* 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. OKAY. [00:00:01] GOOD AFTERNOON EVERYONE. BEFORE WE GET STARTED, THIS IS A QUICK MESSAGE TO OUR VIRTUAL ATTENDEES. UM, UH, WE ARE ABOUT TO BEGIN THE HEARING. AND SO, UH, YOU ARE CURRENTLY IN SORT OF LIKE THE WAITING AREA IN THE WEBEX MEETING. UM, IF YOUR CASE IS CALLED OR WHEN IT'S YOUR TURN FOR YOUR CASE TO BE REVIEWED, UM, I WILL SELECT YOUR NAME FROM THE ATTENDEE LIST AND MAKE YOU A PANELIST. AT THAT TIME, WE'LL BE ABLE TO SEE FROM, SEE AND HEAR FROM YOU AND YOU CAN PRESENT, UM, BUT WE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO HEAR YOU UNTIL WE MAKE YOU A PANELIST. SO JUST WAIT UNTIL YOUR CASE IS CALLED TO KEEP AN EYE ON THE AGENDA. UM, AND WE WILL GET TO YOU WHEN IT'S YOUR TURN. I THINK THE LIVE STREAM HAS BEGUN. IF YOU WANNA GO AHEAD AND CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER. OKAY. GOOD AFTERNOON EVERYONE. I'D LIKE TO CALL TO ORDER THE HISTORIC DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION HEARING FOR WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 7TH, 2022. UM, ROLL CALL PLEASE. GABE IS ABSENT. FISH HERE, SINA HERE. ALASKA HERE. MORALE IS ABSENT. MASUKA HERE. CARPENTER HERE. GROOVE IS ABSENT. BANES IS ABSENT. ZER IS ABSENT. AND BAKER HERE WE HAVE A QUORUM. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. UH, TRANSLATION SERVICES. CORRECT. SO BEFORE WE GET STARTED, WE HAVE A BRIEF ANNOUNCEMENT REGARDING INTERPRETIVE SERVICES FOR THE MEETING. IF WE CAN HAVE ONE OF OUR TRANSLATORS COME UP, PLEASE INTERPRET. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT. UM, LET ME GIVE THE, THE CHAIRMAN STATEMENT. THE HISTORIC AND DESIGNER REVIEW COMMISSION IS AN ADVISORY BOARD APPOINTED BY CITY COUNCIL. I'M SCOTT CARPENTER, THE VICE CHAIR AND ACTING CHAIRMAN FOR TODAY'S HEARING. UH, UH, JEFF FETZER IS OUR NORMAL CHAIR. CHAIRMAN IS THE FUNCTION OF THE COMMISSION TO ADVISE THE CITY MANAGER AND ALL RELEVANT CITY DEPARTMENTS CONCERNING ALL APPLICA APPLICATIONS FOR PERMITS FOR PROPERTIES IN HISTORIC DISTRICTS FOR LANDMARKS ON CITY PROPERTY, IN THE RIVER IMPROVEMENT OVERLAY, AND FOR DEMOLITIONS. IN CONSIDERING WHETHER TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL OF AN APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS, THE COMMISSION 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 AN DECISION MADE BY AN ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL CAN BE FILED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CITY'S UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE. IF ANYONE PRESENT WISHES TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OR IN OPPOSITION TO ANY ITEM ON TODAY'S AGENDA, PLEASE SIGN UP ON THE THE PUBLIC COMMENTS SHEET. IT'S NOT NECESSARY TO SHINE. SIGN UP. IF YOU ARE THE OWNER OF OR THE REPRESENTATIVE FOR A PROJECT ON THE AGENDA, YOU'LL BE CALLED ON AS THE CASE IS IS CALLED. CASE REPRESENTATIVES WILL BE GIVEN NO MORE THAN 15 MINUTES TO PRESENT THEIR CASE WITH AN ADDITIONAL TWO MINUTES TO RESPOND TO PUBLIC COMMENTS. SPEAKERS FOR, OR OPPOSED TO A CASE WILL BE LIMITED TO TWO MINUTES. EACH SPEAKERS MAY ALSO SIGN UP TO YIELD THEIR TWO MINUTES TO ANOTHER SPEAKER WHO HAS SIGNED UP. ANYONE WHO IS YIELDING THEIR TIME MUST BE PRESENT AT THE TIME THE SPEAKER IS CALLED UPON. SPEAKERS WILL BE CALLED UPON IN THE ORDER IN WHICH THEY ARE SIGNED UP FOLLOWING PUBLIC TESTIMONY. ANY COMMISSIONER MAY CALL UPON ANY SPEAKER TO RESPOND TO FURTHER QUESTIONS. APPROVAL BY THE CITY, 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 STARRED WITHOUT OBTAINING THE APPROPRIATE CITY PERMITS AFTER THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS HAS BEEN ISSUED BY THE OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION. AT THIS TIME, I ASK YOU TO, UH, SILENCE YOUR CELL PHONES PLEASE. STAFF ANNOUNCEMENTS. WE DO HAVE A FEW ANNOUNCEMENTS. UH, WE HAVE A COUPLE OF EVENTS COMING UP I WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT. UM, THE FIRST IS THIS SATURDAY MORNING, UM, 10 15 AT THE MISSION BRANCH LIBRARY ON ROOSEVELT AVENUE. UM, THIS IS JUST A PUBLIC INFORMATIONAL MEETING, UM, HIGHLIGHTING U D C CHANGES PERTAINING TO O H P AND H C R C PROCESS. UM, THERE'S ALSO A FEW NEW ONLINE TOOLS WE WANNA PROMOTE SO THAT PEOPLE CAN RECEIVE TRAINING ON HOW TO USE THOSE. AND SO THAT'S JUST A GREAT, UM, OPPORTUNITY FOR ANYBODY WHO LIVES IN HISTORIC DISTRICT OR DOES BUSINESS WITH O H P OR THE H C R C, UH, TO GET UP TO SPEED ON A COUPLE OF INITIATIVES. UM, THE OTHER IS OUR ANNUAL, AT THIS POINT, HISTORIC RUN CREW HOLIDAY [00:05:01] LIGHTS TOUR. AND SO THIS IS A, A VERY CHEAP EVENT FOR RUNNERS AND WALKERS THAT WANT TO, UM, UH, SEE HISTORIC SITES DOWNTOWN, UM, IN A A FITNESS SETTING. AND SO YOU CAN DO A GUIDED TOUR EITHER WALKING OR RUNNING WITH A GROUP. UM, SEE HISTORIC SITES DOWNTOWN AND ENJOY THE HOLIDAY LIGHTS. UM, REGISTRATION IS JUST $10 AND YOU GET A, IS THIS, IS THIS TRUE, JESS? YOU GET A BEANIE AND A MUG, OR JUST A MUG, A BEANIE. NO BEANIE, JUST A MUG, BUT IT IS STILL A DEAL. SO BE SURE TO SIGN UP FOR THAT. THE INFORMATION'S ON OUR FACEBOOK PAGE. UM, AND THEN THE O H P WEBSITE AS WELL. UM, WITH THAT, I THINK OUR FIRST ITEM FOR BUSINESS IS APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES FROM NOVEMBER 16TH. OH, I'M SORRY. LET ME PASS YOU OVER. PASS THIS OVER TO OUR DIRECTOR, SHANNON MILLER. HELLO EVERYONE. UM, I JUST WANTED TO COME BY TODAY AT THE BEGINNING OF THE MEETING AND, AND THANK ALL OF YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE THIS YEAR ON THE ON THE COMMISSION. UM, YOU KNOW, THE, THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO SEES A DISPROPORTIONATE NUMBER OF ALL THE CASES IN THE WHOLE STATE OF TEXAS, AND A BIG CHUNK OF THOSE COME TO THE COMMISSION, AND YOU ALL SPEND A LOT OF TIME AND ENERGY. UM, AND I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT ELSE. AN ANXIETY PROBABLY, UM, DEALING WITH SOME OF THESE CASES. AND, UM, WE REALLY APPRECIATE EVERYTHING THAT YOU DO FOR THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO. AND, UM, BEFORE YOU LEAVE, GRAB A LITTLE HOLIDAY GIFT THAT WE HAVE FOR EACH OF YOU ON YOUR WAY OUT THERE, DOWN AT THE END OF THE, OF THE DAIS. AND I ALSO JUST WANNA TAKE THIS OPPORTUNITY PUBLICLY TO THANK THE DESIGNER VIEW TEAM, UM, OF O H P. EVERYBODY HERE DOES A REALLY AMAZING JOB KEEPING UP WITH ALL OF THESE CASES. YOU KNOW, MANY OF SOME OF THEM ARE ADMINISTRATIVE THAT YOU ALL NEVER SEE, AND WE, WE TRY TO, UM, STREAMLINE EVERYTHING AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE. SO BY THE TIME YOU DO SEE IT, IT'S AS CLEAR AS WE CAN, AS WE CAN MAKE IT AND PROVIDE YOU WITH THE RESOURCES THAT YOU NEED. AND SO THE STAFF DOES A REALLY GREAT JOB. AND THEN ALSO THANKS TO ALMA FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE FOR, UM, HER GREAT LEGAL SUPPORT AS WELL. UM, SO IT'S THAT TIME OF YEAR. JUST WANTED TO SAY THANK YOU AND WISH EVERYONE A HAPPY HOLIDAY SEASON AND THANK YOU FOR THAT. AND ON BEHALF OF MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS, WE THANK THE STAFF FOR ALL YOUR HARD WORK AND SUPPORT AND, AND, UM, YOUR DEDICATION AND A LOT OF THE, UH, THE PUBLIC OUTREACH PROGRAMS THAT YOU'RE INVOLVED IN, JUST THE LONG HOURS OF PREPARING THOSE. I KNOW, UH, COMMISSIONER, UH, FETZER ASKED FOR SOME STATISTICS ABOUT, UH, THE NUMBER OF CASES THAT THE, UH, THAT THE OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION HAS GONE THROUGH IN THE YEAR, UH, 2022. AND, UH, I WON'T STEAL HIS THUNDER. HE'LL TALK ABOUT THAT NEXT TIME WHEN HE COMES. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. AND [Approval of Minutes] NOW WE CAN GET TO THE EXCITING MEETING MINUTES FROM NOVEMBER 16TH. DO WE HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL FOR THE MEETING MINUTES FOR DECEMBER 16TH, MR. CHAIR? I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE NOVEMBER SIX, THE MEETING MINUTES SECOND. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND ROLL CALL PLEASE. FISH. AYE. SAVINA. AYE. VELAZQUEZ. AYE. MAZUA. AYE. AYE. CARPENTER GROUP. AYE. AND, UH, BAKER AYE. MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU. NOW [CONSENT AGENDA Items are placed on the consent agenda when staff recommends approval or recommends approval with stipulations that the applicant agrees to. Any member of the public desiring to speak on a consent agenda item may sign up and be heard prior to voting on the consent agenda. Commissioners may request to remove any item from the consent agenda and have it placed on the individual consideration agenda. All items on the consent agenda will be considered for approval by one motion adopting the items with staff findings and recommendations.  ] WE HAVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. UM, BEFORE WE DO, UM, WE'LL HAVE, WE'LL PLAY COMMENTS THAT WE HAVE FOR ITEMS ON CONSENT. I BELIEVE WE JUST HAVE, UH, THE ONE VOICEMAIL FOR ITEM THREE. WE DON'T HAVE ANYONE SIGNED UP IN PERSON. GO AHEAD AND PLAY THAT ONE VOICEMAIL. YES. THIS IS FOR AGENDA ITEM NUMBER THREE. CASE NUMBER 2 0 2 2 DASH 5 4 9 2 1 1 8 WEST KINGS HIGHWAY. MY NAME IS BIANCA MALDONADO. OFFERING COMMENTS ON BEHALF OF DREA GARZA, PRESIDENT OF THE MONTICELLO PARK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND THE N P N A BOARD OF DIRECTORS PO BOX 1 0 0 3 1 5 7 8 2 0 1. WE ARE SUPPORTIVE OF STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS, BUT RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THE INCLUSION OF THE FOLLOWING. NUMBER ONE, WE REQUEST CLARIFICATION ON THE SIZE OF THE PROPOSED SASH ELEMENTS, THE STYLE AND RAIL WIDTH TO ENSURE PROPOSED STORMS. WINDOW SASH DO NOT OBSCURE THE PRIMARY SASH. SECOND, WE REQUEST A PROPER INVENTORY OF ALL EXTERIOR WINDOWS TO INCLUDE THE REAR WINDOWS ON THE REAR PORCH. A CLEAR IMAGE OF EACH WINDOW WHERE THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING TO INSTALL A STORM WINDOW SHOULD BE DOCUMENTED IN THIS APPLICATION. NUMBER THREE, THE COLOR OF THE PROPOSED STORM WINDOWS SHALL BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE EXISTING PALLET OF THE HOME'S MASONRY MATERIALS. NUMBER FOUR, THE SPECIFICATION SHEET SUBMITTED DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE EDITED TO REFLECT THE SELECTION OF A STORM WINDOW FOR FULL VIEW AT 2 1 1 8 WEST KINGS HIGHWAY. WE ASK THAT THIS BE, UM, SUBMITTED PRIOR TO FINAL APPROVAL BEING GIVEN. NUMBER FIVE, WE REQUEST A NOTE TO BE PLACED ON THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS THAT THE ORIGINAL X NUMBER OF WINDOWS WILL NOT BE REMOVED OR ALTERED AS PART OF THE STORM WINDOW INSTALLATION. [00:10:02] INCLUDE THE WINDOWS ON THE FRONT AND THE REAR PORCHES. THANKS SO MUCH FOR CONSIDERATION OF OUR COMMENTS AND WE'RE THANKFUL FOR THIS PROPERTY OWNER AND THE INVESTMENT THAT THEY'RE MAKING IN THEIR HOME. AND TO CASE NUMBER THREE, CAN STAFF ADDRESS THOSE ITEMS ADMINISTRATIVELY IN WORKING WITH THE, UH, THE APPLICANT? THE APPLICANT, UH, APPLIED FOR AND RECEIVED APPROVAL ADMINISTRATIVELY FOR FULL REHAB OF ALL OF THE HISTORIC ONE OVER ONE WOOD WIN WOOD WINDOWS, UM, AS PART OF A SCOPE OF WORK THAT WAS APPROVED ADMINISTRATIVELY OF THE SAME REQUEST. ALRIGHT, GIVEN, UH, THAT I THINK THOSE ARE ALL OUR, OUR PUBLIC COMMENTS FOR THE CONSENT AGENDA, DO ANY OF MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS WISH TO PULL A CASE FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION? I WOULD LIKE TO PULL CASE NUMBER ONE. OKAY. ANYONE ELSE? OKAY. SO I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR THE BALANCE. MR. CHAIR, I'LL DO A MOTION OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. ITEM NUMBER TWO THROUGH SEVEN WAS STAFF STIPULATIONS. WE HAVE A MOTION. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? A SECOND. WE HAVE A MOTION TO SECOND ROLL CALL PLEASE. FISH. AYE. SABINA AYE. VELASQUEZ AYE. MOOKA AYE. CARPENTER? AYE. GRO AYE. AND BAKER AYE. MOTION PASSES. YOUR HONOR, THE CONSENT AGENDA AND YOUR ADDRESS IS THREE 15 FLORIDA 2118 WEST KINGS HIGHWAY 2 27 WEST GRAMERCY 3 38 ARMY 2 68 LAVERA AND 1 26 BRERA. YOUR CASE HAS BEEN APPROVED AND YOU DO NOT NEED TO STAY FOR THE REMAINDER OF THIS HEARING. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, PLEASE CONTACT A MEMBER OF STAFF. YOUR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS OR COMMISSION ACTION LETTER WILL BE PREPARED AND EMAILED TO YOU WITHIN 10 DAYS. [INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION  ] UH, AGENDA ITEM NUMBER ONE, THE APPLICANT SHOULD BE, UH, WITH US VIRTUALLY. COMMISSIONER YOU, UH, WISH TO PULL THIS CASE? YES, I WANNA PULL THIS CASE, UM, FOR ONE MINOR ADJUSTMENT. UM, THIS IS IN RIO. IT'S NOT A DESIGNATED HISTORIC BUILDING. UM, IT DOESN'T HAVE LANDMARK STATUS, BUT IT IS, AS IT'S NOTED IN THE REVIEW, HAS VERY STRONG HISTORIC, UH, CHARACTERISTICS OR CHARACTER DEFINING ELEMENTS SUCH AS THE CURVED AWNING, THE, THE STOREFRONT, WHICH IS THE BASIS FOR MAKING THE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE STOREFRONT BY STAFF. UH, ONE ITEM THAT I THINK IS IMPORTANT TO MAINTAIN ARE AT THE VERY LEAST, NOT LOSE. AND THAT'S THE ROUND WINDOW ON THE ORIGINAL. IT IS PART OF THE CHARACTER DEFINING ELEMENTS OF THIS BUILDING. UM, SO, UH, BARRING THE APPLICANT'S DESIRE TO KEEP THE WINDOW IN THE PROPOSAL, I WOULD BE READY TO MAKE AN, UH, UM, A MOTION TO ACCEPT ALL SEVEN OF THE STIPULATIONS, BUT ALSO ADD AN EIGHTH ONE THAT THE ORIGINAL FRAMING FOR THAT WINDOW BE NOT DESTROYED IN THIS RENOVATION. AND I DO HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF ABOUT THE, THE REMAINING OVAL WINDOWS IN STOREFRONT ARE THOSE ORIGINAL TO THIS FACADE? UH, STAFF DOESN'T HAVE THE INFORMATION TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT WE DON'T HAVE ANY PHOTOS OF THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE OR THE STRUCTURE AS IT WAS COMPLETED. OKAY. OKAY. THANK YOU. THAT'S WHAT MAKES I THINK THE, THE, THOSE WINDOWS A LITTLE TRICKY BECAUSE, UM, IT LOOKS LIKE WE'VE GOT A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT TENANTS IN THE BUILDING AND THE PROPOSAL WE SEE TODAY IS ONLY FOR THE, UM, I GUESS THE, THE RIGHT SIDE OF IT. SO I WOULD BE, UH, I WOULD LIKE TO OFFER OR INVITE, UH, OTHER COMMISSIONERS TO COMMENT BEFORE I MAKE THAT, UH, MOTION. NO, I, I THINK THAT IS A, A REASONABLE REQUEST SINCE THAT'S A SUCH A DISTINCTIVE, UH, FEATURE, UH, ON THE, ON THE, THE BUILDING, EVEN IF THEY ARE NEEDING TO BLOCK IT UP, IF IT COULD BE DONE IN SOME REVERSIBLE WAY, I THINK THAT WOULD BE ADVISABLE. CAN WE ASK THE APPLICANT? YES. CAN THE APPLICANT, UH, RESPOND TO THAT REQUEST? SO I SAW THE APPLICANT'S NAME ON HERE PREVIOUSLY. THERE'S A DAVID VELA RAISING HIS HAND. I DON'T KNOW IF HE REPRESENTS THE CASE OR NOT, MR. VELA, IF YOU DO, YOU CAN UNMUTE YOURSELF. THAT THAT IS NOT MY CASE. I, I'M SORRY. I, THIS IS NOT MY PROJECT. I, I JUST WAS TALKING ABOUT THE THREE 15TH FLOOR. I DIDN'T KNOW IF THAT ONE, IF I NEEDED TO STAY, STAY ON OR NOT. I DON'T MEAN TO INTERRUPT THIS. I AM COMPLETELY APOLOGIZE. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS PROJECT. OKAY. AND NOW THERE'S A CHRIS JOHNSON RAISING HIS HAND. CHRIS, DO YOU REPRESENT THIS PROJECT? [00:15:03] ANYONE? LOOK AT HIS NAME. MR. JOHNSON, YOU CAN UNMUTE TO RESPOND. SORRY. CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW? YES. UH, YEAH. THIS IS CHRIS JOHNSON. I'M WITH OWNERSHIP, UM, WITH THE PROJECT IN POSTINA. WE ARE COMFORTABLE MORE THAN HAPPY TO MAINTAIN THAT ROUND WINDOW. THANK YOU. APPRECIATE THAT. DO WE HAVE A SECOND FOR THE PROPOSED, UH, OR YOU WANNA MAKE FORMALIZE YOUR I DIDN'T HEAR HE, HE SAID THAT THEY'D BE HAPPY TO ACCOMMODATE THAT. OKAY. MR. CHAIR, WHAT IF WE COULD, WAS IT JUST THE ROUND WINDOW OR THE OVAL OR THE, THE OVAL AS WELL? WELL, WE UNDERSTAND THAT THERE'S NOT WORK BEING IMPACTED ON THAT RIGHT NOW, SO YEAH. THE OVAL IS NOT PART OF OUR LEASE OR A RIGHT. I THINK IT'S A SEPARATE TENANT. SO DO WE HAVE A SECOND TO, UH, COMMISSIONER SAVS? MR. CHAIRMAN, I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION. OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND ROLL CALL PLEASE. FISH. AYE. SAVINA? AYE. VELASQUEZ. AYE. MAZUA. AYE. GRO. AYE. BAKER AYE. AND CARPENTER AYE. MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. MOVING TO INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION NOW. UH, AGENDA ITEM NUMBER EIGHT H D R C, CASE NUMBER 20 22 5 5 7 6 16 AND SIX 18. WILMINGTON, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A FINDING OF HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE FOR 6 16 6 18 WILMINGTON, UH, THE STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF A FINDING OF HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE AND THAT THE HISTORIC AND DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION SHOULD RECOMMEND APPROVAL FOR LANDMARK DESIGNATION OF 6 16 6 18 WILMINGTON BASED ON FINDINGS A THROUGH G. GOOD AFTERNOON, COMMISSIONERS. I'M JENNY HAY, THE SCOUT, A PROGRAM MANAGER. UM, GOOD TO SEE YOU. UH, THE PROPERTY OWNER, UM, IS HERE AS WELL. UH, SO HE'LL SPEAK AFTER, UM, AFTER ME. UM, THE PROPERTY AT SIX 18 WILMINGTON IS A DOUBLE SHOTGUN WITH A REAR JUNCTION. IT WAS BUILT IN 1925 FOR DEWEY WRIGHT AND HIS FAMILY. UM, INTERESTINGLY, THE FIRST TENANTS OF THE NEIGHBORING UNIT WERE TOM FROST JR. AND HIS WIFE, UM, DEWEY LIKELY KNEW THE FROSTS PROFESSIONALLY AS HE WAS AN INVESTMENT MAKER AT ALAMO NATIONAL BANK. THE PROPERTY REMAINED WITH THE WRIGHT FAMILY THROUGH AT LEAST 1948 WITH VARIOUS TENANTS IN THE OTHER UNITS. UM, THOSE TENANTS LARGE, LARGELY WORKED IN NEARBY BUSINESSES LIKE SAMUEL'S GLASS AND FRANZ ICE SHOP. THE HOME IS LOCATED JUST A FEW PARCELS OUTSIDE OF THE TOBIN HILL HISTORIC DISTRICT AND CITY COUNCIL. DISTRICT ONE. THE TOBIN HILL HISTORIC RESOURCE SURVEY THAT WAS COMPLETED LAST YEAR IDENTIFIED THIS AREA AS A POTENTIAL HISTORIC DISTRICT, BOTH LOCALLY AND NATIONAL REGISTER. AND THIS STRUCTURE WOULD BE CONSIDERED A CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE. UM, AND JUST TO BE VERY CLEAR, IT IS NOT CURRENTLY DESIGNATED HISTORIC EITHER AS A LANDMARK OR WITHIN THE DISTRICT. WE RECEIVED A DEMOLITION REQUEST FROM THE PROPERTY OWNER ON SEPTEMBER THE SIXTH. OUR RESEARCH INDICATED POTENTIAL SIGNIFICANCE AND A SITE VISIT WAS SCHEDULED FOR THE DEMOLITION AND DESIGNATIONS COMMITTEE ON NOVEMBER THE NINTH. THERE SEEMED TO BE CONSENSUS FROM THOSE COMMISSIONERS PRESENT THAT THE CASE SHOULD BE HEARD BY THE COMMISSION. UM, I'M GONNA BRIEFLY DESCRIBE THE CRITERIA UNDER WHICH THIS PROPERTY REACHES THE THRESHOLD FOR ELIGIBILITY. UM, IT MEETS CRITERIA NUMBER THREE, UH, FOR ITS IDENTIFICATION WITH PEOPLE WHO MADE SIGNIFICANT CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE COMMUNITY, NAMELY THE RIGHTS AND THE FROSTS. NUMBER FIVE, FOR ITS UNIQUE VERNACULAR STYLE AND FORM AS A REAR JUNCTION DOUBLE SHOTGUN, WHICH IS PARTICULARLY VULNERABLE AND INCREASINGLY RARE. UH, WE KNOW OF ABOUT 12 REMAINING EXAMPLES. CITYWIDE NUMBER EIGHT, BECAUSE OF ITS INTEGRITY OF LOCATION, DESIGN, MATERIALS AND WORKMANSHIP, WHICH YOU SEE EVIDENT IN THE CRAFTSMAN. DETAILS STILL PRESENT ON THE HOME. NUMBER 11, UH, IT STRONGLY EXEMPLIFIES THE SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HERITAGE OF SAN ANTONIO AS A REPRESENTATION OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN THE 1920S RELATED TO STREETCAR EXPANSION. AND FINALLY, NUMBER 13, IT'S IMPORTANT AND SIGNIFICANT RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER STRUCTURES. UM, IN THIS CASE, THIS HAS BEEN DOCUMENTED THROUGH BOTH THE TOBIN HILL HISTORIC RESOURCE SURVEY THAT I MENTIONED EARLIER, AS WELL AS THE ONGOING CITYWIDE SHOTGUN HOUSE SURVEY INITIATIVE. UM, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AS WE GO ALONG, BUT I'LL GO AHEAD AND CALL THE PROPERTY OWNERS UP. HOW ARE Y'ALL TODAY? GOOD AFTERNOON. UH, UM, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. UM, I'M HANK COLEMAN. UH, MY ADDRESS IS, UH, 6 48 DELMAR, WHICH WE'RE ALSO RENOVATING, WHICH IS ALSO A HISTORICAL, IN FACT, EVERYTHING WE'VE DONE IN THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO HAS EITHER BEEN IN THE EAST SIDE PROMISE, HIGHLAND PARK, UM, AREAS WHERE WE HAVE NEVER TORN A HOUSE DOWN. IF YOU GUYS WERE AWARE [00:20:01] OF THAT TERRIFIC FIRE THAT HAPPENED ON OMAHA, UH, THAT LOOKED LIKE SOMEBODY HAD TAKEN A FLAMETHROWER TO IT, THAT WAS AN ARSON. WE WERE ACTUALLY PLANNING TO RENOVATE THOSE HOUSES. IF YOU GO AND SEE OUR HOUSES ON IDAHO AND OMAHA, WE, UH, WE TOOK THOSE HOUSES FROM A CONDITION THAT MOST PEOPLE WOULD'VE THOUGHT WE SHOULD'VE TORN 'EM DOWN TO THIS. THIS IS A UNIQUE, UH, PROBLEM. NUMBER ONE. IF I HAD THOUGHT THIS PROPERTY WAS HISTORIC AT THE TIME WE PURCHASED IT, WHICH HAS BEEN ABOUT FOUR AND A HALF YEARS AGO, UM, WE PROBABLY WOULD NOT HAVE BOUGHT IT BECAUSE IT'S UNFORTUNATELY UN RENOVATABLE THIS. WE HAVE HAD FOUR SETS OF ENGINEERING, UM, OPINIONS. I CAN GET THOSE TO YOU IF YOU'D LIKE TO SEE THEM. THE PROBLEM WITH DOING A RENOVATION ON THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY IS THE MINUTE WE GO TO TRY TO TAKE IT TO A LIFTED STATUS. THE UNFORTUNATE THING IS THE FOUNDATIONS, WHICH THIS PICTURE DOES NOT SHOW YOU, UM, IS SITTING FLAT ON THE GROUND. IF WE WERE TO LIFT THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY, WE WOULD UNFORTUNATELY HAVE TO BREAK THE HOUSE IN HALF. UM, THEREFORE DESTROYING A CERTAIN SET OF FEATURES FOR THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY. AND HAVING RENOVATED, UH, ABOUT 130 HOUSES AND OUR HOUSES ARE ALL ORIENTED TO, UH, WHAT WE CALL THE HUMAN INFRASTRUCTURE OF SAN ANTONIO TEACHERS, POLICEMEN, FIREMEN. UM, WE NORMALLY RENT PROPERTIES AT ABOUT 30% UNDER WHAT YOU WOULD SEE ON ZILLOW. SO THAT IS OUR ENTIRE MANTRA. THAT IS WHO WE RENT TO. UM, THAT'S WHY WE HAVE REALLY GREAT NEIGHBORS IN OUR NEIGHBORHOODS IS BECAUSE WE, WE FEEL LIKE WE'RE KEEPING THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THIS PARTICULAR HOUSE, UNFORTUNATELY, IS UN RENOVATABLE. UM, IF MR. FROST WOULD LIKE TO COME BY IT, I WOULD BE HAPPY TO SELL IT TO HIM. BUT, UH, FRANKLY, WHAT WE ARE HERE TO DO IS TO EXPLAIN TO YOU THAT THIS IS ALSO A HAZARD. UM, WE ACTUALLY HAD A FIRE CALL RIGHT AFTER AMY AND THE GROUP CAME OUT. UM, WE HAVE DONE EVERYTHING WE CAN POSSIBLY DO TO KEEP THE HOMELESS OUT OF THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY. IT IS ALSO, UNFORTUNATELY, CLOSE TO A, UM, A DRUG TREATMENT CENTER. AND SO THERE IS A GREAT DEAL OF DRUGS. WE DRIVE BY THIS HOUSE PROBABLY TWICE A WEEK. WE'VE PUT UP A STORM FENCE. UNFORTUNATELY WE HAD TO BUY THE FENCE 'CAUSE THEY CUT IT INTO PIECES. SO WE ARE REQUESTING A, UH, AN AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY TO WHERE WE WOULD PREFER, IF POSSIBLE, TO TAKE THIS DOWN TO THE STICKS AND TRY TO TRY TO SUPPORT ALL OF THE FEATURES IN THERE, UM, AND SAVE THOSE MATERIALS AND USE THEM IN THE, IN THE REBUILD OF THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY. UM, I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE IS A, UH, THERE'S ACTUALLY A, A SCHOOL, UM, WE WOULD LIKE TO WORK WITH THE SCHOOL IN TERMS OF BRINGING THEM IN. UM, BILL, MY SENIOR CONTRACTOR IS HERE WITH ME TODAY. AND WE TALKED ABOUT THAT AT THE MEETING WE HAD ON NOVEMBER THE NINTH. WE HAVE GONE BACK, WE FEEL LIKE WITH THE, WITH THE ARCHITECTS THAT WE'RE USING. AND, UH, THE NEXT DOOR NEIGHBOR ON THE LEFT HAND SIDE HAPPENS TO WORK FOR LAKE PLATO. UM, WE, WE BELIEVE THAT WE CAN BRING SOMETHING BACK THAT IS ARCHITECTURALLY SIGNIFICANT BUT IS CONTEMPORARY AND IS SAFE. WE JUST DON'T BELIEVE THIS HOUSE WILL EVER BE SAFE NO MATTER WHAT WE DO TO IT, BECAUSE WE CANNOT ACTUALLY RENOVATE IT IN PLACE. SO WE DON'T WANT TO TEAR IT DOWN. IN FACT, WE HAVE NOT TORN DOWN A SINGLE HOUSE. WE OWN, UH, ALMOST 150 HOUSES IN SAN ANTONIO. WE DON'T WANT TO TEAR IT DOWN. WE JUST DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER OPTION. IS OUR PROBLEM IS THAT IT'S, IT'S, IT'S ACTUALLY WORTH MORE AS A LOT IF YOU CAN BELIEVE THAT, THAN THE HOUSE ITSELF IS WORTH ON IT. SO, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS BECAUSE WE'VE, WE, LIKE I SAID, WE'VE PROBABLY SPENT $25,000 DOING ENGINEERING ON THIS HOUSE. UM, AND WHEN WE BOUGHT IT, THE INTENT WAS TO FIX IT. THAT THAT WAS, WE DID NOT BUY IT WITH THE INTENTION TO TEAR IT DOWN, WHICH IS WHY WE WAITED ALMOST FOUR YEARS BEFORE WE BROUGHT IT FOR OUR DEMOLITION PERMIT. QUESTIONS? YEAH, I HAVE A, A BRIEF QUESTION. YES, SIR. IN THE, UH, THE SEPTEMBER 6TH DEMO DEMOLITION APPLICATION, DID YOU DESCRIBE THE SORT OF SELECTIVE DEMOLITION AND SALVAGE PROCESS THAT YOU WERE ENVISIONING FOR THE WE DID NOT KNOW THAT WAS AVAILABLE UNTIL WE MET WITH THE COMMITTEE ON, IN THAT INFORMAL MEETING ON THE NINTH. WE WOULD, WE WOULD PREFER TO DO THAT. WE DIDN'T EVEN KNOW THAT WAS AVAILABLE, TO BE HONEST. OKAY. IN FACT, WE, WE HAVE NEVER MADE ANY APPLICATION FOR TAX CREDITS IN, IN THE EAST SIDE PROMISED NEIGHBORHOODS FOR THE ROUGHLY 90 HOUSES WE RENOVATED IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD. [00:25:01] I'D BE HAPPY TO SHOW YOU ALL OF THEM. 