* 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. [Roll Call] [00:00:04] OKAY, JEFF. WE'RE LIVE. OKAY. I WOULD LIKE TO CALL TO ORDER THE HISTORIC AND DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION FOR WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 18TH. 18TH, 2020. MAY I HAVE A ROLL CALL PLEASE? FERNANDEZ HERE. FISH HERE. GIBBS? HERE. VELASQUEZ? HERE. AREOLA HERE. CARPENTER. HERE. RUB BOWMAN. HERE. ZER HERE. LA HERE. BEFORE WE GET STARTED, WE DO HAVE A BRIEF ANNOUNCEMENT REGARDING TRANSLATION SERVICES FOR THE MEETING. THANK YOU. THANK [Chairman's Statement] YOU. CAN WE PLEASE HAVE THE CHAIRMAN'S STATEMENT? THE HISTORIC AND DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION IS AN ADVISORY BOARD APPOINTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL. I'M JEFFREY FETZER, CHAIRMAN, AND THE VICE CHAIR IS SCOTT CARPENTER. IT IS THE FUNCTION OF THE COMMISSION TO ADVISE THE CITY MANAGER AND ALL RELEVANT CITY DEPARTMENTS CONCERNING ALL APPLICATIONS FOR PERMITS FOR PROPERTIES AND HISTORIC DISTRICTS FOR LANDMARKS ON CITY PROPERTY IN THE RIVER IMPROVEMENT OVERLAY AND FOR DEMOLITIONS. IN CONSIDERING WHETHER TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL OF AN APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS, THE COMMISSION WILL BE GUIDED BY THE CITY'S UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AND DESIGN GUIDELINES AND STANDARDS THAT HAVE BEEN ADOPTED BY CITY COUNCIL IN APPEAL OF A DECISION BY AN ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL CAN BE FILED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CITY'S UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE. THE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC CAN WATCH THIS MEETING THROUGH LIVESTREAM. THEY CAN ALSO LISTEN TO THE MEETING THROUGH AUDIO ONLY BY CALLING 2 1 0 2 0 6 5 4 8 3 IN ENGLISH OR IN SPANISH. THE MEETING IS BEING RECORDED IN SPANISH. FOR THOSE APPLICANTS OR MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC THAT REQUIRE TRANSLATION SERVICES. THE INTERPRETER WILL TRANSLATE OVER THE PHONE AS NECESSARY IN AN EFFORT TO HEAR ALL CASES ON THE AGENDA, AS WELL AS TO MINIMIZE THE LENGTH OF THE MEETING, APPLICANTS WILL NEED TO SUMMARIZE THEIR STATEMENTS AND BE AS BRIEF AS POSSIBLE. MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC THAT ARE SPEAKING IN SUPPORT OR OPPOSITION EACH HAVE A MAXIMUM OF TWO MINUTES FOR THEIR COMMENTS, AND EACH COMMISSIONER WILL BE LIMITED TO FIVE MINUTES FOR QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS REGARDING EACH APPLICATION. APPROVAL BY THE COMMISSION DOES NOT TAKE THE PLACE OF ANY TYPE OF PERMIT. PERMITS MUST BE OBTAINED FOR ALL WORK. CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR WORK APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION WILL BE EMAILED TO YOU WITHIN 10 DAYS. NOWHERE OF ANY TYPE IS TO BE STARTED WITHOUT OBTAINING THE APPROPRIATE CITY PERMITS. AFTER A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS HAS BEEN APPROVED, HAS BEEN ISSUED BY THE OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION. AT THIS TIME I'LL ASK O H P STAFF TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR TODAY'S MEETING. THANK YOU. UM, AS YOU CAN SEE ON THE SCREEN, UM, WE DO HAVE A FULL AGENDA, SO WE'LL GO AHEAD [1. 20-6710 Review and approval of the 2021 HDRC Schedule of Hearings and Application Deadlines.] AND GET STARTED. UM, THE FIRST ITEM IS ACTUALLY, UH, REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF THE 2021 H C R C HEARING SCHEDULE AND DEADLINES. UM, WE'RE GONNA PUT THAT ON YOUR SCREEN FOR REFERENCE NOW. UM, WE HAVE NOTED ONE EDIT THAT NEEDS TO BE MADE AT THE VERY BOTTOM. FEBRUARY 2ND SHOULD BE 2022 INSTEAD OF 21. UM, AND IF THERE'S NO OTHER EDITS, UH, RECOMMENDED BY COMMISSIONERS WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR APPROVAL. WITH THAT CLARIFICATION, CAN I, IS THIS DISCUSSION QUESTION OR JUST CAN I ASK SOMETHING IN GENERAL? SURE. WHEN, WHEN DO WE PLAN ON GETTING BACK TO IN PERSON? I MEAN, THAT MIGHT NOT BE RELATIVE TO THIS, BUT I'M JUST CURIOUS. UM, THERE'S, THERE'S NO, UM, REASON TO DO SO AT THE TIME. UM, WE'RE CURRENTLY OPERATING UNDER, UM, THE, UH, ADVICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL. UM, SO WE ARE ABLE TO OPERATE HOW WE'RE DOING NOW FOR THE TIME BEING. UM, IF THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT IS RESTATED AT REINSTATED AS IT WAS BEFORE COVID, THEN WE'LL HAVE TO RETURN TO IN PERSON. BUT THAT HASN'T HAPPENED AND, AND WE DON'T ANTICIPATE THAT IT WILL ANYTIME SOON. FAIR ENOUGH. THANK YOU. THIS IS COMMISSIONER FISH. I MOVE FOR APPROVAL. ITEM ONE WITH, UH, THE CORRECTED DATE. THIS COMMISSIONER CARPENTER I SECOND WITH THE CORRECTED DATE. WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND FOR APPROVAL AS AMENDED. UH, ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE UNMUTE, RAISE YOUR HAND AND SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. AYE. I'LL OPPOSE, UNMUTE. RAISE YOUR HAND AND SAY NAYYY. MOTION PASSES. OKAY. [Consent Agenda] UM, SO WE HAVE, UH, ITEMS TWO THROUGH, [00:05:01] WE, CAN YOU SCROLL DOWN A LITTLE BIT FOR ME OR ZOOM OUT TWO THROUGH 22 THAT ARE ON CONSENT. UM, WE DO HAVE PUBLIC COMMENTS FOR THOSE ITEMS AND I WILL READ THOSE AT THIS TIME. UM, THE FIRST IS ITEM 2, 4 0 3 MONTANA, PATTY ZIONS. UH, THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY CONCURS WITH THE O H P RECOMMENDATION THAT 4 0 3 MONTANA IS WORTHY OF HISTORIC LANDMARK DESIGNATION. THIS QUEEN AND HOUSE IS A FINE EXAMPLE OF NOTED ARCHETYPE FRIEDRICH SLING'S EARLY WORK IN SAN ANTONIO. WE WENT ON TO DESIGN SOME OF THE CITY'S MOST SIGNIFICANT CHURCHES, INCLUDING ST. MARY'S CHURCH, ST. GERARD'S, AND THE CHAPEL AT INCARNATE WORD AMONG OTHERS. MOREOVER, HIS CLIENT, NICHOLAS LEE PETRICK, PLAYED A SIGNIFICANT ROLE IN DEVELOPING MANY OF THE 1920S NEIGHBORHOODS. WE NOW FIND HISTORIC 4 0 3 MONTANA SURPASSES TO THRESHOLD NECESSARY FOR DESIGNATION AS A HISTORIC LANDMARK, AND WE URGE YOU TO VOTE ACCORDINGLY. I RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY ITEM 9 8 15 8 75 EAST ASHBY PLACE. UM, RICKY KUSHNER FOR THE TOBIN HILL COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION. UH, THEY APPROVE THIS REQUEST. UM, ITEM 13 11 11 11 15 NORTH PALMETTO PATTY ZIONS, THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY OF SAN ANTONIO POSES THE PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION AT 1111 TO 1115 NORTH PALMETTO. THE USE OF DEEPER SETBACKS TO ALLOW FOR AN, FOR AN INAPPROPRIATE HEIGHT AND INCOMPATIBLE ROOF DECK. THE OVERALL HEIGHT AND MASSING FOR THE TWO STRUCTURES WOULD CONTINUE TO DOMINATE, CREATING A CULMINATIVE VISUAL IMPACT INCONSISTENT WITH THE SCALE OF THE SURROUNDING NE HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOOD. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED. UM, ALSO ON THAT ITEM, UM, MONICA SAVINO, WE DO NOT SUPPORT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS WHILE STAFF CONTENDS THAT THE FRONT SETBACK SHOULD NOT BE SO DEEP AS TO BE DISSIMILAR TO THOSE FOUND IN THE BLOCK. LIKEWISE, THE SCALE MASSING AND HEIGHT SHOULD NOT BE SO DISSIMILAR TO THOSE FOUND IN THE BLOCK. UM, HOWEVER, THE SCALE MASSING AND HEIGHTS OF BOTH UNITS ARE VERY DISSIMILAR TO ANYTHING FOUND IN THE BLOCK. THE FRONT ELEVATIONS OF THESE TWO HOUSES ARE IDENTICAL, IDENTICAL, EXCUSE ME, IDENTICAL TO THOSE. IN ANOTHER CASE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA, 9 0 9 NORTH HACKBERRY, WITH THE EXCEPTION THAT THESE HOUSES ARE AT LEAST SIX FEET TALLER DUE TO THE ROOF OF THE LARGE REAR PORTION OF THE HOUSE. THE THREE STORY REAR DECKS ON BOTH UNITS EXCEED THAT OF THE MAJORITY OF HISTORIC BUILDINGS BY MORE THAN ONE STORY PER THE GUIDELINES AND SERVE ONLY TO EMPHASIZE THE HOUSE'S SCALE, MASSING AND HEIGHTS ARE OUT OF CONTACT WITH THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES ON THAT BLOCK. WE URGE DUE, UH, TO NOT APPROVE THE PROPO PROPOSAL AS SUBMITTED. ITEM 15, UM, 1833 EAST HOUSTON, MONICA SAVINO SUBMITS. WE SUPPORT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS FOR TAX CERTIFICATION. ITEM 18 6 15 NORTH MESQUITE, UH, MONICA ZAINO SUBMITS. WE DO NOT SUPPORT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS. ALUMINUM WINDOWS WERE BEING, BECOMING PREVALENT AT THIS TIME. EXCUSE ME, ALUMINUM WINDOWS WERE BECOMING PREVALENT AT THE TIME THIS HOME WAS BUILT. WE RECOMMEND THE APPLICANT DETERMINE THAT THESE ARE NOT THE ORIGINAL WINDOWS OR THAT THE ORIGINAL WINDOWS, OR WHAT THE ORIGINAL WINDOWS LIKELY WERE. WE DO NOT RECOMMEND THE USE OF VINYL WINDOWS EVER. THESE ARE TYPICALLY WHITE UNITS, WHITE FRAMES AND SASHES, UM, HAVE NEVER BEEN RECOMMENDED BY STAFF. ADDITIONALLY, VINYL WINDOWS ALL HAVE FOUR DIVIDED LIGHTS REGARDLESS OF THE GRILL CHOICE. IF REPLACEMENT IS ALLOWED, WE RECOMMEND STAFF ASSIST THE APPLICANT TO CHOOSE A MATERIAL CORRECT IN PERIOD STYLE. UM, ITEM 20, UM, HAROLD FLETCHER II CEMENTS AS THE GOLD STAR FATHER OF CORPORAL JACOB WOODLOCK FLETCHER. UM, US ARMY KILLED IN ACTION IN AFGHANISTAN ON, UH, NOVEMBER 24TH, 2004. I SUPPORT THIS MEMORIAL NOT SO MUCH FOR THE FAMILIES, BUT BECAUSE OF THE YOUNG MEN AND WOMEN FROM THE FAMILIES. ITEM 21 9 0 9 NORTH HACKBERRY, MONICA SAVINO SUBMITS. WE SUBMIT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS INCLUDING STIPULATIONS. THE FRONT HOUSES ARE RELATIVELY MODEST, BUT WITH DIFFERENT ARCHITECTURAL ELEMENTS, ALLOWING EACH HOUSE TO BE RECOGNIZED AT ITS AS ITS OWN HOME. THE REAR ACCESSORY HOUSE IS LEGIBLE AS JUST THAT THE ACCESSORY SECONDARY UNIT. WE APPRECIATE THE APPLICANT'S WORK TO CREATE INFILL THAT IS MORE CONGRUENT WITH THE EXISTING HISTORIC URBAN PATTERNS THAT WE HAVE IN OUR HISTORIC DISTRICT. UM, AND I BELIEVE THAT'S ALL THE COMMENTS FOR CONSENT ITEMS. THERE'S ADDITIONAL LETTERS, UM, IN YOUR PACKETS FOR REFERENCE. UM, DO COMMISSIONERS WISH TO PULL ANY ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION? THIS COMMISSIONER GIBBS, I'D LIKE TO PULL ITEMS 13 AND ITEM 18. OKAY, WE WILL HIGHLIGHT THOSE ON THE SCREEN. UM, I WAS JUST REMINDED WE DO HAVE A COUPLE OF VOICEMAILS FOR ITEM 20. LEE, IF YOU CAN PULL THIS FROM THE PROPERTIES FOLDER. YES. MY NAME IS JOHN D BAES. I WAS THE CHAIRMAN AND FOUNDER OF THE VIETNAM VETERANS MEMORIAL FUND THAT CREATED VETERANS MEMORIAL PLAZA IN THE VIETNAM VETERANS MEMORIAL. I'M CALLING REGARDING CASE NUMBER 2 0 2 0 4 9 4. AND THE ADDRESS IS, UH, AUDITORIUM [00:10:01] CIRCLE. UH, MEMORIAL PARK. UH, I AM CALLING TO FULLY SUPPORT THE PROPOSAL THAT IS, UH, AND I'M A GOLD STAR FROM SAN ANTONIO. I'M ALSO OF AMERICA, CHAPTER PRESIDENT FOR THE LONE STAR CHAPTER, AND I'M CALLING YOU REGARDING THE HERSCHEL WOODY WILLIAMS MEDAL OF HONOR FOUNDATION. UM, AND THE, UH, THE REQUIRE OR THE REQUEST TO BUILD A GOLD STAR FAMILIES MONUMENT HERE IN SAN ANTONIO. I AM IN VERY MUCH IN SUPPORT OF THAT. UM, I WOULD LIKE FOR THAT TO TAKE PLACE. I THINK THAT GOLD STAR FAMILIES, UM, WOULD APPRECIATE IT THE ENTIRE, YOU KNOW, OUR ENTIRE AREA HAS MANY GOLD STAR FAMILIES AND I THINK THAT WOULD BE APPRECIATED. AND I THINK THAT IT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT THE CITY SHOULD GET BEHIND AND, UM, DO AND AND TO AND TO PUT IT INTO PLAY. SO, UM, ANYWAY, I, AGAIN, I AM IN SUPPORT OF THAT AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. Y'ALL HAVE A GREAT DAY. MY NAME IS JOSEPH BRE. I AM AN UNITED STATES ARMY VETERAN AND A SOLDIER FOR LIFE. I CURRENTLY LIVE AT 1 7 5 1 8 HILLS EDGE ROAD, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS, ZIP CODE 7 8 2 5 7. I'M CURRENTLY THE CO-CHAIRMAN OF THE SAN ANTONIO COMMUNITY ACTION COMMITTEE THAT ARE KNOWN AS THE SAC ACT. I'M ALSO A DISTINGUISHED QUARTERMASTER AT UNITED STATES ARMY NORTH, AND I'M ALSO A CIVILIAN AID TO THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY. I'M CALLING TO FULLY SUPPORT MISS MISS CANDY MARTIN'S APPLICATION TO HAVE A GOLD STAR FAMILY MONUMENT HERE IN SAN ANTONIO. THIS IS, THIS REQUEST IS ITEM NUMBER 20 DASH 6 8 0 6 ON TODAY'S AGENDA. THE ADDRESS DESCRIPTION IS MEMORIAL PARK AND THE HISTORIC DISTRICT NAME IS AUTO AUDITORIUM CIRCLE. AS, AS IT HAS BEEN SAID MANY TIMES, THE STRENGTH OF OUR ARMY IS OUR SOLDIERS AND THE STRENGTH OF OUR SOLDIERS IS THEIR FAMILIES. ALL TOO OFTEN THE FAMILIES OF OUR FALLEN CARRY AN IMMEASURABLE BURDEN WITH LITTLE SUPPORT OR RECOGNITION. IT IS TIME FOR THE CITIZENS OF SAN ANTONIO TO SUPPORT OUR GOLD STAR FAMILIES WITH THE APPROVAL AND DEDICATION OF THIS MONUMENT. THANK YOU FOR YOUR, FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. UH, THIS IS TRACE BERG AND I LIVE AT, UH, 2 0 1 LILAC LANE, SAN ANTONIO 7 8 2 0 9. CALLING ABOUT ITEM NUMBER 2 0 6 8 0 6. UH, AND THE ADDRESS OF THE REQUEST IS AUDITORIUM CIRCLE. AND THIS IS FOR THE GOLD STAR FAMILY MONUMENT, UH, WHICH IS BEING PROPOSED, UH, HERE IN SAN ANTONIO MILITARY CITY, U S A, UH, WHICH IS WAY OVERDUE TO IN RECOGNIZING ALL OF THE FAMILIES WHO HAVE GIVEN THEIR SONS AND DAUGHTERS TO SERVE THIS NATION TO GIVE THE ULTIMATE PRICE FOR FREEDOM. UH, THIS REMEMBRANCE WILL SERVE NOTICE TO ALL GOING FORWARD, OUR THANKS AND RECOGNITION TO THOSE FAMILIES AND TO THOSE CHILDREN, UH, WHO SERVED. UH, I CURRENTLY, UH, AM SERVING AS A CIVILIAN AID TO THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY EMERITUS FOR TEXAS SOUTH. AND, UH, INVOICING MY SUPPORT FOR THIS PROJECT. THANK YOU. BYE. GOOD DAY. MY NAME IS CATHERINE MARIANA. I DO NOT LIVE IN SAN ANTONIO OR BEAR COUNTY FOR THAT MATTER. I LIVE IN VILLE, JUST SOUTH OF SAN ANTONIO. I'M HERE TO REFERENCE NUMBER 20 DASH 6 8 0 6 AT AUDITORIUM CIRCLE, THE GOLD STAR FAMILY'S MONUMENT BY THE HERSCHEL WOODY [00:15:01] WILLIAMS MEDAL OF HONORS FOUNDATION. I'M THE WIDOW OF TECH SERGEANT MARK MARIANA, UNITED STATES AIR FORCE, WHO DIED NOVEMBER 15TH, 2003. AS I STATED, I DO NOT LIVE IN SAN ANTONIO, BUT I'M SPEAKING AS THE GOLD STAR WISE OF AMERICA, SOUTH CENTRAL REGION PRESIDENT, WHICH INCLUDES TEXAS, OKLAHOMA, ARKANSAS, MISSOURI, AND LOUISIANA. OUR LOCAL CHAPTER IS THE LONE STAR CHAPTER WITH 223 ACTIVE MEMBERS. THERE ARE ROUGHLY 1500 GOLD STAR FAMILIES IN OUR AREA AND NOT ALL BELONG TO THE GOLD STAR WISE OR GOLD STAR MOTHERS ORGANIZATION. THIS MONUMENT WOULD NOT ONLY REPRESENT SAN ANTONIO GOLD STAR FAMILIES, BUT ALL GOLD STAR FAMILIES IN OUR AREA. PLEASE CONSIDER APPROVING THE PLACEMENT AND CONSTRUCTION OF THIS MEMORIAL FOR ALL FOLKS, OUR FAMILIES AND OUR LOVED ONES WHO ARE NO LONGER WITH US. THANK YOU FOR HEARING US OUT AND EVEN CONSIDERING THIS MEMORIAL. HELLO, MY NAME IS MARCEL DENISE VOS. MY ADDRESS IS 1 2 3 ROUNDABOUT LANE KERRVILLE, TEXAS. I'M CALLING IN REFERENCE TO ITEM NUMBER TWO ZERO DASH 6 8 0 0. AND UM, THE ADDRESS OF THE REQUEST IS AUM AUTO AUDITORIUM CIRCLE. I AM A GOLD STAR MOTHER AND I'M CALLING IN SUPPORT OF THE GOLD STAR FAMILY'S MONUMENT. THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE GREATLY APPRECIATED BY MANY GOLD STAR FAMILY MEMBERS IN THIS AREA. THANK YOU. HI, UH, MY NAME IS JEFF WELLS AND I'M CALLING FROM THE WISH BAR HEROES FOUNDATION. I'M THE PRESIDENT, FOUNDER OF THE ORGANIZATION AND I'M JUST CALLING IN SUPPORT OF ITEM NUMBER 20 DASH 6 8 0 6. UH, THE ADDRESS IS MEMORIAL PARK, H D R C, CASE NUMBER 2020 DASH 4 9 4. AND THE REQUEST IS FOR THE ADDITION OF A GOLD STAR MONUMENT. AND THIS, THIS IS IN CITY, UH, COUNCIL DISTRICT ONE, AND I JUST WANTED TO EXPRESS MY SUPPORT FOR THE MONUMENT THERE IN IN MEMORIAL PARK AND JUST TALK ABOUT, YOU KNOW, THE FACT THAT OBVIOUSLY WE'RE MILITARY CITY U S A, WE HAVE ONE OF THE GREATEST VETERAN POPULATIONS IN THE COUNTRY AND WE'RE ONE OF THE FEW CITIES, UH, IN THE UNITED STATES THAT DOES NOT, UH, HAVE A GOLD STAR MONUMENT. AND OBVIOUSLY WITH, WITH WE, WE, WE ALSO HAVE ONE OF THE GREATEST POPULATIONS OF GOLD STAR FAMILIES LIVING IN SAN ANTONIO. AND THE GOLD STAR FAMILIES IS THE FAMILY OF, OF, UH, SOMEONE WHO HAS FALLEN, UH, AND PAID THE ULTIMATE SACRIFICE IN, UH, DURING MILITARY OPERATION. SO I JUST THINK IT'S VERY, VERY IMPORTANT FOR US AS A CITY TO HAVE THIS MONUMENT. UH, I BELIEVE THAT IT, IT ADDS TO, UH, WHAT'S ALREADY HAPPENING THERE AT, AT MEMORIAL PARK, WHICH IS JUST A, AN AMAZING, UH, PARK THAT'S, THAT'S, UH, IT'S AN AMAZING TRIBUTE TO OUR, OUR MILITARY VETERANS AND OBVIOUSLY THE GOLD STAR FAMILIES OR HONOR THE, THE FAMILIES OF THOSE WHO HAVE SACRIFICED SO MUCH. SO JUST WANT TO EXPRESS MY SUPPORT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THE OPPORTUNITY AND HAVE A GREAT DAY. BYE. OKAY, THANK YOU. AND JUST THAT FIRST ONE THAT WOULDN'T FINISH PLAYING, THAT WAS FOR THE RECORD, UM, A VOICEMAIL IN SUPPORT OF ITEM 20. UM, SO I BELIEVE COMMISSIONER GIBBS HAS MADE A MOTION FOR ACTUALLY, UH, HAS REQUESTED THAT ITEM 13 AND 18 BE PULLED FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION. THAT'S CORRECT, YES. OKAY. ARE THERE ANY OTHER ITEMS? IF NOT, WE CAN, UM, ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF THE REMAINDER AND I'M GONNA ASK WE TO RE-SHARE THE SCREEN IN A HIGH RESOLUTION SO THAT THEY CAN SEE THOSE, THOSE NUMBERS. CHAIRMAN, THIS IS COMMISSIONER CARPENTER. I MOVE FOR APPROVAL OF ITEMS TWO THROUGH 1214 THROUGH 1719 THROUGH 22 WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS. COMMISSIONER VELASQUEZ WILL SECOND WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND AS NOTED. ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE UNMUTE, RAISE YOUR HAND AND SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? RA UNMUTE. RAISE YOUR HAND AND SAY NAY. MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU. UM, THANK YOU. UM, NOW WE'LL MOVE ON TO THE INDIVIDUAL ITEMS AND UM, MR. CHAIR, JUST FOR, UM, YOUR KNOWLEDGE, UM, THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE HAS RECOMMENDED, UM, FOR INDIVIDUAL CASES THAT WE DO ROLL CALL, VOTING, UH, MOVING FORWARD SO THAT WE CAN SEE EVERYBODY CLEARLY. SO WE'LL BE DOING THAT FOR THE REST OF THE ITEMS. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. [13. 20-6778 Address/Description: 1111 & 1115 N Palmetto HDRC Case No.: 2020-435 Historic District Name: Dignowity Hill Applicant: James Benfield/Benfield Real Estate Request: Construction of two, 2-story residential structures City Council Dist.: 2] SO, EDWARD, ARE YOU THERE WITH ADAM 13? YES, I AM. CAN YOU HEAR ME? YEP. SO COMMISSIONER, THIS WAS PULLED FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT WE HAVE ON THE LINE? YES, THIS IS COMMISSIONER GIBBS. UM, UH, MY QUESTIONS ARE BRIEF. UM, SO, [00:20:01] UM, SINCE I'M LIMITED ON TIME, I JUST WANT TO GO OVER WHAT THE, SOME OPPOSITION THAT WAS ABOUT THE PROJECT. UM, MAINLY CONCERNING THE SETBACKS. I UNDERSTAND FROM THE D R C WHAT WAS AGREED UPON OR WHAT WAS DISCUSSED IN THE D R C. 'CAUSE I READ THE, THE NOTES FROM THAT. HOWEVER, UM, THERE IS CONCERN FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD ABOUT THE SETBACKS ARE, ARE DISSIMILAR TO THOSE FOUND ON A BLOCK. I KNOW THOSE ARE, THAT ARE IMMEDIATES ARE, YOU KNOW, PRETTY MUCH CONSISTENT, BUT ON A BLOCK IS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT AS WELL AS LIKEWISE ABOUT THE SCALE AND THE MASSING. SO JUST WANT YOU TO SPEAK TO THE, TO THOSE ITEMS. AND ALSO WHEN IT COMES TO THE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR STAFF, UM, THE STIPULATION, I'M SORRY, UM, ARE YOU IN FULL AGREEMENT WITH ALL THE STIPULATIONS THAT STAFF HAS IN PLACE? YES. UH, EDWARD AM AM I READY? YES, , YOU CAN, YOU CAN GO AHEAD. OKAY. YES, MR. GIBBS, UM, APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS. JUST TO LET YOU KNOW, I, I'VE HAD THIS DISCUSSION ABOUT THE HEIGHT AND ALL THAT. WE DID MAKE SOME MODIFICATIONS THAT WERE RECOMMENDED TO ME. UM, I ALSO INCLUDED IN THE PLAN PICTURES OF SOME HOUSES LITERALLY THAT ARE WITHIN A HOUSE OR TWO. THERE'S ONE CADDY CORNER. I ACTUALLY BUILT A HOUSE ABOUT A YEAR AGO THAT'S TWO HOUSES AWAY, THAT'S THE EXACT SAME HEIGHT. UH, BUT WE WENT AHEAD AND PUSHED, PUSHED IT BACK A LITTLE BIT TO ADDRESS THAT SITUATION AND I'VE HAD MULTIPLE MEETINGS WITH THE D R C, UM, AND THEY'VE STATED THAT IT'S APPROPRIATE FOR THE AREA. OKAY, I UNDERSTAND THAT BECAUSE THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT THE D R C REPORT SAYS WHEN IT COMES TO THAT. SO WHEN IT COMES TO THE, THE OTHER STIPULATIONS, UM, THAT THE STAFF IS RECOMMENDING, ARE YOU IN FULL AGREEMENT WITH ALL THE STIPULATIONS THAT ARE LISTED THERE? OH, YES SIR. 100%. THEY'VE ALREADY BEEN ADDRESSED AND THEY'RE ALREADY ON THE NEW SET OF PLANS THAT I SENT TO H D R C ON FRIDAY. OKAY. OR I SENT TO EDWARD HALL, MR. HALL ON FRIDAY. GOTCHA, GOTCHA. OKAY. ALRIGHT. UM, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME. THANK YOU SIR. MR. CHAIRMAN, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? MR. CHAIRMAN? COMMISSIONER CARPENTER FOR NO FURTHER, UH, QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? APPROVAL STAFF STIPULATIONS? MAY I ASK US A SECOND? WE HAVE A MOTION, A SECOND FOR APPROVAL WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS. WE HAVE A ROLL CALL PLEASE. FERNANDEZ. AYE FISH? AYE. GIBBS? AYE. VELASQUEZ AYE. AREOLA? AYE. CARPENTER? AYE. RUBE AYE. BOWMAN? AYE BETS? AYE. NOTHING. AYE. MOTION CARRIES. NOW WE HAVE, UM, ITEM 18, 6 15 NORTH MESQUITE. WE DO HAVE THE APPLICANT. ONE SECOND. I MM-HMM. , IT'S NOT WORKING. THERE YOU GO. YEAH, THAT'S GONNA WORK. LET'S DO THIS. RACHEL, CAN YOU GO TO THE TRACKING SHEET [00:25:01] AND CALL THE APPLICANT FOR ITEM 18? HI COMMISSIONERS, I'M BACK ONLINE. UH, RACHEL IS CALLING THE APPLICANT NOW. SORRY ABOUT THAT. HEY RACHEL, IF YOU, UM, CAN UNMUTE YOURSELF, YOU SHOULD BE GOOD TO GO. RACHEL, ARE YOU THERE? YEAH, I THINK SHE'S STILL CALLING. WHAT'S YOUR NUMBER? OKAY. OH, RACHEL, HIT STAR SIX AGAIN. ARE YOU THERE? HELLO? [18. 20-6851 Address/Description: 615 N MESQUITE ST HDRC Case No.: 2020-504 Historic District Name: Dignowity Hill Applicant: Darren Craddock Request: Window replacement, fenestration modifications City Council Dist.: 2] CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES. . OKAY, GREAT. YES, THE APPLICANT DARREN IS ON THE LINE FOR SIX 15 NORTHEAST, PETE. OKAY, DARREN, CAN YOU HEAR US? I CAN. THANK YOU. A LITTLE CHALLENGING TO COMMUNICATION THERE BY THE CERTAIN THINGS. SO I BELIEVE COMMISSIONER GIBBS PULLED THIS FOR A QUESTION. UH, MR. GIBBS? YES, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. UM, MY QUESTION IS BRIEF HERE AND I'M PRETTY MUCH IN AGREEMENT WITH WHAT, UM, WAS IN THE, UH, REPORT AS WELL AS, UM, EVERYTHING FOR STAFF STIPULATIONS, BUT REASON I PULLED IT WAS BECAUSE OF CONCERN FROM ONE OF THE, UM, THE NEIGHBORHOODS IN ASSOCIATES IN, UM, DICK WOODY HILL. SO THE MAIN QUESTION I HAVE IS, UM, ABOUT THE WINDOWS, ABOUT THE VINYL WINDOWS AND, YOU KNOW, WERE THEY, UM, THESE WERE ORIGINAL WINDOWS BACK AT THE TIME. UM, AND IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE CURRENTLY REPLACING WITH LIKE ITEMS OR IS IT SOMETHING THAT YOU'RE GOING DIFFERENTLY TO, TO FIT WITH WHAT YOU'RE THE SCOPE OF PROJECT? WELL, THE, THE, THE REASON THAT, UM, THERE'S SEVERAL REASONS FOR CHOOSING THIS PARTICULAR WINDOW. UH, I, I APPROACHED, UM, HISTORIC COMMISSION, WELL NOT THE COMMISSION, THE O H P, UM, PROBABLY STARTED ABOUT TWO MONTHS AGO AND HAD SEVERAL ITEMS TO BRING UP AND THE WINDOWS WAS ONE OF THEM. EVERYTHING ELSE HAS BEEN APPROVED AND WE'VE STARTED WORK AFTER RECEIVING THE C O A, UM, THE WINDOWS THERE ARE 14 TO BE REPLACED. AND, UM, WE DID LOOK TO AT WOOD WINDOWS, THE COST IS, UH, THE, THE IS THREE MORE THAN THREE TIMES THE PRICE. AND SO THAT WAS, UH, A CONCERN. SO WE CAME BACK WITH A PARTICULAR VINYL WINDOW. ONE OF THE, UM, ASPECTS, EVEN THOUGH THE STIPULATIONS REQUEST NOT HAVING WHITE WINDOWS, UH, THE COLOR IS ONE ASPECT OF WHAT WE WERE ASKED TO COMMENT ON. AND THE REASON WE CHOSE WHITE IS BECAUSE ALL THE TRIM ON THE HOUSE IS WHITE. AND EVEN THE, THE PORCH FASCIA AND POSTS THAT WERE AGREED BY A HISTORIC COMMISSION OR O H P ADMINISTRATIVELY, UH, WE'D INDICATED WE WOULD PAINT THEM WHITE AND THAT WAS EVEN REQUESTED THAT WE PAINT THEM WHITE. SO TO PUT WINDOWS OF A DIFFERENT COLOR WOULD BE SOMEWHAT OUT OF CHARACTER. WE DID COME IN THEN WITH, UM, A PLY JAM 1500 SERIES. UM, THEY HAVE THREE DIFFERENT STYLES. UH, ONE HAS, UH, KIND OF A LIP TO IT, ONE HAS A BRICK MOLD AND ONE IS COMPLETELY FLAT. UM, WE CAME IN WITH THE FIRST VARIETY AND WE WERE TOLD THAT THERE WAS A CONCERN OF THE, UM, I FORGET WHAT THE TERM IS, IT, IT'S KIND OF LIKE A LIP TO IT IF YOU LIKE. AND SO WE WENT BACK TO THE MANUFACTURER AND THEY CAME BACK WITH THE SECOND STAR, WHICH WAS THE BRICK MOLD, WHICH I THEN PRESENTED. UM, AND THEN WAS ADVISED THAT THAT WOULDN'T BE THE BEST. BUT, UH, MR. FAN AND I WERE TALKING AND HE SAID PROBABLY THE FLAT, UM, THE FLAT VERSION, WHICH IS THE THIRD STYLE OF THE PLY GEN 1500, UM, WOULD, WOULD ACTUALLY BE MORE LIKELY TO [00:30:01] CONFORM TO, UM, HISTORICS RECOMMENDATIONS AS FAR AS THE SIZE, THE STYLES, THE RAILS, AND THE FACT THAT IT WAS A, A, UM, ONE ON TOP OF ANOTHER STYLE WINDOW, MUCH MORE LIKE A, A TYPICAL HISTORIC WINDOW THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE TWO SEPARATE SASHES INSTEAD OF VERY OFTEN VINYL WINDOWS LOOK LIKE THEY'RE JUST ONE BIG WINDOW AND THEY DON'T HAVE ANY, UM, ANY RESEMBLANCE TO THE, TO THE HISTORIC STYLE WINDOWS. UM, I'M NOT SURE IF THAT ANSWERED YOUR QUESTION, BUT I JUST WANTED TO KIND OF GO THROUGH A LITTLE BIT OF AN EXPLANATION OF, YOU KNOW, WHAT WE'VE BEEN GOING THROUGH BACK AND FORTH AND BACK AND FORTH AND TO GET TO THE STAGE OF WHAT WE ACTUALLY PRESENTED AND REQUESTED TO USE. NO, YOU DID ANSWER MY PREVIOUS WINDOWS. SORRY, THE PREVIOUS WINDOWS WERE ALUMINUM. I DON'T KNOW WHAT WAS THERE BEFORE THAT. OBVIOUSLY WE JUST, UM, PURCHASED THE HOUSE RECENTLY. SO, UM, YEAH, I HOPE THAT ANSWERS YOUR QUESTIONS. IF YOU HAVE ANY FURTHER ONES, PLEASE GO AHEAD. NO, YOU DID ANSWER MY QUESTION AND THANK YOU FOR THE, THE DETAILED EXPLANATION BECAUSE WITH THE CONCERNS FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD, I JUST WANT TO ADDRESS THOSE AND ASK THOSE QUESTIONS. UM, AND THE NEXT QUESTION, THANK YOU SIR FOR YOUR TIME. I APPRECIATE IT. UM, OF COURSE, OF COURSE. THANK CARE. THE OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF, UM, SO THE OTHER CONCERN WAS THAT, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE TYPICALLY WHITE UNITS AND WHITE FRAMES AND STATUTES HAVE NEVER BEEN APPROVED BY OR RECOMMENDED BY STAFF. SO IS, AND I'M LOOKING OVER HERE IT, DID WE, ARE THIS CHANGING THE SLIGHTLY OR JUST BECAUSE WHAT THE APPLICANT SAID AS FAR AS, YOU KNOW, THE, THE OTHER COLORS MAGAZINE MATCHING WITH THE HOME, THE WHITE WINDOW SASHES. IS THAT WHY WE WENT WITH THAT OR THAT'S WHY WE APPROVED THAT? YEAH, THAT'S USUALLY A, A STIPULATION A NEW CONSTRUCTION. UM, AND SO HERE IT'S A REPLACE WE'RE, WE'RE DEALING WITH AN EXISTING ALUMINUM WINDOW CONDITION. SO IT'S FAIR TO SAY THAT IT COULD BE SIMILAR IN COLORATION TO WHAT'S THERE. OKAY. ALRIGHT. THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE THAT. THAT CONCLUDES MY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THIS IS CHAIRMAN FETZER. THIS IS A QUESTION FOR STAFF. UH, LOOKING AT PHOTOS 20 AND 26, UM, IT APPEARS THAT THE ALUMINUM SASH ARE INSIDE A WOOD FRAME. UM, SO BASED ON THIS, AND I DON'T KNOW IF Y'ALL DID A SITE VISIT, UH, Y'ALL CONCLUDED THAT THESE ALUMINUM WINDOWS ARE PROBABLY NOT ORIGINAL AND THE ORIGINAL MAY HAVE HAD WOOD WINDOWS. YEAH, IF WE CAN GO TO A ZOOMED OUT PHOTO OF THE HOUSE, THIS IS ACTUALLY A FULL VICTORIAN HOUSE. YOU KNOW, AT SOME POINT IT'S BEEN ADDED ONTO. I, I DO REALIZE IT LOOKS MORE KIND OF MID-CENTURY WITH SOME OF THE ELEMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN ADDED. UM, BUT YES, WE DO BELIEVE WOOD WINDOWS WOULD'VE BEEN ORIGINAL HERE. OKAY, THANK YOU MR. CHAIRMAN. IF THERE ARE NO FURTHER QUESTIONS OR DISCUSSION, I MOVE TO APPROVAL WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS, UH, WITH THE EXCEPTION THAT THE COLOR OF THE WINDOWS CAN BE WHITE TO MATCH WITH THE EXISTING COLOR STANDARD OF THE BOARD. MAY I ASK US A SECOND? WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND AS NOTED. YOU HAVE A ROLL CALL PLEASE. FERNANDEZ? AYE FISH? AYE. GIBBS AYE. VELASQUEZ AYE. OLA? AYE. CARPENTER? AYE. ROB, AYE BOW AYE THATOR? AYE SIR? AYE. MOTION CARRIES. MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU. THAT [23. 