[Houston Archaeological and Historical Commission on June 20, 2024.]
[00:00:15]
IT'S NOW 2 39, UH, THURSDAY, JUNE 20TH, 2024.
UM, AND I'M GONNA OPEN UP THE HOUSTON ARCHEOLOGICAL HISTORICAL COMMISSION.
I'LL BEGIN BY CALLING THE MEETING TO ORDER, UM, AND ASKING FOR A QUORUM.
COMMISSIONERS, WHEN I ANNOUNCE YOUR NAME, PLEASE UM, AFFIRM THAT YOU'RE IN THE ROOM.
COMMISSIONER CURRY IS OUT OF TOWN AND ABSENT.
COMMISSIONER COSGROVE PRESENT.
COMMISSIONER WEAU JACKSON PRESENT.
COMMISSIONER DUBOSE IS LIKELY TO ARRIVE A LITTLE BIT LATER.
AND, AND, UH, JENNIFER OSLAND IS PRESENT.
SO WE HAVE QUORUM AND WE MAY PROCEED WITH THE MEETING.
FIRST ON THE AGENDA WILL, UM, WILL BE THE DIRECTOR'S REPORT.
GOOD AFTERNOON, UH, CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.
I'M JENNIFER OSLAND, INTERIM DIRECTOR OF THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT AND SECRETARY OF THIS COMMISSION.
UM, THE, UH, THIS MEETING IS BEING CONDUCTED IN PERSON AT 900 BAGBY STREET ON THE PUBLIC LEVEL.
THE AGENDA IS AVAILABLE@HOUSTONPLANNING.COM AND IN INCLUDES PUBLIC PARTICIPATION RULES.
UM, MAY ONE WILL JUST REMIND EVERYBODY, IF YOU ARE HERE TO SPEAK ON AN ITEM TODAY, PLEASE, UM, MAKE SURE YOU SIGN UP AT THE, AT THE DESK UP THERE.
WE WANNA MAKE SURE WE DON'T MISS YOU.
UM, THE HISTORIC, UH, PRESERVATION BOARD, UH, HAS MET TWICE IN THE PAST FEW MONTHS.
THE APPEALS BOARD HAS MET TWICE.
UM, AND I PROBABLY MENTIONED, UH, SPOKE TO YOU ABOUT THE MAY 6TH, BUT JUST, UM, AS A REMINDER ON MAY 6TH, THE BOARD PARTIALLY REVERSED THE COMMISSION'S DECISION, UH, ON 85 30 GLEN VALLEY DRIVE IN THE GLENBROOK VALLEY HISTORIC DISTRICT.
AND THEIR ACTION WAS TO PARTIALLY REVERSE, UH, THE HHC DECISION TO REMOVE THE PAINT FROM THE BRICK, UH, AND THE CERTIFICATE OF REMEDIATION WILL STAND.
UM, ON MONDAY, JUNE 17TH, THE HISTORIC, UH, THE APPEALS BOARD CONSIDERED TWO APPEALS, ONE FOR 8 0 7 WOODLAND STREET AND THE WOODLAND HEIGHTS HISTORIC DISTRICT, AT WHICH THE BOARD PARTIALLY AFFIRMED THE DENIAL OF THE COA REGARDING BUILT ITEMS. AND THAT WAS THE SECOND STORY TO, UM, AN EXISTING GARAGE AND ISSUED A CERTIFICATE OF REMEDIATION FOR WORK COMPLETED.
UM, ALSO THEY CONSIDERED AN APPEAL FOR 4 4 3 COLUMBIA STREET AND THE HOUSTON HEIGHTS SOUTH HISTORIC DISTRICT AT WHICH THE BOARD REVERSED, UH, THE DECISION OF THE HHC REGARDING A PROPOSED ADDITION.
UM, THAT WAS, UH, AN ADDITION ON THE BACK OVER A LARGE PORCH THAT HAD, UM, ORIGINALLY COME TO THE COMMISSION.
I THINK, UM, LIKE IN 2019 OR SOMETHING.
I DON'T HAVE THAT DATE, SO I APOLOGIZE.
SO THAT'S APPEALS BOARD ACTIVITY.
UM, I WANNA REMINDER, UM, JUST ANOTHER REMINDER THAT WE WILL BE HAVING TRAINING, UM, COMMISSIONERS AND APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS ON JULY 19TH.
UH, WE, THE STAFF HAS NARROWED DOWN THE LOCATION TO TWO, UM, HISTORIC VENUES.
SO, UM, WE WILL BE GETTING WITH YOU JUST AS SOON AS WE CAN, UM, SEE WHICH ONE WE CAN AFFORD.
UM, BUT THAT'LL BE COMING IN THE NEXT, UH, FEW DAYS.
LAST MONTH I PROMISED TO BRING YOU AN EXPLANATION OF HOW THE CITY GOES ABOUT ENFORCING VIOLATIONS, UH, TO THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION ORDINANCE.
AND I APOLOGIZE, I DON'T HAVE THAT FOR YOU TODAY.
I WANNA MAKE SURE I'M NOT MAKING THINGS UP, AND SO I NEED A LITTLE BIT OF EXTRA VIEW TIME, SO I WILL HAVE THAT FOR YOU AT YOUR JULY MEETING.
UH, HERE'S A SNAPSHOT OF SOME PRESERVATION WORK.
UM, THAT'S NOT, UH, THAT IS BEYOND TODAY'S AGENDA.
UH, WE RECEIVED A TOTAL OF 56 APPLICATIONS SINCE YOUR LAST UPDATE IN MAY.
THERE WERE 16 ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVALS AND NINE PRE-APPLICATION DESIGN REVIEWS.
ALSO, UH, THIS WEEK, UM, NEXT WEEK AT CITY COUNCIL WILL BE, UH, THERE'LL BE A, A HEARING FOR
[00:05:01]
SEVERAL LANDMARK DESIGNATIONS, UM, THAT HAPPENS ON, UH, WEDNESDAY, I BELIEVE.AND LAST BUT CERTAINLY NOT LEAST, I WANNA ASK, UM, A GROUP OF INTERNS WE HAVE WITH US THIS SUMMER TO STAND UP.
UM, I SEE YOU, SEE YOU BACK THERE, SEVERAL.
WE HAVE, I THINK 11 WORKING WITHIN OUR DEPARTMENT, UM, AND WITH, THERE'S, UM, ONE WITH THE HISTORIC TEAM AND WE ARE EXCITED TO HAVE THEM.
THEY'RE HERE FOR SEVERAL WEEKS OVER THE SUMMER AND WE'RE PUTTING THEM TO WORK, LEARNING ALL ABOUT PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT AND PRESERVATION AND ALL OF THE FUN STUFF THAT WE DO.
SO WE WANNA THANK THEM FOR THEIR SERVICE TO THE CITY THIS SUMMER.
UM, AND THAT, UM, JUST IN CLOSING, IF ANYONE HAS QUESTIONS, PLEASE CALL THE HOUSTON OFFICE OF PRESERVATION HOTLINE AT 8 3 2 3 9 3 6 5 5 6 OR VISIT OUR WEBSITE@HOUSTONPLANNING.COM.
AND THAT CONCLUDES MY DIRECTOR'S REPORT.
WE WILL NOT BE HAVING A MAYOR'S LIAISON REPORT TODAY.
UH, SO WE WILL PROCEED WITH CONSIDERATION OF THE MAY 9TH, 2024 HAHC MEETING, MINUTES COMMISSION MEMBERS IF YOU HAVE A CHANCE TO LOOK AT, UH, THE RECORDED MINUTES.
IF THERE ARE ANY COMMENTS, PLEASE ANNOUNCE THEM AT THIS TIME.
AND IF NOT, IS THERE A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE MINUTES? COMMISSIONER AUER JACKSON MOVES TO ACCEPT THE MAY 9TH MEETING MINUTES.
OKAY, BUT FIRST, IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND
ANY OPPOSED? ANY ABSTENTIONS MOTION PASSES.
WE ARE NOW MOVING ON TO ITEM AGENDA, A PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDERATION OF AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON A PROTECTED LANDMARK DESIGNATION APPLICATION FOR DELCO HOUSE AT 8 0 7 NORTH LOOP, HOUSTON, TEXAS 7 7 0 2 2.
GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIRPERSON AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.
THIS IS STAFF PERSON TAYLOR VALLEY.
I SUBMIT FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
AGENDA ITEM A FOR PROTECTED LANDMARK DESIGNATION FOR 8 0 7 NORTH LOOP, THE DELCO HOUSE.
THE DELCO HOUSE STORY BEGINS WITH TWO BROTHERS, EXALTING AND NELSON, BORN IN VILLE, LOUISIANA DURING THE EARLY, THE EARLY 19TH CENTURY TO PARENTS LOUDEST AND ODELIA DELCO.
IN 1928, EXALTED MARRIED PAULINE AND WELCOMED THEIR FIRST CHILD, EXALT AND DELCO JR.
FOLLOWED BY SONS, JOSEPH AND ROOSEVELT.
IN 1931, NELSON MARRIED PAULINE GASPARD AND WELCOMED THEIR ONLY CHILD, LAWRENCE IN 1931.
BY 1930, THE DELCO FAMILY WAS LIVING IN HOUSTON'S THIRD WARD COMMUNITY.
THE REASON FOR THE DELCO BROTHERS MOVED TO HOUSTON IS UNKNOWN.
LIKELY THEY MOVED TO HU THE CITY FOR THE MANY ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITIES AVAILABLE DURING THE TIME PERIOD.
EXALTING BEGAN WORKING AS A BUTLER AND DRIVER FOR THE FAIRISH FAMILY AT 10 REMINGTON LANE.
HIS EMPLOYER, WILLIAM FARISH II, WAS THE PRESIDENT OF STANDARD OIL AT THE TIME.
HIS FATHER, WILLIAM FARISH II, WAS THE NEPHEW OF JEFFERSON DAVIS EXALTING WORKED FOR THE FARISH FAMILY FOR 50 YEARS.
NELSON WORKED AT HUGHES TOOL COMPANY AND LATER AS A LONG SHORES MAN, HE WAS AN ACTIVE MEMBER OF THE INTERNATIONAL LONG SHORES MEN ASSOCIATION, OR THE ILA LOCAL NUMBER 1331.
BY 1935, THE BROTHERS WERE LIVING IN INDEPENDENCE HEIGHTS.
EXALTING PURCHASED A HOME AT 6 0 7 EAST 31ST STREET, NO LONGER EX STAMP.
AND NELSON WAS RENTING A HOME ON EAST 31ST STREET.
THE DELCO HOME WAS BUILT BY THE EARLY 1930S AND OWNED BY NELSON AND PAULINE DELCO, THE DELCO FAMILY, WHICH, WHICH SETTLED AT 69 16 NORTH MAIN IN 1938, WAS FORCED TO MOVE THEIR HOME IN 1958 AS THE SIX 10 LOOP WAS CONSTRUCTED THROUGH THE COMMUNITY.
THE DELCO HOUSE NOW SITS AT 8 0 7 NORTH LOOP.
THE DELCO HOME IS AN EXAMPLE OF THE HISTORIC HOMES CONSTRUCTED IN THE COMMUNITY AT THE HEIGHT OF PROSPERITY AND GROWTH DURING 1910 TO 1940.
THE HOME IS ALSO REPRESENTATIVE OF A LATER ERA OF DISPLACEMENT AND CHANGE SUFFERED BY THE INDEPENDENCE HEIGHTS COMMUNITY, BROUGHT BY HOUSTON'S EXPANSION AND DEVELOPMENT DURING THE 1950S.
THE 1,360 SQUARE FOOT SINGLE STORY BUNGALOW HOME FEATURES A PYRAMIDAL ROOF AND FRONT GABLE PORCH.
IT INCLUDES A LIVING ROOM, DINING ROOM, KITCHEN WITH SITTING AREA, TWO BATHROOMS AND THREE BEDROOMS. ALL ORIGINAL WINDOWS AND FLOORING ARE INTACT.
THE HOME MEETS CRITERIA 1, 3, 5, AND EIGHT FOR LANDMARK DESIGNATION AND ONE AND TWO FOR PROTECTED LANDMARK DESIGNATION.
STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE HOUSTON ARCHEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL COMMISSION RECOMMEND
[00:10:01]
TO THE CITY COUNCIL THE PROTECTED LANDMARK DESIGNATION OF THE DELCO HOUSE AT 8 0 7 NORTH LOOP, HOUSTON, TEXAS 7 7 0 0 2.THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
THANK YOU TAYLOR COMMISSION MEMBERS, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF FOR THIS APPLICATION? OKAY.
AGAIN, I'M GONNA OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS ITEM.
IF THERE'S ANYONE, UM, IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION ABOUT THIS SUBMISSION, PLEASE ANNOUNCE YOURSELF AND COME AND APPROACH THE, THE MICROPHONE.
I'M GONNA CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, UH, COMMISSION MEMBERS.
IS THERE A MOTION ON THIS? ON THIS ITEM, I'D LOVE TO MAKE THE MOTION TO ACCEPT THE PROTECTED LANDMARK DESIGNATION NOMINATION FOR THE DELCO HOUSE.
IS THERE A SECOND? COSGROVE SECONDS.
ANY OPPOSITION? ANY ABSTENTIONS? THE MOTION PASSES.
WE'RE NOW MOVING ON TO ITEM AGENDA B.
CONSIDERATION OF AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS, APPLICATIONS FOR CONSENT AGENDA.
GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR AND COMMISSIONERS AND THE PUBLIC.
TODAY'S STAFF STAFF RECOMMENDS THE FOLLOWING, 11 MI 11 ITEMS FOR ACTION PER STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS IN ONE MOTION THOUGH THE ITEMS ARE AS FOLLOWS, ITEM B 1 3400 WHITE OAK ALTERATION OF THE STOREFRONT IN THE HOUSTON HEIGHTS SOUTH HISTORIC DISTRICT.
RECOMMENDATION, DENIAL AND ISSUANCE OF A COR ITEM B 4 9 1 5 COLUMBIA STREET ALTERATION EDITION IN THE HOUSTON HEIGHTS SOUTH HISTORIC DISTRICT DEFERRAL PER THE APPLICANT, ITEM B 5 1 0 3 1 EAST 16TH STREET, DEMOLITION OF THE GARAGE IN NOR HILL.
RECOMMENDATION APPROVAL B 6 1 0 3 1 EAST 16TH STREET, NEW CONSTRUCTION OF THE GARAGE IN NOR HILL.
RECOMMENDATION, APPROVAL ITEM B 7 1 0 3 1 EAST 16TH STREET, ALTERATION EDITION IN NOR HILL HISTORIC DISTRICT RECOMMENDATION APPROVAL ITEM B 9 8 3 3 1 GLEN CREST STREET ALTERATION OF WINDOWS IN THE GLENBROOK VALLEY HISTORIC DISTRICT DEFERRAL PER STAFF ITEM B 10 83 27 GLEN LOCK STREET ALTERATION OF WINDOWS IN GLENBROOK VALLEY DEFERRAL DEFERRAL PER THE APPLICANT, ITEM B12 8 1 5 HAWTHORN HAWTHORNE ALTERATION REAR PORCH AND CANOPY AWNING IN AUDUBON PLACE.
DENIAL AND ISSUANCE OF A COR ITEM B 14 4 2 8 ARLINGTON STREET ALTERATION EDITION IN THE HOUSTON HEIGHTS SOUTH HISTORIC DISTRICT RECOMMENDATION APPROVAL ITEM B 16 6 1 2 WOODLAND STREET ALTERATION EDITION IN THE WOODLAND HEIGHTS HISTORIC DISTRICT RECOMMENDATION, APPROVAL AND ITEM B 17 2 0 2 STRATFORD STREET A NEW CONSTRUCTION OF THE GARAGE IN AVONDALE EAST.
HISTORIC DISTRICT APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS.
THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT REQUEST APPROVAL OF ALL STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THESE PROCEEDING ITEMS B ONE B FOUR, B FIVE B SIX B SEVEN B NINE B, 10 B12 B 14 B 16, AND B 17.
STAFF RECOMMENDS THE FOLLOWING SIX ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION.
ITEM B 2 1 3 1 NORTH STREET OR 31 0 7 UNIT STREET ALTERATION EDITION OF OPENINGS IN GERMANTOWN.
ITEM B 3 4 25 COLUMBIA STREET, NEW CONSTRUCTION, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL IN THE HOUSTON HEIGHTS SOUTH HISTORIC DISTRICT APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS 5 0 2 HAWTHORNE STREET, ALTERATION OF SIDING IN WESTMORELAND IN DENIAL OF OF A COA ISSUANCE OF A-C-O-R-B
[00:15:03]
11 1 1 3 6 KEY STREET ALTERATION EDITION IN THE NOR HILL HISTORIC DISTRICT RECOMMENDATION, APPROVAL B 1314 SHADOW LAWN STREET ALTERATION EDITION IN THE SHADOW LAWN.HISTORIC DISTRICT RECOMMENDATION APPROVAL AND B 13 18 0 6 DECATUR STREET ALTERATION EDITION IN THE OLD SIX WARD.
HISTORIC DISTRICT APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS.
STAFF RECOMMENDS THE FOLLOWING SIX ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION.
THAT IS B2B THREE, B EIGHT B 11, B 13, B 15 HERE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
THANK YOU TERRANCE, UH, COMMISSION MEMBERS, ARE THERE ANY OF THE ITEMS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA THAT YOU'D LIKE TO PULL FOR, FOR CONSIDERATION FOR DISCUSSION? MR. MCNEIL? CAN I ASK A, I'D LIKE TO ASK A QUESTION IF POSSIBLE WITHOUT PULLING ON ITEM B ONE, SINCE WE HAD SUCH A, UM, TIME AND OPPORTUNITY TO LOOK AT THIS PROJECT.
THE, THE APPROVING THIS PROJECT AND ISSUING A COR ALLOWS THEM TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE PLAN AS I'M LOOKING AT IT.
AND I BELIEVE THERE IS A SPEAKER SIGN UP ON THIS MEETING? YES SIR.
TERRANCE, CAN I ASK, UM, SINCE THERE ARE THREE DEFERRALS, UM, IN THE CONSENT AGENDA, ARE THE APPLICANTS IN AGREEMENT? I KNOW SOME OF THEM WERE THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, BUT ONE OR TWO WERE STAFF? YES, MA'AM.
SO THE, UM, THERE WERE A FEW THINGS THAT CAME UP THAT WE THINK WOULD BENEFIT THE APPLICANT AND WE HAVE BEEN UNABLE TO REACH THEM.
SO BY DEFAULT WE FIGURED IT WOULD BE BEST FOR US TO DEFER THE APPLICATION SINCE WE CAN'T GET IN TOUCH WITH THEM AND THEN WORK WITH THEM OVER THE NEXT MONTH AND TRYING TO GET A SOLUTION FOR THEIR COA.
GREAT, THANK YOU, APPRECIATE THAT.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER PROJECTS FROM THE COMM COMMISSION MEMBERS THAT YOU'D LIKE TO PULL? OKAY, AT THIS TIME I'D LIKE TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS QUESTION BECAUSE I DO HAVE A NUMBER OF SPEAKERS SIGNED UP FOR MANY OF THESE ITEMS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.
UM, THEY INCLUDE ITEMS 1, 7, 12, 16, AND 17.
SO IF YOU ARE HERE TO SPEAK, UH, ON BEHALF OF ONE OF THESE PROJECTS AND YOU SUPPORT THE ACTION THAT STAFF HAS RECOMMENDED, YOU DON'T HAVE TO SPEAK AND IT WILL REMAIN ON CONSENT.
BUT IF YOU, UM, BUT IF YOU'RE NOT IN, UH, IF YOU'RE IN OPPOSITION TO WHAT STAFF IS RECOMMENDING AND YOU WOULD LIKE THE PROJECT TO BE INDIVIDUALLY DISCUSSED, THIS IS THE TIME TO, UM, ANNOUNCE THE PROJECT NUMBER TO PULL TO, TO PULL IT FROM CONSENT AND HAVE IT REVIEWED INDIVIDUALLY.
WHAT NUMBER, SHARON, CAN YOU, CAN YOU HEAR THE NUMBER? THE, I I BELIEVE THE ITEM THAT THEY WERE ASKING FOR IS ALREADY OFF A CONSENT AGENDA, SO CORRECT.
YES, IT'S ALREADY OFF OF THE CONSENT AGENDA, SO IT'S, YEAH, SO EVERYBODY'S GOOD.
SO WE WILL, I'LL CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING ON THAT QUESTION AND WE WILL, UH, MOVE FORWARD.
UM, COMMISSION MEMBERS, IS THERE A MOTION TO ACCEPT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION FOR THE CONSENT AGENDA AND FOR THE ACTIONS, UH, PRESCRIBED, UM, RECOMMENDED BY STAFF COSGROVE MAKES A MOTION TO ACCEPT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.
IS THERE A SECOND? STAFF A SECOND.
ANY OPPOSED? ANY ABSTENTIONS? THAT MOTION PASSES AND WE'LL MOVE ON TO UM, B TWO.
GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.
THIS IS STAFF PERSON JASON LATHAL.
TODAY I SUBMIT FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION ITEM B 2 1 31 NORTH STREET, AKA 31 0 7 UNIT STREET.
AS INDICATED IN THE INVENTORY IN GERMANTOWN HISTORIC DISTRICT, THE APPLICANT PROPOSES TO ADD A PARTIAL SECOND STORY ADDITION ON TOP OF THE EXISTING DUPLEX.
THIS WILL ADD A TOTAL OF 520 SQUARE FEET TO A DUPLEX THAT IS ALREADY AT 1005 544 SQUARE FEET.
IT WILL HAVE A MIX OF A THREE OVER 12 AND SIX OVER 12 ROOF PITCH WITH COMPOSITION SHINGLES, SMOOTH CEMENTITIOUS SEATING SIDING WITH A SEVEN INCH REVEAL.
THERE WILL BE WOOD AND OR CLAD INSIDE AND RECESSED ONE
[00:20:01]
OVER ONE LIGHT PATTERN, SINGLE HUNG WINDOWS.ON THE SECOND STORY ADDITION ON THE EXISTING DUPLEX STRUCTURE, APPLICANT PROPOSED TO REMOVE THE EXISTING MIDDLE DOOR ON THE RIGHT EAST ELEVATION.
REPLACE WITH MATCHING BRICK, REPLACE THE EXISTING REAR DOOR ON THE RIGHT EAST ELEVATION, REPLACE WITH THE CRAFTSMAN'S DOOR, REMOVE THE EXISTING MIDDLE DOOR AND SMALL WINDOW ON THE LEFT WEST ELEVATION AND REPLACED WITH MATCHING BRICK.
WE'LL ALSO REPURPOSE THE AWNING AND RELOCATE IT OVER THE PROPOSED DOORWAY ON THE REAR ELEVATION.
UH, APPLICANT ALSO PROPOSES REPLACE THE EXISTING REAR DOOR ON THE LEFT WEST EL ELEVATION.
REPLACE WITH THE CRESSMAN DOOR.
REMOVE TWO SMALL WINDOWS ON THE REAR NORTH ELEVATION.
THE SMALL WINDOW NEAREST UNIT STREET TO BE REPLACED WITH MATCHING BRICK.
THE SMALL WINDOW FURTHEST FROM UNIT STREET TO REPLACE WITH THE CRAFTSMAN DOOR AND THE AWNING THAT WILL BE SHIFTED FROM THE LEFT ELEVATION.
ALL REMAINING HISTORIC WOOD WINDOWS ARE TO REMAIN AND BE RESTORED.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS TO RETAIN THE DOOR AND SMALL WINDOW IN THE MIDDLE OF BOTH SIDE ELEVATIONS.
THE OWNER, CHRISTINA PERPICH, HAS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK.
THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
I'M AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
UH, COMMISSION MEMBERS, ARE THERE QUESTIONS OF STAFF FOR THIS ITEM BEFORE I OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING? I HAVE A QUESTION, PLEASE.
COST IN TERMS OF THE ADDITION, JUST THE ADDITION.
IS THIS NOT, IS THIS A SHALL APPROVE BECAUSE IT THAT IS CORRECT.
IT DOES MEET THE SHALL APPROVE, BUT HOWEVER, SINCE THEY'RE DOING WORK TO THE EXISTING STRUCTURE, IT CANNOT GO THROUGH AS AN AA.
WITHOUT ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME FOR STAFF, WHICH YOU CAN STILL ASK LATER.
UM, I'M GONNA OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING.
I DO HAVE A SPEAKER SIGNED UP FOR THIS ITEM.
AND IT SAYS, UM, AS MENTIONED, CHRISTINA PERPICH, IF YOU CAN PR PRONOUNCE YOUR NAME AND MAKE SURE THAT I, IF I IF PRONOUNCE IT CORRECT CORRECTLY OR NOT.
PLEASE MATCH YOURSELF TO THE COMMISSION AND PLEASE LET US KNOW YOUR THOUGHTS.
UM, I AM THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AT 1 31 NORTH STREET, 31 0 7 EUNICE.
UM, AND, UM, MY POSITION IS, UM, I GUESS AS THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND, AND IN PARTICULAR, UM, YOU KNOW, I GREATLY APPRECIATE THE APPRECIATION OF THE COUNCIL HERE TODAY.
UM, AND I'VE, WHAT I'M TRYING TO DO IS I'VE PURCHASED THIS HOME IN ORDER TO MAKE IT A PRIMARY RESIDENCE FOR MYSELF AND MY TWO CHILDREN.
SO RIGHT NOW IT'S CURRENTLY A DUPLEX AND I'M LOOKING TO MAKE IT INTO A SINGLE FAMILY HOME THAT MY KIDS WHO ARE, UM, CURRENTLY GOING TO TRAVIS ELEMENTARY CAN CONTINUE THROUGH THE SCHOOL SYSTEM THERE, UM, AND MAKE IT A FAMILY HOME THAT'S LIVABLE FOR THE THREE OF US.
UM, SO I THINK THAT WE'VE TALKED THROUGH, HE'S TALKED THROUGH MOST OF THE MAIN THINGS TO CONSIDER FOR IT.
UM, THE ITEMS I BELIEVE THAT YOU HAD CONCERNS ABOUT WAS WITH REGARD TO THEIR REMOVAL AND CHANGES ON THE EXTERIOR DOORS.
AND I GUESS THAT MY PERSPECTIVE ON IT IS THAT THERE'S SIX EXTERIOR DOORS IN A 1400 SQUARE FOOT HOUSE.
UM, AND SO, UM, THEY'RE JUST AWKWARDLY SPACED.
AND SO TRYING TO TAKE A LAYOUT THAT WAS ONCE TO 700 SQUARE FOOT UNITS AND THEN CHANGING IT INTO ONE MAIN HOUSE, UM, IT'S DIFFICULT TO MAKE THE, LIKE WALLS AND DOORS AND THINGS WHERE YOU WANT THEM.
AND SO, UM, WITH THAT CONSIDERATION, UM, AND THEN I KNOW WE'VE TALKED ABOUT OTHER OPTIONS OF HOW YOU CAN MAKE THEM AVAILABLE FROM THE OUTSIDE, BUT NOT FROM THE INSIDE.
UM, BUT I JUST AM CONCERNED WITH LIKE WEATHERPROOFING AND HAVING THAT OPENING THAT'S AVAILABLE THERE.
UM, SO CURRENTLY, UM, ON THE TWO SIDES OF THE HOUSE, THE TWO DOORS THAT ARE WITHIN QUESTION, UM, ARE THE ONES, UM, THAT ONE IS, THEY'RE BOTH CURRENTLY ATTACHED TO THE KITCHENS OF THE DUPLEX IN ITS CURRENT STATE.
