* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting. [00:00:07] OKAY, JEFF, WE'RE LIVE. YES. I'D LIKE TO CALL TO ORDER THE HISTORIC AND DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION FOR WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 20, 20, 21. I HAVE A ROLL CALL, PLEASE. FERNANDEZ. [Roll Call] FERNANDEZ. SHE WAS HERE. OKAY. WE'LL COME BACK TO HER. UM, SHE'S, I THINK HER VIDEO'S WHERE SHE IS. FERNANDEZ, ARE YOU THERE? YES. SORRY. CONVENTION PROBLEM. HERE? YES. HERE GIBBS. HERE. VELASQUEZ. HERE. AREOLA. HERE. CARPENTER. HERE. RUBE. HERE. BOWMAN BETTS. HERE. LAO HERE. UM, BEFORE WE GET STARTED, WE DO HAVE A BRIEF ANNOUNCEMENT REGARDING TRANSLATION SERVICES FOR THE MEETING. GONNA THANK YOU. WE PLEASE TO, EXCUSE ME. CAN WE PLEASE HAVE THE CHAIRMAN'S STATEMENT? YES. THE HISTORIC AND [Chairman’s Statement] DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION IS AN ADVISORY BOARD APPOINTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL. I'M JEFFREY FETZER, CHAIRMAN AND 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 IN HISTORIC DISTRICTS FOR LANDMARKS ON CITY PROPERTY AND THE RIVER IMPROVEMENT OVERLAY. AND FOR DEMOLITIONS. AND CONSIDERING WHETHER TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL OF AN APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS, THE COMMISSION SHALL BE GUIDED BY THE CITY'S UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AND DESIGN GUIDELINES AND STANDARDS THAT HAVE BEEN ADOPTED BY CITY COUNCIL. AN 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 THAT 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 TR 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. ACA 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. NO WORK OF ANY TYPE IS TO BE STARTED WITHOUT OBTAINING THE APPROPRIATE CITY PERMITS. AFTER A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS HAS BEEN ISSUED BY THE OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION, I WOULD LIKE TO THANK, UH, SHANNON MILLER AND ALL OF THE O H P STAFF FOR ALL OF THE WORK THAT THEY CONTINUE TO DO OVER THE, THE LAST MONTH AND GETTING US TO, UH, THIS NEW 2021 CALENDAR FOR THE COMMISSION. AT THIS TIME, I WILL ASK O H P STAFF TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR TODAY'S MEETING. THANK YOU. UM, BEFORE WE GET STARTED WITH THE, THE CASE LIST, UM, WE DO HAVE THE FIRST ORDER [1. 21-1206 Annual Election of Officers] OF BUSINESS, WHICH IS THE ELECTION OF OFFICERS, UH, FOR 2021. UM, SO, UH, CHAIRMAN FETZER AND VICE-CHAIRMAN CARPENTER, UM, ARE BOTH ELIGIBLE TO SERVE ADDITIONAL TERMS JUST FOR YOUR INFORMATION. UM, AND NOW WE'LL OPEN THE FLOOR, UM, FOR NOMINATIONS FOR, UH, CHAIR. THIS IS, UH, MR. VELASQUEZ. YES. I'D LIKE TO NOMINATE CHAIRMAN FETZER TO CONTINUE AS CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR CARPENTER TO CONTINUE AS, UH, VICE CHAIR FOR THE YEAR 2021. IF THERE'S A SECOND, WE CAN DO BOTH WITH ONE MOTION. MR. GI. I SECOND. OKAY. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSE SAY NAYYY. MOTION CARRIES. SO, CONGRATULATIONS CHAIRMAN FETZER AND [00:05:01] VICE-CHAIRMAN CARPENTER, YOU'RE, YOU'RE IN IT FOR THE LONG HAUL. UM, SO CASE LIST IS ON THE SCREEN. AS YOU CAN SEE, WE HAVE, UH, A LARGE NUMBER OF CASES ON TODAY'S AGENDA. UM, LET'S ACTUALLY LOOK AT THE ITEMS IN RED JUST FOR ANNOUNCEMENTS. UM, WE DO HAVE SOME CHANGES TO THE AGENDA. ITEMS 36 THROUGH, LET'S GET THOSE ON THE SCREEN. YEAH. ITEMS 36 THROUGH 39. UM, ACTUALLY ITEMS 36 THROUGH 38 HAVE BEEN WITHDRAWN. UM, ITEMS 39 AND 42 HAVE BEEN POSTPONED AND WILL NOT BE HEARD TODAY. UM, WE DID RECEIVE COMMENTS. UM, WE DO ANTICIPATE THAT THERE WILL BE CHANGES TO THIS APPLICATION. SO, UM, PEOPLE WHO PROVIDED COMMENT WILL HAVE ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITY TO UPDATE THEIR COMMENTS AS THESE ARE, UH, PLACED ON FUTURE AGENDAS. UM, SO NOW LET'S TAKE A LOOK AT THE CONSENT AGENDA. LET'S ZOOM OUT A LITTLE BIT SO THAT WE CAN SEE THE FULL LIST. UM, SO WE DO HAVE, UH, ONE RECUSAL FOR ITEM 27. SO LET'S GO AHEAD. IT'S HIGHLIGHTED IN YELLOW, UM, THAT WILL BE HEARD INDIVIDUALLY SO THAT WE CAN HAVE ALL COMMISSIONERS VOTE ON CONSENT ITEMS. UM, SO I NOW, NOW WILL START READING [Public Comments] PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED FOR ITEMS ON CONSENT. UM, SO THE FIRST IS ITEM NUMBER 3, 3 19 DELAWARE. THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY OF SAN ANTONIO CONTINUES TO OBJECT TO THE PROPOSED ADDITIONS TO, IN DELAWARE, NOT RELATE TO THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD AND ARE INAPPROPRIATE AND PATTERN, FORM IMMATERIALS. WHILE THERE ARE SOME OTHER SHIPPING CONTAINER STRUCTURES IN THE DISTRICT, IT'S NOT APPROPRIATE TO IMITATE STRUCTURES THAT ARE EXCEPTIONS TO THE DISTRICT'S CHARACTER AND AMBIANCE. MOREOVER, THE EXISTENCE OF SUCH EXCEPTIONS CANNOT BE CONSIDERED PRECEDENT AS EACH STRUCTURE IS DISTINCT AND JUDGE AS EACH STRUCTURE IN A DISTRICT IS JUDGED, NOT BY PRECEDENT, BY BY ITS UNIQUE HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE AND CONTEXT. UM, THE NEXT COMMENTS ARE FOR ITEM NUMBER FIVE. UM, THE KING WILLIAM ASSOCIATION ARCHITECTURAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE REVIEWED THIS PROJECT AND HAVE CONCERNS WITH THE PROXIMITY OF THE RAMP AND DECK TO THE EXISTING NARROW SIDEWALK. PARKED VEHICLE BUMPERS, OVERHANG THE SIDEWALK AND CONSTRUCT PASSAGE FOR PEDESTRIANS ON THE SIDEWALK. AT THIS LOCATION, WE RE REQUEST THAT THE APPLICANT CONSIDER A MULTIPLE OF ALTERNATIVES TO THE CURRENT PROPOSAL. OPTION ONE, USE THE MAIN ENTRANCE FOR ACCESSIBLE DOOR AND CONSTRUCT A NEW RAMP ON THE PLAN WEST OF THE MAIN ENTRANCE. UM, THE DECK WILL REMAIN WELL SHOWN, BUT REDUCED IN DEPTH AND TO INCREASE THE WIDTH OF THE SIDEWALK, USABLE AREA OF THE DECK WILL BE INCREASED IN THIS OPTION. AND OPTION TWO, USE THE MAIN ENTRANCE FOR THE ACCESSIBLE DOOR REVERSE SWING AND SHIFT THE NEW RAMP TO RUN ALONG THE EXISTING NORTH WALL. ELIMINATE ELIMINATING THE NEW DOOR PROPOSED ON THE NORTH WALL. ALSO REDUCE THE DEPTH OF THE DECK TO INCREASE THE WIDTH OF THE SIDEWALK. USABLE AREA OF THE DECK WILL IN WILL BE DECREASED. IN THIS OPTION, WE CONCUR WITH STAFF IN REQUESTING RAILING DETAILS TO ENSURE THAT THE DESIGN IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE STYLE OF THE BUILDING. UM, THE NEXT COMMENTS ARE FOR ITEM NUMBER EIGHT, UM, 8 31 LAMAR, WE DO NOT SUPPORT O HP'S RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THIS METAL FENCE BUILT PRIOR TO A C O A PER THE INVESTIGATION REPORT OF NOVEMBER 16TH, 2020 PER O H P AND A DECEMBER, 2017 RECOMMENDATION TO DENY AN IDENTICAL FENCE CATTLE PANEL FENCE THAT FEATURES METAL POSTS AND RAILS IS A FENCING DETAIL COMMONLY FOUND ON COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL PROPERTIES. THE GUIDELINES DO NOT OFFER CONDITIONAL DESIGNS OR MATERIALS FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION OR VACANT LOTS. UH, THE NEXT COMMENTS ARE FOR ITEM 11, UM, AND WE HAVE, OH, NEVERMIND. UM, THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY OF SAN ANTONIO SUPPORTS A FINDING OF THE SOURCE SIGNIFICANCES FOR THE 1926 SAMUEL AIR LAKE FILLING STATION AT 26 0 2 NORTH FLORES. THIS BUILDING MEETS CRITERIA SIX 11 AND 13 FOR LANDMARK DESIGNATION. IT RETAINS MANY CHARACTER DIVINING FEATURES, EMBODIES THE VITAL ROLE OF GUESTS OF THE GASOLINE INDUSTRY IN THE LOCAL ECONOMY. THE STATION ALSO RELATES TO A LANDMARK SISTER STATION AT 6 0 1 NORTH ALAMO THROUGH ITS 1927, TIES TO THE WITHERSPOON OIL COMPANY. THE STATION SUBSEQUENT USE USES AS A CONVENIENCE STORE. ICE HOUSE, AND MUSIC VENUE DEMONSTRATE ITS VERSATILITY AS A CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE WITH AN ELIGIBLE WITHIN AN ELIGIBLE ALT VISTA HISTORIC DISTRICT. NOW WE'RE GONNA GO DOWN TO ITEM 22 1 18 LOTUS, THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY OF SAN ANTONIO SUPPORTS HISTORIC LANDMARK DESIGNATION FOR THE HOUSE AT ONE 18 LOTUS IN THE LAVACA DISTRICT. WE AGREE WITH THE OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION AND THE LAVACA NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION THAT THE HOME MEETS CRITERIA ONE FIVE AND 13 FOR DESIGNATION. THIS HOUSE IS ONE OF A QUARTET OF FULL VICTORIAN HOUSES BUILT ON THE BLOCK IN 1910, ALL OF WHICH SURVIVED DESPITE SOME ADDITIONS AND ALTERATIONS. IT AS A PRIME EXAMPLE OF THE STYLE FEATURING A CURVED PORCH, VICTORIAN GABLES AND DECORATIVE SHINGLES, FIBER SIDING, AND THE STANDING SCENE METAL ROOF. THIS BLOCK RETAINS THE MASS, THE VAST MAJORITY OF ITS ORIGINAL BUILDINGS IN THE HOUSE AT WELLINGTON LOTUS PROVIDES CONTINUITY AND CONTEXT TO ITS HISTORIC SURROUNDINGS. ITEM 24 12 0 6 WEST AGARITA. THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY CONCURS WITH THE O H P STAFF. RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL OF HISTORICAL LANDMARK DESIGNATION. 1206 WEST AGARITA MEETS CRITERIA THREE, FIVE AND 13 AS DETERMINED BY STAFF AND THE BEACON HILL AREA NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. WE ALSO FIND THAT THE STONE SHRINE LOCATED IN THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE FRONT YARD IS DISTINCTIVE VERNACULAR, IS A DISTINCTIVE [00:10:01] VERNACULAR IN CHARACTER DEFINING ELEMENT. FURTHER RESEARCH REGARDING THE DATES OF ITS CONSTRUCTION AND COMMISSION MAY, MAY ALSO SUPPORT BY FULFILLING CRITERION ONE. THIS HOUSE IS ONE OF TWO CRAFTSMAN STYLE HOMES BUILT FOR THE PROMINENT TASSOS FAMILY IN 1921, BOTH OF WHICH HAVE SURVIVED DESPITE SOME ADDITIONS AND ALTERATIONS. THAT IS A PROPER EXAMPLE OF A FRONT GABLE CRAFTSMAN RESIDENCE FEATURING A SEG SEPARATE GABLE ELEMENT WITH DURKIN HEAD OVER THE FULL WIDTH FRONT PORCH. THE TASSOS FAMILY WERE ACTIVE MEMBERS OF THE GREEK COMMUNITY IN SAN ANTONIO AND WE'RE THE PROPRIETORS OF MANY WELL-KNOWN RESTAURANTS IN THE CITY AND FOUNDERS OF ST. SOPHIA CHURCH. THIS HOME RETAINS MUCH OF ITS HISTORIC INTEGRITY AND TOGETHER WITH OTHER SURVIVING RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES ALONG WEST AGARITA BETWEEN BLANCA ROAD AND THE HIGHWAY REFLECT THE ORIGINAL PLATING FOR THIS NEIGHBORHOOD. WE SUPPORT ITS DESIGNATION. UM, AND NOW WE WILL PLAY THE VOICEMAIL RECEIPT FOR THIS CASE. SIMA COLVIN, 8 1 7 WEST MAGNOLIA AVENUE. ITEM NUMBER 21 DASH 11 56 12 0 6 WEST AGARITA. DEAR COMMISSIONERS, MY NAME IS SIMA COLVIN AND I'M THE CO-CHAIR OF THE BEACON HILL AREA NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION ZONING AND URBAN DESIGN COMMITTEE. THIS STATEMENT IS ON BEHALF OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. WE UNDERSTAND THAT THIS ITEM IS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA AND WE LOOK FORWARD TO ITS APPROVAL, BUT WE ALWAYS LIKE TO TAKE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SUPPORT THE WORK OF THE O H P AND THIS COMMISSION AND SHOW THAT WE ARE A COMMUNITY THAT IS ENGAGED AND DOING ITS PART. THIS IS THE SECOND TIME THAT THIS CASE WILL COME BEFORE YOU AND YOU WILL HAVE OUR PREVIOUS STATEMENT OF SUPPORT IN YOUR PACKET, AS WELL AS A RECENT STATEMENT THAT WAS SUBMITTED TO PROVIDE GREATER CONTEXT. ONCE AGAIN, WE WOULD LIKE TO THANK O H P STAFF FOR ITS DI DILIGENCE AND EXCELLENT COMMUNICATION IN ASSISTING US THROUGH THIS PROCESS. ALTHOUGH OURS IS A NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICT, WE HAVE ALWAYS SUPPORTED THE INDIVIDUAL DESIGNATION OF HOMES AND COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD BY REQUEST OF THE PROPERTY OWNER. IN THIS CASE, WE REGRET THE OWNER IS NOT IN SUPPORT, BUT WE CONTINUE TO COMMUNICATE WITH THEM AND OUR COUNCIL MEMBER IN THE HOPES THAT WE CAN MAKE THIS A MUTUALLY BENEFICIAL OUTCOME. WE APPRECIATE THAT THEY WITHDREW THEIR DEMOLITION REQUEST. HOWEVER, WHILE WE WERE RESEARCHING AND PREPARING OUR APPLICATION FOR THE NON-OWNER REQUEST FOR REVIEW, WE FOUND INFORMATION REGARDING THE TASSOS FAMILY WHO BUILT THE HOME IN THE EARLY TWENTIES THAT WE FELT SUPPORT PURSUING HISTORIC DESIGNATION. REGARDLESS, WE HAVE SPOKEN WITH CYNTHIA TASSOS PHILLIPS GRANDDAUGHTER OF GUS TASSOS, AND SHE SUPPORTS AND APPRECIATES OUR EFFORTS. ALTHOUGH SHE AND HER HUSBAND NOW LIVE IN AUSTIN, SHE SHARED WITH ME THAT THEY STILL LOVINGLY REFER TO THE HOME AS 1206 AND MAKE A POINT TO DRIVE BY IT WHEN THEY VISIT SAN ANTONIO. WE HAVE ALSO HAD OVERWHELMING SUPPORT FROM OUR MEMBERSHIP TO PURSUE THIS DESIGNATION, THE PRESSURE THAT OUR NEIGHBORHOOD IS UNDER FOR DEVELOPMENT AND REDEVELOPMENT AS WE THE CONVERSATION OF GOING HISTORIC. AND WE LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING WITH O H P TO REINTRODUCE THE CONCEPT TO OUR MEMBERSHIP SO THAT WE CAN HAVE A ROBUST CONVERSATION OF THE PROS AND CONS. THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE. UM, AND THEN FINALLY FOR ITEM 28, UM, 1235 EAST CROCKETT, WE DO NOT SUPPORT O P'S RECOMMENDATIONS. THE STRUCTURE WAS RELOCATED TO THE SITE AT AN UNKNOWN DATE AND WAS USED AS A DUPLEX FOR DECADES. THE CHARACTER A A DEFINING CHARACTERISTIC FOR HISTORIC ONE STORY DUPLEXES IN OUR HISTORIC DISTRICT IS A SEPARATE ROOF OR ROOF GABLE AT EACH ENTRY. XTON EXAMPLES AND DIGNITY HILL INCLUDE 400 NORTH MONUMENTAL AND 7 0 6 HAZE. A FRONT PORCH IN THIS VERNACULAR STYLE HOUSE WOULD LIKELY HAVE PAINTED WOOD COLUMNS AND SIMPLE BAST TRADES. UM, SO THAT IS ALL OF THE COMMENTS RECEIVED FOR ITEMS ON CONSENT, UM, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF 27, WHICH WE'LL PULL, UH, FOR INDIVIDUAL VOTE. UM, DO COMMISSIONERS WISH TO [CONSENT AGENDA] PULL ANY ADDITIONAL ITEMS FROM CONSENT? AND LET'S, LET'S ZOOM IN ON THAT LIST SO THAT WE CAN READ A LITTLE BETTER. MS. COMMISSIONER VELAZQUEZ, I'D LIKE TO PULL THE AGARITA. UM, PAGE 24. YES, MR. COMMISSIONER GIBBS, I'D LIKE TO PULL ITEM EIGHT AND ITEM 28. DID YOU SAY 20 OR 28? UM, 28. THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT. NUMBER EIGHT AND TWO EIGHT, YES. SO LET'S UNMARK 20. THERE WE GO. AND WE'LL MARK 28. THANK YOU. OKAY, ANY OTHER ITEMS? LET'S GET THOSE MOVED. AND THEN WE WILL CALL FOR A VOTE FOR THE REMAINDER, WHICH WILL BE ONE THROUGH SEVEN. UH, SCROLL BACK UP. PLEASE BE MOTION FOR ONE THROUGH SEVEN. NINE THROUGH 23, 25 THROUGH 26, AND THEN 29 AND 30. THIS IS COMMISSIONER GROUP MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA I JUST LISTED. SECOND, [00:15:05] WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR THE CONSENT AGENDA. UH, CLARIFICATION. DOES THAT INCLUDE ALL OF STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS? CORRECT. WITH STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS AND SECOND ON STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS. THANK YOU. UH, MAY I HAVE A ROLL CALL PLEASE? FERNANDEZ? AYE. FISH? AYE. GIBBS. AYE. VELASQUEZ. AYE. AREOLA. AYE. CARPENTER. AYE. GROUP. AYE. UM, FETZER. AYE. LA AYE. UH, MOTION CARRIES. UM, SO IN THE INTEREST OF COMMISSIONER'S SCHEDULES, WE'RE ACTUALLY GONNA GO OUT OF ORDER SLIGHTLY. UM, WE'RE GONNA HEAR ITEM 24 [24. 21-1156 Address/Description: 1206 W AGARITA HDRC Case No.: 2021-009 Applicant: OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION Request: Recommendation for historic landmark designation City Council Dist.: 1] FIRST, UM, BECAUSE WE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE AS MANY COMMISSIONERS AVAILABLE TO TAKE ACTION ON THAT ITEM. UM, SO LET'S SEE IF JESS IS READY FOR THAT. ITEM 24 IS 1206 WEST AGARITA. UM, SO THIS WAS PULLED FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION BY COMMISSIONER VELAZQUEZ. COMMISSIONER. COMMISSIONER VELAZQUEZ, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF OR FOR, FOR THE PROPERTY OWNER? UH, IS THE PROPERTY OWNER, UH, HERE COREY? THIS IS JESSICA. I JUST REACHED HIM. I JUST NEED TO CONFERENCE HIM INTO THE MEETING. I JUST NEED ABOUT 30 MORE SECONDS. GREAT, THANKS. SO LET'S STAND BY FOR THAT. I'M GONNA, COREY, CAN YOU HEAR ME? THIS IS JESSICA. YES. GREAT. UM, AND DO YOU WANT ME TO READ THE CASE INTO THE RECORD? UM, NO. UM, COMMISSIONER VELAZQUEZ, IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS FOR THE OWNER, WE THINK WE HAVE THEM CONNECTED. WELL, I I DON'T WANT TO TAKE, HOLD ON ONE. OKAY. I HAVE RODRIGO ON THE LINE. WELL, FIRST AND FOREMOST, UH, COREY, I, I, I SPEAK CLEAR. I I I'M NOT NECESSARILY SURE WHAT OVERARCHING, UH, YOU KNOW, OPINION OF THE , BUT I, I PULLED IT SPECIFICALLY FOR PURPOSE THAT IT WOULD GET AN INDIVIDUAL VOTE. UH, I'M AWARE OF THIS, UH, CASE AND ON PRINCIPLE, UH, I, I, I'M, I'M NOT, UH, UH, INCLINED TO VOTE FOR THIS DESIGNATION, BUT I JUST WANTED TO HAVE THE RECORD, RECORD MY, MY REASONS FOR DOING SO. THI THIS PROJECT BECOMES, UH, UH, TO THE ATTENTION, IT GETS TO THE ATTENTION OF O H P AND THE, AND THE, UH, UH, UH, THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION THERE BECAUSE, UH, THERE WAS AN APPLICATION FOR DEMOLITION OF THIS BUILDING. SO AT, AT, AT SOME POINT, THE OWNER RESCINDED THAT, UH, REQUEST FOR DEMOLITION AND THEN HAS, UH, UH, KIND OF FOLLOWED THE DIRECTION THAT WE WOULD HOPE THAT A, THAT A HOMEOWNER OR A PROPERTY OWNER WOULD FOLLOW ON THEIR OWN TO, UM, UH, UH, RESTORE, RENOVATE, UM, A A, A PIECE OF HISTORIC STOCK IN SAN ANTONIO OR SO, SO TO SPEAK, RIGHT? I MEAN, THIS IS A NEIGHBORHOOD THAT'S FILLED WITH HISTORIC STOCK AND MOST DEFINITELY ANY REQUEST FOR, UH, UH, LANDMARK DESIGNATION OR, OR, UH, UH, UH, UH, A A, UM, UH, A DESIGNATION BY O H P, THAT THAT, THAT IT WOULD, UM, MOST DEFINITELY, UH, UH, UH, HAVE, UH, MET THE CRITERIA THAT EVERY PROPERTY AND THAT NEIGHBORHOOD WOULD MEET. NOW, THAT AREA IS A CONSERVATION DISTRICT. IT'S A CONSERVATION DISTRICT FOR, FOR A REASON. AND, UH, WITHOUT GETTING INTO, YOU KNOW, THE MANY REASONS, RIGHT? IT, IT, IT DOES SET KIND OF A CONTRADICTION IN, UH, IN THE, UH, IN THE, UH, UH, THE REQUEST THAT THIS SINGLE PROPERTY SINGLED OUT [00:20:01] TO BE THIS BECAUSE THAT FAMILY, WHICH I'M SURE THAT IF YOU DO THE, THEIR, THE HISTORY OF ALL THE, THE HOUSES IN THAT AREA, THEY'RE GONNA HAVE NEIGHBORS THAT EQUALLY CONTRIBUTED TO THE COMMUNITY. I, I, I BELIEVE THAT THE, THAT THE OWNER HAS IS, IS DOING THE RIGHT THING. THEY'VE PULLED THEIR DEMOLITION AND, AND I, I KIND OF, UH, WANT THIS TO HAVE AN INDIVIDUAL VOTE BECAUSE I THINK THAT IT, THAT IT IS AN ABUSE OF THE INTENTION OF, UH, DESIGNATION TO, TO SINGLE OUT A PROPERTY THAT, THAT AN OWNER AT SOME POINT WOULD REALIZE THAT THEY DON'T WANT TO TEAR A, A PARTICULAR PROPERTY DOWN, UH, AND THAT IT, IT, IT, IT GIVES THE APPEARANCE OF A, OF A CONSEQUENCE OF A PENALTY. AND, AND IN THIS CASE, IT'S A CONSEQUENCE AND A PENALTY FOR, FOR ACTUALLY DOING THE RIGHT THING. SO IF, IF, IF THIS TYPE OF A MESSAGE IS SENT OUT, RIGHT, IF THIS TYPE OF A, OF A, OF A MESSAGE IS, IS GOT TEETH, THEN IN REALITY WHAT IT, WHAT IT, UH, ENCOURAGES IS PEOPLE TO QUICKLY DEMOLISH AND QUICKLY MAKE CHANGES BEFORE THEY, THEY, UH, GET ADDITIONAL REGULATION PLACED ON THEIR PROPERTIES. SO I, I WOULD URGE THE COMMISSION TO REALLY CONSIDER WHAT THE INTENT OF THE OWNER IS IN THIS PROPERTY WITH RESPECT TO THE WORK THAT THEY ARE DOING AND THE LIGHT THAT WENT OFF FOR THEM AND, AND, AND, AND THE FACT THAT THEY HAVE THEIR OWN, UH, UM, UM, UH, CHOOSING CHOSEN TO DO WHAT WE WOULD THINK WOULD BE THE RIGHT THING AND, AND NOT, UH, SEND A MESSAGE, UH, THAT IF YOU EVEN THINK A TERRY SOMETHING DOWN, YOU'RE ONLY GOING TO, UH, SOUND OFF THE ALARM. THAT WOULD END UP WITH YOU GETTING ADDITIONAL REGULATION PUT ON, ON YOUR PROPERTY, BUT SPECIFICALLY WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF A NEIGHBORHOOD WHO EVERY HOUSE IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD MEETS THE SAME CRITERIA, BUT THEY WILL NOT BE ASKED TO RECEIVE THE SAME. IN THIS CASE, I WILL CALL IT A CONSEQUENCE. THOSE ARE MY COMMENTS. THANK YOU. UM, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS OR DO WE HAVE A MOTION FOR THIS ITEM? THIS IS FOR LANDMARK DESIGNATION AS INITIATED BY CITY COUNCIL. THIS IS COMMISSIONER FISH. UM, I WOULD LIKE TO JUST ADD A, A COMMENT THAT, THAT THIS PROJECT ISN'T, ISN'T, UH, ONE THAT'S BEEN SINGLED OUT. WHEN DEMOLITION REQUESTS ARE PULLED, THOSE ARE REVIEWED BY STAFF AND THOSE THAT ARE, UH, THOSE THAT MEET THE CRITERIA GENERALLY COME TO US. UM, WE, WE SEE, UH, A NUMBER OF CASES THAT ARE INITIATED BY DEMOLITION REQUESTS. THIS HAS ALREADY BEEN SUPPORTED BY, UH, THIS COMMISSION AND BY CITY COUNCIL. SO, UM, I WOULD MOVE FOR APPROVAL OF DESIGNATION. SO SECOND, THIS IS COMMISSIONER GROUP. SECOND. THIS IS CHAIRMAN FETZER. WE HAVE A MOTION TO SECOND FOR APPROVAL. I MAY HAVE A ROLL CALL, PLEASE. FERNANDEZ. AYE. FISH? AYE. GIBBS. AYE. VELASQUEZ. NAY. AREOLA. NAY CARPENTER. AYE GROUP. AYE. BOWMAN. OH, THATER. AYE. LA AYE, UH, MOTION DOES CARRY. UM, SO THAT TAKES US BACK TO, LET'S LOOK AT THE CASE LIST. UH, ITEM 8 8 31 [8. 21-1187 Address/Description: 831 LAMAR ST HDRC Case No.: 2020-525 Historic District Name: Dignowity Hill Applicant: Ron Hill Request: Front yard fence installation City Council Dist.: 2] LAMAR, UM, I BELIEVE WE, YOU ARE THE CASE MANAGER. DO WE HAVE THE PROPERTY OWNER LINE? DO WE KNOW WHO CONTACTED THE PROPERTY OWNER? I HERE? YES. UH, SCHS, I CAN READ THE REQUEST AND FINDINGS, OR IF YOU'D LIKE TO ASK DIRECT QUESTIONS, THE APPLICANT IS AVAILABLE. UM, THIS COMMISSIONER GIBBS, I'D LIKE TO ASK A COUPLE QUESTIONS. SO IF I'M, I'M READING THIS CORRECTLY. THIS WAS A, UM, SORT OF A COMPLIANCE CASE. SO THE DEFENSE WAS ERECTED BEFORE, UM, RECEIVING A C O A AND I'M LOOKING AT THE, UM, THE NOTES FROM THE, UM, O H P. AND IF I'M READING THIS CORRECTLY, IT'S SAYING THAT THE STAFF SPOKE TO OWNER WHO EXPLAINED THAT DEFENSE CONTRACTOR SAID THEY RECEIVED PERMITS AND APPROVAL, BUT STAFF EXPLAINED THAT NOTHING HAD BEEN APPROVED OR RECEIVED. SO, UM, MY CONCERN ABOUT THE FENCE IS THAT I, I LOOKED AT THE PLANS, I LOOKED AT THE, THE OTHER EXAMPLES OF [00:25:01] FENCING IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AND I'M, I'M CURIOUS, UM, 'CAUSE A LOT OF THE, UM, FENCES THAT ARE REPRESENTED IN THE APPLICATION ARE NOT THE SAME TYPE OF FENCE. SO WHAT IS THE APPLICANT TRYING TO, TO DICTATE HERE? BECAUSE I ONLY SAW ONE OTHER PEDAL TYPE FENCE IN THOSE PICTURES DEPICTED. SO CAN YOU EXPLAIN THAT PLEASE? YEAH, SO THE PICTURES THAT I HAD, UH, SHARED OF, OF OTHER PROPERTIES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UM, ARE, I MEAN, MY UNDERSTANDING WAS ONE OF THE MAJOR OBJECTIONS WAS, IS THAT IT WAS A METAL FRAME AND NOT A WOOD FRAME. AND SO, UM, I'D EXPLICITLY CHOSE METAL JUST BECAUSE OF THE DURABILITY AND JUST THE, THE INTEGRITY OF, YOU KNOW, OF THE MATERIAL OVER A PERIOD OF TIME. UM, THE OTHER REFERENCES THAT I HAD IN, IN THE IMAGES THAT, UH, I GUESS YOU GUYS ARE SHOWING NOW, UM, THEY'RE, THEY'RE METAL FENCES. UM, SOME HAVE CATTLE PANELS, SOME DO NOT, BUT IN SHORT, THEY ARE, YOU KNOW, METAL FENCES AND, AND A, A VERY SIMILAR DESIGN WITH THE TOP, YOU KNOW, THE TOP RAILINGS AND SO FORTH. I DON'T . YEAH, I WOULD AGREE THAT THEY ARE METAL. UM, BUT LIKE I SAID, I, I ONLY SAW WHEN YOU TAKE OUT THE DIFFERENT COLOR WHEN THIS ONE IS A DARK FENCE, THE ONE FOR THIS HOME. AND THEN THE OTHER KETTLE TYPE FENCE WAS MORE LIKE A SILVER TYPE FENCE AGAIN. AND IT WAS METAL AS WELL. SO I WAS JUST CURIOUS 'CAUSE THE OTHER ONES I WAS SHOWING WERE ROD IRON FENCES, WHICH TO ME WOULD SEEM MORE APPROPRIATE, YOU KNOW, FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD. UM, SO WHAT HAPPENED WITH THE APPROVAL? I MEAN, HOW, HOW, WHAT DID THE CONFUSION COME IN WHERE YOU MENTIONED THAT YOU HAD RECEIVED APPROVAL? SO I HAD CONTRACTED A COMPANY TO BUILD THE FENCE. IT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THEY HAD TAKEN CARE OF THE PERMITS AND THE NECESSARY APPROVALS. UM, COME TO FIND OUT THAT WAS NOT THE CASE AND, AND THAT WAS, YOU KNOW, WELL AFTER THE FENCE WAS BUILT. OKAY. AND SO, OKAY. I'M, I'M DONE WITH QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. APPRECIATE, APPRECIATE YOUR TIME, SIR. YEAH, JUST TO CLARIFY, THE FENCE YOU SEE ON THE SCREEN IS THE ACTUAL FENCE THAT HAS BEEN INSTALLED AS REQUESTED. GOTCHA. THANK YOU. I ALSO WANNA SAY, UM, YOU KNOW, THESE INSTANCES ARE, ARE DIFFICULT. UM, WE ALWAYS TRY TO BE THE MOST CONSISTENT. UM, AND MOST RECENTLY WE DID HAVE ANOTHER NEW CONSTRUCTION CASE WITH A IDENTICAL FENCE MOSTLY APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION. AND SO WE ARE SORT OF FOLLOWING THAT PRECEDENT JUST 'CAUSE THERE'S NOT A BETTER WORD TO USE. UM, BUT, BUT THE COMMENTS WE RECEIVED ARE CORRECT. LIKE, WE DON'T REALLY HAVE NEW FENCE GUIDELINES FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION, AND SO THAT MIGHT BE SOMETHING WE NEED TO ADDRESS IN THE FUTURE. RIGHT, RIGHT. I WOULD AGREE. THANK YOU, COREY. APPRECIATE IT. UH, COMMENT. MR. SHE VELASQUEZ? UH, I, COREY, I JUST WANT TO JUST TELL YOU, TELL YOU STAFF THAT I APPRECIATE Y'ALL TAKING, UH, TIME TO CONSIDER, UH, THE, THESE, I THINK THE SITUATION THAT WE'RE GONNA HIT MORE AND MORE AND MORE, RIGHT AS THE INNER CITY GETS, UH, INVESTED BACK IN AND, AND NEW CONSTRUCTION IS CONSTRUCTED. UH, PERSONALLY PERSPECTIVE, I'M A STRONG BELIEVER THAT NEW CONSTRUCTION OFFERS AN OPPORTUNITY TO CREATE THE PRESERVATION ITEMS FOR THE FUTURE, RIGHT? THEY'RE EMPTY, THEY'RE EMPTY LOTS. UM, BUT WHEN, WHEN NEW VOCABULARIES ENTER, UH, THAT, THAT IS THE TIME TO CONSIDER, UH, SAY NEW, NEW, UH, THINGS THAT MIGHT BE APPROPRIATE. UH, AND, AND WITHOUT SAYING THAT ONE WAY OR ANOTHER, UH, IT IT SHOULD GO WAY OR ANOTHER, I DO APPRECIATE YOU THINKING ABOUT IT IN, IN, IN A, IN THAT VERY SPECIAL WAY. OKAY. THIS IS COMMISSIONER FISH. UH, I SUPPORT STAFF'S FINDINGS AND STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS. SO I APPROVAL WITH STAFF STIPULATION. SECOND. SECOND. THIS IS CHAIRMAN FETZER. WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND FOR APPROVAL WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS. MAY HAVE A ROLL CALL PLEASE. AND JUST TO CLARIFY, THAT SECOND APPEARED TO COME FROM COMMISSIONER BREW, UM, FERNANDEZ. SORRY, IT WAS COMMISSIONER FA. YEAH, IT WAS ME. COMMISSIONER FERNANDEZ. OH, I'M SORRY. OKAY. FERNANDEZ AYE FISH. AYE. GIBBS. NAYYY VELASQUEZ. AYE. AREOLA. AYE. [00:30:01] CARPENTER. AYE GROUP. AYE. BETTS SIR? AYE. LA AYE. MOTION CARRIES. OKAY, BACK TO OUR CASE LIST. WE ARE NOW ON ITEM, UH, 27 [27. 21-1139 HISTORIC TAX VERIFICATION: MULTIPLE ADDRESSES Address/Description:119 GORMAN ST 220 BROADWAY 305 BURLESON ST 310 CALLAGHAN AVE 335 W GRAMERCY PLACE 427 ADAMS ST 611 DEVINE ST 720 E CARSON 1829 N NEW BRAUNFELS AVE HDRC Case No.: 2021-005 Landmark Name: Various Historic District Name: Various Request: Historic Tax Verification City Council Dist.: Various] MR. OUR TEXT VERIFICATIONS. UM, AND THIS ONE WAS PULLED STRICTLY FOR RECUSAL FROM COMMISSIONER CARPENTER. SO COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, IF YOU CAN MUTE YOURSELF AND TURN OFF YOUR VIDEO. UM, IF THERE'S NOT FURTHER QUESTIONS OR DISCUSSION, UH, WITH STAFF, WE CAN ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR THE 7 27. THIS IS COMMISSIONER FISH, I MOVE FOR APPROVAL. COMMISSIONER FERNANDEZ. SECOND. UH, THIS CHAIRMAN FETZER, WE HAVE A MOTION TO SECOND FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER 27. MAY I HAVE A ROLL CALL PLEASE? FERNANDEZ? AYE FISH? AYE. GIBBS? AYE. QUEZ AYE. AREOLA? AYE. CARPENTER. OH, RECUSED GROUP. AYE. FETZER. AYE. LA AYE. MOTION CARRIES. UM, ITEM 28, UM, [28. 