20-6774 Address/Description: 335 TRAIL HDRC Case No.: 2020-471 Historic District Name: River Road RIO District: RIO-1 Applicant: David Morin/MNO Investments Request: Consideration and action of an application for a multi-unit residential development: A. Waiver of the one-year waiting period of subsequent application for multi-unit residential development as provided for by Section 35-451(f) of the Unified Development Code, and if approved; B. Consideration of a request of a Certificate of Appropriateness for Construction City Council Dist.: 1 ] BRINGS US TO ITEM 23, WHICH IS 3 35 TRAIL. UM, EDWARD, ARE YOU THERE? I AM. CAN YOU HEAR ME OKAY? YES. UH, BEFORE WE START, UM, BECAUSE WE DO HAVE QUITE A FEW COMMENTS FOR THIS CASE, UM, I DO WANT TO TELL EVERYONE THAT WE'LL FOLLOW THE, UH, THE, UH, RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR THE H C R C, WHICH IS WE WILL PROVIDE THE APPLICANT SPEAKING TIME, 15 MINUTES. UM, WE WILL IMMEDIATELY FOLLOW THAT WITH THE PUBLIC COMMENTS AND THEN THE APPLICANT WILL RECEIVE AN ADDITIONAL TWO MINUTES FOR REBUTTAL BEFORE WE GET INTO DISCUSSION. GO AHEAD, EDWARD. ALRIGHT, AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 23 H D R C, CASE NUMBER 20 24 71 3 35 TRAIL. THERE ARE TWO ITEMS ON THE REQUEST FOR TODAY. ITEM A IS THE CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF A WAIVER PURSUANT TO CITY CODE SECTION 35 4 51 F TO ACCEPT AND REVIEW THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED FOR THE REVIEW FOR THE REQUEST DESCRIBED BELOW, WHICH IS ITEM TWO. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A MULTI-UNIT RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, [00:35:01] 21 UNITS ON THE VACANT LOT LOCATED AT 3 35 TRAIL. THE PROPERTY FEATURES LOTS THAT ARE LOCATED WITHIN THE RIVER IMPROVEMENT OVERLAY ONLY, AS WELL AS THOSE THAT ARE LOCATED WITHIN BOTH THE RIVER IMPROVEMENT OVERLAY AND THE RIVER ROAD HISTORIC DISTRICT. THE APPLICANT HAS PROPOSED FOR THE RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES TO FEATURE TWO, TWO AND ONE HALF AND THREE STORIES IN HEIGHT. ACCESS TO THE SITE WILL BE PROVIDED FROM TRAIL STREET AND ATCH STREET. THIS REQUEST INCLUDES REVISED PARKING, BUILDING DESIGN, AND BUILDING MASSING FOR ITEM A. STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE PROPOSAL HAS BEEN SUFFICIENTLY REVISED TO WARRANT APPROVAL OF A WAIVER OF THE ONE YEAR TIME LIMITATION FOR ITEM B STAFF THAT RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS WITH STIPULATIONS. I HAVE THE APPLICANT DAVID MORIN ON THE LINE NOW. HELLO? CAN, CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES, WE CAN. AND DAVID, JUST SO YOU KNOW, WE HAVE YOUR, YOUR FIRST PRESENTATION FOR THE WAIVER PULLED UP. OKAY, GREAT. SO AS, AS EDWARD READ, WE HAVE, WE HAVE TWO, UH, APPLICATIONS FOR THIS HEARING. THE FIRST IS FOR THE WAIVER, UH, TO BE HEARD, AND THE SECOND IS FOR FINAL APPROVAL OF THE 3 3 5 TRAIL PROJECT. SO I WANTED TO START OUT FIRST, UM, I, I KNOW THIS HAS BEEN A, YOU KNOW, LONG AND, UH, VERY TRICKY PROJECT IN SITE. UM, AND I I WANNA SAY THANK YOU FOR YOUR PATIENCE AND I WANNA SAY THANK YOU FOR YOUR FEEDBACK. UH, I DO BELIEVE THAT FROM THE TIME THAT H D R C APPROVED THE PROJECT IN DECEMBER, 2019 TO TODAY, THAT THE PROJECT HAS DRAMATICALLY IMPROVED. UH, THANKS TO THE FEEDBACK FROM COMMISSIONERS AND FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD. AND IF WE HAVE, UM, INCONVENIENCE TO THE COMMISSION IN THE PAST WITH OUR WAIVER REQUEST, UH, I, I DO APOLOGIZE AND I I HOPE THAT WE CAN BE FORGIVEN FOR THAT. SO TO START THE REQUEST FOR THE WAIVER, UH, START WITH THE QUESTION, IS THERE SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE THAT CHANGES HAVE BEEN MADE TO THE PROJECT? AND EDWARD, IF YOU COULD PLEASE GO TO SLIDE TWO. WE'RE THERE, DAVID, IT'S JUST GONNA BE LAGGED ON YOUR END. OKAY, GREAT. SO THIS IS A COMPARISON CHART SHOWING THE HT R C APPROVED PROJECT IN DECEMBER, 2019. AND THE CURRENT APPLICATION, UH, WHICH WE'RE REQUESTING A WAIVER FOR. SO PREVIOUSLY WE HAD 24 UNITS IN THE CURRENT APPLICATION WE HAVE 21 AND THIS IS A REDUCTION OF THREE UNITS IN TERMS OF UNIT HEIGHTS. UM, THE, THE BIG ISSUE, UH, WAS ALWAYS HEIGHT ON TRAIL STREET. WE HAD THREE, THREE STORY UNITS ON TRAIL STREET. NOW WE HAVE ALL TWO STORY UNITS ON TRAIL STREET. SO WE COMPLETELY ELIMINATED THE THREE STORY UNITS ON TRAIL. BEFORE WE HAD EIGHT UNITS ON TRAIL, NOW WE HAVE FIVE. UM, BEFORE THE BUILDING FOOTPRINT IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT WAS 47%. AND NOW THE BUILDING FOOTPRINT IN THE HISTORIC, UH, DISTRICT IS 39% IS A, A SUBSTANTIAL DECREASE IN BUILDING FOOTPRINT. THE GARAGES WE HAD FRONT FACING GARAGES IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT, WE HAD ONE FOR EACH UNIT, SO THAT WAS EIGHT GARAGES, BUT WE COMPLETELY ELIMINATED THOSE FRONT FACING GARAGES. AND WE NOW HAVE A TRADITIONAL, UM, TO THE SIDE OF THE BUILDING PARKING CONFIGURATION FOR EACH UNIT. BEFORE THE TOTAL BUILDING SQUARE FOOTAGE WAS 58,740 SQUARE FEET, AND NOW IT'S AROUND 49,000. THIS IS A, YOU KNOW, 9,000 SQUARE FOOT REDUCTION, VERY SIGNIFICANT DECREASE AND 9,000 SQUARE FEET, JUST DEPENDING ON THE UNIT SIZE OF THE HOME SIZE, THAT COULD BE ANYWHERE FROM FOUR TO SIX HOMES ELIMINATED IN BUILDING FOOTPRINT OR START BUILDING SQUARE FOOTAGE. THE NEW PLAN ALSO SAVES THE HERITAGE OAK TREE. SO THESE ARE THE CHANGES THAT HAVE BEEN MADE SINCE THE H D R C APPROVED PROJECT IN DECEMBER, 2019. AND, UH, EDWARD, IF YOU COULD PLEASE GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE. SO BEFORE THIS WAS THE BUILDING MASSING [00:40:02] ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN ON TRAIL STREET. YOU, YOU CAN SEE THE GARAGES, YOU CAN SEE THE THREE STORY UNITS, UM, REALLY A, A, A MORE BRUTAL, UH, WESTERN EDGE AND NO SPACING FOR A HERITAGE OAK TREE. UH, THE HERITAGE OAK TREE WOULD BE ELIMINATED. UH, NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. THIS IS OUR CURRENT APPLICATION, THE UNIT CONFIGURATION ON TRAIL STREET. AND AS YOU CAN SEE, WE NOW HAVE FIVE COTTAGES INSTEAD OF EIGHT LARGE TOWNHOUSE UNITS. AND EACH COTTAGE IS IN THE TRADITIONAL CONFIGURATION OF THE HISTORIC DISTRICT. AND AS YOU ENTER INTO THE COMMUNITY, YOU SEE THE PRESERVATION OF THE LARGE 58 INCH HERITAGE OAK TREE, WHICH SHOULD PROVIDE CHARACTER SHADE AND SHADE TO THE COMMUNITY. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. THIS WOULD BE APPROVED CONFIGURATION AND BUILDING DESIGN ON ATCH. AS YOU CAN SEE, THE PORCHES ARE PRIVATE, MORE MODERN, THE WINDOW PATTERN IS MODERN, THE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN IS VERY MODERN. AND EDWARD, NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. NOW YOU CAN SEE WE'VE REALLY COMPLETELY OVERHAULED THE DESIGN ON ATCH, CREATED A MUCH MORE TRADITIONAL LOOK AND FEEL THAT WE THINK WILL BE, UH, MUCH BETTER FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. THIS SLIDE SHOWS EIGHT UNITS ON TRAIL STREET. THIS IS WHAT WAS APPROVED IN DECEMBER, 2019. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. THE CURRENT CONFIGURATION, THE CURRENT APPLICATION SHOWS FIVE WEALTH BASED UNITS ON TRAIL STREET. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. BEFORE AGAIN, WE HAD THESE THREE STORY UNITS ON TRAIL. THIS IS WHERE, UH, THE THREE STORY UNITS WERE IN THE SITE PLAN. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. NOW ALL OF THE UNITS ON TRAIL ARE TWO STORIES. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. HERE, HERE WE'RE JUST SHOWING HOW WE REMOVE THE FRONT FACING GARAGES IN OUR OUR TRADITIONAL DRIVEWAY PATTERN. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. AND HERE WE SHOW IN THE SITE PLAN, UH, THE PRESERVATION OF THE HERITAGE OAK TREE, UH, AS COMPARED TO THE PREVIOUS PLAN THAT WAS APPROVED WHERE THE HERITAGE OAK TREE WAS ELIMINATED. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. SO THE MAJOR CHANGES THAT WE HAVE MADE SINCE WE WERE APPROVED IN DE DECEMBER, 2019, WE MADE CHANGES TO MASSING PRE PRESERVATION, LOT COVERAGE, PARKING, AND WE UH, OUR PROTECTING THEIA. THESE WERE ALL CONCERNS OF THE UM, RIVER ROAD NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. SO IN TERMS OF MASSING HERE, AGAIN, THERE'S BEFORE AND AFTER THE TWO STORIES ON TRAIL STREET. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. AND WE ALSO SOFTENS THE MASSING ON THE EDGE UNITS. SO NOW WE HAVE A MIX OF 2, 2, 2 AND A HALF STORIES KIND OF WITH AN ATTIC SPACE AND THREE STORY UNITS PROVIDING A GREAT TRANSITION BETWEEN THE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES AND THE DEVELOPMENT PROJECT. AND THIS IS, UM, A GOOD THING. IT PROVIDES MORE SUNLIGHT THAT I KNOW IS A CONCERN OF THE, OF THE COMMISSIONERS AND, AND OVERALL WILL BE BETTER FOR THE COMMUNITY. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. UM, AGAIN, WE'VE PRESERVED THE 58 INCH HERITAGE OAK TREE. WE'RE ALSO PRESERVING A 28 INCH GRAND CYPRESS TREE. WE HAVE A CONDUCTED A FULL ARBORIST REPORT. THIS IS AN ARBORIST THAT, UH, USED TO WORK FOR THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO AND HE'S A, A REAL PROFESSIONAL. AND WE ALSO HAVE, UH, ADDED A HERITAGE OAK COURTYARD. UM, THIS WILL BE SOMETHING FOR THE WHOLE COMMUNITY TO ENJOY. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. UM, AGAIN, TOTAL LOT COVERAGE CHANGED FROM 44% TO 41% AND THE TOTAL COVERAGE IN THE HISTORIC CHANGE ABOUT 47% TO 39%. THE GUIDELINES RECOMMEND LOT COVERAGE TO BE LESS THAN 50%. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. [00:45:02] UM, PARKING, WHICH WAS A HAS ALWAYS BEEN A QUESTION. WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING TO EXPAND ATCH BY SIX FEET. THIS WILL ALLOW 11 POTENTIAL GUEST PARKING SPACES. UM, TRAIL STREET HAS LONG TRADITIONAL DRIVEWAYS IN THE CURRENT APPLICATION. UM, THESE DRIVEWAYS COMBINED CAN ACCOMMODATE 15 VEHICLES. EACH UNIT WILL HAVE SUPPORT FOR THREE VEHICLES. SO WE EXPECT A LOT OF ONE CAR HOUSEHOLDS, UH, IN THIS PROJECT, BUT IF THEY HAVE, UM, ADDITIONAL VEHICLES AND GUESTS, THOSE GUESTS WILL BE ACCOMMODATED WITHOUT HAVING TO PARK IN THE STREET. OVERALL, IF YOU INCLUDE, UM, ATCH, WE HAVE 58 PARKING SPACES FOR A 21 UNIT PROJECT. THIS IS A 2.76 TO ONE PARKING RATIO. AND IF YOU INCLUDE THE SPACES THAT ARE INTERNAL TO THE SITE, UH, WE HAVE 2.33 TO ONE PARKING. SO AMPLE PARKING, UH, THE ZONING REQUIRES 1.5 TO ONE SPACES. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. WE CREATED A STORMWATER PLAN THAT DOES NOT DIRECTLY DRAIN ANY STORMWATER INTO THE ASEC. WE REDUCED LOCK COVERAGE. WE HAVE 15 FOOT SETBACKS FROM THE ASEC, A WALKING TRAIL TO CELEBRATE THE ASEC, AND WE CONDUCTED A FULL ARCHEOLOGICAL REPORT, UM, TO MAKE SURE THAT WE WEREN'T, UM, IMPEDING UPON THE ASEC. THERE IS A LOT OF SUPPORT FROM THE PROJECT IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA. UH, THIS INCLUDES PROPERTY OWNERS AND RESIDENTS AND THE PREVIOUSLY DESCRIBED CHANGES, UH, HAVE BEEN MADE TO ACCOMMODATE THE, UH, RIVER ROAD NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS REQUESTS. AND THEN HERE'S AGAIN, A SUMMARY OF THE CHANGES MADE. AND THAT'S ALL WE HAVE, UH, FOR THE PRESENTATION TODAY FOR THE WAIVER. THANK YOU. OKAY. DAVID, DO YOU WANT TO CONTINUE, UM, WITH YOUR PRESENTATION FOR THE CERTIFICATE, YOU HAVE ABOUT FIVE MINUTES OF SPEAKING TIME. OH, I WAS, I WAS WONDERING IF THE COMMISSION, UH, WOULD CONSIDER THE WAIVER BEFORE WE WENT INTO THE, UM, APPLICATION FOR THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS. MR. CHAIR. UH, IF WE CONSIDER THE WAIVER NOW WITHOUT LOOKING AT THE COMPLETE APPLICATION, I THINK WE WOULD NEED TO HEAR ALL THE PUBLIC COMMENTS NOW. WE DEFINITELY WILL. UM, SO LET'S DO THAT. I'LL READ THE COMMENTS AND THEN WE CAN HAVE DISCUSSION REGARDING THE WAIVER ITEM. YES. OKAY. OKAY. SO BEAR WITH ME. I'M GONNA DO MY BEST TO GET THROUGH THESE. UM, WE HAVE, UH, EXHIBITS TO DISPLAY FOR A FEW OF THESE WHILE I READ. UM, THIS FIRST ONE LEE IS FROM ROBERT BUCHANAN. IF YOU COULD PUT THAT ON THE SCREEN, THAT SHOULD BE RIGHT UP. SO I'M GONNA START, UM, ROBERT BUCHANAN, 1 33 ARMOR PLACE. THERE IS A FUNDAMENTAL FLAW ON THE DESIGN OF THIS PROJECT. SOLVING IT WILL SIGNIFICANTLY ALTER THE SITE PLAN AS DRAWN. IT DOES NOT MEET EITHER THE U D C OR FIRE CODE REQUIREMENTS. THIS ISSUE MUST BE ADDRESSED BEFORE ANY CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS IS GRANTED BECAUSE TRAIL STREET IS A DEAD END. THE U D C AND FIRE CODE REQUIRE THAT THERE IS A TURNAROUND FOR EMERGENCY VEHICLES LESS THAN 150 FEET FROM THE END OF THE STREET. BOTH CODES CLEARLY DESCRIBED THE TURNAROUND CALLED A HAMMERHEAD. BECAUSE OF ITS T SHAPE, IT HAS TO BE AT LEAST 20 FEET WIDE BY 70 FEET LONG. THE LENGTH INCLUDES THE WIDTH OF TRAIL STREET AT THAT LENGTH. THE TURNAROUND LENGTH WILL EXTEND INTO AND POSSIBLY THROUGH THE TRUNK OF THE HERITAGE OAK TREE IN ORDER TO MEET THE CITY REQUIREMENTS TO SUPPORT HEAVY VEHICLES. THE TURNAROUND NEEDS CONSIDERABLE EXCAVATION IN ORDER TO PLACE THE REQUIRED BASE FILL UNDER THE PAVING, WHICH REQUIRE REMOVING THE ROOT SYSTEM. BASICALLY, THE CURRENT PLACEMENT OF THE TURNAROUND IS A DEATH SENTENCE FOR THE HERITAGE OAK. THE SOLUTION IS FOR THE H C R C TO REQUIRE THE APPLICANT TO MODIFY THE SITE PLAN. SO THE TURNAROUND DOES NOT THREATEN THIS HERITAGE JOKE. THIS WILL REQUIRE MAJOR ADJUSTMENT TO THE SITE PLAN. SO UNTIL THE ISSUE IS REMEDIED, THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATE NEEDS NEEDS TO BE DENIED. UM, THE NEXT IS MIKEY MOORE, 6 0 3 RIVER ROAD. DAVID CALLED US TO A MEETING YESTERDAY BUT HAD NO AGENDA WHY HE CALLED IT AND NO ANSWERS. HE HAS NOT TRIED TO HELP BLEND ON IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. AND YESTERDAY INSULTED EMBARRASSED THE NEIGHBORHOOD PARTICIPANT. HE LIES WHEN HE SAYS A LOT OF NEIGHBORS SUPPORT THE DEVELOPMENT. NONE DO EXCEPT PERIMETER LANDOWNERS WHO WANT TO PROFIT FROM IT AND ARE INVOLVED WITH OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. UM, NOT DO THEY ATTEND MEETINGS OR GATHERINGS. UM, AND THREE, THE LIVES ARE AT RISK. IF DEVELOPMENT DOES NOT CREATE EMERGENCY ACCESS OUT OF TRAIL STREET, A FIRE ENGINE CAN'T EVEN GET INTO, PUT OUT [00:50:01] A FIRE AND HAS TO PARK ON LYDELL AND STRETCH ITS HOSE 150 TO 200 FEET TO PUT OUT A FIRE. IF ANYONE HAS AN EMERGENCY AND A SMALL TRUCK IS PARKED ANYWHERE ON TRAIL, ALL LIVES WILL BE AT RISK. THERE'S NO EMERGENCY ACCESS OVER TO THE NEAREST STREET ATCH. SO ALL RESIDENTS LIVES WILL BE AT RISK IN AN EMERGENCY. UM, THE NEXT IS PATTI ZIONS 1 0 7. KING WILLIAM, THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY OF SAN ANTONIO CONTINUES TO SHARE THE CONCERNS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD REGARDING THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AT 3 35 TRAIL AND A SUITABILITY FOR THE RIVER ROAD HISTORIC DISTRICT IN TERMS OF ITS SCALE, MASSING AND PROXIMITY TO THE ASA. UM, RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED. UM, THE NEXT IS DAVID SCHMIDT. UM, ONE 50 OSTROM DRIVE. THE SCALE AND MASSING OF THIS PROPOSED PROJECT CONTINUED TO BE AN ISSUE. SPECIFICALLY THE PROPOSED HEIGHTS OF SOME OF THE BUILDINGS WITHIN THE RIVER ROAD HISTORIC DISTRICT DO NOT MEET THE DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR GUIDELINES. THE PROPOSAL INCLUDES THREE STORY BUILDINGS THAT FACE OR ABOVE ONE STORY HOUSES ACCORDING TO UDC 35 6 74 1 A NEW BUILDINGS SHOULD REINFORCE ESTABLISHED BUILDING TRADITIONS AND RESPECT THE CONTEXT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THE PROPOSED PROJECT DOES NOT MEET THE STANDARD. THE C O A SHOULD BE DENIED FOR NON-CONFORMITY TO THE T C UM, THE DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR STANDARDS IN THE RIO OVERLAY. THE PROPOSED PROJECT IS SLIGHTLY IMPROVED BUT NOT APPROPRIATE FOR ITS LOCATION WITHIN AN ADJACENT TO THE RIVER ROAD HISTORIC DISTRICT. UM, RICHARD GREED SIX 15 RIVER ROAD. I ASKED THE H C R C TO REJECT THE PROPOSED PLANS FOR 3 35 TRAIL STREET. I RIDE AS A PAST RIVER ROAD NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION CHAIR, EXCUSE ME, UM, AND A 30 YEAR RESIDENT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THE CURRENT PLAN IS A HAPHAZARD ATTEMPT TO SATISFY SPECIFIC H C R C GUIDELINES WITHOUT CONSIDERATION OF BASIC PROBLEMS OF MASSING SCALE AND DENSITY. FOR EXAMPLE, THE CURRENT DESIGN TRIES TO MAXIMIZE BUILDING SIZE AND PROFITS BY MOVING UNITS TO WITHIN 10 FEET OF THE PROPERTY LINE ON TRAIL STREET. AT THE SAME TIME, THE PROPOSED THREE STORY BUILDINGS, THREE AND FOUR ARE WITHIN THE RIVER ROAD TO STORE DISTRICT BOUNDARIES. THE FACT THAT IT NEEDS TO BE RECOGNIZED AND CONSIDERED THE PROPOSAL LACKS TO CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS THAT WOULD DETAIL THE EFFECT OF THESE PROPOSED CHANGES ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THE ORIGINAL 18 FOOT SETBACK WAS STIPULATED TO PROTECT THE STORES IN BRANO HOUSE WITHOUT CONSTRUCTION DETAILS SUCH AS SIGHT LINES, PORCHES, AND CAR CARPORTS. UM, IT'S IMPOSSIBLE TO VISUALIZE THE EFFECTS THESE BUILDINGS WILL HAVE ON OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT THERE IS ANOTHER REASON TO DENY THE PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION PLAN. IT WAS A CONTROVERSIAL PROJECT. VAST MAJORITY OF NEIGHBORS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION REMAIN OPPOSED TO THE PLAN. WE HAVE APPEARED 13 TIMES TO VOICE OUR CONCERNS ABOUT THE MASS SCALE AND DENSITY OF THE PLANS. I ASK YOU TO, TO DENY THE PROPOSAL AND THAT TO REQUIRE THE DEVELOPERS, DEVELOPERS TO SUBMIT A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WITH APPROPRIATE CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTATION FOR CONSIDERATION. THEN WE WILL BE ABLE TO EVALUATE THE PRO PROPOSAL ACCURATELY AND UNDERSTAND ITS IMPACTS ON OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. UM, THE NEX IS MARGARET DAY 8 22. EAST MAGNOLIA FLOODING HAS LONG BEEN OUR CONCERN. EACH REVISION OF THE FLOOD MAP SHOWS A HUNDRED YEAR FLOOD CREEPING FURTHER, FURTHER INTO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. THIS PROJECT DRASTICALLY INCREASES THE IMP IMPERMEABILITY ON WHAT IS NOW VACANT LAND. UM, THAT WATER WILL GO SOMEWHERE. THE PROPOSAL IS THAT 10% OF THE SITE RUNOFF WILL DRAIN DIRECTLY INTO STR TRAIL STREET. TRAIL STREET, WHICH SLOPES DIRECTLY INTO THE UPPER LAB. BOOR SEIA, A LOT OF WATER WILL FUNNEL INTO THE ASSIA NEIGHBORHOOD. THE UPPER LAB BOR SEIA IS PROMINENT IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THIS AREA. THIS IS ONE OF A FEW EXISTING SEGMENTS OF THE HISTORIC CONSTRUCTION. ITS PRESERVATION COULD MATTER TO THE H D R C. THE DRAINAGE PLAN HAS BEEN CRITICIZED MANY TIMES AND A C O A DENIED ON OCTOBER 2ND, 2019 OVER DRAINAGE ISSUES. THIS CONCERN HAS NOT GONE AWAY. U D C 35 6 72 B SEVEN STATES THAT A SEIA SHALL NOT BE USED FOR ANY TYPE OF DRAINAGE. THE SAN ANTONIO RIVER AUTHORITY HAS STATED THAT THE PROJECT MUST DEAL WITH 100% OF ITS RAINWATER ON SITE, THAT ANY EXISTING DRAINAGE OFF OF THE SITE DUE TO THE NATURAL TOPOGRAPHY MUST BE REMEDIED, UM, MEDIATED IN THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN, WHICH IS NOT ACHIEVED. HERE. THE DEVELOPER HAS PROPOSED A LETTER FROM HIS ENGINEER STATING NO RUNOFF ENTERS THE ASAKI FROM THE SITE. THIS MAY BE TRUE BUT DOES NOT ADDRESS THE RUNOFF ENTERING TRAIL FROM THE SITE AND THEN FUNNEL AND THEN BEING FUNNELED DIRECTLY INTO THE ASA. THE ASA MUST BE PROTECTED. THE CURRENT DESIGN ALLOWS FOR SUBSTANTIAL RUNOFF TO, TO ENTER INTO IT VIA TRAIL STREET ADDING TO ITS EROSION AND INCREASING THE CHANCES OF FLOODING IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. FOR THIS REASON, THE C O A SHOULD BE DENIED. ROSEMARY, ROSEMARY MARTINEZ THREE 14 TRAIL. MY NAME IS ROSEMARY MARTINEZ AND I OWN THE PROPERTY AT THREE 14 TRAIL STREET. THIS WAS MY GRANDMOTHER'S HOME AND IT IS. UM, AND WHILE IT IS VACANT AT THE TIME I GREW UP IN THIS AREA, INCLUDING SATCH AND WOODLAWN STREETS AND APPRECIATE THE UNIQUENESS AND BEAUTY OF THE RIVER ROAD AREA AND SURROUNDING AMENITIES CURRENTLY, TRAIL STREET HAS JUST A FEW HOMES AND IS FAR FROM THE QUAINT NEIGHBORHOOD THAT I REMEMBER. HOWEVER, TRAIL STREET AT ONE TIME ALSO CARRIED THE SAME HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE AND CHARM AND STORIES OF FAMILIES, OF LIVES OF DAYS GONE BY JUST AS THE RIVER ROAD NEIGHBOR NEIGHBORHOODS STILL DO TODAY AND SUPPORT THE OAKS AT RIVER ROAD TOWNHOUSE PROJECT AS A MEANS TO BRING VIABILITY TO THE NEGLECTED CORNER OF THE COMMUNITY. UM, WHETHER WE AGREE OR NOT, JUST KNOWING THAT THIS ONE ACRE GREEN SPACE BETWEEN TRAIL AND SATCH WITH SOMEBODY DEVELOP, I CAN APPRECIATE THE DEVELOPER'S EFFORT TO CAPTURE THE BEAUTY AND CHARACTER OF THIS UNIQUE AREA. WE SEE THE FULL LETTER IN THE APPLICATION PACKAGE. THE NEXT IS KEVIN DE [00:55:01] LA GARZA, SEVEN 17 EAST ATCH. I'M WRITING IN SUPPORT OF THE 3 35 TRAIL STREET TOWNHOUSE DEVELOPMENT IN BRACKENRIDGE PARK NEIGHBORHOOD. I'M A PROPERTY OWNER DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE TOWNHOUSE PROJECT. I BELIEVE THAT THE TOWNHOUSES WILL BREATHE MUCH LIVE INTO THE AREA. I PURCHASED A HOME IN THE AREA DUE DUE TO ITS AMAZING PROXIMITY TO BRECKENRIDGE PARK, TO THE ZOO, THE PEARL BREWERY, TRINITY UNIVERSITY, AND THE ST. MARY'S STRIP AND MY BUSINESS. UM, IT IS EXCITING TO SEE A PROJECT THAT WILL GIVE OTHER PEOPLE THE OPPORTUNITY TO LIVE IN A WALKABLE, VIBRANT AREA. PLEASE SEE THE FULL LETTER IN THE H C R C APPLICATION. ONE SECOND. THE NEXT IS JESSICA CERVANTES, 34 0 8 NORTH ST. MARY'S. DEAR HISTORIC DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION, WE MOVED OUR SMALL BUSINESS TO 48 0 8 NORTH ST. MARY'S, 34 0 8 NORTH ST. MARY'S SEVERAL YEARS AGO BECAUSE WE ANTICIPATED THAT THE IMMEDIATE AREA WAS GOING TO BE IMPROVED. WE ARE SO CLOSE TO THE ZOO, THE PARKING GOLF COURSE, AND SO MANY OTHER GREAT AMENITIES. THE AREA IMMEDIATELY SURROUNDING US IS BEGGING TO SEE MORE PEOPLE. WHEN WE HEARD ABOUT THE TRAIL STREET TOWN HOMES PROJECT, WE WERE VERY EXCITED. HOWEVER, WE ARE SAD TO SEE THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAS TAKEN SO LONG TO GET THAT THE DEVELOPMENT HAS TAKEN SO LONG TO GET APPROVAL. MORE FAMILIES ON RECESS AND TRAIL WOULD BE SO GREAT FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THE LAND BETWEEN ATCH AND TRAIL STREET IS IN BAD SHAPE. TRAIL STREET IS AN EYESORE. THE NEW DEVELOPMENT LOOKS BEAUTIFUL AND WOULD HEAVILY IMPROVE THIS AREA. RETAIL AND RESTAURANTS WOULD HAVE MORE CUSTOMERS AND MORE FAMILIES CAN ENJOY. THE BEAUTY OF BRACKENRIDGE PARK, WE LOVE HAVING A BUSINESS HERE AND HOPE MORE PEOPLE CAN LIVE HERE. WE LOOK FORWARD TO MEETING OUR NEW