'CAUSE WE'RE PROUD OF ALL, EVERY SINGLE ONE OF 'EM. SO, SO IN YOUR, IN DETENTION TO SALVAGE THE MATERIAL AND USE THOSE, REUSE THAT, REUSE THAT MATERIAL FOR THE, AND TO ACTUALLY FOLLOW THE, THE, THE CRAFTSMAN STYLE THAT IS CURRENTLY IN THE HOUSE, WHICH OUR ARCHITECT SAYS HE WOULD REALLY LIKE TO DO. SO WHAT WE INTEND TO PUT BACK IN PLACE IS SOMETHING THAT'S STYLISTICALLY CONSISTENT WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT PLAN WISE AND EVERYTHING, IT'D BE TOTALLY RECONFIGURED YES. PIECE OF PROPERTY. YEAH. JUST UTILIZING SALVAGED MATERIAL, CORRECT. IN THE STYLE OF WHAT WAS THERE BEFORE. YES SIR. THANK YOU MR. CHAIR. I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS BEFORE MOTION. CAN I JUST COMMENT ON GENERAL COMMENTS ON THE PROCESS? YEAH. PUBLIC COMMENTS FIRST. OH YEAH. IF WE WANT TO GO AHEAD AND PLAY THE VOICEMAIL WE HAVE FOR THIS CASE AND THEN, UM, THE OWNER HAS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR REBUTTAL BEFORE WE GET INTO DISCUSSION. MY NAME IS FREDERICA KUSHNER. I'M SPEAKING FOR THE TOBIN HILL COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION. MY ADDRESS IS 4 0 5 EAST MYRTLE STREET. THESE COMMENTS, CONCERN H D R C, ITEM NUMBER 8 6 1 6 AND 6 1 8 WILMAN AVENUE. THE COMMUNITY HAS HAD NO COMMUNICATION WITH THE OWNER. O H P STAFF SAYS THAT THE DUPLEX AT 6 1 6 WILMINGTON AVENUE IS A SHOTGUN DUPLEX. A TERM I HAD NEVER ENCOUNTERED UNTIL RECENTLY, BUT BEFORE THEN, WHEN I SAW IT, I KNEW IT WAS UNIQUE BECAUSE OF ITS DESIGN. AND IT WAS OLD BECAUSE OF ITS ARCHITECTURE, ESPECIALLY THE TWO CHIMNEYS. VISUALLY, THIS MODEST HOUSE FITS INTO THE STREET WHERE IT WAS LOCATED. THE OTHER HOUSES ON THE STREET WERE OBVIOUSLY BUILT FOR MIDDLE INCOME FAMILIES, CLERKS AND STORE MANAGERS. THE YOUNG BANKER, TOM C FROST JR. LIVED IN ONE SIDE OF THE DUPLEX BEFORE TAKING ON THE RESPONSIBILITIES OF HIS FAMILY'S PROFESSION. MANY OF THE HOUSES BUILT IN THE 1920S AND 1930S ARE STILL OCCUPIED. THIS SMALL DEBT DUPLEX SHOULD BE REHABILITATED SO THAT IT CAN AGAIN BE USED AS HOUSING. THERE ARE OTHER DUPLEXES IN SAN ANTONIO, BUT VERY FEW LIKE THIS. ONE, ONE THIRD OF TOBIN HILL TO THE EAST OF ST. MARY'S STREET HAS ALMOST NONE OF ITS ORIGINAL HOUSING LEFT. IT'S ALL BEEN REPLACED BY HUNDREDS OF NEW UNITS, MOST OF THEIR MAIN HISTORIC BUILDINGS. IN THE HISTORIC, IN THE RESIDENTIAL CORE BETWEEN NORTH ST. MARY'S AND MCCULLOUGH, A DETERMINATION THAT THIS SHOTGUN DUPLEX HAS HISTORIC DIS SIGNIFICANCE WILL SEND A MESSAGE THAT THIS AND THE OTHER HOUSES ON WILMINGTON IN THE RESIDENTIAL CORE ARE IMPORTANT TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND TO THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO. IF THE CITY IS TO RETAIN ITS CHARACTER AND ITS VISUAL APPEAL, IT NEEDS ARCHITECTURE LIKE THIS, WE ARE ASKING YOU TO APPROVE HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE FOR 6 1 6 WILMINGTON AVENUE. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND CONSIDERATION, MR. CHAIR. YEAH. JUST A SECOND. DID STAFF HAVE A COMMENT BACK, UH, TO, AS YOU SAID, A REBUTTAL FOR THE COMMENTS THEY MADE? NO, I'M SAYING THE, THE OWNER, UM, WOULD HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY AT EACH OTHER FUNDED BECAUSE WE WERE ANTICIPATING A LETTER FROM THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY. AND I I DON'T THINK WE GOT IT. IT MIGHT HAVE GONE TO A MEMBER OF STAFF THAT'S OUT OF OFFICE TODAY. OKAY. DO YOU HAVE A COMMENT FOR THE I PUBLIC COMMENT? I, I'M CERTAINLY NOT GONNA ARGUE WITH THE FACT THAT IN ITS ORIGINAL STATE IT WAS ARCHITECTURALLY SIGNIFICANCE. RIGHT. THE THE PROBLEM IS, IS IF THAT LADY WOULD LIKE TO BUY IT FROM ME, I'D BE HAPPY TO SELL IT TO HER AND LET HER RENOVATE IT. I THINK SHE'LL FIND THAT EXACTLY IS WHAT WE FOUND IS IT'S UN RENOVATABLE. IF YOU COULD RENOVATE THIS HOUSE, WE WOULD ALREADY BE RENOVATING IT. I WOULDN'T EVEN BE IN FRONT OF YOU. UM, AND IF YOU GO BACK AND LOOK AT WHEN WE BOUGHT IT, WE BOUGHT THIS HOUSE IN 2017 AND WE'VE DONE, WE'VE TRIED TO DO THIS WORK AND IN FACT, BILL HAD ACTUALLY, WE PUT A NEW ROOF ON IT AS THE FINE LADY AT THE END SAW WE, WE HAD ROOFED IT, WE HAD PLANNED ON RENOVATING IT UNTIL THE ENGINEERS GOT AHOLD OF IT AND JUST SAID, I'M SORRY, YOU'RE JUST, YOU'RE WASTING YOUR MONEY. SO THAT THE ARCHITECTURAL SIGNIFICANCE AND WHAT THE LADY ON THE PHONE SAID, I DON'T DISAGREE WITH HER. LISTEN, I GREW UP IN DALLAS, I LIVE IN AUSTIN. I'M WATCHING ALL OF THIS STUFF. YOU, YOU CAN IMAGINE THE DESTRUCTION I'VE SEEN THE, YOU KNOW, THOSE TWO CITIES ARE FRANKLY COMMITTING ARCHITECTURAL HARRY CAREY AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED. IF WE HAD A HISTORY OF TEARING THINGS DOWN, I WOULD BE SITTING HERE SAYING, WELL, YOU KNOW, YOU GUYS GOTTA LET ME DO THIS 'CAUSE YOU SHOULD HAVE TOLD ME THIS WHEN I BOUGHT IT. I'M NOT, FRANKLY, WHAT I'M SAYING IS, IS THAT IF WE COULD RENOVATE THAT PROPERTY, WE WOULD RENOVATE IT. IT'S JUST UN RENOVATABLE AT THIS POINT. AND SO THE, THE, THE FINANCIAL PROBLEM, PROBLEM IS IF WE HAD, IF IT WAS EVEN IN MODESTLY BETTER SHAPE, WE WOULD'VE ALREADY PULLED A PERMIT AND BEEN RENOVATING THE PROPERTY. SO I THINK IF THE, THE, THE TIME WE HAVE TAKEN TO ANALYZE IT PROBABLY TELLS YOU WE WOULDN'T, WHO WOULD SIT ON AN ASSET FOR FOUR YEARS, UM, [00:30:01] UNLESS THEY WERE OUT OF THEIR MIND AND NOT RENOVATE IT OR LEAVE IT IN ITS ORIGINAL CONDITION, WHICH WAS VERY, VERY POOR AND WAS UNSAFE FOR ANY KIND, ANYBODY TO HABITAT, TO BE HONEST. GREAT. THANK YOU FOR THOSE COMMENTS. YES, SIR. UH, YES, COMMISSIONER, MR. CHAIR, I WANTED TO ASK A QUESTION TO OF THE GENTLEMAN FIRST. 'CAUSE I KNOW YOU'RE GONNA MAKE A MOTION AND THEN WE CAN NO, I'M NOT MAKE A MOTION ACTUALLY, UH, RIGHT NOW. UH, I WILL NOT MAKE A MOTION. IT WAS A GENERAL COMMENT, SO, OKAY. 'CAUSE YOU MENTIONED A SO I WAS AT THE MEETING AND I KIND OF WANTED TO, SO LIKE A REPORT ON THE YEAH, I WAS GONNA DO THAT. AND ALSO HOW WE, WE, WHAT OUR CONVERSATION WENT AND KIND OF QUESTIONS TO STAFF TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYBODY'S CLEAR. UM, THE THINGS THAT WE DISCUSSED WAS WE LOOKED AT THE PROPERTY AND, AND WE KIND OF GOT ALONG VERY WELL. AND I YES, WE THINK WE CAN GET TO A FINAL. THE QUESTION TODAY IS NOT WHETHER OR NOT IS DEMOLITION. AND I THINK THAT'S AN IMPORTANT FACT. WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT TODAY IS FINDING A SIGNIFICANCE. AND WE TALKED ABOUT THIS AND I THINK YES, THE APPLICANT IS IN AGREEMENT OF FOLLOWING THE PROCESS, WHETHER OR NOT THERE'S HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE. THE STAFF HAS NOW GOTTEN US A FORMAL, YOU KNOW, ANSWER TO THIS WE DIDN'T HAVE AT THE MEETING. AND SO FINDING OF SIGNIFICANCE. THEN AFTER THAT, IT WILL GO AND STAFF CORRECT ME, IT'LL GO TO CITY COUNCIL ZONING AND CITY COUNCIL WHERE IT VIA LANDMARK, AND THEN WE CAN GO BACK AND THEN WE CAN DISCUSS DEMOLITION OR PARTIAL DEMOLITION OR WHAT IT WILL LOOK LIKE AFTER MM-HMM. AND I THINK THE APPLICANT WAS IN AGREEMENT TO FOLLOW THAT PROCESS. I AM WITH THE COMMISSION HERE. AND IF THE FINAL REPORT FROM STAFF WAS FINDING, TO BE HONEST, YES, THE INTERIORS IS TERRIBLE, BUT THE HOUSE AND HOW IT IS, I MEAN, WE CAN ALL AGREE AND THAT IS WHY THE APPLICANT WANTS TO RECONSTRUCT SOMETHING THAT'S SIMILAR TO WHAT EXISTS BECAUSE IT IS HISTORIC, SIGNIFICANT TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. AND I THINK SOME OF THE HISTORIC SIGN, SOME OF THE, YOU KNOW, THE FACTS THAT STAFF HAS PRESENTED TODAY IS, IS CORRECT. SO WE'RE NOT, BY THE WAY THANK YOU. I JUST WANT, WE'RE NOT ARGUING ABOUT ITS HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE. I LOVE THE HOUSE, THAT'S WHY I BOUGHT IT. I MEAN THE, THE, WHETHER IT'S HISTORICALLY SIGNIFICANT OR NOT, IF WE COULD RENOVATE IT, THIS, THAT'S ALL. I'M, I'M NOT SAYING IT'S NOT SIGNIFICANT, I'M JUST SAYING THE PROBLEM IS EVEN WITH ITS, ITS SIGNIFICANCE. WE, WE PROBABLY, WELL, WE KNOW WE CAN'T FIX IT, SO WE PROBABLY HAVE TO DO SOMETHING ELSE. GOOD. UM, I JUST WOULD LIKE TO ECHO WHAT COMMISSIONER GRU SAID ABOUT WHAT IS THE QUESTION THAT'S BEFORE US TODAY. SO LET'S KEEP THE, THE QUESTIONS SORT OF FOCUSED ON THAT. I WAS MERELY ASKING ABOUT THE DEMOLITION SINCE THAT WAS THE THING THAT HAD SPURRED THE VERY, UH, FACT THAT IT'S COME BEFORE US. YES, SIR. SO, UM, COMMISSIONER VELASQUEZ, YOU HAD A QUESTION. W WELL, I I DIDN'T KNOW WHETHER IT WAS, UH, WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF DISCUSSION TO, TO SAY THAT WE'RE, WE'D ALSO BE LOOKING AT WHETHER THERE'S A LOSS OF HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE AS A RESULT OF, SAY FOR INSTANCE, JUST THE PICTURES THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT. UH, BECAUSE WE LOOK AT THINGS THAT ARE, UH, YOU KNOW, A QUESTION OF SIGNIFICANCE OR, OR NOT. BUT WE ALSO HAVE TO REMEMBER THAT, THAT WE, WE ALWAYS, UM, VERY OFTEN, UH, ARE BROUGHT, UH, PROJECTS THAT HAVE LOST THEIR HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE. AND WHAT CONSTITUTES THAT? WELL, I, IS IT SUBJECTIVE, RIGHT? IS IT COST VERSUS, OR, OR POSSIBILITY VERSUS, UH, IMPOSSIBILITY? SO I, I THINK POSSIBLY THAT THAT'S, THAT'S MORE APPROPRIATE IN DISCUSSION, MR. CHAIR. SO ONCE SOMEONE MAKES A MOTION, THEN WE MIGHT BE . YEAH, I AGREE. LET'S, LET'S, UH, JUST CONCLUDE KIND OF FACT FINDING HERE IF ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS AND THEN I WE'LL GET ONTO THAT DISCUSSION. 'CAUSE I THINK THAT'S VERY RELEVANT BECAUSE COMMISSIONER FISH, YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER LOPEZ? SINO? UH, YES, I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. UM, YOU BOUGHT THIS IN 2017? YES, MA'AM. HOW, UM, HOW RECENTLY DID YOUR PAID TENANTS MOVE OUT? UH, 2019. 2019. MM-HMM. . UM, ALSO ON THE BACKSIDE, THE PHOTO WE'RE LOOKING AT MM-HMM. , THE NORTHWEST ELEVATION. UH, ONE OF THE OBSERVATIONS WE MADE, AND I JUST WANTED TO GET YOUR CONFIRMATION OF THAT. YES, MA'AM. THE UNIT ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE TO THE NORTH THAT HAS A ADDITION PUT ONTO THE ORIGINAL, CORRECT? IT DOES, YES, IT DOES. AND THAT'S WHY THAT ROOF IS KIND OF FUNNY. CORRECT. OKAY. YES. THAT WAS NOT ORIGINAL. JUST FOR IF IF YES, IF YOU CAN, YES. THERE WE SEE IT. YEAH. SO THE, THESE HOUSES AT THIS VINTAGE, OF COURSE HAD BACK PORCHES. SO THIS WAS A, WHETHER IT WAS, YOU KNOW, PERMITTED OR NOT, I HAVE NO ABSOLUTELY NO IDEA. BUT SOMEBODY, AND, AND, AND YOU WOULD NOT BELIEVE 90% OF THE HOUSES, AND BILL, BILL CAN CONFIRM THIS, 90% OF THE HOUSES THAT WE GO INTO LITERALLY WILL HAVE BEADBOARD ON THE WALLS PAST, YOU KNOW, PAST THE KITCHEN BECAUSE IT WAS, IT USED TO BE A BACK PORCH. UM, THIS IS ONE OF THOSE. SO THE ARCHITECTURAL SIGNIFICANCE OF THE BACK HALF OF THIS SORT OF BACK QUARTER OF THIS HOUSE IS NOT THERE. IF IT WAS ORIGINAL, IT WOULD BE A BACK PORCH, A SCREENED IN BACK PORCH. WELL, IT MAY BE, WE [00:35:01] FIGURED IT MAY BE BEYOND THAT, BUT ONE WOULD HAVE TO EXCAVATE A LITTLE BIT TO FIND THAT. SO THANK YOU. I HAVE NO FURTHER QUESTIONS. YES, MA'AM. THANK YOU COMMISSIONER. COMMISSIONER BAKER, YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER MASUKA? I GUESS THE ONLY QUESTION I WOULD HAVE IS IF YOU WERE TO REBUILD, WOULD YOU REBUILD IN THE SAME, UH, UM, FLOOR PLAN WE'RE, THE INTENT IS TO BUILD A TWO STORY USING EXACTLY THOSE FLOOR PLANS. SO THERE, INSTEAD OF BEING TWO, THERE WOULD BE FOUR. AND THE REASON FOR THAT IS IF, IF YOU ALL KNOW THAT NEIGHBORHOOD, THOSE THINGS ARE SELLING FOR PRO FOR PRICES THAT NURSES AND, AND INTERNS CAN'T PAY, FRANKLY. SO OUR INTENT IS TO DO EXACTLY ON THE SELL SIDE, WHAT WE'RE DOING ON THE RENT SIDE, WHICH IS TO TRY TO SELL THOSE UNITS AGAIN TO THE HUMAN INFRASTRUCTURE AT A PRICE THAT WOULD BE VASTLY DISCOUNTED TO WHAT'S AROUND THAT PROPERTY NOW. UM, SO YOU KNOW THAT WE ARE, WE'RE A LITTLE BIT KIND OF OFF THE NORMAL, UH, BUILDER, UH, RETAIL CENTRAL BECAUSE WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS HOLD THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOODS AND EITHER RENT OR SELL IN THAT, IN THAT PRICE POINT. SO THE HOUSES THAT WE DID ON OMAHA AND IDAHO, WHEN WE SOLD THOSE HOUSES, WE KNEW WE SOLD THEM 25 TO 30% UNDER MARKET. AND WE PRICED THEM THAT WAY. AND WE'RE CONTINUING TO DO THAT BECAUSE THAT'S THE ONLY WAY PEOPLE CAN AFFORD. I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU GUYS FEEL ABOUT IT, BUT, UH, YOU KNOW, YOU LOSE YOUR HUMAN INFRASTRUCTURE. YOU DON'T HAVE A CITY. YOU LOSE THIS GUY SITTING OVER HERE AND YOU LOSE YOUR POLICEMEN AND YOUR FIREMEN AND THEY'RE ALL SUDDENLY LIVING IN, YOU KNOW, NEW BRONSVILLE. I DON'T KNOW HOW THAT WORKS. 'CAUSE AT SOME POINT IN TIME, THE CITY ISN'T A CITY ANYMORE. 'CAUSE THE PEOPLE THAT HAVE TO DO THE WORK EVERY DAY AREN'T THERE. RIGHT. SO THAT WAS, THAT WAS OUR INTENT AND OUR GOAL, AND THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT WE'VE BEEN DOING SINCE WE'VE STARTED PURCHASING PROPERTIES OVER THE LAST SEVEN YEARS IN SAN ANTONIO. COMMISSIONER, DO YOU HAVE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? IF THERE'S NONE, I'LL BE READY TO MAKE A MOTION. MR. CHAIR. THANK YOU. SO MOTION TO APPROVE THE, UH, APPLICATION FOR FINDING OF STRIKE SIGNIFICANCE. AND I LOOK FORWARD TO OR FURTHER DISCUSSION OF THE DEMOLITION AND THE REBUILD, WHICH IS OUR NEXT PREVIEW. OKAY. DO I, CAN I SIT? I'D LIKE TO SECOND. OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. CAN WE HAVE ROLL CALL PLEASE? I, SORRY. LET'S HAVE A DISCUSSION. FIRST, UH, MR. CHAIR, IF I MAY. UM, YOU KNOW, I, I, I'M, I FEEL PARTICULARLY LOOKING AT SOME OF THE INTERIOR, UH, IMAGES THAT THERE'S A REASONABLE ARGUMENT FOR A LOSS OF SIGNIFICANCE. THE OTHER THING IS, I THINK THAT THERE'S, THERE'S, THERE'S A VERY LAX, UH, EFFORT, UH, IN DEFINING THIS STRUCTURE AS A DOUBLE SHOTGUN HOUSE. UM, YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S KIND OF LIKE DEFINING A, A, A ZEBRA AS A HORSE. THEY LOOK SIMILAR, BUT, UM, THERE ARE CHARACTERISTICS THAT STEP FAR AWAY FROM, UH, THE DE THE MINIMALIST DETAILING OF A SHOTGUN HOUSE. NOT ONLY THAT, IF WE'RE LOOKING AT, AT THE, AT THE SANBORN MAP, THAT TAKES US BACK TO WHAT, WHAT, WITHOUT HAVING ANY OTHER VERIFICATION LOOKS LIKE. UM, UH, 1938, WE SEE THE SHAPE OF THE HOUSE. AND THE, THE, THE INTENT OF THE SHOTGUN HOUSE IS VERY, VERY, UM, UM, PURPOSEFUL. SO WHERE WE SEE THESE DOUBLE SHOTGUN HOUSES, IN EFFECT WITH A DOUBLE SHOTGUN HOUSE IS CHARACTERIZED BY, OR THESE COMMUNITIES THAT THE HOUSES ARE VERY CLOSE TOGETHER, 24 FOOT LOTS, WHERE YOU HAD TWO SHOTGUN HOUSES THAT AT SOME POINT JOINED. SO WHEN WE LOOK AT THIS BUILDING, IT GIVES THE APPEARANCE THAT IT'S A SHOTGUN HOUSE AND A SHOTGUN HOUSE THAT AT SOME POINT JOINED. BUT IN THIS CONTEXT, IF YOU LOOK AT THE SANDBORN MAP, JUST THE SHAPE OF THE BUILDING IS, IS IT, IT WOULD BE INAPPROPRIATE TO REFER TO AS A SHOTGUN HOUSE, MORE SO AS A DUPLEX WITH SHOTGUN CHARACTERISTICS, BUT MOST DEFINITELY NOT A DOUBLE SHOTGUN HOUSE. SO E E EVEN JUST ON THE, ON THE MERIT OF, OF THE, OF THE INSPECTION OF THE STYLE OF THIS HOUSE, I FIND IT INACCURATE. AND, AND JUST ON ITS FACE, UH, IT DOES NOT PRESENT, UH, JUSTIFIABLE ARGUMENT THAT WE WOULDN'T JUST BE SAYING THAT IT'S HISTORICALLY SIGNIFICANT, BUT WE WOULD BE CHARACTERIZING IT, OR I THINK MORE APPROPRIATELY MISCHARACTERIZING IT. IT, UM, THE, THE OTHER THING IS THAT WHEN WE LOOK AT THE HOUSE AND WE LOOK AT WHAT IS SIGNIFICANT ABOUT THE WOOD WINDOWS OR ABOUT THE, THE DIFFERENT ELEMENTS OF THIS HOUSE THAT HAVE CLEARLY BEEN CHANGED OVER THE COURSE OF MANY YEARS, THIS IS A LITTLE BIT MORE, UM, UH, CHARACTERISTIC OF A FRANKENSTEIN HOUSE THAT, THAT IT'S CHANGED IN TIME AND THAT IT'S, IT'S IT'S, [00:40:01] YOU KNOW, NO OFFENSE TO THE, TO THE OWNER, BUT IT'S, IT'S, IT'S MORE CHARACTERISTIC OF A SLUMLORD HOUSE, YOU KNOW? SO, UM, THEY, I THINK THAT THAT IT, IT DOES, UM, UH, MOST DEFINITELY HAVE THESE CHARACTERISTICS THAT, THAT ON A QUICK REVIEW, YES, YES. THEY'RE, THEY'RE JUST AS SIGNIFICANT AS A, AS A TIPPED OVER, UM, UH, A DORK COLUMN, YOU KNOW, BUT OUT OF ITS CONTEXT, YOU KNOW, IT'S JUST A TIPPED OVER DORK COLUMN. I THINK THIS BUILDING, UH, UH, KIND OF FALLS INTO THAT, INTO THAT CATEGORY WHERE, UH, IT, IT, IT, IT HAS, UH, SIGNIFICANTLY LOST ITS, ITS CONTEXT. AND IT, AND ALSO IN SPEAKING ABOUT IT WITH RESPECT TO STAFF'S, UH, UH, CHARACTERISTIC OF, UH, AFFORDABLE HOUSING. I THINK ONE IMPORTANT QUESTION FOR THE OWNER TO A ANSWER IS IF IT WAS REHABILITATED, WHAT WOULD HAPPEN TO ITS AFFORDABILITY? AND IT'S A VERY IMPORTANT QUESTION THAT WE NEED TO BE ASKING OURSELVES, BECAUSE I THINK WE'RE USING THE TERM WORKFORCE HOUSING, BELIEVING THAT THESE HOUSES ARE GOING TO, ARE GONNA BE GIVEN THESE $200,000 RENOVATIONS, AND THAT AT THE END OF THE DAY YOU'RE GONNA BE ABLE TO RENT IT FOR $600, WHICH IS JUST NOT, UH, REALISTIC. THANK YOU, SIR. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER FISH. UM, I CONCUR WITH, UH, STAFF'S FINDINGS ON THE FINDING FOR SIGNIFICANCE BASED ON THE, UH, THE CATEGORIES OUTLINED. I UNDERSTAND THE CONDITION OF THE FLOOR JOIST ON THE GROUND, AND, YOU KNOW, FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, I DON'T SEE THAT AS WARRANTING A LOSS OF CERTAIN SIGNIFICANCE. IF THIS MOVES FORWARD AND DOES ACHIEVE DESIGNATION, I THINK THAT WE ENCOUNTER, UM, STRUCTURES THAT NEED SOME LEVEL OF PRESERVATION IN A LOT OF DIFFERENT STATES AND SOME LEVEL OF RECONSTRUCTION AND PRESERVATION WOULD BE POSSIBLE EVEN WITH THAT DESIGNATION THAT I THINK WOULD ALIGN WITH THE, SOME OF WHAT THE OWNER DESCRIBED AS INTENT. SO I'LL BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION AS IT'S MADE. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER ZILLO. UH, THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. UM, GLAD WE'RE CUTTING TO THE CHASE AND TALKING ABOUT THE DESIGNATION OR, OR THE FINDING OF HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE. UM, THIS HOUSE IS VERY SIMILAR TO SO MANY THAT WE FIND. THERE ARE SOME PLACES WE HAVE A GREAT AMOUNT OF DETERIORATION IN OTHER AREAS. UM, THERE'S REMARKABLE PRESERVATION OR REMARKABLE EXTENT EXISTING MATERIAL LIKE THE ORIGINAL WOOD SCREENS ON THE WINDOWS AND THE DETAIL. IT'S AMAZING. ANYWAY, UM, I WILL BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION AND I WOULD ALSO JUST MAKE A CASUAL REQUEST TO STAFF THAT IF THIS DOES PASS TO THIS NEXT STAGE, THAT STAFF WORK AS QUICKLY AND DILIGENTLY WITH THE OWNER AND OTHER CITY OFFICES TO ENSURE THE SAFETY AND SECURITY OF THE BUILDING. UM, THANK YOU. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER BAKER. UH, BASED ON THE INFORMATION THAT'S BEEN PRESENTED, I'M GOING TO SUPPORT OF FINDING OF HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE. BUT AS AN ENGINEER AND A HOMEOWNER MYSELF, I GUESS WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO, TO THE STAFF TO DO IS TO DESIGNATE OR IDENTIFY THOSE COM UH, FEATURES OF THE HOUSE, WHICH NEED TO BE PRESERVED, BECAUSE I'M VERY CONSCIOUS OF THE FACT THAT THIS, UH, THE APPEARANCE OF THE HOUSE IN ITS CURRENT FORM IS NOT ADDITIVE TO THE VALUE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. AND I THINK THAT IF I WAS LIVING IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, I'D RATHER HAVE A HOUSE THAT DIDN'T QUITE LOOK EXACTLY THE SAME AS ITS ORIGINAL, BUT WAS AN INHABITED BY GOOD PEOPLE THAT WERE ADDING VALUE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD RATHER THAN HAVING A DECREPIT, UH, UNSAFE HOUSE THAT'S VACANT. AND SO I, I THINK THAT, UH, WE, WE SHOULD TRY TO BE PRUDENT AND, UH, JUST IDENTIFY THE FEATURES THAT NEED TO BE PRESERVED, KNOWING THAT PERHAPS YOU, YOU KNOW, AS THE, AS THE OWNER IS TRYING TO, UM, YOU KNOW, REASONABLY REPLACE THINGS AND, AND MAKE THEM LOOK, YOU KNOW, UH, UH, AS CLOSE TO THE ORIGINAL AS POSSIBLE THAT, UH, THAT THEY MAY NOT BE EXACT. AND SO, UH, THOSE, THOSE I GUESS ARE, ARE MY, UH, MY THOUGHTS AND, AND REQUESTS OF THE STAFF MOVING FORWARD. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER MAZUA? UH, I, I AGREE WITH, UH, COMMISSIONER BAKER'S ASSESSMENT. UM, I'LL ALSO BE SUPPORTING HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE FINDING COMMISSIONER GROUP. YES, THANK YOU. UM, ACTUALLY DRIVING OFF, I THINK THERE WAS ANOTHER PROPERTY WITHIN A BLOCK THAT'S VERY SIMILAR IN THAT DESIGNS, WHICH HAS BEEN REMODELED. AND I THINK THAT'S KIND OF LIKE, I THINK I'M VERY CONFIDENT I THAT THIS FINDING OF HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE GOES ALONG WITH THE OWNER'S WISHES TO, YOU KNOW, REBUILD SOMETHING. AND I THINK IT GOES TWO WAYS. IS, AND NOW WE'LL ASK STAFF THAT WE HAD THAT DISCUSSION TOO, IS NOW THAT WE ARE IN [00:45:01] THE PROCESS AND IT HAS TO GO TO ZONING AND IT HAS TO GO TO CITY COUNCIL, IT, WE'RE NOT FINAL ON THIS. WE'RE JUST RECOMMENDING. AND, UM, IN THE MEANTIME, WE'RE HOPING THAT THE CITY, RESPECTIVE CITY COUNCIL OFFICES, AND I THINK THE OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION IS TRYING TO WORK, YOU KNOW, TRIES THE WAY TO SAVE THIS FROM THE TENANTS THAT RIGHT NOW ARE DESTROYING THIS PROPERTY, UM, FOR BECOMING A, A WORSE THE INSIDE. YES. AND WE LOOKED AT IT AND WE, AND THE PICTURE OF THE, OF THE FLOORS, THE OWNER CONFIRMED THAT ONE OF THE TENANTS HAD RIPPED IT OFF OUT OF NOT TENANTS. 'CAUSE THEY'RE NOT PAYING RENT , RIGHT. ONE OF THE INTRUDERS HAD RIPPED IT OUT OUT OF RAGE AND WANTED SOME WOOD FIRE. SO THEY'RE LITERALLY LIKE LIGHTING. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY'RE USING IT FOR, BUT I MEAN, WE CAN SEE THAT DESTRUCTION IS GOING ON AND THE INSIGHTS. SO WE'RE ALL HOPING, AND, AND WE DID HAVE THE DISCUSSION THAT WE'RE HOPING THAT THIS COULD BE A FAST, YOU KNOW, GO THROUGH A LITTLE BIT MORE EXPEDITED PROCESS AND WE'LL, I'LL ASK FOR THAT FROM THE, FROM THE STAFF TO EXPEDITE THIS AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE SO WE CAN GET INTO THE DISCUSSION OF, UM, PARTIAL DEMOLITION OR FULL DEMOLITION AND WHAT'S GONNA BE REBUILT. GREAT. WELL, AND TO THAT POINT, I WILL CLARIFY THAT THE CODE ACTUALLY ALLOWS THE PROPERTY OWNER TO COME IN WITH A FORMAL REQUEST FOR DEMOLITION WHILE THE PROCESS FOR DESIGNATION IS UNDERWAY. UM, SO IF THE MOTION TODAY PASSES, IT'LL BE HELD UNDER INTERIM CONTROL. SO BASICALLY WE TREAT IT LIKE IT'S HISTORIC UNTIL WE'RE TOLD IT'S NOT. UM, SO IT WILL GO THROUGH COUNSEL AND IF APPROVED THERE, WE'LL GO THROUGH THE PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS AGAIN FOR LANDMARK DESIGNATION, BUT NOTHING WOULD BE STOPPING THE PROPERTY OWNER FROM COMING WITH A FORMAL REQUEST FOR DEMOLITION OF A LANDMARK. WE WOULD TREAT IT THAT WAY. AND YOU COULD REVIEW ECONOMIC HARDSHIP AND ALL OF THOSE, UH, UH, DIFFERENT, UH, KIND OF CONDITIONS RELATED QUESTIONS. IF YOU COME BACK TO THE MIC, SIR, I KNOW THERE ARE A LOT OF PEOPLE HERE. YOU GUYS DON'T WANNA BE HERE BECAUSE NINE O'CLOCK AT NIGHT. UH, WE WOULD PREFER TO BE WORKING WITH WHOMEVER ON THE COMMITTEE TO START THE PROCESS OF, OF RESTOR. I MEAN, UH, UH, REMOVING ALL THE RESTORATIVE PRODUCTS FROM THE HOUSE SO THAT WE COULD, WE, WE WILL BEGIN THAT PROCESS AND WORK WITH YOU GUYS ON THAT. WE HAVE NO INTENT TO, WE WOULD PREFER TO GO THROUGH THE PROCESS AND BE GOOD STEWARDS AND GOOD, GOOD CITIZENS. SO WE'RE NOT GONNA DO ANYTHING TO THE HOUSE. THE ONLY THING THAT WORRIES US IS WE ALL TALKED ABOUT ON, UH, NOVEMBER THE NINTH, WE HAVE HAD A FIRE. UM, WE'VE, WE GO BY THERE, I MEAN, , IT'S A LITTLE BIT LIKE THOSE ROACHES THAT YOU CAN'T EVER GET RID OF. THEY, YOU KNOW, YOU THINK YOU'VE GOTTEN RID OF 'EM AND THEY'RE BACK IN TWO DAYS. SO WE ARE, WE CAN'T KEEP IT UNLESS WE POST A GUARD AT THAT HOUSE, UNFORTUNATELY, JUST DUE TO ITS PROXIMITY TO THE DRUG REHAB, A FACILITY THAT'S LITERALLY DOWN THE STREET. WE JUST CAN'T, WE CAN'T KEEP IT UNOCCUPIED. SO THAT IS OUR ONLY WORRY. AND, AND I THINK I EXPRESSED THAT PRETTY SUBSTANTIALLY WHEN YOU GUYS CAME OUT, WHICH WAS IF SOMETHING HAPPENS IN THERE, THAT'S GONNA BE ON ME AND I'M TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT NOTHING DOES HAPPEN IN THERE. SO I WILL, I'LL BE HAPPY TO COME DOWN AND WORK WITH STAFF EVERY WEEK IF WE, YOU KNOW, IF WE NEED TO, UM, JUST TO KEEP THE PROCESS MOVING. THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AND I APPRECIATE MY FELLOW COMMISSIONER'S COMMENTS. I, I TOO WILL SUPPORT THE FINDING OF HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE. I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO DISTINGUISH THE DIFFERENCE, THOUGH THEY'RE RELATED ITEMS, UH, BETWEEN HISTORIC INTEGRITY AND, AND PHYSICAL CONDITION. AND I THINK THERE'S A HIGH DEGREE OF IN HISTORICAL INTEGRITY HERE, DESPITE ITS PHYSICAL CONDITION. SO WITH THAT, I WILL ASK, UH, FOR ROLL CALL, FISH. AYE, SAVINA AYE. NAY. AYE GROUP. AYE. AYE. AND, UH, CARPENTER AYE. MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AGENDA ITEM NUMBER NINE, H D R C, CASE NUMBER 20 22 5 5 9 9 18. DAWSON, THE APPLICANT'S REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO ONE, CONSTRUCTED TWO STORY RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE AT THE REAR OF THE LOT ADDRESS AT NINE 18 DAWSON. THE PROPOSED NEW CONSTRUCTION WILL FEATURE FRONTAGE OF FLORENCE STREET AND FEATURE A DRIVEWAY TO THE EAST OF THE STRUCTURE. TWO, TO PERFORM EXTERIOR MODIFICATIONS TO THE EXISTING REAR ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, INCLUDING MODIFYING THE FENESTRATION PATTERN ON BOTH THE EAST AND WEST FACADES. THE REMOVAL OF AN EXISTING GARAGE DOOR OPENING ON THE SOUTH FACADE, REPLACING THE EXISTING ASBE SIDING WITH NEW LAP SIDING AND CONSTRUCTING BOTH FIRST, FIRST AND SECOND LEVEL ADDITIONS TO THE EXISTING SINGLE STORY REAR ACCESSORY STRUCTURE. AND THREE, INSTALL A DRIVEWAY TO THE EAST OF THE [00:50:01] EXISTING ACCESSORY STRUCTURE AND INSTALL A PARKING LOCATION AT THE CENTER OF THE SITE APPROXIMATELY FOR APPROXIMATELY FOUR AUTOMOBILES. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER ONE, THE CONSTRUCTION OF A TWO STORY RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE BASED ON FINDINGS ONE A THROUGH ONE M WITH THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS, ONE THAT WOULD, OR ALUMINUM CLAD WOOD WINDOWS THAT ARE CONSISTENT WITH STAFF STANDARDS FOR WINDOWS AND NEW CONSTRUCTION BE INSTALLED IS NOTED IN FINDING ONE J IN THE APPLICABLE CITATIONS. TWO, THAT ADDITIONAL FENESTRATION BE ADDED TO BOTH TO THE WEST FACADE IS NOTED IN FINDING ONE H AND THREE THAT THE PROPOSED PRIVACY FENCING NOT EXCEED SIX FEET AND HEIGHT STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER TWO, EXTERIOR MODIFICATIONS TO THE EXISTING REAR ACCESSORY STRUCTURE AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN ADDITION OF ADDITIONS BASED ON FINDINGS TWO A THROUGH TWO G STAFF RECOMMENDS THE APPLICANT CONSTRUCT A ONE STORY ADDITION TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE GUIDELINES. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER THREE, THE INSTALLATION OF DRIVEWAYS WITH THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS, UH, THAT ONSITE PARKING, THAT THE ONSITE PARKING LOCATION BE MADE OF PERVIOUS PING, UH, THE APPLICANT, UH, JESSE RAMIREZ, AS WELL AS I BELIEVE, UH, RUSTY LOPEZ ARE JOINING US VIRTUALLY. MR. LOPEZ? THERE YOU ARE. YEAH, WE CAN HEAR YOU. OKAY. THERE YOU GO. I JUST TURNED ON THE CAMERA AS WELL. UH, THIS IS JESSE. RUSTY IS HAVING TROUBLE LOGGING IN, SO, UM, SO I, I CAN BASICALLY SPEAK TO THE PROJECT. SO YEAH, SO WE'RE, WE'RE OKAY WITH MAKING ALL THE, YOU KNOW, WE MADE ALL THE, UH, RECOMMENDATIONS. UH, I SENT, UH, MR. UH, ED RIGHT NOW, UM, THE ADDITIONAL TWO WINDOWS THAT HE REQUESTED. I, IT KIND OF LANDS IN THE KITCHEN AND I WAS WONDERING IF THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE CAN KIND OF NOT HAVE TO DO. 'CAUSE IT'S BASICALLY RIGHT THERE WHERE THE KITCHEN IS. UM, I, I BELIEVE IF I'M CORRECT, THAT WOULD GENERALLY BE IN THE LOCATION THAT I'M DRAWING RIGHT HERE. UH, RIGHT. YEAH, THAT'S CONSISTENT WITH WHERE STAFF'S RECOMMENDING. UM, SO COMMISSIONERS THAT'LL, UH, BE FOR DISCUSSION. I'M SORRY, UH, JESSE, GO AHEAD. YEAH, YEAH, THAT, THAT'S ALL I WAS SAYING. I MEAN, I, I THINK YOU BROUGHT UP THE, THE OTHER SLIDE RIGHT WHERE IT KIND OF FACES THE ACTUAL KITCHEN AND, UM, RIGHT THERE. SO THAT, THAT'S KIND OF MAKES IT DIFFICULT AND REALLY NO REASON FOR THEM TO BE THERE OTHER THAN APPEAL THROUGH THE EXTERIOR. UH, I'M NOT SURE HOW THAT WOULD WORK WITH, WITH, UM, THE LAYOUT THERE. I WOULD HAVE TO, SO IF THAT, IF THAT'S SOMETHING WE CAN NOT HAVE TO DO, THAT WOULD BE GREAT. UM, IF NOT, I WOULD'VE TO FLIP THE, FLIP THE FLIP THE, THE, THE, THE FLOOR PLAN AND I THINK THE OTHER SIDE WILL HAVE WINDOWS AS WELL. SO, UH, IT MIGHT BE AN ISSUE THERE. AND MR. HALL, WHERE DO YOU SEE US AT AS FAR AS THE OTHER RECOMMENDATIONS FROM STAFF AND THE, THE LATEST DOCUMENTS? SURE, SURE THING. SO, UM, I THINK WHAT MAY BE HELPFUL IS, AS WE'VE DONE IN THE PAST, IS JUST FOR STAFF TO WALK THROUGH. SO, UM, I'LL DO THAT. UH, SO, UM, THIS HAS COME BACK FOR FINAL APPROVAL, UH, GENERALLY WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE APPLICANT CONFIRMING THE SPECIFIC WINDOW PRODUCT, ADDING WINDOWS HERE ON THE, UH, WEST FACADE. UH, AND THEN THE LAST STIPULATION, UH, WAS THAT, UM, THE PROPOSED PRIVACY FENCING THAT WE SEE ON THE SITE PLAN NOT EXCEED SIX FEET IN HEIGHT. I'M DRAWING THE OUTLINE OF THE PRIVACY FENCING S FINES THAT THE PREVIOUS STIPULATIONS, UH, THAT WERE, UH, INCLUDED AT CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL HAVE BEEN MET FOR THE, THE TWO STORY REAR ACCESSORY STRUCTURE. UH, AND STAFF FINDS THAT TO BE IN A, IN A SITUATION, UH, FOR RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL. UM, SO IF, IF THE COMMISSION WANTS TO DISCUSS THAT FIRST, UH, THEN, THEN WE CAN, UM, ITEM NUMBER THREE, STAFF IS ALSO RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF WHEN THE APPLICANT FIRST CAME. UH, OR MOST RECENTLY CAME, THERE WERE FOUR DRIVEWAYS, UH, WITH FOUR CURB CUTS, FOUR APRONS ON FLORENCE. THE COMMISSION STIPULATED THE TWO OF THOSE BE REMOVED. THE APPLICANTS REMOVED TWO OF THOSE, THE OTHER TWO MEASURED 10 FEET IN WIDTH. STAFF FINDS THE PROPOSED PARKING TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE GUIDELINES AS FAR AS LOCATION. THE CURB CUTS, APRONS, DRIVEWAYS ARE CONSISTENT, UH, WITH THE GUIDELINES. UH, STAFF FINDS THAT SIMPLY TO CONTINUE TO MINIMIZE THE AMOUNT OF, UH, BUILDING A LOT RATIO OR, UH, IMPERVIOUS PAVING OR IMPERVIOUS COVERED A LOT RATIO THAT THE APPLICANT MAKE THE PARKING LOCATIONS, UH, PERVIOUS TO HELP WITH, UH, SITE DRAINAGE. UM, STAFF DOES NOT, UH, FIND THAT THE PROPOSED, UH, MODIFICATIONS AND ONE STORY AND TWO STORY ADDITIONS TO THE EXISTING ONE STORY ACCESSORY STRUCTURE ARE APPROPRIATE. [00:55:01] UH, SO THAT'S THE STRUCTURE HERE. THAT'S WHERE STAFF LANDS ON THAT. UM, HOWEVER, UM, IT, IT SOUNDS LIKE THE APPLICANT'S ONLY IN DISAGREEMENT WITH STAFF IN ONE SITUATION FOR THE TWO STORY STRUCTURE, NEW CONSTRUCTION. UH, SO IF THE COMMISSION WANTS TO DISCUSS THAT IN ITEM NUMBER THREE, UM, THEN THAT'S PROBABLY A BIT MORE DIRECT THAN, UH, FOCUSING ON NUMBER TWO RIGHT NOW. OKAY, THANK YOU. SO LET'S OPEN UP FOR QUESTIONS, KIND OF DISCOVERY HERE. IF ANYONE HAS QUESTIONS FOR MR. LOPEZ OR FOR STAFF? MS. MR. VELAZQUEZ. MR. FISHER, I HAVE A QUESTION. OKAY. I JUST, UH, MR. LOPEZ, ARE, YOU'RE IN AGREEMENT THAT WE'RE GONNA DISCUSS ITEM ONE AND THREE AND PROBABLY FOLLOW STAFF STIPULATIONS ON ITEM TWO, STAFF RECOMMENDATION? UH, I, I'LL JUMP IN. UH, SO, UH, THIS IS, UH, JESSE RAMIREZ. I'M SORRY, HIS SCREEN NAME SAYS FIRST LOPEZ. SORRY, MR. RAMIREZ, I'M SURE YOU CALLING YOU'RE AGREE RAMEZ. SORRY. SO YOU'RE AGREEING THAT WE CAN GO AHEAD AND DISCUSS ITEM ONE AND THREE AND FOLLOW STAFF RECOMMENDATION ITEM TWO? YES. YES. UH, LIKE YEAH, THE DENIAL FOR THE EXISTING ADDITION. YEAH, THAT'S, THAT CAN BE PAUSED. UH, WE'RE, WE ARE GONNA FOLLOW GUIDELINES FOR, UH, SINGLE STORY SO THAT WE CAN GO BACK TO THAT ONE LATER. SO WE JUST WANNA DISCUSS RIGHT NOW, UH, THE, THE TWO STORY. YEAH. OKAY. I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE. THANK YOU. I DO HAVE A QUICK QUESTION, MR. CHAIR. SORRY. SO LATE. UM, QUESTION FOR STAFF. CAN YOU CLARIFY THE TREATMENT OF THE PRIVACY FENCE AS IT SITS FORWARD OF THE FRONT ELEVATION OF THE TWO STORY? CERTAINLY. UM, AND, UM, THERE ARE A COUPLE OF FINDINGS. UM, SO, UM, FINDING D I BELIEVE, UM, FINDING THE ADDRESSES, THIS AS WELL AS FINDING ONE M. UM, I'LL READ FINDING ONE M 'CAUSE IT SPECIFICALLY TALKS TO THE PRIVACY FENCING. SO THE APPLICANT HAS PROPOSED TO INSTALL PRIVACY FENCING AT THE REAR, THAT IS THE NORTH AND THE SIDE THAT IS THE WEST OF THE PROPOSED NEW CONSTRUCTION. THE FENCING WILL EXTEND TO THE EAST PROPERTY LINE INTO THE RIGHT OF WAY AT FLORENCE STREET. THIS CONFIGURATION IS CONSISTENT WITH THE EXISTING PRIVACY FENCES ON THIS BLOCK, AS WELL AS PAST COMMISSION APPROVALS WHERE SIX FOOT TALL PRIVACY FENCING WAS APPROVED ON FLORENCE STREET IN FRONT OF NEW CONSTRUCTION STAFF FINDS THE PROPOSED FENCING TO BE APPROPRIATE AND CONSISTENT WITH THE GUIDELINES. HOWEVER, THE PROPOSED FENCING SHOULD BE NO TALLER THAN SIX FEET IN HEIGHT. UH, AND JUST FOR A LITTLE ALLEY CONTEXT, SO, UM, THERE ARE PRIVACY FENCES THAT EXTEND, UH, FROM THEIR TYPICAL LOCATION AS THEY FRONT DAWSON STREET, UH, TO THE REAR OF LOTS TO FLORENCE ALLEY. SO, UH, YOU CAN SEE WHAT'S LEFT REMAINING OF THOSE. YOU CAN SEE A NEW ONE DOWN HERE AT THE, THE END OF THE STREET, UH, PRIVACY FENCING THAT IS FOUR FEET OR SIX, EXCUSE, EXCUSE ME, SIX FEET TALL. UM, AND THEN AS YOU ROUND THE CORNER DOWN HERE, I CAN GO TO GOOGLE, UH, IF I NEED TO. UM, THERE'S ALSO SIX FOOT TALL PRIVACY FENCING. IN THE CONTEXT OF THIS BEING A FRONT FACING OR A DAWSON FACING STRUCTURE, THE PRIVACY FENCING WOULD NEED TO BE WELL BEHIND THE FRONT FACADE OF THE HOUSE. UH, WITH THIS CONTEXT ON FLORENCE STREET, WHICH IS A NAMED STREET, BUT FUNCTIONS AS A REAR ALLEY WITH REAR ACCESSORY STRUCTURES. AND YOU COULD SAY BACKYARD THINGS GOING ON, UH, STAFF FINDS THAT PRIVACY FENCING THAT EXTENDS, UH, PERPENDICULAR TO THE STREET, TO THE STREET WOULD BE APPROPRIATE. THANK YOU. AND THAT'S, THAT'S PERPENDICULAR TO THE STREET AT SIX FEET, CORRECT? CORRECT. ALRIGHT, ANYONE ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SO ESSENTIALLY WE'RE COMING DOWN TO WHERE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ONE AND THREE, TWO IS BEING SORT OF WITHDRAWN FOR RIGHT NOW. UM, AND SORRY, MR. RAMIREZ, I, I, I GOT A LITTLE CONFUSED ON WHO WE WERE TALKING TO THERE. UH, SO YOU'RE ACCEPTING OF, UM, THE STAFF STIPULATIONS FOR, FOR ONE AND THREE, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE ADDITIONAL FENESTRATION, IS THAT CORRECT? WELL, I MEAN, I, I I THINK THAT WOULD BE, UM, YES. I MEAN, YEAH, HAVE NO ISSUE WITH ONE AND THREE AT ALL. UH, WE CAN GO AHEAD AND, AND, AND GET THAT, UH, DONE. IT'S NOT, I THINK THAT WAS PART OF, UH, THE SIX FEET. I, I JUST DON'T THINK WE PUT IT ON THE, ON THE PLAN. BUT YEAH, WE WEREN'T INTENDING TO GO HIGHER THAN SIX FEET THANK YOU. IF THERE'S NO OTHER QUICK QUESTIONS, I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION. PLEASE. I'LL DO A MOTION. UM, I DO THINK, I AGREE WITH STAFF THAT ADMINISTRATION AT LEAST ONE WINDOW SHOULD BE ADDED TO THAT WEST FACADE. SO I THINK THERE'S AN OPTION MAYBE TO FLIP THAT KITCHEN. AND, UM, I, I WOULD BE LESS WORRIED IF YOU REMOVED A WINDOW ON THE, UH, WHERE THE SINK CURRENTLY IS. SO MAYBE LIKE FLIPPING THE SINK AND THE FRIDGE WITH A SINK AND DISHWASHER WITH A STOVE AND THE FRIDGE, [01:00:01] I DON'T KNOW. UM, SO I WILL BE SUPPORTING THAT. SO MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM ONE WITH ALL STAFF STIPULATIONS. MOTION TO, UM, ACTUALLY IS, IS ITEM TWO WITHDRAWN OR SHOULD WE GO AHEAD AND APPROVE WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS? UH, THE APPLICANT NOTED THAT THEY WERE GONNA REDESIGN. UM, SO, UH, JESSE, I'M ASSUMING THAT ITEM NUMBER TWO, YOU WOULD LIKE TO WITHDRAW AND NOT HAVE ANY ACTION TAKEN ON THAT CORRECT. ITEM NUMBER TWO IS THE FENESTRATION, RIGHT? UH, WELL, I'M, I'M SORRY. ITEM NUMBER TWO IS THE, THE ADDITIONS TO THE EXISTING STRUCTURE. YES. YES. LET'S WITHDRAW NUMBER TWO FOR THIS FROM THIS POINT. YEAH. SINCE, UH, YEAH. AND I THINK WE DID GO OVER THE LOT AND WE WALKED IT AND I THINK IT, IT, IT WILL MAKE SENSE TO HAVE LIKE A ONE STORY THERE INSTEAD OF, UH, THE TWO STORIES. SO, SO YEAH, WE'RE OKAY WITH THAT. THANK YOU. SO YEAH, BASED ON THAT COMMENT, SO ITEM NUMBER TWO HAS BEEN REDRAWN MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM ONE AND THREE WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS. ALRIGHT, WE HAVE MOTION. DO WE HAVE A SECOND, MR. CHAIRMAN? I SECOND. THANK YOU. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION MR. CHAIR? YES, SIR. YES SIR. WITH, WITH RESPECT TO THE WINDOW, I KNOW THE MOTION'S ALREADY BEEN MADE, BUT YOU KNOW, THE, THE, UM, ELEVATION FOLLOWS THE PLAN AND THE PLAN IS VERY, UH, SIMPLE. IT, IT HAS A KITCHEN THAT'S FACING THAT WALL FLIPPING, IT CREATES THE SAME PROBLEM. CORRECT. AND, AND, AND IN EFFECT, WE'RE ASKING THEM TO REDESIGN THEIR KITCHEN SO THAT THEY CAN ACCOMMODATE A WINDOW. SO IT'S NOT SO MUCH AT A WINDOW, IT'S, IT'S, IT'S A, IT'S A LARGER PROBLEM THAN THAT. IF THE DESIGN IS, UM, YOU KNOW, THEORETICALLY WITH RESPECT TO THE DESIGNER AND, AND THE, AND THE INTENT OF THE, THE OWNER THAT PERHAPS IN THIS, IN THIS INSTANCE OR INSTANCES LIKE THIS, WHERE, UM, THE, UM, ITS FORM IS FOLLOWING ITS FUNCTION, UM, THAT, THAT WE MAY BE ENTERING INTO A REALM OF, UM, DESIGNING FOR AS OPPOSED TO, UH, SEEING HOW THE EXTERIOR IS REF REFLECTING THE INTERIOR USE. AND IT IS ON A SUBORDINATE ELEVATION. IT'S NOT THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING. IT'S, AND IT, AND IT'S, IT, ITS STORY OUTSIDE IS TRUE TO ITS STORY INSIDE. UH, I WANT TO, UH, SUPPORT THE PASADENA, THE ONE IN, IN THREE. BUT, UH, YOU KNOW, I, I'D LIKE TO, TO, UM, UH, SUBMIT AN, UM, AN ALTERNATE MOTION. IS THAT PROPERLY SAID, CAN AMEND A MOTION. I'D LIKE TO AMEND THE MOTION TO ENABLE TWO TO DROP OFF SO THAT THE BUILDING CAN BE AS DESIGNED. OKAY. LET'S GO AHEAD AND GET, UH, COMMENTS ON THE OTHERS AND THEN WE'LL COME BACK FOR AN AMENDMENT THEN. THANK YOU, SIR. OKAY. MR. FISH. UM, I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, IN RE IN REGARDS TO THE PATTERN OF THE FENESTRATION HERE, THAT'S A PRETTY LONG WALL AT THE FIRST LEVEL WITHOUT MUCH OF A BREAK. SO I'LL BE SUPPORTING STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION AS THE MOTION WAS MADE TO POINT OF ORDER. IF HE DOES AN ALTERNATE MOTION, WE CAN GO AHEAD. IF IT DOESN'T GET A SECOND. IF NOT, WE DISCUSS THAT MOTION ALTERNATE, LIKE THAT ITEM. WELL, IT'S, IT'S UP TO THE CHAIR IF HE WANTS TO COMPLETE THE DISCUSSION ABOUT THE MAIN MOTION BEFORE GETTING A DISCUSSION ABOUT THE AMENDMENT, I THINK. UM, AND, AND THERE'S A DISTINCTION BETWEEN AN AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION, WHICH WAS TO REMOVE ONE OF THE STIPULATIONS INCLUDED. SO THAT'S A CLARIFYING TO THE MOTION ON THE TABLE VERSUS AN ALTERNATE MOTION, WHICH WOULD BE A DIFFERENT OUTCOME. AND SO WHAT HAS BEEN PROPOSED AS AN AMENDMENT? YEAH, I WOULD GO LIKE TO GO AHEAD AND GET THE REST OF THE COMMISSIONER'S COMMENTS ON THAT. UH, MR. CHAIR, I WOULD BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION FOR ONE AND THREE WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS. ONE WINDOW WOULD DO A WORLD OF GOOD ON THAT SIDE. UM, AND TO ADD A LITTLE BIT OF, YOU KNOW, REDESIGN THE KITCHEN JUST A WEE BIT IS ENTIRELY FEASIBLE. COMMISSIONER BAKER, SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THAT PICTURE RIGHT THERE AND THAT AREA THAT'S HIGHLIGHTED BEING THE KITCHEN. I GUESS MY QUESTION IS, SO I, I CAN SEE HOW IF WE ARE LOOKING AT IT RIGHT NOW, LOOKING THROUGH THE WALL, THE RIGHT SIDE OF THAT BLUE RECTANGLE WOULD BE WHERE THE FRIDGE IS, AND THEN THE CENTER WOULD BE WHERE THE RANGE IS, AND THEN THERE WOULD BE CABINETRY IN THE COUNTERTOP ON THE LEFT HAND SIDE. AND SO WE'RE ASKING THAT THE, THE OWNER THEN JUST MOVE THINGS THAT, WHAT WE WE'RE JUST LOOKING AT ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS. SO WE DON'T SEE ANY OF THE UTILITIES OR ANYTHING AT THIS POINT, BUT WE'RE JUST SAYING PUT ANOTHER WINDOW AND WE WOULD WANT THAT TO, I GUESS, BE SIMILAR TO OTHERS IN SIZE AND, AND IN STYLE. [01:05:02] UM, I GUESS I'M INTERESTED IN KNOWING FROM THE OWNER THEIR THOUGHTS ON THAT RECOMMENDATION. HOW, HOW EASY OR DIFFICULT IS THAT? DOES IT IMPACT THE COST OR JUST INTERESTED IN KNOWING THEIR THOUGHTS? CERTAINLY. AND, UM, I'LL JUST SAY A LITTLE CLARIFICATION FROM STAFF STANDPOINT. UM, OUR PURVIEW IS ON THE EXTERIOR STRUCTURES. SO WHEN WE GIVE A RECOMMENDATION FOR ADDITIONAL FENESTRATION, WE'RE LOOKING AT THIS IN THE CONTEXT OF WHERE ARE WINDOWS TYPICALLY PLACED WITHIN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT AND WITHIN THE BUILT CONTEXT. UM, OBVIOUSLY WITH THE APPLICANT, HE'S GOT SOME INTERIOR CONSIDERATION GOING ON ABOUT WHERE HE'S PLACING WINDOWS, BUT FOR US, WE'RE NOT TYPICALLY GONNA SAY, WE UNDERSTAND THE FRIDGE GOES THERE, WE UNDERSTAND YOUR RANGE IS THERE, SO IT'S OKAY, NOT THAT PLACE A WINDOW. UM, BUT, UH, JESSE, GO AHEAD. UH, YEAH, SO BASICALLY, UH, THAT'S, THAT'S THE FIRST THING I I, I DID SEND IT TO THE DESIGNER AND I I DID ASK HIM IF THERE WAS SOMETHING WE CAN DO TO MAKE THAT POSSIBLE. UH, AND I'M LOOKING AT THE FLOOR PLAN NOW AND IT IS BASICALLY LIKE THE OTHER COUNCILMAN SAID, IF I FLIPPED THE KITCHEN TO THE OTHER SIDE, I DO HAVE WINDOWS IN THE OTHER SIDE AS WELL, THAT, THAT I'M ALREADY, THAT I HAVE THERE. SO I WOULD HAVE TO REMOVE THOSE. SO IT'S GONNA, IT'S GONNA AFFECT ONE THING OR THE OTHER, RIGHT? ONE SIDE OR THE OTHER. UM, IF, IF I PUT, I MEAN IT'S, IT'S, IT'S KIND OF, IT WILL MAKE IT VERY DIFFICULT TO JUST READ. I MEAN, WE PRACTICALLY HAVE TO REDESIGN THE WHOLE INTERIOR TO MAKE A WINDOW THERE. UH, I COULD POSSIBLY ADD A COUPLE OF WINDOWS IN THE MIDDLE BETWEEN THE CABINETS, WHICH ARE NOT GONNA BE THE REGULAR STANDARD THREE BY FIVES, UH, INSTEAD OF THE BACKSPLASH. I CAN HAVE A WINDOW IN BETWEEN THE LOWER CABINET AND THE TOP CABINET, BUT THEY'RE GONNA BE SMALLER WINDOWS, LIKE MAYBE TWO BY TWOS OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, FIXED WINDOWS. BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT'S GONNA BE APPEALING 'CAUSE THEY'RE GONNA BE SMALL LITTLE QUADRANTS IN THE MIDDLE OF THE LOWER BUILDING LIKE THREE FEET UP FROM THE FLOOR, YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? UH, SO YEAH, IT WILL MAKE IT VERY DIFFICULT TO GO BACK TO SCRATCH AND KIND OF FIGURE IT OUT AND, AND, AND DO THIS. UM, ONLY OTHER THING I CAN THINK OF LOOKING AT THE FLOOR PLAN IS MAYBE MOVING THAT SINK TO WHERE THE STOVE IS AND PERHAPS PUT A WINDOW ON TOP OF THE SINK AND THEN PUT THAT KIT IN THE STOVE ON THE OTHER SIDE. AND I THINK THAT WOULD WORK BY ADDING ONE MORE WINDOW THERE. I, I THINK THAT THAT WOULD BE POSSIBLE. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER MAZUA, DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS OR DISCUSSION ABOUT THE STANDING MOTION? I THINK THE SUGGESTION OF MOVING THE SINK AND THE DISHWASHER TO WHERE THE STOVE IS A, IS A GOOD ONE BECAUSE IT ADDS THAT EXTRA LIGHT FROM THE WINDOW. MM-HMM. WITH WITHOUT TOO MUCH WORK. YES. I THINK THAT'S DOABLE. OKAY. COMMISSIONER, I JUST HAD ONE LAST COMMENT AND I THINK WHAT STAFF SAID IT WAS VERY IMPORTANT, WE HAVE TO LOOK AT THIS FROM AN EXTERIOR STANDPOINT. WE DON'T KNOW IF 10 YEARS DOWN THE ROAD SOMEBODY'S GONNA REMODEL THAT KITCHEN. SO FROM AN EXTERIOR STANDPOINT AND FOR WHAT WE SEE COMMONLY HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOODS THAT IS, UH, A SIDE OF THE HOUSE THAT IS VISIBLE, YOU KNOW, PROMINENT. SO ESPECIALLY BECAUSE IT IS ON THE GROUND FLOOR. I THINK THAT'S WHY I WOULD, YOU KNOW, I MADE THAT MOTION AND I KEEP THAT STIPULATION THERE. AND MY LAST QUESTION TO THE, UH, APPLICANT IS THAT UNCONDITION STORAGE COULD HAVE POTENTIALLY A, A WINDOW AS WELL REMOVING THAT WINDOW FROM THE SINK. MAYBE THAT, UM, ONCE IT'S UNCONDITION, WELL, I MEAN, IT DOESN'T IMPEDE YOU FROM MAYBE ADDING A WINDOW ON THAT FACE. THERE'S A, THERE'S ONE THAT ACTUALLY SHOWS IT, UM, THE ELEVATION, NOT THE FLOOR PLAN, BUT THE ELEVATION ON THE NEXT PAGE RIGHT THERE. YEAH. FOR THE STORAGE. FOR THE STORAGE. WE CAN ADD A WINDOW, BUT I MEAN, IT'S, IT'S KIND OF A STORAGE, UH, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE LIKE TO PUT SHELVES AND STUFF LIKE THAT TO HANG STUFF, BUT WE CAN PUT IT IN THERE. STORAGE. I GUESS WHAT I'M LEAVING IT IS BEFORE YOU MAKE ANY PLANS, MAYBE JUST CHECK WITH STAFF. WE HAVE SEEN JUST, UH, WINDOWS. I DON'T KNOW, IT'S SOUNDS VERY WEIRD FOR THE NEW APP IN NEW COMMISSIONERS, BUT WE HAVE HAD WINDOWS PUT IN WITH ACTUALLY WALLS ON THE BACK, UH, SEALED UP FROM THE INSIDE, JUST, UH, FOR US TO KIND OF HAVE SOME KIND OF A FENESTRATION. SO, UM, THANK YOU. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER VASQUEZ, DO YOU WISH TO, UH, FORMULATE YOUR AMENDMENT? WELL, YOU, YOU, MR. CHAIR? I JUST WANT TO, UM, YOU KNOW, IN THE SUBTLE DETAILS OF THE SIMPLE PEOPLE THAT WOULD LIVE IN A, IN A HOUSE WITH A SIMPLE KITCHEN, THAT WE COULD MOVE A WINDOW. BUT IF YOU'RE THE PERSON WASHING DISHES, YOU KNOW, PERHAPS YOU REALLY FIND VALUABLE THE ABILITY TO LOOK OUT INTO THE BACKYARD. BUT BECAUSE THE HOUSE HAS TO HAVE A WINDOW, BECAUSE ANOTHER HOUSE HAS A WINDOW ON THE SIDE THAT YOU'RE KIND OF RELEGATED TO HAVING IT LOOK TO THE SIDE OF THE HOUSE, WHICH POTENTIALLY IS SOMEBODY ELSE'S WALL. SO SOMETIMES [01:10:01] COMPROMISES, JUST IN THE SENSE THAT THERE'S A A, A HOUSE WITH A PLAN AND THE PLAN, THE PLAN, THE PLAN CAN MANDATE, UH, IF THE DESIGNER CHOOSES IT TO SHORT OF, OF LOOKING AT OTHER WAYS TO INTERRUPT THAT WALL. THE, THE WALL DOESN'T JUST NEED TO BE INTERPRETED BY A WINDOW. IT COULD BE INTERRUPTED BY A, BY AN OFFSET CREATED TO AUGMENT THE, THE STOVE, RIGHT? OR, OR IS A, IS A VENT, UH, UH, UM, YOU KNOW, LIKE A RESTAURANT STYLE DOMED VENT, A UM, VISUAL BREAK THAT, THAT MADE MAKES THE WALL INTERESTING. THERE'S ALL KINDS OF DIFFERENT ELEMENTS TO BREAK THAT, THAT, THAT, UM, THAT I GUESS THAT LONG LINEARNESS OF IT. BUT, UM, IT JUST SEEMS THAT, UM, DESIGN OR EXTERIOR DESIGN IS, IS, YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT JUST EXTERIOR DESIGN. IT, IT, IT IS ALSO A REFLECTION OF THE INTERIOR. THOSE ARE MY ONLY COMMENTS, SIR. SO DO YOU HAVE AN AMENDMENT? UH, YOU KNOW, I, I, UM, I, MY AMENDMENT WAS BE A MOTION TO, TO, TO APPROVE AS, AS SUBMITTED WITHOUT, UH, THE ITEM, UM, REQUIRING THE WINDOW, WHICH IS TWO. OKAY. THANK YOU. WE HAVE A MOTION, WE HAVE A, A PROPOSED AMENDMENT. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? MR. UH, CHAIR? I'D LIKE TO, I GUESS, PROPOSE A MOTION THAT, A COMPROMISE THAT, UM, RATHER THAN IT HAVE A WINDOW, THE OWNER MUST PROPOSE A SOMETHING THAT VISUAL, UM, VISUALLY BREAKS UP THAT, THAT LONG. WHETHER THAT'S A WINDOW THAT ACTUALLY FUNCTIONS WINDOW, OR WHETHER IT'S SOMETHING THAT'S JUST A SUPERFICIAL WINDOW THAT HAS FILM OR SOMETHING ELSE ON IT. UM, I, I GUESS I WOULD OFFER THAT UP AS, AS A COMPROMISE BETWEEN WINDOW OR NO WINDOW. OKAY. SO LET'S DEAL WITH THE PARLIAMENTARIAN ISSUES HERE. SO, UH, DUE TO LACK OF SECOND, I'M GONNA SAY THE FIR, THE FIRST AMENDMENT FAILED, UM, AND YOU PROPOSED A SECOND AMENDMENT THAT INVOLVES, UH, BASICALLY SAYING EITHER A WINDOW OR SOME OTHER ARCHITECTURAL, UM, UH, FEATURE DETAIL TO BREAK UP THE WALL TO ADDRESS THE CONCERN THAT STAFF HAS. DO WE HAVE A SECOND FOR THAT AMENDMENT? AND MR. MR. EDWARD, DO YOU HAVE A COMMENT? IT'S KIND OF AN IDEA. I MEAN, WE HAVE, THE COMMISSION HAS APPROVED OTHER INSTANCES OF A BLIND WINDOW WHERE IT'S NOT A WINDOW, BUT IT'S BASICALLY TWO SHUTTERS THAT ARE IN A WINDOW SIZE OPENING. SO IT JUST LOOKS LIKE THERE'S A CLOSED WINDOW WITH SHUTTERS LIKE COVERING THE OPENING. UM, THAT MIGHT BE SOMETHING THAT WOULD FALL UNDER THIS MOTION, UNDER THE ORIGINAL MOTION IT WOULD FALL, RIGHT? ORIGINAL MOTION WOULD REQUIRE A WINDOW. SO WE HAVE AN AMENDMENT, UH, TO SORT OF BROADEN WHAT THE POTENTIAL SOLUTION COULD BE. DO WE HAVE A SECOND FOR THAT AMENDMENT? I'LL SECOND IT. OKAY. WE HAVE AN AMENDMENT AND A SECOND TO THAT THEN WE SHALL NOW I GUESS DO ROLL CALL ON THAT FISH. NAY. SO BE NO NAY VELASQUEZ AYE. MASUKA, NAYYY GRO NAY BAKER AYE. AND CARPENTER AND NAY MOTION FAILS. ROLL CALL ON THE, UH, THE ORIGINAL MOTION FISH. AYE. SABINO. AYE. VELAZQUEZ NAY MASUKA. AYE. CART. UM, GROUP. AYE. BAKER, NAYYY AND CARPENTER? AYE. MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, UH, JESSE, I'LL, UH, TOUCH BASE WITH YOU AND RUSTY TOMORROW. THANK YOU. OKAY, SO THAT'S BASICALLY APPROVING A ONE WINDOW VERSUS A TWO. IT'S THE, THE INTRODUCTION OF A WINDOW ON THAT FACADE. OKAY, PERFECT. THAT'D BE FINE. THANK YOU. MM-HMM. ? YEAH. AND JUST TO CLARIFY THE, THE, AS STATED HERE, IT SAYS THE ADDITION OF FENESTRATION, SO THAT COULD BE SINGLE, PLURAL, OR YOU CAN COME BACK AND MAKE AN ALTERNATIVE PROPOSAL TO STAFF IF, UH, THAT COULD, YOU CAN COME BACK THROUGH. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. NEXT CASE, AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 10, H D R C, CASE NUMBER 2022 DASH 5 43 15 REFUGIO. [01:15:01] THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL TO ONE, REMOVE AND ENCLOS ONE OF THE ORIGINAL FRONT DOOR OPENINGS ON THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE. TWO, MODIFY THE FENESTRATION ON THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE AND THREE, CONSTRUCT AN APPROXIMATELY 775 SQUARE FOOT TWO STORY REAR ADDITION ITEM ONE. STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE FRONT DOOR ENCLOSURE BASED ON FINDING D. ITEM TWO. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE FENESTRATION MODIFICATION TO THE REAR ELEVATION BASED ON FINDING E WITH THE FOLLOWING STIPULATION. ONE THAT THE APPLICANT PROVIDES EVIDENCE TO STAFF THAT THE EXISTING REAR DOOR IS NOT ORIGINAL TO THE STRUCTURE. AND TWO, THAT THE APPLICANT SUBMITS FINAL MATERIAL SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE PROPOSED REPLACEMENT DOOR AND SIDELIGHTS TO STAFF FOR REVIEW A FULLY WOOD DOOR AND FULLY WOOD SIDELIGHTS WOULD BE MOST APPROPRIATE. ITEM THREE STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL OF THE CONSTRUCTION OF A TWO STORY REAR ADDITION BASED ON FINDING E FINDINGS E THROUGH S STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE APPLICANT MEET THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS PRIOR TO RETURNING TO THE H D R C ONE, THAT THE APPLICANT REDUCES THE TOTAL LOCK COVERAGE TO LESS THAN 50% BASED ON FINDING F AND SUBMITS UPDATED PLANS TO STAFF FOR REVIEW PRIOR TO RETURNING TO THE H D R C FOR CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL. TWO, THAT THE APPLICANT REDUCES THE OVERALL MASSING OF THE REAR ADDITION AND PROPOSES A REAR ADDITION THAT DOES NOT EXTEND BEYOND THE FRONT FACADE BASED ON BINDING G. THE APPLICANT MUST SUBMIT UPDATED DRAWINGS TO STAFF FOR REVIEW PRIOR TO RETURNING TO THE H D R C THREE THAT THE APPLICANT SUBMITS A SALVAGE PLAN FOR ANY REUSABLE MATERIAL REMOVED TO ACCOMMODATE THE REAR REAR EDITION BASED ON FINDING J FOUR THAT THE APPLICANT UPDATES THE PROPOSAL TO FEATURE WINDOWS OF TRADITIONAL PROPORTIONS BASED ON FINDING K. THE APPLICANT MUST SUBMIT UPDATED DRAWINGS TO STAFF FOR REVIEW PRIOR TO RETURNING TO THE H D R C FIVE THAT THE APPLICANT INCORPORATES A MORE TRADITIONAL FENESTRATION PATTERN ON THE FRONT FACADE AND SOUTH ELEVATION. BASED ON FINDING L THE APPLICANT MUST SUBMIT UPDATED DRAWINGS TO STAFF FOR REVIEW PRIOR TO RETURN RETURNING TO THE H D R C SIX, THAT THE DETACHED GARAGE OR PARKING AREA THAT A DETACHED GARAGE OR PARKING AREA IS UTILIZED IN LIEU OF THE PROPOSED FRONT FACING ATTACHED GARAGE BASED ON FINDING P SEVEN THAT THE APPLICANT SUBMITS DIMENSIONS FOR THE PROPOSED DRIVEWAY PARKING PAD AND DRIVEWAY APRON TO STAFF FOR REVIEW BASED ON FINDING Q PRIOR TO RETURNING TO THE H D R C AND EIGHT THAT THE APPLICANT SUBMITS A LANDSCAPING PLAN TO STAFF REVIEW BASED ON FINDING SS PRIOR TO RETURNING TO THE H D R C. AND AS A CASE COMMENT, THE APPLICANT HAS SUBMITTED EVIDENCE TO STAFF THAT THE EXISTING REAR DOOR IS NOT ORIGINAL TO THE STRUCTURE AND THE APPLICANT, DAVID HANNON AND PROPERTY OWNER IS BOB KNIGHT. AND ALEJANDRO RAMON ARE WITH US IN PERSON. GOOD AFTERNOON, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME. MY NAME IS DAVID HANNON. I'M A PRINCIPAL WITH FISHER HACK ARCHITECTS AND I'M REPRESENTING THE HOMEOWNERS, BOB AND ALEJANDRO WHO HERE TODAY. UM, THE HOMEOWNERS ARE, HAVE RECENTLY PURCHASED THIS HOME IN LAVACCA AND THEY ARE MOVING DOWN HERE FROM CHICAGO, AND THIS IS SUPPOSED TO BE THEIR FOREVER HOME. SO THEY'RE, YOU KNOW, THEY'VE GOT A LOT OF VESTED INTO THIS, AND SO EVERYTHING'S GOT A VERY SPECIFIC PURPOSE TO IT BASED ON WHAT THEIR NEEDS ARE, UM, AND EVERYTHING LIKE THAT. SO, UM, WE'VE HAD, UH, TWO VERY PRODUCTIVE D R C MEETINGS PRIOR TO COMING HERE. UM, AND SO WE, WE FEEL LIKE WE'VE ADDRESSED, UM, THOSE INITIAL CONCERNS, UM, WITH THE PACKAGE THAT WE HAVE OUT NOW. UM, AND I'M HAPPY TO KIND OF GO THROUGH THE, UH, STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS, UM, KIND OF ITEM BY ITEM. SO ITEM NUMBER ONE, UM, THIS DIDN'T GET BROUGHT UP IN THE INITIAL TWO D R C MEETINGS, SO WE JUST KIND OF LEFT IT, UM, IN PLACE. UM, BUT WE, WE DO RECOGNIZE THE, THAT THE ADDITIONAL FRONT DOOR, THE FRONT PORCH IS A CHARACTER DEFINING FEATURE OF THE HOUSE. UM, IT IS CURRENTLY THE FRONT DOOR OF THE HOUSE, BUT HISTORICALLY IT WAS PROBABLY THE, THE DOOR THAT WE'RE KEEPING, UH, WAS MORE OR LESS THE FRONT DOOR, BUT WE ARE MEANT, WE ARE, UM, UH, WILLING TO KEEP THE FRONT DOOR, UM, THAT WE'RE PROPOSING TO BE REMOVED AND JUST BLOCK IT IN FROM THE INSIDE AND JUST NOT HAVE IT BE AN ACTUAL FUNCTIONING DOOR. SO ITEM NUMBER TWO, UM, REGARDING THE, THE REAR DOOR. UM, SO WE HAVE SENT, UM, STAFF SOME ADDITIONAL PHOTO THAT KIND OF CLARIFIES, UH, THIS A LITTLE BIT FURTHER. UM, AS YOU CAN SEE, THE, THE FRONT DOOR THAT WE'RE PROPOSING TO REMOVE IT HAS THE LITTLE SHED ROOF OVER IT. THERE'S A OUTLINE OF A WINDOW THAT USED TO BE THERE, THE ADDITION THAT'S BEEN ENCLOSED, THAT'S TO THE LEFT. WE FEEL LIKE THAT WAS ORIGINALLY A, A PORCH, UM, WITH THE HOUSE. AND SO THE DOOR, THE BACK DOOR TO THE HOUSE WOULD'VE BEEN, YOU KNOW, WITHIN THAT PART. AND SO WE ARE PROPOSING TO GO BACK WITH AN ALL WOOD DOOR WITH WOOD FRAMED SIDELIGHTS, UM, IN ITS PLACE. UH, SO ITEM NUMBER THREE, THE, UH, LOT COVERAGE OF THE, UM, [01:20:01] OF THE ENTIRE BUILDING. WE'RE RIGHT AT 50.8%, SO WE'RE, WE'RE JUST ON THE CUSP OF THAT, YOU KNOW, 50% MARK. UM, AGAIN, WE, WE ARE IN CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL, SO THERE'S STILL SOME INITIAL, OR THERE'S STILL SOME REMAINING DESIGN WORK TO BE DONE THAT, YOU KNOW, MAYBE WE CAN MASSAGE IT A LITTLE BIT MORE TO GET, YOU KNOW, UNDERNEATH THAT 50%, YOU KNOW, TECHNICALLY. UM, YEAH. AND THEN I, ITEM NUMBER 3.2, WE'LL SAY, UH, AS FAR AS THE OVERALL MASSING OF THE HOUSE NOT MOVING, NOT, UM, BEING IN FRONT OF THE FRONT FACADE. SO WE, UH, WE FEEL LIKE THE, UM, THE ADDITION TO THE HOUSE DOES NOT GO PAST THE FRONT FACADE OF THE HOUSE. UM, AS YOU CAN SEE IN, UH, DETAIL NUMBER TWO IN THE UPPER RIGHT HAND SIDE, UM, YOU KNOW, WE'RE, WE'RE STILL SET FAR BACK AS ESSENTIALLY AS FAR BACK AS, AS THE HOUSE OR THE ADDITION CAN GO, UM, BASED ON ITS HOW IT'S CURRENTLY DESIGNED. UM, ITEM NUMBER 3.3, UH, SINCE WE ARE STILL VERY EARLY IN THIS, IN THE, UH, DESIGN PROCESS, WE ARE, UM, OPEN TO DISCUSSING ITEMS OF THE ADDITION THAT WE'RE TAKING DOWN TO BE SALVAGED, SUCH AS THE WINDOWS AND THOSE BEING USED ELSEWHERE AS AN ARTIFACT OR, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING, UM, YOU KNOW, ANOTHER KIND OF STANDALONE ARCHITECTURAL FEATURE THAT, UM, AT LEAST, YOU KNOW, CAN BE KEPT AND SALVAGED. SO WE'RE, WE'RE DEFINITELY OPEN TO THAT. UM, ITEM NUMBER 3.4 AND 3.5. UM, I THINK THESE HAD TO DO WITH THOSE, THOSE SMALLER WINDOWS AT THE, AT THE SECOND FLOOR, IS THAT RIGHT? AND SO, UM, AS FAR AS THE SCALING OF THOSE WINDOWS, WE'RE DEFINITELY OPEN TO MAKING THEM A LITTLE TALLER. UM, SO THAT THEY'RE A LITTLE BIT MORE ON SCALE WITH THE WINDOWS ON THE, UM, ORIGINAL PART OF THE HOUSE. UH, THE WIDTH IS ALSO SOMETHING THAT, YOU KNOW, WE COULD MASSAGE A LITTLE FURTHER. UM, BUT I BELIEVE THE WIDTH IS ACTUALLY THE SAME WIDTH AS, UH, THE EXISTING WINDOWS. UM, THEY'RE JUST NOT AS TALL. UM, AND THAT'S ONE ON THE FRONT FACADE, MAINLY DUE TO THE ROOF. UM, WE DO HAVE A FEW, UH, INCHES THAT IT CAN GROW THERE. UM, THE WINDOW ON THE SOUTH ELEVATION AT THE SECOND FLOOR, UM, WE DO HAVE SOME ROOM TO MAKE THAT A LITTLE TALLER. THE ISSUE, UH, WE HAVE, UM, ON THAT ELEVATION IS THAT THE WALL OR THE CEILINGS AREN'T AS TALL AS THE CEILINGS ON THE, UM, FIRST FLOOR. AND SO, UM, FOR, FOR THE WINDOW TO BE AS TALL AS, AS THOSE, UM, WE'LL JUST, WE JUST HAVE TO STUDY A LITTLE FURTHER TO MAKE SURE THAT THE WINDOW'S REALLY NOT SITTING ON THE GROUND, UM, OR ON THE FLOOR. IN THAT CASE. THEN I'M GONNA GO BACK TO, UH, ITEM NUMBER TWO, 3.4 OR ITEM NUMBER 3.6. UM, AND I WANNA ADJUST THE, UH, THE REMAINING TWO ITEMS, UM, THAT THE, UH, APPLICANT SUBMITS DIMENSIONS FOR THE PROPOSED DRIVEWAY. UM, SO THE APRON, UM, RIGHT AS IT MEETS THE SIDEWALK, UM, IT IS RIGHT ABOUT 10 FEET AND AT THE STREET, UM, I THINK WE'RE RIGHT ABOUT 12 AND A HALF FEET. UM, OH, I MEAN, I'M SORRY, RIGHT ABOUT 14 FEET, UM, WIDE AS IT, AS IT HITS, HITS THE STREET. AND THEN OF COURSE, UH, SINCE WE'RE STILL KIND OF EARLY IN THE DESIGN PROCESS, WE DON'T HAVE A FULL LANDSCAPING PLAN, UM, RIGHT NOW. UH, THE IDEA IS THAT, UM, WE REALLY JUST WANT TO KIND OF GET THE STRUCTURE BUILT FIRST AND THEN, UH, THE APPLICANT, UH, OR THE OWNERS WILL END UP DOING A, A LANDSCAPE PLAN AS A SEPARATE SUBMITTAL, UM, ONCE IT'S DONE. SO, SO, AND THEN GOING BACK TO THE, THE GARAGE, WE, WE'VE LOOKED AT, UM, VARIOUS DIFFERENT CONFIGURATIONS. UH, FOR THIS NEW ADDITION. UM, WE DID, UH, EXPLORE IN A DETACHED, UM, CONDITION IT, AND JUST BECAUSE OF THE CONSTRAINTS OF THE SITE, SINCE IT IS SO SMALL, UM, WE JUST COULDN'T FIT IN, UM, THE PROGRAM FOR THE HOUSE THAT THE, THAT THE OWNERS WERE REQUESTING, UM, AND HAVE A SEPARATE GARAGE STRUCTURE. UM, AND SO WE'RE, WE'RE, UH, WE'RE ASKING THAT WE GARAGE REMAIN, UM, AS PART OF THE PROJECT. WE KNOW IT'S, UM, IT'S, UH, A LITTLE ABNORMAL FOR, UM, HOUSES THAT ARE, UM, THAT ARE EXISTING, BUT THERE IS MANY PRECEDENTS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION HOMES TO HAVE GARAGES ON SITE. SO WE'RE, WE DON'T FEEL IT'S THAT FAR OUT OF PLACE. UM, BUT WITH THAT, WE'LL, I'LL BE HAPPY TO TAKE ANY OF YOUR QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS. [01:25:01] GREAT, THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE PUBLIC COMMENTS? WE DO. THERE ARE TWO LETTERS OF SUPPORT IN YOUR FOLDER, AND I'LL PLAY VOICEMAILS NOW. HELLO, UH, THIS IS LOUIS FISHER AND I LIVE AT 3 0 6 RERA ABOUT A BLOCK FROM REFUGIO. UH, I WANT TO, UH, VOICE MY SUPPORT FOR, UH, BOB KNIGHT'S, UH, EDITION PROJECT CASE NUMBER 2022 DASH FIVE 40 AT THREE 15 REFUGIO. UM, I LIKE THE WAY IT IS SET BACK FROM THE STREET AND PROVIDES OFF STREET PARKING AS WELL AS GARAGE, UH, PARKING. UH, AND, UH, IT'S THE MAIN MASS OF THE ADDITION IS SET BACK FROM THE, UH, THE, THE SMALLER, UH, ORIGINAL HOUSE. THANK YOU. HELLO, MY NAME IS IRBY HIGHTOWER AND I LIVE AT THREE 10 STREET. I'M CALLING IN FAVOR OF CASE NUMBER 2 0 2 2 5 4 0 AT THREE 15 REFUGIO STREET. I THINK THE ADDITION IS APPROPRIATE TO THE HOUSE. IT'LL BE A GREAT ADDITION TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND I LOOK FORWARD TO SEEING IT CONSTRUCTED SOON. THANK YOU. MY NAME IS DIANE E. HOLDEN JONES, AND I LIVE AT 3 0 9 REFUGIO JUST DOWN THE STREET FROM BOB, AND I THINK IT WOULD BE THEIR CASE NUMBER'S, 2 0 2 2 DASH FIVE FOUR OH SLASH 3 1 5 REFUGIO. AND THEY'RE WONDERFUL. AND I THINK THEY SHOULD BE ABLE TO HAVE THAT ADDITION PUT ON. I THINK IT'LL DEFINITELY ENHANCE THEIR PROPERTY AND MINE TOO. I ALSO OWN 3 0 2 LAVACCA STREET. UH, SO I HAVE SEVERAL PROPERTIES HERE AND I FULLY SUPPORT THEM. THANK YOU. HI, THIS IS MICHAEL LOPEZ AT 3 1 4 REFUGIO. JUST CALLING TO SAM IN FAVOR OF BOB'S PROJECT, 2 0 2 2 DASH 5 4 0 AT 3 1 5 REFU. UM, I KNOW THEY WANNA MAKE THIS THEIR FOREVER HOME, AND I'M HAPPY TO HAVE THEM IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THEIR PLAN WILL ENHANCE THE PROPERTY AND THE STREET, AND I FULLY SUPPORT THE ADDITION. THANK YOU. AND THAT CONCLUDES PUBLIC COMMENT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. UM, BEFORE WE GET TO QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS, WE HAD, UH, TWO DRCS, ONE BACK IN JULY AT THE END OF JULY, AND THE OTHER ONE WAS IN SEPTEMBER. AND WE HAVE TWO COMMISSIONERS THAT WERE PRESENT THERE. WOULD EITHER OF YOU, UH, COMMISSIONER SINO OR COMMISSIONER MAZUA WISH TO COMMENT ON THE DISCUSSION THEN AND THE APPLICATION THAT YOU SEE NOW BEFORE YOU, UH, MR. CHAIR? I'LL GO AHEAD AND, UM, TRY TO RECOLLECT AS MUCH AS I CAN BECAUSE IT WAS QUITE SOME TIME AGO. UM, THE FIRST, UH, THE FIRST RENDITION, I KNOW WE HAD SOME SERIOUS, UH, CONCERNS ABOUT, UM, AND, AND, AND QUESTIONS ABOUT THE LOT. THE LOCK COVER AND THE GARAGE VOLUME, I BELIEVE WAS SITTING FORWARD. THE SOD HAD REALLY NO RELATION TO THE MAIN HOUSE OR THE GUIDELINES OR CONTEXT. SO WHAT WE SEE HERE IS A GREAT IMPROVEMENT. UM, UM, IT, YES, IT'S, IT IS A GREAT IMPROVEMENT FROM WHAT WE DID SAW THE FIRST TIME, AND I'LL WAIT TILL MY TURN TO HAVE COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS BEYOND THAT. THANK YOU COMMISSIONER. COMMISSIONER ZUKA, DO YOU WISH TO, UH, MAKE COMMENT ON THE D R C? NO, I DON'T, EXCEPT TO SAY THAT I, I DO AGREE. I THINK IT IS A, UH, GREAT IMPROVEMENT ON WHAT WE SAW AT THE D R C AND, UH, I'D BE IN FAVOR OF IT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. I'LL, UH, JUST GO DOWN THE LINE HERE. UH, COMMISSIONER GROOVE, DO YOU HAVE, UH, ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE, ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANTS OR FOR OUR ATTENDEES AT THE D R C? OKAY. UH, COMMISSIONER BAKER OKAY COM. COMMISSIONER SINO, DO YOU WISH TO MAKE, UH, HAVE ANY, ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? UM, LET'S SEE. UM, YES, ABOUT THE LANDSCAPE, YOUR LANDSCAPE DRAWING IN THE FRONT. YOU'RE SHOWING A, UM, SORT OF AN, UM, SEMI-PERMEABLE KIND OF PAVING WITH INFILL. WHAT IS THE REMAINING OF THE FRONT YARD AND WHAT IS THE BACKYARD LANDSCAPE GOING TO BE LIKE? WE, WE DON'T KNOW YET. UM, RIGHT NOW IT'S, IT'S STILL UP IN THE AIR ON, ON WHAT IT'S GONNA BE, BUT THEY HAVE, THEY DON'T HAVE ANY DEVELOPED PLANS FOR IT AT THIS POINT. UM, OKAY. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER FISH. SO MY QUESTIONS ARE GONNA REVOLVE AROUND THE, UH, THE GARAGE, THE GARAGE DOOR SPECIFICALLY, AND IT'S KIND OF GONNA RELATE TO LANDSCAPING. I THINK IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT THAT, [01:30:01] THAT THIS REED NOT LIKE AN ATTACHED GARAGE, BUT MAYBE LIKE A BRIDGED ADDITION. I THINK THE PLAN IS INDICATING THERE'S KIND OF A BREAK IN THE PLANE AND THIS IS PUSHED BACK REASONABLY WELL. I KNOW THE SITE IS VERY TIGHT AND THAT THERE ARE CONSTRAINTS ON ALL SIDES, PARTICULARLY PUSHING IT BACK FURTHER. YOU HAVE JUST ENOUGH ROOM, UM, TO BE ABLE TO PARK A CAR IN THE DRIVEWAY OUTSIDE OF THE, THE GARAGE DOOR IF THE GARAGE DOOR WERE CLOSED AND ONE IN THE CAR. SO WE'VE GOT TWO, UM, TWO CAR PARKING WITHOUT CREATING A FRONT YARD PARKING SITUATION, WHICH I THINK IS REALLY IMPORTANT. UH, SO THERE'S NO PARKING IN FRONT DIRECTLY IN FRONT OF THE HOUSE. IS THERE ANY, ANY DESIRE OR INTENT TO INCLUDE, UM, A FRONT YARD FENCE THAT CROSSES THAT DRIVE IN APRON AND TURNS BACK TO THE PORCH? OR ARE THERE GONNA BE ANY OTHER ELEMENTS THAT KIND OF VISUALLY SEPARATE THE GARAGE ENTRANCE FROM THE STREET? I, I BELIEVE WE HAVE DISCUSSED HAVING A SMALL, UH, METAL OR A STEEL FENCE IN THE FRONT, UM, REMINISCENT OF SOMETHING YOU WOULD SEE IN, IN KING WILLIAM, UM, AND MAYBE A SLIDING GATE, UM, YOU KNOW, COULD GO IN ACROSS THE DRIVEWAY. UM, AND THEN WE COULD, YOU KNOW, LOOK AT WAYS OF, YOU KNOW, BRINGING THAT FENCE, YOU KNOW, BACK TO THE GARAGE TO KIND OF SEPARATE IT EVEN FURTHER. YOU KNOW, I THINK THE GUIDELINES TALK ABOUT FRONT YARD FENCING. YOU KNOW, IF IT'S, THERE'S GONNA BE A GATE, MAYBE THIS, THE, A FRONT YARD FENCE TURNS BACK, UM, UH, BACK ALONG THE, THE SIDE OF THAT PORCH AND TERMINATES INTO THE HOUSE. SO THERE ISN'T A FENCE NECESSARILY IN FRONT OF THE PORCH, BUT I THINK THAT MIGHT GO A LONG WAYS IN CREATING A, A LAYER OF SEPARATION AND MAKING THE PERCEPTION THAT THIS MASS OF THE ADDITION IN THE GARAGE IS SITTING FURTHER BACK. UM, I, I SEE THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS IN SUPPORT, THEY'RE MENTIONING, INCLUDING STAFF STIPULATIONS, AND SOME OF THESE STIPULATIONS ARE A LITTLE BIT DUBIOUS IN MOVING FORWARD WITH CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL. SO THAT'S THE PIECE OF IT THAT I'M LOOKING AT THE MOST. THANKS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER VELASQUEZ, DO YOU HAVE, UH, ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? Y YES, I, IT'S A, IT'S A BEAUTIFUL DESIGN. THANK YOU. UM, THE, UH, SIDE SETBACK, UH, NOTICING THE BUILDINGS OVER THE SETBACK, IS IT EXISTING THAT WAY OR ARE YOU MOVING IT THERE? NO, THAT'S, THAT'S HOW IT CURRENTLY EXISTS, SIR. OKAY. ALRIGHT. SO, UM, SO THEN THE ONLY, UM, UH, PIECE IS THAT 8%, I GUESS THAT YOU'RE OVER THE, THE, THE POT SIZE 0.8? YEP. 0.8%, YES. OKAY. WELL ALL, ALL IN ALL, IT'S A BEAUTIFUL PROJECT. THANK YOU. THAT'D BE SUPPORTING IT. THANK YOU, SIR. ALRIGHT, MR. CHAIR, I'M RULE DO A MOTION PLEASE. THANK YOU. THIS IS JUST TO GET DISCUSSION. IT IS CONCEPTUAL. UM, AND I FEEL LIKE A LOT OF THESE STIPULATIONS YOU SAID YOU WOULD AGREE WITH AND I FEEL LIKE THERE'S SOME THAT WE CAN JUST KEEP THEM ON THERE FOR THE DISCUSSION AND THEN WE CAN SEE WHICH ONES, IF, IF WE'RE REMOVING SOME FOR FINAL, BUT JUST KEEPING THEM FROM ALSO JUST TO CONTINUE THE PROJECT. UM, I WILL, UH, DO A MOTION TO APPROVE WITH ALL STIPULATIONS. AND, AND ONE OF THE THINGS IS I WANNA AGREE WITH, I'M NOT SO WORRIED ABOUT THE LOT COVERAGE OF A FEW PERCENTS. I THINK WE'RE FINE ON THAT. YOU KNOW, I THINK SOME OF THE STIPULATIONS THAT ARE MORE IMPORTANT IS, UM, FENESTRATIONS THE SAME DISCUSSION WE HAD ON THE LAST PROPERTY. SO IT'S MORE LIKE, WHERE ARE WE ADDING WINDOWS AND WHAT TYPE OF WINDOWS SO WE CAN HAVE A DEEPER DISCUSSION. I DON'T THINK IT CHANGES ANYTHING FROM YOUR CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL. I THINK WHAT'S IMPORTANT TO DISCUSS TODAY ON A CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL IS JUST TO GIVE YOU SOME GUIDANCE ON THAT GARAGE. I THINK IT'S SUPER IMPORTANT THAT, UM, WHAT COMMISSIONER, UM, FISH SAID IS HOW CAN WE MAKE IT LOOK SO MUCH AS POSSIBLE AS A DETACHED GARAGE? I SAW IN SOME OF THE D R C COMMENTS THAT SOMEBODY HAD PROPOSED, PUT A WINDOW, YOU DID THAT. SO THAT'S KIND OF THE THINGS THAT, SO I WOULD SAY LET'S LEAVE THE STIPULATION ON THERE, BUT I THINK YOU ARE FOLLOWING THE STIPULATIONS AND WE COME UP TO, YOU KNOW, A FINAL WITH WITHOUT. THANK YOU. UM, JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, OR DO WE WANNA SEE IF THERE'S A SECOND FIRST? NO, LET'S GO AHEAD AND CLARIFY THAT. SO TO CLARIFY, IT'S RECOMMENDING, UM, APPROVAL OF ALL THE ITEMS WITH STEP STIPULATIONS. AND I KNOW THAT ITEM ONE DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL. SO I'M GONNA CLARIFY ITEM ONE, I RECOMMEND APPROVAL. UM, ITEM NUMBER TWO, STAFF WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS. AND ITEM NUMBER THREE, RECOMMEND CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL WITH ALL STIPULATIONS. THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING THAT. DO WE HAVE SECOND? I'LL SECOND. THANK YOU. WE HAVE, UH, A MOTION AND A SECOND. UH, DO WE HAVE DISCUSSION? PROFESSOR? UH, SORRY. UH, COMMISSIONER GROOVE, DO YOU WISH TO ELABORATE UPON YOUR, UH, YOUR MOTION AT ALL? I THINK I DID. YOU'RE FINE. SO I WENT AHEAD OF MYSELF. SORRY. THAT'S FINE. COMMISSIONER, UH, VELAZQUEZ, YOUR SECOND, DO YOU WISH TO ELABORATE UPON IT? WELL, SHORT, SHORT OF THE, YOU KNOW, THE, IT, IT WOULD BE GREAT IF THE, IF, IF ANY STIPULATION WITH RESPECT TO THE DETACHED GARAGE IS REALLY MINIMIZED [01:35:01] BE BECAUSE IT, HE'S ACHIEVING IT VERY WELL. UM, THE, IT'S A COMPLEX, UM, UH, UH, EXTERIOR SOLUTION AND IT'S HANDLED VERY ELEGANTLY. UH, THE, UM, YOU KNOW, I'M ALWAYS UP AGAINST THE, THE, THE, THE FENCE, YOU KNOW, MYSELF CONSIDERING THAT, YOU KNOW, A LOT SIZE IS A CERTAIN SIZE AND THAT PART OF THE MATH PROBLEM IS TO WORK IN THE CONSTRAINTS OF THE ALLOWABLE FOOTAGE. RIGHT. BUT AT THE SAME TIME, I I, YOU KNOW, IF YOU DON'T, IF YOU DON'T PUSH FOR SOMETHING, YOU, YOU DEFINITELY AREN'T GONNA GET IT RIGHT? BUT IT IS A BEAUTIFUL PROJECT. IT IT, IT IT IS IN THE CHARACTER OF THAT COMMUNITY, BUT I ALSO WANNA BE SUPPORTIVE OF THOSE ELEMENTS THAT ARE UNIQUE TO YOUR DESIGN, RIGHT? SO I KNOW YOU ARE KEEPING WITHIN THE CHARACTER OF THAT COMMUNITY, BUT, UM, BUT I ALSO APPRECIATE, UM, THE, YOU KNOW, THE EFFORT TO, UH, FIRST AND FOREMOST ACHIEVE A BEAUTIFUL SOLUTION. OKAY. UH, THAT, THOSE ARE MY COMMENTS. SO IF I CAN JUST CHIME IN. SO I AM HEARING THAT THERE SEEMS TO BE SUPPORT FOR THE GARAGE CONFIGURATION. SO I JUST WANNA MAKE IT CLEAR THAT STIPULATION SEVEN THAT WE'VE RECOMMENDED IS AGAINST THE ATTACHED TO GARAGE. SO THAT MIGHT HAVE TO BE CLARIFIED IN THE MOTION IF THERE'S INTEREST IN NOT INCLUDING THAT STIPULATION, BUT THAT IS WHAT IS CURRENTLY INCLUDED IN THE MOTION. OKAY. AND IT'S MORE ABOUT, I WOULD WANT IT TO LEAVE IT THERE BECAUSE IF WE'RE TRYING TO MIMIC A DETACHED GARAGE, THAT'S WHY I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THAT DISCUSSION KEEPS GOING. IT'S, IT'S NOT BINDING, RIGHT? SO IT'S FOR FINAL, WE'LL KEEP THAT AS LONG AS THAT'S CLEAR TO THE APPLICANT. BUT AS IT'S WRITTEN IS THE STIPULATION IS THAT THE GARAGE REMAINED DETACHED IN LIEU OF THE PROPOSED FRONT FACING ATTACHED GARAGE. SO IT IS A CHANGE TO WHAT WE SEE TODAY. WELL, WELL, MR. CHAIR, WE SHOULD BE VERY CAREFUL, RIGHT? BECAUSE WE'RE, WE'RE ARTICULATING THE IDEA THAT THERE IS A, AN EFFORT TO, TO ARTICULATE THE CHANGE IN, UH, ELEVATION DEPTH. BECAUSE, BECAUSE AN EXPECTATION FOR A DETACHED GARAGE IS ALMOST AN IMPOSSIBILITY IN THIS SCENARIO. RIGHT? COMMISSIONER GROUP IS, IS IT YOUR INTENTION? I'LL ENTERTAIN AN AMENDMENT IF YOU GUYS, IT WASN'T, I, I, I REALIZED THAT IF, IF STAFF FINDS THAT IT'S NOT A CLEAR, I WOULD ENTERTAIN, I THINK I CAN'T AMEND MY OWN MOTION. SO I WOULD ENTERTAIN SOMEBODY TO AMEND THAT ITEM STIPULATION. I WOULD ACCEPT THAT AMENDMENT COMMISSIONER GROUP. YOU CAN CLARIFY. IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE IN THE FORM OF A MOTION. OKAY. SO WHAT I'LL DO IS I'LL JUST CLARIFY AND THEN, UH, SEE IS FOR ITEM THREE, JUST INCLUDING EVERY STIPULATION, BUT ON STIPULATION SIX IS MAYBE FURTHER STUDY, UM, THE GARAGE AND, AND YOU KNOW, ACCEPTING A, AN ATTACHED GARAGE, BUT THAT MAYBE KIND OF MIMICS THE ATTACHED. SO, UM, IS THAT CLEAR ENOUGH FOR CONCEPTUAL? OKAY. SO IS THAT ACCEPTABLE TO OUR SECOND ACCEPTABLE? YES. OKAY. YEAH, AND I THINK THE INTENT IS SINCE THIS IS STILL FOR CONCEPTUAL, THAT THE EXPLORATION'S GONNA GO ON AND THE INTENT IS THERE WITHIN THE GUIDELINES, THIS BEAD DETACHED, BUT THE PHYSICAL, UH, PARAMETERS OF THE SITE MAKE THAT NEARLY IMPOSSIBLE. OKAY. SO GIVEN THAT, UM, ANY, ANY OTHER DISCUSSION FOR THE, THE MOTION THAT IS AT HAND? COMMISSIONER FISH? NO. COMMISSIONER VELAZQUEZ? NO. COMMISSIONER SENO? UH, YES. THANK YOU MR. CHAIR. UM, I AM, I'M COMPLETELY SUPPORTIVE OF PURSUING ALL OF THOSE STAFF STIPULATIONS AND ESPECIALLY THE ONE WITH THE, UM, DETACHED GARAGE AND THE SPIRIT OF THAT, THAT MOTION, UM, GOING TO THE SPIRIT OF THE, THAT MOTION TO, UM, HOPEFULLY COME UP WITH A VOLUME THAT LOOKS DETACHED. UH, ONE OF THE PROBLEMS I HAVE IN LOOKING AT THIS FRONT ELEVATION FROM THE STREET, UM, WE HAVE THE SHED ROOF COMING OVER THE GARAGE, WHICH IS GOOD. AND IT, UM, HELPS PUSH THE, UM, MAIN TWO STORY BACK INTO THE BACKGROUND A LITTLE BIT. BUT I THINK THE CONFLICT IS THE WIDTH OF THE AREA BEING USED FOR THE GARAGE AND THE TWO STORY VERSUS THE WIDTH OF THE ACTUAL GABLE ROOF. THERE'S A PROPORTIONAL ODDITY GOING ON, AND THAT I THINK IS LEADING TO THE PROBLEMS WITH THE WINDOWS ON THE FRONT TOO. THERE'S A RELATIONSHIP AMONG ALL THOSE THINGS. SO PERHAPS THAT CAN BE USED AS A CUE TO RECONSIDER THAT FRONT THAT, UM, FRONT EXPOSED, UH, GABLE. AND WHAT HAPPENS TO THOSE SPACES TO THE LEFT TO, IS IT TO THE EAST? NO, TO THE WEST. UM, WE SEE YOU HAVE A, UM, SHED DORMER BEYOND, MAYBE THERE'S A DEVICE LIKE THAT THAT CAN BE USED TO ROOF THAT PORTION, BUT WHAT WE'RE SEEING IS THAT GABLE THAT'S VERY, VERY WIDE, SO YOU, YEAH. YOU CAN SEE. SO, UM, THOSE ARE MY CONCERNS. SURE. AND ALSO THE LANDSCAPING. [01:40:01] UM, WHAT I'M AFRAID IS GOING TO HAPPEN IS WE'RE LEFT WITH VERY LITTLE PERMEABLE PER LAND OR, UH, DIRT ON THE LOT. AND WHEN WE HAVE SO MUCH BUILT 50%, 52, 50 5% LOT COVERAGE, HAVING SOME BUFFER OF GREEN, UH, REALLY CAN GO A LONG WAY AND FITTING WITH CONTEXT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER BAKER, DO YOU HAVE, UH, ANY COMMENTS ON THE MOTION? I REALLY LIKE THE DESIGN. LIKE IF IT WEREN'T FOR SOME OF THESE THINGS, I'D BE LIKE, CAN YOU DESIGN ME A HOUSE LIKE THIS AS WELL? I THINK IT'S, I THINK IT'S REALLY WELL DONE, BUT I DO THINK THAT IT'S IMPORTANT TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THE FEEDBACK FROM THE, THE COMMISSION. UM, AND I THINK THE COMMENTS ARE GOOD, SO I SUPPORT THAT OVER AND, UH, MR. MOOKA, ANY FURTHER COMMENTS? NO, NO FURTHER COMMENTS. OKAY. AND I, I WOULD JUST ADD THAT IT, YEAH, I THINK IT IS A VERY SKILLFUL, SKILLFUL DESIGN. I THINK THERE ARE THINGS THAT YOU'RE TRYING TO DO TO MITIGATE THE FACT THAT WE CAN'T DO A, A, A DETACHED GARAGE, YOU KNOW, CREATING SORT OF AVOID, UH, OF SORTS WITH THE, WITH THE GLAZING BETWEEN THEM. UM, BUT I JUST ENCOURAGE YOU TO CONTINUE TO STAY IN DIALOGUE WITH STAFF AND WITH THE, YOU KNOW, PERHAPS ANOTHER D R C BEFORE YOU COME BACK FOR FINAL. OKAY. SO GIVEN THAT I WOULD, UH, ASK FOR ROLL CALL, PLEASE FISH. AYE. SABINA AYE. VELASQUEZ AYE GROUP? AYE. AND BAKER? AYE. CARPENTER? AYE. MOTION PASSES. UH, DID WE HAVE MOOKA? I, AYE AND MAZUA, I'M SO SORRY ABOUT THAT. MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU. THANK YOU GUYS. GOOD LUCK TO YOU. AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 11, H D R C, CASE NUMBER 2022 DASH 5 61 2 24 EAST CAROLINA. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO ONE COMPLETE FENESTRATION MODIFICATIONS AND TWO, RECEIVE HISTORIC TAX CERTIFICATION. STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE FENESTRATION MODIFICATIONS OR HISTORIC TAX CERTIFICATION BASED ON FINDINGS. A THROUGH E STAFF FINDS THAT THE APPLICANT SHOULD RESTORE THE FENESTRATION PATTERN ON THE REAR ADDITION TO ITS PREVIOUS CONDITION, OR SHOULD SUBMIT PLANS FOR THE INSTALLATION OF APPROPRIATE FENESTRATION ON THE REAR ADDITION. IF THE H D R C IS COMPELLED TO APPROVE THE FENESTRATION MODIFICATIONS IN THE EXISTING CONFIGURATION, THE PROPERTY IS ELIGIBLE FOR HISTORIC TAX CERTIFICATION AND THE APPLICANT MAY RETURN TO THE H D R C FOR HISTORIC TAX VERIFICATION. AS A CASE COMMENT, UM, THIS CASE PREVIOUSLY CAME TO THE H D R C IN MARCH, 2019 TO REQUEST APPROVAL FOR EXISTING VIOLATIONS IN ORDER TO QUALIFY FOR THE SUBSTANTIAL REHABILITATION TAX INCENTIVE. UH, THE NEW PROPERTY OWNER HAS SINCE CORRECTED, UH, IN VIOLATION, THAT WAS THE INSTALLATION OF SQUARE COLUMNS WITH STONE BASES AND EXPOSED BOLTS, AND IS NOW REQUESTING APPROVAL OF THE VIOLATION THAT WAS INSTALLED BY THE PREVIOUS PROPERTY OWNER, UM, WHICH IS THE FENESTRATION ON THE REAR ADDITION. AND THE PROPERTY OWNER, MELISSA STEN, IS WITH US VIRTUALLY. MS. SWELL, DO YOU WISH TO, UH, SPEAK TO YOUR PROJECT? YES. THANK YOU. UM, YES. SO WE'RE REQUESTING HISTORIC TAX CERTIFICATION, UH, BASED ON RESOLVING THE OUTSTANDING VIOLATION WITH PRIOR RECONSTRUCTION WORK ON THE COLUMNS. UM, I, LET'S SEE. WE FINISHED, COMPLETED THAT, WE WORKED WITH YOU GUYS AND COMPLETED THAT THE END OF THIS PAST SUMMER. AND THE REASON WE ARE PROPOSING NOT TO, TO ADDRESS THE ISSUES WITH THE REAR ELEVATION, UH, IS BECAUSE OF THE SIGNIFICANT, UM, THE SIGNIFICANT PROJECT THAT THAT WOULD BE TO ACTUALLY HAVE TO RENOVATE THE INTERIOR TO ADD, UH, WINDOWS OR MAKE CHANGES. SOME OF THE EVIDENCE THAT WE INCLUDED SHOWS THE INTERIOR OF THE HOME, THE BACK WALL AND THE UPSTAIRS IS COMPLETELY, UM, BATHROOM OR CLOSET. UM, THERE REALLY IS ACTUALLY NO PLACE TO PUT A WINDOW, UM, OTHER THAN THAT PICTURE WINDOW, WHICH THE PRIOR OWNERS HAD PUT IN. YOU CAN SEE ABOVE THE TOILET, THAT'S THE ONLY WINDOW UP THERE. UM, SO THERE'S NO LOCATION TO ACTUALLY INSTALL A WINDOW. UM, AND ADDITIONALLY, THE REAR OF OUR HOME, THERE'S NO SIGHT LINE TO THE REAR OF THE HOME FROM THE STREET BEHIND US BECAUSE OF THE, UH, JUST THE NATURE OF THE STREETS. IT'S LIKE BEHIND US IS TWO BLOCKS DOWN, IT'S AT A DIAGONAL OR 45 DEGREE ANGLE TO OUR STREET. SO THERE'S NO SIGHT LINE, UM, TO THE REAR OF OUR HOUSE. [01:45:03] THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY, UM, PUBLIC COMMENTS? YES, UH, WE DO HAVE A VOICEMAIL AND THERE WAS A LETTER SUBMITTED TO STAFF, UM, UNDER A DIFFERENT ADDRESS SO IT'S NOT IN YOUR FOLDER. SO I WILL PUT THAT ON THE SCREEN, UM, WHILE WE ARE LISTENING TO THE VOICEMAIL. JUST ONE MOMENT. OKAY. GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS KATHY VIC, 1 0 7 KING WILLIAM. THIS IS IN REGARDS TO AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 11. THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY OF SAN ANTONIO AWARDED A BUILDING GRANT FOR THE SUCCESSFUL COLUMN RESTORATION PROJECT AT 2 2 4 EAST CAROLINA. THIS WAS A SUBSTANTIAL TASK UNDERTAKEN BY THE APPLICANT TO CORRECT A VIOLATION MADE BY THE PREVIOUS OWNER. THE REAR ADDITION MODIFICATIONS IN QUESTION WERE ALSO THE WORK OF THE PREVIOUS OWNER. THE APPLICANT HAS SHOWN THAT THE REAR ADDITION IS NOT VISIBLE FROM THE STREET BEHIND IT, NOR IS IT VISIBLE FROM THE FRONT RIGHT OF WAY DUE TO TREES AND THE PROXIMITY OF THE NEIGHBORING HOUSES. THEREFORE, WE SUPPORT THE FENESTRATION MODIFICATION REQUEST, WHICH WOULD ALLOW THE APPLICANTS TO RECEIVE HISTORIC TAX CERTIFICATION FOR THE WORK THEY HAVE DONE IN GOOD FAITH TO RESTORE AND PRESERVE THIS HISTORIC HOME. THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. AND THAT CONCLUDES PUBLIC COMMENT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. SO MY HU MY HUSBAND'S ON THE CALL TOO. I DON'T KNOW IF HE HAD ANYTHING TO ADD. HE'S IN THE OTHER ROOM, BUT HE'S BEN STANDAL . MR. NO ADDITIONAL COMMENTS HERE. I THINK THAT IT'S BEEN, UM, UH, WELL SPOKEN TO HERE AND MOVING ON INTO THE, THE PUBLIC COMMENTS AND LETTERS HERE IS, IS, IS FINE MR. CHAIR, BASED ON THAT, I'LL BE READY FOR A MOTION. OKAY, LET'S, UH, JUST SEE IF ANYONE HAS ANY QUESTIONS BEFORE WE DO MOTION. ANY, ANY COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS CASE? WELL, UH, MORE FOR STAFF. UH, JUST A A CLARIFICATION, THE ADMINISTRATION MODIFICATION IS RE REFERENCING THE EXISTING, UH, DOOR WINDOW CONFIGURATION IN THE BACK. THAT IS CORRECT. SO CURRENTLY THE EXISTING FENESTRATION PATTERN IS CONSIDERED TO BE NON-COMPLIANT AS THE REQUEST TO, UM, SEEK APPROVAL FOR THAT IN 2019 WAS DENIED BY THE H D R C. SO UNTIL THIS, UH, FENESTRATION PATTERN IS APPROVED IN ITS EXISTING CONFIGURATION, THE PROPERTY WILL NOT BE ELIGIBLE FOR THE SUBSTANTIAL REHABILITATION TAX INCENTIVE. SO WHEN YOU SAY EXISTING FENESTRATION, YOU'RE SAYING THAT IT ALREADY, IT, IT HAD A FENESTRATION UH, CONFIGURATION THAT EXISTED IN, IN THE PERIOD WHERE WE KNEW AND THEN IT CHANGED AND THAT'S WHY IT'S NON-COMPLIANT? CORRECT. SO THERE WAS A PREVIOUSLY EXISTING REAR ADDITION, AND I'LL PUT THAT ON THE SCREEN NOW. UM, SO THE PREVIOUS PROPERTY OWNER REMOVED THIS REAR ADDITION THAT DOES APPEAR ON, I BELIEVE THE 1911 SANDBORN MAPS, UM, AND THEN INSTALLED THE CURRENT REAR ADDITION WITH THE CURRENT FENESTRATION PATTERN. AND SO THE UM, STAFF RECOMMENDATION BACK IN 2019 WAS THAT THEY RESTORE THE REAR ADDITION TO ITS PREVIOUSLY EXISTING CONDITION. UM, AND THE REQUEST TO APPROVE THE REAR ADDITION AS IT CURRENTLY EXISTS WAS DENIED BY THE H D R C. OKAY. JUST ONE, ONE MORE QUESTION THEN IN THE HISTORIC TAX CREDIT. UM, THE SPIRIT OF IT, I I, IS IT, IS IT A, IT'S A REQUIREMENT OR IS IT IN THE DISCRETION OF, LET'S SAY NOT THE H D R C YET, BUT IN TERMS OF THE DISCRETION OF O H P? YEAH, SO TO BE ELIGIBLE FOR THE SUBSTANTIAL REHABILITATION TAX INCENTIVE, THE APPLICANT MUST MEET A COST THRESHOLD, UH, WHICH THE APPLICANT HAS MET. AND THEN ALL EXTERIOR WORK MUST HAVE RECEIVED ALL, UM, NECESSARY CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS AND PERMITS AND INTERIOR WORK MUST BE PERMANENT AS WELL. UM, SO IF THERE ARE ANY EXISTING VIOLATIONS ON A PROPERTY AND THE PROPERTY IS NOT IN COMPLIANCE, IT'S NOT ELIGIBLE FOR THE TAX INCENTIVE. THANK YOU COMMISSIONER SINA. UH, THANK YOU. UM, THIS IS A QUESTION ALSO FOR STAFF AT A, ON A PREVIOUS CASE AND IN THE PAST WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT BLIND WINDOWS, UH, OR A TREATMENT THAT WOULD IMPLY THAT THERE WAS A WINDOW. WOULD THAT BE A SUITABLE SOLUTION FOR THIS EXAMPLE? FOR THIS CASE? SURE. SO IF THAT KIND OF A SOLUTION WAS APPROVED BY THE H D R C AND THEN THAT WAS INSTALLED BY THE PROPERTY OWNER, IT WOULD THEN BE ELIGIBLE FOR THE TAX INCENTIVE. OKAY. AND THAT COULD BE NOT A FULL WINDOW, BUT JUST THE UM, TRIMS AND [01:50:01] INFILL THAT WOULD SUGGEST A WINDOW IN THE PROPER LOCATIONS. CORRECT. UM, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR MS. AL. IS THAT, UM, SOMETHING THAT YOU GUYS MIGHT CONSIDER? WE WOULD REALLY HOPE NOT TO BECAUSE NO ONE WOULD SEE IT AND IT WOULD COME AT A COST OF COURSE IN SOME LEVEL OF MAINTENANCE TO, UH, INSTALL AND CERTAINLY KEEP UP THE HEALTH OF THAT AS A FEATURE ON THE REAR OF THE HOME. OKAY, THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER FISH, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTION? NO, I DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, BUT I'LL BE SUPPORTIVE MAKING A MOTION AS SOON AS WE ARE ABLE. DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? ALRIGHT. NO, UH, COMMISSIONER ZUKA? ANY QUESTION? NO QUESTIONS. OKAY. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER FISH. UM, I DO RECALL THE, THE PREVIOUS HEARINGS WITH THE PREVIOUS OWNER ON, UM, UNAUTHORIZED MODIFICATIONS BROADLY TO THIS. AND I APPLAUD, UH, THE CURRENT OWNER FOR TAKING CORRECTIVE ACTIONS ON A NUMBER OF THOSE THINGS. I'LL BE IN SUPPORT, UH, OF THE REQUEST. SO I MOVE FOR APPROVAL OF THE FENESTRATION MODIFICATIONS AND APPROVAL OF THE HISTORIC TAX CREDIT CERTIFICATION. SECOND. OKAY. SO WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND DISCUSSION OF THE MOTION COMM. COMMISSIONER VELASQUEZ, I, I'M JUST, UH, I WANT TO, I WANT TO BETTER UNDERSTAND ON THE, THE TAX CREDIT CERTIFICATION WITHIN THEN, UM, MAKE THE, THE, THE ADJUSTMENTS THAT WERE MADE TO THE REAR, DOES IT MAKE THEM NOW PROPER? IT DOES. SO YOU SAID IT MEANS THE DOOR STYLE, EVERYTHING THAT'S BACK THERE, THAT IS REALLY COMMON KIND OF, AND STAFF CAN CLARIFY IF THE H D R C IS TO APPROVE THE FENESTRATION PATTERN AS IT CURRENTLY EXISTS, THE PROPERTY WOULD THEN BE CONSIDERED IN COMPLIANCE AND ELIGIBLE FOR THE TAX INCENTIVE. SO THEN HISTORIC TAX CERTIFICATION WOULD BE APPROVED TODAY AND THE APPLICANT COULD RETURN TO THE H D R C TO TO REQUEST HISTORIC TAX VERIFICATION, WHICH IS THE PART TWO OF THE APPLICATION PROCESS. WELL, UH, I WANNA BE SUPPORTIVE. THE, THE ONLY THING IS THAT WE JUST HAD A NEW CONSTRUCTION THAT HAD A WALL THAT HAD NO FENESTRATION AND WE DIDN'T ENABLE IT. AND THEN IT'S, IT'S NOT A HISTORIC WALL. AND NOW WE HAVE A HISTORIC WALL THAT HAS NO FENESTRATION AND IT'S AN EQUAL, IT'S, THIS IS ACTUALLY A GREATER SITUATION. BUT I MEAN, UM, I WANNA BE SUPPORTIVE OF THE MOTION. I WANT TO ELABORATE ON MY SECOND TO EXPLAIN. OKAY. SO MR. COMMISSIONER VELASQUEZ, UM, SO TWO OF THE REASONS WHY I SECOND THE MOTION AND IT WOULD'VE BEEN SIMILAR TO WHAT MOTION IS. UM, THIS VIOLATION WAS NOT DONE BY THE APPLICANT. THE APPLICANT HAS ACTUALLY PURCHASED THIS HOME AND HAS ALREADY DONE EXTENSIVE WORK TO CORRECT OTHER VIOLATIONS OF THIS HOME. UM, ONE, UH, THIS IS NOT THE FIRST TIME THAT WE SEE NEW HOMEOWNERS TAKING ON THE BURDEN OF VIOLATIONS. AND I FEEL LIKE WHEN AN APPLICANT HAS DONE A REASONABLE EFFORT TO CORRECT AT LEAST MANY OF THE VIOLATIONS, AND I THINK, I ALWAYS THINK I WOULD RATHER FOCUS ON THE VIOLATIONS THAT ARE VISIBLE FROM THE STREET THAN THE ONES THAT ARE NOT VISIBLE. AND I THINK THE APPLICANT TODAY MADE A VERY GOOD CASE OF WHAT'S VISIBLE FROM THE BACK, UM, THE WHATEVER THE DOORS, UH, THAT IS NOT IN QUESTION TODAY. SO IT WAS THE UPPER WINDOWS OF THE SECOND FLOOR. IT WAS MORE THE FENESTRATION, THE MORE THAN MATERIAL. UM, I DID NOT AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER SENOS PROPOSAL BECAUSE ONE IS, AGAIN, I THE BURDEN OF PUTTING THIS IN A NEW OWNER THAT HAS ALREADY DONE SUBSTANTIAL WORK TO THE CHANGE IN THE FRONT. AND THEN SECOND THAT MEANS CUTTING INTO THE SIDING. I'M WORRIED ABOUT THAT. AND THAT WAS WHAT LIKE WORD OF FENESTRATION, LIKE WATER, LIKE PENETRATING TO WHAT'S ALREADY BEEN DONE. SO THAT WAS KIND OF MY WORRY AND WHY I WOULDN'T SUPPORT IT. AND SECOND, WE HAVE BOTH LETTERS FROM THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY VOICEMAIL AND LETTERS FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD, WHICH IS ALWAYS ALSO IMPORTANT TO GET THEIR SUPPORT AND THAT IS WHY I WAS SUPPORTED THIS MOTION. SO QUESTION FOR STAFF. IS THE CURRENT APPLICANT FINANCIALLY BENEFITING FROM THE WINDOW MODIFICATIONS? IS THAT PART OF THE TAX CREDIT GOING TO THEM OR IS THE TAX CREDIT REALLY TIED TO THE WORK THAT THEY DID? THE CORRECTIVE MEASURES THAT THEY DID? SO THEY QUALIFY FOR THE TAX INCENTIVE BASED ON CORRECTIVE WORK THAT THEY HAVE ALREADY DONE AND OTHER IMPROVEMENTS. UM, SO THEY ALREADY QUALIFY FOR THE COST THRESHOLD, IF THAT IS THE QUESTION. UM, OF COURSE THE FENESTRATION MODIFICATIONS COULD ALSO BE USED TO QUALIFY FOR THE TAX INCENTIVE, BUT THAT WOULDN'T BE NECESSARY IN THIS CASE SINCE THEY ALREADY QUALIFY. BUT MY POINT IS, IS THAT THEY HAD NO EXPENDITURE ON ON THE CHANGES THAT WERE DONE PREVIOUS TO THEIR OWNERSHIP AND SO THEREFORE THEY SHOULDN'T BENEFIT FINANCIALLY TO THESE, YOU KNOW, INAPPROPRIATE MODIFICATIONS [01:55:01] THAT WERE DONE. AND THIS IS TO THE POINT OF, UH, COMMISSIONER VELASQUEZ, IT SEEMS LIKE IT'S, YOU KNOW, I I I AM SUPPORTIVE OF, OF UH, YOU KNOW, REWARDING THIS, THIS PROPERTY OWNER FOR THE WORK, THE GOOD WORK THAT THEY'VE DONE. BUT, UH, IS THAT ALSO REWARDING THEM FOR PREVIOUS WORK THAT THAT WAS NOT IN COMPLIANCE? SO IF I UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION CORRECTLY, THE PROPERTY OWNER, THE CURRENT PROPERTY OWNER IS NOT USING THE COSTS OF THE REAR ADDITION THAT WAS PREVIOUSLY INSTALLED BY THE PREVIOUS PROPERTY OWNER TO QUALIFY FOR THE TAX INCENTIVE. SO ALL OF THE COSTS THAT THEY HAVE, UM, THAT THEY'VE LISTED TO QUALIFY FOR THE TAX INCENTIVE, THAT'S WORK THAT THEY HAVE DONE SINCE THIS VIOLATION WAS ALREADY IN PLACE. OKAY, THANK YOU. AND COMMISSIONER GROOVE, YOU, YOU PUT FORTH THE MOTION CORRECT? COMMISSIONER FISH? I SECOND. OH, COMMISSIONER FISH. SORRY. ALRIGHT. ALRIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. APPRECIATE IT. UM, COMMISSIONER FISH? UM, I REALLY DON'T HAVE ANY COMMENTS. I THINK THE, THE, THE VISIBILITY IS AN IMPORTANT PART OF THIS. I'M VERY FAMILIAR WITH THE BLOCKS, UH, TO THE REAR OF, UM, THE STREET AND UM, I'M COMFORTABLE WITH WHERE THIS HAS LANDED. I THINK THIS IS THE APPROPRIATE WAY FORWARD WITH THIS CASE. UM, DO YOU WISH TO FORMULATE A MOTION AND, AND TAKING LIBERTIES AS THE CHAIR? I WOULD, I WOULD ASK THAT MAYBE THERE MIGHT BE SOME CLARIFICATION THAT THE, UH, FENESTRATION MODIFICATIONS THAT WERE DONE IN THE BACK ARE NOT PART OF THIS, UH, THIS APPROVAL PROCESS. 'CAUSE I DON'T WANT TO HAVE THAT BE ESTABLISHED AS THAT THOUGH. THIS IS RECEIVING THE, THE, THE SEAL OF APPROVAL OF THIS COMMISSION. COULD STAFF OR THE CITY ATTORNEY MAKE A SUGGESTION ON, ON WHAT LANGUAGE MIGHT MEET THIS UH, DESIRE? I MEAN YOU EFFECTIVELY ARE APPROVING IT. I I'M SORRY IF WE DIDN'T UNDERSTAND THE INITIAL QUESTION. SO EVEN THOUGH THIS ISN'T WORK, THAT WAS PART OF THE OWNER, THE CURRENT OWNER'S EXPENDITURES TO MEET THE HISTORIC TAX INSTEAD OF THRESHOLD. UM, THE OTHER REQUIREMENT IS THAT YOU NOT HAVE ANY VIOLATIONS ON RECORD. SO THE ACTION TODAY APPROVES THE CURRENT CONFIGURATION IN THE REAR SO THAT WE RESOLVE THE VIOLATION ISSUE AND THEN THE OWNER IS ABLE TO PROCEED WITH THIS OR TAX CERTIFICATION 'CAUSE THEY'VE ALREADY QUALIFIED. I THINK THAT WOULD BE THE LANGUAGE, RIGHT. APPROVING THE CURRENT ADMINISTRATION TO REMOVE CURRENT VIOLATIONS. WELL, AND AND MR. CHAIR, THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT MY, MY COMMENTS WERE LEADING TOWARD BECAUSE WE'RE IN THE SAME MEETING AS A PREVIOUS, UH, IT'S THE SAME, IT'S THE EXACT SAME CONDITION, NOT VISIBLE, BUT THAT'S DUE CONSTRUCTION. THIS IS, YOU MEAN EVEN JUST USING THE TERMS OF TAX CREDIT, RIGHT? YES. SO CAN IT BE APPROVING OF, OF THE, THE WORK DONE BUT NOT, UM, BUT BUT NOT THE VIOLATION BECAUSE IT WAS DONE BY A PREVIOUS OWNER? THOSE ARE EFFECTIVELY THE SAME. I MEAN IF, IF, IF THE ONLY QUE THE ONLY QUESTION TODAY ON THE AGENDA IS THE CURRENT CONFIGURATION THAT YOU SEE IN THIS PICTURE. IF THAT IS APPROVED THEN THE HISTORIC TAX CERTIFICATION IS ALSO APPROVED BECAUSE THEY'VE MET THAT THRESHOLD AND THE ISSUE REGARDING THE VIOLATION HAS BEEN RESOLVED. OKAY. RIGHT. Y YES. UH, COMMISSIONER FISH, YOU'VE MADE YOUR MOTION CORRECT. OKAY. AND WE HAVE A SECOND CORRECT. ALRIGHT. ANY, UH, I THINK WE'VE DISCUSSED IT. WELL, LET'S JUST DO OUR ROLL CALL AND SEE HOW THIS GOES. FISH. AYE. SAVINA NAY VELAZQUEZ AYE. MASUKA AYE GROUP. AYE. BAKER AYE. AND CARPENTER NAY. MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH AND THANK YOU FOR THE, THE GOOD WORK THAT YOU'VE DONE ON THIS AND TAKING ON THE VIOLATIONS IT'S, UH, THAT YOU INHERITED. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. YEP. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. NEXT CASE AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 12 H D R C, CASE NUMBER 2022 DASH 5 44 3 54 NORTH DRIVE. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO ONE, REPLACE THE EXISTING COMPOSITION SHINGLE ROOF ON THE GARAGE WITH A CORRUGATED METAL ROOF TO MATCH THE PATIO COVER AND THE REAR ACCESSORY STRUCTURE. AND TWO, MODIFY THE GABLE ROOF FORM TO A FLAT ROOF FORM AND RAISE THE HEIGHT OF THE TOP PLATE OF THE GARAGE. ITEM ONE STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE ROOF MATERIAL CHANGE ON THE REAR ACCESSORY STRUCTURE. BASED ON FINDINGS A THROUGH C STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE APPLICANT INSTALLS A REPLACEMENT COMPOSITION [02:00:01] SHINGLE ROOF TO MATCH THE PREVIOUSLY EXISTING ROOF. ITEM TWO. STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE ROOF FORM MODIFICATION BASED ON FINDING D STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE APPLICANT RETAINS THE FRONT GABLE AND SHED ROOF FORMS. AS A CASE COMMENT, THIS APPLICATION PREVIOUSLY CAME TO STAFF AS A POST-WORK APPLICATION, UH, WITH A REQUEST TO REPLACE THE TERMITE DAMAGED WOOD SIDING ON THE REAR ACCESSORY STRUCTURE AND TO REPLACE THE EXISTING ROOF WITH A CORRUGATED METAL ROOF TO MATCH THE CARPORT ROOF. UM, STAFF WORKED WITH THE, UM, APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER TO MAKE THE REQUESTS, UH, ELIGIBLE FOR ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL. UH, STAFF AT THIS TIME DIDN'T MISUNDERSTOOD THE EXISTING CONDITIONS AND PREVIOUS CONDITIONS OF THE GARAGE. UM, AND THE APPLICANT WAS ACTUALLY REQUESTING TO REPLACE THE EXISTING COMPOSITION SHINGLE ROOF WITH A METAL ROOF, WHICH WOULD'VE COME TO H D R C, HAD STAFF NOT MISUNDERSTOOD. UM, SO THE APPLICANT IS COMING TO THE H D R C NOW TO REQUEST APPROVAL FOR THESE, UH, FOR THESE COMPLETED MODIFICATIONS AND THE PROPERTY OWNERS, KIM BISHOP AND LOUIS VAL, THANK YOU ARE WITH US IN PERSON. SO PLEASE WE DO EVERYTHING TOGETHER? YES. GOOD AFTERNOON, PLEASE DO. GOOD AFTERNOON. I'M LISA DENNIS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. UM, WE, WE ARE TAKEN BACK THAT WE'RE HERE TO REQUEST ANYTHING FROM YOU. UM, BECAUSE ON OCTOBER 10TH WE GOT OUR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS AND SO WE WENT AHEAD AND FINISHED OUR BUILDING, AND, UM, WE DID EVERYTHING THAT WAS ASKED BY MAKING IT ALL WOOD, ALL WOOD WINDOWS, AND ALL OF THAT. AND SO IT ENDED UP COSTING WHAT WE THOUGHT WAS GONNA BE ABOUT $8,000 IN FIXING ALL OUR TERMITE DAMAGE, WHICH COULD, THE WHOLE PLACE WAS JUST FALLING DOWN, UM, LIKE YOU'D WALK IN IT AND BUGS WERE FALLING ON ME TO REPLACE THAT. IT ENDED UP COSTING ALMOST $17,000 TO REPLACE, TO FIX OUR GARAGE. UM, AND THEN WE GOT TOLD, OH, WAIT, WE MADE A MISTAKE, AND IT'S GONNA COST YOU ANOTHER 18,000 TO DO IT AGAIN. SO, UM, WE ARE HERE TO ASK YOU GUYS TO NOT MAKE US DO THIS AGAIN, . WE, WE ALREADY HAVE OUR CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL, SO I'LL ENTERTAIN QUESTIONS AS FAR AS TIMELINE OF THINGS HAPPENING. UM, THE COUNCILWOMAN WAS BRIEFED ON THE TIMELINE AND THE INFORMATION THAT, UH, THE UNFORTUNATE EVENTS THAT LED TO THIS SITUATION THAT WE ARE HERE AT, AT THIS POINT. UM, SO, UM, WHAT, LIKE, UH, KIM SAID, WE ARE ASKING FOR THE COUNCIL TO APPROVE THE, THE TWO, UM, ITEMS, UM, WHICH IS, AND IT'S A LITTLE EMBARRASSING, BUT ALL THAT STUFF IS WHAT WE ARE ARTISTS, AND THAT'S OUR INVENTORY. THAT WAS, IT'S RUINED NOW. IT WAS IN THE GARAGE. AND BECAUSE WE HAD TO SIT IT OUTSIDE AND WAIT SO LONG, UM, IT'S ALL RUINED NOW. SO WE'VE ALSO LOST ABOUT, ABOUT 10,000 THOUSAND DOLLARS WORTH OF INVENTORY AND ARTWORK, AND NOW WE HAVE TO PAY ALMOST ANOTHER $2,000 TO HAVE IT HAULED OFF. SO, UM, I BELIEVE OUR, OUR COUNCILWOMAN SPOKE TO THE COMMISSIONER IN CHARGE OF OUR, OF OUR AREA WITH THAT, AND THE COMMISSIONER'S WITH OUR, UM, UM, BEEN AWARE OF, UH, ALL THAT INFORMATION THAT WE SENT TO OUR COUNCILWOMAN. SO THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE. AND LET ME JUST CLARIFY THAT FOR A SECOND, IF I CAN. UH, I WAS NOT IN CONTACT WITH A COUNCILWOMAN, A STAFF PERSON FROM THE COUNCIL DISTRICT CONTACTED ME TO LET ME KNOW THAT, UM, THAT YOU WERE INTERESTED, BUT WE NE WE NEVER HAD A CONVERSATION, RIGHT? UM, I JUST WAS SENT, YOU KNOW, THAT THERE WAS NEIGHBORS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. UH, TO MY QUESTION, HOW WAS THIS PRESENTED? LIKE, HOW DID YOU FIND OUT THAT YOU WERE ON THIS CASE TODAY? AND I THINK THIS IS FURTHER ISSUE FOR WHY, THE REASON WHY I WAS CONTACTED AT FIVE O'CLOCK ON FRIDAY, WE GOT NOTIFICATION THAT WE HAD TO BE HERE TODAY, WHICH IS REALLY HARD BECAUSE I TEACH AN AFTERSCHOOL PROGRAM. SO I HAVE MY KIDS HAVING THEIR CHRISTMAS PARTY RIGHT NOW WITHOUT ME. UM, . SO THIS WAS, UM, WE FOUND OUT FIVE O'CLOCK ON FRIDAY, AND IF WE, YOU NEED ALL THAT INFORMATION THAT WE FORWARDED TO OUR COUNCIL PERSON, WE CAN MAKE IT ALL AVAILABLE OUR PERMISSION. BUT AFTER GARAGE, WE DIDN'T CHANGE THE FOOTPRINT AND IT'S IN THE BACK, AND YOU CAN'T EVEN SEE IT FROM THE STREET OR THE ALLEY. BUT TO CLARIFY, THERE WAS SIGNIFICANT REFRAMING OF THE, OF THE GARAGE, RIGHT? I MEAN, IT WASN'T, IT WASN'T, NO, NOT THE REFRAMING. WE JUST, WE DID HAVE TO REPLACE A LOT OF WOOD. THERE WAS A LOT OF, IT WAS BROUGHT DOWN BASICALLY TO THE BROKEN BASE OF THAT WAS PIECEMEAL TOGETHER FROM 1943 WHEN THAT, UH, STRUCTURE WAS BUILT. UM, IT DOESN'T, WE WENT TO THE CITY AND WE FOUND THAT THE STRUCTURE DIDN'T EVEN EXIST ON THE FLOODPLAIN MAP. UM, AND [02:05:01] THAT WAS AN ADDITIONAL FORWARD THAT WE SENT, UH, TO OUR REPRESENTATIVE. UM, SO, UM, IT WAS JUST, WE REPLACED WHATEVER WAS ROTTEN AND EATEN BY THE TERMITES, WHICH WERE STARTING TO SPREAD TO THE REST OF THE COMMUNITY. AND AS WE STARTED TAKING OFF MORE, WE HAD TO, WE, WE KEPT THE SAME FOOTPRINT OF THE, UH, GARAGE. AND THEN WE, UH, MADE THE FOOTPRINT, UH, FIT TOGETHER WITH REINFORCED, UM, RECASTING OF THE CEMENT FLOOR. UM, SO ALL THAT WAS, UH, CHANGED WAS THE, THE, THE MATCHING OF THE PATIO TOP TO THE, UH, ROOF, THE PATIO ON THE BACK TO THE ROOF, WHICH I WASN'T AWARE THAT IT WAS A ROOF GABLE THAT HAD TO GO THROUGH ALL THAT. SO ALL THIS WAS EXPEDITED REAL QUICK, AND, AND THERE WAS AN UNFORTUNATE SET OF EVENTS THAT BROUGHT US TO THIS. OKAY. AND WE HAVE A PUBLIC COMMENT. WE DO HAVE ONE VOICEMAIL, AND I CAN PLAY THAT NOW. OH, IT'S AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 12 3 54 NORTH DRIVE, CASE NUMBER 20 22 5 4 4. MY NAME IS ROBIN FOSTER, OFFERING COMMENTS ON BEHALF OF DREA GARZA, PRESIDENT OF MONTICELLO PARK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, M P N A, AND THE M P N A BOARD OF DIRECTORS, PO O BOX 1 0 0 3 1 5 7 8 2 0 1. WE SUPPORT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ITEM NUMBER ONE AND NUMBER TWO, NOT ONLY DID THE APPLICANT NOT APPLY FOR THE CORRECT SCOPE OF WORK WITH O H P, THE PROPER SCOPE OF WORK WAS NOT DISCLOSED IN THE PERMITS APPLIED FOR AND RECEIVED FROM D S D FOR THE RECORD. TWO BUILDING PERMITS WERE ISSUED BY D S D ONE FOR MINOR BUILDING REPAIR AND ONE FOR REROOFING ON OCTOBER 12TH IN THE REROOF PERMIT APPLICATION. THE SCOPE OF WORK IS DEFINED AS NO CHANGE TO PITCH, REMOVING EXISTING SHINGLES AND REPLACING WITH SAME TYPE, NO OTHER WORK TO BE DONE IN THE MINOR BUILDING REPAIR PERMIT APPLICATION. THE SCOPE OF WORK WAS DEFINED AS NO STRUCTURAL WORK INVOLVING FRAMING OF ROOF, WALLS, DOORS, WINDOWS, FLOORS, OR STAIRS WITHOUT THE PROPER SCOPE OF WORK IDENTIFIED. A COMPLETE BUILDING PLAN REVIEW DID NOT OCCUR FOR THIS PROPERTY. WE RAISED CONCERN WITH THE PROCESSING OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVALS FOR CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS BY O H B STAFF, BECAUSE ONE OF THE FUNDAMENTAL ELEMENTS OF AN APPLICATION FOR REPAIRS IS THE REQUIREMENT OF PHOTOS OF THE AREAS IN QUESTION. A GOOGLE EARTH IMAGE SHOWS THE GARAGE WITH A COMPOSITION SHINGLED ROOF. THE PHOTOS IN THE H D R C APPLICATION SHOW THAT THE GARAGE IMPROVEMENTS WERE COMPLETED AFTER O H P SITE VISIT ON OCTOBER 28TH. MOREOVER, GIVEN THE EXTENT, EXTENT OF THE MODIFICATIONS REQUESTED, WINDOWS RAISED, HEADER PLATE HEIGHT, FOUNDATION, SIDING, ROOFING, ROOF PROFILE, GARAGE DOOR, ET CETERA, THIS APPLICATION SHOULD HAVE GONE BEFORE H D R C INITIALLY. THANK YOU FOR RECEIVING MP A'S COMMENTS. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER VELAZQUEZ, YOU HAD A QUESTION? YES, SIR. MR. CHAIR. YOU KNOW, I THINK, I THINK MUCH OF WHAT WE'RE CONSIDERING IS IN THAT EMAIL THERE OR IN, IN THAT VOICE MESSAGE, BECAUSE AT SOME POINT THE, THE, THE, THE PERSON THAT LEFT THE MESSAGE TURNS HER ATTENTION TOWARDS, UH, O H P. AND, UM, YOU KNOW, I THINK THIS IS KIND OF THE INHERENT, UH, PROBLEM THAT HAVE TO BE WORKED OUT, OR IT'S JUST PART OF THE, THE, THE PROCESS THAT O H P HAS SOME DISCRETION TO DECIDE WHAT COMES BEFORE THE H D R C AS OPPOSED TO EVERYTHING JUST COMING BEFORE THE H D R C. UM, SO IT, IT SEEMS THAT THE CIRCUMSTANCES WOULD BE MORE A CONVERSATION ABOUT HOW IT HAPPENED THAN ABOUT THE ARCHITECTURAL ASPECTS OF THIS CONVERSATION OR THIS, THIS APPLICANT. SO IT SEEMS IT'S INCUMBENT ON US TO, UM, NOT PENALIZE THE APPLICANT FOR WHAT IS VERY CLEARLY, UH, UM, AN OMISSION ON THE PART OF THE OFFICE OF PRESERVATION. AND, AND FOR THE HARD WORK THAT O H P DOES AND THE STAFF DOES. I MEAN, YOU'RE NOT GONNA BAT A HUNDRED PERCENT, THAT'S JUST A REALITY. SOMETIMES THINGS, YOU KNOW, PASS SUICIDE. I DON'T MEAN THAT AS A NEGATIVE CRITICISM, PARTICULARLY WITH RESPECT TO THE AMOUNT OF WORKLOAD THAT THAT'S, THAT, THAT, THAT YOU GUYS HAVE. SO, SO I THINK ONE QUESTION THOUGH TO STAFF IS, UM, WHAT WAS DE THE SCOPE OF WORK THAT WAS DESCRIBED TO YOU? YOU, THAT IS WHAT YOU'RE DECIDING WHETHER IT COMES TO US OR NOT, AND THEY HAVE, THEY HAVE PRETTY CLEAR DELINEATION IN THE, UH, U D C AS TO WHICH THINGS ARE SUPPOSED TO COME BEFORE THIS COMMISSION, WHICH ONES THEY CAN, UH, DECIDE, UH, INTERNALLY WITH O H P TO HELP THE EFFICIENCIES OF THIS PROCESS. SO WAS THERE A DISCREPANCY IN THE SCOPE OF WORK THAT WAS DESCRIBED TO YOU AND WHAT YOU'VE OBSERVED ON THE SITE? CORRECT. SO STAFF WORKED WITH MR. VALDERS ON THE INITIAL APPLICATION. UM, AND WE WORKED TOGETHER BY EMAIL AND BY PHONE TO DISCUSS THE SCOPE OF WORK THAT WAS REQUESTED. AND WE WORKED TOGETHER ALSO TO DETERMINE WHAT COULD BE ELIGIBLE FOR ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL. SO THAT MEANT CHANGING SOME OF THE SCOPES OF WORK, WHICH INCLUDED, UH, THE SIDING REPLACEMENT TO BE IN [02:10:01] KIND AND ALSO THE IN IN-KIND WINDOW REPLACEMENT AS WELL. SO PREVIOUSLY THERE WERE SOME SMALLER WINDOWS PROPOSED THAT WE DISCUSSED WOULD BE, UH, WOULD REQUIRE H D R C REVIEW. AND SO DURING OUR DISCUSSIONS, UM, THE SCOPE OF WORK WAS UNDERSTOOD AS IN-KIND ROOF REPLACEMENT. UH, SO WE HADN'T DISCUSSED A ROOF FORM MODIFICATION, BUT THE APPLICANT DID SAY REPEATEDLY THAT THEY WANTED TO MATCH THE EXISTING ROOF LINE, WHICH NOW OVER TIME WE REALIZE WAS TO MATCH THAT EXISTING CARPORT ROOF LINE. SO THERE JUST WASN'T THAT CLARITY IN OUR DISCUSSIONS WHEN WE WERE DISCUSSING THE SCOPE OF WORK EXCEPT FOR THIS DRAWING THAT WE TURNED IN, IN OUR APPLICATION IN THE INITIAL APPLICATION. SO, AND IT LOOKS JUST LIKE THAT , AND THAT'S IN THE INITIAL PAPERWORK THAT'S ON, AT LEAST ON THE DOCKET, UM, THAT YOU HAVE. UM, SO LIKE I SAID, THERE WAS AN UNFORTUNATE, UH, SET OF EVENTS THAT BROUGHT US HERE. NOTHING WAS MEANT TO BE A MISLEAD BECAUSE WE WERE ALSO TRYING TO PREVENT THE, THE SPOILAGE OF ALL OUR MATERIALS THAT WE HAVE STORED IN THE GARAGE. AND THERE'S, UM, THAT REALLY BROUGHT US TO, FIRST OF ALL, I GOT A, A CITATION THAT SAID I WAS GONNA HAVE TO APPEAR BEFORE A CITY MAGISTRATE BECAUSE I WAS GOING TO BE UNDER CHARGES OF PUBLIC NUISANCE. I'M A SCHOOL TEACHER, I CANNOT GO TO JAIL BECAUSE I'LL LOSE MY JOB. SO MY, MY LIVELIHOOD WAS THREATENED AND THAT'S WHY I CALLED RACHEL RIGHT AWAY, SAID, I NEED TO GET THIS DONE RIGHT AWAY. I CAN'T, I CAN'T GO TO THE, TO MUNICIPAL COURT. THEN I HAVE TO TELL MY PRINCIPAL, HEY, I GOT, I GOT CITED AND NOW I'M A PUBLIC NUISANCE AFTER 22 YEARS OF BEING HERE AND CONTRIBUTING TO SAN ANTONIO AND THE CULTURE. SO THAT'S THAT ALL KIND OF, YEAH. YOU KNOW, THERE WAS NO, I SOUNDS LIKE THERE'S A MASSIVE MIS MISCOMMUNICATION GOING ON HERE. UM, RACHEL, COULD YOU GO TO PAGE 24 PLEASE? I JUST HAVE ONE OTHER QUESTION AND WE'LL GET BACK ONTO TRACK HERE WITH PROCEDURES. SO IN THAT LOWER PHOTOGRAPH THERE, THERE IS A ROOF THAT HAS A BROKEN PITCH TO IT, THAT IT IS AN EASED WRITTEN. YES. DOES THAT STILL EXIST OR DID THAT GET TOTALLY REFRAMED THAT BROUGHT IN? NO, THAT'S WHAT WAS FALLING IN. 