[00:00:14]
UH, TWO 40 THURSDAY, MAY 9TH, 2024.
TODAY'S MEETING OF THE HOUSTON ARCHEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL COMMISSION.
I'M COMMISSION CHAIR DAVID EK TO VERIFY WE HAVE A QUORUM.
I WILL CALL THE ROLE THE CHAIR IS PRESENT.
JACKSON'S NOT HERE, BUT SHE IS SCHEDULED TO BE HERE, BUT CURRENTLY NOT HERE.
UH, COMMISSIONER JONES WILL NOT BE ATTENDING.
COMMISSIONER DUBOSE? NOT IN THE ROOM.
COMMISSIONER COSGROVE WILL NOT BE IN ATTENDANCE.
AND MR. COLLUM IS NOT PRESENT.
UM, AND THIS IS HER LAST OFFICIAL MEETING, WHICH I'LL MENTION AGAIN AT THE END OF THE MEETING, BUT, UM, BUT, BUT WE, SHE MAY JOIN US NONETHELESS.
AND THEN LASTLY, THE, UH, DEB, UH, THE DIRECTOR.
WE HAVE A QUORUM AND WE WILL FIRST START, UM, WITH THE, UM, DIRECTOR'S.
WE'LL START WITH THE DIRECTOR'S REPORT FIRST.
GOOD AFTERNOON, COMMISSIONERS.
UM, I'M JENNIFER OSLAND, UH, INTERIM DIRECTOR OF THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT AND SECRETARY OF THIS COMMISSION.
UM, JUST WANTED TO REMIND EVERYBODY THAT MAY IS HISTORIC PRESERVATION MONTH.
SO HOPEFULLY, UM, I DON'T THINK WE HAVE ANYTHING IN PARTICULAR RIGHT NOW, UM, LINED UP, BUT, UM, WE'LL FIND A WAY TO, UM, CELEBRATE.
ALSO, JUST WANTED TO SAY QUICKLY, UM, WE WANNA THANK ANNE COLLUM, UM, FOR ALL OF HER SERVICE ON THIS COMMISSION.
I'M NOT SURE IF SHE WILL, AS, UM, THE CHAIR JUST MENTIONED, IF SHE WILL COME, BUT SHE HAS BEEN ACTIVE AND IMPORTANT MEMBER OF THIS PROCESS AND WE WANNA JUST RECOGNIZE HER SERVICE AND THANK HER.
SO, UM, AND UM, FINALLY, HERE'S A SNAPSHOT OF SOME OF THE PRESERVATION WORK THAT HAS BEEN OCCURRING SINCE WE LAST MET.
UM, IT'S NOT ON TODAY'S AGENDA.
STAFF RECEIVED A TOTAL OF 52 APPLICATIONS SINCE, UH, YOUR LAST UPDATE IN MARCH.
WE HAD 14 ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVALS AND 12 PRE-APPLICATION DESIGN REVIEWS IN MARCH AND APRIL.
WE HAVE NO LANDMARK OR PROTECTED LANDMARK ACTIVITY TO REPORT.
UM, IF ANYONE HAS ANY QUESTIONS, THEY CAN CALL THE OFFICE OF PRESERVATION HOTLINE AT 8 3 2 3 9 3 6 5 5 6 OR VISIT OUR WEBSITE@HOUSTONPLANNING.COM.
UM, I DO NOT BELIEVE WE'RE GONNA HAVE A MAYOR'S LIAISON REPORT, BUT I, UH, I DO NOTE COMMISSIONER JACKSON, UM, IS PRESENT.
SO WE'LL BE NEXT UP ON THE AGENDA WILL BE THE CONSIDERATION OF THE MARCH 14TH, 2024 HAHC MEETING MINUTES, WHICH WERE IN OUR, OUR PACKET, UH, COMMISSION MEMBERS.
ARE THERE ANY COMMENTS ABOUT THE MEETINGS? AND IF NOT, IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE? YEP.
ARE THERE ANY OPPOSED? ARE THERE ANY ABSTENTIONS? THOSE MINUTES ARE ACCEPTED.
UH, NEXT ON THE AGENDA IS THE ADOPTION OF SPEAKER SPEAKERS GUIDELINES AND PROCEDURES, WHICH, UM, WHICH IS ALSO IN THE PACKET, WHICH, UM, BASICALLY PUTS US BACK INTO, UM, FACE-TO-FACE MEETINGS AGAIN.
UM, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE INFORMATION IN THE PACKET? ESSENTIALLY, THIS IS A RETURN TO THE DAYS OF PRE COVID.
AND IF NO QUESTIONS, IS THERE A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE NEW PROCEDURES? COMMISSIONER AUER JACKSON MOVES.
[00:05:01]
UH, WE'LL SECOND.ARE THERE ANY OPPOSED? ARE THERE ANY ABSTENTIONS? OKAY.
NEXT ON THE AGENDA, WE'LL BE GOING TO ITEM A, WHICH IS A PUBLIC HEARING IN CONSIDERATION OF AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON A LANDMARK DESIGNATION APPLICATION FOR FRANK, A WATTS HOUSE AT 2 5 2 9 STANMORE DRIVE, HOUSTON, TEXAS 7 7 0 1 9.
GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.
THIS IS STAFF PERSON KARA QUIGLEY.
I SUBMIT ITEM, A POSSIBLE LANDMARK DESIGNATION OF THE FRANK A. WATTS HOUSE AT 25 29 STANMORE DRIVE FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
THE RESIDENCE AT 2 5 2 9 STANMORE DRIVE, DESIGNED BY WELL-KNOWN ARCHITECT CAMERON FAIRCHILD, WAS, WAS CONSTRUCTED IN 1934 FOR FRANK A AND BETTY WATTS.
THE TWO STORY HOUSES CLAD IN HANDMADE CEDAR BAYOU BRICK VENEER AND WAS DESIGNED IN THE ECLECTIC STYLE, INCORPORATING COLONIAL REVIVAL DETAILS CENTERED AROUND A HORSESHOE SHAPED COURT MADE UP OF FIVE OTHER SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS.
THE FRONT FACADE OF THE MAIN DWELLING IS ASYMMETRICAL, RESULTING FROM THE HIP AND VALLEY SLOPED ROOF THAT PROJECTS OUTWARD.
CREATING A T-SHAPED FLOOR PLAN, THE FRONT DOOR FACES EAST TOWARDS THE COURT AND OPENS ONTO A BRICK CLAD ENTRY COVERED BY A TRIANGULAR CORNER ROOF SUPPORTED BY TWO WOOD COLUMNS.
A LATER ADDITION TO THE SOUTHEAST SIDE OF THE HOUSE IS CLAD AND CEDAR SHINGLES AND RELATES TO THE HISTORIC STRUCTURE IN FORM, HEIGHT AND DETAILING.
TAKING FAIRCHILD'S ORIGINAL DESIGN INTO CONSIDERATION.
THE PROPERTY ALSO INCLUDES A ONE AND A HALF STORY BRICK VENEER GARAGE TO MATCH THE MAIN HOUSE WITH LIVING QUARTERS ABOVE THE GARAGE.
CAMERON FAIRCHILD DESIGNED ALL FIVE OF THE DWELLINGS THAT THE RIVER OAKS CORPORATION BUILT IN 1934 AROUND THE FIRST OF THE RIVER OAKS COURTS ON STANMORE DRIVE.
FAIRCHILD'S ARCHITECTURAL CAREER WAS NOTED FOR HIS ECLECTIC SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES, PRIMARILY IN RIVER OAKS.
THE FRANK A. WATTS HOUSE MEETS CRITERIA ONE, FOUR AND SIX FOR LANDMARK DESIGNATION.
STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE HOUSTON ARCHEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL COMMISSION RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL THE LANDMARK DESIGNATION OF THE FRANK A. WATTS HOUSE AT 25 29 STANMORE DRIVE, HOUSTON, TEXAS 7 7 0 9 CHAIR.
AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION, HOMEOWNER BRUCE FEN, HAS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF THIS ITEM.
I'M ALSO AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS.
THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
ARE THERE ANY, UH, QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME FOR STAFF? OKAY.
I'M GONNA OPEN UP A PUBLIC HEARING AND WE DO HAVE A SPEAKER SIGNED UP.
UM, WOULD MR. BRUCE FINN APPROACH THE MICROPHONE? AND, AND IF YOU COULD JUST RESTATE YOUR NAME AS WELL FOR THE RECORD.
UH, MY NAME IS BRUCE FINN AND I DIDN'T REALLY KNOW I WAS SPEAKING, I WAS JUST COMING TODAY.
UM, IN CASE ANYBODY HAD QUESTIONS IN REGARDING THE HOUSE AND THE RENOVATIONS HAD BEEN DONE TO IT.
UH, COMMISSION MEMBERS, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OF THE SPEAKER ON THIS ITEM? NOT HEARING ANY.
UM, WE CAN PROCEED TO THE NEXT, UH, STEP.
AT THIS TIME I'M GONNA, I GUESS I'LL JUST ASK IF THERE'S ANYONE ELSE IN THE PUBLIC WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM, PLEASE ANNOUNCE YOURSELF AT THIS TIME AND APPROACH THE MICROPHONE.
I'M GONNA CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, UH, COMMISSION MEMBERS THERE.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION OR IS THERE A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE RECOMMENDATION COMMISSION NOR WEAU JACKSON MOVES TO, UH, APPROVE THE NOMINATION OF THE LANDMARK DESIGNATION FOR THE FRANK A. WATTS.
IS THERE A SECOND? COMMISSIONER BLAKELY SECONDS.
ANY OPPOSED? ANY ABSTENTIONS? THAT MOTION PASSES.
SO MOVING ON TO THE NEXT ITEM, ITEM B, CONSIDERATION OF AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS, APPLICATIONS FOR CONSENT AGENDA.
TERRANCE, GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR AND COMMISSIONERS AND THE PUBLIC.
UH, MY NAME IS STAFF MEMBER TERRANCE JACKSON.
TODAY'S STAFF RECOMMENDS THE FOLLOWING ITEMS FOR ACTION PER STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS IN ONE.
MOTION ITEMS B 1 2 0 1 EAST NINTH STREET ALTERATION EDITION IN HOUSTON HEIGHTS SOUTH.
RECOMMENDATION APPROVAL ITEM B 4 3400 WHITE OAK DRIVE ALTERATION STOREFRONT HOUSTON HEIGHTS SOUTH HAS BEEN DEFERRED BY THE APPLICANT.
[00:10:02]
ITEM B 6 5 28 COLUMBIA STREET ALTERATION PORCH HOUSTON HEIGHTS SOUTH DENIAL ISSUANCE OF A COR ITEM B 7 7 7 1 15 GLEN VISTA STREET ALTERATION WINDOWS IN THE GLENBROOK VALLEY.HISTORIC DISTRICT APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS.
ITEM B 8 5 1 16 HIGHLAND STREET ALTERATION EDITION IN THE WOODLAND HEIGHTS HISTORIC DISTRICT RECOMMENDATION, APPROVAL ITEM B 9 1 1 1 1 EAST 11TH STREET, ALTERATION, SIGN AND DOORS IN THE NOR HILL HISTORIC DISTRICT.
RECOMMENDATION, APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS.
ITEM B TEN THREE ZERO SIX HAWTHORNE STREET, ALTERATION WINDOWS IN THE WESTMORELAND HISTORIC DISTRICT.
RECOMMENDATION DENIAL ISSUANCE OF A COR ITEM B 11 6 3 4 WEST COTTAGE STREET, ALTERATION, SIDING AND WINDOW SIDING, DOORS AND WINDOWS IN THE NOR HILL HISTORIC DISTRICT.
APPROVAL ITEM B12 1 9 8 7 WEST GRAY STREET, ALTER ALTERATION OF THE STOREFRONT.
IT'S A LANDMARK IN THE RIVER OAKS THEATER AND SHOPPING CENTER.
RECOMMENDATION, APPROVAL ITEM B 13 5 0 5 COLUMBIA STREET, ALTERATION EDITION, HOUSTON HEIGHTS SOUTH.
RECOMMENDATION APPROVAL ITEM B 14 7 2 1 COLUMBIA STREET, ALTERATION EDITION IN THE HOUSTON HEIGHTS SOUTH HISTORIC DISTRICT.
DENIAL OF A COR ISSUANCE, I MEAN DENIAL ISSUANCE OF A COR.
ITEM B 1 15 2 0 0 9 WEST GRAY STREET ALTERATION ASSIGNED LANDMARK RIVER OAKS, UH, THEATER AND SHOPPING CENTER.
RECOMMENDATION APPROVAL ITEM B 17 1-824-HEIGHTS BOULEVARD, NEW CONSTRUCTION OF THE GARAGE, HOUSTON HEIGHTS EAST.
RECOMMENDATION APPROVAL ITEM B 18 1 3 4 2 HARVARD STREET ALTERATION EDITION IN THE HOUSTON HEIGHTS EAST HISTORIC DISTRICT.
RECOMMENDATION, APPROVAL B 19 3 0 7 BAYLIN AVENUE ALTERATION EDITION IN THE WOODLAND HEIGHTS HISTORIC DISTRICT RECOMMENDATION.
APPROVAL ITEM B 20 1-806-DECATUR STREET ALTERATION EDITION IN THE HOUSTON, I MEAN, I'M SORRY, IN OH SIX WARD HAS BEEN DEFERRED BY THE APPLICANT.
THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT REQUESTS APPROVAL OF ALL STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR THESE PROCEEDING ITEMS. ITEMS PROVO PROPOSE FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION, THEREFORE ARE ITEMS B TWO, B THREE, B FIVE, AND B 16.
WE ARE HERE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
UH, SO FIRST COMMISSIONERS, ARE THERE ANY, UH, OF THESE ITEMS THAT, UH, YOU WOULD LIKE TO PULL FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION IN DISCUSSION? MR. MCNEIL? B SEVEN.
B SEVEN? ARE THERE ANY OTHER, UM, PROJECTS TO PULL FROM THE COMMISSION? QUESTION PLEASE, PLEASE PROCEED.
TERRENCE, THERE UM, ARE TWO ITEMS FOR THE SAME ADDRESS.
AND SO ITEMS 17 ARE, HOW ARE, HOW RELATED ARE THEY IN TERMS OF ONE BEING RECOMMENDED FOR, UH, UH, APPROVAL AND THE OTHER AND NOT? OKAY, SO ITEM B 17 IS, UM, FOR A, UH, ALTERATION, WHICH IS A RAMP AND, EXCUSE ME, 16.
SO B 16 18 24 HEIGHTS BOULEVARD.
UM, I WAS WORKING WITH THE ARCHITECT ON MAKING SOME CHANGES AND THEIR OWNER, UH, WANTED TO PUT IT SOMEWHERE DIFFERENT.
SO THE CHANGES TO THE DRAWING WERE NOT IN THE DRAFT, SO I DID NOT, SO WE DID NOT PUT IT ON THE CONSENT AGENDA SO YOU GUYS COULD REVIEW IT.
SO THE RAMP AND THE GARAGE, THE PROPOSED NEW CONSTRUCTION FOR THE GARAGE ARE SEPARATE? YES.
COMPLETELY SEPARATE ISSUES? YES, SIR.
I HAVE A A POINT FOR CLARIFICATION.
YES, COMMISSIONER? YEAH, PLEASE.
I THINK I, I MISSED IT, BUT I DID NOT HEAR 1342
[00:15:01]
HARVARD STREET BEING CALLED OUT.DO YOU WANNA PULL THAT ITEM? NO, I JUST WANTED, I I DIDN'T HEAR THAT.
I'D LIKE TO PULL, UH, THE TWO FOR RIVER OAKS THEATER AND SHOPPING CENTER.
AT THIS TIME, I'M GONNA OPEN UP A PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS TO SEE, I HAVE A NUMBER OF SPEAKERS SIGNED UP FOR MANY OF THESE ITEMS, ALTHOUGH FOR THE MOST PART WHAT I SEE ARE SUPPORTIVE OF THE RECOMMENDATION, UM, I'M UNCLEAR ABOUT ITEM NINE ON 1 1 1 1 EAST 11TH STREET.
UM, SO IF, UM, THIS IS YOUR CHANCE, IF YOU WANT TO PULL A PROJECT FOR CONSENT TO BE INDIVIDUALLY DISCUSSED, PLEASE ANNOUNCE THE PROJECT AT THIS TIME ONLY FOR THE ONES THAT ARE ON CONSENT.
AGAIN, IF YOU ARE SUPPORTIVE OF THE APPLICATION, IT'S LIKELY TO BE APPROVED IN THE NEXT FEW MOMENTS.
I WOULD ASK RESPECTFULLY THAT WE DO, UM, HEAR THE ITEM THAT YOU JUST SAID, WHICH IS NUMBER NINE, I BELIEVE.
UH, WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THE CLIENT AND EVERYONE'S CLEAR.
I'M GONNA CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON, ON INPUT.
UM, LET ME READ, READ THE, THE LIST AS I, THE SLATE OF, UH, THAT I HAVE.
I HAVE ITEM ONE, I HAVE ITEM FOUR, I HAVE ITEM SIX, I HAVE ITEM EIGHT, ITEM 10, ITEM 11, ITEM 13, ITEM 14, ITEM 17, 18, 19, AND 20.
TERRANCE COMMISSION MEMBERS, IS THERE A MOTION, IF THERE'S NOT FURTHER DISCUSSION, IS THERE A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE RECOMMENDED, UM, MODIFIED LIST FROM STAFF AND APPROVAL FOR, UM, THEIR STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THOSE ITEMS? COMMISSIONER SEPULVEDA MOVES TO ACCEPT.
IS THERE ANY OPPOSED? ARE THERE ANY ABSTENTIONS THAT MOTION PASSES? WE WILL NOW, UM, WE WILL NOW CONTINUE WITH, UM, SUBMISSIONS FOR INDIVIDUAL DISCUSSION STARTING WITH ITEM NUMBER 2 8 0 7 WOODLAND STREET.
GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR AND COMMISSIONERS AND THE PUBLIC.
MY NAME'S ROMAN MCALLEN, I'M THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER FOR THE CITY.
AND THIS ITEM WILL BE FAMILIAR TO YOU AT 8 0 7 WOODLAND STREET.
AND THIS IS A, UH, CONTRIBUTING BUNGALOW THAT HAD TWO FRONT DOORS AND TWO BACK DOORS IN THE WOODLAND HEIGHTS AREA IS CIRCA 1912.
AND IF WE JUST STAY ON THAT FRONT PAGE OF THAT STAFF REPORT, PAGE ONE, WHAT WE HAVE IS A REQUEST TO ADD A SECOND STORY TO THE NON-CONTRIBUTING GARAGE THAT WAS APPROVED IN 2018.
THE PROJECT WAS COMPLETED WITHOUT A C OF A OR A PERMIT, AND THE PROJECT WOULD BE REVISED IF THIS C OF A APPLICATION IS APPROVED.
THE PROPOSAL HAS BEEN REVISED SINCE YOU SAW IT LAST.
UH, AND IT WAS DENIED BY THIS COMMISSION.
IT WAS REVIEWED ALSO BY THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION APPEALS BOARD, AND THE APPEALS BOARD ASKED THE APPLICANT
[00:20:01]
TO REAPPLY AFTER REVIEWING THE PROJECT WITH PERMITTING SUCH THAT THEY WOULD BE SURE THAT THE SECOND FLOOR AS PROPOSED WOULD, UH, MEET BUILDING CODE AND THAT THEN THE APPLICANT SHOULD REVISE THE APPLICATION IN RETURN TO THIS COMMISSION.SO THAT IS WHY YOU'RE SEEING IT A LITTLE, A COUPLE OF POINTS ABOUT THE PROJECT.
IT IS A 228 SQUARE FOOT, UH, SECOND FLOOR TO A 228 SQUARE FOOT SINGLE CAR GARAGE.
THE, THE APPLICANT HAS AGREED TO THE CONDITIONS WHICH WE'RE GONNA RECOMMEND, AND, UH, THOSE BEING A HIP ON THE FRONT FACING PORTION OF THE ROOF AND THAT THE, UH, THE RIDGE HEIGHT BE LOWERED BY ONE FOOT BY CHANGING THE RISE OVER RUN.
AND, UM, AND THEY'RE ALSO REMOVING A SECOND FLOOR DOOR PROPOSING TO REMOVE THE SECOND FLOOR DOOR THAT FACES TO THE WEST.
I'D LIKE TO NOW KIND OF TAKE YOU THROUGH THIS RATHER LONG REPORT BY JUMPING FORWARD TO PAGE SIX.
AND JUST TO RE TO GO OVER THE STRUCTURE.
SO PAGE SIX STARTS WITH AN INVENTORY PHOTO WHERE THE BUILDING WAS CLAD WITH VINYL IN 2018.
AND THEN, UH, BELOW, I'M SORRY, 2018 IS WHEN THE VINYL WAS REMOVED.
THE INVENTORY PHOTO DATES TO PROBABLY 11 OR 12.
THEN ON PAGE SEVEN, UH, YOU SEE THE STRUCTURE AS IT IS TODAY.
UH, AND IN ON THE LEFT CORNER OF THAT YOU DO SEE THAT SECOND FLOOR EDITION IN THAT IMAGE.
THE PAGE EIGHT IS A STREET VIEW OF THE STRUCTURE.
THAT PAGE EIGHT IS A, UH, THE, THE FRONT OF THAT STRUCTURE AND THERE IS A CARPORT THAT YOU SEE IN THAT IMAGE THAT'S RIGHT IN FRONT OF THE STRUCTURE WITH EXPOSED ROOF AFTER TAILS.
THAT STRUCTURE WAS THERE WHEN THIS APPLICANT PURCHASED IT, AND THAT'S PROVEN BY HIS SURVEY.
IT WAS SUBMITTED, UH, SO WHEN HE PURCHASED THE PROPERTY.
SO THAT'S REALLY NOT PART OF OUR DISCUSSION AND IT SEEMS RATHER APPROPRIATE.
ACTUALLY PAGE NINE IS, UH, ANOTHER, ANOTHER IMAGE WITH THE SECOND FLOOR I BELIEVE.
AND THEN WE'RE GONNA GO TO TEN FIRST 10 FLEAS RIGHT THERE.
10 SHOWS THE PROPERTY IMMEDIATELY TO THE WEST ON THE TOP.
BIG IMAGE THERE, WHICH HAS A GARAGE APARTMENT, UH, SET BACK ON THE LOT.
AND THE TWO IMAGES BELOW THAT SHOW A SINGLE STORY GARAGE AND A TWO STORY GARAGE APARTMENT.
ALL OF THEM IN THE CONTEXT AREA.
PAGE 11 DOES SHOW THE STREET VIEW AT A DIAGONAL TO THE WEST.
IT'S HARD TO MAKE OUT FROM THAT IMAGE, BUT IT'S SOMETHING I EXPERIENCED FROM GOING THERE MULTIPLE TIMES TO PREPARE FOR THIS REPORT.
AND THAT IS THE SENSE THAT THESE GARAGES AREN'T THAT FAR FROM ANOTHER, THE ONE ON THE LEFT BEING THE NEIGHBORS AND THE ONE TO THE RIGHT ON PAGE 12 OF THIS PROJECT, OF THIS APPLICATION, YOU SEE OF PAGE 12, 1 4.
NOW HERE YOU'RE LOOKING, UH, ON YOUR RIGHT IS THE TWO STORY GARAGE.
AND ON YOUR LEFT IS THAT GARAGE APARTMENT NEXT DOOR.
AND THE FENCE IS MORE OR LESS ON THE PROPERTY LINE OR CLOSE TO IT, JUST TO GIVE YOU A SENSE OF THE RELATIONSHIP OF THESE BUILDINGS.
THE PROPOSED BUILDING IS, UH, A LITTLE FURTHER OVER, MAYBE A FOOT OVER MORE THAN THE OTHER ONES.
THE NEXT PAGE ON 13 IS LOOKING FORWARD, UH, TOWARDS THE, TOWARDS THE STREET.
AND FINALLY, AND I'M, I APOLOGIZE, I'M DONE WITH THESE SORT OF TRYING TO SET YOU UP WITH THE SCENE HERE.
BUT ON PAGE 14 IS AN IMAGE ON THE, IN THE BACKYARD, UH, OF THE APPLICANT'S PROPERTY LOOKING TOWARDS THE NEIGHBOR'S, UH, GARAGE APARTMENT.
OKAY? SO PAGE 15 IS REALLY HELPFUL IN UNDERSTANDING THE CONTEXT AREA.
AT THE TOP OF PAGE 15 IS A, UH, AERIAL VIEW THAT SHOWS THE CONTRIBUTING BUILDINGS ALL LABELED.
SO THE APPLICANT'S SIDE OF THE STREET, THE NORTH SIDE OF WOODLAND IS THEY'RE ALL CONTRIBUTING.
AND ON THE SOUTH SIDE, UH, THERE ARE THREE CONTRIBUTING.
AND UH, EIGHT 14 IS A TWO STORY BUILDING OF ABOUT 1930 AND WHICH WAS LABELED NON-CONTRIBUTING.
AND 8 0 8 IS A BUNGALOW THAT WAS, UH, HAD A BRICK VENEER ADDED TO IT AND I ASSUME THAT'S WHY THEY AT LABELED THAT ONE NON-CONTRIBUTING.
AND 8 0 2 IS A NEWER, A NEWER HOME.
NOW ALSO IN THAT IMAGE WHAT'S IMPORTANT IS I'VE LABELED THE GARAGES AND I'VE LABELED 'EM AS EITHER ONE OR TWO STORY.
SO YOU GET A SENSE OF THEIR PLACEMENT WITHIN THAT CONTEXT AREA.
AND YOU ALSO GET A SENSE THAT THE LITTLE BOX AT 8 0 7, THAT'S UP FOR DISCUSSION.
[00:25:01]
TWO STORY UNIT IS ABOUT HALF THE SIZE OF THE, UH, OF MOST OF THE GARAGES IN THE AREA.AND IT IS TOWARDS THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY.
WE'LL TALK ABOUT THAT IN A MINUTE, BUT NOT AT THE REAR.
I'D LIKE TO GO FORWARD, JASON, NOW TO PAGE, UH, ONE PAGE, SKIP PAGE.
LET'S GO TO PAGE 17, THE BLACK AND WHITE.
SO WE WERE FORTUNATE THAT WE DIDN'T HAVE THESE LAST TIME.
THESE ARE SOME COUNTY IMAGES FROM JUNE OF 1965.
AND UH, THEY SHOW THE 8, 8 15 ON THE TOP PHOTO WITH A SINGLE GARAGE BACK THEN.
AND, UH, OUR PROJECT 8 0 7 BELOW WITH THE KID PA PLAYING IN THE STREET.
AND THAT IS A DIFFERENT GARAGE THAT DIDN'T SHOW UP ON THE SANBORNS, BUT YOU DO SEE THERE KIND OF EQUAL TO THE NEIGHBOR'S GARAGE, WHAT ALMOST LOOKS LIKE A QUO HUT THERE SITUATED THERE.
AND THEN THE NEXT PAGE, I'VE PUT THOSE TOGETHER IN ONE VIEW AND YOU GET A SENSE OF THOSE BUILDINGS.
ONE THING THAT DID SHOW THAT AT EIGHT 15, ODDLY THAT THERE WAS, UH, TWO GARAGES AT ONE TIME ON THAT SITE, THE APPRAISER HAD LABELED ONE FOR DEMOLITION.
AND I SAY, I SAY ALL THAT TO GIVE A SENSE THAT OVER TIME THE PLACEMENT OF BUILDINGS AND GARAGES HAS CHANGED IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
I'D LIKE TO GO TO PAGE 20 BECAUSE THE DECISION IN OF THIS COMMISSION IN 2018 TO APPROVE THE TWO STORY REAR EDITION INCLUDED, OF COURSE THE ONE STORY GARAGE.
AND THIS IMAGE I'VE LINED UP, UH, THE, UH, THE DRAWINGS THAT WERE SUBMITTED BACK IN 2018.
AND THE BLUE LINES REPRESENT, YOU KNOW, THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE ON THE LEFT AND THE END, ORIGINAL END OF THE HOUSE ON THE RIGHT AND KIND OF THE MIDPOINT.
AND YOU NOTICE THE GARAGE IN THE LOWER IMAGE IS A LITTLE BIT, BE A LITTLE BIT MORE THAN HALFWAY BACK FROM THE FRONT GABLE OF THE PORCH.
NOW IF YOU WANT TO COUNT, COUNT THE FRONT WALL OF THE HOUSE, IT'S MORE LIKE AT THE MIDPOINT, BUT I THINK THAT WAS THE DECISION OF THE COMMISSION BACK THEN.
AS WELL AS THAT THERE HAVE BEEN AND ARE TODAY THREE, UH, LARGE OR MEDIUM DIAMETER TREES IN THAT BACKYARD, UH, AND THAT WERE IMPORTANT TO THE APPLICANTS IN 2018 AND ARE IMPORTANT TO THE APPLICANTS NOW.
SO IF YOU GO TO PAGE 21 OF THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN, AND I SPEAK ABOUT THIS AS A PROPOSED PLAN, THOUGH WE KNOW HERE WE'RE DISCUSSING A PROJECT WHICH HAS BEEN DONE ALREADY, BUT WE TREAT THEM ALL THE SAME WHEN THEY GET TO THIS STAGE.
AND THAT THE TREE CA THE TREES ARE NOTED IN THAT IMAGE ALSO NOTED AS THE FIRE RATED WALL AND THE THREE FOOT THREE INCHES SETBACK FROM THE PROPERTY LINE.
UH, THE REMAINING DR PICTURE, PAGE 22 AND 23, JUST STRAIGHT UP SHOW YOU WHAT IT IS.
IT'S A, IT'S A SECOND FLOOR RIGHT SMACK ON TOP OF THE, THE OTHER ONE, UH, WITH VERY NO DECORATION.
IT ACTUALLY GOES EXACTLY WITH THE EXISTING GARAGE.
AND ON PAGE 24, WE HAVE THAT 2018 IMAGE AT THE TOP AND I JUST WENT AHEAD AND, AND PUT IN WHAT THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE IF THEY HAD SEEN IT BELOW.
IT WOULD LOOK LIKE THAT AND IT'S A COUPLE OF FEET AS AS PROPOSED WITH THE CONDITIONS WE'VE PROPOSED, WHICH THE APPLICANT IS WILLING TO ACCEPT, IT WOULD BE AT LEAST TWO FOOT BELOW THE RIDGE OF THE ORIGINAL HISTORIC HOME.
NOW, IF YOU WILL PLEASE, I'D LIKE TO GO BACK JASON TO THE FRONT AND TALK ABOUT THE CRITERIA IN OUR RECOMMENDATION.
WE ARE RECOMMEND RECOMMENDING THAT THAT DENIAL OF THE C OF A, BECAUSE IT NEEDS A C OF R AND ISSUANCE OF A C OF R FOR THE WORK COMPLETED WITH THE CONDITION THAT THE RIDGE HEIGHT BE LOWERED BY ONE FOOT AND THE FRONT FACING PORTION OF THE ROOF BE REFRAMED WITH A HIP.
AND THE APPLICANT HAS, IS AGREED TO ACCEPT THOSE CONDITIONS WITH IF IT'S APPROVED AT THIS COMMISSION LEVEL, HIS PREFERENCE WOULD BE TO LEAVE THE BUILDING THE WAY THAT IT IS.
ON PAGE TWO, THE ALTERATIONS TO A NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE.
THERE ARE THREE NUMBERED THINGS YOU NEED TO MEET.
NUMBER ONE IS THAT THE BUILD THE CHANGES MUST RECOGNIZE THE BUILDING AS A PRODUCT OF ITS OWN TIME AND AVOID SEEKING EARLIER OR LATER APPEARANCES.
THAT'S A ONE, A ONE B, IT GOTTA MATCH THE FEATURES OF THE EXISTING BUILDING.
AND THAT'S CLEARLY MET TWO DOESN'T APPLY, THREE DOES.
AND I THINK THIS IS WHERE I THINK STAFF WE IN REVIEWING IT LAST TIME, MAY, MAY HAVE MISSED SOMETHING BECAUSE THREE A SAYS THE DISTANCE FROM THE PROPERTY LINE TO THE FRONT AND SIDE WALLS, PORCHES AND EXTERIOR FEATURES OF ANY PROPOSED ADDITION OR ALTERATION MUST BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE DISTANCE FROM THE PROPERTY LINE OF SIMILAR ELEMENTS OF EXISTING CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES IN THE CONTEXT AREA.
I'VE CHECKED THIS AS SATISFIED BECAUSE THE PROPOSED PROJECT DOES NOT CHANGE THE DISTANCES
[00:30:01]
FROM THE PROPERTY LINES TO THE FRONT OR THE SIDE WALLS.AND YOU, YOU COULD GO AND MAKE THE ARGUMENT THAT THE SECOND FLOOR IS AN EXTERIOR FEATURE, BUT THAT'S IN MY MIND NOT WHAT WE THINK ABOUT WHEN WE THINK ABOUT FEATURES.
