* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting. [00:00:14] 2 35. [Houston Archaeological and Historical Commission on August 13, 2026.] THURSDAY, OCTOBER 13TH, 2026. TODAY'S MEETING OF THE HOUSTON ARCHEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL COMMISSION. HAHC IS CALLED TO ORDER. I'M COMMISSION CHAIR DAVID EK TO VERIFY WE HAVE A QUORUM. I'LL CALL THE ROLE, UH, COMMISSIONER THE CHAIR IS PRESENT. COMMISSIONER JONES. PRESENT. COMMISSIONER CARL SMITH PRESENT. COMMISSIONER BLAKELY PRESENT. COMMISSIONER ESCOBAR PRESENT. COMMISSIONER HILL PRESENT. COMMISSIONER COSGROVE IS ABSENT. COMMISSIONER SIDEL? NOT CURRENTLY HERE. COMMISSIONER MARK SMITH, NOT HERE. COMMISSIONER BROWNING PRESENT AND COMMISSIONER BROBECK WILL BE ABSENT. COMMISSIONER GARCIA PRESENT. COMMISSIONER DAVIS PRESENT AND SECRETARY AND PLANNING DIRECTOR OF TRAN PRESENT. THANK YOU. WE HAVE A QUORUM. DID YOU SAY THE RIGHT DATE? AUGUST 13TH, 2026. WITH THAT WE'LL MOVE ON TO THE, UM, THE CHAIR'S REPORT AND I WILL JUST READ THE SPEAKER RULES, UM, WHICH IF YOU CAME IN THE FRONT DOOR, IT WAS TO YOUR LEFT. UM, ALL COMMENTS SUBMITTED IN WRITING OR BY PHONE WILL BE INCLUDED IN THE AGENDA TO PUT ON THE RECORD BY STAFF. IF YOU, IF A SPEAKER WISHES TO DISCUSS ANY SUBJECT, NOT AUTHOR OR NOT. OTHERWISE ON THE AGENDA, TIME IS ALLOWED UNDER PUBLIC COMMENTS. ALL OTHER AGENDA ITEMS HAVE BEEN HEARD. APPLICANT APPLICANT'S FOR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS AND HISTORIC DESIGNATIONS WHO ARE PRESENT AND WISH TO SPEAK SHALL SPEAK FIRST AND ARE ALLOWED THREE MINUTES FOR AN OPENING PRESENTATION. THE APPLICANT IS ALSO PERMITTED A TWO MINUTE REBUTTAL AFTER ALL SPEAKERS HAVE BEEN HEARD. IF THERE ARE NO SPEAKERS OTHER THAN THE APPLICANT, THERE IS NO REBUTTAL PERIOD. ALL OTHER SPEAKERS WILL BE PERMITTED TO SPEAK TO THE COMMISSION MEMBERS FOR TWO MINUTES. NO SPEAKER IS PERMITTED TO ACCUMULATE SPEAKING TIME FROM ANOTHER PERSON. TIME DEVOTED TO ANSWERING ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION IS NOT CHARGED AGAINST ALLOTTED SPEAKING. SPEAKING TIME, THE COMMISSION MAY CHANGE THE SPEAKING TIME IF WARRANTED. THE COMMISSION RESERVES A RIGHT TO LIMIT SPEAKERS IF IT IS IN THE COMMISSION'S JUDGMENT THAT AN ISSUE HAS BEEN SUFFICIENTLY DISCUSSED AND ADDITIONAL SPEAKERS ARE REPETITIVE OR IF SPEAKERS DO NOT FOLLOW THIS ESTABLISHED DECORUM. WHAT BEGAN ON MAY 6TH, 2024 AND THEREAFTER, THERE IS NOT AN OPTION TO SPEAK REMOTELY. THE MEETING CAN BE VIEWED ON HTV HOUSTON MUNICIPAL CHANNEL AND HTV WEBSITE. AND WITH THAT WE'LL MOVE ON TO THE DIRECTOR'S REPORT. GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR, HICK COMMISSION MEMBERS, STAFF, AND THE PUBLIC. I AM VON TRAN, SECRETARY OF THIS COMMISSION AND DIRECTOR OF THE HOUSTON PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. WELCOME. BEFORE I BEGIN MY DIRECTOR'S REPORT, I WOULD LIKE TO RECOGNIZE TWO FACES ON TWO NEW FACES ON THE HORSESHOE. UH, FIRST AND FOREMOST, MARTA KNO. DID I SAY THAT RIGHT? MARTA, PLEASE. ALL RIGHT. UM, VERY CLOSE. SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH MARTA, FOR JOINING US TODAY. UM, YOU ARE A WELCOME, UH, UH, TO BE HERE WITH US AND YOU'VE BEEN SITTING ON THIS COMMISSION FOR, UH, MANY YEARS, AND SO WE WILL, WE WELCOME YOU BACK. ALL RIGHT. AND ALSO SITTING WITH US IS A NEW FACE REP, UM, REPRESENTING THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT FOR US. I WOULD LIKE TO INTRODUCE MS. HEATHER COOK. HEATHER COMES FROM THE RANDALL LAW FIRM AND SHE IS ASSISTING US ON THIS COMMISSION AS WELL AS OTHER WORKS, UH, WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, UH, PARTICULARLY THE PLANNING, UH, DEPARTMENT AS WELL. HEATHER COMES, UH, TO US WITH YEARS AND YEARS OF EXPERIENCE, UH, OUTSIDE AS WELL AS 11 YEARS WITH THE CITY OF HOUSTON, SERVING AS THE ASSISTANT ASSISTANT. UM, LEGAL, WHAT IS YOUR TITLE? ASSISTANT LEGAL. UH, I LOST MY, I WAS A SENIOR ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY. THERE WE GO. WITH THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT. YES. ASSISTANT SENIOR ATTORNEY WITH THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT. SO, WELCOME BACK. THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE WITH US. UM, YOUR THANK YOU SERVICE WILL BE MOST APPRECIATED AND VALUED. ALRIGHT, SO HERE'S MY DIRECTOR'S REPORT. FOR THE MONTH OF AUGUST NINE, PRE-APPLICATION [00:05:01] DESIGN REVIEW REQUESTS WERE RECEIVED. 41 CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS APPLICATIONS WERE SUBMITTED. YEAR TO DATE TOTAL NOW STANDS AT 24 PRE-APPLICATION REVIEWS AND 221 COA SUBMISSIONS. ADDITIONALLY, STAFF ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVED SIX COAS DURING THIS CYCLE, BRINGING THE YEAR TO DATE ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL TO A TOTAL OF 61. IN CLOSING, 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. THIS CONCLUDES MY DIRECTOR'S REPORT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. UM, AND AS MENTIONED ON THE AGENDA IS THE MAYOR'S LIAISON REPORT, AND AGAIN, RETURNING TO OUR COMMISSION IN MARCH, EO, UM, DO YOU HAVE ANY, UH, WORDS THAT YOU'D LIKE TO SHARE? UH, THANK YOU CHAIR. I'M JUST GLAD TO BE BACK. UM, IT, IT HAS BEEN A WHILE. I, UH, MOVING INTO THE NEW ADMINISTRATION FROM MAYOR TURNER'S ADMINISTRATION TO WHITMEYER TOOK UP SOME TIME. BUT, UM, IN DISCUSSION WITH DIRECTOR TRAN, I'M, I'M HAPPY TO COME BACK AND, AND BE THE EX-OFFICIO MEMBER OF THE BOARD AND, AND DO APPRECIATE THE WORK OF THE COMMISSION. GREAT, THANK YOU. WITH THAT, WE'LL MOVE ON TO THE CONSIDERATION OF THE JULY 16TH, 2026 HAHC MEETING MINUTES COMMISSION MEMBERS. HAVE YOU HAD A CHANCE TO REVIEW THE MINUTES AND IF SO, ARE THERE ANY CHANGES OR IS THERE A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE MINUTES? GARCIA VOTE. GARCIA. MOTION TO ACCEPT THE MINUTES. THANK YOU. IS THERE A SECOND BILL? SECOND BILL. SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. UH, ALL OPPOSED? NONE. THANK YOU. WE'LL NOW MOVE ON TO ITEM A, WHICH IS A CONSIDERATION OF REFERRAL TO THE TEXAS HISTORICAL COMMISSION FOR NOMINATION TO THE NATIONAL REGISTRY OF HISTORIC PLACES FOR LYONS AVENUE, HISTORIC DISTRICT, HOUSTON HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS, ROUGHLY BOUNDED BY LYONS AVENUE BETWEEN BENSON AND YALE STREET. YATES STREET. EXCUSE ME. GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION. THIS IS STAFF PERSON SAMANTHA DELEON. I SUBMIT ITEM A FOR CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON REFERRAL TO THE TEXAS HISTORICAL COMMISSION FOR THE NOMINATION TO THE NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES FOR THE LION, A AVENUE HISTORIC DISTRICT. THE LION'S AVENUE HISTORIC DISTRICT IS A SURVIVING SEGMENT OF ONE OF HOUSTON'S HISTORIC MAIN STREETS IN THE CITY'S HISTORICALLY BLACK FIFTH WARD, ENCOMPASSING A ONE THIRD MILE STRETCH OF LYONS AVENUE, EXTENDING FROM THE INTERSECTION OF LYONS AVENUE AND YATE STREET WEST TO BENSON STREET, AND INCLUDING ONE PARCEL OF ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF LYONS AVENUE, WEST OF BENSON STREET, THE DISTRICT IN CHAINS, A MODERATELY INTACT GROUP OF BUILDINGS ASSOCIATED WITH ONE OF THE CITY'S MAJOR 20TH CENTURY AFRICAN-AMERICAN BUSINESS DISTRICTS. DESPITE LOSSES IN HISTORIC FABRIC, THE DISTRICT CONTINUES TO REFLECT THE INSTITUTION, BUSINESSES AND RESIDENTS THAT ONCE TO FIND THIS COMMUNITY CENTER. THE LYONS AVENUE HISTORIC DISTRICT IS NOMINATED TO THE NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES UNDER CRITERION A IN THE AREA OF BLACK HISTORY AND SOCIAL HISTORY. OF THE 52 RESOURCES WITHIN THE BOUNDARY 26 RETAINS, UH, SUFFICIENT INTEGRITY TO CONVEY THE DISTRICT'S HISTORIC CHARACTER. THE PERIOD OF SIGNIFICANCE BEGIN CIRCA 1925 AND END CIRCA 1970. STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE HAC REFER THE NOMINATION OF THE LIONS AVENUE HISTORIC DISTRICT TO THE THC FOR LISTING ON THE NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION. I'M AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS. THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. AT THIS TIME I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. IS ANYONE HERE IN THEIR AUDIENCE TO SPEAK ABOUT THIS ITEM ON THE AGENDA? I DON'T HAVE ANYONE SIGNED UP FOR THIS ITEM. I'M NOT HEARING ANYONE. I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING COMMISSION MEMBERS. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF? AND IF NOT, IS THERE A VOTE TO RECOMMEND? UM, UH, THE REFERRAL TO THE THCI. SO MOVED. ESCOBAR MAKES THE MOTION. JONES. SECONDS. JONES SECONDS. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THANK YOU. THANK YOU. PASSES. WE'LL NOW MOVE ON TO ITEM B, PUBLIC HEARING CONSIDERATION OF A PROTECTED LANDMARK DESIGNATION APPLICATION FOR THE BURIN SEVENTH DAY ADVENT ADVENTIST CHURCH AT 2 1 1 9 ST. EMANUEL STREET, HOUSTON, TEXAS 7 7 0 0 3. GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIRMAN. AND OH, SORRY. GOOD AFTERNOON [00:10:01] CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION. THIS IS STAFF PERSON AARON EDWARDS. I SUBMIT ITEM B FOR THE CONSIDERATION OF 2119 ST. EMANUEL STREET FOR THE PROTECTED LANDMARK DESIGNATION OF THE BUR SEVENTH DAY ADVENTIST CHURCH. THE CHURCH IS A ONE STORY EARLY 20TH CENTURY VERNACULAR, SANDSTONE CLAD BUILDING THAT WAS COMPLETED IN 1921 BY THE BUILDER OF THE CHURCH MEMBER JAMES A. CARROLL. THAT SAME YEAR THE CONGREGATION WAS OFFICIALLY ESTABLISHED, BECOMING THE FIRST BLACK SEVENTH DAY ADVENTIST CHURCH WITH ITS PASTOR FOR, UH, FOR PASTOR BEING HERBERT D GREEN. OVER THE COURSE OF THE 105 YEAR HISTORY, BREEN HAS REMAINED RESILIENT THROUGH ITS THREATS OF GENTRIFICATION AND DISPLACEMENT OF WIDESPREAD RACISM OF THE JIM CROW LAWS AND CIVIL RIGHTS ERRORS. BREEN SHOWED THE DEDICATION BY SERVING THIRD WORLD COMMUNITY WHEN THEY RELOCATED IN THEIR ORIGINAL LOCATION FROM 1813 DOW TO 2118. 2119 ST. EMANUEL STREET IN AVOIDANCE FOR THE FORCEFUL EXPANSION OF THE GULF FREEWAY THROUGH THE AREA IN 1946. DURING THE 1950S, UNDER THE LEADERSHIP OF PASTOR D PATSON, THE CHURCH BECAME INVOLVED WITH THE HISTORIC COUNCIL AND EDUCATION RE RACE, RELI RACE RELATIONS THAT SPONSORED COMMUNITY EVENTS, PANEL DISCUSSIONS, AND INTERFAITH SHIPS. WITH ENCOURAGED DIALOGUE BETWEEN HOUSTON'S DIVERSE RELIGIOUS AND RACIAL COMMUNITIES DURING THE 1960S AND 1970S. THEY CONTINUED ON WITH SUCCESSFUL COMMUNITY INITIATIVES BY OPENING UP SAVE THE PEOPLE CENTER, AN EMERGENCY ASSISTANCE SITE FOR INDIVIDUALS WITH FAMILIES RECEIVING WELFARE. THE CENTER LATER ON EXPANDED ITS SERVICE BY ADDING A MEDICAL AND DENTAL VAN. 24 HOUR SERVICE AND COMMUNITY DONATION. THE PASTOR AND THE MEMBERS OF THE CONGREGATION ARE SEEKING PROTECTED LANDMARK DESIGNATION FOR THE PROPERTY IN THE THIRD WARD TO PROTECT AND PRESERVE THE HISTORY FOR THE SIGNIFICANT CHURCH FOR GENERATIONS TO COME. THIS PROPERTY MEETS CRITERIA ONE, THREE, AND EIGHT FOR LANDMARK DESIGNATION AND CRITERIA, ONE FOR PROTECTED LANDMARK DESIGNATION. STAFF SEEKS SUPPORT FROM THE HOUSTON ARCHEOLOGICAL AND HISTORIC COMMISSION FOR THE PROTECTED LANDMARK DESIGNATION OF 2119 ST. EMANUEL STREET, HOUSTON, TEXAS 7 7 0 0 3, KNOWN AS THE BUREN SEVENTH DAY ADVENTIST CHURCH CHAIR. MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION, I'M AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS. THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION. THANK YOU. THIS TIME I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. IS THERE ANYONE THAT HAS COME TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM ON THE AGENDA? NOT HEARING ANYONE. I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING COMMISSION MEMBERS. ARE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS APPLICATION OR IS, IS THERE A MOTION TO ACCEPT GARCIA? A MOTION TO ACCEPT? IS THERE A SECOND ESCOBAR SECONDS. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES. WE'LL NOW MOVE ON TO ITEM C, PUBLIC HEARING IN CONSIDERATION OF A, A PROTECTED LANDMARK DESIGNATION APPLICATION FOR THE DONNY MCQUAIN FREEMAN HOUSE AT 2 5 2 2 COME STREET, HOUSTON, TEXAS 7 7 0 0 4. GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIRS AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION. THIS IS STAFF PERSON SAMANTHA DELEON. I SUBMIT FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION ITEM C AT 25 22 CALT STREET FOR PROTECTED LANDMARK DESIGNATION OF THE DONNIE MCIL LANE. FREEMAN HOUSE. THE HOME AT 2 5 2 2 CALT STREET IS A COLONIAL REVIVAL STYLE HOME CONSTRUCTED IN 1928 AND COMPLETED IN 1929 IN RIVERSIDE, HARRIS, THE DONI, MCEWING AND FREEMAN HOUSE. A 2 5 2 2 CAL MEETS CRITERIA 1, 3, 4, AND FIVE FOR LANDMARK DESIGNATION AND CRITERION ONE FOR PROTECTED LANDMARK DESIGNATION. THE 1920S SUBDIVISION WAS ONCE KNOWN AS THE JEWISH RIVER OAKS, AND LATER BECAME HOME TO MANY OF HOUSTON'S PROMINENT AFRICAN AMERICAN PROFESSIONALS. THE TWO STORY BRICK VENEER HOME HAS HAD SIX OWNERS AND OPERATED AS A RENTAL RESIDENCE FROM 1957 THROUGH THE LATE 1970S. NOTABLE TENANTS INCLUDE THE THOMAS F. FREEMAN, THE RENOWNED TEXAS, UH, SOUTHERN UNIVERSITY DEBATE COACH. THE PROPERTY INCLUDES A CONTRIBUTING HOUSE AND A NON-CONTRIBUTING DETACHED GARAGE. ONE OF 50 OF THE NEW RIVERSIDE TERRACE, UH, ADDITIONS THE LOT ON 2 5 2 2. KME WAS PURCHASED FROM THE GARDEN TRUST COMPANY IN 1928 BY DF ERS WHO BOUGHT AND SOLD THE PROPERTIES TO AN INVESTOR. THE HOMES FIRST OWNER PURCHASED THE LOT FROM VICAR THAT SAME YEAR AND HIRED CONTRACTOR WY TO BUILD THE HOME FOR $10,000. THE NUMEROUS OCCUPANTS OF 25 22 KME REFLECT THE HISTORY OF RIVERSIDE TERRORISTS ITSELF FROM THE BOOM AND BUST OF THE 1920S AND 1930S TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S TRANSITION INTO A HOME FOR HOUSTON'S AFRICAN AMERICAN PROFESSIONALS. THE NOMINATION WAS WRITTEN BY, UH, DIVAN WALLACE WITH PRESERVATION HOUSTON STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE HOUSTON ARCHEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL COMMISSION RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL THE PROTECTED LANDMARK DESIGNATION OF 25 22 CALT STREET, HOUSTON, TEXAS 7 7 0 0 3. THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION. THANK YOU. I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. [00:15:01] I DO HAVE A SPEAKER SIGNED UP, UM, WHICH WAS AS MENTIONED. UH, YVONNE WALLACE, IF YOU COULD RESTATE YOUR NAME AND THE MICROPHONE FOR THE RECORD. GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR AND COMMISSIONERS. MY NAME IS DION WALLACE AND I AM HERE REPRESENTING PRESERVATION HOUSTON IN SUPPORT OF THE PROTECTED LANDMARK DESIGNATION OF 25 22 KME STREET, ALSO REFERRED TO AS THE DONI KEL WAYNE FREEMAN HOUSE. DURING THE INITIAL 30 YEARS FOLLOWING ITS CONSTRUCTION IN 1929, THE RESIDENTS CHANGED HANDS NUMEROUS TIMES. THIS SUCCESSION OF OWNERS INCLUDED VARIOUS LOCAL PROFESSIONALS, SUCH AS A NATURAL GAS ENGINEER, AN OIL DISTRIBUTOR, A BUILDING MANAGER, A PHARMACIST, AND A ROLLING MILL SUPERINTENDENT UNTIL 1957. THIS ALL CHANGED IN 1958 WHEN THE PROPERTY WAS PURCHASED BY THOMAS F. FREEMAN, A CONSEQUENTIAL FIGURE IN HOUSTON CIVIC AND EDUCATIONAL HISTORY. FREEMAN'S 71 YEAR CAREER WAS DEFINED BY MENTORSHIP AND SERVICE. BEFORE COMING TO HOUSTON FREEMAN TAUGHT A MOREHOUSE COLLEGE WHERE A YOUNG MARTIN LUTHER KING JR. SAT IN ON ONE OF HIS LECTURES. FREEMAN LATER FOUNDED THE TEXAS SOUTHERN UNIVERSITY DEBATE TEAM AND LED IT FOR 64 YEARS, BUILDING THE TEAM INTO ONE OF THE MOST RESPECTED COLLEGIATE DEBATE PROGRAMS IN THE COUNTRY, AND MENTORING GENERATIONS OF STUDENTS WHO WENT ON TO SHAPE LAW, POLITICS AND PUBLIC LIFE. DURING HIS TIME AS THE DEBATE COACH, HE MENTORED THE LIKES OF FORMER UNITED STATES REPRESENTATIVE BARBARA JORDAN, WHO WAS A MEMBER OF THE DEBATE TEAM, ALONG WITH ACTOR DENZEL WASHINGTON, WHILE WORKING ON THE SET OF THE GREAT DEBATERS. DURING HIS OWNERSHIP OF 2 5 2 2 CALLANT STREET, THE HOME IN ITS REAR GARAGE APARTMENT HOUSED A SERIES OF TENANTS REFLECTING RIVERSIDE TERRACES EMERGENCE OF A CENTER FOR BLACK PROFESSIONAL LIFE. GIVEN THIS HISTORY, ITS PLACE IN THE STORY OF RIVERSIDE TERRACE, ITS CONNECTION TO THOMAS F. FREEMAN. ON BEHALF OF PRESERVATION HOUSTON, WE ENCOURAGE THE COMMISSION TO APPROVE THIS NOMINATION. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE IN THE AUDIENCE THAT THAT IS HERE TO SPEAK ON THE ITEM AS WELL? IF SO, PLEASE ANNOUNCE YOURSELF AND NOT SEE ANYONE. OKAY. I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. AND ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF FOR THIS APPLICATION OR IS THERE A MOTION TO ACCEPT? I'LL MOVE. OKAY. I'VE GOT A MOTION FROM, UH, COMMISSIONER ESCOBAR. COMMISSIONER JONES WILL SECOND JONES. SECONDS. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU. I'LL NOW MOVE ON TO ITEM D, WHICH IS A PUBLIC HEARING IN CONSIDERATION OF A PROTECTED LANDMARK DESIGNATION APPLICATION FOR THE BUFFALO BAYOU PARK CISTERN AT 1 0 5 B SABINE STREET, HOUSTON, TEXAS 7 7 0 0 7. GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION. THIS IS STAFF PERSON YASMINE ARSLAN. ITEM D AT 1 0 5 B SABINE STREET HAS BEEN SUBMITTED FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. THE BUFFALO BAYOU PARK CISTERN IS AN APPROXIMATELY 87,500 SQUARE FOOT ONE STORY RESERVOIR. CONSTRUCTED CIRCUIT 19 26, 19 27. ORIGINALLY DESIGNED AS A 15 MILLION GALLON GROUNDWATER GROUNDWATER RESERVOIR. IT SERVED AS A CRITICAL COMPONENT OF HOUSTON'S MUNICIPAL WATER SYSTEM FOR ROUGHLY 80 YEARS. THE CISTERN IS HISTORICALLY SIGNIFICANT AS THE LARGEST GROUNDWATER RESERVOIR EVER CONSTRUCTED IN HOUSTON, REPRESENTING A PERIOD WHEN THE CITY RELIED EXCLUSIVELY ON GROUNDWATER FOR ITS MUNICIPAL WATER SUPPLY. IT CONTRIBUTED TO HOUSTON'S DEVELOPMENT BY STABILIZING WATER PRESSURE, SUPPORTING FIRE PROTECTION, AND PROVIDING EMERGENCY SUPPLY DURING REGIONAL DISASTERS, INCLUDING THE 1929 AND THE 1935 FLOODS. SINCE ITS DECOMMISSIONING AND SUBSEQUENT REHABILITATION, IT HAS BECOME A TREASURED CULTURAL SITE OFFERING PUBLIC ACCESS HISTORY TOWARDS AND IMMERSIVE ART INSTALLATIONS THAT MAKE USE OF ITS UNIQUE ACOUSTICS AND DRAMATIC INTERIOR. ARCHITECTURALLY, THE CISTERN IS A PORT CONCRETE, PARTIALLY BELOW GRADE STRUCTURE SUPPORTED BY A STRIKING GRID OF 2 22 21 CONCRETE COLUMNS EACH 25 FEET TALL TODAY, THE SHALLOW WATER LEVEL MAINTAINED INSIDE CREATES REFLECTIVE VISUALS THAT HIGHLIGHT THE COLUMN GRID AND EMPHASIZE THE MONUMENTAL SCALE OF THE SPACE. THIS REPORT WAS PREPARED BY EMILY ARWAN WITH PRESERVATION HOUSTON. THE CISTERN SATISFIES CRITERIA 1, 3, 4, 5, AND EIGHT FOR LANDMARK DESIGNATION AND CRITERION ONE FOR PROTECTED LANDMARK DESIGNATION. STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE HOUSTON ARCHEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL COMMISSION RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL THE PROTECTED LANDMARK DESIGNATION OF THE BUFFALO BAYOU PARK CISTERN AT 1 0 5 SABINE STREET. THIS CONCLUDES [00:20:01] MY PRESENTATION. THANK YOU. WE'LL, UM, OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AT THIS TIME. I DO HAVE TWO SPEAKERS THAT HAVE SIGNED UP. THE FIRST IS EMILY ARWAN, FOLLOWED BY ALISON DURAN. GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSION. I'M EMILY WAN WITH PRESERVATION HOUSTON. UM, WE WERE VERY EXCITED WHEN BUFFALO BAYOU PARTNERSHIP REACHED OUT TO US, UM, TO WRITE THIS PROTECTED LANDMARK NOMINATION IN CELEBRATION OF THE CISTERNS CENTENNIAL. UM, AT FIRST WHEN I WAS THINKING ABOUT WHAT TO SAY, I WAS KIND OF LIKE, IS IT EVEN NECESSARY TO SPEAK? 'CAUSE IT SEEMS TO ME LIKE EVERYONE KNOWS AND LOVES THE CISTERN, BUT THAT WAS ONLY THE CASE BECAUSE BUFFALO BAYOU PARTNERSHIP AND THE CITY OF HOUSTON HAD THE FORESIGHT TO TURN IT INTO THE CULTURAL TREASURE THAT IT IS NOW WHEN IT WAS NOT WELL KNOWN, LARGELY ABANDONED, HADN'T BEEN USED IN YEARS. UM, AND, UH, WE, WE REALLY WANNA CELEBRATE THAT FORESIGHT, DEDICATION, AND, YOU KNOW, MAKING THE HARDER DECISION TO TURN THIS INTO SOMETHING THAT WAS, UH, PUBLICLY ACCESSIBLE. UM, AND THAT HOUSTONIANS WILL BE ABLE TO, TO ENJOY FOR NOW GENERATIONS TO COME. THEY'RE TAKING THE NEXT STEP, UM, TRYING TO DESIGNATE THIS AS A PROTECTED LANDMARK. UM, SO THAT ENSURES THAT THE, THE CISTERN WILL REMAIN A CULTURAL TREASURE FOR HOUSTON INTO THE FUTURE. UM, SO WE REALLY ARE GRATEFUL FOR BUFFALO BAYOU PARTNERSHIP AND THE CITY OF HOUSTON FOR TAKING THIS STEP. UM, AND OF COURSE WE BELIEVE IT MEETS THE CRITERIA FOR PROTECTED LANDMARK DESIGNATION. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. AND THE NEXT SPEAKER IS ALLISON DURAN. GOOD AFTERNOON. UM, I'M FROM BUFFALO BAYOU PARTNERSHIP AND I HAVE, COULD YOU RESTATE YOUR NAME IN THE MICROPHONE AS WELL FOR THE RECORD? GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS ALISON DURAN AND I'M WITH BUFFALO BAYOU PARTNERSHIP. I HAVE THE DISTINCT PLEASURE OF WORKING AT THE VISITOR CENTER AND BEING ABLE TO SEE ALL OF THE VISITORS THAT COME TO THE CISTERN EVERY DAY. WE SEE VISITORS THAT ARRIVE THERE AND THEY OFTEN MAKE IT THEIR VERY FIRST STOP FROM THE AIRPORT WITH THEIR LUGGAGE AND OFTENTIMES ALSO THEIR VERY LAST STOP. I SEE THE CISTERN NOT ONLY AS SOMETHING THAT SITS BEHIND A PIECE OF GLASS, BUT SOMETHING THAT PEOPLE ARE ABLE TO WALK THROUGH AND EXPERIENCE FIRSTHAND. IT IS SOMETHING THAT I AS HAVE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO START FROM THE VERY BEGINNING OF THIS PROCESS TO SEE AND FEEL THAT IT WOULD BE SO IMPORTANT TO PRESERVE FOR MANY FUTURE GENERATIONS TO COME. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE IN THE PUBLIC WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? NOT HEARING ANYONE. I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND COMMISSION MEMBERS. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF ON THE APPLICATION? AND IF NOT, IS THERE UM, A MOTION? UM, I SIT ON THE BOARD OF BUFFALO VALUE PARTNERSHIPS, SO I'M NOT SURE IF I NEED TO RECUSE MYSELF FROM A VOTE, ALTHOUGH I ENTHUSIASTICALLY SUPPORT, UM, THIS PRESENTATION. , NOT A PROBLEM. UM, OKAY, IS THERE A MOTION COMMISSIONER JONES WILL MAKE THE MOTION. OKAY. IS THERE A SECOND? GARCIA SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? AND THERE'LL BE ONE ABSTENTION FOR COMMISSIONER ESCOBAR. OKAY, THANK YOU. WE ARE GONNA MOVE ON. UM, BEFORE WE GET TO ITEM E, I'D LIKE TO SUGGEST, UM, WE CONSIDER A VOTE TO, UM, MOVE ITEM G, THE POSSIBLE RECONSIDERATION FOR THE NOR HILL DESIGN GUIDELINES ABOVE ITEM F, UM, WHICH WAS INVOLVES THE REVIEW OF THE REVISED RULES OR PROCEDURE FOR THE HAHC. IS THERE, UM, WOULD ANYONE, UH, BE INTERESTED TO MAKE A MOTION SO THAT WE COULD, UM, HAVE THE PUBLIC, UM, THAT THAT PUBLIC MATTER HEARD FIRST? I'LL MAKE THAT MOTION TO MOVE ITEM G BEFORE ITEM F ON THE AGENDA. IS THERE A SECOND? BLAKELY SECONDS? BLAKELY SECONDS. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? OKAY, THANK YOU. AND NOW WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM E CONSIDERATION OF THE FOLLOWING APPLICATIONS FOR CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS, ONE OR MORE ITEMS MAY BE TAKEN IN ONE MOTION. ASK CONSENT ITEMS AND I WILL BE, THE CHAIR WILL BE, UM, RECUSING HIMSELF FROM ITEM NUMBER FOUR. GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIR MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION. THIS IS STAFF PERSON SAMANTHA DEION. I PRESENT ITEM E OUR CONSENT AGENDA IF THE COMMISSION WOULD LIKE TO ACCEPT THE FOLLOWING. UM, UH, WOULD LIKE TO TAKE IF ONE OR MORE ITEMS MAY BE TAKEN IN MOTION AS CONSENT ITEMS. ITEM 4 9 1 4 MAIN STREET ALTERATION OTHER FOR, UH, THE [00:25:01] LANDMARK NOMINATION OF THE COMMERCE, UH, BUILDING E 5 14 24 ASHLAND STREET, NEW CONSTRUCTION OF A GARAGE OR CARPORT IN HOUSTON HEIGHTS WEST ITEM E 6 14 24 ASHLAND STREET ALTERATION EDITION LOCATED IN HOUSTON HEIGHTS, WEST ITEM E 7 7 1 9 WOODLAND STREET. NEW CONSTRUCTION OF A GARAGE OR CARPORT LOCATED IN WOODLAND HEIGHTS. ITEM E 8 7 1 9 WOODLAND STREET ALTERATION EDITION LOCATED IN WOODLAND HEIGHTS. ITEM E NINE, UH, 5 29 EUCLID STREET, ALTERATION EDITION LOCATED IN WOODLAND HEIGHTS. ITEM E 10 3400 WHITE OAK DRIVE, ALTERATION DOORS, WINDOWS LOCATED IN HOUSTON HEIGHTS EAST OR IN HOUSTON HEIGHTS SOUTH. ITEM E 11 16 24 HEIGHTS BOULEVARD. NEW CONSTRUCTION OF A GARAGE OR CARPORT LOCATED IN HOUSTON HEIGHTS EAST. ITEM E 12 16 24 HEIGHTS BOULEVARD. LOCATED AT UH, OR A ALTERATION EDITION LOCATED IN THE HOUSTON HEIGHTS EAST ITEM E 13 1 1 9 EAST 20TH STREET, ALTERATION DOORS, BALCONY OR RAMP, UH, PER THE PROTECTED LANDMARK OF THE JONATHAN E BANTA HOUSE ITEM E 14 18 19 LUBBOCK STREET, ALTERATION, SIDING OR TRIM DOORS, WINDOWS, OR ROOF LOCATED IN THE OLD SIX WARD AND IS ALSO THE PROTECTED LANDMARK OF THE HEINRICH AND HANNAH GEESE HOUSE. ITEM E 15 8 23 PIE STREET, ALTERATION PORCH OR BALCONY LOCATED IN NOR HILL. ITEM E 16 19 27 SOUTH BOULEVARD, ALTERATION DOORS, WINDOWS, OTHER LOCATED IN BOULEVARD OAKS. ITEM E 17 5 0 9. SO ROSS STREET LOCATED, UH, ALTERATION EDITION LOCATED IN FIRST MONTROSE COMMONS. ITEM E 18 11 36 REG DRIVE, ALTERATION WINDOWS LOCATED IN NOR HILL. ITEM E 19 11 39 WEST MELWOOD STREET, ALTERATION WINDOWS LOCATED IN NOR HILL. ITEM E 24 25 COLUMBIA STREET, NEW CONSTRUCTION OF GARAGE OR CARPORT LOCATED IN HOUSTON HEIGHTS SOUTH IN ITEM E 21 19 25 WASHINGTON AVENUE ALTERATION SIGN LOCATED IN THE OLD SIX WARD. THANK YOU. UM, AND I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A CLARIFICATION THAT, UM, ITEM E FOUR REMAIN OFF OF CONSENT. OKAY. THANK YOU. I HAVE A FEW SPEAKERS SIGNED UP FOR ITEM SEVEN, EIGHT, AND NINE AND THEY ARE SUP APPEAR TO BE SUPPORTIVE BASED ON THE CARDS THAT I'VE RECEIVED. UM, IF ANY OF YOU WANT TO PULL ONE OF THOSE PROJECTS, UM, NOW'S YOUR TIME TO SAY. SO. UM, IF ANY OTHER MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC WOULD LIKE TO PULL AN ITEM THAT YOU ARE HERE TO SPEAK ABOUT THAT YOU DISAGREE WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS FROM STAFF, THIS IS ALSO YOUR OPPORTUNITY TO, TO PULL THAT ITEM FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION. OKAY. HEARING, I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THAT. AND THEN COMMISSIONER DAVIS, DO YOU HAVE ITEMS THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO PULL? 18 AND 19. OKAY. ARE THERE ANY OTHER COMMISSION MEMBERS THAT WANNA PULL AN ITEM? ITEM NINE. ITEM NINE, COMMISSIONER HILL, ITEM 21, PLEASE. OKAY. ANY OTHER ITEMS COMMISSION MEMBERS WOULD LIKE TO PULL? I, OKAY, I'M GONNA READ THE REVISED CONSENT LIST, THEN IT'LL BE ITEMS 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 19, AND 20. I'M SORRY. I WANT TO RETRACT MY REQUEST FOR ITEM NINE. YOU MAY DO SO . SO YOU WANT TO JUST REMOVE NINE BEYOND CONSENT, SO WE'LL ADD NINE BACK TO THE CONSENT LIST. 18 AND 19. 1819 OR PAUL . SO IT SHOULD BE 18, 19, 21. OKAY. OKAY. SO WE'LL BE GOING FROM ITEM 16. WE'LL BE GOING THEN TO ITEM 20. WE'LL STILL BE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA. CLARIFICATION? YES. ITEM E 17 5 0 9. SO WALL STREET. WAS THAT PULLED? THANK YOU. OKAY, SO JUST [00:30:01] 18 AND 19. MY APOLOGIES IN ONE IN 21 AND I JUST PUT BACK, OKAY, SO I'LL, I'LL READ THIS. LET'S LOOK ONE MORE TIME. THE REVISED LIST WILL BE ITEMS 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, AND 20. SO COMMISSION MEMBERS, UM, IS THERE A MOTION TO ACCEPT THIS REVISED CONSENT LIST WITH THE RECOMMENDED, UM, ACTIONS BY STAFF? IS THERE A MOTION? A MOTION TO ACCEPT? WE HAVE A MOTION. IS THERE A SECOND HILL? SECOND HILL SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THOSE MOTIONS PASSES. AND WE'LL NOW MOVE ON TO ITEM ONE. GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION. THIS IS STAFF PERSON JACQUELYN BROWN. ITEM ONE AT 2 0 2 EAST 31ST AND A HALF STREET IN THE STARK WEATHER HISTORIC DISTRICT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION, THIS ITEM HAS BEEN DEFERRED TWICE AND MUST BE ACTED ON TODAY. THE 962 SQUARE FOOT ONE STORY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE WITH A DETACHED GARAGE WAS A CONTRIBUTING CRAFTSMAN STYLE PROPERTY THAT WAS CONSTRUCTED CIRCA 1930. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A COA FOR DEMOLITION OF THE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE. STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO DENY THE COA WITH THE FOLLOWING OPTIONS. NUMBER ONE, ISSUE THE PERMIT MORATORIUM OF TWO YEARS. TWO ISSUE THE COR FOR REPAIR, RECONSTRUCTION, OR RESTORATION OF ALL OR PART OF THE DEMOLISHED STRUCTURE USING AS MUCH SALVAGE MATERIAL AS POSSIBLE. OR THREE ISSUE A COR FOR RELOCATING A CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE TO THE SITE WITH CONDITIONS BETWEEN NOVEMBER 10TH AND NOVEMBER 20TH, 2025. THE CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE WAS DEMOLISHED BY THE APPLICANT. AFTER RECEIVING A DEMOLITION PERMIT APPROVAL ON NOVEMBER 20TH, STAFF DISCOVERED THAT OUT OF THE 25 PROPERTIES IN THE STARK WEATHER HISTORIC DISTRICT INVENTORY LIST, TWO PROPERTIES 2 0 2 AND 2 0 4 EAST 31ST AND A HALF STREET DID NOT HAVE THE REQUIRED HISTORIC HOLDS THAT WOULD'VE PRE PREVENTED THE APPROVED DEMOLITION PRO PERMIT. THE OVERSIGHT WAS CORRECTED IMMEDIATELY AND NOW ALL 25 PROPERTIES HAVE THE REQUIRED HISTORIC HOLDS. STAFF HAS RECEIVED TWO PUBLIC COMMENTS ON THE SCREEN ARE OPTIONS FOR THE COMMISSION TO CONSIDER. THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION. THANK YOU. AT THIS TIME I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS ITEM. I DO HAVE A FEW SPEAKERS WHO HAVE, UH, SIGNED UP TO SPEAK. UM, THE APPLICANT IS JEFFREY URMAN. WE'LL BEGIN WITH YOU. IF YOU COULD RESTATE YOUR NAME IN THE, UM, THE MICROPHONE FOR THE RECORD, UH, FOLLOWED BY TY UH, KEKOA. MY NAME IS JEFFREY STURMAN. AND, UH, I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT I'M VERY SORRY FOR WHAT HAS HAPPENED AND ACCEPT WHATEVER OUTCOME IS DECIDED. UH, WHETHER IT'S THE MORATORIUM BUILDING A SIMILAR STRUCTURE OR MOVING A SIMILAR STRUCTURE TO THE LOT. UH, I HAD NO KNOWLEDGE OF THE DESIGNATION OF THE HOUSE IS HISTORIC UNTIL AFTER IT WAS DEMOLISHED. AND WE RECEIVED COMMENTS FROM THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT REGARDING OUR NEW CONSTRUCTION THAT WERE PROPOSED. THESE ARE NOT EXCUSES, BUT JUST HERE'S SOME OF THE FACTS. THE SELLER'S DISCLOSURES MARKED AS NOT HISTORIC. AND I HAVE THAT IF, BECAUSE I BELIEVE THAT WAS A TOPIC OF DISCUSSION LAST TIME. IF THEY WANNA SEE THAT I HAVE IT HERE WITH ME. UM, YOU COULD PUT THAT ON THE DOCUMENT CAMERA. DOCUMENT CAMERA PLEASE. OKAY. UM, SO UNFORTUNATELY THERE ARE NO SIGNS ON THE STREET MARKING END OF HISTORIC, UH, AND I OBSERVED NEW CONSTRUCTION HOMES ON THE STREET AND, AND THE NEAR VICINITY. UH, THE TITLE COMMITMENT DID NOT MENTION HISTORIC, AND THEN THE DEMOLITION PERMIT WAS GRANTED, WHICH I HAVE WITH ME AS WELL. I NEVER WANNA PUT PROFITS OVER PEOPLE, AND IF I KNEW IT WAS HISTORIC, WE WOULD NOT HAVE PURCHASED THE HOME. AND IF WE WOULD'VE FOUND OUT IT WAS HISTORIC AFTER PURCHASING, WE'D REMODELED THE HOUSE. I'VE REMODELED OVER DOZENS OF HOMES, UM, NONE OF THEM BEING HISTORIC, AND MY WIFE AND I CURRENTLY LIVE IN A 1920S DUPLEX, WHICH WE RENOVATED. UM, AND JUST ONE LAST COMMENT IS I'D LIKE TO KNOW IF THERE'S A WAY THAT ME AND MY COMPANY COULD HELP RESTORE SIGNAGE DESIGNATING OR ON THE STREET VISUALLY SHOWING THAT THE STREET IS HISTORIC, SHOWING THE STARK WEATHER HISTORIC DISTRICT. THAT'S EVERYTHING. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THE NEXT SPEAKER IS TY KAKOA. [00:35:01] PLEASE CORRECT ME ON THE, ON THE PRESENTATION PRESENTATION MODE. PLEASE IF YOU COULD STATE YOUR NAME IN THE MICROPHONE. UH, SORRY. MY NAME IS TY KAKOA. I'M HERE TODAY ON BEHALF OF COUNCIL MEMBER MARIO CASTILLO. AT THE COMMISSION'S JULY 16TH MEETING, COUNCIL MEMBER CASTILLO REQUESTED A DELAY IN CONSIDERING THE MATTER INVOLVING 2 0 2 EAST 31ST AND HALF STREET, AND THE IMPROPER DEMOLITION OF A HISTORIC HOME IN THE STARK WEATHER HISTORIC DISTRICT. THAT DELAY GAVE OUR OFFICE AN IMPORTANT OPPORTUNITY TO ENGAGE WITH MEMBERS OF THE HISTORIC INDEPENDENCE HEIGHTS COMMUNITY AND TO THE LEADERSHIP OF THE HOMES. INDEPENDENCE HEIGHTS HOLDS A UNIQUE PLACE IN HOUSTON AND TEXAS HISTORY AS THE FIRST AFRICAN AMERICAN INCORPORATED MUNICIPALITY IN THE STATE COUNCIL MEMBER CASTILLO IS PROUD TO REPRESENT THIS COMMUNITY AND BELIEVES PROTECTING ITS HISTORY ALSO MEANS ENSURING THE VOICES OF THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE PRESERVED THAT HISTORY ARE HEARD AND RESPECTED THROUGH THESE CONVERSATIONS. COUNCILOR CASTILLO STANDS WITH THE INDEPENDENCE HEIGHTS COMMUNITY AND SUPPORTS THE COMMUNITY'S REQUEST FOR A MOR MORATORIUM ON THIS PROPERTY. WHILE WE CANNOT RESTORE WHAT IS LOST, WE CAN ACKNOWLEDGE THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THAT LOSS, ENSURE THE COMMUNITY'S CONCERNS ARE HEARD AND RESPECTED. PROTECTING THE HISTORY AND LEGACY OF INDEPENDENCE HEIGHTS REQUIRES THAT THE COMMUNITY HAVE A MEANINGFUL VOICE IN DETERMINING WHAT COMES NEXT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THE NEXT SPEAKER IS TANYA WELLS. IT'S FOLLOWED BY DR. SABRINA NORMAN. GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS TANYA WELLS. I AM THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE INDEPENDENT HEIGHT TREE DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL. IMAGINE YOU OWN SOMETHING PRECIOUS, SOMETHING THAT YOU GAVE A DISTINCTION THAT GAVE YOU A DISTINCTION THAT NO, THAT NOT EVERYONE SHARED. IMAGINE IT WAS TAKEN FROM YOU AND YOU COULD NEVER GET IT RETURNED. THEN IMAGINE BEING ASKED WHAT ACCOUNTABILITY SHOULD LOOK LIKE GIVEN YOUR ANSWER AND BEING TOLD TO SIT DOWN WITH THE PERSON WHO TOOK IT FROM YOU. HOW DOES THAT FEEL? THAT IS HOW THIS COMMUNITY FEELS. THE RESIDENTS OF THE STARK WEATHER HISTORIC DISTRICT HAVE LOST A HISTORIC HOME THAT CAN NEVER BE REPLACED. AND YET MONTHS LATER, WE ARE STILL HERE DELIBERATING OVER WHAT SHOULD BE A CLEAR RESPONSE. WHAT MAKES THIS CONCERNING IS WE RECENTLY LEARNED THAT RESIDENTS SHARED WITH US PICTURES IDENTIFYING THE STREET AS HISTORIC WE'RE REMOVED AND THROWN ON THE GROUND. FIRST, THE PHYSICAL PROTECTIONS ARE REMOVED. NEXT, COINCIDENTALLY, THE AUTOMATED PROTECTIONS ARE REMOVED. A STRANGER IS ABLE TO DEMOLISH A PIECE OF HISTORY THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE PROTECTED. THEN THE VERY ENTITY WHO IS SUPPOSED TO PROTECT HISTORIC DISTRICTS ARE DELAYING THE DECISION TO DO SO. WHEN YOU PUT THESE SITUATIONS TOGETHER OR THESE CIRCUMSTANCES TOGETHER, IT IS DIFFICULT FOR THIS COMMUNITY TO SIMPLY ACCEPT THAT THIS WAS AN UNFORTUNATE ADMINISTRATIVE MISTAKE. EVEN MORE DISASTROUS. THE CITY OF HOUSTON HAS NEVER FORMALLY APOLOGIZED TO THE RESIDENTS OF THE STARK WEATHER HISTORIC DISTRICT FOR ITS FAILURE TO PROTECT THIS HISTORIC PROPERTY. THE RESIDENTS ARE NOT CONCERNED THAT THEIR HOUSES WILL BE UP FOR SALE TO THE HIGHEST BIDDER AND WILL NOT BE PROTECTED AGAINST GREED. IHRC BLOCK WALKED TO GET SIGNATURES TO PETITION THE CITY OF HOUSTON AND I AT THE AND THE HISTORIC COMMISSION. IS THERE A MOTION TO EXTEND THE SPEAKER TIME FOR ONE MINUTE? I MOVE TO THAT MOTION. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. GARCIA SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. PLEASE PROCEED. IHRC BLOCK WALKED TO GET SIGNATURES TO PETITION THE CITY OF HOUSTON AND THE HISTORIC COMMISSION, BUT THEY WOULD NOT SIGN BECAUSE THEY ARE AFRAID THAT THEY WOULD BE RETALIATED AGAINST BECAUSE YOU WILL NOT ACT IN THEIR BEST INTERESTS AND SPEAKING WITH THEM, WE ALSO FOUND THAT SOME OF THEIR HOMES ARE NOT EVEN LISTED IN THE STARK WEATHER HISTORIC DISTRICT, EVEN THOUGH THEY SIGNED THE PAPERWORK TO BE INCLUDED. SO WHAT IS REALLY HAPPENING HERE? LET'S BE CLEAR. WE ARE NOT ACCEPTING ANOTHER CONVERSATION, ANOTHER DEFERRAL. THE COMMUNITY HAS ALREADY SPOKEN. INDEPENDENT HEIGHTS IS THE FIRST INCORPORATED BLACK MUNICIPALITY IN TEXAS. THE STARK WEATHER HISTORIC DISTRICT REPRESENTS A PART OF THAT LEGACY. THESE HOMES ARE NOT SIMPLY BUILDINGS, THEY ARE TANGIBLE PIECES OF HISTORY. THE COMMISSION'S CONTINUED DELAY IS NOT NEUTRAL. AT SOME [00:40:01] POINT IN ACTION BECOMES PART OF THE HARM. YOU CANNOT BRING BACK THIS HOME, BUT YOU CAN STILL DEMONSTRATE THAT THE HISTORY OF INDEPENDENT HEIGHTS MATTERS. THAT HISTORIC PRESERVATION PROTECTIONS ACTUALLY MEANS SOMETHING. OR DO YOU FEEL IT MATTERS FOR HISTORIC DISTRICTS, BUT JUST NOT THE BLACK ONES. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THE NEXT SPEAKER, AS I MENTIONED, IS DR. SABRINA NORMAN. OKAY, GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS DR. SABRINA NORMAN, MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION. I STAND BEFORE YOU TODAY, NOT AS A DEVELOPER, NOT AS AN ATTORNEY. DOCUMENT CAMERA PLEASE. AND NOT AS SOMEONE LOOKING AT THIS COMMUNITY FROM THE OUTSIDE. I AM A 70-YEAR-OLD RESIDENT OF THE STARK WEATHER HISTORIC DISTRICT. I LIVE HERE. THIS IS MY HOME. THIS IS MY HISTORY. AND I'M HURT. IMAGINE LIVING IN A PLACE BECAUSE YOU VALUE ITS HISTORY AND ITS CHARACTER. ONLY TO WATCH THAT, THAT HISTORY DISAPPEARS BECAUSE THE VERY SYSTEM DESIGNED TO PROTECT IT, IT FELL. AND THEN AFTER THE LOSS, WE ARE ASKED TO WAIT. WE HAVE WAITED FOR ANSWERS. WE HAVE WAITED FOR ACCOUNTABILITY, AND WE HAVE WAITED FOR THE CITY TO ACKNOWLEDGE THIS FAILURE. AND YOU KNOW WHAT? WE'RE STILL WAITING. WHAT EVEN HURTS MORE IS THAT THIS COMMUNITY HAS ALREADY TOLD YOU WHAT WE BELIEVE SHOULD HAPPEN. FROM WHERE I SIT AS A RESIDENT, IT FEELS LIKE MY VOICE AND THE VOICES OF THE OWNERS MATTER LESS. WE DON'T MATTER THAN THE INTEREST OF THE PERSON WHO NOW WANTS TO DEVELOP THE PROPERTY. I WANT EACH OF YOU TO UNDERSTAND ONE THING. IF NOTHING ELSE, WHEN YOU DESTROY A PIECE OF HISTORY, WE CAN'T GET IT BACK. YOU CAN BUILD A NEW HOUSE, YOU CAN BUILD SOMETHING BIGGER. YOU CAN PUT A NEW TRUCTURE ON THE LAND. WE CAN'T BE REVEALED THE HISTORY THAT WAS DESTROYED. SO WE HAVE SPOKEN. OUR HISTORY IS NOT DISPOSABLE. OUR COMMUNITY IS NOT DISPOSABLE. AND NEITHER SHOULD OUR VOICES BE. THANK YOU. UM, I DO HAVE A QUESTION FROM COMMISSIONER ESCOBAR FOR OUR PREVIOUS SPEAKER. TANYA WELLS PRESENTATION MODE, PLEASE. YES, MS. WELLS. UM, WELL TO BOTH OF OUR SPEAKERS ACTUALLY, UM, I WANTED TO, UM, MAKE A POINT OF CLARIFICATION BECAUSE IT IS CLEAR TO ME FROM YOUR STATEMENT THAT HOW OUR LAST DECISION TO DEFER WAS RECEIVED. AND I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT IT'S ON RECORD. AND I WANNA LOOK YOU IN YOUR FACE AND TELL YOU THAT THAT DEFERRAL HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH DISMISSING WHAT SHOULD BE DONE THERE. UM, AND THE, THE FACT THAT WE WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THE RIGHT THING IS ALLOWED TO HAPPEN, IT HAD EVERYTHING TO DO WITH THE FACT THAT THERE WERE MULTIPLE SUGGESTIONS ABOUT WHAT YOU ALL WANTED TO DO NEXT WITH THAT PROPERTY. AND YOUR SUGGESTION WAS THAT YOU MIGHT WANT TO TAKE ANOTHER HOME FROM SOMEWHERE, PUT IT THERE, PUT A, UM, A CONVENING SPACE THERE, WHICH IS DEVELOPMENT. YOU WOULD HAVE TO GET SOME LEVEL OF PERMIT FOR THAT. AND IF WE WERE TO DENY ALL DEVELOPMENT AND, AND ANY TYPE OF PERMIT FOR TWO YEARS BEING ISSUED ON THAT, WE WOULD QUITE LITERALLY CUT YOUR HANDOFF FROM BEING ABLE TO DO WHAT YOU STATED IN FRONT OF US WAS ONE OF YOUR LIST. I THINK FOR, I'M SPEAKING FOR MYSELF, I AGREE THAT THE DEVELOPER SHOULD NOT HAVE A, PER A PERMISSION TO MOVE FORWARD WITH JUST PUTTING SOMETHING THERE, MAKING SOMETHING THAT WAS LIKE THE OTHER. HOWEVER, IF WE ACCEPTED THAT THERE WOULD BE NO PERMIT ON THAT PROPERTY, WE WOULD THEN BE TELLING YOU THAT YOU ALSO CAN'T DO ANYTHING ONSET PROPERTY. AND I DON'T KNOW IF THAT NUANCE WAS NOTED. IT WAS NEVER ABOUT IGNORING A COMMUNITY, MAKING YOU HAVE A DELAY TO CAUSE HARM. IT WAS TO KEEP YOU FROM SCREWING OVER YOURSELF UNKNOWINGLY AND ALLOWING TIME [00:45:01] FOR ALL THE DOCUMENTATION, ALL THE RESEARCH, ALL THE RECEIPTS TO BE PROVIDED SO THAT A CONFIDENT VOTE YES OR NO COULD BE MADE. AND THAT WE WOULD KNOW THAT YOU'VE HAD A CHANCE TO DETERMINE WHETHER YOU WANT AN ACTUAL MORATORIUM ON ANY DEVELOPMENT, INCLUDING YOUR OWN, TO YOUR OWN BENEFIT AND YOUR OWN USE. UM, NOT JUST TO PREVENT THE DEVELOPER FROM BEING TO DEVELOP TO, FROM BEING ABLE TO DEVELOP. WHY I VOTED THAT WAY AND I CAN'T SPEAK FOR OTHERS, IS TO KEEP YOU FROM BEING BARRED FROM YOUR OWN DECISION IN YOUR OWN COMMUNITY ON THE PROPERTY YOU SAID YOU HAD AN INTEREST IN HAD YOU SAID THE COMMUNITY WANTS NOTHING TO HAPPEN ON THIS PROPERTY AND WE ACCEPT THAT I WOULD'VE VOTED A VERY DIFFERENT WAY. AND SO I WANT TO, I WANT TO ASK A QUESTION. DOES YOUR STATEMENT STILL STAND IN LIGHT OF THE FACT THAT WE WANTED TO LEAVE ROOM FOR YOU TO DETERMINE WHAT YOU WANTED TO DO AND NO, THERE WAS NOT THE INTENTION OF GO NEGOTIATE WITH THE PERSON WHO CAUSED HARM. IT WAS MORE SO CONFIRM WHAT PATHWAY IS POSSIBLE. UM, YOU HAVE RECEIPTS, YOU HAVE RESEARCH, AND NOW YOU CAN DETERMINE THAT YOU ARE WILLING TO ALSO BE EXCLUDED FROM DEVELOPING ON THAT PROPERTY TO YOUR OWN COMMUNITY'S ORGANIZING BENEFIT. SO, UM, IF YOU'LL GO BACK TO MAY, WHEN WE FIRST STARTED COMING TO THESE MEETINGS, THE COMMISSION HAS ALWAYS ASKED WHAT IS THE DETERMINATION? YOU ASKED AT THE LAST MEETING, WHAT DOES THE CITY WANT? THE CITY GAVE YOU YOUR ANSWER IN MAY THE COMMISSION ASKED FOR THE COA, THE COMMUNITY DID NOT. WE EXPRESSED THEN, AND DR. NORMAN EXPRESSED ON BEHALF OF THE, UH, MEMBERS THAT CAN'T MAKE IT BECAUSE OF THEIR ELDERLY. THEY DON'T WANT ANYTHING THERE. BUT THEY KNOW THAT THAT MEANS FOR TWO YEARS THERE'S NOT ANYTHING THERE. BUT THE EVENTUALITY AFTER THE TWO YEARS WAS TO BE ABLE TO PUT SOMETHING THERE. WHAT SHE IS WANTING AND EXPRESSING IS NOT SOMETHING THAT THE HISTORICAL COMMISSION CAN GIVE. IT WILL HAVE TO BE SOMETHING THAT THE CITY OF HOUSTON WORKS OUT WITH. THE STARK WEATHER DI WITH THE, THE STARKWEATHER DISTRICT RESIDENTS. RIGHT. BUT WE UNDERSTOOD AND THEY UNDERSTOOD. AND WE ALSO SAID WE DID NOT WANT TO MEET AT THAT LAST MEETING BECAUSE THERE WAS NOTHING TO MEET. THERE. THERE WAS A GENTLEMAN HERE AND I DON'T REMEMBER WHO JUST SAID, WELL, YOU KNOW, I MEAN HE, THE OWNER WANTS TO WORK WITH THEM. WHY NOT PUT A HOUSE THERE? AND QUITE FRANKLY, THAT IS, IS AND THAT ASKING TO MEET WITH THE OWNER, THAT'S OPPRESSION. YOU'RE ASKING THEM TO MEET WITH SOMEONE WHO DAMAGED THEIR DISTRICT. AND SO WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH THEM TO COME UP WITH A SOLUTION AFTER WE HAVE THIS VOTE THAT SAYS THERE'S A TWO YEAR MORATORIUM. AND THAT'S WHAT WE'VE BEEN SAYING ALL ALONG. THEY KNOW WHAT THEY WANT. WE KNOW THAT FOR TWO YEARS NOBODY CAN DO ANYTHING. MM-HMM . BUT THAT GIVES US TWO YEARS TO PLAN WHAT THEY DO WANT. MM-HMM . WHICH IS TO EVENTUALLY HAVE SOMETHING THERE MM-HMM . WHICH IS EVENTUALLY TO BRING A HOME THERE. AND THAT'S WHAT DR. NORMAN SAID BEFORE THAT. AND MAYBE IT WAS NOT EXPRESSED CLEARLY, BUT THAT'S WHAT THEY WANT, WANT. THE TWO WASN'T EXPRESSED CLEARLY. THE FACT THAT, THAT NOTHING COULD HAPPEN UNTIL AFTER THE TWO YEARS, I COULD GO BACK TO THE MINUTES. THAT PART, THAT NUANCE WAS NOT SPECIFIED. AND THEREFORE MYSELF, AND I KNOW OTHERS MAY HAVE BEEN CONFUSED BY THE FACT THAT THERE WAS A STATED DESIRE IN THAT SAME MEETING TO MOVE FORWARD WITH PUTTING SOMETHING ON THAT HOUSE WITH SOME LEVEL OF EXPEDIENCY. AND SO THE RECOGNITION OF THE TWO YEAR MORATORIUM WAS NOT CLEAR FOR THOSE WHO WERE VOTING. I THINK WE, I'M SORRY, I DIDN'T MEAN TO INTERRUPT. I THINK WHEN WE CAME BACK TO THE, AND, AND, YOU KNOW, WE COULD LOOK BACK AT THE MINUTES WHEN WE CAME BACK AND IT WAS SAID NO, THAT, THAT THEY DON'T WANT ANYTHING THERE. THEY'VE, THEY'VE CLEARED THEY WANTED, THEY KNOW WHAT THE TWO YEAR MORATORIUM MEANS. OKAY. BUT AGAIN, WHAT THEY'RE ASKING, IT'S NOT SOMETHING THEY, THAT THIS COMMISSION CAN DO. THAT WAS THE OTHER SOMETHING THAT THE HI, THE THE CITY OF HOUSTON YES, MA'AM HAS TO DO. YES MA'AM. AND THE CITY OF HOUSTON NEEDS TO COME TO THE TABLE WITH THESE RESIDENTS TO FORMALLY APOLOGIZE AND THEN TO ALSO FIGURE OUT HOW TO MAKE IT RIGHT. I AGREE WITH THAT WHOLEHEARTEDLY. AND I AGREE WITH THAT. THAT STEP TOO IS NOT SOMETHING THIS COMMISSION CAN HANDLE. BUT THE CLARIFICATION ABOUT THE FACT THAT YOU WOULD ALSO BE HANDCUFFING YOURSELF FOR TWO YEARS TO DO WHAT YOU ULTIMATELY SAID, THAT THAT CLARIFICATION WAS NOT THERE. AT LEAST IN MY MIND, I CAN'T SPEAK FOR OTHERS. THAT WAS PURELY THE ONLY REASON WHY IT WAS NOT CLEAR TO MAKE A DECISION AT THAT MOMENT TO DENY ANY FURTHER PERMITS ON THIS PROPERTY. I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THAT IS CLEAR BETWEEN MY UNDERSTANDING AND YOUR UNDERSTANDING BECAUSE MY ADVOCACY FOR THIS COMMUNITY VIA TANYA DEBO IS EVER [00:50:01] TRUE AND EVER DYING. IT IS NEVER ABOUT, UM, WAFFLING ON A POSITION CAUSING SOMEONE TO WAIT AND ASK YOU TO NEGOTIATE WITH YOUR OPPRESSOR. AND, YOU KNOW, TANYA WOULD ROLL OVER IN HER GRAVE IF SHE THOUGHT SHE PROBABLY IS RIGHT NOW. YES. SHE WOULD ROLL OVER IN HER GRAVE IF SHE THOUGHT THAT ANYONE WAS DOING THAT OUT OF DISRESPECT FOR, UM, INDEPENDENCE HEIGHTS. IT WAS SHEERLY OUT OF RESPECT FOR ARE YOU SURE YOU CAN'T, YOU DON'T WANT SOMETHING THERE AND YOU DON'T WANT TO POTENTIALLY NEGOTIATE TO HAVE SOMEONE GIVE YOU A SPACE FOR YOU TO MEET AND CONVENE. AND WHEN THAT POSSIBILITY HAS BEEN ELIMINATED, THEN WE'LL ALL WAIT TWO YEARS AND FIGURE OUT WHAT HAPPENS. YES. AND, AND THE RESIDENTS UNDERSTAND THAT. AGAIN, WE'VE HAD TO HAVE THE CONVERSATION TO SAY THAT WE NEED A DETERMINATION FIRST. CORRECT. BEFORE WE CAN MOVE FORWARD. YES MA'AM. AND I JUST WANT YOU GUYS JUST TO UNDERSTAND THAT WHETHER OR NOT YOU ALL SAY IT'S WAITING, THAT'S HOW THE RESIDENTS FEEL. UNDERSTOOD. AND THESE ARE PEOPLE WHO HAVE WORKED HARD ALL OF THEIR LIFE, THEY'VE CONTRIBUTED, AND NOW THEY'RE IN THE LATER YEARS OF THEIR LIFE AND THEY'RE AFRAID FOR THEIR HOMES. SO DO THEY DO FEEL LIKE SINCE THIS HAPPENED, UH, UH, NOVEMBER WILL BE A YEAR AND NOTHING AND THAT'S HOW THEY SEE IT AND WHY THEY MAY NOT BE. THAT'S, I'M EXPRESSING WHAT WE ARE HEARING FROM THE RESIDENTS WHEN WE MEET WITH THEM. THANK YOU FOR YOUR ADVOCACY. THANK YOU FOR YOUR INTENTION. THANK YOU FOR YOUR CLARITY AND THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING THIS ISSUE AND WHERE THE RESIDENT'S HEARTS RESIDE. THEIR UNDERSTANDING OF THE TWO YEAR DELAY THAT I THINK HELPS MAKE IT CLEAR FOR ME PERSONALLY, FOR MY VOTE. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THE, FOR HAVING THE CONVERSATION. THANK YOU. MM-HMM . THANK YOU. WHILE I HAVE THE PUBLIC COMMENT OPEN STILL, IS THERE ANY OTHER MEMBER OF THE, OF THE AUDIENCE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM WHO HAS NOT SIGNED UP TO SPEAK, NOT HEARING OR SEEING ANYONE? I'M GONNA CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND TURN IT OVER TO THE COMMISSION MEMBERS, UM, TO ASK QUESTIONS OF STAFF AND OR TO ENTERTAIN MOTIONS TO DO A REBUTTAL. OH, I'M APOLOGIES. UM, I'LL REOPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND THE APPLICANT HAS A REBUTTAL. UM, I JUST MORE WANTED TO CLARIFY THE TWO YEARS. IS IT FROM THE, THE DATE OF DEMOLITION? IS THAT CORRECT OR IS IT FROM ONE THAT'S DECIDED I NEED TO ASK? IT'S GONNA BE THE DATE, UH, FROM THE DATE OF DENIAL OF THE COA IF THAT'S IN FACT WHAT HAPPENS WITH THE COMMISSION TODAY. BECAUSE THE DOCUMENTATION I READ IS SAYS DATE OF DEMOLITION. BUT I'LL REFER TO YOU AS LEGAL. UM, LIKE I SAID, I ACCEPT WHATEVER'S DECIDED. I DID WANT TO LET YOU ALL KNOW IS THAT, UM, I DID PURCHASE SOME HOMES THAT ARE NOT IN, IN STARK WEATHER, BUT ARE IN THE SAME VICINITY AND A SIMILAR CHARACTER OR SIMILAR BUILD YEAR AND STYLE AND WOULD, YOU KNOW, MOVE IT ONTO THE LOT IF WHENEVER THE TWO YEARS IS UP. YOU KNOW, UNFORTUNATELY I MIGHT NOT HAVE A HOME THAT COULD BE MOVED ONTO THE LOT. AND MY UNDERSTANDING IS THEN WE WOULD BUILD A NEW BUILDING. IS THAT CORRECT? LIKE IT WOULD, A NEW BUILDING WOULD BE PERMITTED AT THE END OF THE TWO YEAR MORATORIUM. YOU COULD BUILD A NEW BUILDING, BUT IT HAS TO BE SUBSTANTIALLY THE SAME SIZE AND FOOTPRINT. OKAY, UNDERSTOOD. WELL, LIKE I SAID, I JUST WANTED TO, YOU KNOW, OFFER THAT WE HAVE HOMES, TWO OF THEM. ONE IS ALREADY SOMEBODY ALREADY EXPRESSED. I'M GONNA GONNA GIVE IT TO THEM AND IT'S GONNA MOVE IT TO THEIR LOT. IT'S NOT IN STARK WEATHER, IT'S ANOTHER AREA. BUT WE CAN GO AHEAD AND RIGHT NOW WE HAVE THAT, THOSE, UH, OPTIONS, BUT WE DON'T ALWAYS HAVE HOMES THAT IN THE, IN THE SURROUNDING VICINITY READY TO MOVE. SO THANK YOU. THANK YOU. WITH THAT I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND COMMISSION MEMBERS. ARE THERE QUESTIONS OR DISCUSSIONS OR COMMISSIONER BLAKELY? I HAVE A QUESTION. MAYBE THIS IS A LEGAL QUESTION. UM, WHAT, WHAT DOES DUE DILIGENCE LOOK LIKE WHEN IT COMES TO ESTABLISHING WHETHER YOUR HOME IS, IS OR IS NOT IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT? SO THIS HISTORIC DISTRICT DESIGNATION IS FILED OF RECORD IN THE REAL PROPERTY RECORDS FOR THE REAL PROPERTY IN QUESTION IN HARRIS COUNTY WHERE THE PROPERTY'S LOCATED. SO YOU KNOW, ANY PERSON THAT'S PURCHASING PROPERTY, IF THEY'RE WORKING THROUGH A TITLE COMPANY AND THEY'VE GOT A TITLE POLICY, THAT INFORMATION SHOULD BE PULLED AS PART OF THEIR TITLE INSURANCE. UM, THEY ARE DEEMED, EVEN IF THEY DON'T HAVE ACTUAL NOTICE, THEY'RE DEEMED TO HAVE CONSTRUCTIVE NOTICE OF WHATEVER'S FILED OF RECORD IN THE REAL PROPERTY RECORDS. I HOPE THAT CLARIFIES AND ANSWERS YOUR QUESTION. SO BASICALLY BASED ON THE PROCEDURE THAT THE OWNER WENT THROUGH, THERE WAS NO WAY TO KNOW FOR HIM TO KNOW THAT THERE HAD BEEN A MISTAKE FOR, THERE WAS NO OTHER PLACE HE SHOULD HAVE CHECKED TO SEE IF IT WAS A HISTORIC [00:55:01] DISTRICT OR, UM, THAT'S INCORRECT BECAUSE THE HISTORIC DISTRICT DESIGNATION WAS FILED OF RECORD IN THE REAL PROPERTY RECORD. SO EVEN IF HE DIDN'T KNOW, HE SHOULD HAVE KNOWN HE SHOULD HAVE DONE HIS RESEARCH WHEN HE BOUGHT THE PROPERTY. THANK YOU. THEN I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF, PLEASE. COMMISSIONER BLAKELY, UM, ONE OF THE SPEAKERS INDICATED THAT THERE WERE RESIDENTS OF THE STARK WEATHER DISTRICT WHO BELIEVED THEY HAD DONE PAPERWORK BUT FOUND THAT THEIR HOUSES WERE NOT ACTUALLY REGISTERED IN THE SYSTEM. UM, HAS SOME KIND OF AUDIT BEEN DONE OR IS HAS SOME SORT OF CHECKING BEEN DONE TO MAKE SURE THAT THE DISTRICT IS NOW PROPERLY DOCUMENTED WHERE IT SHOULD BE? GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS JEFF BUTLER WITH STAFF. UH, WE RECEIVED AN INQUIRY ABOUT THAT THIS MORNING ABOUT THE, UM, BOUNDARY BEING MODIFIED. UM, WE WERE STILL WORKING WITH THE, IN THE PERSON WHO MADE THE INQUIRY TO FIND OUT EXACTLY WHICH, UH, PROPERTY IN QUESTION WAS REMOVED. BUT WE DID RESEARCH THAT DURING THE DESIGNATION, THE BOUNDARY WAS MODIFIED. SO IT, THEY MAY BE REFERRING TO, UM, WHEN HHC ACTED UPON AT THE TIME TO, AND THEY WERE TALLYING UP THE SUPPORT AND THE CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES, THE BOUNDARY WAS MODIFIED TO TAKE A COUPLE HOUSES ON THE SOUTHERN BLOCK OUT OF THE ORIGINALLY PROPOSED DISTRICT. SO IT MAY BE THAT WE'RE STILL WORKING WITH THE, THE GROUP THAT CONTACTED US. AND JUST TO CLARIFY, UM, 'CAUSE I SEEM TO RECALL WHEN THIS HAPPENED, THAT WOULD BE BECAUSE THERE WERE OTHER HOME, OTHER APPLICANTS IN THAT AREA THAT WERE NOT IN FAVOR OF BEING IN THE DISTRICT. RIGHT, RIGHT. A COMBINATION OF THAT AND JUST THE, THE BY THE CRITERIA FOR DESIGNATED DISTRICT IS 67% RESPONDING AND AFFIRMATIVE. AND TO GET THAT AND HAVE A DEFENSIBLE BOUNDARY, THE BOUNDARIES HAVE TO BE EDITED SOMETIMES. THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? THE STAFF FOR THIS, UM, THIS ITEM NUMBER ONE, COMMISSIONER ESCOBAR? YES. UH, JUST A QUICK QUESTION. HOW DIFFICULT WOULD IT BE TO, UM, AMEND AND ANNEX THOSE ADDITIONAL PROPERTIES PRESENT DAY? YEAH, AND I WOULD SAY I THINK THAT'S NOT, THAT'S NOT OUR AGENDA ITEM TODAY. I MEAN, WE, I THINK THEY, YEAH, THEY'RE DULY NOTED. FAIR, FAIR ENOUGH. AP APOLOGIES. THAT IS A BIT OF A, A DETOUR. WE COULD, WE COULD FOLLOW UP, UM, IN A, OUR NEXT MEETING, BUT, UM, APOLOGIES. YES, COMMISSIONER BLAKELY AND I'M, I'M SORRY FOR THE INTERRUPTION. I WANTED TO CLARIFY. IT IS TWO YEARS FROM THE DATE OF DEMOLITION. I'VE GOT THE CODE CITATION. OKAY. SO MY APOLOGIES FOR MISSPEAKING. MAKE SURE BLAKE HAD ANOTHER QUESTION. UM, I FORGOT MY QUESTION. , IT'LL COME BACK TO YOU. UM, IS I GUESS, BUT NOW THIS BRINGS UP ANOTHER QUESTION I HAVE. I'M SORRY. I MAY HAVE MISSED A CONVERSATION THAT TOOK PLACE IN A, A HEARING WHERE I WAS NOT PRESENT. UM, WHERE DID THE TWO YEAR WINDOW COME FROM? UM, AND, AND IS A, LIKE A PERMANENT MORATORIUM, NOT AN OPTION. OH. AND THEN MY QUESTION FOR STAFF IS ARE THERE PRECEDENTS OF OTHER CASES IN WHICH THIS HAS HAPPENED IN WHICH SOMEONE HAS SIMPLY TORN DOWN A HOUSE IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT? AND WHAT WAS THE REMEDIATION IN THOSE CASES? COMMISSIONER JONES, WOULD YOU LIKE TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION? UM, YES. SO WE HAVE EXPERIENCED CASES WHERE STRUCTURES HAVE BEEN TORN DOWN IN HISTORIC DISTRICTS FOR A VARIETY OF DIFFERENT REASONS. UM, THE ONES THAT I HAVE BEEN A PART OF, THERE HAS BEEN ENOUGH OF THE STRUCTURE LEFT TO REBUILD A LIKE STRUCTURE ON TOP OF IT. UM, BUT THOSE CASES ALSO DID NOT HAVE A COMMUNITY THAT HAD A CLEAR WISH WITH THEM ABOUT WHAT SHOULD HAPPEN WITH THE PROPERTY. YEAH, I'LL JUST ASK FOR THOSE CASES. UH, MANY OF THEM HAD A C OF A FOR A RENOVATION AND HAD A FRAMEWORK OR A FRAMEWORK CONTRACTOR WHO HAD REALLY NO IDEA WHAT A HISTORIC HOME WAS AND HAD A OVERZEALOUS FRAMER WHO JUST REMOVED EVERY PIECE OF WOOD, LOOK OLD AND PUT NEW WOOD AND TRIED TO CHANGE IT TO FRAMING FROM A LOON TO WESTERN. AND, AND OFTEN, YOU KNOW, THERE, THERE WASN'T MUCH STANDING OF THE HOME. AND SO, UM, AND THOSE WERE CONSIDERED DEMOLITIONS. UM, IN SOME CASES THEY HAD A C OF A, SO THEY WERE ALLOWED TO GO FORWARD. UM, BUT ESSENTIALLY I CAN, AND I CAN ASK LEGAL, BUT UH, AS FAR AS I KNOW THAT, THAT FOR A DEMOLITION, UH, IN, IN THE ORDINANCE, WHICH, UM, WAS CREATED MANY YEARS AGO, UM, IT SET FORTH THIS MORATORIUM. UH, IF THERE'S AN OUTRIGHT DEMOLITION AND THERE'S A MORATORIUM MORATORIUM FOR TWO YEARS, UH, AFTER TWO YEARS, A SIMILAR SIZE AND SIMILAR [01:00:01] FORM, A STRUCTURE COULD BE REBUILT AND IT'S ONLY AFTER 10 YEARS COULD, COULD AN AN ADDITION OR, OR CHANGES BE MADE THAT WOULD INCREASE THE SIZE. SO, UM, THAT'S PART OF THE LANGUAGE OF THE HISTORIC DISTRICT. IT'S, IT'S PART OF THE, YOU KNOW, IT'S JUST PART OF THE ORDINANCE TO, TO GET TO, YOU KNOW, TO JUST TO DISSUADE PEOPLE FROM TEARING DOWN HISTORIC STRUCTURE, YOU KNOW, KNOWINGLY DOING THAT. SO, SO, SO WE HAVE A, A MEASURE THAT SHOULD DISSUADE PEOPLE, BUT WE DON'T HAVE A SORT OF PUNITIVE MEASURE IF PEOPLE SIMPLY DISREGARD FOR WHATEVER REASON, IT'S A 10 YEAR MORATORIUM ON DOING WHAT THEY WANT IT TO DO, LET'S SAY. SO IF YOU, IF YOU BUY A PROPERTY AND YOU WANT TO BUILD A GIANT HOME ON IT, OR SO A NEW HOME, IT'S HISTORIC, IT'S YOU, UM, YOU TEAR IT DOWN WITHOUT, WITHOUT SHOWING THAT IT COULDN'T BE REPAIRED WITHOUT GOING THROUGH A DEMOLITION, YOU KNOW, GETTING APPROVAL FOR DEMOLITION THROUGH THE HAHC, UM, ESSENTIALLY YOU HAVE TO WAIT TWO YEARS TO PUT BACK WHAT YOU TOOK DOWN. YOU HAVE TO WAIT 10 YEARS TO DO ANYTHING DIFFERENT, ANY, ANY SUBSTANTIALLY LARGER STRUCTURE. SO IT'S A 10 YEAR, YOU'RE, YOU'RE BASICALLY, YOU'RE BUYING PROPERTY AND PAYING TAXES FOR 10 YEARS WITHOUT ANYTHING BUT GRASS. AND THEN IF SOMETHING'S BUILT AFTER TWO YEARS IS THE SAME SIZE AND SOLD TO SOMEONE, CAN THAT PERSON ENLARGE IT OR DID THEY HAVE TO WAIT EIGHT MORE YEARS? I BELIEVE THEY STEPPED TO WAIT 10 YEARS BEFORE ANYONE, ANYONE CAN DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT. RIGHT. UM, AND, AND AT THE END OF 10 YEARS, ANYTHING CAN BE BUILT AT THE END OF TWO YEARS, SOMETHING SUBSTANTIALLY THE SAME STRUCTURE CAN BE REBUILT OR ANOTHER STRUCTURE CAN BE LOCATE RELOCATED. UM, IF THE MOR MORATORIUM WAS NOT IMPOSED BY THE COMMISSION TODAY, UM, AND SOMETHING WAS IMMEDIATELY REBUILT, IT WOULD HAVE TO BE BASICALLY THE SAME STRUCTURE WITH, UM, USING WHATEVER ARTIFACTS FROM THAT STRUCTURE, IF ANY, ARE REMAINING, UM, INCORPORATED. SO IT WOULD HAVE TO BE THE SAME FOOTPRINT AND BASICALLY THE SAME HOUSE THAT WAS THERE, KNOWING THAT IT'S REALLY NOT THE SAME HOUSE . BUT, UM, YOU KNOW, WITHOUT THE MORATORIUM, THERE'S A LITTLE MORE CONTROL OVER WHAT GOES THERE AND WHETHER IT'S LIKE WHAT WAS THERE BEFORE, AFTER TWO YEARS, YOU LOSE A LITTLE BIT OF CONTROL AFTER 10 YEARS THAT CONTROL'S GONE. RIGHT. I GUESS I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT TO MY MIND, I THINK IN, WHEN IT COMES TO HISTORIC DISTRICTS, UM, IF FROM THE POINT OF VIEW OF ARCHITECTURAL HISTORY, I'M AN ARCHITECTURAL HISTORIAN, BUT EVEN MORE SO FROM A POINT OF VIEW OF, OF SOCIAL HISTORY, I WOULD SAY, WHEN THERE'S A COMMUNITY THAT HAS A SENTIMENTAL ATTACHMENT AND IS VERY CLOSE, LIKE IDENTIFICATION WITH THE STRUCTURES, I THINK THE MORATORIUM TAKE, IF YOU TAKE THE LONG VIEW IS INADEQUATE BECAUSE IT JUST ESSENTIALLY LETS THAT PROPERTY GO. UM, SO YEAH, IF WE TAKE THE SHORT VIEW, IT FEELS LIKE TWO YEARS IS A LONG TIME IN REALITY, A YEAR HAS ALREADY PASSED, UM, 10 YEARS. OKAY. FROM A HISTORIAN, WE THINK IN 50 YEAR DURATION. SO 10 SOMETHING BIG BUILT THERE IN 10 YEARS IS FROM, FROM MY POINT OF VIEW, THAT WOULD BE A DISASTER. UM, I WOULD, YOU KNOW, ACTUALLY ASK THE COMMUNITY, UH, AGAIN ABOUT THIS, YOU KNOW, THEIR FEELINGS ABOUT WHAT THEY ULTIMATELY WANT, UM, OR WHETHER THEY FEEL SORT OF LIKE, SORT OF SHOTGUNNED INTO ACCEPTING A MORATORIUM FOR WHAT IT PROVIDES IN THE SHORT TERM. I KNOW I'VE ASKED A LOT OF QUESTIONS. I'M SORRY ABOUT THAT, BUT I HOPE THAT WE'LL CONTINUE THE DISCUSSION. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER HILL, YOU HAVE A QUESTION? I HAVE A FOLLOW UP QUESTION. SO AT THE END OF 10 YEARS, WHEN IT WAS STATED THAT THEY COULD DO ANYTHING THEY WANT IT STILL, IT STILL HAS TO MEET, IT STILL, STILL A STORE DISTRICT STILL HAS TO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OR FOR THE ORDINANCE, FOR, FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION. SO IT'S NOT ANYTHING THEY WANT, BUT IT IS, UM, I MEAN JUST, AND TO ANSWER ONE QUESTION EARLIER FROM THE AUDIENCE, UM, ONE OF THE REASONS IT WAS DEFERRED TO LAST MEETING WAS THE COUNCIL MEMBER CASTILLO'S OFFICE ASKED THAT WE DEFER OUR DECISION SO THAT HIS, HE, HIS OFFICE COULD COMMUNICATE WITH ALL THE PARTIES. AND THAT WAS A REQUEST THAT, UM, I THINK THE CONS, THE, THE COMMISSION ALSO TOOK ON IN ACCOUNT FOR THE PAST DEFERRAL, UM, ESSENTIALLY WHAT OUR OPTIONS, THESE THREE, THREE OPTIONS WE HAVE AS MENTIONED OR TO FOLLOW THE LETTER OF THE LAW FOR DEMOLITION TO YOUR MORATORIUM, AND ONLY AFTER TWO YEARS COULD YOU REBUILD SOMETHING SIMILAR IN SIZE, IN FORM. UM, THE OTHER OPTION THAT WAS STATED IS THAT, IS THAT IF THEY WERE ALLOWED TO REBUILD AS CLOSE PROXIMITY TO THE HOUSE THAT WAS THERE, YOU'D HAVE A MEMORY OF THE HOUSE. IT'S NOT HISTORIC, BUT IF THAT HOUSE HAD BURNED DOWN BY NO FAULT OF ANYONE AND SOMEONE DECIDED TO REBUILD IT SO THAT THE STREET FRONT WAS THE SAME, THAT THAT'S WHAT YOU WOULD RESULT FOR [01:05:01] OPTION TWO. OPTION THREE IS MOVING ANOTHER STRUCTURE ONTO THE PROPERTY FROM ANOTHER NEIGHBORHOOD. AND BECAUSE THAT HISTORY WOULD BE A DIFFERENT HISTORY, IT WOULD NO LONGER BE CONSIDERED HISTORIC. THAT HOME, EVEN IF IT WAS HISTORIC WHERE IT WAS SITTING, ONCE IT MOVES, IT'S NO LONGER HISTORIC AND IT CAN BE TORN DOWN AT ANY TIME. SO, UM, ALTHOUGH IN THIS CASE IT WOULD BE STILL SUBJECT, I MEAN PROBABLY SUBJECT TO THE TWO YEAR, UM, THE TWO YEAR, YOU KNOW, THAT YOU, YOU, UM, YOU'D HAVE TO WAIT TWO YEARS TO DO ANYTHING LARGER AND ESSENTIALLY YOU COULDN'T DO ANYTHING MAJORLY FOR 10 YEARS. SO OUR, YOU KNOW, OUR QUESTION OR THE QUESTION BEFORE US ARE THESE, THESE ARE OUR THREE OPTIONS AND YOU'VE, YOU'VE HEARD FROM, UH, THE APPLICANT, YOU'VE HEARD FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND YOU'VE HEARD ALSO FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS CASTILLO'S OFFICE. OKAY. I'M GONNA, UH, JUST SET A SUGGESTION TO THE PLAYING DIRECTOR. I'M JUST GONNA OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ONE MORE TIME BRIEFLY, PERHAPS, OR PERHAPS NOT. AND, UM, DIRECTOR JUST WANTED TO KNOW WHETHER COMMUNITY HAS ANY OTHER WORDS TO, TO ADD TO THIS, UM, WITH THE DISCUSSION WE'VE HAD, AND YOU, YOU DON'T HAVE TO, UM, YOU'VE BEEN VERY CLEAR ABOUT YOUR WISHES. I, IS THERE ANOTHER MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC LIKE TO SPEAK? IF YOU COULD STATE YOUR NAME AND THE MICROPHONE FOR THE RECORD. MY NAME IS YVAN LENO, AND I JUST WANNA BE CLEAR. I, I'M JUST NO QUESTION. I JUST WANNA UNDERSTAND ABOUT THE 10 YEARS. CAN YOU KIND OF HELP ME WITH THAT? CAN YOU SAY THAT ONE MORE TIME? UM, BASED, THERE, THERE ARE THREE OPTIONS BEFORE THIS COMMISSION. ONE IS THAT THERE'S A MORATORIUM AND NO CONSTRUCTION AT ALL FOR TWO YEARS ON THE PROPERTY. NOTHING CAN BE PUT BACK AFTER TWO YEARS. UM, A STRUCTURE SIMILAR IN SIZE AND FORM COULD BE PUT BACK, BUT IT COULD NOT BE MADE ANY LARGER. HAVING A LARGE ADDITION MADE ONTO IT FOR 10 YEARS. SO, UM, UNDER THAT SCENARIO, THE HOUSE WOULD NOT NECESSARILY RESEMBLE THE HOUSE THAT WAS FORMALLY THERE. IT WOULD SIMPLY BE THE SAME SIZE IN SIMILAR FORM. SO AFTER 10 YEARS, THE PROPERTY COULD BE REDEVELOPED IN WITH ALAR, WITH A LARGER STRUCTURE IF IT WOULD ABIDE BY THE, UM, THE ORDINANCE FOR, YOU KNOW, IT HAS TO FIT WITHIN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. IS THAT CLEAR? YES. BUT IF IT WAS A 10 YEAR MORATORIUM, I THINK YOU SAID SOMETHING ABOUT THAT. THAT'S ON, UH, TO BUILD ANYTHING LARGER THAN WHAT WAS TAKEN DOWN. SO YOU CAN'T BUILD A LARGER HOME ON THE PROPERTY OR ADD ON TO THE HOME ON THE PROPERTY UNTIL 10 YEARS PASSES. SO THAT FOR 10 YEARS, EITHER THERE'S NOTHING ON THE LOT, BUT GRASS OR THERE, THERE COULD BE A STRUCTURE THAT IS THE SAME SIZE AND FORM THAT'S BUILT NEW, OR IT COULD BE A HOME SIMILAR SIZE THAT'S MOVED ON TO THE PROPERTY THAT'S FROM THE SAME AGE OR MAYBE GENERAL APPEARANCE OF THE FORMER HOME COULD BE MOVED ON THE PROPERTY. BUT, BUT NOTHING LARGER COULD EXIST ON THE PROPERTY PERIOD UNTIL 10 YEARS PASSES. SO IF THE BUILDER HAD A 10 YEAR MORATORIUM, NOTHING WOULD HAPPEN. AND THEN AT THE END OF THAT 10 YEARS, THEN HE COULD BUILD SOMETHING LARGER, THE SAME SIZE, HE CAN BUILD SOMETHING LARGER. BUT, UM, BUT OUR, OUR ORDINANCE IS BASED ON WHAT WAS PASSED BY CITY COUNCIL. SO THIS LANGUAGE THAT WE'RE REFERRING TO, UM, THE TWO YEAR MORATORIUM IS NO CONSTRUCTION UNLESS WE ALLOW IT. AND IF, IF WE DO ALLOW ANY CONSTRUCTION, IT CAN'T BE ANY LARGER THAN WHAT THE HOME WAS BEFORE. GOTCHA. AND THEN IT IS TRUE, THE APPLICANT AFTER 10 YEARS, BASED ON THE ORDINANCE, COULD BUILD A LARGER HOME ON, ON THE, THE PROPERTY. AND AT THAT TIME, IT, IT WOULD JUST, IT WOULD HAVE TO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE, OR OF THE ORDINANCE OF, OF THE, OF, OF OUR ORDINANCE. BUT IT COULD BE, IT COULD LOOK VERY DIFFERENT THAN THEIR PREVIOUS HOME. IT COULD BE LARGER THAN THEIR PREVIOUS HOME. AND, UM, AND THEY, THEY, THEY COULD, THEY COULD MAKE AN APPLICATION AFTER 10 YEARS. I SEE. SO I THINK THE, THE DISCUSSION THAT, THAT WE'RE REALLY HAVING IS BETWEEN A MORATORIUM ON NO CONSTRUCTION FOR TWO YEARS, OR, UM, [01:10:01] AND TO ANSWER THE QUESTION EARLIER, WAS THE DISCUSSION OF IF YOU WERE TO BUILD A NEW HOME TO TRY TO MATCH EXACTLY THE HOME THAT WAS THERE AS A MEMORY OF THAT HOME, AS IF IT HAD, LET'S, LET'S JUST SAY HAD HAD BURNED DOWN BY ACCIDENT AND WANT, SOMEONE WANTED TO PUT IT BACK SO THAT IF YOU WALK DOWN THE STREET, THE MEMORY OF THAT FACADE, IT'S STILL THE, THE SAME FACADE THAT GREETS YOU. YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT OLD, YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S NEW. UM, THAT'S ONLY AN OPTION REALLY AT THIS TIME. OR IF THE APPLICANT IN TWO YEARS FROM NOW, YOU KNOW, WOULD WANT TO PUT THAT BACK. BUT THE, THE ONLY CHANCE THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAS TO PUT BACK A HOME THAT LOOKS EXACTLY OR AS CLOSE AS POSSIBLE TO WHAT WAS LOST IS TO, WOULD BE TO, IF THERE WAS SUPPORT TO BUILD, BUILD IT BACK AS IT WAS. UM, THERE ARE NO MATERIALS LEFT THAT I'M AWARE OF TO, YOU KNOW, FROM, FROM THE ACTUAL HOME. THERE ARE NO SALVAGE MATERIALS. UH, I DON'T BELIEVE THAT EXIST. SO THAT, THAT, THAT IS, THAT IS WHAT WE WILL BE DECIDING FROM THE, FROM THESE ARE THE LEGAL OPTIONS THAT WE HAVE TO, TO CONSIDER. I UNDERSTAND. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. OKAY. SO I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AGAIN. IS THERE A MOTION FROM THE COMMISSION? COMMISSIONER ESCOBAR? I MOVE TO DENY, UM, THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS IT, WHATEVER LANGUAGE FOLLOWING THAT I NEED TO MAKE SURE I ADD. WELL, I THINK WE JUST NEED TO STATE WHAT THE, UM, WHAT WE'RE, WE'RE GONNA DENY THAT, WHICH I, I THEREFORE BY, BY THAT SIMPLE LANGUAGE, I'M ASSUMING THAT WOULD THEN INVOKE THE CLAUSE OF TWO YEAR MORATORIUM. YES. AND I NEED TO ADD, THAT'S A LEGAL QUESTION THOUGH. YES. YOU NEED TO STATE IN FULL WHAT YOUR MOTION IS. OKAY. AND I THINK THE PLANE DIRECTOR WOULD LIKE TO ALSO ADD SOMETHING AS WELL. YES, MAY MAY I REQUEST STAFF MEMBER JACQUELINE BROWN TO COME UP AND AGAIN, REPRESENT THE OPTIONS FOR THE VOTE FOR COMMISSIONERS. THANK YOU. SURE. IT'S TO DENY THE COA WITH THE FOLLOWING OPTIONS. ONE ISSUE, A PERMIT MORATORIUM FOR TWO YEARS, TWO, ISSUE A-C-O-R-C-O-R FOR REPAIR, RECONSTRUCTION, OR RESTORATION OF ALL OR PART OF THE DEMOLISHED STRUCTURE USING AS MUCH SALVAGE MATERIAL AS POSSIBLE. OR THREE ISSUE A COR FOR RELOCATING, A CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE TO THE SITE WITH CONDITIONS. QUESTION COMMISSIONER BLAKELY, I'M NOT SURE WHO THIS QUESTION IS FOR, MAYBE IT'S FOR DIRECTOR. UM, WHAT ARE THE CITY'S PLANS FOR, UM, FOR MOVING FORWARD IF THERE WERE TO BE A MOR MORATORIUM IN TERMS OF ADDRESSING THE CONCERNS? I THINK THERE HAS BEEN A, A SORT OF APPEAL FOR JUSTICE IN THE COMMENTS THAT WERE MADE, UM, BY THE MEMBERS, RESIDENTS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. AND SO I GUESS WHAT I'M REALLY ASKING, 'CAUSE OUR HANDS ARE MORE OR LESS TIED, IS WHAT ARE THE CITY'S PLANS AS FAR AS RESPONDING TO THIS APPEAL FOR APOLOGY? UH, BECAUSE I FEEL THAT THE VERY WELL-MEANING, BUT, UM, MISLED, UH, OWNER AND, UH, HAS EXPRESSED A WILLINGNESS TO WORK WITH WHATEVER HAPPENS. BUT I, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO ADDRESS THIS SENSE OF INJURY. SO WHAT IS THE PLAN OF THE CITY IN THAT REGARD? THANK YOU FOR THAT QUESTION. SO FIRST AND FOREMOST, IN TERMS OF THE LAWS AND THE ORDINANCES, IN TERMS OF HOW TO PROCEED GOING FORWARD WITH THE CHOICES, AFTER THE CHOICES ARE MADE, THEN THE CITY NEEDS TO ENSURE IF OPTION ONE, UH, WAS TO BE, UH, TO BE VOTED ON TODAY A MORATORIUM, IT WOULD REQUIRES THAT THE CITY MAKE SURE THAT IN OUR PERMITTING SYSTEM, THE ILMS, THAT IT WOULD BE NOTED AND THAT IF ANY PERMITS COME INTO THE SYSTEM, THAT IT WOULD BE VERY CLEAR NO PERMITS CAN BE ISSUED, UH, FOR TWO YEARS, UH, UPON THE DATE OF THE DEMOLITION, WHICH I BELIEVE IS NOVEMBER 20TH, 2025. AND THEN IF YOU CHOOSE THE OTHER TWO OPTIONS, UH, THEN THAT WE WOULD CONTINUE TO FOLLOW THROUGH AND ENSURE THAT IF A PERMIT WERE TO COME TO THE CITY, UH, THAT THE HOUSE THAT WOULD BE REBUILT WOULD BE IN THE SAME SIZE, THE SAME FORM WITHIN THE SAME CONFIGURATION OF THAT. SO IT WOULD BE NOTED IN OUR PERMITTING SYSTEM. ALTERNATIVELY, IF CHOICE THREE WERE TAKEN [01:15:01] A SIMILAR HOUSE, UM, WITHIN THE SAME TIME PERIOD WOULD BE RELOCATED TO THE LOCATION, WE WILL ENSURE THAT THAT WOULD HAPPEN. IN TERMS OF THE, WHAT WE WOULD NEED TO DO WITH OUR COMMUNITY, I WOULD THINK YES, UM, THIS IS AN AWFUL EVENT AND THAT IT HAS TRANSPIRED. I KNOW THAT I HAVE BEEN WORKING REALLY CLOSELY WITH COUNCIL MEMBER CASTILLO'S OFFICE, AND YES, I DO BELIEVE THAT THE CITY DO OWE THE COMMUNITY AN APOLOGY, AND I WILL BE THE FIRST ONE TO SIT HERE AND EXTEND THAT APOLOGY TO, UH, THE COMMUNITY AND ALSO, UH, TO, UM, TO THANK, UH, MS. TANYA WELLS, AS WELL AS DR. NORMAN FOR COMING OUT HERE TO SPEAK AND TO REPRESENT, UM, AND ADVOCATE FOR THE COMMUNITY. AND I ALSO APPRECIATE MS. ZION, ZION, UM, HERE AS WELL. AND THAT'S THE REASON WHY YOU ARE HERE ON THIS BOARD, UM, AS WELL AS ALL OF YOU. UH, BECAUSE WE ARE HERE TO PROTECT OUR HISTORIC, UM, UH, PROPERTIES AND HISTORY OF THE CITY. AND THIS IS AN UNFORTUNATE SITUATION. UH, THERE ARE NO EXCUSES, BUT YET PLEASE KNOW THAT WE ARE A BIG CITY. IT IS THE FOURTH LARGEST CITY. WE HAVE MORE THAN 21 HISTORIC DISTRICTS. I AM IN THE PROCESS OF DOING AN AUDIT AND ENSURING THAT ALL OF OUR HISTORIC PROPERTIES ARE LINING UP WITH OUR, UH, SYSTEMS OVER AT THE HOUSTON PERMIT CENTER. UH, WE HAVE SEVERAL DATABASES, UH, THAT WOULD NEED TO COMMUNICATE TO EACH OTHER. WE ARE ALL HUMANS AND WE DO MAKE MISTAKES. AND WITHIN OUR SYSTEMS, THERE ARE ABILITIES FOR VARIOUS, UH, VARIOUS STAFF TO EITHER LIFT HOLDS, ADD HOLDS. IT'S A LITTLE BIT OF A COMPLEX PROCESS. I'M STILL TRYING TO FIGURE THAT OUT, UH, BECAUSE OF THE SITUATION. SINCE I CAME ON AS THE DIRECTOR OF THE DEPARTMENT, I HAVE SEEN SEVERAL OF THIS SITUATION. WE'VE, AS, UM, COMMISSIONER JONES MENTIONED, THIS IS NOT THE FIRST, UH, OTHERS ARE NOT EX AS EXTREM AS THIS. THE OTHER ONES WERE IN PRETTY BAD SHAPE. UH, THE OWNER DIDN'T KNOW IT WAS IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT, BUT BY THE TIME IT GOT TO US AND WE WERE LOOKING AT EVIDENCES, AND SOME OF THEM WERE VERY CLEAR, UH, THE STRUCTURES WERE IN DISRE, UH, DISPAIR. AND SO THEREFORE, IN THOSE SITUATIONS, THE COA FOR DEMOLITION WERE GIVEN. THIS SITUATION IS REALLY UNIQUE, UH, STARTS WHETHER, UH, HISTORIC DISTRICT IS VERY IMPORTANT FOR THE CITY OF HOUSTON. UH, WE HOLD IT DEAR IN OUR HEART. UH, IT IS SAD THAT THIS HAPPENED. AND YES, UM, I WILL WORK REALLY HARD WITH THE MAYOR'S OFFICE, THE ADMINISTRATION, WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS TO ENSURE THAT PROPER APOLOGY IS GOING TO BE, UM, UH, BEING, UH, BROUGHT FORWARD. BUT I REALLY TRULY THANK YOU FOR ALL OF THE COMMISSIONERS SITTING HERE TO HELP US WORK THROUGH THIS REALLY DIFFICULT TIME. AND AGAIN, I APPRECIATE MS. TANYA WELLS, DR. NORMAN, UH, FOR COMING HERE. AND WE SINCERELY APOLOGIZE. AND AGAIN, UM, I WANTED TO ASK CHAIR HICK THAT BEFORE THE COMMISSION MAKE A VOTE, I WOULD LIKE, UH, TO ENSURE AND GIVE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR MS. WELLS, DR. MORMAN, UH, NORMAN, TO COME BACK, BACK UP HERE AGAIN AND TO REALLY JUST REITERATE, UH, YOUR FINAL WISH, UH, BEFORE THIS COMMISSION TAKES A VOTE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. SO I'LL REOPEN THE PUBLIC COMMENT. AGAIN, MY NAME IS TANYA WELLS. I'M THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE INDEPENDENT HIGH TREE DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL. THE RESIDENTS OF THE STARK WEATHER HISTORIC DISTRICT WANT A TWO YEAR MORATORIUM IN THAT TIME. THEY INTEND TO WORK WITH THE CITY ON HOW TO MOVE FORWARD. THIS IS SOMETHING THAT IS OUTSIDE OF THE HISTORIC COMMISSION, AND WE UNDERSTAND THAT. WE DO ASK THAT YOU COME TO THE COMMUNITY AND YOU GIVE THAT APOLOGY BECAUSE WE HAVE SOME COMMUNITY MEMBERS HERE THAT ARE STANDING WITH US, BUT THERE ARE SOME COMMUNITY MEMBERS WHO COULDN'T MAKE IT AND THEY DESERVE IT. WE THANK YOU THAT YOU HURT US, BUT WE REALLY WOULD LIKE FOR YOU TO COME TO THE COMMUNITY AND SEE THE STARK WEATHER DISTRICT TALK TO MAYBE SOME OF THE RESIDENTS THAT ARE AVAILABLE TO MAYBE MOVE AROUND. BUT WE, WE HEAR YOU, BUT WE UNDERSTAND THAT WHAT THE TWO YEAR MORATORIUM IS, THAT'S WHAT THEY WANT. THANK YOU. WITH THAT, I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. COMMISSIONER ESCOBAR, YOU WERE MAKING A MOTION AND I THINK YOU NEEDED TO ADD ON TO IT, AND I NEED TO ASK FOR A SECOND AFTER THAT. [01:20:01] YES. I WOULD LIKE TO RESTATE, UM, THAT I MOVE TO DENY, UM, THE DEMOLITION COA AND, UH, WITH THE PERMIT MORATORIUM CHOOSING OPTION ONE THAT WOULD, UH, PREVENT DEVELOPMENT FOR TWO YEARS, UM, FROM THE DATE OF DEMOLITION. IS THERE A SECOND? COMMISSIONER JONES, SECONDS. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? SO THAT MOTION PASSES AND WE'LL NOW MOVE ON TO ITEM TWO. GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION. THIS IS STAFF PERSON TERRANCE JACKSON. ITEM E ZERO TWO AT 5 0 9 EUCLID STREET IN WOODLAND IN THE WOODLAND HEIGHTS HISTORIC DISTRICT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION, THE 1,561 SQUARE FOOT ONE STORY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE IS A CONTRIBUTING, CONTRIBUTING BUNGALOW PROPERTY. CONSTRUCTED CIRCA 1920. STAFF IS IN SUPPORT OF THIS PROPOSED OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT. THE APPLICANT PROPOSES TO CONSTRUCT A 2,169 SQUARE FOOT EDITION, BRINGING THE TOTAL FROM 1561 TO 37 30 SQUARE FEET DEMOLISH AND NON-ORIGINAL ADDITION. TO OPEN THE ORIGINAL FRONT PORCH, REMOVE THE EXISTING ASBESTOS SIDING AND REPAIR AND REPLACE THE FOUR INCH REVEAL WOOD SIDING BENEATH AS NEEDED. INSTALL NEW SMOOTH CEMENT SIDING WITH THE SIX INCH REVEAL. ON THE ADDITION, MAINTAIN THE ORIGINAL WOOD WINDOWS OF THE EXISTING HOME. INSTALL NEW ONE OVER ONE WINDOWS. AT THE ADDITION, THE HOME WILL BE CONSTRUCTED WITH A 27 FOOT SIX AND A HALF INCH MAXIMUM RIDGE HEIGHT. THE ATTACHED GARAGE WILL HAVE A 26 FEET, SIX AND A HALF INCH MAXIMUM RIDGE HEIGHT. THE NEW ROOF WILL HAVE SIX A SIX OVER 12 ROOF PITCH. THE EXISTING GARAGE WILL BE DEMOLISHED AND RECONSTRUCTED. RECONSTRUCTED FORWARD EIGHT FEET TO MINI, MINIMIZE THE AMOUNT OF TREE TRIMMING. THE ADDITION WILL HAVE AN ATTACHED GARAGE WITH THE GARAGE APARTMENT ABOVE. THE PROJECT HAS BEEN DEFERRED TWICE BY THE HHC AND WILL REQUIRE A DECISION. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL. THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION. THANK YOU. AT THIS TIME, I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC COMMENT. I DO HAVE A NUMBER OF SPEAKERS SIGNED UP ON THIS ITEM. UM, WE WILL START WITH THE APPLICANT, IT HOBSON. AND IF YOU COULD RESTATE YOUR NAME IN THE MICROPHONE FOR THE RECORD. YES. HELLO. UH, MY NAME IS EDS HOBSON. UM, WASN'T EXPECTING TO SPEAK HOWEVER, I DID HAVE SOMETHING, UH, SHORT TO, UH, STATE ON THIS HOUSE. ONE WE HAVE DONE AS, UH, MUCH AS WE CAN TO COME BACK AND REVAMP THE HOUSE AND DESIGN AND, UH, FLOW AS, UH, BASED ON A LOT OF THE DECISIONS THAT YOU GUYS HAVE MADE, A LOT OF DECISIONS THAT THE STAFF HAS MADE. I KNOW THAT, UM, THE COMMISSIONER C UH, UH, COSGROVE HAD CAME OUT. I MET WITH HIM. WE, AGAIN, DESIGNED AROUND THAT. WE HAD A, UH, A FORESTER COME OUT TO, UH, TO, UM, LOOK AT THE TREE. UH, WE HAD ALREADY SPOKE ON HOW WE WERE GOING TO MINIMIZE HOW MUCH WE WANTED TO, UM, UH, TEAR, UH, EXCUSE ME, UM, CUT INTO THE TREE. WE KNEW THAT THERE WAS A LOT OF ASPECTS WITH THE HOME WHERE WE'RE ELEVATING IT DIFFERENTLY IN THE BACK GARAGE TO KEEP THE TREE, UH, IN FOR THE MOST PART WHERE IT'S AT, SO WE CAN MINIMIZE THE BRANCHES BEING CUT. UH, AND THEN JUST, JUST IN FINAL, WE KNOW THAT BACK ON, UH, 1211 2005, UH, 5 0 5 TS HORN, UH, WAS A 'CAUSE WE HEARD, YOU KNOW, UM, KIND OF MASKING THE HOME. UH, THAT HOME WAS ALSO [01:25:01] APPROVED. THEN, UH, IT WENT FROM 1269 SQUARE FOOT TO 4,100 SQUARE FEET. UH, IT'S ON THE SAME A HUNDRED BLOCK AS OUR HOME, UH, JUST TWO STREETS UP. IT'S ON A 63 65 SQUARE FOOT LOT. OURS IS ON A 62 50 SQUARE LOT. UH, OUR CURRENT EXISTING IS 1541, AND WE WERE PROPOSING TO GO UP 2199. UH, SO, YOU KNOW, JUST, JUST WE'RE, WE'RE, THERE ARE OTHER HOMES ON THIS, ON THE, ON OUR BLOCK RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET THAT ARE VERY RELATIVELY IN THE CONTEXT OF THIS EXISTING HOME. I MEAN, OF WHAT WE'RE, UM, PROPOSING. AND, UM, JUST, JUST TRYING TO MAKE SURE, YOU KNOW, JUST, JUST TRYING TO LAY OUT THAT WE'VE MADE A LOT OF, UH, CONSOLATION TO TRY TO SHOW OUR EAGERNESS TO, UH, ABIDE BY THE, UH, HISTORIC PRESERVATION, UH, PROTOCOLS AS WELL AS, YOU KNOW, SOME OF THE COMMISSIONERS OR COMMISSION HERE TODAY. UM, ADVICE AND, AND THE STAFF. SO AGAIN, AND, AND LISTEN TO THE PEOPLE OF THE COMMUNITY ABOUT TRYING TO PRESERVE THE TREE AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE, WHICH WE'VE WENT THROUGH EXTENSIVE MEASURES TO TRY TO DO SO WITH EVEN THE ARCHITECTURAL OF THE ROOF OF THE HOME AND THE HEIGHT OF THE HOME AS WELL. SO, THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THE NEXT SPEAKER WILL BE MICHAEL CONNOR, FOLLOWED BY JANE BUCHANAN. DOCUMENT CAMERA, PLEASE. YES, SIR. GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS MIKE CONNOR. I'M A NEIGHBOR. JUST A NEIGHBOR. I'M NOT ADJACENT TO THE DEVELOPMENT. I'M A BLOCK AWAY. I'M AT 5 0 9 WOODLAND STREET. I APPRECIATE THE, THE, UH, COMMISSION ENTERTAINING, UM, US AND OUR DISCUSSION HERE TODAY. I'VE SUBMITTED THREE DIFFERENT LETTERS IN OPPOSITION. MY ENTIRE, UH, OPPOSITION HAS TO DO WITH WHAT CONSIDERATIONS THIS HISTORIC TREE IS GETTING. WHAT'S ON THE OVERHEAD RIGHT NOW? UH, THERE'S, IF YOU CAN SEE IT, THERE'S A RED OUTLINE, WHICH IS A, I BELIEVE, A FAIR DEPICTION OF THE CANOPY OF THIS TREE. THIS CANOPY REACHES SIX ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES. THE MOST IMPORTANT FACTOR I WOULD LIKE THE, THE, THE COMMISSION TO FOCUS ON IS THE TRUNK OF THIS TREE IS NOT ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. IT IS ON A NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTY. IT'S WHAT'S KNOWN AS THE AVERY HOUSE. TO ME, IT WAS BOB AND JULIET'S HOUSE. TO ME, IT WAS GABE AND SARAH'S HOUSE TO ME, NOW IT'S TRAVIS AND, UH, DALLAS'S HOUSE. I'VE BEEN ACROSS THE STREET FOR OVER 30 YEARS. THAT TREE IS THE BACKDROP OF WHAT I SEE FROM MY FRONT PORCH EVERY MORNING AND EVERY EVENING. WE HAVE BEEN HERE TODAY FOR MANY HOURS, AND I WILL NOTE WHAT YOU OBVIOUSLY HAVE JUST EXPERIENCED, AND THAT IS YOU HAVE JUST APPROVED REFERRAL FOR HISTORIC DESIGNATION OF 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 4 DIFFERENT FEATURES IN HOUSTON, IN AND AROUND HOUSTON, TEXAS, THE CI, A CHURCH, A HOME, ANOTHER HOME. THIS TREE HAS EXISTED IN ITS LOCATION SINCE BEFORE THE CITY OF HOUSTON, SINCE BEFORE EACH AND EVERY ONE OF THESE, THESE FEATURES OF OUR CITY, THE CONTEXT OF WHICH IS THIS HISTORIC COMMISSIONS REASON FOR EXISTENCE. YOU HAVE APPROVED THEM ALL UNANIMOUSLY. AND WE'VE SPENT THE LAST FEW MINUTES, IF YOU'LL PERMIT ME HEARING HOW PROBLEMATIC IT WHEN THE HORSE GETS THE BARN. SCISSORS. ALL IN FAVOR. AYE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. AND I APOLOGIZE FOR SPEAKING OVER. WE'VE HEARD RECENTLY FROM, FROM, FROM DR. JORDAN AND OTHERS, HOW PAINFUL IT CAN BE WHEN SOMETHING GOES WRONG, HOW DIFFICULT IT CAN BE TO FIND A WAY TO RECTIFY THIS TREE. ACCORDING TO A CERTIFIED ARBORIST WILL DIE IF THE ORIGINAL PROPOSAL, WHICH I DON'T BELIEVE HAS BEEN SUBSTANTIALLY CHANGED. IN FACT, PERHAPS IT'S WORSE NOW THAN IT WAS AT THE BEGINNING FOR THE TREE. DR. WATSON SAID, IT WILL KILL THIS TREE. NOW, OF COURSE, THAT DEATH WILL NOT OCCUR IMMEDIATELY. IT'S GONNA TAKE YEARS. THE BUILDER WILL BE LONG GONE. WHO'S GOING TO COVER THE COST OF A DEAD TREE? WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THAT THAT BRANCH, THIS BIG ROUND, LITERALLY FALLS ON SOMEBODY'S YARD, HOUSE OR CHILD? [01:30:01] WHY WOULD WE ENDANGER A HUNDRED, 200, 300 YEAR OLD TREE, A TREE THAT PREDATES THE CITY OF HOUSTON, EVEN THE REPUBLIC OF TEXAS, AND PROBABLY EVEN THE DRAFTING OF THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE? WHY WOULD YOU RISK THAT FOR A FEW SQUARE FEET OF SALEABLE REAL ESTATE? I APPRECIATE THE TIME. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THE NEXT SPEAKER, AS I MENTIONED, IS JANE BUCHANAN, FOLLOWED BY NANCY WOOD. IF YOU CAN PLEASE KEEP YOUR, UH, COMMENTS TO THE, THE ALLOTTED TIME. WE HAVE A LONG AGENDA BEFORE US. OH, I HAVE A TIME. THIS IS, OH, I HAVE A, DON'T WORRY. UH, I'M JANE BUCHANAN. GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSIONERS. I'M OWNER OF THE ADJACENT PROPERTY 5 0 1 EUCLID STREET. I, TOO HAVE SUBMITTED COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION THREE TIMES. I WOULD JUST LIKE TO POINT OUT THERE ARE NO SIGNIFICANT CHANGES TO ADDRESS PREVIOUS CONCERNS. THE FIRST BEING THE MASSING. IF YOU LOOK AT THE CONTEXT AREA, THERE ARE 14 CONTRIBUTING HOUSES ON THE 500 BLOCK OF EUCLID STREET. THE AVERAGE SIZE, EVEN WITH ADDITIONS IS 24 42 SQUARE FEET. 3,700 TO 3,800 SQUARE FEET WILL DEFINITELY VISUALLY CROWD ALL NEARBY HISTORIC PROPERTIES. SECOND, I KNOW LAST TIME THERE WAS A LOT OF DISCUSSION ABOUT THE TREE, SO I HAVE DEFINITELY BEEN THINKING ABOUT THAT AND IF IT'S PART OF THE SITE AND IT'S ENVIRONMENT. SO I WOULD CHALLENGE YOU TO THINK ABOUT THAT, THE TREE ON RECORD WITH THE CITY, AND WHAT IF IT WAS A CRUMBLING WALL OR A ROCK CARVING OR A GRAVE THAT HAD BEEN THERE FOR 400 YEARS? WOULD WE CONSIDER THAT AS PART OF THE SITE AND THE ENVIRONMENT? BECAUSE IT HAD EXISTED FOR 400 YEARS IN WOODLAND HEIGHTS? WOODLAND HEIGHTS, OBVIOUSLY IT WAS NAMED THAT FOR A REASON. UH, I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT AS YOU CAN SEE, THE TREE ACTUALLY TOUCHES FIVE HISTORIC PROPERTIES. SO IF YOU APPROVE THIS AND THERE IS A DANGER TO THE TREE AND THE PROPERTIES, YOU ARE PUTTING FIVE CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES AND THEIR CONTEXT AT RISK. IT'S BIGGER THAN JUST THIS APPLICATION. UM, FINALLY, ON THE EXCEPTIONS, WE HAVE SEEN NO EVIDENCE THAT THESE EIGHT FEET WILL HELP THE TREE AT ALL. SO, UH, I'D LIKE TO PERSONALLY SEE THAT RATHER THAN JUST VAGUE ASSURANCES. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. NEXT SPEAKER IS NANCY WOOD, FOLLOWED BY PAUL WHITEHOUSE. PRESENTATION MODE PLEASE. HI THERE. I'M NANCY WOOD. I LIVE NEXT DOOR TO 5 0 9 EUCLID, THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME TODAY. I'LL KEEP IT VERY SHORT. UM, MY CONCERN IS THAT THIS APPLICATION IS NOT APPRECIABLY DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WE'VE SEEN IN JUNE AND JULY. I UNDERSTAND THAT IT'S DIFFICULT TO WEAVE TOGETHER HISTORIC PRESERVATION AND CONTEMPORARY LIVING TO CREATE THE FABRIC OF A NEIGHBORHOOD. THE WOODLAND HEIGHTS IS KIND OF A PLAID, AND EACH STRIPE IS DIFFERENT. EUCLID STREET HAS MODEST HOMES. IT'S ALWAYS HAD MODEST HOMES COMPARED TO WOODLAND, BAYLAND AND MORRISON. AND THIS VARIATION IS PART OF THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. AND AS SUCH, UM, I HEAR THE CONCERNS ABOUT MASSING AND SCALE, AND I DON'T SEE THOSE ADDRESSED IN THESE PLANS, AND I JUST ASK THAT THEY STILL BE CONSIDERED. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR HICK COMMISSIONERS AND STAFF. MY NAME IS PAUL WHITEHOUSE, RESIDENT AT 5 1 3 EUCLID STREET NEXT DOOR TO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. BY TWICE DEFERRING THE APPLICATION. THE COMMISSION HAS GIVEN EVERY OPPORTUNITY FOR THE APPLICANT TO SUBMIT REASONABLE PLANS, AND THEY HAVE FAILED TO DO SO. DESPITE THE CONCERNS VOICED AT PREVIOUS HEARINGS, THE SCALE AND MASSINE REMAIN MATERIALLY UNCHANGED. THE PLAN, 3,700 PLUS SQUARE FOOT ALTERATION IS TOO LARGE. IT WOULD DOMINATE THE EXISTING HOME ADJACENT HOMES, AND THE RESULTANT CROWDING WOULD HARM THE CHARACTER ENVIRONMENT OF THE SENSITIVE PARTS OF THE WOODLAND HEIGHTS. EVEN THE HOMES USED BY THE APPLICANT TO SUPPORTING EXAMPLES ARE SMALLER THAN THE PROPOSED ALTERATION. AND THE SIZES OF THE EXAMPLE ADDITIONS ARE ALSO SMALLER RELATIVE TO, UM, THE EXISTING STRUCTURES. THESE EXAMPLES ACTUALLY SUPPORT THE CASE FOR A MORE MODEST DESIGN. COMMISSIONERS, YOU YOURSELVES HAVE [01:35:01] COMMENTED THAT THE MASSING IS VERY LARGE. YOU'VE COMMENTED THAT IT'S TROUBLING FOR ITS SIZE, IT'S OVERPOWERING, AND THAT THE ADDITION NEEDS TO BE SUBSERVIENT TO THE HISTORICAL STRUCTURE. AND WITH RESPECT TO THE TREE CHAIR BUCH CHECK, YOU'VE EVEN SAID THAT IF THE REAR MOST PORTION OF THE ADDITION WAS ONE STORY, PRESSURE ON THE TREE WOULD BE REDUCED. THE SCALE AND CONTEXT OF THE TREE IS MISLEADINGLY UNDERREPRESENTED IN THE NEWLY SUBMITTED PLANS. IT'S A DEFINING AND FUNDAMENTAL PART OF THE ENVIRONMENT AND HISTORICAL CHARACTER OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES. SO I'M SURPRISED TO SEE, AGAIN, THE CITY, UH, SUGGESTING THAT THIS THIS APPLICATION IS APPROVED. IT'S CLEARLY A PLAN TO MAXIMIZE SQUARE FOOTAGE FOR PROFIT AND IN SUCH A SENSITIVE LOCATION. APPROVAL OF THIS APPLICATION WILL BE UNFORTUNATE, ENCOURAGING OTHER DEVELOPERS TO EXPLOIT OUR HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOODS AND UNDERMINING FUTURE HISTORIC PRESERVATION EFFORTS. I SPECIFICALLY ASK THAT THIS APPLICATION IS NOT DEFERRED AGAIN, BUT THAT IT IS DENIED. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. AND THE LAST SPEAKER WHO SIGNED UP IS TRAVIS BOYLE. UH, CHAIR HICK AND COMMISSIONERS. MY NAME IS TRAVIS BOYLE. I'M, UH, THE OWNER OF 5 0 4 WOODLAND, WHICH IS THE, UH, RE AVERY HOUSE DESIGNATED BY THIS COMMISSION AS A PROTECTED LANDMARK IN 2008. UH, THE, THE HERITAGE LIVE OAK UNDER DISCUSSION AT THE CENTER OF THIS APPLICATION STANDS ON MY PROPERTY AND ITS TRUNK AGAINST THE SHARED LINE WITH 5 0 9 EUCLID. UM, THIS IS THE THIRD TIME THIS APPLICATION HAS COME BEFORE YOU. IT WAS DEFERRED IN JUNE. UH, IT WAS DEFERRED AGAIN IN JULY. UM, IT'S NOW BEFORE YOU AGAIN, WITH STAFF RECOMMENDING STRAIGHT APPROVAL. 10 OF 11 CRITERIA MARKED SATISFIES. THE ONE CRITERIA THAT STILL FAILS IS NUMBER 11. THE STAFF STATED REASON IS THE CIRCUMSTANCES PERTAINING TO THE LARGE OAK TREE, UH, THAT FRAMING, INVERTS CAUSE AND EFFECT THE TREE'S NOT THE PROBLEM. THE PROBLEM IS A TWO STORY STRUCTURE. THE APPLICANT IS UNWILLING TO DESI REDESIGN AROUND IT, TREATING THE OAK AS AN INCONVENIENCE THE APPLICANT CAN INVOKE. RATHER THAN A DOCUMENTED LANDMARK FEATURE, THE DESIGN HAS TO ACCOMMODATE, WRITES THIS INCOMPATIBILITY INTO THE TREE AND ASK THIS COMMISSION TO RATIFY IT. UH, AT THE JULY HEARING, SEVERAL OF YOU ASKED WHETHER THIS COMMISSION CAN CONSIDER THE TREE AT ALL. THE ORDINANCE DRAWS THE CIRCLE. SECTION 3 3, 2, 4 1 1 SPEAKS TO THE HISTORICAL CHARACTER OF THE PROPERTY. SECTION 3 3 2 4 1 4 SPEAKS TO QUOTE THE SITE AND ITS ENVIRONMENT. UH, THIS IS NOT ORDINARY LANDSCAPING. THE CITY'S OWN 2008 PROTECTED LANDMARK DESIGNATION REPORT FOR MY PROPERTY. 5 0 4 WOODLAND NAMES THIS OAK AS PART OF THE DOCUMENTED LANDMARK, APPROXIMATELY 400 YEARS OLD, REGISTERED WITH A HARRIS COUNTY TREE REGISTRY, UH, WHEN THE CITY ITSELF DESIGNATED THE TREE, IT'S NOT FOR THE COMMISSION TO RE DESIGNATE IT AS LANDSCAPING. UM, COMMISSIONER COSGROVE DESCRIBED IN JULY WHAT SHE WAS TOLD AT THE SITE VISIT, THAT THE ADDITION WOULD BE BUILT ON PIER AND BEAM, THE GARAGE ON A SLAB, AND THE DRIVEWAY CHANGED TO GRAVEL. UH, NONE OF THAT APPEARS IN THE AUGUST PLANS. THE PACKET SHOWS NO PIER AND BEAM NOTATION. ANYWHERE THAT I COULD FIND. THE DRIVEWAY IS LABELED AS A PAVER STYLE DRIVEWAY. UH, THE IN THE ASSURANCES MADE AT THE SITE VISIT HAVE NOT MADE IT INTO THE APPLICATION. MOTION TO GRANT THE SPEAKER MORE TIME. IS THERE A SECOND? UH, THANK YOU. UM, ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE PROCEED. THE SITE, THE SITE PLAN ITSELF, HAVING FINALLY DRAWN THE CANOPY, SHOWS THAT THE CANOPY DIRECTLY OVER THE NEWLY ATTACHED GARAGE AND PART OF THE REAR ADDITION WHILE INSTRUCTING THE READER IN THE SAME NOTE TO CONFIRM THE TREE'S EXACT LOCATION AND SIZE, WHICH I BELIEVE SOME OF MY NEIGHBORS HAVE DONE PREVIOUSLY. THE DRAWING ESTABLISHES THE CONFLICT AND DISCLAIMS KNOWLEDGE OF IT. IN ONE LINE, DR. WATSON'S PRESCRIPTION REMAINS WHAT IT WAS IN JUNE. A SHORTER STRUCTURE SET BACK FROM THE REAR, A 30 FOOT TREE PROTECTION AREA, A PURE FOUNDATION WITH A ROOT ZONE, UH, AND A CERTIFIED ARBORIST ENGAGED FROM REDESIGN THROUGH CONSTRUCTION. NONE OF THOSE FOUR IS IN THE AUGUST PLANS. I RESPECTFULLY ASKED THIS COMMISSION TO DENY THE APPLICATION AS SUBMITTED. TWO DEFERRALS HAVE PRODUCED LESS AND LESS SUBSTANTIVE REDESIGN, AND THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION HAVE HAS MOVED IN THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION FROM THE RECORD. A THIRD DEFERRAL WITHOUT BINDING CONDITIONS ONLY REWARDS TWO ROUNDS OF NON-RESPONSIVENESS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE IN THE PUBLIC THAT'S HERE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? IF YOU RAISE YOUR HAND, IF YOU ARE HERE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM, PLEASE PROCEED TO THE MICROPHONE AND STATE YOUR NAME. OKAY. NOT HEARING ANYONE. UM, MR. HOBSON, YOU DO HAVE A REBUTTAL THAT YOU CAN MAKE. UM, I'D LIKE TO SAY THAT MOST OF THE NEIGHBORS THAT GOT UP AND SPOKE, UH, HAVE BEEN ABLE TO REDESIGN AND OR CURATE THEIR HOUSE TO THE, UH, TO THEIR PREFERENCE. [01:40:01] AS WELL AS YOU CAN SEE THAT THERE'S OBVIOUS EVIDENCE THAT THE TREE HAS ALREADY HAD SOME, UH, CASES OF PENETRATION BEING CUT OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT IN ORDER TO ADHERE TO THEIR DESIGN AND MODELS. SO TO ME, THE AUDACITY FOR THEM TO WANT TO COME UP HERE AND SAY THAT I CANNOT DESIGN OUR HOUSE THE WAY WE WOULD LIKE TO AND TAKE THE SAME, UM, UH, UH, UH, AUTHORITY OR THE SAME, UH, OPPORTUNITY THAT THEY HAD TO DESIGN THEIR HOUSE, I THINK IS IS IS UNLAWFUL. SOMEBODY MENTIONED, AND I THINK UNCONSTITUTIONAL, I THINK SOMEBODY MENTIONED. SO, UH, I JUST WANT TO JUST START OUT WITH THAT. UH, WE HAVE PROPOSED, UH, TO BREAK UP THE DRIVEWAY AND ALLOW FOR MOISTURE TO GET DOWN TO THE ROOTS OF THE TREE. SO THAT, AND AGAIN, PRESERVING, UH, UM, THE TREE IN ITS, IN ITS SENSE IN ITS NATURE. WE HAVE LOWERED THE ROOF OF, UH, THE HEIGHT OF THE, THE ROOF FROM 28 AND A HALF DOWN TO 27 AND A HALF. I HAVE GONE OUT THERE. WE HAVE GONE OUT THERE. UM, AND, AND ACTUALLY MEASURED THE TIP OF THE BRANCHES. UH, THERE ARE SOME OVERHANGING BRANCHES THAT W THAT MAY HAVE TO, TO BE CLIPPED, BUT THE MAIN BARK OF THE TREE IS NOT IN JEOPARDY. AND WE'VE STATED THAT THAT WAS NEVER OUR INTENTIONS FROM THE VERY FIRST PLAN. IT WAS ALWAYS HOW DO WE PRESERVE THE TREE? IN A SENSE, I THINK THE NEIGHBORS JUST AUTOMATICALLY SEE A STRUCTURE AND FEEL AS THOUGH, OKAY, IT'S DEVELOPER. NOBODY IS, IS CARING ABOUT THE, UH, HISTORIC PRESERVATION OF THE TREE. AND THAT IS NOT THE CASE. WE HAVE GONE IN, WE'VE MOVED, UH, WE'VE GONE FROM 4,200, I'M SORRY, 4,300 SQUARE FOOT OF THE ORIGINAL PLAN DOWN TO 3,700 SQUARE FEET. SO SOMEBODY STATED WE DID NOT, UM, UH, UH, UH, CHANGE IN SIZE. UH, WE HAVE LOOKED AT, CAN I GET A COUPLE MORE SECONDS PLEASE? NOTION, PLEASE. COMMISSIONER JONES MOVES TO THE SPEAKER ADDITIONAL MINUTE. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND ESCOBAR. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. OKAY, THANK YOU. UH, WE HAVE RESTORED THREE, THREE CORNERS, UH, OF THE HOME. WE MOVED THE HOME, SECOND FLOOR BACK FIVE FEET, AS WELL AS, UM, UH, UH, AS WELL AS RECESS THE CORNERS TO ALLOW FOR THE EXISTING WALLS. THE HOME IS IN INLINE AND SMALLER THAN THE ORIGINAL SCALE. WE HAVE OPENED UP THE BACKYARD AGAIN TO MOVE AWAY FROM THE, UH, THE HOME. UNFORTUNATELY, MAYBE IT DOESN'T SHOW IN THE, IN THE PLANS THAT MAYBE MOST OF THE, UH, UH, UH, CITY, UH, UH, SOME OF THE NEIGHBORS ARE SEEING. BUT THOSE ARE THE ACTUAL FACTS. THE HOME HAS GONE DOWN FROM FIVE BEDROOM TO FOUR BEDROOMS IN ORDER TO AGAIN, ADJUST TO THE SCALE TO MAKE THE HOME SMALLER, UH, IN ANTICIPATION FOR WHAT WE'RE DOING. THE ROOF PITCHES HAVE ALSO BEEN CHANGED AGAIN IN ORDER TO, UH, UH, UH, SACRIFICE THE HOME FOR THE BETTERMENT OF THE TREE. SO AGAIN, UH, IT'S BEEN THREE OF US OUT THERE, A FORESTER AS WELL. WE KNOW THAT THERE ARE CERTAIN AREAS THAT WE DON'T WANT TO CUT, WE WERE NEVER INTENDED TO CUT THAT COULD JEOPARDIZE THE LONGEVITY OF THE TREE. THANK YOU, SIR. WITH THAT, I'M GONNA CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND OPEN TO QUESTIONS FROM A COMMISSION TO STAFF. I DID HAVE A QUESTION FOR LEGAL. UH, ONE OF THE SPEAKERS FOR THE FIRST TIME, UH, TALKED ABOUT THE TREE BEING LISTED, UH, ON THEIR, UM, CERTIFICATE, THEIR, THEIR ORDINANCE FOR THEIR HOME, UM, AS A FEATURE AND AS A REGISTERED, UM, TO, TO HARRIS COUNTY, A REGISTERED HARRIS COUNTY TREE. MY UNDERSTANDING WAS THAT LANDSCAPE IS NOT PART OF OUR PURVIEW. SO I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND, UM, THAT BIT OF INFORMATION, WHICH WAS A NEW, WHICH HAS NOT COME UP IN THE PREVIOUS TWO MONTHS OF DISCUSSIONS. IF, IF YOU HAVE, IF YOU HAVE ANY KNOWLEDGE ABOUT THAT. YEAH, I, I, I, I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THAT PARTICULAR LISTING OR THAT THAT ASSERTION, BUT I CAN SAY THAT LANDSCAPING IS NOT WITHIN THE PURVIEW OF THIS COMMISSION. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER ESCOBAR. UM, I ALSO WAS CURIOUS ABOUT, ABOUT THAT. 