21-1192 Address/Description: 1235 E CROCKETT ST HDRC Case No.: 2020-584 Historic District Name: Dignowity Hill Applicant: Kali Tripp/Tripp Flip, LLC Request: Porch and porch roof modifications City Council Dist.: 2] 1235 EAST CROCKETT WAS PULLED FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION. UM, EDWARD, DO WE HAVE THE APPLICANT ON THE LINE? YES, I HAVE THE APPLICANT. UH, MS. KAYLEY TRIPP ON THE LINE. MS. TRIPP, ARE YOU THERE? YES, I AM. SO ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR, FOR STAFF OR FOR THE OWNER? THIS COMMISSIONER GIBBS? UM, I, I PULLED THIS ITEM BECAUSE I JUST WANTED TO HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT, UM, CONCERNING THIS. SO, UM, IF YOU DON'T MIND JUST GIVING ME A BRIEF, UM, SUMMARY OF WHAT, WHAT YOU ARE, UM, ASKING FOR HERE. SURE. I GUESS, UM, OUR BIGGEST CONSIDERATION WITH THIS DESIGN WAS THE LACK OF A WOODEN FRONT PORCH ON THIS HOME AFTER DOING EXTENSIVE RESEARCH. AND HONESTLY, THIS ISN'T OUR FIRST RODEO AND REHABBING HISTORIC HOMES. UM, THE FACT THAT IT WAS MISSING A FRONT PORCH REALLY JUST SETS IT APART AND MAKES IT INAPPROPRIATE FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD. AND IN, IN MY PACKET, I WROTE A SMALL ESSAY JUST OUTLINING THE HISTORY AND IMPORT ON A HOUSE THAT WAS BUILT IN 1908, WHICH IS WHEN THIS HOUSE WAS BUILT. AND HAVING THAT SINGLE FRONT PORCH IS NOT ONLY IMPORTANT JUST FOR OBVIOUSLY, OBVIOUSLY THE HISTORY OF THE HOME, BUT HONESTLY FOR JUST REJUVENATING THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UM, I JUST FEEL THAT IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT FOR THIS NEIGHBORHOOD TO HAVE NICE HOMES THAT ARE, UM, UP TO A NORMAL STANDARD OF LIVING, WHICH IS NOT AND WAS NOT WHEN THE TENANTS WERE INSIDE OF IT. AND FURTHERMORE, UH, UPON DEMOLITION OF THE INTERIOR, UH, WE WERE ABLE TO FIND THAT THIS HOUSE WAS IN FACT A SINGLE FAMILY HOME ORIGINALLY. SO THAT THAT SINGLE FRONT PORCH IS THAT MUCH MORE IMPORTANT FOR THIS HOME. OKAY. SO, UM, WITH THE HOME, SO YOU'VE MENTIONED, I'M SEEING THE PICTURE ON THE SCREEN HERE THAT, AND I ALSO SEE THAT THE STRUCTURE WAS ACTUALLY RELOCATED TO THIS SITE HERE, UM, SOMETIME IN PAST. SO YOU'RE UM, MENTIONING HERE THAT THESE TWO DOORS HERE, IT STILL SHOWED THERE WAS A SINGLE FAMILY HOME AND NOT A DUPLEX. YES. IS THAT CORRECT? I, WE THIS IS KIND OF BEEN, UM, AS UH, I'VE BEEN SPEAKING TO THE HISTORIC DISTRICT, UH, QUITE THE COMPLICATED PROJECT BECAUSE, UH, WE THOUGHT IT WAS ORIGINALLY A DUPLEX, WHICH IS WHY I HAD TO GO BACK AND REDESIGN TO KEEP THE TWO FRONT DOORS BECAUSE WE ARE CONVERTING IT TO A SINGLE FAMILY HOME BECAUSE I HAD AN INKLING THAT IT WAS ORIGINALLY, UM, JUST BASED ON, OF COURSE THE HISTORY OF THE HOMES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND JUST AT THAT TIME PERIOD. BUT BECAUSE THE DISTRICT WAS, UM, CONCERNED THAT IT MAY HAVE BEEN A DUPLEX AND WE REALLY DIDN'T HAVE THE PAPERWORK AND BLUEPRINTS AND WHATNOT OF IT WHEN IT WAS FIRST BUILT AND WE AGREED THAT WE CAN KEEP TWO FRONT DOORS, TWO FRONT DOORS ON A HISTORIC HOME IS NOT TOTALLY UNCOMMON AS YOU CAN SEE IN A LOT OF DIFFERENT DESIGNS OF HOMES, ESPECIALLY IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD. SO WE WERE FINE WITH THAT. SO THAT'S REALLY WHERE WE CAME TO HAVING THAT SECOND FRONT DOOR, BUT STILL HAVING IT AS A SINGLE FAMILY, AS OF RIGHT NOW, WE STILL JUST PLAN TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THOSE PLANS RIGHT THERE, JUST [00:35:01] HAVING THE TWO DOORS, ONE FRONT PORCH AND HAVING IT AS A SINGLE FAMILY HOME. GOTCHA. ALRIGHT, WELL THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. I APPRECIATE THAT IT'S NEEDED TO HEAR FROM YOU, UM, BEFORE I MADE MY DECISION, SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THAT CON CONCLUDES MY QUESTIONS ACCORDING, UH, NOT COMMENT. MR. CHAIRMAN, THIS IS COMMISSIONER CARPENTER. UM, IF THERE ARE NO FURTHER QUESTIONS, I MOVE FOR APPROVAL WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS 1, 2 3. THIS IS COMMISSIONER FERNANDEZ, I SECOND CHAIRMAN FETZER. WE HAVE A MOTION A SECOND FOR, UM, APPROVAL AS NOTED. MAY HAVE A ROLL CALL PLEASE. UH, COMMISSIONER C C C, UM, CHAIRMAN, I JUST MAKE A COMMENT JUST, JUST, UH, IN, IN TERMS OF WHAT WE'RE APPROVING, UM, I I I, I'M LISTENING TO THE, TO THE, UH, THE COMMENTS OF THE, THE OWNER OR THE DESIGNER. AND WHILE I'LL TEND TO AGREE WITH, WITH , THE THEM THE ILLUSTRATION IS QUICKLY FORCED IS A, I THINK IT'S A GOOD, A GOOD ATTEMPT TO, TO, UM, TO MIMIC MAYBE SOME OF THE IMAGES THAT ARE SHOWN, UH, TO CREATE THAT FRONT PORCH. BUT I THINK THAT ILLUSTRATION THAT'S GIVEN TO US THAT'S ON THE PAGE THAT SAYS, WELL, IT'S THE GRAY, THE DARK GRAY BUILDING WITH THE WHAT APPEARS TO BE CEDAR POSTS. UH, IT'S COMPLETELY INCONSISTENT WITH, WITH THE COMMENTS, RIGHT? SO, SO THIS BEING A, A, UH, HOUSE THAT HAS A PARTICULAR CHARACTER THAT EXISTS, THE NEW CONSTRUCTION, UM, THE, THAT WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED IS, IS AN ALTERATION THAT IS BEYOND WHETHER IT HAS A PORCH OR NOT, IS IT'S AN ALTERATION OF THE CHARACTER, MUCH LIKE THE FENCE THAT WE JUST SAW, THAT THAT IS, UH, LIKE A, WITH A, I GUESS IT'S REFERRED TO AS A CATTLE FENCE, SO I'M NOT NECESSARILY SURE IS A CATTLE FENCE, BUT THIS IS KIND OF LIKE A COUNTRY HOUSE, RIGHT? IT, IT ALTERS, IT'S NOT JUST THE FACT THAT IT'S PAINTED THAT DARK GRAY, BUT, BUT THERE, THERE NEEDS TO BE CLARITY WITH RESPECT TO, UH, WHAT THE MATERIAL IS OF, UH, THE STRUCTURAL MEMBERS ON THE PORCH BECAUSE IT TO, TO ME, IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE CHARACTER OF THE, OF WHAT YOU FIND IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD, JUST, JUST GOING OFF THE COMMENTS THAT ARE BEING MADE, NOT NECESSARILY IT'S A MAKE OR BREAK FOR ME, BUT LOOK, LOOKING FOR CONSISTENCY IN COMMENTS THAT, THAT WHAT WHAT WE SEE IN THE DARK ILLUSTRATION COMPLETELY CHANGES THE CHARACTER OF THE FRONT OF THIS HOUSE. THIS ARE MY COMMENTS. THANK YOU. UH, ANY OTHER COMMENTS? WELL, I, I WOULD MAKE THE COMMENT THAT, UM, I THINK STAFF PICKS UP ON SOME OF, OF THAT CONCERN THAT, UH, COMMISSIONER VELASQUEZ HAS WHEN YOU, YOU, YOU LOOK AT THEIR, UH, STIPULATIONS PARTICULARLY ABOUT, UH, CREATING, YOU KNOW, A FEATURE OF CAPITAL AND, AND BASE TRIM, WHICH WOULD TAKE AWAY FROM THIS SORT OF MORE RAW CEDAR POST APPROACH, WHICH, UH, I, I CONCUR THAT THIS ILLUSTRATION BEGINS TO SUGGEST THAT SORT OF LACK OF FINISH DETAIL. UH, BUT THE STIPULATIONS SEEM TO ADDRESS THAT, SO THAT'S WHY I SPECIFICALLY CALLED THOSE OUT, UH, CHAIR, UH, COM. COMMISSIONER IS IT, UH, I MIGHT ASK THAT, THAT YOU INCLUDE IN YOUR MOTION? UM, WHAT, WHAT, WHAT, WHAT I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND IN THE MOTION I THINK WOULD BE BENEFICIAL AND, AND HELPFUL TO THE OWNER IN THE END, IS THAT THERE, THAT THERE'S VERY, THAT IT'S VERY CLEAR THAT CEDAR IS NOT IN THE CONTEXT OF THAT NEIGHBORHOOD IN THE, ON A FRONT PORCH, ON AN EXISTING FRONT PORCH. THAT AND THAT AND THAT MAYBE BECAUSE THERE'S NOTHING IN THERE, I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANYTHING IN THERE THAT STAFF IS TALKING ABOUT THE MATERIAL. YEAH, I, I CAN'T, UM, I I CAN'T ACCEPT THAT AS A, UH, FRIENDLY AMENDMENT. I DON'T KNOW IF MY SECOND DOES OR NOT. AND I, AND TO PHRASE THAT AMENDMENT, I WOULD SAY IN ADDITION TO STAFF STIPULATIONS, ADD THE, UH, A FOURTH STIPULATION THAT THE, UH, WOOD COLUMNS AND TRIM BE OF, UH, A PAINTING MATERIAL, UH, CONSISTENT WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD. I STILL SECOND. THANK YOU. OKAY, WE HAVE A MOTION, A SECOND IS NOTED. UM, MAY HAVE A ROLL CALL PLEASE. FERNANDEZ. AYE FISH? AYE. GIPPS. AYE. VELASQUEZ AYE. AREOLA. AYE. CARPENTER. AYE. GROUP. AYE, UH, FETZER? AYE. [00:40:01] LA AYE. MOTION CARRIES. OKAY. UP NEXT ITEM [31. 21-1160 Address/Description: 2620 N MAIN AVE HDRC Case No.: 2020-527 Historic District Name: Monte Vista Applicant: Berkeley Lewis/Berkeley Builders, Inc. Request: Skirting replacement City Council Dist.: 1] 31 I BELIEVE 30. GET MY CASE LIST. YEAH. 31. WE DO, WE AT THE APPLICANT FOR 26 20 NORTH MAIN YES. ITEM BERKELEY LEWIS, I'M HERE. HELLO, BERKELEY LEWIS. UH, ITEM NUMBER 31, CASE NUMBER 20 25 27 AT 26 20 NORTH MAIN, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO REPLACE THE WOOD LAB FOUNDATION SKIRTING WITH LIMESTONE MASONRY SKIRTING STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL BASED ON FINDING C STAFF CONCURS WITH THE EVIDENCE OF EXISTING PORTIONS OF ROCK SKIRTING AT THE STRUCTURE AS WELL AS BRICK MASONRY SKIRTING ON SIMILAR NEARBY STRUCTURES. HOWEVER, STAFF FINDS THAT THE LIMESTONE MASONRY AS PROPOSED IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE ESTABLISHED PATTERN IN MATERIAL AND SCALE AND RECOMMENDS RESTORATION OF APPROPRIATE WOOD LAP SKIRTING OR TRADITIONAL BRICK MASONRY. THIS CASE IS RETURNING TO US FROM THE LAST HEARING AS THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED ADDITIONAL RESEARCH THAT YOU'LL FIND STAFF FINDING IN, UH, FINDING D UH, THE ADDITIONAL PHOTOS AND DOCUMENTATION IS AT THE END OF THIS, UH, P D F UH, MR. BROOKLEY LEWIS, WOULD YOU LIKE TO EXPLAIN, UH, YOUR NEW POSITION FROM, UH, THE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION? AND, AND BEFORE WE PROCEED, A COUPLE THINGS, SIR, BEFORE YOU PROCEED, I JUST NEED TO MAKE AN ANNOUNCEMENT. I JUST NEED TO MAKE A QUICK ANNOUNCEMENT THAT I'M SORRY WE'RE HAVING ANOTHER TECHNICAL ISSUE. HE IS GONNA NEED TO RESTART HIS WEBEX. WE'RE NOT GONNA LOSE PHONE CONNECTION, BUT THE SCREEN'S GONNA GO BLANK AND THEN WE'RE GONNA GET THE RIGHT CASE FILE ON THE SCREEN. IT'S, IT'S FROZEN ON HIS END. RIGHT? AND COREY, WE'RE ON ITEM, WHICH, WHICH IT'S A, IT'S ITEM 31, WHICH IS 26 20 NORTH MAIN. WE HAVE A, I DON'T SEE IT IN A FOLDER EITHER, AND I DIDN'T SEE THE ONE BEFORE EITHER, YOU KNOW, IN THE GOOGLE FOLDER. UH, SO IF GO BACK TO THE EMAIL THAT WAS SENT TODAY. WE'RE NOT IN GOOGLE ANYMORE, WE'RE IN SHAREPOINT. WELL, IN THE SHARED FOLDER I HAVE IT, REFRESH THE LINK AND I CO COREY, I CAN CONFIRM IT'S NOT AVAILABLE THERE. UH, COMMISSIONER GRUBE, IF YOU NAVIGATE TO THE AGENDA, ONAR, YOU CAN PULL IT FROM THERE. UM, WHICH IS HOW I WAS ABLE TO ACCESS IT. YEAH, THAT'S WHAT I'M RIGHT NOW. SO JUST FOR STAFF TO KNOW. UM, AND THE BOARD RA WAS NOT THERE EITHER. OKAY. THANK YOU . MR. LEWIS, WE'RE BACK LINE IF YOU'D LIKE TO, UM, BEGIN. YES, THANK YOU SO MUCH. UM, I DISCUSSED, UH, MR. F'S, UM, RECOMMENDATION TO THE LORD, UM, AND I WAS A LITTLE CURIOUS ABOUT WHY HE SAID THAT LIMESTONE WASN'T USED AND HE SAID, WELL, HE WAS CONSTRAINED TO FOLLOW THE GUIDELINES. AND THOSE GUIDELINES STATED APPARENTLY THAT CUT LIMESTONE WAS NOT IN USE DURING THIS PERIOD IN SAN ANTONIO. AND WHILE IT IS VERY TRUE THAT IT WASN'T IN USE IN OTHER PARTS OF THE COUNTRY AND I'VE BEEN THERE, UM, I WAS ABLE TO FIND FIVE HOUSES IN THAT IMMEDIATE NEIGHBORHOOD, UM, THAT HAD CUT LIMESTONE BASES, UM, BOTH SMOOTH LIMESTONE AND TEXTURE LIMESTONE, WHICH IS WHAT, UM, THE HOMEOWNER WAS WANTING TO USE. UM, SO I'M A, I'M A LITTLE CONCERNED THAT THE INFORMATION THAT PRESENTED WASN'T QUITE, QUITE ACCURATE. THERE IS INDEED A LIMESTONE MASONRY CUT MASONRY USED IN THIS PERIOD IN SAN ANTONIO AND NOT JUST IN MONTE VISTA ALL OVER, ALL OVER THE CITY. SO IT IS IN CONTEXT AND, AND IS IN MY OPINION, UH, SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE IT, UH, USED DURING THAT THIS HOUSE WAS BUILT. AND, UM, WE, WE PRESENTED, UH, FIRST OFF WE PRESENTED A NUMBER OF, OF, UH, PHOTOGRAPHS WHICH SHOW THAT UM, THERE ARE INDEED MANY HOMES, UM, IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT HAVE MASONRY SKIRTING, UM, BRICK AND STONE. AND, UM, I WAS ABLE, AGAIN, [00:45:01] I WAS ABLE TO FIND FIVE OF THEM THAT HAD CUT AND TEXTURED LIMESTONE AS WELL. SO OUR POSITION IS THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO RESPECTFULLY SUBMIT THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO GET APPROVAL TO USE THE LIMESTONE SKIRTING. CORY, DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS? I CAN'T SEEM TO FIND ANY IN THE FILE. NO. THERE, THIS IS A RETURNING CASE AND WE DID HAVE COMMENTS PREVIOUSLY FROM THE MONTE VISTA ARCHITECTURAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND THE APPLICANTS ALSO SUBMITTED, UM, A PETITION AT THE END OF THE PRESENTATION FILE THAT'S ON THE SCREEN HERE. YES, WE WERE, WE TALKED TO A NUMBER OF THE NEIGHBOR NEIGHBORS, IMMEDIATE NEIGHBORS, AND THEY WERE ALL IN FAVOR OF THAT SKIRTING. UM, I HAVE A QUESTION AND I THINK IN LARGE PART, THE COMMUNITY IS BEHIND MS. ROHRS BECAUSE SHE'S DOING A LOT TO IMPROVE THE LOOK OF HIS HOME. THIS IS COMMISSIONER FISH. I'VE GOT A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT. DID, DID YOU HAVE A CHANCE TO MEET WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, UH, ABOUT ANY NEW INFORMATION THAT WAS FOUND ABOUT THE HISTORIC SKIRTING MATERIAL? NO, I DID NOT. AND, UH, QUESTION FOR STAFF, IF YOU COULD NAVIGATE TO, I THINK IT'S SLIDE 28. THIS IS AN IMAGE FROM UNDERNEATH THE HOUSE OF THE LIMESTONE WALL. I JUST WOULD LIKE TO CONFIRM WITH THE APPLICANT THAT THE LIMESTONE WALL WE'RE SEEING IN THAT IMAGE. IS THAT THE NEW LIMESTONE OR IS THAT EVIDENCE OF A, OF A PREVIOUSLY EXISTING STONE? WELL, THERE, THERE WERE, THERE'S A SERIES OF PHOTOGRAPHS THAT SHOW THE MASONRY RUBBLE OF WHAT WAS THERE. AND THEN THERE ARE ALSO PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE, UH, LIMESTONE BLOCK WALL THAT, THAT'S THE NEW LIMESTONE BLOCK WALL, CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT. THANK YOU FOR THAT. I, I'D LIKE TO HEAR FROM SOME OF MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS ON THIS. I KNOW LAST TIME WE DISCUSSED IT, THERE WAS EVIDENCE OF A MAC AND REBASE. WE WERE LOOKING FOR ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE. WHAT MIGHT BE, THERE ISN'T A WHOLE LOT OF THAT HERE, BUT, UM, INTERESTED IN THE OTHER, MOST OF IT, MOST OF IT WAS REMOVED FROM THE SITE, AND THAT'S WHAT THE SWORN AFFIDAVITS ARE ABOUT, UH, THAT THESE ARE THE PEOPLE THAT WERE PRESENT WHEN IT WAS PHYSICALLY REMOVED AND FROM THE, FROM THE PROPERTY. UH, BUT THERE'S STILL A FAIR BIT OF IT LEFT, SCATTERED AROUND THE HOUSE THAT WAS USED FOR LANDSCAPING. I, I COMMISSIONERS, WHAT YOU SEE ON THE SCREEN RIGHT NOW IS THE MASONRY THAT WE WOULD CONCUR WAS LIKELY EXISTING PRIOR TO, UH, REMOVAL OR BOARDING UP WITH WOOD LAB. AND WHY IS THAT? UH, BASED ON, UH, BASED ON THE IMAGES OF THE RUBBLE AND THE MASONRY, THAT'S THE SCALE OF THE MASONRY THAT WE WOULD AGREE IS, IS AN IN-KIND REPLACEMENT RATHER THAN CHANGING TO A LARGER, UH, LIMESTONE. SO THE ISSUE ISN'T NECESSARILY THE MATERIAL, ALTHOUGH THAT PLAYS INTO IT, BUT IT'S THE SCALE OF THE THIS, THIS IS COMMISSIONER VELASQUEZ. UH, I'M, I'M INCLINED TO, UM, APPRECIATE THE, UH, RESEARCH'S DONE BY THE, UH, APPLICANT. UH, I THINK ONE OF THE STARK, UM, UH, VISUALS IS WHENEVER ANYTHING NEW IS PLACED ON SOMETHING THAT IS OLD, UH, THERE'S A CONTRAST, BUT IN TIME THE STONE WILL SOFTEN, IT'S COLOR WILL SOFTEN, UM, WHETHER IT'S SMALLER BLOCK OR A BIGGER BLOCK. UM, YOU KNOW, I I I TEND TO THINK THAT RATHER THAN LOOK FOR WHAT'S ON ANOTHER HOUSE, WE'D LOOK FOR SHADOWS, SHADOWS WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF, OF THE ACTUAL STRUCTURE GOING UNDERNEATH IT, LOOKING AT WHERE IT ATTACHES. AND IF THERE ISN'T ANYTHING THERE TO, TO INFORM US, UM, WE, WE DO HAVE EVIDENCE THAT, UH, THE MATERIAL ITSELF RIGHT IS APPROPRIATE. UH, I WOULD THINK THAT, THAT, THAT, THAT SOME POINT, SOMETIMES THESE STONE WALLS END UP BEING PLASTERED AND, AND THEY CAN GO THROUGH ALL KINDS OF DIFFERENT, UM, UH, UH, FACES, SO TO SPEAK. SO, UM, [00:50:01] YOU KNOW, WHEN WHEN, WHEN YOU HIT A POINT WHERE, WHERE THERE'S EVIDENCE OF SOMETHING AND EVIDENCE OF, OF, AND NO EVIDENCE OF WHAT IT IS THAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR, WE'RE KIND OF CREATING OUR OWN PROBLEM AND GOING AROUND IN CIRCLES AND, AND, AND MAKING A, A, A PROCESS GO MUCH LONGER THAN IT NEEDS TO GO. SO FOR, I I, I REALLY DO APPRECIATE THE, THE, UH, THE APPLICANT'S EFFORTS AND, UM, I I THINK THAT REALLY WHAT IS MOST, UM, UH, YOU KNOW, SHOCKING TO THE EYE IS THE FACT THAT IT'S NEW STONE. I THINK IT'S WELL DONE. UM, IT GIVES THE BASE OF THE HOUSE OF, OF A SENSE OF, OF OF STRENGTH, WHICH FOR THE SCALE OF THIS HOUSE, IT'S ALMOST MORE APPROPRIATE THAN THE SMALLER BLOCK. SO I MEAN, IF WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR IS, IS SOMETHING THAT THAT IS APPROPRIATE, I THINK WE CAN, WE CAN, UH, GUESS THAT THE PAST WOULD'VE CHOSEN WHAT STONE WAS AVAILABLE TO IT AT THE TIME. AND, UH, UH, I WOULD BE IN SUPPORT OF THIS AND IF THERE AREN'T ANY OTHER COMMENTS, I WOULD MAKE A MOTION TO, UH, ACCEPT THIS, UH, BASE AS PRESENTED BY THE APPLICANT. THIS IS COMMISSIONER GROUP. I THINK STAFF HAS A RIGHT AND I ALSO UNDERSTAND, UM, COMMISSIONER FISH, WHAT HE WAS SAYING. UM, THE PICTURES REALLY ARE SHOWING EITHER MASONRY OR THEIR SMALLER BRICK, WHICH IS WHAT IS COMMONLY FOUND IN THIS TYPE OF HOMES, THIS TYPE OF ARCHITECTURE IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD. SO I REALLY HAVE, UM, I THINK STAFF HAS IT. UM, AND THAT'S WHAT THE APPLICANT HAS FOUND AS WELL AS EVIDENCE OF WHAT WAS FOUND IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THIS IS CHAIRMAN FETZER, AND I WOULD CONCUR WITH, UH, COMMISSIONER GROOVE AND COMMISSIONER FISH THAT, UM, FROM THE PHOTOS AND THE PHOTO EVIDENCE THAT WAS PRESENTED, UH, THIS PROBABLY HAD A BRICK SKIRT AS OPPOSED TO A LIMESTONE SKIRT. UM, BUT THAT'S MY OPINION. AND WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE TABLE. DO WE HAVE A SECOND OR FURTHER FURTHER COMMENTS? THIS IS COMMISSIONER FISH. UM, I'M GONNA ADMIT TO BEING PARTICULARLY ON THE FENCE WITH IT AT, AT AT FIRST BLUSH. I MEAN, I, I THINK I'M CONCERNED BY IT. I THINK THE, A MASONRY, A MASONRY BASE HERE, UH, IS APPROPRIATE. UH, I HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THE SCALE OF THE MATERIAL THAT'S FORMATTED. UM, I'M WONDERING IF THERE ISN'T, UH, IF, IF THE MOTION FOR APPROVAL DOESN'T PASS, UH, IF THERE'S, IF THERE'S NOT, UH, A LESS DRAMATIC WAY, UH, TO RESOLVE REISSUE IN, UH, A SKIMM CODE CODER, SOME OTHER, SOME OTHER FASHION THAT WOULD SIMULATE THE APPROPRIATE SCALE OF MASONRY. UH, BUT I'M GONNA GO AHEAD AND SECOND THE MOTION LIKELY SUPPORT THE MOTION. UM, IF IT FAILS, THERE MIGHT BE ANOTHER WAY FORWARD. UH, COMMISSIONER FISH, THIS IS, UH, COMMISSIONER VELASQUE SAID THAT'S ONE OF THE, ONE OF THE REASONS WHY I MENTIONED SOMETIMES, YOU KNOW, STONE AND WELL IN TEXAS ANYWAY, RIGHT? STONE IS NOT NECESSARILY MEANT TO BE SEEN AS STONE. IT TYPICALLY IS MEANT TO BE PLASTERED. YOU TAKE, TAKE, YOU KNOW, MISSION SAN JOSE OR THE, THE, UH, ALAMO OR SAN FERNANDO CATHEDRAL, I, I, I'M NOT, UM, YOU, YOU KNOW, THE, THE STONE AS IT IS SOMETIMES IS KIND OF A DECONSTRUCTED VISUAL, RIGHT? UM, I'D HATE TO SEE SOMEBODY HAVE TO TEAR DOWN SOMETHING THAT IS RELATIVELY APPROPRIATE, RELATIVELY, UM, IT, TO ME IT THAT THAT'S, IT JUST DOESN'T SEEM TO BE FAIR. BUT THE, THE, UH, APPLICATION OF PLASTER ON IT MIGHT BE A WAY TO MITIGATE, UH, YOU KNOW, TO, TO, TO, TO, UH, IMPOSE A LESSER, UH, CONSEQUENCE. RIGHT? UH, BUT, UH, I, I JUST WANNA TELL YOU, I APPRECIATE YOUR SECOND THANK YOU. THIS IS COMMISSIONER CARPENTER. I'M, I APPRECIATE THE COMMENTS OF MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS AND, AND I THINK IT IS THE, FOR ME, IT'S NOT THE MATERIALITY PER SE AS IT IS THE SCALE OF IT. UM, BUT HAVING SAID THAT, IN, IN MANY WAYS, THIS IS MORE NOBLE MATERIAL. UM, AND I'D RATHER SEE THAT EVEN IF IT MAY NOT BE EXACTLY HISTORICALLY ACCURATE, UH, THAN SAY AN INFERIOR MATERIAL, THAT WOULD LEAD TO FURTHER DETERIORATION OF THE HISTORIC STRUCTURE. SO, UM, I'M, I'M IN SUPPORT OF THE, THE MOTION AS AS IT'S, SO WE HAVE A MOTION AND [00:55:01] A SECOND FOR APPROVAL AS SUBMITTED. UH, MAY I HAVE A ROLL CALL PLEASE? UH, FERNANDEZ, UH, AYE FISH? AYE. GIBBS AYE. VELASQUEZ AYE. AREOLA? AYE. CARPENTER? AYE. GROUP? AYE. BETTS. AYE. AND LAVO, I THINK WE MIGHT HAVE LOST LA FOR HIS APPOINTMENT. SO THAT IS, UH, UNANIMOUS. MOTION CARRIES. OKAY, UP NEXT IS ADAM 30. OKAY, SO I, I'M UNDERSTANDING THEN THAT THAT MEANS THAT THE, UH, THAT THE LIMESTONE BASE HAS BEEN APPROVED? YES. MR. LEWIS, I'LL FOLLOW UP IN THE EMAIL. THANK YOU. OKAY, WELL THANK, THANK YOU ALL SO MUCH. I REALLY APPRECIATE IT. UH, UH, I THINK IT WAS A VERY FAIR DECISION AND MY HOMEOWNER WILL BE VERY PLEASED AND SHE'S REALLY DEDICATED TO RESTORING THIS HOME, SO YOU'RE GONNA SEE SOME VAST IMPROVEMENTS IN IT. THANK YOU. HEY EDWARD, ARE YOU THERE WITH THE [32. 21-1185 Address/Description: 225 KING WILLIAM HDRC Case No.: 2020-540 Landmark Name: Individual Landmark Historic District Name: King William RIO District: RIO-4 Applicant: Pam Carpenter/Seventh Generation Design, Inc. Request: Construction of rear additions and accessory structures, site work, rehabilitation, demolition of an existing addition City Council Dist.: 1] APPLICANT FOR 32? I AM. UH, I'LL GO AHEAD AND READ THE REQUEST INTO THE RECORD, MA'AM. THANKS. AGENDA, ITEM NUMBER 32 H D R C, CASE NUMBER 20 25 42 25 Q WILLIAMS. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL TO ONE PERFORM REHABILITATIVE SCOPES OF WORK TO INCLUDE THE REPAIR OF WOOD, WINDOWS AND DOORS AND KIND REPAIR TO VARIOUS WOOD ELEMENTS, INSULATION OF AN ARCHITECTURALLY APPROPRIATE FOUNDATION, SKIRTING AND THE REMOVAL OF NON-ORIGINAL FRONT, FRONT PORCH AND CONSTRUCTION OF AN ARCHITECTURALLY APPROPRIATE PORCH. TWO, DEMOLITION OF AN EXISTING HISTORIC WING AND CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW ADDITION AND ITS PLACE. ADDITION CONSISTS OF A NUMBER OF ADDITIONS AND HAS BEEN MODIFIED SINCE, SINCE ITS ORIGINAL CONSTRUCTION CIRCA 1893, PARTIAL DEMOLITION OF THE REAR PORCH ROOF AND PORTIONS OF THE REAR PORCHES. FOUR. CONSTRUCT THE REAR ADDITION TO BE LOCATED WHERE THE CURRENT KITCHEN ADDITION IS LOCATED. FIVE. CONSTRUCT A NEW FIREPLACE IN CHIMNEY AT THE REAR OF THE HISTORIC STRUCTURE. SIX. CONSTRUCT A PANTRY ADDITION TO THE EXISTING BRICK. ADDITION TO WE CONSTRUCT A NEW REAR PORCH, A CONSTRUCT, A DETACHED CARPORT TO BE LOCATED IN THE SIDE REAR YARD, NON-CONSTRUCTIVE STORAGE SHED IN THE SIDE YARD AND 10, CONSTRUCT A DETACHED ACCESSORY STRUCTURE AT THE REAR OF THE SITE. STAFF FOR ITEM NUMBER ONE. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED REHABILITATIVE SCOPES OF WORK WITH THE STIPULATION THAT ALL REPAIR WORK IS DONE IN KIND. THESE ITEMS ARE ELIGIBLE FOR ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL IS NOTED IN FINDING C FOR ITEM TWO, STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF ITEM TWO, THE DISMANTLING AND SALVAGING OF THE EXISTING HISTORIC WING. THREE. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE DEMOLITION OF THE REAR PORCH AND REAR PORCH ROOF IS NOTED IN FINDING F FOUR STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER FOUR. THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE REAR ADDITION OF THE LOCATION OF THE EXISTING REAR WING RECONSTRUCTION OF THE WING BASED ON HISTORICAL DOCUMENTATION IS MOST APPROPRIATE. IF AN EXPANDED REAR FOOTPRINT IS PURSUED, THE CURRENT MASSING MATERIALS AND PROFILES OF THE EXISTING WING SHOULD BE PRIORITIZED AND IN THE DESIGN OF A NEW ADDITION AT THIS LOCATION, FIVE. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER FIVE, THE CONSTRUCTION OF A FIREPLACE AND CHIMNEY AT THE REAR HISTORIC STRUCTURE BASED ON FINDING I WITH THE STIPULATION OF THE PROPOSED CHIMNEY SHOULD BE DESIGNED IN A MANNER THAT COMPLIMENTS HISTORIC CHIMNEYS AND BLUES. ON SITE SIX, STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL. ITEM NUMBER SIX, THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE REAR PANTRY EDITION BASED ON FINDING J WITH THE STIPULATION THAT A SIMILAR ROOT FORM WINDOW MATERIALS AND MATERIALS SHOULD BE USED FOR THIS ADDITION THAT'S FOUND ON THE EXISTING BRICK EDITION. SEVEN. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER SEVEN, THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW REAR PORCH BASED ON FINDING I EIGHT STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER EIGHT. THE CONSTRUCTION OF A REAR YARD CARPORT BASED ON FINDING K STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE APPLICANT ADDRESS THE INCONSISTENCIES WITH THE GUIDELINES FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION BY INCORPORATING MATERIALS, WINDOW MATERIALS, ROOT FORMS, AND MASSING THAT ARE CONSISTENT WITH THOSE SIGNS. HISTORICALLY, ON SITE NINE, STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER NINE. THE INSTRUCTION OF A DETACHED STORAGE STRUCTURE. BASED ON FINDING ILL STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE APPLICANT ADDRESS THE INCONSISTENCIES WITH THE GUIDELINES FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION BY INCORPORATING MATERIALS, WINDOW MATERIALS, ROOT FORMS, AND MASSING THAT ARE CONSISTENT WITH THOSE FOUND. HISTORICALLY ON SITE 10, STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER 10. THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE DETACH REAR ACCESSORIES STRUCTURE BASED ON FINDING N STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE MASKING FOOTPRINT MATERIALS, WINDOW MATERIALS AND ROOT FORM BE AMENDED TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE GUIDELINES FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION. IN ADDITION TO THE ABOVE RECOMMENDATIONS, STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE APPLICANT ADHERE TO THE GUIDELINES [01:00:01] FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION AND THE GUIDELINES FOR ADDITIONS IN REGARDS TO LOT COVERAGE AND MASKING IN REGARDS TO PERCENTAGES OF NEW CONSTRUCTION CONSTRUCTION'S FOOTPRINTS WHEN COMPARED TO THE HISTORIC STRUCTURES FOOTPRINT, I HAVE THE APPLICANT, PAM CARPENTER ON THE LINE, AS WELL AS, UM, A MEMBER OF THE APPLICANT'S TEAM. TOGAN SMITH ON THE LINE. THANK YOU EDWARD. GOOD AFTERNOON, COMMISSIONER. THANK YOU FOR REVIEWING OUR PROPERTY AT 2 25 KING WILLIAMS STREET. BETWEEN BEA GARDEN TURNER. I'LL BE COVERING THE HISTORIC PORTIONS AND TOBIN WILL BE COMMENTING ON THE NEW ADDITIONS AND OTHER ALTERATIONS OWNERS. BILLY AND WENDY ATWELL PURCHASED A PROPERTY LAST YEAR IN A SEVERELY DECLINED STATE. THEY WISH TO REVERT WHAT HAS DEVOLVED INTO A MULTI-UNIT RENTAL, BACK TO A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE. SLIDE 19 AND 20. I'LL BE CALLING OUT THE SLIDES SO THAT YOU CAN FOLLOW ALONG IN THE, IN THE DISCUSSION WITH VISUAL. THIS IS OF THE FRONT FACADE IN 1880. THE HISTORIC HOUSE IS BUILT BY ROBERT KY. IT IS A WEATHERBOARD WOODEN STRUCTURE. IN 1886, HE BUILT HIS SOUTHERN EDITION, PRESUMABLY TO SUPPORT HIS WORK AS EDITOR OF THE LARGEST GERMAN LANGUAGE NEWSPAPER IN TEXAS. HIS FIRST ADDITION TO THE ORIGINAL WOODEN STRUCTURE SETS THE BRICK MATERIAL PALLET TEST DESK FOUND THROUGH RESEARCH WERE DETAILED SPECIFICATIONS IN THE FORM OF A MECHANICS LIE ON THE 1880 ORIGINAL WOODEN HOME. THERE ARE LESS DETAILED SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE 1886 BRICK BRICK DISTANCE. SLIDE 23 THROUGH 26 HISTORIC DATA. THE PROPOSED RECONSTRUCTION OF THE FRONT PORCHES WILL BE BASED UPON THE 1880S. MECHANIC LING NARRATIVE FOUND. THESE WRITTEN SPECIFICATIONS PROVIDE AN AMAZING LEVEL OF DETAIL ABOUT HOW THE ORIGINAL HOUSE WAS TO BE CONSTRUCTED, AND THIS WAS CONFIRMED BY OUR INVESTIGATION TO THE PHYSICAL CONDITION. SLIDE 26 27 SHOW THE ORIGINAL 9/18/96 SANDBORN MAP WITH MAIN HOUSE BRICK ADDITION AND THREE ACCESSORY STRUCTURES. NO ACCESSORY BUILDING SURVIVE. BUT OF NOTE, ALL THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURES HOVER ABOUT THE REAR AND SIDE PROPERTY BOUNDARIES. SLIDE 28 30, YOU ARE SEEING PHOTOGRAPHIC ARCHIVAL INVENTORY FROM YEARS 1971 AND 1976, WHICH DOCUMENTS THE ALTERATIONS IN SIGNIFICANT FROM THE ORIGINAL MECHANICS LANE. THESE INCLUDE THE FRONT PORCH STEPS, SKIRTING, OUTRIGGERS, ROOF PITCH, UM, MOST ELEMENTS OF THE FRONT PORCH POSTS, BUT WE WILL RECONSTRUCT THE FRONT PORCH WITH FIDELITY TO THE MECHANICS LANE. SLIDE 31. THIS IS A MONOGRAM CARRIAGE BLOCK RENET THAT SURVIVED AN ARTIFACT FROM THE SITE. 32. THIS IS THE SITE AS IT IS TODAY. SLIDE 33. THIS IS THE HOUSE ON THE SITE AS IT WAS BUILT IN 18 80 34. THE SITE AFTER THE 1886 BRICK EDITION WAS CONSTRUCTED TO THE SOUTH 35. THE SITE SOMETIME BETWEEN 1880 AND 1896 SHOWING THE REAR L WING ADDITION. FURTHER ADDED TO AND MODIFIED FROM ORIGINAL SLIDE 36. THE SITE, BASED UPON THE 1896 SANDBORN MAP SHOWING THREE DISPERSED REAR FACING ACCESSORY STRUCTURES AND ADDITIONS. THE THREE ORIGINAL ORIGINAL ACCESSORY STRUCTURES WERE CARRIAGE HOUSE A SHED, AND FOUR SERVANT QUARTERS AND A PRIVY ALL LOCATED NEAR THE REAR BOUNDARY 37. SPEAKING OF ACCESSORY STRUCTURES, WERE LOOKING AT A VICINITY MAP OF OTHER PROPERTIES WITH ACCESSORY STRUCTURES. HERE THERE'S A DIVERSITY OF ROOF FORMS RANGING FROM FLAT, LOW SLOPE SHED GABLE TO HIP. IN THIS GRAPHIC, YELLOW REPRESENTS SINGLE STORY LOW SLOPE ACCESSORY STRUCTURES. ORANGE INDICATES TWO STORY FLAT ACCESSORY STRUCTURES. BLUE REPRESENTS ONE AND TWO STORY SLOPED ACCESSORY STRUCTURES. DESPITE THE ROOF'S DIVERSITY, THERE IS A CONSISTENCY OF DEVELOPMENTAL PATTERN FOR ACCESSORY STRUCTURES GRAVITATING TO THE PROPERTY LINE OF REAR AND INSIDE. PLEASE KEEP THIS IN MIND WHEN TOGAN SHOWS YOU THE PROPOSAL FOR NEW ACCESSORY STRUCTURES. 