UM, ONE OF WHICH, UM, THE ONE FACING THE, UH, WEST SIDE OF THE HOUSE IS ONE THAT I'M TRYING TO PUT CABINETRY 'CAUSE THAT'S WHERE THE KITCHEN IS GONNA BE.
UM, AND SO TRYING TO PUT CABINETRY ON THE INSIDE THERE AND SO, UM, IT'S JUST MAKES IT AWKWARD TO HAVE A DOOR RIGHT THERE.
UM, AND THEN ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE HOUSE, UH, IT IS WHERE THE, UH, PRIMARY BEDROOM'S CLOSET IS GONNA BE.
SO IT'S JUST, AGAIN, AN AWKWARD SPOT FOR A DOOR.
UM, AND CONSIDERING THERE'S SO MANY OTHER OPENINGS INTO THE HOUSE, UM, TRYING TO MINIMIZE THE EGRESS POINTS, UM, IN AND OUT OF THE, THE HOME.
ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT? I, OKAY.
[00:25:01]
YOU.UM, WHILE THE PUBLIC HEARING IS STILL OPEN, I'LL JUST ASK TO SEE IF THERE'S ANYONE ELSE IN THE ROOM THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM.
SO NOT HEARING, I'M GONNA CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND, UM, ASK THE COMMISSION FOR THEIR THOUGHTS, DISCUSSIONS, UH, OR ANY UH, FOLLOW UP QUESTIONS FOR STAFF.
WELL, I THINK, UM, WHEN I LOOKED AT THIS, UM, AND, AND READ THROUGH THE APPLICATION, I, I UNDERSTAND THE APPLICANT'S DESIRE TO HAVE MORE OF AN OPEN FLOOR PLAN TO MAKE THIS A, A, A SINGLE OCCUPANCY, UH, RESIDENCE.
UM, BUT I THINK THOSE DOORS ON EITHER SIDE ARE JUST, UM, INTEGRAL TO THE HISTORY AND THE DESIGN OF THIS HOUSE.
SO, UM, I THINK WE KNOW THERE ARE WAYS TO DO SO.
UM, YOU KNOW, EVEN CREATING FALSE WALLS INSIDE THAT WOULD LEAVE THOSE DOORS AND WINDOWS THERE.
BUT, UM, STILL WHEN WE, WHEN I THINK ABOUT THIS HOUSE A HUNDRED YEARS DOWN THE ROAD, BEING ABLE TO TELL THE STORY OF THE DUPLEX AND WHY IT WAS THERE IN THE HEIGHTS, UH, BUILT, YOU KNOW, IN THE, IN THE THIRTIES I THINK IS UM, IS AN IMPORTANT, THESE ARE IMPORTANT CHARACTERISTICS.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF STAFF FROM COMMISSION? I, I HAVE DISCUSSION COMM YOUR COUCH.
I AGREE WITH, WITH WHAT, UM, COMMISSIONER WIER OR JACKSON JUST SAID.
I, I HAVE ANOTHER COMMENT THAT'S ON A SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT TOPIC, BUT THE ROOF ON THE ADDITION, THE SECOND FLOOR EDITION HAS THOSE JERKING HOOD GABLES, THOSE DON'T APPEAR ANYWHERE ON THE HOUSE.
AND I TEND TO THINK THAT THESE ADDITIONS SHOULD BE MORE SIMPLIFIED THAN THE ORIGINAL HOUSE.
AND TO ADD SOMETHING THAT WASN'T THERE BEFORE, LIKE WHY COULDN'T THEY JUST BE GABLES OR HIP ROOFS? 'CAUSE THE HOUSE ALREADY HAS A HIP ROOF.
SO THAT SEEMS LIKE TO ME THE MORE NATURAL KIND OF ROOF FOR THAT ADDITION WAS, WAS THERE A REASON FOR THAT, THAT IT, THAT INCLUSION OF THAT NEW MOTIF? SO FOR CLARIFICATION, ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE FRONT ELEVATION OF THAT SECOND STORY ADDITION AND HOW THAT ROOF LOOKS? YES.
SO IT'S GOT, IT'S GOT A GABLE FACING THE FRONT RIGHT BEHIND THE CHIMNEY AND THEN ONE ON THE RIGHT AND THE LEFT.
AND EACH ONE OF THEM HAVE THE JERKING HEAD ON IT.
THERE'S THAT LITTLE SECTION THAT'S SLOPING DOWN, SO IT'S NOT LIKE A FULL HIP ROOF, BUT SURE.
SO TO KIND OF WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY PROPOSED THERE, IT WAS ACTUALLY A SHED ROOF THAT MATCHED WHAT'S ACTUALLY ON THE REAR PANE.
AND WHEN WE DID A STAFF REVIEW LAST WEEK, HAVING THAT SHED ROOF FACING THE FRONT OR FACING NORTH STREET JUST DIDN'T SEEM APPROPRIATE.
SO DURING OUR DISCUSSION OF STAFF REVIEW LAST WEEK, WE THOUGHT IT WOULD BE BEST TO HAVE THAT BE MORE MIMICKING OF WHAT THOSE SIDE GABLES LOOK LIKE AND IT WOULD BE MORE APPROPRIATE IN LINE WITH THE, UH, WITH THE STRUCTURE.
AND SO I ASKED THE APPLICANT TO MAKE THAT REVISION WHAT SHE HAS COMPLIED WITH.
I WAS JUST GONNA SAY ALL THREE OF THOSE GABLES I FEEL LIKE SHOULD JUST BE A, A GABLE OR A, A HIP ROOF RATHER THAN THIS, THIS JERKING HEAD, WHICH IS IN BETWEEN BOTH OF THOSE.
BUT I THINK ON THIS PROJECT, I MEAN, IF I UNDERSTAND CORRECTLY, PART OF THIS IS IF IT WERE A HIP ROOF, IT WOULD BE CRASHED INTO THE RIDGE OF THE HOUSE.
SO YOU'D HAVE TO RAISE THE STRUCTURE HIGHER FOR POTENTIALLY FOR A HIP.
UM, MY UNDERSTANDING WITH THIS, THIS, THIS APPROACH, IT'S SORT OF IN BETWEEN THE TWO.
SO IT'S, IT'S SORT OF KEEPING THE HEIGHT OF THE REAR ADDITION AS LOW AS POSSIBLE RELATIVE TO THE MASS IN THE FRONT.
AS I UNDERSTOOD THE CURRENT, THE CURRENT SUBMISSION, I GUESS I JUST THINK WHEN THEY DO AN ADDITION LIKE THIS, THEY SHOULD TRY TO MAKE IT AS LEAST VISUALLY, UM, NOTICEABLE AS POSSIBLE AND THAT DRAWS ATTENTION TO IT.
THAT'S JUST THE WAY I'M LOOKING AT IT.
AND IF THERE IS A GEOMETRIC REASON FOR IT, FOR IT HITTING THE, THE RIDGE OF THE ROOF AND WE THINK THAT THAT'S A BETTER WAY TO DO IT, THEN I GUESS I SUPPORT THAT.
BUT I JUST PHILOSOPHICALLY THINK THAT THESE ADDITIONS SHOULD ALWAYS BE THE, THE MOST SIMPLE AS POSSIBLE SO THEY DON'T, UM, DRAW ATTENTION TO THEMSELVES AWAY FROM THE ORIGINAL PART OF THE HOUSE.
JASON, CAN YOU COMMENT ABOUT THE DETAILING OF THESE ROOFS? I MEAN THEY'RE, HOW ABSTRACT ARE THE, THE DETAILING OF THE, THESE PROPOSED SOFFITS AND GABLE CONDITIONS IN TERMS OF THE TRIM AND OTHER ELEMENTS? OKAY, CERTAINLY.
WOULD YOU PLEASE GO TO A SIDE ELEVATION IN ENLARGED PLEASE?
[00:30:06]
YEAH, SO THERE'S GONNA BE A, A FASCIA BOARD AROUND THERE AND SO YOU WON'T BE ABLE TO SEE THE, UH, EXPOSED RAFTER TAILS.AND THAT'S KIND OF TYPICALLY OF WHAT WE ASK REP, UM, APPLICANTS WHEN THEY SUBMIT THAT WAY IT'S NOT, UH,
AS FAR AS THE DETAILS, WE ARE TRYING TO KEEP IT AS SIMPLE AS POSSIBLE SO IT DOESN'T DETRACT FROM THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE.
SO WE DON'T HAVE A LOT OF ORNAMENTATION ON THE ROOF, THE SOFFITS, THE EAVES, OR EVEN THE WINDOW TRIM.
AND THAT'S WHY IT'S LOOKING AS IT IS.
BUT AGAIN, UH, JUST REPEAT WHAT I SAID EARLIER.
THE FRONT ROOF ELEV OF PAIN WAS ORIGINALLY A SHED ROOF AND WE DISCUSSED THIS AND WE THOUGHT THAT IT DIDN'T REALLY SEEM APPROPRIATE TO THE STRUCTURE OR THE CONTEXT AREA AND THAT IT WOULD BE MORE APPROPRIATE TO MAKE IT AS A, UH, GABLE WITH A, WITH A HIP, WITH A CLIPPED.
JASON, IS THERE FURTHER QUESTIONS OF STAFF AS WELL OR ANOTHER DISCUSSION AMONGST COMMISSION MEMBERS? IF NOT, IS THERE A MOTION? UM, I GUESS I WANNA MAKE ONE MORE POINT.
THIS HOUSE IS ON A CORNER AND TO ME THE, THE FRONT AND THE SIDE FACING THE OTHER STREET ARE THE TWO MOST IMPORTANT ONES.
I WOULD BE INCLINED TO LET THEM TAKE THE DOOR OUT ON THE SIDE THAT FACES THE NEIGHBOR'S HOUSE.
UH, BUT I THINK THE TWO DOORS FACING THE STREET THAT ARE MORE VISIBLE SHOULD BE, SHOULD BE RETAINED.
IF I MAY MAKE A CLARIFICATION, COMMISSIONER COUCH ON THAT ELEVATION WHERE IT'S GREEN ON THAT DOOR ON THE REAR, THAT'S NOT BEING, UH, CITED OVER WITH MATCHING BRICK.
THAT'S ACTUALLY JUST GONNA BE HAVE A NEW CRAFTSMAN DOOR ON IT.
YOU WERE ON THE CORRECT ELEVATION EARLIER.
SO THE SECOND GREEN ON THE DOOR TOWARDS THE VERY REAR, ALL SHE'S DOING IS REPLACING WITH THE CRAFTSMAN DOOR, BUT IT'S THE MIDDLE ONE THERE WHERE SHE PROPOSES TO UH, REPLACE AND USE MATCHING BRICK.
ISN'T THE MATCHING BRICK ALSO GONNA BE ON THE SIDE FACING THE NEIGHBOR, WHICH I THINK IS ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE HOUSE? YES, THERE WILL BE MATCHING BRICK ON THE LEFT ELEVATION.
I WAS SAYING I THINK SHE COULD TAKE THE DOOR OUT THERE BECAUSE THAT'S NOT AS VISIBLE FROM THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY AS THE ONE ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE HOUSE.
THAT'S THE DOOR ON THIS EL IMAGE ON THE SCREEN CURRENTLY ON THE, ON THE RIGHT SIDE.
SO IT'S GONNA BE THE MIDDLE DOOR THAT'S HIGHLIGHTED BY A GREEN BOX RIGHT NEXT TO THAT SMALL WINDOW.
BUT, BUT FOR REFERENCE IT'S THE EAST ELEVATION THAT YOU'RE COMMUN STREET THAT IS THE EAST ELEVATION FACING EUNICE STREET.
OKAY, WAIT, FACING THE STREET OR FACING THE NEIGHBOR FACING THE STREET.
BUT I THINK THE COMMENT, COMMENT FROM COMMISSIONER COUCH WAS THE DOOR FACING THE NEIGHBOR, NOT, NOT THE STREET.
AND YOU'RE, YOU'RE MORE, UH, ACCEPTABLE TO THAT BEING REPLACED THAN WITH MATCHING BRICK, RIGHT? MM-HMM
WELL, AND HONESTLY THEY COULD JUST FILL THAT IN WITH A SHEET OF HARDY SIDING OR, OR HARDY PANEL AND THEN BUILD A WALL BEHIND IT AND JUST MAKE IT WATERPROOF, BUT THEN STILL MAINTAIN THE OPENING SO THAT PEOPLE KNOW THERE WAS A DOOR AND A WINDOW THERE AND NOT HAVE TO CHANGE THE BRICK.
AND THEN THAT WOULD BE THE SAME THING AS A WALL AND IT WOULD STILL SHOW EVIDENCE THAT THE DOOR HAD BEEN THERE.
IT COULD ALSO BE, UH, THE MATCHING BRICK COULD BE IN A LITTLE BIT TO GIVE IT SOME GHOSTING OUTLINE.
SO IF YOU'RE TO SEE IT, IT WOULD STILL READ IT AS A DOOR FROM THAT ANGLE.
BUT THEN WHAT ABOUT THE, THE SHED OVER IT? I MEAN THE AWNING OVER IT I THINK IS, IS JUST AS IMPORTANT AS THE ROOF.
I MEAN AS THE DOOR ITSELF, THE DOOR IN THE WINDOW, THE PROPOSED IS SHOWING TO REMOVE THAT AWNING, THE SHED OVER THE DOOR PLUS THE WINDOW PLUS THE DOOR IN THE WINDOW ITSELF COULD, SO YOU BASICALLY SCRAPE IT FROM COULD STEP EVEN IF YOU'RE A PHOTOGRAPH OF THAT, THE ACTUAL IMAGE OF THAT WE DO, YES.
IT'S GONNA BE AT THE BEGINNING OF THE PAGE ALSO TOO.
SHE PROPOSES ON THAT LEFT ELEVATION CONTINUED BACK UP.
SO THAT ONE HIGHLIGHTER RIGHT THERE, SHE'LL TAKE THAT AIE THAT'S OVER THAT PROPOSED DOOR AND SHIFT IT TO THE DOOR ON THE REAR THAT SHE PROPOSES TO MAKE.
IT'S JUST GONNA BE PUT ON THE, UH, REAR ELEVATION.
I JUST STAND BY MY, I THINK WHEN WE TELL THE STORY OF THIS HOUSE AND THAT'S WHY THESE HOUSES ARE DESIRABLE 'CAUSE THEY'VE BEEN THERE.
UM, THAT THAT'S AN IMPORTANT MAKE A MOTION.
IT'S THE WILL OF CONDITION MAKE MOTION.
JASON, CAN YOU REPEAT, REPEAT THE RECOMMENDATION PLEASE.
[00:35:01]
CONDITIONS THAT CERTAINLY STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL WITH CONDITION TO RETAIN THE DOOR AND SMALL WINDOW IN THE MIDDLE OF BOTH SIDE ELEVATIONS.SO I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION BEFORE I CALL THE VOTE? NO.
ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION? AYE.
ANY OPPOSED, ANY ABSTENTIONS? NO, I UNDERSTAND BECAUSE THAT MOTION PASSES.
ALL RIGHT, GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIR MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.
THIS IS STAFF PERSON JASON LENAL.
TODAY I SUBMIT FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION ITEM B 3 4 25 COLUMBIA STREET, THE HOUSTON HEIGHTS SOUTH HISTORIC DISTRICT.
FIRST, I'D LIKE TO SAY THAT THIS IS ACTUALLY A CURRENT LOT THAT IS, UH, CLASSIFIED AS NON-CONTRIBUTING IS ACTUALLY A LARGE LOT.
THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO, UH, REPLANT THIS AND MAKE IT TWO EQUAL LOTS.
50 BY 1 32 ON THE SOUTHERN EDGE OR ON THE SOUTHERN LOT IS THIS ITEM THAT I'M NOW DISCUSSING, WHICH WILL BE REPLANTED WITH THE ADDRESS 4 25 COLUMBIA STREET.
APPLICANT PROPOSES A NEW CONSTRUCTION SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL BE TWO STORY TOTALING 2,869 TOTAL SQUARE FEET.
THERE WILL BE ON THE FIRST FLOOR, 1,385 SQUARE FEET, SECOND FLOOR, 1,484 SQUARE FEET.
WE'LL HAVE A MAXIMUM RIDGE HEIGHT OF 28 FEET, SIX INCHES WITH COMPOSITION SHINGLES, AND A SIX OVER 12 ROOF PITCH.
IT'LL BE ON A PURE BEAM FOUNDATION USING CONCRETE SLASH BRICK MATERIALS WITH THE BRICK SKIRTING AND WOOD LATTICE AT THE CRAWL SPACES.
IT WOULD BE A MIX OF SMOOTH IAN SIDING WITH A SIX INCH REVEAL AND BOARD AND BATTEN IN THE PORCH GABLES.
YOU'LL ALSO HAVE A MIX OF FIXED AND DOUBLE HUNG WINDOWS WITH A MIX OF SINGLE AND THREE OVER ONE LIGHT PATTERNS, ALL WINDOWS TO BE IN SET AND RECESSED.
THESE WILL ALL BE WOOD WINDOWS WITH THE EXCEPTION THAT THE BATHROOM WINDOWS WILL BE FINAL.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL WITH THE CONDITION TO REMOVE THE SECTION OF THE PROPOSED PORCH THAT WRAPS AROUND TO THE SIDE OR NORTH ELEVATION SO THAT THE PORT FRONT PORCH HAS NO WIDER THAN THE FRONT WALL.
THE OWNER TRACY WARE HAS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK AS WELL AS THE ARCHITECT ALIA DENDA.
THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
I'M AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
COMMISSION MEMBERS ARE OF THEIR ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS, THE STAFF AT THIS TIME.
WHAT, WHAT IS THE, UM, RATIONALE FOR TAKING THE SIDE SECTION OF THE PORCH OFF? THE RATIONALE IS THERE ARE NO CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES IN THE CONTEXT AREA, NOR ON, UM, ANY ADJACENT STREETS THAT HAVE WRAPAROUND PORCHES TO SUPPORT THIS.
THIS IS A SECTION OF THE HOUSTON HEIGHTS DISTRICT DISTRICT THAT'S AT THE VERY EDGE.
THERE ARE ONLY FOUR CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES, AND THESE ARE ALL VERY SMALL PORCHES ON THE FRONT.
AND SO THERE'S NOTHING TO SUPPORT OUR WRAPAROUND PORCH.
AND SO THAT IS WHAT HAS, UH, STAFF HAS RECOMMENDED.
SO WITH, WITH THE, UM, WELL, I'M SORRY.
I'LL SAVE THAT FOR DISCUSSION.
AT THIS TIME I'M GONNA OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING.
I DO HAVE TWO SPEAKERS SIGNED UP AS, AS WAS MENTIONED.
UM, THE FIRST PERSON, UM, SIGNED UP TO SPEAK IS THE OWNER TRACY BOULEVARD WARE.
AND, UH, WE'RE SUPER EXCITED ABOUT THIS PROJECT AND, UH, LOVE THE DESIGN.
WE LOVE FRONT PORCHES AND A WRAPAROUND PORCH, UM, LIVE IN THE HEIGHTS FOR ALMOST 20 YEARS AND, UH, I LOVE TO RESTORE THESE OLD HOMES.
UM, THEY DID FIND SOME BEAUTIFUL EXAMPLES.
UM, I WALKED AROUND IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD WITHIN THE 400 BLOCK, UH, BETWEEN COLUMBIA AND HEIGHTS AND FOUND WELL OVER 15 THAT HAVE FRONT PORCHES AND WRAPAROUND PORCHES AND BUILT IN THE TWENTIES.
AND, UM, WHILE I LOVE THIS DESIGN THAT'S, UM, JUST ON THESE FOUR, UM, WE FEEL LIKE WRAPAROUND PORCH WOULD, UH, ALSO ADD A LITTLE BIT OF UNIQUENESS TO IT.
UM, THAT REPRESENTS SOME OTHER STREETS, ONE BLOCK OVER, TWO BLOCKS OVER WITHIN WALKING DISTANCE, UM, FROM THIS.
SO WE REALLY WOULD LIKE TO INCORPORATE THE WRAPAROUND PORCH FOR NOT ONLY THE AESTHETIC
[00:40:01]
HISTORIC, BUT ALSO LIVABILITY.UM, IT'S A FAN FAVORITE OF BUYERS AND SO WE WANNA MAKE THEM HAPPY, BUT WE ALSO WANNA MAKE IT LOOK A LITTLE DIFFERENT.
BUT STILL, LIKE OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, I HAPPEN TO ALSO LIVE ACROSS THE STREET.
SO, UM, THE, THIS DESIGN ACTUALLY IS VERY SIMILAR TO MY HOUSE, WHICH I LOVE, BUT I DO THINK THE WRAPAROUND PORCH WOULD ADD A UNIQUE FEATURE THAT REPRESENTS A COUPLE OF OTHER ELEMENTS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND WITHIN THE 400 AND 500 BLOCK, NOT SEVERAL BLOCKS OVER, THESE ARE JUST A FEW STREETS OVER.
UM, I DID BRING SOME PICTURES WITH ON MY PHONE, BUT I DON'T THINK THAT'S GONNA, WE CAN GET IT UP HERE ON THE DEAL UNLESS Y'ALL WANT TO.
YOU MAY BE ABLE TO PUT YOUR PHONE ON THE PROJECTOR, BUT I'M NOT SURE.
HOW, UM, THIS ONE'S ONLY, UM, TWO BLOCKS.
YEAH, AND IT'S GORGEOUS AND THERE'S ONE RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET WITH THE SAME STYLE AND, UH, THEY WERE BOTH BUILT IN THE TWENTIES AND I BELIEVE THEY'RE, THEY'RE REALLY MAKE A BEAUTIFUL STATEMENT.
WELL, THIS IS ON FOURTH STREET, SO QUESTIONS SHOULD, YEAH, JUST, I THINK WE HAVE A, WE MAY HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION, SO PLEASE PROCEED.
WELL, JUST THAT THIS ISN'T A CRAFTSMAN STYLE HOUSE, SO THE WRAPAROUND PORCH IS KIND OF INDICATIVE OF, OF VICTORIAN, LATE VICTORIAN STYLE OF ARCHITECTURE, LESS SO OF CRAFTSMEN.
SO I THINK FROM THAT, THAT'S WHERE IT'S A LITTLE, UH, UH, SHOULD WE CHANGE IT TO MORE VICTORIAN UNSETTLING FOR ME IS THE DETAILS ARE CLEARLY CRAFTSMEN AND YET THAT LARGE, UM, SO YEAH, I MEAN, WOULD YOU HAVE, IF THE, IF THE WRAPAROUND PORCH IS, IS IS THE SORT OF YOUR YOU WANT WANNA FALL ON, IS THAT, I MEAN, WOULD YOU BE OPEN TO CHANGING SOME OF THE DETAILS? UM, WE COULD, WE REALLY LIKE THE DESIGN THAT'S BEEN CREATED BECAUSE WE FEEL LIKE IT REPRESENTS THE HEIGHTS HISTORIC, UM, APPROPRIATELY SO.
UM, I THINK THE ONLY THING WE'RE ASKING, THIS ONE'S A LITTLE MORE GRAND, IT'S TWO STORIES WE'RE, UH, AS FAR AS PORCHES, WE'RE ONLY PROPOSING ONE STORY WRAPAROUND.
UM, I'M SORRY, NOT ONE STORY, YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? MM-HMM
SO, UM, THE HOUSE THAT'S ACROSS THE STREET FROM THAT IS, UH, MORE CRAFTSMEN AND STYLE.
UM, GUYS, I THOUGHT I'D GET THAT.
I WILL SAY YOUR IPHONE IS A LITTLE BIT CLEARER THAN I CALL XEROX.
SO IT'S ACTUALLY THE TECHNOLOGY WORKS PRETTY WELL, UM, WITH THE IPHONE.
THIS ONE IS, UM, ALSO RIGHT, UM, ON THE SAME STREET AND IT'S MORE CRAFTSMAN AND IT HAS A WRAPAROUND SIDE PORCH.
THERE'S, WE REALLY DID COUNT OVER 15 THAT DO HAVE A WRAPAROUND SIDE PORCH.
TAKES UP TWO THIRDS OF THE FRONT WITH THE SIDE AND THEN WRAPAROUND.
SO I THINK CRAFTSMAN AND VICTORIAN BOTH SHOW THAT STYLE.
I DON'T THINK WRAPAROUND PORCH IS EXCLUSIVE TO VICTORIAN.
NO, I, AND I'M NOT MAKING THAT COMMENT, BUT YOUR PORCH HERE IS RUNNING ALL THE WAY ACROSS THE FRONT AND THEN WRAPPING AROUND AND AS YOU JUST SAID, YEAH, YOU KNOW, THIS ONE HERE, THE OTHER EXAMPLES, HERE'S ANOTHER ONE TOO, FROM A CRAFTSMAN STANDPOINT ARE THAT ARE, ARE NOT, YOU KNOW, THE ENTIRE FRONT OF THE HOUSE AND THEN WRAPPING AROUND.
WE DO HAVE ANOTHER ONE RIGHT ON FOURTH STREET.
THAT, UM, DOES SHOW THE FULL, AND AS YOU CAN SEE, THAT PORCH GOES ALL THE WAY ACROSS THE FRONT.
AND, UH, I BELIEVE THAT ONE'S A LITTLE EARLIER THAN THE TWENTIES, BUT I'M, I'VE HAD TO VERIFY THAT'S THAT'S LATE VICTORIAN.
YEAH, I MEAN ALMOST STEAM STEAMBOAT VICTORIAN.
WELL OF COURSE WITH THAT GINGERBREAD, BUT I MEAN, UM, BUT WE REALLY WOULD LOVE TO HAVE THIS WRAPAROUND.
WE FEEL THAT IT IS REPRESENTATIVE OF THE HISTORIC HEIGHTS AND WOULD BE A NICE EDITION.
ESPECIALLY SINCE ACROSS THE STREET WE'VE GOT A LOT OF NEW, MORE MODERN BUILD.
AND, UH, I, I GUESS I DON'T, I DON'T REALLY HAVE THE SAME ISSUE WITH THE PORCH.
MY ISSUE IS WITH THE DETAILING, THIS GOES BACK TO MY COMMENT ON THE PREVIOUS PROJECT, THE WINDOWS WITH THE DIVIDED LIGHTS IN THE TOP AND THE, THE BOARD AND BATTEN OR, OR WHATEVER THAT IS, AND THE GABLE, THOSE THINGS TO ME DON'T SEEM LIKE ELEMENTS OF HOUSES BEING BUILT TODAY.
THEY'RE LIKE, IF YOU DIDN'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT ARCHITECTURE, YOU MIGHT THINK THIS HOUSE IS BUILT IN 1920 OR SOMETHING.
SO THAT'S WHERE I WOULD, WOULD WANNA BE MORE CAUTIOUS
[00:45:01]
AND SIMPLIFY SOME OF THOSE THINGS SO THAT IT CLEARLY REPRESENTS A MODERN HOUSE BUILT TODAY AND DOESN'T LOOK LIKE A HOUSE THAT SOMEONE WOULD THINK WAS BUILT IN 1920.BUT WOULDN'T, ISN'T THAT THE REASON FOR HISTORIC IS TO MAKE IT LOOK HISTORIC? WELL, NO, THE REASON FOR HISTORIC IS TO PRESERVE HISTORIC BUILDINGS.
AND WHEN YOU DON'T HAVE A HISTORIC BUILDING, YOU SHOULDN'T MAKE IT IMITATE A HISTORIC BUILDING.
YOU SHOULD MAKE IT LOOK LIKE IT'S OF ITS TIME.
'CAUSE THE HISTORIC BUILDINGS REPRESENT THEIR TIME AND THEIR TIME HAS PASSED, BUT WE'RE SAVING THEM AND THE NEW BUILDINGS BEING BUILT NEED TO REPRESENT TODAY AND NOT, NOT 1920.