'CAUSE I HADN'T HEARD THAT AT ALL. UM, AND I AGREE THAT IT WOULDN'T BE CONSIDERED LANDSCAPING IF IT'S A HERITAGE TREE INCLUDED IN THE, THE DESIGNATION. I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT'S CONSIDERED LANDSCAPING. IT'S CONSIDERED A FEATURE, RIGHT. OF THAT DESIGNATION. RIGHT. TYPICALLY, AS FAR AS I KNOW. SO THE ONLY TREES THAT ARE REGULATED BY THE CITY ARE IN THE RIGHT OF WAY, LIKE IN THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY. AND, UM, I MEAN, IF, IF YOU'VE EVER SEEN LIKE SOMEONE CUTS DOWN TREES, I REMEMBER ONE DAY ON KIRBY, SOMEONE CUT DOWN SOME TREES AND, BUT THEY WERE IN THE RIGHT OF WAY. AND THAT, AND THAT WAS A BIG ISSUE. AND THAT'S WHERE THE URBAN FORESTER HAS PURVIEW. UM, THIS IS A HOME AT THE REAR OF THE LOT. BUT AGAIN, I JUST HAD NEVER HEARD THAT BEFORE AND WANTED TO ASK THAT QUESTION. AND, AND YOU'RE [01:45:01] CORRECT. THE CITY OF HOUSTON DOES NOT HAVE A HISTORIC TREE DESIGNATION THAT IT ENFORCES. I WASN'T TALKING ABOUT A DESIGNATION, I WAS TALKING ABOUT ALL THE THINGS THAT ARE PART OF THE CHARACTER THAT ARE CONSIDERED WHEN A HOME IS, IS, IS CONSIDERED COMPLETELY. AND I, I GUESS I'M ASKING FOR, I GUESS WHAT I'M ASKING. AND OF COURSE, WE HAVE A ARCHEOLOGIST HERE, RIGHT? YES. YOU CAN TALK A LOT ABOUT A LOT OF THINGS THAT, AND THAT ACTUALLY WASN'T MY PRIMARY QUESTION, THAT, THAT ARE IMPORTANT ABOVE AND BELOW GRADE. UM, BUT MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THE TREE, BECAUSE LANDSCAPING IS NOT PART OF OUR PURVIEW, IT IT'S NOT, AS FAR AS I UNDERSTAND IT, IT'S NOT PART OF THE, THE, THE, THE ENVIRONMENT, YOU KNOW, THAT WE ARE REGULATING IF YOU, IF YOU WILL, UM, UNLESS IT'S IN THE RIGHT OF WAY IN FRONT OF THE PROPERTY, THEN THE CITY, NOT, NOT US EVEN, BUT THE CITY DOES HAVE A PURVIEW THERE. BUT I'LL, I'LL DIRECTOR. GO DIRECTOR TRAIN. DO YOU WANT TO SPEAK FIRST OR DO YOU WANT TO SURE. DO YOU WANT ME TO ANSWER SOME OF THE QUESTIONS? YEP. REGARDING THE ORDINANCE AND THE TREES. I'M LOOKING, UM, JUST TO DOUBLE CHECK. UM, BUT UH, WITH REGARDS TO HISTORIC PRESERVATION ORDINANCE THAT THIS COMMISSION IS IN CHARGE FOR, UH, WE REALLY HAVE THE OVERSIGHT OF THE STRUCTURE. I DO NOT SEE, UM, ANYTHING IN HERE REFERENCING TREES. UH, WHEN A PROPERTY IS A HISTORIC PROPERTY, UH, WE ARE LOOKING AT STRUCTURE. JUST DOUBLE CHECKING. NOPE, I DO NOT SEE ANY TREES. UH, TREES ARE SUBJECT TO THE, UH, SHRUB TREES AND SHRUB ORDINANCE UNDER PARKS. UH, THERE ARE PROTECTED TREES WITHIN THE RIGHT OF WAYS AS WELL AS MEDIANS. UH, THERE ARE HERITAGE TREES AS WELL, AND WE DO HAVE THEM AT TRANQUILITY PARKS AND IN FRONT OF THE, UH, CITY HALL AND THE WORTHHAM CENTER. BUT THAT'S A DIFFERENT PROCESS AND THAT IS UNDER A DIFFERENT ORDINANCE. AND SO I WOULD SUGGEST, UH, I, I NEED TO DO A LITTLE BIT MORE STUDYING ON, UH, THIS PARTICULAR TREE. IF THE NEIGHBORS OR THE HOMEOWNER HAS A DESIRE TO DESIGNATE THIS TREE AS A HERITAGE TREE, BUT IT WOULD NOT COME OUT, UH, IT WOULDN'T BE DECIDED HERE AT THIS COMMISSION. MAY I JUST ASK A QUESTION ABOUT THAT? DID THIS COMMISSION VOTE ON THE LANDMARK STATUS OF 5 0 2 OR WHATEVER THE, UH, REFERENCED NEIGHBOR PROPERTY WAS? 5 0 5. I BELIEVE IT WAS VOTED ON IN 2008 OR 2009 IS WHAT THE HOMEOWNER SAID. THEN WE SHOULD HAVE THE DOCUMENT AND WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO CHECK TO SEE IF THE TREE WAS INDICATED AS PART OF THE FEATURES. BUT I THINK, YOU KNOW, WHEN WRITING THESE REPORTS AND CONSIDERING HISTORIC CONTEXT, THAT TREE IS DEFINITELY IMPORTANT TO THE HISTORIC CONTEXT. RIGHT? RIGHT. BUT THAT'S NOT, CONTEXT ISN'T NECESSARILY AN ORDINANCE WHEN LOOKING AT A STRUCTURE. WE DO ACTUALLY ARE ASKED IN ITEM FOUR TO PRESERVE DISTINGUISHING QUALITIES OF THE BUILDING STRUCTURE, OBJECT OR SITE AND ITS ENVIRONMENT. MM-HMM . ALSO IN ITEM EIGHT, UM, UH, TO LEAVE UNIMPAIRED THE ESSENTIAL FORM INTEGRITY OF THE BUILDING STRUCTURE OBJECT OR SITE. SO I DON'T, I THINK IT REMAINS DEBATABLE AND SOMETHING THAT WE NEED TO TAKE A POSITION ON. YEAH. LIKE IS THIS PART OF THE SITE? IS IT PART OF THE ENVIRONMENT? JUST FROM A LEGAL PERSPECTIVE, WE MAY WANT TO BE CAREFUL ABOUT WHERE WE GO. WE'VE GOT TWO VERY DISTINCT ISSUES HERE AS I SEE THEM. WE HAVE A, A, AN IMPORTANT MASSING ISSUE, AND THEN WE HAVE THE TREE ISSUE. AND I APPRECIATE THE PUBLIC'S CONCERN ABOUT THAT. I WOULD BE CONCERNED ABOUT THAT. BUT IF WE IMAGINE A SITUATION WHERE, I THINK IT'S CLEAR NOW FROM COMMISSIONER, UH, UH, DIRECTOR TRENDS COMMENTS AND LEGALS COMMENTS, THAT LANDSCAPING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE DOES NOT FALL WITHIN OUR PURVIEW. SO IF WE APPLY A HYPOTHETICAL, ONE COULD PUT A MOISTURE BARRIER AROUND THAT TREE FREE FROM REGULATION BY THIS PANEL AND EFFECTIVELY KILL THE TREE RESULTING IN CIVIL LIABILITY TO NEIGHBORS IF A HURRICANE COMES THROUGH AND IT FALLS OVER ON YOUR HOUSE. BUT THAT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT CAN BE REGULATED. UM, I THINK THE APPEALS BOARD IS MADE VERY CLEAR THAT OUR RECORD NEEDS TO BE CLEAR. AND I'D BE REALLY CONCERNED BASED UPON WHAT LEGAL HAS SAID. AND FORGIVE ME, UH, COMMISSIONER JONES HAS SAID ABOUT PUTTING TOO MUCH EMPHASIS ON SOMETHING THAT IS REVERSIBLE. IN MY MIND, THE CLEAR ISSUE HERE IS MASSING. AND WHEN I'M LOOKING AT ITEM 10, AND I NOTE THAT, UH, THE PLANNING DIDN'T, UH, APPROVED ITEM 10, BUT WHEN I GO THROUGH, I DON'T SEE OTHER EXAMPLES OF SIMILAR MASSING. AND EVERYTHING THAT IS BEING SAID HERE IS OBVIOUSLY EXTREMELY IMPORTANT. BUT DO WE HAVE AN EASIER ANSWER BY ANSWERING THE MASSING QUESTION FIRST? UH, COMMISSIONER DAVIS' [01:50:01] NEXT, FALLBACK COMMISSIONER ESCOBAR. UM, I DO, UH, DO WANNA ACKNOWLEDGE THAT I DO SEE THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN JULY AND AUGUST PLANS THAT YOU DID. THEY DID MOVE IT BACK. AND THE REASON TO FOR MOVING IT BACK HAD TO BE IN TO ADDRESS MASSING ISSUE. UM, BUT I THINK WE HAVE AN OPTION HERE BECAUSE THIS TREE THING IS VERY UNUSUAL. WE HAVE AN OPTION THAT WE COULD ALLOW THE, THE, UM, HOMEOWNER TO MOVE BOTH THE GARAGE AND THE SECOND FLOOR FARTHER FORWARD TO GIVE THE TREE MORE ROOM. WE JUST HAVE TO BE ABLE TO ACCEPT THAT THE MASSING IS GOING TO BE LARGER, BUT YOU CAN DRAW IT OUT, YOU CAN SEE, GIVE THEM THEIR BEDROOM BACK, SHIFTING THE WHOLE THING DOWN, UM, THE BEDROOM ON THE BASE. BUT, UM, I THINK IF YOU DRAW IT OUT, YOU COULD ACTUALLY SEE YOU COULD DO THAT. OKAY. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER ESCOBAR. AGAIN, APOLOGIES. I KNOW WE'RE, WE'RE GOING LONG. UM, MY, MY ACTUAL ORIGINAL QUESTION WAS GONNA BE ABOUT THE PIER AND BEAM AND HOW, UM, WHEN THAT ENTERED THE CONVERSATION AND IF THE PIER AND BEAM AND, YOU KNOW, UM, MOVING ONE MOVE, MOVING, UM, MOVING THAT, THAT PORTION OF THE STRUCTURE TO PIER AND BEAM AND MOVING IT AWAY FROM THE TREE CANOPY AND THE ROOT STRUCTURE COULD PREVENT THAT, UM, THE, THE DAMAGE THAT WE'RE CONCERNED ABOUT. UM, AND SO DID ANYONE ELSE HA HEAR ABOUT THE PIER BEAM PREVIOUSLY? I SOMEHOW FORGOT AND DID NOT RECALL THAT BEING PART OF THE DISCUSSION. I DON'T RECALL. COMMISSIONER COSGROVE MENTIONED THAT PREVIOUSLY, BUT I KNOW THAT HE MADE A SIDE VISIT WITH THE APPLICANT AS, AS WAS MENTIONED, AND THE APPLICANT MENTIONED HE MADE A SUGGESTION ON SITE THAT THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING TO CONSIDER. UM, TREES GENERALLY THE MOST IMPACTFUL THING WITH A TREE IS EVEN MORE SO THAN CUTTING LIMBS IS COMPACTING ROOTS, RIGHT? SO IT'S ALLOWING ROOTS TO HAVE ACCESS TO WATER, BUT ALSO OXYGEN EXCHANGE, AIR EXCHANGES, UM, AS WE STATED IN OUR PREVIOUS, UH, MEETING, I BELIEVE LAST MONTH. BUT THE ISSUE, I, I AGREE WITH, UH, COMMISSIONER BROWNING, THERE'S STILL THE ISSUE OF THE, THE MASSING TO RIGHT TO ALSO, UM, SPEAK TO MR. BROWNING. AGAIN, THAT'S THE QUESTION. UH, COMMISSION OF STAFF, UM, MASSING WHAT I, IN THE CONTEXT AREA, ARE THERE OTHER SIMILAR STRUCTURES WITHIN THE APPLICABLE CONTEXT AREA WITH THIS TYPE OF MASS MASSING? UH, SO I BELIEVE ONE OF THE, UH, RESIDENTS STATED, UH, THAT, THAT THE MASSING ON THE EUCLID ON THIS BLOCK, UH, IS A BIT DIFFERENT. UM, HOWEVER, UM, AND YOU COULD CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, BUT I BELIEVE THE ORDINANCE STATE THAT THE BLOCK FACE IS THE FACE OF THE BLOCK AND THE BLOCK BEHIND IT, WHICH WOULD BE WOODLAND. AND THERE ARE LARGER HOUSES ON WOODLAND STREET. SO IF WE'RE INCLUDING THAT AS THE CONTEXT AREA, THEN THERE WILL BE HOUSES ON WOODLAND, WHICH ARE IN SIMILAR SIZE. UM, THIS ONE WILL MORE THAN LIKELY BE LARGER, UM, HOWEVER, BUT AS COMMISSIONER DAVIS STATED, UM, THE APPLICANT IS HAVING TO MAKE PROVISIONS TO MOVE THIS UP. SO THE MASSING IS GOING TO APPEAR TO BE A LITTLE BIT MORE. UM, AND I, I WANNA STATE THAT SOMETHING WAS MENTIONED EARLIER. THERE IS A PORTION OF THE TRUNK THAT IS ON THIS PROPERTY. I WOULD SAY PROBABLY ABOUT 18 INCHES. SO CURRENTLY THE GARAGE IS, IS ABOUT SIX TO EIGHT INCHES AWAY FROM THE BASE OF THE TREE ON THIS LOT. SO THAT'S THE REASON WHY THEY'RE MOVING IT UP EIGHT FEET. BUT TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, AS FAR AS MASSING IS CONCERNED, THERE ARE SIMILAR, UH, HOMES IN SIZE ON WOODLAND STREET. QUESTION FOR STAFF. WAIT, COMMISSIONER BLAKELY JUST MENTIONED MOVING THE HOUSE UP EIGHT FEET. CAN YOU SHOW US IN THE DRAWINGS WHERE THAT'S INDICATED? SO IT'S THE GARAGE THAT'S MOVED UP EIGHT FEET. UM, GO TO THE SITE PLAN PLEA RIGHT THERE. YEAH, SO, UM, WELL, YOU WERE RIGHT THERE. YOU WERE THERE. IT SHOULD BE THE FIRST DRAWING. YEAH, THAT ONE. SO THE, WITH THE TREE, UM, AS YOU SEE THE TREE, IT'S, IT'S BEEN MOVED UP EIGHT FEET, WHICH IS [01:55:01] WHAT SOMETHING THAT THEY DID LAST MONTH. SO WHAT YOU SEE THAT'S SHADED, THAT IS THE GARAGE THAT HAS BEEN MOVED UP, UM, FROM THE PROPERTY LINE. SO IT'S EIGHT FEET OFF OF THE PROPERTY LINE. I'M SORRY, BUT THOSE, THOSE TWO LOOK THE SAME TO ME, RIGHT? AM I, YES. THIS, WHAT AM I MISSING? YEAH, THE CHANGE WAS DONE IN JULY, SO IT JUST REMAINED THE SAME. I I WOULD HAVE TO, YEAH. SO THIS, THIS IS THE, UH, JUNE DRAWING, I'M SORRY, JULY. JULY. THIS IS AUGUST. UM, SO THIS IS THE PROPERTY LINE. THIS IS EIGHT FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINE. AND THEY MADE THIS CHANGE LAST MONTH, WHICH ORIGINALLY IT WAS, UH, REMAINING IN THE SAME PLACE. I BELIEVE THEY MOVED IT UP MAYBE A COUPLE OF FEET, UM, TO TRY TO SAVE THE TRUNK OF THE TREE. DAR I'M JUST TRYING TO CLARIFY 'CAUSE I'M, I'M SEEING THIS, I THINK I'M SEEING THE SAME PROPORTIONS, UM, AS COMMISSIONER BLAKELY STATED, BUT IT DOESN'T APPEAR TO ME IN THIS DRAWING ON THE RIGHT DATED AUGUST YES. THAT THERE'S ANY DIFFERENCE IN TERMS OF THE PROXIMITY. NO, AGAIN, SO, UM, IT'S MISLABELED, I'M SORRY, THAT SHOULD SAY JULY, JUNE. IT WAS ON THE PROPERTY LINE, THE GARAGE IN JULY, THEY MADE THE CHANGE TO MOVE IT UP EIGHT FEET, AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE SEEING ON THE LEFT SIDE AND RIGHT, THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE SEEING ON THE LEFT. AND IN AUGUST IT REMAINED EIGHT FEET UP. AND THEN THE GARAGE IS ALSO, UH, SPECIFIED TO BE SLAB ON GRADE. THE GARAGE WILL BE SLAB ON. GREAT. YES. AND IS THAT THE MOST AMENABLE TO, TO RESPECTING THE ROOTS OF THE TREE? WELL, IT, WHAT THEY WANTED TO DO WAS USE PAVERS. UM, IT WAS DISCUSSED TO USE GRAVEL. I MEAN, I'M FOR THE DRIVEWAY THAT IS, THEY'RE GONNA, IF IF YOU GO TO THE SITE, THE DRIVEWAY IS BECAUSE OF THE ROOTS OF THE TREE, YOU CAN TELL THAT THE DRIVEWAY IS BEING AFFECTED. UM, SO THEY'RE GOING TO REMOVE ALL THE CONCRETE FROM THE DRIVEWAY, INSTALL PAVERS AND PUT GRAVEL IN BETWEEN THE PAVERS SO THAT IT'LL ALLOW FOR MOISTURE TO PENETRATE THE, THE, UM, THE STRUCTURE AND, AND GET TO THE TREE ROOTS. BUT MEANWHILE, CLOSER TO THE TREE, THERE'S A BIG SLAB THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. FOR THE GARAGE, YES. AND TWO STORIES HIGH. SO ADDING WEIGHT AND COMPACTING SOIL. CORRECT. BUT THAT'S ALREADY THERE AND IT'S CLOSER TO THE TRUNK OF THE TREE. SO THE PROPOSAL WOULD MITIGATE THAT SOMEWHAT BY MOVING THE GARAGE AWAY FROM THE TREE. AND THAT'S CORRECT. NOT BE ANY WORSE IN TERMS OF THE WEIGHT ON THE ROOTS. I, I, I'M NO TREE EXPERT. THAT'S THE IDEA. , THAT IS THE IDEA. THAT IS CORRECT. BECAUSE ONE THING THAT I HAVEN'T REALLY HEARD, AND I UNDERSTAND MAYBE THERE'S SOME ANIMUS INVOLVED THAT, UH, PREVENTS THE OWNER FROM SAYING, I AM TRYING TO SAVE THE TREE, BUT I, I HAVEN'T HEARD LIKE A STRATEGY FROM WITHIN THIS PROPOSAL FOR SAVING THE TREE. I'VE HEARD THIS AND THAT THE SLAB, THE PAVERS, BUT NOT LIKE, I HA I'M NOT HEARING AN ATTITUDE OF CARE. AND I KNOW, UH, TO MY MIND I'M, I'M STICKING WITH THE IDEA THAT THE TREE IS PART OF THE ENVIRONMENT AND THE SITE. UH, SO I DO FEEL THAT THAT'S, I WOULD PREFER TO HEAR AN ATTITUDE OF CARE TOWARD IT THAN A KIND OF, UH, DISMISSAL, WHICH IS WHAT I'M HEARING. WHICH TO ME APPLIES TO THE ATTITUDE TO THE SITE, WHICH IS WHY I FIND IT HARD TO SUPPORT THIS PROPOSAL. WELL, WE DO NEED A MOTION, UM, AND WE CAN NO LONGER DEFER THIS PROJECT BROWNING. I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO DENY THE APPLICATION BASED UPON MASSING. OKAY, THANK YOU. IS THERE A SECOND? C SMITH SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION? AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? OKAY, THAT MOTION PASSES. WE'LL NOW MOVE ON TO ITEM THREE. GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION. THIS IS STAFF PERSON TERRENCE JACKSON. ITEM E THREE AT 11 18 2 LANE STREET IN THE HOUSTON HEIGHTS SOUTH HISTORIC DISTRICT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION, THE 943 SQUARE FOOT ONE STORY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE IS A CONTRIBUTING CRAFTSMAN STYLE PROPERTY. CONSTRUCTED CIRCA 1915 STAFF IS IN SUPPORT OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT. THE APPLICANT PROPOSES TO CONSTRUCT A 1,770 SQUARE FOOT REAR EDITION FIRST AND SECOND FLOORS. THE FIRST FLOOR WILL [02:00:01] HAVE A 732 SQUARE FOOT EDITION, AND THE SECOND FLOOR EDITION WILL BE 1038 SQUARE FEET. THEY PROPOSE TO MAINTAIN ALL EXISTING WINDOWS AND DOORS CONSTRUCT WITH THE MAX RIDGE. COULD BE CONSTRUCTED WITH THE MAX RIDGE HEIGHT OF 26 FEET, 10 INCHES. CONSTRUCT THE SECOND FLOOR EVE HEIGHT AT 20 FEET, SEVEN INCHES TO THE TOP OF THE EVE. CONSTRUCT THE ROOF WITH NEW COMPOSITION SHING SHINGLES WITH A FIVE OVER 12 ROOF PITCH. THE EXISTING FOUR OVER 12 ROOF PITCH TO IS TO REMAIN. THEY PROPOSED TO INSTALL NEW WINDOWS TO BE WOOD, WOOD CLAD AND INSET AND RECESSED IN THE ADDITION. EXISTING FINISHED FLOOR HEIGHT IS CURRENTLY ONE FOOT THREE AND WILL BE RAISED TWO FEET FOR THE ALTERATION. THEY, UH, ALSO PROPOSED TO REMOVE THE EXISTING STONE AND REPLACE WITH WOOD SIDING. THE PROJECT HAS BEEN REFERRED BACK TO YOU ALL FROM THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION APPEALS BOARD FOR RECONSIDERATION. BECAUSE THE APPLICANT HAS PROVIDED ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL. THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION. THANK YOU. AT THIS TIME I OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. I DO HAVE ONE SPEAKER SIGNED UP. WE, WHO IS THE APPLICANT? STEVEN, UM, ROBINSON. ALRIGHT. HEY, STEVEN ROBINSON HERE, OWNER OF, UH, PROPERTY AT 1118 TULANE STREET SINCE 2014. SO REALLY, I WANTED TO SAY TODAY YOU GUYS ARE DOING A GREAT JOB AND I LIKE THE TREE . THAT'S A GREAT DECISION. UM, CON FOR CONCERNING THE STONE VENEER AT 1118, WHAT I'D LIKE TO GIVE YOU TODAY, WE PUT EXTENSIVE EVIDENCE IN, PROBABLY COULD HAVE PUT MORE ON COST VERSUS VALUE ON THIS, ON THIS PROPERTY. AND BELIEVE ME, I WISH THAT BACK IN, I THINK IT WAS MORE LIKE 1927, THAT WHEN IT WAS BUILT, I, I, I WISH THAT THEY HAD BUILT A GREAT FOUNDATION FOR THIS HOUSE. UNFORTUNATELY THEY DIDN'T. SO, BUT WHAT I, WHAT I WILL SAY ON STONE MASONS TRYING TO GET SOMEONE OUT TO EVEN BID THIS JOB WAS DIFFICULT. UM, IF YOU GUYS HAVE HEARD OF, UH, WESTERN SPECIALTIES GROUP, I KNOW THAT PRESERVATION HOUSTON HAS USED, UH, UH, USED THESE GUYS FOR COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS IN HOUSTON. THEY'VE GOT SEVERAL GOLD BRICK AWARDS, BUT WHEN I CALLED 'EM, THEY SAID THEY'D NO LONGER DO RESIDENCES, BUT THEY HAVE CREWS AND SHE KNOWS PEOPLE THAT THAT WILL DO THEM. I CALLED 'EM OUT TO THE HOUSE. THIS IS NOT IN THE, THIS IS EVIDENCE THAT'S NOT IN THIS, UH, COA AND HE TOOK A GOOD LOOK AT IT. A SENIOR GUY, YOU KNOW, FIFTIES, 60-YEAR-OLD. HE SAID HE'D CALLED HIS PARTNER. THEY WERE KIND OF IN A LULL. WELL, HE CALLED ME BACK AND SAID, WE'RE NOT GONNA DO IT. WE DON'T WANNA DO IT. OF COURSE, THIS INVOLVES REMOVING ALL THE STONE, TAKING ALL THE MORTAR OFF THE STONE AND THEN GETTING IT BACK UP. HE SAID LOSSES THERE DOING THAT. AND THE, THE STONE, THIS HOUSE HAS ONE PIECE LENTILS ABOVE THE WINDOWS AND DOORS. SOME OF 'EM PROBABLY WEIGH 150 POUNDS. SOME OF 'EM ARE ALWAYS SHOWING FRACTURED CRACKS. HE SAID 40% LOSS, MAYBE 50. SO THEN WHAT DO WE HAVE WHEN WE DO THIS? THE UNCERTAINTY HERE IS WHAT'S REALLY HOLDING THIS UP AND GOING BACK, CAN YOU GIMME JUST ONE MORE MINUTE? COMMISSIONER JONES? IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND COMMISSIONER. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. THANK YOU SIR. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. SO IN 2014 WE HAD A COA, WE WENT FORWARD WITH IT, WHICH INVOLVED DOING WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT. IT DIDN'T MEET APPRAISAL, IT WAS 95,000 SHORT. I TRIED TO PUT THAT IN THE EVIDENCE. SO THAT MEANT WE COULDN'T, WE COULDN'T AFFORD THAT, THAT PROCESS. SO BY SWITCHING ALSO, THERE'S NO OTHER STONE PROPERTY LIKE THIS IN THE HEIGHTS. YOU GUYS KNOW THIS. NEIGHBORS ARE COOL WITH IT. WHATEVER WE DO, THEY LOVE TO HAVE SOMETHING THERE BESIDES A FALLING DOWN PIECE OF A STONE HOME. ALL THE NEIGHBORS ARE WISHING US LUCK IN THIS, UH, UH, APPLICATION. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, UH, LEMME KNOW. WE'LL, WE'LL LET YOU KNOW. ALRIGHT, THANKS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE HERE IN THE PUBLIC THAT'D LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? NOT HEARING, I'M GONNA CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. IS THERE QUESTIONS, UM, FROM COMMISSION MEMBERS OF STAFF ABOUT ANY OF THE NEW INFORMATION THAT WAS PROVIDED TO THE APPEALS BOARD OR ANYTHING ELSE? COMMISSIONER DAVIS, A QUESTION FOR STAFF, UM, ON THE APPROVAL CRITERIA, YOU HAVE CHECKED NA FOR NUMBER SIX AND [02:05:01] SATISFIED FOR NUMBER SEVEN, BUT CLEARLY YOU ARE PROPOSING TO REPLACE ORIGINAL MATERIAL WITH HARDY PLANK. SO I'M WONDERING WHY WE'RE EVEN TALKING ABOUT HARDY PLANK WHEN THE ORDINANCE REQUIRES LIKE MATERIAL. UM, AND I'D LIKE TO ADDRESS, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU LOOKED AT THE TWO ENGINEERING REPORTS, ONE FROM 1914 OR 15 AND ONE FROM CURRENT, AND THEY'RE PRETTY ALMOST IDENTICAL EXCEPT THAT MORE DETERIORATION HAS HAPPENED. UM, BUT WHAT THESE REPORTS DON'T, DON'T SAY AT ALL, IS THAT THE WEIGHT OF THE STONE IS THE ISSUE. I MEAN, THIS LITTLE HOUSE, IT HELD IT UP FOR A HUNDRED YEARS OR 90 YEARS. AND UM, WHAT THEY WERE TOLD IN 2016 IS THAT THE FOUNDATION NEEDED TO BE CORRECTED AND YOU NEEDED TO DRAIN THE SWAMP UNDERNEATH THE HOUSE. AND SO THOSE WOULD'VE BEEN THINGS THAT WOULD MITIGATE THE DAMAGE THAT HAS HAPPENED SINCE THAT TIME. AND NONE OF THOSE ACTIONS WERE UNDERTAKEN. SO, UM, THE OWNER HAD AN AFFIRMATIVE, UM, RESPONSIBILITY TO, UM, TO MITIGATE AND CORRECT THE DAMAGE. AND IF IT COULDN'T GO FORWARD IN 2016 BASED ON APPRAISAL, THEN WHAT SHOULD HAVE HAPPENED IN 2016 WAS, UM, FILE A HARDSHIP APPLICATION. YOU COULD HAVE DONE THAT. UM, BUT, UH, ALSO HAD A CHOICE THAT IF IT WASN'T VIABLE, YOU SELL THE PROPERTY, PUT THE PROPERTY UP FOR SALE, AND LET SOMEBODY WHO WAS GOING TO TAKE CARE OF THE PROPERTY, TAKE CARE OF THE PROPERTY. YOU DON'T WAIT TILL IT FALLS DOWN TO THEN COME BACK TO THE COMMISSION AND SAY IT'S FALLING DOWN. AND YOU DO HAVE CO YOU ACTUALLY KNOW THE NUMBERS. THERE'S, THERE ARE QUOTES IN HERE FOR TAKING THE STONE DOWN AND PUTTING IT BACK UP. NOW YOU DON'T HAVE TO TAKE IT DOWN AND NUMBER IT AND PUT IT UP LIKE LEGOS. THAT'S NOT NECESSARY, BUT YOU CAN TAKE IT OFF AND YOU CAN CLEAN OFF THE STONE BRICK. PEOPLE DO THAT ALL THE TIME. BUT THERE'S ALSO, IF THE STONE CAN'T BE RECOVERED, THERE ARE STONE OPTIONS TO PUT STONE ON THIS HOUSE. AND SO MY QUESTION IS, WAS THAT EVEN CONSIDERED? OKAY. UM, I'LL GO BACK TO YOUR ORIGINAL QUESTIONS ABOUT, UH, CRITERIA SIX, CRITERIA SEVEN, UM, CRITERIA. SIX NEW MATERIALS TO BE USED FOR ANY EXTERIOR FEATURE, INCLUDING WHAT IS VISIBLE FROM PUBLIC ALLEYS MUST BE VISUALLY COMPATIBLE WITH, BUT NOT NECESSARILY THE SAME AS THE MATERIALS BEING REPLACED IN FORM DESIGN, TEXTURE, AND DIMENSIONS AND SCALE. UM, THERE WILL BE, I MEAN, IT'S STONE. SO WE'RE, UH, ADDING THE DECIDING DOES NOT, UH, DOES NOT MEET THAT. AS FAR AS, UH, CRITERIA SEVEN, THE PROPOSED REPLACEMENT OF EXTERIOR FEATURES, IF ANY, SHOULD BE BASED ON ACCURATE DEPICTION OF FEATURES SUBSTANTIATED BY AVAILABLE HISTORICAL, PHYSICAL, OR PICTORIAL EVIDENCE WHERE THAT EVIDENCE IS AVAILABLE RATHER THAN CONTEXTUAL DESIGNS OF THE AVAILABILITY OF DIFFERENT ARCHITECTURAL ELEMENTS FROM OTHER STRUCTURES, WHICH, UM, THOSE OTHER STRUCTURES HAVE WOOD SIDING. I BELIEVE WHEN YOU STATED IT, YOU SAID IT WOULD BE HARDY. HE'S NOT PROPOSING HARDY, HE'S PROPOSING HARDY SIDING ON THE ADDITION AND WOOD SIDING ON THE ORIGINAL HOME. UM, I CAN'T SPEAK TO WHAT, WHY HE DIDN'T SELL THE HOUSE. I, I CAN'T ANSWER THAT QUESTION. UM, THAT WAS ALSO INCLUDED IN YOUR QUESTION. SO I, I MEAN, THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT HE WOULD HAVE TO ANSWER, UM, WHY HE DIDN'T GET IT APPROVED. I MEAN, WHY DIDN'T GET IT APPROVED IN 2014 AND IN 2026. NOW IN 2026, HE'S TRYING TO DO THIS. I, I HONESTLY CAN'T ANSWER THAT QUESTION. THAT WOULD BE, UM, FOR HIM TO ANSWER IF YOU WOULD. YOU LIKE HIM? I'M GO PUBLIC HEARING HIS CLOSE. SO CAN WE ASK HIM TO COME BACK UP? IF YOU HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT? UM, YOU CAN. THAT'S THE ONLY WAY I, WE CAN, I CAN BRING IT BACK. I THINK ALL THE INFORMATION IS IN THE PACKET. OKAY. ASK A QUESTION. UH, COMMISSIONER BLAKELY, WHY WOULD AND NOT STONE AMONG [02:10:01] COMMISSIONER DAVIS'S QUESTIONS? THAT'S THE ONE I DIDN'T QUITE HEAR AN ANSWER TO. W WHY, UH, WOOD SIDING? UH, I MEAN THAT'S WHAT THE APPLICANT PROPOSED. UM, HE FELT THAT REMOVING THE STONE, UM, AND AND PUTTING THE STONE BACK UP WAS GONNA BE EXPENSIVE FOR HIM, UM, AS THE WAY I UNDERSTAND IT. AND SO WHEN HE PROPOSED THAT AND WE WENT OUT TO, UM, LOOK AT THE SITE WITH THE STRUCTURAL ENGINEER, I MEAN, I'M SORRY, WITH THE STRUCTURAL INSPECTOR, UM, PETE STOCKTON, UM, WHEN WE HAD DISCUSSIONS WITH STAFF AND HE AND HIM, UM, IT WAS DETERMINED THAT THE STONE WAS DAMAGING THE HOME. UM, AND IT WOULD BE BEST, UM, IF HE COULD PUT SIDING BACK ON INSTEAD OF THE STONE REPLACEMENT OF THE STONE. UM, ALSO WE TOOK INTO CONSIDERATION THE LOSS OF STONE. UM, AND AGAIN, WE'RE GOING BASED OFF OF THE FACT THAT HE WAS TOLD THAT IT NEEDED TO BE REMOVED, PALLETIZED AND PLACED BACK. SO I'M NOT TRYING TO SORT OF CRITICIZE YOUR, YOUR PROCESS. I JUST, FROM THE POINT OF VIEW OF WHAT WE'RE ASKED TO LOOK AT, UM, THERE WAS A DECISION TO REPLACE THE STONE WITH A DIFFERENT MATERIAL. SO IT SEEMS LIKE SIX WOULD BE A, DOES NOT SATISFY BECAUSE IT'S WOOD. NOT THAT THAT WOULD, UM, SORT OF TANK THE APPLICATION, BUT, UM, IT DOES SEEM LIKE A, A . THANK YOU. I THINK THE DIRECTOR TRAIN WOULD LIKE TO SAY A FEW WORDS AS WELL. YES. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR ALL THE QUESTIONS. I'M MAKING A REQUEST TO OUR STAFF TO PLEASE ANSWER THE QUESTIONS TO DIRECTLY AND, UH, IF THERE ARE, UH, SITUATIONS WHERE WE NEED THE APPLICANT TO COME UP AND ANSWER, UH, PLEASE ALLOW THE APPLICANT TO ANSWER. UH, SOME OF THE QUESTIONS ARE RHETORICAL, UM, IN SOME WAYS IS HOW I'M SEEING IT IS RHETORICAL. UH, WITH REGARDS TO THE QUESTION OF, UM, CRITERIA NUMBER SIX, WHY IS IT MARKED TO NA? UH, AGAIN, UH, IF I'M LOOKING AT IT, I THINK, UH, COMMISSIONER, UH, DAVIS AND COMMISSIONER BLAKEY HAS A POINT AND WE DEFINITELY CAN MAKE THAT CORRECTION. UH, I DO AGREE WITH THAT. UH, SO, SO PLEASE STAFF, UH, WE'RE VERY OPEN, UH, TO, UH, SEEING, UH, THINGS, UH, FROM A DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE FROM THE COMMISSIONERS. UH, BUT IF WE CAN, UH, STICK TO ANSWERING THE QUESTIONS DIRECTLY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF A COMMISSIONER, A STAFF COMMISSIONER? YEAH, SO THIS IS COMING BACK FROM THE APPEAL BOARD BASED ON NEW INFORMATION IS THE NEW INFORMATION. JUST THE ADDITIONAL SURVEYS THAT HAS BEEN DONE SINCE WE LAST SAW THIS. UH, THE NEW INFORMATION IS THE, UH, THE STRUCTURAL REPORT, THE, UM, REPORT FROM THE, UH, MASONRY COMPANY. UM, AND THEN THE OWNER ALSO PROVIDED THE INFORMATION FROM 2014 AND 2016, I BELIEVE. I BELIEVE THERE'S ALSO, UM, HCA APPRAISALS IN, IN THE REPORT. UM, I MEAN, I, I'D HAVE TO LOOK AT EVERYTHING, BUT THAT'S WHAT I RECALL. THANK YOU. MM-HMM . AND THE CONTRACTOR COMPARISON AS WELL. A COMMENT. COMMISSIONER JONES HAS A COMMENT. SO I, I UNDERSTAND ALL THE ISSUES WITH THE STONE AND THE COST OF FIXING THE WHOLE HOUSE IN STONE AND THINKING ABOUT THE UNIQUENESS OF THIS HOUSE WITHIN THE DISTRICT, THAT WE DO HAVE THE STONE ORIGINAL STONE ON THE HOUSE, AND I FEEL LIKE SOMEWHERE IN THERE IS A COMPROMISE WHERE WE CAN STILL SEE STONE ON THIS HOUSE, UM, BUT MAYBE NOT THE ENTIRETY OF THE HOUSE. WELL, AND I'LL JUST POINT OUT, I MEAN, IT DOESN'T HAPPEN OFTEN, BUT WE HAVE REMOVED MASONRY ENTIRELY AND PUT IT BACK UP ON HOMES WHERE THE WATER ROTTED OUT THE WOOD STRUCTURE BEHIND AND, AND IT HAS BEEN DONE. UM, AND I, I KNOW THERE ARE OTHER MASONS OUT THERE, BUT YOU KNOW, I'VE, I AM WORKING WITH A MASON THAT REPAIRED A HISTORIC, UM, SYNAGOGUE THAT WAS KNOCKED DOWN BY A HURRICANE AND THEY CLEANED IT AND HAD PUT IT BACK UP. SO IT, I, I KNOW THAT, UM, IT MIGHT NEED A MORE PROPER FOUNDATION THIS TIME AROUND BECAUSE IT, IT LIKELY, UM, WHEN THE APPLICANT SAID ABOUT THE ORIGINAL FOUNDATION, MY EXPERIENCES, MANY OF THOSE TIMES THEY WERE LIGHT AND NOT VERY CONSERVATIVE IN THEIR, UM, SIZE. AND THAT MAY HAVE LED TO THE ISSUES THAT WE'RE HAVING TODAY. UM, BUT [02:15:01] I DO KNOW THERE ARE WAYS OF DOING, PUTTING THINGS BACK UP. AND I THINK THAT THE OTHER QUESTION THAT WAS RAISED WAS THAT EVEN IF WE WERE ENTERTAINING A, A DIFFERENT MATERIAL, UH, TYPICALLY WE'D HAVE TO USE SOME KIND OF MASONRY, EVEN IF, EVEN IF IT WAS NOT POSSIBLE TO USE THE STONE LIKE STUCCO OR SOMETHING THAT WAS ACTUALLY MASONRY AS OPPOSED TO WOOD OR SOMETHING THAT LOOKS LIKE WOOD WOULD BE ANOTHER, YOU KNOW, OPTION. BUT I MEAN, I DO NOTE THAT THE PROPOSAL IS TO BUILD A LARGE ADDITION ON THE BACK OF THE HOME, AND SO ALL THE STONE IN THE REAR OF THE HOME IS GONNA BE REMOVED AND TO MAKE WAY FOR THE ADDITION. AND, UM, SO IF THERE IS SOME LOSS OF STONE, YOU KNOW, YOU WOULD ONLY BE PUTTING BACK ON THREE SIDES. SO I, AND I ALSO WRESTLED WITH THE IDEA OF WHAT IF THE FRONT FSAD WAS STONE SO THAT THE FACE IS STILL FACING THE COMMUNITY. COMMISSIONER HILL, YOU HAD A QUESTION AND THEN YOU TOOK YOUR FLAG, YOUR COMMENTS. OKAY, WELL, SO I HAVE A QUESTION. COMMISSIONER BLAKELY CUT YOU OFF THOUGH. I'M FINE. YEP. UM, THERE WAS SOME TALK OF, UH, FLOODING UNDER THE FOUNDATION AND A NEED TO DRAIN THE SWAMP, QUOTE UNQUOTE. I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT IF WE APPROVE SOMETHING, WE'RE NOT OVERLOOKING THAT AND THAT PROBLEM THAT MAY STILL EXIST, THAT MAY CAUSE A REPEAT OF FAILURES OF SHIFTING. IS THAT SOMETHING THAT HAS COME UP AND IS THE, IS THAT, IS ADDRESSING THE, THAT PART OF THE, UH, PLAN FOR THIS HOUSE? YES. UM, THAT'S WHY, RIGHT. CURRENTLY IT'S 15 INCHES ABOVE, UH, GRADE. AND IN THE PROPOSED, UH, PROJECT IS TO RAISE IT UP TO BE TWO FEET. SO THAT, THAT IS, UH, OF COURSE WITH THE FOUNDATION BEING PREPARED THAT THAT IS WHAT THE PLAN IS FOR THE CURRENT PROJECT FOR PROS PROJECT AND FOR THE COMMISSION AND FOR ANY HOMEOWNERS OUT THERE, ALMOST EVERY HOME THAT WE REGULATE THAT IS PURE IN BEAM IN THESE NEIGHBORHOODS, UH, IS LOWER UNDER THE HOUSE THAN IT DOES OUTSIDE THE HOUSE BECAUSE THROUGH FLOWER BEDS OR GRASS CLIPPINGS, UM, THESE THINGS RISE UP HIGHER THAN UNDERNEATH. AND SO IT IS A RECOMMENDATION TO FILL IN THOSE VOIDS BECAUSE WATER DOES IN MOISTURE FORMS AT THE POINT OF LEAST RESISTANCE. AND THAT'S WHY, UM, MANY OF THE HOMES ARE RAISED GET MORE AIRFLOW. UM, BUT THIS, THAT'S A CONDITION THAT EXISTS ALMOST THROUGHOUT ALL OF THE PURINE HOMES WITHIN OUR PURVIEW AND IS A RECOMMENDED, UM, STRATEGY. UM, AND MAY REQUIRE FOLKS TO RAISE THEIR HOME. BUT TODAY WE NEED A MOTION TO OH, FISHER DAVIS. AND THEN WE NEED A MOTION TO REALLY ADVANCE THIS. OKAY. UM, WHEN I WAS DOING MY RESEARCH, I DID FIND A MASONRY COMPANY AND I ASK THEM ABOUT THIS STONE. AND THERE ARE OPTIONS THAT ACTUALLY WILL BE LESS EXPENSIVE THAN PUTTING SIDING BACK UP BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO PAINT IT. SO THERE ARE STONE OPTIONS THAT ARE, ARE COST FRIENDLY. UM, BUT FOR WHAT WE'RE DOING TODAY, UM, COST ISN'T REALLY WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT BECAUSE HE'S NOT, YOU WOULD, HE WOULD NEED TO BE PRESENTING A DIFFERENT TYPE OF APPLICATION FOR HARDSHIP. AND IF THAT IS, IS TRULY THE THING, I WOULD JUST RECOMMEND THAT MAYBE THAT IF, IF THAT IF IT'S HARDSHIP IS THE REASON WE NEED TO SEE THAT DOCUMENTATION. UM, BUT WHAT WE'RE DOING, I THINK IS, OR WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IS THAT THIS HOUSE HAVE STONE ON IT AND WHAT, UH, RECOVER WHAT CAN BE RECOVERED AND USE LIKE MATERIALS, STONE MATERIALS FOR THE REST. IS THAT A MOTION? UM, SO IT'S THE SAME MOTION I MADE LAST TIME, WHICH WAS TO APPROVE ON THE CONDITION THAT, UM, THE STONE BE RETAINED. UM, AND REPLACED ONLY AS NECESSARY WITH LIKE MATERIALS. OKAY. IS THERE A SECOND HILL? SECOND HILL. SECONDS. ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION? AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? BROWNIE BROWNING, OPPOSES. AYE, YOU, YOU'RE, SO JUST, JUST ONE OPPOSE VOTE YEP FOR BROWNING. OKAY, WE'LL NOW MOVE ON TO ITEM FOUR. THE CHAIR IS GONNA RECUSE HIMSELF AND, UH, COMMISSIONER [02:20:01] JONES WILL ASSUME THE HELM. GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIR MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION. THIS IS STAFF TERRENCE JACKSON. ITEM E FOUR AT 9 1 4 MAIN STREET IS A LANDMARK CHAMBER. CHAMBER OF COMMERCE BUILDING HAS BEEN SUBMITTED FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. THE 22 STORY COMMERCIAL TOWER AND 12 STORY ANNEX IS A CONTRIBUTING MID-RISE STYLE PROPERTY CONSTRUCTED CIRCA 1920 BETWEEN CIRCA 1929 TO 1930. STAFF IS IN SUPPORT OF THIS PROJECT. THE APPLICANT PROPOSES TO REBUILD ONE 100% OF THE CASTSTONE SPANS FROM THE 12TH FLOOR TO THE 25TH FLOOR REPAIR AND REPLACE THE CASTSTONE SPANDRELS AT SHELF ANGLES. UTILIZING THE DIAGRAM DEPICTED REMOVES CASTSTONE UNITS WILL BE SALVAGED IF DAMAGED AND DAMAGED CASTSTONE UNITS WILL BE REPLACED WITH GLASS FIBER REINFORCED CONCRETE TO MATCH THE EXISTING. THEY WILL INSTALL SUPPLEMENTAL LATERAL LATERAL ANCHORS AT CASTSTONE UNITS, PATCH SPAS TO AT CASTSTONE AND LIMESTONE SPANDRELS AND REPLACE FAILED PATCHES, REBUILD BRICK MASONRY AT SPAD AND CRACK LOCATIONS. REPLACE ISOLATED STEEL SHELF SHELF ANGLES AT BRICK MASONRY PIERS AND DESIGNATED CASTSTONE SPANDRELS WITH SIGNIFICANT SECTION LOSS OR DEFLECTION. REPOINT OPEN MORTAR JOINTS, REMOVE AND RESET DISPLACED LIMESTONE UNITS AT THE PARAPET WALL. REPOINT THE INBOARD SIDE OF THE MASON REPAIR PITT WALL AND REPLACE WINDOW PERIMETER CEILING. 100%. STAFF ASK THAT THE COMMISSION DECIDE IF OPTION ONE OR OPTION TWO IS APPROPRIATE. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL. THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION. GREAT, THANK YOU. TERRANCE, CAN I ASK YOU TO PRESENT OPTION ONE AND OPTION TWO? OH, I GOTTA BLOW IT UP. SORRY. OH, THERE YOU GO. YOU GOT IT. SO OPTION ONE IS REMOVE AND REPLACE THE THREE PRECAST CAST SPAN JOINTS. JOINTS. THAT'S WHAT'S IN THE GREEN, THE ISOLATED PATCH AND REPAIR TO THE EXISTING UNIT. AND THEY WILL REBUILD THE BRICK MASONRY AT EACH END. IT'S, WHICH IS THE PURPLE, UM, UH, THEY WILL REHABILITATE EXISTING, EXISTING SHELF ANGLE, INCLUDING NEW FLASHING, WHICH IS AT BOTTOM OF THE GREEN SPACE THERE. AND THEY WILL, UM, THE ISOLATED PATCH OF REPAIR AT THE EXISTING UNITS, WHICH IS ABOVE THE GREEN. UM, SO THAT WOULD BE A PATCH AND REPAIR. UM, AND THEN OPTION TWO IS TO REMOVE AND RESET THE THREE PRECAST, UH, SPANDREL UNITS. THAT'S WHAT'S IN THE YELLOW AND THE GREEN. UM, THE ISOLATED PATCH AND REPAIR THE EXISTING, UH, TWO EXISTING UNIT, THAT'S THE ORANGE THAT YOU SEE THERE ON THE TOP RIGHT ABOVE THE YELLOW. UM, THE REBUILD THE, UH, BRICK MASONRY AT EACH END THAT IS THE PURPLE ON, UH, THE RIGHT AND LEFT. AND IN THE GREEN YOU SEE, UH, IT'S REHABILITATE THE EXISTING SHELF ANGLE, INCLUDING NEW FLASHING AND THEN THE ISOLATED PATCH AND REPAIR OF THE EXISTING UNITS. UM, SO THAT, THAT'S REALLY THE TWO OPTIONS. I THINK THE ONLY DIFFERENCE IS, UH, REMOVE AND RESET THE THREE PRECAST, UH, PANELS VERSUS, UH, REMOVE AND REPLACE THE SPANDREL UNITS. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. YOU'RE WELCOME. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FROM COMMISSION? YES. SO THE, THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THESE TWO IS THAT THE ONE OPTION IS GONNA HAVE THE BRAND NEW SPANDRELS SITTING ON TOP OF THE NEW, UH, SHELF. THAT'S CORRECT. HOW, HOW MANY, HOW MANY OF THESE SPANDRELS MAYBE A PERCENTAGE NEED TO BE REPLACED? UH, SO THAT, THAT HAS NOT BEEN DISCUSSED. UM, BUT WE, ALL WE KNOW IS THAT IT'S BETWEEN THE 12TH FLOOR AND THE FIFTH FLOOR. I MEAN, I'M SORRY, 12TH FLOOR AND THE 25TH FLOOR. UM, NOT SURE THE AMOUNT OF THEM, I'M PRETTY SURE SOME ARE MORE DAMAGED THAN OTHERS. SO WHAT IS, WHAT WAS THE DETERMINING FACTOR IN GIVING THESE TWO OPTIONS? 'CAUSE IT SEEMS LIKE YOU'D WANT TO KEEP ORIGINAL MATERIAL, RIGHT? APPLICABLE INSTEAD [02:25:01] OF JUST BLANKET, YOU KNOW, A BLANKET STATEMENT THAT YOU'RE GONNA REPLACE EVERYTHING. RIGHT. AND IT'S, IT WOULD, IT WOULD BE SO BASED ON, UH, UH, WHAT'S, WHAT WAS PRESENTED BY THE ARCHITECTS OR THE APPLICANTS. UM, IT, UH, IT WAS A MATTER OF COST FOR THEM. UH, SO IT WAS VERSUS RE REPAIRING VERSUS REPLACE, UH, YOU KNOW, THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT IT, THAT'S THE, THAT'S WHAT THEY WANTED. SO, AND THEY PREFERRED OPTION ONE I MIGHT ADD TO REPLACE THEM WITH NEW PRECAST UNITS? YES, SIR. THANK YOU. NO PROBLEM. I JUST HAVE A COMMENT. I MEAN, WE JUST RULED ON A RULING THAT DIDN'T MATTER ABOUT COSTS, IT'S ABOUT PRESERVING MATERIAL. SO JUST I GUESS AN APPEAL FOR CONSISTENCY AMONGST THIS BODY. UM, I WOULD RECOMMEND WE LEAN TOWARDS OPTION TWO, EVEN IF IT IS MORE EXPENSIVE. 'CAUSE IT DOES PRESERVE THAT MATERIAL. WELL, I'D LIKE TO OPEN UP THE PUBLIC COMMENT. I DON'T, I KNOW WE DON'T HAVE ANY SPEAKERS SIGNED UP, BUT IF THE APPLICANT WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A STATEMENT, NO. OKAY. WE'LL GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. ARE THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS FROM COMMISSION? UM, I HAVE A QUESTION, UM, TO STAFF. UM, IT, SO DID THE ARCHITECT OR THE APPLICANT, DID HE PROVIDE ANY KIND OF, UM, UM, LAYOUT FOR PANELS TO BE REPLACED OR IS IT JUST A REPLACEMENT OF DAMAGE PANELS? UM, THE CONCERN ON A BUILDING LIKE THIS IS THAT ONCE YOU REPLACE HALF OF A PANEL, IT STARTS LOOKING LIKE A PATCH PROJECT. UM, WAS THERE ANY, ANY, UM, DIRECTION ON, ON, UM, HOW TO REPLACE THOSE AS FAR AS, YOU KNOW, IS IT GONNA BE PER FLOOR IF THEY HAVE ENOUGH MATERIAL TO HANDLE THE FLOOR? WOULD ONE FLOOR BE, UM, NEW PANELS THAT CAN'T BE REPLACED? YEAH, SO, UH, THEY WOULD, IT WOULD BE A REBUILD OF 100% OF THE, UH, CASTSTONE SPAND FROM THE 12TH FLOOR TO THE 25TH FLOOR. SO I DON'T KNOW THAT EXACT NUMBER OF SPANDRELS. I MEAN, UH, BUT UH, GOING FROM 12 TO 25TH FLOOR, LIKE I SAID, WITH A HUNDRED PERCENT, UM, THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE PROPOSING. SO I, FROM 12 TO 25 WOULD ALL APPEAR TO BE THE SAME. AND IS THE APPLICANT, UM, REQUESTING, UH, TAX CREDITS ON THE BUILDING? I DID NOT HAVE THAT CONVERSATION, SIR. I DON'T KNOW. OKAY. BECAUSE I BELIEVE IF HE'S REQUESTING TAX CREDITS, HE'S GONNA HAVE TO TRY AND PRESERVE AS MUCH EXISTING MATERIAL AS POSSIBLE. RIGHT. GINGER , I JUST WANTED TO ADD SOME, UH, FUN HISTORICAL FACTS THAT, UM, THE LIBRARY DOES HAVE TWO SETS OF ORIGINAL DRAWINGS FOR THIS BUILDING. WE HAVE THE JOSEPH FINGER DRAWINGS FROM THE ORIGINAL BUILDING AS WELL AS THE ALFRED FINN EDITION FROM 1938. AND, UM, TERRANCE HAS COME OVER TO TAKE A LOOK AT THOSE DRAWINGS. COMMISSIONER BLAKELY, UM, CAN YOU HELP ME UNDERSTAND THE DRAWINGS THEY, OR THE PHOTOS THEY HAVE, THEY SHOW THE BOTTOM HALF OF THE, IS THAT, IS THAT WHOLE THING, THE SPANDREL AND IT'S JUST THE BOTTOM HALF THAT'S BEING REPLACED OR YOU SAID THE DRAWINGS OR YOU MEAN, DO YOU MEAN LIKE THESE TWO IMAGES OF ONE AND TWO? I MEAN, HERE IS TWO YELLOW AND ONE, RIGHT, AND, AND THE WAY THAT, THE WAY THAT I UNDERSTAND IT TO BE IS THAT THE TOP PORTION, UM, IS TO BE ISOLATED PATCH AND REPAIR. OKAY. SO THEY, THEY DON'T NEED TO BE REPLACED, BUT A LOT OF THE BOTTOM PATH ONES SHOW SIGNS OF YES MA'AM. OKAY. YEAH, I TOO WOULD BE A BIT CONCERNED THAT WHAT WAS NEW MIGHT NOT MATCH IN COLOR TEXTURE, EVEN IF THEY COULD BE REPLICATED IN TERMS OF THEIR FORM. UM, SO I, I WOULD JOIN COMMISSIONER SMITH IN LEANING TOWARD A REPAIR AND REPLACE. YEAH. SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE BEING ASKED AS TO PICK BETWEEN THESE TWO OPTIONS. I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE OPTION TWO GARCIA A SECOND. OKAY. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. ANY [02:30:01] OPPOSED? ANY ABSTENTIONS? OKAY. OPTION ONE PASSES. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. OPTION TWO, SORRY. OPTION TWO PASSES. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIRPERSON MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION AND THE PUBLIC. THIS IS STAFF PERSON CHARLES SEDLER. I SUBMIT FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. ITEM E 18 AT 1136. ALL GREG DRIVE IN THE NOR HILL HISTORIC DISTRICT. THIS IS A CONTRIBUTING CRAFTMAN STYLE BUNGALOW, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE CONSTRUCTED CIRCA 1925 WITH CONTRIBUTING DETACHED SINGLE STORY GARAGE LOADED LOCATED IN THE NOR HILL HISTORIC DISTRICT. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING CATEGORY OF ALTERATION, WHICH WOULD BE WINDOWS DOOR AND FRONT ENTRANCE CANOPY. THIS IS APPLIES TO THE WHOLE HOUSE. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING REPLACEMENT OF NON-ORIGINAL DAMAGED INOPERABLE AND MISMATCHED WINDOWS THROUGHOUT THE HOME WITH WOOD CLAD WINDOWS ON THE NORTH ELEVATION, WHICH IS THE FRONT, UH, PROPOSED REMOVAL OF LARGE PICTURE WINDOW ON THE LEFT FRONT ELEVATION, WHICH IS NOT ORIGINAL, REPLACING WITH TWO SINGLE HUNG WINDOWS, ONE OVER ONE TO BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE EXISTING WINDOWS ON THE RIGHT PROPOSED. THIS IS ALSO NORTH ELEVATION PROPOSED ADDITION OF SHED ROOF STYLE CANOPY OVER THE FRONT DOOR ENTRANCE WITH A COMPOSITION WITH COMPOSITION SHINGLE ROOFING CANOPY BRACKET SHALL BE SQUARE TIMBER, NOT CHAMFER. SO LIKE A VERY SIMPLIFIED APPEARANCE. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION. I DON'T BELIEVE I HAVE ANY SPEAKERS SIGNED UP. I AM AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS. THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION. THANK YOU. UM, I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AT THIS TIME. I DO HAVE TWO SPEAKERS THAT HAVE SIGNED UP. THE, THE FIRST SPEAKER IS LAWRENCE FIBO, FOLLOWED BY DR. LABER. OKAY, GREAT. THANK YOU. UH, HONORABLE COMMISSIONERS. UH, MY NAME IS LAWRENCE FIBO. I DO SUPPORT, UM, THIS PROPOSAL AND, UH, MAINLY I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THAT IN NOR HILL, ALTHOUGH WE ARE A HISTORIC DISTRICT, WE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE MORE, UM, LENIENCY ON REPLACING WINDOWS WITH LIKE MATERIAL. WE THINK THAT THEY SHOULD LOOK LIKE HISTORIC ONE OVER ONE WOOD WINDOWS. BUT, UM, I RECENTLY LOOKED INTO RESTORING SOME OF THE ORIGINAL WINDOWS ON THE, UH, FRONT PART OF MY HOUSE. AND THE COST TO RESTORE ONE OF THOSE WINDOWS IS THE SAME THAT IT COSTS TO GET A NEW, UM, INSULATED, UH, WOOD WINDOW. SO, YOU KNOW, I WOULD PREFER TO HAVE A NEW ONE THAN TO RE YOU KNOW, REFURBISH AN OLD ONE. SO ON THAT NOTE, THAT'S WHY I SUPPORT, UM, THIS PROJECT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. AND THE NEXT SPEAKER IS LABER. GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS DREW LAUER. SORRY, SORRY. UH, I ONLY SIGNED UP BECAUSE I DIDN'T KNOW THAT WE HAD REPRESENTATION, SO IT WAS ALREADY SPOKEN ABOUT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANY OTHER SPEAKER IN THE AUDIENCE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? NOT HEARING. WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, UH, COMMISSION MEMBERS. IS THERE, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF OR IS THERE A MOTION? COMMISSIONER DAVIS, I JUST WANNA CONFIRM BECAUSE I, I SEE THE, THE, UH, ONE OVER ONE WINDOWS IN YOUR DRAFT, HOWEVER, THE WINDOWS THAT ARE A PART OF THE QUOTE AND THE ORDER ARE NOT ONE OVER ONE WINDOW. SO I JUST WANTED TO CONFIRM THAT THAT IS, WE'RE DOING ONE OVER ONE WINDOWS, CORRECT? YES. IF YOU, IF STAFF SCROLLS TO, I THINK THERE'S SOME SITE PICTURES AND THERE'S CURRENTLY, THERE'S FIXED WINDOWS OR CASEMENT WINDOWS ON THE SIDE ELEVATION, SO THAT'S WHAT'S, THAT'S WHERE THOSE WINDOWS APPLY TO. OKAY. I JUST DIDN'T SEE ANY ONE OVER ONES ANYWHERE, SO THANK YOU. IS THERE A MOTION OR ANY OTHER DISCUSSION JONES A MOVES TO ACCEPT STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS? IS THERE A SECOND? SMITH? SECOND. CARL COMMISSIONER CARL SMITH. SECONDS. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED? WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM 19. I, [02:35:04] GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR MEMBER AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION. THIS IS STAFF MEMBER AARON EDWARDS, AND I SUBMIT ITEM 19 FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION AT 1139 WEST MELWOOD STREET FOR RECOMMENDED APPROVAL. THIS ONE STORY, 1072 SQUARE FOOT RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE SITUATED ON A 5,000 SQUARE FOOT INTERIOR LOT LOCATED IN THE NEAR NOR HILL HISTORIC DISTRICT. THIS PROPERTY HAS A BUNGALOW STYLE, PARTIALLY CONTRIBUTING RESIDENTIAL BUILDING ALONG WITH CONTRIBUTING GARAGE, BOTH CONSTRUCTED CIRCA 1925. THE SCOPE OF WORK IS AN ALTERATION TO THE EXISTING STRUCTURE, SPECIFICALLY REMOVING AND REPLACING 13 WINDOWS WITH LIKE FOR LIKE MATERIAL, THE EXISTING WINDOWS ARE REQUESTED FOR REPLACEMENT DUE TO WARPED SILLS AND AIR LEAKAGE BETWEEN THE UPPER AND LOWER SASH. ALL WINDOWS WILL BE ACCLAIMED, DOUBLE HUNG, STILL FLAT BASE FRAME ASSEMBLY LOCATION OF THE WINDOWS INVOLVED ARE IN THE LIVING ROOM, DINING ROOM, KITCHEN, PRIMARY BEDROOM, FRONT ROOM, AND BATHROOM. NO OTHER ALTERATIONS WILL BE MADE IN THE CONTRIBUTING RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION, I'M AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS. THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION. THANK YOU. I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. I DON'T HAVE ANYONE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM IS, IF THERE'S ANYONE HERE, PLEASE ANNOUNCE YOURSELF NOT SEEING ANYONE. I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. ARE THERE QUICK COMMISSIONER DAVIS, YOU HAVE A QUESTION? YES. MY QUESTION IS JUST BECAUSE I WANT TO BE CONSISTENT, AND WE DID HAVE A WINDOW POLICY THAT WE, UM, NOW AND IS THIS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THAT? HAVE THESE WINDOWS BEEN DETERMINED NOT TO BE REPAIRABLE? UM, YES, THAT HAS BEEN DISCUSSED WITH THE APPLICANT'S AGENT. THEY'VE TRIED OVER THE YEARS OF THE OWNERSHIP TO, UH, DO THEIR OWN PERSONAL FIXES TO THE WINDOWS. BUT, UM, BASICALLY WHAT WAS EXPLAINED TO ME WAS THAT THESE ONLY RESULTED IN TO BE TEMPORARY FIXES. SO AT THIS POINT, THEY ARE TRYING TO JUST REPLACE THEM ALL TOGETHER. UM, THE OWNER STRESS THAT SOME OF THESE WINDOWS DON'T EVEN OPEN, AND THEN SOME OF THEM, UM, LEAK, WHICH INHIBITS, YOU KNOW, THE EXPENSE OF THE ELECTRICITY AND SO FORTH AND WEATHERING AND EVERYTHING. I THINK EVERYBODY IN NOR HOME WANTS TO REPLACE ALL THEIR WINDOWS. AND I'M NOT NECESSARILY OPPOSED TO THAT, BUT I'M JUST, WHAT IS THE, WHAT IS OUR POLICY AND ARE WE IMPLEMENTING IT? WE HAVE A POLICY AND IT'S, UM, WE HAVE A ONE PAGE, YOU KNOW, WHICH I THINK IS IN THE APPLICATION AS WELL. I MEAN, IT'S, UM, IT, DID PETE STOCKTON LOOK OR ANY OTHER MEMBERS OF STAFF LOOK AT THESE WINDOWS TO SEE THE, THE CONDITION OF THEM AND THE REPAIRABILITY? UM, NO, PETE STOCKTON DID NOT, UM, LAND HIS EYES ON THEM PERSONALLY, BUT HE CAN DO THAT. IF WE DO MOVE OVER TO A DEFERRAL FOR THE ITEM. I MEAN, I, I'LL JUST ANSWER. I THINK IF WE COULD, COULD WE BRING UP THE POLICY ON WINDOWS? THE, THE FACT SHEET THAT THE CITY DEVELOPED BASICALLY STILL COMES DOWN TO REPAIRABILITY. IF THEY ARE REPAIRABLE, UM, THE IDEA IS STILL TO HANG ONTO THESE WINDOWS AND REPAIR THEM. UM, IF IT'S DETERMINED THAT REPAIRING IS, WOULD BE A VERY ARDUOUS, UH, ENDEAVOR, THEN THAT'S WHAT ALLOWS THE WINDOW TO BE REPLACED. AND THEN THERE'S A REQUIREMENT TO BE INSET AND RECESSED. IT DOESN'T HAVE TO NECESSARILY BE WOOD PER SE, BUT IT NEEDS TO LOOK LIKE WOOD. OF COURSE, A LOT OF THE ISSUES WITH SOME OF THESE NEW WINDOWS, ESPECIALLY VINYL WINDOWS, IS THAT THEY, THEY'RE NOT INSET AND THEY'RE NOT RE THEY'RE NOT THE, THEY'RE NOT SET, THEY'RE SET TO THE OUTSIDE SURFACE OF THE WALL. AND THEY'RE ALSO, THE LOWER SASH IS NOT RECESSED. SO, UM, THAT'S BASE THE BASIC THING LIKE THESE, THE SAME THING IS LOOKED FOR LIKE TAX CREDIT PROJECTS AS WELL. SO I DON'T THINK ANYTHING'S CHANGED, UH, TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION. UM, BUT I, IT'S ALWAYS, I ALWAYS FEEL BETTER IF SOMEONE ON, FROM, FROM STAFF AND IF, IF ALL POSSIBLE, IF, IF PETE HAS SEEN THE WINDOWS STAFF PERSON, SAMANTHA DELEON, I JUST WANTED TO ITERATE FOR THE RECORD THAT AFTER OUR CHAIR REVIEW I DID GET WITH, UM, MS. EDWARDS HERE AND WE DID LET THE APPLICANT KNOW THAT WE WANTED TO DEFER THIS PROJECT BECAUSE WE WANTED TO DO A SITE VISIT. THE APPLICANT LET US KNOW THAT SHE STILL WANTED TO GO AHEAD AND TAKE HER CHANCES, WHICH IS WHY IT'S ON THE AGENDA TODAY. SO THERE WAS NOT ENOUGH TIME TO SCHEDULE A SITE VISIT AND THE APPLICANT INSISTED THAT THEY WANTED TO STILL TAKE THEIR CHANCES AND, UH, TRY AGAIN FOR NEXT MONTH. IF THE ANSWER WAS NO, THANK YOU FOR THAT KNOWLEDGE. WITH THAT, IS THERE A MOTION? MOTION TO DEFER? [02:40:01] I'LL SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTIONS DEFERRED. AND WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM. THANK YOU. 21 COMMISSIONER, YOU SAY, UM, I DID. GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION. THIS IS STAFF PERSON SAMANTHA DELEON. ITEM E 21 AT 9 25 WASHINGTON STREET, WASHINGTON AVENUE IN THE OLD SIX WARD HISTORIC DISTRICT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. THE 17,820 SQUARE FOOT TWO STORY COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL STYLE PROPERTY SITUATED ON A 14,902 SQUARE FOOT INTERIOR LOT. THE APPLICANT PROPOSES TO CONSTRUCT A NEW LED BLADE SIGN AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE PROPERTY AND ADD A PAINTED LETTERING WITH THE TENANT NAME ON THE NORTH STREET FACING THE SIDE OF THE BUILDING ABOVE THE MAIN ENTRANCE. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION. I'M AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS. THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION. THANK YOU. UM, I THINK, I THINK THAT I THINK THAT, UH, COMMISSIONER GARCIA WILL, WILL RECUSE HIMSELF FROM THIS, UH, FOR THIS, SO HE'LL LEAVE THE ROOM, UM, HAVING FORMALLY WORKED ON THIS PROPERTY. UM, WITH THAT I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. I DON'T HAVE ANYONE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THE ITEM. IF YOU WERE HERE FOR THIS ITEM, PLEASE ANNOUNCE YOURSELF NOT HEARING YOU WANNA CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. ANY QUESTIONS FROM COMMISSION, MEMBERS OF STAFF OR RECOMMENDATION FOR, UH, I HAVE SOME COMMENTS ON THIS. UM, SO THEY'RE PROPOSING PAINTING THE BRICK ON THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING, UM, UNDER THE SECTION 33, 2 41. UH, THE PROPOSED ACTIVITY MUST PRESERVE THE DISTINGUISHING QUALITIES OR CHARACTER OF THE BUILDING. AND, UH, THIS IS A UNIQUE BRICK TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND IT WOULD BE A SHAME TO HAVE IT PAINTED ALSO. UM, IF AN ILLUMINATED LIGHT, AND THIS IS FROM THE SIX WORD GUIDELINES, IF AN ILLUMINATED LIGHT IS TO BE USED, IT IS TO BE FRONT LIT. UM, NO BACK LITTER, CHANNEL CUT LIGHTING IS PERMITTED ALSO ON BRACKET SIGNS. UM, BRACKET CAN BE USED IF THEY'RE PERPENDICULAR TO THE FACADE OF THE BUILDING AND THIS ONE IS NOT. SO I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO DEFER. OKAY. IS THERE A SECOND TO DEFER? SURE. UH, DIRECTOR TRAN HAS A QUESTION. YES. COMMISSIONER ELAY, CAN YOU CLARIFY ALSO ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTION REASONS FOR DEFER SO THAT, UH, THERE IS PURPOSE FOR THE DEFERRAL SO THAT STAFF CAN CONTINUE TO WORK WITH APPLICANT? WHAT IS YOUR REQUEST TO WORK OUT, OUT DURING THEIR DEFERRAL PERIOD? UM, MY REQUEST IS TO WORK OUT THAT THE SIGN IS PLACED WITHIN, UH, THE, THE, ON THE BUILDING IN A POSITION THAT ALIGNS WITH THE SIXTH WARD GUIDELINES. UH, WOULD ALSO LIKE THEM TO WORK WITH A SIGN THAT ALSO ADHERES TO THE GUIDELINES OF THE SIXTH WARD. SIXTH WARD WITH REGARD TO ILLUMINATION. AND I WOULD LIKE TO THEN TO ALSO WORK ON, UM, THE BAND SIGN THAT THEY PROPOSE, UH, TO BE SOMETHING THAT DOESN'T, UH, ALTER THE BUILDING IN A WAY THAT WOULD BE DIFFICULT TO REVERSE. IS THERE A SECOND TO THE MOTION TO DEFER? I MAKE A COMMENT. UH, JONES HAS A COMMENT. UH, I THINK, WELL, I CERTAINLY ALIGN WITH PAINTING BRICK. I DON'T THINK PAINTED SIGNS ARE PROHIBITED. I THINK YOU CAN PAINT YOUR, YOUR BUIL BUSINESS'S NAME ON THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING. YES. THIS, THIS APPLICATION PROPOSES SPLATTER PAINT ON THE BRICK. OH, OKAY. UM, BUT WE'RE BEING ASKED ABOUT THE SIGN TODAY, RIGHT? YEAH, WELL, I MEAN, WE CAN EITHER VOTE IT UP OR DOWN. IF, IF IF YOU VOTE IT DOWN, THEN THEY HAVE TO DO ANOTHER APPLICATION, PAY A FEE AND START OVER. IF YOU DEFER IT, THEN THEY DON'T HAVE TO PAY ANOTHER FEE. THEY CAN, I'LL SECOND THE MOTION TO DEFER. ALL IN FAVOR OF DEFERRING THE PROJECT. AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES. AND WE ARE NOW GONNA MOVE ON, UM, [02:45:01] TO ITEM G, UM, WHICH WE HAVE MOVED PREVIOUSLY, MOVED FORWARD OF ITEM F, UH, FOR THE SAKE OF THE, THE, THE FOLKS IN THE PUBLIC THAT ARE HERE. AND, UH, FOR THIS ITEM, IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THERE WILL NOT BE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT DURING ITEM G, BUT IF YOU ARE HERE TO MAKE COMMENTS, AND I DO HAVE A, A NUMBER OF PEOPLE THAT HAVE SIGNED UP, UM, YOU CAN STILL MAKE THESE COMMENTS DURING PUBLIC COMMENT, WHICH WILL HOPEFULLY NOT HAPPEN TOO MUCH LONGER FROM NOW. IF YOU'LL JUST, UH, BEAR WITH US COMMISSIONER, UH, DIRECTOR TRAN. MAY I SUGGEST THAT YOU GO AHEAD AND DO PUBLIC COMMENTS RIGHT NOW? OKAY, WELL, THAT'S, I'M HAPPY TO DO. SO, UM, IS THERE A MOTION TO MOVE ITEM H IN FRONT OF ITEM G? COMMISSIONER JONES MOVES TO MOVE. UM, AGENDA ITEM H TO IN FRONT OF AGENDA ITEM G GARCIA. SECONDS. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. AYE. OKAY, SO WE'LL NOW PROCEED WITH PUBLIC COMMENTS. I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC COMMENT. UM, THE FIRST SPEAKER THAT WAS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK IS VIRGINIA KELSEY. SHE'S OKAY, WE'LL, WE'LL COME BACK. UH, THE NEXT SPEAKER IS BRETT. UM, IS IT OKAY, ITALY. CAN, CAN YOU PRONOUNCE HIS LAST NAME? BAKKER. BAKKER, OKAY. TRYING TO INTERPRET WHAT I'M READING. UM, PATTY PRO. OKAY. JORDAN ROBINSON. OKAY. MARY SCHULTE OR SCHULTZ. OKAY. GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSIONERS AND THANK YOU FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY. MY NAME IS MARY SCHULTZ. I LIVE IN NOR HILL, HAVE BEEN THERE ABOUT 13 YEARS. ALL I WANT TO SAY TODAY IS THAT, UM, WE WERE PLEASED TO SEE THE COMMISSIONER'S QUESTIONS AND CONSIDERATIONS AND THEIR TENTATIVE DECISION TO APPROVE THE GUIDELINES, THE, UM, DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR THE NOR HILL HISTORIC DISTRICT IN JUNE. BUT THEN IT WAS DEFERRED FOR SOME SMALL THINGS INTO JULY. AND SO EVEN THEN AGAIN IT WAS DEFERRED. SO MY MAIN MESSAGE IS THAT THOSE OF US WHO ARE LIVING IN NOR HILL CHOSE TO LIVE IN NOR HILL BECAUSE IT WAS SUCH AN ATTRACTIVE PLACE. IT DOES, IT IS A HISTORIC DISTRICT. IT HAS GUIDELINE, IT HAS, UM, DEED RESTRICTIONS, WHICH WERE OFFICIALLY PRO APPROVED AND FILED WITH THE COUNTY AND THE STATE. BUT THE, UH, DEED RESTRICTIONS TEND TO BE SOMEWHAT GENERAL HAVING TO DO WITH HARMONY FOR ALL OF THE CONSTRUCTION ON A BLOCK OR WITHIN A NEIGHBORHOOD. WE HAVE TO HAVE DESIGN GUIDELINES THAT GIVE SOME REAL CLEAR MEASUREMENTS SO THAT WHEN INDIVIDUALS BRAND NEW COMING IN DON'T HAVE A VERY BIG AWARENESS OF WHAT THEY SIGNED ON THEIR DEED ABOUT A HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOOD, THEY KNOW THAT THERE'S SOME REAL PARAMETERS THAT WILL CAUSE SOME LIMITS TO WHAT CAN BE DONE. AND IT WILL KEEP THE NEIGHBORHOOD THE NICE, UH, ATTRACTIVE WITH TREES, UH, WALKABLE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT ATTRACTED THEM TO MOVE THERE. UH, AS HAS BEEN DISCUSSED AT LENGTH IN THE INDEPENDENCE HEIGHTS ISSUE AND ALSO, UM, WITH THE, UM, THE OTHER ISSUE EARLIER WITH THE TREE, UM, THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO REALLY WANT TO MILL VERY BIG HOUSES, AND WE ARE SAYING THAT'S FINE, PLEASE BUILD THEM SOMEWHERE ELSE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THE NEXT SPEAKER IS BOB RABINOVITZ. HE'S LEFT. OKAY. UH, DWAYNE BRADLEY. GOOD AFTERNOON Y'ALL. I'M DWAYNE BRADLEY. I HAVE LIVED IN NOR HILL SINCE 2000, SO I WAS, UH, KIND OF A BRAND NEW RESIDENT AS THE HISTORIC DISTRICT WAS, UH, IMPLEMENTED. UH, I'M HAPPY, UH, EVEN THOUGH I'VE HAD SOME ISSUES OVER [02:50:01] THE YEARS WITH, UM, HAVING TO JUMP THROUGH HOOPS TO GET THINGS DONE WITH WINDOWS AND, AND OTHER THINGS. UH, I APPRECIATE THE, THE, THE COTTAGE BASED NATURE OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE FACT THAT IT'S A VERY UNIQUE EXAMPLE OF, UH, THE ARCHITECTURE AND HISTORY OF HOUSTON. UM, I'VE BEEN HERE NOW EACH MONTH FOR I THINK THREE PREVIOUS MONTHS. AND IN JUNE, UH, AS YOU VOTED TO TENTATIVELY APPROVE, I THOUGHT MAYBE I'D ONLY HAVE TO COME BACK ONE MORE TIME TO THANK YOU FOR DOING SUCH GREAT WORK. UM, TWO MORE TIMES LATER, I'M HERE TO SAY, PLEASE CONTINUE TO DO YOUR WORK AND, AND GET THIS THING TO THE QUALITY OF LIFE COMMITTEE. GET THIS TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND GET OUR GUIDELINES INTO PLACE PLEASE. BECAUSE AS I SAID, AT LEAST TWO OTHER TIMES EACH MONTH THAT WE DO NOT HAVE THESE GUIDELINES. WE RUN THE RISK AND THE REALITY. IF YOU EVER GO UP NEXT TO THE SHILOH CLUB AT FUGATE AND STUDIO WOOD, YOU'LL SEE A BEAUTIFUL HOUSE IF IT WERE IN WOODLAND HEIGHTS, PERHAPS, BUT VERY INAPPROPRIATELY MASKED SIZE FOR NOR HILL. THERE ARE EITHER UNWITTING OR UNSCRUPULOUS PEOPLE WHO WILL TAKE ADVANTAGE OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AS LONG AS WE DON'T HAVE THE ABILITY TO HAVE THEM JUMP THROUGH THESE, WHAT I THINK ARE QUITE REASONABLE GUIDELINES. SO THANK YOU FOR DOING THE RIGHT THING. I APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU. NEXT SPEAKER IS JOHN SANTORINI. SANTORELLI. SANTORELLI. YEAH, SORRY. GOOD EVENING. I'M JOHN SANTORELLI, UM, A RESIDENT AND HOMEOWNER NOR HILL FOR APPROXIMATELY 10 YEARS. WE'VE HEARD TODAY FROM MANY CLEAR AND ARTICULATE VOICES SPEAKING FOR THE IMPORTANCE OF PRESERVING THE INTEGRITY OF HISTORIC DISTRICTS 2 0 2 EAST 31ST STREET, THE PROFOUND IMPORTANCE TO HOUSTON AND TO HERITAGE COMMUNITIES OF STRONG PROTECTIONS ASSURING CONTEXT, APPROPRIATE MODIFICATIONS 5 0 9 EUCLID, THE IMPACT OF MASSING ON CONTEXT AREA AND ITS IMPLICATIONS FOR SURROUNDING NEIGHBORS AND THE COMMUNITY AND OTHERS, WHICH YOU HAVE APPROVED. THESE ALL IN DIFFERENT AND SIGNIFICANT WAYS. SPEAK TO THE IMPORTANCE OF HONORING YOUR PREVIOUS UNANIMOUS VOTE TO APPROVE THE NOR HILL GUIDELINES. THESE GUIDELINES, WHILE PERHAPS IMPERFECT, AND I SUSPECT THAT PEOPLE ON THIS COMMITTEE RECOGNIZE THAT RARELY IN BALANCING PRIORITIES, IS THERE A SOLUTION THAT'S PERCEIVED AS PERFECT BY EVERYONE. THESE GUIDELINES PROTECT THE HISTORIC CHARACTER OF NOR HILL WHILE ALLOWING CONTEXT, APPROPRIATE MODERNIZATION AND EXPANSION OF OUR HOMES. I URGE THE COMMISSION TO UPHOLD YOUR PREVIOUS APPROVAL AND ALLOW THE GUIDELINES TO ADVANCE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. THE NEXT SPEAKER IS LAWRENCE FIBO. ALRIGHT, UH, THANK YOU MR. CHAIRMAN AND HONORABLE COMMISSIONERS. UM, I, I RE ECHO EVERYTHING THAT HAS BEEN SAID TO THIS POINT. UM, AT THE, AT THE LAST MEETING, WE DID HAVE SOME MEMBERS WHO, UH, FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD WHO EXPRESSED RESERVATIONS ABOUT THE BUILDABILITY, UM, SORRY, BUILDABILITY ABOUT SOME OF THE ITEMS IN THE DESIGN GUIDELINES. AND WE, UM, HAVE MET WITH THEM AT JOHN, JOHN AND MYSELF AND VIRGINIA AT LEAST A COUPLE OF TIMES TO TALK ABOUT THOSE ITEMS. AND I THINK THAT WE ARE WAY CLOSER, UM, IN AGREEMENT AS A COMMUNITY ABOUT THESE DESIGN GUIDELINES THAN YOU MAY HAVE BEEN LEFT WITHIN THE IMPRESSION AT THE LAST MEETING. UM, SO I'M GONNA STOP AND NOT SAY ANYMORE ABOUT THAT. I OBVIOUSLY STRONGLY SUPPORT THAT WE UPHOLD THE GUIDELINES THAT WERE UNANIMOUSLY PASSED PREVIOUSLY. AND I DO WANNA LEAVE YOU WITH SORT OF A HISTORICAL ANALOGY. SOMEONE MENTIONED EARLIER THAT THE TREES AT THAT, UM, ONE PROPERTY ON EUCLID WAS OLDER THAN AMERICA ITSELF. AND SO I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A SIMILAR ANALOGY. IT HAS NOW BEEN 10 YEARS SINCE THE DESIGN GUIDELINES PROJECT BEGAN. THAT IS THE SAME AMOUNT OF TIME IT TOOK FOR THE US COLONIES TO DECLARE INDEPENDENCE, BUILD AN ARMY FORM ALLIANCES, AND TO WIN OUR INDEPENDENCE FROM THE BRITISH CROWN. [02:55:01] AND AT THAT TIME, IT TOOK TWO TO THREE MONTHS TO GET A LETTER FROM HERE TO EUROPE AND ANOTHER TWO TO THREE MONTHS TO GET THOSE LETTERS BACK SO WE COULD HAVE FORMED A NEW COUNTRY IN THE AMOUNT OF TIME THAT IT HAS TAKEN TO GET COMMUNITY OUTREACH POLLS, ET CETERA, AND THE APPROVAL OF THIS BODY. SO PLEASE UPHOLD THE LAST, THE VERY LAST, UM, UNANIMOUS VOTE. THANK YOU. THE NEXT SPEAKER AGAIN IS VIRGINIA KELSEY. I'M VIRGINIA KELSEY. I'M AN ARCHITECT AND RESIDENT OF NOR HILL. YOU KNOW, I'VE BEEN HERE A LOT. I SUPPORT THE GUIDELINES AND HOW THEY WERE APPROVED. IT WAS A VERY LONG PROCESS TO GET HERE. STAFF HAS DONE AN EXCELLENT JOB WITH CONFLICTING POLLS, CONFLICTING INFORMATION, AND IT TOOK A LONG TIME TO GET WHAT IS HERE. AND SINCE THIS VOTE, WE'VE HEARD A LOT OF MISINFORMATION. THERE'S A LOT OF THIS, MOST OF IT'S CLEARLY JUST A LACK OF UNDERSTANDING. WE CAN DO THAT AS A COMMUNITY TO BRIDGE THE UNDERSTANDING. THE HOUSES ARE BUILDABLE, THEY'RE STANDARD FRAMING. A WATER HEATER CAN FIT IN THE ATTIC. A 28 FOOT HEIGHT LIMIT ALLOWS A 30 FOOT WIDE SECOND FLOOR. YOU CAN FIT A POINT WITH A 0.46, UH, FAR. YOU CAN FIT A FOUR BEDROOM HOUSE. BUT WHAT I'M CONCERNED ABOUT IF WE DON'T GO FORWARD, CAN YOU SHOW THIS? THIS WAS WHAT WAS MENTIONED BEFORE. DOCUMENT CAMERA, PLEASE. UM, TODAY WHEN I WALKED IN, ONE OF THE DESIGNERS SAID TO ME, THEY'VE ALREADY HAD TWO PEOPLE CONTACT THEM ABOUT REPLICATING THIS PROJECT. AND IF WE DEFER THIS FOR ANOTHER MONTH, THREE MONTHS, YOU KNOW, I UNDERSTAND THERE'S SOME NUANCES THAT MAYBE AREN'T QUITE PERFECT, BUT NO DOCUMENT IS PERFECT. AND IF IT GOES BACK TO COMMITTEE, DOES IT HAVE TO GO BACK AND GET ANOTHER POLL? WHAT, YOU KNOW, IT'S JUST A NEVER ENDING BECAUSE A SMALL GROUP OF PEOPLE CANNOT GO AND, AND OVERRIDE WHAT HAS BEEN A LONG PROCESS. SO DO NOT ALLOW ANY MISINFORMATION, DERAIL THE PROCESS, PUT POLITICS ASIDE, ACCOMPLISH WHAT NO ONE ELSE HAS BEEN ABLE TO DO IN 10 YEARS. MOVE THE GUIDELINES FORWARD TO THE QUALITY OF LIFE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. LAST SPEAKER SIGNED UP IS, UH, CANDY PRESENTATION MODE. AND IF YOU COULD, UH, RESTATE YOUR FULL NAME IN THE MICROPHONE. YES. MY NAME IS CANDY CARDONA. I WAS REFERRED BY, UM, PRESERVATION HOUSTON. UM, TO GIVE THIS A TRY OUT OF DESPERATION. UM, ONE MOMENT PLEASE. I LIVE ON CENTER STREET ALMOST DIRECTLY ACROSS FROM HARPER SCHOOL, THE HISTORIC HARPER SCHOOL, LOCATED AT 3,200 CENTER STREET, 7 7 0 0 7. I'M HERE TODAY BECAUSE, AND BY THE WAY, THAT SCHOOL WAS BUILT IN 1926. IT'S 100 YEARS OLD, INCLUDING THE TREES ON THE PROPERTY. I'M HERE TODAY BECAUSE WE MAY ONLY HAVE THE REST OF TODAY AND THE FULL DAY TOMORROW TO PRESERVE, UM, THIS HISTORIC BUILDING AND MY NEIGHBORS AND I NEED YOUR HELP. JUST BEFORE COMING HERE TODAY, I RECEIVED AN IMPORTANT RESPONSE FROM MAYOR WHITTIER'S OFFICE. I WAS INFORMED THAT THE DEVELOPERS HAVE GRANTED THE CITY ACCESS TO HARPER SCHOOL TO DETERMINE WHAT MIGHT BE PRESERVED AND THAT MICHELLE AL'S OFFICE IS CURRENTLY LOOKING AT PRESERVATION OPTIONS. I'M EXTREMELY GRATEFUL TO HEAR THAT , BUT I'M ALREADY, UM, EXTREMELY CONCERNED ABOUT THE TIMING. THIS MORNING I STOOD OUTSIDE HARPER SCHOOL AND COULD HEAR EXTENSIVE DRILLING, BANGING, AND INTERIOR WORK TAKING PLACE INSIDE THE HISTORIC BUILDING. I CANNOT SEE EXACTLY WHAT'S BEING REMOVED. UH, SO I DO NOT WANT TO SPECULATE, HOWEVER, THE ACTIVITY IS SUBSTANTIAL. MORE IMPORTANTLY, WORKERS AT THE PROPERTY HAVE TOLD ME THAT DEMOLITION OF THE SCHOOL IS EXPECTED TO BEGIN MONDAY OR TUESDAY. I ALREADY SEE A YELLOW BULLDOZER THERE. THAT MEANS WE HAVE VERY LITTLE TIME, UM, JONES MOVES TO GRANT THE SPEAKER AN ADDITIONAL MINUTE. IS THERE SECOND? I WAS ALSO SECONDS AYE. ALL IN FAVOR? [03:00:01] AYE. AYE. THANK YOU. I WAS ALSO AT HARPER SCHOOL. THE NIGHT OF THE JULY 25 FIRE ALONGSIDE FIREFIGHTERS DOCUMENTED WHAT I WITNESSED WITH PHOTOGRAPHS AND VIDEOS. THE FIRE I PERSONALLY WITNESSED WAS IN THE SEPARATE CAFETERIA BUILDING AT THE REAR LEFT OF THE PROPERTY. THE FIRE NEVER TOUCHED THE HISTORIC SCHOOL. UM, THAT AGAIN, THE CAFETERIA IS NOT ATTACHED TO THE MAIN HISTORIC SCHOOL BUILDING. AND, UM, I KEEP HEARING FROM CONSTRUCTION WORKERS AND EVERYBODY ELSE THAT THE BUILDING WAS, UH, CAUGHT ON FIRE. IT NEEDS TO COME DOWN. AND I'M SIMPLY ADVOCATING FOR THE PROPERTY. UM, I'VE BEEN ADVOCATING FOR MORE THAN A YEAR AND, UM, PARDON ME. BEFORE THE FIRE, I DEVELOPED A PRESERVATION CONCEPT AND I SENT IT TO THE PROSPECTIVE OWNER ON APRIL 7TH AND SENATE, UM, REFINED VERSION APRIL 13TH RECEIVED NO RESPONSE. UM, AND MY GOAL IS TO PRESERVE AS MUCH OF THE HARPER SCHOOL AS REASONABLY POSSIBLE. UM, I'VE SEEN THE BEAUTIFUL INTERIOR COURTYARD. I SAW THE INTERIOR OF THE SCHOOL LAST YEAR, LAST FALL. I'VE BEEN, UH, COMMUNICATING WITH, UH, MY DISTRICT C CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS. AND IT WASN'T UNTIL, UH, JUST RECENTLY THAT MAYOR WHITMEYER HAS SEEN IT AND QUESTIONED WHY, UM, HISD SOLD THIS HISTORIC SCHOOL WHEN THEY SHOULDN'T HAVE. I KNOW THE REAL ESTATE DIRECTOR'S NAME IS LISA LOVE. I'VE GOT HER PHONE NUMBER AND HER EMAIL, AND SHE STILL SOLD IT TO BKR REAL ESTATE MANAGEMENT GROUP. ME AND MY NEIGHBORS DO NOT WANT ANOTHER APARTMENT COMPLEX. WE HAVE NEW, UM, APARTMENTS ALL AROUND US. UH, THERE'S CONSISTENTLY HAMMERING GOING ALONG. UM, THERE'S EXTREME, UM, MARKET DENSITY. WE DON'T NEED ANOTHER APARTMENT. THIS, UM, NEIGHBORHOOD IS ESTABLISHED. MR. MRS. CARDONA, THANK YOU. UM, WE, WE CAN ONLY ALLOW SO MUCH TIME FOR, FOR PUBLIC COMMENT, BUT, UM, WE CAN AT LEAST ASK AMONGST OURSELVES IN THE CITY TO, TO SEE WHAT THEY KNOW AND IF THE, IF THE MAYOR'S OFFICE IS INVOLVED IN THAT, THAT IS AT LEAST A STEP THAT PERHAPS, UH, DIRECTOR TRAN CAN FOLLOW UP WITH AFTER THIS MEETING. SO WE HAVE THE REST OF WHAT'S LEFT TODAY AND ALL DAY TOMORROW. UM, CONSTRUCTION WORKERS HAVE TOLD ME THAT THEY WANNA DEMOLISH THE HISTORIC 100-YEAR-OLD, UH, SCHOOL. UM, MONDAY OR TUESDAY. UM, THE NEW BUYER, UH, MR. GORDY AT BKR MANAGEMENT NEVER RE RETURNED OUR EMAILS. I SEE. I SENT HIM A PRE, UM, A CONCEPT, A PDF CONCEPT DATED APRIL 13TH. MR. TRAIN, DO YOU HAVE A COMMENT OR DO YOU OKAY. UM, WHAT, WHAT DO YOU SUGGEST I DO LEAVE MY PHONE NUMBER? EMAIL. YES, PLEASE LEAVE YOUR CONTACT INFORMATION WITH MY STAFF. AND BY THE WAY, UH, WE ARE ON THIS ITEM. SO I HAVE BEEN SPEAKING TO MAYOR WHITMEYER, UH, TEAM AS WELL AS, UH, MICHELLE, UH, LEAH, UH, WITH THE, WHO IS THE DIRECTOR OF THE ARTS, UM, OF ARTS. UH, IT'S, UH, WE ARE MOVING FAST. I WAS ON THE PHONE WITH, UH, THE GORDY'S COMPANY YESTERDAY, UH, SPOKE TO ONE OF THEIR, UM, PROJECT MANAGER. UH, THEY ARE VERY WILLING TO CONTRIBUTE, UM, ANYTHING THAT WE ARE WILLING, UH, TO COME. AND SO LEAH AND I ARE, OR MICHELLE AND I ARE WORKING ON FIGURING OUT A PATH FORWARD. UM, THERE ARE MANY THINGS THAT WE STILL NEED TO DO, UH, BUT THE DEVELOPER IS WORKING WITH US. THEY ARE NOT GOING TO BE, BE, UH, DE UH, DEMOLISHING THE HISTORICAL PORTION. UH, RIGHT NOW WHAT THEY'RE WORKING ON IS THE WEST WING OF THE BUILDING, THE CAFETERIA. THAT WAS THE ONLY BUILDING THAT CAUGHT ON FIRE, CORRECT. THE REST OF THE SCHOOL. CORRECT. THE THE FIRE DID NOT TOUCH IT. CORRECT. AND SO, UH, WE DO HAVE TIME ON THE HISTORICAL PIECE, AND SO CERTAINLY IF YOU LEAVE YOUR CONTACT INFORMATION AND, UH, WE'LL, WE'LL WORK TOGETHER. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR COMING. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. OKAY. IS THERE ANY OTHER MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC THAT WANTS TO SPEAK AS PART OF PUBLIC COMMENT? OKAY. NOT HEARING ANYMORE. I'M GONNA CLOSE A PUBLIC HEARING AND WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM G. UM, A POSSIBLE RECONSIDERATION OF THE NOR HILL DESIGN GUIDELINES THAT WERE APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS AT THE JUNE 18TH, 2026 HAHC MEETING. COMMISSIONER, PLEASE GO AHEAD. GOOD AFTERNOON, MR. CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION. MY NAME IS JEFF BUTLER. ITEM G IS A POSSIBLE RECONSIDERATION OF THE NOR HILL DESIGN GUIDELINES THAT WERE APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS [03:05:01] AT THE JUNE 18TH, 2026 MEETING. THE SUBJECT OF THIS ITEM WAS DISCUSSED AT THE PREVIOUS MEETING WITH NO ACTION DESIGN. GUIDELINES ARE AN ORDINANCE PROVISION FOR HISTORIC DISTRICTS TO CREATE AN INVENTORY AND ANALYSIS OF HISTORIC RESOURCES. THESE DOCUMENTS SERVE AS STANDARDS FOR DEVELOPMENT WITHIN HISTORIC COMMUNITIES, AS WELL AS GUIDANCE FOR RESIDENTS THE CITY AND STAKEHOLDERS. THE PROPOSED GUIDELINES FOR THE NOR HILL FOR NOR HILL REPRESENT THE CULMINATION OF SEVERAL YEARS OF WORK FROM RESIDENTS TO ALLOW FOR THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION ORDINANCE TO BE APPLIED WITH BETTER INFORMATION ON NOR HILL'S UNIQUE FEATURES. IN JUNE OF THIS YEAR, THE HHC CONDITIONALLY APPROVED A DRAFT OF THE GUIDELINES THAT WOULD ULTIMATELY NEED TO BE APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL. IN JULY, STAFF PRESENTED A REVISED VERSION OF THE DOCUMENT, HOWEVER, THERE WAS A DISAGREEMENT OVER THE APPROVAL CONDITIONS BEING MET. STAFF HAS RECEIVED FOUR WRITTEN AND ONE TELEPHONE COMMENT ON TODAY'S ITEM, WITH THREE EXPRESSING SUPPORT FOR THE GUIDELINES AS APPROVED. AND TWO, EXPRESSING OPPOSITION, MR. CHAIR STAFF WOULD LIKE TO HAND THE FLOOR BACK TO YOU FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION. AND THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION. THANK YOU. UM, MY FELLOW COMMISSION MEMBERS AND MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC, UM, AS STATED IN JUNE, THE HAHC VOTED TO APPROVE THE NOR HILL DESIGN GUIDELINES WITH SPECIFIC CONDITIONS SUGGESTED BY MEMBERS OF THE HAHC. AT OUR LAST MEETING, AS MENTIONED, THE HAHC REVIEWED STAFF'S REVISIONS AS INTERPRETED BY STAFF, UH, TO ACHIEVE THE REQUESTED CONDITIONS. CONSEQUENTLY, MANY OF YOU, INCLUDING MYSELF, EXPRESSED, UM, WHILE SOME CONDITIONS HAD BEEN ADDRESSED, UH, OVERALL, THE REQUESTED CONDITIONS HAVE, HAVE STILL NOT BEEN MET. ADDITIONALLY, WE, WE DID RECEIVE PUBLIC COMMENT FROM FOLKS WHO DID NOT ATTEND THE PRIOR MEETING WAS, WHICH ALSO SOUGHT CLARITY ON A NUMBER OF ISSUES WHICH INVOLVE OR RELATE TO THE UNMET CONDITIONS. UM, THEREFORE, UM, IN ORDER TO MOVE THIS FORWARD IN THE MOST TIMELY, UM, EFFICIENT PROCESS, WITHOUT TRYING TO DELIBERATE THIS DURING OUR MEETINGS, UM, I LIKE TO, UM, PUT FORTH, UM, JUST ASK IF THERE WOULD BE A MOTION TO RECONSIDER THE NOAL DE NO HILL GUIDELINES THAT WE VOTED ON IN JUNE. AND I'M OPEN TO PUTTING FORTH THAT MOTION. SECOND. YOU'RE SECOND. WELL, I WOULD LIKE TO SAY A LITTLE MORE ABOUT IT BEFORE I PUT IT FORTH COMPLETELY, BUT I JUST WANNA GIVE ANYBODY A CHANCE TO SAY ANYTHING. SO, I HEAR EVERYONE WHO HAS GIVEN US COMMENT IN NOR HILL TODAY, AND I'M MAKING THIS MOTION BECAUSE I THINK IT'S IMPERATIVE THAT WE MEET THE TWO CONDITIONS THAT, UM, WE HAD SET FORTH AS A COMMISSION. AND I THINK THESE STRENGTHEN THE GUIDELINES. UM, SO I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO RESEND JUNE'S, UM, CONDITIONAL TENTATIVE APPROVAL OF THE NOR HILL GUIDELINES THAT WERE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS. UM, I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO SAY, UH, REQUEST THAT A COMMITTEE BE FORMED, A SELECT COMMITTEE, UH, AT THE CHAIR'S CHOOSING TO IDENTIFY ANY REMAINING ISSUES AND WORK WITH STAFF TO ADDRESS LANGUAGE TO MEET THESE REQUIRED CHANGES. CLEANING UP THE FAR LANGUAGE RE UM, AND LANGUAGE REGARDING ATTICS PLATE HEIGHT AND THE EFFECTIVE RIDGE HEIGHT, CALCULATING THE RESULTING FAR CAN BE ACHIEVED WITH THE PRESCRIBED SETBACKS. AND TO REMOVE ANY INCONSISTENCIES. I WOULD JUST LIKE TO COMMENT. UM, I AM PREPARED TO SECOND THE MOTION, BUT I WANT TO SAY THAT I REALLY APPRECIATE THE URGENCY TO RESOLVE AND MOVE FORWARD WITH THE GUIDELINES. UM, I DO UNDERSTAND THAT THE CLOCK IS TICKING, BUT ALSO, UM, I APPRECIATE THE WORK OF COMMISSIONER DAVIS AND OTHERS WHO'VE POINTED OUT INCONSISTENCIES. AND IN AS MUCH AS THESE GUIDELINES WILL OPERATE AS AN ALGORITHM, UM, THEY ARE LIKELY TO PRODUCE, HAVE A VERY, UH, HUGE IMPACT ON WHAT GETS PRODUCED AND ALSO ON OUR EFFECTIVENESS AS A COMMISSION. SO THAT'S WHY, ALTHOUGH I REGRET THAT FURTHER DELAY, I WOULD BE INCLINED TO SECOND THE MOTION IF I MAY, JUST FOR BEFORE I CALL THE VOTE ON THE MOTION AT HAND. UM, I KNOW THAT, UM, WE'VE HEARD FROM ANOTHER, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, THE COUNCIL MEMBER'S OFFICE FOR NOR HILL, I KNOW THAT, UM, THE COUNCIL MEMBER HAS SET A PUBLIC MEETING FOR SEPTEMBER 3RD, IS MY UNDERSTANDING, HAS BEEN ANNOUNCED. UM, WE HAVE BEEN RECEIVING PUBLIC COMMENTS, UM, AND WE WILL ALWAYS RECEIVE AND WELCOME PUBLIC COMMENTS AND LISTEN TO THEM. UM, WE ARE NOT LOOKING AT RESURVEY. THIS IS NOT ABOUT STARTING OVER. THIS IS SIMPLY TO, [03:10:01] UH, VERY EX EX QUICKLY MOVE FORWARD, UM, TO GET TO THESE REVISIONS THAT MEET THE REQUIREMENTS THAT THE HAC MEMBERS STATED. AND DIRECTOR TRAN, I'M CURIOUS IF YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS ABOUT THAT BECAUSE, UM, I'M PROPOSING THIS AS A WAY TO SPEED UP THIS PROCESS, FRANKLY, UH, TO BE, TO BE FRANK. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR GIVING ME TIME TO SPEAK, AND I REALLY APPRECIATE THIS MO UH, MOTION. UH, I THINK THAT, UH, THE DEPARTMENT AND OUR STAFF, WE WERE STRUGGLING WITH MEETING THAT CRITERIA AND THE MOTION TO HAVE A COMMITTEE WORK WITH US, I BELIEVE WILL EXPEDIATE THIS PROCESS, BUT NOT TO GO FASTER FOR THE SAKE OF GOING FASTER. UM, AS COMMISSIONER BLAKELY SAID, THIS IS REALLY IMPORTANT. THIS WILL SET, UH, THE, UH, FORMULATION FOR WHAT GOES FORWARD. AND IN ORDER FOR US AND THIS COMMISSION TO BE EFFECTIVE, THAT THIS LAST, UH, 5%, I WOULD SAY, UH, TO BUTTON IT UP. IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT. AND I REALLY FEEL THAT THE WORK, UH, IN THIS COMMITTEE WITH ADDITIONAL RESOURCES, PERSPECTIVES ON THIS COMMISSION WILL GET US, UH, TO THE FINISH LINE. SO I REALLY APPRECIATE THIS, UH, THIS, UH, PIVOT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. AND THE INTENTION IS TO, UM, AGAIN, TO VERIFY SOME OF THESE CLAIMS. AND JUST AS, AS WAS MENTIONED EARLIER, THERE ARE ALL KIND OF THINGS THAT WE CAN HEAR OUT AND ABOUT, BUT, UM, THE IDEA IS TO PUT THOSE TO REST BY LETTING THIS COM LOOKING A COMMITTEE AND STAFF, UH, WORK TOGETHER TO IDENTIFY THOSE THINGS, UH, THAT STILL REMAIN, SOLVE THEM, BRING THEM BACK TO US, AND THEN LET US CONSIDER WHETHER WE WOULD APPROVE OF THEM OR NOT. SO, UM, WITH THAT SAID, IS WHAT, UH, IS THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION THAT HAS BEEN SECONDED? I JUST, I'M SORRY. JUST SO I UNDERSTAND. YES, THE MOTION HAS THE SUPPORT OF THE DIRECTOR AND THE CHAIR. YES. AYE, ANY OPPOSED? I COMMISSIONER ESCOBAR, YOU HAVE A QUESTION? APPARENTLY APOLOGIZE. MY FACE, AND THAT'S BEEN, IT'S BEEN A LONG MEETING, SO IT'S, IT'S NOT A, NOT A PROBLEM. WE INITIALLY APPROVED OF MOVING FORWARD WITH CONDITIONS. YEP. WE ARE CURRENTLY SAYING WE STILL WANT TO MOVE FORWARD WITH APPROVAL AND THAT WE NEED THIS SEPARATE COMMITTEE IN ORDER TO ENSURE THAT THE CONDITIONS THAT WE REQUIRED ARE ACTUALLY MET OR ELSE WE CAN'T MOVE FORWARD WITH AGREEING TO APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS BECAUSE THE CONDITIONS CAN'T BE SATISFIED JUST YET. THE CONDITIONS WERE VERBAL, VERBALLY MADE. OKAY. UM, ATTEMPTS WERE MADE BY STAFF TO INTERPRET THOSE CONDITIONS. MM-HMM . THEY DID SOLVE, SOME OF THE ISSUES WERE ADDRESSED AS WE KNOW, BUT THERE WERE STILL, UH, INCONSISTENCIES. THERE WERE STILL OTHER AREAS WHERE IT WAS STILL CONFUSING. AND HENCE, THERE WERE A LOT OF COMMENTS THAT WE WERE RECEIVING ABOUT, OF PEOPLE THAT ARE VERY CONFUSED ABOUT MANY ASPECTS OF THINGS, WHICH AGAIN, I DON'T THINK ARE REALLY AN ISSUE. BUT THERE, IN THE PERCEPTION OF THE COMMUNITY, UM, WE'D LIKE, AT LEAST I WOULD LIKE HAVING LOOKED AT AT THIS AND, UM, WITHOUT DELIBERATING FROM AS A GROUP. UM, BUT SINCE WE VOTED WITH APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS, IT'S NECESSARY TO RESCIND THAT VOTE IN ORDER TO CONTEMPLATE, UM, FILLING IN THOSE CONDITIONS WITH ACTUAL HARD LINE TEXT THAT COMES FROM MEMBERS OF THIS COMMISSION THAT WE COULD THEN REVIEW AND VOTE ON. AND I BELIEVE THAT THE COMMITTEE, UM, COULD WORK VERY QUICKLY, AND THIS COULD COME BACK TO US VERY QUICKLY AND STILL ALLOW TIME FOR THE COUNCIL MEMBER TO HAVE A PUBLIC MEETING AND TO GET ADDITIONAL INPUT IN TERMS OF, UH, PUBLIC COMMENTS FROM THE CONSTITUENTS. OKAY. UM, THAT, THAT IS MY GOAL. BUT MY GOAL IS NOT TO OPEN UP , UH, IS NOT TO RESURVEY. I MEAN, WE'RE, LOOK, A VERY LONG PROCESS HAS BEEN ONGOING. THREE SURVEYS HAVE BEEN DONE. EVEN THE MOST RECENT SURVEY UNDER OUR CURRENT DIRECTOR, UM, THE WILL OF THE COMMUNITY ON VARIOUS ITEMS HAS BEEN EXPRESSED. MAJORITIES HAVE, HAVE COALESCED AROUND VARIOUS KINDS OF THINGS. AND THAT'S NOT UP FOR OUR, THAT'S NOT UP FOR US TO CHANGE OR TO DENY THE WILL OF THE COMMUNITY. BUT, BUT WE WILL BE TASKED WITH TAKING THESE GUIDELINES AND THEN USING THEM TO LOOK AT PROJECTS AND, AND TO SEE WHETHER THEY MEET THESE GUIDELINES OR NOT. AND WHERE THERE ARE THESE STILL CONFUSING ASPECTS. THIS IS ONLY GONNA GET WORSE IF WE DON'T JUST FIX IT. NOW, I, IT'S BEEN STATED THAT THERE ARE ACTUALLY ONLY A COUPLE THINGS. THEY'RE NOT MANY THINGS. [03:15:01] THEY'RE NOT THAT HARD, BUT THEY'RE HARD ENOUGH THAT THERE HAVE BEEN SO MANY QUESTIONS FROM THE PUBLIC AND CONFUSION. AND IF WE CAN HAVE THIS, UM, HAVE THESE GUIDELINES LEAVE US WITH A VOTE FOR TEXT THAT WE SEE AND READ AND NOT LEAVING IT UP TO, FOR OTHERS TO INTERPRET, I THINK WE'RE GOING TO BE IN A BETTER PLACE AND FASTER. AND, UM, THAT, AND THAT'S WHY I PROPOSED THIS PATH, OR, AND I'M, I'M JUST AND THANKFUL THAT COMMISSION IS COALESCED AROUND IT. SO, MR. SO WE HAD A MOTION, WE HAD A VOTE MOTION. WE JUST NEED ONE REMAINING VOTE. MY APOLOGIES. I WAS THE ONE, UM, YES, IT WAS THE SLOWEST PERSON VOTING, BUT, BUT YOU VOTE TO AFFIRM. I AFFIRM. YES. OKAY. THANK YOU. SO THIS IS A VOTE IN FAVOR OF RESCISSION, CORRECT? CORRECT. YES. IT'S A VOTE TO RESCIND AND ALSO A VOTE TO PROCEED TO CREATE THE COMMITTEE. TO CREATE A COMMITTEE TO CONTINUE TO WORK ON IT AND BRING IT BACK. CORRECT. AND THAT WAS STATED INITIALLY, SO I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE. OKAY. AND IF I MAY, UH, TO SAVE TIME AND MOVE THIS ALONG, I'D LIKE TO NAME, UH, UM, A VERY, UM, SMALL COMMITTEE, UH, COMMISSIONER DAVIS, WHO HAS, UM, IDENTIFIED MANY OF THE ISSUES AND INCONSISTENCIES, UM, AND EXPRESSED THAT TO THE COMMISSION. UM, AND I'D LIKE TO ASK COMMISSIONER COSGROVE IS NOT HERE TODAY, UM, WHO WAS VERY, UM, SPOKEN MUCH ABOUT THE FAR AND ALSO AGAIN, UM, I BELIEVE THAT COMMISSIONER COSGROVE, COMMISSIONER DAVIS, ALONG WITH, UM, MR. JEFF BUTLER ON STAFF CAN MEET, RESOLVE THESE ISSUES, UH, AFTER IDENTIFYING WHAT THESE THINGS ARE AND THEN BRING IT BACK TO US. AND, UM, WITHOUT PROLONGING THIS, YOU KNOW, THIS WITHOUT, WITHOUT BELABORING THIS PROCESS ANY FURTHER, IS THERE A TIMELINE? YOU DIRECTOR, YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE TIMELINE 'CAUSE YES. UM, SO THE TIMELINE IS FOR US WITH THE COMMITTEE, STAFFING COMMITTEE TO WORK ON ACHIEVING THE CONDITIONS THAT WERE GIVEN TO US THAT WAS JUST RECENTLY STATED. AND WE WILL BRING BACK OUR FIRST ATTEMPT TO MEET. SO WE'LL BRING BACK A RED LINE AT THE NEXT COMMISSION MEETING, WHICH WILL BE SEPTEMBER THE 10TH. WE WILL PRESENT IT AHEAD OF TIME. IT WILL BE INCLUDED IN THE AGENDA THE FRIDAY BEFORE SEPTEMBER THE 10TH FOR ALL OF THE COMMISSIONERS TO REVIEW AHEAD OF TIME. WE HOPE THAT WE WILL MEET THE MARK OF WHAT THE COMMISSION WAS EXPECTING AT THE SEPTEMBER 10TH. IF WE, UM, WE WILL REVIEW IT, OR THE COMMISSION WILL REVIEW IT, AND WE WILL GET FEEDBACK AND YOU WILL GIVE US FURTHER INSTRUCTIONS. IF WE MET IT, YOU MAY VOTE TO ADOPT IT. WE WILL MAKE SURE ON THE AGENDA YOU HAVE THE ABILITY TO ALSO TAKE ACTION. SHOULD YOU FIND THAT IT MEETS YOUR EXPECTATION. IT'S NOT A PUBLIC HEARING. WHAT'S THAT? ARE YOU A PUBLIC HEARING? SHE CAN'T ASK QUESTIONS. REGINA. I DON'T THINK WE CAN TAKE QUESTIONS RIGHT NOW BECAUSE WE, WE, IT'S NOT ON OUR AGENDA, BUT, UM, I'M, I'VE BEEN PRETTY CLEAR WITH WHAT I STATED ABOUT THE PROCESS HERE. AND WITHIN ONE MONTH, THE, THE GOAL IS FOR THE COMMITTEE, ALONG WITH STAFF TO, UM, TO BE WORKING IN BETWEEN MEETINGS SO WE CAN TRY TO WORK FORWARD TO, UH, RESOLVE THESE ISSUES AND BRING 'EM BACK TO THIS BODY TO DETERMINE WHAT THIS BODY THINKS ABOUT THAT, THAT, THAT WORK PRODUCT. SO, UM, FOR THIS MEETING, WE'RE, WE'RE NOT DELIBERATING REALLY. WE'RE JUST, UM, WHEN WE LEFT OUR LAST MEETING, WE REACHED THIS POINT. AND, UM, IF IT'S POSSIBLE TO COME BACK IN ONE MONTH'S TIME AND ACTUALLY HAVE A PRODUCT THAT WE MIGHT ACTUALLY SUPPORT AND CAN VOTE ON WITHOUT CONDITIONS, THEN I THINK EVERYONE WILL BE WELL SERVED. AND IN THE PROCESS, IF SOME OF THE QUESTIONS AND THE CONFUSION THAT HAS BEEN EXPRESSED BY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC CAN ALSO BE, UM, RESOLVED, I THINK THAT WOULD ALSO HELP THIS PROCESS, HELP IT THROUGH THE QUALITY OF LIFE AND ALSO HELP IT THROUGH CITY COUNCIL. DIRECTOR, DIRECTOR TRAN. THANK YOU FOR ALSO, UH, I WOULD LIKE TO ALSO, UM, [03:20:01] LET THE COMMISSION KNOW THAT, UH, COUNCIL MEMBER CASTILLO'S OFFICE HAS A REQUEST OR HE HAS HAD MANY REQUESTS FROM THE COMMUNITY, UH, TO MEET WITH HIM. SO HE IS ORGANIZING A TOWN HALL MEETING ON SEPTEMBER THE THIRD. UH, SO THIS IS PRIOR TO OUR NEXT COMMISSION MEETING, THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. OUR STAFF HAVE BEEN INVITED, UH, TO THAT TOWN HALL MEETING. WE WILL BE THERE. I EXPECT THAT THERE WILL BE PUBLIC COMMENTS. WE WILL BE THERE TO COLLECT AND GATHER PUBLIC COMMENTS. WE WILL BRING IT BACK TO YOU ON SEPTEMBER THE 10TH AS WELL. SO WE WILL BE PRESENTING A RED LINE OF OUR ATTEMPT TO GET TO THE FINISH LINE ALONG WITH PUBLIC COMMENTS. IN ADDITION TO THAT, THE COUNCIL MEMBERS' OFFICE HAS ALSO ASKED US, UH, TO ASSIST WITH, UM, SOME, A, UH, A PLATFORM, UH, FOR ADDITIONAL PUBLIC COMMENTS. UM, SO WE WILL BE OPENING OUR WEBSITE, UH, A UM, PLACE WHERE ANYBODY, UH, CAN ALSO SUBMIT, UH, THEIR COMMENTS, UH, WITH REGARDS TO THE NOR HILL GUIDELINES. AND SO WE WILL OPEN THAT, UM, UM, COMMENT PAGE, UH, STARTING TOMORROW. AND WE PLAN TO CLOSE IT, UM, ON SEPTEMBER THE EIGHTH. UH, SO WE WILL BE DELIVERING, UH, PUBLIC COMMENTS AND THE RED LINE TO YOU AT THE NEXT MEETING ON SEPTEMBER THE 10TH. AND, UM, THE COLLECTION OF PUBLIC COMMENTS, UH, WE WILL MAKE SURE, UH, TO CLARIFY ALL IN THE AUDIENCE AND TO YOU. UH, THIS IS NOT A SURVEY OR A VOTE. UH, WE HAVE HEARD FROM PEOPLE COMING TO OUR COMMISSION, WE'VE HEARD FROM THE COUNCIL MEMBER'S OFFICE, UH, THAT, UH, SOME PEOPLE FELT THEY DID NOT HAVE A CHANCE, UH, TO GIVE THEIR COMMENTS. SO THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR EVERYONE TO NOW SPEAK WHAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THE NOR HILL. AND, UM, SO THAT IS, UH, BASICALLY, UH, WHERE WE ARE, UH, THIS IS SO THAT WE CAN ENSURE AS WE GO FORWARD, UH, THAT THERE IS NO, UM, CLOSED DOOR LEFT FOR ANYONE WHEN WE GET TO THE FINISH LINE. SO AGAIN, THERE WILL BE AMPLE OF OPPORTUNITIES FOR OTHER PEOPLE TO CHIME IN ON THE NOR HILL GUIDELINES. THANK YOU. AND WITH THAT, WE'LL NOW MOVE BACK TO ITEM F, WHICH IS THE REVIEW OF THE REVISED RULES AND PROCEDURE FOR HAHC. I DON'T, THERE'S NOT A PRESENTATION. I THINK THAT FOR THIS ITEM, UM, ITEM F REVIEW OF THE REVISED RULES AND PROCEDURES, UH, IN, UM, WE FORWARDED TO YOU A RED LINE OF THE PROPOSED RULES AND PROCEDURES THAT WAS, UH, THAT WAS EMAILED TO YOU. IT IS ALSO ON YOUR IPAD. AND, UM, SO THIS ITEM IS JUST FOR DISCUSSION TODAY. WE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO TAKE ACTION ON IT. UH, SO WE WILL HAVE ON THE NEXT MONTH'S AGENDA FOR YOU TO TAKE ACTION. SO THIS IS OPENING FOR DISCUSSION. SO CHAIR, I'LL HAND THE FLOOR TO YOU IF ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO MAKE ANY COMMENTS ON THE PROPOSED RULES AND PROCEDURES THAT WAS, UH, PUT TOGETHER BY OUR LEGAL TEAM. YEAH, DIRECTOR. THANK YOU. IF I MAY, UM, I, I JUST WANTED TO, TO PREFACE THIS BY STATING THAT THE CHANGES THAT ARE REFLECTED IN THE DOCUMENT THAT'S BEEN PRESENTED TO ALL OF YOU, THEY'RE VERY MINOR CHANGES JUST TO ALIGN YOUR, UM, YOU KNOW, YOUR PROCEDURE WITH WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENS FROM DAY TO DAY. IT'S, IT'S JUST FOR CONSISTENCY WITH HOW YOU ALREADY OPERATE AND TO PROVIDE JUST SOME, SOME, SOME RAILS, SOME GUARDS SO THAT, YOU KNOW, SORT OF THE EXPECTATIONS AND SORT OF THE UNDERLYING RULES OF PROCEDURE ROBERT'S RULES. UM, AND IN THE EVENT THERE'S ANY CONFLICT WITH ROBERT'S RULES OR OTHER ORDINANCES OR OTHER LAWS, [03:25:01] YOU KNOW, WE ADDED SOME PROVISIONS THERE TO MAKE SURE IT'S CLEAR THAT THOSE OTHER ORDINANCES OR LAWS WILL PREVAIL OVER THE RULES OF PROCEDURE. SO, UM, AGAIN, THIS IS JUST SORT OF BRINGING THIS IN LINE WITH CURRENT PRACTICE AND CURRENT LAW. UM, YOU KNOW, THERE WAS A LOT OF, UH, OTHER UNNECESSARY INFORMATION IN HERE THAT'S REALLY NOT NECESSARY FOR YOUR DAY-TO-DAY OPERATION. SO, UM, HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE ABOUT THE CHANGES THAT HAVE BEEN PRESENTED TODAY. THANK YOU. I'D JUST LIKE TO, THE QUESTION OR STATEMENT I HAVE IS SIMPLY THAT, UM, WHILE THESE WILL BE REVISIONS FOR THIS COMMISSION, IT REALLY PUTS US IN ALIGNMENT WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND WITH CITY COUNCIL SO THAT WE'RE ACTUALLY OPERATING WITH THE SAME SET OF STANDARDS AND SORT OF RULES OR PROCEDURE. IS THAT, IS THAT, CAN I CONFIRM THAT THAT'S ABSOLUTELY CORRECT. AND THESE RULES ARE CONSISTENT. OUR FIRM REPRESENTS CITIES, COUNTIES, VARIOUS COMMISSIONS, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATIONS, PORT AUTHORITIES. THIS IS CONSISTENT WITH WHAT ALL OF THESE GOVERNMENTAL TYPES OF ENTITIES TEND TO OPERATE UNDER. SO THERE'S NOTHING, UM, SQUIRRELLY IN HERE THAT YOU GUYS NEED TO BE WORRIED ABOUT. THIS IS JUST VERY CONSISTENT WITH CURRENT PRACTICE AND AGAIN, UM, UPDATING TO CURRENT LAWS, TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT, MAKING SURE THAT LANGUAGE IS UPDATED WITH THOSE CHANGES FOR NOTICE AND THAT SORT OF THING. SO, UM, AGAIN, WE'RE JUST, WE'RE JUST KEEPING THINGS UPDATED. THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? UH, COMMISSIONER TRAN, SORRY, DIRECT DIRECTOR TRAN. UM, I DO WANT TO, UH, GO AHEAD AND MAKE ONE MORE COMMENT. AND, UM, HEATHER, CAN YOU ALSO PLEASE, UH, CHIME IN IF NEEDED, BECAUSE COMMISSIONER BROBECK IS NOT HERE, BUT HE DID TALK TO ME ABOUT THIS RED LINE, AND I JUST WANNA MAKE ONE CLARIFICATION, BECAUSE EARLIER I SAID IT IS A RED LINE. I CALLED IT A RED LINE BECAUSE YOU SEE RED LINES ON THE, UM, THE DOCUMENT THAT I SENT TO YOU. UH, BUT JUST TO MAKE A CLARIFICATION, UH, THE TEXT THAT IS ON THAT VERSION IS NOT A, UM, HOW DO I SAY? SO IT'S NOT A 100%, UH, REFLECTION OF THE DOCUMENT THAT IS A PDF OF THE ORIGINAL 1985. UM, AND SO, UH, COMMISSIONER BROBECK REQUESTED IF WE COULD, UM, GET THE ORIGINAL, IT SEEMED LIKE IT WAS RETYPED. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT IS NECESSARY. SO I WANTED TO ASK HEATHER, UM, IS THAT NECESSARY, OR ARE YOU GOING TO BE ASKING OUR COMMISSIONERS TO CONSIDER, UH, WHAT IS BEING PRESENTED TO YOU, TO THEM BY YOU? UH, NOT NECESSARILY AS A RED LINE, BUT AS A STARTING PLACE? OR DO YOU WANT TO SEND OUT ANOTHER VERSION WHERE IT IS AN, AN ACTUAL, I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU'RE GONNA GET TRANSCRIBED FROM THE PDF, UM, EXACTLY. 'CAUSE I DON'T KNOW WHETHER THAT IS AN EXACT WORDING CONVERTED FROM PDF TO WORD, AND THEN YOU REDLINE IT, REDLINED IT, WANTED TO MAKE THAT CLARIFICATION. 'CAUSE I DON'T WANT TIME TO GO BY AND NEXT WEEK WE HAVE TO DEAL WITH WHAT IS THIS, WHAT IS THE BASELINE? AND SO CAN YOU GIVE US SOME GUIDE, UH, OR SOME INSTRUCTION, HOW TO GO FORWARD? WHAT SHOULD WE BE LOOKING AT? WHAT ARE WE LOOKING AT? ABSOLUTELY. AND, AND, YOU KNOW, I DID NOT DO THE FIRST DRAFT OF THIS. UM, AND SO WHETHER THIS IS TRUE EXACTLY TO THE ORIGINAL, I CAN'T SPEAK TO THAT. BUT BASED ON WHAT I'M HEARING, IT MAY NOT BE AN EXACT REPRODUCTION AND A RED LINE OF THAT. HOWEVER, ATTACHMENT A DOES REPRODUCE THE ORIGINAL LANGUAGE FROM THE 1985 RULE. SO THAT HAS BEEN PROVIDED TO YOU FOR CONSIDERATION. UM, AND SO, YOU KNOW, THE, THE RED LINE IS REALLY MEANT TO HIGHLIGHT THE MAJOR SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES. IF IT'S THE WILL OF THE COMMISSION TO HAVE A SUPER CLEAN EXACT REPLICATION OF THE PDF TO A RED LINE VERSION, WE'RE HAPPY TO DO THAT FOR YOU. UM, YOU KNOW, THE HOPE IS THAT THE DISCUSSION TODAY, UM, YOU KNOW, YOU'VE GOT THE SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES IN FRONT OF YOU, YOU'VE GOT THE ORIGINAL IN FRONT OF YOU, AND THE HOPE IS THAT, YOU KNOW, IF THERE ARE RECOMMENDATIONS OR THINGS THAT YOU'D LIKE CHANGED, WE COULD CERTAINLY INCORPORATE THAT BEFORE IT COMES BACK TO YOU FOR FINAL APPROVAL. SO, CHAIR, MAY I ASK IF YOU CAN ASK FOR A VOTE, DO WILL YOU NEED US TO GIVE YOU A EXACT RED LINE AGAINST THE ORIGINAL, OR ARE YOU OKAY WITH WORKING WITH WHAT WE'VE PRESENTED TO YOU? CERTAINLY. SO LET ME, AND I'LL ASK FOR CLARIFICATION. SO WHEN YOU, WE COLLECT A RED LINE IN, IN THE EMAIL THAT YOU, THAT WE WERE ALL RECEIVED WAS A PDF COPY OF THE ACTUAL FOUNDING DOCUMENT. SO EVERYTHING IN THAT DOCUMENT IS REVEALED AND CAN BE READ. AND I DON'T THINK WE NEED [03:30:01] A TRANSCRIBED TEXT OF THAT. NO, I DON'T THINK SO. BUT I WILL, I WILL ASK MY COMMISSION TO MAKE A MOTION. UH, YOU KNOW, I MEAN THAT WE DON'T NEED, OH, I'M COMMENT, VOTE. WELL, I MEAN, WE'RE, WE CAN ONLY DISCUSS, SO I GUESS IT'S NOT A VOTE. YOU, YOU CAN HAVE A DISCUSSION, GET A GENERAL FEELING. YES. WELL, I MEAN, WE'RE NOT VOTING ON THE ACTUAL ITEM, UH, BUT I'M JUST SAYING I CAN READ WHAT THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT SAID BECAUSE IT'S A PDF AND THEN THE PROPOSED LANGUAGE FOR US TO CONSIDER AND THAT WE MAY TAKE ACTION ON THE NEXT MONTH. UM, SO YES, THE COMMISSION CAN PROVIDE DIRECTION. I, I HAVE A COMMENT. I ASSUME THAT SINCE 1985, THESE RULES AND PROCEDURES HAVE GONE THROUGH NUMEROUS CHANGES TO WHERE WE ARE, WHAT ARE WE ARE LOOKING AT TODAY. AND SO I THINK IT'S MORE USEFUL FOR US TO LOOK AT WHAT IS PRESENTED IN FRONT OF US TODAY AND CONSIDER THOSE THAN TO TRANSCRIBE SOMETHING FROM 1985. UM, I ALSO WANNA SAY I LIKE THE CHANGES BECAUSE THEY'RE TALKING NOW JUST ABOUT RULES AND PROCEDURE AND NOT WHAT THE COMMISSION CAN OR CANNOT DO, RIGHT? SO WE'RE TALKING HOW WE CONDUCT OURSELVES IN THIS MEETING ROOM AND NOT WHAT WE CONSIDER IN TERMS OF CULTURAL RESOURCES. UM, THAT DEFINITELY BELONGS SOMEWHERE ELSE. SO I, I APPLAUD THOSE CHANGES AND THAT'S MY, THAT'S MY OPINION. THANK YOU. UH, COMMISSIONER BLAKELY. YES. I'M WONDERING WHERE DO THESE LIVE? BECAUSE THE, THE ITEM THAT'S DEPICTED IN THE PDF SEEMS LIKE A QUITE INFORMAL PHYSICAL COPY, NOT, YOU KNOW, DIGITAL AND LIKE BOUND WITH A PLASTIC BINDING, LIKE THE RECIPE BOOK OR, I MEAN THE, THE EIGHTIES WERE MUCH MORE INFORMAL. I'LL TELL YOU , IT'S NOT PART OF THE, IS IT PART OF THE ORDINANCE? IS IT LIKE A RIDER ON THE ORDINANCE? DOES IT HAVE ANY RELATIONSHIP TO THE ORDINANCE AT ALL OR IS IT MORE OF WORKING? WELL, UH, IT WAS PART OF THE, MY UNDERSTANDING LEGAL QUESTION IS PART OF THE FOUNDING OF THIS INSTITUTION BACK WHEN PAPER WAS KING. AND, UM, EVERYTHING WAS DONE, UM, IN THAT WAY. UM, BUT AGAIN, MY, MY QUESTION IS AGAIN, AS, AS I SAY, STATED EARLIER OR MY STATEMENT WAS THAT AS THINGS HAVE CHANGED, ACTS AS THERE HAS BEEN RULINGS FROM THE SUPREME COURT, TEXAS SUPREME COURT FOR ALL KINDS OF THINGS THAT WE, THAT WE INTERACT WITH IN TERMS OF WHAT, UM, THE PROJECTS THAT WE ARE REGULATING, UM, BEING UP TO DATE, UH, MATCHING THE SAME ROLES THAT OTHER BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS FOR THE CITY OF HOUSTON FOLLOW, INCLUDING THE PLANNING COMMISSION, WHICH IS VERY SIMILAR TO WHAT WE ARE IN CITY COUNCIL. UM, TO ME THAT'S REALLY BRING, THIS BRINGS US IN ALIGNMENT WITH WHERE, WHERE WE SHOULD HAVE ALREADY BEEN. AND THANK, THANK, YOU KNOW, THANKFULLY TO COMMISSIONER BROBECK TO, YOU KNOW, REALLY ASKING THESE QUESTIONS TO PROMPT US TO LOOK AT THESE THINGS AND TO UPDATE THESE THINGS. AND, UM, AGAIN, WE'LL DISCUSS THIS AGAIN NEXT MONTH IF WE DETERMINE TO TAKE ACTION AT THAT TIME. BUT, UM, IT'S A NECESSARY STEP. PROBABLY SHOULD HAVE HAPPENED A LONG TIME AGO, BUT IT'S JUST, YOU KNOW, WE ARE AGING AND, UM, THIS ORGANIZATION HAS BEEN AGING AND IT'S TIME TO, UM, TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE THIS BUTTON DOWN. WHERE WILL THEY LIVE? SORRY? WHERE WILL THEY LIVE ULTIMATELY? WILL THEY BE ON THE WEBSITE? WILL THEY BE ANOTHER PHYSICAL COPY IN A SAFE SOMEWHERE OR? YEAH, I THINK A WEBSITE IS A NATURAL PLACE FOR IT TO LIVE. IT SHOULD LIVE, LIVE THERE WITH, UH, THE ORDINANCE AND THE MUNI CODE AND EVERYTHING ELSE. WELL, AND ULTIMATELY THAT'S THE DISCRETION OF THE DIRECTOR. UM, BECAUSE THIS IS NOT AN ORDINANCE. IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE CODIFIED. THESE ARE YOUR SORT OF INTERNAL, UM, SOPS. AND SO, UM, YOU KNOW, THEY, THEY LIVE WITH YOU AND TO THE DEGREE THAT THE DIRECTOR CHOOSES TO PUBLISH THAT INFORMATION, YOU KNOW, THAT'S WITHIN THE DIRECTOR'S DISCRETION. I WILL SAY AS, UM, A SEMI HISTORIAN THAT IF WE DO PUT IT TO PAPER AND STORE THAT PAPER, IT LIKELY WILL OUTLIVE THE WEBSITE AND ANY OTHER ELECTRONIC VERSION OF IT. SO, UM, YOU COULD DONATE IT TO THE HOUSTON HISTORY RESEARCH CENTER. I'LL HOLD ON TO IT FOR YOU, GINGER. I JUST GAVE YASMINE THE ORIGINAL PHOTO OF THE COMMISSION. OH. CAN WE PUT THAT ON THE DOCUMENT CAMERA? JUST FOR, FOR, IS THAT POSSIBLE? IS THE BAG STILL HERE? DID YASMINE GO? YASMINE? I DON'T HAVE ACCESS TO IT. IT'S A PHYSICAL PICTURE. HOLD ON, I'LL BE OVER THERE. UM, ANYWAY, THERE, THERE ARE MEMBERS OF THE COM OF THE ORIGINAL COMMISSION THAT I KNOW AND I CANNOT RECOGNIZE THEM IN THE IMAGE. SO THAT'S K. UM, I DID WANNA MENTION THAT AS WE [03:35:01] WERE DISCUSSING THE RULES OF PROCEDURE WITH DIRECTOR TRAN, UM, SHE DID BRING ME INTO THE DISCUSSION BECAUSE OUR RULES FOR COUNSEL ARE CODIFIED THERE IN CHAPTER TWO. SO THERE IS REFERENCE TO THE RULES OF COUNSEL, WHICH ARE IN CHAPTER TWO DASH TWO. WE HAVE 24, EXCUSE ME, WE HAVE 24 RULES THAT LIVE THERE, INCLUDING LIKE RECONSIDERATION AND THAT SORT OF THING. AND SO WE ARE REFERENCING THOSE RULES, WHICH ARE CODIFIED IN THE CODE, UH, JUST AS A BASIS FOR THE OPERATIONS OF THE COMMISSION. SO WHILE THIS ISN'T CODIFIED IN THE CODE, WE DO REFERENCE, SO THERE'S A, A, A BASIS FOR OPERATION AND I CAN, AND WE DID DO THAT PURPOSEFULLY FOR THAT REASON. THANK YOU. IT'S WALKED OFF. OKAY. IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE, UH, DIRECTOR TRAN, THAT YOU'D LIKE TO MENTION ON THIS ITEM OR, OKAY. NO, I DON'T. THANK YOU. I THINK WE'LL THEN MOVE ON TO THE, UM, HISTORIC PRESERVATION. WELL, WE'LL MOVE, SORRY. ITEM I COMMENTS FROM THE HAHC FROM COMMISSION MEMBERS, COMMISSIONER BLAKELY. I, I HAVE A, A REQUEST, UH, TO STAFF, WHICH I HOPE IS NOT TO PERNICKETY. UM, WHEN, WHEN WE HAVE PLANS IN THE, THE PACKETS, IT WOULD BE REALLY, IT'S ALWAYS REALLY HELPFUL IF LIKE, WHEN THERE ARE TWO SIDE BY SIDE DRAWINGS IF THEY'RE AT THE SAME SCALE. UM, I, I STRUGGLED A LITTLE BIT WITH A FEW OF THE, UM, APPLICATIONS TODAY BECAUSE THERE WERE SAY LIKE EXISTING AND PROPOSED AT SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT DEGREES OF ENLARGEMENT, WHICH JUST MAKE IT HARD FOR ME TO, UH, QUICKLY ASSESS THE DEGREE OF DIFFERENCE. AND THEN THE OTHER QUESTION I HAVE IS WHETHER WHERE THERE ARE BIG DRAWINGS WITH LOTS OF INFORMATION ON THEM, IF IT MIGHT BE POSSIBLE JUST TO HAVE A BIG SHEET IN THE PDF SINCE PDFS SEEM TO HAVE THAT CAPACITY SINCE WE'RE NOT WORKING WITH PHYSICAL DOCUMENTS, UH, RATHER THAN TRY TO SHRINK IT. BECAUSE I FIND MYSELF TRYING TO READ DIMENSIONS AND STRUGGLING WITH THAT. I DON'T KNOW IF OTHERS HAVE THE SAME ISSUE, BUT, UH, I, I HOPE THAT ISN'T TOO MUCH TO ASK. SO IT'S JUST SO WE UNDERSTAND IT'S THE, THE REPORT THAT COMES OUT EIGHT AND A HALF BY 11 WHERE WE HAVE THE SITE PLAN BEFORE AND AFTER NEXT TO EACH OTHER AND SCALING THEM TO BE CONSISTENT, NUMBER ONE. AND THEN NUMBER TWO, MAKING THEM LEGIBLE TO WHERE THE DIMENSIONS ARE. YOU CAN READ THEM ON AN IPAD. OKAY. WE'LL WORK TO INCORPORATE THAT. I, AND I KNOW PART OF THE ISSUE IS THAT WITH THE TECHNOLOGY, PUTTING ALL THIS INFORMATION ON THESE REPORTS TAKES UP A LOT OF MEMORY AND SOMETIMES, UM, I KNOW THERE'S BEEN TROUBLE SOMETIMES TRYING TO PUT ALL THIS INFORMATION ON HERE. SO I KNOW THEY HAVE TO SAVE THINGS DOWN TO, TO FIT, UH, HAS BEEN AN ISSUE. BUT I DO IT, IT IS HARD TO REACH SOME OF THE DIMENSIONS SOMETIMES, WHICH ARE, WHICH WOULD BE HELPFUL TO, TO LOOK AT BEFOREHAND. UNDERSTOOD. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? UH, COMMENTS FROM COMMISSION? MEMBERS COMMISSION? OKAY, SO DOCUMENT CAMERA. SO DOCUMENT CAMERA PLEASE. AND IF WE CAN, UM, JUST, CAN WE ZOOM OUT A LITTLE BIT ANYWAY, WE NEED CAPTION . WELL THAT'S, THAT'S WHERE WE STARTED. SO WHAT YEAR SHOULD BE IN 1986? UM, WHICH UHHUH? BUT SHE DOESN'T LOOK LIKE MINETTE . OH, I CAN PICK HER OUT. YEAH. WHICH ONE? PURPLE CROSS, RIGHT? MM-HMM . NEXT. HE'S IN THE FIRST BETWEEN THE TWO BOTTOM ROW WOMEN WITH THE WHITE. WHITE OR LIGHT. LIGHT COLORS. YES, CORRECT. OKAY. OKAY. WITH THAT WE'LL MOVE ON, UH, TO THE LAST ITEM ON THE AGENDA, WHICH IS THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER'S REPORT. OKAY. THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO GIVE THIS REPORT. I AM VON TRAN, THE INTERIM HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER. UM, WE'VE HEARD ONE OF OUR PUBLIC SPEAKER CAME UP TO SPEAK ABOUT THE HARPER SCHOOL. UH, THIS IS THE ONLY ONE ITEM THAT I WAS GOING TO, UM, LET THE COMMISSION KNOW AND THE PUBLIC KNOW THAT WE ARE IN THE PROCESS OF DOING ALL WE CAN, UH, WITH THE GUIDE, UH, OR WITH THE, UM, [03:40:01] DIRECTION OF MAYOR WHITMEYER AND HIS DESIRE, UH, TO SEE IF WE COULD, UH, SAVE, UH, A PORTION OF THE HISTORIC HARPER SCHOOL. MAINLY THE, UH, WHATEVER WE CAN. BUT REALLY RIGHT NOW WE'RE MAINLY LOOKING AT THE FRONT ENTRANCE AND THE SIGNAGE TO THE SCHOOL. UH, THERE ARE MANY, UM, I WOULD SAY, UH, WE'RE LOOKING FOR RESOURCES. WE'RE LOOKING FOR, UM, SOMEONE TO COME IN AND HELP US, UH, WITH, UM, REMOVING THE HISTORICAL, HISTORIC MATERIALS WE ARE LOOKING FOR, UM, A PLACE TO STORE IT. IN THE MEANTIME, WE'RE ALSO LOOKING FOR A LOCATION, A FUTURE LOCATION, UH, PERHAPS THAT THIS CAN HOUSE IN. UH, BUT THERE ARE MANY OPPORTUNITIES. WE JUST REALLY, UH, GOT GOING IN THE LAST, UH, THREE WEEKS, I THINK. UM, SO AS WE'VE BEEN WORKING IN THE BACKGROUND ON THIS ITEM AND, UH, YES, UM, TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE, UH, BUT THE DEVELOPER HAS TOLD US, UH, THAT THEY WILL WORK WITH US. SO, UM, I THINK THAT WE WILL BE ABLE TO SAVE A PORTION OF THIS HISTORIC, UH, PIECE OF ARCHITECTURE OF HOUSTON. SO THAT IS THE END OF MY REPORT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. WITH THAT, WE ARE ADJOURNED. YOU SHOULD. * This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.