NEIGHBORS AND SEEING HOW OUR BUSINESSES CAN SERVE THEIR NEEDS. UM, THE NEXT IS JANICE SULLIVAN, THREE 10 TRAIL STREET. I HAD A VERY CONCERNS ABOUT THE PROJECT. UM, MR. MOORE TOOK THE TIME TO CORRESPOND WITH ME AND EXPLAIN THE SOLUTIONS I'M SUPPORT OF. I AM IN SUPPORT OF THE DEVELOPMENT. NEXT IS CHARLES WARREN, 33 0 2 NORTH ST. MARY'S. MY NAME IS CHARLES WARREN AND I OWN A SMALL BUSINESS ON THE CORNER OF NORTH ST. MARY'S AND TRAIL. I'M FULL SUPPORT OF TASTEFUL DEVELOPMENT IN OR NEAR THE RIVER ROAD NEIGHBORHOOD. I WAS ACTUALLY ON THE RIVER ROAD NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION BOARD FOR A TOTAL OF THREE YEARS. ALTHOUGH THE BOARD MEMBERS ARE ARE EXTREMELY NICE, LOVELY PEOPLE, UM, THEY WERE TYPICALLY ANTI-DEVELOPMENT TO THE AREA. EVERY TIME A POTENTIAL DEVELOPER IN OR NEAR THE NEIGHBORHOOD AROSE, THEY WERE READY FOR BATTLE. THEY SUED DEVELOPERS AT LEAST TWICE WHILE I WAS ON THE BOARD. ONE OF THOSE WAS THE APARTMENT COMPLEX NEAR THE CORNER OF NORTH ST. MARY'S IN MULBERRY. THE OWNER DEVELOPER WAS EXTREMELY NICE AND LET THE ASSOCI ASSOCIATION UTILIZES UNDEVELOPED PROPERTY ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS TO RAISE MONEY. I DON'T REMEMBER ALL THE INFORMATION ABOUT THAT PROPERTY, BUT IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY, THE DEVELOPER BIT OVER BACKWARDS TO APPEASE THE ASSOCIATION. AGAIN, THE PEOPLE ON THE BOARD AND FROM THE RIVER, FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD ARE VERY NICE FOLKS HAVE SAID WHEN IT COMES TO DEVELOPMENT PROPOSED PROJECT, THE OSA RIVER ROAD. JUDGING BY THE RENDERINGS AND MAP LEAD ME TO BELIEVE THAT THIS PROJECT WOULD BE GREATLY ENHANCED, WOULD GREATLY ENHANCE THE NEIGHBORHOOD. VERY LOW KEY, LOW KEY AND TASTEFUL. IN MY OPINION, I AM ALL FOR IT. AND MORE, UM, TOM GOOGLE'S, UM, 7 31 EAST SATCH. UM, THANK YOU FOR SENDING US RENDERINGS AND THE SITE PLAN ON YOUR PROPOSED TOWN HOME DEVELOPMENT IN THE RIVER ROAD NEIGHBORHOOD. WE OWN THE EIGHT 40 APARTMENTS NORTH OF YOUR SITE. WE FEEL THAT YOUR PLAN IS THE APPROPRIATE TRANSITION FROM THE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES TO THE NORTH AND THE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES TO THE SOUTH. PLEASE KNOW THAT WE SUPPORT YOUR EFFORTS TO MAKE THIS REALITY. WE KNOW THAT YOU WILL BE A SUCCESS WITH YOUR TOWN HOME DEVELOPMENT. AUSTIN WALKER, 5 37 EAST CRAIG PLACE AND SUPPORT OF THE PROPERTY AT THE END OF TRAIL BEING DEVELOPED INTO SOMETHING THAT WORKS IN THE RIVER ROAD NEIGHBORHOOD. I BELIEVE THIS DEVELOPER IS WORKING HARD, UH, TOWARD A SOLUTION THAT WORKS FOR ALL. UM, THE NEXT IS BLAIR DAVIS. UM, 33 14 NORTH ST. MARY'S. THE DEVELOPER'S PROPOSED PROJECT IS BEAUTIFUL. I CAN THINK OF NO BETTER PROJECT FOR THAT PIECE OF PROPERTY. THE DESIGN TAKES INSPIRATION FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE NEW PLAN EVEN SAVES A LARGE OAK TREE. THE DEVELOPMENT APPROPRIATELY RESPECTS THE ASAKIA AND IN FACT ENHANCES IT WITH A FIVE FOOT WALKING TRAIL. DEVELOPER HAS LISTENED TO NEIGHBORHOOD TO THE TO NEIGHBORHOOD AND HAS GONE ABOVE AND BEYOND IN USING LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT TECHNIQUES SUCH AS PERMEABLE PAVERS AND RAINWATER CISTERNS TO HEAVILY IMPROVE THE STORM WATER DRAINAGE FROM THE EXISTING CONDITIONS. I'VE HAD MY EYE ON THIS DEVELOPMENT FOR A FEW YEARS AND I HAVE ATTENDED H C R C HEARINGS. I AM SHOCKED THAT THIS DEVELOPMENT CONTINUES TO BE SCRUTINIZED, UM, THAT IT DELIVERS EVERYTHING WE COULD POSSIBLY WANT ON THIS PARCEL AND IN THIS AREA, OUR SECTION OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS DIFFERENT IN CHARACTER FROM THE RIVER ROAD NEIGHBORHOOD TO THE NORTH. OUR PROPERTIES ARE A STRING OF LARGE COMMERCIAL OFFICE BUILDINGS. WELLS FARGO, RED MCCOMBS, TEXAS CAPITAL BANK, UM, AND SAN ANTONIO WATER SURFACE ARE SOME OF THE MORE WELL-KNOWN TENANTS. UM, TRAFFIC IS HEARD FROM HIGHWAY 2 81 AND THE AREA IS COMPOSED OF COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES AND BILLBOARDS. ADJACENT TO MY PROPERTY IS A SELF-SERVE CAR WASH TREATS TRAIL STREET IS HOME TO A BOARDED UP HOUSE PARKING LOTS AND PRIVACY FENCES. IT IS CONFUSING TO ME THAT THE TRAIL STREET TOWN HOMES PROJECT WOULD HAVE RECEIVED SO, SO MUCH PUSHBACK AND PROTESTS TO THE OWNERS IN THIS SECTION OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. IT IS A WELCOME ADDITION. UM, NEXT I HAVE A JOINT STATEMENT SUBMITTED BY SEVERAL NEIGHBORS AND SO I WILL READ EACH SECTION, UH, [01:00:01] BY SUBMITTED BY WHO IT WAS SUBMITTED. THE FIRST IS DANETTE SCHWEERS. UM, WE ARE ALL RIVER ROAD NEIGHBORHOOD, RIVER ROAD RESIDENTS WHO WOULD LIKE TO THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO RESPOND TO THE LATEST SUBMITTAL OF 3 35 TRAIL STREET DEVELOPERS HAVE MADE. OH, UH, WE, THERE IS A VISUAL FOR THIS ONE AND SO YOU NEED TO RESHARE YOUR SCREEN SO WE HAVE THE HIGHER RESOLUTION BEERS. WE'RE JUST MAKING SURE WE HAVE EVERYTHING. UM, I'LL START THIS ONE OVER. DANETTE SCHWEERS. WE ARE ALL RIVER ROAD RESIDENTS WHO WOULD LIKE TO THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO RESPOND TO THE LATEST SUBMITTAL FOR 3 35 TRAIL STREET. THE DEVELOPERS HAVE MADE CHANGES TO THE UNITS AT TRAIL THAT RESPOND TO THE NEED TO REDUCE THE SCALE DENSITY AND MASS. BUT LIKE ALL THE PREVIOUS SUBMISSIONS, IT'S ONE STEP FORWARD AND TWO, SUSPECT. THIS PROPOSAL CREATES NEW PROBLEMS WHEN IT SOLVES OLD ONES. TO THEIR CREDIT, THE DEVELOPERS FINALLY REDUCED THE IMPACT OF PROJECTS ON TRAIL STREET ITSELF, BUT THIS REPRESENTS LESS THAN 25% OF THE PROJECT. IF WE APPLAUD THESE CHANGES, THEN WHAT ABOUT THE OTHER 75% THAT HAS THE SAME SOLUTION THAT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT DECLARED INAPPROPRIATE COMMENTING ON THIS PROPOSAL IS DIFFICULT GIVEN THE LACK OF SUBSTANTIVE DETAILS. THE SITE PLAN IS VERY RUDIMENTARY AND MORE APPROPRIATE FOR CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL. DOES NOT MEET THE STANDARDS ESTABLISHED BY THE H C R C FOR AN ANNOTATED SITE PLAN, DISPLAYING SETBACKS AND ACCURATE DIMENSIONS. THE SUBMITTAL ACT CRITICAL FLOOR PLANS ALSO AN H C R C REQUIREMENT U D C 35 4 51 REQUIRES AT LEAST 80% COMPLETED CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS. THE LAST SUBMISSION OF CDS WAS IN JUNE OF 2019 AND THEY ARE NO LONGER RELEVANT. THIS PRESENTATION DOES NOT, UH, MEET THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR A CERTIFICATE APPROPRIATENESS APPLICATION AND SHOULD NOT BE HEARD UNTIL IT DOES IF THE A C R C GOES FORWARD WITH THE C O A HEARING. HERE'S A SUMMARY OF POINTS WE HAVE MADE SINCE 2018 OF THE ONGOING VIOLATIONS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR GUIDELINES. THE REAL ONE OVERLAY REQUIREMENTS IN THE UNIT FORM DEVELOPMENT CODE. ALL REASONS WHY IT SHOULD BE DENIED. A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS. ARLENE FISHER WRITES THE MASSING, UM, A ONE CRITICAL ISSUE OF THE SCALE AND MASSING LARGELY UNCHANGED SINCE THE LAST PRESENTATION. UM, TWO BUILDINGS IN THE RIVER ROAD HISTORIC DISTRICT ARE STILL THREE STORIES IN HEIGHT. CONTRAVENING THE INTENT OF THE DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR GUIDELINES. UM, THE WHOLE SITE IS WITHIN THE RIO OVERLAY, WHICH IS U D C 35 67 4 1 A. STATES THAT NEW BUILDINGS SHOULD REINFORCE ESTABLISHED BUILDING TRADITIONS AND RESPECT THE CONTEXT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UM, THAT IS CLEARLY VIOLATED WHEN THE THREE STORY STRUCTURES OF THIS PROJECT HAVE PROXIMITY TO SINGLE STORY RESIDENCES ON ALL SIDES. B, WHERE MULTI-FAMILY UNITS, UH, BUT EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES. THE U D C ESTABLISHES A 50 FOOT WIDE BUFFER ALONG THE PROPERTY LINE, WHICH LIMITS MULTI-FAMILY UNITS TO THE HEIGHT OF THE ADJACENT ZONING. IN THIS CASE 35 FEET AND TWO AND A HALF STORIES. ALTHOUGH THE DEVELOPER HAS LABELED THE END UNITS AS TWO AND A HALF STORIES, D D C DEFINES THESE UNITS AS THREE STORY BECAUSE THE UPPER FLOOR'S HABIT HABITAT HABIT HABITABLE AREA EXCEEDS 50% OF THE GROUND FLOOR. THEY'RE CONSIDERED FULL FLOORS. AT LEAST EIGHT OF THE THREE STORY UNITS FALL WITHIN THE 50 FOOT ZONE AND ARE PROHIBITED BY THE U U D C C. AFTER REVIEWING ORDINANCE, UM, 2 0 1 0 2 0 4 0 1 0 4, WHICH ESTABLISHES THE RIVER ROAD STORE DISTRICT, IT SHOWS THAT THE BOUNDARY MAP AND THE PROPOSAL HAS ALWAYS BEEN INCORRECT. IT HAS NOW CLEAR THAT A GOOD PORTION OF ALL BUILDINGS ON UNITS ON BUILDING THREE FALL WITHIN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT, AS DOES PART OF FOUR DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR STANDARDS. STATE THAT THE HEIGHT AND SCALE OF NEW CONSTRUCTION SHOULD NOT EXCEED THAT AT THE MAJORITY OF BUILDINGS IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT, WHICH ARE ONE STORY AND HEIGHT BY MORE THAN ONE STORY. PREVIOUSLY, THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS WAS VERY CRITICAL OF THESE STANDARDS ONLY BEING APPLIED TO THE UNITS ON TRAIL STREET. WE ARE YOU ABLE TO ZOOM IN ON THAT AT ALL? IT'S PRETTY DIFFICULT TO SEE. UM, ED PINER SUBMITS TWO ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS. A THE ROOF FORM AND IMPORTANT ISSUE IS THE ROOF DESIGN, WHICH FEATURES FORMS, SLOPES, AND STYLES TOTALLY ALIEN TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, WHICH IS DOMINATED BY COTTAGES AND BUNGALOWS WITH LOW, WITH LOW PITCHED ROOFS HAVING EXTENDED EAVES. THE PROPOSAL FEATURES VERY STEEP ROOFS AND VIRTUALLY NO OVERHANGS. THE LACK OF CONTEXT FOR THESE ROOFS IS COMPOUNDED BY THE USE OF MANSARDS USED HERE TO TRY TO CAMOUFLAGE THE THREE STORY VOLUMES. THESE ARE VERY VISIBLE ON RESEARCH, BOTH ON THE FRONT AND SIDE FACADES. AGAIN, THE RIO ONE OVERLAY REQUIRES THAT NEW BUILDINGS SHOULD REINFORCE ESTABLISHED BUILDING TRADITIONS AND RESPECT THE CONTEXT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AS WELL. U D C SECTION 35 6 42 A AND TWO SAYS, CONTINUITY OF SCALE AND ORIENTATION SHALL BE EMPHASIZED. THE WINDOW LAYOUT, THE WINDOW LAYOUT HAS ALWAYS BEEN INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THIS ISSUE IS STILL NOT ADDRESSED. THE EAST ELEVATIONS OF BUILDINGS ONE, TWO, AND FOUR AND THE WEST ELEVATION OF BUILDING TWO HAS NO VERTICAL ALIGNMENT OF THE WINDOWS. ADDITIONALLY, [01:05:01] MANY FACADES HAVE THREE DIFFERENT SIZE WINDOWS, INCLUDING POSTMODERN SQUARE WINDOWS THAT WERE EVEN CRITICIZED WHEN THE CONCEPTUAL PHASE OF THE ORIGINAL SUBMISSION TWO YEARS AGO. THE LAYOUT IS CHAOTIC. U D C 35 6 7 4 0 1 B ONE CLEARLY STATES THAT OPENING SHALL APPEAR IN REGULAR PATTERN OR BE CLUSTERED TO FORM COHESIVE DESIGN. SEE PORCHES FUNDAMENTAL TO HOUSING AND RIVER ROAD ARE FUNCTIONING PORCHES. THE PORCHES, THE PROPOSAL HAS PORCHES THAT ARE ABUNDANTLY WIDE BUT ONLY THREE FEET DEEP. THEY SERVE AS TO DEC AS DECORATION, NOT AS USABLE SPACES. UM, THEY NEED TO BE AT LEAST DOUBLE FOR THE PROPOSED DEPTH. THIS IS AN ISSUE THE H C R C HAS BEEN INCONSISTENT ABOUT FOR A LONG TIME, TO WHICH THE DEVELOPER HAS NOT RESPONDED. UM, LEAH BROGAN SUBMITS ITEM THREE, ASSIA AND DRAINAGE. THE UPPER LAVO SEIA IS AN INTERESTING PART OF THE RIVER ROAD NEIGHBORHOOD. IT IS A PROMINENT FEATURE OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF THIS AREA. THE PART OF THE ASSIA, WHICH BORDERS THE 3 35 TRAIL STREET PROJECT, IS ONE OF THE FEW STILL EXISTING SEGMENTS OF HISTORIC CONSTRUCTION. ITS PRESERVATION SHOULD BE OF UTMOST IMPORTANCE TO THE H D R C. THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAS BEEN IMPOSING THIS PROJECT'S DRAINAGE PLAN FOR OVER TWO YEARS BECAUSE OF ITS IMPACT ON THE STABILITY OF THE AND FLOODING. AMAZINGLY, THIS PRESENTATION SHOWS NO CURRENT PROPOSAL TO HANDLE RUNOFF, BUT THE PREVIOUS ONE ALLOWED 10% OF THE SITE STORM WATER DRAINAGE TO RUN INTO THE ASAKIA BY DRAINING. FIRST ON THE TRAIL STREET. THE H C R C CRITICIZED THAT DRAINAGE PLAN THROUGHOUT THE PREVIOUS, UH, PROJECT'S PRESENTATION IN OCTOBER, 2019 DENIED THE C O A OVER DRAINAGE ISSUES. THE LETTER FROM THE DEVELOPER'S ENGINEER AVOIDS ADDRESSING THIS PROBLEM AND ONLY SPEAKS ABOUT DRAINAGE DIRECTLY FROM THE SIDE INTO THE EIA. THE U D C 35 6 72 B SEVEN STATES THAT A SIA SHOULD NOT BE USED FOR ANY TYPE OF DRAINAGE. THE SAN ANTONIO RIVER AUTHORITY HAS STATED THAT THE PROJECT MUST STILL WITH 100% OF ITS RAINWATER ON SITE, THAT ANY EXISTING DRAINAGE OFFSITE DUE THE DUE, THE NATURAL TOPOGRAPHY MUST BE REMEDIED REMEDIATED IN THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN, WHICH IS NOT ACHIEVED TERM. WHILE THEA ITSELF IS NOT WITHIN THE PROJECT SITE, BUT ADJACENT TO IT ON CITY PROPERTY, THAT DOES NOT LESSEN THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE H C R C AND MUST BE PROTECTED AS ALLOWING SUBSTANTIAL RUNOFF TO ENTER THE SAFETY VIA TRAIL STREETS ADDS TO ITS EROSION AND INCREASING THE CHANCES OF FLOODING THE NEIGHBORHOOD. UM, KIM WOOD SUBMITS FOUR HERITAGE TREES. THE PROPOSAL, UM, IMPERILS THE EXISTING, EXCUSE ME, THE NEW PROPOSAL IMPERILS THE EXISTING HERITAGE OAK BY THE ENCROACHMENT OF THE FOUNDATION OF THE TWO TRAIL TOWN HOMES THAT BLINK IT AS WELL. THE FOUNDATION OF A NEW CARPORT TRELLIS IS IN THE CRITICAL ROOT ZONE. THE HAMMERHEAD TURNAROUND DOES, DOES NOT MEET THE FIRE CODE, WHICH REQUIRES A 20 FOOT WIDE BY 70 FOOT LONG PAVED AREA THAT WILL REQUIRE REMOVAL OF THE HERITAGE. OAK BALD CYPRUS, UM, HAS FOUNDATION CONSTRUCTION WITHIN 10 FEET OF ITS TRUNK, AND THE NEWLY PROPOSED PARKING ON ATCH OCCURS OVER ITS ROOT ZONE AS WELL. TO MEET CINDY STANDARDS, THE PAVED AREA WILL REQUIRE AT LEAST A FOOT OF EXCAVATION. PREVIOUS, PREVIOUSLY SUBMITTALS, UM, SHOWED THAT WEAT STREET HAS WIDENED TO MEET THE FIRE CODE AND ALLOWED FOR A FIRE LANE, UM, THAT HAS NOW BEEN INCORPORATED WITHIN THE NEW PARKING AREA. IF THE FIRE LANE IS REQUIRED, THE PARKING WILL INTRUDE EVEN FURTHER INTO THE ROUTE ZONE OF THE HERITAGE CYPRUS. DARLA PINER SUBMITS FIVE SETBACKS, A TRAIL SIDE YARD SETBACK, UM, THE CARPORT AND TRELLIS FOR THE MOST WESTERN UNIT ON TRAIL VIOLATES THE FIVE FIVE FOOT SIGNS SETBACK REQUIREMENT AND NEEDS TO BE REMOVED. B TRAIL FRONT YARD SETBACK. WHEN THE PROJECT WAS APPROVED BY THE H C R C FOR C O A, IT WAS STIPULATED THAT THE SETBACK FROM TRAIL WOULD BE AT LEAST 18 FEET. THE PROPOSAL NOW REDUCES IT TO 10 FEET. NONE OF THE OTHER HOUSES ACROSS THE STREET HAVE A SETBACK UNDER 20 FEET. U T C SECTION 35 6 7 2 BA AND THE GUIDELINES FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION. NOTE THAT THE FRONT FACADES OF NEW CONSTRUCTION ARE TO ALIGN WITH THE FRONT FACADES OF ADJACENT BUILDINGS WHERE A CONSISTENT SETBACK HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED ALONG THE STREET FRONTAGE. THERE IS A SUBSTANTIAL PRECEDENT FOR THE 20 FOOT MINIMUM SETBACK, AND IT SHOULD BE REQUIRED A CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL. THE H C R C ADVOCATED FOR PUSHING THE UNITS ON TRAIL BACK FROM THE STREET TO PROTECT THE HISTORICS ANDO HOUSE. THIS NEW PROPOSAL WITH A 10 FOOT SETBACK PUSHES, PUSHES US BACK TO SQUARE ONE. THE UNITS NEED TO MOVE BACK FROM THE STREET TO AT LEAST 18 FEET TO PROTECT THE INTEGRITY OF THIS HISTORIC LANDMARK. UM, AND THEN DAVID BROKEN SUBMITS SIX, PARKING AND ACCESS A THE TURNAROUND, UM, THE HAMMERHEAD TURNAROUND ON TRAIL REQUIRED BY THE U D C AND FIRE CODE CAN'T BE USED FOR PARKING AS REQUIRED FOR THE INTERNATIONAL FIRE CODE, WHICH THE CITY USES. IT IS MINIMALLY A 20 FOOT WIDE BY 70 FOOT LONG AREA AS MEASURED FROM THE SOUTH OF THE SOUTH, SOUTH SIDE OF TRAIL, UM, WITH A MINIMUM TURNING RADIUS OF 28 FEET. THIS MEANS THAT THE PAVEMENT WOULD PROJECT 50 FEET INTO THE SITE AND REQUIRE THE REMOVAL OF THE HERITAGE. OAK TURNING RADIUS ALSO CUTS ACROSS THE CORNER OF ONE OF THE UNITS. THIS NEEDS REVISION B TRAIL STREET CLASSIFICATION. UM, THE ISSUE OF TRAIL STREET NEEDS TO BE RESOLVED. THE PROPOSAL NEW WIDTH, THE PROPOSED NEW WIDTH MEETS THE CRITERIA OF AN ALLEY OR LANE, BUT THE RIGHT OF WAY IS TOO SMALL TO QUALIFY TRAIL AS A LANE. ALSO, U D C 35 5 0 6 ARE ACCESS AND DRIVEWAYS AND PART D STATES [01:10:01] THAT NO ACCESS POINTS WILL BE ALLOWED FROM AUXILIARY LANES, UM, WHICH WOULD AFFECT ALL THE DRIVEWAYS ON THIS ROAD. SEEING DRIVEWAY SEPARATION ON TRAIL STREET. THE U D C REQUIRES 50 FOOT SEPARATION BETWEEN ACCESS DRIVEWAYS. THE CURRENT PROPOSAL NEEDS TO BE REDESIGNED TO PROVIDE SUFFICIENT SEPARATION BETWEEN THE DRIVES. WE ARE NOW GOING TO MOVE INTO OUR VOICEMAILS. UM, WE ARE YOU READY WITH THOSE? SO I THINK WE HAVE CAMILLE ROSEN GRAND FIRST. THIS LETTER IS ABOUT 3 3 5 TRAIL STREET AND I'M READING IT FOR MY MOTHER. DEAR HISTORIC DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION. MY NAME IS CAMILLE ROSEN GRAND, AND MY FAMILY HAS OWNED THE HISTORIC SPANISH LAND GRANT ZAMBRANO PROPERTY FOR ALMOST 100 YEARS. DURING THIS TIME, THE ROSEN GRANT HAVE RIDICULOUSLY PROTECTED AND NURTURED THIS ONE OF A KIND PIECE OF LAND AT GREAT PERSONAL COST. THROUGH THREE GENERATIONS, WE HAVE PRESERVED THIS AMAZING 1780 STRUCTURE BUILT BEFORE THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION WAS WRITTEN AND THE LOVELY GROUNDS WITH THEIR HERITAGE PECANS ADJACENT TO THE ANCIENT ASAKIA. WE HAVE DONE THIS NOT JUST FOR OURSELVES, BUT FOR THE PEOPLE OF SAN ANTONIO, THE ZAMBRANO HOUSE AND SURROUNDING LAND BEAR THE PLAQUE OF TEXAS HISTORICAL MARKER NUMBER 9, 3 4 AND MAY NEVER BE DEMOLISHED. THIS HISTORIC DESIGNATION HAS BEEN IN PLACE SINCE 1966 AND AND IS ONE OF MANY REASONS THAT THE RIVER ROAD AREA IS LABELED AN OFFICIAL SAN ANTONIO HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOOD. I WILL BE 94 YEARS OLD IN TWO WEEKS AND AM HEARTBROKEN AND APPALLED THAT THIS PROPERTY SO CAREFULLY TENDED TO AND PROTECTED FOR DECADES BY THE PRESERVATION EFFORTS OF OUR COMMUNITY IS UNDER THREAT OF ENCROACHMENT BY A HUGELY OVERSCALED AND COMPLETELY INAPPROPRIATE SERIES OF BUILDINGS LOOMING OVER THE HISTORIC AND BRANO GROUNDS, AND NOW SET BACK ONLY 10 FEET FROM LITTLE TRAIL STREET. THE OAKS AT RIVER ROAD SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO PROCEED AS PRESENTED. THANK YOU FOR CONTINUING TO PROTECT THE HUNDREDS YEAR OLD ZAMBRANO PROPERTY AND OUR RIVER ROAD HISTORIC DISTRICT FOR GENERATIONS OF SAN ANTONIO RESIDENTS TO COME. IT IS THE MORAL AND APPROPRIATE THING TO DO. CAMILLE ROSEN, GRAND 1 0 4, ANASTASIA PLACE, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 7 8 2 1 2. THANK YOU. LET'S DO GEORGE NASH NEXT. MY NAME IS GEORGE NASH. I LIVE AT 8 4 2 EAST MAGNOLIA AVENUE IN RIVER ROAD. UH, MY CONCERN IS 3 3 5 TRAIL STREET. YOUR NUMBER 20 24 7 1. MY MAIN OBJECTION IS TO GRANTING THE WAIVER THE RECIPIENT. UM, YOU KNOW, YOU ALL HAVE THIS REQUIREMENT FOR A ONE YEAR BEFORE RESUBMITTING AND IT'S YOUR POLICY. THE APPLICANT HAS SHOWN NO REASON TO, UM, TO WAIVE THIS PERIOD. ON THE CONTRARY, THERE UNWILLINGNESS TO MAKE SUBSTANTIAL CHANGES IN THEIR PLAN, ESPECIALLY DENSITY, PARKING, ACCESSIBILITY, AND DRAINAGE. THERE ARE ALL REASONS NOT TO GIVE THEM THE WAIVER ON THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS. I STILL OBJECT TO THE DENSITY IN THAT THE CENTER TO UNITS STRADDLE AND ENCROACH UPON THE HISTORIC DISTRICT BOUNDARY. ALL UNITS SHOULD EITHER FACE TRAIL STREET OR FACE ATCH STREET WITH THEIR RESPECTIVE LOTS. GOING BACK TO THE HISTORIC DISTRICT BOUNDARY, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. MY NAME IS MIMI NIA AND I LIVE AT ONE 50 OSTROM DRIVE. THIS IS REGARDING H D R C, CASE NUMBER 20 24 0 1 3 3 5 TRAIL. I REALLY WANNA COME TO H D R C AND SAY, I SUPPORT THIS PROJECT, BUT I CAN'T. THIS HALF DONE REVISION OF THE PLANS IS JUST NOT ACCEPTABLE IN REVIEWING THE REQUIREMENTS FOR APPROVAL, I UNDERSTAND THAT H D R C REQUIRES AN 80% SET OF DRAWINGS FOR REVIEW, NOT SKETCHES, NOT IMPRESSIONS OR WISHFUL THINKING, BUT REAL SCALED DRAWINGS THAT CAN BE VIEWED HOLISTICALLY. THE PROJECT PLANNING MUST BE HOLISTIC WHEN ASPECTS OF THE PLAN ARE CHANGED TO ADDRESS OUR CONCERNS. HOW DOES THIS AFFECT, HOW DOES THIS AFFECT OTHER RELATED ASPECTS OF THE PROJECT AND THE GUIDELINES THAT NEED TO BE MET? RIVER ROAD IS ENDING UP DOING THE DEVELOPER'S DUE DILIGENCE WORK FOR THEM. THE M N O MAY FEEL THAT THEY'VE ADDRESSED THE FIVE CONCERNS RIVER ROAD HAS ALWAYS HAD, BUT THEY'VE NOT RESOLVED THE [01:15:01] CONCERNS. THEY'VE MERELY SHIFTED THE EMPHASIS. THE CONCERNS HAVE ALWAYS BEEN REDUCTION OF MASS OR LOT COVERAGE. THERE IS SOME REDUCTION ON TRAIL, BUT WHAT THEY'RE PROPOSING MERELY SHIFTS THE BUILDINGS FORWARD AND REDUCES THE SETBACKS TO GET THE SQUARE FOOTAGE THEY PLANNED. THERE IS NO SIGNIFICANT REDUCTION IN THE HEIGHT OF BUILDINGS THREE AND FOUR, WHICH ARE WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF THE HISTORIC DISTRICT. THE REVISED PROPOSED TWO AND A HALF AND THREE STORY BUILDINGS ARE WE ON ATCH, ARE BOTH IN RIO ONE AND THE RIO RIVER ROAD HISTORIC DISTRICT, WHERE THEY STILL ABUT ONE STORY HOMES. THE BUILDINGS ARE STILL NOT IN ALIGNMENT WITH THE U D C AND THEY STILL DO NOT FOLLOW THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR STANDARDS FOR RIO ONE. THE PARKING SITUATION AND PROTECTION OF THE HERITAGE TREES IS NOT ADEQUATELY DEVELOPED. THE POWERPOINT SKETCH SUBMITTED IS NOT ACCURATE TO IMPLEMENT THE FIRE TURNAROUND ON TRAIL. THE LARGE HERITAGE OAK TREE WOULD HAVE TO BE REMOVED AND THE TURNAROUND CANNOT BE USED FOR PARKING AS THEY HAVE PLANNED, THE DRAINAGE WILL STILL ENTER AND NEGATIVELY IMPACT THE UPPER LABOR ASAKIA. THIS WAS NOT REVISED AND IS NOT A FULLY DEVELOPED PLAN. RIVER ROAD IS CHARACTERIZED AS UNCOMPROMISING AND NON-SPECIFIC IN THIS AREA. IN THIS CASE, WE'VE COMPROMISED AND WE'VE BEEN CLEAR ABOUT OUR CONCERNS. WE LIVE HERE. WE NEED THE DEVELOPERS TO LISTEN AND COMPREHEND WHAT WE ARE SAYING. WE'RE COUNTING ON THE H D R C TO LISTEN. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. THIS IS JOHN HERTZ, 1 25 ANASTASIA PLACE, SPEAKING ABOUT 3 35 TRAIL STREET. FIRST, WHAT CONSTITUTES SUBSTANTIAL NEW EVIDENCE? O H P BELIEVES THIS TERM APPLIES TO CHANGES MADE BY THE DEVELOPER. WE BELIEVE IT REFERS TO STIPULATIONS THAT MIGHT BE MADE BY THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT UPON DENYING THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS. BUT THE B O A DID NOT DESCRIBE ANY REMEDIATING CRITERIA FOR THE PROJECT BECAUSE IT WAS IRREDEEMABLY INAPPROPRIATE. WHATEVER CHANGES THE DEVELOPER PROPOSES CAN'T BE CONSIDERED SUBSTANTIAL NEW EVIDENCE AS DEFINED BY THE U D C. LOGICALLY, THERE IS NO GROUNDS FOR A WAIVER. SECOND IS THE CONFORMITY OF THE CURRENT PROPOSAL TO THE SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS FOR A C O A. STARTING WITH THE SITE PLAN, WHICH IS SO SCHEMATIC AND CONCEPTUAL, IT IS NOT THE REQUIRED ANNOTATED SITE PLAN, DISPLAYING SETBACKS AND ACCURATE DIMENSIONS. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS DEMAND FOUR PLANS. WHERE ARE THEY? U D C 35 4 51 REQUIRES AT LEAST 80% COMPLETED CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS, BUT THE ONLY CDS WERE SUBMITTED IN JUNE, 2019 AND ARE NOW IRRELEVANT. THE PRESENTATION DOES NOT MEET THE MINIMUM U D C MANDATED REQUIREMENTS FOR A C O A AND SHOULD NOT BE HEARD UNTIL IT DOES. THIRD IS THIS ABUSE OF PROCESS. COUNCILMAN TREVINO IS PREPARING A CONTINUING COUNCIL RESOLUTION TO PREVENT THESE REPEAT REQUESTS FOR A C O A. THIS PROJECT WAS DENIED A C O A BY THE H D R C BEFORE IT WAS DENIED, ONE BY THE BO O A. IT HAS NOW BEEN DENIED TWO WAIVERS OF THE MORATORIUM. THIS IS A WAR OF ATTRITION BEING WAGED BY THE DEVELOPER, WHICH HE HOPES TO WIN BY WEARING US ALL DOWN TO THE POINT AT WHICH THEY GET WHAT THEY WANT. EVEN THOUGH UNDESERVED FOR THESE REASONS ALONE, THERE IS NOTHING HERE THAT MERITS A WAIVER OR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS. THANK YOU. MY NAME IS BILL ER. I HAVE A 1 34 ARNOLD PLACE IN RIVER ROAD CENTER, UH, IN NEIGHBORHOOD. I'M CALLING IN REFERENCE TO ITEM NUMBER 27 ON TODAY'S AGENDA, WHICH IS 3 35 TRAIL IN RIVER ROAD. I HAVE THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS. WHEN, IF THE DEVELOPER CAN BRING THIS PROPOSAL INTO BASIC COMPLIANCE, THERE ARE STILL A NUMBER OF DESIGN ELEMENTS THAT NEED TO BE ADDRESSED. FIRST OF ALL, ROOFS ARE MORE APPROPRIATE FOR A FREEWAY APARTMENT COMPLEX THAN FOR HOMES AND A HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOOD ROAD. THEY'VE INTRODUCED GABLES ON SOME OF THE UNITS ON TRAIL STREET, AND THAT SHOULD BE CONTINUED, UH, WITH GABLES, WITH DORMS FOR ADDITIONAL HEIGHT AS REQUIRED ON THE THEIR OTHER, UH, BUILDINGS AS WELL. NEXT ITEM WOULD BE THE CHAOTIC WINDOW FE ADMINISTRATION. THERE'S NO ORDER OR AT ALL. THIRD ITEM, UH, DESIGN ISSUE IS GOING TO BE THE PORCHES. PORCHES WOULD BE A GRAY AMENITY, BUT A PORCH ARE ONLY, UH, THREE FEET DEEP IS NOT AN AMENITY, BUT JUST A DECLARATION. IT SHOULD BE INCREASED SO THAT IT ACTUALLY IS SOMETHING THAT HAS A POSITIVE RELATIONSHIP. TO THE [01:20:02] THANK THE COMMITTEE FOR YOUR TIME AND PATIENCE, ROY SWEARS 1 0 2 ARMOR 3 3 5 TRAIL CASE 20 24 0 2. GLAD TO SEE THE PROJECT DENSITY REDUCED BUT STILL NEEDS WORK. A LOT OF WORK BEFORE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS CAN EVEN BE CONSIDERED BY H D R C. APPLICANT, PLEASE CONTINUE TO LISTEN AND MAKE POSITIVE CHANGES. THE LIMITS OF THE HISTORIC DISTRICT STILL NEED TO BE CORRECTED. THEY'RE TOO SMALL. I RAISED THIS ISSUE AT THE LAST HEARING AND NOTHING HAS CHANGED. THE EXHIBITS THAT ESTABLISHED THE CORRECT LIMITS, THE ORDINANCE AND THE PLATT, A BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FINDINGS IS H D R C DID NOT CONSIDER ALL BUILDINGS IN THE DISTRICT AS TWO STORIES. BUILDINGS. THREE AND FOUR ARE IN THE DISTRICT, AND THERE'S STILL THREE STORIES, NOT TWO REALLY. ALL THE BUILDINGS NEED TO BE LIMITED TO TWO STORIES PER THE RIO ONE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR STANDARDS, AND IT'S SUBMITTED TODAY. THE ENTIRE SITE WOULD BE LIMITED TO TWO AND A HALF STORIES BY ZONING BECAUSE THE CITY HAS RECENTLY RECOGNIZED ITS MISTAKE OF BLANKET MF THREE ZONING IN THIS AREA. ALL ADJACENT LOTS ARE NOW R THREE OR FOUR. YES, PROJECT RE PLAT WAS SUBMITTED WHEN STILL MF 33. BUT NO, THE CITY NOW RECOGNIZES THAT ALLOWING THREE STORIES WAS INAPPROPRIATE FOR THIS SITE AND MOST DISTURBING IS THE NEW 10 FOOT SETBACK. ALONG TRAIL NOTE, THE ENTIRE 175 FOOT FRONTAGE IS DIRECTLY OPTED FROM THE ZIMBRANO TRACK, A CONTINUOUSLY OCCUPIED HOUSE. FOR OVER 300 YEARS, THE ZAMBRANO AND THE NAVARRO FAMILIES PLANNED THE FIRST REVOLUTION OF TEXAS INDEPENDENCE ON THIS LAND AGAINST THE SPANISH ROYALISTS LEADING TO THE BATTLE OF MEDINA IN 1813. CONTINUE TO RECOGNIZE THAT THIS PLACE REALLY, REALLY MATTERS AND GUARD ITS CENTURIES OLD HERITAGE AGAINST ENCROACHMENT BY MAINTAINING HIGH STANDARDS OF PRESERVATION THAT HONOR THE BRNO'S HISTORY WITH AN 18 TO 20 FOOT SETBACK ALONG TRAIL AND FOR THE ENTIRE SITE TO MAINTAIN A TWO STORY LIMIT. AS ALWAYS, THANK YOU FOR PROTECTING RIVER ROAD. HI, MY NAME IS LARRY CLARK AND I LIVE AT 1 0 2 ALLISON ROAD ADJACENT TO THE PROJECT. THIS IS IN REGARD TO 2020 DASH 4 0 1 3 35. TRAIL. TWO MINUTES IS A SHORT TIME, BUT I'LL TRY TO GET THIS IN. THANK YOU AGAIN. WE APPRECIATE YOU LOOKING AT THIS AND I ASK YOU TO REJECT THIS INAPPROPRIATE PROPOSAL FOR 3 35 TRAIL STREET. THE APPLICANT IS SIMPLY TRYING TO WEAR DOWN THE COMMISSION AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD. WE'VE SEEN THIS PLAN MANY TIMES. IT HAS NOT CHANGED ENOUGH. THERE'S NOT NEW SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE AS REQUIRED BY THE U D C H D R C REQUIRES AN 80% SET OF DRAWINGS FOR REVIEW. AND THIS IS NOT AT THAT LEVEL. WE CANNOT POSSIBLY EVALUATE KEY FEATURES OF THIS PROJECT, SUCH AS DRAINAGE, PORCHES, GRADING THE ACTUAL HEIGHT ABOVE FINISHED GRADE. THIS IS NOT SUFFICIENT FOR YOUR REVIEW. THE STROKE BOUNDARY ACTUALLY EXTENDS ACROSS LOT 20 AND BUILDING FOUR IS WITHIN THE DISTRICT. THE U D C IS THE LAW, AND THERE ARE MANY STANDARDS THAT ARE VIOLATED WITH THIS PLAN. THIS APPLICANT DOESN'T SEEM TO CARE NOTHING IN THE PLANS THAT ADDRESSES HOW THEY'RE GONNA MITIGATE STORM WATER, UM, HOW THEY'RE GONNA HANDLE, UM, FIRE LANE ACCESS. THE, THE 18 FOOT SETBACK ON TRAILS NOW BEEN REDUCED TO 10 FOOT. THERE ARE ALL SORTS OF PROBLEMS THEY'VE BROUGHT UPON THEMSELVES AND THAT THEY EXPECT TO ANSWER IN THE, UM, REVIEW STAGE WITH THE SD, IT'S GONNA COME BACK BEFORE YOU. THE PROBLEM IS IT'S TOO DENSE. THE AMOUNT OF BUILDING AND THE PARKING IS A PROBLEM. IT'S A BAD SITE PLAN. WE'RE NOT IN OPPOSITION TO A MULTI-FAMILY PROJECT ON THIS SITE, BUT THIS IS NOT THE PLAN FOR THIS SITE PROJECT'S ENTIRELY WITHIN THE RIVER ROAD NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE THE HISTORIC DISTRICT, UH, EXTENDS ACROSS IT. I RECOGNIZE YOUR COMMITMENT AND GRATEFUL TO YOU FOR YOUR FOCUS AND ATTENTION ON PROTECTING HISTORIC RESOURCES. PLEASE SEE MY LETTER IN YOUR PACKET. THANKS VERY MUCH, LARRY CLARK. BARBARA WHI HOWELL 1 0 5 MAGNOLIA DRIVE CASE 20 DASH 6 5 0 6 3 35. TRAIL RIVER ROAD'S FIRST STRUCTURE OF THE SOBRANO HOUSE WAS BUILT IN 1780 DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET FROM THIS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT. IT'S LISTED ON THE NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES. THE EARLY 1900 SAW FEW HOMES ADDED. RIVER ROAD COUNTRY DAY SCHOOL OPENED IN 1926. ITS MOST RECENT OWNER, JAZZ LEGEND, JIM CULLEN, IN 1930 RIVER ROAD, NEGOTIATED THE BUILDING OF ALAMO STADIUM FILED SUIT IN 1986 TO PROTECT IT FROM BEING SOLD TO A PROFESSIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE. AND IN 2012, LED THE EFFORT TO PROTECT THE STADIUM FOR OUR STUDENTS' USE ONLY WE ARE COMMITTED TO PROTECTING THE UPPER LA BORE ASAKIA BRACKENRIDGE PARK, AND THE LAST SEGMENT OF THE SAN ANTONIO [01:25:01] RIVER LEFT IN ITS ORIGINAL NATURAL STATE. WE WORK CLOSELY TO PRESERVE THESE HISTORICAL, ECOLOGICAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES FOR SAN ANTONIO AND INCLUDED THEM IN OUR BYLAWS. IN 1975, THE YEAR RIVER ROAD NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, A NONPROFIT 5 0 1 C THREE WAS REGISTERED IN 2011. WE DESIGNATED THE RIVER ROAD HISTORIC DISTRICT ADDING TO THE POSITIVE ECONOMIC IMPACT HISTORIC DISTRICTS GENERATE FOR OUR CITY. HISTORIC DISTRICTS NATURALLY DRAW DEVELOPERS. THEY KNOW THEIR PROJECTS WILL BE SUCCESSFUL. RIVERWOOD WELCOMES BOTH COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT RESULTING IN OFFICE BUILDINGS, STRIP CENTERS, AND APARTMENT COMPLEXES AROUND HIGHWAY 2 81 IN EAST MULBERRY, ALL NEGOTIATED BY RIVER ROAD PERFECTLY PLACED AND SUCCESSFUL. THAT IS WHAT WE WANT FOR 3 35 TRAILS, A PROJECT WHERE NEW RESIDENCE WILL BE A PART OF RIVER ROAD AND INVESTOR RESOURCES INTO A GREAT NEIGHBORHOOD AND HISTORIC DISTRICT WHERE THEY CAN LIVE, WORK, AND PLAY. BUT TO DO THAT, WE NEED YOUR HELP. THERE'S NO SUBSTANTIAL NEW EVIDENCE IN THIS PLAN, A REQUIREMENT FOR BRINGING IT TO YOU. AGAIN, THE REQUIRED PERCENTAGE OF DOCUMENTS TO GRANTED A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS IS MISSING. PLEASE DENY A WAIVER AND A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS. WE WANT TO GET THIS RIGHT AND WE THANK YOU FOR YOUR HELP. GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS RUTH TERESA BERLAND, AND MY PHONE NUMBER IS TWO ONE ZERO SEVEN SEVEN TWO THREE. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU NEED THE ADDRESS, BUT IT IS 1 6 4 EL MONTE BOULEVARD AND I AM CALLING, UH, TO SUPPORT THE RIVER RESIDENCE FOR THEM TO KEEP THEIR HISTORICAL NEIGHBORHOOD AND, UH, AND OPPOSE THE ZONING ON THE PROPERTY THAT THE DEVELOPERS WANT TO CREATE THERE. UH, I BELIEVE IT'S CASE NUMBER 2 0 6 5 0 6, AND IT'S NUMBER SIX ON THE AGENDA. 20 IT'S THREE. THE, THE, UM, ADDRESS OF THE PROJECT IS 3 3 5 TRAIL. AND THAT IS THE INFORMATION THAT I, I HAVE FOR THIS, UH, THIS, UH, ISSUE. AND I, I DO WANT TO, AGAIN, REAFFIRM THAT WHATEVER STEPS THE RIVER ROAD, UH, UH, RESIDENTS THAT WANT TO KEEP THEIR HISTORICAL NEIGHBORHOODS THE WAY THAT IT IS, I WILL SUPPORT THEM IN ANY, UH, STEP THAT THEY TAKE TO, UH, TO, UH, REACH THEIR, THEIR GOAL TO KEEP IT A, A HISTORICAL NEIGHBORHOOD WITHOUT ANY APARTMENTS. ANY OTHER THINGS GOING ON, JUST LEAVE IT THE WAY THAT IT IS. BESIDES THAT, I THINK THAT, UM, WELL, I I DON'T WANNA SAY ANYMORE BECAUSE I'VE ALREADY TOLD YOU THAT I SUPPORT THEM AND I WILL SUPPORT THEM IN ANY ENDEAVOR THAT THEY CHOOSE TO, UH, USE TO KEEP THEIR HISTORICAL DISTRICT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR, UH, THE CALL, FOR LETTING ME TAKE FOR THIS, UM, UH, SERVICE TO BE ABLE TO LEAVE MY, UH, MY COMMENT. THANK YOU. MY NAME IS MIKEY MOORE, AND I LIVE AT 6 0 3 RIVER ROAD, AND I PASS BY ITEM NUMBER 23, WHICH IS 3 35 TRAIL STREET. EVERY DAY. I HAVE THREE COMMENTS. COMMENTS. ONE, DAVID MORIN, THE DEVELOPER CALL THE MEETING OF A NEIGHBORS YESTERDAY, AND HE HAD NO AGENDA. SEVERAL NEIGHBORS REQUESTED THE PURPOSE OF HIS MEETING. HE HAD NO ANSWERS. IT WAS A PHONY AND INSINCERE MEETING. WE GOT NO ANSWERS. WE GOT BULLIED. WE GOT BULLIED. A NEIGHBOR UNFAMILIAR WITH THE, THE CHAT TEACHER MADE NEGATIVE COMMENTS ABOUT DAVID ON IT. AND THEN DAVID WEAPONIZED HER MISTAKE BY READING IT ALOUD TO EVERYONE AND EMBARRASSING HER. THE LADY WAS DEMEANED AND EMBARRASSED AND HUMILIATED WHILE SHE'S SIMPLY TRYING TO SAVE THE LIFE OF HER 94 YEAR OLD MOTHER WHO HAS LIVED HER WHOLE LIFE ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE DEVELOPMENT. AND WHO IS STRUGGLING TO SURVIVE THIS UGLY, NOISY TWO TO THREE STORY UNNEIGHBORLY, UNWANTED BIG DEVELOPMENT. DAVID MOORE IS A PHONY. HE IS NOT A NEVER HAS BEEN CURRENTLY TO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, EVIDENCED BEGINNING AND AGAIN OVER THE YEARS. AND NOW BY HIS BULLYING OF OUR NEIGHBOR'S CHAT ERROR. HE HAS MADE NO SUBSTANTIAL CHANGES TO THE PLANS. IN FACT, LAST NIGHT WE LEARNED THAT A THREE FOOT DOOR STOOP WITH A RAILING IS INSULTINGLY CALLED THE PORCH. COMMENT TWO. DAVID LIED WHEN HE SAID A LOT OF THE NEIGHBORS SUPPORT THE DEVELOPMENT. NONE OF THE ACTIVE NEIGHBORS SUPPORT IT. THE ONLY PEOPLE SUPPORTING [01:30:01] IT OWN NEARBY PROPERTY AND WILL PROFIT IT FROM FILLING THEIR PLACE TO THE COMPLEX. OR THEY WANT MORE TRAFFIC IN CUSTOMERS. NONE ARE INVOLVED WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD AT ALL. THEY NEVER ATTEND MEETINGS OR GATHERINGS. IT IS A LOT. IT'S A LOT. EVEN ANY OF THE NEIGHBORS SUPPORT THE DEVELOPMENT. COMMENT THREE. AND MY PRIMARY COMMENT FROM DAY ONE ABOUT THIS DEVELOPMENT IS THAT IF IT'S THE LIVES AT RISK, THE LIVES AT RISK OF ALL THAT LIVE ON OR NEAR ARE OR WILL LIVE ON TRAIL. THERE'S NO ACCESS TO THE NEAREST STREET TO GET TO. EMERGENCY HEALTH LIVES ARE THREATENED BECAUSE IF THIS DEVELOPMENT HAPPENED, EVEN THE NEW APARTMENT OWNER'S LIVES WILL BE AT RISK. IF ANY TRUCK LIKE FEDEX OR U P S OR AN AMBULANCE IS PARKED ON TRAIL, YOU CANNOT PASS BY. YOU'RE STUCK THERE. EVEN A FIRE ENGINE CANNOT EXIT THE TRAIL. THEY HAVE TO PARK DOWN ON LINDELL AND RUN THEIR FIRE HOSE 150 TO 200 FEET FROM THEIR FIRE ENGINE TO PUT OUT A FIRE. LET THE CONSCIENCE OF H D R C IN THE CITY BEAR THE BLAME FOR ANY LIES THAT WILL BE LOST IF EVER THERE'S AN EMERGENCY ON TRAIL STREET. IF THIS DEVELOPMENT IS APPROVED, THERE'S NO EMERGENCY ACCESS OFF OF TRAIL. IN SUMMARY, I'D SAY THIS DEVELOPMENT HAS TOO MUCH DENSITY, THE DESTRUCTION OF ALL, BUT ONE OF OUR BIG TREES, A THREAT TO OUR HISTORIC, HISTORIC FAIA, AND IT'S A THREAT TO THE VERY LIFE OF A 94 YEAR OLD WHO LIVES IN AND PROTECTS THE OLDEST HOUSE IN FAIR COUNTY. WE ARE ALL OPPOSED TO THIS DEVELOPMENT. THANK YOU. GOODBYE. LUCY WILSON, ONE 30 MAGNOLIA DRIVE. AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 23 3 35 TRAIL SHERMAN FETZER AND COMMISSIONERS, THANK YOU FOR PERMITTING OUR CONCERNS TO BE HEARD. I'VE LIVED IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD FOR THREE YEARS AND HAVE ATTENDED THESE HEARINGS FOR TWO YEARS. OVER THE MANY HEARINGS I HAVE OBSERVED THAT AS CONCERNS ARE RAISED, THAT THE NEXT HEARING MINIMAL MODIFICATIONS HAVE OCCURRED IN HOPES THAT THESE WILL GAIN APPROVAL. THE DEVELOPERS CONTINUE TO IGNORE THAT THE PROJECT IS TOO MASSIVE AND DENSE FOR THE SITE. SOME REDUCTION IN BUILDINGS IS MOVEMENT IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION, BUT IT DOES NOT MEET THE B L A STANDARD. THE REQUEST FOR A WAIVER FOR THE ONE YEAR WAITING PERIOD SHOULD BE DENIED. EARLY ON, RESIDENTS MET WITH THE DEVELOPERS AND MADE SUGGESTIONS, BUT ONCE THE DIVINE DESIGN EMERGED, IT WAS OBVIOUS THAT THEY HAD THEIR PLAN AND NEIGHBORHOOD EXPECTATIONS WERE NOT INCLUDED. OUR ONLY RECOURSE HAS BEEN TO COME TO THESE HEARINGS AND VOICE OUR CONCERNS. RIVER ROAD RESIDENTS REALIZED THE HISTORICAL AND ECOLOGICAL IMPORTANCE OF THIS COMMUNITY. LONG BEFORE HISTORIC DESIGNATIONS WERE AVAILABLE, THE RESIDENTS BANDED TOGETHER TO PROTECT THIS PRECIOUS MICROCOSM. WHILE WE SUCH MAY NOT CARRY HISTORIC DESIGNATION, IT IS ONE OF THE ONLY THREE ENTRANCES INTO RIVER ROAD. YOU ARE BEING ASKED NOT ONLY TO WAIVE THE B O A DECISION, BUT TO IMMEDIATELY APPROVE A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR CONSTRUCTION. WHERE IS THE LEVEL OF CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTATION REQUIRED BY THE U D C IN ORDER FOR SUCH APPROVAL? O H P HAS A LONG LIST OF REQUIREMENTS THAT MUST BE MET, BUT UNLESS THE APPLICANT HAS PROVIDED CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS, WILL THAT OCCUR? THE REQUEST FOR IMMEDIATE APPROVAL SEEMS UNREASONABLE AND SHOULD BE DENIED HOLDING THE LINE ON JUST SUCH PROJECT AS THIS ALLOWS HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOODS TO SURVIVE. THANK YOU. NAME MS. RALEIGH WOOD. I LIVE AT 1 0 9 LINDELL PLASS, AND I'M SPEAKING ON ITEM 23 3 3 5 TRAIL. GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIRMAN. COMMISSIONERS. I WOULD LIKE TO STATE I'M OPPOSED TO THE PROCESS THAT HAS ALLOWED THIS PROJECT TO RETURN TO THE H D R C ON MULTIPLE OCCASIONS FOLLOWING ITS DENIAL IN ONE YEAR SETUP AT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT IN FEBRUARY OF 2020. IT'S ALSO CONCERNING THAT THE APPLICANT IS ABLE TO REPEATEDLY ASK FOR A CONTINUANCE THAT THE NUMBER OF COMMISSIONERS AT A SCHEDULED HEARING IS NOT ACCEPTABLE TO HIM. IN REGARD TO THE PRE CURRENT PRESENTATION, I BELIEVE THE SIZE OF THE CENTER BUILDINGS REMAINS TOO LARGE FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD. IN PARTICULAR, BUILDING FOUR, A THREE STORY STRUCTURE IN THE PREDOMINANTLY ONE STORY HISTORIC DISTRICT. WHEN ASKED ABOUT THIS AT A RECENT MEETING, THE APPLICANT'S RESPONSE WAS AT THE HEIGHT OF BUILDING FOUR WAS NOT A CONCERN AS IT COULD NOT BE SEEN FROM THE STREET. I BELIEVE THIS CONFLICTS WITH ESTABLISHED HISTORIC GUIDELINES AND SETS A BAD PRECEDENT FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT IN HISTORIC DISTRICTS IN REGARD TO THE ISSUE OF SUBSTANTIAL CHANGE, THE CURRENT PROPOSAL FOR SINGLE FAMILY HOMES ON TRAIL STREET APPEARS TO BE, BE A POSITIVE ONE FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD. HOWEVER, AS WITH PRIOR [01:35:01] SUBMISSIONS, POSITIVE CHANGE IN ONE AREA OF THE PROJECT IS NEGATIVELY IMPACTED BY THE PROJECT'S OVERALL SIZE. SPECIFICALLY THE PLANNED USE OF THE TURNAROUND ON TRAIL STREET AS A DEDICATED RESIDENCE PARKING AREA OVER THE ROOT ZONE OF THE HERITAGE OAK TREE. GIVEN THE INAPPROPRIATE HEIGHT, THE BUILDING FOUR FOR THE HISTORIC DISTRICT, AND THE IMPACT THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS OVERALL SIZE CONTINUES TO HAVE ON AREAS SUCH AS PARKING. I DO NOT BELIEVE THE PROJECT, ALTHOUGH PROGRESSING HAS EVIDENCED SUBSTANTIAL CHANGE TO WARRANT WAIVER, THE ONE YOU'RE SET OUT. THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. OKAY, COMMISSIONERS, THAT COMPLETES THE PUBLIC COMMENTS. UM, HE'S GONNA RES RESHARE THE SCREEN FOR US. UM, DAVID MORGAN, IF YOU CAN HEAR ME, YOU DO HAVE TWO MINUTES FOR REBUTTAL IF YOU WANT. TAKE THAT TIME. EDWARD. YEAH. HELLO? CAN YES, I CAN HEAR YOU. CAN YOU HEAR ME? UM, YES. I, I WOULD REQUEST COULD I REQUEST A, UM, THREE OR FOUR MINUTE REBUTTAL? UM, THAT'S AT THE DISCRETION OF THE CHAIR. I SEE HOW FAR YOU GET IN TWO MINUTES. OKAY. WELL, I HAVE A, UM, UH, EDWARD, IF YOU COULD PLEASE, UH, TURN TO PAGE, UM, 52 IN THE, UH, SUPPLEMENTARY EXHIBITS. ONE MOMENT. OKAY, DAVID. OKAY, SO I HAVE, I HAVE MY, UH, CIVIL ENGINEER THAT DESIGNED THE STORMWATER DRAINAGE PLAN, AND THAT HAS, UH, SHOWN THE FIRETRUCK EXHIBIT THAT SHOWS THE FIRE ACCESS TO THE PROPERTY. UM, ONE OF THE COMMENTS THAT WE'VE HEARD OVER AND OVER AGAIN WAS ABOUT THE HAMMERHEAD. AND THE HAMMERHEAD WAS NEVER INTENDED TO BE USED AS A FIRE TRUCK ACCESS POINT. AND SO THE FIRE EXHIBIT SHOULD SHOW EXACTLY HOW THE FIRE TRUCK, UH, WILL COME UP TO THE PROPERTY AS INDICATED BY THE FIRE DEPARTMENT IN THE PRE-PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW MEETING THAT WE HELD, UM, IN 2018. OKAY, DAVID, I DON'T THINK WE HAVE THAT. I DON'T THINK WE HAVE THAT RIGHT PAGE. UM, SO ON THE POSTED, UM, EXHIBITS, IT WAS, YOU REFERENCED THAT PAGE NUMBER. YEAH, SO THESE ARE, THESE ARE THE COMMENTS FROM OUR PROFESSIONALS. OH, OKAY. SO WE DO, WE ARE LOOKING AT THE COMMENTS MATRIX. YES. YES. OKAY. WE'RE THERE. AND SO IF YOU, IF YOU WOULD LIKE, I COULD BRING ON, UM, MY CIVIL ENGINEER NATASHA ULRICH AND, UM, ALSO OUR LAND USE ATTORNEY JAMES MCKNIGHT TO DISCUSS SOME OF THESE COMMENTS. BUT BEFORE THAT, I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT WE DID HOLD A MEETING WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD ON MONDAY. THE PURPOSE OF THE MEETING, UH, WAS DEFINED. IT WAS TO ADDRESS, UH, MANY OF THE QUESTIONS RELATED TO U D C ISSUES. UM, AND I ALSO REQUEST THAT THE COMMISSIONERS, UH, CONSIDER THE MASSIVE AMOUNT OF DUE DILIGENCE AND WORK THAT THE APPLICANT HAS MADE ON THIS PROJECT, UM, INCLUDING THE CIVIL ENGINEERING STORMWATER PLAN THAT AS RESPECTS THE AIA THE, UH, ARCHEOLOGY STUDY THAT WAS CONDUCTED, THE NUMEROUS LETTERS BY THE ARBORIST, UM, THAT DISCUSS THE PRESERVATION OF THE HERITAGE OAK TREE AND THE, UH, D NUMEROUS EXHIBITS THAT WE HAVE, UM, RESPONDING TO SOME OF THESE COMMENTS ABOUT THE U D C. SO IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO HEAR FROM OUR ENGINEER OR LAND ATTORNEY, JUST, JUST PLEASE LET ME KNOW. YES, PLEASE. YOU'VE GOT A COUPLE OF, YOU'VE GOT ANOTHER MINUTE OR SO. OKAY. CORY, COULD YOU, UM, TAP IN NATASHA ULRICH FROM UP ENGINEERING? I'M ON THE CALL. DAVID? YES. HEY, NATASHA, WE CAN HEAR YOU. OKAY. THERE'S A BIT OF A LAG, SO I APOLOGIZE FOR ANY HESITATION THERE. UM, UH, YOU ARE CORRECT, DAVID, IN RE IN RESPONSE TO THE FIRE, UM, COMMENTS, UM, THAT TURNAROUND WAS REQUESTED BY T C I AS A WAY FOR VEHICLE TRAFFIC TO TURN AROUND, NOT FOR FIRE TRUCKS. UM, THE FIRETRUCK IS STOPPING AT THE LAST FIRE HYDRANT AND PULLING FROM THERE AS WELL AS ACCESSING THE SITE OFF OF ATCH. UM, ALL FIRE COVERAGE AROUND THE BUILDINGS, UM, IS, UH, PER CODE, UM, AND, UM, HAS BEEN, UH, APPROVED BY THE FIRE [01:40:01] DEPARTMENT. UM, IN TERMS OF, UM, OF THE EXHIBITS THAT WE HAVE PROVIDED, AND IF I, IF I MAY, THIS IS JAMES MCKNIGHT. CAN EVERYBODY HEAR ME? YES. UH, I WANNA SAY THERE WERE A FEW OR MANY COMMENTS ABOUT THE FACT THAT THERE'S A U D C VIOLATION FOR HAVING THREE STORIES WITHIN 50 FEET. THAT IS A REQUIREMENT THAT WAS ADOPTED BY THE CITY IN DECEMBER OF 2019, WHICH IS AFTER OUR PROJECT STARTED. SO IT, IT DOES NOT APPLY TO US. UH, THE CITY HAS CONFIRMED THAT. SO, UH, THAT SHOULD JUST NOT BE ON AS PART OF THE DISCUSSION. UM, ANOTHER THING, AGAIN, THE, A LOT OF COMMENTS ABOUT THE, THE THREE STORIES THAT ARE PARTIALLY WITHIN THE HISTORIC OVERLAY. THERE WAS A, UH, A MISDRAWN LINE ABOUT THE HISTORIC OVERLAY. WE FIXED THAT FOR THE FINAL REQUIREMENTS. BUT AS FAR AS THREE STORIES GOES, THAT IS NOT A STANDARD. IT IS SOMETHING THAT'S VERY, UH, CLEARLY STATED AS A GUIDELINE, NOT A REQUIREMENT. IT IS NOT A U E C VIOLATION FOR THE COMMISSIONERS TO REVIEW AND APPROVE AS APPROPRIATE A THREE STORY STRUCTURE PARTIALLY IN, WITHIN THE HISTORIC AREA. UM, THAT'S HAPPENED BEFORE IT'S BEEN APPROVED AT THREE STORIES WITHIN THIS HISTORIC, UH, H D R C MEMBERS HAVE THAT AUTHORITY. IT, IT, IT, WE KEEP HEARING IT IS SOME KIND OF U D C VIOLATION TO APPROVE THAT. IT IS NOT. THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MADE COMMENTS ABOUT IT. THEIR COMMENTS WERE, DID H D R C HAVE ENOUGH INFORMATION TO MAKE THAT DECISION? WE'VE PROVIDED THAT INFORMATION. THEY NEVER SAID YOU CAN'T DO THIS. SO THOSE TWO THINGS ARE VERY IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND ARE NOT U D C VIOLATIONS. AND THIS IS DAVID MOORE, THE A, THE APPLICANT. UM, I, I BROUGHT JAMES AND NATASHA ON AND, AND WE HAVE THIS, UM, DIAGRAM IN, IN THE PRESENTATION, RESPONDING TO THESE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS. AND, UM, YOU KNOW, I JUST, I JUST WANNA SAY I HOPE THAT, UH, THE HISTORIC COMMISSION, UH, TAKES THESE ITEMS INTO CONSIDERATION. AND, UM, I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME. THANK YOU. SO, UH, COMMISSIONERS QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS. UM, COM UH, MR. CHAIR, AS COMMISSIONER OF VELASQUEZ, I, I WANNA COMMENT BECAUSE, UM, MAINLY BECAUSE WE, UH, WE DID HOST A A D R C. I RECALL THAT IT WAS YOU AND I, UH, AND IT'S PROBABLY MOST APPROPRIATE FOR ME TO GIVE A REPORT ON WHAT, WHAT WE, UH, DISCUSSED WITH THE APPLICANT. NOW, UM, THE, UM, THE ONE THING THAT STANDS OUT THE MOST IS THAT, UH, IT'S ALMOST A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT PROJECT NOW THAT THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT THE FOOTPRINT ISN'T VERY SIMILAR. I MEAN, IT REALLY VERY SIMILAR. BUT FOR THE, FOR THE VAST AMOUNT OF TIME THAT WE'VE SPENT ON THIS PROJECT, IT'S BEEN A COUPLE OF YEARS NOW, UM, FROM THE ORIGINAL DISCUSSION OF THE ASAKIA ALL THE WAY TO TWO SMALL DETAILS, ONE OF WHICH WAS, IS, WAS A BIG CONCERN, WAS HOW THE VEHICLES DIDN'T FIT ON TRAIL. THAT THERE, THE, THEIR, THE CAR'S, UH, TAIL ENDS, UH, STUCK OUT ONTO SIDEWALK. WE HAD QUESTION OF SET BACK LINES AND WHERE THE LINES WERE, WHERE THE, THE APPLICANT SINCE HAS REDUCED THE SIZE OF THE BUILDINGS ON TRAIL TO SUCH A DEGREE THAT THE PARKING IS PUSHED ALL THE WAY INTO, TO ALMOST TO THE REAR OF EACH BUILDING. SO THAT THERE'S A STAGING FOR I WOULD FIGURE TWO TO THREE CARS IN LINE INSIDE OF THE SITE, WHICH IS A MAJOR, MAJOR ACCOMPLISHMENT BECAUSE IT, IT SHOWS QUITE A BIT OF, UM, COMPROMISE ON THE PART OF, UH, OF THESE DESIGNERS WHEN THEY WENT BACK TO THE BOARD, THEY DIDN'T, YOU KNOW, GO BACK TO THE BOARD AND MAKE A COUPLE OF TWEAKS HERE. THEY ACTUALLY HAD TO GO BACK AND REDESIGN. ANOTHER IS A BUILDING TO THE NORTH AND THE WEST THAT, UM, WAS A, A ADJACENT, THE ONE STORY BUILDING. I KNOW I HAD, UH, SERIOUS CONCERNS WITH THE, THE BUILDING NOT GRADUATING DOWN TO THE, UH, TO, TO WHAT COULD BE REASONABLY EXPECTED BY A, BY A ONE STORY HOUSE NEXT TO AN EMPTY PIECE OF LAND, RIGHT? POTENTIAL FOR ONE STORY, TWO STORY BUILDING, UM, THAT THEY MADE EFFORTS TO, TO, TO REDUCE THAT, UH, ELEVATION, BUT BUT ALSO TO ORIENT THE ROOF SO THAT THE ROOF LINE IS, UM, THAT ITS MASS IS MINIMAL TO THE, TO THE, UM, TO THE BUILDING. IN OTHER WORDS, THE HALF STORY OR WHATEVER WOULD BE CONSIDERED, UH, AN ATTIC SPACE [01:45:01] IS, UM, IS OBVIOUSLY IN THE ROOF, WHICH VISUALLY, UH, A ROOF IS A ROOF, RIGHT? UM, AND IT'S NOT FLAT. AND, UH, UM, SO, SO THEY WERE ABLE TO ACCOMPLISH THAT, UH, WHICH I THINK WAS VERY, VERY THOUGHTFUL. UM, ANOTHER NOTE WAS THAT THEY DID SOME REDUCTIONS ON THE EAST END THAT REDUCES THE IMPACT, THE VISUAL IMPACT FROM THE EXISTING HOUSE ON THE WEST, UM, THAT, THAT'S NOT, NOT THEIR HOUSE, BUT THE HOUSE THAT, THAT WOULD BE A NEIGHBORING HOUSE LOOKING NORTH AND LOOKING EAST, THAT LOOKING NORTH, THERE'S, THERE'S REALLY KIND OF A MINIMAL OBSTRUCTION OF VIEW. AND THEN LOOKING EAST, IT'S, IT'S AT SUCH A LEVEL THAT IT DOESN'T STEAL, UM, UH, YOU KNOW, THE LARGEST PERCENTAGE OF SUN FROM, FROM THAT, UM, THAT STRUCTURE. SO IT'S VERY, VERY COMPLICATED, VERY DIFFICULT BECAUSE IT'S, UM, UM, UM, YOU KNOW, IT, IT IT'S A, IT'S COMPLICATED PROJECT WITH A LOT OF HISTORY, AND OBVIOUSLY THERE ARE A LOT OF COMMENTS. UM, THE, UM, BUT, BUT I MEAN, I, I, LOOKING AT THE PROJECT, AT SOME POINT THERE, THERE IS A, A, YOU KNOW, WHAT, WHAT QUICKLY BECOMES A, YOU A, UH, A STANDOFF RIGHT? WITHIN, WITHIN THE OPINIONS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND, AND, UH, THE, THE INTENTIONS OR THE RIGHTS OF THE PROPERTY OWNER. UM, SO WHILE LISTENING TO THE, UH, THE COMMUNITY, I THINK THEY'RE, THEY'RE, THEY'RE, UH, UM, THEIR, THEIR COMMENTS ARE, ARE, ARE, ARE IMPORTANT, BUT SO MUCH OF WHAT I HEAR IS, UM, SPEAKING WITH REGARD TO NOTHING HAPPENING, RIGHT? THAT, THAT THE PROPERTY WOULD'VE BEEN TAKEN OFF, OFF THE SLATE FOREVER BEING CONSTRUCTED, OR THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD WOULD'VE BOUGHT THE PROPERTY, OR THAT SOMEHOW IT WOULD'VE BEEN RESTRICTED AS A, AS A PLACE FOR BUILDING. AND THAT NEVER HAPPENED. YOU KNOW, THE, THE, SOMEONE CAME AND PURCHASED THAT PROPERTY, AND OBVIOUSLY AT SOME POINT, THEY HAVE A, RIGHT NOW THE DESIGN I FIND TO BE, UM, UM, SUBSTANTIALLY DIFFERENT. AND AGAIN, IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO, TO, UH, TO MAKE A COMMITMENT LIKE THAT BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT DO NOT AGREE WITH THAT. BUT, UH, FROM, FROM WHERE WE'RE COMING FROM, WHAT I SEE IS, UM, THIS ORIGINAL BUSINESS MODEL OR THIS ORIGINAL, UH, ARCHITECTURAL, UH, UH, STATEMENT THAT IT'S REALLY BEEN EDITED DOWN QUITE A BIT. AND, UH, IT, IT'S REALLY WORTH LOOKING AT, REALLY WORTH VIEWING. AND WITH RESPECT TO THE FIRST ITEM ON OUR AGENDA, UM, THEY, THEY'VE MET, UH, I THINK ALL OF THE COMMENTS BECAUSE THE COMMENTS THAT, THAT WERE MADE AT THE LAST PRESENTATION AND THINK I'M THE ONE THAT SAID, NO, THERE, THERE WERE SOME THINGS THAT THEY JUST DID NOT, THEY JUST REFUSED TO, TO BUDGE ON. THEY CAME BACK AND THEY DID BUDGE ON THOSE ITEMS. AND, UM, SO FROM, FROM THE VOICE OF THE BOARD, THE LAST MEETING, I THINK COMBINED WITH WHAT, WITH, WITH MY FINAL KIND OF STRAGGLING OPINION IS, UH, THAT WOULD MEET THAT SUBSTANTIAL, UH, UH, CHANGE. NOW, I DON'T KNOW HOW THAT SECOND QUESTION, EXCUSE ME. YEAH. EXCUSE ME. COMM, COMMISSIONER, UM, LET'S HEAR FROM SOME OTHER COMMISSIONERS. I BELIEVE WE, UH, UNDERSTAND WHERE YOU'RE, UH, COMING FROM. UM, MR. CHAIRMAN, I, I GUESS IF I COULD JUST OFFER COMMENTARY, I, I, I DO ECHO SOME OF THE THOUGHTS THAT COMMISSIONER VELASQUEZ HAS, UM, WHERE CERTAINLY I, THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UM, WE SHOULD VALUE THEIR CONCERNS. A LOT OF THE SAME ONES I'M HEARING, I, I DON'T FEEL ARE IN OUR SPACE AT ALL, UM, TO MITIGATE. AND SO, UM, I, I ALREADY HAVE, I GUESS MY OPINION ON THIS. AND, UM, UH, LIKE I SAID, I JUST ECHO MAYBE COMMISSIONER VELASQUEZ'S COMMENTS, IS THAT THIS HAS DEFINITELY BEEN A NEGOTIATION. IT'S, IT'S, YOU CAN ACTUALLY SEE IT FROM BEGINNING TO, FROM WHERE IT WAS TO WHERE IT IS. AND SO, UM, I, I AM IN SUPPORT OF, OF THE APPLICATION, SO WAIVER. OKAY. THANK YOU. THIS IS COMMISSIONER BOWMAN. UM, AND I WOULD, YOU KNOW, JUST WANNA CHIME IN REAL QUICK TO AGREE WITH MY, UH, FELLOW COMMISSIONERS. I