* 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. [3:00 P.M. – Call to Order] [00:00:07] I HAD LIKE TO CALL TO ORDER THE HISTORIC AND DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION FOR WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 6TH, 2023. MAY I HAVE A ROLL CALL PLEASE? GIBBS? HERE. CASTILLO. SAVINO? HERE. VELASQUEZ. HERE. GALLOWAY. HERE. MOOKA. HERE. ADA? HERE. VASQUEZ. OH, SORRY. GRO HERE. CERVANTES HERE. POLLEN HERE. AND FETZER HERE. WE HAVE A QUORUM. THANK YOU. BEFORE WE GET STARTED, WE DO HAVE A BRIEF ANNOUNCEMENT REGARDING INTERPRETIVE SERVICES THAT ARE AVAILABLE FOR THE MEETING. IF I COULD PLEASE HAVE OUR INTERPRETER COME UP AND GIVE THAT ANNOUNCEMENT. I THANK YOU. THE HISTORIC AND DESIGN REVIEW COMMISSION IS AN ADVISORY BOARD APPOINTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL. I'M JEFFREY FETZER, CHAIRMAN AND VICE CHAIR IS MONICA SAVINO. IT IS A FUNCTION OF THE COMMISSION TO ADVISE THE CITY MANAGER AND ALL RELEVANT CITY DEPARTMENTS CONCERNING ALL APPLICATIONS FOR PERMITS FOR PROPERTIES IN HISTORIC DISTRICTS FOR LANDMARKS ON CITY PROPERTY, IN THE RIVER IMPROVEMENT OVERLAY, AND FOR DEMOLITIONS. AND CONSIDERING WHETHER TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL OF AN APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS, THE COMMISSION SHALL BE GUIDED BY THE CITY'S UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE AND DESIGN GUIDELINES AND STANDARDS THAT HAVE BEEN ADOPTED BY CITY COUNCIL. AN APPEAL OF A DECISION BY AN ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL CAN BE FILED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CITY'S UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE. IF ANYONE PRESENT WISHES TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OR IN OPPOSITION TO ANY ITEM ON TODAY'S AGENDA, PLEASE SIGN UP ON THE PUBLIC COMMENT SHEET. IT IS NOT NECESSARY TO SIGN UP. IF YOU ARE THE OWNER OF OR REPRESENTATIVE FOR A PROJECT ON THE AGENDA, YOU'LL BE CALLED ON AS THE CASE 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 FOUR 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 IS 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 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 TYP IS TO BE STARTED WITHOUT OBTAINING THE APPROPRIATE CITY PERMITS. AFTER A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS HAS BEEN ISSUED BY THE OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION AT THIS TIME, PLEASE SILENCE YOUR CELL PHONES. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU ALL FOR BEING HERE. UM, WE DO HAVE A FEW ANNOUNCEMENTS. UM, THE FIRST IS KIND OF JUST HOUSEKEEPING. IF EDWARD, YOU COULD PULL UP THE 2023 SCHEDULE. UM, SO JUST A QUICK, UH, ANNOUNCEMENT THAT, UH, DECEMBER 20TH, WHICH WAS PREVIOUSLY MARKED TENTATIVE ON THE CALENDAR IS CONFIRMED. WE DO HAVE A QUORUM FOR THAT MEETING AND SO WE'RE GONNA CONTINUE AND HAVE THAT ON THE SCHEDULE. SO DECEMBER 20TH, WE'LL BE OUR LAST HEARING OF THE YEAR. UM, AFTER THAT WE'LL BE RECONVENING IN ON JANUARY 17TH. UM, SO JUST, UH, IF YOU ARE AN APPLICANT OR PLAN TO SUBMIT FOR WORK, JUST KEEP AN EYE ON THOSE DEADLINES. UM, JANUARY 2ND AND THE NEW YEAR IS GONNA BE THE DEADLINE FOR THAT FIRST MEETING ON JANUARY 17TH. UH, SO JUST MAKE NOTE OF THAT. UM, SECOND, I WANT TO, UM, TAKE A MINUTE TO, UH, PROMOTE SOME OF THE HAPPENINGS DOWNTOWN. UM, WE HAVE THROUGH VISIT SAN ANTONIO CENTRO AND THE CITY'S EFFORTS, UM, OUR FIRST EVER HOLIDAYS ON HOUSTON, WHICH IS A MONTH LONG OF EVENTS, UM, FOCUSED ON THE HOLIDAYS IN DOWNTOWN SAN ANTONIO. IF YOU HAVEN'T BEEN DOWNTOWN SINCE THANKSGIVING OR DRIVEN OR WALK DOWN HOUSTON STREET, UH, DO YOURSELF A FAVOR AND DO THAT. UM, IT HAS BEEN DECORATED, UH, WITH NEW THINGS AT THE INTERSECTIONS AND NEW LIGHTS AND, UM, A LOT OF THE BUILDINGS HAVE ALSO PARTICIPATED. SO IT IS A SITE TO SEE. UM, BUT THERE'S SEVERAL EVENTS THAT I DO WANNA HIGHLIGHT. UM, NEXT TUESDAY ON THE 12TH IS THE TASTE OF HOUSTON COMMUNITY DINNER. UM, THERE ARE TICKETS AVAILABLE THAT YOU CAN PURCHASE THAT IS GONNA BE TAKING PLACE ON THE STREET. THE BLOCK WILL BE CLOSED, UH, TO TRAFFIC. UM, SO IT'S A REALLY UNIQUE EXPERIENCE AND A LOT OF THE LOCAL RESTAURANTS ON HOUSTON STREET WILL BE PARTICIPATING. UM, TICKETS ARE ON SALE AND CLOSED TOMORROW, SO IF YOU WANT TO PARTICIPATE, BE SURE TO GET YOUR TICKETS BEFORE IT'S TOO LATE. UM, IT WILL, IF IT SELLS OUT BEFORE THURSDAY, THEN IT'LL CLOSE, BUT JUST, UM, IF YOU'RE INTERESTED, MAKE, MAKE A POINT TO DO THAT EITHER TODAY OR TOMORROW MORNING. UM, AND THEN THAT, THAT NEXT WEEKEND, UM, UH, STARTING ON THE 15TH, SO IT'S DECEMBER 15TH THROUGH THE 17TH IS THE HOLIDAY MARKET. UM, THAT'S GONNA BE AT LEGACY PARK, UM, AND THEN [00:05:01] ALL DOWN HOUSTON STREET WITH, UM, UH, DIFFERENT VENDORS AND UM, UH, ACTIVITIES FOR FAMILIES. UM, AND THEN NIGHTLY ON THE 15TH AND 16TH THERE'LL BE MULTIPLE HOLIDAY LIGHTS, LIGHTS IN THE SKY SHOWS, UM, AKA DRONES. AND SO THIS IS SOMETHING WE'VE NEVER DONE BEFORE. UM, BUT IT'S GONNA BE REALLY INTERESTING AND, UH, A GREAT SITE FOR, FOR KIDS BECAUSE I THINK THAT SANTA'S GONNA BE MAKING APPEARANCE ON HOUSTON STREET AS WELL. UM, AND THEN THE 19TH IS A 5K FUN RUN, UM, BEGINNING AT ST. PEDRO SPRINGS CULTURAL PARK AND ENDING AT TRAVIS PARK. UM, AND TRAVIS PARK IS GONNA BE A, UM, A FREE ACTIVITY, I'M SORRY, LEGACY PARK. SO THAT'S GONNA BE FREE ACTIVITIES AT LEGACY PARK, UM, AT THE FINISH LINE, UM, FOR ANYONE. SO NOT JUST THOSE WHO PARTICIPATED IN THE 5K, BUT THAT'S OPEN TO ANYBODY. UM, THERE'S GONNA BE A FREE CONCERT AND ACTIVITIES AND AGAIN, SANTA I THINK WILL BE THERE. UM, SO IF YOU ARE INTERESTED IN ATTENDING ANY OF THESE EVENTS, MORE INFORMATION IS, UM, EASILY FOUND ONLINE JUST BY GOOGLING HOLIDAYS ON HOUSTON. UM, THIS IS THE VSA PAGE AND ALL OF THE EVENTS AND, UM, SPONSORED EVENTS AND AS WELL AS PARTNER AGENCY EVENTS, UM, ARE AVAILABLE ON THAT WEBSITE FOR MORE INFORMATION. [Approval of Minutes] UM, AND WITH THAT, I THINK WE CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES FROM NOVEMBER 15TH. DO I HAVE A MOTION OR DO WE HAVE COMMENTS? MOTION TO APPROVE MINUTES FROM NOVEMBER 17TH. SECOND NOVEMBER 15TH. YEP. MOTION IS SECOND. HAVE A ROLL CALL PLEASE. GIBBS. AYE. SAVINO ABSTAIN. VELAZQUEZ. AYE. GALLOWAY AYE. ZUKA. AYE. GUEVARA AYE. GROUP. AYE. CERVANTES? YES. HOLLAND. AYE. AND FETZER. AYE. MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU. [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.  ] NOW THE CONSENT AGENDA AND THE APPLICANT HAS, UH, PULLED ITEM NUMBER 15 FOR, UH, INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION. YEP. AND THAT HAS BEEN MARKED ON THE SCREEN. UM, BEFORE WE GET INTO PUBLIC COMMENTS ON CONSENT ITEMS, UM, I JUST WANNA MAKE A QUICK NOTE ABOUT, UM, ITEM ONE, WHICH IS APPROVAL OF THE NEXT YEAR'S SCHEDULE OF MEETINGS. UM, IF WE COULD PULL THAT UP. UM, WE HAD TO DO SOMETHING A LITTLE UNUSUAL. UM, WE HAD TWO CONSECUTIVE DATES IN A ROW THAT FELL ON OR NEAR CITY HOLIDAYS. AND SO WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING IS TO SORT OF SPLIT THE DIFFERENCE AND HAVE A SPECIAL MEETING ON FRIDAY, JUNE 28TH IN ORDER TO CONTINUE BUSINESS THROUGH THE SUMMER. SO I JUST WANTED TO POINT THAT OUT, BUT THAT WILL BE INCLUDED, UM, ON THE APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA UNLESS THERE'S MODIFICATIONS THAT ANY COMMISSIONERS WOULD LIKE TO MAKE. OKAY. I BELIEVE WE HAVE SOME VOICEMAILS FOR CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS, CORRECT? UH, THE FIRST ITEM IS FOR FIRST VOICEMAIL IS FOR ITEM NUMBER TEN FOUR TEN FUR AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 10, CASE NUMBER 20 23 4 74 10 FUR DRIVE. MY NAME IS ROBIN FOSTER OF THE MONTICELLO PARK ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE OFFERING COMMENTS ON BEHALF OF DREA GARZA, PRESIDENT OF MONTICELLO PARK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, MPNA AND THE 10 MEMBER MPNA BOARD OF DIRECTORS. WE APPRECIATE HOMEOWNERS WHO INVEST IN THEIR HISTORIC HOMES AND TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE HISTORIC TAX CREDIT OFFERED BY THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO. WE SUPPORT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL. THANK YOU. ITEM 12 21 0 7 WEST KINGS AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 12, CASE NUMBER 20 23 4 5 5 21 0 7 WEST KINGS HIGHWAY. THIS IS ROBIN FOSTER MONTICELLO PARK ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE OFFERING COMMENTS ON BEHALF OF DREA GARZA, PRESIDENT OF MONTICELLO PARK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, MPNA AND THE 10 MEMBER MP AND A BOARD OF DIRECTORS. WE APPRECIATE HOMEOWNERS SEEKING TO INVEST IN THEIR HISTORIC PROPERTY. HOWEVER, WE DO NOT SUPPORT THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT A WOOD POST AND RAIL CATTLE PANEL FENCE AROUND A PORTION OF THE FRONT YARD. FEWER THAN 1% OF THE PROPERTIES WITHIN THE MONTICELLO PARK HISTORIC DISTRICT HAVE FRONT YARD FENCES WITH MOST OF THEM BEING INSTALLED BEFORE THE AREA WAS DESIGNATED HISTORIC. A MAJORITY OF THE FENCES WITHIN THE MONTICELLO PARK HISTORIC DISTRICT ARE OF A WROUGHT IRON CONSTRUCTION IF A FRONT YARD FENCE IS INTRODUCED THAN IT SHOULD BE OF A MATERIAL COMMONLY FOUND IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT AND NOT A RUSTIC CATTLE PANEL FENCE. THANK YOU FOR CONSIDERATIONS OF OUR COMMENTS. THAT CONCLUDES VOICEMAILS FOR THE CONSENT AGENDA. UH, COMMISSIONERS, YOU DO HAVE LETTERS, UH, IN YOUR PACKETS. DO ANY COMMISSIONERS WISH TO PULL ANY CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS FOR DISCUSSIONS? YES. OR COMMENT? YES, I DO. I'D LIKE TO PULL, UH, [00:10:01] ITEM 11, UH, 1500 FOR J. THANK YOU. ANY OTHERS? MR. CHAIR? I WOULD LIKE TO PULL ITEM NUMBER 12. OKAY. 11 AND 12. IF THERE'S NO OTHERS, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION CHAIR. I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO, UM, APPROVE THE CASS CONSENT AGENDA, INCLUDING THE 2024 HDRC MEETING SCHEDULE LESS ITEM 11 AND ITEM 12, AND OBVIOUSLY ITEM 15 THAT'S BEEN PULLED. SECOND CLARIFICATION. IS THAT WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS? YES, SIR. YES, SIR. OKAY. THE SECOND CONCURS CONCUR. OKAY. ANY DISCUSSION? I I HAVE A QUESTION, MR. CHAIR? YES, SIR. UM, I, I ALSO HAD COMMENT TO, TO MAKE FOR THE SOUTH DEAL STREET, UM, UM, PROJECT, BUT I WAS WONDERING IF IT, IF, IF WE HAVE A POSITIVE COMMENT TO MAKE AND IT'S ON A CONSENT AGENDA, WOULD IT BE APPROPRIATE FOR US TO MAKE THAT TYPE OF A COMMENT DURING THIS PORTION WITHOUT PULLING IT FOR DISCUSSION? JUST, JUST FOR FUTURE, UH, UH, FOOD FOR THOUGHT OR PROTOCOL? IT COULD, YES. YES. OKAY. THANK YOU, SIR. SOMETHING TO CONSIDER. THANK YOU. YES, SIR. SO, UM, YOU HAVE A ROLL CALL PLEASE? GIBBS? AYE. SABINO? AYE. VELAZQUEZ AYE. GALLOWAY AYE. ZUKA AYE. EVA AYE. GROUP. AYE. ANTES? YES. HOLLAND. AYE. AND ZER AYE. MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU. IF YOU'RE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA AND YOUR ADDRESS IS NINE 14 WEST MULBERRY ONE 11 EAST PECAN, 10 28 SOUTH ALAMO 39 0 3 NORTH ST. MARY'S ONE 10 LEXINGTON 1167 EAST COMMERCE 8 31 EAST MAGNOLIA ONE 16, CAMARGO FOUR 10 FIR THREE 18 WEST ROSEWOOD AND 1614 EAST HOUSTON. 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 FOR YOUR CASE MANAGER. YOUR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS OR COMMISSION ACTION LETTER WILL BE PREPARED AND EMAILED TO YOU WITHIN 10 DAYS. THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH. AND THOSE WHO, UM, HAVE GONE FOR HISTORIC TAX CERTIFICATION, VERIFICATION AND DESIGNATION, WE DO THANK YOU ON BEHALF OF THE CITIZENS OF SAN ANTONIO. [INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION  ] SO AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 11. YES, I, I PULLED IT, UH, BECAUSE I WANTED TO COMMEND PUBLIC WORKS AND THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO FOR A VERY THOUGHTFUL DE DESIGN TO A NEIGHBORHOOD PARK. IT'S IN ONE OF THE POOREST AREAS IN TOWN, AND ALL TOO OFTEN, UM, ADDITIONS, CHANGES ARE DONE IN A VERY, UM, ORDINARY WAY. THIS ONE IS HANDLED, UH, WITH SENSITIVITY. THE, THE LANDSCAPING IS VERY NICE. AND, UM, AND IT JUST MAKES ME HAPPY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER COMMENTS? YE YES, SIR. MR. CHAIR, I, I ALSO, UH, WANT TO COMMEND THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO AND THE LEADERSHIP THAT, THAT BROUGHT THIS PROJECT FORWARD BECAUSE IT'S AN AREA THAT'S, UH, SO IMPORTANT TO THE WEST SIDE OF SAN ANTONIO, BUT IT ALSO CARRIES THE NAME ALBERT BENAVIDEZ. AND THIS IS A, A NAME THAT SETS A STANDARD VERY HIGH SO THAT WE'RE, WE'RE REACHING A POINT WHERE THOSE, THOSE, UH, NEEDED IMPROVEMENTS, DEFERRED MAINTENANCE, WHATEVER, WHATEVER IT CAN BE CALLED. BUT, BUT EVEN TO ALL THE YOUNG PEOPLE, UH, SKATE PARK, YOU KNOW THAT THEY'RE GONNA HAVE A PLACE TO REALLY ENJOY THEMSELVES AND, AND GET SOME PHYSICAL EXERCISE OUTSIDE. UH, COMMEND THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO AND, AND JUST, UM, ENCOURAGE THE FOR FURTHER, UH, UM, IMPROVEMENTS TO, TO THIS AREA. THANK YOU, SIR. THANK YOU. IF THERE'S NO OTHER COMMENTS, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION. MR. CHAIR, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CASE WITH ALL STAFF STIPULATIONS. SECOND. MOTION IS SECOND. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION OF A ROLL CALL, PLEASE? GIBBS? AYE. SAVINA? AYE. VELAZQUEZ. AYE. GALLOWAY. AYE. ZUKA. AYE. EVA. AYE. GROUP. AYE. CERVANTES? YES. HOLLAND. AYE. AND FE AYE. MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 12. UH, COMMISSIONER GRU PULLED IT FOR COMMENT. YES. UM, IS THE APPLICANT HERE? SO, UM, YES SIR. COME UP, PLEASE COME UP TO THE PODIUM AND INTRODUCE YOURSELF PLEASE. HELLO, I'M MORTON BILL BAIRD. I LIVE AT 2107 WEST KINGS HIGHWAY. THANK YOU, SIR. UH, SO I HAVE ONE QUESTION. I KNOW THAT THIS IS NOT PART [00:15:01] OF IT, BUT YOU HAVE GOT THIS APPROVAL FOR THE SIX FOOT FENCE ALONG LAKE RIGHT? IS THAT GONNA BE PLACED BEHIND THE BUSHES? YES, MA'AM. OR, OKAY, SO LIKE BEHIND THE BUSHES, UH, LAKE, AND THEN YOU HAVE YOUR, I THINK THERE'S SOME, UM, CACTUS AND THEN THE BUSHES. YEAH, THERE'S CACTUS, UH, SOME AUGUSTA, WHICH WE'RE GOING TO ADD IN SOME NATIVES THAT ARE BETTER FOR BIRDS. AND, UM, I PULLED THIS ITEM BECAUSE I AGREE WITH, UM, THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS AND I WASN'T SURE WHY, UM, STAFF WAS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE, OF THE TYPE OF FENCE, WHICH IS NOT SOMETHING THAT'S FOUND IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. AND NORMALLY, OH, WE HAVEN'T APPROVED ANYTHING. WOULD YOU BE OPEN TO THE RECOMMENDATION FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD WHICH WAS RECOMMENDING MORE LIKE A WROUGHT IRON? WELL, I, I'M NOT SURE. I WAS JUST TRYING TO DO SOMETHING INEXPENSIVE. UH, I'VE HAD MANY DRUNK PEOPLE AT NIGHT COME INTO MY YARD AND IT SCARES MY KIDS AND PEOPLE WILL COME INTO MY YARD AND STEALING STUFF. UH, WROUGHT IRON SOUNDS REALLY EXPENSIVE. THIS SOUNDED LIKE A, YOU KNOW, IT WOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH THE OTHER FENCE. AND UH, I WAS JUST GONNA USE IT TO MAYBE GROW SOME NATIVE VINES. IT WASN'T GONNA BE ANYTHING TOO OUTTA PLACE, I WOULDN'T THINK. AND ALSO, UM, IT WAS NOT GONNA BE IN FRONT OF THE HOME. IT'S A DOUBLE LOT. SO, UH, THE PORTION THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS JUST, UH, IT WOULDN'T BLOCK BE BLOCKING THE HOUSE AT ALL. UM, IT'S ON A VACANT LOT. YEAH. AND THEN THAT'S WHAT I UNDERSTAND. IT WAS GONNA BE MY NEXT QUESTION. SO THERE'S TWO DIFFERENT, THERE IS TWO LOTS, BUT IS IT JOINED LIKE YOU OWN BOTH? YES. 'CAUSE IT'S ONE PROPERTY, RIGHT? MM-HMM. . SO EVEN THOUGH IT'S TWO LOTS, IT'S ONE PROPERTY. YES. YEAH. I THINK THAT USED TO BE COMMON IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. UM, BUT A LOT OF THE, ON A LOT OF THE DOUBLE LOTS, THEY'VE SINCE BUILT EXTRA HOMES, BUT EXTRA BECAUSE THIS IS A CORNER PROPERTY, RIGHT? IT'S KIND OF A VERY ALSO PROMINENT CORNER IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. IT'S KIND OF LAKE IS ONE OF THE MAIN DRIVES. OH, YEAH, YEAH, YEAH. THERE'VE BEEN CAR WRECKS RIGHT OUTSIDE THE DOOR. YEAH. SO HAVE YOU, UM, AND JUST, I, I DO FEEL LIKE I'M PRETTY MUCH IN AGREEMENT WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD. UM, MAYBE LIKE, IF YOU CAN PULL SLIDE FOUR. YEAH. THAT'S MY HOUSE. LOVE IT. UM, HAVE YOU, COULD YOU CONSIDER WHERE THE GREEN LINE, INSTEAD OF GOING ALL THE WAY DOWN TO THE CORNER, JUST GO STRAIGHT WHERE IT STARTS BY THE HOUSE? UH, YEAH, JUST, I MEAN, FOR SAFETY REASONS YOU WERE SAYING, MENTIONING IT, BUT, OH, I JUST LOVE, YOU KNOW, WE'VE GOT LIKE A LITTLE BENCH WHERE WE SIT AND, AND REED, UM, ON, I GUESS WHAT THE SOUTH, SOUTH OF THAT POND, HISTORIC POND. UM, SO I'D JUST LOVE TO HAVE THAT AS PART OF THE YARD AND NOT OUTSIDE OF A, ANY FENCE THAT WOULD MAKE, I DON'T, I, AGAIN, I DON'T KNOW THE COST OF WROUGHT IRON, BUT THAT SOUNDS LIKE PRICEY . SO. WELL, AND THE THING IS, IT'S, IT'S PROMINENT AND LIKE TO SAY, OKAY, ONE, ONE SIDE OF LAKE IS KIND OF HIDDEN BEHIND THEM, RIGHT? I MEAN, I, I'VE BEEN, UH, GROWING SOME WONDERFUL NATIVE PLANTS THERE. A LOT OF, UH, YOU KNOW, WE HAD THOUSANDS OF BEES RECENTLY AND I FEEL LIKE THE LANDSCAPING THAT WE'VE DONE THERE IS A REAL ASSET. AND I'VE GOTTEN, YOU KNOW, HUNDREDS OF COMPLIMENTS WHEN I'VE BEEN OUT THERE WORKING. UH, ANY FENCING THAT WE DO IS GONNA BE BEHIND, UH, THE TEXAS NATIVE SAGE THAT'S, THAT, THAT WE PLANTED. SO IT'S GONNA BE VERY, IT WILL NOT BE OBTRUSIVE. IT'S, YEAH, I KNOW MY TIME IS UP, BUT, UM, IF I MAY CONTINUE, I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR FROM OTHER COMMISSIONERS. YES. OTHER COMMENTS, QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER SABINO, UM, QUESTION, THIS COULD BE FOR STAFF OR THE APPLICANT. WHERE IS THE NEAREST, UM, FENCE, UH, SIMILAR TO WHAT YOU ARE PROPOSING IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD? WHAT'S THE CLOSEST, UH, EXAMPLE BLOCK WISE? UH, DON'T HAVE THAT NUMBER ON THE TOP OF OUR HEADS. UM, I, I WILL JUST SAY THE REASON, IF THIS WAS A FENCE GOING ACROSS THE ENTIRETY OF THE FRONT YARD, LIKE A TRUE FRONT YARD FENCE, WE WOULD PROBABLY APPROACHED THIS WITH MORE CAUTION. UM, I THINK CONSIDERING THIS WAS ENCLOSING A SIDE YARD, IT WAS CONTINUATION OF THE EXISTING WOOD PRIVACY FENCE, IT SEEMED MORE APPROPRIATE IN THIS SPECIFIC CONDITION TO US, EVEN THOUGH IT'S ON A PROMINENT CORNER PARCEL. YES. EDWARD, DID YOU PULL UP SLIDE 11, MR. BAIRD, IS THIS A, UH, A PHOTO OF THE SAGE THAT YOU'VE PLANTED, UH, ALONG YOUR FRONT? UH, ALONG THE, THE STREET? YES, SIR. SO THE FENCE WILL BE BEHIND THIS? YES. [00:20:01] OKAY. THANK YOU. OTHER QUESTIONS? IF THERE ARE NO MORE QUESTIONS, I WOULD LIKE TO DO A MOTION TO CONTINUE DISCUSSION. YES, I'D LIKE TO MOVE FOR DENIAL. DO WE HAVE A SECOND FOR DISCUSSION? I'LL SECOND IT. OKAY. UH, DISCUSSION. YEAH. AND UH, AND THE REASON IS, AND I UNDERSTAND, UM, STAFF'S POINT OF VIEW, THERE IS NO, AND TO COMMISSIONER SENOS QUESTION, THERE IS REALLY NO EXAMPLES OF A CATTLE FENCE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD UNLESS IT'S PROBABLY LIKE IN THE BACK. UM, AND THE REASON BEING, IT'S, IT'S, I MEAN, I KIND OF AGREE TO THE SIX FOOT FENCE ALSO, YOU KNOW, ALONG LAKE, UM, EVEN THOUGH IT'S A SIDE YARD, BUT IT'S PART OF THE PROPERTY AND IT'S ON A CORNER, UM, I MEAN, PLANTATIONS CAN BE CHANGED OR NOT TAKEN CARE OF AND DISAPPEAR, AND IT'S JUST, I WOULDN'T DISAGREE IF IT WAS LIKE A WROUGHT IRON FENCE, WHICH IS SOMETHING THAT, YOU KNOW, IS FOUND IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. BUT IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD WE'VE BEEN PRETTY CONSISTENT IN ALL MY YEARS BEING ON THIS BOARD TO NOT INTRODUCE, UM, FRONT YARD FENCING BECAUSE THERE'S REALLY VERY LITTLE FRONT YARD FENCING IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD. COMMISSIONER SAVINO, MR. CHAIR. THANK YOU. UM, I, I TEND TO AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER GRU'S COMMENTS AND OBSERVATIONS IN HER NEIGHBORHOOD. UH, ONE OF THE CONCERNS I DO HAVE IS, UM, THIS IS A FENCE TYPE THAT HAS PRETTY MUCH TAKEN OVER A NUMBER OF OUR HISTORIC DISTRICTS. OKAY. FOR THE, FOR THE RE NO OTHER REASON THAN IT'S POPULAR AND IT'S ECONOMICAL. UM, AND THE FENCING, JUST AS THE SITE LAYOUT AND THE ARCHITECTURE IS THE PACKAGE THAT HELPS CREATE THE COLLECTION OF, OF ARCHITECTURAL ELEMENTS AND CONTRIBUTING ELEMENTS THAT MAKE A HISTORIC DISTRICT UNIQUE. AND I, I FEEL LIKE, UM, THERE ARE A NUMBER OF, UH, ECONOMICAL WAYS TO CREATE A FENCE, UM, WITHOUT USING THE CATTLE PANEL OR THE PANEL CATTLE FENCE THAT SEEMS TO BE POPULAR. THERE ARE OTHER WAYS TO HAVE AN ECONOMICAL FENCE THAT WILL BE MORE DURABLE AND MORE LONG LASTING THAN THESE. SO, UM, IN ADDITION TO WHAT COMMISSIONER GRU SAID, I, YOU KNOW, IT'S JUST NOT CHARACTERISTIC OF THAT PARTICULAR HISTORIC DISTRICT. SO FOR THAT REASON, I, I WILL SUPPORT THE, THE MOTION. MR. CHAIR? YES. COMMISSIONER VELAZQUEZ. THE, THE, UM, THE ENVIRONMENT THAT, THAT THE GENTLEMAN IS BRINGING, UH, FOR REVIEW, IS IT, IT DOESN'T APPEAR TO BE AN ENVIRONMENT THAT HAS INVITED WROUGHT IRON INTO ITS VOCABULARY AS IT IS, RIGHT? IT'S A CLAY TILE ROOF, UM, UH, A A A KIND OF NATURAL STONE STACKED WITH THE DETAILING BRICK, A CORDAL WINDOWED ARCH AND, AND, UM, A BIT MORE OF A TRUE ARCH, UM, FOR THE, FOR THE BRICK DETAILING WINDOWS WITHOUT IRON. AND THEN WHEN WE LOOK AT THE GROUND, UH, THE FLAGSTONE DARK STONE, UH, SANDSTONE, AGAIN USED IN CONCERT WITH A VERY NATURAL ENVIRONMENT, IT SEEMS THAT WR IRONS ARE NOT APPROPRIATE FOR THIS SITE. UM, WHICH, WHICH DOES GIVE A GOOD ARGUMENT FOR WOOD. UH, NOW WITH RESPECT TO THE CATTLE WIRE, UM, IT'S NOT OUT OF CONTEXT WITH THIS, WITH THIS KIND OF A COUNTRY, UM, ENVIRONMENT. I DON'T KNOW IF IT WOULD BE LIKE AN ITALIAN COUNTRY ENVIRONMENT OR A FRENCH COUNTRY ENVIRONMENT, BUT THE, IT, IT DOESN'T SEEM OUT OF, OUT OF, UM, UH, THE VOCABULARY OF THE, OF THE LOCATION. 