38 THROUGH 39 PROPOSED PORCH DRAWINGS DEPICTED. LOWER RIGHT IS A COMPARATIVE DRAWING OF WHAT THE PORCH LOOKS LIKE NOW VERSUS WHAT IT WILL, WILL OR SHOULD LOOK LIKE, FOLLOWING THE MECHANIC'S LIEN PRESCRIPTION. THE DESIGN TO SIMPLY FOLLOW THESE FOR SPECIFICATIONS OF THE MECHANICS LIEN AND TO AVOID ANY CONJECTURE ON THE DESIGN ELEMENTS. NOW WE'RE GONNA KIND OF SCROLL THROUGH THIS PACKET OF ABOUT 60 SLIDES, WHICH, UM, THE 40 NUMBERS 40 THROUGH 98 HAVE. THESE ARE EXTENSIVE PHOTOS OF THE SITE AND WE INVITE YOU TO LOOK AT THOSE IN THE PACKET, BUT WE WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT THE FOLLOWING SLIDE, THROWING UP TO, UH, AND THROUGH 53. THE SITE IS HEAVILY VEGETATED AND THE HOME BLOCK MUCH OF THE REAR YARD IN SLIDE 54 [01:05:01] THROUGH 58, UM, WHERE THE FRONT PORCH IS SHOWN. UM, THERE ARE ALSO LOTS IS SHOWING THE INCONSISTENCIES WITH THE MECHANICS LANE. UM, SLIDE 59 THROUGH 61. UM, THESE ARE AT THE BRICK ADDITION AND SHOW THE FRAGILE STATE OF THE REAR PORCH IN 66 AND THE REAR L ADDITION, THE REAR AREA GROWING AGAIN TO 62 THROUGH 99. THESE GUYS FOCUS ON THE REAR ADDITIONS DECAY, THE FAILURES OF THE DECKING AND THE SIDING IN THE, IN THE REAR L WINGS, THE EROSION OF MATERIALITY AND THE END OF SERVICEABLE LIFE, AS WELL AS SIGNIFICANT INTERIOR APPLIED FIRE DAMAGE TO THAT REAR ADDITION. THIS BRINGS US TO SLIDE 100 NOW TO TALK ABOUT THE PROPOSED NEW ADDITIONS AND ALTERATIONS AND HOW TO SUPPORT THE HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT PATTERN OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD OF CODED MET. THANK YOU, PAM. UH, THE PROCESS DATE HAS BEEN VERY POSITIVE. WE MET WITH KING WILLIAMS. WE RECEIVED AND RESPONDED TO THEIR FEEDBACK CONCERNING THE CARPORT SIZE AND LOCATION. THE CARPORT WAS REDUCED FROM A THREE BAY TO A TWO BAY AND PUSHED AS FAR BACK ON THE PROPERTY AS POSSIBLE WHILE MAINTAINING THE HERITAGE OAK TREE AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER. THAT FILTERS THE VIEW OF THE NEIGHBOR'S TWO STORY ACCESSORY STRUCTURE. UH, NEXT SLIDE, 1 0 1, 1 0 2 IS NOTED. WE ALSO HAD TWO D R C MEETINGS, ONE ON SITE AND LISTENED AND RESPONDED AGAIN. THE OWNERS WERE WILLING TO ELIMINATE A PIECE OF PROGRAM AND WE REDUCED THE LOCK COVERAGE. SO THE PROJECT NOW STANDS AT 38%, WELL UNDER THE 50% ALLOWABLE LOT COVERAGE. LET'S GO TO 1 0 3 PLEASE. TREE DIAGRAM. THIS DIAGRAM TELLS THE STORY OF WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO ACHIEVE. THE SITE IS DOTTED WITH TREES AND NEARLY COVERED BY TREE CANOPY. OUR OBJECTIVES WERE TO WORK AROUND ALL HEALTHY TREES, LOCATE ACCESSORY STRUCTURES AT THE PERIPHERY OF THE LOT AS THEY WERE HISTORICALLY, MAINTAIN A SINGLE STORY SCALE, DEFERENTIAL TO THE HISTORIC ARCHITECTURE, AND LEAVE A CENTRAL COURTYARD SPACE. THIS DIAGRAM SHOWS WE HAVE SHIFTED VOLUMES FROM IDEAL LOCATIONS BEHIND AN INSET FROM EXISTING STRUCTURES, BUT HAVE DONE SO TO PRESERVE MATURE TREES THAT ARE CRITICAL TO THE SITE EXPERIENCE. WE INTEND TO FOLLOW THE LEAD OF THE EXISTING STRUCTURES AND ELEVATE NEW ARCHITECTURE ON PEERS TO MINIMIZE ROOT REMOVAL AND DAMAGE. THE CARPORT AND SMALL STORAGE STRUCTURE ARE THE TWO EXCEPTIONS TO THIS. UH, I'D LIKE TO GO TO PAGE, UH, SLIDE 1 0 7, PLEASE, UH, TO COMMUNICATE A BIT MORE ABOUT THE DESIGN CONCEPT. THE ORIGINAL WOOD FRAME HOME WAS BUILT IN 1880 AND THIS IS A SYMMETRICAL GABLE STRUCTURE CLAD WITH WOOD SIDING IN 1886. AS PAM MENTIONED, A BRICK ADDITION WAS CONSTRUCTED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE EXISTING HOUSE. THAT ADDITION WAS SET BACK FROM THE ORIGINAL FACADE AND BUILT WITH A DIFFERENT MATERIAL AND A DIFFERENT ARCHITECTURAL LANGUAGE. NOW, 135 YEARS LATER, WE'RE PROPOSING ANOTHER EDITION TO THIS VERY SPECIAL HOME, STEP BACK, FURTHER LOWER IN SCALE AND OF A NEW LANGUAGE. SO LIKE THE ORIGINAL EDITION, UTILIZING BRICK IS THE PRIMARY MATERIAL. UH, LET'S GO TO SECTIONS PLEASE. UH, SLIDES 1 0 8 1 0 9. IN THIS SECTION YOU CAN SEE THE PROPOSED ARCHITECTURE ON THE LEFT SIDE IS LOWERING SCALE DEFERENTIAL TO THE HISTORIC HOUSE LOCATED BETWEEN MATURE TREES AND THE TREE CANOPY. THE ROOFS APPEAR TO BE FLAT IN THIS CONCEPTUAL MODEL, BUT ARE LOW SLOPING HIP ROOFS THAT SHED WATER, UH, AND REGISTER AS A HORIZONTAL DATUM LINE ALONG ALL SIDES. THERE ARE NUMEROUS REASONS FOR THIS ROOF TYPE. THIS KEEPS THE SCALE OF THE ARCHITECTURE AROUND THE CENTRAL, CENTRAL COURTYARD APPROPRIATE SO AS NOT TO OVERWHELM THIS OUTDOOR ROOM AND IS LIKEWISE SENSITIVE TO NEIGHBORS. THE PROPOSED ROOFS TUCK UNDER THE EAVES OF THE ORIGINAL 1880 GABLE AND 1886 HIT ROOF, SO AS TO BE DEFERENTIAL AND RESPECTFUL OF THESE ROOF FORMS AND CORNICE DETAILS. THIS IS A SENSITIVE MEETING VERSUS A COLLISION OF FORMS. ADDITIONALLY, THE CARPORT ROOF TUCKS UNDER A CRITICAL HERITAGE OAK BRANCH THAT I MENTIONED FILTERS THE EXPERIENCE OF AN ADJACENT TWO STORY ACCESSORY STRUCTURE TO THE SOUTH. AND THE FEW GLIMPSES OF PROPOSED ARCHITECTURE VISIBLE FROM THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY WILL READ AS GARDEN WALLS VERSUS BUILDINGS PRECISELY BECAUSE ROOF LINES ARE IMPERCEPTIBLE. THERE ARE ALSO PRECEDENTS FOR THESE ROOF TYPOLOGIES. SPECIFICALLY, THERE ARE MASONRY STRUCTURES DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO THE NORTH AND SOUTH THAT HAVE FLAT ROOFS. THERE ARE OTHERS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AS WELL THAT PAM IDENTIFIED IN THAT SLIDE. AND WE'LL GET TO ANOTHER SLIDE THAT SHOWS IMAGES OF THOSE DIRECTLY ADJACENT. THE NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. ONE 10, UH, THREE D STREET VIEWS. SO THESE SHOW THE MINIMAL IMPACT OF THE PROPOSED ARCHITECTURE. THE SMALL MOMENTS OF PROPOSED STRUCTURES THAT CAN BE SEEN TO THE NORTH AND SOUTH OF THE HISTORIC HOME ARE SET WELL BACK FROM THE HISTORIC FACADE. THERE ARE NO VISIBLE FENESTRATIONS. THEY READ THIS GARDEN WALLS ARMATURES FOR PLANTS NOT COMPETING BUILDINGS. FOR REFERENCE, THE SOLID BRICK WALL OF THE STORAGE VOLUME IS 76 FEET BACK FROM THE STREET, WHICH IS 30 FEET BEYOND THE FRONT FACADE OF THE 1880 HOME. THIS IS THE MIDDLE IMAGE TO THE LEFT [01:10:01] FOR REFERENCE. UM, ONE MORE PROPOSED ARCHITECTURE BEHIND THE HISTORIC HOME IS LOWER, WHICH WE SAW IN SECTION AND THEREFORE HAS NO IMPACT ON THE EXPERIENCE FROM KING WILLIAMS STREET. LET'S MOVE TO THREE D AERIAL VIEWS PLEASE SLIDE ONE 11 AND ONE 12. AS MENTIONED, OUR INTENTION IS TO USE BRICK MATCHING. THE EXISTING IS THE PRIMARY MATERIAL FOR ADDITIONS AND ACCESSORY STRUCTURES, SO AS THE LIMIT THE PALLET AND AVOID CREATING A CACOPHONY OF MATERIALS. BUT THE INTENT IS TO DIFFERENTIATE THE ADDITION. THE NEW WORK, LIKE THE ORIGINAL ADDITION, DIFFERENTIATED ITSELF THROUGH ARCHITECTURAL LANGUAGE, IN OUR CASE, LOWER, QUIETER, SIMPLER, AND OF ITS TIME. YOU CAN SEE FROM THESE VIEWS THAT ALL OF THE PROPOSED ARCHITECTURE IS SET BACK FROM BEHIND AND LOWER THAN THE HISTORIC STRUCTURE, ALLOWING THE 1880S ARCHITECTURE TO BE THE CENTRAL FOCUS. A PROPOSED PATTERN OF DEVELOPMENT FOLLOWS HISTORIC PRECEDENT WITH ACCESSORY STRUCTURES PUSHED TO THE PERIPHERY OF THE PROPERTY, AND THE MAIN ADDITION COMING OFF OF THE HISTORIC STRUCTURE AS A PERPENDICULAR ARM. YOU CAN ALSO SEE THE SIGNIFICANT CENTRAL GREEN SPACE. SLIDE ONE 12 FORMED BY THE REAR OF THE HISTORIC HOME AND THE PROPOSED STRUCTURES. THIS WILL BE A LARGE LUSH COURTYARD, APPROXIMATELY 40 FEET BY 66, 66 FEET MATERIAL. SLIDE ONE 13. AS MENTIONED, WE INTEND TO MATCH THE 1886 BRICK. THIS IS THE PRIMARY MATERIAL OF THE PROPOSED STRUCTURES. BRONZES, ANODIZED ALUMINUM SIDING AS A SECONDARY MATERIAL THAT COMPLIMENTS THE BRICK AND HARMONIZES WITH THE MINI TREE TRUNKS ON SITE WITH ITS BARK LIKE TONE. RECLAIMED PINE FROM THE HISTORIC DOME WILL BE USED AT THE WOOD BOARD SOFFIT WINDOW AND DOOR FRAMES WILL BE THERMALLY BROKEN ANODIZED ALUMINUM OF A SLIGHTLY DARKER TONE THAN SID TO DIFFERENTIATE FRAMES FROM FACADES. PROPOSED STRUCTURES ARE SIMPLY DETAILED BRICK VOLUMES LESS ORNATE THAN THE HISTORIC HOME. FOLLOWING THE GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF THE HISTORIC DESIGN GUIDELINES, LARGE OPENINGS ADDRESSING THE COURTYARD SPACE UNSEEN FROM THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY, SMALLER APERTURES FACING NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES AND NO OPENINGS FACING THE STREETS WHILE THE PROPOSED MATERIALS MATCH OR COMPLIMENT THE HISTORIC MATERIALS. THE ARCHITECTURAL LANGUAGE IS NEW. CLARITY ABOUT HISTORIC ARCHITECTURE AND NEW ARCHITECTURE IS KEY TO THE HISTORIC HOME'S INTEGRITY. SLIDE ONE 14 PLEASE. ROOF PLAN AND PRECEDENCE. UH, THIS ROOF PLAN SHOWS OUR LOAD LOPING HIP ROOFS AND THE PROPOSED, UH, OF THE PROPOSED ARCHITECTURE AS WELL AS KEY DETAILS CLARIFYING THE 10 AND A HALF INCH FACIA. ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE OF THIS PAGE, YOU CAN SEE PHOTOS OF ACCESSORY STRUCTURES I MENTIONED EARLIER. THE TWO AT THE TOP ARE THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURES MASONRY WITH FLAT ROOFS DIRECTLY TO THE NORTH AND SOUTH OF THIS PROPERTY. AND THEN I'D LIKE TO CIRCLE BACK TO 1 0 4 AND, SORRY, I'M MOVING SO FAST, BUT WE GOT A LOT TO COVER. 1 0 4 SIZE IS A CRITICAL ISSUE, AND THESE NEXT DIAGRAMS WILL SHOW WHERE WE ARE IN SQUARE FOOTAGE OF ADDITIONS AND ACCESSORY STRUCTURES, AS WELL AS LOCK COVERAGE. THE 1 0 4 CONDITIONED ADDITIONS ARE 87% OF THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE EXISTING MAIN HOUSE, WHICH COMPLIES. THE NEXT SLIDE SHOWS WHERE WE ARE RELATIVE TO CITY CODE, WHICH ALLOWS UP TO 2,500 SQUARE FEET OF ACCESSORY STRUCTURES WE'RE WELL UNDER RELATIVE TO THAT, BUT WE KNOW THAT HISTORIC GUIDELINES ARE CALCULATED DIFFERENTLY, AND I'LL GET TO THAT GRAPHIC SOON. LAST, WE'RE UN WELL UNDER ON LOCK COVERAGE, AND IT'S WORTH POINTING OUT THAT THIS IS ACCOMPLISHED WITH ALL OF THE PROGRAM ON ONE LEVEL, SPECIFICALLY TO REMAIN DEFERENTIAL, UH, EDWARD OR WHOEVER'S IN CONTROL. COULD YOU PLEASE BRING UP THE SUPPLEMENTAL DIAGRAMS WE SUBMITTED? UH, HOPEFULLY THOSE CAN COME UP SOON. UM, I'M JUST GONNA KEEP GOING. UH, AND I HOPE YOU GUYS WERE ABLE TO SEE THESE, THESE SHOW THAT IF WE COMPARE THE INTERIOR SPACE OF THE HISTORIC PRIMARY STRUCTURE TO THE INTERIOR SPACE CONDITION OF THE PROPOSED ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, WERE AT 40%. HOWEVER, IF WE RUN THE NUMBERS WITH THE EXTERIOR SPACES, PORCHES AND CARPORT WE'RE OVER THE GUIDELINE PERCENTAGE. SO THAT SAID, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE LOOK AT THIS PROPOSAL IN ITS ENTIRETY BEFORE COMING TO A CONCLUSION ON THIS AND WITH NEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXT TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION. FIRST, THIS IS ONE OF THE LARGER LOTS ON KING WILLIAMS STREET WITH ONE OF THE MORE DIMINUTIVE HISTORIC STRUCTURES. FOR EXAMPLE, THE JOCKEY HOUSE NEXT DOOR, 2 41 KING WILLIAMS, IS ON A SLIGHTLY LARGER LOT THAT HAS 5,598 SQUARE FEET OF HOUSE WITH A 2,160 SQUARE FOOT ACCESSORY STRUCTURE. THE HOUSE WE'RE DISCUSSING AT 2 25, KING WILLIAM NEXT DOOR HAS TWO. OUR OUR PROJECT HAS 2,350 SQUARE FEET OF INTERIOR SPACE AND HISTORICALLY HAD APPROXIMATELY 1050 SQUARE FEET OF ACCESSORY STRUCTURES. SO LESS THAN HALF THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE JOB. IN BOTH CASES, MAIN HOUSE AND ACCESSORY STRUCTURES ON A COMPARABLE LOT AND THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OF THE NORTH 2 21. KING WILLIAM HAS A 2,616 SQUARE FOOT STRUCTURE ON A LOT THAT IS [01:15:01] 40% OF THE SIZE OF 2 25 KING WILLIAM. SO A LARGER MAIN STRUCTURE ON A MUCH SMALLER PROPERTY. SAME THING ACROSS THE STREET, 2 22 KING WILLIAMS, A HOUSE THAT IS MORE THAN TWICE THE SIZE OF 2 25 KING WILLIAMS ON A LOT THAT IS 70% OF THE SIZE. THERE ARE MANY MORE EXAMPLES, BUT THESE ARE THE EXAMPLES THAT ARE CLOSEST TO HOME. SO WE ARE CONSIDERING A PROPERTY THAT WAS HISTORICALLY UNDERDEVELOPED RELATIVE TO OTHER PROPERTIES ON KING WILLIAMS STREET, WHICH SKEWS THE NUMBERS RELATIVE TO THE LOT SIZE, A SIGNIFICANTLY SIZED LOT 0.4 OF AN ACRE. SO GOING BACK TO THE GSKI HOUSE YET AGAIN NEXT DOOR. AS A COMPARISON, OUR PROPOSED ADDITIONS AND ACCESSORY STRUCTURES IN TOTAL ARE STILL LEFT THAN THE MAIN GSKI HOUSE IGNORING THEIR ARE MORE THAN 2000 SQUARE FOOT ACCESSORY STRUCTURE. AND OUR ACCESSORY STRUCTURES AND ADDITIONS ARE ONE STORY MINIMALLY VISIBLE FROM THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY. AT EACH STEP THROUGH THIS PROCESS, WE'VE LISTENED AND RESPONDED TO CONCERNS WE HAVE REDESIGNED AND REDUCED, AND THE RESULT IS A ONE STORY, THREE BEDROOM, TWO CAR, TWO CAR CARPORT HOME THAT DOESN'T MAX OUT HEIGHT LOT COVERAGE OR MAIN HOUSE SQUARE FOOTAGE, AND IS DEFERENTIAL TO THE HISTORIC HOME IN SCALE AND MASSING AND IS SENSITIVE IN TERMS OF MATERIALS, QUIET AND DETAILING SO THAT THE CENTRAL FOCUS REMAINS ON THE 1880S ARCHITECTURE. WE HAVE DILIGENTLY WORKED WITH THESE CARING OWNERS TO DO WHAT IS RIGHT FOR THIS HISTORIC HOME, TO PRESERVE THE HEALTHY TREES ON THE SITE, TO ALLOW THE HISTORIC ARCHITECTURE TO BE THE MAIN EVENT FROM THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY WHILE CREATING A COMPACT COMPOUND THAT ACCOMMODATES MODERN LIFE. MOST IMPORTANTLY, THE ATWELL CARE ABOUT KEITH WILLIAMS. THEY WANT TO BE GREAT NEIGHBORS AND BE COLLECTIVELY ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT. THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. I'M EAGER TO HEAR YOUR COMMENTS AND WE'LL TRY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. THANK YOU. UH, COREY, DO WE HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT? YES. UM, WE HAVE TWO. UM, THE FIRST WAS FROM THE KING WILLIAMS ASSOCIATION. UM, THE ARCHITECTURAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE REVIEWED THIS PROJECT ON FOUR OCCASIONS, TWO, WITH THE APPLICANT AND THEIR DESIGN TEAM TO REVIEW THE PROPOSED DEMOLITION RESTORATION AND ADDITIONS AT 2 25 KING. THE DESIGN GOALS FOR THE PROJECT RECOMMENDABLE RESTORING AND FEATURING THE 1880 AND 1886 HISTORIC STRUCTURE, CONCEALING NEW ADDITIONS FROM THE RIGHT OF WAY, RESERVING ALL MATURE TREES ON THE PROPERTY. UM, WE CONCUR WITH THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVING ITEMS 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, AND SEVEN. WE ALSO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF ITEMS 4, 8, 9, AND 10 AS PROPOSED BY THE APPLICANT. ANY CONSIDERATION OF THE CONTEXT OF THIS SITE AND THE BLOCK, WE FIND THE PROPOSED SCALE MASSING ROOF FORMS AND MATERIAL SELECTIONS OF THE ADDITIONS AS DESIGNED TO BE APPROPRIATE, UM, THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY. NEXT COMMENT. THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY IS, SAN ANTONIO OBJECTS TO THE SCALE AND SCOPE. THE ADDITIONS PROPOSED TO THE HOUSE AT 2 25. KING WILLIAM. THE PROJECT IS CURRENTLY DESIGNED, CREATES A DEVELOPMENT PATTERN THAT IS NOT COMPATIBLE WITH THIS HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOOD, INCLUDING THE PARKING PAD IN THE FRONT YARD OF KING WILLIAM STREET. UM, THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY SUPPORTS THE OBJECTION OF THE OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION, UH, TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE CARPORT, THE STORAGE STRUCTURE IN THE REAR ACCESSORY STRUCTURE. WE OPPOSE THE DEMOLITION OF THE REAR ADDITION AND AGREE WITH THE OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION. THAT RECONSTRUCTION OF THE WING BASED ON HISTORICAL DOCUMENTATION IS THE APPROPRIATE APPROACH. WHILE THE APPLICATION STATES THAT INPUT HAD BEEN SOLICITED FROM THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY OF SAN ANTONIO, IT WAS NOT, WE OPPOSED THE PLAN IN THIS APPLICATION. THANK YOU. THIS IS COMMISSIONER FISH. I CAN GIVE A, A BRIEF REPORT ON, UH, D R C SITE VISIT. UH, I THINK, UM, MYSELF AND THE CHAIRMAN, UH, VISITED AND I, AND I'M GONNA KIND OF HIT ON SOME OF THE POINTS THAT STAFF HAS IDENTIFIED, UH, POTENTIALLY PROBLEMATIC. UH, I WANNA BEGIN WITH THE, THE DEMOLITION, UH, PORTION AND, AND I THINK THIS IS RELATIVE TO ITEM NUMBER FOUR. UM, WE HAD A CHANCE TO WALK THROUGH, UH, THE INTERIOR AND AROUND THE EXTERIOR OF THAT ADDITION. UH, IT WAS CLEAR THAT, UH, THAT SPACE HAD BEEN HEAVILY MODIFIED OVER TIME TO THE EXTENT THAT SHEATHING WASN'T CONSISTENT. JOYCE CHANGED THROUGHOUT, REPRESENTING DIFFERENT TIMES, AND I THINK IN MY OPINION THAT IN MY OPINION, THIS, THIS REPRESENTS A LOSS OF INTEGRITY. AND, UH, I THINK THAT WAS THE CONSENSUS AT THE TIME. IF THE CHAIRMAN HAD A DIFFERENT OPINION, I'LL LET HIM CHIME IN. BUT WHEN IT COMES TO THE DEMOLITION, UH, IT SEEMS LIKE THERE WAS A, A, A LOSS OF SIGNIFICANCE OF THAT STRUCTURE. UH, GENERALLY WHEN, WHEN THERE'S A LOSS OF SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STRUCTURE, I WOULDN'T BE SUPPORTING A RECONSTRUCTION OF IT. AND THERE WAS DISCUSSION ABOUT ITS DIMENSIONS BEING INCOMPATIBLE WITH REUSE AND A NEED TO RECONSTRUCT IT AT A DIFFERENT SCALE OR, OR OCCUPY THAT FOOTPRINT AT A DIFFERENT SCALE. WE ALSO TALKED A LOT ABOUT THE LOT COVERAGE OF THE ADDITIONS, [01:20:01] UH, COLLECTIVELY. UM, WE REVIEWED MAPS THAT SHOWED PREVIOUSLY EXISTING ACCESSORY STRUCTURES IN THE REAR. WE NOTED THE, UH, THE WIDTH OF THE PROPERTY, FAR EXCEEDING THE WIDTH OF THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE AND THE POSITION OF CARRIAGE HOUSES OR GARAGES, UH, IN VIEW OF THE STREET TO THE SIDE OF THE STRUCTURE ON ADJACENT PROPERTIES, AND GENERALLY FOUND THE FOOTPRINTS THAT WERE PROPOSED FOR NEW CONSTRUCTIONS TO, UH, NEW CONSTRUCTION TO BE APPROPRIATE. UM, THERE WAS ALSO, I THINK, A LITTLE BIT OF DISCUSSION ABOUT THE PARKING PAD THAT WAS REFERENCED IN CONSERVATION SOCIETY'S, UH, LETTER ABOUT A FRONT YARD PARKING PAD. I I WOULD JUST POINT OUT THAT THE APPLICANT HERE IS DANCING AROUND TREES TO DEAL WITH PARKING, AND THAT PARKING AREA IS WELL BEHI SET WELL BEHIND THE FRONT PLANE OF THE HOUSE, AND THERE'S SOME EFFORT TO APPROPRIATELY CONCEAL THAT. UM, I THINK THE, THE, THE LAST THING THAT WE TALKED ABOUT, AND PROBABLY A LITTLE BIT MORE ON SITE WAS GENERALLY THE, THE MASSING AND FORM, NOT SO MUCH THE FOOTPRINT OR THE HEIGHT, BUT THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT THE APPROPRIATENESS OF THE ROOFS. AND WE REQUESTED THAT THE APPLICANT REVIEW THE DIFFERENT ROOF TYPES IN THE AREA, UH, AND PROVIDE SOME RATIONALE FOR CONSISTENCY IN THAT ROOF FORM. WHILE THE, THE MAIN STRUCTURE HAS HIP, UH, HIP ROOFS OR GABLE GABLE ROOFS ARE PREDOMINANT ON THE HISTORIC, UH, PRIMARY STRUCTURES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. A LOT OF ACCESSORY STRUCTURES HAVE DIFFERENT TYPES OF ROOF FORMS. UM, AND, UH, THEY PRESENTED THAT PRETTY, PRETTY WELL HERE TODAY. UM, UH, MR. CHAIRMAN, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING FROM THE, FROM THE SITE VISIT THAT YOU'D LIKE TO ADD GIVEN THE COMPLEXITY OF THIS PROJECT? UM, NOT REALLY. I, I AGREE WITH EVERYTHING YOU'VE TALKED ABOUT. WE DID TALK AT LENGTH ABOUT, UH, TRYING TO FIT THE ADDITION, UM, BEHIND OR AT LEAST FLUSH WITH THE NORTH FACADE OF THE MAIN HOUSE. AND BASED ON THE PROGRAM AND THE TRYING TO WORK AROUND MATURE TREES, UM, THEIR PROPOSAL SEEMED, UH, REASONABLE. UH, WE DID TALK, UH, AT LENGTH, LIKE YOU SAID ABOUT THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURES AND HOW THEY RELATE TO, UH, THE HISTORIC PATTERN IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND, UH, REQUESTED ADDITIONAL, UH, INFORMATION WHICH THEY HAVE PROVIDED. UM, SO BASICALLY THAT'S, YEAH, I WOULD CONCUR WITH EVERYTHING YOU HAVE SAID. THIS IS COMMISSIONER GROUP. UM, I, I WAS REALLY INTERESTED IN HEARING WHAT YOU GUYS HAD, UH, SEEN IN D R C, THAT ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, BECAUSE I DO THINK THAT THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT TO ACTUALLY SEE IT IN PERSON, ESPECIALLY WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT DEMOLITION. UM, I I'M STILL NOT, I MEAN, I'M NOT A HUNDRED PERCENT IF, I MEAN, I THINK STAFF HAS AS A POINT, RIGHT? THE GUIDELINES SAY THAT YOU MENTIONED THAT IT HAD LOST THE INTEGRITY, THE HISTORIC INTEGRITY COMPLETELY. UM, AND I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT LIKE, UH, REBUILD, BUT MAYBE SOME OF THE, UH, I MEAN, AND I GUESS WHAT WE CAN SAY IS, YOU KNOW, THE POSITION OF THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURES IN THE SAME PLACE AS IT WAS BEFORE, AND THAT COULD BE USED AS A, YOU KNOW, REALLY TRYING TO, UM, NOT LOSE WHAT WAS THERE AT SOME POINT. UM, THE PARKING PAD, I MEAN, THERE WAS A HOUSE ON TWO TO TWO KING WILLIAM THAT HAS A FRONT PARKING PAD. I GUESS I'M ALSO A LITTLE BIT IN AGREEMENT WITH THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY. IT'S NOT COMMON. IT COULD BE, BUT I THINK THAT, UM, EXTENSION ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, I GUESS IT'S A ITEM I THINK STAFF I WOULD PROBABLY OCCUR WITH, WITH STAFF ON THE, IT'S THE DETACHED RIO ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, I GUESS NUMBER 10 THAT'S NEXT TO THE PARKING PAD. I DON'T THINK THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE SEE OF, AND I ALSO, I'M VERY WORRIED ABOUT THE LOT COVERAGE. THE EXAMPLES THE APPLICANT WAS USING ARE TWO STORY HOMES. AND I, I DON'T THINK WE CAN TAKE A FULL SQUARE FOOTAGE OF A TWO STORY HOME AND COMPARE THAT TO A LOT. WE USUALLY DON'T DO THAT. WE JUST TALK ABOUT A LOT COVERAGE. UM, SO THAT, LIKE THE JOSIA HOUSE OR THE 2 2 2 KING WILLIAM, THEY'RE TWO TO THREE STORY HOMES. UM, SO IN SQUARE FOOTAGE IT'S YES, BUT NOT LOT COVERAGE. AND I, I WANTED TO HEAR, UH, YOUR OPINION FROM D R C ON THE LOT COVERAGE. THIS IS COMMISSIONER FISH AGAIN. UH, WE SPENT A GOOD DEAL OF TIME IN THE REAR YARD, AND IT IS A QUITE SIZABLE REAR YARD. IF YOU LOOK AT THE IMAGE ON [01:25:01] THE SCREEN, YOU SEE THAT A BULK OF THE SQUARE FOOTAGE BEING PROPOSED IS RELATED TO A PARKING STRUCTURE. AND I, I'M NOT CERTAIN THAT PARKING STRUCTURE FOR SQUARE FOOTAGE, UH, ESPECIALLY APPROPRIATELY SIZED PARKING STRUCTURE, SQUARE FOOTAGE, UH, SHOULD BE CONSIDERED PRECISELY THE SAME WAY AS OCCUPIABLE REAR ACCESSORY STRUCTURES. ALSO, IF YOU LOOK TO THE REAR OF THE HOUSE, UM, THE HISTORIC HOUSE, UH, A LOT OF THAT IS, UH, COVERED PATIO, AND I THINK THE APPLICANT MADE A POINT OF TALKING ABOUT CONDITIONED, UH, AND BY THE WAY, THERE, THERE IS EXISTING ELEMENTS OF COVERED PATIOS IN, IN THAT, IN THOSE LOCATIONS. BUT I THINK WHEN THEY MAKE THE POINT OF, UH, INTERIOR SPACE AND HABITABLE SPACE AS BEING A MORE APPROPRIATE, UH, RELATIONSHIP IN, UH, IN SCALE, AND IT IS PROBABLY KIND OF THE GUIDING IN MY, IN MY VIEW, PROBABLY A, A, A GOOD, A GOOD GUIDE. I THINK COMMISSIONER IS A LITTLE BIT, GO AHEAD. WE'VE ALWAYS CONSIDERED OUS VERSUS IMPERVIOUS. SO I MEAN, A PA SOME OF THE PATTERNS I COULD CONSIDER, BUT I MEAN, THE GARAGE STRUCTURE, WELL, I THINK A GARAGE STRUCTURE IS PARTICULARLY A, A CARPORT STRUCTURE IN THIS CASE, PARTICULARLY APPROPRIATE AND COMMON, UH, MORE OR LESS IN THAT POSITION ON A, ON A SITE THAT'S THIS WIDE, UM, IT'S CLEAR THAT IF YOU LOOK AT THE SANDBORNE MAPS, THERE WERE A SERIES OF HISTORICALLY EXISTING ACCESSORY STRUCTURES IN THE, IN THE REAR IN ADDITION TO THE WING THAT THEY'RE REQUESTING DEMOLITION ON. SO IF WE COULD GO TO THAT DRAWING, I DON'T REMEMBER WHICH ONE IT IS. I WOULD SAY GENERALLY THE, THE SCALE AND CONFIGURATION OF THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURES MATCHED WHAT WAS HISTORICALLY PRESENT ON THAT SITE IN WHICH THOSE PIECES ARE NO LONGER EXITING. YEAH. AND THAT I COULD ACCEPT. UM, IT'S JUST A WHOLE LOT COVERAGE. UM, I'M WORRIED ABOUT, AND I, WELL, THIS, THIS IS TOBIN'S ON LOT COVERAGE. WE'RE AT AND 50% IS ALLOWABLE. AND SO EVEN THOUGH WE HAVE NO TWO STORY, UH, COMPONENTS TO THIS PROJECT, WE'RE STILL UNDER, WE'RE STILL COMPLIANT. I THOUGHT YOU SAID THAT THAT WAS ONLY IF YOU DISCOUNTED PATIOS AND I MEAN, PUT YOUR BUSINESS IN PREVIOUS COVERAGE. WHAT ARE THE PERCENTAGE? DO YOU HAVE THAT NUMBER? YEAH, I SLIDE THE CINDY TWO. YEAH, COMMISSION. UM, GO AHEAD. GO AHEAD. I'M SORRY. OKAY, SO IF THAT'S 38%, 1 0 6, 1 0 6 SHOWS THE LOT COVERAGE AT 38%. OKAY. IF THAT'S, THAT'S, AND THAT'S NON-CON CONDITION, TOTALED, DIVIDED BY THE TOTAL LOT AREA, ALL THE OUS COVER ON THE PROPERTY. YEAH. AND THIS IS COMMISSIONER FISH. I, I THINK FROM THE D R C VISIT, WE FOUND THE, THE LOT COVERAGE AND THE SCALE, THE ADDITION APPROPRIATE THERE. THERE ARE A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT I HAVE SOME LINGERING CONCERNS ABOUT, AND I'D LIKE TO GET SOME, UH, THOUGHTS FROM MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS, UH, BRIEFLY ON THAT, IF WE HAVE TIME. UH, WE TALKED A LOT ABOUT THE ROOF FORMS, UH, WHILE WE WERE THERE ON THE SITE, AND I CAN REALLY APPRECIATE THE ROOF FORMS, UH, BEING, YOU KNOW, A ADOPTING A, A VERY, VERY LOW SLOPE PITCH SO THAT THEY'RE ALL IN THE SERVICE OF THE HISTORIC STRUCTURE. THEY REMAIN, UH, RELATIVELY LOW, UH, RELATIVE TO THE STRUCTURES IN THE REAR NORTH AND SOUTH. SO THEY KIND OF HAVE A SMALL VISUAL, A SMALLER VISUAL FOOTPRINT ON ADJACENT STRUCTURES. AND, UM, THE, I I, I THINK YOU, YOU DESCRIBED QUITE ELOQUENTLY THE VARIETY OF ROOF FORMS THAT ARE FOUND ON ACCESSORY STRUCTURES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. I'M NOT SO CONFIDENT ABOUT THE MATERIALITY OF WHAT YOU'RE PROPOSING OR MAYBE THE PRECISION OF THE SLOPE AT ONE QUARTER INCH, UH, OVER A FOOT FALL. UH, BUT, BUT GENERALLY I'M SUPPORTIVE OF THE WAY THIS READS FROM THE STREET AND THE LANDSCAPE IN A MINIMAL, MINIMAL, UH, PROFILE. AND TOBIN, MAYBE YOU CAN TELL US A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE, JUST, JUST VERY BRIEFLY, THE ROOF MATERIAL. UH, YES. I MEAN, THE, THE THOUGHT IS THAT THIS WOULD BE A MEMBRANE ROOF. UM, AND WE CAN GET INTO THE TONE OF THAT, THE COLOR OF THAT AT A D R C IN THE FUTURE. UM, BUT I, BUT I ALSO FEEL LIKE THERE'S, IT WILL BE, UM, [01:30:02] HARDLY SEEN. I MEAN, THERE'S A ON THE LOT. THERE'S TWO STORY ACCESSORY STRUCTURE TO THE SOUTH THAT HAS ONE SECOND STORY WINDOW FACING THIS PROPERTY. AND THEN ALL AROUND US ARE SINGLE STORY ACCESSORY STRUCTURES WITH HOUSES, UH, KIND OF IN THE DISTANCE. SO, UM, YEAH, THE INTENT IS THAT IT, IT REALLY IS A KIND OF A NON ELEMENT. I KEEP SAYING GARDEN WALL. THAT'S, THAT'S THE ATTITUDE THAT, UM, THESE ARE SUBSERVIENT BUILDINGS AND SIMPLE AND FROM THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY, READ AS, AS WALL ELEMENTS THAT COULD BE ARMATURES FOR PLANT LIFE AND THEREFORE RECEDE EVEN FURTHER. UM, AND THE ADVANTAGE OF THAT STORAGE VOLUME THAT WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT IS IT CONCEALS 50% OF THE CARPORT BEYOND IT. UM, SO THAT WALL ALSO, YOU KNOW, PROVIDES PRIVACY TO THE COURTYARD, BUT ALSO CONCEALS THE A SECOND VEHICLE. AND WE'VE GOT THAT SINGLE LANE GOING AS FAR BACK DOWN THE PROPERTY LINE AS POSSIBLE, UH, PER TEAM WILLIAMS' RECOMMENDATION. AND SO WE, WE THOUGHT THIS WAS REALLY A, A TWOFER HERE WHERE WE WERE, UM, GETTING CARS BACK, HIDING 'EM, AND THEN, YOU KNOW, CREATING BUILDINGS THAT DON'T LOOK LIKE BUILDINGS SO THAT THEY'RE, YOU KNOW, UM, NOT COMPETING. YOU PUT A LID ON THAT AND SUDDENLY YOU'RE CREATING A DIALOGUE WITH THIS HISTORIC HOUSE, WHICH WE REALLY DON'T WANT TO DO. KEVIN, I WOULD ADD TO THAT, THAT INCREASING THE SLOPES OF THE