE DEALING WITH THE C OF A APPLICATION.
SO IF YOU DON'T EVER GET TO THE NEED OF A C OF A APPLICATION, YOU DON'T GET TO THE DESIGN GUIDELINES.
IT WOULD GET REJECTED AT PERMITTING 'CAUSE OF THE IMPERVIOUS LOCK COVER.
YOU SEE THIS FROM
SO THAT'S, I WAS ONLY POINT, THE CURRENT PROPOSAL IS TO ADD THE SECOND FLOOR ALTOGETHER.
SO THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE TODAY.
HOWEVER, I'M POINTING OUT THAT THE DIFFERENCE IN HOW THINGS HAPPEN THERE TOWARDS THE REAR.
I HAVE A, WE HAVE A, WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE TABLE TO DEFER THIS ITEM TO ALLOW THE APPLICANT TIME TO READDRESS THE DRAWINGS.
IS THERE A SECOND? UH, CAN I ASK THE QUESTION BEFORE YOU ARE, YOU HAVE A, YOU HAVE A SUGGESTION OF A DEFERRAL, BUT CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, I HEARD THE OWNER WANTS A DECISION, RIGHT? HE DOESN'T, THE OWNER WANTS TO MOVE FORWARD.
HE, YEAH, HE WANTS, HE, HE DOESN'T, HE'S ASKING US NOT TO, NOT TO STOP HIM DOING WHAT HE'S DOING.
SO TO ME, ARE WE, DO WE, SHOULD WE RESPOND TO THE, THE, THE, THE APPLICANT OR DO WE COME UP WITH OUR OWN DEFERRAL PROCESS? WELL, I BELIEVE WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE TABLE.
AND IF IT DOESN'T GET SECOND, WE WON'T VOTE.
VOTE NEGATIVE IF YOU DON'T WANT TO DEFER.
AND THEN WE WILL HAVE A DIFFERENT VOTE.
SO WHAT ARE YOU, WHAT ARE YOU SUGGESTING LIKE THAT WE SAY JUST TAKE IT OFF AND THEN DON'T COME BACK TO US.
I MEAN, IF THAT'S NO, WELL, BECAUSE THE STAFF ALREADY HAS A, HAS A, HAS A DENIAL, HAS A, WHAT DO YOU CALL HAS A RECOMMENDATION, RIGHT? SO DENIAL.
JUST LIKE IT COMPLETELY, YOU'RE JUST PROPOSING YOUR OWN RIGHT NOW I'M PROPOSING SOMETHING.
I THINK THAT'S MORE OF A COMPROMISE.
'CAUSE WE CAN KICK IT BACK AND THEN HE'D HAVE TO START ALL OVER AGAIN.
ACCEPTING STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION AND A MOTION FOR A DEFERRAL.
THERE'S A MOTION THERE A SECOND.
NO, BECAUSE THEN HE HAS TO REAPPLY IF HE GETS DENIED, IT'S, LET'S, YES.
IS THERE A SECOND FOR MOTION TO DEFER? THERE? THERE WASN'T A SECOND.
SO THERE CANNOT BE A DISCUSSION UNTIL THERE'S A SECOND OR THE MOTION DIES.
THERE IS A MOTION OR SECOND? THERE IS A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER STAAVA.
SO WE WILL VOTE ALL IN FAVOR? DO WE NEED A, IS THERE, IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? MOTION? WHAT ARE WE VOTING ON? MOTION TO DEFER.
OPPOSED? THE TWO OPPOSED? ANY ABSTAIN? ABSTENTIONS.
SO THE MOTION PASSES COLUMN VOTED.
I DON'T, I DIDN'T HEAR THEIR VOTE.
FOR THOSE WHO ARE ATTENDING THE ME MEETING VIRTUALLY FOR YOU COMMISSIONERS, WOULD YOU PLEASE UNMUTE YOUR MICROPHONES AND INDICATE HOW YOU VOTED? WE'RE TRYING TO CLARIFY THE VOTE HERE.
WAS IN FAVOR OF DEFERRING BLAKELY WAS IN FAVOR OF DEFERRING OBJECT.
SO TWO, AN OPPOSITION AND THE REST IN FAVOR.
