[Houston Archaeological and Historical Commission on November 7, 2024.]
[00:00:15]
UM, IT IS NOW 2:33 PM THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 7TH, 2024.
TODAY'S MEETING OF THE HOUSTON ARCHEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL COMMISSION.
I'M COMMISSION CHAIR DAVID EK TO VERIFY WE HAVE A QUORUM.
I'LL CALL THE ROLE THE CHAIR IS PRESENT.
UH, THE VICE CHAIR IS ABSENT TODAY.
UM, COMMISSIONER JONES PRESENT.
COMMISSIONER DUBOSE WILL ALSO BE ABSENT TODAY.
COMMISSIONER COSGROVE PRESENT.
AND WE ALSO HAVE JOINING, UM, UH, IS OUR ACTING, UH, SECRETARY NICOLE? PRESENT.
UM, FIRST I'LL JUST, UM, AS PART OF MY CHAIR'S REPORT, I'LL JUST MENTION THE SPEAKING RULES FOR THE MEETING TODAY.
THE MEETING CAN BE VIEWED ON HTV, ALTHOUGH VIRTUAL PARTICIPATION OPTIONS ARE NOT AVAILABLE.
UM, MEETINGS START ABOUT A MINUTE AFTER THE SCHEDULED TIME TO ALLOW THE HTV BROADCAST TO GO LIVE.
SPEAKERS, IF YOU WISH TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION ON AN ITEM, PLEASE FILL OUT THE SPEAKER'S FORM BEFORE THE ITEM IS CALLED AND TURN IT IN TO THE STAFF NEAR THE FRONT DOOR.
THE SPEAKER RULES ARE POSTED ON THE AGENDA AND ARE AT MY DISCRETION.
APPLICANTS MAY OPEN AND SPEAK FOR THREE MINUTES.
YOU MAY ALSO BE RECOGNIZED TO CLOSE WITH AN ADDITIONAL TWO MINUTES.
I MAY CALL ON YOU FOR ADDITIONAL TIME TO ANSWER QUESTIONS FROM COMMISSION MEMBERS.
OTHER PUBLIC SPEAKERS MAY SPEAK ONE TIME UP TO TWO MINUTES WHEN I RECOGNIZE YOU TO SPEAK.
PLEASE NOTE FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION OF CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS IS AFTER STAFF'S INITIAL PRESENTATION, I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING, UM, AND COMMISSION MEMBERS.
PLEASE HOLD YOUR QUESTIONS FOR STAFF UNTIL OUR DELIBERATIONS, UH, FOR SORRY FOR OUR DELIBERATIONS UNTIL AFTER THE PUBLIC HEARING, UM, HAS BEEN OPEN.
AND WITH THAT, WE WILL HAVE A DIRECTOR'S REPORT.
GOOD AFTERNOON, MR. CHAIR AND HISTORIC COMMISSION MEMBERS.
I'M NICOLE BROUSSARD, SECRETARY OF THIS COMMISSION AND DEPUTY ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT.
A PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE FOR LANDMARKS PROTECTED LANDMARKS AND CHANGE OF DESIGNATIONS HAS BEEN FORWARDED TO CITY COUNCIL AND A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD ON WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 20TH AT 9:00 AM IN CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS LOCATED AT 9 0 1 BAGBY.
THIS IS A DESIGNATION REQUEST FOR FIVE LANDMARKS.
THE HAHC APPROVED THE DESIGNATIONS AT THE LAST MEETING AND THEY WILL NOW MOVE FORWARD TO CITY COUNCIL FOR CONSIDERATION.
IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, YOU CAN CALL THE HOUSTON OFFICE OF PRESERVATION HOTLINE AT 8 3 2 3 9 3 6 5 5 6 OR VISIT OUR WEBSITE@HOUSTONPLANNING.COM.
THAT CONCLUDES MY DIRECTOR'S REPORT.
AND I DON'T BELIEVE WE'LL HAVE A MAYOR'S LIAISON REPORT TODAY, SO I WILL BE MOVING ON TO, UM, CONSIDERATION OF THE OCTOBER 10TH, 2024 HAHC MEETING.
HAVE YOU HAD A CHANCE TO REVIEW THE MINUTES AND IF THERE ARE NOT ANY, UH, REVISIONS THAT ARE REQUESTED, IS THERE A MOTION TO ACCEPT? MOTION TO ACCEPT THE MINUTES.
IS THERE A SECOND? COSGROVE SECOND COS SECONDS.
WE WILL NOW MOVE ON TO ITEM A, UM, CONSIDERATION OF AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON THE PROPOSED 2025 HAHC MEETING SCHEDULE.
ROMAN, IS STAFF GONNA PRESENT THE SCHEDULE FORMALLY OR IS IT THERE'S ANY DISCUSSION? MY APOLOGIES CHAIR.
THIS IS STAFF PERSON JASON AL.
I PRESENT TO YOU ITEM A, THE PROPOSED 2025 HAC SCHEDULE.
UH, WE JUST RECOMMEND APPROVAL.
COMMISSION MEMBERS, ARE THERE ANY DISCUSSION ON THE PROPOSED CALENDAR FOR NEXT YEAR AND NOT HEARING ANY? IS THERE A MOTION TO ACCEPT? MOTION TO ACCEPT THEN COMMISSIONER THE MEETING SCHEDULE.
IS THERE A SECOND? MR. STAAVA SECONDS.
[00:05:01]
IN FAVOR? AYE.ANY OPPOSE? ANY ABSTENTIONS? OKAY.
CAN, CAN WE RECOGNIZE, UH, BLAKELY ATTENDING? YES.
COMMISSIONER BLAKELY IS IN ATTENDANCE.
SO WE'LL NOW MOVE ON TO ITEM B.
THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING IN CONSIDERATION OF IMPOSSIBLE ACTION ON A LANDMARK DESIGNATION APPLICATION FOR GREATER PLEASANT HILL MISSIONARY BAPTIST CHURCH AT 8 2 8 WEST 20TH STREET, HOUSTON, TEXAS 7 7 0 0 8.
GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIRS AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.
THIS IS STAFF PERSON SAMANTHA DELEON.
I SUBMIT FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
ITEM B FOR LANDMARK DESIGNATION OF THE GREATER PLEASANT HILL MISSIONARY BAPTIST CHURCH LOCATED AT 8 2 8 WEST 20TH STREET, HOUSTON, TEXAS, 7 7 0 0 8.
THE GREATER HILL MISSION, UH, MISSIONARY BAPTIST CHURCH, UH, GREATER PLEASANT HILL MISSIONARY BAPTIST CHURCH IS A ONE STORY WOOD FRAME.
THREE BAY CHURCH CONSTRUCTED IN A RECTANGULAR PLAN AND IN VERNACULAR STYLE.
THE CHURCH WAS ORGANIZED ON JANUARY 1ST, 1930 BY REVEREND HENRY THOMPSON AND OTHER MEMBERS, MR. AND MRS. BOSTON, MR. AND MRS. COUNTS.
MR. AND MRS. MATTHEWS, MR. AND MRS. ALLISON, MS. WILLIS, MS. BENSON, UH, MS. BEATRIZ FREEMAN, MS. UH, HORTEN JOHNSON AND OTHERS.
THE CHURCH WAS MOST LIKELY CONSTRUCTED BY THE CITY OF REFUGE.
2 87 FN AM A FREEMASONRY LODGE, UH, MADE UP OF CHURCH MEMBERS.
REVEREND GARVY MACK GM ERFORD, WM COUNTS.
BILLY BUTLER, BB ZEER, AND JLTE.
SINCE THE CHURCH HAS REMODELED THE PROPERTY, HAS HAD A NUMBER OF NOTABLE PASTORS SUCH AS REVEREND, UH, REVEREND VALOR, CLARENCE VC COOPER, REVEREND JOSEPH, DANIEL JD PEY, REVEREND BILLY BUTLER, BB ZEER, AND PERHAPS THE MOST WELL KNOWN OUT OF THE BUNCH.
UH, REVEREND BENJAMIN MEREDITH BM JORDAN, FATHER OF THE LATE CONGRESSWOMAN BARBARA JORDAN.
THE GREATER PLEASANT HILL MISSIONARY BAPTIST CHURCH MEETS CRITERIA 1, 3, 6, AND EIGHT FOR LANDMARK DESIGNATION.
STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE HOUSTON ARCHEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL COMMISSION RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL THE LANDMARK DESIGNATION OF THE GREATER PLEASANT HILL MISSIONARY BAPTIST CHURCH LOCATED AT 8 2 8 WEST 20TH STREET, HOUSTON, TEXAS 7 7 0 0 8.
THIS REPORT WAS REPAIRED BY STAFF MEMBER SAMANTHA DELEON, THE APPLICANT, ELAINE BROOKS IS NOT HERE, BUT IS IN SUPPORT AND OWNER AND PASTOR LESTER BROOKS IS HERE AND ON STANDBY FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
I'M ALSO AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
AT THIS TIME, I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.
I DON'T HAVE ANYONE SCHEDULED TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM, BUT IF THERE IS ANYONE THAT IS HERE IN THE ROOM WITH US WOULD LIKE TO SAY A FEW WORDS TO THE COMMISSION, UM, YOU'RE CERTAINLY WELCOME.
SO NOT HEARING, NOT SEEING ANYONE STEP UP.
I'M GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND COMMISSION MEMBERS.
ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF ON THE APPLICATION? AND ROMAN, DO YOU HAVE SOMETHING TO SAY AS WELL? I WANT TO COMMENT ON SOMETHING THAT WAS JUST KIND OF BROUGHT TO MY ATTENTION A LITTLE HERE.
AND IT COULD WOULD BE WITH LEGAL QUESTION.
WHEN WE MAILED OUT NOTICE ON THIS, WE MAILED OUT NOTICE THAT IT WOULD BE FOR A LANDMARK DESIGNATION, WHICH IS WHAT IS ON THE AGENDA BEFORE YOU CORRECT.
AND, UH, THE APPLICANTS ACTUALLY DID PREFER A PROTECTED LANDMARK DESIGNATION.
SO I JUST, WE CAN PROCEED WITH LANDMARK, WHICH IS GOOD AND STAY RIGHT WHERE WE ARE AND BRING BACK THAT LATER.
BUT I JUST WANNA POINT THAT OUT.
YEAH, I I THINK IF YOU ALL WANT TO CONSIDER IT AS AN AMENDED, UM, PROTECTED LANDMARK APPLICATION, WE NEED TO RE-MAIL NOTICE.
SO WE WOULD NEED TO NEED TO DEFER FINAL ACTION FOR THE PROTECTED LANDMARK STATUS TO NEXT MONTH.
YOU COULD PROCEED WITH LANDMARK TODAY.
BUT THE QUESTION IS, I I THINK THERE'S SOMETHING TO, FOR THE, UM, THERE'S, ISN'T THERE A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS ON FOR THIS ITEM? NOT FOR THIS ONE, NO, MA'AM.
I'M HAPPY TO PUT IT TO A VOTE FOR A LANDMARK.
AND THEN IF, DO I NEED TO HAVE A MOTION TO, TO DEFER, DEFER FINAL, ANY FURTHER ACTION TO, TO ALLOW THE ITEM TO COME BACK TO YOU NEXT MONTH AS A PROTECTED LANDMARK MAY BE THE APPROPRIATE WAY TO SAY THAT.
BUT IT WAS STILL OKAY TO VOTE TO BE A LANDMARK TODAY? I THINK YOU, I THINK YOU COULD GO AHEAD AND DO THAT.
IF WE DO GO AHEAD AND VOTE, I MEAN I FOR ONE WOULDN'T MIND AT ALL VOTING IN FAVOR OF, BUT I WANNA BE SURE WE FULLY CONSIDER THAT THAT DOESN'T DELAY OR, OR SOMEHOW, UH, ENDANGER THE, THE BUILDING, THE PROPOSED, WELL, THE PROPOSED LANDMARK STATUS GOING FORWARD.
I'D, I'D RATHER RATHER DENY OR DEFER WHATEVER THIS, TO SEE IT COME BACK NEXT MONTH THAN TO CAUSE US TO DELAY ITS EVENTUAL, UM, PROTECTIVE LANDMARK STATUS.
SO IS MY ONLY CONCERN ABOUT THAT.
YEAH, I I I WOULD ANTICIPATE THAT WE WOULD NOT ASK THIS, THAT, THIS GO TO COUNSEL UNTIL
[00:10:01]
AFTER YOU'RE DONE WITH FINAL ACTION ON WHAT THE APPLICANT HAS NOW ADVISED HE WOULD, THEY WOULD PREFER TO HAVE.I THOUGHT IT WOULD BE NICE TO GIVE A VOTE OF SUPPORT THOUGH, FOR THE APPLICATION.
I JUST HEARD SOMEBODY SAY THAT THE ACTUAL OWNER IS ACTUALLY IN, IN THE AUDIENCE AND THAT, UH, WHY DON'T WE ASK THE OWNER WHAT THE PERSON WOULD LIKE TO DO? BECAUSE IF THE PERSON IS REALLY INTERESTED IN BECOMING IT, BECOMING A-A-P-L-M PROTECTED LANDMARK, I WOULD RATHER WAIT.
SAMANTHA, UH, STAFF PERSON SAMANTHA DELEON, I JUST WANNA CLARIFY THAT THE REASON WHY THIS WAS NOT ORIGINALLY SENT AS A PROTECTED LANDMARK WAS BECAUSE I ERRONEOUSLY THOUGHT THAT IT COULD NOT BE
'CAUSE THIS WAS NOT BUILT A HUNDRED YEARS AGO.
I'VE BEEN TOLD NOW THAT THAT IS NOT THE CASE.
SO I JUST WENT AHEAD WITH A LANDMARK DESIGNATION.
THEY WERE FINE WITH A LANDMARK DESIGNATION.
THIS IS JUST SOMETHING THAT, YOU KNOW, WE CAME TO TERMS WITH TODAY AND REALIZED THAT IT COULD HAVE HAD A PROTECTED LANDMARK DESIGNATION.
UH, BUT YES, UM, I KNOW THAT THEY ARE JUST VERY SUPPORTIVE OF HAVING IT JUST, YOU KNOW, BE A LANDMARK.
UM, SO I HAVE NOT REALLY COMMUNICATED VERY MUCH WITH THE APPLICANT ABOUT THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A PROTECTED LANDMARK AND A REGULAR LANDMARK.
UM, AND THAT IS WHY I JUST WENT FORWARD WITH A REGULAR LANDMARK DESIGNATION.
UH, SO I DID WANNA PROVIDE SOME CLARIFICATION ON THAT.
AND IS THE OWNER HERE, I THOUGHT YOU HAD SAID THE OWNER.
THE A BUT SHE WAS NOT ABLE TO MAKE IT TODAY, CORRECT? YEAH.
I GUESS I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE A VOTE FOR THE APPLICATION THAT WE DO HAVE A RECORD FOR WITH MAY.
PERHAPS A MOTION STATING THAT IN LIEU OF THE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION THAT WE ASK, THAT AT THIS TIME THAT NO ACTION BE GO FURTHER UNTIL, UM, THE, THE, THE REVISION COMES BACK TO US AND THEN WE CAN REVISIT IT NEXT MONTH.
UM, AND, AND WE CAN CONFIRM IN THAT INTERIM THAT THE APPLICANT UNDERSTANDS WHAT THAT MEANS VIS-A-VIS THE PROPERTY AND SUPPORT OR NOT.
AND I, I ASSUME THAT APPLICANT STILL DOESN'T WANNA SPEAK AT THIS TIME IN THE MEETING.
SO AGAIN, I'M GONNA CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING COMMISSION MEMBERS.
UM, IF THERE'S ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION, UM, IS THERE A MOTION ON THE DIRECTION FROM STAFF WITH THE CAVEAT, THE RECOMMENDATION FROM LEGAL? SO WHAT IS THE RECOMMENDATION? AGAIN? THE RECOMMENDATION IS TO RECOMMEND LANDMARK APPROVAL WITH A CAVEAT THAT WE NOW UNDERSTAND THAT THERE IS A DESIRE TO BE A PROTECTED LANDMARK THAT HAS TO BE REPOSTED TO ALL THE RE ALL THE, UH, RESIDENCES AROUND THE AREA.
SO THAT, THAT VOTE CANNOT OCCUR TODAY.
UM, AND SO IF WE VOTE YES TODAY, OR WE DEFER TODAY, WE'LL STILL BE VOTING ON THIS, IT APPEARS NEXT MONTH AS A PROTECTED, RIGHT.
SO TODAY WOULD, I GUESS WOULD BE A, WOULD JUST BE A SHOW OF SUPPORT AND ALSO TO, UM, TO AT LEAST RE RECEIVE A RECOMMENDATION FOR A REGULAR LANDMARK STATUS FOR THIS PROPERTY.
IN OTHER WORDS, IF YOU ACTED ON, IF THE MOTION INCLUDED APPROVAL OF THE LANDMARK STATUS AND THE OWNER BETWEEN NOW AND NEXT MONTH DECIDED THEY DID NOT WANT PROTECTED LANDMARK STATUS, THAT RECOMMENDATION COULD STILL GO FORWARD.
BUT WHAT I WAS SUGGESTING IS IF IT'S IN THE COMMISSION, IF THE COMMISSION DESIRES TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE LANDMARK STATUS TODAY, THAT THEN YOU COULD, UM, MY RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE YOU TAG ONTO THAT MOTION A AN UNDERSTANDING THAT THIS MAY COME BACK TO YOU FOR FURTHER PROTECTED LANDMARK STATUS, HOPEFULLY LIKELY WITHIN THE NEXT MONTH.
WOULD, WOULD YOU MAKE THAT MOTION? I'LL MAKE, I'LL MAKE YOU CAN SAY WHAT SHE SAID.
WHATEVER KIM SAYS THAT MOTION.
ANY OPPOSED? ANY ABSTENTIONS? THAT MOTION PASSES? THANK YOU.
OKAY, NOW WE HAVE UP FOR ITEM C, WHICH IS A CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON THE RECLASSIFICATION OF 3 1 0 9 MORRIS SUN STREET IN THE WOODLAND HEIGHTS HISTORIC DISTRICT.
THIS IS A PROJECT THAT CAME BEFORE THE COMMISSION AT THE END OF THE COMMISSION WHEN WE, UH, BARELY HAD A QUORUM.
UM, AND, UM, BUT ALSO THERE'S SOME NEW INFORMATION THAT I UNDERSTAND IS ALSO, UM, HAS COME TO BEAR.
AND SO ROMAN, IF YOU COULD PRESENT THIS PROJECT.
I'M ROMAN MCALLEN, THE PRESERVATION OFFICER AT THE CITY OF HOUSTON.
[00:15:01]
THE RECLASSIFICATION OF THE STRUCTURE AT 31 0 9 MORRISON, WHICH IS PRESENTLY A FOURPLEX WITH AN ADDITIONAL ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT IN THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY.IN SUMMARY, UH, ON THE FIRST PAGE OF THE REPORT, YOU'LL SEE THAT ORIGINALLY IN 2011 WHEN THE WOODLAND HEIGHTS HISTORIC DISTRICT WAS ESTABLISHED BY CITY COUNCIL, THE INVENTORY LISTED THIS PROPERTY AS A 1920 AMERICAN FOURSQUARE APARTMENT CONTRIBUTING BUILDING.
AND THEN WHAT HA IN 20 14, 3 YEARS LATER, THERE WAS A RESOLUTION BEFORE CITY COUNCIL TO AMEND THE MAP BOUNDARY FOR THE HISTORIC DISTRICT DUE TO A SCRIBNER'S ERROR.
AND THEY ALSO CORRECTED THE CLASSIFICATION OF A FEW PROPERTIES.
AND IN FACT, ON THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY, WAS RELABELED AS A 1930 AMERICAN FOUR SQUARE APARTMENT.
TODAY IT HAS BEEN SHOWN, UH, WITHOUT QUESTION THAT THE BUILDING WAS BUILT IN 1939.
AND THE BUILDING IS VERY DIFFERENT FROM BUILDINGS IN THE DISTRICT.
IT HAS A LOWER CEILING PLATE HEIGHT.
THE EXTERIOR SHEATHING IS AN ASBESTOS STYLE SHEATHING AS ORIGINAL.
UH, IT'S USUALLY WE SEE THAT ON TOP OF SOME OLD, UH, ONE 17 OR SOMETHING.
AND OVERALL, THE FORM DOES NOT CONVEY THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE DISTRICT AND IS NOT IN KEEPING WITH THE CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT.
THEY WERE STILL COMING IN TODAY, UH, FOR RECLASSIFICATION FOR 20 SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, NEARLY ALL THE PROPERTIES THAT ARE, UH, IN THE 200 FOOT MAILING RADIUS.
ALSO, THE WOODLAND HEIGHT CIVIC ASSOCIATION SUPPORTS RECLASSIFICATION AND SOMEONE IS HERE TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF THEM TODAY.
UM, GOING TO PAGE TWO OF THE REPORT, IF WE WILL.
JASON, WE HAVE THE CHANGE DESTINATION CRITERIA.
UM, THIS CAN CHANGES OF CLASSIFICATION.
THEY CAN ONLY BE INITIATED BY THE DIRECTOR OF PLANNING.
UPON THE DIRECTOR OF PLANNING, DETERMINING THAT THE ORIGINAL CLASSIFICATION WAS NOT CORRECT.
UH, THE PUBLIC CAN BRING A REQUEST TO FORWARD TO STAFF FOR US TO LOOK AT A PROPERTY, BUT IF IT DOESN'T MEET THE THRESHOLD OF LOOKING LIKE AN ERROR TO BEGIN WITH, WE DON'T BRING IT TO YOU.
SO IN THIS CASE, THE DIRECTOR HAS INITIATED IT.
UM, AND, AND BECAUSE THE SITE APPEARS TO HAVE POSSIBLY HAVE BEEN INCORRECTLY CLASSIFIED, AND UNDER NUMBER ONE THERE WE SAY THAT THIS MULTIFAMILY HOME APPEARS TO HAVE INCORRECTLY CLASSIFIED.
THE YEAR OF CONSTRUCTION, THE STYLE OF THE HOME, THE FORM OF CONSTRUCTION DOES NOT APPEAR IN KEEPING WITH THE HOMES IN THE DISTRICT.
AND THEN DOWN AT NUMBER THREE, THE BUILDING, A BUILDING THAT WAS CONSTRUCTED DURING THE PERIOD OF SIGNIFICANCE COULD BE CONSIDERED CONTRIBUTING, EVEN IF ITS ARCHITECTURAL STYLE IS DIFFERENT FROM THE REST.
WELL, THIS HOME WAS NOT BUILT DURING THE REALLY IMPLIED PERIOD OF SIGNIFICANCE.
OUR ORDINANCE HAS A LITTLE DISCONNECT IN THAT IT TALKS ABOUT THE PERIOD OF SIGNIFICANCE WITH RESPECT TO CLASSIFICATION.
BUT WHEN WE DESIGNATE HISTORIC DISTRICTS, MOST OF THE DISTRICTS DON'T ACTUALLY USE THE TERM.
HOWEVER, IN THIS CASE, IN THE CITY OF HOUSTON'S PRESERVATION MANUAL, IT IS NOTED THAT THE DISTRICT ILLUSTRATES DEVELOPMENT BETWEEN 1907 AND 1925.
AND, UH, THEN ON NUMBER FOUR THAT WE, WE ARE MENTIONING HERE THAT THE REPORT THAT, AGAIN, SAME, SAME LANGUAGE, UH, THIS BUILDING APPEARS TO HAVE BEEN BOTH BUILT OUT OF THAT PERIOD AND THEN NOT IN THAT STYLE.
NOW, IF THE NEW INFORMATION THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS ON PAGE THREE, THIS BUILDING, UH, SINCE THE LAST TIME WE MET, UH, THE HISTORIC BUILDING INSPECTOR, MR. STOCKTON AGREED TO GO AND HAVE A LOOK AT IT.
HE WANTS TO BE CLEAR THAT HE DOES NOT HAVE, UH, AN OPINION ONE WAY OR THE OTHER ON ITS CLASSIFICATION, BUT HE'S COMMENTING SPECIFICALLY ON OBJECTIVE OBSERVATIONS AT THE SITE.
SO, NUMBER ONE, THE BUILDING RESEMBLES AN AMERICAN FOURSQUARE, BUT IT LACKS THE CHARACTERISTIC INTERIOR STRUCTURE YOU NORMALLY SEE.
AND NUMBER TWO, THIS IS AGAIN AT THE TOP OF PAGE THREE OF 14.
THE EIGHT FOOT PLATE HEIGHT IS TYPICAL IN OF 1940S POST-WAR PLATFORM FRAME BUILDINGS, AND NOT COMMON IN EARLIER STRUCTURES.
AND NUMBER THREE, THE SIDING IS ASBESTOS COMPOSITION APPLIED DIRECTLY TO THE SHEATHING.
ANOTHER CHARACTERISTIC COMMONLY SEEN IN LATER CONSTRUCTION.
UNLIKE CONTRIBUTING BUILDINGS IN THE DISTRICT.
AND NUMBER FOUR, WITH A FEW EXCEPTIONS, THE HOMES IN THE DISTRICT ARE SINGLE FAMILY AND WERE CONSTRUCTED.
WERE, I'M SORRY, WITH FEW EXCEPTIONS, SINGLE FAMILY HOMES WERE CONSTRUCTED IN THE PERIOD OF DEVELOPMENT.
AND THE RENTAL UNIT IS UNUSUAL NOW SINCE MANY OF THE COMMISSIONERS WEREN'T HERE LAST TIME.
WE HAVE SOME PICTURES ON PAGE FOUR AND FIVE OF THE STRUCTURE.
UM, THEY ILLUSTRATE AS EXAMPLE ON FIVE, THE CEILING HEIGHT AT EIGHT FOOT TWO, THE EXTERIOR SHEATHING AND HOW IT'S ON THE BUILDING.
UH, PAGE SEVEN OF 14 HAS AN INTERIOR SHOT OF THE PORTICO, THE ROOF OF THE PORCH.
AND THAT APPEARS TO ME TO BE VERY CONTEMPORARY
[00:20:01]
CONSTRUCTION, EVEN PROBABLY REDONE SINCE THE, UH, BUILDING WAS ORIGINALLY BUILT.UH, PAGE, UH, NINE OF 14 IS A TYPICAL CONTRIBUTING HOUSE.
IT'S ABSOLUTELY GORGEOUS AS MOST OF THE HOMES ARE IN THIS HISTORIC DISTRICT.
UM, THAT YOU HAVE CONTR, YOU KNOW, CONTRIBUTING HOMES SUPPLIED TO YOU ON, UH, NINE AND 10.
UH, UH, MR. LILIENTHAL, IF YOU'LL GO TO PAGE 11, I WANNA POINT OUT THIS MAP, WHICH I TOOK A FEW MINUTES TO.
THIS IS THE 200 FOOT MAILING NOTICE MAP.
AND THE HASH MARK REPRESENTS THE HASH MARKS OVER THE PROPERTIES REPRESENT PROPERTIES IN WHICH WE'VE RECEIVED LETTERS FOR SUPPORT OF THIS RECLASSIFICATION.
UH, YOU'LL SEE THERE, IT'S NEARLY EVERY PROPERTY IN THIS CASE HERE, IT SAYS, UH, 19 OF THESE PROPERTIES.
AND I THINK I'VE PROBABLY GOT A NEW ONE SINCE THIS WENT, SINCE I DRAFTED THIS.
THERE IS A STATEMENT FROM THE OWNER ON WHO IS HERE TODAY, AND I'LL LET HIM SPEAK IN IN REGARD TO THAT.
THERE'S A, ON PAGE 13, THERE'S A LETTER FROM THE, UH, PRESIDENT OF THE WOODLAND HEIGHTS CIVIC ASSOCIATION, WHO IS, I THINK HERE TODAY TO SPEAK.
I WANNA THEN JUST END THIS REPORT.
I DON'T WANT TO GO ON TOO LONG, BUT ON THE NEXT SECTION THERE, OR EXCERPTS, AND THIS MAY NOT BE IN YOUR, UM, PACKET AND YOUR PACKETS ARE THE FULL EMAILS FROM ALL OF THOSE PEOPLE WHO COMMENTED ON THE RECLASSIFICATION.
BUT I WANNA READ YOU SOME EXCERPTS BECAUSE I THINK THEY'RE SO WELL WRITTEN THAT THEY GET RIGHT TO THE POINT.
SO FROM 3 1 1 5 HOUSTON AVENUE, WE HAVE, I SUPPORT THE CHANGE OF CLASSIFICATION OF THE PROPERTY AT 31 0 9 MORRISON FROM CONTRIBUTING TO NON-CONTRIBUTING, THE STRUCTURE IS AN APARTMENT AND IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE HISTORIC HOMES IN THE AREA.
I DO NOT BELIEVE THE STRUCTURE IS ORIGINAL TO THE 1910 TO THE 1920 PERIOD WHEN THE HOMES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD WERE BUILT BY WILLIAM A. WILSON.
ITS DESIGNATION AS CONTRIBUTING WHEN THE DISTRICT WAS ESTABLISHED WAS MOST LIKELY A MISTAKE OR AN OVERSIGHT.
ANOTHER COMMENT FROM 2 0 4 BAYLIN.
THE CURRENT PROPERTY IS IN VERY POOR CONDITION AND IS UNLIKE OTHER PROPERTIES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD REGARDING THE STANDARD OF CONSTRUCTION, AESTHETICS, QUALITY AND SAFETY OF BUILDING MATERIALS AND THE INTENDED USE OF THE PROPERTY.
WE FAVOR AND WELCOME THE RECLASSIFICATION 2 0 5 BAYLIN AVENUE.
WE ARE DEEPLY PASSIONATE ABOUT HISTORIC HOMES AND GOOD ARCHITECTURE, WHICH IS WHY WE PURCHASED A HOME, A HISTORIC LANDMARK, UH, HOME OURSELVES.
HOWEVER, WE AGREE THAT THE HOUSE AT 31 0 9 DOES NOT MERIT FULL HISTORIC DESIGNATION AND PROTECTION GIVEN ITS LATER CONSTRUCTION, MEDIOCRE AESTHETICS.
IT'S A LITTLE HARSH AND BELOW AVERAGE CONSTRUCTION QUALITY.
WE ARE SUPPORTIVE OF THE EFFORTS TO RENOVATE AND OR REPLACE THIS HOUSE, UH, 31 0 7 AMP.
THEY'RE SPEAKING TO THE OWNERS OF THE PROPERTY.