AND THEN B, THE NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE WITH THE ADDITION IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE TYPICAL PROPORTIONS AND SCALE OF THE EXISTING CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES IN THE CONTEXT AREA.
AND COMPATIBILITY IS PERHAPS THE KEY WORD.
SO I'VE WRITTEN HERE THE NON-CONTRIBUTING GARAGE WITH THE SECOND FLOOR EDITION IS DIMINUTIVE AND SET BACK MORE THAN 50% FROM THE FRONT PORCH GABLE OF THE PRIMARY HISTORIC STRUCTURE.
THE GARAGE WITH THE PROPOSED ADDITION HAS NO ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE DISTRICT AND NOR ON THE RESOURCE.
THERE'S SOME OTHER LANGUAGE THERE ABOUT, UM, THAT IT'S 228 SQUARE FEET RIGHT ON TOP OF IT.
SINCE THIS DISCUSSION, AND THIS WAS DENIED ONCE BEFORE, AND WE ARE NOW COMING TO SAY WE'D RECOMMEND APPROVAL, I FELT THAT THERE WAS ADDITIONAL WORK NEEDED TO EXPLAIN THAT.
AND SO IF YOU GO TO PAGE THREE, WE HAVE THE FACT THAT THIS IS WHERE I HAVE TO SAY THESE, I'LL JUST READ IT VERY, THIS, THIS IS A LOCALLY DESIGNATED HISTORIC DISTRICT HERE IN WOODLAND HEIGHTS, BUT OUR CRITERIA THAT WE DEAL WITH EVERY DAY IS BASED ON THE CRITERIA OF THE STANDARDS, THE FEDERAL STANDARDS AND THE STANDARDS MAY BE LOOKED TO IN THIS CASE.
SO I'VE UNDERLINED, AND I'LL JUST READ WHAT I'VE UNDERLINED, BUT FROM THE INTERIOR STANDARDS, WHICH WERE ON THEIR WEBSITE, THEY, THEY CALL OUT THAT THOSE STANDARDS WERE BASED ON THE VENICE CHARTER.
AND THE VENICE CHARTER SAYS IT WAS AN EFFORT TO TREAT HISTORIC RESOURCES, NOT AS UNCHANGEABLE WORKS OF ART, BUT AS IMPORTANT PARTS OF OUR ENTIRE BUILT ENVIRONMENT.
IN THIS CASE, IF WE'RE LOOKING AT THE WHOLE HISTORIC DISTRICT AS THE THING, THE QUESTION IS, IS THE SECOND FLOOR ABOVE A SINGLE FLOOR GARAGE HAVING AN ADVERSE IMPACT? NOW UNDER THE STANDARDS, STANDARDS NINE AND 10 SEEM TO RELATE.
STANDARD NINE SAYS THAT NEW ADDITIONS OR EXTERIOR ALTERATIONS AND RELATED NEW CONSTRUCTION WILL, SHOULD NOT DESTROY HISTORIC MATERIALS FEATURES.
AND HERE'S A KEY THING, SPATIAL RELATIONSHIPS THAT CHARACTERIZE THE PART, THE PROPERTY.
SO IF WE'RE LOOKING AT THE DISTRICT AS THE THING DOES, ARE THOSE SPATIAL RELATIONSHIPS DIS DESTROYED AND I FIND THAT TO BE A STRONG WORD.
UM, AND THAT THE MASSING, THEY SHOULD BE MASSED TO PROTECT THE INTEGRITY OF THE ENVIRONMENT.
NOW, UNDER ALTERATIONS, THEY SAY THE MOST IMPORTANT THING IS THAT SUCH ALTERATIONS DO NOT RADICALLY CHANGE, RADICALLY CHANGE, OBSCURE OR DESTROY CHARACTER DEFINING SPACES.
AND AGAIN, IT'S ABOUT THE DISTRICT AS A WHOLE.
THERE IS THIS RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE HOUSE AND THE GARAGE.
YOU COULD LOOK AT JUST THE HOUSE AS THE RESOURCE AND THEREFORE DOES THE GARAGE RELATIONSHIP TO THE HOUSE, IS THAT A PROBLEM? OR, OR YOU COULD LOOK AT IS THE GARAGE RELATIONSHIP TO THE WHOLE DISTRICT A PROBLEM? FINALLY, ON THE BOTTOM OF THAT PAGE, NEW CONSTRUCTION SHOULD NOT SIGNIFICANTLY ALTER THE HISTORIC RELATIONSHIP OF THE EXISTING BUILDING OR BUILDINGS TO THEIR IMMEDIATE SURROUNDINGS, DESTROY HISTORIC FEATURES OR OBSCURE PRIMARY VIEWS OF THE PROPERTY.
AND I THINK THIS IS IMPORTANT.
THIS IS, THIS IS ALMOST RIGHT ON THE POINT OF ITS NEW CONSTRUCTION IN AN AREA, EITHER A DISTRICT OR NOT.
AND OF COURSE WE'RE NOT OBSCURING THE PRIMARY VIEWS OF THE PROPERTY AT ALL.
AND I DON'T THINK WE'RE SIGNIFICANTLY ALTERING THE RELATIONSHIP OF THE BUILDINGS.
AND I'M ALMOST DONE, I APOLOGIZE FOR THIS ONE, BUT WE'RE BRINGING IT FORWARD TO YOU WITH ALL WE KNOW.
THE, UH, PAGE FOUR FROM THE FEDERAL, FROM THE GUIDE TO THE FEDERAL HISTORIC TAX INCENTIVE PROGRAM HAD SOME, HAD AN ON POINT THING.
NOW IT WAS SPEAKING ABOUT HISTORIC SETTINGS AND DISTRICTS, BUT THIS PHRASE, LARGE SCALE CONSTRUCTION IN PROXIMITY TO A HISTORIC BUILDING MIGHT BE APPROPRIATE IN A DENSE URBAN CONTEXT, BUT NOT APPROPRIATE IN A RULE.
THAT'S THE CLOSEST THING TO WHERE WE COULD APPLY.
WE'RE NOT IN A DENSE URBAN CONTEXT, WE'RE JUST IN A AREA OF HOUSTON.
UM, THAT COULD BE A LITTLE DENSER.
BUT THE QUESTION IS ABOUT, AGAIN, DOES THAT LITTLE STRUCTURE, UH, DOES IT'S SAY IS IT, IS IT, YOU KNOW, LOOK AT THAT RELATIONSHIP AND, AND DO YOU NEED TO GIVE IT SOME DEFERENCE? UH, BECAUSE WE'RE IN THE CITY AND WORRIED ABOUT A LOT OF OTHER REASONS WHY SOMEONE MIGHT WANNA PUT A SECOND FLOOR GARAGE AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
SO I WON'T, I'LL TAKE ANY QUESTIONS.
UH, RECOMMENDATION AGAIN IS THAT WE DENY THE C OF A BUT ISSUE A C OF R FOR THE WORK COMPLETED WITH THE CONDITION THAT THE RIDGE BE LOWERED BY ONE FOOT AND THAT THE FRONT FACING PORTION OF THE ROOF BE REFRAMED WITH A HIP.
BEFORE WE GET TO ANY QUESTIONS I HAS ANNOUNCED COMMISSIONER DEBO HAS ALSO JOINED THE, THIS MEETING DURING THIS, UH, DURING YOUR PRESENTATION.
UM, THAT SAID, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OF ROMAN? I DO HAVE TWO SPEAKERS SIGN UP TO SPEAK ON THIS,
[00:35:01]
UH, ITEM.WE'LL START WITH COMMISSIONER MCNEIL FIRST ROMAN, DO WE HAVE ANYTHING IN WRITING FROM PERMITTING THAT SAYS THAT THE PROJECT WOULD BE APPROVED IF THEY GOT A COA I'LL LEAVE THAT TO THE APPLICANT.
HE, I, HE DIDN'T SHARE THOSE MESSAGES WITH ME, BUT I'M, I AM VERY SURE WE HAVE ASSURANCES FROM THEM AND HE CAN SPEAK TO THAT.
MR. YEAH, UH, I WOULD LIKE TO REFER BACK TO PAGE 15 OF 24.
UH, I, I WOULD LIKE TO CLARIFY THE BOXES THAT HAS NUMBERS IN THEM.
ONE AND TWO, I PRESUME DENOTES THE NUMBER OF STORIES OF THE GARAGE APARTMENTS.
SO RIGHT NOW AT 8 0 7, HE'S JUST TRYING TO BILL A SECOND STORY RIGHT NEXT TO ONE THAT'S ALREADY A SECOND STORY.
UH, WHILE WE'RE ON THAT PAGE, COMMISSIONER, THANK YOU.
I FAILED TO, I HAD SKIPPED OVER PAGE 16.
SO SINCE YOU'RE IN THAT PART OF YOUR BOOK, PAGE 16 IS ALSO RELEVANT TO OUR RECOMMENDATION.
AND THAT IS THAT THE APPLICANT HAS SU PROVIDED THIS LIST HERE BELOW WHERE FIVE OF HIS NEIGHBORS ON THREE SIDES OF HIS PROPERTY HAVE SAID THEY SUPPORT THE PROJECT AS IT IS CURRENTLY BUILT.
THEY DON'T EVEN, THEY'RE NOT EVEN ASKING FOR HIM TO MAKE CHANGES, BUT WE HAVE THEIR NAMES.
THEY, THEY HAVE THE STATEMENT SAYS, ARE YOU IN SUPPORT OF THE GARAGE EDITION? PLEASE SIGN BELOW.
AND YOU SEE THAT THIS, THE YELLOW BOXES IN THAT DIAGRAM, THE ONE AT THE TOP OF THE PAGE IS THE NEIGHBOR IMMEDIATELY BEHIND AND THEN THE NEIGHBOR IMMEDIATELY TO THE EAST AND THEN THREE NEIGHBORS TO THE SOUTH.
AND, AND, AND I THINK THAT'S ALWAYS RELEVANT WHEN WE TALK ABOUT ANY C OF A IS WHAT'S GOING ON IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD BECAUSE WHO BOTH KNOWS WHETHER YOU'RE HAVING AN ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE SPATIAL RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE PROPERTIES THAT'S, THAT'S HAVING AN ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE DISTRICT.
COMMISSIONER CURRY HAS A QUESTION.
ROMAN WILL REMIND US, PLEASE, UH, THE WORK THAT'S BEEN COMPLETED TO DATE FOR WHICH THE COR WOULD BE ISSUED, IF, IF THIS GOES FORWARD, THE, THE WORK.
SO IF WE GO TO PAGE ONE, THE PROPOSAL WAS TO PUT A 228 SQUARE FOOT ADDITION ABOVE THE EXISTING SINGLE CAR GARAGE.
SO IT'S STRAIGHT ABOVE IT, UH, WITH A HIP ROOF OR THE RIDGE HEIGHT OF 20 FOOT SEVEN.
WITH THESE CONDITIONS, THERE ARE A PAIR OF SINGLE HUNG WINDOWS, BUT THEY FACE DIRECTLY, UH, TO THE REAR CEMENT LAPSED SIDING TO MATCH THE EXISTING ON THE GARAGE.
AN EXTERIOR DOOR THAT WAS PREVIOUSLY FACING WEST, WHICH MAY HAVE BEEN A PROBLEM WITH THE FIRE RATING IS BEING REMOVED.
THERE'S NO ENTRY FROM THAT SIDE.
THE, THE SECOND L LEVEL WOULD BE ENTERED FROM INSIDE THE STRUCTURE AND THE SIDE SETBACK IS EXISTING.
SO, SO ALL THOSE THINGS ARE PROPOSED, NOT, NOT BEGUN CONSTRUCTION.
TH THAT'S AGAIN, SO I'M SORRY, I ALWAYS SPEAK TO IT THAT WAY, BUT THAT IS WHAT'S THERE TODAY.
WHAT'S THERE TODAY IS ALL OF THAT EXCEPT THAT THE FRONT GABLE IS, UH, IS NOT A HIP, IT'S JUST A FRONT GABLE FACING AND THAT IT'S, UH, 2021 FEET AND SEVEN INCHES TODAY AND IT HAS A DOOR ON ONE SIDE.
AND THAT, AND THAT'S WHY IT'S A C OF R THAT'S WHY IT'S A CR 'CAUSE IT DIDN'T, IT DIDN'T, IT WAS CONSTRUCTION WITHOUT A C OF A AND BUT THE PROPOSAL, WHAT THE, THE PROPOSAL IS TO CHANGE, REFRAME THE ROOF ENTIRELY, BASICALLY TO HAVE A LOWER PITCH, THUS LOWERING THE RIDGE AND TO CHANGE THE FRONT GABLE TO A HIP.
IS THAT, THAT'S THE RECOMMENDATION FROM STAFF? YES.
SO IF THAT, UH, IF THAT'S, UH, IF WE VOTE AND THAT, UH, RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVED, THEN THAT'LL BE THE COURTS OF ACTION.
HE WOULD THAT, THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING.
SUBMIT NEW DRAWINGS INTO PERMITTING THAT HE'S ALREADY HAD THEM LOOK AT.
HE'S HERE TO SPEAK TO IT, BUT THEN IT WOULD GO THANK.
SO I HAVE ONE POINT FOR CLARIFICATION.
UH, UNDERSTOOD THAT THERE WAS NO COA APPLIED, BUT WAS THERE ANY CONSTRUCTION PERMITS APPLIED AT THE TIME? NO.
SO WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS THAT NOW WE ARE TRYING TO GIVE A COA THAT HOW DO WE KNOW WHEN WE GET THE PER PERMITTING CENTER NOW TO GET INVOLVED THAT THEY ACTUALLY APPROVE THIS PARTICULAR STRUCTURE AT THIS CURRENT TIME? SO THE APPLICANT, AFTER MEETING WITH THE APPEALS BOARD, THE APPEALS BOARD INSTRUCTED HIM TO REVIEW THE PROJECT WITH PERMITTING AND GET A COMPLETE BLESSING ON WHAT THE PROJECT WOULD LOOK LIKE.
SO THEY PRO THEY REVIEWED IT AND HE CAN SPEAK TO IT, BUT THEY REVIEWED IT AND UH, IF THERE WERE SUGGESTIONS HE TOOK THEM, UH, AND WHICH I KNOW ONE OF 'EM HAD TO BE THE REMOVAL OF THE DOOR.
[00:40:01]
HE, WE CAN ANTICIPATE THAT IF HE WERE TO RECEIVE, IF HE WERE TO RECEIVE A CERTIFICATE OF REMEDIATION LIKE THIS ONE THEN, AND YOU CAN SEE YOU NOTICED, UH, BECAUSE I TALKED TO HIM A COUPLE DAYS AGO, I SAID, THIS IS GONNA BE OUR RECOMMENDATION.HE HAD THOSE DRAWINGS DRAFTED.
SO YOU DO SEE IN THE DRAWINGS THAT ARE ATTACHED IN YOUR DOCUMENT, HE'S, THOSE ARE READY TO GO TO PERMITTING, THEY WILL BE REVIEWED TO MAKE SURE THEY COMPLY AND THEN THEY WOULD ISSUE A BUILDING PERMIT AND ACTUALLY HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE INSPECTION PROCESS AND EVERYTHING AND CHECK TO MAKE SURE, HE MAY HAVE TO EXPOSE SOME FRAMING IF HE, UH, YOU KNOW HOW IT IS THAT SOME PEOPLE, IF THEY'VE DONE WORK AND COVERED UP THINGS THAT THE INSPECTORS CAN'T SEE WHAT THEY NEED TO SEE, THEY'LL HAVE 'EM OPEN UP A WALL OR, YOU KNOW, THINGS LIKE THAT.
WELL, THAT, THAT WAS WHAT I WAS ALLUDING TO BECAUSE ALL WE HAVE IS, LIKE WE WERE SAYING, VERBALLY, SOMEBODY THERE AGREED, BUT I AIN'T SEEN ANYTHING IN WRITING.
WELL, THAT WAS COMMISSIONER'S APRIL AND APRIL, I'M SORRY, I DIDN'T MEAN TO CUT YOU OFF, BUT THAT WAS MR. CAMILLE'S MCNEIL'S POINT.
AND I THINK THE OWNER, IF HE'S HERE HERE, HE GOT A HAND UP POINT.
AND THIS, BUT THIS WAS AGAIN, A REQUEST FROM THE APPEALS BOARD WHO, WHO JUST ASKED TO TAKE THIS ROUTE AND THEN SEE WHERE, SEE IF THAT WOULD ALSO HAVE ALTER THE COURSE BACK IN, BACK TO OUR PURVIEW.
WHICH, WHICH, WHICH IT IS NOW.
SO, SO DID HE GET FROM GET A BOOSTER COUCH, A C OF A TO BUILD A ONE STORY GARAGE? YES.
THAT'S THAT APPROVED DRAWING SET IN THAT LOCATION.
AND THAT WAS BUILT, BUT THEN HE, HE BUILT THE GARAGE AS TWO STORIES WITHOUT GETTING A PERMIT AFTER HE GOT THE C OF A FOR A ONE STORY GARAGE, NO, COMMISSIONER COUCH IN 2018, THE SECOND FLOOR EDITION AND ONE STORY GARAGE WERE APPROVED AND THEY WERE DONE AND COMPLETED FOR A DIFFERENT OWNER THAN THIS OWNER PAID.
HE FORWARD, HE BUILT THIS ON TOP OF THAT ONE? YES.
SO THIS ONE, IF IT'S THREE FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINE, DOES IT HAVE LIKE A FIRE RATED WALL AND STUFF? YES, IT, IT DOES.
SO EVEN THOUGH HE DIDN'T GET A PERMIT, HE BUILT IT THAT WAY.
HOW WOULD HE HAVE KNOWN THAT? I WILL, WELL, I THINK, I THINK LIKE MY, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THE DOOR HAS TO BE REMOVED IN ORDER TO CREATE A FIRE RATED WALL AND THERE MAY BE OTHER THINGS NEEDED AS WELL.
YOU'RE GONNA HAVE 25% OPENINGS IN A FIRE RATED WALL ACCORDING TO THE CODE.
SO THE DOOR'S NOT A PROBLEM FOR THE FIRE RATING.
PERMITTING PERMIT THE DRAWING, THE INSPECTOR TRUCK.
IT, IT'S JUST THAT THE ENTIRE WALL HAS TO BE SHEET ROCKED, SHEET ROCK.
YEAH, THAT'S WHY I'M SAYING LIKE, YOU SHOULD TAKE ALL THE SIDING OFF.
YOU HAVE TO REMOVE ALL THOSE TO PROVE TO THE INSPECTOR THAT IS ACTUALLY FIRE RATED.
THAT'S WHY I'M, I'M SKEPTICISM ABOUT THIS BECAUSE WE'RE TRYING TO APPROVE SOMETHING THAT'S BEEN BUILT AND I'M NOT SURE IT'S BUILT TO CODE.
AND WE'RE TRYING TO APPROVE SOMETHING YET I DON'T SEE PETER, PETE, STOCKTON HERE TO SAY, YES, THIS IS WHAT WE WILL ENFORCE.
WELL, BUT I GUESS IF WE APPROVE, IF WE APPROVE IT AND THEN THE THE INSPECTOR HAS TO DEAL WITH IT, IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT OUR DEAL.
WE SAID IT'S OKAY HISTORICALLY AND MASSING AND EVERYTHING, BUT I, I DON'T THINK WE HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT THAT.
THAT'S, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT THEY'RE GONNA DEAL WITH AFTER WE DECIDE ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.
I MEAN, AT THIS, AT THIS POINT, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE VOTE'S GONNA BE, BUT LET'S SAY THERE'S A VOTE AND IT'S AFFIRMATIVE HYPOTHETICALLY, THAT JUST MEANS THERE'S, THERE'S NOW A C OF R THE APPLICANT HAS TO GO GET A PERMIT, THE PERMIT HAS A HOLD ON IT UNTIL, UNTIL STAFF REVIEWS THAT WORK PRESCRIBED WORK, AND THEN THEY RELEASE THE HOLD IF IT MEETS THE C OF R.
SO I THINK AS LONG AS WE ARE DILIGENT TO MAKE SURE A PERMIT IS PULLED AND THE, AND THE CHANGES ARE MADE.
SO THAT, THAT'S WHAT'S THAT WHAT'S, THAT'S WHAT WOULD UNFOLD.
UM, BUT I DO HAVE TWO SPEAKERS TO SPEAK ON THE SIDE.
I WOULD LIKE TO GIVE THEM A CHANCE TO ENTER TO THE CONVERSATION AND THERE MAY BE MORE QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS.
COMMISSIONER BLAKELEY, BLAKE BLAKELEY BLAKELY, UH, I THINK I RECALL SEEING THIS, UH, APPLICATION AT AN EARLIER STAGE.
WAS THERE AN ISSUE ABOUT, UH, THE WATER DRAINING OFF INTO THE ADJACENT PROPERTY? IS THAT PART OF THE RATIONALE BEHIND THE HIP HIP ROOF? NO.
THAT, THAT, I VAGUELY RECALL SOMETHING THAT, THAT WAS ON IT THAT WASN'T ON THIS PROPERTY.
AND THE IDEA FOR THE HIP WAS THAT IT'S JUST MORE DEFERENTIAL TO THE FRONT ELEVATION WHEN, WHEN ADJACENT TO THAT STRUCTURE THAT IT WAS AN IDEA THAT COULD, UH, IF SOMEONE WAS CONCERNED.
AND AGAIN, I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD BE, BUT UH, IF SOMEONE WAS CONCERNED ABOUT THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THAT HISTORIC HOME QUITE OFTEN ON OUR ADDITIONS AND THINGS WE, WE ASK FOR AT FRONT FACING HIP JUST KIND OF BRINGS DOWN THAT, THAT PIECE.
SO, UM, AT THIS TIME I'M GONNA OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING IN THIS ITEM.
I DO HAVE TWO SPEAKERS SIGNED UP.
UM, AND THE FIRST IS THE APPLICANT,
[00:45:01]
UM, JAKE BOWEN, YOU WOULD RE REANNOUNCE YOUR, YOUR, YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD.JAKE BOW, OWNER OF 8 0 7 WOODLAND STREET.
UM, I, I DO WANNA LET YOU KNOW THAT WE ARE IN FOR PERMIT.
UH, THEY HAVE APPROVED THE DRAWINGS STRUCTURALLY AS WELL AS IT'S A ONE HOUR OR TWO HOUR WALL.
UH, THERE'S NO SHEET ROCK, SO EVERYTHING'S OPEN.
SO INSPECTOR, I HAVE HAD AN INSPECTOR COME AND LOOK AT IT.
UM, I'M, I'M WORKING WITH, UM, THE CITY, UH, ATTORNEY AS WELL, UH, WHO HAS PUT A, A, A STOP WORK ORDER ON IT PROJECT.
I'VE GONE THROUGH THE PLANS WITH HER AS WELL.
SHE'S OKAY WITH THE CONSTRUCTION.
SO RIGHT NOW THE PERMIT IS READY TO GO AS LONG AS I PAY MY IMPACT FEES, WHICH IS THE WATER DEPARTMENT, AND I GET A C OF R.
SO ONCE I GET THOSE TWO THINGS, THEY WILL APPROVE THE PERMIT AND MY ARCHITECT HAS CONFIRM THAT I, I HAVE A QUESTION, KIM, FOR THE APPLICANT OWNER, WHO IN LEGAL ARE YOU WORKING WITH? UM, TA TAHAR.
YEAH, SHE'S THE, SHE PUT THE STOP WORK ORDER.
I'VE BEEN GOING TO DUNNO WHO, I'VE BEEN GOING TO COURT WITH HER FOR THE LAST YEAR AND A HALF NOW.
SO DO I, MAY I PLEASE? YEAH, I'M KIND OF CURIOUS.
UH, WE, WE HEAR THE NAME OVER HERE RIGHT AWAY.
SO SHE'S NOT LEGAL, BUT SHE'S A OH, SORRY.
DEPARTMENT OF NEIGHBORHOODS, I THINK.
IT COULD BE A DIFFERENT ATTORNEY.
UM, WHILE YOU'RE HERE, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT FROM COMMISSIONERS? YES, CHAIR.
YOU, THE, THE WORK THAT'S IN NOW FOR PERMIT, THE, WHAT YOU'RE GRAPPLING WITH HERE, WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT TODAY IS IN ADDITION TO AN EXISTING ONE STORY GARAGE.
DID YOU PURCHASE THE PROPERTY WITH THE ONE STORY GARAGE ALREADY COMPLETED? CORRECT.
AND, AND ALL THIS IS ABOUT ADDING ON TO WHAT WAS ALREADY COMPLETE AS A ONE STORY.
WERE THERE ANY ISSUES THAT YOU WERE AWARE OF OR BECAME AWARE OF ABOUT THAT ONE STORY? UM, WHEN YOU, WHEN YOU MADE THE PURCHASE? UH, THE ROOF WAS AS FAR AS THAT IT WAS COM YOU KNOW, THAT IT WAS, THAT IT WAS THROUGH PERMITTING AND THAT IT WAS, UH, I ASSUME IT WAS A RECENT CONSTRUCTION? YES, IT, IT, IT WAS DONE IN 2018.
WILLIAM MILLER WAS THE PREVIOUS OWNER THAT DID THE WORK.
I MEAN, OTHER THAN IT LEAKING, THERE WAS NO ISSUES THAT I COULD UNDERSTAND.
AND PRESUMABLY IT SUFFICIENT FOR A SECOND STORY EDITION? CORRECT.
AND I HAVE A STRUCTURAL ENGINEER THAT HAS STAMPED PLANS.
THANK YOU TO SAY THAT AS WELL.
AND ALSO ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD MAP, THERE'S ONLY TWO, THREE HOUSES THAT, UM, DIDN'T SIGN THAT TWO OF THEM ARE VACANT AND ONE OF THEM, I BELIEVE THE OWNER IS HERE.
I DO HAVE ONE MORE SPEAKER SIGNED UP.
UM, I HAVE LINDA, AND IT'S SPELLED IN CURSIVE AND ON IT'S IAL OR IF YOU CAN CORRECT ME ON PRONUNCIATION.
I'M THE NEIGHBOR THAT IS DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO THE TWO STORY GARAGE ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY.
I'VE LIVED IN OUR HOUSE AT EIGHT 15 WOODLANDS SINCE THE YEAR 2000.
I SAW THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE FIRST, YOU KNOW, THE SINGLE STORY GARAGE APARTMENT.
I ALSO SAW THE, I BELIEVE, UNPERMITTED CONSTRUCTION OF A CANOPY THAT'S NOW THERE TO BLOCK PECANS FROM DROPPING ON YOUR CAR.
AND NOW WE'RE SEEING THIS NEW EDITION THAT'S TAKING IT TO TWO STORIES.
MY HUSBAND, UH, THADDEUS HERRICK FILED WRITTEN COMMENTS ON APRIL 14TH, UH, OBJECTING TO THE COA OR THE, UH, COR, SORRY, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT ACRONYM MEANS.
UH, HE WAS UNABLE TO ATTEND DOING TO DUE TO A WORK CONFLICT, BUT I DO NOTE THAT HIS OBJECTIONS ARE NOT REFLECTED IN THE STAFF REPORT AND I WOULD ASK THAT THAT THEY BE CONSIDERED.
UM, THE OTHER THING I WOULD NOTE ABOUT THE STAFF REPORT IS THAT IT INDICATES THAT THERE IS NOT A NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
IN FACT, THERE IS THE WOODLAND HEIGHTS CIVIC ASSOCIATION THAT VERY AGGRESSIVELY PROTECTS ITSELF AND THE HISTORIC DISTRICT.
AND I THINK THAT SHOULD BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION AS WELL.
SO HAVING JUST REVIEWED THE STAFF REPORT, WHICH I ONLY RECEIVED A FEW HOURS BEFORE THE HEARING AND HAD SIGNIFICANT CHANGES THAT I REALLY DIDN'T HAVE A CHANCE TO DIGEST, UM, YOU KNOW, IT'S REALLY MY OPINION THAT, UH, YOU KNOW, WE'RE, WE'RE REALLY NOT CONSIDERING THE, IN A REAL SORT OF WAY WHAT THE CRITERIA
[00:50:01]
ARE FOR THIS SECOND STORY.IF YOU LOOK AT THE MAPS THAT ARE IN THE PHOTOGRAPHS THAT YOU JUST SAW, OF THE ONE IN TWO STORY GARAGES, YOU'LL SEE EVERY ONE OF THOSE IS PULLED TO THE BACK OF THE LOT.
WHEREAS THIS GARAGE, IT'S NOT RIGHT NEXT TO OUR GARAGE, IT ACTUALLY PRETTY MUCH STARTS FROM THE CORNER OF OUR GARAGE BALCONY AND GOES FORWARD.
SO IF YOU WALK OUT FOR ADDITIONAL TIME, GET THE SPEAKER MORE TIME.
IS THERE RECESS? ALL IN FAVOR? AYE.
YOU BASICALLY SEE A HUGE FLAT WALL WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE DOOR, WHICH GOES TO NOWHERE SINCE THERE WERE ORIGINALLY STEPS INSTALLED THAT WERE ENCROACHING.
SO WE'VE HAD SOME HISTORY, YOU KNOW, WITH THIS PROPERTY AND WITH THE GARAGE.
UM, BUT BASICALLY, YOU KNOW, WHEN I LOOK AT THE CRITER, THE CRITERIA AND ALL DEFERENCE TO MR. MCCOLLUM, YOU KNOW, ONE OF THEM IS A SPATIAL RELATIONSHIPS, RIGHT? IF YOU LOOK AT THIS TWO STORY GARAGE, THERE'S NO OTHER EXAMPLE OF THIS IN THE WHOLE NEIGHBORHOOD WHERE THE GARAGE IS PULLED KIND OF ESSENTIALLY HALFWAY UP INTO THE DRIVEWAY AND THEN GOES TO A SINGLE ONE'S, YOU KNOW, TWO STORY VERY NARROW STRUCTURE WITH NO ARCHITECTURAL DETAIL WHATSOEVER.
NOW I UNDERSTAND THERE, THERE'S THE PROPOSAL TO LOWER THE ROOF LINE.
I SUPPORT THAT, CHANGE IT TO A HIP ROOF, THAT'LL HELP.
BUT STILL, IT DOESN'T, IT DOESN'T ACCOUNT FOR THE LACK OF ANY CONTEXT WITHIN THE REST OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD STRUCTURES.
AND THAT'S REALLY, I GUESS FOR US, THAT'S THE PROBLEM.
UM, AND I KNOW THAT WE'RE SPLITTING HAIRS, I KNOW IT'S A MATTER OF SEMANTICS, BUT I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TO GO BACK AND LOOK AT THE MAPS OF THE PROPERTIES TO SEE WHERE THESE GARAGE APARTMENTS ARE LOCATED.
I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TO READ MY HUSBAND'S COMMENTS.
UM, I ALSO KNOW ALL THE NEIGHBORS.
UM, I, YOU KNOW, I THINK, YOU KNOW, THERE ARE A NUMBER OF HOUSES THAT ARE VACANT ON THE LOT.
SO WHO'S TO SAY WE ARE IMPACTED THE MOST OUT OF ANY OF THE PROPERTY OWNERS? THANK YOU.
UH, COMMISSIONS MEMBERS, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OF THE SPEAKER? I DON'T HAVE A QUESTION, BUT I HAVE A COMMENT I'D LIKE TO MAKE.
I I'M TRYING TO, LET ME, LET ME CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING THEN AT THIS TIME AND PROCEED WITH YOUR, YOUR, YOUR QUES YOUR COMMENT.
CAN I GET A REBUTTAL? I DON'T THINK THERE'S RE YOU, YOU, YOU OKAY.
I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC, UH, HEARING BACK UP AND YOU PLEASE.
UM, I, I DO WANNA STATE BEFORE I STARTED THIS WORK, WHEN I THOUGHT IT WAS BEING DONE WITH THE PERMIT, UM, I DID ASK MY NEIGHBOR WHO IS HERE, UM, I TOLD, TOLD HER MY PLANS AND I DID GET SUPPORT FROM HER AND, YOU KNOW, I'M, I'M ALL ABOUT BEING A GOOD NEIGHBOR AND I WOULD NOT HAVE STARTED THE CONSTRUCTION PROJECT IF I DIDN'T HAVE HER SUPPORT.
SO I DID ASK HER BEFORE CONSTRUCTION STARTED, AND I DID HAVE HER SUPPORT AT THAT POINT.
AND I ALSO WANNA STATE THAT THEIR GARAGE IS ACTUALLY ENCROACHING WITHIN THAT THREE FOOT SPACE.
IT'S MORE LIKE, YOU KNOW, TWO FEET FROM MY PROPERTY LINE WITH AN AIR CONDITIONER THAT'S ALMOST HANGING OVER.
SO, UM, YOU KNOW, I THINK THERE'S, LIKE SHE SAID, WE'RE SPLITTING HERE.