SO THE MOTION CARRIES TO DEFER THE ITEM.
ALL RIGHT, THAT CONCLUDES SECTION C, SECTION D COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC HEARING NONE.
ARE THERE ANY COMMENTS FROM THE HAHC?
[01:50:04]
PLEASE? WHEN WE GOT OUR DESIGNATION IN 2011, WE HAD MANY HOMES THAT WERE ON THE CUSP OR, YOU KNOW, JUST A FEW MONTHS OR A YEAR FROM BEING, UH, CONTRIBUTING.AND WE WERE TOLD THAT THESE WOULD BE, AND WE HAD THE PETITION SIGNED FOR THE PEOPLE IN FAVOR OF IT.
AND, BUT IT NEVER CAME AROUND.
SO WE'VE GOT A BUNCH OF HOUSES THAT SHOULD BE CONTRIBUTING, BUT THEY POP UP.
IT WAS SUPPOSED TO HAVE BEEN REVISITED AND IT WAS NEVER REVISITED.
ARE THEY JUST DYING LIKE THAT? UH, THIS IS JENNIFER OSLAND.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENT, COMMISSIONER.
I, WE WILL HAVE TO LOOK INTO IT.
WE DON'T HAVE, UM, A PLAN AT THE MOMENT TO REVISIT THAT.
UM, WE ARE, OUR GOAL ACTUALLY FOR THIS YEAR IS TO GET DESIGN GUIDELINES IN, BUT WE WILL LOOK AT OUR, UM, WORK PLAN AND, AND SEE WHAT WE CAN DO AND GET BACK WITH YOU ON THAT.
UH, YA HAS A QUESTION ACTUALLY FOR, UH, STAFF BLAKELY.
UM, I'D LIKE HER TO GIVE US THE DATES THAT SHE HAS IN MIND FOR THE, UH, POSTPONEMENT OF THE CAMP.
I THINK THERE WERE SOME DATES, BUT I I DIDN'T CATCH THEM.
TAYLOR, UH, THIS IS STAFF PERSON TAYLOR VALLEY.
UM, WE DON'T HAVE AN EXACT DATE YET.
UM, WE CAME BACK WITH A COUPLE OF OPTIONS OF APRIL 27TH, UM, A MID-JULY OPTION, AND NOW WE NEED A THIRD.
SO WE'RE JUST CHECKING ON THAT.
YEAH, I KNOW, BUT WHAT IS YOUR DATE ON APRIL 27TH IS THE FIRST ONE.
AND WE ARE WAITING BACK TO HEAR ON A THIRD.
AND MY APOLOGIES, I WAS REFERRING YOU TO BLAKELY WAS SUPPOSED TO BE TAYLOR, SORRY.
COULD I, ARE WE STILL, ARE WE STILL COMMISSIONER CURRY? ARE WE STILL AT, UH, ITEM F OH, SORRY, SORRY, E WE ARE ON ITEM E, E.
SO, UH, I, I GUESS A QUESTION FOR TO ALL, TO EACH OF YOU, UM, HAVEN'T WE HAD IN THE FAIRLY RECENT PAST A, UH, SUBMITTAL OF A PROPERTY DESIGNATED, UH, AS NON-CONTRIBUTING, UH, WITH A REQUEST FOR A REVISION TO THAT DESIGNATION OR VICE VERSA? HASN'T THIS ISSUE COME UP ON AN INDIVIDUAL PROPERTY? UH, YES.
AND, AND THEN SO, UH, FOLLOWING THAT, UM, CONFIRMATION, UM, IS, IS THAT A WAY TO ADDRESS PER PERHAPS, UH, COMMISSIONER COLLIN'S CONCERN ABOUT, UH, PROPERTIES IN GLENBROOK VALLEY, WHICH ORIGINALLY WOULD NOT, WE'RE NOT, WERE DESIGNATING NON-CONTRIBUTING BECAUSE OF, UH, THEY WEREN'T OLD ENOUGH AND NOW THEY ARE.
YES, THERE IS A PROCESS ESTABLISHING THE ORDINANCE, AND OF COURSE WE HAVE TO COMPLY WITH CHAPTER TWO 11 OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE NOW.