NEW ADDITIONS WITH IMPACT AND CAUSE OVER FRAMING OF THE HISTORIC ROOF, AND THESE ADDITIONS CURRENTLY ARE VERY DEFERENTIAL TO THE HISTORIC CORE AND ALLOW THE HISTORIC TRUCK STRUCTURE TO RETAIN ITS AUTONOMY. THIS IS COMMISSIONER VELASQUEZ, UM, EXCUSE ME. THE, UM, COMMENTS OF STAFF ARE QUITE COMPLICATED AND THE, UM, PROJECT ITSELF IS QUITE COMPLICATED. UM, AND I, YOU KNOW, I I I WOULD COMMEND THE DESIGN, RIGHT? BY, BY ALL MEANS. IT'S A BEAUTIFUL DESIGN. AND, AND I THINK THOUGH, UH, ONE COMMENT THAT THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY MADE THAT THAT IS REALLY VERY, VERY VALID, PARTICULARLY WITH RESPECT TO OTHER CASES THAT WE'VE HAD, IS THE MASSING, THE, THE, YOU KNOW, THE MASSING SEEMS, UM, UH, LIKE VERY, VERY CREATIVE TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO USE AS MUCH OF THE PROPERTY AS POSSIBLE. CONTRAST BETWEEN WHAT WAS THERE AND WHAT IS THERE NOW OR WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED. THE OTHER THING IS THAT, YOU KNOW, I, I'M, I, I'M NOT, UM, ABLE TO TAKE ARCHITECTURAL DIALOGUE AND CONVERT IT TO, UM, THE, ALL THE OTHER CONVERSATIONS THAT WE HAVE HERE THAT TALK ABOUT APPROPRIATENESS, RIGHT? BUT AT THE SAME TIME, I, I, UH, I APPRECIATE, UH, ALIEN, UH, UH, UH, UH, ADDITIONS TO PROPERTY THAT DON'T TRY TO BE HISTORIC, RIGHT? BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT, AND, AND OF COURSE IT RAISES THE BAR ON THE QUALITY, BECAUSE I THINK THE ONE THING THAT YOU TRY TO MATCH IS THE QUALITY WITH WHAT IS OLD, WITH WHAT IS NEW. BUT I THINK WE SET A PRECEDENT, NOT THAT, NOT THAT PRESIDENT HASN'T ALREADY BEEN SET IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD, BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF CONTRADICTIONS TO HOW WE FOLLOW THE, THE GUIDELINES WITH RESPECT TO, TO, UH, YOU KNOW, HOW GOOD A PRESENTATION IS, HOW GOOD, HOW ARTICULATE THE PRESENTER IS. BUT IN THE END, IT'S THE VISUAL, RIGHT? IT'S THE PICTURE THAT WE SEE AND IT'S WHAT WE ARE ABLE TO ALLOW IN KING WILLIAM BECAUSE OF, OF A, OF AN ELOQUENT PRE, UH, PRESENTATION VERSUS, UM, UM, MORE LAYMAN TERMS IN, IN OTHER NEIGHBORHOODS THAT PROPOSE THINGS THAT, THAT THEY DON'T GET A CHANCE. I MEAN, UM, UH, SO, SO TO ME, THE, THE, THE, THE DIFFICULTY THAT, THAT I HAVE, I, I IS, IS THAT THIS WILL SET A PRECEDENT IN MY MEMORY FOR WHAT WE'RE WILLING TO, TO, TO, TO ALLOW, NOT HERE, BUT EVERYWHERE. THAT BEING SAID, I'M, I AM INCLINED TO, TO, TO LIKE, UH, TO THINK THAT THIS IS APPROPRIATE BECAUSE IT'S GOOD DESIGN MATCHED WITH GOOD DESIGN. UM, BUT, BUT I, I, I, I DO, UM, UM, ASK THE COMMISSION TO, TO BE VERY THOUGHTFUL OF, OF, OF THE LANGUAGE THAT'S USED TO DESCRIBE WHY THIS IS OKAY. BECAUSE WHAT LANGUAGE WE USE TO SAY WHY THIS IS APPROPRIATE HERE SHOULD, UH, BE ECHOED IN IN OTHER, UM, UM, UH, UM, APPLICANT'S, UH, DESIRE TO, [01:35:01] LET'S JUST SAY IMPOSE THEIR OWN CREATIVE GENIUS ON PROPERTIES THAT, THAT THEY OWN. BECAUSE THAT'S HOW I SEE THIS. I SEE THIS AS A, AS A, AS A, AS A VERY, UH, CRAFTY WAY, A VERY SKILLED, UH, WAY TO, UM, UH, GRAFT MODERNISM WITH, UM, UH, THE, THE HISTORIC ARCHITECTURE FOUND IN KING WILLIAM. AND, AND IT'S NOT, I DON'T THINK IT'S SO MUCH THAT THIS IS APPROPRIATE OR INAPPROPRIATE, BUT THAT KING WILLIAM IS FULL OF CONTRADICTIONS TO OUR RULES. UM, SO, SO THAT, THAT BEING SAID, THE, THE ONLY ONE REAL, UM, HESITATION THAT I WOULD HAVE TO, TO, TO SAYING THAT THIS IS, UM, UH, ON THE MONEY IS THAT I, I DO AGREE THAT THE MASSING IS, UH, OVER THE TOP. AND, UM, AND I DON'T THINK THAT THAT'S A QUESTION OF THE ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS OR IMPERVIOUS COVER OR WHERE THE PARKING LOT IS. JUST LOOK AT THE PICTURE THAT'S ON THE SCREEN AND YOU CAN LOOK AT THE SITE OF, UH, WHAT WAS THERE AND WAS BEING PROPOSED. AND, UM, I WOULD HAVE TO AGREE WITH THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY. AND, AND, AND JUST TO REITERATE, I'D ASK MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS, UH, THAT WE BE CONSISTENT WITH WHATEVER PRECEDENTS WE SIT HERE. I ACTUALLY AGREE WITH YOU, COMMISSIONER VELAZQUEZ. I THINK YOU HAD A GOOD POINT IN, IN SAYING THAT IT IS SOMETHING THAT WE NOT USUALLY SEE, AND WE WILL NOT USUALLY COME TO OUR ATTENTION, SO WE HAVE TO BE VERY CAREFUL. I DID NOTICE THAT THIS IS CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL, SO I THINK THAT THIS IS ACTUALLY A BIG PRESENTATION FOR ONLY A CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL. SO I THINK THEY'RE FURTHER DOWN, AND I THINK THERE'S, THERE'S SOMETHING THAT CAN BE WORKED WITH, AND I ALSO THINK THERE'S SOME OF THE ITEMS AS YOU MENTIONED, THAT CAN ALSO BE, UM, I GUESS WE HAVE TO REVIEW THEM MORE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE APPROVING, UM, SOMETHING THAT IT WOULD FALL INTO WHAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD CAN ACCEPT. UM, I WOULD SAY THAT I, I, I WOULD PROBABLY, UH, ACCEPT ALL OF THE ITEMS, BUT SOME OF THE STIPULATIONS WOULD HAVE TO STAY. AND, AND I GUESS MY MAIN IS THAT STORAGE STRUCTURE. I GUESS WE JUST HAVE TO REALLY MAKE SURE THAT WE UNDERSTAND WHAT THAT STORAGE, STORAGE STRUCTURE IS DOING WITH THE CAR PORT. AND, AND WHEN YOU SAY, UM, SOME OF THE MASSING, AND I GUESS I, I GUESS THAT'S ALSO ONE OF THE COMMENTS FROM STAFF IS THE NEW BUILD CONSTRUCTION GUIDELINES. THERE ARE SOME WINDOWS THAT WE DON'T USUALLY FIND IN NEW CONSTRUCTION THAT WE HAVE NOT REALLY ACCEPTED IN, IN ADDITIONAL, IN, IN, IN NEW CONSTRUCTION OR ADDITIONS TO, UH, HISTORIC STRUCTURES, SO THAT WE HAVE TO BE REALLY CAREFUL TO WHAT WE ARE. UM, YEAH, APPROVING COMMISSIONER APPROVED THE WIND, THE WINDOWS BRING UP THE LAST THING ON MY LIST THAT I WAS TRYING TO GET TO. UH, I THINK THERE ARE, ARE WINDOWS BEING PROPOSED, UH, IN THIS PROJECT TWO DIFFERENT WAYS. AND I, I HAVE CONCERN ABOUT CONSISTENCY WITH THE GUIDELINES ON AT LEAST ONE SET OF THEM. AND, UH, UH, FIRST THE, THE, THE TYPE OF WINDOWS THAT I HAVE THE MOST CONCERNED WITH IN TERMS OF TYPE AND SHAPE ARE, ARE THOSE PUNCHED WINDOWS THAT OCCUR IN THE MASONRY WALL, UH, SIMILAR TO THE WAY THE WINDOWS OCCUR IN THE HISTORIC STRUCTURE. I HAVE LESS CONCERN ABOUT THE AREAS OF GLAZING THAT APPEAR TO SEPARATE VOLUMES AND APPEAR TO BE ALMOST LIKE ENCLOSED IN DOG TROTS, AND WE CAN KIND OF SEE THOSE OCCURRING ON THE MIDDLE OF THE ADDITION. I THINK THAT THAT KIND, THIS IDEA OF, OF AN ENCLOSED VOLUME HELPS BREAK DOWN THE PERCEPTION OF THE MASS, UH, WHERE IT'S PERCEIVED. AND IT, IT ISN'T COMMON, UH, THAT WE SEE RESIDENTIAL APPLICATIONS THAT PROPOSE, UM, LET'S SAY FLOOR TO CEILING GLASS ENCLOSURE, UM, AS A WAY TO DEAL WITH TRANSPARENCY. BUT I THINK THAT'S A DIFFERENT ISSUE THAT THE GUIDELINES DON'T SPEAK SO DIRECTLY TO. AND WHEN IT, WHEN IT COMES TO OVERALL THE PROJECT'S CONSISTENCY WITH THE GUIDELINES, UM, I'VE ENUMERATED, UH, MY SEVERAL CONCERNS. I THINK, UH, IN LARGE PART IT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE GUIDELINES WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, UH, THE MATERIALITY AND THE, THE SCALE OF THESE ADDITIONS, UM, THAT IS CARRIED, CARRIED FORWARD IN A VERY SYMPATHETIC WAY. I THINK IF THERE'S A PIECE OF THIS THAT, THAT MIGHT NEED ADDITIONAL SCRUTINY, IT'S, IT'S TO ME ABOUT MAYBE ABOUT THE ROOF MATERIAL IN THE FORM, AND IT'S EASY TO, TO MIX UP MASSING AND ROOF FORM. I THINK, UM, IN TERMS OF THE WAY THAT THIS IS LAID OUT ACROSS THE, THE, THE SITE, THE WAY IT'S PROPOSED ON THE SITE, UM, I DON'T HAVE HAVE SO MUCH RESERVATION FOR AND, AND COMMISSIONER GROOVE, YOU'RE CORRECT. THIS IS FOR, UM, UH, CONCEPTUAL [01:40:01] APPROVAL TODAY, AND WE DID ASK THAT THEY PROVIDE SOME ADDITIONAL DETAILS ON HOW THESE DIFFERENT KINDS OF MATERIALS WOULD COME TOGETHER, WHICH IS ONE REASON WHY THEY'RE PRESENTING THAT DID OCCUR IN THE D R C. UM, IF I TRY TO BREAK THIS DOWN INTO A MOTION, UH, TODAY, THAT CAN GET US FORWARD. UM, OH, ONE, ONE MORE THING BEFORE I TRY TO MAKE A MOTION HERE. UM, I, I WOULD LIKE TO THANK THE APPLICANT FOR MEETING WITH AT LEAST THE KING WILLIAM ASSOCIATION A NUMBER OF TIMES. UM, AND I THINK IT, IT SPEAKS TO, UH, YOUR EFFORTS THAT THE KING WILLIAM ASSOCIATION IS IN SUPPORT OF YOUR PROJECT, UM, AS PROPOSED. UM, I THINK THAT A LOT TO ME. GO AHEAD, COMMISSIONER FISH TOBIN SMITH. ONE MORE TIME. SORRY TO INTERRUPT YOU. I JUST WANTED TO JUMP IN BEFORE A MOTION MADE, BUT THE CRITICAL IN MY OPINION, IS ONE 10, WHICH, WHICH ARE THE FROM KING WILLIAM. AND SO WHEN WE TALK ABOUT MASSING OR ROOF FORMS OR SCALE, I THINK THE REASON THIS PROJECT IS, IS BECAUSE WE MADE SUCH PUSH THINGS TO THE REAR AND, UM, NON, AND SO WHAT YOU DO REALLY SEE FROM THE STREET, THE CARPORT IS SORT OF NOT A MASS, BUT AN OPEN, UH, FLOATING EDGE. AND THEN ON TO THE NORTH OF THAT STORED VOLUME, WHICH READS LIKE A WALL, AGAIN, A FLOATING ROOF FORM THAT'S, YOU KNOW, COVERED WALKWAY. AND SO THERE'S LIKENESS, TO, UM, ELEMENTS THAT , WHICH ARE MINIMAL. UM, AND SO THAT, I THINK THAT WAS OUR GREAT EFFORT AGAIN, LET THE HISTORIC ARCHITECTURE SING, GET OUR STUFF, UH, TO THE BACK AND DEFER AND SUPPORT THIS INCREDIBLE STRUCTURE THAT THESE OWNERS WANT TO PUT BACK TOGETHER. EXACTLY AS IT WAS. THIS IS COMMISSIONER VELASQUEZ WITH YOUR PERMISSION, COMMISSIONER FISH. UM, YOU TO, TO, TO ME, YOU KNOW, I JUST WANNA, UH, MAKE SURE WE WE'RE, WE'RE VERY, UH, CLEAR THAT CONSISTENCY'S GOTTA PLAY A AN IMPORTANT PART HERE. WE HAD REMEMBER A CASE THERE IN KING WILLIAMS IN THE COMMERCIAL, UH, ZONE THERE, THE COMMERCIAL, UH, CORRIDOR THERE WHERE A LADY RECENTLY PUT TWO STORAGE SHEDS IN THE BACK OF HER BUILDING, AND THEY WERE JUST STORAGE SHEDS, AND THEY WEREN'T ANCHORED INTO THE GROUND. AND, AND THE COMMISSION WAS VERY ADAMANT ABOUT WHAT IT CONSIDERED IN, IN KEEPING, LIKE, FOR INSTANCE, WHEN WE GET SOMEONE WHO PUTS A PORCH ON THEIR, UH, OR, OR SOMEBODY WHO DOESN'T HAVE A PORCH ON THEIR, ON THEIR FRONT, AND THEN WE SAY, WELL, IT, IT SHOULD HAVE A PORCH BECAUSE EVERYTHING IN THE AREA HAS A PORCH, RIGHT? THE THO THOSE TO ME ARE NOT, I MEAN, I DON'T MEAN ANY DISRESPECT TO ANYBODY, BUT TO ME, THOSE ARE NOT GOOD ARGUMENTS, BUT THEY'RE THE ARGUMENTS THAT WE USE FOR CONSISTENCY. THE, THE, THE OTHER SIDE OF THAT COIN TO ME IS THAT I SEE WHAT IS BEING PRESENTED TO US AS ONE, UH, UH, ARCHITECTURAL EXPRESSION, THE MARRIAGE OF WHAT IS OLD WITH WHAT IS NEW. AND I WOULD, I WOULD HARDLY, UH, UH, TRY TO, UH, ALTER ONE ELEMENT OF THIS, WHAT WHAT APPEARS TO BE A VERY QUALIFIED ARCHITECT'S, UH, EXPRESSION. THE, THE MOVING OF ONE THING CAN CHANGE SO MUCH MORE IN THAT HOUSE THAT, THAT BY THE END OF A, OF, OF FIVE OR SIX DRCS, THEY'RE, THERE'S, THEY'RE, THEY'RE, THEY'RE WILLING TO BUILD A HOUSE THAT GOT APPROVED, BUT NOT A PERFECT ARCHITECTURAL STATEMENT, WHICH I THINK IS KIND OF WHAT THEY'VE ACHIEVED. SO EVEN WITH RESPECT TO THE WINDOWS MEETING THE GUIDELINES, HOW CAN THE GUIDELINES POSSIBLY MEET, UH, UH, THE, UH, THE NEEDS OF THIS NEW MODERN ARCHITECTURAL EXPRESSION? SO WITHIN, WITHIN THAT CONTEXT, I DON'T THINK THE WHOLE DISCUSSION, I MEAN, FOR ME, IS ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT IT MEETS THE GUIDELINES OR IT DOES IT, IT IT IS AN ALIEN COMPARED TO WHAT THAT, THAT, UH, THAT HOUSE THAT'S THERE. AND IT'S DEFINITELY NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE FACT THAT WE DIDN'T LET THAT, WELL, WE GAVE THAT LADY A HARD TIME ABOUT THE TWO SHEDS THAT SHE HAD BEHIND HER COMMERCIAL BUILDING, AND THEY WEREN'T EVEN ACCURATE INTO THE GROUND. WHAT ALL I'M SAYING IS THAT WHATEVER WORDS ARE DIGESTED HERE, THEY AMOUNT TO THE VISUAL, NOT, NOT TO THE INTELLECTUAL, BUT TO WHAT WE SEE AND WHAT LOOKS APPROPRIATE OR NOT APPROPRIATE OR WHAT MATCHES OR DOESN'T MATCH. AND, AND I APPRECIATE THIS, UH, UM, EXPRESSION FROM THIS PRESENTATION, BUT I THINK THE IMPORTANT THING IS THAT WHATEVER WE DO HERE, WE WE SHOULD ALLOW IT TO EMPOWER THOSE OTHERS THAT, THAT COME BEFORE US THAT MAY NOT BE AS ARTICULATE OR MAY NOT HAVE THE, THE BUDGET TO ACHIEVE, UM, UH, THE, THE, THESE, THESE OBVIOUS, [01:45:01] UH, GREAT ARCHITECTURAL ACHIEVEMENTS. AND THAT'S, THAT'S, UH, UH, WHEN, WHEN WE, WHEN I VOTE THAT I'M GONNA HAVE IN MIND THAT IF I, UH, VOTE, UH, FOR APPROVAL OF THIS CONCEPTUAL, UH, APPLICATION, THAT I'M GONNA VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE FOR THE, FOR ANOTHER, UH, APPLICATION THAT'S GOING TO PUT BEFORE THIS COMMISSION, UH, A WELL DONE PIECE OF ARCHITECTURE, BUT MOST DEFINITELY IS ALIEN TO WHAT IS THERE COMMENTS? THIS IS, THIS IS COMMISSIONER FISH. MR. CHAIRMAN, DO YOU WANT ME TO TRY TO CRAFT A MOTION? YES, PLEASE. OKAY. UM, I, I JUST HAVE ONE COMMENT BEFORE I TRY TO DO THIS MOTION IN RESPONSE TO, UH, THE COMMISSIONER'S THOUGHTS, UH, WHEN IT COMES TO REAR ACCESSORY STRUCTURES, UH, THAT MEET THE GUIDELINE, I THINK YOU WERE REFERRING TO A RATHER LARGE HABITABLE STRUCTURE, NOT A STORAGE BUILDING, UH, WHERE NO, THEY WERE TWO RIGHT THERE NEXT TO THE NEW OYSTER BAR ON, ON, UH, . YES, I DID. I DID A SITE VISIT BUILDINGS, I DID A SITE VISIT. UM, ONE OF THOSE NEEDED TO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE GUIDELINES. UH, THERE WAS RELATIVELY SIMPLE SOLUTION TO MAKE IT, UH, MEET THE GUIDELINES AND THE, THE T ONE 11 BE MODIFIED, UH, TO APPEAR LIKE BORDEN BATTEN AND THAT SHUTTERS BE PUT ON THE WINDOWS. I THINK THAT THE, THE GUIDELINE, I, I THINK IN LARGE PART, THIS IS CONSISTENT WITH THE GUIDELINE AS GUIDELINES AS PROPOSED. THE GUIDELINES DO NOT PROHIBIT STYLES THAT ARE MORE CONTEMPORARY. THEY TALK ABOUT, UH, MATERIAL MASSING, UH, FORM SITE AND, AND THINGS LIKE WINDOWS, THOSE THINGS THAT WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT MORE SPECIFICALLY. SO WHEN, WHEN YOU LOOK AT A, AT A, AN AXON, A METRIC OVERHEAD VIEW, CERTAINLY THE, THE FORM OF THE ACCESSORIES ARE DIFFERENT THAN THE PRIMARY, BUT THERE'S THE PRIMARY HISTORIC STRUCTURE, BUT THE GUIDELINES DON'T TELL US IT HAS TO MATCH. THE GUIDELINES SAY THAT THE FORMS SHOULD BE FOUND IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AND IN LARGE PART, DIFF LOWER SUBORDINATE ROOF FORMS ARE FOUND IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD. SO I JUST DON'T THINK IT'S VERY MUCH OF A STRETCH TO SUGGEST THAT, THAT THIS IS LARGELY MEETING WITH THE GUIDELINES, UM, AS WE APPLY THEM UNIFORMLY ACROSS ALL PROJECTS, SAY IN RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS, PEOPLE, PEOPLE WHO GENERALLY PROPOSE, UM, A MORE CONTEMPORARY INTERPRETATION OF THE HISTORIC CONTEXT HAVE A BIT OF A HIGHER BAR IN REALLY WEAVING IN THE MATERIAL IN THE FORM, THE SUBORDINATE ROLE OF ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, UH, BECAUSE THERE IS A LITTLE BIT OF, OF, OF RESISTANCE IN THE LANGUAGE. AND I THINK THIS PROJECT IN LARGE PART DOES THAT. SO I'M GONNA WORK ON AN, ON A MOTION HERE, AND IF THAT MOTION FAILS, WE'LL, WE'LL TRY TO FIND ANOTHER WAY FORWARD, BUT WE NEED TO GET MOVING ON. UM, I'M GENERALLY GOING TO TAKE THE POSITION THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD RECOMMENDED, AND, UM, I'M JUST GONNA GO THROUGH THIS ITEM BY ITEM STAFF SO THAT IT'S, IT'S CLEAR. UM, I WOULD MOVE, UH, I MOVE FOR APPROVAL OF ITEMS 1, 2, 3, 5 WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS. UM, I MOVE FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM FOUR, UH, WHICH IS RELATED TO, UM, I RE APPROVAL OF ITEM FOUR AS PROPOSED, WHICH IS RELATED TO THE, UH, EXI, THE EXISTING REAR STRUCTURE, UM, APPROVAL OF ITEM EIGHT, UH, WITH EXCEPTION OF WINDOWS. I WOULD ASK THAT THE APPLICANT EXPLORE ADDITIONAL FENESTRATION OPTIONS THAT WOULD BE MORE CONSISTENT WITH THE GUIDELINES, UM, APPROVAL OF ITEM NINE AS PROPOSED AND APPROVAL OF ITEM 10 AS PROPOSED. AND THAT CONCLUDES MY MOTION. UM, I'LL SECOND THE MOTION. THIS IS COMMISSIONER VELASQUEZ. I JUST WANNA ADD ONE COMMENT. UH, I DON'T WANT MY COMMENTS TO HAVE BEEN, UM, TAKEN AS, UH, OPPOSITION TO THIS PROJECT. I JUST WANNA MAKE CLEAR THAT MY COMMENTS ARE JUST, UH, I, AND I DO APPRECIATE YOUR CLARIFICATION THAT THESE GUIDELINES DO NOT, UH, UH, HOLD US BACK FROM, UH, LOOKING AT, UH, CONTEMPORARY ADDITIONS TO HISTORIC STRUCTURES. THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I'M GONNA REMEMBER. AND, AND, UM, UM, UH, YOU KNOW, I, I, UM, I LOOK FOR, UH, THEIR INTERPRETATION OF THE, OF COMMENTS, OF THE GUIDELINES, [01:50:01] AND HOPEFULLY THAT THEY WOULD TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THE MASSING COMMENT FROM THE, UH, CONSERVATION SOCIETY. THANK YOU. SO WE, THIS IS CHAIRMAN FETZER. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND AS NOTED, UH, CLARIFICATION. UH, ITEM SIX AND SEVEN, YOU MADE NO MENTION OF COMMISSIONER FISH, APOLOGIES. I MOVE FOR APPROVAL, UH, TO ADD ITEMS. UH, FIVE, YOU SAID FIVE AND SIX, CORRECT? SIX AND SEVEN, SIX AND SEVEN, SIX AND SEVEN, I'M SORRY, SIX AND SEVEN. UM, AS PRESENTED. AND I WOULD JUST LIKE TO REMIND THE COMMISSION THAT, THAT THIS IS, UH, FOR CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL. THE APPLICANT SHOULD LISTEN TO CONCERNS THAT WERE PRESENTED BY THE COMMISSION AND THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY, AND CONTINUE TO EXPLORE OPTIONS WHERE THERE IS SOME DISAGREEMENT. DOES COMMISSIONER VELASQUEZ APPROVE THE, UH, AMENDED MOTION? YES, I DO. THANK YOU. SO, MOTION AND A SECOND. MAY I HAVE A ROLL CALL, PLEASE? UH, FERNANDEZ. AYE. FISH? AYE. GIBBS AYE. VELASQUEZ, AYE. AREOLA, YOU'RE MUTED, BUT I, I SEE YOU, I SEE YOUR HAND IS UP. EYE THUMBS UP. ALMA, CAN WE TAKE THAT? YES. OKAY. CARPENTER, THAT'S REFUSED ROBE. RUBE, I, I CAN'T HEAR ANYONE ANYMORE. GROUP GRO, CAN YOU HEAR ME, COREY? YES. OKAY, YOU CAN HEAR US AND I HEAR ALMA. OKAY, WE'VE GOT A THUMBS UP. SO THAT'S AN I FROM GROOVE FETZER. AYE, UH, MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. OKAY, [33. 21-1183 Address/Description: 344 MARY LOUISE HDRC Case No.: 2020-560 Historic District Name: Monticello Park Applicant: Joe Cano/All Pro Services of Texas Request: Roof modifications, construction of a rear porch City Council Dist.: 7] ITEM 33, WE, YES, ONE MOMENT. AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 43, CASE NUMBER 20 25 60 AT 3 44. MARY LOUISE, THE APPLICANT IS A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO REPLACE A DETACHED WOOD PERGOLA WITH AN ATTACHED REAR ROOF ADDICTION ADDITION FOR A REAR COVERED PATIO. STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL BASED ON FINDING. D. STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE PERGOLA ROOF FEATURES A PROFILE AND DESIGN THAT DOES NOT DOMINATE THE MASSING OF THE HISTORIC STRUCTURE. STAFF RECOMMENDS THE PERGOLA ROOF SLOPE BE MODIFIED TO BE SUBORDINATE TO THAT OF THE HISTORIC STRUCTURE'S ROOF AT THE REAR OF THE STRUCTURE. THIS CASE COMES TO US AS A COMPLIANCE CASE. UH, THE APPLICANT HAS AGREED TO STAFF STIPULATIONS ON THE RECORD. HOWEVER, UPON DROPPING OFF THE YARD SIGN LAST WEEK, STAFF FINDS THAT THE, UH, THE CONSTRUCTED WORK DOES NOT MATCH THE SUBMITTED DRAWINGS WITH STIPULATIONS. SO I HAVE THE APPLICANT, JOE CANO ON THE LINE. JOE, IF YOU'D LIKE TO EXPLAIN YOUR POSITION ON THIS. YES. UM, BASICALLY THE DRAWING WAS INITIALLY TO FOLLOW THE, THE GABLE LINE TO PROVIDE THE THREE 12 PITCH NEEDED FOR THE BACK, UH, COVERED PORCH. HOWEVER, UM, THERE WAS A SPOT THAT WASN'T NOTICEABLE ON THE SATELLITE SHOT TO THE ARCHITECT, TO WHICH THE DEAD VALLEY, WHERE THE ROOF ASS ALL COME TOGETHER, WHICH CAN CAUSE DEBRIS, BUILDUP OR ICING OR FURTHER WATER DAMAGE. SO WE HAD TO ACTUALLY COME APPROXIMATELY ONE FOOT FORWARD TOWARDS THE HOU THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE TO, TO HELP ELIMINATE THAT DEAD VALLEY, AS WELL AS MAINTAIN THAT THREE 12 PITCH FOR THE REAR PORCH. THAT'S THE ONLY THE DESIGN CHANGE, AND IT'S NOT NOTICEABLE FROM THE PEDESTRIAN VIEW WHEN YOU'RE WALKING THROUGH. IT LOOKS LIKE THE CONTINUOUS ORIGINAL GABLE LINE, IF YOU NOTICE ON THAT PHOTO. THANK YOU. JUST A NOTE TO STAFF, THIS IS ANOTHER ONE THAT DID NOT SHOW UP ON THE, THE LIST OF, UH, REVIEW, UH, MATERIALS. THEY, THEY SHOULD BE IN THERE NOW. YOU MIGHT HAVE TO REFRESH THAT FOLDER TO SEE THEM. THANKS. I'M NOT SURE WHICH ONE'S ON THE SCREEN, BUT YOU'LL BE ABLE TO SEE THE SLIDE, [01:55:01] UH, MOVEMENT FORWARD. THE PITCH. WELL, THIS IS CHAIRMAN FETZER. IT'S UNFORTUNATE THAT WE CANNOT SEE THAT, UM, WATER VALLEY CON, UH, CONDITION THAT, UM, CAUSED YOU TO FRAME DIFFERENTLY THAN THE DRAWING AND THE UNDERSIDE OF THAT COVERED PATIO WOULD BE FINISHED OFF. OBVIOUSLY, WE LEFT IT FOR INSPECTION PURPOSES. SO, UH, CHAIRMAN, THIS IS COMMISSIONER CARPENTER. UM, I DROVE BY THIS YESTERDAY. AND, UM, YOU KNOW, I, I THINK IT IS UNFORTUNATE THAT THE ORIGINAL, UH, PLAN WAS NOT FOLLOWED BECAUSE, UH, THIS DOES SEEM TO OBSCENE THE, THE HISTORIC HOUSE WITH THIS, UH, UM, NEW ROOF STRUCTURE. AND, UM, I JUST, I WISH IT WERE A LITTLE BIT MORE DEFERENTIAL TO THE, TO THE, THE EXISTING HOUSE. UH, I THINK I WOULD'VE BEEN MORE SUPPORTIVE OF EVEN A, A FLAT OR LOW SLOPE SLOPE, UM, KIND OF PERGO LIKE STRUCTURE BACK BEHIND RATHER THAN SOMETHING THAT CRAWLS UP ON TOP OF THE HISTORIC HOME AND ALTERS THE, THE, UH, YOU KNOW, THE PRIMARY ROOF LINE SIGNIFICANTLY. UM, SO THAT IT'S CONCERNING FOR ME THAT, THAT, THAT TO ADDRESS A TECHNICAL ISSUE THAT, UM, INSTEAD OF KIND OF GOING MORE SUBSERVIENT TO THE MAIN HOUSE, IT'S BECAME SPEAKING DOMINANT, UH, AS A RESULT OF TRYING TO, UH, UH, ADDRESS THAT TECHNICAL ISSUE. UM, JUST TO INTERJECT THERE, UM, THE, THE PREVIOUS ROOF WAS, UM, LEAKING AND THAT'S WHY THAT'S WHAT CAUSED THE WHOLE, UM, ADDRESSING OF THE RE-ROOFING TO PREVENT FURTHER WATER DAMAGE. SO IF STAFF WOULD GO BACK TO THE PICTURE BEFORE, UH, AND, AND, AND RELATING TO THE COMMENT OF A COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, WHAT WOULD BE THE SOLUTION? I MEAN, IT'S JUST, UM, IMITATING THE ROOF FORM THAT WE SEE RIGHT NOW. AND, AND JUST GOING BACK TO WHAT WAS THERE ORIGINALLY, OR, I MEAN, IT'S JUST A HARD ONE, RIGHT? IT'S DIFFICULT BECAUSE IT'S PRETTY FAR INTO THE CONSTRUCTION NOW. IS THERE A SIDE SHOT OF THAT PICTURE RIGHT THERE? THE, THE, UH, LEFT SIDE, THE ONE THAT NO, OF THE, OF THE RED, NOT THE GREEN VERSION. THE RED MARIE WHERE IT WAS THE ORIGINAL, THAT, THAT WOULD BE THE ORIGINAL ONE, HUH? THAT ONE IS THERE, THERE'S NOT A SIDE, A SIDE SHOT OF THAT. THAT'S THE BACKSIDE, RIGHT? THERE'S NOT THE SIDE SHOT THAT'S, NO SIR, THAT'S THE BACK SHOT. I'M SORRY. A SIDE, SIDE SHOT THIS, THIS WAY, THAT, THAT ONE, NO, THIS WAS THE ONLY, THE ONLY PREVIOUS PHOTO SUBMITTED. OKAY. SO ONE SOLUTION WOULD'VE BEEN, UH, TO COME IN UNDER THE EXISTING EAVES WITH A LOW SLOPE ROOF, UM, RATHER THAN TYING INTO THE, UH, THE EXISTING PITCHED ROOF. UM, I'M SORRY. THE, THE PROBLEM WITH THAT WAS YOU COULD SEE AT THE CURRENT PHOTO THAT'S ON SCREEN WITH THE WHITE DOOR TO THE RIGHT, THAT FACET RIGHT THERE, THE OF THE ROOF LINE ACTUALLY DUMPS WATER ONTO THE PORT, ONTO THE REAR DECK, AS WELL AS THE ONE WHERE THE WINDOW IS IN THE REAR WATER DUMPING THERE. THE PERGOLA WAS LOCATED TOO CLOSE CAUSING WATER AND DEBRIS TO GET PUSHED TOWARDS THE HOME. AND THEN TO THE FAR RIGHT, THERE'S A REAR DOOR RIGHT THERE OF A LAUNDRY ROOM, WHICH SOMEONE PUT SOME SORT OF MAKESHIFT FLAT ROOF ON THERE, WHICH WAS LIKE A APPROXIMATELY A FOUR BY SIX COVERING THAT WASN'T ADEQUATELY FRAMED. IT WAS, THEY WERE USING TWO BY FOURS, AND THAT WAS A FLAT ROOF, [02:00:01] WHICH WAS ALSO CAUSING WATER TO GO TOWARDS THE LAUNDRY AND TOWARDS THAT DINING WALL, THAT'S WHAT STARTED THE WHOLE BALL IN MOTION. LIKE I SAID, IS THIS A FULL REMODEL OR IS THIS AN INSURANCE, OR ARE YOU JUST, WERE YOU JUST DOING THE ROOF AND WHAT WAS THE SCOPE OF THE PROJECT? WE WERE JUST DOING THE ROOF AND, UM, ELIMINATING THE, UM, THE WOOD ROTTED, UH, PERGOLA TOWARDS THE BACK OR, OR RATHER, UM, REAR PORCH. SO YOU ARE A ROOFING COMPANY? YES, WE ARE. I'M A GENERAL CONTRACTOR. SO, UM, YOU COULD GO BACK AND, AND, AND, AND REDO IT AS, AS PROPOSED WHEN INITIALLY THE, AGAIN, THE INITIAL, THE, THE DILEMMA WITH THAT WAS BECAUSE WE HAD TO COME ONE FOOT FORWARD BECAUSE TO HELP ELIMINATE THAT DEAD VALLEY, WHICH WAS FROM THE FRONT PITCH, BECAUSE THE GABLES CHANGED DIRECTION RIGHT THERE AT THAT DINING AREA BECAUSE THERE WAS A REMODEL DONE THERE YEARS AGO. AND WHEN THEY DID THAT, THEY REDIRECTED THAT, THAT TYPE OF PITCH. AND THEN THEY, IT DID ALL THAT MAKESHIFT ONE. I'M SAYING AFTER THE OTHER REMODEL, I'M GUESSING SUNLIGHT OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT WOULD'VE CAUSED THEM TO DO SOMETHING LIKE THAT, OR MAYBE RAINWATER DUMPING UNDER THAT AREA. YOU COULD SEE ON THIS PHOTO THAT'S ON THE SCREEN, THE ONE ON THE FAR LEFT IS A DOOR LEADING TO THE LAUNDRY ROOM, AND IMMEDIATELY TO THE RIGHT IS A SMALL WINDOW TO THE KITCHEN, DINING AREA AND THEN GOING, CONTINUING TO THE RIGHT. OOPS. MM-HMM. IT, IT, IT, IT, IT APPEARS THAT, I'M SORRY, GO AHEAD. NO, I WAS GONNA SAY I'M DRAWING RIGHT THERE. YOU COULD SEE WHERE WE TRIED TO, WE INITIALLY TRIED TO FOLLOW THE GABLE LINE OF THE RECOMMENDATION TO O H P, BUT AGAIN, YOU HAVE TO COME ONE FOOT FORWARD BECAUSE OF THAT DEAD VALLEY WHERE BASICALLY WHEN THE ROOF LINES CHANGE DIRECTION, THE WATER FLOWS IN A BUNCH OF DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS. SO WE'RE TRYING TO KEEP THE WATER FLOW TO SHED OFF AS QUICKLY AS WE CAN WITHOUT HAVING BUILD UP OR BACKFLOW AGAINST OTHER, UM, PITCH CHANGES. WELL, YOU KNOW, THE DRAWING THAT'S THERE, THIS COMMISSIONER VELASQUEZ THE DRAWING THAT'S THERE IS A VERY GOOD, GOOD DRAWING. UM, THANK YOU. AND, AND I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT, WHAT, WHAT OUR PROBLEM IS GONNA BE. OKAY. BECAUSE THAT WE HAVE YET TO DEFINE THAT. I THINK THAT IF I WAS LOOKING, IF, IF JUST, JUST LOOKING AT YOUR EXISTING ROOF PLAN FROM THAT DRAWING RIGHT THERE, IT, IT, IT LOOKS LIKE REALLY THE ONLY COMMON SOLUTION WOULD'VE BEEN TO TAKE THE RIDGE LINE TO THE CENTER POINT OF THE, THE OUTER, UH, ROOF LINE TO THE, TO THE PROPERTY LINE FROM THAT OTHER ROOF LINE, IN WHICH CASE YOU WOULD'VE CHANGED YOUR CENTER RIDGE. SO YOUR RIDGE LINE WOULD'VE BEEN FURTHER IN THIS CASE, FURTHER TO THE BOTTOM OF THE DRAWING, FURTHER TO THE CENTER OF, OF THAT SECTION. IN WHICH CASE YOU WOULD'VE TO REFRAME THAT WHOLE SECTION AND YOUR, YOUR BACK PORCH WOULD'VE COME OUT. YOU'D HAVE A WHOLE NOTHER ROOF, BUT, BUT IT WOULD BE A BIGGER, MORE SUBSTANTIAL ROOF. OKAY. VERY MUCH SO. NOW, I, I, I, I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW, UM, HOW Y'ALL CAME UP WITH THIS SOLUTION OR WHETHER YOU GOT WITH STAFFING WHEN WE SAW THAT, THAT YOU REALLY HAD LIMITED OPTIONS BECAUSE LOOKING AT THE EXISTING ROOF FROM THAT OTHER DRAWING THAT WAS ON, IT SEEMS THAT WHAT YOU TRIED TO DO IS SOLVE A PROBLEM THAT WAS CREATED BY TWO OTHER PROBLEMS THAT WERE SOLVED BEFORE YOU. SO HERE WE ARE. CORRECT. HERE, HERE WE ARE. AND, AND I, I CAN SEE THAT THAT PROBABLY WHAT WAS, WHAT WHAT WAS MOST, UM, UH, AN ISSUE HERE IS, IS EVEN, EVEN WHAT, EVEN WHAT, UH, WHAT I'M SUGGESTING, I CAN SEE THAT IT WOULD PROBABLY CONFLICT WITH THE OTHER HIP THAT'S THERE. SO I, I, I ASKED THE BOARD, UM, IT, IT, I THINK IT COMES DOWN TO SAYING WHETHER OR NOT THIS IS GONNA, UM, UH, BE DEEMED AS, YOU KNOW, JUST A NECESSARY EVIL IN, IN THE IN AND THE LACK OF A SUITABLE SOLUTION TO PROBLEMS CREATED BY A HOUSE THAT HAD ADD-ONS AND ADD-ONS THAT DIDN'T, THAT THAT DIDN'T QUITE WORK ON THEIR OWN. UM, OR THAT, YOU KNOW, SOMEHOW SOMEONE'S GOT A BETTER SOLUTION OR THAT, OR THAT YOU JUST WOULDN'T APPROVE A, A REAR PORCH TO BEGIN WITH. UH, BECAUSE I THINK THAT IT, LOOKING AT THE DIFFERENT OPTIONS THAT YOU CAN SEE, JUST FROM LOOKING AT IT, THAT, UM, YOU'D ALMOST HAVE TO REBUILD THAT WHOLE ROOF TO MAKE IT BE APPROPRIATE, RIGHT? FOR ITS THE ARCHITECTURAL ASPECTS OF IT. UM, OR, OR, OR YOU WOULD SAY NO, YOU, YOU, YOU COULDN'T BUILD A, A PORCH THERE BECAUSE THERE IS NO SOLUTION TO IT, RIGHT? UH, OR THAT YOU WOULD SAY THAT THERE'S A SOLUTION TO IT. SO I, YOU KNOW, I I, I WOULD, UH, TEND TO THINK THAT YOU, YOU, YOU CORRECT YOUR HEAD TRYING TO FIGURE THIS OUT AND, UM, I MEAN, YOU KNOW, THE OPTION FOR US WOULD BE THAT EITHER THAT IT, THAT, THAT IT WAS, UH, APPROVABLE THE WAY THAT IT IS OR, OR, [02:05:01] AND WE WOULDN'T EVEN SEE IT, RIGHT? UH, UH, I, I, I WOULD THINK THAT YOU, YOU PROBABLY TRIED AS HARD AS YOU COULD MY COMMENTS AND, AND WE, THIS WAS A COMPLIANCE CASE RIGHT THERE, THERE, THEY'RE, THEY DIDN'T HAVE A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS EVEN FOR THAT EARLIER SCHEME, CORRECT? CORRECT. HOWEVER, ON THAT SAME NOTE, UM, I DIDN'T INTERJECT ON THAT ONE BECAUSE I DID ACTUALLY GO THROUGH THE, UM, TO GET THE APPROVAL. AND I, ONCE I HAD THE APPROVAL LETTER, SOMEHOW IT WAS, I'M NOT SURE IF IT WAS OMITTED OR JUST NOT RELAYED ON THE ACTUAL LETTER ITSELF, BUT WHEN I PULLED MY PERMIT, MY PERMIT SPECIFICALLY SAID WHAT IT WAS, AND THEY ASKED FOR THE LETTER AND I FORWARDED, I FORWARDED 'EM COPIES OF THE LETTER. SO SOMEHOW FROM THE APPROVAL AND ACTUAL PRINTING OF THE LETTER TO MY ACTUAL PERMIT ISSUANCE, THAT'S WHEN THE WHOLE ITEM KIND LIKE, WAS, LIKE I SAID, I'M NOT SURE OMITTED OR NOT APPROPRIATELY, UH, NOTATED AND THAT'S WHAT CAUSED THE CASE. . ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT? COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, YOU DROVE BY THIS PROPERTY, DID ANYTHING ELSE COME TO MIND? WELL, YOU KNOW, I WASN'T AWARE AS TO WHY THEY DID THE, THE DEGREE OF OVERBUILD ON THIS, AND IT LOOKS LIKE THERE WAS SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT OF, OF RECONSTRUCTION OF THE ROOF ANYWAYS, UM, UH, TO, TO EVEN ACCOMPLISH THIS. SO IT'S, I THINK THIS VIEW RIGHT HERE, EVEN THOUGH THIS IS UM, NOT REPRESENTATIVE OF ITS CURRENT STATE, UH, IS WHEN IT WAS FIRST BEING FRAMED OUT, I THINK SHOWS THAT IT'S NOT A BENIGN ALTERATION. IT, IT STICKS OUT PRETTY SIGNIFICANTLY. UM, SO I, UH, I I DON'T REALLY HAVE A SOLUTION BECAUSE I DON'T QUITE FULLY UNDERSTAND WHAT THE TECHNICAL PROBLEM WAS. UH, WHEN I LOOK AT THAT ROOF PLAN, IT LOOKS LIKE IT WOULD WORK. AND SO, UM, I I, I WISH THEY'D STUCK TO YOU, BUT LET ME ASK YOU, BECAUSE YOU'RE MORE FAMILIAR WITH THIS, UH, TYPE OF WORK. CAN YOU GO TO PICTURE 13, UH, COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, OR I THINK THERE MAY BE, THERE WAS ONE FURTHER. SO IF THE ROOF WAS JUST ON THE PITCH THAT IS EXISTING RIGHT HERE, I MEAN, RIGHT THERE, RIGHT, WITHOUT ELEVATING IT, THE ONE FOOT UP AND THEN GOING FLAT OUT ONCE YOU HIT THAT WALL AND THEN GO FLAT OUT AS IF IT WAS, UH, A PERGOLA OR WHATEVER, WE GO FLAT OUT, WOULDN'T THAT WORK? NO, UNFORTUNATELY NOT, BUT IT'S ON SCREEN NOW. THERE'S A HUGE OAK TREE BACK IN THE BACK AND THAT'S WHERE THE DEBRIS COMES DOWN AND THAT'S WHAT ALL THE BUILDUP WAS. SO WITH A THREE PITCH, IT ALLOWS THE RAINWATER TO BE ABLE TO WASH IT OFF VERSUS THE HOMEOWNERS, WHICH IS OBVIOUSLY MORE ELDERLY, CAN'T GET UP THERE AND HIRE GUYS REGULARLY TO JUST KEEP MOVE, REMOVING DEBRIS OFF THE ROOF LINE. OKAY. AND WHAT STAFF IS SHOWING RIGHT THERE IS YOU TAKE FROM THE PITCH OF THE EXISTING, LIKE RIGHT THERE WHERE STAFF IS DRAWING THE LINE AND THEN YOU GO DOWN FROM THERE. SO INSTEAD OF BEING THREE, IT'S JUST ONE THAT SHOULD BE ENOUGH TO DRAW THE WATER DOWN. WELL, NO, UNFORTUNATELY. I THINK THAT WOULD PROBABLY BE SOMETHING THAT I WOULD, UH, PROVE AND, AND THAT'S PROBABLY CLOSER TO WHAT WE HAVE, OR IF NOT, YOU KNOW WHAT, WE'LL HAVE TO SEND THIS TO D R C AND MAYBE WORK ON MORE DETAILED DESIGN. I GUESS WE'RE JUST, I MEAN, WE CAN'T REALLY SIT HERE AND DESIGN IT FOR RIGHT, AND THAT'S WHAT, THAT'S WHAT THE DILEMMA IS BECAUSE THAT, THAT PITCH LINE RIGHT THERE WAS THE INITIAL DESIGN. HOWEVER, IF THERE'S, YOU COULD SEE WHERE IT ACTUALLY, THE RED LINE IS NOW, IF YOU GO TO THAT POINT THERE, IT'S ALMOST A ZERO. AND IF YOU GO TO THE LINE THERE WHERE IT REACHES, WHICH IS LITERALLY A ONE, AND THEN IT, IT LITERALLY WOULD CHOP THE DECK AND IT WOULD FALL TO THE END OF THE HOUSE AND IT DOESN'T WORK BECAUSE THERE'S NOT ENOUGH ROOF TO ACCOMMODATE THAT LINE. YEAH. THIS IS CHAIRMAN FETZER. IT SOUNDS LIKE WE'RE TRYING TO DESIGN THIS BY COMMITTEE, BY ZOOM, AND I WOULD SUGGEST THAT WE SEND THIS TO D R C WHERE WE CAN, UH, SPEND SOME MORE DETAILED TIME WITH IT. MR. CHAIRMAN, I MOVE THAT THIS, UH, CASE BE DEFERRED TO, UH, D R C MEETING IN THE FUTURE. SECOND, WE HAVE A MOTION, A SECOND TO SEND THIS TO DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE. [02:10:01] WE HAVE A ROLL CALL, PLEASE, FERNANDEZ. AYE. ISH. I, I MISS THE MAJORITY OF THIS, SO I'LL ABSTAIN GIBBS. AYE. QUEZ NA, AREOLA. AYE. UH, CARPENTER? AYE. GROUP. AYE. BETTS. AYE. MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU. UM, ITEM 34. [34. 21-1177 Address/Description: 2323 W GRAMERCY PLACE HDRC Case No.: 2020-548 Historic District Name: Monticello Park Applicant: Michael Pensabene/Freedom Solar Power Request: Solar panel installation City Council Dist.: 7] YES. AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 34 H G R C, CASE NUMBER 2020 DASH 5 48 23 23 WEST GRAMERCY PLACE. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO INSTALL 21 SOLAR PANELS ON THE EXISTING ROOF. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL BASED ON FINDINGS A THROUGH D WITH THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS, ONE THAT THE SOLAR PANELS ARE CITED SO THAT THEY'RE NOT VISIBLE FROM THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY. THE APPLICANT IS REQUIRED TO SUBMIT AN UPDATED ROOF PLAN SHOWING A SOLAR ARRAY THAT IS NOT VISIBLE FROM THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY FOR STAFF TO REVIEW AND APPROVE TWO, THAT THE SOLAR PANELS MAINTAIN AT LEAST 18 INCHES OF SEPARATION FROM THE ROOF EAVES AND THE PROPERTY OWNER, REBECCA, IS ON THE LINE NOW. REBECCA, ARE YOU THERE? I'M HERE. SO REBECCA CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT THE COMMISSIONERS MAY HAVE. THIS IS COMMISSIONER CARPENTER. UM, I SEE THAT YOU HAVE SOME, UH, AS I LOOK AT AN AERIAL VIEW THAT'S IN THE PACKAGE, THERE ARE SOME MM-HMM. ACCESSORY STRUCTURES BACK BEHIND. WAS THERE ANY KIND OF INVESTIGATION MADE TO, UH, SEE WHETHER THOSE COULD BE UTILIZED TO PUT THESE PANELS ON RATHER THAN PUTTING THEM ON THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE? AND I'LL, I'LL TELL YOU WHAT MY, MY CONCERN IS, IS THAT, UH, PARTICULARLY THOSE THAT ARE ALONG THE WEST, WHICH IS ALSO THE PLACE WHERE YOU GAIN THE MOST, UH, ENERGY EFFICIENCY, UH, UH, THAT, THAT EXPOSURE ARE SOMEWHAT VISIBLE BECAUSE OF HOW THE HOUSES ARE, HOW YOUR NEIGHBOR TO YOUR WEST STEPS BACK. AND SO THAT WHOLE LINE OF 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 PANELS IS PRETTY VISIBLE FROM GRAMERCY. AND SO, UM, I WAS WONDERING WAS THERE ANY INVESTIGATION OF UTILIZING THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURES? UM, I HAVE A SHADING REPORT, UM, ON MY, UH, OR THAT WAS DONE IN MAY. UM, AND THERE'S ONE, UH, ONE FACET OF ONE ROOF IN THE BACK THAT IS SOMEWHAT USABLE. UM, BUT WE HAVE TWO BIG, UH, PECAN TREES IN THE BACK. SO THOSE BACK BUILDINGS ARE LARGELY SHADED. UM, THE, THE PROPOSAL THAT YOU GUYS HAVE AND THE PROPOSAL THAT I HAVE, I DIDN'T GET WHAT HE SENT INTO YOU. UM, I HAVE EARLIER VERSIONS. UM, AND I THINK IN THE VERSION THAT YOU GUYS GOT, IT LOOKS LIKE THERE'S ONE EXTRA PANEL ON THAT, UH, WEST SIDE, UH, VERSIONS. I GOT IT STARTED A LITTLE FURTHER BACK. I, I, I MUST SAY THAT IF YOU LIKE STRAIGHT ON THE HOUSE, YOU CAN'T SEE EITHER OF THE SIDE ROUTES AND, UM, YOU CAN SEE A LITTLE OF THAT SIDE ROOF. I MEAN, IT'S NOT A VERY, UM, STRONG, UH, VISUAL, UH, ON THE WEST SIDE, BUT FOR SOME REASON OUR, THE ELEVATION OF OUR HOUSE AND EVERYTHING, IT, IT IS NOT COMPLETELY INVISIBLE ON THE EAST SIDE. IT IS INVISIBLE. YOU JUST CAN'T SEE THE ROOF. UM, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S ANY HELP. DID YOU COME OUT TO THE HOUSE TO LOOK? DID SOMEONE COME TAKE A LOOK? UM, I HAVE NOT, BUT I WAS LOOKING AT, UM, VIEWS FROM, FROM THE STREET CORNER. I WAS JUST TRYING TO PULL THAT UP FROM, FROM GOOGLE, UM, LOOKING FROM THE WEST, AND I DON'T KNOW IF WE'VE GOT ANY OF THOSE HERE. UM, SO LIKE GOOGLE MAPS? YEAH, UH, GOOGLE MAPS, THEY HAVE THE, UH, THE STREET LEVEL VIEWS THERE. UM, AND JUST YOU CAN SEE A BIT OF THE ROOF THERE. I, I'LL ADMIT THAT BECAUSE OF THE PITCH OF YOUR ROOF, UM, IT, IT'S NOT THAT NOTICEABLE UH, YOU KNOW, TYPICALLY WE TRY TO KEEP IT OFF OF THE, THE PRIMARY STRUCTURES AND SEE IF WE CAN PUT 'EM ON THE, ON THE BACK. AND I CAN COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND, I'VE GOT A SIMILAR BIG OLD PECAN IN MY BACKYARD. IT'S 90 YEARS OLD AND BOMBARDS THOSE WITH PECANS EVERY, EVERY FALL. SO I KNOW THOSE ARE DENTS AND [02:15:01] YOU PROBABLY CAN'T GET ANY EFFICIENCY FROM THAT. BUT IF YOU JUST PUSH THE PANELS A LITTLE BIT MORE TOWARDS THE BACK, THAT, I MEAN, RIGHT THERE IS A REALLY GOOD VIEW OF THE HOUSE FROM THE STREET, AND THAT'S KIND OF OUR PURVIEW, RIGHT? IT'S LESS VISIBLE FROM THE STREET. WE CAN'T, YOU KNOW, WE'RE NOT STANDING ON A LADDER LOOKING AT IT. SO, UH, IF YOU GO BACK TO THE PLAN OF THE, OF THE SOLAR PANELS, I GUESS THERE'S JUST A, A COUPLE OF PANELS, SO THE ONES ON THE WEST SIDE, MAYBE TO PUSH THOSE A LITTLE BIT FURTHER DOWN SO THEY'RE NOT TOO CLOSE TO THE FRONT OF THE HOME, AS WELL AS, UH, MAYBE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT A SOLUTION FOR THAT, UM, SET OF FOUR PANELS THAT'S ON THE EAST SIDE AND TRY TO PUT THEM ELSEWHERE. UM, THAT COULD BE A STIPULATION AND THAT WAY WE ALSO, I MEAN, IT COULD BE APPRO, A STAFF STIPULATION THAT COULD BE A SOLUTION TO IT. IS THERE ANY WAY YOU GUYS COULD PUT UP THE, THE THERE THANK YOU . UM, YEAH. SO YOU THINK IF, DID YOU SAY, JUST TO CLARIFY, MOVE BACK THE ONES THAT, THAT ARE TO THE, ON THE WEST SIDE, WHICH MIGHT INCLUDE SOME TRIMMING OF THE PECAN TREE OR SOMETHING TO GET, BECAUSE RIGHT NOW THEY STOP AT THE EDGE OF THE PECAN SHADE THAT, THAT YEAH, AND I UNDERSTAND THE PROPOSAL IS ALSO MADE TO MAXIMIZE THE MOST POSSIBLE. I MEAN, WE HAVE SEEN APPLICANTS COME BACK WITH LESS AMOUNTS OF SOLAR PANELS BY JUST, YOU KNOW, RETHINKING A LITTLE BIT AND READJUSTING THE SIZE OF THE PANELS OR THE PLACEMENTS OF THE PANELS. SO I MEAN, I WOULD, I WOULD PROBABLY BE, YOU KNOW, I WOULD PROBABLY NOT ACCEPT THE PANELS AS THEY ARE RIGHT NOW, RIGHT. ALL THE WAY TO THE FRONT. BUT I MEAN, I'M, I'M FAIR, I MEAN, I'M OPEN TO WHAT OTHER COGNITIONS, BUT I'M JUST THINKING IN THE LINES OF THE GUIDELINES IS WE WANT THE LEAST VISIBLE FROM THE STREET. SO I WOULD SAY PROBABLY THOSE ARE THE ONES THAT WOULD BOTHER ME. AND THEN THE OTHER ONES ON THE EAST SIDE, UH, WILL PROBABLY ALSO BE THE ONES THAT ARE MOST VISIBLE FROM THE STREET. YOU ACTUALLY CAN'T SEE THE EAST SIDE AT ALL. YOU CAN'T SEE THOSE EAST FACING SLOPES. YOU'RE WELCOME TO. THIS IS COMMISSIONER FISH. I JUST HAVE A FEW THOUGHTS. UM, WHEN I WAS, WHEN I WAS LOOKING AT THIS CASE AND I, AND I WAS LOOKING AT THE ROOF PLAN, I WAS CONCERNED, UH, PARTICULARLY ABOUT THE WEST FACING PANELS ON THAT FRONT GABLE, UM, HAVING LOOKED AT THE PITCH OF THE ROOF AND THE IMPACT MM-HMM. DUAL IMPACT OF THESE ON THE CHARACTER OF NEIGHBORHOOD, THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, BECAUSE MOST IMPORTANTLY OF THE PITCH OF THE ROOF, I, I REALLY DON'T HAVE SUBSTANTIAL CONCERNS WITH WHAT IS PROPOSED. I'D BE WILLING TO SUPPORT, UH, WHAT IS PROPOSED BASED ON, UH, THE LIMITED VISIBILITY, UH, THAT'S, UH, GARNERED BY THE VERY LOW SLOPE, UH, ROOF. THIS COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, I, I, I TEND TO AGREE WITH THAT PRIMARILY, AND I'M, I, I PULLED UP THE GOOGLE, UH, IMAGE THAT I LOOKED AT EARLIER WHEN I WAS LOOKING AT THIS CASE, AND IT MAY BE THAT IT'S JUST SIMPLY THAT ONE LEADING PANEL THERE ON THAT GABLE GETS MM-HMM. POSITIONED BACKWARDS JUST SO THAT WE GET A LITTLE BIT MORE OF A BACKING OFF OF THAT, THAT FRONT, UM, EVE LINE. AND THEN WITH YOUR RELATIVELY LOW SLOPE, UH, ROOF, YOU KNOW, THE REST OF THEM ARE NOT GOING TO BE, YOU KNOW, VISIBLE OR GONNA BE MINIMALLY VISIBLE. AND I THINK THAT FITS WITHIN THE GUIDELINES. THIS IS CHAIRMAN FETZER. UM, IT LOOKS LIKE THERE ARE FIVE PANELS ON THE, UH, NORTH PART OF THE ROOF RIGHT IN THERE. UH, RIGHT. IS IS THERE ROOM FOR TAKING A COUPLE OF THOSE OFF THE WEST THAT ARE NEAR THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE AND PUTTING THEM CORRECT? WHERE HE'S DRAWING THE, OR THEY'RE DRAWING THE PANEL RIGHT PANEL NOW? UH, IT, IT, IT MAKES SENSE TO ME, BUT I'M NOT THE SOLAR EXPERT. WELL, I THINK WE CAN MOTION LIKE THAT. I THINK WE CAN FIGURE OUT A WAY TO MOVE FORWARD HERE. AND IT MIGHT MEAN A, IF THEY CAN'T BE REPOSITIONED, IT MIGHT MEAN ELIMINATING THEM, BUT I THINK WE CAN DO IT IN SUCH A WAY THAT GIVES THE INSTALLER SOME FLEXIBILITY. UH, I MOVE FOR APPROVAL WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS ONE AND TWO AND I'D ADD A THIRD STIPULATION THAT, UH, THE FRONT, UH, FRONT FACING SOLAR PANEL ON THE WEST SIDE, UH, BE REMOVED OR RELOCATED, UH, TO THE NORTH FACE. AND I SAY THIS BECAUSE OF THE ROOF PENETRATIONS ON THE WEST FACE, UH, THE, THE PANEL ARRAY CAN'T NECESSARILY JUST SLIDE BACK WITHOUT A LOT OF MODIFICATIONS. SO I THINK THAT WILL GIVE THE APPLICANT THE MOST FLEXIBILITY. YEAH, I AGREE. THERE ARE, THERE ARE EVENT STACKS THAT, THAT ARE GOING TO DRIVE THAT. SO, UM, I, UH, SUPPORT THAT MOTION. I SECOND THE MOTION I, CAN I ASK MORE QUESTION? YES, MA'AM. UM, THE [02:20:01] 18 INCH SETBACK FROM THE EVES, UM, THAT MEANS FROM THE BOTTOM OF THE ROOF. CORRECT? WHAT, WHAT ARE THE, WHAT, HOW MANY INCHES DOES HE HAVE? DO WE HAVE THE ROOM? I, I EXPECTED SOMEONE FROM THE SOLAR COMPANY , SO, SO I CAN SPEAK TO THAT. THAT'S, UH, STANDARD BUILDING CODE. THE INSTALLERS DIDN'T REALLY UNDERSTAND THAT THEY NEED TO MEET THAT REQUIREMENT. A LOT OF TIMES THESE DIAGRAMS THAT WE SEE AREN'T PERFECTLY TO SCALE, SO THAT, THAT THEY SHOULD UNDERSTAND THAT THAT'S A REQUIREMENT OF IN INSTALLING THEM IN THE DRAWING THAT'S UP ON THE SCREEN. FOR INSTANCE, THOSE E SPACING ONES ARE NOT SHOWING AN 18 INCH SETBACK IN THE DIAGRAM, BUT IT'S COMMON, IT'S COMMON WHEN WE SEE THESE DIAGRAMS THAT THAT'S NOT, UH, PERFECT. UH, THEY MAY NEED TO ADJUST THEIR LAYOUT WHEN THEY, WHEN THEY FIELD MEASURE PRECISE DIMENSIONS. OKAY, SO THIS CHAIRMAN FETZER, WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND, UH, AS NOTED. HAVE A ROLL CALL PLEASE. FERNANDEZ AYE FISH? AYE. GIBBS. AYE. VELAZQUEZ AYE. AREOLA. AYE. CARPENTER. AYE. GROUP. AYE. BETTS AYE. MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU. ITEM 35. [35. 21-1181 Address/Description: 2030 W GRAMERCY PLACE HDRC Case No.: 2020-561 Historic District Name: Monticello Park Applicant: MEYER CARL BENJAMIN Request: Installation of a retaining wall, site modifications City Council Dist.: 7] YES. ITEM 35, CASE NUMBER, UH, 35, OR CASE NUMBER 20 25 61. AT 2030 WEST GRAMERCY, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO ONE, INSTALL AN 18 INCH RETAINING WALL AT THE FRONT YARD SLOPE, FEATURING CONCRETE KEYSTONE BLOCKS TWO TO INSTALL AN EIGHT FEET BY 12 FEET FLAGSTONE PATIO IN THE FRONT YARD. STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF ITEM ONE. THE CONSTRUCTION OF A RETAINING WALL BASED ON FINDING B THROUGH G STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE EXISTING SLOPED TYPOGRAPHY SHOULD BE PRESERVED IF PRESERVATION PREVENTION OF EROSION IS NECESSARY. STAFF FINDS TRADITIONAL LANDSCAPE EDGING STRIPS EXCEEDING NO MORE THAN FOUR INCHES FROM GRADE IS APPROPRIATE. IF THE COMMISSION FINDS THAT A RETAINING WALL IS APPROPRIATE FOR THE SITE, STAFF RECOMMENDS THE FOLLOWING STIPULATION, ONE THAT THE WALL DESIGNED AND MATERIAL SHOULD FEATURE A SIMPLE STUCCO OR A CAST CONCRETE RETAINING WALL SIMILAR TO THE MATCHING MATERIALS OF THE HOUSE AND WALL, UH, SUCH AS THE 2002 WEST GRAMERCY. INSTEAD OF THE PROHIBITED CONCRETE KEYSTONE BLOCKS TO THAT, THE HEIGHT SHOULD BE REDUCED TO A MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF APPROXIMATELY EIGHT INCHES IN HEIGHT, OR THE MINIMUM HEIGHT TO MAINTAIN THE LAWN SLOPE STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF ITEM TWO. THE INSTALLATION OF THE FLAGSTONE PATIO BASED ON FINDING H STAFF FINDS THAT THE AREA SHOULD BE RESTORED TO A GRASS, LAWN, OR NATURAL PLANT BED. IF A MULCH OR ROCK BED IS USED, THE TOTAL SQUARE FOOT OF THE IMPERVIOUS AREA SHOULD BE REDUCED TO AN APPROPRIATE SCALE FOR FRONT YARD LANDSCAPES IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT. THIS REQUEST DOES COME TO US AS A, UH, COMPLIANCE CASE. I HAVE THE APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER, UH, CARL AND BRITTANY MEYER ON THE LINE. THERE'S ALSO ONE LETTER OF OPPOSITION AND 16 VOICEMAILS OF SUPPORT WHENEVER THE COMMISSION IS READY TO HEAR THOSE. CARL, IF YOU'D LIKE TO INTRODUCE YOURSELF AND YOUR POSITION. YEAH, ABSO ABSOLUTELY HOI. THANK YOU. UM, IF YOU DON'T MIND, UM, I, I'LL HAVE, I'LL HAVE MY WIFE GO FIRST. I'D LOVE TO GO. LADIES FIRST. . HI Y'ALL. MY NAME IS BRITTANY. UM, WE JUST WANNA THANK Y'ALL FIRST FOR TAKING THE TIME TO MEET WITH US TODAY. UM, AS WE ASK FOR OUR RETAINING WALL AND THE PATIO, UM, TO RECEIVE THE CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS. WE FEEL VERY BLESSED, UM, TO HAVE BEEN ABLE TO SPEND THE LAST FOUR YEARS LIVING IN MONTICELLO PARK. WE LOVE THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND OUR NEIGHBORS VERY MUCH. WHEN WE MADE THE DECISION TO, UM, INSTALL THE RETAINING WALL, WE DID NOT DO SO WITH ANY MALICE, NOR DID WE INTEND TO CIRCUMVENT THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION TEAM OR THIS COMMISSION. UM, WE'RE ASKING TODAY FOR YOUR BENEVOLENCE AND EFFORT UNDERSTANDING. UH, WE WERE SIMPLY NAIVE AND UNEDUCATED ABOUT ALL THE STEPS THAT WE NEEDED TO TAKE TO DO THIS PROPERLY. UM, I'M CURRENTLY FIVE MONTHS PREGNANT WITH QUADRUPLETS. UM, WE HAD TO MAKE THE DIFFICULT DECISION TO MOVE TO BE CLOSER TO OUR MEDICAL TEAMS AND FAMILIES, UM, BEFORE DOING SO. AS YOU CAN SEE, YOU'LL SEE IN THE PICTURES, THE LANDSCAPING WAS IN DESPERATE NEED OF, UM, REFRESHING TO IMPROVE THE OVERALL LOOK OF THE PROPERTY. UM, OUR DUE DILIGENCE CONSISTED OF, YOU KNOW, WALKING AROUND THE NEIGHBORHOOD, SEEING WHAT OUR FELLOW NEIGHBORS HAD DONE ALONG WITH THE MATERIALS THAT THEY HAD USED, AND DOING OUR BEST TO INTEGRATE, UM, WHAT WE SAW TO KEEP WITH THE CHARM OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. UM, ALL PASS IT OVER TO CARL TO DISCUSS THE SPECIFICS OF THE PROJECTS. ABSOLUTELY. THANK YOU. [02:25:01] UM, YEAH, JUST, I'D JUST LIKE TO REITERATE, UM, YOU KNOW, A LITTLE BIT OF MY WIFE'S COMMENTS WE'RE, WE'RE, SHE'S ACTUALLY UP IN MONTANA RIGHT NOW, AND I'M HERE DOWN IN TEXAS, SO FORGIVE US FOR, UM, YOU KNOW, ANY, ANY CHALLENGES WE MAY DEAL WITH. BUT, UM, WE MOVED IN HERE FOUR YEARS AGO AND, AND WE'RE NOT FROM HERE. WE'RE, WE'RE FROM MONTANA. WE'RE FROM, FROM A PLACE THAT ACTUALLY DOESN'T HAVE HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOODS, UM, WAS COMPLETELY NAIVE WHEN WE MOVED IN HERE AND, AND DIDN'T KNOW THAT, THAT THIS ACTUALLY EXISTED. AND I, I WAS UNAWARE OF THIS PROCESS AND, YOU KNOW, WE PURCHASED THIS HOME WITH A VISION, UH, YOU KNOW, A NUMBER OF YEARS AGO, FOUR YEARS AGO TO BE EXACT. UM, AND, AND, YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE LAST THINGS THAT WE WANTED TO DO, UH, WAS THE FRONT YARD BEFORE FINDING OUT THAT WE NEED TO MOVE HOME, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE OF OUR EXPANDING FAMILY. UM, I DIDN'T EXPECT, UM, YOU KNOW, WHAT, WHAT THIS HAS ALL BECOME AND IT'S, IT'S, IT'S ADDED SOME EXTRA STRESS TO OUR LIVES, UM, YOU KNOW, WHICH IS, IS UNFORTUNATE RIGHT NOW. UM, WE'VE RECEIVED AN OUTPOURING OF SUPPORT AND KIND WORDS OVER THESE RECENT IMPROVEMENTS THAT WE'VE MADE TO THE FRONT OF OUR HOME. UM, YOU KNOW, COMMENTS FROM PEOPLE WALKING BY, YOU KNOW, THAT HAVE LIVED IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD FOR YEARS, SAYING HOW MUCH, UH, THEY, THEY, THEY JUST ABSOLUTELY LOVED WHAT WE'VE DONE. UM, AND, AND, YOU KNOW, A LITTLE BIT OF SURPRISE TO HEAR, UM, YOU KNOW, SOME OF THE CHALLENGES THAT WE'VE BEEN FACING, UM, OVER THE LAST SIX OR SEVEN WEEKS. UH, WE'VE LEARNED A TON FROM EMPLOYEE AND EDWARD, UH, IN THIS PROCESS. UM, YOU KNOW, AND, AND I JUST HOPE THAT WE CAN COME TO, UH, YOU KNOW, SOME SORT OF A, AN AGREEMENT. UM, YOU'LL SEE IN THE PICTURES THAT WE'VE SUBMITTED, UH, THE AREA, THE AREA WAS AN ABSOLUTE EYESORE, UM, BEFORE WE MADE ANY CHANGES. AND, YOU KNOW, WE HAD A SLOPING, AS YOU'RE PROBABLY WELL AWARE OF IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, A LOT OF THESE LONG SLOPE FORWARD, AND OURS HAD BASICALLY CREATED A DIRT HILL. UM, YOU KNOW, THAT THAT ROCKS WOULD FALL OFF, UH, OFF OF WEEDS WOULD GROW ON, AND IT WAS JUST EXTREMELY UNATTRACTIVE. UM, YOU KNOW, I'VE, I'VE WALKED THE NEIGHBORHOOD MULTIPLE TIMES. WE, WE, YOU KNOW, WE, WE HAVE A WONDERFUL DOG THAT WE WALK AROUND HERE ALL THE TIME, AND I'VE SEEN, I'VE SEEN THESE WALLS, YOU KNOW, UH, IN, IN VARIOUS OTHER PLACES. UM, YOU KNOW, THROUGHOUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD, I ACTUALLY COUNTED 67 TOTAL RETAINING WALLS, UM, IN A FOUR BLOCK RADIUS JUST SOUTH OF OUR HOUSE. AND I DIDN'T GO NORTH. UM, YOU KNOW, WE ALL KNOW WHY THEY'RE USED AND, AND, YOU KNOW, WE'RE, WE'RE EXTREMELY PLEASED WITH THE PROJECT. UM, YOU KNOW, THE, THE LAST THINGS THAT I'D SAY, UM, YOU KNOW, AS MY WIFE MENTIONED, WE ARE, WE ARE IN THE PROCESS OF, OF EXPANDING OUR FAMILY. OUR HOUSE WENT UP FOR SALE ON THE 15TH OF JANUARY, AND WE HAVE A FAMILY THAT'S FALLEN IN LOVE WITH OUR HOME AND STIPULATIONS REQUIRE US TO, TO TAKE CARE OF THIS. UM, YOU KNOW, BEFORE, BEFORE WE'RE ABLE TO COMPLETE THAT. UM, YOU KNOW, AND, AND I JUST ASKED FOR YOUR GRACE TODAY, I'VE HEARD THE TERMS RELATIVELY APPROPRIATE USED, I'VE HEARD THE TERM, A MARRIAGE OF OLD VERSUS NEW USED EARLIER, AND I FEEL THAT WHAT WE DID WITH THE FRONT OF OUR YARD, I FEEL LIKE IT EMBODIES THOSE TERMS. YOU KNOW, WE'RE SO SAD TO LEAVE THIS NEIGHBORHOOD. WE LOVE THIS NEIGHBORHOOD, UM, AND IT'LL ALWAYS HAVE A SUPER SPECIAL PLACE IN OUR HEART. UM, YOU KNOW, BUT I BEG YOU TO KEEP THOSE WORDS IN YOUR MIND, YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU DO MAKE YOUR DECISION TODAY, COMMISSIONERS, WE HAVE QUITE A BIT OF PUBLIC COMMENTS FOR THIS CASE, SO IF IT'S OKAY, I WILL GO AHEAD AND, UM, GET INTO THOSE. YES, PLEASE. OKAY. FIRST, WE HAVE WRITTEN COMMENTS FROM THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY. UM, I APOLOGIZE, I LOST MY SPOT. OKAY. THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY OF SAN ANTONIO AGREES WITH THE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS FOR 2030 WEST GRAMERCY CHARACTER DEFINING TOPOGRAPHY SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN ALTERED. WHILE THERE ARE SOME OTHER RETAINING WALLS IN THE DISTRICT, IT IS NOT APPROPRIATE TO IMITATE STRUCTURES THAT ARE EXCEPTIONS TO THE DISTRICT'S CHARACTER AND AMBIANCE. AND THE TOPOGRAPHY ON THIS BLOCK IS GENERALLY INTACT, WHERE THE EXISTENCE OF SUCH, SUCH EXCEPTIONS CANNOT BE CONSIDERED PRECEDENT AS EACH STRUCTURE IN A DISTRICT IS JUDGED, NOT BY THE PRESIDENT, BUT BY ITS UNIQUE HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE OF CONTEXT. UM, AND NEXT I'M GONNA ASK WE TO PLAY, UM, SEVERAL VOICEMAILS THAT WE RECEIVED. HELLO, MY NAME IS ANNA. [02:30:01] I LIVE AT TWO ZERO, UH, ONE SIX WEST GRAMERCY PLACE. I'M CALLING ON MY NEIGHBOR, UM, WHO IS, UH, DISPUTING A RETAINING WALL, UH, THAT WAS PUT UP AT 2030 WEST GRAMERCY PLACE. UH, I, UH, MY VOTE IS TO KEEP THE RETAINING WALL. UH, IT, IT LOOKS VERY NICE. UM, UH, IT HA THEN IT, UH, IT DID BEFORE THE MUD WAS SLIDING DOWN AND, AND, UH, THIS RETAINING WALL HAS HELPED A LOT OF THAT DIRT, UH, STOP FROM GOING INTO THE SIDEWALK, UH, AREA WHERE I WALKED DAILY. UH, WOULD APPRECIATE IF YOU LEAVE THE RETAINING WALL THERE. UH, IF YOU HAVE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS OR, UH, WOULD LIKE, UH, FOR MORE INFORMATION ON ME, YOU CAN CALL ME AT TWO ONE ZERO THREE THREE FOUR SEVEN THREE. HELLO, MY NAME IS BARBARA GLENNY. I RESIDE AT 2001 WEST GRAMERCY PLACE. I'M CALLING A REFERENCE OF THE RETAINING WALL AT 2030 WEST GRAMERCY PLACE. THE WALL IN LANDSCAPING WAS BEAUTIFULLY DONE ONLY AS TO THE AESTHETICS OF THE STREET BEFORE THE WALL, THERE WAS A LOT OF EROSION, DIRT, AND MUD ON THE SIDEWALK. NOW I CAN WALK MY DOG AND DOG BY WITHOUT HAVING TO SIDESTEP THE AREA. I'VE SEEN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD MAKE WONDERFUL STEPS FORWARD. I WISH MORE EFFORT WERE GIVEN TO CORRECT, NEGLECTED, AND ABANDONED HOMES LIKE THE ONE ACROSS THE STREET FROM ME. I'M CALLING AND SUPPORT OF OUR WONDERFUL NEIGHBOR WHO IS JUST TRYING TO IMPROVE OUR BEAUTIFUL NEIGHBORHOOD. PLEASE LET THE WALL REMAIN. IT'S LOVELY. THANK YOU. HI, I'M CALLING REGARDING, UM, 2 0 3 0 WEST GRAMERCY PLACE. UM, I LIVE AT 2 0 5 3 WEST GRAMERCY PLACE. UH, I'M CALLING BECAUSE YOU HAVE BEEN, UM, TELLING THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE HERE THAT THE, THE WALL THAT THEY CONSTRUCTED, THE RETAINING WALL THEY CONSTRUCTED IN THEIR FRONT YARD IS NOT, UM, HISTORICALLY IN VIBE WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND YOU CONTINUE TO CALL THEM AND TELL THEM THAT THEY MUST TAKE IT DOWN AND RESTORED THE GRASS SPERMS, UM, THAT WERE THERE PREVIOUSLY. I'M HERE TO JUST LET YOU KNOW THAT WHAT WAS THERE PREVIOUSLY WAS AN EYESORE. UM, IT WASN'T, THIS IS TOTALLY IN KEEPING WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD. I HAVE A HISTORICAL ARCHITECTURAL BACKGROUND, UH, WORKED FOR MANY. IF YOU LOOK AROUND THIS NEIGHBORHOOD, THERE ARE MANY RETAINING WALLS THAT ARE SIMILARLY JUST CONSTRUCTED. IN FACT, THIS ONE IS WAY PRETTIER THAN MOST OF THEM, AND I HAVE SEEN ENDLESS CONSTRUCTION THAT YOU GUYS HAVE APPROVED THAT IS ABSOLUTELY NOT IN KEEPING WITH THE HOMES. FOR INSTANCE, AT 2 1 1 5 WEST GRAMERCY, THERE WAS A PORCH SUPPLY THAT'S IN THE MISSION STYLE ON AN ART DECO BUILDING. IT LOOKS LIKE IT WAS STUCK ON. IT DOESN'T MATCH THE NEIGHBORHOOD AT ALL. THERE IS OTHER CONSTRUCTION GOING ON ON WEST KINGS THAT, UM, HASN'T SOUGHT ANY APPROVAL AT ALL. AND YET THIS BEAUTIFUL, IT'S ACTUALLY A BEAUTIFUL WALL THAT WAS CONSTRUCTED TO KEEP THE SOIL IN PLACE AND TO PROVIDE BEDS FOR GROWING, UM, ESTABLISHED PLANTS. SOMEBODY IN YOUR COMMISSION IS BEING NITPICKY AND IS THINKING THAT THE GLASS IS LIKE WAY BETTER. WELL, I'M HERE TO TELL YOU IT ISN'T THAT THESE PEOPLE ARE LOVELY NEIGHBORS. THEY CONTRIBUTE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THIS IS ABSOLUTELY IN KEEPING WITH THE HISTORIC, UH, APPEARANCE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AND I WOULD BE VERY UPSET IF IT WAS RETURNED BACK TO WHAT IT WAS. THIS MESSAGE IS FOR THE, UH, AGENDA OF JANUARY 20TH FOR THE HISTORIC DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION. I'M CALLING REGARDING ITEM 35 ON THE AGENDA. MY NAME IS, UH, DR. GERARD LONG, AND MY WIFE MARGARET PADDY. WE LIVE AT 2002 WEST GRAMERCY PLACE, AND WE'RE CALLING REGARDING THE PROPERTY AT 2 0 3 0 WEST GRAMERCY PLACE, OWNED BY CARL AND BRITTANY MEYER. WE WISH TO EXPRESS OUR SUPPORT, UH, OF KEEPING THE RETAINING WALL THEY CURRENTLY HAVE IN CURRENTLY HAVE INSTALLED. THAT'S MADE FROM LANDSCAPE BLOCKS. IT IS SIMILAR TO MANY OTHER RETAINING WALLS IN, IN PLACE IN THE MONTICELLO HISTORICAL DISTRICT DISTRICT. IT IS MUCH MORE EFFECTIVE AT HOLDING BACK THE EARTH THAN A RECOMMENDED GRASS SPERM, WHICH DOES NOT HOLD BACK ANY EARTH. THE GRASS PER FREQUENTLY HAS NO GRASS ON IT DUE TO DROUGHT. AND, AND AFTER IT DOES RAIN, THE DIRT FROM THE YARD IS ON THE SIDEWALK. WE'VE LIVED IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD FOR 30 YEARS BEFORE BRITTANY AND CARL MOVED INTO THE HOME FOUR YEARS AGO. THIS PROPERTY WAS AN EYESORE. IN A SHORT TIME, THEY HAVE TURNED IT INTO A LOVELY HOME THAT ADDS TO THE APPEAL OF OUR BLOCKS. THERE ARE OTHER RETAINING WALLS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT [02:35:01] HAVE BEEN CONSTRUCTED BY THE CITY IN PLAIN CONCRETE, WE'RE NOT SURE