NAT AND BECKY HAVE HELD LEADERSHIP POSITIONS AND VOLUNTEERED TIRELESSLY, TIRELESS HOURS OVER THE YEARS TO OUR WOODLAND HEIGHTS CIVIC ASSOCIATION AND FRIENDS OF THE WOODLAND PARK.
THEY WERE ALSO INSTRUMENTAL IN THE CREATION OF THIS HISTORIC DISTRICT.
THIS IS NOT A CASE WHERE SOMEONE IS NOT SUPPORTIVE OF PRESERVATION, INCLUDING PRESERVATION AND CLEANUP EFFORTS THROUGHOUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD PARK AND NEARBY BAYOU NATS GUIDED TOUR ALONG LITTLE WHITE OAK BAYOU HAS BEEN A SPECIAL ANNUAL EVENT THAT BRINGS TOGETHER DOZENS OF NEIGHBORS SEEING AND GETTING TO KNOW THEM.
IT IS CLEAR WITH THEIR VERY EVERY INTENTION FOR THEIR IS FOR THE BETTERMENT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE COMMUNITY.
AND WE SUPPORT RECLASSIFICATION.
I'M GONNA JUST READ ONE MORE 'CAUSE I CAN FEEL THAT I'VE GONE ON A BIT, UH, FAR, UH, LONG.
UH, BUT I'LL JUST, UH, SAY THAT, UM, 31 14 MORRISON SAID, I'M AN OWNER WHO HAS RESIDED AT THIS ADDRESS, 31 14 ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FOR 35 YEARS.
IF THE CLASSIFICATION OF THE PROPERTY AT 31 0 9 MORRISON STREET WAS BASED ON THE ASSUMPTION OR MISUNDERSTANDING THAT THE STRUCTURES WERE BUILT IN APPROXIMATELY 1930, THE CLASSIFICATION WAS DONE IN ERROR.
THESE APARTMENTS SINGULARLY SINGULARLY CONFLICT WITH THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD INSTRUCTORS.
SO I DON'T WANNA BELABOR IT, BUT WE ARE RECOMMENDING THAT YOU RECOMMEND THE CITY COUNCIL THAT WE RECLASSIFY THE PROPERTY.
AND THERE ARE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC HERE TO SPEAK.
I THINK WE'RE GONNA HOLD ON QUESTIONS AND I'M GONNA OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.
I HAVE A NUMBER OF SPEAKERS SIGNED UP.
SO LET'S, LET'S WORK THROUGH THE SPEAKERS.
UM, BUT AT THIS TIME I'M GONNA OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AS MENTIONED, THE APPLICANT IS HERE, UH, NAT SMITH.
UH, IF YOU CAN PLEASE ADDRESS THE COMMISSION ALSO TO BE FOLLOWED BY MICHAEL GRAVES.
THANKS FOR, UH, HAVING ME BACK.
UH, ROMAN SAID A LOT OF WHAT I, UH, HAD INTENDED TO SAY, SO I THANK YOU ROMAN.
UH, THAT WAS A, AN AMAZING REPORT.
UM, ROMAN TERRENCE AND, UH, JASON AND PETE STOCKTON HAVE ALL BEEN OUT TO THE SITE AND THEY,
[00:25:01]
AND ANYONE ELSE THAT I BRING TO THE PLACE ARE ALL IN AMAZEMENT THAT THIS IS HISTORICALLY CONTRIBUTING.EVERYBODY SAYS WHAT'S GOING ON.
AND I TRULY THINK THAT THE REASON FOR IT BEING CALLED HISTORICALLY CONTRIBUTING IS THAT IT WAS INCORRECTLY DATED FROM THE START.
HCA STILL CALLS IT A 1920 CONSTRUCTION.
AND OUR LATEST, MOST UPDATED WOODLAND HEIGHTS INVENTORY CALLS IT 1930.
BUT CLEARLY IT WAS STARTED THE, I HAD THE BUILDING PERMIT FROM AUGUST OF 20, OF AUGUST OF 39.
SO I'M CALLING IT A CONSTRUCTION THAT WAS COMPLETED IN 1940.
UM, AND SO TO UNDERSTAND THIS BETTER, I DID GET PETE STOCKTON OUT AND YOU'VE HEARD WHAT HIS LETTER, UH, WAS.
AND, UH, PETE WAS VERY CAREFUL TO MAKE OBSERVATIONS.
BUT THE OBSERVATIONS ABOUT THE BUILDING ARE, ARE ONE THING, BUT THEY DON'T EXPLAIN THE WHOLE SITUATION UNLESS YOU ALSO LOOK AT THE AGE OF CONSTRUCTION AND THE, UH, ARCHITECTURAL STYLE.
AND SO, I'M GONNA BELABOR THAT A LITTLE BIT AND GO BACK TO WHAT THE INVENTORY OF HISTORICALLY CONTRIBUTING HOMES IN THE, UH, WOODLAND HEIGHTS ARE.
THERE ARE 322 HISTORICALLY CONTRIBUTING HOMES.
THE PEAK OF CONSTRUCTION WAS IN 1920.
THERE WAS PRECIOUS LITTLE CONSTRUCTION IN THE WOODLAND HEIGHTS AFTER 1920 DURING, I SHOULD GRANT THE SPEAKER MORE TIME.
DURING THE THIRTIES, THERE WERE ONLY THREE CONTRIBUTING HOMES BUILT SO CLEARLY.
SO, AN APARTMENT BUILDING BUILT IN 1940 IS AN OUTLIER, AND WE COULD GO ON AND TALK ABOUT ARCHITECTURAL STYLE.
UH, MY STREET HAS BUILDINGS WITH GRACEFUL, UH, YOU KNOW, STYLES AND, AND 11 AND 12 FOOT CEILING HEIGHTS AND AMPLE ROOF OVERHANGS AND WOOD SIDING AND GENEROUS PORCHES.
THIS IS AN OUTLIER AND I'D LIKE THE, UH, COMMISSION TO, UH, CONSIDER CHANGING THE, UH, THE CLASSIFICATION.
UM, WE MAY, THERE ARE A NUMBER OF SPEAKERS SIGN UP.
WE MAY LET THE SPEAKERS COME THROUGH.
WE MAY HAVE MORE QUESTIONS OR, OR WE MAY HAVE NO QUESTIONS.
UH, THE NEXT SPEAKER, AS I MENTIONED IS MICHAEL GRAVES.
UH, WE WILL BE FOLLOWED BY ANN ROBESON.
UH, GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSION.
UH, THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME AND I'M, I'M HAPPY TO BE HERE TO SPEAK.
UM, I AM A 25 YEAR NEIGHBOR OF WOODLAND HEIGHTS IN THE WOODLAND HEIGHTS, UH, HISTORIC DISTRICT.
SPECIFICALLY, I LIVE ABOUT TWO BLOCKS AWAY AT 3 3 0 4 BOW SHOP IN AN ORIGINAL WILLIAM WILSON HOME.
UM, SO I AM DEARLY ATTACHED TO THE PRESERVATION OF THE HISTORIC HOMES, BUT I AM HERE TODAY IN MY CAPACITY AS THE PRESIDENT OF THE WOODLAND HEIGHTS CIVIC ASSOCIATION.
AND, UH, I, THE FINE REPORT THAT WE WERE GIVEN EARLIER, UH, ASIDE, UH, I, I'M HERE TO INTRODUCE THE LETTER THAT WE, UH, OFFER IN SUPPORT OF THE RECLASSIFICATION OF THIS HOUSE.
UM, ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE WOODLANDS HEIGHTS CIVIC ASSOCIATION, I'D LIKE TO OFFER THIS EXPRESSION OF SUPPORT FOR MR. NAT SMITH'S DESIRE TO HAVE THE PROPERTY AT 31 0 9 MORRIS STREET.
RE-CATEGORIZED AS NON-CONTRIBUTING WITH RESPECT TO THE WOODLAND HEIGHTS HISTORIC DISTRICT.
WHILE WE ARE ARDENT SUPPORTERS OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION, THE STRUCTURE IN QUESTION WE BELIEVE BUILT IN 1940 DOES NOT IN ANY WAY SPEC REFLECT THE DESIGN OR AESTHETIC QUALITIES OF THE ORIGINAL WILSON HOMES THAT THE HISTORIC DISTRICT WAS CREATED TO PROTECT THAT IT SHOULD BE CONSIDERED CONTRIBUTING.
SEEMS LIKELY TO BE AN ERROR OR AN OVERSIGHT.
UH, THE WHCA BOARD HAS BEEN BRIEFED ON THIS AND WITH RESPECT TO THEIR PLANS TO GO FORWARD.
AND WE ARE SATISFIED THAT THE HOME THEY INTEND TO BUILD WILL BE MORE CONSISTENT WITH THE ORIGINAL AESTHETIC OF THE WILSON HOMES THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD TREASURE SO MUCH.
SO, UH, WITH THAT, I THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND I WILL ALLOW THE NEXT SPEAKER.
THE NEXT SPEAKER IS ANN ROBESON, FOLLOWED BY NORMAN SAKURA.
I'LL BE BRIEF 'CAUSE STEPH STOLE MOST OF MY THUNDER TOO.
SO
[00:30:01]
PROPERTY FOR 38 YEARS.WE ALSO OWN THE ADJACENT PROPERTY BEHIND IT AT 3 1 0 7 HOUSTON AVENUE, WHICH WE'VE OWNED FOR 40 YEARS.
AND, UH, I HAVE TO SAY, I HAVE TO LOOK AT THAT PROPERTY EVERY MORNING WHEN I GET UP AND IT IS NOT A CONTRIBUTING PROPERTY.
I WANNA ALSO, UH, SINCE GREG'S LETTER WAS MOSTLY READ, I WANNA READ JUST ONE LITTLE PARAGRAPH FROM KEVIN DEBOSE, WHO IS OUR NEXT DOOR NEIGHBOR WHO LIVES IN THE QUEEN ANNE, THAT IS FROM, UH, 19 OH, UH, SIX.
AND HE SAYS, UH, THERE IS NOTHING ABOUT THE DATE HISTORY OR PHYSICAL APPEARANCE OF THE STRUCTURE THAT WOULD APPEAR TO MAKE IT CONTRIBUTING IN ANY WAY.
OUR BLOCK OF MORRISON STREET HAS A NUMBER OF HISTORIC STRUCTURES THAT RICHLY DESERVE CONTRIBUTING CLASSIFICATION AND SHOULD BE PRESERVED AT ALL COSTS.
TO THE CONTRARY, IT HAS BEEN AN EYESORE ON THE OF THE BLOCK FOR MOST OF THE 42 YEARS THAT WE HAVE LIVED HERE.
AS I MENTIONED, UH, THE NEXT SPEAKER IS NORMAN SAKURA, FOLLOWED BY BECKY HOLSTER.
I, UH, LIVE NEXT DOOR TO THAT PROPERTY AND I'VE LIVED THERE FOR 30 PLUS YEARS, AND IT IS A'S BEEN AN APARTMENT WITH A GARAGE APARTMENT IN THE BACK.
SO THERE'S LOTS OF CARS PARKED OUT THERE.
UM, IT ALSO HAS THE EIGHT FOOT CEILINGS, ASBESTOS SIDING, AND IT IS NOT A CONTRIBUTING PROPERTY THING, SO THANK YOU.
COULD YOU RESTATE YOUR NAME? IS IT, IS IT, UH, BECKY HOUSTON.
IT WAS, WAIT, I COULDN'T, UM, I COULDN'T DECIDE THAT IT WAS A U OR AN N
UM, I AM NATS WIFE AND CO-OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AT 31 0 9 MORRISON.
WE HAVE LIVED IN OUR HOUSE AT 30 11 MORRISON FOR 40 YEARS, AND WE ARE THREE HOUSES AWAY FROM THE 31 0 9 PROPERTY THAT'S BEING DISCUSSED TODAY.
IN 1984, WE PURCHASED OUR HOME IN THE WOODLAND HEIGHTS BECAUSE OF THE APPRECIATION WE HAD AND CONTINUE TO HAVE FOR THE HISTORIC HOMES AND THE INTACTNESS, IF THAT'S A WORD OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
NAT AND I FEEL LIKE WE WALK OUR TALK REGARDING OUR SINCERE APPRECIATION FOR THIS HISTORICAL COMMUNITY.
AS 20 YEARS BEFORE THE CREATION OF THE HISTORIC DESIGNATION FOR THE WOODLAND HEIGHTS, WE BOUGHT A RATHER DECREPIT BUNGALOW READY FOR THE BULLDOZER AT 4 0 1 OMAR AND RESTORED IT TO ITS ORIGINAL CHARM.
OUR SON IS, AND HIS FAMILY STILL LIVE THERE, OR, OR THEY LIVE THERE TODAY.
FOR THESE REASONS, WE ARE SUPPORTERS OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION.
WE APPRECIATE THE WORK YOU DO, AND WE ALSO APPRECIATE THE TIME THAT YOU ARE TAKING TO REVIEW THE DATA BEING BROUGHT TO YOU REGARDING THE ERRONEOUS AGE, DATE, AND THE INVENTORY.
AND TO LISTENING TO OUR COMMENTS.
AS NAT HAS NOTED, 31 0 9 MORRISON IS COMPLETELY DIFFERENT FROM THE OTHER HOUSES IN THIS HISTORIC DI DISTRICT.
IT DIFFERS IN ARCHITECTURAL STYLE AND ALSO IN THE QUALITY OF CONSTRUCTION AND MATERIALS USED.
RESEARCHING THE ACTUAL DATE OF CONSTRUCTION 1940 EXPLAINS THE DISCONNECT.
BY CONSIDERING THE NEW DATA BROUGHT BEFORE YOU AND CHANGING THE DESIGNATION TO REFLECT THIS NEW INFORMATION, YOU WILL OPEN THE DOOR TO BUILDING A NEW STRUCTURE MUCH MORE IN KEEPING WITH THE AESTHETIC OF THIS HISTORICAL NEIGHBORHOOD.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND CONSIDERATION.
AND I HAVE ONE MORE SPEAKER SIGN UP.
UM, I ALSO LIVE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
I'M AT THE 700 BLOCK OF BAYLAND JUST A FEW BLOCKS AWAY, AND I COMPLETELY AGREE THAT THEY SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO DO THIS, BUT I DO TAKE OBJECTION WITH THE FACT THAT THE WOODLAND HEIGHTS CIVICS ASSOCIATION IS COMING AND SPEAKING ON THEIR BEHALF.
REASON BEING, AND YOU GUYS NEED TO HEAR THIS, IT WAS STATED, THEY ARE GOOD NEIGHBORS.
THEY'VE DONE THIS, THEY'VE DONE THAT.
THAT'S INSIGNIFICANT TO THE SITUATION.
AND THIS HAS BEEN GOING ON WAY TOO MUCH.
COME AND SPEAK ON THE MERITS OF THE PROPERTY, BUT NOT ON THE NEIGHBORS THEMSELVES.
THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY, I COMPLETELY A THOUSAND PERCENT AGREE, BUT WHEN SOMEONE COMES UP HERE TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF THE PROPERTY AND THEY SPEAK ABOUT THE PERSON AND NOT THE PROPERTY, PLEASE WEIGH THAT AND CONSIDER THAT FOR THE MERITS OF THE PROPERTY, NOT THE MERITS OF THE PERSON.
NOW, THAT'S ALL THE SPEAKERS I HAVE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK ON THE ITEM? IF SO, PLEASE ANNOUNCE YOURSELF AT THIS TIME.
I'M GONNA CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING COMMISSION
[00:35:01]
MEMBERS.ARE THERE QUESTIONS OF STAFF QUESTIONS IN GENERAL? I THINK THE, THE MAIN ISSUES AS I UNDERSTAND IT, IS THAT THERE MORE INFORMATION HAS COME TO COME TO BEAR SINCE THIS LAST CAME, BEFORE THIS COMMISSION.
THE FULL COMMISSION IS LARGELY HERE IN TACT.
UM, AND, AND THAT THE, THE VISIT BY STAFF AND PETE HAVE ALSO COLLABORATED THE, UM, THE ACTUAL, UM, BUILDING PERMIT THAT WAS IN THE HHC UH, HCA FILE, WHICH, WHICH IS IN YOUR PACKET.
DO YOU HAVE A QUESTION OR A MOTION OR A QUESTION? I HAVE, I HAVE TWO QUESTIONS ACTUALLY FOR ROMAN.
FIRST FOLLOWED BY COMMISSIONER MCNEIL.
UH, THE FIRST QUESTION IS, UH, VERY STRAIGHTFORWARD.
UH, AFTER YOU, AFTER, LET'S SAY IF THE CONVERSION IS SUCCESSFUL TO A NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE, THAT MEANS THIS BUILDING CAN BE TORN DOWN.
WELL, IT IT CAN BE TORN ON REGARDLESS, BUT IT MEANS, IT COULD BE, IT WILL NOT NEED A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR A DEMOLITION PERMIT TO BE ISSUED.
SO SECOND QUESTION IS MORE OF A PHILOSOPHICAL QUESTION.
UH, I'M GONNA TAKE AN EXAMPLE IN FIRST WARD, THAT'S THE, THE, THAT'S THE NEIGHBORHOOD WHERE I LIVE IN.
SO THIS IS, THE QUESTION I HAVE IS, WHEN YOU SAY CONTRIBUTING AND PERIOD OF SIGNIFICANCE, I, I HAVE A, A ISSUE WITH THIS.
IN 95% OF THE HOUSES OF, OF THE HISTORIC HOUSES IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT OF HY FIRST WARD ARE IN, BUILT IN THE PERIOD OF 1870 TO 1900 QUEEN ANNE STYLE.
SINGLE STORY, UH, YOU KNOW, COTTAGES, BUT SPRINKLE IN THERE ABOUT 5% OF THE HISTORIC DISTRICT ARE, UH, CRAFTSMEN, 1920 PLUS ERA BUN UH, CRAFTSMAN BUNGALOWS.
SO DOES THAT MEAN THOSE 1920S TO 1930 MAYBE BUNGALOW, UH, CRAFTSMAN, BUNGALOW ARE CONSIDERED TO BE NON-CONTRIBUTING, COULD BE NON-CONTRIBUTING BECAUSE THEY WERE NOT IN THAT ERA PERIOD OF SIGNIFICANCE.
THIS, THIS BEARS DIRECT FUNDAMENTALS TO THE QUESTION THAT I, I WANT ANSWERED BEFORE I VOTE.
THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER, I KNOW YOU WERE INVOLVED IN THE CREATION OF THAT HISTORIC DISTRICT AND IN THE RECENT RESTORATION OF TWO BEAUTIFUL BUNGALOW CRAFTSMAN HOMES OF THAT STYLE, YOU'RE MAKE MAKING DO, DID, DO YOU KNOW, I DON'T HAVE THE DOCUMENT IN FRONT OF ME IF THE DISTRICT WAS, HAD A PERIOD OF SIGNIFICANCE THAT WAS LABELED WITH IT OR SOME LANGUAGE TO THAT EFFECT? NO, I DON'T THINK THERE WAS THAT, THAT SAY PERIOD.
THIS, THIS IS, SO THAT WAS THE QUESTION RIGHT.
WHEN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT WAS CREATED OUT OF MAYBE 60 ODD TO 70 HOMES, THEY WERE MAINLY 95% QUEEN ANTS AND 5% CRAFTSMEN.
TOTALLY MAYBE SEPARATED BY 30, 40 YEARS OF CONSTRUCTION DIFFERENCE IN, IN THE PERIOD.
SO IF SOMEBODY NOW LIVES IN A, IN A, IN A, UH, CRAFTSMAN STYLE HOUSE AND COME BEFORE THIS COMMISSION AGAIN AND SAY, WELL, YOU KNOW, I LIVE IN A CRAFTSMAN HOUSE BUILT IN AROUND 1930, WHEREAS ALL THESE OTHER HOUSES ARE IN 1880S, MAYBE I SHOULD, UH, RECLASSIFY IT AS NON-CONTRIBUTING AS WELL.
SO HOW IS THAT ARGUMENT GONNA BE DIFFERENT FROM TODAY'S ARGUMENT? I THINK IT'S DIFFERENT IN THAT THIS OVERALL, THE WOODLAND HEIGHTS HISTORIC DISTRICT'S HOMES ARE ARGUABLY WHAT WE MIGHT OFTEN CALL KIND OF A A, IF NOT A GRAND HOME, CERTAINLY AN ARTICULATED DESIGN HOME.
I MEAN, YOU, YOU CAN SEE IT IN THE CONTRIBUTING BUILDINGS THAT YOU HAVE THERE.
THIS HOUSE IS NOT ONLY THE YEAR THAT MAKES IT APPARENT, BUT IT IS ALSO, THANKS, CHARLES.
THE, UH, THE STYLE OF CONSTRUCTION.
SO GOING BACK, SO THE, THIS ISN'T, ALTHOUGH WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE PICTURE, IT SEEMS TO HAVE SORT OF A CRAFTSMAN FOUR SQUARE FORM, BUT IT DOESN'T HAVE AS, UH, MR. STOCKTON COMMENT.
IT DOESN'T HAVE THE, UH, I'LL USE HIS TERM 'CAUSE IT WAS, HE'S ALWAYS ON POINT.
UM, IT'S NOT IN THE, UM, WHERE IS IT? WHERE IS IT? GO? JUST GIMME A SECOND HERE.
UH, IT'S USING THE WESTERN PLATFORM FRAMING, I THINK YOU MENTIONED.
YOU REMEMBERED THAT, THAT HE WAS USING A WESTERN STYLE PLATFORM FRAMING A LOWER CEILING HEIGHT, AND THEN THE WAY THE EXTERIOR SHEATHING IS DONE.
SO, AND, AND IT STANDS ALONE IN THE WOODLAND HEIGHTS HISTORIC DISTRICT.
THAT'S WHY SOME OF THE COMMENTS WERE, IT'S UNIQUELY DIFFERENT IN A WAY THAT'S NOT CONSISTENT WITH THAT DISTRICT.
WHERE I BELIEVE IF I WAS LOOKING AT OLD, UM, HIGH FIRST WARD OR OLD SIXTH WARD EVEN, WHICH STARTS ALSO EARLY, UM, THAT THE WOODEN BUNGALOWS, YOU'RE REFERRING TO, THE CRAFTSMAN WOODEN BUNGALOWS THAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO STILL HAVE SHIPLAP.
[00:40:01]
STILL HAVE WOOD SIDING, ORIGINAL WOOD SIDING OF THE OLD FOREST DEMOLISHED PRIOR TO THE OIL INDUSTRY AND WHERE THE TIMBER BARONS MADE THEIR MONEY.THIS HOUSE DOESN'T HAVE THAT IN IT.
AND SO IT IS, IT ISN'T, UH, WE LOOK AT THESE CRITICALLY VERY, VERY CRITICALLY.
UM, AND, AND, AND IT JUST SEEMS TO STAND OUT INDIVIDUALLY AS ONE RESOURCE, ONE STRUCTURE IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD THAT DOESN'T, IS UNIQUELY NOT FITTING IN.
I MEAN, WE, WE ARE GOING TO THAT LEVEL OF SEPARATION OF DETAILS, BUT LET ME SAY THIS THE SAME THING.
THOSE QUEEN END HOUSES HAVE 12 FOOT CEILINGS IN TRANSOMS THROUGH EVERY WINDOW, EVERY DOOR AS EVEN INTERIOR DOORS.
WHEREAS THE CRAFTSMEN WERE MAINLY EIGHT, NINE FOOT CEILINGS WITH JUST NO TRANSOMS WHATSOEVER BECAUSE OF THE PERIOD IT WAS BUILT.
SO TO ME, WHEN YOU SAY DIFFERENT, UH, OF MATERIALS OR DIFFERENT OF STYLES AND SO ON AND SO FORTH, QUEEN ANNE AND, AND, AND CRAFTSMAN ALSO DEFER GREATLY.
AND I'M SORRY, CHARLES JUST REMINDED ME OF THE, THE, THE MA ANOTHER CLA POINT IS THAT THIS DISTRICT DOES SEEM TO HAVE A PERIOD OF SIGNIFICANCE.
WELL, WHEN WE LOOK AT THAT CRITERIA PAGE ON PAGE TWO FROM THE CITY OF HOUSTON'S PRESERVATION MANUAL, A DOCUMENT THAT PRESUMABLY WE, THE CITY CRAFT, IT STATES THE HISTORIC DI THE HISTORIC DISTRICT, WOODLAND HEIGHTS HISTORIC DISTRICT.
AND IN QUOTES HERE, I HAVE ILLUSTRATES DEVELOPMENT IN HOUSTON BETWEEN 1907 AND 1925.
SO WHEN THE DISTRICT WAS CREATED, THAT'S VERY CLOSE TO STATING THE PERIOD OF SIGNIFICANCE IN THAT TERM.
I SEE COMMISSIONER JONES MEAN IF YOU WORK WITH SECTION 1 0 6 AND IF YOU ARE LOOKING AT IT ALL THE TIME, YOU LOOK FOR THESE CLEARS AND, AND THAT, THAT'S AGAIN HOW WE GOT HERE.
AND ROMAN, MAYBE OUTSIDE OF THIS MEETING, STAFF COULD FOLLOW BACK UP COMMISSIONER YAPP ABOUT FIRST HIGH WARD.
YOU KNOW, HIS QUESTION MORE FORMALLY ABOUT WHAT THAT, WHAT THAT STATES.
BUT I MEAN, TODAY BEFORE US IS THE APPLICATION THAT'S, THAT'S HERE.
SO ARE THERE OTHER QUESTIONS THAT YOU HAVE? I MEAN, I HAVE A COMMENT.
WELL, I KNOW COMMISSIONER NEAL HAD A QUESTIONS AS WELL.
I I'M MAKING A MOTION, SO, OKAY.
SO I, I WAS HERE WHEN THEY HAD THE FIRST PRESENTATION OF THIS, AND I, I MEAN, I'M, I'M KIND OF IN AGREEMENT WITH COMMISSIONER YAP THAT THIS IS A 85-YEAR-OLD BUILDING THAT IS ONLY 14 YEARS OUT OF THE POSSIBLE PERIOD OF SIGNIFICANCE.
SO IT'S, IT'S STILL A HISTORIC BUILDING.
WE HAVE BUILDINGS IN GLENBROOK VALLEY THAT THEY ARBITRARILY DESIGNATED AT 50 YEARS, AND THERE'LL BE A BUILDING FROM 1962 THAT ISN'T IN THE PERIOD OF SIGNIFICANCE BECAUSE THEY, THEY DID IT THAT WAY WHEN THEY MADE THE DISTRICT.
SO PICKING AND CHOOSING HISTORY, TO ME IS KIND OF TROUBLING AS A HISTORIAN BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO TAKE EVERYTHING THAT WAS THERE.
IT'S, IT'S, IT WAS BUILT THERE IN 1939 OR 1940, PROBABLY AS A RESULT OF THE DEPRESSION AND MAKING, UH, MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
WHEREAS THESE OTHER HOUSES MAY HAVE BEEN SUBDIVIDED OR SOMETHING, UH, WHEN THE ECONOMY WENT BAD.
SO IT'S PART OF THE HISTORY OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, EVEN IF IT'S NOT THE SAME AS THE MORE, UH, OPULENT HOUSES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
MY COMMENT IS JUST, MY, MY READ OF THIS OR UNDERSTANDING IS THAT, UM, PART OF THE ISSUE BEFORE THE, THE REASON THE PLANNING DIRECTOR BROUGHT IT BACK TO US, UH, TO FOR THIS MEETING IS, IS THAT IT APPEARS THAT WHEN IT WAS ORIGINALLY DETERMINED CONTRIBUTING, IT WAS BASED ON FALSE INFORMATION OF, OF A CONSTRUCTION DATE THAT WAS, UM, ALMOST 39 OR OR 19 YEARS DIFFERENT FROM WHAT THE ACTUAL DATE WAS.
SO IN PART OF THIS, I MEAN, PART OF THIS DELIBERATION IS ALSO, IT'S LIKELY THIS PROJECT NEVER WOULD'VE BEEN ON THAT LIST TO BEGIN WITH, UH, IF NOT FOR THAT THE, THE RECORDS WERE INCORRECT.
AND IN YOUR PACKET IS, ARE THE ACTUAL, UH, PERMIT INFORMATION THAT THAT'S PART OF IT.
I MEAN, A LOT OF THINGS ARE OLD AND WE WE'RE ALL GETTING OLDER TOO, BUT IT, AND THAT DOESN'T MEAN WE'RE NOT GOOD.
I MEAN IT'S, UH, UM, BUT THIS IS A, WE, WE'VE NEVER QUITE SEEN THIS APPLICATION BEFORE.
I'LL JUST PUT IT THAT WAY BECAUSE WE'VE NEVER HAD AN APPLICATION WHERE THE INFORMATION WAS IN SO INCORRECT ABOUT ITS INCEPTION AND DATE OF CONSTRUCTION.
SO THAT THINK THAT'S A NUANCE WITH THIS.
AND I WASN'T HERE WHEN THIS WAS FIRST PRESENTED, SO I, I I, UM, I'D LIKE TO COMMENT ONE MORE PLEASE.
I'D LIKE TO ADD COMMISSIONER COUCH.
IN ADDITION, I THINK THE ORDINANCE SPEAKS SPECIFICALLY TO THE POINT YOU'RE MAKING UNDER CRITERIA FOUR, UNDER SECTION 33 2 2 7 C FOUR.
ANY BUILDING THAT WAS CONSTRUCTED OUTSIDE OF THE PERIOD OF SIGNIFICANCE IS CONSIDERED NON-CONTRIBUTING, EVEN IF IT LOOKS LIKE A HISTORIC BUILDING.
AND IN THIS CASE, EVEN IF IT IS OLD, THAT IS BECAUSE THE CONTRIBUTING
[00:45:01]
STATUS IS BASED ON THE PROPERTY'S ABILITY TO CONVEY THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE DISTRICT, NOT ITS APPEARANCE OR COMPATIBILITY WITH HISTORIC PROPERTIES.I MEAN, IT'S NOT RIGHT WHERE YOU ARE BECAUSE YOU'RE MENTIONING THAT IT IS 88 YEARS OLD, BUT I FEEL LIKE THAT LANGUAGE FOR ME IS PRETTY SPECIFIC.
UH, MAY I MAKE A COMMENT? PLEASE, PLEASE.
UM, EVERYTHING IS HISTORIC AND, BUT WE DON'T VALUE ALL STRUCTURES EQUALLY IN MY EXPERIENCE WHEN WE VALUE A GROUP OF BUILDINGS AND MAKE IT INTO A HISTORIC DISTRICT.