THINK THAT BASED ON, YOU KNOW, SOME OF THE DISCUSSION THAT HAS BEEN, YOU KNOW, BROUGHT UP FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD, ONE THING THAT I WANT US TO REMEMBER IS KIND OF WHAT OUR PURVIEW IS, AND SOME OF THE ITEMS THAT ARE REALLY, UH, SPECIFIC TO THE HISTORIC, UH, GUIDELINES AND WHAT'S IM, UH, IMPORTANT FOR US TO, TO BE FOCUSED ON. AND A LOT OF THE CONCERNS AND THE COMMENTS THAT I WAS HEARING, UM, WERE NOT DIRECTLY RELATED TO, TO US. AND THEN SOME OF THE OTHER CONCERNS I FEEL LIKE HAVE BEEN ADDRESSED, UM, AND TO THE POINT WHERE, FROM, IN MY OPINION, PRETTY EXHAUSTIVELY, UH, AS FAR AS [01:50:01] YOU CAN GET, UH, FROM A PROFESSIONAL OPINION, UM, FROM, UH, MULTIPLE PROFESSIONALS IN THE FIELD AT THIS POINT. SO I THINK THAT, UH, THE, AT, AT SOME POINT WE HAVE TO, UH, CONTINUE TO TRUST THE PROCESS DOWN LINE, UH, TRUST FIRE MARSHALS, TRUST, YOU KNOW, UH, THE D S D AND, AND THE PLAN REVIEWS AND, AND ALL OF THE, UH, DIFFERENT, UH, GROUPS THAT ARE GONNA HAVE TO, TO REVIEW THIS PROJECT IN ORDER FOR IT TO GET BUILT. BUT I THINK THAT, UH, THE, THE SPEED BUMPS THAT WERE THERE FOR HISTORIC, I THINK, UH, THERE HAS BEEN ENOUGH OF A CHANGE FOR ME TO, UH, TO REVIEW THAT, THAT FIRST ITEM ON OUR AGENDA. THIS IS COMMISSIONER GROUP. UM, I THINK COMMISSIONER BOWMAN HAD A RIGHT. UH, WE HAVE ONE ITEM RIGHT NOW THAT, UM, IS TO BE CONSIDERED, AND SOME OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS, WE CAN ALWAYS, UM, CONSIDER THOSE IN ITEM TWO. SOME OF THEM WILL BE CONSIDERED, I FEEL, BUT FOR ITEM ONE, UM, SUBSTANTIAL CHANGE IN THE PROJECT. YES, I WOULD AGREE AS WELL. THIS IS COMMISSIONER FISH. UH, UM, I, I HOPE YOU WERE DONE COMMISSIONER GROUP. UH, IT SOUNDED LIKE YOU WERE, I DIDN'T MEAN TO INTERRUPT IF YOU WEREN'T. UM, I HAVE, I HAVE, UH, CONTINUED TO HAVE CON SOME CONCERNS ABOUT THE, THE BREADTH AND WHICH THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS OVERTURNED THE PREVIOUS APPROVAL. I HAVE REMAINING CONCERNS ABOUT BUILDING, UH, THE HEIGHTS OF BUILDINGS THREE AND FOUR. UM, AND, AND I SHARE SOME OF THE CONCERNS ABOUT THE PROXIMITY OF THE VISUAL TO WHICH, IF WE LOOK IT, UH, CLOSER THAN LAST TIME. AND I, I HAVE SOME RESERVATIONS, UM, ABOUT THAT. UM, I ALSO, UH, BELIEVE I UNDERSTAND, UH, SOME OF THE, THE CONFUSION ABOUT THE TURNAROUND AT THE END OF THE STREET BECAUSE, UM, WHILE THIS HAS BEEN A LONG PROCESS, UM, I THINK IT WAS PRINT PRESENTED ON NUMEROUS OCCASIONS THAT EMERGENCY AROUND, AND THAT WAS THE JUSTIFICATION OF THE HAMMERHEAD, UH, THAT IT WAS MEANT TO SUPPORT, UH, EMERGENCY VEHICLES AND NOT JUST BE A HAMMERHEAD TURNAROUND FOR, UH, RESIDENTIAL VEHICLES AT THE END. SO I, I DEFINITELY UNDERSTAND THE COMMUNITY'S CONCERN ABOUT THE SCALE OF THE HAMMERHEAD PRESENTED ON, AND I HAVE CONCERNS THAT IF THAT HAMMERHEAD WERE, UH, TO BE SCALED IN SUCH A WAY TO SUPPORT EMERGENCY VEHICLES, IT, IT WOULD DEFINITELY, UH, NEGATIVELY IMPACT THE HERITAGE TREE, WHICH IS, IS WHY THIS PLAN WAS KIND OF, UH, YOU KNOW, RECONFIGURED ALONG TRAIL IN THAT WAY. AND, AND THOSE ARE MY COMMENTS. SO THIS IS COMMISSIONER, UH, CARPENTER. UM, I, I'M JUST ADDING TO WHAT HAS BEEN ALREADY SAID. I THINK THERE, I APPRECIATE THE CLARIFICATIONS ON THAT VEHICLE HAMMERHEAD BECAUSE, UH, IT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING WERE PREVIOUS, UH, DISCUSSIONS THAT, UH, IT WAS FOR EMERGENCY VEHICLE TURNAROUND. AND SO I APPRECIATE, UH, UP ENGINEERING COMING ON AND, AND CLARIFYING THAT ITEM FOR US AS WELL AS, UH, MR. MCKNIGHT'S, UH, REMINDER ABOUT, UH, THE HEIGHTS, UH, FOR BUILDINGS, UH, THREE AND FOUR, AND KIND OF WHAT, WHAT THIS, UH, DEVELOPER IS BEING HELD TO. SO I APPRECIATE THAT. ALSO, I THINK THERE HAS BEEN SUBSTANTIAL CHANGES. I THINK, UH, MR. GORDON WENT THROUGH, UH, A GOOD LIST OF THAT IN THE NUMBER OF UNITS, THE HEIGHT OF THE UNITS, UH, THE HANDLING OF, OF PARKING. I THINK ALL OF THOSE, UH, ARE SUBSTANTIAL CHANGES. BUT I THINK THE NEIGHBORHOOD ALSO HAS SOME GOOD POINTS ABOUT THE, THE SORT OF NORTHERN PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT, REALLY FROM A MASSING AND, UH, UH, FOOTPRINT STANDPOINT REALLY HASN'T SIGNIFICANTLY CHANGED. SO IN SOME WAYS THAT KIND OF COMES OUT AS, UH, AS A DRAW OFF FOR ME. BUT IN, IN TOTAL, I DO BELIEVE THERE HAVE BEEN SUBSTANTIAL CHANGES MADE THAT WARRANT A RE REVIEW OF THIS PROJECT. THIS IS CHAIRMAN FETZER. AND, UM, I THINK EVERYTHING THAT COMMISSIONER OTHER COMMISSIONERS HAVE SAID, UH, I TEND TO AGREE WITH, UH, [01:55:01] THERE HAS BEEN, UM, CHANGES TO ADDRESS CONCERNS OF THE COMMISSION AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD. UH, OTHER MODIFICATIONS, MODIFICATIONS HAVE NOT BEEN DONE IN TERMS OF MASSING, ESPECIALLY ON BUILDINGS THREE AND FOUR. UM, AND, UM, THE CLOSENESS OF THE, THE TRAIL STREET PROPERTIES NOW TO TRAIL STREET, UM, LOOKING AT IT FURTHER, I THINK HAS SOME, UH, ISSUES AS WELL AS, UH, IF THE, EVEN THOUGH THEY'RE, ACCORDING TO THIS DRAWING, THE LOOKS LIKE THE, UH, THE HOSE LAYOUT AND THE, THE ACCESS FOR FIRE LANE, UH, COVERS ALL THE PROPERTIES. UM, MY GUESS IS THAT THAT HERITAGE OAK THAT IS SUBJECT TO, UM, DRIVING ON ITS ROOTS, UH, TRUCKS GOING DOWN THERE AND BACKING UP, WHETHER IT'S A FIRETRUCK OR A U P S TRUCK OR A, UH, WHAT HAVE YOU, I THINK THE HERITAGE OAK DOES, HAS SOME, UH, CHALLENGES. SO, UM, AT THIS POINT, I'M NOT SURE HOW I, HOW I'LL VOTE DEPENDING ON WHAT THE MOTION IS. MR. CHAIRMAN, THIS IS COMMISSIONER FISH. UM, THE, THE, THE FIRST ITEM WE'RE TAKING UP IS FOR THE WAIVER. SO I SUPPOSE, UH, OTHER SPECIFIC CONCERNS CAN BE DISCUSSED FURTHER, UH, ON THE SECOND ITEM IF WE WERE TO PROCEED TO THAT. IS THAT CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT. I'LL, I'LL MAKE THE MOTION, UM, TO ACCEPT, UH, FORGIVE ME, I'M NOT WORDING THIS CORRECTLY, BUT TO ACCEPT APPLICANT'S, UH, WAIVER REQUEST, UM, COMMISSIONER AREOLA, COULD YOU, UH, SPECIFICALLY, UH, READ ITEM A, THE RECOMMENDATION? UM, SURE. MAKE YOUR MOTION AND THEN ALSO PROVIDE, UM, YOUR BIN AS TO WHY? LET'S SEE HERE. LEMME PULL IT UP. SORRY. WE CAN, WE, CAN YOU HAVE IT? OKAY. UM, LET'S SEE HERE. WELL, I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE OR, OR TO, UM, APPROVE ITEM A WE'RE DISCUSSING, RIGHT, UH, FOR CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF WAIVER PURSUANT TO CITY CODE SECTION 35, UH, 4 5 1 TO ACCEPT AND REVIEW THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED FOR THE REQUEST TO DESCRIBE COMMISSIONER VELASQUEZ. I, I'LL SECOND IT. AND, AND MR. CHAIR, WITH YOUR PERMISSION, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A, A COMMENT, PARTICULARLY TO STAFF. UM, IT, IT IS VERY, VERY IMPORTANT TO ME TO, TO, TO HAVE CONFIDENCE THAT STAFF BRING SOMETHING BEFORE US THAT HAS BEEN VETTED THROUGH THEIR, UH, EXPERTISE. BECAUSE, UH, THERE ARE THINGS THAT I THINK ARE VERY SPECIFIC TO ARCHITECTURE THROUGH URBAN PLANNING, AND THEN THERE IS HAVING A CLEAR UNDERSTANDING OF, OF, OF WHAT THE PROCESSES ARE. SO, YOU KNOW, JUST LIKE WHEN WE GET TO OUR, UM, RECOMMENDATIONS AND RECITATION, UM, STAFF HAS, UM, TRIED THEIR BEST TO BE AS THOROUGH AS POSSIBLE, RIGHT? UM, SO I, I THINK ALONG THE LINES OF, OF, OF THE MOTION, I, I, I WANNA, UH, BE ABLE TO TRUST THAT THE REASON THAT THIS COMES BEFORE US IS BECAUSE THE APPLICANT IS FOLLOWING THE, THE, UH, THE PROCESS. 'CAUSE WE GET A LOT OF COMMENTS THAT SAY THE PROCESS IS THIS, OR THE PROCESS IS THAT, BUT ULTIMATELY IT'S ON THE AGENDA BECAUSE STAFF PUT IT ON THE AGENDA. SO, UH, ALL THE MORE REASON TO, TO JUST TELL STAFF THAT, YOU KNOW, YOUR, YOUR DUE DILIGENCE OR YOUR, YOUR, YOUR, UH, CONFIDENCE, UH, IS VERY IMPORTANT. IT'S VERY APPRECIATED AS WELL. BUT, UH, ULTIMATELY, UH, WE TRUST THAT, UH, THAT YOU'RE DOTTING YOUR I'S AND CROSSING YOUR T'S, AND NOT JUST AT THIS ONE, BUT AT, AT THE, AT THE REALLY HARD ONES TOO, THE REALLY HIGH PROFILE ONES. SO, UH, LET'S, IT'S, UH, JUST WANNA VOICE THAT. THANK YOU. JUST AGAIN, TO QUICKLY CLARIFY THE MOTION THAT IS BASED ON THE STAFF'S FINDINGS. BASED ON STAFF'S FINDINGS. CORRECT. THANK YOU. [02:00:08] UM, OH, COMMISSIONER FETZER HAS LOST POWER TO HIS HOUSE. SO LET'S I, OH, NO, LET'S TAKE A MOMENT. HE CAN CALL IN WHAT TIMING? HUH? TIMING. COREY, WOULD IT BE APPROPRIATE TO TAKE A FIVE MINUTE BREAK WHILE WE GET HIM BACK ONLINE? MAYBE? YEAH. UM, VICE CHAIR CARPENTER, WOULD YOU LIKE TO CALL A RECESS? YEAH. AS ACTING CHAIRMAN, I CALL THE FIVE MINUTE RECESS, AND WITH THE HOPE THAT OUR CHAIRMAN CAN FIND RE CONNECTIVITY. THANK YOU. OKAY, EVERYONE, WE'RE BACK. UM, SO FOR THE RECORD, CHAIRMAN FETZER LOST LOST POWER AT HIS HOME. I WAS ABLE TO JOIN BY HIS PHONE. UM, HIS POWER IS BACK ON NOW, BUT HE IS WORKING ON GETTING HIS COMPUTER RESTARTED. UM, AND SO I BELIEVE WE HAD A MOTION, UH, FROM COMMISSIONER, UH, OLA FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM A BASED ON STAFF'S FINDINGS, AND A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER VELAZQUEZ. YES. SO ANY OTHER COMMENTS? THIS IS CHAIRMAN FETZER. IF NOT, I'LL, UH, REQUEST A ROLL CALL. FERNANDEZ. AYE. FISH NAY. GIBBS NAY. VELAZQUEZ AYE. AREOLA? AYE. CARPENTER? AYE. RUBE. AYE. BOWMAN? AYE. THAT SIR, NAY, UNE NAY, UM, THAT DID RECEIVE SIX VOTES IN FAVOR. SO THAT, THAT ITEM PASSES, WE'RE ABLE TO DISCUSS ITEM TWO. UM, SO DAVID MOORE, I ASSUME YOU'RE STILL THERE? YES. OKAY. . UM, WE HAVE YOUR, YOUR SECOND PRESENTATION UP. UM, YOU HAD JUST A FEW MINUTES LEFT OVER FROM YOUR PREVIOUS PRESENTATION, SO I'LL ASK YOU TO BE AS, AS QUICK AS POSSIBLE. YES. SO WE HAVE THE SECOND PRESENTATION UP. SO THIS IS JUST THE, UH, VIEW FROM TRAIL STREET. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. UM, HERE'S THE VIEW FROM ATCH WITH THE, UH, SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCED MASSING ON THAT CORNER UNIT. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. AGAIN, ANOTHER, UH, SLIDE WITH ATCH. UM, AGAIN, MORE SITE CONTEXT. AS, AS YOU KNOW, THE, THE SITE IS KIND OF BOUNDED BY ATCH AND TRAIL, AND IS REALLY IN A TRANSITION ZONE BETWEEN HIGH DENSITY COMMERCIAL TO THE NORTH AND LOWER DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO THE SOUTH. UH, THE PROJECT IS AT THE NORTHERNMOST TIP OF THE RIVER ROAD HISTORIC DISTRICT, AND THIS IS THE, UH, ACCURATE DRAWING OF THE RIVER ROAD. HISTORIC DISTRICT SITE HAS BEEN ZONED MULTIFAMILY, UH, ZONING BEGAN IN SAN ANTONIO, AND THE SITE IS PARTIALLY WITHIN RIVER ROAD, UM, AND ENTIRELY COVERED BY RIO ONE. UM, AGAIN, THE MAJORITY OF PROPERTY OWNERS IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA SUPPORT THE PROJECT. UH, SOME OF THOSE OWNERS HAD WRITTEN IN LETTERS. UM, YOU RECEIVED LETTERS FROM KEVIN DE LA GARZA, WHO, UH, RECENTLY PURCHASED A, A HOME ON ATCH AND PLANS TO, UH, MOVE IN AND DO RENOVATIONS. JESSICA CERVANTES, A SMALL BUSINESS OWNER ON THE CORNER OF ATCH [02:05:01] AND ST. MARY'S. UH, SHE WAS VERY EXCITED ABOUT THE, UM, ADDITIONAL, UH, HOMEOWNERS THAT WILL BE COMING TO THIS SECTION OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. AND YOU ALSO HAVE ROSEMARY MARTINEZ, WHO, UM, HER, HER, UH, MOTHER PASSED AWAY, AND SHE INHERITED A PROPERTY ON TRAIL STREET, UH, THAT'S IN, IN BAD CONDITION. AND SHE WOULD LIKE TO, UH, IMPROVE THE PROPERTY OR SELL IT ALL, ALL OF WHICH, UH, THINK THAT THIS PROJECT WILL BE A BIG, UH, BOON TO THE AREA. UH, NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. SO, THIS IS ATCH. UM, THE OVERWHELMING MAJORITY OF OWNERS ON ATCH SUPPORT THE PROJECT AND THE SETBACKS ON ATCH ARE APPROXIMATELY 10 FEET, UH, FROM THE STREET. SO WE BELIEVE OUR, OUR SETBACKS BEING THE SAME ARE APPROPRIATE ON ATCH. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. THIS IS TRAIL STREET. UM, TRAIL STREET HAS BEEN NEGLECTED FOR MANY YEARS. UM, YOU CAN SEE THAT THERE'S, UH, BOARDED UP HOUSE FENCES, A EMPTY PARKING LOT, UM, ALL, ALL ALONG TRAIL STREET. WE BELIEVE THAT OUR PROJECT WILL BE A, A MASSIVE IMPROVEMENT TO TRAIL STREET AND, AND REALLY TO SAN ANTONIO. ONE OF THE BIG CONCERNS THAT I HAD HEARD FROM SOME OF THE COMMISSIONERS THAT WE, WE DIDN'T ADDRESS IN OUR WAIVER APPLICATION, AND I HOPE COULD BE, UM, COULD POTENTIALLY, UH, YOU KNOW, MAYBE SWAY SOME OF THE COMMISSIONERS THAT VOTED AGAINST THE WAIVER, UH, WAS VISIBILITY AND THE, THE BUILDING FOOTPRINTS OF BUILDING THREE AND FOUR, WHERE THEY PARTIALLY ENCROACH UPON THE HISTORIC DISTRICT. THEY KIND OF STRADDLE BETWEEN RIVER, THE RIO DISTRICT, AND THE RIVER ROAD HISTORIC LINE. UM, IN TERMS OF VISIBILITY, THE SITE ITSELF IS, UM, IS VERY PROTECTED, UH, JUST BY THE EXISTING CONDITIONS. YOU'VE GOT A LOT OF TREES ON ADJACENT PROPERTIES. THIS IS THE CORNER OF ST. MARY'S AND TRAIL STREET. AS YOU CAN SEE, THE SITE IS BARELY VISIBLE. IT'S VERY TUCKED AWAY. THIS IS WHEN YOU, UH, ARE TURNING THE CORNER ON DEWBERRY AND TRAIL. AGAIN. IT'S, IT'S HEAVILY CONCEALED FROM PUBLIC VIEW. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. THESE ARE A COUPLE OF VIEWS. UH, ONE IS FROM ATCH AND ST. MARY'S. AGAIN, YOU CAN SEE THAT IT'S, IT'S, IT'S REALLY NOT VERY VISIBLE. AND FROM MULBERRY, THE, THE PROJECT WILL BE BARELY VISIBLE TO THE PUBLIC. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. HERE'S A, UM, VIEWPOINT FROM RIVER ROAD. THAT, AND THAT'S THE ACTUAL ROAD ITSELF, RIVER ROAD. SO YOU CAN SEE IT'S, IT'S HEAVILY, HEAVILY COVERED. THERE'S A LOT OF VEGETATION, NOT VERY VISIBLE. AND THEN AS YOU GET CLOSER TO THE PROPERTY ON, ON ASCIA STREET, UM, YOU CAN ALSO SEE THAT THERE ARE A LOT OF TREES, OTHER ITEMS THAT ARE REALLY CONCEALING THE PROPERTY, UH, FROM VIEW. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. IN TERMS OF THE, UH, MASSING CHANGES THAT WE'VE MADE, UM, CONSIDERABLY THIS, UM, WESTERN EDGE OF THE PROPERTY THAT WOULD BE VISIBLE FROM ST. MARY'S STREET AND TWO NEIGHBORS THAT WOULD BE DRIVING DOWN ST. MARY'S STREET TO GO ABOUT THEIR DAILY LIVES, WE HEAVILY REDUCED THE MASSING AND THESE TWO UNITS TO, TO PROVIDE A TRANSITION. UM, SO THAT WAY THE, THE THREE STORY, UH, UNITS WOULD BARELY VISIBLE FROM THE ROAD. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. ONE OF THE REASONS WE HAVE GOTTEN SUPPORT FROM THE NEIGHBORS IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA IS DUE TO THE EXISTING CONDITIONS OF TRAIL STREET. UM, TRAIL STREET IS NOT IN GOOD CONDITION, I THINK BY ANY OBJECTIVE MEASURE. AND, YOU KNOW, WE ARE ADJACENT TO A LARGE, I WOULD, I WOULD IMAGINE A 95% IMPERVIOUS COVER PARKING LOT. AND, UH, ALSO SURROUNDED BY, UM, HOMES THAT ARE IN DISREPAIR. UH, THE OWNERS OF THESE PROPERTIES HAVE EXPRESSED, UH, EXCITEMENT ABOUT THE PROJECT AND SUPPORT FOR THE PROJECT. UM, SOME OF THEM HAVE LIMITED FINANCIAL MEANS, UH, WHERE THEY CAN'T JUST DIVE INTO A MAJOR HOME RENOVATION. UM, AND THEY'RE REALLY SEEING THIS PROJECT AS, UM, A, A, A REALLY, UH, POSITIVE BENEFIT FOR THEM, UH, ESPECIALLY IN THESE TOUGH TIMES. UH, MR. MOR, MR. MOR, THIS IS CHAIRMAN FETZER. UM, IF YOU COULD WRAP THIS UP PLEASE, WITH ANY NEW INFORMATION. I BELIEVE A LOT OF [02:10:01] THIS WE'VE HEARD BEFORE. OH, YES, SIR. UM, LET ME, LET ME SEE WHAT, UM, SLIDES WE CAN GET TO. UH, I DO HAVE SOME SLIDES THAT GO OVER SOME CONCERNS FROM THE RIVER ROAD NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, INCLUDING SOME OF THE U D C, UH, COMMENTS THAT HAD BEEN SUBMITTED. IS THAT, DO YOU THINK THAT'S APPROPRIATE? COMMISSIONER FETZER, IF YOU'D TRY TO WRAP IT UP IN A COUPLE OF MINUTES? SURE. OKAY. SO EDWARD, THAT'LL BE SLIDE 18. THANK YOU. SO WE'VE HAD SEVERAL CONCERNS FROM THE RIVER ROAD NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, UM, THAT WE FEEL THAT WE HAVE ADDRESSED. UM, WE'LL GO THROUGH THEM VERY QUICKLY AS DISCUSSED. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. UH, THE MASSING, WE'VE DEFINITELY, UM, DRAMATICALLY CHANGED THE MASSING TO SHOW TRANSITIONS TWO STORY UNITS ON TRAIL. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. UM, THERE'S, HERE'S A SAMPLE OF THE ARBORIST REPORT. I MEAN, IT'S, IT'S IN THE PRESENTATION. UM, I HOPE, I HOPE THAT YOU HAVE READ IT JUST IN TERMS OF THE TREES AND THE IMPACT ON THE TREES. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. UM, I KNOW SOME OF THE COMMISSIONERS HAD MENTIONED THAT THEY DID NOT FEEL THAT THE LOT COVERAGE HAD CHANGED, UH, DRAMATICALLY, BUT IT DID, IT CHANGED. IT CHANGED FROM 47% TO 39% IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT, AND THAT'S ABOUT 2,500 SQUARE FEET. SO WHEN YOU CONSIDER, WHEN YOU CONSIDER THE LOT COVERAGE ALONE AND YOU CONSIDER OKAY, TWO TO THREE STORIES, UH, THAT'S ANYWHERE FROM 5,000 TO 7,500 SQUARE FEET ELIMINATED FROM THE PROPERTY. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. THIS IS A, UH, DIAGRAM THAT SHOWS THE CORRECT HISTORIC DISTRICT BOUNDARY, AS EXPRESSED AS A CONCERN BY THE NEIGHBORS. UH, AND, AND THIS IS WHERE WE ARE GETTING THAT 39% BUILDING FOOTPRINT IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. OH, AND AS YOU CAN SEE, SORRY, GO. IF YOU GO TO THE PREVIOUS SLIDE, IT SHOWS THE, UH, THE, THE, HOW THE HISTORIC DISTRICT CUTS INTO, UH, BUILDINGS THREE AND FOUR. AND AGAIN, THESE BUILDINGS ARE ABOUT, UM, 80 TO 90 FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINE. SO NOT, NOT VISIBLE. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. UM, THIS WAS IN TERMS OF PARKING. YOU SAW THE SLIDE. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. THIS IS JUST SHOWING THE PARKING AND, AND HOW IT WOULD WORK IF, IF IT WAS FULLY FULL WITH GUESTS. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. AND THIS WOULD SHOW THE TRAIL STREET PARKING CONFIGURATION IF FULLY, UH, FULL WITH GUESTS. AND YOU CAN SEE IN THE MIDDLE HERE, UH, IN FRONT OF THE HERITAGE OAK, THERE IS A SPACE WHERE VEHICLES, UM, CAN GO DOWN THE STREET, BACK IN AND BACK OUT. AND WE CAN, UM, ALLOCATE THAT SPECIFICALLY FOR TURNING AROUND. AND WE CAN HEAVILY BARRICADE, UH, THIS SECTION. UM, THAT WAS A, A BIG CONCERN, I THINK FROM THE COMMISSIONERS, WAS THE FIRETRUCK BACKING UP TO THE HERITAGE OAK AND POTENTIALLY IMPEDING ON THE ROOTS. UM, WE WOULD, UH, AGREE TO A STIPULATION TO DO A, UH, FIRE BARRIER OR SOME KIND OF BARRIER, UM, TO PROTECT THAT HERITAGE TREE. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. THIS IS JUST A LETTER FROM THE ENGINEER IN TERMS OF THE AEC. NEXT SLIDE. SLIDE PLEASE. UM, THESE ARE THE U D C AND ZONING, UH, QUESTIONS. YOU, YOU SAW THE, UM, PIECE OF THE APPLICATION THAT WE SUBMITTED THAT ADDRESSED THESE CONCERNS. UM, YOU KNOW, WE DID HAVE A PRE-PLANNED REVIEW MEETING WITH THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO. WE MET WITH STREETS, FIRE TRAFFIC, DRAINAGE, LANDSCAPE, AND TREE, UH, T I A, ADDRESSING ZONING BUILDING AND O H P. AND THEN NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. THESE ARE JUST THE, UH, SUMMARY OF CHANGES THAT HAVE BEEN MADE. AND NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. I, I, I APOLOGIZE IF WE WENT A LITTLE BIT OVER IN THIS LAST, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. SO, QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS FROM THE COMMISSION ON, UM, CHAIRMAN FETZER. THIS IS COMMISSIONER RU, UH, TO THE APPLICANT. HOW, UM, HAVE YOU READ THE, UH, RECOMMENDATIONS STIPULATIONS FROM UH, STAFF? DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS TO THOSE SPECIFICALLY? I'VE READ THE COMMENTS FROM STAFF. [02:15:01] EDWARD, WE CANNOT HEAR YOU. UH, RECOMMENDATION WITH STIPULATIONS, I THINK THERE'S ABOUT 10 STIPULATIONS ON ITEM B. UM, THERE'S SOME STIPULATIONS WITH THE WINDOWS MATERIALS, THE BOARD OF BAT, THE ROOF MATERIAL, UM, ARCHEOLOGY REPORT. DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS? HAVE YOU READ THOSE? THAT WAS TO YOU MR. M. YEAH. I'M WONDERING IF WE LOST HIM. EDWARD, YOU, I THINK HE'S TRYING TO RECONNECT. I, YEAH. GIVE US ONE MOMENT. LOTS OF ISSUES TODAY, AND I DON'T THINK MERCURY IS RETROGRADE. WE CAN BLAME ON SUN SPOTS. THIS IS EDWARD. I SHOULD BE BACK NOW WITH DAVID. HELLO? UH, COMMISSIONERS. CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES. YES. SO I THINK, UH, COMMISSIONER GRU HAD ASKED, UM, IF WE HAD REVIEWED STAFF'S STIPULATIONS AND IF WE HAD ANY, UH, CONCERNS. UH, WE, WE HAVE REVIEWED STAFF'S STIPULATIONS, UM, AND, AND WE DO AGREE WITH THEM AND, AND WE, UH, WE WOULD COMPLY WITH THEM. THE OTHER, THE OTHER ONE THAT I WANTED TO MENTION WAS, UH, AN ADDITIONAL STIPULATION THAT I TOLD THE NEIGHBORHOOD ON MONDAY, UM, THAT WE WOULD, UH, COMPLY WITH OR, OR ADD TO THE, UM, LIST OF STIPULATIONS. AND THAT'S TO, UH, EXPAND THE PORCHES ON TRAIL STREET TO FIVE FEET. I DID DISCUSS WITH THE NEIGHBORS THAT THEY WERE THREE FEET IN DEPTH, AND I, UH, I TOLD THEM THAT I WOULD BE REQUESTING THAT WE WOULD MAKE THEM FIVE FEET IN THE STIPULATIONS. UH, SO I ASKED THAT THAT WOULD BE ADDED WITH THE UNITS ON TRAIL STREET, UM, TO THE, UH, TO THE, UH, STIPULATIONS. AND THAT WOULD, WITHOUT GETTING CLOSER TO TRAIL STREET, IT'D BE PUSHING IT FURTHER BACK INTO THE PROPERTY OR REDUCING YOUR SQUARE FOOTAGE. YES, SIR. THAT WOULD FURTHER, UH, REDUCE SQUARE FOOTAGE. UM, EXACTLY. THANK YOU. SO THIS IS, UH, COMMISSIONER CARPENTER. I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF. ONE OF THE, UM, PERSISTENT COMMENTS FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, THE MEMBERS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD WAS ABOUT THE 80%, UH, CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENT, UH, REQUIREMENT FOR US TO REVIEW THIS FOR FINAL. CAN YOU ALL SPEAK TO THAT? YEAH. UM, SO WE ACTUALLY SPOKE A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THIS AT OUR COMMISSIONER TRAINING IN SEPTEMBER. UM, THERE IS MULTIPLE PROVISIONS IN CODE AS TO WHAT'S, UH, WHAT CONSTITUTES A COMPLETED APPLICATION, UM, FOR A CERTIFICATE. UM, ULTIMATELY THE, THE H C R C, IT'S VERY CLEAR IN THE CODE, IS THE, UM, HAS SOLE DISCRETION OVER THE COMPLETENESS. AND SO WE WOULD REFER TO YOU, UM, WE'VE, WE DO HAVE A ANNOTATED SITE PLAN. WE DO HAVE ACCURATE ELEVATIONS FOR THE BUILDINGS, AND SO WE DO FEEL THAT IT'S SUFFICIENT FOR STAFF IF THIS WERE TO COME IN FOR PLAN REVIEW, TO BE ABLE TO COMPARE THAT PLAN SET AGAINST WHAT YOU SEE TODAY. UM, BUT IF YOU FEEL THAT THERE'S DETAILS MISSING, UM, THAT IS NEEDED IN ORDER TO TAKE ACTION FOR A CERTIFICATE, THAT CAN CERTAINLY, UM, BE A CONSIDERATION. UM, IN THE PAST WHEN SOMETHING HAS LACKED SUFFICIENT DETAIL OR FOUND TO LACK SUFFICIENT DETAIL BY THE COMMISSION, UM, THE MOTION HAS BEEN FOR CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL OR APPROVAL WITH STIPULATIONS THAT CERTAIN ASPECTS RETURN. THANK YOU FOR THAT. I APPRECIATE THAT. COULD YOU ALSO SPEAK, UH, AND, AND I'M, I'M DOING, SOME OF THESE ARE SOFTBALLS, BUT IT'S FOR THE PURPOSE OF, OF KIND OF, UH, CLARIFYING ITEMS FOR, FOR THE PUBLIC AND GENERAL PUBLIC AS WELL. CAN YOU SPEAK TO THE, THE DIFFERENTIATION BETWEEN A STANDARD AND A GUIDELINE, PARTICULARLY IN REFERENCE TO THE HEIGHTS OF THE BUILDINGS THAT RECOMMENDED, [02:20:01] UH, NEW CONSTRUCTION WITHIN A HISTORIC DISTRICT? SO WITHIN DEVELOPMENT CODE, THERE ARE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS THAT ARE OFTENTIMES TIED TO ZONING, UM, FOR THE PROPERTY. UM, IN HISTORIC DISTRICTS, WE HAVE HISTORIC DESIGN GUIDELINES THAT ARE ALSO TIED TO THAT HISTORIC ZONING, BUT THEY'RE NOT DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. UM, THE DIFFERENCE IS THAT THE GUIDELINES GIVE THE COMMISSION, UM, DISCRETION OVER THE APPLICATION OF THAT GUIDELINE. UM, THE STANDARDS, UM, ARE NOT ALWAYS SOLE DISCRETION OF THE COMMISSION. SOMETIMES THOSE MIGHT ALSO REQUIRE VARIANCE, UH, TO, TO RECEIVE A PERMIT BY THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. UM, SO THAT'S THE DISTINCTION. UM, USUALLY THE STANDARDS ARE, ARE NUMERICAL IN NATURE, SO THERE ARE, THERE ARE HARD AND FAST NUMBER, UM, IN TERMS OF HIDE OR SETBACK IN THOSE TYPES OF STANDARDS. UM, BUT AGAIN, THE, THE GUIDELINES ARE WHAT GIVES THE COMMISSION A LITTLE BIT OF DISCRETION. AND IN THIS INSTANCE, WE ARE LOOKING AT A GUIDELINE THAT IS DICTATING THE HEIGHT OF BUILDING, SAY, BUILDING THREE AND FOUR, UH, THAT ARE PARTIALLY WITHIN THE DISTRICT. UM, YEAH, I MEAN, AGAIN, THOSE DON'T SOLELY, THEY'RE NOT SOLELY REVIEWED IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT OR SOLELY REVIEWED IN RIO. THEY'RE KIND OF IN BETWEEN. UM, SO IT'S REALLY UP TO THE COMMISSION TO DECIDE IF, IF WHAT IS PROPOSED IS CONSISTENT WITH ALL OF THE APPLICABLE STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES. OKAY. GREAT. THANK YOU, COREY. I APPRECIATE THAT. I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT FOR MYSELF AND FOR MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS AND ANYONE LISTENING TO IT, SO THAT WE'RE AS CRYSTAL CLEAR AS WHAT THE STANDARDS ARE OR THE GUIDELINES THAT ARE BEING ASKED SINCE THIS WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS, UH, KINDA BROUGHT INTO QUESTION IN THE, UH, THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, UH, DECISION CO. CORY IS COMMISSIONER VELAZQUEZ. COREY, DO YOU HAVE, UH, OR HA HAVE YOU BEEN, UH, PRESENTED WITH, UH, FOR THE A FOR THE APPLICATION, A SET OF, YOU MAY HAVE ALREADY ANSWERED THIS, BUT I I WANNA HEAR IT WAY, A SET OF WORKING? NO, UM, A SET OF TWO DIMENSIONAL, UM, DESIGN DEVELOPMENT DRAWINGS THAT, THAT, UH, SPEAK TO THE, UH, UH, THE THREE D ANIMATION DRAWINGS THAT WERE PRESENTED. UM, SO WHAT IS IN THE PACKET IS WHAT WE HAVE. AND SO YOU CAN SEE WE HAVE ELEVATIONS FOR ALL SIDES OF ALL BUILDINGS. UM, WE HAVE THE ANNOTATED SITE PLAN. UM, WE HAVE A MORE DETAILED ENGINEERED SITE PLAN THAT IS BASED ON THE