BUT I DO WANT TO SAY THAT I DID ASK FOR SUPPORT AND I WAS GIVEN IT BEFORE CONSTRUCTION STARTED.
CAN I, CAN I ASK A QUESTION? MM-HMM
MR. JACKSON? UH, MR. BOW, SORRY, DID I GET YOUR NAME RIGHT? YES, I DO HAVE A QUESTION.
YOU JUST SAID WHEN YOU THOUGHT THE PROJECT WAS PERMITTED, I HIRED A CONTRACTOR WHO I THOUGHT WAS PULLING ALL THE NECESSARY PERMITS.
UM, I TALKED TO THREE DIFFERENT CONTRACTORS, TWO OF THEM, UM, I TALKED INTIMATELY ABOUT WHEN I GOT THEIR PRICES BACK AND THEY WERE SAYING BECAUSE IT'S A NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE, I DIDN'T HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE HISTORICAL BOARD.
I SHOULDN'T HAVE TRUSTED THEM.
AND I THOUGHT THEY WERE GETTING ALL THE NECESSARY BUILDING PERMITS, THEY WERE NOT.
SO I FOUND THAT OUT ONCE CONSTRUCTION STARTED.
BUT WHILE, WHILE WE'VE GOT YOU OH, CHAIR MA'AM, ONE MORE MR. CURRY QUESTION.
WHAT, WHAT ABOUT THE POINT THAT, UH, THE LOCATION OF IT IS, IS NOT, UM, ALIGNED WITH ANY OTHER ADJACENT OR NEARBY GARAGES IN TERMS OF IT NOT BEING AT THE REAR PROPERTY LINE BUT BEING FORWARDED INTO THE, UH, BUILDABLE AREA? UM, IT'S ON THE REAR HALF OF THE PROPERTY.
IT IS, WHICH I BELIEVE IS WHAT THE STIPULATION SAYS, AND THAT'S WHY IT'S, UH, RECOMMENDED FOR A C OF R.
UM, THERE IS A PROPERTY THAT'S, I GUESS THAT'S A SIDE YARD.
WELL, A LOT OF THE SIDE YARDS, THE GARAGES ARE RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE PROPERTY AS WELL.
BUT THE POINT FOR CLARIFICATION FOR ALL OF US IS THAT WHEN YOU BOUGHT THE PROPERTY, THAT ONE STORY GARAGE IS ALREADY IN PLACE.
[00:55:01]
GARAGE IS OUR ONLY EXTERIOR SPACE, WHICH IS A DECK WHICH ALSO HAS THREE MATURE TREE OR TWO MATURE TREES.I'M GONNA CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AGAIN IN ROMAN ONCE, JUST, I DON'T WANT YOU TO CLOSE IT, UH, CHAIR UNLESS YOU WANT I HAVE, I WANNA POINT OUT THAT I APOLOGIZE, BUT I DO HAVE THE LETTER, UH, THAT THE LADY WRITE SAID HER HUSBAND WROTE YES.
AND IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN IN THE STAFF REPORT.
AND I ASK, UH, IT'S ABOUT THREE PARAGRAPHS.
WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO READ IT? YES, PLEASE.
IS DATED, THIS WAS EMAILED, UH, TO THIS PRESERVATION OFFICE BY THADDEUS HERRICK AND UH, HE'S AT EIGHT 15 WOODLAND.
AND, UM, TO THE OFFICE OF PRESERVATION, I'M WRITING REGARDING A TWICE DENIED C OF A FOR A GARAGE EDITION AT 8 0 7 WOODLAND STREET IN THE WOODLAND HEIGHTS, A DESIGNATED HISTORIC DISTRICT.
THE OWNER IS AGAIN SEEKING A C OF A AND MY WIFE AND I WERE RESIDE NEXT DOOR AT EIGHT 15 WOODLAND.
NUMBER ONE, THE ADDITION WAS BUILT WITHOUT PERMITS AND DONE SO HASTILY OVER A WEEKEND, A LITTLE OVER A YEAR AGO IF MEMORY SERVES.
AND WHEN I FIRST ASKED ABOUT THE PROJECT, THE OWNER ASSURED ME EVERY ASPECT OF THE STRUCTURE WAS WITHIN THE GUIDELINES.
THIS INCLUDE, THIS INCLUDED AN EXTERIOR STAIRCASE SINCE REMOVED THAT FACED OUR HOUSE THREE INCHES FROM THE LOT LINE.
I WOULD NOTE THAT THIS NEIGHBORHOOD HAS WORKED TIRELESSLY OVER THE PAST 25 YEARS TO SECURE BOTH HISTORIC DESIGNATION AND LOT SIZE PROTECTION.
AND THERE ARE STILL PLENTY OF LOTS IN THE WOODLAND HEIGHTS OUTSIDE OF HISTORIC ZONE WHERE HOMEOWNERS CAN DO PRETTY MUCH WHATEVER THEY PLEASE.
NUMBER TWO, TO MY KNOWLEDGE, THE LATEST APPLICATION SEEKS ONLY TO REMOVE A DOORWAY FACING OUR PROPERTY WITHOUT STAIRS.
AND WHILE IT LOOKS ODD, IT DOES NOT CHANGE THE FACT THAT THE STRUCTURE WAS BUILT ILLEGALLY AND FLIES IN THE FACE OF HISTORIC NORMS. THE ADDITION, WHICH THE OWNER ORIGINALLY DESCRIBED AS A WOODWORKING SHOP, BUT NOW CALLS A STORAGE AREA, WAS BUILT ATOP A ONE STORY GARAGE LOCATED NOT AT THE END OF THE DRIVEWAY, BUT RATHER IN THE MIDDLE.
THE RESULT IS A NARROW TWO STORY STRUCTURE THAT IS UNLIKE ANY ACCESSORY UNIT ON OUR BLOCK OR IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT.
AND COUPLED WITH THE HOUSE ITSELF, A RENOVATED DUPLEX TO WHICH SIGNIFICANT SQUARE FOOTAGE WAS ADDED A FEW YEARS AGO, THE STRUCTURE IN QUESTION CREATES A CRAMMED LOT LINE TO LOT LINE LOOK AND FEEL.
NUMBER THREE, FINALLY, THOUGH I DO NOT WANT TO DWELL ON MY BACKYARD, THE ADDITION JUST SEVERAL FEET FROM OUR PROPERTY LINE IS AN EYESORE THAT WAS SERIOUSLY, THAT HAS SERIOUSLY DIMINISHED OUR OUTSIDE SPACE.
WE LIVE IN A HOME THAT IS MORE THAN 100 YEARS OLD AND ARE FORTUNATE TO HAVE A LOT AND A HALF AND THE HALF LOT WHICH FACES THAT STRUCTURE.
WE HAVE PLANTED A LUSH GARDEN AND BUILT A PERGOLA.
NOW ROSE COVERED FOR OUTDOOR DINING.
THE GARAGE ADDITION, WHICH LOOMS OVER US, CAN BEST BE DESCRIBED AS TWO SHIPPING CONTAINERS STACKED TO TOP EACH OTHER WITH A ROOF.
THE EXTERIOR WALL WE LOOK AT IS WHITE AND WINDOWLESS AND BLOCKS AIRFLOW.
IN ADDITION TO BEING UNSIGHTLY.
IN THIS CASE, I WOULD STRONGLY ENCOURAGE THE OFFICER PRESERVATION TO DO THE RIGHT THING AS THE OWNER TO TAKE RESPONSIBILITY AND ACCOUNTABILITY AND BRINGING THE STRUCTURE DOWN SINCERE, SINCERELY, THA IS HERRICK.
OKAY, THANK YOU ROMAN FOR, FOR READING THAT OUT LOUD.
SO COMMISSION MEMBERS ARE THERE ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION? I HAVE A QUESTIONS.
SO WHEN THIS CAME UP BEFORE AND NOW I REMEMBER IT, WE TOLD THEM, I THINK, TO KNOCK DOWN THE SECOND STORY, RIGHT? MM-HMM
SO WHY WOULD WE CHANGE OUR MINDS AND SAY IT'S OKAY TO KEEP A SECOND STORY NOW AS OPPOSED TO WHEN IT CAME UP THE FIRST TIME? THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND.
WHAT, WHAT CHANGED THAT MADE IT ACCEPTABLE NOW WHEN IT WASN'T BEFORE? I, I CAN'T THINK OF ANYTHING THAT CHANGED.
WE HAVE APPROVED A COA IN 2018 FOR A ONE STORY GARAGE IN THE ADDITION TO THE HOUSE.
AND I THINK THE FACT THAT THE GARAGE IS PULLED FORWARD ON THE LOT IN ORDER TO PRESERVE THE TREES PROBABLY WENT, I DON'T KNOW IF I WAS EVEN HERE IN 2018, PROBABLY WENT INTO THE THOUGHT PROCESS OF APPROVING A ONE STORY GARAGE.
AND THE GENTLEMAN MOVED FORWARD WITH AN ILLEGAL SECOND STORY EDITION WITHOUT A COA WITHOUT PERMITS.
AND WE DECIDED PREVIOUSLY ON THIS COMMISSION THAT HE SHOULD BRING IT BACK TO A ONE STORY GARAGE, WHICH WAS APPROVED BY THIS COMMISSION IN 2018.
AND, AND I DON'T UNDERSTAND AS COMMISSIONER COUCH, WHAT REALLY IS ALL THAT DIFFERENT AND WE'LL MOVE TO A VOTE AND FIGURE OUT WHAT THE COMMISSION BELIEVES.
[01:00:01]
THANK YOU.WELL, I DON'T DO WE DO, IS THERE, WAS THERE A MEETING THAT WAS RECENTLY TO THIS HOUSE CAME UP WHEREBY WE ACTUALLY DENIED THE, THE, THE SECOND STORY AND, AND ASKED WHEN, SO WHEN WAS THIS LAST MEETING? SIX MONTHS AGO OR FOUR MONTHS.
IT, IT WENT TO THE APPEALS BOARD AND THEN THE APPEALS BOARD ASKED THE APPLICANT TO GET WITH THE, UH, PERMITTING DEPARTMENT, UM, ABOUT, ABOUT THE CONSTRUCTION, WHICH THEN KICKED IT BACK TO THIS COMMISSION.
SO, WELL, THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION.
UH, CHAIR, MAY I JUST CLEAR UP A COUPLE? ONE THING, ROMAN PLEASE.
THE, UM, THE DECISION IN BEFORE THIS COMMISSION WAS JUST TO DENY A C OF A, UH, THERE WAS, WE DIDN'T RECOMMEND A CFR AT THE TIME.
STAFF DIDN'T RECOMMEND A C OF R AT THE TIME.
WE RECOMMENDED DENIAL AND THEN THIS COMMISSION JUST DENIED IT.
AND THEN WHEN IT WENT TO APPEALS, THEY REVIEWED IT.
UH, AND UH, I WILL SAY ONE THING THAT IS DIFFERENT IS THAT OUR RECOMMENDATION WAS DENIAL BEFORE.
AND OUR RECOGNITION IS APPROVAL NOW.
AND I DO THINK WE, UM, I MEAN THE KEY COMES DOWN TO IF WE DON'T LOOK AT THE SECRETARY OF INTERIOR STANDARDS, IF WE DON'T, WHICH EVEN A CONSERVATIVE APPLICATION OF THOSE STANDARDS NOW WOULD RECOMMEND APPROVAL.
BUT IF WE JUST LOOK AT OUR OWN LOCAL ORDINANCE, IT APPEARS IT MEETS THE CRITERIA.
AND SO IF I HAD BEEN ACTING IN THE ROLE OF PRESERVATION OFFICER AND WE HAD SEEN AN ALTERATION TO A NON-CONTRIBUTING BUILDING, WE WOULD'VE LOOKED AT THE CRITERIA ON PAGE TWO AND APPROVED IT.
SO IT'S, I, YOU KNOW, THE DIFFERENCES THAT WE, ONE THING IS WE'RE RECOMMENDING IT DIFFERENT AND I THINK WE'RE RECOMMENDING A DIFFERENCE, ESPECIALLY AFTER REALLY LOOKING AT THE WHOLE AREA AND CONSIDERING THE, THE PROJECT IN TOTAL PLUS H-H-C-H-P-A-B, THE PEELS BOARD, UM, WAS VERY CLEAR.
UH, THEY, THEY DID THINK, UH, THEY DIDN'T HAVE ACTUALLY, IT SEEMED TO BE THAT THEY DIDN'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE PROJECT, BUT THEY WANTED TO MAKE SURE IT WAS LEGAL.
SO THEY SAID YOU GUYS SHOULD GO AND MAKE SURE IT'S LEGAL AND YOU SHOULD REAPPLY TO THE HISTORICAL COMMISSION.
AND THEY UPHELD THE DECISION AT THAT TIME.
I JUST WANT TO, THAT YOU DIDN'T ACTUALLY SAY TO TAKE DOWN THE SECOND FLOOR, YOU JUST DENIED THE C OF A, WHICH IN THE LONG, IF THAT'S UPHELD, IT DOES HAVE THE SAME EFFECT.
IT MEANS THE SECOND FLOOR IS NOT LEGAL AND, UM, THAT I'LL STOP THERE IN CASE I'VE MISSED ANYTHING.
BUT, BUT, WELL, I GUESS THE WAY I WOULD SEE IT IS, UH, I WOULD MAKE A MOTION TO DENY THE C OF A, JUST LIKE WE DID BEFORE, AND BE CONSISTENT, SAY THE SAME THING, AND THEN LET THE HBAB DECIDE IF THEY WANNA DO SOMETHING.
BUT I DON'T THINK THAT WE SHOULD FLIP FLOP AROUND AND REVERSE WHAT WE'VE ALREADY DECIDED.
'CAUSE WE TALKED ABOUT THIS FOR A LONG TIME IN THE PREVIOUS MEETING.
IF I UNDERSTAND CORRECTLY, THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS ISSUANCE OF A COR.
IT'S, IT IS TO DENY THE C-O-A-I-I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF, PLEASE.
UM, WHAT STANDS OUT FOR ME IS THE, THAT THE, THE ADDITION OR THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE IS SO FAR FORWARD.
IT IS TRUE THAT IN THE AERIAL VIEW THAT'S SHOWN ON PAGE, UH, WHATEVER IT IS ANYWAY, IF YOU LOOK AT THE AERIAL VIEW, THE OTHER GARAGES IN THE AREA ARE ALL FAR, ARE ALL DISTINCTLY PULLED BACK TO THE BACK OF THE LOT AND, UM, SOMEONE I THINK MENTIONED THAT THERE WAS A TREE, AND PERHAPS THAT HAD BEEN A CONSIDERATION IN THE POSITION OF THAT, UM, GARAGE THAT WAS ADDED.
UM, IT'S ALSO CLEAR THAT THERE, IF IT HAD BEEN ALL THE WAY AT THE BACK, THERE WOULD'VE BEEN NO SPACE FOR THE TABLE AND CHAIRS THAT ARE, YOU KNOW, USED ON THE SITE RIGHT NOW.
I GUESS MY QUESTION IS, IN THE 2018 APPROVAL OF THE ONE STORY GARAGE, WAS THERE A DISCUSSION OF LIMITING IT TO ONE STORY OR WAS THAT TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT AT ALL, LIKE THE NEED TO KEEP THE LOW PROFILE? WAS THAT, DID THAT ENTER INTO IT AT ALL? WERE THERE CONSIDERATIONS THAT WERE CONTINGENCIES THAT WERE BOUND UP WITH THE APPROVAL IN 2018? THANK YOU FOR ASKING, COMMISSIONER.
THANK YOU FOR ASKING, COMMISSIONER.
I DID GO BACK TO THE 2018 VIDEO, WHICH IS ONLINE, AND, UH, THE ITEM WAS PASSED ON CONSENT NOW, AND, AND THEN THAT MEANS, WELL, I OFTEN SAY, WELL, IS IT JUST, WAS IT A BUSY DAY? WELL, THERE WERE MANY ITEMS PULLED OFF OF THAT CONSENT AGENDA,
[01:05:01]
BUT NOT THAT ITEM.SO THERE WASN'T ANY DISCUSSION OF IT.
AND, UM, YES, THAT IS A SPACE IN THE REAR AND, UH, RIGHT ROWAN, I'LL JUST ADD, I MEAN, I DON'T, I CAN'T REMEMBER WHEN THIS CAME UP IN BEFORE, BUT I MEAN, THIS COMMISSION LOOKS AT WHAT WE'RE PRESENTED WITH.
SO WE ARE LIKE, WE DON'T, WE, WE, WE, WE DON'T, UM, PUT CONDITIONS ON SOMETHING ABOUT THAT, LIKE A HYPOTHETICAL THAT DOESN'T PRESENT ITSELF AT THE TIME.
WE, WE JUST LOOK AT WHAT WE HAVE.
SOMETIMES PEOPLE COME BACK AND THEY GET, THEY HAVE A C OF A, AND THEN THEY COME BACK AND SAY, WELL, I WANNA CHANGE IT AGAIN.
AND THEN WE EITHER ACCEPT THAT OR WE DON'T.
BUT, UM, I, I, IT WOULD BE ATYPICAL TO PUT A, TO THINK FORWARD ABOUT FUTURE MOVES THAT ARE NOT BEFORE THE COMMISSION.
WE, WE ARE, I THINK KIM, KIM, OUR LEGAL WOULD STRESS THAT WE SIMPLY ACT ON WHAT IS BEFORE US AT THE TIME.
AND I THINK THAT, UM, THE DIFFERENCE NOW IS BETWEEN THE APPEALS BOARD, BUT WE HAVE MORE PHOTOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE.
THERE WAS A GARAGE AT THE REAR THAT HAD NOT SHOWN UP ON THE SANBORNS.
THAT GARAGE OBVIOUSLY WAS, WENT DOWN MANY YEARS AGO BECAUSE TREES GROW UP IN ITS PLACE.
AND I, I WOULD SUSPECT THE ONE STORY EDITION WAS APPROVED BECAUSE IT WAS ONE STORY.
THERE WAS A CARPORT, IT'S UNCLEAR TO ME IF THE CARPORT WAS IN FRONT OF IT AT THE TIME, BUT THERE WAS A CARPORT BUILT, UM, WHEN THIS APPLICANT BOUGHT THE PROPERTY.
UM, THE CONCESSION FROM THE CURRENT APPLICANT IS TO REDUCE THE ROOF, THE PITCH OF THE ROOF TO LOWER THE HEIGHT AND MAKE IT A HIP TO MAKE IT LESS NOTICEABLE.
UH, OTHER CONSIDERATIONS, OTHER THAN TAKING IT ALL DOWN WOULD BE TAKING IT DOWN SOMEWHAT TO MAKE, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE IT'S, I THINK MY UNDERSTANDING IT'S THE USE OF STORAGE.
WE DON'T REGULATE USE, BUT IT'S, IT'S LIKE IT WAS A SHOP OR SHOP STORAGE OR SOMETHING IS MY UNDERSTANDING.
BUT IT'S, IT'S UP TO THIS COMMISSION TO DECIDE THE NEXT MOVE.
SO IF I COULD JUST MAKE A COMMENT, I THINK I JUST WANNA SAY THAT IT SEEMS THAT WHAT'S BEING PUT BEFORE US IS WE'RE BEING ASKED TO RUBBER STAMP THIS SECOND STORY EDITION BY GIVING THE COR WE'RE BEING ASKED TO VALIDATE THE SECOND STORY EDITION TO THIS THING.
IF I MAY, I THINK WHAT WE'RE BEING ASKED, BECAUSE ALTHOUGH THE WORK HAS TAKEN PLACE, AND THAT'S WHY AS A C OF R WE STILL, WE'LL STILL VOTE ON ANY WORK ACTIVITY, WHETHER PROPOSED OR ACTUALLY ALREADY IMPLEMENTED FOR, IS IT APPROPRIATE? SO IF, IF THE COMMISSION MEMBERS THINK IT IS APPROPRIATE, THEN THEY SHOULD VOTE FOR STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.
IF IF COMMISSION THINKS IT'S NOT APPROPRIATE REGARDLESS, THEN THEY SHOULD VOTE AGAINST THAT.
RIGHT? THAT MEAN WE, WE, AND AGAIN, I'LL ASK HIM TO HELP CLARIFY, BUT WE OFTEN HAVE TO REVIEW PROJECTS THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN IMPLEMENTED AND DECIDE WHETHER THEY SATISFY THEIR CRIME CRITERIA OR THEY DON'T.
AND SO WE, THAT WE'RE NOT RUBBER STAMPING ANYTHING.
NOW WE'RE, WE'RE GONNA VOTE WHETHER IT'S IT'S APPROPRIATE OR NOT APPROPRIATE, NONETHELESS, THAT THAT'S OUR, THAT'S OUR VOTE TODAY.
AND THEN WHAT HAPPENS WITH THE APPEALS BOARD IS WHAT HAPPENS WITH THE APPEALS BOARD.
AND MR. MR. CHAIR, IF I CAN FOR, FOR THE FELLOW COMMISSIONERS.
SO THE, THE QUESTION I'M ASKING FOR YOUR CLARIFICATION, THE QUESTION, ROMAN IS MAKING THE CASE THAT THIS IS SPATIALLY, THIS FITS THE NEIGHBORS MAKING THE CASE THAT SPATIALLY THIS DOES NOT FIT BECAUSE IT IS FORWARD OF THE LOT.
IS THAT THE GENERAL GIST OF IT? WELL, PERHAPS, PERHAPS THE, THE, THE PROPORTION OF IT IS THIN AND IT LOOKS VERY TALL.
THERE, THERE'S A, THAT'S THE OTHER ASPECT I SEE.
MR. CHAIR, CAN I ASK UH, ROMAN A QUESTION, PLEASE? UH, ROMAN, UH, HYPOTHETICALLY IF THERE WAS A NEW PROJECT THAT CAME UP, UH, WITH A HISTORIC HOUSE AND THE PERSON WANTED TO BUILD THE EXACT SAME STRUCTURE, LIKE WHAT YOU SEE HERE, UH, WOULD YOU HAVE, UH, APPROVED IT? SAME EXACT SQUARE, LITTLE RECTANGULAR BOX.
THE QUESTION IS, WOULD, WOULD YOU RECOMMEND APPROVAL? WOULD YOU, WOULD YOU RECOMMEND APPROVAL? RIGHT.
50 FEET BEHIND THE PROPERTY LINE IF, ASSUMING, ASSUMING THAT THERE IS STILL MORE SPACE IN THE BACK, RIGHT? BUT THE PERSON DECIDED TO BUILD IT FROM 50 TO 70 OR 80 FEET AND THEN LEAVE THE LAST 20 FEET FOR A YACHT, WOULD YOU HAVE APPROVED IT? THANK YOU.
THAT'S, I'M GLAD I'M GONNA ANSWER THAT BECAUSE IT'S SO DIRECTLY ON POINT TO WHAT COMMISSIONER BLAKELY WAS, WAS ASKING.
IF IT WAS NEW CONSTRUCTION IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT, UH, LET'S SEE, BELOW 600 SQUARE FEET, IT COULD BE APPROVED.
I'M GONNA ASK YASMINE BELOW 600 SQUARE FEET A NEW CONSTRUCTION GARAGE, APARTMENT AA OR COMMISSION AA, IF IT MEETS CRITERIA, IF IT MEETS CRITERIA AND WHICH CRITERIA? NEW CONSTRUCTION IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT, CORRECT?
[01:10:01]
YES.SO THE THE CRITERIA WOULD ACTUALLY EVEN BE DIFFERENT.
YES, IT WOULD BE DIFFERENT CRITERIA WOULD BE THE SAME.
IT'S ONLY, IT CAN BE APPROVED ADMINISTRATIVELY BECAUSE IT'S UNDER 600.
NO LET BUT YA I THINK YOU, I THINK YOU NEED TO MAKE, THERE'S A LITTLE NUANCE THERE.
AND I WANT TO, I WANT TO, UH, IF YOU CAN FIND IT YASMINE, WHERE YOU GOT IT THERE ON A, ON SOMEONE'S MACHINE, BUT NUANCE.
BUT YA YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT COMMISSIONER NEW CONSTRUCTION IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT, WHICH APPLIES DIFFERENT CRITERIA TO COMMISSIONER BLAKELY'S POINT.
THE COMMISSION APPROVED THE CONSTRUCTION OF THIS BUILDING IN THIS PLACE, WHICH IS A NON-CONTRIBUTING BUILDING AND A REASONABLE LOOK AT THAT GIVEN THE EVOLUTION OF PEOPLE'S PROPERTIES.
THAT IS THAT A SECOND FLOOR MIGHT BE ADDED TO THAT ONE DAY AND THAT SECOND FLOOR'S ADDITION WOULD FALL TO THE HISTORIC OFFICE AND USE DIFFERENT CRITERIA.
AND THAT DIFFERENT CRITERIA IS THE CRITERIA THAT YOU HAVE ON THIS APPLICATION, WHICH IT MEETS.
AND NO ONE YET HAS SAID HOW IT DOESN'T MEET CRITERIA ONE, TWO AND THREE AND 2 41 0.1.
I I THINK MY BIGGEST ISSUE IS THAT YOU BUILD THE STRUCTURE AT 50 FEET BEHIND THE PROPERTY LINE.
NOT SO MUCH THAT IT'S, UH, YOU COULD HAVE A THREE STORY STRUCTURE, BUT MY ISSUE IS 50 FEET BEHIND THE PROPERTY LINE AND NOT RIGHT AT THE END OF THE PROPERTY LINE AND HAVE SOMEBODY HAVE A YARD AT THE BACK THERE.
UH, I I WANT TO ADDRESS, WE HAVE TO, SORRY, I'D LIKE TO ADDRESS, UH, THE APPROVAL CRITERIA OF, UM, SORRY.
NO, THIS, I WANT TO SAY THAT I, HE SAID, WILL YOU APPROVE IT'S TRUE STORY? I WANNA ACKNOWLEDGE WHAT THE, UM, THE NEIGHBOR SAID ABOUT NOT MATCHING THE SPATIAL PROPORTIONS OF COMPARABLE OTHER STRUCTURES IN THAT BLOCK.
AS WE CAN SEE FROM THE AERIAL PHOTO, IT'S NARROWER AND TALLER.
WE CAN SEE THAT THAT ALSO IN THE ELEVATIONS.
SO I THINK THERE IS ROOM FOR, YOU KNOW, DEBATE ABOUT WHETHER IT, HOW IT'S COMPATIBILITY WITH THE OTHERS.
UM, YEAH, ALSO IT SAYS MUST BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE DISTANCE FROM THE PROPERTY LINE OF SIMILAR ELEMENTS OF EXISTING CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES IN THE CONTEXT AREA.
SO THE FACT THAT IT'S CLOSER TO THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE IS, UM, SO I WOULD SAY THREE A AND B.
THERE IS, THERE ARE CONSIDERATIONS THAT, UM, MIGHT WEIGH AGAINST ITS, ITS MEETING THOSE C CRITERIA OR SATISFYING THE CRITERIA.
I JUST, I JUST THINK THAT YOU HAVE TO, AS A COMMISSIONER, LOOK AT THIS.
WOULD YOU HAVE APPROVED A TWO STORY GARAGE, 50 FEET FROM THE FRONT IF THIS CAME BEFORE US AND KNOWING THIS COMMISSION, I WOULD SAY NO.
IT'S THREE FIFTY THREE AND WE HAVE A LONG AGENDA AFTER THIS AS WELL.
WE'VE ALREADY LOOKED AT THIS SECOND AND VOTED ON THIS AND SO I, I I, I REC, I I MCNEIL MOTIONS TO, UM, DENY THE COA AND DENY THE COR.
IS THAT CORRECT? THAT COULD BE GOOD.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION WHERE I CALL THE VOTE? SO, SO THAT WE'RE ALL CLEAR AND SO THAT I'M CLEAR, WE'RE VOTING TO NOT ACCEPT STAFF RECOMMENDATION, CORRECT? WELL THAT IS THE MOTION.
JUST PLEASE JUST, JUST 'CAUSE WE'VE BEEN ASKED THIS BEFORE AND I THINK WE HEARD BASICALLY FROM COMMISSIONER BLAKELY WHAT IT IS.
BUT IF YOU COULD BE CLEAR ABOUT WHAT CRITERIA IT DOESN'T MEET AND HOW I'M, I'M REFERENCING CRITERIA THREE A IN THE DISTANCE FROM THE PROPERTY LINE TO THE FRONT SIDE WALLS, PORCHES, EXTERIOR FEATURES OF ANY PROPOSED ADDITION OR ALTERATION MUST BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE DISTANCE FROM THE PROPERTY LINE OF SIMILAR ELEMENTS OF EXISTING CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES IN THE CONTEXT AREA.
WHEN I LOOK AT ALL THE GARAGES IN THE CONTEXT AREA, THEY ARE ALL SET BACK 75 FEET.
AND, AND SO THERE ARE ONE STORY AND TWO STORY GARAGES, BUT THEY'RE ALL 75 FEET BACK.
AND SO IF SOMEONE CAME BEFORE THIS COMMISSION WITH THE GARAGE AT 50 FEET BACK, WOULD I AGREE TO A TWO STORY STRUCTURE? PROBABLY NOT.
I WOULD AGREE TO ONE STORY STRUCTURE, WHICH THIS COMMISSION DID IN 2018.
AND I THINK THE SECOND ASPECT COMMISSIONER BLAKELY DEFINED IS THE PROPORTION OF THE, THE SLENDER, THE SLENDERNESS RATIO OF THE, BECAUSE IT'S A ONE BAKE, UM, GARAGE.
THAT THAT WAS THE ISSUE GIVEN ITS CURRENT HEIGHT, PROPOSED HEIGHT, I THINK PROPORTION.
UM, WE HAVE HAD AN AMPLE DISCUSSION ON THIS ITEM.
[01:15:01]
SEE WHAT THIS, WHAT WILL BRING ALL IN FAVOR OF THIS MOTION PLEASE SAY AYE.ALL WHO ARE OPPOSED TO THE MOTION? AVA IS OPPOSED.
IS ANY OTHER OPPOSED? OPPOSED? DEBO IS OPPOSED.
ARE THERE ANY ABSTENTIONS? OKAY, SO THAT MOTION PASSES.
WE'RE GONNA MOVE ON TO ITEM 3, 4 4 3 COLUMBIA STREET.
GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIRPERSON, MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.
THIS IS STAFF PERSON JASON LILIENTHAL.
TODAY I SUBMIT FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION ITEM B 0 3 4 4 3 COLUMBIA STREET IN THE HOUSTON HEIGHTS SOUTH HISTORIC DISTRICT.
THIS CAME BEFORE YOU IN THE MARCH 14TH, UM, HAAC MEETING.
AT THAT MEETING, THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION WAS DENIAL AND COMMISSION, UH, HAD DECIDED TO DEFER IT, HOPING TO SEE THAT THERE WOULD BE ANY CHANGES TO THE MASSING.
ALL THAT HAS COME BACK IS THAT THERE WAS A CHANGE IN THE FENESTRATION PATTERNS ON THE LEFT AND REAR ELEVATIONS.
HOWEVER, THE MASSING REMAINS THE SAME.
WE HAVE A SECOND STORY CONDITION SPACE ABOVE A REAR PORCH THAT IS LARGER THAN AT ATYPICAL PORCH DIMENSION.
SO IF THE OTHER, UH, PROPOSED CHANGES REMAIN THE SAME REGARDING ROOF PITCH COMPOSITION, SHINGLES, WINDOWS, AND SIDING.
WITH THAT BEING SAID, UH, STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL, NOT SATISFYING CRITERIA 10.
AND THE HOUSTON HEIGHTS DESIGN GUIDELINES, I WOULD SAY THAT THIS DOES PUT THE FAR OVER BY 130 FEET, BUT IT'S NOT ONLY ABOUT THE NUMBERS, IT'S NOT QUANTITATIVE, THIS IS QUALITATIVE.
UH, THE WHOLE REASON THE HOUSTON HEIGHTS DISTRICT WANTED DESIGN GUIDELINES WAS BECAUSE OF HUGE MASSING BEING BUILT IN THE AREA.
AND SO WHEN THEY VOTED ON THIS IN 2017, SECTION SIX QUALITATIVE STANDARDS FOR ADDITIONS, THE RESIDENTS VOTED ON WHAT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE AND INAPPROPRIATE, UM, ADDITIONS.
THEY NEVER SAW ANY SUCH, SUCH MODELS AS THIS.
SO THAT'S WHY I HAD INCLUDED THAT.
IT IS IN NOT SATISFYING THE HOUSTON DESIGN GUIDELINES WHEN THEY VOTED ON THIS.
CHAIRPERSON COMMISSION MEMBERS, THE OWNER VAL COSTELLO, HAS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK.
THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
I AM AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
COMMISSION MEMBERS OTHER QUESTIONS? CURRY IS, UH, JASON, IS THIS NOT ON? UH, WAS THIS NOT ON CONSENT AGENDA BECAUSE WE'VE SEEN IT BEFORE.
YOU WANTED TO TO SEE IT DOWN? THAT IS CORRECT.