UM, I THINK IF WE TAKE GLENBROOK VALLEY FOR AN EXAMPLE, THERE WAS LIKE A DEVELOPER WHO HAD AN IDEA AND THE BUILDINGS ARE DIFFERENT FROM ONE ANOTHER, BUT THEY ALL RELATE TO THE DEVELOPER'S IDEA ABOUT HOW THE NEIGHBORHOOD SHOULD BE FORMED.
SO IF THIS WERE A CASE IN WHICH SOMEONE HAD SAID, WE, WE NEED DIFFERENT KINDS OF HOUSING IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD, AND HAD PROVIDED A PLAN, A MASTER PLAN WITH ACCOMMODATION FOR MULTIFAMILY AND SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, I THINK THAT WOULD BE, THAT WOULD BE A BASIS ON WHICH TO ARGUE FOR THIS ONE INSTEAD.
IT SEEMS TO ME THAT THIS IS AN OUTLIER HAS BEEN IN SO MANY WAYS AND A KIND OF AD HOC ADDITION, AND I DON'T THINK IT SHOULD BE COUNTED.
UH, I DON'T THINK IT'S HISTORIC NATURE SHOULD, UH, COMPEL US TO, TO CONSIDER IT AS HAVING THE SAME VALUE AS THE, THE OTHER HOMES AROUND IT.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? I DO HAVE, A PERSON HAS ASKED TO MAKE A MOTION.
UM, COMMISSIONER MCNEIL, DO YOU WANT TO A MOVE TO ACCEPT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION TO RECLASSIFY THIS PROPERTY AS NON-CONTRIBUTING? OKAY.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? LET'S TEST THIS MOTION.
ALL IN FAVOR OF THIS MOTION? AYE.
AND THEN ANY ABSTENTIONS? THAT MOTION PASSES.
SO NOW WE'LL BE MOVING ON TO ITEM D, CONSIDERATION OF AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS, APPLICATIONS FOR CONSENT AGENDA.
GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR COMMISSIONERS AND THE PUBLIC.
I AM STAFF MEMBER TERRENCE JACKSON.
AND TODAY'S STAFF RECOMMENDS THE FOLLOWING ITEMS FOR ACTION PER STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS IN ONE MOTION.
ITEMS D 1 6 1 2 WAVERLEY STREET AND ALTERATION.
ADDITION, PROTECTED LANDMARK OF THE SWIFT AND COMPANY PACKING PLANT RECOMMENDATION APPROVAL ITEM D 4 5 5 0 HEIGHTS BOULEVARD ALTERATION ASSIGNED IN THE HOUSTON HEIGHTS SOUTH HISTORIC DISTRICT RECOMMENDATION APPROVAL ITEM D 5 8 1 4
APPROVAL ITEM D 7 6 3 8 HARVARD STREET, NEW CONSTRUCTION OF A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE IN THE HOUSTON HEIGHTS, HIS SOUTH HISTORIC DISTRICT RECOMMENDATION APPROVAL ITEM D 8 6 3 8 HARVARD STREET ALTERATION EDITION OF THE HOUSTON HEIGHTS SOUTH HISTORIC DIS DISTRICT RECOMMENDATION.
APPROVAL ITEM D 9 1 1 2 0 WEST GARDNER STREET ALTERATION EDITION IN THE NOR HILL HISTORIC DISTRICT.
RECOMMENDATION, APPROVAL ITEM D TEN TWO ZERO ZERO SEVEN SHARON STREET, ALTERATION OF WINDOWS AND SIDING IN THE HIGH FIRST WARD.
DENIAL OF A COA AND ISSUANCE OF A COR FOR WORK COMPLETED.
ITEM D 11 2 0 0 3 UNION STREET, ALTERATION OF WINDOWS AND DOORS IN
[00:50:01]
THE OLD SIX WARD.HISTORIC DISTRICT RECOMMENDATION, APPROVAL ITEM D 12 1 5 2 8 COURTLAND STREET ALTERATION OF AN ADDITION IN THE HOUSTON HEIGHTS EAST HISTORIC DISTRICT RECOMMENDATION APPROVAL ITEM D 13 1 5 2 8 COURTLAND STREET IN THE, UM, I'M SORRY, ITEM D 13 1 5 2 8 CORLAND STREET, NEW CONSTRUCTION OF GARAGE IN THE HOUSTON HEIGHTS EAST HISTORIC DISTRICT RECOMMENDATION, APPROVAL, THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT REQUEST APPROVAL OF ALL STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE PROCEEDING ITEMS WE ARE REQUESTING.
ITEMS D 2 8 0 2 COMMERCE BE CONSIDERED INDIVIDUAL INDIVIDUALLY.
AND ITEM D 3 1 15 412 LANE WAS WITHDRAWN BY THE APPLICANT.
WE ARE HERE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
UH, TERRANCE AND I MAY ASK THAT WE PULL ITEM NINE BECAUSE I HAVE SPEAKERS SIGNED UP ON BOTH SIDES.
SUPPORTIVE AND NOT SUPPORTIVE OF THAT ITEM OR 1 1 2 0 WEST GARDNER STREET COMMISSION MEMBERS.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER PROJECTS YOU WOULD LIKE TO PULL? I WOULD LIKE TO PULL, UH, D FIVE.
ANY OTHER PROJECTS? YEP, WE WOULD LIKE TO PULL, UH, D UH, SIX MONG GLEN STREET AND D 10, 2007 HUN STREET.
ANY OTHER PROJECTS YOU'RE NOT HEARING ANYMORE? AND, UH, JUST BASED ON WHAT I HAVE SIGNED TO SPEAK, UNLESS THERE'S, UM, ANY OTHER PERSON IN THE, IN THE AUDIENCE THAT IS HERE, UH, FOR THESE REMAINING CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS, PLEASE ALLOW YOURSELF AT THIS TIME, TERRANCE, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, THE CON THE CONSENT AGENDA WILL BE ITEM ONE, ITEM FOUR, ITEM SEVEN, ITEM EIGHT, ITEM 11, 12, AND 13.
SO IF, IF, UM, OPENING THE PUBLIC HEARING, IF THERE'S NO, IF THERE'S NO ONE THERE, SPEAK ON THOSE ITEMS, I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
UH, COMMISSION MEMBERS, IS THERE A MOTION TO ACCEPT THIS REVISED CONSENT AGENDA LIST ALONG WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS FROM STAFF COMMISSIONER COSGROVE MOVES? IS THERE A SECOND? JONES SECONDS.
ANY OPPOSED? ANY ABSTENTIONS? OKAY, THOSE, THOSE PASS.
AND WE'LL NOW MOVE ON TO ITEM 2 18 0 2 COMMERCE STREET.
UM, MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION, I AM STAFF MEMBER YASMINE ARSLAN.
I SUBMIT FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION ITEM D TWO AT 8 0 2 COMMERCE STREET.
THIS IS A NON-CONTRIBUTING VACANT LOT LOCATED IN THE MAIN STREET MARKET SQUARE HISTORIC DISTRICT LOCATED NEXT TO AND SHARES PROPERTY LINE WITH CONTRIBUTING HISTORIC BUILDINGS AT 800 COMMERCE STREET, UH, UH, COMMERCE.
UM, THE ORIGINAL SUBMISSION WAS APPROVED BY HAHC ON APRIL 21ST, 2022.
THIS APPLICATION IS A REVISION TO A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED, UM, C OF A, THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING THE FOLLOWING CHANGES, UM, AND THE REASON BEHIND IT, THE APPLICANT IS GONNA SPEAK ABOUT THAT.
UM, BUT THE APPLICANT'S PROPOSING THE FOLLOWING CHANGES PROPOSED ARCHITECTURAL CHANGES ARE LIMITED TO THE FOURTH FLOOR.
THE SQUARE FOOTAGE IS PROPOSED TO INCREASE FROM 2000 AND 120 SQUARE FEET TO 3,585 SQUARE FEET MAXIMIZING FLOOR AREA FOR CRITICAL OFFICE AREAS.
THE OCCUPIED AREAS PROPOSED TO EXPAND TO THE NORTH TOWARD COMMERCE AND WEST TOWARD MILAM, MAINTAINING A FIVE FOOT SETBACK ALONG BOTH FRONTAGES WITH THE PROPOSED FOURTH FLOOR FACADES EXPANDING IN FOOTPRINT.
WINDOWS ARE PROPOSED TO BE PUNCHED, OPENING AND CLADDING IS PROPOSED TO BE A DEEP CORRUGATED HORIZONTAL METAL, UM, PANELING IN A DARK BRONZE FINISH.
STAFF IS, STAFF HAS NO RECOMMENDATION.
AND THE REASON BEHIND THAT, THIS TOOK, UM, QUITE SOME TIMES FOR IT TO, TO BE APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION.
[00:55:01]
UH, IT ALSO HAD ABOUT SEVEN OR EIGHT DESIGN REVIEWS.SO WE FELT WE, WE, WE SUPPORT WHAT THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING, BUT WE FELT THAT THIS NEEDS TO COME BACK TO COMMISSION TO DISCUSS, UM, THE CHANGE AND THE, UM, YOU KNOW, CLADDING MATERIAL AND THE SQUARE FOOTAGE.
SO, AND I'M AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
YASMIN, BEFORE I OPEN UP PUBLIC HEARING, ONE THING IS THAT I THINK THE APPLICANT PROPOSED TWO DIFFERENT OPTIONS FOR THE CLADDING OF THIS FOURTH FLOOR.
UH, BUT THERE'S A PREFERENCE FROM THE APPLICANT YES.
FOR, FOR WHAT YOU PRESENTED TO, TO ME.
AND SO HE HAS, HE HAS OPTIONS AS HE WOULD, WOULD LIKE THIS TO BE A DECISION MADE TODAY.
SO HIS MAIN, UM, HE WOULD LIKE TO, TO STICK, AS I MENTIONED, TO THE CORRUGATED, UH, HORIZONTAL METAL ON THE, ON THE, UM, FOURTH FLOOR.
UM, BUT HE ALSO HAS A RENDERING AS, UH, MASONRY IF, IF THAT'S WHAT THE COMMISSION WANTS.
BUT HE WOULD LIKE TO, UH, FOCUS ON THE CLADDING MATERIAL IF THAT CAN GET APPROVED.
AT THIS TIME I'M GONNA OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING QUESTION FOR JASMINE.
ORIGINALLY THE FOURTH FLOOR OF THIS BUILDING THAT WE ALREADY APPROVED WAS TO BE LIKE A, A DECK.
IS THAT CORRECT? IF MY MEMORY SERVED, YES.
AND, UM, DO YOU MIND JASON, GOING TO THE SITE PLAN, UM, OR THE FOURTH FLOOR PLAN SHOWING, AND SO THIS IS HOW IT WAS BEFORE THE SETBACK WAS QUITE BIG AND YES, THE SQUARE FOOTAGE WOULD MUCH SMALLER AND IT READ MORE LIKE A PENTHOUSE.
WHEREAS, UM, IF YOU GO TO THE PROPOSED NOW, IT'S BIGGER AND I THINK, AND I WILL LET THE APPLICANT SPEAK, BUT I THINK, UM, THE, THE HURRICANE AND STORM THAT HAPPENED LAST MAY, WHAT WAS KIND OF EYEOPENING FOR THEM, THAT THE FIRST FLOOR REALLY FLOODS A LOT AND THEY CAN'T PUT WORKSPACES ON THE FIRST FLOOR.
AND THAT WAS THE REASONING BEHIND IT.
AND I'M FAMILIAR WITH THIS PROPERTY.
I THINK THE SUGGESTED FLOODPLAIN WITH THE NEW RESTRICTIONS IS VIRTUALLY AT LEVEL TWO OR JUST BELOW FLOOR LEVEL TWO.
THIS, THIS IS A, THIS IS, THIS CORNER IS VERY LOW CORNER MM-HMM
UH, RELATIVE TO ALL THE BUILDINGS IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA.
SO, UM, AND IT HAS FILLED WITH, UH, A GREAT AMOUNT OF WATER, UM, DURING HARVEY, UM, AS WELL.
WITH THAT, I'M GONNA OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.
I DO HAVE A COUPLE SPEAKERS SIGNED UP.
UM, FIRST IS THOMAS DEROY, UH, FOLLOWED BY BENNY AUGUSTA JR.
I'M GONNA SPEAK FIRST AND SHORTER BECAUSE I'M NOT THE ARCHITECT.
UM, BUT I AM THE OWNER, ONE OF THE OWNERS.
I'M THE MANAGING PARTNER OF THE LAW FIRM AND I'M HONORED TO BE HERE ONCE AGAIN.
UH, WE WERE HERE IN 2022 AND I WAS ABLE TO SPEAK TO Y'ALL AND I APPRECIATED, UH, THE FEEDBACK.
WE HAD A LOT OF FEEDBACK AND WE GOT TO A PLACE THAT WE WERE HAPPY.
REMEMBER I WAS, WHEN I SPOKE THEN I SAID 15, 16, AND 17 WAS HORRENDOUS FOR US FOR OUR BUILDING BECAUSE WE FLOODED ALL THREE YEARS.
AND AT THAT POINT WE KNEW WE COULDN'T USE THE FIRST FLOOR HARDLY.
SO AS YOU GO NOW AND YOU'VE APPROVED, IT LOOKS, IT'S A PARKING GARAGE WITH NICE GATES AND IT LOOKS ACTUALLY WONDERFUL.
THAT LAST CORNER OF THE BUILDING ON THE WEST SIDE, WE'RE STILL USING THE FIRST FLOOR BECAUSE IT WAS SLIGHTLY ELEVATED ABOUT THREE FEET THE WAY IT WAS DONE, YOU KNOW, A HUNDRED YEARS AGO WHEN IT WAS BUILT THAT WAY.
ACTUALLY IT WAS SO TRUCKS CAN BACK UP AND HAD TWO BAYS IF YOU LOOK AT THE INSIDE OF IT.
SO IT WAS REALLY NEAT THE WAY IT WAS DONE.
BUT OF COURSE WE CAN'T USE IT THAT WAY.
WHAT HAS HAPPENED IS I'VE BEEN AT THE FIRM NOW, UH, ALMOST 30 OVER 30 YEARS, EARLY NINETIES.
I WAS THE EIGHTH LAWYER WHEN I CAME ON.
I'M HONORED TO BE THAT NOW WE HAVE 28 LAWYERS AND ABOUT CLOSE TO 90 EMPLOYEES.
WE LOVE OUR BUILDING EVEN WITH ALL THE FLOODING WE HAVE MADE DUE.
AND WITH YOUR HELP, WE WERE ABLE TO MAKE THE ADJUSTMENTS.
WE WANNA BUILD THIS NEW BUILDING.
WHAT HAPPENED THIS YEAR? THE, UH, TORNADO KNOCKED OVER OUR NEIGHBOR'S WALL THAT HAS AFFECTED OUR PARKING GARAGE AND WE STILL CAN'T USE IT.
WE'RE TRYING TO, I THINK WE FINALLY GOT AN ORDER FROM A DISTRICT COURT TO GET IT FIXED IN A CERTAIN ENGINEERING, UH, PROCEDURE SO NOBODY GETS HURT.
AND THEN WE HAD THE FLOODING THAT WE GOT THREE OR FOUR FEET OF WATER AGAIN IN OUR FIRST FLOOR.
THE NEXT DAY THE POWER WAS BACK ON.
WE WERE WORKING THAT OTHER CORNER WHERE WE HAVE ACTUAL STAFF MEMBERS AND, AND LAWYERS THAT WAS DELAYED, YOU KNOW, MANY WEEKS BECAUSE OF THE DAMAGE.
SO WE WENT BACK TO OUR ARCHITECTS AND WE SAID, LOOK, IF WE'RE GONNA BUILD THIS BUILDING, LET'S NOT HAVE MORE OF DAMAGE AND LESS SPACE.
LET'S FORGET ABOUT THE KITCHEN THAT WE PLANNED.
IT WAS GONNA BE A GREAT KITCHEN WITH A
[01:00:01]
BAR AND A PATIO.IF YOU REMEMBER, SOME OF YOU REMEMBER WHY NOT? WE WERE GONNA HAVE A FOURTH FLOOR.
LET'S MAKE IT NICE, BUT NOW WE REALIZE THE REALITY IS WE NEED THE SPACE.
AND SO WE WENT THROUGH THE ARCHITECT AND SAID, FORGET, SCRATCH ALL THAT.
AND HE WISELY TOLD US, YOU CAN'T GO OVER THE WALL TO THE END BECAUSE OF Y'ALL'S RECOMMENDATION.
SO THAT'S WHY WE'RE ASKING THIS MODIFICATION.
UH, OF COURSE WE WANT IT TO LOOK VERY SIMILAR TO WHAT YOU APPROVED IN 2022, AND THAT'S WHY WE'RE KIND OF MAKING THOSE ADJUSTMENTS.
BUT I WILL STOP UNLESS YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS AND LET THOMAS DEROY THE ARCHITECT, GIVE YOU HIS INPUT.
BUT I WOULD JUST SAY, UH, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT PRIOR TO THE RACHO STORM AND THE, THE RECENT HURRICANE, YOU ALL WERE GOING FORWARD WITH CONSTRUCTION.
ALL THE STEEL HAS BEEN, IS IN PROCESS BEING FABRICATED FOR THE DESIGN AS PREVIOUSLY APPROVED.
SO THAT DESIGN IS, IS ACTUALLY BEING, UH, IMPLEMENTED.
AND THE ARCHITECT MAYBE SPEAK TO THAT.
BUT THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING IN THE APPLICATION IS THAT, THAT THE, THAT THAT'S ALREADY, THAT SHIP IS SAILED AND IS SOON TO BE CONSTRUCTION WILL BE COMMENCING, UM, WHEN THOSE ARE FABRICATED.
SO, SO THE PART OF THIS IS HOW CAN YOU ACCOMPLISH THIS ADDITIONAL FLOOR LEVEL GIVEN THE PARAMETERS OF THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED? UM, CAN'T REALLY CHANGE IN THAT, IN THAT, IN THAT REGARD.
STRUCTURALLY, AT LEAST THE STEEL IS LEAD.
AND OF COURSE HE'S GONNA GIVE YOU THE DETAILS ON THAT.
BUT WE HAVE HIRED CONTRACTORS, WE HAVE CONTRACTS, WE HAVE THE BANK APPROVAL FOR THE WHOLE CONSTRUCTION.
WE ORDERED STEEL, WHICH REMEMBER WAS A REALLY DIFFICULT THING TO ORDER WHEN WE FIRST GOT THIS APPROVAL.
SO WE'RE TRYING TO KEEP WITH THE SAME FRAMING, EXCEPT INSTEAD OF HAVING A KITCHEN AND SOME GLASS, WE'RE JUST GONNA TRY TO FRAME IT ALL IN TO HAVE OFFICE SPACE.
SO AGAIN, THE THE ONE INITIAL SPEAKER IS THOMAS FRE.
AND A FEW OF US ON THE COMMISSION HAD A, A MEETING AT OUR MEETING JUST TO DISCUSS THIS.
SO THOMAS F WITHOUT NEED ANY ARCHITECTS.
IT'S NOT OFTEN THAT AN APPLE COMES WITH AN APPROVED, UM, PIECE TO COME BACK, UH, FOR A LITTLE BIT MORE, BUT HERE WE ARE DUE TO THE UNFORTUNATE, UM, SITUATION THAT WE'RE IN FROM THIS YEAR.
UH, AS MR. AUGUSTO SAID, UH, THE NEEDS, THE FUNCTIONAL NEEDS REALLY WERE THE PRIMARY DRIVER OF THIS CHANGE.
SO I THINK THAT WAS ALREADY KIND OF DISCUSSED.
SO I'LL KIND OF DIVE RIGHT INTO THE SPECIFIC CHANGES.
WE'RE NOT LOOKING TO CHANGE ANYTHING FROM THE FIRST, FOURTH OR THE THIRD FLOOR.
I THINK WE HAD A LOT OF GOOD FEEDBACK TWO YEARS AGO WHEN WE CAME TO THE CONCLUSION OF HAVING THAT BRICK, THAT MASONRY, THE WINDOW DESIGNS, EVERYTHING IS SET.
THE FOURTH FLOOR WAS SET BACK, UH, A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT, 16 AND 14 FEET ON THE TWO DIFFERENT STREET SIDES, UH, FOR THAT AMENITY SPACE, WHICH AS MR. AUGUSTO JUST MENTIONED, IT'S JUST SIMPLY NO LONGER NEEDED.
SO AS ARCHITECTURE SHOULD ALWAYS BE FUNCTIONAL FIRST MORE THAN ANYTHING ELSE, UNDERSTANDING THAT THERE'S STILL A PUBLIC FUNCTION OF MAKING SURE EVERYTHING IS HISTORIC, IS STILL RESPECT.
UH, WE'RE HERE TO ESSENTIALLY MAKE THE CASE FOR HAVING A MAXIMIZED AREA ON THAT FOURTH FLOOR.
OUR STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS, NO SURPRISE SAID YEAH, JUST BUILD IT TO THE VERY EDGE AND GO VERTICAL.
THAT'S THE SIMPLEST THING TO DO.
THE LOADS GO VERTICALLY THROUGH THOSE COLUMNS, WHICH HAVE BEEN ORDERED, FABRICATION UNDERWAY.
UH, BUT RESPECTFULLY, WE DID HAVE A COUPLE OF DISCUSSIONS BEFORE.
UH, WE DID GO BACK TO OUR STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS AND SAID, LOOK, WE, WE NEED TO STILL BE RESPECTFUL TO THE HISTORIC DISTRICT.
CAN WE AT LEAST DO SOME SORT OF SETBACK? SO WE DID LOOK INTO A FIVE FOOT SETBACK WITH STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS.
THEY GRUMBLED, WE CONVINCED THEM, PLEASE, LET'S JUST DO THIS.
'CAUSE A FLUSH DESIGN IN REALITY IS NOT EVER GONNA LOOK AESTHETICALLY PLEASING, EVEN IF FUNCTIONALLY IT'S THE BEST.
AND EVEN IF SQUARE FOOTAGE WISE, IT'S CLEARLY THE MAXIMIZED OPTION.
SO A FIVE FOOT SETBACK DOES TURN INTO A DOMINO EFFECT.
AS A RESULT, THE MATERIALS, WHICH WAS MOSTLY GLASS, WITH A LITTLE BIT OF MASONRY IN BETWEEN, IS NOW MUCH MORE VISIBLE TO THE STREET SIDE.
AND AS A RESULT, THAT DOES SUDDENLY LOOK VERY DIFFERENT ALSO, BECAUSE IT'S NOT AN AMENITY SPACE ANYMORE.
YOU KNOW, A LOUNGE, KITCHEN AREA, IT'S REALLY OFFICE SPACE, WHICH MEANS YOU DO NOT WANNA HAVE ALL THAT GLASS.
IT JUST BECOMES VERY PROBLEMATIC FROM A DESIGN POINT OF VIEW.
SO WE ARE LOOKING AT DOING SMALLER PUNCHED OPENINGS, WHICH I DO THINK IS MUCH MORE CONTEXTUAL TO SOME OF THE, UH, CONTEXT ACROSS THE STREET, EVEN WITHIN THE BLOCK FACE AND THROUGHOUT THE DISTRICT ITSELF.
UM, AND SO WE ARE LOOKING AT DOING A, UH, HORIZONTAL, UH, METAL CLADDING AS YESIN MENTIONED, I BELIEVE THE CASE STUDY.
IF YOU COULD FLIP TO THE CASE STUDY PAGE ONE, I BELIEVE IT'S THE, THE COFFEE BUILDING DOWN JUST DOWN THE STREET.
THE SUNSET COFFEE LAKE PLATO, GREAT AUSTIN FIRM DESIGNED THAT, UH, RENOVATION.
UM, WE THINK IT'S
THAT WAY THE MASSING OF THE PRIMARY MASONRY AREA DOES NOT CHANGE, UH, AESTHETICALLY.
[01:05:01]
I THINK THE PUBLIC WOULD READ THAT AS STILL A NICE PROPORTIONED MASONRY ELEMENT WITHIN A, UH, WITH THE PENTHOUSE PIECE BEING UNIQUE IN MATERIAL ON PURPOSE SO THAT IT DOES READ AS SOMETHING DIFFERENT.I'LL TRY TO MAKE IT BRIEF, I PROMISE.
UNFORTUNATELY, THIS BUILDING IS NOT IN THE DISTRICT FAVOR.
UNFORTUNATELY, THIS BUILDING TECHNICALLY ISN'T THE, IN THE DISTRICT, I WOULD ARGUE THAT THE PUBLIC DOESN'T KNOW WHERE THOSE LINES IN THE SAND FALL.
IT'S TWO BLOCKS AWAY AND IS ABSOLUTELY HISTORIC IN OTHER TERMS. UM, THE, AND, AND OF COURSE FROM A TECHNICAL POINT OF VIEW, I THINK MASSING, MASONRY PENTHOUSE, IT'S VERY SIMILAR TO WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING.
UH, THE NEXT, UH, CASE STUDY, I DO WANNA LEAN INTO A LITTLE BIT HEAVIER.
I HAD A PROFESSOR IN GRAD SCHOOL SAY, YOU KNOW, ARCHITECTURE'S NOT ABOUT THE OBJECT, THE BUILDING, IT'S ABOUT THE VOID.
AND IF YOU LOOK AT THE BOTTOM, UH, IMAGE, I PUT THIS IN HERE BECAUSE THERE IS THE, UH, ONE 12 MILAM STREET ACROSS THE STREET, AND IT'S FOUR STORIES, AND IT'S FLUSH TO MILAM.
AND IT'S VERY SIMILAR IN SCALE PROPORTION.
AND THIS NEW CONSTRUCTION WOULD BE ACROSS THE STREET.
AND SO IF YOU THINK ABOUT IT AS AN URBAN CORRIDOR, AS YOU ENTER DOWNTOWN FROM 45, 45, YEAH, UM, YOU ESSENTIALLY HAVE A GATEWAY.
SO I THINK PROPORTIONALLY, CONTEXTUALLY, FOUR STORIES, EVEN FLUSH, I DO THINK MAKES A LOT OF SENSE.
IT EVEN BECOMES MORE RESPECTFUL, LET'S CALL IT, TO SOME OF THE BUILDINGS IN THE VICINITY.
AND THEN THE THIRD CASE STUDY, THE LAST ONE I PROMISE, IS, UH, ONE BLOCK FURTHER TO THE SOUTH, VERY SIMILAR CONDITION.
AGAIN, THIS IS A CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE, JUST LIKE THE ONE BEFORE.
UH, THREE STORIES OF MASONRY WITH A APPROXIMATE FIVE FOOT SETBACK AS WELL ON A, AN INTERESTING POSTMODERN EDITION ON TOP.
UH, I THINK IT'S TWO FEET SETBACK ON THE OTHER SIDE, FIVE FOOT AVERAGE ON THE MILAM SIDE.
AND SO WE'RE DOING SOMETHING VERY SIMILAR TO THAT.
UM, NORMALLY WITH CLIENTS WE ARE, WE TRY NOT TO HAVE MANY, MANY, MANY, MANY OPTIONS BECAUSE SOMETIMES THAT ACTUALLY BECOMES MORE DIFFICULT.
AND SO WE ARE LEANING HEAVILY INTO A FIVE FOOT SETBACK WITH METAL CLADDING, UH, AS OUR PREFERRED SOLUTION.
HOWEVER, I DO REMEMBER TWO YEARS AGO, MASONRY WAS A KEY ELEMENT.
UH, AND THOUGH I DO BELIEVE THE EXTRA MASONRY FOURTH FLOOR MAKES VISUALLY THIS LOOK VERY HEAVY AND MASSIVE.
AND THEREFORE I DON'T BELIEVE THAT'S CONTEXTUALLY THE RIGHT SOLUTION.
I DO HAVE AN IMAGE OF THAT IN CASE ANYONE IS CURIOUS ABOUT WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE.
SO THAT I THINK, UM, CLARIFIES I CAN GO INTO THE FOUR CRITERIA VERY SPECIFICALLY AND HOW ELEMENTS KIND OF TIE INTO SOME OF THOSE MATERIALS.
HAPPY TO GO INTO THAT DETAIL IF YOU'D LIKE.
OTHERWISE, I'LL WAIT FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
I THINK WE'RE FINE UNLESS OUR QUESTIONS FROM COMMISSION MEMBERS.
I KNOW COMMISSIONER COUCH AND I SAT ON A MEETING, AND SO I, I'M CURIOUS.
I, I KNOW I THINK COMMISSIONER COUCH HAS SOME OBSERVATIONS.
UM, BUT BEFORE WE START THAT, I JUST WANTED TO SEE IF THERE'S ANYONE ELSE IN THE ROOM THAT WANTS TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM.
IF SO, AT THIS TIME, PLEASE ANNOUNCE YOURSELF.
I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE ARCHITECT BEFORE YOU.
UM, SIR, COULD YOU HELP ME UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN B AND C? AND THEN WHAT ACTUALLY WOULD WE BE VOTING ON SINCE THERE'S FOUR ALTERNATE DESIGNS IN THE PROPOSAL? SURE.
SO THE ALTERNATE OPTIONS ARE REALLY HERE BECAUSE THE KEY THAT I'M HOPING TO GAIN TODAY IS SOMETHING APPROVED SO THAT WE CAN GET THE CONSTRUCTION STARTED.
AND SO THAT'S WHY I HAVE A COUPLE OF EXTRA OPTIONS IN HERE.
SO YOU'RE ASKING FOR THE DIFFERENCE SPECIFICALLY BETWEEN B AND C, B AND C.
SO IF YOU LOOK AT THE BOTTOM RIGHT, I HAVE A SPECIFIC PLAN VIEW, UM, AND THAT SHOWS YOU HOW OPTION B HAS THOSE METAL PANELS FLUSH WITH THE MILAM AND THE COMMERCE SIDE.
TECHNICALLY I SAY FLUSH, BUT BECAUSE METAL PANELING IS LESS THICK, IT'S A COUPLE OF INCHES, ABOUT FOUR INCHES, LET'S CALL IT RECESSED.
BUT FOR ALL INTENTS AND PURPOSES, IT'S A FLUSH METAL, UH, FACADE WITH THE BRICK BELOW WITH A SLIGHT PUSHBACK.
OPTION C HAS THE FLUSH SIDE ON MYAM, BUT 10 FOOT SETBACK ON COMMERCE SO THAT YOU RETAIN A LITTLE BIT MORE OF THAT ORIGINAL DESIGN WHERE YOU HAVE A DEEPER SETBACK ON COMMERCE.
YOU STILL ARE, SO YOU STILL MAINTAIN THE 10 FEET.