WELL, IF, IF I MAY ADD, SO IN THE WAY WE TRY TO DO THAT IS TO MAINTAIN PROPORTION AND SCALE AND, BUT SIMPLIFY SOME OF THE DETAILING.
THE THE SPECIFIC PROVISION FOR WHICH WE ARE DISCUSSING IS, IS THAT WE DON'T WANT TO CREATE A FALSE PAST, WHICH IS AN ILLUSION OF SOMETHING THAT IS OLD, WHEN IN FACT IT'S OF OUR TIME.
SO WE'RE TRYING TO FIND SOMETHING THAT IS RECESSIVE ENOUGH TO FIT INTO THE CONTEXT OF THE HISTORIC STRUCTURES IS OF A SIMILAR SCALE, AS I MENTIONED, BUT SIMPLIFY DESIGN SO THAT IT DOES, IT'S NOT, UM, IT, IT'S SO IT'S JUST, IT'S COMFORTABLE IN ITS SETTINGS, BUT IT'S, IT'S NOT TRYING TO TR UH, BLAZE A NEW TRAIL BASED ON AN OLD THEME.
SO IT'S, IT'S SORT OF A, IT, IT'S, IT'S KIND OF A, THAT'S WHY WE HAVE MANY DIFFERENT, UH, CRITERIA ON THE ORDINANCE THAT WE HAVE TO LOOK AT EACH ONE.
AND, UH, SOME ARE MASSING AND SOME ARE MATERIALS AND YOU'RE IN A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT, UM, CONSIDERATION 'CAUSE THIS IS NEW CONSTRUCTION AND, AND IS NOT CONTRIBUTING.
SO THAT, THAT'S ANOTHER ASPECT THAT WE LOOK AT AS WELL.
THAT THAT'S WHY I'M, I THINK THE PORCH IS FINE.
'CAUSE HISTORIC HOUSE WOULDN'T HAVE HAD A PORCH LIKE THAT AS WE, AS WE SEEN ANYTHING.
SO I THINK THIS HOUSE, THE DESIGN IS GOOD.
I WOULD JUST SAY I WOULD WANT TO SEE LIKE ONE OVER ONE WINDOWS INSTEAD OF THE, THE TRIPLE THE, THE THREE OVER ONE AND THE FRONT GABLE BE MORE SIMPLIFIED.
BUT OTHER THAN THAT, I, I PERSONALLY THINK THIS HOUSE IS FINE SIMPLIFIED
I MEAN, I I WOULD JUST DO SOMETHING MORE SIMPLE.
WELL IF YOU'RE PREPARED TO MAKE A MOTION, UM, I MEAN, CAN CAN THEY ASK THAT THE APPLICANT WHETHER THEY'RE WILLING TO ENTERTAIN A MOTION OF THAT NATURE? UM, 'CAUSE AGAIN, WE, IT'S NOT DRAWN SO THEY'RE WILLING TO ENTERTAIN A MOTION OF THAT NATURE.
BUT I JUST WANNA GET LEGAL COUNSEL TO ADVISE US ON, ON WHAT WE, WE UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT WHAT, WHAT, FROM WHAT WE'VE SEEN, WE, WE HAVE A DRAWING AND WE CAN IMAGINE FEWER MUTTONS IN THE DRAWING AND WE CAN IMAGINE A SIMPLIFIED SIGHTING.
SO I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT YOU CONCUR WHERE I, I THINK IF YOU GET THE APPLICANT'S RE YOU KNOW, CONSENSUS THAT SHE UNDERSTANDS WHAT'S BEING REQUESTED OVER AND ABOVE THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION, THEN YOU MAY DO SO.
UM, THE, THE QUESTION COMES UP AND AS YOU ALL KNOW, WE'VE GOTTEN THIS BACK FROM THE HPAB BEFORE, WHEN AN APPLICANT DOESN'T LIKE WHAT'S GONE, THE QUESTION IS IS DO THEY WANT, DOES THE APPLICANT WANT A DECISION BASED ON WHAT'S BEEN SUBMITTED AND OR WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATION, OR ARE THEY WILLING TO CONSIDER SOMETHING ELSE AS YOU ALL ARE PRESENTING HERE TODAY? I THINK THAT'S THE QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT.
I'M FINE WITH THE WINDOW CHANGE AND THE SIDING GOING FROM BAT AND BOARD TO, UH, PLANK.
THEN I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION OKAY.
THAT WE ACCEPT THE DESIGN AS IT IS WITH THE CHANGE THAT THE WINDOWS GO TO BE ONE OVER ONE AND THE FRONT AND THE SIDE GABLES OF THE PORCH HAVE HORIZONTAL SIDING INSTEAD OF VERTICAL SIDING.
IF THERE'S NO OTHER DISCUSSION, ALL IN FAVOR OF THAT MOTION.
ANY OPPOSED? ANY ABSTENTIONS? SO THAT MOTION PASSES.
OH, I'M WELL SORRY, WE, THE OTHER SPEAKER WAS FOR THE PROJECT.
IT WAS, IT WAS THE AGENT FOR THE OWNER.
SO, UM, I GUESS WE'RE OKAY NOT HAVING THE AGENT SPEAK YOU, YOU, YOU COULD STILL INVITE HER UP TO MAKE COMMENTS.
WE WERE NOW MOVING ON TO ITEM B SEVEN, I BELIEVE.
[00:50:02]
GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIR PERSON AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.THIS IS STAFF PERSON TAYLOR VALLEY.
I SUBMIT ITEM B EIGHT AT 5 0 2 HAWTHORNE STREET IN THE WESTMORELAND DISTRICT.
THE APPLICANT PROPOSES TO KEEP THE HARDY PLANK SIDING WITH A FIVE INCH REVEAL THAT WAS REPLACED ON THE FRONT PORCH AND EAST ELEVATION WITHOUT THE ISSUANCE OF A COA AND REPLACE THE REST OF THE HOME MINUS THE REAR LOWER LEVEL PICTURED ON PAGE NINE OF THE STAFF REPORT.
THE OWNER WAS RED TACKED FOR THE FIRST TIME ON MAY 16TH AND THEN SUBMITTED AN APPLICATION TO US SHORTLY AFTER.
STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL OF A COA AND ISSUANCE OF A COR WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS.
HARDY PLANK IS TO BE REMOVED FROM THE PORCH AND EAST ELEVATION OF THE HOME AND BE REPAIRED AND REPLACED AS NEEDED WITH WOOD SIDING.
THE SIDING IS TO BE BACK PRIMED AND CUT INS TO BE PRIMED AND AN EIGHT AND A ONE EIGHTH INCH VERTICAL GAP OR EXPANSION GAP MUST BE BETWEEN THE SIDING AND INSULATION TO ALLOW FOR THE WOOD SIDING TO DRY CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.
I'M AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
THE APPLICANT IS AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
OTHER QUESTIONS? THE STAFF COMMISSIONER MCNEIL? UM, I'M JUST WONDERING, WE'RE ASKING THE APPLICANT TO REPLACE THE WOOD SIDING, BUT WE'RE NOT, UM, SAYING WHAT EXACTLY, WHAT'S IS IT, IS IT JUST A FIVE AND A QUARTER SMOOTH LAP SIDING? IS IT BEVELED, IS IT PINE? DO WE KNOW WHAT IT IS TERRANCE? DO, DO WE KNOW WHAT THE STOR SIDING WAS THAT WAS REMOVED THE PROFILE? I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S BEVELED.
UH, SO I WAS, UM, WHEN THE THREE ONE ONE CALL CAME IN, I WAS THE STAFF MEMBER WHO WAS UH, ASSIGNED WITH GOING OUT THERE.
UM, UNFORTUNATELY I DID NOT GET THE MEASUREMENTS OF, OF THE ACTUAL SIDING.
THERE IS SIGHTING STILL REMAINING ON ONE SIDE OF THE HOME.
SO WE WOULD ASK THAT HE MATCH WHATEVER THAT SIGHTING IS AND, AND WE'LL, I WOULD BE HAPPY TO GO OUT THERE AND DOCUMENT IT FOR THE ACTUAL REPORT SO THAT IT, IT CLEARLY STATES WHAT THE, UH, SIDING SHOULD BE.
THAT'S, YEAH, THAT'S ALL I'M ASKING FOR.
INSTEAD OF GIVING THEM THE LEEWAY TO JUST PUT UP ANY KIND OF WOOD SIDING.
MR. COSGROVE, JUST A QUICK QUESTION.
IN THE, IN THE APPLICATION HERE IT SAYS THAT YOU SAID THAT THEY RECEIVED THE RED TAG ON MAY 16TH AND THEN SUBMITTED A C OF A, BUT IN HERE IT SAYS THEY RECEIVED THREE RED TAGS.
DID THEY OCCUR AFTER THE 16TH OR BEFORE THE 16TH? YES, THERE WAS TWO AFTERWARDS.
SO THEY CONTINUED TO WORK AFTER THEY GOT A RED TAG.
THEY DIDN'T, UM, THEY JUST KEPT GETTING THE RED TAG UNTIL IT LED UP TO COMMISSION, BUT THEY STOPPED WHENEVER THEY GOT THE FIRST ONE AND, UM, SUBMITTED.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM COMMISSION MEMBERS NOT HEARING? I'M GONNA GO AHEAD AND OPEN, OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING.
WE DO HAVE A SPEAKER SIGNED UP, UH, TO SPEAK AND I HAVE, UM, FRANCIS SWEENEY WHO IS THE OWNER.
YOU CAN RESTATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS THE COMMISSION.
UM, MY NAME'S FRANCIS SWEENEY AND I'M THE OWNER OF 5 0 2 HAWTHORNE.
UM, AND WE WOULD ASK THAT WE'D BE ALLOWED TO KEEP THE HARDEE SIDING.
UH, THE HOUSE, YOU KNOW, AS IS TYPICAL IN A LOT FOR A LOT OF HOUSTON HOMES GETS A LOT OF WEATHERING AND WE DON'T WANT TO HAVE TO REDO THE SIDING.
UH, IF IT'S DONE WITH THE OLD SIDING THAT WAS THERE ALREADY, WE WERE ALREADY SEEING ON ALL SIDES OF THE HOUSE, UH, THAT THERE WAS SERIOUS WEATHERING AND DECAY GOING ON AND THE HOUSE IS QUITE RICKETY AS IT IS.
SO WE WANTED TO HAVE A SIDING THAT WOULD LAST FOR MANY YEARS.
UM, WHAT OUR PLAN IS IS FROM THE STREET THERE WOULD BE NO CHANGE IN ASPECT OF THE HOUSE.
SO WE ARE TRYING TO PRESERVE EXACTLY WHAT THE HOUSE LOOKS LIKE, THE SIDING, UM, THE SPACING OF THE SIDING THAT WE'RE USING, THE COLORING OF IT IS ALL GOING TO BE IDENTICAL TO WHAT IS THERE ALREADY.
SO ALL WE ARE DOING IS DOING NO CHANGE TO THE, THE VISUAL OF THE HOUSE, BUT JUST WE'RE USING A MATERIAL THAT WE THINK IS GOING TO WEAR, UH, MUCH BETTER.
UH, WE'VE ALREADY DONE, UH, PART OF THE, THE SITE THAT IS ALMOST NOT VISIBLE FROM THE STREET, UH, BEFORE WE EVEN KNEW THAT A COA WAS REQUIRED FOR THIS.
AS SOON AS WE GOT REG TAGGED, WE DID STOP ALL WORK ON THIS.
WE WOULD ASK, UH, OUR PRIMARY ASK IS TO BE ALLOWED, USE THE HARDY PLANK FOR WEATHERING.
AND IF THIS COMMISSION DECIDES THAT REALLY PLANK, UH, WOOD SIDING, UH, SHOULD BE USED, WE WOULD ASK THAT WE'D BE ALLOWED KEEP AT THE EASTERN SIDE THAT WE'VE ALREADY DONE AND IS, IS HARDLY VISIBLE FROM THE STREET.
YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT A VERY ACUTE ANGLE TO SEE THAT.
SO, UM, YOU KNOW, THAT WOULD BE OUR KIND OF SECONDARY
[00:55:01]
ASK THAT WE COULD AT LEAST PRESERVE THAT, UM, THAT EASTERN WALL, UH, WITH THE HARDY PLANK THAT'S ALREADY BEEN DONE.BUT IDEALLY WE'D LIKE TO BE ABLE TO, UH, MAINTAIN HARDY PLANK ON BOTH THE EAST AND FRONT FACADES.
UH, AND DID YOU TAKE ANY PICTURES OF THE PREVIOUS WOOD SIDING THAT WAS REMOVED? UH, YOU MENTIONED THE, THE, YOU REFERRED TO THE STATE OF THE WOOD SIDING, BUT IS THERE ANY DOCUMENTATION ON THE CONDITION OF THAT WOOD BEFORE IT WAS REMOVED IN TERMS OF DETERIORATION AND SO FORTH? UH, SO WE DIDN'T TAKE PICTURES OF, OF, UH, THE ACTUAL PART THAT WAS REMOVED BECAUSE WE DIDN'T KNOW WE'D HAVE TO SUBMIT AN APPLICATION LIKE THIS.
BUT WE DID SUBMIT AS PART, PART OF OUR PACKAGE, PARTS OF THE HOUSE, BOTH FRONT FACADE AND OTHER FACADES THAT HAVEN'T BEEN TOUCHED.
AND YOU CAN SEE QUITE CLEARLY, UH, THE, THE PAINT FLAKING, THE WOOD ROTTING AND JUST GENERAL DECAY, IT WAS IN QUITE A BAD STATE.
ARE THERE OTHER QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT? DO YOU HAVE, I, I DON'T KNOW HOW LONG YOU'VE OWNED THE PROPERTY.
DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA IF THE SIDING THAT YOU REMOVED WAS ORIGINAL TO THE HOME? UH, WE DON'T KNOW.
WE'VE OWNED THE PROPERTY FOR ABOUT 10 YEARS.
UM, I DON'T KNOW IF IF THE, IF IT WAS EVER REPLACED IN THE PAST.
THERE WAS, WHEN WE BOUGHT IT ON THE BACKSIDE, THERE IS SOME HARDY PLANK, UH, SIDING ALREADY DONE ON THAT.
SO THE BACK THAT'S NOT VISIBLE TO THE STREET UHHUH UH, LOOKS MODERN AND IS HARDY PLANK JUST ON THE FRONT SIDE.
I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S ORIGINAL, BUT THAT WAS WOOD.
HAVE YOU, SINCE YOU'RE CONCERNED WITH WEATHERING IN THE 10 YEARS THAT YOU'VE OWNED IT, HAVE YOU STRIPPED AND SANDED AND PAINTED OR MAINTAIN, TRIED TO MAINTAIN THE WOOD SIDING? UH, WE HAVE DONE SOME PAINTING OF THE, OF THE FRONTS, UM, JUST OF THE UH, THE SORT OF TRIM OF IT.
UM, BUT UH, THAT THAT'S ALL WE'VE DONE.
WE HAVEN'T DONE A GENERAL PAINT OR A SIDING.
IT IS, PART OF IT IS CRUMBLING AWAY, SO IT'S, IT'S, IT'S NOT THE TYPE OF WEAR AND TEAR THAT COULD BE DONE BY JUST, UH, SMALL MAINTENANCE.
WELL, IT, THAT'S WHY WE, WE WANTED TO DO THIS.
WELL IT, IT APPEARS THAT THIS MAY BE THE ORIGINAL SIDING.
SO IT'S BEEN ON THERE FOR POTENTIALLY A HUNDRED YEARS.
YES, IT, IT WAS, YOU KNOW, THE MATERIALS LAST IF THEY'RE MAINTAINED.
BUT LIKE ANYTHING WITH HOME OWNERSHIP, I THINK YOU HAVE TO, YOU DO HAVE TO MAINTAIN THAT, UM, IN SEALING THE WOOD.
SO THAT'S WHY I WAS ASKING IF YOU HAD DONE ANYTHING IN THE 10 YEARS.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT? WERE THERE ANY INVENTORY PHOTOS LIKE FROM THE HARRIS COUNTY ARCHIVES OR ANYTHING LIKE THOSE ONES? THEY HAVE USUALLY FROM 1960 TO SEVENTIES.
I WAS JUST CURIOUS TO KNOW 'CAUSE SOMETIMES THEY HAVE, THEY'LL SHOW YOU WHAT THE SIGHTING LOOKED LIKE 50 YEARS AGO OR 60 YEARS AGO.
THAT'S MORE FOR THE STUFF I THINK.
YEAH, I DIDN'T HAVE ANY, UM, PICTURES FROM THE ARCHIVES.
SO YOU, YOU CHECKED THOUGH? NO, I DIDN'T.
I SHOULD HAVE GOTTEN A BLA FOR THAT BLAS.
UM, TYPICALLY SOME, I DO FIND THAT THEY DO HAVE PICTURES SOMETIMES I HAVEN'T ACTUALLY SEEN THEM FOR WESTMORELAND, BUT THAT'S MY MISTAKE AND I SHOULD HAVE CHECKED ON THAT.
WELL WHAT WHAT I DO WHEN I DO RESEARCH IS I JUST EMAIL THE ARCHIVIST AND SHE'LL PULL THE THINGS PRETTY QUICKLY.
THEY HAVE LITTLE FILES AND THEY'LL JUST SCAN 'EM AND EMAIL 'EM TO YOU.
YEAH, LIKE I SAID, I USUALLY DO.
I DIDN'T FOR THIS ONE BECAUSE THEY DON'T US, THEY DON'T ALWAYS COME WITH PICTURES.
SO I SHOULD HAVE DONE JUST DOUBLE CHECKED.
ALSO, SOME OF THE SITING LIKE ON THE CHIMNEY AND WHATEVER THIS, THIS THING WITH THE TWO FRENCH DOORS IS LIKE, THAT LOOKS LIKE IT'S FROM THE EIGHTIES OR SOMETHING.
LIKE I DON'T THINK THAT'S ORIGINAL TO THE HOUSE.
SO IT'S, IT'S HARD FOR ME TO KNOW WHAT WAS ORIGINAL AND WHAT'S NOT.
'CAUSE THIS STUFF IN THE BACK, LIKE THESE METAL STAIRS AND THIS WEIRD CONFIGURATION OF THE BACK PORCH, LIKE THAT'S OBVIOUSLY ALL WAY AFTER THE HACK FACT AFTER THE HOUSE, THE HOUSE IS LIKE APARTMENTS OR SOMETHING.
I WOULD SAY TO USE TREATED WOOD SIDING, YOU CAN GET, UM, SIDING THAT'S TREATED IF WE DON'T ALLOW THEM REPLACE IT.
'CAUSE 'CAUSE IF, IF, IF SOME OF THESE PICTURES OF SIDINGS ALL ROTTEN, LIKE I SEE THAT ON THESE ADDITIONS LIKE THE 1980 STUFF LIKE THAT, I THINK WE SHOULD LET HIM REPLACE BUT DO IT WITH WOOD SIDING.
'CAUSE WOOD SIDING DOES LOOK A LOT DIFFERENT THAN HARDY SIDING.
LIKE IT, IT'S TOTALLY DIFFERENT.
IF YOU LOOK AT IT, THEY LOOK VERY, VERY SEPARATE FROM EACH OTHER.
AND IT'S IMPORTANT I THINK TO USE THE NATURAL SIDING 'CAUSE IT LOOKS LIKE WOOD SIDING AND THESE HOUSES WOULD'VE HAD WOOD SIDING, NOT HARDY SIDING, BUT YOU CAN, IF YOU TALK TO THE LUMBERYARD, IF YOU MAKE A BIG ENOUGH ORDER, THEY'LL RUN IT THROUGH
[01:00:01]
THE, THE PRESSURE TREATMENT AND YOU CAN GET TREATED SITING THAT LASTS FOR A REALLY VERY LONG TIME.LIKE AS LONG AS, AS HARDY SIDING DOES.
UH, WHILE THE PUBLIC HEARING IS STILL OPEN, I'M JUST GONNA ASK TO SEE IF IS THAT'S, I ONLY HAD ONE SPEAKER SIGNED UP, SO IF THERE'S ANYONE ELSE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM, PLEASE ANNOUNCE YOURSELF AT THIS TIME.
SO NOT HEARING, I'M GONNA CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND UM, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO OKAY.
PLEASE ACCEPT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION AS PRESENTED WITH THE, UH, ADDITION THAT, UM, STAFF IDENTIFY EXACTLY WHAT SIZE THE SIDING IS AND, AND UH, MAKE SURE THAT THE APPLICANT IS MATCHING WHAT WAS THERE, WHAT IS STILL AT EXTENT.
I HAVE A, I HAVE A MOTION IN A SECOND.
SO THAT, IS THAT THE SIDE THAT THIS SIDE HERE THAT'S REAL CLOSE TO THE HOUSE, TAYLOR MASS.
CAN WE PUT UP THE, THE PLAN OF THE EAST SIDE? I MEAN IF YOU LOOK AT THE EAST SIDE HE HAS, YOU CAN SEE THE BACK, WHICH IS STILL BLUE AND THE NEW HARDY.
SO HE IS, HE IS ACTUALLY GETTING THE SIZE CORRECT.
SO EACH COURSE IS MATCHING WITH THE BACK IS HARDY, RIGHT? WELL IT'S ALL, IT'S IT'S, IT'S ALL LINED UP.
SO, AND THE SAME ON THE FRONT, BUT LOOK AT THE, LOOK AT THE FRONT CORNER, IT'S THE SAME.
SO I WOULD OFFER A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT THAT YOU'D ALLOW HIM TO KEEP THE EAST SIDE REPLACE ANYTHING ON THE BACK WITH HARDY.
'CAUSE IT'S IN THE BACK AND IT'S NON, IT'S A NON-ORIGINAL ADDITION ON THE BACK AND THE FRONT BE REPLACED WITH WOOD SIDING.
AND TAYLOR, CAN WE PUT UP A PLAN BEFORE PLAN SO WE COULD IDENTIFY? I JUST THINK WE'RE MISSING THE QUESTION.
YEAH, I THINK WE'RE KIND OF MISSING THE POINT HERE BECAUSE WE, UH, CAN I, BECAUSE WE'VE LOST ALL THIS HISTORIC MATERIAL NOW.
YEAH, IT'S MEAN, THAT'S A, THIS IS A CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT OF THAT WHOLE EAST SIDE OF HISTORIC MATERIAL THAT'S NOW GONE.
SO WE'RE GONNA, WE'RE GONNA PUT NEW 7-YEAR-OLD PINE ON THE SIDE, WHICH IS HONESTLY, EVEN IF IT'S TREATED IS NOT GONNA LAST.
SO I'D LIKE TO POINT OUT, EVEN IF WE DECIDE IF TO LET THEM KEEP THE HARDY PLANK, UH, THE, THE TRIM IS WRONG.
UH, THE PIC, IT'S LIKE A PICTURE FRAME.
UH, IT'S, THERE'S NO, UH, CORRECT, THERE'S NO CAP ON THE SILL.
SO THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE CHANGED TO MATCH THE ORIGINAL.
AND TAYLOR, I'M JUST ASKING, COULD, COULD, COULD WE PUT THE FLOOR PLAN UP AND COULD WE DRAW A LINE SO WE COULD DEFINE THE PROPORTION OF THE EAST WALL THAT, THAT WE'RE REFERENCING WITH? UM, THERE WASN'T A FLOOR PLAN PROVIDED FOR THIS ONE, FOR THIS APPLICATION.
CAN WE JUST DRAW ONTO THAT AERIAL SITE VIA PHOTOGRAPH? YEAH.
SO THE HOUSE FACES SOUTH, SOUTH, THE HOUSE FACES SOUTH.
SO WHAT ARE WE LOOKING AT? THE EAST ELEVATION? WELL, IT'S IN THE MIDDLE OF THE BLOCK, SO BOTH, BOTH FACE NEIGHBORS, BUT THE EAST HAS THE DRIVEWAY.
UHHUH
THE OTHER ONE ONE'S REALLY CLOSE TO THE APARTMENT.
I THINK AS TO THE AMENDMENT, I, I CONCUR WITH COMMISSIONER STAAVA THAT IT'S NOT JUST A QUESTION OF, UM, I MEAN, I WOULD SUPPORT THE CHARITY OF NOT ASKING SOMEONE TO UNDO WHAT THEY HAD DONE ALREADY.
BUT I DO THINK THAT THE, THE WAY THE TRIM IS HANDLED, THE WAY THE EDGE OF THE BUILDING IS HANDLED OUGHT TO BE CONSISTENT ACROSS THE WHOLE HOUSE.
THE WINDOWS WOULD HAVE TO BE REDONE.
AND YOU'RE WELCOME TO REJECT MY FRIENDLY AMENDMENT.
SO WHERE ARE WE? WELL, I HAVE A MOTION IN A SECOND, SO I'M GONNA CALL A VOTE, BUT I JUST WANNA HAVE A HEALTHY DISCUSSION.
SO, UM, AT THIS TIME, ALL IN FAVOR OF THE, SORRY TO INTERRUPT, BUT DOES THE MOTION INCLUDE DEALING WITH THE WINDOWS? NO.
MY MOTION WAS TO ACCEPT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION WITH THE CAVEAT THAT STAFF GO OUT AND MEASURE THE WHAT, WHAT REMAINS OF THE SIDING, TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT IS MATCHED.
AND THE WINDOW TRIM WOULD MATCH THE ORIGINAL TRIM HISTORICALLY.
SO WE'RE GONNA, WE'RE GONNA INCLUDE THAT THAT LANGUAGE NEEDS TO BE ADDED NOT IN STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION, I DON'T THINK.
SO BETH, YOU CONCUR WITH THAT,
[01:05:01]
THAT THE WINDOW TRAIN WILL MATCH HISTORIC DETAILING.ALL IN FAVOR OF, OF THAT MOTION.
ANYONE OPPOSED TO THE MOTION? THE OPPOSITION WAS WHO PLEASE? BY NAME? NO ONE IS, NO ONE HAS OPPOSED YET THERE NO OPPOSITION.
AND WHO WAS THE SECOND ON THE MOTION PLEASE? GUAVA.
AND ANYONE ABSTAINING FROM THE MOTION? SO IT WAS UNANIMOUS.
SO NOW WE'RE MOVING, I BELIEVE, TO ITEM B 11.
AND WE ARE RECOGNIZING THAT COMMISSIONERS DEBOS AND ALDA ARE NOW IN ATTENDANCE.
GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR PERSON, MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION AND THE PUBLIC.
THIS IS STAFF PERSON CHARLES SADLER.
I SUBMIT ITEM B 11 AT 1136 KEY STREET IN NOR HILL HISTORIC DISTRICT FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION, THIS PROPERTY INCLUDES A CONTRIBUTING ONE STORY RESIDENCE CONSTRUCTED CIRCA 1930 ON A 5,000 SQUARE FOOT INTERIOR LOT.
APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A 724 SQUARE FOOT ADDITION TO THE REAR WITH 167 SQUARE FOOT COVERED PORCH TO EXISTING CONTRIBUTING SINGLE STORY RESIDENCE.
THE ADDITION IS TO BE CLOUD AND SMOOTH HARDY BOARD SIDING, EXCUSE ME, TO MATCH EXISTING HOME AS WELL AS COMPOSITION SHINGLES TO MATCH EXISTING ROOF.
THE PROPOSED RIDGE HEIGHT IS 19 FEET FROM GRADE.
PROPOSED PLATE HEIGHT IS 10 FEET.
THE EXISTING PLATE HEIGHT VARIES BETWEEN EIGHT AND NINE FEET.