COMING BACK AND THE OWNER DOES OPPOSE STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
I DO WANNA ADD, I HAVE HAD A CONVERSATION WITH THE OWNER AND APRIL, UH, HE DOES WANT COMMISSION TO MAKE A DECISION.
DOES NOT WANT TO DEFERRAL AGAIN.
UH, I THINK THERE'S ANOTHER QUESTION FOR YOU.
UM, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, WHEN WE SAW THIS IN MARCH, I DIDN'T, I DON'T RECALL THAT THE FALL THAT HE WAS OVER THE FAR IN THE CALCULATION.
AM I MISREMEMBERING? I'M GOING THROUGH MY STAFF REPORT.
I HAVE THE MEASURABLE STANDARDS TOWARDS THE END OF THE STAFF REPORT AFTER THE ELEVATION DRAWINGS, AND IT WOULD BE ON PAGE THE SAME 17.
SO IT IS STILL MEETING MAXIMUM LOCK COVERAGE, BUT NOT THE FAR AND I HAVE INCLUDED SEVERAL NUMBERS WHERE I DO STIPULATE THAT IT SAYS WITHOUT THE SQUARE FOOT BELOW THE CONDITION SPACE.
BUT I DO NOTE IF YOU ADD THAT IN, IT'S A NEGATIVE 130 IF YOU ADD IN THAT CONDITION SPACE.
SO YOU'RE ADDING IN AN EXTERIOR PORCH, WHICH IS NOT CONDITIONED SPACE TO GET TO A FAR NUMBER THAT'S OVER THE ALLOWABLE STANDARD.
SO AS DRAWN, IT ACTUALLY MEETS THE FAR IT WOULD, I WOULD SAY, AS DRAWN.
IT DOESN'T MEET THE FAR AS THE FAR WAS DEVELOPED.
THE, THE FAR WASN'T DEVELOPED WITH NEGATIVE SPACE PUMPED UP INTO THE VOLUME.
THE VOLUME WAS A VOLUME, BUT LIKE THE, THE FLOOR AREA RATIO WAS BASED ON A VOLUME SPACE THAT WAS LOOKED AT FROM MASSING MODELS AND VOTED ON BY THE PUBLIC.
SOME, SOME VOTED FOR VERY LARGE THINGS, SOME VOTED VERY, VERY SMALL THINGS AND ABOUT 80% VOTED FOR THE MEDIUM.
UM, AND, AND THERE WAS AN ADDITIONAL CONCESSION ADDED IN THE, IN THESE DESIGN GUIDELINES TO ALLOW FOR OUTDOOR KITCHENS THAT COULD BE COVERED THAT WOULD NOT ACCOUNT AGAINST THE FAR WITH THEM BEING TACKED ONTO THE STRUCTURE ITSELF.
BUT THEY WEREN'T INSIDE THE MASSING THAT THE PUBLIC LOOKED AT.
[01:20:01]
HERE AT THIS COMMISSION.UH, WHEN, WHEN WE SEEN LARGE PORCHES, IT PROPOSED WITHIN THE MA THE MAIN MASS.
SO HAS THE FAR CHANGED FROM 2019 TO 2024? NO.
NO, BUT YOU CAN SAY THAT CHANGE OVER TIME THERE HAS BEEN FURTHER POLICY DEVELOPMENT AND AS THINGS STARTS TO CHANGE AND WE ENCOUNTER SUCH PROPOSED PROJECTS.
BUT THE FAR HASN'T CHANGED SINCE 2019 WHEN WE, WHEN WE APPROVED THIS PROJECT AND THE DESIGN GUIDELINES HAVEN'T CHANGED SINCE 2019 WHEN WE APPROVE THIS PROJECT.
BUT WE STILL HAVE QUALITATIVE GUIDELINES OR CRITERIA THAT WE CAN APPLY.
AND WHAT COMMISSIONER OR THE CHAIR WAS SAYING WAS THAT WE WERE ASSUMING IT WOULD BE A TWO STORY BUILDING WITH THE FIRST FLOOR AND A SECOND FLOOR ALL PART OF THE HOUSE RATHER THAN SOMETHING CARVED OUT OF IT.
BECAUSE THE SHAPE BECOMES VERY STRANGE AND NOT IN ANY WAY SIMILAR TO ANY OF THE OTHER HISTORIC BUILDINGS IN THE, IN THE DISTRICT.
AND THE COMMISSION APPROVED THIS DESIGN IN 2019.
NEVER GOT BUILT, BROUGHT IT BACK IN 2024.
AND SO NOW WE'RE DENYING SOMETHING WE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED WHEN THERE'S BEEN NO CHANGE TO THE DESIGN GUIDELINES AND THERE'S BEEN NO CHANGE TO THE FAR, BUT THERE'S BEEN A CHANGE IN HOW CONTRACTORS AND DESIGNERS ARE, ARE MANIPULATING THE SYSTEM, MANIPULATING THE GUIDELINES TO TRY AND TO, TO GERRYMANDER.
I MEAN I THINK WE HAVE TO TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION.
I DON'T HAVE ANY DATA OF AREAS THAT HAVE BEEN APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION AND THEN BUILT AND THEN SOMEWHERE BETWEEN ONE TO 10 YEARS THEY'VE COME BACK AND FILLED IN THE BOTTOM SECTION, THEREBY GOING OVER THE FAR, I GUESS I WOULD NEED TO KNOW CITY HOUSTON DATA OF RED TAGS WHERE PEOPLE ARE ACTUALLY ILLEGALLY FILLING IN THESE SECTIONS.
UM, I'M JUST STRUGGLING TO UNDERSTAND WHY WE'RE GONNA DENY SOMETHING THAT WE APPROVE WHEN THERE'S BEEN NO CHANGES TO THE DRAWINGS AND THERE'S NO CHANGES TO THE DESIGN GUIDELINES.
UH, I'LL PROBABLY BE ON THE, UH, UM, BUT I THINK THIS WAS ONE OF THE FIRST EXAMPLES OF THE PORCH OVER THE BACK, LIKE THE, THE HOUSE THAT HANGS OVER THE BACK OF ITSELF.
AND WE HADN'T SEEN VERY MANY OF THEM.
AND SO WE SAID, OKAY, MEETS THE FIRE LIKE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, VERY LITERALLY.
BUT THEN WE STARTED TO SEE A WHOLE BUNCH OF THEM AND SOME THAT WERE LIKE VERY EGREGIOUS.
AND I THINK NOW, SINCE THIS HAS COME UP AFTER WE'VE SEEN ALL THOSE OTHER ONES COMING FORWARD, THAT WE WOULD BE INCLINED TO NOT AGREE WITH IT ANYMORE BECAUSE THE GUIDELINES WERE APPROVED IN 2018.
SO THIS IS ONE OF THE VERY EARLY PROJECTS UNDER THE GUIDELINES JUST UNDERSTOOD.
I I WANNA SAY THAT I, I THINK CONTEXT IS IMPORTANT THAT EVEN IF THE GUIDELINES HAVEN'T CHANGED, IF THE WORLD AROUND THE HOUSE HAS CHANGED, I THINK THAT CAN MATTER.
ON THE OTHER HAND, I THINK THE MOST STRAIGHTFORWARD WAY TO ADDRESS THE CHANGE IN THE CONTEXT WOULD BE TO CHANGE THE DESIGN GUIDELINES.
THAT WOULD BE MUCH MORE TRANSPARENT THAN TO, UM, FOR THIS COMMISSION TO RULE WITH CONTEXT IN MIND.
BECAUSE THAT'LL BE COMPLETELY, UM, YOU KNOW, INTANGIBLE.
WELL, I REMEMBER WE TALKED ABOUT MAKING A MEMORANDUM OF, OF WHITE PAPER.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT IT WOULD BE TO ADDRESS THIS VERY SITUATION SINCE IT STARTED TO COME UP WITH ALARMING FREQUENCY.
AND THEN I DON'T KNOW WHAT HAPPENED AFTER THAT.
'CAUSE IT SEEMED LIKE WE STOPPED TALKING ABOUT IT, BUT I THOUGHT FOR A WHILE WE WERE GONNA HAVE OFFICIAL.
BUT THERE'S ALSO ONE OTHER LEG TO THIS THREE-LEGGED STOOL, WHICH WAS AT LEAST, UM, WHAT IS A PORCH? I MEAN, UH, YOU KNOW, WITHIN THE CONTEXT AREA, PORCHES HAVE A GENERIC PROPORTION, DEPTH AND WIDTH.
AND UM, AND WE STARTED SEEING SOME REALLY LARGE, YOU KNOW, STRUCTURES PROPOSED, WHICH WERE ATYPICAL OF ANY PORCHES EVER IN THE CONTEXT AREA.
SO THAT IN ADDITION TO THIS QUESTION, THERE'S ALSO THE QUESTION OF WHAT IS A PORCH AND WHAT, YOU KNOW, WHAT LOOKS LIKE A, A PORCH AND YOU KNOW, IN, IN TERMS OF MATCHING THE, THE PREDOMINANT PORCHES AND SIZING CONFIGURATION WITHIN THE CONTEXT AREA, YOU KNOW, WITHIN THE PERIOD OF SIGNIFICANCE.
SO, UM, AS WE BEGAN TO SEE THE, YOU KNOW, BIG EXTREME OUTLIERS COME OUR WAY, IT WASN'T JUST THIS ISSUE, BUT ALSO THAT, YOU KNOW, THE BACK OF THE STRUCTURE, I MEAN, ONE WOULD HAVE TO LOOK AT THIS TO SEE WHETHER IT LOOKS LIKE A BAY HOUSE VERSUS APOR, A PORCH THAT'S IN, THAT WAS BUILT IN THE PERIOD OF, OF SIGNIFICANCE.
AND THAT'S, THAT'S THE OTHER ASPECT I THINK THE COMMISSION WILL HAVE TO LOOK AT ON THIS PROJECT.
AND OTHERS LIKE IT LOOK FORWARD TO THE CONVERSATION THAT WE UNFORTUNATELY COULDN'T HAVE.
BUT WHENEVER WE HAVE A CAMP, THIS IS A GREAT TOPIC FOR THAT CONVERSATION AND SOME SORT OF MEMORANDUM BECAUSE BY THE LETTER OF THE LAW, THIS THING FITS.
AND SO NOW WE'RE VOTING, NOW WE'RE VOTING IT, WE'RE VOTING AGAINST IT BECAUSE THE SPIRIT OF THE COMMISSION HAS CHANGED OVER
[01:25:01]
FIVE YEARS.BUT THE QUALITATIVE GUIDELINES ARE EXPLICITLY WRITTEN INTO THE, THE DESIGN GUIDELINES, JUST AS THE QUANTITATIVE ONES ARE.
SO WE'RE NOT CONTRADICTING OURSELVES BECAUSE WE'RE USING A DIFFERENT PART OF THE GUIDELINES.
WE ACCEPT TAX RECOMMENDATION MOVE FORWARD.
BEFORE THAT, MR. CHAIR, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR JASON, IF YOU WILL.
UH, I REFER TO YOUR PICTURE ON PAGE 14 OF 20.
JUST, JUST SIMPLY LOOKING AT THIS FROM A TWO DIMENSIONAL PERSPECTIVE, JASON, IF I WERE TO DROP OFF, PULL OFF THE TWO COLUMNS AT THE BACK AND DROP THE SECOND FLOOR DOWN TO THE FIRST FLOOR, THIS HOUSE WOULD'VE BEEN APPROVED, CORRECT? RIGHT.
IF YOU SHIFTED THE CONDITION SPACE FROM THE SECOND FLOOR DOWN TO DOWN TO THE FIRST, FIRST FLOOR YEAH.
AND IT STILL MET THE FAR OKAY THEN YES.
NOW I WANT YOU TO IMAGINE IF NOW SOMEBODY COME, SOMEBODY ELSE COME AS OPPOSED TO JUST PUTTING TWO OF THIS POSTS AND NOW THE GUY DECIDE HE WANTS TO LIVE ON THE SECOND FLOOR AND BUILD SIX POSTS AND ENLARGE THE SECOND FLOOR LIVING INTO FOUR BEDROOMS, RIGHT? AND HAVE A HUGE BACK PORCH UNDERNEATH CUPBOARD.
WOULD THIS STILL HAVE METAPHOR BASED ON WHAT WE'VE BEEN DOING? DISCUSSIONS AND IT'S ALL CONDITION SPACE AND THAT PORTION ENLARGES IT.
SO DOES THE SECOND CONDITION SPACE, NO.
YES, BECAUSE THAT HAS BEEN THE TOPIC OF THIS CONVERSATION WITH THE COMMISSION EVER SINCE WE STARTED SEEING PROJECTS LIKE THIS START COMING IN, IN JANUARY, 2022.
SO TO ME THERE IS THE FAR STILL COMES INTO PLAY.
EVEN IF THE, THE GUY BUILDS ON, UH, THREE, FOUR ROOMS ON THE SECOND FLOOR, THERE IS STILL A FAR THAT COMES INTO PLAY.
SO I WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT EVERYTHING ELSE THAT'S BUILT ON THE SECOND FLOOR UNDER A VACUUM FIRST FLOOR DOES NOT COUNT AS FAR AM AM I, ARE YOU GETTING MY POINT? WILL YOU RESTATE THAT PLEASE? SO MY IMPRESSION IS THAT WHEN WE SAY THIS HOUSE DOES NOT MEET THE SPIRIT OF THE, OF THE THING IS BECAUSE YOU ARE BUILDING LIVING STRUCTURE ON AN EMPTY BACK, UH, VACUUM FIRST FLOOR.
ALRIGHT? SO TO ME IT'S NOT FAIR TO COUNT AS FAR BECAUSE THE GUY IS MAYBE NOT BEING FAIR, YOU KNOW, NOT IN THIS RIGHT.
SPIRIT OF THE HISTORIC DISTRICT BECAUSE THE FAR WAS COUNTED AS THOUGH HE WAS LIVING SPACE, BUT THERE'S NO LIVING SPACE ON FIRST FLOOR.
AND BUT IF THE GUY WAS, THERE WAS ANOTHER GUY.
SO THIS IS LIKE A, MAYBE AN OUTLIER.
AND, AND IF THAT'S THE CASE, I DON'T THINK THE FAR CONTRIBUTED TO THE SECOND FLOOR, RIGHT? BECAUSE NOW YOU'RE SAYING THIS IS, THIS DOES NOT MEET THE SPIRIT.
WHY DOES IT NOT MEET THE SPIRIT? BECAUSE YOU ARE JUST LIVING ON SECOND FLOOR AND FIRST FLOOR IS EMPTY SPACE.
BUT YOU CAN PUSH THE BOUNDARY EVEN FURTHER.
SOMEBODY CAN COME IN AND SAY, I WANT TO HAVE SIX POLES, A GIANT BACKYARD BACK, UH, BACK, UH, PORCH, AND THEN HAVE FOUR ROOMS DOUBLE THE SIZE OF THIS.
WHAT IS THAT RESTRICTION? IS IT STILL NOT MASSING OR IS IT FAR NOW IT'S GONNA BE BOTH CORRECT.
AS AGAIN, QUALITATIVE SIX AND SECTION SIX.
NOW THOSE MASSIVE MODELS WERE EVER BROUGHT FORWARD TO THE RESIDENTS WHEN THEY VOTED ON THIS.
ALSO TOO, I REMEMBER WHEN THIS BECAME UP TWO YEARS AGO, IF THERE'S NO SUCH THING WHEN YOU HAVE A REAR PORCH, THERE'S NO SUCH THING AS DOING CONDITIONS BASED ABOVE IT.
A REAR PORCH, A HISTORIC REAR PORCH HAS NOTHING ABOVE IT.
SO NOW PEOPLE ARE DOING THAT, BUT IT'S NOW A LARGER PORCH DIMENSION.
THIS IS NOW 13 FEET, FOUR INCHES, 18 FOUR.
THAT'S NOT ATYPICAL BACK PORCH.
BUT NOW YOU'RE DOING IT TO WHERE YOU HAVE THIS COMING UP.
AND ALSO TOO, THIS KIND OF, WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT THE SPIRIT, THIS IS THE SPIRIT THAT YOU SEE MORE ON THE GULF SHORE WHERE YOU HAVE BAY TOWNS RAISED UP WHERE YOU CAN PARK OR CUT UNDERNEATH.
BUT THIS IS NOT THE SPIRIT IN THE HOUSTON HEIST DESIGN DISTRICT.
SO IN THE ROUNDABOUT WAY, I WAS TRYING TO GET TO THE BOTTOM OF THIS IS ACTUALLY, THIS IS NOT A DISCUSSION ABOUT FAR, THIS IS A DISCUSSION ABOUT A BACK PORCH THAT HAS A LIVING SPACE ON TOP.
SO EVEN IF I HAVE ONLY ONE COLUMN AND THE BACK IS JUST STICKING OUT A LITTLE BIT, SO ON THE SECOND FLOOR, IF THE SIZE IS HALF, I STILL DON'T SEE THE SPIRIT BEING MET, REGARDLESS OF FAR AM I RIGHT IN MY ASSESSMENT? CORRECT.
I FOLLOW YOUR, UH, YOUR TRAIN OF THOUGHT.
GUESS NOW YOU FOLLOW MY TRAIN OF THOUGHT.
THAT'S THE WAY THE REJECTION COMES IN.
NOT BECAUSE OF FAR, BUT BECAUSE OF THE SPIRIT THAT THE HOUSE WAS BUILT IN.
DO WE HAVE A SPEAKER? WE DO HAVE A SPEAKER AND COMMISSIONER CARLOS HAS QUESTION FOR STAFF AS WELL.
[01:30:01]
BEFORE AND IT APPARENTLY IT'S A BIT BAIT.IT'S A BAIT SWITCH BECAUSE WHEN YOU HAVE SOMETHING ON TOP OF IT LATER, UH, YOU'RE IT'S GONNA HAVE A, A PORCH, LIKE A, A COVERED PORCH AT A LATER DATE WITHOUT, POSSIBLY, WITHOUT A PERMIT OR SOMETHING THAT COULD HAPPEN.
SO FOLLOWING, THAT'S WHY YOU GOTTA FOLLOW THE FAR SO FOR ME IT'S A, A BAIT SWITCH.
NOW WE DO HAVE A PUB A A SPEAKER SIGNED UP AT LEAST ONE.
SO I'M GONNA OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING AT THIS TIME.
AND AS MENTIONED, UM, MR. VOW COSTELLO, WHO IS THE OWNER, IF YOU COULD RE RESTATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS THE COMMISSION.
GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.
I'M VAL COSTELLO, UH, OWNER OF 4 4 3 COLUMBIA STREET.
UM, THIS PROJECT WAS BROUGHT FORWARD IN TO THIS COMMISSION IN 2020, AND I CAN ASSURE YOU THERE WAS ZERO THOUGHT ABOUT GERRYMANDERING OR BAIT AND SWITCHING.
THE ONLY REASON THAT IT EXTENDS OUT THAT FAR AT THE TIME, FAR, FAR, LITTLE LETTERS, UM, THE ONLY REASON IT EXTENDS OUT THAT WAY IS BECAUSE THAT LOWER ORANGE PART IS AN ADDITION THAT EXISTS.
OKAY? SO THAT'S NOT CONSTRUCTION, THAT'S AN EXI, AN ADDITION THAT EXISTS.
WHAT IS THE CONSTRUCTION IS ABOVE THAT IS THE SECOND FLOOR.
SO IN ORDER TO KEEP WITHIN THE 29.04, WHICH IS 44 TIMES 6, 6600, THAT'S THE ONLY WAY THAT I COULD DO THAT WITHOUT EXTENDING BEHIND THE ADDITION, WHICH RIGHT NOW IS COMMUNAL AREA IS THE GREAT ROOM, LIVING ROOM.
AND CURRENTLY ON THE OTHER HALF OF THE WALL IS A MASTER BEDROOM.
THAT'S ALL WE NEED FOR COMMON AREA LIVING AREAS.
SO TO EXTEND THAT BY FIVE OR 10 FEET SO THAT I'M NOT OVERHANGING WOULDN'T HAVE ADDED ANY VALUE TO US.
WHAT ADDS VALUE IS BEING ABLE TO ADD A FULL MASTER SUITE ON THE SECOND FLOOR.
SO AGAIN, THAT COLORED AREA IS NOT REPRESENTATIVE ACTUALITY IN TERMS OF THE, THE, THE FIRST FLOOR AND BACK THAT EXISTS, THAT'S AN ADDITION THAT WAS BUILT IN BEFORE I BOUGHT THE HOUSE IN 2020.
SO, YOU KNOW, THE, THE WAY I VIEW IT IS THIS WAS PRESENTED TO COMMISSION IN 2020.
IT WAS APPROVED AND NOTHING HAS CHANGED AS COMMISSIONER, UM, MCNEIL, COMMISSIONER MCNEIL SAID.
AND SO I, MY VIEW IS IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN APPROVED TODAY.
I'M DISAPPOINTED THAT STAFF RECOMMENDED DENIAL AND SORT OF THE REVERSE OF COMMISSIONER POINT IS THAT IF IT WAS APPROVED BEFORE, WHY WOULD YOU CHANGE? NOW THE PRIOR AGENDA ITEM IS IF YOU HAD DENIED BEFORE, WHY WOULD YOU APPROVE? THIS IS A REVERSAL OF THAT.
UM, AGAIN, IT WAS JUST IN ADDITION TO WHICH THIS BLOCK, THIS 400 BLOCK COLUMBIA STREET IS, HAS ONLY FOUR, UM, UH, UH, APPLICABLE WHATEVER YOU CALL, UM, CONTRIBUTING.
CONTRIBUTING, SORRY, ONLY FOUR CONTRIBUTING HOUSES IN THE BLOCK.
SO IT'S ONE OF THE LEAST CONTRIBUTING IN THE ENTIRE HEIGHTS AREA.
SO I'M LOOKING AT COMMERCIAL AT THE END OF THE BLOCK.
I'M LOOKING AT NOTHING BUT HUGE, 3,500 TO OVER 4,000 SQUARE FOOT HOUSES OPPOSITE ME.
THERE'S TWO DOORS DOWN FROM ME.
THERE'S A HOUSE THAT HAS A THIRD FLOOR THAT LOOKS DOWN UPON ME.
THIS IS NOT ATYPICAL MASSING I WOULD SUGGEST IN THIS BLOCK.
AND, AND, AND I KNOW OF MANY OTHER AND HISTORIC HOMES THAT HAVE BEEN MASKED THAT WAY AND THEN FILLED IN UNDERNEATH.
BUT AGAIN, I HAVE NO INTENTION OF FILLING IN UNDERNEATH.
I DON'T WANNA FILL IN UNDERNEATH.
YES, THERE'S A DECK BACK THERE, BUT THAT DECK IS MOTION BEHIND ADDITION HERE.
IS THERE A SECOND? I'M, I'M DONE.
I'M, I'M JUST SAYING THAT DECK IS BEHIND AN ADDITION THAT'S NOT AN ORIGINAL DECK.
'CAUSE THAT'S NOT THE ORIGINAL HOUSE BEHIND THERE.
SO IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS, IF NOT, I'LL SIT DOWN.
LET'S SEE IF THERE ARE QUESTIONS.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? OKAY, THANK YOU.
AT THIS TIME, ARE THERE ANY OTHER MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? I DON'T HAVE ANYONE ELSE SIGNED UP FOR THIS ITEM.
OKAY, I'M GONNA CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR AT THIS TIME.
IS THERE FOR THE DISCUSSION OR IS THERE A MOTION TO TEST? COMMISSIONER MCNEIL HAD A MOTION ON THE FLOOR.
I MOTION TO, TO ACCEPT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR OF THAT MOTION? AYE.
[01:35:02]
MCNEIL? OPPOSED.I'M, I'M, NO, JUST, JUST STAAVA AND MCNEIL.
I'D LIKE TO CHANGE TO OPPOSED, ACTUALLY.
SO BLAKE, AVA MCNEIL ARE OPPOSED.
ARE THERE ANY EXTENSIONS? WAIT, I'M SORRY, CHAIR, I MISUNDERSTOOD.
DOES A, IF COMMISSIONER MCNEILL IS OPPOSED AND HE MAKE THE MOTION TO DENY THAT MOTION, IT'S JUST A MOTION HE CAN, HE CAN DENY HIS OWN MOTION.
THAT WAS ONLY A QUESTION OF PARLIAMENTARY PROCEDURE AND I THOUGHT IT'S ODD.
ODD, BUT, YOU KNOW, MOVING THINGS DOWN THE ROAD, WE GOT TOO MANY THINGS ON THE AGENDA.
AND THEN ANY ABSTENTIONS? OKAY, WELL THAT'S THE FIRST TIME IN MY TIME ON THIS COMMISSION THAT'S EVER HAPPENED.
BUT I'LL JUST SAY THAT SOMEONE'S ALWAYS STIRRING STUFF UP.
GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIRPERSON AND COMMISSION MEMBERS.
THIS IS STAFF PERSON JASON LEVENTHAL.
TODAY I SUBMIT FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION ITEM B OH FIVE AT 1115 LAG GREEN STREET NOR HILL HISTORIC DISTRICT APPLICANT PROPOSES A SIGNIFICANT CHANGE TO THE COA THAT WAS APPROVED BY THIS COMMISSION AT THE MARCH 14TH, 2024 COMMISSION MEETING.
THIS CHANGE WOULD NOT QUALIFY AS AN INSIGNIFICANT AND NON-SUBSTANTIVE IMPACT ON THE PROJECT PROJECT FOR WHICH THE C OA IS GRANTED.
THE PROPOSED CHANGE IS TO THE SECOND STORY OF THE PROPOSED REAR EDITION.
WHAT WAS APPROVED WAS A HIP ROOF.
NOW APPLICANT PROPOSES TO ADD A FRONT FACING GABLE WITH A VENT BRACKET AND FASCIA BOARD MIMICKING THE FRONT GABLE ON THE HISTORIC STRUCTURE.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS FOR REMOVAL OF THE VENT AND FASCIA BOARD FROM THE PROPOSED FRONT GABLE.
ON THE SECOND STORY REAR EDITION CHAIRPERSON COMMISSION MEMBERS, THERE ARE TWO SPEAKERS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK THE OWNERS, MR. AND MRS. HIXSON AND A REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE NOR HILL CIVIC ASSOCIATION, VIRGINIA.
KELSEY, THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
I'M AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
COMMISSIONER MEMBERS, ARE THERE QUESTIONS OF STAFF COMMISSIONER MCNEAL? UH, JASON IS THE, IS THE SECOND STORY ADDITION, DOES IT HAVE BOX OFFIT OR OPEN TAILS? WHEN YOU SAY REMOVE THE FACIAL BOARD FROM THE SECOND STORY FRONT FACING GABLE AND I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT IT MIGHT LOOK LIKE.
I'M GOING TO, I THINK HE'S JUST REFERRING TO THE HORIZONTAL LINE THAT'S, YEAH, PAGE 10 OF 13.
SO IF YOU LOOK BELOW THAT VENT, DO YOU HAVE A LARGE HORIZONTAL FASCIA BOARD THAT MIMICS THE EXACT ONE ON THE FRONT PORCH GABLE? THAT'S WHAT I'M REFERRING TO.
OH, NOT, NOT THE, NOT THE FASCIA ON THE BEHIND IT, BUT ON THAT, WHAT DO YOU CALL THAT COMMISSIONER? DO YOU CHECK A WATER TABLE? A BREAK? A I HEAR FREEZE THIS FREEZE BOARD FREEZE FREEZE BOARD FREEZE.
I, I THINK A FREEZE BOARD IS CORRECT.
OKAY, SO REMOVE THE FREEZE BOARD, NOT THE FASCIA.
REMOVE THE WHOLE BIG GONNA DO IT THE BRACKETS INBOARD LEAVE THE GABLE LEAVE.
THE GABLE RECOMMENDATION IS LEAVE THE GABLE JUST RIGHT.
AND ALSO TO THIS, GABLE HAS A SLIGHT CLIP ON IT, BUT THAT WAY IT'S NOT MIMICKING THE FRONT PORCH WAS JUST CREATING LIKE, LIKE AS IF IT WAS BUILT IN THE TIME PERIOD.
THAT, AND NOT JUST LEAVE IT AS A HIP ROOF.
I DO HAVE TWO SPEAKERS SIGN UP.
LET, LET ME OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING.
LET'S, LET'S HEAR FROM THEM AS WELL.
UM, THE FIRST SPEAKER IS THE OWNER, UM, WHICH IS, UH, LEE, SORRY.
I DID NOT KNOW AT THE TIME WHO WOULD BE SHOWING UP.
OKAY, WELL THEY CAN BOTH SHOW UP.
ARE YOU BOTH HERE? YES, MA'AM.
IT LOOKS LIKE BOTH HAVE SHOWN UP.
WELL, AND THEY CAN, THEY CAN BOTH SPEAK.
SO IF YOU, YOU BOTH KIND AHEAD AND COME UP.
I, I MEAN THEY CAN SPEAK INDIVIDUALLY, UH, YOU KNOW, BUT IF YOU'LL JUST ANNOUNCE YOUR, YOUR FULL NAME TO THE, AND AND THEN ADDRESS THE COMMISSION.
HI CHAIR, PERSON AND COMMISSION, UM, COMMISSIONERS.
I'M THE HOMEOWNER AND THIS IS MY HUSBAND, UH, JAMES HICKSON.
UM, SO, UH, THANK YOU FOR LETTING US SPEAK TODAY.
I, UM, AFTER PRESENTING THE PROPOSAL FOR, UM, A ROOF THAT WAS IN HARMONY WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD, I, I DO APPRECIATE THE DESIRE FOR SOME DISTINCTION BETWEEN THE,
[01:40:01]
THE NEW ADDITION AND THE ORIGINAL HOME.OUR MOTIVATION FOR KEEPING THE DETAILING IS, UM, JUST TO HONOR THE HISTORY OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND KEEP IN HARMONY WITH THE LOOK OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, WE ARE WILLING TO SIMPLIFY, UM, I HAVE A PICTURE IF I CAN SHOW.
STAFF CAN PUT THAT UP ON THE OVERHEADS, THE CAMERA PLEASE DOCUMENT.
THESE BOTTOM THREE ARE THE MAIN, OKAY.
UM, SO WHAT I'M TRYING TO SHOW HERE IS A PROPOSAL TO, TO, UM, KEEP THE, REMOVE THE BRACKETS FOR DIFFERENTIATION PURPOSES.
KEEP THE FREEZE BOARD BUT REMOVE THE TRIM FROM THE TOP.
SO IT'S A COMPLETELY SIMPLE FREEZE BOARD IN KEEPING WITH ANOTHER APPROVED EDITION AT, UM, 1105 WEST COTTAGE.
UM, AND ALSO KEEP A VERY SIMPLE VENT, JUST A RECTANGLE VENT WITH A THREE AND A HALF INCH TRIM.
UM, AS YOU CAN SEE IN 1202 ASHLAND, WHICH IS IN WEST HEIGHTS, UM, THAT WAS REMODELED IN 2013.
SO THAT'S OUR RESPECTFUL, UH, PROPOSAL.
ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OF THIS APPLICANT FROM, FROM STAFF COMMISSIONER CURRY? SO I'M TRYING TO FOLLOW YOU WHAT YOU'RE SAYING AND WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT ARE, ARE THESE IMAGES IN SUPPORT OF WHAT'S BEEN BEEN SUBMITTED TODAY OR IS IT SOMETHING ELSE? SO THIS IS ACTUALLY WOULD BE A REVISION.
SO THIS IS, UM, STAFF, STAFF RECOMMENDATION WAS APPROVAL WITHOUT ANY DETAILING AT ALL.
UM, AND OUR, OUR PROPOSAL IS TO REMOVE MOST OF THE DETAIL, BUT, BUT THAT'S NOT DEPICTED IN ANY OF THESE OTHER THAN BY EXAMPLE, UH, UH, JUST WITH THE WORDS IN RED, NO BRACKET.
IT'S NOT A DRAWING OF WHAT YOU'RE DESCRIBING.
IT'S NOT AN ARCHITECTS DRAWING.
I'M TRYING TO SEE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
AND I CAN SEE IT IN MY HEAD, BUT I DON'T SEE IT HERE.
I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S NOT DRAWN THERE.
YOU'RE SHOWING EXAMPLES I THINK.
AND APPARENTLY THOSE ARE PROJECTS THAT THIS COMMISSION APPROVED.
SO WE'VE APPROVED THAT HORIZONTAL BOARD AND WE'VE APPROVED A GABLE INVENT ON OTHER PROJECTS IN THE DISTRICT THAT WE'RE SIMPLIFIED.
COMMISSIONER JACKSON IS THERE, OH, I'M JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT THE ROOF STRUCTURE ITSELF.
THERE'S NOW, THERE IS THE FRONT FACING, UM, GABLE COMING OUT.
IS THAT JUST ADDITIONAL ATTIC SPACE? I MEAN IT DOES PROTRUDE BEYOND, IT APPEARS ON PAGE 12 BEYOND WHERE THE ORIGINAL HIP ROOF WAS.