UM, IT WOULD BE AN ASYMMETRICAL FLUSH CONDITION ON BOTH STREET SIDES, VERY SIMILAR TO THE COFFEE, UH, THE SUNSET COFFEE BUILDING, WHICH IS FLUSH ON ONE SIDE AND HAS A HEAVY RECESS ON THE SIDE OF ELEVATION.
DOES THAT ANSWER, WOULD YOU STILL BE ABLE TO WALK OUT HERE AS WELL AND TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THAT AREA? POTENTIALLY 10 FOOT IS TIGHT.
UH, FUNCTIONALLY I WOULD ARGUE IT'S PROGRAMMATICALLY DIFFICULT, BUT POSSIBLE THE FIVE FOOT AND FIVE FOOT, ALTHOUGH WE ARE PUSHING FOR THAT, WOULD IN THEORY NOT BE USABLE AT ALL.
BUT IT DOES GIVE YOU AN EVEN SETBACK.
WE WOULD BE, UM, OBVIOUSLY OPEN TO WHATEVER RECOMMENDATIONS THAT THE COMMISSION HAS, WHETHER IT'S A 10 AND ZERO OR A FIVE AND FIVE.
[01:10:01]
LEAST OFFER A SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN SQUARE FOOTAGE FOR THAT OFFICE AREA, WHICH IS THE PRIMARY PURPOSE OF THE REQUEST.AND I THINK THE, JUST FOR COMMISSION, THE REASON THE STAFF HAD NO RECOMMENDATION IS BECAUSE WE HAVE THESE TWO DIFFERENT OPTIONS.
THEY REALLY WOULD LIKE US TO JUST TO COME BACK WITH A RECOMMENDATION.
SO, UM, BUT THEY ARE, BUT THEY, AS THEY STATED, ARE IN SUPPORT OF THE PROJECT AND IT IS ACTUALLY NEW CONSTRUCTION.
I, I HAVE ONE QUICK QUESTION, PLEASE.
UM, FOR THE THE NEW FOURTH FLOOR THOUGH, YOU'RE, YOU'RE SHOWING THE TOTAL HEIGHT OF IT, IS IT THE SAME AS THE OLD FOURTH FLOOR? IT JUST LOOKS TALLER 'CAUSE IT'S CLOSER TO THE EDGE.
IT'S JUST THE PERCEIVED HEIGHT THAT LOOKS TALLER.
UH, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE ARCHITECT AS WELL, CHRIS.
SO IF, IF WE ARE LOOKING AT ONE OPTION, WHICH IS A FIVE FOOT SETBACK IN, IN TWO DIRECTIONS, THAT'S RIGHT.
AND THE OTHER ONE WILL BE A 10 FOOT SETBACK ON THE, ON THE LENGTH WISE OR ON IN THE FRONT? THE FRONT.
SO THE SHORT FACADE ON COMMERCE STREET WOULD BE A 10 FOOT SETBACK, BUT THE LONGER FACADE AS YOU'RE DRIVING DOWN MILAM, THAT WOULD BE FLUSH AND THAT WOULD BE A ZERO SETBACK.
OH, SO IT'S EITHER FIVE FIVE OR 10 ZERO, ESSENTIALLY THAT WOULD BE A, A SIMPLE A OR B IS, IS IS KIND OF A, IS, YEAH, THAT'S RIGHT.
BUT IN THIS CASE, YOUR, YOUR USABLE OFFICE BASE IS STILL THE SAME SQUARE FOOTAGE.
THE ZERO SETBACK ON MILAM WOULD YIELD MORE SQUARE FOOTAGE AND WITH A 10 FOOT, IT WOULD ALSO YIELD TECHNICALLY, EVEN IF IT'S A SMALL AREA, A LARGE, AN ACTUAL USABLE AREA, UH, ALONG COMMERCE.
BUT THEN IF YOU HAVE A ZERO SETBACK, THEN WHEN YOU HAVE MASONRY FROM ZERO TO THE THIRD FLOOR AND THEN SUDDENLY NOW YOU HAVE METAL, WOULDN'T THAT LOOK UGLY? I DON'T BELIEVE SO.
UM, LAKE PLATO DID THE SAME EXACT CONDITION AND IT WOULDN'T BE FLUSH.
IT WOULD BE, IN FACT, I SAID FOUR INCHES.
THE MORE I THINK ABOUT IT, UH, THE STEEL ITSELF IS SET BACK SO FAR WITHIN THOSE EXTERIOR COLUMNS THAT I WOULD GUESS A ONE FOOT TO ONE FOOT FOUR FOOT RECESS.
SO IT WOULD BE A, IT WOULD NOT BE FLUSH.
I WOULDN'T WANT IT TO BE FLUSH.
THAT WOULD DEFINITELY BE TO YOUR, THAT WAS WHAT I WAS WORRIED ABOUT.
AND I THINK THE BUILDING IS ONE OF YOUR CASE STUDIES.
IT'S, UH, I DON'T THE OFFICIAL NAME, BUT IT WAS PART OF THE MAGNOLIA B BREWERY BREWERY COMPLEX DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET.
UM, HAD SORT OF A LAYERED EFFECT.
WHERE THERE'S A SERIES OF HORIZONTAL, UH, LINES THAT, OF ATTENUATION THAT WAS IN ONE OF YOUR CASE REFERENCES.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE ARCHITECT? OKAY.
CAN I ASK ONE QUESTION PLEASE.
IN THE EVENT THERE'S NOT A STRONG PREFERENCE FOR EITHER OF THOSE TWO OPTIONS, IS IT POSSIBLE TO POTENTIALLY HAVE AN APPROVAL FOR BOTH OPTIONS IN THE EVENT THAT STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING COSTING OR COST BUDGET OR EVEN UH, OWNERSHIP DECIDES AFTER SOME THOUGHT THAT THEY'D PREFER ONE OR THE OTHER? WE CAN CERTAINLY DISCUSS IT.
I'M GONNA CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT THIS TIME.
COMMISSION MEMBERS, UM, I GUESS, I MEAN, COMMISSIONER KA, DO YOU WANT TO RELAY ANYTHING FROM OUR PRELIMINARY MEETING? IT'S BEEN SLIGHTLY REVISED SINCE WE ALSO SAW, SAW THIS.
AND SO, UM, DO YOU HAVE ANY RECOMMENDATIONS OR THOUGHTS ABOUT WELL, I THINK THEY MATERIAL THAT WE'RE RECOMMENDING AND ALSO ONE VERSUS THE OTHER OR BOTH? SURE.
WELL, WE TALKED ABOUT A FIVE FOOT SETBACK ON BOTH SIDES AND THEY, THEY'RE SHOWING THAT TO US.
AND WE ALSO TALKED ABOUT USING A DIFFERENT MATERIAL THAN MASONRY FOR THE FACADE CLADDING.
SO AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED, THEY DID WHAT WE WOULD LIKE THEM TO DO.
AND I THINK THE PROPOSED OPTION IS, IS ACCEPTABLE TO ME.
THE THIS 10 AND FIVE ONE, THIS IS NEW TO ME, BUT, BUT WE TALKED ABOUT FIVE FEET ON BOTH SIDES.
YEAH, WHEN WE MET WITH THEM PREVIOUSLY AND THEY SHOWED US THAT, AND, AND I THINK THAT'S, TO ME, THE BEST WAY TO GO FORWARD.
YEAH, I I AM A HUNDRED PERCENT IN AGREEMENT WITH YOU ON THE FIVE AND FIVE, WHICH ALSO BE REASONABLE IN GIVING THEM THE OFFICE SPACE MORE.
UH, AND ALSO AESTHETICALLY, THE SETBACK BEING EQUAL ON BOTH SIDES, I THINK IT'S AESTHETICALLY MORE PLEASING AND YOU COME OFF 45 OR, UH, COMING INTO THE, FROM, FROM THE HIGHWAY.
AND I THINK, UH, AS A NOT SO HONKING LOOKING THING, I THINK THAT I PREFER THE METAL.
SO I'VE JUST SAID WHAT I PREFER.
SO YOU GUYS MAKE THE RECOMMENDATION.
SO, SO CAN I MAKE A MOTION THEN THAT WE ACCEPT THE PROPOSAL AS IT IS WITH THE FIVE FOOT CEX AND THE DARK COLORED METAL? OKAY.
IS THERE A SECOND? SHOULD WE, SHOULD WE SPECIFY WHAT IT IS WE'RE VOTING ON IN TERMS OF
[01:15:01]
ITS DESCRIPTION IN THIS PROPO UH, SUBMITTAL? I JUST SAID THAT I SAID WHAT, WHAT THEY ASKED FOR.I THINK WHAT THEY'RE ASKING FOR MAY, I THINK THE QUESTION IS, I EXPLAIN WHICH IS THE NUMBER, THE NUMBER ON THE DIAGRAM.
SO THE, THE PROPOSED WORK IS FOR THE METAL CLADDING AND THE FIVE AND FIVE, UH, SETBACKS.
THE, THE APPLICANT, UM, PROVIDED US WITH A SUPPORTING DOCUMENT THAT AT THE END IT SAYS APPLICANT'S MATERIAL SUPPORTING DOCUMENT.
AND IN THOSE DOC, IN THAT DOCUMENT, HE PROVIDED OPTIONS BECAUSE HE, HE, WE DIDN'T WANNA SEE THIS GET DEFERRED.
SO IN CASE YOU DIDN'T LIKE THE PROPOSED WORK, HE HAD OPTIONS TO SEE IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO APPROVE THEM.
BUT THE PROPOSED WORK IS METAL CLADDING AND FIVE AND FIVE SETBACKS.
ANY OTHER QUICK DISCUSSION BEFORE I VOTE OR, OR CALL THE VOTE? OKAY.
ALL IN FAVOR OF THAT MOTION? AYE.
ANY OPPOSED? ANY ABSTENTIONS? THAT MOTION PASSES.
SHE MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.
THIS IS STAFF PERSON KARA QUIGLEY.
I SUBMIT ITEM D FIVE AT EIGHT 14 QUI IN FIRST MONTROSE COMMONS FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
THE PROPERTY INCLUDES A CONTRIBUTING DUTCH COLONIAL STYLE RESIDENCE CONSTRUCTED CIRCA 1920, SITUATED ON A 5,000 SQUARE FOOT INTERIOR LOT.
THE APPLICANT PROPOSES TO RELOCATE THE FRONT DOOR AND STOOP FROM THE RIGHT EAST SIDE OF THE FRONT SOUTH ELEVATION TO THE ORIGINAL LOCATION OF THE PRIMARY ENTRANCE.
THIS ALTERATION IS SUPPORTED BY HISTORIC DOCUMENTATION THAT PROVES THIS PROPOSED RELOCATION IS HISTORICALLY ACCURATE BY BRINGING BACK THE ORIGINAL FACADE ORIENTATION.
THE SIDE PROJECTION WHERE THE EXISTING DOOR CURRENTLY IS LOCATED WAS ORIGINALLY A SUN PORCH BEFORE BEING CONVERTED INTO CONDITION SPACE.
THE DOOR OPENING WILL BE REPLACED WITH A WINDOW THAT WILL BE RELOCATED FROM THE SITE TO MATCH THE EXISTING WINDOWS ON THE FRONT ELEVATION.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.
THE OWNER OF BENJAMIN, INCLUDING IS HERE ON STANDBY.
I AM AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
I'M GONNA OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING.
I DO HAVE A SPEAKER SIGNED UP.
UH, YOU HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF COMMISSIONER STAVO SPEAK.
UH, THE FIRST SPEAK, WELL, ONE SPEAKER SIGNED UP TO SPEAK WHEN THAT WOULD BE STEVEN LONGMEYER.
GOOD AFTERNOON, COMMISSIONER STEVE LONGMEYER.
I'M THE PRESIDENT OF THE CIVIC ASSOCIATION OF THE FIRST MONTROSE COMMONS.
THE OWNERS MET WITH US SHORT VERY SHORTLY AFTER COMING UP WITH THEIR PLANS AND HAVE SHARED WITH US PRETTY CONSISTENTLY.
AS YOU KNOW, I'VE BEEN THROUGH A LOT OF THESE, UH, PROPOSED RENOVATIONS IN OUR HISTORIC DISTRICT AND I AM SINGULARLY IMPRESSED WITH THE AMOUNT OF HISTORIC DOCUMENTATION THAT THEY GOT ON THEIR OWN.
UM, I KNOW THIS HOUSE VERY WELL.
I'VE TRIPPED OVER THE FRONT STAIRS ON THE RELOCATED, UH, FRONT DOORSTEP MANY TIMES AND IT'S ALWAYS SEEMED OUT OF PLACE.
I WHOLEHEARTEDLY ENDORSED THEIR PLANS TO REC, RELOCATE IT BACK TO ITS, UH, ORIGINAL, UH, LOCATION AS A, AN EXAMPLE OF HOW TO DO HISTORIC RESTORATION THE RIGHT WAY.
I HAVE NO ONE ELSE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM, BUT IF ANYONE WANTS TO SPEAK ON THE ITEM, THIS IS YOUR CHANCE TO NOW STAND UP AND APPROACH THE MICROPHONE.
I'M GONNA CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
UH, MR. QUESTION, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR BOTH THE STAFF AND THE OWNER.
UH, I COMMEND YOU IF, IF YOU WERE TO MOVE THE DOOR TO THE ORIGINAL ABOUT MOVING THE DOOR TO THE ORIGINAL PLACE.
BUT MY CONCERN IN THE QUESTION IS AESTHETICALLY THE FRONT DOOR PROPOSAL, I WAS LOOKING AT IT AND IT SEEMS, UH, LIKE 1960S, UH, MID-CENTURY RANCH STYLE DOOR.
AND I'VE SEEN THE KIND OF DOOR AND IT'S, UH, SIMILAR TO LIKE GLEN AND GLENBROOK VALLEY.
SO I WAS JUST WONDERING IF IT'S POSSIBLE TO CHANGE THE, THE STYLE, JUST SOMETHING A LITTLE BIT MORE APPROPRIATE THAT THAT'S FITTING TO THAT HOUSE.
LIKE I'VE SEEN THREE, UH, AND IT CAN'T, SOMETHING THAT COULD BE CHANGED TO, WELL, LET ME LOOK AT IT ONE MOMENT.
I REFERRING TO LIKE CRITERIA THREE, IT SAYS CURRENTLY, UH, IT'S BEING RECOGNIZED AS A BUILDING STRUCTURE, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH.
AND THEN, UH, PRODUCTS OF ITS OWN TIME TO AVOID, UH, THE, THE CHANGING AND CREATING, UH, AND CREATING TO A LATER TIMEFRAME.
[01:20:01]
SO THAT WAS JUST MY CONCERN AND MY QUESTION, I JUST WANTED TO SEE WHAT YOUR THOUGHTS WERE.IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT IMPORTANT DETAIL, BUT IT WAS JUST, UH, ONCE YOU SEE IT, I, I FIND IT PRETTY OBVIOUS.
SO THE APPLICANT IS ALSO HERE, RIGHT HERE.
UH, AND I THINK THEY HAVE VARIOUS OPTIONS THAT THEY'RE CONSIDERING FOR DORIS, BUT THEY CHOSE THAT ONE SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE THEY FELT THAT IT WAS COMPLIMENTARY, UH, REPRESENTATIVE OF THE DUTCH COLONIAL STYLE.
UM, AND THEY INCLUDED A FEW OTHER, UM, IMAGES FROM PREVIOUS OR HISTORIC, LIKE ADS OF THE BUILDING OR SIMILAR BUILDING STYLES.
AND IT HAD, UM, DOORS THAT LOOKED LIKE THAT.
SO THAT WAS THE, WHAT THEY WERE TRYING TO DO.
SO CAN WE, I WANT TO ASK THE OWNER IF HE WOULD, UH, MAYBE CONSIDER, UH, SOME, UH, PICKING MAYBE SOMETHING DIFFERENT STYLE THAT WOULD MORE BE FITTING WITH THE AGE OF THE HOUSE AND BE ABLE TO KEEP THAT, THAT STYLE, BUT FOR THAT DIFFERENT, UM, THE X THE, THE XS THERE AT THE BOTTOM OR THE CROSSINGS THAT THEY'RE ON THE BOTTOM.
I'M GONNA OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING TO ALLOW THE OWNERS TO SPEAK.
BUT COULD YOU STATE YOUR NAME AND, UH, MY QUESTION FOR STAFF IS JUST THAT IF YOU HAVE EVIDENCE THAT THE DOOR THAT'S PROPOSED IS IN KEEPING WITH THIS PERIOD, THAT MIGHT BE HELPFUL TO SHARE.
'CAUSE THAT THE, JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT IF IT SEEMED LIKE THAT COULD BE AN OPTION, IF IT WAS PART OF THAT PERIOD.
BUT I'M CURIOUS WHAT, I KNOW THE OWNER HAS DONE THE RESEARCH, UM, BUT IF YOU COULD ADDRESS THE COMMISSION, MAYBE YOU COULD ANSWER, ANSWER SOME OF THE QUESTIONS FROM COMMISSIONER STAVO.
UH, BENJAMIN, INCLUDING, UH, OWNER OF 8 1 4 QUI, UM, YEAH, THE FRONT DOOR, YOU KNOW, OUR PLAN WAS JUST TO GO WITH A, A DUTCH STYLE FRONT DOOR WITH THE OPENING ON THE TOP, UM, TO WHERE YOU COULD USE THAT FOR AIRFLOW.
UH, WE'RE OPEN TO WORKING WITH STAFF TO FINDING SOMETHING PERIOD APPROPRIATE.
I THINK THAT WAS ONE OF THE FIRST THINGS THAT WE TALKED ABOUT IS, YOU KNOW, OUR, OUR GOAL IS TO MOVE THE DOOR FROM ONE SIDE BACK TO THE OTHER.
UM, WE WANT IT TO BE PERIOD APPROPRIATE.
WE WANT IT TO FEEL, YOU KNOW, LIKE A 1920S HOME.
UM, SO WE'RE OPEN TO OTHER OPTIONS, YOU KNOW, FINDING SOMETHING AND WORKING WITH STAFF.
COULD I ADD, UH, SINCE WE'RE FOCUSED ON THE DOOR, THERE'S, THERE'S EXAMPLES ON PAGE 19 AND 20 OF, UH, THAT ARE VERY SIMILAR TO EACH OTHER.
UH, PRESUMABLY MIGHT BE DEEMED MORE APPROPRIATE.
THAT ONE AND THE NEXT ONE BOTH HAVE A SIMILAR STYLE DOOR.
I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S CLOSER TO WHAT, UH, YES.
YEAH, THAT'S WHAT I WAS THINKING.
SO YOU'RE OPEN TO THAT? YEAH, WE'RE OPEN TO IT.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF THE STAFF OR APPLICANT? THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE TODAY.
YOU GOT HIGH PRAISE FROM, UH, DR.
LET'S, LET'S, THAT'S SAYING SOMETHING.
IS THERE A MOTION I MOVE? DO WE ACCEPT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL AND THAT THE OWNER WORK WITH STAFF, UH, ON THE SELECTION OF THE FRONT DOOR? OKAY.
ANY OPPOSED? ANY ABSTENTIONS? THE MOTION PASSES.
GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.
THIS IS STAFF PERSON KARA WILEY.
I SUBMIT ITEM D SIX AT 7 615 MON GLEN IN GLENBURG VALLEY FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
THE PROPERTY INCLUDES A NON-CONTRIBUTING AMERICAN RANCH STYLE RESIDENCE, CONSTRUCTED CIRCUIT 1963, SITUATED ON A 7,839 SQUARE FOOT INTERIOR LOT.
THE APPLICANT PROPOSES TO REMOVE THE EXISTING ALUMINUM WINDOWS ON THE FRONT ELEVATION ONLY AND REPLACED WITH NEW VINYL WINDOWS TO IMPROVE ENERGY EFFICIENCY.
THIS APPLICATION WAS DEFERRED FOLLOWING THE OCTOBER 10TH, 2024 HHC MEETING TO ALLOW MORE TIME FOR STAFF TO COLLECT ALTERNATIVE WINDOW OPTIONS AND WORK WITH THE APPLICANT TO CONSIDER OTHER REMEDIES.
SINCE THE DEFERRAL STAFF PROVIDED FOUR ADDITIONAL OPTIONS TO THE APPLICANT, WHICH INCLUDED INTERIOR WINDOW INSERTS AS WELL AS THREE VARIATIONS OF MILL FINISH ALUMINUM WINDOWS.
THE DETAILS OF THESE QUOTES CAN BE FOUND ON PAGE 18 THROUGH 22 OF THE STAFF REPORT.
THE APPLICANT HAS REVIEWED AND CONSIDERED ALL AVAILABLE OPTIONS WITH HOP STAFF AND HAS COME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT SHE STILL WISHES TO REPLACE THE EXISTING ALUMINUM WINDOWS WITH NEW VINYL WINDOWS.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.
THE OWNER COULD NOT ATTEND TODAY'S MEETING, BUT HAS PROVIDED A LETTER ADDRESSED TO THE COMMISSION TO STATE HER POSITION.
FOR THE RECORD, THIS LETTER IS INCLUDED ON PAGE 16 OF 25 OF THE SUBMISSION PACKET.
AND I'M HAPPY TO READ IT ON HER BEHALF DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING PORTION OF THIS ITEM.
IF THERE ARE ANY SPECIFIC QUESTIONS ABOUT HOW STAFF CAME TO THIS RECOMMENDATION, THE PRESERVATION OFFICER IS AVAILABLE.
I'M ALSO AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS.
THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
[01:25:01]
THANK YOU.UM, JUST, I'LL JUST ASK IF THERE'S ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE TO SPEAK ON THIS SIDE.
I'M NOT HEARING, I'M GONNA CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
UM, I GUESS WE, I THINK THERE PROBABLY ARE SOME QUESTIONS, BUT I GUESS ONE THING IS, UM, ROMAN, COULD YOU RESTATE AS YOU DID LAST, OUR LAST MEETING, THIS IS A NON-CONTRIBUTING HOUSE AND CAN YOU STATE THE CRITERIA FOR REPLACEMENT WINDOWS? 'CAUSE I THINK THAT LANGUAGE IS GONNA BE IMPORTANT TO OUR DISCUSSION TODAY.
CHAIR, UH, THE, THE CRITERIA IN THIS CASE FOR IS GONNA BE FOUND ON PAGE 2 25 OF THE, THE REPORT, WHICH IS, UM, SECTION 33, 2 40, I BELIEVE.
NO, 33, 2 41, 1 B AT THE BOTTOM.
SO WHEN YOU'RE, UM, ALTERING A NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE, THE PROPOSED ACTIVITY MUST RECOGNIZE, IS THAT THE RIGHT ONE? ON THE RIGHT ONE? CAROL? I'M CHECKING RIGHT HERE.
THIS IS THE MAIN ONE THEY'RE ASKING FOR, RIGHT? RIGHT.
THE, UH, AND, AND THAT'S NOT, SO IT'S NOT SUPPOSED TO LOOK LIKE IT'S TRYING TO LOOK LIKE ANOTHER BUILDING PERIOD.
AND THEN THE B THERE, THE PROPOSED ACTIVITY MUST MATCH THE ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES OF EITHER THAT EXISTING NON-CONTRIBUTING RESOURCE OR THE CONTRIBUTING BUILDINGS IN THE CONTEXT AREA.
NOW THAT'S, AND WE TYPICALLY DO THAT UNDER A, AS, AS A ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL.
UM, BUT THAT'S THE ONLY CRITERIA WE HAVE WHEN IT COMES TO APPROVAL OF ALTERATIONS TO NON-CONTRIBUTING BUILDINGS.
SO I THINK THE DISCUSSION TODAY PERHAPS IS THE WORD MATCH.
UH, WHAT IS THE DEFINITION OF MATCH? UM, YES.
WELL, IT, IT IS, AND, UM, IN A WAY YOU'RE PROBABLY GETTING TO THE QUESTION OF, I THINK LAST TIME WE CAME HERE WE WERE RECOMMENDING DENIAL, BUT WE HAD AN ITEM ON THE LAST COMMISSION MEETING, UM, IF YOU'LL REMEMBER, IN THE HEIGHTS OF A NON-CONTRIBUTING BUILDING WITH WINDOWS, THAT THE WINDOWS IS PROPOSED IN.
THAT BUILDING DID NOT MATCH THE WINDOWS IN THAT NON-TRAINING BUILDING.
IT DID NOT MATCH THE WINDOWS IN THE CONTACT AREA, CONTEXT AREA.
UH, BUT THE, IN THE, IN THAT CASE, THE APPLICANTS HAD THEIR REASON AND THEIR REASON BEING, THEY WERE MAKING AN ULTRA EFFICIENT HOME KNOWN AS A PASSIVE HOUSE, UH, TECHNIQUE FOR BUILDING A HOME, UH, OR RE REHABILITATING A HOME.
AND THIS APPLICANT HERE, WE STAFF REALLY, UH, THOUGHT ABOUT THIS DEEPLY, BUT WE HAVE IT FEEL LIKE AN APPLICANT WHO, FOR HER REASONS IS CHOOSING TO, TO GO WITH THE, THIS VINYL WINDOW.
AND, AND, UM, WE'RE GOING ON THE PRECEDENT FROM THAT LAST DECISION IN THAT LAST COMMISSION MEETING TO SAY, OKAY, WELL WHEN, SO AN APPLICANT PUTS FORWARD A REASON, UM, AND, AND WE FEEL LIKE THIS WOULD BE IS IT'S AN E IT'S AN E EQUITABLE ISSUE FOR US.
SO WE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL, ESPECIALLY GIVEN THAT THE APPLICANT HAS TAKEN THE TIME TO CONSIDER A LOT OF OTHER OPTIONS IN OUR FIELD CARE OVER HERE.
UH, AND WE'VE PROVIDED HER A LOT.
THERE ARE MORE AND THERE'S MORE.
WE, YOU PROBABLY THERE, THERE'S, IF WE HAD MORE TIME, WE COULD OFFER HER MORE, BUT RIGHT NOW SHE WANTS TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE WINDOWS THAT'S PROPOSED.
COMMISSIONER BLAKELY, UH, I APPRECIATE THE, UM, YOUR, JUST YOUR EXPLANATION OF, UH, DEFERRING TO THE REASONS OF THE APPLICANT.
I FEEL THAT THE PARALLEL, WELL, LET'S SEE.
I MEAN, IF THE PARALLEL HOLDS, I THINK WE COULD, COULD POTENTIALLY KIND OF ENDANGER OUR FUTURE EFFORTS TO CONVINCE PEOPLE TO TAKE, YOU KNOW, TO INVEST IN KEEPING THE ALUMINUM WINDOWS IN GLENBROOK VALLEY IF FOR PERSONAL REASONS, THE, THE DEPARTMENT SUPPORTS SOMEONE REPLACING WITH A VINYL.
UM, BECAUSE THERE MIGHT, I MEAN, IF, IF A DEVELOPER COMES UP OR SOMEONE WHO'S BOUGHT THE HOUSE IN ORDER TO SELL IT, UM, YOU KNOW, ANYTHING COULD FALL IN THE CATEGORY OF A REASON, RIGHT? AND SO YOU, WHAT WE WOULD BE SETTING UP IS A SCENARIO IN WHICH SOMEONE HAS REASONS THAT ARE NOT IN THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE, BUT HAVING SET THE PRECEDENT THAT WE, UH, DEFER TO REASONS WOULD HAVE TO THEN DEFER TO THESE, THIS REPLACEMENT AS WELL.
AND THEN THERE'S THE SORT OF SLIPPERY SLOPE PROBLEM THAT IF IT, THE WORD GETS OUT THAT BECAUSE SOMEONE MADE A COMPELLING CASE FOR THEIR PERSONAL DESIRE TO MAKE, UH, THE REPLACEMENT, OTHERS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD MIGHT WONDER, WELL, WHY SHOULD I GO WITH ALUMINUM? AND THEN, THEN, SO I THINK IT'S REALLY A QUESTION OF COMMITMENT TO THOSE WINDOWS THAT IS A PART OF THE, YOU KNOW, THE STYLE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, RIGHT? THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND THAT, I'M NOT SAYING THAT WE SHOULD,
[01:30:01]
I'M NOT, I'M JUST TRYING TO LAY THIS OUT IN THOSE TERMS. NOT AT THE MOMENT ARGUING THAT WE SHOULD SAY NO, BUT I JUST THINK THAT WE SHOULD MAYBE EVEN TAKE A POSITION ON LIKE, WELL, DO WE REALLY THINK THAT THE ALUMINUM WINDOWS ARE WORTH DEFENDING? UM, SO THANK YOU.I MEAN, I, MY MY QUESTION IS, I DON'T QUITE SEE THE PARALLEL WITH THE OTHER PROJECT BECAUSE THE OTHER PROJECT WAS IN A DIFFERENT DISTRICT WHERE WINDOWS FOR PROMINENT WOOD, UH, ORDINANCE ALLOWS FOR, UM, WINDOWS TO BE MADE OF DIFFERENT MATERIALS AS LONG AS THEY RESEMBLE THE WINDOWS IN THE CONTEXT AREA.
AND THE COMMISSION WAS, GAVE SOME DEFERENCE TO NOT ALLOW, NOT HAVING TO REQUIRE THE LOWER SASH BE INSET, BASICALLY.
THAT WAS THE, THAT WAS THE DIFFERENCE.
OTHERWISE THAT WINDOW WOULD'VE ACTUALLY MET THE REQUIREMENTS EVEN ON A CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD.
TO ME THAT THE, THE PROBLEM HERE IS, UM, SORT OF, UH, MR. BLAKEY MENTIONED IS THAT THE HOUSE HAS ALUMINUM.
NOW THE DISTRICT CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES ARE ARE ALL ALUMINUM, OR ARE ALL ALUMINUM WHEN IN THE PERIOD OF SIGNIFICANCE.
SO THE ISSUE IS THAT REPLACING THE WINDOWS, IF THERE WERE, IF THERE WERE ANY OF THE ALUMINUM OPTIONS, THEN THERE, THERE WOULD NOT BE AN ISSUE.
UM, BUT TO ME THAT THAT'S THE, THE ISSUE BEFORE THE COMMISSION IS TO DECIDE WHAT THAT IS.
'CAUSE IT'S, THE DIFFERENCE IS LINDBURG VALLEY IS DIFFERENT AND, UM, YEAH, IT, THE, THE NEIGHBORHOOD RUNS ALUMINUM, UH, HISTORICALLY AND ON THE, ON THE EXISTING NOT CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE.
AND THAT'S, TO ME, THAT'S THE, THE ISSUE BEFORE US TO, TO WORK THROUGH.
I I UNDERSTAND THAT, UH, WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, ANDAND, WHAT BOTH OF YOU ARE, ARE SAYING, THE, UM, IT'S A DIFFICULT TASK.