PREVIOUS ITERATION. AND SO THAT WOULD NEED TO BE UPDATED, UH, IF THE PROJECT WERE TO MOVE FORWARD. UM, AND, AND THOSE ARE ALL THINGS THAT IN THE PLAN REVIEW PROCESS AND THE PERMITTING PROCESS, WE WOULD REVIEW AGAINST WHAT YOU SEE TODAY AND MAKE SURE THERE'S CONSISTENCY. IF SOMETHING CAME OUT OF DESIGN DEVELOPMENT, UM, AS THIS CAME THROUGH PERMITTING THAT WAS INCONSISTENT WITH WHAT YOU SEE TODAY, THAT ITEM WOULD POTENTIALLY BE REFERRED BACK TO THE COMMISSION FOR ADDITIONAL ACTION. RIGHT. BUT, BUT HOW DO YOU, HOW DO YOU DISTINGUISH BETWEEN THE, THE ANIMATIONS? LIKE LET'S JUST TALK ABOUT TRAIL. HOW DO YOU DISTINGUISH BETWEEN THE ANIMATIONS AND THE WORKING DRAWINGS, THE QUASI WORKING DRAWINGS? RIGHT. UN UNLESS THEY ACTUALLY GIVE YOU THE THING AND SAY, THIS IS, THESE TWO CORRELATE WHAT THE COMMISSIONER SAW IN ANIMATION FORM, AND THESE ARE THE DRAWINGS FOR HOW, HOW WOULD, LIKE, LIKE IT'S MOST, FOR, FOR ME, IT'S ALWAYS MOST, UH, UH, COMFORTABLE TO, TO, UH, UM, UM, AGREE WITH A TWO DIMENSIONAL DRAWING. RIGHT. A WORKING DRAWING OR THAT STYLE OF DRAWING AS OPPOSED TO AN ANIMATION. YEAH. UM, SO GENERALLY, YOU'RE RIGHT, THE, UM, THE CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS ARE TYPICALLY CONSIDERED THE DOCUMENT OF RECORD, AND THE RENDERINGS ARE JUST FOR KIND OF ILLUSTRATION PURPOSES, HELP EXPLAINING THE CONTENT. UM, I, I HAVEN'T NOTICED ANY INCONSISTENCIES BETWEEN THE RENDERINGS AND THE ELEVATIONS, BUT IF YOU FIND ANYTHING, IT'S, WE CAN CERTAINLY, UH, MAKE NOTE OF THAT. CAN YOU SCROLL TO THE, TO THE WORKING DRAWINGS FOR THE TRAIL BUILDINGS? UM, I THINK THEY SHOULD BE ON THE SCREEN NOW. THE ELEVATIONS OF THE, THE PLAN, UM, THAT'S NOT GONNA BE AT WE, IF YOU GO UP HIGHER BEFORE THE ELEVATIONS. YEAH, THAT'S THE OLD ONE, RIGHT? NO. OKAY. OKAY. SO THEY'RE DIFFERENT STYLE OF DRAWINGS, BUT, BUT YOU DO HAVE SOMETHING THAT, THAT THEY, THEY DO INCLUDE DIMENSIONS, AND SO THEY'RE ENFORCEABLE IN TERMS OF THE PRESENTED SETBACKS BACK TO WHAT ALL OF THOSE, THOSE ASPECTS. OKAY, THANKS COREY. [02:25:08] THIS IS CHAIRMAN FETZER. UM, I THINK THE, THE MAIN CONCERN I STILL HAVE IS THE, UH, THE DENSITY OF THE DEVELOPMENT. UM, THE TRAIL STREET HAS BEEN, UH, REDUCED IN DENSITY, WHICH IS, UH, WHICH RELATES MORE TO THE, UM, SINGLE FAMILY NATURE OF THE, OF THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD. BUT THE MIDDLE AND, AND UH, NORTH PART OF THE SITE, UH, FOR ME IS STILL, UH, PROBABLY TOO DENSE. MR. CHAIRMAN, CAN, CAN I ASK A QUESTION OF MR. MORIN, IF THAT'S OKAY? THIS IS COMMISSIONER. I'M NOT ENTIRELY SURE MY AUDIO IS WORKING. WE, WE CAN HEAR YOU. WE CANNOT SEE YOU THOUGH, WHICH IS NOT GOOD. I'M GONNA, I'M GONNA TRY TO KICKSTART THE VIDEO THEN AGAIN, I DUNNO IF YOU CAN SEE ME OR NOT. IT SAYS IT'S WORKING ON MY END. BUT MR. MOR, I HAD A QUESTION ABOUT THE TRAIL STREET SETBACK. UM, IN THE ILLUSTRATED SITE PLAN, YOU'RE SHOWING A 10 FOOT, 10 FOOT SETBACK FROM THE PROPERTY LINE. UM, AND THERE ISN'T A DIMENSION ILLUSTRATED TO THE END PAVEMENT OR ALL OVER CURB. I WAS WONDERING IF YOU KNEW OFFHAND WHAT THAT DIMENSION WAS? OH, THAT, THAT IS, THAT IS 10 FEET FROM THE, UH, PAVEMENT. SO THE, THE SITE PLAN IS NOT SHOWING IT THAT WAY. IT'S SHOWING THE CURB BEYOND THE PROPERTY LINE. SO, SO I, I UNDERSTAND THAT THE EDGE OF CURB IS A, ON THE PROPERTY LINE, UH, IN YOUR PROPOSAL, AND THEY'RE NOT, THERE'S NOT ESSENTIALLY LIKE A MO STRIP GAP OR AN EXTRA GAP BEYOND THE PROPERTY LINE, IS THAT CORRECT? I, UM, WELL, THE, OH, SORRY. THE, UH, THE SETBACK IS FROM THE PROPERTY LINE, AND THEN WE'LL HAVE A CURB CUT, UH, AND WE'RE ACTUALLY EXTENDING TRAIL STREET BY TWO FEET, SO IT'LL PRETTY MUCH BE FROM THE, UH, FROM THE CURB. OKAY. SO THE SETBACK WHERE IN, IN THE DRAWING THAT'S ON THE SCREEN, YOU'RE SHOWING THE ROLLOVER CURB, UH, ABOUT THREE FEET, UH, BEYOND THE PROPERTY LINE, BUT IT IN FACT IS, UH, COINCIDENT THAT ROLLOVER CURB WILL BE PUSHED BACK TO THE PROPERTY LINE, CORRECT? OH, OH, NO, NO, SORRY. YOU'RE, YOU'RE LOOKING AT IT, YOU'RE LOOKING AT IT CORRECTLY. THE ROLLOVER CURB IS, IS, UM, THERE AND THERE WILL BE, UM, YOU KNOW, CURB OR DRIVEWAYS THAT WILL GO, UH, EXTEND ABOUT THREE FEET. UM, OKAY. SO THE SETBACK FROM THE STREET, THE FRONT FACE OF THE BUILDINGS ARE SETBACK FROM THE STREET, UH, APPROXIMATELY 13 FEET BASED ON YEAH. IN THIS DRAWING. YEAH. OKAY. THANK YOU. AND, AND JUST ONE MORE QUESTION ABOUT THE PORCHES, THE ADDITIONAL TWO, TWO FEET MINIMUM OF PORCHES THAT IS NOT GOING TO COME CLOSER TO TRAIL, BUT INSTEAD, UH, BE PUSHED INTO THE INTERIOR IN THE FRONT PORCH ZONE BY TWO FEET, CORRECT? YES, SIR. THAT'LL BE, THAT'LL BE IN THE INTERIOR. AND I, AND I REVIEWED THE COMMENTS FROM A RECENT DRCS, AND I NOTICED THERE WERE QUESTIONS ABOUT YOUR ABILITY TO REDUCE THE HEIGHT OF BUILDINGS, THREE OR FOUR, OR THREE AND FOUR. AND, UM, I BELIEVE, UH, IN THE NOTES, THE ANSWER, UH, FROM, FROM YOU OR YOUR REPRESENTATIVES WAS NO, THEY COULD NOT BE. UM, SO I JUST WANT TO POSE IT AGAIN. UM, AND I'M, AND I'M ASKING IT FOR A COUPLE OF REASONS. IT IT'S ONE OF THE BIGGEST, UH, MOST SENSITIVE REMAINING PIECES FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD. IT'S ALSO ONE OF THE REASONS THAT THE, THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS MAY HAVE OVERTURNED THE PREVIOUS APPROVAL. NOW, I WOULD HATE TO MOVE FORWARD ON SOMETHING THAT PUTS US RIGHT BACK, UH, WHERE WE ARE IN A MONTH OR TWO. SO, UH, IF YOU COULD SPEAK JUST FOR A MOMENT OR TWO, MOMENT OR TWO ABOUT WHY YOU DON'T BELIEVE IT'S POSSIBLE TO REDUCE, UH, THE HEIGHT OF BUILDINGS THREE OR FOUR. I'D APPRECIATE IT. YEAH. SO, UM, INCREASING THE ENTIRE DE DECREASING THE HEIGHT ENTIRELY OF [02:30:01] BUILDINGS THREE AND FOUR, UH, WOULD BE JUST ECONOMICALLY DETRIMENTAL TO THE PROJECT, UM, IN, IN, IN, IN A WAY THAT COULD NOT BE MENDED BY, BY OTHER CHANGES TO THE SITE PLAN. UM, WE, WE REDUCED THE TOTAL, UH, BUILDING SQUARE FOOTAGE BY 9,000 SQUARE FEET. UM, AND ADDITIONAL SQUARE FOOTAGE WOULD, WOULD REALLY, UH, HINDER THE, UH, FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY OF THE PROJECT. UM, WE COULD CONSIDER, UH, YOU KNOW, WHAT WE'RE SHOWING IN BUILDING FOUR. UM, YOU KNOW, WE, WE, THERE'S A, THERE'S A SMALL CUTOUT OF BUILDING FOUR THAT IS IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT. UH, WE, WE COULD CERTAINLY, UM, WORK WITH STAFF TO, YOU KNOW, TRY TO GRADUATE THAT, THAT CUTOUT OR SLOPE THAT ROOF A LITTLE BIT OR SET IT BACK. UM, AND, AND BUILDING THREE, UM, WE, WE FEEL LIKE WE'VE ADDRESSED BUILDING THREE, UM, FROM THE REALLY VISIBLE PORTION OF THE PROPERTY, UM, BUILDING THREE TRANSITIONS OR TWO STORY WITH AN ATTIC TO A THREE STORY. SO, UM, YOU KNOW, MAYBE, MAYBE THERE'S FOR BUILDING FOUR, MAYBE THERE'S AN ACCOMMODATION WE COULD MAKE AND WE COULD HAVE IT AS A, UH, STIPULATION. UM, BUT, UH, MR. MOORE, I, I, I APPRECIATE YOU KIND OF POINTING TO BUILDING FOUR, BECAUSE THAT IS THE ONE THAT IS IN CLOSEST PROXIMITY TO TWO SINGLE FAMILY HOUSES ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE ASAKIA. UM, I REALIZE THAT IF WE LOOK ON THE MAP THAT SHOWS THAT HISTORIC, UH, BOUNDARIES, THAT'S, THAT'S ONE PIECE. AND, UH, STAFF, IF YOU COULD GO TO THE SLIDE THAT SHOWS THE, THE, THE SITE PLAN, I GUESS, IN THIS DOCUMENT SET MIGHT, THERE WE GO. UM, YOU'VE IDENTIFIED REDUCING THE HEIGHT IN THOSE AREAS THAT ARE ILLUSTRATED IN PURPLE, UH, TO ADDRESS, UH, SOME OF THE RELATIONSHIP TO THE SINGLE FAMILY HOUSES AND THIS IDEA OF A STEP UP. UH, BUT THE PROXIMITY TO THE ZAMBRENO, THE ZAMBRENO PROPERTY, AND SOME OF THOSE, I, I, I, I CONTINUE TO SHARE THE CHAIRMAN'S CONCERNS ABOUT THE PERCEPTION AND HEIGHT, UH, ALONG THAT EDGE. UH, PROBABLY THAT'S PROBABLY THE HIGHEST THING ON, ON MY LIST THAT'S REMAINING. UM, I NOTICED THAT WHEN YOU PREVIOUSLY, UH, DID A STEP UP WHERE YOU DROPPED THOSE ROOFS DOWN ON THOSE CORNERS, I FOUND THAT WAS PRETTY SUCCESSFUL IN THE REDUCTION OF, OF MASS. UM, AND MAYBE THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY THERE. I DON'T KNOW WHAT MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS THINK, BUT, UH, THO THAT CONCLUDES MY QUESTIONS, AND I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING ELSE. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS. I, THIS IS CHAIRMAN FETZER. UH, WHAT IS THE, UH, CEILING HEIGHT ON THE SECOND AND THIRD FLOORS OF BUILDINGS THREE AND FOUR? YES. LET ME, UH, PULL UP THE ELEVATIONS, UM, REALLY QUICK. SO THE, THE CEILING HEIGHT FOR THE, UM, SECOND FLOOR ELEVATION WOULD BE 22 FEET FOR BUILDINGS, THREE FOR BUILDINGS, THREE FOR BUILDING THREE. AND THEN IF I LOOK TO, UM, BUILDING FOUR, IT IS, IT IS THE, IT IS 22, 22 FEET, THREE INCHES. NO, WHEN YOU'RE STANDING ON THE SECOND FLOOR, HOW TALL IS THE CEILING? IS IT A 10 FOOT CEILING IN THAT SPACE? IT IS. IT'S A 10 FOOT CEILING, YES, SIR. AND THE SAME ON THE THIRD FLOOR. THE, THE THIRD FLOOR, UM, IS SLIGHTLY REDUCED DUE TO THE ROOF FORM. IT, IT'LL BE ABOUT NINE, NINE FEET ON THE THIRD FLOOR. OKAY. SO POTENTIALLY MASSING ON THOSE BUILDINGS, THREE AND FOUR, AND MAYBE ONE AND TWO AS WELL. COULD BE, YOU COULD LOOK AT REDUCING THE CEILING HEIGHTS ON THE SECOND AND THIRD FLOORS. WE, WE COULD LOOK INTO THAT. YES, SIR. BECAUSE A 10 FOOT TALL BEDROOM CEILING ON THE SECOND FLOOR AND THIRD FLOOR, UH, THAT I'VE ALWAYS THOUGHT THAT THOSE ARE VERY TALL SPACES AND, AND, UH, MAYBE NOT APPROPRIATE FOR, FOR HUMAN SCALE AS OPPOSED TO THE, THE LIVING AREAS ON THE FIRST FLOOR. OH, WELL, WELL, UM, THE, THE, THE LIVING FLOOR, UH, THE LIVING AREA WILL BE A COMBINATION OF FIRST AND SECOND FLOOR. UM, AND SO, SO THE, THE, THE SECOND FLOOR WILL HAVE, UH, A LIVING AREA AND KITCHEN, WHICH IS, IS TYPICAL OF A TOWN HOME PRODUCT. AND THAT, THAT'S WHY WE WANTED THE 10 FEET ON, ON THE SECOND FLOOR. [02:35:01] BUT THE, THE, THE FIRST FLOOR IS, UM, IS LESS HEIGHT. THE FIRST FLOOR IS ABOUT NINE FEET. OKAY. OTHER QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS FROM THE COMMISSION? I, I, UM, I, I, I KIND OF ECHO THE, THE, UM, COMMENTS. THIS IS COMMISSIONER . SO THE CHAIRMAN, UM, I'M NOT SURE THAT THE WORD WOULD DENSITY AS MUCH AS IT'S MASSING, BUT, UM, TRAIL STREET REALLY DOES, DOES SPEAK TO THE SOLUTION. WHAT, WHAT WAS DONE ON TRAIL IS THE GENERAL ATTITUDE. I THINK THAT THAT MAKES THE PROJECT, UM, FIT AND MAKE IT AND MAKES IT APPROPRIATE, THE GENERAL ATTITUDE OF WHAT, UH, THE DEVELOPERS HAVE DONE ON TRAIL. UH, BUT NOW I JUST, I JUST, YOU WANNA JUST KIND OF VOICE THIS, UM, A FEAR OF REALLY OF, OF, OF ALL PROJECTS THAT COME BEFORE THIS COMMISSION. SO I THINK THERE'S A PLACE WHERE THE PROJECTS, UM, GET TO A POINT WHERE THEY, WHERE THEY'RE, WHERE THEY'RE REALLY GOOD PROJECTS AND THEN, UM, UM, THROUGH COMMENTARY OR THROUGH THROUGH, UH, CO-DESIGNING THE, THE A THE, UH, YOU KNOW, THE HORSE BECOMES A ZEBRA RIGHT AWAY, YOU KNOW, UH, OR A CAMEL, RIGHT? SO IT JUST THINK YOU SHOULD BE VERY CAREFUL ABOUT, UM, UH, DIVING TOO MUCH DEEPER INTO THE ACTUAL, UH, DESIGN ITSELF. BUT, UH, UH, WITH RESPECT TO, UH, UH, THE CHAIRMAN'S COMMENTS, I THINK THAT, THAT ALONG THE AREAS OF THOSE, THE TWO LARGER BUILDINGS, YOU KNOW, MY, MY ONLY HESITATION IS THAT, IS THAT, THAT, THAT MASSING IS, IS PRETTY INTIMIDATING. UH, UM, BUT, BUT, BUT YOU KNOW, ON THE OTHER HAND, THE WAY THAT IT, IT GRADUATES UP FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS, IS A LITTLE ENCOURAGING. UH, IT JUST DOESN'T GRADUATE BACK DOWN RIGHT ON THE, I GUESS IT'S ON THE ATCH SIDE. UM, SO IT'S A, IT'S A, IT'S A TOUGH ONE, BUT, UH, SPEAKING FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF TRAIL, I MEAN, THAT, THAT, THAT REALLY IS, UH, IT'S A LOT OF WORK, YOU KNOW, AND, UM, IT'S TO BE KIND OF COMMENDED, UH, YOU KNOW, IF I HAD A WISHLIST RIGHT, IT WOULD BE TO, TO, UH, YOU KNOW, STAND IN FRONT OF THE TRAIL, UH, ELEVATION AND THEN TO WALK TO THE ATCH ELEVATION AND, AND JUST KIND OF CLOSE YOUR EYES ACROSS YOUR FINGERS AND SAY, WOW, WHAT WOULD IT LOOK LIKE IF IT FELT MORE LIKE TRAIL? RIGHT? UH, THAT'S JUST FOOD FOR THOUGHT, THOUGH. OKAY. THANK YOU. THIS IS COMMISSIONER BOWMAN. I, I HAVE SOME, UH, THOUGHTS ON THE, THE BUILDING THREE AND FOUR. THEY, THEY SEEM, I, I JUST, I FEEL LIKE THOSE ARE, ARE THE MAIN BUILDINGS THAT ARE IN THAT COMMERCIAL BUFFER ZONE. AND WE, WE KIND OF HAVE THIS SITUATION WHERE THERE'S THAT, THAT ONE SMALL HOUSE THAT'S ADJACENT TO IT, WHICH IS ALSO A MULTI-FAMILY ZONED PROPERTY. AND SO, YOU KNOW, JUST THINKING OF, OF, YOU KNOW, ONE THAT BEING A RIO DISTRICT OVERLAY INSTEAD OF THE MORE, YOU KNOW, IT, IT'S, IT'S LEANING MORE TOWARDS THAT COMMERCIAL ENVIRONMENT OVER THERE ON THE SITE PLAN. I, I JUST, I, I'M MORE SYMPATHETIC TO THE DEVELOPER TO, TO TRY TO WORK THAT A LITTLE BIT HARDER THAN THIS TRAIL STREET ELEVATION. AND I THINK THAT THEY'VE WORKED THIS TRAIL STREET ELEVATION AS HARD AS THEY CAN, AND IN ORDER, YOU KNOW, TO MAKE IT WORK. I, I, I'M MORE SYMPATHETIC TO THAT OTHER ELEVATION OF BUILDING THREE AND FOUR. UH, MR. CHAIRMAN, UH, UM, I'LL KEEP MY COMMENTS FOR YOU 'CAUSE I KNOW WE COULD PROBABLY BE HERE ALL DAY, BUT I, I, I WANNA ECHO, UH, COMMISSIONER BOWMAN'S THOUGHTS AND SENTIMENTS. I, I AGREE WITH THAT. IS, UM, THAT MASSING LEANING INTO LARGER SCALE BUILDINGS THAT ARE REALLY NEARBY, IT, IT, IT PLANS WELL ENOUGH FOR ME. THANK, THANK YOU. IF THERE'S NO OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS, WOULD SOMEONE LIKE TO VENTURE A MOTION AND ADD AS MANY STIPULATIONS AS YOU FEEL APPROPRIATE? YEAH, WE CAN YOU MOVE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION BACK ON THE [02:40:01] SCREEN, JUST AS REFERENCE YOU, YOU, YOU KNOW, CHAIRMAN, I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW. WELL, WHAT, UH, CONSTITUTES A EMOTION SOMETIMES, BUT IT, IT, TO ME, I'M, I'M A LITTLE, UH, UH, UNCOMFORTABLE WITH THE, THE SPEED OF THE PRESENTERS, UM, UH, PRESENTATION OR THE, THE LACK OF TIME, UH, FOR THE, YOU KNOW, FOR THE OVERALL PRESENTATION. I THINK IN THE D R C, WE GOT MUCH, A MUCH DEEPER PRESENTATION THAN THEY WERE ABLE TO GIVE HERE. I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S JUST THE CHOICE OF THE INFORMATION THAT THEY CHOSE TO SHARE, BUT, UH, WELL, COMMISSIONER VELAZQUEZ, THAT'S WHY THE D R C IS FOR, YEAH, BUT THIS IS, THIS IS ON THE RECORD AND THE PACKET, THIS IS NOT, THIS IS ON THE RECORD, SO, AND I APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS, BUT, BUT I, I'D LIKE TO FINISH WHAT I'M SAYING BECAUSE I'M, I'M WONDERING WHETHER OR NOT, UM, THE, THE APPLICANT, UH, HAS HEARD, UH, SOME STRONG COMMENTS FROM THE COMMUNITY, UH, A A LITTLE BIT MORE CLARITY FROM THE BOARD IF THEY'RE INTERESTED IN CONTINUING AND READY ONE MORE TIME. THEY'VE, I THINK THAT, I THINK THAT WHAT I'VE HEARD IS THIS REALLY WEIGHTED, UH, COMMENTARY ON THE MASSING OF THE BUILDING THREE AND FOUR. I AM CURIOUS TO SEE WHAT CAN HAPPEN. SO MY COMMENTS ARE JUST STRICTLY WITH RESPECT TO, UH, WHETHER OR NOT, UM, IT'S WORTH FOR THE APPLICANT TO ASK FOR IT TO BE CONTINUED. ONE MORE TIME. THIS IS COMMISSIONER BOWMAN. I, I HAVE A, A COMMENT ON THAT AS WELL. I, I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, LOOKING AT SOME OF THE INFORMATION THAT WAS PRESENTED TODAY, I THINK IT WAS DEFINITELY ENOUGH INFORMATION FOR US TO GET TO A DECISION ON ITEM A. UM, WHEN IT COMES TO ITEM B, THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS, I, I THINK THAT THERE'S ENOUGH DIRECTION HERE TO GET US, IN MY OPINION, CLOSE TO THAT, BUT THERE'S NOT ENOUGH INFORMATION TO MAKE THAT FINAL DECISION AND TO MAKE THAT, UH, APPROVAL. UM, AND SO I WOULD, YOU KNOW, LOOK TO MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS TO, TO TRY TO DRAFT, UM, A MOTION FOR SOME TYPE OF CERTIFICATE, NOT CERTIFICATE, BUT A, A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF, UH, THE CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL, UM, WITH STIPULATIONS TO GET US CLOSER TO, UM, A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS, JUST BECAUSE OF THE, THE, THE LEVEL OF CHANGE THAT WE APPROVED IN ITEM A. I THINK IT'S, YOU KNOW, UH, SUBSEQUENTLY IMPORTANT TO GET THAT LEVEL OF CHANGE DOCUMENTED, UH, IN CORRECT WORKING DRAWINGS SO THAT WE CAN GET ITEM BE APPROPRIATELY APPROVED. AND I THINK THAT THIS WOULD BE, UH, DETRIMENTAL TO OUR PROCESS IF, AGAIN, WE GIVE A CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL AND CAN'T FOLLOW THROUGH WITH A, UH, CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS ON THE NEXT REVISION. SO I, I THINK THAT IT'S IMPORTANT FOR US AS COMMISSIONERS TO VIEW THIS AS AN OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE THE APPROPRIATE STIPULATIONS, UM, THAT WOULD DRIVE THIS TOWARDS THE GOALS THAT YOU FEEL ARE APPROPRIATE IN THE NEXT PHASE OF REVISIONS, BUT ALSO, UH, AN OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO REALLY VET OUR OPINION ON THIS, UM, AND, AND MAKE IT KNOWN IF, IF WE'RE MOVING TOWARDS A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS OR IF WE'RE MOVING AWAY FROM IT. SO THAT'S, THAT'S MY COMMENTS JUST TO MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS, JUST TO TRY TO GET SOME DIRECTION ON THIS AND TRY TO MAKE A DECISION. 'CAUSE AT THE END OF THE DAY, THIS PROJECT NEEDS A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS TO GET BUILT OR TO MOVE TO THE NEXT PHASE, AND I JUST WANT US TO TRY TO MOVE IT IN THAT DIRECTION, UH, THE, THE, IN THE MOST APPROPRIATE WAY POSSIBLE. COMMISSIONER BOWMAN, I SUGGEST YOU DO A MOTION AND THEN, UH, COMMISSIONERS CAN ADD STIPULATIONS. IT SOUNDED LIKE A MOTION . UH, WELL, I MAKE A MOTION TO, UM, UH, PROVIDE A CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL OF THE DESIGN AS PRESENTED TODAY, UM, WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS, UH, AND WITH THE ADDITIONAL STIPULATION THAT WAS PROVIDED BY MR. MOORE. UM, AND THAT, UH, THERE IS A WELCOME OPENING FOR MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS TO ADD ANY ADDITIONAL STIPULATIONS, UM, RECONSIDERATION OF THE MASSING OF BUILDING THREE AND FOUR TO, TO WHAT DEGREE? UM, LIKE, I THINK [02:45:01] THIS IS, THIS IS WHAT I THINK IS, IS REALLY TRICKY ABOUT A CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL WITH STIPULATIONS TOO, IS IF WE, I JUST WANT US TO BE VERY SPECIFIC ABOUT IT SO THAT WE CAN GET, YOU KNOW, AND ACTUALLY IS IT REGARDING THE FLOOR LEVELS, UM, WITH ME REMOVING IT, I THINK THE APPLICANT KNOWS WHAT THEY HAVE TO WORK WITH, UH, TO PROBABLY GET CONCEPTUAL FINAL. THIS IS COMMISSIONER FISH. UH, I HAVE ONE CONCERN ABOUT MOVING, MOVING FORWARD WITH A CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL WITHOUT, WITHOUT PRETTY SPECIFIC, UH, METRICS BECAUSE IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT JUST WITH THIS APPLICANT, BUT WITH ANOTHER NUMBER OF APPLICANTS WHEN THERE'S A CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL, BUT STILL OUTSTANDING ISSUES THAT WOULDN'T NECESSARILY GARNER THE SUPPORT OF THE MAJORITY OF THE COMMISSION, LET'S SAY NEXT TIME OR THE TIME AFTER, OR HOWEVER MANY TIMES THIS HAPPENS. UH, IT CREATES, IT CREATES A, A, A BIT OF AN INCONSISTENCY, ESPECIALLY, ESPECIALLY IF THE COMMISSION IS KIND OF DECIDED ON IT. A CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL IS NON-BINDING. AND, UM, WHEN THERE'S AN ISSUE, WHEN THERE'S AN ISSUE LIKE THE, LIKE THE, THE VOLUME BUILDINGS OF FOUR, I, I HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF HESITATION SUPPORTING APPROVAL, BECAUSE THEN THAT IS USED AS JUSTIFICATION FOR NOT CHANGING ANYTHING UNLESS IT'S SPECIFIC. AND I DON'T KNOW THAT I HAVE A SPECIFIC ANSWER, AND I, I, I APPRECIATE THAT, THAT WE, WE NEED TO FIND A WAY TO MOVE THIS, MOVE THIS ALL FORWARD. BUT I DO HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT A CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL WITH, WITH VAGUE STIPULATIONS, AND I DON'T KNOW, UM, HOW MY, HOW, HOW SOME OF THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS FEEL ABOUT A CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL, UH, AT THIS TIME. WELL, UM, THIS IS COMM COMMISSIONER IN, THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS WHY I WAS SUGGESTING IF THE APPLICANT WAS INTERESTED IN REQUESTING THAT CONTINUANCE, BECAUSE ALONG THE LINES OF WHAT COMMISSIONER, UH, GROUP SAID THAT IT IS PRETTY CORRECT THAT THE, UM, APPLICANT HAS DEMONSTRATED THAT THEY, THEY CAN HEAR AND THAT THEY, AND THAT THEY CAN TRANSLATE, THAT THEY CAN TRANSLATE BECAUSE THEY DID, WITH RESPECT TO THE PROPERTY, THE BUILDINGS ON TRAIL. BUT AT THIS POINT, IT, IT, TO ME, IT APPEARS THAT THE, THAT THE WEIGHT OF THE OBLIGATION IS ON THE OWNER. IT'S, IT'S PRIMARILY. THAT'S NOT ME. I SWEAR TO YOU, IT'S PRIMARILY THE OWNER. YOU NEED TO MUTE, AND IT GIVES THE OWNER THE OPPORTUNITY TO, UH, CONTEMPLATE THE CHANCES. I, AND I, I WANNA SAY THAT WITH RESPECT TO SOMETHING THAT COMMISSIONER, UM, FISH SAID, UH, THAT WE HAVE TO FIND A WAY TO MOVE THIS FORWARD. I, I'M NOT NECESSARILY SURE THAT I, I, I, I MEAN, RESPECTFULLY DISAGREE WITH IT, WITH THAT, BECAUSE I DON'T THINK THAT THAT, AT LEAST FOR MY, MY PART, THAT I'M HERE TO MOVE IT FORWARD OR TO STOP IT ONE WAY OR THE OTHER APPROPRIATE TO FIND IT APPROPRIATE OR NOT APPROPRIATE. AND IT GETS TO THE, TO ME, TO BE THE STRONGEST S OF THE COMMISSION THAT HAVE BEEN THREE AND FOUR AND MASSING. NOW, WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? BECAUSE A ALONG THE LINES OF WHAT, UH, UH, A GROUP WAS ASKED, UH, WHAT DOES THAT MEAN, RIGHT? UH, YOU CAN ONLY ANSWER MASSING THROUGH PERCENTAGE. SO THE ANSWER, IF YOU ANSWERED IT, WOULD HAVE TO BE 10%, 20%, 30%, 40%. THE SHAPE OF THAT IS UP TO THE DESIGNER. SO REALLY, EITHER, EITHER WE TELL THE DESIGNER, LOOK, YOU GO BACK AND, AND, AND TAKE OUT 30 TO 35% OF WHAT IT IS THAT YOU'RE PROPOSING OR WE TELL THE APPLICANT, GO BACK AND DECIDE FOR YOURSELF WHAT, WHAT, WHAT YOU WANT TO RISK, BECAUSE THERE REALLY IS NO WAY TO SAY THAT WE GOTTA GET TO A POINT WHERE WE CAN MOVE THIS FORWARD, BECAUSE WHAT, WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? MR. CHAIRMAN, MR. CHAIRMAN, COMMISSIONER BOWMAN? UH, I'M SORRY TO, I JUST WANTED TO, UH, REMIND YOU GUYS THAT, UH, MY, UH, MOTION WAS TO, UH, APPROVE THIS AS A CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL, UM, AS PRESENTED WITH THE, UH, WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF STAFF, WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS, AS WELL AS, UH, MR. MORIN'S STIPULATIONS. SO I AM WELCOMING OTHER, UH, YOU KNOW, CONCEPTUAL STIPULATIONS, BUT I, I, I WOULD LIKE FOR US TO, YOU KNOW, DECIDE IF THAT'S GONNA GET A SECOND OR NOT. CAN WE ALSO , MR. CHAIRMAN, I'M WILLING, I'M, I'M WILLING TO MAKE A SECOND ON THAT ALREADY. UM, AND AS MR. COMMISSIONER BOWMAN'S, UH, WITH COMMISSIONER BOWMAN'S CURRENT STIPULATIONS AND NO ADDITIONAL ONES, I JUST HAVE A A, A QUESTION. UM, SO ARE WE, IF WE MOVE TO CONCEPTUAL, WHAT ARE WE EXPECTING TO SEE? IS IT JUST TO, UH, TIME AND PUTTING IT ON A TIMEOUT AND WAITING UNTIL THE NEXT [02:50:01] MEETING? OR ARE WE WAITING TO SEE CHANGES IN MASSING ON BUILDINGS THREE AND FOUR? SO, SO AS PER, AS THIS MOTION IS PRESENTED, ALL I'M LOOKING FOR IS TO, UH, REALLY MEET THE 80% DOCUMENTATION STANDARDS REQUIRED BY, UM, THE OWNER TO PROVIDE FOR, YOU KNOW, THE, WHAT I CONSIDER ONE OF THE, UH, PREVIOUS CONVERSATIONS ABOUT THE DOCUMENTATION LEVEL BEING LACKING. I THINK THAT WE NEED MORE INFORMATION. UM, SO, YOU KNOW, UH, I AM WELCOMING SPECIFIC COMMENTS ON MASSING OR, OR ON SITE PLANNING, BUT I JUST WANT TO GIVE THESE GUYS SOMETHING TO, UH, TO MOVE FORWARD WITH BASICALLY. AND SO THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO DO WITH THE CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL. UNDERSTOOD. OKAY. YOU, YOU CLEARED MY QUESTION. THANK YOU. UM, COMMISSIONER BOWMAN, UM, BEFORE WE MOVE ON, I DO JUST WANT TO CLARIFY, YOU SAID THE ADDED STIPULATION FROM THE APPLICANT, SO WHAT I HEARD WAS REDUCTION IN HEIGHT AND THE PORTIONS OF BUILDING FOUR THAT WERE IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT. IS THAT WHAT YOU WERE? OKAY. AND TO CLARIFY THE, UH, ADDED STIPULATION, WHAT THAT I WAS REFERENCING WAS THE, UH, THE ADDITIONAL TWO FEET ON THE FRONT PORCHES, UH, AND THAT THOSE WOULD BE, UM, REDUCED FROM THE BUILDING INTERIOR, NOT, UH, TO ENCROACH UPON THE ALREADY, UH, EXISTING SETBACK TO THE PROPERTY LINE AND THE CURB IN ADDITION TO THE HEIGHT THING IN, IN ADDITION TO THE HEIGHT THING, AGAIN, SECOND. WELL, THIS IS CHAIRMAN FETZER AS A, UH, AS A POSSIBLE AMENDMENT TO INCLUDE THE, UM, REDUCTION IN MASSING AND OR DENSITY OF BUILDINGS THREE AND FOUR IN THE NEXT PRESENTATION. I, I THINK WE CAN INCLUDE THAT. I THINK THAT THAT'S OBVIOUSLY SOMETHING THAT, UH, A LOT OF THE COMMISSIONERS ARE, UH, YOU KNOW, UH, A HOT BUTTON ITEM FOR THEM. AND I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, UH, COMMISSIONER FISH MADE A GOOD POINT ABOUT THAT BEING POTENTIALLY AN ITEM THAT THE, UH, THAT WAS THE RE REASON WHY THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS KICKED THAT BACK TO US IN THE BEGINNING. UM, BUT I THINK WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO DO IS I, I CAN ACCEPT THAT AS A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO OUR, UH, STIPULATION, AND I THINK THAT IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT THAT THE OWNER, UH, WORK THROUGH THAT GUIDANCE AS TO THE BEST OF THEIR ABILITY, UM, WITH BUILDINGS THREE AND FOUR, BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW IF WE CAN ACTUALLY GIVE YOU GUYS A, A CLEAR ANSWER AS TO WHAT WOULD BE ACCEPTED, AND