'CAUSE THAT'S WHERE OUR, OUR WASHER AND DRYER IS. AND I, WE COULDN'T EVEN GET INTO OUR WASHER AND DRYER ANYMORE 'CAUSE IT WAS COMING ALL DOWN AND WE HAD LIKE, BUGS WERE LIKE, I WAS JUST LIKE, HE WAS IN CHARGE OF WASHING PHOTOS. THERE'S PHOTOGRAPHS OF, OF ALL THE TERMITE MATERIALS. SO, SO YEAH, UNDOUBTEDLY THE CONDITIONS WARRANTED SIGNIFICANT REPAIRS, BUT IT SEEMS LIKE WE'VE LOST AND THAT WAS AN ADD HISTORIC PROFILE ADD ON? THAT WAS, THAT WAS AN ADD-ON TOO, BECAUSE WE STILL HAVE THE ORIGINAL PLANKED WALL FROM THE ORIGINAL, ORIGINAL GARAGE IS STILL INSIDE THERE. AND SO WE DIDN'T EVEN TAKE, WE DIDN'T TOUCH ANY OF THAT. AND OUR CONTRACTOR WAS REALLY GREAT. HE REALLY, HE REALLY WORKED TO MAKE SURE WHATEVER WOOD HE COULD SAVE, HE SAVED. MR. CHAIRMAN. YES. I'LL GET BACK TO YOU. QUESTIONS? YES. QUESTIONS. I DO. I WAS GONNA ASK FOR A CONSIDERATION, MR. CHAIR, LIKE IF WE'RE GOING INTO OPINIONS OR FACTS, UM, AS A REPRESENTATIVE OF THIS DISTRICT AND AS SUPPORT OF, UH, OF MY NEIGHBORS, I WOULD LIKE TO DO A MOTION FOR D R C. I WON'T DO IT, BUT I'M JUST SAYING THAT THAT IS SOMETHING THAT I WOULD LIKE FOR US TO REALLY GET A HAND OF WHAT HAS BEEN DONE BECAUSE CLEARLY I ALSO FEEL VERY IN AGREEMENT WITH COMMISSIONER VELASQUEZ THAT THEY SHOULD NOT BE HELD LIABLE FOR MISCOMMUNICATIONS. AND I THINK THAT THERE'S A WAY THAT WE CAN SOLVE THIS. UM, I THINK THEY HAVE BEEN, BEEN IN GOOD FAITH. THAT'S BEEN WORK DONE IN GOOD FAITH. ALRIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. UM, PRIOR TO, WE WILL, WE'LL HAVE THAT AS A MOTION. PRIOR TO THAT THOUGH, ANY, UH, OF FURTHER QUESTIONS TO BE ABLE TO SUPPORT THAT MOTION OR, YEAH, I DID HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS AND I REALIZED I HAD MORE THAN A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. SO I'M, UH, IN AGREEMENT WITH, UH, COMMISSIONER GRU THAT THE COM IT'S NOT COMPLEX, THE COMPLICATEDNESS OF THE FORMS, THE SITE PLAN, THE MATERIALS AND THE TIMELINE DO REQUIRE A SITE VISIT. I THINK SO. SO, MR. GRU, WOULD YOU LIKE THE MOTION TO YEAH, SO I'LL DO A SITE VISIT, MOTION SITE VISIT ALSO, BECAUSE I THINK IT GOES BACK TO LAST CASE, UH, SOME KIND OF LIKE HOW MUCH IS THE VISIBILITY? THERE'S ALREADY BEEN SUBSTANTIAL WORK DONE. UM, I THINK, UM, I MEAN I CAN CLARIFY THIS, UH, WAS BROUGHT TO US AND WAS BROUGHT TO STAFF BY THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, WHICH IS ALSO SOMETHING THAT, YOU KNOW, THEY, IT WAS NOT BECAUSE THE, THE O H P CAME AND, AND, AND WE'RE LIKE LOOKING AT IT OR SOMETHING. IT HAS BEEN BROUGHT UP. SO I THINK ONE OF THE IMPORTANT FACTORS HERE IS I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT, UM, THE DECISION THAT WE ULTIMATELY MAKE, WE CAN ALSO LOOK AT IT. SO IT WOULD BE A, A SITE VISIT. SO WE ALSO CAN SEE WHAT IS ACTUALLY VISIBLE FROM THE STREET AND WHAT IS THE SUBSTANTIAL WORK THAT HAS BEEN DONE. WE DID SUBMIT PICTURES FROM THE ALLEY, FROM THE FRONT OF THE STREET, UM, AND, UM, FROM THE NEIGHBOR'S, UH, HOUSE AS WELL, UM, [02:15:01] TO, UH, WHEN RACHEL REQUESTED THOSE PHOTOGRAPHS FOR THIS. SO THEY ARE IN THERE AS WELL, UM, IN THE DOCKET. YEAH, I THINK THOSE WERE HELPFUL, BUT I THINK IT ALSO BE HELPFUL FOR COMMISSIONERS TO SEE IT FIRSTHAND. MM-HMM. , DO WE HAVE A SECOND TO THE PROPOSED, UH, MOTION FOR C? I'LL SECOND. I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S A MOTION ALREADY MADE, BUT MR. CHAIR, I'M, I'M, I'M, MY, MY FEELING I GUESS FEELINGS. THERE WAS A MOTION RECOMMENDATION. THERE WAS A MOTION MADE AND THERE'S A SECOND. THERE IS A SECOND. OKAY, SO, WELL, I DO YOU HAVE, DO YOU HAVE A COMMENT ABOUT THE, THE MOTION? WELL, YES I DO BECAUSE I, I, AND, AND RESPECTFUL OF THE MOTION I THINK IS A GOOD MOTION. I, I, BUT, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, THERE'S A BUT'S, YOU KNOW, COMMENT MADE FROM THE COMMUNITY THAT RECOGNIZES SOMETHING, UH, RECOGNITION FROM STAFF THAT, UH, SOMETHING DID OCCUR AND, UM, UH, YOU KNOW, UH, UH, PARALLEL, UH, TO, TO, TO THE COMMENTS FROM THE OWNERS. IT, I MEAN, IT, IT, IT DOESN'T SEEM PRACTICAL TO TURN THE CLOCK BACK THAT IF THIS PROJECT IS COMPLETED, THAT PERHAPS THE BEST, UM, SOLUTION IS TO APPROVE AS COMPLETED. AND THERE'S ENOUGH CONFUSION TO, TO, TO, TO, TO, TO BE UNDERSTOOD, UM, AND PERHAPS GETTING THIS OFF OUR DOCKET, LETTING THESE GOOD PEOPLE GO AND ON WITH THEIR LIVES AND, AND WE ALL JUST DO A BETTER JOB TO MAKE SURE THESE THINGS DON'T FALL THROUGH THE CRACKS. BECAUSE THE D R C, WE'RE GONNA GO OUT TO A D R C, BUT WE W W I MEAN, I MEAN, SHORT OF TURNING THE CLOCK BACK OR, OR, OR DECONSTRUCTING, UH, IT JUST DOESN'T SEEM PRACTICAL, PARTICULARLY WITH RESPECT TO THE CLEAR MISCOMMUNICATION ON ALL PARTIES. I APPRECIATE THAT. BUT I THINK THERE'S ALSO, UH, KEEN INTEREST ON THE PART OF THE COMMUNITY SO THAT I THINK THEY WOULD KIND OF EXPECT US TO HAVE AT LEAST A D R C TO DO OUR DUE DILIGENCE ON THIS. SO, UH, ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON THE MOTION? HEARING NONE, I WOULD, UH, WE DID ASK FOR, UH, ROLL CALL PLEASE. THEIR FOLLOWING FISH ABSTAIN. SABINA AYE. VELAZQUEZ NAY. MASUKA AYE. GROUP. AYE. BAKER NAYYY AND CARPENTER. AYE. MOTION PASSES. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. STAFF WILL GET WITH YOU IN AN ORGANIZED A SITE VISIT FOR SOME COMMISSIONERS TO COME OUT, SEE IT FIRSTHAND, BE BETTER INFORMED OF THE, OF THE SITUATION THERE, AND HOPEFULLY FIND A QUICK RESOLUTION. WE DID LOOK INTO AND GET A CONTRACTOR'S BID, UH, TO MEET THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION. AND THE LOWEST BID WE GOT WAS $16,000 TO DO ALL THAT. AND THAT PUTS US BEYOND ANYTHING WE'VE, WE'VE ALREADY SPENT. SO JUST HAVE 30 A NOTE. OKAY. THANK YOU. APPRECIATE IT. ALRIGHT, NEXT CASE, PLEASE. H D R C, CASE NUMBER 2022 DASH 5 5 5 400 CLUB DRIVE. THE APPLICANT REQUESTS A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO MODIFY PROPOSED WINDOWS ON A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED EDITION, MODIFY THE FIRST STORY ROOF FORM AND INSTALL BARREL TILE ROOF TO THE ADDITION AND PROPOSED ROOF CONNECTION. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF ITEM ONE, MODIFICATION OF PROPOSED WINDOWS ON A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED EDITION BASED ON FINDING D. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF ITEM TWO, MODIFICATION OF THE ROOF FORM BASED ON FINDING E WITH THE FOLLOWING STIPULATION THAT THE APPLICANT PROPOSES A ROOF FORM THAT IS AS SIMPLIFIED AS POSSIBLE AND ALLOWS FOR DRAINAGE AWAY FROM THE HOUSE. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF ITEM THREE, INSTALLATION OF A BARREL TILE ROOF TO THE ADDITION AND PROPOSED ROOF CONNECTION BASED ON FINDING F AND WE HAVE THE APPLICANT ESTEBAN SANCHEZ IN PERSON. AND THERE IS ALSO ONE VOICEMAIL JUST TO NOTE. HI EVERYONE, I'M GONNA SPEAK IN SPANISH SO WE CAN UNDERSTAND EACH OTHER BETTER. MY ENGLISH IS NOT THE BEST, BUT . OKAY. WHEN, HI, GOOD AFTERNOON. THANK YOU EVERYBODY FOR REVIEWING AND SEEING MY CASE. I DO UNDERSTAND, UM, 0.1 AND TH AND THREE WHY, UH, THOSE ABOUT THOSE BEING APPROVED. BUT I WOULD LIKE TO UNDERSTAND ABOUT 0.2, UH, WHAT ARE YOUR SUGGESTIONS ON THIS ONE? OR [02:20:01] DO I JUST HAVE TO HEAR YOUR COMMENTS FOR THIS POINT? UM, STAFF, DO YOU WANT TO ADDRESS THAT? SURE. SO, UM, THE, I I PUT UP A SLIDE HERE THAT SHOWS THE ORIGINAL ROOF PLAN SUBMITTED AS PART OF RECONSTRUCTION OF THIS ADDITION TO THE REAR OF THE HOUSE. AND, UM, THE ADJUSTMENT AT WRIGHT IS WHAT, UM, STAFF WITNESSED ON SITE AT A SITE VISIT. AND SO THE CONCERN I THINK FROM STAFF IS THAT THESE SORT OF MULTIPLE INTERSECTING ROOF PLANES ARE MAY CREATE, UH, WATER RUNOFF ISSUES. AND WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT A ROOF FORM IS PROPOSED THAT'S AS SIMPLE AS POSSIBLE, THAT ENSURES PROPER WATERSHED OFF THE ROOF. AND THIS ROOF, THIS PARTICULAR ROOF PLAN MIGHT WORK, BUT THERE'S PHOTOS OF THE AS CONSTRUCTED THAT GIVE US PAUSE. SO WE WILL PUT THOSE ON THE SCREEN. MR. CHAIR, CAN I ASK A QUESTION TO STAFF? UH, WE DO HAVE ONE. LET'S GET, LET'S GET, UH, COMMUNITY COMMENTS PLEASE AND THEN WE'LL GET QUESTIONS. YES. THIS IS FOR AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 13 400 CLUB DRIVE, CASE NUMBER 2 0 2 2 DASH 5 5 5. MY NAME IS BIANCA MALDONADO, OFFERING COMMENTS ON BEHALF OF DREA GARZA, PRESIDENT OF THE MONTICELLO PARK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION AND THE N P A BOARD OF DIRECTORS PO BOX 1 0 0 3 1 5 7 8 2 0 1. WE APPRECIATE THE APPLICANT FOR MEETING THE HISTORIC DISTRICT GUIDELINES FOR WINDOWS AND BUILDING MATERIALS AS THEY EXIT ON THE 400 BLOCK OF CLUB DRIVE. WE SUPPORT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ITEMS ONE, TWO, AND THREE WITH STIPULATIONS. WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THE INCLUSION OF A STIPULATION TO ITEM NUMBER ONE TO RESOLVE THE TRANSITION OF THE STUCCO TO THE STONE ON THE NEW ADDITION, SPECIFICALLY THE CAP PROFILE AND MATERIAL WHERE IT MEETS THE WINDOWS SILLS. ALSO, THE STUCCO FINISH SHOULD BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE EXISTING HOME OR HAVE A MINIMAL TEXTURE. WE ALSO RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THE CONTRACTOR REVIEW SOME OF THE FLASHING LAPSE AND CONDITIONS, SPECIFICALLY THE FLASHING AT THE WINDOW SILL FOR THE WINDOW IN THE, AND THE LAPSE WHERE THE ADDITION MEETS THE EXISTING STRUCTURE TO PREVENT WATER INFILTRATION INTO THE HISTORIC STRUCTURE. ALSO, THE NEW ADDITION DOES NOT APPEAR TO HAVE RESOLVED HOW THE MEETS THE STONE. WE WISH THE APPLICANT SUCCESS. WE THANK YOU FOR CONSIDERATION OF OUR COMMENTS. I REALIZE I SHOULD HAVE MADE A POINT OF CLARIFICATION. UM, SO THE ADDITION WAS APPROVED BY, UM, H T R C PREVIOUSLY, BUT UPON A SITE VISIT, UM, STAFF NOTED THAT FENESTRATION, UM, HAD BEEN CHANGED SINCE THE APP APPRO APPROVED DESIGN. AND SO ALL ELSE ON THE STRUCTURE REMAINS IN COMPLIANCE. IT'S THE WINDOWS THAT, UM, THE FENESTRATION IN GENERAL THAT'S OUT OF COMPLIANCE RIGHT NOW. AND BEFORE WE GET TO QUESTIONS, WE HAD, UM, A D R C SITE VISIT THAT WAS MENTIONED. UH, DO ANY OF MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS THAT WERE IN ATTENDANCE WISH TO MAKE A COMMENT ON THAT? OOPS. WELL, I WILL 'CAUSE I WAS IN ATTENDANCE AND SO, UM, YOU KNOW, WE THANK YOU FOR, UM, UH, ALLOWING US TO COME OUT TO THE SITE AND, AND, UM, I WOULD SAY THE APPLICANT WAS VERY RECEPTIVE AND VERY, UH, OPEN TO, TO DIALOGUE AND DISCUSSION ABOUT HOW TO, HOW TO IMPROVE THE, THE PROJECT AND HOW TO BEST EXECUTE IT. UM, SO TO THAT POINT, UH, LET'S GET TO THE COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS. COMMISSIONER VELASQUEZ, YOU HAD A QUESTION? WELL, THERE, THERE ARE TWO PICTURES THAT, UH, I THINK ARE 15 AND 16 OR 14 AND 15. 14 AND 15. AND COMMISSIONER CARPENTER, THE PICTURE THAT IS 15 IS A STRANGE PICTURE BECAUSE THE PICTURE THAT IS 14 DOESN'T LOOK LIKE IT WOULD WORK, BUT THEN WHEN WE HIT 15, IT APPEARS THAT THE WATER'S VALLEY DOWN. YEAH. SO I STUDIED THOSE VERY CAREFULLY WHEN I SAW THE PACKAGE. IF YOU GO BACK TO 15 FOR A SECOND, UHHUH, , SORRY. UH, THE, THE PREVIOUS ONE THEN, SORRY. SO IN THIS PHOTOGRAPH, THE NEXT PHOTOGRAPH, UH, IS, IT'S, IT'S, UH, POINT OF VIEW IS FROM BACK THERE CLOSE TO WHERE THE GENTLEMAN IS IN THE YELLOW SHIRT. SO YOU'RE, WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING FORWARD THERE, YOU'RE SEEING THE SLOPE IN THE FOREGROUND THERE TO THE RIGHT OF THE SCREEN. IS THE SLOPE IF WE GO BACK YEAH. IS THE SLOPE THAT YOU SEE IN THE LEFT. AND THEN AT THE RIGHT OF THIS IMAGE THERE IS ANOTHER LITTLE CRICKET VALLEY THAT IS SLOPING TOWARDS THE CORNER [02:25:01] OF THE BUILDING THAT'S JUST RIGHT OFF VIEW HERE. SO IT IS, IT IS A LITTLE CONFUSING AS BOTH OF THOSE, THOSE VIEWS LOOK LIKE THEY'RE THE SAME, BUT THEY'RE NOT. THEY'RE REALLY, WE'RE LOOKING AT TWO DIFFERENT, UH, VALLEY CONDITIONS. THIS DOES RAISE A LOT OF QUESTIONS, PARTICULARLY WHEN YOU IMAGINE THAT THIS IS GONNA BE A TILE ROOF AND WHERE THAT WINDOW IS RIGHT NOW, CURRENTLY THE SIL, THAT WINDOW LOOKS LIKE IT'S RIGHT DOWN, DOWN ON THE DECK OF THE, SO, SO THEN IN THE PICTURE THAT'S ON THE SCREEN MM-HMM. , THE, THE RAW WOOD FASCIA IS AT LEAST EIGHT FEET AWAY FROM THE FELT. THE RAW WOOD FASCIA IS AT LEAST EIGHT FEET AWAY FROM THE FELT ON THIS SIDE WITH THE, WITH THE VENT COMING UP. YES. THERE'S A GAP THAT'S BETWEEN THEM. SO IF WE GO BACK TO THE FLOOR PLAN, YOU CAN SEE THAT GAP. SO THEN THIS CORNER IS WHERE, SO THE GAP, I WISH I COULD POINT. SO MR. CHAIR, LET ME ASK QUICKLY, IS THAT, UM, LOOKING AT THAT PREVIOUS DIAGRAM, THE, UH, GAP THAT HAS THE ARROW SLOPING DOWNWARD TO THE RIGHT HAND SIDE WITH A YELLOW LINE THAT WAS A FLAT ROOF OR A LOW SLOPE ROOF SET AT A LOWER PLATE HEIGHT? IS THAT WHAT THAT IS? YES. IT'S A, IT'S A LOWER SLOPE ROOF. CORRECT. AND THAT WAS WHAT WAS ENABLING THE SEPARATE ROOF FORMS TO SUCCESSFULLY DRAIN, BECAUSE THEN THEY WOULD DRAIN DOWN IF THERE WAS A SPILLOVER FROM THE GABLE, UH, OF THE ADDITION, IT COULD ALWAYS DROP ONTO THAT LOWER PLANE AS WELL AS THE, UH, LARGE HIP CONFIG ON THE MAIN HOUSE. IT WOULD DROP TO THAT LOWER FLAT ROOF. IS THAT CORRECT? SO THAT LOWER FLAT ROOF WAS THE DEVICE THAT WAS GOING TO MAKE IT MAKE THAT DRAINAGE POSSIBLE. SO I'M ASKING EVERYBODY WHO SAW THAT SAW THAT NOTE. IS THAT, IS THAT WHAT'S WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT? IT LOOKS LIKE IT WOULD BE THE CRICKET, BUT, BUT THERE'S NO CRICKET THERE OR THERE. I MEAN, IT'S AN OPTICAL ILLUSION THAT IT'S THERE, BUT 'CAUSE THE FLASHLIGHT CLEARLY SHOWS IT GOING TO THE CORNER, THE FLASHING. BUT GOING BACK TO THE SUBMITTED DRAWING, UM, THE FLAT ROOF WAS ENABLING ALL OF THESE THREE ROOFS TO, UM, RESOLVE. AND THAT IS NO LONGER THERE BECAUSE THE, THE GET, UH, RIDGE FROM THE ADDITION IS NOW ENCROACHING OVER INTO THE DOMAIN OF THE EXISTING HOUSE. THAT'S WHERE THE MIX UP IS. SO THIS IS, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR I MAYBE COMMISSIONERS THAT WERE ON THE D R C STAFF OR THE APPLICANT. WHY, WHY WAS THE, THE DESIGN CHANGED TO THE CONFIGURATION THAT WE'RE SEEING FROM THE ONE ORIGINALLY SUBMITTED? WHAT WAS THE RATIONALE? OKAY, FRAMING THE SUGGESTION TO THE CHANGE TO FIGURATION WAS THE SUGGESTION FROM THE BUILDER AND THE PERSON THAT DESIGNED THE ROOF. AND A FOLLOW UP TO THAT, THE ONE THAT WAS SUBMITTED WITH THE FLAT ROOF AND THE LOW SLOPE THAT BROKE THE RIDGE, THAT'S BROKE THE RIDGE, THAT'S WHAT WAS PREVIOUSLY APPROVED AND WE ISSUED A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR, CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT, YES. AND IN FACT, THE SUGGESTION WAS MADE THAT THE ROOFS HAVE THIS CERTAIN OR PARTICULAR SHAPE THAT IS, UH, INCLINING TOWARDS THE DOWNWARD BECAUSE WHEN THE ROOF WAS FLAT, THEN THAT WOULD'VE CAUSED DIFFICULTIES AND POSSIBILITIES FOR INFILTRATION OF WATER. AND THIS WAY THE WATER RUNS OFF. UM, CAN YOU ELABORATE ON THE DIFFICULTIES OR THE REASON WHY THE LOW SLOPE ROOF WOULDN'T WORK? I, I UNDERSTAND A LOW SLOPE ROOF DOESN'T EVACUATE WATER AS QUICKLY, WHICH IS WHY WE USUALLY GUTTER THINGS LIKE THIS. BUT, BUT WAS THERE, WAS THERE AN IMPOSSIBILITY OF THAT SOLUTION WORKING AND IF SO, WHAT WAS IT? [02:30:11] CONSTRUCTION? SO FROM THE EXPLANATION THAT I RECEIVED AND WHAT I HAD UNDERSTOOD IS THAT THIS WOULD HELP THE RUNOFF OF THE WATER, THAT THE FLAT, UH, LAYOUT OF THE ROOFS WOULD THEN NOT ALLOW FOR THE PROPER WATER RUNOFF. AND AT THAT MOMENT I HAD UNDERSTOOD THAT THIS WOULD ALSO SIMPLIFY WHAT WAS THE CONSTRUCTION, UM, AND AFOREMENTIONED, UH, INTERPRETER'S MISTAKE. HE DID MENTION THAT THIS WOULD ALSO ALLOW FOR THE CONNECTION OF THE WALLS IF THE ROOF WAS THEN IN SLOPED RATHER THAN FLAT CONSTRUCTION. AND THE WAY THAT THE ROOF IS LAID OUT IS THEY'RE ALL INCLINED IN A WAY THAT THE WATER IS RUNNING OFF, OUT AND TOWARDS THE STREET RATHER THAN IN A WAY THAT IT WOULD AFFECT THE HOME. MR. CHAIR, I'D LIKE TO ASK HIM A QUESTION. PLEASE GO AHEAD. IS THE SAME CONTRACTOR DOING THE WORK CURRENTLY? THE ORIGINAL CONTRACTOR? OKAY. YES. OKAY. ACTUALLY, UH, SORRY, UM, SUPERIOR AND THAT CORNER TO THE RIGHT SIDE SEEMS TO BE FLAT, BUT THERE ACTUALLY IS A SLOPE ON THAT ANGLE. SO MR. CHAIR QUESTION FOR STAFF IN, ARE YOU LOOKING AT IT WITH THE OPINION THAT THE WATER'S NOT GONNA LEAVE THAT ROOF? THE CONCERN IS THAT THE CURRENT CONFIGURATION WOULDN'T ADEQUATELY DRAIN, UM, PARTICULARLY IN THAT CORNER THAT THAT WAS JUST ADDRESSED. SO, SO IF HIS CONTRACTOR WAS HERE THAT OBVIOUSLY DOES THESE ROOFS, HE WOULD OBVIOUSLY DISAGREE WITH YOU, RIGHT? HE'D HAVE TO I CAN'T SPEAK FOR HIM. NO, BUT I MEAN THE GUY THAT'S DREW THE LINES AND IS GONNA LAY THE ROOF IS CONTRARY RIGHT? TO THE IDEA THAT IT'S NOT GONNA DRAIN ADEQUATELY. I CAN'T SPEAK FOR HIM. YEAH, BUT I THINK ONE THING THERE, DID THE SITE, ON THE SITE VISIT, WAS THIS PORTION OF THE ROOF VISIBLE? NO. THIS, THIS WASN'T DISCUSSED AS PART OF THAT SITE VISIT? CORRECT. THE SITE VISIT, THIS WAS CAUGHT AS PART OF, UM, A D R C SITE VISIT FOR, UH, FENESTRATION MODIFICATIONS ON THE TWO STORY PORTION OF THE HOUSE. UM, WHEN WE WERE THERE FOR THAT D R C STAFF SAW THE ROOF MODIFICATIONS AND THE MODIFICATIONS TO THE PROPOSED FENESTRATION ON THE ADDITION STAFF IDENTIFIED THAT, BUT IT WASN'T DISCUSSED AMONGST THE COMMISSIONERS 'CAUSE WE DIDN'T GET UP ON THE ROOF THERE. BUT, UM, YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU SEE SOMETHING THAT IS, IS SORT OF, UH, IN, UH, AN ANOMALY TO WHAT NORMAL CONSTRUCTION PRACTICES YOU'RE, YOU'RE ENCOUNTERING, UM, YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE SORT OF A, A DUTY TO INFORM AND I THINK THAT'S PART OF WHAT THE CONCERN IS HERE. TYPICALLY YOU HAVE LIKE FIVE AND 12 MINIMUM FOR, FOR A BARREL TILE TYPE ROOF AND THIS IS WAY WAY LOWER THAN THAT. SO IT BEGINS TO RAISE INTO QUESTION JUST THE, THE WHOLE TECHNOLOGY. AND THE ONLY REASON WHY IT'S OF CONCERN TO US OR IS OUR OF OUR PURVIEW IS THAT IT THREAT, IT POTENTIALLY THREATENS THE HISTORIC STRUCTURE. I THINK MY CONCERN IS ALONG THE SAME LINES AS AN ARCHITECTURAL SOLUTION, I'M KIND OF ALONG THE LINE WITH STAFF, MAYBE IT COULD WORK, BUT I'M CONCERNED ABOUT IT COMPROMISING THE INTEGRITY OF THE, THE STRUCTURE. I THINK WHAT WAS PROPOSED AND PREVIOUSLY APPROVED WAS BY FAR A SUPERIOR SOLUTION AND IT'S UNFORTUNATE. CAN WE GET A MOTION BEFORE WE GO INTO DISCUSSION AND OPINIONS? YES. LET'S, UH, GO AHEAD AND GET A FORMAL MOTION THEN. COMM COMMISSIONER GRU, DO YOU WISH TO PUT FORTH I'M SORRY, IT'S 'CAUSE I DIDN'T LISTEN TO THE FIRST PART. I HAD THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THE APPLICANT WAS AGREEING TO ALL THE STIPULATIONS PER THE NOTES OF THE INITIAL SLIDE. SO, UM, I MEAN I CAN, I I DON'T, NO I DON'T BECAUSE IT WASN'T PART, SO A QUESTION TO THE APPLICANT BEFORE WE MAYBE FISH OUT A, A MOTION HERE. NO, NO PUN INTENDED THERE. UM, [02:35:02] SO ARE YOU ACCEPTING OF STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS AND REQUESTS HERE? UH, YEAH, BUT NO. YEAH, ONE AND THREE, YES. TWO NOT SURE. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE IF THE RECOMMENDATION IS TO FULLY CHANGE THE ROOF OR JUST MAKE A MINOR MODIFICATION, SEE, AND, AND MR. CHAIR, I'M WONDERING IF IT SAYS THE APPLICANT PROPOSES A ROOF FORM THAT IS SIMPLIFIED THAT IT LEAVES A LOT OF ROOM. RIGHT? RIGHT. OR IF IT SHOULDN'T SAY THAT ENSURES UH, MAXIMUM PROTECTION OF HISTORIC INTEGRITY. UM, MAYBE IT HAS MORE TEETH, BUT I WOULDN'T KNOW WHAT TO DO. I MEAN, IF IT JUST SAID THAT, IF IT SAID YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO DO THIS AND IT SAYS THAT IT COULD JUST GO BACK AND DO WHAT IT'S THERE. RIGHT. MR. FISH, DO YOU HAVE, I HAVE ONE QUESTION FOR STAFF ABOUT THAT STIPULATION. YOU KNOW, A LOT OF TIMES WHEN WE SEE THE WORD ROOF FORM, WE'RE REALLY TALKING ABOUT THE IMPACT ON, ON THE INTEGRITY OF THE FORM, BUT THE OPERATIVE WORD HERE IS REALLY TO ALLOW FOR DRAINAGE IN THE MOST EFFICIENT WAY, PARTICULARLY IN THAT CRICKET. IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT. UNDERSTOOD. THANK YOU. WE'VE ALL BEEN LOOKING AT THE SAME PICTURE. IT'S, IT'S THE SAME CONCERN THAT YOU HAVE AS WE'RE, WE THINK THERE'S A PRACTICALITY ISSUE WITH HOW, HOW THAT WALL IS GONNA BE PROTECTED FROM RUNOFF. SO HOW ABOUT I I'LL TRY MOTION. OKAY, PLEASE. AND, AND IT WILL BE, I I DON'T WANNA DO ANOTHER SITE VISIT 'CAUSE WE'VE ALREADY DONE IT. WE'VE ALREADY SEEN IT. UM, BUT I DO FEEL THAT THIS ROOF FORM, THIS STIPULATION CANNOT STAY AS IS. SO MAYBE I'LL JUST DO IT, WE'LL DO A D R C AND LIKE ONLINE D R C, BUT WE CAN GO IN DEEPER DISCUSSION OR HELP THE APPLICANT. I MEAN ITS, IT CAN, LET'S JUST DO THIS A MOTION, UM, TO APPROVE WITH ALL STIPULATIONS AND THEN APPLICANT CAN COME TO AN INFORMAL D R C WHERE WE CAN DISCUSS DEEPER IDEAS WITH HIS ROOFER. BUT AT THIS POINT I, I MEAN I FEEL THE REST OF THE COMMISSION, BUT I WANNA MAKE SURE THE APPLICANT KNOWS THAT WE CAN DISCUSS IDEAS NOT HERE, BUT AT INFORMAL MEETINGS HAVE TO BE ON SITE. SO TO CLARIFY, IS THE D R C AN OPTIONAL THING OR ARE YOU SAYING APPROVAL WITH, WELL THE, ALL PPLICANT HAVE THE OPTION TO GO TO D R C UNLESS HIS ROOFER COMES UP WITH A PLAN NEXT WEEK AND, AND STAFF FINDS IT. I THINK WHAT, BASED ON YOUR COMMENTS, I THINK WE'RE ALL IN AGREEMENT THAT THERE, THERE IS GONNA, THERE IS GONNA BE A D R C OR SOMETHING OR LIKE A DEEPER CHANGE BECAUSE THIS, I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY SOLUTIONS TO IT THAT JUST CAN BE A MINOR ADJUSTMENT. YEAH, I MEAN IF THERE'S INTEREST IN GETTING HIM THE OPTION TO MOVE FORWARD, UM, BUT STILL THE CHANCE TO REVIEW A COUPLE OF OPTIONS WITH THE ROOFER TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE GONNA WORK AND THAT THERE'S A GOOD COMFORT LEVEL, THEN I THINK IT COULD BE APPROVAL WITH STIPULATIONS AND THEN MAYBE THE ADDED STIPULATION THAT THE APPLICANT PRESENT OPTIONS TO A D R C. UM, AND THEN POTENTIALLY WE COULD GO AHEAD AND LET HIM MOVE FORWARD DEPENDING ON WHAT THE FEEDBACK FROM THE D R C WAS PROVIDED, THAT THAT WAS INCLUDED IN THE MOTION AND THERE WASN'T A REQUIREMENT TO COME BACK TO THE FULL COMMISSION. IF THERE IS AN INTEREST TO HAVE HIM COME BACK TO THE FULL COMMISSION WITH WHATEVER THE FINAL SOLUTION FOR THE MODIFIED ROOF IS, THEN, THEN THAT COULD BE STATED IN MOTION AS WELL. BUT I, I THINK YOU CAN GIVE THE D R C A LITTLE BIT OF DISCREPANCY OVER LIKE WHAT THE FINAL OPTION IS EXACTLY, BECAUSE I DON'T WANNA OBLIGATE ANYBODY AND I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT ITEM ONE IS APPROVED, RIGHT? SO I DON'T WANNA SEE A FULL D R C FOR EVERYTHING. AND I STILL SAY THAT IF THE ROOFER COMES BACK WITH A SOLUTION, THEN HE DOESN'T HAVE TO WAIT, YOU KNOW, ANOTHER MONTH BEFORE COMING FOR THE, UH, SO I DON'T KNOW IF, IF I FEEL FINE. ALRIGHT, SO WHAT I'M UNDERSTANDING IS THE MOTION IS A APPROVAL WITH, UH, STAFF STIPULATIONS AND THE REQUESTS THAT ITEM TWO BE ADDRESSED AT A D R C. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? JUST TO CLARIFY, I'M SORRY, I NEED TO CLARIFY. WOULD THAT MEAN THAT ITEM TWO WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK TO THE H D R C OR YOU AUTHORIZING STAFF TO, TO MAKE A DECISION BASED ON MAKE A DECISION? I MEAN, IN MY MIND, UM, THERE'S NOT GONNA BE AN OPTION THAT WON'T NOT DO A BIG MODIFICATION. SO IT'S GONNA COME BACK TO H JERSEY. IS THAT, I THINK IT'S GONNA HAVE TO COME BACK TO D TO H D R C. IT'S WHATEVER'S INCLUDED IN THE MOTION. IF THE INTENT IS THAT IT COMES BACK TO THIS COMMISSION, THEN THAT CAN BE EXPRESSLY STATED IN THE MOTION. BUT I DO THINK IT IS POSSIBLE THAT WE HAVE A D R C AND THEN THERE'S FEEDBACK THERE. THAT'S WHY I DON'T, AND THERE'S A KIND LEVEL WITH STAFF ISSUING BASED ON THE D R C [02:40:01] FEEDBACK. I THINK THAT CAN BE INCLUDED AS WELL. I'M COMFORTABLE WITH THAT. LEAVE IT LIKE THAT. IT DOESN'T HAVE TO COME BACK FOR H G R C. SO CAN WE CLARIFY THE MOTION ONE MORE TIME? S SO TO CLARIFY THE MOTION AND TO TELL ME IF I'M WRONG, UM, APPROVAL WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS AND WITH THE REQUIREMENT THAT THE ITEM TWO BE ADDRESSED AT A D R C WITH, UH, STAFF'S FINAL, UM, RESOLUTION OF THAT. THANK YOU. AND DO WE HAVE A SECOND? YES, THAT'S THE SECOND. OKAY. COMMISSIONER VOS VELASQUEZ SECONDS. ANY DISCUSSION, ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION REQUIRED? YES SIR. UM, SO AS I LOOK AT THIS PICTURE, I GUESS HA HAVING, UH, WORKED ON A LOT OF ROOF PROJECTS BEFORE, I, I BELIEVE THAT THE CONCERN WE HAVE WITH THE WALL ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE PICTURE, 'CAUSE I THINK THE APPLICANT HAS BASICALLY SAID, TELL ME WHAT YOU, WHAT I NEED TO CHANGE. SO I THINK THAT TO PROTECT THAT HISTORIC WALL ON THE RIGHT CAN BE DONE WITH A MECHANICAL SOLUTION THAT DOES NOT CHANGE THE ARCHITECTURE. ESSENTIALLY MORE FLASHING, UM, ASPHALT TAR, WHAT WHATEVER IMPERMEABLE MATERIALS CAN BE PLACED TO KIND OF PREVENT SPLASHING OR WHATEVER, UH, POOLING OF WATER, UH, THAT'S GONNA DAMAGE THAT WALL. THE CONCERN I'VE GOT IS I THINK THAT WINDOW, THE, THE TALL SLENDER WINDOW HAS TO BE CHANGED 'CAUSE IT LOOKS LIKE THE FLASHING SITS UP OVER THE SILL. SO I THINK THAT WINDOW HAS TO BE CHANGED, WHICH THEN CHANGES THE FENESTRATION, WHICH THEN, AND SO I GUESS I THINK WE JUST SAY CHANGE THE WINDOW, WORK OUT THE SOLUTION ON THE GROUND AND, AND THEN THE APPLICANT CAN MOVE OUT WITH, WITH THE WORK. 'CAUSE RIGHT NOW THE HOUSE IS SITTING THERE, YOU KNOW, WITH NO TILE ON IT. SO I, I THINK THAT'S THE FASTEST WAY TO MOVE FORWARD BECAUSE I THINK YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT THE WINDOW. RIGHT, I AGREE. IT'S, IT'S NOT SIMPLY APPLYING A FLUID OR, UH, YOU KNOW, WATERPROOFING. IT'S GONNA BE, UH, A RESTRUCTURING OF THE, OF THE GEOMETRIES OF THE ROOF TO SOLVE THAT PROBLEM. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? I WOULD THINK THAT THE, UH, ROOFER, UM, WOULD HAVE TO BE THERE BECAUSE IF WE'RE JUST LOOKING AT THIS SAME, AT THESE SAME PHOTOGRAPHS, IT'S REALLY HARD TO TELL. UH, SO THAT WOULD BE MY COMMENT THAT HE COME BACK WITH, UH, THE, THE SLOPE OF THE ROOF AWAY. THAT'S GONNA PROTECT THE INTEGRITY OF THE WALL. UH, OTHERWISE I COULDN'T TELL FROM THESE PHOTOGRAPHS. SO A GOOD, GOOD SUGGESTION FOR THE D R C. HAVE YOUR ROOFER, UH, BE IN ATTENDANCE FOR THAT? YOU KNOW, IT'LL PROBABLY BE A VIRTUAL D R C. OKAY. ? UH, MAY I MAKE AN YES, ONE MORE SUGGESTION ON THAT AS HE COMES TO THE D R C WITH, UM, THE ROOFER COMES TO THE D R C, UM, IN ADDITION TO HAVE THE DRAWING THAT IT WAS SUBMITTED AND YOUR PROPOSAL, HAVE 'EM ALSO DO A SKETCH OF WHAT'S EXISTING? I THINK THE, THE PLAN SUBMITTED AS IS THAT WHAT'S EXISTING? IT'S, IT'S I THINK MISSING ONE SEAM IN THIS PLACE SOMEWHERE. IT'S KIND, YEAH, IT'S KIND OF NOT RIGHT. ANYWAY. OKAY. I I, IF I MAY, I THINK THAT DRAWING DOES ACCURATELY SHOW WHAT THE PHOTOGRAPH SHOWS. WHAT'S MISSING THOUGH IS THE ELEVATION HEIGHTS TO, TO SHOW, IF YOU THINK ABOUT LIKE THE, THE WATER'S GONNA COME OFF THE GABLE WITH SOME VELOCITY AND IF IT'S A HARD RAINFALL, IS IT, IS IT GOING TO RAMP UP SO TO SPEAK AND GO UP AGAINST THE WALL? UM, THAT WOULD BE A GOOD ADDITION TO HAVING THE, UM, WHERE THE ROOF, ROOF WALL CONNECTION IS AND WHAT THAT ELEVATION IS. SO WE GET AN IDEA OF WHAT THOSE SLOPES ARE. WELL, MR. CHAIR, I WANNA ASK STAFF ANOTHER QUESTION WHEN WE LOOK AT THE IMAGE, RIGHT? JUST FOR JUST, UH, FOR THE, UH, THE, THE, UM, THE PICTURE THAT YOU HAD UP THE PLAN, JUST WHERE THAT CRICKET IS. YEAH. NOW IS, IS IT NECESSARY JUST, JUST FOR NECESSARY THAT THAT BUILDING IS CONNECTED TOGETHER THE WAY THAT IT IS? NO, THIS IS PART OF WHAT WAS BUILT WITHOUT PREVIOUS APPROVAL. SO THE ORIGINAL DESIGN, THERE WAS A SORT OF LOWER SLOPED FLAT ROOF AND, AND THE ADDITION THAT WAS RECONSTRUCTED WAS NOT [02:45:01] ATTACHED IN THAT WAY EITHER. BUT, BUT, BUT THE ADDITION THAT'S CONSTRUCTED, DOES IT CHANGE THE NATURE OF THAT LOWER SLOPED ROOF? I MEAN IT OBVIOUSLY IT CHANGED IT, BUT, BUT THE LOWER SLOPE, IT WENT BACK TO THAT WITH, WITH AN ADEQUATE SLOPE. WOULD IT SOLVE THE PROBLEM THAT WAS CREATED? THIS DESIGN HAS ALREADY BEEN APPROVED. SO IF THEY WENT BACK TO THIS DESIGN ON THE SCREEN NOW, THAT'S ALREADY BEEN APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION. AH, WELL THERE YOU HAVE IT . THANK YOU. I HAVE, UH, JUST POINT OF PRIVILEGE, JUST A COUPLE OF QUICK, QUICK QUESTIONS TO BRING UP, UH, ON BEHALF OF THE COMMUNITY AS WELL THAT THEY BROUGHT UP IN THEIR, UH, IN THEIR STATEMENT. UM, AND A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT, THE STUCCO THAT'S GOING TO BE, UH, PUT ONTO THE ADDITION IS THAT GOING TO MATCH THE EXISTING HISTORIC STUCCO . OKAY. AND ALSO THE, THE WATER TABLE OF STONE, THE STONE SKIRTING, IS IT GOING TO BE CAPPED WITH, UH, WITH A STONE? AND THAT STONE'S GONNA BE PUT IN A HORIZONTAL BEDDING OR ORIENTATION, NOT LIKE THE PEANUT BRITTLE STONE, CORRECT? MM-HMM. . OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ALRIGHT, SO WE HAVE A MOTION, WE HAVE A SECOND. WE'VE HAD DISCUSSION. I THINK WE HAVE A SOLUTION. LET'S HAVE ROLL CALL FISH. AYE. SABINA AYE. VELASQUEZ AYE. ZUKA AYE. GROUP. AYE. BAKER AYE. AND CARPENTER? AYE. MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU SO MUCH MR. CHAIR. WE'VE MOMENTARILY LOST QUORUM IT LOOKS LIKE. SO JUST A REMINDER, UH, ITEM NUMBER 14, 2 0 4. QUENTIN HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN. YES. AND I JUST STARTED TO TELL YOU WE LOST QUORUM. LOST WHAT? WE'VE LOST A QUORUM. SO WE NEED TO TAKE A RECESS. SO, UH, WE'LL TAKE A QUICK, UH, FIVE MINUTE BREAK. ARE WE BACK LIVE? OKAY. CALLED COMMISSION BACK INTO ORDER. AND AS I'VE MENTIONED, UH, 4 0 2 QUENTIN HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN. SO WE'RE GOING TO 6 0 3 CEDAR ITEM 15 AGENDA. WOW, THAT'S LOUD TODAY. AGENDA ITEM 15 H D R C CASE 2022 DASH 5 62. UM, 6 0 3 CEDAR. APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO EXPAND THE EXISTING DRIVEWAY APPROACH TO BE 20 FEET WIDE AT THE CUT. STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL TO EXPAND THE EXISTING DRIVEWAY APPROACH AT 20 FEET BASED ON FINDING B AND THE APPLICANT, DAN GONZALEZ, IS HERE IN PERSON GONZALEZ. I'M THE, UH, CONTRACTOR FOR THE, FOR THIS PROJECT. UH, LAST YEAR THE, THE OWNER, UH, SUBMITTED A, A REQUEST FOR APPROPRIATENESS A CERTIFICATE. AND IN THAT INITIAL PLAN THERE WAS A, UH, A CARPORT, A TWO CAR, UH, CARPORT. AND ALSO PART OF THAT APPLICATION INCLUDED A, UH, A NEW FENCE, PRIVACY FENCE AND A GATE TO ACCOMMODATE THAT, THAT CARPORT. SO WE BUILT THE, UH, THE, UH, THE A D U ON THAT PROJECT AND WHEN WE WENT TO REDO THE, UH, THE APPROACH WE SUBMITTED FOR APPLICATION AND THEY TOLD US THAT WE, WE HAD TO COME TO THE, TO H D R C TO GET, GET APPROVAL. SO WE'RE, WHAT WE'RE ASKING IS, UH, YOU KNOW, TO EXTEND, IF WE CAN SEE THE, THAT THAT LOWER PHOTO IS, IS THE EXISTING, UH, DRIVEWAY RIGHT NOW IT'S ABOUT 10 FEET AT THE, AT THE NARROW POINT. THESE ARE THE DRAWINGS THAT WERE, YEAH, SO IT'S ABOUT 10 FEET AT THE, AT THE UPPER PART AND IT OPENS UP, YOU KNOW, MAYBE TO 11 OR 12 FEET. AND SO RIGHT WHERE THAT OLD HOUSE IS THAT THAT'S ALREADY GOTTEN TORN DOWN. THERE'S ALREADY A, UH, THE NEW STRUCTURE'S ALREADY GOTTEN BUILT BASED ON THE DESIGN BY THE, UH, BY THE ARCHITECT. BUT THAT SITE PLAN WAS THE ORIGINAL DRAWING SUBMITTED. AND SO I GUESS THE, THE OWNERS WERE A LITTLE CONFUSED 'CAUSE THEY, THEY WERE UNDER THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THE, THE FENCE AND THE GATE SHOWED, UH, SHOWED IT ON THE SITE PLAN WAS, UH, PART OF THAT INITIAL APPLICATION. THIS IS WHAT IT IS NOW. SO THAT'S THE EXISTING, UH, APPROACH. WE WANTED TO WIDEN IT TO ALLOW THOSE TWO CARS FOR THAT CARPORT. UH, WHAT WE ALSO DID IS WE WENT AROUND THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND EVEN ACROSS THE STREET, UH, WE TOOK SOME PICTURES AND, UH, WITHIN, I DON'T KNOW, MAYBE TWO OR THREE BLOCKS FROM THAT, FROM, UH, FROM OUR PROJECT THAT 4 31 ADAMS [02:50:01] PARTICULAR IS A, IS A NEW PROJECT. UH, TRY TO FIND INFORMATION ON WHEN THAT GOT BUILT. UH, COULDN'T GET ANYTHING. SAW SOME STUFF, UH, ONLINE THAT THEY HAD GOTTEN SOME, UH, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT LAST YEAR, UH, TO, TO DO THAT, UH, TO DO THAT DRIVEWAY, I THINK OR SOMETHING WITH A CORNER. BUT IT WAS, IT WAS A PRETTY RECENT PROJECT. SO WE WANTED TO SHOW THAT, THAT JUST WITHIN THAT, WITHIN THE TWO OR THREE BLOCKS THERE, THERE'S ALREADY EXISTING CONDITIONS THAT ALLOW FOR, FOR WIDER APPROACH. SO, AND IF WE GO BACK TO THE EXISTING NOW WITH THE NEW CARPORT, RIGHT, YOU CAN SEE HOW, YOU KNOW, WE, WE NEED TO COME UP WITH A SOLUTION, UH, TO ADDRESS THAT. I MEAN, WE HAVE TO, WE HAVE TO DO SOMETHING. SO THAT'S WHY WE'RE TRYING TO, TRYING TO SEE IF WE CAN GET THAT APPROACH WIDENED TO ACCOMMODATE THOSE TWO CARS. DO. OKAY. DO WE HAVE A PUBLIC COMMENT? UM, THERE'S A LETTER IN YOUR FOLDER, BUT THERE'S NO VOICEMAILS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. UM, COMMISSIONERS QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? UH, MR. CHAIRMAN, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF ABOUT THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION AND THE SITE PLAN THAT WAS APPROVED AND WHETHER OR NOT THE APRON WAS ADDRESSED DIRECTLY BY THE COMMISSION IN THAT ORIGINAL CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS. I'M ASKING THE QUESTION BECAUSE I SORT OF RECALL A DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS AT SOME POINT IN TIME, BUT IT'S A LOT OF CASES. GIMME A MOMENT. IS THERE ANY OTHER DISCUSSION THAT CAN HAPPEN WHILE YOU LOOK THIS UP? YES. NO, THAT'S ALL THAT THIS IS ABOUT. YES. SO THE, I I, I REMEMBER WE HAVE CONVERSATIONS PARTICULARLY IN THE HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOODS ABOUT DRIVEWAY WITS. AND WHEN WE MANAGE MULTIPLE DRIVEWAYS, PARTICULARLY WHEN THEY'RE NEW OR WHEN THEY'RE ON ALLEY SIDES, YOU KNOW, THERE'S SOME STRATEGIES OF BREAKING, BREAKING UP THE APRONS SOMETIMES. UM, AND I KNOW GENERALLY WE TRY TO AVOID THE 20 FOOT WIDE DRIVEWAY. UM, I JUST CAN'T RECALL THE SPECIFICS OF THE DISCUSSION ON HOW THIS WOULD BE USED. I KNOW THE KING WILLIAM ASSOCIATION, UH, IS CITING THAT THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE DRIVEWAYS ARE AT 10 FEET AND THAT IS THE GUIDELINES AND THAT THEY'RE NOT SUPPORTING THE 20 FEET. UH, THERE, THERE MIGHT BE SOMETHING IN THE MIDDLE. I, I THINK IT'D BE DIFFICULT TO SUPPORT THE FULL 20 FOOT. AND I, I BELIEVE THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS CASE THAT YOU MENTIONED WAS EXACTLY THAT. A BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS CASE, PROBABLY NOT ONE THAT WAS APPROVED, UH, DIRECTLY HERE, UH, SUBMITTED BY THE OWNER AND THE, THE DESIGNER. AND SO I THINK BY SUBMITTING THAT SITE PLAN, THEY UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT IT WAS UNDERSTOOD THAT THERE WAS, EVEN THOUGH IT MAY NOT HAVE BEEN EXPLICIT, IT WAS UNDERSTOOD THAT IT'S A TWO CAR CARPORT. AND SO THAT THE, UH, THE, WE WOULD PROBABLY HAVE TO ACCOMMODATE THAT TWO CAR CARPORT IN SOME MANNER. SO MAYBE THE 20 FOOT IS MAYBE A LITTLE TOO MUCH, BUT, UH, WE GOTTA HAVE TO DO, WE HAVE TO DO SOMETHING, CAN'T LEAVE IT LIKE THIS. I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF, AND IT DOES GO TO THE EARLIER, UM, QUESTION THAT COMMISSIONER FISH HAD. UM, HOW I, HELP ME UNDERSTAND. SO THE PREVIOUS CASE WAS, WAS APPROVED, UH, COMMISSION APPROVED IT. UM, WHAT IS THE BASIS FOR DENYING OR NOT SUPPORTING IT NOW AND MAKING THAT 180 ON THIS VERY LAST? SO I'M CHECKING OUR PORTAL RIGHT NOW TO SEE IF WE HAVE ANY MODIFICATIONS TO THE DRIVEWAY. RIGHT NOW I'M SEEING 88, UM, AND SIDEWALK MODIFIC OR MODIFICATIONS, I'M SORRY, REPAIR. I AM NOT SEEING DRIVEWAY MODIFICATIONS. AND SO WHEN I GET THESE CASES, I HAVE TO GO BASED ON THE GUIDELINES AND WHAT DO THEY SAY AND HOW DO THEY APPLY TO THIS CASE. SO GOING BY THE GUIDELINES, I OBVIOUSLY CANNOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL ON THIS CASE. OKAY, MR. CHAIR, I GOT A QUESTION. YES, PLEASE GO AHEAD. UH, DAN, UM, THE, THE APPROACH THAT'S THERE RIGHT NOW FOR A NEW APPROACH, WOULD THAT APPROACH BE DEMOLISHED TO MAKE WAY FOR A NEW APPROACH? IT WOULD HAVE TO, IT'S IN PRETTY BAD, CORRECT? UH, DISREPAIR. SO THEN WITHOUT GIVING A DIMENSION, RIGHT, IT WOULD, IT WOULD BE MOST LIKELY CENTERED, RIGHT? [02:55:01] MM-HMM. . SO, UH, THEN POSSIBLY, UH, THE, A COMPROMISE IS SOMEWHERE BETWEEN 16 AND 20 FEET. IF IT'S NOT 20 CENTERED, THE VEHICLE MIGHT HAVE TO DO A LITTLE, BUT IT SEEMS THAT THERE'S A PREVAILING PATTERN IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD FOR, UH, WI WIDTHS ALREADY. SO HE'S NOT OUTSIDE OF THE CONTEXT OF WHAT EXISTS. MR. CHAIRMAN, WHAT? SO, SO LOOKING AT THAT AGAIN, UH, TO, TO, UM, CONTINUE THE THOUGHT OF, UH, UM, MY FELLOW COMMISSIONER, IF YOU DEMOED THE, THE EXISTING DRIVEWAY, YOU REPLACED IT WITH A CONCRETE DRIVEWAY WITHIN THE GUIDELINES OF THE COMMUNITY AT 10 FOOT WIDTH. AND THEN PERHAPS, I DON'T KNOW IF, IF, UH, THIS HAS BEEN DONE IN THE AREA, BUT MAYBE CONSIDERING PERMEABLE PAVERS ON EITHER SIDE, THAT WOULD ALLOW THE GRASS TO GROW UP THROUGH IT, BUT PROVIDE THE STABILITY TO SUPPORT A VEHICLE. IT'S DONE ALL THE TIME IN EUROPE, UH, AND, AND OTHER PLACES THEN VISUALLY YOU WOULD GET THE, YOU'D HAVE TO BREAK THE CURB WIDER, BUT AS FAR AS THE PERMEABILITY OVERALL ON THE LOT, AND THEN VISUALLY, IS THAT SOMETHING THAT HAS BEEN DONE IN, I GUESS MY OPEN QUESTION, UM, AS THE, AS THE NEWEST COMMISSIONER, HAS THAT BEEN DONE PREVIOUSLY? DOES IT EXIST IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD? AND, UH, AND IS THAT SOMETHING THAT THE APPLICANT WOULD BE OPEN TO? WELL, I THINK THE ISSUE WITH THAT IS THAT THE APPROACH ABUTS THE SIDEWALK AND THE SIDEWALK ABUTS THE DRIVEWAY. SO THERE'S NOT MUCH BUFFER SPACE TO ADD, YOU KNOW, WHAT YOU'RE, WHAT YOU'RE SUGGESTING IT WOULD HAVE TO HAPPEN ON THE SIDEWALK SIDE BECAUSE THERE'S ALREADY A DRIVEWAY. SO WE'RE, WE'RE JUST ASKING TO CHANGE THE APPROACH BECAUSE IT'S THE APPROACH AND THEN IT'S THE SIDEWALK, AND THEN THE DRIVEWAY IS LIKE TWO INCHES FROM THAT COMMISSIONERS IN TERMS OF TRYING TO ADD A PERMEABLE SPACE. THERE'S JUST NOT ENOUGH AND MAKING IT REAL NARROW, IT DOESN'T HAVE ENOUGH DEPTH, YOU KNOW, TO BE ABLE TO GO IN THERE AND THEN TO GET, GET TO THE BACK, YOU KNOW, IF THERE'S ANOTHER CAR THERE NOT, NOT, NOT DEFINITELY. SO PERHAPS I'M NOT MAKING MYSELF CLEAR. WHAT I'M SAYING IS YOU WOULD END UP WITH 20 FOOT WIDE AREA, LIKE YOU'RE REQUESTING, BUT THE CENTER 10 FEET WOULD BE CONCRETE, NEW, NEWLY POURED CONCRETE. YOU WOULD STILL HAVE THE SAME SIDEWALK GOING THROUGH THERE. YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO REPO PART OF THAT AS WELL. AND THEN FIVE FEET ON EITHER SIDE. I'M NOT TELLING YOU HOW TO DO IT, BUT I AM, UH, OR TELLING YOU A WAY THAT, THAT I, AND THEN YOU'D HAVE PERMEABLE PAVERS ON FIVE FEET ON EITHER SIDE WITH THE GRASS GROWING UP THROUGH THAT, YOU'D HAVE TO CUT THE CURB ADDITIONAL 10 FEET. YEAH. AND THAT, THAT'S THE ISSUE IS REALLY, IT'S THE, THE APRON THAT IS GENERATED BY THIS, THAT'S RUNNING IN, UH, COUNTER TO, TO WHAT THE GUIDELINES ARE. UH, SO THE SITE PLAN YOU SEE ON THE SCREEN IS INCLUDED IN THE 2021 H C R C CASE FOR THE ACCESSORY. UM, I, I CAN'T SAY THAT THE APRON QUESTION WAS SPECIFICALLY A REQUEST ITEM OR DISCUSSED. I, YOU KNOW, I DON'T HAVE THE SAME MEMORY THAT COMMISSIONER FISH HAS, BUT IT DID APPEAR ON A 2021 SITE PLAN THAT CAME BEFORE THE COMMISSION. WITH THAT BEING SAID, MR. CHAIR, WE MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE AS SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT. OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION. DO WE HAVE A SECOND FOR DISCUSSION? UM, I'LL SECOND IT. OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND OPEN FOR DISCUSSION. COMMISSIONER VELAZQUEZ, WOULD YOU LIKE TO ELABORATE? WELL, UM, I THINK THAT, THAT AS SUBMITTED IS, UM, IF YOU GO TO THE PAGE THAT IS PAGE SEVEN STAFF, THERE, THERE'S A PREVAILING PATTERN IN THE COMMUNITY, BUT IT COULD BE CLARIFIED TO NOT BE 20 TO BE 18, TO BE 16, BUT MOVING AWAY, I THINK FROM 10 12 GREATER THAN THAT WOULD BEST ACCOMMODATE THE SIZE OF VEHICLES TODAY. AND WHEN WE LOOK AT THE BUILDING NEXT TO IT AS A WHOLE COMPLEX, THE SCALE IS NOT AS GREAT AS IF IT'S JUST A DRIVEWAY. IT'S ACTUALLY A, A MORE LINEAR STREET FRONT. SO IT'S, IT'S, IT'S WITHIN SCALE. MR. BAKER, WOULD YOU LIKE TO ELABORATE UPON YOUR SECOND? I, I, I BELIEVE THAT, UH, IT, IT'S WITHIN THE SPIRIT OF WHAT'S DONE IN THIS C COMMUNITY. THERE'S CLEARLY BEEN SOME CASES, AND I WENT ON GOOGLE EARTH AND LOOKED AND, AND SOME OF THE EXAMPLES THAT ARE SHOWN THERE HAVE HUGE DRIVEWAY, HUGE, UH, HUGE, UH, CONCRETE SURFACE AREAS. AND, AND SO I, I THINK THIS, THIS IS A REASONABLE REQUEST. I PERSONALLY [03:00:01] FEEL LIKE A, A, UH, A PERMEABLE SURFACE, UH, IS GONNA HELP DRAINAGE IS AESTHETICALLY WOULD BE ALLOWABLE. BUT, UH, IF, IF THAT'S NOT, IF WE'RE PICKING ONE OR THE OTHER, THEN I SAY IN FAVOR OF THE APPLICANT AND ALLOW FOR A WIDER DRIVEWAY. MR. CHAIR? YES. UM, I WOULD LIKE TO, UM, ADD THAT, UM, THE 20 FEET, UH, WHAT, WHAT WE SEE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE COMMUNITY WITH DRIVEWAYS. MOST OF THOSE WERE DONE YEARS AND YEARS AGO. AND THE, AND THE GOAL WAS TO PUT DOWN THE CONCRETE, GET IT IN QUICKLY, AND CREATE A LOT OF SPACE. WE'RE IN A DIFFERENT PLACE NOW AND WE CAN CREATE SOMETHING THAT IS, UM, EASILY AS FUNCTIONAL, BUT MIGHT BE A LITTLE BIT MORE SENSITIVE TO THE SETTING AND NOT JUST DUMP AS MUCH CONCRETE AS WE CAN. I WOULD BE SUPPORTIVE OF THIS ALTERATION IF IT WERE LIMITED TO 16 FEET IN WIDTH OR LESS. THE 20 FOOT WIDE IS VERY, VERY, VERY GENEROUS. THAT IS, UM, EQUAL AND EVEN GREATER THAN TRAFFIC LANES. UM, SIDE BY SIDE. IT'S GREATER THAN PARKING SPACES. SO, UM, THE ABILITY FOR CARS TO MANEUVER IN A SLIGHTLY NARROWER SPACE, UM, IS VERY POSSIBLE. SO I WOULD SUPPORT IT WITH A, A NUMBER VALUE ON THAT WIDTH AND, AND I WOULD ACCEPT THAT MR. CHAIR AS A AUGMENTATION TO MY MOTION. OKAY. YEAH, AND IT'S, I THINK INFORMATIVE TO GO ON GOOGLE, UH, MAPS AND TAKE A LOOK. THE, THE PROPERTY IMMEDIATELY TO THE SOUTH OF US HAS, UM, AN ENORMOUS, ENORMOUS, UH, CURB CUT THERE OF IT LOOKS LIKE 30 FEET OR MORE. AND SO THE, THE MORE THAT WE CAN CURTAIL THIS DOWN, I THINK THE BETTER IT WOULD REALLY HELP THE, UH, THE WHOLE PEDESTRIAN EXPERIENCE, NEIGHBORHOOD EXPERIENCE THERE. SO, SO WE HAVE A MOTION FOR, UH, APPROVING AS SUBMITTED WITH THE LIMITATION THAT THE 16 FEET CURB CUT BE LIMITED TO 16 FEET UPPER PART, RIGHT? YES. YEAH. AND THEN YOU HAVE THE FLARING THAT WOULD TAKE PLACE. YEAH. MR. CHAIRMAN, I DO HAVE A COMMENT. OKAY. ON THIS, WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT, UM, I GUESS SLIDE SIX, THIS IS THE HISTORIC POSITION OF THE APRON, AND YOU'LL NOTICE THAT IT REALLY IS FAR RIGHT ALIGNED TO THE DRIVE AND THE CARPORT AND, UM, I DON'T SEE ANY GOOD REASON TO CHANGE AT LEAST THAT SIDE OF THE DRIVE. YOU KNOW, IT SEEMS LIKE THAT SHOULD BE MAINTAINED. THAT SIDE OF THE APRON AND THE CURB CUT SHOULD REMAIN THERE. THAT PUTS A PARTICULARLY ASYMMETRIC CONDITION WITH 16 FEET LIMITATION. UM, I'D BE MORE INCLINED TO ASK THE APPLICANT TO REASONABLY REDUCE IT FROM 20 TO THE EXTENT THAT IT VISUALLY MAKES SENSE, BUT RIPPING ALL THIS UP AND TRYING TO REBUILD THIS CURB ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE TO EXTEND IT TO THE LEFT A FEW MORE FEET JUST DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE TO ME TO SAVE A FEW FEET ON THE APRON. I'M MORE INCLINED TO JUST APPROVE THE REQUEST AS IT'S MADE THAN TO TRY TO DO GYMNASTICS TO MIDDLE ROAD, MIDDLE OF THE ROAD. THIS. OKAY. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? IF NOT, OH, WE HAVE A, SO WE HAD A CLARIFICATION VELA. SO WE HAD A CLARIFICATION FROM COMMISSIONER VELASQUEZ YES. TO, TO APPROVE OF, UH, SUBMITTED WITH, UH, 16 FEET AND WIDTH. UM, AND THE SECOND, MR. BAKER, ARE YOU IN CONCURRENCE OF THAT? YES. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, ANY OTHER COMMENTS? SO THAT ISSUE OF, OF CENTERING THAT, THAT THAT'S, UH, THAT'S NOT GONNA BE CONSIDERED OR I WOULD SAY IT'S YOUR CHOICE. YEAH, I, I I THINK IT NEEDS TO BE WHATEVER, PRACTICAL, BECAUSE I THINK BY THE TIME YOU, YOU REHAB THAT WHOLE THING, YOU'RE PROBABLY GONNA BE PUTTING BACK MOST OF THAT BIT OF CURB ANYWAYS. UM, SO I WOULD SUGGEST CENTERING, BUT THAT'S JUST MY OPINION. OH, ALRIGHT. SO WE'VE GOT A MOTION, WE'VE GOT A SECOND, WE'VE GOT A CLARIFICATION. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? IF NOT, WE'LL DO ROLL CALL FISH. AYE. SAVINA AYE. VELAZQUEZ AYE. MASUKA AYE. UH, GROUP HAS LEFT. BAKER AYE. AND CARPENTER AYE. MOTION PASSES. [03:05:01] OKAY, THANK YOU. UM, SO JUST A A POINT, UM, COMMISSIONER FETZER HAS JOINED US VIRTUALLY AND SO WE'LL BE ABLE TO MAINTAIN A QUORUM. UM, BUT BECAUSE VICE-CHAIR CARPENTER IS IN PERSON, HE CONTINUES TO BE THE PRESIDING OFFICER. I'M SORRY, I DIDN'T HEAR THAT. I, I'LL CONTINUE AS ACTING CHAIR. IS THAT CORRECT? OKAY. YEAH, FINE. ALRIGHT, SO, UH, ITEM NUMBER 16, AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 16 H T R C CASE 2022 DASH 5 54, UM, SIX 12 AND SIX 14 EAST MULBERRY. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO ONE, REPLACE ALL EXISTING ORIGINAL WOOD WINDOWS WITH ALUMINUM WINDOWS. TWO, REPLACE ORIGINAL WOOD FRONT DOORS. THREE, CONSTRUCT AN ADDITION TO THE FRONT FACADE, AND FOUR, CONSTRUCT AN ADDITION TO THE REAR FACADE RECOMMENDATION. OKAY, YOU CAN STAND HERE. HERE. OKAY. STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE REPLACEMENT OF ALL EXISTING WOOD WINDOWS WITH ALUMINUM WINDOWS. BASED ON FINDING, B. STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE APPLICANT REPAIR THE WOOD WINDOWS WITHIN KIND MATERIALS. THE FOUR WINDOWS THAT ARE BEYOND REPAIR SHOULD BE REPLACED WITH SALVAGED WOOD WINDOWS. IF THE APPLICANT IS RESPONSIBLE FOR SUBMITTING SALVAGED WOOD WINDOWS TO O H P STAFF FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL PRIOR, PRIOR TO THE INSTALLATION AS REPLACEMENT WINDOWS TO STAFF RECOMMENDS APPLICANT RE REPAIR, REPAIR THE FRONT DOORS AND SIDE LIGHTS, OR REPLACE HIM WITH A DOOR WITH TWO DIVIDED LIGHTS AND WOODEN MATERIAL BASED ON FINDING C THREE STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND THE CONSTRUCTION OF A FRONT ADDITION BASED ON FINDING F UM, FOUR STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE REAR ADDITION OF THE STRUCTURE BASED ON FINDING G AND H WITH THE STIPULATION THAT THE INBUILT AREAS BE ARTICULATED BY A PIECE OF VERTICAL TRIM. AND THE APPLICANT, LIN WOLF IS HERE IN PERSON. I, HELLO. THIS IS MY FIRST TIME DOING THIS, SO, WELL, YOU'RE AMONGST FRIENDS. JUST TELL US WHAT YOU WANT TO DO AND, AND, UH, WHY YOU WANNA DO IT. UM, SO THE HOUSE, YOU CAN SEE IT THERE. IT'S KIND OF LIKE AN H IT, AND WITH EACH UNIT ON EACH SIDE AND THERE, SEE, AND IT'S IN THE BACK ALSO. SO I'VE GOT THREE ROOF LINES DRAINING INTO A VERY SMALL AREA. YOU CAN SEE HOW TIGHT IT IS. THAT'S ALL I, SO IT'S NOT LIKE AN ADDITION THAT I'M STACKING ONTO THE BACK. I'M JUST TRYING TO CLOSE IN THAT AREA ON THE FRONT. IN THE BACK, I'LL DIVIDE IT EVENLY BETWEEN THE TWO SPACES IN THE BACK, THAT SMALL LITTLE AREA, I'M GOING TO USE IT FOR A MASTER CLOSET. THE EXISTING MASTER CLOSETS, LIKE TWO BY THREE, IT'S REALLY SMALL AND IT'S JUST A SMALL SPACE. AND ON THE FRONT IT'S A, IT'S THE SAME SIZE, BUT IT'S, UM, ALL JUST PULL IT TOGETHER AND EXTEND THE BEDROOM UP THAT'S ALREADY THERE. THAT WINDOW THAT YOU SEE FROM THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE THAT IS RECESSED NOW, IT WILL JUST BE BROUGHT FORWARD IN THAT SMALL LITTLE AWKWARD SPACE. UM, IT'S GOTTA, UH, IT USED TO BE A FIREPLACE, A NON-WORKING FIREPLACE THAT HAD FALLEN DOWN. AND SO THAT WOULD BE THE AREA LOST ON THE INTERIOR. SO ON THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE, I JUST WANNA MAKE IT FLUSH. AND THE ROOF LINE THAT YOU SAW, THAT PICTURE, UM, IT'S, THERE SHOULD BE THAT ELEVATION THAT YOU JUST PASSED. NO ONE UP, RIGHT, RIGHT THERE. SO THAT'S WHAT IT WOULD LOOK LIKE. IT'S JUST GONNA BE ATTACHED TO THAT PERPENDICULAR ROOF. AND IT'S JUST GONNA HAVE A GRADE THAT COMES AND IT MEET AND IT MEETS THE EXISTING ROOF ON EACH SIDE. AND THEN THOSE ARE THE TWO EXISTING WINDOWS, BEDROOM WINDOWS THAT ARE JUST GONNA BE PUSHED FORWARD. SO THAT'S THE ADDITION PART. AND THEN THE OTHER PART IS THE WINDOWS. UM, THERE'S ONLY THE TWO WINDOWS, THOSE TWO WINDOWS THAT ARE PART OF THE BEDROOMS. ONE IS SIX 14 AND ONE IS SIX 12. AND THOSE ARE THE ONES THAT I WAS SAYING WOULD BE MOVED FORWARD, FLUSH WITH THE FRONT. AND THEN [03:10:01] I COULD JUST HAVE ONE GUTTER GOING ACROSS THE FRONT OR HOWEVER Y'ALL SUGGEST. BUT, AND THEN, UM, THE WINDOWS, A MAJORITY OF THE WINDOWS ARE ON THAT SIDE OF THE HOUSE THAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT. THAT PHASE 2 81, I'VE GOT MULTI-FAMILY ON ONE SIDE OF ME AND I'VE GOT A, LIKE A, A COMMERCIAL PARKING LOT ON THE OTHER SIDE OF ME. I'M AT THE CORNER OF MULBERRY AND 2 81. SO ALL OF THOSE WINDOWS THAT ARE ON THAT ONE SIDE, UM, THE WINDOW LAYOUT IS, SHOULD BE IN THERE. UM, DID YOU, THIS ONE HERE? NO, THE, WELL, I PRESENTED THIS ONE. THAT WAS THE FIRST ONE. AND THEN THE CASEWORKER SAID SHE PUT THIS ONE IN ALSO. THAT'S OKAY. BUT YOU CAN SEE A MAJORITY FIVE THROUGH 13 AND 34 THROUGH 26. THE 34 THROUGH 26 FACES MY NEIGHBOR, IT'S CONCRETE. AND I THINK HE HAS TWO WINDOWS ON HIS SIDE, BUT THERE'S JUST A CONCRETE DRIVEWAY, A VERY SMALL LIKE AREA BETWEEN US. AND ON THE OTHER SIDE, FIVE THROUGH 13, ALL FACE 2 81. WE GET A LOT OF THE TRAFFIC NOISE WE GET, THEY PUT A, UM, CROSSWALK, I GUESS FOR THE IMPAIRED. SO IT COUNTS DOWN. IT DOES IT, YOU DON'T HAVE TO PUSH THE BUTTON AND YOU CAN HEAR IT INSIDE THE HOUSE. THE SIX 14, THE ONE THAT FACES IS WHERE I WAS LIVING, UM, UNTIL WE HAD TO MOVE OUT. AND IT'S BEEN VACANT EVER SINCE. IT'S IN MAJOR DISREPAIR. THE WINDOWS ARE EITHER BROKEN, CRACKED, THEY'RE ROTTEN OUT. THERE'S TERMITES AND WOOD ROT. SO I'M JUST ASKING. I MEAN, EVEN IF, UH, I, I'M NOT OPPOSED. I LOVE THIS HOME. I'VE HAD IT FOR A VERY LONG TIME. I WANT TO TAKE IT BACK TO THE WAY IT WAS. I'M NOT LOOKING TO DO ANYTHING RADICAL, BUT IN ORDER TO PRESERVE THIS HOME, I DO FEEL LIKE I NEED TO ENCLOSE THOSE SMALL AREAS. I HAVE PAID A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF MONEY GETTING THE FOUNDATION FIXED. THE SLOPE ON THE LOT IS FROM FRONT TO BACK. THE DRAINAGE GOES TOWARDS THE BACK OF THE HOUSE. SO ESPECIALLY IN THAT FRONT AREA, GETTING ALL THAT RAIN, IT PUSHES IT UP UNDERNEATH THE HOUSE. SO IN THAT AREA RIGHT THERE, THERE USED TO BE A CONCRETE PATIO IN THERE. YOU COULD TELL THAT OVER THE YEARS AND YEARS IT HAD BEEN ADDED TO. SO IT WAS HIGHER THAN EVEN THE TWO LITTLE DOORS THAT WERE THERE. AND WATER WAS COMING IN THE LIVING ROOM. UM, WHEN WE GOT THE FOUNDATION FIXED THAT WAS TAKEN OUT, IT WAS JUST A THIN PIECE ON DIRT, SO THAT DIDN'T RESOLVE THE ISSUE. SO THAT'S WHY I'M ASKING FOR JUST THOSE TWO ENCLOSURES. YOU CAN SEE THAT'S WHAT IT WOULD LOOK LIKE AFTERWARDS. AND THEN THE WINDOWS I'M JUST ASKING FOR, UM, FIRST MY CONTRACTOR HAD DONE VINYL. UM, I'VE UPGRADED THOSE NOW TO ALUMINUM. THEY'RE SINGLE HUNG, THEY'RE DOUBLE PANE. THE EFFICIENCY, THE ENERGY EFFICIENCY IS MUCH GREATER. IT'S ONLY 800 SQUARE FEET ON EACH SIDE. YOU CAN SEE HOW MANY WINDOWS I HAVE IN EACH UNIT. IT'S A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT. UM, I AM PRESERVING ALMOST ALL OF THEM. UM, THE ONLY TWO THAT ARE THE ONLY ONES THAT WOULD BE TAKEN OUT ARE RIGHT THERE IN THE MASTER BEDROOM WHERE THE MASTER BEDROOM WOULD BE MET WITH THAT WALL WOULD NOW COME TOGETHER. SO, UM, IT WOULD JUST BE THAT LITTLE VALLEY, WHICH IN JUST THAT SMALL LITTLE VALLEY IN THE BACK OF THE HOUSE, THERE'S SIX WINDOWS. SO THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO IMPROVE UPON. UM, AS FAR AS THE FRONT DOOR, UH, THE SIDE PANELS ARE NOT A PROBLEM, BUT THE FRONT DOOR, WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO DO, BECAUSE I AM RIGHT ON THAT CORNER, TRAFFIC BACKS UP ON MULBERRY 'CAUSE OF THE LIGHT THERE AND EVERYBODY LOOKS INSIDE, [03:15:01] IT'S LIKE YOU'RE IN A FISH BOWL. THAT'S THE LIVING ROOM RIGHT THERE. UM, I'VE TRIED EVERYTHING, BUT THE BEST ONE WAS JUST A CURTAIN. THAT WAS THE LAST THING I DID. BUT THE DOOR OPENS INWARD AND YOU, YOU, UM, CATCH THE CURTAIN EVERY TIME. SO I'D LIKE TO GO WITH A DOOR THAT HAS THE GLASS ON TOP, MAYBE LIKE A 40 20 OR A 70 30. UM, AND SOLID ON THE BOTTOM. SO THOSE ARE THE THREE CHANGES THAT I WAS LOOKING AT WITH THE WINDOWS, THE ENCLOSURES IN THE DOOR. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. CLAUDIA, DO WE HAVE A PUBLIC COMMENT? I KNOW WE'VE GOT A LETTER OR A EMAIL. WE JUST HAVE THE LETTER. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ALRIGHT, SO COMMISSIONERS QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT OR FOR STAFF. I'M GOING TO JUMP IN AND BE VERY DIRECT. THERE'S A LOT GOING ON MM-HMM. , A LOT OF THINGS, UM, THAT ARE REALLY COUNTER TO WHAT WE DO WITH HISTORIC HOUSES. SO I WOULD LIKE TO OFFER YOU, BEFORE I MAKE A SUGGESTION TO THE COMMISSIONERS, WOULD YOU BE INTERESTED IN ATTENDING A D R C WHERE WE CAN SIT DOWN WITH YOU AND LOOK AT YOUR PLAN, LOOK AT YOUR GOALS, AND LOOK AT THE FEASIBILITY OF THESE THINGS? YEAH, I, YEAH, I'M OPEN TO ANY ADVICE TO GET IT DONE. UM, BUT I DO, I'M JUST UNDER THE CONSTRAINT OF TIME. UM, I'D LIKE TO BE ABLE TO GIVE IT, GET IT LIVABLE AGAIN. I'VE GOT VAGRANTS THERE AND ESPECIALLY WITH THE COLD WEATHER. UM, I'VE HAD A LOT OF BREAK-INS AND THEY KEEP BREAKING GLASS, YOU KNOW, THE WIND, I DO HAVE ALARMS, SO THEN I GET NASTY LETTERS FROM THE POLICE DEPARTMENT SURE, SURE. FOR A WHILE. SO IT'S JUST CREATING A LOT OF PROBLEMS. I'M SORRY. SO, WELL, I WOULD LIKE TO, UM, MAKE A MOTION, UM, AND THEN WE CAN DISCUSS AMONG THE COMMISSIONERS, BUT I MAKE A MOTION TO DEFER THIS TO A D R C AT THE NEXT AVAILABLE, UH, D R C. WHAT IS C R C A DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE. OKAY. WHICH WILL INCLUDE SOME OF US STAFF AND SOME OTHER INDIVIDUALS TO HELP YOU, UH, NAVIGATE THIS. OKAY. WE HAVE A, UH, MOTION. DO WE HAVE A SECOND, MR. CHAIRMAN? I SECOND. THANK YOU. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. UM, JUST A LITTLE BIT MORE DISCUSSION. I, YOU KNOW, WHEN I, I LOOKED AT, YEAH, I LOOKED AT, AT THE PACKAGE AND, AND LIKE, UM, ON PAGE 14 OR IMAGE 14, WHERE CONCEPTUALLY THIS SEEMS LIKE A FAIRLY SIMPLE THING JUST TO INFILL THESE GAPS BETWEEN THE BUILDINGS AND KINDA MAXIMIZE THE, THE FLOOR PLAN. UM, AND, AND ALL THAT MAKES RATIONAL SENSE, BUT IT RADICALLY ALTERS THE CHARACTER OF THE, OF THE BUILDING. AND AS, AS COMMISSIONER AV SAID, THESE ARE SORT OF COUNTER TO KIND OF WHAT WE WOULD IN INTEND. AND, AND THERE, THERE LOOKED LIKE THERE WAS SOME SORT OF FRONT GABLE THERE. BUT THEN WHEN I LOOK AT THE OTHER DRAWINGS, WELL THERE LOOKS LIKE THERE'S AN ACKNOWLEDGEMENT. THERE WOULD HAVE TO BE A CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT OF OVER FRAMING TO CREATE ROOF. WELL, I'M NOT GONNA DO THAT. YEAH. THAT, I DON'T KNOW WHY THAT STAYED IN THERE, BECAUSE THEN I, I GOT THE CAD DRAWINGS OF THEY ACTUALLY DID THE SLOPE AND THERE SHOULD BE EVEN ANOTHER ONE IN THERE THAT DOES GIVE THE SLOPES OFF OF THE MAIN ROOF. AND, UM, I WAS GONNA CHANGE THE AWNINGS. THE AWNINGS ARE ENORMOUS, BUT I I DID DROP THAT. I, UM, IT THERE. YEAH. AND I, I THINK THERE, THERE ARE SOME GOOD INTENTIONS TO WHAT YOU'RE DOING THERE. OKAY. JUST EVEN IF YOU LOOK AT, UM, THE DRAWING NUMBER 19 OR OR IMAGE 19, AND THERE IS A HOUSE JUST LIKE MINE, THREE DOORS DOWN. UM, NOT THIS, NOT MY NEIGHBOR HERE, BUT THE ONE NEXT TO IT. I MEAN, THE WHOLE STORY IS, IS, UM, AND SHE WAS THERE TILL NOT TOO LONG AGO AT THAT HOUSE, IS THAT THEY BUILT ALL THOSE BACK IN THE DAY THEY HAD A, I THINK A TORTILLA COMPANY AND THEY HAD BUILT THOSE, THIS HOUSE. 'CAUSE I ALWAYS KICKED MYSELF THAT I DIDN'T GET THAT ONE. I DROVE MY KIDS TO SCHOOL EVERY DAY AND PASSED THESE, BUT IT, IT WAS IN BAD SHAPE. AND THE PEOPLE WHO THEY LIVE IN ONE SIDE OF IT, YOU CAN TELL THE LEFT SIDE IS BLACKED OUT. THEY JUST USE THE ONE DOOR, BUT IT'S THE EXACT SAME HOUSE AS MINE. THEY ENCLOSED THE FRONT. THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT I WANT TO DO WITH MINE, EXCEPT I'LL KEEP MY AWNINGS. UM, AND THEN THEY EVEN ADDED ONTO THE BACK OF THEIR HOUSE AND HAVE A PATIO AND EVERYTHING INSTEAD OF JUST CLOSING [03:20:01] IN THE ONE AREA. BUT THAT'S, IT MAKES IT EASY TO VISUALIZE BECAUSE I THINK THERE ARE FOUR HOUSES DOWN FROM MINE. SURE. SO, UM, I THINK THIS DESERVES A LOT MORE DISCUSSION IN FINDING, YOU KNOW, THE RIGHT SOLUTIONS FOR ACCOMPLISHING WHAT YOUR GOALS ARE. OKAY. SO I, I APPRECIATE THE SUGGESTION THAT THIS BE REFERRED TO DRC. MR. I'D JUST LIKE TO PROPOSE, I'VE BEEN LOOKING AT THE, UH, UH, GOOGLE, GOOGLE MAPS AND I SEE THAT THE, THE ADDRESS, UH, THAT MS. WOLF HAS, UH, MENTIONED THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT THERE IS FIVE 20 AND 5 22 ON THE, ON THE SAME STREET THERE. I WOULD JUST PROPOSE THAT, UH, THE D R C ALSO LOOK AT PERHAPS ANY OTHER H D R C ACTIONS THAT WERE DONE IN THE PAST WITH FIVE 20 AND 5 22, AND USE THAT AS A PRECEDENT OR TEMPLATE FOR, UH, FOR THIS APPLICATION. I WOULD LOVE THAT. THANK YOU. I'VE, I'M, I'M LIKE THE CREEPY STALKER LADY THAT'S BEEN OVER THERE TAKING PICTURES. I WANTED TO KIND OF KNOCK ON THEIR DOOR, BUT IT, IT'S, THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO DO. AND THEY, ALMOST ALL MY NEIGHBORS DO HAVE MOST OF THEM VINYL WINDOWS IN. UM, THE COST, IF I DO HAVE TO REFURBISH ALL MY WINDOWS IS LIKE FOUR TIMES THE AMOUNT. BUT THE MAIN THING IS IT, WHICH I WOULD GLADLY GO THAT WAY IF THE COST, YOU KNOW, WASN'T SO EXCESSIVE. BUT IT STILL LEAVES ME WITH THE ISSUE OF THE, THE EFFICIENCY AND THE NOISE. THE NOISE IS A HUGE FACTOR IN THE HOUSE. AND I'D LIKE TO KEEP THE WINDOWS, BUT I NEED TO GET THE WINDOWS MORE CURRENT, MORE UPDATED, UM, FOR THOSE REASONS. AND, AND I'M VERY FAMILIAR WITH YOUR PROPERTY, PROBABLY DROVE BY IT DAILY FOR, OH, I'M YEARS AND YEARS AND YEARS, I'M SURE. AND IT IS A HIGH TRAFFIC STREET AND VERY CLOSE TO 2 81. SO THERE'S SOME CONCERNS THERE. AND IT'S NOT JUST DRIVING BY BECAUSE THE LIGHT BACKS UP AT ALL TIMES OF THE DAY. RIGHT. AND EVERYBODY LOOKS IN THERE. I MEAN, THEY, YOU CAN'T DO ANYTHING ON THAT PROPERTY. PEOPLE COME AND KNOCK ON THE DOORS ALL THE TIME. AND SO IT, I NEED TO GET IT MORE SECURE AND I JUST NEED TO GET IT LIVABLE AGAIN SO WE CAN MOVE BACK IN. OKAY. VERY GOOD. SO, UM, I THINK IT'S A GOAL FOR EVERYONE HERE. YES. SO I THINK WE'VE, WE'VE HAD SOME DISCUSSION. WE'VE GOT A MOTION AND A SECOND, UNLESS THERE'S FURTHER COMMENTS, I WOULD, UH, ASK FOR ROLL CALL PLEASE. FISH. AYE SINA AYE. QUE ZUKA AYE GROUP HAS LEFT. UH, ZER. COMMISSIONER ZER, HE'S SAYING AYE, BUT MUTED. ONE MORE TIME. AYE. THERE WE GO. DID YOU HEAR ME? YES. THANK YOU. YES, BAKER. AYE. AND CARPENTER AYE. MOTION PASSES. SO STAFF WILL SET UP A MEETING WITH YOU AND, AND THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS AND WE'LL GET TOGETHER AND DO SOME BRAINSTORMING FOR YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. TAKE CARE. THANK YOU. UPDATES. OKAY. THANK YOU. AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 17, H D R C CASE 2022 DASH 5 41, UM, 1110 BURNETT STREET. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS TO CONSTRUCT A DETACHED GARAGE ON AN EXISTING CONCRETE SLAB WITH ROLLING GARAGE DOORS. STAFF, STAFF RECOMMENDS CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL OF DETACHED GARAGE BASED ON FINDING B THROUGH D WITH THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS. ONE THAT THE ROOF BE SIMILAR IN PITCH AND FORMED THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE AS NOTED IN FINDING C TWO THAT A DETACHED GARAGE UNHEEDED BE DETACHED FROM ONE ANOTHER. THREE THAT THE APPLICANT SUBMITS WINDOWS FOR REVIEW THAT ARE CONSISTENT WITH STAFF STANDARDS FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF A C O A BASED ON FINDING D FOUR, THAT THE APPLICANT SUBMITS A FRENCH DOOR EXAMPLE FOR REVIEW TO STAFF PRIOR TO APPROVAL BASED ON FINDING D ON FINDING D AND FIVE THAT THE APPLICANT SUBMITS FINAL MATERIAL SPECIFICATIONS FOR STAFF REVIEW ON THE GARAGE DOOR BASED ON FINDING D SIX THAT THE APPLICANT SUBMITS EXAMPLES FOR STAFF TO REVIEW FOR THE PROPOSED CITED MATERIAL BASED ON FINDING D. AND THE APPLICANT IS HERE [03:25:01] IN PERSON. HELLO, MY NAME IS RICARDO ORTIZ. EXCUSE ME. I AM THE OWNER OF 1110 BURNETT. THANK YOU MR. ORTIZ FOR JOINING US, AND THANK YOU FOR STICKING TO THE END HERE WITH US. UM, TELL US ABOUT YOUR PROJECT. SO IT'S BEEN A WHILE. I'VE BEEN TRYING TO BUILD THIS, UM, I ENDED UP BUILDING A SHED, UH, WENT THROUGH ALL THE, I I SUBMITTED THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS, BUT I BELIEVE IT WASN'T NEEDED FOR THE SIZE. UH, BUT I DID TRY TO FOLLOW THE CHANNELS. UM, SO THE, IT'S KIND OF AN ODD DEAL. THE WAY I HAVE THE SHED SET UP IS YOU CAN SEE THE DOORS OPEN UP THIS WAY, UM, TO DO A DETACHED GARAGE, WHICH I WAS INFORMED AFTER I SUBMITTED EVERYTHING. UM, I TOLD 'EM I WOULD PROBABLY HAVE TO FLIP MY SHED AROUND, WHICH I REALLY DIDN'T WANT TO DO. I KIND OF WANTED TO GO WITH THE ORIGINAL DESIGN THAT I HAD. SO I DIDN'T KNOW WHAT STEPS I NEEDED TO TAKE NOW TO INCLUDE MY SHED WITH THE GARAGE. SO THIS IS THE IDEA THAT I HAD. UM, IT'S PRETTY MUCH TOGETHER. UM, I WANTED THE GARAGE TO BE CONSTRUCTED ALONE. NOTHING BE, UM, LOAD BEARING ON THE ACTUAL SHED. SO THE SHED WOULD STILL BE, UH, BY ITSELF, BUT I WANTED TO BE ABLE TO HAVE ACCESS TO MY SHED THROUGH THE GARAGE. UM, SO RIGHT HERE YOU CAN SEE THE SHED IS ALONE AND THEN I HAVE THE GARAGE NEXT TO IT. UM, SO LIKE I SAID, EVERYTHING THAT WAS GONNA BE ON THE GARAGE FOR THE ROOF IS ALL GONNA BE LOADING ON THE ACTUAL GARAGE STRUCTURE. UM, YES. SO I DON'T KNOW HOW TO GO APPROACH IT. I ASKED CLAUDIA IF I SHOULD RESUBMIT IT WITH THE SHED OR IF I SHOULD JUST GO WITH THE SAME APPLICATION, UH, IN THE DRAWINGS, EVERYTHING. I WASN'T, UH, I WAS TRYING TO INCLUDE THE SHED, UM, ON THE ORIGINAL LAYOUT. OKAY. ONE THING THAT, UM, WAS REQUESTED WAS THE PITCH OF THE ROOF. UM, THE WAY IT IS RIGHT NOW ON THE CURRENT, UH, HOME, THE PITCH IS ACTUALLY TOWARDS THE BACK. UM, SO RIGHT NOW THE WAY I HAVE IT IS THE PITCH IS GOING TOWARDS THE SIDE OF THE, OF THE HOME. I MEAN, AWAY FROM THE HOME ACTUALLY. SO THE EXISTING HOME IS NEXT TO THE SHED RIGHT NOW? YEAH. . AND SO YOU'RE APPROACHING THE, THE PROPOSED GARAGE IN THIS IMAGE THAT WE SEE HERE WOULD BE, THE APPROACH WOULD BE FROM THE KIND OF THE RIGHT GEAR TO TOWARDS IT, RIGHT? AND THEN THE GARAGE IS GONNA BE BUILT. YEAH. SO THERE'S A PRETTY LONG DRIVEWAY, I WANNA SAY IT'S LIKE MAYBE 40 FEET. SO YOU WOULD COME IN THROUGH THE DRIVEWAY AND THEN YOU HAD TO MAKE A LEFT TO GO INTO THE GARAGE. SO YEAH, THE, THE GARAGE IS LIKE IN THE MIDDLE OF THE PROPERTY. SO YOU'RE TURNING THE CAR 90 DEGREES. YEAH. YEAH. TO TURN INTO THERE. MAYBE THERE'S 25, 30 FEET HERE ON THE SIDE. YEAH, IT'S PRETTY WIDE BACK THERE. I'M ABLE TO MOVE. I, I'VE BEEN ABLE TO PARK TWO CARS ON THAT SLAB BEFORE I'VE BEEN ABLE TO GET 'EM IN AND OUT. NO PROBLEM. UM, MY MAIN PURPOSE FOR THE GARAGE ISN'T EVEN TO STORE THE VEHICLES ANYMORE, IT'S TO STORE MY STUFF BECAUSE I DON'T HAVE ANY STORAGE IN THE, ON THE PROPERTY. SO RIGHT NOW THAT, UH, SHED IS PRETTY MUCH FULL AND UM, I HAVE A LOT MORE STUFF . SO YEAH, I DON'T REALLY USE THE SLAB FOR PARKING ANYMORE. UM, I JUST NEED MORE STORAGE AREAS, WHAT I REALLY NEED. AND AT THE TIME BEFORE DOING THE SHED, I REALLY WANTED TO BUILD A GARAGE. I JUST DIDN'T HAVE THE, THE FUNDS. AND NOW I DO, THIS IS JUST AN OBSERVATION BEFORE WE OPEN UP. IT SEEMS LIKE THAT THE RETENTION OF THE SHED AND TRYING TO INCORPORATE IT INTO THE DESIGN OF THE GARAGE IS SORT OF COMPROMISING THE PROJECT AS WHOLE. YEAH. YEAH. AND I'VE BEEN OPEN WITH CLAUDIA. I TOLD HER ANY CHANGE THAT WE NEED TO DO, UM, I'M FOR IT. IF WE NEED TO ADD ANYTHING ELSE TO THE OUTSIDE, WHATEVER CHANGES NEED TO BE DONE, UM, THIS IS REALLY WHAT I WANT. BUT IF THIS ISN'T POSSIBLE THEN LIKE I SAID, I WOULD THINK I WOULD NEED TO MOVE MY SHED IN A DIFFERENT AREA AND THEN I CAN ACTUALLY DO A DETACHED GARAGE. [03:30:01] COMMISSIONERS, ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS? I, I HAVE A QUESTION. HOW THICK IS THAT SLAB THAT YOU PARK ON? RIGHT NOW IT'S A FOUR INCH SLAB IS WHAT THEY POUR DOWN. SO I, I'M AN ENGINEER. A CONCERN I HAVE IS IF YOU BUILD A BIG GARAGE ON TOP OF THAT AND THEN YOU PARK A CAR THERE THAT THAT SLAB IS GONNA CRACK AND THEN YOU'RE GONNA HAVE PROBLEMS WITH THE GARAGE. AND SO MORE SO THAN THE SHED BEING THE, THE ANCHOR POINT ON WHICH THE WHOLE PLAN IS BUILT, IT LOOKS TO ME LIKE THE PAD IS ACTUALLY WHAT IS THE ANCHOR POINT. AND AND THAT'S THE, THE WEAKEST, THE WEAKEST LINK IN THE PLAN IS, AND THAT'S MY CONCERN IS THAT WE WOULD BE AUTHORIZING YOU TO BUILD SOMETHING THAT THAT'S ON, NOT ON AN ACTUAL STRUCTURAL FOUNDATION. SO I DO HAVE SOME FRIENDS THAT DO, UH, CONTRACTING. THEY TOLD ME THAT PUTTING A FOOTER AROUND THE WHOLE PERIMETER WOULD PROBABLY BE IDEAL, BUT I WANTED TO HAVE A SPACE TO LIKE, I GUESS ENTERTAINMENT. I DON'T KNOW IF SHE HAS THE LAST, SO, SO, SO THEY BASICALLY SAID BUILD UP A, A SPREAD FOOTER AROUND IT AND THEN PUT THE, AND THEN BUILD ON TOP THE LOAD BEARING WALLS ON THE FOOTER. YEAH. AND THAT'S JUST YOUR FLOOR IN US? YEAH. OKAY. YEAH. SO I WAS TRYING TO AVOID THAT BECAUSE THAT ENTAILS ME MOVING THE SHED AND DOING A LOT MORE WORK. UM, BUT I'M, I WANT IT TO BE DONE RIGHT. I WANT IT TO PASS ALL INSPECTION OF WHATEVER. YOU'D PROBABLY ALSO LOSE YOUR TREE. YEAH. SO THE TREE IS KIND OF IN THE WAY AND IT LOOKS LIKE IT WILL BE ABLE TO STAY THERE. UM, I DO HAVE SOME QUESTIONS. I, HOW FAR IS THAT SLAB CURRENTLY FROM YOUR PROPERTY LINE ON THE EAST? UH, I BELIEVE IT'S SIX FEET FROM THE, THE PROPERTY LINE. 'CAUSE MY HOME, UH, I LOOKED AT IT THE OTHER DAY. I MIGHT'VE TAKEN A PICTURE. THE HOME, YOU CAN ACTUALLY SEE THAT IT'S MORE TO THE FENCE LINE. MY QUICK OBSERVATION ON THIS IS, UM, THERE'S A, IT'D BE HELPFUL TO HAVE A LITTLE BIT MORE INFORMATION. OKAY. YOU KNOW, YOUR, YOUR SLAB THAT YOU'RE SHOWING, UH, YOU'VE GIVEN US SOME DIMENSIONS. UM, IT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO SEE HOW IT'S ORIENTED ON THE SITE. IT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO HAVE AN ENTIRE SITE PLAN THAT SHOWS WHERE YOUR HOUSE IS, WHERE YOUR DRIVEWAY IS RELATIVE TO THIS GARAGE COMPONENT. BECAUSE WITHOUT SOME OF THAT INFORMATION, LIKE SETBACKS AND HOW MUCH MORE SPACE IS THERE, BECAUSE THERE'S A POOL BACK THERE TOO, RIGHT? YEAH. IT'S REALLY HARD FOR US TO PROVIDE ANY ASSISTANCE OR MAKE DECISIONS. UH, UNDERSTANDABLE. I DID SEE A LOT OF, UM, DIAGRAMS TODAY. I DID GET A LOT OF INFORMATION TODAY, SO YEAH. YEAH. I, I DO KNOW THAT WHAT I PRESENTED WASN'T, I GUESS UP TO STANDARDS OF WHAT I SAW IN THE PREVIOUS CASES. MM-HMM. . SO YEAH, WE COULD DEFINITELY, UH, GET SOME MORE INFO ON THAT. UM, I JUST WANT TO KNOW IF I SHOULD JUST CONTINUE WITH THIS, UM, THIS STYLE OR IF I SHOULD JUST COMPLETELY DO IT. UM, DIFFERENT. I, I JUST DON'T WANT TO KEEP GOING IN THIS DIRECTION IF THIS ISN'T GONNA GET APPROVED, UH, MAYBE I CAN OFFER A LITTLE BIT OF ADVICE. I THINK YOU HAVE TO BE CAREFUL ABOUT KIND OF THE TAIL WAGGING THE DOG HERE. IF YOU WANT STORAGE AND YOU WANT MOVABLE STORAGE AND YOU DON'T HAVE TO SET STRUCTURAL FOUNDATIONS ON YOUR SITE LIKE THE ONE THAT YOU'VE BUILT, YOU KNOW, BY PURPOSE, PURPOSE ADDING STRUCTURES. IF YOU NEED ANOTHER ACCESSORY STRUCTURE FOR STORAGE, I THINK YOU PROBABLY WENT ABOUT IT THE RIGHT WAY THE FIRST TIME. IF YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO CHOP THAT SLAB UP TO TURN IT INTO A STRUCTURAL FOUNDATION TO HOLD A GARAGE THAT IS NOW THE SHAPE OF THE SLAB AND NOT NECESSARILY DESIGNED TO HOLD A VEHICLE BECAUSE YOU'RE GONNA USE IT AS STORAGE, YOU'RE GONNA GET YOURSELF IN ANOTHER JAM IN TERMS OF THE SHED ROOF, WHICH I THINK IS WHAT YOU'RE REALLY ASKING US ABOUT. IS IT POSSIBLE TO DO A LOW SLOPE SHED ROOF OR A COLLECTION OF STRUCTURES ON THE SITE? I THINK THAT'S POSSIBLE. BUT THIS ROOF FORMED, THE WAY IT'S PROPOSED NEXT TO A GABLED ROOF IS PROBABLY PROBLEMATIC. YOU KNOW, LIKE IMAGINING THESE PERMANENT, UH, SLAB ON GRADE, UH, GARAGE STRUCTURES NEXT TO ELEVATED STORAGE KINDS OF THINGS, BRINGING THOSE TOGETHER IS GONNA BE A LITTLE BIT TRICKY. YEAH, THAT'S ONE OF MY CONCERNS TOO THAT I HAD THAT HOW CAN WE MAKE THOSE TWO STAY TOGETHER WITHOUT ATTACHING THEM? SO ONE, ONE SUGGESTION. [03:35:01] YOU'VE MENTIONED YOU WANTED TO, YOU'D USE THIS SLAB FOR ENTERTAINMENT. YOU'RE NOT NECESSARILY PARKING CARS THERE, THERE'S A BARBECUE PIT THERE. YOU HAVE A STORAGE PIECE ON ONE SIDE. I MEAN, YOU COULD CONSIDER, UH, AN OVERHEAD STRUCTURE. I, I DON'T WANNA USE THE WORD CARPORT. YEAH. THAT'S, YOU KNOW, A LOW SLOPE, FLAT ROOF THAT CAN KIND OF CREATE A SPACE BETWEEN SOME OF THESE MOVABLE STORAGES. IT GIVES YOU MORE FLEXIBILITY, A LITTLE BIT LESS PERMANENT. I THINK YOUR, YOUR DIFFICULT, YOUR CHALLENGE HERE IS AN IMAGINING GARAGE THAT'S TRADITIONALLY FRAMED ON. YEAH. 'CAUSE I WAS, I WAS TRYING TO DO SOMETHING WITH STORAGE AND KIND OF LIKE A POOL HOUSE DEAL. 'CAUSE I DO HAVE THE POOL, SO I WAS TRYING TO INCORPORATE KIND OF THE BOTH. BUT I DO NEED A GARAGE. SO THAT'S REALLY WHAT I NEED MORE. UM, AND LIKE I SAID, I'M NOT OPPOSED TO REDOING EVERYTHING AND HAVING A, A STANDALONE GARAGE, BUT I WOULD KIND OF LIKE TO DO SOMETHING LIKE THIS AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT NEXT STEPS I WOULD NEED TO TAKE TO KEEP THIS DESIGN. UM, I WOULD, I WOULD SAY DEVELOP A FULL SITE PLAN WITH ALL THE FEATURES OF THE SITE PLAN, BECAUSE I ACTUALLY THINK THAT THERE MIGHT BE, YOU MIGHT SEE SOME OPPORTUNITIES FOR A BETTER LOCATION OR A BETTER SITUATION FOR THE GARAGE. ESPECIALLY IF YOU ANTICIPATE A POOL IN A POOL HOUSE AND ADDITIONAL ACCESSORY STRUCTURES RIGHT HERE IN THE MIDDLE OF THE SITE. IT'S PROBABLY NOT NECESSARILY GONNA BE THE BEST PLACE FOR YOU. AND MAYBE THAT GIVES AN OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO MEET, TO MEET AND TALK ABOUT THE ARRANGEMENT OF THE ELEMENTS AND THEN THE DETAILS IN A D R C. YOU CAN, YOU CAN, UM, ASK STAFF, YOU CAN MEET WITH STAFF OR YOU CAN ASK STAFF TO SCHEDULE AN APPOINTMENT WITH THE D R C, UH, ON YOUR OWN. YEAH. YEAH. I, I SPOKE TO CLAUDIA AND I TOLD HER, YOU KNOW WHAT, I JUST KIND OF WANT TO GO IN THERE AND SEE WHAT THEY TELL ME AND GET SOME FEEDBACK AND THEN JUST GO FORWARD FROM THERE. YEAH. I THINK THAT'S GOOD ADVICE TO THINK, THINK ABOUT THIS HOLISTICALLY AND KINDA LONG TERM BECAUSE THERE SOME OTHER CONCERNS IN ADDITION TO THE STRUCTURE OF THE SLAB AND THAT SORT OF THING. THERE'S ALSO THE PROXIMITY OF THAT ADDITION TO THE MAIN HOUSE THAT THAT'S A CODE DRIVEN THING AS WELL. AND IF YOU'RE GONNA GO TRY TO GET THIS PERMITTED AND YOU'RE INCORPORATING THAT INTO THIS NEW CONSTRUCTION, THEN SUDDENLY THEY'RE GONNA REQUIRE YOU TO HAVE THAT 20 FEET AWAY FROM THE MAIN HOUSE. OH. SO THERE'S SOME BIGGER CONSIDERATIONS THERE THAT I THINK NEED TO BE LOOKED AT SITE-WIDE . OKAY. SO YOU'RE SAYING IT'S TYPICALLY 20 FEET AWAY FROM THE HOME. IS THAT A NEW IF IF, YEAH, IF IT'S A, UH, DETACHED GARAGE. CORRECT. OKAY. SO I, I, I THINK I MIGHT FALL UNDER THERE BECAUSE LET SEE, IS IT 1213? I THINK I HAVE ABOUT MAYBE 18 FEET THERE FROM THE SLAB TO THE HOME. I GOTTA MEASURE IT, BUT I WANNA SAY IT'S ABOUT 18 FEET. SO THIS IS, THIS IS COMMISSIONER FETZER. YEAH. BUT WHEN YOU ADD THE GARAGE AND INCORPORATE THE SHED, YOU DON'T HAVE 20 FEET BETWEEN THE HOME AND THE SHED. I'M SORRY. SO I'M FINE WITH MOVING THE SHED ANYWHERE ON THE PROPERTY. SO IF I NEED TO MOVE THE SHED SOMEWHERE ELSE, UM, I'M FINE WITH THAT TOO. SO THAT WOULD GIVE ME THE 20 FEET BEAT FROM THE HOME. RIGHT. THAT WOULD BE AN OPTION, SIR. ONE OF THE THINGS YOU MIGHT CONSIDER IS ACTUALLY ORIENTING YOUR GARAGE AND PLACING IT LIKE RIGHT ACROSS THE FENCE FROM YOUR NEIGHBOR AT 1106 WHERE YOU'D DRIVE STRAIGHT INTO THE GARAGE AND THEN YOU WOULD HAVE THAT, THAT CONCRETE PAD. YOU, YOU'D HAVE THE GARAGE ON ONE SIDE OF IT. AND, AND THEN ON THE ADJACENT SIDE, ESSENTIALLY YOU WOULD HAVE YOUR, UM, YOUR EXISTING SHED. OKAY. I MEAN YOU'D HAVE TO GET THE SPACING AND THE ADJACENCIES RIGHT. BUT IN TERMS OF LIKE WHERE ON THE LOT AND THEN, THEN IT'S A BLANK CANVAS FOR YOU. AND THEN YOU CAN DESIGN IT SO THAT IT'S GOT A GABLE ROOF, THAT MAT THAT, THAT MATCHES THE FRONT OF YOUR HOUSE AND THE STRUCTURE AND EVERYTHING LOOKS THE SAME. AND WHAT YOU PUT INSIDE THAT THAT GARAGE OR THAT ADDITIONAL STRUCTURE CAN SERVE WHATEVER YOUR PURPOSES ARE, UM, THAT, THAT MIGHT BE SOMETHING CONSIDERED BECAUSE THEN YOU, THEN YOU ISOLATE THE UNCERTAINTY OF THE EXISTING PAD OR THE EXISTING SHED. RIGHT. OKAY. YEAH, THAT DOES MAKE SENSE. COMMISSIONER, UH, MR. UH, MR. CHAIR, I, UM, BASED ON ALL OF THESE COMMENTS, WE'VE GOT TWO CHOICES. WE CAN EITHER GET A BUNCH OF PIZZAS AND SODAS AND STAY ALL NIGHT AND FIGURE THIS OUT. OR I CAN MAKE A MOTION NO TO ASK YOU TO UM, UM, WITHDRAW WHAT YOU HAVE HERE NOW AND COME BACK TO D R C, COME BACK, MAKE AN APPOINTMENT FOR A D R C ONCE YOU HAVE A TWO SCALE FULLY DIMENSION SITE PLAN OKAY. OF EXISTING CONDITIONS. OKAY. YEAH, I COULD DO THAT. SO JUST TO REPHRASE THAT, TO CLARIFY THINGS JUST WE'RE REFERRING THE PROJECT TO THE D [03:40:01] R C? YES. YES. AND I MEAN WE CAN'T MAKE A MOTION FOR THE APPLICANT TO WITHDRAW. I CAN AGREE TO THAT AND THEN COME BACK WITH A FRESH APPLICATION. THAT'S FINE. OR WE CONFER TO D R C. THAT'S THE GOAL. YES. SO WE HAVE A MOTION. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION NECESSARY? IF NOT, ROLL CALL PLEASE. FISH. AYE SINA? AYE. MAZUA. AYE. FETZER. AYE. BAKER? AYE. AND CARPENTER. AYE. MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. APPRECIATE IT. ALRIGHT. NEED A MOTION TO UH, MOVE TO ADJOURN. MOVE TO ADJOURN. THANK YOU ALL. APPRECIATE IT VERY MUCH. THANK YOU FOR JOINING, JEFF. 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.