WE HAVE AN APPLICANT WHO, UH, YOU KNOW, THE STAFF CKR HAS TRIED TO WORK WITH, UH, YOU KNOW, UH, WE, WE CAN'T FORCE PEOPLE WE TO, TO, TO GET EVERY QUOTE AND LOOK AT EVERY OPTION.
I MEAN, SOME DO, RIGHT? UH, BUT, AND SOME PEOPLE HAVE LIMITED CAPACITY TO GET CALLS AND MEET PEOPLE AND MAYBE WORRY ABOUT SECURITY WHO'S COMING TO MY HOME OR ALL KINDS OF THINGS COULD COME INTO PLAY.
UM, WINDOWS IN GLENBROOK VALLEY CONTINUE TO BE A CHALLENGE FOR US AND, AND THE NON-CONTRIBUTING BUILDINGS, AND THERE'S A LOT, THERE ARE A LOT OF BALLS HERE.
UM, I FEEL LIKE THE STAFF'S DECISION, A LOT OF TIMES I HAVE A KIND OF A BASIC PHILOSOPHY.
IF WE END UP ON THE FENCE, WE TILT TOWARDS THE APPLICANT, UH, THAT, AND THAT DOESN'T MEAN Y'ALL HAVE TO DO THAT, BUT, UH, WE CITY EMPLOYEES
I'VE NOT SEEN, I I WOULD SUPPORT ALUMINUM WINDOWS ALL DAY LONG, EVERY DAY ON A CONTRIBUTING HOME IN GLENBROOK VALLEY.
FOR ME, IT'S A NON-CONTRIBUTING HOME.
THE LANGUAGE SAYS THAT SHE'S GOT A MATCH PROPOSED ACTIVITY MUST MATCH THE ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES, MATERIALS, AND CHARACTERS OF EITHER THE EXISTING NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES OR THE CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES.
AND ON PAGE FIVE OF 25, THIS, IT POINTS OUT THAT GLEN STREET INCLUDES 22 PROPERTIES OUT OF THOSE 2219 ARE NON-CONTRIBUTING, AND SEVEN ALREADY HAVE VINYL.
SO SHE'S MATCHING THE OTHER HOUSES IN HER CONTEXT AREA.
BUT WITH RESPECT, THAT'S NOT WHAT THE ORDINANCE SAYS.
I MEAN, IT'S, IT'S YOUR, IT'S WHAT'S ON THE HOUSE ITSELF, OR THE CONTRIBUTING HOMES IN THE APPEARS OF SIGNIFICANCE, WHICH IN THAT CASE IS ALUMINUM.
I MEAN, THE VINYL DIDN'T EXIST WHEN THE NEIGHBORHOOD WAS BUILT.
SO I'M JUST SAYING WE DON'T, WE DON'T ACCEPT IN ANY DISTRICT, UM, WE DON'T USE LATER REPLACEMENT WINDOWS THAT ARE PERHAPS NOT APPROPRIATE AS A BENCHMARK FOR MATCHING.
UM, THE, THE ORDINANCE IS BASED ON THE PERIOD SIGNIFICANCE.
THAT'S ALL, THAT'S ALL I'M SAYING.
SO THE PROBLEM HERE IS IT'S ALUMINUM.
IS IS THAT, THAT'S THE QUESTION BEFORE US.
IT WON'T END WITH THIS SUBMISSION, BUT WE ARE ASKED TO, YOU KNOW, TO COME UP WITH A, A CONSENSUS FOR THIS PROPERTY NONETHELESS.
BUT BB SAYS WE MUST MATCH EITHER THE CONTRIBUTING OR NOT.
SO THE PERIOD IS, IS ALUMINUM AND HOW MANY TIMES HAVE WE VOTED? WE'VE VOTED CONSISTENTLY, EVEN THOUGH WE HAVE TO TAKE EACH ONE AS A STANDALONE ITEM.
WE HAVE VOTED MANY TIMES TO ALLOW PEOPLE TO REPLACE THEIR WINDOWS IN GLENBROOK VALLEY.
AS A MATTER OF FACT, TWO OR THREE MONTHS, WAS IT AUGUST? RIGHT? I THINK WE VOTED TO ALLOW SOMEONE TO REPLACE THEIR WINDOWS AND WE VOTED TO ALLOW SOMEONE ELSE TO NOT REPLACE THEIR WINDOWS.
THE INCONSISTENCY IN GLENBROOK VALLEY DRIVES ME NUTS.
SO, BUT IF IN AUGUST WE SAID, HEY, GO AHEAD AND REPLACE ALL YOUR WINDOWS.
THAT WAS WITH, I DON'T THINK IT WAS WITH VINYL, I THINK IT WAS ALUMINUM REPLACEMENT, BUT WE SAID, HEY, GO AHEAD AND REPLACE ALL YOUR WINDOWS.
BUT IF SEVEN OF HER NEIGHBORS HAVE VINYL WINDOWS AND SHE'S MATCHING OTHER, NON, NON-CONTRIBUTING HOUSES IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AS THEY
[01:35:01]
STAND TODAY, UH, IT, IT'S A PROBLEM EVERY SINGLE MONTH ON THIS COMMISSION ON HOW WE DEAL WITH GLENBROOK VALLEY.UH, BECAUSE IT'S NON-CONTRIBUTING.
I WOULD JUST, I I WOULD, I WOULD AGREE WITH STAFF.
'CAUSE IT'S A NON-CONTRIBUTING HOUSE.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO IF IT'S A CONTRIBUTING HOUSE.
I'M GOING, YOU HAVE TO REPLACE WITH ALUMINUM, BUT I'M APPROVING YOUR REPLACEMENT.
BUT THIS ONE, AS COMMISSIONER EK EXPLAINED IS PRETTY CLEAR.
IT, THE ORDINANCE SAYS MATCH THE OTHER WINDOWS ON THAT SAME HOUSE OR WINDOWS ON CONTRIBUTING HOUSES IN THE DISTRICT.
SO NON OTHER NON-CONTRIBUTING DO NOT PROVIDE THE STANDARD FOR THIS HOUSE.
THERE'S A HOUSE IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD TWO BLOCKS AWAY THAT'S PAINTED PURPLE ABOUT THE COLOR OF YOUR NAME TAG THERE IN FRONT OF IT.
AND SO IF THIS APPLICANT CAME TO US WITH A REQUEST TO PAINT HER HOUSE PURPLE BECAUSE OF THE PRECEDENT, YOU'D BE OKAY WITH IT? I I CAN'T FOLLOW YOUR, I CAN'T FOLLOW YOUR ARGUMENT AT ALL.
IT'S A NON-CONTRIBUTING HOUSE.
WE, SO THERE'S SEVEN, SEVEN OTHER NON-CONTRIBUTING HOUSES IN HER NEIGHBORHOOD AS THAT HAVE FINAL WINDOWS.
IT'S JUST EXPLAINED, AND MAYBE YOU DON'T ACCEPT THE EXPLANATION THAT, THAT WHAT'S RELEVANT IS, IS THE COMPARISON TO THE NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE AT, AT THE PERIOD OF APPROPRIATENESS NOT TO A WHITE COLOR.
I MEAN, THAT'S A HUGE DIFFERENCE.
I CHAIR, I UH, KARA WANNA MAKE SURE WE POINTED OUT THAT WE, THAT IT, YOU EXPLAINED WHY, WHAT, WHY IT'S NOT ANALOGOUS TO THE OTHER DECISION AND JUST TO FOR OUR POINTS.
THE TWO THINGS WERE THAT IT IS A NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE, THAT ONE WAS A NON-CONTRIBUTORY, AND THAT THIS PERSON IS ALSO VERY INTERESTED IN ENERGY EFFICIENCY.
EFFICIENCY, UH, WHICH WAS THE GOAL OF THE OTHER HOUSE TOO.
AND WE, I REMEMBERED THAT YOU WERE GONNA READ HER COMMENTS.
IS THAT STILL, ARE WE GONNA GET TO THE LATER, TO THE, UH, TO THE PUBLIC HEARING? TO THE PUBLIC HEARING PORTION ON THIS ITEM? I, I THOUGHT YOU READ.
SORRY, I THOUGHT YOU READ HER.
LET, LET ME OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING SO WE CAN READ THAT LETTER.
I THOUGHT YOU WERE QUOTING FROM HER IN YOUR, UH, APPLICATION.
SO, DEAR MEMBERS OF THE HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION, I'M WRITING A SECOND LETTER AS MY REQUEST TO HAVE ENERGY EFFICIENT WINDOWS INSTALLED ON THE FRONT OF MY HOME AT 76 15 MOUNT GLEN DRIVE, HOUSTON, TEXAS 7 7 0 6 1 HAS BEEN DEFERRED.
I UNDERSTAND MY HOME IS IN A HISTORIC COMMUNITY, BUT IT IS A NON-CONTRIBUTING HOUSE AND SHOULD BE VIEWED AS SUCH.
HOWEVER, THE CURRENT RECOMMENDATIONS MADE BY THE HISTORIC COMMISSION HAVE NOT BEEN BASED ON THE REASONS I AM REQUESTING THAT INSTALLATION OF ENERGY EFFICIENT WINDOWS, THE SUGGESTIONS SLASH OPTIONS THE HISTORIC COMMISSION HAVE MADE ARE OUT OF THE SCOPE OF WHAT I AM TRYING TO ACHIEVE BASED ON THE FOLLOWING POINTS.
THE WINDOW VENDOR SPECIFIED BY THE HISTORIC COMMISSION IS THREE TIMES THE COST FOR WHICH I HAVE ALREADY OBTAINED A QUOTE.
I HAVE RECEIVED A QUOTE FROM A REPUTABLE VENDOR I HAVE USED PREVIOUSLY, AND THEIR PRODUCTS HAVE CONSISTENTLY MET HIGH STANDARDS OF QUALITY AND PERFORMANCE.
THE FINANCIAL BURDEN OF THE VENDOR, THE HISTORIC COMMISSION RECOMMENDED IS SUBSTANTIAL AND POSES A SIGNIFICANT HARDSHIP.
THE RECOMMENDED VENDOR SUGGESTED IS EVEN MORE EXPENSIVE FOR THE TYPE OF WINDOWS I'M TRYING TO INSTALL.
THE COMMISSION SUGGESTS USING A WINDOW INSERT.
AND THE NEIGHBOR WHO HAS INSTALLED THESE INSERTS DID IT PRIMARILY FOR NOISE CONTROL RATHER THAN FOR WEATHERPROOFING OR INSTALLATION.
MY PRIMARY CONCERN IS TO ENSURE MY HOME IS ENERGY EFFICIENT AND WELL INSULATED, WHICH MY CURRENT VENDOR'S WINDOW EFFECTIVELY ADDRESS THREE VENDOR RESTRICTIONS.
I UNDERSTAND THE COMMISSION'S PREFERENCE FOR CERTAIN MATERIALS TO MAINTAIN HISTORICAL AUTHENTICITY.
HOWEVER, I RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THE FLEXIBILITY TO USE MY PREFERRED VENDOR WHO HAS PROVIDED A COMPETITIVE QUOTE AND WHOSE PRODUCTS MEET BOTH AESTHETIC AND FUNCTIONAL REQUIREMENTS.
RESTRICTING HOMEOWNERS TO A SPECIFIC VENDOR LIMITS OUR ABILITY TO MANAGE COSTS AND CHOOSE TRUSTED SERVICE PROVIDERS.
FOUR, PRESERVATION AND PRACTICALITY.
WHILE I AM COMMITTED TO PRESERVING THE HISTORICAL CHARACTER OF MY HOME, IT IS EQUALLY IMPORTANT TO BALANCE THIS WITH PRACTICALITY AND AFFORDABILITY.
FIVE TIME DURATION START OF PROCESS WAS SEPTEMBER 3RD, 2024 WHEN FEE OF $145 WAS PAID TO HISTORIC COMMISSION.
MY VISION WAS TO HAVE THE ENERGY EFFICIENT WINDOWS INSTALLED BEFORE COLD WEATHER ARRIVE, TO CUT DOWN ON DRAFTS, CONDENSATION RUNNING DOWN WINDOW SILLS, AND LOWERING MY UTILITIES TO KEEP MY HOUSE WARM.
DUE TO ISSUE OF INSTALLING ENERGY EFFICIENT WINDOWS STILL BEING UNRESOLVED, I AM UNABLE TO PURSUE OTHER PRIORITIES.
I AM NEEDING TO ADDRESS MY HEALTH, NEEDING HEART ARTERY STENT PROCEDURE AND MAKE ADDITIONAL IMPROVEMENTS TO THE INTERIOR OF MY HOME.
CONSIDERING THIS, I KINDLY REQUEST THE COMMISSION TO ALLOW THE USE OF MY PREFERRED VENDOR FOR WINDOW REPLACEMENT.
CONSIDER THE PRACTICALITY AND FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS OF THE SPECIFIED MATERIALS AND
[01:40:01]
VENDOR RESTRICTIONS.ALLOW FOR MATERIALS AND DESIGN THAT WILL COMPLIMENT BOTH APPEARANCE AND MAKE MY HOME MORE EFFICIENT.
I APPRECIATE YOUR UNDERSTANDING AND LOOK FORWARD TO YOUR FAVORABLE RESPONSE.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION TO THIS MATTER.
MAY I ASK A QUESTION OF STAFF PLEASE? COMMISSIONER BLAKELY? UH, MY QUESTION IS, WAS THE ENERGY EFFICIENCY OF THE WINDOW INSERT PART OF THE CONVERSATION? IT WAS, UM, AND SHE JUST STILL WASN'T CONFIDENT WITH IT.
UM, WE REFERRED HER TO A PREVIOUS APPLICANT IN GLENBROOK VALLEY WHO HAS USED THE WINDOW INSERTS, BUT SHE WAS USING THEM FOR A DIFFERENT PURPOSE, PRIMARILY FOR SOUND.
AND SO WHEN WE SPOKE WITH HER, SHE FELT LIKE, YOU KNOW, THAT WAS SOMEBODY NEARBY WHO, YOU KNOW, DIDN'T SEE ANY DIFFERENCE OF WHAT SHE WAS TRYING TO MEET.
UM, SO SHE WASN'T INTERESTED IN IT AND SHE WAS JUST MORE COMFORTABLE REPLACING ALL OF THEM.
BUT THE REALITY IS OBJECTIVELY IT DOES MAKE A DIFFERENCE.
YEAH, I MEAN, THEY'RE USED, SOMETIMES THEY'RE USED FOR, SOUNDS LIKE IN COURTHOUSE STORE COURTHOUSE SOMETIMES THEY'RE USED FOR ENERGY EFFICIENCY.
UM, THEY JUST HAVE A DUAL, THEY, THEY'VE DID DUAL BENEFITS AND THERE ARE MULTIPLE VENDORS WHO MAKE THE INTERIOR STORM WINDOWS.
IT JUST SAYS, ARE THERE ARE MORE THAN ONE MANUFACTURER OF ALUMINUM WINDOWS? UM, IT'S JUST THE ONE I THINK THAT QUOTES WE'RE GETTING WERE, WERE, WERE OBTAINED FROM WAS A LOWER COST OPTION MM-HMM
UM, THAT MAY HAVE BEEN LOOKED AT, BUT YEAH.
BUT TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, COMMISSIONER BLAKELY, YES.
THE INFORMATION WAS PROVIDED TO HER.
SO SHE IS AWARE OF ALL THE RESEARCH ON IT AND SUCH, BUT SHE STILL, STILL CHOSE AGAINST IT.
AND I JUST WANNA RESTATE AS MY UNDERSTANDING GLOBALLY AS WE STEP BACK FROM THIS PROJECT, THAT IF, IF HOME IS NOT CONTRIBUTING, AND I'LL, I'LL SPEAK TO SPECIFICALLY GIL VALLEY, IF A HOME IS NOT CONTRIBUTING, THE HOMEOWNER CAN REPLACE THEIR WINDOWS.
I THINK THAT THAT IS MY UNDERSTANDING BECAUSE THAT THERE'S NOTHING IN THEIR ORDINANCE THAT DOESN'T ALLOW THEM TO CHANGE OUT THEIR WINDOWS.
YOU COULD TEAR THAT IN YOUR HOUSE.
YOU, AND YOU COULD, YOU COULD REPLACE YOUR WINDOWS.
THE QUESTION IS WHAT IS THE COMPARABLE MATCH TO THE WHAT WAS ON THE NON CONTRIBUTING HOUSE OR ON THE CONTRIBUTING HOMES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD WITHIN THE PERIOD OF SIGNIFICANCE, BASICALLY WHEN THEY WERE, WHEN THEY, WHEN THESE HOMES WERE BUILT? THAT, THAT, THAT'S REALLY THE WHAT'S BEFORE US TO FIND A CONSENSUS ONE WAY OR ANOTHER.
AND SO THE OTHER NON-CONTRIBUTING HOUSE THAT CAME BEFORE US WHERE SHE HAD THE DIAMOND LIGHT PATTERNS AND WE VOTED TO NOT ALLOW HER TO CHANGE THOSE OUT, RIGHT.
IT WENT BACK TO APPEALS AND APPEAL BOARDS SAID, GO AHEAD AND CHANGE HER WINDOWS.
AM I RECALLING ACCURATELY OUR HISTORY? I DON'T RECALL WHETHER THAT WAS, WELL, AGAIN, I DON'T RECALL AT THE TIME WHETHER IT WAS CONTRIBUTING OR NOT CONTRIBUTING, BUT I'M JUST SAYING.
BUT, BUT BASED ON, BASED ON THE PRESENTATION FOR THIS PROJECT AT LAST MONTH'S PRESENTATION, READING THROUGH THE ORDINANCE, THAT IS WHAT, THAT WAS A CONSENSUS THAT STAFF AGREED THAT WE, WE HAD CONSENSUS ON.
ARE THE, ARE THE QUESTIONS OR DISCUSSIONS? I MEAN, I FEEL LIKE THERE'S TWO PRESSING ISSUES WITH THIS THAT WE NEED TO DISCUSS AT THE END, RIGHT? BECAUSE IT HAS TO DO WITH GLENBROOK VALLEY AS A WHOLE AND NOT THIS INDIVIDUAL HOUSE AT THE END OF THIS MEETING VERSUS THIS YEAH.
DURING COMMENT THEN IS THERE A MOTION BEFORE WE DO THAT? I, WE HAVEN'T SAID IT YET, BUT JUST TO POINT OUT THE OBVIOUS, I I THINK IT WOULD BE A TERRIFIC SHAME TO LOSE THESE WINDOWS WHEN THERE ARE OPTIONS PROPOSED THAT CHECK ALL THE BOXES IF WE'RE GONNA TALK ABOUT HARDSHIP THAT COSTS FAR LESS THAN WHAT THIS APPLICANT HAS STATED A PREFERENCE FOR.
AND SO BEYOND THE ISSUE OF THE MATERIAL OF THE FRAMES THEMSELVES, I THINK WE MENTIONED AT THE LAST MEETING, BUT WE DIDN'T SAY IT AGAIN TODAY, SO I'LL SAY IT, GO AHEAD AND GO TO PAGES, UH, 11 THROUGH 12, PLEASE.
THE, THE CHARACTER OF THESE WINDOWS AND THE GLAZING THEMSELVES, HOPEFULLY, OBVIOUSLY IS VERY MUCH A PART OF THIS HOUSE AND THEREFORE THIS DISTRICT, UH, THERE ARE OTHER EXAMPLES OF THIS, BUT, BUT THIS ONE IS, IS AN EXTREMELY, UH, DRAMATIC CASE OF THAT THERE'S OVER 900 PIECES OF GLASS IN THIS WOMAN'S
[01:45:02]
FOUR WINDOW OPENINGS IN THE FRONT OF THIS HOUSE.THEY'VE BEEN THERE FOR 60 GOING ON 70 YEARS.
YOU KNOW HOW MANY OF 'EM ARE BROKEN? 'CAUSE WE'VE LOOKED AT EACH OF THEM.
IT'S A COMPLETELY INTACT AND OPERABLE SYSTEM OF SLIDING WINDOWS ON THE ENDS AND SINGLE HUNGS IN THE MIDDLE.
IT'S PART OF THE HOUSE AND IT'S PART OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND WE'RE GONNA ALLOW, POTENTIALLY ALLOW SOMEBODY TO TEAR IT OUT BECAUSE I THINK IT'D BE A SHAME.
WELL, IS THERE A MOTION TO ATTEST? UM, BECAUSE I'M NOT TOUCHING IT.
I, I'M GOING TO SAY BECAUSE, UH, I'M, I'M RECALLING A MOMENT IN THE SUMMERTIME WHEN I WAS REACHING OUT TO PEOPLE, UH, TO TRY TO CULTIVATE A CONVERSATION ABOUT GLENBROOK VALLEY AND ONE RESPONSE, AN EMAIL RESPONDENT SAID THAT THERE'S NO ISSUE HERE.
THE JOB OF THE COMMISSION IS TO ENFORCE THE ORDINANCE.
AND, UH, IF THE COMMISSION CAN'T DO THAT, IT'S BECAUSE IT LACKS A BACKBONE.
ACTUALLY, IT WAS LIKE, BECAUSE I LACK A BACKBONE IF I, IF I'M NOT COMFORTABLE SIMPLY ENFORCING THE ORDINANCE.
UM, AND I THINK ON SOME LEVEL THE ORDINANCE IS THERE TO ADDRESS THE NEIGHBORHOOD, RIGHT? TO KEEP THE CHARACTER THIS CONSISTENT.
AND SO I THINK WHAT WHAT PUTS US IN A BIND IS THAT WE ARE TASKED WITH PROTECTING THIS MASS OF BUILT MATERIAL AND THEN PRESENTED WITH ONE AFTER ANOTHER INDIVIDUAL CASE, UM, OF A PERSON WITH CONCERNS AND A CERTAIN SCOPE OF CAPACITY TO THINK.
AND, AND IN THE, IN THE SAME TIME, WE, WE LACK A CULTURE.
WE HAVEN'T YET, WE, AND I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S EVEN OUR RESPONSIBILITY.
MAYBE IT'S OUTSIDE OUR SCOPE TO CULTIVATE A CULTURE OF STEWARDSHIP OF THESE HOMES, RIGHT? SO WITHOUT THAT, IT COMES DOWN TO A SIMPLE QUESTION OF THE SORT OF CALLOUSNESS OF THE COMMISSION THAT CAN ONLY SEE THE NEIGHBORHOOD AS A WHOLE AND CAN'T ACKNOWLEDGE THE SIGNIFICANCE OF INDIVIDUAL SITUATIONS VERSUS, UH, THE IRRESPONSIBILITY OF THE COMMISSION THAT RESPONDS TO THE INDIVIDUAL CASES AND ABANDONS ITS MISSION.
SO I THINK ALTHOUGH I, MY HEART GOES OUT TO THIS RESIDENT, THIS OWNER WHO HAS MADE SO MANY EFFORTS TO WORK WITH THE CITY AND WITH STAFF, UM, I THINK THE SYSTEM NEEDS TO CHANGE.
BUT I, I, I THINK THAT IN THIS CASE, OUR TASK IS PRETTY CLEAR, IT'S PRETTY CLEAR CUT IN TERMS OF OUR RESPONSIBILITY TO THE ORDINANCE.
UM, AND THE ORDINANCE IS PRETTY CLEAR IN WHAT IT WOULD WOULD SAY ABOUT A CASE LIKE THIS.
I DO THINK WE NEED TO HELP CULTIVATE THAT CULTURE.
UH, I'M SORT OF AT A LOSS FOR WHAT TO DO GIVEN WHAT I SEE AS OUR ROLE, UH, FOR THIS PERSON.
UH, MAY I SPEAK? SURE, YEAH, PLEASE.
UH, I'M GOING TO NUMBER ONE SAY VERY CLEARLY THAT I AM NO GLENBROOK VALLEY WINDOW EXPERT.
SO I'M GONNA TAKE IT LIKE FROM A, FROM A, UH, VERY, I WOULD SAY UNBIASED PERSPECTIVE.
SO THE FIRST QUESTION I HAVE IS THEN TO ALL THE COMMISSION AND TO MAYBE STAFF IN FRONT AS WELL, IS IF THIS IS A NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE, IS THE APPLICANT ALLOWED TO REMOVE THE WINDOW, WHETHER IT'S IN WORKING CONDITION OR NOT IN WORKING CONDITION? YES, THEY ARE ALLOWED.
THIS IS A NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE.
SO THEY CAN REMOVE THE WINDOW.
SO THAT ANSWERS QUESTION NUMBER ONE FOR ME.
SO NUMBER TWO, THEN THE FOLLOW ON QUESTION IS IF THEY HAVE, IF THEY HAVE THE, IF THEY HAVE THE RIGHT TO RE TO REMOVE THAT WINDOW, THEN THE QUESTION IS, MUST THEY PUT IT BACK IN ALUMINUM OR DO THEY HAVE A CHOICE TO PUT VINYL OR ALUMINUM? DO THEY HAVE A CHOICE? WELL, AS POINTED OUT BEFORE THAT, THAT THEY HAVE TO, IT MATCH THE ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES, MATERIALS AND CHARACTER OF EITHER THAT EXISTING HOME OR THE CONTRIBUTING HOMES IN THE CONTEXT AREA.
SO IN THIS CASE, THE ANSWER TO THAT IS IT
[01:50:01]
CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES OF THAT AREA? IT MEANS IT'S ALL ALUMINUM IF I, IF I READ IT CORRECTLY, THE ORIGINAL CONSTRUCTION.SO THEREFORE THE CHOICE IS NOT THERE REALLY.
THIS DEFINITELY YOU NEED TO REPLACE IT BACK WITH ALUMINUM AND IT HOUSE, THIS HOUSE ORIGINALLY WAS ALUMINUM, RIGHT? THESE ARE THE ORIGINAL WINDOWS.
I THINK THAT'S, THAT'S ON, ON UH, CONTESTED.
AND, AND SO TO YOUR POINT, WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IN THAT SCENARIO, THE REPLACEMENT OF THESE ORIGINAL ALUMINUM WINDOWS WITH, UH, REPLACEMENT ALUMINUM WINDOWS? WHAT WOULD BE LOST WOULD BE THIS SPECIAL GLAZING DETAIL, THE PENTON, BECAUSE IT DOES EXIST IN OTHER HOUSES IN GLENBROOK VALLEY, BUT IT ALSO, THERE'S ALSO THE PLANE GLAZING WITHOUT THIS HARLEQUIN PATTERN IN NON-CONTRIBUTING AND CONTRIBUTING ORIGINAL STOCK.
SO LET, LET ME PLAY THE BAD GUY.
LET ME MAKE A RECOMMENDATION AND WE SEE WHERE WE GO FROM THERE.
UH, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO, UH, UH, ALLOW THE APPLICANT TO REPLACE THE WINDOW, BUT WITH ALUMINUM, BECAUSE THAT'S THE, UH, STYLE OR THE, THE MATERIAL OF THAT, UH, CONTRIBUTING ERROR.
DOES THE MOTION NEED TO, UH, ADDRESS THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION SPECIFICALLY? I THINK YES.
CAN YOU PUT STAFF RECOMMENDATION BACK UP OR RESTATE IT? WHAT WAS STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR VITAL? RESTATE IT.
APPROVAL
SO I THINK YOUR MOTION STARTS OUT SOMETHING LIKE, I RECOMMEND WE, UH, NOT TAKE AGAINST STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND FOR WHATEVER YOU, YOU'RE CHOOSING TO SUBSTITUTE.
SO I, I WILL, UH, KIM, PLEASE CORRECT MY LANGUAGE IF IT GETS WRONG.
SO NUMBER ONE, I WOULD, UH, I WOULD NOT AGREE WITH STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL.
INSTEAD, UH, I WOULD LIKE THE APPLICANT TO BE, UH, GIVEN THE OPTION TO UH, REPLACE, UH, THE, UH, CURRENT ALUMINUM WINDOWS AND WITH ALUMINUM WINDOWS, UH, WITH NEW ALUMINUM WINDOWS.
THAT WILL BE MY RECOMMENDATION MOTION.
WOULD THEY NEED ENERGY EFFICIENT ALUMINUM? YES.
I MEAN, I WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT ALUMINUM WINDOWS.
ARE YOU, MY QUESTION FOR YOU, UH, ARE YOU INCLUDING THE, UM, THE, THE DIVIDERS OF THE DIAMOND PATTERN? NO, THAT'S, THAT'S NOT POSSIBLE.
IF THESE COME OUT, THEY DON'T COME BACK IN.
NO ONE, NO ONE MAKES THAT IN THE LAST 15 YEARS.
AT LEAST MY UNDERSTANDING, I WAS JUST WONDERING IS, UH, MY KNOWLEDGE IS THAT ONCE YOU REPLACE THOSE HARLEQUIN, THEY'RE NOT COMING BACK.
JUST SIMPLE ALUMINUM WINDOWS, BUT AT LEAST, AT LEAST IT'S ALUMINUM WINDOWS, NOT VINYL.
UH, DO I NEED TO REPEAT? NO, I DON'T THINK SO.
BUT IS THERE A SECOND? I WOULD JUST ADD ENERGY EFFICIENT ALUMINUM WINDOWS JUST TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THAT EXISTS.
OUR FRIENDLY AMENDMENT, I WOULD ADD ENERGY EFFICIENT ALUMINUM WINDOWS, BUT MILL FINISH, MID MILL FINISH.
IT'S ONLY THE, THE WINDOWS ON THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE.
THE APPLICATION IS ONLY FOR THE ONLY THE FRONT FACADE.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? AYE.
ANY OPPOSED? ANY ABSTENTIONS? MOTION PASSES.
WE'LL NOW MOVE ON TO I BELIEVE ITEM 9 1 1 2 0 WEST GARDNER STREET.
GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE HHC.
THIS IS STAFF PERSON TERRENCE JACKSON.
AND TODAY I SUBMIT TO YOU ITEM D NINE AT 1 1 20 WEST GARDNER STREET, A CONTRIBUTING HOME LOCATED IN THE NOR HILL HISTORIC DISTRICT.
THE PROPERTY INCLUDES THE CONTRIBUTING 1,182 SQUARE FOOT, ONE STORY WOOD
[01:55:01]
FRAME, SINGLE FAMILY BUNGALOW RESIDENCE, AND AN EXISTING DETACHED GARAGE SITUATED ON A 5,000 SQUARE FOOT INTERIOR LOT.THE HOME HAS A NON-ORIGINAL ADDITION AT THE REAR, AT THE REAR, WHICH WILL BE DEMOLISHED PRIOR TO THE ADDITION.
BUT THE FOOTPRINT HAS BEEN INCORPORATED INTO THE PROPOSED DESIGN.
THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A VERY MODEST SIDE AND REAR ADDITION TO THE RESIDENCE, WHICH HAS SUFFERED SEVERE DAMAGE TO THE CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES, STRUCTURES, ROOF, CEILING, WALLS, AND WINDOWS.
AS A RESULT OF THE, THE DERECHO WINDSTORM ON MAY 17TH, 2024, THE APPLICANT PROPOSES TO CONSTRUCT A TWO TH 271 SQUARE FOOT ADDITION TO THE SIDE AND REAR OF THE EXISTING HOME, BRINGING THE TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE HOME TO 1,453 SQUARE FOOT REPAIR AND REPLACE SIDING AS NEEDED AND INSTALL NEW SIDING AT ADDITION TO MATCH THE EXISTING HAVE A THREE FOOT THREE AND A HALF INCH SETBACK AT THE WEST PROPERTY LINE MATCH EXISTING FINISHED FLOOR OF ONE FOOT EIGHT AND A HALF INCHES.
CONSTRUCT A NEW FRONT FACING GABLE ROOF TO MATCH EXISTING SIX OVER 12.
PITCH AND PROPOSE 18 FEET, TWO 18 FOOT, TWO INCHES, TWO INCH RIDGE HEIGHT, WHICH IS ONE FOOT SIX INCHES HIGHER THAN THE EXISTING RIDGE.
CONSTRUCT THE ADDITION WITH A PLATE HEIGHT OF 11 FOOT TWO AND A HALF INCHES, WHILE THE TOP PLATE OF THE EXISTING IS NINE FOOT EIGHT AND A HALF INCHES.
RESTORE THE HISTORIC WINDOWS AS NEEDED THROUGHOUT THE HOME.
NEW AND NON HISTORIC WINDOWS SHALL BE CUSTOM BUILT WOOD WINDOWS TO MATCH THE ONE OVER ONE LIGHT PATTERN.
INSTALL COMPOSITE ROOF SINGLES TO MATCH THE EXISTING CONSTRUCT.
THE HOME WITH EXPOSED RAPTOR TAILS TO MATCH THE EXISTING HAVE A HIGHER EVE OF 10 FOOT ONE AND A QUARTER.
WHILE THE EXISTING IS EIGHT FOOT SEVEN INCHES, THE HOME HAS A UNIQUE SIGHT CIRCUMSTANCE STANCE WITH BEING APPROXIMATELY SIX FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINE ON THE WEST SIDE.
STAFF WOULD LIKE TO CALL YOUR ATTENTIONS TO PAGE FIVE THROUGH SEVEN TO REVIEW THE PHOTOS OF, TO REVIEW THE PHOTOS OF SOME OF THE DAMAGES CAUSED BY THE TREE FALLING ON THE HOME AND DAMAGING A PORTION OF THE CONTRIBUTING ROOF WHERE THE PROPOSED ADDITION IS IS TO BE CONSTRUCTED.
PLEASE ALSO RECOGNIZE THE ENGINEER'S REPORT, WHICH IS ATTACHMENT A, WHICH BEGINS ON AT PAGE 27.
STAFF WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THAT THE OWNER AND THE AGENT HAVE BEEN IN CONTACT WITH PLUM ALLEY TO RECEIVE QUOTES FOR WINDOW RESTORATION AND TO BUILD CUSTOM WINDOWS FOR THIS PROJECT.
THE WINDOWS THAT WILL BE RESTORED AND REPLACED SHALL BE RESTORED AND CONSTRUCTED BY PLUM ALLEY, REDUCE THE SIZE OF THEIR INITIAL PROJECT IN AN EFFORT TO KEEP THEIR DESIGN IN LINE WITH THE NOR HILL NEIGHBORHOOD.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL FOR OF THE COA CHAIR MEMBERS OF THE HHC.
THE AGENT AND THE OWNERS, OWNERS ARE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK AND I'M AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
THIS INCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
AT THIS TIME I'M GONNA OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING.
I DO HAVE FOUR, UM, INDIVIDUALS LINED UP TO SPEAK.
UH, THE FIRST SPEAKER WHO SIGNED UP IS JULIA PEACOCK, FOLLOWED BY FORS MCFARLAND.
I AM THE HOMEOWNER AND I'M HERE WITH MY FIANCE, UH, FORS.
UH, GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSIONER AND COMMITTEE MEMBERS.
IF YOU HAD TOLD ME A YEAR AGO THAT I WOULD BE HERE, I WOULD'VE THOUGHT YOU WERE CRAZY.
HAVING FRESHLY MOVED INTO MY FIRST HOME WITH MY FIANCE.
HOWEVER, ON MAY 16TH, THE DIRETO BROUGHT TWO VERY LARGE PECAN TREES INTO AND ONTO OUR HOME IN NOR HILL.
WE WERE IMMEDIATELY GRATEFUL THAT THE HOME HAD KEPT US SAFE WITHIN, BUT IT WAS RECOGNIZABLE.
THE HOME WAS INCREDIBLY AND IN SOME WAYS IRREVERSIBLY DAMAGED FROM THE IMPACT AND RAIN THAT FOLLOWED.
AS REMEDIATION PROGRESSED, THE SAD REALITY SUNK IN.
BUT WE LOOKED FOR AN OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE LEMONADE FROM THE LEMONS THAT LIFE HAS HANDED US BY ADDING TO THE HOME WHILE MAKING THESE NECESSARY REPAIRS.
THE PROPOSED ADDITION IS SPLIT INTO TWO PARTS.
ONE IS THE 113 SQUARE FOOT ADDITION ON THE SOUTHEAST OF THE HOME, WHICH WILL SERVE AS A UTILITY ROOM TO MOVE THE MECHANICS AND UTILITIES, WHICH ARE CURRENTLY ALL IN THE GARAGE, STILL INTO THE HOME.
THE SECOND PART IS A 158 ADDITION TO THE SOUTH SOUTHWEST OF THE HOME, CONCENTRATED IN THE AREA MOST IMPACTED, NO PUN INTENDED BY THE TREES.
THIS ADDITION IS TO BE DISTRIBUTED AMONG EXISTING SPACE IN THE HOME TO INCREASE FUNCTIONALITY FROM THE DAY AFTER THE DISASTER.
WE'VE WORKED HARD THROUGH REMEDIATION TO TRY AND PROTECT AND PRESERVE AS MUCH OF THE HISTORICAL ELEMENTS OF THE HOME AS POSSIBLE.
I CONSULTED VIA PHONE CALLS WITH THE OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION THROUGHOUT.
WE DIRECTED THE REMEDIATION COMPANY TO SAVE AS MUCH OF THE SHIPLAP AS POSSIBLE, EVEN VISITING
[02:00:01]
DURING THE DAY TO DO CHECK-INS AND EVEN PULL SOME OUT OF THE DUMPSTER.WE SPENT HOURS REMOVING THE DECADES WORTH OF NAILS ON, SAW HORSES IN OUR BACKYARDS.
WE'VE REACHED OUT TO THE WINDOW COMPANIES AND PLUMB ALLEY SPENT THE TIME TO HELP US TO UNDERSTAND WHICH WINDOWS WERE HISTORIC, WHICH WEREN'T, AND WHAT OUR OPTIONS WERE, AND THAT ALL THE HISTORIC WINDOWS DO NEED REPAIR AND OR RESTORATION.
DUE TO THE IMPACT WE CONSULTED WITH NEIGHBORS TO FIND A CONTRACTOR WHO HAD A TRUSTED REPUTATION FOR WORKING IN HISTORIC DISTRICTS AFTER BEING TAKEN ADVANTAGE OF BY A REMEDIATION COMPANY AND HAS A WILLINGNESS BOTH TO WORK WITH INSURANCE AND OURSELVES.
HOWEVER, OUR STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING REPORT WAS EYEOPENING CALLING FOR THE COMPLETE REMOVAL OF THE NON HISTORIC ADDITION, THE ROOF AND SUPPORT SYSTEM, A RELEVELING OF THE HOME AND A REBUILDING OF AN ENTIRE NEW ROOF AND SUPPORT SYSTEM.
WE HAVE WORKED TO ATTEMPT TO FIND SOME ALTERNATIVES TO TRY AND RESTORE AS MANY OF THE HISTORIC ELEMENTS OF THE HOME WERE FEASIBLE, WHILE STILL NEEDING TO REBUILD SOME OF THE AREAS MOST DAMAGED TO RESTORE A STRUCTURALLY SOUND HOME.
WE'RE DOING OUR BEST TO PRESERVE THE HISTORIC CHARACTER AND MATERIAL OF THE HOME WHILE ADDING FUNCTIONAL SPACE IN A WAY THAT MAINTAINS A BACKYARD DOES NOT IMPEDE ON OUR NEIGHBORS IS SIMPLE, COST-EFFECTIVE, HARMONIOUS WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND WOULD ENABLE US TO STAY IN THE HOME FOR MANY YEARS TO COME.
AND I'LL BE HERE TO ANSWER ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS, EITHER ABOUT THE DAMAGE THAT WAS, UM, INCURRED BY THE TREES, UH, ANY OF THE PLANS, AND I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME IN REVIEWING THEM.
UM, YOU MAY, YOU MAY GO AND STAND BY AND WE MAY LET OTHERS SPEAK, BUT THERE MAY BE QUESTIONS.
BUT, UM, WE'RE SORRY TO HEAR ABOUT THE STORM.
THE STORM HAD TREMENDOUS IMPACTS ACROSS THE CITY.
UM, I WOULD SAY EVEN MORE THAN A HURRICANE FROM VERY SIMILAR, UM, BUT IN A VERY SHORT DURATION, UH, UNLIKE A HURRICANE.
SO, UM, BUT THE NEXT SPEAKER, UM, SIGNED UP WAS, UH, FOREST MC MCFARLAND, IF YOU'D LIKE TO SPEAK.
MY NAME IS FORREST MCFARLANE, APPLICANT AND HOMEOWNER.
I JUST WANTED TO MAKE MYSELF AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS.
UH, THE NEXT SPEAKER I'LL CALL IS ROD FRAGO.
I BELIEVE HE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK LAST IF POSSIBLE.
UM, THE OTHER SPEAKER I'VE SIGNED UP IS VIRGINIA KELSEY.
UM, I'M VIRGINIA KELSEY AND I AM HERE AS THE VP OF DEED RESTRICTIONS FOR NOR HILL.
UM, PLEASE BE AWARE THAT THE PLANS FOR THIS PROJECT HAVE NOT YET BEEN SENT TO NOR HILL FOR APPROVAL.
LAST FRIDAY WHEN THE AGENDA FOR TODAY'S MEETING WAS POSTED, I REACHED OUT TO THE OWNER AND RECOMMENDED SHE SUBMIT THE PLANS.
WE HAD HAD AN EXCHANGE OVER THE SUMMER IN WHICH WE WERE OFFERED.
WE OFFERED TO MEET WITH HER AS WE DO WITH EVERY HOMEOWNER THAT COMES TO US TO HELP 'EM THROUGH THE PROCESS.
WE ENCOURAGE OWNERS TO WORK IN PARALLEL WITH HOP IN RESPONSE TO OUR REQUEST TO HER PLANS, THE OWNER INFORM US, QUOTE, I WAS ADVISED BY THE CONTRACTOR THAT THE MOST MAJOR CONCERNS CAN COME FROM HAHC.
HE TOLD US THAT ONCE WE HAD HAHC CHANGES INCORPORATED, WE WOULD SUBMIT TO NOR HILL.
THIS IS BECOMING AN INCREASING PROBLEM FOR NOR HILL AND EVERY HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOOD.
CONTRACTORS GAIN THE APPROVAL OF HAHC AND PROCEED WITH GETTING A PERMIT.
THEIR GOAL, IT APPEARS, IS TO, AND THIS MAY BE AN ASSUMPTION, IS TO BYPASS CIVIC ORGANIZATIONS AND HOAS AS THEY SEE IT EASIER TO GET APPROVAL FROM YOU WHO MAY BE LESS FAMILIAR WITH EVERY NEIGHBORHOOD.
THE APPLICATION FOR PERMIT SIMPLY REQUIRES A SIGNED STATEMENT UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY THAT THE OWNER IS COMPLIANCE WITH DEED RESTRICTIONS.
THERE IS NO VERIFICATION THAT ANY CIVIC ORGANIZATION OR HOA HAS APPROVED PLANS.
WHAT ENSUES IS LIKELY VERY FRUSTRATING FOR THE OWNER.
AND IN SOME CASES, THE CONTRACTOR USES THIS TO THREATEN THE CIVIC ORGANIZATION.
IT LEAVES US OUR ONLY RECOURSE TO BE A LAWSUIT.
IS THERE A SECOND JOHN SECONDS.
NNA REQUEST THAT A REQUIREMENT OF COMING BEFORE HAHC IS A LETTER FROM THE OWNER'S COMMUNITY.
IT DOES NOT HAVE TO BE A LETTER IN SUPPORT OF A PROJECT, BUT SIMPLY TO ALLOW A NEIGHBORHOOD THE OPPORTUNITY TO VOICE THEIR OPINION.
WE WISH TO WORK WITH THE CITY TO IMPROVE THIS PROCESS AS FAR AS THE DESIGN ITSELF BEFORE YOU, THE DEED RESTRICTIONS COMMITTEE REVIEWED THE PLANS OF
[02:05:01]
THE SUBMISSION ONLINE AND WE GENUINELY WANT TO APPLAUD THE OWNER FOR THEIR VERY MODEST SCALE EDITION.AND ESPECIALLY IN THIS, IN, IN LIGHT OF WHAT'S HAPPENED TO THEM AND ALL OF YOUR WORK TO TRY TO MATCH THE WINDOWS AND EVERYTHING ELSE.
OKAY? I WANT THAT TO BE CLEAR.
UM, HOWEVER, OUR ONLY CONCERN THAT WE HAVE, AND WE WANNA WORK WITH THEM ON IT, IS THE RAISED EVE HEIGHT AS WE FEEL LIKE IT OVERPOWERS THE HOUSE ON THE SIDE.
WE'RE NOT TRYING TO CHANGE THE SQUARE FOOTAGE, BUT THAT'S OUR CONCERN, IS THAT IF YOU WOULD LOWER THE EVE HEIGHT, THAT WOULD BE MORE IN KEEPING WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
WE'RE CONCERNED ABOUT ALLOWING HIGHER EVE HEIGHTS AS IT SETS PRECEDENT THAT MIGHT DISRUPT THE SCALE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
IN THE PAST, HAHC HAS REPEATEDLY SUPPORTED OUR POSITION.
THAT ADDITION SHOULD MATCH THAT OF THE ORIGINAL HOUSE.
ANY QUESTIONS? NOT AT THIS TIME, BUT THAT MAY CHANGE.
I DO HAVE A NUMBER OF SPEAKERS SIGNED UP.
UH, THE NEXT SPEAKER I WILL CALL IS MARIAN WRIGHT.
HERE WE GO AGAIN, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.
A CIVICS CLUB COMING AND GIVEN THEIR OPINION, ABSOLUTELY FABULOUS, WONDERFUL.
THEY'RE ALLOWED TO DO SO, BUT SAYING THAT AN APPLICANT HAS TO GO TO A CIVIC CLUB BEFOREHAND AND THAT BEING A MAJOR ISSUE, IT SHOULDN'T BE.
THEY SHOULD BE ABLE TO COME TO YOU GUYS OR APPLY AND DO IT WITHOUT HAVING TO GO TO THEM.
I'M SORRY, BUT THIS HAS TO STOP.
THE CIVICS CLUBS DO NOT HAVE THE POWER THAT THEY'RE TRYING TO GRASP.
SO JUST REALLY, REALLY, THAT'S ALL.
AND THE LAST SPEAKER I HAVE SIGNED UP ON THE LIST IS ROD FRIGO.
UH, ROD FRIGO, THE AGENTS FOR MY CLIENTS.
UH, WE JUST HEARD VIRGINIA TELL YOU AGAIN WITH A BIG TALL TALE.
WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO GO TO WHOEVER WE WANT TO.
THERE'S NOTHING IN THAT DEED RESTRICTION SAYS I CAN'T COME TO YOU FIRST.
AND THE REASON WE COME TO YOU FIRST, THAT'S WHERE WE SPEND THE MONEY.
IT COSTS US MONEY TO COME HERE.
AND IF I DON'T GET THE STAFF ON MY SIDE AND YOU PEOPLE ON MY SIDE, I DON'T HAVE NOTHING.
NOW THEY THINK THEY GOT JURISDICTION OVER YOU PEOPLE.
THEY CAN'T EVEN PROVE THAT PROCTOR PLAZA ASSIGNED THE DEED RESTRICTION ENFORCEMENT TO NOR HILL.
WE'VE ASKED FOR IT FOR THREE YEARS NOW.
I'M GETTING A LAWYER GONNA GET IT COMPELLED.
IF THEY DON'T HAVE IT, I'M GONNA TABLE THEM NOW.
DO THEY OR DON'T THEY? IT'S A VERY SIMPLE QUESTION AND THEY WON'T ANSWER IT.
'CAUSE I KNOW FROM 1980S WHEN I TALKED TO WILLIE CHILDRESS IN THE NINETIES, THERE'S MAJOR PROBLEMS THERE AND THERE'S NOTHING ON FILE.
JOHN ELLO OWNS A LOT OF TITLE COMPANIES.
HE SEARCHED EVERYWHERE, NOTHING ON FILE.
AND WE BELIEVE THAT PEOPLE IN PROCTA PLAZA, SOME OF THE MEMBERS WOULDN'T GO ALONG WITH IT, SO THEY WOULDN'T SIGN IT.
SO THEY DON'T HAVE THE SO-CALLED POWER.
THEY'RE JUST A CIVICS CLUB WITH ZERO POWER, NO GOVERNMENT POWER.
NOW DO WE TRY TO GET ALONG WITH 'EM? YEAH, BUT THEY'RE NOT GONNA TELL US WHAT WE HAVE TO DO OR WHO WE HAVE TO SUBMIT TO.
YOU'RE THE ONES THAT ARE IN CHARGE HERE AND IT GOES FROM YOU BACK TO THEM THEN TO THE CITY.
YEAH, WE'RE IN THE DRIVER'S SEAT AND THEN THEY GOTTA START WORKING WITH US.
THEY COME OUT WITH THIS NONSENSE.
OH, IT'S 10 FOOT WALL HEIGHT FOR SIX FEET.
NOW THEY'RE LUCKY TO EVEN HAVE A HOUSE STANDING IF THEY WANT TO.
AND YOU KNOW THIS, DAVE, IF AN INSURANCE COMPANY AND AN ENGINEER CONDEMNS THAT HOUSE, YOU GUYS ARE GONNA HAVE TO GO ALONG WITH IT OR LOSE IT IN THE COURTROOMS. IS THAT TRUE? GRANT THE SPEAKER MORE TIME.
IS THERE A SECOND? THANKS BUDDY.
BUT MR. VAGO, CAN YOU ADDRESS THE APPLICATION BEFORE US? WHAT DO YOU WANT ME TO ADDRESS? I MEAN, UH, I'M JUST THEIR AGENT.
I JUST, UH, TRIED TO HELP HIM.
GET AN ENGINEER TO LOOK AT IT, THEN TAKE IT FROM THERE.
GO TO THE HISTORIC, GET APPROVAL, GO TO THE CIVICS CLUB, TELL 'EM HERE'S WHAT WE GOT.
BUT THEY'RE LUCKY THEY HAD TWO BIG
[02:10:01]
TREES THAT, THAT HOUSE IS EVEN STANDING NOW.YOU GOTTA GIVE 'EM CREDIT FOR TRYING TO PUT IT BACK.
IT'S A NICE LITTLE HISTORIC HOME.
BUT THEY ALSO HAVE THE RIGHT TO USE THEIR ENGINEERING REPORTS AND THEIR INSURANCE REPORTS WHERE THEY COULD TABLE THAT PLACE.
WE WANNA LEVEL IT, FIX IT, AND GET ON DOWN THE ROAD.
NOW THEY'RE ALL BLAMING CONTRACTORS.
YOU EVER NOTICE THAT NOR HILL COMES HERE EVERY WEEK OR EVERY TIME YOU HAVE A COMMISSION MEETING AND BLAMES THE CONTRACTORS? DON'T YOU THINK A LITTLE BLAMES ON NOR HILL? YOU GOT TWO PEOPLE RENEGADES IN THERE RUNNING IT.
IN MY OPINION, NEITHER ONE OF 'EM TELL THE TRUTH.
SO, YOU KNOW, YOU GUYS MAKE YOUR OWN DECISION.
BUT WE CAME HERE AND THAT'S WHERE WE'RE ASKED TO GO.
THAT'S WHERE WE SPENT THE MONEY.
AND YOU MAKE YOUR OWN DECISION WHAT YOU'RE GONNA DO WITH THESE PEOPLE, BUT AT LEAST MAKE IT SO YOU GET ON DOWN THE ROAD AND GET BACK THEIR HOUSE BACK TOGETHER.
INSURANCE COMPANIES FUNDED IT, THEY'RE READY TO GO.
WE WE WILL ADDRESS THE APPLICATION BEFORE US.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WANTS TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? I DON'T HAVE ANYONE ELSE SIGNED UP.
I'M GONNA CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT THIS TIME.
UM, COMMISSION MEMBERS, ARE THERE QUESTIONS OF STAFF, UM, ABOUT THE APPLICATION BEFORE US? I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION.
I MOVE TO ACCEPT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.
ANY OPPOSED? ANY ABSTENTIONS? THAT MOTION PASSES.
OKAY, WE'RE GONNA MOVE ON TO ITEM TEN TWO ZERO ZERO SEVEN SHERN STREET.
AND I'LL JUST SAY FOR THE COMMISSION AND FOR LEGAL, UH, I'D LIKE TO AT LEAST MAYBE IN IN OUR, OUR COMMISSION COMMENTS WE CAN MAYBE ADDRESS.
UM, IT, IT SOUNDS LIKE WE HAVE LOTS TO TALK ABOUT.
BUT WE CAN, WE CAN, WE CAN TALK ABOUT SOME PROCEDURAL THINGS AS WELL.
BUT I'LL, I'LL PUSH THAT TO THE END OF THE MEETING IF, IF THAT, IF THAT'S ACCEPTABLE.
GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIR MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.
THIS IS STAFF PERSON JASON LILIENTHAL.
TODAY I SUBMIT FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION ITEM D 10, 2007 SHE SHEET AND FIRST WARD, THIS COMES TO YOU AS A, UH, POLICE OFFICER.
THE OWNER GARY WILLIAMS BOUGHT THIS PLACE YEAH, BACK IN JANUARY AND HE IS FAITHFULLY GOING TO RESTORE IT.
AND HE ACTUALLY GOT A LOWER PRICE THAN, UH, REAL ESTATE DEVELOPERS.
HE JUST WANTED TO TEAR IT DOWN.
THEY SOLD IT TO HIM BECAUSE ONE, HE'S HPD AND HE WANTS TO RESTORE IT.
A COUPLE OF THINGS THOUGH IS SANBORNS DO SHOW THAT THIS WAS ORIGINALLY A ONE STORY QUEEN ANN.
AND AS YOU LOOK ON WHAT'S BEING SHOWN ON THE MONITOR, ANOTHER SANBORN SHOWS IT AS ONE STORY.
ONCE WE GET TO 1950 BECOMES TWO STORY.
SO I'VE BEEN INFORMED THANK YOU, UH, TO UH, KNOWLEDGEABLE COMMISSION MEMBERS THAT THIS WAS FIRST FLOOR WAS RAISED UP, WHICH BECAME THE SECOND FLOOR AND THEY BUILT THE FIRST FLOOR.
SO IT'S THE SAME FOOTPRINT, BUT THE ORIGINAL BUILDING THAT WAS THERE BACK IN THE LATE 1890S.
SECOND FLOOR IS WHAT'S THE ORIGINAL? SO THERE IS GHOSTING ON THE FRONT OUTLINED THERE IN THAT RED OF WHERE THAT FRONT DOOR IS.
AND AT SOME TIME IN THE PAST, THAT DOOR WAS REMOVED AND THEY PUT ON A NON HISTORIC WINDOW.
BUT AT SOME TIME THERE, IT WAS A DUPLEX IN THE HARRIS COUNTY BUILDING LAND ASSESSMENT SURVEY LISTED AS A DUPLEX.
SO YOU HAD ONE FAMILY UPSTAIRS, ONE FAMILY ON THE SECOND FLOOR, AND THAT SECOND FLOOR HAD A PORCH WITH THE DOOR.
BUT AGAIN, AT SOME POINT THAT DOOR WAS ENCLOSED, THE PORCH WAS REMOVED.
SO AS WE COME TODAY, HE HAS BEEN RESTORING IT.
STAFF HAS BEEN FOUR STAFF VISITS TWO BACK IN JANUARY.
I HAVE PHOTOS BACK IN JANUARY WHERE THERE'S A LOT OF SIDING DAMAGE.
THERE'S ACTUALLY A, UM, MIX MATCH OF SIDING THAT'S GOING ON THAT PREVIOUS OWNERS DID TO TRY AND KEEP IT GOING.
THE RIGHT ELEVATION HAD THE EXTENSIVE SIDING DAMAGE.
AND THAT'S WHERE WE SEE A LOT OF REPLACEMENT OF ONE BY SIX SEAT SIDING.
SO WHAT WE SEE NOW IS LARGE PORTION OF SITE IS REPLACED.
AND THAT SECOND STORY WHERE A DOOR WAS AND IT WAS A NON HISTORIC WINDOW, WAS REPLACED WITH THE WINDOW THAT STAFF LEAVES IS APPROPRIATE.
THAT WAS TAKEN OFF OF THE REAR.
IT'S MATCHING THE SAME DIMENSION AS THE, UH, ORIGINAL WINDOWS AND THE LIGHT PATTERNS.
SO I'LL CONCLUDE WITH SAYING THAT STAFF RECOMMENDS DENY OF THE COA ISSUANCE OF THE COR FOR WORK COMPLETED.
THE OWNER IS NOT HERE TO SPEAK.
THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
I'M AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
LEMME JUST OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING IF THERE'S ANYONE IN THE ROOM THAT WOULD SPEAK TO THIS ITEM.
I'M GONNA CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
MY ONLY QUESTION IS THE WORK WAS DONE WITHOUT A C OF A, BUT YOU DO CONDONE THE WORK THAT WAS DONE.
IS THAT, IS THAT ACCURATE OR CAN, CAN YOU COMMENT ON WHAT WAS DONE?
[02:15:02]
THE WORK THAT WAS PERFORMED, WHAT, WHAT YOU TAKE ISSUE WITH AND WHAT YOU, WHAT YOU IS ACCEPTABLE? OKAY, SO AS I'VE SAID, I'VE BEEN IN CONTACT WITH THIS OWNER, UH, EVER SINCE HE BOUGHT IT BACK IN JANUARY.I DID SAY THERE ARE SMALL SECTIONS OF SIDING THAT ARE DAMAGED.
IT SAID THOSE SMALL SECTIONS THAT'S ORDINARY, ORDINARY MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR, YOU DON'T NEED TO SEE AWAY FOR THAT.
HE SAID, BUT IF YOU'RE GONNA DO ANYTHING ELSE WITH THE WINDOWS, CONTACT ME FIRST.
THEN HE TOLD THE CONTRACTOR, GIVE THE GREEN LIGHT, MOVED IT.
SO NOW WE'RE AT THIS POINT, BUT I ALWAYS MAKE SURE THAT I KEPT HIS APPLICATION ON FILE AT SOME POINT WHEN WE MIGHT NEED, IF HE, DURING THE RESTORATION, IF HE FOUND ANYTHING ELSE THAT MIGHT COME UP THAT WE NEED TO GET APPROVAL FROM THE COMMISSION.
AND SO NOW WE'RE AT THIS POINT AND NOW ASKING FOR APPROVAL STAFF RECOMMENDATION OF THE ISSUANCE OF A COR.
RIGHT, BUT YOU, YOU, YOU, YOU ARE APPROVAL STAFF IS AN APPROVAL OF WHAT HAS BEEN DONE AS A C OF R.
YEAH, I WAS TRYING TO AVOID SAYING THAT, CONDONE IT, BUT UM, FOR THE WORK COMPLETED, YES, I DO BELIEVE THAT IS APPROPRIATE AND COMPATIBLE.
IS IT MAINLY JUST THE WINDOW WINDOW AGAIN, WITNESS SIDING, ALL THE MAINTENANCE? NO, NO, NO.
THERE WAS MORE REMOVED THAN, YEAH.
ORDER AND INCIDENT REPAIR WOULD BE SMALL SECTIONS.
THAT WHOLE RIGHT ELEVATION HAS BEEN REMOVED.
SO THAT'S, YOU TAKE A WHOLE ELEVATION, THAT'S WHEN WE SEEK A COA FOR THAT.
AND AS FAR AS THAT WINDOW, IT CANNOT BE AA BECAUSE IT SAYS THAT IN YOU MAINTAIN THE WINDOW OPENING AS A SMALL WINDOW, IT GOT ENLARGED.
UH, FOR JASON, I ACTUALLY, UH, BROUGHT THIS UP.
UH, THIS IS IN, IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO I WANT TO BE OPEN AND CLEAR ABOUT THIS.
BUT I ALSO WANNA STATE THAT THIS IS THE ONLY TWO STORY HOUSE, ORIGINAL HOUSE IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT.
SO PRESERVATION OF THIS HOUSE IS OF PARAMOUNT IMPORTANCE TO THIS HISTORIC DISTRICT.
UM, SO GOING BACK TO THE QUESTION WHY I PULLED THIS WAS BECAUSE BASED ON SANDBORN, AND BASED ON JASON'S DESCRIPTION, THERE WAS A SECOND STORY PORCH, UH, WHICH WAS BASICALLY THE, THE FIRST STORY PORCH ELEVATED TO THE SECOND STORY AND ORIGINAL DOOR THERE.
UM, I AM CONCERNED THAT JUST BY, UH, AND I'M GUESSING THIS APPLICANT HAS, UH, NOT APPLICANT, THE OWNER HAS ACTUALLY MOVED A WINDOW FROM THE BACK OF THE HOUSE, BACK OF THE ORIGINAL HOUSE TO THE FRONT, WHICH IS FINE, BUT I DON'T THINK THAT THAT, UH, WHAT I'M OBJECTING TO IS ACTUALLY PUTTING A WINDOW.
AND THEN FIVE YEARS FROM NOW, EVERYBODY THINKS THAT ORIN WAS ORIGINALLY THERE.
UH, TO ME, UH, BEING THE FRONT FACADE OF THE HOUSE IS CRITICAL.