UH, THE EXISTING ROOF, WELL THE PROPOSED ROOF WOULD MATCH THE EXISTING, WHICH IS A PITCH OF SIX 12 AND THE, UH, WINDOWS, WHICH ARE REALLY NOT VERY VISIBLE FROM THE RIGHT OF WAY, BUT THERE ARE SOME WINDOWS ON THE ADDITION.
THEY WOULD BE WOOD WINDOWS, ONE OVER ONE SINGLE HUNG AND INSET.
THE NEXT COMPONENT OF THE APPLICATION IS THE ADDITION OF A FREE STANDING CARPORT.
THAT WOULD BE 456 SQUARE FEET AND INCLUDE A, A GARAGE AND A CARPORT, WHICH TOTALED THAT 456 SQUARE FEET.
THOSE ALSO WILL BE CLAD AND SMOOTH.
HARDY BOARD SIDING COMPOSITION, ROOF COMPOSITION, SHINGLE ROOF.
IT WOULD HAVE A STANDARD METAL GARAGE DOOR.
UH, THE PROPOSED RIDGE HEIGHT WOULD BE 13 FEET FOUR INCHES.
THE ROOF PITCH WOULD MATCH THE EXISTING HOUSE AND B SIX 12, THE CARPORT TO MEET A BUILDING CODE WOULD HAVE A SOLID ONE HOUR FIRE RATED WALL ON THE EAST ELEVATION.
SO THAT WOULD BE THE GARAGE WALL WOULD CONTINUE TO ENCLOSE THE CARPORT ON THAT ONE SIDE.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.
I DON'T BELIEVE THAT NOR HILL IS HERE TO SPEAK.
I, I HAVE ONE SPEAKER SIGNED UP.
SO THEY ARE HERE AND, AND THEY HAVE MADE, UH, COMMENTS, WHICH IS PART OF THE STAFF REPORT.
YEAH, THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION AND I'M AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
UH, STAFF, UH, COMMISSION MEMBERS.
ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF BEFORE I OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING? OKAY, THANK YOU.
NOT HEARING I'M, ANY QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME? I'M GONNA OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING.
I DO HAVE TWO PEOPLE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM.
AND THE FIRST SPEAKER IS VIRGINIA KELSEY.
I'M THE NOR HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION VICE PRESIDENT OF DEED RESTRICTIONS.
UM, WE GREATLY APPRECIATE THAT THIS IS A ONE STORY ADDITION TO THE HOME AND TRYING TO KEEP IN THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND OF THE HOUSE, AND WE GREATLY APPRECIATE THAT.
HAVING SAID THAT, THERE ARE A COUPLE OF ISSUES, UH, THAT WE WISH TO SPEAK ABOUT.
ONE IS THAT THE ADDITION TO THE HOUSE IS, UM, A BIT WIDER OF, QUITE A BIT WIDER THAN THE EXISTING HOUSE.
AND THEY HAVE A 10 FOOT PLATE HEIGHT.
WE'RE NOT COMPLAINING ABOUT THE WIDTH OF THE REAR OF THE HOUSE, BUT WITH A 10 FOOT HEIGHT, WHICH WE HAVEN'T ALLOWED ON ANY OF THE RESIDENCES TO BE AT 10 FEET, UNLESS THERE'S SOME RARE EXCEPTION THAT THE EXISTING HOUSE IS OF THAT HEIGHT, IT MAKES THE REAR SIGNIFICANTLY
[01:10:01]
HIGHER AND BIGGER IN SCALE THAN THE EXISTING HOUSE.UM, EVEN THOUGH IT'S AT THE REAR, IT IS STILL AN ISSUE IN TERMS OF THE SCALE HAVING A TALLER PLATE HEIGHT.
NOR HILL HAS NEVER APPROVED, UM, IN RECENT TIMES ANY 10 FOOT PLATE HEIGHTS FOR GARAGES OR CARPORTS.
SO AGAIN, THE CARPORT AND THE GARAGE IS SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER AND ESPECIALLY HOW CLOSE IT IS TO THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE, IT IS AN ISSUE.
AND ALSO IN TERMS OF THAT, THE COLUMNS ON THE CARPORT MATCH THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE.
THIS IS A SECONDARY, UM, STRUCTURE.
AND EVEN THOUGH NOR HILL IS USUALLY ALL IN FAVOR OF MATCHING, THERE IS TIMES TO MATCH AND TIMES NOT TO MATCH.
AND A SECONDARY STRUCTURE SHOULD NOT BE MATCHING, UM, THE PRIMARY COLUMNS AT THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE.
NOW THERE'S ONE LAST VERY IMPORTANT ISSUE IS THAT THE HOUSE IS THREE FEET FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE.
IS THERE A MOTION TO EXTEND THE SPEAKER'S TIME? MOTION TO GRANT THE ALL IN FAVOR? AYE.
UM, SINCE THE GUIDELINES HAVE BEEN UNDER CONSIDERATION FOR THE LAST, UM, YEAR AND A HALF, THEY WERE MADE PUBLIC AT THE END OF LAST YEAR.
WE HAVE HAD A SIX FOOT REAR SETBACK.
THERE ARE VERY FEW PROJECTS THAT HAVE, UM, A SETBACK OF THREE FEET FOR MANY, MANY YEARS.
NOR HILL HAS HAD, UM, SETBACKS GREATER THAN THAT DISTANCE.
THERE WERE A FEW THAT WERE FIVE FEET.
UM, WE HAVE SIX FEET, BUT THREE FEET IS VERY SMALL AND THAT IS NOT IN KEEPING WITH THE HARMONY OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO THOSE ARE THE PRIMARY ISSUES.
THE REAR SETBACK, UM, THE HEIGHT OF THE ADDITION, THE HEIGHT OF THE GARAGE, AND THE COLUMNS ON THE GARAGE.
ANY QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONER MEMBERS? ANY QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT? I MEAN, SORRY OF THE SPEAKER.
AS COMMISSIONER SEPULVEDA, HOW FAR, HOW CLOSE TO THE PROPERTY LINE IS THIS PROPOSED PROJECT? THREE FEET THANK TO THE REAR.
IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SPEAKING OF? YES.
AND THAT THREE FEET IS ALSO FOR THE PROPOSED STRUCTURE AS WELL, NOT JUST THE GARAGE.
I, AS I READ THE PLAN, I DO HAVE ONE MORE SPEAKER SIGN UP FOR THIS ITEM, WHICH IS AMANDA REYNOLDS.
HI, UH, MY NAME'S AMANDA REYNOLDS.
I'M PRESIDENT OF THE NOR HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
UM, AS VIRGINIA MENTIONED, UM, THE GUIDELINES ARE IN A PHASE THAT MAKES IT AS A NEIGHBORHOOD.
WE'RE TRYING TO DECIDE WHETHER, HOW WE'RE IN AN AWKWARD POSITION AS FAR AS TIMING OF THIS PROJECT.
UM, THE GUIDELINES HAVE BEEN OUT IN THEIR CURRENT DRAFT PUBLICLY SINCE THE END OF DECEMBER.
UM, WE FEEL, WE FELT AS A BOARD THAT THAT WAS ENOUGH TIME THAT THIS PROJECT WAS AFTER IT HAD BEEN MADE PUBLIC.
AND AFTER THE FEEDBACK PERIOD, THIS WAS SUBMITTED AFTER ALL OF THAT.
UM, SO WE FELT THAT WE WERE GONNA USE THOSE GUIDELINES AS THEY CURRENTLY WERE WHEN REVIEWING THIS PROJECT.
BUT AGAIN, WE RECOGNIZE THAT IT'S IN AN AWKWARD PHASE.
UM, SO WE'RE ALSO TRYING TO GO BY CONSISTENCY OF WHAT WE'VE DONE IN THE PAST.
UM, SOME THINGS HAVE, THIS PROJECT HAS BOTH, UM, GARAGES AS FAR AS THE PLATE HEIGHT ON GARAGES.
THERE'S SOME INCONSISTENCY, THERE'S BEEN A LITTLE BIT MORE VARIATION IN THAT PLATE HEIGHT.
UM, BUT AS VIRGINIA MENTIONED, THOSE COLUMN DETAILS ON THE FRONT OF THE GARAGE, MAKING IT A LOT MORE DETAILED IS NOT SOMETHING THAT I'M AWARE OF WE'VE EVER APPROVED.
UM, AS FAR AS THIS FIRST STORY PLATE HEIGHT BEING 10 FEET, UM, THAT IS SIGNIFICANTLY LARGER THAN WE'VE APPROVED IN THE PAST.
WE'VE STAYED AT EIGHT OR NINE FEET, SO WE'RE TRYING TO STAY WITH THAT CONSISTENCY, UM, WITH THE REAR PROPERTY LINE.
UM, THAT THE ADDITION IS THREE FEET FROM THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY LINE.
I THINK THROUGHOUT THE YEARS, THREE OR FOUR HOUSES HAVE BEEN APPROVED.
WE CONSIDER THOSE AN EXCEPTION THAT WE'RE, THAT WE'RE NOT CONSIDERING LIKE A GOOD EXCEPTION.
WE JUST, THAT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT WE'VE TYPICALLY APPROVED.
UM, THIS IS, WE RECOGNIZE THIS IS BACKING AGAINST A COMMERCIAL PROPERTY, BUT FROM OUR SIDE AND OUR PERSPECTIVE, WE HAVE TO STAY CONSISTENT.
A JUDGE WOULD NOT CARE WHAT'S BEHIND.
ARE THE OTHER QUESTIONS OF THE SPEAKER COMMISSIONER MCNEIL NEXT DOOR? EXCUSE ME.
IT MAY, MAY INTERJECT FOR JUST A
[01:15:01]
MINUTE.FOR WHATEVER REASON, WE'RE HAVING A LOT OF TROUBLE HEARING VARIOUS COMMISSIONERS.
IF YOU COULD ALL MAKE SURE YOUR MICS ARE PULLED UP, TURNED ON AND SPEAK CLEARLY AND IT WOULD BE VERY, VERY HELPFUL.
I WANTED TO SAY IT BEFORE WE HAD A LOT OF DISCUSSION.
CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW? YES, SIR.
THE PROPERTY THAT IS ON THE CORNER OF STU WOOD AND KEY, IT LOOKS LIKE WHATEVER STRUCTURE IS AT THE BACK OF THAT IS RIGHT ALMOST UP TO THE FENCE.
YEAH, THE IF, UM, AND THE OTHER SIDE AS WELL, WHATEVER STRUCTURE IN THE BACK OF THAT PROPERTY LOOKS LIKE IT'S ABOUT THREE FEET FROM THE FENCE AS WELL.
SO I'M MISUNDERSTANDING THE COMET THAT IT'S UNCHARACTERISTIC, THAT THESE BUILDINGS ARE THREE, NOT THREE FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINE.
SO THE, UM, OF THOSE BUILDINGS, THOSE DO BOTH EXIST AT THREE FEET.
UM, FROM A HISTORY STANDPOINT, ONE WAS APPROVED LAST YEAR, THE OTHER ONE WAS DONE, UM, AGAINST WHAT WAS, WHAT WAS, UM, EVEN IF YOU LOOK BACK IN YOUR OWN RECORDS, WHAT WAS DONE BY THE PLAN, UM, THAT PROPERTY EVEN WAS RED CARDED LIKE FOUR TIMES DURING THE CONSTRUCTION.
UM, SO THAT'S, IT EXISTS, BUT IT WASN'T WHAT WAS APPROVED BY THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, I THINK THAT BECAUSE OF THAT, THE OTHER HOUSE GOT APPROVED AT THREE FEET.
UM, BUT IF YOU LOOK AT THE NEIGHBORHOOD AS A WHOLE, I WOULD SAY THERE'S UM, I KNOW OF FOUR PROPERTIES ACROSS THE ENTIRE 800, SOME HOUSES THAT HAVE A THREE FOOT SETBACK AND THREE OF THEM ARE GONNA BE ON KEY.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF THE SPEAKER? OKAY, THANK YOU.
AT THIS TIME I'LL JUST ASK, I DON'T HAVE ANYONE SIGN UP.
UM, THERE, THERE MAY BE ONE MORE PERSON.
SO IF, IF SO YEAH, PLEASE, PLEASE.
IF THERE'S ANOTHER SPEAKER I WANT TO, AND I JUST WANTED TO SORT OF HIGHLIGHT TO THE EXISTING GARAGE, THE SETBACK IS THREE FEET, NINE INCHES.
THAT'S WHAT'S THERE CURRENTLY.
BUT ANYONE ELSE THAT WANTS TO SPEAK ON THIS MATTER NOW IS THE TIME TO APPROACH THE PODIUM AND ANNOUNCE YOUR NAME AND, AND ADDRESS THE COMMISSION.
UH, ROD RIEGEL AGENT FOR THE OWNERS.
UH, FIRST OF ALL, WE JUST HEARD IT'S A BUNCH OF BS.
I BUILT A LOT OF GARAGES IN NOR HILL OVER THE YEARS.
THREE FOOT OFF THE FENCE LINE.
IT'S NOT, WHAT'S FUNNY HERE IS WHY ARE WE EVEN TALKING ABOUT EASEMENTS WHEN NEITHER ONE OF YOU IS, IT'S NOT IN YOUR WHEELHOUSE.
LET'S GO TO CITY PLAYER, LET'S GO TO THE COURT.
THIS IS NOT FROM, UH, I TALKED TO MEYER'S OFFICE, UH, AUSTIN UTILITY COMMISSION.
I'VE TALKED TO THE STRUCTURAL DEPARTMENT.
NOW THEY COULD TALK GUIDELINES ALL THEY WANT.
THE ONLY REASON THEY GOT GUIDELINES 'CAUSE THEY GOT A PERSONAL VENDETTA AGAINST THE STAFF OVER HERE AND THEY WANNA STOP THEIR GUIDELINES FOR COMING INTO EFFECT.
BUT THE THING IS, THEY DON'T HAVE THE JURISDICTION TO STOP US FROM BUILDING THREE FOOT OFF THAT EASEMENT.
AND IT'S UP AGAINST A PARKING LOT.
IT'S 40 FEET BACK TO A, A DOG BAKERY, BISCUIT FACTORY, A BOOT FACTORY.
YOU KNOW, THIS IS A BUNCH OF NONSENSES AND, BUT THEY LET THEIR FRIEND DO IT.
JAN GRIFFIN ON GARDNER STREET, SHE GOT TO BUILD THREE FOOT OFF THE FENCE LINE.
SO MY CLIENT'S A TITLE TO THAT.
NOW THE 10 FOOT RULE, YOU WANT NINE FOOT WALLS.
I CAN CUS MY CUSTOMER ABOUT THAT.
NOW THE POST, EVER SINCE THE HISTORIC START OF THIS, IT WAS ALSO RULE OF THUMB.
IF YOU'RE GONNA BUILD, YOU MATCH THE HOUSE.
ANYTHING YOU CAN SEE FROM THE STREET MATCH THE HOUSE YOU DO THAT HISTORICALLY LEAVE YOU ALONE.
NOW THE POSTS MATCHED THE HOUSE.
NOW AS THINGS CHANGED, WE DON'T HAVE TO MATCH THE HOUSE NO MORE.
THIS IS JUST A HARASSMENT CHARGE RIGHT HERE.
AND LEMME TELL YOU, THE LAST TIME WE WERE HERE, AMANDA REYNOLDS STOOD HERE AND TOLD YOU 50% OF NOR HILL HAD SIDE ENTRANCES ON PORCHES.
WE COUNTED THEM ON 800 SOME HOUSES OVER 700 AT FRONT ENTRANCE WALKWAYS.
BUT THE THING IS, THEY SHOULDN'T WIN THIS ARGUMENT ON EASEMENTS BECAUSE IT'S IN NEITHER ONE OF YOURS WHEELHOUSE.
OR, OR MAYBE YOU HAVE A DIFFERENT OPINION ON IT.
UM, I, I MEAN I I'M GONNA ASK A QUESTION OF LEGAL ABOUT THAT QUESTION, BUT, UM, MY QUESTION FOR YOU ABOUT THE GARAGE AND THE COLUMNS IS YOUR REFERENCE TO THE COLUMNS FOR GARAGES.
CAN YOU CITE OTHER GARAGES THAT HAVE BEEN BUILT WITH SIMILAR COLUMNS? UH, WELL, I IN YOUR, IN YOUR SURVEY, WELL DOWN ON EAST 16TH STREET,
EVEN WHEN WE DO FRONT PORCHES, WE MATCH THE HOUSE.
I MEAN, I THOUGHT THAT WAS A RULE OF THUMB WITH THE HISTORIC, THAT IF YOU BUILD IT WITH AQUA RANDY PACE, ALL THE, UH, JOY TOY BOARD IN THE OLD DAYS, IF YOU BUILT AND WE COULD SEE IT FROM THE STREET, YOU MATCH THE HOUSE.
IF YOU DO THAT, WE'LL LEAVE YOU ALONE.
[01:20:01]
CARE WHAT YOU DO IN THE BACK AS FAR AS THE EASEMENT, I DON'T THINK THIS, UH, COMMITTEE OR, OR EVEN NOR HILL, THEY'RE, THEY'RE IN THE WRONG PLACE TO CONTEST THAT IT DOESN'T BELONG IN THIS BUILDING.I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOUR TAKE IS OR WHAT MAYBE LEGAL COULD TELL US.
YEAH, WELL AFTER, AFTER YOU'RE FINISHED YOUR PRESENTATION AND I, I WILL, ONCE WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC, WELL, I'M DONE.
WELL, I KNOW NEXT DOOR HAS A CARPORT, JUST LIKE THE ONE I'M BUILDING WITH SIMILAR POSTS.
I MEAN, WE'RE NOT DOING SOMETHING OUTRAGEOUS HERE.
IT'S A LITTLE TINY 10 FOOT WIDE CARPORT WITH TWO LITTLE POSTS TO MATCH THE FRONT PORCH.
BUT WASN'T THAT ONE, THE ONE THEY SAID GOT RED TAG.
NOW, WOULD IT BE CHEAPER FOR ME NOT TO DO BRICK COLUMNS? YEAH, SAVE ME A LOT OF MONEY.
BUT THE CUSTOMER WANTED IT AND I FELT THEY WERE ENTITLED TO IT.
I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THE DESIGN.
I'M NOT SURE WHETHER WHO THAT WOULD GO TO.
THIS IS THE AGENT FOR THE, UH, APPLICANT.
UH, IT LOOKS AS THOUGH THERE, UM, I I GUESS IS, IS THERE THE PLAN TO USE THE MUD ROOM AS AN ENTRANCE FROM THE OUTSIDE INTO THAT BACK AREA? OR WILL THERE BE ACCESS TO THE ADDITION FROM THE REST OF THE HOUSE? NO, THEY HAVE AN ACCESS.
IT'S ACTUALLY ACCESS THE HALLWAY NOW, THEN THERE IS A MUD ROOM THERE.
SO YOU'RE GONNA COME OUT ONTO A LITTLE DECK RIGHT THERE.
BUT DO YOU HAVE TO ENTER FROM OUTSIDE TO GET INTO THAT PART? OR CAN YOU INSIDE IN THE BACK, BUT YOU CAN OR DO YOU GO THROUGH THE UTILITY ROOM, GO INSIDE AND COME OUT AND YOU CAN GO OUTSIDE AND GO IN? I MEAN, IT'S, I THINK THE QUESTION IS, IS THERE A WAY BETWEEN THE UTILITY ROOM AND THE ADDITION THAT THAT'S ACTUALLY OPEN TO WALK BETWEEN THE TWO? OH YEAH.
WELL, YOU GO THROUGH THE UTILITY ROOM, OPEN THE DOOR INTO THE BEDROOM.
SO MR. BLAKE, I THINK THE BLUE LINE IS, IS IS A OPENING THERE.
I JUST ASK BECAUSE JUST LOOKING AT THE PLAN, IF YOU HAD TO TAKE OUT THREE FEET, UH, I MEAN YOU WOULD LOSE THE, THAT'S ESSENTIALLY THE WIDTH OF THE MUD ROOM.
AND I ALSO THINK IT'S, THERE'S A COMMENT, NOT A QUESTION, BUT I HAVEN'T SEEN A LOT OF PROPOSED ONE STORY ADDITIONS THAT ATTEMPT TO RESPECT THE SORT OF
I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING TO ITS CREDIT.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF THE SPEAKER? UM, I'LL GET TO MY, MY, MY, UH, THE OTHER QUESTION.
SO I'M GONNA CLOSE, CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING UNLESS THERE IS ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD IN THE AUDIENCE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS MATTER AT THIS TIME'S YOUR TIME TO ANNOUNCE YOURSELF AND PLEASE APPROACH THE PODIUM.
UM, I DON'T KNOW THAT WE CAN DO REBUTTAL UNLESS YOU'RE THE APPLICANT.
UM, WE JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY.
YEAH, IT'S, I THINK IT'S ONLY THE APPLICANT WE CAN DO THAT FOR.
SO LEMME I'LL, I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
I DO WANNA ASK THE QUESTION ABOUT THE SETBACKS BECAUSE, UM, PERHAPS, I MEAN THE, THE SETBACKS ARE STILL SET BY THE CITY INDEED RESTRICTIONS AND, UM, WE ARE NOT ENFORCERS OF SOME ASPECTS OF THOSE THINGS.
AND SO, UH, I JUST, COULD YOU CLARIFY FOR THE COMMISSION? CORRECT.
SETBACKS ARE EITHER SET BY, UM, VARIOUS CITY ORDINANCES, INCLUDING THE BUILDING CODE, HOW FAR YOU HAVE TO BE AWAY FROM FOR FIRE SAFETY, ET CETERA.
UM, OR IN SOME CASES DEED RESTRICTIONS TO MY, THE QUESTION OF DEED RESTRICTIONS HERE HAS NOT BEEN RAISED.
SO WE'RE DEALING WITH JUST THE STANDARD STANDARD REQUIREMENTS.
SO THAT'S OUTSIDE YOUR JURISDICTION.
AND SOMETIMES THERE ARE ALSO UTILITY SETBACKS.
SO THERE AND THAT ARE NOT ALWAYS RECORDED.
I HAVE PAINFULLY FOUND YEAH,
SO THAT PAINFULLY THAT THAT UTILITIES HAVE A RIGHT TO RUN, RUN THINGS, UH, IN THE BACK OF HOMES.
AND SO I DON'T KNOW WHETHER THAT HAS BEEN DETERMINED ON THIS PROPERTY AS WELL, BUT WHEN BUILDING PERMITS WOULD BE SUBMITTED, THAT WOULD BE EVALUATED AND THEN TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION IF THERE'S A FIVE FOOT UTILITY EASEMENT BACK THERE OR A 10 FOOT THAT WILL BE ENFORCED AT THE BUILDING PERMIT STAGE OR ELSE THE APPLICANT WOULD BE OFFERED THE OPPORTUNITY IF, IF IT'S AT ALL POSSIBLE OF VACATING THAT PORTION OF THE EASEMENT AND RELOCATING LINES OR WHAT HAVE YOU.
AN EXPENSE, USUALLY HOMEOWNERS DON'T WANT TO GO THROUGH.
BUT TYPICALLY THERE'S A FIVE FOOT UTILITY EASEMENT ON THE GROUND AND A 10 FOOT AERIAL EASEMENT.
AND IF YOU'RE ONE STORE, YOU'RE NOT IN THE, YOU'RE NOT IN THE AERIAL EASEMENT.
SO BEGINS AT 23 IN NEWER SUBDIVISION.
BUT THIS IS AN OLDER PLACE, SO YEAH, OBVIOUSLY.
AND SO YEAH, IT WOULD DEPEND ON WHAT WAS, WHAT WAS DEDICATED AT THE TIME.
I, I WILL ADD, AND THE POINT WAS MADE BY NOR HILL, I, I KNOW HOW MUCH WORK THEY HAVE GONE THROUGH WITH STAFF AND WORKING ON THEIR DESIGN GUIDELINES, BUT THEY HAVE NOT BEEN ADOPTED, SO THEY AREN'T YOUR GUIDELINES TO ENFORCE.
UM, THEY'RE CERTAINLY A DRAFT GUIDELINE TO BE PROVIDED AT THIS POINT TO NEIGHBORS.
[01:25:01]
I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THE HEIGHTS DESIGN GUIDELINES.I THINK THAT THEY HAVE SIDE SETBACKS ON THE HEIGHTS DESIGN GUIDELINES, LIKE THEY'RE FIVE FEET MINIMUM, AND THEY CAN VARY DEPENDING ON THE, HOW THEY ADDITION IS CONFIGURED.
SO AM I, AM I, AM I MISREMEMBERING THAT THERE ARE, THERE ARE PROVISIONS ABOUT SIDE SETBACKS.
I BELIEVE THEY HAVE TO DO WITH THE HEIGHT OF THE EAVE.
THE CLOSER THEY ARE TO THE SETBACK, THE, THE LOWER THEY MUST BE, FOR INSTANCE.
IF YOU'RE FIVE FEET AWAY, IT'S A, IT'S DIFFERENT THAN IF YOU'RE THREE FEET AWAY.
BUT, BUT THOSE ARE IN AN APPROVED GUIDELINES THAT HAVE BEEN VET, YOU KNOW, VETTED AND, AND APPROVED.
AND THE CURRENT GUIDELINES, AS WAS MENTIONED, HAVE YET TO BE APPROVED.
BUT I GUESS EVEN IF, IF WE DON'T HAVE GUIDELINES, IF WE THINK THAT THE HOUSE SHOULD BE FURTHER AWAY FROM THE STREET, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE CAN'T ASK THEM TO DO BECAUSE WE HAVE GUIDELINES WRITTEN THAT HAVE SETBACKS AND WE'RE ALLOWED TO MAKE DISCRETIONARY DECISIONS REGARDING HOW FAR THE BUILDING SHOULD BE FROM THE PROPERTY BECAUSE OF HISTORIC REASONS.
I BELIEVE, WELL, I'LL SAY THIS, I I, I BELIEVE THE ONLY ONE I'M AWARE OF IS THE, THE PREVAILING FRONT SETBACK.
WE, WE, WE HAVE, WE HAVE LOOKED AT THE MEAN AVERAGE 80%, LET'S SAY 80% SETBACK DIMENSION FOR FROM THE FRONT TO LIKE A PORCH OR THE FRONT, TO THE, TO THE HOME.
AND IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING FROM THE SIDE, LIKE THESE, A SIDE SETBACK, I MEAN, YOU KNOW, WITHIN THREE FEET YOU HAVE TO HAVE NON-COMBUSTIBLE CONSTRUCTION.
SO SOME, YOU KNOW, THERE THE, THE, THE CITY ORDINANCES COME TO PLAY WHEN, WHEN WE GET, UH, CLOSER THAN THREE FEET.
UM, AND THEY, THEY AFFECT THINGS LIKE O ROOF, LIKE OVERHANGS AND OTHER THINGS, WHETHER YOU CAN HAVE IT OR NOT HAVE IT AND HOW THINGS ARE BUILT.
BUT, UM, I THINK I'M, I'M, I'M HAVING A HARD TIME FINDING WHERE THIS COMMISSION CAN RULE ON THE, ON THE REAR SETBACK IN THIS MATTER.
I THINK, I DON'T THINK, THINK COMMISS CAN COMMENT ON THE OTHER ITEMS RAISED, BUT THAT'S UP UP TO COMMISSION.
I I'D AGREE IN URGING CAUTION ON IMPOSING REQUIREMENTS FOR A REAR SETBACK IN PARTICULAR, IT'S BEEN POINTED OUT, UM, THAT THE ADJACENT PROPERTY SEEM TO BE AS CLOSE TO THE PROPERTY LINE AS IS PROPOSED HERE OR APPROXIMATELY.
UM, IT IS THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY, NOT WHAT'S SEEN FROM THE, THE FRONT OF THE STREET.