BUT YES, WE CAN GO THROUGH THAT PROCESS AND AS WE GET REQUESTS FROM, AND I'M TRYING TO REMEMBER, I THINK WE HAD ONE THAT WAS A CONTRIBUTING, THAT WANTED TO BE A NON-CONTRIBUTING AND ONE THAT WAS VICE VERSA.
SO, UM, WE'VE HAD THOSE, THOSE ON OCCASION.
UM, BUT YES, IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY COME TO US FROM THE OWNERS OF EACH OF THOSE PROPERTIES.
NO, BUT THE STAT, I THINK WHAT, WHAT, UM, MS. OLY WAS, WAS DISCUSSING WAS THAT, YOU KNOW, IF THERE'S STAFF TIME TO DO THAT ON A, ON A DISTRICT BASIS, THAT'S A, THAT'S A DIFFERENT KIND OF STAFF LEVEL, UM, COMMITMENT OF TIME AND ENERGY TO DO THAT.
AND ONE OF THESE MIGHT HAVE EVEN BEEN IN GLENBROOK VALLEY THAT I'M REMEMBERING RECENTLY.
SO, UM, YOU KNOW, INDIVIDUAL OWNERS CAN ALWAYS BRING THOSE TO US.
COMMISSIONER CARROW, THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE TODAY.
I'M SURE THAT COMMISSIONER HICK WILL FROM NOW AND FOREVER STAY ON ZOOM
I DID WANT ON WHAT REAL POSSIBILITY OF GETTING DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR GLENBROOK VALLEY.
I KNOW HOW MUCH THIS COMMISSION LOVES TO HAVE WINDOW CONVERSATIONS IN GLENBROOK VALLEY, BUT IF THERE'S SOME REALLY SPECIFIC SOMETHING THAT WE COULD LEAN ON AND THEN BLOCK WALK AND EDUCATE THIS NEIGHBORHOOD,
[01:55:01]
IT SURE WOULD BE HELPFUL.I WOULD BE GLAD TO GIVE UP A SATURDAY AND BLOCK WALK THIS NEIGHBORHOOD AND PASS OUT FLYERS AND DO WHATEVER I COULD TO EDUCATE.
WELL, I THINK THE, UM, THANK YOU FOR THAT.
ONE IS, IS GETTING DESIGN GUIDELINES, WHICH IS A, A PROCESS THAT RE REQUIRES A LOT OF TIME AND CONSENSUS BUILDING.
THEN THERE IS COMPLYING WITH THE EXISTING RULES OR ANY NEW DESIGN GUIDELINES THAT GET PUT IN PLACE, WHICH MIGHT BE THE BLOCK WALKING OR THE UM, UH, JUST GENERAL NOTIFICATION AND, YOU KNOW, ENGAGING AND EDUCATING THE FOLKS THAT ARE LIVING THERE.
AND WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT THAT.
UM, AND I HAVEN'T LANDED ON EXACTLY HOW, YOU KNOW, WHAT THAT WOULD BE, BUT THAT'S, I THINK, UM, I'LL DEFER TO ROMAN AS TO IF WE PUT ANY MORE THOUGHT INTO WHAT THAT MIGHT LOOK LIKE.
IS IT REALISTIC TO GET DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR GLENBROOK VALLEY THIS YEAR? OH, I THINK IT'S VERY REALISTIC.
UM, WE'RE WORKING THROUGH NOR HILL NOW AND ALTHOUGH THAT WE'RE GONNA GO FOR ANOTHER, I THINK WE'RE LOOKING AT A LITTLE BIT MORE INPUT NEEDED THERE.
THAT MIGHT TAKE US ANOTHER 30 DAYS TO GATHER THAT INPUT ONCE WE GET, ONCE WE PUT THAT NEW REQUEST OUT.
BUT THEN I COULD SEE WHERE WE SHOULD MOVE TO GLENBROOK VALLEY NEXT, BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY W WE, WE SHOULD TRY TO ADDRESS SOME OF THE ISSUES, ESPECIALLY AS IT COMES TO THE WINDOWS.
UM, AND JUST TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION HOW THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS TODAY AND HOW IT WAS WHEN IT WAS ADOPTED.