IS THAT CORRECT? CONDITION SPACE? I THINK YOU HAVE TWO BEDROOMS. THERE'S JUST AN OVERHANG.
YEAH, THAT, THAT WOULD BE IN THE ROOF.
OKAY, SO IT'S PURELY COSMETIC OR CORRECT.
BUT THEN IT MAKES THE ADDITION LOOK BIGGER BECAUSE NOW YOU'RE ADDING A GABLE AND IT DOES, IT'S LIKE JUST ADDING EXTRA, EXTRA ROOF TO THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING.
UH, MR. CHAIR, UH, I WANTED TO CLARIFY THE, THE, THE PICTURE THAT WAS ON BEFORE, UH, FROM STAFF, NOT THE ONE THAT, THAT THE OWNER IS DISPLAYING, BUT FROM PRESENTATION BACK TO PRESENTATION? YES.
UH, THE ONE BEFORE THIS, UH, PAGE ON PAGE 11 OF THIR 11 OF 13, IT SAYS YES.
THIS ONE, IF I LOOK AT THE TOP, IT SAYS THE APPROVE RIGHT ELEVATION ON MARCH 14TH.
SO THERE, IT HAS COME BEFORE THE COMMISSION, I GUESS.
SO NOW WE'RE COMING BACK WITH A GABLE, LIKE A A A CLIP GABLE ROOF.
IS THAT THE, WHY ARE WE COMING BACK WITH THIS NOW? YOU'RE COMING BACK.
AS I STATED THAT THEY WERE SUBMITTING FOR A REVISION AND THIS DID NOT FIT THE REVISION CRITERIA.
AS I STATED AT THE BEGINNING, THIS WOULD NOT, THIS WILL HAVE A SIGNIFICANT AND SUBSTANTIAL IMPACT AND THEREFORE IT COULDN'T QUALIFY AS A REVISION.
SO WE BROUGHT IT BACK TO THE COMMISSION TO CONSIDER.
AND I DO HAVE ANOTHER SPEAKER SIGNED UP, UNLESS YOU ALSO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK AS, AS, AS PART OWNER.
YOU HAVE OUTRIGHT AS WELL TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION, BUT PLEASE NOT YOUR NAME.
[01:45:01]
AT 1115 THE GREEN STREET.UM, WE'RE BRINGING THIS FORWARD TO TRY AND MAINTAIN SOME SIMILARITY, SOME SIMILARITY IN CHARACTER FOR, FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND TRY AND MELT WITH THINGS A LITTLE BIT MORE.
I THINK WHAT WE'VE TRIED TO DO IS ADJUST THINGS SO THAT IT'S GOING TO BE A RELATIVELY MINOR IMPACT.
UM, BUT UH, WE'RE WILLING TO ACCEPT THE, THE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS, BUT WE, WE WANTED TO TAKE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO COME FORWARD AND ASK FOR PERMISSION TO ADD SUBTLE DETAILING THAT WOULD HELP MERGE THINGS WITH THE DETAIL OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT WHILE ALSO DIFFERENTIATING FROM THE HISTORIC, UM, UH, UH, UH, ORIGINAL PORTION OF THE HOUSE.
HENCE THE, WHAT WHAT WAS SHOWN IN THE STREAM WAS A WAY TO KEEP THE ELEMENTS BUT ABSTRACT EACH OF THEM TO BE VERY RECTANGULAR, ESSENTIALLY WITHOUT THE HISTORIC TRIM ASSOCIATED.
IF I CAN PARAPHRASE WHAT I SAW.
AND, YOU KNOW, RE REMOVE, REMOVE SOME ELEMENTS AND CHANGE OTHERS TO DIFFERENTIATE.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF THIS SPEAKER? I HAVE ONE MORE SPEAKER SIGNED UP, WHICH IS VIRGINIA KELSEY.
I'M ON THE BOARD OF, UH, NOR HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
I'M THE VICE PRESIDENT OF DEED RESTRICTIONS AND, UH, WE FOUND OUT ABOUT THIS, UM, CHANGE.
WE DISCUSSED AMONG OURSELVES ON THE BOARD ABOUT THE DESIRE FOR MODIFICATIONS AND THERE WAS 100%, UM, CONSENSUS TO SUPPORT THE DESIGN AS IT WAS SUBMITTED.
UH, THE N NOR HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION FULLY SUPPORTS THE PROPOSED SECOND FLOOR CLIP GABLE, AS SHOWN ON THE APRIL 4TH, 2024 DRAWINGS.
ANY SECOND FLOOR ADDITION TO AN EXISTING BUNGALOW ON AN INTERIOR LOT HERE IS SUFFICIENT DIFFERENTIATOR IN AND OF ITSELF BECAUSE THERE WOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN A SECOND FLOOR.
THERE ARE NO ORIGINAL SECOND FLOORS ON INTERIOR LOTS.
SO IF THE CONCERN IS A FALSE HISTORY, NO ONE WOULD BE CONFUSED THAT THE ADDITION WAS A PART OF THE ORIGINAL DESIGN AS THERE WERE NO TWO STORY HOMES ON INTERIOR LOTS IN NORTH NORTH HILL.
THE DESIGN AND THE ACCOMPANYING DETAILING HOW IT SERVES IS TO BREAK DOWN THE SCALE AND IT UNITES IT WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD, MAKING IT MORE COMPATIBLE WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UH, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO REFLECT ON THE CHARM OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THAT NOR HILL IS A HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO WHAT IS IMPORTANT IS HOW IT FITS IN WITH THE ENTIRE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND THIS BREAKING DOWN THE SCALE RATHER THAN HAVING THIS HIP ROOF JUST STANDING THERE AS SOMETHING FOREIGN TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT DOESN'T HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE CONTEXT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, THAT DOESN'T HAVE ANY SCALE, THAT DOESN'T HAVE ANY DIFFERENTIATOR INTERRUPTS THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND IT BRINGS A CONTRADICTORY ELEMENT IN.
I HAVE A MOTION FOR THE SPEAKER TO SPEAK.
MOTION TO GRANT THE SPEAKER ONE MORE TIME.
IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL BE QUICK.
SO SIMPLIFYING THE, THE DESIGN FOR THE SAKE OF DIFFERENTIATING IT, IT INTERRUPTS THE NEIGHBORHOOD AS A WHOLE.
UM, SO THE BOARD WOULD LIKE TO, UM, ACCEPT ALL THE DETAILS.
THE DETAILS, UH, WE WOULD SAY ARE NOT QUOTE HISTORIC, BUT TYPICAL, UH, CONSTRUCTION DETAILS THAT YOU FIND TODAY.
UH, THE BRACKETS ALLOW A STOPPING POINT FOR THAT TRIM BOARD.
UM, THEY ALSO ALLOW FOR A LITTLE THINNER CONSTRUCTION.
THEY, UH, THEY SERVE A PURPOSE.
NOW THERE COULD BE MORE SUBTLETY PERHAPS INVOLVED.
DON'T HAVE THE BRACKET STICK OUT OF THE FASCIA.
YOU KNOW, MAKE 'EM A LITTLE SIMPLER AND NOT CLIPPING THE BOTTOM, HAVING A DIFFERENT, YOU KNOW, VENT UP THERE.
BUT TRY AND KEEP SOME OF THE DETAILS, MAKE IT A LITTLE MORE SUBTLE.
LET'S NOT BE AFRAID OF BEING SUBTLE WHEN THE FACT THAT YOU ALREADY HAVE THIS MASS UP THERE IS A DIFFERENTIATOR.
[01:50:01]
THANK YOU.COMMISSIONER FUR, YOU HAVE A QUESTION? I WAS GONNA ASK IF WE COULD LOOK AT, UM, PAGE 10 OF 13 WHILE, WHILE MS. KELSEY'S HERE 10.
I'M SORRY, I WAS ANSWERING ANOTHER QUESTION FOR ROMAN.
NO, WE'RE WE'RE TRYING TO GET TO PAGE.
SO, SO WHAT, 10 10, PARDON? SO WHAT, WHAT WHAT YOU'RE ARGUING FOR AND WHAT YOU'VE STATED IN WRITING.
I'M FAR, YOU HAVE COMPLETELY LOST ME ON THE LAST OF SUBMITTAL IS YES, I KNOW THAT IS WHAT'S SUBMITTED IN, IN PURPLE VERSUS PURPLE ORANGE PREVIOUSLY IN ORANGE, RIGHT? CORRECT.
WE SUPPORT FULLY PURPLE AS DRAWN THE CLIP GABLE AND THE DETAILING UNDERNEATH IT.
BECAUSE IT MAKES IT COMPATIBLE WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO THEREFORE IT DOESN'T STAND OUT.
I GUESS THE WAY I SEE IT IS THESE TWO STORY EDITIONS ARE ABERRATIONS IN AND OF THEMSELVES.
'CAUSE THE REASON NOR HILL GOT LISTED AS A HISTORIC DISTRICT IS 'CAUSE THEY'RE ALL THE LOW ONE STORY BUNGALOWS STILL.
SO TO ADD DECORATIONS AND EMPHASIZE THE TWO STORY EDITION TO ME SEEMS TO BE AGAINST THE SPIRIT OF THE, THE ONE STORY BUNGALOW STREET SCAPES THAT YOU SEE THERE THAT ARE DISTINCTIVE COMPARED TO A LOT OF OTHER PARTS OF HOUSTON.
SO I, I JUST DON'T FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH THEM ADDING DECORATIONS TO SOMETHING THAT'S ALREADY WHAT I DON'T THINK SHOULD BE THERE TO BEGIN WITH BECAUSE THOSE HOUSES, AS YOU SAID, WERE ALL ONE STORY.
AND THEN TO MAKE THEM TWO STORIES REALLY CHANGES THE CHARACTER SO MUCH THAT WE SHOULD REALLY TRY TO DE-EMPHASIZE THE FACT THAT THEY'RE PUTTING THESE BIG ADDITIONS ON THESE HOUSES.
I'D LIKE TO ADDRESS THAT IF I COULD.
I AGREE THAT IT WOULD BE NICE IF THERE WERE NO TWO STORY ADDITIONS PERSONALLY, BUT THERE'S NEEDS AND SUCH WHEN YOU HAVE IT SIMPLIFIED AS YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, IT ACTUALLY CALLS, IN MY OPINION, AND OF THE BOARD AND MANY, MOST OF NOR HILL THAT IT ACTUALLY CALLS MORE ATTENTION TO THE SECOND FLOOR BECAUSE IT'S NOT IN KEEPING WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT THEN IT MAKES IT SEEM LIKE YOU'RE TRYING TO IMITATE THE HISTORIC ARCHITECTURE WHEN IT'S SOMETHING THAT CLEARLY IS NOT PART OF THE HISTORIC ARCHITECTURE.
SO I FEEL LIKE THEN IT'S KIND OF A CONTRADICTION BECAUSE IF IT'S A SECOND STORY ADDITION, YOU SHOULD TRY TO MINIMIZE IT AND MAKE IT AS RECESSIVE VISUALLY AS POSSIBLE, RATHER THAN MAKE IT LOOK LIKE SOMETHING THAT MIGHT'VE BEEN PART OF A HISTORIC BUILDING, A TWO STORY BUILDING.
SO THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT I'D STRUGGLE WITH IS THAT I THINK YOU'RE, YOU'RE TIPTOEING VERY CLOSE TO MAKING IT TRY TO, YOU KNOW, GO AGAINST THE SPIRIT OF, UH, CATEGORY THREE, WHICH IS DON'T TRY TO MAKE IT LOOK LIKE FROM THIS HISTORIC, BECAUSE YOU'RE SAYING YOU WANT IT TO BE IN HARMONY WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT WITH THE HISTORIC PARTS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
BUT IT'S NOT EVER GONNA BE IN HARMONY WITH IT BECAUSE IT'S A TWO STORY ADDITION.
SO IT SHOULD BE AS SIMPLE AS POSSIBLE, I THINK.
I THINK YOU'D BE MORE COMFORTABLE WITH A CLIP GABLE WITHOUT THE, UM, SAME VENT.
UH, IS THIS OVER THE FRONT PORCH, FOR INSTANCE? MORE, A MORE ABSTRACTED VERSION OF IT? I'D BE MORE COMFORTABLE WITH THE, THE DESIGN THAT WAS PREVIOUSLY APPROVED BY THE HISTORIC COMMISSION.
UM, BEFORE WE MOTION, MY QUESTION FOR THE SPEAKER WAS JUST THAT THE APPLICANT ALSO PROPOSED TO KEEP THE ELEMENTS BUT ABSTRACT EACH OF THEM IN SUCH A WAY THAT NEVER WOULD'VE BEEN SEEN THE LIGHT OF DAY BACK IN THE DAY.
THAT BY REMOVING ELEMENTS OF TRIM THAT MIGHT BE CONFUSED WITH HISTORIC, BUT STILL KEEP TRIM, STILL KEEP THE FEATURES.
DO YOU, DO YOU, UM, SUPPORT THEIR, THE, THE SKETCH THAT THEY PRESENTED AS, AS A, AS AN OPTION, AS A POTENTIAL OPTION THAT KEPT THE FEATURES BUT DID ABSTRACT THEM SLIGHTLY? UM, IF THE CHOICE, YOU KNOW, IF IT'S A CONTINUUM, WE, I MEAN I CAN UNDERSTAND PUTTING A, A DIFFERENT VENT UP THERE, YOU KNOW, SIMPLIFYING THE TRIM AROUND THERE FOR THE NOR HILL BOARD, WE WOULD LIKE IT TO BE AS CLOSE TO THE PURPLE AS POSSIBLE.
UH, WE UNDERSTAND THE POSITION, THE ARGUMENT AND UH, IF IT NEEDS TO BE ABSTRACTED AND STILL KEEPS THE CLIP GABLE, WHICH MORE UNIFIES IT WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD, THAT WOULD BE BETTER.
I, I WANTED TO ADD, AND ALSO IN RESPONSE TO YOUR THANK YOU, I I, I APPRECIATE THE CASE YOU'VE MADE FOR DUPLICATING THE, THE WAY THE GABLE IS HANDLED ON THE FIRST FLOOR.
AT THE SAME TIME, I THINK IF, IF IN ANOTHER POSSIBLE WORLD THERE HAD BEEN A TWO STORY BUNGALOW, THERE WOULD'VE BEEN A SORT OF ARCHITECTURAL SOLUTION FOR THE SECOND STORY, RIGHT? WE HAVE TO IMAGINE MAYBE THE ARCHITECT THAT MADE THIS HOUSE, HOW WOULD THEY HAVE DONE THE SECOND STORY? THE PORCH HAS A CERTAIN CONSTRUCTIVE LOGIC IN TERMS OF THE COLUMNS THAT HOLD UP.
IT, IT, IT COMMUNICATES THAT THE COLUMNS ARE HOLDING UP THE SORT OF PEDIMENT ABSTRACTED PEDIMENT.
[01:55:01]
AND SO TO DUPLICATE THAT WHERE THERE AREN'T COLUMNS, FOR EXAMPLE, IS QUITE DIFFERENT.LIKE, LIKE IT'S A DIFFERENT KIND OF, UM, EXPRESSION OF STRUCTURE AND CONSTRUCTION.
SO IT ISN'T JUST A KIND OF LIKE SILENCE, IT'S MORE OF A DECORATIVE MOVE THAN AN ARCHITECTURAL ONE TO PUT THOSE ON THE SECOND STORY.
SO I, WITH THAT IN MIND, I I WOULD ADVOCATE FOR THE SOLUTION THAT THE OWNERS PROPOSE WHERE IT'S AN ABSTRACTED SECOND STORY THAT BEGINS TO TRY TO FIND WHAT WOULD BE A SECOND STORY FOR THE BUNGALOW RATHER THAN JUST COPY WHAT THE FIRST FLOOR IS.
BUT WE KNOW WHAT I LIKE TO MAKE A POINT, BUNGALOWS A SECOND STORY BUNGALOWS, THEY'RE BIPLANE BUNGALOWS ALL OVER THE PLACE AND THEY'RE SECOND STORY IS ALWAYS IN THE CENTER OF THE BUNGALOW.
THEY'RE NEVER IN THE BACK LIKE THIS.
LIKE THIS MASSING IS NEVER SEEN IN ANY HISTORIC BUNGALOWS, VIRGINIA, WHICH DIFFERENTIATES IT.
YOU'RE SAYING IT'S ON THE PORCH.
IT'S VERY, VERY COMMON TO SEE THE CLIP GABLE THROUGHOUT THE BUNGALOWS ON THE MAIN BODY OF THE BUNGALOW OR ON COMPONENTS OR HAVE 'EM STEPPED ON TOP OF EACH OTHER.
THAT'S A VERY COMMON FEATURE WITHOUT, THROUGHOUT NOR HILL.
WHICH, WHICH IS A MEANS TO BREAK UP THE MASSING.
I THINK, I MEAN, I, I, THE THE, I UNDERSTAND THERE'S NOT A, THERE'S NOT A PORCH ON THE SECOND FLOOR, BUT IT SEEMS TO ME THAT IT, WHAT IT DOES DO IS IT BREAKS UP THE MASS OF THE OVERALL UNI, LIKE THE UNIT ROOF OF THE HIP, THE HIP ITSELF, WHICH IS ONE FORM WHERE MOST OF THE STRUCTURES IN NOR HILL HAVE HAVE A, THEY'RE NOT JUST ONE THING, THEY'RE LIKE THREE THINGS OR TWO THINGS PUSHED TOGETHER.
THERE IS NOT A SINGLE MASS OF A STRUCTURE THAT'S A SOLID BLOCK THAT'S PUT ON TOP.
AND IF YOU DO THE HIP ROOF, THAT'S AS IT IS.
THAT'S INTER DO YOU WANT ME TO STOP
UH, INTRODUCING A FOREIGN SCALE BECAUSE YOU'RE EXACTLY RIGHT.
COMMISSIONER MCNE, I HATE TO INTERRUPT THIS WONDERFUL ARCHITECTURAL DISCUSSION, BUT I BELIEVE COMMISSIONER BLAKELY BY THE TERM ADVOCATE FOR WAS MAKING A MOTION.
I WOULD LOVE TO SECOND THAT MOTION.
LET, I DON'T, WELL, LET, LET ME MAKE SURE THERE'S NOT A PUBLIC, ANYONE ELSE IN THE PUBLIC HERE TO SPEAK.
SO IS THERE ANYONE IN THE PUBLIC HERE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM IN ADDITION THAT DID NOT SIGN UP? WHO'S NOT YOURSELF NOW? NOT HERE.
I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC IF MAY JUSTICE COMMISSION.
DO YOU WANNA SEE THAT DRAWN AGAIN THAT THE OWNERS PRESENTED? YOU GOT IT? I DON'T THINK SO.
UM, MR. BLAKELY, OKAY, SO HELP ME OUT IF I DON'T GET THIS RIGHT, I MOVE THAT WE, UM, SUPPORT THE OWNER'S PROPOSAL OF AN ABSTRACTED, UH, SECOND STORY GABLE, WHICH I, I DON'T, I BELIEVE THAT IS IN CONSISTENT WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
UM, SO I GUESS I MOVE THAT WE, UM, SUPPORT STAFF RECOMMENDATION WITH THE PROVISO THAT WE ASK FOR THE OWNERS TO IMPLEMENT THE ABSTRACTED GABLE, WHICH IS TO SAY THEY'VE OFFERED VARIATIONS.
THEY HAVEN'T PROPOSED SOMETHING SPECIFIC.
NO, IT SAYS RIGHT HERE WHAT THEY WANT.
WELL, BUT THES AND FISHER BOARD, SO, SO MAKE A MOTION TO, FOR THE APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS THAT THE VENT HAVE A ONE BY FOUR TRIM AROUND, IT HAS NO SILL AS DRAWN.
THE FREEZE BOARD IS JUST A FLAT ONE BY 12.
IT HAS NO TRIM, WHICH MIGHT BE IN A BED MOLDING.
AND THEN THE BRACKETS GO AWAY.
WE WANT, WE WANT, WE WANT SIMPLIFIED BRACKETS THAT ARE, THAT DO NOT EXTEND PAST THE ROOF LINE.
SO YOU'RE, SO YOU'RE CHANGING, SHE HAD PROPOSED NO BRACKET.
SO DO YOU WANT TO GO WITH, WITH THIS RECOMMENDATION? NO, NO, NO, NO.
I'M NOT GOING WITH WHAT STAFF'S RECOMMENDING.
I'M GOING WITH WHAT THE OWNER, WHAT THE OWNERS ARE PROPOSING AND WHAT NOR WHAT I HEAR NORVILLE WANTS.
BUT THE OWNER STILL WANTS TO HAVE BRACKETS, BUT THEY, THEY'RE WILLING TO MAKE 'EM SIMPLIFIED.
EVERYTHING EXTRACTED, SIMPLIFIED THE BRACKET.
MAKE SURE THEY DON'T EXTEND PAST THE ROOF LIKE THEY WOULD HAVE ON A TRADITIONAL BUNGALOW AND, UM, DIMINUTIVE BUT KEEPING IN, I MEAN, IT'S HARD, HARD TO DESCRIBE IN THE SPIRIT OF WHAT NOR HILL WANTS.
AND AND THAT'S YOUR SECOND RIGHT? THAT THAT'S MY SECOND, YES.
SO WE'RE COMMISSIONER BLAKELEY'S MOTION COMMISSIONER, BUT I WHAT HE SAID YEAH, FOR HER MOTION
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? NOT, NO.
CAN I MAKE A, CAN I MAKE A COMMENT ON THIS THING RIGHT NOW? YOU CAN BEFORE WE VOTE.
SO IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE IN NO HILL, WE ARE ALLOWING FOR A CLIP GABLE.
AND IN, UH, 95% OF OUR OTHER, UH, COAS THAT WE COME ACROSS IN WHATEVER HISTORIC DISTRICTS WE HAVE BEEN STRESSING HIP ROOF.
SO WHY THE DIFFERENCE? YEAH, I DON'T GET IT.
THE NEIGHBORHOOD, THE NEIGHBORHOOD WANTS IT.
YOU HAVE A CON UNANIMOUS CONSENSUS FROM THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE.
[02:00:01]
WE HAVE OUR OWN GUIDELINES.WE DON'T, MAYBE I DON'T SEEM, I DON'T THINK I, I I'M IN AGREEMENT.
I LIVE IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT WHERE WE HAVE A VICTORIAN GA TWO OVER TWO WINDOWS.
I HATE 1 0 1 WINDOWS, BUT I HAD TO APPLY 1 0 1 WINDOWS ON MY NEW ADDITION.
MEAN WELL, I, I THINK THIS COULD BE, I MEAN I UNDERSTAND, BUT I THINK THIS GENERAL CON CONVERSATION COULD BE A GOOD CAMP DISCUSSION HONESTLY, BECAUSE I THINK BEYOND THIS APPLICATION, WE CAN TALK ABOUT THIS ABSTRACTLY ACROSS THE BOARD RIGHT NOW.
IT'S JUST, THERE'S A MOTION, THERE'S A SECOND AND THERE'S, THERE'S A, I JUST FEEL THAT WE ARE BEING VERY INCONSISTENT WITH OUR APPROACH.
IN RESPONSE TO COMMISSIONER Y'S POINT, UM, YOU KNOW, YOUR, YOUR DECISIONS ARE NOT PRECEDENTIAL AND EVERY PIECE OF REAL ESTATE IS DIFFERENT AND UNIQUE.
AND IT MAY WELL OF, WELL YOU KNOW THIS BETTER THAN I DO.
THE, YOU KNOW, VARIES BETWEEN HISTORIC DISTRICTS.
SO, AND MAY VARY ON THE TYPE OF HOUSE AND SO FORTH.
SO YOU MAY WANT, I, I AGREE IT'S A GOOD TOPIC FOR THE CAMP TRAINING TO TALK ABOUT HOW TO HANDLE THESE ITEMS. BUT, BUT WE DON'T HAVE TO BE WED TO CONSISTENCY IN THAT, IN THAT, IN IN DESIGN CONSISTENCY TO THAT REGARD.
THANK YOU FOR MAKING THAT POINT.
AND I, FROM MY, FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, I CAN'T SEE HOW SLAPPING UP BIG ADDITION WITH THAT HIP ROOF ON IT IS EITHER BETTER FOR THE PROPERTY OR FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO I THINK WE'RE DOWN TO DETAILING ON A GABLE, UH, CLIPPED GABLE AT THAT.
THAT'S, THAT'S THE THIRD PRECEDENT.
NAY, BUT ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.
AND ALL OPPOSED? NAY, NAY, NAY.
AM I CORRECT PLEASE? UH, THOSE WHO ARE OPPOSED, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD.
CAN WE ASK THE COUNT, THE OFFICIAL COUNT FOR THAT? ANY ABSTENTIONS NOT HEARING ANY? OKAY.
SO THE MOTION MAJORITY IS YAY, FOUR WERE OPPOSED.
THIS IS ITEM NUMBER 7 7 7 1 5 GLEN VISTA STREET.
GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIRPERSON AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.
THIS IS STAFF PERSON SAMANTHA DELEON.
I SUBMIT ITEM B SEVEN AT 7 7 1 5 GLEN VISTA STREET IN THE GLENBROOK VALLEY HISTORIC DISTRICT FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
THE 1,700 SQUARE FOOT ONE STORY CONTRIBUTING RANCH STYLE RESIDENT WAS BUILT CIRCA 1960.
ON MARCH 11TH, 2024, THE APPLICANT APPLIED FOR A COA FOR WINDOW ALTERATIONS.
THE APPLICANT PROPOSED THAT THE, UH, THE REPLACEMENT OF TWO ORIGINAL ALUMINUM WINDOWS ON THE RIGHT SIDE ELEVATION TO RECESSED VINYL WINDOWS.
AS THE APPLICANT WAS UNABLE TO FIND LOCALLY SOURCED MILL ALUMINUM WINDOWS.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS THAT THE PROPERTY OWNERS SAFELY REMOVE THE TWO ALUMINUM WINDOWS BEING REPLACED AND KEEP THEM ON THE PROPERTY FOR THE DURATION OF OWNERSHIP.
CHAIRS AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.
THE APPLICANT IS NOT HERE, BUT HAS GIVEN ME A STATEMENT TO READ ON HER BEHALF.
I'M ALSO AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
WHAT I READ THAT THE STAFF WROTE IS THAT THE APPLICANT WAS UNABLE TO FIND LOCALLY SOURCED MILL ALUMINUM WINDOWS.
UM, COMMISSIONER CURRY SENT OUT LATE YESTERDAY AND UPDATED DOCUMENT FROM THE WINDOW COMMISSION, BUT WE ALSO SPENT A TON OF TIME WITH COMMISSIONER JACKSON TERRENCE, UM, IN THIS DISTRICT TWO, THREE YEARS AGO COMING UP WITH A LIST.
SO IT'S NOT THAT A LIST OF ALUMINUM WIND MANUFACTURERS WAS JUST PRESENTED LAST NIGHT.
IT'S BEEN IN EXISTENCE FOR YEARS.
AND SO TO SAY THAT MILL FINISHED ALUMINUM WINDOWS ARE NOT AVAILABLE.
SO WE MUST GO TO WINDOW WORLD, I THINK IS, UM, PROBABLY INACCURATE AND NOT A GOOD PRECEDENT FOR THE DISTRICT.
AND BETTER YET, INSTEAD OF REPLACEMENT, LET'S REPAIR WHAT'S THERE BECAUSE WE ALSO HAVE SEVERAL COMPANIES HERE LOCALLY THAT ARE REPAIRING, UM, AND ACCESS TO REPLACEMENT PARTS AND REGLAZING.
[02:05:01]
BUT I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR THE APPLICANT'S STATEMENT.DO WE NEED TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS KIM? IF, IF, IF IT'S READ BY STAFF, IS IT, I WOULD GO AHEAD NOR OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING SINCE SHE'S GONNA READ THE STATEMENT FROM THE OWNER.
SO PUBLIC HEARING IS NOW OPEN.
MY NAME IS ANDREA A AND I APOLOGIZE THAT I CANNOT BE HERE TODAY.
I THANK THE COMMITTEE FOR THEIR TIME TO EVALUATE THE CHANGES WE ARE TRYING TO MAKE IN OUR HOME.
WE PURCHASED OUR HOME IN 2020 WHEN WE FELL IN LOVE WITH THE SPACE IT HAD TO OFFER.
UNFORTUNATELY, SINCE THAT TIME, WE HAVE HAD MULTIPLE ISSUES WITH NOISE COMPLAINTS DUE TO OUR NEIGHBORS.
THE WINDOWS THAT RUN NEAREST TO THEIR HOME WOULD ALLOW NOISE AND SHATTERING OF THE WALLS THAT HINDERS OUR SONS, OUR SONS, AND OUR ABILITIES TO SLEEP AT NIGHT.
WE ARE REQUESTING THE UPDATES OF THE WINDOWS TO BOTH BATH BEDROOMS DUE TO THIS, AS WELL AS THE FACT THAT OUR SON'S BEDROOM RECEIVED A BB GUNSHOT THAT SHATTERED ONE OF THE GLASS PANELS IN THE WINDOW.
WE HAVE TAKEN OTHER MEASURES TO PREVENT THE NOISE, SUCH AS BUILDING A FENCE NEXT TO THE PROPERTY, BUT THAT HAS NOT DECREASED THE VOL, THE VOLUME.
WE ALSO DID THIS DUE TO THE FACT THAT THEY WERE ON OUR PROPERTY WITHOUT PERMISSION.
SHE'S REFERRING TO THE FENCE BEING BUILT, WHY THEY, WHY THEY BUILT IT.
UH, WE UNDERSTAND THAT THE HISTORIC DISTRICT WILL COMPROMISE AND ALLOW US TO CHANGE THE BEDROOM WINDOWS, BUT KEEP THE MAIN ONE INTACT.
I APPRECIATE THE COMPROMISE AND I'M WILLING TO WORK WITH THE DISTRICT IN ORDER TO KEEP THE FRONT WINDOW THE SAME.
UM, WHILE I HAVE THIS OPEN, I'M GONNA ASK IF THERE'S ANYONE ELSE THAT ATTENDING THE MEETING WOULD SPEAK ON THIS ITEM.
PLEASE ANNOUNCE YOURSELF AT THIS TIME.
UM, I GUESS I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
AND IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF STAFF FOR THIS ITEM THAT, WELL, I GUESS YES, I'LL, I'LL PHRASE MINE IN THE FORM OF A QUESTION.
DO YOU THINK THE APPLICANT WOULD BE, UH, WILLING TO EXPLORE OTHER OPTIONS THAT WOULD ADDRESS THE NOISE AND THE BROKEN, UH, THE, THE PUNCTURE TO THE WINDOW, UM, BUT WOULD MAINTAIN THE HISTORIC WINDOWS? I WOULD, I'M NOT SURE.
I WOULD SAY NO, BECAUSE WE ALREADY COMPROMISED WITH HER BECAUSE SHE WANTED TO CHANGE THE FRONT WINDOW.
WE WERE ABLE TO GO AHEAD AND ASK HER TO LEAVE THAT OUT OF THE APPLICATION.
SO AGAIN, IT'S NOT NEARLY AS VISIBLE, BUT SHE IS JUST REALLY WANTING JUST TO CHANGE THIS, THOSE TWO WINDOWS.
JUST I UNDER I UNDERSTAND THAT.
MY COUNTER TO HER, AND I'M SORRY SHE'S NOT HERE, WOULD BE THAT, THAT ACTUALLY THE ENDO INSERTS HAVE A SPECIFIC, UM, LINE THAT IS FOR NOISE CANCELING AND IS FOR, FOR NOISE.
UM, AND I THINK ALTHOUGH IT'S BEEN SEVERAL YEARS, I THINK COMPARATIVELY THE FULL REPLACEMENT OF THE WINDOW PLUS THE STORING OF THE HISTORIC WINDOW AND THE FACT THAT IT COULD GET DAMAGED OVER THE YEARS WOULD BE COMPARABLE TO ONE OF THOSE ENDO INSERTS.
UM, SO I, I, I WOULD, I WOULD PROBABLY SUGGEST DEFERRAL UNTIL THAT THAT NEW PIECE OF INFORMATION COULD BE PRESENTED TO THE, TO THE, UM, APPLICANT WITH THE, WITH AN ALTERNATIVE BEING THAT THE APPLICATION IS JUST DENIED AND THE WINDOWS STAY.
I WOULD SU I WOULD SUGGEST THAT GIVEN THE NUMBER OF TIMES WE HAVE ALLOWED OTHER HOMEOWNERS IN GLENBROOK VALLEY TO CHANGE THEIR WINDOWS, ESPECIALLY ON THE SIDES AND BACK, THAT WE GIVE HER THE OPPORTUNITY TO JUST REPLACE THOSE WINDOWS WITH NEW MILL FINISH ALUMINUM WINDOWS WITH, UH, MANUFACTURERS DOCUMENTED BY MR. CURRY.