UM, IT DOES NOT MEAN, AND I DID NOT MEAN TO IMPLY WE COULDN'T INCLUDE SETBACKS IN FUTURE DESIGN GUIDELINES AS THEY'RE, AS THEY'RE, UM, SENT THROUGH REVIEW AND, AND ONTO CITY COUNCIL.
THAT'S A DIFFERENT ISSUE AS THEY, AS THEY GO THROUGH THAT PROCESS.
BUT BE, WELL, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION WITH TWO CONDITIONS THAT THE FLOOR PLATE AS THE, AS THE APPLICANT HAS, HAS ACQUIESCED TO BE LOWERED TO NINE FEET FROM 10 FEET AND THAT THE DESIGN OF THE GARAGE BE SIMPLIFIED SO THAT IT IS NOT MATCHING THE FRONT.
AND THAT'S SOMETHING THAT COULD BE APPROVED BY STAFF WHEN A, A REDESIGN COMES BACK.
THE DESIGN OF THE GARAGE OR THE DESIGN OF THE GARAGE COLUMNS.
WELL, I'M OFFENDED BY THE, BY THE DETAIL IN THE, IN THE GABLE AS WELL, BUT I, SO I WOULD SAY THE COLUMNS, SO I'M JUST TRYING TO CLARIFY.
YEAH, I I WOULD SAY ALL OF IT, BUT DO I NEED TO CLARIFY? PLEASE? HOW ABOUT THE, 'CAUSE THE OBJECTION SO FAR HAS BEEN TO THE COLUMNS.
COULD, COULD WE ENLARGE THE IMAGE OF THE PROPOSED GARAGE ELEVATION ON SCREEN, THE SIMPLIFICATION OF THE COLUMNS TO THE CARPORT LEADING TO THE GARAGE? I, I THINK I AGREE WITH YOU ABOUT THE, THE GABLE.
'CAUSE YOU LOOK AT THE PICTURE OF THE OLD GARAGE, IT'S PLAIN, IT'S LIKE A LITTLE MINI FRONT PORCH.
AND IT, IT LOOKS LIKE EXACTLY AND IT SHOULD LOOK LIKE A GARAGE.
SO HOW DO I SAY THAT? JUST I WOULD SAY SIMPLIFIES THE FRONT ELEVATION OF THE GARAGE SO IT DOESN'T LOOK EXACTLY LIKE THE PORCH OF THE HOUSE.
WELL, I THINK WE JUST START WITH ABOUT THE COLUMNS, DIDN'T WE? NO, I SAID IN MY ORIGINAL MOTION TO CONDITION THAT THE DESIGN OF THE GARAGE BE SIMPLIFIED SO THAT IT DOES NOT LOOK LIKE IT MATCHES, SO THAT IT IS NOT REPLICATING THE FRONT FACADE OF THE HOUSE TO BE APPROVED BY STAFF.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION BEFORE I CALL THE VOTE? AND I'M JUST COMMISSIONER MCNEIL ON THE LANGUAGE A LITTLE BIT.
THAT WE'RE SIMPLIFYING THE COLUMNS AND THE GARAGE.
MIKE, PLEASE SIMPLIFYING THE COLUMNS IN THE FRONT ELEVATION.
NOT THE, NOT THE, NOT THE OTHER THREE SIDES
[01:30:01]
OF THE GARAGE.WELL, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY LOOK LIKE.
I ASSUME THEY'RE PRETTY SIMPLE.
YEAH, I'M JUST MAKING SURE STAFF KNOWS.
I'M TRYING TO MAKE SURE THE STAFF KNOWS WHAT WE'RE RECOMMENDING TO THEM.
IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING WE'RE TALKING ABOUT NOT HAVING A CLIPPED ROOF ON THE GARAGE, SIMPLIFYING THE FRONT ELEVATION OF THE GARAGE AND GIVING SOME DISCRETION TO STAFF TO IN DEFERENCE FOR THAT.
TO THE EXTENT THAT KIM WANTS US TO FIND FURTHER THOUGH, I WOULD LIKE TO DEFINE FURTHER BECAUSE WE, WE CAN, IF WE NEED TO, BUT WE WANT TO BASICALLY ABSTRACT IT INTO SIMPLIFY THE DETAILING AND OF, OF THE COLUMN.
MAYBE THERE SHOULDN'T BE A COLUMN, MAYBE THERE SHOULDN'T BE BRICK.
BUT, UM, I MEAN I, I I TRUST STAFF TO MAKE THAT YOU, YOU'RE MAKING A MOTION.
SO I WOULD JUST DEFINE YOUR MOTION AND THEN SEE, SEE WHAT COMMISSION THINKS IT.
I THINK YOU HAVE TO BE CLEAR ENOUGH SO THAT STAFF UNDERSTANDS AND THE APPLICANT UNDERSTANDS WHAT'S BEING REQUESTED.
BUT I WOULD LIKE TO ASK THAT I THINK, THINK PROBABLY WANTS TO SPEAK.
SO, UH, UM, NO, I, I'M HERE TO SAY I UNDERSTAND WHERE YOU'RE GOING IF YOU WANNA MAKE IT A LITTLE CLEARER.
CAN I JUST SAY THIS, CAN WE JUST OFFER THAT THEY PUT IN A SIX BY SIX TREATED PINE POST AND HAVE A STRAIGHT GABLE AND NOT A CLIP FRONT GABLE? WELL, THAT FEELS LIKE WE'RE DESIGNING.
I'M TRYING TO STAY AWAY FROM, THAT'S FROM DESIGNING, SIMPLIFYING THE FRONT ELEVATION OF THE GARAGE.
IT'S SIMPLIFYING THE FRONT ELEVATION OF THE CARPORT.
BUT I THINK, BUT I THINK ROMAN IS COMFORTABLE WITH THE MOTION YOU'VE MADE, PROVIDED IT PASSES.
SO LET'S, LET'S TEST THIS OUT.
ALL IN FAVOR OF THIS MOTION, PLEASE SAY AYE.
ARE THERE ANY, UH, OPPOSED? ARE THERE ANY ABSTENTIONS? OKAY, THAT MOTION PASSES.
AND NOW WE'RE MOVING ON TO ITEM B 13.
GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.
THIS IS STAFF PERSON KARA WIGLEY.
I SUBMIT ITEM B 13 AT 14 SHALON STREET IN SHALON HISTORIC DISTRICT FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION, THIS PROPERTY INCLUDES A CONTRIBUTING FRENCH MEMORIAL STYLE THREE STORY MASONRY, 2,650 SQUARE FOOT SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE WITH A COPPER ROOF CONSTRUCTED IN 1923 BY ARCHITECT JW NORTHROP JR.
THE SITE ALSO INCLUDES A NON-CONTRIBUTING DETACHED GARAGE.
THE BUILDING, THE BUILDINGS ARE POSITIONED ON A 34,782 SQUARE FOOT SEMICIRCULAR ATYPICAL LOT WITH THREE VIEWPOINTS ON ALL SIDES OF THE PROPERTY.
THE APPLICANT PROPOSES TO RESTORE THE PRIMARY BUILDING BACK TO THE ORIGINAL FOOTPRINT IN FRONT ELEVATION PER THE 1923 BLUEPRINTS AND SANBORN MAPS, WHICH CAN BE FOUND ON PAGE 13 THROUGH 16 OF THE STAFF REPORT.
THE PROPOSAL INCLUDES THE REMOVAL OF A NON HISTORIC REAR EDITION, WHICH WAS COMPLETED IN 1989, REMOVAL OF THE NON-CONTRIBUTING DETACHED GARAGE STRUCTURE, A NEW TWO-STORY REAR ADDITION TO THE MAIN HOUSE AND A NEW ATTACHED TWO-STORY GARAGE STRUCTURE.
ALL OF THE ORIGINAL CORNERS AT THE MAIN HOUSE WILL BE PRESERVED PER THE 1923 BLUEPRINTS.
THE NEW TWO STORY EDITION WILL EXTEND FROM THE REAR OF THE MAIN HOUSE WITH AN INSET HYPHEN TO DIFFERENTIATE BETWEEN THE ORIGINAL HOUSE AND THE ADDITION.
A REAR CONDITION SUNROOM WILL CONNECT THE MAIN HOUSE TO THE NEW TWO STORY GARAGE.
A PERSPECTIVE DRAWING OF THIS CAN BE FOUND ON PAGES 17, 18, AND 28 OF THE STAFF REPORT.
PRIOR TO THE CURRENT PROPOSED DESIGN, THE PREVIOUS SUBMISSION OF THE GARAGE HAD A ROOF PITCH THAT WAS SUBSTANTIALLY HIGHER THAN WHAT HAS BEEN PROVIDED.
THE ARCHITECT HAS WORKED WITH STAFF EXTENSIVELY TO REDUCE THE MASS HEIGHT AND LOCATION OF THE PROPOSED GARAGE STRUCTURE.
AFTER VARIOUS CONCERNS WERE EXPRESSED BY RESIDENTS OF SHADOW LAWN.
THE PROPOSED ATTACHED GARAGE STRUCTURE WILL BE SUBORDINATE TO AND NOT EXCEED THE RIDGE HEIGHT OF THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE TO REDUCE THE VISUAL IMPACT OF THE NEIGHBORING STRUCTURES.
THE PROPOSAL MEETS THE 11 CRITERIA FOR ALTERATIONS, REHABILITATIONS RESTORATIONS, AND ADDITIONS OF SECTION 33 DASH 2 41 OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION ORDINANCE.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.
THE AGENT, DYLAN KYLE ARCHITECTS HAVE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM.
SEVERAL RESIDENTS OF SHADOW LAWN HISTORIC DISTRICT HAVE ALSO SIGNED UP TO SPEAK.
I'M ALSO AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS BEFORE I OPEN THIS UP TO PUBLIC HEARING OF STAFF? OKAY, NOT HEARING.
I'M GONNA OPEN UP A PUBLIC HEARING.
UM, I HAVE 10 PEOPLE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM, SO THIS MAY BE A RECORD IN MY TIME ON THIS COMMISSION AND I'LL ASK MR. COMMISSIONER COSGROVE, 'CAUSE WE'VE BEEN HERE THE THE SAME AMOUNT AND, BUT, UM, SO, UM, BUT I DO HAVE A NUMBER OF PEOPLE SIGNED UP AND THERE MAY BE ADDITIONAL PEOPLE THAT HAVE NOT SIGNED UP THAT MAY ALSO WANNA SPEAK.
[01:35:01]
FIRST PERSON, UM, WHO SIGNED UP, WHICH IS DI DYLAN.KYLE, IF YOU COULD, UH, RESTATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS THE COMMISSION.
AND, UH, THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME.
I, I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO SAY.
ACTUALLY, THE ONLY THING I WAS GONNA SAY IS THE, WELL, UM, I WAS GONNA SHOW IT UP.
THE UPDATED 3D IS NOT ON THE SCREEN AND I, I DO HAVE IT HERE.
YOU CAN DO THE DOCUMENT, DOCUMENT CAMERA.
SO IF WE, WHERE'D I PUT IT? OH, RIGHT HERE.
AND THIS IS ALSO IN REFERENCE TO THE MODELS THAT ARE ON, UH, PAGES 18, 17, AND 18.
BUT THIS IS A MORE UPDATED VERSION OF THE LAST ONE.
SO THIS IS THE VERSION OF THE GARAGE THAT WE DID AFTER WE TALKED TO STAFF AND TRIED TO, CAN REDUCE THE SIDE.
CAN YOU COME TO THE MICROPHONE? SO WE, THIS IS THE, THE GARAGE THAT WE DID AFTER WE TALKED TO STAFF, PUSHED IT FURTHER BACK FROM THE PROPERTY LINE AND MADE IT A SMALLER STRUCTURE.
SO I JUST THOUGHT YOU MIGHT WANNA SEE THAT.
I DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER COMMENTS NECESSARILY.
AND WHILE, BUT WHILE YOU'RE HERE, UM, THERE MAY BE SOME QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION MEMBERS.
AND I'M SORRY, WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE? CAN YOU POINT OUT FOR ME THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WHAT WE'RE SEEING ON YOUR PHONE AND WHAT WE HAVE IN THE DRAWINGS? CAN, CAN YOU PUT THE OTHER, THERE'S ANOTHER, THERE'S ANOTHER BACK TO PRESENTATION.
UH, HOW DO I GET THAT UP ON THE SCREEN? I'M ON PAGE 17.
IS THERE ANY WAY TO ENLARGE IT? NO.
WELL, IT IS HARD TO SEE, BUT THAT GARAGE IS JUST THAT, THAT BLUE GARAGE IS FURTHER FORWARD.
WAIT, NO, THAT, THAT'S THE NEW ONE OR THE OLD ONE? I CAN'T, I CAN'T SEE IT.
SO THAT'S, THAT'S THE SMALLER GARAGE.
I WOULD NEED THE, UH, WAIT, DO YOU HAVE THE, DO YOU HAVE, YOU DIDN'T HAVE THE BIGGER ONE ON THERE? MM-HMM.
SO FOR CLARIFICATION, THE ONE THAT IS ON THE REPORT IS THE UPDATED VERSION AND THE, WE PRINTED IT OFF THE CITY WEBSITE.
IT WASN'T UPDATED, SO THAT'S GOOD.
BUT, BUT PRIOR, PRIOR TO VERY RECENTLY WHAT WAS ON THE CITY REPORT AND TRACKER WAS THE OLD VERSION.
IS THAT FAIR? DO YOU KNOW WHEN THIS WAS UPDATED? WHICH ONE WAS THIS? THE ONE THAT IS CURRENTLY ON TRACKER IS THIS SAME ONE, WHICH IS THE UPDATED VERSION.
AND IS IS THE BUILDING, THE WHITE BUILDING AND THE FOREGROUND IN THESE TWO PICTURES OR NO, AND SORRY, IN THE BACKGROUND, IS THAT A NEIGHBORING NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTY? YES, THAT'S THE PROJECT THAT'S NOT PART OF THE SO THERE'S NOT, THAT'S NOT THEIR PROJECT? NO, THAT IS NOT PART OF THIS.
WE WERE JUST DOING IT SO THAT WAY YOU COULD SEE THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE PROPOSED GARAGE STRUCTURE AND THE NEIGHBORING STRUCTURE.
THE ADDITION ITSELF, I MEAN THE ROOF IS SLIGHTLY HIP, IS THAT, OR IS IT PURE METAL? I'M, I'M SORRY, I COULDN'T, I'M NOT SURE I'M UNDERSTANDING THE, THE ROOF OF THE, NOT THE GARAGE, BUT THE ADDITION ITSELF, THE, THE ADDITION IS KIND OF MULTI-PART.
SO THERE'S, UM, WELL, THE TALL PART, YEAH, IT IS HIP.
THERE'S A HYPHEN BETWEEN THE TWO.
UHHUH
AND THEN THE OTHER HIP IS THE NEW GARAGE.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF THIS SPEAKER? I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THE ORIGINAL, UH, HOUSE.
UM, I MEAN, I, I CAN SEE THAT THIS IS A VERY THOUGHTFUL DESIGN THAT YOU'RE PROPOSING AND IT'S ADDING A FEW VOLUMES, ACTUALLY SORT OF THE SAME STRATEGY AS AS THE PRIOR ADDITIONS.
BUT THE ORIGINAL HOUSE, WAS IT ASYMMETRICAL TO BEGIN WITH? YES.
IT LOOKS AS THOUGH IT HAS LIKE ONE SORT OF LARGER, YEAH, IT HAD A TWO STORY PIECE ON ONE SIDE.
IF YOU GO TO THE, UH, ORIGINAL FRONT ELEVATION, YOU CAN SEE THAT.
I DON'T KNOW HOW TO TELL YOU WHERE THAT IS, BUT, AND THEN THE LOW PART ON THE OTHER SIDE, IS THAT A, I'M LOOKING AT PAGE 16.
IS THAT A, LIKE A SHELTERED ENTRANCE OR WAS THAT A ENCLOSED SPACE? IT WAS ORIGINALLY A CARPORT.
I'M NOT SURE HOW THEY GOT A CAR IN THERE, BUT IT WAS, IT WAS, YEAH, THAT DRAWING, THEY WERE SMALLER BACK IN THE DAY.
SO THAT'S THE ORIGINAL ASYMMETRICAL.
WELL, IT LOOKS LIKE THEY PUT THE TERRACE INTO THE METAL.
SO CAN YOU COMMENT ON THE ASYMMETRY AT ALL? I'M SORT OF SURPRISED OF THE ORIGINAL HOUSE.
WELL, A LOT OF, A LOT OF VERY TRADITIONAL HOUSES HAD A CENTRAL SYMMETRY THAT DISSIPATED AS IT WENT TO THE SIDES AND BECAME MORE PICTURESQUE ON THE SIDES.
I THINK OF THAT AS A, A FAIRLY COMMON, UH, THING THAT HAPPENS ON TRADITIONAL HOUSES, EVEN IF THEY HAVE A CENTRAL AXIS SYMMETRY.
[01:40:01]
BUT IT SEEMS PERFECTLY NORMAL TO ME.BUT YOU CAN LOOK AT LIKE THE JOHN STAUB BOOKS.
HE DID STUFF LIKE THAT IN BRICKS.
MR. MCNEIL, DO YOU HAVE A QUESTION OF THE SPEAKER? UH, MR. KYLE, I'M LOOKING AT THE PAGE 39 OF OUR SUBMITTAL PACKAGE, WHICH IS GOT SOME PINK HIGHLIGHTER ON THE OTHER PROPERTIES AND SHADOW ON.
UM, THERE WAS A QUESTION THAT I WAS TRYING TO FIGURE OUT THE, UM, UH, SOMETHING IN CHAPTER OR, UH, ITEM 11 SAID THAT, UM, ADDITIONS THAT WE MAKE SHOULD NOT BE CLOSER TO THE STREET THAN OTHER SIMILAR STRUCTURES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR THE, THE, UH, HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND THE GREEN, THE GREEN DISTANCES I WAS SHOWING ARE PLACES WHERE EXISTING GARAGES ARE CLOSER TO THE PROPERTY LINE THAN OUR GARAGE WOULD BE.
UM, I HAVEN'T MEASURED THAT THIS IS FROM THE GYMS MAP, BUT THEY ARE GENERALLY PRETTY ACCURATE, THOSE GYMS MAPS.
AND THE PINK ARE JUST ME SHOWING WHERE, UH, SETBACKS ARE VIOLATED.
DOES YOUR PRO PROJECT VIOLATE ANY SETBACKS? NO, IT DOES NOW BEFORE WE DEMOLISH THE GARAGE.
THE GARAGE, THE EXISTING GARAGE VIOLATES A SETBACK.
SO WHEN THE NEW GARAGE WILL NOT.
SO THE NEXT SPEAKER SIGNED UP, UM, IS KEA FORGE.
YOU JUST HEAR FOR QUESTIONS OR? I, I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD.
UH, THE NEXT SPEAKER IN ORDER IS PHILLIP EWALD.
IF YOU COULD RE RESTATE YOUR NAME AND PLEASE ADDRESS THE COMMISSION.
I, UH, LIVE ACROSS THE STREET FROM 14 SHADOW LAWN, DOCUMENT CAMERA.
SO THE, WE HAVE A VERY UNUSUAL NEIGHBORHOOD WITH A, UH, A CIRCULAR, UH, ROAD.
AND THIS 14 SHADOW LAWN IS RIGHT AS THE FRONT ENTRANCE AS YOU COME IN.
UH, UNFORTUNATELY THE, UH, THE HOUSE HAS TURNED SLIGHTLY AND SO THE GARAGE AND ONE SIDE OF THE HOUSE IS WHAT YOU, IS WHAT YOU SEE WHEN YOU, WHEN YOU, WHEN YOU COME IN.
CAN YOU THERE, THE CURRENT DESI UH, DESIGN THAT'S BEEN PRESENTED, UM, YOU CAN SEE THAT THAT LITTLE PART IS SAVED AND EVERYTHING ELSE IS BEING DEMOLISHED.
AND SO, UM, THE NEW GARAGE IS, UH, SIGNIFICANTLY LARGER THAN THE EXISTING GARAGE.
IT'S, UH, 27% TALLER, AND IT IS, UH, UM, 16 FEET, TWO INCHES CLOSER TO THE, UH, STREET THAN THE EXISTING GARAGE.
AND THEN, UH, ONE OF THE OTHER TROUBLING, UH, FEATURES IS THAT, UH, THE, THE CURRENTLY, THE, THE CURRENT GARAGE IS ACTUALLY SLIGHTLY BEHIND THE JOHN STAUB HOUSE.
AND NOW WITH THE NEW GARAGE, THE, THE GARAGE IS 16 FEET, TWO INCHES IN FRONT OF THE JOHN, UH, STOP HOUSE.
UH, THE GARAGE DOORS ARE ALSO 10 FEET TALL, WHICH IS UNUSUAL FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UH, SOME OF THE ORDINANCES I'VE LOOKED AT, UH, THE DISTANCE FROM THE PROPERTY LINE OF, OF THE, IS THERE MOTION? MOTION.
UH, THE DISTANCE FROM THE PROPERTY LINE OF, OF, OF THE FRONT OF THE GARAGE MUST BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE DISTANCE FROM THE PROPERTY LINE OF SIMILAR ELEMENTS OF EXISTING, UH, CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES IN THE CONTEXT AREA.
WHILE I CAN'T THINK OF ANYTHING MORE CONTEXTUAL THAN THE GARAGE THAT'S RIGHT NEXT DOOR, IT'S ONLY EIGHT FEET AWAY.
AND SO IT'S GOING FROM BEHIND THAT BUILDING TO, IN FRONT OF IT, UH, UH, THE SCALE AND THE PROPORTIONS OF THE NEW CONSTRUCTION, UM, HAVE TO BE, UH, CONTRIBUTING TO THE CONTEXT AREA.
UH, AGAIN, THE GARAGE IS MUCH, MUCH TALLER THAN ANY OF THE OTHER GARAGES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
I HAVE, UH, PHOTOGRAPHS OF ALL OF THE GARAGES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
[01:45:01]
ALL DAY LOOKING AT THEM, BUT, UH, ALMOST ALL THE GARAGES ARE TWO STORY.UH, BUT THEY'RE, THEY'RE, THE SCALE OF THEM IS, IS MUCH, MUCH SMALLER.
UH, AGAIN, I SAID IT WAS 27%, UH, TALLER THAN THE, THAN THE CURRENT GARAGE.
WOULD YOU LIKE TO SEE ANY MORE OF THE GARAGES OR, UH, I THINK IF YOU COULD JUST QUICKLY PUT PRESS IN FRONT OF THE DOCUMENT, UH, SCREEN, IT WILL GIVE THE COMMISSION MEMBERS A FEEL FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND CHARLES, I WOULD JUST MAKE DO IT VERY QUICKLY, BUT, AND THEN, UH, SOME OF THE OTHER, UH, GENTLEMEN AND LADIES ARE GONNA TALK ABOUT THE, THE, UM, THE, THE AGE OF THIS, UH, SIGNIFICANT PART OF THE HOUSE THAT'S BEING TORN DOWN.
IT LOOKS TO ME LIKE ABOUT 40% OF THE HISTORIC HOUSE IS GOING TO BE TORN DOWN TO BUILD ESSENTIALLY A NEW AND DIFFERENT, UH, UH, UH, UH, HOUSE.
UH, THIS IS A, UH, A NEWSPAPER ARTICLE FROM 1944 THAT SHOWS THE SYMMETRICAL, UH, DESIGN.
AND WE ALSO HAVE INFORMATION FROM BOOKS THAT SHOW THAT THE ORIGINAL ARCHITECT ADDED ONTO THE HOUSE, UH, FOR THE ORIGINAL OWNERS SEVEN YEARS AFTER HE COMPLETED THE FIRST HOUSE.
ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OF THE SPEAKER? OKAY, THANK YOU.
UM, THE NEXT SPEAKER WHO IS SIGNED UP IS PAMELA PIERCE.
SHE KEEPS THESE FOR THE RECORD.
THE NEXT SPEAKER IS ROD DEANO.
UH, THANKS FOR ALLOWING ME TO SPEAK.
I AM, I LIVE IN 14 SHADOW LAWN SE I MEAN 17 SHADOW LAWN, WHICH IS RIGHT NEXT DOOR.
IT'S THE HOUSE THAT YOU SAW RIGHT NEXT DOOR.
AND I, I NEW TO THIS TYPE OF THING, BUT WHEN I LOOKED AT THE COMMISSION'S REQUIREMENTS, I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THIS MEETS THREE OF THE CRITERION.
I DON'T BELIEVE IT MEETS CRITERION ONE, WHICH IS TO RETAIN AND PRESERVE THE HISTORICAL CHARACTER OF THE PROPERTY.
AND SOME OF THE FACTORS ARE HOW THE BUILDING IS CITED.
THE OVERALL SETTING, AND WHICH I THINK IS MOST RELEVANT HERE IS THE PLACEMENT OF THE BUILDING ON THE SITE AND HOW IT RELATES TO THE NEIGHBORING STRUCTURES.
AND, AND THAT'S MY HOUSE RIGHT NEXT DOOR.
I THINK THIS, THIS ADDITION WILL OVERWHELM THE LOOK OF MY HOUSE.
THESE, WHEN THESE HOUSES WERE BUILT, THEY WERE, THEY, IT WAS ONE HALF OF A CIRCLE WAS ON ONE AND ONE IS THE OTHER.
AND THEY HAD A COMMON ROAD, SO TO SPEAK, TO GET INSIDE.
SO THE HOUSES WERE BUILT MUCH CLOSER THAN THEY WOULD NORMALLY.
SO WHEN THEY ADD, WHEN THEY, THIS BIG ADDITION IS ADDED, IT WILL CHANGE THE WHOLE DYNAMICS OF THE WAY THINGS LOOK IN THIS CIRCLE.
UM, THE OTHER, THE OTHER CRITERIA IS 10, WHICH IS SIMILAR TO THE, TO ONE, WHICH IS IT MUST BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE MASSING SIZE, SCALE, AND CHARACTER OF THE PROPERTY.
AND THE CONTEXT AREA, WHICH IS WHAT WE'RE BASICALLY TALKING ABOUT, CRITERION 11 ALSO, THAT'S THE DISTANCE FROM THE PROPERTY LINE, UH, THE DISTANCE FROM THE PROPERTY LINES THAT OTHER OF THESE FILLED, LET ME JUST PULL THAT UP.
BUT THAT'S THE OTHER ONE THAT I DON'T THINK IS MET, WHICH IS THE DISTANCE FROM THE PROPERTY LINE TO THE FRONT.
AND SIDEWALK PORCHES AND OTHER EXTERIORS MUST BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE DISTANCE FROM THE PROPERTY LINE TO SIMILAR EV ELEMENTS OF EXISTING CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES.
AND THIS IS GOING 16 FEET FORWARD.
UM, THE OTHER, THE OTHER, I DON'T KNOW HOW IMPORTANT THIS IS, BUT IN, IN THE MOTION TO GRANT THIS SPEAKER MORE TIME, IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND.
IN, IN THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS, THE PROPOSAL THE APPLICANT PROPOSES TO RESTORE THE HISTORIC HOME TO THE ORIGINAL FOOTPRINT WITH THE NORTHEAST OF EL ELEVATION OF THE 1923 PLAN AND WITH THE REMOVAL OF THESE NON HISTORIC EDITION.
SO IF, IF WE GO TO PAGE 16, WHICH OF THIS THING YOU'LL, YOU'LL SEE THE ORIGINAL HISTORIC FOOTPRINT IS ON THE TOP AND IT'S, AS YOU'LL SEE, IT'S A MODEST HOUSE.