THOSE WALLS ARE HISTORICALLY CORRECT, BUT THEY ARE NOT AS APPEALING AS THE RETAINING WALL INSTALLED BY THE MYERS. THE MYERS HAVE DONE A BEAUTIFUL JOB WITH THIS HOME. WE HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH, UH, THE RETAINING WALL, AND WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT THEY BE ALLOWED TO LEAVE THE NEW RETAINING WALL INTACT. THANK YOU FOR YOUR ASSISTANCE. UH, HELLO. MY NAME IS ERIC DRUM AND MARIO, AND WE LIVE AT 19 WEST, UH, GRAMERCY PLACE. WE'RE CALLING ON BEHALF OF THE MEYERS AT 2030 WEST GRAMERCY. REGARDING THE RETAINING WALL. WE FEEL THAT THE WALL HAS ENHANCED THE BEAUTY OF THE HOUSE AND FITS IN WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD LANDSCAPE IS EVIDENCE THAT THEY HAVE DESIGNED AND EXECUTED A WELL THOUGHT OUT PLAN, AND THE WALL IS WELL CONSTRUCTED. THERE ARE MANY RETAINING WALLS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT ARE POORLY PLANNED OR FALLING APART, AND DO NOT COMPLIMENT THE HOMESTEAD LIKE THE MYERS HOUSE DOES. ALSO, THE WALL PROVIDES A SAFETY MEASURE, BUT NOT ALLOW ANY EROSION OR DEBRIS FROM COLLECTING ON THE SIDEWALK. THE WALL, ALONG WITH THE LANDSCAPING SHOWS HOW THE MYERS HAVE TAKEN PRIDE IN OUR MONTICELLO, JEFFERSON NEIGHBORHOOD. LASTLY, THEIR IMPROVEMENT TO THEIR PROPERTY ONLY BENEFITS, UH, OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND DOES NOT TAKE AWAY FROM OUR GRAMERCY BLOCK. MY NAME IS JAYA MILLER, 2 1 4 OH WEST GRAMERCY. UM, I DON'T KNOW THE OWNERS, BUT I WAS ASKED TO MAKE A COMMENT ON THE NEW RETAINING WALL OF, UH, OF THE FRONT LAWN ON THE HOUSE ON 2 1 3 0 WEST GRAMERCY. THE RETAINING WALL JUST ABOUT TWO FEET TALL, HAS A NEUTRAL BEIGE GRAY COLOR AND IT'S VERY AESTHETICALLY PLEASING. AND THE SIDE HAS A WELCOME FUNCTION TO PREVENT THE DIRT AND THE STONES TO SLIDE DOWN ON THE SIDEWALK, MAKING THEM WALKING BY, UH, BY MUCH SAFER. I DEFINITELY ADMIRE ALL THE IMPROVEMENT DONE ON 21 TO GRAMERCY HOUSE AND WALLS, BUT, HELLO? HI, UH, MY NAME'S GILBERT MORENO. I LIVE AT 2115 WEST GRAMERCY. ONE OF MY NEIGHBORS ON 2030 WEST GRAMERCY, UM, HAS A H C R C SIGN ON THEIR FRONT YARD, AND I JUST WANTED TO VOTE IN SUPPORT OF HIM KEEPING HIS RETAINING WALL. I THINK THAT IT, IT LOOKS GOOD THE WAY IT IS. IT MATCHES THE HOUSE AND IT, UH, P TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. MY NUMBER'S TWO TEN TWO SIX ZERO SIX EIGHT SIX EIGHT. HELLO, MY NAME IS HILDA AND I LIVE AT 1951 WEST GRAMERCY PLACE. MY PHONE NUMBER IS TWO TEN SEVEN. HI, MY NAME IS JENNIFER PETIT. I LIVE AT 2 0 2 6 WEST GRAMERCY PLACE AND I'M CALLING ABOUT THE HEARING SCHEDULED TODAY REGARDING THE LANDSCAPING OF 2 0 3 0 WEST GRAMERCY PLACE. MY HUSBAND AND I BOUGHT OUR HOUSE IN AUGUST AND THE MEYERS HOME AT 2 3 0. OUR NEXT DOOR NEIGHBORS, THEIR HOMES STOOD OUT TO US EVEN BEFORE THEY REDID THEIR FRONT YARD. AS ONE OF THE PRETTIEST AND MOST WELL-MAINTAINED HOMES ON OUR BLOCK, THEIR LANDSCAPING HAS ADDED EVEN GREATER CURB APPEAL TO THIS AREA OF OUR STREET. WE UNDERSTAND THAT THEY DID NOT USE APPROVED MATERIALS FOR THE WALL, BUT IN OUR OPINION, IT LOOKS COMPLETELY NATURAL WITH THE LOOK OF THEIR HOME. THERE'S CURRENTLY AN EMPTY HOUSE ON THE CORNER OF BAUM AND WEST GRAMERCY THAT IS LITERALLY FALLING APART. THE CITY DOES NOT SEEM TO CARE ABOUT THAT YET. THE MEYERS WHO HAVE SHOWN GREAT PRIDE OF OWNERSHIP ARE GETTING PENALIZED FOR WHAT CAN ONLY BE CONSIDERED A PROPERTY UPGRADE. YOU KNOW, UNFORTUNATELY NOT EVERYONE IN THE MONTICELLO PARK HISTORIC DISTRICT TAKES SUCH GREAT PRIDE IN MAINTAINING A BEAUTIFUL HOME OR YARD. YOU KNOW, WE HAVE RETAINING WALLS THAT ARE LITERALLY FALLING DOWN, PROPERTIES THAT HAVE BEEN UTTERLY NEGLECTED, AND IT JUST SEEMS UNJUST THAT OUR NEIGHBORS WHO HAVE TAKEN STEPS TO ADD VALUE, NOT JUST TO THEIR HOME, BUT TO OUR STREET IN GENERAL, ARE BEING PUNISHED. WE PAY HIGH PROPERTY TAXES TO LIVE HERE, AND I DON'T THINK IT'S RIGHT THAT WE HAVE TO JUMP THROUGH HOOPS IN ORDER TO MAKE POSITIVE LANDSCAPING CHANGES TO OUR FRONT YARDS. PLEASE DON'T PUNISH THE BEST LOOKING HOUSE ON OUR BLOCK. THANK YOU AND HAVE A GOOD DAY. HI, MY NAME IS JESSICA ORTIZ AND I LIVE AT 2050 WEST GRAMERCY. I'M CALLING IN SUPPORT OF OUR NEIGHBORS MEYERS THAT LIVE AT 2030 WEST GRAMERCY. UM, WE REALLY, REALLY THINK THE IMP IMPROVEMENTS THAT THEY'VE DONE TO THEIR HOUSE LOOKS WONDERFUL. [02:40:01] UM, THE RETAINING WALL LOOKS GREAT. WE THINK ALL OF IT TOTALLY FITS WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD, UM, AND THE STYLE. SO WE JUST WANTED TO CALL AND GIVE OUR SUPPORT AND SAY THAT WE DO APPRECIATE, YOU KNOW, THEM, UH, MAKING THOSE IMPROVEMENTS TO THEIR HOME. IT MAKES OUR STREET LOOK BETTER, IT MAKES OUR NEIGHBORHOOD BETTER. AND, UM, WE JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE Y'ALL KNEW THAT. UH, WE THINK IT LOOKS GREAT. THANK YOU. HELLO, THIS IS JORDAN ELLIS OF 2026 WEST GRAMERCY PLACE. I'M CALLING TO COMMENT ON THE HEARING REGARDING THE RETAINING WALL AT 2030 WEST GRAMERCY PLACE. BEING DISCUSSED ON JANUARY 20TH. I WAS ASTOUNDED TO LEARN THAT THE CITY HAD THREATENED TO HAVE THE MYERS TAKE DOWN THE RETAINING WALL THAT THEY RECENTLY BUILT. THEY HAVE DONE INCREDIBLE WORK TO BEAUTIFY THEIR HOME THAT CERTAINLY HAD SOME THE NICEST LANDSCAPING ON THE BLOCK AND IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN GENERAL, THEY EXEMPLIFY PRIDE OF HOME OWNERSHIP. CERTAINLY THERE ARE THINGS THAT SHOULD BE MONITORED BY HISTORICAL SOCIETY. HOWEVER, MY WIFE AND I HAVE BOUGHT OUR HOME IN JULY, AND NO ONE FROM THE CITY HAS MADE ANY EFFORT TO REACH OUT AND PROVIDE INFORMATION ABOUT WHAT MATERIALS PLANTS CAN BE USED AND CANNOT BE USED TO PREVENT SOME OF THESE THINGS. THE CITY'S GOT TO TAKE PROACTIVE EFFORT TO INFORM NEW HOMEOWNERS OF THESE GUIDELINES, AND THAT THERE ARE GUIDELINES IN GENERAL FOR CHANGES SUCH AS BUILDING RETAINING WALLS. MY PROPERTY TAXES ARE WAY TOO HIGH, CANNOT BE BETTER INFORMED. THERE ARE RETAINING WALLS CRUMBLING THROUGHOUT MONTICELLO PARK IN A HOME BESIDE US ON THE CORNER OF BALLAM AND GRAMERCY THAT HAS BEEN LEFT TO ROT. PERHAPS THE CITY SHOULD PAY MORE ATTENTION, UM, TO THESE DISCREPANCIES. INSTEAD, FAMILIES WHO ARE MAKING EFFORTS LIKE THE MYERS DE BEAUTIFY OUR NEIGHBORHOOD ARE BEING PENALIZED BY THE HISTORIC SOCIETY. PENALTIES SUCH AS THIS ONE WILL MAKE OTHER MEMBERS OF OUR GREAT NEIGHBORHOOD MORE HESITANT TO MAKE CHANGES THAT IMPROVE THE NEIGHBORHOOD AS A WHOLE. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. HELLO, MY NAME IS LAURA ELLE SANCHEZ. I LIVE AT 2034 WEST GRAMERCY PLACE, WHICH IS RIGHT NEXT DOOR TO CARL AND BRITTANY MEYER, UH, AT 2030 WEST GRAMERCY PLACE I'M CALLING TODAY IN SUPPORT OF MEYERS AND OF THE SUBJECT AT HAND, WHICH IS THE RETAINING WALL THEY RECENTLY BUILT IN THEIR YARD. I PERSONALLY THINK IT BEAUTIFIES THE HOME. UM, ALL THE IMPROVEMENTS THEY'VE MADE, THEIR LANDSCAPING, IT JUST MAKES THE HOME LOOK BEAUTIFUL. I'VE BEEN A RESIDENT ON THIS BLOCK FOR 50 YEARS. I GREW UP AT 2039 WEST GRAMERCY ACROSS THE STREET, AND I CURRENTLY, LIKE I SAID BEFORE, MENTIONED THAT I LIVE AT 2034 WEST GRAMERCY PLACE. UH, SO I DO NOT BELIEVE THIS TAKES AWAY ANY OF THE HISTORICAL LOOK OF THE BLOCK. THERE'S ACTUALLY TWO OTHER NEIGHBORS ON THIS BLOCK THAT HAVE SIMILAR WALLS, SO I URGE YOU TO PLEASE ALLOW THEM TO KEEP THIS WALL. THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS LORI AND MY HUSBAND PAUL, AND I LIVE AT 2051 WEST GRAMERCY IN SAN ANTONIO. I AM CALLING IN REGARDS TO YOUR FILE NUMBER TWO ONE DASH 1 1 8 1 REGARDING THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2030 WEST GRAMERCY. THE MAYORS HAVE MADE SOME MUCH NEEDED IMPROVEMENTS TO THEIR BEAUTIFUL HOME IN THEIR FRONT YARD. THEY ADDED A VERY NICE RETENTION WALL TO THEIR FRONT YARD THAT SEPARATES THE SLOPING LAWN FROM THE SIDEWALK. PRIOR TO THIS RETAINING WALL, THE DIRT AND ROCKS FROM THEIR LAWN WOULD FALL ONTO THE SIDEWALK, ESPECIALLY AFTER IT RAINED. IT WOULD AND WOULD MAKE FOR A VERY UNSAFE AREA TO WALK THROUGH. WE ARE VERY HAPPY WITH THE WAY THE RETAINING WALL LOOKS, BUT ESPECIALLY THAT IT IS NOW A SAFE AREA TO WALK THROUGH. IT IS GREAT TO HAVE NEIGHBORS THAT TAKE PRIDE IN THEIR HOME AND KEEP IT UP SO NICELY. THANK YOU. HELLO, MY NAME IS MARIO GOFF AND I'M CALLING ALSO ON BEHALF OF ERIC JUGO. WE BOTH LIVE AT 1950 WEST GRAMERCY PLACE. WE'RE CALLING ON BEHALF OF THE MYERS AT 2030 WEST GRAMERCY REGARDING THE RETAINING WALL. WE FEEL THAT THE WALL HAS ENHANCED THE BEAUTY OF THE HOUSE AND FITS WITH OUR NEIGHBORHOOD LANDSCAPE. IT IS EVIDENT TO HAVE DESIGNED AND EXECUTED A WELL THOUGHT OUT PLAN. THE WALL IS WELL CONSTRUCTED. THERE ARE MANY RETAINING WALLS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT ARE POORLY PLANNED AND ARE FALLING APART AND DO NOT COMPLIMENT THE HOMES LIKE THE MYERS HOUSE DOES. THE WALL DOES PROVIDE A SAFETY MEASURE BY NOT ALLOWING ANY EROSION AND DEBRIS FROM COLLECTING ON THE SIDEWALK. THE WALL, ALONG WITH THE LANDSCAPING SHOW THAT THE MYERS HAVE TAKEN PRIDE IN OUR MONTICELLO JEFFERSON NEIGHBORHOOD. LASTLY, THEIR IMPROVEMENTS TO THEIR PROPERTY ONLY BENEFIT OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND DOES NOT TAKE ANYTHING AWAY FROM OUR GRAMERCY BLOCK. THIS IS REVEREND DIANE DS 2 0 3 1 WEST GRAMERCY PLACE. I'M CALLING IN REFERENCE TO THE RETAINING WALL AT 2 0 3 0 WEST GRAMERCY. CARL AND BRITTANY MEYER HAVE BEEN THE BEST OF NEIGHBORS FOR THEIR FOUR YEARS IN OUR COMMUNITY. THE ATTENTION AND CARE THEY HAVE CONSISTENTLY PAID TO THEIR PROPERTY REFLECTS THE BEST OF MONTICELLO'S CHARACTER. [02:45:02] THE ADDITION OF THE RETAINING WALL BEAUTIFULLY AND ARTFULLY SOLVES A PROBLEM THAT PLAGUES ALL OF US WHOSE PROPERTY LIES ABOVE STREET LEVEL. TO SAY THAT THE WALL DOES NOT SUPPORT THE AUTHENTIC VIBE OF THE MONTICELLO PARK HISTORIC DISTRICT IS HARSHLY, PURE, PUNITIVE, AND ILL-INFORMED, PLEASE RECONSIDER APPROVAL OF THE IMPROVEMENTS THEY HAVE MADE TO THEIR PROPERTY. THANK YOU. HI, THIS IS RICARDO ORTIZ. MY ADDRESS IS 2 0 5 0 WEST GRAMERCY PLACE. I'M CALLING IN REGARDS TO THE PROPERTY AT 2030 WEST GRAMERCY, UH, AND THEIR CASE WITH H B R C. I JUST WANTED TO CALL AND GIVE MY SUPPORT TO THE OWNERS AT 2030 WEST GRAMERCY. I THINK THAT THE RETAINING WALL LOOKS GREAT. UH, THE IMPROVEMENTS THAT THEY HAVE MADE TO THEIR HOUSE LOOK, LOOK AMAZING, AND I THINK, UH, IMPROVES THE, UH, THE AESTHETICS OF OUR STREET. AND I ALSO THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, H D R C CAN, UH, YOU KNOW, MAKE CHANGES TO HISTORIC PROPERTIES WHENEVER BIG HOTELS OR MAJOR CORPORATIONS COME DOWN AND WANNA DEVELOP SAN ANTONIO, THAT YOU GUYS CAN FIND IT IN YOUR HEARTS TO, UH, LET SOME HOME HOMEOWNERS IMPROVE THEIR HOME. THAT'S ALL. AND ONE LAST NOTE BEFORE I HAND IT BACK TO, UH, THE APPLICANT COMMISSIONERS THE PHOTO THAT YOU'RE SEEING ON SCREEN FEATURES, UH, MODIFIED PLANTING STRIP IN CONSULTATION WITH THE APPLICANT, THERE IS A PENDING, UH, APPLICATION THAT'S ELIGIBLE FOR ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL SHOWING THAT THE PLANTING STRIP WILL HAVE OVER 50% PLANT COVER WHEN THE PLANTS ARE, UH, IN, IN FULL BLOOM. UM, SO THAT IS NOT ONE OF THE OUTSTANDING ITEMS AT THIS TIME. THIS IS COMMISSIONER GROUP. I HAVE TO HOP ON ABOUT ONE MINUTE. UM, I JUST REALLY QUICKLY JUST WANTED TO PUT MY INPUTS AND SO IT IS MY DISTRICT. I JUST WANNA TELL THE MYERS THAT THEY HAVE SOME GREAT NEIGHBORS , I THINK, I DON'T THINK I'VE EVER HEARD SO MANY PEOPLE SPEAK ON BEHALF OF A CASE UNLIKE A RESIDENTIAL SINGLE CASE. UM, I WOULD BE IN SUPPORT OF REMAIN, UH, OF, UH, KEEPING THE RETAINING WALL AND MAYBE REMOVING THE PATIO. IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE ANY CONCRETE WAS USED. IT JUST USED LIKE ITS PAPER AND SAND. MAYBE THAT COULD BE FILLED OUT WITH SOME, UH, MULCH LIKE STAFF WAS, UM, PROPOSING IF, UM, IF YOU WANTED TO KEEP THAT AS LIKE A SITTING AREA. BUT, UM, SORRY, I HAVE TO HOP OFF. I'LL BE BACK IN ABOUT 20 MINUTES. I, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT. THE, UM, THE, THE, THE FLAGSTONE THAT'S IN FRONT OF THE HOUSE, THERE'S AN OBJECT IN THE CENTER. WHAT IS THAT OPTION? UH, THAT WOULD BE THE LIGHT POST. THERE'S A LIGHT POST IN THERE? NO, NO, IN IN THE OTHER ONE. IN THE, IN THE ONE WITH THE FLAGSTONE. THAT'S THE LAMPPOST. OH YEAH, THAT'S THE LAMPPOST AND HANGING ON THE LAMPPOST. IS THAT PART OF THE, THE, UH, EXPRESSION THERE, OR IS IT IT JUST HAPPENS TO NO SIR. THAT WAS SO SORRY, SIR. NO, SIR. THAT WAS JUST A SIGN THAT I'D MADE FOR OUR LITTLE HOME AND THAT CAN COME OFF AT ANY TIME. UM, WE ENVISIONED, YOU KNOW, THE NEW OWNERS PLANNING, YOU KNOW, SOME BEAUTIFUL, UM, IVY OR SOMETHING TO GO AROUND THE POLE AND THEN HAVING, UM, YOU KNOW, SOME HANGING PLANTS OFF OF THERE. YEAH, IT'S JUST A SIGN THAT SAYS OUR NAME. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. I WAS JUST WONDERING IF IT WAS PERSONAL. THIS, THIS IS MR. FISH. I JUST HAVE A FEW BRIEF THOUGHTS HERE. UM, I, I'M LOOKING AT THE FRONT PORCH CONFIGURATION OF THIS HOUSE AND I NOTE THAT THERE, THERE IS NOT AN OCCUPIABLE FRONT PORCH. UM, I DON'T THINK IT'S UNCOMMON THAT WE SUGGEST, UH, SOME MODIFICATIONS TO THE LANDSCAPE TO CREATE, UH, MAYBE A FRONT PORCH LIKE AREA IN LIEU OF ALTERATIONS TO THE FRONT PORCH. UM, I DON'T PARTICULARLY OBJECT TO THE LIMITED PAVED AREA AROUND THE LAMPPOST. I'D MAKE ONE OBSERVATION ABOUT THE, THE, THE POSSIBLE NEED FOR A RETAINING WALL. UH, MANY OF THOSE CALLS MENTIONED THAT THAT DIRT, UH, STONES AND DEBRIS, UH, WOULD COVER OVER THE SIDEWALK AND REQUIRE A LOT OF MAINTENANCE. IT SUGGESTS TO ME THAT PERHAPS THE, THE SLOPE OF THE LAWN UP AGAINST THE SIDEWALK, UH, IS, IS SUCH THAT SOME SORT OF RETAINAGE HERE IS PROBABLY APPROPRIATE. I DO HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF CONCERN ABOUT THE MATERIAL AND MAYBE THE HEIGHT OF IT. UM, APPRECIATE STAFF POINTING OUT THAT THE MO STRIP PIECE IS NOT, NOT NECESSARILY A PART OF WHAT WE'RE HEARING TODAY. UH, I'D LIKE TO GET A FEW MORE THOUGHTS. I'M SURE THERE'S A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT OPINIONS ON THIS. YEAH, THIS IS COMMISSIONER CARPENTER AND, AND I LIVE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND WALK BY DOGS UP AND DOWN THESE STREETS AND, AND, UM, HAVE DEFINITELY EXPERIENCED, UH, THE WASHOUT THAT THEY'RE DESCRIBING. SO THERE'RE, THERE'S [02:50:01] DEFINITELY A TECH TECHNICAL NEED AND, AND IT'S BEEN EXACERBATED BY, UH, THE LOW, UH, AMOUNT OF RAIN THAT WE'VE HAD RECENTLY. SO THE, THESE LAWNS THAT, UH, TYPICALLY HAD, YOU KNOW, GRASS THAT WOULD RETAIN THE SOIL ON THE HAVE BEEN REALLY DRYING OUT AS, AS WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO COMPLY WITH THE, UH, THE WATER RESTRICTIONS. I KNOW MY OWN YARD IS DOING THAT RIGHT NOW. I HAVE A SIMILAR KIND OF, UH, SLOPING BURN LIKE FORM HERE. UM, I, I THINK MY CONCERN ABOUT THIS IS LESS ABOUT WHETHER THERE, THERE'S A TECHNICAL REQUIREMENT HERE TO ADDRESS, UH, YOU KNOW, A CHANGING CLIMATIC ISSUE, UM, AND MORE ABOUT THE MATERIALITY OF THIS. UH, MANY OF THE NEIGHBORHOODS RETAIN WALLS OR EITHER CONCRETE STONE OR, UM, OR, YOU KNOW, SOME KIND OF FLAGSTONES AND THINGS LIKE THAT. THIS FEELS, UM, A LITTLE BIT MORE KIND OF, UM, YOU KNOW, LOWE'S OR HOME DEPOT TYPE OF MATERIAL THAT I, UH, WHILE I'M SURE IT'S COST EFFECTIVE, UM, AND, AND KIND OF NEUTRAL IN CHARACTER. THE, THE MODULARITY OF IT I THINK IS, IS A LITTLE DISTRACTING LITTLE, UH, I DON'T THINK, UH, COMPLETING KEEPING WITH SORT OF THE MORE NATURAL MATERIAL PALLET THAT WE FIND IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. UM, I'M GLAD TO HEAR THAT THE, THE PLANNING STRIP IS GOING TO BE SOMEWHAT REPLANTED RATHER THAN RIGHT INTO JUST A ZEROSCAPE GRAVEL. 'CAUSE THAT IS YOU, IF YOU EVEN JUST GO ON GOOGLE EARTH AND, AND DO A, A A A VIEW AERIAL VIEW OF THIS, WE'LL SEE THAT THAT'S A REAL DISTINCTIVE OF MULTIPLE STREETS IN IN THE ELLA AREAS. THAT SORT OF GREEN BELT, I'M A LITTLE CONCERNED ABOUT IT IS THAT GRAVEL, THE, THE DARK GRAY GRAVEL AND THE WALKWAY, THE WALKWAY LEADING UP TO THE FRONT DOOR APPEARS TO BE ORIGINAL. BUT IS THAT GRAVEL ALSO PART OF OUR CONSIDERATION FOR THIS, THIS PATIO AND, AND THE, THE PLANTING THAT'S GOING ON THERE IN THE FRONT? AND THAT'S A QUESTION FOR LEE. YEAH, SO SAP, SAP FOUND THAT THAT FEATURE WAS INSTALLED, UH, AT LEAST TWO YEARS AGO OUTSIDE OF THE PERIOD OF ENFORCEMENT. AND, UH, IT DOESN'T DOMINATE THE FRONT YARD, SO IT ISN'T A CONCERN AT THIS TIME. OKAY. UM, I GUESS ONE THING THAT I WOULD ASK IS, IS THERE A POSSIBILITY TO ACHIEVE THE SAME DEGREE OF, OF, UH, EROSION PROTECTION HERE, BUT MAYBE TAKE THAT, UH, WALL DOWN A COURSE OR TWO SO THAT IT ISN'T QUITE SO, UH, PROMINENT, UH, TO KIND OF CURVE INTO IT, TO KIND OF TRANSITION BACK INTO IT AS IT WAS HISTORICALLY WHERE THERE'S A SLIGHT CURING, UH, SLOPE THERE AND, AND INTER INTRODUCE SOME PLANTING THAT CAN GROW OVER, UH, THE RETAINING WALL AND SOFTEN THAT UP? THAT'S A, A CHARACTERISTIC YOU SEE ON A LOT OF THE STREETS WITH THE NEIGHBOR, UH, IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. AND, AND THE NEIGHBORS THAT SPOKE UP ARE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. THERE ARE A LOT OF THESE HISTORICAL WALLS THAT ARE CRACKED, UH, THAT ARE OUT OF PLUM BECAUSE OF THE, UH, THE PRESSURE OF THE SOILS BEHIND THEM. SO THERE'S A LOT OF THESE FEATURES AROUND THAT ARE IN, IN POOR, POOR CONDITION. UM, SO, YOU KNOW, THERE'S A LOT THAT RINGS TRUE WITH WHAT THEY'RE SAYING THERE. I THINK FOR ME TO OFFSET THE KIND OF MODULAR MATERIALITY OF THIS, PERHAPS IF IT CAME DOWN A COURSE OR TWO, UH, AND THEN REESTABLISH THAT CAP PIECE THAT THEY HAVE, UH, REPRO PROFILE IT SO THAT IT CURVES INTO THAT, UM, TO SORT OF RECALL THE ORIGINAL PROFILE OF THE, UH, OF THE YARD. UM, I'M NOT A FAN OF THE, UM, THE PATIO THERE. I THINK IT LOOKS VERY CONTRIVED. UM, AND I, WHILE I APPRECIATE, UH, COMMISSIONER FISH'S COMMENTS ABOUT, YOU KNOW, THE LACK OF A, OF A, A PORCH THAT YOU CAN SIT ON, THAT JUST SEEMS VERY, UH, NOT INTEGRATED INTO THE LANDSCAPE IN A, IN A WAY THAT THAT REFLECTS SOME OF THE OTHER, UH, DESIGN DECISIONS THAT THIS CLIENT HAS MADE. COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, THIS IS COMMISSIONER FISH, COULD, COULD WE PERHAPS ASK THE, THE APPLICANT TO RESPOND TO THE POSSIBILITY OF REMOVING A COURSE OF THE BLOCK OFF THE RETAINING WALL? UM, AND, AND BY A COURSE, BASICALLY WE JUST MEAN A ROW SO LOWER, LOWER IT DOWN ONE ROW. YES. YEAH, I, I'D BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO, TO DO THAT. UM, ABSOLUTELY. UM, I, I WOULD LOVE YEAH, SOME SORT OF, UM, YOU KNOW, WAY FORWARD WITH THIS JUST SO WE CAN GET IT TAKEN CARE OF. I'M, I'M HAPPY TO TAKE DOWN A LEVEL. I, I THINK THE REMOVING OF A COURSE WOULD SUBSTANTIALLY IMPROVE, UH, THE APPEARANCE OF [02:55:01] THE, THE MATERIAL, THE SCALE OF MATERIAL THERE. UM, AND IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE MIGHT BE SUPPORT FOR THAT ON THE COMMISSION. THIS IS CHAIRMAN FETZER AND I WOULD CONCUR WITH, UM, COMMISSIONER CARPENTER AND COMMISSIONER FISH THAT, UH, IF THE HEIGHT OF THIS WALL CAME DOWN, UH, REESTABLISHED A LITTLE BIT OF THAT, UH, HISTORIC SLOPE TO THE FRONT YARD, UH, WOULD GREATLY IMPROVE THIS. AGAIN, UH, POSSIBLY ADDING, UH, SOME SORT OF GROUND COVER OR VINES ON THE, THE YARD SIDE OF THIS THAT WOULD GROW OVER AND, AND START OBSCURING THE, UH, THIS MATERIAL. UM, I DO WANT TO THANK THE MYERS FOR, UM, WHAT THEY'VE DONE TO THE HOUSE AND PROPERTY AND, UH, AND ALL THE OBVIOUSLY SUPPORT FROM THE, FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD. UM, A NOTE TO STAFF, UH, I WENT ON, 'CAUSE THERE WAS A COMMENT THAT, UH, THE PROPERTY OWNERS DID NOT KNOW THAT THEY WERE IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT AND DIDN'T KNOW THAT THERE WERE, UH, PROCEDURES THAT NEEDED TO FOLLOW. AND I WENT ON BEARER COUNTY APPRAISAL DISTRICT, UH, WEBSITE AND LOOKED AT A NUMBER OF, UH, PROPERTIES IN THIS SURROUNDING AREA. AND NONE OF THEM ARE ZONED, UH, THEY'RE ALL JUST ZONED R SIX. THERE'S NO DESIGNATION AS TO THE FACT THAT THEY'RE IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT, JUST SORT OF, UH, PUTTING IT IN, UH, O H P STAFF'S, UH, THINGS TO DO. NOT THAT THEY DON'T HAVE A LOT OF THINGS TO DO, BUT AN EDUCATION, UH, EFFORT IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD AS WELL AS COORDINATING WITH, UH, THEIR APPRAISAL DISTRICT FOR PROPER ZONING DESIGNATIONS THAT WOULD, YEAH, IF I COULD JUST ONE LITTLE COMMENT THAT WOULD BE SO HELPFUL. 'CAUSE YOU KNOW, LIKE I SAID, WE'RE FROM MONTANA, WE DON'T EVEN, WE DIDN'T EVEN KNOW THESE EXISTED AND, YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S OUR SINCEREST APOLOGIES. UM, YOU KNOW, WITH, WITH THIS, UM, IF WE WOULD'VE KNOWN WHAT WE WERE GETTING INTO, UM, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE WERE, UM, WHEN WE WERE BUYING A HOME DOWN HERE, I, I CAN'T SAY WE WOULD'VE MADE A DIFFERENT DECISION BECAUSE WE LOVED THE NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT WE WOULD'VE BEEN SO MUCH MORE INFORMED. AND, YOU KNOW, MAYBE SOMETHING AS SIMPLE AS 15 MINUTES OF, OF TIME AT THE CLOSING TABLE WITH SOMEBODY FROM YOUR OFFICE WHEN THEY CLOSE ON A HOME IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT. UM, YOU KNOW, AND, AND I DON'T, I KNOW YOU GUYS ARE STRETCHED, WE'RE ALL STRETCHED. UM, YOU KNOW, BUT A LITTLE BIT OF, A LITTLE BIT OF NOTICE, UM, YOU KNOW, FOR THE HOMEOWNER BEFORE WE ACTUALLY, YOU KNOW, GET INTO THE PROCESS, I THINK ALLEVIATES A LOT OF THESE HEADACHES. AND, YOU KNOW, WE'RE SINCERELY, YOU KNOW, SORRY FOR, FOR THE CHALLENGES HERE. THIS IS COMMISSIONER CARPENTER. I APPRECIATE THAT. AND, AND, UH, UH, O H P HAS, UH, A PROGRAM WHERE THEY'RE TRYING TO EDUCATE, UM, UH, PARTICULARLY OUR REALTORS OR PROFESSIONALS, UH, ABOUT THIS. THEY MAKE THEIR OWNERS AWARE OF IT. UM, INCIDENTALLY, I USED, I USED TO LIVE IN BOZEMAN, MONTANA FOR ABOUT 14 MONTHS, SO YOU'RE GOING BACK TO A BEAUTIFUL PART OF THE WORLD AND CON CONGRATULATIONS ON YEAH, ON THE, ON THE THEY LOVE BOZEMAN . YEAH, . THANK YOU. SO, UH, CHAIRMAN, I'M GONNA ATTEMPT TO CRAFT A MOTION HERE, BUT DEFINITELY, UM, ASK MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS TO PITCH IN WITH THE, UH, UH, AMENDMENTS IF I, AND MUFF THIS ONE. SO I MOVE FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER ONE WITH A STIPULATION THAT ONE COURSE OF THE RETAINING WALL WALL BE REMOVED AND THE CAPPING COURSE BE REPLACED. THEN ON TOP OF THAT, THAT THE, UH, THAT THE PROFILE OF THE, UH, LAWN THEN CURVED TO MEET THAT, THAT, UH, RETAINING WALL, UH, TO, UH, RECALL THE HISTORIC PROFILE OF THE, OF THE LAWN, UH, TO SOME DEGREE, UM, AND THAT THE, UH, APPLICANT WORK WITH O H P TO DEVELOP A, A PLANTING PLAN THAT, UH, INTRODUCES PERHAPS VINES OR OTHER PLANTING MATERIAL THAT THE TRAIL OVER MS. WALL, UH, REGARDING ITEM NUMBER TWO, UM, I SUPPORT STAFF'S COMMENTS ON THIS. AND SO, UH, AT THE RISK OF UPSETTING, UH, THINGS HERE, I'M GONNA SAY THAT, UH, THE, UH, THE FLAGSTONE PATIO SHOULD BE REMOVED TO RE REESTABLISH, UH, IN A LARGE AREA OF THE YARD. IF THE CLIENT, I'M SORRY, IF THE APPLICANT, UM, WISHES TO COME BACK TO O H P WITH A, [03:00:01] UH, A WAY OF MODIFYING THAT EXISTING PATIO THAT IS MORE IN KEEPING WITH THE, UM, WITH, WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND WITH THAT CURVING WALKWAY AND THAT SORT OF THING, YOU'RE CERTAINLY WELCOME TO DO SO. UH, SO TO, JUST TO SUMMARIZE AGAIN, UM, MOVE FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM ONE WITH THE STIPULATION THAT ONE COURSE, UH, IN HEIGHT BE REMOVED FROM THE RETAINING WALL, THE, UH, WALL BE PROFILE TO, UH, TAPERED DOWN TO IT AND THAT A LANDSCAPE PLAN BE DEVELOPED THAT INTRODUCES TRAILING VINES AND, UH, DENIAL OF ITEM NUMBER TWO. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? THIS IS COMMISSIONER FERNANDEZ. I SECOND WE HAVE A MOTION TO SECOND MAY HAVE A ROLL CALL, PLEASE. FERNANDEZ. AYE. FISH? UM, NAY. I AGREE WITH ITEM ONE, BUT NOT ITEM TWO. OKAY. AYE, VELAZQUEZ. AYE. AREOLA AYE. CARPENTER, AYE. GROUP. OH, STEPS AWAY. THAT'S RIGHT. THAT'S HER. THAT AYE. MOTION CARRIES. MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU. UM, THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH. IT IS NOW SIX OH EIGHT AND I'M GONNA CALL FOR A FIVE MINUTE RECESS. OKAY. CAN WE PAUSE THE LIVE STREAM? OKAY. LOOKS LIKE WE'RE LIVE AGAIN SO WE CAN PROCEED WITH CASE 35. RACHEL, DO YOU HAVE THE APPLICANT ON THE LINE? UH, SO RACHEL, YOU'RE MUTED. LET ME, I BELIEVE WE JUST DID 35. OH, YOU'RE, I'M SORRY, YES, 40. UH, RACHEL, I STILL CAN'T HEAR YOU. HOW ABOUT NOW? YES. OKAY, GREAT. MARY JO IS ON THE LINE. ALRIGHT, WELCOME BACK. THE, UH, WE'RE ON ITEM 40, [40. 21-1170 Address/Description: 533 E CARSON HDRC Case No.: 2020-559 Historic District Name: Government Hill Applicant: Mary Vargas/VARGAS MARY JOSEPHINE Request: Window replacement and fenestration modifications City Council Dist.: 2] CASE NUMBER 20 25 59 AT 5 33 EAST CARSON, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO, OR THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO ONE, REPLACE WINDOWS MK AND F WITH PELLA ARCHITECTURAL SERIES WINDOWS TWO RELOCATE WOOD WINDOW L TO WINDOW E, WHICH WAS FULLY REMOVED BY FIRE, DAMAGE AND APPROVED FOR A NEW WINDOW REPLACEMENT. IF APPROVED WINDOW L WOULD THEN FEATURE A NEW WOOD WINDOW PRODUCT AS WELL. AND THREE, REMOVE THE WEST SIDE NON HISTORIC WINDOW LOCATED IN THE ENCLOSED BALCONY PORCH AND REPLACED WITH WATERFALL SIDING. STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF ITEM ONE. WINDOW REPLACEMENT BASED ON FINDING. B STAFF FINDS THAT INDIVIDUAL REPAIR AND POTENTIAL RECONSTRUCTION OF INDIVIDUAL SES SHOULD BE CONSIDERED PRIOR TO WHOLESALE WINDOW REPLACEMENT IF REPLACEMENT IS APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION. STAFF FINDS THAT THE SUBMITTED PE ARCHITECTURAL SERIES WINDOWS ARE GENERALLY CONSISTENT WITH THE STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR ORIGINAL WOOD WINDOW REPLACEMENT. STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF ITEM TWO WINDOW RELOCATION BASED ON FINDING C. HOWEVER, IF WINDOW M PART OF ITEM ONE IS APPROVED FOR REPLACEMENT, THEN STAFF FINDS THAT RELOCATION OF WINDOW L IS APPROPRIATE TO CONCUR SIMULTANEOUSLY. AND THREE STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL. ITEM THREE, BASED ON FINDING D STAFF RECOMMENDS ENCLOSING THE EXISTING WINDOW OPENING WITH A SHUTTER CONFIGURATION OR INTERIOR TREATMENT WHILE KEEPING THE WINDOW OPENING IN PLACE WILL MAINTAIN THE VISUAL APPEARANCE OF THE BALCONY AND WOULD BE MORE APPROPRIATE THAN FURTHERING THE NON-CONFORMING CONDITION OF A FRONT PORCH. ENCLOSURE, I DO HAVE, UH, MARY JO ON THE LINE, UH, AND, UH, MARY HAS, UH, SUBMITTED A PRESENTATION THAT WE CAN GO THROUGH AND, UH, SHE ALSO SUBMITTED AN ADDITIONAL DOCUMENT PRIOR TO THE, UM, THE POSTING DEADLINE THAT SHOWS CONS, COST CONSIDERATION FOR WINDOW REPAIR VERSUS REPLACEMENT. UH, MARY JO, IF YOU'D LIKE TO INTRODUCE YOUR SELF AND, AND BEGINNING YOUR PRESENTATION. MAYOR, UH, COMMISSIONERS AND MEMBERS OF THE STAFF. MY NAME IS MARY BILL VARGAS AND I'M THE PROPERTY OWNER OF 5 3 3 EAST CARSON. I HAVE SOME BACKGROUND. UM, THE PROPERTY WAS BUILT IN 1920 AND HAD HAD MULTIPLE TRADITIONAL INNOVATION. IT WAS CONVERTED FROM A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING INTO A FOURPLEX APARTMENT AND IT SUSTAINED TWO MAJOR [03:05:01] FIRES, UM, WITH THE LAST ONE BEING IN 2017. AND THE DAMAGE EXCEEDED 75% OF THE PROPERTY. THE PROPERTY HAS LOST SIGNIFICANT PORTIONS OF HIS, HIS OF ITS HISTORIC CHARACTER AND MOST OF ITS ORIGINAL FABRIC DUE TO ALTERATIONS AND FIRE DAMAGE. THE, FOR EXAMPLE, THE UPSTAIRS FRONT BALCONY WAS ENCLOSED. THERE ARE NO ROUND COLUMNS OR CAPITALS. THE BASES ON THE FRONT PORCH, THE BRICK FIREPLACE HAS BEEN REMOVED. A REAR ADDITION TO THE UPPER AND LOWER LEVEL WAS ADDED. ADDITIONAL ENTRANCES, STAIRCASES WERE ADDED TO ACCESS APARTMENTS. 