'CAUSE HE'S, HE'S GETTING THE WATER FROM A, UH, WITH A CISTERN. UH, SO, SO THERE'S A COMMITMENT TO THE, TO THE NATURAL, UH, UH, VALUE OF WHAT THE COMMUNITY THERE, BECAUSE IT COULD VERY EASILY BE ARGUED THAT EVEN AS A HISTORIC DISTRICT, NONE OF THE BUILDINGS THERE ARE NECESSARILY TEXAS BUILDINGS. SO HOW DO THEY EVEN FIT IN THIS TEXAS LANDSCAPE? RIGHT? UM, HE'S, HE'S REALLY USING THE FENCE AS A BEHIND THE, THE, WHAT IS THE REAL BARRIER, WHICH IS THE TEXAS SAGE. SO IT'S ALMOST SECONDARY. AND UM, I MEAN, IT, IT SEEMS THAT THE REAL ARGUMENT WOULDN'T BE TO SAY THAT IT SHOULD BE STEEL OR NOT, BUT THAT IF IT'S WOOD, PERHAPS THE, THE, THE, THE, UH, THE CATTLE IRON, THE, THE CATTLE WIRE COULD BECOME PICKETS. [00:25:02] I, I WAS, WHEN I WAS CONSULT, WHEN I WAS RESEARCHING THIS, I WAS TOLD THAT THERE HAD TO BE SPACE BETWEEN THE WOOD. AND SO THAT SEEMED LIKE THE LOGICAL WAY TO DO IT. I WAS PLANNING ON GROWING SOME NATIVE TEXAS VINES. I DON'T, I'M NOT INTERESTED. I KNOW WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT WITH THE, UH, YOU KNOW, THE UBIQUITY OF THIS TYPE OF FENCE. IT'S, IT'S LIKE THE NEW WHITE PICKET FENCE KIND OF THING. AND IT'S NOT JUST LIKE THE COOLEST, MOST CHARACTER FILLED THING. AND THE REASON WHY I LOVE THIS HOUSE, UH, IS BECAUSE OF THE CHARACTER OF IT, THE HANDBUILT NATURE OF IT. I TRULY LOVE THIS HOUSE AND I'VE SPENT THOUSANDS OF HOURS IN THAT YARD. SO IT'S REALLY ABOUT CREATING A, AN OASIS OF TEXAS NATURE. THAT'S, THAT'S, THAT'S BEEN THE WHOLE THING. WELL, I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS THAT SHOULD PROBABLY COME INTO THE VOCABULARY OF THE GENTLEMAN'S PRESENTATION, MR. CHAIRS, THAT THE, I THINK WE LOOK AT IT AS CATTLE WIRE BECAUSE THAT'S HOW IT'S BEEN. YOU, YOU KNOW, SEEN AND WHERE, WHERE IN MOST NEIGHBORHOODS IT'S RIGHT ON THE STREET AND YOU SEE THE CATTLE WIRE AND IT'S OBVIOUSLY CATTLE WIRE, BUT IN THIS CASE IT APPEARS THAT IT'S REALLY VINE WIRE. AND, AND IN THAT, UH, I THINK CONTEXT, I, I'D BE MORE SUPPORTIVE OF, OF APPROVING THIS WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS. HOWEVER, THE MOTION IS FOR DENIAL. SO I, I I WON'T BE SUPPORTING THE, THE MOTION FOR DENIAL, BUT PARTICULARLY BECAUSE THE RIGHT IRON IS JUST AS ALIEN, IF NOT MORE ALIEN. THANK YOU, SIR. THANK YOU. OTHER COMMENTS? I DO, YEAH, I, I WOULD'VE TO AGREE. I THINK, UH, I THINK SAM'S GOT IT RIGHT ON THIS ONE AND, UH, I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION. OKAY. I DO HAVE A QUESTION. UM, UM, ON THIS PLAN, WOULD YOU CONSIDER MOVING THE, UH, SOUTH SECTION OF THE FENCING UP TO CLOSER TO THE, UM, TO THE POND IN THAT CONCRETE PAD THAT'S AROUND IT RATHER THAN SO CLOSE TO THE, THE FRONT STREET? YEAH, SURE. EDWARD, COULD YOU DRAW THAT ALONG THERE? SO IT'D BE MUCH CLOSER TO THE FRONT FACADE OF YOUR HOUSE? YEAH, IT SEEMED LIKE WHEN I WAS RESEARCHING THIS, THAT ONCE I MOVE SIX FEET BACK FROM THE FRONT PORCH LINE, SO IT'D BE LIKE, YOU COULD SEE IT ABOUT, EVEN WITH THE NORTH SIDE OF THAT LITTLE POND PATIO THING, THAT'S WHERE IT FALLS INTO THE PURVIEW OF THE HDRC, RIGHT? SO YEAH, I MEAN, I COULD TAKE IT ALL THE WAY BACK TO THERE. I JUST, YEAH. OKAY. SOMETHING TO CONSIDER. ALRIGHT, UM, MR. CHAIR, JUST TO YES, COMMENT ON CLARIFICATION. SO I MEAN, THE MOTION TO DENY DOES NOT COME WITH ANY, UM, STIPULATIONS OF APPROVAL WITH DIFFERENT MATERIAL. I THINK THE MOTION TO DENIAL IS MORE BECAUSE OF THE LOCATION OF THE FENCE. UM, AND IT'S NOT SO MUCH ABOUT THE MATERIAL, I THINK THAT CAN BE UP FOR DISCUSSION, BUT IT IS REALLY, UM, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE HAVE NOT INTRODUCED FENCES IN PROPERTIES IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD. AND I THINK THAT'S THE POINT IS IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD WE REALLY DON'T HAVE MANY FENCES WHERE HISTORICALLY THERE WAS NO FENCE. AND STAFF IS CONSIDERING THIS AS A SIDE, BUT IT IS ON A CORNER AND IT'S ONE PROPERTY. SO THAT WAS THE REASON FOR THAT. I PPLICANT COULD COME BACK WITH A, A NEW APPLICATION WITH A NEW LOCATION, RIGHT? YEAH. I, I, I'M NOT LIKE A BIG FENCE GUY. UH, IT'S JUST THE ISSUE HAS BEEN BROUGHT IN MY FACE DUE TO PEOPLE IN THE YARD AT 3:00 AM MANY TIMES. SO IT'S NOT SOMETHING I'M LIKE GOING OUT MY WAY TO, YOU KNOW, IT'S EXPENSIVE. IT'S LIKE, IT'S NOT SOMETHING I'M SUPER EXCITED ABOUT. OKAY, THANK YOU. I FEEL LIKE I HAVE TO DEAL WITH IT. IF THERE'S NO OTHER COMMENTS, UH, ROLL CALL PLEASE. WELL, MR. CHARLEY, TO YOU JUST MAKE ONE COMMENT. I I I, I'D LIKE THE OPPORTUNITY TO, TO BE ON THE RECORD THAT, UM, THERE, THERE ARE MAJOR CIRCUMSTANCES THROUGHOUT THE COUNTRY THAT THEY'RE DEALING, UM, WHERE, WHERE PEOPLE ARE DEALING WITH SIGNIFICANT INTRUSION. UM, AND I WOULD IMAGINE THAT IF EVERYBODY WAS RESPECTFUL THAT INTRUSION WOULDN'T BE SUCH A BIG DEAL. BUT THAT'S, THAT'S NOT THE CASE. SO, SO THERE, THERE, THERE REALLY SHOULD BE SOME EFFORT FOR A COMMISSION TO, TO HAVE CONSIDERATION FOR THE, THE, THE CHANGING FORCES IN, IN COMMUNITY THAT THERE DOESN'T SEEM TO BE SOLUTIONS FOR. AND, UH, THE FENCE IS NOT SOMETHING THAT'S BEING INVENTED TODAY. THEY EXIST AND THEY EXIST FOR PURPOSE. AND WHERE THOSE PURPOSES ARE PRESENTED TO US FOR, UH, UH, REASONS THAT, THAT ANY, UM, [00:30:01] I GUESS REASONABLE PERSON WOULD, WOULD AGREE THAT, UM, THAT THAT REASON, UM, IS A GOOD REASON. AND WE DEFINITELY, UH, NEED TO GIVE A, A PROPERTY OWNER THE RIGHT TO PROTECT THEIR PROPERTY AND THEIR FAMILY. I JUST WANTED TO TRY TO GET THAT ON THE RECORD. THANK YOU, SIR. THANK YOU. AND ROLL CALL PLEASE. AND THIS IS THE MOTION TO DENY GIBBS. AYE. SAVINO. AYE. VELAZQUEZ, MAY GALLOWAY AYE. ZUKA AYE. GIDA AYE. GROUP. AYE. CERVANTES, NO. HOLLAND. AYE. AND FETZER. AYE. MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU. SO, UM, IF YOU WANNA COME BACK WITH AN ALTERNATE PROPOSAL, WE'LL BE HAPPY TO CONSIDER IT. WONDERFUL, THANK YOU. THANK YOU. AGENDA ITEM 15, SORRY. UH, NAME ITEM NUMBER, SORRY. AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 15. I SEE CASE 2023 DASH 4 63 3 0 1 LAVACCA STREET. THE APPLICANT'S REQUESTING APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO, UM, ONE, INSTALL A THREE FOOT TALL WOOD FRAME CATTLE PANEL FENCE WITH A SLIDING DRIVEWAY GATE AND PEDESTRIAN GATE TWO, CONSTRUCT A METAL CARPORT. THREE, REMOVE EXISTING FLAT WORK. FOUR, INSTALL A FRONT WALKWAY USING PAVERS. FIVE, INSTALL REAR WALKWAY USING PAVERS. SIX, CONSTRUCT A FULL LENGTH FRONT PORCH WITH WOODEN POSTS AND A STANDING SEA METAL ROOF. SEVEN CONSTRUCTIVE REAR ADDITION MEASURING APPROXIMATELY 150 SQUARE FEET. UM, EIGHT, INSTALL NEW WINDOWS AND DOORS AND GABLE BINS. UH, GOOD AFTERNOON, MY NAME IS FERNANDO MORALES. UM, I'M, OH, I'M SORRY. NEED TO READ IN STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS. OKAY. AND CLAUDIA, THERE'S A LOT OF DETAIL HERE, SO JUST SUMMARIZE. UM, OKAY. SO STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF ITEMS ONE, TWO, UM, THREE AND FOUR, FIVE AND 6, 7 8 WITH, UM, QUITE A FEW STIPULATIONS. DO YOU WANT ME TO RUN THROUGH ALL THE STIPULATIONS? UM, NO, I DON'T BELIEVE SO. UM, I GUESS IF YOU INTRODUCE YOURSELF AND, AND THEN WHICH STIPULATIONS YOU'RE, UH, REQUESTING DISCUSSION ON. THANK YOU. UH, FERNANDO MORALES. I'M WITH CANDID WORKS ARCHITECTS. UM, WE ARE THE DESIGNERS ON THIS PROJECT. UM, SO AS HAS JUST BEEN MENTIONED, STAFF, UM, PROVIDED A RANGE OF RECOMMENDATIONS AND MANY STIPULATIONS AND WE'RE VERY HAPPY TO, UH, COMPLY WITH BASICALLY ALL THE STIPULATIONS. HOWEVER, I JUST WANTED TO, UM, UH, OPEN UP DISCUSSION ON A FEW OF THE STIPULATIONS TO SEE IF THE COMMISSION MIGHT BE OPEN TO, UH, WAIVING THOSE PARTICULAR STIPULATIONS IN THIS CASE BASED ON, UH, PRECEDENTS THAT I AM PREPARED TO SHOW AROUND THE NEIGHBORHOOD. SO, UH, AND I, I DO HAVE A PRESENTATION QUEUED UP, I BELIEVE, I THINK, I THINK EDWARD ALREADY OPENED IT UP SOMEWHERE. UM, BUT TO START, SO, UH, ITEM ONE STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE INSTALLATION OF A THREE FOOT TALL WOOD FRAMED CATTLE PANEL FENCE. THERE'S ANOTHER CATTLE PANEL FENCE, UH, WITH A SLIDING DRIVEWAY GATE. SO HERE, UM, WE DO PLAN TO DO EXACTLY THAT, WHICH STAFF HAS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL. HOWEVER, I WANTED TO SEE IF IT WOULD BE POSSIBLE FOR THE SLIDING DRIVEWAY GATE, WHICH IS GONNA BE ON THE SIDE STREET INDIANOLA TO BE A STEEL FRAMED ROLLING GATE AS OPPOSED TO WOOD ONLY BECAUSE WE FEEL THAT, AND IT'S BEEN OUR EXPERIENCE OVER TIME, THAT STEEL FRAMED SLIDING GATES JUST HOLD UP BETTER. UM, THEY'RE MORE DURABLE AND THEY HOLD THEIR SHAPE OVER TIME MORE EFFECTIVELY. SO THAT WOULD BE OUR FIRST, UM, REQUEST. UM, SHOULD I JUST GO THROUGH ALL OF THEM? CERTAINLY. OKAY. UM, AND THERE WAS A PRECEDENT IMAGE. UH, SOMEWHERE IN THIS RANGE OF IMAGES OF, UH, A STEEL SLIDING GATE, THEY CAN BE VIEWED AROUND THE NEIGHBORHOOD, RIGHT, RIGHT THERE IN THAT IMAGE. SO THIS [00:35:01] IS AN EXAMPLE ON BARRERA STREET OF THE WHOLE FENCE IS STEEL. WE WOULD BE DOING WOOD, BUT THE GATE ITSELF THERE IN THE IMAGE IS STEEL FRAME. SO SOMETHING SIMILAR TO THAT IS WHAT WE WOULD BE, UH, REQUESTING PERMISSION TO DO. UM, NEXT ITEM WOULD BE ITEM TWO. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE INSTALLATION OF A CARPORT BASED ON FINDING C AND D WITH THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS. UM, THAT THE PROPOSED, UH, THAT THE, THAT THE PROPOSED POSTS AND FRAMING OF THE CARPORT BE FULLY, UH, WOOD. SO STAFF, UM, UH, BASICALLY IS SAYING THAT THEY FEEL WOOD WOULD BE A MORE APPROPRIATE MATERIAL FOR THE CARPORT TO BE MADE OUT OF. AND, UM, WE CERTAINLY, UM, ARE ARE HAPPY TO COMPLY WITH THAT AND BE IN AGREEMENTS WITH AGREEMENT WITH THAT. BUT WE WOULD LOVE TO BE ABLE TO DO A STEEL FRAMED CARPORT IF THE COMMISSION WOULD ALLOW THAT. AND UM, HERE WE JUST HAVE PROVIDED A FEW IMAGES OF DIFFERENT EXAMPLES AROUND THE VODKA NEIGHBORHOOD WHERE YOU CAN SEE, UM, JUST EXAMPLES OF, UH, REALLY MORE LIKE TRELLIS STRUCTURES THAT ARE STILL FRAMED WITH CATTLE PANEL HORIZONTALLY LAID THAT VINES EVENTUALLY GROW ON AND MOSTLY COVER. SO THIS IS ONE EXAMPLE AND THEN SCROLLING UP, UM, UP, UP, UP. UH, THANK YOU. ONE MORE IMAGE UP. THERE'S ANOTHER EXAMPLE THERE ON CEDAR STREET, UM, THAT'S KIND OF A VIEW FARTHER BACK AND THEN UP SOME MORE, UH, A FEW MORE SLIDES UP. UH, THAT'S AN EXAMPLE OF A STEEL STRUCTURE IN FRONT OF THE HOUSE THAT IS COVERED IN VINES NOW. AND THEN THE IMAGE ABOVE IS JUST WHAT IT LOOKED LIKE WHEN IT WAS BRAND NEW. SO WE WOULD BASICALLY BE ENVISIONING SOMETHING LIKE THAT IF THAT WOULD BE ALLOWED BY THE COMMISSION. UM, AND THIS WOULD BE BEHIND THE HOUSE, UM, THAT'S IN QUESTION RIGHT NOW. SO YOU WOULDN'T ACTUALLY SEE THE STEEL TRELLIS CARPORT STRUCTURE FROM LAVACCA STREET. IT WOULD ONLY BE VISIBLE FROM THE SIDE STREET INDIANOLA. UM, ITEM FOUR STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE INSTALLATION OF A FRONT WALKWAY WITH PAVERS BASED ON FINDINGS F WITH THE FOLLOWING STIPULATION THAT A TRADITIONAL PAVER CONFIGURATION IS UTILIZED INSTEAD OF A MODERN DESIGN. SO AGAIN, WE'RE HAPPY TO, UM, DO SOMETHING THAT'S MORE TRADITIONAL IN NATURE, BUT AGAIN, IF THE COMMISSION WOULD BE OPEN TO IT, WE'D LOVE TO DO SOMETHING LIKE WHAT YOU SEE IN THIS EXAMPLE HERE FROM THIS PROPERTY ON RERA STREET, WHERE THERE ARE, UM, BASICALLY JUST RECTANGULAR CONCRETE PAVERS SET IN GRAVEL. AND THEN THERE WAS ONE MORE OTHER SIMILAR IMAGE FROM ANOTHER EXAMPLE ON LAVACCA STREET. I THINK IT'S NEAR THE END. THAT'S A CLOSEUP VIEW OF THE ONE ON RERA. AND THEN FARTHER DOWN, THAT'S AN EXAMPLE ON LAVACCA STREET, WHICH IS JUST A FEW HOUSES DOWN FROM THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION. UH, AND THEN FINALLY, UH, ITEM SIX STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF CONSTRUCTION OF A FULL LENGTH FRONT PORCH WITH WOODEN POSTS AND A STANDING SEA METAL ROOF BASED ON FINDING H WITH THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS THAT THE PORCH DEPTH BE REDUCED TO FOUR TO FIVE FEET. SO, UM, IF YOU WOULD COULD GO TO THE FIRST SLIDE. IN OUR CURRENT DESIGN, WE'RE PROPOSING AN EIGHT FOOT DEEP FRONT PORCH. UM, HOWEVER, IN THEIR FINDING STAFF LAID OUT THAT BASED ON WHAT THEY'RE ABLE TO SEE IN THE SANDBORNE MAPS, UM, THERE WAS A, A, A PORCH THERE, UM, ORIGINALLY, BUT THEIR, UM, I GUESS INTERPRETATION OR, OR OR VIEW OF WHAT THEY'RE ABLE TO SEE IN THE SANDBORN, UH, IMAGE, WHICH IS ON THE BOTTOM HERE IN THIS, ON THIS SLIDE, IS THAT THE PORCH WAS ORIGINALLY SHALLOW, SHALLOWER THAN EIGHT FEET. SO, SO CURRENTLY THERE IS NO PORCH. THERE WAS A PORCH THERE ORIGINALLY BASED ON THE SANBORN MAP, BUT IT HAS SINCE BEEN REMOVED OR DESTROYED. SO WE WANT TO PUT A NEW, A NEW PORCH BACK, BUT WE'D LIKE TO DO AN EIGHT FOOT DEEP PORCH. UM, SO WE WERE, WE'RE CERTAINLY SENSITIVE TO THAT AND, AND CAN SEE THAT THERE IS, THERE IS SOME SORT OF DIMENSION ILLUSTRATED IN THE SANBORN IMAGE, AND SO WE WANT TO BE SENSITIVE TO THAT. SO WHAT WE DID WAS WE TOOK OUR PROPERTY SURVEY, WHICH WE HAVE ABOVE, AND I APOLOGIZE FOR THE GRAININESS OF THAT IMAGE, BUT BASICALLY WE TOOK OUR SURVEY THAT WE HAD AND SCALED IT AND APPLIED A GRAPHIC SCALE THERE IN BLACK BELOW THE HOUSE ON THE SURVEY. AND THEN WE SCALED THE SANDBORNE MAP IMAGE TO THE SAME SCALE AS THE, UH, SURVEY AND APPLIED THE SAME GRAPHIC SCALE. SO THE HOUSE ITSELF IS ROUGHLY 27 FEET DEEP FROM FRONT TO BACK. AND SO EACH SORT OF, UH, INCREMENT THAT YOU CAN SEE ON OUR GRAPHIC SCALE THERE BELOW EACH IMAGE IS FIVE FEET. SO [00:40:01] YOU CAN SEE THERE IN THE SANBORN IMAGE THAT WHAT, WHAT IS SHOWN THERE IN THE SANBORN IMAGE, THE DEPTH OF THAT PORCH IS GREATER THAN FIVE FEET. IT'S ACTUALLY RIGHT AT ABOUT EIGHT, UH, WHEN WE MEASURED IT IN AUTOCAD AFTER WE SCALED IT. SO, SO OUR, OUR, UM, OUR FEELING, OUR POSITION IS THAT THE PROPOSAL OF AN EIGHT FOOT DEEP PORCH IS, IS REASONABLE AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH WHAT'S SHOWN ON THE SANBORNE MAP WHEN YOU, WHEN YOU ACTUALLY SCALE THE SANBORN MAP AND MEASURE IT. UM, SO THAT'S, THAT, THOSE ARE ALL THE STIPULATIONS THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO OPEN UP FOR CONSIDERATION. THANK YOU. UH, QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION, MR. CHAIR? I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS. YES. COMMISSIONER GROUP. UH, ACTUALLY ON THAT POINT, UM, WITH THE EIGHT FOOT PORCH, HOW WOULD YOU BE, UM, FOR THAT NEIGHBORING PROPERTY? YEAH, GO BACK TO THAT SLIDE AND UM, ADDRESS 3 0 9. 'CAUSE ACTUALLY, IF YOU LOOK AT THE SAME MAP, IT SEEMS LIKE THE ORIGINAL PORCH WAS ALIGNED WITH THAT 3 0 9 PROPERTY. DO YOU KNOW HOW MUCH THEY, UH, HOW MANY FEET THEY HAVE FROM THE, I I DON'T OFFHAND, BUT WOULD YOU BE OPEN TO BE LIKE, ALIGNED WITH THAT PROPERTY, WHICH IS SOMETHING THAT, YOU KNOW, POTENTIALLY YEAH, ABSOLUTELY. UM, COULD WE, COULD WE SEE THE SANDBORNE IMAGE AGAIN? WE PULL THE SANDBORN MAP EXACTLY AND ZOOM IN. IT SEEMS LIKE THOSE WERE, THOSE TWO PROPERTIES SEEMED VERY ALIGNED ON THE SANBORN MAP. IT SAYS THREE 13, BUT I THINK THAT'S THE, OH, MAYBE NOT, IT'S TWO PROPERTIES DOWN, BUT WELL, MAYBE THE 3 0 9 AND THE THREE 13 I DIDN'T SEE ON THE OTHER, LET ME LOOK AT THE MAP OF THE CURRENT MAP. THREE 13 SEEMS TO BE MUCH MORE IN FRONT OF 3 0 9, BUT, UM, I GUESS I'M ASKING IF THERE COULD BE SOME ALIGNMENT WITH THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES. I THINK THAT'S ONE, UH, UM, I GUESS I WOULD, I WOULD ASK WHICH NEIGHBORING PROPERTY I ON THE BLOCK WE USUALLY LOOK LIKE AT A MEDIAN OF THE BLOCK. OKAY. I MEAN, IT DOES SEEM THAT A LOT OF, SOME OF THESE PROPERTIES DO HAVE, YOU KNOW, CLOSE TO THE, TO THE SIDEWALK. I WOULD JUST SEE THAT AS BEING MAYBE A WAY OF, YEAH. AND THEN ON THE FENCE, UM, BECAUSE OF THE GATE, I MEAN, YOU ARE USING THE RERA AS AN EXAMPLE. UM, I DON'T REMEMBER EXACTLY THE, I MEAN, ONE THING IS IN LA VACA IT IS MUCH MORE COMMONLY FOUND THE, THE CATTLE FENCING AND MUCH MORE FRONT YARD FENCING. THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF, UH, CASES OF THOSE. UM, I'M JUST, I'M A LITTLE TORN ABOUT THE CHANGING MATERIAL. SO LIKE, YOU KNOW WHAT IF, YOU KNOW, YOU WANNA DO METAL ON THE CARPORT, BUT STAFF IS SAYING WOOD AND THEN ON THE OTHER WAY AROUND THEY'RE SAYING KEEP THE SAME MATERIAL ON THE FENCE. AND I SAY LIKE, I THINK THAT WOULD, THAT'S PROBABLY SOMETHING THAT I WOULD BRING UP IN DISCUSSION IS CAN WE KEEP IT ONE MATERIAL? UM, WELL WE CAN DO, UM, A STEEL FRAMED GATE THAT'S FACED WITH WOOD SO THAT THE STEEL IS HIDDEN. SO LIKE THE, THE SKELETON OF THE GATE WOULD BE STEEL SO THAT IT'S STRONG, BUT THEN WE COULD FACE IT WITH, WE COULD WRAP THE STEEL WITH WOOD SOMEHOW. RIGHT. SO THAT IT LOOKS LIKE A WOOD GATE, BUT WOULD HAVE A STEEL STRUCTURE. I CAN KEEP IT FOR DISCUSSION. I'M JUST GIVING, MAYBE IT WOULD BE TOO HEAVY, BUT I DON'T KNOW. WE CAN MAKE IT WORK. YEAH, WE COULD WRAP IT WITH WOOD. I HAVE MORE QUESTIONS. COMMISSIONER SAVINO. THANK YOU. I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. UM, LOOKING AT SLIDE NUMBER 10 IN THE PACKAGE, IN THE PUBLIC PACKAGE, WE SEE SOME EARLIER, UM, PAVING IN THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE. YES. WHAT KIND OF MATERIAL IS THAT? RIGHT NOW? I BELIEVE THAT'S CONCRETE. AND HOW FAR OUT DOES IT EXTEND FROM THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE? I BELIEVE IT EXTEND, IT EXTENDS OUT ROUGHLY SEVEN TO EIGHT FEET. I'M, I'M NOT EXACTLY SURE. IT MIGHT BE A BIT MORE THAN THAT ACTUALLY. MM-HMM. THE IMAGE BELOW MIGHT SHOW IT FROM A BETTER PERSPECTIVE. OKAY. OKAY. AND SO BECAUSE IT'S BEEN COVERED WITH CONCRETE FOR A WHILE, UM, I'M ASSUMING Y'ALL HAVE NOT DONE ANY EXCAVATION THERE TO LOOK FOR A PREVIOUS FOUNDATION OF AN EARLIER PORCH? WE HAVE NOT. OKAY. UM, ALSO, UM, QUESTION ABOUT THE FENCING PRECEDENT THAT YOU PRESENTED. THE, UH, HOUSE ON RERA STREET. MM-HMM. AND YES, THE GATE IS ON THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE. HOW [00:45:01] TALL IS THAT FENCE IN THAT GATE ON RERA? UHHUH? ? I BELIEVE IT LOOKS, I BELIEVE FOUR FEET. 'CAUSE IT LOOKS, UM, AND IT MAY JUST BE THE, THE SCALE, UH, FROM THE PHOTO, BUT IT, IT LOOKS A LITTLE BIT LESS THAN FOUR FEET. MM-HMM. . AND THE REASON I'M ASKING IS BECAUSE, UM, THERE'S SOMETHING ABOUT THAT FOUR FOOT DIMENSION THAT JUST SEEMS VERY, UM, AGRICULTURAL OR INDUSTRIAL OR COMMERCIAL. MM-HMM. AND THE WAY THIS FENCE LOOKS, OH, WE CAN TALK ABOUT IT LATER, BUT THANK YOU FOR, UM, YES, WE, I BELIEVE FOUR FEET IS THE MAX HEIGHT ALLOWED UHHUH , AND WE'D ACTUALLY PREFER TO DO A THREE FOOT TALL FENCE. THAT'S WHY I WAS ASKING IF THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT YOU'D LOOK AT TO ABSOLUTELY. BETTER WORK WITH THE PROPORTION OF THE HOUSE. MM-HMM, AND JUST THAT RESIDENTIAL OR DOMESTIC FEE. RIGHT. OKAY. THANK YOU. OTHER QUESTIONS? YES, SIR. YES. COMMISSIONER VELASQUEZ, UM, YOU'RE, YOU'RE THE PROJECT MANAGER OR THE ARCHITECT OR ARCHITECT? ARCHITECT. SO YOU'RE AN ARCHITECT, UM, WITH ALL OF THE STIPULATIONS THAT HAVE BEEN PUT IN FRONT OF Y'ALL, IT'S, IT'S QUITE A LENGTHY LIST. IS IT CORRECT, UH, THAT THE ONLY ISSUES YOU WOULD HAVE ARE WITH ITEM ONE, WHICH IS THE, THE SLIDING GATE MATERIAL ITEM TWO, THAT THE POSTS FOR THE DRIVEWAY AND, AND THE, FOR THE, FOR THE, UH, UH, CARPORT SLASH UH, PERGOLA THAT, THAT THAT'D BE ALLOWED TO BE STEEL. AND ITEM FOUR, THAT, UM, THE PAVERS BE MORE IN LINE WITH SOME OF THE MORE MODERN INTERPRETATIONS THAT ARE FOUND IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. AND ITEM SIX, THAT, AND I, AND I DO AGREE THAT, THAT, THAT IF THE SANBORN MAPS ARE, ARE CORRECT, THAT AN ASSUMPTION CAN BE MADE THAT YOU'RE WITHIN EIGHT FEET. MOST DEFINITELY. 'CAUSE THERE'S, THERE'S SPACE ON THAT SIDE AND SPACE ON THE OTHER SIDE AS WELL FROM FIVE. RIGHT. BUT OUT OF ALL OF THE ITEMS, THOSE ARE THE ONLY ITEMS THAT YOU HAVE A, UH, THAT YOU WOULD NOT AGREE WITH. UH, CORRECT. OKAY. MR. CHAIR, IF THERE ARE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION. ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? YES, COMMISSIONER VELAZQUEZ? WELL, SIR, I, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS LESS THAT, UH, THE APPLICANT IS ENABLED TO, UH, USE, UH, UH, TRUE MATERIAL STEEL, UH, FOR THE, UH, GATE LESS ITEM TWO, THAT THE, THAT THE APPLICANT IS ENABLED TO USE STEEL FRAMING AS OPPOSED TO WOOD. UM, ASSUMING THAT THE, THAT THE STEEL FRAMING IS A DIMENSIONAL TO WHAT A WOOD FRAMING WOULD BE. UH, ITEM FOUR THAT THE APPLICANT IS ENABLED TO, TO USE A, A, UH, TO DES TO, TO, TO CONSTRUCT THE, THE WALKWAY IN A WAY THAT IS SYMPATHETIC TO THE DESIGN AS SUBMITTED. AND, UH, ITEM SIX, THAT THE PORCH THAT THEY BE GIVEN THE, THE ABILITY TO, UM, UH, CONSTRUCT THEIR PORCH AT EIGHT FEET END OF, UH, MOTION. THANK YOU, SIR. I'LL SECOND THAT. SECOND. I'M SORRY. CAN YOU ALSO ADD THAT ALL THE OTHER ITEMS ARE APPROVED WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS? YEAH, THAT'S HOW I STARTED THE MOTION. THANK YOU. THANK YOU THOUGH, MR. UH, MRS. GROUP. YES. UM, SO WE HAVE A MOTION, A SECOND DISCUSSION. MR. CHAIRMAN, CHAIR SAVINO? UM, YEAH. UM, LET'S SEE. I'M, FIRST OF ALL, I AM SO HAPPY THIS HOUSE IS GETTING ATTENTION AFTER SO MANY YEARS OF BEING ENDANGERED. AND AS WE KNOW WITH THE, UM, LIMESTONE AND CALICHE, UM, THESE STRUCTURES CAN REALLY EXPERIENCE A LOT OF DAMAGE IN A SHORT AMOUNT OF TIME. SO I'M REALLY TICKLED BY THAT. UM, AND I ALSO THINK THAT THE LAVACCA NEIGHBORHOOD IS ONE OF THOSE HISTORIC DISTRICTS THAT HAS, UM, UH, BECAUSE OF ITS, UH, TIGHT URBAN, UH, PLANNING OR DEVELOPMENT, UM, DIFFERENT SOLUTIONS ARE REQUIRED AND WE SEE A RANGE OF COMMERCIAL, UH, INDUSTRIAL AND RESIDENTIAL MATERIALS HERE. FOR THAT REASON, I DO THINK, UH, WHAT YOU'RE PROPOSING WORKS IN THIS PARTICULAR LOCATION. SO, UM, I WILL BE HAPPY TO SUPPORT IT. OTHER COMMENTS, MR. CHAIR? I DO HAVE ONE LAST THING THAT I FORGOT. YES. AND I ASKED ABOUT THE PORCH AND THE EVIDENCE TO THE PORCH. I THINK IT IS REALLY IMPORTANT THAT YOU LEAVE, UM, YOURSELF OPEN TO WHAT THAT ORIGINAL PORCH WAS. AND YES, THE SETBACK WILL BE ONE OF THE DETERMINERS, BUT THERE IS SOMETHING ABOUT THE, THE ELEVATION OF LOOKING AT THAT END GABLE WALL WITH THE OTHER [00:50:01] ADDITION. AND THAT PORCH, THE PORCH LOOKS WAY TOO BIG FOR THAT GABLE VOLUME. THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT. NOT THE PLAN SO MUCH, BUT WHAT DOES IT LOOK LIKE? MM-HMM. IN, IN SECTION OR AN ELEVATION. AND SO I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TO BE OPEN TO REDUCING THE DEPTH OF THAT. FOR THAT REASON, CERTAINLY UHHUH . THANKS. OKAY. OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMENTS? MAY I HAVE A ROLL CALL PLEASE? GIBBS? AYE. SAVINO? AYE. VELAZQUEZ. AYE. GALLOWAY AYE. ZUKA. AYE. GIDA. AYE. GROUP. AYE. CERVANTES? YES. HOLLAND. AYE. AND FETZER. AYE. MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. AGENDA ITEM 16. AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 16, HGRC CASE NUMBER 2023 DASH 4 4 1 23 10 WEST KINGS HIGHWAY. THE APPLICANT REQUESTS A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO ONE PAINT THE PREVIOUSLY UNPAINTED BRICK. TWO, REPLACE THE BAY WINDOW ON THE PRIMARY ELEVATION WITH A FIXED METAL FRAME WINDOW. THREE, REPLACE THE WOOD COLUMN ON THE FRONT PORCH WITH A BREEZE BLOCK WALL. THE STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF ITEMS ONE THROUGH THREE BASED ON FINDINGS A THROUGH H. UM, THE HOMEOWNER HAS NOT INDICATED THAT THEY WOULD BE HERE. UM, THERE IS ONE LETTER AND ONE VOICEMAIL FOR THE COMMISSION TO REVIEW. WELL, AND COMMISSIONERS, AS YOU KNOW, THERE IS A REQUIREMENT IN THE UDC THAT WE TAKE ACTION ON ITEMS WITHIN 60 DAYS. UM, THIS IS AN ENFORCEMENT CASE AND SO THIS CAME AS A WORK, UM, DONE WITHOUT APPROVAL. UM, AND THE DEADLINE FOR ACTION FOR THE COA IS DECEMBER 23RD. AND SO WE DO HAVE ONE MORE HEARING BEFORE WE ABSOLUTELY NEED ACTION ON THIS, BUT I JUST WANTED TO GIVE THAT, GIVE YOU THAT CONTEXT BEFORE YOU DECIDED TO EITHER POSTPONE OR HEAR THE CASE. AND WE HAVE POSTPONED THIS ONCE, CORRECT? THIS WAS POSTPONED FROM THE LAST HEARING. OKAY. UH, BE CURIOUS TO HEAR WHAT THE COMMISSION THINKS I'M INCLINED TO. UM, YOU'VE GIVEN THE APPLICANT TWO OPPORTUNITIES TO COME AND PRESENT THEIR CASE. I'M INCLINED TO, UM, MOVE FORWARD ON THE CASE, BUT I'D LIKE TO HEAR WHAT OTHER COMMISSIONERS THINK. AND WE DO HAVE PUBLIC COMMENTS ON THIS ONE. OH, YES. SO LET'S HAVE THE PUBLIC COMMENTS PLEASE. AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 16, CASE NUMBER 20 23 4 4 1 23 10 WEST KINGS HIGHWAY. MY NAME IS ROBIN FOSTER OF THE MONTICELLO PARK ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE. OFFERING COMMENTS ON BEHALF