IT'S, BUT IN ON A LARGE LOT, WHAT THEY'RE PROPOSING IS GOING TO THE THIRD PICTURE, THE BOTTOM ONE, BACK TO PRESENTATION.
AND THAT DOES NOT LOOK LIKE THE ORIGINAL FOOTPRINT, WHICH IS WHAT THEY SAY IS SUPPOSED TO HAPPEN.
AND THEN THE THIRD THING IS, AND, AND I DON'T KNOW HOW IMPORTANT THIS IS, BUT THIS, THIS IS A UNIQUE, UH, UNIQUE NEIGHBORHOOD.
WE HAVE 13 HOUSES, REALLY 12 IN THIS AREA.
WE HAVE THREE IN THE CIRCLE, WE HAVE NUMBER 14, WE'VE GOT MINE AND WE'VE GOT ONE OTHER.
AND THEN WE'VE GOT NINE HOUSES
[01:50:01]
THAT SURROUND IT.AND, AND, AND WE ALL KNOW EACH OTHER AND PEOPLE WALK THEIR DOGS AROUND THE CIRCLE.
WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH THAT FRONT SO THAT, THAT HOUSE IS, IS REALLY FRONT AND CENTER OF THE ENTIRE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND WHAT I THINK IS VERY TELLING IS THAT A LOT OF US HAVE SHOWED UP HERE AND NINE OUT OF THE 12 OF US OPPOSED THIS PROJECT.
AND, AND WE'RE THE PEOPLE THAT HAVE THE LARGEST STAKE IN THIS HISTORICAL NEIGHBORHOOD WE'RE THE ONES THAT HAVE BOUGHT HOMES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND HAVE, HAVE NOT CHANGED OUR HOMES.
SO I DON'T KNOW HOW IMPORTANT THAT IS TO THE COMMISSION, BUT I THINK IT SHOULD BE CONSIDERED.
CAN I ASK THE SPEAKER TO CLARIFY SOMETHING? UM, AND FORGIVE ME, I CAN'T REMEMBER IF IT WAS YOU OR MR. EALD, BUT THE DEMOLITION, SOMEONE SAID THERE WOULD BE DEMOLITION OF THE ORIGINAL HISTORIC HOUSE, 40%.
SO WHERE, WHERE IS THAT? BECAUSE ON THE, ON THESE BLUEPRINTS HERE, IT'S SHOWING THAT THE ORIGINAL HOUSE WAS INDEED, YOU KNOW, A VERY MODEST FOOTPRINT.
I'LL SPEAK TO THAT IF YOU WANT.
UH, JAY, UH, SOMEBODY, ANOTHER, ANOTHER RESIDENT WILL SPEAK TO THAT.
I THINK THERE'S A CONFUSION ABOUT, IF YOU LOOK AT PAGE 20, THE TOP PART YEAH.
UH, SHOWS THAT A, A LOT OF THE, I GUESS WHAT WAS REFERRED TO AS A 19 EDITION.
EDITION AS AN EDITION MM-HMM
IS WHAT PEOPLE PRIMARILY SEE AS THEY COME IN RIGHT INTO THE AREA.
BUT I WAS CONCERNED WITH THE DEMOLITION OF THE ORIGINAL.
THINK THERE'S CONFUSION BETWEEN THAT AND THE ORIGINAL.
I THINK MAYBE, WELL, HOPEFULLY SOMEONE CAN CLARIFY THAT.
THE NEXT SPEAKER WHO IS SIGNED UP IS HENRIETTA ALEXANDER.
UH, WOULD YOU JAY HURT, SPOKE? ABSOLUTELY.
MY NAME IS JAY HURT AND I APPRECIATE THE COMMISSION'S TIME.
I WANNA SPEAK TO SECTION 33 DASH 24 7 A OF THE HISTORIC ORDINANCE.
SPECIFICALLY IT RELATES TO DEMOLITION OF CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, I BELIEVE IN THIS APPLICATION THERE'S SOME, EITHER SOME INADEQUACIES OR SOME I MATERIAL THAT'S NOT INCLUDED IN THE APPLICATION THAT SHOULD BE INCLUDED.
UM, SPECIFICALLY RELATE AS IT RELATES TO WHAT'S BEING DEEMED A NON HISTORIC EDITION.
YOU'LL SEE IN THE APPLICATION'S A LARGE SHADED AREA THAT'S SCHEDULED UNDER THEIR APPLICATION BE DEMOLISHED AND IT'S LISTED AS A NON HISTORIC EDITION, UH, PER SECTION 33 DASH 2 47 A.
THAT SEEMS TO BE INCONSISTENT WITH THE ORDINANCE.
UH, THE ORDINANCE SAYS THAT ANY CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE SHALL NOT BE DEMOLISHED AND THERE ARE CERTAIN EXCEPTIONS UNDER WHICH IT COULD BE DEMOLISHED.
AND THAT'S, AS YOU KNOW, IF THE HOUSE IS SERIOUSLY DETERIORATED, IF IT WOULD PROVIDE AN UNREASONABLE ECONOMIC HARDSHIP OR IF THERE ARE UNUSUAL AND COMPELLING CIRCUMSTANCES THAT WOULD GIVE THE COMMISSION THE AUTHORITY TO DESTROY, TO DEMOLISH A CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE.
UH, IN ITS IN EITHER IN PART OR IN FULL, SPECIFICALLY CRITERIA NUMBER NINE WE SPOKE TO, THAT SPEAKS TO NOT DESTROYING IN IN THE APPLICATION CRITERIA.
NUMBER NINE IS CHECKED AS HAVING BEEN SATISFIED.
UM, SPECIFICALLY AS IT RELATES TO THE DEMOLITION, THERE WAS AN ADDITION IN 1931 AND IT'S DOCUMENTED MULTIPLE SOURCES.
THERE'S A, UH, RICE DESIGN ALLIANCE DID RESEARCH AND CONDUCTED A TOUR ON SHADOW LAWN THAT SPECIFICALLY HAD THIS HOUSE ON IT.
AND IN THEIR WRITE-UP, THEY SPECIFICALLY MENTIONED THAT IN 1931, NORTHROP, WHO WAS THE ORIGINAL ARCHITECT, MADE A SUBSTANTIAL ADDITION TO THE BACK OF THE HOME FOR MR. AND MRS. COOKER WHO WERE THE, THE INDIVIDUALS WHO OWNED THE HOUSE AND BUILT THE HOUSE.
SO IN 1931, THERE WAS A SUBSTANTIAL ADDITION THAT WAS BUILT.
THIS IS THE BUILDING PERMIT FROM 1931 THAT REFERENCES THE ADDITION TO THE HOUSE AND THE ADDITION OF A GARAGE.
SO THE ACTUAL BUILDING PERMIT IS AS IS AS YOU SEE.
IS YOUR SECOND ALL IN FAVOR? AYE.
I ALSO REFERENCE THAT THERE'S IN THE APPLICATION THIS REFERENCE TO A 1989 EDITION, AND I BELIEVE THERE'S SOME LUMPING TOGETHER OF ADDITIONS.
SO I THINK THIS HOUSE OVER THE YEARS WAS ADDED ONTO IN NUMEROUS DIFFERENT WAYS, AND THAT'S WHY I THINK THE APPLICATION IS EITHER INCOMPLETE OR INACCURATE OR JUST LACKING SOME OF THE INFORMATION.
UNFORTUNATELY, AS A NEIGHBORHOOD, WE WERE RELATIVELY SLOW TO GET THIS INFORMATION TO STAFF, OR IT MAY HAVE BEEN INCLUDED IN THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION.
THIS IS A PHOTOGRAPH OF THE HOUSE IN 1944 THAT CLEARLY SHOWS THE ADDITION ON THE RIGHT, IF YOU'RE FACING THE HOUSE, THE TWO STORY EDITION THAT IS AT SOME POINT WHAT WE KNOW WHEN IT HAPPENED, IT WAS IN 1931, IT REPLACED THE CARPORT THAT WAS REFERENCED.
SO THE APPLICATION SPEAKS TO TAKING THE HOUSE BACK TO ITS ORIGINAL 1924 DESIGN.
[01:55:01]
HOUSE LOOKED LIKE THIS SINCE 1931.SO 93 YEARS OUT OF ITS A HUNDRED YEAR EXISTENCE.
THE HOUSE FROM THE STREET LOOKED LIKE THAT.
THERE'S, THERE'S A, THERE'S A PERMIT, THERE'S A PHOTOGRAPH, ET CETERA.
AND SO I THINK THE APPLICATION IS INACCURATE IN THAT REGARD.
UM, ADDITIONALLY TO FURTHER SUBSTANTIATION, TO THE EXTENT THAT'S NEEDED IN THE APPLICATION, THE SANBORNE MAP IS INACCURATE.
THERE'S A REFERENCE TO A 1952 SANBORN ACT THAT SHOWS SANBORN MAP, EXCUSE ME, THAT SHOWS A SINGLE STORY ON THE RIGHT THAT'S INACCURATE AS EVIDENCED BY THIS PICTURE BECAUSE IT'S THE 1950.
I LOOKED AT IT PERSONALLY IN THE IDELSON LIBRARY AND THE MAP FROM 1952 SHOWS THAT IT'S A SINGLE STORY ON THE RIGHT WHEN THE PICTURE SHOWS CLEARLY IT WAS TWO STORIES.
SO, AND THAT'S IN THE APPLICATION IS THAT SANDBORN MAP.
MY UNDERSTANDING IS IT'S MISLABELED AS 1924, BUT THE STAFF I THINK HAS CORRECTED IT TO SHOW THAT IT'S REALLY THE MAP FROM 1952.
THERE'S ANOTHER PIECE OF APPLICATION THAT, THAT SUBSTANTIATES THIS, THAT'S IN THE APPLICATION.
THAT'S THE HARRIS COUNTY OR THE EQUIVALENT OF HARRIS COUNTY APPRAISAL DISTRICT THAT SPEAKS TO THE SIZE OF THE HOUSE IN 1964.
IN 1964, THE HOUSE WAS SHOWN AS 4,600 SQUARE FEET.
THE ORIGINAL BLUEPRINT THAT THEY'RE WANTING TO RESTORE THE HOUSE TO WAS ONLY 2,650 SQUARE FEET.
SO SOMEWHERE BETWEEN 1924 AND 1964, THE HOUSE WAS MATERIALLY ADDED ON TO, AGAIN, THAT'S OVER 50 YEARS AGO.
THE ENTIRE HOUSE, INCLUDING THE GARAGE, WAS A CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE WHEN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT WAS CREATED.
THERE WAS NO DISTINCTION WHEN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT WAS CREATED SAYING THAT THE ORIGINAL FOOTPRINT OF THE HOUSE IN 1924 IS CONTRIBUTING, BUT THE ADDITIONS ARE NOT.
SO BASED ON THIS INFORMATION, I STRONGLY SUGGEST AND WOULD ASK FOR DENIAL OF THIS APPLICATION AND FOR RECONSIDERATION ON THE PART OF THE PROPERTY OWNERS AND ARCHITECT.
FINAL POINT THAT I'D LIKE TO MAKE IS, IF YOU LOOK AT IN THE BACK OF THE HOUSE, THERE ARE FLAT ROOF.
THERE'S A SUNROOM WITH A FLAT HOUSE, FLAT ROOF.
AND SPECIFICALLY AS IT RELATES TO SHADOW LONG HISTORIC DISTRICT, THERE ARE VERY CLEAR DO'S AND DON'TS.
WHAT IS ALLOWED, WHAT IS NOT ALLOWED.
AND YOU'LL SEE IN THE RIGHT, IN THE RED BOX ON THE RIGHT IF YOU COULD ZOOM IN JUST A BIT, IS IT SAYS VERY CLEARLY NOT ALLOWED IN SHADOW LONG HISTORIC DISTRICT ARE SHED FLAT GAMBELL OR MANED ROOF SHAPES.
SO THERE'S NUMEROUS VIOLATIONS OF THE, BOTH THE ORDINANCE AND THE, AND THE RESTRICTIONS IN THIS APPLICATION, WHICH IS WHY I URGED DENIAL OF THE APPLICATION.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME AND IF ANYBODY HAS ANY QUESTIONS, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER.
MR. HURT, DO YOU HAVE, THANKS FOR, FOR SHARING ALL THIS.
DO YOU HAVE ANY, UH, DOES THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAVE ANY, UM, PHOTOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE OF THE GARAGE OR THE REAR OF THE HOUSE BETWEEN 1940 AND 1980? I DO NOT CURRENTLY HAVE THAT, ALTHOUGH THE INFORMATION THAT I PRESENTED HAS BEEN ACQUIRED JUST IN THE LAST 24, LITERALLY 24 TO 48 HOURS.
MY SUGGESTION WOULD BE THAT IF NOT A DENIAL, THEN CERTAINLY A DEFERRAL TO GIVE STAFF AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND FRANKLY HOPEFULLY THE ARCHITECT IN THE, IN THAT TEAM TO COLLABORATE TOGETHER TO FIND A SOLUTION.
BECAUSE I PERSONALLY RESTORED MY HOUSE FOR THREE AND A HALF YEARS.
OH, BY THE WAY, I LIVE RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET FROM NUMBER 14.
AND DYLAN KYLE, COINCIDENTALLY, WAS MY ARCHITECT.
HE'S AN EXTRAORDINARILY TALENTED ARCHITECT.
WE WORKED VERY, VERY HARD TO MAKE SURE THAT THE HOUSE WAS IN KEEPING WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND I'M QUITE PROUD OF WHAT WE DID.
UM, IN THAT PROCESS, WE MET WITH THE NEIGHBORS.
WE CONSUL, WE, WE SHARED IN ADVANCE OF AN APPLICATION WHAT WE WANTED TO DO AND GOT NEIGHBORHOOD, YOU KNOW, INPUT AND INCORPORATED THAT INPUT IN, IN MANY WAYS INTO OUR DESIGN.
THAT PROCESS WAS NOT DONE HERE.
MY HOPE IS THAT EITHER A DENIAL OR A DEFERRAL WOULD GIVE THAT THE, UH, PROVIDE THAT OPPORTUNITY IF THE OWNER AND THE ARCHITECT ARE WILLING TO ENGAGE WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN A, IN A THOUGHTFUL DISCUSSION AROUND WHAT A BEST SOLUTION IS.
I ALSO PERSONALLY BELIEVE IF WE DON'T RESTORE THESE HOUSES IN SOME FORM OR FASHION AND MAKE THEM LIVABLE BY MODERN STANDARDS, WE RISK LOSING THEM ALTOGETHER.
SO I AM A, I'M A PRESERVATIONIST.
I MEAN, I BELIEVE THAT WE NEED TO HAVE REASONABLE ADDITIONS TO THESE HOUSES SO THAT THEY DON'T DETERIORATE AND ULTIMATELY HAVE TO BE TORN DOWN.
SO I'M NOT SUGGESTING WE DO NOTHING TO THIS HOUSE, I JUST THINK WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED IS COMPLETELY OUT OF CONTEXT WITH THE ADJOINING PROPERTIES ON WHAT IS A VERY SMALL STREET.
DO, DOES SHUTTLE ON HAVE, UH, DEED RESTRICTIONS OR ANY NEIGHBORHOOD REVIEW AND PERMITTING? WE, WE HAVE VERY LIMITED DEED RESTRICTIONS.
THEY, THERE WAS A CONTROVERSY YEARS AGO ABOUT GETTING THE PAST AND ESSENTIALLY THEY SAY IT'S SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE ONLY AND THERE'S A SETBACK REQUIREMENT AND THAT'S EFFECTIVELY ALL THAT THE DEED RESTRICTIONS CALL FOR.
SO NO, THERE IS NO FORMAL APPROVAL PROCESS THROUGH.
WHAT IS, WHAT AM I READING ON THE SCREEN THEN? WHAT YOU READ, WHERE'S THAT FROM? THAT IS, IF YOU LOOK, THAT'S MY QUESTION.
I'M NOT SURE HOW YOU SEE THE TOP OF IT.
THAT'S FROM THE CITY'S WEBSITE.
IT'S, AND THOSE ARE THE CONDITIONS RELATED TO THE SHADOW ON HISTORIC DISTRICT.
I, WHERE THAT'S FROM THE CITY OF HOUSTON'S WEBSITE.
SO TERRANCE JUST POINTED OUT THAT THAT IS FROM A DOCUMENT THAT'S ON
[02:00:01]
THE WEBSITE CALLED I BELIEVE THE HIS THE PRESERVATION MANUAL.UM, AND WHICH I THINK WAS A DOCUMENT THAT WAS PUT OUT WHEN THE ORDINANCE WAS BEING PREPARED.
UM, IT'S NOT A DOCUMENT THAT'S APPROVED BY COUNSEL, BUT WE'LL LOOK AT THAT AND SURE.
IT'S TO, I THINK IT IS TO PROVIDE SOME ROUGH GUIDELINES OR, OR UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT VARIOUS NEIGHBORHOODS LOOK LIKE.
BUT WE'LL LOOK BACK AT THAT, NOT SPEAKING FOR THE NEIGHBORS, BUT I THINK THE, THE FLAT ROOF IS PROBABLY THIRD, FOURTH DOWN THE LIST, UH, OF ISSUES.
SO THAT DOCUMENT DOES NOT PERTAIN TO ANY HOUSES IN SHADOW LAWN SPECIFICALLY, CORRECT? MY, I DON'T BELIEVE SO, BUT I THINK THAT THAT ISSUE DESERVES US, DESERVES LEGAL, AT LEAST FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, FURTHER LOOK.
NOT SINCE THE DISTRICT WAS ESTABLISHED.
THERE'S A MODERN FLAT ROOF HOUSE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT IT WAS A CONTRIBUTING HOUSE WHEN THE DISTRICT WAS CREATED.
YEAH, I THINK PHIL JOHNSON SAID OF THAT HOUSE, IT WAS MORE ME THAN ME, RIGHT? CORRECT.
UM, WELL THANK YOU AGAIN FOR SPEAKING AND I DO HAVE A FEW MORE SPEAKERS.
UM, WOULD HENRIETTA ALEXANDER LIKE TO SPEAK AT THIS TIME? GOOD AFTERNOON, AND THANK YOU FOR GIVING ME THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TO YOU.
I WAS VERY IMPRESSED WITH, UH, THE DETAIL YOU WENT INTO AND THE OTHER RENOVATIONS AND PROPOSED ADDITIONS, ET CETERA.
THEY'RE JUST GOING BACK TO THE, THE, THE PRESENTATION THAT WAS ONLINE.
WHILE YOU SPEAK, UM, I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT I CAN CON CONCUR WITH THE PREVIOUS REMARKS AND THAT I LIVE AT, UM, SIX SHADOW LINE, WHICH IS DIRECTLY ACROSS THE CIRCLE.
I'M ON THE, UM, E EAST SIDE OF THE PROPOSED CHANGES.
AND, UM, THAT, THAT 14 SHADOW LINE IS A LITTLE UNIQUE AND THAT IT'S, IT'S WITH WITHIN THE CIRCLE.
SO IT'S NOT LIKE THE HOUSES ON THE OUTSIDE WHERE ADDITIONS MAYBE ARE NOT SEEN.
THEY'RE NOT AS HIGHLY VISIBLE AS WHAT WOULD HAPPEN INSIDE OF THAT CIRCLE.
AND UH, I LOOK AT THAT HOUSE EVERY DAY AND I AM CONCERNED ABOUT THE FLAT ROOFS.
I AM CONCERNED ABOUT THE SCALE OF THE ADDITION.
UM, AND THE REMOVAL OF WHAT RIGHT NOW MAKES THE HOUSE SYMMETRICAL, WHICH WAS ADDED OR DESIGNED IN THE THIRTIES, NOT LONG AFTER THE ORIGINAL HOUSE WAS BUILT.
BUT WHEN YOU ENTER SHADOW LAWN, THAT IS REALLY LIKE, YOU KNOW, THE TOUCHSTONE FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UH, I THINK WHAT ONE REASON THAT WE'RE ALL QUITE CLOSE IN THAT CIRCLE IS BECAUSE WE ALL APPRECIATE THE HISTORIC NATURE AND HOW UNIQUE THAT STREET IS IN HOUSTON, WHERE SO MANY HOUSES ARE BEING TORN DOWN, ALTERED MCMANSIONS BEING BUILT, WHATEVER YOU WANNA SAY.
WE APPRECIATE THE SCALE AND THE HISTORIC NATURE OF THE EXISTING HOUSES, AND WE WORKED HARD.
IT'S NOT ALWAYS EASY IN PRESERVING THOSE HOUSES AND PRESERVING THE DETAILS THAT MAKE THEM UNIQUE TO HOUSTON AND PARTICULARLY ON OUR STREET.
BUT THERE'S NOT MANY ENCLAVES LIKE THIS SMALL STREET.
AND WE HAVE A LOT OF, WE HAVE RICE STUDENTS, WE HAVE PEOPLE THAT COME FROM ALL OVER TO, TO LOOK AT THE HOUSES THERE.
DO YOU, DO YOU HAVE MORE TO SAY? AND FINALLY I'M JUST CONCERNED ABOUT THE PROPOSED ADDITIONS.
UH, THE NEXT SPEAKER WHO HAS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK IS ROY SMITH.
UM, UM, I HAVE THE WEST VIEW OF NUMBER 14 AND, UM, THE OB OBVIOUSLY WHEN WE LOOKED INTO THIS, THE IT, THE STRUCTURE AND THE CONTEXT SEEMS TO BE OUT OF, UM, OUT OF SYNC WITH THE CURRENT CURRENT BUILDING.
AND IF YOU LOOK AT THE, UM, CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS, LOOKING AT THE 3D OF THE NORTH AND THE SOUTH, UM, VIEWS, YOU CAN SEE THIS, IT'S QUITE DIFFERENT, YOU KNOW, IN TERMS OF THE, UM, THE AREA OF THE NEW ADDITION.
AND, AND THE, THE SIDE OF THE HOUSE THAT WE
[02:05:01]
SEE MOSTLY IS ALL GONNA BE, IT'S GONNA BE A DEMOLITION.THEY'RE GONNA REBUILD THAT AND PUT A NEW GARAGE THAT THAT GARAGE IS OUT OF, OUT OF SCALE.
AND BY BEING, UM, 16 FEET OR 12 TO 16 FEET FORWARD TOWARDS, TOWARDS THE STREET, YOU KNOW, BLOCKS THE VIEW OF THE, UM, STAR, STAR HOUSE RIGHT NEXT DOOR.
AND YOU HEARD FROM THE INDIVIDUAL THAT OWNS THE STAR HOUSE.
AND SO IT'S, IT JUST CHANGES THE WHOLE PERSPECTIVE OF THE VIEW FROM THE STREET.
UM, LEMME SEE WHAT ELSE I SAY.
ANYWAY, THAT'S, THANK YOU FOR THE TIME.
THE NEXT SPEAKER IS ALEXANDER WEBB.
MY NAME IS ALEXANDER WEBB AND I REPRESENT THE HOUSEHOLD AT SEVEN SHADOW ON, UH, THIS IS THE ONLY CIRCULAR STREET IN THE CITY THAT I KNOW OF.
UH, AND I FEEL IT NEEDS TO BE CONSIDERED DIFFERENTLY THAN A LINEAR STREET.
MY PARENTS BOUGHT AN APRIL OF 2022 WANTING SPECIFICALLY TO BE IN A NEIGHBORHOOD WITH HISTORIC CHARM AND WHERE THERE'S SOME GUARANTEE THAT THAT FIELD WOULD BE PRESERVED.
THIS IS ONLY HISTORIC DISTRICT IN THE MUSEUM DISTRICT, BOULEVARD OAKS AREA THAT HAS NEVER HAD A DEMOLITION.
AND WHERE ALL HOUSES ARE CONSIDERED CONTRIBUTING IS CURRENTLY INTACT.
THAT'S PART OF THE BEAUTY OF SHADOW LAWN 14.
SHADOW LAWN IS THE MOST PROMINENT HOME IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AS PEOPLE HAVE SAID, AND ONE CAN SEE IT FROM ALL SIDES AND FROM BOTH ENTRANCES TO SHADOW LAWN.
THE PROPOSED EDITION CONCLUDES CONTEMPORARY PORTIONS.
THIS WOULD BE FINE IF NOT VISIBLE FROM THE STREET, BUT BECAUSE THE PROPERTY IS ON A SEMI-CIRCULAR SITE, THE FRONT SIDES AND EVEN BACK OF THE PROPERTY ARE VISIBLE TO THE ENTIRE NEIGHBORHOOD AND ALL FACE THE CURB.
MY PARENTS AND I ARE CONCERNED ABOUT BLOCKING THE VIEW OF THE ADJACENT HOME BY FAMED ARCHITECT JOHN STAUB.
THE FACT IS THAT THE FOCAL POINT FROM THE MAIN ENTRANCE TO THE CIRCLE, AND THE FIRST THING ONE WILL SEE WHEN ENTERING THE NEIGHBORHOOD AS PROPOSED, WILL BE A MASSIVE NEW GARAGE WITH VERY TALL DOORS.
UH, SO WE THEREFORE OPPOSE THE PLANS AS SUBMITTED.
UH, THE NEXT SPEAKER WHO SIGNED UP IS LARRY BELL.
THANK YOU FOR, FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
I THINK YOU CAN TELL FROM THE PREVIOUS SPEAKERS AND PERHAPS ANOTHER, WE'RE A VERY CLOSE NEIGHBORHOOD.
WE CARE ABOUT OUR PROPERTIES A GREAT DEAL.
I THINK A LOT OF US FEEL WE GOT A LITTLE BIT BLINDSIDED TIME-WISE ON THIS PROPOSAL.
I LIVE, I'M OUR PROPERTY, MY WIFE NANCY AND I ARE IN THE CENTER ADJOINING, UH, NUMBER 17, THAT'S BEEN DISCUSSED.
AND, AND, AND, UH, NUMBER 14 WE'RE IN NUMBER 16.
OUR HOME WAS DESIGNED BY HOWARD BARN STONE, ALSO CLOSE TO TO, TO JOHN STAUB.
AND JOHN HOWARD WAS A COLLEAGUE OF MINE.
I'M A SENIOR PROFESSOR OF ARCHITECTURE AT THE UNIVERSITY OF HOUSTON, WHERE I CONTINUE TO BE ON THE FACULTY.
UH, WE'RE IMP ALL IMPRESSED BY THE DETAIL OF CONCERN YOU'VE HAD FOR PRESERVATION.
OBVIOUSLY YOU TAKE IT VERY SERIOUSLY.
YOU'RE CONCERNED ABOUT DETAILS, YOU'RE CONCERNED ABOUT AUTHENTICITY, YOU'RE CONCERNED ABOUT PRESERVATION.
THIS ADDITION YOU, AND WE WANNA BE WELCOMING TO OUR NEW NEIGHBORS.
UNDERSTAND THAT THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT TO US.
BUT THIS NEW EDITION, THE SCALE IS VERY, VERY OFFENSIVE TO US.
IT'S, AS I AS HAS BEEN MENTIONED, IT'S RIGHT ONLINE WITH THE ENTRANCE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
IT'S, UH, IT, IT CHANGES THE SCALE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND, AND BASICALLY, UH, IT'S GOING TO AFFECT OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE CHARACTER OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD FOR A VERY LONG TIME TO COME.
AND SO WITH THAT, WE JOIN ALL OF THE OTHER SPEAKERS IN SAYING WE HOPE THAT THIS, UH, THE PROPOSAL IS DENIED AND, UH, IS NOT THAT WE OBJECT AS TO SMALL REASONABLE CHANGES TO MAKE THE HOUSE MORE, UH, UTILITARIAN FOR THE NEIGHBORS MOTION GRANT.