70% OF THE ORIGINAL HOUSE SIDING IS NOW COVERED OR CLADDED WITH ALUMINUM SIDING. AND THERE ARE FOUR TYPES OF SIDING, UH, VISIBLE ON THE HOUSE. THERE ARE 13 HISTORIC WOOD WINDOWS IN THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURES THAT ARE THREE FEET BY SEVEN FEET, AND ALL WINDOWS ARE IN NEED OF SOME REPAIR. THE COMMISSION HAS APPROVED REPLACEMENT OF WINDOW E WITH APELLA ARCHITECTURAL SERIES WINDOW, AND MY HOPE IS TO RESTORE THE PROPERTY SO THAT IT CAN BE RENTED TO PROVIDE A HEALTH AND SAFE HOME FOR TENANTS THAT IS CLEAN, AESTHETICALLY APPEALING, ENERGY EFFICIENT IN A COST-EFFECTIVE MANNER THAT IS IN KEEPING THE DESIGN AND ERROR. MY REQUEST REQUEST IS TO REPLACE WINDOWS M, K, AND F WITH TELE ARCHITECTURAL WINDOWS TO SWITCH THE LOCATION OF THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED WINDOW E WITH WINDOW L AND TO REMOVE THE WEST SIDE NON HISTORIC WINDOW LOCATED IN THE ENC BALCONY PORCH. AND, UM, REPLACED THAT WITH WATERFALL SIDING. THE NEXT SLIDE SHOWS THE, UH, HISTORIC WINDOWS AND IT CAN BE SEEN AS A AND C ON THE FRONT PORCH. I'M NOT SURE IF THE SLIDES ARE MOVING OR WOULD'VE BEEN FROZEN. YES, YES MA'AM. THERE'S A, THERE'S GONNA BE A DELAY ON WHAT YOU SEE, BUT WE ARE, WE ARE FOLLOWING YOUR LEAD WITH THE SENTENCE. OKAY. SO I MUST NOT BE IN SYN AT ALL WITH YOU BECAUSE I STILL SEE, UM, PAGE THREE OF YOUR, YOUR PAGE THREE. SO YES, YES MA'AM. THERE'S GONNA BE, THERE'S GONNA BE A DELAY ON YOUR END. UM, SO WE'RE, WE'RE PUTTING THE SLIDES UP BASED ON WHAT YOU'RE TELLING US TO DO, BUT THERE'S, YOU'RE NOT GONNA SEE IT RIGHT AWAY. OKAY. I'LL CONTINUE. CONTINUE. THANK YOU. OKAY. UM, SO I, I'VE DEPICTED THE 13 WINDOWS, THE FRONT SIDE SHOWING A AND C, AND THEN THE NEXT SLIDE HAS, UH, TWO ANGLES OF THE B SIDE OF THE PROPERTY, WHICH SHOWS B, C, B, D, H, J, L, M, AND G. AND THEN THE NEXT SLIDE SHOWS TWO HISTORIC WINDOWS, UH, K AND F. THE NEXT COUPLE OF SLIDES SHOW THE CONDITION OF THE PRO, UH, WINDOWS WINDOW M HAS HAD, UH, SOME SIGNIFICANT, UH, NEEDS SIGNIFICANT REPAIR TO THE SASHES, THE CENTER DIVIDERS, UM, AS WELL AS THE WINDOW FRAME. I HAD A GENTLEMAN COME OUT AND GIVE ME AN ESTIMATE AND HE SAID THAT IT WOULD BE ABOUT $1,800 AND IF I WERE TO REPLACE THAT WINDOW WITH A P WINDOW, IT WOULD BE ABOUT $950 IF YOU LOOK AT THE WINDOWS K. AND UM, F YOU'LL SEE THAT THOSE ARE ALSO, UH, NEED OF SIGNIFICANT REPAIR AND I'M SUGGESTING THAT WE SALVAGE THOSE PARTS FOR THE OTHER WINDOWS. AGAIN, I COULD USE SOME OF THE PIECES, UH, GENTLEMEN THAT CAME ALSO TO GIVE ME AN ESTIMATE. ALSO SAID THAT THE REPAIR THOSE WOULD BE ABOUT $1,200. AND SO IF JUST THOSE THREE WINDOWS, IF I DID THE REPAIRS THAT, THAT I'VE BEEN QUOTED, IT WOULD BE ABOUT 4,200. IF I WERE TO REPLACE THOSE THREE WINDOWS. THE ESTIMATED COST IS ABOUT 1,900, [03:10:02] WHICH IS LESS THAN HALF THE PRICE. UM, AND I WOULD AT LEAST BE ABLE TO SALVAGE THOSE PARTS TO DO REPAIRS ON THE OTHER WINDOWS. THE WINDOWS THAT I'M PROPOSING TO BE REPLACEMENT ARE THE PELLA ARCHITECTURAL SERIES WINDOWS THEY'VE APPROVED BY THE OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION. THEY HAVE THE SAME LOOK AND SIZE AS THE ORIGINAL HISTORIC WINDOWS, AND THEY'RE SINGLE HUNG WOOD WINDOWS THAT ARE PRIMED AND INSULATED, LOW EGA GLASS, UM, WINDOWS K AND F WEST FACING AND DO NOT FACE THE STREET. UM, BY BEING ABLE TO RELOCATE THE WINDOW E UPSTAIRS, IT WOULD PUT THOSE WINDOWS A LITTLE BIT FARTHER FROM THE STREET SIDE, UM, AND AT LEAST THEY WOULD MATCH TWO WINDOWS UPSTAIRS. WHEREAS AT THE CURRENT, UH, SITUATION, THERE'S ONE WINDOW IN A ROOM THAT HAS THOSE THREE, UM, ORIGINAL WINDOWS AND SO THEY WOULDN'T MATCH AT ALL. UM, THE BENEFITS OF THESE WINDOWS ARE, IT MAINTAINS HISTORIC LOOK OF THE ORIGINAL WINDOWS. IT ADDRESSES SOME LEATHER REMEDIATION THAT I HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THEIR ENERGY EFFICIENT AND THAT THEY HAVE A SIGNIFICANT COST IMPACT BECAUSE THEY COST CONSIDERABLY LESS IN THE NEXT ITEM, UM, IT'S THE SUPPORTING INFORMATION FOR, UM, PLACING THE WINDOWS. YOU CAN SEE IN THAT DIAGRAM WHERE WINDOW E IS AND UM, WHERE WINDOW L THEY WOULD JUST SWITCH PA PLACES. AND MY LAST REQUEST IS THE REMOVAL OF THE WEST SIDE NON HISTORIC WINDOW LOCATED IN THE ENCLOSED BALCONY PORCH AND REPLACED IT WITH WATERFALL SIDING. UM, STAFF HAS BEEN OUT THERE AND I KNOW THAT SOMETIMES A PICTURE YOU, YOU, YOU CAN'T REALLY TELL WHETHER THAT'S ACCURATE OR NOT, BUT THOSE ELECTRIC HIGH POWERED WIRES ARE WITHIN ABOUT 18 INCHES OF THAT AREA. SO MAINTENANCE IS A PROBLEM, UM, BEING CLOSE WITH THE HIGH VOLTAGE, UH, WIRES AND IF WE COULD REMOVE THAT, IT WOULD ELIMINATE, UH, EX YOU KNOW, THE EXTRA MAINTENANCE AND IT WOULD ALSO HELP KEEP THE BIRDS AND THE SQUIRRELS FROM TRYING TO NEST IN THAT AREA. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN TAKE A CLOSER LOOK, BUT EVEN THERE, THERE WAS A BIRD NEST BEHIND THE FRAME OF THAT WINDOW IN THE PAST. THIS WINDOW HAS BEEN BROKEN, BROKEN OUT FROM HAIL DAMAGE AND IT'S CAUSED DAMAGE TO THE INTERIOR OF THE BUILDING. AND LIKE I SAID, IT, IT IS NOT MAINTENANCE NIGHTMARE AND WE WOULD BE ABLE TO AT LEAST PUT SOME INSULATION IN THAT AREA WHEN WE REPLACE THE STIPING. UM, IN SUMMARY, IN KEEPING WITH THE SPIRIT OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION AND THE HISTORIC PRESERVATIONS COMMISSIONS, UM, I'M REQUESTING THAT YOU CONSIDER APPROVAL OF THE REPLACEMENTS OF WINDOWS, MK AND F WITH APELLA ARCHITECTURAL SERIES AND DO THE SWITCH LOCATION, THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED WINDOW, H D L, AND THEN ALSO TO REMOVE THE WEST SIDE NON HISTORIC WINDOW LOCATED IN THE ENCLOSED BALCONY COURT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. UH, DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS ON THIS? NO, I DON'T BELIEVE WE DO. OKAY, THANK YOU. THIS, THIS IS COMMISSIONER FISH. I KNOW THE PROPERTY HAS COME BEFORE US, UH, BUT BEFORE THE COMMISSION, UH, BEFORE IS RELATED TO SIDING. UM, MY, MY THOUGHTS ON THIS, WHILE I APPRECIATE STAFF'S FINDINGS, IS THAT THE COMPREHENSIVE WINDOW PLAN, UH, MAKES, MAKES A LOT OF SENSE TO ME IN GROUPING SOME OF THE HISTORIC WINDOWS IN ALLOWING FOR THE RELOCATION AND PARTICULARLY WINDOW L AND, AND WHILE A COUPLE OF THOSE WINDOWS INDIVIDUALLY MIGHT BE SAL UH, REPAIRED IN PLACE, I THINK THE IDEA THAT THEY SAL AND USED TO REPAIR THE OTHER WINDOWS IS UH, REASONABLE TO, TO MAINTAIN AS MANY OF THE HISTORIC WINDOWS IN THE BEST CONDITION POSSIBLE AS A REASONABLE, UM, APPROACH. SO, UM, I WOULD BE SUPPORTIVE OF UH, THREE ITEMS, BUT I'M INTERESTED IN HEARING FROM OTHER COMMISSIONERS. THIS IS COMMISSIONER GRU. UM, I AGREE A HUNDRED PERCENT WITH [03:15:01] YOU. UH, COMMISSIONER FISH, WE'VE BEEN OUT TO THE PROPERTY A COUPLE OF TIMES AS WELL. UM, I MEAN NOT BESIDES THE FIRE, I THINK, UM, THE OWNER, MS. VARGAS HAS REALLY DONE A LOT TO THIS PROPERTY. I HAVE A QUESTION TO YOU, WHAT, WHAT HAPPENED TO THAT WINDOW RIGHT THERE THAT WE'RE SEEING, UM, FOR THAT SUNROOM? SO THERE'S TWO WINDOWS THAT I SEE ON THE PICTURE, BUT I DON'T SEE THAT IN THE PLAN. SO THE ONE TO THE LEFT, DID YOU APPROVE GETTING THAT REMOVED AT A PREVIOUS? UM, IF YOU GO BACK THERE, RIGHT IN THAT RIGHT THERE, YEAH. HAS THAT ALREADY BEEN REMOVED? NO. NO IT HAS NOT. IT'S, THAT IS JUST PROPOSED, UH, PICTURE. SO THAT'S NOT PART OF THE APPLICATION TODAY? THAT IS CORRECT. IT IS NOT PART OF THE APPLICATION. I'M MAKING PLANS, YOU KNOW, TO BE AS COOPERATIVE AS POSSIBLE AND, AND PURCHASE A WOOD WINDOW FOR THAT AREA. I, I KNOW THAT THAT'S BEEN IMPORTANT TO THE STAFF. IS THAT WINDOW DAMAGED AS WELL? UH, YES IT IS. SO, BECAUSE IF I RECALL, I MEAN ON THE OTHER SIDE WE'RE REMOVING THAT, THAT WINDOW THAT'S BY THE ELECTRICAL. I ALSO, I WOULD SUPPORT THAT, UM, FOR THE REASON OF THE ELECTRICAL PLUS, I MEAN ALSO USING NON HISTORIC, BUT, AND THIS IS A LITTLE BIT COMPLICATED 'CAUSE IT IS NON HISTORIC. UH, THE SUNROOM WAS KIND OF EXTENDED OUT, IF I RECALL YOU WERE GONNA DO A LAUNDRY ROOM THERE. SO WE ALL ALSO JUST SUGGESTED FOR YOU TO JUST, UH, PUT A FAKE WINDOW THERE AND UM, AND CLOSE THE WALL ON WHICH SIDE WHERE WE'RE DISCUSSING THAT AT SOME POINT. WOULD THAT BE THAT WINDOW THAT YOU WERE TRYING, THAT'S WHERE THE LAUNDRY ROOM GOES, OR WOULD THAT BE ON THE OTHER SIDE? WELL, ONE SIDE WAS A, A CLOSET AND THE OTHER SIDE WAS THE LAUNDRY ROOM. AND THE LAUNDRY ROOM IS BY THE WIRES. YEAH, I WANTED TO OTHER SIDE, UH, SO THAT I COULD UTILIZE THE SPACE AS WELL. AND, AND THE WINDOW WAS DAMAGED BUT I DIDN'T HAVE IT PROPERLY AGENDIZED LAST TIME AND I, I'M TRYING VERY HARD TO BE COMPLIANT, SO I DID NOT ASK AT THIS TIME. I, I WOULD LIKE TO NOT, I WOULD LIKE TO REMOVE THE WINDOW ON BOTH SIDES, BUT I DO NOT BE SUPPORTIVE OF REMOVING THIS WINDOW WITHOUT ANY CON ANY CONDITIONS ON THE OTHER ONE. AND I WOULD ALSO PROBABLY ENCOURAGE YOU TO NOT REMOVE THE OTHER WINDOW AND JUST CLOSE THE WALL FROM THE INSIDE IN THE CLOSET. UM, MAYBE YOU CAN PROVIDE US PICTURES OF THE CURRENT STATE OF THE WINDOW, BUT I WOULD, I WOULD PROBABLY BE WHERE I'LL BE LEANING THIS ONE I THINK YOU STATED YOUR CASE OF, OF ALSO SAFETY AND I THINK IT'S AN IMPORTANT, UH, REASON. THIS IS COMMISSIONER FISH. I, I WOULD ECHO COMMISSIONER GROOVE'S COMMENTS. UM, IF, IF THAT, IF THAT WINDOW IS REPLACED WITH A NEW WINDOW AND IT'S WALLED IN, IN A SUITABLE WAY TO SERVE AS A CLOSET ON THE INSIDE, THAT CAN BE ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVED. IT DOES NOT HAVE TO COME BACK HERE. YOU, YOU COME BACK. I KNOW WE'VE DISCUSSED THAT PARTICULAR WINDOW THAT'S NOT ON THE AGENDA TODAY ON PREVIOUS AGENDAS. I THINK YOU'D HAVE, UH, A GREATER DEAL OF DIFFICULTY FINDING SUPPORT FOR THAT IN THE FUTURE. BUT, UM, JUST TO LET YOU KNOW AND, AND I WOULD GO AHEAD AND MAKE A MOTION TO MOVE FOR APPROVAL OF ITEMS ONE, TWO AND THREE AS SUBMITTED. SECOND, I HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL AS NOTED. HAVE A ROLL CALL PLEASE. FERNANDEZ AYE FISH? AYE. GIBBS. AYE. VELASQUEZ AYE. AREOLA? AYE. CARPENTER? AYE. RUTH? AYE. THATT SIR? AYE, MOTION CARRIES. OKAY, IT BRINGS US TO ITEM 41. THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH. REALLY APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU MA'AM. BYE-BYE. EDWARD, DO YOU HAVE THE AGENDA ITEM NUMBER THERE? YOU YES, I DO. GO, GO AHEAD. IT [41. 21-1171 Address/Description: 1910 E HOUSTON ST HDRC Case No.: 2021-011 Historic District Name: Dignowity Hill Applicant: Felix Ziga/Ziga Architecture Studio PLLC Request: Construction of a 2-story residential structure City Council Dist.: 2] EXHIBIT ITEM NUMBER 41 H D R C, CASE NUMBER 20 21 0 1 1 19 10 HOUSTON, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A TWO STORY RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE AT 1910 EAST HOUSTON AND NEW CONSTRUCTION ON THIS LOT, WHICH WAS ORIGINALLY APPROVED BY THE HISTORIC AND DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION ON JUNE THE SIXTH, 2018, WITH THREE OTHER STRUCTURES, ONE OF WHICH HAS BEEN CONSTRUCTED SINCE THAT TIME, THE ISSUED H D R C CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS HAS EXPIRED AT THIS TIME. THE APPLICANT HAS NOTED [03:20:01] THAT APPROVED HAS NOTED THAT APPROVAL FOR ONLY LOT 41 IS REQUESTED. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL BASED ON FINDINGS. A THROUGH O STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE APPLICANT ADDRESS THE FOLLOWING ITEMS PRIOR TO RECEIVING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS, ONE, THAT THE APPLICANT PROVIDE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION NOTING A FOUNDATION HEIGHT THAT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE GUIDELINES AS NOTED IN FINDING D TWO, THAT THE APPLICANT INCORPORATE ROOT FORMS, SPECIFICALLY PORCH FORMS AND MASSING, THAT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE GUIDELINES AS NOTING NOTED IN FINDING F. ADDITIONALLY, STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE GABLE RETURNS BE ELIMINATED. THREE, THE APPLICANT ADMINISTRATION TO THE NORTH AND SOUTH BESIDES, AND THAT ALL WINDOWS FEATURE TRADITIONAL PROFILES AND EQUAL SASH SIZES IS NOTED IN FINDING G OR THAT THE APPLICANT INCORPORATE TRADITIONAL DOUBLE HEIGHT PORCH MASSING IS NOTED IN FINDING. H FIVE ARE STAFF STIPULATIONS IN REGARDS TO MATERIAL SPECIFICATIONS. UH, I WON'T READ THROUGH THOSE FOR TIME CONSIDERATION, BUT IF THE COMMISSION WOULD LIKE TO REVISIT THAT LATER, WE CAN SIX, UH, DEAD WOOD OR ALUMINUM CLAD WOOD WINDOWS BE INSTALLED THAT ARE CONSISTENT WITH STAFF STANDARDS. ADDITIONALLY, STAFF RECOMMENDS THE PROPOSED WINDOWS FEATURE EQUAL DASHES, TRADITIONAL DIMENSIONS, AND THAT ALL GROUP WINDOWS ARE SEPARATED BY VOLUMES OF SIX INCHES IN WIDTH. ALL WINDOW OPENING SHOULD FEATURE TRADITIONAL TRIMMING SEAL DETAILS. AND SEVEN, THAT A FRONT CONCRETE WALKWAY BE INSTALLED IN THE DETAILED LANDSCAPING PLAN. BE SUBMITTED FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL. NOTED IN FINDINGS N AND O. UH, THERE ARE TWO CASE COMMENTS IN REGARDS TO A FOUNDATION SETBACK INSPECTION, AS WELL AS A ROOFING INSPECTION TO BE SCHEDULED WITH O H P. I HAVE THE APPLICANT, SHANNON O'MALLEY ON THE LINE, AS WELL AS, UH, FELIX VIGA, WHO IS ON THE APPLICANT'S TEAM. YOU MAY PROCEED, MS. O'MALLEY. OKAY. UH, YES, YES. GOOD EVENING. UH, MY NAME'S SHANNON O'MALLEY. I'M HERE TODAY FOR A REISSUE OF MY CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS. THIS PROJECT WAS PREVIOUSLY AS APPROVED AS EDWARD WAS STATED. I ORIGINALLY WORKED FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD, THE DESIGN REVIEW REVIEW, UH, UH, COMMITTEE STAFF AND H D R C, UH, BOARD, UH, ON MULTIPLE, MULTIPLE TIMES FOR APPROXIMATELY A YEAR TO GET THESE FOUR DESIGNS APPROVED. UH, I REALIZE THAT SINCE IT'S BEEN TWO YEARS, APPROXIMATELY SINCE THE, THAT, UH, SINCE THE APPROVAL THAT STAFF HAS INCORPORATED SOME MINOR AND ADDITIONAL GUIDELINES. SINCE THEN, I'M IN AGREEMENT ON MOST OF THESE, UH, ITEMS. I ONLY HAVE A COUPLE OF REMARKS AS PER ITEM ONE, I, UH, AM, I'M IN AGREEMENT WITH STAFF AS OF ITEM SIX. I'M IN, IN AGREEMENT WITH STAFF. AND AS OF SEVEN, I'M IN, IN AGREEMENT WITH STAFF. AS OF FIVE. I'M IN AGREEMENT WITH STAFF ON ALL OF IT EXCEPT THE FIRST, UH, SENTENCE THAT I WILL READDRESS IN A MINUTE. UH, SO I WOULD LIKE TO BE, UH, SPEAK TO ITEMS TWO AND THREE, AND I BELIEVE FOUR KIND OF GOES IN HANDS WITH TWO. UH, SO, UH, FINALLY, AND THEN I'LL ADDRESS, UH, THAT FIRST SENTENCE IN FIVE. UH, AS TO ITEM TWO, I AGREE WITH REMOVING THE GABLE RETURNS IN REGARDS TO THE SECOND PART OF ITEM TWO. AND, UH, UH, UH, KIND OF WITH, UH, ITEM FOUR, I WOULD LIKE TO KEEP THE PORCH FEATURES THAT WERE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED IN THE ORIGINAL APPROVAL PROCESS, UH, AND THEN AS, UH, AS PREVIOUSLY APPROVED IN ITEM NUMBER THREE. UH, UH, AS TO THE, UH, FIRE CODE, I'M LIMITED TO THE AMOUNT OF GLASS ON THESE SIDE, UH, UH, SIDES. THESE WALLS WILL NOT BE VISIBLE FROM THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY AS TO THE APPROXIMATE, THE PROXIMITY OF THE HOUSE ONTO TO THE LEFT AND RIGHT OF THE, OF THE WALL OF THE HOUSE. EXCUSE ME. AND THEN AS TO ITEM FIVE, UH, MY DI MY, UH, DESIGN THAT WAS PREVIOUSLY APPROVED HAS A SIX INCH PROFILE THAT STAFF AND STAFF IS RE RECOMMENDING A FOUR INCH PROFILE. THE SIX INCH PROFILE IS JUST AS PREVALENT IN THE 1920 THROUGH FORTIES CRAFTSMAN STYLE HOUSES AS THE FOUR INCH OR THE TEARDROP PROFILES. MY PREVIOUS APPROVED DESIGN, UH, IS MORE CONSISTENT WITH THE BLOCK, WITH THE SIX INCH, UH, PROFILE. AND I'VE, UH, AND AM MORE CONSISTENT WITH THE HOUSE THAT'S NEXT DOOR TO IT THAT I'VE ALREADY, UH, PREVIOUSLY CONSTRUCTED, AND IT WAS PREVIOUSLY APPROVED WITH THE ORIGINAL APPROVAL FOR THE FULL, I WOULD LIKE TO STAY CONSISTENT WITH THE PREVIOUS HOUSE, UH, AS IT'S RIGHT NEXT TO IT, AND TO THE REST OF THE BLOCK, UH, EXAMPLES OF THAT SIDING. AND, AND THEN THE OTHER PART OF FIVES. UH, AS TO THE MITRE, BECAUSE I'M USING A HORIZONTAL SIDING ON THE SIDES AND SWITCHING TO A BOARD AND BATTEN STYLE, I WOULD LIKE TO, UH, UH, TO ELIMINATE THAT, UH, PART AS TO ALLOW FOR THE TRANSITION FROM ONE MATERIAL TO THE OTHER, UH, AND TO GO WITH THE ORIGINALLY APPROVED DESIGN FROM, [03:25:01] UH, THE PREVIOUS APPROVAL TWO YEARS AGO. UH, SO YEAH. THANK YOU. AND I, YEAH, COREY, DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS? YES, UH, VERY BRIEFLY. UH, FROM A GROUP OF NEIGHBORS IN THE DIGNITY HALL SOAR DISTRICT, UM, THEY JUST SUPPORT SAS RECOMMENDATIONS. OKAY. THIS, THIS IS COMMISSIONER FISH AND, UH, AT RISK OF CUTTING ANYBODY OFF, I REISSUES, I THINK REISSUES SHOULD BE DONE AS WI WITHIN A REASONABLE AMOUNT OF TIME SHOULD BE DONE AS, UH, UH, WITHOUT AS MANY CHANGES AS POSSIBLE. I KNOW THIS WAS LITIGATED OVER, UH, A PRETTY LENGTHY PERIOD OF TIME. I BELIEVE I WAS ON THE COMMISSION THEN AND, AND REVIEWED THESE, UH, THE, THE ITEMS THAT THE APPLICANT AGREED TO. UH, IN TERMS OF, UH, UH, ITEMS 2, 3, 4, AND FIVE, UH, IN ADDITION TO WHOLLY AGREEING TO ONE SIX AND SEVEN I, I SUPPORT. SO AT RISK OF CUTTING ANYBODY OFF, I'M JUST GONNA GO AHEAD AND CRAFT THAT INTO A MOTION AND, UH, WE CAN SEE WHERE IT GOES. SO I, I MOVED FOR, UH, APPROVAL WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS ONE, SIX, AND SEVEN WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS. UH, NUMBER TWO, THAT THEY REMOVED THE GABLE RETURNS WITH STAFF STIPULATION NUMBER THREE, UH, APPROVE AS A PREVIOUSLY, PREVIOUSLY SUBMITTED AND APPROVED. ITEM NUMBER FOUR, EXCUSE ME, I HAVE A DOG APPROVED AS, UH, PREVIOUSLY SUBMITTED. YOU HAVE A HUSKY . UM, IT'S NOT A DOG THAT'S AN ALIEN MAN, . I DID LOSE MY TRACK A BIT. I THINK FOUR WAS AS PREVIOUSLY APPROVED, AND THAT RELATED TO THE PORCH, UH, FIVE APPROVED WITH THE SIX INCH PREVIOUSLY APPROVED PROFILE AND REMOVE THE REFERENCE TO THE MITRE CORNERS. AND, AND I THINK THAT COVERS ALL OF THE ITEMS. QUE A SECOND. THEN I WANT TO MAKE A COMMENT ALONG THE LINES OF WHAT YOU'RE, WHAT I THINK THE SPIRIT OF WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS, UH, COMMISSIONER FISH, IF IT'S A, UM, A KIND OF A REISSUE OF A CERTIFICATE, IT SEEMS THAT ALL OF IT'S ALREADY BEEN, UM, BEEN APPROVED. THE GENTLEMAN THAT PRESENTED CLEARLY UNDERSTANDS THE INTENT OF HIS DESIGN. I MEAN, I MEAN, VERY, VERY, SEEMS VERY INTIMATELY RELATED TO IT. SO I WOULD ASK COMMISSIONER FISHER, ALTHOUGH I'LL SECOND THE MOTION THAT YOU MADE, I'D, I'D ASK YOU JUST TO, UH, CONSIDER A MOTION THAT, UH, JUST A, IT ENABLES A CONTINUATION OF, OF WHAT HAD ALREADY BEEN APPROVED ALL THE WAY. UH, BUT I DEFER TO YOUR WISDOM. WELL, I, I UNDERSTAND, UH, THAT COMMENT. AND, UH, IF I, IF I RECALL THIS, RECEIVED APPROVAL WITH A NUMBER OF STIPULATIONS, SOME OF WHICH ARE JUST, ARE REAPPEARING AS PART OF THE REISSUANCE. I THINK THIS IS LAR MY MOTION IS LARGELY IN THE SPIRIT OF WHAT WAS PRE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED. AND I APPRECIATE THE APPLICANT, UH, AGREEING, UH, TO THE STIPULATIONS THAT HE DID. SO, UM, IF THE MOTION FAILS, WE CAN TAKE UP A DIFFERENT MOTION. THANKS FOR THAT PERSPECTIVE. AYE SECOND STANDS WITH YOU. WE HAVE A MOTION, A SECOND AS NOTED. WE HAVE A ROLL CALL, PLEASE. FERNANDEZ. AYE. FISH? AYE. GIBBS. AYE. VELAZQUEZ. AYE. AREOLA? AYE. CARPENTER. AYE. GROUP. AYE, UH, FETZER? AYE. MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN, CAN WE DISCUSS A POSSIBLE TIME FOR THE MEETING? YES. 'CAUSE WE HAVE ONE, TWO, WE HAVE FIVE MORE CASES. UM, IS SEVEN 30 REASONABLE HARD STOP, HARD, HARD STOP OR STOP ON THE CASE AT, IF WE'RE IN THE MIDDLE OF A CASE AT SEVEN 30, WE'LL FINISH THAT ONE AND THEN, UH, A RECONSIDER AT SEVEN 15. I'M AMENABLE TO THAT. ANY OBJECTION FROM ANY COMMISSIONER? THANK YOU. THEN WE WILL HAVE A, UH, A, UH, HARD STOP AT SEVEN 15 OR FINISH THE CASE. WE ARE ON AT SEVEN 15. AND IF WE HAVE ANY OTHERS LEFT OVER, WE WILL, UH, ENTERTAIN MOTIONS TO, UH, CONTINUE THOSE TO THE NEXT AGENDA. GREAT. EDWARD, DO YOU HAVE THE APPLICANT [03:30:01] FOR THIS NEXT ITEM? YES, YOU DO. GO AHEAD. I DO. AGENDA [43. 21-1147 Address/Description: 255 BRAHAN HDRC Case No.: 2020-577 Historic District Name: Westfort Applicant: Cy Goudge/JCG Homes, LLC Request: Construction of five, 2-story residential structures City Council Dist.: 2] ITEM NUMBER 43 H D R C, CASE NUMBER 20 25 77 2 55 BRAHAM, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT FOUR TWO STORY RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES WITH A DETACHED GARAGE STRUCTURE AT 2 55 LOCATED WITHIN THE WEST FOREST. HISTORIC DISTRICT STAFF RECOMMENDS CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN, SETBACKS, BUILDING SPACING, BUILDING FOOTPRINTS IN GENERAL BUILDING MASSING BASED ON FINDINGS A THROUGH SS STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE APPLICANT ADDRESS THE FOLLOWING ITEMS PRIOR TO RETURNING TO THE COMMISSION FOR FINAL APPROVAL, ONE THAT THE APPLICANT CONTINUED TO TO DEVELOP ROOF MASSING IS NOTED IN FINDING M PARTICULARLY THAT OF THE CORNER STRUCTURE AS DESIGNED. THE ROOF'S FEATURE PROFILES THAT ARE ATYPICAL OF THOSE FOUND HISTORICALLY WITHIN THE DISTRICT ON TWO STORY STRUCTURES SINCE THE APPLICANT UTILIZED FOUNDATION AND FLOOR HEIGHTS THAT ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE GUIDELINES AS NOTED IN FINDING L THREE THAT THE APPLICANT ADHERE TO THE MATERIALS AND WINDOW STANDARDS NOTED IN THE APPLICABLE CITATIONS IN THE FIND IN FINDINGS, N AND O FORWARDED TO PROPOSED DRIVEWAYS ON HAYWOOD BE SEPARATED BY LANDSCAPING ELEMENTS AS THREE TO TWO SEPARATE DRIVEWAYS THAT NO DRIVEWAY EXCEED 10 FEET IN WIDTH, AND THAT THE GARAGE DOORS FEATURE SINGLE WIDTHS, METAL CONSTRUCTION, AND WINDOWS. AND FIVE, THAT THE ATTACHED GARAGE, THAT THE ATTACHED GARAGE FOR THE CORNER STRUCTURE IS NOTED IN FINDINGS J AND R BE ELIMINATED IN ORDER TO REDUCE THE MASSING OF THE CORNER STRUCTURE. I HAVE THE APPLICANT SI ON THE LINE NOW. HELLO. HOW ARE Y'ALL TODAY? UM, WE ARE, UH, SEEKING APPROVAL FOR, UM, THIS PROJECT. WE HAVE BEEN BACK AND FORTH WITH Y'ALL ON THIS PROJECT NUMEROUS TIMES. I THINK Y'ALL HAVE SEEN THIS OVER THE LAST, LIKE, THREE YEARS. WE HAVE BEEN WORKING ON IT SINCE AUGUST. UM, YOU KNOW, WE, WHEN WE TOOK OVER THE PROJECT OR WHEN WE PURCHASED THE PROPERTY, UM, AND WE STARTED LOOKING AT IT, WE WERE LOOKING AT DOING SOME TOWN HOMES. UH, OUR FIRST PLAN WAS TO DO EIGHT. WE DON'T, I DON'T THINK WE EVER EVEN BROUGHT THAT TO Y'ALL. 'CAUSE WE KNEW THAT WASN'T GONNA GO WELL. AND THEN WE WENT TO SIX. UM, AND WE TRIED TO WORK ON THAT OVER, UH, A PRETTY GOOD PERIOD OF TIME. WENT BACK AND FORTH, GOT PRETTY CLOSE TO FEELING LIKE, UM, WE WERE GETTING, MAKING SOME HEADWAY. BUT WE STARTED TO GET, UM, IT STARTED NOT TO WORK ON OUR SIDE FOR WHAT WAS HAPPENING. UM, ONE OF THE MAIN CONCERNS WAS TO REDUCE DOWN TO FIVE. AND WHEN WE WENT TO FIVE ON A TOWN HALL STRUCTURE, IT DIDN'T FEEL LIKE IT WAS GONNA FIT WITHIN, UM, WHAT WE WERE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH. SO WE, WE DECIDED TO, WE GOT CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL FOR THAT, BUT WE DECIDED TO REDO THE PLAN AND GO FOR FOUR DETACHED HOMES, DIVIDE UP THE LOT SO YOU HAVE A LITTLE BIT MORE SPACE BETWEEN 'EM, KIND OF GO MORE ACCURATE TO WHAT IS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. UM, AS FAR AS, UM, KIND OF WHAT'S GOING ON, ONE OF THE COMMENTS IN THE PREVIOUS, UH, MEETINGS WAS THAT WE DO, UH, BREAK APART THE FRONT FACADE AND THE FRONT FACADE MASSING WAS ONE OF OUR BIGGEST, UH, HICCUPS ON THERE. SO WE BROKE IT INTO TWO PROPERTIES INSTEAD. AND THEN, UH, BECAUSE OUR LOT IS SO, UM, BIG, WE, WE WERE ABLE TO PUT TWO MORE, UM, UH, SMALLER HOUSES BEHIND THE TWO BIG ONES THAT FACED BRA HAND. UM, SO WE'VE, WE'VE JUST STARTED, UH, WE FEEL LIKE THIS IS A GOOD STEP FORWARD. WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH THE, UM, BOTH THE WEST FORT ALLIANCE, UH, WELL REALLY JUST WITH THE WEST, FOR WEST FORT ALLIANCE. UH, AS FAR AS, UM, UH, GETTING SOMETHING THEY WOULD BE, THEY'D BE HAPPY WITH. I KNOW THEY STILL HAVE SOME CONCERNS OVER A FEW THINGS, BUT I DO KNOW THIS PLAN IS CLOSER TO WHAT FITS INTO WHAT THEY'RE HOPING TO SEE OUT OF THIS, UM, OUT OF THIS, UH, PROPERTY. THANK YOU COMMISSIONER AL. GO AHEAD AND READ THE PUBLIC COMMENTS FOR THIS CASE. UM, THE FIRST, THE WESTPORT ALLIANCE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION HAS WORKED DILIGENTLY WITH SAIGU. HE HAS MADE SEVERAL CONCESSIONS. HOWEVER, WE ARE STILL CONCERNED ABOUT SCALE AND MASS ON THE CORNER HOME OF HAN AND HAYWOOD. THE BUILDING TO LOT RATIO IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THE PLAN ALSO CALLS FOR A SIDE GARAGE, WHICH IS NOT COMMON TO THE AREA. WE ARE CONCERNED ABOUT DENSITY. AS THE TWO APARTMENTS ABOVE THE BACK HOUSES OFF HAYWOOD WOULD MAKE SIX UNITS AS THEY WILL BE EQUIPPED TO TO BE RENTALS. UM, WE ASK THAT THE H C R C STRICTLY ENFORCE HEIGHT REQUIREMENTS. IN ADDITION, THE BUILDINGS APPEAR TO AFFECT ROAD STRUCTURES OF THREE TREES. SGO HAS STATED HE WILL EMPLOY AN ARBORIST, AND WE ASK THAT THE H C R C INCLUDE THE ARBOR STUDY AS A CONDITION OF APPROVAL. FINALLY, WE ARE CONCERNED ABOUT IMPERVIOUS COVER. TO THE EXTENT THAT THE H C R C HAS PURVIEW, PLEASE INCORPORATE THESE CONCERNS INTO REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATIONS. UM, THE NEXT COMES FROM THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY. IN 2016, THE DEMOLITION OF THE LANDMARK WORTHY HOUSE AT 2 55 HAN INSPIRED WEST FORT RESIDENTS TO SEEK DISTRICT DESIGNATION TO PROTECT THE HISTORIC CHARACTER OF THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD. SINCE THEN, INFILL FOR THE SITE HAS BEEN PROPOSED AND REJECTED [03:35:01] MULTIPLE TIMES IN THE LAST FEW YEARS. THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY OF SAN ANTONIO OBJECTS TO THE LATEST DEVELOPMENT PLAN. ALTHOUGH THE NUMBER OF MULTI-FAMILY STRUCTURES HAS BEEN REDUCED, THEY STILL DO NOT FIT WITH THE HISTORIC PATTERN OF SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES THAT DOMINATE THE NORTH SIDE OF THIS SECTION OF HAN. UM, THE AMOUNT OF IMPERVIOUS COVER REMAINS SIGNIFICANT. FURTHERMORE, THE PROPOSED UNITS CONTRADICT THE GOAL OF THE 2003 NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, WHICH SEEKS TO REDUCE DENSITY ON LOTS, WHERE THE ORIGINAL USE WAS A SINGLE FAMILY. BECAUSE THE PROPOSED REDUCTIONS IN LOT COVERAGE AND DENSITY DO NOT ADEQUATELY CONFORM TO THE CHARACTER OF THE HISTORIC DISTRICT OR THE INTENT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, WE THE COMMISSION TO, TO DENY THIS REQUEST. AND I, I GUESS I FORGOT TO TELL YOU WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR. WE HAVE, UH, TALKED BACK AND FORTH WITH STAFF. WE AGREE ON THE, ALL THE STIPULATIONS THAT THEY HAVE PUT IN PLACE, EXCEPT FOR THE VERY LAST ONE. WE WOULD LIKE TO KEEP THE ATTACHED GARAGE ON THE CORNER STRUCTURE, UM, JUST SOLELY BECAUSE WE WOULD LOVE, WE NEED, WE WANT TO HAVE GARAGE PARKING, AND THAT'S REALLY THE ONLY WAY TO ACHIEVE THE PARKING, UM, THAT WE, WE WANT TO, FOR THIS, THIS PROPERTY. UM, WE FEEL IS AS LONG AS WE, UM, WE DO HAVE THE PROPOSED DRIVEWAYS ON HAYWOOD TO BE SEPARATED BY LANDSCAPING, AND WE DO SINGLE DOOR GARAGES LIKE WE, LIKE WAS SUGGESTED IN THE D R C MEETING THAT WE HAD A FEW WEEKS AGO, AND ADD, YOU KNOW, METAL WITH, WITH WINDOWS ALL THE, BASICALLY FINDING FOUR. IF WE AGREED TO THOSE THEN THEN FINDING FIVE, UH, WE COULD BE BE ACCEPTED WITHOUT HAVING TO STIPULATE TO FINDING FIVE. BUT THAT'S WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR. THIS IS COMMISSIONER FISH. CAN YOU SPEAK TO THE IMPERVIOUS COVER ON, UH, IMPERVIOUS COVER? YEAH, GO AHEAD. UH, THE, THE, THE IMPERVIOUS COVER, UM, AS PER PLAN IS ABOUT 38%. THAT WOULD BE UTILIZING, UM, IMPERVIOUS, UH, DRIVES ACROSS THE ENTIRE, UM, OR SORRY, PERVIOUS DRIVES ACROSS THE ENTIRE, WHETHER THAT'S PAVERS OR, UM, IMPERVIOUS, UH, CONCRETE. EVEN IF WE DID THOSE AS HARD SURFACE DRIVES, IF YOU'RE JUST LOOKING AT IT FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE, WE'D BE AT 49%. SO WE'D STILL BE AT THE, UM, TOTAL OF RIGHT UNDERNEATH THE 50% MARK ON THE ENTIRE OF THE ENTIRE, UH, LOT. AND TO BE CLEAR, THAT'S, THAT IS THE THREE DIFFERENT LOTS THAT ARE SUBDIVIDED FROM THE MAIN