IF, IF WE ARE GOING TO DO SOMETHING TO THE FRONT AND IT'S SOMETHING THAT IS NOT ORIGINAL, OUR RELATIVES PUT SIDING BECAUSE SOMEDAY SOMEBODY IS GOING TO MAYBE RESTORE THIS HOUSE, ANOTHER OWNER AND THEY CAN RESTORE THE HOUSE TO THE TWO STORY PORCH THAT IT WAS.
UM, AND THE REASON WHY I CAN SAY THAT IS BECAUSE ON THE FIRST, ON THE ORIGINAL, UH, QUEEN END HOUSE, THE WINDOWS ARE TALLER, MUCH TALLER.
AND THE, AND THE FIRST STORY HOUSE, WHICH IS SUBSEQUENTLY LIKE A PERIOD OF DURING CRAFTSMAN STYLE, UH, IT, THE WINDOWS WERE CHUBBIER BASICALLY SHORTER.
AND TO PUT THIS WINDOW LIKE AS THOUGH IT'S THE ORIGINAL QUEEN AND IN THE FRONT, IT CAN BE MISLEADING THE FACT THAT THIS WAS THERE FROM THE VERY BEGINNING AND IT'S NOT.
SO I WOULD RATHER THAT IF THERE IS A COR THAT THIS WINDOW ACTUALLY BE REMOVED AND JUST PLAIN SIDING THERE.
SO NOT TO MISLEAD, UH, PEOPLE IN THE FUTURE.
WHY NOT MAKE 'EM PUT A DOOR THERE THEN? BECAUSE THAT WAS A DOOR ORIGINALLY? YES, THEY WILL, THAT WILL BE MY PREFERENCE TO PUT A DOOR BACK THERE.
BUT THEN I WOULD THE WHOLE HOUSE MISLEAD PORCH MISLEADING TO WHAT WAS THERE ORIGINALLY.
'CAUSE THEY ADDED A FIRST FLOOR TO A ONE STORY HOUSE.
SO IT'S, I I GUESS I'M CONFUSED AS TO WHAT THE RIGHT THING TO DO HISTORICALLY WOULD BE GIVEN THE AMOUNT OF MODIFICATION THIS HOUSE IS ENDURED.
YEAH, THE SAND BARN MAP CLEARLY SHOWS THAT WHEN THE HOUSE WAS RAISED, THERE WAS TWO PORCHES THERE AS WELL.
IF YOU GO BACK TO THE SANDBORNE MAP OF THE 1950, UH, IF YOU GO BACK TO THE 1950 VERSION, THERE IS A TWO AND TWO, YOU CAN SEE THAT THERE IS TWO PORCHES ORIGINALLY.
[02:20:01]
I WAS JUST BEING THE CONSERVATIVE DOMINIC, YEAH, I WOULD SAY YOU NEED TO RESTORE THE TWO PORCHES.UH, BECAUSE THE, YOU CAN SEE THE ORIGINAL PORCH IN THE, RIGHT NOW THE, THE EXISTING PORCH IS SUPPORTED BY SOME METAL BARS, SOME METAL POSTS.
IT'S NOT EVEN THE WAY IT WAS ORIGINALLY.
BUT I DON'T THINK I AS A COMMISSIONER CAN FORCE SOMEBODY TO REBUILD TWO PORCHES.
SO, YOU KNOW, UH, SO, BUT THE FACT THAT THEN MY FEAR IS THAT TO PUT THE THIRD WINDOW, LIKE AS THOUGH IT WAS ORIGINALLY THERE MAKES AS THOUGH THE HOUSE LOOK LIKE THREE ORIGINAL WINDOWS IN THE FRONT TO BEGIN WITH.
AND THAT'S NOT ACTUAL IF, IF YOU WILL.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER DISCUSSIONS OF STAFF? ROMAN, YOU MAKE A COMMENT? I DO.
I JUST WANNA SAY THAT WHY I UNDERSTAND THE REASONING COMMISSIONER YAP BEHIND THAT, UM, FROM A PRESERVATION, YOU KNOW, POINT OF VIEW.
IT, IT, IT IT'S YOU, IT'S IN MY CASE HERE.
'CAUSE SO WHEN THEY, WHEN THEY MOVED TO THE SECOND FLOOR, AND I KNOW WE'RE USING THAT MAP RIGHT THERE THAT YOU SEE BEFORE YOU, AND, AND JASON JUST INFORMED ME THAT WE'RE USING THAT TO SAY THAT THE SECOND THAT THE PORCH WAS, THERE WAS A SECOND FLOOR PORCH, UH, ALLEGEDLY MAYBE THAT YOU COULD COME OUT THAT DOOR AND BE ON A PORCH.
ALTHOUGH, AND I WAS TRYING TO USE MEMORY TO FIGURE OUT IS THAT REALLY WHAT THAT TOO MEANS? I THINK IT'S REASONABLE TO THINK THAT IT DOES, BUT I'M NOT A HUNDRED PERCENT SURE THAT TOO.
AND THAT LOCATION ON THAT DRAWING ACTUALLY MEANS THAT IT MIGHT, IT MIGHT BE, AND I DON'T KNOW IF, UH, ASHLEY JONES, COMMISSIONER JONES, IF YOU, DO YOU READ THAT THAT WAY? MY INTERPRETATION IS THAT IT'S A TWO STORY PORCH.
SO THEN YES, IT WAS CONVERTED TO COMMISSIONER MCNEIL'S POINT.
AT SOME POINT IT WAS CONVERTED TO THIS ONE WINDOW, UH, THERE AND THEN MANY, MANY, MANY DECADES HAVE PASSED AND PORCH ROTS OFF AND WHAT HAVE YOU.
AND NOW THE, UM, THE CURRENT OWNER WHO'S AN OFFICER WITH THE HOUSTON, UH, POLICE DEPARTMENT, I UNDERSTAND, HAS BOUGHT THIS.
AND HE, HE DID WITHOUT A PERMIT MOVE THAT WINDOW.
BUT IF I HAD SEEN THE APPLICATION TO REMOVE AN ORIGINAL WINDOW FROM THE REAR ELEVATION AND PUT IT IN THIS LOCATION, I WOULD BE THINKING TO MYSELF, YOU'RE REMOVING A NON-ORIGINAL WINDOW AND YOU REPLACING IT WITH A MORE APPROPRIATE WINDOW.
I'D GET TO MY LITTLE FENCE I TALK ABOUT, I'M LIKE, OKAY, IT'S NOT THE DOOR, BUT IT'S A WINDOW AND I'M ON THE FENCE AND IT HIGHLY LOOKS APPROPRIATE.
AND IT IS A TWO STORY STRUCTURE.
BUT NOW THAT WE'VE BEEN REALIZED IT WAS ONE STORY, UH, COMMISSIONER COUCH HAS LEFT HERE, BUT HE'S HAD A COUPLE OF PROJECTS WHERE HE TALKS TO ME ABOUT HOW THAT, WHEN WE SEE THAT INFILL AND AN OLD SIX WARD, WE HAD AN ITEM HERE, WHICH WAS A COR, AN OLD SIX WARD FOR THE EXACT SAME SORT OF STRUCTURE.
ALL THAT TO SAY I'M IN DEFENSE OF OUR RECOMMENDATION OF ACCEPTING THE WORK AS IS.
IT WOULD BE THAT I'M NOT SO SURE OUR RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE ANY DIFFERENT IF THE APPLICANT CAME FORWARD WITHOUT HAVING DONE THE WORK AND SAID, I'D LIKE TO MOVE ONE OF THE ORIGINAL TWO OVER TWO WINDOWS FROM THE REAR ELEVATION.
UH, AND I'D LIKE TO BRING IT TO THE FRONT AND PLACE OF THAT.
BUT I DO UNDERSTAND, OF COURSE, THAT THE, THAT THAT, THAT THERE IS A POINT IN TIME AT WHICH THERE WAS A SECOND FLOOR PORCH THERE.
I DON'T KNOW HOW STRUCTURALLY SOUNDED EVER WAS, BUT THERE WOULD'VE BEEN.
SO I JUST WANT TO SAY IN DEFENSE OF OUR, I WOULD BELIEVE THAT, I THINK OUR, OUR RECOMMENDATION ISN'T VERY FAR OUT OF LINE FROM SURE.
BUT ROMAN, LIKE LET'S SAY, LET'S SAY A COMMISSION VOTED TO GIVE APPROVAL FOR STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION TODAY.
I MEAN, IF A HOMEOWNER IN THE FUTURE WANTED TO REBUILD THESE PORCHES, THAT'S WHICH EXISTED AND WANTED TO CONVERT THAT WINDOW TO A DOOR, STAFF WOULDN'T BE SUPPORTIVE OF THAT.
I MEAN, SO I MEAN, IT'S THIS, UM, I I DON'T THINK THAT, THAT, THAT FUTURE OUTCOME IS NOT RECRUITED.
UH, YOU KNOW, IT, IT, IT COULD OCCUR IF THAT WERE THE WILL OF SOMEONE TO DO, UH, 'CAUSE THERE'S, THERE'S AN ESTABLISHED HISTORY HERE.
UM, BUT I MEAN, IS THERE A MOTION TO MAKE, DO YOU HAVE A MOTION FOR THIS ITEM, MR. COSGROVE? I MEAN, I'D MAKE A MOTION TO ACCEPT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.
I FEEL LIKE THIS COMMISSION HAS OFTEN LET PEOPLE, YOU KNOW, IT WAS A DOOR, IT WAS A WINDOW MOST RECENTLY.
IT'S A SLIGHTLY LARGER WINDOW.
I JUST, I'M NOT FEELING THAT IT'S A COMMISSION.
WE'VE MICROMANAGED OKAY, A BUILDING IN THIS CONDITION THAT DOESN'T, WE DON'T HAVE A PICTURE OF IT.
WE DON'T KNOW WHAT IT LOOKED LIKE IF IT HAD TWO PORCHES.
I MEAN, ACTUALLY IF YOU BROUGHT THAT IN FRONT OF ME, I WOULD HAVE MORE TROUBLE APPROVING A DOUBLE PORCH IF I HAD NO ACTUAL EVIDENCE THAT IT EXISTED.
BUT THE SANBORN SAYS IT WAS THERE.
COMMISSIONER COUCH WOULD MAKE SURE THAT WAS VERY DETAILED, VERY SIMPLE.
I MEAN, I I BASED ON THE OTHER
[02:25:01]
CASE WE'VE HAD, BUT, SO I HAVE A SECOND ANY, ANY OTHER DISCUSSION.SO I'LL CALL THE ALL IN FAVOR? AYE.
COMMISSIONER STOP IS ALSO OPPOSED FOR THE RECORD.
I BELIEVE WE ARE NOW GONNA MOVE ON TO, UH, ITEM E COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC.
AND I DO HAVE ONE SPEAKER SIGNED UP.
I'M GONNA OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING, UM, FOR MARIAN WRIGHT.
UM, IF YOU, IF YOU CAN RESTATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD.
I FEEL LIKE Y'ALL ARE MY NEW BEST FRIENDS.
I WATCH THESE MEETINGS ON HTV AND HONESTLY, I DON'T UNDERSTAND SOME OF THE DECISIONS THAT Y'ALL MAKE.
Y'ALL SEEM SO CONFUSED ABOUT WHAT TO DO WITH WINDOWS.
BUT Y'ALL REALLY NEED TO COME TO SOME SORT OF CONCLUSION ON WHAT Y'ALL ARE GONNA DO WITH WINDOWS.
Y'ALL WENT AHEAD AND WITH SOLAR PANELS, NOW YOU ALLOW THEM TO GO ON THE HISTORIC HOUSES, RIGHT? BECAUSE WE ALL KNOW ABOUT ENERGY CONSERVATION AND HOW IMPORTANT SOLAR PANELS ARE WINDOWS.
I LIVE IN A HOUSE THAT WAS BUILT IN 1905 OF MON BAYLAND AND Y'ALL ACTUALLY HAVE IT AS NON-CONTRIBUTING.
BILL BALDWIN SOLD IT TO ME WHEN I SAID, BILL, IT'S NOT CONTRIBUTING.
HE WAS LIKE, IT'S WHAT I'M LIKE MY FRIEND WHO LIVES ON OMAR, WHO LIVES IN A HOUSE THAT WAS BUILT IN 2002.
Y'ALL HAD IT AS CONTRIBUTING HOW THE CITY DECIDES.
THESE THINGS ARE REALLY KIND OF JUST WONKY.
I HAVE A NEIGHBOR THAT LIVES ACROSS THE STREET FROM ME WITH OLD WINDOWS.
LIKE I HAVE, SHE HAD TWO INCHES OF COKE IN A GLASS.
SHE'S 80 SOMETHING YEARS OLD AT THE TIME.
THAT'S THE KIND OF SIEVES WE LIVE IN, IN THESE OLDER HOUSES.
I DON'T WANNA REPLACE MY WINDOWS, BUT IF I DID, YOU DANG BET I'D COME HERE AND ARGUE TOOTH AND NAIL ABOUT THE ENERGY EFFICIENT OF IT.
AND MY HUSBAND WANTS TO REPLACE 'EM.
HE LOOKS AT THE ELECTRIC BILLS EVERY YEAR AND HE IS LIKE, WHAT ARE YOU DOING? AND Y'ALL ARE JUST ARBITRARILY UP HERE.
YOU HAD SOMEONE, Y'ALL DENIED SOMETHING.
Y'ALL SAID THAT MOST OF THE WINDOWS WERE VINYL, RIGHT? THREE TIMES LESS EXPENSIVE.
MOTION SPEAKER ONE TIMES A SECOND.
I DON'T KNOW, DO YOU WANNA DISCUSS THIS OR DO YOU JUST WANT TO HARASS US? THIS IS, I'D LOVE TO DISCUSS IT.
IT'S, THIS IS PUBLIC COMMENT, NOT PUBLIC DISCUSSION.
THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT DOES NOT ALLOW FOR A DISCUSSION OR DEBATE BACK AND FORTH.
THERE BE A CHANCE FOR A DISCUSSION DIALOGUE.
IT'S NOT POSTED ON THE AGENDA.
OH, I WAS, WELL, I MEAN BASICALLY THAT'S JUST IT.
YOU GUYS HAVE TO FIGURE OUT WHAT Y'ALL ARE GONNA DO.
AND HONESTLY, WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT THE INTENT OF WHAT Y'ALL ARE SUPPOSED TO DO AND WHAT Y'ALL ARE DOING, I MEAN, WE'RE JUST NOW TALKING ABOUT A WINDOW AND POSSIBLY PUTTING A DOOR ON A SECOND STORY GOING TO NOWHERE.
AND THAT SEEMED TO MAKE SENSE TO SOME OF Y'ALL.
SO ANYWAY, IF Y'ALL HAVE ANY KINDA MEETINGS WITH THE PUBLIC WHERE WE CAN COME AND SPEAK WITH Y'ALL ABOUT THIS, I'D LOVE TO, BUT I GUESS THAT'S IT.
UH, I GOT NOTHING MORE THANK YOU'ALL.
I HAVE NO ONE ELSE SIGNED TO SPEAK, BUT IF ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK, NOW'S YOUR TIME.
I'M GONNA CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND OPEN UP COMMENTS FROM THE HAHC COMMISSION MEMBERS.
SO IN OUR CONSTANT DISCUSSIONS OF GLENBROOK VALLEY, I THINK THERE'S TWO THINGS THAT ARE REALLY CLEAR THAT WE DEFINITELY NEED TO RESURVEY GLENBROOK VALLEY AND START THINKING ABOUT THE HOMES THAT WERE NOT INCLUDED IN THE ORIGINAL SURVEY BECAUSE THEY WEREN'T QUITE 50 YEARS OLD YET WHEN THEIR SURVEY WAS DONE.
UM, YOU KNOW, ALL OF THESE HOMES WERE PLANNED IN THE SAME COMMUNITY AT THE
[02:30:01]
SAME TIME.AND THEY'RE DEFINITELY A PART OF THE INTEGRITY OF, OF THE COMMUNITY.
UM, THE SECOND IS, I THINK WE DO NEED TO SIT DOWN AND HAVE A MEETING WHERE WE REALLY FOCUS IN, NOT JUST ON WINDOWS IN GLENBROOK VALLEY, BUT WHAT ARE ALL THE DIFFERENT FEATURES THAT DEFINE THE HISTORIC NATURE OF GLENBROOK VALLEY AS A WHOLE.
YOU KNOW? UM, AND IT MAY BE THAT WE REALLY FOCUS IN ON OUR SPECIAL WINDOWS THAT ARE IN THE DISTRICT, LIKE OUR HARLEQUIN WINDOWS AND THE ONES THAT YOU DON'T NORMALLY SEE.
RIGHT? BUT I THINK THAT WE REALLY DO NEED TO SIT DOWN AND, AND, AND DIG IN.
AND THIS MAY THEN HELP STAKEHOLDERS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, RIGHT? BECAUSE THEY'RE OBVIOUSLY FINDING SOMETHING THAT'S IMPORTANT TO THEM THAT WE CAN TAKE ACTION ON WITHIN OUR CURRENT PARAMETERS.
I HAD A QUESTION FOR LEGAL, AGAIN ABOUT THE QUESTION RAISED ABOUT DEED RESTRICTIONS.
I MEAN, IT'S, IT'S NOT THE PURVIEW OF THIS BODY, I BELIEVE TO GET TO, TO WHEN, WHEN THAT'S NOT, THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE HERE TO DO.
WE'RE HERE TO REVIEW THESE APPLICATIONS.
I'LL JUST SAY IN MY TIME, WHICH IS, AND COMMISSIONER COSGROVE, WE'VE BEEN HERE THE LONGEST.
UM, IT'S BEEN BENEFICIAL TO HAVE FEEDBACK FROM THE COMMUNITY, INCLUDING THE DE THE, THE DE RESTRICTION COMMITTEES IN VARIOUS NEIGHBORHOODS TO KNOW WHAT IS THE PUBLIC VIEWPOINT, THE PUBLIC BEING INDIVIDUALS, AND THE PUBLIC BEING ANY, ANY, UM, OTHER ASSOCIATION THAT'S IN THE AREA.
UM, SO I MEAN, I THINK THAT'S A PLUS TO HAVE THAT INFORMATION.
SO WE HAVE ALL THE INFORMATION WHEN WE'RE MAKING A DECISION.
I DON'T THINK WE, I DON'T THINK I TO THE DISCUSSION THAT WE HAD EARLIER OR THAT WAS BROUGHT UP REALLY OUTSIDE THE PURVIEW OF THE APPLICATION.
I DON'T THINK, I DON'T KNOW THAT THERE'S AN ACTUAL REQUIREMENT ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.
IT DOESN'T REALLY MATTER TO ME.
IT'S JUST, I, I FIND IT'S HELPFUL TO HAVE AS MUCH PUBLIC INPUT AS WE CAN GET TO MAKE A DECISION THAT'S INFORMED.
BUT, UM, I THINK THAT WILL CONTINUE TO BE WHAT IT IS.
DO, DO YOU, DO YOU HAVE ANY CO COUNSEL ON THAT ASPECT? YEAH, I'LL, I'LL ADD OF COURSE THE, YOU KNOW, ANYTIME SOMEONE WILL GO IN FOLLOWING HOPEFULLY HAHC ACTION OR MAYBE WITHOUT, BUT WHEN THEY APPLY FOR A BUILDING PERMIT, PEOPLE HAVE TO CERTIFY ON BEHALF OF THE OWNER THAT, THAT THEY'RE NOT VIOLATING DEED RESTRICTIONS.
SO IT'S VERY DIFFERENT IF THERE'S AN HOA WITH VALID DEED RESTRICTIONS WITH AN ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE WHERE BY THOSE RESTRICTIONS, UM, APPROVAL, PRIOR APPROVAL FROM THEM IS REQUIRED.
UM, MAY NOT HAVE BEEN WRITTEN TO BE BEFORE HISTORIC COMMISSION.
UM, YOU KNOW, WHERE DOES IT FALL IN THE THAT THAT'S SOMETHING WE KIND OF HAVE TO WORK, WORK WITH THE HOA WHO DEALS WITH THOSE RESTRICTIONS.
A CIVIC CLUB IS OFTEN NOT AN HOA AS WE ANTICIPATE IT.
AND THEY MAY HAVE CERTAIN RESTRICTIONS AND DESIGN GUIDELINES AND THE WAY THEY WANT THINGS TO DO, BUT UNLESS SOMEONE SIGNS ONTO THEM CONTRACTUALLY AND AGREES TO BE BOUND BY THEM, THEY'RE REALLY NOT BOUND BY THEM.
SO THAT'S SOMETHING WE'RE WRESTLING WITH, WITH NOR HILL.
UM, I KNOW THERE ARE VARIOUS SETS OF DEED RESTRICTIONS IS MY UNDERSTANDING.
I'VE ASKED STAFF TO PROVIDE ME WITH WHAT THEY HAVE.
I'VE GOT A LINK NOW TO THE DESIGN GUIDELINES.
SO, UM, YOU KNOW, THOSE ARE UNDER REVIEW AND YOU'LL BE SEEN THOSE SHORTLY.
BUT, UM, YEAH, IT'S A TOUGH, I THINK ALWAYS THOSE REPRESENTATIVES CAN COME, YOU KNOW, THAT THAT'S NOT A, IT'S, IT JUST BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT AN HOA OR BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT VALID DEED RESTRICTIONS DOESN'T MEAN THAT A CIVIC CLUB CANNOT COME AND SPEAK ABOUT IT AND VOICE THEIR OPINION, JUST LIKE ANY MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM THE COMMISSIONER? YES, I, I WANNA ADDRESS WHETHER OR NOT COMMISSIONERS GO TO PROJECTS IN THE FIELD PRIOR TO A COMMISSION MEETING.
UM, I HAD A MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC REACH OUT TO ME DIRECTLY TO GO LOOK AT A HOUSE, WHICH I DECLINED TO DO.
'CAUSE IT WAS NOT, UM, SOMETHING THAT WAS, THAT ROMAN APPROACHED ME ABOUT IT, IT WAS SOMETHING, RIGHT? IT WAS DIRECT.
AND SO, BUT THEN I HEARD THAT OTHER MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION MIGHT HAVE GONE TO THAT PROPERTY, AND I DON'T, THE COUPLE OF TIMES THAT MEMBERS HAVE GONE TO THE PROPERTY, THEY'RE NOT MAKING A SPECIFIC PRESENTATION TO THE COMMISSION.
SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT INFORMATION THEY'RE GLEANING FROM A PROPERTY VISIT THAT'S BROUGHT BACK TO THE COMMISSION.
[02:35:01]
IS THAT IF A COMMISSIONER GOES TO A PROPERTY THAT THEN THEY HAVE SPECIFIC KNOWLEDGE THAT IS DIFFERENT THAN THE REST OF US ON THE COMMISSION, AND THAT MIGHT AFFECT THEIR VOTE.AND SO I WOULD, I'M LOOKING FOR SOME CONSISTENCY AROUND THIS AS TO WHETHER OR NOT COMMISSIONERS ARE ALLOWED TO GO VISIT A PROPERTY BEFOREHAND.
AND IF SO, HOW DO THEY BRING THAT INFORMATION BACK TO US SO THAT WE ARE ALL SHARING IN THE SAME KNOWLEDGE? RIGHT.
WELL, IT'S ALWAYS BEEN MY UNDERSTANDING INDIVIDUALLY, A MISSION MEMBER IS NOT RECOMMENDED TO GO TO A SUBJECT PROPERTY.
UM, SO THAT INFORMATION CAN BE HEARD AS IT IS HERE.
THERE IS, I MEAN, A MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC CAN REQUEST STAFF COME TO THEIR SITE AND THEY CAN ALSO, STAFF CAN REQUEST I THINK UP TO TWO COMMISSION MEMBERS TO, TO ACCOMPANY THEM.
AND SO, UM, BUT YOU'RE BASICALLY IN, IT'S A, IT'S LIKE A MEETING WITH, WITH, YOU'RE WITH STAFF, YOU DON'T HAVE, YOU, YOU HAVEN'T REACHED QUORUM, BUT IT IS A WAY TO TRY TO LOOK AT SOMETHING AND TRY TO, YOU KNOW, GIVE FEEDBACK THAT'S THEN PRESENTED IN THE, IN THE MEETING.
AND SOMETIMES I'M ON THOSE MEETINGS, SOME THOSE VISITS, SOMETIMES OTHER PEOPLE AT THIS TABLE ARE, AND WHEN THAT HAPPENS, I LIKE TO CALL UPON THEM TO EXPLAIN TO COMMISSION WHAT, WHAT, WHAT DID THEY GLEAN FROM THEIR MEETING THAT WAS DONE WITH STAFF.
SO IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING WE'RE IT'S NOT RECOMMENDED THAT WE NOT ENGAGE WITH THE PUBLIC INDIVIDUALLY AND, AND WE ENGAGE INSIDE THIS FORUM.
AND THE ONLY TIME THAT WE'RE ACTUALLY ON SITE IS IF WE ARE INVITED AS PART OF A MEETING AND WE'RE WITH STAFF AT ALL TIMES.
AND I BELIEVE THAT IS, THAT IS, THAT IS OKAY.
BUT, UM, WE'VE NEVER CO COVERED THAT PART IN ETHICS TRAINING.
UM, SO THAT WE HAVE, WE'VE, WE'VE TALKED ABOUT, WELL, WE TALKED ABOUT INDIVIDUALLY NOT GOING, BUT I'M SAYING, BUT MEETINGS WITH, IF YOU'RE ON A, ON A MEETING WITH STAFF UP TO TWO COMMISSIONERS, THAT'S STILL OKAY, I BELIEVE.
AND WE'VE SET THAT UP AS A COMMITTEE, AS YOU ALL WHO SERVE ON IT, KNOW, SO THAT THERE'S AN OFFICIAL COMMITTEE OF THIS GROUP THAT STAFF MAY REQUEST YOUR SERVICES TO HELP ON PARTICULARLY STICKY APPLICATIONS OR WHERE THEY FEEL THEY NEED MORE SPECIFIC ADVICE.
UM, ALWAYS WE'VE ASKED STAFF OR YOU AS MEMBERS OF THAT GROUP TO COME BACK AND REPORT BACK EXACTLY.
YOU WANT TO BE ABLE TO REPORT BACK TO THIS COMMISSION.
WE WENT OUT THERE AND WE MADE THESE CHANGES AND RECOMMENDATIONS, UM, WITH REGARD TO BEING CONTACTED BY AN INDIVIDUAL OF THE, OF THE PUBLIC AND APPLICANT AND OPPONENT, WHAT HAVE YOU.
UM, IT GETS MORE, IT GETS MUCH MORE STICKY.
AND I THINK WE'VE ALWAYS ADVISED YOU IN ETHICS TRAINING TO AVOID EX PARTE COMMUNICATION LIKE THAT AND TO ENCOURAGE THAT INDIVIDUAL TO COME HERE, MAKE THEIR CASE TO THE ENTIRETY.
OR ONCE THEY FILE A AN APPLICATION, DOES IT COME UNDER THAT ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE? THANK YOU.
I, I'D LIKE TO BRING UP SOMETHING THAT, UH, FOLLOWING ON, UH, BECAUSE THIS, MY, MY ISSUE IS MAYBE A, A HYBRID OF BOTH.
UH, I THINK THERE WAS ONE PARTICULAR PROJECT RECENTLY THAT, UH, THAT, UH, THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO COME BEFORE THE COMMISSION THAT WE, THE THREE PEOPLE WERE INVITED.
THREE, THREE COMMISSIONERS WERE INVITED, BUT I WAS INVITED DIRECTLY BY STAFF, UH, AND MAYBE SOME OF THE COMMISSIONERS WERE DIRECTLY INVITED BY THE OWNER.
SO TO ME, THERE WAS THIS, WHAT I WAS LOOKING AT IS, THIS IS NO DIFFERENT FROM TWO COMMISSIONERS GOING OUT WITH, YOU KNOW, JASON OR WITH YASMINE TO LOOK AT THE PROBLEM, WHICH THEY MAY NOT SEE, OR THEY WANT A, A SECOND OR THIRD PAIR OF EYES ON, YOU KNOW, GOING UNDER THE HOUSE, GOING INTO THE RAFTERS AND, AND SO ON AND SO FORTH.
WHAT I WANT TO CLARIFY IS THAT, IS THE, IS IT OKAY THAT DURING THIS SITE VISIT THAT THE APPLICANT SLASH OWNER SLASH ARCHITECT BE THERE ALSO, OR SHOULD IT BE JUST THE HPO STAFF AND THE COMMISSIONERS? SO THIS IS GETTING MURKY, RIGHT? BECAUSE THEN YOU'RE THINKING ABOUT MAYBE THE APPLICANT WILL TRY TO SWAY OUR, OUR OPINIONS OR WHATEVER.
SO CAN YOU PLEASE ELABORATE ON THAT, KIM? I, I'M NOT SURE I CAN SAY, I CAN GIVE YOU A BRIGHT LINE, BUT I WILL SAY THAT, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY WHEN, WHEN THAT SORT OF THING HAPPENS, THE QUESTION WILL ALWAYS BE, WELL, DID YOU SPEND MORE TIME WITH THE APPLICANT OR THE OWNER OR THE ARCHITECT AND THE PUBLIC DIDN'T HAVE THE BENEFIT OF THAT DISCUSSION HAPPENING HERE.
SO I, I THINK THAT THE IDEA OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE DESIGN REVIEW WAS TO WORK WITH STAFF ON THE ISSUES, NOT THE EXTERNAL FOLKS, AND TO AVOID THAT APPEARANCE.
WELL THEN, THEN IT SHOULD FALL ON THE PURVIEW OF ROMAN TO HAVE HIS STAFF WHEN WE ARE ASKED TO GO OUT THAT NO OTHER PEOPLE ARE ALLOWED OUT THERE.
[02:40:01]
BECAUSE NORMALLY THE ONES THAT WE GET IS, OH, LET, LET US TRY TO COORDINATE A MEETING WITH GOING OUT THERE WITH THE APPLICANT ITSELF AS WELL, RIGHT? SO MAYBE GOING FORWARD WE SHOULDN'T BE DOING THAT.WE'LL WORK WE'LL WITH STAFF ON SOME GUIDELINES FOR THAT TYPE OF MEETING AND, AND WHAT CAN HAPPEN.
SO OBVIOUSLY YOU NEED PERMISSION TO BE ON SITE.
UM, I DO NOT RECOMMEND THAT ANY OF YOU GO WITHOUT PERMISSION.
UM, SO YOU KNOW, THERE'S GOTTA BE SOMEBODY THERE OR SOMEBODY WHO'S AUTHORIZED YOU TO BE THERE.
SO YEAH, WE'LL WORK WITH STAFF.