OF DREA GARZA, PRESIDENT OF THE MONTICELLO PARK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, OR MPNA AND THE 10 MEMBER MPNA BOARD OF DIRECTORS. WE NOTE THAT THIS IS A VIOLATION CASE, EVEN THOUGH THE PROPERTY OWNER PRESENTED AND RECEIVED HDRC APPROVAL FOR OTHER IMPROVEMENTS ON THIS PROPERTY A FEW MONTHS AGO. IT'S UNFORTUNATE THAT WORK WAS DONE WITHOUT A C OF A AND RESULTED IN A LOSS OF ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES AND HISTORIC CHARACTER OF THIS CLASSIC RANCH STYLE HOME. WE ASK THAT HDRC DENY THE APPLICATION FOR THE INTRODUCTION OF BREEZE BLOCKS, THE INSTALLATION OF AN ALUMINUM WINDOW AND EXCESSIVELY LARGE SINGLE PANE PICTURE WINDOW AND THE PAINTING OF THE EXTERIOR MASONRY ELEMENTS OF THE HOME. THE PHOTOS SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT SHOW HOMES WHICH WERE PAINTED PRIOR TO THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE MONTICELLO PARK HISTORIC DISTRICT AND SERVE AS EXAMPLES FOR WHY THIS HISTORIC DISTRICT WAS CREATED. THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2 2 9, MARY LOUISE DID RECEIVE HDRC APPROVAL TO PAINT THE MASONRY. HOWEVER, THE HOME WAS FOUND TO BE NON-CONTRIBUTING TO THE HISTORIC DISTRICT. WE ALSO REFERENCED THE HOME TWO BLOCKS EAST OF THE APPLICANT AT 2001 WEST KINGS HIGHWAY, A VIOLATION CASE IN WHICH HDRC DENIED THE EXTERIOR PAINTING OF THE HOME'S MASONRY IN 2023. IN THAT CASE, UNDER OVERSIGHT BY OHP, A COLD FLAG PRODUCT WAS USED TO REMOVE THE PAINT FOR THE HOMES BRICK, PLEASE UPHOLD THE INTEGRITY OF THE MONTICELLO PARK HISTORIC DISTRICT AND PRESERVE THE NATURAL APPEARANCE OF OUR MASONRY HOMES. THANK YOU MR. CHAIR. [00:55:03] YES. IF THE REST OF THE COMMISSION AGREES AND ALLOWS, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION. ANY OTHER COMMENTS? YES. COMMISSIONER GROUP. I'LL MAKE A MOTION, UM, BASED ON STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND, UM, MOVE. I GUESS IT'S TO DENIAL, UH, WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS AND 'CAUSE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS. AND THE VIOLATION IS FROM OCTOBER. I THINK IT GAVE THE APPLICANT PLENTY OF TIME. SECOND. I SECOND. MOTION A SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? UH, YES. COMMISSIONER SAVINO? YEAH, I WAS NOT FAMILIAR WITH IT FROM LAST SESSION, BUT REALIZING THAT THE APPLICANT IS FAMILIAR WITH THE PROCESS, UM, I'LL DEFINITELY BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION. THANK YOU. HAVE A ROLL CALL PLEASE. GIBBS. AYE. SAVINO? AYE. VELAZQUEZ? AYE. GALLOWAY AYE. ZUKA. AYE. GUEVARA AYE. GROUP. AYE. CERVANTES? YES. HOLLAND. AYE. AND FETZER AYE. MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU. AGENDA ITEM 17. AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 17, HDRC CASE NUMBER 20 23 4 6 2 6 20 SOUTH PRESA. UH, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF A WAIVER PURSUANT TO CITY CODE SECTION 35 6 0 8 SUBSECTION G TO ACCEPT THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED FOR THE REQUEST TO INSTALL RIGID FOAM INSULATION ON THE EXISTING STUCCO CLADDING AND APPLY NEW STUCCO ON, ON THE FOAM. THE APPROVAL OF THE CLADDING TREATMENT IS NOT A REQUEST AT THIS TIME. THIS IS ONLY A WAIVER. STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE WAIVER PURSUANT TO CITY CODE SECTION 35 6 0 8 SUBSECTION G BASED ON FINDING C. SHOULD THE HDRC APPROVE THE WAIVER TO RECONSIDER THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION, THE CO WA REQUEST WOULD FIRST BE REFERRED TO A DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE SITE VISIT PER THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST. UH, WE HAVE THE APPLICANT HERE NOW. GOOD AFTERNOON, MR. CHAIR COMMISSIONERS CAROLINE MCDONALD WITH BROWN AND MCDONALD, 100 NORTHEAST LOOP FOUR 10, UM, HERE ON BEHALF OF THE PROPERTY OWNER AND APPLICANT, I DO HAVE A BRIEF PRESENTATION. I CAN CONTROL IT FROM HERE. THANK YOU. UM, SO JUST RIGHT OFF THE BAT, THIS IS JUST A WAIVER. UM, I, I, WE DO HAVE SUBSTANTIALLY NEW INFORMATION TO GIVE TO YOU GUYS, UM, UH, FROM THE LAST HEARING. SO I'LL, I'LL JUST START OFF. I'M SURE EVERYONE IS, UH, FAMILIAR WITH THE SITE. THIS IS SIX TWO OH, SOUTH PRESA. OKAY. UM, IN THE LA VACA HISTORIC DISTRICT, SOUTH TOWN SOUTHWEST OF ALAMO STREET IN SOUTH PRESA. UM, CASE TIMELINE, PERTINENT TO THE FACTS TODAY, UM, MY CLIENT DID RECEIVE A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS IN APRIL. UM, THERE WERE SOME MATTERS THAT CAME BEFORE YOU OVER THE SUMMER. UM, BUT SPECIFIC TO TODAY, UM, THERE WAS SOME, UM, REHABILITATION OF THE BUILDING AND A STOP WORK OR ORDER WAS ISSUED ON AUGUST 22ND. THERE WERE SEVERAL DAYS OF RAIN, UM, AND THE PROPERTY OWNER DID CONTINUE TO WORK. UM, AND THERE WAS A, AN ADDITIONAL STOP WORK ORDER. UM, AND THEN HE DID COME TO HDRC WHERE THE REQUEST WAS DENIED. I, I DO BELIEVE IT WAS DENIED BECAUSE IT WAS PRESENTED THAT HE WAS APPLYING EFIS TO EXISTING STUCCO, AND THAT THAT DID NOT HAPPEN. UM, THE EFIS WAS APPLIED TO THE ORIGINAL, UH, STRUCTURE, WHICH WAS CONCRETE AND BRICK. THE STUCCO WAS COMPLETELY REMOVED, UM, BECAUSE OF THE DISREPAIR THAT IT WAS IN, IT WAS IMPACTING THE BUILDING. SO, UM, I WAS BROUGHT IN AFTER THAT HEARING, EXCUSE ME, AND DID GO BEFORE THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ON NOVEMBER 6TH, WHERE THERE WAS A MOTION TO CONTINUE THE CASE TO ALLOW US TO COME BACK TO HDRC WITH, WITH THIS NEW INFORMATION. AND SO HERE WE ARE TODAY. UM, THIS IS A PICTURE OF THE BUILDING THAT WAS, UH, SUBMITTED WITH THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS. IT WAS, UM, APPROVED, OBVIOUSLY, UH, NOT WITH THE MATERIALS LAID OUT, BUT THIS IS, UM, ASIDE FROM THE ROOFING THAT WAS APPROVED OVER THE SUMMER, THIS IS WHAT THE BUILDING LOOKS LIKE TODAY. UM, SO AGAIN, THIS IS THE REQUEST FOR THE WAIVER. WE WOULD REALLY LIKE TO GET, UM, THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING SCHEDULED AND HAVE A MEETING ON SITE SO YOU CAN COME SEE WHAT, WHAT THE BUILDING LOOKS LIKE, BECAUSE IT, AGAIN, IT DOES LOOK MUCH LIKE WHAT IT, UH, WHAT IT, THAT PICTURE WAS, UM, A HISTORY OF THE PROPERTY AND GIVE A LITTLE BIT MORE CONTEXT. IS THERE A, OH, WE LOST IT. OKAY. UM, SO THIS IS [01:00:01] WHAT THE BUILDING LOOKS, UH, LOOKED LIKE, UM, WITH THE STUCCO ON, ON THE OUTSIDE, UH, WHEN THE PROPERTY WAS PURCHASED. HERE'S A TIMELINE OF HOW IT'S BEEN ADDED ON TO SINCE THE, YOU KNOW, LATE 18 HUNDREDS AND EARLY 19 HUNDREDS. THAT'S CENTER BUILDING IN RED WAS THE ORIGINAL BUILDING. UM, THE BUILDING AT WITH THE WINDOWS, UH, WITH IN BLUE WAS THEN ADDED, AND THEN IN GREEN WAS THE LAST EDITION. AND OF COURSE IT WAS SENIOR VEGGIE FOR A VERY LONG TIME. AND WE ACTUALLY HAVE THE FORMER PROPERTY OWNER HERE WHO OPERATED SIM SENIOR VEGGIE, UM, TO SPEAK ON OUR BEHALF. UM, SO PART OF THE WAIVER, THE MAIN PART OF THIS PRESENTATION TODAY AND FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION, UM, IS THAT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION WAS THAT THE E FS WAS APPLIED TO HIS EX THE EXISTING STUCCO, WHICH IS INCORRECT. AND I'M GONNA ASK MY, MY TEAM TO BRING UP THE EXAMPLE MATERIALS THAT WE PREPARED FOR YOUR REVIEW TO SHOW HOW WE BROUGHT THE BUILDING DOWN TO ITS ORIGINAL MATERIALS, WHICH WAS CONCRETE AND BRICK BECAUSE THE STUCCO WAS IN SUCH DISREPAIR. AND THIS IS WHAT WAS ADDED. AND STUCCO IS ON THE FINISH. IT IS ON THE OUTSIDE OF THE BUILDING. AND THAT IS WHAT YOU SEE IN THE, THAT PICTURE TODAY. SO, UM, I GUESS I JUST WANT TO TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE APPLICATION. I'M SORRY. MY NAME IS, UH, L UH, RIO. I'M THE ARCHITECT OF RECORD FOR THE PROJECT. I'M AT, UH, 67 0 7 WEST HAUSMAN ROAD. UM, I JUST WANTED TO TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE, UH, THE APPLICATION OF THE, UM, THE SYSTEM HERE. UM, SO AS, UH, WE WERE DISCUSSING, THE EXISTING STUCCO WAS REMOVED FROM, UH, FROM THE FACADE. AS YOU CAN SEE THERE. IT WAS TAKEN DOWN TO THE, UH, EXISTING, UH, CMU WALLS. SO THERE WAS DIFFERENT MATERIALS. THERE WAS CMU WALLS, THERE WAS CONCRETE, AND THEN THERE WAS A EXISTING BRICK WALLS UP THERE. AND SO IT WAS ALL REMOVED DOWN. AND THEN, UH, THIS APPLICATION, WHICH CONSISTS OF KIND OF AN EFIS AND STUCCO, UH, WAS APPLIED TO IT. AND I'VE GOT HERE, IF Y'ALL WANT TO TAKE A LOOK AT, UH, THE APPLICATION, UH, OF THE DIFFERENT MATERIALS AND HOW IT WAS APPLIED. UH, AND THIS IS IN FACT AN ACTUAL THREE PROCESS STUCCO THAT'S ON THERE WITH THE KIND OF A, A PAINT FINISH WITH THE, UH, THE TEXTURE APPLIED TO IT ON THERE. ? UH, SURE I CAN WHAT, UH, ON HERE? SO YOU'VE, YOU'VE GOT KIND OF THE MASONRY THAT'S, UH, ON THERE, UH, BELOW HERE. THIS WOULD BE THE EXISTING, UH, THE CONCRETE WALLS, TILT WALLS OR WHATEVER WAS ON THERE. SORRY, NOT GONNA PICK IT UP. . LET'S SEE, Y'ALL STRAINING . SO, YEAH, SO WE'VE GOT THE EXISTING HERE. SO THIS ORIGINALLY WOULD'VE HAD THE STUCCO ON IT. THE STUCCO WAS REMOVED. UH, SO WE GOT DOWN TO THE BARE STRUCTURAL ELEMENT. SURE. UM, THEN AFTER THAT, UH, THIS GRAY ITEM IS A, UH, IT'S KIND OF A SEALER TO SEAL THE EXISTING, UH, UH, CONCRETE. AND THEN FROM THAT YOU, UH, THERE'S A, LIKE A MAST STICK OR A GLUE APPLIED, AND YOU APPLY THE, UH, THE INSULATION ON THERE. ON TOP OF THE INSULATION. YOU HAVE KIND OF A FABRIC. AND THEN YOU HAVE KIND OF A THREE STEP, UH, PROCESS, UH, TO, TO INSTALL THE STUCCO. UM, YOU HAVE THE, THE DOMESTIC UNDERNEATH HERE. THEN YOU HAVE YOUR FIRST COAT, THEN YOU HAVE KIND OF A WATERPROOF, UH, COAT THAT GOES ON THERE. UH, AND THEN THE FINAL, UH, UH, E EFIS OR FINAL PAINT WITH TEXTURE ON IT, UH, CREATING THIS, THIS NEW SYSTEM. OKAY. I THINK THAT'S GOOD. THANK YOU. MM-HMM. . UM, SO WE WANTED TO PRESENT THIS TO YOU TO GIVE YOU A BETTER IDEA OF THE, THE PROCESS THAT THAT WENT THROUGH HERE TODAY. UM, AND SO THE REMAINDER OF THE PRESENTATION JUST ADDRESSES THE WAIVER REQUEST AND HOW, HOW THE BUILDING WAS IN SUCH DISREPAIR THAT, UM, OUR, OUR STUCCO, UH, CONSULTANT AND CONTRACTOR, UH, DID NOT RECOMMEND, UM, APPLYING STUCCO TO THE EXISTING BUILDING AS IT WOULD'VE BEEN TOO HEAVY AND WOULD'VE BROUGHT THE, THE WALLS DOWN. UM, AND SO THIS IS THE, THE RESULT THAT, UH, THAT HE THOUGHT WOULD BE BEST FOR THE BUILDING. SO HERE'S ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON THE PROCESS THAT WENT THROUGH ON RECONSTRUCT OR REHABILITATING THE BUILDING. AND THEN WE DO HAVE LETTERS OF SUPPORT. UM, THESE WERE SUBMITTED WITH OUR BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CASE. UM, AND THEY'RE FROM PROPERTY OWNERS SURROUNDING OUR BUILDING. [01:05:01] THIS IS ULTIMATELY OUR SUPPORT, UM, FROM THOSE THAT ARE, ARE NEIGHBORING US. THERE ARE ARE TWO IN OPPOSITION THAT ARE OWNED BY THE SAME LLC. UM, AGAIN, AND THIS IS THE, UM, YOU KNOW, IF YOU APPROVE THE APPEAL AND THE WAIVER TODAY, WE CAN HAVE A SITE VISIT AND THEN FOCUS ON THE MATERIALS THAT, THAT WERE USED AT HAND. SO, UM, THE ARCHITECT AND I ARE HERE FOR ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE, BUT WE WOULD RESPECTFULLY REQUEST YOUR APPROVAL OF THE RA WAIVER TODAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE ANY VOICEMAILS OR CITIZENS TO BE HEARD? WE DO. WE HAVE TWO IN-PERSON SPEAKERS THAT'LL CALL UP HERE. AND THEN WE ALSO HAVE A VOICEMAIL. UM, SO FIRST SPEAKER IS JOSE RODRIGUEZ. HELLO, I'M JOSE ROD. I'M AT 6 28 SOUTH PRESA. DIRECTLY NEXT DOOR TO THE BUILDING THAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT. AND I'M ALSO THE PREVIOUS OWNER OF THAT BUILDING AS WELL. I'M JUST HERE TO SAY BASICALLY THAT, UM, INITIALLY WHEN I'VE COME TO THESE MEETINGS, I JUST FEEL LIKE IT'S, IT'S SO SIMPLE AND WE'RE MAKING IT SO DIFFICULT. HONESTLY. THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT THE THICKNESS OF THE BUILDING, AND THEN I'M LISTENING TO IT AND I'M LIKE, WAIT A MINUTE. THEY REMOVED SO MUCH STUCCO FROM THAT BUILDING. AND INITIALLY WHEN HDR WAS COMING, THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT THE THICKNESS. THEY WERE NEVER TALKING ABOUT THE PRODUCT. IT WAS ALWAYS THE THICKNESS OF THE BUILDING. 'CAUSE I'VE BEEN HERE LISTENING AND I SEE IT. AND THEN I, I REALIZED ALL THE STUCCO THAT WAS REMOVED, AND AFTER THEY PUT THAT BACK, THERE WAS AREAS THAT THE BUILDING HAD STUCCO OVER STUCCO YEARS AFTER YEARS. AND NO ONE REALLY ACTUALLY FIXED THE BUILDING. SO IT WAS BEEN, AND I HAD IT, AND AT MY TIME WE DIDN'T DO THAT EITHER. SO THEN NOW I SEE THAT THEY BROUGHT IT DOWN TO ITS ORIGINAL STRUCTURE, AND THEN THEY PUT WHAT THEY DID. NOW THERE'S, IT'S NOT, I MEAN, THERE MAY BE AN AREA THAT IT'S THICKER, BUT THERE'S A LOT OF AREAS WHERE IT'S NOT. SO, I JUST FEEL LIKE IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S ORIGINAL STRUCTURE. I MEAN, I JUST FEEL THAT SOMEONE FINALLY WENT IN THERE AND THEY ACTUALLY APPLIED AND TRIED TO DO THIS THE RIGHT WAY, WHICH I COULDN'T DO WHEN I OWNED THE BUILDING. AND I SEE IT NOW AND IT'S, AND I'M NEXT DOOR. I LOOK AT IT EVERY DAY MORE THAN ANYBODY IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR ANYBODY ELSE. AND I SEE IT AND IT'S A BEAUTIFUL BUILDING, AND I SEE WHAT THEY DID. AND IT LOOKS ORIGINAL. THE WINDOWS, THERE USED TO BE RESIDENTIAL WINDOWS ON THIS BUILDING. I MEAN, THAT NEVER BELONGED THERE. NO ONE EVER GOT THOSE PERMITS BEFORE. THIS HAS BEEN DONE THE WAY I FEEL IT SHOULD BE DONE. AND I JUST, I'M HERE TO SUPPORT IT BECAUSE I'M A NEIGHBOR AND I SEE IT EVERY DAY AND I SEE THE WORK THAT'S GETTING PUT IN AND I JUST, I JUST, I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY IT'S BECOMING SO DIFFICULT. I MEAN, IT'S SO OBVIOUS. AND SOMETIMES I JUST FEEL LIKE, I MEAN, IF YOU GO AND YOU SEE IT, IF YOU GO LIKE WHAT THEY'RE SAYING AND YOU SEE IT, I SEE IT EVERY DAY. IT'S JUST, IT'S AN EASY ANSWER. AND I JUST HOPE THAT Y'ALL LISTEN TO ME AND I'M JUST HERE TO SUPPORT IT. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, ASK ME. THANK YOU. UM, JESSICA DEL. HI. GOOD, GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME'S JESSICA DELVE. UM, I'M A NATIVE HERE IN SAN ANTONIO. GREW UP ON THE SOUTH SIDE, HAVE FAMILY ON THE WEST SIDE. AND I'M IN SUPPORT OF THE BUSINESS. UM, 'CAUSE WE DO SEE THAT AREAS GROWING AND BOOMING AND GETTING TO GET TO KNOW PABLO MORE AND GETTING TO HAVE HIS VISION AND WHAT HE WANTS TO BRING TO SAN ANTONIO. I FEEL LIKE WE NEED MORE OF THAT HERE. SO I'M IN SUPPORT OF THE BUSINESS AND HOPEFULLY Y'ALL WOULD CONSIDER IT. MM-HMM. . THANK YOU. MM-HMM. . AND THEN WE HAVE ONE VOICEMAIL. I'LL PLAY THAT NOW. THIS IS KATE RUCKMAN FOR THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY OF SAN ANTONIO, 1 0 7 KING WILLIAMS STREET, TWO TEN TWO TWO FOUR SIX ONE SIX THREE. REGARDING ITEM NUMBER 17 6 20 SOUTH PREFACE STREET. THE CONSERVATION SOCIETY OF SAN ANTONIO AGREES WITH OHB STAFF THAT THE APPLICANT HAS NOT PRESENTED SUFFICIENT NEW EVIDENCE NOR INCORPORATED CHANGES BASED ON PREVIOUS RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE COMMISSION. AND THE WAIVER SHOULD NOT BE GRANTED. FIVE STOP WORK ORDER DOES NOT REFLECT A WILLINGNESS TO COOPERATE IN THE VERY MANNER THE APPLICANT IS NOW REQUESTING FROM THE COMMISSION. THANK YOU. OKAY. QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION, MR. CHAIR? YES. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER. UM, QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT. CAN YOU COME INTO THE PODIUM PLEASE? YES, SIR. SO, UM, FIRST I WANT TO THANK YOU, UM, FOR SHOWING US THE WORK AND HOW THE PROCESS WENT. SO HELP ME UNDERSTAND A LITTLE BIT BETTER AS I WAS READING THROUGH THE CASE, UM, ON LAST WEEK. SO I UNDERSTAND A LITTLE BIT BETTER, BUT MY QUESTION IS, IS REALLY A SIMPLE ONE. IN ORDER TO, UM, BE GRANTED THE WAIVER BY US, UM, YOU NEED TO SHOW SIGNIFICANCE, YOU KNOW, CHANGES. OKAY? SO, MM-HMM, , I THANK YOU FOR YOUR PRESENTATION, BUT GIVE ME A QUICK BULLET POINT OF WHAT CHANGES WERE MADE, UM, THAT, [01:10:01] UM, THAT YOU WOULD SAY ARE SIGNIFICANT. SO WE CAN, IT COULD BE AN EASIER DECISION FOR US. SURE. UH, YES, COMMISSIONER, I, I THINK IT REALLY GOES DOWN TO THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION THAT THE EFIS WAS APPLIED TO THE EXISTING STUCCO AND IT, AND IT WASN'T, IT WAS NOT. UM, YOU CAN SEE HERE THIS IS A, A PERFECT MOCKUP OF WHAT HAPPENED AT THAT BUILDING. THE EFIS WAS APPLIED, BUT IT WAS APPLIED BECAUSE THE SUCH DETERIORATION OF THE EXISTING BUILDING, UM, IN ORDER TO PROTECT THE LONGEVITY OF THE BUILDING AND HAVE IT, HAVE IT LAST LONGER. UM, THE, IT WAS BROUGHT DOWN TO THE ORIGINAL MATERIALS AND THEN THE EFIS WAS ADDED AND THE STUCCO PUT ON TOP OF IT. A LOT OF THE COMMENTS, UM, I I READ FROM THE FIRST MEETING AGAIN, I WASN'T HERE, WAS THAT, YOU KNOW, THIS IS SUCH A SIGNIFICANT CHANGE FROM WHAT THE BUILDING LOOKED LIKE. WELL, IT, IT LOOKS LIKE WHAT THE COA WAS APPROVED FOR. SO, UH, YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT THE BASIS OF STAFF'S ARGUMENT AGAINST THE APPROVAL HERE WAS THAT THE EFIS WAS APPLIED TO THE STUCCO, BUT IT WASN'T, IT, IT JUST, IT WASN'T, AND THAT'S, THAT'S A MATERIAL FACT. SO YOUR POINT IS BASICALLY SAYING THAT IT'S A SIGNIFICANT CHANGE BECAUSE THE STAFF SAID IT WAS DONE A PARTICULAR WAY AND YOU'RE SAYING IT WASN'T DONE A PARTICULAR WAY. SO THAT'S YOUR SIGNIFICANT YES, SIR. AND THAT THE STUCCO ON THE OUTSIDE OF THE BUILDING IS WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY APPROVED WITH THE COA. WELL, LET ME CLARIFY. UH, LINK FOR CONSIDERATION OF A WAIVER ALLOWS FOR YES. A CHANGE IN THE APPLICATION OR SUBSTANTIAL NEW EVIDENCE. AND SO WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED IS, IS WHAT THEY'RE PRESENTING AS NEW EVIDENCE THAT WASN'T PREVIOUSLY CONSIDERED WHEN THIS WAS DENIED. AND, AND THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING THAT BECAUSE THAT WAS GONNA BE MY NEXT QUESTION TO STAFF. SO THANK YOU. THANK YOU MR. CHAIR. YES, I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS. COMMISSIONER GROUP. UM, AND I AGREE WITH MY COMMISSIONER TO MAKE REALLY CLEAR OF OUR PURVIEW HERE TODAY IS JUST THE WAIVER AND CONSIDER THE SUBSTANTIAL CHANGE OR NEW EVIDENCE, NOT WHETHER OR NOT IT'S APPROPRIATE FOR THE BUILDING. WHETHER, UM, SO WHAT YOU WERE SHOWING IN THAT PICTURE, I'M, I UNDERSTOOD AND THE APPLICANT, WE HAD A LENGTHY DISCUSSION ABOUT IT WAS YES, WE UNDERSTOOD THAT SOME OF THE STUCCO WAS REMOVED FROM THE BACK 'CAUSE THE PICTURE SHOWED IT AND IT WAS BRICK. BUT ON THE FRONT, CAN WE, IF WE CAN PULL UP A PICTURE OF THE FRONT, AND I THINK THAT'S ACTUALLY MORE WHERE OUR DISCUSSION WENT. THAT TIME WAS SPECIFICALLY ON THE FRONT AND THOSE HISTORIC ELEMENTS, THERE ARE HISTORIC ELEMENTS WITH STUCCO THAT HAVE BEEN COVERED. IF YOU GO, A STAFF CAN PULL A PICTURE OF THE FRONT WITHOUT THE NEW MATERIAL. JUST, UM, YEAH, I THINK THERE WAS ANOTHER ONE BEFORE YOU, UM, BEFORE THEY ADDED THE, THE WHITE. RIGHT. DO YOU, UH, DO YOU KNOW WHICH SLIDE YOU'RE REFERRING TO? THERE WAS ONE WHERE THE PICTURE WAS THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING WHERE THEY HAD SOME OF THAT INSTALLATION AND SOME OF THE NEW WINDOWS AND DOORS, BUT THEY DIDN'T HAVE ANY OF THAT, UH, WHITE INSTALLATION ON THERE. ALRIGHT, I'LL TRY TO FIND THAT ONE. DO YOU UNDERSTAND MY QUESTION? UH, I DO MA'AM. YES. AND I, I'M, I'M TRYING TO FIND THE SPECIFIC, UM, AREAS, BUT MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THOSE FEATURES WERE PRESERVED. UM, AND THEY ARE STILL FEATURED ON, ON THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING, CORRECT? THEY'RE STILL THERE. YES. SO THAT WAS COVERED UP AND THAT'S, I THINK THAT WAS WHERE THE DISCUSSION WAS GOING. SO THAT IS COVERING UP STUCCO RIGHT THERE ON THE FRONT. I UNDERSTAND THE BACK, BUT ON THE FRONT THOSE HISTORIC ELEMENTS ARE NOT STUCCO, THEY'RE NOT, THE FRONT IS NOT STUCCO THEN IT IS NEW STUCCO, NOT WHAT THEY APPLIED THE HISTORIC ELEMENTS AND THE YELLOW ORIGINAL PARTS OF THE TOP ABOVE THE NEW WINDOWS. THE YELLOW THAT WAS COVERED UP WASN'T THAT STUCCO AS WELL IN THE FRONT. SO, SORRY, THERE'S A COUPLE OF COLORS ON HERE. THIS YELLOW HERE? YEAH. MM-HMM. , I MEAN WE CAN GO SLIDE 25. I FEEL LIKE I JUST SAW THE PICTURE. MAYBE IT WAS ON THE APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION. SO IN THIS FRONT, NONE OF THE STUCCO WAS REMOVED ONLY AROUND THE WINDOWS? CORRECT. WHICH WAS NOT STUCCO. I THINK THE APPLICANT HAD SPECIFIED THAT IT WAS LIKE WOOD THAT WAS PUT AROUND THE WINDOWS. IT WAS LIKE METAL. YEAH. EXCUSE ME, SIR, WOULD YOU INTRODUCE YOURSELF PLEASE, RIO? MY NAME IS PABLO RIOS, 6 2 0 SOUTH PRESA. THE YELLOW MATERIAL THAT YOU SEE, THAT'S DENSE GLASS THAT WAS USED TO REPLACE THE, UM, STOREFRONT THAT WAS MADE OF PARTICLE BOARD BEFORE I PROVIDED THESE PICTURES TO RACHEL WHEN SHE ASKED ME ABOUT PRESERVATION OF, UM, OF HISTORICAL ELEMENTS. AND [01:15:01] ALL OF THIS WAS DONE AS MOCK-UP. SO THIS IS MOCK-UP PRIOR TO US FINISHING THE PROCESS. AND IN MY EMAIL LOG, YOU CAN SEE THE CONVERSATION WHERE I'M TELLING HER THAT I'M MOCKING UP THESE PRESERVATION SO SHE CAN SEE THEM. I HAVE THE EMAIL LOG. SO THIS IS A MOCKUP, IT'S NOT PART OF THAT LAYERS OF MATERIAL THAT YOU'RE USING. THIS IS A MOCKUP OF THE PRESERVATION OF THE ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS. THE PROCESS IS STILL THAT PROCESS. EXACTLY. SO CORRECT. YOU HAVE THE ORIGINAL STUCCO STILL, AND THEN YOU ADDED THAT WHITE INSULATION THAT'S INCORRECT. THE ORIGINAL STUCCO AFTER THE MOCKUP WAS REMOVED FROM THE BUILDING, LIKE THE REST OF THE BUILDING, THE CONTRACTOR WOULD NOT PUT THIS SYSTEM ON TOP OF STUCCO. HE WOULD NOT. DO WE HAVE ANY EVIDENCE OF THAT? WE HAVE PLENTY OF PICTURES OF THE FRONT WHERE THAT WAS REMOVED IN BETWEEN, YEAH, WE CAN PROVIDE THAT. YEAH, WE CAN PROVIDE THOSE. AND I GUESS MY OTHER QUESTION WAS MORE TO STAFF. SO THIS WENT TO BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND HOW CAN THEY MAKE A CONTINUANCE? SO HOW DID THAT HAPPEN? UM, THE APPLICANT REQUESTED ADDITIONAL TIME IN ORDER TO COME BACK TO THIS COMMITTEE WITH, UM, A WAIVER CONSIDERATION. OKAY. COMMISSIONER SAVINO? UM, A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS JUST TO REITERATE. MM-HMM. , UM, THE PHOTO THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT, THE ARCHITECTURAL DETAILING OF STUCCO ORIGINALLY WAS ALL REMOVED. SO THIS COULD BE RECREATED. MM-HMM, . OKAY. AND MY OTHER QUESTION IS, CAN YOU CONFIRM THAT BASICALLY WHAT WE'RE BASING THE WAIVER ON THE NEW EVIDENCE IS MOSTLY THE MEANS AND METHODS BY WHICH THIS BUILDING IS GETTING A NEW ENVELOPE? THAT'S, THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. THANK YOU. I'LL MOVE MOTION. MR. CHAIR. UH, JUST A CLARIFICATION QUESTION FOR THE SLIDE THAT'S UP HERE. SO THIS IS A MOCK-UP OF WHAT WAS FINALLY CONSTRUCTED? YEAH. SO, UM, RACHEL'S INITIAL EMAIL TO US WAS SPECIFIC TO PRESERVATION OF ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS. MM-HMM. AT THE TIME WE WERE WORKING IN THE BACK OF THE BUILDING, WHICH WAS BEING STRIPPED DOWN. I HAD THE CONTRACTOR STOP WHAT HE WAS DOING SO THAT HE CAN SHOW WHAT THE PROCESS LOOKS LIKE OF RES OF CON CONTINUING THE ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS. AND THOSE WERE THE PICTURES THAT I TOOK AND I SENT TO HER. AFTER THAT, THE CONTRACTOR FINISHED HIS WORK ACCORDING TO HIS, THE WAY HE DOES IT. OKAY. SO ON THIS PARTICULAR PHOTO, YOU TOOK THIS PHOTO AND THEN AFTER THAT THE CONTRACTOR TOOK THE, UH, THAT OF THAT AREA OFF AND THEN TOOK THE ORANGE AND RED STUCCO OFF? CORRECT. AND THEN HE CAME BACK WITH THE STYROFOAM AGAIN. SO IT'S NOT STYROFOAM. THIS IS THERMO FOAM. THIS IS PART OF THE ECOSYSTEM. SO IT'S NOT STYROFOAM. THE INSULATION. YEAH. SO THIS, THE INSULATION WAS TAKEN OFF FROM THIS MOCKUP? CORRECT. THEN THE STUCCO WAS TAKEN OFF THE ORANGE AND RED STUCCO THAT'S HERE SHOWN IN THIS PHOTO, AND THEN THE INSULATION WAS PUT BACK ON? CORRECT. OKAY. AND DO YOU HAVE, UM, ANY RECORD OF HOW THICK THAT, UH, EXISTING STUCCO WAS? SO I, I HAVE PHOTOS THAT WE'VE SUBMITTED. WE CAN, AND YOU WE CAN, WE CAN, BUT I DON'T KNOW HOW IT'LL SHOW UP ON THERE. IT, IT'LL SHOW UP. I KNOW THE, THE PREVIOUS OWNER HAD SAID IT HAD BEEN STUC OUT OVER SEVERAL TIMES, SO MM-HMM. . UM, ARE WE TALKING THREE QUARTERS OF AN INCH, AN INCH, INCH AND A HALF INCHES? PROBABLY A COUPLE INCHES. A COUPLE OF INCHES, I THINK IS THE CONSENSUS THAT, THAT'S PROBABLY THE BEST PICTURE WE HAVE ON. SO BETWEEN THE, THE, UH, LEFT SIDE AND THE RIGHT SIDE, WHERE THE, PLEASE SPEAK INTO THE MICROPHONE, SIR. YOU CAN TELL WITH, WITH THE RIGHT SIDE AND THE LEFT SIDE WHERE WE DID GO DOWN TO THE BRICK TO SHOW THIS PICTURE ON THE LEFT SIDE, UM, THERE'S A DIFFERENCE OF ABOUT INCH AND A HALF, TWO INCHES OF STUCCO THAT STILL HAD NOT BEEN REMOVED YET. SO THEY WERE WORKING FROM RIGHT TO LEFT. OKAY. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER GRUBB? I'M DOING MOTION IF THERE NO MORE QUESTIONS? NO MORE QUESTIONS. I MEAN, UNLESS THE APPLICANT HAS PICTURES OF SPECIFICALLY TO THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING, NOT THE SIDE OR THE BACK FURTHER DOWN, LIKE I THINK WE'RE MORE OF THE HISTORICAL ELEMENTS, WHICH WE'RE IN DISCUSSION. UM, IF NOT SO FAR, I THINK, UM, I'LL DENY THE WAIVER MOTION TO DENY THE WAIVER [01:20:01] SECOND MOTION. A SECOND DISCUSSION. YEAH, AND I'M JUST CLARIFYING, I I, I FEEL LIKE, YOU KNOW, IF, IF THE APPLICANT REALLY WANTS THIS WAY, I THINK THAT AN EFFORT SHOULD HAVE BEEN DONE TO REALLY, UM, THIS REQUEST OF NEW EVIDENCE OR THIS PROOF OF NEW EVIDENCE. I FEEL LIKE IT'S NOT REALLY BEEN PRESENTED TO US YET ON, SPECIFICALLY ON THE, ON THE FRONT WHERE IT SAYS THE NEW VEGGIE, WHERE THE SIGNS ARE, WHICH IS MORE LIKE, YOU KNOW, THE HISTORIC, UM, SOME OF THE HISTORIC FEATURES. AND I THINK THAT WAS WHERE OUR DISCUSSION WAS GOING. UM, BACK THEN. UM, OF COURSE THIS STILL GIVES THE APPLICANT THE OPTION TO GO TO BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, BUT I THINK THAT THE, THESE HISTORIC ELEMENTS MORE THAN THE BRICK WALLS, THOSE WERE WHAT WERE MAIN DISCUSSION WAS BACK THEN FOR. UM, SO I THINK THAT'S THE PART THAT I REALLY WOULD HAVE LIKED TO SEE IF, YOU KNOW, IF YOU WERE REALLY REQUESTING NEW EVIDENCE OR PRESENTED THAT, I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE SEEN THAT. MR. CHAIR? YES. COMMISSIONER GIBBS. UM, THANK YOU, SIR. UM, I WOULD AGREE WITH, UM, COMMISSIONER GROUP. I, I APPRECIATE WHAT YOU SHOWED AS FAR AS THE PROCESS OF THEY NATURE, BUT IT, IT DOESN'T SHOW A SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE, YOU KNOW, TO, OR, UM, TO THE PROCESS THAT WILL REQUIRE US TO APPROVE OR WOULD LEAD US TO SAY, LET'S GO AHEAD AND GRANT THIS WAIVER. UM, SO I JUST WANT TO CALL ON RECORD, SAY THAT I AM IN AGREEMENT WITH THAT AND, AND IF YOU CAN SHOW US THAT, THEN IT WOULD BE DIFFERENT. BUT RIGHT NOW, I, I JUST DON'T SEE THAT EVIDENCE. UH, I, I THINK THE WAIVER IS NOT FOR THE USE OF MATERIAL. THE WAIVER IS SO THAT WE CAN GET IN FRONT OF OHP AGAIN AND HAVE THEM COME TO THE SITE AND COME UP WITH A SOLUTION. ALL WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS COME UP WITH A SOLUTION SO THAT EVERYBODY CAN MOVE FORWARD. SO IT'S NOT THAT WE'RE ASKING FOR YOU TO APPROVE TODAY, IT'S JUST THAT WE'RE ASKING FOR THEM TO BE ABLE TO COME OUT. AND THAT IS TRUE. WE UNDERSTAND WHAT THE QUESTION IS. UM, WHETHER YOU FEEL THE APPLICANT HAS DEMONSTRATED ENOUGH NEW EVIDENCE THAT WOULD WARRANT RECONSIDERATION OF THIS REQUEST. WELL, AND THAT'S IT, MR. CHAIR. I, I, I'D LIKE TO PROPOSE A SUBSTITUTE MOTION, BUT, BUT I'D LIKE TO ASK, UH, LEGAL COUNSEL IF IT'S APPROPRIATE TO, UM, MOTION TO TABLE AND THEN PROPOSE, UH, SUBSTITUTE, OR IS IT APPROPRIATE JUST TO PROPOSE A SUBSTITUTE MOTION OR MAKE A MOTION FOR SUBSTITUTE MOTION? YOU CAN STILL MAKE A MOTION. AN ADDITIONAL MOTION. WELL, I, I'D LIKE TO, TO, UM, MAKE A SUBSTITUTE MOTION TO, UH, APPROVE THE WAIVER AND ENABLE THE HDRC TO, UM, UM, TO, UM, RE RESPECT THE REQUEST FOR A DRC THAT GIVES US THE OPPORTUNITY TO GO TO THE SITE AND, AND TO INSPECT IT, UM, BASED ON ALL OF THE, UM, THE TESTIMONY OF THE, THE, UH, THE, THE, UH, UH, PERSON THAT, THAT REVIEWED THE, THE MASONRY, THE STRUCTURAL, UH, UH, DEFICIENCIES, UM, ET CETERA. 'CAUSE I THINK AT THE, AT THE, AT THE, IN, IN TERMS OF GOOD FAITH, UH, WELL, I, I THINK THAT'S IT, RIGHT? YEAH. THAT'S, THAT'S THE MOTION SUBSTITUTE MOTION. I'LL SECOND THAT. OKAY. DISCUSSION ON THIS AMENDED MOTION. WELL, WELL, MR. CHAIR, I, I, I REMEMBER THE CASE, UH, THAT THERE, THERE IS A, THERE IS FUNDAMENTALLY A, A A A CONFUSION, UH, BETWEEN WHAT WAS EXPECTED AND HOW THAT WAS COMMUNICATED, BECAUSE THE PICTURE THAT WAS SUBMITTED FOR THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS IN EFFECT, IS EXACTLY WHAT WAS DONE. WHAT, WHAT COMES BACK TO US IS THE FACT THAT THERE WAS, UH, SOME CONFUSION WITH RESPECT TO EFA STUCCO, THE MATERIALITY OF IT ALL. NOW, UH, I, I THINK, UM, THO THO THOSE THAT, THAT, THAT HAD EATEN AT THIS RESTAURANT OVER THE YEARS, IT WAS S SEVERAL OTHER RESTAURANTS, UH, IN, IN SOME CASES YOU, YOU DID FEEL THE BUILDING WAS GONNA FALL DOWN ON YOU. AND THERE ARE PICTURES THAT SHOW THE ROOF STRUCTURE. AND, AND OF COURSE, ONE OF THE IMAGES HERE SHOWS THE OSB, THIS BUILDING. SO THE EXPERIENCE THAT WE HAVE HISTORICALLY, AT LEAST WITH RESPECT TO THE LAST 25, 30 YEARS OF IT, IS NONE OF IT IS, IS, UH, SIGNIFICANT OF ANYTHING UNTIL YOU PEEL IT BACK. SO, PEELING IT BACK, I THINK IT, IT ENABLES, UH, THE, THE PERSON THAT'S GONNA MAKE THE INVESTMENT TO LOOK AT IT AND TO DETERMINE WHAT IS THE BEST WAY TO CREATE SOME, UM, UH, UH, CONTINUITY WITHIN THE DIFFERENT MATERIALS AS THIS BUILDING HAS, HAS BEEN, HAS MORPHED OUT OVER THE YEARS. BUT THE REQUEST FOR A WAIVER IS NOT WITHOUT, I THINK WHAT, WHAT IS REALLY SYMBOLIC OF WHAT ANY APPLICANT, UM, IT PUTS ON THE TABLE TO SAY THAT THEY'RE [01:25:01] PROVIDING A TRUSTWORTHY TESTIMONY. AND THAT IS THAT WE ARE BEING INVITED, WE ARE BEING ASKED TO, TO VISIT THIS PROPERTY AND TO, TO LOOK AT IT. UM, AND, AND I THINK WE, WE OWE THIS APPLICANT, WE OWE ALL THE APPLICANTS THAT OPPORTUNITY. SO, SO THE WAIVER ENABLES THAT SO THAT WE CAN COME BACK AND WE CAN, WE CAN LOOK AT THIS, AT THIS PROJECT, UH, UH, FROM, FROM, FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF WHAT SEEMS TO BE AN APPLICANT WHO, WHO REALLY WANTS THE BEST THING FOR, FOR THIS BUILDING. BECAUSE AFTER ALL, UM, UH, YOU KNOW, THE, THE INITIAL CONFUSION WAS SHOWN TO US ILLUSTRATED IN THE ACTUAL, UH, PRESENTATION THAT WAS GIVEN. THE, THE, THE, UH, THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS. THERE WAS A CONFUSION AT THAT TIME. THERE STILL REMAINS THAT CONFUSION. AND I THINK THE BEST THAT WE CAN DO IS MATCH THAT, UH, UM, GOOD FAITH WITH GOOD FAITH IN A DRC. THANK YOU, SIR. THANK YOU. OTHER COMMENTS, MR. CHAIRMAN? YEAH. YES. COMMISSIONER. COMMISSIONER. I TEND ABOUT THIS. I TEND TO AGREE WITH, UH, UH, MY FELLOW COMMISSIONER THERE, UM, IN DUE DILIGENCE, I MEAN, THIS, THIS APPLICANT IS COMING FORWARD, THIS APPLICANT IS PRESENTING INFORMATION, WHICH I TEND TO BELIEVE SOME OF THE DETAILS MAYBE ARE NOT THERE. SOME OF MY FELLOW COMMERS MAY NOT BELIEVE THEM BECAUSE SOME OF THE DETAILS ARE NOT PRESENTED IN A MANNER THAT'S CON CONVINCES THEM, BUT THEY'RE ASKING US TO DO A LITTLE DUE DILIGENCE AND TO KIND OF GO OVER THERE AND SEE. AND I THINK THAT'S WHAT WE AS PUBLIC SERVANTS OWE ALL OUR, UH, UH, APPLICANTS. SO I HAVE NO PROBLEM GOING OVER THERE LOOKING AT STUFF, POKING AROUND, ASKING QUESTIONS. THAT'S WHAT WE'RE SUPPOSED TO DO. AND I THINK THIS, UH, THIS MERITS AT LEAST THAT. THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HOLLAND. SURE. UM, THE, WITH RESPECT TO THE, THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS, I BELIEVE THEY, UH, THE BOARD MADE THE DECISION DECIDED TO, TO PUSH THIS BACK TO HDRC, TO, UH, IN, IN, WITH THE, WITH THE THOUGHT THAT, UH, PERHAPS THERE WAS A, A ADDITIONAL NEW EVIDENCE. AND THE, AND THE WAIVER IS HINGING ON THE PRESENTATION OF, UH, NEW MATERIAL EVIDENCE. AND I'M JUST NOT SEEING ANYTHING DIFFERENT THAN WE SAW, UM, A COUPLE MONTHS AGO OR, OR A MONTH, A MONTH AGO. SO I, I WON'T BE SUPPORTING THE ALTERNATE MOTION. OKAY. AND I WOULD TEND TO AGREE WITH THAT. UH, COMMENT. OTHER COMMENTS? WELL, MR. CHAIR, JUST ONE, ONE OTHER, UH, THING THAT I THINK IS, UH, IMPORTANT TO, TO, UH, SHARE, UH, THOUGHT PROCESS OF THE MOTION, YOU KNOW, THE TERM MATERIAL EVIDENCE, THE, THE, THE APPLICANT DID TELL US, JUST SO FOR THE RECORD, SO THAT WE REITERATE THAT WE, WE ALL UNDERSTAND THAT STAFF IMPLIED, IF NOT DIRECTLY, THAT STUCCO EXISTED, AND EFIS WAS PLACED ABOVE THAT STUCCO. THE, THE, UM, MATERIAL EVIDENCE IS THAT STUCCO, THAT STUCCO WAS REMOVED, THE EFIS WAS NOT PLACED ON THE STUCCO, IT WAS PLACED ON THE BRICK, PARTICULARLY WITH RESPECT TO OUR CONVERSATION ABOUT THE THICKNESS AND THE CHANGE IN, IN, IN THE, AND THE WEIGHT OF THE BUILDING. UH, SO I THINK THAT, THAT, THAT, UH, UH, PART OF THE, THE CONSIDERATION THAT I, I DO WANNA MAKE IS THAT, THAT SHOULD THIS, UH, APPLICANT CHOOSE TO CHALLENGE, UH, THIS WITH THE TERMINOLOGY OF MATERIALITY, UH, IT, IT JUST APPEARS TO ME THAT TO ERR ON THE SITE OF CAUTION AND TO BE PRUDENT WITH RESPECT TO THE ASSERTIONS THAT STAFF MAKE AS RECOMMENDATIONS THAT LIMIT A PERSON'S FULL FREEDOM TO ENJOY THEIR PROPERTY, UM, MY MOTION FOR WAIVER IS BASED ON THAT, THAT CLEAR MATERIAL DIFFERENCE. AND I THINK IT'S IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THIS COMMISSION TO, UH, MAKE SURE THAT, THAT WE PROVIDE THE CITY OF SAN ANTONIO WITH, UH, UM, THE, THE EASIEST ROUTE TO, TO A SOLUTION IN THIS CASE, A WAIVER THAT ENABLES A DRC COSTS NOBODY ANYTHING. AND, AND I WOULD URGE THIS COMMISSION TO, UM, UH, REALLY CONSIDER THAT WHEN WE TALK ABOUT MATERIAL THERE IS THE ABSTRACT, BUT SOMETIMES MATERIAL MEANS MATERIAL. AND WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN STUCCO AND EFAS AND NO STUCCO AND EFAS, THAT IS A MATERIAL DIFFERENCE. THANK YOU, SIR. THANK YOU. I ALSO WANT TO REITERATE THIS IS WHAT, WHAT FELLOW COMMISSIONER [01:30:01] POINTED OUT THAT THIS WORK CAME BACK FROM BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. THEY PUSHED IT BACK TO US. SO I THINK IT'S INCUMBENT ON US TO DO OUR JOB AND NOT JUST SWEEP IT UNDER THE RUG OR JUST DENY ARBITRARILY. I THINK THAT WE OWE, AGAIN, DUE DILIGENCE TO THE APPLICANT AND TO THE CITY TO DO WHAT IS ASKED OF US AS A, AS A COMMISSION. WELL, I WOULD COUNTER THAT SOMEWHAT IN SAYING THAT, UM, AND MAYBE I'M PLAYING DEVIL'S ADVOCATE HERE. UH, THE REMOVAL OF THE STUCCO ON THIS PARTICULAR SLIDE, UM, WE DON'T HAVE PHOTOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE THAT THAT WAS DONE. UH, IF PHOTOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE CAME BACK TO US WHERE SOME OF THE EXISTING CONDITION WAS, UH, REMOVED TO SHOW THAT THE EXISTING STUCCO HAD BEEN REMOVED BEFORE THE EFIS, UH, THAT MIGHT BE COMPELLING ENOUGH EVIDENCE TO CONSIDER A WAIVER. AND MY AND MR. CHAIR, MR. CHAIR, CAN WE COMMENT NOW? OTHERS? YES. UM, AND I WOULD AGREE WITH YOU ON THAT, AND I THINK IF WE LOOK AT PICTURE 37, I THINK, UM, IF STAFF CAN PULL 37 UP, I THINK THOSE WOULD BE THE SIDES OF THE PROPERTY THAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE, UM, WHERE THAT EVIDENCE OR JUST THAT FOCUS ON THAT NEW EVIDENCE. 'CAUSE UM, I, YOU KNOW, I THINK THE APPLICANT HAS, I MEAN, IT'S COMING TODAY WITH THE OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT, BUT I MEAN, JUST FROM PURVIEW AND FROM, YOU KNOW, A WAIVER STANDPOINT, UM, THAT'S WHERE I THINK THOSE ARE THE TWO FRONTS THAT WE WEREN'T REALLY UNDERSTANDING. THE APPLICANT HAS HAD SEVERAL STOP WORK ORDERS AND ALSO WAS, I MEAN, VERY DETAILED AND ANSWERING ALL OUR QUESTIONS. SO RELYING JUST ON ONE STAFF COMMENT FROM RECOMMENDATIONS, UM, FROM THE CASES, THAT'S PROBABLY NOT MY REASON TO NOT SUPPORT THE, I'M NOT SUPPORTING THE SUPPORT SUPPORTING THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION, BUT SUPPORTING THE INITIAL MOTION IS MORE BASED ON, UM, I MEAN THERE'S, I DON'T SEE THE EVIDENCE YET. WELL, WELL, MR. CHAIR, JUST BASED ON, ON YOUR, RESPOND TO YOUR COMMENTS, THE, THE APPLICANT HAS TOLD US NOW, SURE, WE COULD CHOOSE TO BELIEVE OR NOT BELIEVE, BUT, UH, I, I, I, I THINK IT'S BENEFICIAL TO BELIEVE BOTH, RIGHT? THE APPLICANT HAS TOLD US THAT HE HAS AN EMAIL WHERE HE'S IN COMMUNICATION WITH THE, WITH THE, WITH THE STAFF MANAGER, AND HE'S PRESENTED IMAGES OF THE MOCKUP. AND THE MOCKUP MEANS THAT THE MOCKUP WAS THEN REMOVED AND THEN THE STUCCO WAS REMOVED. SO, SO, I I, IF IT'S HIS WORD OR SOMEONE ELSE'S WORD, THERE IS NO OTHER WORD. WE WE'RE MAKING AN ASSUMPTION THAT THERE'S AN ALTERNATE TRUTH TO THAT, TO THAT, UH, UM, ASSERTION THAT THE, THAT THE APPLICANT IS MAKING. WHERE'S THE ALTERNATE, UH, UM, UH, CHOICE, RIGHT? WHAT, WHAT ARE WE CHOOSING BETWEEN IF WE ARE TAKING THE APPLICANT AS WE SHOULD TAKE, YOU KNOW, 99% OF OUR APPLICANTS, UH, ON GOOD FAITH? AND I'M SURE STAFF WOULD WOULD AGREE IF STAFF, UH, UH, WAS EMPOWERED TO DO SO, THAT THAT WAS A MOCKUP THAT WAS REMOVED SO THAT THEN THE STUCCO COULD BE REMOVED, MOVED. MR. CHAIR CALL FOR THE QUESTION, PLEASE. YES. YEAH. COMMISSIONER GIBBS. I'M AFRAID EVERYBODY TO MOVE AND VOTE ON THE MOTION, SIR. I MEAN, WE'RE, WE'RE GOING, YOU KNOW, BACK AND FORTH WITH THE SAME COMMISSIONERS ON THIS OPPOSING POINTS OF VIEW. SO LET'S JUST HAVE THE VOTE AND THEN GO FROM THERE. THANK YOU. HAVE A ROLL CALL, PLEASE. THIS IS ON THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION. YES. BEFORE WE DO, I JUST WANNA CLARIFY, THE CODE REQUIRES A MAJORITY OF THE MEMBERSHIP OF THE COMMISSION, SO SIX VOTES IS NEEDED TO APPROVE THIS MOTION. GIBBS NAY, SAVINO NAY VELASQUEZ AYE. GALLOWAY AYE. MOOKA AYE. GIDA AYE. GROUP. NAYYY CERVANTES. YES. HOLLAND NAY AND FITZER NAY. MOTION FAILS. I HAVE A QUESTION. SO THAT'S FIVE VOTES. SO THE MOTION'S NOT SUCCESSFUL. WE CAN DO THE ORIGINAL MOTION ROLL CALL ON THE ORIGINAL MOTION. GIBBS AYE. SAVINO? AYE. VELAZQUEZ NAY. GALLOWAY NAY. MOOKA NAY. EVADO [01:35:01] NAYYY GROUP? AYE. CERVANTES, NO. HOLLAND? AYE. AND FETZER AYE. MOTION FAILS. MOTION FAILS. CHAIR, CHAIR. CAN I DO ANOTHER MOTION? YES. I MOVE TO CONTINUANCE AND, UM, ASKED THE APPLICANT TO COME BACK WITH, UM, EVIDENCE, NEW EVIDENCE WITH THAT COMMENTS, UH, ON THE STUCCO OF THOSE, REMOVAL OF THAT STUCCO AFTER THE MOCKUP. I'LL SECOND THAT. CAN I, CAN I JUST MAKE A QUICK COMMENT AND ASK FOR VOTE? YES. UH, ROLL CALL PLEASE. MR. ROLL CALL PLEASE. WE'RE NOT GONNA HAVE A DISCUSSION. MM-HMM. NO, YOU'VE ALREADY HAD IT. WE DON'T HAVE TO HAVE A DISCUSSION CHAIR. NO, I DON'T THINK. DISCUSSION'S UP TO THE CHAIR. I THINK DISCUSSION'S PART OF, UH, PROTOCOL, ISN'T IT? I'VE NEVER HEARD OF ANYBODY, UH, HAVING THE . WHAT ARE YOUR COMMENTS, PLEASE? WELL, I, I'D LIKE TO HEAR FOR THE APPLICANT, IF THE APPLICANT HAS WORDS, I'D LIKE TO, DOES THE APPLICANT HAVE ANYTHING ADD? I'LL LEAVE THAT TO THE, THE APPLICANT CHOOSES NOT TO. DOES THE APPLICANT HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD TO THE PROPOSED MOTION? NOT AT THIS TIME, SIR. THANK YOU. OKAY, THANK YOU. HAVE A ROLL CALL PLEASE. AYE. SAV NAY. VELAZQUEZ, I HA I NEED, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR LEGAL. GO AHEAD. IF, IF, IF A MOTION LIKE THIS FAILS, THEN WHAT HAPPENS? WE'LL HAVE TO WAIT A YEAR. I AYE. GALLOWAY AYE. MOOKA AYE. GUEVARA AYE. GROUP. AYE. CERVANTES? YES. HOLLAND. AYE. AND FETZER AYE. MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU. SO THE APPLICATION IS CONTINUED AND, UM, IF YOU'LL COME BACK WITH FURTHER EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT YOUR WAIVER REQUEST, WE'LL BE HAPPY TO LISTEN TO IT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. AGENDA ITEM 18. ITEM 18 ON THE AGENDA, HDRC, CASE NUMBER 2023 DASH 2 57 1 14 BERRY STREET. THE APPLICANT REQUESTS A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT THE TWO STORY RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE ON THE VACANT LOT AT ONE 14. BERRY STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THEIR REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT A TWO-STORY RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE BASED ON FINDINGS E THROUGH YOU. THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS, ONE THAT APPLICANT INCORPORATES PROPOSED MASSING AND SCALE CONSISTENT WITH THE GUIDELINES FOR RECONSTRUCTION, IN PARTICULAR, INCORPORATING AN OVERALL BUILDING WIDTH OR ARRANGEMENT OF BASE THAT IS COMPATIBLE WITH SURROUNDING HISTORIC STRUCTURES. AS NOTED IN FINDING G TWO, THAT IS NOTED IN FINDING J WITH THE STANDING SEA METAL ROOF ON THE FRONT PORCH. FEATURES PANELS THAT CONFORM TO GUIDELINES THREE, THAT THE APPLICANT CONFIRMS DOOR MATERIALS, UH, AS NOT REASON FINDING M FOUR, THAT A WOOD OR ALUMINUM CLAD WOOD WINDOW CONSISTENT WITH STAFF STANDARDS FOR WINDOWS IN CONSTRUCTION BE INSTALLED AS NOTED IN APPLICABLE CITATIONS. AND THEN FINDING N FIVE THAT THE APPLICANT AMENDS THE PROPOSED FENESTRATION PROFILE TO INCORPORATE WINDOWS THAT FEATURE 1 0 1 PROFILE RATHER THAN FIXED PLAYER STORY WINDOWS PROPOSED AS NOTED IN FINDING O SIX THAT ALL MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT BE SCREENED FROM VIEW FROM THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY, AS NOTED IN FINDING T SEVEN, THAT THE APPLICANT MEETS ALL SETBACK STANDARDS AS REQUIRED BY CITY ZONING AND OBTAIN A VARIANCE FROM THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT OF APPLICABLE EIGHT ARCHEOLOGY. AN ARCHEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATION IS REQUIRED IF EXCAVATIONS ARE NECESSARY NEAR THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY IMPACTS TO THE UPPER, UH, LABOR. BO AND SAFETY SHALL BE AVOIDED. THE PROJECT SHALL COMPLY WITHOUT FEDERAL, STATE, AND LOCAL LAWS, RULES AND REGULATIONS REGARDING ARCHEOLOGY AS APPLICABLE FOUNDATION INSPECTION IS TO BE SCHEDULED WITH OHP STAFF TO ENSURE THE FOUNDATION SETBACKS AND HEIGHTS ARE CONSISTENT WITH APPROVED DESIGN. THE INSPECTION IS TO OCCUR AFTER THE INSTALLATION OF FORM WORK AND PRIOR TO THE INSTALLATION OF FOUNDATION MATERIALS. AN INSPECTION MUST BE SCHEDULED FOR HP STAFF PRIOR TO THE START OF WORK ON THE STANDING SCENE METAL ROOF TO VERIFY THE ROOFING MATERIAL MATCHES THE APPROVED SPECIFICATIONS. UM, WE HAVE THE APPLICANT, JIM TOFOYA HERE IN PERSON. UH, THERE WERE NO LETTERS, BUT WE DO HAVE FOUR VOICEMAILS AND FIVE, UM, IN-PERSON. PUBLIC COMMENTS? YES, SIR. WOULD YOU INTRODUCE YOURSELF, PLEASE? YES. JIM TEFOYA. I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF THE, UM, OWNERS, UH, DANIEL AND STEPHANIE BINYA. UH, WE ARE HERE, [01:40:01] UM, REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A TWO-STORY RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE ON A VACANT LOT AT 1 1 4 DEBERRY. WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO, FIRST AND FOREMOST, IS GO THROUGH THE PLANS BRIEFLY IN THAT I'VE GOT A POWERPOINT SLIDE THAT I'D LIKE TO, UH, UH, GO FOR AND REVIEW WITH YOU. THIS IS, UH, THE SITE PLANNED AND, UH, THIS, UH, THIS SITE PLAN HERE IS ON A PARALLELOGRAM, UH, SHAPED LOT. AND, UH, THIS IS, UH, WHAT WE'VE DESIGNED TO FIT WITHIN THE, UH, YOU KNOW, AS BEST AS WE COULD TO FIT WITHIN THIS, THE SETBACKS. SO WE HAVE A 14 FOOT EASEMENT, UH, ON THE FRONT UTILITY EASEMENT. UH, WE'VE GOT A 20 FOOT SEAT, UH, FOOT, UH, SETBACK ON THE BACK AND ON THE, UH, SIDES, FIVE FOOT, UH, SET EASEMENT. THEN WE HAVE A 10 FOOT PRIVATE SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT, UH, WHERE THE SEWER, UH, THE PROPOSED SEWER LINE WILL, UH, BE, UH, EXCAVATED. SO WE CAN GO TO THE NEXT PAGE, PLEASE. OF COURSE. THIS IS THE, UH, IT IS A TWO STORY STRUCTURE. WE'VE GOT THE FIRST FLOOR AND THE SECOND FLOOR. PRETTY BASIC, UH, LAYOUT. OF COURSE, WE'VE GOT THE ELEVATIONS AND THE DOOR AND WINDOW SCHEDULES, AND OUR ROOF PLAN AND CONSTRUCTION DETAILS. YEAH, GO AHEAD. YEAH. OKAY, GREAT. GREAT. OKAY. SO THE, UM, AGAIN, THESE, THE STIPULATIONS HERE ARE NUMBERED ONE THROUGH EIGHT. AND WHAT WE'VE DONE HERE, UH, WE'VE, UH, ADDED THE STIPULATIONS, UH, AND RELATIVE, UH, IMAGES AND SLIDES THAT PERTAIN TO THE, TO THE STIPULATIONS. SO ITEM NUMBER ONE IS THAT THE APPLICANT, OF COURSE, INCORPORATES PROPOSED MASS AND SKILL CONSISTENT WITH THE GUIDELINES. NEW CONSTRUCTION, PARTICULARLY INCORPORATED OVERALL BUILDING WITHIN RANGE OF BAYS IS COMPATIBLE WITH SURROUNDING HISTORIC STRUCTURES NOTED IN FINDING GENE. THIS RIGHT HERE IS AN AERIAL VIEW. OKAY? WHAT THE MOCKUP OF WHAT THE ACTUAL, UH, HOME WOULD SIT WITHIN THE, THE BOUNDARIES. AND AGAIN, WHAT I DID HERE IS I, UH, TRACED OUT THE PARALLELOGRAM SHAPED LOT ALONG WITH THE RESPECTIVE SETBACKS, AND THEN PUT THE PROPERTY, UM, THE, THE PROPOSED HOME WITHIN THE, UH, WITHIN THE PROPERTY. THIS IS THE BUILDING HEIGHTS OF SURROUNDING STRUCTURES IN RELATION TO, UM, THE PROPOSED MASSING SCALE. I WANTED TO POINT OUT HERE THAT THE PROPOSED HOME THAT WE ARE, UH, PROPOSING TO BUILD IS 27 FOOT IN HEIGHTS. AND IF YOU'LL LOOK ACROSS THE, UH, POWERPOINT SLIDE, WE'VE GOT BUILDINGS THAT ARE 27 32 FOOT HEIGHT, UH, 28, 25, AND WE FEEL THAT, UH, WE ARE WITHIN, UM, THE, THE BUILDING HEIGHTS OF SURROUNDING STRUCTURES. ITEM NUMBER TWO REFERENCES THE TYPE OF, UM, STANDING SEAM ROOF, 18 TO 21 INCHES SEAMS THAT ARE ONE TO TWO INCHES APART. AND SO IF YOU LOOK AT THE BOTTOM ONE WITH THE RED HIGHLIGHTED AREA, YOU'LL SEE THAT IT'S, UH, IT IS FLAT, IT'S SMOOTH, IT DOESN'T HAVE ANY RIBS OR STRIATIONS. UH, THAT'S THE INTENDED MATERIAL THAT WE ARE PROPOSING TO USE. ITEM NUMBER THREE, UH, THAT THE APPLICANT CONFIRMS, UH, WHAT DOOR MATERIAL WOULD BE USED. UH, THIS IS AN ANDERSON TYPE WINDOW, UH, A DOOR, I APOLOGIZE. AND THIS IS A STRAIGHT LINE, 1 0 2, UH, UH, DOOR. AND THIS, OF COURSE, THIS DOOR HERE WOULD BE THE SAME FOR THE REAR DOORS AND THE TOP BALCONY DOORS AS WELL. UH, WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THE WINDOWS THAT ARE WOOD OR ALUMINUM COLLIDE WINDOW, THAT'S CONSISTENT WITH STAFF'S, UH, RECOMMENDATIONS. THIS WINDOW HERE, I ACTUALLY PLACED A PHONE CALL TO THE ANDERSON COMPANY, AND I DISCUSSED THE PROJECT AND THE HISTORICAL, UH, DISTRICT IN NATURE OF WHAT WE WERE PLANNING TO DO. AND THIS IS WHAT THEY RECOMMENDED. THEY SAID, THIS IS ONE OF THE, UM, HISTORICAL, YOU KNOW, UH, RECOMMENDED TYPE WINDOWS. THIS IS A TRUE WOOD WINDOW, AND IT IS CLADDED IN FABRICS MATERIAL, UH, NOT AN ALUMINUM, BUT THE FABRICS MATERIAL. THIS IS, [01:45:01] UH, I'VE BEEN ASKED WHAT, WHAT IS FABRICS? AND, UH, THIS IS A MATERIAL, UM, IT'S A, THE TWO TIMES STRONGER IS VINYL PERFORMS WELL WHEN EXPOSED TO EXTREME HEAT AND TEMPERATURES, IT WON'T FADE, FLAKE, BLISTER PILL. UH, IT'S MADE OF RECLAIMED FIBER, WOOD FIBERS AND THERMOPLASTIC POLYMERS. IT FUSED TOGETHER. SO