BUT WE DO CARE ABOUT THE CHARACTER OF THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, THIS WAS THE LAST SPEAKER WHO WAS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK, BUT THERE COULD BE OTHERS IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK.
AND IF SO, WOULD YOU PLEASE STAND AND APPROACH THE
[02:10:01]
PODIUM? OKAY, NOT HEARING, I'M GONNA CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT THIS TIME.CAN I ASK A QUESTION, MR. YES, SURE.
MAY I SUGGEST SINCE A RECOMMENDATION AT LEAST FROM THE AUDIENCE HAS BEEN THAT THEY, THEY MAY PREFER A DEFERRAL OR MAY REQUEST A DEFERRAL, UM, THAT YOU LEAVE THE HEARING OPEN UNTIL YOU HAVE A MOTION TO EITHER TAKE ACTION OR DO A DEFERRAL AND THAT WILL HOLD THE HEARING OPEN.
I WILL, I WILL HOLD THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN.
UH, YES, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR MR. KYLE OR THE, YES.
YOU'RE REPRESENTING THE, THE OWNER, CORRECT.
SO YES TO MS. MICKELSON'S POINT.
UM, CLEARLY THE, THE TONE IN THE ROOM IS, UM, THAT, THAT THIS NEEDS A LITTLE MORE WORK FROM THE NEIGHBOR'S PERSPECTIVE.
SO THAT WAS MY QUESTION TO YOU.
DO, DO YOU AND OR THE APPLICANT HAVE AN APPETITE FOR DEFERRING THIS PROJECT TO WORK? OH, OF COURSE.
WE ALREADY, WITH THIS, WE ALREADY MODIFIED IT, UM, LAST WEEK FOR, FROM COMMENTS THAT WERE GIVEN.
SO IT'S, UM, I'M HAPPY TO MODIFY IT.
I'M SURE THE OWNER OR I THINK THE OWNER WOULD NEED TO BE CONSULTED, OF COURSE.
AND THEY'RE NOT HERE FOR ME TO ASK, BUT, UH, I DON'T HAVE ANY PROBLEM WITH IT, NO.
UH, COULD YOU SPEAK TO SOME OF THE QUESTIONS THAT WERE RAISED ABOUT THE VARIOUS ADDITIONS, LIKE THE EARLY ADDITIONS, UH, MADE TO THE STRUCTURE? SO I DID, I DID NOT HAVE ACCESS TO INFORMATION ABOUT THE EXACT DATES OF THE ADDITIONS THAT WERE MADE.
UM, I, I DO WISH I'D HAD THAT INFORMATION SOONER, ALTHOUGH I DON'T KNOW THAT THERE'S A, UH, TO ME, I WOULD'VE RESTORED IT BACK TO THE ORIGINAL, UM, THE FIRST, THE FIRST FOOTPRINT, UM, BECAUSE I LIKED THAT.
I JUST HAPPENED TO LIKE THAT ONE BETTER.
UM, AND IT SEEMS LIKE, YOU KNOW, IF THERE'S A RULE THAT WE HAVE TO KEEP SOMETHING THAT WAS FROM 1931, I THINK THAT'S FINE.
IT'S NOT GONNA HURT ANYTHING TO KEEP THAT ADDITION.
I THINK THE ONES ON THE BACK ARE DESTRUCTIVE TO THE HOUSE.
THAT ONE ON TOP OF THE EXISTING CARPORT IS NOT DESTRUCTIVE TO THE HOUSE.
THE CROSSLIGHT AND THE ENTIRE INTENT OF THE HOUSE OF THIS PERIOD, TO ME, IS DESTROYED BY THE ADDITIONS THAT ARE ON THE BACK THAT WE'RE REMOVING.
SO I DON'T HAVE ANY PROBLEM WITH KEEPING, AND I DON'T THINK THE OWNER WOULD EITHER KEEPING THE ADDITION THAT'S ABOVE THE EXISTING CARPORT OR THE ORIGINAL CARPORT THAT'S NO LONGER A CARPORT.
BUT, UM, I WOULD, I DON'T KNOW IF ANY OF THE OTHER ADDITIONS ARE FROM PREVIOUS TO 50 YEARS AGO.
WELL, I THINK THAT IS SOMETHING THAT HOPEFULLY IN A DEFERRAL THAT WORKING WITH STAFF OR AT THE GUIDANCE OF STAFF, UM, THAT COULD BE UNEARTHED A LITTLE BIT BECAUSE I, I THINK THERE IS A VALID, UM, UM, ADDITION TO THE CONVERSATION THAT THE PERIOD OF SIGNIFICANCE HERE IS, IS BROADER THAN JUST THE DATE OF CONSTRUCTION MM-HMM
UM, AND, YOU KNOW, LEARNING MORE ABOUT THE 1931 EDITION, HOW MUCH DID IT INCLUDE, IF ANY, OFF THE REAR OF THE HOUSE, I THINK WOULD BE HELPFUL TO, I THINK TO THE CONVERSATION GOING FORWARD.
WAS IT JUST THE ADDITION OVER THE CARPORT, THE ENCLOSURE AND ADDITION OVER THE CARPORT? OR WAS IT SOME OF THE, THE MASSING BEHIND? SO GENERALLY WHEN, WHEN I WALK INTO HOUSES OF THIS PERIOD, YOU CAN SEE, UM, OVER THE STAIR TO A LIGHT TO A WINDOW.
LIKE ALMOST EVERYONE I'VE EVER KNOWN HAS YOU SEE THROUGH.
AND VERY OFTEN THAT'S A PIECE THAT GETS ADDED ONTO, AND THAT HAS HAPPENED HERE WHERE THE STAIRS IS VERY INTERIORIZED.
SO TO ME, EVEN IF THAT IS POST OR PRE 50 YEARS, I WOULD ARGUE THAT IT SHOULD BE REMOVED.
AND THE PIECE THAT'S ON THE BACK OF THE LIVING ROOM DESTROYS THE LIGHT AND CIRCULATION OF THE LIVING ROOM.
SO, I MEAN, I WOULD STILL THINK, UH, THE OWNERS AND I WOULD WANT TO REMOVE THE BACK ADDITIONS, UM, IF, BUT IF THERE'S A, UH, TO ME THERE WOULD BE A COMPELLING RULE THAT THE SUBSEQUENT ADDITION DAMAGED THE ORIGINAL HOUSE.
I DON'T THINK THAT'S THE CASE WITH THE ONE OVER THE ORIGINAL CARPORT.
I DON'T THINK IT DAMAGED THE HOUSE.
I JUST THINK IT D MADE IT DIFFERENT.
BUT, UM, I WOULD HOPE THAT WE COULD NOT BE HELD COMPLETELY TO THAT RULE IF WE FEEL LIKE THE ADDITION THAT WAS MADE MORE THAN 50 YEARS AGO WAS NOT A BENEFICIAL ADDITION TO THE HOUSE.
BUT I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S THE CASE OR NOT.
YEAH, NO, I, I MEAN, I THINK, YES, THERE'S PLENTY OF SUBJECTIVITY IN THE WORK THAT WE DO, BUT MORE DOCUMENTATION SO THAT IT'S, IT'S CLEAR CLEARER IN THE APPLICATION VERSUS A BLANKET STATEMENT THAT, YOU KNOW, WE WOULD DEMOLISH.
YEAH, NO, ONLY REMOVING, UH, LATER ADDITIONS.
I, I JUST, UM, UH, THE, THE GOAL HERE WAS TO TRY TO RESTORE THE HOUSE TO ITS ORIGINAL CONDITION, NOT TO HAVE THESE ADDITIONS ON THE BACK.
MOSTLY THEY'RE THE ONES THAT I FIND DIFFICULT TO LEAVE BECAUSE THEY ARE DETRIMENTAL TO ME, TO THE FEEL OF THE HOUSE INSIDE AND OUT.
WELL, WITHIN, EXCEPT YOU'RE ADDING A SIGNIFICANT
[02:15:01]
MAST OF A NEW ADDITION.SO YOU MAY FEEL THAT THAT'S MORE, UM, HONORING THE HOUSE MORE THE NEIGHBORS.
I DON'T, DON'T FEEL THAT AT THIS POINT, OR AT LEAST AT THIS POINT IN THE DESIGN.
SO I, I JUST, AGAIN, WE'RE ALL, THEY'RE ALL LEVELS OF SUBJECTIVITY HERE.
I JUST, I THINK WHAT I MEAN IS THAT THE OWNERS, FROM WHAT I KNOW, WOULD PROBABLY RATHER STILL REMOVE THE BACK ADDITIONS AND MAKE THEIR ADDITIONS SMALLER RATHER THAN KEEP THE BACK ADDITIONS IF I HAD TO SPEAK FOR THEM.
I DON'T KNOW THAT, BUT I THINK SO.
AND IF I MAY ASK THAT, I MEAN, WHAT YOU'RE DESCRIBING, I THINK IT'S, UH, MANY OF THE HOMES NOT BY JOHN STAUB AND MANY OF HIS, OF HIS, UH, COLLEAGUES AT THE TIME, AGAIN, BEFORE CONDITIONING.
UM, THESE HOMES WERE, WERE DESIGNED TO BE ONE ROOM DEEP.
AND I THINK WHAT, WHAT I'M HEARING YOU SAY IS THAT IN YOUR, IN YOUR MIND, YOUR GOAL WITH THIS DESIGN WAS TO SORT OF REESTABLISH THE ONE ROOM DEEP ELEMENT.
SO THAT ROOMS COULD HAVE WINDOWS ON TWO OR POSSIBLY THREE SIDES OF, OF SAY, LARGER ROOMS. YES, EXACTLY.
AND THAT, THAT'S HOW MANY OF THESE HOMES WERE BUILT PRIOR TO AIR, FORCED AIR.
BUT, UH, DO YOU NEED ANYTHING ELSE? I HAVE A QUESTION.
UM, DID YOU STUDY THE APPEARANCE OF THE HOUSE FROM THAT ROAD THAT SERVES AS A SORT OF ENTRANCE TO THE CIRCULAR ROAD THAT THE HOUSE IS ON? WELL, I, I LIVE TWO DOORS, TWO STREETS DOWN, SO I, I GO THERE A LOT.
I'M JUST, I KNOW IT PRETTY WELL.
I'M JUST, I MEAN, I THINK I AM, I'M NOT, I'M, I'M CONFIDENT THAT YOU KNOW IT.
I THINK THAT, UM, WHEN PRESENTED WITH A 3D MODEL, UM, IT'S NOT CLEAR TO ME HOW THE HOUSE IS BEING, UH, ADJUSTED.
HOW THE MASSING OR THE ELEVATION, UH, IS BEING ATTUNED TO WHAT'S AROUND IT SO MUCH.
I, I'M, IT SEEMS MORE THAT THE HOUSE IS BEING CONSIDERED ALMOST AS AN OBJECT IN ITSELF.
AND I, I, I JUST, I THINK THAT THAT DUE TO THE UN UNUSUAL CONDITION OF THE HOUSE BEING ON A CIRCULAR SITE WITH A ROAD AROUND IT, ORDINARILY WE MIGHT CARE MORE ABOUT THE FRONT ELEVATION AND NOT SO MUCH ABOUT THE SIDES.
'CAUSE THERE WOULD BE NEIGHBORS THERE, BUT SINCE THERE ARE NO NEIGHBORS THERE, THAT ELEVATION DOES BECOME QUITE IMPORTANT.
UM, I MEAN, 1, 1, 1 THING I'M NOT QUITE SURE OF HEARING YOU DESCRIBE THE DESIGN, SEEING THE MATERIALS THAT HAVE BEEN PRESENTED IS WHAT IS THE, THE STRATEGY FOR DETERMINING THE SIZES OF THOSE MASSING THOSE MASSES THAT YOU'RE ADDING TO THE BACK? UM, I, I, MAYBE THAT COULD BE CLEAR.
WELL, ONE OF THE PROBLEMS NOW IS THAT YOU CAN'T, YOU CAN BARELY PULL A CAR INTO THE GARAGE 'CAUSE IT'S SO LOW.
IT'S, AND THAT'S NOT UNCOMMON OF THE OLD GARAGES.
SOME OF THEM DON'T EVEN FIT CARS.
AND THAT IS, THE OWNERS HAVE TOLD ME THAT THEY CAN'T GET, THEY WOULDN'T REALLY BE ABLE TO PARK IN THE GARAGE.
SO IT DOES HAVE TO BE RAISED A LITTLE BIT.
BUT THIS IS ALSO, IS THIS A TWO STORY GARAGE? IT'S A TWO STORY GARAGE NOW.
IT JUST HAS A VERY, THIS IS VERY LOW AND CRAMPED, BUT THEY, I'M SURE CAN HAVE A LOWER GARAGE THAN WHAT I'VE DRAWN.
BUT IT DOES NEED TO BE A LITTLE HIGHER THAN IT'S NOW.
I, I THINK THE DOORS ARE SIX FOOT EIGHT TALL TIME AND CONVERSATION.
I MEAN, SIMILARLY, I HAD A QUESTION ABOUT THE 16 FEET IN FRONT.
I MEAN, COULD THE SITE BE REWORKED WHERE THE GARAGE IS RECESSED? YEAH.
SO IT SEEMS LIKE TIME, IF YOU'RE AMENABLE PROPERTY OR THE OWNER OWNER'S AMENABLE THAT THIS IS A DEFERRAL.
AND WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TO WORK WITH THE NEIGHBORS AS YOU HAVE BEFORE.
I DON'T SEE ANY, I DON'T SEE ANY REASON NOT TO, UH, PUSH THE GARAGE FURTHER BACK.
WE DID IT ONCE ALREADY AND IT CAN BE DONE AGAIN FURTHER BACK.
UM, WE DID, WE DID, UH, UH, WELL ANYWAY, I THINK THAT'S TOTALLY FINE.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THAT MOTION? ALL IN FAVOR? AYE.
ANY OPPOSED? ANY ABSTENTIONS? THAT MOTION PASSES NEXT ON THE ITEM AGENDA IS B 15 POINT OF SPECIAL PRIVILEGE.
I HAVE ANOTHER APPOINTMENT AFTER THIS, SO.
WOULD YOU GUYS LIKE TO TAKE A BREAK? NO, I THINK WE'D LIKE TO WORK THROUGH THIS.
WE'RE STILL TECHNICALLY YOU'VE GOT TWO MINUTES, TERRANCE.
AS LONG AS YOU DON'T SAY GOOD MORNING.
[02:20:01]
WELL, GOOD EVENING CHAIRPERSON AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.UH, THIS IS STAFF PERSON TERRENCE JACKSON.
TODAY I SUBMIT FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION ITEM B 16 1-806-DECATUR STREET IN THE OLD SI SIXTH WARD HISTORIC DISTRICT.
IN THIS APPLICATION, THE APPLICANT PROPOSES TO DEMOLISH THE EXISTING 216 SQUARE FOOT DETACHED CARPORT.
ADD A TWO STORY ADDITION AT THE NORTH WALL OF THE EXISTING RESIDENCE.
THE ADDITION WILL, WILL CONSIST OF A 564 SQUARE FOOT CONDITION LIVING SPACE AND ONE BEDROOM, ONE BATH ON THE SECOND FLOOR.
THE ADDITION OF A 534 SQUARE FOOT ATTACHED CARPORT ON THE FIRST FLOOR.
AND THE NEW ROOF WILL BE A FOUR AND A HALF OVER 12 PITCH WITH THE HIP ROOF.
THE NEW ROOF WILL BE CONSTRUCTED WITH 30 YEAR COMPOSITION SINGLES.
AND, UH, THEY ARE PROPOSING TO ADD WOOD SIDING TO MATCH THE EXISTING PROFILE.
IN ADDITION, UM, THERE ARE TWO FIREWALLS THAT RUN PARALLEL WITH THE PROPERTY LINES.
UM, AND THAT IS BECAUSE, UH, THE, THE STRUCTURE IS THREE FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINE.
SO, UM, AS PER CITY CODE, THEY ARE ASKING TO ASKING TO KEEP THOSE WALLS.
UM, WITH THAT BEING SAID, UM, STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THE APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS UNDER THE CONDITION THAT THE OWNER AND THE AGENT WORK WITH STAFF TO DEVELOP A DIFFERENT WINDOW SOLUTION.
AND THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? SORRY, THE AGENT, UH, DAVID, JEFF IS HERE TO SPEAK AS WELL.
THERE ANY QUESTIONS TO STAFF FROM THE COMMISSION? COMMISSIONER MCNEIL.
TERRANCE, WHAT'S THE STAFF'S OBJECTION TO THE WINDOWS, UH, IN THE PRESENTED MATERIAL? UH, SO STAFF, THE, THE WINDOWS SEEMS QUITE LARGE.
UM, WE ACTUALLY WENT, DROVE, I ACTUALLY STAFF ACTUALLY DROVE AROUND OLD SIX WARD TO SEE IF WE CAN FIND A, UH, WINDOW THAT WAS IN THE CONTEXT AREA TO MATCH THIS.
UM, UNFORTUNATELY THERE WASN'T.
I THINK THERE IS A QUESTION AS FAR AS ALSO WITH THE POSITIONING OF THE WINDOW.
HOWEVER, WE ALSO UNDERSTAND THAT, UM, THIS, THIS HOME IS ACTUALLY PERFECTLY POSITIONED FOR A GREAT VIEW OF DOWNTOWN.
SO WE UNDERSTAND WHY THAT'S BEEN DONE.
UM, HOWEVER, WE JUST FEEL THAT THE, THE, THE WINDOW SEEMS TO BE A BIT LARGER THAN WHAT WE'RE ACCUSTOMED TO SEEING IN AN OLD SIX WARD.
UM, AND THAT'S THE REASON WHY WE WOULD ASK TO WORK WITH STAFF AND, AND THE AGENT IS ACTUALLY HERE TO DEFEND HIS, UH, STANCE ON THAT.
SO IT'S NOTHING TO DO WITH THE MATERIALS, IT'S JUST THE SIZE OF THE TWO.
I DUNNO IF THEY'RE OPERABLE OR FIXED, BUT THOSE TWO WINDOWS ON THE CORNER THAT WOULD THEN FACE DOWNTOWN, IS THAT ACCURATE? YES.
SO THE, UH, THE ONE THAT'S BEING SHOWED THERE IS, YOU CAN SEE IT FROM SABINE STREET, THE ONE THAT'S ACTUALLY ON THE FRONT FACADE, I THINK YOU GET A BETTER VIEW OF, OF DOWNTOWN.
UM, BUT AGAIN, IT'S, IT'S JUST SEEMS LIKE THE SCALE OF IT IS, IS QUITE LARGE AND WE'RE JUST NOT ACCUSTOMED TO SEEING SUCH A THING IN SIXTH WARD.
UM, WE'RE OPEN TO MAYBE HAVING A, A, A DIFFERENT LAYOUT BECAUSE RIGHT NOW IT SEEMS LIKE THE WAY THIS, THAT IT, THAT IT LOOKS, IT LOOKS LIKE A FAUX MUON AND MORE OF A PICTURE WINDOW THAN WHAT WE'RE ACTUALLY ACCUSTOMED TO SEEING.
SO THAT'S OUR, THAT'S WHERE OUR POSITION IS ON THAT ONE.
AND TERRANCE, IF I MAY ASK YOU, IT'S, IT'S EXISTING ON THE HOUSE, BUT THE WINDOW ASSEMBLAGE ON THE FRONT MASS OF THE HOUSE YES.
IS, IS ALSO, THERE'S A QUESTION ABOUT THAT BECAUSE THIS, THERE WAS A, A C OF A FOR THIS PROJECT AND WHAT WAS IMPLEMENTED ISN'T, DOESN'T ACTUALLY MATCH WHAT WAS APPROVED.
SO, UM, THE OVERALL, THE OVERALL SIZE OF THE OPENING I THINK DOES, BUT THE ACTUAL, UM, WHAT WHAT HAPPENS WITHIN THE OVERALL OPENING IS DIFFERENT THAN WHAT ACTUALLY GOT APPROVED.
BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT WAS BUILT.
WHAT WAS, UH, SUBMITTED FOR THE PREVIOUS COA, UM, THE MIDDLE PANE WAS A BIT LARGER AND THE, THE TWO OUTER PANES WERE, WERE SMALLER.
SO, UM, THAT WAS PRESENTED THAT, THAT IS WHAT WAS PRESENTED.
BUT WHAT IS WHAT WAS ACTUALLY BUILT IS THAT IT WAS SEPARATED INTO THREE EQUAL PANES.
SO I MEAN, AND THE HOUSE IS NOT CONTRIBUTING.
SO THIS HOME, UM, AS YOU CAN SEE, WE FOUND SANBORN MAPS FROM WHAT SAY TO BE BEFORE THE FIFTIES THAT SHOWED A HOUSE THERE.
UM, WE'RE NOT SURE IF THIS IS THE EXACT HOUSE THAT WAS THERE.
AND THE SECOND ONE THAT'S BEING SHOWN THERE.
[02:25:01]
IT LOOKS LIKE THAT HOUSE WAS MOVED AND SOMETHING ELSE WAS BUILT.UM, BUT THE WINDOWS ON THIS HOUSE WERE ALL ALUMINUM.
THEY WERE APPROVED BY COMMISSION, UH, I BELIEVE IN 22.
UM, SO, UM, WE DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE AN ISSUE WITH THE FACT THAT THE WINDOW THAT'S BEING PROPOSED IS AN ALUMINUM WINDOW BECAUSE IT MATCHES WHAT THEY HAVE CURRENTLY.
AND THIS IS A NON-CONTRIBUTING HOME.
HOWEVER, IT'S JUST THE SIZE AND, AND THE FACT THAT IT LOOKS LIKE A FAMONT.
AND SO YOU MEAN THERE ARE LIMITED WINDOWS? YES.
FOR SALE
AND THE OTHER ASPECT OF THE HOUSE IS, LIKE YOU SAID, THE AGE IS QUE IT'S, IT'S IN QUESTION.
AND, BUT I GUESS WHAT IS IT PRESENTED FEELS LIKE IT'S SORT OF A FIFTIES YES.
HOME BASED ON THE SIDING AND THE WINDOWS THAT WERE EVIDENT ON THE HOUSE.
EVERYTHING, I MEAN, IF YOU WALK THE SITE, EVERYTHING FEELS LIKE A TRADITIONAL, UM, PEERING BEAM, HISTORIC CRAFTSMAN HOME JUST BECAUSE OF THE WAY THAT THE, THE OPENINGS ARE PRESENTED, WHERE THE OPENINGS ARE LOCATED, UM, HAS NICE SHUTTERS ON THEM, WHICH WE KNOW PROBABLY CAME AFTERWARDS.
BUT IT DOES APPEAR TO BE A, UH, HOME THAT WAS, UH, BUILT IN A PERIOD OF SIGNIFICANCE IN OH SIX WARD.
I DO, WE DO HAVE A SPEAKER SIGNED UP WHO MAYBE COULD ADD, ADD MORE LEVI TO YOU TO THE CONVERSATION.
UM, I'M GONNA OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING AND UM, AND HAVE ONE SPEAKER SIGN UP, WHICH IS, UH, DAVID JEFFERS.
I'M DAVID JEFF, I'M THE APPLICANT AND THE AGENT FOR THE OWNER AND THE ARCHITECT FOR THE PROJECT.
UM, THIS HOUSE WAS ALSO DECEPTIVE TO ME WHEN I FIRST SHOWED UP.
IT LOOKED LIKE IT HAD BEEN REMODELED BECAUSE OF THE TYPE OF SIDING, THE PITCH OF THE ROOF.
THERE'S ACTUALLY A TRIANGULAR GABLE VENT ON THE FRONT, WHICH ARE ALL TELLS THAT IT'S NOT A HISTORIC CRAFTSMAN.
AND I THOUGHT IT HAD BEEN REMODELED, BUT IT'S ALSO BUILT IN A WAY THAT MAKES IT SEEM LIKE IT WAS BUILT IN THE FIFTIES.
THE SPACING IS MUCH TIGHTER IN THE RAFTERS CEILING JOISTS.
IT'S A FIFTIES HOUSE THAT WAS BUILT IN SOME WAY TO LOOK LIKE A CRAFTSMAN BUNGALOW.
UM, BUT I'M MOSTLY HERE TO TALK ABOUT THE WINDOW.
UM, WHAT WE PROPOSED HERE IS THE ALTERNATE.
THE OWNERS INITIALLY WANTED A, YOU KNOW, SINGLE LARGE PIECE OF GLASS TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE VIEWS OF DOWNTOWN, UH, FROM THAT CORNER.
AND I'D LIKE TO GET JUST A LITTLE MORE FEEDBACK ABOUT WHAT WE SHOULD LOOKING, WHAT WE SHOULD BE LOOKING AT IN TERMS OF PROPORTION.
I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW IF THE 3D VIEWS SHOW IT, BUT THE ADDITION IS SETBACK.
WELL, MORE THAN 50% OF THE LOT DEPTH FROM THE STREET.
UM, THE HOUSE ITSELF, YOU KNOW, EVEN THOUGH IT'S A FOUR AND A HALF OR A FOUR AND 12, UM, IT DOES HAVE THE GABLE, WHICH MEANS THAT WHEN YOU'RE STANDING IN THE RIGHT OF WAY ITSELF, IT'S BASICALLY IMPOSSIBLE TO SEE THE FRONT ELEVATION OF THE HOUSE.
PART OF THE REASON WE DID THE HIP KEPT THE PLATE HEIGHT DOWN TO NINE ON THE SECOND FLOOR WAS TO TRY TO MAKE IT AS INVISIBLE AS POSSIBLE.
I DO TAKE SOME ISSUE WITH THE CONSIDERATION OF THE VIEW FROM SABINE STREET.
WE'RE ALREADY DEALING WITH A LOT OF CONSTRAINTS.
AND THEN TO ALSO PUT THE RESTRICTIONS IN A WAY OF A CORNER LOT ON US BECAUSE OF THE ACCIDENT OF THE CURRENT PARKING LOT.
DEVELOPMENT IS VERY SLIGHTLY UNFAIR IN MY OPINION.
JUST A PERSONAL OPINION THOUGH.
UM, SO THE, THE GUIDELINES FOR OLD SIX WARD DO SPECIFY VERY CLEARLY THAT THE WINDOW PROPORTIONS SHOULD BE EITHER SQUARE OR VERTICAL.
UM, THE PROPORTIONS THAT WE HAVE DONE, THE OVERALL SIZE OF THE GLASS MATCHES EXACTLY WHAT THE FRONT WINDOW IS.
UM, AND WHAT WE TRIED TO DO IS MAINTAIN SOME OF THE LARGE PICTURE WINDOW FEEL BY DOING A SINGLE VERTICAL DIVISION.
UM, BUT MAKING IT A VERTICAL PROPORTION, WHICH IT IS EACH, EACH ONE OF THOSE LIGHTS IS FOUR FEET BY FIVE FEET.
WE'VE GOT A GUARDRAIL BEHIND IT FOR A STAIR.
WE'RE LIMITED ON OUR HEIGHT BECAUSE WE'RE TRYING TO KEEP THE PLATE DOWN.
UM, WE'RE TRYING TO MAXIMIZE THOSE VIEWS.
AND THE 3D MODEL, I HATE TO SAY THIS 'CAUSE I CREATED IT, IS A LITTLE DECEPTIVE.
UM, THAT CENTER PORTION ISN'T A FALSE M OR A FALSE MULIAN IN ANY WAY.
IT WOULD ACTUALLY BE TWO WINDOW UNITS THAT WOULD BE MOLD TOGETHER.
SO THAT CENTER PORTION, EVEN THOUGH IT DOESN'T QUITE LOOK LIKE IT, UM, WOULD BE THE SIMILAR TO THE THICKNESS OF WHAT YOU'RE SEEING ON THAT FRONT WINDOW, WHICH DOES APPEAR TO BE AN ALUMINUM FRONT WINDOW FROM THE FIFTIES OR SIXTIES.