I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THAT'S VERY CLEAR TO THE OWNER THAT THAT IS A VERY SUBJECTIVE THING AT THIS POINT. UM, WITH RESPECT TO CHAIRMAN FETZER'S, UM, AMENDMENT OR OUR INCLUSION, UM, ONE OF THE REASONS WHY, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, I'D LIKE JUST TO ENSURE THAT WITH, WITHIN ALL THE PROCESS HERE, THAT A MESSAGE IS SENT TO THIS, TO THIS APPLICANT, THAT A CONTINUANCE WOULD PROBABLY BRING HIM THE SAME RESULT. NOW, WITH RESPECT TO THE, TO, TO CHAIRMAN'S COMMENTS CHAIR, UH, CHAIRMAN, I, I REALLY, REALLY, I MEAN, I PUT MYSELF IN THE SEAT OF THE, OF THE PERSON THAT'S GOTTA SIT THERE AND COME UP WITH A SOLUTION, IT, IT SEEMS THAT A PERCENTAGE IS THE ONLY FAIR WAY TO SEND SOMEBODY BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD IF THEY HAVE NO UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT IS OR WHAT ISN'T, THAT, YOU KNOW, THEY COULD CHOOSE TO LUMP OFF 10% AND IT MIGHT NOT BE ENOUGH. I, I KNOW IT'S A GUESS, BUT, YOU KNOW, WE'RE, WE'RE PRETTY EDUCATED GUESSERS HERE WHEN IT COMES TO THIS TYPE OF A, OF A PROBLEM. WELL, IF YOU WANTED A PERCENTAGE FOR ME, I, MY OPINION IS THAT BUILDINGS THREE AND FOUR SHOULD BE NO HIGHER THAN TWO OR TWO AND A HALF STORIES. I THINK I FIND FAIR COMMENT . SO, MS. COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, I, I WONDER, WOULD, UH, COMMISSIONER BOWMAN, IN THE SPIRIT OF, YOU KNOW, TRYING TO PUT METRICS TO THIS AND TRYING TO AVOID THIS FROM BOOMERANGING BACK FROM THE B O A, THAT WE INCLUDE THAT, UH, STIPULATION THAT BE NO MORE THAN TWO OR TWO AND A HALF STORIES IN ITS VISUAL APPEARANCE, SO THIS AFRICA COULD GO BACK JUST PLATE HEIGHTS, TOUGH THINGS, , AND DO THE OTHER VISUAL TRIPS THEY'VE BEEN DOING THAT REALLY WORK HARD AS [02:55:01] HARD AS THEY HAVE ON, ON THOSE, UH, BUILDINGS THAT DO CONTRIBUTE INTO THE, INTO THE HISTORIC DISTRICT. SORRY, COMMISSIONER BOWMAN, I ACCIDENTALLY UNMUTED YOU. I'M TRYING TO UNMUTE. UNMUTE. THERE WE GO. OH, UH, JUST ONE OF THE, THE, THE COMMENTS, YOU KNOW, I, I HEAR THAT COMMENT AND WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO, UH, TRY TO, I'M SORRY THERE'S A LOT OF NOISE GOING ON IN THE BACKGROUND, SO I APOLOGIZE. UM, THERE'S, UH, TO ME, I JUST, I WANT YOU GUYS TO, TO KIND OF TALK TO THAT TRANSITIONAL ZONE OF, OF THE, THIS COMMERCIAL, UH, CONTEXT, BECAUSE IF YOU LOOK, YOU KNOW, DIRECTLY ACROSS, WE'RE LOOKING AT PARKING LOTS, WE'RE LOOKING AT, YOU KNOW, MULTI-STORY BUILDINGS AND, YOU KNOW, WE'RE, WE'RE LOOKING AT A MULTI-FAMILY ZONING, UM, ONE OF THE HIGHEST MULTI-FAMILY ZONINGS OUT THERE. AND SO I, TO BE FAIR TO THE OWNER, I WOULD LIKE TO, TO HEAR MORE, UH, I, I, I CAN, I CAN RESPECT THE VISUAL TRICKS AND I CAN RESPECT, YOU KNOW, THE CEILING HEIGHTS. I THINK THAT, UH, COMMISSIONER FETZER HAD A VERY GOOD OBSERVATION ABOUT THE, THE PERCEPTION OF THOSE CEILING HEIGHTS, YOU KNOW, UH, BUT WHAT, WHAT ABOUT THE STORIES, UM, ON THOSE NON HISTORIC PROPERTIES, UH, WHAT THE, THE, THE, THOSE FACES OF THAT? I KNOW THAT THESE ARE STRADDLING THAT LINE, BUT YEAH, SO THIS, THIS, UH, COMMISSIONER CARPENTER AGAIN, I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND, UH, COMM'S POINT ABOUT SORT OF THE DEVELOPMENT GRADIENT AND ALLOWING IT TO, TO GO HIGHER, AND AS YOU'RE GOING TO THE NORTH AND ENGAGING WITH THE COMMERCIAL DISTRICT, THAT I THINK KIND OF AT THE HEART OF THE WATERMELON FOR THE SITE TO HAVE THAT SORT OF OUT SCALE, UH, WITH THE DISTRICT THAT I'D BE VERY CONCERNED ABOUT. OKAY. I, I, I THINK IN, IN THE, UH, WITH, WITH THAT STATEMENT, I THINK WE, WE CAN, UH, ACCEPT THAT AS AN, UH, UH, AMENDMENT TO THE CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL REQUIREMENTS THAT, UH, THE BUILDINGS THREE AND FOUR BE NO LARGER THAN TWO OR TWO AND A HALF STORIES. I'LL KEEP MY SECOND. OKAY, MR. CHAIRMAN, FETZER, WE HAVE A MOTION FOR CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL WITH STAT'S RECOMMENDATIONS, AND THE, UH, NOTED, UH, UM, OWNERS, UH, STATEMENTS AND THE ADDED STIPULATION THAT BUILDING THREE AND FOUR BE NO HIGHER THAN, UH, TWO OR TWO AND A HALF STORIES. MAY I HAVE A ROLL CALL, PLEASE? NUNEZ? AYE. ISH. NAY GIBBS NAY VELAZQUEZ NAY AREOLA? AYE. CARPENTER? AYE. RUTH? AYE. BOWMAN? AYE. BETTS NAY, UNE NAY. THAT'S FIVE TO FIVE. MOTION DOES NOT PASS. WE WOULD NEED ANO ANOTHER MOTION. WE NEED A NEW MOTION, PLEASE. THIS IS COMMISSIONER CARPENTER. I'M GOING TO TAKE A, A CUE FROM COMM COMMISSIONER VASQUEZ AND, UH, MOVE FOR A CONTINUANCE OF THIS. AND WITH THE CONTENTION OF THE OWNER PERHAPS TAKING HEART SOME OF THESE COMMENTS HE, HE'S HEARD TODAY, UM, AND PERHAPS IN A FUTURE D R C, WE, UH, WE, WE ADDRESS THESE AND COME BACK WITH THE SAME SUCCESS THAT YOU'VE HAD IN, IN, UH, WORKING HARD ON TRAIL STREET COMMISSIONER VELASQUEZ. I, I'LL SECOND IT. AND, UH, IN, IN, IN DOING THAT, I WANT TO JUST SAY, UH, VERY LOUDLY THAT THE, THAT THE APPLICANT HEARD. I MEAN, I, I, I THINK I, I'VE HEARD, UH, A LOT FROM THE DIFFERENT COMMISSIONERS, UM, WHERE THEY'RE AT. YOU CAN GUESS, BUT IT'S GONNA MEAN GOING TO THE DRAWING BOARD. AND, UH, AND IN THAT DECIDING, I THINK, UH, YOU HAVE ALL THE COMMUNITY AND, AND JUST, JUST TO, JUST TO KIND OF SAY THAT, YOU KNOW, SOME OF THE KIND OF MEAN-SPIRITED OR THE, OR THE VERY, THE VERY ROUGH COMMENTS THAT ARE MADE, I THINK THAT THEY'RE, YOU KNOW, IN, IN A WAY OUT OF PLACE, AND THEY, THEY DON'T, THEY DON'T BEAR ANY WEIGHT FOR ON, ON ME. UM, BUT THERE'S A LOT OF VERY, VERY, UH, INTELLIGENT COMMENT THAT'S MADE, AND MOST DEFINITELY FROM THE COMMISSION THAT, UH, UH, YOU KNOW, I WANNA SAY IT COMING BACK, [03:00:01] IT DID HAVE THAT, THAT REALLY HONEST EFFORT. SO WITH ALL OF THAT, I, I HOPE THAT THE, THAT THE APPLICANT IS ABLE TO REALLY DECIDE WHETHER THEY WANT A PROJECT THERE OR NOT. THANK YOU. SO WE HAVE A MOTION, A SECOND FOR CONTINUANCE. UM, UH, MAY I HAVE A ROLL CALL, PLEASE? FERNANDEZ? AYE. YES. AYE. GIS? AYE. VELAZQUEZ AYE. AREOLA? AYE. CARPENTER? AYE. RUB. IS THAT AN AYE? AYE. AYE. FETZER AYE. AYE. A THAT HAS CONTINUED MOTION PASSES. UH, THIS IS CHAIRMAN FETZER, I'D LIKE TO CALL FOR A, A SHORT BREAK. CAN WE ALSO PUT A DEADLINE TO WHEN WE'LL END THE MEETING TODAY? THAT, SO WE'LL COME BACK AND DISCUSS. OKAY, THANK YOU. THANK YOU. SO RETURN AT SIX 30. THERE WE GO. JEFF. WE'RE LIVE. YES, THIS IS CHAIRMAN FETZER. UH, WE'RE GONNA ENDEAVOR TO GET TO ALL THE CASES TODAY, BUT, UM, WE WILL HAVE A, A TIME CERTAIN STOP AT SEVEN 30. UM, WE'LL FINISH THE CASE THAT WE'RE ON, AND IF WE DON'T GET TO ALL THE CASES, WE WILL CONTINUE THEM, UH, AT THE NEXT AVAILABLE, UH, HEARING. OKAY. UM, SO WE, WE WERE ON ITEM 23. UM, ITEM 24. WE [25. 20-6798 Address/Description: 313 N PINE ST HDRC Case No.: 2020-388 Historic District Name: Dignowity Hill Applicant: Felix Ziga/Ziga Architecture Studio PLLC Request: Construction of two, 2-story residential structures City Council Dist.: 2 ] ATTEMPTED TO CONTACT THE APPLICANT AND THEY WERE UNAVAILABLE. SO WE'VE CONTACTED THE APPLICANT RIGHT UP 25. WE'RE READY TO PROCEED. AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 25 H D R C, CASE NUMBER 20 23 88 3 13 NORTH PINE. THE APPLICANT'S REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT TWO, TWO STORY RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES ON THE VACANT LOT AT THREE 13 NORTH POND, LOCATED WITHIN THE DIGNITY HILL HISTORIC DISTRICT. THIS LOT IS LOCATED AT THE CORNER OF NORTH POND AND POTOMAC STREETS. STAFF RECOMMENDS FINAL APPROVAL BASED ON FINDINGS A THROUGH U WITH THE STIPULATION THAT THE PROPOSED NEW CONSTRUCTION FEATURE, INCREASED SETBACK THAT WILL RESULT IN BOTH STRUCTURES, FEATURING A SETBACK THAT IS DEEPER THAN THE HOUSE AT 3 0 3 NORTH PINE, THE FIRST HOUSE IMMEDIATELY LOCATED TO THE SOUTH OF THE SITE. UH, THERE ARE TWO CASE COMMENTS, ONE IN REGARDS TO A FOUNDATION INSPECTION. THE OTHER IN REGARDS TO A STANDING SEA METAL ROOF, I HAVE THE APPLICANT, FELIX CIGA HERE, UM, PROPOSE NEW CONSTRUCTION FEATURE, STEP BACK MAY RESULT IN CONSTRUCTION. UM, GOOD EVENING. UH, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN OF THE OR LA COMMISSIONERS, UM, THIS IS FELIX ZIGA. I'M THE ARCHITECT ON THE PROJECT. UM, I, WE'RE, WE'RE, I THINK WE GOT THE PROJECT TO A GOOD POINT. THE ONLY, UM, STIPULATION WE HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO MEET A HUNDRED PERCENT IS THE FRONT SETBACK. UM, I DID WANT TO QUICKLY, UH, RUN THROUGH, UM, SOME OF THE FEEDBACK THAT WE RECEIVED AT, UM, D R C. UM, SO AT D R C, WE WERE, WE WERE ASKED IF WE COULD EXPLORE, UM, FLIPPING THE TWO HOMES. UM, Y'ALL HEAR ME THERE, THERE'S A LAG ON MY SCREEN. I'M NOT, I'M NOT SEEING ANYTHING. WE CAN HEAR YOU. AND WE CURRENTLY HAVE THE, LIKE, THE COLORED SITE ON SCREEN. YOU HAVE, WHICH, WHICH DRAWINGS? WE CAN GO, WE CAN GO TO AGE 13 OR 14. UM, OKAY, LET ME, LET ME SEE WHAT PAGE 13 AND 14 ARE. 13 IS THE, LIKE THE SITE PLAN WITH THE GOOGLE EARTH OVERLAY. OKAY, BEAR WITH ME. OKAY, NOW WE'RE LOOKING AT THE SAME THING. UM, SO YEAH, THE, WE, WE ACTUALLY WENT BACK, UM, AND WENT INTO THE HISTORIC DESIGN GUIDELINES AND WE, WE RECALCULATED OUR MEDIAN HISTORIC SETBACK LINE, UH, BASED ON THE SETBACKS THAT ARE THERE TODAY. I KNOW, UM, STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THAT WE, UH, PUSH OUR BUILDINGS BACK BEHIND THE HISTORIC STRUCTURE TO THE SOUTH. UM, WE WANT TO TAKE A MORE, UM, HOLISTIC AND COHESIVE APPROACH AND LOOK AT, YOU KNOW, IF WE LOOKED AT ONLY [03:05:01] THAT PORTION OF THE BLOCK, WE ONLY HAVE ONE STRUCTURE TO FOLLOW, UH, THE URBAN FABRIC TOO, RIGHT? UM, SO WE WE'RE LOOKING ACROSS THE STREET TO TRY TO GET IT MORE, UM, UM, AVERAGE, UM, OR, YOU KNOW, A, A MORE, UM, I GUESS A, A MORE DIVERSIFIED OR, OR, OR, UM, A BETTER MEDIAN, RIGHT? WITH MORE, MORE STRUCTURES, UH, TO PULL FROM. UM, HOWEVER, WE DID EXPLORE, IF YOU CAN, UH, SCROLL TO PAGE, UM, 15 PLEASE. UM, WE DID WANT TO SHOW SOME ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS WHERE WE DID EXPLORE FLIPPING THE TWO HOMES. UM, SO PAGE 15 SHOWS THE PROPOSED CONFIGURATION. UM, PAGE 16 SHOWS, UM, A THREE D RENDERING OF THE PROPOSED CONFIGURATION. UM, AND IT SHOWS THE MASSING, UH, THE PORCH MASSING AND HOW THAT KIND OF, WE, WE FEEL HELPS TRANSITION. UM, THE TWO STORY MASSING DOWN TO THE ONE STORY, UM, PAGE 17, UM, ILLUSTRATES THE DIFFERENCE, UM, OF THE KIND OF WHAT WE EXPLORED, RIGHT? FLIPPING BUILDING ONE AND BUILDING TWO ON THE SITE, UM, BECAUSE OF THE ROOF LINE. UM, WE THINK THAT IT CREATES A STARKER CONTRAST BETWEEN THE TWO STORY AND THE ONE STORY. IT'S NOT AS GRADUAL OF A TRANSITION, AND THAT'S WHY WE, WE KEPT IT THE WAY WE HAD IT. UM, WE DID PUSH SHAVE OFF 18 INCHES OFF THE BUILDING. UM, SO THAT PAGE 18 SHOWS THE, THE THREE D RENDERING OF, OF THAT ALTERNATIVE, UM, SOLUTION. UM, THE, THE OTHER ITEM I WANTED TO SHOW IS, UM, PAGE 25, WE PULLED OUT THE HISTORIC SANBORN MAP. AND WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING RIGHT NOW IS WAY, THE WAY IT'S SET BACK A LOT MORE THAN THE STRUCTURE THAT WAS THERE HISTORICALLY. UH, AT LEAST BASED ON THIS HISTORIC SAM ON THAT. UM, SO WE THINK, YOU KNOW, WE THINK WE'RE IN LINE WITH, WITH THE, THE SPIRIT OF THE CODE, THE SPIRIT OF THE HISTORIC DESIGN GUIDELINES. UM, YOU KNOW, IT'S WHAT IS, WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING IS BETTER THE SETBACK MORE THAN WHAT WAS THERE BEFORE, RIGHT? UM, SO YEAH, I MEAN, THAT, THAT'S, THAT'S THE, WHAT WE WANTED TO PRESENT. AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, I THINK, UH, IF WE CAN GO BACK TO THAT SETBACK SIDE, UM, ORIGINAL SETBACK SITE PLAN ON PACE 13, YOU KNOW, THE, THE MATH, YOU KNOW, WE'RE, WE'RE PUTTING, WE'RE BY PULLING OUT OF THE, THE, THE HOUSES ACROSS THE STREET, WE'RE, WE'RE MEETING THE, YOU KNOW, THE STRAIGHT INTERPRETATION OF THE CODE, RIGHT? THE, THE MEDIAN, THE MATH SHOWS THAT THE MEDIAN IS 26 FOOT THREE, UH, OFF THE CURB, AND WE'RE PROPOSING, WHAT IS THAT? UH, 27, RIGHT? SO WE'RE, WE'RE EXCEEDING THE, THE HISTORIC DESIGN GUIDELINE, RIGHT? SO, UM, BUT THAT, THAT COMPLETES OUR PRESENTATION. UM, IF, IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS I CAN HELP ANSWER, I'M HAPPY TO DO SO. THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE ANY, UH, PUBLIC COMMENTS? WE ACTUALLY DON'T, OR SURPRISE ME, I JUST DOUBLE CHECKED. UM, WE DON'T, FOR THIS ONE, COMMISSIONER FISH, WE DO HAVE A LETTER FROM H PARK IN SUPPORT. OKAY. IN YOUR, IN YOUR FOLDER. UM, I, I WOULD, I WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS PARTICULARLY THE SETBACK ON BUILDING TWO. I THINK IT WAS, IT WAS THE LAST TIME YOU HEARD THIS CASE, I ASKED QUESTIONS ABOUT WHAT WERE YOU MEASURING TO, WHAT WAS ITS GENERAL PROXIMITY TO THE HOUSE ON THE SOUTH. AND, AND I THINK BUILDING TWO WAS, IN MY MIND, THE MORE SENSITIVE ONE, BECAUSE THIS IS A TWO STORY STRUCTURE ADJACENT TO HISTORIC BUILDING THERE, UH, BUILDING ONE, UH, ON AN OPEN STREET CORNER MATCHES THE BUILDING ACROSS POTOMAC, UH, AT THIS POINT. AND, UH, DON'T HAVE PARTICULAR CONCERN ABOUT THAT. FOR BUILDING TWO, I WOULD POINT OUT THAT THE, THE SITE PLAN IS SHOWING A 20, 27 FOOT SETBACK TO SOME PORCH ELEMENTS, AND THEN THE PRIMARY FACE OF THE HOUSE, I BELIEVE IS SETBACK, AT LEAST ANOTHER FOOT. BUT I, I'D LIKE TO ASK MR. ZIGA, UM, HOW FAR THOSE PORCH ELEMENTS COME OUT FROM THE PRIMARY FACE OF BUILDING TWO? UM, SURE. SO THE RIGHT THERE WE ARE MEASURING TO THE EAVE. UM, BUILDING TWO HAS 18 INCH OVERHANGS. SO THE ACTUAL, THE, THE FOUNDATION EDGE OF THE PORCH, UM, AND THE COLUMNS, [03:10:01] RIGHT? THE MASSING OF THE PORCH IS ACTUALLY AT 28 FOOT SIX. UM, AND THE, THE, THE BODY MASSING RIGHT ADJACENT TO THAT IS, IS ANOTHER 18 INCHES. UM, PAST THAT. OKAY, THANK YOU. SO 18 INCHES PAST THAT, YOU KNOW, I THINK, I THINK IN TERMS OF INTERPRETING THE GUIDELINE HERE, UH, GIVEN THAT THE PORCH IS PRESENTED IN A WAY THAT IS REALLY SET BACK SIGNIFICANTLY FURTHER THAN THE PROPERTY TO THE SOUTH, AND THE PRIMARY FACE OF THE MEANING THE FIRST FACE OF THE WALL WITH THE WINDOWS IS, IS SET BACK BEYOND THE ADJACENT HOUSE. GIVEN THE LIGHTNESS OF THAT FOR STRUCTURE, I DON'T HAVE ANY CONCERNS ABOUT THAT SETBACK. I WOULD LIKE TO ASK IF ANY OF MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS CONCUR DISAGREE. , THIS IS COMMISSIONER, IF I MAY. UH, COMMISSIONER CARPENTER. WE HAD A, A COMMITTEE MEETING, I, I, I GUESS MAYBE A WEEK AND A HALF, COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO. IT WAS A VERY GOOD, VERY GOOD CONVERSATION. UM, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE DISCUSSED, AND I THINK CHAIRMAN FETCHER WAS IN THE, IN THE, IN THE D R C, UH, AS WELL WITH ALL OF THE, THE WORK AND THE, AND THE VERY, UH, SENSITIVE CARE TO DETAIL THAT THESE DESIGNERS HAVE. SO, UM, AND, AND ALSO NOTING SOME OF THE INCONSISTENCIES IN THAT, THAT MAKE UP OF THE CONSISTENCY, RIGHT, IS THAT THERE'S CONSIST THERE'S INCONSISTENCY IN THE, IN THE EXACT PLACEMENT OF, OF SETBACKS, UM, OR, YOU KNOW, PROPERTY SHIFTING OVER THE COURSE OF A HUNDRED YEARS. UH, BUT, BUT MOST DEFINITELY THE INS AND OUTS WITHIN THE FOOT OR THE INCHES OF THE FACADE ARE REALLY INTENTIONAL EFFORTS TO CREATE SHADOW AND DESIGN. SO, SO WHAT WE RECOGNIZED WAS THAT, THAT THEY'RE REALLY RIGHT ON THE MONEY WITH RESPECT TO DOING WHAT YOU HAVE TO DO TO CREATE GOOD DESIGN. UM, AND, AND, AND, AND THAT THE MOST NOTABLE, UH, DIFFERENCES WOULDN'T BE, UH, THE, THE SIX INCHES OR EIGHT INCHES OF WHERE PLACEMENT IS, BUT MORE, MORE TO THE POINT THE, THE CRAFTSMAN ATTITUDE. SO VERY, VERY, UH, UM, JUST TO SAY ENCOURAGING, UH, BUT, BUT ALTHOUGH, YOU KNOW, ALWAYS REMINDING THEM THAT THAT, THAT EVERY, EVERY, UM, UH, DECISION IS SUBJECT TO, TO, TO THE VOTE OF OPINIONS THERE. UH, BUT, BUT MOST DEFINITELY, I WANTED JUST TO SAY THAT WE HAD A VERY PRODUCTIVE, UH, UH, D R C WITH THEM. AND THAT I THINK OUR GENERAL ATTITUDE WAS ONE OF RESPECT FOR, UH, THE QUALITY OF DESIGN WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF THE HISTORIC, UH, UH, OBJECTIVE. THANK YOU. YEAH, THIS IS CHAIRMAN FETZER, AND I WOULD AGREE WITH THAT AND, AND THANK THE APPLICANT FOR, UH, LOOKING AT, UH, STUDYING WHETHER IT MAKES SENSE TO SWITCH BUILDING ONE OR BUILDING TWO, UH, FROM THE CORNER. SO TO CLARIFY, IF YOU GO TO DRAWING PAGE 15, THIS IS THE, THE PROPOSAL YOU'RE, UH, PRESENTING, CORRECT? YES, SIR. THAT IS, UH, THAT IS AS, AS, UH, PRESENTED OR AS PROPOSED. UM, WHEREAS PAGE 17 SHOWS THE, THE ALTERNATIVE SOLUTION. OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, SIR. THIS IS COMMISSIONER CARPENTER. I, I WANNA KIND OF ECHO WHAT, UH, COMMISSIONER VELASQUEZ SAID. I THINK THIS IS VERY MUCH IN THE SPIRIT OF THE GUIDELINES WHERE, WHERE THE BULLETS ARE POSITIONED. I THINK THE, UH, THE APPLICANT APPEARS TO RESPONDED WELL TO THE INPUT AND, UM, I'M PARTICULARLY APPRECIATIVE OF THE DETAILING OF THE WINDOWS AND, UH, THE WINDOWS SELECTIONS AS, AS WOOD STANDING CEMENT ROOFS, UH, THE USE OF PORCHES AND, UH, SMALLER GABLES TO BREAK UP THE, THE OVERALL MASSING. SO, UM, UNLESS, UH, ONE OF THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS HAS, UH, SOME, UH, ISSUE OF, OF, UH, OBJECTION, I WOULD MOVE FOR APPROVAL WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS. CAN ASK FOR A SECOND. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. UM, UM, CAN I CLARIFY THE, THE MOTION PLEASE? UM, IF, IF, IF THE MOTION IS WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS, THAT MEANS WE STILL HAVE TO PUSH BUILDING TWO BACK A BIT FURTHER. UM, COULD I SUGGEST, UM, I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW IF I CAN SUGGEST, BUT IS THAT THE RIGHT MOTION THAT, IS THAT THE INTENT OF THE MOTION? LET ME ASK, UH, THIS, THIS COMMISSIONER VELASQUEZ HAS SECONDED COMMISSIONER CARPENTER. UH, PART OF THE, PART OF THE, THE, THE, UM, UM, DISCUSSION THAT WE HAD WAS, UH, OR, AND THE D R C WAS WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF WHAT THEY HAVE, HOW THEY'VE SOLVED SEVERAL PROBLEMS, AND, [03:15:01] AND THE, UH, COMPROMISE OF, OF, UH, OF, UH, OF THE MINIMAL AMOUNT OF SPACE THAT, THAT, THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. THAT THAT, UM, IN ORDER TO HAVE THE PORTRAIT, UH, UH, EXTENDING OUT IN ORDER TO CREATE THE SHALLOW LINE AND ALL THOSE, ALL OF THOSE UP, UH, UH, CAREFUL DETAILS THAT, THAT I WOULD THINK THAT THAT WOULD BE, UH, RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WOULD NOT, UH, UH, BE ALONG THE LINES OF THE, OF A MOTION THAT, UH, SURE, LET, LET ME SPEED THIS ALONG 'CAUSE I WANT US TO BE SURE THAT WE'RE GETTING THROUGH AS MANY CASES AS WE CAN THIS EVENING. SO I, LET ME AMEND MY OWN, UH, MOTION THERE, UM, AND SAY THAT, UH, MOVE WITH APPROVAL WITH THE, UH, MOTION ABOUT THE FOUNDATION INSPECTION AND THE STANDING SCENE, UH, UH, ROOF INSPECTION, BUT THAT THE SETBACKS AS PRESENTED, UH, TODAY ARE, ARE WITHIN, THEY'RE APPROPRIATE WITHIN THE GUIDELINES. THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING ON MY SECOND, UH, OKAY, WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND, I MAY HAVE A ROLL CALL, PLEASE. FERNANDEZ. AYE. FISH? AYE. EBBS. AYE. VELASQUEZ. AYE. AREOLA? I THINK WE LOST HIM. UH, CARPENTER. AYE. RUBE ALSO ABSENT FETZER AYE. LFO, MR. LFO? OKAY, WE'RE DOWN A FEW, BUT MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU. OKAY. UM, LET'S GIVE EDWARD A MOMENT TO CONTACT THE APPLICANT FOR ADAM 26. YEAH, COREY, I WAS DOING THE HEADCOUNT AND WE'RE, WE'RE JUST RIGHT AT QUORUM RIGHT NOW, SO THANK YOU FOR THAT. IF ANYONE ELSE LEAVES , LET US KNOW. WE HAVE SEVEN AND SO RESTROOM BREAKS ARE ALLOWED AS LONG AS YOU GIVE ME A HEADS UP AND I CAN MAKE SURE WE HAVE SIX. GO AHEAD. AGENDA [26. 20-6879 Address/Description: 326 RIVERSIDE DR HDRC Case No.: 2020-433 Historic District Name: Mission RIO District: RIO-5 Applicant: Patrick Christensen/Patrick Christensen, Attorney at Law Request: Construction of twenty-six, 2-story residential structures City Council Dist.: 3 ] ITEM, AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 26 H D R C, CASE NUMBER 20 24 33 3 26 RIVERSIDE. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT 26 INDIVIDUAL RESIDENTIAL UNITS ON ALLOTTED 3 26 RIVERSIDE DRIVE LOCATED WITHIN THE RIVER IMPROVEMENT OVERLAY DISTRICT FIVE IN THE MISSION HISTORIC DISTRICT STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN BASED ON FINDINGS, E F G H I S T AND W STAFF FINDS THAT THE FOLLOWING ITEMS SHOULD BE ADDRESSED PRIOR TO RECEIVING A RECOMMENDATION FOR CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL. ONE, THAT THE APPLICANT, THE APPLICANT USE SETBACKS THAT ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE GUIDELINES FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION IN REGARDS TO THE SETBACKS ON RIVERSIDE DRIVE. TWO, THAT THE APPLICANT ELIMINATE THE FRONT ORIENTED PARKING AND PROPOSED PARKING THAT IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE GUIDELINES IN U D C THREE IF THE PROPOSED DRIVEWAY COMPLY WITH THE GUIDELINES FOR SITE ELEMENTS. FOUR, THAT A DETAILED LANDSCAPING PLAN BE DEVELOPED AND THAT WALKWAYS IN LINE WITH FRONT PORCHES AND FIVES. THE APPLICANT COORDINATED WITH THE SAN ANTONIO RIVER AUTHORITY STAFF RECOMMENDS CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL OF DESIGN ELEMENTS INCLUDING BUILDING MASSING, BUILDING FOOTPRINT, AND GENERAL DESIGN PRINCIPLES WITH THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS. UH, ONE THAT THE APPLICANT CONTINUE TO DEVELOP ROOF FORMS, BUILDING HEIGHTS AND WIDTHS AND PORCHES PORCH PROFILES TO DEVELOP AN OVERALL DESIGN THAT FEATURES VARIATION BETWEEN STRUCTURES THAT BOARD AND BATTEN SIDING. FEATURE BOARDS THAT ARE 12 INCHES WIDE AND BATTEN THAT ARE ONE TO TWO INCHES WIDE. LAP SIDING IS FEATURING EXPOSURE FOUR INCHES. ALL SIDING IS FEATURE SMOOTH FINISHES. THREE IS IN REGARDS TO STAFF'S WINDOW SPECIFICATIONS. FOUR, THE FULLY SIZED WINDOWS BEING INCORPORATED INTO EACH FACADE AND THAT EACH IN THE FACADE FEATURE, TRADITIONAL FENESTRATION PATTERNS. FIVE, THE VARIOUS ARCHITECTURAL ELEMENTS CONTINUE TO BE INTRODUCED, AND SIX IS IN REGARDS TO ARCHEOLOGY. ADD THE APPLICANT PATRICK CHRISTENSEN AS WELL AS THE ARCHITECT. NICK MEL ON THE LINE, WOULD YOU LIKE FOR THE APPLICANT TO START? YEAH, GO AHEAD. UM, PATRICK, I'LL BE HONEST, WE SHORT ON TIME TONIGHT, SO IF YOU CAN BE AS BRIEF AS [03:20:01] POSSIBLE. ? YES, COMMISSIONER IS PATRICK CHRISTENSEN, THREE 10 SOUTH ST. MARY'S, 3 2700. I'M HERE WITH THE ARCHITECT NICK MELDY. I KNOW MOST OF YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH THIS SITE, SOME OF YOU HAVE ACTUALLY BEEN THERE. IF YOU RECALL, WE DID REQUEST A MISSION SIMULATION OF TWO OF THE, TWO OF THE, UH, OLDER STRUCTURES THAT WERE BASICALLY SUPPORT STRUCTURES FOR THE FORMER MOBILE HOME PARK THAT WAS ON THE SITE. I BELIEVE WE'RE ALMOST THERE. WE'RE IN AGREEMENT WITH PRETTY MUCH EVERYTHING. I'LL JUST KIND OF START AND NICK JUMP IN IF YOU NEED TO. I'LL KIND OF START WITH THE FIRST ONE ON THE SETBACK. I MEAN, THE SITE IS DIFFICULT AS YOU CAN PROBABLY IMAGINE. WE'RE RIGHT ON THE RIVER AND WE'VE GOT A, A WEIRD STREET ON, YOU KNOW, ON RIVERSIDE IS A WEIRD STREET AT THIS SIDE. THERE'S NO CURBS, THERE'S NO SIDEWALKS ON OUR PROPERTY. IT'S BASICALLY THE STREET KIND OF ENDS WHEREVER THE GRASS STOPS. SO THERE REALLY IS NO STANDARD SETBACK UP AND DOWN THE STREET. AS YOU GO EAST, THERE ARE MOBILE HOMES THAT ARE PROBABLY FIVE TO 10 FEET FROM THE, THE PROPERTY LINE AS FAR AS I CAN TELL ACROSS THE STREET. THERE'S SOME WAREHOUSES THAT ARE UP TO 170 FEET AWAY FROM THE RIGHT OF WAY LINE. SO I WOULD ASK FOR YOUR, UH, FORGIVENESS AND, AND LENIENCY ON, ON COMPLYING WITH A EXISTING SETBACK ON THE STREET FACADE THAT REALLY DOESN'T EXIST. THIS IS NOT YOUR NORMAL PLAID STREET. UM, YOU KNOW, GOING FROM THERE. UM, NICK, YOU WANNA MENTION ON THE FRONT ORIENTED PARKING? OH, SURE. UM, SO I, I I GUESS I'M, I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED ON THE FRONT ORIENTED PARKING. UM, I MEAN WE HAD SOME, UH, LOCATED TO THE SIDES OF THE, UM, OF THE PROPOSED, UH, HOUSES FACING RIVERSIDE DRIVE, BUT THOSE ARE ACCESSED FROM, UM, A DRIVEWAY, UH, UH, ON THE, ON THE BACKSIDE OF THOSE HOUSES, NOT FROM THE FRONT. WHAT WE'RE, WHAT WE'RE INDICATING FROM THE FRONT IS A, UH, NEW SIDEWALK AND LANDSCAPING, UM, FACING RIVERSIDE DRIVE, UM, AND THEN, UM, WALKWAYS THAT APPROACH TO A, UH, UH, UH, TO, TO A FRONT PORCH, UH, THAT FACES RIVERSIDE DRIVE. UM, SO, UM, UH, WE'RE, WE'RE, WE'RE PROPOSING, UM, DRIVEWAYS THAT ARE ACCESSED FROM THE REAR, UM, NOT, NOT FROM THE FRONT. UM, YEAH, AND, AND, AND IN TERMS OF THE, UH, IN TERMS OF THE SETBACKS TOO, UM, I MEAN AS, AS PATRICK MENTIONED, UM, WE'RE, WE'RE NOT DEALING WITH A LOT OF, UM, COHESIVE CONTEXT HERE, UH, FOR ESTABLISHING A, UH, CONSISTENT, UH, SETBACK. I, I, I THINK, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE, UH, THE EXISTING HOUSE, UH, THAT IS, UH, SET TO REMAIN, UM, ON THE, UH, NORTHWEST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY AND, UH, AND WILL BE RESTORED. AND THEN WE HAVE THE, UM, I THINK WHAT IS, UH, NOW A BAR THAT LONG BUILDING TOWARDS THE WEST, UH, OF, OF THE SITE. UM, AND, AND THOSE ARE BOTH SETBACK, UM, YOU KNOW, QUITE FAR AND MORE OF A, YOU KNOW, MAYBE SUBURBAN, UM, COMMERCIAL ORIENTATION. UM, NICK AND, UH, NICK, CAN YOU TOUCH ON THE DRIVEWAY COMPLYING WITH THE GUIDELINES FOR SIDE ELEMENTS ITEM NUMBER THREE? OH, SURE, YEAH, YEAH. AND RIGHT, EXACTLY. AND IN TERMS OF THE DRIVEWAY, UH, WE'RE PROPOSING A DRIVEWAY THAT'S WIDER THAN 10 FEET, UH, UH, TO ALLOW FOR, UM, UH, FIRETRUCK ACCESS. UH, WE, WE NEED A