ACTUALLY HAS SOMETHING TO, UH, ALSO MAYBE ADD, MAYBE KIM YOU CAN HELP ME OUT SHORT OF HAVING A, UH, DESIGN GUIDELINES.
I'VE HEARD JUST NOW THE, UH, THE, I GUESS THE TRANSLATOR WAS SAYING THAT THEY ARE NOT AWARE THAT THERE ARE ALUMINUM OPTIONS JUST FOR WINDOWS.
I I DON'T WANT TO EVEN GO THAT FAR ABOUT BRICKS AND ALL THAT.
IS IT AGAINST THE RULE TO HAVE THE WINDOWS COMMITTEE MAYBE MAKE A SUMMARIZED LATEST, UH, UPDATE SUMMARY TO SAY THERE ARE ALUMINUM OPTIONS ARE WE'RE NOT REALLY PROMOTING THE, UH, THE, THE, THE VENDORS, BUT THEY ARE BY THESE MAKERS THAT I WILL BE HAPPY AS WELL JUST AS COMMISSIONER MCNEIL TO HAND OUT FLYERS.
SO WE DON'T SIT HERE FOR TWO HOURS.
YEAH, I, I'LL YES, IT WOULD, THE SHORT ANSWER IS YES.
I THINK IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE FOR THE WINDOWS COMMITTEE, UM, TO COME UP WITH SOME OF THOSE STANDARDS AND THE STAFF COULD START DISTRIBUTING THAT TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION BLOCK WALKING, WHATEVER, PUT IN A NEWSLETTER.
WHATEVER IT TAKES TO GET THAT INFORMATION OUT.
IT, IT EXISTS AS AN INITIAL STEP.
IT EXISTS AND I'VE SENT IT OUT AND I'LL SEND IT OUT AGAIN.
I I DON'T THINK YOU GUYS ARE LOOKING AT THREE EMAILS.
YEAH, I'LL SEND IT AGAIN TODAY.
YEAH, NO, I, I THINK THAT'S, THAT'S CERTAINLY AN OPTION TO TRY AND START CAPTURING THAT AND REMINDING THEM, BECAUSE IT WAS SEVERAL YEARS AGO WHEN YOU ALL HAD THE WINDOW WORKSHOP, UM, OUT THERE.
SO IF THAT'S LOW HANGING FRUIT, UM, YOU KNOW, I WILL SAY, I THINK THAT WAS PART OF THE COMMENTS FROM THE APPEALS BOARD AS WELL, IS, YOU KNOW, WHY ISN'T THERE MORE INFORMATION OR CAN THE COMMISSION AND STAFF GET THAT INFORMATION OUT TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD? SO I WAS UNDER THE, UH, I WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT WE, BECAUSE WE PUT VENDORS IN THERE, LIKE WHO MAKES THOSE THINGS THAT IT'S PROHIBITED? IS IT YES.
OR IS IT NOT PROHIBITED? IT'S, IT'S NOT PROHIBITED.
BUT I'D ENCOURAGE AND, AND I MEAN, I'D LIKE TO LOOK AT IT AS WELL, WE WANNA BE CLEAR THAT THE CITY IS NOT RECOMMENDING PARTICULAR VENDORS, BUT THESE ARE VENDORS THAT MIGHT HAVE THE PRODUCTS AVAILABLE THAT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE.
UH, AND I WOULD SAY PUTTING IT IN A NEWSLETTER IS NOT SUFFICIENT.
AND I HEARD COMMISSIONER BLAKELY AT ONE POINT SAY SHE MIGHT HAVE SOME STUDENTS AND YOU MIGHT HAVE SOME INTERNS OR SOMETHING STUDENTS YEAH.
AND, AND DOMINIC AND I WILL LEAVE THE CHARGE AND PASSING OUT FLYERS.
BUT IF YOU COULD KNOCK ON A HUNDRED DOORS ON A SATURDAY AND THEN ASK THOSE PEOPLE TO TALK TO THEIR NEIGHBORS, AND WE MIGHT OVERCOME A LITTLE BIT OF THE INERTIA AROUND, WE DON'T KNOW THAT WE LIVE IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT.