I I THINK WE'RE HEARING THAT THE SPECULATION IS THAT WOULD BE THE PREFERENCE OF THE OWNER TO REPLACE THE WINDOWS WITH, WITH SOMETHING THAT, THAT WAS DEEMED APPROPRIATE VERSUS, UH, SOME OTHER STRATEGY.
I JUST KNOW THAT, UM, SOMETHING THAT SHE MENTIONED TO ME WAS FINANCIAL, UM, LIMITATIONS.
SO THEY ONLY WANTED TO REPLACE THREE WINDOWS JUST 'CAUSE THAT'S ALL THEY COULD AFFORD.
SO I'M NOT SURE, I KNOW THAT LOOKING AT CURRY'S SHEET, THAT ALL THREE REPLACEMENTS WERE LISTED AS ALL, OR THE ACTUAL REPLACEMENT FOR THE WINDOWS WERE ALL LISTED AS WITH LIKE $5 SIGNS.
SO I CAN DEFINITELY MENTION IT TO THE APPLICANT.
I JUST DON'T KNOW OR THINK IT WILL BE FEASIBLE FOR THEM TO AFFORD TWO BRAND NEW MILL ALUMINUM FINISHED WINDOWS JUST BECAUSE OF, BUT I ISSUE WITH THAT ARGUMENT IS THAT IT'S FAR, FAR CHEAPER TO PUT AN INTERIOR WINDOW IN MM-HMM
AND THERE ARE DIFFERENT MANUFACTURERS THAN TO REPLACE IT WITH EVEN THE WINDOW THAT THE APPLICANT HAS, HAS ACTUALLY SUBMITTED FOR AND, AND WHICH HAD THE EXPRESS PURPOSE OF BLOCKING SOUND.
EVERYONE THAT LIVES NEAR A BAR HAS THEM ON THE INSIDE OF THEIR WINDOW 'CAUSE THEY WORK.
SO IT'S, IT'S, YOU KNOW, IF, IF MON IF MONETARY ISSUES WERE, WERE THE ISSUE, TECHNOLOGY HAS SOLVED THIS IN
[02:10:01]
A DIFFERENT WAY WITHOUT YOU LOSING THE WINDOW.AND I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND THAT BB YOU KNOW, MEAN THOSE WINDOWS THAT SHE HAS, THEY'RE DESIGNED TO REPLACE THE GLASS.
LIKE YOU GO IN HOME DEPOT AND THEY CUT THE GLASS FOR YOU.
AND I, I'D LIKE TO, SO IT'S, IT'S, THE GLASS ITSELF IS NOT AN ISSUE.
I'D LIKE TO MAKE THAT POINT TOO.
THE GLASS REPLACEMENT'S NOT THE ISSUE AT ALL.
AND BB GUNS ARE NOT THE ISSUE AT ALL.
AND TRESPASSING NEIGHBORS ARE NOT THE ISSUE AT ALL.
AND THE FACT THAT SHE PROBABLY REALLY NEEDS TO REPLACE HER NEIGHBORS VERSUS THE WINDOWS
SHE'S IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT AND THAT'S HISTORIC MATERIAL THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, WHICH IS, WHICH HAPPENS TO BE HER WINDOWS.
SO THERE'S, THERE'S GOOD LESS EXPENSIVE ALTERNATIVES THAN REPLACING THE WINDOWS.
AND IT SOUNDS LIKE THAT'S THE RECOMMENDATION WE'RE GONNA MAKE.
I, I DO WANNA MAKE A MOTION TO, TO ASK STAFF TO DEFER THIS.
I HATE DOING THAT, BUT TO ASK STAFF TO GO BACK WITH THIS NEW TO THE APPLICANT INFORMATION TO EXPLORE THE WINDOW INSERTS, INTERIOR INSERTS THAT ARE SPECIFIC FOR NOISE CANCELING, THAT, THAT I BELIEVE ARE THE LEAST EXPENSIVE SOLUTION TO THE ISSUE IF THE FINANCIAL, UM, HARDSHIP IS IN FACT THE MAIN CONCERN.
SECONDS ME, ANY OTHER DISCUSSION BEFORE I CALL THIS MO ON THIS MOTION? I WANNA ADD THAT I ALSO, UH, HAVE AN ENDO WINDOW IN MY HOUSE AND IT'S REALLY, UH, A LOT CHEAPER, UH, THAN REPLACING A WINDOW.
UH, REDUCES THE NOISE, UH, AND, AND EVERYTHING.
SO I WOULD HIGHLY SUGGEST IT SINCE YOU BROUGHT IT UP.
MAY I ASK, DO YOU HAVE THEM THROUGHOUT THE HOUSE OR JUST IN CERTAIN AREAS WHERE NOISE IS OR, OR OTHER ISSUES OR PERCEIVED? JUST IN THE FRONT BECAUSE, UH, ONE, IT'S ONE BLOCK AWAY FROM WESTHEIMER.
SO, YOU KNOW, THAT'S ALL YOU GOTTA SAY.
ALL IN FAVOR OF THIS MOTION, PLEASE SAY AYE.
ANY ABSTENTIONS TO THIS MOTION? ALRIGHT, THAT, THAT MOTION DID REFER PASSES.
WE'RE NOW MOVING, I BELIEVE TO ITEM NUMBER NINE, WHICH IS 1 1 1 1 EAST 11TH STREET.
B, WHAT IS IT? B NINE, RIGHT? ROMAN? YES.
CHARLES, PICK UP THE TAB FOR HIM.
UH, SO THIS IS, UM, ITEM B NINE.
GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR PERSON, MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION AND MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC.
THIS IS STAFF PERSON CHARLES SADLER.
I SUBMIT FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
1111 EAST 11TH STREET, A CONTRIBUTING ONE STORY, COMMERCIAL BUILDING THAT IS SEEKING ALTERATIONS, UH, NEW FRONT DOOR AND EXISTING OPENING A SET OF TWO WALL SCONCES FLANKING ENTRANCE DOOR WITH EXTERIOR WALL MOUNTED CONDUIT.
SO IT'S NOT A TRENCH IN THE HISTORIC, UH, FACADE, EXTERIOR FACADE FINISHES TO REMAIN AS EXISTING, EXISTING BUILDING MURAL TO REMAIN INTACT.
UH, SIGNAGE, STARBUCKS WORD MARK, THAT'S EIGHT, UH, 58 AND A HALF WIDE BY SIX INCHES TALL.
UM, THERE WAS A LITTLE CONFUSION WITH THIS, WHICH I'VE CLARIFIED.
UH, SO THIS IS PROPOSED TO BE ILLUMINATED AND THESE ARE LASER CUT, PIN MOUNTED ON THE FRONT OF THE KNEE WALL FACING THE, UH, THE STREET ON THE SOUTH ELEVATION.
UH, THERE'S ALSO SECOND SIGN SIGNAGE STARBUCKS, THE SIREN DISC LOGO, WHICH IS FIVE FEET DIAMETER, WHICH IS ETER INTER, EXCUSE ME, INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED FLUSH-MOUNTED SOUTH FACADE OVER ENTRANCE DOOR.
UH, THIRD SIGN SIGNAGE, STARBUCKS WORD MARK, UH, WHICH IS 10 FEET LONG BY 16 INCHES TALL.
THAT'S ALSO INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED, FLUSH MOUNTED EAST FACADE.
AND LET'S SEE, THE LAST MAIN POINT, UH, A DETACHED OUTDOOR SEATING AREA THAT'S 19 FEET BY 14 FEET WITH A TWO AND A HALF FOOT TALL KNEE WALL, UH, WITH A BUILT-IN PLANTER.
AND THAT INCLUDES MOVABLE PATIO FURNITURE AND ATTACHED BENCHES AND SHADE UMBRELLAS.
AND STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL WITH
[02:15:01]
CONDITIONS, WHICH ARE, AND WE'VE WORKED CLOSELY WITH THE NOR HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.AND THAT IS THE, THE RECOMMENDATION IS THESE CONDITIONS, ALL SIGNAGE SHALL BE PAINTED ON THE SURFACE, SO NOT ILLUMINATED.
UH, THEY MAY BE FRONT LIT PER STAFF APPROVAL.
AND THE SECOND POINT, EXCUSE ME, UH, THAT THE PLANTER DESIGN BE MORE IN KEEPING WITH THE DISTRICT PER STAFF APPROVAL.
SO NOT, NOT A CONTEMPORARY BRICK UH, PLANTER AS IT CURRENTLY IS.
UH, UH, NOR HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IS HERE.
UH, THEY INDICATED THAT THEY'D LIKE TO COMMENT ON THIS, ON THIS.
THIS CONCLUDES MY REPORT AND I'M NOW AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
AND I, I DO HAVE TWO SPEAKERS SIGN UP, UH, FOR THIS ITEM QUESTION, BUT YES, WE'LL START WITH QUESTIONS FOR STAFF AND COMMISSIONER WEAU JACKSON HAS A QUESTION.
IS THE CONCERN ABOUT THE PLANTER SLASH KNEE WALL OUTDOOR DINING ENCLOSURE, JUST THE MATERIAL? OR IS IT THE DESIGN OR THE HEIGHT OR ANYTHING ELSE? UH, JUST THE MATERIAL AS FAR AS I'M, AS FAR AS I'VE, I'VE CORRESPONDED WITH NOR HILL, SO, OH, IT'S THE, IT'S JUST THE MATERIAL.
SO THEY LIKE, WELL, THEY'RE THINKING, UH, FOR INSTANCE, LIKE A WROUGHT IRON FENCING OR SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE MUCH MORE, UH, LIKE A, A LOWER VISUAL IMPACT THAN A LARGE MASONRY WALL.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF STAFF AT THIS TIME? COMMISSIONER BLAKELY, WHAT IS THE RATIONALE BEHIND THE LIT VERSUS INTERNALLY ELIMINATED SIGN? UH, GOOD QUESTION.
UH, IN YOU WANT ME TO ADDRESS THAT? OH, SURE.
UM, SO WE JUST NOTICED ACTUALLY LATE IN THE DAY THAT, THAT THE PROPOSAL HAD THE BACKLIT ACRYLIC BACK, UH, LIT SIGNAGE THAT STARBUCKS HAS EVERYWHERE.
AND WE NEVER APPROVE ACRYLIC BAT LIT SIGNAGE IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT.
UM, AND, AND IT'S JUST ABOUT FITTING IN.
THERE'S NO DESIGN GUIDELINES ADOPTED IN NOR HILL, BUT IT, THAT'S THE WAY IT WORKS.
AND SO THE PROPERTY'S IMMEDIATELY TO THE WEST.
AND ALSO HERE TODAY, THE OWNER OF THE BUILDING IS HERE AND WE HAVE APPROVED MULTIPLE SIGNS ON THAT BUILDING AND THEIR, THEIR BACKLIT SIGNS.
AND ONE NEON SIGN ALSO WAS APPROVED, BUT IT'S JUST BEEN THAT BIG PLATE OF ACRYLIC WITH THE LIGHT BEHIND IT DOESN'T USUALLY FIT IN THE CONTEXT AREA.
NOW I WILL SAY THAT WE CAME UP WITH THE PAINTING, UH, JUST WITH A, IN A QUICK DISCUSSION.
I HOPE TODAY THAT WE CAN RES WHATEVER IS DISCUSSED HERE.
I THINK WE NEEDED, AGAIN, IT WAS GOOD.
YOU ASKED, AND THIS ITEM'S HERE, LET'S TALK ABOUT IT AND HEAR FROM THE OTHER PEOPLE.
SO, ROMAN, THE, THE SIGN ON THE CURRENT PHOTO ON, UM, FOUR OF 16, THE ON THE CURRENT, UM, INVENTORY PHOTO FOUR 16.
IS THAT THE RUMBLE? THAT'S OH, NO.
UH, THIS PICTURE IS THE CURRENT ELEVATION OF THE BUILDING.
IT ACTUALLY IS PAINTED WITH THAT.
AND THE STARBUCKS WOULD BE MOVING IN ON THE FAR RIGHT.
BUT WHAT'S THERE NOW WHERE IT SAYS RUMBLE, IS THAT NOT AN ACRYLIC THAT'S PART OF THE PROPERTY? YES.
I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S BACKLIT AND HOW LONG, THAT COULD BE A QUESTION IF THAT'S A CURRENT PHOTO.
BUT IS THE RUMBLE SIGN WHAT YOU EXPECT? ACRYLIC.
IT BETTER NOT BE STARBUCKS TO BE, IT BETTER NOT BE, I CAN'T TELL.
AND I DON'T REMEMBER PROVING THAT ONE.
GUYS, IF ANYONE WANTS TO CHECK TO SEE, DID WE GET A C OF A ON THE RUMBLE SIGN? FAR LEFT ON THAT.
CAN WE GET THE SPEAKERS TO THE MICROPHONE PLEASE? FOR THE RECORD? SO WE HAVE AN ILLEGAL SIGN ON THE BUILDING.
HE'LL COME UP AND ADDRESS IT, BUT THE OWNER HAS JUST SPOKEN AND SAYS HE OWNS A BUILDING AND THAT'S AN ILLEGAL SIGN.
SO WE'LL GET THAT STRAIGHTENED OUT.
IT IT, WELL 'CAUSE IT HASN'T BEEN APPROVED BY THIS.
'CAUSE IT HASN'T BEEN APPROVED BY THIS COMMISSION.
IT'S A, AN ACRYLIC BACKLIT SIGN IS NOT A, A SPECIFIC VIOLATION OF DESIGN GUIDELINES.
IT IS, IT IS ACRYLIC BACK CLICK SIGNS.
YOU DO NOT, AND YOU JUST USE THE CRITERIA TO, TO GET THERE.
BUT IT'S JUST A NO-NO, ALL ACROSS EVERYWHERE I'VE EVER WORKED.
YOU DON'T PUT THEM IN HISTORIC RESTRICTION.
WELL, NO, I, I GET THAT, BUT I DON'T, I I WAS WONDERING IF IT WAS SPECIFICALLY CALLED OUT IN THE GUIDELINES BEYOND JUST COMMON.
EXCEPT IT'S NOT BECAUSE THERE'S NOT DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR NOR HILL.
SO I'M GONNA OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AT THIS TIME.
I DO HAVE TWO SPEAKERS, AND THE FIRST IS THE OWNER, MR. ZACHARY WOLF.
IF YOU WOULD PLEASE RESTATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS THE COMMISSION.
[02:20:03]
I'M GONNA GO LOWER.I'M, UH, REPRESENT THE BUILDING OWNERS.
AND, UH, I CAME JUST BECAUSE, UH, STARBUCKS COULDN'T MAKE THE MEETING.
THERE'S NOT VIRTUAL OPTIONS ANYMORE.
SO, UM, WE KIND OF RECEIVED RECOMMENDATIONS FROM NOR HILL YESTERDAY REGARDING, UH, PAINTING THE SIGN AND, AND, UM, A, I GUESS A DIFFERENT MATERIAL FOR THE KNEE WALL.
IT SOUNDS LIKE THEY'RE OKAY WITH THE PATIO KNEE WALL.
UM, BUT, UH, I, I WASN'T, IT WASN'T QUITE CLEAR UNTIL, UH, ROMAN NOW JUST STATED, I GUESS ALTERNATE MATERIALS.
UM, YOU KNOW, MY MY OPINION IS THAT THEY'RE, YOU KNOW, PER THE RENDERING, THEY'RE JUST MATCHING WHAT'S ALREADY THERE.
AND, UM, IF, YOU KNOW, IF THAT'S A CONDITION, I THINK THEY WOULD BE MORE THAN ACCEPTABLE TO DO THAT.
UM, I DON'T SEE ANY ISSUE WITH IT.
UM, YOU KNOW, THERE'S SOME, THE USE OF HEIGHTS AS AN ADJECTIVE.
I DON'T KNOW HOW TO DEFINE THAT AS, YOU KNOW, A MORE HEIGHTS, YOU KNOW, KNEE WALL.
WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? UM, YOU KNOW, YOU LOOK AROUND THE HEIGHTS THERE,
SO, YOU KNOW, IN MY OPINION, I THINK THEY TASTEFULLY MATCH THE BUILDING AND ADDING SOME GREENERY, WHICH, YOU KNOW, WARMS IT UP AND MAKES IT A VERY LOVELY PLACE FOR PEOPLE TO ENJOY.
UM, REGARDING THE SIGNAGE, YOU KNOW, UM, PAINTING ON THE WALL WITH GOOSE, THAT LIGHTING, YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT'S MORE MATCHING HISTORICAL STANDARDS WHERE, UH, I BELIEVE, YOU KNOW, THE THOUGHT IS TO DO SOMETHING THAT IS NOT MATCHING HISTORICAL.
AND, UH, WE HAVE A FEW OTHER PROPERTIES IN NOR HILL DOWN THE STREET WHERE AS RO ROWAN MENTIONED, UH, NE AT ONE NEON, UH, ONE REVERSE OR TWO REVERSE CHANNEL BACK LIT.
AND ADDITIONALLY, ROMAN, ROMAN, I JUST REALIZED.
BUT LAST MONTH, THE COA WAS APPROVED ON A, A SIMILAR SIGN AT 1129 EAST 11TH FOR, UH, YOU KNOW, INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED.
SO FOR ME, I'M NOT UNDERSTANDING, UH, THE ISSUE HERE AS FAR AS Y'ALL'S STANDARDS.
THERE MAY BE OPINIONS, YOU KNOW, PERSONAL, PERSONAL TASTE, OPINIONS FROM NOR HILL.
UM, BUT IT SEEMS TO MEET ALL THE GUIDELINES FROM, FROM MY, UH, LIMITED KNOWLEDGE.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE SPEAKER FROM COMMISSIONERS? I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT, UH, WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED, UM, FOR THE SPEAKER OR THE NEXT SPEAKER? I HAVE, I HAVE ONE MORE SPEAKER TO SPEAK, UH, SIGNED UP TO SPEAK.
UM, MAYBE THIS WOULD BE FOR THE OWNER.
OWNER'S REP ON PAGE EIGHT OF 16, LOOKING AT THE RENDERING OF THE PROPOSED SOUTH ELEVATION.
UM, THE BRICK IS LIKE ALL IN THE SAME PLANE IN THIS DRAWING ACROSS THE FRONT OF THE FACADE.
AND WHAT ARE ACTUALLY IN THE EARLIER PHOTOS, VERTICAL PIERS THAT HAVE A DIFFERENT, THEY DIFFERENT, UM, THEY STAND UP A LITTLE BIT IN FRONT OF THE FACADE AND HAVE A DIFFERENT, LIKE THEY'RE BRICK, I GUESS.
UM, I'M JUST WONDERING, DOES THE RENDERING SHOW AN ALTERATION TO THE DEPTH, DEPTH VARIATION OF THE FACADE? OR IS THAT JUST A QUIRK OF THE RENDERING? AND WILL THOSE, THAT FRAMEWORK OF WHAT LOOKS LIKE FOUR VERTICAL PIERS AND THE HORIZONTAL BE PRESERVED IN WHAT'S PROPOSED? DOCUMENT CAMERA PLEASE.
I THINK WHAT YOU'RE DESCRIBING ARE LIKE, WHAT ARE LIKE EXTERIOR PILE LASTERS AND THE, THE WAY THEY BREAK PAGE PAGE FOUR IS THE PHOTOGRAPH.
IT APPEARS TO JUST BE A POOR RENDERING.
THEY'RE NOT MAKING ANY OTHER CHANGES.
I, THE RENDERING IS JUST SHOWING SIGNAGE AND THEN THE KNEE WALL.
UM, I DON'T THINK THAT, I MEAN, YEAH, WE HAD TO CLARIFY THAT IT WASN'T CONCRETE.
IT'S CURRENTLY ASPHALT, SO I THINK IT'S JUST A RENDERING FOR, YOU KNOW, RENDERING PURPOSES.
I DO HAVE ONE MORE SPEAKER SIGN UP, WHICH IS VIRGINIA KELSEY.
ACTUALLY, I ALSO SIGNED UP CHAIR.
UM, COMMISSIONER SEPULVEDA HAS TO EXIT.
DO WE STILL HAVE QUORUM? I BELIEVE WE STILL DO.
UM, COMMISSIONER DUBBO HAS TO EXIT TOO.
I THINK WE STILL HAVE UNTIL SIX.
[02:25:01]
MOVE ON.VIRGINIA, IF YOU'LL PLEASE ADDRESS THE COMMISSION.
I'M, UM, NOR HILL VICE PRESIDENT OF DEED RESTRICTIONS.
UH, THIS, UH, WE ONLY BECAME AWARE OF THE SUBMITTAL, UM, WHEN WE SAW IT LISTED ON FRIDAY, UM, AND OR MONDAY, UH, WHEN IT WAS LISTED.
AND WE JUST GOT COPIES OF THE DRAWINGS ON MONDAY OR TUESDAY OF THIS WEEK.
UH, SO WE HAD A, UM, MEETING OF THE DEED RESTRICTIONS COMMITTEE.
WE HAVE NOT HAD A CHANCE TO REVIEW IT WITH THE BOARD.
THE DEED RESTRICTIONS COMMITTEE MET ON TUESDAY.
AND LOOKING AT THE, THE DESIGN, UM, THERE IS AN EMBRACE OF BRINGING, UH, PEOPLE TO THE, TO THE FRONT AND THE SIDEWALK AND CONTINUING THE SORT OF FRONT LINE, UM, THAT'S IMPOSED BY THE, THE, THE SHOPS AT THE OTHER END.
SO THAT CONCEPT IS, IS A GOOD ONE FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, IT WAS FELT THAT THE BRICK, AS IT IS, IS VERY COMMERCIAL IN CHARACTER AND DOESN'T HAVE A SORT OF THE, THE QUIRKY VIBE THAT YOU HAVE OF NOR HILL THAT WE MIGHT EXPECT OR EMBRACE.
SOMETHING THAT WAS A LITTLE MORE IN CONTRAST TO THE, TO THE, TO THE BUILDING.
WE DIDN'T HAVE A SPECIFIC DIRECTION OF WHAT IT SHOULD BE OR MANDATE, UH, BUT RATHER JUST THAT THE IDEA OF NON-CONFORMITY, INDIVIDUALITY, A QUIRKY SELF-EXPRESSION IS REALLY WHAT THE HEIGHTS IS ALL ABOUT.
AND HAVING THIS VERY, YOU KNOW, IN, IN, I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU CALL IT, COMMERCIAL BRICK PIECE ISN'T IN KEEPING WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND ITS CHARACTER.
UM, PARTICULARLY THE SIGN ON THE EAST SIDE.
THEY WANTED IT STRONGLY TO BE PAINTED AND NOT HAVE IT ALUMINUM, FA ILLUMINATED FACING THE STREET AS WELL AS THE ONE ON THE PLANTER.
THERE WAS ACKNOWLEDGEMENT BY THE COMMITTEE THAT SOMETHING WOULD HAVE TO PROBABLY BE ILLUMINATED FOR THE LOGO ON THE FRONT, MOTION AGAINST SPEAKER, MORE TIME CHAIR SECOND.
UH, IF, IF, IF IT'S PAINTED, THAT WOULD BE GREAT.
IF THERE'S SOME OTHER OPTION, PLEASE.
YEAH, WE, WE, WE'VE GOT A HARD STOP COMING UP, SO PLEASE PROCEED.
I BASICALLY THAT THE MORE WE CAN GET PAINTED, BUT ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THE LOGO IN THE MIDDLE PROBABLY HAS TO HAVE SOMETHING A LITTLE MORE FITTING, UH, TO WHAT IS NEEDED.
AND THERE ARE SOME ILLUMINATED SIGNS.
THEY ARE NEON, THEY'RE A LITTLE MORE QUIRKY, THEY'RE NOT, SO I'M DONE.
SO, AS A COMMISSION, WE'RE SUPPOSED TO GIVE DIRECTION TO, UM, MR. WOLF, I BELIEVE, UH, AS FAR AS WHAT THIS PLANTER DETAIL WALL DETAIL IS SUPPOSED TO BE, WHAT IS THE NOR HILL, UH, ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE GONNA SAY YES TO OR AGREE WITH THE COMMISSION ON, SAY THAT WAS A GREAT CHOICE,
UM, THEY DID NOT HAVE ENOUGH TIME TO REALLY DISCUSS IT.
UM, AND WE TALKED ABOUT DIFFERENT OPTIONS AND THEY DID NOT FEEL LIKE IT WAS OUR JOB TO BE SUGGESTING TO THEM.
BUT RATHER, UM, STARBUCKS IS A BIG OPERATION.
THEY, THEY ADAPT THEIR DESIGNS TO DIFFERENT COMMUNITIES AND WE WANT TO CHALLENGE THEM TO COME UP WITH A MORE CREATIVE SOLUTION.
I DO HAVE ONE MORE SPEAKER SIGNED UP, WHICH IS ANN THOMAS, IF YOU WOULD, THANK YOU.
YOU WOULD RESTATE YOUR NAME? UH, YES SIR.
MY NAME IS ANN THOMAS AND I'M THE ARCHITECTURAL REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE LANDLORD, NOT FOR STARBUCKS.
UM, WE GOT AN EMAIL FROM MISS VIRGINIA YESTERDAY WITH HER COMMENTS.
AND ONE OF THE THINGS ABOUT THIS LITTLE STREET 11TH STREET IS THAT IT IS A COMMERCIAL STREET.
IT IS COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS AND SO IT HAS A COMMERCIAL VIBE.
BUT ONE OF THE OTHER THINGS THAT WE TOOK IN CONSIDERATION WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT HER COMMENTS, UH, SHE RECOMMENDS LOOKING AT THE HEIGHTS GUIDELINES, AND I WENT TO PAGE ONE 17.
IN MIDDLE OF THE PAGE IT SAYS, COMPLIMENTARY DOES NOT REQUIRE NEW BUILDINGS TO MIMIC HISTORIC PROPERTIES.
IN FACT, THE CD ENCOURAGES CONTEMPORARY DESIGN WITHIN THE HISTORIC DISTRICTS WHEN A NEW BUILDING IS CONSTRUCTED AS DESIGNED, SHOULD BE RELATED TO HISTORIC BUILDINGS IN THE AREA THROUGH MASS FORM, SCALE, PROPORTIONS, ET CETERA, ET CETERA, ET CETERA.
AND IN MY OPINION, THE SITTING PLANNER IS A CONTEMPORARY FORM FOR THAT RELATIONSHIP.
ALSO, SPEAKING WITH STARBUCKS, I KNOW ONE OF THE REASONS THEY WANTED TO BUILD IT IS BECAUSE THAT IS SUCH A BUSY STREET, IT HAS A LOT OF CAR NOISE AND THEY ARE TRYING TO DAMPEN THAT NOISE WITH THE PLANTING AND WITH THE WALL SO THAT PEOPLE FEEL COMFORTABLE SITTING OUT THERE.
[02:30:01]
WAY.UH, AN OPEN FENCE ISN'T GONNA HELP PREVENT SOME OF THAT NOISE THAT'S GONNA BE COMING INTO THAT AREA.
UH, ALSO ON THE SIGNS, AS STATED BEFORE, NOR HILL DOES NOT HAVE THEIR GUIDELINES.
WE WERE ASKED TO GO TO THE HEIGHTS GUIDELINES, WHICH WE DID REFER TO.
AND IT DOES SAY THAT SIGNS MAY NOT BE INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED, BUT THERE ARE FOUR OTHER CONSIDERATIONS HERE THAT WE THINK THAT WE WOULD LIKE FOR STARBUCKS TO BE ABLE TO LOOK AT THOSE BEFORE MAKING A FINAL DECISION.
PAINTING ON THE BUILDING IS OUR LEAST FAVORITE OF THE FOUR OP, OR THAT'S ACTUALLY A FIFTH OPTION.
UM, SO THE CURRENT PROPOSED BRICK PLANTER WALL, IT'S FOUR-SIDED IS, UH, NO SIR, IT IS A TWO-SIDED, UH, STRUCTURE OR THREE SIDED STRUCTURE.
I HAVE, UH, THERE'S AN LARGE DOCUMENT CAMERA, PLEASE.
UH, WOULD THE LANDLORD BE AMENABLE POTENTIALLY TO WOOD AS OPPOSED TO A BRICK? SO, SO IT'S, I I'M NOT, I'M JUST ON BEHALF OF THE BUILDING OWNER.
I'M NOT, I CAN'T SAY THAT THE TENANT WOULD BE AMENABLE TO THAT.
PERHAPS WE, IT COULD BE STARBUCKS COULD, EXCUSE ME, PERHAPS STARBUCKS COULD BE ASKED TO SHOW SOME DIFFERENT OPTIONS.
I THINK, I MEAN, ON THE ONE HAND, IT BRICK'S NICE BECAUSE YOU CAN SIT ON IT, YOU KNOW, UM, BUT IT DOES, IT IS KIND OF AS RENDERED, WHICH IS ALL WE HAVE TO GO ON REALLY.
IT DOES, IT IS KIND OF IMPOSING AND LOCK VIEW AND HARD.
IT'S A NEW WALL, SO IT'S NOT WALL.
YEAH, I MEAN I HAPPEN TO THINK IT'S A NICE CONTRAST TO THE OBVIOUS HISTORIC BUILDING THAT BEEN PAINTED CHAIR.
'CAUSE IT IS SO CLEAN AND DESIGN.
YEAH, I THINK THE WOOD, I DON'T KNOW WHAT PURPOSE WOOD WOULD SERVE.
UH, IT, THERE'S NO WOOD ANYWHERE AND IT, IT WOULDN'T GIVE YOU ANY TYPE OF SAFETY OR, WELL, ONE, A ADVANTAGE OF WOOD WOULD BE THAT ACOUSTICAL ISSUE.
THE BRICK IS NOT GOING TO DAMPEN SOUND, BUT WE'LL REFLECT.
I THINK WE HAVE MULTIPLE QUESTIONS, I THINK FOR YOU ALL, BUT I'LL JUST, I'LL JUST INTERJECT ALSO BECAUSE YOU MENTIONED WORD SAFETY.
YOU ARE CLOSE TO A STREET AND A CURB.
SO, UM, AND I MEAN, I JUST, WE WANNA FIND THE RIGHT SOLUTION FOR THIS FROM A HISTORIC DISTRICT STANDPOINT.
I'M ALSO, I MEAN, CARS JUMP CURBS ALL THE TIME.
AND SO ALSO THE IDEA OF SOMETHING MASONRY DOES SEEM LIKE THERE COULD BE A WAY TO DO THAT BECAUSE THINGS HAPPEN THAT YOU WOULD NOT IMAGINE.
BUT THERE ARE VIDEOS OF THEM, SO WE KNOW THEY, THEY TAKE PLACE.
SO YEAH, BECAUSE WE'RE SITTING OUT THERE AND WE'RE BY A STREET, I, I DO RECOGNIZE THAT THERE'S, THERE'S SOME CONSIDERATION FOR WHAT MATERIAL IS AND, AND WHAT IS, YOU KNOW, WHAT KIND OF A BALLARD EFFECT THIS WOULD HAVE AS WELL FROM A SAFETY STANDPOINT.
AND, AND I WOULD ALSO SAY THAT IT IS, UH, THERE'S NOT A CURB THERE BECAUSE IT WAS ORIGINALLY FRONT END PARKING.
SO IT'S EVEN, THERE'S EVEN MORE DANGEROUS.
THERE'S NOT REALLY A CURB WHERE A CAR COULD JUST COME EASILY.
YOU, YOU'RE NOT PUTTING PEOPLE IN DANGER, ARE YOU? I HOPE NOT.
YOU SAID THE WORD AND, AND, AND IF YOU, WELL, ONE OF THE REASONS IF YOU'RE DESIGNING, IF NO WAIT, IF YOU DESIGN TO RESIST THE FORCE OF MOVING VEHICLES, THEN YOU'LL NEED TO BE CLEAR ABOUT THAT.
AND WE WOULD ALL NEED TO BE CLEAR ABOUT THAT.
AND THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE HERE FOR.
SO, OKAY, I RETRACT THAT STATEMENT ON PAGE 10 16.
IT SHOWS THAT THERE IS A CURB.
I'M GETTING A, I'M GETTING ALARMED, BUT I LET, LET ME ADD A COUPLE OF THINGS.
FIRST OF ALL THAT I HAVEN'T HEARD ANYBODY REALLY SAY ANYTHING AGAINST THE IDEA OF A SEATED PLANTER AREA, WHATEVER YOU WANNA CALL IT.
AND I CERTAINLY AGREE THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU CAN SIT ON IS A GREAT AMENITY WHEREVER IT IS HISTORIC DISTRICT OR ANYWHERE ELSE IN THE WORLD WE HIT.
BUT, BUT IT'S DETAILED IN A VERY CONTEMPORARY, SIMPLISTIC RUNNING BOND PATTERN.
I, I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO BELABOR THE POINT THAT THERE'S AN INFINITE NUMBER OF WAYS TO DO THIS THAT COULD BE A LITTLE MORE, UM, INTERESTING OR MAYBE MORE PALATABLE TO THE DISTRICT.