I THINK THIS IS A, AN EXCELLENT CHOICE. OH, SORRY ABOUT THAT. MM-HMM. ITEM NUMBER FIVE, THAT THE APPLICANT AMENDS A PROPOSED FENESTRATION PROFILE TO INCORPORATE WINDOWS THAT FEATURE A ONE OVER ONE PROFILE. AND THIS SLIDE HERE DEMONSTRATE THAT WE HAVE, UH, WORKED DILIGENTLY AND MAKING SURE THAT WE HAVE A ONE OVER ONE, UH, THE TOP RIGHT PHOTO WHERE IT HAS THE REAR EAST ELEVATION. THE REASON WE DON'T HAVE A WINDOW DIRECTLY UNDERNEATH THE BALCONY JUST LEFT TO THE, UH, EXTERIOR DOORS IS BECAUSE WE HAVE A KITCHEN THERE. AND THEN THE PICTURE TO THE BOTTOM, UH, LEFT, THAT IS A GARAGE. WE'VE GOT TWO WINDOWS THAT, UH, ANTA NOT ON A 1 0 1 CONDITION. . OKAY. THANK YOU. MM-HMM, , UH, ITEM NUMBER, UH, SIX, UH, THAT THE MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT BE SCREENED FROM VIEW, AND SO THE MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT WILL BE BEHIND THE HOME. AND, UH, ITEM NUMBER SEVEN, THAT THE APPLICANT MEETS ALL SETBACK STANDARDS AS REQUIRED BY CITY ZONING AND ATTAIN A VARIANCE FROM THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS IF APPLICABLE. SO WE HAVE BEEN IN COMMUNICATION WITH THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS. AND THE SECOND PAGE HERE, THIS IS OUR APPLICATION NUMBER, UH, WE'VE SUBMITTED FOR AN APPLICATION FOR, FOR THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS. OKAY, THANK YOU. UH, THE LAST ITEM IS ARCHEOLOGY AND, UM, THAT AN ARCHEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATION IS REQUIRED IF EXCAVATION IS NECESSARY. AND WE'VE BEEN IN CONTACT WITH THE SOUTH TEXAS ARCHEOLOGICAL RESEARCH SERVICES, LLC, UM, WHO WE PROPOSE, UH, WE INTEND TO, UH, BRING ON TO HELP US WITH HISTORICAL, I'M SORRY, WITH THE ARCHEOLOGICAL, UM, UH, SITUATION OF THE PROPERTY. SO I FEEL THAT, UH, WE HAVE DONE OUR DUE DILIGENCE TO ADDRESS EVERY ONE OF THE STIPULATIONS, UH, THAT STAFF HAS, UM, REQUESTED. AND SO, UM, I'M OPEN FOR YOUR QUESTIONS, MR. CHAIR. I HAVE A QUESTION. OKAY. THANK YOU. UH, WE HAVE SOME CI CITIZENS TO BE HEARD AND THEN, UH, SOME VOICEMAILS. AND THEN WE'LL GET TO, UH, COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS, BARBARA HEL. AND HERE'S THE, UH, GOOD EVENING. UH, MY NAME IS BARBARA WHIT HOWELL AND I'M HERE, UH, REPRESENTING THE RIVER ROAD HISTORIC DISTRICT RESOURCES COMMITTEE, A-K-A-A-R-A-R-C FOR RIVER ROAD. UM, THE RIVER ROAD HISTORIC RESOURCES COMMITTEE SUPPORTS THE OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION STAFF. RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING BUILDING AN ENTRANCE ORIENTATION AND BUILDING MASS FORM. WE HAVE MET WITH THE APPLICANTS, UH, FOR THE LAST, UH, TWO YEARS ACTUALLY, UH, COMING NEXT MONTH. AND THE CURRENT CONTENT OF THEIR APPLICATION BROUGHT UP SOME CONCERNS, BUT WE HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO, UM, GET A RESPONSE FROM THE APPLICANT FOR THIS, THIS CURRENT, UH, TIME AND PLAN FOUR ITEMS REMAIN PROBLEMATIC, PROBLEMATIC FOR THE COMMITTEE SETBACKS, LANDSCAPE PLAN APPROVAL, DRAINAGE, CONSTRUCTION SITE SECURITY, THE RIVER ROAD NEIGHBORHOOD HISTORIC RESOURCES COMMITTEE PROPOSES APPROVAL WITH THE FOLLOWING FOUR STIPULATIONS. ONE IS THE DENIAL OF THE FIVE TO 10 FOOT REQUEST SHOWN ON THE CURRENT PLAN. WE WEREN'T CLEAR ABOUT WHAT THAT MEASUREMENT WAS BECAUSE IT WASN'T CLEAR TO US ON THE PLAN. UH, IT'S ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE PRIMARY RESIDENCE AND IT VIOLATES CITY CODES AND NEGATIVELY IMPACTS THOSE HISTORIC HOMES TO THE EAST OF PROPOSED NEW CONSTRUCTION. AND I'M ASSUMING THAT'S THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, UM, APPLICATION THAT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT THAT JUST PRESENTED THE APPLICANT STIPULATION TWO SUBMITTAL OF LANDSCAPING PLAN FOR APPROVAL THAT INCLUDES HOMEOWNER, PLANT, AND MAINTAIN SCREENING FEATURES OF HEIGHT TO MITIGATE THE NEGATIVE IMPACT OF THE PROPOSED STRUCTURE ON EXISTING HISTORIC HOMES. THE CURRENT PLANT PLAN SHOWS THREE EXISTING TREES WITH RED, THE XS, DO YOU HAVE THAT ON THERE? OKAY. OH, OH, I CAN'T SEE IT. OH, THAT'S, THAT'S FINE. YOU SEE THE BIG RED XS ANYWAY, . UM, AND THESE TREES DON'T EXIST ON THE, ON THE PROPERTY NEXT TO THIS BUILDING. UH, THE PROPOSED THREE, UH, BUSHES [01:50:01] THAT ARE TO THE RIGHT OF THAT, THEY'RE IN YELLOW, A LITTLE BIT ON THE PERIMETER, WILL NOT SCREEN THE VIEW FROM THE SECOND FLOOR PORCH INTO THE NEIGHBOR'S YARD. STIPULATION THREE, MITIGATE WATER RUNOFF FROM PROPOSED NEW CONSTRUCTION TO PREVENT NEGATIVE IMPACT ON ADJACENT HISTORIC HOMES. AND THAT'S TWO A, THE PICTURE NUMBER, THE DRIVEWAY, AND ALL EXTERIOR PAVED AREAS, UH, UH, NEED TO BE CONSTRUCTED WITH PERVIOUS MATERIALS AND RAINWATER BE CAPTURED ON SITE AND NOT ALLOWED TO SPILL ONTO NEIGHBORHOOD NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES OR SPILL INTO STREETS. AND FOUR WOULD BE, UH, SECURITY LOCKABLE FENCING DURING CONSTRUCTION. WE LOOK FORWARD TO THE ADDITION OF THIS RESIDENCE TO OUR HISTORIC DISTRICT AND NEIGHBORHOOD AS CONSTRUCTION MOVES FORWARD. AND THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I KNOW THIS IS A, A LONG DAY FOR YOU ALL. THANK YOU. OKAY. UM, I HAVE CHRIS CRYSTAL. UM, I HAVE FOUR, OR ACTUALLY THREE PEOPLE THAT HAVE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK. UM, THE MOST TIME WE CAN GIVE YOU IS SIX MINUTES. OKAY. IT'LL BE SIX MINUTES. TWO PEOPLE, RIGHT? SIX MINUTES WITH THE ADDED SPEAKERS. UM, YEP. EDWARD, JUST MAKE SURE YOU SWITCH OVER THE INPUT. HELLO, MY NAME IS CHRIS CRYSTAL. I LOST MY VOICE LAST WEEK AND, UH, BEEN HERE FOR A FEW HOURS NOW. SO BEAR WITH ME IF I TRY TO, UH, UH, WORK THROUGH THIS. UH, I AM DIRECTLY SOUTH OF THE ONE 14 DEBERRY PROJECT. UH, WE'VE BEEN HERE A FEW TIMES. UM, I'M AT 6 7 7 EAST WOODLAWN, UH, DIRECTLY SOUTH. UH, WE'VE BEEN HERE A FEW TIMES AND WE'VE GONE OVER THE KIND OF THIS, I FEEL LIKE IT'S THE SAME ITERATIONS OVER AND OVER AND OVER, AND THE SAME KIND OF THINGS OVER AND OVER AND OVER. UM, IT'S AN UNFORTUNATE SIZED LOT, WHICH I'VE SAID IN THE PAST. AND I'VE ALSO SAID IN THE PAST THAT THESE FOLKS HAVE A RIGHT TO BUILD A HOUSE ON THEIR PROPERTY. IT JUST NEEDS TO HAVE AS LOW IMPACT AS POSSIBLE ON NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES, UH, YOU KNOW, UM, VALUES, COMMUNITY NEIGHBORHOODS, SO ON AND SO FORTH. UM, AND SO I PUT TOGETHER A LITTLE PRESENTATION TODAY TO KIND OF GO OVER WHAT, UH, I'VE SAID IN THE PAST. UH, I TRY TO, UH, UNIFY EVERYTHING AND TO, UM, TO BE AS SUCCINCT AND FOCUSED AS POSSIBLE ON SOME OF THE THINGS I THINK WILL NEGATIVELY IMPACT MYSELF PERSONALLY, AND THEN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, KIND OF AS A WHOLE. SO IF YOU'LL GO TO SLIDE TWO, PLEASE. I HAVE PO UH, JUST PUSH. GOT IT. IT'S ON NOW. I HAVE CONTROL. UH, SO THE BUILDING ENTRANCE, UH, AND ORIENTATION NUMBER ONE ON THE HDRC GUIDELINE, UH, ONE OF THE THINGS IT SAYS IS IN THE EXAMPLE, IT DOESN'T SAY EXPLICITLY IN THE VERBIAGE, BUT IN THE EXAMPLE, UM, AS WHEN THEY, UH, KIND OF SHOW THIS, NOT THAT, UH, IN THE SCENARIOS THEY SAY THAT, UH, A, UH, SIDE FACING BALCONY, UH, CREATES A PRIVACY CONCERN. SO, UM, WITH THAT BEING SAID, THE TWO PIECES OF THIS PUZZLE IS ONE, UM, THE REAR SETBACK DOES, UH, ENCROACH, UM, OVERSTEP THE, UM, SETBACK, UH, WITH THAT FIVE TO 10 FOOT. WE'RE NOT EXACTLY SURE HOW LONG IT IS. IT WASN'T NOTED IN THE, UH, IN THE DESIGN. AND THEN SECONDLY, UM, THERE IS A DIRECT SHOT INTO FOUR NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES, A BIRD'S EYE VIEW, IF YOU WILL, UH, DIRECTLY INTO THOSE BACKYARDS. AND I, I JUST REALLY THINK THAT THE FACT THAT THERE ARE NO OTHER SECOND FLOOR BALCONIES, ESPECIALLY IN THE REAR, UH, TO COMPARE THOSE TWO AND THESE VERY TIGHT KNIT SMALL NEIGHBORHOOD, UH, THE FACT THAT IT CREATES PRIVACY CONCERNS, I THINK THAT THE REAR FACING BALCONY SHOULD BE ELIMINATED ALTOGETHER. UM, AND SO THESE, I'VE LISTED THE PROPERTIES THAT, UH, HAVE THE VIEW, AND THEN I HAVE KIND OF A DIAGRAM HERE SHOWING WHERE IT IS. MY HOUSE IS DIRECTLY SOUTH, UH, MY NEIGHBOR'S, UH, THE NEIGHBOR OVER THERE, AND THEN THE HOUSE ON THE NORTH, WHICH, UH, IS THE ONE THAT ACTUALLY DIVIDED THE LOT AND CREATED A, A BACKYARD INTO A, UM, A SINGLE LOT TO BE BUILT ON. EXCUSE ME. THIS RIGHT HERE IS A DRONE SHOT. THIS IS APPROXIMATELY 15 FEET FROM THE FENCE AND APPROXIMATELY 18 FEET HIGH. IT IS THE BEST EXAMPLE I COULD DO WITH ZERO ZOOM INVOLVED TO SHOW EXACTLY WHAT THE VIEW WOULD BE FROM THE BALCONY TO MY BACKYARD. UH, MY BACKYARD IS CURRENTLY UNDER CONSTRUCTION, SO PLEASE DON'T, UH, PLEASE DON'T JUDGE ME THERE. BUT AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE IS NO CANOPY, UH, THAT IS LISTED ON THE DESIGN PLAN THAT EXISTS. SO THIS WOULD BE THE VIEW FROM THEIR BALCONY INTO OUR BACK PATIO, UH, WHERE I DO HAVE AN OUTDOOR KITCHEN AND WE SPEND A LARGE MAJORITY OF, OF OUR PERSONAL TIME. UH, AND MY NEIGHBORS HAVE THE SAME BASIC DEAL. THEY HAVE A COVERED PATIO AND IT WOULD BE A DIRECT SHOT. UH, IN FRONT OF THEM. THEY ARE, UH, TRINITY KIDS AND THEY ARE RENTERS. THEY HAD NO DESIRE TO COME HERE AND SPEAK TODAY. UH, SO, UH, I APOLOGIZE FOR THEIR ABSENCE. UH, GOOD KIDS THOUGH, THEY DON'T BOTHER ME EVEN THOUGH THEY'RE FOUR COLLEGE KIDS. OVERALL MASS, THIS IS A BIG ONE FOR ME. UH, THE BIGGEST PART OF THIS IS THERE SEEMS TO BE A LOT, AND I DON'T KNOW A HUNDRED PERCENT THIS COULD [01:55:01] BE PER OR, UH, PERVIOUS MATERIAL, BUT IT LOOKS IMPERVIOUS TO ME AS FAR AS THE, UH, DRIVEWAY, THE SIDEWALKS, THE PATIOS, ALL THE THINGS. IT LOOKS LIKE IT TAKES UP, WELL, MORE THAN 50% OF THE TOTAL LOT. UH, AND WHAT I'VE GOT IS A FLOODING CONCERN. SO THE NEXT FEW SLIDES HERE, UM, I DON'T HAVE THE TIME. I WANNA MAKE SURE I DON'T GO OVER HERE. CAN'T SEE IT. SORRY. OH, WOW. I'M RUNNING OUTTA TIME. I'LL SPEED UP. UM, SO, UM, THE REAL REAR FACING BALCONY AND SOME OF THE OTHER STUFF EXCEEDS THAT. UM, AND THEN ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS IS A, IS A ISSUE THAT I TAKE AND THAT IS THE, UH, MIX OF THE ROOFING MATERIALS. I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE STANDING SEAM AND THE ARCHITECTURAL, UH, OR THE, UH, ASPHALT SHINGLES ON THE ROOF. AND THEN THERE WAS A FRONT FENCE, UM, IN PLACE AT ONE POINT, BUT IT'S GONE. SO I WAS KIND OF CURIOUS ABOUT THAT. UM, THE GARAGE IS ONE OF THE BIGGEST PROBLEMS. IF THAT GARAGE WERE ELIMINATED OR UH, TURNED INTO A DETACHED GARAGE, YOU COULD MOVE THE PROJECT, UH, A LITTLE BIT NORTH AND HELP SOME OF THE FLOODING THAT I'M GONNA ALLUDE TO HERE. THIS IS AFTER A DECENT RAIN. IT'S NOT CRAZY, IT WASN'T A FLOOD SITUATION, BUT IT HAPPENS ALMOST EVERY TIME IT RAINS. I AM DOWNHILL FROM THIS PROPERTY. UM, EVERYTHING FROM THIS PROPERTY AND SOUTH, AND THEN EAST HEADS TO THE SAN ANTONIO RIVER. SO, UH, PERVIOUS MATERIAL AND A LARGE, UH, STRUCTURE WILL, UM, WILL BLOCK HOW MUCH TIME WAS MINUTE. GOT IT. NOW I'M, NOW I'M ROCKING AND ROLLING. SO YOU CAN SEE HERE THE I'M COLORBLIND, SO I APOLOGIZE. THE LIGHT BLUE THING, UH, THAT STARTS AT THE PROJECT, UH, COMES DOWN MY HOUSE IS IN THAT DIRECT PATH. THIS IS THE WATER FLOW AND LITERALLY HOW IT FLOWS FROM OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. AND THEN THE PURPLE OR, OR BLUE OR WHATEVER THAT RIDE IS, THAT'S THE SAN ANTONIO RIVER. AND EVERYTHING FLOWS FROM 2 81 FROM THE INTERSECTION OF, OF, OF ST. MARY'S AND 2 81 BASICALLY, UH, SOUTH AND SOUTHEAST TO THE RIVER. UH, SO THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT AS WE COVER UP DIRT, UH, THAT WE UNDERSTAND WHERE IS THIS WATER GONNA GO, UH, WHENEVER WE DO IT. AND PART OF MY PROBLEM IS THE FACT THAT RIGHT NOW ALL THE WATER RUNS INTO THE FRONT OF MY HOUSE. I'VE CONTACTED 3 1 1, I'VE DONE EVERYTHING I CAN DO TO GET THEM TO HELP ME WITH THE DRAINAGE. UH, IT HAS NOT, UH, HELPED, BUT, UM, AS EVERYTHING THAT THAT HAPPENS NORTH OF ME UPHILL FROM ME, IS GOING TO AFFECT, UH, MORE AND MORE FOR FLOODING. AND THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS I TAKE, UH, ISSUE WITH THIS, UM, RIGHT HERE. UM, UH, BARBARA WAS KIND ENOUGH TO, UH, ALLUDE TO THIS A SECOND AGO, BUT THE THREE TREES THAT SHOW CANOPY, THAT SHOW SOME SORT OF, UH, PRIVACY SHADE, WHATEVER IT IS, THEY DON'T EXIST. AND THEN THE BIG POINT I WANNA MAKE WAS, UM, THEY LISTED THESE AS RED TIPPED FILLIN TREES, I THINK. I CAN'T REMEMBER WHAT THEY WERE. UH, BUT REGARDLESS, THIS IS A TEMPORARY SOLUTION, A NATURAL SOLUTION, IF YOU WILL. AND I DON'T NECESSARILY AGREE WITH IT. AND HERE'S WHY THOSE THINGS. I JUST LOOKED UP THAT PLANT 'CAUSE I NEVER HEARD OF IT. AM I OUT OF TIME? OH, THAT PLANT NEEDS FULL, UH, SUN. IT IS JUST NORTH OF A GIANT SIX FOOT FENCE. IT'LL NEVER GET SUN, IT'LL NEVER WORK. IT'LL DIE. SO THAT'S MY TIME, I GUESS. , THANK YOU VOICEMAILS. HI, GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS CAMERON CARR. I LIVE AT 2 0 9 LINDELL PLACE IN RIVER, IN THE RIVER ROAD NEIGHBORHOOD. I'M CALLING ON CASE NUMBER 2 0 2 3 DASH 4 3 7. THE ADDRESS, ONE 14 BEARD. UM, THE MAJOR CONCERN FOR ME IS THE REAR FACING BALCONY, UH, FACING THE ADJACENT, UH, NEIGHBOR AND, UH, THE SETBACK AND UTILITY EASEMENT CAUSING THE PRIVACY ISSUES WITH A SHARED FENCE, UH, OF MINE. UM, THE SIZE AND SCALE OF THE CONSTRUCTION SEEMS TO BE WAY OUT OF LINE FOR A LOT OF THAT SIZE IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND, UM, POTENTIALLY CAUSING FLOODING ISSUES, UM, ON THAT, UH, STREET WAY. UM, JUST SIMPLY, UM, CONCERNED WITH THE OVERALL SIZE OF THIS PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION DOES NOT SEEM TO FIT ON THE LOT, UH, SIZE AND WITHIN OUR BLOCK OF SIMILAR SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. PLEASE CALL ME IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. MY NUMBER'S 2 1 0 8 4 6 5 2. MY NAME IS JIMMY KENNEDY, 5 0 9 RIVER ROAD, ABOUT ITEM NUMBER 18 1 1 4 DEBERRY STREET AND THE RIVER ROAD NEIGHBORHOOD. I'M AGAINST THE APPLICATION APPLICANT RECEIVING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS [02:00:02] AT THIS TIME, THE HDRC COMMITTEE HAS MADE ITSELF PERFECTLY CLEAR THAT A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS WILL BE GIVEN WHEN ALL THE STIPULATIONS ARE MET. THE STIPULATIONS HAVE NOT BEEN MET. THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSIONERS. MY NAME IS PATRICIA PRT. I LIVE AT 7 33 EAST WOODLAWN IN THE RIVER ROAD HISTORIC DISTRICT. I ADDRESS YOU TO EXPRESS MY OPPOSITION TO ANY FURTHER APPROVALS OF CASE 2023 DASH 2 57 AT 1 1 4 DEBERRY IN THE RIVER ROAD HISTORIC DISTRICT AND HOPE THAT THE ACTION YOU TAKE TODAY IS TO DENY APPROVAL UNTIL ALL OF THE STIPULATIONS OUTLINED BY OHP STAFF AND COMMISSIONERS ARE MET BY THE PROPONENT. THIS CASE HAS COME BACK REPEATEDLY TO THE COMMISSION AND SOME RECOMMENDATIONS HAVE BEEN IMPLEMENTED BY THE PROPONENT, BUT MANY ARE STILL OUTSTANDING. TO CONTINUE TO TAKE THE TIME OF STAFF, COMMISSIONERS AND THE PUBLIC IS ABUSIVE TO THE PROCESS. I OBJECT ESPECIALLY TO THE MASSING AND SCALE OF THE PROPOSED STRUCTURE. THE PROPONENT HAS BEEN INSTRUCTED REPEATEDLY TO REDUCE THE OVERALL STRUCTURE SIZE TO COMPLY WITH HISTORIC GUIDELINES FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION, AND ALSO IMPORTANTLY, THE STRUCTURE IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE MASSING AND SCALE OF HISTORIC RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES FOUND WITHIN THE RIVER ROAD DISTRICT. SPECIFICALLY WITH REGARD TO ARCHITECTURAL FORM, AS YOU KNOW, RIVER ROAD IS A DISTRICT FEATURING SMALL BUNGALOWS WITH VERY FEW ONE AND A HALF STORY STRUCTURES AND EVEN FEWER TWO STORY STRUCTURES. WHILE THE PROPONENT CAN BUILD A TWO STORY STRUCTURE UNTIL THEY REDUCE THE MASSING SCALE, ET CETERA. SO ITS NOT OVERPOWER ALL OF THE OTHER BUNGALOWS ON THE SIDES AND REAR IT IS INAPPROPRIATE AND MUST BE DENIED. IF NOT FOR THE FACT THAT I HAD HAKI, I WOULD BE THERE IN PERSON TODAY TO THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE TO OUR HISTORIC COMMUNITY. HAPPY HOLIDAYS BE YOU AND I AND I REPEAT PLEASE DENY ANY FURTHER APPROVALS UNTIL ALL STIPULATIONS ARE MET. THANK YOU. YES, THIS IS SETH TEAL. I RESIDE AT 1 1 3 LINDELL PLACE, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 7 8 2 1 2. THAT'S IN THE RIVER HISTORIC DISTRICT. I'M CALLING IN REGARDS TO CASE NUMBER 2023 DASH 4 3 7, WHICH IS 1 1 4 DEBERRY. UH, I WANNA STATE THAT I'M OPPOSED, UH, TO THIS, UH, NEW PROJECT. I THINK THE, THE SIZE RELATIVE TO THE LOT, THE ENCROACHMENTS, UH, ON THE EASEMENTS, UH, AND SETBACKS, UM, ARE AN ISSUE. THE FRONT FACING GARAGE IS AN ISSUE, UM, AND THE BALCONY APPEARING INTO NEIGHBOR'S YARDS ALSO AN ISSUE FOR ME AS WELL AS, UH, SOME OF THE MATERIALS SELECTED FOR THE PROJECT. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, UH, YOU CAN REACH ME AT 2 1 0. THAT CONCLUDES OUR VOICEMAILS. THANK YOU. THE APPLICANT. COME BACK UP PLEASE. AND DO YOU HAVE ANY, UH, COMMENTS ON WHAT YOU'VE HEARD FROM THE, UH, COMMUNITY? WE DO. UH, THE POWERPOINTS LEFT. I'LL INTRODUCE MYSELF. MY NAME IS STEPHANIE PINA. I'M THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AT ONE 14 DUKE AREA. MY HUSBAND'S WORK, SO HE IS NOT ABLE TO BE HERE. THANK YOU. OKAY, SO THIS IS THE LANDSCAPE PLAN AND TOTALLY UNDERSTANDING, UH, YOU KNOW, UM, SOME OF THE NEIGHBOR'S CONCERNS HERE. SO THIS IS THE LANDSCAPE, UH, PLAN THAT WE PROPOSE. UM, I'M GONNA GO AHEAD AND GO AHEAD AND TELL THE CHASE, OKAY, THIS IS WHAT THE, THE PROPERTY WOULD LOOK LIKE AFTER THE LANDSCAPE PLAN. OKAY, SO THE FRONT, WE'VE GOT SHRUBS ON THE RIGHT, SHRUBS ON THE LEFT. UM, UH, I HAVE A BACKGROUND IN BIOLOGY AND THIS PLANT HERE, RED TIP FATIA. OKAY. THEY GO UP TO 20 FEET SHADE, SOME SHADE, FULL SUN IS NOT REQUIRED AND THEY STILL GROW. OKAY? OUR PLAN AND OUR INITIATIVE IS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE PROVIDE PRIVACY FOR EVERYBODY AND EVERYONE INVOLVED. AS YOU CAN SEE AT THE WEST VIEW, THE FRONT ELEVATION. WE'RE TAKING CARE OF THAT RIGHT THERE ON THE BALCONY ON THE PICTURE TO THE RIGHT. AND, UM, TOP RIGHT BALCONY, VIEWING SOUTH WHERE MR. CHRIS, UH, CHRIS WELLS TALKING THAT, YOU KNOW, WE'RE GONNA HAVE A DIRECT VIEW INTO HIS LOT, NOT WITH THE RED TAPES. THAT'S OUR, THAT'S OUR METHOD AND OUR WAY TO PROVIDE SCREENING AT THE BOTTOM. UH, LEFT. THIS IS VIEWING. UM, CAN WE SCROLL UP A LITTLE? MOVE THE IMAGES, UH, CAN WE REDUCE THE SIZE MAYBE SO WE CAN SEE THE LABELS. HERE WE GO RIGHT THERE. BALCONY VIEWING NORTH AND EAST. OKAY. THERE ARE TREES, THERE ARE, [02:05:01] UM, NEIGHBORS TREES BACK THERE ALREADY. UM, AND WE'RE PREPARED TO PLANT ADDITIONAL SHRUBS, TREES, WHATEVER WE NEED TO, TO, UH, PROVIDE ADDITIONAL PRIVACY TO THAT AREA. AND THEN YOU'VE GOT THE NORTHEAST VIEW IN THE BACKSIDE OF THE HOME. AGAIN, THIS VIEW IS A DIRECT SHOT INTO, UH, MR. CHRIS, UH, CHRIS WILL'S LOT. SO YOU CAN SEE THAT, UH, WITH THESE RED TIPS AND FATIA, RED TIP FAT TONY, IS THAT WE HAVE DONE OUR DUE DILIGENCE AND MAKING SURE THAT WE TAKE CARE OF THE PRIVACY AND RESPECT IN THE NEIGHBOR'S, UH, PRIVACIES. OKAY. AND THIS IS THE RED HIP FATIA SHADING ELEMENT PROVES PRIVACY, DECREASES NOISE, AND IT CAN, HAS A 20 FOOT HEIGHT, UH, UH, POTENTIAL. AND, UH, I THINK THE, UH, OWNER HERE WOULD LIKE TO, UH, SAY A FEW WORDS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME THIS AFTERNOON. UM, AGAIN, MY NAME IS STEPHANIE, AND IT SOUNDS LIKE THE CONCERNS THAT BARBARA BROUGHT UP, SHE HAD FOUR THINGS THAT SHE MENTIONED. UM, THERE, YOU KNOW, WE'RE BEING, THEY'RE BEING ADDRESSED AND YOU, YOU ASKED FOR CERTAIN THINGS TO BE ADDRESSED AND, AND JIM HAS COME BACK ONE FOR ONE. SO I FEEL LIKE THE THINGS THAT THE COMMITTEE HAD RECOMMENDED LAST TIME, WE HAVE SOMETHING TO, TO GO RIGHT TO SHOW YOU WE'RE WORKING ON THAT WE'RE GOING TO COMPLY WITH WHAT YOU'RE ASKING FOR. UM, FOR EXAMPLE, THE SETBACKS WHERE WE HAVE AN APPLICATION FOR THE, UM, THE VARIANCE COMMITTEE ALREADY RUNNING, UM, AS FAR AS SOMETHING BARBARA BROUGHT UP, SECURITY WITH A LOCK FRONT STRING CONSTRUCTION OF, OF COURSE. I MEAN, I, THAT'S, YOU KNOW, THAT MAKES SENSE. SO THAT SHOULDN'T BE ANYTHING TO KEEP US FROM PROCEEDING, UH, FORWARD. UM, THE RUNOFF THAT MR. CRYSTAL WAS TALKING ABOUT, UH, YOU KNOW, OF COURSE ANY HOUSE THAT'S BUILT THERE NEEDS TO HAVE THE, YOU KNOW, THE INFORMATION BY THE EXPERTS THAT ARE GONNA BE BUILDING, PUTTING THE PLAN TOGETHER TO, TO NOT HAVE THAT HAPPEN. BUT, UM, BUT, UH, WHAT I'M TRYING TO SAY IS THAT ANY HOUSE BUILT THERE WOULD, WOULD HAVE AN ISSUE. SO THE EXPERTS ARE THE ONES TO ADDRESS IT, NOT JUST SAYING, OH, I'M WORRIED ABOUT IT, BUT WE NEED, YOU KNOW, THE, THE BUILDER TO WORK WITH THE PEOPLE THAT ARE, YOU KNOW, GONNA BE ADDRESSING THAT BASED ON THEIR TRAINING. UM, SO I FEEL LIKE THAT WE'VE, WE'VE GONE, WE'VE DONE OUR PART TO, UM, ADDRESS THE ISSUES THAT YOU HAD FOR US LAST TIME AND THE CONCERNS THAT THE NEIGHBORS HAVE BROUGHT UP ALSO HAVE SAID THAT THEY WANT THE CONCERNS TO BE ADDRESSED. AND, AND WE HAVE. SO I'M HOPING THAT, UM, YOU CAN SEE THAT WE'RE, WE'RE TRYING TO COMPLY WITH THE THINGS THAT YOU HAD ASKED FOR. SO ON A MORE, YOU KNOW, PERSONAL NOTE, LIKE OTHER PEOPLE HAVE SAID, I AM A HOME HOME OWNER IN SEIN, TEXAS. MY HUSBAND COMMUTES, UH, TO SAN ANTONIO. WE HAVE, HE HAS AN HOUR DRIVE IN, AN HOUR DRIVE BACK, WORKS OVER, YOU KNOW, 70 HOURS A WEEK. UM, HE'S A PHYSICIAN. I'M A SPEECH PATHOLOGIST. WE'RE TRYING TO MOVE INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, LIVE THERE, BE PART OF THE COMMUNITY. HE WORKS IN SAN ANTONIO ALREADY, AND I THINK SOMEONE ELSE BROUGHT UP THAT WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON THIS PROJECT FOR A LONG TIME AND BE GREAT TO ACTUALLY LIVE ON OUR PROPERTY. SO, UM, I GUESS I JUST WANTED TO SAY, I FEEL LIKE, YOU KNOW, WE WE'RE COMPLYING WITH WHAT YOU'RE ASKING FOR, AND I WOULD LIKE TO LIVE IN A HOUSE THAT'S SAFE WITH A GARAGE THAT I CAN LOCK WHEN MY HUSBAND'S ON CALL. AND I, I FEEL LIKE I WANT TO BE ABLE TO LIVE IN A HOME WITH A FIRST FLOOR MA FIRST FLOOR MASTER, WHEREAS I AGE AND LIVE ON THIS PROPERTY AND BECOME PART OF THIS NEIGHBORHOOD THAT I'M ABLE TO LIVE DOWNSTAIRS AND NOT, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE OF WHAT PEOPLE ARE MENTIONING, MAYBE CREEP IN ON A, A HOUSE SIZE AND PUT MYSELF UPSTAIRS. YOU KNOW, I JUST, AS A HOMEOWNER, THIS, THAT'S MY DREAM, TO BE ABLE TO LIVE IN A SAFE PLACE, BE SAFE IN MY HOME FOR YEARS AND YEARS AND YEARS TO COME. AND I FEEL LIKE THE, THE PLANS THAT WE HAVE, UH, ARE GOOD FOR ME AND THE PLANS THAT WE HAVE HAVE COMPLIED WITH WHAT YOU'VE ASKED FOR. THANK YOU. UH, QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION, MR. CHAIR? YEAH, I, I HAVE A QUESTION. YES. COMMISSIONER CERVANTES, UM, TO THE APPLICANT, WILL YOU GET RID OF THE BALCONY? UH, WHAT WAS THAT NOW? I'M SORRY. WILL YOU REMOVE THE BALCONY FROM YOUR PLAN? SO THE HOMEOWNERS STARTED THIS PROJECT TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION. THEY STARTED THIS PROJECT, I BELIEVE IN APRIL OF 2022. AND THE RENDERINGS PLANS AND OTHER ARCHITECTS AND DESIGNERS THAT THEY HAVE WORKED WITH, [02:10:01] THEY HAVE GONE, UH, I GUESS SPENT COUNTLESS OF HOURS AND TIMES JUST TRYING TO IMAGINE WHAT A BACKYARD WOULD LOOK LIKE. OKAY. AND I FEEL BASED ON KNOWING THEM AND THEM COMING TO OUR OFFICES AND, AND PLANNING EVERYTHING OUT, THAT THIS, BASED ON THEIR FAMILY, THEIR, THAT THIS IS THE BEST FIT, BEST CASE DESIGN FOR THEM. AND THEY'VE COME TO ME AND SAY, JIM, THIS IS A MUST. OUR BALCONY IS SOMETHING THAT IS JUST A MUST. WHAT ELSE CAN WE DO TO ADD, TO PROVIDE PRIVACY, TO MAKE SURE THAT WE, YOU KNOW, UNDERSTAND THE CONCERNS OF OUR NEIGHBORS? OKAY. AND BUILD SOMETHING THAT IS, YOU KNOW, SAFE, SECURE, PRIVATE. AND SO TO YOUR ANSWER, THAT IS THEIR REQUEST THAT THIS BE RESPECTED, AND THIS WOULD BE JUST ONE OF THE REQUESTS THAT THEY REALLY WANT IN THEIR HOME. I, I STILL DIDN'T GET AN ANSWER. SO THE ANSWER WOULD BE YES, WE, NO, WE WOULD NOT BE, UH, WILLING TO, AT THIS POINT DO AWAY AND ELIMINATE THE BALCONY IN ITS TOTALITY. COMMISSIONER. OKAY. THANK YOU. THAT'S AN ANSWER. YES. COMMISSIONER GIBBS. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. UM, STAFF, CAN YOU GO TO SLIDE 16 PLEASE? ON THE POWERPOINT OR ON THE POWERPOINT? YES. YES. OKAY. CAN YOU TALK TO MR. SLIDE 16? THAT'S WHAT I'M LOOKING FOR. SO MY QUESTION IS, UM, SO YOU, YOU MENTIONED THE TREES ARE THERE AND THE ONES THAT YOU'RE GOING TO PLANT, YOU MENTIONED, GAVE US INFORMATION THAT YOU HAVE A BACKGROUND IN BIOLOGY. SO MY QUESTION IS, THE NEIGHBORING NEIGHBORS, I MEAN, THE NEIGHBORS ARE COMPLAINING THAT IT'S NOT GONNA BE PRIVACY ISSUE THERE, BUT YOU MENTIONED THAT THESE TREES ARE THERE. SO ARE THESE ALL ACTUAL, OR ARE THEY PROPOSED? OR IS IT A COMBINATION OF BOTH? IT'S A COMBINATION OF BOTH. THEY DO HAVE SOME TREES WITHIN THAT, THAT FENCE LINE. THERE ARE SOME, AND THEY'RE SPACED OUT. OKAY. BUT WE ARE PROPOSING TO EITHER DO THE RED TIP FATIA AS IN ADDITION TO PLANTING TREES. AND SOMETHING THAT, YOU KNOW, WE WOULD MORE BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO DO IS TO PARTNER WITH THEM AND TO BUILD AND TO ADD ADDITIONAL TREES OR WHATEVER WE NEEDED TO FOR THAT SPACE. HOW LONG IS THAT PROCESS? I MEAN, HOW LONG WOULD IT TAKE FOR THE TREES TO GET TO THE HEIGHT? UM, FOR THE PRIVACY? WELL, WHILE IN LIEU OF, WE WOULD ACTUALLY GO WITH THE RED TUBS 'CAUSE THEY'RE VERY FAST GROWING. OKAY. WE WOULD START WITH THE RED TUBS FIRST, BUT WE WOULD, MY PRO, YOU KNOW, WHAT I WOULD PROPOSE IS TO PUT THE RED TIPS DOWN FIRST. THAT'S GONNA AUTOMATICALLY WITHIN, I'M GONNA SAY A COUPLE, TWO, THREE YEARS, THEY'RE GONNA BE VERY, VERY TALL, BUT RIGHT BEHIND THAT PLANT THE TREES SO THEY CAN START, UH, REACHING INTO FULL MATURITY. OKAY. THANK YOU. AND THE SECOND QUESTION IS FOR THE PROPERTY OWNERS. SO MA'AM, IF YOU CAN COME OUT PLEASE. SO, UM, UM, MR. CRYSTAL HAD MENTIONED THE CONCERN ABOUT WATER AND I, AND I HEARD WHAT YOU SAID, AND I, I GET THAT. UM, YOU KNOW, BUT MY QUESTION IS, HAS THAT ISSUE BEEN ADDRESSED OR IS IT BEING ADDRESSED OR IS IT SOMETHING THAT YOU'RE JUST LIKE, HEY, WHATEVER, WHATEVER. I, I MEAN, I JUST ASSUME THAT'S PART OF THE NATURAL PROCESS OF BUILDING IS THAT THAT WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, UH, JUST A CONCERN. I I, YOU KNOW, I'M SORRY THAT THERE'S A LOT OF WATER RUN OFF RIGHT NOW, BUT I HAVE, THERE'S NO PROPERTY UP, THERE'S, THERE'S NOTHING, THERE'S NO BUILDING THERE. SO I LEAVE THAT TO THE, WELL THEN THAT, THAT MEANS THERE'S NO BUILDING GONNA BE CONSTRUCTED. THAT'S REALLY UNFAIR TO SAY THAT I HAVE NO, NO ABILITY TO HAVE A HOUSE BECAUSE IT'S GONNA , I'M SORRY, LET ME, LET ME, LET ME JUST RESTATE THAT I LEAVE THAT WOULD LEAVE THAT TO THE EXPERTS, THE BUILDER THAT KNOWS THAT THAT NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED. I HAVE NO EXPERIENCE WITH FLOOD RUNOFF PERSONALLY. SO THAT'S MY RESPONSE IS I WOULD LEAVE IT TO THE EXPERT TO, BUT UM, AS FAR AS IS THERE A PLAN IN PLACE ALREADY? WELL, I KNOW, BUT THERE'S, THERE WILL BE ONCE THE, THE PLANS GET ONCE THINGS GET GOING. I MEAN, YES. TO, TO, TO ADD TO, TO ADD TO THAT THE INTERNATIONAL 2021 INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL COURTS CODES, UH, I LOVE THE CODES, RESPECT THE CODES, BUT THERE ARE RUNOFF IN GRADING RECOMMENDATIONS. OKAY. AND THAT'S ONE THING THAT WE ARE AUTOMATICALLY GONNA DO. WE'RE GONNA GRADE THE PROPERTY APPROPRIATELY. THE SECOND THING THAT WE WOULD DO THAT WE'VE MENTIONED IN PRIOR MEETINGS BEFORE, IS WE WILL BUILD BURNS, [02:15:02] UM, SWELLS OR WHATEVER WE NEED TO, TO MAKE SURE THAT THE MAJORITY OF THE RUNOFF FROM THIS PROPERTY, INCLUDING RAIN GUTTERS, HOWEVER THAT NEED TO BE, TO DRAIN TOWARDS THE WEST AND 2 81, SO THAT NOTHING GOES BACK TOWARDS THE BACKSIDE OF THE NEIGHBORS. AND THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE COULD CONTROL WITH BERMS AND SWELLS AND LANDSCAPING TO ANSWER. THANK YOU. THAT'S MY TIME. AND THE REST OF MY COMMENTS ARE NOT THANK YOU, SIR. THEIR QUESTIONS, BUT NOT COM I MEAN, THEY'RE COMMENTS, NOT QUESTIONS. SO I'LL WAIT FOR A DISCUSSION. THANK YOU, SIR. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER HOLLAND. JUST TO HELP ME DISTILL, UM, DISTILL THE APPLICATION DOWN IN, IN THE STIPULATION. SO OUT OF STIPULATIONS ONE THROUGH EIGHT, WHICH ONES DO YOU TAKE EXCEPTION TO? IT SOUNDED LIKE EARLIER YOU SORT OF AGREED WITH OR DIDN'T REALLY HAVE AN ISSUE WITH, UM, ANY OF THEM, BUT I, BUT NO, PLEASE, COULD YOU YEAH. POINT OUT WHICH ONES, WHATEVER THE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDED LAST TIME, THE ONE THROUGH EIGHT AND, AND WE'VE COME BACK WITH THE PROPOSAL TO ADDRESS THAT? I DON'T, THAT'S ALL GREAT. SO I DON'T, I DON'T TAKE AN, UH, AN OFFENSE TO ANY OF THOSE OR, OR I'M SORRY. WHATEVER YOU'RE, YOU'RE IN AGREEMENT WITH. I'M IN AGREEMENT WITH WHAT THE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDED LAST TIME THAT WE DO AND WE'RE DOING THAT. YES. OKAY. MR. CHAIR? YES. COMMISSIONER SAVINA. THANK YOU. UM, COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. SO THEN ON ITEM NUMBER ONE, UH, REQUESTING, UM, ADDRESSING THE MASSING YES MA'AM. AND SCALE, HOW WILL THAT BE DONE GOING FORWARD? AS I MENTIONED PREVIOUSLY WHEN I ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, BUT AS I MENTIONED PREVIOUSLY, WE HAVE THE FAMILY HAS WORKED WITH OTHER ARCHITECTS, DESIGNERS, OTHER CONTRACTORS TO COME UP WITH A SOLUTION FOR THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY. AND I FEEL THAT AT WHERE WE ARE TODAY IS WE HAVE MET ALL OF THE STAFF STIPULATIONS AS BEST AS WE CAN. AND SO, SO YOU BELIEVE YOU ARE MEETING IT AS IS? WE DO FEEL BASED ON YES MA'AM. WE DO FEEL THAT WE ARE MEETING THAT STIPULATION. OKAY. AND AND THE REASON WHY IS, UM, THE POWERPOINT, I RECALL SEEING THE DIAGRAMS. OKAY. YES. UH, MY SECOND QUESTION IS GOING BACK TO THE DRAINAGE BECAUSE ALL OF THIS IS VERY, UM, UM, INTEGRATED ALL OF THE DESIGN DECISIONS. SO WHAT DO YOU THINK, UM, FROM THE BACK OF THE LOT TO THE STREET, WHAT DO YOU THINK THAT ELEVATION CHANGE MIGHT BE THAT YOU'LL NEED TO DRAIN TO GET POSITIVE DRAINAGE AWAY FROM THE BACK PROPERTY? LOT TO DO BARRY? IT IT MAY BE SOMEWHERE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OF SIX TO EIGHT INCHES. SIX TO EIGHT INCHES? YES. OKAY. MM-HMM, , UM, I'M GONNA GUESS IT'S, LET'S SAY EIGHT OR 10 INCHES JUST TO BE ON THE SAFE SIDE. SURE. UM, AND SO YOUR FOUNDATION IS ALSO, WHAT ABOUT A FOOT OR TWO ABOVE GRAY? 1414. 1414. YES, SIR. SO SUDDENLY WE'RE ALMOST TWO FEET HIGHER THAN THE HEIGHTS. I MEAN, YOU'RE, I I FEEL LIKE, UM, ONCE YOU BEGIN TO ADDRESS YOUR DRAINAGE WITH GRADING, YOU'RE SUDDENLY MAKING THAT HOUSE TALLER. THE FOUNDATION TO THE PLATE HEIGHTS AREN'T TALLER ALONG WITH THE ROOF, BUT JUST THE EX, YOU KNOW, THE RESULT, THE PRODUCT OF THAT HOUSE RISING ON A GRATED PLINTH ALMOST TO DEAL WITH THE DRAINAGE, THAT'S WHAT'S GOING TO, UM, CAUSE THE HOUSE TO BECOME EVEN BIGGER. THAT SECOND STORY BALCONY EVEN BIGGER. SO, UM, HOW WILL YOU ADDRESS THAT GRADE CHANGE ON YOUR REAR PROPERTY LINE AND YOUR SIDE PROPERTY LINES? SURE. GREAT, GREAT QUESTION. RETAINING WALLS OR, GREAT QUESTION. GREAT QUESTION. SO, YES. AND, AND, UH, SO I'VE BEEN IN TOUCH WITH THE CIVIL ENGINEER WITH THAT PARTICULAR SOILS AND WHAT THAT PROPERTY DOES AND HOW JUST, YOU KNOW, THE SOILS ARE. SO ONE OF THE, UM, CONSIDERATIONS AND OPTIONS. IT IS A CHANGE. AND THE OVERALL HEIGHT DOES INCLUDE THE GRADING AND THE FOUNDATION FOR THAT, UH, FOR THE OVERALL HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING, ACCORDING TO ONE OF MY DRAWINGS IN HERE IN THE PACKAGE, I THINK IT'S FROM THE FOUNDATION. LET'S SEE. ANYWAY, SO THAT, THAT'S ALL I WAS ASKING IS IF THAT WAS TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION. ABSOLUTELY. AND, AND OTHER THINGS THAT WE HAVE DONE TO, UH, MITIGATE, UH, RUNOFF, THOSE KIND OF THINGS IS INSTALLING FRINGE DRAINS TO SOME DEGREE AND ADDING SOME ADDITIONAL GRADING AND DRAIN, HELPING, UH, DIVERT WATER. BUT YOU'LL STILL HAVE AN ELEVATION CHANGE BETWEEN YOUR PROPERTY AND THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY? WE WILL, WE WILL. OKAY. THANK YOU. YES. THANK YOU. UHHUH , MR. CHAIR? YES. COMMISSIONER VELASQUEZ. SIR, SIR? UH, I'M, I WAS LOOKING AT THE DRAWINGS. I'M TRYING TO FIND, [02:20:01] I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHY YOU NEED A VARIANCE. 'CAUSE THE SHEET A THREE, IT SEEMS EVERYTHING'S INSIDE OF THE PROPERTY LINES. WHY, WHY WOULD YOU NEED A VARIANCE? IF YOU LOOK AT THE, UM, THE, THE DRAWING THAT IS, YEAH, SHEET A THREE. IF YOU LOOK AT THE SETBACK, UM, 20 FEET, WE HAVE A DASH LINE ALL THE WAY DOWN THROUGH THE PROPERTY, RIGHT? THERE'S A, WAS A 20 FOOT SETBACK. IF YOU LOOK AT THE PATIO, THAT 20 FOOT SETBACK GOES RIGHT THROUGH THE BACK PART OF THAT PATIO AND BALCONY. SO, SO, SO WHY INITIALLY, UM, DIDN'T THE DESIGN, WHY WASN'T THE SETBACK SEEN AS CRITERIA FOR THE DESIGN? IT WAS, AND I'LL, I'LL POINT THAT OUT. CAN I HAVE THE POWERPOINT AND I JUST REAL QUICKLY JUST, JUST SAY, BECAUSE IT SEEMS THAT THE PATIO OR THE, OR THE BALCONY HAD AN OPTION, UH, ASIDE FROM THE EAST ELEVATION. IT HAD AN EASY OPTION, BUT THE CHOICE WAS TO GO TO THE EAST NECESSITATING VARIANCE, WHICH INCREASES THE MASSING. OKAY. RIGHT. AND SO THIS IS SOMETHING THAT IN ORDER TO FIT A HOME WITHIN THE SETBACKS, THIS IS WHAT I FEEL WE WOULD'VE HAD TO DESIGN. SO WE INITIALLY PROPOSED THIS TO THE OWNER AND TO, UH, OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION STAFF. AND THEY BOTH IMMEDIATELY LOOKED AT THAT AND SAID, NO, THIS WOULD NOT BE SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE FOR THE AREA. AND THE OWNERS THEMSELVES SAID, NO, THIS IS NOT, NOT SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD NOT WANT TO BUILD AND BE HAPPY WITH AS OUR LAST, YOU KNOW, FINAL HOME. AND SO YOU, I MEAN, THAT IS, THAT IS UNDERSTANDING THAT THAT'S, IF THAT'S THE ONLY THING THE PERSON KNEW HOW TO DESIGN, RIGHT? I MEAN, I MEAN, I MEAN, I CAN, I MEAN, I UNDERSTAND THAT IF, IF THE PERSON DOING IT ONLY HAD ONE IDEA, THAT ONE, RIGHT? ABSOLUTELY. AND SO, AND SO TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION TO THAT IS THAT THE OWNERS HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH DIFFERENT COMPANIES, DIFFERENT ARCHITECTS, SINCE APRIL OF 2022. AND WE FEEL THAT THIS IS WHAT WE, WE'VE COME TO. AND, UM, OKAY. THANK YOU, SIR. MM-HMM. , OTHER QUESTIONS? THE COMMISSION, UM, YEAH. DOES THE, DOES THE BALCONY CAUSE THE NEED FOR THE VAR FOR THE, UH, REQUEST FOR VARIANCE? I THINK I SAW A SLIDE WHERE YOU HAD THE BALCONY STICKING OUT OVER AND LET MY FELLOW COMMISSIONER ALREADY COVERED THAT, BUT WHERE, WHERE IT HADN'T READ. YEAH. OKAY. SO IS THAT, WHAT, IS THAT WHERE THE VARIANCES? YES, IT WOULD BE THE 13 FOOT VARIANCE INTO THE 20 FOOT SETBACK. THAT LITTLE TRIANGLE RIGHT THERE. YES. I THINK YOU HAD A SLIDE WHERE IT WAS, WHERE IT WAS WRITTEN IN RED. THAT'S WHERE YES. SO THE BALCONY, THAT OLD BALCONY CAUSING TROUBLE, YOU KNOW? YEAH. YEAH. THERE IT IS. IT'S THAT PORTION OF THE BALCONY THAT IS CAUSING THE VARIANCE. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? IF NOT, DO WE HAVE A MOTION, AT LEAST FOR DISCUSSION, MR. CHAIR? I WOULD MAKE A MOTION YES. TO, TO APPROVE THE APPLICATION WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS. I, I'LL SECOND IT MOTION. AND SECOND, I WOULD LIKE TO ADD AN AMENDMENT TO THAT. OKAY. THAT THE BALCONY BE REMOVED. I WILL SECOND THE AMENDMENT. OKAY. WOULD YOU LIKE TO CLARIFY OR EXPAND COMMISSIONER SAMANTHAS? YEAH. YEAH. THAT, THAT, THAT'S JUST THE, THE BALCONY IS CAUSING PROBLEMS. UH, UH, YOU KNOW, WITH ALL THE NEIGHBORS, UH, I DON'T THINK THERE'S ONE NEIGHBOR THAT DOESN'T AGREE WITH IT AND DOESN'T FEEL INVADED BY IT. I UNDERSTAND THE MITIGATING THAT THEY'RE GONNA TAKE, BUT VEGETATION CAN CHANGE. PEOPLE CAN CUT TREES OUT, PEOPLE CAN CUT BUSHES OUT, BUSHES CAN DIE. UH, AND I THINK THAT BALCONY IS JUST PROBABLY A LITTLE BIT TOO MUCH MORE THAT NEIGHBORHOOD IN THE HOUSES IN THE AREA. SO I THINK JUST, YOU KNOW, I, I LIKE THE MOTION STAFF STIPULATIONS, BUT I, I WOULD ADD THAT THE BALCONY BE REMOVED AS WELL. OKAY. OTHER DISCUSSION? COMMISSION? YES, SIR. VELAZQUEZ, UM, MR. CHAIR? UM, I, I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH, UH, SUBMITTING TO HDRC [02:25:03] BEFORE GOING TO, OR, OR INVESTIGATING THE VARIANCE OR REQUESTING THE VARIANCE WITH A SCHEMATIC. I, I DON'T KNOW HOW IT WORKS IN TERMS OF THE CITY PROTOCOL, WHETHER TO GO TO THE, YEAH, SO THE CODE SPECIFICALLY SAYS THAT THE HCRC IS A RECOMMENDING BODY TO OTHER COMMISSIONS, OTHER COMMISSIONS AND BOARDS. AND SO THAT INCLUDES THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. SO IN THE CASE WHERE, UM, SOMETHING HAS BEEN APPROVED BY THE HCRC THAT REQUIRES A VARIANCE, IT STILL GOES TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, BUT IT WILL GO WITH THE RECOMMENDATION OF THIS BODY, WHICH THEY'RE USUALLY LOOKING FOR IF IT'S AN HISTORIC DISTRICT. BUT NOW, CORY, DOES THAT MEAN THAT IT CAN'T GO TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FIRST WITH THE, WITH THE SCHEMATIC? AND SHOULD IT PASS IT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT THEN COME TO THE HDRC? IT CAN, BUT THERE'S NO REQUIREMENT TO DO IT THAT WAY. OKAY. WELL, THE WAY THAT I UNDERSTAND, THE WAY THAT I WOULD UTILIZE THE PROCESS, WHICH IS THE WAY THAT I UNDERSTAND THE PROCESS, IS THAT YOU WOULD DO THAT FIRST, BECAUSE THEN THE HDRC IS OBSERVING SOMETHING THAT IS WITHIN, WITHIN THE USABLE SPACE IN FULL CONFIDENCE IN, IN THIS CASE, I'D HAVE TO APPROACH IT FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF THE DESIGNER TO HAVE MADE THE DECISION TO DRAW OUTSIDE THE LINES AND THEN FIGURE OUT WHETHER OR NOT HE COULD GET PERMISSION TO DO THAT. SO IT CREATES A CIRCUMSTANCE WHERE IN ORDER TO CONSIDER MASSING, IT WOULD SEEM THAT A PREREQUISITE TO CONSIDERING MASSING WOULD BE WHAT WERE YOU ABLE TO DO WITHIN THE ALLOWABLE, LET'S SAY CUBICLE SPACE OF, OF ALLOWABLE MASSING, WHICH WOULD BE HEIGHT RESPECTIVE OF OTHER HEIGHTS, BUT MOST DEFINITELY THE BOX RELATED TO THE, THE INVISIBLE LINES THAT, THAT ENVELOPE THE BOX. RIGHT. BECAUSE WHEN I, WHEN I LOOK AT THE DESIGN, MR. CHAIR, I, I, I, I MEAN, I CAN'T HELP, BUT, BUT SEE THAT, THAT THE CAR, THE, THE, THE GARAGE IS OUT OF CHARACTER WITH WHAT WE WOULD EXPECT IN, IN TERMS OF A DETACHED GARAGE OR GARAGES WITHIN THE CHARACTER OF A HISTORIC GARAGE, WHICH COULD HAVE BEEN MITIGATED BY A BALCONY, NOT IN THE NORTH, BUT ON THE, ON THAT SIDE. NOW, I'M NOT TRYING TO DESIGN IT, I'M JUST SAYING THAT, THAT, THAT IT APPEARS THAT THE MASSING PROBLEM HAS BEEN CREATED BY NOT BEGINNING WITHIN THE ALLOWABLE BOUNDARIES. YES, SIR. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER SAVINO? UH, YEAH, UH, TO FOLLOW ALONG WITH THAT THOUGHT, UM, I'VE ALWAYS FELT LIKE THE, THE MASSING OF THIS HAS BEEN WAY TOO MUCH. EVEN COMPARING FOOTPRINTS AND HEIGHTS AND WHAT HAVE YOU WITH SURROUNDING BUILDINGS, IT IS REALLY TOO MUCH, ESPECIALLY FOR THE LOT. SO, AND WE'VE IDENTIFIED WHAT THOSE PROBLEMATIC ELEMENTS WERE, AND IT WAS THE GARAGE, THE ATTACHED GARAGE, AND ALSO THE BE BEGIN THE BALCONY FROM THE VERY BEGINNING FOR MONTHS AGO. WE'VE ALL, YOU KNOW, Y'ALL HAVE SPENT QUITE A LOT OF TIME ON THIS. AND, UM, A NUMBER OF US HAVE ALSO OVER A LONG PERIOD OF TIME, SO THERE'S BEEN GOOD EFFORT IN THIS. HOWEVER, THE ESSENTIAL PARTS THAT THE BIG ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM, IF IT WERE, UM, IS THE MASSING, AND IT'S THE GARAGE AND THE BALCONY. NOW I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF, AND THAT IS ON THE CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL THAT WE PROVIDED LAST TIME, THERE WAS AN ADDITIONAL STIPULATION TO BUILD THE GARAGE WITHIN, TO BUILD, WITHIN ZONING THE BASE ZONING DESIGNATION, SETBACKS FOR THE REASON THAT IT WOULD BETTER CONFORM WITH THE HISTORIC DESIGN GUIDELINES, AND THAT STIPULATION HAS DROPPED OFF OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS. CAN YOU EXPLAIN WHAT, WHY THAT IS? YEAH, I WOULD SAY HE'S MEETING THAT STIPULATION. UM, I ACTUALLY DON'T KNOW THAT THE PATIO ALONE IS GONNA TRIGGER A VARIANCE, BUT THAT'S NOT A QUESTION FOR US TO ANSWER. THAT'S USUALLY SOMETHING THAT COMES AT THE TIME OF PERMITTING. UM, I ASSUME THAT YOU'VE GOTTEN THAT DIRECT FEEDBACK FROM A DSD EMPLOYEE. WE'VE ACTUALLY BEEN HAD, WE'VE HAD MULTIPLE CONVERSATIONS WITH ZONING WITH THE ZONING DEPARTMENT. WE'VE BEEN IN HAND IN HAND TRYING TO WORK ON THIS. AND SO, UH, WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE UDC OKAY, WITH ZONING FOR THIS PARTICULAR, YOU KNOW, SITUATION, UH, THEY'RE THERE TO HELP AND TO UNDERSTAND AND MITIGATE, YOU KNOW, IRREGULAR SHAPE LOTS. AND AGAIN, YOU KNOW, THAT'S JUST SOMETHING THAT WE'RE WORKING WITH THEM AS WELL TO MAKE SURE THAT, UH, YOU KNOW, WE CAN MAKE THIS, MAKE THIS HAPPEN. YEAH. BUT GENERALLY, THE MASSING OF THE STRUCTURE APPEARS TO FALL WITHIN THE SETBACK. SO I BELIEVE THAT MEETS THE STIPULATIONS, BUT THE MASS, THE MASSING DOESN'T. BUT EVEN IF AN APPLICANT IS CONFORMING TO A STIPULATION, THAT STIPULATION REMAINS ON THE LIST OF RECOMMENDATIONS? NO, NOT ALWAYS. UM, SOMETIMES WE LEAVE THEM AS A DOCUMENTATION ISSUE. UM, SO [02:30:01] IF THERE'S KIND OF AN OUTSTANDING QUESTION ABOUT MATERIAL SPECIFICATIONS, WE'LL INCLUDE THAT KIND OF STANDARD STIPULATION LANGUAGE FOR MATERIAL SPECIFICATIONS SO THAT WE CAN CONTINUE TO WORK WITH THE APPLICANT TO ISSUE THE COA. BUT I DON'T THINK THE SETBACKS ARE AN ISSUE ANYMORE, BUT THE MASSING REMAINS CORRECT, WHICH IS WHAT THE SETBACK ADDRESSES. SO I'M STILL REALLY HAVING A PROBLEM WITH THE MASSING AS IT RELATES TO SETBACKS AND ANY NUMBER OF DEVICES, DESIGNED DEVICES, IT'S VERY, VERY IMPORTANT. AND OF COURSE, THE DRAINAGE IS JUST, YOU KNOW, UH, I, I'M, I THINK IT NEEDS A MORE, UM, UH, CLOSER LOOK, A MORE COMPLEX SOLUTION THAN JUST BUILDING THE GRADE UP. I, I DON'T SEE THAT AS BEING A, A SUITABLE SOLUTION IN THIS SETTING. OTHER COMMENTS I HAVE, JUST TO CLARIFY REAL QUICK, SO MY AMENDMENT IS, IS THAT, WOULD THAT BE AN ADDITIONAL STIPULATION? IS MY AMENDMENT, OR HOW WOULD THAT BE? HOW WOULD THAT GO ON THERE? I BELIEVE YOUR STIPULATION WOULD BE ADDED TO ALL OF THE STAFF STIPULATIONS THAT WERE IN THE ORIGINAL AMENDED. OKAY, GREAT. THANK YOU. OKAY. AND, UM, I'VE BEEN ON SEVERAL DRCS WITH OTHER COMMISSIONERS AND WE'VE TALKED WITH, UH, THE APPLICANT ON NUMEROUS OCCASIONS, AND, UH, THE HOUSE HAS, UM, BEEN REVISED OVER TIME AND, UM, I THINK IT'S GETTING BETTER, BUT, UH, THERE HAS ALWAYS BEEN CONCERN ABOUT THE, UH, THE 10 FOOT BALCONY OFF THE BACKSIDE, ESPECIALLY AS IT PROJECTS OVER THAT 20 FOOT SETBACK. UM, I THINK THAT, UM, SINCE IT'S ALL UNDER THE SAME ROOF FORM, I THINK THAT, UM, EXACERBATES THE ISSUE OF THE, THE MASS OF THE STRUCTURE. SO, UM, IF THERE'S NO OTHER COMMENTS, I'M GONNA CALL FOR A ROLL CALL VOTE ON THE AMENDED MOTION GIBBS QUESTION BEFORE I ON AMENDED MOTION. SO I THOUGHT IT WAS JUST A STIPULATION, SIR, ADDED TO THE MOTION. SO, SO IT IS TWO MOTIONS NOW. THIS IS AN AMENDED MOTION, WHICH WOULD RESULT IN THE ADDITION OF A STIPULATION TO THE MAIN MOTION TO REMOVE THE BALCONY FROM THE DESIGN. NAY SAVINO AYE. VELAZQUEZ PASS. CALLAWAY AYE. MOOKA AYE. GIADA. AYE. CERVANTES? YES. HOLLAND. AYE. AND FETZER. AYE. MOTION CARRIES. SO NOW DO WE VOTE ON THE ORIGINAL MOTION? A I QUEZ. MR. VELASQUEZ, DID YOU WANNA VOTE ON THIS? OH, I'M SORRY. UM, UH, I WAS GONNA VOTE NAY, OR I'M VOTING NAY DOESN'T CHANGE THE THING. SO MOTION PASSES. DO WE NOW VOTE ON THE MOTION AS AMENDED? ROLL CALL. VOTE. OH. MOTION TO THIS SAYS A MOTION TO APPROVE WITH STIPULATIONS. OKAY. GIBBS? AYE. SAVINA NAY. VELAZQUEZ NAY. GALLOWAY AYE. ZUKA AYE. YDA AYE. CERVANTES? YES. HOLLAND. AYE. AND FETZER. AYE. MOTION CARRIES. MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU. NOW, SHOULD YOU COME UP WITH A DESIGN? NO, IT'S THE MOTION WITHIN THE SETBACK AND YOU CAN ALWAYS PROPOSE SOMETHING ELSE AMENDED. RIGHT? UNDERSTOOD. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. AGENDA ITEM 19, MR. CHAIR. SIR, BEFORE WE GO TO THE NEXT ITEM, I, I JUST NEED SOME CLARIFICATION ON WHAT JUST HAPPENED HERE. SO JUST A SECOND. OH, MR. MR. CHAIR, WE NEED A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MAIN MOTION AS AMENDED. SO YOU HAD A MAIN MOTION BY COMMISSIONER HOLLAND, SECOND BY COMMISSIONER VELASQUEZ TO APPROVE WITH STAFF STIPULATION. YOU ALSO HAD AN AMENDED MOTION TO APPROVE, TO AMEND TO REMOVE THE BALCONY. THE, THE, THE AMENDED MOTION PASSED THE MOTION TO APPROVE WAS STAFF STIPULATION PASSED, AND NOW YOU NEED TO TAKE A VOTE TO APPROVE AS AMENDED. WELL, MY AMEND WAS A STIPULATION WAS JUST AN ADDITIONAL STIPULATION THAT THE BALCONY BE REMOVED, CORRECT? YEAH. WE SAID [02:35:01] BEFORE THE SECOND VOTE THAT IT INCLUDED ALL THE STIPULATIONS INCLUDING THE AMENDED STIPULATION. YES. THAT'S WHAT I UNDERSTOOD. TO BE STILL HAVE THE, AN ORIGINAL MOTION. I RECOMMEND MR. CHAIR, THAT YOU TAKE A VOTE TO APPROVE WITH THE MAIN MOTION AS AMENDED. DO WE NEED A MOTION TO THAT EFFECT? NO. CALL FOR VOTE. ROLL CALL. VOTE PLEASE. GIBBS. AYE. SAVINO, NAYYY VELAZQUEZ. I, I HONESTLY DON'T KNOW WHAT WE'RE VOTING ON. YOU'RE, I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE, WHAT THE MOTION IS. YOU'RE VOTING TO APPROVE THE MAIN MOTION AS AMENDED. THE MAIN MOTION WAS TO APPROVE WITH STAFF STIPULATION WITH THE AMENDMENT TO REMOVE THE BALCONY. AYE. GALL GALL AYE. ZUKA AYE. GUEVARA. AYE. CERVANTES? YES. HOLLAND. AYE. AND FETZER. AYE. MOTION CARRIES. MR. CHAIR, MR. CHAIR. FOR, FOR, WAIT, WAIT, WAIT. WHO'S COMMISSIONER GIBBS. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. SO, UM, AGAIN, SO WITH THIS, I, I THINK IT, FOR ME, IT CREATED A LITTLE CONFUSION HERE AS FAR AS WHAT WE WERE DOING IN THAT PARTICULAR MOTION, BECAUSE IT APPEARED TO ME THAT, UM, UH, COMMISSIONER WHEN HE REQUESTED THAT WE REMOVE THE BALCONY AND THAT WE WERE VOTING ON THAT PARTICULAR ONE. SO, AND HE SAID THAT HE WAS JUST ADDING IT AS A STIPULATION, YOU KNOW, TO THE, TO THE MOTION. SO I UNDERSTOOD THAT. SO WHEN WE VOTED ON THE FIRST, FIRST MOTION, THAT WAS TO DECIDE WHETHER WE WERE GONNA REMOVE THE BUCKLE OR NOT. THE SECOND ONE WAS BASED ON WHAT STAFF RECOMMENDED OR WHAT THE ORIGINAL MOTION WAS, WHETHER WE WERE APPROVING IT WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS. AND SO WHEN WE ADDED THE THIRD PORTION HERE WITH, UM, TAKING THE APPROVED MOTION AS AMENDED, THAT'S WHERE IT GOT A LITTLE DICEY FOR ME. AND SO I JUST NEEDED TO BE CLEAR ON WHAT WE WERE DOING BECAUSE THAT I KIND OF LOST IT IN THAT, IN THAT CASE THERE, SIR? YES. MY UNDERSTANDING FOR EVERYTHING LEGAL, WE NEEDED TO TAKE A VOTE ON THE MOTION AS AMENDED. YES. COMMISSIONER VELAZQUEZ? I, I, NO COMMENT. NO COMMENT. I, I THINK WE'RE DEFINITELY DONE. THE MOTION PASSED. ALL OF THE STIPULATIONS DISCUSSED WERE INCLUDED. OKAY. WE'RE DONE. THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. AGENDA ITEM 19. ITEM 19, ON THE HDRC AGENDA, CASE NUMBER 20 23 4 5 3 2 25 LINDELL PLACE, THE APPLICANT REQUESTS A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO ONE, MODIFY A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED DESIGN FOR A REAR ADDITION. TWO, REPLACE TWO EXISTING WORK LIGHT DOORS WITH HALF LIGHT DOORS, THREE, INSTALL SLIDING DOORS RATHER THAN FRENCH DOORS. ON THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED DESIGN FOR THE RARE WEST EDITION STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF ITEM ONE, MODIFICATION OF A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED DESIGN FOR A RARE EDITION. BASED ON FINDINGS, B AND C STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED PLANS BE ADHERED TO, WHICH INCLUDE RETAINING THE EXISTING NORTHWEST GABLE IN ITS CURRENT FORM. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF ITEMS TWO AND THREE BASED ON FINDING D WE HAVE THE APPLICANT, JONATHAN, UH, REYNOLDS VIA WEBEX. UM, THERE AREN'T ANY VOICEMAILS, BUT THERE ARE TWO LETTERS ON FILE IN SUPPORT OF THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST. YES, SIR. WOULD YOU INTRODUCE YOURSELF, PLEASE? UH, YEAH, MY NAME IS CARL RED MILLER. I'M A RESIDENT AND OWNER OF THE PROPERTY. OUR BUILDER, JOHN REYNOLDS, WAS ON FOR THE FIRST TWO AND A HALF HOURS OF THE MEETING AND, UH, HAD TO EXCUSE HIMSELF, UH, AFTER THAT. SO I WILL HAVE THE PLEASURE OF PRESENTING OUR CASE TODAY, EVEN THOUGH I AM, UH, WHOLLY UNPREPARED, BUT I WILL DO MY BEST. OKAY, THANK YOU. I THINK FOR CLARIFICATION, IF WE COULD HAVE THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED DESIGN AND THE PROPOSED DESIGN FOR THE, UH, IF YOU'D LIKE, I SENT A POWERPOINT TO JESSICA, WHICH HAS, UM, ALL OF THE ITERATIONS, INCLUDING THE VERY FIRST ONE, THE APPROVED ONE, AND THEN THE MODIFICATIONS, UM, KIND OF IN SEQUENCE TO SORT OF SHOW, UM, I THINK EXACTLY WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT AND SORT OF TALK ABOUT THE, THE SORT OF TIMELINE OF THINGS. THERE WAS A LITTLE BIT OF, UM, I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU CALL IT, INACCURACY OR MISREPRESENTATION A LITTLE BIT ABOUT SOME OF THE NOTES THAT WERE ON THE THING IN TERMS OF THE, IN TERMS OF THE DRC. AND SO I JUST KIND OF WANTED TO, TO, TO, UH, GET THAT, GET THAT, UH, [02:40:01] STRAIGHTENED OUT. BUT, UH, OR SORRY, BEFORE YOU CONTINUE, THIS IS JESSICA. UM, I GOT A PRESENTATION FROM, UH, FROM JONATHAN. IS THAT THE ONE THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT? YEAH, YEAH, THE POWERPOINT. THERE'S A, THERE'S A PPT AND A PDF. IT DOESN'T REALLY MATTER WHICH ONE THOUGH. UM, ADD THAT ONE IS IN THE LATE FILE AS WELL. UM, PERFECT. SO HERE WE ARE. THIS IS THE ORIGINAL, THIS IS THE PLAN. THIS IS THE ORIGINAL FLOOR PLAN IN THE HOUSE, AS IT IS RIGHT NOW, PRIOR TO ANY MODIFICATION. WHAT YOU SEE IN RED IS THE NORTHEAST CORNER, UM, WHICH IS IN ITSELF. IN ADDITION, THE, THE ORIGINAL HISTORIC CORE OF THE HOUSE WAS KIND OF THAT S SHAPE GOING FROM THE NORTHWEST, UM, DOWN TO THE, TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER. AND THEN YOU HAVE THAT OTHER PART IN RED, UM, WHICH IS AT ISSUE TODAY, WHICH WAS ADDED ON LATER. SO THAT'S SORT OF THE CONTEXT AROUND THE SORT OF WHERE WE'RE AT. IF YOU WANNA GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. AND SO, WHEN WE FIRST CAME TO THE COMMISSION IN FEBRUARY, THIS WAS THE DESIGN THAT WE PROPOSED. AND, UM, AT THAT TIME DURING THIS MEETING, THERE WAS NO DISCUSSION OF THE GABLE, NO MENTION WAS MADE OF THE GABLE OR EXPANDING THE FOOTPRINT. UM, THERE WAS A DRC THAT WAS SET AT THAT TIME TO GO AND EXAMINE THE ROT OF THE WINDOWS. UM, WE WERE TALKING ABOUT REPLACEMENT OF SOME OF THE WOOD WINDOW SYSTEMS, WHICH WERE, UM, TOTALLY ROTTEN OUT. AND SO THEY WANNA HAVE DRC TO COME OUT TO THE SIDE TO TALK ABOUT THE WINDOWS SYSTEMS. AND, UM, IT WAS AT THE TIME THAT THEY CAME OUT TO TALK ABOUT THE WINDOWS THAT THEY SORT OF, I GUESS, HAD A, A GREATER UNDERSTANDING OF THE PLAN. IT WAS OBVIOUSLY CLEAR FROM THE PLAN THAT WE SUBMITTED THAT THAT GABLE WAS EXPANDING, BUT THROUGHOUT THE REVIEW PROCESS OF THE CITY STAFF AND THE COMMISSIONERS THE FIRST TIME AROUND, IT DIDN'T, YOU KNOW, NOBODY REALLY NOTICED IT. I GUESS PROBABLY BECAUSE THE, THE RENDERING AND THE SORT OF PROFILE OF THE TWO GABLES ARE REALLY VERY MUCH IN KEEPING WITH THE WAY THAT THEY CURRENTLY ARE. UM, SO ANYWAYS, WE HAD THE DRC TO COME OUT ABOUT THE WINDOWS. WE TALKED ABOUT THE WINDOWS. UM, AND AT THAT TIME, THE COMMISSIONERS UNDERSTOOD THAT THE GABLE WAS GONNA BE EXPANDING AND THEN SORT OF PROVIDED INFORMAL ADVICE DURING THE DRC ABOUT THE GABLE EXPANSION. UM, BUT OBVIOUSLY THAT WAS NEVER PART OF THE ORIGINAL MEETING. SO THIS WAS THE VERY FIRST PLAN THAT WE SUBMITTED. SO, UM, WE GO ON, THIS IS JUST THE ROOF PLAN FOR, FOR CONTEXT. SO FOLLOWING THE DRC, WE, UH, TOOK TO HEART SOME OF THE INFORMATION THAT THE COMMISSIONERS PROVIDED ABOUT MODIFYING THE GABLES ON THE HISTORIC CORE OF THE HOUSE. AND SO WHAT YOU SEE HERE IS THE LEFT ELEVATION, AND IN THE PREVIOUS SLIDE, THIS GABLE WAS BEING WIDENED, AND THIS IS PART OF THE HISTORIC CORE OF THE HOUSE. WE LOVE LIVING IN OUR HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOOD. WE WANT TO HAVE A NICE PRODUCT. UM, WHEN WE'RE DONE, WE PLAN ON STAYING THERE FOR A LONG TIME. AND SO, YOU KNOW, ADVICE ON HOW WE CAN PRESERVE THE HISTORIC NATURE OF OUR HOUSE WAS WELL RECEIVED. WE INCORPORATED THAT ADVICE INTO OUR DESIGN. UM, AND SO HERE YOU CAN SEE THE LEFT ELEVATION, WHICH IS BASICALLY JUST AS IT IS RIGHT NOW. THIS HAS THE ADDITION. UM, AND HANG ON FOR ME, JUST GO BACK FOR JUST A SEC. SO THIS HAS THE, THE, WE MODIFIED, MODIFIED THE WHOLE FLOOR PLAN MODIFIED, UM, THIS PART OF THE DESIGN TOOK THE COMMISSIONS, UH, ADVICE TO HEART ON THE LEFT SIDE, ON THE RIGHT SIDE. YOU CAN GO AHEAD AND DO IT. WE, WE WENT WITH A PLAN THAT WE KNEW WOULD GET APPROVAL, WHICH WAS TO USE THIS SORT OF SHED ROOF DESIGN, UM, BECAUSE IT LEFT THE NORTH EAST GABLE INTACT AND RIGHT. THIS IS PRETTY EASY TO APPROVE FROM A POINT OF VIEW OF LOOKING AT THE STIPULATIONS, UM, BECAUSE IT JUST SORT OF JUTS OUT OFF THE SIDE, BUT IT'S NOT PARTICULARLY VISUALLY APPEALING. UM, AND SO, YOU KNOW, WE HAD THIS PLAN APPROVED, BUT WE WERE JUST KIND OF SITTING STEWING ON IT, AND WE JUST WEREN'T REALLY HAPPY WITH THE WAY, UM, THAT IT TURNED OUT. I, I, I CIRCLED THESE HERE AND MADE THE BIG NOTE IN RED. IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THESE ARE NOT SYMMETRICAL, THEY'RE NOT IDENTICAL RIGHT NOW. SO OUR PROPOSED PLAN, THEY WILL NOT BE THE SAME, NOR ARE THEY THE SAME RIGHT NOW. SO I [02:45:01] FEEL LIKE THAT'S JUST SOMETHING THAT WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYBODY SORT OF UNDERSTOOD. UM, AND SO IF YOU WANT TO, I GUESS GO AHEAD AND, AND GO ON THEN TO THE NEXT ONE. SO HERE'S THE PROPOSED, UM, HERE'S WHAT WE HAVE, HAVE COME UP WITH, WHICH IS TO, UM, YOU KNOW, MODIFY THE ONE GABLE TO BE WIDER, BUT TO PRESERVE THE SORT OF TWO, UM, GABLE FORMAT, RIGHT? IT RETAINS THE HISTORIC GABLE ON THE HISTORIC CORE OF THE HOUSE, WHICH IS THE NORTHWEST CORNER. AND THE ONLY PART THAT IT MODIFIES IS WHAT WAS IN ITSELF ALREADY IN ADDITION. UM, SO THAT'S, THAT'S, UH, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING TO BE, TO BE NOTED. I KNOW THAT THIS IS, UH, LISTED AS VISIBLE FROM THE RIGHT OF WAY. IN REALITY, IT DOES HAVE LOW REAL WORLD VISIBILITY FROM THE RIGHT OF WAY. UM, IT IS BEHIND THE FENCE, UM, AND IT'S JUST NOT A, NOT A PROMINENT FEATURE FROM THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE. WE HAVE SOME PICTURES, THERE'S SOME PICTURES IN THERE WE CAN LOOK AT LATER, BUT, UM, JUST SORT OF PUTTING THAT IN THERE. IT, IT RETAINS THE TWO GABLE PROFILE, RIGHT? UM, THE SHED ROOF IT, YOU KNOW, IT'S SORT OF SIX AND ONE HALF DOZEN OF ANOTHER, BUT THERE WERE I THINK FOUR STIPULATIONS. AGAIN, THIS WAS NOT MY PRESENTATION TO GIVE, SO BEAR WITH ME. BUT YOU KNOW, THE ROOF, LIKE IF YOU LOOK AT THE ROOF, UH, UH, GUIDELINES, RIGHT? YOU WANT, IT WAS, I THINK TO MAINTAIN THE ORIENTATION, TO MAINTAIN THE OVERHANG, YOU MAINTAIN THE PITCH AND MAINTAIN THE, THE DESIGN OR THE SHAPE OR SOMETHING, RIGHT? AND BASICALLY THE SHED ROOF SOLUTION MAINTAINS THE PITCH AND THE OVERHANG AND THE ORIENTATION, BUT CHANGES THE SHAPE. AND THIS SOLUTION MAINTAINS, UH, MAINTAINS THE ORIENTATION AND THE OVERHANG AND THE SHAPE, BUT NOT THE PITCH, RIGHT? AND SO YOU KIND OF HAVE THIS THREE OUT OF FOUR WITH EITHER OF THE SOLUTIONS. SO, UM, YOU KNOW, THE ADDITION'S STILL CITED AT THE REAR. IT, WE FEEL LIKE THIS HAS LESS VISIBLE IMPACT THAN THE DOUBLE SHED ROOF. THAT'S, YOU KNOW, IT JUST FELT LIKE A LITTLE BIT OF A SQUARE PEG IN A ROUND HOLE. UM, A LITTLE BIT. IT STILL HAS THE HISTORICAL CONTEXT. IT'S GOT THE, UM, YOU KNOW, THE DOUBLE GABLE DESIGN, AND IT DOESN'T CHANGE THE APPROVED FOOTPRINT AT ALL. I THINK JESSICA MADE A NOTE IN THE, UH, FINDINGS THAT WE HAD CHANGED THE FOOTPRINT OF THE HOUSE, BUT THAT'S JUST NOT TRUE. UM, I THINK, YEAH, AND THERE'S THE ROOF PLAN JUST FOR CONTEXT, BUT, UM, YEAH, THERE YOU GO. THAT'S I THINK PRETTY MUCH PLAIN LANGUAGE. WHAT WE'RE, HOW WE WOULD LIKE TO, MR. CHAIR, I GOT A QUESTION. YES. COMMISSIONER VELAZQUEZ, UM, IF, IF STAFF COULD, YEAH. ON THIS ELEVATION, NOW INSIDE OF THERE, THERE'S A DRAWING THAT SHOWS A ROOF STRUCTURE. LIKE, UH, IT'S LIKE A, LIKE A FRAME, A FRAMING. OH, YEAH. 3D, RIGHT? YEAH, YEAH. THE ROOF LINE. OKAY. WHY IS THE, WHY IS THAT IN THERE? THE, THE FRAMING STRUC THE FRAMING ANIMATION OR THE FRAMING, UH, 3D DRAWING? UM, I DON'T KNOW. IS THAT A OKAY, WELL, 'CAUSE 'CAUSE IT, IT, IT, IT IT'S GIVING ME THE IMPRESSION THAT YOU'RE REFRAMING ALL THE ROOF, THAT THE ROOF IS COMPLETELY BEING REDONE. UM, THE RECONSTRUCTED THE REAR PART OF THE HOUSE WILL BE, YEAH. NOT LIKE, YEAH. OKAY. SO, SO NOW, BECAUSE ON, ON THAT ELEVATION THAT YOU HAD ON, ON THE, ON THE ADDITION. ON THE ADDITION, RIGHT? WHAT YOU CAN SEE HERE ON THE SORT OF WEST SIDE OF THAT, THAT'S THE HISTORIC GABLE, THE, THE PART THAT'S BEING MODIFIED IS NOT PART OF THE HISTORIC CORE OF THE HOUSE. OKAY. BUT THE PART THAT YOU'RE LEAVING THE, THE PART THAT HAS THE TWO DIFFERENT GABLES, OKAY. RIGHT. AND I DON'T, I DON'T WANNA MAKE YOU FEEL LIKE ONE WAY OR THE OTHER IS CORRECT OR NOT CORRECT. I JUST WANNA HAVE AN UNDERSTANDING, BECAUSE IN MY MIND, YOU'RE REDOING THE, THE ROOFS. I, I I, THAT COULD BE WRONG, BUT WHY DIDN'T YOU FOLLOW THE SAME PITCH, EVEN IF IT'S WIDER? UH, IS THAT EXISTING? I WOULD LOVE TO HAVE GOTTEN THE PITCH ON THAT TO BE STEEPER, BUT IF WE HAD IT ANY STEEPER, THE RIDGE LINE ON THAT WOULD'VE HAD TO COME UP IN ABOVE THE HEIGHT OF THE GABLE ON THE FRONT, WHICH WE DIDN'T FEEL LIKE THE COMMISSION WOULD HAVE GONE FOR. RIGHT? BECAUSE IT WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN SUBORDINATE TO THE, TO, YOU KNOW, TO THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE. YEAH. AND SO THIS WAS REALLY THE BEST SOLUTION THAT WE COULD COME WITH, THAT WE FELT LIKE WAS STILL WITHIN THE GUIDELINES. RIGHT. WELL, IT'S A GOOD, THAT WAS A GOOD DECISION, BUT, BUT I WOULD, I WOULD THINK THAT, THAT IT WOULD'VE BEEN, UH, UM, BETTER FOR THE BUILDING, FOR THE PITCHES TO MATCH AND TO BE, IT WAS SUBORDINATE. THAT'S SUBORDINATE, THAT'S A PHILOSOPHICAL CONVERSATION. THIS IS ACCEPTABLE. THIS IS, THIS IS, IF YOU'RE ALRIGHT WITH IT, YOU KNOW, IT, IT'S, IT, IT HAS A FEELING OF A HOUSE THAT HAS BEEN THERE AND THAT HAS A LIFE OF ITS OWN. AND IT'S TELLING ITS OWN STORY, RIGHT? IF IT'S JUST THERE TO, TO BE SUBORDINATE TO THE FRONT PITCHES, I'M NOT NECESSARILY SURE. BUT, BUT [02:50:01] WHATEVER GETS THE VOTES I THINK IS REAL IMPORTANT. IT'S A, IT'S, IT, IT CAME UP, IT IS VERY NICE. I JUST SHOULD LET YOU KNOW THAT, THAT, THAT IT, IT, IT IS EVERYTHING THAT YOU SAID IT IS DOING. UH, SO I APPRECIATE YOUR PRESENTATION. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER SAVINO, I HAVE A REQUEST FOR STAFF. CAN YOU PLEASE SHOW THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED ELEVATION SHEET THAT PRECEDED THIS? AND JUST TO FOLLOW, UH, REITERATE THE, THE QUESTION, UM, THE REASON YOU DON'T LIKE THIS ELEVATION ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE IS WHY, UH, VISUALLY I THINK IT'S LESS APPEALING THAN THE OTHER ONE. IT SORT OF, UH, HAS THE FEELING OF AN AFTERTHOUGHT. I ALSO WORRY ABOUT THE DRAINAGE. UM, I THINK THAT THE LOWER, UM, PROFILE THERE WILL END UP WITH MORE, UH, YOU KNOW, CHANCE FOR WATER INCURSION AND ACCUMULATION OF DEBRIS AND EVERYTHING LIKE THAT. YEAH. MAYBE, MAYBE NOT. UM, IF IT'S DONE PROPERLY, IT SHOULDN'T BE. BUT SO YOU DON'T, UM, UM, THINK THAT THE REVISED ELEVATION LOOKS A LITTLE BIT MORE BLANK, WALLISH AND LARGE WITHOUT ANOTHER WINDOW OR A DETAIL, A TRIM OR SOMETHING ELSE TO BREAK UP THAT LARGE EXPANSIVE SIDING? UH, YES. I, I THINK IT, IT LOOKS, IT LOOKS FINE. IT'S, IT'S OKAY TO YOU? YEAH. OKAY. THAT'S OKAY. THANK YOU. SURE. OTHER QUESTIONS? UH, I DO HAVE ONE. DO YOU KNOW WHEN THE ADDITION THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, WHEN THAT WAS ADDED TO THE HOUSE, UM, THE CITY STAFF DOCUMENT SAID 19 55, 19 55. MM-HMM. . OKAY. SO ARGUABLY IT, ARGUABLY IT HAS ACHIEVED ITS OWN HISTORIC, UH, PRECEDENT ON THE BUILDING. UM, ARE YOU ARGUING THAT OR ARE YOU ASKING ME , I GUESS THAT'S A STATEMENT THAT I SHOULD SAVE FOR LATER. UM, SURE. OTHER QUESTIONS? MR. CHAIRMAN? MAKE A MOTION YES. TO, UH, PROVE WITH, AS, AS PRESENTED BY THIS GENTLEMAN WITH STAFF STIPULATIONS LESS THEIR RECOMMENDATION FOR, UH, I ITEM ONE NOW. WELL, NO, TO PRESENT, UH, UH, TO APPROVE AS PRESENTED. YEAH. 'CAUSE THERE ARE, THERE'S REALLY NOTHING ON THE RECOMMENDATIONS. OKAY. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? I CAN SECOND THAT. OKAY. UH, COMMISSIONER HOLLAND, CAN YOU GET A CLARIFICATION ON THE, WHAT THE MOTION IS? THE, THE, THE MOTION, UH, LOOKING AT THE RECOMMENDATIONS AND SEEING THAT THERE ARE ALREADY NO STIPULATIONS IN THERE. RIGHT. UM, THAT, THAT THE ONLY QUESTION IS TO THAT ELEVATION THAT HE WAS PRESENTING. SO THE MOTION IS TO APPROVE, UH, AS PRESENTED AS AS SUBMITTED. AS SUBMITTED, YEAH. THAT'S PRESENTED BY THE APPLICANT. YEAH. UH, AND, AND IF WE'RE IN DISCUSSION, MR. CHAIR, I, I KIND OF LIKE TO, TO JUST KINDA SHARE A THOUGHT, PARTICULARLY WITH COMMISSIONER SAVINO. UM, IT, IT, IN TERMS OF SUBORDINATE OR, OR NOT SUPPORTED, I, I FIND IT UNFORTUNATE THAT, THAT THE REAL EXPERIMENT WOULD BE FOR THAT REAR PITCH TO MATCH ALL THE OTHER PITCHES. IF IT'S A, IF IT'S A, UH, UM, A, A DESIGN, UH, A FIRSTHAND DESIGN OPPORTUNITY, BECAUSE IT DOES, IT DOESN'T EXIST. THIS IS SOMETHING THAT'S GONNA BE, UH, COMMISSIONER DONE. WE DID, UM, EXPLORE THAT AND WE DID HAVE THAT MOCKED UP IN THE DESIGN, AND IT WOULD'VE ENDED UP WITH THE RIDGE LINE BEING ABOUT TWO FEET HIGHER. UM, AND, YOU KNOW, TO YOUR POINT, THERE IS I THINK SOME OBFUSCATION IN THE LANGUAGE AROUND WHAT EXACTLY THAT MEANS, RIGHT? UM, AND IN TERMS OF THE HEIGHT ITSELF, THE, THE LANGUAGE ABOUT BEING SUBORDINATE IS IN THERE. BUT IN TERMS OF THE HEIGHT, YOU KNOW, I THINK IT HAS SOME QUALIFIERS LIKE GENERALLY AND, YOU KNOW, SHOULD BE, AND THESE OTHER SORT OF THINGS. WELL, SOME OF IT IS HOW FAR IN FRONT YOU'RE STANDING, RIGHT? HOW FAR BEHIND FROM THE FRONT IT IS, WHETHER YOU'RE STANDING AT THE STREET AND YOU ACTUALLY CAN SEE A TWO FOOT HEIGHT, BUT IT JUST, IN THIS CASE, IT'S BEHIND IT, YOU KNOW, IT'S PROBABLY 30, 40 FEET BEHIND THE SORT OF FRONT FACING MASS OF THE HOUSE. AND HONESTLY, LIKE, WE CONSIDERED SUBMITTING THAT WITH THE STEEPER PITCH, AND I THINK VISUALLY IT PROBABLY WOULD'VE BEEN IN, YOU KNOW, KEEPING WITH IT. BUT WE FELT LIKE THE GUIDELINES [02:55:01] DIDN'T REALLY SUPPORT US IN BRINGING THAT, UH, VERSION FORWARD. OKAY. WELL, I, UM, COMMISSIONER SAVINO, IF THERE'S ANYTHING THAT YEAH, YOU WOULD ADD FOR, OH, THIS FOR EDUCATION PURPOSES, THERE'S, YEAH, THERE'S A LOT OF FODDER HERE. UM, IT'S, YOU KNOW, FOR, BECAUSE THIS IS AN ADDITION AND, UM, MODIFICATION TO AN EARLIER EDITION, EVEN THOUGH IT IS HISTORIC, IT'S KIND OF SIX ONE AND A HALF A DOZEN OF ANOTHER IN THAT WAY THAT IT'S, UM, UM, SUBJECTIVE AESTHETIC, RIGHT? I'M LOOKING AT IT FROM A PRACTICAL STANDPOINT. IF IT WERE ME, I WOULD NOT, I WOULD NOT BE DOING THIS WHEN I WOULD'VE BEEN DOING THE PREVIOUS. MY, MY FEAR IS ALWAYS ADDING A FOUNDATION FLUSH WITH AN EXISTING ONE. AND WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THE MOVEMENT OVER TIME AND THE ABILITY TO KEEP THAT GABLE SMOOTH AND PERFECT, THAT NEW ONE IS NOT GUARANTEED. WE WANT OFFSETS, WE WANT DETAILS AND, AND VOLUMES THAT HAVE MOVED A LITTLE BIT BACK AND TRIM BOARDS TO BETTER ACCOMMODATE THE MOVEMENT THAT WILL INEVITABLY COME WITH AN ADDITION ONTO A HOUSE. THAT'S MY, WHERE I'M COMING FROM ON THIS. SO IT'S, IF YOU'RE WILLING TO, YOU KNOW, DIVE INTO THAT, UM, THAT'S, UH, YOUR PREROGATIVE, I WOULD, UH, SUPPORT IT. PERFECT. THANK YOU. OTHER COMMENTS? MAY HAVE A ROLL CALL, PLEASE. GIBBS NAYYY SAVINO AYE. VELAZQUEZ AYE. GALLOWAY AYE. ZUKA. AYE. KIVA AYE. CERVANTES? YES. HOLLAND. AYE. AND FETZER NAYYY, UH, MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. A ITEM 20 WAS POSTPONED BY THE APPLICANT. SO AGENDA ITEM 21, AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 21, HDRC, CASE NUMBER 20 23 4 4 6 2 2 2 VANCE. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO DEMOLISH ONE OF YOUR ACCESSORY STRUCTURE. STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL BASED ON FINDINGS A THROUGH H. THE APPLICANT DOES NOT SATISFY THE DOCUMENTATION REQUIREMENTS FOR DEMOLITION OF A LANDMARK, AND THE APPLICATION IS INCOMPLETE IF THE HDRC FINDS THAT THE APPLICATION, IF THE HDRC FINDS THE APPLICATION TO BE COMPLETE AND FINDS DEMOLITION APPROPRIATE, STAFF RECOMMENDS THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS, ONE THAT THE APPLICANT COMPLY WITH THE CITY'S DECONSTRUCTION ORDINANCE AND SELECTS A CERTIFIED DECONSTRUCTION CONTRACTOR TO COMPLETE DECONSTRUCTION FORM SUBMISSION AND PERMITTING IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE U-D-C-U-D-C CHAPTER 12. ARTICLE TWO IS NOTED IN FINDING F. AND THEN TWO, ANY FUTURE REQUESTS FOR REPLACEMENT OF THE REAR ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, UH, WILL REQUIRE AN ADDITIONAL APPLICATION FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL. THE APPLICANT, NATE MANFRED, IS HERE IN PERSON. UH, GOOD EVENING EVERYBODY. UH, I'M NATE MANFORD WITH FRENCH AND MICHIGAN, AND WE'RE HERE TO DISCUSS, YEAH, THE REQUEST FOR DEMOLITION FOR, UH, AN EXISTING GARAGE STRUCTURE. UM, I GUESS PART OF THE PROCESS HERE FOR US, IT'S A LITTLE BIT OF A CHICKEN AND AN EGG PROCESS. THE, UM, OWNERS OF THE PROPERTY WANT TO DO SOME ADDITIONS, SOME DEVELOPMENT TO THE BACK OF THEIR PROPERTY. WE DID GET APPROVAL TO DEMOLISH AN EXISTING STORAGE BUILDING THAT WAS CONSIDERED TO BE NON-CONTRIBUTING. UM, AND THE OWNERS GOT APPROVAL TO DO SOME OTHER IMPROVEMENTS TO THEIR MAIN HOUSE. UM, THAT BEING SAID, I UNDERSTAND, YOU KNOW, THE STAFF STIPULATIONS OR REQUIREMENTS. SO AGAIN, WE'RE KIND OF A LITTLE BIT OF A CHICKEN AND EGG SITUATION HERE. SO WE PUT FORWARD AS PART OF OUR WHOLE PACKAGE, PART OF IT WAS TO REQUEST TO DEMOLISH THIS BUILDING AS WELL. AND I GUESS FROM OUR STANDPOINT, THE BUILDING ON THE INTERIOR HAS NO FOUNDATION. IT IS SHORED UP BASICALLY STRUCTURALLY WITH, YOU KNOW, SOME LUMBER TO KEEP IT UP IN PLACE. AND THE FRONT WALL HAS BEEN REPLACED PREVIOUSLY, THE SLIDING DOORS AND THE ENTIRE FRONT WALL. SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A STRUCTURE THAT'S MAYBE 75% ORIGINAL. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S ANY THRESHOLD TO MEET OR NOT. BUT, YOU KNOW, PROCEEDING FORWARD, THE NEXT PHASE FOR US WITH THE CLIENTS WILL BE TO COME UP WITH WHAT WE PLAN TO DO IN THE REAR. AND SO I GUESS AGAIN, OUR REQUEST WAS TO REQUEST FOR THESE DEMOLITIONS IN ADVANCE, SO WE KNEW WHAT ROOM WE HAD TO WORK WITH. AND THAT'S REALLY ABOUT WHERE WE ARE RIGHT NOW. OKAY, THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE ANY VOICEMAILS? WE DON'T. THERE IS A LETTER IN OUR, UH, [03:00:01] INFORMATION FROM THE ONES FROM KING WILLIAM AND ASSOCIATION QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT OR STAFF . YEAH, I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION FOR STAFF HERE. SO WHEN DO WE NOT CONSIDER IF, IF 75% OF IT IS NOT ORIGINAL, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE GOING INTO THE SHIP OFTHE, UH, DYNAMIC HERE IS, IS IT THIS THE SAME BUILDING? IS IT THE SAME SHIP? IF SO, SO MUCH OF IT HAS BEEN REPLACED. 75% IS ORIGINAL . OH, IT'S, IT'S 75% ORIGINAL YOU SAID? YEAH, REALLY ONLY THE FRONT WALL HAS BEEN REPLACED WITH THE FRONT SLIDING DOORS. OH, OKAY. I MISUNDERSTOOD THAT. I THOUGHT FOR SOME REASON I THOUGHT I HEARD THAT 75% HAS BEEN CHANGED. I SAID THAT'S WHAT'S LEFT. OKAY. GOT IT. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER SAVINA. YEAH, THANK YOU. UM, MR. CHAIR STAFF, UH, IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, WHY ARE WE NOT REQUESTING, UH, EVEN CONCEPTUAL REPLACEMENT PLANS FOR THIS? I MEAN, THE APPLICANT CAN ANSWER THAT, BUT I DON'T BELIEVE THERE ARE ANY, I MEAN, JUST WANT TO ADDRESS THAT WE PRESENTED THIS AS OUR REQUEST. AGAIN, CHICKEN AND EGG GOING, YOU KNOW, IF WE KIND OF HAVE A CARTE BLANCHE SITUATION, IF WE REMOVE THESE, THEN THE NEXT PHASE WOULD BE LIKE WORKING WITH THE CLIENTS TO COME UP WITH PLANS INCLUDING MAYBE A REPLACEMENT PLAN FOR THIS STRUCTURE. SINCE WE DON'T DO A LOT OF DEMOLITION PROJECTS WITH OUR, YOU KNOW, OFFICE, EVEN THOUGH WE DO A LOT OF WORK IN HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOODS, WE WEREN'T ADVISED OTHERWISE AFTER THE APPLICATION WAS PUT IN . I THINK IT MIGHT BE HELPFUL, UM, OR SUBMITTED TO, TO, TO SUBMIT THOSE THINGS. OH, FOR SURE, FOR SURE. I DON'T, WE'LL SEE IF, IF WE HAVE ANY OTHER, OTHER QUESTIONS JUST TO SAY, WHEN WE DID MEET WITH JESSICA ON SITE AND JESSICA WAS VERY HELPFUL AT THAT POINT, SHE DID SAY, DO YOU HAVE REPLACEMENT PLANS? AND WE SAID, WELL, NO, WE DON'T. AND SHE SAID, WELL, MAYBE THE NEXT PHASE WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, AFTER THIS, DEPENDING ON WHERE THIS LANDS WOULD BE, THEN TO SUBMIT A SET OF PLANS WITH POTENTIAL REPLACEMENT PLANS. MM-HMM. . AND THAT'S COMPLETELY FINE. AGAIN, IT'S A CHICKEN AND EGG SITUATION FOR THE WAY WE'RE APPROACHING THIS. RIGHT. JUST WHAT WILL WE HAVE TO WORK WITH IF WE ARE ALLOWED TO TAKE THIS DOWN VERSUS IF WE'RE REQUIRED TO KEEP THIS, THEN WHAT DO WE HAVE? SURE. I WOULD, I WAS JUST GONNA SAY, UNLESS THERE ARE OTHER QUESTIONS, I WOULD MAKE A, UM, TYPICALLY WHEN A STRUCTURE IS COMING DOWN OR REQUESTED TO COME DOWN, THERE ARE REPLACEMENT PLANS. SO WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO BASICALLY, UH, PULL YOUR APPLICATION AND COME BACK WITH, YOU KNOW, SCHEMATIC BUTTER PAPER SKETCHES OF WHAT OH NO, WE YOU PROPOSE FOR A REPLACEMENT, WHETHER IT'S A RECONSTRUCTION OF THIS STRUCTURE OR, UH, AN ADDITION THAT WOULD, UH, MODIFY, UH, THE, UH, THE, UH, OUTBUILDING. UM, WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO DO THAT? YEAH, CERTAINLY. CERTAINLY WE WOULD COME BACK WITH MORE THAN THAT. I THINK AT THIS POINT WE'LL WORK WITH THE CLIENTS TO DO THAT NEXT PHASE OF DESIGN. UM, AGAIN, THIS WAS PART OF A BIGGER PACKAGE TO PRESENT ORIGINALLY WITH A COUPLE ELEMENTS. SURE. AND THE NEXT PHASE WOULD BE WHAT'S THE NEXT COMPOSITION FOR WHAT HAPPENS IN THE BACKYARD. OKAY. SO YEAH, WE CERTAINLY HAVE NO PROBLEM DOING THAT. MR. CHAIR, GO QUESTION FOR STAFF. YES. JUST TO HELP, UH, WITH THEIR CONSIDERATIONS. UH, EDWARD, WHAT, WHAT, WHAT IS YOUR, UH, WHAT IS STAFF'S, UM, OPINION, UH, WHERE, WHERE IS THE HISTORIC, UM, DATA AND WAS IT SANBORN MAPS? WHAT, WHAT, WHAT WAS IT THAT, OKAY. UH, WELL THE, THE STRUCTURE IS ON THE SANBORN MAP. UH, HERE IS THE, I DON'T SEE THE DATE RIGHT AWAY, BUT, UM, HERE'S THE SANBORN MAP. SO THE STRUCTURE IS CONSIDERED CONTRIBUTING TO THE PROPERTY AND TO THE LAVACCA HISTORIC DISTRICT. UM, IT'S NOTED IN, I THINK THAT'S FINDING E UM, UH, THERE'S NOT AN A COST ESTIMATE THAT'S BEEN PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT. SO, UH, PART OF PROVING THE ECONOMIC HARDSHIP FOR THE REMOVAL OF ANY REAR ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, UH, WE ASK APPLICANTS TO PROVIDE A COST ESTIMATE THAT SHOWS WHAT THE COST OF REHABILITATION OF THE STRUCTURE OR RECONSTRUCTION WOULD BE VERSUS THE COST OF DEMOLITION AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW STRUCTURE. UM, IF YOU, UH, NOTE TO FINDING E THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE HAVEN'T, UM, THAT WE HAVEN'T RECEIVED. UH, SO, UH, IN THEORY, IF THAT WAS PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT, THE APPLICATION WOULD THEN COULD BE COMPLETE AND WE WOULD BE ABLE TO MAKE THAT DETERMINATION TO SEE, UH, IF AN ECONOMIC HARDSHIP HAD BEEN, HAD [03:05:01] BEEN MET. SO, SO NOW EDWARD, ON THE SANBORN MAP IS, IS THE LITTLE BUILDING THE A THE BUILDING THAT HAS A A IN IT OR IS IT THE OTHER ONE? UH, THAT'S, UH, THIS, THIS STRUCTURE RIGHT HERE? CORRECT. SO ON THE PICTURE, IT DOESN'T APPEAR TO BE THAT CLOSE TO A PROPERTY LINE OR THE PICTURES WEREN'T TAKEN SO AS TO SHOW IT BEING ON ON THOSE TWO BOUNDARIES. IT, IT, THAT'S, THAT'S, UM, IT'S CORRECT TO, TO UH, UH, ASSESS THAT THE BUILDING IS ON THOSE TWO PROPERTY BOUNDARIES. CORRECT. I MEAN, UH, SANBORN MAPS AREN'T NECESSARILY ACCURATE OR TOO SCALE, UH, BUT WE CAN, UH, GET A GENERAL SENSE OF A LOCATION, SORRY, WE CAN GET A GENERAL SENSE OF A LOCATION BASED ON THE STRUCTURES IN THE FAR NORTHWEST OR SOUTHWEST, WHATEVER CORNER OF THE PROPERTY, UM, PROPERTY LINES MOVE AS WELL. UM, SO WE SEE THAT PARTICULARLY, UH, IN KING WILLIAM AND LE BACA WHERE PROPERTY LINES FEATURE PROPERTIES FEATURE, UH, NON-UNIFORM SHAPES AND SIZES. OKAY. THANK YOU EDWARD. THANK YOU COMMISSIONER HOLLAND, JUST TO KIND OF CUT TO IT, DO YOU TAKE EXCEPTION WITH ANY OF STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS ON THIS? NOT NECESSARILY AT ALL. UM, AND I, THE ONLY THING I WILL SAY IS I THINK, I DON'T EVEN, YOU DON'T EVEN HAVE TO. I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION IF I CAN. YEAH. THEN UNLESS THE APPLICANT WANTS TO PULL HIS APPLICATION AND COME BACK WITH A SCHEMATIC PLAN FOR RECONSTRUCTION, I GUESS WHAT'S THE BEST RECOMMENDATION? SINCE WE ARE WILLING TO DO THAT, THAT'S NOT, LIKE I SAID, THAT WAS REALLY THE NEXT PHASE OF THIS, UH, ARE, ARE WE HINDERED IN ANY WAY FROM FUTURE DEMOLITION REQUESTS? I WOULD SAY FROM A STAFF STANDPOINT OF WHAT WOULD COMPLETE THE APPLICATION IS WE WOULD NEED A COST ESTIMATE, UH, AND A GENERAL OVERVIEW OF WHAT STRUCTURALLY IS UNSOUND OR INADEQUATE WITH THIS ACCESSORY STRUCTURE AND A COST ESTIMATE THAT SAYS, HERE'S A LINE BY LINE ITEM OF WHAT IT WOULD TAKE TO REHABILITATE THE STRUCTURE VERSUS WHAT THIS WOULD COST TO RECONSTRUCT THE STRUCTURE IN ITS SAME FOOTPRINT OR SIZE. WHEN WE REVIEW THESE APPLICATIONS, THAT'S GENERALLY WHAT WE HAVE AND THAT'S WHAT'S NOTED IN FINDING EI BELIEVE. UM, MAY I JUST ADD A COMMENT TO THAT CONVERSATION? UM, CONSIDERING WHAT APPEARS TO BE A STRUCTURE THAT IS IN RELATIVELY GOOD SHAPE, MAYBE NOT IDEAL FOR THE FUNCTION, UM, I'M MORE INCLINED TO LOOK FOR REPLACEMENT PLANS THAT CAN CONSIDER REUSE OF THIS OR RELOCATION OF IT. OKAY. AND IF WE WERE TO LOOK AT REPLACEMENT PLANS, WHICH ARE INEVITABLE, CORRECT? RIGHT. THIS IS NOT BEING REQUESTED TO DEMOLISH BECAUSE IT'S A EXACTLY. IMMINENT DANGER TO THE CHILDREN OR SOMETHING THAT'S FOR TRUE. THAT'S TRUE. YOU KNOW, SO IT, THERE MIGHT BE SOLUTIONS FOR OTHER USES OF IT OR PARTS OF IT. YEAH. AND THAT IT COULD BE THAT WE INTEGRATE, BUT WE DON'T KNOW. PART OF OUR REQUEST DON'T ALSO WAS LIKE, WE DON'T KNOW EXACTLY. SO, AND I WILL SAY I, THE ONLY THING I WISH WE HAD, I THINK WE FELL THROUGH THE CRACKS BECAUSE OF THE THANKSGIVING HOLIDAY. WE WERE NOT INFORMED THAT OUR IMPLICA OUR APPLICATION WAS INCOMPLETE WITH THE COST BENEFIT OR THE COST ANALYSIS INFORMATION. AND AGAIN, I'M NOT PUTTING ANY BLAME ON ANYONE. I JUST THINK WE FELL THROUGH THE HOLIDAY CRACKS AT THAT TIME. UM, SO I APOLOGIZE FOR NOT INCLUDING THAT INFORMATION IN THE APPLICATION , WE JUST WERE NOT TOLD THAT THIS WAS INCOMPLETE, I GUESS IN THAT ASPECT. OKAY. WELL, UH, COMMISSIONER HOLLAND WAS PREPARED TO MAKE A MOTION. I, SURE. YEAH. I WOULD JUST MOVE TO ACCEPT THE APPLICATION WITH STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS. AS LONG AS THIS DOESN'T HINDER US IN THE NEXT PHASE, I HAVE NO PROBLEM. THAT'S THE BENEFIT OF PULLING IT. YEAH. SO YOU MIGHT PULL IT, UH, I, I'M SORRY, WITHOUT, WITHOUT A SECOND. CAN I MAKE A MOTION TO, UH, CONTINUE THIS, UM, TO, UM, CONFORM TO THE APPLICANT'S OKAY. SCHEDULE TO PRESENT MORE INFORMATION TO COMPLETE THE APPLICATION. OKAY. SECOND, SECOND, SECOND. I'M JUST GONNA SECOND ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION. I JUST, I'M JUST GONNA SAY, BECAUSE I THINK IF YOU'RE ON THE WAY TO REPLACEMENT PLANS, MAY AS WELL START LOOKING AT S SCHEMATICS. YEAH. AND OF COURSE, AND WE MAY CONSIDER INCORP LIKE AS YOU MENTIONED, MAYBE IT'S RETAINS, MAYBE IT'S INCORPORATED, I DON'T KNOW. BUT THAT WOULD BE THE NEXT PHASE OF THE DESIGN PROCESS. OKAY. THANK YOU. HAVE A ROLL CALL PLEASE. WELL, LET'S CLARIFY, UM, MR. HOLLAND'S MOTION FIRST I WITHDRAW MY MOTION. OKAY, SO MOTION ON THE TABLE IS FOR CONTINUANCE IN ORDER TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. YES. GIBBS. AYE. SAV AYE. AYE. GALLOWAY AYE. MAZUA AYE. GIDA AYE. CERVANTES? YES. HOLLAND. AYE. AND ZER AYE. MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH AND WE LOOK FORWARD TO YOUR, UH, DEVELOPMENT IONS. AGENDA ITEM 22. [03:10:07] AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 22 HJC CASE 2023 DASH 4 64 3 22 MISSION STREET. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO REPLACE THE EXISTING SITE FACING FRONT DOOR WITH THE WINDOW MEASURING 1, 2, 2 FEET AND HEIGHT IN 28. I'M SORRY, 102 INCHES AND HEIGHT BY 28 INCHES WIDE. STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE REPLACE OF THE REPLACEMENT OF THE EXISTING SIDE DOOR WITH THE WINDOW BASED ON FINDING B AND THE APPLICANT, ALLEGRA VOL IS HERE IN PERSON. HI, YES. WOULD YOU INTRODUCE YOURSELF PLEASE? GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS ALLEGRA VOLPE. RIGHT. UM, SO I AM HERE TO DISCUSS A DOOR AT THE FRONT OF MY PROPERTY IN KING WILLIAM THAT I WOULD LIKE TO REPLACE WITH A WINDOW THAT IS EXACTLY THE SAME AS THE OTHER TWO, ALMOST FLOOR TO CEILING WINDOWS AT THE FRONT OF THE HOME. AND WHILE THERE IS NO QUESTION THAT THE DOOR IS AN OLD DOOR, UM, BASED ON SOME OF THE PATCHY SIDING ON THE EXTERIOR AND IN INTERIOR OF THE HOME, UM, IT INDICATES THAT THERE COULD HAVE BEEN A WINDOW OF THAT SIZE AT SOME POINT. SO I DON'T PARTICULARLY LOVE THE IDEA OF HAVING TWO FRONT DOORS, UM, AT MY HOUSE. AND HERE THIS IS AN EXAMPLE, UM, OF THE WINDOW THAT WE WOULD BE REPLACING IT WITH. SO IT WOULD BE EXACTLY AS THE TWO IN FRONT. UM, AND THEN IF WE SCROLL DOWN A LITTLE BIT MORE, I THINK, YEAH, SO ON THE SECONDARY DOOR RIGHT THERE ABOVE YOU CAN SEE THAT PATCHED UP SIDING. UM, YEAH. WHICH, WHICH DOES INDICATE THAT THERE WAS SOMETHING ELSE THERE PRIOR. AND UM, I BELIEVE THESE IMAGES, THE EXTRA IMAGES I SENT YOU MIGHT NOT HAVE MADE IT RIGHT, BUT THEY'RE PERFECT. UM, ANOTHER THING THAT, UH, I LOOKED INTO WAS THAT AT ONE POINT THE HOME WAS A BOARDING HOUSE. SO INSIDE THE HOME ABOVE THE DOORWAYS, THERE ARE DIFFERENT NUMBERS. ONE THROUGH FIVE. UM, YEAH. UH, INDICATING THAT THE HOUSE WAS SORT OF CHOPPED UP INTO ROOMS FOR BORDERS. AND THIS IS A VISUAL OF THE INTERIOR OF THE ROOM THAT I'M TALKING ABOUT, THE DOORS IN TERRIBLE CONDITION. UM, BUT YOU CAN KIND OF SEE IN THIS RED AREA WHERE THAT PATCHED UP WOOD IS. AND SO I'M SEEKING APPROVAL TO KIND OF MIMIC THE ARCHITECTURE, UM, OF THAT ROOM ON THE COMPLETE, ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF THAT ROOM, THERE IS ALSO A WINDOW THAT WOULD MATCH WHAT WOULD BE REPLACED HERE. OKAY. THANK YOU. YES, CLAUDIA? IF YOU'D SHOW, UH, PHOTO 14 THAT ALSO SHOWS THE, THE INTERIOR OF THE EXISTING DOOR. YES. SO IN THAT PHOTO, THERE'S ALSO A WIDE SHOT OF THE, UM, WINDOW ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE. THAT WOULD BE RIGHT THERE, BUT, OKAY. UH, DO WE HAVE ANY VOICEMAILS? YES, WE DO. OKAY. YES. MY NAME IS LISA LIN. I'M CALLING ON BEHALF OF THE KING WILLIAM ASSOCIATION ARCHITECTURAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE REGARDING 3 2 2 MISSION STREET, CASE NUMBER 2 0 2 3 4 6 4. DEAR COMMISSIONER, THE KING WILLIAM ASSOCIATION ARCHITECTURAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE REVIEWED THE APPLICATION AND THE OHP STAFF FIGHTING OF RELEVANT HISTORIC GUIDELINES AND FINDINGS. WE DO NOT CONCUR WITH THE OHP STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO DENY APPROVAL OF REPLACING THE EXISTING DOOR WITH A WINDOW. THE EXISTING DOOR IS NOT ORIGINAL TO THIS OPENING. EVIDENCE IN THE INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE OPENING CLEARLY INDICATE THAT A FORMER TALLER OPENING EXISTED BEFORE THE CURRENT DOOR. THE SHORT PIECES OF WOOD BOARDS AND SITING PATCHED OVER THE DOOR WERE INSTALLED OVER THE SHORTER DOOR WHEN IT REPLACED THE FORMER TALL WINDOW THAT MATCHED THE SAME TALL WINDOW ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE ROOM. IN ADDITION, THE INTERIOR WOOD TRIM AROUND THE CURRENT DOOR DOES NOT MATCH THE TRIM AROUND THE OTHER OPENINGS IN THE ROOM, WHICH INDICATES THAT THE DOOR WAS INSTALLED LATER. WE RECOMMEND THAT APPROVAL BE GIVEN TO THIS APPLICATION AS SUBMITTED. IF THERE IS ANY HESITATION, AT LEAST REQUIRE THE STAFF TO INVESTIGATE THE EVIDENCE FURTHER BEFORE A DECISION IS RENDERED. THANK YOU. OKAY. QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT, MR. CHAIR? [03:15:01] I DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT. BUT IF THERE AREN'T ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION, I, I'M READY TO MAKE A MOTION. ANY QUESTIONS? OKAY. YES, SIR. MR. CHAIR, I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE AS PRESENTED BY THE APPLICANT, UH, FOR REPLACEMENT OF THAT DOOR WITH A WINDOW TO MATCH, WINDOW AS SHOWN IN PICTURE NUMBER. I DON'T HAVE THE PICTURE IN MY PRESENTATION, BUT THE PICTURE SHOWING THE LONG WINDOW, I, I WILL SECOND THAT YOU HAVE A MOTION TO SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? HAVE A ROLL CALL PLEASE. GIBBS. AYE. SAVINO? AYE. VELAZQUEZ? AYE. GALLOWAY? AYE. MOOKA. AYE. EVADO. AYE. CERVANTES, PLEASE? YES, HOLLAND. AYE. AND FETZER AYE. MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU SO MUCH AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR PATIENCE. YEAH. HAVE A GREAT AGENDA. ITEM 23. AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 23 HDRC CASE NUMBER 2023 DASH 4 52 26 ARMY BOULEVARD. THE APPLICANT'S REQUESTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR APPROVAL TO ONE, REPLACE FOUR ALUMINUM WINDOWS ON THE FRONT FACADE, FOUR ALUMINUM WINDOWS ON THE REAR FACADE AND THREE ALUMINUM WINDOWS ON THE EAST FACADE AND INSTALL VINYL WINDOWS. TWO. REPLACE THE EXISTING FRONT PORCH RAILING WITH A CATTLE PANEL STYLE RAILING AND THREE, RECEIVE HISTORIC TAX CERTIFICATION. RECOMMENDATION ITEM ONE. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF ALUMINUM WINDOW REPLACEMENT BASED ON FINDINGS A THROUGH D WITH THE FOLLOWING STIPULATION THAT THE APPLICANT SAW FULLY WOOD WINDOWS THAT MEET STAFF STANDARD WINDOW STIPULATIONS AND SUBMITS UPDATED SPECIFICATIONS TO STAFF FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL. UH, WITH OUR GENERAL, UH, STIPULATIONS, ITEM TWO STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE FRONT PORCH RAILING REPLACEMENT BASED ON FINDING, E STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT THE PORCH RAILING PORCH RAILING RETURN TO ITS PREVIOUS CONDITION. ITEM THREE, THE PROPERTY IS NOT ELIGIBLE FOR HISTORIC TAX CERTIFICATION AT THIS TIME. BASED ON FINDING B, F AND G, THE PROPERTY MAY BE ELIGIBLE FOR THE SUBSTANTIAL REHABILITATION TAX INCENTIVE. ONCE THE PROPERTY COMES INTO COMPLIANCE, THE APPLICANT MARIA MENDEZ IS HERE VIRTUALLY. THERE IS NO LETTERS OR VOICEMAILS TO REVIEW MR. MENDEZ. UM, YOU'LL NEED TO UNMUTE AND THEN YOU CAN, UH, GIVE US YOUR COMMENTS, PLEASE. YES, WE CAN. OKAY. SO WHAT HAPPENED WITH THIS PROPERTY IS THAT IT BELONGS TO A FRIEND OF MINE AND, UM, SHE HAD, UM, SOME PERMITS TO GET THE AC DONE AND SHE GOT SOME PLUMBING DONE IN THE BUILDING, ADDED SOME AC IN THE UPPER UNITS AND ADDED, UH, SOME PLUMBING STUFF. AND AT THE TIME SHE DIDN'T REALIZE THAT SHE NEEDED TO GET PERMITS TO DO THE WINDOWS. SO SHE HAD, UH, THESE TWO WINDOWS REPLACED 'CAUSE THEY WERE IN PRETTY BAD. UH, THEY WEREN'T , THEY WERE STILL ALUMINUM WINDOWS, BUT THEY WERE PRETTY BAD, SO SHE WANTED TO GET 'EM REPLACED. SO WE WENT AHEAD AND, UH, SHE SAID, WENT AHEAD AND GOT ME APPRAISAL. AND THEN SHE, THEN THEY, SHE GOT THE, THE LETTER SAYING SHE HAD TO PULL, SHE HAD TO GO TO THE HISTORIC SOCIETY AND WE, SHE STOPPED ALL WORK AND STARTED WORKING ON THE, GETTING THE, THE, THAT ALL FIXED CORRECTLY. UM, SO NOW THAT SHE KNOWS THAT SHE HAS TO DO THAT, THAT'S WHY SHE PUT THE APPLICATION IN. SEE WHAT WE HAVE TO DO TO, TO GET THIS CORRECTED OR THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE ANY, UH, VOICEMAILS? WE DO NOT. THERE'S OTHER WORK THAT WE'RE GONNA DO. UM, WE'RE GONNA REPLACE THE ONE SIDE ONE, I THINK IT'S THE WEST WALL IS, UH, THE, THE CEDAR. THE CEDAR SHINGLES ARE PRETTY IN BAD, REAL BAD SHAPE 'CAUSE THEY GOT BURNED BY THE FRONT. SO WE'RE, UH, PROPOSING TO REPLACE THAT OR THAT THAT WHOLE WALL SHINGLES AND THEN USE THE SHINGLES THAT WE TAKE OFF OF THERE THAT ARE STILL GOOD AND, AND PATCH WHEREVER WE NEED TO PATCH ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE HOUSE AND THEN REPAINT THE HOUSE. UM, THAT STUFF THAT'S INCLUDED IN THE, IN THE, UM, IN WHAT WE WANNA DO IN THE PROPOSED, UH, IN THE PROPOSED, UH, CHANGES TO THE EXTERIOR OF THIS HOUSE. YES, I BELIEVE SOME OF THAT WORK WILL BE, UH, AVAILABLE FOR, UH, ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL. UH, QUESTION THE WINDOWS THAT ARE IN YOUR APPLICATION, THIS WOULD BE ONE FOR THE, UH, STAFF. WOULD THESE PARTICULAR WINDOWS, BASED ON THE PROFILES AND DIMENSIONS, WOULD THESE MEET, UH, [03:20:01] STANDARD STIPULATIONS? THEY WOULDN'T. UM, THEY ARE VINYL. UM, THE TWO MIDDLE WINDOWS ARE FIXED SO THEY DON'T, UM, FEATURE TRADITIONAL DESIGN. UH, ALSO TO THE INSTALLATION METHOD USED IS PROBABLY WITH A NAIL FIN RATHER THAN A BLOCK FRAME. SO THE DEPTH WOULD BE A CONCERN. UM, THOSE ARE JUST A FEW OF THE, UM, A FEW, UH, WE DID DO A SITE VISIT ON SITE AND I MET WITH THE APPLICANT AND WE DISCUSSED, UH, POTENTIAL ALTERNATIVES. THE WINDOWS THAT WERE ORIGINALLY, OR THE WINDOWS THAT WERE REMOVED WERE NON-ORIGINAL OR NON HISTORIC ALUMINUM WINDOWS. AND SO WE DISCUSSED POTENTIAL OPTIONS, UH, RANGING FROM WOOD TO ALUMINUM CLAD WOOD. MR. CHAIR, I HAVE QUESTION. OKAY. BUT FURTHER ON THAT QUESTION, SO THEN WE GOT THAT ONE, ONE MOMENT ONE PLEASE. MR. MENEZ, WOULD THE PROPOSED WINDOWS THAT ARE IN THE PACKET, THERE'S SOME SHOP DRAWINGS OR DRAWINGS, RIGHT? DO, WOULD THOSE MEET STANDARD STIPULATIONS BECAUSE OF THE, UM, UPPER SASHES PROJECTING OUT BELOW THE LOWER SASH MORE TYPICAL TO A STANDARD WINDOW? I MEAN, THE REQUEST IS WHAT WE SEE IN THE PICTURE, BUT HE SUBMITTED THIS DRAWING AND THERE'S STILL SEVEN MORE WINDOWS TO BE REPLACED. SO WOULD THIS WINDOW PROPOSED MEET STIPULATIONS FOR THE OTHER REPLACEMENT WINDOWS OR DOES THAT, OR DOES STAFF NEED MORE TIME TO REVIEW THIS? I BELIEVE STAFF WOULD NEED MORE TIME TO REVIEW THE WINDOWS THAT WERE PROPOSED FOR REPLACEMENT AT THE REAR. AND, UM, THOSE ARE CURRENTLY ALUMINUM WINDOWS. THE APPLICANT ORIGINALLY CAME FORWARD WITH, UM, THE PROPOSAL TO INSTALL THE VINYL WINDOWS, MUCH LIKE THE ONES AT THE FRONT FACADE. UM, SO MY APOLOGIES ON THAT FOR NOT KNOWING THAT. OKAY. UH, MR. CHAIR, I HAVE A QUESTION. SO YES, COMMISSIONER CERVANTES? YEAH, JUST REAL QUICK FOR STAFF. SO BASED ON WHAT WAS THERE, OR BEFORE HE REPLACED IT WAS ALUMINUM WINDOWS WERE THERE BEFORE, WHICH WERE NOT, UH, ORIGINAL TO THE HOUSE. CORRECT. SO HE CAN FALL IN AND REPLACE 'EM WITH ALUMINUM WINDOWS, JUST LIKE WHAT HE HAD BEFORE. CORRECT. IT'S LESS ABOUT THE ACTUAL MATERIAL. I KNOW WE GET CAUGHT UP ON WHETHER IT'S ALUMINUM OR VINYL OR WOOD OR WHATEVER. RIGHT, RIGHT. BUT IF IT'S NON-ORIGINAL, WE ALLOW REPLACEMENT WITH A, WE DON'T REQUIRE THEM TO GO BACK TO WOOD. WE CAN, WE CAN CONSIDER ALUMINUM, WE CONSIDER EVEN VINYL. BUT WHAT WE WORK WITH THEM TO DO IS TO MEET THE OTHER STANDARD STIPULATIONS THAT ARE ABOUT THE INSTALLATION DEPTH, THE THICKNESS OF THE MEMBERS, UM, AND JUST LIKE KIND OF THE, THE PROFILE OF THE WINDOW. GOT IT. AND SO IN, IN A SITUATION LIKE THIS, AN OPTION TO HIM IS ALSO, AND I GUESS THIS IS FROM MY UNDERSTANDING, WANNA ASK QUESTION. AN OPTION FOR HIM IS ALSO TO, UH, UH, PUT TRIM ON THE WINDOW TO MAKE IT LOOK LIKE IT, LIKE IT WAS BEFORE. CORRECT. HE COULD AUGMENT WHAT HE'S GOT THERE. I DON'T THINK THAT WOULD BE SUCCESSFUL. SO I, I MEAN, I GUESS I'M, I'M, I ALMOST, I MEAN I DO CONSTRUCTION AS WELL AND I KNOW YOU COULD, I MEAN YOU COULD, YOU KNOW, INSET WINDOWS A LITTLE BIT MORE TO GET WHAT YOU NEEDED IF THAT WAS THE CASE. UM, I UNDERSTAND THAT, THAT THE WINDOWS THAT ARE THERE RIGHT NOW, AT LEAST THE ONES IN THE BACK ARE IN PRETTY BAD SHAPE. THE ALUMINUM WINDOWS. AND WE WANTED JUST, WE WANTED TO GET SOMETHING THAT WAS OF COURSE MORE ECONOMICAL, UH, AS FAR AS LIKE SAVING ENERGY AND STUFF, DOUBLE PANE WINDOWS OR SOMETHING THAT WAS BETTER THAN WHAT'S THERE. AND OF COURSE, BUT WHEN, BUT OF COURSE WHEN WE GOT THAT, THE, THE REQUEST FOR THE GO, THE HISTORIC SOCIETY, AND WE SUBMITTED THIS INFORMATION RIGHT NOW WE'RE THE, THE HOMEOWNER'S THINKING, WELL MAYBE I'LL JUST LEAVE WHAT I HAVE THERE BECAUSE OF COURSE IF WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO PUT WOOD WINDOW BUDGET GOES FROM MAYBE, YOU KNOW, THREE, $400 A WINDOW TO A THOUSAND, $1,500 A WINDOW. YOU KNOW WHAT I'M SAYING? SO THEN IT'S JUST LEAVE IT AS IS. IT'S GONNA BE THE PROBABLY THE OPTION. MR. FOR NOW, MR. CH QUESTION FOR STAFF BEFORE WE GET AWAY FROM THESE WINDOWS, THE DRAWINGS, MR. MENDEZ, THE DRAWINGS THAT YOU SUBMITTED OF, THAT YOU SUBMITTED OF PROPOSED WINDOWS, IS THAT THE WINDOW THAT YOU INSTALLED ON THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE? YES, SIR. OKAY, THANK YOU. SO FOR STAFF, UM, THE, [03:25:01] THE, THE FACADE OF THE HOUSE, THE FRONT, AT LEAST THREE SIDES IT SEEMS, IS THAT A CLADDING OR IS THAT THE ORIGINAL HOUSE? THE SHINGLES. THE SHINGLES. THAT'S THE ORIGINAL MATERIAL AS FAR AS WE KNOW HISTORICALLY. SO WHEN WE SEE THE TERRACOTTA, ALL OF THAT IS PART OF THE ORIGINAL HOUSE. THE, THE TILE. YEAH. OKAY. UM, AND THEN, UH, SO , WHEN YOU ASKED THE QUESTION ABOUT IF THE CUT SHEETS FORM, I, I BLANKED AND I THOUGHT ABOUT LIKE WHAT THE DIMENSIONS OF THE, THE MEETING RAILS AND EVERYTHING WERE, BUT THE ISSUES ARE, YOU CAN ACTUALLY SEE IT HERE. UM, SORRY, CAN YOU GO TO SLIDE SIX AND YEAH, ZOOM IN ON THAT LITTLE WINDOW. UM, SO ALL OF THESE WINDOWS HAVE A KNEEING FIN, AND SO THAT IMMEDIATELY CREATES AN ISSUE WITH THE DESIRED INSTALLATION DEPTH. UM, THE OTHER ISSUE IS THAT IT'S A, UM, SINGLE HUNG, AND WHAT THAT DOES IS SOMETIMES WITH A SINGLE HUNG WINDOW, THE BOTTOM SASH, WHICH WOULD NORMALLY BE OPERABLE OR IS OPERABLE, ALSO INCLUDES A, UM, I DON'T KNOW HOW TO EXPLAIN THIS, BUT A FRAME FOR THE SCREEN. UM, AND SO THAT ELIMINATES THE ABILITY TO HAVE THAT SEPARATION OF THE TOP SASH AND THE BOTTOM SASH. AND YOU SEE THAT DEPTH, IT'S APPEARS TO BE KIND OF ONE CONTINUOUS PLANE. AND SO THIS WOULD NOT CONFORM WITH THE STANDARD STIPULATIONS. OKAY? THERE ARE VINYL WINDOWS THAT CAN DO THAT. THERE'S LUMINAL WINDOWS THAT CAN DO THAT. UM, BUT, AND SO THAT'S WHY WE'VE INCLUDED THOSE STIPULATIONS BECAUSE WE CAN STILL LOOK AT A, A NON-WOOD PRODUCT THAT MEETS THOSE OTHER STIPULATIONS. IS THAT CONFUSING AS EVER? SO, SO THEY DID SEND US, AND I, AND I'LL, I'LL AGREE WITH MR. UM, UM, I FORGOT WHAT HIS NAME WAS, BUT, UM, HE DID SEND ME A CUT SHEET AND, AND NOT A CUT SHEET, BUT AT LEAST A DESCRIPTION OF WHAT HE, WHAT WINDOWS HE WANTED. SO WE WENT AHEAD AND SENT THAT DESCRIPTION TO THE, THE MANUFACTURER THAT, THAT, THAT WE ARE WORKING WITH FOR WINDOWS TO SEE IF THEY COULD GET US SOMETHING LIKE THAT AND SEE WHERE, WHERE THE COST WOULD BE FOR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. AND THEN WE, IF WE CAN GET THAT, THEN WE WOULD, WE'LL, WE'LL SUBMIT THAT IN AS THE ONES WE WANNA REPLACE. SINCE HE ALREADY GAVE US AN IDEA OF WHAT WE COULD REPLACE 'EM WITH, I'D BE READY TO MAKE A MOTION. I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE REQUEST, UH, WITH ALL OF STAFF'S RE UH, STIPULATIONS. DO WE HAVE A SECOND, SECOND, SECOND, SECOND DISCUSSION. UM, THE REASON WHY I THINK THIS IS, UM, THIS IS GONNA BE WORKABLE IS THAT ALTHOUGH THIS IS A HISTORIC HOUSE AND THOSE WINDOWS WOULD'VE BEEN WOOD, ALL WOOD, AND THAT WOULD TYPICALLY BE WHAT WE WOULD REQUEST IS A REPLACEMENT WITH ALL WOOD OF STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS TO GO WITH THIS WINDOWS STANDARD POLICY, I THINK IS A GOOD COMPROMISE, IF YOU WILL, ON THIS PARTICULAR CASE. SO I WOULD BE AMENABLE TO A, A, A METAL CLAD WOOD WINDOW IN THIS, IN THIS CASE. UM, BUT THEN AGAIN, THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN, ANY MATERIAL COULD CONFORM TO THIS. THANK YOU. YOU HAVE A ROLL CALL PLEASE? GIBBS? AYE. SAVINO? AYE. VELAZQUEZ? AYE. GALLOWAY? AYE. ZUKA? AYE. GIDA. AYE. CERVANTES? YES. HOLLAND. AYE. AND FETZER. AYE. MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THAT WAS THE LAST CASE, SO WE ARE ADJOURNED. OKAY, THANK YOU. I HAVE A QUESTION BEFORE WE, WE CLOSE. UM, YES SIR. CAN I TALK? YES SIR. YES. I JUST WANNA KNOW. OKAY, SO WHAT ARE WE AGREEING TO? IS THAT WE ARE GOING TO CHANGE THE WINDOWS TO SOMETHING THAT MATCHES, UH, WHAT THEY SENT US THAT WE COULD USE. YEAH, YOU'LL RIGHT, CORRECT. YEAH. SHE'LL WORK WITH BRIAN TO CONFIRM A PRODUCT THAT MEETS THE STIPULATIONS, UM, AND WE CAN PROVIDE SOME RECOMMENDATIONS AS WELL. OKAY. AND AS FAR AS THE, UH, HA THE RAILING, WE WOULD HAVE TO GO BACK TO THE ONES WITH THE LITTLE, WITH THE LITTLE TICKETS OR WHATEVER. YES, SIR. AND GET THE RAILING. OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. 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.