I THINK EDUCATING ABOUT THE HISTORIC DISTRICT IS ONE THING, BUT GIVING THEM, WE, WE DO NEED TO BE CAREFUL ABOUT GIVING THEM OPTIONS BECAUSE IT MAKES IT LOOK LIKE WE'RE SAYING YOU CAN REPLACE YOUR WINDOWS, WHICH IN FACT, IF YOU'RE A CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE, WE'LL MAKE IT CLEAR.
I THINK YOU CAN'T REPLACE YOUR WINDOWS JUST WILLY-NILLY.
UNLESS THEY'RE DAMAGE BEYOND REPAIR.
SO I, I WOULD, I WOULD ALSO, WE HAVE VOTED TO ALLOW PEOPLE TO REPLACE THEIR WINDOWS AND I KNOW, BUT TECHNICALLY THE WE WITH ALUMINUM WINDOWS, I, I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT, YOU KNOW, WE LOOK AT TRANSLATING THE DOCUMENTS AS WELL.
WELL, THAT'S A GOOD INTO DIFFERENT LANGUAGES.
[02:00:01]
ENGLISH.AND THAT HASN'T BEEN DONE YET.
BUT JUST, JUST, JUST TO CLARIFY, THE RESOURCE THAT EXISTS IS IN THE PROCESS OF BEING UPDATED TO BE CURRENT INCLUDES THREE CATEGORIES.
ONE IS LOCAL CONTACTS FOR, UH, COMPANIES WHO EXIST TO REPAIR THESE KINDS OF PRODUCTS IN PLACE.
SO IN TERMS OF HARDSHIP, THAT'S THE LEAST EXPENSIVE.
AND THOSE ARE EXPRESSED WITH DOLLAR SIGNS, YOU KNOW, LIKE, UH, UH, HOTELS, $1 SIGN, $2 SIGNS, $5 SIGNS.
THE SECOND CATEGORY ARE THE, UH, INTERIOR, LET'S CALL 'EM STORM, UH, INSERTS, ALSO LESS EXPENSIVE THAN REPLACEMENT.
AND THEN THERE'S A RANGE OF POTENTIAL FOR REPLACEMENT FOR WHAT MAY BE APPROPRIATE DEPENDING ON THE PARTICULAR SPECIFICATION AND DETAILS.
SO THERE ARE THREE CATEGORIES, ONLY, ONE OF WHICH IS REPLACEMENT.
THE OTHER TWO ARE, ARE INTENTIONALLY SOMETHING ELSE BESIDES REPLACEMENT.
AND, AND CERTAINLY AN EXPLANATORY PARAGRAPH UP FRONT THAT PEOPLE HOPEFULLY WOULD READ FIRST IS, IS IMPORTANT.
AND IT WOULD BE GREAT TO HAVE IT IN BOTH LANGUAGES AS WELL.
WE, WE, WE COULD ADD THE FOURTH CATEGORY, WHICH MIGHT BE $6 SIGNS THAT WOULD SAY, REPLACE WITH VINYL, COME TO HAHC AND HAVE TO RERE REPLACE 'EM.
AND PAINT THE BRICK WHILE YOU'RE AT IT.
SO WE'RE NOT GONNA SOLVE THE WINDOW TOPIC TODAY.
UH, SHOULD WE MOVE ON TO THE PRESERVATION OFFICER'S REPORT? I I HAVE ONE QUICK COMMENT.
AFTER HEARING WINDOW WORLD TRIGGERED ME, WE WERE GONNA MAKE LIKE A LETTER TO SEND TO SOME OF THESE COMPANIES THAT ARE KNOWN OFFENDERS.
HAS THERE BEEN ANY PROGRESS ON THAT? I, I HAVE RECEIVED THAT FROM STAFF AND IT'S ON MY LIST TO REVIEW.
DO YOU MEAN, DO YOU MEAN VENDOR OFFENDERS? IS THAT, IS THAT WHAT YOU MEAN? YEAH, YEAH, YEAH, YEAH.
TO SEND A LETTER TO WINDOW WORLD TO SAY, STOP DOING THIS, YOU'RE, YOU NEED TO FOLLOW THE RULES.
I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY, UH, OR, UM, SINCE YOU ASKED YOUR QUESTION ABOUT THE CAMP TRAINING COMMISSIONER YET, WE JUST GOT AN EMAIL DURING THIS MEETING.