YOU KNOW, IT MIGHT BE A BRICK PATTERN THAT'S SOMETHING OTHER THAN JUST A PURE RUNNING BOND.
AND IF IT WERE TO BE WOOD, IT COULD BE WOOD THAT COULD BE APPLIED TO CMU OR, OR MASONRY ABOVE OTHER SORTS.
SO YOU'D HAVE THE ACOUSTICAL VALUES SUCH AS IT WOULD BE, I'M SKEPTICAL ABOUT AND POTENTIALLY, UH, SAFETY ISSUES.
IF YOU WANT TO ADDRESS THOSE, ADDRESS THEM.
WELL, I WOULD SAY, UM, SO I THINK THERE'S, THERE'S A LOT OF ROOM TO MOVE THERE WITH THAT.
I, I'M SORRY, I'M HOLDING BACK A QUESTION.
WHAT IS THIS GEOMETRIC PATTERN ON THE BUILDING THAT, THAT WAS A, IS THAT AN APPLIED
[02:35:01]
GRAPHIC OR IS THAT A METAL? NO, THAT WAS A LOCAL ARTIST IS A, WELL WHAT IS IT? IS IT A METAL SCREEN? IS IT A PAINT? NO, IT'S JUST PAINT ON THE PAINT.IT'S PAINT ON PAINT ON SURFACE PAINT.
UM, YEAH, I MEAN, YOU KNOW, I COULD CERTAINLY, I, I HAVE NO ISSUE SPEAKING WITH THE, THE CL THE TENANT AND ASKING THEM TO PROPOSE, YOU KNOW, WELL I WOULD IN ENDLESS AMOUNT OF OPTIONS AND DESIGNS.
I MEAN, WHAT, WHAT WILL BE APPROVED? I MEAN, IS IT, IF IT'S BRICK, DOES IT NEED, YOU KNOW, WHERE DO YOU, WHERE DOES IT BEGIN? WHERE DOES IT THEN YOU'RE GOING TO, NOR HILL, YOU KNOW, IS A GROUP OF PEOPLE THAT YOU KNOW ARE IN, IN SUPPORT OF THE, UH, THE PATIO.
JUST, WE DON'T KNOW PARTICULARLY WHAT THEY WANT.
SO I JUST DON'T KNOW WHERE IT ENDS.
I'M HAPPY TO EXERCISE THAT, BUT AT A CERTAIN POINT, THE, THE TENANT WE'D LIKE THEM TO GET GOING WITH CONSTRUCTION TOO.
UM, WELL, MR. CHAIR, WE COULD LOOK AT LIKE THE HEIGHTS MERCANTILE, WHICH IS ALSO IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT AND THEY HAVE CONCRETE AND CINDER BLOCK WITH THIS, THE MORTAR COMING OUT THE SIDES OF IT AND RUSTED STEEL.
'CAUSE THAT'S ON THE HISTORIC DISTRICT THAT'S ON SIXTH STREET AND HEIGHTS BOULEVARD.
SO I PERSONALLY THINK THAT THIS BRICK WALL IS PROBABLY FINE.
UM, AND I DO THINK SOMETHING MYSTERY BEING RIGHT ON THE STREET WOULD BE, EVEN IF IT'S NOT LIKE SAFETY RATED, WOULD MAKE PEOPLE PSYCHOLOGICALLY FEEL MORE COMFORTABLE THAN A WOOD SCREEN OR LATTICE OR, OR RUT IRON RAILING OR SOMETHING.
'CAUSE NO ONE'S GONNA WANNA SIT OUT THERE WITH THOSE CARS GOING AS FAST AS THEY GO.
UH, AFTER HEARING, UH, VARIOUS POINTS, UH, AND THERE ARE STILL A LOT OF THINGS THAT ARE UP IN THE AIR.
AND ALSO THE FACT THAT, UH, THE OWNERS, THE, UH, TENANTS AND THE, UH, THE, I GUESS NORTH HILL, THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAS NOT GOT, GIVEN THE TOTAL INPUT.
I WOULD SUGGEST THAT, UH, WE NEED TO DEFER THIS.
WE WE'RE NOT DESIGNING SOLUTION HERE RIGHT NOW IN THE INTEREST OF TIME, I WOULD LIKE TO JUST DEFER THIS PROJECT TILL THEY MEET WITH NORTH HILL FIRST AND THEN THEY COME BACK TO THE PO AND THEN THE PO MEET WITH US.
YEAH, THAT WILL, THAT WILL BE MY RECOMMENDATION.
IS THAT ACCEPTABLE TO THE OWNER OR HE IS ENGAGED WITH THE HISTORIC DISTRICT AS WE SPEAK?
I MEAN THE, I MEAN, RIGHT NOW THE OWNER IS STILL ENGAGED TO FIGURE OUT THE SIGN OPTIONS TO FIGURE OUT A COMEBACK ON THE SIGN ASPECT, RIGHT? I THINK YOU COULD ALLOW THE OWNER AND STAFF TO FIGURE OUT THE SIGNAGE.
I ALSO KNOW THAT YOU WANNA MOVE FORWARD.
YOU HAVE A TENANT WHO NEEDS TO DO BUILD OUT.
SO ARE YOU OPEN TO US DEFERRING THIS? CAN YOU ASK IF IT'S DEFERRED? IT COMES BACK TO US PRESENTATION PLEASE.
IF I, I MEAN DEFERRING, WHICH ISSUE? THE SIGNAGE OR THE EVERYTHING.
I MEAN, WELL, COULD THEY DEFER JUST THE SIGNAGE AND THE FRONT PLANTER AND THEN LET THE INTERIOR WORK GET A PERMIT? WELL, SO THAT THEY DON'T HAVE TO STOP THAT.
WELL, LET, LET, LEMME JUST STATE WHAT, LEMME JUST STATE WHAT'S ON THE SCREEN.
WE HAVE A RECOMMENDATION FROM STAFF TO APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS PROVIDED THAT THE SIGN BE CHANGED AND THAT THE WALL BE CHANGED TO BE IN KEEPING WITH THE DISTRICT, WHICH I ASSUME MEANS, AND THE IN THAT WOULD BE DETERMINED BY STAFF IS THAT, AM I, AM I CORRECT? CORRECT.
SO WE DON'T, WE, WE COULD SAY WE AGREE WITH THAT RECOMMENDATION.
THEY'LL WORK IT OUT AND AM AM I NOT STATING THE OBVIOUS? I MEAN WELL THAT'S WHAT IT SAYS ON THE PROPOSAL HERE.
SO SOMEONE COULD MAKE A MOTION CURRY MOVES THAT WE ACCEPT STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
WELL, BUT, UH, SECOND THE QUESTION THEN IS THAT IF, DO YOU, YOU SAY ONLY THE STAFF, THEN WHAT ABOUT IF NOR HILL COMES BACK AND SAY THEY DON'T AGREE KEEPING WITH THE DISTRICT? I ASSUME STAFF WOULD WORK.
UH, I, I DON'T, I DON'T THINK STAFF IS IS MEAN.
I'LL ASK THE DIRECTOR OF PLANNING, BUT I DON'T THINK STAFF IS UNDER A, AN ADVISORY THAT THEY HAVE TO GET AN APPROVAL FROM NOR HILL.
BUT I DO THINK STAFF IS GONNA TAKE, TAKE, COMMENT IN, IN CONSIDERATION IN GOOD FAITH FROM NOR HILL.
I'M NOTHING YOU'RE ASKING FOR.
THAT'S WHAT I, THAT'S WHAT I READ BETWEEN THE LINES OF THIS TEST.
I I JUST WANT TO COMMENT THAT I WOULD, IF I COULD AMEND THE APPROVAL FROM WHAT YOU'VE HEARD, I DO BELIEVE OTHER OPTIONS MAY WORK AND BE SATISFACTORY THAT ARE NOT THE, FOR THE SIGN THAT ARE NOT PAINTING THAT SIGN ON THE SURFACE.
SO I WOULD ACTUALLY ASK RESPECTFULLY THAT WE WOULD APPROVE WITH THE CONDITIONS THAT STAFF WORK OUT ALL OF THOSE THINGS PER STAFF APPROVAL.
AND YES, OF COURSE WE WILL, UH, WORK CLOSELY WITH THE NOR HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND REVIEW
[02:40:01]
THINGS CLOSELY.THAT WOULD BE OUR APPROACH TO BE THAT WE FEEL THAT IT'S A DESIGN THAT YOU WOULD ACCEPT, WHICH WE ALWAYS LOOK, TRY TO GET TO AS WELL AS OF COURSE THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
'CAUSE WE HAVE TO LET HIM KNOW THE APPLICANTS THAT THEY HAVE TO SIGN THAT FORM WHEN THEY APPLY FOR THE PERMIT, THAT THEY HAVE RECEIVED APPROVAL FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION IN THIS CASE.
'CAUSE THERE ARE DEED RESTRICTIONS THAT, THAT THEY ARE OBLIGATED TO DO SO TO MEET.
AND I'LL JUST SAY, SO CAN WE JUST AMEND THE, THE MOTION YOU, WILL YOU RESTATE YOUR MOTION TO, TO INCLUDE THAT THEN? UH, CURRY MOVES THAT WE ACCEPT, UH, STAFF RECOMMENDATION WITH THE AMENDMENT THAT THE SIGNAGE NOT BE LIMITED TO PAINTED ON SURFACE BUT AS, UH, AS NEGOTIATED, UH, BETWEEN PARTIES.
ANY OPPOSED? ANY ABSTENTIONS? THE MOTION PASSES.
AND, AND, AND STAFF, I WOULD IMAGINE THERE'S GONNA BE SOME KIND OF CONCRETE BACKUP WALL BEHIND WHATEVER YOU APPROVE BECAUSE I CANNOT IMAGINE PUTTING PEOPLE THAT CLOSE TO THE CAR WITHOUT SOMETHING THAT COULD STOP A VEHICLE BECAUSE UNFORTUNATELY IT HAPPENS.
CHAIRPERSON MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION OF AND OF THE PUBLIC, THIS IS STAFF PERSON CHARLES SADLER, UH, THIS APPLICATION BEFORE YOU, WE HAVE ADDED TO THIS REPORT SINCE IT WAS ORIGINALLY POSTED.
SO THERE'S, IT'S QUITE A SIMPLE APPLICATION.
UH, BUT IT, WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO, WHAT YOU'RE GONNA SEE ON THE SCREEN, THERE'S BEEN SOME ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ADDED TO IT.
SO IT WAS EXPANDED UPON AND MADE MORE CLEAR, BUT THERE'S BEEN NO CHANGES.
I SUBMIT FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION, 1987 WEST GRAY STREET NUMBER 33, WHICH IS PART OF THE LANDMARKED RIVER OAK SHOPPING CENTER.
THIS IS A COMMERCIAL BUILDING SEEKING TO ADD A VERTICAL PIER.
UH, THE PIER SHALL MATCH EXISTING STUCCO PIERS.
AND THE REASON FOR THIS IS TO, IT'S PART OF A, A INTERIOR RENOVATION FOR A NEW TENANT.
SO THE ALAN EDMONDS IS, I FORGET WHO THAT'S GONNA BE, BUT THAT'S GONNA BE ENLARGED.
AND THEN I THINK SEPHORA IS GONNA BE WHERE ANN TAYLOR IS.
AND IF YOU GO TO THE ILLUSTRATED, UH, UH, THAT WOULD BE ON PAGE SEVEN THAT GOES INTO A LITTLE MORE DETAIL THAT IT'S, IT'S IN KEEPING WITH WHAT IS THERE.
UM, STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL.
I DON'T BELIEVE ANYONE IS HERE TO SPEAK ON THIS.
IS THERE A PRECEDENT FOR, FOR KEEPING TO CHANGE, FOR CONTINUING TO CHANGE THE FENESTRATION PATTERN AND ALL THESE OTHER THINGS THEY KEEP DOING TO THESE POOR BUILDINGS? LIKE, LIKE WHY, WHY ARE WE APPROVING THIS? BECAUSE I, THEY KEEP LIKE MESSING WITH THESE BUILDINGS OVER AND OVER AGAIN AND DOING ALL SORTS OF TERRIBLE THINGS TO THEM.
SO WHY ARE WE APPROVING THOSE? OR DO WE EVEN KNOW WHAT WAS ORIGINAL? DOESN'T MATTER WHAT WE APPROVED BECAUSE 90 DAYS THEY DO WHATEVER THEY WANT TO ANYWAY.
BUT WHY WOULDN'T WE APPROVE IT? IT'S BETTER THAN SOME OF THE STUFF WE'VE THAT WE'VE APPROVED.
EVERY TIME THIS THING COMES UP, I GET FRUSTRATED 'CAUSE THEY'RE ALWAYS DOING SOMETHING INAPPROPRIATE TO IT.
ARE THERE, DID YOU, DO YOU HAVE CHARLES ANY HISTORIC PHOTOS OF THESE BAYS TO SEE WHAT ORIGINALLY, I MEAN MY, MY GUESS IS THIS HAS BEEN SO MANIPULATED THAT THERE'S, THERE'S NOTHING THAT, THERE'S NO ORIGINAL FENESTRATION PATTERN LEFT, RIGHT? THE UNFORTUNATELY THERE'S NO, IT'S NOT OLD ENOUGH THAT THE, THAT THERE'S BE BUREAU OF LAND ASSESSMENT OR SAND.
I MEAN IT'S, THAT WOULD, AS FAR AS I CAN TELL FROM THE ARCHIVES, WE HAVEN'T GOTTEN ANY, ANY, UH, GRANULAR INFORMATION, BUT MAYBE ROMAN CAN, WELL I THINK THAT WITH THESE, AND SO WE'VE GOT AN IMAGE OF IT UP THERE.
I MEAN, GENERALLY WE LOOK AT THESE AND WE HOPE THAT THE DESIGN FOR THE FACADE IS IN KEEPING WITH THE, THE BUILDING.
AND WE OFTEN WILL ASK THEM TO REVISE ELEVATIONS BEFORE THEY GET TO YOU.
AND, UH, IF WE HAVEN'T IN THIS CASE, WE MUST HAVE FELT THAT THE, THE, UH, PROPOSAL DIDN'T DO MUCH CHANGES THERE.
UH, AND TO BE CLEAR, YEAH, IT WOULD BE HARD FOR US TO KNOW EXACTLY
[02:45:01]
WHAT WAS LEFT ORIGINALLY IN THAT PARTICULAR SPOT.UM, AND WE HAD THIS COME UP WHEN I FIRST GOT HERE ABOUT FOUR YEARS AGO.
JASON HAD ONE WE WORKED ON THAT, UH, HAD A LOT OF CHANGES AND WE WENT IN THERE AND WE DID HAVE THEM PUT BACK A BLACK TILE WALL AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
BUT GENERALLY WE'RE JUST LOOKING AND SEE IF IT'S IN KEEPING WITH THE BUILDING.
UM, I DON'T HAVE ANYONE FROM THE PUBLIC SIDE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM, BUT I'M GONNA OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING AT THIS TIME AND JUST ASK, IS THERE ANYONE HERE IN, IN THE ROOM THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? CANNOT HEARING? I'M GONNA CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
UM, IS THERE A FURTHER DISCUSSION OR IS THERE A MOTION TO ACCEPT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION OR ANOTHER MOTION? MOTION TO ACCEPT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.
IS THERE A SECOND? I'M CURIOUS TO HEAR FROM THE COMMISSIONER WHO PULLED THE THIS FOR CONSIDERATION? CARRIE, WHY'D YOU, BECAUSE THEY'VE BEEN MESSING.
IN 90 DAYS IT'S GONNA BE LOOK EXACTLY LIKE THIS, THIS APPLICATION.
WHAT? WELL, I HAVE A MOTION, BUT I DON'T HAVE A SECOND, SO I'LL WITHDRAW MY MOTION.
DO I HAVE ANOTHER MOTION
AM AM I READING IT RIGHT? THAT THE REASON FOR THE MODIFICATIONS TO THE FRONT FACADE ARE SIMPLY FOR A NEW DEMISING PARTITION BETWEEN TWO TENANTS, CORRECT.
SO IT'S STRUCTURALLY IT'S GONNA CHANGE ON THE INTERIOR AND THEY WANT THE EXTERIOR.
IT'S STRUCTURALLY BECAUSE THE DEMISING PARTITION IS NOT NECESSARILY STRUCTURAL.
THERE'S GONNA BE A NEW WALL ON THE INSIDE UNTIL THIS, YOU NEED TO SEPARATE TWO TENANTS.
RIGHT? SO THIS, AND THERE ARE WAYS POTENTIALLY TO SEPARATE TWO TENANTS AT THE FRONT FACADE WITHOUT HAVING TO MODIFY THE EXTERIOR OF THE FRONT FACADE.
YEAH, THERE'S ALREADY A MOYA IN THERE.
THEY CAN JUST GO TO THE MULIAN AND THEY MAY BE CONCERNS ABOUT THAT ACOUSTICALLY AND FROM A SECURITY STANDPOINT.
BUT THOSE ARE ALL THINGS THAT THEY'RE MODIFYING A NON HISTORICAL PORTION OF THE BUILDING THAT'S ALREADY BEEN MODIFIED.
YOU'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT THE ORIGINAL FACADE FROM THE 1940S THAT'S ALREADY GONE.
WEINGARTEN'S HAS ALREADY DESTROYED ALL THAT.
THEY'RE JUST PUTTING UP ANOTHER STUCCO PARTITION ON A NON HISTORIC SECTION OF THE BUILDING.
NONE OF THAT'S ORIGINAL ON THE FACADE.
THAT'S NOT ORIGINAL AT THAT POINT ANYMORE.
THEY, THEY CAN DO WHATEVER THEY WANT TO.
SO I NEED, I NEED, YEAH, I NEED A MOTION.
WELL, I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE SECOND, THAT WE DENY THE APPROVAL.
AND I'LL ASK AGAIN FOR THE CRITERIA OVER WHICH WE WOULD BE DENYING IT ON
WELL, I DON'T, YOU CAN'T BRING A MOTION FOR THAT.
YEAH, I MEAN THE, THE QUESTION IS, I MEAN, IF IT'S, IF, IF THAT, THAT AMOUNT OF THE WALL IS NOT ORIGINAL, I JUST NEED UNDERSTAND HOW, HOW THIS, HOW THIS WORKS.
I MEAN, BECAUSE I UNDERSTAND IT'S, IT'S A MODIFICATION.
NUMBER FOUR, THE PROPOSED ACTIVITY MUST PRESERVE THE DISTINGUISHING QUALITIES OR CHARACTER OF THE BUILDING STRUCTURE, OBJECT OR SITE AND ITS ENVIRONMENT.
ONE COULD ARGUE THAT TO ADD ANOTHER PEER AND NOW THEY'RE GONNA BE THREE FAT PIERS IN A ROW, WHICH DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE AT ALL.
STARTS TO SOLIDIFY THAT, UM, FACADE, WHICH IS OTHERWISE WINDOWS SEPARATED BY SLENDER ALUMINUM OR METAL IONS SO FAR.
SO I'M GONNA CALL THE VOTE WHO, WHO IS IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION AS STATED.
RIGHT? THE MOTION BY IS DENIED IS DENIAL.
ANY OPPOSED TO THE MOTION? ANY ABSTENTIONS? THE MOTION PASSES.
OKAY, WE ARE GONNA MOVE ON TO ITEM 15, 2009 WEST GRACE STREET.
GOOD EVENING CHAIRPERSON AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.
THIS IS STAFF PERSON SAMANTHA DE LEONE.
I SUBMIT ITEM B 15 AT 2009 WEST GRAY STREET AT THE RIVER OAKS THEATER AND SHOPPING CENTER.
FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION, THE RIVER OAKS THEATER AND COMMUNITY SHOPPING CENTER IS THE CITY OF HOUSTON LANDMARK DESIGNATED IN JUNE, 2007.
THE COMMERCIAL BUILDING WAS CONSTRUCTED CIRCA 1937.
ON MARCH 13TH, 2024, THE APPLICANT APPLIED FOR A CUA
[02:50:01]
FOR SIGN ALTERATION.THIS APPLICANT IS PROPOSING NEW SIGNAGE TO DISPLAY THE NAME OF THE RESTAURANT.
LEO'S, THE PROPOSED SIGNAGE IS A ONE REVERSE LIT CHANNEL LETTERS STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL CHAIRS AND MEMBER OF THE COMMISSION.
THE APPLICANT IS NOT HERE, BUT I'M AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS.
THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
ARE THERE QUESTIONS OF STAFF COMMISSIONERS? I HAVE A QUESTION.
IS THIS THE OLD PERRY'S STEAKHOUSE LOCATION? I DON'T THINK SO.
IT, IT WAS A, WHEN I LOOKED IT UP, IT WAS A BUSINESS THAT I DID NOT RECOGNIZE.
I, THE, THE, THE, JUST TO THE RIGHT THEATER TO THE WEST OF THE THEATER SIDE.
ON THE THEATER SIDE, IT'S ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF IT'S OPPOSITE SIDE.
ON PAGE SEVEN OF SEVEN, THEY'VE GOT A GOOGLE MAPS POINTING TO IT.
BUT SAMANTHA, THE, THE SIZE OF THE SIGN IS TYPICAL OF OTHER SIGNS WE'VE APPROVED.
IT'S IN, IN THE, THE TYPE OF SIGN IS ALSO THE TYPE WE HAVE APPROVED IN THE PAST.
I DON'T THINK YOUR MICROPHONE'S ON.
I RECOMMEND, UH, I MAKE A MOTION, UH, TO ACCEPT STAFF APPROVAL OF THIS ITEM.
ANY OPPOSED? WELL, DIDN'T WE TALK ON THE STARBUCKS THING THAT WE DON'T LIKE THESE KIND OF SIGNS? THIS IS A DIFFERENT TYPE OF SIGN.
THIS IS NOT A SELF ILLUMINATED, IT'S A CHANNEL CHANCE TO CHANNELIZED, BUT HAS A, IT'S IT'S BACK LIT, BUT IT'S NOT A, IT'S NOT A ACRYLIC WHERE LIGHT'S COMING THROUGH THE ACRYLIC.
ALL THE OTHER SIGNS ON THE BUILDING ALREADY, WHICH I THINK THE, THE MAIN ISSUE IS THAT THE LIGHT IS OUTSIDE OF, OF THE SIGN, WHETHER IT'S IN FRONT OR BEHIND, BUT IT'S NOT, IT'S EXTERNAL AND NOT INTERNAL TO THE FIXTURE.
THAT'S WHY IT WAS MARKED AS APPROVAL.
SO ANY ABSTENTIONS THAT MOTION PASSES.
WE HAVE ONE MORE ITEM ON THE AGENDA.
WHICH IS ITEM NUMBER 16 18 24 HEIGHTS BOULEVARD.
SO IT SAYS GOOD AFTERNOON, BUT I'M GONNA SAY GOOD EVENING CHAIRPERSON AND MEMBERS OF THE HHC.
THIS IS STAFF PER PERSON, TERRENCE JACKSON.
AND TODAY I SUBMIT TO YOU ITEM B 16 AT 1824 HEIGHTS BOULEVARD.
A CONTRIBUTING HOME LOCATED IN THE HOUSTON HEIGHTS EAST HISTORIC DISTRICT BUILT CIRCA 1889.
THE PROPERTY INCLUDES A TWO STORY WOOD FRAME, 3,791 SQUARE FOOT CONTRIBUTING QUEEN END RESIDENCE, WHICH IS NOW COMMERCIAL STRUCTURE SITUATED ON A 15,000 SQUARE FOOT LOT.
THE APPLICANT IS A APPRO, UH, IS PROPOSING TO CONSTRUCT AN A DA RAMP AT THE FRONT OF THE EXISTING HOME.
THE APPLICANT ALSO HAS AN APPLICATION TO CON TO CONSTRUCT A NEW TWO STORY DETACHED THREE CAR GARAGE APARTMENT, WHICH IS APPLICATION 20 24 0 1 0 8.
THE PROJECT MEETS THE HEIGHTS DESIGN GUIDELINES.
IN THIS ALTERATION APPLICATION, THE APPLICANT HAS TWO OPTIONS AND PROPOSES AS OPTION ONE PARTIALLY DEMOLISH THE EXISTING HANDRAILS AT THE FRONT PORCH.
CONTRIBUTING FRONT PORCH CONSTRUCT A NEW CONCRETE, A DA ACCESSIBLE RAMP WITH STEEL HANDRAILS.
THIS OPTION ALLOWS FOR NO PENETRATIONS TO THE ORIGINAL CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE.
OPTION TWO DEMOLISH THE EXISTING EXTERIOR WOOD LANDING AND STAIR CONSTRUCT A NEW WOOD, A DA ACCESSIBLE RAMP AND HAND RAILS CONSTRUCT NEW WOOD STAIRS AND HAND RAILS.
THE NEW WOOD HAND RAILS WILL MATCH THE EXISTING HANDRAILS AT THE FRONT PORCH CONTRACTOR TO MINIMIZE THE PENETRATIONS TO THE ORIGINAL SIDING.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF A COA FOR EITHER OPTION.
HOWEVER, THE OPTION THE OWNER PREFERS OPTION ONE CHAIR MEMBERS IN A HHC, THE AGENT JOEL JAMES IS ON STANDBY TO SPEAK.
AND I AM AVAILABLE FOR, I AM AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
TERRANCE, UH, COMMISSION MEMBERS.
ARE THERE QUESTIONS OF STAFF? STAFF REALLY DOESN'T CARE WHICH OPTION STAFF HAS? NO, WE DON'T.
UH, THE ON, LIKE I SAID, THE OWNER PREFERS OPTION ONE, SO WE'RE FINE
[02:55:01]
WITH THAT.WHAT, SO JUST REAL QUICK, WHY IS ONE CONCRETE AND ONE WOOD? WELL, SO BECAUSE OF THE ONE TO THE PLAN.
WELL, THE ONE THAT'S TO THE RIGHT, UH, OF THE, OF THE FRONT FACADE, UM, THAT ONE WOULD GO, THAT WOULD, WOULD ENCROACH INTO THE PROPERTY, WELL WOULD BE LESS THAN THREE FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINE.
SO THAT'S WHY IT WOULD NEED TO BE, UH, SOMETHING THAT'S NOT, NOT FIRE.
BUT THE, THE, I DON'T KNOW WHICH DIRECTION THIS HOUSE FACES, BUT THE LEFT SIDE OF THE HOUSE ON THE DRAWINGS ON PAST THE GABLE WHERE THAT LUNETTE WINDOW IS AND THE FRENCH DOOR, THAT'S AN ADDITION, RIGHT? THAT'S NOT PART OF THE ORIGINAL HOUSE.
CAN YOU BLOW UP THE FLOOR PLAN FOR ME? IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE IT WAS THERE BEFORE.
YEAH, SO, SO THE ORIGINAL HOME IS, UH, IT'S, I CAN'T READ IT ON HERE, BUT I CAN TELL YOU THAT TO THE LEFT OF, SO LET'S SAY THE WEIGHT OF THAT, IT'S LAID OUT PLAN SOUTH OF THE PORCH.
THAT'S THE ORIGINAL PORTION OF THE HOME.
THE PLACE WHERE THE, UM, INTERIOR STAIRS, THE INTERIOR STAIRS IS, THAT IS AN ADDITION.
BUT THERE WOULD HAVE TO BE A PORTION OF THE, UM, OF THE RAMP AT THE LANDING THAT WOULD HAVE TO, THAT WOULD ACTUALLY HAVE TO PENETRATE INTO THE, UM, ORIGINAL SIDING BECAUSE OF WHERE IT'S LOCATED.
WHY COULDN'T THEY JUST HAVE THE RAMP PULLED AWAY A COUPLE INCHES FROM THAT? WELL, BECAUSE THEY, UM, THEY HAVE PARKING AND THE AGENT IS HERE TO SPEAK, BUT THEY HAVE PARKING ISSUES.
UM, SO THEY HAVE TO HAVE, I BELIEVE, SIX PARKING SPOTS.
AND IF THEY SHIFT THAT DOWN ANY FURTHER, IT'S GOING TO AFFECT THE PARKING LAYOUT AND THAT, AND JUST FOR POINT OF CLARITY, THAT PARKING, THE SIX PARKING SPOTS THAT THEY HAVE IS BASED ON THE HISTORIC, UH, UH, UH, GOODNESS FORGIVE ME EXEMPTION THAT THEY RECEIVED.
SO IS THIS COMMERCIAL BUILDING? YES, SIR.
BEN, I HAVE, I HAVE A SPEAKER THOUGH.
SO YOU HAVE A, IF YOU HAVE A QUESTION, OTHERWISE I'M GONNA OPEN UP A PUBLIC COMMENT.
SO I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC COMMENT AT THIS TIME.
WE DO HAVE A SPEAKER SIGNED UP.
UM, I JUST, MR. MR. JOEL JAMES, IF YOU COULD APPROACH THE COMMISSION AND PLEASE RESTATE YOUR NAME AND YES.
HI, I'M JOEL JAMES WITH BRICKMAN DESIGN.
WE'RE THE ARCHITECT FOR THE PROJECT.
UH, JUST TO CLARIFY, IT IS NOT CURRENTLY COMMERCIAL.
WE ARE DOING A PROJECT TO MAKE IT A COMMERCIAL PERMITTING TO GO THROUGH COMMERCIAL PERMITTING.
AND IS THERE ANY OPTION TO PUT THE RAMP ON THE BACK? NO.
WITH THE DESIGN OF THE, THE, THE GARAGE, UH, APARTMENT, WHICH IS GONNA BE A RESIDENCE AFTER THE HOUSE BECOMES COMMERCIAL.
THERE'S NO WAY TO GET BACK THERE.
IT'S PRIVATE VERSUS PUBLIC SPACE.
IS THERE A SITE PLAN SHOWING ALL THIS TOGETHER WITH THE SIX PARKING SPOTS? I, I FEEL LIKE RIGHT NOW I'M HAVING TROUBLE.
I THINK WE'RE LOOK PAGE FIVE, BUT THAT PAGE IS THE PARKING INDICATED FIVE.
IT DOESN'T SHOW THE GARAGE APARTMENT BECAUSE THE GARAGE APARTMENT'S REALLY QUITE LARGE.
WELL, NO, THEY'RE GONNA ADD IN THE BIG GARAGE APARTMENT THAT WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT.
YOU SEE, IF YOU, IF YOU LOOK AT THE OTHER, THE ONE WITH THE SAME ADDRESS BE B 17, B 17, IT'S, IT'S REALLY QUITE LARGE.
IT'S LIKE, DO SEE IT AT THE THREE CAR GARAGE? YOU HERE? IS THIS THE, SEE THIS IS WHAT THEY'RE GONNA ADD BEHIND IT.
I HAVE THE AISLE HERE FOR CARS TO DRIVE BY AND THEN YOU'RE GONNA HAVE 45 DEGREE PARKING SPOTS HERE.
AND I HAVE THREE OF 'EM THAT ARE GONNA BE UP, UP AGAINST THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE.
UM, AND IS ONE OF THOSE ACCESSIBLE.
SO WHEN, WHEN I TRY TO PUT THE, THE, THE RAMP OVER HERE, WHICH IS AN OPTION TWO, ANY, ANY MOVING OF IT OUT IS GONNA TAKE AWAY FROM THIS AISLE.
AND THEREFORE I BECOME NONCOMPLIANT WITH TRAFFIC REQUIREMENTS FOR AISLE WIDTH.
OH, HERE'S THE, UH, PARKING STALL DIMENSIONS.
BUT YOUR, YOUR PARKING ONE OF THOSE SPACES HAS TO BE AN ACCESSIBLE SPACE, CORRECT? YES.
ONE OF THOSE IS AN ACCESS IS GONNA BE AN ACCESSIBLE SPACE THAT CAN GET OVER TO THAT RAMP.
THE ONE THAT'S OVER HERE FURTHEST TO THIS SIDE.
THIS WILL BE THE, UH, FIVE FOOT REQUIRED AISLE.
AND THEN I'LL GIVE THEM A, A, UH, A WAY TO GET TO THAT RAMP RIGHT THERE.
IS IT A BUT IS IT A FIVE FOOT AISLE? IF, I MEAN, IF, IF YOU HAVE ONE IS NOT, NOT A VAN ACCESSIBLE SPACE, WHICH TAKES UP TWO, IT TAKES UP MORE ROOM.
I'M REQUIRED TO HAVE ONE VAN ACCESSIBLE SPOT AND IT'S REQUIRED TO HAVE A FIVE FOOT AISLE NEXT TO IT, PROVIDED THAT THE SPACE IS WIDE AND IS IT MEETS THE WIDTH.
SO IT IT'S IT'S MORE THAN JUST A STANDARD SPACE WHEN YOU HAVE A FIVE FOOT AISLE.
[03:00:01]
AND THEN YOU HAVE TO PROVIDE A ACCESSIBLE ROUTE FROM THAT SPACE TO WHEREVER THE ACCESSIBLE ENTRANCE IS.I HAVE TO PROVIDE ACCESSIBLE ROUTE TO THE RAMP, CORRECT? YES.