MINIMUM OF 20 FEET, UH, FOR, FOR THAT DRIVEWAY AND FOR THE CIRCULAR DRIVE, UH, GOING AROUND, UM, UH, GOING THROUGH THE SITE. UM, SO THAT'S, THAT, THAT'S WHY WE'RE PROPOSING ONE, UH, UH, 20 FOOT DRIVE AISLE, UH, THERE, UM, AND REDUCING ACTUALLY THE NUMBER OF DRIVEWAYS, UM, UH, FOR THE SITE ALTOGETHER. I THINK CURRENTLY THERE ARE TWO OR THREE, UM, THAT ACCESS THIS SITE AT THIS POINT. AND THEN ON THE REDUCING THAT TO ONE AND THAT'S WANNA ADD, WE, WE'LL CERTAINLY SUBMIT A DETAILED LANDSCAPING PLAN WITH OUR, UH, FINAL APPROVAL. AND YOU, WE WILL WORK WITH THE SAN ATTORNEY RIVER AUTHORITY. THERE IS NO, NO WALKWAY BEHIND THIS PROPERTY BETWEEN THIS PROPERTY AND THE RIVER. IF THERE IS ONE CONSTRUCTED, WE WOULD CERTAINLY REACH OUT TO SARAH TO SEE IF WE COULD GET SOME KIND OF A GATE ACCESS. AND I BELIEVE THAT'S ABOUT IT. WE HAVE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. UH, THIS IS CHAIRMAN FETZER, AND I WAS IN THE D R C DISCUSSING THIS PROJECT, AND I SEE SOME RENDERINGS WHERE, UH, YOU TOOK SOME OF OUR COMMENTS AND LOOKED AT SOME OF THE MASSING, SORT OF, UH, LET'S SEE, DRAWING 30, UM, WHERE YOU COMBINE SOME OF THE UNITS TO, UH, BREAK UP THAT, UH, YOU KNOW, COOKIE CUTTER APPEARANCE THAT, THAT THE SITE PLAN HAS. UM, I ASSUME YOU'RE STILL STUDYING, UH, THAT, UH, THAT ASPECT OF THE PROJECT. UH, CORRECT. ABSOLUTELY. YEAH. UM, I MEAN THAT THIS WAS, UH, A [03:25:01] FIRST OR SECOND PASS, YOU KNOW, UH, UH, PROBABLY SECOND PASS INTERNALLY AT THE, AT WHAT SOME OF THOSE DIFFERENT ROOF SHAPES COULD BE. WE ALSO LOOKED AT, UM, TAKING ALL'S, UM, SUGGESTION TO COMBINE, UM, UH, A COUPLE OF THE UNITS TOGETHER TO BREAK UP THE MASSING AS WELL. AND, UH, WE FEEL I, THAT COMING BACK WITH, YOU KNOW, SORT OF THREE DIFFERENT SHAPES WITH FOUR TO FIVE DIFFERENT CONFIGURATIONS, UM, REALLY HELPS BREAK THAT UP. UM, AND, AND WE'RE, I MEAN, WE'RE, WE'RE, WE WERE REALLY HAPPY WITH THAT, UH, UH, WITH THAT COMMENT. AND, UM, HOPE YOU GUYS ARE HAPPY WITH THE OUTCOME. YEAH, I THINK IT'S HELPING THE, THE OVERALL DEVELOPMENT. UM, ONE QUESTION THAT CAME UP AT THE D R C IS, UH, GUEST PARKING. UH, YOU'VE GOT THE TWO CAR DRIVEWAY FOR EACH UNIT, UH, BUT AS A, SINCE YOU'VE GOT A LOOP DRIVE THROUGH THERE, WHICH I ASSUME IS FOR THE, THE, UH, FIRE TRUCKS, WHERE WOULD ANY GUESTS PARK? SO, UH, RIGHT GUESTS WOULD LIKELY PARK, UM, ON THE UM, ON RIVERSIDE DRIVE ON THE STREET OR IF, UH, OR IN THEIR DRIVEWAYS, IF, UH, IT'S ONLY TAKEN UP BY ONE CAR, POTENTIALLY. UH, BUT THERE'S NO, UH, AT THIS POINT, UM, THERE'S NO REQUIREMENT IN THE U D C, UM, FOR, FOR GUEST PARKING, UM, YOU KNOW, HERE. UM, AND, UH, AND I THINK THE, UH, THE PARKING REQUIREMENT FOR EACH UNIT IS AT 1.5 AND, AND WE ARE EXCEEDING THAT AT THIS POINT. UM, SO, UH, AT THIS POINT, GUESTS WOULD PARK OUTSIDE AND WALK IN. OKAY. DO YOU THINK THAT'S ACTUALLY PRACTICAL? UH, THIS IS PATRICK. THE, UH, RIVERSIDE'S PRETTY WIDE HERE. I MEAN, EVERY TIME I'VE GONE TO THE SIDE, I PARK ON THE STREET, I'VE NEVER FELT LIKE MY CAR WAS UNSAFE OR ANYBODY WAS GONNA HIT IT. THERE'S REALLY NOT A LOT OF TRAFFIC ON THIS STREET. OKAY. BUT YOU WILL BE GENERATING A LOT OF TRAFFIC WITH THESE MANY UNITS ON THIS SIDE. YEAH. SO I GUESS ONE CONCERN I'VE GOT IS JUST, YOU KNOW, 1, 1 1 CONCERN THAT WE HA OH, YES. GO AHEAD. SORRY. YEAH. ONE CONCERN I HAVE IS JUST THE DENSITY AND WHETHER THEY'RE, UH, COULDN'T BE MORE PUBLIC SPACE OR A COMMON SPACE THAT MIGHT PROVIDE SOME, UH, SOME, I GUESS, PARKING . I THINK ONE PART ALSO, UM, TAKING UP, YOU KNOW, TOO MUCH, UM, UH, LAND FOR IMPERVIOUS COVER AS WELL, AND SO WE, YOU KNOW, WE, UH, WE WANT TO BE SENSITIVE TO, UH, UH, THE, THE SITE DRAINAGE AND RUNOFF, YOU KNOW, IN THIS CASE AS WELL. SO ANY, ANY SORT OF OTHER PARKING ELEMENTS WOULD LIKELY, UH, AND, AND POTENTIALLY PORTIONS OF THAT, OF THAT DRY VIAL. UM, MIGHT NEED TO HAVE SOME, UM, IMPER, UH, UH, SORRY, SOME IMPERVIOUS COVER TO IT. OKAY. CHAIRMAN FITZER, I PARTICIPATED IN THE DRC AS WELL, UH, UH, FROM, I GUESS FROM THE POINT WHEN THEY REQUESTED DEMOLITION OF PARTICULAR BUILDINGS. AND, UM, ALSO THE, THE, UM, UH, THE, UH, UH, BOARD, UH, COMMISSIONER FROM DISTRICT THREE, WHICH IS WHERE THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED. IT'S A VERY UNIQUE, UH, AREA THAT, UH, HAS BEEN KIND OF, UH, IN A, ON A RUN, PRETTY MUCH A RUNDOWN PART OF, UH, THE, UM, THE TREK TO THE SOUTH SIDE. UH, THE ROAD RIVERSIDE, AS IT BEGINS FROM ROOSEVELT CONTINUES THROUGH, IT'S ONE OF THE LITTLE KNOWN SOUTH SIDE SHORTCUTS. IT CAN TAKE YOU PRETTY FAR DOWN TO, UH, PRESA OR TO, UH, TO, UH, HOT WELLS. AND THERE ARE OTHER MULTIFAMILY, UH, ESTABLISHMENTS AS YOU GO DOWN. I THINK EVEN THE SANTO HOUSING AUTHORITY HAS ONE, UH, MUCH FURTHER DOWN. BUT, UM, AND I THINK ONE OF THE UNIQUE SITUATIONS THAT THIS, UH, APPLICANT WOULD FIND THEMSELVES IN IS ONE WHERE THEY WOULD THEN BE DEFINING WHAT THE VOCABULARY WOULD BECOME, BECAUSE IT, THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF, UH, DEMOLITION IN THE ENVIRONMENT, SO THERE'S NOT A WHOLE LOT THERE. I THINK THE, UH, UH, LUMBER 54 IS ACROSS THE STREET, SO IT ALMOST PRESENTS ITSELF AS AN INDUSTRIAL AREA, AS IT BACKS ITSELF UP INTO THE, INTO THE RIVER. SO I, I'M, I'M, UH, REALLY PLEASED TO SEE POSITIVE DEVELOPMENT. UH, COREY, THIS IS FOR CONCEPTUAL, OR IT'S JUST FOR CONCEPTUAL, RIGHT? CORRECT. UH, I, WELL, IF, IF THERE AREN'T ANY OTHER COMMENTS, I, I WOULD MAKE A MOTION TO, UH, UH, ACCEPT THIS, UH, APPLICATION AS SUBMITTED WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATION COMMISSIONER, UM, [03:30:01] ON THE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS ASSOCIATED WITH THE SITE PLAN ITEMS ONE, TWO, AND THREE. UH, THE FIRST ONE BEING THE SETBACK, THE SECOND ONE BEING THE ORIENTATION OF THE PARKING ALONG THE STREET, THE THIRD ONE BEING THE, THE REQUIRED 20 FOOT DRIVE AISLE FOR SAFETY REASONS. UM, I, I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT, THAT THOSE BE EXCLUDED. I THINK THE SETBACK AS PROPOSED IS, IS CONSISTENT WITH THE WAY THE SITE HAS BEEN UTILIZED AND ON AS IT EXISTS ON THE BEND. I DON'T THINK IT'S COMING IN FRONT OF, OR JUST TAKING AWAY FROM THE PROPERTY, THE NORTHWEST TO THE PROPERTIES, TO THE NORTHWEST, AND, UH, TRYING TO FLIP SOME OF THOSE DRIVES TO RIVERSIDE DOESN'T MAKE A WHOLE LOT OF SENSE TO ME. I THINK THE WAY THAT IT'S PROPOSED, UM, MAKES SENSE. AND OF COURSE, THE 20 FOOT DRIVE AISLE MAKES SENSE TO ME AS WELL. WELL, I, I, UH, APPRECIATE YOU CLARIFYING THAT. UM, COMMISSIONER FISH AND, AND I, UH, WOULD PROPOSE AS, UH, AMENDED BY A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT FROM COMMISSIONER FISH EXCLUDING ONE I, UH, ITEMS ONE, TWO, AND THREE. YOU, YOU, ARE YOU, UH, UM, RECOMMENDING THE EXCLUSION OF FOUR AS WELL? COMMISSIONER FISHER? I DON'T THINK YOU ARE RIGHT. I BELIEVE ITEMS ONE, TWO, AND THREE ARE WHAT THE APPLICANT WERE. ONE, TWO, AND THREE. YES. SO EXCLUDING SAME MOTION EXCLUDING RECOMMENDATION ITEMS ONE, TWO, AND THREE. SECOND. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER, WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? HAVE A ROLL CALL PLEASE. FERNANDEZ. AYE. FISH? AYE. GIBBS? AYE. VELAZQUEZ. AYE. CARPENTER. AYE GROUP. AYE THAT, SIR? AYE. MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU. UM, NEXT [27. 20-6830 Address/Description: 523 SHOOK AVE HDRC Case No.: 2020-487 Historic District Name: Monte Vista Applicant: Aaron Ely/CS CROSS Request: Window replacement City Council Dist.: 1 ] WE HAVE ITEM 27. RACHEL, ARE YOU THERE? YES. CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES, MA'AM. OKAY. AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 27 H C R C, CASE NUMBER 2020 DASH 4 87 5 23 SHOOK. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO REPLACE TWO WINDOW UNITS WITH ALUMINUM CLOUD. WOOD WINDOWS STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL BASED ON FINDINGS. A THROUGH C STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE APPLICANT REPAIR THE EXISTING WINDOWS IN PLACE. IF THE H C R C FINDS THE WINDOW REPLACEMENT, APPROPRIATE STAFF RECOMMENDS THE FOLLOWING STIPULATION, ONE THAT THE APPLICANT REPLACES THE EXISTING WINDOWS WITH A FULLY WOOD WINDOW PRODUCT THAT MEETS STAFF STANDARD WINDOW SPECIFICATIONS AND SUBMITS UPDATED SPECIFICATIONS TO STAFF FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL. AND I HAVE THE APPLICANT, AARON ELY ON THE LINE. UH, AARON, WOULD YOU LIKE TO BRIEFLY DESCRIBE YOUR REQUEST? SURE. UH, GOOD EVENING, UH, COMMISSIONERS, UM, AGAIN, I WORK, I WORK WITH A, UH, HOME REMODELING FIRM, UH, HERE IN SAN ANTONIO. AND THIS IS A CLIENT OF OURS. UM, WE, UH, STOP BY THEIR HOUSE, UH, ACTUALLY A FEW MONTHS AGO. UM, AND WHEN THEY MOVED IN, A PILLOW WINDOW WAS ALREADY INSTALLED, UH, IN THE KITCHEN, UH, WHICH IS WHERE, UH, THESE WINDOWS ARE LOCATED. AND SO, UM, MUCH WITH, UH, MOST OF OUR PROJECTS, WE TRY TO BE CONSISTENT, UM, THROUGHOUT THE, THE ROOMS AND THE SPACES AND KEEPING EVERYTHING THE SAME, OBVIOUSLY WITH THE WINDOWS. UM, THE, THE MAIN WINDOW, UH, THAT'S THE PROBLEM HAS THE BOTTOM RAIL, UM, THAT'S NEARLY COMPLETELY DETACHED FROM THE WINDOW. UM, UH, YOU CAN ACTUALLY WALK UP TO IT OUTSIDE AND SEE, UH, RIGHT THROUGH BETWEEN THE GLASS AND THE RAIL AS IT AS IT STANDS RIGHT NOW. UM, SO WE WOULD, UH, MOST CERTAINLY, UH, PREFER TO REPLACE THAT. UM, I AM CERTAINLY WILLING TO, UH, CHANGE THE REQUEST FROM THE ALUMINUM CLAD WINDOW TO, UH, A WOODEN ONE, UM, AS REQUESTED. UM, WE CERTAINLY PREFER ALUMINUM CLAD JUST BECAUSE, UH, IT, IT OFFERS A, A MAINTENANCE FREE SOLUTION FOR OUR CLIENTS, UM, FOR, FOR YEARS DOWN THE ROAD. AND, AND WE DON'T END UP WITH WINDOWS THAT ARE PAINTED SHUT. UM, THAT CAN BE FRUSTRATING FOR THEM, BUT, UH, WE CAN, WE CAN CERTAINLY MAKE THAT ACCOMMODATION BY CHANGING THE ALUMINUM CLAD TO WOOD. UM, BUT I DID WANT TO, UH, JUST CONFIRM, UM, A COUPLE THINGS WITH THE, UH, RECOMMENDATION THAT WAS MADE. UM, I NOTICED THAT IT SAID THAT THE WINDOWS SHOULD FEATURE AN INSET OF TWO INCHES WITHIN THE FACADES, AND SHOULD FEATURE PROFILES FOUND HISTORICALLY WITHIN THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY, UM, THE MEETING RAILS NO TALLER THAN ONE AND A QUARTER INCHES AND STYLES NO WIDER THAN TWO AND, UH, AND A QUARTER INCHES WIDE. [03:35:01] UM, THE, THE WINDOWS THAT WE'RE TRYING TO MATCH TO THAT WAS ALREADY INSTALLED, UM, BEFORE THE CLIENT EVEN MOVED IN AGAIN, WAS A PILLOW WINDOW, WHICH WE'VE, UH, DONE OUR BEST TO MATCH WITH WHAT PELLA CURRENTLY OFFERS. UM, WE ARE WITHIN THE GUIDELINES FOR THE, UM, THE STYLES AS THEY'RE ONLY, UH, AN INCH AND SEVEN 16TH WIDE. UM, SO WELL WITHIN THAT, UM, TWO AND A QUARTER INCH LIMITATION. HOWEVER, THE MEETING RAILS, UM, LOOK FROM WHAT I CAN SEE IN THE SPECIFICATIONS, UM, THAT PELLA HAS AVAILABLE, THE MEETING RAILS HAVE A HEIGHT OF ONE AND SEVEN 16TH. SO AT LEAST WITH VS WE'RE THREE SIXTEENTHS OF AN INCH TOO TALL, UM, OF THE MEETING RAIL. BUT I GUESS WHAT'S PERHAPS THE, THE LARGER ISSUE WOULD BE THE TWO INCHES, UM, OF, OF THE INSET. UM, LOOKING AT THE SPECS FOR THE NEW WINDOWS THAT PELLA OFFERS, UM, THERE REALLY ONLY APPEARS TO BE ABOUT AN INCH FROM THE OUTSIDE SURFACE OF THE BRICK MOLD, UM, TO THE, THE OUTERMOST SURFACE OF THE UPPER SASH. UM, HOWEVER, IN LOOKING AT THE WINDOWS THAT ARE CURRENTLY PRESENT THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE HOME, THIS IS ESSENTIALLY HOW THOSE ARE AS WELL. UM, AND THAT, THAT UPPER SASH DOES NOT HAVE A TWO INCH CLEARANCE BETWEEN, UM, ITS OUTERMOST SURFACE AND THE, THE BRICK MOLD AS WELL. UM, SO I, UH, WOULD REQUEST THAT WE WOULD BE WILLING TO MAKE THAT, UH, ACCOMMODATION, UM, SO THAT WE CAN KEEP THE WINDOWS CONSISTENT IN THE KITCHEN, UM, WITH THE ONE THAT IS ALREADY THERE AND WAS, UM, I, FROM WHAT I CAN TELL, IS NO MORE THAN A DECADE OLD AND, AND IS WORKING FINE, UM, UH, TO, TO KEEP THOSE CONSISTENT, UM, AND WAVE THAT TWO INCH, UH, UH, REQUIREMENT, UM, SO THAT WE CAN KEEP THAT CONSISTENCY OF THIS WINDOW THROUGHOUT ALL THE REST OF THEM THROUGHOUT THE HOUSE. THIS IS COMMISSIONER FISH. I, I THINK THE, THAT IF WE APPROVE A WINDOW REPLACEMENT, THE, THAT THE REPLACEMENT MATCH, ITS EXISTING, ITS CURRENT POSITION, MEANING WE'RE NOT GONNA ASK YOU TO RECESS IT FURTHER THAN IT ALREADY IS IN ITS EXISTING CONDITION. UM, I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THE OTHER WINDOWS THAT WERE REPLACED. WHAT ARE THE MATERIAL, WHAT'S THE EX FINISHED MATERIAL ON THOSE EXTER EXTERIOR WINDOWS HAVE BEEN REPLACED? ARE THEY WOOD OR ARE THEY ALUMINUM? CLA THE, SORRY, COULD YOU REPEAT THAT ONE MORE TIME? I THINK SO THE OTHER 1, 1 1 PILLOW WINDOW IN THE KITCHEN, THE ONE THAT WAS INSTALLED 10 YEARS AGO, THE ONE THAT WAS INSTALLED 10 YEARS AGO, IS THAT WOOD OR ALUMINUM CLAD? IT? IT IS WOOD. IT'S WOOD. IS THERE NOT A PICTURE OF THAT WINDOW? UM, YEAH. RACHEL, DO YOU KNOW IF WE HAVE A, A SLIDE WITH THAT? NO, I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THERE IS A PHOTO IN THE EXHIBITS OF THAT WINDOW, BUT I UNDERSTAND THAT THIS WINDOW THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT WOULD BE IN THE KITCHEN. SO THE OTHER WINDOW, THE NEWER WINDOW IS WHERE TO THIS WINDOW. SO WITHIN THE KITCHEN, UM, ESSENTIALLY IF YOU, IF YOU WERE TO WALK INTO THE KITCHEN, THE, THE WINDOW THAT IS SEVERELY DAMAGED IS JUST TO THE RIGHT AND IS WHAT IS FACING THE STREET. UM, THE WINDOW THAT WAS, UH, RE UH, REPLACED A FEW YEARS BACK, THAT IS NOW PELLA WOULD BE THE ONE THAT IS DIRECTLY IN FRONT OF YOU. THERE IS ALSO A DOUBLE UNIT, UM, WHICH IS DIRECTLY OVER THE SINK. UM, THERE REALLY ISN'T ANY ISSUE WITH THOSE TWO. UM, WE WERE SIMPLY GOING TO REPLACE THOSE AGAIN FOR CONSISTENCY. UM, IF WE WERE GOING TO HAVE THE OLD PELLA AND THE CENTER OF THE ROOM AND THE NEW PILLOW WINDOW OFF TO THE RIGHT, UM, THOSE WOULD HAVE A MUCH DIFFERENT VIEWING, ESPECIALLY THROUGH THE GLASS. UM, IN CONTRAST TO THE TWO ORIGINAL ONES THAT WOULD BE OVER THE SINK, UM, THAT WOULD, YOU WOULD BE ABLE TO SEE THAT HISTORIC, UH, KIND OF, UH, WAVE THROUGH THROUGH THE GLASS OF THAT. I GUESS MY DILEMMA HERE COMES TO IT SOON, AND IT IS ONLY BECAUSE OF ONE WINDOW THAT WAS INSTALLED 10 YEARS AGO. I DON'T SEE THAT, UM, THE WINDOW THAT NEEDS THE REPAIR IS SUCH IN A BAD SHAPE THAT IT QUALIFY REPLACEMENT AS COMPARED TO OTHER, UM, APPLICATIONS THAT WE'VE SEEN. SO I FEEL LIKE, UM, I THINK WE HAVE TO BE CONSISTENT WITH WHAT WE HAVE APPROVED BEFORE. THIS IS COMMISSIONER CARPENTER. I CONCUR WITH THAT. IF, IF THE WINDOW THAT'S, UH, BEING PROPOSED TO BE REPLACED IS, UH, THE ONE THAT'S ON PAGE NUMBER 14, IT'S ON YOUR SCREEN RIGHT NOW, UH, IT LOOKS LIKE THEN YOU MAY BE DOING [03:40:01] SOME SELECTIVE, UH, MEMBER REPAIR OR JUST, UH, RE GLUING, UH, REMOVING SOME ROTTED PIECES, BUT, UH, 75% OF THAT WINDOW CAN BE, UH, REHABILITATED AND REMOVED. SO I DON'T SEE WHY WE'D, UH, BE COMPELLED TO THROW OUT THE BABY WITH THE BATH WATER BECAUSE OF ONE WINDOW. MRS. CHAIRMAN FETZER. AND I WOULD AGREE WITH THAT. IT LOOKS TO ME LIKE, UM, YES, THERE'S SOME WORK TO BE DONE ON THIS WINDOW, BUT IT'S, UH, THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE SASH LOOKS TO BE INTACT, UM, AND CAN BE REPAIRED. SO THIS COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, UM, I SUPPORT STAFF'S FINDINGS IN THIS AND, UH, APPROVE, UH, FOR NOT APPROVING THE APPLICATION BASED UPON STAFF'S FINDINGS. THIS IS COMMISSIONER FISH. I SECOND. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. MAY WE HAVE A ROLL CALL PLEASE? FERNANDEZ? AYE. FISH? AYE. GIBBS. AYE. VELAZQUEZ AYE. CARPENTER? AYE. GROUP. AYE. AYE. MOTION GARY'S. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. [28. 20-6871 Address/Description: 732 N PINE ST HDRC Case No.: 2020-445 Historic District Name: Dignowity Hill Applicant: John Perez/Castilla's Construction Request: Demolition of rear accessory structure and construction of a rear residential structure City Council Dist.: 2 ] ADAM. 28 EDWARD. AGENDA ITEM, AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 28 H D R C, CASE NUMBER 20 24 45 7 32 NORTH PINE STREET. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO DEMOLISH THE HISTORIC REAR ACCESSORY STRUCTURE AT THE REAR OF 7 32 NORTH PINE, WHICH FEATURES ACCESS TO BURNETT STREET. THE APPLICANT'S REQUESTING CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A REPLACEMENT STRUCTURE FOR WHICH THE APPLICANT HAS PROPOSED TWO OPTIONS, A ONE STORY RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE, AND A TWO STORY RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE. STAFF FINDS THAT THE APPLICANT HAS MADE A CASE FOR AN UNREASONABLE ECONOMIC HARDSHIP AND RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE DEMOLITION OF THE REAR ACCESSORY STRUCTURE WITH THE FOLLOWING STIPULATION THAT THE APPLICANT SUBMIT A SALVAGE PLAN, NOTING THE REUSE OF MATERIALS FROM THE HISTORIC ACCESSORY STRUCTURE THAT ARE NOT BE ON REPAIR. STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED NEW CONSTRUCTION AT THIS TIME. WHILE STAFF FINDS THE PROPOSED MASSING OF THE ONE STORY STRUCTURE TO BE APPROPRIATE, STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE STRUCTURE FEATURE A SETBACK THAT IS GREATER THAN THE ADJACENT HISTORIC SETBACK STRUCTURE SETBACKS ON NETTE. ADDITIONALLY, STAFF RECOMMENDS THE FOLLOWING ITEMS BE ADDRESSED PRIOR TO RECEIVING A RECOMMENDATION FOR CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL. ONE, THAT THE APPLICANT CONFIRMED THE PROPOSED FOUNDATION HEIGHTS AND ADHERED TO THE GUIDELINES. TWO, THAT THE APPLICANT INSTALL WINDOWS WITH PROPORTIONS THAT ARE CONSISTENT WITH THOSE FOUND HISTORICALLY IN THE DISTRICT. THREE, THAT THE APPLICANT CONFIRMED CONSISTENCY WITH THE GUIDELINES IN REGARDS TO LOT COVERAGE. STIPULATION FOUR IS IN REGARDS TO STAFF STANDING SCENE, METAL, ROOF AND SIDING SPECIFICATIONS. UH, FIVE THAT THE APPLICANT HAS INSTALL WINDOWS THAT ARE CONSISTENT WITH STAFF STANDARDS FOR WINDOWS AND NEW CONSTRUCTION. SIX, THAT THE APPLICANT SUBMIT A SITE PLAN NOTING THE MODIFIED CURB CUT AND DRIVEWAY IN RELATIONSHIP TO THE PROPOSED NEW CONSTRUCTION. AND SEVEN, THAT A FRONT WALKWAY, WALKWAY BE INSTALLED AND A LANDSCAPING PLAN BE DEVELOPED IS NOTED IN FINDING V AND W. ADDITIONALLY, ALL MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT SHOULD BE SCREENED, IS NOTED IN FINDING X. I HAVE THE APPLICANT, UH, MR. JOHN PAUL PEREZ ON THE PHONE. UH, GOOD EVENING. UH, APPRECIATE THE, UH, APPRECIATE THE TIME THAT YOU GUYS HAVE SET ASIDE FOR ME THIS EVENING. UM, EDWARD, DO YOU HAVE ANY OF MY FILES? DO YOU HAVE THE APPLICATION THAT I SUBMITTED AND THE CONCEPTUAL DRAWINGS? YES, SIR. CURRENTLY ON THE SCREEN WE HAVE, UM, YOUR COVER SHEET THAT NOTES THE TWO STORY PROPOSED STRUCTURE. UM, IF YOU'RE, UH, VIEWING ON THE INTERNET, YOU'LL SEE A SLIGHT DELAY. OKAY. ALRIGHT. HERE, IT'S POPPING UP. OKAY, I SEE IT. NOW. IF, IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND, IF YOU COULD JUST GO SCROLL UP TO, UH, 20. YEAH, THAT ONE. THAT'S FINE RIGHT THERE. THAT ONE THAT YOU, YOU WERE JUST ON. IS IT? I CAN BARELY MAKE IT OUT. 22. THAT'S FINE. WE CAN GO, WE CAN GO WITH THAT. OKAY. SO AGAIN, I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME. UM, THE, THE, THE PROPERTY IS, UH, LOCATED AT 7 32 NORTH PINE AND THAT'S, UM, IDENTIFIED THERE ON THE, UH, THE TOP RIGHT. IT'S A TWO STORY STRUCTURE. UM, AND IF YOU, IF YOU, UH, PAN TO THE, TO THE LEFT OF THAT SCREEN, YOU'LL SEE A REPLACEMENT STRUCTURE THAT YOU CONTINUE ON. YOU'LL SEE ANOTHER MASSING MODEL OF AN EXISTING ONE STORY. UM, THE, THE PROJECT [03:45:01] FOR THE REPLACEMENT, UM, UH, STRUCTURE CURRENTLY HAS A, UH, DETACHED GARAGE THAT IS IN, UH, A DISREPAIR. IF YOU COULD GO TO, UH, IMAGE, UM, IT'S ONE OF THE FIRST IMAGES. IF YOU GO, IF YOU GO DOWN, I'M SORRY, YOU NEED, YOU NEED TO GO BACK UP. SLIDE 24 A DELAY. SLIDE 24. 24, CORRECT. THERE YOU GO. 24. THANK YOU. OKAY, WE'RE LOOKING AT IT NOW. OKAY. I DON'T SEE IT, BUT I'LL TAKE YOUR WORD FOR IT. UH, 24 SAY. SO WHAT YOU HAVE THERE IS, UH, YOU HAVE THE FRONT ELEVATION OF THAT DETACHED GARAGE, UM, AND THAT'S FACING, UH, BURNETT STREET. AND SO WE DID AN ANALYSIS ON THE GARAGE AND WE WE'RE FINDING THAT THERE'S A LOT OF, UH, UH, WATER DAMAGE, UM, THAT HAS, UH, CAUSED, UH, THE, THE SEAL PLATE AND THE, UH, THE VENEER, THE EXISTING VENEER TO BE, UM, UH, WATER DAMAGE. AND THAT GOES, UH, THAT, THAT CONDITION EXISTS THROUGHOUT THE, UH, THE PERIMETER OF THE BUILDING AS WELL AS MR. UH, MR. PEREZ, UH, STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE DEMOLITION, UH, WITH THE STIPULATION THAT YOU SALVAGE. SO, UH, MAYBE IF YOU'D LIKE TO ADDRESS THE NEW CONSTRUCTION, UM, THAT MAY BE A LITTLE MORE, UH, CERTAINLY MAYBE MORE EFFICIENT OF OUR TIME. CERTAINLY. THANK YOU. UH, SO WE CAN GO TO THE, BACK TO THE CONCEPTUALS. DO YOU WANT TO GO TO, UH, THE SITE PLAN? YES. WE'LL START OFF ON THE SITE PLAN. UH, AND I BELIEVE THAT, UM, WE, IF YOU COULD GO ACTUALLY, UH, TO THE, UH, THE SITE PLAN THAT SHOWS BOTH, UM, SORRY, LET ME FIND THE PAGE NUMBER. IT SHOWS THE EXISTING AND PROPOSED ON THE SAME SHEET. SORRY, I'LL GET THE PAGE NUMBER FOR YOU. I BELIEVE IT'S 23 SHEET. 23. THANK YOU. SO THERE'S SOME STIPULATIONS, UM, WITH THE DEMOLITION, UH, WITH THE NEW CONSTRUCTION AND THOSE STIPULATE, ONE OF THE STIPULATIONS THAT STOOD OUT TO ME WAS SETBACK. UM, THERE'S A, THERE'S CURRENTLY WE HAVE THE, THE REAR OF THE, UM, OF THE REPLACEMENT DWELLING IN LINE WITH THE EXISTING ONE STORY BUILDING. AND THE, UM, THE FRONT OF THE DWELLING IS IN LINE WITH THE, UH, THE ONE STORY BUILDING ON BURNETT AS WELL. NOW, I THINK THERE WAS SOME STIPULATIONS WHERE YOU PREFERRED US TO SET, SET BACK THAT AR AR REAR SETBACK ON THE REPLACEMENT STRUCTURE. IF, IF WE WERE TO DO THAT, THAT WOULD, UM, ENCROACH IN THE, THE NEW SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE, UH, THE DWELLING. SO WE'RE GONNA TAKE A LOOK AT THAT. WE HAVEN'T DOVE INTO THAT PROGRAM, UH, PROGRAMMATICALLY, BUT, UH, WE CAN CERTAINLY DO THAT. UH, AND MR. MR. PEREZ, LEMME CLARIFY A LITTLE BIT. THAT WAS ACTUALLY IN REGARDS TO THE FRONT SETBACK. UH, SO, UH, WE, IF YOU DON'T MIND, IF YOU COULD GO TO PAGE 49, UM, EITHER PAGE 49 OR 49 WILL WORK. UH, SO THE WAY THE SETBACK IS DRAWN ON PAGE 49 SHOWS THE FRONT SETBACK EXCEEDING THAT OF THE ADJACENT ONE STORY STRUCTURE AS WELL AS THE SIDE SETBACK OF THE ADJACENT TWO STORY STRUCTURE, WHICH IS ADDRESSED IN NORTH PINE STREET. UH, SO STAFF SPECIFICALLY IS ASKING FOR THE SETBACK OF THE REPLACEMENT STRUCTURE, UH, TO BE, UH, GREATER THAN THOSE FOUND HISTORICALLY ON BURNETT STREET. UM, AND THEN SPECIFICALLY IN REGARDS TO THE REPLACEMENT STRUCTURE, STAFF FINDS THE ONE STORY STRUCTURE, UH, TO BE MOST APPROPRIATE. SO, UM, IF YOU MAYBE WANT TO, UH, SPEAK TO THE MASSING, UH, AND IF , CAN I SAY SOMETHING FOR TIME CONSTRAINT? THIS IS COMMISSIONER GRU. I, I AGREE WITH THE DEMOLITION. UM, I THINK THIS IS A BIG PROJECT TO BE IN A REVIEW RIGHT NOW, OF COURSE, BUT I ALSO WANT THE APPLICANT TO BE ABLE TO MOVE FORWARD. I WOULD ALSO BE AGREEING WITH STAFF ON THE ONE STORY, BUT I WOULD PROBABLY MOVE THIS TO A D R C 'CAUSE THERE HASN'T BEEN A D R C, CORRECT? THERE'S A LOT OF STIPULATIONS THAT MAYBE THE APPLICANT COULD TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION AND, UM, AND, AND THEN HAVE A, A GOOD D R C DISCUSSION ON THE TWO OPTIONS. I'LL, I'LL SEND CHAIRMAN FETZER, THIS IS CHAIRMAN FETZER AND I WOULD AGREE WITH THAT AND I WOULD ASK THE APPLICANT TO WORK WITH O H P BECAUSE I THINK THAT REAR SETBACK, UH, IS GONNA BE AN ISSUE UNLESS YOU GO FOR A VARIANCE BECAUSE YOU'RE NOT USING AN EXISTING [03:50:01] SLAB. SO, UH, ANY NEW CONSTRUCTION ON A SIDE IS GONNA REQUIRE THAT FIVE FOOT SETBACK ON THE, UH, ON THE REPLACEMENT DWELLING. WOULD IT BE OKAY WITH YOU CHAIRMAN THAT WE, UH, DO A MOTION? CERTAINLY. SO MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM ONE WITH STAFF STIPULATION, WHICH IS THE DEMOLITION, AND THEN MOTION TO MOVE, UH, ITEM NUMBER TWO, WHICH IS THE PROPOSAL OF THE NEW CONSTRUCTION TO D R C. I'LL SECOND IT. VELASQUEZ SECOND FERNANDEZ. WE HAVE A MOTION. A SECOND MAY HAVE A ROLL CALL PLEASE. FERNANDEZ? AYE. FISH? AYE. GIBBS? AYE. VELASQUEZ. AYE. CARPENTER? AYE. GROUP. ZER. NAY. OKAY. MOTION GOES. THE D R C, UM, MOTION PASSES. 7 23. WE WERE GONNA BREAK AT SEVEN 30. I BELIEVE Y'ALL HAVE NOTIFIED THE LAST THREE APPLICANTS THAT WE WILL MOVE THEM TO THE NEXT AGENDA. IS THAT CORRECT? WE HAVE. OKAY. DO, UH, ALMA DO WE NEED TO, UM, MAKE CONTINUANCE MOTIONS ON THOSE CASES OR CAN WE DO ONE MOTION WITH ALL OF THOSE ITEMS LISTED? SO WOULD BE A CONTINUANCE FOR ITEMS 24, 29, 30 AND 31 31. THIS COMMISSIONER, COMMISSIONER [Items 24 & 29 - 31] CONTINUE ITEMS 24, 29, 30, AND 31 TO THE NEXT HEARING. COMMISSIONER FERNANDEZ SECOND. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND WE HAVE A ROLL CALL PLEASE. UH, WE CAN JUST DO A ALL AT ONCE. OKAY. UNMUTE, RAISE YOUR HAND AND SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. [Approval of HDRC Meeting Minutes November 4, 2020.] OKAY. NOW WE HAVE, DO WE HAVE MEETING MINUTES THIS TIME? YES, WE DO. FROM NOVEMBER 4TH. THIS IS COMMISSIONER FERNANDEZ. MOTION TO APPROVE MEETING MINUTES FROM MEETING FROM DATE, UH, NOVEMBER 4TH, SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? UNMUTE. RAISE YOUR HAND AND SAY AYE. AYE. A OPPOSED? MOTION TO ADJOURN. ADJOURN. THANK YOU EVERYONE. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH AND SORRY FOR THE DELAY ON TRAIL 'CAUSE OF MY POWER. THANK YOU, CHAIR. THANK YOU CORY. * 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.