AND SO THE DATES THAT WE WILL RE POLL THIS COMMISSION ON AND THE APPEALS BOARD TO SEE IF THEY CAN MAKE IT THE THREE DATES WOULD BE APRIL 27TH, JULY 19TH, OR JULY 20TH.
AND, UM, AND THE REASON THAT WE, UH, HAVE TAKEN THE TIME TO DO THIS IS THAT WE FEEL THAT THE THREE TRAINERS THAT ARE AVAILABLE ON THOSE DATES MIGHT BE THE MO BEST, MOST APPROPRIATE ONES FOR HOUSTON.
AND THEY HAVE A LOT OF TRAINERS.
BUT WE WERE TRYING TO BRING IN THE THREE THAT WE FEEL ARE A GOOD FIT FOR, UH, FOR US.
C SORRY, COULD YOU SAY THE THIRD DATE? I GOT APRIL 27TH.
I DON'T KNOW HOW WE SWITCHED TO A FRIDAY, BUT TELLING ME, DOUBLE CHECK MY NOTES.
JULY 19TH IS A FRIDAY SEVENTH, AND WE WERE LOOKING AT ETHICS TRAINING FOR YOU ALL.
ETHICS AND PROCEDURAL TRAINING.
WE WERE LOOKING AT APRIL 25TH, WHICH WOULD THEN BE REALLY CLOSE TO THE 27TH.
SO, UM, YEAH, WE'LL WORK WITH STAFF TO SEE HOW ALL OF THOSE DAYS WORK OUT WHILE WE TRUCK.
I, AND THEN THE OTHER THING I'D LIKE TO JUST COMMENT ON IS ALSO THAT WE DID RECEIVE, UH, SOME TRAVEL GRANTS A WHILE BACK.
THERE WERE, WE HAVE SOME TRAVEL GRANTS TO ATTEND THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE OF PRESERVATION COMMISSION'S ANNUAL FORUM, OR BIANNUAL FORUM.
IT'S TAKING PLACE IN WEST PALM BEACH, FLORIDA, JULY 31ST THROUGH AUGUST 4TH.
SO JULY 31ST THROUGH AUGUST 4TH.
UH, AND WE HAVE THESE GRANTS THAT COVER AIRFARE AND ACCOMMODATIONS.
UH, RIGHT NOW WE HAVE TWO OF THOSE.
AND, UH, MY, I THINK STAFF'S PRIORITY WOULD BE TO SEND COMMISSIONERS.
SO PLEASE, IF YOU, COMMISSIONER AND I HAVE SENT YOU AN EMAIL, YOU'VE ALL, DURING THIS MEETING, RECEIVED AN EMAIL WITH A LINK TO THAT CONFERENCE, UH, TO SEE WHETHER OR NOT YOU COULD, UH, ATTEND.
AND THEN, AND DON'T FEEL BAD BECAUSE I DO DID ASK THE TEXAS HISTORICAL COMMISSION IF THERE WOULD BE OTHERS AVAILABLE.
AND THEY SAID ACTUALLY, IF THAT THERE'S A GOOD CHANCE THAT THERE WOULD BE OTHER GRANTS THAT, IN OTHER WORDS IN OTHER CITY WILL TURN IT DOWN AND WE COULD SEND OTHER PEOPLE.
AND THE ONLY COST TO THE CITY OF HOUSTON THEN WILL BE THE REGISTRATION.
AND I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THE FOOD AND PICKING UP THAT STUFF.
I DON'T WANNA GET INTO THE, THE FINANCE GUY WILL GET REAL MAD AT ME THERE, BUT LET'S JUST SAY THAT WE DID AIRFARE AND ACCOMMODATION IS A BIG DEAL AND I'M VERY THANKFUL THAT THE, UH, THE CITY OF HOUSTON, BECAUSE WE'RE A CERTIFIED LOCAL GOVERNMENT, WE GET, WE GET THESE GRANTS.
SO PLEASE CHECK YOUR EMAIL AND SEE IF YOU CAN ATTEND, ATTEND THAT.
[02:05:01]
WE'RE ADJOURNED.