I UNDERSTAND THE CONFUSION AND, AND THESE ARE, AS YOU SAY, STICKY OR GRAY ISSUES.
DOES THAT, MR. MCNEIL, DOES THAT GET TO YOUR QUESTION,
AND SO MY CONCERN IS HOW, IF MY CONCERN IS THAT SOME COMMISSIONERS ARE GOING TO A JOB SITE AND THEN GAINING MORE KNOWLEDGE ABOUT A PARTICULAR PROJECT WHEN EVERYTHING SHOULD BE PRESENTED TO US HERE, THAT WE ALL HAVE THE EXACT SAME INFORMATION.
WE'RE ALL VOTING FROM THE EXACT SAME PLACE OF INFORMATION, DISCUSSION, ET CETERA.
AND SO JUST RAISING THE QUESTION AND TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE, WE'LL, WE'LL MAKE THAT PART OF STAFF'S DISCUSSION.
AS YOU KNOW, WE'VE BEEN DOING THIS FOR ROMAN THREE, FOUR YEARS WITH THE, WITH THE DESIGN COMMITTEE.
SO, YOU KNOW, MAYBE TIME TO RE-LOOK AT WHAT WORKS AND WHAT DOESN'T.
UH, MY NEXT QUESTION IS, IS IT POSSIBLE TO INCREASE THE SPEAKER'S TIME TO THREE MINUTES INSTEAD OF TWO? AND IF SO, HOW WOULD WE GO ABOUT DOING THAT? I THINK THE APPLICANT IS THREE MINUTES.
THE APPLICANT IS THREE MINUTES AND THEY CAN ALSO DO REBUTTAL AT THE END.
AND SO THEY'RE SPEAKING FOR THREE MINUTES AND THEN WE'RE GIVING THEM AN EXTRA TWO MINUTES AFTER THAT.
I'M THE DESIGNATED IN
UM, UM, ESSENTIALLY, AGAIN, AS THE, AS I MENTIONED THE CURRENT SPEAKER RULES IS THAT THE APPLICANT HAS THREE MINUTES, UM, TO MAKE THEIR CASE.
AND YOU, YOU MAY ALSO HAVE ANOTHER ADDITIONAL TWO MINUTES AT THE END TO CLOSE IF SOMEONE SPEAKS AGAINST THE PROJECT AND MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC.
UM, STILL HAVE ONE MINUTE, UM, SORRY, SORRY.
UP TO OTHER PUBLIC SPEAKERS MAY SPEAK ONE TIME, UP TO TWO MINUTES, UH, WHEN RECOGNIZED.
SO MY ONLY THING IS TO KEEP THESE MEETINGS NOT GOING AS LONG AS WE HAVE GONE IS THAT WE GRANT ADDITIONAL TIME.
WE GRANT ADDITIONAL MINUTE, UH, SO THAT THEY CAN, THEY CAN WRAP UP AND, AND FOCUS ON THE, THE ISSUE.
IF, IF THEY NEED ANOTHER MINUTE, WE CAN DO ANOTHER VOTE.
BUT, BUT MY, MY RECOMMENDATION ONCE WE'VE ALREADY GIVEN THE FIRST THREE AND THE SECOND TWO IS THAT WE DON'T JUST RIGHT.
LET'S GIVE IT ONE MINUTE AND THEN LET'S WAY BRING IT TO A NOW IS THAT THE WAY IT'S SET UP NOW? THAT'S IT IS.
SO THE BELL WILL RING AT ONE MINUTE? YES.
UM, FOR THE APPLICANT, LIKE HE SAID THREE.
AND THEN, UM, IF Y'ALL ALLOW IT, I GIVE ONE MORE MINUTE AND THEN FROM THERE, YOU KNOW, IT'S Y'ALL, IT'S UP TO YOU.
BUT I THINK WHEN YOU MAKE THE MOTION, IT'S GREAT.
IF YOU'LL STATE THAT TIME AT LEAST OF THE BELL WILL GO BACK OFF BECAUSE I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT FOR THE APPLICANTS TO MAKE THEIR CASE ABOUT THE APPLICATION BEFORE US AND NOT TALK ABOUT OTHER ISSUES.
THAT, THAT MAKE THE MEETING LONGER.
BUT ALSO THEY DON'T REALLY STRENGTHEN THEIR CASE.
UH, IF THEY CAN JUST FOCUS ON THEIR APPLICATION, I THINK THEY'VE GOT A BETTER CHANCE OF GETTING THEIR QUESTION.
I'M MAKE A MOTION TO GRANT SPEAKER ONE MORE MINUTE.
UH, MY LAST PIECE IS, I THINK THAT IN OUR GROUP MEETING PREVIOUSLY THIS YEAR, WE WERE GONNA TALK ABOUT WINDOWS AND WE NEVER DID.
AND SO TO, UH, ASH COMMISSIONER JONES'S, UM, REQUEST, I, I AGREE AS WE'VE HEARD FROM THE PUBLIC THAT IF WE COULD GET ALL ON THE SAME PAGE ON WINDOWS WOULD BE GREAT.
I THINK WE ALL ARE ACCEPTING GLENBURG VALLEY 'CAUSE WE ALL OVER THE MAP AND, AND SO I DON'T KNOW WHEN AND WHERE THAT HAPPENS OR HOW WE GO ABOUT THAT FROM THE CITY'S POINT OF VIEW, BUT YEAH, AND I HAVE, I CAN TALK TO, WE'LL, YEAH, WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT IT.
WE'RE GONNA SCHEDULE SOMETHING FOR THIS BODY AND ALSO FOR THE HPAB TO COME TOGETHER AND TALK
[02:45:01]
ABOUT ALL OF THESE GRAY AREAS, UH, IN THE NEAR FUTURE.SO THIS IS THE, THE SESSION THAT WE WERE SAYING THAT AFTER THE, UH, THE, UH, MAJOR THING THAT WE HAD, THIS IS GOING TO BE THE HUDDLE SECTION, RIGHT? SO THIS IS NOT JUST ABOUT WINDOWS.
THIS IS GOING TO BE MASSING, THIS IS SURE.
THIS ISS GONNA BE A FALSE PASS.
THIS IS GONNA BE ABOUT A NUMBER OF THINGS, BUT AGAIN, IT WOULD BE A CONTINUATION OF CAMP.
CAMP WAS A PRESENTATION GIVEN TO US BY THREE INDIVIDUALS.
THIS, THE INTENT OF THIS IS TO HAVE A A A A PUBLIC, IT'LL BE A PUBLIC MEETING.
THE PUBLIC CAN COME AND ASK QUESTIONS, BUT ALSO WE WOULD, AND WITH STAFF, UM, AND WE CAN THEN TALK AMONGST OURSELVES ABOUT MANY OF THESE ISSUES.
THAT'S THE MOST IMPORTANT PART, I THINK, IS TO TALK AMONGST OURSELVES.
BUT IS IT GOING THIS YEAR YOU THINK? OR IT'S GONNA BE A SCHEDULING ISSUE AND I KNOW THAT WE NEED TO GET, UH, WE HAVE KEY PEOPLE LIKE KIM THAT WE DEFINITELY WANT TO BE A PART OF IT
SO IT'S A SCHEDULING ISSUE, BUT WE'RE GONNA WORK ON THAT.
BUT I ALSO THINK IT WOULD BE GOOD IF WE COULD AT LEAST TRY TO FIGURE THIS IN LIKE EVERY THREE MONTHS, HAVE ONE OF THESE MEETINGS AND JUST PUT IT ON A CALENDAR, EVEN IF IT'S NOT A, A DAY LONG MEETING, JUST LIKE A LONG MORNING MEETING OR SOMETHING.
I'D LIKE TO GET THE APPEALS BOARD TO BE IN THE MEETING AS WELL SO THAT EVERYONE CAN HEAR WHAT'S BEING SAID.
AND THERE COULD BE FEEDBACK IN A, IN A, IN A BACK AND FORTH.
I THINK THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL.
YOU KNOW, WE, THERE WILL BE NEW ISSUES IN THE FUTURE THAT WE DON'T KNOW ABOUT.
SO IF WE COULD JUST HAVE SOME TYPE OF, OF A WORKING GROUP MEETING ON SOME BASIS, UM, BUT NOT TOO, NOT, YOU KNOW, NOT TOO LONG EACH TIME.
I THINK IT WOULD BE HELPFUL JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT WE CAN HAVE DISCUSSIONS THAT WE CAN'T HAVE, EXCEPT FOR THIS TIME PERIOD IN OUR MEETING, WHICH IS NOT ENOUGH TIME TO REALLY GET INTO SOME OF THESE ITEMS. I THINK THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT I'M LOOKING FOR.
WELL, WE ALREADY APPROVED MARCH 13 NEXT YEAR'S SCHEDULE, WHICH THEY SAY THIS TRAINING SECOND THURSDAY, THAT'S A DIFFERENT TRAINING, I BELIEVE THAN IF, IF WE'RE ALL IN AGREEMENT ABOUT SOMETHING LIKE A QUARTERLY MEETING ON, ON GENERAL TOPICS.
IS THAT I'M LOOKING AT YOU, IS THAT, IS THAT
BUT IT'S A SCHEDULING ISSUE WITH ROOM AVAILABILITY, ET CETERA.
BUT, BUT FROM A LEGAL STANDPOINT, ABSOLUTELY.
YEAH, THAT'S, WE WOULD JUST HAVE TO KNOW WHAT TOPICS TO POST ON THE AGENDA.
SO, BECAUSE AS NOTED, IT WILL BE A PUBLIC MEETING.
PEOPLE CAN COME AND TALK AND SO FORTH.
THEN THEY KNOW WHAT'S COMING UP.
I THINK I'M GETTING A DIFFERENT ANSWER THAN I EXPECTED.
SO, SO THE MEETINGS THAT WE WERE JUST TALKING ABOUT, SAY QUARTERLY MEETINGS ON GENERAL TOPICS FOR MM-HMM
THOSE WOULD BE PUBLIC MEETINGS OR NOT NECESSARILY.
ANYTIME I THINK THREE OR MORE MEMBERS GET TOGETHER, IT HAS TO BE A PUBLIC MEETING.
SO MAYBE THAT'S A DIFFERENT THAT'S FINE.
AND MAYBE THAT'S A DIFFERENT MEETING THAN THE ONE I WAS IMAGINING WHERE WE WOULD, WHERE WOULD WE BE TALKING ABOUT, UM, AMONG OURSELVES? HUDDLING.
WELL, I MEAN EVEN I THINK THAT'S A LOT.
WELL, WHAT I'M SAYING IS, I MEAN, EVEN CAMP WAS A PUBLIC MEETING.
ANY MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC AND SOME MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC DID COME, BUT IT, IT DID.
NO, WE DON'T HAVE A MEETING THAT'S NOT A PUBLIC MEETING.
GENERALLY NOT EVEN EVEN YOUR ETHICS WORKSHOPS, THOSE ARE PUBLIC MEETINGS.
I CAN THINK OF ONE EXCEPTION AND THAT WAS AN EXCEPTIONAL SITUATION.
THAT WAS EXECUTIVE SESSION DURING THE MEETING.
SO, SO WHILE I'VE GOT KIM, I'LL, I'LL GO AHEAD AND ASK, AND MAYBE WE'VE ALREADY DISCUSSED THIS ENOUGH, BUT THE, THE ISSUE OF WHETHER WE HAVE, UH, INFORMATION ON AN APPLICANT ON AN APPLICATION THAT THE AN HOA OR A CIVIC CLUB HAS, THAT'S, THAT'S MAYBE THAT'S USEFUL FOR US OR MAYBE THAT'S HELPFUL FOR US IN OUR, IN OUR DECISION MAKING.
BUT THAT'S, THAT'S, THAT'S ESSENTIALLY UP TO AN APPLICANT TO DECIDE WHAT TO INCLUDE AND NOT INCLUDE RIGHT.
ABSENT ANY DOCUMENTATION, LIKE DEED RESTRICTIONS WHERE WE COULD FIND WHERE WE KNEW OR COULD FIND OUT THAT THIS WAS APPROVAL FROM AN ARCHITECTURAL COMMITTEE WAS REQUIRED AHEAD OF TIME.
SO IF I WAS AN APPLICANT BEFORE THIS COMMISSION, I MIGHT WANNA BOLSTER MY CASE FOR MY APPLICATION, WHATEVER IT IS I'M LOOKING FOR.
AND SO I WOULD, I MIGHT WANT TO INCLUDE AS MUCH OF THAT KIND OF INFORMATION AS I COULD TO HELP RIGHT.
BUT I WOULDN'T HAVE TO, IT WOULD BE MY OPTION AS AN APPLICANT TO DECIDE WHAT ORDER TO COME HERE TO THIS COMMISSION VERSUS ANY OTHER BODY.
I WOULD SAY THAT IS GENERALLY CORRECT.
I HAVE ONE MORE FOR YOU HERE WHILE I'VE GOT YOU.
THIS IS ABOUT, UM, RECLASSIFICATION TODAY WE HEARD, UH, VALE RECLASSIFICATION OF A PROPERTY FROM, UM, CONTRIBUTING TO NON-CONTRIBUTING.
AND I'M NOT ASKING ABOUT THAT PARTICULAR CASE, BUT YOU, WE REMEMBER THAT FROM EARLIER IN THIS MEETING, RIGHT? YEAH.
[02:50:01]
ABOUT THIS QUESTION RELATED TO THAT.IS THAT THE SAME WAY THAT A PROPERTY WOULD GO FROM BEING RECLASSIFIED AS NON-CONTRIBUTING TO CONTRIBUTING MM-HMM
IN THE CASES WHERE SOMEONE WOULD WANT TO DO THAT? YEP.
THE APPLICANT, THE HOMEOWNER WITH HELP FROM STAFF WOULD BRING THAT TO THIS COMMISSION AND WE WOULD MAKE A A, A MOTION ON THAT.
IT COULD BE BROUGHT THE SAME WAY.
UM, IT COULD BE SOMETHING THAT IS INITIATED.
WE'RE UNDER CHAPTER TWO 11 OF CH OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE NOW, WHERE TECHNICALLY THAT CAN BE, UM, INITIATED BY THE CITY.
WE ALWAYS LIKE IT WHEN THE OWNERS AGREE.
THAT BEING SAID, I I, I HAVE A QUESTION, UH, AND I MAY BE LACKING ACCURATE INFORMATION OR DATA.
DID THE APPEALS BOARD VOTE ON A PROJECT THAT HAD BEEN DEFERRED AT THEIR LAST MEETING? WANNA ANSWER THAT? WELL, YES THEY DID.
BUT LET MY BRAIN CATCH UP WITH YOUR, YOUR QUESTION.
IT HAD BEEN WHOSE ITEM WAS THAT? THAT WE DID JASON
SO IT WAS DEFERRED LAST MEETING WAS DEFERRED, BUT THAT WAS THE, UH, SECOND TIME IT WAS BROUGHT, IT WAS BROUGHT IN THE PREVIOUS MEETING AND THE, THERE WAS A DECISION MADE AND THE APPEAL WAS OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING'S DECISION.
SO, SO THE ITEM CAME BEFORE YOU ALL IN SEPTEMBER IT WAS MADE PART OF THE CONSENT AGENDA AND ACTED ON THE APPLICANT WAS NOT HERE BECAUSE IT WAS FURTHER DOWN ON THE AGENDA.
THEY CAME I THINK EITHER WHEN YOU BARELY HAD A QUORUM AT THE END OF THAT MEETING OR AFTER YOU HAD LOST ONE.
I'M, I WAS NOT AFTER THE, IT WAS AFTER.
AND SO THEY ASKED IF YOU'LL RECALL IN OCTOBER TO BE, TO BE ALLOWED TO SPEAK AND KIND OF RE HAVE YOU RECONSIDER THAT YOU ALL DEFERRED THE ITEM, BUT THEY, THE HOMEOWNERS HAD ALREADY TIMELY FILED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE HPAB.
SO WE EXPLAINED THE PROCEDURAL ISSUE AND HOW THIS WAS ALL WORKING WITH YOUR AGENDAS AND THEY CHOSE TO GO AHEAD.
THE, THE BOARD FELT THAT THEY HAD NEW INFORMATION THAT HAD NOT BEEN AVAILABLE WHEN YOU ALL CONSIDERED IT AND THEY APPROVED THE REQUEST OF THE HOMEOWNERS TO, UM, I'M GONNA SAY PUT IN DIVIDED LIGHT WINDOWS INSTEAD OF ONE OVER ONE, IF I'M REMEMBERING CORRECTLY, WINDOWS THAT THEY HAD REPLACED UPSTAIRS.
I THINK SOME OF IT IS SAVED
SOMETHING SOMEONE MENTIONED EARLIER WAS THAT WE MIGHT MEET TOGETHER WITH THE APPEALS BOARD AND I THINK THAT MIGHT BE PRODUCTIVE SO THAT WE'RE NOT MAKING DECISIONS THAT, UM, SORT OF WASTING TIME, MAKING DECISIONS THAT THEY'RE JUST GOING TO GO AHEAD AND THEY, THEY HAD SOME INTERESTING COMMENTS AND I THINK A JOINT MEETING WITH THEM WOULD BE GOOD.
UM, THEY HAD SOME INTERESTING COMMENTS ABOUT REALLY WHAT COULD THEY DO WITH THE C OF R.
UM, ARE THEY REALLY UPHOLDING WHAT YOU DO ON C OF A VERSUS THAT, UM, THEY WERE CONCERNED THAT IT HAD BEEN ON CONSENT AGENDA.
ALTHOUGH I THINK CONSENT ITEMS HAVE BEEN APPEALED TO THE BOARD BEFORE.
SO I THINK A A, A MEETING AND A CONVERSATION SPECIFICALLY ON SOME OF THOSE ISSUES WOULD BE HELPFUL.
ARE THERE MEETINGS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC? YES.
SO WE COULD ATTEND THEM ABSOLUTELY.
BUT, BUT HISTORICALLY WE, THEY'VE BEEN INVI I MEAN, SINCE THEY'VE EXISTED, THEY'VE BEEN INVITED TO ALL OF OUR MEETINGS IS MY UNDERSTANDING.
SO IT'S, IT'S NOT SOMETHING NEW, IT'S JUST IT THERE.
WE HAVEN'T ALWAYS HAD AN APPEALS BOARD.
I MEAN WE, IT USED TO BE THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
SO, UM, AND THAT WAS, SO THOSE DELIBERATIONS HAPPENED BY COMMITTEE.
SO, UM, IT'S A LITTLE BIT EASIER I THINK NOW THAT WE HAVE A COMMISSION.
THEY HAVE A COMMISSION AND WE CAN MEET TOGETHER AND HEAR THE SAME INFORMATION.
SO THAT IS PART OF THE, THE GOAL OF THIS FOLLOW UP FAMILY MEETING.
A QUESTION THOUGH, FOR THE HPAB MEETING, SO THEY ARE GIVEN THE RESULTS OF THE HAHC MEETING, UH, DO THEY ACTUALLY GET A AUDIO RESULT OF WHATEVER THAT WE DISCUSS HERE PRIOR TO OUR DECISION AS WELL? OKAY, THANK YOU.
YES, THEY PROVIDE A TRANSCRIPT OF, OF, IT MAY NOT BE YOUR MINUTES BECAUSE JUST OF THE TIMING, THEY MAY NOT BE APPROVED MINUTES, BUT IT'S A, A TRANSCRIPT OF WHAT COMMISSION DISCUSSED HERE.
[02:55:02]
OKAY.UH, HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER'S REPORT.
LET ME JUST, UH, SAY THANK YOU FOR ALL OF YOU, YOUR WORK.
UM, I'LL SAY IT, I'VE SAID IT ONCE BEFORE.
IT'S THE BEST COMMISSION THAT I'VE EVER SEEN.
WE HAVE A GREAT COMMISSION HERE.
UH, JUST TO UPDATE, UH, WE, UH, ON MY REPORT WITH THE GLO, WE'VE, WE'RE STILL REVIEWING PROJECTS.
WE REVIEWED 14 PROJECTS SINCE THE LAST TIME Y'ALL MET.
UH, AND STAFF CONTINUES TO WORK WITH THE PEOPLE IN PLEASANTVILLE, UH, MARY FONTANO AND STATE REPRESENTATIVE HAROLD DUTTON.
AND FOR WORK IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD, WE'RE WORKING ON THE LIONS AVENUE GRANT, UH, WHERE WE'RE GONNA PUT OUT A REQUEST TO WORK WITH A CONSULTANT TO WRITE A NATIONAL REGISTER NOMINATION.
AND THE DRAFT OF THE DOCUMENT WE'RE GONNA MAKE PUBLIC SO THAT PEOPLE CAN BID ON THAT IS GONNA COME FORWARD SOON.
UH, IT'S NOT A LARGE ENOUGH MONEY TO GO THROUGH THE BIG PURCHASING PROCESS, SO IT'LL BE A LITTLE MORE DIFFERENT.
UM, WE'RE CONTINUE TO DO ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVALS A LOT QUICKER WITH A LITTLE INTERNAL DESIGN REVIEW.
I MEAN, SORRY, UH, ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL REVIEW COMMITTEE WE HAVE WITH INTERNALLY.
SO THAT THREE STAFF MEMBERS ARE, ONCE WE, ONCE WE LABEL IT ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL, WE'RE ON IT AND WE MAKE A DECISION AND WE DRAFT SOMETHING AND WE GET A SIGNATURE.
THE NOR HILL DESIGN GUIDELINES, UM, WE'RE HOPING TO SHOOT FOR THE NEXT MEETING BEING AT MAYBE IN MID-DECEMBER.
WE'VE GOTTA FIND THE PUBLIC PLACE TO DO THAT IN TO, UM, PRESENT TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD THE, UH, UPDATED DRAFT BEFORE THE NEXT STEP WOULD BE TO COME HERE.
AND THEN OH SIX WARD, UH, MR. LILIENTHAL HAD A MEETING ON OCTOBER THE SIXTH.
THOSE DOCUMENT, THAT WORK IS GOING FORWARD AS WELL.
UM, PRESERVATION HOUSTON REPRESENTED IN THE BACK HERE BY EMILY IS, UH, WE'RE, THEY'RE, YOU KNOW, I'VE MENTIONED THIS BEFORE, BUT THEY HAVE A GRANT TO DO A REALTOR, UH, PROGRAM.
WINDOWS COMMITTEE WILL, UM, AT THE DECEMBER MEETING, Y'ALL ARE TALKING ABOUT WINDOWS AT THE DECEMBER MEETING.
WE PLAN TO MAKE A REPORT TO YOU ON STATISTICS AND MAPS AND THINGS ABOUT WINDOWS.
SO THAT CAN HELP THAT CONVERSATION.
ALSO, JUST WANNA SAY, I WENT TO NEW ORLEANS, UH, AT THE BEGINNING OF LAST WEEK FOR THE NATIONAL TRUST PASS FORWARD CONFERENCE, WHICH WAS, UH, TERRIFIC.
I HADN'T BEEN TO ONE OF THOSE IN NINE YEARS.
AND, UM, I WA THERE WERE A COUPLE TAKEAWAYS THAT I JUST WANTED TO SHARE.
NINE YEARS AGO WAS HERE, UH, NINE YEARS AGO I WAS IN WASHINGTON, DC I, YEAH, YEAH, I, I REMEMBER I HAD JUST BEEN MARRIED, UH, OH, YEAR
SO I DROVE TO NEW ORLEANS, DIDN'T SPEND MUCH OF OUR TAX DOLLARS.
UM, THE, UM, THERE WAS A GREAT PRESENTATION ABOUT CHINATOWNS.
WE DON'T TALK A LOT ABOUT CHINATOWNS.
THERE WAS A PANEL DISCUSSION WITH CHINATOWN, UM, EXPERTS FOR ATLANTA, MANHATTAN, HOUSTON, AND I WANNA SAY THAT ONE WAS CHICAGO OR PHILLY.
AND, UH, THERE'S A PERSON EMPLOYED AT THE NATIONAL TRUST, A CHINESE-AMERICAN.
AND SHE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THIS TOPIC GOT TALKED ABOUT.
AND IT WAS VERY, VERY INTERESTING.
UH, AND THERE'S A GENTLEMAN HERE THAT WORKS FOR HOUSTON COMMUNITY COLLEGE THAT'S WRITTEN A BOOK ABOUT HOUSTON'S CHINATOWN, WHO KNEW, RIGHT? AND SO HE, UM, PRESENTED AND, UH, MY TAKEAWAY WAS THAT I'VE GOTTA GET TOGETHER WITH HIM BECAUSE WE HAVE A FEW RESOURCES, ESPECIALLY HERE ON THE EAST SIDE OF DOWNTOWN IN THE ORIGINAL CHINATOWN, I'M SORRY, THE OTHER CITY, HOW THE OTHER CITY WAS NEW ORLEANS'S CHINATOWN.
SO THAT'S WHO THE OTHER CITY WAS.
AND, UH, THEY'VE DONE WHAT THEY CAN TO SAVE THE LAST LITTLE REMNANTS OF THEIR CHINATOWN.
AND YOU REALLY HAVE TO LOOK FOR 'EM.
UM, I KNOW MS. BROUSSARD IS FROM, UH, NEW ORLEANS, AND SHE KNOWS ABOUT IT, BUT THERE'S SOME INTERESTING LITTLE STATISTICS THAT PEOPLE DIDN'T KNOW THAT CHINESE WEREN'T, UM, UH, THAT DURING THE TIME OF, UH, SEGREGATION, WHEN AFRICAN AMERICAN PERSON COULDN'T GO INTO A, A, A WHITE RESTAURANT OR A WHITE ESTABLISHMENT, THEY COULD GO TO A CHINESE ESTABLISHMENT.
THEY WEREN'T CONSIDERED WHITE OR SOMETHING.
SO IT, IT'S LIKE A WHOLE INTERESTING HISTORY AND THAT'S WHY LOUIS ARMSTRONG HAD THIS TREMENDOUS MEMORY OF EATING AT THE CERTAIN CHINESE CHINATOWN RESTAURANT AND THAT HE ENJOYED IT.
UM, I WANNA ALSO TO SAY WITH SOMETHING, I GOTTA FIND IT HERE, WAS REALLY, REALLY GOOD.
UM, SO THIS IS A COMMENT, AND I WAS JUST FROM A TALK WITH, UM, A PANEL AND WE TALKED ABOUT THE SOJOURNER TRUTH LEGACY PROJECT, BUT SOMEONE MADE THE COMMENT THAT EVERY PLACE HAS A HISTORY AND A CULTURE.
AND I THINK WE DO A GOOD JOB HERE IN THAT WE LET THE COMMUNITY TELL US WHAT, WHAT IS THAT? AND, YOU KNOW, THESE LITTLE LANDMARKS WE GET, WE'VE HAD A LITTLE HICCUP HERE AT CITY COUNCIL MOVING
[03:00:01]
A COUPLE OF THESE LANDMARKS ON ALAMEDA AND ANOTHER ONE ON THE NORTH LOOP THAT WE WERE, WEREN'T SURE WE WERE GONNA GET IT TO CITY COUNCIL.BUT THE POINT IS THAT THESE PEOPLE CAME FORWARD AND ASKED FOR THOSE LANDMARKS, RIGHT? SO IF WE JUST STAY OPEN TO IT, WE KNOW WHAT HISTORY NEEDS TO BE SAVED, AND THAT'S THE JOB THAT WE DO HERE.
UH, ANYTHING ELSE OUTTA THAT? I WANT TO TELL YOU BEFORE THAT I'M LOOKING AT MY SCRATCH NOTES.
SORRY, I HAVE LITTLE GIRLS AND I HAVEN'T HAD TIME TO CATCH UP WITH ANYTHING.
I WAS GONNA JUST ALSO SAY HAPPY VETERAN'S DAY, WHICH IS MONDAY.
UH, WE ARE OFF ON VETERANS DAY.
AND TO THAT I'LL MENTION MY NAMESAKE ROMAN SANTIAGO.
HE WAS, UH, UH, A MEXICAN MIGRANT FARM WORKER THAT MY NAME COMES FROM.
HE WAS FROM, UH, NEW MEXICO, OR HE WAS IN NEW MEXICO WHEN HE TURNED 18 AND WAS DRAFTED TO BIDEN IN WORLD WAR II.
AND, UH, HE WAS IN THE PHILIPPINES WHEN THE, UH, UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT DECIDED TO PUT THEIR RESOURCES TO FIGHT IN EUROPE, TO FIGHT AGAINST ADOLF HITLER AND THE GERMANS IN EUROPE.
SO WE, WE, WE LEFT BEHIND A LOT OF, UH, FILIPINOS AND AMERICANS THAT WERE FIGHTING IN THE PHILIPPINES, BUT THEY HAD NO WEAPONS LEFT, NO AMMUNITION.
SO THEY GOT BACKED UP AGAINST THE END OF THE BATAN PENINSULA, THEIR BACKS AGAINST THE WATER, AND THEY HAD TO SURRENDER TO THE JAPANESE.
AND AT THAT MOMENT, THERE WAS A, THE JAPANESE TOOK THEM IN AND THEY DIDN'T HONOR THE CODES, AND THEY MADE THESE PEOPLE MARCH FOR 60 MILES.
UM, HUNDREDS AND HUNDREDS OF FILIPINOS DIED AND AMERICAN SOLDIERS DIED.
THEY MARCHED WITH NO FOOD AND NO WATER TO, UH, CAMP ORION, I THINK WAS THE CAMP, BUT IT WAS A PRISONER WAR CAMP.
AND, UH, RAMON MADE IT TO THE CAMP.
BUT LIKE A LOT OF SOLDIERS, HE DIED THERE IN THE CAMP.
UM, AND HIS COUSIN, HIS DISTANT COUSIN, MY DAD ALFRED, UH, ALSO GRADUATED FROM HIGH SCHOOL OR GRADUATED 11TH GRADE AND WAS, WAS DRAFTED IT TO FIGHT IN, UH, WORLD WAR II AND FOUGHT IN THE PHILIPPINES, UH, AS THE JAPANESE WERE THEN RETREATING AND WAS ONE OF THE FIRST, UH, SOLDIERS TO ENTER JAPAN AFTER WE, UH, THEY, UH, THEY HAD SURRENDERED AND WAS THERE TO, UH, KEEP THE MPS IN, UH, KEEP THE SOLDIERS IN LINE, WHICH HE SAID IT WAS.
THEY WERE VERY WELL-BEHAVED, BUT THEY FOUGHT FOR DEMOCRACY AND THE RULE OF LAW.
AND, UH, WE'RE ALL BENEFICIARIES OF THE, UH, VETERANS.
AND WITH THAT, OUR MEETING IS ADJOURNED.