LOT, CORRECT? YES, SIR. OKAY. UH, DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA WHAT THE, WHAT THE PREVIOUS COVER IS OR LOT COVERAGE IS ON THE INDIVIDUAL? LOTS BECAUSE IT, I MEAN, JUST, JUST AT A GLANCE, IT LOOKS LIKE THERE'S A LOT OF PERVIOUS COVER ON, ON THE FRONT TWO LOTS, AND THE REAR LOT IS PRETTY DENSE. UM, IF YOU GIVE ME FIVE MINUTES, I CAN PROBABLY SCALE IT ON MY COMPUTER, BUT I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANNA WAIT THAT LONG TO DO THAT. WELL, I, I MEAN, I'M JUST TRYING TO, TRYING TO SPEAK TO SOME OF THE CONCERNS ABOUT LOCK COVERAGE. I TAKE THE POINT THAT THE, THAT THE OVERALL DEVELOPMENT IS 39, UH, SLASH 49, DEPENDING ON WHETHER OR NOT YOU'RE COUNTING DRIVEWAYS AS PERVIOUS, UM, IT'S THAT PORTION OF LOCK COVERAGE THAT I, I GUESS I'M, I'M MORE INTERESTED IN BECAUSE THE FRONT TWO HAVE A MUCH LOWER, UH, COVERAGE THAN THE, THAN THE REAR ONE. YES. UH, SO TO THE APPLICANT, THIS IS CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL AND MAYBE THAT'S JUST SOMETHING THAT WE CAN PUT AS A STIPULATION THAT HE MAKES SURE HE HAS THAT, UM, AND MAYBE NOT COUNT IN THE DRIVEWAY. UM, MAKING THE DRIVEWAY AND PREVIOUS WOULD PROBABLY BE THE SOLUTION. PROBABLY. SORRY. WOULD, WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE TO GET A, A REPORT FROM THE D R C PARTICULAR? YEAH, ACTUALLY I WAS GONNA SAY YOU, UH, I DON'T KNOW, UH, COMMISSIONER CARPENTER THAT I WAS THERE TOO. AND WE CAN ADDRESS ITEM FIVE, WHICH WE ACTUALLY ALSO DISCUSSED. UM, THERE'S SOME, UM, AND THIS ACTUALLY, IF YOU LOSE A SITE PLAN AGAIN, UM, I THINK WHAT'S CONFUSING HERE IS THAT YOU CAN'T SEE THAT BRAND STREET IS ON THE LEFT AND HAYWOOD IS ACTUALLY THE SIDE STREET. UM, AND WHEN WE WENT TO THE D R C, WE DID PULL UP GOOGLE, UM, AND FOUND ACTUALLY A FRONT FACING GARAGE, I THINK TWO, UH, EXAMPLES JUST ON THAT BLOCK OF HAYWOOD. SO WE WERE FINDING THAT THAT WOULD BE ACCEPTABLE BASED ON, ON, UM, ON WHAT'S EXISTING IN HAYWOOD. YEAH, THIS IS . I WOULD CONCUR WITH THAT. UH, ACROSS HAYWOOD, THERE'S A, A, UH, ON THE CORNER OF HAYWOOD AND BRAHAM ACROSS THE STREET, THERE'S A, UH, TWO STORY GARAGE APARTMENT THAT HAS A, UH, CURB CUT ON HAYWOOD. UH, THE PROPERTY THAT FA UH, NEXT PROPERTY TO THE NORTH ALSO HAS A CURB CUT TO THE, UH, ON HAYWOOD, UH, FOR A, UH, ACCESSORY STRUCTURE. SO, UH, THE SUGGESTION THAT THE D R C HAD WAS TO, UM, HAVE THE, THE CONCRETE STRIP DRIVE [03:40:01] AND SINGLE DOORS ON THAT, UH, HAYWOOD FACING GARAGE TO, UH, HELP WITH THE SCALE OF THAT. WE TALKED A LOT ABOUT THE, UH, THE ROOF STRUCTURE OF THE CORNER BUILDING AND THE HEIGHTS OF THE, THE BUILDINGS, WHICH, UM, WE HAD ASKED FOR RELATIVE HEIGHTS OF ADJACENT PROPERTIES, WHICH, UM, I DON'T BELIEVE ARE IN THIS PACKET. UH, NO SIR. WE WERE GONNA ADDRESS THOSE. I, UH, I MISUNDERSTOOD YOU IF YOU WANTED THOSE FOR THIS MEETING. UM, I WAS GONNA ADDRESS THOSE IN THE, WHEN WE GO FOR FINAL APPROVAL CALL, UM, THIS IS JUST CONCEPTUAL. UM, I THOUGHT THOSE WERE REQUESTED FOR THE FINAL. I THOUGHT WHAT YOU WANTED TO SEE FOR, UM, CONCEPTUAL IS WHAT WE PRESENTED TO D R C DI. THIS IS COMMISSIONER FISH. YOU, YOU MAY WANT TO CONSIDER VOLUNTEERING TO A D R C TO DISCUSS THE PARTICULAR HEIGHT ISSUE, UH, PRIOR TO FINAL APPROVAL. IF IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT WE CAN REALLY STUDY TO TODAY, UM, I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO SEND THIS TO D R C FOR THAT PARTICULAR REASON, BUT, BUT IF THERE'S A QUESTION AS TO THE RELATIVE HEIGHTS THAT COULD IMPACT YOUR PROPERTY, WOULD BENEFIT YOU TO PRESENT THAT TO, UH, THE COMMITTEE AHEAD OF TIME. I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE PROPERTY HONOR. UH, COMMISSIONER VELASQUEZ IS, IS THE PROPERTY PLATTED AS IT'S SHOWN ON THE DRAWING HERE, THOSE PROPERTY LINES, ARE THEY ALREADY DRAWN AND RECORDED? NO, SIR. THEY, UM, THAT WOULD BE A, THAT IS, THEY ARE, THE PROPERTY IS PLOTTED AS A SINGLE PROPERTY AND, UM, IT WOULD BE, UH, THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING WE WOULD HAVE TO REPL FOR. SO, UM, SO THEN YOUR INTENTION IS TO, TO, TO PLA AS IT'S SHOWN HERE WHERE THE PROPERTY LINES WHERE AS THEY'RE SHOWN, LIKE SAY FOR INSTANCE, WHERE YOU HAVE A SHARED PARK, UH, GARAGE, AND SO THERE'D BE A, LIKE A, LIKE AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE TWO PROPERTIES AND THE DEEDED IN THAT THEY'D HAVE PERPETUAL USE OF THAT GARAGE. YES, SIR. THE, THE PROPERTY IN THE BACK WOULD BE THE, UM, WOULD BE THE TWO HOUSES OR THE TWO, UH, HOUSES IN THE BACK WOULD BE ON THE SAME LOT. SO THEY'D HAVE AN AGREEMENT, UH, A SHARED AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE TWO, UH, PROPERTIES, THE TWO FRONT PROPERTIES, ESPECIALLY THE CORNER LOT PROPERTY. IT WOULD JUST BE ON ITS OWN COMPLETELY UNRELATED TO EVERYBODY ELSE. THE OTHER PROPERTY WOULD JUST HAVE AN EASEMENT ON THE DRIVEWAY TO, UM, TO GET TO THEIR, TO GET TO THEIR DRIVEWAY. WE PROBABLY ENCOMPASS, UM, AS I WAS LOOKING AT IT NOW, PROBABLY TRY TO ENCOMPASS A LITTLE BIT MORE, IT REDRAW THAT LINE, JUST A TADD BIT TO ENCOMPASS A LITTLE BIT MORE OF THAT, UH, DRIVE IN THE BACK TO INCLUDE IT COULD, UM, ESPECIALLY FOR THE IMPERVIOUS COVER, THE, THE REASON I ASK COREY, IF YOU COULD WEIGH IN IT, IT SEEMS THAT, THAT, THAT THIS WOULD NOT GO BEYOND CONCEPTUAL AT THIS POINT. THAT, THAT THEY WOULD GET CONCEPTUAL HERE AND THEN THEY'D HAVE TO GO THROUGH PLATING. BECAUSE WHAT WE WOULD APPROVE DEFINITELY RELATES TO THE PROPERTY LINES AND THE, AND, AND WHAT IS ALLOWABLE ON JUST YOUR BASIC CODE, RIGHT. THAT THEY WOULD GET CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL THAT WOULD GIVE 'EM WEIGHT TO GO TO WHEN THEY GO THROUGH THE PLANNING PROCESS AS THEY GO THROUGH THE ZONING. RIGHT. BUT I MEAN, YES, THIS IS WHY WE HAVE CONCEPTUAL FOR COMPLICATED PROJECTS IS IT GIVES, UH, APPLICANTS A CHANCE TO GET FEEDBACK SO THAT THEY CAN START TAKING THOSE OTHER DEVELOPMENT RELATED STEPS AND START TO KIND OF CONCRETE THINGS IN PLACE. I I BUT OBVIOUSLY AS THOSE STEPS ARE TAKEN, WE ENCOURAGE, UM, THE APPLICANT TO KEEP WORKING WITH THE COMMISSION, ESPECIALLY THE D R C SUBCOMMITTEES AS AN OPTION THAT IS REALLY VALUABLE AS THINGS START TO FIRM UP. I COMPLETELY AGREE. BUT, BUT WITH RESPECT TO SOME OF THE COMMENTS THAT WERE ABOUT, UH, UM, YOU KNOW, FULL APPROVAL THAT THAT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT WOULD HAPPEN UNTIL AFTER THE PLATTING PROCESS OCCURS. RIGHT? BECAUSE REMEMBER THE OTHER PROJECT THAT WE HAD THAT HAD VERY SIMILAR CHARACTERISTICS AND IT HAD GONE THROUGH THE PLATING PROCESS ALREADY, WHICH MEANS THAT IT HAD ALREADY RECEIVED WHAT, WHAT COULD BE SEEN AS KIND OF REGULATORY APPROVAL THAT, THAT THEY, THAT SOMETHING CAN GO THERE WITHIN NORMAL CONTEXT, RIGHT? KIND OF EXTRA NORMAL OF, OF ALL THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESSES, THE PLANNING PROCESS REALLY IS THE MOST DETACHED. UM, THE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION CAN'T REVIEW, UH, BASED ON, UH, DETAILS. THEY'RE JUST MAKING SURE IT COMPLIES WITH STATE LAW AND ZONING. UM, SO, BUT OBVIOUSLY IF, IF THE APPLICANT IS WANTING TO ACHIEVE CERTAIN PERFORMANCE AND CERTAIN BUILDING FOOTPRINTS AND SIZES AND SQUARE FOOTAGE, THEN, THEN THEY'RE GONNA WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WHAT THEY'RE PROPOSING IS GOING TO WORK THAT WAY AS THEY GO THROUGH THE BLATTING PROCESS, THEY'RE NOT GONNA END UP WITH A RESULT THAT ISN'T. NO, I, I, I, I FOLLOW YOU COREY. THE ONLY THING IS THAT FOR CONCEPTUAL, FOR CONCEPTUAL, I THINK EVERYTHING'S PERFECTLY FINE, BUT IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT LIKE IN A MONTH IT'S GONNA RETURN BEFORE IT GOES TO PLANNING IT, IT'S ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE TO HAVE A DETERMINATION AS TO APPROPRIATENESS OF A BUILDING WITH RELATION TO A SIDE OR A BACK SETBACK IF WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE, WHAT [03:45:01] THE BASE ZONE REQUIRES. SO ANOTHER OPTION WOULD BE TO, I MEAN, THERE'S NOTHING STOPPING SUBSEQUENT CONCEPTUAL APPROVALS PRIOR TO FINAL. UM, SO IF THERE'S MORE DETAIL THAT THE COMMISSION WOULD LIKE TO SEE, I RECOMMEND THAT THAT BE INCLUDED AS A STIPULATION TO RETURN AS A SEPARATE OR INDIVIDUAL ITEM SO THAT, UH, THE DESIGN CAN KIND OF FLESH OUT WITH INPUT FROM THE COMMISSION. CO. COREY, THANK YOU. BECAUSE THAT'S, I THINK THAT'S EXACTLY, UH, UH, YOU KNOW, WHAT YOU JUST SAID THERE IS I THINK THE CLARITY THAT THIS APPLICANT REALLY NEEDS TO CONSIDER, THAT THEY CAN KIND, IT'S KIND OF LIKE NOT, IT IS KIND OF NON-BINDING, RIGHT? THAT THEY CAN CONTINUE THROUGH A CONCEPTUAL PROCESS. YOU DON'T HAVE TO TALK ABOUT, UH, UH, UM, A, A, UM, A FINAL IN ANY WAY, SHAPE OR FORM AND, AND TO REALLY GET THAT OUT OF THEIR HEAD UNTIL THEY GO THROUGH THE PLANNING PROCESS AND, AND CONTINUE CONCEPTUAL WITH DRCS OR WHATEVER IS AVAILABLE TO THEM. THIS IS A, YEAH, THIS IS COMMISSIONER CARPENTER AND, AND I APPRECIATE THE, THOSE DISCUSSIONS AND PARTICULARLY I THINK GOING BACK TO COMMISSIONER FISHER'S COMMENT ABOUT THAT BACK LOT AND THE IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE ON THAT, UH, I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING THAT THE TRAPS ON THAT NEED TO BE RUN PROBABLY EVEN BEFORE YOU DO THE, UM, THE FINAL PLATING BECAUSE YOU MAY HAVE TO REAPPORTION SOME OF THE PROPERTY JUST TO BE ABLE TO ACHIEVE YOUR PERCENTAGES. SO I THINK THERE'S SOME WISDOM IN WHAT, UH, COMMISSIONER LASSEZ IS, IS, UH, SUGGESTING. UM, JUST A KIND OF A FEW COMMENTS TO ADD ON TO THOSE THAT WERE ALREADY SHARED BY, UH, UH, CHAIRMAN FETZER AND COMMISSIONER . UM, I HAD SOME CONCERNS ABOUT THE RESULTING ROOF, UH, SHAPES THAT WERE, UH, BEING PROPOSED, PARTICULARLY FOR THOSE TWO FRONT, UH, UH, HOUSES OR STRUCTURES THAT ARE FACING ON THE, UH, ONTO THE BRAND. UM, I THINK THERE CAN BE A SIMPLER WAY OF APPROACHING HOW THOSE ARE ACHIEVED IN, IN LOOKING AT THE PLANS AND I KNOW WHAT IS GOING ON HERE, THERE, THERE, TRYING TO RECALL WHAT WAS THERE HISTORICALLY WHERE THERE WAS A SORT OF LARGE GABLE ROOF THAT KIND OF WENT FROM EAST TO WEST ACROSS THE SITE. BUT ACTUALLY WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE FLOOR PLANS, YOU MIGHT RETHINK THAT AND BE ABLE TO PULL DOWN SOME OF THE APPARENT MASSING BY HAVING ACTUALLY THOSE, UH, BE GABLES THAT ARE GOING TOWARDS US, UH, TOWARDS , UH, RATHER THAN GOING, UH, YOU KNOW, PARALLEL WITH IT. SO, UH, THAT WAS A COMMENT I HAD. 'CAUSE THERE SEEMS TO BE, PARTICULARLY WHEN YOU LOOK AT THAT EAST ELEVATION AND THE PORCHES AND CONVOLUTION GOING ON, WITHOUT THOSE, UH, SECOND STORY PORCHES ARE BEING ROOFED. THERE'S ALSO A LITTLE BIT OF MYSTERY AND INCONGRUITY BETWEEN, UH, FLOOR PLANS FOR THE, THE WESTERN UNIT THERE. THERE'S SOME KIND OF ROOF STRUCTURE AT THE FIRST LEVEL THAT WRAPS AROUND THE CORNER OF THE GARAGE AND, UH, CREATES SOMETHING, UM, UH, ON OTHER SIDE. IT DOESN'T SHOW UP IN THE, IN THE FLOOR PLAN, IT LOOKS LIKE THERE'S A SUGGESTION THAT MIGHT BE A, A WEST FACING PORCH OR SOMETHING. SO THERE'S SOME DEVELOPMENT ARCHITECTURALLY IN MY MIND THAT NEEDS TO TAKE PLACE TO ADDRESS SCALE AND MASSING. BUT FROM A CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL STANDPOINT, I FEEL, UH, THAT THIS IS, HAS GONE PROBABLY AS FAR AS IT SHOULD WITH US BEFORE SOME OF THOSE ISSUES THAT COMMISSIONER VASQUEZ WAS WAS TALKING ABOUT IN COMMISSIONER FISH. SO I WOULD, UH, MOVE FOR APPROVAL WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS ONE THROUGH FOUR. THIS IS COMMISSIONER FISH. I SECOND. OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL FOR CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL AS NOTED. MAY YOU HAVE A ROLL CALL PLEASE? FERNANDEZ? AYE FISH? AYE. GIBBS AYE. QUEZ AYE. AREOLA? AYE. CARPENTER. AYE. GROUP. AYE BE AYE. MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU. SO IT LOOKS LIKE WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO GET THROUGH ONE MORE CASE. SO, UM, AT THE END OF THAT I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR POSTPONEMENT OF 45, 46 AND 47. OKAY. AND WE HAVE THE APPLICANT FOR, FOR THIS NEXT CASE ON THE LINE AND WE WILL INFORM THE REMAINDER THAT THERE'LL BE POSTPONED. OKAY. ITEM NUMBER 44 [44. 21-1152 Address/Description: 115 CALLAGHAN AVE HDRC Case No.: 2020-573 Historic District Name: Lavaca Applicant: Adan Ochoa/AO Design, LLC Request: Construction of a rear and side addition, exterior modifications, site modifications City Council Dist.: 1] H D R C CASE NUMBER 2020 DASH 5 73 ADDRESS, ONE 15 CALLAHAN AVENUE. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL. TWO ONE CONSTRUCT A REAR INSIDE ADDITION TOTALING APPROXIMATELY 1006 1066 SQUARE FEET. TWO. WIDEN THE EXISTING DRIVEWAY TO ACCOMMODATE TWO CARS IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE PROPOSED SIDE. ADDITION, HE REQUESTED DRIVEWAY MODIFICATIONS CREATE A FRONT YARD PARKING CONDITION. ITEM ONE. STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL BASED ON FINDINGS A THROUGH G. STAFF RECOMMENDS THE APPLICANT ADDRESS THE FOLLOWING ITEMS PRIOR [03:50:01] TO RETURNING TO THE H D R C ONE, THAT THE APPLICANT RECONFIGURES THE ADDITION FOOTPRINT TO BE COMPLETELY INSET BEHIND THE EASTERN FACADE OF THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE TO EXTEND TOWARDS THE REAR OF THE LOT VERSUS TO THE SIDE. AS NOTED IN FINDING C AND D TWO, THAT THE APPLICANT SIMPLIFIES THE ADDITION SOFFIT DETAILING AS NOTED IN FINDING G AND THREE, THAT THE APPLICANT SUBMITS FINAL WINDOW SPECIFICATIONS THAT COMPLY WITH R STANDARD WINDOW STIPULA STIPULATIONS AS LISTED IN THE RECOMMENDATION ITEM TWO. STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND THE DRIVEWAY MODIFICATIONS AS PROPOSED BASED ON FINDING H STAFF FINDS THAT THE APPLICANT SHOULD MODIFY THEIR PROPOSAL TO INCLUDE A DRIVEWAY THAT EXTENDS TO THE BACK OF THE LOT TO FOLLOW THE HISTORIC DEVELOPMENT PATTERN OF THE DISTRICT AS NOTED IN FINDING H AND I DO WANT TO NOTE THAT THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED ALTERNATE ALTERNATE SITE PLANS, UM, LAST FRIDAY. THAT STAFF IS NOT FULLY REVIEWED. UM, THOSE ARE LOCATED ON PAGE 26 AND 27 OF THE CASE FILE. UM, AND WE DO HAVE THE APPLICANT ON THE LINE. UM, DO YOU WANNA INTRODUCE YOURSELF AND SUMMARIZE YOUR REQUEST? SURE. MY NAME'S ADAM OCHOA. I'M WITH AO DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION. I KNOW THAT OUR CUTOFF TIME IS AT SEVEN 15, SO IF Y'ALL JUST WANT TO APPROVE RIGHT NOW, WE COULD PROBABLY SNEAK IN MORE IN BEFOREHAND. NO. OKAY. SO, UM, THE HOUSE, UM, IS OWNED BY THE MENDOZAS. THEY'VE BEEN THERE, THE HOUSE HAS BEEN WITH THEM FOR ABOUT 50 YEARS. IT WAS HER CHILDHOOD HOME. UM, THEY USED TO LIVE IN STONE OAK AREA, BUT THEY DECIDED TO GO AHEAD AND MOVE BACK OVER HERE AND PURCHASE, UM, THEIR FAMILY OWNED HOME, UM, WHEN THEIR MOTHER HAD PASSED AWAY. SO THEY'VE BEEN WANTING TO STAY HERE IN THE COMMUNITY BECAUSE THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT THEY KNOW, THAT'S WHAT THEY LOVE. UM, MR. MENDOZA'S REALLY WANTING TO, UM, BUILD TOWARDS THE SIDE OF THE PROPERTY. AS YOU CAN SEE, THIS PROPERTY HERE IS ONE OF THE LARGER ONES ON THIS BLOCK. UM, AND MR. MENDOZA AND MS. MENDOZA, THEY'RE BOTH ELDERLY, SO THEY TOOK INTO CONSIDERATION OF PUTTING THE HOUSE TOWARDS THE BACK, BUT IT'S JUST A LONG, LONG DISTANCE FOR THEM TO HAVE TO, UM, GET UP AND WALK ALL THE WAY TO THE FRONT IF THERE'S A PACKAGE OR IF THERE'S A, UH, DOORBELL OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. UH, ANOTHER REASON WHY THEY'RE WANTING IT TO THE SIDE IS 'CAUSE THEY'RE ALSO ACTIVE IN THE COMMUNITY. THEY'RE ALWAYS LOOKING OUT FOR THEIR NEIGHBORS, ALWAYS LOOKING TO SEE WHO'S IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, WHO'S WALKING. UM, AND BY HAVING IT WHERE IT'S, WHERE WE'RE PRO PROPOSING TO LOCATE IT, UM, THEY CAN DO THAT. THEY CAN EASILY DO THAT BY GETTING UP, LOOKING OUT THEIR WINDOW AND SEEING IN THE FRONT YARD AGAIN, BY IT BEING ALL THE WAY IN THE BACK. THEY JUST CAN'T DO THAT. UH, KIND OF CREATING LIKE A SHOTGUN HOME 'CAUSE YOU'RE JUST GONNA HAVE ONE STRAIGHT HALLWAY THAT JUST GOES ALL THE WAY TO THE BACK. UM, ANOTHER REASON FOR THAT HOUSE TO BE, UM, POSITIONED THE WAY IT IS, IS 'CAUSE THEY WANT TO UTILIZE THAT BACKYARD FOR GATHERINGS FOR, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD GATHERINGS. I'M SORRY, NOT NEIGHBORHOOD GATHERINGS, BUT FAMILY GATHERINGS AND BEING ABLE TO VIEW THE TOWER OF AMERICA, UM, THE TOWERS, IT'S DIRECTLY RIGHT IN BACK OF THEM. THEY CAN GO OUTSIDE THE BACK DOOR AND JUST SIT AND RELAX AND ENJOY WHEN WE DO GET THE FIREWORKS BACK AGAIN. UH, ENJOY THAT BY DOING THE SHOTGUN, UM, BY DOING THE LONG, UM, PROPOSAL, THAT MEANS THAT THEIR DECK WOULD BE BUILT TO THE SIDE WHICH IS VIEWABLE FROM THE STREET, WHICH WOULD ALSO BRING UP THE CASE IF H C R C WOULD ALLOW THEM TO PUT A A, A DECK, A BIG DECK ON THE SIDE THAT IS GONNA BE VIEWABLE. UM, SOMETHING THAT WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT ALSO WAS IF WE WERE TO GO TO THE SITE, IF VEGETATION COULD BE GROWN THERE, WE CAN DO A VEGETATION WALL, DO SOME TYPE OF TREES, TRY TO BLOCK IT SOMEHOW. UM, I KNOW THAT I HAD PUT AN EXAMPLE, UH, FURTHER DOWN, UM, I BELIEVE IT'S THE LAST TWO PAGES OF THE, UM, OF THE SUBMITTAL HERE OF ANOTHER HOUSE THAT WE HAD DONE, UM, ON HOWARD STREET, SIMILAR TO THIS HOUSE AS WELL. WE BUILT TO THE SIDE. UM, AND AS YOU CAN SEE, WE WENT AHEAD AND PUT THE GABLE NOT ATTACHING IT TO THE EXISTING HOUSE BY CREATING A, A FLAT SOAP, A SLOPE, WHICH KIND OF, UM, SEPARATED THE TWO, UH, RESIDENCES. SO IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE IT WAS ACTUALLY ATTACHED. UH, I KNOW I KIND OF WENT THROUGH IT REALLY FAST, BUT IT'S ALREADY 7 0 8. WE, WE DON'T NEED TO RUSH YOUR CASE. WE'RE GONNA, WE'RE COMPLETE THIS CASE. UH, I ASSUME, JEFF, DO WE HAVE ANY, ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS? UM, JUST ONE, UH, THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY OF SAN ANTONIO HAS REVIEWED THE INITIAL PLANS FOR THE ADDITION TO THE WELL-PRESERVED VICTORIAN BULK COTTAGE AT ONE 15, CALLAHAN AND LAVACCA. WE OBJECTED TO THESE INITIAL PLANS BECAUSE THE LARGE ADDITION IS VISIBLE FROM THE STREET AND ALTERED THE APPEARANCE OF THE HISTORIC HOUSE REVISED PLAN SUBMITTED ON JANUARY 15TH AND ILLUSTRATED ON PAGE 26 OF THE APPLICATION WITH THE ENTIRE ADDITION BEHIND THE HISTORIC HOUSE. THIS, THIS IS AN ACCEPTABLE SOLUTION FOR THE ADDITION AND MEETS PRESERVATION STANDARDS. UM, COMMISSIONER [03:55:01] FISH? I DON'T, I THOUGHT I HEARD THAT YOU, YOU WERE GONNA SAY SOMETHING, BUT IF, IF, UH, IF NOT, I, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE AS SUBMITTED. IT'S A, THAT'S A STRONG ENDORSEMENT FROM THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY IN LIGHT OF THE, THE, YOU KNOW, THE OTHER ONE THAT WE SAW EARLIER. UM, THIS IS MORE IN KEEPING WITH, UH, WHAT IS EXPECTED, BUT, UM, THIS IS AN EXISTING STRUCTURE. IT IS A BEAUTIFUL HOUSE. THERE, THERE, THEY'RE DEFINITELY GOING GOOD ATTITUDE TOWARD IT. COMMISSIONER, COULD YOU DIRECT US TO THE PLAN WHICH YOU'RE DISCUSSING? IS THAT THE PLAN OPTION OR THE PLAN ALTERNATE ON 26TH OR 27 OR THE ORIGINAL? WELL, THERE, NOW YOU GOT ME BECAUSE I THOUGHT I WAS JUST TALKING ABOUT THE, THE LAST COMMENTS THAT WE, THAT WE HEARD FROM THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY. SO, SO THERE THEY WERE REFERENCING, UH, ALTERNATE THAT WAS PRESENTED ON, UH, SLIDE 26, BUT I BELIEVE THERE ARE THREE DIFFERENT PLAN PROPOSALS IN THIS PACKAGE. AND THE LATTER TWO HAVE NOT NECESSARILY BEEN REVIEWED BY STAFF. THAT'S CORRECT. UM, IF WE CAN GO TO THE ORIGINAL SITE PLAN, WELL, CAN, CAN, CAN I ASK THE APPLICANT TO SHED SOME LIGHT ON, UH, WHAT THEY'RE ASKING THE WELL, WELL, THE ORIGINAL ONE IS THE PLANS THAT ARE, THAT ARE DESCRIBED ON, UM, PAGE 22. THAT WAS WHAT WE, OR THAT'S WHAT WE WANTED TO, UH, PROPOSE. THE REASON FOR THE OTHER TWO SITE PLANS THAT WERE PUT IN THERE WERE TO STIPULATE HOW IT WASN'T GONNA WORK, HOW IT CREATES THAT, THAT LONG HALLWAY, HOW IT CREATES THE BURDEN FOR ELDERLY TO GET UP AND WALK THE ADDITIONAL, UH, FEET. UM, THERE, THE PROPOSED TIME THAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE, I BELIEVE IT WAS AT LIKE, UM, I BELIEVE IT WAS LIKE ABOUT 70 FEET FROM THEIR ROOM TO THE FRONT DOOR. IS THAT THE BACK D ONE PAGE? D ONE? I MEAN, IT'S, THAT'S A, I I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S THE PROPER PAGE, BUT IS THAT THE FLOOR PLAN, UH, THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT? YEAH, THE, THE FLOOR ON PAGE 22. WELL, D SHEET, THE, THE ARCHITECTURAL SHEET D 1.0. OKAY, ONE SECOND PLEASE. UM, THAT IS THAT, WELL THAT'S THE, UH, THE DEMOLITION PLAN. YOU GO TO, UH, A A 1.0 OR A ONE? UH, YEAH, A 1.0 THAT IS THE PROPOSED, UH, FLOOR PLAN. OKAY. WHAT'S THE ONE THAT HAS A CIRCLE AROUND IT AND IT SAYS NEW ADDITION. OKAY. OKAY. AND THEN SHOWS SLIDE 26, WHICH IS THE ONE THAT, UH, THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY WAS REFERRING TO. SO THAT'S WHAT HE WAS SAYING IS THAT'S THE ALTERNATIVE PLAN WHERE YOU MOVING EVERYTHING FROM BEHIND OF THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE. I, I HEAR YOU. I I'M SORRY. I WOULD HAVE TO, UH, RESEND MY MOTION. I MISUNDER. YEAH. AND THERE'S ON, I HAVE THE, THE PROJECT FILE OPEN ON ONE SIDE AND ON THE OTHER SIDE I HAVE, AND THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY DID NOT HAVE ANYTHING ON ITEM TWO, SO WE MAY ALSO WANNA DISCUSS THAT. SO THIS IS COMMISSIONER FISH. UM, UH, I'D LIKE TO ASK THE CLIENT IF, SO I, I GATHER THAT THE ALTERNATE THAT'S SHOWING THE ADDITION FULLY BEHIND A HISTORIC STRUCTURE, UH, YOU'RE SUGGESTING THAT THAT'S DEMONSTRATING WHAT DOESN'T WORK, UH, IN YOUR FAVOR. HALLWAY. UH, CAN YOU SPEAK TO YES, YES SIR. CAN YOU SPEAK TO THE PLAN PRESENTED ON 27? IS THAT A BETTER ALTERNATIVE THAN THE ONE ON 26? LEMME TAKE A LOOK. UH, 27 AND, AND THAT'S TO, THAT'S THE SECOND ALTERNATE THAT YOU PROVIDED THAT SHOWS THE REAR ADDITION TURNED SIDEWAYS, BUT STILL MOSTLY BEHIND THE HISTORIC STRUCTURE. IT'S STILL A BIT OF A HALLWAY, BUT IT, IT APPEARS TO BE A LITTLE BIT MORE, IT, IT'S ACTUALLY STILL THE, THE, UH, IF YOU LOOK AT IT ACCORDING TO LIKE FEET, IT'S ONLY ABOUT, UH, BELIEVE IT WAS ABOUT, UH, 10, A 10 FOOT DIFFERENCE FOR THEM TO GET UP AND HAVE TO WALK ALL THE WAY OVER THERE. BECAUSE AGAIN, THE OTHER THING, UH, THAT THEY'RE WORRIED ABOUT IS HAVING TO PARK AND THEN GET INTO THE HOUSE WITH GROCERIES OR WITH JUST THEMSELVES AND THEN HAVE TO GET ALL THE WAY TO THE BACK OF THE HOUSE WHERE MORE THAN LIKELY THEY'RE GONNA RESIDE. OKAY. SO LET'S TALK ABOUT ITEM TWO. THE, THE, THE DRIVEWAY, UM, AS PROPOSED, UM, REALLY DOESN'T MEET THE GUIDELINES THAT'S SHOWING A FLARE THAT'S, UH, CLEARLY VISIBLE, UH, FROM THE CORRECT FRONT, I BELIEVE. AND, UH, THE, SOME OF THE ALTERNATE POSITIONS, UM, OF THE ADDITION GIVE YOU MORE FLEXIBILITY, BUT YOU'RE NOT REALLY PROPOSING HOW TO RESOLVE THE DRIVEWAY [04:00:01] IN THOSE ALTERNATES IF IT IS, UH, DFR OR NOT. UM, I AGREE WITH, WITH STAFF IN THAT, IN THAT THE ORIGINAL PROPOSAL, UM, IS REALLY IMPACTING THE HOUSE IN A VERY, VERY VISUAL WAY FROM THE STREET. NOW, I UNDERSTAND THAT THE, THAT THERE'S A, A FAIR AMOUNT OF WIDTH ON THIS LOT AND, UM, I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THE ADDITION NEEDS TO BE FULLY BEHIND THE HOUSE, PARTICULARLY IF IT'S LOCATED A LITTLE BIT FURTHER BACK. SO THE PLAN ALTERNATIVE THAT YOU'RE PROPOSING THAT YOU'RE NOT, YOU'RE, YOU'RE DEMONSTRATING DOESN'T PARTICULARLY WORK WELL FOR YOU. BUT THE ONE THAT WE SEE ON SLIDE 27, UM, I CAN BE AGREEABLE TO, UH, THAT HAS MINIMAL VISIBILITY TO THE STREET, BUT IT'S PUSHED, IT'S PUSHED BACK INTO THE REAR YARD, PROBABLY BEHIND A FENCE STRUCTURE. AND I THINK IT'S, IT'S MORE, MORE COMPATIBLE WITH THE GUIDELINES THAN THE ORIGINAL PROPOSAL WHERE IT'S EXTENDING FROM THE HOUSE OUT INTO THE WIDTH OF THE YARD. UM, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANT US TO CONSIDER, UH, THAT PLAN FOR CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL TODAY, OR IF YOU'D RATHER HAVE, UH, A LENGTHIER DISCUSSION IN A D R C ABOUT THE POSSIBILITIES YOU THINK. I THINK YEAH, WE'D RATHER DIRECTION. WE WOULD RATHER, YEAH, WE'D RATHER GO AHEAD AND GO TO D R C BECAUSE, UM, THAT WASN'T, AGAIN, ME SENDING THOSE TWO SITE PLANS WEREN'T FOR OPTIONS. THEY WERE MORE REASONS WHY THEY WOULDN'T WORK. UH, AND I SPOKE TO THE CLIENT ABOUT THAT AS WELL, UM, ASKING HIM, I'M PRETTY SURE THAT THEY'RE GONNA TAKE IT THIS WAY, WHICH THE WAY THAT Y'ALL DID, JUST TAKE IT. UM, SO WE'LL GO AHEAD AND GO TO D R C AND SEE IF WE CAN FIGURE SOMETHING ELSE OUT BY BRINGING IT BACK TO THE FRONT, KIND OF LIKE THE WAY I DID AT THE WAY IT WAS APPROVED FOR THE ONE ON HOWARD STREET, UH, IN THE MON VISTA DISTRICT. UM, THAT I DO, I DO THINK THERE ARE SOME POSSIBILITIES THAT ARE LESS EXTREME THAN THE ONES THAT YOU PRESENTED AS ALTERNATES. UH, BUT THE PRIMARY PROPOSAL I, I, I SHARE STAFF'S CONCERNS ON, SO I I I WOULD MOVE TO SEND THIS TO A D R C AND HAVE THIS SCHEDULED AT THE EARLIEST POSSIBLE D R C DATE. I, I'LL SECOND THAT. COMMISSIONER FISHER, I DO WANNA ASK THE GENTLEMAN A QUESTION. WH WHY IS IT THAT THE OLD FLOOR PLAN OR WITHIN REASONABLE, UH, GROWTH FROM THE OLD FLOOR PLAN, WHY, WHY IS IT THAT THE IMPROVEMENTS COULDN'T WORK WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF WHAT, WHAT WAS THERE, WHAT IS CURRENTLY THERE? YEAH, BECAUSE IT SEEMS THAT, OKAY, ON ONE HAND, THE, UH, THE, THE, THE MOBILITY IS AN ISSUE, RIGHT? CAN'T WALK 70 FEET, RIGHT? BUT 125 THAT, THAT SAYS A LOT TO, TO THE SIZE OF A HOUSE AND, AND JUST IN GENERAL AND, AND THAT D ONE THAT YOU SAY IS THE DEMOLITION IT, UH, I WOULD IMAGINE THAT THEY HAD WORKED OUT SOME SOLUTIONS THAT ALREADY WORK AND THAT JUST CRAFTING IT WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF, OF WHAT WAS THERE. BECAUSE EVEN I LOOK AT THAT, THAT PAGE 27 AND, AND UM, THERE'S THAT REAL STRANGE CONNECTION, THAT LINEAR CONNECTION THAT IT SEEMS THAT WITH MOVEMENT IN A HOUSE, THAT THAT'S A REALLY KIND OF A WEAK, IT CREATES MORE, IT CREATES OWN PROBLEMS. ALTHOUGH THAT'S NONE IN MY BUSINESS, RIGHT? I'M MORE JUST SAYING THAT, THAT IT SEEMS THAT THAT PAGE, THAT D ONE THAT'S THE DEMOLITION, IT, IT SHOWS THAT YOU'RE REMOVING SOME THINGS THAT REALLY WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF THAT, WITHIN REASONABLE GROWTH IN D RRC. YEAH, I KNOW. NO, I KNOW THAT. AND, AND, AND I JUST TOOK US TWO MINUTES OVER SO, UH, I APOLOGIZE BUT UH, JUST FOOD FOR THOUGHT. OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION TO WITNESS THIS TO D R C. MAY I HAVE A ROLL CALL PLEASE? FERNANDEZ? AYE. FISH? AYE. GIBBS? AYE. QUEZ AYE. AREOLA? AYE. CARPENTER? AYE. GROUP? AYE BE SIR. AYE MOTION CARRIE. SO THE LAST [Items 45 - 47] 3 45, 46, 47. WE NEED A MOTION TO POSTPONE THOSE TO, UH, A SPECIFIC TIME, EITHER THE NEXT MEETING OR WITHIN 30 DAYS OR, UH, WE NEED A SPECIFIC, YOU CAN SAY EARLIEST AVAILABLE MEETING. OKAY. COMMISSIONER, COMMISSIONER CARPENTER HERE. UM, JUST VERY QUICKLY, COREY, ARE ANY OF THESE TIME SENSITIVE? ARE WE OKAY ON ALL OF THEM? WE'RE OKAY ON ALL OF THEM. OKAY. SO I MOVE THAT CASE ITEMS NUMBER 45 THROUGH 47 B, MOVE TO THE NEXT AVAILABLE H G O C HEARING I SECOND. COMMISSIONER FERNANDEZ. MOTION IS SECOND. HAVE A ROLL CALL PLEASE. I THINK WE CAN JUST DO ALL IN FAVOR. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES. THIS IS COMMISSIONER CARPENTER. THERE ARE [Approval of HDRC Meeting Minutes for December 16, 2020.] UM, MEETING MINUTES FOR DECEMBER 16TH TO APPROVE. [04:05:01] I MOVE FOR APPROVAL AS SUBMITTED. THIS IS COMMISSIONER FERNANDEZ I SECOND. MOTION APPROVE. UH, MOTION TO SECOND TO APPROVE. DECEMBER 16TH, 2020. MEETING MINUTES. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. ANY, ANY OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES. MR. CARPENTER, I MOVE FROM ADJOURN. COMMISSIONER FERNANDEZ, I SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. * 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.