WHICHEVER LOCATION THAT WOULD BE.
AND YOU GOTTA CROSS THE, THE, YOU GOTTA CROSS THE, THE, THE PARKING, THE TRAFFIC, UH, THE FLOW OF TRAFFIC.
SO, SO JUST THERE IS GONNA BE THE SIX SPOTS ACROSS IN THE FRONT YARD OF THE HOUSE.
IS THAT WHAT'S HAPPENING? Y YES.
IT'S HARD FOR ME TO SEE THE SCREEN'S.
I SHOW OFF THE EXISTING PLAN HERE.
THERE WILL BE THREE SPOTS ALONG THE FRONT HERE.
THERE'LL BE THREE ADDITIONAL SPOTS RIGHT HERE.
SO YOU'LL BE ABLE TO COME IN FROM HEIGHTS BOULEVARD, COME ACROSS PARK THREE HERE, PARK THREE HERE, HEAD ON IN FRONT OF THIS POOL.
AND THEN THERE'LL BE AN EXIT OUT THIS WAY.
AND WHERE'S THE HANDICAP SPOT GONNA BE? THE HANDICAP SPOT IS GONNA BE OVER HERE WHEN YOU FIRST COME IN.
IT'LL BE THE FIRST SPOT THAT'S AVAILABLE IN THE SCENARIO WHERE IF I GET THE RAMP OVER HERE, IF THE RAMP HAS TO BE OVER HERE, IT'S GONNA BE KIND OF THE SECOND SPOT OVER.
UM, I HAVE A A, A LAYOUT FOR A, A SOLUTION FOR BOTH.
'CAUSE THEN IT'S, BUT I DON'T REALLY LIKE IT TOUCHING THE PORCH, BUT MAYBE VISUALLY WON'T NOTICE IT AS MUCH.
MY OPINION IS IT PRESERVES THE FRONT ELEVATION TO TUNE IT OVER ON THE RIGHT SIDE, BUT OPTION B JUST GOES ON THE ADDITION.
SO MAYBE IT DOESN'T MATTER THERE EITHER.
LOOK AT THE ELEVATION OF THE HOUSE.
YOU GUYS ARE WORRIED ABOUT THE FRONT ELEVATION OF THE HOUSE ON PARKED IN THE FRONT YARD.
WELL, WE DON'T COMMERCIAL SPACE LIKE ALL THE OTHER COMMERCIAL BUSES.
STREET ON STREET PARKING OPTIONS TO, OR IS THAT ALREADY YOU'RE NOT ALLOWED TO HAVE ANY OF THE REQUIRED SPOTS BE OFF STREET.
I TALKED TO TRAFFIC ABOUT HAVING A COUPLE OF PARKING SPOTS OFF THE ALLEY.
HE SAID, WELL, THAT'S NOT, UM, AGAINST ANY RULES.
IT'S NOT THE ROUTE I SHOULD PROBABLY APPROACH FIRST TO TRY AND HARMONY ANY SHARED PARKING OPTIONS, WITH'S ANY OF THAT BUSINESS.
NO, BUT IF, IF I LOOK AT PAGE SEVEN OF 11, I FEEL THAT THE IMPACT OF THE, UH, OPTION ONE IS BACK TO PRESENTATION.
IT'S MINIMUM IF I LOOK AT PAGE SEVEN OF 11, OKAY.
THEY BUILD A CONCRETE STRUCTURE RIGHT NEXT TO THE FRONT PORCH.
UH, BUT TO ME, YOU, WHICH IS THE OPTION THAT'S CURRENTLY BEING SHOWN? THE OPTION CURRENTLY BEING SHOWN, YOU'RE REFERRING TO? YEAH, THE OPTION ONE.
THE, THE, YOU CAN STILL SEE THE ENTIRE STRUCTURE, THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE OF THE HOUSE.
AND, AND THE, AND UH, HANDRAILS AND THE GUARDRAILS AND SO ON.
SO THE ONLY THING THAT YOU'RE JUST SEEING IS THIS ADDITIONAL THING.
AND THEN YOU ARE CLOSEST TO THE HANDICAPPED PARKING MM-HMM
AND THAT'S WHAT THE OWNER WANTS TOO, RIGHT? CORRECT.
SO LET'S MAKE A MOTION TO, I'M GONNA, I'M GONNA CLOSE THE I PUBLIC HEARING, MAKE A MOTION TO ACCEPT OPTION ONE.
AND DO I HAVE A SECOND? I SECOND A, I'M GONNA LET YOUR CO-CHAIR, UH, SECOND.
ANY OPPOSED? ANY ABSTENTIONS? THANK YOU, TERRANCE.
I, I TERRANCE, I'M JUST HAPPY THAT YOU DIDN'T ADDRESS THIS BY SAYING GOOD MORNING.
THAT'S WHY I'M SAYING THANK YOU.
OKAY, WE ARE GONNA MOVE ON TO, UM, ITEM C.
IS THERE ANY MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC THAT WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION? PLEASE COME FORWARD NOW AND, AND STATE YOUR NAME.
UM, ITEM D, HIS COMMENTS FROM THE HAHC.
AND PLEASE, ANYTHING THAT WE CAN SAVE FOR CAMP, SAVE IT.
UM, DO WE HAVE A PROPOSED DATE FOR ANOTHER CAMP? TAYLOR, DO YOU, CAN YOU GIVE US AN UPDATE ON WHEN, UM, IT'S THE SAME DATE THAT WE CAME UP TO.
I'M NOT SURE IF WE ADDRESSED IT LAST TIME, BUT IT'S THE ONE THAT WE ALL VOTED ON, WHICH WAS JULY 19TH.
AND IS THERE MORE INFORMATION ABOUT, LIKE, I GOT A, WHAT I SAW WAS A VIRTUAL INVITE TO THE MEETING.
IS IT A VIRTUAL MEETING OR IS IT IN PERSON? AND IS THERE A TIMEFRAME FOR THE MEETING? BECAUSE I DIDN'T SEE A TIMEFRAME.
UM, IT WAS, IT WAS NEVER GONNA BE VIRTUAL.
I THINK THAT MAY HAVE BEEN THE ETHICS TRAINING.
MAYBE YOU THINK YOU MAY BE, UM, REFERRING TO THAT.
MAYBE I'M CONFUSED FROM WHAT I SAW WHEN WE WENT INTO MY EYE CALENDAR.
BUT IS THERE ALSO, OH, I, I PUT A PLACEHOLDER IN TEAMS. UM, SO I'M SORRY FOR THE CONFUSION, BUT NO, IT WASN'T VIRTUAL.
[03:05:01]
IS, IS THERE A TIME WINDOW FOR THAT DAY? WE DON'T HAVE THE EXACT TIME, BUT WE ARE GONNA SAY THE WINDOW IS GONNA BE ABOUT NINE TO FIVE.IT'S A MICROSOFT TEAMS MEETING.
MY HOPE IS WE CAN MAKE A NINE TO THREE, BUT JUST
UM, WE'RE STILL WORKING ON ALL OF THE DETAILS, BUT THAT'S, UM, VAGUE TIMEFRAME.
AND WE'RE STILL HAVING THE HISTORIC MEETING THE DAY BEFORE.
SO WE'RE SPENDING A LOT OF TIME TOGETHER.
WHAT? THAT'S, WHAT ABOUT WOULD YOU SUGGEST STARTING EARLIER? I'M SORRY TO, WOULD YOU SUGGEST STARTING EARLIER, LIKE AT EIGHT TO THREE BECAUSE YOU NEED TO LEAVE BY THREE.
I, I THINK WE SHOULD PROBABLY START AT NINE, BUT I'M JUST, I DON'T KNOW WHETHER WE CAN ACTUALLY DO OUR BUSINESS BETWEEN NINE AND THREE, THREE IF WE'RE VERY, YOU KNOW, KEEP KEEP TO KEEP TO OUR MISSION.
UM, I I KNOW THAT WAS THE, EVERYONE HAD A CONFLICT.
THAT WAS THE DAY THAT HAD THE LEAST AMOUNT OF CONFLICTS AS I RECALL.
I JUST HAVE TO GO TO THE FAMILY REUNION THAT EVENING, SO I'M JUST, AND IT'S NOT IN TOWN, SO, UM, WE CAN MAKE THIS WORK.
I JUST WANNA SEE IF WE CAN TRY TO MAKE SURE WE PLAN THAT CAREFULLY.
SO SORRY, WE HAVE TO BE DONE AT WHAT TIME? WELL, I WAS JUST ASKING, IS THERE ANY WAY THAT WE COULD BE, COULD WE BE WRAP IT UP BY THREE O'CLOCK? IT WAS JUST INSTEAD OF FOUR O'CLOCK OR YOU COULD LEAVE OR THAT'S FINE TOO.
YEAH, I MEAN, I'M NOT A PROBLEM.
I'M JUST, I I COULDN'T TELL FROM MY INVITE 'CAUSE I COULDN'T, I DIDN'T HAVE IT.
OKAY, SO WE'RE GONNA MOVE ON TO, UM, ITEM E.
HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICERS REPORT.
WELL, OR, OR MAYBE THAT THE TRAINING HAS ANYTHING ABOUT HOW TO BE A, UH, CH UH, SORRY.
UH, COMMISSIONER HICK, COMMISSIONER STAAVA HAS A COMMENT AND HE BACK FOR THE, WELL YOU BROUGHT UP THE ISSUE.
IT'S REALLY AT THE RIGHT TIME.
UM, WE HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT ENFORCEMENT AND FOR THE LAST MONTH, TWO MONTHS, WE'VE HAD THREE HOUSES ON AU AUDUBON PLACE, CHANGING WINDOWS WITHOUT A C OF A OR A PERMIT.
UM, THAT'S BEEN THE LAST FEW MONTHS.
THERE WAS ONE MONTH THAT WAS BUILDING A GARAGE IN THE BACK WITHOUT A PERMIT OR CERTIFICATE.
UM, SO I APPROACHED THE OWNER, THEY REFUSED, THEY SAID THERE WAS NO ENFORCEMENT.
THEY COULD DO WHATEVER THEY WANT.
SO YESTERDAY, OR UH, TWO DAYS AGO, THERE WERE TWO HOUSES THAT WERE REPLACING WINDOWS.
UH, AND I SAW THE WINDOWS, I TOOK PICTURES.
THE WINDOWS THAT THEY WERE TRYING TO REPLACE, WERE FINE.
UM, SO I, I WANTED TO GO TO THE OFFICE TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT THE ENFORCE ENFORCEMENT.
I MEAN, I JUST FEEL THAT THERE'S TIME FOR US TO DISCUSS ENFORCEMENT AND SEE WHAT WE CAN DO IT ABOUT IT.
AND I DIDN'T KNOW IF ROMAN, THERE'S ANYTHING THAT YOU CAN SUGGEST.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER STAAVA.
I DISCUSSED THAT WITH, UM, MS. MICKELSON AND SHE LEFT A LITTLE EARLIER TO JUST A LITTLE WHILE AGO.
AND I CALLED HER, OR I TALKED TO HER ABOUT THIS AND I SAID, LOOK, YOU KNOW, WHAT ABOUT THAT PART OF THE ORDINANCE THAT SAYS WHEN YOU'RE IN VIOLATION OF THE PRESERVATION ORDINANCE, YOU MAY BE FINED UP TO $500 A DAY AND EVERY DAY THAT YOU'RE NOT IN COMPLIANCE IS A NEW VIOLATION.
AND SHE WAS TOLD ME SHE WAS, WE, SHE WAS GONNA SEND AN EMAIL IMMEDIATELY, AND THIS WAS YESTERDAY TO MAKE AN INQUIRY AS TO HOW WE'RE GONNA DO THAT AND WHY WE AREN'T DOING THAT AND HOW WE'RE GONNA DO THAT.
AND, UM, SINCE THE DAY I CAME IN, I TOLD, UH, THE, THE FORMER DIRECTOR GIVE ME A BADGE.
UH, YOU KNOW, WE, WE, WE, WE HAD A, AND I, I'M SORT OF JOKING, BUT WHAT I MEAN IS I HAVE NO PROBLEM, UH, WITH THAT.
AND, AND LAST WEEK I, UH, HAD TO GO TO A PROPERTY IN OLD SIX WARD WHERE I SAW INAPPROPRIATE WORK GOING ON.
UH, UM, DIRECTOR OSLAN PUT A STOP WORK ORDER.
THEY HAD EXCEEDED THEIR REPAIR PERMIT.
THEY HAD A REPAIR PERMIT, BUT THEY WERE GOING WAY TOO FAR.
UH, AND UM, WE REELED THEM IN AND THEY'LL BE
[03:10:01]
COMING.UH, WELL WE MET THERE WITH THE BUILDING INSPECTOR, MR. STOCKTON.
AND, UM, THAT ONE, WE DID THAT.
AND THEN, SO WITH THE ONES THAT ARE GOING ON IN AUDUBON, I MEAN, WE, WE UH, WE RESPONDED QUICKLY.
UM, UH, STAFF MEMBER, UH, JASON, LILLIAN AL WAS VERY GOOD ABOUT, UM, WE GOT THE, I FORGOT WE LOOKED AT 'EM, WE CHECKED WHERE WE WERE.
WE SAW THOSE WINDOWS, WHICH WERE COMPLETELY APPROPRIATE.
UM, BEING WITH TAKEN OUTTA THAT ROMAN, JUST, JUST IN KNOWING THAT PEOPLE HAVE TO LEAVE, I DON'T WANT TO STOP.
AND, AND HOPEFULLY OUR CURRENT DIRECTOR OF PLANNING CAN DO SOMETHING, RIGHT? YEAH.
BECAUSE YOU HAVE EVEN WHITE OAK, RIGHT? WHERE, WHERE WE GO TO AN A PERSON'S SITE, WE SPEND TWO HOURS AT THIS SITE TALKING ABOUT THIS WORK MATERIAL.
THE GUY JUST COMES ALONG, RIPS THE ENTIRE FACADE OF THAT 3,400 WHITE OAK OUT.
RIGHT? WHAT ARE THE CONSEQUENCES? WHAT ARE THE CONSEQUENCES IN GLENBROOK VALLEY TO PUT IN WINDOW WORLD WINDOWS? WHAT ARE THE CONSEQUENCES IN AUDUBON THERE? HONESTLY, WE NEED BADGES AND WE NEED FINES.
'CAUSE THE PREVAILING ATTITUDE ON THE STREET, IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT I DO, THERE'S NO ENFORCEMENT.
I THINK IT'S, UM, WHAT KIM'S GONNA DO, BECAUSE WE CAN DO BADGES AND WE DO, YOU KNOW, ISSUE CITATIONS AND THINGS, AND THEN IT, YOU KNOW, IT EITHER IT GOES TO COURT AND GETS TOSSED OUT.
SO WHAT KIM'S GONNA DO, AND WHAT I HEARD, I JUST HEARD IT QUICKLY EARLIER, UH, THIS AFTERNOON, IS SHE'S GONNA GET WITH THEIR LITIGATION DEPARTMENT TO SEE, UM, ESP PARTICULARLY IN, UM, UH, COMMISSIONER STYLES NEIGHBORHOOD WHERE HE'S COMPLAINING.
BUT YEAH, WE'LL SEE WHAT WE CAN DO BECAUSE IT IS, IT'S, WE SPEND ALL THIS TIME AND, UH, EFFORT AND PEOPLE JUST DISREGARD US.
SO, BUT I FEEL LIKE I'VE BEEN BRINGING THIS UP AT THE END OF EVERY MEETING, LIKE EVERY OTHER TIME FOR THE LAST YEAR OR TWO YEARS.
AND IT DOESN'T SEEM LIKE A SINGLE INCH OF MOVEMENT ON THIS SUBJECT.
PEOPLE NOD THEIR HEAD AND SAY, YEAH, WE'RE GONNA WORK ON IT, AND THEN YOU COME BACK THE NEXT MONTH AND NO WORK THAT I EVER SEE HAS BEEN DONE.
SO I DON'T KNOW IF THEY'RE JUST NOT DOING ANYTHING ABOUT IT, OR THERE'S SOME REASON WHY THEY CAN'T, LIKE, 'CAUSE OF THAT THE LAWSUIT, YOU KNOW, AGAINST HISTORIC PRESERVATION THAT WENT TO THE TEXAS SUPREME COURT.
I FORGET THE WOMAN'S NAME THAT LED IT.
AND NOW EVERYTHING IS IN DISARRAY OR WHAT.
BUT, BUT I, I AGREE THAT PEOPLE DON'T THINK THEY DO THESE THINGS AND WE GIVE THEM THE COR, BUT THEN THEY DON'T MAKE THE CORRECTIONS.
MAYBE SOME OF THE GOOD PEOPLE DO, BUT MOST PEOPLE PROBABLY JUST TOTALLY IGNORE IT UNLESS THEIR GAS GETS TURNED OFF AND THEY CAN'T GET TURNED ON OR SOMETHING AGAIN.
SO, I MEAN, WHAT I, IT'S HARD TO EVEN SAY WHAT TO DO 'CAUSE WE KEEP BRINGING IT UP, BUT THEN NOTHING EVER HAPPENS.
SO, YOU KNOW, I, I DON'T KNOW.
I MEAN, WHAT I CAN OFFER IS, I MEAN, I, I, I HEAR YOUR FRUSTRATION.
I THINK WE AND THE DEPARTMENT SHARE THAT, AND OTHER PEOPLE IN THE CITY SHARE THAT.
IT'S A COMPLICATED, IT'S NOT JUST A MATTER OF US GOING OUT AND, AND ISSUING RED TAGS OR FINES.
THERE'S THE COURTS, UM, THERE'S THE STATE LAWS THAT LIMIT OUR ABILITY TO SHUT PEOPLE DOWN OR TO DO THINGS.
SO WHAT, UM, WHAT I CAN DO COMMIT TO DOING IS TO PROVIDING, YOU KNOW, A DETAILED EXPLANATION OF WHERE THE STOPPING POINTS ARE, YOU KNOW, OR WHERE THE HURDLES ARE THAT WE CAN'T SEEM TO GET OVER MM-HMM
UM, SO AT LEAST THERE'S CLARITY AND YOU'LL UNDERSTAND.
AND MAYBE, MAYBE WITH THAT, MAYBE Y'ALL HAVE SOME GOOD IDEAS ON HOW TO, TO OVERCOME THOSE.
BUT THAT, THAT MUCH WE CAN, WE CAN DO.
I MEAN, IF IT'S AT THE COUNCIL LEVEL, THEN WE CAN SHOW UP ON A TUESDAY PUBLIC COMMENT AND SAY, HEY, WE'RE HAVING AN ISSUE.
IF IT'S A LEGISLATIVE ISSUE LEVEL, THEN AT LEAST I CAN CONTACT MY LEGISLATOR AND, AND SAY, IF I KNEW WHERE TO DIRECT SOME ENERGY, THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL.
SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMITMENT DIRECTOR OSLAND, UH, YOU KNOW, GIVEN NOW IS MAY, MAYBE THAT COULD BE A TOPIC THAT'S ADDED INTO JULY 19 WHEN WE MEET UP WITH KIM AS A SITE THAT WE DISCUSS THIS PARTICULAR ISSUE AS WELL.
WHAT YOU AND KIM FIND OUT THAT WE ARE THE HURDLES AND HOW WE ALL CAN BRAIN BRAINSTORM PLUS THE STAFF ABOUT HOW WE CAN GET OVER THIS A LOT.
WE, WE'VE, WE'VE GOT A LOT, BUT WE WILL CONSIDER ADDING THAT AND THAT JUST, UM, AND MAYBE WE'LL TALK TO THE CAMP PROVIDERS TO SEE IF THERE'S, IS THERE SOMETHING WE CAN LEARN FROM OTHER PLACES? YEAH, YEAH.
I'D BE CURIOUS TO KNOW WHAT'S A HARD PLACE YEAH.
WHAT THEY DO IN OTHER CITIES, LIKE IN SAN ANTONIO OR SOMETHING WHERE THE PRESERVATION SEEMS TO BE STRONGER.
SO WE'LL, WE'LL THINK ABOUT IF IT FITS IN THE AGENDA OR NOT.
OR IF IT'S SOMETHING WE CAN JUST, UM, WE CAN WORK
[03:15:01]
THROUGH SEPARATELY BECAUSE THANK YOU.WHAT HAPPENED TO THE LAST QUESTION? WHAT HAPPENED TO THE ETHICS TRAINING? NOW WE HAVE, WE HAVE IT POSTPONED, POSTPONED, AND NOW IT'S CANCELED.
SO WHAT, WHAT ARE WE, ARE WE WAITING FOR SOMETHING NOW? UM, WE NEED TO SCHEDULE THAT.
UM, AND THAT WE WILL HAVE TO WORK WITH KIM ON HER SCHEDULE, BUT WE WILL, THAT'S COMING.
BUT I, BUT I DO THINK THAT THERE'S STILL THE C OF R PROCESS THAT IF WE, THAT, THAT THE ONE REMEDY THAT WE DO CONTROL WITHIN THESE CHAMBERS IS SETTING THAT THE TERMS FOR WHAT A C OF R IS.
SO, YOU KNOW, IF SOMEONE TAKES OUT WINDOWS THAT ARE GOOD, THEY CAN PUT BACK WINDOWS THAT ARE GOOD.
SO, YOU KNOW, IT, IT'S, UM, YOU KNOW, THERE ARE SOME THINGS THAT WE CAN STILL DO BY, BY STILL FOLLOWING THROUGH ON A SEA OF OUR PROCESS WITHIN THE SPIRIT OF THIS ORDINANCE.
UM, IN ADDITION TO WHAT'S HAPPENING, YOU KNOW, LEGALLY BEYOND THESE CHAMBERS.
ONE, SOME THINGS I THINK SOMETIMES WE SHOOT OURSELVES ON THE FOOT.
'CAUSE I PERSONALLY THINK THE WINDOW POLICY NEEDS TO BE REVISITED COMPLETELY BECAUSE IT'S AN ACHILLES HEEL FOR US.
WE HAVE SO MANY PROBLEMS WITH THE WINDOWS, AND MAYBE THE WAY WE HAVE IT WRITTEN IS TRUE DRACONIAN OR SOMETHING.
BUT, BUT I DO THINK, AND, AND IN GLEN BROOK VALLEY, YOU KNOW, PARTS OF GUN BROOK VALLEY ARE MORE LIKE ARCHITECTURALLY DISTINCTIVE THAN OTHER PARTS.
MAYBE WE NEED TO THINK ABOUT LIKE DOING A CONSERVATION DISTRICT AND PART OF IT INSTEAD OF A FULL PRESERVATION DISTRICT.
BUT I, I JUST, I FEEL LIKE WE COULD ALSO LOOK AT SOME OF OUR POLICIES AND MAKE THEM SO THAT THEY'RE, IT'S, IT'S MORE REASONABLE FOR PEOPLE TO STAY IN COMPLIANCE OF THEM.
BECAUSE, 'CAUSE I JUST THINK THE WINDOWS, LIKE AS SOMEONE WHO DOES A LOT OF REMODELING, IT'S REAL HARD TO WORK WITH THOSE WINDOWS SOMETIMES.
AND THEN THE END RESULT IS YOU GET WINDOWS THAT ARE STILL NOT VERY GOOD IN THE END, AND YOU SPEND ALL THIS TIME AND MONEY AND EFFORT ON 'EM.
WE TALKING ABOUT A COUPLE OF THINGS AT THE SAME TIME.
MOST PEOPLE, RIGHT? AND SO THAT'S ABOUT DOING WORK, WHATEVER WINDOWS WE, WE'VE TALKED ABOUT SENDING CEASE AND DESIST LETTERS TO WINDOW WORLD AND NOTHING EVER HAPPENS WITH THAT EITHER.
I FEEL LIKE I'VE BROUGHT THAT UP A BUNCH OF TIMES ALSO.
WELL, AND WE'VE, WE'VE COMMUNICATED TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN GLENBROOK VALLEY AD NAUSEUM AND IT DOESN'T DO ANYTHING.
UM, I MEAN, I, I WONDER SPECIFICALLY ABOUT WINDOWS NOW THAT, NOT NOW, BUT THAT YOU'VE BROUGHT THIS BACK TO OUR ATTENTION, STEVE, IF, AND WE HAVE A LOT OF NEW STAFF.
IF THE, IF THIS ISN'T JUST AN EDUCATION IN PART, AND I KNOW WE'VE, I'M SURE STAFF FEELS LIKE THEY ARE BEATING THEIR HEADS AGAINST THE WALL, BUT IN TRYING TO EDUCATE, I MEAN, I, I'VE GOT QUOTES AT HOME BETWEEN WHAT AN ENDO AND A REPLACEMENT WINDOW IS AND BEING ABLE TO SHOW THAT ROMAN TO AN APPLICANT.
LOOK, YOU CAN REPLACE THIS WINDOW WITH A CRAPPY VINYL WINDOW AND THEN YOU CAN REPLACE IT AGAIN IN 10 YEARS OR FOR LESS MONEY THAN THAT.
YOU CAN INSTALL THIS GREAT PRODUCT THAT IS GOING TO MAKE EVERYONE HAPPY, SAVE YOU MONEY, AND BE A BETTER PRODUCT THAN THE VINYL REPLACEMENT.
THAT'S LETTING PEOPLE KNOW BECAUSE THE WINDOW PEOPLE AREN'T KNOCKING DOOR TO DOOR, LIKE WINDOW WORLD.
SO I WOULD LIKE TO LET MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS KNOW THAT OVER AT RICE, WE'RE PLANNING AN EVENT, A PUBLIC CONVERSATION ABOUT GLENBROOK VALLEY.
WE'D LIKE TO INVITE A RANGE OF SPEAKERS FROM THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, THE COMMISSION.
UM, WE ARE TALKING ABOUT POTENTIALLY HOSTING A WINDOWS WORKSHOP THAT WE COULD POTENTIALLY DO IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO IF ANYBODY HAS SUGGESTIONS, PLEASE REACH OUT TO ME, UM, IN THE NEXT SIX WEEKS OR SO.
THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER JA, UH, JACKSON.
WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO DO, UH, ADD TO IT THAT WHAT YOU SAID IS IN A LOT OF THE, UH, LIKE HEIGHTS, OH SIX WARD AND FIRST WARD, HISTORIC DISTRICTS, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE EVEN OLDER WINDOWS BECAUSE THOSE ARE LIKE TWO OVER TWO TYPE WINDOWS.
AND THE ISSUE HAS ALWAYS BEEN, NOT THE WINDOW IS BAD ENOUGH.
THE ISSUE HAS ALWAYS BEEN, IT'S VERY LEAKY.
IT'S, IT'S, IT'S NOT PROTECTING THE HOUSE.
AND WE REMODEL THE HOUSE, BUT YET THE WINDOW, YOU KNOW, WE GOT ABOUT 20 OF THEM PER HOUSE.
AND THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO ARE VERY HAPPY TO REPLACE THEM WITH WOOD WINDOWS, NEW ONES GEL.
BUT WE, WE, BECAUSE OF OUR ORDINANCE, DO NOT ALLOW THEM TO DO SO.
DON'T, DON'T TALK ABOUT THE BAD PLAYERS WHO WANT TO REPLACE THEM WITH VINYL.
THERE ARE MANY PEOPLE WHO WANT TO REPLACE THEM WITH GEL ONE, TWO, YOU KNOW, TWO OVER TWO WINDOWS OR WHATEVER.
BUT THEY ARE HAMPERED BY THAT BECAUSE WE, WE HAVE ALL THESE HUNG WINDOWS AND WE WANT THEM TO RESTORED.
WELL, AND THIS IS THE ISSUE IS NOT TO RESTORE THE WINDOW, BUT TO LET THEM CHANGE IT TO NEW WOOD WINDOWS.
WELL, BUT STILL, STILL HAVE THE SAME LOOK.
I MEAN, LOOK, THE, BUT THE WINDOW THAT YOU'RE DESCRIBING WILL OUTLAST THE GEL AND WINDOW YOU PUT IN THAT OPENING.
BUT WE, WE GET INTO THIS SITUATION, AND I AGREE WITH, WITH DOMINIC, BECAUSE WHEN YOU REMODEL THE HOUSE, YOU REMOVE
[03:20:01]
SO MUCH HISTORIC MATERIAL, NO MATTER HOW CAREFUL YOU ARE, PILES AND PILES OF SHIPLAP GO OUT.LIKE YOU GOTTA PUT PLUMBING AND YOU PULL ALL THE SHIPLAP OFF THE CEILING AND YOU DON'T PUT THAT BACK.
'CAUSE IT'S DESTROYED WHEN YOU TAKE IT OFF TO RUN PIPES AND ELECTRIC REWIRE A HOUSE AND STUFF.
SO OUR, OUR INSISTENCE, LIKE, LIKE ON THIS, THE WINDOWS TO ME IS, IS PERSONALLY FRUSTRATING BECAUSE WE FIXATE ON THE WINDOWS AND THEN THEY CAN LIKE TRASH EVERYTHING ELSE IN THE HOUSE.
AND WE JUST SAY, OH, WHATEVER.
I MEAN, I JUST THINK CAN GO ROUND AND ROUND IN CIRCLES.
YOU KNOW, PEOPLE, PEOPLE MAKE THE CLAIM THAT THEY WANT ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND THAT'S WHY THEY'RE REPLACING WINDOWS AND THEY'RE PUTTING IN ANTIQUATED SYSTEMS THAT ARE GAS BASED OR, YOU KNOW, I MEAN WE CAN'T FIX EVERYTHING.
THEY, THEY TAKE TRIM OFF, THEY DO ALL SORTS OF STUFF.
AND YOU DON'T HAVE PETE STOCKTON GOING EVERY FIVE SECONDS TO LOOK AT EVERY PROJECT.
AND THAT'S JUST WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU REMODEL A HOUSE.
WELL WE, WELL WE DO REGULATE SHIPLAP.
AND WE, YOU'RE NOT ALLOWED TO REMOVE IT IF YOU DO HAVE TO MOVE IT FOR WHAT YOU'RE DESCRIBING.
COMMISSIONER COUCH, YOU HAVE TO PUT BACK AT LEAST LIKE A QUARTER INCH.
WELL, I REMODELED THE, THAT'S WHAT THE CLUNKED FARMHOUSE AND IT HAS LIKE, PROBABLY 10% OF ITS HISTORIC, HISTORIC MATERIAL LEFT BECAUSE IT WAS ALREADY CARD WITH HARDY SIDING WHEN THEY GOT IT LISTED.
YOU LOOK AT HISTORIC PICTURES, THAT'S BEEN COMPLETELY CHANGED FROM WHEN IT WAS BUILT.
SO, AND WE HAVE THESE WOOD WINDOWS THAT WE HAD TO LIKE RECONSTRUCT THAT AREN'T EVEN ORIGINAL.
THEY'RE PROBABLY ADDED LIKE 50 YEARS AFTER THE HOUSE WAS BUILT AND SOMEONE SPENT A LOT OF TIME MONEY FIXING 'EM AND, AND EVERYTHING.
AND WE'VE HAD TO, TO REPLACE THE SILLS AND THE, THE JAMS AND THINGS OF THEM.
AND IT'S JUST, THEY'RE GONNA, AS SOON AS THEY STOP, THEY'RE, THEY'RE ALREADY STARTING TO DISINTEGRATE AGAIN.
SO IT'S, IT IS PERSONALLY VERY FRUSTRATING TO ME TO HAVE TO PUT THESE WINDOWS BACK THAT I KNOW IN 10 YEARS THEY'RE GONNA FALL APART 'CAUSE THEY'RE ALREADY ROTTEN.
AND WE'VE PUT, PUT MODERN WINDOWS IN BECAUSE THEY'RE BETTER.
NO, THOSE OLD WINDOWS ARE ALL ROTTEN.
YOU WOULD REPLACE THEM IDEALLY IF YOU HAD YOUR CHOICE.
WITH WHAT? WITH WOOD CLAD WINDOWS THAT ARE DOUBLE PAN PELLA ANDERSON MARVIN.
HIS HISTORICALLY THE, A WHOLE LINE OF HISTORIC WINDOWS.
BUT YOU HAVE TO CHANGE THE DESIGN GUIDELINES TO ALLOW PEOPLE TO CHANGE WINDOWS.
I THINK THAT THERE ARE GUIDELINES TO ALLOW FOR IT, RIGHT? YEAH.
AND THEN WE, WE FIXATE ON SOMETHING WHERE YOU LOOK AND MAYBE IT'S A HALF INCH DIFFERENCE, BUT FROM 20 FEET AWAY YOU CAN'T TELL A DIFFERENCE.
UH, MR. CHAIR, I DIDN'T WANNA OPEN A CAN OF WORM.
I WAS SUGGESTING, WELL, COMMISSIONER YAP.
I THINK YOU JULY 19TH, YOU LIKE
BUT I THINK WE, WE WILL MOVE THIS TO CAMP AND UM, THIS 6:00 PM IS OUR WITCHING HOUR.