AND THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY TO ASK QUESTION ABOUT THE WINDOWS.
I JUST LIKE SOME FEEDBACK ON WHAT'S NOT ACCEPTABLE ABOUT YES.
SINCE, SINCE YOU ASKED FOR FEEDBACK.
YEAH, I THINK MY, I MEAN, KUDOS TO YOU FOR, YOU KNOW, GETTING IN, DOING SOME RESEARCH AND TRYING TO FIGURE OUT
[02:30:01]
WHAT, WHAT THIS, YOU KNOW, THE PERIOD AND, AND, AND ANY, UM, CONSTRUCTION METHOD YOU COULD, YOU CAN DEDUCE.UM, I THINK AS WE, I THINK WE HAD SEEN THAT THE, THE WINDOW REPLACEMENT FROM 2022 WAS REPLACING WHAT WE THINK WAS THE, YOU KNOW, A 1950S ALUMINUM PICTURE WINDOW WITH TWO CASEMENTS ON EITHER SIDE.
THAT'S NOT WHAT YOU INHERITED HERE.
UM, SO WITHOUT
UM, AND SO THERE'S VERY LITTLE, UH, IT LOOKS VERY DISJOINTED TO ME.
AND THEN YOU HAVE THE CRAFTSMAN DOORS, WHICH
SO THERE, THERE'S JUST A, THERE'S, IT'S VERY HARD TO READ MM-HMM
SO MY, I GUESS MY QUESTION TO YOU WOULD BE, IS THERE AN APPETITE FOR GIVING YOUR, YOUR PROPERTY OWNER A PICTURE WINDOW OF SORTS IN THE ADDITION? UM, AND, AND PERHAPS, UH, TAKING ANOTHER STAB AT THAT FRONT WINDOW WITH THE PICTURE WINDOW AND THE TWO CASE MATS OR SOMETHING CLOSER TO WHAT WAS THERE BEFORE THE 2022 BOTCH AND THEN MIMICKING THAT CONFIGURATION.
IT'S, IT'S THE CONFIGURATION THAT I THINK IS THROWING ME OFF.
WE'VE GOT SOMETHING THAT'S WRONG ON THE BOTTOM THERE.
NOT YOUR FAULT, BUT NOT WHAT, NOT WHAT WAS THERE PRIOR TO 2022 THAT'S OFF AND NOW WE'RE ADDING SOMETHING UP ABOVE THAT IS IN CONFLICT WITH THAT AS WELL.
SO, SO I, I CAN SPEAK TO THE FRONT WINDOW.
SO I WAS NOT INVOLVED IN THE PREVIOUS COA FOR THE WINDOW REPLACEMENT.
THAT FRONT WINDOW IS AN ORIGINAL ALUMINUM WINDOW.
UM, YOU CAN SEE IT WHEN YOU GO THERE.
IT'S LIKE EIGHT INCH THICK SINGLE PANE IT IS TODAY.
THE OWNERS NEVER WENT THROUGH WITH THE FRONT WINDOW REPLACEMENT.
THEY, THE CURRENT OWNERS ARE THE ONES THAT SUBMITTED THAT COA UHHUH
AND ACCORDING TO THEM, THEY WENT THROUGH WITH THE WINDOW REPLACEMENT, BUT THEY NEVER REPLACED THE FRONT WINDOW.
UM, I'VE LIVED IN HOMES THAT HAVE THESE OLD ALUMINUM WINDOWS AND IT IS AN OLD ALUMINUM WINDOW.
I MEAN, THE GLASS IS SINGLE PANE, IT'S THIS THICK.
IT HAS THE, THE TRIANGLE BEAD THAT YOU SEE ON THE OUTSIDE WITH THE, WITH THE WINDOW PUTTY, BUT THE ONE OVER ONE THO THOSE FRONT WIN.
SO THE WINDOWS IN THE ADDITION ARE THINGS WE'RE PROPOSING, BUT THAT FRONT WINDOW THAT YOU SEE IN THE PHOTOS IS AN ORIGINAL WINDOW TO THE HOUSE.
IT LOOKS TO ME, JUST FROM LOOKING AT THE CONSTRUCTION OF IT, THAT IT'S AN ORIGINAL ALUMINUM WINDOW, WHICH THAT WASN'T REPLACED IN 2022 WAS NOT REPLACED BECAUSE IT LOOKS VERY DIFFERENT FROM THE INVENTORY PHOTO.
I THINK, AS I RECALL, THERE'S A PHOTOGRAPH OF THE HOME, WHICH IS DIFFERENT.
THE PICTURE WINDOW IS ACTUALLY WIDER THAN CURRENTLY.
AND IT APPEARED TO BE TWO CASEMENTS ON EITHER SIDE, WHICH SORT OF, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, LEND IT TO THAT FIFTIES, UM MM-HMM
I MEAN, CAN, CAN STAFF, CAN CAN TERRANCE CAN YOU BRING UP THAT IMAGE? IT'S, IT'S WEIRD.
IT'S LIKE, IT'S SOMETHING, THE INVENTORY PHOTOGRAPH ONE, THOSE, WELL, THERE THERE WAS ANOTHER ONE.
UM, THERE WAS A GOOGLE MAP PICTURE.
SO YEAH, LEMME JUST HAVE ANOTHER STAFF MEMBER.
UM, SO THAT WAS FROM THE REPORT.
UNFORTUNATELY, I DON'T HAVE PHOTOS FROM, WE CAN'T CONSIDER THAT.
I DIDN'T THINK THAT THAT WAS GONNA BE AN ISSUE HERE.
BUT, UM, UM, I THINK YOU CAN SEE, I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS PERMISSIBLE MIC, UH, MS. MICKELSON, BUT I THINK YOU CAN SEE ON GOOGLE MAPS, UM, WHEN YOU GO BACK TO THE, YOUR PREVIOUS PHOTOS THAT SEEM TO BE MORE, UM, MORE TELLING NO CAN SEE.
SO WE'VE, WELL I THINK, I GUESS THE COMMISSIONER WEER JACKSON.
SO IF HE REPLACED THE FRONT WINDOW WITH WINDOWS THAT LOOK LIKE THE ADDITION WINDOWS, ARE YOU HAPPY? NO, MY UM, I MEAN I, I THINK THIS IS PRETTY CLEAR THAT THOSE ARE ALUMINUM CASEMENT DIVIDED CASEMENT WINDOWS WITH A LARGER PICTURE WINDOW IN THE CENTER.
UM, IT'S HARD TO TELL BECAUSE THEY'RE INTERIOR.
CAN WE PUT THAT IN THE DOCUMENT CAMERA FOR THE RECORD? THIS TWO YEARS AGO THOUGH? SO PRIOR TO THE REPLACEMENT OF THESE ONE OVER ONES, THERE APPEARED TO BE SOMETHING ELSE THERE.
SO MY COUNT, MY, MY GUESS WAS,
[02:35:02]
YEAH, CAN YOU GO BACK WITH THAT AND THEN MIMIC SOMETHING MORE IN KEEPING WITH THAT UPSTAIRS DOCUMENT CAMERA PLEASE.OH, LET'S HOPE I DON'T GET A TEXT FROM A KID RIGHT NOW.
NOW FIX WHAT THEY'RE PROPOSING IS WE'RE DEALING WITH SOMETHING IN THE FRONT AND WE'RE MATCHING THAT.
SO HOW DO YOU KNOW WHAT, WHICH IS DIFFERENT FROM MACHINE? A I FRAME THAT I DON'T, WELL, I KNOW THAT THOSE ALUMINUM CASE WINDOWS SURROUNDING A, A PICTURE WINDOW WOULD'VE BEEN FROM THE EARLY 1950S.
IT APPEARS TO BE ALUMINUM, NOT STEEL.
IT COULD HAVE BEEN PAINTED STEEL.
IT COULD HAVE BEEN IN EARLIER WINDOW.
BUT FOR REFERENCE MORE THE SAME BECAUSE SEE THE MIDDLE PART'S WIDER.
NO, NOT IT'S WIDER, BUT CAR CAN YOU, KAREN, CAN YOU JUST CONFIRM, UM, THIS IS A, THIS IS AN OLDER IMAGE OF THE HOUSE SHOWING A DIFFERENT LIGHT PATTERN.
BUT THE, AND IN THE C OF A, UH, WAS GOING TO MATCH THAT PROPORTION AS IT HAD BEEN, BUT WITH NEW WINDOWS.
AND SO THAT'S, THAT'S WHY IT'S IT, THAT'S WHY IT APPEARED TO ME ANYWAY, THAT THE CURRENT WINDOWS WERE RECENT AND, AND THEY, AND THEY DEFINITELY DON'T MATCH THE C OF A YES.
AND, AND THE PHOTOGRAPH THAT WE'RE SEEING MATCHED THE C OF A SO THAT IT, IT, IT, IT ALL LIKE SOMETHING IS NOT AS AS AMISS.
SO, UM, THE, THE PICTURE THAT'S BEING SHOWN RIGHT NOW DOES, UH, LOOK LIKE THE PICTURE THAT WAS IN THE COA OF THE EXISTING AND THE WINDOWS THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE REPLACED WITH.
AND I THINK THAT'S WHEN STAFF REALIZED THAT THERE WAS A DIFFERENCE ONCE WE SAW THE, UH, NEW PHOTOS OF THE, UH, WINDOWS AS THEY ARE NOW.
SO, UM, YES, THE, THE, I THINK I STATED EARLIER THAT THE PANE IN THE MIDDLE WAS A BIT LARGER AND NOW IT SEEMS LIKE THREE EQUAL, UH, PANES OF GLASS.
SO I MEAN, SO THE CURRENT PROPERTY OWNERS APPLIED FOR THIS, THE WINDOW THAT THEY ACTUALLY PUT BACK AFTER WE APPROVED A COA IN 2022 DID NOT MEET WHAT WE APPROVED.
AS FAR AS THE COA THAT WE VIEWED FROM 2022 U ARE CORRECT.
SO AND SO THESE ARE THE SAME PEOPLE.
SO GIVEN THAT THESE ARE THE SAME PROPERTY OWNERS, I DON'T THINK IT WOULD BE UNREALISTIC TO ASK THEM TO, TO GO BACK AND, AND CONSIDER, UH, I I I DON'T KNOW WHAT WE LEGALLY CAN DO, KIM, BUT TO GO BACK AND SO IT'S, IT'S THE SAME OWNER AND DO WHAT WE APPROVED.
BUT I GUESS MY, BUT BACK TO THIS, THE, THE APPLICATION BEFORE US TODAY, THE REASON I WANTED THIS SHOWN WAS BECAUSE MY QUESTION IS, YOU KNOW, UH, YOU KNOW, WHAT IF THE WINDOW ON THE REAR EDITION WAS A PICTURE WINDOW WITH, WITH THIS, WELL IT COULD BE THIS OR EVEN JUST A BIGGER PICTURE WINDOW, BUT WITH HALF OF THE, THE SIDE, UM, I WOULD CALL LIKE A BAY AREA, YOU KNOW, WINDOW.
BUT THAT, THAT INSTEAD OF JUST BEING TWO EQUAL, EQUAL PLACES, WHAT IF, WHAT IF ONE OF THE TWO IS THE SAME WIDTH OF WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY ON THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE AND THE REST OF THE OPENINGS? THE OPENINGS STILL THE SAME SIZE IS A, IS NOW A WIDER PICTURE WINDOW THAN SHE SEEN IN THIS IMAGE.
BUT AT LEAST THERE'S, THERE'S SOMETHING ABOUT IT THAT'S IN THE DNA OF THE ORIGINAL FIFTIES HOME.
EVEN THOUGH YOU, YOU END UP WITH, UM, IN SOME WAYS A LARGER PIECE OF GLASS WITH A SMALLER PIECE OF WINDOW THAT I'M JUST, AND I'M JUST PUTTING OUT THERE AS A, IS THAT SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE WORTH LOOKING AT, I GUESS? OR IS, IS THAT, IS THAT A QUESTION FOR STAFF OR IS THAT A QUESTION? IT'S A QUESTION FOR MR. JEFFERS.
I THINK MR. JEFFS HAD ASKED FOR GUIDANCE ON, ON, WELL THE WINDOW UPSTAIRS AND THANK YOU CHAIR EK.
I MEAN THAT, I'M JUST SAYING I'M THROWN OFF BY THE WINDOW IN THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE.
'CAUSE IT'S, THERE'S NOTHING LIKE IT IN THE OLD SIX WARD.
SO I THINK WE HAVE TO IN THE OLD PERIOD OR THE FIFTIES OR ANY PERIOD.
SO IS THERE SOMETHING WE CAN DO TO DEAL WITH THE FRONT WINDOW ON THE HOUSE THAT WE THINK WAS ORIGINAL TO THE HOUSE AND NOW IS TAKEN OUT, BUT, OR WE, WE CAN'T DO A C OF R OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT? I MEAN, SOMEONE, IT'S NOT BEFORE YOU AS PART OF THE APPLICATION.
WE NEED TO, BUT THERE WAS NEED DIRECT HIM ON THE UPSTAIRS ADDITION.
NOTHING ELSE OR PERMITTING THIS.
SO, BUT, BUT THERE MAY BE A REFERRAL TO THE LOWER WINDOW IS APPROVED IF IT, IF IT, IF IT WAS IMPLEMENTED OUTSIDE THE CO, OUTSIDE OF THE C OF A, THAT THAT'S ALL.
I JUST WANT TO COMMENT ON THAT.
AND I THINK FOR ME THERE ISN'T ANYTHING WE CAN DO ABOUT IT.
IT WAS, SHOULD HAVE BEEN CAUGHT DURING THE INSPECTION PHASE.
I MEAN, I THINK THOSE PERMITS WOULD'VE, THE PERMIT WAS PROBABLY INSPECTED AND FINALIZED AND IT'S JUST THAT THE PERSON DIDN'T NOTICE THAT IT WASN'T AS DRAWN IN THE, IN THE DRAWING EITHER THAT ROMAN THAT FRANKLY I HAVEN'T, AND I'M SORRY I'M GONNA SAY THIS 'CAUSE FORTUNATELY
[02:40:01]
I, I HAVE TO STEP OUT, BUT I, WHEN MR. JEFFERS ASK BACK TO PRESENTATION THE QUESTION ABOUT GUIDANCE FOR UPSTAIRS, I, I THINK IN SEEKING THE APPROVAL OF THIS COMMISSIONER, IT WOULD, MY COUNSEL IS TO TRY AND AND DO SOMETHING THAT IS A NOD TO WHAT WAS THERE ORIGINALLY AND WHAT SHOULD BE THERE.WHAT WE AS A COMMISSION PERMITTED OR WELL, I MEAN I GUESS PART OF THEA AS PART OF THE COA THAT WAS NOT, I MEAN I I'VE GOT A LITTLE SOUR TASTE BECAUSE OF THE PROPERTY OWNERS DIDN'T REPLACE WITH WHAT WAS APPROVED IN THE COA BY THIS COMMISSION.
I I'M NOT CLAIMING THAT THAT WAS INTENTIONAL OR NEFARIOUS.
MAYBE IT WAS A MISTAKE AND THEN IT WASN'T CALLED AN INSPECTION.
BUT I, I WOULD HAVE MUCH MORE, I WOULD BE MUCH MORE OPEN TO, TO BEING, TO BEING OPEN TO SOMETHING UPSTAIRS IF THAT FRONT WINDOW WAS, WAS REPLACED AS IT AS WE PASSED, AS WE APPROVED.
I GUESS I'M NOT SEEING ANYTHING IN THE DOCUMENTS ABOUT WHAT WAS PASSED OR APPROVED IN 20 QUESTION 2022, WE APPROVED THE REPLACEMENT OF THAT FRONT WINDOW.
WITH WHAT? WITH EXACTLY IN, WITH THE SAME LIGHT PATTERN AS IN THE PHOTOGRAPH, THE FIXED WINDOW THAT WAS WIDE AND TWO SLIMMER SIDE WINDOWS.
THAT'S NOT WHAT WAS REPLACED AS, AS PROVEN BY PHOTOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE.
THERE ARE NOW THREE EQUAL PART WINDOWS.
IT'S NOT WHAT WE APPROVED IN 2022.
IT APPEARS THAT THAT'S A DIFFERENT ENFORCEMENT ISSUE THOUGH.
BUT I THINK THE RELEVANCE, IF I MAY SAY IS THAT IF ORDINARILY WE MIGHT IN OFFERING GUIDANCE LOOK TO THE ORIGINAL HOUSE, BUT IN THIS CASE IF THERE'S SOME ERROR, IF WE KNOW OF SOME DISCREPANCY IN THE ORIGINAL HOUSE, WE CAN'T USE IT AS A PRECEDENT FOR MAKING RECOMMENDATIONS WITHOUT SOME, YOU KNOW, CONCERN.
SO I WOULD SAY THAT'S HOW IT BECOMES RELEVANT.
BUT, UH, I'M NOT SAYING IT'S NOT RELEVANT.
I'M SAYING THAT THAT'S NOT PART OF THIS APPLICATION THOUGH.
BUT THE APPLICANT ASK, OR THE APPLICANT'S AGENT ASK FOR RECOMMEND GUIDANCE, I THINK WAS YOUR TERM ON HOW TO ADDRESS THOSE UPPER WINDOWS.
SO THIS COMMISSIONER'S GUIDANCE IS LOOKED TO WHAT WAS ORIGINAL AND WHAT SHOULD THAT FRONT WINDOW SHOULD LOOK LIKE.
IDEALLY YOU COULD CONVINCE YOUR PROPERTY OWNERS TO DO THAT FRONT WINDOW THE WAY IT WAS APP APPLIED AND PERMITTED.
BUT IF NOT, I STILL THINK THAT THAT THAT'S, IT WAS EVEN STRANGER.
THEY APPARENTLY GOT AN OLD 11 WINDOW TO REPLACE IT WITH.
I MEAN IT, IT, IT JUST, IT'S A VERY ODD THING.
BUT COMMISSIONER, DO YOU HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION? I MEAN, I THINK WE'RE CLOSE TO LEAST MAKING I I A MOTION I COMING FORWARD.
SO WE KEEP, OR I KEEP SAYING WE NEED TO NOT MIMIC HISTORIC FEATURES ON THE BUILDING MM-HMM
ON THE NEW PART OF THE BUILDING.
AND SO TO LIKE COPY THE OLD DESIGN LITERALLY FOR THE NEW WINDOW, I THINK CONTRADICTS THAT POINT OF VIEW.
AND I THINK MAKING THEM PUT BACK THE WINDOW ON THE FRONT IS A DIFFERENT ISSUE THAT I WOULD SUPPORT.
BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT WE CAN TALK ABOUT THAT NOW.
BUT ON THE ADDITION TO CLARIFY COMMISSIONER CASH, I'M NOT SAYING REPLICATE IT.
I'M SAYING IN THE, IN THE LIGHT PATTERN, I THINK YOU CAN DO A NOD TO THAT THREE PART WINDOW WITHOUT PUTTING THE EXACT WINDOW THERE.
BUT THE THREE PART WINDOW MIMICS THE ORIGINAL WINDOW ON THE HOUSE AND WE WE'RE WE'RE DIRECTED TO MAKE THE ADDITION DIFFERENT THAN THE HIS THAN, BUT IT'S A NON-CONTRIBUTING HOUSE.
SO I, I MEAN YEAH, BUT I THINK THE WINDOW CAN BE DIFFERENT ANYHOW BECAUSE THE, IT'S A NON-CONTRIBUTING HOUSE.
THE PROPOSED WINDOWS BUILD SIX FOUR DESIGN GUIDELINES SHOW WHAT IS PROPOSED AS PART OF WHAT THEY ACCEPT AND THEIR WINDOW GUIDELINES.
BUT BUT, BUT CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, THE PROPOSED WINDOWS ON THE ADDITION THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ARE FIXED WINDOWS.
THEY'RE NOT OPERABLE AT LEAST ONE OF THE ON THE FRONT.
SO THE WINDOW IS NEVER GONNA BE AN EXACT COPY.
ALL WE'RE, THE SEMANTICS I THINK WE'RE IN RIGHT NOW IS THE PROPORTIONS OF THAT WINDOW, UH, RELATIVE TO THE DNA OF THAT HOUSE IN THE FRONT.
AND, AND, AND, AND THE, WHAT IS, WHAT IS DIFFERENT PERHAPS FOR THE CHAIR AND I IS THAT IN, IN, IN OUR BRIEFING MEETING, WHICH WE DO EVERY MEETING, YOU KNOW, ONE WEEK IN ADVANCE, WE WERE SHOWN THE C OF A.
SO WE UNDER, WE, WE UNDERSTAND THE HISTORY OF THIS HOUSE.
AND SO WE'RE WE'RE JUST SAYING, UM, THIS, SO SOMETHING HAPPENED HERE THAT SHOULDN'T HAVE HAPPENED.
CAN'T EXPLAIN THAT, BUT, BUT IT, IT SEEMS LIKE IT DOES AFFECT WHAT WE, WHAT WE DO FOR WHAT IS BEFORE US AND WELL THEN SHOULD DEFERRED.
[02:45:01]
SO WE CAN, AND BEFORE US IS DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WE SAW.SO THE APPLICANT HAS MADE AN OVERTURE AND ADJUSTED THE WHAT IS BEING PRESENTED, UM, AS MANY PEOPLE DO BEFORE THEY COME FOR THE FINAL DRAWING.
THAT, THAT, THAT'S, THAT'S BASICALLY WHAT THE CO-CHAIR WAS, WAS SAYING RENDER.
AND I WAS SAYING YOU COULD TAKE OFF ONE OF THOSE AND JUST HAVE, KEEP ONE SIDE WINDOW AND MAKE THE PICTURE EVEN BIGGER.
I'M, I'M JUST SAYING EITHER APPROACH I THINK IS IN THE SPIRIT OF THE ORIGINAL HOUSE, BUT IS NOT THE SAME COPY OF WHAT WAS THERE.
YEAH, THAT'S I, SO YEAH, I, I'M, I'M OPEN TO EITHER APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS, WORKING WITH STAFF TO COME UP WITH BETTER WINDOW PATTERN IF YOU'D PREFER TO DEFER.
SO WE CAN JUST REPRESENT SOMETHING.
THIS, I'VE MADE A SKETCH THAT STILL COMPLI THAT SHOWS SOMETHING THAT COPIES MORE OF THE MID-CENTURY MODERN PATTERN BUT ALSO STILL COMPLIES WITH THE OLD SIX WARD WHERE THEY WANT SQUARE OR VERTICAL.
CAN YOU, CAN YOU PUT, CAN YOU PUT THAT ON A DOCUMENT WINDOW? NOT IS THE SOLUTION, BUT IT'S, IT'S WHAT DOCUMENT CAMERA.
BUT IN THEORY SOMEONE CAN MAKE A MOTION THAT ALLOWED STAFF SOME DEFERENCE TO I BELIEVE ADVANCE.
ISN'T THAT WHAT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS? RECOMMENDATION, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO, TO ACCEPT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL OF THE PROJECT WITH THE CONDITION, THE CAT CONDITION THAT, THAT WE WORK WITH STAFF ON THE WINDOWS.
TERRENCE, YOU LIKE THAT WINDOW? WHO WAS THE SECOND PLEASE? ANY OPPOSED? ANY ABSTENTIONS? SO IT'S UNANIMOUS.
THE SECOND WAS, UH, THE SECOND WAS COMMISSIONER BLAKELY.
AND NOW WE MOVED TO
YOU LIKE THAT WINDOW? IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE, IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE THINKING OF THAT? THAT'S WHAT I DESCRIBED.
I I CALL THAT A BAY AREA WINDOW BECAUSE IT'S, IT'S, YEAH, IT'S SAN FRANCISCO WINDOW.
I CAN BRING YOU A BOOK IN THE NEXT MEETING.
I WILL, I DON'T UNDERSTAND ALL THESE FANCY ARCHITECTURAL TERMS.
WHERE IS THE, OKAY, SO WE'RE GONNA MOVE ON TO I, UM, AGENDA ITEM C, COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC.
WOULD ANY MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC LIKE TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION? PLEASE COME FORWARD NOW.
NO PUBLIC, MAINLY SEEING STAFF.
SO I WILL MOVE ON TO COMMENTS FROM THE HAHC.
AND SO THEN I'LL MOVE ON TO THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER'S REPORT.
ROMAN, JUST THAT REMINDER THAT IT, THAT THE, UH, THE DAY AFTER THE NEXT COMMISSION MEETING IN JULY, THE DAY RIGHT AFTERWARDS IS CAMP.
AND I'VE ASKED THAT WE, WE'LL, WE'LL SEND YOU AN INVITE SO IT'LL POP UP ON YOUR CALENDAR.
WHAT IS THAT DATE, ROMAN? IT'S THE 19TH OF JULY.
ARE YOU DONE THIS TIME? AND IS THE TIME, IS THE TIME EIGHT? WE'VE ONLY DONE IT ONCE.
EIGHT TO FOUR OR I SAY, IS THAT THE, DO WE, DO WE KNOW WHAT THE ACTUAL TIME ON JULY 19TH? ABOUT EIGHT EIGHT, 8:00 AM AND UM, WE'LL PINPOINT THE LOCATION.
ANY OTHER, ANY OTHER COMMENTS? I'LL JUST MENTION THIS, THAT WE HAVE FOUND A PROVIDER IN BEAUMONT THAT, UH, SUTHERLANDS, THAT HAS A MILL FINISHED, UH, WINDOW THAT IS VERY, VERY APPROPRIATE AND, AND, UH, CAN GET TO, CAN GET TO, BUT WE'LL DETAIL YOU OUT THAT INFORMATION LATER ON THAT, THAT CAN GET TO HOUSTON.
AND THINK, AND MAYBE WE COULD, I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW IF THE WINDOWS, I THINK THE WINDOWS ON THE, ON THE PROJECT WE JUST REVIEWED MAY BE A DIFFERENT MANUFACTURER THAT'S ON THE LIST, BUT THEY UM, IT, IT'S A DIFFERENT MANUFACTURER, WHICH IS ALSO LOCAL, BUT IT, IT IS RIGHT THERE.
YOU WANNA ASK HIM? WHAT'S HIS NAME? DAVID JEFFERS.
DAVID, WHAT'S THE WINDOW MANUFACTURER ARE YOU USING? WE WANT TO USE WESTERN, BUT WE ALSO CONSIDER RAM.
BECAUSE RAM I THINK IS THE LOCAL YEAH, RAM LOCAL HAS A BIGGER PROFILE THAT'S CLOSER TO THE, THE PROFILE.
WESTERN'S IN CALIFORNIA SO IT'S, IT'S ANOTHER WINDOW, BUT THEY BASICALLY MAKE PICTURE WINDOWS ON THESE ENCASEMENTS.
THEY DON'T MAKE A DOUBLE HUNG TO MY KNOWLEDGE, BUT, BUT THEY DO MAKE, AND THEY'RE USED A LOT FOR HOUSES HERE IN THE CITY AND THEY'RE MADE AT LEAST THE RAM ARE MADE LOCAL, SO I'M NOT SURE.
IS RAM MAKING A MILL FINISH THOUGH? EVERYTHING'S ANODIZED OUTTA RAM.
I KNOW THAT WE, WE, I THINK WE ALLOW ANODIZED AS WELL, BUT, UM, OH WE DID? YEAH.
VALLEY THE TREND, THE TREND IS BLACK OUT, OUT THERE IN THE NEW WORLD, BUT, BUT THEY STILL, BUT THEY STILL MAKE ALUMINUM WINDOWS.
UM, ANYTHING ELSE? ROMAN? GREAT MANUFACTURER.